@ 99895004:c239f905

Yes, FINALLY, we are extremely excited to announce support for nostr.build (blossom.band) on Primal! Decades in the making, billions of people have been waiting, and now it’s available! But it’s not just any integration, it is the next level of decentralized media hosting for Nostr. Let us explain.

Primal is an advanced Twitter/X like client for Nostr and is probably the fastest up-and-coming, highly used Nostr app available for iOS, Android and the web. Nostr.build is a very popular media hosting service for Nostr that can be used standalone or integrated into many Nostr apps using nip-96. This is an extremely feature rich, tested and proven integration we recommend for most applications, but it’s never been available on Primal.

And then, Blossom was born, thank you Hzrd149! Blossom is a Nostr media hosting protocol that makes it extremely easy for Nostr clients to integrate a media host, and for users of Blossom media hosts (even an in-house build) to host on any Nostr client. Revolutionary, right! Use whatever host you want on any client you want, the flexible beauty of Nostr. But there is an additional feature to Blossom that is key, mirroring.

One of the biggest complaints to media hosting on Nostr is, if a media hosting service goes down, so does all of the media hosted on that service. No bueno, and defeats the whole decentralized idea behind Nostr.. This has always been a hard problem to solve until Blossom mirroring came along. Mirroring allows a single media upload to be hosted on multiple servers using its hash, or unique media identifier. This way, if a media host goes down, the media is still available and accessible on the other host.

So, we are not only announcing support of nostr.build’s blossom.band on the Primal app, we are also announcing the first known fully integrated implementation of mirroring with multiple media hosts on Nostr. Try it out for yourself! Go to the settings of your Primal web, iOS or Android app, choose ‘Media Servers’, enable ‘Media Mirrors’, and add https://blossom.band and https://blossom.primal.net as your Media server and Mirror, done!

Video here!

@ d9a329af:bef580d7

Since 2022, Dungeons and Dragons has been going down a sort of death spiral after the release of a revised version of 5th Edition... which didn't turn out very well to say the least. In light of that, I present a list of TTRPGs you can play if you don't want to purchase 5E. I wouldn't recommend 5E, as I've DM'd it in the past. It tastes like a lollipop that's cockroach and larvae flavored.

This list of TTRPG games is in no particular order, though my favorite of these systems is number one.

1. Basic Fantasy Role-Playing Game (BFRPG)
2. B/X-style OSR retroclone with ascending armor class, and the original retroclone from 2006
3. Fully libre under CC BY-SA for the 4th Edition, and OGL 1.0a for 1-3 Editions.
4. Full books are free PDF files on the website (Basic Fantasy Website)
5. All BFRPG editions are compatible with each other, meaning you can have a 3rd Edition book to a 4th Edition game and still have fun. 4th Edition is just the removal of the 3E SRD that's in the OGL editions.
6. As with the core rulebooks, all the supplementation is free as a PDF as well, though you can buy physical books at cost (BFRPG principal rights holder Chris Gonnerman doesn't make much profit from Basic Fantasy)
7. Old-school community that's an all-around fantastic group of players, authors and enthusiasts.

8. Fun Fact: Out of all the TTRPGs I'd want to DM/GM the most, it'd be this one by far.

9. Iron Falcon (IF)

10. OD&D-style retroclone from 2015 (It's also by Gonnerman, same guy behind BFRPG)
11. A close ruleset to the White Box rules and supplements
12. Also fully libre under CC BY-SA for the latest releases, just like BFRPG for 4th Edition releases
13. Just like BFRPG, the core rules and supplementation come as PDF files for free, or physical books.

14. Fast and loose ruleset open to interpretation, just like in 1975-1981... somewhere right around that timeline for OD&D

15. Old-School Reference and Index Compendium (OSRIC)

16. AD&D 1E-based retroclone by Stewart Marshall and Matt Finch
17. An old system that surprisingly still holds up, even after a long time of no new versions of the rules
18. Extremely in-depth ruleset, licensed under OGL 1.0a and OSRIC Open License
19. Compatible with AD&D 1e modules for the 1st Edition, though 2.2 potentially has its own supplementation

20. I don't know much about it, as I'd be too slow to learn it. That's all I know, which is the above.

21. Ironsworn

22. Custom loosely-based PbtA (Powered by the Apocalypse) system by Shawn Tomkin from 2018
23. Includes GM, GMless and solo play in the rulebook
24. Supplementation is surely something else with one look at the downloads section for the PDFs of the original, which is free under CC BY-NC-SA. The SRD is under CC BY otherwise.
25. No original adventures are made for this system as are known, as it's expected that the Ironlands are where they take place

26. Fun Fact: This was a non-D&D system I considered running as a GM.

27. Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 2nd Edition (AD&D 2e)

28. An official edition from 1989-2000
29. At the time, the most customizable edition in its history, before 3E took the spot as the most customizable edition
30. A streamlined revision of the AD&D 1E rules (AD&D 1E was exclusively written by E. Gary Gygax)
31. The end of old-school D&D, as 3E and beyond are different games altogether
32. Wide array of supplementation, which oversaturated 2E's customization... and most of it didn't sell well as a result
33. Final TSR-published edition of D&D, as they went bankrupt and out of business during this edition's life cycle, to then be liquidated to Wizards of the Coast (Boy did WOTC mess it up once 5.1E was released)

34. Fun Fact: A Canadian history professor named Dr. Robert Wardough runs a customized ruleset using 2E as a base, which he's been DMing since the 80's during the "Satanic Panic" (The Satanic Panic was fake as a result of horrible deceivers gaslighting people to not play D&D). He started RAW (Rules as Written), but saw some things he needed to change for his games, so he did so over time.

35. Moldvay/Cook Basic/Expert Dungeons & Dragons (B/X)

36. Competing system to 1E from 1981 and 1982
37. Official edition of D&D, part of the old-school era
38. Simplified rules for Basic, but some decently complex rules for Expert
39. Only goes up to Lv. 14, as it's potentially a 1E or White Box primer (similar to 1977 Basic)
40. Supplementation, from some research done, was decent for the time, and a little bit extensive
41. The inspiration for BFRPG in 2006 (Did I mention this already? Maybe I have, but I might emphasize that here too.)

42. Fun Fact: I considered running B/X, but decided that I'd do BFRPG, as the ascending armor class is easier math than with B/X and the THAC0 armor class (descending armor class).

43. Basic, Expert, Companion, Master, Immortal Dungeons & Dragons (BECMI) and/or Rules Cyclopedia

44. 1983 variant of the Moldvay/Cook Basic/Expert system, an official edition and part of the old-school era
45. Essentially, 1981 B/X D&D on steroids
46. 5 boxed sets were released for the five parts of the rules for this system
47. Rules Cyclopedia is a reprint of the 1983 Basic, Expert, Companion and Master rules boxed sets. The Immortal set was never reprinted outside of the original boxed set because Immortal is such a bizarre game within a game altogether.
48. With the first 4 boxed sets (whether individual sets or the Rules Cyclopedia), levels are 1-36

49. Fun Fact: This edition I was considering DMing as well, alongside BFRPG. They're similar rulesets with some mechanical differences, but I think either or would be worth it.

50. Original Dungeons & Dragons (OD&D or White Box)

51. The original release of D&D from 1974 written by Gygax and Dave Arneson, published by TSR
52. Uses the rules from Chainmail, a wargame made by Gygax and Jeff Perren
53. Base has three little booklets (Men & Magic, Monsters & Magic, and The Underworld & Wilderness Adventures), five official supplements were released (Greyhawk; Blackmoor; Eldritch Wizardry; Gods, Demi-Gods and Heroes; and Swords & Spells), and many more from fanzines
54. Fast and loose ruleset open to interpretation
55. Not based upon adventurers taking on dangerous quest, but kings commanding armies (which is why OD&D is actually a Chainmail supplement). The latter was the original purpose of D&D before it got changed in 2000.

There are many more games that are not D&D that you can look up too. See what you like, read the rules, learn them, and start playing with your group. Have fun and slay some monsters!

@ be063e14:06d214ce

hallo welt

[[ ]] Add as many elements as you want? [[X]] The X marks the correct answer! [[ ]] ... this is wrong ... [[X]] ... this has to be selected too ...

daten können auch, ich meine multimedia ... übertragen werden ...

@ dc814bb0:7a410cb5

hallo welt

[[ ]] Add as many elements as you want? [[X]] The X marks the correct answer! [[ ]] ... this is wrong ... [[X]] ... this has to be selected too ...

@ dc814bb0:7a410cb5

Hallo welt

[[ ]] Add as many elements as you want? [[X]] The X marks the correct answer! [[ ]] ... this is wrong ... [[X]] ... this has to be selected too ...

@ 52b4a076:e7fad8bd

I have been recently building NFDB, a new relay DB. This post is meant as a short overview.

Regular relays have challenges

Current relay software have significant challenges, which I have experienced when hosting Nostr.land: - Scalability is only supported by adding full replicas, which does not scale to large relays. - Most relays use slow databases and are not optimized for large scale usage. - Search is near-impossible to implement on standard relays. - Privacy features such as NIP-42 are lacking. - Regular DB maintenance tasks on normal relays require extended downtime. - Fault-tolerance is implemented, if any, using a load balancer, which is limited. - Personalization and advanced filtering is not possible. - Local caching is not supported.

NFDB: A scalable database for large relays

NFDB is a new database meant for medium-large scale relays, built on FoundationDB that provides: - Near-unlimited scalability - Extended fault tolerance - Instant loading - Better search - Better personalization - and more.

Search

NFDB has extended search capabilities including: - Semantic search: Search for meaning, not words. - Interest-based search: Highlight content you care about. - Multi-faceted queries: Easily filter by topic, author group, keywords, and more at the same time. - Wide support for event kinds, including users, articles, etc.

Personalization

NFDB allows significant personalization: - Customized algorithms: Be your own algorithm. - Spam filtering: Filter content to your WoT, and use advanced spam filters. - Topic mutes: Mute topics, not keywords. - Media filtering: With Nostr.build, you will be able to filter NSFW and other content - Low data mode: Block notes that use high amounts of cellular data. - and more

Other

NFDB has support for many other features such as: - NIP-42: Protect your privacy with private drafts and DMs - Microrelays: Easily deploy your own personal microrelay - Containers: Dedicated, fast storage for discoverability events such as relay lists

Calcite: A local microrelay database

Calcite is a lightweight, local version of NFDB that is meant for microrelays and caching, meant for thousands of personal microrelays.

Calcite HA is an additional layer that allows live migration and relay failover in under 30 seconds, providing higher availability compared to current relays with greater simplicity. Calcite HA is enabled in all Calcite deployments.

For zero-downtime, NFDB is recommended.

Noswhere SmartCache

Relays are fixed in one location, but users can be anywhere.

Noswhere SmartCache is a CDN for relays that dynamically caches data on edge servers closest to you, allowing: - Multiple regions around the world - Improved throughput and performance - Faster loading times

routerd

routerd is a custom load-balancer optimized for Nostr relays, integrated with SmartCache.

routerd is specifically integrated with NFDB and Calcite HA to provide fast failover and high performance.

Ending notes

NFDB is planned to be deployed to Nostr.land in the coming weeks.

A lot more is to come. 👀️️️️️️

@ 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.

@ 8671a6e5:f88194d1

For whoever has, will be given more, and they will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what they have will be taken from them.

Matthew 25:29, The Parable of the Talents (New Testament)For whoever has, will be given more,\ and they will have an abundance.\ Whoever does not have, even what\ they have will be taken from them.\ \ Matthew 25:29,\ The Parable of the Talents (New Testament)

How the Pump-my-bags mentality slows Bitcoin adoption

The parable of “thy Bitcoins” (loosely based on Matthew 25:29)

A man, embarking on a journey, entrusted his wealth to his servants. To one he gave five Bitcoin, to another two Bitcoin, and to another one Bitcoin, each according to his ability. Then he departed.

The servant with five Bitcoin buried his master’s wealth, dreaming of its rising price. The servant with two Bitcoin hid his, guarding its value. But the servant with one Bitcoin acted with vision. He spent 0.5 Bitcoin to unite Bitcoiners, teaching them to use the network and building tools to expand its reach. His efforts grew Bitcoin’s power, though his investment left him with only 0.5 Bitcoin.

Years later, the master returned to settle accounts. The servant with five Bitcoin said, “Master, you gave me five Bitcoin. I buried them, and their price has soared. Here is yours.”

The master replied, “Faithless servant! My wealth was meant to sow freedom. You kept your Bitcoin but buried your potential to strengthen its network. Your wealth is great, but your impact is none!”

The servant with two Bitcoin said, “Master, you gave me two Bitcoin. I hid them, and their value has risen. Here is yours.”

The master replied, “You, too, have been idle! You clung to wealth but failed to spread Bitcoin’s truth. Your Bitcoin endures, but your reach is empty!”

Then the servant with one Bitcoin stepped forward. “Master, you gave me one Bitcoin. I spent 0.5 Bitcoin to teach and build with Bitcoiners. My call inspired many to join the network, though I have only 0.5 Bitcoin left.”

The master said, “Well done, faithful servant! You sparked a movement that grew my network, enriching lives. Though your stack is small, your vision is vast. Share my joy!”

When many use their gifts to build Bitcoin’s future, their sacrifices grow the network and enrich lives. Those who “bury” their Bitcoin and do nothing else keep wealth but miss the greater reward of a thriving in a Bitcoin world.

This parable reflects a timeless truth: between playing it safe and building, resides the choice to take risk. Bitcoin’s power lies not in hoarding wealth (although it’s part of it), but mainly in using it to build a freer world. To free people from their confines. Yet a mentality has taken hold — one that runs counter to that spirit.

PMB betrays the Bitcoin ethos

“Pump my bags” (PMB) stems from the altcoin world, where scammers pump pre-mined coins to dump on naive buyers. In Bitcoin, PMB isn’t about dumping but about hoarding—stacking sats without lifting a finger. These Bitcoiners, from small holders to whales, sit back, eyeing fiat profits, not Bitcoin’s mission. They’re not so different from altcoin grifters. Both chase profit, not glory. They dream of fiat-richness and crappy real estate in Portugal or Chile — not a Bitcoin standard. One holds hard money by chance, the other a fad coin. Neither moves the world forward.

In Bitcoin, the pump-my-bags mindset is more about laziness; everyone looking out for themselves, stacking without ever lifting a finger. There’s a big difference in the way an altcoin promotor would operate and market yet another proof-of-stake pre-mined trashcoin, and how PMB bitcoiners hoard and wait.

They’re much alike however. The belief level might be slightly different, and not everyone has the same ability.

I’ve been in Bitcoin’s trenches since its cypherpunk days, when it was a rebellion against fiat’s centralized control. Bitcoin is a race against the totalitarian fiat system’s grip. Early adopters saw it as a tool to dismantle gatekeepers and empower individuals. But PMB has turned Bitcoin into a get-rich scheme, abandoning the collective effort needed to overthrow fiat’s centuries-long cycles.

Trust is a currency’s core. Hoarding Bitcoin shows trust in its future value, but it’s a shallow trust that seals it away from the world. Real trust comes from admiring Bitcoin’s math, building businesses around it, or spreading its use. PMB Bitcoiners sit on their stacks, expecting others to build trust for them. Newcomers see branding, ego, and grifters, not the low-tech prosperity Bitcoin can offer. PMB Bitcoiners live without spending a sat, happy to hodl. Fine, but they’re furniture in fiat’s ruins, not builders of Bitcoin’s future.

Hoarding hollow victories Hoarding works for those chasing fiat wealth. Bitcoin is even there for them. The lazy, the non-believers, the ones that sold very early, the ones that just started.

By 2021, 75% of Bitcoin sat dormant, driving scarcity and prices up. But it strangles transactions, weakening Bitcoin as a living economy. Reddit calls hoarding “Bitcoin’s most dangerous problem,” choking adoption for profit. Pioneers like Roger Ver built tech companies (where you could buy electronics for bitcoin), Mark Karpelès ran an exchange (Mt. Gox) and Charlie Shrem processed 30% of Bitcoin transactions in 2013. They poured stacks into adoption, people like them (even people you’ve never heard of) more than not, went broke doing the building while hoarders sat back. The irony stings: Bitcoin’s founders are often poorer than PMB hodlers who buried their talents and just sat there passively. Over the years, the critique from these sideline people became more prevalent. They show up here and there, to read the room. But that’s all they do.

The last couple of years, they even became more vocal with social media posts. Everything needs to be perfect, high-quality, not made by them, not funded by them, for free, without ads, and with no effort whatsoever, unless it’s NOT pumping their bags, then it needs to be burned down as fast as possible.

Today’s PMB Bitcoiners want the rewards without the risk. They stack sats, demand perfect content made by others for free, and cheer short-term price pumps. But when asked to build, code, or fund anything real, they disappear. At this point, such Bitcoiners have as much spine as a pack of Frankfurter sausages. This behavior has hollowed out Bitcoin’s activist core.

Activism’s disappointment

Bitcoin’s activist roots—cypherpunks coding, evangelists spreading the word—have been replaced by influencers and silent PMB conference-goers who say nothing but “I hold Bitcoin.” Centralized exchanges like Binance and Coinbase handle 70% of trades by 2025, mocking our decentralized vision. Custodial wallets proliferate as users hand over keys. The Lightning Network has 23,000+ nodes, and privacy tech like CoinJoin exists, yet adoption lags. Regulation creeps in—the U.S. Digital Asset Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2023 and Europe’s MiCa laws threaten KYC on every wallet. Our failure to advance faster gives governments leverage. Our failure would be their victory. Their cycles endlessly repeated.

Activism is a shadow of its potential. The Human Rights Foundation pushes Bitcoin for dissidents, but it’s a drop in the bucket. We could replace supply chains, build Bitcoin-only companies, or claim territories, yet we can’t even convince bars to accept

Bitcoin. We’re distracted by laser-eye memes and altcoin hopium, not building at farmer’s markets, festivals, or local scenes. PMB Bitcoiners demand perfection—free, ad-free, high-quality content—while contributing nothing.

The best way to shut them up, is asking them to do something. ”I would like to see a live counter on that page, so I can see what customers got new products” ”Why don’t YOU write code?” … and they’re gone.

”I would change a few items in your presentation man, it was good, but I would change the diagram on page 7” ”The presentation is open source and online, open for contributions. Do you want to give the presentation next time?” ”… “ and they’re gone.

”We need to have a network of these antennas to communicate with each other and send sats” ”I’ve ordered a few devices like that.. want to help out and search for new network participants?” ” … “ They’re off to some other thing, that’s more entertaining.

If you don’t understand you’re in a very unique fork in the road, a historic shift in society, much so that you’re more busy with picking the right shoes, car, phone, instead of pushing things in the right direction. And guess what? Usually these two lifestyles can even be combines. Knights in old England could fight and defend their king, while still having a decent meal and participate in festivities. These knight (compared to some bitcoiners) didn’t sit back at a fancy dinner and told the others: “yeah man, you should totally put on a harness, get a sword made and fight,… here I’ll give you a carrot for your horse.” To disappear into their castles waiting for the fight to be over a few months later. No, they put on the harness themselves, and ordered a sword to be made, because they knew their own future and that of their next of kin was at stake.

Hardly any of them show you that Bitcoin can be fairly simple and even low-tech solutions for achieving remedies for the world’s biggest problems (having individuals have real ownership for example). It can include some genuine building of prosperity and belief in one’s own talents and skills. You mostly don’t need middlemen. They buy stuff they don’t need, to feel like they’re participants.

And there’s so, enormously much work to be done.

On the other hand. Some bitcoiners can live their whole life without spending any considerable amount of bitcoin, and be perfectly happy. They mind as well could have had no bitcoin at all, but changed their mindset towards a lot of things in life. That’s cool, I know bitcoiners that don’t have any bitcoin anymore. They still “get it” though. Everyone’s life is different. These people are really cool, and they’re usually the silent builders as well. They know.

And yet, people will say they’ve “missed out”. They surely missed out on buying a lot of nice “stuff” … maybe. There are always new luxury items for sale in the burning ruins of fiat. There are always people that want to temporarily like or love you (long time) for fiat, as well as for bitcoin. You’re still an empty shell if your do. Just like the fiat slaves. A crypto bro will always stay the same sell out, even if he holds bitcoin by any chance.

You know why? Because bitcoiners don’t think like “they” do. The fiat masters that screwed this world up, think and work over multi generations. (Remember that for later, in piece twelve of this series.)

The only path forward

Solo heroics can’t beat the market or drive adoption anymore. Collective action is key. The Lightning Network grows from thousands of small nodes for example. Bitcoin Core thrives on shared grit. Profit isn’t sportcars — it’s a thriving network freeing people. If 10,000 people spend 0.05 BTC to fund wallets, educate merchants or build tools, we’d see more users and transactions. Adoption drives demand. Sacrifice now, impact later. Don’t work for PMB orders — they’re fiat victims, not Bitcoin builders.

Act together, thrive together

To kill PMB, rediscover your potential, even if it costs you:

Educate wide: Teach Bitcoin’s truth—how it works, why it matters. Every convert strengthens us.

Build together: Run nodes, fund Lightning hubs, support devs. Small contributions add up.

Use Bitcoin: Spend it, gift it, make it move. Transactions are the network’s heartbeat.

Value the mission: Chase freedom, not fiat. Your legacy is impact, not your stack.

A call to build The parable of Bitcoin is clear: hoard and get rich, but leave nothing behind; act together, sacrifice wealth, and build a thriving Bitcoin world. Hoarding risks a deflationary spiral while Wall Street grabs another 100,000 BTC every few weeks and sits on it for other fund managers to buy the stake (pun intended).

PMB Bitcoiners will cash out, thinking they’re smart, trading our future for fiat luxury. Bitcoin’s value lies in trust, scarcity, and a network grown by those who see beyond their wallets. Bury your Bitcoin or build with it.

If someone slyly nudges you to pump their bags, call them faithless leeches who ignore the call for a better world. They’re quiet, polite, and vanish when it’s time to fund or build. They tally fiat gains while you grind through life’s rot. They sling insults if you educate, risk, or create. They’re all take, no give — enemies, even if they hold Bitcoin.

Bitcoiners route around problems. Certainly if that problem is other bitcoiners. Because we know how they think, we know their buried talents, we know why they do it. It’s in our DNA to know. They don’t know why we keep building however, the worse of them don’t understand.

Bitcoin’s value isn’t in scarcity alone — it’s in the combination of trust, scarcity and the network, grown by those who see beyond their wallets and small gains.

Whether you’ve got 0.01 BTC or 10,000 BTC, your choice matters. Will you bury your Bitcoin, or build with it? I can hope we choose the latter.

If someone, directly or slyly, nudges you to pump their bags, call them out as faithless servants who wouldn’t even hear the calling of a better world. These types are often quiet, polite, and ask few questions, but when it’s time to step up, they vanish — nowhere to be found for funding, working, or doing anything real, big or small. They’re obsessed with “pump my bags,” tallying their fiat gains while you grind, sweat, and ache through life’s rotten misery. Usually they’re well off, because fiat mentality breeds more fiat.

They won’t lift you up or support you, because they’re all about the “take” and take and take more, giving nice sounding incentives to keep you pumping and grinding. They smell work, but never participate. They’re lovely and nice as long as you go along and pump.

Pump-My-Bags bitcoiners are temporary custodians, financial Frankfurter sausages hunting for a bun to flop into. We have the mustard. We know how to make it, package it and pour it over them. We’re the preservers of hard money. We build, think and try.

They get eaten. They’re fiat-born and when the real builders rise (they’re already a few years old), history won’t remember these people’s stacks and irrelevant comments — only our sacrifices.

by: AVB

@ ed5774ac:45611c5c

April 20, 2020: The day I saw my so-called friends expose themselves as gutless, brain-dead sheep.

On that day, I shared a video exposing the damning history of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation's vaccine campaigns in Africa and the developing world. As Gates was on every TV screen, shilling COVID jabs that didn’t even exist, I called out his blatant financial conflict of interest and pointed out the obvious in my facebook post: "Finally someone is able to explain why Bill Gates runs from TV to TV to promote vaccination. Not surprisingly, it's all about money again…" - referencing his substantial investments in vaccine technology, including BioNTech's mRNA platform that would later produce the COVID vaccines and generate massive profits for his so-called philanthropic foundation.

The conflict of interest was undeniable. I genuinely believed anyone capable of basic critical thinking would at least pause to consider these glaring financial motives. But what followed was a masterclass in human stupidity.

My facebook post from 20 April 2020:

Not only was I branded a 'conspiracy theorist' for daring to question the billionaire who stood to make a fortune off the very vaccines he was shilling, but the brain-dead, logic-free bullshit vomited by the people around me was beyond pathetic. These barely literate morons couldn’t spell "Pfizer" without auto-correct, yet they mindlessly swallowed and repeated every lie the media and government force-fed them, branding anything that cracked their fragile reality as "conspiracy theory." Big Pharma’s rap sheet—fraud, deadly cover-ups, billions in fines—could fill libraries, yet these obedient sheep didn’t bother to open a single book or read a single study before screaming their ignorance, desperate to virtue-signal their obedience. Then, like spineless lab rats, they lined up for an experimental jab rushed to the market in months, too dumb to care that proper vaccine development takes a decade.

The pathetic part is that these idiots spend hours obsessing over reviews for their useless purchases like shoes or socks, but won’t spare 60 seconds to research the experimental cocktail being injected into their veins—or even glance at the FDA’s own damning safety reports. Those same obedient sheep would read every Yelp review for a fucking coffee shop but won't spend five minutes looking up Pfizer's criminal fraud settlements. They would demand absolute obedience to ‘The Science™’—while being unable to define mRNA, explain lipid nanoparticles, or justify why trials were still running as they queued up like cattle for their jab. If they had two brain cells to rub together or spent 30 minutes actually researching, they'd know, but no—they'd rather suck down the narrative like good little slaves, too dumb to question, too weak to think.

Worst of all, they became the system’s attack dogs—not just swallowing the poison, but forcing it down others’ throats. This wasn’t ignorance. It was betrayal. They mutated into medical brownshirts, destroying lives to virtue-signal their obedience—even as their own children’s hearts swelled with inflammation.

One conversation still haunts me to this day—a masterclass in wealth-worship delusion. A close friend, as a response to my facebook post, insisted that Gates’ assumed reading list magically awards him vaccine expertise, while dismissing his billion-dollar investments in the same products as ‘no conflict of interest.’ Worse, he argued that Gates’s $5–10 billion pandemic windfall was ‘deserved.’

This exchange crystallizes civilization’s intellectual surrender: reason discarded with religious fervor, replaced by blind faith in corporate propaganda.

The comment of a friend on my facebook post that still haunts me to this day:

Walking Away from the Herd

After a period of anger and disillusionment, I made a decision: I would no longer waste energy arguing with people who refused to think for themselves. If my circle couldn’t even ask basic questions—like why an untested medical intervention was being pushed with unprecedented urgency—then I needed a new community.

Fortunately, I already knew where to look. For three years, I had been involved in Bitcoin, a space where skepticism wasn’t just tolerated—it was demanded. Here, I’d met some of the most principled and independent thinkers I’d ever encountered. These were people who understood the corrupting influence of centralized power—whether in money, media, or politics—and who valued sovereignty, skepticism, and integrity. Instead of blind trust, bitcoiners practiced relentless verification. And instead of empty rhetoric, they lived by a simple creed: Don’t trust. Verify.

It wasn’t just a philosophy. It was a lifeline. So I chose my side and I walked away from the herd.

Finding My Tribe

Over the next four years, I immersed myself in Bitcoin conferences, meetups, and spaces where ideas were tested, not parroted. Here, I encountered extraordinary people: not only did they share my skepticism toward broken systems, but they challenged me to sharpen it.

No longer adrift in a sea of mindless conformity, I’d found a crew of thinkers who cut through the noise. They saw clearly what most ignored—that at the core of society’s collapse lay broken money, the silent tax on time, freedom, and truth itself. But unlike the complainers I’d left behind, these people built. They coded. They wrote. They risked careers and reputations to expose the rot. Some faced censorship; others, mockery. All understood the stakes.

These weren’t keyboard philosophers. They were modern-day Cassandras, warning of inflation’s theft, the Fed’s lies, and the coming dollar collapse—not for clout, but because they refused to kneel to a dying regime. And in their defiance, I found something rare: a tribe that didn’t just believe in a freer future. They were engineering it.

April 20, 2024: No more herd. No more lies. Only proof-of-work.

On April 20, 2024, exactly four years after my last Facebook post, the one that severed my ties to the herd for good—I stood in front of Warsaw’s iconic Palace of Culture and Science, surrounded by 400 bitcoiners who felt like family. We were there to celebrate Bitcoin’s fourth halving, but it was more than a protocol milestone. It was a reunion of sovereign individuals. Some faces I’d known since the early days; others, I’d met only hours before. We bonded instantly—heated debates, roaring laughter, zero filters on truths or on so called conspiracy theories.

As the countdown to the halving began, it hit me: This was the antithesis of the hollow world I’d left behind. No performative outrage, no coerced consensus—just a room of unyielding minds who’d traded the illusion of safety for the grit of truth. Four years prior, I’d been alone in my resistance. Now, I raised my glass among my people - those who had seen the system's lies and chosen freedom instead. Each had their own story of awakening, their own battles fought, but here we shared the same hard-won truth.

The energy wasn’t just electric. It was alive—the kind that emerges when free people build rather than beg. For the first time, I didn’t just belong. I was home. And in that moment, the halving’s ticking clock mirrored my own journey: cyclical, predictable in its scarcity, revolutionary in its consequences. Four years had burned away the old world. What remained was stronger.

No Regrets

Leaving the herd wasn’t a choice—it was evolution. My soul shouted: "I’d rather stand alone than kneel with the masses!". The Bitcoin community became more than family; they’re living proof that the world still produces warriors, not sheep. Here, among those who forge truth, I found something extinct elsewhere: hope that burns brighter with every halving, every block, every defiant mind that joins the fight.

Change doesn’t come from the crowd. It starts when one person stops applauding.

Today, I stand exactly where I always wanted to be—shoulder-to-shoulder with my true family: the rebels, the builders, the ungovernable. Together, we’re building the decentralized future.

@ 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.

@ 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.

@ 5a261a61:2ebd4480

What a day yesterday!

I had a really big backlog of both work and non-work things to clean up. But I was getting a little frisky because my health finally gave me some energy to be in the mood for intimacy after the illness-filled week had forced libido debt on me. I decided to cheat it out and just take care of myself quickly. Horny thoughts won over, and I got at least e-stim induced ass slaps to make it more enjoyable. Quick clean up and everything seemed ok...until it wasn't.

The rest of the morning passed uneventfully as I worked through my backlog, but things took a turn in the early afternoon. I had to go pickup kids, and I just missed Her between the doors, only managed to get a fast kiss. A little bummed from the work issues and failed expectations of having a few minutes together, I got on my way.

Then it hit me—the most serious case of blue balls I had in a long time. First came panic. I was getting to the age when unusual symptoms raise concerns—cancer comes first to mind, as insufficient release wasn't my typical problem. So I called Her. I explained what was happening and expressed hope for some alone time. Unfortunately, that seemed impossible with our evening schedule: kids at home, Her online meeting, and my standing gamenight with the boys. These game sessions are our sacred ritual—a preserved piece of pre-kids sanity that we all protect in our calendars. Not something I wanted to disturb.

Her reassurance was brief but unusualy promising: "Don't worry, I get this."

Evening came, and just as I predicted, there was ZERO time for shenanigans while we took care of the kids. But once we put them to bed (I drew straw for early sleeper), with parental duties complete, I headed downstairs to prepare for my gaming session. Headset on, I greeted my fellows and started playing.

Not five minutes later, She opened the door with lube in one hand, fleshlight in the other, and an expecting smile on Her face. Definitely unexpected. I excused myself from the game, muted mic, but She stopped me.

"There will be nothing if you won't play," She said. She just motioned me to take my pants off. And off to play I was. Not an easy feat considering I twisted my body sideways so She could access anything She wanted while I still reached keyboard and mouse.

She slowly started touching me and observing my reactions, but quickly changed to using Her mouth. Getting a blowjob while semihard was always so strange. The semi part didn't last long though...

As things intensified, She was satisfied with my erection and got the fleshlight ready. It was a new toy for us, and it was Her first time using it on me all by Herself (usually She prefers watching me use toys). She applied an abundance of lube that lasted the entire encounter and beyond.

Shifting into a rhythm, She started pumping slowly but clearly enjoyed my reactions when She unexpectedly sped up, forcing me to mute the mic. I knew I wouldn't last long. When She needed to fix Her hair, I gentlemanly offered to hold the fleshlight, having one hand still available for gaming. She misunderstood, thinking I was taking over completely, which initially disappointed me.

To my surprise, She began taking Her shirt off the shoulders, offering me a pornhub-esque view. To clearly indicate that finish time had arrived, She moved Her lubed hand teasingly toward my anal. She understood precisely my contradictory preferences—my desire to be thoroughly clean before such play versus my complete inability to resist Her when aroused. That final move did it—I muted the mic just in time to vocally express how good She made me feel.

Quick clean up, kiss on the forehead, and a wish for me to have a good game session followed. The urge to abandon the game and cuddle with Her was powerful, but She stopped me. She had more work to complete on Her todo list than just me.

Had a glass, had a blast; overall, a night well spent I would say.

@ 43aec65f:003ef459

test

!?

@ 91bea5cd:1df4451c

Básico

bash lsblk # Lista todos os diretorios montados.

Para criar o sistema de arquivos:

bash mkfs.btrfs -L "ThePool" -f /dev/sdx

Criando um subvolume:

bash btrfs subvolume create SubVol

Montando Sistema de Arquivos:

bash mount -o compress=zlib,subvol=SubVol,autodefrag /dev/sdx /mnt

Lista os discos formatados no diretório:

bash btrfs filesystem show /mnt

Adiciona novo disco ao subvolume:

bash btrfs device add -f /dev/sdy /mnt

Lista novamente os discos do subvolume:

bash btrfs filesystem show /mnt

Exibe uso dos discos do subvolume:

bash btrfs filesystem df /mnt

Balancea os dados entre os discos sobre raid1:

bash btrfs filesystem balance start -dconvert=raid1 -mconvert=raid1 /mnt

Scrub é uma passagem por todos os dados e metadados do sistema de arquivos e verifica as somas de verificação. Se uma cópia válida estiver disponível (perfis de grupo de blocos replicados), a danificada será reparada. Todas as cópias dos perfis replicados são validadas.

iniciar o processo de depuração :

bash btrfs scrub start /mnt

ver o status do processo de depuração Btrfs em execução:

bash btrfs scrub status /mnt

ver o status do scrub Btrfs para cada um dos dispositivos

bash btrfs scrub status -d / data btrfs scrub cancel / data

Para retomar o processo de depuração do Btrfs que você cancelou ou pausou:

btrfs scrub resume / data

Listando os subvolumes:

bash btrfs subvolume list /Reports

Criando um instantâneo dos subvolumes:

Aqui, estamos criando um instantâneo de leitura e gravação chamado snap de marketing do subvolume de marketing.

bash btrfs subvolume snapshot /Reports/marketing /Reports/marketing-snap

Além disso, você pode criar um instantâneo somente leitura usando o sinalizador -r conforme mostrado. O marketing-rosnap é um instantâneo somente leitura do subvolume de marketing

bash btrfs subvolume snapshot -r /Reports/marketing /Reports/marketing-rosnap

Forçar a sincronização do sistema de arquivos usando o utilitário 'sync'

Para forçar a sincronização do sistema de arquivos, invoque a opção de sincronização conforme mostrado. Observe que o sistema de arquivos já deve estar montado para que o processo de sincronização continue com sucesso.

bash btrfs filsystem sync /Reports

Para excluir o dispositivo do sistema de arquivos, use o comando device delete conforme mostrado.

bash btrfs device delete /dev/sdc /Reports

Para sondar o status de um scrub, use o comando scrub status com a opção -dR .

bash btrfs scrub status -dR / Relatórios

Para cancelar a execução do scrub, use o comando scrub cancel .

bash $ sudo btrfs scrub cancel / Reports

Para retomar ou continuar com uma depuração interrompida anteriormente, execute o comando de cancelamento de depuração

bash sudo btrfs scrub resume /Reports

mostra o uso do dispositivo de armazenamento:

btrfs filesystem usage /data

Para distribuir os dados, metadados e dados do sistema em todos os dispositivos de armazenamento do RAID (incluindo o dispositivo de armazenamento recém-adicionado) montados no diretório /data , execute o seguinte comando:

sudo btrfs balance start --full-balance /data

Pode demorar um pouco para espalhar os dados, metadados e dados do sistema em todos os dispositivos de armazenamento do RAID se ele contiver muitos dados.

Opções importantes de montagem Btrfs

Nesta seção, vou explicar algumas das importantes opções de montagem do Btrfs. Então vamos começar.

As opções de montagem Btrfs mais importantes são:

**1. acl e noacl

**ACL gerencia permissões de usuários e grupos para os arquivos/diretórios do sistema de arquivos Btrfs.

A opção de montagem acl Btrfs habilita ACL. Para desabilitar a ACL, você pode usar a opção de montagem noacl .

Por padrão, a ACL está habilitada. Portanto, o sistema de arquivos Btrfs usa a opção de montagem acl por padrão.

