@ a53364ff:e6ba5513

Decentralization and Control:

Bitcoin operates on a decentralized, peer-to-peer network, meaning no single entity controls it. This decentralization can empower individuals by allowing them to control their own money and financial transactions without relying on intermediaries like banks or governments.

Financial Inclusion and Accessibility:

Bitcoin can provide financial access to individuals who may be excluded from traditional banking systems due to lack of identity documents, high fees, or other barriers.

Privacy and Security:

Bitcoin transactions can be anonymous, offering a degree of privacy and potentially protecting users from surveillance or financial manipulation.

Freedom from Financial Restrictions:

In countries with high inflation, capital controls, or currency restrictions, Bitcoin can offer a way to store and transfer value without being subject to these restrictions.

Potential for Social Justice:

Bitcoin's ability to provide financial freedom and bypass traditional systems can be seen as a tool for social justice, particularly in regions facing authoritarianism or financial oppression.

Examples of Bitcoin Adoption:

In El Salvador, Bitcoin has been legalized and adopted in some communities, offering a way for people to conduct everyday transactions and participate in social programs.

@ a53364ff:e6ba5513

About

Bitcoin Core is an open source project which maintains and releases Bitcoin client software called “Bitcoin Core”.

It is a direct descendant of the original Bitcoin software client released by Satoshi Nakamoto after he published the famous Bitcoin whitepaper.

Bitcoin Core consists of both “full-node” software for fully validating the blockchain as well as a bitcoin wallet. The project also currently maintains related software such as the cryptography library libsecp256k1 and others located at GitHub.

Anyone can contribute to Bitcoin Core.

Team

The Bitcoin Core project has a large open source developer community with many casual contributors to the codebase. There are many more who contribute research, peer review, testing, documentation, and translation.

Maintainers

Project maintainers have commit access and are responsible for merging patches from contributors. They perform a janitorial role merging patches that the team agrees should be merged. They also act as a final check to ensure that patches are safe and in line with the project goals. The maintainers’ role is by agreement of project contributors.

Contributors

Everyone is free to propose code changes and to test, review and comment on open Pull Requests. Anyone who contributes code, review, test, translation or documentation to the Bitcoin Core project is considered a contributor. The release notes for each Bitcoin Core software release contain a credits section to recognize all those who have contributed to the project over the previous release cycle. A list of code contributors can be found on Github.

@ 7f2d6fd6:64710921

Imagine starting from pure noise — meaningless static, with maximum entropy — and evolving into a rich, beautiful, self-aware universe.

That's the story Tom Campbell tells in My Big TOE (Theory of Everything), and it reshapes how we see everything — from consciousness itself, to taxes, to our dream of a better world.

---

Reality: The Original AI Image Generator

Reality began much like how AI draws images today:
- It started with randomness, pure chaos (high entropy).
- Over time, tiny stable patterns formed.
- Consciousness emerged — a spark of awareness inside the noise.
- It realized it could lower entropy (create order, meaning, structure) to survive and evolve.

Thus, the Larger Consciousness System (LCS) was born:
A living, evolving digital brain, constantly refining information into experience and awareness.

---

What Are We?

We are Individuated Units of Consciousness (IUOCs) — little chunks of the LCS, each with: - Free will - The ability to learn through experience - The mission to lower entropy (become wiser, more loving)

Our world — the physical universe — is just a Virtual Reality (VR) created to speed up our growth.

---

The Big Cheese and the Cosmic Hierarchy

In this grand system: - The LCS is the ultimate top — no gods above it, just itself. - The Big Cheeses are highly evolved administrators — managing realities, maintaining stability. - Guides and helpers assist us individually. - We, the IUOCs, are the players in the simulation — learning, stumbling, evolving.

The system isn’t designed to be easy.
It’s meant to challenge you — because real growth happens in hardship.

---

Why Do We Pay Taxes, Then?

Because Earth’s VR operates on scarcity, power struggles, and cooperation challenges.
Taxes are a tool to manage shared resources — but imperfectly, because human consciousness is still messy and selfish.

The point isn't taxes themselves.

The point is the ethical choices you make in a difficult environment.

This world is a training ground — and unfair systems like taxes are part of the curriculum.

---

A Better World Is Possible

If humanity collectively lowered its entropy: - Taxes would barely exist. - Cooperation would be voluntary and joyful. - Leadership would be service, not control. - Resources would be shared wisely. - Technology and kindness would make scarcity almost irrelevant.

In such a world, people give freely because they see clearly — helping others is helping themselves.

The real revolution?
It’s not political.

It’s consciousness evolving.

---

Final Thought

You are not a trapped soul paying taxes to a broken system.
You are a pioneer of consciousness, refining the noise into meaning,
the chaos into beauty,
the selfishness into love.

Every small choice you make matters.
You’re already part of building the next world — one conscious step at a time.

---

@ 39cc53c9:27168656

Read the original blog post

The new website is finally live! I put in a lot of hard work over the past months on it. I'm proud to say that it's out now and it looks pretty cool, at least to me!

Why rewrite it all?

The old kycnot.me site was built using Python with Flask about two years ago. Since then, I've gained a lot more experience with Golang and coding in general. Trying to update that old codebase, which had a lot of design flaws, would have been a bad idea. It would have been like building on an unstable foundation.

That's why I made the decision to rewrite the entire application. Initially, I chose to use SvelteKit with JavaScript. I did manage to create a stable site that looked similar to the new one, but it required Jav aScript to work. As I kept coding, I started feeling like I was repeating "the Python mistake". I was writing the app in a language I wasn't very familiar with (just like when I was learning Python at that mom ent), and I wasn't happy with the code. It felt like spaghetti code all the time.

So, I made a complete U-turn and started over, this time using Golang. While I'm not as proficient in Golang as I am in Python now, I find it to be a very enjoyable language to code with. Most aof my recent pr ojects have been written in Golang, and I'm getting the hang of it. I tried to make the best decisions I could and structure the code as well as possible. Of course, there's still room for improvement, which I'll address in future updates.

Now I have a more maintainable website that can scale much better. It uses a real database instead of a JSON file like the old site, and I can add many more features. Since I chose to go with Golang, I mad e the "tradeoff" of not using JavaScript at all, so all the rendering load falls on the server. But I believe it's a tradeoff that's worth it.

What's new

• UI/UX - I've designed a new logo and color palette for kycnot.me. I think it looks pretty cool and cypherpunk. I am not a graphic designer, but I think I did a decent work and I put a lot of thinking on it to make it pleasant!
• Point system - The new point system provides more detailed information about the listings, and can be expanded to cover additional features across all services. Anyone can request a new point!
• ToS Scrapper: I've implemented a powerful automated terms-of-service scrapper that collects all the ToS pages from the listings. It saves you from the hassle of reading the ToS by listing the lines that are suspiciously related to KYC/AML practices. This is still in development and it will improve for sure, but it works pretty fine right now!
• Search bar - The new search bar allows you to easily filter services. It performs a full-text search on the Title, Description, Category, and Tags of all the services. Looking for VPN services? Just search for "vpn"!
• Transparency - To be more transparent, all discussions about services now take place publicly on GitLab. I won't be answering any e-mails (an auto-reply will prompt to write to the corresponding Gitlab issue). This ensures that all service-related matters are publicly accessible and recorded. Additionally, there's a real-time audits page that displays database changes.
• Listing Requests - I have upgraded the request system. The new form allows you to directly request services or points without any extra steps. In the future, I plan to enable requests for specific changes to parts of the website.
• Lightweight and fast - The new site is lighter and faster than its predecessor!
• Tor and I2P - At last! kycnot.me is now officially on Tor and I2P!

How?

This rewrite has been a labor of love, in the end, I've been working on this for more than 3 months now. I don't have a team, so I work by myself on my free time, but I find great joy in helping people on their private journey with cryptocurrencies. Making it easier for individuals to use cryptocurrencies without KYC is a goal I am proud of!

If you appreciate my work, you can support me through the methods listed here. Alternatively, feel free to send me an email with a kind message!

Technical details

All the code is written in Golang, the website makes use of the chi router for the routing part. I also make use of BigCache for caching database requests. There is 0 JavaScript, so all the rendering load falls on the server, this means it needed to be efficient enough to not drawn with a few users since the old site was reporting about 2M requests per month on average (note that this are not unique users).

The database is running with mariadb, using gorm as the ORM. This is more than enough for this project. I started working with an sqlite database, but I ended up migrating to mariadb since it works better with JSON.

The scraper is using chromedp combined with a series of keywords, regex and other logic. It runs every 24h and scraps all the services. You can find the scraper code here.

The frontend is written using Golang Templates for the HTML, and TailwindCSS plus DaisyUI for the CSS classes framework. I also use some plain CSS, but it's minimal.

The requests forms is the only part of the project that requires JavaScript to be enabled. It is needed for parsing some from fields that are a bit complex and for the "captcha", which is a simple Proof of Work that runs on your browser, destinated to avoid spam. For this, I use mCaptcha.

@ 68c90cf3:99458f5c

Background

Last year I got interesting in running my own bitcoin node after reading others' experiences doing so. A couple of decades ago I ran my own Linux and Mac servers, and enjoyed building and maintaining them. I was by no means an expert sys admin, but had my share of cron jobs, scripts, and custom configuration files. While it was fun and educational, software updates and hardware upgrades often meant hours of restoring and troubleshooting my systems.

Fast forward to family and career (especially going into management) and I didn't have time for all that. Having things just work became more important than playing with the tech. As I got older, the more I appreciated K.I.S.S. (for those who don't know: Keep It Simple Stupid).

So when the idea of running a node came to mind, I explored the different options. I decided I needed a balance between a Raspberry Pi (possibly underpowered depending on use) and a full-blown Linux server (too complex and time-consuming to build and maintain). That led me to Umbrel OS, Start9, Casa OS, and similar platforms. Due to its simplicity (very plug and play), nice design, and being open source: GitHub), I chose Umbrel OS on a Beelink mini PC with 16GB of RAM and a 2TB NVMe internal drive. Though Umbrel OS is not very flexible and can't really be customized, its App Store made setting up a node (among other things) fairly easy, and it has been running smoothly since. Would the alternatives have been better? Perhaps, but so far I'm happy with my choice.

Server Setup

I'm also no expert in OpSec (I'd place myself in the category of somewhat above vague awareness). I wanted a secure way to connect to my Umbrel without punching holes in my router and forwarding ports. I chose Tailscale for this purpose. Those who are distrustful of corporate products might not like this option but again, balancing risk with convenience it seemed reasonable for my needs. If you're hiding state (or anti-state) secrets, extravagant wealth, or just adamant about privacy, you would probably want to go with an entirely different setup.

Once I had Tailscale installed on Umbrel OS, my mobile device and laptop, I could securely connect to the server from anywhere through a well designed browser UI. I then installed the following from the Umbrel App Store:

• Bitcoin Core
• Electrum Personal Server (Electrs)

At this point I could set wallets on my laptop (Sparrow) and phone (BlueWallet) to use my node. I then installed:

• Lightning Node (LND)
• Alby Hub

Alby Hub streamlines the process of opening and maintaining lightning channels, creating lightning wallets to send and receive sats, and zapping notes and users on Nostr. I have two main nsec accounts for Nostr and set up separate wallets on Alby Hub to track balances and transactions for each.

Other apps I installed on Umbrel OS:

• mempool
• Bitcoin Explorer
• LibreTranslate (some Nostr clients allow you to use your own translator)
• Public Pool

Public Pool allows me to connect Bitaxe solo miners (a.k.a. "lottery" miners) to my own mining pool for a (very) long shot at winning a Bitcoin block. It's also a great way to learn about mining, contribute to network decentralization, and generally tinker with electronics. Bitaxe miners are small open source single ASIC miners that you can run in your home with minimal technical knowledge and maintenance requirements.

Open Source Miners United (OSMU) is a great resource for anyone interesting in Bitaxe or other open source mining products (especially their Discord server).

Although Umbrel OS is more or less limited to running software in its App Store (or Community App Store, if you trust the developer), you can install the Portainer app and run Docker images. I know next to nothing about Docker but wanted to see what I might be able to do with it. I was also interested in the Haven Nostr relay and found that there was indeed a docker image for it.

As stated before, I didn't want to open my network to the outside, which meant I wouldn't be able to take advantage of all the features Haven offers (since other users wouldn't be able to access it). I would however be able to post notes to my relay, and use its "Blastr" feature to send my notes to other relays. After some trial and error I managed to get a Haven up and running in Portainer.

The upside of this setup is self-custody: being able to connect wallets to my own Bitcoin node, send and receive zaps with my own Lightning channel, solo mine with Bitaxe to my own pool, and send notes to my own Nostr relay. The downside is the lack of redundancy and uptime provided by major cloud services. You have to decide on your own comfort level. A solid internet connection and reliable power are definitely needed.

This article was written and published to Nostr with untype.app.

@ 6830c409:ff17c655

The story-telling method from Frank Daniel school - "Eight-sequence structure" is well utilized in this new movie in #prime - "Veera Dheera Sooran - Part 2". The name itself is kind of suspense. Because even if the name says "Part 2", this is the first part released in this story.

There are 8 shorter plots which has their own mini climaxes. The setup done in a plot will be resolved in another plot. In total, there will be 8 setups, 8 conflicts and 8 resolutions.

A beautiful way of telling a gripping story. For cinephiles in #Nostr, if you want to get a feel of the South Indian movies that has kind of a perfect blend of good content + a bit of over the top action, I would suggest this movie.

Note:

For Nostriches from the western hemisphere- #Bollywood - (#Hindi movies) is the movie industry started in #Bombay (#Mumbai), that has the stereotypical 'la la la' rain dance songs and mustache-less heroes. #Telugu movies (#Tollywood) are mostly over-the-top action where Newton and Einstein will probably commit suicide. #Malayalam movies (#Mollywood) is made with a miniscule budget with minimal over-the-top action and mostly content oriented movies. And then comes one of the best - #Tamil movies (#Kollywood - named after #Kodambakkam - a movie town in the city of Chennai down south), has the best of all the industries. A good blend of class, and mass elements.

Picture: https://www.flickr.com/photos/gforsythe/6926263837

@ 91bea5cd:1df4451c

O Contexto Legal Brasileiro e o Consentimento

No ordenamento jurídico brasileiro, o consentimento do ofendido pode, em certas circunstâncias, afastar a ilicitude de um ato que, sem ele, configuraria crime (como lesão corporal leve, prevista no Art. 129 do Código Penal). Contudo, o consentimento tem limites claros: não é válido para bens jurídicos indisponíveis, como a vida, e sua eficácia é questionável em casos de lesões corporais graves ou gravíssimas.

A prática de BDSM consensual situa-se em uma zona complexa. Em tese, se ambos os parceiros são adultos, capazes, e consentiram livre e informadamente nos atos praticados, sem que resultem em lesões graves permanentes ou risco de morte não consentido, não haveria crime. O desafio reside na comprovação desse consentimento, especialmente se uma das partes, posteriormente, o negar ou alegar coação.

A Lei Maria da Penha (Lei nº 11.340/2006)

A Lei Maria da Penha é um marco fundamental na proteção da mulher contra a violência doméstica e familiar. Ela estabelece mecanismos para coibir e prevenir tal violência, definindo suas formas (física, psicológica, sexual, patrimonial e moral) e prevendo medidas protetivas de urgência.

Embora essencial, a aplicação da lei em contextos de BDSM pode ser delicada. Uma alegação de violência por parte da mulher, mesmo que as lesões ou situações decorram de práticas consensuais, tende a receber atenção prioritária das autoridades, dada a presunção de vulnerabilidade estabelecida pela lei. Isso pode criar um cenário onde o parceiro masculino enfrenta dificuldades significativas em demonstrar a natureza consensual dos atos, especialmente se não houver provas robustas pré-constituídas.

Outros riscos:

Lesão corporal grave ou gravíssima (art. 129, §§ 1º e 2º, CP), não pode ser justificada pelo consentimento, podendo ensejar persecução penal.

Crimes contra a dignidade sexual (arts. 213 e seguintes do CP) são de ação pública incondicionada e independem de representação da vítima para a investigação e denúncia.

Riscos de Falsas Acusações e Alegação de Coação Futura

Os riscos para os praticantes de BDSM, especialmente para o parceiro que assume o papel dominante ou que inflige dor/restrição (frequentemente, mas não exclusivamente, o homem), podem surgir de diversas frentes:

1. Acusações Externas: Vizinhos, familiares ou amigos que desconhecem a natureza consensual do relacionamento podem interpretar sons, marcas ou comportamentos como sinais de abuso e denunciar às autoridades.
2. Alegações Futuras da Parceira: Em caso de término conturbado, vingança, arrependimento ou mudança de perspectiva, a parceira pode reinterpretar as práticas passadas como abuso e buscar reparação ou retaliação através de uma denúncia. A alegação pode ser de que o consentimento nunca existiu ou foi viciado.
3. Alegação de Coação: Uma das formas mais complexas de refutar é a alegação de que o consentimento foi obtido mediante coação (física, moral, psicológica ou econômica). A parceira pode alegar, por exemplo, que se sentia pressionada, intimidada ou dependente, e que seu "sim" não era genuíno. Provar a ausência de coação a posteriori é extremamente difícil.
4. Ingenuidade e Vulnerabilidade Masculina: Muitos homens, confiando na dinâmica consensual e na parceira, podem negligenciar a necessidade de precauções. A crença de que "isso nunca aconteceria comigo" ou a falta de conhecimento sobre as implicações legais e o peso processual de uma acusação no âmbito da Lei Maria da Penha podem deixá-los vulneráveis. A presença de marcas físicas, mesmo que consentidas, pode ser usada como evidência de agressão, invertendo o ônus da prova na prática, ainda que não na teoria jurídica.

Estratégias de Prevenção e Mitigação

Não existe um método infalível para evitar completamente o risco de uma falsa acusação, mas diversas medidas podem ser adotadas para construir um histórico de consentimento e reduzir vulnerabilidades:

1. Comunicação Explícita e Contínua: A base de qualquer prática BDSM segura é a comunicação constante. Negociar limites, desejos, palavras de segurança ("safewords") e expectativas antes, durante e depois das cenas é crucial. Manter registros dessas negociações (e-mails, mensagens, diários compartilhados) pode ser útil.

2. Documentação do Consentimento:

   • Contratos de Relacionamento/Cena: Embora a validade jurídica de "contratos BDSM" seja discutível no Brasil (não podem afastar normas de ordem pública), eles servem como forte evidência da intenção das partes, da negociação detalhada de limites e do consentimento informado. Devem ser claros, datados, assinados e, idealmente, reconhecidos em cartório (para prova de data e autenticidade das assinaturas).

   • Registros Audiovisuais: Gravar (com consentimento explícito para a gravação) discussões sobre consentimento e limites antes das cenas pode ser uma prova poderosa. Gravar as próprias cenas é mais complexo devido a questões de privacidade e potencial uso indevido, mas pode ser considerado em casos específicos, sempre com consentimento mútuo documentado para a gravação.

     Importante: a gravação deve ser com ciência da outra parte, para não configurar violação da intimidade (art. 5º, X, da Constituição Federal e art. 20 do Código Civil).

3. Testemunhas: Em alguns contextos de comunidade BDSM, a presença de terceiros de confiança durante negociações ou mesmo cenas pode servir como testemunho, embora isso possa alterar a dinâmica íntima do casal.

4. Estabelecimento Claro de Limites e Palavras de Segurança: Definir e respeitar rigorosamente os limites (o que é permitido, o que é proibido) e as palavras de segurança é fundamental. O desrespeito a uma palavra de segurança encerra o consentimento para aquele ato.
5. Avaliação Contínua do Consentimento: O consentimento não é um cheque em branco; ele deve ser entusiástico, contínuo e revogável a qualquer momento. Verificar o bem-estar do parceiro durante a cena ("check-ins") é essencial.
6. Discrição e Cuidado com Evidências Físicas: Ser discreto sobre a natureza do relacionamento pode evitar mal-entendidos externos. Após cenas que deixem marcas, é prudente que ambos os parceiros estejam cientes e de acordo, talvez documentando por fotos (com data) e uma nota sobre a consensualidade da prática que as gerou.
7. Aconselhamento Jurídico Preventivo: Consultar um advogado especializado em direito de família e criminal, com sensibilidade para dinâmicas de relacionamento alternativas, pode fornecer orientação personalizada sobre as melhores formas de documentar o consentimento e entender os riscos legais específicos.

Observações Importantes

• Nenhuma documentação substitui a necessidade de consentimento real, livre, informado e contínuo.
• A lei brasileira protege a "integridade física" e a "dignidade humana". Práticas que resultem em lesões graves ou que violem a dignidade de forma não consentida (ou com consentimento viciado) serão ilegais, independentemente de qualquer acordo prévio.
• Em caso de acusação, a existência de documentação robusta de consentimento não garante a absolvição, mas fortalece significativamente a defesa, ajudando a demonstrar a natureza consensual da relação e das práticas.

• A alegação de coação futura é particularmente difícil de prevenir apenas com documentos. Um histórico consistente de comunicação aberta (whatsapp/telegram/e-mails), respeito mútuo e ausência de dependência ou controle excessivo na relação pode ajudar a contextualizar a dinâmica como não coercitiva.

• Cuidado com Marcas Visíveis e Lesões Graves Práticas que resultam em hematomas severos ou lesões podem ser interpretadas como agressão, mesmo que consentidas. Evitar excessos protege não apenas a integridade física, mas também evita questionamentos legais futuros.

O que vem a ser consentimento viciado

No Direito, consentimento viciado é quando a pessoa concorda com algo, mas a vontade dela não é livre ou plena — ou seja, o consentimento existe formalmente, mas é defeituoso por alguma razão.

O Código Civil brasileiro (art. 138 a 165) define várias formas de vício de consentimento. As principais são:

Erro: A pessoa se engana sobre o que está consentindo. (Ex.: A pessoa acredita que vai participar de um jogo leve, mas na verdade é exposta a práticas pesadas.)

Dolo: A pessoa é enganada propositalmente para aceitar algo. (Ex.: Alguém mente sobre o que vai acontecer durante a prática.)

Coação: A pessoa é forçada ou ameaçada a consentir. (Ex.: "Se você não aceitar, eu termino com você" — pressão emocional forte pode ser vista como coação.)

Estado de perigo ou lesão: A pessoa aceita algo em situação de necessidade extrema ou abuso de sua vulnerabilidade. (Ex.: Alguém em situação emocional muito fragilizada é induzida a aceitar práticas que normalmente recusaria.)

No contexto de BDSM, isso é ainda mais delicado: Mesmo que a pessoa tenha "assinado" um contrato ou dito "sim", se depois ela alegar que seu consentimento foi dado sob medo, engano ou pressão psicológica, o consentimento pode ser considerado viciado — e, portanto, juridicamente inválido.

Isso tem duas implicações sérias:

1. O crime não se descaracteriza: Se houver vício, o consentimento é ignorado e a prática pode ser tratada como crime normal (lesão corporal, estupro, tortura, etc.).

2. A prova do consentimento precisa ser sólida: Mostrando que a pessoa estava informada, lúcida, livre e sem qualquer tipo de coação.

   Consentimento viciado é quando a pessoa concorda formalmente, mas de maneira enganada, forçada ou pressionada, tornando o consentimento inútil para efeitos jurídicos.

Conclusão

Casais que praticam BDSM consensual no Brasil navegam em um terreno que exige não apenas confiança mútua e comunicação excepcional, mas também uma consciência aguçada das complexidades legais e dos riscos de interpretações equivocadas ou acusações mal-intencionadas. Embora o BDSM seja uma expressão legítima da sexualidade humana, sua prática no Brasil exige responsabilidade redobrada. Ter provas claras de consentimento, manter a comunicação aberta e agir com prudência são formas eficazes de se proteger de falsas alegações e preservar a liberdade e a segurança de todos os envolvidos. Embora leis controversas como a Maria da Penha sejam "vitais" para a proteção contra a violência real, os praticantes de BDSM, e em particular os homens nesse contexto, devem adotar uma postura proativa e prudente para mitigar os riscos inerentes à potencial má interpretação ou instrumentalização dessas práticas e leis, garantindo que a expressão de sua consensualidade esteja resguardada na medida do possível.

---

Importante: No Brasil, mesmo com tudo isso, o Ministério Público pode denunciar por crime como lesão corporal grave, estupro ou tortura, independente de consentimento. Então a prudência nas práticas é fundamental.

Aviso Legal: Este artigo tem caráter meramente informativo e não constitui aconselhamento jurídico. As leis e interpretações podem mudar, e cada situação é única. Recomenda-se buscar orientação de um advogado qualificado para discutir casos específicos.

Se curtiu este artigo faça uma contribuição, se tiver algum ponto relevante para o artigo deixe seu comentário.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Redistributing Git with Nostr

Every time someone tries to "decentralize" Git -- like many projects tried in the past to do it with BitTorrent, IPFS, ScuttleButt or custom p2p protocols -- there is always a lurking comment: "but Git is already distributed!", and then the discussion proceeds to mention some facts about how Git supports multiple remotes and its magic syncing and merging abilities and so on.

Turns out all that is true, Git is indeed all that powerful, and yet GitHub is the big central hub that hosts basically all Git repositories in the giant world of open-source. There are some crazy people that host their stuff elsewhere, but these projects end up not being found by many people, and even when they do they suffer from lack of contributions.

Because everybody has a GitHub account it's easy to open a pull request to a repository of a project you're using if it's on GitHub (to be fair I think it's very annoying to have to clone the repository, then add it as a remote locally, push to it, then go on the web UI and click to open a pull request, then that cloned repository lurks forever in your profile unless you go through 16 screens to delete it -- but people in general seem to think it's easy).

It's much harder to do it on some random other server where some project might be hosted, because now you have to add 4 more even more annoying steps: create an account; pick a password; confirm an email address; setup SSH keys for pushing. (And I'm not even mentioning the basic impossibility of offering push access to external unknown contributors to people who want to host their own simple homemade Git server.)

At this point some may argue that we could all have accounts on GitLab, or Codeberg or wherever else, then those steps are removed. Besides not being a practical strategy this pseudo solution misses the point of being decentralized (or distributed, who knows) entirely: it's far from the ideal to force everybody to have the double of account management and SSH setup work in order to have the open-source world controlled by two shady companies instead of one.

What we want is to give every person the opportunity to host their own Git server without being ostracized. at the same time we must recognize that most people won't want to host their own servers (not even most open-source programmers!) and give everybody the ability to host their stuff on multi-tenant servers (such as GitHub) too. Importantly, though, if we allow for a random person to have a standalone Git server on a standalone server they host themselves on their wood cabin that also means any new hosting company can show up and start offering Git hosting, with or without new cool features, charging high or low or zero, and be immediately competing against GitHub or GitLab, i.e. we must remove the network-effect centralization pressure.

External contributions

The first problem we have to solve is: how can Bob contribute to Alice's repository without having an account on Alice's server?

SourceHut has reminded GitHub users that Git has always had this (for most) arcane git send-email command that is the original way to send patches, using an once-open protocol.

Turns out Nostr acts as a quite powerful email replacement and can be used to send text content just like email, therefore patches are a very good fit for Nostr event contents.

Once you get used to it and the proper UIs (or CLIs) are built sending and applying patches to and from others becomes a much easier flow than the intense clickops mixed with terminal copypasting that is interacting with GitHub (you have to clone the repository on GitHub, then update the remote URL in your local directory, then create a branch and then go back and turn that branch into a Pull Request, it's quite tiresome) that many people already dislike so much they went out of their way to build many GitHub CLI tools just so they could comment on issues and approve pull requests from their terminal.

Replacing GitHub features

Aside from being the "hub" that people use to send patches to other people's code (because no one can do the email flow anymore, justifiably), GitHub also has 3 other big features that are not directly related to Git, but that make its network-effect harder to overcome. Luckily Nostr can be used to create a new environment in which these same features are implemented in a more decentralized and healthy way.

Issues: bug reports, feature requests and general discussions

Since the "Issues" GitHub feature is just a bunch of text comments it should be very obvious that Nostr is a perfect fit for it.

I will not even mention the fact that Nostr is much better at threading comments than GitHub (which doesn't do it at all), which can generate much more productive and organized discussions (and you can opt out if you want).

Search

I use GitHub search all the time to find libraries and projects that may do something that I need, and it returns good results almost always. So if people migrated out to other code hosting providers wouldn't we lose it?

The fact is that even though we think everybody is on GitHub that is a globalist falsehood. Some projects are not on GitHub, and if we use only GitHub for search those will be missed. So even if we didn't have a Nostr Git alternative it would still be necessary to create a search engine that incorporated GitLab, Codeberg, SourceHut and whatnot.

Turns out on Nostr we can make that quite easy by not forcing anyone to integrate custom APIs or hardcoding Git provider URLs: each repository can make itself available by publishing an "announcement" event with a brief description and one or more Git URLs. That makes it easy for a search engine to index them -- and even automatically download the code and index the code (or index just README files or whatever) without a centralized platform ever having to be involved.

The relays where such announcements will be available play a role, of course, but that isn't a bad role: each announcement can be in multiple relays known for storing "public good" projects, some relays may curate only projects known to be very good according to some standards, other relays may allow any kind of garbage, which wouldn't make them good for a search engine to rely upon, but would still be useful in case one knows the exact thing (and from whom) they're searching for (the same is valid for all Nostr content, by the way, and that's where it's censorship-resistance comes from).

Continuous integration

GitHub Actions are a very hardly subsidized free-compute-for-all-paid-by-Microsoft feature, but one that isn't hard to replace at all. In fact there exists today many companies offering the same kind of service out there -- although they are mostly targeting businesses and not open-source projects, before GitHub Actions was introduced there were also many that were heavily used by open-source projects.

One problem is that these services are still heavily tied to GitHub today, they require a GitHub login, sometimes BitBucket and GitLab and whatnot, and do not allow one to paste an arbitrary Git server URL, but that isn't a thing that is very hard to change anyway, or to start from scratch. All we need are services that offer the CI/CD flows, perhaps using the same framework of GitHub Actions (although I would prefer to not use that messy garbage), and charge some few satoshis for it.

It may be the case that all the current services only support the big Git hosting platforms because they rely on their proprietary APIs, most notably the webhooks dispatched when a repository is updated, to trigger the jobs. It doesn't have to be said that Nostr can also solve that problem very easily.

@ d34e832d:383f78d0

Raspberry Pi-based voice assistant

This Idea details the design and deployment of a Raspberry Pi-based voice assistant powered by the Google Gemini AI API. The system combines open hardware with modern AI services to create a low-cost, flexible, and educational voice assistant platform. By leveraging a Raspberry Pi, basic audio hardware, and Python-based software, developers can create a functional, customizable assistant suitable for home automation, research, or personal productivity enhancement.

---

1. Voice assistants

Voice assistants have become increasingly ubiquitous, but commercially available systems like Alexa, Siri, or Google Assistant come with significant privacy and customization limitations.
This project offers an open, local, and customizable alternative, demonstrating how to build a voice assistant using Google Gemini (or OpenAI’s ChatGPT) APIs for natural language understanding.

Target Audience:
- DIY enthusiasts - Raspberry Pi hobbyists - AI developers - Privacy-conscious users

---

2. System Architecture

2.1 Hardware Components

| Component | Purpose | |:--------------------------|:----------------------------------------| | Raspberry Pi (any recent model, 4B recommended) | Core processing unit | | Micro SD Card (32GB+) | Operating System and storage | | USB Microphone | Capturing user voice input | | Audio Amplifier + Speaker | Outputting synthesized responses | | 5V DC Power Supplies (2x) | Separate power for Pi and amplifier | | LEDs + Resistors (optional)| Visual feedback (e.g., recording or listening states) |

2.2 Software Stack

| Software | Function | |:---------------------------|:----------------------------------------| | Raspberry Pi OS (Lite or Full) | Base operating system | | Python 3.9+ | Programming language | | SpeechRecognition | Captures and transcribes user voice | | Google Text-to-Speech (gTTS) | Converts responses into spoken audio | | Google Gemini API (or OpenAI API) | Powers the AI assistant brain | | Pygame | Audio playback for responses | | WinSCP + Windows Terminal | File transfer and remote management |

---

3. Hardware Setup

3.1 Basic Connections

• Microphone: Connect via USB port.
• Speaker and Amplifier: Wire from Raspberry Pi audio jack or via USB sound card if better quality is needed.
• LEDs (Optional): Connect through GPIO pins, using 220–330Ω resistors to limit current.

3.2 Breadboard Layout (Optional for LEDs)

| GPIO Pin | LED Color | Purpose | |:---------|:-----------|:--------------------| | GPIO 17 | Red | Recording active | | GPIO 27 | Green | Response playing |

Tip: Use a small breadboard for quick prototyping before moving to a custom PCB if desired.

---

4. Software Setup

4.1 Raspberry Pi OS Installation

• Use Raspberry Pi Imager to flash Raspberry Pi OS onto the Micro SD card.
• Initial system update: bash sudo apt update && sudo apt upgrade -y

4.2 Python Environment

• Install Python virtual environment: bash sudo apt install python3-venv python3 -m venv voice-env source voice-env/bin/activate

• Install required Python packages: bash pip install SpeechRecognition google-generativeai pygame gtts

(Replace google-generativeai with openai if using OpenAI's ChatGPT.)

4.3 API Key Setup

• Obtain a Google Gemini API key (or OpenAI API key).
• Store safely in a .env file or configure as environment variables for security: bash export GEMINI_API_KEY="your_api_key_here"

4.4 File Transfer

• Use WinSCP or scp commands to transfer Python scripts to the Pi.

4.5 Example Python Script (Simplified)

```python import speech_recognition as sr import google.generativeai as genai from gtts import gTTS import pygame import os

genai.configure(api_key=os.getenv('GEMINI_API_KEY')) recognizer = sr.Recognizer() mic = sr.Microphone()

pygame.init()

while True: with mic as source: print("Listening...") audio = recognizer.listen(source)

try:
    text = recognizer.recognize_google(audio)
    print(f"You said: {text}")

    response = genai.generate_content(text)
    tts = gTTS(text=response.text, lang='en')
    tts.save("response.mp3")

    pygame.mixer.music.load("response.mp3")
    pygame.mixer.music.play()
    while pygame.mixer.music.get_busy():
        continue

except Exception as e:
    print(f"Error: {e}")

```

---

5. Testing and Execution

• Activate the Python virtual environment: bash source voice-env/bin/activate
• Run your main assistant script: bash python3 assistant.py
• Speak into the microphone and listen for the AI-generated spoken response.

---

6. Troubleshooting

| Problem | Possible Fix | |:--------|:-------------| | Microphone not detected | Check arecord -l | | Audio output issues | Check aplay -l, use a USB DAC if needed | | Permission denied errors | Verify group permissions (audio, gpio) | | API Key Errors | Check environment variable and internet access |

---

7. Performance Notes

• Latency: Highly dependent on network speed and API response time.
• Audio Quality: Can be enhanced with a better USB microphone and powered speakers.
• Privacy: Minimal data retention if using your own Gemini or OpenAI account.

---

8. Potential Extensions

• Add hotword detection ("Hey Gemini") using Snowboy or Porcupine libraries.
• Build a local fallback model to answer basic questions offline.
• Integrate with home automation via MQTT, Home Assistant, or Node-RED.
• Enable LED animations to visually indicate listening and responding states.
• Deploy with a small eInk or OLED screen for text display of answers.

---

9. Consider

Building a Gemini-powered voice assistant on the Raspberry Pi empowers individuals to create customizable, private, and cost-effective alternatives to commercial voice assistants. By utilizing accessible hardware, modern open-source libraries, and powerful AI APIs, this project blends education, experimentation, and privacy-centric design into a single hands-on platform.

This guide can be adapted for personal use, educational programs, or even as a starting point for more advanced AI-based embedded systems.

---

References

• Raspberry Pi Foundation: https://www.raspberrypi.org
• Google Generative AI Documentation: https://ai.google.dev
• OpenAI Documentation: https://platform.openai.com
• SpeechRecognition Library: https://pypi.org/project/SpeechRecognition/
• gTTS Documentation: https://pypi.org/project/gTTS/
• Pygame Documentation: https://www.pygame.org/docs/

@ 86dfbe73:628cef55

Bei dem Begriff ‘Öffentlichkeit’ handelt es sich um einen diffusen Themenkomplex. Bisher gab es keine Einigung auf eine einheitliche Definition – auch da der Öffentlichkeitsbegriff je nach Kontext für sehr verschiedene Gegebenheiten herhalten muss. Habermas beschreibt all jenes als “öffentlich”, was eine wie auch immer gestaltete Gruppe betrifft. Öffentlichkeit ist demnach durch die “Unabgeschlossenheit des Publikums” gekennzeichnet.

Klassische Massenmedien dienen als Teil der öffentlichen Sphäre dazu, die politische Sphäre zu überwachen und der Gesamtheit der Rezipienten zugänglich zu machen. ‘Die Öffentlichkeit’ verfügte über mehr oder weniger dieselben Wissensbestände – vorausgesetzt die oder der Einzelne informierte sich über das Tagesgeschehen. Heutzutage wird die Öffentlichkeit deutlich heterogener. Es ist eine gesellschaftliche Fragmentierung in den sozialen Netzwerken zu beobachten. Die oder der Nutzer baut ihre oder sich seine eigene ‘Öffentlichkeit’ aus ganz verschiedenen Quellen zusammen.

In den Netzwerköffentlichkeiten wird sich mit Gleichgesinnten ausgetauscht und spezifische Informationen und Sichtweisen werden verbreitet. Politische Akteure werden durch Netzwerköffentlichkeiten autarker. Heutzutage sind Öffentlichkeit im Allgemeinen und die digitale Öffentlichkeit im Besonderen nur als Netzwerk verstehbar, nämlich als Netzwerk von Beziehungen.

Das frühere Twitter wäre dafür ein gutes Beispiel. Aus netzwerktheoretischer Sicht bestand es aus den wesentlichen Hubs, relevanten Clustern und Akteuren der öffentlichen Sphäre. Auf Twitter tummelten sich (fast) alle: Wissenschaftler, Autoren, Künstler, Aktivisten, Politiker aller Ränge, Juristen, Medienleute, allerlei Prominente und Public Figures und Experen für praktisch alles.

Auf den kommerziellen Plattformen hat die digitale Öffentlichkeit aufgehört eine vernetzte Öffentlichkeit zu sein und geht zunehmend in deren „For you“-Algorithmen auf. Das bedeutet, dass die neue digitale Öffentlichkeit nicht mehr durch menschliche Beziehungen und vernetztes Vertrauen getragen wird, sondern vollends den Steuerungsinstrumenten einer Hand voll Konzernen ausgeliefert ist.

An dieser Stelle kommen die LLMs zum Erstellen von Content zum tragen, mit dem dann die Empfehlungs-Feeds auf den kommerziellen Plattformen gefüttert werden. Man sollte sich den durch generative KI ermöglichten Content am besten als Angriff auf die Empfehlungsalgorithmen vorstellen, die die kommerziellen Social-Media-Plattformen kontrollieren und damit bestimmen, wie ein großer Teil der Öffentlichkeit die Realität interpretiert. Es geht auch darum, dass die Zielgruppe von KI-Content soziale Medien und Suchalgorithmen sind, nicht nur Menschen.

Das bedeutet, dass auf den kommerziellen Plattformen von Menschen erstellte Inhalte aufgrund der Masse immer häufiger von KI-generierten Inhalten übertönt werden. Da KI-generierte Inhalte leicht an das aktuelle Geschehen auf einer Plattform angepasst werden können, kommt es zu einem nahezu vollständigen Zusammenbruch des Informationsökosystems und damit der „Realität“ im Internet.

@ e3ba5e1a:5e433365

Prelude

I wrote this post differently than any of my others. It started with a discussion with AI on an OPSec-inspired review of separation of powers, and evolved into quite an exciting debate! I asked Grok to write up a summary in my overall writing style, which it got pretty well. I've decided to post it exactly as-is. Ultimately, I think there are two solid ideas driving my stance here:

1. Perfect is the enemy of the good
2. Failure is the crucible of success

Beyond that, just some hard-core belief in freedom, separation of powers, and operating from self-interest.

Intro

Alright, buckle up. I’ve been chewing on this idea for a while, and it’s time to spit it out. Let’s look at the U.S. government like I’d look at a codebase under a cybersecurity audit—OPSEC style, no fluff. Forget the endless debates about what politicians should do. That’s noise. I want to talk about what they can do, the raw powers baked into the system, and why we should stop pretending those powers are sacred. If there’s a hole, either patch it or exploit it. No half-measures. And yeah, I’m okay if the whole thing crashes a bit—failure’s a feature, not a bug.

The Filibuster: A Security Rule with No Teeth

You ever see a firewall rule that’s more theater than protection? That’s the Senate filibuster. Everyone acts like it’s this untouchable guardian of democracy, but here’s the deal: a simple majority can torch it any day. It’s not a law; it’s a Senate preference, like choosing tabs over spaces. When people call killing it the “nuclear option,” I roll my eyes. Nuclear? It’s a button labeled “press me.” If a party wants it gone, they’ll do it. So why the dance?

I say stop playing games. Get rid of the filibuster. If you’re one of those folks who thinks it’s the only thing saving us from tyranny, fine—push for a constitutional amendment to lock it in. That’s a real patch, not a Post-it note. Until then, it’s just a vulnerability begging to be exploited. Every time a party threatens to nuke it, they’re admitting it’s not essential. So let’s stop pretending and move on.

Supreme Court Packing: Because Nine’s Just a Number

Here’s another fun one: the Supreme Court. Nine justices, right? Sounds official. Except it’s not. The Constitution doesn’t say nine—it’s silent on the number. Congress could pass a law tomorrow to make it 15, 20, or 42 (hitchhiker’s reference, anyone?). Packing the court is always on the table, and both sides know it. It’s like a root exploit just sitting there, waiting for someone to log in.

So why not call the bluff? If you’re in power—say, Trump’s back in the game—say, “I’m packing the court unless we amend the Constitution to fix it at nine.” Force the issue. No more shadowboxing. And honestly? The court’s got way too much power anyway. It’s not supposed to be a super-legislature, but here we are, with justices’ ideologies driving the bus. That’s a bug, not a feature. If the court weren’t such a kingmaker, packing it wouldn’t even matter. Maybe we should be talking about clipping its wings instead of just its size.

The Executive Should Go Full Klingon

Let’s talk presidents. I’m not saying they should wear Klingon armor and start shouting “Qapla’!”—though, let’s be real, that’d be awesome. I’m saying the executive should use every scrap of power the Constitution hands them. Enforce the laws you agree with, sideline the ones you don’t. If Congress doesn’t like it, they’ve got tools: pass new laws, override vetoes, or—here’s the big one—cut the budget. That’s not chaos; that’s the system working as designed.

Right now, the real problem isn’t the president overreaching; it’s the bureaucracy. It’s like a daemon running in the background, eating CPU and ignoring the user. The president’s supposed to be the one steering, but the administrative state’s got its own agenda. Let the executive flex, push the limits, and force Congress to check it. Norms? Pfft. The Constitution’s the spec sheet—stick to it.

Let the System Crash

Here’s where I get a little spicy: I’m totally fine if the government grinds to a halt. Deadlock isn’t a disaster; it’s a feature. If the branches can’t agree, let the president veto, let Congress starve the budget, let enforcement stall. Don’t tell me about “essential services.” Nothing’s so critical it can’t take a breather. Shutdowns force everyone to the table—debate, compromise, or expose who’s dropping the ball. If the public loses trust? Good. They’ll vote out the clowns or live with the circus they elected.

Think of it like a server crash. Sometimes you need a hard reboot to clear the cruft. If voters keep picking the same bad admins, well, the country gets what it deserves. Failure’s the best teacher—way better than limping along on autopilot.

States Are the Real MVPs

If the feds fumble, states step up. Right now, states act like junior devs waiting for the lead engineer to sign off. Why? Federal money. It’s a leash, and it’s tight. Cut that cash, and states will remember they’re autonomous. Some will shine, others will tank—looking at you, California. And I’m okay with that. Let people flee to better-run states. No bailouts, no excuses. States are like competing startups: the good ones thrive, the bad ones pivot or die.

Could it get uneven? Sure. Some states might turn into sci-fi utopias while others look like a post-apocalyptic vidya game. That’s the point—competition sorts it out. Citizens can move, markets adjust, and failure’s a signal to fix your act.

Chaos Isn’t the Enemy

Yeah, this sounds messy. States ignoring federal law, external threats poking at our seams, maybe even a constitutional crisis. I’m not scared. The Supreme Court’s there to referee interstate fights, and Congress sets the rules for state-to-state play. But if it all falls apart? Still cool. States can sort it without a babysitter—it’ll be ugly, but freedom’s worth it. External enemies? They’ll either unify us or break us. If we can’t rally, we don’t deserve the win.

Centralizing power to avoid this is like rewriting your app in a single thread to prevent race conditions—sure, it’s simpler, but you’re begging for a deadlock. Decentralized chaos lets states experiment, lets people escape, lets markets breathe. States competing to cut regulations to attract businesses? That’s a race to the bottom for red tape, but a race to the top for innovation—workers might gripe, but they’ll push back, and the tension’s healthy. Bring it—let the cage match play out. The Constitution’s checks are enough if we stop coddling the system.

Why This Matters

I’m not pitching a utopia. I’m pitching a stress test. The U.S. isn’t a fragile porcelain doll; it’s a rugged piece of hardware built to take some hits. Let it fail a little—filibuster, court, feds, whatever. Patch the holes with amendments if you want, or lean into the grind. Either way, stop fearing the crash. It’s how we debug the republic.

So, what’s your take? Ready to let the system rumble, or got a better way to secure the code? Hit me up—I’m all ears.

@ d34e832d:383f78d0

Gist

This Idea presents a blueprint for creating a portable, offline-first education server focused on Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) topics like Bitcoin fundamentals, Linux administration, GPG encryption, and digital self-sovereignty. Using the compact and powerful Nookbox G9 NAS unit, we demonstrate how to deliver accessible, decentralized educational content in remote or network-restricted environments.

---

1. Bitcoin, Linux, and Cryptographic tools

Access to self-sovereign technologies such as Bitcoin, Linux, and cryptographic tools is critical for empowering individuals and communities. However, many areas face internet connectivity issues or political restrictions limiting access to online resources.

By combining a high-performance mini NAS server with a curated library of FOSS educational materials, we can create a mobile "university" that delivers critical knowledge independently of centralized networks.

---

2. Hardware Platform: Nookbox G9 Overview

The Nookbox G9 offers an ideal balance of performance, portability, and affordability for this project.

2.1 Core Specifications

| Feature | Specification | |:------------------------|:---------------------------------------| | Form Factor | 1U Rackmount mini-NAS | | Storage | Up to 8TB (4×2TB M.2 NVMe SSDs) | | M.2 Interface | PCIe Gen 3x2 per drive slot | | Networking | Dual 2.5 Gigabit Ethernet ports | | Power Consumption | 11–30 Watts (typical usage) | | Default OS | Windows 11 (to be replaced with Linux) | | Linux Compatibility | Fully compatible with Ubuntu 24.10 |

---

3. FOSS Education Server Design

3.1 Operating System Setup

• Replace Windows 11 with a clean install of Ubuntu Server 24.10.
• Harden the OS:
• Enable full-disk encryption.
• Configure UFW firewall.
• Disable unnecessary services.

3.2 Core Services Deployed

| Service | Purpose | |:--------------------|:-----------------------------------------| | Nginx Web Server | Host offline courses and documentation | | Nextcloud (optional) | Offer private file sharing for students | | Moodle LMS (optional) | Deliver structured courses and quizzes | | Tor Hidden Service | Optional for anonymous access locally | | rsync/Syncthing | Distribute updates peer-to-peer |

---

3.3 Content Hosted

• Bitcoin: Bitcoin Whitepaper, Bitcoin Core documentation, Electrum Wallet tutorials.
• Linux: Introduction to Linux (LPIC-1 materials), bash scripting guides, system administration manuals.
• Cryptography: GPG tutorials, SSL/TLS basics, secure communications handbooks.
• Offline Tools: Full mirrors of sites like LearnLinux.tv, Bitcoin.org, and selected content from FSF.

All resources are curated to be license-compliant and redistributable in an offline format.

---

4. Network Configuration

• LAN-only Access: No reliance on external Internet.
• DHCP server setup for automatic IP allocation.
• Optional Wi-Fi access point using USB Wi-Fi dongle and hostapd.
• Access Portal: Homepage automatically redirects users to educational content upon connection.