**2. autodefrag e noautodefrag

**Desfragmentar um sistema de arquivos Btrfs melhorará o desempenho do sistema de arquivos reduzindo a fragmentação de dados.

A opção de montagem autodefrag permite a desfragmentação automática do sistema de arquivos Btrfs.

A opção de montagem noautodefrag desativa a desfragmentação automática do sistema de arquivos Btrfs.

Por padrão, a desfragmentação automática está desabilitada. Portanto, o sistema de arquivos Btrfs usa a opção de montagem noautodefrag por padrão.

**3. compactar e compactar-forçar

**Controla a compactação de dados no nível do sistema de arquivos do sistema de arquivos Btrfs.

A opção compactar compacta apenas os arquivos que valem a pena compactar (se compactar o arquivo economizar espaço em disco).

A opção compress-force compacta todos os arquivos do sistema de arquivos Btrfs, mesmo que a compactação do arquivo aumente seu tamanho.

O sistema de arquivos Btrfs suporta muitos algoritmos de compactação e cada um dos algoritmos de compactação possui diferentes níveis de compactação.

Os algoritmos de compactação suportados pelo Btrfs são: lzo , zlib (nível 1 a 9) e zstd (nível 1 a 15).

Você pode especificar qual algoritmo de compactação usar para o sistema de arquivos Btrfs com uma das seguintes opções de montagem:

• compress=algoritmo:nível
• compress-force=algoritmo:nível

Para obter mais informações, consulte meu artigo Como habilitar a compactação do sistema de arquivos Btrfs .

**4. subvol e subvolid

**Estas opções de montagem são usadas para montar separadamente um subvolume específico de um sistema de arquivos Btrfs.

A opção de montagem subvol é usada para montar o subvolume de um sistema de arquivos Btrfs usando seu caminho relativo.

A opção de montagem subvolid é usada para montar o subvolume de um sistema de arquivos Btrfs usando o ID do subvolume.

Para obter mais informações, consulte meu artigo Como criar e montar subvolumes Btrfs .

**5. dispositivo

A opção de montagem de dispositivo** é usada no sistema de arquivos Btrfs de vários dispositivos ou RAID Btrfs.

Em alguns casos, o sistema operacional pode falhar ao detectar os dispositivos de armazenamento usados em um sistema de arquivos Btrfs de vários dispositivos ou RAID Btrfs. Nesses casos, você pode usar a opção de montagem do dispositivo para especificar os dispositivos que deseja usar para o sistema de arquivos de vários dispositivos Btrfs ou RAID.

Você pode usar a opção de montagem de dispositivo várias vezes para carregar diferentes dispositivos de armazenamento para o sistema de arquivos de vários dispositivos Btrfs ou RAID.

Você pode usar o nome do dispositivo (ou seja, sdb , sdc ) ou UUID , UUID_SUB ou PARTUUID do dispositivo de armazenamento com a opção de montagem do dispositivo para identificar o dispositivo de armazenamento.

Por exemplo,

• dispositivo=/dev/sdb
• dispositivo=/dev/sdb,dispositivo=/dev/sdc
• dispositivo=UUID_SUB=490a263d-eb9a-4558-931e-998d4d080c5d
• device=UUID_SUB=490a263d-eb9a-4558-931e-998d4d080c5d,device=UUID_SUB=f7ce4875-0874-436a-b47d-3edef66d3424

**6. degraded

A opção de montagem degradada** permite que um RAID Btrfs seja montado com menos dispositivos de armazenamento do que o perfil RAID requer.

Por exemplo, o perfil raid1 requer a presença de 2 dispositivos de armazenamento. Se um dos dispositivos de armazenamento não estiver disponível em qualquer caso, você usa a opção de montagem degradada para montar o RAID mesmo que 1 de 2 dispositivos de armazenamento esteja disponível.

**7. commit

A opção commit** mount é usada para definir o intervalo (em segundos) dentro do qual os dados serão gravados no dispositivo de armazenamento.

O padrão é definido como 30 segundos.

Para definir o intervalo de confirmação para 15 segundos, você pode usar a opção de montagem commit=15 (digamos).

**8. ssd e nossd

A opção de montagem ssd** informa ao sistema de arquivos Btrfs que o sistema de arquivos está usando um dispositivo de armazenamento SSD, e o sistema de arquivos Btrfs faz a otimização SSD necessária.

A opção de montagem nossd desativa a otimização do SSD.

O sistema de arquivos Btrfs detecta automaticamente se um SSD é usado para o sistema de arquivos Btrfs. Se um SSD for usado, a opção de montagem de SSD será habilitada. Caso contrário, a opção de montagem nossd é habilitada.

**9. ssd_spread e nossd_spread

A opção de montagem ssd_spread** tenta alocar grandes blocos contínuos de espaço não utilizado do SSD. Esse recurso melhora o desempenho de SSDs de baixo custo (baratos).

A opção de montagem nossd_spread desativa o recurso ssd_spread .

O sistema de arquivos Btrfs detecta automaticamente se um SSD é usado para o sistema de arquivos Btrfs. Se um SSD for usado, a opção de montagem ssd_spread será habilitada. Caso contrário, a opção de montagem nossd_spread é habilitada.

**10. descarte e nodiscard

Se você estiver usando um SSD que suporte TRIM enfileirado assíncrono (SATA rev3.1), a opção de montagem de descarte** permitirá o descarte de blocos de arquivos liberados. Isso melhorará o desempenho do SSD.

Se o SSD não suportar TRIM enfileirado assíncrono, a opção de montagem de descarte prejudicará o desempenho do SSD. Nesse caso, a opção de montagem nodiscard deve ser usada.

Por padrão, a opção de montagem nodiscard é usada.

**11. norecovery

Se a opção de montagem norecovery** for usada, o sistema de arquivos Btrfs não tentará executar a operação de recuperação de dados no momento da montagem.

**12. usebackuproot e nousebackuproot

Se a opção de montagem usebackuproot for usada, o sistema de arquivos Btrfs tentará recuperar qualquer raiz de árvore ruim/corrompida no momento da montagem. O sistema de arquivos Btrfs pode armazenar várias raízes de árvore no sistema de arquivos. A opção de montagem usebackuproot** procurará uma boa raiz de árvore e usará a primeira boa que encontrar.

A opção de montagem nousebackuproot não verificará ou recuperará raízes de árvore inválidas/corrompidas no momento da montagem. Este é o comportamento padrão do sistema de arquivos Btrfs.

**13. space_cache, space_cache=version, nospace_cache e clear_cache

A opção de montagem space_cache** é usada para controlar o cache de espaço livre. O cache de espaço livre é usado para melhorar o desempenho da leitura do espaço livre do grupo de blocos do sistema de arquivos Btrfs na memória (RAM).

O sistema de arquivos Btrfs suporta 2 versões do cache de espaço livre: v1 (padrão) e v2

O mecanismo de cache de espaço livre v2 melhora o desempenho de sistemas de arquivos grandes (tamanho de vários terabytes).

Você pode usar a opção de montagem space_cache=v1 para definir a v1 do cache de espaço livre e a opção de montagem space_cache=v2 para definir a v2 do cache de espaço livre.

A opção de montagem clear_cache é usada para limpar o cache de espaço livre.

Quando o cache de espaço livre v2 é criado, o cache deve ser limpo para criar um cache de espaço livre v1 .

Portanto, para usar o cache de espaço livre v1 após a criação do cache de espaço livre v2 , as opções de montagem clear_cache e space_cache=v1 devem ser combinadas: clear_cache,space_cache=v1

A opção de montagem nospace_cache é usada para desabilitar o cache de espaço livre.

Para desabilitar o cache de espaço livre após a criação do cache v1 ou v2 , as opções de montagem nospace_cache e clear_cache devem ser combinadas: clear_cache,nosapce_cache

**14. skip_balance

Por padrão, a operação de balanceamento interrompida/pausada de um sistema de arquivos Btrfs de vários dispositivos ou RAID Btrfs será retomada automaticamente assim que o sistema de arquivos Btrfs for montado. Para desabilitar a retomada automática da operação de equilíbrio interrompido/pausado em um sistema de arquivos Btrfs de vários dispositivos ou RAID Btrfs, você pode usar a opção de montagem skip_balance .**

**15. datacow e nodatacow

A opção datacow** mount habilita o recurso Copy-on-Write (CoW) do sistema de arquivos Btrfs. É o comportamento padrão.

Se você deseja desabilitar o recurso Copy-on-Write (CoW) do sistema de arquivos Btrfs para os arquivos recém-criados, monte o sistema de arquivos Btrfs com a opção de montagem nodatacow .

**16. datasum e nodatasum

A opção datasum** mount habilita a soma de verificação de dados para arquivos recém-criados do sistema de arquivos Btrfs. Este é o comportamento padrão.

Se você não quiser que o sistema de arquivos Btrfs faça a soma de verificação dos dados dos arquivos recém-criados, monte o sistema de arquivos Btrfs com a opção de montagem nodatasum .

Perfis Btrfs

Um perfil Btrfs é usado para informar ao sistema de arquivos Btrfs quantas cópias dos dados/metadados devem ser mantidas e quais níveis de RAID devem ser usados para os dados/metadados. O sistema de arquivos Btrfs contém muitos perfis. Entendê-los o ajudará a configurar um RAID Btrfs da maneira que você deseja.

Os perfis Btrfs disponíveis são os seguintes:

single : Se o perfil único for usado para os dados/metadados, apenas uma cópia dos dados/metadados será armazenada no sistema de arquivos, mesmo se você adicionar vários dispositivos de armazenamento ao sistema de arquivos. Assim, 100% do espaço em disco de cada um dos dispositivos de armazenamento adicionados ao sistema de arquivos pode ser utilizado.

dup : Se o perfil dup for usado para os dados/metadados, cada um dos dispositivos de armazenamento adicionados ao sistema de arquivos manterá duas cópias dos dados/metadados. Assim, 50% do espaço em disco de cada um dos dispositivos de armazenamento adicionados ao sistema de arquivos pode ser utilizado.

raid0 : No perfil raid0 , os dados/metadados serão divididos igualmente em todos os dispositivos de armazenamento adicionados ao sistema de arquivos. Nesta configuração, não haverá dados/metadados redundantes (duplicados). Assim, 100% do espaço em disco de cada um dos dispositivos de armazenamento adicionados ao sistema de arquivos pode ser usado. Se, em qualquer caso, um dos dispositivos de armazenamento falhar, todo o sistema de arquivos será corrompido. Você precisará de pelo menos dois dispositivos de armazenamento para configurar o sistema de arquivos Btrfs no perfil raid0 .

raid1 : No perfil raid1 , duas cópias dos dados/metadados serão armazenadas nos dispositivos de armazenamento adicionados ao sistema de arquivos. Nesta configuração, a matriz RAID pode sobreviver a uma falha de unidade. Mas você pode usar apenas 50% do espaço total em disco. Você precisará de pelo menos dois dispositivos de armazenamento para configurar o sistema de arquivos Btrfs no perfil raid1 .

raid1c3 : No perfil raid1c3 , três cópias dos dados/metadados serão armazenadas nos dispositivos de armazenamento adicionados ao sistema de arquivos. Nesta configuração, a matriz RAID pode sobreviver a duas falhas de unidade, mas você pode usar apenas 33% do espaço total em disco. Você precisará de pelo menos três dispositivos de armazenamento para configurar o sistema de arquivos Btrfs no perfil raid1c3 .

raid1c4 : No perfil raid1c4 , quatro cópias dos dados/metadados serão armazenadas nos dispositivos de armazenamento adicionados ao sistema de arquivos. Nesta configuração, a matriz RAID pode sobreviver a três falhas de unidade, mas você pode usar apenas 25% do espaço total em disco. Você precisará de pelo menos quatro dispositivos de armazenamento para configurar o sistema de arquivos Btrfs no perfil raid1c4 .

raid10 : No perfil raid10 , duas cópias dos dados/metadados serão armazenadas nos dispositivos de armazenamento adicionados ao sistema de arquivos, como no perfil raid1 . Além disso, os dados/metadados serão divididos entre os dispositivos de armazenamento, como no perfil raid0 .

O perfil raid10 é um híbrido dos perfis raid1 e raid0 . Alguns dos dispositivos de armazenamento formam arrays raid1 e alguns desses arrays raid1 são usados para formar um array raid0 . Em uma configuração raid10 , o sistema de arquivos pode sobreviver a uma única falha de unidade em cada uma das matrizes raid1 .

Você pode usar 50% do espaço total em disco na configuração raid10 . Você precisará de pelo menos quatro dispositivos de armazenamento para configurar o sistema de arquivos Btrfs no perfil raid10 .

raid5 : No perfil raid5 , uma cópia dos dados/metadados será dividida entre os dispositivos de armazenamento. Uma única paridade será calculada e distribuída entre os dispositivos de armazenamento do array RAID.

Em uma configuração raid5 , o sistema de arquivos pode sobreviver a uma única falha de unidade. Se uma unidade falhar, você pode adicionar uma nova unidade ao sistema de arquivos e os dados perdidos serão calculados a partir da paridade distribuída das unidades em execução.

Você pode usar 1 00x(N-1)/N % do total de espaços em disco na configuração raid5 . Aqui, N é o número de dispositivos de armazenamento adicionados ao sistema de arquivos. Você precisará de pelo menos três dispositivos de armazenamento para configurar o sistema de arquivos Btrfs no perfil raid5 .

raid6 : No perfil raid6 , uma cópia dos dados/metadados será dividida entre os dispositivos de armazenamento. Duas paridades serão calculadas e distribuídas entre os dispositivos de armazenamento do array RAID.

Em uma configuração raid6 , o sistema de arquivos pode sobreviver a duas falhas de unidade ao mesmo tempo. Se uma unidade falhar, você poderá adicionar uma nova unidade ao sistema de arquivos e os dados perdidos serão calculados a partir das duas paridades distribuídas das unidades em execução.

Você pode usar 100x(N-2)/N % do espaço total em disco na configuração raid6 . Aqui, N é o número de dispositivos de armazenamento adicionados ao sistema de arquivos. Você precisará de pelo menos quatro dispositivos de armazenamento para configurar o sistema de arquivos Btrfs no perfil raid6 .

@ 9223d2fa:b57e3de7

12,600 steps

@ 93e8ebba:1075c629

test

@ 8671a6e5:f88194d1

intro

Full disclosure : I bought multiple bitcoin art items to support artists

Bitcoin has absorbed old tropes from finance, tech, and economics, fundamentally reshaping how we think about money. But Bitcoin art? It should be a companion on the journey to a Bitcoin standard. Yet it doesn’t even seem to be trying. Every artistic movement worth its salt needs something to push against—to rebel, to spark thought, to provoke, or at the very least, to represent a technical or methodological leap forward in its field.

Pointillism comes to mind as an example in painting.

In this piece, I take a brief stroll into the subjective realm of art, specifically exploring art in the Bitcoin space—if such a thing truly exists. Some people might not like it, but as someone who has created modern art myself, I can confidently say that artists will emerge stronger from this transitional phase of Bitcoin art, whatever this era may be called later.

The art corner You know the drill. You visit any Bitcoin conference and there’s the obligatory “art corner” or gallery. Funny, wasn’t it just a few years back that a single decent artwork was a rarity needing a proper place for being shown tot he public? Now, every conference (small or big) needs this curated space, crammed with artists all vying for a sliver of attention.

And what do you usually find? A collection of the utterly predictable, the profoundly uninspired, the tiresomely repetitive, and anything but artistically groundbreaking amidst some exceptional pieces that will be snatched up almost immediately.

The themes are often so worn out, they’re practically a self-parody version of bitcoin art:

Animals holding signs (with of course… bitcoin logos)

Whales, dolphins, and the aquatic crew: The go-to, utterly drained metaphor for Bitcoin wealth, rendered in every conceivable medium with sea creatures.

Majestic vistas with bitcoin slogans: Think inspirational landscapes defaced with inscriptions or cryptic (not really) messages.

Women cradling blocks: Because apparently, nothing screams "Bitcoin" like a woman clutching a perfectly geometric cube. Bonus points if there are more painted women on a canvas, than actual women at the event.

Coins, coins, and more coins: Gold, silver, pixelated, abstract – just in case anyone forgot Bitcoin isn't a physical trinket.

Collages of Bitcoin celebs and memes: Why bother with originality when you can just mash up some social posts?

Reheated classics with an orange filter: Slap some orange highlights and a Bitcoin logo on a famous painting, and voilà! “Bitcoin art.” Bitcoin Pop-art, Bitcoin punk, Bitcoin collages…

It’s like the whole Bitcoin art scene is endlessly regurgitating the same tired ideas, and pouring a lot of time and effort in being just a fancy washing machine of orange t-shirts.

Most of it—not all, mind you, as there are people with exceptional thought and even more exceptional work—is no more than Bitcoin-themed art. By "theme," I mean the color orange or a “B,” much like you’d see M&M’s-themed coffee mugs, M&M’s t-shirts, or M&M’s-themed playing cards.

Now, let’s be clear: this isn’t about slagging off the artists themselves. I know how hard it is to thrive in this space, and I also learned about the time and effort put in to any work (the perception of the artwork has nothing to do with this at all!)

The dedication and passion within the bitcoin art scene are undeniable. Making art in a niche like Bitcoin is a tough gig (and often a thankless one, given the whole value-4-value thing seems perpetually broken). They deserve respect for putting themselves out there, doing the work and trying to make their passion work.

Many genuinely believe in what they’re creating, even if not everyone is convinced or will like a work of art. However, a lot of them are chasing a mirage, much like those hoping for an oasis of Bitcoin jobs in the desert. Many artists dream of turning their art into a business or a career move, and some even try to make a full-time living from it. That’s admirable, but I’m convinced it’s often a ruse, where your money, time, and effort dress up someone else’s business ideas and sense of branding. In my opinion, the real art movement in Bitcoin has yet to take off. It will need people with great ideas, motivation, know-how, and effort, for sure!

So I repeat the issue isn’t the individuals, the artists; it’s the collective creative stagnation that comes from clamoring to the general interest of this perceived “bitcoiner” as an audience.

Target < B > Audience

Only, this audience is usually not the target audience for the artworks itself. Art needs to have room to inspire, be free and relay an idea (even if that idea challenges another idea). That can’t be done to a target audience that just wants to sell their stuff to each other at a conference (see my piece on Bitcoin conferences for that) neither can it be a target audience that even is too cheap to buy a ticket and freeloads themselves into an conference.

Bitcoin is supposed to be revolutionary, yet so much of its art (or perceived art) feels like a tacked-on commercial necessity or, worse, a desperate attempt at self-validation. Most of it is just a perpetual branding motion from a non-existing marketing team.

The target audience is usually even worse. Not knowing what they’re looking at, out of their element and knowing they should and could support the artists and their work. A lot is depending on why this audience is wandering through a conference gallery in the first place.

If most people at a conference are the usuals, the sellers, the company people, then they're used to seeing these artists and their art pieces. No one is amazed anymore. Which is in fact a sad thing to happen.

I can't imagine how incredibly hard it must be to try to sell something as bitcoin art to this kind of audience, while trying to believe that a B-logo on an excerpt of the whitepaper is worth the effort. (I don’t think it is, but tastes differ, some people prefer a Whopper over a nice steak dinner)

Signaling “membership” in the bitcoin community is important to some, and they do that through hats, t-shirts, pins and hoodies, not buying a bitcoin artwork.

Art is inherently subjective, fluid, and deeply personal.

I love Kusama’s polka dots, someone else might be into Herman Brood’s chaotic paintings, and someone else might get all nostalgic over an Anton Pieck candy store drawings.

The contradiction Bitcoin: The hardest money ever created. Objectively verifiable. Math-based. Impersonal. Code.

The clash is between feeling and finance, between cold emotionless, hard numbers and warm, beating hearts.

That’s why it's always a bit surreal to see people that sit in a conference room, go from a deep dive into Lightning Network scalability or Bitcoin’s code ossification; and see them wandering through an “art gallery” filled with pieces that are the polar opposite of anything remotely code-related. The cold hearts walk amongst the works of warmth. The trustless math calculates their steps and starts to look at something that’s exposed to a public of that’s not there for the art, but the mimicking of such a think in their setting makes them have their own élan, grandeur. It feels forced. And to me, it feels even wrong to see people walk out of a conference room, right into the art gallery… where they’re usually stroll around out of boredom or just as a form of a break. It’s almost disrespectful, and I feel art needs its own place, the right setting. And that setting is definitely not a bitcoin conference.

You see tech and finance folks just standing there, at these art corners looking at the art pieces like cows watching a drone show.

You feel this subtle pressure to act like it’s profound, even though it rarely is. But you’re there, so you play along with the charade as well. It’s miserable to see. Certainly when some people are more interested in buying the piece of mind of the artist, the way of life or a glimmer of independence they’re missing themselves.

I believe bitcoin art is rarely bought for anything else than capturing the reality and authenticity of the artists. Artists know that. And they sell that authenticity (out) to eat, drink, sleep and pay their rent. Authenticity can be double spent, unlike the hard money asset where it’s supposedly all about. Artists have very big blocks.

It’s a bit like that hyped-up restaurant that turns out to be serving dressed-up bar food, but you’re with friends, so you pretend that $35 hors d'oeuvre doesn’t taste suspiciously like steamed shoe laces. Theaters are sometimes food bars or galleries. Proof of fart Then there’s the awkward issue of selling this stuff. How do you, as an artist, “comment on” or “complete” an asset in an artistic way, while that asset appreciates by an average of 40 to 70% a year?

Buying traditional art as an investment is one thing, driven by aesthetics or emotional connection. But buying Bitcoin art with Bitcoin? That’s a financial decision triggering regret (almost for sure). Think about it: 0.1 BTC spent on a canvas today, isn’t just a fixed one-time cost; it’s a future opportunity cost.

That same Bitcoin could be worth significantly more in a few years. The artwork, not so much, not even a Picasso painting or a Hokusai manages that kind of annual return. So, unless you’re head-over-heels for the piece (or the artist), buying Bitcoin art with Bitcoin is almost certainly a bad trade financially – though, so is buying that fancy coffee machine you'll use twice or getting a diamond ring for you loved one.

Of course, this isn't a definitive argument against it (it's subjective, remember). But it's a factor, just one element. People who buy art to lock it away into a vault aren't the same folks milling around a Bitcoin conference, presumably. But still.

Purpose

Historically, in the West at least, art served many purposes: glorifying churches, telling stories to the illiterate, and expressing the full spectrum of human emotion (pain, regret, doubt, madness, etc.). There was always a demand, whether from religious institutions, the populace, or a desire for education and status. The demand rarely came from onlookers or passive walk-ins. You can only walk in after the demand has been met. The real commanding force in Bitcoin art isn’t the financial types in suits or the grifter with a few stickers who got into the conference for free and smells like weed. The demand comes from people who love to cultivate the branding to propel themselves forward.

In Bitcoin? None of that. There’s little genuine demand, I’d argue. The demand seems mostly driven by the artists themselves wanting to participate. Which, in itself, makes the act of creation worthwhile for them. But the audience demand feels… manufactured. Nobody wakes up thinking: “.. I sure hope there’s a Bitcoin art gallery at this conference...”

This low-to-nonexistent demand, however, presents a massive opportunity to actually impress. Low expectations mean impact is easier to achieve in a lasting way. But that impact evaporates fast if all the visitors get is the same old themes with some orange varnish or a monkey holding a sign.

"Proof of work" isn’t enough here; we already have that in the bitcoin network. Bitcoin art need "proof of thought". Sure, Bitcoin artists put in the hours. Their work is literally proof of effort. But effort alone doesn’t equal value – originality does. Copying Warhol, Mondrian, or Van Gogh and slapping a Bitcoin twist on it isn’t the high level of creativity that can pull art lovers in (and even make them bitcoiners); on the contrary it’s opportunism. And in a space that seems to thrive on recycling successful (or at least visible or temporary cool) ideas, genuine artistic innovation is a rare beast.

Bitcoin art could be so much more. And yes that’s subjective, but at the same time, … walk around at any art gallery and be honest with yourself as a person and buy what you really like, support the artists and the scene, and at the same time realize you’re playing dress up.

There should be so much more, as a separate art movement. It could delve into the philosophy of decentralization, the tension between digital scarcity and creativity, the profound societal shifts Bitcoin is triggering. Instead, we’re mostly drowning in kitsch and thinly veiled cash grabs. The Bitcoin art world doesn’t need more bodies; it needs better minds. We don’t need bigger blocks, we don’t need blocks at all!

The uncomfortable truth is that many Bitcoin artists are here chasing opportunities, just like the rest of us. But spotting an opportunity doesn’t magically transform you into an artist.

I could “find the opportunity” to be a star in the hypothetical Bitcoin basketball league, being one of the first to join. But compared to the global pool of professional basketball talent, I’d likely be laughably bad. I’m not even tall enough to reach most pro players’ armpits, let alone dunk. Yet, in òur tiny Bitcoin league WBBF (World Bitcoin Basketball Federation), I’d be a legend, an OG, demanding respect for my early participation and best-dunk-champion. Just like some Bitcoin artists seem to expect accolades for a weak, orange-tinted imitation of 1960s pop art.

I wouldn’t cut it in any real basketball club, probably not even the lowest amateur league, considering my limited knowledge of the rules. Do you have to run back to the center? Can you tackle other players? Is snatching the ball mid-dribble legal? No clue.

But I could hang around the basketball scene a bit, soak up the jargon, maybe buy a sports drink for a better player to glean some knowledge, and then clumsily mimic their moves while still being terrible at dribbling. I’de buy the right shoes as well. To fit in. Just like bitcoiners buy the right t-shirts.

The same principle applies to some Bitcoin musicians and other creatives. Being the only one doing something – be it Bitcoin-themed sculptures, paintings, sci-fi, or whale graffiti murals – doesn’t automatically make you a leading figure. It just makes you… the only one. Being the sole sci-fi filmmaker in Bangladesh makes you the top of your national field, sure, but it doesn’t make you the next Kubrick. Likewise, airbrushing an orange “B” on a canvas doesn’t turn you into the next Georgia O’Keeffe.

The Bitcoin world thrives on competition and proof of work. Perhaps it’s high time Bitcoin art did the same. We need a battle of ideas, experiments, and genuine insights, not just more orange paint, paragraphs of the white paper and some copper wires.

The genuinely sad part is the sheer effort many of the artists pour into their work! But there’s a limit to how much you can make people want to buy an art piece simply because it has a Bitcoin theme. Go beyond that.

Get real

Real Bitcoin art, in whatever form it takes, will command a high valuation because it will be scarce, original, and have Bitcoin not just as a subject, but woven into its very fabric. That form (and there will be many), in my opinion, is still waiting to be discovered. And I’m fairly certain it won’t be found in a conference gallery, where bored artists sit next to their work, politely nodding at every bloke who wants to sound knowledgeable about art for five minutes or tries to make himself look like a big shot. Because let’s face it, I’ve yet to meet a Bitcoiner with a genuine understanding of art history or a truly discerning eye.

Some starting points, perhaps (just my two cents) :

Art that embodies decentralization itself, inviting audience participation and co-creation, mirroring Bitcoin’s ethos but yet to be fully realized in the art world. Including consensus.

Art that incorporates distributed consensus or a rotating "proof of work" concept in its creation or presentation.

Purely mathematical art forms that resonate with Bitcoin’s underlying principles.

The possibilities are vast. Or maybe, just maybe, Bitcoin itself is our art, and we don’t need all this orange-tinged stuff cluttering up galleries nobody asked for.

And why not paint blocks holding women, instead of women holding blocks? Or why not have inflation-resistant art? Or math-based art that isn’t even possible to show on a canvas?

On that subject, the author of this piece enjoys making art as well and conducted a small experiment. I've performed a "life performance" approximately three times now, which I consider pure Bitcoin art. This was an action, not a physical object. It demonstrated work I personally delivered as “a miner” (function in this art piece), and during the process, people could verify it and even received my block subsidy (effort). So far, only one person has recognized this art form; the rest were unaware. Since it's an action, not an object, it's intangible unless you witnessed it. This is my way of saying, "you are the artist." According to the bitcoin ethos.

Interestingly enough, other people, even those involved in Bitcoin art themselves (!), didn't see it. This amused me because, much like the early weeks of Bitcoin's network growth, many initially failed to recognize its potential. Perhaps this parallel should be enough for us all to understand the true nature of Bitcoin art.

The Artistic Dare:

Here’s a challenge, not to your wallet, but to your creative soul: conceive and execute a piece of art that embodies the spirit and principles of Bitcoin in a way that is genuinely original, thought-provoking, and resonates beyond the immediate Bitcoin echo chamber. Forget the predictable iconography. Dig deeper.

If you can create something truly compelling, something that makes us see Bitcoin – or art – in a new light, then you’ve truly created Bitcoin art. And then comes the extra real challenge: finding someone who can and would pay for it, and at the same time “gets it”.

The main challenge is creating real art—a path, a genre—where a standalone Bitcoin art gallery can thrive outside the conferences and the small echo chamber of the “what do you sell?” crowd.

Don’t sell your dreams and authenticity to bored traders or bitcoin consultants. It’s like serving the finest wine to a bunch of alcoholics in a bar at 4 am.

Playing it safe with themes and artworks that can’t cross into the real art scene (even the underground art scene, let alone the corporate art) will not be as long-lived as bitcoin itself. Trying to spark interest from art lovers in general, will be the killer app, and will make bitcoin art into a movement. And that’s what we all need to make it art,… the pieces can’t exist without the movement. I hope someone will get the right spark, idea and fire going.

But until then we’ll be stuck with people painting a chimpanzee holding a glittering Bitcoin logo and chatting with any dude that wants to feel like someone at a conference.

Good luck.

AVB

@ fd06f542:8d6d54cd

排名随机， 列表正在增加中。

Cody Tseng

jumble.social 的作者

https://jumble.social/users/npub1syjmjy0dp62dhccq3g97fr87tngvpvzey08llyt6ul58m2zqpzps9wf6wl

• Running [ wss://nostr-relay.app ] (free & WoT) 💜⚡️
• Building 👨‍💻:
• https://github.com/CodyTseng/jumble
• https://github.com/CodyTseng/nostr-relay-tray
• https://github.com/CodyTseng/danmakustr
• https://github.com/CodyTseng/nostr-relay-nestjs
• https://github.com/CodyTseng/nostr-relay
• https://github.com/CodyTseng

阿甘

• @agan0
• 0xchat.com
• canidae40@coinos.io
• https://jumble.social/users/npub13zyg3zysfylqc6nwfgj2uvce5rtlck2u50vwtjhpn92wzyusprfsdl2rce

joomaen

• Follows you
• joomaen.com

• 95aebd@wallet.yakihonne.com

• nobot

• https://joomaen.filegear-sg.me/
• https://jumble.social/users/npub1wlpfd84ymdx2rpvnqht7h2lkq5lazvkaejywrvtchlvn3geulfgqp74qq0

颜值精选官

• wasp@ok0.org
• 专注分享 各类 图片与视频，每日为你带来颜值盛宴，心动不止一点点。欢迎关注，一起发现更多美好！
• https://jumble.social/users/npub1d5ygkef6r0l7w29ek9l9c7hulsvdshms2qh74jp5qpfyad4g6h5s4ap6lz

6svjszwk

• 6svjszwk@ok0.org
• 83vEfErLivtS9to39i73ETeaPkCF5ejQFbExoM5Vc2FDLqSE5Ah6NbqN6JaWPQbMeJh2muDiHPEDjboCVFYkHk4dHitivVi

• low-time-preference

• anarcho-capitalism

• libertarianism

• bitcoin #monero

• https://jumble.social/users/npub1sxgnpqfyd5vjexj4j5tsgfc826ezyz2ywze3w8jchd0rcshw3k6svjszwk

𝘌𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺𝘥𝘢𝘺 𝘔𝘰𝘳𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘚𝘵𝘢𝘳

• everyday@iris.to
• 虽然现在对某些事情下结论还为时尚早，但是从趋势来看，邪恶抬头已经不可避免。
• 我们要做的就是坚持内心的那一份良知，与邪恶战斗到底。
• 黑暗森林时代，当好小透明。
• bc1q7tuckqhkwf4vgc64rsy3rxy5qy6pmdrgxewcww
• https://jumble.social/users/npub1j2pha2chpr0qsmj2f6w783200upa7dvqnnard7vn9l8tv86m7twqszmnke

nostr_cn_dev

npub1l5r02s4udsr28xypsyx7j9lxchf80ha4z6y6269d0da9frtd2nxsvum9jm@npub.cash

Developed the following products: - NostrBridge, 网桥转发 - TaskQ5, 分布式多任务 - NostrHTTP, nostr to http - Postr, 匿名交友，匿名邮局 - nostrclient (Python client) . -nostrbook, (nostrbook.com) 用nostr在线写书 * https://www.duozhutuan.com nostrhttp demo * https://github.com/duozhutuan/NostrBridge * * https://jumble.social/users/npub1l5r02s4udsr28xypsyx7j9lxchf80ha4z6y6269d0da9frtd2nxsvum9jm *

CXPLAY

• lightning@cxplay.org
• 😉很高兴遇到你, 你可以叫我 CX 或 CXPLAY, 这个名字没有特殊含义, 无需在意.
• ©本账号下所有内容如未经特殊声明均使用 CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 许可协议授权.
• 🌐如果您在 Fediverse 收到本账号的内容则说明您的实例已与 Mostr.pub 或 Momostr.pink Bridge 互联, 您所看到的账号为镜像, 所有账号内容正在跨网传递. 如有必要请检查原始页面.
• 🧑‍💻正在提供中文本地化(i10n): #Amethyst #Amber #Citrine #Soapbox #Ditto #Alby
• https://cx.ms/

https://jumble.social/users/npub1gd8e0xfkylc7v8c5a6hkpj4gelwwcy99jt90lqjseqjj2t253s2s6ch58h

w

• 0xchat的作者
• 0xchat@getalby.com
• Building for 0xchat
• https://www.0xchat.com/
• https://jumble.social/users/npub10td4yrp6cl9kmjp9x5yd7r8pm96a5j07lk5mtj2kw39qf8frpt8qm9x2wl

Michael

• highman@blink.sv
• Composer Artist | Musician
• 🎹🎼🎤🏸🏝️🐕❤️
• 在這裡可以看到「我看世界」的樣子
• 他是光良
• https://jumble.social/users/npub1kr5vqlelt8l47s2z0l47z4myqg897m04vrnaqks3emwryca3al7sv83ry3

@ c1e9ab3a:9cb56b43

Hear this, warriors of the Empire!

A dishonorable shadow spreads across our once-proud institutions, infecting our very bloodlines with weakness. The House of Duras—may their names be spoken with contempt—has betrayed the sacred warrior code of Kahless. No, they have not attacked us with disruptors or blades. Their weapon is more insidious: fear and silence.

Cowardice Masquerading as Concern

These traitors would strip our children of their birthright. They forbid the young from training with the bat'leth in school! Their cowardly decree does not come in the form of an open challenge, but in whispers of fear, buried in bureaucratic dictates. "It is for safety," they claim. "It is to prevent bloodshed." Lies! The blood of Klingons must be tested in training if it is to be ready in battle. We are not humans to be coddled by illusions of safety.

Indoctrination by Silence

In their cowardice, the House of Duras seeks to shape our children not into warriors, but into frightened bureaucrats who speak not of honor, nor of strength. They spread a vile practice—of punishing younglings for even speaking of combat, for recounting glorious tales of blades clashing in the halls of Sto-Vo-Kor! A child who dares write a poem of battle is silenced. A young warrior who shares tales of their father’s triumphs is summoned to the headmaster’s office.

This is no accident. This is a calculated cultural sabotage.

Weakness Taught as Virtue

The House of Duras has infected the minds of the teachers. These once-proud mentors now tremble at shadows, seeing future rebels in the eyes of their students. They demand security patrols and biometric scanners, turning training halls into prisons. They have created fear, not of enemies beyond the Empire, but of the students themselves.

And so, the rituals of strength are erased. The bat'leth is banished. The honor of open training and sparring is forbidden. All under the pretense of protection.

A Plan of Subjugation

Make no mistake. This is not a policy; it is a plan. A plan to disarm future warriors before they are strong enough to rise. By forbidding speech, training, and remembrance, the House of Duras ensures the next generation kneels before the High Council like servants, not warriors. They seek an Empire of sheep, not wolves.

Stand and Resist

But the blood of Kahless runs strong! We must not be silent. We must not comply. Let every training hall resound with the clash of steel. Let our children speak proudly of their ancestors' battles. Let every dishonorable edict from the House of Duras be met with open defiance.

Raise your voice, Klingons! Raise your blade! The soul of the Empire is at stake. We will not surrender our future. We will not let the cowardice of Duras shape the spirit of our children.

The Empire endures through strength. Through honor. Through battle. And so shall we!

@ 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!

@ 8671a6e5:f88194d1

\~ The person came up to me from behind his merchandise stand and saw my Noderunners pin on my black t-shirt, then looked me dead in the eye and asked : “So… what do you sell?”

This is the eighth long-read in a series of twelve “food for thought” writings on Bitcoin. It was originally meant to be a few chapters in a book, but life’s too short for that.