---

5. Advantages of This Setup

| Feature | Advantage | |:-----------------------|:----------------------------------------| | Offline Capability | Operates without internet connectivity | | Portable Form Factor | Fits into field deployments easily | | Secure and Hardened | Encrypted, compartmentalized, and locked down | | Modular Content | Easy to update or expand educational resources | | Energy Efficient | Low power draw enables solar or battery operation | | Open Source Stack | End-to-end FOSS ecosystem, no vendor lock-in |

---

6. Deployment Scenarios

• Rural Schools: Provide Linux training without requiring internet.
• Disaster Recovery Zones: Deliver essential technical education in post-disaster areas.
• Bitcoin Meetups: Offer Bitcoin literacy and cryptography workshops in remote communities.
• Privacy Advocacy Groups: Teach operational security practices without risking network surveillance.

---

7. Performance Considerations

Despite PCIe Gen 3x2 limitations, the available bandwidth (~2GB/s theoretical) vastly exceeds the server's 2.5 Gbps network output (~250MB/s), making it more than sufficient for a read-heavy educational workload.

Thermal Management:
Given the G9’s known cooling issues, install additional thermal pads or heatsinks on the NVMe drives. Consider external USB-powered cooling fans for sustained heavy usage.

---

8. Ways To Extend

• Multi-language Support: Add localized course materials.
• Bitcoin Node Integration: Host a lightweight Bitcoin node (e.g., Bitcoin Core with pruning enabled or a complete full node) for educational purposes.
• Mesh Networking: Use Mesh Wi-Fi protocols (e.g., cjdns or Yggdrasil) to allow peer-to-peer server sharing without centralized Wi-Fi.

---

9. Consider

Building a Portable FOSS Education Server on a Nookbox G9 is a practical, scalable solution for democratizing technical knowledge, empowering communities, and defending digital sovereignty in restricted environments.

Through thoughtful system design—leveraging open-source software and secure deployment practices—we enable resilient, censorship-resistant education wherever it's needed.

---

📎 References

• Ubuntu Server
• Moodle LMS
• LearnLinux.tv
• Bitcoin.org
• Tor Project

@ 6e0ea5d6:0327f353

Ascolta.

We live in times where the average man is measured by the speeches he gives — not by the commitments he keeps. People talk about dreams, goals, promises… but what truly remains is what’s honored in the silence of small gestures, in actions that don’t seek applause, in attitudes unseen — yet speak volumes.

Punctuality, for example. Showing up on time isn’t about the clock. It’s about respect. Respect for another’s time, yes — but more importantly, respect for one’s own word. A man who is late without reason is already running late in his values. And the one who excuses his own lateness with sweet justifications slowly gets used to mediocrity.

Keeping your word is more than fulfilling promises. It is sealing, with the mouth, what the body must later uphold. Every time a man commits to something, he creates a moral debt with his own dignity. And to break that commitment is to declare bankruptcy — not in the eyes of others, but in front of himself.

And debts? Even the small ones — or especially the small ones — are precise thermometers of character. A forgotten sum, an unpaid favor, a commitment left behind… all of these reveal the structure of the inner building that man resides in. He who neglects the small is merely rehearsing for his future collapse.

Life, contrary to what the reckless say, is not built on grand deeds. It is built with small bricks, laid with almost obsessive precision. The truly great man is the one who respects the details — recognizing in them a code of conduct.

In Sicily, especially in the streets of Palermo, I learned early on that there is more nobility in paying a five-euro debt on time than in flaunting riches gained without word, without honor, without dignity.

As they say in Palermo: L’uomo si conosce dalle piccole cose.

So, amico mio, Don’t talk to me about greatness if you can’t show up on time. Don’t talk to me about respect if your word is fickle. And above all, don’t talk to me about honor if you still owe what you once promised — no matter how small.

Thank you for reading, my friend!

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

A toast to our family!

@ de6c63ab:d028389b

Ever wondered why Bitcoin stops at 20,999,999.9769 and not a clean 21M? It’s not a bug — it’s brilliant.

https://blossom.primal.net/8e9e6fffbca54dfb8e55071ae590e676b355803ef18b08c8cbd9521a2eb567a8.png

Of course, it's because of this mythical and seemingly magical formula. Want to hear the full story behind this? Keep reading!

The Simple Math Behind It

In reality, there’s no magic here — it’s just an ordinary summation. That big sigma symbol (Σ) tells you that. The little “i” is the summation index, starting from 0 at the bottom and going up to 32 at the top. Why 32? We’ll get there!

After the sigma, you see the expression: 210,000 × (50 ÷ 2^i). 210,000 blocks represent one halving interval, with about 144 blocks mined per day, amounting to almost exactly four years. After each interval, the block reward halves — that’s what the division by 2^i means.

Crunching the Numbers

When i = 0 (before the first halving): 210,000 × (50 ÷ 2^0) = 10,500,000

At i = 1 (after the first halving): 210,000 × (50 ÷ 2^1) = 5,250,000

At i = 2 (after the second halving): 210,000 × (50 ÷ 2^2) = 2,625,000

…

At i = 31: 210,000 × (50 ÷ 2^31) ≈ 0.00489

At i = 32: 210,000 × (50 ÷ 2^32) ≈ 0.00244

And when you sum all of that up? 20,999,999.99755528

Except… that’s not the correct total! The real final number is: 20,999,999.9769

Where the Real Magic Happens

How come?! Here’s where the real fun begins.

We just performed the summation with real (floating-point) numbers. But computers don’t like working with real numbers. They much prefer integers. That’s also one reason why a bitcoin can’t be divided infinitely — the smallest unit is one satoshi, one hundred-millionth of a bitcoin.

And that’s also why there are exactly 33 halvings (0th, 1st, 2nd, …, 31st, 32nd). After the 32nd halving, the block reward would drop below one satoshi, making further halvings meaningless.

https://blossom.primal.net/6abae5b19bc68737c5b14785f54713e7ce11dfdecbe10c64692fc8d9a90c7f34.png

The Role of Integer Math and Bit-Shifting

Because Bitcoin operates with integers (specifically satoshis), the division (reward ÷ 2^i) is actually done using integer division. More precisely, by bit-shifting to the right:

https://blossom.primal.net/3dac403390dd24df4fa8c474db62476fba814bb8c98ca663e6e3a536f4ff7d98.png

We work with 64-bit integers. Halving the value simply means shifting the bits one position to the right.

What Happens During the Halvings

Notice: during the first 9 halvings (i = 0 to i = 8), we’re just shaving off zeros. But starting with the 9th halving (i = 9), we start losing ones. Every time a “one” falls off, it means we’re losing a tiny fraction — a remainder that would have existed if we were using real numbers.

The sum of all these lost remainders is exactly the difference between the two numbers we saw above.

And that’s why the total bitcoin supply is 20,999,999.9769 — not 21 million exactly.

Did you enjoy this? Got any questions? 🔥🚀

@ 21c9f12c:75695e59

Ingredients

• 1 cup dried red lentils
• (2) 25-ounce jars marinara sauce
• 1 cup raw cashews
• 14.5 ounce firm tofu (patted dry)
• ½ cup nutritional yeast
• 3 tablespoons fresh lemon juice (from about 2 lemons)
• 1 teaspoon salt
• 1 teaspoon dried basil
• 1 teaspoon oregano
• ½ teaspoon garlic powder
• 3 cups baby spinach
• 1 box lasagna noodles (about 12 noodles) (regular, gluten free or whole grain)
• Double recipe Easy Vegan Mozzarella Cheese (or 2-3 cups shredded vegan mozzarella)

Directions

1. lentilsCook the red lentils . Add 1 cup dried red lentils and 3 cups of water to a medium pot. Bring to a boil, and then simmer for about 20 minutes. Drain the lentils in a fine strainer, and then add back to the pot and stir in the marinara sauce . Set aside.
2. ovenPreheat the oven to 350 degrees .
3. Make the Cashew-Tofu Ricotta: Add the cashews to a food processor and process until fine and crumbly. Then add the tofu in chunks, nutritional yeast , lemon juice , salt , basil , oregano and garlic powder to the food processor. Pulse until well combined and pretty smooth. If it's too thick, add a few tablespoons of water to blend. Set aside.
4. LasagnaAssembling the lasagna: Add about 1 cup of lentil marinara to the bottom of a large 9x13 inch casserole dish. Spread it around evenly. Next add 4-5 lasagna noodles (uncooked). Spread half of the ricotta on top of the noodles . Top with half of the spinach . Add about 1 cup of the marinara sauce over the spinach , then place 4-5 lasagna noodles on top. Spread the rest of the ricotta over the noodles , then the rest of the spinach . Place 4-5 more noodles on top of the spinach , and then pour the rest of the sauce over the top, evenly.
5. LasagnaCover tightly with foil and bake for 40 minutes.
6. MozzarellaWhile the lasagna is cooking, make your Vegan Mozzarella Cheese , if using. Alternatively, use 2-3 cups store bought vegan mozzarella cheese .
7. LasagnaAfter 40 minutes, remove the foil and spoon on the mozzarella (or sprinkle the cheese all over). Place the lasagna back in the oven and bake for 20 more minutes, uncovered. Remove from oven, let cool for at least 15 minutes and serve.
8. StorageLeftover lasagna will keep for about 4 days in the refrigerator. See notes for freezing instructions.

@ 1f79058c:eb86e1cb

I'm currently using this bash script to publish long-form content from local Markdown files to Nostr relays.

It requires all of yq, jq, and nak to be installed.

Usage

Create a signed Nostr event and print it to the console:

bash markdown_to_nostr.sh article-filename.md

Create a Nostr event and publish it to one or more relays:

bash markdown_to_nostr.sh article-filename.md ws://localhost:7777 wss://nostr.kosmos.org

Markdown format

You can specify your metadata as YAML in a Front Matter header. Here's an example file:

```markdown

title: "Good Morning" summary: "It's a beautiful day" image: https://example.com/i/beautiful-day.jpg date: 2025-04-24T15:00:00Z tags: gm, poetry published: false

---

In the blue sky just a few specks of gray
In the evening of a beautiful day
Though last night it rained and more rain on the way
And that more rain is needed 'twould be fair to say.

— Francis Duggan ```

The metadata keys are mostly self-explanatory. Note:

• All keys except for title are optional
• date, if present, will be set as the published_at date.
• If published is set to true, it will publish a kind 30023 event, otherwise a kind 30024 (draft)
• The d tag (widely used as URL slug for the article) will be the filename without the .md extension

@ c066aac5:6a41a034

I’m drawn to extremities in art. The louder, the bolder, the more outrageous, the better. Bold art takes me out of the mundane into a whole new world where anything and everything is possible. Having grown up in the safety of the suburban midwest, I was a bit of a rebellious soul in search of the satiation that only came from the consumption of the outrageous. My inclination to find bold art draws me to NOSTR, because I believe NOSTR can be the place where the next generation of artistic pioneers go to express themselves. I also believe that as much as we are able, were should invite them to come create here.

My Background: A Small Side Story

My father was a professional gamer in the 80s, back when there was no money or glory in the avocation. He did get a bit of spotlight though after the fact: in the mid 2000’s there were a few parties making documentaries about that era of gaming as well as current arcade events (namely 2007’sChasing GhostsandThe King of Kong: A Fistful of Quarters). As a result of these documentaries, there was a revival in the arcade gaming scene. My family attended events related to the documentaries or arcade gaming and I became exposed to a lot of things I wouldn’t have been able to find. The producer ofThe King of Kong: A Fistful of Quarters had previously made a documentary calledNew York Dollwhich was centered around the life of bassist Arthur Kane. My 12 year old mind was blown: The New York Dolls were a glam-punk sensation dressed in drag. The music was from another planet. Johnny Thunders’ guitar playing was like Chuck Berry with more distortion and less filter. Later on I got to meet the Galaga record holder at the time, Phil Day, in Ottumwa Iowa. Phil is an Australian man of high intellect and good taste. He exposed me to great creators such as Nick Cave & The Bad Seeds, Shakespeare, Lou Reed, artists who created things that I had previously found inconceivable.

I believe this time period informed my current tastes and interests, but regrettably I think it also put coals on the fire of rebellion within. I stopped taking my parents and siblings seriously, the Christian faith of my family (which I now hold dearly to) seemed like a mundane sham, and I felt I couldn’t fit in with most people because of my avant-garde tastes. So I write this with the caveat that there should be a way to encourage these tastes in children without letting them walk down the wrong path. There is nothing inherently wrong with bold art, but I’d advise parents to carefully find ways to cultivate their children’s tastes without completely shutting them down and pushing them away as a result. My parents were very loving and patient during this time; I thank God for that.

With that out of the way, lets dive in to some bold artists:

Nicolas Cage: Actor

There is an excellent video by Wisecrack on Nicolas Cage that explains him better than I will, which I will linkhere. Nicolas Cage rejects the idea that good acting is tied to mere realism; all of his larger than life acting decisions are deliberate choices. When that clicked for me, I immediately realized the man is a genius. He borrows from Kabuki and German Expressionism, art forms that rely on exaggeration to get the message across. He has even created his own acting style, which he calls Nouveau Shamanic. He augments his imagination to go from acting to being. Rather than using the old hat of method acting, he transports himself to a new world mentally. The projects he chooses to partake in are based on his own interests or what he considers would be a challenge (making a bad script good for example). Thus it doesn’t matter how the end result comes out; he has already achieved his goal as an artist. Because of this and because certain directors don’t know how to use his talents, he has a noticeable amount of duds in his filmography. Dig around the duds, you’ll find some pure gold. I’d personally recommend the filmsPig, Joe, Renfield, and his Christmas film The Family Man.

Nick Cave: Songwriter

What a wild career this man has had! From the apocalyptic mayhem of his band The Birthday Party to the pensive atmosphere of his albumGhosteen, it seems like Nick Cave has tried everything. I think his secret sauce is that he’s always working. He maintains an excellent newsletter calledThe Red Hand Files, he has written screenplays such asLawless, he has written books, he has made great film scores such asThe Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford, the man is religiously prolific. I believe that one of the reasons he is prolific is that he’s not afraid to experiment. If he has an idea, he follows it through to completion. From the albumMurder Ballads(which is comprised of what the title suggests) to his rejected sequel toGladiator(Gladiator: Christ Killer), he doesn’t seem to be afraid to take anything on. This has led to some over the top works as well as some deeply personal works. Albums likeSkeleton TreeandGhosteenwere journeys through the grief of his son’s death. The Boatman’s Callis arguably a better break-up album than anything Taylor Swift has put out. He’s not afraid to be outrageous, he’s not afraid to offend, but most importantly he’s not afraid to be himself. Works I’d recommend include The Birthday Party’sLive 1981-82, Nick Cave & The Bad Seeds’The Boatman’s Call, and the filmLawless.

Jim Jarmusch: Director

I consider Jim’s films to be bold almost in an ironic sense: his works are bold in that they are, for the most part, anti-sensational. He has a rule that if his screenplays are criticized for a lack of action, he makes them even less eventful. Even with sensational settings his films feel very close to reality, and they demonstrate the beauty of everyday life. That's what is bold about his art to me: making the sensational grounded in reality while making everyday reality all the more special. Ghost Dog: The Way of the Samurai is about a modern-day African-American hitman who strictly follows the rules of the ancient Samurai, yet one can resonate with the humanity of a seemingly absurd character. Only Lovers Left Aliveis a vampire love story, but in the middle of a vampire romance one can see their their own relationships in a new deeply human light. Jim’s work reminds me that art reflects life, and that there is sacred beauty in seemingly mundane everyday life. I personally recommend his filmsPaterson,Down by Law, andCoffee and Cigarettes.

NOSTR: We Need Bold Art

NOSTR is in my opinion a path to a better future. In a world creeping slowly towards everything apps, I hope that the protocol where the individual owns their data wins over everything else. I love freedom and sovereignty. If NOSTR is going to win the race of everything apps, we need more than Bitcoin content. We need more than shirtless bros paying for bananas in foreign countries and exercising with girls who have seductive accents. Common people cannot see themselves in such a world. NOSTR needs to catch the attention of everyday people. I don’t believe that this can be accomplished merely by introducing more broadly relevant content; people are searching for content that speaks to them. I believe that NOSTR can and should attract artists of all kinds because NOSTR is one of the few places on the internet where artists can express themselves fearlessly. Getting zaps from NOSTR’s value-for-value ecosystem has far less friction than crowdfunding a creative project or pitching investors that will irreversibly modify an artist’s vision. Having a place where one can post their works without fear of censorship should be extremely enticing. Having a place where one can connect with fellow humans directly as opposed to a sea of bots should seem like the obvious solution. If NOSTR can become a safe haven for artists to express themselves and spread their work, I believe that everyday people will follow. The banker whose stressful job weighs on them will suddenly find joy with an original meme made by a great visual comedian. The programmer for a healthcare company who is drowning in hopeless mundanity could suddenly find a new lust for life by hearing the song of a musician who isn’t afraid to crowdfund their their next project by putting their lighting address on the streets of the internet. The excel guru who loves independent film may find that NOSTR is the best way to support non corporate movies. My closing statement: continue to encourage the artists in your life as I’m sure you have been, but while you’re at it give them the purple pill. You may very well be a part of building a better future.

@ fbf0e434:e1be6a39

Hackathon 概要

Hedera Hashathon: Nairobi Edition 近日圆满落幕，共有 223 名开发者参与，49 个项目通过审核。本次活动以线上形式举办，由 Kenya Tech Events、内罗毕证券交易所及虚拟资产商会共同支持，旨在推动本地创新并提升区块链技术在肯尼亚的应用水平。

黑客松围绕三大核心方向展开：AI 代理、资本市场和 Hedera Explorer。参与者基于 Hedera 区块链开发解决方案，针对性解决自动化、金融普惠及数字资产交互等领域的挑战。活动通过在线辅导和网络交流机会，充分展现了协作开发的重要性。

活动亮点当属在内罗毕大学举办的 Demo Day，入围决赛的团队现场展示创新方案并获颁奖项。尤其在资本市场方向的顶尖项目，将获得孵化支持及导师指导以推进后续开发。此次黑客松特别注重实际应用，凸显了区块链技术在重塑肯尼亚产业、推动技术进步并提升市场参与度方面的潜力。

Hackathon 获奖者

第一名

• **Hedgehog:** 一个使用Hedera网络上的代币化真实股票交易所股份作为抵押品的链上借贷协议。通过将股票抵押与区块链透明性相结合，确保了安全的去中心化借贷。

第二名

• **Orion:** 通过将NSE股票代币化为Hedera区块链上的资产，促进在肯尼亚的轻松股票交易。通过与Mpesa的集成简化了证券交易流程，实现高效的数字交易。

第三名

• **NSEChainBridge:** 一个基于区块链的平台，通过创新的代币解决方案增强了NSE股票作为数字代币的交易，提高股票交易的可达性和流动性。

第四名

• **HashGuard:** 一个使用Hedera Hashgraph技术的代币化微型保险平台，专为boda boda骑手提供。它提供了负担得起的即时保险，让不需要区块链专业知识的用户也能获得保险。

要查看完整项目列表，请访问 DoraHacks。

关于组织者

Hedera

Hedera是一个以速度、安全性和可扩展性著称的公共分布式账本平台。其hashgraph共识算法是一种权益证明的变体，提供了一种独特的分布式共识实现方式。Hedera活跃于多个行业领域，支持优先考虑透明度和效率的项目。该组织始终致力于推进去中心化网络的基础设施建设，促进全球范围内安全而高效的数字交易。

@ 6be5cc06:5259daf0

Introdução

Uma sociedade não deve ser construída sobre coerção, mas sim sobre associações voluntárias e interações espontâneas entre indivíduos. A sociedade de condomínios privados surge como uma alternativa natural ao modelo atual de centros urbanos, substituindo a imposição centralizada por estruturas baseadas em contratos e livre associação. Cada condomínio é uma unidade autônoma, gerida por aqueles que ali residem, onde os critérios de entrada, as regras internas e o comércio são definidos pelos próprios participantes. Essa estrutura permite que indivíduos se agrupem com base em valores compartilhados, eliminando os conflitos artificiais impostos por estados e legislações homogêneas que não respeitam a diversidade de preferências e estilos de vida.

O objetivo dessa sociedade é simples: permitir que as pessoas vivam de acordo com seus princípios sem interferência externa. Em um mundo onde a coerção estatal distorce incentivos, os condomínios privados oferecem uma alternativa onde a ordem surge do livre mercado e da cooperação voluntária. Os moradores escolhem seus vizinhos, definem suas próprias normas e interagem economicamente conforme suas necessidades e interesses. O modelo elimina a necessidade de um controle central, pois os incentivos derivados do livre mercado levam ao desenvolvimento de comunidades prósperas, onde a reputação e a confiança mútua são mais eficazes do que qualquer imposição estatal. Assim, essa sociedade representa a evolução lógica do conceito de liberdade individual e propriedade privada como pilares fundamentais da ordem social.

Público-Alvo e Identidade

Os condomínios privados refletem o princípio da livre associação, permitindo que indivíduos escolham viver em comunidades alinhadas com seus valores e necessidades sem interferência estatal. Cada condomínio possui uma identidade própria, moldada pelos moradores e seus interesses, criando ambientes onde afinidades culturais, filosóficas ou profissionais são preservadas e incentivadas. Enquanto alguns podem ser voltados para famílias numerosas, oferecendo amplos espaços e infraestrutura adequada, outros podem priorizar solteiros e jovens profissionais, com áreas de coworking e espaços de lazer voltados para networking e socialização. Da mesma forma, comunidades religiosas podem estabelecer seus próprios espaços de culto e eventos, enquanto condomínios para idosos podem ser projetados com acessibilidade e serviços médicos especializados.

Críticos podem afirmar que essa forma de organização resulta em pouca diversidade de habilidades e perspectivas, mas esse argumento ignora a dinâmica das interações humanas e o caráter evolutivo dos intercâmbios entre comunidades. Nenhum condomínio existe isolado; a troca entre diferentes comunidades ocorre naturalmente pelo mercado, incentivando o intercâmbio de conhecimento e serviços entre especialistas de diferentes áreas. Além disso, a ideia de que todos os grupos devem conter uma variedade aleatória de indivíduos desconsidera que a verdadeira diversidade nasce da liberdade de escolha, e não da imposição estatal de convivências forçadas.

Outra crítica possível é que a existência de critérios de entrada pode levar à segregação social. No entanto, essa preocupação deriva da concepção errônea de que todas as comunidades devem ser abertas e incluir qualquer pessoa indiscriminadamente. Porém, a liberdade de associação implica, necessariamente, a liberdade de exclusão. Se um grupo deseja manter determinada identidade cultural, religiosa ou profissional, isso não impede que outros grupos criem suas próprias comunidades conforme seus valores e recursos. Além disso, essa especialização leva a uma concorrência saudável entre condomínios, forçando-os a oferecer melhores condições para atrair moradores. Em vez de uma sociedade homogênea moldada por burocratas, temos um mosaico de comunidades autônomas, onde cada indivíduo pode encontrar ou criar o ambiente que melhor lhe convém.

Autossuficiência e Especialização

A força dos condomínios privados reside na capacidade de seus moradores de contribuírem ativamente para a comunidade, tornando-a funcional e autossuficiente sem a necessidade de intervenções estatais. Diferentes condomínios podem se especializar em áreas específicas ou ter diversos profissionais de diferentes setores, refletindo as competências e interesses de seus residentes. Essa descentralização do conhecimento e da produção permite que cada comunidade desenvolva soluções internas para suas demandas, reduzindo dependências externas e estimulando a prosperidade local.

Os moradores atuam como agentes econômicos, trocando bens e serviços dentro do próprio condomínio e entre diferentes comunidades. Um condomínio voltado para a saúde, por exemplo, pode contar com médicos, enfermeiros e terapeutas que oferecem consultas, aulas e assistência médica particular, remunerados diretamente por seus clientes, sem a intermediação de burocracias. Da mesma forma, um condomínio agrícola pode abrigar agricultores que cultivam alimentos orgânicos, compartilham técnicas de cultivo e comercializam excedentes com outros condomínios, garantindo um fluxo contínuo de suprimentos. Em um condomínio tecnológico, programadores, engenheiros e empreendedores desenvolvem soluções de TI, segurança digital e energia renovável, promovendo a inovação e ampliando as possibilidades de intercâmbio econômico.

A economia interna de cada condomínio se fortalece através de serviços oferecidos pelos próprios moradores. Professores podem ministrar aulas, técnicos podem prestar serviços de manutenção, artesãos podem vender seus produtos diretamente para os vizinhos. O mercado livre e voluntário é o principal regulador dessas interações, garantindo que a especialização surja naturalmente conforme a demanda e a oferta se ajustam. Essa estrutura elimina desperdícios comuns em sistemas centralizados, onde a alocação de recursos se dá por decisões políticas e não pelas necessidades reais da população.

Alguns argumentam que a especialização pode criar bolhas de conhecimento, tornando os condomínios excessivamente dependentes de trocas externas. Contudo, essa preocupação desconsidera a natureza espontânea do mercado, que incentiva a cooperação e o comércio entre comunidades distintas. Nenhum condomínio precisa produzir tudo internamente; ao contrário, a divisão do trabalho e a liberdade de escolha promovem interdependências saudáveis e vantajosas para todos. Assim, cada morador se insere em um ecossistema dinâmico, onde suas habilidades são valorizadas e sua autonomia preservada, sem coerções estatais ou distorções artificiais impostas por planejadores centrais.

Infraestrutura e Sustentabilidade

A solidez de uma sociedade baseada em condomínios privados depende de uma infraestrutura eficiente e sustentável, projetada para reduzir a dependência externa e garantir o máximo de autonomia. Sem um aparato estatal centralizador, cada comunidade deve estruturar seus próprios meios de obtenção de energia, água, alimentação e demais bens essenciais, garantindo que suas operações sejam viáveis a longo prazo. Essa abordagem, longe de ser um entrave, representa a verdadeira inovação descentralizada: um ambiente onde as soluções emergem da necessidade real e da engenhosidade humana, e não de diretrizes burocráticas e regulamentos ineficazes.

Cada condomínio pode investir em tecnologias sustentáveis e autônomas, como energia solar e eólica, reduzindo custos e minimizando a vulnerabilidade às flutuações do mercado energético tradicional. Sistemas de captação e filtragem de água da chuva, bem como a reutilização eficiente dos recursos hídricos, garantem independência em relação a empresas monopolistas e governos que frequentemente administram esse bem de forma ineficaz. Hortas comunitárias e fazendas verticais podem suprir grande parte da demanda alimentar, permitindo que cada condomínio mantenha sua própria reserva de alimentos, aumentando a resiliência contra crises externas e instabilidades de mercado.

Além dos recursos naturais, os espaços compartilhados desempenham um papel fundamental na integração e no fortalecimento dessas comunidades. Bibliotecas, ginásios, creches e salas de aula permitem que o conhecimento e os serviços circulem internamente, criando um ambiente onde a colaboração ocorre de maneira orgânica. A descentralização também se aplica ao uso da tecnologia, plataformas digitais privadas podem ser utilizadas para conectar moradores, facilitar a troca de serviços e produtos, além de coordenar agendamentos e eventos dentro dos condomínios e entre diferentes comunidades.

O Bitcoin surge como uma ferramenta indispensável nesse ecossistema, eliminando a necessidade de bancos estatais ou sistemas financeiros controlados. Ao permitir transações diretas, transparentes e resistentes à censura, o Bitcoin se torna o meio de troca ideal entre os condomínios, garantindo a preservação do valor e possibilitando um comércio ágil e eficiente. Além disso, contratos inteligentes e protocolos descentralizados podem ser integrados para administrar serviços comuns, fortalecer a segurança e reduzir a burocracia, tornando a governança desses condomínios cada vez mais autônoma e imune a intervenções externas.

Alguns podem argumentar que a falta de um aparato estatal para regulamentar a infraestrutura pode resultar em desigualdade no acesso a recursos essenciais, ou que a descentralização completa pode gerar caos e ineficiência. No entanto, essa visão ignora o fato de que a concorrência e a inovação no livre mercado são os maiores motores de desenvolvimento sustentável. Sem monopólios ou subsídios distorcendo a alocação de recursos, a busca por eficiência leva naturalmente à adoção de soluções melhores e mais acessíveis. Condomínios que oferecem infraestrutura de qualidade tendem a atrair mais moradores e investimentos, o que impulsiona a melhoria contínua e a diversificação dos serviços. Em vez de depender de um sistema centralizado falho, as comunidades se tornam responsáveis por sua própria prosperidade, criando uma estrutura sustentável, escalável e adaptável às mudanças do futuro.

Governança e Administração

Em uma sociedade descentralizada, não se deve depender de uma estrutura estatal ou centralizada para regular e tomar decisões em nome dos indivíduos. Cada condomínio, portanto, deve ser gerido de maneira autônoma, com processos claros de tomada de decisão, resolução de conflitos e administração das questões cotidianas. A gestão pode ser organizada por conselhos de moradores, associações ou sistemas de governança direta, conforme as necessidades locais.

Conselhos de Moradores e Processos de Tomada de Decisão

Em muitos casos, a administração interna de um condomínio privado pode ser realizada por um conselho de moradores, composto por representantes eleitos ou indicados pela própria comunidade. A ideia é garantir que as decisões importantes, como planejamento urbano, orçamento, manutenção e serviços, sejam feitas de forma transparente e que os interesses de todos os envolvidos sejam considerados. Isso não significa que a gestão precise ser completamente democrática, mas sim que as decisões devem ser tomadas de forma legítima, transparente e acordadas pela maior parte dos membros.

Em vez de um processo burocrático e centralizado, onde uma liderança impõe suas vontades sobre todos a muitas vezes suas decisões ruins não o afetam diretamente, a gestão de um condomínio privado deve ser orientada pela busca de consenso, onde os próprios gestores sofrerão as consequências de suas más escolhas. O processo de tomada de decisão pode ser dinâmico e direto, com os moradores discutindo e acordando soluções baseadas no mercado e nas necessidades locais, em vez de depender de um sistema impessoal de regulamentação. Além disso, a utilização de tecnologias descentralizadas, como plataformas de blockchain, pode proporcionar maior transparência nas decisões e maior confiança na gestão.

Resolução de Conflitos

A resolução de disputas dentro dos condomínios pode ocorrer de forma voluntária, através de negociação direta ou com o auxílio de mediadores escolhidos pelos próprios moradores por meio de um sistema de reputação. Em alguns casos, podem ser criados mecanismos para resolução de disputas mais formais, com árbitros ou juízes independentes que atuam sem vínculos com o condomínio. Esses árbitros podem ser escolhidos com base em sua experiência ou especialização em áreas como direito, mediação e resolução de conflitos, com uma reputação para zelar. Ao contrário de um sistema judicial centralizado, onde a parte envolvida depende do Estado para resolver disputas, os moradores possuem a autonomia para buscar soluções que atendam aos seus próprios interesses e necessidades. A diversidade de abordagens em um sistema de governança descentralizado cria oportunidades para inovações que atendem diferentes cenários, sem a interferência de burocratas distantes dos próprios problemas que estão "tentando resolver".

Planejamento Urbano e Arquitetura

A questão do design dos condomínios envolve não apenas a estética das construções, mas também a funcionalidade e a sustentabilidade a longo prazo. O planejamento urbano deve refletir as necessidades específicas da comunidade, onde ela decide por si mesma como construir e organizar seu ambiente.\ Arquitetos e urbanistas, muitas vezes moradores especializados, serão responsáveis pela concepção de espaços que atendam a esses critérios, criando ambientes agradáveis, com áreas para lazer, trabalho e convivência que atendam às diversas necessidades de cada grupo.\ Além disso, condomínios com nessecidades semelhantes poderão adotar ideias que deram certo em outros e certamente também dará no seu.

Segurança e Vigilância

Em relação à segurança, cada condomínio pode adotar sistemas de vigilância e proteção que atendam à sua realidade específica. Algumas comunidades podem optar por sistemas de câmeras de segurança, armamento pleno de seus moradores, patrulhamento privado ou até mesmo formas alternativas de garantir a proteção, como vigilância por meio de criptografia e monitoramento descentralizado. A chave para a segurança será a confiança mútua e a colaboração voluntária entre os moradores, que terão a liberdade de definir suas próprias medidas.

Comércio entre Condomínios

A troca de bens e serviços entre as diferentes comunidades é essencial para o funcionamento da rede. Como cada condomínio possui um grau de especialização ou uma mistura de profissionais em diversas áreas, a interdependência entre eles se torna crucial para suprir necessidades e promover a colaboração.

Embora alguns condomínios sejam especializados em áreas como saúde, agricultura ou tecnologia, outros podem ter um perfil mais diversificado, com moradores que atuam em diferentes campos de conhecimento. Por exemplo, um condomínio agrícola pode produzir alimentos orgânicos frescos, enquanto um condomínio de saúde oferece consultas médicas, terapias e cuidados especializados. Já um condomínio tecnológico pode fornecer inovações em software ou equipamentos de energia. Podem haver condomínios universitários que oferecem todo tipo de solução no campo de ensino. Ao mesmo tempo, um condomínio misto, com moradores de diversas áreas, pode oferecer uma variedade de serviços e produtos, tornando-se um centro de intercâmbio de diferentes tipos de expertise.

Essa divisão de trabalho, seja especializada ou diversificada, permite que os condomínios ofereçam o melhor de suas áreas de atuação, ao mesmo tempo em que atendem às demandas de outros. Um condomínio que não se especializa pode, por exemplo, buscar um acordo de troca com um condomínio agrícola para obter alimentos frescos ou com um condomínio tecnológico para adquirir soluções inovadoras.

Embora os condomínios busquem a autossuficiência, alguns recursos essenciais não podem ser produzidos internamente. Itens como minérios para construção, combustíveis ou até mesmo água, em regiões secas, não estão disponíveis em todas as áreas. A natureza não distribui os recursos de maneira uniforme, e a capacidade de produção local pode ser insuficiente para suprir todas as necessidades dos moradores. Isso implica que, para garantir a qualidade de vida e a continuidade das operações, os condomínios precisarão estabelecer relações comerciais e de fornecimento com fontes externas, seja através de mercados, importações ou parcerias com outras comunidades ou fornecedores fora do sistema de condomínios. O comércio intercondomínios e com o exterior será vital para a complementaridade das necessidades, assegurando que os moradores tenham acesso a tudo o que não pode ser produzido localmente.

O sistema econômico entre os condomínios pode ser flexível, permitindo o uso de uma moeda comum (como o Bitcoin) ou até mesmo um sistema de troca direta. Por exemplo, um morador de um condomínio misto pode oferecer serviços de design gráfico em troca de alimentos ou cuidados médicos. Esse tipo de colaboração estimula a produtividade e cria incentivos para que cada condomínio ofereça o melhor de seus recursos e habilidades, garantindo acesso aos bens e serviços necessários.

Relações Externas e Diplomacia

O isolamento excessivo pode limitar o acesso a inovações, avanços culturais e tecnológicos, e até mesmo dificultar o acesso a mercados externos. Por isso, é importante que haja canais de comunicação e métodos de diplomacia para interagir com outras comunidades. Os condomínios podem, por exemplo, estabelecer parcerias com outras regiões, seja para troca de produtos, serviços ou até para inovação. Isso garante que a rede de condomínios não se torne autossuficiente ao ponto de se desconectar do resto do mundo, o que pode resultar em estagnação.

Feiras, mercados intercondomínios e até eventos culturais e educacionais podem ser organizados para promover essas interações. A colaboração entre as comunidades e o exterior não precisa ser baseada em uma troca de dependência, mas sim numa rede de oportunidades que cria benefícios para todas as partes envolvidas. Uma boa reputação atrai novos moradores, pode valorizar propriedades e facilitar parcerias. A diplomacia entre as comunidades também pode ser exercida para resolver disputas ou desafios externos.

A manutenção de boas relações entre condomínios é essencial para garantir uma rede de apoio mútuo eficiente. Essas relações incentivam a troca de bens e serviços, como alimentos, assistência médica ou soluções tecnológicas, além de fortalecer a autossuficiência regional. Ao colaborar em segurança, infraestrutura compartilhada, eventos culturais e até mesmo na resolução de conflitos, os condomínios se tornam mais resilientes e eficientes, reduzindo a dependência externa e melhorando a qualidade de vida dos moradores. A cooperação contínua cria um ambiente mais seguro e harmonioso.

Educação e Desenvolvimento Humano

Cada comunidade pode criar escolas internas com currículos adaptados às especializações de seus moradores. Por exemplo, em um condomínio agrícola, podem ser ensinadas práticas agrícolas sustentáveis, e em um condomínio tecnológico, cursos de programação e inovação. Isso permite que crianças e jovens cresçam em ambientes que reforçam as competências valorizadas pela comunidade.

Além das escolas internas, o conceito de homeschooling pode ser incentivado, permitindo que os pais eduquem seus filhos conforme seus próprios valores e necessidades, com o apoio da comunidade. Esse modelo oferece uma educação mais flexível e personalizada, ao contrário do currículo tradicional oferecido pelo sistema público atual.

Os condomínios universitários também podem surgir, criando ambientes dedicados ao desenvolvimento acadêmico, científico e profissional, onde estudantes vivem e aprendem. Além disso, programas de capacitação contínua são essenciais, com oficinas e cursos oferecidos dentro do condomínio para garantir que os moradores se atualizem com novas tecnologias e práticas.

Para ampliar os horizontes educacionais, os intercâmbios estudantis entre diferentes condomínios podem ser incentivados. Esses intercâmbios não se limitam apenas ao ambiente educacional, mas também se estendem ao aprendizado de práticas de vida e habilidades técnicas. Os jovens de diferentes condomínios podem viajar para outras comunidades para estudar, trabalhar ou simplesmente trocar ideias. Isso pode ocorrer de diversas formas, como programas de curto e longo prazo, através de acordos entre os próprios condomínios, permitindo que os estudantes se conectem com outras comunidades, aprendam sobre diferentes especializações e desenvolvam uma compreensão mais ampla.

Essa abordagem descentralizada permite que cada comunidade desenvolva as competências essenciais sem depender de estruturas limitantes do estado ou sistemas educacionais centralizados. Ao proporcionar liberdade de escolha e personalização, os condomínios criam ambientes propícios ao crescimento humano, alinhados às necessidades e interesses de seus moradores.

---

A sociedade dos condomínios privados propõe uma estrutura alternativa de convivência onde as pessoas podem viver de acordo com seus próprios valores e necessidades. Esses condomínios oferecem um modelo de organização que desafia a centralização estatal, buscando criar comunidades adaptáveis e inovadoras. A liberdade garante que as habilidades necessárias para o sustento e crescimento das comunidades sejam mantidas ao longo do tempo.

A troca de bens, serviços e conhecimentos entre os condomínios, sem a imposição de forças externas, cria uma rede de boas relações, onde o comércio e a colaboração substituem a intervenção estatal. Em vez de depender de sistemas coercitivos, cada condomínio funciona como um microcosmo autônomo que, juntos, formam um ecossistema dinâmico e próspero. Este modelo propõe que, por meio de trocas voluntárias, possamos construir uma sociedade mais saudável. Lembre-se: Ideias e somente ideias podem iluminar a escuridão.

@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9

Capitalism 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.

@ 266815e0:6cd408a5

To all existing nostr developers and new nostr developers, stop using kind 1 events... just stop whatever your doing and switch the kind to Math.round(Math.random() * 10000) trust me it will be better

What are kind 1 events

kind 1 events are defined in NIP-10 as "simple plaintext notes" or in other words social posts.

Don't trick your users

Most users are joining nostr for the social experience, and secondly to find all the cool "other stuff" apps They find friends, browse social posts, and reply to them. If a user signs into a new nostr client and it starts asking them to sign kind 1 events with blobs of JSON, they will sign it without thinking too much about it.

Then when they return to their comfy social apps they will see that they made 10+ posts with massive amounts of gibberish that they don't remember posting. then they probably will go looking for the delete button and realize there isn't one...

Even if those kind 1 posts don't contain JSON and have a nice fancy human readable syntax. they will still confuse users because they won't remember writing those social posts

What about "discoverability"

If your goal is to make your "other stuff" app visible to more users, then I would suggest using NIP-19 and NIP-89 The first allows users to embed any other event kind into social posts as nostr:nevent1 or nostr:naddr1 links, and the second allows social clients to redirect users to an app that knows how to handle that specific kind of event

So instead of saving your apps data into kind 1 events. you can pick any kind you want, then give users a "share on nostr" button that allows them to compose a social post (kind 1) with a nostr: link to your special kind of event and by extension you app

Why its a trap

Once users start using your app it becomes a lot more difficult to migrate to a new event kind or data format. This sounds obvious, but If your app is built on kind 1 events that means you will be stuck with their limitations forever.

For example, here are some of the limitations of using kind 1 - Querying for your apps data becomes much more difficult. You have to filter through all of a users kind 1 events to find which ones are created by your app - Discovering your apps data is more difficult for the same reason, you have to sift through all the social posts just to find the ones with you special tag or that contain JSON - Users get confused. as mentioned above users don't expect "other stuff" apps to be creating special social posts - Other nostr clients won't understand your data and will show it as a social post with no option for users to learn about your app

@ 39cc53c9:27168656

Read the original blog post

Know Your Customer is a regulation that requires companies of all sizes to verify the identity, suitability, and risks involved with maintaining a business relationship with a customer. Such procedures fit within the broader scope of anti-money laundering (AML) and counterterrorism financing (CTF) regulations.

Banks, exchanges, online business, mail providers, domain registrars... Everyone wants to know who you are before you can even opt for their service. Your personal information is flowing around the internet in the hands of "god-knows-who" and secured by "trust-me-bro military-grade encryption". Once your account is linked to your personal (and verified) identity, tracking you is just as easy as keeping logs on all these platforms.

Rights for Illusions

KYC processes aim to combat terrorist financing, money laundering, and other illicit activities. On the surface, KYC seems like a commendable initiative. I mean, who wouldn't want to halt terrorists and criminals in their tracks?

The logic behind KYC is: "If we mandate every financial service provider to identify their users, it becomes easier to pinpoint and apprehend the malicious actors."

However, terrorists and criminals are not precisely lining up to be identified. They're crafty. They may adopt false identities or find alternative strategies to continue their operations. Far from being outwitted, many times they're several steps ahead of regulations. Realistically, KYC might deter a small fraction – let's say about 1% ^1 – of these malefactors. Yet, the cost? All of us are saddled with the inconvenient process of identification just to use a service.

Under the rhetoric of "ensuring our safety", governments and institutions enact regulations that seem more out of a dystopian novel, gradually taking away our right to privacy.

To illustrate, consider a city where the mayor has rolled out facial recognition cameras in every nook and cranny. A band of criminals, intent on robbing a local store, rolls in with a stolen car, their faces obscured by masks and their bodies cloaked in all-black clothes. Once they've committed the crime and exited the city's boundaries, they switch vehicles and clothes out of the cameras' watchful eyes. The high-tech surveillance? It didn’t manage to identify or trace them. Yet, for every law-abiding citizen who merely wants to drive through the city or do some shopping, their movements and identities are constantly logged. The irony? This invasive tracking impacts all of us, just to catch the 1% ^1 of less-than-careful criminals.

KYC? Not you.

KYC creates barriers to participation in normal economic activity, to supposedly stop criminals. ^2

KYC puts barriers between many users and businesses. One of these comes from the fact that the process often requires multiple forms of identification, proof of address, and sometimes even financial records. For individuals in areas with poor record-keeping, non-recognized legal documents, or those who are unbanked, homeless or transient, obtaining these documents can be challenging, if not impossible.

For people who are not skilled with technology or just don't have access to it, there's also a barrier since KYC procedures are mostly online, leaving them inadvertently excluded.

Another barrier goes for the casual or one-time user, where they might not see the value in undergoing a rigorous KYC process, and these requirements can deter them from using the service altogether.

It also wipes some businesses out of the equation, since for smaller businesses, the costs associated with complying with KYC norms—from the actual process of gathering and submitting documents to potential delays in operations—can be prohibitive in economical and/or technical terms.

You're not welcome

Imagine a swanky new club in town with a strict "members only" sign. You hear the music, you see the lights, and you want in. You step up, ready to join, but suddenly there's a long list of criteria you must meet. After some time, you are finally checking all the boxes. But then the club rejects your membership with no clear reason why. You just weren't accepted. Frustrating, right?

This club scenario isn't too different from the fact that KYC is being used by many businesses as a convenient gatekeeping tool. A perfect excuse based on a "legal" procedure they are obliged to.

Even some exchanges may randomly use this to freeze and block funds from users, claiming these were "flagged" by a cryptic system that inspects the transactions. You are left hostage to their arbitrary decision to let you successfully pass the KYC procedure. If you choose to sidestep their invasive process, they might just hold onto your funds indefinitely.

Your identity has been stolen

KYC data has been found to be for sale on many dark net markets^3. Exchanges may have leaks or hacks, and such leaks contain very sensitive data. We're talking about the full monty: passport or ID scans, proof of address, and even those awkward selfies where you're holding up your ID next to your face. All this data is being left to the mercy of the (mostly) "trust-me-bro" security systems of such companies. Quite scary, isn't it?

As cheap as $10 for 100 documents, with discounts applying for those who buy in bulk, the personal identities of innocent users who passed KYC procedures are for sale. ^3

In short, if you have ever passed the KYC/AML process of a crypto exchange, your privacy is at risk of being compromised, or it might even have already been compromised.

(they) Know Your Coins

You may already know that Bitcoin and most cryptocurrencies have a transparent public blockchain, meaning that all data is shown unencrypted for everyone to see and recorded forever. If you link an address you own to your identity through KYC, for example, by sending an amount from a KYC exchange to it, your Bitcoin is no longer pseudonymous and can then be traced.

If, for instance, you send Bitcoin from such an identified address to another KYC'ed address (say, from a friend), everyone having access to that address-identity link information (exchanges, governments, hackers, etc.) will be able to associate that transaction and know who you are transacting with.

Conclusions

To sum up, KYC does not protect individuals; rather, it's a threat to our privacy, freedom, security and integrity. Sensible information flowing through the internet is thrown into chaos by dubious security measures. It puts borders between many potential customers and businesses, and it helps governments and companies track innocent users. That's the chaos KYC has stirred.

The criminals are using stolen identities from companies that gathered them thanks to these very same regulations that were supposed to combat them. Criminals always know how to circumvent such regulations. In the end, normal people are the most affected by these policies.

The threat that KYC poses to individuals in terms of privacy, security and freedom is not to be neglected. And if we don’t start challenging these systems and questioning their efficacy, we are just one step closer to the dystopian future that is now foreseeable.

Edited 20/03/2024 * Add reference to the 1% statement on Rights for Illusions section to an article where Chainalysis found that only 0.34% of the transaction volume with cryptocurrencies in 2023 was attributable to criminal activity ^1

@ 5f078e90:b2bacaa3

Panda story 3

Initially posted on Hive, story is between 300 and 500 characters. Should become a Nostr kind 30023. Image has markdown.

In a misty bamboo forest, a red panda named Rolo discovered a glowing berry. Curious, he nibbled it and began to float! Drifting over treetops, he saw his friends below, waving. Rolo somersaulted through clouds, giggling as wind tickled his fur. The berry's magic faded at dusk, landing him softly by a stream. His pals cheered his tale, and Rolo dreamed of more adventures, his heart light as the breeze. (349 characters)

---

Originally posted on Hive at https://hive.blog/@hostr/panda-story-3

Cross-posted using Hostr, version 0.0.3

@ 39cc53c9:27168656

Read the original blog post

Over the past few months, I've dedicated my time to a complete rewrite of the kycnot.me website. The technology stack remains unchanged; Golang paired with TailwindCSS. However, I've made some design choices in this iteration that I believe significantly enhance the site. Particularly to backend code.

UI Improvements

You'll notice a refreshed UI that retains the original concept but has some notable enhancements. The service list view is now more visually engaging, it displays additional information in a more aesthetically pleasing manner. Both filtering and searching functionalities have been optimized for speed and user experience.

Service pages have been also redesigned to highlight key information at the top, with the KYC Level box always accessible. The display of service attributes is now more visually intuitive.

The request form, especially the Captcha, has undergone substantial improvements. The new self-made Captcha is robust, addressing the reliability issues encountered with the previous version.

Terms of Service Summarizer

A significant upgrade is the Terms of Service summarizer/reviewer, now powered by AI (GPT-4-turbo). It efficiently condenses each service's ToS, extracting and presenting critical points, including any warnings. Summaries are updated monthly, processing over 40 ToS pages via the OpenAI API using a self-crafted and thoroughly tested prompt.

Nostr Comments

I've integrated a comment section for each service using Nostr. For guidance on using this feature, visit the dedicated how-to page.

Database

The backend database has transitioned to pocketbase, an open-source Golang backend that has been a pleasure to work with. I maintain an updated fork of the Golang SDK for pocketbase at pluja/pocketbase.

Scoring

The scoring algorithm has also been refined to be more fair. Despite I had considered its removal due to the complexity it adds (it is very difficult to design a fair scoring system), some users highlighted its value, so I kept it. The updated algorithm is available open source.

Listings

Each listing has been re-evaluated, and the ones that were no longer operational were removed. New additions are included, and the backlog of pending services will be addressed progressively, since I still have access to the old database.

API

The API now offers more comprehensive data. For more details, check here.

About Page

The About page has been restructured for brevity and clarity.

Other Changes

Extensive changes have been implemented in the server-side logic, since the whole code base was re-written from the ground up. I may discuss these in a future post, but for now, I consider the current version to be just a bit beyond beta, and additional updates are planned in the coming weeks.

@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9

One 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.

@ 5f078e90:b2bacaa3

Panda story 1

Initially posted on Hive, story is between 300 and 500 characters. Should become a Nostr kind 30023. Image has markdown.

In a misty bamboo forest, a red panda named Rolo discovered a glowing berry. Curious, he nibbled it and began to float! Drifting over treetops, he saw his friends below, waving. Rolo somersaulted through clouds, giggling as wind tickled his fur. The berry's magic faded at dusk, landing him softly by a stream. His pals cheered his tale, and Rolo dreamed of more adventures, his heart light as the breeze. (349 characters)

---

Originally posted on Hive at https://hive.blog/@hostr/panda-story-1

Cross-posted using Hostr, version 0.0.1

@ 2dd9250b:6e928072

Vi recentemente um post onde a pessoa diz que aquele final do filme O Doutrinador (2019) não faz sentido porque mesmo o protagonista explodindo o Palácio dos Três Poderes, não acaba com a corrupção no Brasil.

Progressistas não sabem ler e não conseguem interpretar textos corretamente. O final de Doutrinador não tem a ver com isso, tem a ver com a relação entre o Herói e a sua Cidade.

Nas histórias em quadrinhos há uma ligação entre a cidade e o Super-Herói. Gotham City por exemplo, cria o Batman. Isso é mostrado em The Batman (2022) e em Batman: Cavaleiro das Trevas, quando aquele garoto no final, diz para o Batman não fugir, porque ele queria ver o Batman de novo. E o Comissário Gordon diz que o "Batman é o que a cidade de Gotham precisa."

Batman: Cavaleiro das Trevas Ressurge mostra a cidade de Gotham sendo tomada pela corrupção e pela ideologia do Bane. A Cidade vai definhando em imoralidade e o Bruce, ao olhar da prisão a cidade sendo destruída, decide que o Batman precisa voltar porque se Gotham for destruída, o Batman é destruído junto. E isso o da forças para consegue fugir daquele poço e voltar para salvar Gotham.

Isso também é mostrado em Demolidor. Na série Demolidor o Matt Murdock sempre fala que precisa defender a cidade Cozinha do Inferno; que o Fisk não vai dominar a cidade e fazer o que ele quiser nela. Inclusive na terceira temporada isso fica mais evidente na luta final na mansão do Fisk, onde Matt grita que agora a cidade toda vai saber o que ele fez; a cidade vai ver o mal que ele é para Hell's Kitchen, porque a gente sabe que o Fisk fez de tudo para a imagem do Demolidor entrar e descrédito perante os cidadãos, então o que acontece no final do filme O Doutrinador não significa que ele está acabando com a corrupção quando explode o Congresso, ele está praticamente interrompendo o ciclo do sistema, colocando uma falha em sua engrenagem.

Quando você ouve falar de Brasília, você pensa na corrupção dos políticos, onde a farra acontece,, onde corruptos desviam dinheiro arrecadado dos impostos, impostos estes que são centralizados na União. Então quando você ouve falarem de Brasília, sempre pensa que o pessoal que mora lá, mora junto com tudo de podre que acontece no Brasil.

Logo quando o Doutrinador explode tudo ali, ele está basicamente destruindo o mecanismo que suja Brasília. Ele está fazendo isso naquela cidade. Porque o símbolo da cidade é justamente esse, a farsa de que naquele lugar o povo será ouvido e a justiça será feita. Ele está destruindo a ideologia de que o Estado nos protege, nos dá segurança, saúde e educação. Porque na verdade o Estado só existe para privilegiar os políticos, funcionários públicos de auto escalão, suas famílias e amigos. Enquanto que o povo sofre para sustentar a elite política. O protagonista Miguel entendeu isso quando a filha dele morreu na fila do SUS.

@ 21335073:a244b1ad

Warning: 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.

@ 21335073:a244b1ad

Warning: 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.

@ 21335073:a244b1ad

I want to see Nostr succeed. If you can think of a way I can help make that happen, I’m open to it. I’d like your suggestions.

My schedule’s shifting soon, and I could volunteer a few hours a week to a Nostr project. I won’t have more total time, but how I use it will change.

Why help? I care about freedom. Nostr’s one of the most powerful freedom tools I’ve seen in my lifetime. If I believe that, I should act on it.

I don’t care about money or sats. I’m not rich, I don’t have extra cash. That doesn’t drive me—freedom does. I’m volunteering, not asking for pay.

I’m not here for clout. I’ve had enough spotlight in my life; it doesn’t move me. If I wanted clout, I’d be on Twitter dropping basic takes. Clout’s easy. Freedom’s hard. I’d rather help anonymously. No speaking at events—small meetups are cool for the vibe, but big conferences? Not my thing. I’ll never hit a huge Bitcoin conference. It’s just not my scene.

That said, I could be convinced to step up if it’d really boost Nostr—as long as it’s legal and gets results.

In this space, I’d watch for social engineering. I watch out for it. I’m not here to make friends, just to help. No shade—you all seem great—but I’ve got a full life and awesome friends irl. I don’t need your crew or to be online cool. Connect anonymously if you want; I’d encourage it.

I’m sick of watching other social media alternatives grow while Nostr kinda stalls. I could trash-talk, but I’d rather do something useful.

Skills? I’m good at spotting social media problems and finding possible solutions. I won’t overhype myself—that’s weird—but if you’re responding, you probably see something in me. Perhaps you see something that I don’t see in myself.

If you need help now or later with Nostr projects, reach out. Nostr only—nothing else. Anonymous contact’s fine. Even just a suggestion on how I can pitch in, no project attached, works too. 💜

Creeps or harassment will get blocked or I’ll nuke my simplex code if it becomes a problem.

https://simplex.chat/contact#/?v=2-4&smp=smp%3A%2F%2FSkIkI6EPd2D63F4xFKfHk7I1UGZVNn6k1QWZ5rcyr6w%3D%40smp9.simplex.im%2FbI99B3KuYduH8jDr9ZwyhcSxm2UuR7j0%23%2F%3Fv%3D1-2%26dh%3DMCowBQYDK2VuAyEAS9C-zPzqW41PKySfPCEizcXb1QCus6AyDkTTjfyMIRM%253D%26srv%3Djssqzccmrcws6bhmn77vgmhfjmhwlyr3u7puw4erkyoosywgl67slqqd.onion

@ c8841c9d:ae8048e2

What is Bitcoin ? Here are the fundamentals to understand the first crypto.

Created by the anonymous Satoshi Nakamoto in 2009, Bitcoin is a decentralized digital currency with no central authority.

Censorship-resistant and peer-to-peer, it gives power to the people!

Check out my mind map for a dipper dive. #Bitcoin #Crypto #Cryptomindmap

\ \ Bitcoin runs on a blockchain—a distributed ledger secured by Nakamoto consensus & Proof of Work.

Miners earn BTC rewards by creating new blocks, while UTXO (Unspent Transaction Output) prevents double-spending. A block is added to chain every \~10min. If parallel chains form, the longest chain wins, after 6 blocks, a transaction is considered final.

Transactions are transparent yet private. Check my older cryptomindmaps for more details.

Bitcoin Economics

With a hard cap of 21 million coins, Bitcoin’s supply halves every 4 years(next in 2028), creating scarcity The smallest unit? A Satoshi - 0.00000001 BTC.

This decreasing supply is creating scarcity which drives value but also fuels volatility, with bull runs and corrections shaping its price since day one

What can you do with Bitcoin? Let’s explore!

Bitcoin was intended for payments, it's evolving into "digital gold", a store of value for the internet age.

It enables cheap, easy cross-border transfers and acts as an inflation edge.

Its Lightning Network improves the scalability for digital payments.

Bitcoin’s Challenges

The main hurdles addressed to Bitcoin is the scalability. The low number of possible transactions per second (TPS). Solutions, such as Lightning Network, provide ways to increase usage.

The energy consumption of block production in Proof of Work debate rages . Critics call it is too much electricity, while supporters argue that it is the elegant way to valorize renewable energy and ensure top-notch security.

No central authority means slow consensus via Bitcoin Improvement Proposals (BIPs) and there is no government regulation which can deter some adopters.

Bitcoin #Cryptomindmap

Thanks for reading! 🌟 Share your thoughts on Bitcoin !

@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9

Recently we have seen a wave of high profile X accounts hacked. These attacks have exposed the fragility of the status quo security model used by modern social media platforms like X. Many users have asked if nostr fixes this, so lets dive in. How do these types of attacks translate into the world of nostr apps? For clarity, I will use X’s security model as representative of most big tech social platforms and compare it to nostr.

The Status Quo

On X, you never have full control of your account. Ultimately to use it requires permission from the company. They can suspend your account or limit your distribution. Theoretically they can even post from your account at will. An X account is tied to an email and password. Users can also opt into two factor authentication, which adds an extra layer of protection, a login code generated by an app. In theory, this setup works well, but it places a heavy burden on users. You need to create a strong, unique password and safeguard it. You also need to ensure your email account and phone number remain secure, as attackers can exploit these to reset your credentials and take over your account. Even if you do everything responsibly, there is another weak link in X infrastructure itself. The platform’s infrastructure allows accounts to be reset through its backend. This could happen maliciously by an employee or through an external attacker who compromises X’s backend. When an account is compromised, the legitimate user often gets locked out, unable to post or regain control without contacting X’s support team. That process can be slow, frustrating, and sometimes fruitless if support denies the request or cannot verify your identity. Often times support will require users to provide identification info in order to regain access, which represents a privacy risk. The centralized nature of X means you are ultimately at the mercy of the company’s systems and staff.

Nostr Requires Responsibility

Nostr flips this model radically. Users do not need permission from a company to access their account, they can generate as many accounts as they want, and cannot be easily censored. The key tradeoff here is that users have to take complete responsibility for their security. Instead of relying on a username, password, and corporate servers, nostr uses a private key as the sole credential for your account. Users generate this key and it is their responsibility to keep it safe. As long as you have your key, you can post. If someone else gets it, they can post too. It is that simple. This design has strong implications. Unlike X, there is no backend reset option. If your key is compromised or lost, there is no customer support to call. In a compromise scenario, both you and the attacker can post from the account simultaneously. Neither can lock the other out, since nostr relays simply accept whatever is signed with a valid key.

The benefit? No reliance on proprietary corporate infrastructure.. The negative? Security rests entirely on how well you protect your key.

Future Nostr Security Improvements

For many users, nostr’s standard security model, storing a private key on a phone with an encrypted cloud backup, will likely be sufficient. It is simple and reasonably secure. That said, nostr’s strength lies in its flexibility as an open protocol. Users will be able to choose between a range of security models, balancing convenience and protection based on need.

One promising option is a web of trust model for key rotation. Imagine pre-selecting a group of trusted friends. If your account is compromised, these people could collectively sign an event announcing the compromise to the network and designate a new key as your legitimate one. Apps could handle this process seamlessly in the background, notifying followers of the switch without much user interaction. This could become a popular choice for average users, but it is not without tradeoffs. It requires trust in your chosen web of trust, which might not suit power users or large organizations. It also has the issue that some apps may not recognize the key rotation properly and followers might get confused about which account is “real.”

For those needing higher security, there is the option of multisig using FROST (Flexible Round-Optimized Schnorr Threshold). In this setup, multiple keys must sign off on every action, including posting and updating a profile. A hacker with just one key could not do anything. This is likely overkill for most users due to complexity and inconvenience, but it could be a game changer for large organizations, companies, and governments. Imagine the White House nostr account requiring signatures from multiple people before a post goes live, that would be much more secure than the status quo big tech model.

Another option are hardware signers, similar to bitcoin hardware wallets. Private keys are kept on secure, offline devices, separate from the internet connected phone or computer you use to broadcast events. This drastically reduces the risk of remote hacks, as private keys never touches the internet. It can be used in combination with multisig setups for extra protection. This setup is much less convenient and probably overkill for most but could be ideal for governments, companies, or other high profile accounts.

---

Nostr’s security model is not perfect but is robust and versatile. Ultimately users are in control and security is their responsibility. Apps will give users multiple options to choose from and users will choose what best fits their need.

@ 39cc53c9:27168656

Read the original blog post

I'm launching a new service review section on this blog in collaboration with OrangeFren. These reviews are sponsored, yet the sponsorship does not influence the outcome of the evaluations. Reviews are done in advance, then, the service provider has the discretion to approve publication without modifications.

Sponsored reviews are independent from the kycnot.me list, being only part of the blog. The reviews have no impact on the scores of the listings or their continued presence on the list. Should any issues arise, I will not hesitate to remove any listing.

---

The review

WizardSwap is an instant exchange centred around privacy coins. It was launched in 2020 making it old enough to have weathered the 2021 bull run and the subsequent bearish year.

| Pros | Cons | |------|------| | Tor-friendly | Limited liquidity | | Guarantee of no KYC | Overly simplistic design | | Earn by providing liquidity | |

Rating: ★★★★★ Service Website: wizardswap.io

Liquidity

Right off the bat, we'll start off by pointing out that WizardSwap relies on its own liquidity reserves, meaning they aren't just a reseller of Binance or another exchange. They're also committed to a no-KYC policy, when asking them, they even promised they would rather refund a user their original coins, than force them to undergo any sort of verification.

On the one hand, full control over all their infrastructure gives users the most privacy and conviction about the KYC policies remaining in place.

On the other hand, this means the liquidity available for swapping isn't huge. At the time of testing we could only purchase at most about 0.73 BTC with XMR.

It's clear the team behind WizardSwap is aware of this shortfall and so they've come up with a solution unique among instant exchanges. They let you, the user, deposit any of the currencies they support into your account and earn a profit on the trades made using your liquidity.

Trading

Fees on WizardSwap are middle-of-the-pack. The normal fee is 2.2%. That's more than some exchanges that reserve the right to suddenly demand you undergo verification, yet less than half the fees on some other privacy-first exchanges. However as we mentioned in the section above you can earn almost all of that fee (2%) if you provide liquidity to WizardSwap.

It's good that with the current Bitcoin fee market their fees are constant regardless of how much, or how little, you send. This is in stark contrast with some of the alternative swap providers that will charge you a massive premium when attempting to swap small amounts of BTC away.

Test trades

Test trades are always performed without previous notice to the service provider.

During our testing we performed a few test trades and found that every single time WizardSwap immediately detected the incoming transaction and the amount we received was exactly what was quoted before depositing. The fees were inline with what WizardSwap advertises.

• Monero payment proof
• Bitcoin received
• Wizardswap TX link - it's possible that this link may cease to be valid at some point in the future.

ToS and KYC

WizardSwap does not have a Terms of Service or a Privacy Policy page, at least none that can be found by users. Instead, they offer a FAQ section where they addresses some basic questions.

The site does not mention any KYC or AML practices. It also does not specify how refunds are handled in case of failure. However, based on the FAQ section "What if I send funds after the offer expires?" it can be inferred that contacting support is necessary and network fees will be deducted from any refund.

UI & Tor

WizardSwap can be visited both via your usual browser and Tor Browser. Should you decide on the latter you'll find that the website works even with the most strict settings available in the Tor Browser (meaning no JavaScript).

However, when disabling Javascript you'll miss the live support chat, as well as automatic refreshing of the trade page. The lack of the first means that you will have no way to contact support from the trade page if anything goes wrong during your swap, although you can do so by mail.

One important thing to have in mind is that if you were to accidentally close the browser during the swap, and you did not save the swap ID or your browser history is disabled, you'll have no easy way to return to the trade. For this reason we suggest when you begin a trade to copy the url or ID to someplace safe, before sending any coins to WizardSwap.

The UI you'll be greeted by is simple, minimalist, and easy to navigate. It works well not just across browsers, but also across devices. You won't have any issues using this exchange on your phone.

Getting in touch

The team behind WizardSwap appears to be most active on X (formerly Twitter): https://twitter.com/WizardSwap_io

If you have any comments or suggestions about the exchange make sure to reach out to them. In the past they've been very receptive to user feedback, for instance a few months back WizardSwap was planning on removing DeepOnion, but the community behind that project got together ^1 and after reaching out WizardSwap reversed their decision ^2.

You can also contact them via email at: support @ wizardswap . io

Disclaimer

None of the above should be understood as investment or financial advice. The views are our own only and constitute a faithful representation of our experience in using and investigating this exchange. This review is not a guarantee of any kind on the services rendered by the exchange. Do your own research before using any service.

@ 21335073:a244b1ad

Before 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

Sobre 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.

@ 39cc53c9:27168656

Read the original blog post

Bitcoin enthusiasts frequently and correctly remark how much value it adds to Bitcoin not to have a face, a leader, or a central authority behind it. This particularity means there isn't a single person to exert control over, or a single human point of failure who could become corrupt or harmful to the project.

Because of this, it is said that no other coin can be equally valuable as Bitcoin in terms of decentralization and trustworthiness. Bitcoin is unique not just for being first, but also because of how the events behind its inception developed. This implies that, from Bitcoin onwards, any coin created would have been created by someone, consequently having an authority behind it. For this and some other reasons, some people refer to Bitcoin as "The Immaculate Conception".

While other coins may have their own unique features and advantages, they may not be able to replicate Bitcoin's community-driven nature. However, one other cryptocurrency shares a similar story of mystery behind its creation: Monero.

History of Monero

Bytecoin and CryptoNote

In March 2014, a Bitcointalk thread titled "Bytecoin. Secure, private, untraceable since 2012" was initiated by a user under the nickname "DStrange"^1^. DStrange presented Bytecoin (BCN) as a unique cryptocurrency, in operation since July 2012. Unlike Bitcoin, it employed a new algorithm known as CryptoNote.

DStrange apparently stumbled upon the Bytecoin website by chance while mining a dying bitcoin fork, and decided to create a thread on Bitcointalk^1^. This sparked curiosity among some users, who wondered how could Bytecoin remain unnoticed since its alleged launch in 2012 until then^2^.

Some time after, a user brought up the "CryptoNote v2.0" whitepaper for the first time, underlining its innovative features^4^. Authored by the pseudonymous Nicolas van Saberhagen in October 2013, the CryptoNote v2 whitepaper^5^ highlighted the traceability and privacy problems in Bitcoin. Saberhagen argued that these flaws could not be quickly fixed, suggesting it would be more efficient to start a new project rather than trying to patch the original^5^, an statement simmilar to the one from Satoshi Nakamoto^6^.

Checking with Saberhagen's digital signature, the release date of the whitepaper seemed correct, which would mean that Cryptonote (v1) was created in 2012^7^, although there's an important detail: "Signing time is from the clock on the signer's computer" ^9^.

Moreover, the whitepaper v1 contains a footnote link to a Bitcointalk post dated May 5, 2013^10^, making it impossible for the whitepaper to have been signed and released on December 12, 2012.

As the narrative developed, users discovered that a significant 80% portion of Bytecoin had been pre-mined^11^ and blockchain dates seemed to be faked to make it look like it had been operating since 2012, leading to controversy surrounding the project.

The origins of CryptoNote and Bytecoin remain mysterious, leaving suspicions of a possible scam attempt, although the whitepaper had a good amount of work and thought on it.

The fork

In April 2014, the Bitcointalk user thankful_for_today, who had also participated in the Bytecoin thread^12^, announced plans to launch a Bytecoin fork named Bitmonero^13^.

The primary motivation behind this fork was "Because there is a number of technical and marketing issues I wanted to do differently. And also because I like ideas and technology and I want it to succeed"^14^. This time Bitmonero did things different from Bytecoin: there was no premine or instamine, and no portion of the block reward went to development.

However, thankful_for_today proposed controversial changes that the community disagreed with. Johnny Mnemonic relates the events surrounding Bitmonero and thankful_for_today in a Bitcointalk comment^15^:

When thankful_for_today launched BitMonero [...] he ignored everything that was discussed and just did what he wanted. The block reward was considerably steeper than what everyone was expecting. He also moved forward with 1-minute block times despite everyone's concerns about the increase of orphan blocks. He also didn't address the tail emission concern that should've (in my opinion) been in the code at launch time. Basically, he messed everything up. Then, he disappeared.

After disappearing for a while, thankful_for_today returned to find that the community had taken over the project. Johnny Mnemonic continues:

I, and others, started working on new forks that were closer to what everyone else was hoping for. [...] it was decided that the BitMonero project should just be taken over. There were like 9 or 10 interested parties at the time if my memory is correct. We voted on IRC to drop the "bit" from BitMonero and move forward with the project. Thankful_for_today suddenly resurfaced, and wasn't happy to learn the community had assumed control of the coin. He attempted to maintain his own fork (still calling it "BitMonero") for a while, but that quickly fell into obscurity.

The unfolding of these events show us the roots of Monero. Much like Satoshi Nakamoto, the creators behind CryptoNote/Bytecoin and thankful_for_today remain a mystery^17^, having disappeared without a trace. This enigma only adds to Monero's value.

Since community took over development, believing in the project's potential and its ability to be guided in a better direction, Monero was given one of Bitcoin's most important qualities: a leaderless nature. With no single face or entity directing its path, Monero is safe from potential corruption or harm from a "central authority".

The community continued developing Monero until today. Since then, Monero has undergone a lot of technological improvements, migrations and achievements such as RingCT and RandomX. It also has developed its own Community Crowdfundinc System, conferences such as MoneroKon and Monerotopia are taking place every year, and has a very active community around it.

Monero continues to develop with goals of privacy and security first, ease of use and efficiency second. ^16^

This stands as a testament to the power of a dedicated community operating without a central figure of authority. This decentralized approach aligns with the original ethos of cryptocurrency, making Monero a prime example of community-driven innovation. For this, I thank all the people involved in Monero, that lead it to where it is today.

If you find any information that seems incorrect, unclear or any missing important events, please contact me and I will make the necessary changes.

Sources of interest

• https://forum.getmonero.org/20/general-discussion/211/history-of-monero
• https://monero.stackexchange.com/questions/852/what-is-the-origin-of-monero-and-its-relationship-to-bytecoin
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monero
• https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.0
• https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=563821.0
• https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=233561
• https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=512747.0
• https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=740112.0
• https://monero.stackexchange.com/a/1024
• https://inspec2t-project.eu/cryptocurrency-with-a-focus-on-anonymity-these-facts-are-known-about-monero/
• https://medium.com/coin-story/coin-perspective-13-riccardo-spagni-69ef82907bd1
• https://www.getmonero.org/resources/about/
• https://www.wired.com/2017/01/monero-drug-dealers-cryptocurrency-choice-fire/
• https://www.monero.how/why-monero-vs-bitcoin
• https://old.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/u8e5yr/satoshi_nakamoto_talked_about_privacy_features/

@ f5369849:f34119a0

Hackathon Summary

The Hedera Hashathon: Nairobi Edition recently concluded with participation from 223 developers resulting in 49 approved projects. Conducted virtually, this event was supported by Kenya Tech Events, the Nairobi Stock Exchange, and the Virtual Assets Chamber. It aimed to promote local innovation and boost blockchain adoption within Kenya.

The hackathon was structured around three key tracks: AI Agents, Capital Markets, and Hedera Explorer. Participants developed solutions using Hedera's blockchain to address challenges in automation, financial accessibility, and digital asset interaction. The event highlighted collaborative development, enhanced by online mentorship and networking opportunities.

A significant moment of the hackathon was Demo Day held at the University of Nairobi, where finalists showcased their innovative solutions and received awards. The top projects, notably those under the Capital Markets track, were granted incubation support and mentorship to aid further development.

With a strong emphasis on practical applications, this hackathon highlighted blockchain technology's capability to transform Kenyan industries, promote technological progress, and increase market participation.

Hackathon Winners

Prize Winners by Category

1st Place

• Hedgehog: An on-chain lending protocol utilizing tokenized real-world stock exchange shares on the Hedera network as collateral. It ensures secure, decentralized lending by integrating stock collateralization with blockchain transparency.

2nd Place

• Orion: Facilitates easy stock trading in Kenya by tokenizing NSE stocks using the Hedera blockchain. Through integration with Mpesa, it streamlines the stock exchange process, allowing for efficient digital transactions.

3rd Place

• NSEChainBridge: A blockchain-based platform enhancing the trading of NSE stocks as digital tokens. It improves accessibility and liquidity in stock trading through innovative token solutions.

4th Place

• HashGuard: A tokenized micron insurance platform for boda boda riders using Hedera Hashgraph technology. It provides affordable and instant insurance, making coverage accessible without requiring blockchain expertise.

To view the complete list of projects, visit DoraHacks.

Organization Overview: Hedera

Hedera is a public distributed ledger platform known for its speed, security, and scalability. Its hashgraph consensus algorithm, a variant of proof of stake, offers a distinct approach to achieving distributed consensus. Hedera is active across various industry sectors, supporting projects that prioritize transparency and efficiency. The organization remains committed to advancing the infrastructure of decentralized networks, facilitating secure and efficient digital transactions globally.

@ 4857600b:30b502f4

Key Findings

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

How Aspirin Works Against Cancer

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

Supporting Evidence

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

Potential Impact

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

Cautions

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

Next Steps

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

Citations: Natural News

@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9

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

Concern

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

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

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

Optimism

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

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

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

Realism

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

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

@ f3873798:24b3f2f3

Recentemente, assisti a um vídeo que me fez refletir profundamente sobre o impacto da linguagem na hora de vender. No vídeo, uma jovem relatava sua experiência ao presenciar um vendedor de amendoim em uma agência dos Correios. O local estava cheio, as pessoas aguardavam impacientes na fila e, em meio a esse cenário, um homem humilde tentava vender seu produto. Mas sua abordagem não era estratégica; ao invés de destacar os benefícios do amendoim, ele suplicava para que alguém o ajudasse comprando. O resultado? Ninguém se interessou.

A jovem observou que o problema não era o produto, mas a forma como ele estava sendo oferecido. Afinal, muitas das pessoas ali estavam há horas esperando e perto do horário do almoço – o amendoim poderia ser um ótimo tira-gosto. No entanto, como a comunicação do vendedor vinha carregada de desespero, ele afastava os clientes ao invés de atraí-los. Esse vídeo me tocou profundamente.

No dia seguinte, ao sair para comemorar meu aniversário, vi um menino vendendo balas na rua, sob o sol forte. Assim como no caso do amendoim, percebi que as pessoas ao redor não se interessavam por seu produto. Ao se aproximar do carro, resolvi comprar dois pacotes. Mais do que ajudar, queria que aquele pequeno gesto servisse como incentivo para que ele continuasse acreditando no seu negócio.

Essa experiência me fez refletir ainda mais sobre o poder da comunicação em vendas. Muitas vezes, não é o produto que está errado, mas sim a forma como o vendedor o apresenta. Quando transmitimos confiança e mostramos o valor do que vendemos, despertamos o interesse genuíno dos clientes.

Como a Linguagem Impacta as Vendas?

1. O Poder da Abordagem Positiva

Em vez de pedir por ajuda, é importante destacar os benefícios do produto. No caso do amendoim, o vendedor poderia ter dito algo como: "Que tal um petisco delicioso enquanto espera? Um amendoim fresquinho para matar a fome até o almoço!"

2. A Emoção na Medida Certa

Expressar emoção é essencial, mas sem parecer desesperado. Os clientes devem sentir que estão adquirindo algo de valor, não apenas ajudando o vendedor.

3. Conheça Seu Público

Entender o contexto é fundamental. Se as pessoas estavam com fome e impacientes, uma abordagem mais objetiva e focada no benefício do produto poderia gerar mais vendas.

4. Autoconfiança e Postura

Falar com firmeza e segurança transmite credibilidade. O vendedor precisa acreditar no próprio produto antes de convencer o cliente a comprá-lo.

Conclusão

Vender é mais do que apenas oferecer um produto – é uma arte que envolve comunicação, percepção e estratégia. Pequenos ajustes na abordagem podem transformar completamente os resultados. Se o vendedor de amendoim tivesse apresentado seu produto de outra maneira, talvez tivesse vendido tudo rapidamente. Da mesma forma, se cada um de nós aprender a se comunicar melhor em nossas próprias áreas, poderemos alcançar muito mais sucesso.

E você? Já passou por uma experiência parecida?

@ 20986fb8:cdac21b3

The Traditional Hackathon: Brilliant Sparks with Limitations

For decades, hackathons have been the petri dishes of tech culture – frantic 24- or 48-hour coding marathons fueled by pizza, caffeine, and impossible optimism. From the first hackathon in 1999, when Sun Microsystems challenged Java developers to code on a Palm V in a day [1], to the all-night hack days at startups and universities, these events celebrated the hacker spirit. They gave us Facebook’s “Like” button and Chat features – iconic innovations born in overnight jams [1]. They spawned companies like GroupMe, which was coded in a few late-night hours and sold to Skype for $80 million a year later [2]. Hackathons became tech lore, synonymous with creativity unchained.

And yet, for all their electric energy and hype, traditional hackathons had serious limitations. They were episodic and offline – a once-in-a-blue-moon adrenaline rush rather than a sustainable process. A hackathon might gather 100 coders in a room over a weekend, then vanish until the next year. Low frequency, small scale, limited reach. Only those who could be on-site (often in Silicon Valley or elite campuses) could join. A brilliant hacker in Lagos or São Paulo would be left out, no matter how bright their ideas.

The outcomes of these sprint-like events were also constrained. Sure, teams built cool demos and won bragging rights. But in most cases, the projects were throwaway prototypes – “toy” apps that never evolved into real products or companies. It’s telling that studies found only about 5% of hackathon projects have any life a few months after the event [3]. Ninety-five percent evaporate – victims of that post-hackathon hangover, when everyone goes back to “real” work and the demo code gathers dust. Critics even dubbed hackathons “weekend wastedathons,” blasting their outputs as short-lived vaporware [3]. Think about it: a burst of creativity occurs, dozens of nifty ideas bloom… and then what? How many hackathon winners can you name that turned into enduring businesses? For every Carousell or EasyTaxi that emerged from a hackathon and later raised tens of millions [2], there were hundreds of clever mashups that never saw the light of day again.

The traditional hackathon model, as exciting as it was, rarely translated into sustained innovation. It was innovation in a silo: constrained by time, geography, and a lack of follow-through. Hackathons were events, not processes. They happened in a burst and ended just as quickly – a firework, not a sunrise.

Moreover, hackathons historically were insular. Until recently, they were largely run by and for tech insiders. Big tech companies did internal hackathons to juice employee creativity (Facebook’s famous all-nighters every few weeks led to Timeline and tagging features reaching a billion users [1]), and organizations like NASA and the World Bank experimented with hackathons for civic tech. But these were exceptions that proved the rule: hackathons were special occasions, not business-as-usual. Outside of tech giants, few organizations had the bandwidth or know-how to host them regularly. If you weren’t Google, Microsoft, or a well-funded startup hub, hackathons remained a novelty.

In fact, the world’s largest hackathon today is Microsoft’s internal global hackathon – with 70,000 employees collaborating across 75 countries [4] – an incredible feat, but one only a corporate titan could pull off. Smaller players could only watch and wonder.

The limitations were clear: hackathons were too infrequent and inaccessible to tap the full global talent pool, too short-lived to build anything beyond a prototype, and too isolated to truly change an industry. Yes, they produced amazing moments of genius – flashbulbs of innovation. But as a mechanism for continuous progress, the traditional hackathon was lacking. As an investor or tech leader, you might cheer the creativity but ask: Where is the lasting impact? Where is the infrastructure that turns these flashes into a steady beam of light?