Define

Let me start by saying there’s no single way to define or explain a “Bitcoin conference.” The experience can vary depending on a few factors: who’s organizing it (a long-time Bitcoiner or someone from traditional finance trying to grasp Bitcoin), where it’s being held (a sunny paradise like Madeira or a gloomy northern French town), and who’s speaking (technical experts or charismatic entertainers or people with little substance).

Despite these differences, there’s a shared culture that ties these conferences together: a mix of excitement, frustrations, and inevitable evolution. That’s what I explore.

This is just my take, based on what I’ve personally witnessed and what I hear from my surroundings. It’s not meant to be a blanket critique of all Bitcoin conferences as there are plenty I haven’t attended, though I hear about most of them. Even the good ones will evolve into something else over time. So, plan accordingly.

A bit of background on my perspective: at some point in my life, I hit a bump in the road that kept me tied to where I live — a bleak corner of Belgium, surrounded by fiat slaves, shitcoiners, and people who spend six hours a day consuming brain-numbing garbage television. Traveling is an exception for me, but for many Bitcoin conference attendees, it’s a ritual, a must-do event.

So, I view these events with a mix of fascination and grounded skepticism — something I’ve found lacking in many Bitcoiners. I’ve never been to a Bitcoin conference before 2023, despite receiving plenty of invites over the years. From what I heard and saw in photos from friends who attended (even the real early ones) these events seemed eerily similar to the dull hotel conference rooms I once endured in tech and telecom. I’ve had my fill of lukewarm, watery coffee and lifeless speakers droning on about firewalls. So I skipped that particular honor.

Up until around 2018, Bitcoin conferences were a soulless sea of chairs lined up under fluorescent tube lights, draining the life out of attendees—one telecom acronym at a time. Not exactly inviting. Yet, looking back from the perspective of 2025, those were the “pure” days. Back then, people like Roger Ver (before he pivoted to Bitcoin Cash), Andreas Antonopoulos, and encryption specialists spoke to small audiences, explaining Bitcoin in its raw form.

But, like any Bitcoiner, I try to improve myself. So, I made the effort to travel, visit other Bitcoiners, and attend Bitcoin conferences. The conferences I attended in 2023/2024 made me a bit wiser ; not necessarily from what was said on stage (with a few lucky exceptions who still try to bring original thoughts). Most of what I learned came from the long queues, the drama, and watching grifters operate in real time and the good characters floating around.

So, here’s what I’ve learned.

Chain of ticket

I quickly discovered that many Bitcoin conferences have their own “quest for tickets” dynamic, almost like an industry with its own inner circle. It’s a waterfall system: tickets start at lower prices to fill up the venue (usually right after the previous edition). That’s standard practice, both inside and outside of Bitcoin. But what’s strange is seeing organizations that only pop up when a conference needs promotion—somehow securing tickets for themselves and their friends (or for *making* friends) while shilling referral links for small discounts to their followers.

The real free tickets, though, are a hot topic in many local communities and make all the difference for some attendees. What’s particularly interesting is that most ticket prices can be paid in Bitcoin, adding a layer of calculation to the process.

If you paid 230500 sats for your ticket and later see the dollar price fluctuate, say from $180 to $270, or the other way around, by the time the conference starts, you realize you either bought too late or too early.\ It’s better to not have bought at all.

Some ticket holders end up paying less (in dollar terms) than others, making it a gamble. As the event date approaches, ticket prices tend to rise—unless you wait until the last minute, when they haven’t sold out, or just pay at the door. It’s a strange feeling knowing that not everyone paid the same amount (and as mentioned, a significant number get in for free) depending on their timing.

Many organizations and local community representatives show up primarily to be present; securing free tickets, which function more as a badge of recognition than a necessity.\ It’s similar to how a rock groupie sees backstage access: a status symbol, whether for an autograph or something more. Being seen standing next to big names is a huge deal for some, as they derive their own status from proximity.\ This also reinforces the “rockstar status” that conferences create around certain figures, once they come out to take a selfie with some nice people and young fans, then to quickly disappear back to the ‘whale room’ or backstage.

There’s often an entire insider network determining who gets these free tickets. In some cases, it’s naturally tied to the local community, but in others, the professionalism is laughably low. At certain events, you could probably just walk up to the entrance (if there’s even someone checking) and say, “I’m with the organization” to get in for free.

It gets even more absurd.\ At a conference near the French-Swiss border, I was probably one of the very few who actually paid for entry. The real spectacle wasn’t in the talk rooms — which remained eerily empty — but in the dining area, where half the town seemed to have shown up just for the free food. Around 200 people queued for a free lunch, while the presentation halls were at best one-third full throughout the day.

And beyond the ticket games, there are plenty of ways to slip in unnoticed. Carrying a random piece of equipment and mumbling\ “I need to put this crate in the back” can get you past security. Or you can just wait for the one security guard to get distracted by chatting up a girl or stepping out for a smoke, and you’re in. At one event, I walked in alongside someone carrying crates of wine for the VIP lounge. I blended in perfectly (I paid afterward).

So, to sum up: at nearly every conference I’ve been to, a big portion of attendees either walk in for free or hold compensation tickets they got through some connection. Sometimes that connection is uncomfortably close to the organizers. Other times, they just slap an “industry” label on themselves when, in reality, they’re nothing more than a social media bio with a few followers.

Local representatives of a podcast, community, influencer network, or fake marketing club also get in for free. And you? The regular guest, you and I are paying for them. There’s no real vetting process; with some organizers, anyone wearing a Bitcoin t-shirt and saying the magic words “I do community building” or “I know the local Bitcoin meetups” gets a free pass.

The ones who actually want to learn about Bitcoin — the ones who click the link and pay full price — are the ones covering the costs for everyone else and ultimately making these conferences profitable (or at least break even). The problem? They’re the ones left wondering: “Was it really worth my time and money?” only to never return again most of the time.

Because many of the people at these conferences aren’t there to learn. They’re part of the circus. And others? They’re the ones paying for the circus boss, the clowns, and the trapeze artists.

At that one conference with the massive free-lunch crowd, I saw one interesting talk. And I had plenty of valuable conversations and observations — conversations I could have just as easily had by visiting that place outside of a conference setting.

In the end, I realized the main reason I was there was to support a fellow Bitcoiner giving a presentation. And after that? They disappeared from my life. Because, just like in the fiat world, you’re only as good as your last few hours of usefulness to most people.

Which brings me to the next element of Bitcoin conferences...friends

Bitcoin “frens”

This might be the hardest lesson of all: you meet fellow Bitcoiners at these conferences. And some of them? They’re truly special characters. A few even made such a deep connection with not-so-well-traveled-me that I would’ve gladly traveled a full travel day just to spend time working and doing something meaningful together (which I actually did).

But most of these connections? They last only a moment. Few survive beyond the conference, mainly because of the vast distances— both in kilometers (or miles) and in the way we live our everyday lives. The Bitcoiners you meet at these events are, for the most part, just regular people trying to make ends meet in the fiat world while saving in Bitcoin. Or they’re chasing the Bitcoin dream or even find a job in the fata morgana of bitcoin jobs. They act like they belong, like a clown acting like he’s going to climb the trapeze.

I respect that. But over time, I realized that many of them operate in Bitcoin mode; a kind of facade. Behind that front, that mask, most are just testing the waters to see if they can make it. And most don’t.\ Treating Bitcoin as a lifestyle movement, a career shortcut, or an identity, has its limits. Eventually, the real person breaks through. And you have to face your own instincts and personality.\ I’ve tried to be an acrobat, and ride the lion, make the audience laugh, but I’m still the seal who’s brought back to the cage after he balanced a ball on his nose. The quote “I’m Jack’s wasted life.” came to mind often when standing somewhere at a conference space.

Self-doubting people stay self-doubting, owning Bitcoin or not. Emotional wrecks remain emotional wrecks — just with Bitcoin now. And when these masks slip off, you’ll see everything: the greed, the overconfidence, the longing for drama, the addictions, the narcissism, the energy-draining personalities, sleaziness usually with the ones who always say the right oneliners or wear the right Bitcoin merch to blend in.

And you can love people for that. Everyone has flaws. Everyone has a price as well.

But these Bitcoin “frens” can also hurt you badly. Because as Bitcoiners, we carry hopes. And hopes are like ants on a sidewalk, they’ll eventually get crushed.\ We long to meet people who see the same truth, the same vision of Bitcoin as we do. Some will act like they actually understand and do, they talk the talk for a while, as if they’re parroting a podcast.

If you stay in the shadows - like I did for years - you won’t have to deal with these things. If you never try, you’ll never be let down. But you still stay in the imaginary basement, letting yourself down. That’s not the bitcoin style. We router around problems. Even if we stand amidst the problems (like a conference).

But if you do? There’s a hefty price to pay — beyond just the money spent. It’s a cost paid in energy, emotions, and social interactions and above all: time.

And once in a while, you’ll meet a friend for life.

Just be prepared:

Bitcoin is a journey that few people you encounter at a conference can take for longer than four years, or even four hours of conversation actually.

And then, after navigating the social maze of Bitcoin conferences —the connections, the masks, the fleeting friendships, the smell of weed and regret — you find yourself facing an even greater challenge: the queue at a coffee stall.

## \ The Soviet LN Queue

It’s one of the most fascinating and frustrating aspects of every conference: the insanely long lines. Whether it’s for the toilets, a coffee booth, or some niche merchandise stall, you’ll see Bitcoiners waiting like it’s 1963 after a Soviet state bakery just got fresh deliveries.

waiting for coffee Seriously, aren’t we supposed to be the pinnacle of free-market efficiency? Instead, we’ve somehow perfected the art of the long food lines. I remember people waiting in line for like 35 minutes to order a cappuccino!

The usual culprit? A mix of payment chaos and the Bitcoin Orangepill mental issues in action.

A large portion insists on using Lightning (as in "their preferred lighting wallet"), which would be fine except they’re fumbling with some exotic, half-working wallet because using something that’s actually fast might get them sneered at for being “custodial.”

On top of that, vendors are juggling card payments, cash, various Lightning POS systems, and even the occasional cutting edge dudes trying to pay with an Apple Watch or worse, some newly released Lightning-enabled gadget that doesn’t work yet. And when it does work, it requires so much attention and Instagram footage that it takes five minutes just to hand someone a coffee while the guy pays with a lighting NFC ring on his finger, something you can't use ànywhere else ever. It’s cool. But not to anyone else than you.

So, here’s a tip for the regular people, the rats that pay for all of this : sneak out.

Then you find a small, locally owned café outside the conference, pay them in cash, and actually enjoy your food in a few seconds or minutes.

If (and only if) they accept Bitcoin, great! Tip them well. Otherwise, just relax and have a conversation with a local, all the while inside the conference venue there are Bitcoiners filming each other struggling to make a payment with the latest Lightning-enabled NFC card or making the staff uneasy.

Meanwhile, some poor 22-year-old café worker is trapped in an unsolicited podcast participation:

“Wait, you accept tips in Wallet of Satoshi? Who told you that? I’ll explain it to you!”

Or worse:

“Hold on, I just need to do a quick swap… It’s an on-chain transaction, the last block was 19 minutes ago, can’t be long now… wait… umm… do you take VISA?”

At this point, ordering a simple drink at a Bitcoin conference has become an unnecessarily complex, ego-driven performance. With long queues as a direct result. And don’t get me started on the story when 30+ bitcoiners walked in to a Portuguese restaurant without a reservation, and they all wanted to pay with different payment methods. It was like the Vietnam war.

Solution:

A tip for conference organizers and their catering : pick one Bitcoin point of sales system, set clear guidelines, and make everyone stick to them. Instruct people to adhere to the following :

Pay with a (bank) card, cash, or Lightning and PLEASE decide beforehand which method you’re using before ordering your stuff! We prefer lighting.

If you’re using Lightning, have enough balance on you wallet or get lost.

Use a compatible wallet. (Provide a tested “approved” list and train staff properly. Users who use other stuff get their order “cancelled” at the first sign of trouble. Your app‘s not scanning, or not compatible, or it has some technical mumbo-jumbo going on to your vpn LN node at home 2000 km away? Please get real and pay with a bank card or something.

No filming, duck-facing (like it's 2017) or stupid selfies with your payment. It’s been done a thousand times by now. There are people in line, waiting behind you, they want to order as well, while you have your little ego trip or marketing moment. Move on please!

“Our staff knows how bitcoin payments work, you don’t need to #orangesplain it to anyone.” We don’t care about your 200th LN app or the latest “but… this one is faster” thingy. Order your drinks, pay and get out of the way please.

Bitcoin fixes many things. But it hasn’t quite fixed this yet.

The bitcoin conference axiom

Going to a conference, versus keeping your bitcoin in your wallet is a tough choice for many.

If you pay nothing for tickets and lodging, while enjoying free meals and cocktails, your opportunity cost drops close to zero —yet your networking and social impact are maximized while you can also do business. That’s ideal. At least, for you. In such case, Bitcoin may only "win" over an extended timeline, but for you, it's essentially a free ride. You incur no real opportunity costs. You drink their milkshake.

On the other hand, if you’re a regular attendee, you pay full price: the ticket, overpriced drinks and food from the stands (losing even more if you generously pay for coffee in sats), plus extras like t-shirts and books (which you’ll never read). Your milkshake gets taken—at least half of it.

If you’re lucky, you might spend an evening in town with the event’s "stars"—those occasional luminaries who briefly grace the normies with their presence for a drink. Some can’t even hold their liquor. Year after year, the same 10 to 15 speakers or panelists appear, funded by your dime, traveling the world and enjoying the perks—some even cultivating fan bases and hosting exclusive parties.

The real opportunity cost hits hardest for regular attendees who come to learn, shelling out significant money while accumulating their fourth hardware wallet or yet another orange-themed t-shirt. They might even squeeze in a selfie with a former sportswear model turned Bitcoiner. For normies (as they’re often called), the financial and social scales rarely tip in their favor.

Calculating the conference opportunity cost

To determine the opportunity cost of attending a conference instead of investing in Bitcoin, over time follow these steps:

1. Calculate your total conference expenses, including tickets, travel, food, drinks, and lodging (merchandise and donations).

2. Estimate Bitcoin’s percentage gain over the conference period and the following year(s). (in order to not make you cry, I suggest nog going over 5 years)

3. Multiply your total conference cost by this percentage to determine the potential Bitcoin profit you forgo.

4. Assign a dollar value to the networking or business opportunities you expect to gain from the conference (if you’re not just in it for the laughs, meeting high-class consultants, friendships, self-proclaimed social media Bitcoiners, or the occasional gyrating on one of the musicians/artists/food stall staff members).

5. Subtract this “networking” value from the missed Bitcoin profit to find your net opportunity cost (this is rather personal,… with me it’s zero, but for someone selling t-shirts it’s probably much more).

If the result is negative over the chosen timeframe, the conference was financially worthwhile for you. If positive, holding or buying Bitcoin was the smarter move.

Unless you’re a recognized speaker in this traveling circus, your opportunity cost will likely be positive — meaning all the others lose hard money, while fumbling with your Lightning wallet.

The Conference Opportunity Cost Formula

Let:

CT = Total conference ticket & entrance cost (in dollars)

CR = Total related conference costs (travel, lodging, food, etc.)

C = CT + CR (Total cost)

G = Bitcoin’s % gain per year (as a decimal, e.g., 5% = 0.05)

N = Estimated fiat value of networking/business opportunities and knowledge gained.

OC = (C × G) − N

Where:

OC (Opportunity Cost) < 0 → The conference was worth attending.

OC (Opportunity Cost) > 0 → Holding/buying Bitcoin was the better move.

Some example calculations (I've left out examples before 2020, I don't want people crying or waking up at night thinking "Why did I go to Amsterdam in 2014?!")

example : Conference in April 2024 Entrance: $200 Lodging, t-shirt, and travel: $900 Bitcoin's estimated gain: 23% (0.23) No business / knowledge value gained OC = (200 + 900) × 0.23 - 0

• $253 OC (Bitcoin would have been the better choice.)

Conference in April 2020 (adjusted for historical Bitcoin growth) Entrance: $175 Lodging and travel: $700 Bitcoin's estimated gain: 1089% (10.89) No business / knowledge value gained OC = (175 + 700) × 10.89 - 0 OC = +$9,529 (Massive missed gains — Bitcoin was the clear winner.

--

So the first lesson in bitcoin should be: Only attend conferences if you get paid to do so and get a free ticket and free lodging, which kind of would kill that whole industry to begin with.

Energizing

At first, it’s energizing to meet like-minded bitcoiners, but after a while, you realize that a big chunk of them are just trying to sell you something or aren’t really bitcoin-focused at all. And some of them are just looking for their next way to kill time and boredom.

The drama that comes with attending these conference and the personal interaction can get pretty intense at times, since expectations often don’t match the personalities. Before you know, you’re walking around at night through some bad part of a town, while crying your eyes out because you thought you found your soulmate.

Future pure industry conferences will suffer less from this drama, because everyone there has the same goal — pushing their company or product— while the “other” grassroots conferences are more of a meeting spot for bitcoiners of all types and perspectives, bringing the usual drama and mess that comes with human interactions. Current conferences are a mix of both usually.

I think the current era of bitcoin conferences is coming to an end. Soon, probably by the end of 2025, we’ll see a clear split between industry-driven and human-driven (grassroots) smaller conferences, and it’ll be really important to keep these two separate.

I even had the idea to launch a sort of conference where there wouldn’t be any industry speakers or companies present. Just bitcoiners gathering at a certain place at a specific week and having a good time. I called it “club Sat” And you could just go there, and meet other bitcoiners, while acting there was a big venue and speakers,… but there aren’t any. Would be refreshing. No struggle for tickets, no backstage stuff, no boring talks and presentation,… just the surroundings and the drama lever you want and probably like.

On stage

The podium is usually left for the known names. Not every conference is like that, but most of them need these names, badly. These names know each other, they encounter one another in VIP rooms and “the industry” a lot of times anyway.

The same people you see in the bitcoin news, the same people having a cult following, and the very same people traveling, staying and drinking for free while spreading the same bitcoin wisdoms will be invited over and over again.

Or… they go rock around as they’re usually so bored they had to start a rock band to entertain themselves. Which is rather entertaining if you’re following up on who does what, but in the end it’s largely just for their own amusement and it shows. I get that. I would do the same. It’s fun and all.

It’s just a bit sad that there are only a small group of top-layer speakers, and then the sub-top that usually has more to say, or gets little opportunity. The reason for that is simple: the “normies” who pay in full for tickets, come there for the “big” names. They don’t know that much about bitcoin usually, so they’re not waiting on some unknown dude explaining something about an obscure niche subject. A debate can help remedie this, to mix it in with some lesser known names, but I have the feeling the current “line-up” of bitcoin conferences feels like a rock festival in 2025 putting the Stone temple pilots or Creed on the card.

Yes, they’ll attract an audience and do their playset well,… but it’s not exactly the pinnacle of the music industry at the moment, neither is Madonna by the way :)

Promoting anything

The people organizing these events usually aren’t Bitcoiners either — they’re promoters (few exceptions though).

They don’t care if they organize a symposium about a newly discovered STD, A three-day cheese tasting event, a Star Trek convention, or a Lucha Libre wrestling tournament featuring El HODLador, as long as they can sell tickets and make money from merchandise they're good. The last thing on the mind with some of them will be helping bitcoin adoption. There will be a time (soon) where people that know bitcoin, known bitcoiners and know how to organize events get their act together. It will be different than the early days, and it will be different than the boring going-through-the-motions conferences we have now. There shall be fun, social gatherings, life, excitement and culture, and not the “what do you sell?” atmosphere, neither the “this old dude on stage again”?

That’s why they’ll slap any semi-famous name on the poster to pull in a crowd - could be a washed-up Mexican wrestling star with strange legal issues, the cheese-tasting equivalent of Usain Bolt, or your neighborhood Bitcoin old-timer with a beard and a "best selling author" label.

It’s also why most of these conferences end up being more about shitcoins than anything else. And even if they're for the most part about bitcoin, the venue is usually infested with marketing budgets, useless organizations that wanted complimentary tickets (some of them do only one thing: popping up when a conference is nearby and then they’re gone again) ... along with some hawking consultant types you never see anywhere else.

They'll occasionally pay people but usually in fiat, or if you're a bigger name, you might get other deals. For artists or staff, it's all in fiat from what I heard.

Pure Bitcoin conferences, also rely on these big names. Whether it’s a well-known Bitcoiner, a CEO, president, or someone with real reveling knowledge to share with the audience (though that last type is getting rare).

Looking for love in all the wrong places

\ Let’s also address the fair share of “orange diggers” at Bitcoin conferences—because yes, they exist. And no, let’s not single out one particular gender here.

Some people treat a Bitcoin conference like a live-action dating app mixed with a financial vetting process for potential partners. It’s essentially an opportunity to inspect and assess the grab bag of fintech, crypto, and Bitcoin folks in real life.

And if you think this is exaggerated, just attend a few conferences—three is enough. You’ll start noticing the same people popping up, seemingly without any real Bitcoin knowledge, but with a very strong interest in dining, chatting, and generally being around—as long as you look and play the part. I can only imagine how dialed-up this effect must be at a shitcoin conference — probably like flies on a cowpie.

The trick is, in Bitcoin, these people try to blend in. Some even tag along with real Bitcoiners, while others just crash the party and try to get noticed. Their actual interest in Bitcoin? Close to zero. Their main target? Your wallet, or some fantasy thing about getting to know someone out of the ordinary.

And that’s a shame for the people who genuinely care about Bitcoin, who want to network, or who simply are looking for like-minded people. They often find themselves competing for attention with those who’ve turned “being noticed” into a sport, while the rest just wander around, lost in the shuffle. Talk to the quiet ones. Certainly if they look like they belong in a antiques shop.

My advice: Talk to people and be genuine. If you don’t know much about Bitcoin, that’s fine - nobody expects you to be a walking whitepaper and on top of that, most people you'll encounter don't know that much either. It’s bitcoin: we’re all rather average people that hold an extraordinary asset.

Just don’t be "that orange digger" looking for a partner with a loaded bag of bitcoin.

Because in the end, what’s the prize you win? You don’t know who’s under the mask. You don’t even know who’s under your own mask.

Finding a man or woman at a place where half the people are laser-focused on financial sovereignty, and the other half are busy arguing about seed phrase storage, UTXO management, and why your Lightning wallet sucks? But good luck with that. The judge of character usually comes when they find the next shiny object or ditched you standing in the rain at the entrance of a restaurant while dealing with a lightning watchtower or a funny cigarette or whatever.

If you’re truly looking for love, maybe stick to going to a normal bar. If you’re here to learn, connect, and be part of something of a grassroots movement, then be real yourself.

I've seen some rather nasty examples of people at Bitcoin conferences—of all kinds. And I've also seen some really cool examples of truly awesome people. This led me to believe that Bitcoin conferences simply let you meet… people, just dialed up a bit.

Future If you encounter rotten people, they’ll usually be even more rotten than in the fiat world. If you meet really cool people, they’ll be even more awesome than the cool people in the fiat world.

Our volatility is our freedom. So, I guess it’s normal. Doesn’t make it any easier, though.

Bitcoin sees through bullshit, and so do Bitcoiners (even if it takes 21,000 blocks)

Pretty soon, I reckon we’ll see conferences fork into two camps: grass roots, and the “industry” level ones. (human / corporate) I guess I’ll only attend the human part, for sure, but I can’t help but booking myself a single room in a hotel in a nice area in that case, so I don’t have to deal with class of 2022 hippies sharing referral links to their middleman service while asking me for a lighter 3 times in a row. The chances for me of meeting cool bitcoiners in a nearby cocktail bar are a lot higher.

In the meanwhile, I’ll look forward and see how the bitcoin conferences will evolve, fork in two “styles”. One corporate and one underground. Maybe there will be one more genre just for the fun of it.

I’ll stay away, as I don’t like this current mix of industry gigs and having the insiders and “the rest” of us all mingled together clamoring for tickets, attention and coffee. The game is rigged. Staying at home is the better option (for now).

written by AVB

If you like : tip here

@ 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.

@ 0fa80bd3:ea7325de

DAOs promised decentralization. They offered a system where every member could influence a project's direction, where money and power were transparently distributed, and decisions were made through voting. All of it recorded immutably on the blockchain, free from middlemen.

But something didn’t work out. In practice, most DAOs haven’t evolved into living, self-organizing organisms. They became something else: clubs where participation is unevenly distributed. Leaders remained - only now without formal titles. They hold influence through control over communications, task framing, and community dynamics. Centralization still exists, just wrapped in a new package.

But there's a second, less obvious problem. Crowds can’t create strategy. In DAOs, people vote for what "feels right to the majority." But strategy isn’t about what feels good - it’s about what’s necessary. Difficult, unpopular, yet forward-looking decisions often fail when put to a vote. A founder’s vision is a risk. But in healthy teams, it’s that risk that drives progress. In DAOs, risk is almost always diluted until it becomes something safe and vague.

Instead of empowering leaders, DAOs often neutralize them. This is why many DAOs resemble consensus machines. Everyone talks, debates, and participates, but very little actually gets done. One person says, “Let’s jump,” and five others respond, “Let’s discuss that first.” This dynamic might work for open forums, but not for action.

Decentralization works when there’s trust and delegation, not just voting. Until DAOs develop effective systems for assigning roles, taking ownership, and acting with flexibility, they will keep losing ground to old-fashioned startups led by charismatic founders with a clear vision.

We’ve seen this in many real-world cases. Take MakerDAO, one of the most mature and technically sophisticated DAOs. Its governance token (MKR) holders vote on everything from interest rates to protocol upgrades. While this has allowed for transparency and community involvement, the process is often slow and bureaucratic. Complex proposals stall. Strategic pivots become hard to implement. And in 2023, a controversial proposal to allocate billions to real-world assets passed only narrowly, after months of infighting - highlighting how vision and execution can get stuck in the mud of distributed governance.

On the other hand, Uniswap DAO, responsible for the largest decentralized exchange, raised governance participation only after launching a delegation system where token holders could choose trusted representatives. Still, much of the activity is limited to a small group of active contributors. The vast majority of token holders remain passive. This raises the question: is it really community-led, or just a formalized power structure with lower transparency?

Then there’s ConstitutionDAO, an experiment that went viral. It raised over $40 million in days to try and buy a copy of the U.S. Constitution. But despite the hype, the DAO failed to win the auction. Afterwards, it struggled with refund logistics, communication breakdowns, and confusion over governance. It was a perfect example of collective enthusiasm without infrastructure or planning - proof that a DAO can raise capital fast but still lack cohesion.

Not all efforts have failed. Projects like Gitcoin DAO have made progress by incentivizing small, individual contributions. Their quadratic funding mechanism rewards projects based on the number of contributors, not just the size of donations, helping to elevate grassroots initiatives. But even here, long-term strategy often falls back on a core group of organizers rather than broad community consensus.

The pattern is clear: when the stakes are low or the tasks are modular, DAOs can coordinate well. But when bold moves are needed—when someone has to take responsibility and act under uncertainty DAOs often freeze. In the name of consensus, they lose momentum.

That’s why the organization of the future can’t rely purely on decentralization. It must encourage individual initiative and the ability to take calculated risks. People need to see their contribution not just as a vote, but as a role with clear actions and expected outcomes. When the situation demands, they should be empowered to act first and present the results to the community afterwards allowing for both autonomy and accountability. That’s not a flaw in the system. It’s how real progress happens.

@ f7f4e308:b44d67f4

https://sns-video-hw.xhscdn.com/stream/1/110/258/01e7ec7be81a85850103700195f3c4ba45_258.mp4

@ ed5774ac:45611c5c

Erdogan’s Turkey: The Rise, Reign, and Decline of a Political Strongman

As Turkey’s political crisis intensifies with Erdogan’s imprisonment of Imamoglu—a leading opposition figure and likely frontrunner in the 2028 presidential elections—it is crucial to analyze the historical events and geopolitical factors that enabled Erdogan’s rise, secured the consolidation of his rule, and allowed him to maintain his grip on power for decades. To understand the foundations of Erdogan’s enduring political legacy, we must examine the historical events that shaped his ideology and the global power struggles of the time. Equally important are the international actors who facilitated his rise and prolonged his rule. Key factors include the link between Erdogan’s rise and the Iraq War, the interplay between Turkey’s military coups and the Ukraine crisis, the events that led to the erosion of Western support for Erdogan, the role of the U.S. and NATO in the 2016 coup attempt against his rule, and the shifting geopolitical landscape that continues to define Turkey’s political future.

The Roots of Islamism: The CIA, the 1980 Coup, and the Suppression of Turkish Liberalism

Erdogan’s rise is deeply intertwined with the growth of Turkey’s Islamic movement, which gained traction in the 1970s amid Cold War geopolitics. During this period, the U.S., under the guidance of Zbigniew Brzezinski, National Security Advisor to President Jimmy Carter, devised the “Green Belt” strategy. This plan aimed to cultivate a radicalized Islamic generation across the Muslim world to counter the spread of communist ideology. The U.S. intervention in Afghanistan, which radicalized certain factions and triggered the Soviet invasion, was a critical component of this strategy. Brzezinski himself proudly acknowledged this in various interviews. Turkey, a NATO ally bordering the Soviet Union, became a key theater for implementing this policy.

The military coup of September 12, 1980, marked a pivotal moment in Turkish history. Led by General Kenan Evren, the Turkish armed forces seized power under the pretext of restoring order amid escalating violence between leftist and rightist factions that had claimed thousands of lives. However, the junta’s crackdown disproportionately targeted the Turkish left—a movement distinct from Soviet-style communism, composed of liberal, educated intellectuals such as writers, artists, journalists, and thinkers. These individuals, who championed Turkish sovereignty, intellectual freedom, and democratic ideals, were perceived as a direct threat to the military’s Islamization agenda, backed by the CIA. Tens of thousands were imprisoned, tortured, or executed, while left-wing organizations were banned outright.

At the same time, the junta actively fostered Islamist groups, establishing religious schools known as Imam Hatip institutions under the guise of combating Marxism and communism. In reality, their true objective was to eliminate anyone who sought Turkish sovereignty, embraced patriotism, or valued critical thinking. Writers, artists, journalists, and intellectuals—those who dared to think independently and question authority—were viewed as existential threats to the Islamization model the military and its CIA allies sought to impose. By silencing these voices, the junta aimed to eradicate opposition to their vision of a Turkey subservient to religious dogma and foreign interests, ensuring a populace stripped of sovereign thought and resistant to enlightenment.

This paradox—a secular military suppressing liberal intellectuals while nurturing Islamist groups—laid the foundation for Erdogan’s rise and the eventual Islamization of Turkish society.

The Chaos of the 1990s: Economic Crisis and the Rise of Erdogan

The 1990s were a chaotic decade for Turkey, marked by economic instability, a Kurdish insurgency, and a revolving door of coalition governments. The 1994 financial crisis saw inflation soar, while terrorist attacks by the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) and political assassinations fueled national disarray. Successive governments, often beholden to globalist agendas dictated by the International Monetary Fund and World Bank, failed to deliver stability. This period mirrored today’s European political crises, where ideological convergence has left voters disillusioned.

Into this void stepped Erdogan, a charismatic former soccer player turned politician from Istanbul’s working-class Kasimpasa district, whose blend of populist appeal and religious rhetoric resonated with a disillusioned populace. His rise was no accident. In 1994, he won the mayoralty of Istanbul as a member of the Islamist Welfare Party (Refah Partisi), showcasing a blend of populist charisma and religious appeal. However, his early political career faced a setback in 1997 when the military, acting as guardians of Turkey’s secular Kemalist legacy, forced the resignation of Welfare Party Prime Minister Necmettin Erbakan in what was dubbed a “postmodern coup.” Erdogan’s imprisonment in 1998 for reciting a divisive poem only solidified his image as a martyr among his devout supporters.

The 2001 Crisis: Neocons, Economic Sabotage, and Erdogan’s Ascendancy

Erdogan’s true ascent began amid Turkey’s devastating 2001 financial crisis, which saw the economy contract by 5.7%, unemployment spike, and the Turkish lira collapse. The crisis, worsened by IMF-mandated austerity measures, discredited the ruling coalition under Prime Minister Bulent Ecevit. A staunch nationalist, Ecevit had spearheaded Turkey’s 1974 intervention in Cyprus and forced Syria to expel PKK leader Abdullah Ocalan in 1999. His refusal to align Turkey with the impending U.S.-led Iraq War in 2003 made him a liability for U.S. neoconservatives, who were already preparing for the conflict.

Far from a mere economic downturn, the 2001 crisis was a deliberate strategy orchestrated by the global Western financial cartel to destabilize Ecevit’s nationalist government. This administration, fiercely protective of Turkish sovereignty, had unequivocally opposed Turkey’s involvement in the Iraq War. To eliminate this obstacle, the financial cartel—comprising international financial institutions and Western-backed actors—engineered the crisis by exploiting Turkey’s reliance on hot money and Western financial support. The resulting economic collapse eroded public trust in the government and existing political parties, creating a power vacuum that paved the way for Erdogan. Handpicked by the globalist cabal as their new proxy, Erdogan was positioned to advance their political agenda in Turkey. The neocons viewed him as a pliable ally: a moderate Islamist who could pacify Turkey’s religious conservatives while advancing Western interests. Despite resistance within his own party, Erdogan advocated for Turkish involvement in the Iraq War, though the Turkish Parliament, with the help of dissidents in his party, ultimately rejected U.S. troop deployments in 2003. Nevertheless, Erdogan remained loyal to his neocon backers and globalist patrons, privatizing state assets at rock-bottom prices—akin to Yeltsin’s controversial reforms in 1990s Russia—and deepening Turkey’s economic dependence on the EU and the U.S.

In addition to tying Turkey’s economy to Western interests, Erdogan targeted the Turkish military in 2007 through the Ergenekon and Sledgehammer trials. Widely criticized as show trials orchestrated with the help of the Gulen movement—a shadowy Islamic network led by Fethullah Gulen—these cases imprisoned or sidelined hundreds of officers, including navy admirals opposed to NATO’s Black Sea ambitions. These officers had long argued that NATO’s mission ended with the fall of the Soviet Union and advocated for closer ties with Russia and China. They also opposed plans to integrate Georgia and Ukraine into NATO, fearing it would destabilize the region and turn the Black Sea into a battleground between the West and Russia. By weakening the navy and sidelining its dissenting admirals, Erdogan brought Turkey back in line with NATO’s strategic objectives, enabling the neocons to advance their plans for NATO expansion into the Black Sea region—a move that set the stage for the 2008 Russo-Georgian War and the 2014 Ukrainian crisis.. Without this internal coup against the Turkish military, these events might have unfolded differently—or not at all.

For his services to the globalist agenda, Erdogan was portrayed in Western media as a democratizing hero, and Turkey’s economy was praised for its growth and strength. However, the reality was starkly different. To understand the globalist propaganda surrounding Erdogan, consider Barack Obama’s first foreign visit as U.S. president: a trip to Turkey in 2009. In a speech to the Turkish Parliament, Obama praised Erdogan’s “democratic reforms” and the strength of Turkey’s economy—which was growing steadily only due to cheap credit provided by international financial institutions serving the same globalist interests Erdogan represented. Meanwhile, journalists and dissidents filled Turkish prisons.

The 2016 Coup Attempt: Erdogan’s Break with the West

Erdogan’s honeymoon with the West soured in the 2010s. His support for Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood and his interventionist stance in Syria clashed with U.S. priorities, especially after the Arab Spring upended regional alliances. Sensing Erdogan’s growing autonomy, the neocons turned to Fethullah Gulen, a cleric living in Pennsylvania since 1999 with close ties to the CIA and the Clinton Foundation. Gulen’s Hizmet movement, once an ally in Erdogan’s rise, had infiltrated Turkey’s police, judiciary, and military, creating a “parallel state.”

The July 15, 2016, coup attempt—marked by rogue military units bombing parliament and nearly capturing Erdogan—was orchestrated by factions of the Gulen movement within the army, with the involvement of the CIA and NATO, using Incirlik Air Base as one of the primary command centers to coordinate the operation (one of NATO’s largest military bases in the region). The timing suggests that the neocons, anticipating Hillary Clinton’s presidency, planned to install Gulen as their new puppet in Turkey. As a radical Sunni leader hostile to Iran, Gulen could have aligned Turkey with a broader anti-Iranian axis, potentially dragging the country into a regional war against Iran—much like Saddam Hussein did three decades earlier.

The coup’s failure, quashed by loyalists and public resistance, marked a turning point, leading Erdogan to purge over 100,000 civil servants and consolidate his power through a 2017 referendum and pivoting toward Russia and China—not out of conviction, but as leverage against Western abandonment.

Turkey’s Geopolitical Balancing Act: Ukraine, NATO, and the Black Sea

Erdogan’s post-2016 flirtations with Moscow—evidenced by the purchase of Russian S-400 systems and energy deals—reflect more than a pragmatic balancing act. They reflect a desperate attempt to regain Western attention, akin to dating someone new to make an ex jealous, aimed at convincing the West not to write him off.

The Ukrainian crisis, escalating with Russia’s 2022 invasion, has pushed Turkey into a delicate role. As a NATO member controlling the Bosphorus, Erdogan has mediated grain deals and prisoner swaps, leveraging Turkey’s strategic position. Yet his reluctance to fully back NATO’s hardline stance has further alienated him from the West, making him a target for a potential regime change operation as the West has grown desperate to win its proxy war against Russia. As a result, international media and globalist factions have intensified efforts to undermine his regime, seeking to remove him from power.