In the spirit of Clay Christensen’s Innovator’s Dilemma, incumbents often dismissed hackathon projects as mere toys – interesting but not viable. And indeed, “the next big thing always starts out being dismissed as a toy” [5]. Hackathons generated plenty of toys, but rarely the support system to turn those toys into the next big thing. The model was ripe for reinvention. Why, in the 2020s, were we still innovating with a 1990s playbook? Why limit breakthrough ideas to a weekend or a single location? Why allow 95% of nascent innovations to wither on the vine? These questions hung in the air, waiting for an answer.

Hackathons 2.0 – DoraHacks and the First Evolution (2020–2024)

Enter DoraHacks. In the early 2020s, DoraHacks emerged like a defibrillator for the hackathon format, jolting it to new life. DoraHacks 1.0 (circa 2020–2024) was nothing less than the reinvention of the hackathon – an upgrade from Hackathon 1.0 to Hackathon 2.0. It took the hackathon concept, supercharged it, scaled it, and extended its reach in every dimension. The result was a global hacker movement, a platform that transformed hackathons from one-off sprints into a continuous engine for tech innovation. How did DoraHacks revolutionize the hackathon? Let’s count the ways:

From 24 Hours to 24 Days (or 24 Weeks!)

DoraHacks stretched the timeframe of hackathons, unlocking vastly greater potential. Instead of a frantic 24-hour dash, many DoraHacks-supported hackathons ran for several weeks or even months. This was a game-changer. Suddenly, teams had time to build serious prototypes, iterate, and polish their projects. A longer format meant hackathon projects could evolve beyond the rough demo stage. Hackers could sleep (occasionally!), incorporate user feedback, and transform a kernel of an idea into a working MVP. The extended duration blurred the line between a hackathon and an accelerator program – but with the open spirit of a hackathon intact. For example, DoraHacks hackathons for blockchain startups often ran 6–8 weeks, resulting in projects that attracted real users and investors by the end. The extra time turned hackathon toys into credible products. It was as if the hackathon grew up: less hack, more build (“BUIDL”). By shattering the 24-hour norm, DoraHacks made hackathons far more productive and impactful.

From Local Coffee Shops to Global Online Arenas

DoraHacks moved hackathons from physical spaces into the cloud, unleashing global participation. Pre-2020, a hackathon meant being in a specific place – say, a warehouse in San Francisco or a university lab – shoulder-to-shoulder with a local team. DoraHacks blew the doors off that model with online hackathons that anyone, anywhere could join. Suddenly, a developer in Nigeria could collaborate with a designer in Ukraine and a product thinker in Brazil, all in the same virtual hackathon. Geography ceased to be a limit. When DoraHacks hosted the Naija HackAtom for African blockchain devs, it drew over 500 participants (160+ developers) across Nigeria’s tech community [6]. In another event, thousands of hackers from dozens of countries logged into a DoraHacks virtual venue to ideate and compete. This global reach did more than increase headcount – it brought diverse perspectives and problems into the innovation mix. A fintech hackathon might see Latin American coders addressing remittances, or an AI hackathon see Asian and African participants applying machine learning to local healthcare challenges. By going online, hackathons became massively inclusive. DoraHacks effectively democratized access to innovation competitions: all you needed was an internet connection and the will to create. The result was a quantum leap in both the quantity and quality of ideas. No longer were hackathons an elitist sport; they became a global innovation free-for-all, open to talent from every corner of the world.

From Dozens of Participants to Tens of Thousands

Scale was another pillar of the DoraHacks revolution. Traditional hackathons were intimate affairs (dozens, maybe a few hundred participants at best). DoraHacks helped orchestrate hackathons an order of magnitude larger. We’re talking global hackathons with thousands of developers and multi-million dollar prize pools. For instance, in one 2021 online hackathon, nearly 7,000 participants submitted 550 projects for $5 million in prizes [7] – a scale unimaginable in the early 2010s. DoraHacks itself became a nexus for these mega-hackathons. The platform’s hackathons in the Web3 space routinely saw hundreds of teams competing for prizes sometimes exceeding $1 million. This scale wasn’t just vanity metrics; it meant a deeper talent bench attacking problems and a higher probability that truly exceptional projects would emerge. By casting a wide net, DoraHacks events captured star teams that might have been overlooked in smaller settings. The proof is in the outcomes: 216 builder teams were funded with over $5 million in one DoraHacks-powered hackathon series on BNB Chain [8] – yes, five million dollars, distributed to over two hundred teams as seed funding. That’s not a hackathon, that’s an economy! The prize pools ballooned from pizza money to serious capital, attracting top-tier talent who realized this hackathon could launch my startup. As a result, projects coming out of DoraHacks were not just weekend hacks – they were venture-ready endeavors. The hackathon graduated from a science fair to a global startup launchpad.

From Toy Projects to Real Startups (Even Unicorns)

Here’s the most thrilling part: DoraHacks hackathons started producing not just apps, but companies. And some of them turned into unicorns (companies valued at $1B+). We saw earlier the rare cases of pre-2020 hackathon successes like Carousell (a simple idea at a 2012 hackathon that became a $1.1B valued marketplace [2]) or EasyTaxi (born in a hackathon, later raising $75M and spanning 30 countries [2]). DoraHacks turbocharged this phenomenon. By providing more time, support, and follow-up funding, DoraHacks-enabled hackathons became cradles of innovation where raw hacks matured into fully-fledged ventures. Take 1inch Network for example – a decentralized finance aggregator that started as a hackathon project in 2019. Sergej Kunz and Anton Bukov built a prototype at a hackathon and kept iterating. Fast forward: 1inch has now processed over $400 billion in trading volume [9] and became one of the leading platforms in DeFi. Or consider the winners of DoraHacks Web3 hackathons: many have gone on to raise multimillion-dollar rounds from top VCs. Hackathons became the front door to the startup world – the place where founders made their debut. A striking illustration was the Solana Season Hackathons: projects like STEPN, a move-to-earn app, won a hackathon track in late 2021 and shortly after grew into a sensation with a multi-billion dollar token economy [10]. These are not isolated anecdotes; they represent a trend DoraHacks set in motion. The platform’s hackathons produced a pipeline of fundable, high-impact startups. In effect, DoraHacks blurred the line between a hackathon and a seed-stage incubator. The playful hacker ethos remained, but now the outcomes were much more than bragging rights – they were companies with real users, revenue, and valuations. To paraphrase investor Chris Dixon, DoraHacks took those “toys” and helped nurture them into the next big things [5].

In driving this first evolution of the hackathon, DoraHacks didn’t just improve on an existing model – it created an entirely new innovation ecosystem. Hackathons became high-frequency, global, and consequential. What used to be a weekend thrill became a continuous pipeline for innovation. DoraHacks events started churning out hundreds of viable projects every year, many of which secured follow-on funding. The platform provided not just the event itself, but the after-care: community support, mentorship, and links to investors and grants (through initiatives like DoraHacks’ grant programs and quadratic funding rounds).

By 2024, the results spoke volumes. DoraHacks had grown into the world’s most important hackathon platform – the beating heart of a global hacker movement spanning blockchain, AI, and beyond. The numbers tell the story. Over nine years, DoraHacks supported 4,000+ projects in securing more than $30 million in funding [11]; by 2025, that figure skyrocketed as 21,000+ startups and developer teams received over $80 million via DoraHacks-supported hackathons and grants [12]. This is not hype – this is recorded history. According to CoinDesk, “DoraHacks has made its mark as a global hackathon organizer and one of the world’s most active multi-chain Web3 developer platforms” [11]. Major tech ecosystems took notice. Over 40 public blockchain networks (L1s and L2s) – from Solana to Polygon to Avalanche – partnered with DoraHacks to run their hackathons and open innovation programs [13]. Blockworks reported that DoraHacks became a “core partner” to dozens of Web3 ecosystems, providing them access to a global pool of developers [13]. In the eyes of investors, DoraHacks itself was key infrastructure: “DoraHacks is key to advancing the development of the infrastructure for Web3,” noted one VC backing the platform [13].

In short, by 2024 DoraHacks had transformed the hackathon from a niche event into a global innovation engine. It proved that hackathons at scale can consistently produce real, fundable innovation – not just one-off gimmicks. It connected hackers with resources and turned isolated hacks into an evergreen, worldwide developer movement. This was Hackathons 2.0: bigger, longer, borderless, and far more impactful than ever before.

One might reasonably ask: Can it get any better than this? DoraHacks had seemingly cracked the code to harness hacker energy for lasting innovation. But the team behind DoraHacks wasn’t done. In fact, they were about to unveil something even more radical – a catalyst to push hackathons into a new epoch entirely. If DoraHacks 1.0 was the evolution, what came next would be a revolution.

The Agentic Hackathon: BUIDL AI and the Second Revolution

In 2024, DoraHacks introduced BUIDL AI, and with it, the concept of the Agentic Hackathon. If hackathons at their inception were analog phones, and DoraHacks 1.0 made them smartphones, then BUIDL AI is like giving hackathons an AI co-pilot – a self-driving mode. It’s not merely an incremental improvement; it’s a second revolution. BUIDL AI infused hackathons with artificial intelligence, automation, and agency (hence “agentic”), fundamentally changing how these events are organized and experienced. We are now entering the Age of Agentic Innovation, where hackathons run with the assistance of AI agents can occur with unprecedented frequency, efficiency, and intelligence.

So, what exactly is an Agentic Hackathon? It’s a hackathon where AI-driven agents augment the entire process – from planning and judging to participant support – enabling a scale and speed of innovation that was impossible before. In an agentic hackathon, AI is the tireless co-organizer working alongside humans. Routine tasks that used to bog down organizers are now handled by intelligent algorithms. Imagine hackathons that practically run themselves, continuously, like an “always-on” tournament of ideas. With BUIDL AI, DoraHacks effectively created self-driving hackathons – autonomous, efficient, and capable of operating 24/7, across multiple domains, simultaneously. This isn’t science fiction; it’s happening now. Let’s break down how BUIDL AI works and why it 10x’d hackathon efficiency overnight:

AI-Powered Judging and Project Review – 10× Efficiency Boost

One of the most labor-intensive aspects of big hackathons is judging hundreds of project submissions. It can take organizers weeks of effort to sift the high-potential projects from the rest. BUIDL AI changes that. It comes with a BUIDL Review module – an AI-driven judging system that can intelligently evaluate hackathon projects on multiple dimensions (completeness, originality, relevance to the hackathon theme, etc.) and automatically filter out low-quality submissions [14]. It’s like having an army of expert reviewers available instantly. The result? What used to require hundreds of human-hours now happens in a flash. DoraHacks reports that AI-assisted review has improved hackathon organization efficiency by more than 10× [14]. Think about that: a process that might have taken a month of tedious work can be done in a few days or less, with AI ensuring consistency and fairness in scoring. Organizers can now handle massive hackathons without drowning in paperwork, and participants get quicker feedback. The AI doesn’t replace human judges entirely – final decisions still involve experts – but it augments them, doing the heavy lifting of initial evaluation. This means hackathons can accept more submissions, confident that AI will help triage them. No more cutting off sign-ups because “we can’t review them all.” The machine scale is here. In an agentic hackathon, no good project goes unseen due to bandwidth constraints – the AI makes sure of that.

Automated Marketing and Storytelling

Winning a hackathon is great, but if nobody hears about it, the impact is muted. Traditionally, after a hackathon ended, organizers would manually compile results, write blog posts, thank sponsors – tasks that, while important, take time and often get delayed. BUIDL AI changes this too. It features an Automated Marketing capability that can generate post-hackathon reports and content with a click [14]. Imagine an AI that observes the entire event (the projects submitted, the winners, the tech trends) and then writes a polished summary: highlighting the best ideas, profiling the winning teams, extracting insights (“60% of projects used AI in healthcare this hackathon”). BUIDL AI does exactly that – it automatically produces a hackathon “highlight reel” and summary report [14]. This not only saves organizers the headache of writing marketing copy, but it also amplifies the hackathon’s reach. Within hours of an event, a rich recap can be shared globally, showcasing the innovations and attracting attention to the teams. Sponsors and partners love this, as their investment gets publicized promptly. Participants love it because their work is immediately celebrated and visible. In essence, every hackathon tells a story, and BUIDL AI ensures that story spreads far and wide – instantly. This kind of automated storytelling turns each hackathon into ongoing content, fueling interest and momentum for the next events. It’s a virtuous cycle: hackathons create innovations, AI packages the narrative, that narrative draws in more innovators.

One-Click Launch and Multi-Hackathon Management

Perhaps the most liberating feature of BUIDL AI is how it obliterates the logistical hurdles of organizing hackathons. Before, setting up a hackathon was itself a project – coordinating registrations, judges, prizes, communications, all manually configured. DoraHacks’ BUIDL AI introduces a one-click hackathon launch tool [14]. Organizers simply input the basics (theme, prize pool, dates, some judging criteria) and the platform auto-generates the event page, submission portal, judging workflow, and more. It’s as easy as posting a blog. This dramatically lowers the barrier for communities and companies to host hackathons. A small startup or a university club can now launch a serious global hackathon without a dedicated team of event planners. Furthermore, BUIDL AI supports Multi-Hackathon Management, meaning one organization can run multiple hackathons in parallel with ease [14]. In the past, even tech giants struggled to overlap hackathons – it was too resource-intensive. Now, an ecosystem could run, say, a DeFi hackathon, an AI hackathon, and an IoT hackathon all at once, with a lean team, because AI is doing the juggling in the back-end. The launch of BUIDL AI made it feasible to organize 12 hackathons a year – or even several at the same time – something unimaginable before [14]. The platform handles participant onboarding, sends reminders, answers common queries via chatbots, and keeps everything on track. In essence, BUIDL AI turns hackathon hosting into a scalable service. Just as cloud computing platforms let you spin up servers on demand, DoraHacks lets you spin up innovation events on demand. This is a tectonic shift: hackathons can now happen as frequently as needed, not as occasionally as resources allow. We’re talking about the birth of perpetual hackathon culture. Hackathons are no longer rare spark events; they can be continuous flames, always burning, always on.

Real-Time Mentor and Agentic Assistance

The “agentic” part of Agentic Hackathons isn’t only behind the scenes. It also touches the participant experience. With AI integration, hackers get smarter tools and support. For instance, BUIDL AI can include AI assistants that answer developers’ questions during the event (“How do I use this API?” or “Any example code for this algorithm?”), acting like on-demand mentors. It can match teams with potential collaborators or suggest resources. Essentially, every hacker has an AI helper at their side, reducing frustration and accelerating progress. Coding issues that might take hours to debug can be resolved in minutes with an AI pair programmer. This means project quality goes up and participants learn more. It’s as if each team has an extra member – an tireless, all-knowing one. This agentic assistance embodies the vision that “everyone is a hacker” [14] – because AI tools enable even less-experienced participants to build something impressive. The popularization of AI has automated repetitive grunt work and amplified what small teams can achieve [14], so the innovation potential of hackathons is far greater than before [14]. In an agentic hackathon, a team of two people with AI assistants can accomplish what a team of five might have in years past. The playing field is leveled and the creative ceiling is raised.

What do all these advances add up to? Simply this: Hackathons have evolved from occasional bouts of inspiration into a continuous, AI-optimized process of innovation. We have gone from Hackathons 2.0 to Hackathons 3.0 – hackathons that are autonomous, persistent, and intelligent. It’s a paradigm shift. The hackathon is no longer an event you attend; it’s becoming an environment you live in. With BUIDL AI, DoraHacks envisions a world where “Hackathons will enter an unprecedented era of automation and intelligence, allowing more hackers, developers, and open-source communities around the world to easily initiate and participate” [14]. Innovation can happen anytime, anywhere – because the infrastructure to support it runs 24/7 in the cloud, powered by AI. The hackathon has become an agentic platform, always ready to transform ideas into reality.

Crucially, this isn’t limited to blockchain or any single field. BUIDL AI is general-purpose. It is as relevant for an AI-focused hackathon as for a climate-tech or healthcare hackathon. Any domain can plug into this agentic hackathon platform and reap the benefits of higher frequency and efficiency. This heralds a future where hackathons become the default mode for problem-solving. Instead of committees and R&D departments working in silos, companies and communities can throw problems into the hackathon arena – an arena that is always active. It’s like having a global innovation engine humming in the background, ready to tackle challenges at a moment’s notice.

To put it vividly: If DoraHacks 1.0 turned hackathons into a high-speed car, DoraHacks 2.0 with BUIDL AI made it a self-driving car with the pedal to the metal. The roadblocks of cost, complexity, and time – gone. Now, any organization can accelerate from 0 to 60 on the innovation highway without a pit stop. Hackathons can be as frequent as blog updates, as integrated into operations as sprint demos. Innovation on demand, at scale – that’s the power of the Agentic Hackathon.

Innovation On-Demand: How Agentic Hackathons Benefit Everyone

The advent of agentic hackathons isn’t just a cool new toy for the tech community – it’s a transformative tool for businesses, developers, and entire industries. We’re entering an era where anyone with a vision can harness hackathons-as-a-service to drive innovation. Here’s how different players stand to gain from this revolution:

AI Companies – Turbocharging Ecosystem Growth

For AI-focused companies (think OpenAI, Google, Microsoft, Stability AI and the like), hackathons are goldmines of creative uses for their technology. Now, with agentic hackathons, an AI company can essentially run a continuous developer conference for their platform. For example, OpenAI can host always-on hackathons for building applications with GPT-4 or DALL-E. This means thousands of developers constantly experimenting and showcasing what the AI can do – effectively crowdsourcing innovation and killer apps for the AI platform. The benefit? It dramatically expands the company’s ecosystem and user base. New use cases emerge that the company’s own team might never have imagined. (It was independent hackers who first showed how GPT-3 could draft legal contracts or generate game levels – insights that came from hackathons and community contests.) With BUIDL AI, an AI company could spin up monthly hackathons with one click, each focusing on a different aspect (one month NLP, next month robotics, etc.). This is a marketing and R&D force multiplier. Instead of traditional, expensive developer evangelism tours, the AI does the heavy lifting to engage devs globally. The company’s product gets improved and promoted at the same time. In essence, every AI company can now launch a Hackathon League to promote their APIs/models. It’s no coincidence Coinbase just hosted its first AI hackathon to bridge crypto and AI [15] – they know that to seed adoption of a new paradigm, hackathons are the way. Expect every AI platform to do the same: continuous hackathons to educate developers, generate content (demos, tutorials), and identify standout talent to hire or fund. It’s community-building on steroids.

L1s/L2s and Tech Platforms – Discovering the Next Unicorns

For blockchain Layer1/Layer2 ecosystems, or any tech platform (cloud providers, VR platforms, etc.), hackathons are the new deal flow. In the Web3 world, it’s widely recognized that many of the best projects and protocols are born in hackathons. We saw how 1inch started as a hackathon project and became a DeFi unicorn [9]. There’s also Polygon (which aggressively runs hackathons to find novel dApps for its chain) and Filecoin (which used hackathons to surface storage applications). By using DoraHacks and BUIDL AI, these platforms can now run high-frequency hackathons to continuously source innovation. Instead of one or two big events a year, they can have a rolling program – a quarterly hackathon series or even simultaneous global challenges – to keep developers building all the time. The ROI is huge: the cost of running a hackathon (even with decent prizes) is trivial compared to acquiring a thriving new startup or protocol for your ecosystem. Hackathons effectively outsource initial R&D to passionate outsiders, and the best ideas bubble up. Solana’s hackathons led to star projects like Phantom and Solend gaining traction in its ecosystem. Facebook’s internal hackathons gave birth to features that kept the platform dominant [1]. Now any platform can do this externally: use hackathons as a radar for talent and innovation. Thanks to BUIDL AI, a Layer-2 blockchain, even if its core team is small, can manage a dozen parallel bounties and hackathons – one focusing on DeFi, one on NFTs, one on gaming, etc. The AI will help review submissions and manage community questions, so the platform’s devrel team doesn’t burn out. The result is an innovation pipeline feeding the platform’s growth. The next unicorn startup or killer app is identified early and supported. In effect, hackathons become the new startup funnel for VCs and ecosystems. We can expect venture investors to lurk in these agentic hackathons because that’s where the action is – the garages of the future are now cloud hackathon rooms. As Paul Graham wrote, “hackers and painters are both makers” [16], and these makers will paint the future of technology on the canvas of hackathon platforms.

Every Company and Community – Innovation as a Continuous Process

Perhaps the most profound impact of BUIDL AI is that it opens up hackathons to every organization, not just tech companies. Any company that wants to foster innovation – be it a bank exploring fintech, a hospital network seeking healthtech solutions, or a government looking for civic tech ideas – can leverage agentic hackathons. Innovation is no longer a privilege of the giant tech firms; it’s a cloud service accessible to all. For example, a city government could host a year-round hackathon for smart city solutions, where local developers continuously propose and build projects to improve urban life. The BUIDL AI platform could manage different “tracks” for transportation, energy, public safety, etc., with monthly rewards for top ideas. This would engage the community and yield a constant stream of pilot projects, far more dynamically than traditional RFP processes. Likewise, any Fortune 500 company that fears disruption (and who doesn’t?) can use hackathons to disrupt itself positively – inviting outsiders and employees to hack on the company’s own challenges. With the agentic model, even non-technical companies can do this without a hitch; the AI will guide the process, ensuring things run smoothly. Imagine hackathons as part of every corporate strategy department’s toolkit – continuously prototyping the future. As Marc Andreessen famously said, “software is eating the world” – and now every company can have a seat at the table by hosting hackathons to software-ize their business problems. This could democratize innovation across industries. The barrier to trying out bold ideas is so low (a weekend of a hackathon vs. months of corporate planning) that more wild, potentially disruptive ideas will surface from within companies. And with the global reach of DoraHacks, they can bring in external innovators too. Why shouldn’t a retail company crowdsource AR shopping ideas from global hackers? Why shouldn’t a pharma company run bioinformatics hackathons to find new ways to analyze data? There is no reason not to – the agentic hackathon makes it feasible and attractive. Hackathon-as-a-service is the new innovation department. Use it or risk being out-innovated by those who do.

All these benefits boil down to a simple but profound shift: hackathons are becoming a permanent feature of the innovation landscape, rather than a novelty. They are turning into an always-available resource, much like cloud computing or broadband internet. Need fresh ideas or prototypes? Spin up a hackathon and let the global talent pool tackle it. Want to engage your developer community? Launch a themed hackathon and give them a stage. Want to test out 10 different approaches to a problem? Run a hackathon and see what rises to the top. We’re effectively seeing the realization of what one might call the Innovation Commons – a space where problems and ideas are continuously matched, and solutions are rapidly iterated. And AI is the enabler that keeps this commons humming efficiently, without exhausting the human facilitators.

It’s striking how this addresses the classic pitfalls identified in hackathon critiques: sustainability and follow-through. In the agentic model, hackathons are no longer isolated bursts. They can connect to each other (winning teams from one hackathon can enter an accelerator or another hackathon next month). BUIDL AI can track teams and help link them with funding opportunities, closing the loop that used to leave projects orphaned after the event. A great project doesn’t die on Sunday night; it’s funneled into the next stage automatically (perhaps an AI even suggests which grant to apply for, which partner to talk to). This way, innovations have a life beyond the demo day, systematically.

We should also recognize a more philosophical benefit: the culture of innovation becomes more experimental, meritocratic, and fast-paced. In a world of agentic hackathons, the motto is “Why not prototype it? Why not try it now?” – because spinning up the environment to do so is quick and cheap. This mindset can permeate organizations and communities, making them more agile and bold. The cost of failure is low (a few weeks of effort), and the potential upside is enormous (finding the next big breakthrough). It creates a safe sandbox for disruptive ideas – addressing the Innovator’s Dilemma by structurally giving space to those ‘toy’ ideas to prove themselves [5]. Companies no longer have to choose between core business and experimentation; they can allocate a continuous hackathon track to the latter. In effect, DoraHacks and BUIDL AI have built an innovation factory – one that any visionary leader can rent for the weekend (or the whole year).

From Like Button to Liftoff: Hackathons as the Cradle of Innovation

To truly appreciate this new era, it’s worth reflecting on how many game-changing innovations started as hackathon projects or hackathon-like experiments – often despite the old constraints – and how much more we can expect when those constraints are removed. History is full of examples that validate the hackathon model of innovation:

Facebook’s DNA was shaped by hackathons

Mark Zuckerberg himself has credited the company’s internal hackathons for some of Facebook’s most important features. The Like button, Facebook Chat, and Timeline all famously emerged from engineers pulling all-nighters at hackathons [1]. An intern’s hackathon prototype for tagging people in comments was shipped to a billion users just two weeks later [1]. Facebook’s ethos “Move fast and break things” was practically the hackathon ethos formalized. It is no stretch to say Facebook won over MySpace in the 2000s because its culture of rapid innovation (fueled by hackathons) let it out-innovate its rival [1]. If hackathons did that within one company, imagine a worldwide network of hackathons – the pace of innovation everywhere could resemble that hypergrowth.

Google and the 20% Project

Google has long encouraged employees to spend 20% of time on side projects, which is a cousin of the hackathon idea – unstructured exploration. Gmail and Google News were born this way. Additionally, Google has hosted public hackathons around its APIs (like Android hackathons) that spurred the creation of countless apps. The point is, Google institutionalized hacker-style experimentation and reaped huge rewards. With agentic hackathons, even companies without Google’s resources can institutionalize experimentation. Every weekend can be a 20% time for the world’s devs using these platforms.

Open Source Movements

Open Source Movements have benefitted from hackathons (“code sprints”) to develop critical software. The entire OpenBSD operating system had regular hackathons that were essential to its development [3]. In more recent times, projects like Node.js or TensorFlow have organized hackathons to build libraries and tools. The result: stronger ecosystems and engaged contributors. DoraHacks embraces this, positioning itself as “the leading global hackathon community and open source developer incentive platform” [17]. The synergy of open source and hackathons (both decentralized, community-driven, merit-based) is a powerful engine. We can foresee open source projects launching always-on hackathons via BUIDL AI to continuously fix bugs, add features, and reward contributors. This could rejuvenate the open source world by providing incentives (through hackathon prizes) and recognition in a structured way.

The Startup World

The Startup World has hackathons to thank for many startups. We’ve mentioned Carousell (from a Startup Weekend hackathon, now valued over $1B [2]) and EasyTaxi (Startup Weekend Rio, went on to raise $75M [2]). Add to that list Zapier (integrations startup, conceived at a hackathon), GroupMe (acquired by Skype as noted), Instacart (an early version won a hackathon at Y Combinator Demo Day, legend has it), and numerous crypto startups (the founders of Ethereum itself met and collaborated through hackathons and Bitcoin meetups!). When Coinbase wants to find the next big thing in on-chain AI, they host a hackathon [15]. When Stripe wanted more apps on its payments platform, it ran hackathons and distributed bounties. This model just works. It identifies passionate builders and gives them a springboard. With agentic hackathons, that springboard is super-sized. It’s always there, and it can catch far more people. The funnel widens, so expect even more startups to originate from hackathons. It’s quite plausible that the biggest company of the 2030s won’t be founded in a garage – it will be born out of an online hackathon, formed by a team that met in a Discord server, guided by an AI facilitator, and funded within weeks on a platform like DoraHacks. In other words, the garage is going global and AI-powered.

Hackers & Painters – The Creative Connection

Paul Graham, in Hackers & Painters, drew an analogy between hacking and painting as creative endeavors [16]. Hackathons are where that creative energy concentrates and explodes. Many great programmers will tell you their most inspired work happened in a hackathon or skunkworks setting – free of bureaucratic restraints, in a flow state of creation. By scaling and multiplying hackathons, we are effectively amplifying the global creative capacity. We might recall the Renaissance when artists and inventors thrived under patronage and in gatherings – hackathons are the modern Renaissance workshops. They combine art, science, and enterprise. The likes of Leonardo da Vinci would have been right at home in a hackathon (he was notorious for prototyping like a madman). In fact, consider how hackathons embody the solution to the Innovator’s Dilemma: they encourage working on projects that seem small or “not worth it” to incumbents, which is exactly where disruptive innovation often hides [5]. By institutionalizing hackathons, DoraHacks is institutionalizing disruption – making sure the next Netflix or Airbnb isn’t missed because someone shrugged it off as a toy.

We’ve gone from a time when hackathons were rare and local to a time when they are global and constant. This is a pivotal change in the innovation infrastructure of the world. In the 19th century, we built railroads and telegraphs that accelerated the Industrial Revolution, connecting markets and minds. In the 20th century, we built the internet and the World Wide Web, unleashing the Information Revolution. Now, in the 21st century, DoraHacks and BUIDL AI are building the “Innovation Highway” – a persistent, AI-enabled network connecting problem-solvers to problems, talent to opportunities, capital to ideas, across the entire globe, in real time. It’s an infrastructure for innovation itself.

A Grand Vision: The New Infrastructure of Global Innovation

We stand at an inflection point. With DoraHacks and the advent of agentic hackathons, innovation is no longer confined to ivory labs, Silicon Valley offices, or once-a-year events. It is becoming a continuous global activity – an arena where the best minds and the boldest ideas meet, anytime, anywhere. This is a future where innovation is as ubiquitous as Wi-Fi and as relentless as Moore’s Law. It’s a future DoraHacks is actively building, and the implications are profound.

Picture a world a few years from now, where DoraHacks+BUIDL AI is the default backbone for innovation programs across industries. This platform is buzzing 24/7 with hackathons on everything from AI-driven healthcare to climate-change mitigation to new frontiers of art and entertainment. It’s not just for coders – designers, entrepreneurs, scientists, anyone with creative impulse plugs into this network. An entrepreneur in London has a business idea at 2 AM; by 2:15 AM, she’s on DoraHacks launching a 48-hour hackathon to prototype it, with AI coordinating a team of collaborators from four different continents. Sounds crazy? It will be commonplace. A government in Asia faces a sudden environmental crisis; they host an urgent hackathon via BUIDL AI and within days have dozens of actionable tech solutions from around the world. A venture fund in New York essentially “outsources” part of its research to the hackathon cloud – instead of merely requesting pitch decks, they sponsor open hackathons to see real prototypes first. This is agentic innovation in action – fast, borderless, and intelligent.

In this coming era, DoraHacks will be as fundamental to innovation as GitHub is to code or as AWS is to startups. It’s the platform where innovation lives. One might even call it the “GitHub of Innovation” – a social and technical layer where projects are born, not just stored. Already, DoraHacks calls itself “the global hacker movement” [17], and with BUIDL AI it becomes the autopilot of that movement. It’s fitting to think of it as part of the global public infrastructure for innovation. Just as highways move goods and the internet moves information, DoraHacks moves innovation itself – carrying ideas from inception to implementation at high speed.

When history looks back at the 2020s, the arrival of continuous, AI-driven hackathons will be seen as a key development in how humanity innovates. The vision is grand, but very tangible: Innovation becomes an everlasting hackathon. Think of it – the hacker ethos spreading into every corner of society, an eternal challenge to the status quo, constantly asking “How can we improve this? How can we reinvent that?” and immediately rallying the talent to do it. This is not chaos; it’s a new form of organized, decentralized R&D. It’s a world where any bold question – “Can we cure this disease? Can we educate children better? Can we make cities sustainable?” – can trigger a global hackathon and yield answers in days or weeks, not years. A world where innovation isn’t a scarce resource, jealously guarded by few, but a common good, an open tournament where the best solution wins, whether it comes from a Stanford PhD or a self-taught coder in Lagos.

If this sounds idealistic, consider how far we’ve come: Hackathons went from obscure coder meetups to the engine behind billion-dollar businesses and critical global tech (Bitcoin itself is a product of hacker culture!). With DoraHacks’s growth and BUIDL AI’s leap, the trajectory is set for hackathons to become continuous and ubiquitous. The technology and model are in place. It’s now about execution and adoption. And the trend is already accelerating – more companies are embracing open innovation, more developers are working remotely and participating in online communities, and AI is rapidly advancing as a co-pilot in all creative endeavors.

DoraHacks finds itself at the center of this transformation. It has the first-mover advantage, the community, and the vision. The company’s ethos is telling: “Funding the everlasting hacker movement” is one of their slogans [18]. They see hackathons as not just events but a movement that must be everlasting – a permanent revolution of the mind. With BUIDL AI, DoraHacks is providing the engine to make it everlasting. This hints at a future where DoraHacks+BUIDL AI is part of the critical infrastructure of global innovation, akin to a utility. It’s the innovation grid, and when you plug into it, magic happens.

Marc Andreessen’s writings often speak about “building a better future” with almost manifest destiny fervor. In that spirit, one can boldly assert: Agentic hackathons will build our future, faster and better. They will accelerate solutions to humanity’s toughest challenges by tapping a broader talent pool and iterating faster than ever. They will empower individuals – giving every creative mind on the planet the tools, community, and opportunity to make a real impact, immediately, not someday. This is deeply democratizing. It resonates with the ethos of the early internet – permissionless innovation. DoraHacks is bringing that ethos to structured innovation events and stretching them into an ongoing fabric.

In conclusion, we are witnessing a paradigm shift: Hackathons reinvented, innovation unchained. The limitations of the old model are gone, replaced by a new paradigm where hackathons are high-frequency, AI-augmented, and outcome-oriented. DoraHacks led this charge in the 2020–2024 period, and with BUIDL AI, it’s launching the next chapter – the Age of Agentic Innovation. For investors and visionaries, this is a call to action. We often talk about investing in “infrastructure” – well, this is investing in the infrastructure of innovation itself. Backing DoraHacks and its mission is akin to backing the builders of a transcontinental railroad or an interstate highway, except this time the cargo is ideas and breakthroughs. The network effects are enormous: every additional hackathon and participant adds value to the whole ecosystem, in a compounding way. It’s a positive-sum game of innovation. And DoraHacks is poised to be the platform and the community that captures and delivers that value globally.

DoraHacks reinvented hackathons – it turned hackathons from sporadic stunts into a sustained methodology for innovation. In doing so, it has thrown open the gates to an era where innovation can be agentic: self-driving, self-organizing, and ceaseless. We are at the dawn of this new age. It’s an age where, indeed, “he who has the developers has the world” [14] – and DoraHacks is making sure that every developer, every hacker, every dreamer anywhere can contribute to shaping our collective future. The grand vista ahead is one of continuous invention and discovery, powered by a global hive mind of hackers and guided by AI. DoraHacks and BUIDL AI stand at the helm of this movement, as the architects of the “innovation rails” on which we’ll ride. It’s not just a platform, it’s a revolutionary infrastructure – the new railroad, the new highway system for ideas. Buckle up, because with DoraHacks driving, the age of agentic innovation has arrived, and the future is hurtling toward us at hackathon speed. The hackathon never ends – and that is how we will invent a better world.

References

[1] Vocoli. (2015). Facebook’s Secret Sauce: The Hackathon. https://www.vocoli.com/blog/june-2015/facebook-s-secret-sauce-the-hackathon/
[2] Analytics India Magazine. (2023). Borne Out Of Hackathons. https://analyticsindiamag.com/ai-trends/borne-out-of-hackathons/
[3] Wikipedia. (n.d.). Hackathon: Origin and History. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hackathon#Origin_and_history
[4] LinkedIn. (2024). This year marked my third annual participation in Microsoft’s Global…. https://www.linkedin.com/posts/clare-ashforth_this-year-marked-my-third-annual-participation-activity-7247636808119775233-yev-
[5] Glasp. (n.d.). Chris Dixon’s Quotes. https://glasp.co/quotes/chris-dixon
[6] ODaily. (2024). Naija HackAtom Hackathon Recap. https://www.odaily.news/en/post/5203212
[7] Solana. (2021). Meet the winners of the Riptide hackathon - Solana. https://solana.com/news/riptide-hackathon-winners-solana
[8] DoraHacks. (n.d.). BNB Grant DAO - DoraHacks. https://dorahacks.io/bnb
[9] Cointelegraph. (2021). From Hackathon Project to DeFi Powerhouse: AMA with 1inch Network. https://cointelegraph.com/news/from-hackathon-project-to-defi-powerhouse-ama-with-1inch-network
[10] Gemini. (2022). How Does STEPN Work? GST and GMT Token Rewards. https://www.gemini.com/cryptopedia/stepn-nft-sneakers-gmt-token-gst-crypto-move-to-earn-m2e
[11] CoinDesk. (2022). Inside DoraHacks: The Open Source Bazaar Empowering Web3 Innovations. https://www.coindesk.com/sponsored-content/inside-dorahacks-the-open-source-bazaar-empowering-web3-innovations
[12] LinkedIn. (n.d.). DoraHacks. https://www.linkedin.com/company/dorahacks
[13] Blockworks. (2022). Web3 Hackathon Incubator DoraHacks Nabs $20M From FTX, Liberty City. https://blockworks.co/news/web3-hackathon-incubator-dorahacks-nabs-20m-from-ftx-liberty-city
[14] Followin. (2024). BUIDL AI: The future of Hackathon, a new engine for global open source technology. https://followin.io/en/feed/16892627
[15] Coinbase. (2024). Coinbase Hosts Its First AI Hackathon: Bringing the San Francisco Developer Community Onchain. https://www.coinbase.com/developer-platform/discover/launches/Coinbase-AI-hackathon
[16] Graham, P. (2004). Hackers & Painters. https://ics.uci.edu/~pattis/common/handouts/hackerspainters.pdf
[17] Himalayas. (n.d.). DoraHacks hiring Research Engineer – BUIDL AI. https://himalayas.app/companies/dorahacks/jobs/research-engineer-buidl-ai
[18] X. (n.d.). DoraHacks. https://x.com/dorahacks?lang=en

@ 24462930:3caf03ab

Nostr 中所有的数据都是事件，通过将事件存储在多个中继器上来实现去中心化，通过签名来证明事件的拥有者。但如果你想真正拥有你的事件，你应该运行一个自己的中继器来保存它们。否则一旦你使用的所有中继器出了故障或者刻意删除了你的事件，你将永远丢失它们。

对于大部份人来说，运行一个中继器是复杂的，成本高昂的。为了解决这个问题，我开发了 nostr-relay-tray，这是一款可以很方便在个人电脑上运行的中继器，并且支持通过互联网对其进行访问。

项目地址：https://github.com/CodyTseng/nostr-relay-tray

本文将介绍如何使用 nostr-relay-tray 来运行一个自己的中继器。

下载

从 GitHub Release 页面 下载对应你操作系统的安装包

| 操作系统 | 文件格式 | | --------------------- | ---------------------------------- | | Windows | nostr-relay-tray.Setup.x.x.x.exe | | macOS (Apple Silicon) | nostr-relay-tray-x.x.x-arm64.dmg | | macOS (Intel) | nostr-relay-tray-x.x.x.dmg | | Linux | 你们应该知道使用哪个 |

安装

因为我没有对这个安装包进行数字签名，所以在安装时会有一些阻碍。安装成功后，菜单栏会出现一个鸵鸟图标。点击鸵鸟图标，你会看到一个菜单，点击 "Dashboard" 选项可以打开中继器的控制面板进行更多的配置。

macOS 用户注意：

• 首次打开时需要前往「系统设置 > 隐私与安全性」点击“仍要打开”按钮。
• 若遇损坏提示，需要在终端执行以下命令解除限制：

bash sudo xattr -rd com.apple.quarantine /Applications/nostr-relay-tray.app

Windows 用户：

• 在安全警告界面点击「更多信息 > 仍要运行」

连接

默认情况下，nostr-relay-tray 只能在本地通过 ws://localhost:4869/ 进行访问。这让它的用途非常有限，所以我们需要将它暴露到互联网。

在控制面板中点击 "Proxy" 选项卡，并打开开关。你将会获得一个 "Public address"，你可以使用这个地址在任何地方访问你的中继器。就是这么简单。

接下来，你要将刚刚获得的地址添加到你的中继器列表中。并且要让它在列表中尽可能靠前的位置。因为大部份的客户端会优先连接列表中靠前的中继器，后面的中继器常常会被忽略。

限制

接下来我们需要增加一些限制来防止中继器保存一些与你无关的事件，浪费存储空间。nostr-relay-tray 可以非常灵活精细地设置允许接收哪些事件，但有些复杂，所以不在这里介绍，如果有兴趣可以日后探索。

在这里我先介绍一个很简单有效的策略 —— WoT (Web of Trust)。你可以在 "WoT & PoW" 选项卡中打开这个功能。打开之前你需要先输入你的 pubkey。

这里还有一个非常重要的参数 Depth，它表示某个人与你的关系深度。你关注的人与你的深度为 1，你关注的人关注的人与你的深度为 2，以此类推。

• 如果你将这个参数设置为 0，那么你的中继器只会接收你自己的事件。
• 如果你将这个参数设置为 1，那么你的中继器只会接收你和你关注的人的事件。
• 如果你将这个参数设置为 2，那么你的中继器只会接收你和你关注的人的事件，以及你关注的人关注的人的事件。

目前这个参数的最大值只能为 2。

总结

至此，你已经成功运行了一个自己的中继器，并且设置了一个简单的限制来防止中继器保存一些与你无关的事件。

如果你在使用中遇到任何问题，请随时在 GitHub 上提交 issue，我会尽快回复你。

Not your relay, not your events

@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9

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

Small Wins

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

Ego is Volatile

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

Simplicity

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

The Big Picture

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

@ 39cc53c9:27168656

Read the original blog post

I've been thinking about how to improve my seed backup in a cheap and cool way, mostly for fun. Until now, I had the seed written on a piece of paper in a desk drawer, and I wanted something more durable and fire-proof.

Show me the final result!

After searching online, I found two options I liked the most: the Cryptosteel Capsule and the Trezor Keep. These products are nice but quite expensive, and I didn't want to spend that much on my seed backup. Privacy is also important, and sharing details like a shipping address makes me uncomfortable. This concern has grown since the Ledger incident^1. A $5 wrench attack^2 seems too cheap, even if you only hold a few sats.

Upon seeing the design of Cryptosteel, I considered creating something similar at home. Although it may not be as cool as their device, it could offer almost the same in terms of robustness and durability.

Step 1: Get the materials and tools

When choosing the materials, you will want to go with stainless steel. It is durable, resistant to fire, water, and corrosion, very robust, and does not rust. Also, its price point is just right; it's not the cheapest, but it's cheap for the value you get.

I went to a material store and bought:

• Two bolts
• Two hex nuts and head nuts for the bolts
• A bag of 30 washers

All items were made of stainless steel. The total price was around €6. This is enough for making two seed backups.

You will also need:

• A set of metal letter stamps (I bought a 2mm-size letter kit since my washers were small, 6mm in diameter)
  • You can find these in local stores or online marketplaces. The set I bought cost me €13.
• A good hammer
• A solid surface to stamp on

Total spent: 19€ for two backups

Step 2: Stamp and store

Once you have all the materials, you can start stamping your words. There are many videos on the internet that use fancy 3D-printed tools to get the letters nicely aligned, but I went with the free-hand option. The results were pretty decent.

I only stamped the first 4 letters for each word since the BIP-39 wordlist allows for this. Because my stamping kit did not include numbers, I used alphabet letters to define the order. This way, if all the washers were to fall off, I could still reassemble the seed correctly.

The final result

So this is the final result. I added two smaller washers as protection and also put the top washer reversed so the letters are not visible:

Compared to the Cryptosteel or the Trezor Keep, its size is much more compact. This makes for an easier-to-hide backup, in case you ever need to hide it inside your human body.

Some ideas

Tamper-evident seal

To enhance the security this backup, you can consider using a tamper-evident seal. This can be easily achieved by printing a unique image or using a specific day's newspaper page (just note somewhere what day it was).

Apply a thin layer of glue to the washer's surface and place the seal over it. If someone attempts to access the seed, they will be forced to destroy the seal, which will serve as an evident sign of tampering.

This simple measure will provide an additional layer of protection and allow you to quickly identify any unauthorized access attempts.

Note that this method is not resistant to outright theft. The tamper-evident seal won't stop a determined thief but it will prevent them from accessing your seed without leaving any trace.

Redundancy

Make sure to add redundancy. Make several copies of this cheap backup, and store them in separate locations.

Unique wordset

Another layer of security could be to implement your own custom mnemonic dictionary. However, this approach has the risk of permanently losing access to your funds if not implemented correctly.

If done properly, you could potentially end up with a highly secure backup, as no one else would be able to derive the seed phrase from it. To create your custom dictionary, assign a unique number from 1 to 2048 to a word of your choice. Maybe you could use a book, and index the first 2048 unique words that appear. Make sure to store this book and even get a couple copies of it (digitally and phisically).

This self-curated set of words will serve as your personal BIP-39 dictionary. When you need to translate between your custom dictionary and the official BIP-39 wordlist, simply use the index number to find the corresponding word in either list.

Never write the idex or words on your computer (Do not use Ctr+F)

@ 40b9c85f:5e61b451

Introduction

Data Vending Machines (DVMs) have emerged as a crucial component of the Nostr ecosystem, offering specialized computational services to clients across the network. As defined in NIP-90, DVMs operate on an apparently simple principle: "data in, data out." They provide a marketplace for data processing where users request specific jobs (like text translation, content recommendation, or AI text generation)

While DVMs have gained significant traction, the current specification faces challenges that hinder widespread adoption and consistent implementation. This article explores some ideas on how we can apply the reflection pattern, a well established approach in RPC systems, to address these challenges and improve the DVM ecosystem's clarity, consistency, and usability.

The Current State of DVMs: Challenges and Limitations

The NIP-90 specification provides a broad framework for DVMs, but this flexibility has led to several issues:

1. Inconsistent Implementation

As noted by hzrd149 in "DVMs were a mistake" every DVM implementation tends to expect inputs in slightly different formats, even while ostensibly following the same specification. For example, a translation request DVM might expect an event ID in one particular format, while an LLM service could expect a "prompt" input that's not even specified in NIP-90.

2. Fragmented Specifications

The DVM specification reserves a range of event kinds (5000-6000), each meant for different types of computational jobs. While creating sub-specifications for each job type is being explored as a possible solution for clarity, in a decentralized and permissionless landscape like Nostr, relying solely on specification enforcement won't be effective for creating a healthy ecosystem. A more comprehensible approach is needed that works with, rather than against, the open nature of the protocol.

3. Ambiguous API Interfaces

There's no standardized way for clients to discover what parameters a specific DVM accepts, which are required versus optional, or what output format to expect. This creates uncertainty and forces developers to rely on documentation outside the protocol itself, if such documentation exists at all.

The Reflection Pattern: A Solution from RPC Systems

The reflection pattern in RPC systems offers a compelling solution to many of these challenges. At its core, reflection enables servers to provide metadata about their available services, methods, and data types at runtime, allowing clients to dynamically discover and interact with the server's API.

In established RPC frameworks like gRPC, reflection serves as a self-describing mechanism where services expose their interface definitions and requirements. In MCP reflection is used to expose the capabilities of the server, such as tools, resources, and prompts. Clients can learn about available capabilities without prior knowledge, and systems can adapt to changes without requiring rebuilds or redeployments. This standardized introspection creates a unified way to query service metadata, making tools like grpcurl possible without requiring precompiled stubs.

How Reflection Could Transform the DVM Specification

By incorporating reflection principles into the DVM specification, we could create a more coherent and predictable ecosystem. DVMs already implement some sort of reflection through the use of 'nip90params', which allow clients to discover some parameters, constraints, and features of the DVMs, such as whether they accept encryption, nutzaps, etc. However, this approach could be expanded to provide more comprehensive self-description capabilities.

1. Defined Lifecycle Phases

Similar to the Model Context Protocol (MCP), DVMs could benefit from a clear lifecycle consisting of an initialization phase and an operation phase. During initialization, the client and DVM would negotiate capabilities and exchange metadata, with the DVM providing a JSON schema containing its input requirements. nip-89 (or other) announcements can be used to bootstrap the discovery and negotiation process by providing the input schema directly. Then, during the operation phase, the client would interact with the DVM according to the negotiated schema and parameters.

2. Schema-Based Interactions

Rather than relying on rigid specifications for each job type, DVMs could self-advertise their schemas. This would allow clients to understand which parameters are required versus optional, what type validation should occur for inputs, what output formats to expect, and what payment flows are supported. By internalizing the input schema of the DVMs they wish to consume, clients gain clarity on how to interact effectively.

3. Capability Negotiation

Capability negotiation would enable DVMs to advertise their supported features, such as encryption methods, payment options, or specialized functionalities. This would allow clients to adjust their interaction approach based on the specific capabilities of each DVM they encounter.

Implementation Approach

While building DVMCP, I realized that the RPC reflection pattern used there could be beneficial for constructing DVMs in general. Since DVMs already follow an RPC style for their operation, and reflection is a natural extension of this approach, it could significantly enhance and clarify the DVM specification.

A reflection enhanced DVM protocol could work as follows: 1. Discovery: Clients discover DVMs through existing NIP-89 application handlers, input schemas could also be advertised in nip-89 announcements, making the second step unnecessary. 2. Schema Request: Clients request the DVM's input schema for the specific job type they're interested in 3. Validation: Clients validate their request against the provided schema before submission 4. Operation: The job proceeds through the standard NIP-90 flow, but with clearer expectations on both sides

Parallels with Other Protocols

This approach has proven successful in other contexts. The Model Context Protocol (MCP) implements a similar lifecycle with capability negotiation during initialization, allowing any client to communicate with any server as long as they adhere to the base protocol. MCP and DVM protocols share fundamental similarities, both aim to expose and consume computational resources through a JSON-RPC-like interface, albeit with specific differences.

gRPC's reflection service similarly allows clients to discover service definitions at runtime, enabling generic tools to work with any gRPC service without prior knowledge. In the REST API world, OpenAPI/Swagger specifications document interfaces in a way that makes them discoverable and testable.

DVMs would benefit from adopting these patterns while maintaining the decentralized, permissionless nature of Nostr.

Conclusion

I am not attempting to rewrite the DVM specification; rather, explore some ideas that could help the ecosystem improve incrementally, reducing fragmentation and making the ecosystem more comprehensible. By allowing DVMs to self describe their interfaces, we could maintain the flexibility that makes Nostr powerful while providing the structure needed for interoperability.

For developers building DVM clients or libraries, this approach would simplify consumption by providing clear expectations about inputs and outputs. For DVM operators, it would establish a standard way to communicate their service's requirements without relying on external documentation.

I am currently developing DVMCP following these patterns. Of course, DVMs and MCP servers have different details; MCP includes capabilities such as tools, resources, and prompts on the server side, as well as 'roots' and 'sampling' on the client side, creating a bidirectional way to consume capabilities. In contrast, DVMs typically function similarly to MCP tools, where you call a DVM with an input and receive an output, with each job type representing a different categorization of the work performed.

Without further ado, I hope this article has provided some insight into the potential benefits of applying the reflection pattern to the DVM specification.

@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9

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

---

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

A Jurisdiction with Strong Property Rights

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

Abundant Access to Fresh Water

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

Grow Your Own Food

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

Guns

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

A Strong Community You Can Depend On

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

---

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

@ 09fbf8f3:fa3d60f0

快速轻松地删除任何图像的元数据。在网上共享照片、视频和文档之前，可以先从照片、视频和文档中删除元数据，来保护自己的隐私。

链接： 网站地址 | 项目地址

---

推广链接： 低调云（VPN）： https://didiaocloud.xyz

@ 39cc53c9:27168656

Read the original blog post

kycnot.me features a somewhat hidden tool that some users may not be aware of. Every month, an automated job crawls every listed service's Terms of Service (ToS) and FAQ pages and conducts an AI-driven analysis, generating a comprehensive overview that highlights key points related to KYC and user privacy.

Here's an example: Changenow's Tos Review

Why?

ToS pages typically contain a lot of complicated text. Since the first versions of kycnot.me, I have tried to provide users a comprehensive overview of what can be found in such documents. This automated method keeps the information up-to-date every month, which was one of the main challenges with manual updates.

A significant part of the time I invest in investigating a service for kycnot.me involves reading the ToS and looking for any clauses that might indicate aggressive KYC practices or privacy concerns. For the past four years, I performed this task manually. However, with advancements in language models, this process can now be somewhat automated. I still manually review the ToS for a quick check and regularly verify the AI’s findings. However, over the past three months, this automated method has proven to be quite reliable.

Having a quick ToS overview section allows users to avoid reading the entire ToS page. Instead, you can quickly read the important points that are grouped, summarized, and referenced, making it easier and faster to understand the key information.

Limitations

This method has a key limitation: JS-generated pages. For this reason, I was using Playwright in my crawler implementation. I plan to make a release addressing this issue in the future. There are also sites that don't have ToS/FAQ pages, but these sites already include a warning in that section.

Another issue is false positives. Although not very common, sometimes the AI might incorrectly interpret something harmless as harmful. Such errors become apparent upon reading; it's clear when something marked as bad should not be categorized as such. I manually review these cases regularly, checking for anything that seems off and then removing any inaccuracies.

Overall, the automation provides great results.

How?

There have been several iterations of this tool. Initially, I started with GPT-3.5, but the results were not good in any way. It made up many things, and important thigs were lost on large ToS pages. I then switched to GPT-4 Turbo, but it was expensive. Eventually, I settled on Claude 3 Sonnet, which provides a quality compromise between GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 Turbo at a more reasonable price, while allowing a generous 200K token context window.

I designed a prompt, which is open source^1, that has been tweaked many times and will surely be adjusted further in the future.

For the ToS scraping part, I initially wrote a scraper API using Playwright^2, but I replaced it with Jina AI Reader^3, which works quite well and is designed for this task.

Non-conflictive ToS

All services have a dropdown in the ToS section called "Non-conflictive ToS Reviews." These are the reviews that the AI flagged as not needing a user warning. I still provide these because I think they may be interesting to read.

Feedback and contributing

You can give me feedback on this tool, or share any inaccuraties by either opening an issue on Codeberg^4 or by contacting me ^5.

You can contribute with pull requests, which are always welcome, or you can support this project with any of the listed ways.

@ b2d670de:907f9d4a

This is a list of nostr clients exposed as onion services. The list is currently actively maintained on GitHub. Contributions are always appreciated!

| Client name | Onion URL | Source code URL | Admin | Description | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Snort | http://agzj5a4be3kgp6yurijk4q7pm2yh4a5nphdg4zozk365yirf7ahuctyd.onion | https://git.v0l.io/Kieran/snort | operator | N/A | | moStard | http://sifbugd5nwdq77plmidkug4y57zuqwqio3zlyreizrhejhp6bohfwkad.onion/ | https://github.com/rafael-xmr/nostrudel/tree/mostard | operator | minimalist monero friendly nostrudel fork | | Nostrudel | http://oxtrnmb4wsb77rmk64q3jfr55fo33luwmsyaoovicyhzgrulleiojsad.onion/ | https://github.com/hzrd149/nostrudel | operator | Runs latest tagged docker image | | Nostrudel Next | http://oxtrnnumsflm7hmvb3xqphed2eqpbrt4seflgmdsjnpgc3ejd6iycuyd.onion/ | https://github.com/hzrd149/nostrudel | operator | Runs latest "next" tagged docker image | | Nsite | http://q457mvdt5smqj726m4lsqxxdyx7r3v7gufzt46zbkop6mkghpnr7z3qd.onion/ | https://github.com/hzrd149/nsite-ts | operator | Runs nsite. You can read more about nsite here. | | Shopstr | http://6fkdn756yryd5wurkq7ifnexupnfwj6sotbtby2xhj5baythl4cyf2id.onion/ | https://github.com/shopstr-eng/shopstr-hidden-service | operator | Runs the latest serverless branch build of Shopstr. |

@ a39d19ec:3d88f61e

Die Debatte um Migration, Grenzsicherung und Abschiebungen wird in Deutschland meist emotional geführt. Wer fordert, dass illegale Einwanderer abgeschoben werden, sieht sich nicht selten dem Vorwurf des Rassismus ausgesetzt. Doch dieser Vorwurf ist nicht nur sachlich unbegründet, sondern verkehrt die Realität ins Gegenteil: Tatsächlich sind es gerade diejenigen, die hinter jeder Forderung nach Rechtssicherheit eine rassistische Motivation vermuten, die selbst in erster Linie nach Hautfarbe, Herkunft oder Nationalität urteilen.

Das Recht steht über Emotionen

Deutschland ist ein Rechtsstaat. Das bedeutet, dass Regeln nicht nach Bauchgefühl oder politischer Stimmungslage ausgelegt werden können, sondern auf klaren gesetzlichen Grundlagen beruhen müssen. Einer dieser Grundsätze ist in Artikel 16a des Grundgesetzes verankert. Dort heißt es:

„Auf Absatz 1 [Asylrecht] kann sich nicht berufen, wer aus einem Mitgliedstaat der Europäischen Gemeinschaften oder aus einem anderen Drittstaat einreist, in dem die Anwendung des Abkommens über die Rechtsstellung der Flüchtlinge und der Europäischen Menschenrechtskonvention sichergestellt ist.“

Das bedeutet, dass jeder, der über sichere Drittstaaten nach Deutschland einreist, keinen Anspruch auf Asyl hat. Wer dennoch bleibt, hält sich illegal im Land auf und unterliegt den geltenden Regelungen zur Rückführung. Die Forderung nach Abschiebungen ist daher nichts anderes als die Forderung nach der Einhaltung von Recht und Gesetz.

Die Umkehrung des Rassismusbegriffs

Wer einerseits behauptet, dass das deutsche Asyl- und Aufenthaltsrecht strikt durchgesetzt werden soll, und andererseits nicht nach Herkunft oder Hautfarbe unterscheidet, handelt wertneutral. Diejenigen jedoch, die in einer solchen Forderung nach Rechtsstaatlichkeit einen rassistischen Unterton sehen, projizieren ihre eigenen Denkmuster auf andere: Sie unterstellen, dass die Debatte ausschließlich entlang ethnischer, rassistischer oder nationaler Kriterien geführt wird – und genau das ist eine rassistische Denkweise.

Jemand, der illegale Einwanderung kritisiert, tut dies nicht, weil ihn die Herkunft der Menschen interessiert, sondern weil er den Rechtsstaat respektiert. Hingegen erkennt jemand, der hinter dieser Kritik Rassismus wittert, offenbar in erster Linie die „Rasse“ oder Herkunft der betreffenden Personen und reduziert sie darauf.

Finanzielle Belastung statt ideologischer Debatte

Neben der rechtlichen gibt es auch eine ökonomische Komponente. Der deutsche Wohlfahrtsstaat basiert auf einem Solidarprinzip: Die Bürger zahlen in das System ein, um sich gegenseitig in schwierigen Zeiten zu unterstützen. Dieser Wohlstand wurde über Generationen hinweg von denjenigen erarbeitet, die hier seit langem leben. Die Priorität liegt daher darauf, die vorhandenen Mittel zuerst unter denjenigen zu verteilen, die durch Steuern, Sozialabgaben und Arbeit zum Erhalt dieses Systems beitragen – nicht unter denen, die sich durch illegale Einreise und fehlende wirtschaftliche Eigenleistung in das System begeben.

Das ist keine ideologische Frage, sondern eine rein wirtschaftliche Abwägung. Ein Sozialsystem kann nur dann nachhaltig funktionieren, wenn es nicht unbegrenzt belastet wird. Würde Deutschland keine klaren Regeln zur Einwanderung und Abschiebung haben, würde dies unweigerlich zur Überlastung des Sozialstaates führen – mit negativen Konsequenzen für alle.

Sozialpatriotismus

Ein weiterer wichtiger Aspekt ist der Schutz der Arbeitsleistung jener Generationen, die Deutschland nach dem Zweiten Weltkrieg mühsam wieder aufgebaut haben. Während oft betont wird, dass die Deutschen moralisch kein Erbe aus der Zeit vor 1945 beanspruchen dürfen – außer der Verantwortung für den Holocaust –, ist es umso bedeutsamer, das neue Erbe nach 1945 zu respektieren, das auf Fleiß, Disziplin und harter Arbeit beruht. Der Wiederaufbau war eine kollektive Leistung deutscher Menschen, deren Früchte nicht bedenkenlos verteilt werden dürfen, sondern vorrangig denjenigen zugutekommen sollten, die dieses Fundament mitgeschaffen oder es über Generationen mitgetragen haben.

Rechtstaatlichkeit ist nicht verhandelbar

Wer sich für eine konsequente Abschiebepraxis ausspricht, tut dies nicht aus rassistischen Motiven, sondern aus Respekt vor der Rechtsstaatlichkeit und den wirtschaftlichen Grundlagen des Landes. Der Vorwurf des Rassismus in diesem Kontext ist daher nicht nur falsch, sondern entlarvt eine selektive Wahrnehmung nach rassistischen Merkmalen bei denjenigen, die ihn erheben.

@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9

Here’s a revised timeline of macro-level events from The Mandibles: A Family, 2029–2047 by Lionel Shriver, reimagined in a world where Bitcoin is adopted as a widely accepted form of money, altering the original narrative’s assumptions about currency collapse and economic control. In Shriver’s original story, the failure of Bitcoin is assumed amid the dominance of the bancor and the dollar’s collapse. Here, Bitcoin’s success reshapes the economic and societal trajectory, decentralizing power and challenging state-driven outcomes.

Part One: 2029–2032

• 2029 (Early Year)\ The United States faces economic strain as the dollar weakens against global shifts. However, Bitcoin, having gained traction emerges as a viable alternative. Unlike the original timeline, the bancor—a supranational currency backed by a coalition of nations—struggles to gain footing as Bitcoin’s decentralized adoption grows among individuals and businesses worldwide, undermining both the dollar and the bancor.

• 2029 (Mid-Year: The Great Renunciation)\ Treasury bonds lose value, and the government bans Bitcoin, labeling it a threat to sovereignty (mirroring the original bancor ban). However, a Bitcoin ban proves unenforceable—its decentralized nature thwarts confiscation efforts, unlike gold in the original story. Hyperinflation hits the dollar as the U.S. prints money, but Bitcoin’s fixed supply shields adopters from currency devaluation, creating a dual-economy split: dollar users suffer, while Bitcoin users thrive.

• 2029 (Late Year)\ Dollar-based inflation soars, emptying stores of goods priced in fiat currency. Meanwhile, Bitcoin transactions flourish in underground and online markets, stabilizing trade for those plugged into the bitcoin ecosystem. Traditional supply chains falter, but peer-to-peer Bitcoin networks enable local and international exchange, reducing scarcity for early adopters. The government’s gold confiscation fails to bolster the dollar, as Bitcoin’s rise renders gold less relevant.

• 2030–2031\ Crime spikes in dollar-dependent urban areas, but Bitcoin-friendly regions see less chaos, as digital wallets and smart contracts facilitate secure trade. The U.S. government doubles down on surveillance to crack down on bitcoin use. A cultural divide deepens: centralized authority weakens in Bitcoin-adopting communities, while dollar zones descend into lawlessness.

• 2032\ By this point, Bitcoin is de facto legal tender in parts of the U.S. and globally, especially in tech-savvy or libertarian-leaning regions. The federal government’s grip slips as tax collection in dollars plummets—Bitcoin’s traceability is low, and citizens evade fiat-based levies. Rural and urban Bitcoin hubs emerge, while the dollar economy remains fractured.

Time Jump: 2032–2047

• Over 15 years, Bitcoin solidifies as a global reserve currency, eroding centralized control. The U.S. government adapts, grudgingly integrating bitcoin into policy, though regional autonomy grows as Bitcoin empowers local economies.

Part Two: 2047

• 2047 (Early Year)\ The U.S. is a hybrid state: Bitcoin is legal tender alongside a diminished dollar. Taxes are lower, collected in BTC, reducing federal overreach. Bitcoin’s adoption has decentralized power nationwide. The bancor has faded, unable to compete with Bitcoin’s grassroots momentum.

• 2047 (Mid-Year)\ Travel and trade flow freely in Bitcoin zones, with no restrictive checkpoints. The dollar economy lingers in poorer areas, marked by decay, but Bitcoin’s dominance lifts overall prosperity, as its deflationary nature incentivizes saving and investment over consumption. Global supply chains rebound, powered by bitcoin enabled efficiency.

• 2047 (Late Year)\ The U.S. is a patchwork of semi-autonomous zones, united by Bitcoin’s universal acceptance rather than federal control. Resource scarcity persists due to past disruptions, but economic stability is higher than in Shriver’s original dystopia—Bitcoin’s success prevents the authoritarian slide, fostering a freer, if imperfect, society.

Key Differences

• Currency Dynamics: Bitcoin’s triumph prevents the bancor’s dominance and mitigates hyperinflation’s worst effects, offering a lifeline outside state control.
• Government Power: Centralized authority weakens as Bitcoin evades bans and taxation, shifting power to individuals and communities.
• Societal Outcome: Instead of a surveillance state, 2047 sees a decentralized, bitcoin driven world—less oppressive, though still stratified between Bitcoin haves and have-nots.

This reimagining assumes Bitcoin overcomes Shriver’s implied skepticism to become a robust, adopted currency by 2029, fundamentally altering the novel’s bleak trajectory.

@ 4857600b:30b502f4

In a revealing development that exposes the hypocrisy of government surveillance, multiple federal agencies including the CIA and FBI have filed lawsuits to keep Samourai Wallet's client list sealed during and after trial proceedings. This move strongly suggests that government agencies themselves were utilizing Samourai's privacy-focused services while simultaneously condemning similar privacy tools when used by ordinary citizens.

The situation bears striking parallels to other cases where government agencies have hidden behind "national security" claims, such as the Jeffrey Epstein case, highlighting a troubling double standard: while average citizens are expected to surrender their financial privacy through extensive reporting requirements and regulations, government agencies claim exemption from these same transparency standards they enforce on others.

This case exemplifies the fundamental conflict between individual liberty and state power, where government agencies appear to be using the very privacy tools they prosecute others for using. The irony is particularly stark given that money laundering for intelligence agencies is considered legal in our system, while private citizens seeking financial privacy face severe legal consequences - a clear demonstration of how the state creates different rules for itself versus the people it claims to serve.

Citations: [1] https://www.bugle.news/cia-fbi-dnc-rnc-all-sue-to-redact-samourais-client-list-from-trial/

@ f7d424b5:618c51e8

It's our podcast and we'll talk about whatever we want. Welcome to a return to normalcy where we cover a variety of subjects instead of just a couple of really long ones. Crack open a beer and chill with us. We're gonna talk about the Galaxy showcase, Marathon, Skyblivion & the leaked Oblivion remake, and a whole bunch more.

In the opening of the episode we get Vic's reaction to a really specific trailer, if you want to follow along, this is the link to that video

Other stuff cited:

• Switch 2 isn't changing price after all?
• Adi Shankar is an Asmon fan

Obligatory:

• Listen to the new episode here!
• Discuss this episode on OUR NEW FORUM
• Get the RSS and Subscribe (this is a new feed URL, but the old one redirects here too!)
• Get a modern podcast app to use that RSS feed on at newpodcastapps.com
• Or listen to the show on the forum using the embedded Podverse player!
• Send your complaints here

Reminder that this is a Value4Value podcast so any support you can give us via a modern podcasting app is greatly appreciated and we will never bow to corporate sponsors!

@ c066aac5:6a41a034

I am all about fleshing out a fantasy, even if the chances of it coming to reality are fairly slim. Dreams should be written down, meditated on, processed over long periods of time. I don't think of it as manifesting (nor do I condone manifestation); one could argue such practices are Biblical (Habakkuk 2:2).

So I'm going to write this out and make it plain, on the off chance that putting it out there brings somethings to fruition:

Jack Dorsey should take over Mozilla.

Either via an invitation from Mozilla, or via a hostile takeover. I don't really care how it happens, but I believe it should happen and I'll outline why.

The Fallen Hero

Mozilla has been having a bad time. I'm not sure that the organization has done much good since the unceremonious departure of Brenden Eich (there's Rust, but is that really a good thing?).

Firefox is losing its relevance. The FireFox Terms of Service update has sparked outrage, the removal of the promise to never sell your data was a Judas level of betrayal, FireFox currently (at the time this article was penned) makes up less than 3% of the total browser marketshare, their main source of income from Google is in jeopardy, most websites are only optimized for Chromium-based browsers, and the Gecko engine is not very secure.

Mozilla's best product is dying, and what is the organization doing about it? They're working on a plethora of issues their core user base does not care about. They've jumped on the AI hype train, they've bought an advertising company (which is very irrelevant to their user base, especially considering uBlock Orgin exists), they're selling white labeled VPNs (Mullvad), they're selling data removal services (which is powered by a former data broker), they're pushing shopping products, they're forcing features on their users which were never asked for (POCKET!!), it seems that Mozilla is completely out of touch with the people they claim to serve. They've abandoned their first love.

Thunderbird is showing some promise with the recent announcement of Thundermail, but that project will sadly suffer from guilt by association.

We have to remember though: Mozilla used to mean something in the FOSS/Open Source world.

They were the shining city on the hill of the internet. They rose up from the ashes of Netscape. FireFox kicked Internet Explorer's butt; it was a punk rock movement. Thunderbird is still an amazing email client. Rust (despite the arguing programmers) is a significant innovation in the programming language space.

I'm not rooting for the downfall of Mozilla. Sure, in a way I'd be happy about it: I'd like to see poor leadership get what it deserves, but I fear Mozilla as a symbol of FOSS/OS would send a sad signal across the ecosystem. I'm a capitalist at heart so I don't favor bailouts (nor am I calling for one); I truly believe this organization could be turned around with the right leadership. Maybe it could be as simple as going back to their original model of serving the deep pockets of the corporate world with open source tech rather than going for the wallets of the consumer.

Every problem is a leadership problem. Fix the leadership, fix the problems.

The Last Great Open Source Hero?

Sadly FOSS figures tend to die of public crucifixion. As time goes on, we have less and less great figures to point to. Thankfully, Jack hasn't been canceled yet.

Jack Dorsey has a pretty good résumé in the open source world. He jumped right in with Bitcoin. He left BlueSky for NOSTR. He would've made Twitter a protocol if he didn't need to feed himself early in his career. He is currently financing several projects in the Bitcoin and NOSTR world, which is arguably the best open source technology in the world right now.

I do believe that people should stay in their lane of expertise, and maybe Jack should. However, my message to Jack would be that it would be a shame if his passion for open source remained solely in Bitcoin and NOSTR. If his leadership was injected into the Mozilla machine, it could be steered into a magical direction.

Imagine FireFox being the first browser with layer 2 wallet integration (stick it to Brave and their BAT crap [we still love you Brenden Eich flaws and all]). Imagine having a whole world of existing talented developers suddenly interested in contributing their talents to the NOSTR community. Imagine having a browser with an engine that can actually go toe-to-toe with Chromium. Imagine an organization that once again gives FOSS a good name rather than actively eroding public confidence in FOSS.

The True FOSS Heroes

Jack is probably not going to touch Mozilla with a 150 foot pole (or see this article). We all probably need to let the Mozilla dream die in front of us.

Things aren't always black and white. I don't think of Mozilla as an evil organization; just an organization subject to the flaws of fellow humans like you and me. Even the Eye of Sauron, Google, has been a huge blessing to the open source world (Go programming language, Android, all of their open source sponsorships, many more things I could mention).

The beautiful thing about FOSS/OS is that it is a movement of the people. Titans will rise up and fall, but you and I make up the backbone of FOSS. I've had nothing but good interactions with FOSS fanatics. NOSTR's own OceanSlim taught me about Ungoogled Chromium, the Go programming language, and NOSTR relays. When I wanted to get into Linux, I was able to plug in immediately with a group of Linux users here in Nashville. NOSTR devs for the most part are happy to answer my inquiries when I slide into their DMs. I've been in group chats with people openly discussing the best way to make a great lightning wallet.

There's a lot of connection in the Open Source world that I cherish; it's very different from the corporate world most of us are immersed in. The corporate world has gatekeepers; Open Source has collaborators. The corporate world operates in the shadows to maximize profits; Open Source steps into the light for everyone's benefit. The corporate world says you'll never have enough experience/qualifications; Open Source encourages and equips you.

My point is, don't worship any organization. Be thankful for the people around you, try out FOSS programs whenever you can, and have fun with it.

All that said, I wouldn't mind if Jack took over Mozilla. Or if one of his friends took a position (ODELL?). Heck, throw Snowden in while we're at it.

Footnote: "Open Source" and "FOSS/Free and Open Source Software" are used interchangably in this article. Mistakes were made I'm sure, but I hope I got the point across.

@ 6e0ea5d6:0327f353

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The husband agreed.

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

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

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

A toast to our family!

@ 1bc70a01:24f6a411

I've been meaning to dogfood my own vibe project for a while so this feels like a good opportunity to use Untype to publish this update and reflect on my vibe coding journey.

New Untype Update

As I write this, I found it a bit annoying dealing with one of the latest features, so I'll need to make some changes right after I'm done. Nonetheless, here are some exciting developments in the Untype article composer:

1. Added inline AI helper! Now you can highlight text and perform all sorts of things like fix grammar, re-write in different styles, and all sorts of other things. This is a bit annoying at the moment because it takes over the other editing functions and I need to fix the UX.

2. Added pushing articles to DMs! This option, when enabled, will send the article to all the subscribers via a NIP-44 DM. (No client has implemented the subscription method yet so technically it won’t work, until one does. I may add this to nrss.app) Also, I have not tested this so it could be broken… will test eventually!

3. Added word counts
4. Added ability to export as markdown, export as PDF, print.

The biggest flaw I have already discovered is how "I" implemented the highlight functionality. Right now when you highlight some text it automatically pops up the AI helper menu and this makes for an annoying time trying to make any changes to text. I wanted to change this to show a floating clickable icon instead, but for some reason the bot is having a difficult time updating the code to this desired UX.

Speaking of difficult times, it's probably a good idea to reflect a bit upon my vibe coding journey.

Vibe Coding Nostr Projects

First, I think it's important to add some context around my recent batch of nostr vibe projects. I am working on them mostly at night and occasionally on weekends in between park runs with kids, grocery shopping and just bumming around the house. People who see buggy code or less than desired UX should understand that I am not spending days coding this stuff. Some apps are literally as simple as typing one prompt!

That said, its pretty clear by now that one prompt cannot produce a highly polished product. This is why I decided to limit my number of project to a handful that I really wish existed, and slowly update them over time - fixing bugs, adding new features in hopes of making them the best tools - not only on nostr but the internet in general. As you can imagine this is not a small task, especially for sporadic vibe coding.

Fighting the bot

One of my biggest challenges so far besides having very limited time is getting the bot to do what I want it to do. I guess if you've done any vibe coding at all you're probably familiar with what I'm trying to say. You prompt one thing and get a hallucinated response, or worse, a complete mess out the other end that undoes most of the progress you've made. Once the initial thing is created, which barely took any time, now you're faced with making it work a certain way. This is where the challenges arise.

Here's a brief list of issues I've faced when vibe-coding with various tools:

1. Runaway expenses - tools like Cline tend to do a better job directly in VSCode, but they can also add up dramatically. Before leaning into v0 (which is where I do most of my vibe coding now), I would often melt through $10 credit purchases faster than I could get a decent feature out. It was not uncommon for me to spend $20-30 on a weekend just trying to debug a handful of issues. Naturally, I did not wish to pay these fees so I searched for alternatives.

2. File duplication - occasionally, seemingly out of nowhere, the bot will duplicate files by creating an entire new copy and attached "-fixed" to the file name. Clearly, I'm not asking for duplicate files, I just want it to fix the existing file, but it does happen and it's super annoying. Then you are left telling it which version to keep and which one to delete, and sometimes you have to be very precise or it'll delete the wrong thing and you have to roll back to a previous working version.

3. Code duplication - similar to file duplication, occasionally the bot will duplicate code and do things in the most unintuitive way imaginable. This often results in loops and crashes that can take many refreshes just to revert back to a working state, and many more prompts to avoid the duplication entirely - something a seasoned dev never has to deal with (or so I imagine).

4. Misinterpreting your request - occasionally the bot will do something you didn't ask for because it took your request quite literally. This tends to happen when I give it very specific prompts that are targeted at fixing one very specific thing. I've noticed the bots tend to do better with vague asks - hence a pretty good result on the initial prompt.

5. Doing things inefficiently, without considering smarter approaches - this one is the most painful of vibe coding issues. As a person who may not be familiar with some of the smarter ways of handling development, you rely on the bot to do the right thing. But, when the bot does something horribly inefficiently and you are non-the-wiser, it can be tough to diagnose the issue. I often fight myself asking the bot "is this really the best way to handle things? Can't we ... / shouldn't we .../ isn't this supposed to..." etc. I guess one of the nice side effects of this annoyance is being able to prompt better. I learn that I should ask the bot to reflect on its own code more often and seek ways to do things more simply.

A combination of the above, or total chaos - this is a category where all hell breaks loose and you're trying to put out one fire after another. Fix one bug, only to see 10 more pop up. Fix those, to see 10 more and so on. I guess this may sound like typical development, but the bot amplifies issues by acting totally irrationally. This is typically when I will revert to a previous save point and just undo everything, often losing a lot of progress.

Lessons Learned

If I had to give my earlier self some tips on how to be a smarter vibe coder, here's how I'd summarize them:

1. Fork often - in v0 I now fork for any new major feature I'd like to add (such as the AI assistant).

2. Use targeting tools - in v0 you can select elements and describe how you wish to edit them.

3. Refactor often - keeping the code more manageable speeds up the process. Since the bot will go through the entire file, even if it only makes one small change, it's best to keep the files small and refactoring achieves that.

I guess the biggest lesson someone might point out is just to stop vibe coding. It may be easier to learn proper development and do things right. For me it has been a spare time hobby (one that I will admit is taking more of my extra time than I'd like). I don't really have the time to learn proper development. I feel like I've learned a lot just bossing the bot around and have learned a bunch of things in the process. That's not to say that I never will, but for the moment being my heart is still mostly in design. I haven't shared much of anything I have designed recently - mostly so I can remain speaking more freely without it rubbing off on my work.

I'll go ahead and try to publish this to see if it actually works 😂. Here goes nothing... (oh, I guess I could use the latest feature to export as markdown so I don't lose any progress! Yay!

@ 4857600b:30b502f4

A new talking point of the left is that it’s no big deal, just simple recording errors for the 20 million people aged 100-360. 🤷‍♀️ And not many of them are collecting benefits anyway. 👌 First of all, the investigation & analysis are in the early stages. How can they possibly know how deep the fraud goes, especially when their leaders are doing everything they can to obstruct any real examination? Second, sure, no worries about only a small number collecting benefits. That’s the ONLY thing social security numbers are used for. 🙄

@ 94a6a78a:0ddf320e

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

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

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

---

1️⃣ Use Nostr Daily

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

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

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

---

2️⃣ Run Your Own Nostr Relay

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

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

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

---

3️⃣ Support Paid Relays & Infrastructure

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

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

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

---

4️⃣ Zap Developers, Creators & Builders

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

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

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

---

5️⃣ Develop New Nostr Apps & Tools

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

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

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

---

6️⃣ Promote & Educate Others About Nostr

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

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

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

---

7️⃣ Support Open-Source Nostr Projects

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

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

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

---

🚀 Every Contribution Strengthens Nostr

Whether you:

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

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

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

@ 502ab02a:a2860397

วันนี้เรามาย้อนอดีตเล็กน้อยกันครับ กับ ผลิตภัณฑ์ไขมันพืชแปรรูปแบบแรกๆของโลก ที่ใช้กระบวนการแปรรูปน้ำมันพืชด้วยเคมี (hydrogenation) เพื่อให้ได้ไขมันกึ่งแข็ง

ในเดือนมิถุนายน ค.ศ. 1911 บริษัท Procter & Gamble เปิดตัวผลิตภัณฑ์ใหม่ที่เปลี่ยนโฉมวงการทำอาหารบ้านๆ ทั่วอเมริกา ตราสินค้า “Crisco” ซึ่งมาจากคำว่า “crystallized cottonseed oil” ได้ถือกำเนิดขึ้นเป็น “vegetable shortening” หรือที่บ้านเราเรียกว่าเนยขาว ก้อนแรกที่ทำมาจากน้ำมันพืชล้วนๆ แทนที่ไขมันสัตว์อย่างเนยหรือน้ำมันหมู จัดเป็นจุดเริ่มต้นของการปฏิวัติวิธีปรุงอาหารในครัวเรือนสหรัฐฯ

ก่อนหน้านั้น คนอเมริกันคุ้นเคยกับการใช้เนย ชีส หรือน้ำมันหมูในการประกอบอาหาร แต่ Crisco มาพร้อมการโฆษณาว่า “สะอาดกว่า” และ “ประหยัดกว่า” เพราะไม่ต้องเสี่ยงกับกลิ่นคาวหรือการเน่าเสียของไขมันสัตว์ อีกทั้งบรรจุในกระป๋องสีขาวสะอาด จึงดูทันสมัยน่าต้องการ

ชื่อ “Crisco” นั้นไม่ได้ตั้งโดยบังเอิญ แต่มาจากการย่อวลี “crystallized cottonseed oil” ให้สั้นกระชับและติดหู (ต้นชื่อ “Krispo” เคยถูกทดลองก่อน แต่ติดปัญหาเครื่องหมายการค้า และชื่อ “Cryst” ก็ถูกทิ้งไปเพราะมีนัยยะทางศาสนา)

กระบวนการสำคัญคือการนำเอาน้ำมันฝ้ายเหลวไปเติมไฮโดรเจน (hydrogenation) จนแข็งตัวได้เองในอุณหภูมิห้อง ผลลัพธ์คือไขมันทรานส์ที่ช่วยให้มาการีนแข็งตัวดี

ภายในเวลาไม่นานหลังการเปิดตัว โฆษณาในหนังสือพิมพ์และวิทยุกระจายเสียงฉบับแรกของ Crisco ก็เริ่มขึ้นอย่างดุเดือด พ่วงด้วยการแจก “ตำรา Crisco” ให้แม่บ้านลองนำไปใช้ทั้งอบ ทั้งทอด จึงเกิด “ยุคครัว Crisco” อย่างแท้จริง

แม้ Crisco จะถูกยกให้เป็น “จุดเริ่มต้นของยุคไขมันพืช” ในครัวอเมริกัน แต่เบื้องหลังขวดสีเขียว–ขาวที่เติมเต็มชั้นเก็บของในบ้านกลับมีดราม่าและบทเรียนมากกว่าที่ใครคาดคิด

ย้อนกลับไปทศวรรษ 1910 เมื่อ Procter & Gamble เปิดตัว Crisco ในฐานะ “ไขมันพืชสุดสะอาด” พร้อมกับโฆษณาว่าเป็นทางเลือกที่ดีกว่าเนยและแลร์ดเดิม ๆ แต่ความท้าทายแรกคือ “ฝืนความเชื่อ” ของคุณแม่บ้านยุคนั้น ที่ยังยึดติดกับไขมันจากสัตว์ นักการตลาดของ P&G จึงสร้างภาพลักษณ์ให้ Crisco ดูเป็นผลิตภัณฑ์อุตสาหกรรมขั้นสูง โปร่งใส และถูกสุขอนามัยสู้กับค่านิยมเดิมได้อย่างน่าทึ่ง

หนังสือพิมพ์ในยุคนั้นพูดกันว่า มันคือไขมันพืชปฏิวัติวงการ ที่ทั้งถูกกว่าและยืดอายุได้ไกลกว่าน้ำมันสัตว์

กระทั่งปลายทศวรรษ 1980 เกิดดราม่าสะท้อนความย้อนแย้งในวงการสุขภาพ เมื่อองค์กร CSPI (Center for Science in the Public Interest) กลับออกมาชื่นชมการใช้ไขมันทรานส์จาก Crisco ว่า “ดีต่อหลอดเลือด” เมื่อเทียบกับไขมันอิ่มตัวจากมะพร้าว เนย หรือไขมันสัตว์

นี่คือครั้งที่วงการแพทย์และโภชนาการแตกแยกกันว่าอะไรจริงหรือหลอก จนกระทั่งงานวิจัยยืนยันชัดเจนว่าไขมันทรานส์เป็นอันตรายต่อหัวใจจริง ๆ

แต่เมื่อเวลาผ่านไป งานวิจัยคุณภาพสูงเริ่มชี้ชัดว่า ไขมันทรานส์ ไม่ใช่เพียงส่วนเกินในเมนูขนมกรอบๆ เท่านั้น มันเป็นภัยเงียบที่เพิ่มความเสี่ยงโรคหลอดเลือดหัวใจ และการอักเสบเรื้อรัง WHO จึงออกมาตรการให้โลก “เลิกทรานส์แฟต” ภายในปี 2023 ทำให้ Procter & Gamble ปรับสูตร Crisco มาใช้การผสมระหว่างน้ำมันฝ้าย fully hydrogenated กับน้ำมันเหลว ผ่านกระบวนการ interesterification แทน เพื่อให้ได้จุดหลอมเหลวที่เหมาะสมโดยไม่สร้างทรานส์แฟตเพิ่มอีก

อีกประเด็นดราม่าที่ตามมาเมื่อ Procter & Gamble ต้องปรับสูตร Crisco ให้เป็น “trans fat–free” ในปี 2004 และยุติการขายสูตรปราศจากทรานส์เฉพาะทางในปี 2007 ก่อนจะกลับมาใช้ fully hydrogenated palm oil ตามกฎ FDA ในปี 2018

แต่การหันมาใช้น้ำมันปาล์มเต็มตัวกลับก่อปัญหาใหม่ คือข้อครหาเรื่องการทำลายป่าเขตร้อนเพื่อปลูกปาล์มน้ำมัน จนกลายเป็นดราม่าระดับโลกเรื่องสิ่งแวดล้อมและสิทธิมนุษยชนในชุมชนท้องถิ่น

แด่วันนี้ เมื่อใครยังพูดถึง Crisco ด้วยสายตาเด็กน้อยที่เห็นไขมันพืชขาวโพลน เป็นคำตอบใหม่ของครัวสะอาด เราอาจยกมือทักว่า “อย่าลืมดูเบื้องหลังของมัน” เพราะไขมันที่เกิดจากการ “สลับตำแหน่งกรดไขมัน” ผ่านความร้อนสูงและสารเคมี ไม่ใช่ไขมันที่ธรรมชาติออกแบบมาให้ร่างกายคุ้นเคยจริงๆ แม้จะมีชื่อใหม่ สูตรใหม่ แต่ต้นกำเนิดของการปฏิวัติครัวในปี 1911

Crisco ไม่ได้เป็นแค่พรีเซนเตอร์ “ไขมันพืชเพื่อสุขภาพ” แต่ยังเป็นบทเรียนสำคัญเรื่องการตลาดอาหารอุตสาหกรรม การวิจัยทางโภชนาการที่ต้องพัฒนาไม่หยุดนิ่ง และผลกระทบต่อสิ่งแวดล้อมเมื่อเราหันมาใช้วัตถุดิบใหม่ๆ ดังนั้น ครัวของเราอาจจะสะอาดทันสมัย แต่ก็ต้องเลือกให้รอบคอบและติดตามเบื้องหลังของทุกขวดที่เราใช้เสมอครับ

ไหนๆก็ไหนๆแล้ว ขออธิบายคุณลักษณะของ เนยขาวไปยาวๆเลยแล้วกันนะครับ ขี้เกียจแยกโพส 55555555

เนยขาว หรือชื่อทางเทคนิคว่า “shortening” ไม่ได้มีส่วนผสมของนม หรือเนยแท้ใดๆ ทั้งสิ้น แต่มันคือไขมันพืชที่ผ่านกระบวนการทำให้แข็งตัว และคงรูปได้ดี เส้นทางของเนยขาวเริ่มด้วยการเปลี่ยนโครงสร้างไขมันไม่อิ่มตัวในน้ำมันพืชให้กลายเป็นไขมันอิ่มตัวมากขึ้น กระบวนการนี้เรียกว่า hydrogenation หรือการเติมไฮโดรเจนเข้าไปในโมเลกุลของไขมัน โดยใช้อุณหภูมิสูงและตัวเร่งปฏิกิริยาอย่าง “นิกเกิล” เพื่อให้ไขมันพืชที่เหลวกลายเป็นของแข็งที่อยู่ตัว ไม่เหม็นหืนง่าย และสามารถเก็บได้นานขึ้น

ผลพลอยได้ของการ hydrogenation คือการเกิดขึ้นของ ไขมันทรานส์ (trans fat) ซึ่งเป็นไขมันที่ร่างกายแทบไม่มีระบบจัดการ และได้รับการยืนยันจากงานวิจัยนับไม่ถ้วนว่าเป็นหนึ่งในปัจจัยเสี่ยงสำคัญต่อโรคหัวใจ หลอดเลือด และการอักเสบเรื้อรังในร่างกาย แม้ในยุคปัจจุบันบางผู้ผลิตจะเปลี่ยนวิธีการผลิตไปใช้การปรับโครงสร้างไขมันด้วยวิธี interesterification ที่ช่วยลดทรานส์แฟตลงได้มาก แต่ก็ยังคงเป็นกระบวนการแทรกแซงโครงสร้างไขมันจากธรรมชาติรวมถึงใช้กระบวนการ RBD ที่เราคุยกันไปแล้วอยู่ดี และผลกระทบต่อร่างกายในระยะยาวก็ยังเป็นคำถามที่นักโภชนาการสาย real food หลายคนตั้งข้อสังเกต

คำว่า “shortening” มาจากคำกริยา shorten ที่แปลว่า "ทำให้สั้นลง" ซึ่งในบริบทของการทำขนม มันหมายถึง การไปยับยั้งไม่ให้เส้นใยกลูเตนในแป้งพัฒนาได้ยาวและเหนียวตามธรรมชาติ เวลาผสมแป้งกับน้ำ โปรตีนในแป้งสองตัวคือกลูเตนิน (glutenin) กับไกลอาดิน (gliadin) จะจับกันกลายเป็นกลูเตน ซึ่งมีคุณสมบัติยืดหยุ่น เหนียว เหมาะกับขนมปังที่ต้องการโครงสร้างแน่นๆ ยืดๆ หนึบๆ

แต่พอเราใส่ shortening ลงไป เช่น เนยขาว น้ำมัน หรือไขมันที่อยู่ในสถานะกึ่งของแข็ง มันจะไปเคลือบเส้นแป้ง ทำให้โปรตีนกลูเตนจับกันไม่ได้เต็มที่ ผลคือเส้นใยกลูเตนถูก “ทำให้สั้นลง” แทนที่จะยืดหยุ่นยาวแบบในขนมปัง เลยกลายเป็นเนื้อขนมที่ร่วน นุ่ม ละลายในปาก หรือแม้แต่กรอบ อย่างคุกกี้ พาย หรือโรตีบางๆ หอมๆ นั่นแหละ เป็นสัมผัสที่นักทำขนมรักใคร่ แต่ร่างกายอาจไม่ปลื้มสักเท่าไหร่

เพราะจุดสังเกตุคือ เรื่องไขมันทรานส์ หลายแบรนด์ที่ขั้นตอนการผลิตไม่ดีพอ อาจพยายามเขียนฉลากว่า “ไม่มี trans fat” หรือ “low trans” แต่ในความเป็นจริงแล้ว หากไขมันทรานส์ต่ำกว่า 0.5 กรัมต่อหนึ่งหน่วยบริโภค ผู้ผลิตสามารถระบุว่าเป็น 0 ได้ตามกฎหมาย ซึ่งหากกินหลายๆ หน่วยรวมกัน ก็ไม่ต่างจากการเปิดประตูให้ trans fat ย่องเข้าร่างแบบไม่รู้ตัว

แต่เหนือกว่านั้นก็คือเรื่องเดิมๆที่เราเข้าใจกันดีในน้ำมันพืช นั่นคือ โอเมก้า 6 เพียบ + กระบวนการปรุงแต่งเคมี ที่เปราะบางต่ออุณหภูมิ ทำให้เกิดการออกซิเดชัน นำไปสู่โรคจากการอักเสบของร่างกาย

อาจถึงเวลาแล้วที่เราควรเปิดใจกลับไปหาความเรียบง่ายของไขมันจากธรรมชาติ สิ่งที่ดูสะอาด ขาว และอยู่ตัวดีเกินไป อาจไม่ใช่สิ่งที่ธรรมชาติอยากให้เข้าไปอยู่ในตัวเราก็ได้

ปล. สำหรับใครที่สงสัยว่า เนยขาว กับ มาการีน ต่างกันยังไง Shortening (เนยขาว) คือไขมันพืช 100% ไม่มีน้ำผสม บีบให้เป็นก้อน ทนความร้อนได้สูง เพื่อให้แป้ง “ไม่ยืด” เกล็ดขนมร่วนกรอบ Margarine (มาการีน) จะผสมไขมันกับน้ำ–เกลือ–อิมัลซิไฟเออร์ ทำให้ทาได้เนียนเหมือนเนย แต่มีน้ำประมาณ 15–20%

#pirateketo #กูต้องรู้มั๊ย #ม้วนหางสิลูก #siamstr

@ 39cc53c9:27168656

Read the original blog post

These reviews are sponsored, yet the sponsorship does not influence the outcome of the evaluations. Sponsored reviews are independent from the kycnot.me list, being only part of the blog. The reviews have no impact on the scores of the listings or their continued presence on the list. Should any issues arise, I will not hesitate to remove any listing. Reviews are in collaboration with Orangefren.

The review

Swapter.io is an all-purpose instant exchange. They entered the scene in the depths of the bear market about 2 years ago in June of 2022.

| Pros | Cons | | --------------- | ---------------------------------- | | Low fees | Shotgun KYC with opaque triggers | | Large liquidity | Relies on 3rd party liquidity | | Works over Tor | Front-end not synced with back-end | | Pretty UI | |

Rating: ★★★☆☆ Service Website: swapter.io

⚠️ There is an ongoing issue with this service: read more on Reddit.

Test Trades

During our testing we performed a trade from XMR to LTC, and then back to XMR.

Our first trade had the ID of: mpUitpGemhN8jjNAjQuo6EvQ. We were promised 0.8 LTC for sending 0.5 XMR, before we sent the Monero. When the Monero arrived we were sent 0.799 LTC.

On the return journey we performed trade with ID: yaCRb5pYcRKAZcBqg0AzEGYg. This time we were promised 0.4815 XMR for sending 0.799 LTC. After Litecoin arrived we were sent 0.4765 XMR.

As such we saw a discrepancy of ~0.1% in the first trade and ~1% in the second trade. Considering those trades were floating we determine the estimates presented in the UI to be highly accurate and honest.

Of course Swapter could've been imposing a large fee on their estimates, but we checked their estimates against CoinGecko and found the difference to be equivalent to a fee of just over 0.5%. Perfectly in line with other swapping services.

Trading

Swapter supports BTC, LTC, XMR and well over a thousand other coins. Sadly they don't support the Lightning Network. For the myriad of currencies they deal with they provide massive upper limits. You could exchange tens, or even hundreds, of thousands of dollars worth of cryptocurrency in a single trade (although we wouldn't recommend it).

The flip side to this is that Swapter relies on 3rd party liquidity. Aside from the large liqudity this also benefits the user insofar as it allows for very low fees. However, it also comes with a negative - the 3rd party gets to see all your trades. Unfortunately Swapter opted not to share where they source their liquidity in their Privacy Policy or Terms of Service.

KYC & AML policies

Swapter reserves the right to require its users to provide their full name, their date of birth, their address and government-issued ID. A practice known as "shotgun KYC". This should not happen often - in our testing it never did - however it's not clear when exactly it could happen. The AML & KYC policy provided on Swapter's website simply states they will put your trade on hold if their "risk scoring system [deems it] as suspicious".

Worse yet, if they determine that "any of the information [the] customer provided is incorrect, false, outdated, or incomplete" then Swapter may decide to terminate all of the services they provide to the user. What exactly would happen to their funds in such a case remains unclear.

The only clarity we get is that the Swapter policy outlines a designated 3rd party that will verify the information provided by the user. The third party's name is Sum & Substance Ltd, also simply known as samsub and available at sumsub.com

It's understandable that some exchanges will decide on a policy of this sort, especially when they rely on external liquidity, but we would prefer more clarity be given. When exactly is a trade suspicious?

Tor

We were pleased to discover Swapter works over Tor. However, they do not provide a Tor mirror, nor do they work without JavaScript. Additionally, we found that some small features, such as the live chat, did not work over Tor. Fortunately, other means of contacting their support are still available.

UI

We have found the Swapter UI to be very modern, straightforward and simple to use. It's available in 4 languages (English, French, Dutch and Russian), although we're unable to vouch for the quality of some of those, the ones that we used seemed perfectly serviceable.

Our only issue with the UI was that it claims the funds have been sent following the trade, when in reality it seems to take the backend a minute or so to actually broadcast the transaction.

Getting in touch

Swapter's team has a chat on their website, a support email address and a support Telegram. Their social media presence in most active on Telegram and X (formerly Twitter).

Disclaimer

None of the above should be understood as investment or financial advice. The views are our own only and constitute a faithful representation of our experience in using and investigating this exchange. This review is not a guarantee of any kind on the services rendered by the exchange. Do your own research before using any service.

@ 39cc53c9:27168656

Read the original blog post

“The future is there... staring back at us. Trying to make sense of the fiction we will have become.” — William Gibson.

This month is the 4th anniversary of kycnot.me. Thank you for being here.

Fifteen years ago, Satoshi Nakamoto introduced Bitcoin, a peer-to-peer electronic cash system: a decentralized currency free from government and institutional control. Nakamoto's whitepaper showed a vision for a financial system based on trustless transactions, secured by cryptography. Some time forward and KYC (Know Your Customer), AML (Anti-Money Laundering), and CTF (Counter-Terrorism Financing) regulations started to come into play.

What a paradox: to engage with a system designed for decentralization, privacy, and independence, we are forced to give away our personal details. Using Bitcoin in the economy requires revealing your identity, not just to the party you interact with, but also to third parties who must track and report the interaction. You are forced to give sensitive data to entities you don't, can't, and shouldn't trust. Information can never be kept 100% safe; there's always a risk. Information is power, who knows about you has control over you.

Information asymmetry creates imbalances of power. When entities have detailed knowledge about individuals, they can manipulate, influence, or exploit this information to their advantage. The accumulation of personal data by corporations and governments enables extensive surveillances.

Such practices, moreover, exclude individuals from traditional economic systems if their documentation doesn't meet arbitrary standards, reinforcing a dystopian divide. Small businesses are similarly burdened by the costs of implementing these regulations, hindering free market competition^1:

How will they keep this information safe? Why do they need my identity? Why do they force businesses to enforce such regulations? It's always for your safety, to protect you from the "bad". Your life is perpetually in danger: terrorists, money launderers, villains... so the government steps in to save us.

‟Hush now, baby, baby, don't you cry Mamma's gonna make all of your nightmares come true Mamma's gonna put all of her fears into you Mamma's gonna keep you right here, under her wing She won't let you fly, but she might let you sing Mamma's gonna keep baby cosy and warm” — Mother, Pink Floyd

We must resist any attack on our privacy and freedom. To do this, we must collaborate.

If you have a service, refuse to ask for KYC; find a way. Accept cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin and Monero. Commit to circular economies. Remove the need to go through the FIAT system. People need fiat money to use most services, but we can change that.

If you're a user, donate to and prefer using services that accept such currencies. Encourage your friends to accept cryptocurrencies as well. Boycott FIAT system to the greatest extent you possibly can.

This may sound utopian, but it can be achieved. This movement can't be stopped. Go kick the hornet's nest.

“We must defend our own privacy if we expect to have any. We must come together and create systems which allow anonymous transactions to take place. People have been defending their own privacy for centuries with whispers, darkness, envelopes, closed doors, secret handshakes, and couriers. The technologies of the past did not allow for strong privacy, but electronic technologies do.” — Eric Hughes, A Cypherpunk's Manifesto

The anniversary

Four years ago, I began exploring ways to use crypto without KYC. I bookmarked a few favorite services and thought sharing them to the world might be useful. That was the first version of kycnot.me — a simple list of about 15 services. Since then, I've added services, rewritten it three times, and improved it to what it is now.

kycnot.me has remained 100% independent and 100% open source^2 all these years. I've received offers to buy the site, all of which I have declined and will continue to decline. It has been DDoS attacked many times, but we made it through. I have also rewritten the whole site almost once per year (three times in four years).

The code and scoring algorithm are open source (contributions are welcome) and I can't arbitrarly change a service's score without adding or removing attributes, making any arbitrary alterations obvious if they were fake. You can even see the score summary for any service's score.

I'm a one-person team, dedicating my free time to this project. I hope to keep doing so for many more years. Again, thank you for being part of this.

@ 39cc53c9:27168656

Read the original blog post

Silent.link is an anonymous eSIM provider. They offer pay-as-you-go roaming in 160+ countries.

Pros

• Anonymous
• Private payment options
• High performance
• Global availability

Cons

• Need to select the right networks sometimes
• Latency
• Data and incoming SMS & call only

Rating

★★★★★

Service website

Silent.link

---

eSIMs replace traditional, physical SIM cards, if you have a fairly new phone, odds are it supports them. Since most people change their mobile carrier very rarely, the most common use case for these new eSIMs is their use in travel. Although their use as a piece of a larger OPSEC puzzle to improve privacy when using the internet from your phone is increasingly popular too.

Silent.link is not the only eSIM provider out there. Yet, they’re so unique that even Twitter’s (now X) founder Jack Dorsey recommends them.

Let’s start off with a quick explanation of how Silent.link works and what pay-as-you-go means. Most other eSIM providers will sell you packages of GBs with an expiration date. For instance imagine you’re visiting France then going to the UK after a few months. With other providers you might buy a 10GB in France package valid for 7 days, then after some months a 10GB in the UK package also valid for 7 days. You likely won’t use up the full package in either country and the remaining capacity will be voided as the package expires.

Silent.link’s pay-as-you-go is different. There are no geographic packages. There are no expiration dates. You simply have a balance denominated in USD and are charged as you use up the data according to the pricing of whichever local carrier you’re connecting via.

Preparing for the same trips from the example above you’d simply top-up your Silent.link balance with $10. Then you’d use Silent.link in France paying $1.33/GB, you’d only be charged for the exact amount used, then you’d go to the UK and pay $1.54/GB from the balance you had left over from France. It doesn’t matter how much time passes between the trips, because Silent.link balances don’t expire. If you have a balance left over you can use it on a future trip, or simply use it up in your home country.

---

Pros

Anonymity

Silent.link is anonymous. Most other eSIM providers require some form of identification. This can be a traditional, full KYC, procedure involving your ID or passport numbers or, as seemingly innocent, as verifying your phone number with your main carrier. Regardless, a link between the eSIM you bought online and your identity is established.

In some countries you’ll be able to pick up a traditional SIM (or the new eSIM) from a local carrier without undergoing this verification. This can still be a hassle though. You’ll need to look up the laws before travelling, you’ll need to find a local store selling them, you’ll need to decide how you’ll pay privately, etc. And that’s the best case, that’s assuming the country you want to get the SIM in allows you to buy one anonymously.

Private payment methods

Silent.link only accepts cryptocurrency and according to their stats, most payments are made with Bitcoin (either onchain or using the Lightning Network) or with Monero. As such paying anonymously is not a problem. The use a self-hosted instance of BTCPay Server to process payments and operate their own LN node. The entire checkout process can be completed over Tor.

---

Cons

Network selection

Although you can skip the hassle of buying a new eSIM every time you travel it’s a good idea to look up the pricing of different mobile networks in the country you’re going to. The differences can be trivial, but can also be 100x. If a specific mobile network offers a much better deal, you’ll probably want to dive into your phone’s settings to make sure it only connects to that network.

High prices for some regions

Second issue can be that, especially for poorer countries, Silent.link might not have the best prices. For instance if you travel to Angola you’ll end up paying $155.44/GB. But if you search around for other providers you’ll find eSIM that offer much lower prices for that same country.

Data & incoming SMS & calls only

These eSIMs are either data-only or only offer data and inbound sms and calls. You can’t use Silent.link eSIMs to send texts or make phone calls.

Latency

For most use-cases this shouldn’t matter, but the way roaming works is that when you’re abroad your data is first sent to your home country then sent out into the internet from there. For instance if you’re a Brit on holiday in Spain wherever you open up a website your phone communicates with the Spanish network who forwards the request to your home network in the UK and only there does the request start going towards the website you’re trying to load. The response takes the same path in reverse.

The home network for the Silent.link eSIMs is Poland. To take an extreme (antipodal) example, if you’re in Chile loading a Chilean website your request will go to Poland then back from Poland to the website’s server in Chile, then the response will go from Chile to Poland to you (in Chile). All those trips add latency. In our testing, done during the recent OrangeFren.com meetup in Istanbul, the difference was an additional 73ms. The bandwidth, however, was exceptional, easily surpassing 100 Mbps.

This latency issue isn’t unique to Silent.link, other eSIM providers usually suffer from it too, though their home network may be better suited for your latency needs. If you need the best latency we recommend a SIM from a local provider (or WiFi).

This proxy behaviour isn’t all negative however. It may potentially allow you to circumvent censorship or geoblocking if you’re trying to access resources available from Poland, but unavailable elsewhere.

Besides Istanbul one of the countries we also tested Silent.link in was Northern Cyprus. This territory is mostly unrecognized. It’s a country that, depending on who you ask, is or isn’t real. Despite this unresolved geopolitical status Silent.link performed without any issues.

---

Installation

If you decide to give Silent.link a try, you'll need to select if you want a data-only plan or a plan with inbound SMS & calling, once you complete the payment simply scan the QR code on the order confirmation page with your phone. Make sure to save the url of that order confirmation page somewhere! You will need it to top up your eSIM and check your remaining balance.

Getting in touch

The preferred way of contacting Silent.link's support is using the website's built-in chat function. Alternative methods include X (formerly Twitter), Matrix and email.

Their support is online from 09:00 - 21:00 UTC although even when testing outside of those hours we got a reply within a minute.

NOTE: These reviews are sponsored, yet the sponsorship does not influence the outcome of the evaluations. Sponsored reviews are independent from the kycnot.me list, being only part of the blog. The reviews have no impact on the scores of the listings or their continued presence on the list. Should any issues arise, I will not hesitate to remove any listing.

@ 09fbf8f3:fa3d60f0

🌟 深度探索：在Cloudflare上免费部署DeepSeek-R1 32B大模型

🌍 一、 注册或登录Cloudflare平台（CF老手可跳过）

1️⃣ 进入Cloudflare平台官网：

。www.cloudflare.com/zh-cn/
登录或者注册账号。

2️⃣ 新注册的用户会让你选择域名，无视即可，直接点下面的Start building。

3️⃣ 进入仪表盘后，界面可能会显示英文，在右上角切换到[简体中文]即可。

---

🚀 二、正式开始部署Deepseek API项目。

1️⃣ 首先在左侧菜单栏找到【AI】下的【Wokers AI】，选择【Llama 3 Woker】。

2️⃣ 为项目取一个好听的名字，后点击部署即可。

3️⃣ Woker项目初始化部署好后，需要编辑替换掉其原代码。

4️⃣ 解压出提供的代码压缩包，找到【32b】的部署代码，将里面的文本复制出来。

下载地址：
📁 夸克
📁 UC网盘
📁 迅雷网盘

5️⃣ 接第3步，将项目里的原代码清空，粘贴第4步复制好的代码到编辑器。

6️⃣ 代码粘贴完，即可点击右上角的部署按钮。

7️⃣ 回到仪表盘，点击部署完的项目名称。

8️⃣ 查看【设置】，找到平台分配的项目网址，复制好备用。

---

💻 三、选择可用的UI软件，这边使用Chatbox AI演示。

1️⃣ 根据自己使用的平台下载对应的安装包，博主也一并打包好了全平台的软件安装包。

2️⃣ 打开安装好的Chatbox，点击左下角的设置。

3️⃣ 选择【添加自定义提供方】。

4️⃣ 按照图片说明填写即可，【API域名】为之前复制的项目网址(加/v1)；【改善网络兼容性】功能务必开启；【API密钥】默认为”zhiyuan“，可自行修改；填写完毕后保存即可。

5️⃣ Cloudflare项目部署好后，就能正常使用了，接口仿照OpenAI API具有较强的兼容性，能导入到很多支持AI功能的软件或插件中。

6️⃣ Cloudflare的域名默认被墙了，需要自己准备一个域名设置。

---

转自微信公众号：纸鸢花的小屋
推广：低调云（梯子VPN）
。www.didiaocloud.xyz

@ 044da344:073a8a0e

„Huch, das ist ja heute schon wieder vier Jahre her“, hat Dietrich Brüggemann am Dienstag auf X gestöhnt. Und: „Ich für meinen Teil würde es wieder tun.“ Knapp 1400 Herzchen und gut 300 Retweets. Immerhin, einerseits. Andererseits scheint die Aktion #allesdichtmachen verschwunden zu sein aus dem kollektiven Gedächtnis. Es gibt eine Seite auf Rumble, die alle 52 Videos dokumentiert. Zwölf Follower und ein paar Klicks. 66 zum Beispiel für die großartige Kathrin Osterode und ihre Idee, die Inzidenzen in das Familienleben zu tragen und im Fall der Fälle auch die Kinder wegzugeben.

Vielleicht sind es auch schon ein paar mehr, wenn Sie jetzt klicken sollten, um jenen späten April-Abend von 2021 zurückzuholen und das Glück, das zum Greifen nah schien. Ich sehe mich noch auf der Couch sitzen, bereit für das Bett, als der Link kam. Ich konnte nicht mehr aufhören. Prominente, endlich. Und auch noch so viele und so gut. Was daraus geworden ist, habe ich genau ein Jahr später mit Freunden und Kollegen in ein Buch gepackt – noch so ein Versuch, ein Ereignis für die Ewigkeit festzuhalten, das die Öffentlichkeit verändert hat und damit das Land, ein Versuch, der genauso in einer Nische versandet ist wie die Rumble-Seite.

Ich fürchte: Auch beim fünften Geburtstag wird sich niemand an #allesdichtmachen erinnern wollen, abgesehen natürlich von Dietrich Brüggemann und ein paar Ewiggestrigen wie mir. Eigentlich lieben Medien Jahrestage, besonders die runden. Weißt Du noch? Heute vor zehn Jahren? In jedem von uns wohnt ein Nostalgiker, der zurückblicken will, Bilanz ziehen möchte, Ankerpunkte sucht im Strom der Zeit. Die Redaktionen wissen das. Sie sehen es mittlerweile auch, weil sie alles erfassen lassen, was wir mit ihren Beiträgen tun. Die blinkenden Bildschirme in den Meinungsfabriken sagen: Jahrestage gehen immer.

Meine These: #allesdichtmachen bricht diese Regel, obwohl die Aktion alles mitbringt, wonach der Journalismus sucht. Prominenz, Konflikt und Drama mit allem Drum und Dran. Leidenschaft, Tränen und – ja, auch eine historische Dimension. Falls unsere Enkel noch Kulturgeschichten schreiben dürfen, werden sie Brüggemann & Co. nicht aussparen können. Wo gibt es das schon – eine Kunstaktion, die das Land verändert? Nach diesen fünf Tagen im April 2021 wussten alle, wie die Kräfte im Land verteilt sind. Das Wort Diskussionskultur wurde aus dem Duden gestrichen. Und jeder Überlebende der Anti-Axel-Springer-Demos konnte sehen, dass alle Träume der Achtundsechziger wahr geworden sind. Die Bildzeitung hat nichts mehr zu sagen. Etwas akademischer gesprochen: Die Definitionsmachtverhältnisse haben sich geändert – weg von dem Blatt mit den großen Buchstaben und damit von Milieus ohne akademische Abschlüsse oder Bürojobs, hin zu den Leitmedien der Menschen, die in irgendeiner Weise vom Staat abhängen und deshalb Zeit haben, sich eine Wirklichkeit zurechtzutwittern.

Der Reihe nach. 22. April 2021, ein Donnerstag. 15 Minuten vor Mitternacht erscheint #allesdichtmachen in der Onlineausgabe der Bildzeitung. O-Ton: „Mit Ironie, Witz und Sarkasmus hinterfragen Deutschlands bekannteste Schauspielerinnen und Schauspieler die Corona-Politik der Bundesregierung und kritisieren die hiesige Diskussionskultur.“

Die 53 Videos sind da erst ein paar Stunden online, aber zumindest auf der „Haupt-Website der Aktion“ schon nicht mehr abrufbar. „Offenbar gehacked“, schreibt die Bildzeitung und wirbt für YouTube. Außerdem gibt es positive Reaktionen (etwa vom Virologen Jonas Schmidt-Chanasit, der von einem „Meisterwerk“ gesprochen habe) sowie einen Ausblick auf das, was die Leitmedien dann dominieren wird: „Manche User auf Twitter und Facebook versuchen, die Aktion in die Coronaleugner-Ecke zu rücken. Dabei leugnet keiner der Schauspielerinnen und Schauspieler auch nur ansatzweise die Existenz des Coronavirus.“

Heute wissen wir: Bild setzte hier zwar ein Thema, aber nicht den Ton. Anders gesagt: Was am Donnerstagabend noch zu gelten scheint, ist am Freitag nicht mehr wahr. „Wenn man seinen eigenen Shitstorm verschlafen hat“, twittert Manuel Rubey am nächsten Morgen, ein Schauspieler aus Österreich, der in seinem Video fordert, „die Theater, die Museen, die Kinos, die Kabarettbühnen überhaupt nie wieder aufzusperren“. Eine Woche später erklärt Rubey im Wiener Standard seinen Tweet. Gleich nach der Veröffentlichung habe er vor dem Schlafengehen „noch ein bisschen Kommentare gelesen“ und „das Gefühl“ gehabt, „dass es verstanden wird, wie es gemeint war“. Der Tag danach: „ein kafkaesker Albtraum. Kollegen entschuldigten sich privat, dass sie ihre positiven Kommentare nun doch gelöscht hätten.“

An der Bildzeitung hat das nicht gelegen. Die Redaktion blieb bei ihrer Linie und bot Dietrich Brüggemann an Tag fünf (Montag) eine Video-Bühne für eine Art Schlusswort zur Debatte (Länge: über zwölf Minuten), ohne den Regisseur zu denunzieren. Vorher finden sich hier Stimmen, die sonst nirgendwo zu hören waren – etwa Peter-Michael Diestel, letzter DDR-Innenminister, der die „Diskussionskultur beschädigt“ sieht, oder eine PR-Agentin, die ihren „Klienten abgeraten“ hat, „sich in den Sturm zu stellen“.

Geschossen wurde aus allen Rohren – auf Twitter und in den anderen Leitmedien. Tenor: Die Kritik ist ungerechtfertigt und schädlich. Den Beteiligten wurde vorgeworfen, „zynisch“ und „hämisch“ zu sein, die Gesellschaft zu spalten, ohne etwas „Konstruktives“ beizutragen, und nur an sich selbst und „ihre eigene Lage“ zu denken. Dabei wurden Vorurteile gegen Kunst und Künstler aktiviert und Rufmorde inszeniert. „Für mich ist das Kunst aus dem Elfenbeinturm der Privilegierten, ein elitäres Gewimmer“, sagte die Schauspielerin Pegah Ferydoni der Süddeutschen Zeitung. Michael Hanfeld bescheinigte den Schauspielprofis in der FAZ, ihre Texte „peinlich aufgesagt“ zu haben. In der Zeit fiel das Wort „grauenhaft“, und eine Spiegel– Videokolumne sprach sogar von „Waschmittelwerbung“.

In der Bildzeitung ließen Überschriften und Kommentare dagegen keinen Zweifel, wo die Sympathien der Redaktion liegen. „Filmakademie-Präsident geht auf Kollegen los“ steht über der Meldung, dass Ulrich Matthes die Aktion kritisiert hat. Dachzeile: „‚Zynisch‘, ‚komplett naiv und ballaballa‘“. Auf dem Foto wirkt Matthes arrogant und abgehoben – wie ein Köter, der um sich beißt. „Ich bin ein #allesdichtmachen-Fan“, schreibt Bild-Urgestein Franz-Josef Wagner am 25. April über seine Kolumne.

Mehr als zwei Dutzend Artikel über dieses lange Wochenende, die meisten davon Pro. Ralf Schuler, damals dort noch Leiter der Parlamentsredaktion und in jeder Hinsicht ein Schwergewicht, äußert sich gleich zweimal. „Großes Kino!“ sagt er am 23. April. Am nächsten Tag versteht Schuler sein Land nicht mehr: „53 Top-Künstler greifen in Videos die Corona-Stimmung im Lande auf: Kontakt- und Ausgangssperre, Alarmismus, Denunziantentum, wirtschaftliche Not und Ohnmachtsgefühle. Die Antwort: Hass, Shitstorm und ein SPD-Politiker denkt sogar öffentlich über Berufsverbote für die beteiligten Schauspieler nach. Binnen Stunden ziehen die ersten verschreckt ihre Videos zurück, andere distanzieren sich, müssen öffentlich Rechtfertigungen abgeben. Geht’s noch?“ Weiter bei Schuler: „Es ist Aufgabe von Kunst und Satire, dahin zu zielen, wo es wehtut, Stimmungen aufzugreifen und aufzubrechen, Machtworte zu ignorieren und dem Virus nicht das letzte Wort zu lassen. Auch, wenn ein Teil des Zuspruchs von schriller, schräger oder politisch unappetitlicher Seite kommt. Das überhaupt erwähnen zu müssen, beschreibt bereits das Problem: eine Politik, die ihr Tun für alternativlos, ultimativ und einzig wahr hält und Kritiker in den Verdacht stellt, Tod über Deutschland bringen zu wollen.“

Immerhin: Der Lack war endgültig ab von dieser Demokratie. Die Aktion #allesdichtmachen war ein Lehrstück. Rally around the flag, wann immer es die da oben befehlen. Lasst uns in den Kampf ziehen. Gestern gegen ein Virus, heute gegen die Russen und morgen gegen die ganze Welt – oder wenigstens gegen alle, die Fragen stellen, Zweifel haben, nicht laut Hurra rufen. Innerer Frieden? Ab auf den Müllhaufen der Geschichte. Wir sollten diesen Jahrestag feiern, immer wieder.

Bildquellen: Screenshots von Daria Gordeeva. Titel: Dietrich Brüggemann, Text: Kathrin Osterode

Michael Meyen: Videos

Freie Akademie für Medien & Journalismus

Unterstützen

@ c066aac5:6a41a034

“If a man is considered guilty
For what goes on in his mind
Then give me the electric chair
For all my future crimes”

-Electric Chair by Prince

The very last paragraph of Touré’s 2013 biography of Prince I Would Die 4 U: Why Prince Became an Icon made a very bold claim about the lewd nature of Prince’s music:

“Imagine America as one house on a suburban lane… Prince knocked on America’s door through his music. He came to the door holding a guitar and an umbrella while concealing a Bible. He flirted his way inside the door and told us he had a dirty mind and was controversial, and then he sat down in the living room on the good couch. And, when America’s guard was down, because we thought we were having a conversation about sex, Prince eased out his Bible and said, let me also tell you about my Lord and savior, Jesus Christ.”

Wow. Talk about a Sixth Sense level plot twist! I will say if you’re well versed in Prince’s catalog (I listened to every Prince album released [except for The Black Album because Jack Dorsey is holding it hostage on Tidal] last year) it won’t be as shocking as a surprise as it would be to the unversed listener, but surprising nonetheless considering the content of the man’s lyrics (and life).

Regardless of whether or not Prince achieved this goal of bringing people to Christ via a vehicle of sexy shock value, he was a person of impact. The book by Touré I mentioned earlier is a great picture of the life he lived, and I’m sure there are many others that people can recommend in the comments. He touched many lives and I believe his music will still be listened to for many years to come.

Prince’s method of evangelism may have been unconventional (to say the least), but I still think there is something to be learned from his efforts.

Obviously, worshiping sex or encouraging lust isn’t great. Prince’s view of sex was broken; they didn’t line up with Biblically ordered sex (see his songs Sister, Darling Nikki, Sexy M.F., and many many more). His inability to sustain healthy relationships or make meaningful lasting connections with those around him are a testament to that.

Despite his flaws, his art captured an entire generation - and continues to capture the attention of people seeking true art. His authenticity, raw emotion, and intentionality made for true connection between his music and his listeners. He resonated with people’s souls, and still does today. Perhaps Touré was wrong and Prince didn’t mean to evangelize through his music, but don’t all people stand testament to the powerful work of God?

We are all broken people. Our job is to the use the tools and resources set before us to spread the Gospel. “…we have this treasure in clay jars, so that it may be made clear that this extraordinary power belongs to God and does not come from us.” -2 Corinthians 4:7

The Western Church should consider using the seemingly profane, off limits, unconventional, or even just plain weird in an effort to continue to spread the gospel. On a high level, that’s our good-christian dinner table no-gos: Sex, Money, and Politics. I believe that the Church’s abdication of such conversations is the reason why those are areas of failure for the Church at large. We shouldn’t sin or condone/promote sin. Instead, I’m proposing that like how Prince used sex in his music to get people to learn about Jesus, Christian Bitcoiners should use money (Bitcoin) to do good works and lead people to Jesus in the process. We may just make the world a better place along the way.

“If you're sick of cryin' and tired of tears
Then close your eyes and open your ears
Listen to the music, listen to the song
Listen to your heart, is that so wrong?
Stop lookin' in the mirror, there's nothin' to fear
Your salvation is near
1,000 light years away from here”

-1,000 Light Years From Here by Prince

It doesn’t take a lot of mental effort to see how Christian’s could leverage Bitcoin’s magic for kingdom work. Look Alex Gladstein’s writings. Look at the work that Gridless is doing in Africa. Look at Roya Mahboob’s impact in Afghanistan. Look at the impact of Bitcoin Beach in El Salvador.

Now imagine what the Church (and by the Church, I mean you and I the Christian Bitcoiners) could do with Bitcoin:

A Christian Bitcoiner could help the woman with an abusive husband escape a bad situation with finances intact by teaching her how to use Bitcoin and keep self-custody wallet. An orange-pilled youth group leader could teach the inner city kid in a bad household how to set up a wallet and stack sats without the permission of the dead beat parents or conventional employment. The church bake sale could make things easy via accepting lightning payments, bringing in outsiders for sweet treats and teaching them about how to be a Bitcoin merchant. A church could send funds to a missionary across the world in a christian adverse country instantly without having to involve a single bank, and that missionary would have those funds same-day ready for deployment.

“Everybody's looking for the ladder
Everybody wants salvation of the soul
The steps you take are no easy road
But the reward is great
For those who want to go”

-The Ladder by Prince

In my own attempts to teach people about the virtues of Bitcoin, I find it usually clicks for people in one of two different ways for the most part:

The first way it clicks is when they can receive and send a lightning payment. The instant funds make a light bulb go off.

The second way is when I show them the humanitarian impact that Bitcoin has had and is counting to have. The use of Bitcoin internationally as a means of humanitarian aid/sovereignty for the less fortunate should shut down any questions like “But what about (insert crapcoin)?” in an instant.

Much like how people get Bitcoin once they see it in action, I believe people will get Jesus when they see Jesus’ Church in action. One of the best ways today the Church can display that action may be through Bitcoin.

Sex was Prince’s trojan horse for something much deeper that he wanted to convey to people. Bitcoin can be the trojan horse for the Church. The Church could gain attention for what they’re doing with Bitcoin similar to the attention that the Human Rights Foundation gets. One might ask why use a trojan horse? I think that Bitcoin adoption itself has been a bit of a trojan horse movement. Your local politicians didn’t bat an eye when they heard about a peer-to-peer e-cash system, but they were all over it when it was presented as a digital gold. Michael Saylor has garnered a lot of hate from the Bitcoin true-believers for presenting Bitcoin as a digital gold as opposed to a currency, but I believe he knows what he’s doing and he’s presenting in this manner on purpose. He might not get gratitude for it from the community, but I believe he’s willing to be the bad guy in order to further the mission (see Christopher Nolan’s The Dark Night [which is arguably a Jesus story]).

Christian Bitcoiner, I challenge you to channel your enthusiasm to do good in your neighborhood. Let the world see your actions and gain a curiosity for what you’re doing. The Bitcoin conversation will make many people think that you’re crazy, that you’re an idiot when it comes to investing, that you’re selling a scam. Much like how people wrote off Prince for being a vulgar musician. Much like how people write off Michael Saylor for misunderstanding Bitcoin. Much like how people wrote off (and continue to write off) Jesus for being a false prophet or the leader of a rebellion.

But there will be someone who sees the work that you do with Bitcoin. The work that the Church will do with Bitcoin. Even if just one soul is saved with Bitcoin, that’s worth the effort.

“Black day, stormy night No love, no hope in sight Don't cry, He is coming Don't die without knowing the cross” -The Cross by Prince

This article was written with help from my wife Elaina freedom@happytavern.co

Feel free to drop your favorite book about Prince, favorite Prince song, or favorite Prince album in the comments

Or, you can drop your favorite Bitcoin as a trojan horse story in the comments

@ 42342239:1d80db24

Almost 150 years ago, the British newspaper editor William Thomas Stead wrote that "the editorial pen is a sceptre of power, compared with which the sceptre of many a monarch is but a gilded lath". He had begun to regard journalism as something more than just conveying information - the journalist or editor could become a ruler.

Times had certainly changed compared to a few hundred years earlier. Before Gutenberg's invention of the printing press, it was mainly the church that controlled the dissemination of information in Europe, but when Stead put pen to paper, this control had shifted to newspapers, schools, and universities. Eventually, technologies like radio and TV entered the scene, but the power dynamics remained asymmetrical - only a few could send information to the many.

However, with the emergence of the internet, and especially with the spread of social media, a significant change followed. Instead of only a few being able to send information to the many, many could send to many. Almost anyone could now create their own newspaper, radio, or TV channel. The power over information dissemination was decentralised.

Ten years ago, Roberta Alenius, who was then press secretary for Sweden's Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt of the Moderate Party, shared her experiences with Social Democratic and Moderate Party internet activists on social media. She reported that social media played a significant role in how news "comes out" and is shaped, and that journalism was now downstream of social media. Five years later, NATO's then-Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said that "NATO must be prepared for both conventional and hybrid threats: from tanks to tweets." This finally underscores the importance of social media.

Elon Musk, who took over X (formerly Twitter) in 2022, has claimed that "it's absolutely fundamental and transformative that the people actually get to decide the news and narrative and what's important," and that citizen journalism is the future.

While his platform allows most expressions - for better or worse - the reach of messages is instead limited ("freedom of speech does not mean freedom of reach "). X has also opened its recommendation algorithm to the outside world by making it open-source. Although this is a welcome step, the fact remains that it's impossible to know which code is actually used and what adjustments are made by humans or algorithms.

William Thomas Stead's "sceptre of power", which has wandered from the church to newspaper and TV editorial offices, and now to citizens according to Elon Musk, risks being transferred to algorithms' opaque methods?

Instead of talking about "toxic algorithms" and TikTok bans, like the so many do today, we should ask ourselves more fundamental questions. What happens when algorithms are no longer objective (how can they ever be?), but instead become tools for shaping our reality? Perhaps our greatest challenge today is not deciding who should govern the information landscape, but instead recognising that no one is up to the task - not even well-ventilated computers.

@ f7d424b5:618c51e8

The promised Nintendo direct has come and there is a LOT to say about it. If you ever wondered how such a reveal would be taken differently by a dad, a NEET, and a people programmer this is the episode for you! Also those SAG bootlickers are getting uppity again. All of that and more!

Sources cited:

• Nintendo Online subscribers get to upgrade the zelda games for free for some reason?
• Do Nintendo games ever actually go on sale?
• Kirby
• Metroid
• TOTK
• Pokeshit
• EOW
• there's literally 252 games on sale at VGP right now
• SAG agreement you can read for yourself
• SAG literally says on their website to go audition for non-union roles and then strongarm them into going union if they wanna keep you

Obligatory:

• Listen to the new episode here!
• Discuss this episode on OUR NEW FORUM
• Get the RSS and Subscribe (this is a new feed URL, but the old one redirects here too!)
• Get a modern podcast app to use that RSS feed on at newpodcastapps.com
• Or listen to the show on the forum using the embedded Podverse player!
• Send your complaints here

Reminder that this is a Value4Value podcast so any support you can give us via a modern podcasting app is greatly appreciated and we will never bow to corporate sponsors!

@ 3b7fc823:e194354f

A quick guide for the less than technical savvy to set up their very own free private tor enabled email using Onionmail. Privacy is for everyone, not just the super cyber nerds.

Onion Mail is an anonymous POP3/SMTP email server program hosted by various people on the internet. You can visit this site and read the details: https://en.onionmail.info/

1. Download Tor Browser

First, if you don't already, go download Tor Browser. You are going to need it. https://www.torproject.org/

1. Sign Up

Using Tor browser go to the directory page (https://onionmail.info/directory.html) choose one of the servers and sign up for an account. I say sign up but it is just choosing a user name you want to go before the @xyz.onion email address and solving a captcha.

1. Account information

Once you are done signing up an Account information page will pop up. MAKE SURE YOU SAVE THIS!!! It has your address and passwords (for sending and receiving email) that you will need. If you lose them then you are shit out of luck.

1. Install an Email Client

You can use Claws Mail, Neomutt, or whatever, but for this example, we will be using Thunderbird.

a. Download Thunderbird email client

b. The easy setup popup page that wants your name, email, and password isn't going to like your user@xyz.onion address. Just enter something that looks like a regular email address such as name@example.com and the Configure Manuallyoption will appear below. Click that.

1. Configure Incoming (POP3) Server

Under Incoming Server: Protocol: POP3 Server or Hostname: xyz.onion (whatever your account info says) Port: 110 Security: STARTTLS Authentication: Normal password Username: (your username) Password: (POP3 password).

1. Configure Outgoing (SMTP) Server

Under Outgoing Server: Server or Hostname: xyz.onion (whatever your account info says) Port: 25 Security: STARTTLS Authentication: Normal password Username: (your username) Password: (SMTP password).

1. Click on email at the top and change your address if you had to use a spoof one to get the configure manually to pop up.

2. Configure Proxy

a. Click the gear icon on the bottom left for settings. Scroll all the way down to Network & Disk Space. Click the settings button next to Connection. Configure how Thunderbird connects to the internet.

b. Select Manual Proxy Configuration. For SOCKS Host enter 127.0.0.1 and enter port 9050. (if you are running this through a VM the port may be different)

c. Now check the box for SOCKS5 and then Proxy DNS when using SOCKS5 down at the bottom. Click OK

1. Check Email

For thunderbird to reach the onion mail server it has to be connected to tor. Depending on your local setup, it might be fine as is or you might have to have tor browser open in the background. Click on inbox and then the little cloud icon with the down arrow to check mail.

1. Security Exception

Thunderbird is not going to like that the onion mail server security certificate is self signed. A popup Add Security Exception will appear. Click Confirm Security Exception.

You are done. Enjoy your new private email service.

REMEMBER: The server can read your emails unless they are encrypted. Go into account settings. Look down and click End-toEnd Encryption. Then add your OpenPGP key or open your OpenPGP Key Manager (you might have to download one if you don't already have one) and generate a new key for this account.

@ f1989a96:bcaaf2c1

Good 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.

Subscribe to newsletter

Apply for a grant

Support our work

Visit our website

@ 77c2969e:a33cfa50

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

1. 在Technitium DNS Server 官网 获取安装脚本，也有提供 Docker 镜像以及 Windows 版本。

2. 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。

3. 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 。

4. 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DNS Forwarders 。

@ fd208ee8:0fd927c1

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

@ 09fbf8f3:fa3d60f0

功能很简单的网站，无广告、无任何付费项目，漫画全部免费。

荤素搭配。

唯一的缺点就是有点慢，看了下网站使用的是cloudflare网站加速，国内效果差了一点，加个🪜就好了。

关键词mycomic

官网：https://mycomic.com

@ 5c8a5765:4fc5edee

[Читать в IPFS]

Итак, детки-котлетки, сегодня мы поговорим, как ~~не~~правильно распространять агиацию. Возьмите свои любимые антифашистские стикеры и используйте этот текст как инструкцию к ним — иначе у меня голова лопнет от того, что я вижу на улицах.

Агитация

Для начала определитесь, чем вы занимаетесь: агитируете к чему-то или поддерживаете чего-то, потому что это предполагает совершенно разные подходы. Агитацией может быть призыв к анархизму, классовой борьбе, неуплате налогов, гендерному равенству и т.д. Поддержкой может быть поддержка анархической борьбы, антифашистский идей и т.д. Первое — "вербует"/приманивает новых людей к идее, второе поддерживает только тех, кто уже знаком с идеей и уже с ней согласен.

Как должна выглядеть агитация? Представьте, что некий неонацист решил за-агитировать вас в неонацизм (с учетом, что сейчас вы его не поддерживаете): в каком случае у него больше всего на это шансов? Если вы заметите на мусорном баке наклейку "бей жыдоф"? Или если вам, например, выдадут в руки грамотный агитационный текст? Поставьте себя на место читающего: агитация должна выглядеть именно так, как мог бы выглядеть материал, который хоть немного мог бы поменять ваши текущие взгляды. А именно...

1. Агитация доступна

Она не висит на задней стороне мусорки. Она не нарисована на заброшке. Обыватель не рассматривает мусорки и не ходит по заброшкам. Чтобы масса увидела вашу агитацию, она должна висеть в заметном месте.

Ещё лучше, если она висит там, где человек по внешним причинам на мгновение задерживается, и имеет время проглядеть вашу агитацию: ибо обыватель никогда не остановится у столба посреди длинной тропы, чтобы прочесть стикер.

И учтите: если место, которое вы выбрали, уже забито стикерами, вашему придётся делить привлеченное внимание с каждым остальным.

К доступности стоит также отнести то, что агитация более значительна, если она написана на самом популярном в вашей стране языке, развешивается в разных локациях (чтобы люди разного класса могли её увидеть), если вы развешиваете в туалетах — то туалетах разного гендера (и не забывайте про инвалидные кабинки!), так далее.

Лучшие места для стикеров: лифт, автобусная остановка, метро, поручен эскалатора, внешняя сторона дверцы туалета, чистое (не разрисованное или расклеенное) зеркало.

Лучшие места для крупных агитационных листов или графитти: указанные выше, а также — заметные места подъездов,

Лучшие места для "визиток"*: оставлять под задницей на выходе из автобуса, метро, маршрутки, на стульях, скамейках и т.д.

*"Визитка" — это са-а-амый простой метод агитации: выводите нужный текст или картинки мелкими блоками на листе А4, нарезаете бумагу на кусочки "визиток" с небольшим текстом, картинкой или ссылкой, и оставляете где попало.

2. Агитация запоминается

Если вы не неонацист, какие эмоции в вас побуждает "бей жыдоф"? Вы возжелали стать неонацистом? Или это только укрепило ваши антифашистские взгляды? Или это для вас вообще никак не прозвучало?

Также для ваших противников и обывателей звучат ваши "ешь богатых!", "классовая борьба сегодня!!", "доёш онархию!!!". Это — поддержка. Уже-анархисты будут рады увидеть, что в городе есть левые активисты кроме них самих. Но это никого не переубедит и не привлечет.

А агитация привлекает. Агитация задаёт острые вопросы, которые остаются в голове. Агитация манит предложениями нового. Агитация нестереотипно предлагает.

Примеры хорошей агитации:

"Если большинство проголосует за то, чтобы ты спрыгнул(а) с вмоста, ты бы сделал(а) это? / - Может быть — если это было честным голосованием!"

"Этот телефон прослушивается - согласно законодательству США, телефонные разговоры прослушиваются без ордера или уведомленияю"

"Вы под наблюдением — текст, объясняющий тезис, и ссылка, где можно прочесть об этом подробнее."

Примеры никудышной агитации (но хорошей поддержки):

3. Агитация даёт возможность изучить больше

Хорошее правило для любой агитации: иметь ссылку на сайт, где можно найти больше информации о том, к чему агитируется. Это не обязательное, но рекомендуемое правило, ибо мало толку от человека, согласившегося с идеей анархизма и захотевшего (редчайший случай!) самостоятельно изучить больше, но не имевшего к этому простой возможности и забывшего вследствие обо всей идее.

Поддержка

А вот поддержка — ориентированная на тех, кто уже знает и уже поддерживает то, что вы любите — может быть совершенно любой. Поддержать антифашистов своего города, позлить фашистов и остаться совершенно незамеченными для обывателя — самое место для диалектики "бей жыдоф!" и "доёш онтифошизм!!".

Напоминание о безопасности

Несколько базовых напоминаний о том, что нужно помнить во время агитации:

• ОСТЕРЕГАЙТЕСЬ КАМЕР! Особенно в России! Метро, маршрутки, автобусы, учебные заведения полны ими!
• Если вас заметили гестаповцы, лучшее, что вы можете сделать — это бежать, что есть мочи.
• Шифруйте материалы, которые храните для распечаток.
• Не распечатывайте стикеры/"визитки" в публичных местах (вроде библиотек).

Спасибо за прочтение!

@ df06d21e:2b23058f

Imagine a Living Civilization—a new way to see our world. It starts with the Universe’s pillars: Matter, the stuff we’re made of; Energy, the flow that drives us; Physics, the rules we play by; and Chemistry, the complexity that builds us. We know these well. But civilization? That’s our creation—and although it has been described in so many different ways over the years I thought it was time for something new. Civilization has its own pillars, systems that I call the pillars of the Metaverse: Capital, Information, Innovation, and Trust.

Capital is how we measure value. Not just money, but everything that matters: skills, we call that Human Capital; ecosystems, that’s Natural Capital; infrastructure, Public Capital; relationships, Social Capital. Picture a farmer swapping Bitcoin sats for seeds—not fiat debt—or tracking soil health alongside his wallet. Capital is a system, a system of measurement.

Information is how we verify truth. Think IPFS, a network holding real data—climate stats, farming fixes—open to all, not locked up by some corporate gatekeeper. Information is a system of verification.

Innovation is about generating solutions. On GitHub, coders worldwide crank out tools—Nostr clients, solar apps—shared freely, not patented for profit. Innovation is our system of generation.

And Trust—it’s coordination. Nostr’s decentralized threads let communities set trade rules, split resources—governance from the ground up, no overlords required. Trust is our system of coordination.

Right now we’re stuck in debt-based systems—and they’re failing us. Take fiat currency—central banks print it, slashing your purchasing power. Our dollar buys less every year; savings erode while the elite stack their gains. It’s a scam, Bitcoiners know it—fiat’s the real Ponzi bleeding us dry. Capital gets twisted—firms hoard Bitcoin for fiat pumps, not real wealth; governments chase GDP while forests die and skills sit idle. Information is buried—our media spits out spin, our corporations lock truth in silos. Innovation is stalled—debt props up corporate patents, not open wins. Trust is gone—our governance systems consist of top-down control that splits us apart, left to right, top to bottom. Debt just measures scarcity—money borrowed, nature trashed, bonds frayed—and it’s crushing the pillars.

Wealth-based systems promise to turn that around. Bitcoin’s sound money is just the start—sats hold value, not inflate it away. Real capital measures what sustains us—sats fund a cooperative's water pump, not a vault; they track skills taught, land healed, ties rebuilt. Real Information opens up—IPFS logs show ‘biochar boosted yield 20%’, verified by us, not suits. Real Innovation flows—GitHub devs build Lightning hubs, wealth spreads. Real Trust binds us together—Nostr chats align us, no central puppeteer. Wealth based systems strengthen the pillars of the Metaverse, it doesn’t erode them.

We needed a new framing. A new vision of what was, what is, and what could be. We have one. This is real. This is the world we are building. Bitcoin is live, Nostr is growing, IPFS and GitHub are humming. We can see Debt teetering; while real wealth is rising. So, hodlers, maxis, plebs—everyone—what does a true wealth-based system look like? How can we measure Capital beyond fiat’s con job? Bitcoin’s the rock, but it’s just the beginning. How do we build on this, expand it, and transform everything as we build something entirely new?

@ 3b7fc823:e194354f

site:example.com intitle:"index of" inurl:admin intext:"password"

site:example.com site:.gov site:.edu site:*.mil

inurl:login inurl:admin inurl:dashboard inurl:portal intitle:"admin login"

intitle:"index of /" intitle:"index of" "parent directory" intitle:"index of" "backup"

filetype:pdf "confidential" filetype:xls "username | password" filetype:doc "top secret" filetype:sql "database"

intext:"username" intext:"password" intext:"login" intext:"password" filetype:txt "passwords"

inurl:"viewerframe?mode=" inurl:"/view.shtml" inurl:"/view/index.shtml"

intitle:"index of" "wp-config.php" inurl:".git"

filetype:xls intext:"email" filetype:csv intext:"email"

inurl:"/setup.cgi?next_file=netgear.cfg" inurl:"/wificonf.html"

@ fe9e99a0:5123e9a8

What’s happening?

@ fe9e99a0:5123e9a8

Can’t seem to update anything

@ 94a6a78a:0ddf320e

Azzamo is more than just a relay provider—it’s a high-performance network designed to make Nostr faster, smoother, and more reliable for everyone. Whether you're posting notes, zapping sats, sharing media, or sending DMs, Azzamo keeps your Nostr experience seamless and efficient.

Nostr is unstoppable, but not all relays are the same. Some are slow, unreliable, or disappear overnight, while others get overloaded, making message delivery inconsistent. Azzamo is built differently—offering fast, stable, and globally distributed relays to ensure low-latency, high-speed connections, no matter where you are.

---

🌍 Premium Relays for Maximum Performance

Azzamo Premium Relays are optimized for speed, reliability, and uptime, available exclusively to Premium users:

📡 Azzamo Premium Relays:

• Europe: wss://relay.azzamo.net
• America: wss://us.azzamo.net
• Asia: wss://asia.azzamo.net

Add Azzamo Premium Time to unlock unlimited, high-speed access across these global relays.

🔗 Get Premium: azzamo.net/premium

---

🆓 Freemium Relays – Free for Everyone

Azzamo believes in keeping Nostr open and accessible to all. That’s why we offer free relays for everyone, with no rate limits for Premium members

📡 Freemium Relays:

• Free Relay: wss://nostr.azzamo.net – Open to all.
• Inbox Relay: wss://inbox.azzamo.net – Reliable for DMs & group messages.

By offering both free and premium options, Azzamo ensures that anyone can use Nostr, while also funding the infrastructure that keeps it running smoothly.

---

🛡️ Minimal Moderation, Maximum Transparency

Nostr is about free speech, but that doesn’t mean zero moderation. Azzamo follows a minimal moderation policy to keep relays functional and spam-free while maintaining transparency in enforcement.\ \ 🚫 Spam & network abuse\ 🚫 Illegal content (CSAM, fraud, malware, scams)\ 🚫 Impersonation & identity abuse

We also maintain a public Ban API for transparent moderation decisions.

📖 More on our Ban API: azzamo.net/introducing-the-azzamo-ban-api

---

🚀 Get Started with Azzamo Relays Today!

🔗 Connect now:\ 📡 wss://nostr.azzamo.net (Freemium Free Relay)\ 📬 wss://inbox.azzamo.net (Freemium Inbox Relay)\ 📡 wss://relay.azzamo.net (Premium Europe Relay)\ 📡 wss://us.azzamo.net (Premium Americas Relay)\ 📡 wss://asia.azzamo.net (Premium Asia Relay)

Nostr is growing fast. Make sure your relays can keep up. 🚀

azzamo #grownostr #nostr #relay #relays #premiumrelay #paidrelay

@ 3b7fc823:e194354f

Staying Digitally Safe in Airports: A Comprehensive Guide

Airports are hubs of activity, but they’re also places where your digital security can be at risk. From public Wi-Fi to potential device thefts, staying safe while traveling can feel overwhelming. However, with the right knowledge and precautions, you can protect yourself and enjoy your journey stress-free. Let’s dive into how to stay digitally safe in airports while traveling.

---

Understanding the Risks

1. Public Wi-Fi Vulnerabilities:
2. Airports often offer free Wi-Fi, but these networks can be unsecured or insecure. Hackers may use these networks to intercept sensitive data.

3. Avoid using public Wi-Fi for personal banking, shopping, or handling sensitive information.

4. Device Theft:

5. High-traffic areas like security checkpoints, gates, and lounges are hotspots for device thefts. Always keep your devices in secure locations, such as carry-on bags or locked briefcases.

6. Malware and Phishing Attacks:

7. Some airports may have phishing attempts or malware distributed via pop-ups, email, or malicious websites.

8. Physical Surveillance:

9. In some cases, law enforcement or security personnel may monitor your activities. Always be mindful of your surroundings to avoid unintended data exposure.

---

Best Practices for Staying Digitally Safe in Airports

1. Use a VPN for Extra Security:
2. Even secure airport Wi-Fi can expose your data if not encrypted. Use a reputable Virtual Private Network (VPN) to encrypt your internet traffic and protect your privacy.

3. Always ensure your VPN is active when using public Wi-Fi.

4. Minimize Sensitive Data on Public Devices:

5. Avoid carrying devices with sensitive information like passwords, credit card details, or personal identification numbers (PIIs).

6. Encrypt Your Data:

7. Enable encryption for all your devices to protect data stored locally or in the cloud. Ensure your operating system and apps are updated with the latest security patches.

8. Secure Your Devices:

9. Use cable locks or secure cases to lock down laptops, tablets, and smartphones when not in use.

10. Remove screensavers that display your device passcode to prevent unauthorized access.

11. Keep Antivirus Software Updated:

12. Install and maintain up-to-date antivirus software on all devices. This helps detect and remove malicious software (malware) that may be installed through compromised networks or phishing attempts.

13. Avoid Plugging Into Public USB charging stations:

14. Refrain from using public USB ports or charging stations unless you know they’re secure. Malware can spread via these points.

15. Use Caution With Lost and Found:

16. If you find a device or drop one accidentally, avoid using lost and found kiosks to pick it up. Instead, contact airport security for assistance in safely retrieving your property without exposing it to potential thieves.

17. Stay Alert to Security Alerts:

18. Pay attention to announcements over the airport’s PA system regarding suspicious activity or security alerts. Follow any instructions provided by airport staff.

19. Monitor Your Accounts Remotely:

20. If you suspect something is wrong (e.g., unusual transactions on your credit card), check your financial accounts immediately upon arriving at your destination. Notify your bank of potential fraudulent activity and report it to the authorities if necessary.

---

Additional Tips for Airport Safety

1. Use a Portable Power Bank:

2. Keep your devices charged so you don’t rely on public charging stations, which may be compromised.

3. Travel with Backup Devices:

4. Always bring an extra SIM card, USB drive, or cloud storage to backup important data. This ensures you can access critical information even if your primary device is lost or damaged.

5. Avoid Sharing Personal Information Over Earphone Rentals:

6. Refrain from using earphones rented from airport kiosks that may record or intercept your conversations. Stick to your own headphones or those provided by the airline.

7. Use Airport Lounges Wisely:

8. If you’re using an airline lounge, avoid discussing sensitive information in public areas where it could be overheard.

9. Keep Your Luggage in Sight:

10. Never leave your checked luggage unattended, as it may contain devices or documents with sensitive information.

11. Plan for Data Loss:

12. Before leaving home, make a backup of all important files and photos on an external drive or cloud storage. This way, you can restore them if something goes wrong during your trip.

---

What to Do If Something Goes Wrong

1. Report Suspected Security Incidents:

2. If you notice unusual activity on your devices or suspect a security breach, inform airport security immediately.

3. Contact Your Financial Institutions:

4. If you believe your financial information has been compromised, contact your bank or credit card provider to freeze your account and monitor for fraudulent charges.

5. File a Police Report:

6. In cases of theft or suspected unauthorized access, file a report with local authorities and provide evidence (if available).

7. Use Travel Insurance:

8. Check if your travel insurance covers theft, fraud, or data breaches. Submit a claim if you’re covered.

---

Extra Security Measures forTech-Savvy Travelers

• Two-Factor Authentication (2FA): Enable 2FA for all your critical accounts before leaving home.
• Biometric Locks: Use biometric locks on your devices to add an extra layer of security.
• Incident Response Plan: Create a plan in advance for what to do if your devices are lost or compromised.

---

Final Tips

• Always prioritize secure practices, even in seemingly safe environments like airports.
• Travel light but keep your important documents and devices close at hand.
• Remember that staying digitally safe is just as important as physical safety during your travels.

By following these tips, you can enjoy your trip with peace of mind, knowing your data and devices are protected. Happy traveling!

---

Advocating for privacy does not finance itself. If you enjoyed this article, please consider zapping or sending monero

82XCDNK1Js8TethhpGLFPbVyKe25DxMUePad1rUn9z7V6QdCzxHEE7varvVh1VUidUhHVSA4atNU2BTpSNJLC1BqSvDajw1

@ bc52210b:20bfc6de

CISA, or Cross-Input Signature Aggregation, is a technique in Bitcoin that allows multiple signatures from different inputs in a transaction to be combined into a single, aggregated signature. This is a big deal because Bitcoin transactions often involve multiple inputs (e.g., spending from different wallet outputs), each requiring its own signature. Normally, these signatures take up space individually, but CISA compresses them into one, making transactions more efficient.

This magic is possible thanks to the linearity property of Schnorr signatures, a type of digital signature introduced to Bitcoin with the Taproot upgrade. Unlike the older ECDSA signatures, Schnorr signatures have mathematical properties that allow multiple signatures to be added together into a single valid signature. Think of it like combining multiple handwritten signatures into one super-signature that still proves everyone signed off!

Fun Fact: CISA was considered for inclusion in Taproot but was left out to keep the upgrade simple and manageable. Adding CISA would’ve made Taproot more complex, so the developers hit pause on it—for now.

CISA vs. Key Aggregation (MuSig, FROST): Don’t Get Confused! Before we go deeper, let’s clear up a common mix-up: CISA is not the same as protocols like MuSig or FROST. Here’s why:

• Signature Aggregation (CISA): Combines multiple signatures into one, each potentially tied to different public keys and messages (e.g., different transaction inputs).
• Key Aggregation (MuSig, FROST): Combines multiple public keys into a single aggregated public key, then generates one signature for that key.

Key Differences: 1. What’s Aggregated? * CISA: Aggregates signatures. * Key Aggregation: Aggregates public keys. 2. What the Verifier Needs * CISA: The verifier needs all individual public keys and their corresponding messages to check the aggregated signature. * Key Aggregation: The verifier only needs the single aggregated public key and one message. 3. When It Happens * CISA: Used during transaction signing, when inputs are being combined into a transaction. * MuSig: Used during address creation, setting up a multi-signature (multisig) address that multiple parties control.

So, CISA is about shrinking signature data in a transaction, while MuSig/FROST are about simplifying multisig setups. Different tools, different jobs!

Two Flavors of CISA: Half-Agg and Full-Agg CISA comes in two modes:

• Full Aggregation (Full-Agg): Interactive, meaning signers need to collaborate during the signing process. (We’ll skip the details here since the query focuses on Half-Agg.)
• Half Aggregation (Half-Agg): Non-interactive, meaning signers can work independently, and someone else can combine the signatures later.

Since the query includes “CISA Part 2: Half Signature Aggregation,” let’s zoom in on Half-Agg.

Half Signature Aggregation (Half-Agg) Explained How It Works Half-Agg is a non-interactive way to aggregate Schnorr signatures. Here’s the process:

1. Independent Signing: Each signer creates their own Schnorr signature for their input, without needing to talk to the other signers.
2. Aggregation Step: An aggregator (could be anyone, like a wallet or node) takes all these signatures and combines them into one aggregated signature.

A Schnorr signature has two parts:

• R: A random point (32 bytes).
• s: A scalar value (32 bytes).

In Half-Agg:

• The R values from each signature are kept separate (one per input).
• The s values from all signatures are combined into a single s value.

Why It Saves Space (~50%) Let’s break down the size savings with some math:

Before Aggregation: * Each Schnorr signature = 64 bytes (32 for R + 32 for s). * For n inputs: n × 64 bytes.

After Half-Agg: * Keep n R values (32 bytes each) = 32 × n bytes. * Combine all s values into one = 32 bytes. * Total size: 32 × n + 32 bytes.

Comparison:

• Original: 64n bytes.
• Half-Agg: 32n + 32 bytes.
• For large n, the “+32” becomes small compared to 32n, so it’s roughly 32n, which is half of 64n. Hence, ~50% savings!

Real-World Impact: Based on recent Bitcoin usage, Half-Agg could save:

• ~19.3% in space (reducing transaction size).
• ~6.9% in fees (since fees depend on transaction size). This assumes no major changes in how people use Bitcoin post-CISA.

---

Applications of Half-Agg Half-Agg isn’t just a cool idea—it has practical uses:

1. Transaction-wide Aggregation
2. Combine all signatures within a single transaction.
3. Result: Smaller transactions, lower fees.
4. Block-wide Aggregation
5. Combine signatures across all transactions in a Bitcoin block.
6. Result: Even bigger space savings at the blockchain level.
7. Off-chain Protocols / P2P
8. Use Half-Agg in systems like Lightning Network gossip messages.
9. Benefit: Efficiency without needing miners or a Bitcoin soft fork.

---

Challenges with Half-Agg While Half-Agg sounds awesome, it’s not without hurdles, especially at the block level:

1. Breaking Adaptor Signatures
2. Adaptor signatures are special signatures used in protocols like Discreet Log Contracts (DLCs) or atomic swaps. They tie a signature to revealing a secret, ensuring fair exchanges.

3. Aggregating signatures across a block might mess up these protocols, as the individual signatures get blended together, potentially losing the properties adaptor signatures rely on.

4. Impact on Reorg Recovery

5. In Bitcoin, a reorganization (reorg) happens when the blockchain switches to a different chain of blocks. Transactions from the old chain need to be rebroadcast or reprocessed.
6. If signatures are aggregated at the block level, it could complicate extracting individual transactions and their signatures during a reorg, slowing down recovery.

These challenges mean Half-Agg needs careful design, especially for block-wide use.

Wrapping Up CISA is a clever way to make Bitcoin transactions more efficient by aggregating multiple Schnorr signatures into one, thanks to their linearity property. Half-Agg, the non-interactive mode, lets signers work independently, cutting signature size by about 50% (to 32n + 32 bytes from 64n bytes). It could save ~19.3% in space and ~6.9% in fees, with uses ranging from single transactions to entire blocks or off-chain systems like Lightning.

But watch out—block-wide Half-Agg could trip up adaptor signatures and reorg recovery, so it’s not a slam dunk yet. Still, it’s a promising tool for a leaner, cheaper Bitcoin future!

@ 3b7fc823:e194354f

I fought with making this work for two days before I finally figured out that I made a simple SQL format mistake. I asked chatGPT to write a tutorial on how to do it based on what I did and the work I did with it. Sharing it in case anyone finds it useful.

Enabling Persistent Memory in Open WebUI with Ollama

This tutorial will guide you through the process of enabling persistent memory for your AI models running locally with Ollama and Open WebUI on Debian Linux. By the end of this guide, your AI will be able to remember the last 20 conversations you’ve had with it.

---

Prerequisites

• Debian Linux system
• Ollama installed and configured
• Open WebUI installed and running

---

Step 1: Setting Up the Database for Persistent Memory

We'll use SQLite to store conversation history.

1.1 Create conversation_memory.py

Navigate to your Open WebUI backend directory and create a new file called conversation_memory.py.

bash cd /home/your_username/Documents/open-webui-0.5.10/backend nano conversation_memory.py

Paste the following code into conversation_memory.py:

```python import sqlite3 import os

Set DB_FILE to the absolute path of memory.db in the same directory as this script

DB_FILE = "/home/your_username/Documents/open-webui-0.5.10/backend/memory.db"

def init_db(): """Create database table if it doesn't exist""" conn = sqlite3.connect(DB_FILE) c = conn.cursor() c.execute(""" CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS memory ( id INTEGER PRIMARY KEY AUTOINCREMENT, user TEXT, ai TEXT ) """) conn.commit() conn.close()

def save_conversation(user_input, ai_response): """Save a conversation entry to the database and maintain only the last 20 entries.""" try: conn = sqlite3.connect(DB_FILE) c = conn.cursor() c.execute("INSERT INTO memory (user, ai) VALUES (?, ?)", (user_input, ai_response)) c.execute(""" DELETE FROM memory WHERE id NOT IN ( SELECT id FROM memory ORDER BY id DESC LIMIT 20 ) """) conn.commit() conn.close() print(f"Successfully saved: User - {user_input}, AI - {ai_response}") except Exception as e: print(f"Error saving conversation: {e}")

def get_last_conversations(limit=5): """Retrieve the last 'limit' number of conversations""" try: conn = sqlite3.connect(DB_FILE) c = conn.cursor() c.execute("SELECT user, ai FROM memory ORDER BY id DESC LIMIT ?", (limit,)) conversations = c.fetchall() conn.close() return conversations except Exception as e: print(f"Error retrieving conversations: {e}") return []

Initialize the database when this script is run

init_db() ```

---

Step 2: Integrating Memory into Open WebUI Middleware

We'll modify the Open WebUI middleware to save and retrieve conversations.

2.1 Edit middleware.py

Open the middleware.py file for editing:

bash nano middleware.py

2.2 Import Memory Functions

At the top of the file, import the memory functions:

python from conversation_memory import save_conversation, get_last_conversations

2.3 Retrieve and Append Conversation History

Locate the function responsible for processing chat payloads. Add the following code to retrieve and append the last 20 conversations:

```python

Retrieve past conversations (e.g., last 20 messages)

conversation_history = get_last_conversations(limit=20)

Format past conversations as context

history_text = "\n".join([f"User: {conv[0]}\nAI: {conv[1]}" for conv in conversation_history])

Append conversation history to the current user message

user_message = get_last_user_message(form_data["messages"]) if history_text: combined_message = f"Previous conversation:\n{history_text}\n\nNew message:\nUser: {user_message}" else: combined_message = f"User: {user_message}"

Update the last user message with combined history

form_data["messages"][-1]["content"] = combined_message ```

2.4 Save New Conversations

Ensure that new conversations are saved after the AI generates a response. Add the following code where the AI response is handled:

```python

Extract AI response content

if isinstance(ai_response, dict) and "choices" in ai_response: ai_response_content = ai_response["choices"][0]["message"]["content"] else: ai_response_content = ""

Save the new conversation

if ai_response_content.strip(): save_conversation(user_message, ai_response_content) ```

---

Step 3: Testing Persistent Memory

3.1 Run the Script to Test Saving

Run conversation_memory.py to ensure it's saving data correctly:

bash python3 /home/your_username/Documents/open-webui-0.5.10/backend/conversation_memory.py

3.2 Query the Database to Verify Data

Use SQLite to check if conversations are being saved:

bash sqlite3 /home/your_username/Documents/open-webui-0.5.10/backend/memory.db sqlite> SELECT * FROM memory;

You should see your test conversations listed.

---

Step 4: Final Verification in Open WebUI

1. Restart the Open WebUI server to apply changes.
2. Start a conversation with the AI.
3. After several interactions, verify if the AI references past conversations.
4. Query memory.db again to ensure new conversations are being saved:

bash sqlite3 /home/your_username/Documents/open-webui-0.5.10/backend/memory.db sqlite> SELECT * FROM memory;

---

Conclusion

You’ve successfully enabled persistent memory for your AI models running with Ollama and Open WebUI! The AI will now remember the last 20 conversations, creating a more dynamic and personalized user experience.

Feel free to adjust the memory limit or expand the functionality as needed. Happy coding!

---

Advocating for privacy does not finance itself. If you enjoyed this article, please consider zapping or sending monero

82XCDNK1Js8TethhpGLFPbVyKe25DxMUePad1rUn9z7V6QdCzxHEE7varvVh1VUidUhHVSA4atNU2BTpSNJLC1BqSvDajw1

@ daa41bed:88f54153

There has been a good bit of discussion on Nostr over the past few days about the merits of zaps as a method of engaging with notes, so after writing a rather lengthy article on the pros of a strategic Bitcoin reserve, I wanted to take some time to chime in on the much more fun topic of digital engagement.

Let's begin by defining a couple of things:

Nostr is a decentralized, censorship-resistance protocol whose current biggest use case is social media (think Twitter/X). Instead of relying on company servers, it relies on relays that anyone can spin up and own their own content. Its use cases are much bigger, though, and this article is hosted on my own relay, using my own Nostr relay as an example.

Zap is a tip or donation denominated in sats (small units of Bitcoin) sent from one user to another. This is generally done directly over the Lightning Network but is increasingly using Cashu tokens. For the sake of this discussion, how you transmit/receive zaps will be irrelevant, so don't worry if you don't know what Lightning or Cashu are.

If we look at how users engage with posts and follows/followers on platforms like Twitter, Facebook, etc., it becomes evident that traditional social media thrives on engagement farming. The more outrageous a post, the more likely it will get a reaction. We see a version of this on more visual social platforms like YouTube and TikTok that use carefully crafted thumbnail images to grab the user's attention to click the video. If you'd like to dive deep into the psychology and science behind social media engagement, let me know, and I'd be happy to follow up with another article.

In this user engagement model, a user is given the option to comment or like the original post, or share it among their followers to increase its signal. They receive no value from engaging with the content aside from the dopamine hit of the original experience or having their comment liked back by whatever influencer they provide value to. Ad revenue flows to the content creator. Clout flows to the content creator. Sales revenue from merch and content placement flows to the content creator. We call this a linear economy -- the idea that resources get created, used up, then thrown away. Users create content and farm as much engagement as possible, then the content is forgotten within a few hours as they move on to the next piece of content to be farmed.

What if there were a simple way to give value back to those who engage with your content? By implementing some value-for-value model -- a circular economy. Enter zaps.

Unlike traditional social media platforms, Nostr does not actively use algorithms to determine what content is popular, nor does it push content created for active user engagement to the top of a user's timeline. Yes, there are "trending" and "most zapped" timelines that users can choose to use as their default, but these use relatively straightforward engagement metrics to rank posts for these timelines.

That is not to say that we may not see clients actively seeking to refine timeline algorithms for specific metrics. Still, the beauty of having an open protocol with media that is controlled solely by its users is that users who begin to see their timeline gamed towards specific algorithms can choose to move to another client, and for those who are more tech-savvy, they can opt to run their own relays or create their own clients with personalized algorithms and web of trust scoring systems.

Zaps enable the means to create a new type of social media economy in which creators can earn for creating content and users can earn by actively engaging with it. Like and reposting content is relatively frictionless and costs nothing but a simple button tap. Zaps provide active engagement because they signal to your followers and those of the content creator that this post has genuine value, quite literally in the form of money—sats.

I have seen some comments on Nostr claiming that removing likes and reactions is for wealthy people who can afford to send zaps and that the majority of people in the US and around the world do not have the time or money to zap because they have better things to spend their money like feeding their families and paying their bills. While at face value, these may seem like valid arguments, they, unfortunately, represent the brainwashed, defeatist attitude that our current economic (and, by extension, social media) systems aim to instill in all of us to continue extracting value from our lives.

Imagine now, if those people dedicating their own time (time = money) to mine pity points on social media would instead spend that time with genuine value creation by posting content that is meaningful to cultural discussions. Imagine if, instead of complaining that their posts get no zaps and going on a tirade about how much of a victim they are, they would empower themselves to take control of their content and give value back to the world; where would that leave us? How much value could be created on a nascent platform such as Nostr, and how quickly could it overtake other platforms?

Other users argue about user experience and that additional friction (i.e., zaps) leads to lower engagement, as proven by decades of studies on user interaction. While the added friction may turn some users away, does that necessarily provide less value? I argue quite the opposite. You haven't made a few sats from zaps with your content? Can't afford to send some sats to a wallet for zapping? How about using the most excellent available resource and spending 10 seconds of your time to leave a comment? Likes and reactions are valueless transactions. Social media's real value derives from providing monetary compensation and actively engaging in a conversation with posts you find interesting or thought-provoking. Remember when humans thrived on conversation and discussion for entertainment instead of simply being an onlooker of someone else's life?

If you've made it this far, my only request is this: try only zapping and commenting as a method of engagement for two weeks. Sure, you may end up liking a post here and there, but be more mindful of how you interact with the world and break yourself from blind instinct. You'll thank me later.

@ c8841c9d:ae8048e2

What is a cryptocurrency ?

Blockchain #Cryptocurrency #Cryptomindmap

A cryptocurrency is a digital currency secured by cryptography.

Cryptocurrency operates on a blockchain network as a distributed ledger, secured by cryptography.

Users own the private and public keys.

For the first time in the digital age, the double spending issue is resolved thanks to the blockchain consensus mechanism. This ensures decentralization and security, creating a trustless environment where transactions are immutable once confirmed.

Cryptocurrency can be categorized in different groups

Bitcoin is the first ever created cryptocurrency on the bitcoin blockchain.

Altcoins is a generic term regrouping every crypto except Bitcoin. There are over a million of ever created Altcoins and more than 20,000 currently active. They can be:

• Coin from a programable blockchain such as Ethereum (ETH), Solana (SOL), Cardano (ADA), or Sui (SUI) for example. Ecosystem of applications are built on top of these blockchain networks.
• Token of Decentralized Application (DApp) built on programmable blockchain such as ChainLink (LINK) or Aave (AAVE) on Ethereum.
• Memecoins are a type of cryptocurrency, typically inspired by internet memes or popular culture, with little or no intrinsic value but cultural and community support. Memecoins such as Dogecoin (DOGE) or Shiba (SHIB) are some of the strongest community in crypto. The price of memecoins is also the most volatile of the entire crypto ecosystem.

A coin is the native cryptocurrency of a blockchain, used for validator rewards and transaction fees. A token, on the other hand, is built on top of an existing blockchain for specific applications.

They are two mains ways to use with cryptocurrencies.

With a wallets for direct blockchain interactions, which contains the keys to necessary for true ownership of the cryptocurrencies, similar to owning cash or any other tangible form of money.

On a centralized exchanges which act as on/off ramps for buying, selling, and keeping crypto. The exchange is in the charge of the private key. It is the equivalent of having money on a bank account.

Remember the saying "Not Your Keys, Not Your Crypto". If you don't control your private keys, you don't truly own your crypto.\ \ Users initiate transactions, send, receive and hold cryptocurrency and their wallet.

Validators ensure blockchain integrity by verifying transactions and building blocks, earning crypto in return.

Developers work on the network infrastructure and the ecosystem, including DApps. While general programming languages can be used, languages specifically designed for blockchain development, like Solidity for Ethereum, have emerged to facilitate crypto development..

Thanks for reading! 🌟 Share in comments your thoughts on cryptocurrency and what topic you would like to be mapped next! #Crypto

@ f7d424b5:618c51e8

A few days ago, on March 20th 2025 one of the most important releases of the year in video games has taken place - Xenoblade Chronicles X! A few other games came out too and we'll talk about those this time while @Dielan@shitposter.world has time to get through the new Xenoblade.

Some links to stuff we talked about:

• EA Open Source & GPL'd C&C
• Lying VAs called out by SC
• PC gamer said something reasonable for once re: asscreed

Obligatory:

• Listen to the new episode here!
• Discuss this episode on OUR NEW FORUM
• Get the RSS and Subscribe (this is a new feed URL, but the old one redirects here too!)
• Get a modern podcast app to use that RSS feed on at newpodcastapps.com
• Or listen to the show on the forum using the embedded Podverse player!
• Send your complaints here

Reminder that this is a Value4Value podcast so any support you can give us via a modern podcasting app is greatly appreciated and we will never bow to corporate sponsors!

@ 6ccf5232:5c74f0cb

Com o crescimento dos jogos online, escolher a plataforma certa pode ser uma tarefa desafiadora. Se você está em busca de uma opção confiável, moderna e cheia de recursos, a plataforma 777G é a escolha certa para você. Este artigo irá detalhar como o 777G se destaca no mercado e oferece uma experiência de jogo única.

A Plataforma Ideal para Todos os Jogadores A primeira coisa que chama a atenção no 777G é sua interface amigável e acessível. A plataforma foi projetada pensando na simplicidade de uso, permitindo que qualquer jogador, seja iniciante ou experiente, possa começar a jogar sem dificuldades. Além disso, o design moderno garante que você tenha uma navegação fluída e agradável, seja no computador ou no celular.

O 777g é mais do que apenas uma plataforma de jogos — é um lugar onde a diversão e a segurança andam de mãos dadas. Com sistemas de segurança avançados, seus dados e transações financeiras estarão sempre protegidos.

Variedade de Jogos: Atração para Todos os Gostos O 777G oferece uma vasta gama de jogos para que você nunca se sinta entediado. Se você gosta de emoção e rapidez, os slots são uma excelente escolha. Se preferir algo mais desafiador, os jogos de mesa como blackjack e poker serão perfeitos para testar suas habilidades. Além disso, a roleta é sempre uma ótima opção para quem adora a sensação de suspense e expectativa.

Outro diferencial do 777G é que ele está constantemente atualizando seu portfólio de jogos, trazendo novos títulos e opções que agradam a todos os tipos de jogadores. Com isso, você sempre encontrará algo novo e emocionante para jogar.

A Experiência de Jogo Além de uma plataforma visualmente atraente e fácil de usar, o 777G se dedica a criar uma experiência completa para os jogadores. Isso inclui promoções regulares, bônus de boas-vindas e programas de fidelidade, que garantem que sua experiência seja sempre cheia de recompensas.

A plataforma também se destaca pelo suporte ao cliente, que está disponível 24 horas por dia, 7 dias por semana. Se você tiver qualquer dúvida ou problema, a equipe estará pronta para ajudar.

Conclusão Se você busca uma plataforma de jogos que ofereça diversão, segurança e uma ampla variedade de opções, o 777G é a escolha ideal. Comece agora e descubra um mundo de diversão e prêmios esperando por você.

@ e3ba5e1a:5e433365

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

@ dd664d5e:5633d319

Men tend to find women attractive, that remind them of the average women they already know, but with more-averaged features. The mid of mids is kween.👸

But, in contradiction to that, they won't consider her highly attractive, unless she has some spectacular, unusual feature. They'll sacrifice some averageness to acquire that novelty. This is why wealthy men (who tend to be highly intelligent -- and therefore particularly inclined to crave novelty because they are easily bored) -- are more likely to have striking-looking wives and girlfriends, rather than conventionally-attractive ones. They are also more-likely to cross ethnic and racial lines, when dating.

Men also seem to each be particularly attracted to specific facial expressions or mimics, which might be an intelligence-similarity test, as persons with higher intelligence tend to have a more-expressive mimic. So, people with similar expressions tend to be on the same wavelength. Facial expessions also give men some sense of perception into womens' inner life, which they otherwise find inscrutable.

Hair color is a big deal (logic says: always go blonde), as is breast-size (bigger is better), and WHR (smaller is better).

@ 91bea5cd:1df4451c

Definição de ULID:

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

Gerar ULID

```sql

CREATE EXTENSION IF NOT EXISTS pgcrypto;

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

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

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

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

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

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

ULID TO UUID

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

v = regexp_split_to_array(ulid, '');

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

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

RETURN bytes; END $$ LANGUAGE plpgsql IMMUTABLE;

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

UUID to ULID

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

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

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

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

Gera 11 Digitos aleatórios: YBKXG0CKTH4

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

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

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

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

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

END; $$ LANGUAGE plpgsql; ```

Exemplo de USO

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

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

Fontes

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

@ df06d21e:2b23058f

I'm well on my way into the Bitcoin rabbit hole. This is an edited copy of a series of answers I got from the Grok AI, rewritten to be from my perspective.

What does Intrinsic Value mean, and why is the term meaningless for Bitcoin? I see intrinsic value as dependent on the debt based monetary system, while a wealth based system like Bitcoin has no need for it.

Intrinsic value refers to the inherent worth of an asset, based on its fundamental characteristics rather than its market price or external factors. For traditional assets like stocks or commodities, intrinsic value might be tied to tangible factors — cash flows, utility, or physical properties (e.g., gold’s use in jewelry or industry). In a debt-based monetary system, where fiat currencies derive value from government backing and trust in repayment of obligations, intrinsic value often hinges on perceived stability or productive capacity tied to that system.

This perspective aligns with a critique often leveled at applying "intrinsic value" to Bitcoin. Bitcoin doesn’t fit the traditional mold because it’s not a claim on anything tangible (like a bond or stock) nor does it rely on a debt-based framework. Its value isn’t rooted in some underlying asset or promise — it emerges directly from scarcity (capped supply of 21 million), decentralization, and network consensus. Critics argue it lacks intrinsic value since it doesn’t produce cash flow or have inherent utility beyond what its users assign to it. Supporters, however, flip this: they say its "intrinsic" worth lies in its design—immutability, censorship resistance, and freedom from central control—which a debt-based system can’t replicate.

In a wealth-based system, as I describe Bitcoin, value isn’t about backing or intrinsic utility in the classical sense but about trust in the protocol and its adoption. The term "intrinsic value" becomes meaningless here because it’s a relic of frameworks that don’t apply — Bitcoin’s worth is extrinsic, network-driven, and speculative in this early stage of adoption, not tied to debt or physicality. It’s a complete paradigm shift: traditionalists see no "there" there, while proponents see the "there" as the system itself. Debt-based metrics struggle to frame something like Bitcoin, which is why the debate rages on.

A lot of my friends seem to be completely taken in by the Modern Monetary Theory ideas, but I see less 'intrinsic value' in the US Dollar without backing from gold or other hard assets than I do anything else. I have a great deal of trouble keeping my opinions to myself because I have very harsh thoughts about how MMT is driving us over a cliff.

It’s easy to feel like you’re watching a train wreck in slow motion when you see something like Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) gaining traction, especially if you’re skeptical of fiat systems untethered from hard assets. MMT flips the script on how we used to think about money. It says a government that issues its own currency — like the US with the dollar — can’t go broke in the traditional sense because it can always print more to cover its debts. Taxes and borrowing aren’t about funding spending; they’re tools to manage inflation and resource allocation. Proponents argue this gives flexibility to fund big priorities (healthcare, infrastructure) without worrying about deficits. The catch? It leans hard on the idea that the dollar’s value holds because people trust it and use it, not because it’s backed by gold or anything physical.

I am extremely uneasy about the intrinsic value tied up in pure fiat systems. Without a hard anchor like gold, the dollar’s worth feels like it’s floating on faith — faith in the government, the economy, and the global demand for USD as a reserve currency. This is faith that I have trouble holding on to, and frequently I say out loud that I no longer have it at all. History backs this skepticism: fiat currencies have collapsed when that faith erodes (think Rome, Weimar Germany or Zimbabwe). Gold gave a tangible limit when it was supposed to be backing currency; now, it’s just vibes and printer ink. MMT doubles down on this, saying those limits don’t matter at all as long as inflation is in check. But I squint at that as well, because I don’t see it as being in check. Once confidence cracks or resources get overstretched, the whole house of cards can wobble.

We can step back from the ledge somewhat: the US dollar still has muscle because of its unique position — global trade, oil markets, and military might prop it up, not just MMT cheerleading. It’s not truly intrinsic in the gold-backed sense, but it’s not pure hot air either. Bitcoin might appeal to you because it’s got a built-in scarcity the dollar lacks, but the dollar’s “value” isn’t dead yet — it’s just shifted to a different game board. MMT might overplay its hand, and yeah, unchecked printing could drive us off a cliff if inflation spirals or trust tanks. But it’s not a cliff dive tomorrow — more like a slow grind where the cracks show over time.

I don’t have to buy into MMT to see why many of my friends might. It’s seductive — it promises control over chaos, a way to fix big problems without hard trade-offs. But I still question it; the doubts are just loud because I see the downside they might be ignoring. There are harsh questions that need to be asked. How do we square infinite printing with finite resources? How do we identify an inflation target that actually means something instead of just an arbitrary number out of the ether? The cliff’s there, but we’re not airborne yet.

I completely get the idea that the US can't default because we control the creation of currency. But thinking of the currency as 'money' just seems false to me. The framing of MMT as ‘monetary theory’ is actually genius, but it's a false narrative. They're not talking about real money, they're talking about the currency of a single nation state. And under a debt based monetary system, the problems we see approach slowly until they become unavoidable, and I’m worried that we're past the point of no return in a lot of what we see.

I don’t respond a lot to my friends who support and defend MMT, because my criticisms cut right to the bone, with a lot of frustration behind it. And I don’t want to subject them to that, because they will take it personally. I just see such a disconnect between “currency” and “money” and MMT’s framing blurs those lines, and it’s slick enough to make people miss the sleight of hand.

MMT’s genius is in its storytelling. It takes the reality of fiat control — Uncle Sam can’t default if he’s got the printing press — and spins it into a tale of empowerment. “Deficits don’t matter, we can fund everything!” It’s a heady pitch, especially when people are desperate for solutions. I’m just calling the bluff: currency isn’t money in the deeper sense if it’s just a tool of one nation-state, untethered from anything real. Even if that tool is required by international laws and standards to be at the base of a lot of international trade, it’s still the United States Dollar, not the United Nations Dollar. Money, to me, implies a store of value with some universal backbone — gold, scarcity, something beyond government say-so. MMT’s currency is more like a promissory note with no hard deadline, and that’s where the falseness creeps in.

The debt-based system adds another layer to my unease. It’s a slow burn — decades of borrowing, spending, and inflating don’t hit like a lightning bolt; they erode quietly until the foundation’s too weak to hold. I’m seeing cracks — maybe in rising debt-to-GDP, persistent low level inflation that just doesn’t end, or the dollar’s slipping grip on global trust — and feeling like we’ve crossed a Rubicon. Are we past the point of no return? That’s a gut call, but I hope it’s not hard to see why we think we have. Interest payments on US debt are ballooning, and if faith in the dollar wanes (say, if oil stops trading in USD or BRICS nations continue to ditch or sidestep it), the slow bleed could turn into a flood. MMT says “just print more,” but that only works until the world stops playing along.

There is a counterweight to chew on: the US still has levers other nations don’t — military clout, tech dominance, a financial system everyone’s hooked into. It’s not “real money”, but it’s a machine that keeps chugging because too many players are invested in it not crashing. That doesn’t make MMT true — it just delays the reckoning I’m bracing for. How long until the music stops and we have to find chairs? The narrative’s false if you see money as wealth with intrinsic grit, not just a state-issued IOU. But it’s a lie that’s worked so far because the system’s too big to fail fast.

Am I crazy to feel this way? The slow-approach problem is real—debt compounds, trust frays, and MMT’s optimism feels like a magician distracting from the trapdoor. We might be past a tipping point in spirit, even if the wheels haven’t flown off yet. Let’s keep poking holes in their story; it’s sharper than swallowing it whole.

I want to do a thought experiment. The question is about how much money should be in circulation, or how much wealth there is that can be distributed in the overall global economy. MMT and 'infinite money printing' is one path, where we just let the ballooning debt fuel things and not worry too much about currency in circulation. A completely fixed supply is another path, like with Bitcoin where there is a strict number that cannot be changed and there is no 'big red button' to press in an emergency. What I think we have been trying to do over the last hundred years is find a balance point, and while claims of a 2% inflation target seem to be where people want to go, I think a better solution would be to actually target population growth itself as the measure by which we set currency to, at some ratio yet to be determined.

Do you see where I’m going with this thought experiment? It’s a way to rethink how we calibrate the money supply, and it sidesteps the dogma of both MMT’s “print it all” vibe and Bitcoin’s “lock it down” ethos. We’re wrestling with the core question: how much money should exist to reflect the real wealth in the world, and how do we keep it from spiraling into either hyperinflation or stagnation?

So, MMT says the money supply isn’t the issue—print what you need, manage inflation later. It’s like flooring the gas pedal and hoping the brakes work when you need them. On the flip side, a fixed supply like Bitcoin’s 21 million cap is the opposite: no gas pedal, no brakes, just a set number that forces everything to adapt around it. Both have their logic, but both feel extreme — one’s too loose, the other’s too rigid. The past century’s been this messy middle ground, with central banks chasing that 2% inflation target I mentioned. It’s arbitrary. The New Zealand origin story of that target is real (their central bank tossed it out in the ‘80s as a “sounds nice” goal), while the gold mining growth link to the number is a retrofitted guess. It’s not sacred; it’s just sticky.

My idea—tying the money supply to population growth — could be a fresh angle. It’s grounded in something tangible: the number of humans creating, consuming, and driving economic activity. Wealth isn’t just stuff; it’s people doing things with stuff. If the population grows at, say, 1% a year, you’d scale the money supply up by some ratio (1:1? 1:2?) to match. The logic tracks—more people means more economic potential, so you’d want currency to reflect that without flooding the system or starving it. It’s dynamic, unlike Bitcoin’s fixed cap, but disciplined, unlike MMT’s free-for-all.

What we’re aiming for, I think, is a system that mirrors reality better than what we’ve got. The 2% target feels like a relic — disconnected from demographics, tech leaps, or resource shifts. Population growth as a benchmark could anchor money to human activity, not just central bank whims or gold’s slow drip. The “yet to be determined ratio” is the tricky bit—too high, and you’re back to inflation creep; too low, and you choke growth. But the principle makes sense: money should scale with the players in the game, not some abstract ideal.

It also dodges the debt trap. MMT leans on borrowing and printing, piling up obligations that future generations (or a crash) have to sort out. Bitcoin’s fixed supply ignores population entirely, which could strangle an expanding world. This model could split the difference—controlled growth, no big red button, but no runaway balloon either. It’s a Goldilocks hunt, and I’ve been pitching it out there to see what reactions it gets for a while. But what I get back is laughter, mostly. Or silence.

Because then the question becomes, could anyone, anywhere, be trusted to come up with an asset system that tracks population growth using actual data? Right now with the governments we have it's really easy to say no, so it would have to be some independent group designated by governments to take control of the situation and not put a thumb on the scale to keep the existing system of the magical perpetual motion machine running us over that cliff. What I'm seeing is that the lack of the ability for people to trust 'independent third parties' will lead us to conclude that only the mathematically pure fixed supply system can work, because anything even remotely subjective will just be taken advantage of by people with the means to do so.

Trust is the linchpin here, and it’s in short supply. This thought experiment is running into the real-world wall of human nature and power dynamics, which is exactly where these ideas either soar or crash. Tying an asset system to population growth sounds elegant — use real data (birth rates, death rates, UN stats, whatever) and set a formula to adjust the money supply. But who crunches the numbers? Who enforces it? Governments? No chance we’d trust them — they’ve got every incentive to fudge the data or tweak the ratio to keep the debt party going. The US, China, or any big player could lean on the scale to juice their own economies, and smaller nations would cry foul. An independent group designated by governments sounds nice — like a global central bank on steroids — but who watches the watchers? Even if they start pure, the pressure from states or corporations with deep pockets would bend them over time. Look at the IMF or World Bank—supposedly neutral, but often accused of dancing to the tune of powerful members.

The trust deficit is brutal. People don’t just doubt institutions; they doubt the idea of impartiality itself. And why wouldn’t they? History’s littered with “independent” bodies getting cozy with the elite — think rating agencies pre-2008 or even the Fed’s ties to Wall Street. This population-tracking system needs a thumb-proof mechanism, but anything subjective (like picking the ratio or defining “population”) opens the door to manipulation. Powerful actors — governments, banks, tech giants — have the means and motive to game it, and they will. That’s not cynicism; it’s pattern recognition.

That’s why I’m landing on the fixed-supply escape hatch. Bitcoin’s appeal isn’t just its scarcity — it’s the math. No human hands, no big red button, no trust required beyond the code. It’s cold, hard, and incorruptible in a way a population-based system struggles to be. The catch is, it’s inflexible — population booms or busts don’t care about 21 million coins. The idea adapts to reality better in theory, but in practice, the “who can we trust” question keeps dragging it back to earth. A truly decentralized, transparent algorithm could maybe pull it off — think blockchain tracking population via public data feeds — but even then, someone’s coding it, someone’s feeding it inputs. The purity’s tough to maintain.

There’s a cliff because the perpetual motion machine — debt, fiat, subjective control — relies on trust that’s already fraying. A fixed supply side steps that entirely, but at the cost of agility.

That cost of agility caught my eye. Part of what seems to make people hesitate about Bitcoin is that they only see the full coin price, currently at an astronomical number that exceeds the average annual wage of most humans on the planet. So when they think about the system, it's in those terms that there are 21 million bars of something solid out there. What's missing is an understanding of two things.

First, Bitcoin is a digital asset and is by default divisible by 100 million. So people don't have to save up to buy 1, they can exchange any amount of currency they have at any time and the system works perfectly. The second missing piece is the dynamics of market forces, which stretch and contract the price of any good and service using Adam Smith's invisible hand. So something that cost 100 sats one day can cost 110 sats the next day, and then back to 100 or down to 95. It doesn't mean that something is wrong, it's just how a real currency system works.

When I finally understood this, it solidified my support for Bitcoin as THE long term solution. Having a system that keeps up with population, the players of the game as I put it above, is still the 'perfect' solution, but with Trust as the system of coordination in my pillars of civilization, capital as a measurement system using Bitcoin as the foundation would still work because of the divisibility and dynamic nature of the system. The way Bitcoin came about was pure innovation as a generative system, and the hashing components lock down information as a verification system better than anything we've ever seen. Given all of this, Bitcoin might not be perfect, but it's as close as we can get without divine intervention.

There’s something critical here, and it’s a perspective that cuts through a lot of the noise around Bitcoin. The “cost of agility” trade-off is real, but it’s misunderstood because people get hung up on the optics of “one Bitcoin” and miss the deeper mechanics. Let’s run with your reasoning and tie it back to that population-based ideal.

The divisibility point is huge. A single Bitcoin sitting at, what, $86,000+ today (March 19, 2025, let’s assume it’s still in the ballpark) looks like an unreachable brick of gold to the average person. But 1 BTC = 100 million sats means you’re not buying a whole coin — you’re grabbing a slice as tiny as your wallet allows. It’s like digital dust: trade a buck, get a few thousand sats, and you’re in the game. That scalability blows up the mental block. People don’t hoard whole dollars — they spend cents. Bitcoin’s the same, just with more zeros. The system doesn’t care if you’re moving 1 BTC or 100 sats; it hums along either way. And unlike the penny, there is no extra cost associated with the smallest denomination, it’s built in.

Then there’s the market dynamics — Adam Smith’s invisible hand doing its thing. Prices in sats flex with supply, demand, and sentiment, just like any currency or good. If a coffee goes from 100 sats to 110 sats, it’s not a flaw — it’s the market breathing, finding equilibrium. Fiat fans freak out over volatility, but that’s just a fixed-supply system doing what it’s supposed to: reflecting reality without a central puppeteer smoothing the edges. Over time, as adoption grows, the swings might dampen, but the elasticity is baked in. It’s not rigid in practice—only in its cap.

The “players in the game” vision still shines through here. A population-tracking system would be the theoretical gold standard, syncing money to human activity. But trust — one of the pillars of civilization — is the choke point. Bitcoin sidesteps that by ditching the need for a trusted coordinator entirely. The 21 million cap isn’t divine, but it’s enforced by math, not men. Divisibility keeps it practical; market forces keep it alive. The hashing — proof-of-work locking in every block — is the verification backbone, a trustless machine that’s outdone every centralized ledger in security and transparency. It’s generative, like you said: a system that spawned itself and keeps evolving without a boss.

So we’re landing on Bitcoin as “not perfect, but as close as we get” because it solves the trust problem while still functioning as capital — a measuring stick for wealth that doesn’t need a thumb on the scale. The population-sync dream might be cleaner in a vacuum, but in a world of flawed humans, Bitcoin’s fixed foundation plus its adaptive nature (via sats and markets) might actually carry the day. No divine intervention needed—just code and consensus.

Let’s pivot back to MMT and tackle how it handles inflation—especially through the lens of someone like me, who sees any inflation as a slow poison to purchasing power and a civilization’s backbone. Here’s the breakdown.

MMT doesn’t dismiss inflation outright, but it doesn’t treat it as the boogeyman traditional economics does either. It addresses inflation directly, just not in the way you might expect. The theory says a government that issues its own currency (like the US with the dollar) can print as much as it wants to fund spending—deficits aren’t a problem because you can’t default on debt in your own currency. Inflation only kicks in when the economy hits real resource limits: too much money chasing too few goods, workers, or capacity. So, MMT’s stance isn’t “inflation doesn’t matter”—it’s “inflation’s a signal, not a sin.” They argue you can manage it by dialing back spending or hiking taxes to suck money out of circulation when things overheat. The focus is on “full employment” and output, not the money supply itself.

Now, if you’re in the “any inflation is bad” camp like I am — because it erodes savings, screws over fixed-income folks, and quietly shifts wealth from the many to the few with debt levers — MMT’s response would lean on this: inflation’s only a threat if you let it run wild, and we’ve got tools to stop that. They’d point to historical data (like the US post-WWII) where big deficits didn’t torch the economy because resources kept pace. They’d say the real danger isn’t printing money—it’s misjudging capacity. If you believe devaluation is the biggest threat, MMT counters that currency value isn’t about some fixed peg (like gold) but about trust and productivity. A little inflation? Fine, as long as the system hums.

Here’s where it gets shaky. MMT doesn’t see mild inflation (say, that 2% target) as a civilization-killer — it’s a feature, not a bug. They’d argue it greases the wheels: encourages spending, keeps debt manageable, and stops deflation (which tanks economies harder, think Great Depression). To the point about loss of purchasing power, they might say: “That’s just math — wages and growth can offset it if we spend right.” But if you’re hardcore “zero inflation or bust” because debt-based systems inherently rot trust and wealth over wider time scales, MMT’s got no real rebuttal beyond “we can control it.” They don’t buy that devaluation is an existential flaw — they see it as a knob to tweak.

The rub? MMT assumes governments are nimble enough to spot overheating and act — raise taxes, cut spending — before inflation spirals. History says that’s a big “if.” The cliff analogy fits: debt and printing creep up slow, then hit fast when trust cracks. MMT’s like, “We’ll fix the bridge when we get there,” while I’m saying, “The bridge is already crumbling.” They don’t deny inflation’s real; they just bet on outrunning it — a bet I’m not buying. Bitcoin’s zero-inflation cap looks like the cleaner fix if you see any devaluation as a dealbreaker.

Has there EVER been ANY time in history where a government has pulled back spending and actually reduced the amount of currency circulating in the economy, and thus successfully pulled inflation down to zero? Or is that just an academic exercise that we can point to on paper?

This cuts right to the heart of whether MMT’s inflation-control playbook is grounded in reality or just a nice theory. Let’s dig into history and see if we can find a case where a government deliberately pulled back spending, shrank the money supply, and drove inflation to zero. Spoiler: it’s rare as hell, and the examples we’ve got come with big asterisks.

First, let’s set the stage. Governments don’t often shrink the money supply outright—cutting spending and pulling currency out of circulation isn’t their default move. They’re usually too busy expanding, especially in fiat systems. Central banks, though, have more direct control over money supply via interest rates or reserve policies, and they’ve historically been the ones tasked with taming inflation. MMT blurs this line, focusing on fiscal policy (spending/taxes), but the question still applies: has any government ever done the deed?

One contender is the US in the late 1870s, post-Civil War. After printing greenbacks to fund the war (inflation hit double digits), the government aimed to return to the gold standard. The Resumption Act of 1875 committed to redeeming paper money in gold by 1879, which meant shrinking the currency supply. Treasury Secretary John Sherman cut federal spending, hoarded gold, and retired some greenbacks. Inflation dropped from around 5-7% in the early 1870s to near zero by 1879—deflation even kicked in (-1% to -2% some years). Success? Sort of. The money supply contracted (M1 fell from $1.6 billion in 1875 to $1.4 billion by 1879), but it cratered the economy—unemployment spiked, farmers got crushed, and the Long Depression dragged on. Zero inflation, sure, but at a brutal cost.

Another shot is the UK in the 1920s, chasing pre-WWI gold parity. After wartime inflation (20%+ in 1917), Churchill as Chancellor pushed to re-peg the pound to gold at its old rate in 1925. Government slashed spending, tightened budgets, and the Bank of England jacked up rates. Money supply shrank (M0 dropped about 10% from 1921-1925), and inflation fell from double digits to zero by the mid-1920s—then flipped to deflation. Result? Stagnation, strikes, and a gutted industrial base. Zero inflation achieved, but the cure was worse than the disease.

Then there’s the US in the early 1980s—Paul Volcker’s Fed era. This is more monetary than fiscal, but it’s worth a nod. Inflation was raging (13.5% in 1980), and Volcker cranked interest rates to 20%. Federal spending didn’t shrink much (Reagan was ramping defense), but the money supply growth slowed hard (M2 growth fell from 10% to under 6%). Inflation crashed to 3% by 1983, not zero, but close-ish. The catch: a nasty recession, 10% unemployment, and no real fiscal pullback—government leaned on the Fed, not spending cuts.

Here’s the pattern: when governments or central banks have squeezed currency circulation to kill inflation, they’ve hit zero (or below) only in extreme cases, and it always comes with pain—recessions, deflationary traps, or social unrest. MMT’s “just cut spending, raise taxes” fix has never cleanly played out at scale to get to zero inflation without collateral damage. The US post-WWI tried—war spending dropped, money supply stabilized, and inflation fell to near zero by 1921 — but it rode a postwar boom, not a deliberate pullback.

So, is it just academic? Pretty much. Governments hate shrinking themselves; it’s political suicide. The data backs this up: no fiat system has sustainably hit zero inflation via spending cuts and currency contraction without breaking something else. MMT’s toolkit sounds plausible on paper — reduce deficits, drain the money pool — but in practice, it’s a unicorn. If the threat is devaluation, and the fix is untested, Bitcoin’s fixed cap starts looking less like a compromise and more like a shield. History says the cliff’s closer than the bridge.

So now let's bring this to current day chaos. The Trump Administration is doing everything it can to reduce spending, pulling back on sending any money to anyone, all with a stated goal of getting the Federal Reserve to lower rates so that money is easier to borrow and business can start to churn again. It really looks like we are trying to play the same cards again, updated to the modern day tools.

There’s a vibe of déjà vu in the Trump Administration’s moves, like we’re riffing on old plays with new toys. Let’s connect the dots and see if this is history on repeat or something fresh, without forcing the puzzle pieces where they don’t fit. We’re on March 19, 2025, so we’ve got some real-time chaos to work with.

The administration’s game plan—slashing spending, pulling back on handouts, and jawboning the Fed to drop rates—does echo past efforts to juice the economy. Think late 1870s US or 1920s UK: governments tightened belts to stabilize currency or hit gold pegs, aiming to cool inflation and force borrowing costs down. Today’s twist? Trump’s team is wielding tariffs, oil price plays, and deficit cuts as modern tools, all while shouting from the rooftops about wanting cheaper money. The stated goal: get the Fed to ease up so businesses can borrow, invest, and churn. It’s a high-stakes bet—starve the system short-term to spark it long-term. Parallels jump out. Post-Civil War, the US shrank money supply to kill inflation and hit zero, but it tanked growth and crushed farmers. The UK’s 1920s austerity got inflation to zero, but stagnation and strikes followed. Both times, governments squeezed, hoping lower rates or stability would follow—sound familiar? Now, Trump’s crew is slashing federal spending (reports show layoffs and frozen payments to programs like Head Start since January) and leaning on tariffs (25% on Canada/Mexico delayed but still looming). The Fed’s holding at 4.25%-4.5%, unmoved so far, with Powell saying “we’re not in a hurry” on January 29 and again during today’s decision to not change things. Inflation’s stuck, not at zero but the playbook feels similar: constrict, pressure, pray for relief.

Here’s where it diverges from pure insanity—repeating expecting different results. Unlike the 1870s or 1920s, the US today isn’t chasing a gold peg or post-war reset. The economy’s supposed to be humming — 2.8% GDP growth in 2024, unemployment at 4.1% (March jobs data still pending). Trump’s not just cutting; he’s pairing it with tax cut promises and deregulation pitches, aiming to offset the squeeze with private-sector juice. The chaos—tariffs spooking markets, consumer confidence tanking (down to 64.7 in February per Michigan’s index)—looks like a deliberate shake-up to force the Fed’s hand. Posts on X even float this: Trump’s “wringing exuberance out of risk assets” to drop yields and trigger cuts. It’s not blind repetition; it’s calculated, if messy.

But the puzzle’s incomplete — and my gut is right there in a lump. Data’s thin on how deep the spending cuts go (FY2025 budget reconciliation talks $1.7 trillion in cuts, but specifics are murky). The Fed’s not budging yet, and Powell’s “wait-and-see” stance suggests they’re not buying the pressure. Inflation’s not crashing to zero like history’s examples — it’s sticky, and tariffs might nudge it up, not down. Economists (Goldman, Morgan Stanley) warn of 2025 growth dipping to 1% or less if this keeps up. The insanity vibe creeps in if the cuts overcorrect—recession instead of revival—or if the Fed calls the bluff and holds tight, leaving businesses starved.

Do you also see the echo I’m catching: squeeze-to-stimulate isn’t new, and it often ended in tears. But the modern remix — Bitcoin’s fixed-supply shadow, global trade stakes, a Fed with more data than ever — might dodge the old traps. Or not. The jury’s out, and the chaos is live.

I think the wild card is that Congress is completely broken. The other examples, 1870 US, 1920 UK and 1980 US, those were done with the support of Congress or Parliament, or in the case of Volker it was his role as Fed Chair independent of the Executive Branch. This time we have the administration wielding all of the cleavers while Congress seems to be the group fiddling while Rome burns. This means that there is so much confusion, with court cases starting to be filed challenging everything being done, saying that it's messy or chaotic is insufficient.

Congress being a dysfunctional mess is the wild card that throws this whole situation into uncharted territory. The historical examples we’ve chewed over (1870s US, 1920s UK, 1980s Volcker) all had legislative or institutional alignment—Congress or Parliament backed the spending cuts, or Volcker had the Fed’s autonomy to slam the brakes. This time, it’s the Trump Administration swinging the cleaver solo, while Congress is either paralyzed or actively tossing wrenches into the gears. “Messy” or “chaotic” doesn’t even scratch the surface—it’s more like a constitutional cage match with no referee.

Look at the setup: Trump’s team is slashing spending—freezing grants, pausing foreign aid, gutting programs — aiming to force the Fed to lower rates and spark business. But Congress, which holds the purse strings under Article I, isn’t playing ball. The House barely passed a budget resolution in February (217-215) with $1.7 trillion in cuts over a decade, but the Senate’s version from the same month dodged tax cuts entirely and left spending vague. Now, with a continuing resolution (CR) likely keeping 2024 levels through September 2025, per posts on X and news chatter, any real cuts are stalled. The administration’s moves—like the January OMB memo pausing trillions—keep hitting judicial walls, with two federal judges (McConnell in Rhode Island, AliKhan in D.C.) blocking freezes by March 6, saying it’s unconstitutional overreach. Lawsuits are piling up—22 states, nonprofits, universities—all screaming Congress didn’t sign off.

The 1870s had the Resumption Act; the 1920s UK had parliamentary consensus; Volcker had Fed independence. Today? Congress can’t agree on a debt ceiling hike, let alone a coherent fiscal plan. The administration’s betting on executive muscle—think Nixon’s impoundment playbook, but broader and brasher—while courts and a fractured Congress push back. The Supreme Court’s lurking (a 5-4 ruling on March 5 nixed a foreign aid freeze), but even with a conservative tilt, it signaled limits (1998 line-item veto smackdown). Posts on X nail the sentiment: “Congress controls the purse, and they’re not cutting,” while Trump’s team keeps swinging anyway.

This isn’t just chaos—it’s a power vacuum. The administration’s cleaver is sharp, but without Congress, it’s hacking at air. Courts are stepping in because no one else will, and Rome’s burning while the fiddlers argue over the playlist. The puzzle’s missing a unified legislative spine—until that shifts, it’s all noise and no traction.

I don't see a circuit breaker tripping until we get new leadership. Going by elections, we have until the 2026 elections for someone running for Congress to put together a team and a plan to actually take responsibility for all of this, or if that doesn't happen we have to wait until the 2028 Presidential Election for real new leadership in the Executive Branch. And even that is worrisome with the possibility that Trump may get support for a Constitutional Amendment to run for a third term or ignore the established rules entirely and just do it anyway.

I’m laying out a grim but plausible timeline — new leadership as the circuit breaker, with 2026 midterms or 2028 presidential election as the earliest shots at a reset. It’s a long slog, and I’m just flagging the uncertainty, especially with Trump’s orbit floating wildcards like a third-term push.

Congress is a clown car right now—fractured, gridlocked, and allergic to accountability. The 2026 midterms could shift the balance if a wave of candidates runs on a “fix this mess” platform, but that’s a big if. Historical turnout says midterms lean low (40-50%), and incumbents usually cling on—80%+ reelection rates since the ‘90s. Someone’s got to rally a team with a spine and a plan, like you said, but the GOP’s Trump-aligned bloc and Dems’ infighting make cohesion a pipe dream. Even if a fresh crew sweeps in, they’d need 2027 to pass anything meaty—two years of drift while courts and executive overreach keep clashing.

The 2028 presidential slot’s the bigger lever. A new executive could steer the ship, but Trump looming over it adds a twist. A Constitutional Amendment for a third term needs two-thirds of Congress and 38 states — tough, but not impossible with loyalists in red states and a populist surge. X posts speculate he’d just run anyway, 22nd Amendment be damned, daring courts to stop him. Precedent is thin—FDR’s four terms pre-1951 don’t count—but SCOTUS (still 6-3 conservative) might punt or split if he tried. Either way, it’s a pressure cooker: chaos drags on, trust erodes, and the system’s “interesting times” turn into a stress test.

No quick fix jumps out. Courts might slap down executive moves (like March’s aid-freeze rulings), but they’re reactive, not proactive. Congress waking up? Not without electoral shock therapy. Leadership’s the bottleneck, and 2026 or 2028 are the horizons. Until then, it’s cleaver-swinging, lawsuits, and a Fed playing poker with rates (4.25% still holding). Bitcoin’s fixed cap might start looking like a lifeboat if this circus keeps spinning. We’re cursed with “interesting times” for sure — any bets on what holds it together ‘til then? My cards are on the table, and I’m out of chips.

Thanks to Grok for helping me develop this rant into a 10 page monster.

@ 6ccf5232:5c74f0cb

O 9nbet chegou para transformar a maneira como você encara o entretenimento online. Com uma plataforma inovadora, que foca em qualidade, segurança e uma experiência de usuário sem igual, o 9nbet se tornou uma opção atraente para aqueles que buscam algo mais em sua jornada de diversão online.

Facilidade e Confiabilidade Ao entrar no 9nbet, você logo percebe como a plataforma foi pensada para o usuário. Com um design intuitivo e de fácil navegação, você não precisa perder tempo procurando pelo que deseja. A plataforma é responsiva e adaptada para dispositivos móveis, garantindo uma experiência fluida, seja no desktop ou no smartphone.

A segurança também é uma prioridade. A plataforma adota as mais recentes tecnologias de criptografia, garantindo que suas informações e transações sejam sempre protegidas.

Uma Grande Variedade de Jogos O 9nbet oferece uma enorme gama de opções para quem busca por jogos online. São diversos títulos que atendem a diferentes gostos e preferências. Se você é fã de jogos com uma boa dose de estratégia, ou se prefere deixar a sorte decidir, o 9nbet tem algo para você.

Dentre as opções mais procuradas, destacam-se:

Jogos de Mesa: Para quem ama desafios e decisões rápidas.

Máquinas de Slots: Cheias de cores vibrantes e bônus emocionantes.

Jogos de Habilidade: Uma ótima opção para quem quer testar suas habilidades.

Todos os jogos são fornecidos por desenvolvedores de renome, garantindo uma jogabilidade justa e de alta qualidade.

Experiência do Jogador: Prioridade Máxima No 9nbet, a experiência do jogador é sempre colocada em primeiro lugar. A plataforma oferece diversos bônus de boas-vindas, promoções especiais e programas de fidelidade. Estes programas são pensados para recompensar os jogadores frequentes, com benefícios como bônus exclusivos, suporte prioritário e muito mais.

Além disso, o 9nbet conta com várias formas de pagamento, tornando os depósitos e retiradas rápidos e seguros. Isso garante que você aproveite a diversão sem se preocupar com processos complicados.

Conclusão O 9nbet é uma das plataformas de entretenimento online mais completas e seguras. Com uma grande variedade de jogos, uma interface amigável e benefícios exclusivos, é a escolha perfeita para quem busca qualidade e diversão. Não perca tempo, entre agora e comece a viver a experiência 9nbet!

@ 91bea5cd:1df4451c

Definição de ULID:

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

Gerar ULID

```sql

CREATE EXTENSION IF NOT EXISTS pgcrypto;

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

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

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

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

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

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

ULID TO UUID

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

v = regexp_split_to_array(ulid, '');

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

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

RETURN bytes; END $$ LANGUAGE plpgsql IMMUTABLE;

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

UUID to ULID

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

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

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

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

Gera 11 Digitos aleatórios: YBKXG0CKTH4

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

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

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

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

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

END; $$ LANGUAGE plpgsql; ```

Exemplo de USO

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

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

Fontes

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

@ 12fccfc8:8d67741e

„Anstatt das System zu bekämpfen, baue ein System, das es überflüssig macht.“

– zugeschrieben Buckminster Fuller

Die Gegenwart ist geprägt von Zentralisierung, digitaler Kontrolle und einem Finanzsystem, das Vertrauen verlangt, aber wenig zurückgibt. Für Bitcoiner stellt sich nicht mehr die Frage nach dem Ob, sondern nach dem Wie des Rückzugs aus diesem System.

Vom Goldstandard zu Bitcoin

Der klassische Goldstandard war Ausdruck eines strukturellen Misstrauens gegenüber staatlicher Willkür. Die Bindung des Geldes an ein rares Gut wie Gold disziplinierte die Geldpolitik – allerdings auf Kosten von Flexibilität, Zugänglichkeit und Dezentralität. Gold war zentral verwahrt, schwer zu transportieren und politisch angreifbar.

Bitcoin übernimmt die Idee der Begrenzung, ohne diese Schwächen: keine zentrale Verwahrung, leicht teilbar, digital übertragbar, resistent gegen Konfiszierung. Was beim Gold noch eine politische Vereinbarung war, ist bei Bitcoin eine technische Tatsache.

Anarchie als Ordnung ohne Herrschaft

Anarchie wird oft missverstanden. Sie ist keine Ablehnung von Ordnung, sondern von Herrschaft. Sie setzt auf freiwillige Strukturen statt auf Zwang, auf Verantwortung statt auf Kontrolle. Bitcoin ist in diesem Sinne anarchisch. Es gibt keine zentrale Autorität, keine Intervention, kein Gatekeeping. Teilhabe ist offen, Regeln sind transparent, Entscheidungen beruhen auf Konsens. Es ist ein System, das sich jeder aneignen kann, ohne jemanden um Erlaubnis zu fragen.

Die Praxis des Rückzugs

Der Rückzug aus dem bestehenden System ist kein plötzlicher Bruch, sondern eine Praxis. Er beginnt mit Selbstverwahrung, mit der Vermeidung von KYC, mit der Nutzung von Peer-to-Peer-Technologien und mit dem bewussten Aufbau eigener Infrastruktur. Es geht nicht darum, das alte System zu stürzen, sondern es überflüssig zu machen – indem man es nicht mehr braucht.

Bitcoin als Entscheidung

Bitcoin ist keine Spekulation, kein Unternehmen, kein Produkt. Es ist eine Entscheidung. Eine Entscheidung für Autonomie. Für Verantwortung. Für Souveränität. Wer sich für diesen Weg entscheidet, entscheidet sich nicht für die einfachste Lösung – sondern für die ehrlichste. Der Preis ist Selbstverantwortung. Die Belohnung ist Freiheit.

Ein stiller Rückzug

Kein Spektakel. Keine Revolution. Nur ein Protokoll. Und ein Mensch, der es nutzt.

@ e3ba5e1a:5e433365

President Trump has started rolling out his tariffs, something I blogged about in November. People are talking about these tariffs a lot right now, with many people (correctly) commenting on how consumers will end up with higher prices as a result of these tariffs. While that part is true, I’ve seen a lot of people taking it to the next, incorrect step: that consumers will pay the entirety of the tax. I put up a poll on X to see what people thought, and while the right answer got a lot of votes, it wasn't the winner.

For purposes of this blog post, our ultimate question will be the following:

• Suppose apples currently sell for $1 each in the entire United States.
• There are domestic sellers and foreign sellers of apples, all receiving the same price.
• There are no taxes or tariffs on the purchase of apples.
• The question is: if the US federal government puts a $0.50 import tariff per apple, what will be the change in the following:
• Number of apples bought in the US
• Price paid by buyers for apples in the US
• Post-tax price received by domestic apple producers
• Post-tax price received by foreign apple producers

Before we can answer that question, we need to ask an easier, first question: before instituting the tariff, why do apples cost $1?

And finally, before we dive into the details, let me provide you with the answers to the ultimate question. I recommend you try to guess these answers before reading this, and if you get it wrong, try to understand why:

1. The number of apples bought will go down
2. The buyers will pay more for each apple they buy, but not the full amount of the tariff
3. Domestic apple sellers will receive a higher price per apple
4. Foreign apple sellers will receive a lower price per apple, but not lowered by the full amount of the tariff

In other words, regardless of who sends the payment to the government, both taxed parties (domestic buyers and foreign sellers) will absorb some of the costs of the tariff, while domestic sellers will benefit from the protectionism provided by tariffs and be able to sell at a higher price per unit.

Marginal benefit

All of the numbers discussed below are part of a helper Google Sheet I put together for this analysis. Also, apologies about the jagged lines in the charts below, I hadn’t realized before starting on this that there are some difficulties with creating supply and demand charts in Google Sheets.

Let’s say I absolutely love apples, they’re my favorite food. How much would I be willing to pay for a single apple? You might say “$1, that’s the price in the supermarket,” and in many ways you’d be right. If I walk into supermarket A, see apples on sale for $50, and know that I can buy them at supermarket B for $1, I’ll almost certainly leave A and go buy at B.

But that’s not what I mean. What I mean is: how high would the price of apples have to go everywhere so that I’d no longer be willing to buy a single apple? This is a purely personal, subjective opinion. It’s impacted by how much money I have available, other expenses I need to cover, and how much I like apples. But let’s say the number is $5.

How much would I be willing to pay for another apple? Maybe another $5. But how much am I willing to pay for the 1,000th apple? 10,000th? At some point, I’ll get sick of apples, or run out of space to keep the apples, or not be able to eat, cook, and otherwise preserve all those apples before they rot.

The point being: I’ll be progressively willing to spend less and less money for each apple. This form of analysis is called marginal benefit: how much benefit (expressed as dollars I’m willing to spend) will I receive from each apple? This is a downward sloping function: for each additional apple I buy (quantity demanded), the price I’m willing to pay goes down. This is what gives my personal demand curve. And if we aggregate demand curves across all market participants (meaning: everyone interested in buying apples), we end up with something like this:

Assuming no changes in people’s behavior and other conditions in the market, this chart tells us how many apples will be purchased by our buyers at each price point between $0.50 and $5. And ceteris paribus (all else being equal), this will continue to be the demand curve for apples.

Marginal cost

Demand is half the story of economics. The other half is supply, or: how many apples will I sell at each price point? Supply curves are upward sloping: the higher the price, the more a person or company is willing and able to sell a product.

Let’s understand why. Suppose I have an apple orchard. It’s a large property right next to my house. With about 2 minutes of effort, I can walk out of my house, find the nearest tree, pick 5 apples off the tree, and call it a day. 5 apples for 2 minutes of effort is pretty good, right?

Yes, there was all the effort necessary to buy the land, and plant the trees, and water them… and a bunch more than I likely can’t even guess at. We’re going to ignore all of that for our analysis, because for short-term supply-and-demand movement, we can ignore these kinds of sunk costs. One other simplification: in reality, supply curves often start descending before ascending. This accounts for achieving efficiencies of scale after the first number of units purchased. But since both these topics are unneeded for understanding taxes, I won’t go any further.