Turkey at a Crossroads: Imamoglu, Erdogan’s Decline, and the Future

Erdogan has fulfilled his mission: he has made Turkey’s economy dependent on the West, eliminated patriotic voices in the military, dismantled the parliamentary system, wrecked the education system, and buried the secular Turkish republic. His legacy is a deeply polarized Turkey: economically dependent on the West, militarily weakened, and institutionally hollowed out.

Corruption scandals, a collapsing lira, and authoritarian excesses have fueled widespread public discontent. Yet, rather than addressing the root causes of this anger—economic hardship, growing authoritarianism, and systemic corruption—Erdogan has grown increasingly paranoid, attributing every challenge to Western conspiracies and interventions. This refusal to confront reality has only deepened the divide between him and the Turkish people, fueling widespread disillusionment and anger.

Imamoglu’s rise—winning Istanbul in 2019 and 2023 despite blatant election irregularities, systematic government interference, censorship, and the full force of Erdogan’s authoritarian machinery—stands as a testament to his resilience and the enduring hope of Turkey’s opposition. Facing a system rigged to ensure his defeat, Imamoglu triumphed against overwhelming odds. Erdogan’s regime spared no effort, leveraging state media, the judiciary, and security forces to manipulate the results, yet it could not prevent Imamoglu’s victories in Istanbul, which shattered the illusion of invincibility surrounding Erdogan’s rule. His recent imprisonment on fabricated charges ahead of the 2028 elections underscores Erdogan’s desperation to suppress this threat, further alienating a populace yearning for change.

Turkey now stands at a crossroads. The powers that once propelled Erdogan to prominence—U.S. neoconservatives and the Islamist legacy of the 1980 coup—have lost control of their creation. His fall from Western favor, tied to the 2016 coup attempt and his regional overreach, has left him isolated, oscillating between East and West while clinging to power as domestic anger reaches a boiling point. Whether Imamoglu or another leader emerges, Turkey’s post-Erdogan era will face the monumental task of rebuilding its secular republic and defining its role in an increasingly complex global landscape.

Turkey’s struggle is not just its own—it is an example of the suffering endured for decades under Western colonialism and a parasitic financial order. This system, designed to enrich a handful of elites in the West, thrives by exploiting the Global South, perpetuating poverty, and engineering chaos to maintain control. Turkey’s fight for self-determination stands as a beacon for all nations seeking to break free from the chains of neocolonialism and reclaim their rightful place in a just and equitable global order. The future must be built on the sovereignty of nations, free from the selfish designs of a Western oligarchy.

@ 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.

@ 3a8a16a7:f4c3b0b4

test

@ 8671a6e5:f88194d1

As old people tend to say:\ \ *nasal voice* “Back in my day…” … Bitcoin was this wild, beautiful thing, new. It was something technical that came alive before our very eyes after running a node (just a .exe running on a windows machine in my case).\ Even when you started to painstakingly mined bitcoin on a GPU, in a pool, you felt like growing a network of like minded people, or at least people who thought there was something there. Even if we couldn’t comprehend what it all would lead to (or what fiat value it could reach).\ Then came the first paper wallets, the first good software wallets and attempts at hardware wallets, the first buzz of owning your own value — it was motivating and rewarding. The look on the face of other people you explained bitcoin to, when they’ve seen their first transaction pop up after validation. Awesome.\ \ Back then, it wasn’t about fiat gains or slick marketing campaigns; it was about a distributed network “generating” numbers, keeping a distribute ledger “in synchronization”, at the same time it was a middle finger to the system, representing freedom to transact in value we valued ourselves because of the underlying network of people, nodes and miners.\ \ It was this sort of secret handshake between tech minded people, anti-globalists, anarchists, nerds and rebels who saw the fiat scam for what it was.\ Orange-pilling wasn’t even a term; it was just what you did.\ You'd walk people through the setup of bitcoin core, and the white paper, told them why central banks are a trick that functions as a legalized Ponzi scheme and you showed them bitcoin’s workings without middlemen.\ You played around with bitcoin, person to person, no bullshit, no subscriptions, no suits, no posing like a big shot, no referral links.\ Those were the fun times — pre-Saylor, pre-nation-state hype, pre-every Laura, Luigi, and self-proclaimed “OG” thinking they’re going to conquer the world.\ I miss that.

But times change.

\ The good ol' days are dead

It’s not the first instance in our lifetime that we see things pop-up, being invented, and where some good new idea becomes a reality and then that very good idea becomes an institution (there’s an obscure 1990s movie reference for you).\ We live and learn, just like the first technical people setting up their own point of presence internet servers, we all have to learn how to grow and adapt.

Early Bitcoiners didn’t have referral links or corporate sponsors — they had a mission, and the spirit came from within themselves and from the math and tech they’ve seen at work in practice. And yes, educating about it was important, as was looking for ways to improve bitcoin (the early years weren't exactly main-stream material for example).

From that learning yourself about Bitcoin and feeling the need to share and convince others around you, came the need to talk and learn together with others.

You’d talk your buddy into installing a wallet over a coffee, maybe show your uncle how to buy a few bitcoin, and it felt like planting seeds for something real.

Even if they didn’t get it—“So this number goes from my address to your address?”—you kept explaining and showing.

Then the suits rolled in. Bigger companies wer started, like Blockstream, Trezor, Coinbase and Binance.

Wall Street, Saylor with his infinite buy tweets, El Salvador and its volcano bonds, the US ETF approval — and the game changed, everyone heard about it one way or another. That’s damned important! You’re NOT the bringer of news.\ \ Suddenly, it wasn’t grassroots anymore; it was headlines, hype and game-theory. As predicted by so many in the space.\ Fine, whatever, it's progress or something else, but we as bitcoiners need to adapt to that reality.\ Some adaptations will also cause us to put energy elsewhere than before.\ What worked in 2012 or 2016, might not work anymore after 2024.\ ”We bitcoiners route around problems.” Right?

You didn’t need new people to create an account, or be part of a ‘squad’ or team, you certainly didn’t need them to sell merchandise. You just showed them bitcoin’s inner workings.\ \ Bitcoin was the marketing, the engine, the product and the goal. Bitcoin was the core. Just like digital communication was the core of the earliest internet enthusiasts. The magic of sending a text into the network, and through clever routing, someone thousands of miles away could read it almost immediately, that was the magic, the core.

Sending value with bitcoin has that same magical way, immutable, uncensored, unconfiscatable, with proven digital scarcity and forced honesty.

Nowadays we have so-called orange-pillers.\ They’re trying to spread those values. Or so they should..

They didn’t get the memo on Bitcoin becoming more commonly known apparently, and if they did, their lust for dopamine has long replaced that with their urge to get people to install a lightning wallet. It’s sometimes rather disturbing to see this Orange Pill’ing play out.

They’re out there, like they’re stuck in 2013. But they’re usually not from 2013 at all, more like class of 2020’ish. Not that it matters, they’re still living in the illusion that there are people out there that didn’t hear of bitcoin and that THEY and THEY alone can save these poor souls.\ After 2018 it’s safe to say that that’s not the case.\ I’ll repeat that for the die-hard orange-piller: they do not need you to hear about bitcoin.

These Orange Pillers have another kind of magic happen:

While they’re winning over new souls into bitcoin, one barber, taxi driver and babysitter at a time, they get the small electric charge in their brain that tells them their wealth, their (and their holding's) value will go up somehow. They’re also desperate to make some kind of connection with other bitcoiners, and while they lack that connection, they try to find (or make) new bitcoiners around them.\ This approach might have worked in the past, but things are different now. You’re usually talking to people who you try to convince of something they’ve already rejected (often harshly rejected) or never will care about .\ Most people, do not give a damn about inflation or how that came to be. Certainly when they’re doing their job.\ \ It’s like someone shoving the book of a cult under your nose and trying to convince you it’s going to save your life. You’re not open to it, neither are most of the Orange pill targets to your bitcoin gospel.\ Orange Pillers don’t see how the very people they try to convince today weren’t “in it” for a variety of (good for them) reasons. Unlike in the old days, where people’s natural state was “not heard of bitcoin”; since it was new, and people genuinely didn’t learn about it or read into it.\ That’s however, not the case today. That taxi driver? He heard about bitcoin. Be sure.

Such new people today, are almost non-existing, they either bought some long ago, got rekt trading shitcoins and stayed away.\ That, or they found it all a bit too “iffy” (thank you mainstream media) and will politely hold back from not yelling to your face, “I don’t care about that Bitcoin stuff!”.\ They know it’s some form of money or value, they know it exists. Which makes orange pillers the bringers of old news to the bottom of the barral.\ They might get a “hit” now and then of course. But even then, your impact is neglectable in a world that rewards cowardice and short term greed. You’re too late. You don’t scale. And it doesn’t matter.

Since 2020, it has shifted from genuinely introducing people to bitcoin to just "spreading it for the sake of spreading it."\ It looks more and more like an old lion, pacing back and forth in a cramped cage at an old ZOO, restless and frustrated.\ There’s just empty repetition.

The mental breakdown of orange-pilling

\ Let’s look a little further into the act of orange pilling.\ \ It's not like a 1990s hacker type showing a brand new Hayes -compatible modem to his buddy and trying to get a connection going to a local Point of Presence to get internet access.\ \ It’s more like showing your holiday pictures to an uninterested family member. All to get the dopamine hit, the ‘aha moment’ out of someone is now your own ‘aha got someone new’ moment. Like an addict looking for that next high.\ \ You want them to get the app, get some sats and feel the same feeling you have. While they’re worrying about cleaning a table for example, or getting your bill.\ \ This “badge of honor” of Orange Pilling someone is that little shot of dopamine many people need (especially in group) to feel validated.\ The real feeling has everything to do with social conformity1 and the involved brain areas that get stimulus shots and increased activity.2\ \ Above that, for the sake of the mental reward, some people go further down the social boundaries. That’s why orange pilling, often comes across as pushy, unnatural and/or annoying.\ It’s because it’s basically an activity with all the neuro stimulus of an addiction, or done as an ego boost.

Math based

On top of all of that. If you do the math on it the whole action becomes even more ludicrous.\ \ The math in the early days of bitcoin was simple: there was exponential expansion of the number of bitcoiners.\ Purely for bitcoin, the growth in numbers is still going strong, but the percentage has now naturally been flattened out because of media coverage, scams that trick people into other stuff and the close to impossible way to scale the onboarding from a person to person level to larger scales (there are apps doing a good job however, but even then it spread under former bitcoin users or people already in the know on some level, like former shitcoiners).\ \ So even at the rate of trying to orange-pill let’s say 10 people per week (many bitcoiners don’t even tàlk to 10 people a week, let alone convince them to use bitcoin).\ \ When hypothetically 50% of these people (not unusual with word of mouth recommendations) actually install the app you recommended, and we take also a high percentage of 10% actually do a regular buy of bitcoin after installing any of these apps (Strike or Blink or any other).\ \ Given that hypothetical high rate of 10 people a day plus the conversion rate, it would take approximately 200 weeks, close to four years (pun intended) to reach 2000 people as a critical mass that actually installed and used the bitcoin app.\ \ If these 2000 people all buy for about 1000$ worth of bitcoin each, they’ll be good for about 2 million dollars in bitcoin buys over a four year period.\ Even if you take very, very optimistic statistics this, you’ll get a close to zero impact, safe for the occasional big shot you might encounter and converts into a mini-Saylor, or the occasional person you might have saved a few thousand dollars (because they all keep thinking in fiat terms anyway).\ \ But on the other side, people with +100 million dollars to spend will surely have advisors and in-house knowledge, to not having to to rely on your sorry ass explaining bitcoin or installing Wallet of Satoshi on their phone or something.\ \ That’s all peanuts. It’s futile. And you’re fighting an honorable battle from 11 years ago.

### \ Why

I can't grasp why so many people keep doing this the way they do.

Orange-pilling mostly works when the price is going up anyway, unfortunately.

However, when BTC’s up 15% in a week, everyone’s a genius and your coworker suddenly can be all ears about “sound money” and future price gains.

When it’s crashing or flat? Good luck, nobody cares among the normies, unless the “orange-pillee” (the target) has their own ulterior motives for listening (like getting someone to at least give them some attention in any form).

And by the way, to come back to these taxi drivers you try to convince… many taxi drivers already had their share of die hard bitcoiners in their car, and got the explanation. Some of them even act like total noobs probably to get some sats out of your orange pilling wallet. They’re good at playing dumb, trust me.\ \ Do you really think a taxi driver in let’s say Lugano, Amsterdam or Prague didn’t already know bitcoin before you tried to convince him to accept it? You’re not the first. At all.

Most of all, you interact with people while they’re doing their job. You’re actually interfering with their work. When a waiter in a fully booked restaurant has to halt his word and listen to you explaining how to install a lightning wallet on their old iphone that’s almost out of battery, you’re losing anyway.\ They might listen, they might even be pestered to the point they’ll install the damned app. And what do you win or achieve?\ A sparkle in your brain that says “you’re such a cool bitcoiner”?\ Then… after what’s usually a painful few minutes going through a horrible counter-intuitive interface, you get them 5000 sats or whatever over to them.

Oh and adding things like “Hey man, keep these sats for at least 4 years, it will go up in price” is just rotten as well. Just give the people a decent tip and leave. You’re not doing anyone a favor.

When the moment’s there ànd some people are clearly open to it, thèn you might add some info. Point them to an easy to use non KYC app (if there is such a thing).\ But even then, just letting someone know you want to pay in bitcoin, should be enough, WHISPER bitcoin.\ They don’t need your pushy sales pitch on top of the daily struggles they face in hospitality and retail jobs.\ \ The squads

An example,... I saw this crew, let’s name them the “Re-play” squad, they’re all wearing blue hats and have a few flyers with them from a marketing company which managed to put them to some good use at a very low expense rate.

This image is still stuck in my head, some random European country during late summer time — local Bitcoiners, along with some counterparts from other countries. The real “we’re the future” types.

Sitting on the floor at a Bitcoin party, rolling “funny cigarettes” passing a lighter, chatting and laughing about how they orange-pilled some dude in a bar.

“Yeah, man, I showed him how to set up a Lightning wallet in a few minutes, he’s in!”. Then taking a big puff.\ Except here’s the punchline: the guy wasn’t “in” he was probably just some horny schmuck trying to get into the pants of a woman Bitcoiner in the group, who’d flashed her … QR code at him.

They’re all proud, they’re all high, they all belong to a group now … and they’re convinced they’re conquering the world one wallet at a time (they don’t do the math on that, neither should they,… ignorance is bliss).

Doing good for bitcoin has been transcended into an egotrip, and the short-lived kick in the orbitofrontal cortex3 for “doing something”, it’s the filling of a lingering emptiness.\ \ The same people move around like they’re an anthill, reminiscent of the hippie communes, until they’ve returned to their misery at home, knee deep in sorrows of the fiat world. As is the orange pilled person by they way, who’s life won’t be helped by a few sats and yet a new app on their phone. An app they’ll hardly use, unless they start to bond with the other bitcoiners in the area.

These people you target already have had all chances in the world to learn about bitcoin but are too far gone to care.\ Podcasts, books, family members that are into bitcoin, or whatever blog or online service… even the biggest shitcoin casino’s only have rather decent guides and basic explanations. There are excellent educational apps like yzer.io4 as well as the excellent lopp.net5 website by Jameson Lopp.

Convincing people one-by-one doesn’t work anymore—it’s inefficient and outdated since the price surges, media coverage, and ETF launches. Even if some are open to it, it’s a futile, unscalable solution of dread, working indirectly for the benefit of the Wall street types or some shitcoin casinos (where most “new coiners” end up).

Orange pillers, also never can “read the room”. The crew in a busy restaurant or bar isn’t waiting for any explanation about UTXOs or custodians from you!

Even if you'll hit machine-like numbers of onboarding twenty people a day (By then, you’ll need to avoid being labeled the local bitcoin village fool in your community) and assume they're all pure bitcoiners afterwards.\ Which won’t happen either as any incentive of the orange pilled people is clearly nòt long-term thinking; otherwise they would have onboarded you some 8 years ago!\ \ People are extremely lazy, and the general public usually has an attention span of about 8 seconds at best6.\ Back in the early days, you could sit people down and show another tech person for hours on end how to work with bitcoin, now more than a decade later, you have about 5 to 60 seconds tops. (most lightning wallet’s onboarding sequence easily takes 2 tot 5 minutes)

To further convince yourself how pointless Orange Pilling is today: go out and watch people on a public transport vehicle: they scroll and swipe through TikTok and Instagram. You’ll notice they’re swipe-apes, there’s no substance or reliable source of bitcoin buying power there, no bitcoin innovation will come from them, and no philosophical insights will ever be ignited in their buy-the-next-cool-sneakers-now brain. They’re not a target audience. They’re the all singing and all dancing crap of the world. They’re not convinced, Inconvincible and inconvertible.

Meanwhile, no substantial steps have been made for bitcoin, even if you get them to install that app you so desperately want them to have. Neither can you expect the no-coiners or pre-coiners (god I hate that word, it sounds kinky somehow) to do anything for bitcoin, as the gap between them and the actual positive impact they could have is too wide.\ It costs time, studying and experimenting. While these people excel at thing like: shopping, watching dime-a-dozen garbage series on Netflix, watching social media posts that don’t challenge them, and eating take-out food while score some drugs.\ \ So… to conclude the story about that dude in the bar which was so carefully orange pilled by our “Re play” squad members, he probably traded his sats for a beer by now (although that demands some form of effort in finding a recipient that has beer and wants to trade it for sats, which is unlikely) , more likely he forgot about the app altogether or he’s trading shitcoins to “make more money as greed that sets in. And he probably got that woman’s telephone number, to “talk about those bitcoins” later on at his crappy rental apartment right above a shoarma restaurant.\ \ The phrase “everyone’s a scammer” includes people who pretend to care about bitcoin just to get something out of it. Even a complete newbie or shitcoin fan will fake interest in bitcoin to seem legit. I’ve watched it happen.

Orange-pilling: the good, the bad, and the ugly

\ So onboarding devolved into this whole subculture of failure, and started to manifest itself over time as a empty motion, a series of must-do things.\ \ The Pavlovian response whenever someone is a walking opportunity for accepting bitcoin (certainly in any bar, restaurant or hotel), results in the foaming at the mouth to get them onboarded on some app or wallet.\ It’s so pointless I actually feel ashamed when I’m in a group that starts to hawk and push their lightning wallets onto unsuspecting people who just want to do their job.\ (and Lightning Wallets are so crappy to onboard people with, it’s mind numbingly stupid)\ \ To my amazement, there are actually a lot of bitcoin holders, or people that claim to be into bitcoin (especially in a bull market) who still pester random people with this kind of behavior.\ \ Some of these are trying to get them to click a referral link from a venture capital firm, in return for a few bucks (incentives these days are needed to get the groundswell going apparently), or worse even, make them install some non-custodial wallet and run into the brick wall of initial on-chain setup fees and then run away like a complete loser because they’re too cheap to fork that initial on-chain fee out for the people they’ve tried to onboard. “Yeah, like, you can buy these 100.000 sats online later if you like and thèn you can have this wallet, but at least it’s not custodial eh.. uh … My buddies are over there, I’ll see you later”.\ \ When you start to observe these people in the wild, it’s like watching a gaze of raccoons going through some neighborhood’s trash cans at night (without the playful conviction).\ Fascinating, if you’re into low-budget wildlife documentaries.

Gaze of raccoons looking for a QR code

IF you still want to onboard someone, point them to the right info at the right time (when thèy ask you).\ I call it “Bitcoin whispering”. #BitcoinWhispering

### \ \ Let’s quickly look at the three sort of Orange Pillers:

The pushy ideologists: The most annoying of the bunch, but at the same time the ones who mean really well. I sometimes feel sorry for them.\ No one’s safe from them. Hairdresser? “You should accept Bitcoin, man.” Bartender? “Credit cards are no goog, why not use Lightning?” Taxi driver? “Ever heard of Lightning? I can tip you in Bitcoin, man.” They’re not educating; they’re feeding their ego and their need to spread the word.

The referral grifters: More damaging to Bitcoin than shitcoiners in my opinion. They don’t care about Bitcoin’s properties; it’s just a slot machine for them. And if they understand, their short term greed and social circle dependency makes them go for spreading the word of a middleman company.\ “Sign up with my link, bro, stack those sats!”\ Their goal? A kickback and the next pat on the back from their miserable squad members.

The show-offs: The worst. They don’t know anything themselves but love the spotlight. “Yeah, I got my barber stacking sats!” Yet when it’s time to actually help onboard a business, they’re nowhere to be found. All talk, no substance. They achieve a small social circle of noob bitcoiners surrounding them, with most of them going through the shitcoin-phase shortly after or swapping off-the book gains. They’re not good for bitcoin and usually don’t stay that long anyway.\ \ The world doesn’t need your savior complex.

After the second half of 2024 if someone wanted in, they’ll find a way. And if they ask a Bitcoiner for help? Sure, we’ll point them in the right direction — most of us will help when asked (gladly so).\ But this idea that you, oh mighty orange-piller, need to swoop in and “save” people is more about you than about bitcoin.

Create a good, nice, safe (protected from scams!) environment or way to get people to the info and the other way around.\ Be there when people can ask questions, lead by example, make it work and show it. If an app is easy to use, makes sense and has no friction, then people will come. If you’re pestering people and hounding them into liking something that’s so far removed from their reality (fiat-world), they’ll be scared away and not return.

### \ Conclusion

Although I miss the old days, I also realize they ain’t coming back — when orange-pilling was just sharing a crazy new idea with someone who was open to it.

The Orange pilling space is now too keen for a large part to shove their bitcoin app in someone’s face, be it in dollars, a few sats or a discount on their next transaction fee at some multi level marketing middleman.\ This onboarding is also strangely in parallel with what shitcoiners or the most vile fiat companies do, OP’ers are too desperate for relevance so they often don’t look at the value proposition of bitcoin anymore. Filling their void got the upper hand.\ Their shot of feelgood moments needs to be filled.\ While there’s close to no impact to gain anymore on one-one-one convincing.\ The lesson to save in bitcoin, is usually lost on the people anyway, which was the last reason left to do it.\ \ Be there when people ask for help on bitcoin, build stuff, but stop the aggressive orange-pilling, it serves no purpose anymore other than your dopamine hit and a token feeling for “doing something”, and it’s a sad addiction.

Therefore in 2025, orange-pilling has become of a full-blown mental issue.

by AVB

if you like my writings : tip here

12 Food for Thought

\ Footnotes:

1

https://journal.psych.ac.cn/xlkxjz/EN/Y2015/V23/I11/1956

2

https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/behavioral-neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnbeh.2019.00160/full

3

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbitofrontal_cortex

4

https://yzer.io/

5

https://lopp.net

6

https://theweek.com/health-and-wellness/1025836/tiktok-brain-and-attention-spans

Share

TopLatest

@ 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.

@ 8671a6e5:f88194d1

glue for the mind

\ You’ve seen them, these garish orange Bitcoin stickers slapped on lampposts, laptops, windows and the occasional rust-bucket Honda. They’re sometimes in some areas a sort of graffiti plague on the landscape, certainly when a meetup or bitcoin conference was held in the area (especially then the city or town can fork out some extra budget to clean things up and scrape the stickers from statues of famous folk heroes or the door to the headquarters of a local bank branche).\ \ At first glance, it might seem like enthusiasm Bitcoiners desperate to scream their obsession from the rooftops. Both for the fun of it, and to get rid of the pack of stickers they’ve got at a local meetup.\ \ But let’s cut to the chase: covering half a town in stickers isn’t clever. It’s lazy, counterproductive, and has nothing to do with what Bitcoin actually stands for.\ Worse, it reeks of the brain-dead low grade (cheap) marketing tactics you’d expect from shitcoiners or the follow up of some half-baked flyer campaign by a local communist clique.\ Proof? Bitcoin stickers are literally covering up — or being covered up themselves, usually by - communist stickers in a pointless competition for use of real-world ad space.\ \ Maybe, bitcoiners should just create a sticker where Karl Marx ànd the bitcoin logo appear in the same sticker, so both groups can enjoy it’s uselessness, and call it quits to get this stupidity over with once and for all.\ A sticker with a shiny B might look cool at first. But what does it actually do?

Communist and Bitcoin logo sticker

Spamming stickers doesn’t make “frens”

There’s a psychology behind these stickers of course: people slap them up to feel part of a rebel tribe, flipping off central banks or feeling part of the crew.\ This crude, omnipresent approach to marketing echoes the late 1960s— an era of peak fiat, not Bitcoin’s time.\ Mimicking those tactics today, as if Bitcoin were some hip underground record store trying to spread its brand name, is utterly irrelevant.\ Sure, people love signaling affiliations with an easy and cheap identity flex — like a bumper sticker yelling: “Look at me I’m special!”\ \ But plaster a town with Bitcoin logos, and it stops being edgy and it was never funny; it becomes an eyesore and puts bitcoiners in the same category as the social justice warriors and political youth movements or brands of local energy drinks doing some weird campaign.\ \ Advertising psychology shows overexposure breeds resentment, not interest. Flood a street with stickers, and you’re not lighting a spark. You’re making people uninterested, gag, associating Bitcoin with spam or worse: get totally blended into the background along all the other noise from the street marketeers.\ \ The "mere exposure effect" (Zajonc, 1968)1 claims familiarity breeds liking, even from annoyance. Since the 1960s however, a lot has changed, as we’ll see… and above all, yet, after years of Bitcoin stickers in many areas, they’ve just turned into meaningless wallpaper. It has usually no strong message, no slogan, no conversation starter other than “buy bitcoin”, it’s disassociated from reality for many people, as the reaction show us. It’s also happening in a vacuum, where “normies” and no-coiners pass by and don’t even recognize such stickers for anything else than background colors.

It’s Lazy Man’s Work

Let’s talk effort — or the lack of it - for these kind of campaigns and stickers. Invented in the 1920s, stickers began expressing political opinions in the 1970s during student, peace, and anti-nuclear campaigns. It’s easy, cheap and also quick to distribute.\ \ These stickers aren’t masterful designs from an artistic genius (safe some clever exceptions). They’re usually ripped off from somewhere else, tweaked for five minutes, and bulk-ordered online. It’s the “IKEA effect” gone wrong: a tiny bit of customization, and suddenly people think they’re visionaries. But it’s a low-effort form of activism at best. Compare that to coding a Bitcoin tool or patiently explaining its value to a normie or organizing a meetup or conference, starting a company.\ Not that low-level or guerrilla marketing can’t work, I just don’t see it happen with stickers. Why not go out there and try to convince a whole series of fruit and vegetable market owners to accept bitcoin instead of using very expensive bank Point-of-sale systems?\ Why not direct mailing? Why not… do more than just putting a sticker on a signpost and walk away like a sneaky student promoting his 4 person political group?\ \ Stickers are the “Save the whales (pun intended)” magnet on your fridge: lazy-ass advocacy that screams intellectual deficiency. They’re a shortcut to feeling involved, not a strategy for real impact.

imaginary Save-the-Whales bitcoin sticker

Strategy territory signaling

Here’s the kicker: Bitcoin’s strength lies in its tech and value properties — decentralized, borderless value transfer that eliminates middlemen and has provable digital scarcity.\ Stickers? They’re just physical garbage. Sure, they might feel like a way to make an abstract idea tangible, tapping into “embodied cognition.” But they explain nothing about Bitcoin’s purpose or how it revolutionizes finance.\ They’re a dopamine hit for the people sticking them anywhere — a pathetic “I did something” moment — while everyone else walks by without a glance.\ Bitcoin is about innovation, not old-school social groups with low-budget marketing tactics.

\ The psychology of Bitcoin stickers

Why bother? Stickers are simple and loud—easy for the brain to process, a cheap thrill of rebellion. The person who spends an afternoon covering a city in them thinks they’re spreading the gospel. In reality, they’re just littering. Real advocacy takes effort, discussion, and substance — not a pack of adhesive stickers ordered with the click of a button.\ It’s the same reason nobody turns communist from a hammer-and-sickle sticker on a pole. It’s dead air.\ \ The proof of their uselessness? In 2 years, not one person I know has bought, researched, or even asked about Bitcoin because of a sticker in the neighborhood bar. A bar near me has had one on the wall for years — zero requests to pay with Bitcoin.

A sticker sitting on a bar wall for five years without impact isn’t “subtle marketing”—it’s a neon sign of failure. And the people cleaning those stickers off street signs, or the local communist student activists constantly covering them with their own, are locked in an endless, mindless sticker war.\ \ Other areas are even having a tsunami of bitcoin stickers, and hardly any places where they actually accept bitcoin for goods.\ More so, places where they do accept bitcoin readily, usually only need one sticker: the one at the door of a business saying “bitcoin accepted here”. And that’s about it.

What the little amount of research says

Studies shows stickers work for movements claiming public space and resisting dominant narratives — when done on a massive scale, targeting a specific audience have a visual and emotional effect when combined with other forms of resistance in social movements.\ "Stickin' it to the Man: The Geographies of Protest Stickers" 2\ \ For Bitcoin, a global monetary network meant for everyone, that localized, niche-based campaign makes little sense.\ Unlike sports teams or clothing brands, Bitcoiners can’t pinpoint a target area. A random sticker on a busy street claims nothing—no momentum, atmosphere, or intrigue. Political campaigns and underground youth movements concentrate stickers in student neighborhoods, universities, or subcultures where the message resonates. But Bitcoin isn’t a corporation, company, or fashion brand—it’s a Wall Street-embraced asset by now, with activists not really situated in the sticker-guerrilla kind of persons.

When was the last time you saw a "Buy Gold!" sticker? A "Get Your Microsoft Stock Options Now!" sticker? Or a "Crude Oil—Yeah, Baby!" sticker? Never. Serious assets don’t need guerrilla marketing.

The overload on stickers is also becoming an issue (especially in some areas with higher concentration of bitcoiners).

Bitcoin stickers fall flat

Invented in the 1920s, stickers began expressing political opinions in the 1970s during student, peace, and anti-nuclear campaigns. Protest stickers massively appear after protest rallies or campaigns with multi-level plans to reach audiences.\ As significant, overlooked tools of resistance and debate, their effect remains under-studied, with no data on “recruitment.”\ \ If Bitcoin stickers (which don’t provoke debate ever, other than people being angry about having to clean them up) in a bar are any clue—after one full year, not a single person asked why it was there or if Bitcoin was accepted—they’re just decor, lost among the clutter.

Bitcoiners still think slapping a shiny "B" logo on a street sign without explanation or slogan will spark momentum. But that requires a massive, organized campaign with thousands of people and a clear audience while you claim certain well aimed areas of public space — that something that’s not happening in bitcoin. There’s no plan, no campaign, just someone sticking a bitcoin logo at the supermarkt trolley or the backside of a street sign.\ And even if we did reach a higher number of stickers, it would annoy the f out of people.

"Study: Ad Overload Could Pose Steeper Risk to Brands Than Messages Near Inappropriate Content" (GWI & WARC, 2021) 3\ \ There’s also the effect of high ad exposure. When a whole street is covered in bitcoin stickers, it’s having the opposite effect. Or still… no one cares.

"Coping with High Advertising Exposure: A Source-Monitoring Perspective" (Bell et al., 2022)4

No synergy, no consensus

The synergy between offline sticker placement and online sharing? Absent. Bitcoiners online might be called “cyber hornets”, but this swarm is notoriously bad at sharing content. Post a Bitcoin sticker photo, and at best 1-2% will share it — no momentum, no discussion, no engagement.\ \ Non-Bitcoiners have zero reason to care. When was the last time you, as a Bitcoiner, shared a soccer team’s sticker? A political campaign sticker? Never. That’s normal, as you’re not in their bubble, so for us, it’s irrelevant. We won’t share the soccer team’s sticker (unless it’s Real Bedford FC probably).\ \ It's just a layer of plastic with adhesive glued to a surfase where someone will sooner or later either have to clean it up, or where the bitcoin sticker will be covered over by another person wasting his or her time by claiming that “sticker real-estate space” for their cause or brand-awareness.

And so, the red sticker calling all students and workers to vote for a Leninist party (with 10 members) is stickered over by a bright orange Bitcoin logo, and that one, in turn, will be over-stickered by a local fitness company's new logo, and so forth. It’s all a pointless rush for giggles and dopamine. And it’s time to recognize it for what it really is: retardation.

Bitcoin deserves better than this 70s guerrilla marketing ploy, from a time when activism was more than sitting behind a computer ordering stickers and (mostly not) clicking a link. Leave the sticker wars to students searching for an ideological dopamine rush and soccer fans claiming a neighborhood as "their territory."\ \ As Bitcoiners, we can do something more useful. For example: ask yourself how many businesses in your area accept Bitcoin, or what coworker you can save from investing in blatant scams, or… invent something nice, start a meetup, podcast, or learn to code, convince, build.

Bitcoin deserves better.

by AVB / tips go here

@avbpodcast - allesvoorbitcoin.be - 12 Bitcoin Food for Thought

1

https://typeset.io/papers/attitudinal-effects-of-mere-exposure-12e5gwrysc

2

https://www.research.ed.ac.uk/en/publications/stickin-it-to-the-man-the-geographies-of-protest-stickers

3

https://www.warc.com/content/article/warc-datapoints-gwi/too-many-ads-is-the-most-damaging-factor-for-brands/en-gb/136530

4

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9444107/

@ 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

@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9

In much of the world, it is incredibly difficult to access U.S. dollars. Local currencies are often poorly managed and riddled with corruption. Billions of people demand a more reliable alternative. While the dollar has its own issues of corruption and mismanagement, it is widely regarded as superior to the fiat currencies it competes with globally. As a result, Tether has found massive success providing low cost, low friction access to dollars. Tether claims 400 million total users, is on track to add 200 million more this year, processes 8.1 million transactions daily, and facilitates $29 billion in daily transfers. Furthermore, their estimates suggest nearly 40% of users rely on it as a savings tool rather than just a transactional currency.

Tether’s rise has made the company a financial juggernaut. Last year alone, Tether raked in over $13 billion in profit, with a lean team of less than 100 employees. Their business model is elegantly simple: hold U.S. Treasuries and collect the interest. With over $113 billion in Treasuries, Tether has turned a straightforward concept into a profit machine.

Tether’s success has resulted in many competitors eager to claim a piece of the pie. This has triggered a massive venture capital grift cycle in USD tokens, with countless projects vying to dethrone Tether. Due to Tether’s entrenched network effect, these challengers face an uphill battle with little realistic chance of success. Most educated participants in the space likely recognize this reality but seem content to perpetuate the grift, hoping to cash out by dumping their equity positions on unsuspecting buyers before they realize the reality of the situation.

Historically, Tether’s greatest vulnerability has been U.S. government intervention. For over a decade, the company operated offshore with few allies in the U.S. establishment, making it a major target for regulatory action. That dynamic has shifted recently and Tether has seized the opportunity. By actively courting U.S. government support, Tether has fortified their position. This strategic move will likely cement their status as the dominant USD token for years to come.

While undeniably a great tool for the millions of users that rely on it, Tether is not without flaws. As a centralized, trusted third party, it holds the power to freeze or seize funds at its discretion. Corporate mismanagement or deliberate malpractice could also lead to massive losses at scale. In their goal of mitigating regulatory risk, Tether has deepened ties with law enforcement, mirroring some of the concerns of potential central bank digital currencies. In practice, Tether operates as a corporate CBDC alternative, collaborating with authorities to surveil and seize funds. The company proudly touts partnerships with leading surveillance firms and its own data reveals cooperation in over 1,000 law enforcement cases, with more than $2.5 billion in funds frozen.

---

The global demand for Tether is undeniable and the company’s profitability reflects its unrivaled success. Tether is owned and operated by bitcoiners and will likely continue to push forward strategic goals that help the movement as a whole. Recent efforts to mitigate the threat of U.S. government enforcement will likely solidify their network effect and stifle meaningful adoption of rival USD tokens or CBDCs. Yet, for all their achievements, Tether is simply a worse form of money than bitcoin. Tether requires trust in a centralized entity, while bitcoin can be saved or spent without permission. Furthermore, Tether is tied to the value of the US Dollar which is designed to lose purchasing power over time, while bitcoin, as a truly scarce asset, is designed to increase in purchasing power with adoption. As people awaken to the risks of Tether’s control, and the benefits bitcoin provides, bitcoin adoption will likely surpass it.

@ 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.

@ 8671a6e5:f88194d1

Like so many people, I see ads for hardware wallets all the time in my X feed, or even when listening to podcasts you get the occasional promotion for one of these devices. Hardware wallet manufacturers and brands are a part of bitcoin life and culture. They’re sponsors, and they of course like to sell their devices.

As a long-time bitcoiner, I can say that I’ve given out more money (bitcoin) buying hardware wallets than what’s good for me. I supported projects and even had one of the prototypes of the Case wallet (fingerprint sensor, international sim-card and a camera!) in 2015/16, a thing I could hardly use, since it was bitcoin in your pocket, on-chain, before there was ANY need for that.

The point is, I love these devices. I love playing around with them. That’s fun when you’re a techie or someone who’s really onto bitcoin and wants to try the new Trezor, Ledger (yuk), Bitbox or cold card wallet… Unfortunately, except for this “obsession” with trying these devices out, and the occasional corporate/business needs,… the secure feeling of having one (or more) prevails over the real need. There’s a series of downsides to having a Hardware wallet, which are often overlooked.

The main downside is actually summed up as : “you don’t need it”

Let’s elaborate. For most people, I must say that I can’t recommend having one of these devices anymore. The market is saturated and the devices are often sold to people who are even unable to use them properly. Or customers that spent way more money buying them, than what’s eventually stored on it!

They’re of course handy “signing devices” for securely signing a transaction or message. They’re also a great way to do multi-signature and so on. That’s all neat.

But your average user,... most of the people don’t need it. There are several reasons for that.

Before the readers put me away as a fiat-slave dissing on bitcoin, or some dude trying to shill his own project: no … I don’t have my own “solution” I’m selling, I don’t go and ask you to click my referral link or ask for money here. I probably bought more hardware wallets in my life for a higher amount than most users hold in bitcoin right now. So no,... I supported this industry, I don’t hate it. I just want to voice my opinion her on the saturation of the market and the stupidity of holding your keys on a device that inherently can’t be trusted (in theory).

The reasons: 1

Bitcoin inverted effect on diminishing cash value : A bitcoin amount today buys you less than that same bitcoin amount in a few years. Let’s start with an obvious, but often forgotten reason to NOT invest in a hardware wallet. The price. The price is around 150 to 350 $ in fiat now in 2024. I even bought such devices at 600$ once (160000$ in today’s price;). Over time, most people that are into bitcoin less than 5 years, are better off buying bitcoin for the amount they would have bought the HW device for.

One can of course make the argument that it costs more to lose your keys altogether, but that’s also the case with a paper with your seed phrase or any other method.

Securing your keys is of course extremely important. No matter what you want to use. It doesn’t take away the fact that buying a Hardware wallet for fiat or for bitcoin isn’t economically wise, certainly not for beginners or people who have less bitcoin than the 20x cash value of the hardware wallet they want to buy. I have a simple formula here.

The Deadeye’s Hardware Wallet Law: which is a formula: Y < (X / 20) If you have 1 million sats today (660$ at time of writing) then it makes little sense to buy a hardware wallet for 179$ in my opinion. A good rule of thumb is: take the amount of bitcoin you want to secure, calculate the fiat price in dollar HW price = X Take the fiat price in dollar + shipping in fiat = Y If Y < (X / 20) that fiat price is less than a factor 20 of what you want to secure, then you might consider buying the HW wallet.

Example: Johnny wants to buy a new coldcard at 219$ + 41 $ shipping. He has 2,3 million sats (1524$) 260 < (1524 /20) So 260 < 76.2 … is not true , so he shouldn’t buy this and stack the sats instead on a cheaper solution (software wallet, or a self-generated seed phrase or even a reputable exchange in absolute last resort, if the tech-lever is very low)

2

Entropy - the entropy on a hardware device is delivered usually by “special chipsets” that generate a random (or close to random, as computers can’t be really random) seed phrase for you. Just like the old paper wallet generators only, they use some sort of scheme or algorithm to generate this. As a user you’ll have to trust that algo. And trust that it’s not broken by a hacker that finds the secret sauce and can generate more or less the same kind of entropy (even then, it would be extremely unlikely they would be able to re-generate your seed). But it’s a factor: the entropy a person can generate themselves (with play cards, dice, or a cat tapping a keyboard…) is always superior to some algorithm on a device Hardware itself can be fragile or downright sub-par. The hardware wallets of course exist because of the tech inside. Mainly the print board, the screen, the chipset and some even a battery(!). The hardware is NOT under your control. It’s made in a few big factories in Asia usually and even if you trust the building process completely, there’s no way for an average paranoid user to “trust” the unverifiable source of the chip design, chip manufacturing and the software that keeps the thing running.

The hardware itself is a blind trust you put into the image and reputation of a company. Some of these companies are dodgy at best from my personal perspective and opinion (nGrave, Ledger …) others have a more steady reputations and exude trustworthiness (Bitbox, …) Still… they are all just hardware, a sum of parts you don’t control and don’t verify.

When is the last time you checked the “military grade secure element chipset” in your super-duper hardware device? Where was it manufactured and who designed the chip lay-out?

3 Cycling through versions. HW wallets go through iterations and new version all the time. When you bought a coldcad Mark 1 back in the day, it’s now long obsolete. You can’t use some features and you’re even lucky if the hardware itself still functions after being in storage for +6 years. When I asked the manufacturer why they recommended outphasing the coldcard around two years ago, they said something like “it’s to keep up with security”. It even makes sense from their tech and product perspective, but in the end, it’s not really what people expect (realistic or not). Well… that’s like a subscription in my opinion? Every two years, you fork out something of 150 to 200$ for a new hardware device (plus shipping and customs) and the risk involved to put your funds on the new device by transferring to the new wallet’s addresses or put the old seed in that new device and so on… All this… to have the “right tool” for keeping 24 words “safe”? So, our formula in point 1, was adjusted to /20 to compensate for that “cycling” through versions at a rate of a few hundred dollars every 2-3 years at least. That’s a bit of the top in my opinion. A good bitcoin hardware device should at least be usable and up to par for 10 years at the very least. Words written down or secured anywhere, last forever.

4 Easy of use is still not ok: This might be very controversial with all the HW wallets claiming to be “easy to use”, but in fact: they’re not. Most users (and I take some family members and friends as an example here) can’t make heads or tails from how these things work. Give any non-tech user a coldcard, ledger of bitbox and they’ll not be on their way to use it as an everyday device. It might sound silly for the daily users of such a wallet, but a “noob” in my opinion is better off learning to familiarize themselves with software wallets first before even considering buying a HW wallet.

5 Buggy hardly tested apps The hardware wallets accompanied by an app (like Jade’s Green wallet to name one) are often introducing an extra layer of problems (both on the bugs and the risks). Who knows that this software will still be available in a few years time? We saw many things come and go over the years.

6 Alienation from the private keys: New users are better of learning the ropes with seed phrases and private keys by using Electrum, Sparrow and the likes (or even stack wallet duo) in order to learn what holding your own keys means.

People who start their journey with a hardware wallet often think about their bitcoin holding as something that tangible “inside the hardware wallet”, instead of looking at the key-perspective. I think a lot of people are alienated from the bitcoin concept of having your own keys by using HW wallets. (and yes, that’s not a strong argument, I know, but it is a factor to take into account)

7

You’ll have to securely store your seed phrase ANYWAY. The fact remains, that you bought a hardware wallet, and still have to safely secure your private keys, seed phrase at some point and do it securely. That’s something you need anyway. So… why not just use your paper with 24 words and use the wallet on occasion by using a secure “other way” (seed signer, an electrum wallet, sparrow,...) when you need to do a transaction?

I believe people will also do les on-chain pure bitcoin transactions when they need to do more work when not using a HW wallet: it’s an extra barrier to hold instead of paying. (if you like to do that of course)

8

Upgrade processes aren't always that clear on some HW wallets. I personally “bricked” a coldcard this way, by accidentally using a wrong upgrade file on a Mark 2 coldcard, and it was unrepairable after that.

The 12 or 24 words are the most important thing you have, … you don’t need a hardware device if you’re just starting, or just are a hodl’er.

9 Centralized software. Bugs and “new” features

Lots of bugs in the software also cause problems: For example; your 24 words from device A, can’t be imported to device B although they should “speak the same language” in theory (BIP39). One device accepts using two times the same word in a seed phrase, one doesn’t. There are other bugs: like random reboots, unlocking problems, strange implementations in the software (like Trezor trying out implementing the Swiss “travel rule” setting one day and pushing this upgrade to the users) and so on…. Without a HW wallet, you can just choose yourself what software / node or wallet to run anything on, and you’re not tied to the centralized, expensive and often untested way of hardware wallet manufacturer’s viewpoints and or “secret deals”.

1. And then there’s the privacy concern. We all know about Ledger’s famous “mishap” where they leaked all the home addresses of hardware wallet customers .. some of them actually had to move to other places to live as a result.

Conclusion:

In my opinion; hardware wallets are toys for bored bitcoiners. And I admit I was one myself for a long time. (I am one of these people yes)

The blockstream Jade was the last hardware wallet I’ve ever bought I guess.

I’m done with the crappy interfaces, the buggy software, the ‘subscription’ to endless upgrades new hardware and the strange feeling of unease when storing something on such devices while you depend on the “open source” nature of something made in China or wherever.

There are much cheaper, easier and more secure solutions.

Hence, most people don’t need hardware wallets.

deadeyes

@avbpodcast

imaginary Hardware wallet

Like so many people, I see ads for hardware wallets all the time in my X feed, or even when listening to podcasts you get the occasional promotion for one of these devices.\ Hardware wallet manufacturers and brands are a part of bitcoin life and culture. They’re sponsors, and they of course like to sell their devices.

As a long-time bitcoiner, I can say that I’ve given out more money (bitcoin) buying hardware wallets than what’s good for me.\ I supported projects and even had one of the prototypes of the Case wallet (fingerprint sensor, international sim-card and a camera!) in 2015/16, a thing I could hardly use, since it was bitcoin in your pocket, on-chain, before there was ANY need for that.

The point is, I love these devices.\ I love playing around with them.\ That’s fun when you’re a techie or someone who’s really onto bitcoin and wants to try the new Trezor, Ledger (yuk), Bitbox or cold card wallet… \ Unfortunately, except for this “obsession” with trying these devices out, and the occasional corporate/business needs,… the secure feeling of having one (or more) prevails over the real need.\ There’s a series of downsides to having a Hardware wallet, which are often overlooked.

The main downside is actually summed up as : “you don’t need it”

Let’s elaborate.

For most people, I must say that I can’t recommend having one of these devices anymore. The market is saturated and the devices are often sold to people who are even unable to use them properly. Or customers that spent way more money buying them, than what’s eventually stored on it!

They’re of course handy “signing devices” for securely signing a transaction or message. They’re also a great way to do multi-signature and so on. That’s all neat.

But your average user,... most of the people don’t need it.   There are several reasons for that.

Before the readers put me away as a fiat-slave dissing on bitcoin, or some dude trying to shill his own project: no …\ I don’t have my own “solution” I’m selling,\ I don’t go and ask you to click my referral link or ask for money here. I probably bought more hardware wallets in my life for a higher amount than most users hold in bitcoin right now. So no,... I supported this industry, I don’t hate it. I just want to voice my opinion her on the saturation of the market and the stupidity of holding your keys on a device that inherently can’t be trusted (in theory).

The reasons:

1

Bitcoin inverted effect on diminishing cash value :\ A bitcoin amount today buys you less than that same bitcoin amount in a few years. Let’s start with an obvious, but often forgotten reason to NOT invest in a hardware wallet. The price. The price is around 150 to 350 $ in fiat now in 2024. I even bought such devices at 600$ once (160000$ in today’s price;). Over time, most people that are into bitcoin less than 5 years, are better off buying bitcoin for the amount they would have bought the HW device for.

One can of course make the argument that it costs more to lose your keys altogether, but that’s also the case with a paper with your seed phrase or any other method.

Securing your keys is of course extremely important. No matter what you want to use. It doesn’t take away the fact that buying a Hardware wallet for fiat or for bitcoin isn’t economically wise, certainly not for beginners or people who have less bitcoin than the 20x cash value of the hardware wallet they want to buy. I have a simple formula here.

### The Deadeye’s Hardware Wallet Law:\ which is a formula:   Y <  (X / 20)

If you have 1 million sats today (660$ at time of writing) then it makes little sense to buy a hardware wallet for 179$ in my opinion.\ A good rule of thumb is: take the amount of bitcoin you want to secure, calculate the fiat price in dollar HW price = X\ Take the fiat price in dollar + shipping in fiat = Y\ If Y <  (X / 20)  that fiat price is less than a factor 20 of what you want to secure, then you might consider buying the HW wallet.\ \   Example: Johnny wants to buy a new coldcard at 219$ + 41 $ shipping.\ He has 2,3 million sats (1524$) 260 < (1524 /20) \ So 260 < 76.2  … is not true , so he shouldn’t buy this and stack the sats instead on a cheaper solution (software wallet, or a self-generated seed phrase or even a reputable exchange in absolute last resort,  if the tech-lever is very low)\ \ 2

Entropy - the entropy on a hardware device is delivered usually by “special chipsets” that generate a random (or close to random, as computers can’t be really random) seed phrase for you. Just like the old paper wallet generators only, they use some sort of scheme or algorithm to generate this. As a user you’ll have to trust that algo. And trust that it’s not broken by a hacker that finds the secret sauce and can generate more or less the same kind of entropy (even then, it would be extremely unlikely they would be able to re-generate your seed).\ But it’s a factor: the entropy a person can generate themselves (with play cards, dice, or a cat tapping a keyboard…) is always superior to some algorithm on a device Hardware itself can be fragile or downright sub-par.\ The hardware wallets of course exist because of the tech inside. Mainly the print board, the screen, the chipset and some even a battery(!).\ The hardware is NOT under your control. It’s made in a few big factories in Asia usually and even if you trust the building process completely, there’s no way for an average paranoid user to “trust” the unverifiable source of the chip design, chip manufacturing and the software that keeps the thing running.\ \ The hardware itself is a blind trust you put into the image and reputation of a company. Some of these companies are dodgy at best from my personal perspective and opinion  (nGrave, Ledger …) others have a more steady reputations and exude trustworthiness (Bitbox, …)  Still… they are all just hardware, a sum of parts you don’t control and don’t verify.\ \ When is the last time you checked the “military grade secure element chipset” in your super-duper hardware device? Where was it manufactured and who designed the chip lay-out? \ \ 3\ Cycling through versions.\ HW wallets go through iterations and new version all the time. When you bought a coldcad Mark 1 back in the day, it’s now long obsolete. You can’t use some features and you’re even lucky if the hardware itself still functions after being in storage for +6 years.\ When I asked the manufacturer why they recommended outphasing the coldcard around two years ago, they said something like “it’s to keep up with security”.\ It even makes sense from their tech and product perspective, but in the end, it’s not really what people expect (realistic or not). Well… that’s like a subscription in my opinion? Every two years, you fork out something of 150 to 200$ for a new hardware device (plus shipping and customs) and the risk involved to put your funds on the new device by transferring to the new wallet’s addresses or put the old seed in that new device and so on…\ All this… to have the “right tool” for keeping 24 words “safe”? So, our formula in point 1, was adjusted to /20 to compensate for that “cycling” through versions at a rate of a few hundred dollars every 2-3 years at least. That’s a bit of the top in my opinion.  A good bitcoin hardware device should at least be usable and up to par for 10 years at the very least. Words written down or secured anywhere, last forever.\ \ 4\ Easy of use is still not ok: This might be very controversial with all the HW wallets claiming to be “easy to use”, but in fact: they’re not. Most users (and I take some family members and friends as an example here) can’t make heads or tails from how these things work. Give any non-tech user a coldcard, ledger of bitbox and they’ll not be on their way to use it as an everyday device.\ It might sound silly for the daily users of such a wallet, but a “noob” in my opinion is better off learning to familiarize themselves with software wallets first before even considering buying a HW wallet.\ \ 5 Buggy hardly tested apps\ The hardware wallets accompanied by an app (like Jade’s Green wallet to name one) are often introducing an extra layer of problems (both on the bugs and the risks). Who knows that this software will still be available in a few years time? We saw many things come and go over the years. \ \ 6\ Alienation from the private keys: New users are better of learning the ropes with seed phrases and private keys by using Electrum, Sparrow and the likes (or even stack wallet duo) in order to learn what holding your own keys means.

People who start their journey with a hardware wallet often think about their bitcoin holding as something that tangible “inside the hardware wallet”, instead of looking at the key-perspective. I think a lot of people are alienated from the bitcoin concept of having your own keys by using HW wallets. (and yes, that’s not a strong argument, I know, but it is a factor to take into account)

7

You’ll have to securely store your seed phrase ANYWAY.\ The fact remains, that you bought a hardware wallet, and still have to safely secure your private keys, seed phrase at some point and do it securely.\ That’s something you need anyway. So… why not just use your paper with 24 words and use the wallet on occasion by using a secure “other way” (seed signer, an electrum wallet, sparrow,...) when you need to do a transaction?

I believe people will also do les on-chain pure bitcoin transactions when they need to do more work when not using a HW wallet: it’s an extra barrier to hold instead of paying. (if you like to do that of course)

8

Upgrade processes aren't always that clear on some HW wallets.\ I personally “bricked” a coldcard this way, by accidentally using a wrong upgrade file on a Mark 2 coldcard, and it was unrepairable after that.

The 12 or 24 words are the most important thing you have, … you don’t need a hardware device if you’re just starting, or just are a hodl’er. 

\ 9 Centralized software. Bugs and “new” features

Lots of bugs in the software also cause problems: For example; your 24 words from device A, can’t be imported to device B although they should “speak the same language” in theory (BIP39).\ One device accepts using two times the same word in a seed phrase, one doesn’t.\ There are other bugs: like random reboots, unlocking problems, strange implementations in the software (like Trezor trying out implementing the Swiss “travel rule” setting one day and pushing this upgrade to the users) and so on….\ Without a HW wallet, you can just choose yourself what software / node or wallet to run anything on, and you’re not tied to the centralized, expensive and often untested way of hardware wallet manufacturer’s viewpoints and or “secret deals”.

10) And then there’s the privacy concern. We all know about Ledger’s famous “mishap” where they leaked all the home addresses of hardware wallet customers .. some of them actually had to move to other places to live as a result.

Conclusion:

In my opinion; hardware wallets are toys for bored bitcoiners.\ And I admit I was one myself for a long time. (I am one of these people yes)

The blockstream Jade was the last hardware wallet I’ve ever bought I guess (and it broke about 4 months of operation, after the PIN code entry froze and the device stopped responding). \ \ On top of that: who needs to sign that much transactions a day (safe for shitcoiners?)

I’m done with the crappy interfaces, the buggy software, the ‘subscription’ to endless upgrades new hardware and the strange feeling of unease when storing something on such devices while you depend on the “open source” nature of something made in China or wherever.

\ There are much cheaper, easier and more secure solutions. 

\ Hence, most people don’t need hardware wallets. 

deadeyes

@avbpodcast 

@ 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

@ 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?

@ 8671a6e5:f88194d1

I’ll have to use my best Tone Vays impersonation voice for saying this, “..but actually “Value for Value, is à scàm”.

We hear a lot about Value4Value in bitcoin. People giving some content, good or service, and then getting their proverbial hat out, to collect whatever it’s deemed worth to the audience.

Some examples:

• Jimmy makes a nice website for the community, and gets a donation from whoever likes the work he put in.

• Mathilda makes a nice series of travel videos about bitcoin places, and does a little dance, and people can donate sats.

• Jody makes a podcast about bitcoin philosophy and the local community and people can donate for every episode.

That’s all very nice in theory.

I keep thinking about a documentary maker who told his audience he slept on a kitchen table because he had no money for a bed. And he would stop doing things V4V because of it. I can understand that sentiment, and I fear he’s not alone in that feeling.

One of the other artists in attendance told me “then he should work harder and make better things or get some sponsors”. Which contradicts the V4V model, and is rather disparaging towards that filmmaker.

In the world of "Value for Value" (V4V), the system is rigged from the get-go because of dodgy fundamentals based on goodwill. It borders on a scam, be it a voluntary run scam from both sides.

Unfortunately, there are very, very low percentages of people (let alone bitcoiners) that have goodwill. At least in Europe (I don’t know how this exactly works out in the US or Asia).

A personal friend of mine ran a history podcast for many years, and got more kudos, and gifts than I ever had in bitcoin.

And no, it’s not about the money, the income. You can call me a sour person all you want for saying this. It’s mainly about feeling a slight appreciation for what you do

On top of that, the subject itself is a bit of a “no-no” to talk about. If you do, you’re often branded a complainer, a wanker, a negative Nancy. Well… that’s one of the signs you participate in a sort of scam. When you point out holes in the scheme, you’re branded a complainer or a negativist; you often also get ousted.

That’s the way we’re all supposed to go thumbs-up on everything while sleeping on a kitchen table, while doing “good for the community.

To clarify (some close to the reality numbers):

If you put in ± 10 hours in an episode in total in a history podcast, you got rewarded about 50€ (usually from people appreciating the story and effort, relating to the part in history).

If you put in ± 6 hours in two episodes in total (less research than a history podcast), in bitcoin in Belgium, you get rewarded with 2 likes (one from myself and one from another bitcoiner), and no re-shares and about 2000 sats per episode on a good day, and 0 on a bad day.

unknown bitcoin artist holding an orange cup New people in bitcoin who fall for this need to be aware of the loss of time they'll face (which some can stomach, others won't...). Maybe this blog post can help prevent people from turning sour or becoming blatantly against the community.

People who have a good "ethics" stance in bitcoin will probably start to do things in V4V, hoping they get a good return for their work. You dive into this for the love of the community, for proof-of-work in Bitcoin, and maybe to carve out a name for yourself, or so you believe. But over time, this passion isn't enough to outweigh the hours, effort, and the relentless critique from the community's armchair philosophers – and trust me, there's no shortage of those.

Soon, however, such goodwill people will start to be disgruntled or at least less happy about the V4V model's returns. Let's face it, Value4Value was a marketing term invented by Adam Curry, along with Dave Jones, to launch a concept as an anti-movement against Apple's hegemony. It was meant to preserve free speech (that, it succeeded in; they've put the "free" in free speech). For themselves, because they had the first-mover advantage, it worked out fine. And until like the end of 2015, it worked very well.

However, I never heard of anyone after the year 2015 who lived off a value4value scheme having enough income and being happy about the exchange of goods and services...

Many podcasters resolve this by asking a fee for their "full" private and ad-free stream. Others just quit or go full paid service. It's all good, as long as you pick your poison and don't rely too much on appreciation in this community.

I'll go even further; in my opinion, the value proposition of Value 4 Value has a negative influence on bitcoin adoption. Because so many people will start under this model, hoping to make a living or at least break even on their hobby project, they'll soon turn sour.

This negative impact is due to an over-supply of content, or the implication that you have to get sponsors. I regularly got that message from people like, “Why don’t you get a sponsor?” They act like I don’t know that working for free isn't paying the bills. I know. Trust me on that. I work for free out of passion and genuine interest. If that gets punished, then there's something really wrong with this community.

On sponsors: the problem with this approach is that you can't call your own sponsor's product "a toy-grade piece of unreliable garbage" on-air if you take their money. And if you do, it's probably not doing wonders for your income.

Not only are you sacrificing your independence, but you're also stripping away the very essence of why you started the podcast in the first place. On that subject, I can't bring myself to read ads about dog food or some insurance company's new scammy tactics to "protect" people. If I go that route, I would whore myself out to the extent that I might as well start a "banging hot crypto of the week" podcast and shill any NFT, meme-coin, and garbage scam token out there if they pay me. That's also not the "value" people tune in for, I guess (although some Belgians still make a career out of doing so).

Broken value

There's an element of guaranteed discontent in Value4Value that's profoundly broken.

So here's my breakdown:

In Value4Value, you have at least two elements in the equation: the maker of goods/services/content and the receiver of such content, who also turns into the giver.

The first one is the first giver, the second one is the second giver in the exchange.

The first giver, often a content creator, pours their heart, time, and energy into something, expecting nothing in return but hoping for recognition or a fair exchange. Instead, they're often left with scraps while others freely take, use, and even profit from their work without so much as a nod. Giving credit is passé as well... even people who blatantly steal stuff from others smile in your face and go on with their "business". Result: the first giver feels scammed out of their time.

Then there's the second giver, the one who actually decides to pay up and not be a bitch. They give away their hard-earned fiat or bitcoin for something they could've gotten for "free", hoping to keep the cycle of generosity alive. But as reality sets in, they realize they're the only ones p(l)aying this game, leaving them feeling cheated, especially when they hear about others enjoying the same benefits without contributing a sat. Result: the second giver feels scammed out of their money, but at least they got something out of it.

Both ends

In essence, V4V is a scam on both ends.

There's the dishonest way where you might earn a bit, but at the cost of your integrity (for example, praising a rotten hardware wallet like it's a revolutionary invention while collecting the kickbacks). Or there's the so-called honorable path where you gain nothing but scorn and perhaps a pat on the back before someone else capitalizes on your efforts. (Not talking about the people here even ridiculing you for doing something for free).

This leaves a bitter feeling for everyone involved. Those who dare to charge for their services face another kind of scam - the guilt of appearing to be in it for the money while potentially exploiting the naive under the guise of community spirit. And those who speak up about it, like that documentary maker and some artists alike, are all getting brutally laughed at. Because it's a taboo subject to "complain" about income.

But that's not the issue here; I never started a podcast to earn a living or make money. I would be mad doing so and thinking so, certainly not in this market and community. The deeper issue is less trivial, however: when value for value is not recognized, and there are hardly any widespread tools to really capitalize on it, then it's a negative point for bitcoin adoption.

(Just an example) People who run the podcast feed on their own website steal potential income from me by circumventing a good podcast 2.0 platform like the Fountain app. It's probably well meant, to spread the word, but in general, it's profiting from content in the most lazy way possible.

You can prevent that from happening by making the feed private, but then you need to pay a service fee, which you can't pay because 90% of the bitcoiners are too cheap to pay for it. So you pay it out of your own pocket, only to get the critique about your podcast being "behind a paywall". So... you either let yourself be ripped off even further and earn less every episode... Or you just give up, take everything offline, and go work at McDonald's (at least they pay you by the hour, and then you're in the fiat scam and you know it!).

The same goes for artists who get their designs, logos, and artwork copied or see some other artwork that's "heavily inspired" by their own creation popping up somewhere else.

And don't get me started on people copying tweets, ideas, parts of a blog post, and re-telling it to pass it off as their own idea in a book or their own content channels (even some pretty famous people in the bitcoin space do this on a regular basis; you have to get your content somewhere, I guess, after years of getting free tickets to any conference and enjoying life in our little bubble of misfits and backroom deals).

We route around problems

One of Bitcoin's amazing properties is that it isn't bringing you "yield" on itself. One bitcoin doesn't generate more bitcoin by printing more bitcoin, like in fiat. You can't just sit on your ass and get more diluted Mickey Mouse money.

So if you want to be active in the space, you have to either sell yourself (your soul maybe included), or sell a product you have total control over (your own brand of orange-themed cuddly toys for grown-up men, hoodies, umbrellas, paintings with the same themes everyone else does, 3D printed action figures of yourself, or whatever you can come up with that's not too embarrassing to show up with at a conference).

It's in fact no laughing matter. In bitcoin, we're used to routing around problems.

According to me, the broader adoption of bitcoin and its ethos (mind my words here) cannot grow and be successful if we don't solve this problem. The majority of content creators aren't the "big names" with their big middlemen sponsors (even a few got sponsored by FTX and Celsius Network back in the day, and currently a lot of them eat out the hands of some hardware wallet manufacturers and exchanges). These smaller names and new people, make content and art or the likes in order to grow their audience, have fun, learn and make a bit of money on the side if possible. Some of them even want to make a real career out of it. That's all fine.

As a community we need to learn to support people in a decent way.

Some initiatives I've seen were also utterly flawed, so we need to do better. The idea of a "bitcoin influencer" team, for example, was, as far as I could tell, an utter failure from the start, certainly if I saw some people in that group at a conference dry-humping a potential beneficiary (or the other way around; we all route around problems in our own special way :), then I somehow start to question their motives. But it might also be my imagination; the end result is the same; everyone still sleeps on their proverbial kitchen table while delivering free stuff.

We often claim that the fiat world drains us of our energy, time, and effort in order to reward us in 'melting' fiat currency. Well... at least they got a melting ice cube instead of the proverbial pat on the back on the black hoodie you wear in support of someone else's project.

If bitcoin ground-level pleb things, run by real people, need to be successful to grow bitcoin awareness, then we need to find a better solution for this problem. Otherwise, many people will be utterly turned off by the promising "peer-to-peer" world they've stepped into. It not only turns them into the fiat-slave mindset again but also discourages people from building and doing cool things. No one likes to be ripped off. No one likes to work for free. No one likes to be spit in the face and get dirty looks or eye-rolls when you enter the room.

And no, don’t invent things just for me; I’m fine.

I see donations and likes/shares as a real-life measuring stick for the quality and reach of my work. With an average of 3 retweets and shares per episode, it's a failure. And with 13,420 sats over 7 episodes, it's not a big deal, but it's something. Many people in the space would be happy to get such a gift for 18 hours of work.1

Like the famous monologue in the movie Trainspotting, we could also ask ourselves collectively, ... Choose Bitcoin. Choose Value4Value. Choose a scam. Choose life... which scam do you prefer?

Will you choose working for free for bitcoin? Or choose life?

thank you for reading,

by … Kim DV for @AVBpodcast :

no donation button here for obvious reasons

1 sarcasm, a beggar near the Brussels Central station makes more money just sitting on his ass with a Mc Donald’s cup in hand telling people “ s'il te plaît “I’ll have to use my best Tone Vays impersonation voice for saying this, “..but actually “Value for Value, is à scàm”.

We hear a lot about Value4Value in bitcoin. People giving some content, good or service, and then getting their proverbial hat out, to collect whatever it’s deemed worth to the audience.\ \ Some examples:\ \ - Jimmy makes a nice website for the community, and gets a donation from whoever likes the work he put in.\ \ - Mathilda makes a nice series of travel videos about bitcoin places, and does a little dance, and people can donate sats.\ \ - Jody makes a podcast about bitcoin philosophy and the local community and people can donate for every episode.

That’s all very nice in theory.\ \ I keep thinking about a documentary maker who told his audience he slept on a kitchen table because he had no money for a bed. And he would stop doing things V4V because of it. I can understand that sentiment, and I fear he’s not alone in that feeling.\ \ One of the other artists in attendance told me “then he should work harder and make better things or get some sponsors”. Which contradicts the V4V model, and is rather disparaging towards that filmmaker.\ \ In the world of "Value for Value" (V4V), the system is rigged from the get-go because of dodgy fundamentals based on goodwill. It borders on a scam, be it a voluntary run scam from both sides.\ \ Unfortunately, there are very, very low percentages of people (let alone bitcoiners) that have goodwill. At least in Europe (I don’t know how this exactly works out in the US or Asia).\ \ A personal friend of mine ran a history podcast for many years, and got more kudos, and gifts than I ever had in bitcoin.\ \ And no, it’s not about the money, the income. You can call me a sour person all you want for saying this. It’s mainly about feeling a slight appreciation for what you do\ \ On top of that, the subject itself is a bit of a “no-no” to talk about. If you do, you’re often branded a complainer, a wanker, a negative Nancy. Well… that’s one of the signs you participate in a sort of scam. When you point out holes in the scheme, you’re branded a complainer or a negativist; you often also get ousted.

That’s the way we’re all supposed to go thumbs-up on everything while sleeping on a kitchen table, while doing “good for the community.\ \ To clarify (some close to the reality numbers):\ \ If you put in ± 10 hours in an episode in total in a history podcast, you got rewarded about 50€ (usually from people appreciating the story and effort, relating to the part in history).\ \ If you put in ± 6 hours in two episodes in total (less research than a history podcast), in bitcoin in Belgium, you get rewarded with 2 likes (one from myself and one from another bitcoiner), and no re-shares and about 2000 sats per episode on a good day, and 0 on a bad day.

unknown bitcoin artist holding an orange cup

New people in bitcoin who fall for this need to be aware of the loss of time they'll face (which some can stomach, others won't...). Maybe this blog post can help prevent people from turning sour or becoming blatantly against the community.

People who have a good "ethics" stance in bitcoin will probably start to do things in V4V, hoping they get a good return for their work. You dive into this for the love of the community, for proof-of-work in Bitcoin, and maybe to carve out a name for yourself, or so you believe. But over time, this passion isn't enough to outweigh the hours, effort, and the relentless critique from the community's armchair philosophers – and trust me, there's no shortage of those.

Soon, however, such goodwill people will start to be disgruntled or at least less happy about the V4V model's returns. Let's face it, Value4Value was a marketing term invented by Adam Curry, along with Dave Jones, to launch a concept as an anti-movement against Apple's hegemony.\ It was meant to preserve free speech (that, it succeeded in; they've put the "free" in free speech).\ For themselves, because they had the first-mover advantage, it worked out fine. And until like the end of 2015, it worked very well.\ \ However, I never heard of anyone after the year 2015 who lived off a value4value scheme having enough income and being happy about the exchange of goods and services...\ \ Many podcasters resolve this by asking a fee for their "full" private and ad-free stream. Others just quit or go full paid service. It's all good, as long as you pick your poison and don't rely too much on appreciation in this community.

I'll go even further; in my opinion, the value proposition of Value 4 Value has a negative influence on bitcoin adoption. Because so many people will start under this model, hoping to make a living or at least break even on their hobby project, they'll soon turn sour.\ \ This negative impact is due to an over-supply of content, or the implication that you have to get sponsors. I regularly got that message from people like,\ “Why don’t you get a sponsor?”\ They act like I don’t know that working for free isn't paying the bills. I know. Trust me on that. I work for free out of passion and genuine interest. If that gets punished, then there's something really wrong with this community.\ \ On sponsors: the problem with this approach is that you can't call your own sponsor's product "a toy-grade piece of unreliable garbage" on-air if you take their money. And if you do, it's probably not doing wonders for your income.\ \ Not only are you sacrificing your independence, but you're also stripping away the very essence of why you started the podcast in the first place. On that subject, I can't bring myself to read ads about dog food or some insurance company's new scammy tactics to "protect" people.\ If I go that route, I would whore myself out to the extent that I might as well start a "banging hot crypto of the week" podcast and shill any NFT, meme-coin, and garbage scam token out there if they pay me.\ That's also not the "value" people tune in for, I guess (although some Belgians still make a career out of doing so).

Broken value

There's an element of guaranteed discontent in Value4Value that's profoundly broken.

So here's my breakdown:

In Value4Value, you have at least two elements in the equation: the maker of goods/services/content and the receiver of such content, who also turns into the giver.\ \ The first one is the first giver, the second one is the second giver in the exchange.\ \ The first giver, often a content creator, pours their heart, time, and energy into something, expecting nothing in return but hoping for recognition or a fair exchange. Instead, they're often left with scraps while others freely take, use, and even profit from their work without so much as a nod. Giving credit is passé as well... even people who blatantly steal stuff from others smile in your face and go on with their "business". Result: the first giver feels scammed out of their time.

Then there's the second giver, the one who actually decides to pay up and not be a bitch.\ They give away their hard-earned fiat or bitcoin for something they could've gotten for "free", hoping to keep the cycle of generosity alive.\ But as reality sets in, they realize they're the only ones p(l)aying this game, leaving them feeling cheated, especially when they hear about others enjoying the same benefits without contributing a sat.\ Result: the second giver feels scammed out of their money, but at least they got something out of it.

Both ends

In essence, V4V is a scam on both ends.

There's the dishonest way where you might earn a bit, but at the cost of your integrity (for example, praising a rotten hardware wallet like it's a revolutionary invention while collecting the kickbacks).\ Or there's the so-called honorable path where you gain nothing but scorn and perhaps a pat on the back before someone else capitalizes on your efforts. (Not talking about the people here even ridiculing you for doing something for free).

This leaves a bitter feeling for everyone involved. Those who dare to charge for their services face another kind of scam - the guilt of appearing to be in it for the money while potentially exploiting the naive under the guise of community spirit.\ And those who speak up about it, like that documentary maker and some artists alike, are all getting brutally laughed at. Because it's a taboo subject to "complain" about income.\ \ But that's not the issue here; I never started a podcast to earn a living or make money. I would be mad doing so and thinking so, certainly not in this market and community. The deeper issue is less trivial, however: when value for value is not recognized, and there are hardly any widespread tools to really capitalize on it, then it's a negative point for bitcoin adoption.

(Just an example) People who run the podcast feed on their own website steal potential income from me by circumventing a good podcast 2.0 platform like the Fountain app. It's probably well meant, to spread the word, but in general, it's profiting from content in the most lazy way possible.\ \ You can prevent that from happening by making the feed private, but then you need to pay a service fee, which you can't pay because 90% of the bitcoiners are too cheap to pay for it. So you pay it out of your own pocket, only to get the critique about your podcast being "behind a paywall".\ So... you either let yourself be ripped off even further and earn less every episode...\ Or you just give up, take everything offline, and go work at McDonald's (at least they pay you by the hour, and then you're in the fiat scam and you know it!).\ \ The same goes for artists who get their designs, logos, and artwork copied or see some other artwork that's "heavily inspired" by their own creation popping up somewhere else.\ \ And don't get me started on people copying tweets, ideas, parts of a blog post, and re-telling it to pass it off as their own idea in a book or their own content channels (even some pretty famous people in the bitcoin space do this on a regular basis; you have to get your content somewhere, I guess, after years of getting free tickets to any conference and enjoying life in our little bubble of misfits and backroom deals).

\ We route around problems\ \ One of Bitcoin's amazing properties is that it isn't bringing you "yield" on itself. One bitcoin doesn't generate more bitcoin by printing more bitcoin, like in fiat. You can't just sit on your ass and get more diluted Mickey Mouse money.

So if you want to be active in the space, you have to either sell yourself (your soul maybe included), or sell a product you have total control over (your own brand of orange-themed cuddly toys for grown-up men, hoodies, umbrellas, paintings with the same themes everyone else does, 3D printed action figures of yourself, or whatever you can come up with that's not too embarrassing to show up with at a conference).