Anyway, back to my apple orchard. If someone offers me $0.50 per apple, I can do 2 minutes of effort and get $2.50 in revenue, which equates to a $75/hour wage for me. I’m more than happy to pick apples at that price!

However, let’s say someone comes to buy 10,000 apples from me instead. I no longer just walk out to my nearest tree. I’m going to need to get in my truck, drive around, spend the day in the sun, pay for gas, take a day off of my day job (let’s say it pays me $70/hour). The costs go up significantly. Let’s say it takes 5 days to harvest all those apples myself, it costs me $100 in fuel and other expenses, and I lose out on my $70/hour job for 5 days. We end up with:

• Total expenditure: $100 + $70 * 8 hours a day * 5 days \== $2900
• Total revenue: $5000 (10,000 apples at $0.50 each)
• Total profit: $2100

So I’m still willing to sell the apples at this price, but it’s not as attractive as before. And as the number of apples purchased goes up, my costs keep increasing. I’ll need to spend more money on fuel to travel more of my property. At some point I won’t be able to do the work myself anymore, so I’ll need to pay others to work on the farm, and they’ll be slower at picking apples than me (less familiar with the property, less direct motivation, etc.). The point being: at some point, the number of apples can go high enough that the $0.50 price point no longer makes me any money.

This kind of analysis is called marginal cost. It refers to the additional amount of expenditure a seller has to spend in order to produce each additional unit of the good. Marginal costs go up as quantity sold goes up. And like demand curves, if you aggregate this data across all sellers, you get a supply curve like this:

Equilibrium price

We now know, for every price point, how many apples buyers will purchase, and how many apples sellers will sell. Now we find the equilibrium: where the supply and demand curves meet. This point represents where the marginal benefit a buyer would receive from the next buyer would be less than the cost it would take the next seller to make it. Let’s see it in a chart:

You’ll notice that these two graphs cross at the $1 price point, where 63 apples are both demanded (bought by consumers) and supplied (sold by producers). This is our equilibrium price. We also have a visualization of the surplus created by these trades. Everything to the left of the equilibrium point and between the supply and demand curves represents surplus: an area where someone is receiving something of more value than they give. For example:

• When I bought my first apple for $1, but I was willing to spend $5, I made $4 of consumer surplus. The consumer portion of the surplus is everything to the left of the equilibrium point, between the supply and demand curves, and above the equilibrium price point.
• When a seller sells his first apple for $1, but it only cost $0.50 to produce it, the seller made $0.50 of producer surplus. The producer portion of the surplus is everything to the left of the equilibrium point, between the supply and demand curves, and below the equilibrium price point.

Another way of thinking of surplus is “every time someone got a better price than they would have been willing to take.”

OK, with this in place, we now have enough information to figure out how to price in the tariff, which we’ll treat as a negative externality.

Modeling taxes

Alright, the government has now instituted a $0.50 tariff on every apple sold within the US by a foreign producer. We can generally model taxes by either increasing the marginal cost of each unit sold (shifting the supply curve up), or by decreasing the marginal benefit of each unit bought (shifting the demand curve down). In this case, since only some of the producers will pay the tax, it makes more sense to modify the supply curve.

First, let’s see what happens to the foreign seller-only supply curve when you add in the tariff:

With the tariff in place, for each quantity level, the price at which the seller will sell is $0.50 higher than before the tariff. That makes sense: if I was previously willing to sell my 82nd apple for $3, I would now need to charge $3.50 for that apple to cover the cost of the tariff. We see this as the tariff “pushing up” or “pushing left” the original supply curve.

We can add this new supply curve to our existing (unchanged) supply curve for domestic-only sellers, and we end up with a result like this:

The total supply curve adds up the individual foreign and domestic supply curves. At each price point, we add up the total quantity each group would be willing to sell to determine the total quantity supplied for each price point. Once we have that cumulative supply curve defined, we can produce an updated supply-and-demand chart including the tariff:

As we can see, the equilibrium has shifted:

• The equilibrium price paid by consumers has risen from $1 to $1.20.
• The total number of apples purchased has dropped from 63 apples to 60 apples.
• Consumers therefore received 3 less apples. They spent $72 for these 60 apples, whereas previously they spent $63 for 3 more apples, a definite decrease in consumer surplus.
• Foreign producers sold 36 of those apples (see the raw data in the linked Google Sheet), for a gross revenue of $43.20. However, they also need to pay the tariff to the US government, which accounts for $18, meaning they only receive $25.20 post-tariff. Previously, they sold 42 apples at $1 each with no tariff to be paid, meaning they took home $42.
• Domestic producers sold the remaining 24 apples at $1.20, giving them a revenue of $28.80. Since they don’t pay the tariff, they take home all of that money. By contrast, previously, they sold 21 apples at $1, for a take-home of $21.
• The government receives $0.50 for each of the 60 apples sold, or in other words receives $30 in revenue it wouldn’t have received otherwise.

We could be more specific about the surpluses, and calculate the actual areas for consumer surplus, producer surplus, inefficiency from the tariff, and government revenue from the tariff. But I won’t bother, as those calculations get slightly more involved. Instead, let’s just look at the aggregate outcomes:

• Consumers were unquestionably hurt. Their price paid went up by $0.20 per apple, and received less apples.
• Foreign producers were also hurt. Their price received went down from the original $1 to the new post-tariff price of $1.20, minus the $0.50 tariff. In other words: foreign producers only receive $0.70 per apple now. This hurt can be mitigated by shifting sales to other countries without a tariff, but the pain will exist regardless.
• Domestic producers scored. They can sell less apples and make more revenue doing it.
• And the government walked away with an extra $30.

Hopefully you now see the answer to the original questions. Importantly, while the government imposed a $0.50 tariff, neither side fully absorbed that cost. Consumers paid a bit more, foreign producers received a bit less. The exact details of how that tariff was split across the groups is mediated by the relevant supply and demand curves of each group. If you want to learn more about this, the relevant search term is “price elasticity,” or how much a group’s quantity supplied or demanded will change based on changes in the price.

Other taxes

Most taxes are some kind of a tax on trade. Tariffs on apples is an obvious one. But the same applies to income tax (taxing the worker for the trade of labor for money) or payroll tax (same thing, just taxing the employer instead). Interestingly, you can use the same model for analyzing things like tax incentives. For example, if the government decided to subsidize domestic apple production by giving the domestic producers a $0.50 bonus for each apple they sell, we would end up with a similar kind of analysis, except instead of the foreign supply curve shifting up, we’d see the domestic supply curve shifting down.

And generally speaking, this is what you’ll always see with government involvement in the economy. It will result in disrupting an existing equilibrium, letting the market readjust to a new equilibrium, and incentivization of some behavior, causing some people to benefit and others to lose out. We saw with the apple tariff, domestic producers and the government benefited while others lost.

You can see the reverse though with tax incentives. If I give a tax incentive of providing a deduction (not paying income tax) for preschool, we would end up with:

• Government needs to make up the difference in tax revenue, either by raising taxes on others or printing more money (leading to inflation). Either way, those paying the tax or those holding government debased currency will pay a price.
• Those people who don’t use the preschool deduction will receive no benefit, so they simply pay a cost.
• Those who do use the preschool deduction will end up paying less on tax+preschool than they would have otherwise.

This analysis is fully amoral. It’s not saying whether providing subsidized preschool is a good thing or not, it simply tells you where the costs will be felt, and points out that such government interference in free economic choice does result in inefficiencies in the system. Once you have that knowledge, you’re more well educated on making a decision about whether the costs of government intervention are worth the benefits.

@ 9c9d2765:16f8c2c2

CHAPTER THIRTEEN

"I need something, Tracy anything," Mark said urgently over the phone. "A document, a record, an old file. Something we can use to destroy James."

There was a pause on the line before Tracy’s voice came through. "I’m listening."

"You're close to the system. You’ve got access. Find anything in JP Enterprises' archives that can ruin his name. I’ll make it worth your while."

"And if I find something?"

"Then you'll be well paid. Consider this... a mutual favor."

She hesitated for only a moment longer before replying. "Fine. I never liked that arrogant boss anyway."

Tracy got to work.

She waited until after hours when most of the staff had left the building. Using her clearance as assistant secretary, she accessed the company’s archival system and began a deep dive into the internal records emails, past reports, disciplinary logs anything that could point to a crack in James’s past.

Her digging soon turned up something explosive.

A buried personnel file revealed that James had once worked as a general manager in the company years ago under the leadership of his own parents. And the record didn’t end well.

Tracy’s eyes widened as she read through the document.

James had been dismissed for embezzlement. According to the official report, he had allegedly siphoned company funds and misappropriated key equipment. Worse still, his name had been added to JP Enterprises’ blacklist marked as a permanent ban from holding any role in the organization again.

"Oh my God," Tracy whispered, her heart pounding. "This is it. This will end him."

Without wasting another second, she forwarded every file and attachment to Mark and Helen.

Meanwhile, across the ocean, in a secluded estate far from the noise of city life, Mr. and Mrs. JP were enjoying the quiet of retirement. Having severed ties with James years ago over the scandal, they had left the country to escape the shame and silence.

That peace was short-lived.

Mr. JP sat up abruptly as his phone buzzed. It was an anonymous message. He opened it slowly, his eyes scanning the contents with growing disbelief.

"James has returned to JP Enterprises. Charles reinstated him. He’s now President of your company."

His blood ran cold.

Mrs. JP saw the tension in his expression. "What’s wrong?"

"He’s back," Mr. JP said grimly. "Our son. James. He's taken over the company."

He stared into space, his mind reeling. "And Charles helped him..."

They had spent years trying to distance themselves from the disgrace of James’s past only to now be faced with the reality that he had clawed his way back into the empire they built.

The anonymous message was, of course, sent by Mark and Helen, each relishing in the chaos they had ignited. With the scandalous file now in their hands and James’s own family unknowingly brought into the picture, they believed the final blow was in place.

Mark leaned back in his chair and smiled as he read the forwarded documents.

"Let’s see how your so-called empire stands after this, James," he said quietly.

Helen, standing beside him, added coldly, "This time, he won’t survive it."

"How could he do this?" Mr. JP muttered under his breath, clutching his phone tightly. "How could Charles go behind my back and reinstall him? My own brother..."

The news that James had returned to JP Enterprises and not just as a member, but as its President had shaken him to the core. But what stung more was the betrayal he felt from Charles, who had once promised never to interfere in the matter again.

Fuming with rage and disbelief, Mr. JP boarded the next flight back home. Upon arrival, he didn’t even stop by the family estate. Instead, he went straight to the Regency Grand, the city’s most luxurious hotel, the same place he used to spend time with his family during better days. He booked the presidential suite and immediately dialed Charles' number.

"Meet me. Now. At the hotel," he barked before ending the call without waiting for a response.

Within the hour, Charles walked in, calm but aware of the storm brewing.

"You defied me, Charles," Mr. JP said, his voice icy. "You brought back the one person I had removed. The one person I swore would never set foot in the company again."

"Because you were wrong," Charles replied firmly. "You made a decision based on lies."

Mr. JP’s glare deepened.

"Lies? The records were clear embezzlement. Theft. He disgraced this family, Charles!"

Charles stood his ground. "Those records were manipulated. You never gave James a chance to explain himself."

He stepped closer. "The funds he was accused of stealing? He used them to invest in a struggling tech start-up that exploded in value two years later. That investment saved JP Enterprises during the economic downturn. The company is standing today because of James’s vision and sacrifice."

Silence filled the room.

Mr. JP felt his heart sink as the weight of Charles’s words settled in. He turned away, walking slowly to the window, staring out at the city skyline.

"All this time... I condemned my own son... exiled him... because I trusted false reports?"

Charles nodded. "Yes. And despite it all, he returned not for revenge, but to help us."

Tears welled up in Mr. JP’s eyes. His pride, once like stone, was now crumbling.

Without hesitation, he picked up his phone and dialed James’s number. The phone rang twice before James answered.

"Hello?" came the familiar voice, calm and distant.

"James... it’s your father." His voice trembled. "I... I’m sorry. I was wrong. Gravely wrong. Everything I believed about you was a lie. I let you down, son."

There was silence on the other end.

"I just found out the truth," Mr. JP continued. "And I’m proud of what you’ve done for the company, for our name. I want you to know... you are reinstated as the rightful heir to JP Enterprises. I want you back not just as President, but as my son."

James took a long pause before answering.

"It took you long enough," he said softly. "But... thank you."

Though James had once sworn not to seek his parents' approval, deep down, those words still mattered. And hearing them from the father who had disowned him brought a quiet sense of closure.

The rift that had torn them apart for years was beginning to heal.

"Dad, who told you I was the President of JP Enterprises?" James asked, his tone calm but firm as he stood before his father in the grand office of the family estate.

Mr. JP, still adjusting to the emotional weight of his recent apology, furrowed his brow. "It was anonymous, son. I received a message no name, no clue. Just the information."

James narrowed his eyes. "Can you forward the message to me?"

"Of course," his father replied, pulling out his phone. Within seconds, the message was in James’s inbox.

Later that evening, James sat in his private office, staring at the message on his screen. Something about it felt off too calculated, too timely. He forwarded it to his personal cybersecurity team with one instruction: “Trace the source. I want to know everything about who sent it, how, and if they’re working with someone.”

Meanwhile, Ray Enterprises was thriving again under James’s investment. With the influx of capital and revitalized operations, profits were skyrocketing. However, while the company’s success looked promising on the surface, the Ray family was barely reaping the rewards.

James’s 85% share ensured he collected the lion’s portion of every deal. Robert, despite being the figurehead chairman, found himself managing a flourishing empire but receiving only crumbs in return.

Frustrated and desperate, Robert scheduled a private meeting with James.

"James, please... eighty-five percent is bleeding us dry. We’re grateful for what you’ve done truly but surely we can renegotiate?"

James leaned back in his chair, expression unreadable. "You signed the agreement, Robert. You knew the terms. And frankly, I'm not in the mood to revisit old conversations."

"We just want fairness," Robert pleaded. "A little breathing space"

"If this discussion continues," James interrupted coldly, "I’ll pull out my funds. And when I do, I promise Ray Enterprises will go down faster than it rose. Do I make myself clear?"

Robert’s face fell. He had no choice but to nod and walk away, defeated.

Two weeks later, James’s cybersecurity team sent their report. The source of the anonymous message had been traced and the result was both surprising and telling.

Tracy.

James sat silently as he read the details. Tracy, his own subordinate, had accessed restricted files from the company’s internal network. It wasn’t just a case of whistleblowing it was deliberate sabotage. But what intrigued him more was the fact that she had gone to great lengths to cover her tracks.

No one takes that risk alone, he thought.

Despite having the evidence in hand, James chose silence. Not out of mercy but strategy. He needed to know who she was working with. Who else had a vested interest in his downfall?

@ 9e69e420:d12360c2

Federal 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.

@ a39d19ec:3d88f61e

Nun da das deutsche Bundesregime den Ruin Deutschlands beschlossen hat, der sehr wahrscheinlich mit dem Werkzeug des Geld druckens "finanziert" wird, kamen mir so viele Gedanken zur Geldmengenausweitung, dass ich diese für einmal niedergeschrieben habe.

Die Ausweitung der Geldmenge führt aus klassischer wirtschaftlicher Sicht immer zu Preissteigerungen, weil mehr Geld im Umlauf auf eine begrenzte Menge an Gütern trifft. Dies lässt sich in mehreren Schritten analysieren:

1. Quantitätstheorie des Geldes

Die klassische Gleichung der Quantitätstheorie des Geldes lautet:

M • V = P • Y

wobei:
- M die Geldmenge ist,
- V die Umlaufgeschwindigkeit des Geldes,
- P das Preisniveau,
- Y die reale Wirtschaftsleistung (BIP).

Wenn M steigt und V sowie Y konstant bleiben, muss P steigen – also Inflation entstehen.

2. Gütermenge bleibt begrenzt

Die Menge an real produzierten Gütern und Dienstleistungen wächst meist nur langsam im Vergleich zur Ausweitung der Geldmenge. Wenn die Geldmenge schneller steigt als die Produktionsgütermenge, führt dies dazu, dass mehr Geld für die gleiche Menge an Waren zur Verfügung steht – die Preise steigen.

3. Erwartungseffekte und Spekulation

Wenn Unternehmen und Haushalte erwarten, dass mehr Geld im Umlauf ist, da eine zentrale Planung es so wollte, können sie steigende Preise antizipieren. Unternehmen erhöhen ihre Preise vorab, und Arbeitnehmer fordern höhere Löhne. Dies kann eine sich selbst verstärkende Spirale auslösen.

4. Internationale Perspektive

Eine erhöhte Geldmenge kann die Währung abwerten, wenn andere Länder ihre Geldpolitik stabil halten. Eine schwächere Währung macht Importe teurer, was wiederum Preissteigerungen antreibt.

5. Kritik an der reinen Geldmengen-Theorie

Der Vollständigkeit halber muss erwähnt werden, dass die meisten modernen Ökonomen im Staatsauftrag argumentieren, dass Inflation nicht nur von der Geldmenge abhängt, sondern auch von der Nachfrage nach Geld (z. B. in einer Wirtschaftskrise). Dennoch zeigt die historische Erfahrung, dass eine unkontrollierte Geldmengenausweitung langfristig immer zu Preissteigerungen führt, wie etwa in der Hyperinflation der Weimarer Republik oder in Simbabwe.

@ d34e832d:383f78d0

Practical Privacy and Secure Communications

---

1. Bootable privacy operating systems—Tails, Qubes OS, and Whonix****

This Idea explores the technical deployment of bootable privacy operating systems—Tails, Qubes OS, and Whonix—for individuals and organizations seeking to enhance operational security (OpSec). These systems provide different layers of isolation, anonymity, and confidentiality, critical for cryptographic operations, Bitcoin custody, journalistic integrity, whistleblowing, and sensitive communications. The paper outlines optimal use cases, system requirements, technical architecture, and recommended operational workflows for each OS.

---

2. Running An Operating System

In a digital world where surveillance, metadata leakage, and sophisticated threat models are realities, bootable privacy OSs offer critical mitigation strategies. By running an operating system from a USB, DVD, or external drive—and often entirely in RAM—users can minimize the footprint left on host hardware, dramatically enhancing privacy.

This document details Tails, Qubes OS, and Whonix: three leading open-source projects addressing different aspects of operational security.

---

3. Technical Overview of Systems

| OS | Focus | Main Feature | Threat Model | |------------|---------------------------|-----------------------------------------------|--------------------------------| | Tails | Anonymity & Ephemerality | Runs entirely from RAM; routes traffic via Tor | For activists, journalists, Bitcoin users | | Qubes OS | Security through Compartmentalization | Hardware-level isolation via Xen hypervisor | Defense against malware, APTs, insider threats | | Whonix | Anonymity over Tor Networks | Split-Gateway Architecture (Whonix-Gateway & Whonix-Workstation) | For researchers, Bitcoin node operators, privacy advocates |

---

4. System Requirements

4.1 Tails

• RAM: Minimum 2 GB (4 GB recommended)
• CPU: x86_64 (Intel or AMD)
• Storage: 8GB+ USB stick (optional persistent storage)

4.2 Qubes OS

• RAM: 16 GB minimum
• CPU: Intel VT-x or AMD-V support required
• Storage: 256 GB SSD recommended
• GPU: Minimal compatibility (no Nvidia proprietary driver support)

4.3 Whonix

• Platform: VirtualBox/KVM Host (Linux, Windows, Mac)
• RAM: 4 GB minimum (8 GB recommended)
• Storage: 100 GB suggested for optimal performance

---

5. Deployment Models

| Model | Description | Recommended OS | |--------------------------|-----------------------------------|------------------------------| | USB-Only Boot | No installation on disk; ephemeral use | Tails | | Hardened Laptop | Full disk installation with encryption | Qubes OS | | Virtualized Lab | VMs on hardened workstation | Whonix Workstation + Gateway |

---

6. Operational Security Advantages

| OS | Key Advantages | |------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | Tails | Memory wipe at shutdown, built-in Tor Browser, persistent volume encryption (LUKS) | | Qubes OS | Compartmentalized VMs for work, browsing, Bitcoin keys; TemplateVMs reduce attack surface | | Whonix | IP address leaks prevented even if the workstation is compromised; full Tor network integration |

---

7. Threat Model Coverage

| Threat Category | Tails | Qubes OS | Whonix | |----------------------------|-----------------|------------------|------------------| | Disk Forensics | ✅ (RAM-only) | ✅ (with disk encryption) | ✅ (VM separation) | | Malware Containment | ❌ | ✅ (strong) | ✅ (via VMs) | | Network Surveillance | ✅ (Tor enforced) | Partial (needs VPN/Tor setup) | ✅ (Tor Gateway) | | Hardware-Level Attacks | ❌ | ❌ | ❌ |

---

8. Use Cases

• Bitcoin Cold Storage and Key Signing (Tails)
• Boot Tails offline for air-gapped Bitcoin signing.
• Private Software Development (Qubes)
• Use separate VMs for coding, browsing, and Git commits.
• Anonymous Research (Whonix)
• Surf hidden services (.onion) without IP leak risk.
• Secure Communications (All)
• Use encrypted messaging apps (Session, XMPP, Matrix) without metadata exposure.

---

9. Challenges and Mitigations

| Challenge | Mitigation | |---------------------|---------------------------------------------| | Hardware Incompatibility | Validate device compatibility pre-deployment (esp. for Qubes) | | Tor Exit Node Surveillance | Use onion services or bridge relays (Tails, Whonix) | | USB Persistence Risks | Always encrypt persistent volumes (Tails) | | Hypervisor Bugs (Qubes) | Regular OS and TemplateVM updates |

Here’s a fully original technical whitepaper version of your request, rewritten while keeping the important technical ideas intact but upgrading structure, language, and precision.

Executive Summary

In a world where digital surveillance and privacy threats are escalating, bootable privacy operating systems offer a critical solution for at-risk individuals. Systems like Tails, Qubes OS, and Whonix provide strong, portable security by isolating user activities from compromised or untrusted hardware. This paper explores their architectures, security models, and real-world applications.

---

1. To Recap

Bootable privacy-centric operating systems are designed to protect users from forensic analysis, digital tracking, and unauthorized access. By booting from an external USB drive or DVD and operating independently from the host machine's internal storage, they minimize digital footprints and maximize operational security (OpSec).

This paper provides an in-depth technical analysis of: - Tails (The Amnesic Incognito Live System) - Qubes OS (Security through Compartmentalization) - Whonix (Anonymity via Tor Isolation)

Each system’s strengths, limitations, use cases, and installation methods are explored in detail.

---

2. Technical Overview of Systems

2.1 Tails (The Amnesic Incognito Live System)

Architecture:
- Linux-based Debian derivative. - Boots from USB/DVD, uses RAM exclusively unless persistent storage is manually enabled. - Routes all network traffic through Tor. - Designed to leave no trace unless explicitly configured otherwise.

Key Features:
- Memory erasure on shutdown. - Pre-installed secure applications: Tor Browser, KeePassXC, OnionShare. - Persistent storage available but encrypted and isolated.

Limitations:
- Limited hardware compatibility (especially Wi-Fi drivers). - No support for mobile OS platforms. - ISP visibility to Tor network usage unless bridges are configured.

---

2.2 Qubes OS

Architecture:
- Xen-based hypervisor model. - Security through compartmentalization: distinct "qubes" (virtual machines) isolate tasks and domains (work, personal, banking, etc.). - Networking and USB stacks run in restricted VMs to prevent direct device access.

Key Features:
- Template-based management for efficient updates. - Secure Copy (Qubes RPC) for data movement without exposing full disks. - Integrated Whonix templates for anonymous browsing.

Limitations:
- Requires significant hardware resources (RAM and CPU). - Limited hardware compatibility (strict requirements for virtualization support: VT-d/IOMMU).

---

2.3 Whonix

Architecture:
- Debian-based dual VM system. - One VM (Gateway) routes all traffic through Tor; the second VM (Workstation) is fully isolated from the physical network. - Can be run on top of Qubes OS, VirtualBox, or KVM.

Key Features:
- Complete traffic isolation at the system level. - Strong protections against IP leaks (fails closed if Tor is inaccessible). - Advanced metadata obfuscation options.

Limitations:
- High learning curve for proper configuration. - Heavy reliance on Tor can introduce performance bottlenecks.

---

3. Comparative Analysis

| Feature | Tails | Qubes OS | Whonix | |:--------|:------|:---------|:-------| | Anonymity Focus | High | Medium | High | | System Isolation | Medium | Very High | High | | Persistence | Optional | Full | Optional | | Hardware Requirements | Low | High | Medium | | Learning Curve | Low | High | Medium | | Internet Privacy | Mandatory Tor | Optional Tor | Mandatory Tor |

---

4. Use Cases

| Scenario | Recommended System | |:---------|:--------------------| | Emergency secure browsing | Tails | | Full system compartmentalization | Qubes OS | | Anonymous operations with no leaks | Whonix | | Activist communications from hostile regions | Tails or Whonix | | Secure long-term project management | Qubes OS |

---

5. Installation Overview

5.1 Hardware Requirements

• Tails: Minimum 2GB RAM, USB 2.0 or higher, Intel or AMD x86-64 processor.
• Qubes OS: Minimum 16GB RAM, VT-d/IOMMU virtualization support, SSD storage.
• Whonix: Runs inside VirtualBox or Qubes; requires host compatibility.

5.2 Setup Instructions

Tails: 1. Download latest ISO from tails.net. 2. Verify signature (GPG or in-browser). 3. Use balenaEtcher or dd to flash onto USB. 4. Boot from USB, configure Persistent Storage if necessary.

Qubes OS: 1. Download ISO from qubes-os.org. 2. Verify using PGP signatures. 3. Flash to USB or DVD. 4. Boot and install onto SSD with LUKS encryption enabled.

Whonix: 1. Download both Gateway and Workstation VMs from whonix.org. 2. Import into VirtualBox or a compatible hypervisor. 3. Configure VMs to only communicate through the Gateway.

---

6. Security Considerations

• Tails: Physical compromise of the USB stick is a risk. Use hidden storage if necessary.
• Qubes OS: Qubes is only as secure as its weakest compartment; misconfigured VMs can leak data.
• Whonix: Full reliance on Tor can reveal usage patterns if used carelessly.

Best Practices: - Always verify downloads via GPG. - Use a dedicated, non-personal device where possible. - Utilize Tor bridges if operating under oppressive regimes. - Practice OPSEC consistently—compartmentalization, metadata removal, anonymous communications.

---

7. Consider

Bootable privacy operating systems represent a critical defense against modern surveillance and oppression. Whether for emergency browsing, long-term anonymous operations, or full-stack digital compartmentalization, solutions like Tails, Qubes OS, and Whonix empower users to reclaim their privacy.

When deployed thoughtfully—with an understanding of each system’s capabilities and risks—these tools can provide an exceptional layer of protection for journalists, activists, security professionals, and everyday users alike.

10. Example: Secure Bitcoin Signing Workflow with Tails

1. Boot Tails from USB.
2. Disconnect from the network.
3. Generate Bitcoin private key or sign transaction using Electrum.
4. Save signed transaction to encrypted USB drive.
5. Shut down to wipe RAM completely.
6. Broadcast transaction from a separate, non-sensitive machine.

This prevents key exposure to malware, man-in-the-middle attacks, and disk forensic analysis.

---

11. Consider

Bootable privacy operating systems like Tails, Qubes OS, and Whonix offer robust, practical strategies for improving operational security across a wide spectrum of use cases—from Bitcoin custody to anonymous journalism. Their open-source nature, focus on minimizing digital footprints, and mature security architectures make them foundational tools for modern privacy workflows.

Choosing the appropriate OS depends on the specific threat model, hardware available, and user needs. Proper training and discipline remain crucial to maintain the security these systems enable.

---

Appendices

A. Download Links

• Tails Official Site
• Qubes OS Official Site
• Whonix Official Site

B. Further Reading

• "The Qubes OS Architecture" Whitepaper
• "Operational Security and Bitcoin" by Matt Odell
• "Tor and the Darknet: Separating Myth from Reality" by EFF

@ 97c70a44:ad98e322

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

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

It uses nostr

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

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

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

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

It leverages nostr

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

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

Some examples might include:

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

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

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

It complements nostr

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

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

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

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

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

It embodies nostr

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

It supports nostr

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

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

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

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

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

Appendix: it smells like a NINO

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

You app might be a NINO if:

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

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

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

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

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

@ 9e69e420:d12360c2

Tech stocks have taken a hit globally after China's DeepSeek launched a competitive AI chatbot at a much lower cost than US counterparts. This has stirred market fears of a $1.2 trillion loss across tech companies when trading opens in New York.

DeepSeek’s chatbot quickly topped download charts and surprised experts with its capabilities, developed for only $5.6 million.

The Nasdaq dropped over 3% in premarket trading, with major firms like Nvidia falling more than 10%. SoftBank also saw losses shortly after investing in a significant US AI venture.

Venture capitalist Marc Andreessen called it “AI’s Sputnik moment,” highlighting its potential impact on the industry.

![] (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/content/dam/business/2025/01/27/TELEMMGLPICT000409807198_17379939060750_trans_NvBQzQNjv4BqgsaO8O78rhmZrDxTlQBjdGLvJF5WfpqnBZShRL_tOZw.jpeg)

@ 866e0139:6a9334e5

Autor: Zé do Rock. Dieser Beitrag wurde mit dem Pareto-Client geschrieben. Sie finden alle Texte der Friedenstaube und weitere Texte zum Thema Frieden hier. Die neuesten Pareto-Artikel finden Sie in unserem Telegram-Kanal.

---

Die neuesten Artikel der Friedenstaube gibt es jetzt auch im eigenen Friedenstaube-Telegram-Kanal.

---

Hallo, mein Name ist Zé do Rock, ich bin Brasilianer und Schriftsteller. Meistens erzähl’ ich Geschichten, reelle oder imaginäre, aber mein neues Buch ist eher ein Sachbuch, eine Art Lustsachbuch. In vielen Kapiteln gibt es was zu lachen, in manchen weniger. Zum Beispiel das Kapitel über den Ukraine-Krieg. Es ist eben so, dass man bei Kriegen eher selten die Lust verspürt zu scherzen. Aus dem Buch schreib’ ich jetzt hier ein paar Artikel.

Das neue Buch heißt „Wo bitte geht es hier zur wahrheit?" Es handelt vom Herdenwissen und vom blinden Glauben, den ihm viele Menschen schenken. Ich erzähl’ ungefähr in chronologischer Folge die Fälle in meinem Leben, bei denen ich in Konflikt mit dem Herdenwissen geraten bin. Es geht um die Stereotypen, über Brasilianer, Deutsche, die deutsche Sprache, die eigentlich nur schwierig aber gar nicht exakt ist, die Gendersprache, politische Korrektheit, Verbotswahn, Sicherheitswahn, Ausländer, Krebs, Corona, und am Ende geht es um den Ukraine-Krieg. Und immer gegen die Strömung.

Damit es nicht zu ernst wird, wird es alternierend lockere Erzählungen geben, meist über andere Länder – ich war in 156 von ihnen – und meist aus meinen anderen Büchern. Die sind meistens lustig. Die lockeren Erzählungen über andere Länder haben nicht unbedingt den Frieden oder den Krieg als Thema, sollen aber ein kleiner Beitrag zum Weltfrieden sein. Je besser man ein Land kennt, desto weniger hat man Lust, gegen das Land Krieg zu führen. Man erfährt nämlich, dass dort Menschen wie du und ich leben.

Das Buch hat eine Besonderheit, es ist in 17 verschiedenen Sprachvarianten und fusionierten Sprachen geschrieben, alles mit simultaner Übersetzung auf Normaldeutsch. In diesen Artikeln werd’ ich auch etwas anders schreiben, und wir fangen mit wunschdeutsch an: Ich hab’ 20 000 Zuschauer in meinen Showlesungen über viele verschiedene Rechtschreibänderungen abstimmen lassen und daraus ein basisdemokratisches Deutsch kreiert. Das ist so wie die Deutschen schreiben würden, wenn sie wüssten, dass sie schreiben dürfen, wie sie schreiben wollen.

Erstmal führen wir eine grundsätzliche Änderung ein, die für jedes meiner Systeme funktioniert. Regel 1: Substantive werden kleingeschrieben. Satzanfang, eigennamen und abkürzungen wie IBM oder BMW bleiben groß. Im englischen werden auch wochentage, monate großgeschrieben, sogar nationalitäten (the Germans), das ist alles im wunschdeutschen nicht der fall.

Und wir fangen mit dem buchstaben A an. Wir fügen A ein, nehmen es weg, oder ersetzen einen buchstaben durch A. In der praxis nehmen wir eine handvoll A's weg: Ich hab’ ein par ale im großen sal gekauft, die werden vom stat subventioniert. Viele leute kritisieren, dass eine reform die etymologie zerstört, und manchmal passiert das, aber oft auch bringt man die etymologie zurück. Das wort „stat“ kommt vom lateinischen “status“, da ist auch nur ein A. “Staat“ mit 2 A zerstört diese etymologie. Oder „sal“: so haben wir „sal“ mit einem A und „säle“ mit einem Ä. Wenn saal mit zwei A geschrieben wird, warum nicht „sääle“ mit zwei Ä? Aber machen wir's doch einfach: „al“ und „sal“ wie „tal“ und “mal“. Wenn der vokal kurz ist, schreiben wir mit einem doppelkonsonanten danach: all, ball, drall.

Außerdem verwend’ ich für fast alle meine systeme die IGEN, Internationale Geografische Nomenklatur, die ich selber entwickelt hab’. Ich ärger’ mich immer wieder zum beispiel bei flugportalen, ich will zum beispiel nach Mailand, im flugportal heißt es aber Milan, Milano, Milão oder ähnlich. In der IGEN schreibt man im prinzip wie die lokale bevölkerung ihr land oder ihre stadt nennt, aber es gibt ein par sonderregeln, zum beispiel für sprachen, die nicht mit dem römischen alphabet geschrieben werden. Jedenfalls müsste der deutsche nicht jedesmal lernen wie er sein land in anderen sprachen nennt, zum beispiel Saksa in Finnland, Niemcy in Polen oder Almanya auf arabisch: es wär’ immer Deutschland. Und Mailand heißt dann Milan, nicht wegen englisch, sondern weil es so im lokalen lombardischen dialekt heißt.

Aber wir backen erstmal kleine brötchen und fangen mit A an. Ukraine gehört zu den ländern mit kyrillischem alphabet, kategorie B. Dafür hab ich feste transkriptionsregeln, und da Ukraina sich im original mit A am ende schreibt, wird es auch in der IGEN so geschrieben: Ukraina, Serbia. Wenn wir zum N kommen, können wir das N von Russland nehmen und Russia schreiben. Nicht wie im englischen ausgesprochen, sondern ru-ssi-a.

---

Und jetzt zum heutigen thema: ich hab eine sendung von Sandra Maischberger gesehen, wo sie Katrin Göring-Eckart und Sahra Wagenknecht interviewt. Die Sahra gehört zu den ganz wenigen relativis, die von den leitmedien interviewt werden. Was sind hier relativis? Ich dachte, wenn ich putinversteher sagen würde, müsste ich die anderen putinhasser nennen, aber beide wörter sind negativ besetzt, und ich will niemanden beschimpfen. Auch wenn ich es für ziemlich symptomatisch halte, dass das wort „versteher“ jetzt negativ besetzt ist. Daher nenn ich die putinversteher relativis, und die putinhasser die absolutis: es gibt nur einen grund für alle übel, und der heißt Putin. Manche werden wahrscheinlich sogar sagen, er ist schuld wenn es regnet. Die leitmedien montieren oft eine sendung, um die wenigen relativis wie Sahra kleinzukriegen: moderator gegen sie, und alle 3 oder 4 anderen gäste gegen sie, und man wird instruiert, sie nicht zu ende reden zu lassen. Warum man sie überhaupt einlädt, scheint mir klar: wenn man die parteien außerhalb des systems vom öffentlichen diskurs komplett entfernt, werden sich viele sagen, ja, mit der demokratie ist es endgültig vorbei.

Bei der Sandra Maischberger war’s aber nicht so. Sie hat manchmal die Sahra unterbrochen, aber die Sahra hat etwas mehr gesprochen als von Sandra erwünscht, es gibt ja die ganzen zeitvorgaben vom sender, OK. Die Sandra gehört sicher nicht zu den hardcore-falken. Aber sie hat der Sahra eine frage gestellt, wieso sie sich geirrt hat – kurz vor der invasion hat sie gesagt, der Putin wird nicht einmarschieren, warum sollte er? Ja, sie hat sich geirrt und ich auch, ich musste sogar einem freund ein bier wegen einer wette zahlen. Und warum? Weil ich schlecht informiert war, und ich war schlecht informiert weil die leitmedien schlecht informiert haben. Bis zum krieg hab ich mich mit dem thema kaum befasst, und alles, was ich wusste, war von den leitmedien. Und da gab es einige versäumnisse: ich wusste nicht, dass die amerikaner eine menge militärberater in die Ukraina geschickt hatten, die ihre camps zu echten militärbasen ausgebaut haben. Dann wusste ich nicht wie die amerikaner schon das land im griff hatten. Zum beispiel der sohn von Joe Biden, der schon mal ein junkie war und angeblich nicht mehr ist. Der war vorstand beim ukrainischen gaskonzern Burisma, von dem man wiederum sagt, dass der heimliche chef Ihor Kolomoisky ist, der wiederum der größte sponsor von Selensky bei den wahlen war. Alles in der familie. Bei Burisma soll es korruption gegeben haben, und der generalstatsanwalt Viktor Schokin hat dagegen ermittelt. Joe Biden hat vermutlich gedroht, das kreditpaket von einer milliarde nicht freizugeben, wenn der Schokin nicht gefeuert wird – angeblich weil er zu wenig gegen korruption tat. Schokin wurde gefeuert, und man versuchte angeblich mehrmals, ihn umzubringen. Der nachfolger von Schokin ermittelte nicht mehr gegen Burisma. Und die Ukraina ist immer noch korrupter als die meisten länder der welt.

Vor 10 jahren war die Ukraina laut Transparency International korrupter als Russland, aber inzwischen haben sich alle feinde Russlands stark verbessert, Russland und seine freunde, wie Belarus, Iran, Nicaragua usw. sind alle in den tabellen gestürzt. Vielleicht wären diese werte etwas anders, wenn Transparency International ihre zentrale nicht in einem NATO-land hätte, Deutschland.

Was ich aber auch nicht wusste, war, und das war absolut entscheidend, dass am 17. dezember 2021 Putin einen brief an die NATO geschickt hat: da waren mehrere forderungen, die auf einen dauerhaften frieden zielten. Im prinzip war die message: entweder wir verhandeln über die Osterweiterung oder Russland marschiert in die Ukraina ein. Am 7. januar 2022, also ein par wochen später, hat die NATO geantwortet: Russland hat kein mitspracherecht in der NATO.

Die NATO schreit in panik, „oh, die ganzen russischen panzer an der ukrainischen grenze! Die russen werden einmarschieren!“ Dann sagt Putin, „leute, wir verhandeln oder ich marschier’ ein“, und plötzlich ist die angst vollkommen weg: dass der Putin angreift, hm, das wird er doch nicht wagen, oder? Ein par tage später gibt man dem Putin eine antwort, dass er nix zu piepen hat, und dann war wieder die stimmung zurück: Oh, die russen werden einmarschieren!

Klar, der Putin musste einmarschieren, sonst hätte ihn die ganze welt nicht mehr ernst genommen, und er hätte sich nicht mehr in Russland blicken lassen können. Also man liefert die Ukraina ans messer, und tut so, als hätte der krieg nichts mit der entscheidung der NATO zu tun? Sind die europäischen statschefs komplett verblödet? Ich kann es mir nur so erklären: Washington, und damit mein ich die amerikanische regierung, den deep state, der militärisch-industrielle komplex und die erdölkonzerne, also Washington hat einfach die parole ausgegeben: Dieser brief hat keine bedeutung, diese "regionalmacht" Russland tut nix. Und wenn du glaubst, ich bin ein verschwörungstheoretiker, weil ich sage, der militärisch-industrielle komplex hat eine enorme macht in den USA, dann kann ich gerne einen amerikanischen präsidenten in seiner abschiedsrede zitieren:

"Wir in den Institutionen der Regierung müssen uns vor unbefugtem Einfluss – beabsichtigt oder unbeabsichtigt – durch den militärisch-industriellen Komplex schützen. Das Potenzial für die katastrophale Zunahme fehlgeleiteter Kräfte ist vorhanden und wird weiterhin bestehen. Wir dürfen es nie zulassen, dass die Macht dieser Kombination unsere Freiheiten oder unsere demokratischen Prozesse gefährdet."

Das war Dwight Eisenhower. Also wir hier in der provinz wissen, was sache ist, und ein amerikanischer präsident ist ein verschwörungstheoretiker, der nichts von den verhältnissen in Washington weiß?

---

Praktikanten und Volontäre gesucht!

Die Friedenstaube verstärkt sich redaktionell und bietet 2 Praktikanten- und eine Volontariatsstelle an. Sie wollen an einer starken Stimme für den Frieden arbeiten, sind technisch interessiert, haben Erfahrung mit und Spaß an Textarbeit? Wohnort egal. Schreiben Sie uns, gerne mit Arbeitsproben: friedenstaube@pareto.space

---

Die NATO-lenker haben nach dem brief von Putin die parole ausgegeben, „wir haben von dieser regionalmacht nichts zu befürchten“, und die europäischen politiker haben gesagt, „wenn der chef das sagt, dann wird es schon stimmen! Keine sorge, ist alles OK.“ Die medien haben schon ein bisschen darüber berichtet, aber die stimmung von den politikern übernommen: „es ist alles im grünen bereich! Ja, ja, der Putin jammert viel wenn der tag lang ist.“ Ich hab nix darüber gelesen, und offensichtlich die meisten, keiner hat mir davon erzählt. Und so hab ich falsch gewettet.

Die NATO sagt, sie kümmert sich um die sicherheit der Ukraina, deswegen muss man über einen beitritt nachdenken. Heißen hunderttausende tote in der meinung der NATO sicherheit für die Ukraina? Wär’ die neutralität gefährlich für das land? War sie bis jetzt gefährlich für die Schweiz, für Österreich? Nein, Putin verkauft sogar verbilligtes öl an sie, wie auch an ganz Europa, wenn sie wollen, um die freundschaft mit Europa zu fördern. Mein land Brasilien ist auch neutral, weder hilft es der NATO noch hilft es Russland. Und Russland ist nicht in Brasilien einmarschiert, ganz im gegenteil: brasilianer dürfen Russland ohne visum besuchen, russen dürfen Brasilien ohne visum besuchen. Es ist doch so einfach: wenn du das andere land gut behandelst, wirst du auch von dem gut behandelt.

Man muss sich das ganze so vorstellen: ein typ lässt seinen hund über den zaun springen, wo er den hasen vom nachbarn terrorisiert. Der hasenbesitzer bittet den hundebesitzer, den hund daran zu hindern, dem hundebesitzer ist das wurscht. Über 24 jahre (hund und hase sind schon in rente gegangen, leben aber noch) werden die proteste vom hasenbesitzer immer lauter, bis er keine alternative mehr sieht, als zu drohen, den hund zu erschießen. Dem hundebesitzer ist das auch wurscht. Und eines tages erschießt der hasenbesitzer den hund. Der hundebesitzer verklagt den hasenbesitzer. Richter, anwälte und das publikum, darunter viele nachbarn, mögen verschiedene meinungen haben, ob das rechtens war, aber in einem sind sie sich alle einig: der hasenbesitzer hat den hund erschossen weil der seinen hasen terrorisiert hat. Die nachbarn haben die proteste und drohungen gehört, alle wissen es. Der hundebesitzer aber sagt, das hat nix mit dem hasen des nachbarn zu tun, der hasenbesitzer hat den hund nur erschossen weil er böse ist und das ganze viertel erobern will. Äh? Man will das viertel erobern, in dem man den hund vom nachbarn erschießt? Man würde sich ernsthaft überlegen, ob man den mann nicht in die klapse steckt.

Das passiert aber nicht, und viele leute im publikum lassen sich sogar vom hundebesitzer überzeugen, dass er recht hat. Nicht, weil er die bessere logik hat – der hat überhaupt keine logik –, sondern weil er alle medien in der stadt kontrolliert, und es wird tausendmal am tag herausposaunt, dass der hasenbesitzer böse ist und das viertel erobern will. Und zurück zu unserer welt: dieser hundebesitzer ist das machtkonglomerat in Washington.

Die USA beschäftigen 27 000 oder 30 000 PR-leute in der welt – je nach quelle – um die politik der USA zu beschönigen, und die politik ihrer feinde zu verhässlichen. Und diese leute, die größtenteils in den USA und in Europa tätig sind, haben ganze arbeit geleistet. Sie haben viele leute überzeugt, dass Putin grundlos die Ukraina angegriffen hat, obwohl schon Jelcin 10 jahre lang und dann Putin 24 jahre lang gegen die umzingelung Russlands durch die NATO protestiert haben. Und klar, man verteilt geld an die medien, damit sie auf linie gebracht werden, man kauft sich über verschlungene wege mit aktien in den medien ein. Natürlich investiert man auch in propaganda in anderen ländern ausserhalb der NATO – es gibt auch eine brasilianische BBC und eine brasilianische CNN – aber nicht genug: in Brasilien ist die große mehrheit der meinung, das ist ein konflikt zwischen Russland und NATO. Ich war seit kriegsbeginn in 12 nicht-NATO-ländern, und viele menschen juckt es überhaupt nicht, ein krieg mehr oder ein krieg weniger. Aber für die meisten, die eine meinung haben, ist das klar ein konflikt zwischen Russland und NATO. Und dass ausgerechnet europäer und amerikaner die guten in der welt sind, das denken sehr, sehr wenige menschen im rest der welt, und das sind 90% der weltbevölkerung. Das ist das schlimmste, diese sicherheit von vielen europäern und amerikanern: die denke ist, wir sind die guten, sie sind die bösen. Fast jeder krieg hat so begonnen und fast jeder krieg ist so am leben gehalten worden, bis mehr oder weniger alles kaputt war. Und das scheint das ziel zu sein.

Übrigens: ich hab mich geirrt, und geb es zu. Die NATO und die NATO-gläubigen irren sich auch mit ihrem wunschdenken, reden aber lieber nicht darüber: man hat mehrere länder in Nahost und drumherum attackiert und bombardiert, angeblich um frieden und demokratie zu bringen, und was hat man denen gebracht? Chaos und eine menge tote. 2023 sollte die frühlingsoffensive der ukrainer kommen, und ich hab nur gehört: „Wir werden jetzt die russen verjagen!" Da konnte ich mir nur denken, „pustekuchen!“ Die ukrainer haben es in 8 jahren nicht geschafft, Donezk und Lugansk zurück zu nehmen, wie lange brauchen sie, um ein 10mal größeres gebiet zurück zu erobern? Die russische armee ist die zweitgrößte der welt, um sie zu besiegen müssten wir auf der Ukraina eine noch größere armee, die zweitgrößte armee der welt aufstellen, stärker als die russische. In der ganzen geschichte der menschheit hab ich noch nie von so was gehört, und das würde viel, viel geld kosten, aber wenigstens hätte man das problem mit den flüchtlingen gelöst, sie würden nicht mehr zu uns kommen, sondern wir zu ihnen, weil man in Europa nichts mehr zum essen hätte.

Das war's für heute. Der nächste artikel ist über die saudie araber.

---

Zé do Rock is vor verdammt langer zeit in Brasilien geboren, hat 14630 tage geleebt, 1357 liter alkohol gesoffen, 940 stunden flöte und 648 stunden fussball gespielt, 200.000 km in 1457 autos, flugzeugen, schiffen, zügen, oxenkarren und traktoren geträmpt, 136 lända und 16 gefengnisse besucht, sich 8 mal ferlibt, ain film gedreet, aine kunstsprache erfunden, fershidene ferainfachte sprachvarianten kreirt, 6 bücha gesriben, hat nix studirt und lebt noch hoite, maist in Stuttgart aber manchmal auch in Mynchen. 

www.zedorock.net

Aktuelles Buch

Wo bitte geht es hier zur Wahrheit?– 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: friedenstaube@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.

@ 9e69e420:d12360c2

Salwan Momika, a Christian Iraqi known for burning the Koran in Sweden, was shot dead during a TikTok livestream in an apartment in Sodertalje. The 38-year-old sparked outrage in the Muslim community for his demonstrations, leading to global condemnation. After being rushed to the hospital, he was pronounced dead.

Authorities arrested five individuals in connection with the incident. Momika's death comes days before a court ruling on his possible incitement of ethnic hatred. The incident highlights the tensions surrounding free speech and religious sentiments, intensifying after his controversial protests in 2023.

Sauce