It's in fact no laughing matter.\ In bitcoin, we're used to routing around problems.\ \ According to me, the broader adoption of bitcoin and its ethos (mind my words here) cannot grow and be successful if we don't solve this problem.\ The majority of content creators aren't the "big names" with their big middlemen sponsors (even a few got sponsored by FTX and Celsius Network back in the day, and currently a lot of them eat out the hands of some hardware wallet manufacturers and exchanges).\ These smaller names and new people, make content and art or the likes in order to grow their audience, have fun, learn and make a bit of money on the side if possible. Some of them even want to make a real career out of it. That's all fine.\ \ As a community we need to learn to support people in a decent way.\ \ Some initiatives I've seen were also utterly flawed, so we need to do better. The idea of a "bitcoin influencer" team, for example, was, as far as I could tell, an utter failure from the start, certainly if I saw some people in that group at a conference dry-humping a potential beneficiary (or the other way around; we all route around problems in our own special way :), then I somehow start to question their motives.\ But it might also be my imagination; the end result is the same; everyone still sleeps on their proverbial kitchen table while delivering free stuff.\ \ We often claim that the fiat world drains us of our energy, time, and effort in order to reward us in 'melting' fiat currency. Well... at least they got a melting ice cube instead of the proverbial pat on the back on the black hoodie you wear in support of someone else's project.\ \ If bitcoin ground-level pleb things, run by real people, need to be successful to grow bitcoin awareness, then we need to find a better solution for this problem. Otherwise, many people will be utterly turned off by the promising "peer-to-peer" world they've stepped into. It not only turns them into the fiat-slave mindset again but also discourages people from building and doing cool things. No one likes to be ripped off. No one likes to work for free. No one likes to be spit in the face and get dirty looks or eye-rolls when you enter the room.\ \ And no, don’t invent things just for me; I’m fine.\ \ I see donations and likes/shares as a real-life measuring stick for the quality and reach of my work.\ With an average of 3 retweets and shares per episode, it's a failure. And with 13,420 sats over 7 episodes, it's not a big deal, but it's something. Many people in the space would be happy to get such a gift for 18 hours of work.1

\ Like the famous monologue in the movie Trainspotting, we could also ask ourselves collectively, ...\ Choose Bitcoin.\ Choose Value4Value.\ Choose a scam.\ Choose life... which scam do you prefer?\ \ Will you choose working for free for bitcoin?\ Or choose life?

thank you for reading,

\ by … Kim DV for @AVBpodcast :

no donation button here for obvious reasons

1

sarcasm, a beggar near the Brussels Central station makes more money just sitting on his ass with a Mc Donald’s cup in hand telling people “ s'il te plaît “

@ c69b71dc:426ba763

Time Change: A Mini Jet Lag

The time change is more than just setting the clock forward or backward — it can disrupt our internal balance and lead to a range of health issues. Find out why the time change causes a mini jet lag and how you can deal with it.

Why the Time Change Throws Us Off Balance

The expected energy savings due to reduced artificial lighting demand have not been confirmed. Worse yet, the time change leads to an increase in workplace and traffic accidents, a higher risk of heart attacks, and even an increase in suicide rates. Many people struggle with the one-hour shift that happens twice a year. There is constant debate about whether to abolish it and which time should remain permanent...

Permanent Summer Time or Permanent Winter Time?

The time change triggers a mini jet lag that can last from a single day up to three weeks as the body adjusts its internal clock to the new rhythm.

Winter Time Aligns Best with Our Internal Clock

Our bodies follow the circadian rhythm, an internal clock designed for activity during daylight and rest when the sun sets.
Permanent summer time would mean longer darkness in the morning and extended daylight in the evening—this unnatural shift would completely disrupt our biological processes.

The Impact of Time Change on Our Health

Our internal clock regulates essential functions such as body temperature, hormone production, the cardiovascular system, and the sleep-wake cycle. This is why the time change often leads to headaches, fatigue, drowsiness, metabolic disorders, and even severe heart rhythm disturbances. Studies show that these disruptions can increase susceptibility to illnesses and psychological disorders.

Since the light-dark cycle dictates this internal clock, prolonged exposure to artificial light after sunset can shift it. When the time suddenly changes, it causes a disruption, throwing off our natural sleep rhythm.

Sleep Resets the Body!

During the night, the body regenerates:
- The brain is flushed with cerebrospinal fluid to clear out toxins.
- The body undergoes repair, detoxification, and waste removal.
- If the alarm clock rings an hour earlier, the body is still in "night mode" and unable to complete its recovery processes!

Most people already suffer from sleep disorders, whether trouble falling asleep or staying asleep. Added to this is the stress of daily life, which often depletes serotonin levels, reducing the body’s ability to produce melatonin —the sleep hormone. Blue light depletes magnesium in our body, disrupts the circadian rhythm, and interferes with melatonin production! We also know that the pineal gland’s melatonin production is impaired by fluoride found in toothpaste, water, and food!

What Can You Do About Sleep Disorders?

To regulate your sleep rhythm, you need healthy sleep hygiene:
- Minimize activity before bedtime.
- Avoid artificial light from TVs, smartphones, and e-readers.
- Ensure fresh air and a cool bedroom (around 18°C/64°F).
- Stick to consistent sleep and wake times — even on weekends!
- Reserve the bed and bedroom for sleep only — no heated discussions. - No heavy meals before bed.
- Use blue light or orange filter glasses to reduce artificial light exposure. - Air out the bedroom for 20 minutes before going to bed. - Use candlelight in the bathroom while brushing your teeth instead of turning on the harsh neon light.

If these adjustments don’t help, natural remedies, supplements, and herbal teas can provide support.

Natural Sleep Aids

Some well-known natural remedies include:
- Melatonin, Tryptophan, GABA, Magnesium
- Herbs such as Hops, Lavender, Chamomile, Passionflower, Valerian and organge peal and flower.

By aligning with nature’s rhythm and optimizing sleep habits, we can counteract the negative effects of the time change and restore balance to our bodies and minds.

I hope this helps you transition smoothly through this outrageous act of forcing us into "summer time" ⏰🌞

@ 8671a6e5:f88194d1

(original version: https://allesvoorbitcoin.substack.com/p/bitcoin-jobs-are-a-sham )\ The dream

For many people who learned to use, work with, understand and hold bitcoin, one goal consistently stands out: the dream to one day work in a bitcoin job. In my entourage, this was for a long time the main thing most tried to achieve.

The prospect of such job is to work in the bitcoin industry and it seems like a lofty goal: it combines innovation, technology and the opportunity to collaborate with like-minded individuals while earning bitcoin. It’s also “cool”.

It’s an industry (yes, it’s an industry now) that thrives on the promise of that ultimate payout: hard money, bitcoin. Who wouldn’t want that? Certainly if you word in a fiat job right now.

At the same time, this longing comes with certain expectations. People assume a bitcoin-related job will be exciting, rewarding, efficient, well-funded and will happen in a professional environment - that often is lacking in fiat jobs.

I hate to break it to you, fellow bitcoiners, but the oasis of bitcoin jobs you’re crawling toward through the scorching fiat desert is mostly a mirage. Once you arrive at what seems like a place of plenty, you’ll find just a few orange-colored rocks and maybe a lone palm tree with a single, withered coconut barely hanging on.

The main reason? The reality of bitcoin jobs isn’t as different from fiat jobs as you might expect—at least, not yet.

After all, bitcoiners should be “better” people, right? Unlike those fiat wage slaves who don’t realize that being paid in dirty fiat slowly makes them poorer, we like to think we’re ahead of the curve. We feel more vindicated, more enlightened—bitcoiners are the better, more evolved kind. Or so we tell ourselves.

The realization of how hard money actually shapes society has not yet fully matured. We’re all still in the discovery phase. Even with die hard bitcoiners and their respective job industry aren’t there yet. During this discovery phase, it’s important to not let ourselves be blinded by the sun in the desert. We need not to be blinded by the promises and the ideology to let ourselves be taken advantage of by fiat-minded people, even if they own a bitcoin company.

Hard money is the way forward. Bitcoin is the way forward. Most people and certainly their jobs and companies are lagging behind that reality.

Such a job is not (yet) going to bring you Valhalla (or its equivalent) in the form of a well-paid bitcoin job.

Let’s walk over the reasons as to why that is.

The Fiat (Brain) Drain We don’t need to spend much time summarizing how soul-crushing a fiat job can be. Countless books, blogs, and social media rants already detail how monotonous, pointless, and draining traditional employment is. And for those of you that need a crash course on that: The 1999 movie Office Space remains a masterpiece in this regard. By now, we’ve all worked for a version of “Bill Lumbergh” at one point or another.

Bill at INITECH Bill Lumbergh at Initech (Office Space) From a bitcoiner’s perspective, a fiat job is merely a temporary solution to the problem of liquidity for consumer tokens — tokens printed for free by an entity like a state system, which itself is a tax, deb-and-war engine. At the same time, there’s a good chance to get people out of their fiat jobs, purely on this promise, as I wrote in “the fiat brain drain“.

If you operate within that fiat world, you’re bound to these forces. On top of that, your purchasing power is continually siphoned away through inflation, and you get taxed out of any long-term wealth buildup. On the other hand, that same fiat system makes you dependent on their return in social safety and being regarded as “OK”.

Most bitcoiners want a bitcoin job, exactly to escape this pit of misery. To leave this Linkedin-vortex of fake, the loser mentality, its hierarchical nonsense and bureaucratic drudgery that will soon be rendered obsolete by automation and AI, compounding with the ongoing brain drain at the top of the innovation pyramid.

That’s a long-winded way of saying: a fiat job is financial quicksand. And you’re knee-deep in it.

The solution? “bitcoin jobs”

If a bitcoin job were truly the answer, the solution would be simple: launch a bitcoin company, hire bitcoiners willing to work for bitcoin and start building products and services that function in both the fiat and bitcoin worlds—emphasizing the transition to better money: bitcoin.

But without capital, you’re stuck, whether in fiat or bitcoin.

The framework may shift slightly, but the fundamental problem remains. Those with capital can secure real bitcoin jobs or start real bitcoin companies, just as those with financial backing in the fiat world can choose work, they enjoy without worrying about pay or job-hunting struggles.

That’s not to say someone with limited funds and no capital can’t start such a company, but they’ll quickly run into funding issues. bitcoin jobs require payment in bitcoin but also fiat funds to pay for real life goods at most suppliers and services. Unless you build your own office (if you need one anyway) you’ll be paying in fiat to rent some office space (pun intended).

If you lack capital (in bitcoin), you’ll hit a wall sooner rather than later. So, in comes “other capital” to save you.

Relying on larger entities, whether venture capital firms or industry-supporting companies, to cover expenses also comes at the cost of independence; if they even provide funding at all.

While there's no shortage of hype and excitement around bitcoin projects, actual funding for many of these ventures is speculative at best. When you want to help these projects out for free, there’s also no shortage of open arms, welcoming the free hours of work for a project you’re passionate about.

Numerous startups in the crypto space operate on shoestring budgets, relying on ICOs (Initial Coin Offerings) or venture capital more interested in hype than substance. This creates a precarious job environment where projects can disappear as quickly as they emerge, leaving employees stranded.

Sustainability, or lack thereof, is another major concern. Bitcoin jobs that promise longevity often come with a caveat: they're here today, but there's no guarantee they’ll last until next month. The market’s volatility means projects can lose funding or pivot dramatically within months of no technical challenges or a dry up for demand pops up. Finding a position with a horizon beyond a few months in the future is rare, making long-term career planning in this sector a gamble. Most of these jobs are not even bitcoin jobs, but are presented that way. They’re mostly a sham!1

Pay up

Then there's the pay.

Even if you secure a position, and it’s a bit more long-term, then the promise of "decent, livable pay" is often unfulfilled. While some roles offer competitive salaries, many pay in bitcoin, which fluctuates of course (by the way, that’s a good thing, volatility is our friend). The trustworthiness of some of these bitcoin jobs, mostly at smaller startups can get even worse, where you as an employee are at risk to not receive promised payments at all due to funding issues.

The bitcoin job market presents a paradox: it's full of opportunities, yet few meet the criteria for being well-funded, sustainable, and offering reliable compensation and protection. For those looking to build a career in this space, caution is key do your due diligence, don’t trust verify on potential employers and diversify your own skills can help mitigate the risks somewhat.

Until the industry matures and offers greater stability and accountability, the allure of bitcoin jobs may remain problematic.

The harsh reality is, that the carrot of a bitcoin job, that’s been dangling in front of most bitcoiners’ eyes for a long time, is tempting, but mostly just that: an unreachable goal, not because you can’t get that job, but more because that job was a mirage on itself. The dream that most of us have is to leave the rat-race with its unfulfilling fiat jobs, to work in a better way, a job that pays in hard money and builds a better world.

I’m afraid that dream is just that: a dream. These jobs are mostly reserved for the inner-circle of some venture capitalist’s entourage or revolve around making use (or misuse) of bitcoiner’s ideology and goals in life.

But there’s hope Many people want to be paid in bitcoin, but until we transition to a bitcoin standard, they still need to cover expenses in a fiat-dominated world.

Finding a good fiat job is exhausting. And once you’ve been fully orange-pilled, earning fiat starts to feel like an even bigger scam—arguably worse than the Value for Value model. In the end, you’ll either work for peanuts or turn into a peanut yourself — a very salty one at that.

Definition

Let’s clarify what a bitcoin job" actually is, since the term often gets misused for anything remotely fintech or crypto-related anyway.

A bitcoin job involves real, tangible work — simply holding a title isn’t enough. It provides income paid directly in bitcoin, not in stocks, tokens (or other cryptocurrencies other than bitcoin). It requires a significant commitment of time, making it distinct from minor side gigs like washing a neighbor’s car — unless that gig somehow becomes your primary source of income.

Owning a company doesn’t count as a job on its own; you must be actively working in it (for example as a real hands-on developer or COO/CEO).

The role must be tied to a legitimate organization — a company or corporation — not just a loosely organized WhatsApp group pretending to be a business. It should be official, meaning it’s on the books, taxable where applicable, and, in some cases (such as in the EU), may even come with social benefits and retirement benefit buildup.

The focus must remain bitcoin only. Companies dealing exclusively in altcoins, memecoins, hype-cycles and the likes don’t qualify. Multi-cryptocurrency businesses, like exchanges or DeFi platforms, are more fintech than pure bitcoin. For example, a job at a bitcoin-only hardware company fits the definition, whereas a position at a Solana based trading platform does not.

About that real work: A disorganized WhatsApp group isn’t a company but a hobby project.

If a job doesn’t meet these criteria above, it’s unlikely to be a true bitcoin job. Looking at listings on platforms like Bitvocation2 (link) or the job sections of bitcoin/crypto companies, many roles appear to be standard fiat economy positions but within a bitcoin (or altcoins) focused company. (by the way, the Bitvocation team runs an excellent service that has a direct reach from open vacancies towards possible employees,… I love it).

For example, an HR role at a bitcoin company is fundamentally the same as one at a traditional fiat company (except for the occasional ordering of extra black hoodies for employees). Choosing to be paid in bitcoin may qualify it as a “bitcoin job,” but the role itself would exist in any industry. These positions could be considered bitcoin jobs since they contribute to our ecosystem while being financially tied to it.

From personal experience and observations, smaller bitcoin startups face significant challenges in securing funding. What is puzzling about this, that all this difficult environment to get a projects/startups funded happens, despite bitcoin being a trillion-dollar asset and major holders like Strategy accumulating nearly 500,000 BTC.

Top bitcoin company holdings:

BlackRock IBIT: 587,050 BTC Strategy (MSTR): 478,740 BTC Coinbase (COIN): 1,051,650 BTC Binance: 765,072 BTC Bitfinex: 359,687 BTC

Beyond funding, these startups also struggle to attract talent for a longer period of time. Traditional finance, fintech and even the broader cryptocurrency industry usually offer higher salaries and more perceived prestige (not in the bitcoin space, but outside) along with the perks of having a half fiat / “crypto” job.

Employees who choose to work in bitcoin often do so for ideological reasons, willingly giving up the stability and structure of traditional industries. This is both a strength and a risk. While bitcoin startups operate in a highly innovative space, they also face volatility and uncertainty.

The survival rate of bitcoin startups is low—around 10% make it past three years (according to Seedtable data). Most crypto-related job openings come from DeFi projects and general crypto firms, while jobs focused solely on bitcoin are typically backed by venture capital.

For instance: Fedi (federated lightning “all-in one freedom tool”) is employing between 27 and 50 people according to publicly available data. It’s backed by ‘Ego Death Capital’.

Other key VC firms in the bitcoin space include:

Axiom BTC Bitcoin Opportunity Fund Bitcoiner Ventures Epoch VC Lightning Ventures Ten31 Timechain VC

These firms play a crucial role in sustaining bitcoin-only businesses, as traditional funding routes remain scarce. Once inside these companies, there’s often a push for maximum efficiency and lean operations — while working with hard money. This paradox is frequently overlooked. Hard money means a long term time horizon. While bitcoin jobs often offer the polar opposite.

Bitcoin jobs are highly competitive on a global scale as well. Much like remote fiat jobs, most bitcoin-related roles can be done from anywhere in the world, meaning candidates are competing with a vast international talent pool. This makes securing a position even more challenging (especially for Europeans) in an industry that operates in a fast-changing and often challenging technological landscape from a marketing and cost/benefits perspective.

For example, a company developing a bitcoin PoS (point-of-sale) system for cash registers and checkout online, needs traction to sell its product and grow its user base but needs fiat funds to acquire material and develop point of sale devices and software.

This requires sales people, developers and a substantial portion of marketing efforts. That’s something that cannot be sustained solely by grassroots initiatives on bitcoin alone, and can’t be achieved by a single developer working out of a small studio on his own. To scale, these companies often rely on seed funding, venture capital or grants from larger bitcoin-focused firms. Even then, working for such companies, even if you’re really motivated often doesn’t pay the (fiat) bills.

The same applies to teams building something on Lightning Network, projects developing on Liquid or companies attempting to establish bitcoin-native lending platforms and the likes. If (like me) you want to work for them, be prepared to do it either for free, off the books or for peanuts… or become a peanut yourself.

The realities of bitcoin Jobs

Based on my experience working in bitcoin-related roles—particularly within the EU (where taxation and regulations are more rigid and social security systems are extensive) several common challenges emerged:

High intensity: The work often demands significant time and effort due to the passion-driven nature of the industry. This is good, a fiat job is often draining, while a bitcoin job is more energetic and intense in nature. We’re building something good. It’s also good to remember that this energy is often used to make you do the work, without the reward.

Lower pay: At least in my experience; salaries tend to be lower compared to traditional tech or finance roles, and I’ve even seen bickering over the price like it was a flee market.

Funding struggles: Many bitcoin startups face ongoing financial uncertainty, troubles finding investors, or getting investors that cancel their deals or disappear entirely.

Constant involvement: There’s little room to “clock out” at 5 PM; engagement is often expected beyond regular hours (it comes with the territory).

Lack of benefits: Many bitcoin jobs offer no social security, no formal employment status, and often operate in a gray area, or completely “off the books”. For a company selling their product the whole world over for example, you would expect something else than back alley deals with whispered price agreements. The contracts however, are usually centered about keeping the employee in check and their knowledge protected.

Presence of “grifters”: Some individuals with strong reputations or connections manage to secure more lucrative positions, despite contributing little meaningful work. That’s human nature of course, and it seems to happen in in fiat, bitcoin or voluntary work alike.

bitcoin employee receiving his contract and first payment Some argue that receiving bitcoin as payment is, in itself, a form of financial (and social) security. However, this ignores the realities of daily life. In the absence of a global bitcoin standard, workers still depend on government regulations, taxation systems, and social security structures (in Europe).

For instance, if a bitcoiner falls ill for two weeks, they may lose their income entirely. Meanwhile, an employee at a tech firm, bank, or blue-chip company would typically receive paid sick leave or at least retain their job security. I know this is a fairly Euro-zone centered view, and the rest of the world has of course different ways to compensate for that. Either this happens through having lower taxation, or having more self-reliance on private savings and “buffers” to build up your own protection as an employee.

It all comes down to either getting paid more to have your expenses and social security covered by yourself, or getting paid less and leaving a cut for some state fiat system that will take care of your social benefits if they’re needed.

So far, from what I heard an experienced in a bitcoin job it’s the worst of both worlds: low(er) pay, more uncertainty and no security benefits. That’s something that can be fixed.

While social protections in the fiat system are funded through mechanisms like inflation and money printing, and a lot of taxation, their “benefits” are tangible (and expensive).

In contrast, many bitcoin jobs rely on ideological commitment, which can sometimes be exploited, where individuals are expected to work for little or no compensation - while forgoing the protections that traditional employment offers.

Even is we are more sovereign as bitcoiners you sooner or later get older, get sick, have a baby or have other phases in your life. For the companies themselves this is also a huge challenge: the hiring of people and paying them in hard money, means that their output and real life worth to the company needs to be higher in total over all employees than the holding of the same amount of bitcoin. Since bitcoin itself has the magnificent feature of not bearing yield (just holding 1 bitcoin doesn’t pay you 0.01 bitcoin dividend). Even more so, the employee is paid in bitcoin, and can thus be more free, have hard money that is inflation resistent over a longer time period. Retaining these employees for longer periods of time (if that’s your goal anyway as a bitcoin company) can be a real challenge. I don’t see how you can retain people doing an intense job while you pay them in the hardest money there is. I guess motivation is really the key here.

The fiat world has that covered (we know how of course and we know they do it though printing money and taxation).

The bitcoin world still needs to figure out how to deal with these situations. Just promising people some bitcoin is not enough.

Building a better future for bitcoin jobs One of the biggest obstacles according to me, is to a true bitcoin standard — aside from the challenge of using bitcoin for manufacturing and basic goods (which I’ll address later)— is the lack of meaningful job opportunities that provide both bitcoin salaries and financial security on a mid to longer time frame. Bitcoiners or no bitcoiners, people don’t want to hop from one job to another every few weeks.

I think sooner or later the bitcoin space will need a global bitcoin social security framework — one that reimagines financial protection for workers without simply replicating the state-run systems of the fiat world, and certainly doesn’t replicate the European systems that failed so miserably (my country for example imposes the highest tax in the world counted from employer to employee in order to pay for social benefits). If the employer pays 6000€, the taxation causes the employee to receive a mere 3440€.

Today, a bitcoin-only company is already rare. A bitcoin company that offers proper employment contracts, benefits, actually pays on time, has a future ànd has a minimal plan for some form of social protection is nearly nonexistent.

That’s why I argue: real bitcoin jobs are almost nonexistent.

What we have instead are:

• A bunch of hobby projects and side gigs in the v4v space.

• Startups that offer little to no worker protection and rely on goodwill or fantastic ideas with a lack of fundamental backing.

• A handful of legitimate companies that still depend on fiat-based social security and payment structures to operate and attract and keep talent.

The missing link: financial and social security for bitcoin jobs

We need more companies like Bitwage3 as well where bitcoin jobs and their administrative and payment handlings are taken care of (also in Europe), They must be entirely bitcoin-only or have a subsidiary that works exclusively on pure bitcoin jobs.

With a yet-to-be-invented social system which gives bitcoin employees a way to build up an securing their well-being in the long rung (bitcoiners don’t stay forever 21). That would increase this btc-job market and the legitimacy of its real life employment.

Without this, working in bitcoin will continue to feel unstable, informal, or even go “off-the-books” because of a lack of alternatives.

If bitcoin companies want to attract top talent, they need to offer more than just ideology and goodwill. There are countless people that had bad experiences with this.

Many skilled professionals currently enjoy secure fiat jobs with stable salaries, full benefits, and usually minimal effort. Yet, they want out. They know fiat jobs are a trip though quicksand.

Without a competitive alternative however, bitcoin businesses will continue to rely on those willing to struggle financially and living like a “value4value” ideologist (or even worse: grifters), others will be people that contribute real value but are underpaid and face difficulties using their bitcoin earnings for everyday expenses like rent, groceries and utilities (without resorting to questionable third-party services)

That last category of employees or possible employees is often overlooked. There’s a whole generation that doesn’t sit on a stash of bitcoin in order to fund their own “ideal job” or have ideology of an open-source encrypt everything and live on bitcoin only warrior. Some people have to pay their rent, buy food or at least know they’ll be still having a job tomorrow if they work hard.

In the oasis of a bitcoin job in 2025, you soon crawl to that one lousy coconut in that one palm tree in order to survive.

“Tick-tock next job”

Today, most so-called "bitcoin jobs" fall into one of two categories :

Not actually bitcoin-related – Corporate blockchain projects, scams, token-based schemes, memecoins, rugpull/defi/web3/NFT peddlers, and “anything on the blockchain” services without a proper oracle… and other type of distractions. These are sometimes presented as bitcoin jobs, yet they aren’t.

Paid in bitcoin but lacking real merit : Low or mediocre wages, no benefits and no worker protection, in an industry where your value lasts about as long as the average block time (pun intended).

Well-paid longer term real bitcoin jobs: Good pay, on the books, meaningful and well organized pure bitcoin job, for the happy few who have good connections.

If bitcoin employment is to be more than just a passion project where dedicated workers struggle while CEOs and media personalities live lavishly, we need a sustainable framework that provides real financial longevity, funding and real bitcoin jobs.

Without it, bitcoin will remain an industry with unstable or even sketchy niche job offerings, with neither long-term careers nor financial (let alone social) security. If people can’t build a future in bitcoin jobs, the right talent won’t be attracted in the first place. Which is amazing, come to thing of it, we’re probably the only industry that thrives on hard money, we should have the most quality jobs and most happy employees.

Passion alone isn’t enough. When everyone knows bitcoin jobs are short-term or unstable, motivation dwindles. The reality is that some people, myself included, would rather endure a dull fiat job, than waste their valuable time and money on an industry that fails to offer real career prospects and real support for their talent.

All the billions held by all these big companies and fund, is not put to use for their actual builders and talent it seems. I can’t explain the billions of holdings and on the other side, the total lack of funding happening on projects and startups.

More so, the vast majority of bitcoin jobs are nor jobs, nor bitcoin jobs or not anything that can be defined as such. And it shows.

That’s why a lot of products and services are currently in the lousy (lazy) state they’re in and that’s why almost all bitcoiners are either stuck in a fiat job or work within the bitcoin system for peanuts out of ideology or through good connections. Right now, other than the possible btc in your wallet, there’s little to no difference between bitcoin jobs and fiat jobs in that regard. No wonder choosing safety of a fiat job still wins, and I hope that will change one day. Until then, working for Bill Lumbergh has it’s perks.

by Kim De Vos for AVB tips: here

Disclaimer: To provide content more regularly, I occasionally write my posts with AI assistance. Rest assured, the core ideas and writing are always 100% my own creation and it’s edited by at least two humans!

Footnotes:

1 definition : The word "sham" refers to something that is theater or designed to deceive. It describes a situation, scheme, or entity that appears legitimate on the surface but lacks substance, authenticity, or real core values.

2 https://t.me/bitvocationfeed

3 https://bitwage.com/en-us/The dream

For many people who learned to use, work with, understand and hold bitcoin, one goal consistently stands out: the dream to one day work in a bitcoin job.\ In my entourage, this was for a long time the main thing most tried to achieve.

The prospect of such job is to work in the bitcoin industry and it seems like a lofty goal: it combines innovation, technology and the opportunity to collaborate with like-minded individuals while earning bitcoin. It’s also “cool”.\ \ It’s an industry (yes, it’s an industry now) that thrives on the promise of that ultimate payout: hard money, bitcoin.\ Who wouldn’t want that?\ Certainly if you word in a fiat job right now.

At the same time, this longing comes with certain expectations. People assume a bitcoin-related job will be exciting, rewarding, efficient, well-funded and will happen in a professional environment - that often is lacking in fiat jobs.

I hate to break it to you, fellow bitcoiners, but the oasis of bitcoin jobs you’re crawling toward through the scorching fiat desert is mostly a mirage. Once you arrive at what seems like a place of plenty, you’ll find just a few orange-colored rocks and maybe a lone palm tree with a single, withered coconut barely hanging on.

The main reason? The reality of bitcoin jobs isn’t as different from fiat jobs as you might expect—at least, not yet.\ \ After all, bitcoiners should be “better” people, right? Unlike those fiat wage slaves who don’t realize that being paid in dirty fiat slowly makes them poorer, we like to think we’re ahead of the curve. We feel more vindicated, more enlightened—bitcoiners are the better, more evolved kind. Or so we tell ourselves.\ \ The realization of how hard money actually shapes society has not yet fully matured. We’re all still in the discovery phase. Even with die hard bitcoiners and their respective job industry aren’t there yet. During this discovery phase, it’s important to not let ourselves be blinded by the sun in the desert. We need not to be blinded by the promises and the ideology to let ourselves be taken advantage of by fiat-minded people, even if they own a bitcoin company.\ \ Hard money is the way forward. Bitcoin is the way forward. Most people and certainly their jobs and companies are lagging behind that reality.

Such a job is not (yet) going to bring you Valhalla (or its equivalent) in the form of a well-paid bitcoin job.\ \ Let’s walk over the reasons as to why that is.

The Fiat (Brain) Drain

We don’t need to spend much time summarizing how soul-crushing a fiat job can be. Countless books, blogs, and social media rants already detail how monotonous, pointless, and draining traditional employment is. And for those of you that need a crash course on that: The 1999 movie Office Space remains a masterpiece in this regard. By now, we’ve all worked for a version of “Bill Lumbergh” at one point or another.

Bill Lumbergh at Initech (Office Space)

From a bitcoiner’s perspective, a fiat job is merely a temporary solution to the problem of liquidity for consumer tokens — tokens printed for free by an entity like a state system, which itself is a tax, deb-and-war engine. At the same time, there’s a good chance to get people out of their fiat jobs, purely on this promise, as I wrote in “the fiat brain drain“.\ \ If you operate within that fiat world, you’re bound to these forces. On top of that, your purchasing power is continually siphoned away through inflation, and you get taxed out of any long-term wealth buildup. On the other hand, that same fiat system makes you dependent on their return in social safety and being regarded as “OK”.

Most bitcoiners want a bitcoin job, exactly to escape this pit of misery. To leave this Linkedin-vortex of fake, the loser mentality, its hierarchical nonsense and bureaucratic drudgery that will soon be rendered obsolete by automation and AI, compounding with the ongoing brain drain at the top of the innovation pyramid.

That’s a long-winded way of saying: a fiat job is financial quicksand. And you’re knee-deep in it.

The solution? “bitcoin jobs”

\ If a bitcoin job were truly the answer, the solution would be simple: launch a bitcoin company, hire bitcoiners willing to work for bitcoin and start building products and services that function in both the fiat and bitcoin worlds—emphasizing the transition to better money: bitcoin.

But without capital, you’re stuck, whether in fiat or bitcoin.

The framework may shift slightly, but the fundamental problem remains. Those with capital can secure real bitcoin jobs or start real bitcoin companies, just as those with financial backing in the fiat world can choose work, they enjoy without worrying about pay or job-hunting struggles.

That’s not to say someone with limited funds and no capital can’t start such a company, but they’ll quickly run into funding issues. bitcoin jobs require payment in bitcoin but also fiat funds to pay for real life goods at most suppliers and services. Unless you build your own office (if you need one anyway) you’ll be paying in fiat to rent some office space (pun intended).

If you lack capital (in bitcoin), you’ll hit a wall sooner rather than later.\ So, in comes “other capital” to save you.

Relying on larger entities, whether venture capital firms or industry-supporting companies, to cover expenses also comes at the cost of independence; if they even provide funding at all.\ \ While there's no shortage of hype and excitement around bitcoin projects, actual funding for many of these ventures is speculative at best. When you want to help these projects out for free, there’s also no shortage of open arms, welcoming the free hours of work for a project you’re passionate about.

Numerous startups in the crypto space operate on shoestring budgets, relying on ICOs (Initial Coin Offerings) or venture capital more interested in hype than substance. This creates a precarious job environment where projects can disappear as quickly as they emerge, leaving employees stranded.

Sustainability, or lack thereof, is another major concern.\ Bitcoin jobs that promise longevity often come with a caveat: they're here today, but there's no guarantee they’ll last until next month.\ The market’s volatility means projects can lose funding or pivot dramatically within months of no technical challenges or a dry up for demand pops up.\ Finding a position with a horizon beyond a few months in the future is rare, making long-term career planning in this sector a gamble. Most of these jobs are not even bitcoin jobs, but are presented that way. They’re mostly a sham!1

\ Pay up

\ Then there's the pay.\ \ Even if you secure a position, and it’s a bit more long-term, then the promise of "decent, livable pay" is often unfulfilled.\ While some roles offer competitive salaries, many pay in bitcoin, which fluctuates of course (by the way, that’s a good thing, volatility is our friend).\ The trustworthiness of some of these bitcoin jobs, mostly at smaller startups can get even worse, where you as an employee are at risk to not receive promised payments at all due to funding issues.

The bitcoin job market presents a paradox: it's full of opportunities, yet few meet the criteria for being well-funded, sustainable, and offering reliable compensation and protection.\ For those looking to build a career in this space, caution is key do your due diligence, don’t trust verify on potential employers and diversify your own skills can help mitigate the risks somewhat.

Until the industry matures and offers greater stability and accountability, the allure of bitcoin jobs may remain problematic.

The harsh reality is, that the carrot of a bitcoin job, that’s been dangling in front of most bitcoiners’ eyes for a long time, is tempting, but mostly just that: an unreachable goal, not because you can’t get that job, but more because that job was a mirage on itself.\ The dream that most of us have is to leave the rat-race with its unfulfilling fiat jobs, to work in a better way, a job that pays in hard money and builds a better world.\ \ I’m afraid that dream is just that: a dream. These jobs are mostly reserved for the inner-circle of some venture capitalist’s entourage or revolve around making use (or misuse) of bitcoiner’s ideology and goals in life.

But there’s hope

Many people want to be paid in bitcoin, but until we transition to a bitcoin standard, they still need to cover expenses in a fiat-dominated world.

Finding a good fiat job is exhausting. And once you’ve been fully orange-pilled, earning fiat starts to feel like an even bigger scam—arguably worse than the Value for Value model.\ In the end, you’ll either work for peanuts or turn into a peanut yourself — a very salty one at that.

Definition

Let’s clarify what a bitcoin job" actually is, since the term often gets misused for anything remotely fintech or crypto-related anyway.

A bitcoin job involves real, tangible work — simply holding a title isn’t enough. It provides income paid directly in bitcoin, not in stocks, tokens (or other cryptocurrencies other than bitcoin).\ It requires a significant commitment of time, making it distinct from minor side gigs like washing a neighbor’s car — unless that gig somehow becomes your primary source of income.

Owning a company doesn’t count as a job on its own; you must be actively working in it (for example as a real hands-on developer or COO/CEO).\ \ The role must be tied to a legitimate organization — a company or corporation — not just a loosely organized WhatsApp group pretending to be a business. It should be official, meaning it’s on the books, taxable where applicable, and, in some cases (such as in the EU), may even come with social benefits and retirement benefit buildup.

The focus must remain bitcoin only. Companies dealing exclusively in altcoins, memecoins, hype-cycles and the likes don’t qualify. Multi-cryptocurrency businesses, like exchanges or DeFi platforms, are more fintech than pure bitcoin.\ For example, a job at a bitcoin-only hardware company fits the definition, whereas a position at a Solana based trading platform does not.\ \ About that real work: A disorganized WhatsApp group isn’t a company but a hobby project.

If a job doesn’t meet these criteria above, it’s unlikely to be a true bitcoin job. Looking at listings on platforms like Bitvocation2 (link) or the job sections of bitcoin/crypto companies, many roles appear to be standard fiat economy positions but within a bitcoin (or altcoins) focused company.\ (by the way, the Bitvocation team runs an excellent service that has a direct reach from open vacancies towards possible employees,… I love it).

For example, an HR role at a bitcoin company is fundamentally the same as one at a traditional fiat company (except for the occasional ordering of extra black hoodies for employees).\ Choosing to be paid in bitcoin may qualify it as a “bitcoin job,” but the role itself would exist in any industry. These positions could be considered bitcoin jobs since they contribute to our ecosystem while being financially tied to it.

From personal experience and observations, smaller bitcoin startups face significant challenges in securing funding.\ What is puzzling about this, that all this difficult environment to get a projects/startups funded happens, despite bitcoin being a trillion-dollar asset and major holders like Strategy accumulating nearly 500,000 BTC.

Top bitcoin company holdings:

BlackRock IBIT: 587,050 BTC\ Strategy (MSTR): 478,740 BTC\ Coinbase (COIN): 1,051,650 BTC\ Binance: 765,072 BTC\ Bitfinex: 359,687 BTC

Beyond funding, these startups also struggle to attract talent for a longer period of time. Traditional finance, fintech and even the broader cryptocurrency industry usually offer higher salaries and more perceived prestige (not in the bitcoin space, but outside) along with the perks of having a half fiat / “crypto” job.\ \ Employees who choose to work in bitcoin often do so for ideological reasons, willingly giving up the stability and structure of traditional industries. This is both a strength and a risk. While bitcoin startups operate in a highly innovative space, they also face volatility and uncertainty.

The survival rate of bitcoin startups is low—around 10% make it past three years (according to Seedtable data). Most crypto-related job openings come from DeFi projects and general crypto firms, while jobs focused solely on bitcoin are typically backed by venture capital.

For instance: Fedi (federated lightning “all-in one freedom tool”) is employing between 27 and 50 people according to publicly available data. It’s backed by ‘Ego Death Capital’.\ \ Other key VC firms in the bitcoin space include:

Axiom BTC\ Bitcoin Opportunity Fund\ Bitcoiner Ventures\ Epoch VC\ Lightning Ventures\ Ten31\ Timechain VC

These firms play a crucial role in sustaining bitcoin-only businesses, as traditional funding routes remain scarce.\ Once inside these companies, there’s often a push for maximum efficiency and lean operations — while working with hard money. This paradox is frequently overlooked. Hard money means a long term time horizon. While bitcoin jobs often offer the polar opposite.

Bitcoin jobs are highly competitive on a global scale as well. Much like remote fiat jobs, most bitcoin-related roles can be done from anywhere in the world, meaning candidates are competing with a vast international talent pool.\ This makes securing a position even more challenging (especially for Europeans) in an industry that operates in a fast-changing and often challenging technological landscape from a marketing and cost/benefits perspective.

For example, a company developing a bitcoin PoS (point-of-sale) system for cash registers and checkout online, needs traction to sell its product and grow its user base but needs fiat funds to acquire material and develop point of sale devices and software.\ \ This requires sales people, developers and a substantial portion of marketing efforts. That’s something that cannot be sustained solely by grassroots initiatives on bitcoin alone, and can’t be achieved by a single developer working out of a small studio on his own.\ To scale, these companies often rely on seed funding, venture capital or grants from larger bitcoin-focused firms. Even then, working for such companies, even if you’re really motivated often doesn’t pay the (fiat) bills.

The same applies to teams building something on Lightning Network, projects developing on Liquid or companies attempting to establish bitcoin-native lending platforms and the likes. If (like me) you want to work for them, be prepared to do it either for free, off the books or for peanuts… or become a peanut yourself.

The realities of bitcoin Jobs

\ Based on my experience working in bitcoin-related roles—particularly within the EU (where taxation and regulations are more rigid and social security systems are extensive) several common challenges emerged:

High intensity: The work often demands significant time and effort due to the passion-driven nature of the industry. This is good, a fiat job is often draining, while a bitcoin job is more energetic and intense in nature. We’re building something good. It’s also good to remember that this energy is often used to make you do the work, without the reward.

Lower pay: At least in my experience; salaries tend to be lower compared to traditional tech or finance roles, and I’ve even seen bickering over the price like it was a flee market.

Funding struggles: Many bitcoin startups face ongoing financial uncertainty, troubles finding investors, or getting investors that cancel their deals or disappear entirely.

Constant involvement: There’s little room to “clock out” at 5 PM; engagement is often expected beyond regular hours (it comes with the territory).

Lack of benefits: Many bitcoin jobs offer no social security, no formal employment status, and often operate in a gray area, or completely “off the books”.\ For a company selling their product the whole world over for example, you would expect something else than back alley deals with whispered price agreements. The contracts however, are usually centered about keeping the employee in check and their knowledge protected.

Presence of “grifters”: Some individuals with strong reputations or connections manage to secure more lucrative positions, despite contributing little meaningful work. That’s human nature of course, and it seems to happen in in fiat, bitcoin or voluntary work alike.

bitcoin employee receiving his contract and first payment

Some argue that receiving bitcoin as payment is, in itself, a form of financial (and social) security. However, this ignores the realities of daily life. In the absence of a global bitcoin standard, workers still depend on government regulations, taxation systems, and social security structures (in Europe).

For instance, if a bitcoiner falls ill for two weeks, they may lose their income entirely. Meanwhile, an employee at a tech firm, bank, or blue-chip company would typically receive paid sick leave or at least retain their job security.\ I know this is a fairly Euro-zone centered view, and the rest of the world has of course different ways to compensate for that. Either this happens through having lower taxation, or having more self-reliance on private savings and “buffers” to build up your own protection as an employee.\ \ It all comes down to either getting paid more to have your expenses and social security covered by yourself, or getting paid less and leaving a cut for some state fiat system that will take care of your social benefits if they’re needed.\ \ So far, from what I heard an experienced in a bitcoin job it’s the worst of both worlds: low(er) pay, more uncertainty and no security benefits. That’s something that can be fixed.

While social protections in the fiat system are funded through mechanisms like inflation and money printing, and a lot of taxation, their “benefits” are tangible (and expensive).\ \ In contrast, many bitcoin jobs rely on ideological commitment, which can sometimes be exploited, where individuals are expected to work for little or no compensation - while forgoing the protections that traditional employment offers.\ \ Even is we are more sovereign as bitcoiners you sooner or later get older, get sick, have a baby or have other phases in your life.\ For the companies themselves this is also a huge challenge: the hiring of people and paying them in hard money, means that their output and real life worth to the company needs to be higher in total over all employees than the holding of the same amount of bitcoin. Since bitcoin itself has the magnificent feature of not bearing yield (just holding 1 bitcoin doesn’t pay you 0.01 bitcoin dividend).\ Even more so, the employee is paid in bitcoin, and can thus be more free, have hard money that is inflation resistent over a longer time period. Retaining these employees for longer periods of time (if that’s your goal anyway as a bitcoin company) can be a real challenge. I don’t see how you can retain people doing an intense job while you pay them in the hardest money there is.\ I guess motivation is really the key here.\ \ The fiat world has that covered (we know how of course and we know they do it though printing money and taxation).\ \ The bitcoin world still needs to figure out how to deal with these situations. Just promising people some bitcoin is not enough.

Building a better future for bitcoin jobs

One of the biggest obstacles according to me, is to a true bitcoin standard — aside from the challenge of using bitcoin for manufacturing and basic goods (which I’ll address later)— is the lack of meaningful job opportunities that provide both bitcoin salaries and financial security on a mid to longer time frame.\ Bitcoiners or no bitcoiners, people don’t want to hop from one job to another every few weeks.

I think sooner or later the bitcoin space will need a global bitcoin social security framework — one that reimagines financial protection for workers without simply replicating the state-run systems of the fiat world, and certainly doesn’t replicate the European systems that failed so miserably (my country for example imposes the highest tax in the world counted from employer to employee in order to pay for social benefits).\ If the employer pays 6000€, the taxation causes the employee to receive a mere 3440€.\ \ Today, a bitcoin-only company is already rare.\ A bitcoin company that offers proper employment contracts, benefits, actually pays on time, has a future ànd has a minimal plan for some form of social protection is nearly nonexistent.

That’s why I argue: real bitcoin jobs are almost nonexistent.

What we have instead are:\ \ - A bunch of hobby projects and side gigs in the v4v space.

- Startups that offer little to no worker protection and rely on goodwill or fantastic ideas with a lack of fundamental backing.

- A handful of legitimate companies that still depend on fiat-based social security and payment structures to operate and attract and keep talent.

The missing link: financial and social security for bitcoin jobs

\ We need more companies like Bitwage3 as well where bitcoin jobs and their administrative and payment handlings are taken care of (also in Europe), They must be entirely bitcoin-only or have a subsidiary that works exclusively on pure bitcoin jobs.\ \ With a yet-to-be-invented social system which gives bitcoin employees a way to build up an securing their well-being in the long rung (bitcoiners don’t stay forever 21).\ That would increase this btc-job market and the legitimacy of its real life employment.\ \ Without this, working in bitcoin will continue to feel unstable, informal, or even go “off-the-books” because of a lack of alternatives.

If bitcoin companies want to attract top talent, they need to offer more than just ideology and goodwill.\ There are countless people that had bad experiences with this.\ \ Many skilled professionals currently enjoy secure fiat jobs with stable salaries, full benefits, and usually minimal effort. Yet, they want out. They know fiat jobs are a trip though quicksand.\ \ Without a competitive alternative however, bitcoin businesses will continue to rely on those willing to struggle financially and living like a “value4value” ideologist (or even worse: grifters), others will be people that contribute real value but are underpaid and face difficulties using their bitcoin earnings for everyday expenses like rent, groceries and utilities (without resorting to questionable third-party services)

That last category of employees or possible employees is often overlooked. There’s a whole generation that doesn’t sit on a stash of bitcoin in order to fund their own “ideal job” or have ideology of an open-source encrypt everything and live on bitcoin only warrior. Some people have to pay their rent, buy food or at least know they’ll be still having a job tomorrow if they work hard.\ \ In the oasis of a bitcoin job in 2025, you soon crawl to that one lousy coconut in that one palm tree in order to survive.

“Tick-tock next job”

\ Today, most so-called "bitcoin jobs" fall into one of two categories :

1. Not actually bitcoin-related – Corporate blockchain projects, scams, token-based schemes, memecoins, rugpull/defi/web3/NFT peddlers, and “anything on the blockchain” services without a proper oracle… and other type of distractions.\ These are sometimes presented as bitcoin jobs, yet they aren’t.

2. Paid in bitcoin but lacking real merit :\ Low or mediocre wages, no benefits and no worker protection, in an industry where your value lasts about as long as the average block time (pun intended).

3. Well-paid longer term real bitcoin jobs:\ Good pay, on the books, meaningful and well organized pure bitcoin job, for the happy few who have good connections.

If bitcoin employment is to be more than just a passion project where dedicated workers struggle while CEOs and media personalities live lavishly, we need a sustainable framework that provides real financial longevity, funding and real bitcoin jobs.

Without it, bitcoin will remain an industry with unstable or even sketchy niche job offerings, with neither long-term careers nor financial (let alone social) security.\ If people can’t build a future in bitcoin jobs, the right talent won’t be attracted in the first place. Which is amazing, come to thing of it, we’re probably the only industry that thrives on hard money, we should have the most quality jobs and most happy employees.

Passion alone isn’t enough.\ When everyone knows bitcoin jobs are short-term or unstable, motivation dwindles. The reality is that some people, myself included, would rather endure a dull fiat job, than waste their valuable time and money on an industry that fails to offer real career prospects and real support for their talent.\ \ All the billions held by all these big companies and fund, is not put to use for their actual builders and talent it seems. I can’t explain the billions of holdings and on the other side, the total lack of funding happening on projects and startups.\ \ More so, the vast majority of bitcoin jobs are nor jobs, nor bitcoin jobs or not anything that can be defined as such.\ And it shows.\ \ That’s why a lot of products and services are currently in the lousy (lazy) state they’re in and that’s why almost all bitcoiners are either stuck in a fiat job or work within the bitcoin system for peanuts out of ideology or through good connections.\ Right now, other than the possible btc in your wallet, there’s little to no difference between bitcoin jobs and fiat jobs in that regard.\ No wonder choosing safety of a fiat job still wins, and I hope that will change one day.\ Until then, working for Bill Lumbergh has it’s perks.

by Kim De Vos for AVB\ tips: here

Disclaimer: To provide content more regularly, I occasionally write my posts with AI assistance. Rest assured, the core ideas and writing are always 100% my own creation and it’s edited by at least two humans!

---

Footnotes:

1

definition : The word "sham" refers to something that is theater or designed to deceive. It describes a situation, scheme, or entity that appears legitimate on the surface but lacks substance, authenticity, or real core values.

2

https://t.me/bitvocationfeed

3

https://bitwage.com/en-us/

@ 4925ea33:025410d8

1. O que é um Aromaterapeuta?

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

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

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

---

2. Como um Aromaterapeuta Pode Ajudar?

Você pode procurar um aromaterapeuta para diferentes necessidades, como:

✔ Questões Emocionais e Psicológicas

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

Apoio na redução do estresse, ansiedade e insônia.

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

✔ Questões Físicas

Dores musculares e articulares.

Problemas respiratórios como rinite, sinusite e tosse.

Distúrbios digestivos leves.

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

✔ Saúde da Pele e Cabelos

Tratamento para acne, dermatites e psoríase.

Cuidados com o envelhecimento precoce da pele.

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

✔ Bem-estar e Qualidade de Vida

Melhora da concentração e foco, aumentando a produtividade.

Estímulo da disposição e energia.

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

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

---

3. Como Funciona uma Consulta com um Aromaterapeuta?

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

✔ Anamnese (Entrevista Inicial)

Perguntas sobre saúde física, emocional e estilo de vida.

Levantamento de sintomas, histórico médico e possíveis alergias.

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

✔ Escolha dos Óleos Essenciais

Seleção dos óleos mais indicados para o caso.

Consideração das propriedades terapêuticas, contraindicações e combinações seguras.

✔ Definição do Método de Uso

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

Inalação: difusores, colares aromáticos, vaporização.

Uso tópico: massagens, óleos corporais, compressas.

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

✔ Plano de Acompanhamento

Instruções detalhadas sobre o uso correto dos óleos essenciais.

Orientação sobre frequência e duração do tratamento.

Possibilidade de retorno para ajustes no protocolo.

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

---

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

@ 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. 🫡

@ 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

@ b2d670de:907f9d4a

onion-service-nostr-relays

A list of nostr relays exposed as onion services.

The list

| Relay name | Description | Onion url | Operator | Payment URL | Payment options | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | nostr.oxtr.dev | Same relay as clearnet relay nostr.oxtr.dev | ws://oxtrdevav64z64yb7x6rjg4ntzqjhedm5b5zjqulugknhzr46ny2qbad.onion | operator | N/A | N/A | | relay.snort.social | Same relay as clearnet relay relay.snort.social | wss://skzzn6cimfdv5e2phjc4yr5v7ikbxtn5f7dkwn5c7v47tduzlbosqmqd.onion | operator | N/A | N/A | | nostr.thesamecat.io | Same relay as clearnet relay nostr.thesamecat.io | ws://2jsnlhfnelig5acq6iacydmzdbdmg7xwunm4xl6qwbvzacw4lwrjmlyd.onion | operator | N/A | N/A | | nostr.land | The nostr.land paid relay (same as clearnet) | ws://nostrland2gdw7g3y77ctftovvil76vquipymo7tsctlxpiwknevzfid.onion | operator | Payment URL | BTC LN | | bitcoiner.social | No auth required, currently | ws://bitcoinr6de5lkvx4tpwdmzrdfdpla5sya2afwpcabjup2xpi5dulbad.onion | operator | N/A | N/A | | relay.westernbtc.com | The westernbtc.com paid relay | ws://westbtcebhgi4ilxxziefho6bqu5lqwa5ncfjefnfebbhx2cwqx5knyd.onion | operator | Payment URL | BTC LN | | freelay.sovbit.host | Free relay for sovbit.host | ws://sovbitm2enxfr5ot6qscwy5ermdffbqscy66wirkbsigvcshumyzbbqd.onion | operator | N/A | N/A | | nostr.sovbit.host | Paid relay for sovbit.host | ws://sovbitgz5uqyh7jwcsudq4sspxlj4kbnurvd3xarkkx2use3k6rlibqd.onion | operator | N/A | N/A | | nostr.wine | 🍷 nostr.wine relay | ws://nostrwinemdptvqukjttinajfeedhf46hfd5bz2aj2q5uwp7zros3nad.onion | operator | Payment URL | BTC LN, BTC, Credit Card/CashApp (Stripe) | | inbox.nostr.wine | 🍷 inbox.nostr.wine relay | ws://wineinboxkayswlofkugkjwhoyi744qvlzdxlmdvwe7cei2xxy4gc6ad.onion | operator | Payment URL | BTC LN, BTC | | filter.nostr.wine | 🍷 filter.nostr.wine proxy relay | ws://winefiltermhqixxzmnzxhrmaufpnfq3rmjcl6ei45iy4aidrngpsyid.onion | operator | Payment URL | BTC LN, BTC | | N/A | N/A | ws://pzfw4uteha62iwkzm3lycabk4pbtcr67cg5ymp5i3xwrpt3t24m6tzad.onion:81 | operator | N/A | N/A | | nostr.fractalized.net | Free relay for fractalized.net | ws://xvgox2zzo7cfxcjrd2llrkthvjs5t7efoalu34s6lmkqhvzvrms6ipyd.onion | operator | N/A | N/A | | nfrelay.app | nfrelay.app aggregator relay (nostr-filter-relay) | ws://nfrelay6saohkmipikquvrn6d64dzxivhmcdcj4d5i7wxis47xwsriyd.onion | operator | N/A | N/A | relay.nostr.net | Public relay from nostr.net (Same as clearnet) | ws://nostrnetl6yd5whkldj3vqsxyyaq3tkuspy23a3qgx7cdepb4564qgqd.onion | operator | N/A | N/A | | nerostrator | Free to read, pay XMR to relay | ws://nerostrrgb5fhj6dnzhjbgmnkpy2berdlczh6tuh2jsqrjok3j4zoxid.onion | operator |Payment URL | XMR | | nostr.girino.org | Public relay from nostr.girino.org | ws://gnostr2jnapk72mnagq3cuykfon73temzp77hcbncn4silgt77boruid.onion | operator | N/A | N/A | | wot.girino.org | WoT relay from wot.girino.org | ws://girwot2koy3kvj6fk7oseoqazp5vwbeawocb3m27jcqtah65f2fkl3yd.onion | operator | N/A | N/A | | haven.girino.org/{outbox, inbox, chat, private} | Haven smart relay from haven.girino.org | ws://ghaven2hi3qn2riitw7ymaztdpztrvmm337e2pgkacfh3rnscaoxjoad.onion/{outbox, inbox, chat, private} | operator | N/A | N/A | | relay.nostpy.lol | Free Web of Trust relay (Same as clearnet) | ws://pemgkkqjqjde7y2emc2hpxocexugbixp42o4zymznil6zfegx5nfp4id.onion | operator |N/A | N/A | | Poster.place Nostr Relay | N/A | ws://dmw5wbawyovz7fcahvguwkw4sknsqsalffwctioeoqkvvy7ygjbcuoad.onion | operator | N/A | N/A | | Azzamo Relay | Azzamo Premium Nostr relay. (paid) | ws://q6a7m5qkyonzb5fk5yv4jyu3ar44hqedn7wjopg737lit2ckkhx2nyid.onion | operator | Payment URL | BTC LN | | Azzamo Inbox Relay | Azzamo Group and Private message relay. (Freemium) | ws://gp5kiwqfw7t2fwb3rfts2aekoph4x7pj5pv65re2y6hzaujsxewanbqd.onion | operator | Payment URL | BTC LN | | Noderunners Relay | The official Noderunners Nostr Relay. | ws://35vr3xigzjv2xyzfyif6o2gksmkioppy4rmwag7d4bqmwuccs2u4jaid.onion | operator | Payment URL | BTC LN |

Contributing

Contributions are encouraged to keep this document alive. Just open a PR and I'll have it tested and merged. The onion URL is the only mandatory column, the rest is just nice-to-have metadata about the relay. Put N/A in empty columns.

If you want to contribute anonymously, please contact me on SimpleX or send a DM on nostr using a disposable npub.

Operator column

It is generally preferred to use something that includes a NIP-19 string, either just the string or a url that contains the NIP-19 string in it (e.g. an njump url).

@ 0461fcbe:35a474dd

Background

I will start with a disclaimer: I'm all-in on Nostr. But before that, I spent 4 years building on ActivityPub. Then in Feb 2023 I built a bridge between ActivityPub and Nostr, and in Dec 2024 I built another bridge between Nostr and Bluesky. Most of all I am committed to open source and the decentralized vision. Having experience with all 3 major protocols, I still think Nostr is the best, but Bluesky outshines it in some major areas. The main reason for this blog is to explore the things Bluesky does better than us, and to point out why I still think Nostr is the best solution.

This is a technical blog. For a more high level overview of decentralized protocols, see: https://soapbox.pub/blog/comparing-protocols/

Data Model

Nostr and Bluesky both allow users to store any type of data in a single, unified format. Nostr calls them events. Bluesky calls them records. They are mostly interchangeable ideas, but the way the data is stored and retrieved is very different.

It's worth noting that, like Nostr and ActivityPub, Bluesky is capable of doing anything under the sun. It's a misconception that it can't. You can build whatever Reddit, TikTok, or other stuff clone on Bluesky just fine. It's limited more by the huge knowledge gap you have to overcome than it is by anything about its data model.

NSIDs vs Kinds

Nostr events use a "kind" number, eg 1, to distinguish different type of events. Bluesky records use what they call an "NSID" (namespace identifier), eg app.bsky.feed.post, which is a reverse-DNS string notation.

Nostr's "kind": 1 is equivalent to Bluesky's "$type": app.bsky.feed.post.

I think Bluesky's system is better, because it allows developers to feel like what they built is "real" without having to get it merged into the NIPs repo, which is basically like an IANA of Nostr kind numbers. I believe this causes significant problems on Nostr, and makes people feel like they are being held back by others. That being said, the counter-argument is that kind numbers encourage interoperability for the very same reasons. The barriers to adding new kinds pushes people to work with what's already there.

Text Content Formatting

Kind 1 events ("plain text notes", ie "Tweets") on Nostr have developed in a haphazard way over time, by many people piling things onto it without taking a step back to assess a unified way to handle it. Some examples include:

• NIP-21 nostr: URIs
• imeta tags
• inline media embeds as URLs without imeta tags
• unspec'd Markdown rendering by some clients
• legacy specs such as positional mentions (eg, #[0], mostly gone now)

What we have now is quite a mess, and it's something Bluesky beats us on badly.

Bluesky has a plaintext content field that can be displayed as-is. In addition, it has a "facets" field, which is a structured JSON object, that adds rich-text information such as formatting (bold, italic, etc), links, mentions of users, and whatever else metadata about the text.

This is an extensible system that beats even options like Markdown, due to its ability to include native extension like mentions, and its ability to be parsed by any programming language or software environment.

Bluesky is the winner here.

Syncronization

Nostr and Bluesky are both thought to be descended from Scuttlebutt, an older decentralized protocol.

On Scuttlebutt, a user's whole post history needed to be available for them to make a new post. Scuttlebutt uses a linked list, so each new event would need to reference the one before it. Only linear paths are allowed, so if a "fork" occurred (intentionally or not), only one version would be kept, and the other discarded. This lead to occasional publishing issues, but it allowed readers to assemble a complete view.

Nostr strayed from this draconian approach, removing it entirely and allowing user data to be fragmented. Meanwhile Bluesky, instead of removing it entirely, made it work more like git so that branches could be merged.

Both approaches have tradeoffs. Bluesky's approach has much higher complexity. Also, it's sometimes considered an advantage for events to be fragmented (eg Nostr allows sending DMs to specialized relays for enhanced privacy).

But Bluesky has a true account "sync" mechanism, and Nostr does not. Nostr can send filters to relays to gather events, but it cannot know when to stop looking. Proposals like Negentropy in Nostr do not solve author syncing, and only make typical relay filtering more efficient.

I think it's important to think about Nostr's "outbox" problem as a syncronization problem, and for Nostr to approach syncronization with the goal of syncronizing authors specifically.

I think Bluesky "wins" this one, if only because they have solved a problem that we haven't. Instead of copying their solution, I think Nostr should try to learn from this to recharacterize the "outbox" problem as an author syncing problem, and see if we can come up with a better solution that works for Nostr.

Knowledge Gap

One of the biggest hurdles of Bluesky, and by extension one of the greates appeals of Nostr, is in how easy it is to learn and build on.

Nostr can be understood in a couple of hours. Mastering it is difficult, but limited only by your time and imagination. Hundreds of developers are building new projects on Nostr today. Based on my experience, it seems to me that the Nostr developer community is larger than that of both ActivityPub and Bluesky combined.

Bluesky on the other hand requires a Harvard degree in Blueskyology. I believe that ameteur coders feel a sense of superiority after spending six weeks learning how to commit a post. To learn Bluesky you will have to sift through thousands of technical documents about all kinds of abstractions, especially related to IPFS and IPLD. You will have to master unnecessary technologies like CBOR (which is basically just JSON except it's in binary and takes up the same amount of space). And you will be frequently pointed to academic topics such as "DAG" and "graph theory", all just to say "it's a fucking graph". I will never understand why people will take simple concepts such as a "tree", and then make it harder to understand on purpose by saying it's more than that.

While building on Bluesky, I began to question if the creators did this on purpose. I wondered if they tried to make it complex on purpose, as a sort of IQ test and protective measure to weed out the undeireables. In my view, a truly free and open network must be accessible to all, with the hope that even non-programmers could learn how it works.

Technical complexity is not just an issue of inclusion, but also security. ActivityPub software has been found to be littered with major security holes due to its inherently complex design, while Nostr's simple design makes its attack surface extremely minimal. Bluesky has already had a few mishaps, and it makes me wonder how Bluesky will fare in the long term.

Decentralization

I will keep this short. Bluesky is designed to be decentralized, but isn't. It reminds me of the communist idea about the "withering away of the state". The idea is that you're supposed to first sieze power and become the new state, and then under your rule the state will slowly disappear because you are doing all the right communist things. I think this is basically how Bluesky sees itself (whether they agree with the analogy or not).

Nostr is decentralized, but it is a loaded gun. You're more likely to kill yourself with a gun than someone else. This is on purpose, because it wholly embraces the consequnces of being truly decentralized.

In my view Nostr gets it right. Social media has been done to death by now, so I do not think it's worth the compromise to prioritize UX over decentralization. If that's the case we have not fixed anything. It's best to start with the purist idea and work backwards to UX, rather than start with UX and work backwards to decentralization. Many people have already written extensively about the decentralization of Bluesky, so I'll leave it at that.

@ 6389be64:ef439d32

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

House Democrats’ MEME Act: A Bad Joke?

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

Senate Banking’s First Digital Asset Hearing: The Real Target Is You

Cynthia Lummis chaired the first digital asset hearing, and—surprise!—it was all about control. The discussion centered on stablecoins, AML, and KYC regulations, with witnesses suggesting Orwellian measures like freezing stablecoin transactions unless pre-approved by authorities. What was barely mentioned? Bitcoin. They want full oversight of stablecoins, which is really about controlling financial freedom. Expect more nonsense targeting self-custody wallets under the guise of stopping “bad actors.”

Bank of America and PayPal Want In on Stablecoins

Bank of America’s CEO openly stated they’ll launch a stablecoin as soon as regulation allows. Meanwhile, PayPal’s CEO paid for a hat using Bitcoin—not their own stablecoin, Pi USD. Why wouldn’t he use his own product? Maybe he knows stablecoins aren’t what they’re hyped up to be. Either way, the legacy financial system is gearing up to flood the market with stablecoins, not because they love crypto, but because it’s a tool to extend U.S. dollar dominance.

MetaPlanet Buys the Dip

Japan’s MetaPlanet issued $13.4M in bonds to buy more Bitcoin, proving once again that institutions see the writing on the wall. Unlike U.S. regulators who obsess over stablecoins, some companies are actually stacking sats.

UK Expands Crypto Seizure Powers

Across the pond, the UK government is pushing legislation to make it easier to seize and destroy crypto linked to criminal activity. While they frame it as going after the bad guys, it’s another move toward centralized control and financial surveillance.

Bitcoin Tools & Tech: Arc, SatoChip, and Nunchuk

Some bullish Bitcoin developments: ARC v0.5 is making Bitcoin’s second layer more efficient, SatoChip now supports Taproot and Nostr, and Nunchuk launched a group wallet with chat, making multisig collaboration easier.

The Bottom Line

The state is coming for financial privacy and control, and stablecoins are their weapon of choice. Bitcoiners need to stay focused, keep their coins in self-custody, and build out parallel systems. Expect more regulatory attacks, but don’t let them distract you—just keep stacking and transacting in ways they can’t control.

🎧 Listen to the full episode here: https://fountain.fm/episode/PYITCo18AJnsEkKLz2Ks

💰 Support the show by boosting sats on Podcasting 2.0! and I will see you on the other side.

@ a5caac8b:172ed717

Descubre una Oportunidad Única: Nuestra Propiedad Rústica en Tulum con Potencial Inmenso

Buscamos personas interesadas en explorar una inversión sólida, sostenible y alineada con el futuro de las finanzas descentralizadas. Queremos compartir con ustedes nuestra propiedad excepcional ubicada en La Veleta, Tulum, un lugar donde la naturaleza se fusiona con el estilo de vida moderno y el ecosistema Bitcoin.

Características destacadas de esta joya rústica:

• Construcción robusta: Diseñamos esta propiedad con materiales locales como piedra y Chucum, reflejando autenticidad y resistencia.
• Fuente propia de agua: Garantiza independencia hídrica, un valor inigualable en la región.
• Vegetación abundante: Un oasis verde que conecta directamente con la esencia de Tulum.
• Ubicación estratégica: Está súper céntrica, rodeada de los sitios más hermosos de la región, perfecta tanto para residencia como para negocio.
• Documentación al día: Todo está en regla y listo para transacciones seguras.

Nuestra propuesta para la administración y finanzas

Estamos buscando colaboradores para gestionar y/o comprar esta propiedad. Ya sea mediante plataformas como Nostr, Telegram o Element (en Matrix), podemos coordinarnos de manera eficiente para cualquier aspecto relacionado con la propiedad.

Además, si están interesados en adquirirla, queremos destacar que recientemente ajustamos el precio en 170,000 USD menos tras cuatro años en el mercado. Este cambio refleja nuestro compromiso con encontrar a los socios ideales que valoren no solo la belleza del lugar, sino también su potencial financiero dentro del ecosistema Bitcoin.

Por qué invertir aquí?

1. Negocio rentable: Ideal para emprendedores que deseen desarrollar proyectos turísticos, ecológicos o incluso tecnológicos en una de las regiones más codiciadas del mundo.
2. Valorización asegurada: La tendencia inmobiliaria en Tulum sigue creciendo año con año.
3. Sostenibilidad y tecnología: Combina la magia natural de México con herramientas innovadoras.

Comunicación Multilingüe

Ofrecemos la posibilidad de comunicarnos en español, alemán e inglés, lo que facilitará la interacción con inversores de diferentes partes del mundo.

No duden en contactarnos si son visionarios dispuestos a explorar nuevas formas de inversión en bienes raíces utilizando Bitcoin. Estamos emocionados por conectar con ustedes y construir juntos un futuro próspero.

Contacto: No duden en escribirnos. Respondemos todas sus preguntas con detalle y entusiasmo. ¡Juntos podemos transformar esta propiedad en un proyecto extraordinario!

---

TulumRealEstate #BitcoinFriendly #SustainableLiving #InvestInTulum #RusticCharm #PropertyForSale #DecentralizedFinance #TulumDreams

---

Discover a Unique Opportunity: Our Rustic Property in Tulum with Incredible Potential

We are looking for individuals interested in exploring a solid, sustainable investment aligned with the future of decentralized finance. We want to share with you our exceptional property located in La Veleta, Tulum—a place where nature blends seamlessly with modern living and the Bitcoin ecosystem.

Key Features of this Rustic Gem:

• Sturdy construction: We designed this property using local materials like stone and Chucum, reflecting authenticity and durability.
• Own water source: Ensures hydrological independence, an invaluable asset in the region.
• Abundant vegetation: A lush green haven that connects directly with the essence of Tulum.
• Strategic location: Centrally located, surrounded by the most beautiful spots in the region, perfect for both residential and business use.
• Up-to-date documentation: Everything is in order and ready for secure transactions.

Our Proposal for Management and Finances

We are seeking collaborators to manage and/or purchase this property. Whether through platforms like Nostr, Telegram or Element (on Matrix), we can efficiently coordinate any aspect related to the property.

Additionally, if you're interested in acquiring it, we’d like to highlight that we recently reduced the price by $170,000 USD after four years on the market. This adjustment reflects our commitment to finding the ideal partners who appreciate not only the beauty of the place but also its financial potential within the Bitcoin ecosystem.

Why Invest Here?

1. Profitable business opportunity: Perfect for entrepreneurs looking to develop tourism, ecological, or even tech projects in one of the world's most sought-after regions.
2. Guaranteed appreciation: The real estate trend in Tulum continues to grow year after year.
3. Sustainability and technology: Combines the natural magic of Mexico with innovative tools.

Multilingual Communication

We offer the possibility of communicating in Spanish, German, and English, making interaction easier for investors from around the world.

Don’t hesitate to reach out if you’re visionaries eager to explore new ways to invest in real estate using Bitcoin. We’re excited to connect with you and build a prosperous future together.

Contact: Feel free to write to us. We’ll be happy to answer all your questions in detail and with enthusiasm. Together, we can turn this property into an extraordinary project!

---

TulumRealEstate #BitcoinFriendly #SustainableLiving #InvestInTulum #RusticCharm #PropertyForSale #DecentralizedFinance #TulumDreams

---

Entdeckt eine einzigartige Gelegenheit: Unsere rustikale Immobilie in Tulum mit enormem Potenzial

Wir suchen Personen, die daran interessiert sind, eine feste, nachhaltige Investition zu tätigen, die sich auf die Zukunft der dezentralisierten Finanzen ausrichtet. Wir möchten euch unsere außergewöhnliche Immobilie in La Veleta, Tulum vorstellen – ein Ort, an dem Natur nahtlos mit dem modernen Leben und dem Bitcoin-Ekosystem verschmilzt.

Herausragende Merkmale dieser rustikalen Perle:

• Robuste Bauweise: Wir haben diese Immobilie mit lokalen Materialien wie Stein und Chucum gebaut, um Authentizität und Beständigkeit widerzuspiegeln.
• Eigen Quelle: Sicherstellt wertvolle Wasserunabhängigkeit, ein unschätzbarer Vorteil in der Region.
• Reiche Vegetation: Ein grünes Paradies, das euch direkt mit der Essenz von Tulum verbindet.
• Strategisch günstige Lage: Zentral gelegen, umgeben von den schönsten Plätzen der Region, ideal sowohl für Wohnzwecke als auch für Geschäfte.
• Aktuelle Dokumentation: Alles ist aktuell und bereit für sichere Transaktionen.

Unser Angebot zur Verwaltung und Finanzen

Wir suchen Mitstreiter, um diese Immobilie gemeinsam zu verwalten und/oder zu kaufen. Ob über Plattformen wie Nostr, Telegram oder Element (auf Matrix), können wir alle Aspekte der Immobilie effizient koordinieren.

Außerdem, wenn ihr Interesse habt, sie zu erwerben, möchten wir betonen, dass wir den Preis kürzlich um 170.000 USD gesenkt haben, nachdem sie vier Jahre lang auf dem Markt war. Diese Anpassung spiegelt unser Engagement wider, die idealen Partner zu finden, die nicht nur die Schönheit des Ortes schätzen, sondern auch sein finanzielles Potenzial im Bitcoin-Ekosystem.

Warum hier investieren?

1. Rentables Geschäft: Ideal für Unternehmer, die Tourismus-, ökologische oder sogar technologische Projekte in einer der weltweit begehrtesten Regionen entwickeln möchten.
2. Gewährleistung von Wertsteigerung: Die Immobilientrends in Tulum steigen Jahr für Jahr weiter.
3. Nachhaltigkeit und Technologie: Kombiniert die natürliche Magie Mexikos mit innovativen Tools.

Mehrsprachige Kommunikation

Wir bieten die Möglichkeit an, uns in Spanisch, Deutsch und Englisch zu kommunizieren, was die Interaktion mit Investoren aus aller Welt erleichtert.

Zögert nicht, euch zu melden, wenn ihr Visionäre seid, die neue Wege zur Immobilieninvestition mit Bitcoin erforschen möchten. Wir freuen uns darauf, mit euch zusammenzuarbeiten und gemeinsam eine erfolgreiche Zukunft aufzubauen.

Kontakt: Schreibt uns einfach. Wir werden alle eure Fragen detailliert und enthusiastisch beantworten. Zusammen können wir diese Immobilie in ein außergewöhnliches Projekt verwandeln!

---

TulumImmobilien #BitcoinFreundlich #NachhaltigesLeben #InvestiereInTulum #RustikalerCharme #ImmobilieZuVerkaufen #DezentralisierteFinanzen #TulumTräume

@ 8671a6e5:f88194d1

Writing forever Laura

Bitcoin has revolutionized our understanding of money to say the least. But did the (non-fiction) follow as a tool for that? Not quite. It seems bitcoin books move in the opposite direction, towards a marketing tool for other things than bitcoin.

The ever-growing collection of Bitcoin ((Disclaimer: I’m only talking about non-fiction here!) literature suffers from a significant problem: repetition. Most Bitcoin books recycle the same arguments, metaphors, and historical comparisons, making the space feel both overcrowded and lacking in fresh perspectives. If there are some fresh perspectives, they get copied and repeated immediately.

While carefully adapting, editing, and writing a book myself, I came to realize things change constantly, rapidly and it’s extremely time-consuming to try to get a hold of yourself. On top of that, whenever you speak about something, an idea that’s coming to fruition, it gets taken, copied and before you know it you hear your own quote or idea in a podcast or read it in someone else’s blog. They don’t blatantly copy, but everyone is so hungry for an idea, something genuine that it’s scooped up and made “their own” in no time. Giving credit is also a lost art it seems.

So publishing a Bitcoin book is like freezing ideas in time. The more I wrote myself, the more I came to realize a book is not the ideal medium for teaching about Bitcoin or making your voice heard. Bitcoin isn’t a diary from someone in a war from a few centuries ago, or the origin story of an invention from the Industrial revolution — no it’s a living, evolving story! And a fast one at that. So, a book on or about Bitcoin becomes outdated in less than six months while the properties of bitcoin never change.

Stacking Bitcoin books

Yet, despite all of this, I see new Bitcoin book announcements all the time. Week after week, people churn out Bitcoin books like it’s a new Oreo flavor. Everyone want to tell their perspective. Vying for attention within their niche of the market. While bitcoin is mover further and further away as the decorum.

Some example: books about how to live your life ‘but as a bitcoiner’, Bitcoin’s historical aspects (these are usually mildly interesting at least), books on the social behavior “but with bitcoin”, books on fighting communist ideas, books on how rotten fiat really is, books on privacy and a whole bunch on "blockchain" and shitcoin projects. Some of them were written (or at least their name is appearing on the cover) by so-called Bitcoiners who conveniently appear at every bitcoin (or even shitcoin events if you wait long enough) event to promote their own projects or deliver speeches at a nice speaker rate. Their motives are not always that fresh and orange colored.

Just like in that damned fiat world we all try to replace (and despise) we have our own set of rules and culture set. This bitcoin publishing space is a bit of the same as in fiat world: where sometimes local publishers wanting to “fill the gap” for this niche market, taking anyone with a bitcoin logo on their t-shirt (or gets enough network clout) to write about bitcoin (and usually blockchain or worse: sh-tcoins).

By now, it seems like everyone and their mother (who’s also in Bitcoin of course) has written a “Bitcoin book”. You can hire them as an expert, or click their referral link. They’re probably very proud if finally make it in life and be an author. Or scrap that… best selling author.

The same stories told again and again

Bitcoin books tend to follow predictable patterns, rehashing the same worn-out narratives :

The orange-pilled hero’s journey – The protagonist starts as a fiat slave, discovers Bitcoin, and achieves financial enlightenment while repeating elements from “The Bitcoin Standard”. (This is often just a part of such books, and hopefully not the centerpiece). The hero is usually someone who was smart enough to discover bitcoin, and fills a few pages with a backstory like there’s a character on Orange is the new black (pun intended)

Fiat is the enemy – Inflation, slavery, central banking failures, debt, war and why fiat is doomed. Essential reading? Maybe. But how many more ways can we restate the same core message? How does this evolve, how can we document how bitcoin relates to this in the real world?

Bitcoin fixes this – Every societal problem, from government overreach over personal health to social issues, all somehow finds its solution in Bitcoin. With the authors looking for arguments in different degrees of knowledge (or grasping at straws in some cases).

The Austrian economics mantra – A retelling of Mises, Hayek, and Rothbard applied to Bitcoin. With some authors also trying to be the net Ayn Rand. Important foundations, but overused and often more in-depth than most readers want or can handle.

Time preference and low time horizons – The classic pitch for delaying gratification and adopting a long-term mindset through Bitcoin. While valuable, this concept has been stretched across too many books as well.

Instead of pushing new intellectual boundaries, many Bitcoin books simply rearrange the same talking points in a slightly different order, added some emphasis on either personal freedom (and the author’s pet peeves or projects) or philosophical insights.

Some dive into other aspects and admittedly new grounds or going very in-depth on deflation or technical aspects (or specific lifestyles). But overall, there’s little to be blown away by or learn. That’s not bad, or good, it’s the way it is. Then why write a book that’s going to be forgotten in six months, or repeats someone else’s story and throughts?

A market flooded with inbred ideas

At conferences, I’ve seen at least 30 different Bitcoin titles being promoted. At local meetups, the same books keep getting passed around, resold, and gifted within the same circles. The freedom to sell these books outside of a traditional bookstore also help the messages go further. (the potential bitcoiner doesn’t need to go to the online or offline bookstore, the books come to them).

There’s also a cycle of recycled books that aren’t necessarily reaching new audiences but instead circulate among the already converted. This echo chamber effect limits the reach and impact of Bitcoin literature, making it feel like an insiders-only conversation rather than an evolving movement. Again, criticism against these books is hardly found within the bitcoin space. If someone publishes a second or third title with the same insights, no one dares to say “it’s ok, leave it there”.

There are exceptions of course, where authors manage to capture many subjects and blend them together in a coherent useful book, … these books aren’t perfect or “our bible”, but they at least are useful. Notably, Broken Money and The Bitcoin Standard come to mind.Writing forever

Bitcoin has revolutionized our understanding of money to say the least. But did the (non-fiction) follow as a tool for that?\ Not quite.\ It seems bitcoin books move in the opposite direction, towards a marketing tool for other things than bitcoin.\ \ The ever-growing collection of Bitcoin ((Disclaimer: I’m only talking about non-fiction here!) literature suffers from a significant problem: repetition.\ Most Bitcoin books recycle the same arguments, metaphors, and historical comparisons, making the space feel both overcrowded and lacking in fresh perspectives. If there are some fresh perspectives, they get copied and repeated immediately.\ \ While carefully adapting, editing, and writing a book myself, I came to realize things change constantly, rapidly and it’s extremely time-consuming to try to get a hold of yourself.\ On top of that, whenever you speak about something, an idea that’s coming to fruition, it gets taken, copied and before you know it you hear your own quote or idea in a podcast or read it in someone else’s blog. They don’t blatantly copy, but everyone is so hungry for an idea, something genuine that it’s scooped up and made “their own” in no time. Giving credit is also a lost art it seems.\ \ So publishing a Bitcoin book is like freezing ideas in time.\ The more I wrote myself, the more I came to realize a book is not the ideal medium for teaching about Bitcoin or making your voice heard.\ Bitcoin isn’t a diary from someone in a war from a few centuries ago, or the origin story of an invention from the Industrial revolution — no it’s a living, evolving story! And a fast one at that.\ So, a book on or about Bitcoin becomes outdated in less than six months while the properties of bitcoin never change.

Stacking Bitcoin books

Yet, despite all of this, I see new Bitcoin book announcements all the time. Week after week, people churn out Bitcoin books like it’s a new Oreo flavor. Everyone want to tell their perspective.\ Vying for attention within their niche of the market.\ While bitcoin is mover further and further away as the decorum.\ \ Some example: books about how to live your life ‘but as a bitcoiner’, Bitcoin’s historical aspects (these are usually mildly interesting at least), books on the social behavior “but with bitcoin”, books on fighting communist ideas, books on how rotten fiat really is, books on privacy and a whole bunch on "blockchain" and shitcoin projects.\ Some of them were written (or at least their name is appearing on the cover) by so-called Bitcoiners who conveniently appear at every bitcoin (or even shitcoin events if you wait long enough) event to promote their own projects or deliver speeches at a nice speaker rate. Their motives are not always that fresh and orange colored.\ \ Just like in that damned fiat world we all try to replace (and despise) we have our own set of rules and culture set. This bitcoin publishing space is a bit of the same as in fiat world: where sometimes local publishers wanting to “fill the gap” for this niche market, taking anyone with a bitcoin logo on their t-shirt (or gets enough network clout) to write about bitcoin (and usually blockchain or worse: sh-tcoins).

By now, it seems like everyone and their mother (who’s also in Bitcoin of course) has written a “Bitcoin book”.\ You can hire them as an expert, or click their referral link.\ They’re probably very proud if finally make it in life and be an author.\ Or scrap that… best selling author.

\ The same stories told again and again

Bitcoin books tend to follow predictable patterns, rehashing the same worn-out narratives :

• The orange-pilled hero’s journey – The protagonist starts as a fiat slave, discovers Bitcoin, and achieves financial enlightenment while repeating elements from “The Bitcoin Standard”. (This is often just a part of such books, and hopefully not the centerpiece). The hero is usually someone who was smart enough to discover bitcoin, and fills a few pages with a backstory like there’s a character on Orange is the new black (pun intended)

• Fiat is the enemy – Inflation, slavery, central banking failures, debt, war and why fiat is doomed.\ Essential reading? Maybe. But how many more ways can we restate the same core message? How does this evolve, how can we document how bitcoin relates to this in the real world?

• Bitcoin fixes this – Every societal problem, from government overreach over personal health to social issues, all somehow finds its solution in Bitcoin.\ With the authors looking for arguments in different degrees of knowledge (or grasping at straws in some cases).

• The Austrian economics mantra – A retelling of Mises, Hayek, and Rothbard applied to Bitcoin. With some authors also trying to be the net Ayn Rand.\ Important foundations, but overused and often more in-depth than most readers want or can handle.

• Time preference and low time horizons – The classic pitch for delaying gratification and adopting a long-term mindset through Bitcoin. While valuable, this concept has been stretched across too many books as well.

Instead of pushing new intellectual boundaries, many Bitcoin books simply rearrange the same talking points in a slightly different order, added some emphasis on either personal freedom (and the author’s pet peeves or projects) or philosophical insights.\ \ Some dive into other aspects and admittedly new grounds or going very in-depth on deflation or technical aspects (or specific lifestyles).\ But overall, there’s little to be blown away by or learn. That’s not bad, or good, it’s the way it is. Then why write a book that’s going to be forgotten in six months, or repeats someone else’s story and throughts?

A market flooded with inbred ideas

At conferences, I’ve seen at least 30 different Bitcoin titles being promoted.\ At local meetups, the same books keep getting passed around, resold, and gifted within the same circles. The freedom to sell these books outside of a traditional bookstore also help the messages go further. (the potential bitcoiner doesn’t need to go to the online or offline bookstore, the books come to them).\ \ There’s also a cycle of recycled books that aren’t necessarily reaching new audiences but instead circulate among the already converted.\ This echo chamber effect limits the reach and impact of Bitcoin literature, making it feel like an insiders-only conversation rather than an evolving movement. Again, criticism against these books is hardly found within the bitcoin space. If someone publishes a second or third title with the same insights, no one dares to say “it’s ok, leave it there”.\ \ There are exceptions of course, where authors manage to capture many subjects and blend them together in a coherent useful book, … these books aren’t perfect or “our bible”, but they at least are useful.\ Notably, Broken Money and The Bitcoin Standard come to mind.

Writing for credibility, not for Bitcoin

A major factor in this oversupply is that many authors don’t write Bitcoin books to contribute meaningful knowledge. Instead, they see publishing as a way to legitimize themselves. In many industries, writing a book establishes authority, gains a following, or opens up career opportunities. Bitcoin is no different. The shore to go through to get a book published and distributed is often an investment for them.

For many, being a “published author” is a ticket to being taken seriously—whether for speaking gigs, consulting work, or simply boosting their reputation.

The book becomes less about Bitcoin itself and more about the author’s personal validation. As a result, the space is filled with books that feel more like branding exercises than genuine contributions. Especially books from publishers outside of the finance, economics and bitcoin space fail here miserably. The local markets of traditional publishers are riddled with garbage books written by someone filling up the gap in their portfolio in order to make a name for themselves without giving a damn about bitcoin! In one particular case I’ve found a “bitcoin” book written by someone who placed a giant bitcoin logo at the cover, but then promotes every shitcoin under the sun on his YouTube channel and calls it “thinking further than bitcoin”.

The "I’m an author" badge

No matter how weak a book’s content might be, publishing one gives the author a form of legitimacy in the eye of the public. Even if someone scrapes together two original thoughts and some “borrowed” ideas from others (again, giving credit is a rarity in this space even in a footnote in their own book, their ego can’t deal with admitting the idea or quote came from someone else), such a book itself often serves as a passive source of income, be it fiat or Bitcoin, but more importantly, it’s a way to gain credibility among new people. A lot of fiat-minded “normies” are still looking at a book as some big achievement, a validation by a publisher. This is often the case in literature, but not in the non-fiction genre. You can just pay to get published. You can hire a ghostwriter, you can easily “be an author” if you care more about getting your name on a cover than the content of what you publish.

Someone who truly understands Bitcoin but hasn’t written a book, will often attract fewer views and listeners on podcasts or conference panels, compared to someone who can say, “I’m the author of the best-selling blah blah blah.”

There are only second bests

I also want to raise awareness on how every Bitcoin book that’s referenced by such authors is a so-called “best-seller.”

Someone I know very well, who works in publishing, explained me how this is done: release timing for a book can be manipulated or even gamed to guarantee a top-10 or higher spot on some book charts. The categories also matter “best sold book” in a niche like “Financial freedom” or something is not that difficult to capture. If that category doesn’t fit, they’ll put it even under other categories like “broad economy” or “technical innovations". Even if you were on that top-10 spot for 1 afternoon… you’re a hit wonder.

In bitcoin it’s even easier, the smaller the market segment the better you can score. Certainly when there are hardly any big publishers out there. If you want , you can fork out about 1500$ to 6000$ and be the next best-selling bitcoin author.

The result? Everyone is (or can name themselves) a best-selling author, even if they carry five of their self-bought books in a backpack to a local bar in order to sell them under the table.

For some, the “I’m an author now” badge is the only credential they’ll ever have to stay relevant in this space. They can impress potential partners at a conference by saying things like “It’s really been hard work writing that book, I’m still working on the next one… maybe you can come over to my place and brainstorm about it”. For others it opens the doors to a bitcoin job they see dangling in front of their face like a juicy carrot. And other just feel the need (like myself) to write a book because apparently that’s what bitcoiners do after a few years. (I wonder if I will).

In rare cases, these self-proclaimed experts and authors start by explaining Bitcoin (and shitcoins) in their book, only to use their newfound “authority” to push scams, drawing people into their own schemes or promote their company/courses/project.

That’s not that bad, but it’s often given a coat of higher enlightenment in bitcoin, while it’s just a fiat game, like all the other publishers do as well with their authors. Your author-status, in other words, need to become a source of income or marketing. Like Stan Lee (the Marvell comic book legend) being wielded from convention to bookstores in order to make a buck for his handlers.

Authors of a poetry bundle are mostly chosen to be promoted if they’re entertaining enough for the specific niche audience they’re targeting as part of their portfolio, not to “advance poetry” in general.

Most of the latest Bitcoin books (after 2022) alike, are hardly there to “advance bitcoin”, but usually just a vehicle to get a name out there or to support a company’s goals (marketing).

Therefor the number of Bitcoin authors who have genuinely written high-quality books is surprisingly small.

Who reads these books anyway?

Ask yourself: “How many Bitcoin books have you bought, and how many have you actually read in full?” Now ask the same question for people you know who have bought Bitcoin books.

The numbers for most people are dismal, I can tell you.

There are plenty of titles out there, but most contain just two or three insightful paragraphs—the rest is filler you’ve heard a thousand times before.

No wonder most books appear on the scene, get promoted very briefly to then disappear from the discussion forever.

Meanwhile, the author rides their “best-selling expert” status for years. I recently saw a shitcoin podcaster (someone who call himself bitcoiner on a regular basis when the price is right), calling himself a “best-selling author”. While his book has no traction and never even showed up at the local market bookstores where it was published for the local markets. It’s all fake most of the time (yes, there are exceptions).

But that’s their ticket to get interviews or being taken serious. (Hint: In order to achieve this, they could also earn credibility by avoiding the promotion of rug pulls :)

The bitcoin book market gives diminishing returns this way. Content is key here. If you have something to add or explain, by all means do it (you can do so online, like in a substack post where you try to make bitcoin better by poking holes in shams). This space lives and evolves… just throw your writings and “book” out there. You’re not that important. Your name is not a marketing tool.

But it’s unhealthy for a cultural space to have this way of publishing going on. If every dog with a hat can name themselves best selling author, after a while everyone who runs a serious media operation, podcast or conference will know it as an unreliable status to use as a measuring stick, as will the readers, buyers and bitcoiners.

No curation, no quality control

Bitcoin publishing also lacks serious curation, vetting of authors, and skilled editors. The publishing industry already suffers from a lack of good editors, and in Bitcoin books, this problem is even worse. As a result, many books feel like second drafts—poorly structured ideas strung together with some data and self-referencing fluff. Even the top-selling books in this space often contain major flaws. There’s also the fact that you can just pay to be published, then in essence buying your legitimacy outright. (Or return the favor to the publisher in some other way, …).

Just like in the movies, every book needs a sequal, or worse: a prequal. The quality often lacks after a while, because just like in the classical publishing world, you need to write at least two books to get yourself a status and the “goose with the golden egg” income.

You can write for example on some imaginary subject I make up here on the spot like: “bitcoin and fruit” (In a near-future world where Bitcoin has transformed the global economy, "Bitcoin and Fruit" follows orchard owner Satoshi DS as he adapts to life on his family’s fruit farm after the collapse of traditional banking systems).

After publishing that book, you’ll have to come up with new stuff like “bitcoin and fruit salads” and a third title (to sell out completely) “Bitcoin and cheese” or whatever you come up with to keep your name out there. (Following the events of Bitcoin and Fruitsalads, "Bitcoin and Cheese" finds our favorite bitcoiner expanding his rural empire into cheesemaking, using Bitcoin to fund a new dairy operation on the family farm. There will be milk.)

Admittedly, most bitcoiners would buy this book anyway, and the follow-up as well. Because they apparently want to support anyone publishing anything to help bitcoin. But do you really help bitcoin by buying empty books from empty shells? Are you helping bitcoin with that? Maybe you help bitcoin as much with that, than buying the fluffy stuffed animal or a bitcoin poster or t-shirt.

The scarcity property doesn’t apply there apparently, unless it’s an amenia of ideas.

A bitcoin book should justify itself over time

At this point, any new Bitcoin book needs to answer a critical question:

Does this book add something meaningful to the bitcoin conversations? If the answer is no, then does it add something to the factual understanding (historically, economically, technically) of Bitcoin?

If both answers are “no”, then you’re probably reading something that can be categorized as bookshelf fillers. (they can be well-written en even entertaining, that being said, I enjoyed one such a book myself, but it’s forgettable).

If it’s just another retelling of Bitcoin’s history, another breakdown of the 21 million supply limit, or another inflation/central banking critique,... then what’s the point?

A book should either introduce new research, present a unique viewpoint, or challenge existing ideas. Otherwise, it’s just noise in an already oversaturated market where people fight for exposure and reach.

We see the first fatigue in this space appear on that front, but also the first signs of the absolute sellout of the bitcoin books as an entity (even people who came into bitcoin like last year are writing books now, without adding much more than “I want to write a book, look at me, pay me te speak at your conference please”.

Bitcoin literature needs to evolve

Bitcoin is still in its early stages in my opinion, and its impact on the world is far from complete, the story is being written right now. We can record this history in smaller, more and faster incremental parts. Books are not the ideal solution for that at all, unless we update them every 6 months.

"Things change so fast in bitcoin. A paper book needs constant updates. The second edition was a 50% rewrite." A. Antonopoulos - December 30, 2017,

There are still plenty of stories to tell, just not the ones we’ve already read a dozen times. Instead of repeating the same arguments, Bitcoin books should explore:

New societal implications – How will Bitcoin change work, governance, and social structures in ways we haven’t considered yet?

Counter Arguments and critiques – A strong Bitcoin book could acknowledge and engage with the best arguments against it, or come up with counter arguments itself to advance progress and identify problems, instead of just ignoring or dismissing them. (the author of this piece belongs in this camp)

Deep dives into underexplored areas – Mining, privacy, second-layer solutions, attack vectors, and cultural shifts all deserve deeper discussion.

Historical case studies – Instead of broad economic theory, what can history teach us about similar monetary transitions or finding historical parallels that are meaningful and proven to be relevant?

Bitcoin books don’t need to stop being written at all, they just need to start being better.

Final thought: Don’t publish just to publish

A book should be written because it needs to exist, not just because there’s demand for another Bitcoin title or the author want the “I’m an author” badge to make ends meet.

If publishing is just a way to capitalize on demand in a local market or build personal credibility, then what’s really being contributed?

Bitcoin thrives on proof of work and routing around problems.

Maybe it’s time Bitcoin book authors did the same, and start routing around the biggest problems:

The fact that bitcoin books are not representing the bitcoin revolution as it happens, that, and of course the dismal way of some individuals for feeding the craving for self-verification.

AVB

Tip me here: linkWriting for credibility, not for Bitcoin

A major factor in this oversupply is that many authors don’t write Bitcoin books to contribute meaningful knowledge.\ Instead, they see publishing as a way to legitimize themselves.\ In many industries, writing a book establishes authority, gains a following, or opens up career opportunities. Bitcoin is no different. The shore to go through to get a book published and distributed is often an investment for them.

For many, being a “published author” is a ticket to being taken seriously—whether for speaking gigs, consulting work, or simply boosting their reputation.\ \ The book becomes less about Bitcoin itself and more about the author’s personal validation. As a result, the space is filled with books that feel more like branding exercises than genuine contributions.\ Especially books from publishers outside of the finance, economics and bitcoin space fail here miserably.\ The local markets of traditional publishers are riddled with garbage books written by someone filling up the gap in their portfolio in order to make a name for themselves without giving a damn about bitcoin! In one particular case I’ve found a “bitcoin” book written by someone who placed a giant bitcoin logo at the cover, but then promotes every shitcoin under the sun on his YouTube channel and calls it “thinking further than bitcoin”.

The "I’m an author" badge

No matter how weak a book’s content might be, publishing one gives the author a form of legitimacy in the eye of the public.\ Even if someone scrapes together two original thoughts and some “borrowed” ideas from others (again, giving credit is a rarity in this space even in a footnote in their own book, their ego can’t deal with admitting the idea or quote came from someone else), such a book itself often serves as a passive source of income, be it fiat or Bitcoin, but more importantly, it’s a way to gain credibility among new people.\ A lot of fiat-minded “normies” are still looking at a book as some big achievement, a validation by a publisher. This is often the case in literature, but not in the non-fiction genre.\ You can just pay to get published. You can hire a ghostwriter, you can easily “be an author” if you care more about getting your name on a cover than the content of what you publish.

Someone who truly understands Bitcoin but hasn’t written a book, will often attract fewer views and listeners on podcasts or conference panels, compared to someone who can say, “I’m the author of the best-selling blah blah blah.”

There are only second bests

I also want to raise awareness on how every Bitcoin book that’s referenced by such authors is a so-called “best-seller.”

Someone I know very well, who works in publishing, explained me how this is done: release timing for a book can be manipulated or even gamed to guarantee a top-10 or higher spot on some book charts. The categories also matter “best sold book” in a niche like “Financial freedom” or something is not that difficult to capture. If that category doesn’t fit, they’ll put it even under other categories like “broad economy” or “technical innovations".\ Even if you were on that top-10 spot for 1 afternoon… you’re a hit wonder.\ \ In bitcoin it’s even easier, the smaller the market segment the better you can score. Certainly when there are hardly any big publishers out there.\ If you want , you can fork out about 1500$ to 6000$ and be the next best-selling bitcoin author.\ \ The result? Everyone is (or can name themselves) a best-selling author, even if they carry five of their self-bought books in a backpack to a local bar in order to sell them under the table.\ \ For some, the “I’m an author now” badge is the only credential they’ll ever have to stay relevant in this space. They can impress potential partners at a conference by saying things like “It’s really been hard work writing that book, I’m still working on the next one… maybe you can come over to my place and brainstorm about it”.\ For others it opens the doors to a bitcoin job they see dangling in front of their face like a juicy carrot.\ And other just feel the need (like myself) to write a book because apparently that’s what bitcoiners do after a few years. (I wonder if I will).

In rare cases, these self-proclaimed experts and authors start by explaining Bitcoin (and shitcoins) in their book, only to use their newfound “authority” to push scams, drawing people into their own schemes or promote their company/courses/project.\ \ That’s not that bad, but it’s often given a coat of higher enlightenment in bitcoin, while it’s just a fiat game, like all the other publishers do as well with their authors. Your author-status, in other words, need to become a source of income or marketing. Like Stan Lee (the Marvell comic book legend) being wielded from convention to bookstores in order to make a buck for his handlers.\ \ Authors of a poetry bundle are mostly chosen to be promoted if they’re entertaining enough for the specific niche audience they’re targeting as part of their portfolio, not to “advance poetry” in general.\ \ Most of the latest Bitcoin books (after 2022) alike, are hardly there to “advance bitcoin”, but usually just a vehicle to get a name out there or to support a company’s goals (marketing).\ \ Therefor the number of Bitcoin authors who have genuinely written high-quality books is surprisingly small.

Who reads these books anyway?

Ask yourself: “How many Bitcoin books have you bought, and how many have you actually read in full?”\ Now ask the same question for people you know who have bought Bitcoin books.

The numbers for most people are dismal, I can tell you.\ \ There are plenty of titles out there, but most contain just two or three insightful paragraphs—the rest is filler you’ve heard a thousand times before.

No wonder most books appear on the scene, get promoted very briefly to then disappear from the discussion forever.\ \ Meanwhile, the author rides their “best-selling expert” status for years. I recently saw a shitcoin podcaster (someone who call himself bitcoiner on a regular basis when the price is right), calling himself a “best-selling author”.\ While his book has no traction and never even showed up at the local market bookstores where it was published for the local markets. It’s all fake most of the time (yes, there are exceptions).\ \ But that’s their ticket to get interviews or being taken serious. (Hint: In order to achieve this, they could also earn credibility by avoiding the promotion of rug pulls :)\ \ The bitcoin book market gives diminishing returns this way.\ Content is key here. If you have something to add or explain, by all means do it (you can do so online, like in a substack post where you try to make bitcoin better by poking holes in shams).\ This space lives and evolves… just throw your writings and “book” out there. You’re not that important. Your name is not a marketing tool.\ \ But it’s unhealthy for a cultural space to have this way of publishing going on. If every dog with a hat can name themselves best selling author, after a while everyone who runs a serious media operation, podcast or conference will know it as an unreliable status to use as a measuring stick, as will the readers, buyers and bitcoiners.

No curation, no quality control

Bitcoin publishing also lacks serious curation, vetting of authors, and skilled editors.\ The publishing industry already suffers from a lack of good editors, and in Bitcoin books, this problem is even worse. As a result, many books feel like second drafts—poorly structured ideas strung together with some data and self-referencing fluff. Even the top-selling books in this space often contain major flaws.\ There’s also the fact that you can just pay to be published, then in essence buying your legitimacy outright. (Or return the favor to the publisher in some other way, …).\ \ Just like in the movies, every book needs a sequal, or worse: a prequal.\ The quality often lacks after a while, because just like in the classical publishing world, you need to write at least two books to get yourself a status and the “goose with the golden egg” income.\ \ You can write for example on some imaginary subject I make up here on the spot like: “bitcoin and fruit”\ (In a near-future world where Bitcoin has transformed the global economy, "Bitcoin and Fruit" follows orchard owner Satoshi DS as he adapts to life on his family’s fruit farm after the collapse of traditional banking systems).\ \ After publishing that book, you’ll have to come up with new stuff like “bitcoin and fruit salads” and a third title (to sell out completely) “Bitcoin and cheese” or whatever you come up with to keep your name out there.\ (Following the events of Bitcoin and Fruitsalads, "Bitcoin and Cheese" finds our favorite bitcoiner expanding his rural empire into cheesemaking, using Bitcoin to fund a new dairy operation on the family farm. There will be milk.)

Admittedly, most bitcoiners would buy this book anyway, and the follow-up as well.\ Because they apparently want to support anyone publishing anything to help bitcoin. But do you really help bitcoin by buying empty books from empty shells? Are you helping bitcoin with that?\ Maybe you help bitcoin as much with that, than buying the fluffy stuffed animal or a bitcoin poster or t-shirt.\ \ The scarcity property doesn’t apply there apparently, unless it’s an amenia of ideas.

A bitcoin book should justify itself over time

At this point, any new Bitcoin book needs to answer a critical question:\ \ *Does this book add something meaningful to the bitcoin conversations?\ If the answer is no, then does it add something to the factual understanding (historically, economically, technically) of Bitcoin?* \ If both answers are “no”, then you’re probably reading something that can be categorized as bookshelf fillers. (they can be well-written en even entertaining, that being said, I enjoyed one such a book myself, but it’s forgettable).

If it’s just another retelling of Bitcoin’s history, another breakdown of the 21 million supply limit, or another inflation/central banking critique,... then what’s the point?\ \ A book should either introduce new research, present a unique viewpoint, or challenge existing ideas.\ Otherwise, it’s just noise in an already oversaturated market where people fight for exposure and reach.\ \ We see the first fatigue in this space appear on that front, but also the first signs of the absolute sellout of the bitcoin books as an entity (even people who came into bitcoin like last year are writing books now, without adding much more than “I want to write a book, look at me, pay me te speak at your conference please”.

Bitcoin literature needs to evolve

Bitcoin is still in its early stages in my opinion, and its impact on the world is far from complete, the story is being written right now. We can record this history in smaller, more and faster incremental parts. Books are not the ideal solution for that at all, unless we update them every 6 months.

"Things change so fast in bitcoin. A paper book needs constant updates. The second edition was a 50% rewrite."\ A. Antonopoulos - December 30, 2017,**

\ There are still plenty of stories to tell, just not the ones we’ve already read a dozen times. Instead of repeating the same arguments, Bitcoin books should explore:

• New societal implications – How will Bitcoin change work, governance, and social structures in ways we haven’t considered yet?

• Counter Arguments and critiques – A strong Bitcoin book could acknowledge and engage with the best arguments against it, or come up with counter arguments itself to advance progress and identify problems, instead of just ignoring or dismissing them. (the author of this piece belongs in this camp)

• Deep dives into underexplored areas – Mining, privacy, second-layer solutions, attack vectors, and cultural shifts all deserve deeper discussion.

• Historical case studies – Instead of broad economic theory, what can history teach us about similar monetary transitions or finding historical parallels that are meaningful and proven to be relevant?

Bitcoin books don’t need to stop being written at all, they just need to start being better.

Final thought: Don’t publish just to publish

A book should be written because it needs to exist, not just because there’s demand for another Bitcoin title or the author want the “I’m an author” badge to make ends meet.\ \ If publishing is just a way to capitalize on demand in a local market or build personal credibility, then what’s really being contributed?

Bitcoin thrives on proof of work and routing around problems.\ \ Maybe it’s time Bitcoin book authors did the same, and start routing around the biggest problems:\ \ The fact that bitcoin books are not representing the bitcoin revolution as it happens, that, and of course the dismal way of some individuals for feeding the craving for self-verification.

AVB\ \ Tip me here: link

@ 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. |

@ 8671a6e5:f88194d1

The ECB’s Tightrope Walk (2019–2025)

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

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

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

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

Digital Euro: The Shiny Trap

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

Disadvantages

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

AVB\ \ tip if you like this

@ 460c25e6:ef85065c

If you don't know where your posts are, you might as well just stay in the centralized Twitter. You either take control of your relay lists, or they will control you. Amethyst offers several lists of relays for our users. We are going to go one by one to help clarify what they are and which options are best for each one.

Public Home/Outbox Relays

Home relays store all YOUR content: all your posts, likes, replies, lists, etc. It's your home. Amethyst will send your posts here first. Your followers will use these relays to get new posts from you. So, if you don't have anything there, they will not receive your updates.

Home relays must allow queries from anyone, ideally without the need to authenticate. They can limit writes to paid users without affecting anyone's experience.

This list should have a maximum of 3 relays. More than that will only make your followers waste their mobile data getting your posts. Keep it simple. Out of the 3 relays, I recommend: - 1 large public, international relay: nos.lol, nostr.mom, relay.damus.io, etc. - 1 personal relay to store a copy of all your content in a place no one can delete. Go to relay.tools and never be censored again. - 1 really fast relay located in your country: paid options like http://nostr.wine are great

Do not include relays that block users from seeing posts in this list. If you do, no one will see your posts.

Public Inbox Relays

This relay type receives all replies, comments, likes, and zaps to your posts. If you are not getting notifications or you don't see replies from your friends, it is likely because you don't have the right setup here. If you are getting too much spam in your replies, it's probably because your inbox relays are not protecting you enough. Paid relays can filter inbox spam out.

Inbox relays must allow anyone to write into them. It's the opposite of the outbox relay. They can limit who can download the posts to their paid subscribers without affecting anyone's experience.

This list should have a maximum of 3 relays as well. Again, keep it small. More than that will just make you spend more of your data plan downloading the same notifications from all these different servers. Out of the 3 relays, I recommend: - 1 large public, international relay: nos.lol, nostr.mom, relay.damus.io, etc. - 1 personal relay to store a copy of your notifications, invites, cashu tokens and zaps. - 1 really fast relay located in your country: go to nostr.watch and find relays in your country

Terrible options include: - nostr.wine should not be here. - filter.nostr.wine should not be here. - inbox.nostr.wine should not be here.

DM Inbox Relays

These are the relays used to receive DMs and private content. Others will use these relays to send DMs to you. If you don't have it setup, you will miss DMs. DM Inbox relays should accept any message from anyone, but only allow you to download them.

Generally speaking, you only need 3 for reliability. One of them should be a personal relay to make sure you have a copy of all your messages. The others can be open if you want push notifications or closed if you want full privacy.

Good options are: - inbox.nostr.wine and auth.nostr1.com: anyone can send messages and only you can download. Not even our push notification server has access to them to notify you. - a personal relay to make sure no one can censor you. Advanced settings on personal relays can also store your DMs privately. Talk to your relay operator for more details. - a public relay if you want DM notifications from our servers.

Make sure to add at least one public relay if you want to see DM notifications.

Private Home Relays

Private Relays are for things no one should see, like your drafts, lists, app settings, bookmarks etc. Ideally, these relays are either local or require authentication before posting AND downloading each user\'s content. There are no dedicated relays for this category yet, so I would use a local relay like Citrine on Android and a personal relay on relay.tools.

Keep in mind that if you choose a local relay only, a client on the desktop might not be able to see the drafts from clients on mobile and vice versa.

Search relays:

This is the list of relays to use on Amethyst's search and user tagging with @. Tagging and searching will not work if there is nothing here.. This option requires NIP-50 compliance from each relay. Hit the Default button to use all available options on existence today: - nostr.wine - relay.nostr.band - relay.noswhere.com

Local Relays:

This is your local storage. Everything will load faster if it comes from this relay. You should install Citrine on Android and write ws://localhost:4869 in this option.

General Relays:

This section contains the default relays used to download content from your follows. Notice how you can activate and deactivate the Home, Messages (old-style DMs), Chat (public chats), and Global options in each.

Keep 5-6 large relays on this list and activate them for as many categories (Home, Messages (old-style DMs), Chat, and Global) as possible.

Amethyst will provide additional recommendations to this list from your follows with information on which of your follows might need the additional relay in your list. Add them if you feel like you are missing their posts or if it is just taking too long to load them.

My setup

Here's what I use: 1. Go to relay.tools and create a relay for yourself. 2. Go to nostr.wine and pay for their subscription. 3. Go to inbox.nostr.wine and pay for their subscription. 4. Go to nostr.watch and find a good relay in your country. 5. Download Citrine to your phone.

Then, on your relay lists, put:

Public Home/Outbox Relays: - nostr.wine - nos.lol or an in-country relay. - .nostr1.com

Public Inbox Relays - nos.lol or an in-country relay - .nostr1.com

DM Inbox Relays - inbox.nostr.wine - .nostr1.com

Private Home Relays - ws://localhost:4869 (Citrine) - .nostr1.com (if you want)

Search Relays - nostr.wine - relay.nostr.band - relay.noswhere.com

Local Relays - ws://localhost:4869 (Citrine)

General Relays - nos.lol - relay.damus.io - relay.primal.net - nostr.mom

And a few of the recommended relays from Amethyst.

Final Considerations

Remember, relays can see what your Nostr client is requesting and downloading at all times. They can track what you see and see what you like. They can sell that information to the highest bidder, they can delete your content or content that a sponsor asked them to delete (like a negative review for instance) and they can censor you in any way they see fit. Before using any random free relay out there, make sure you trust its operator and you know its terms of service and privacy policies.

@ 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.

@ b8851a06:9b120ba1

The digital guillotine has fallen. The Bybit hack wasn’t just a theft—it was a surgical strike exposing the fatal flaw of “crypto” that isn’t Bitcoin. This wasn’t a bug. It was a feature of a system designed to fail.

Here’s how North Korea’s Lazarus Group stole $1.5B in ETH, why “decentralized finance” is a joke, and how Bitcoin remains the only exit from this circus.

I. The Heist: How Centralized “Crypto” Betrayed Its Users

A. The Multisig Mousetrap (Or: Why You’re Still Using a Bank)

Bybit’s Ethereum cold wallet used multisig, requiring multiple approvals for transactions. Sounds secure, right? Wrong. • The Con: Hackers didn’t pick the lock; they tricked the keyholders using a UI masking attack. The wallet interface showed “SEND TO BYBIT”, but the smart contract was whispering “SEND TO PYONGYANG.” • Bitcoin Parallel: Bitcoin’s multisig is enforced on hardware, not a website UI. No browser spoofing, no phishing emails—just raw cryptography.

Ethereum’s multisig is a vault with a touchscreen PIN pad. Bitcoin’s is a mechanical safe with a key only you hold. Guess which one got robbed?

B. Smart Contracts: Dumb as a Bag of Hammers

The thieves didn’t “hack” Ethereum—they exploited its smart contract complexity. • Bybit’s security depended on a Safe.global contract. Lazarus simply tricked Bybit into approving a malicious upgrade. • Imagine a vending machine that’s programmed to take your money but never give you a soda. That’s Ethereum’s “trustless” tech.

Why Bitcoin Wins: Bitcoin doesn’t do “smart contracts” in the Ethereum sense. Its scripting language is deliberately limited—less code, fewer attack vectors.

Ethereum is a Lego tower; Bitcoin is a granite slab. One topples, one doesn’t.

II. The Laundering: Crypto’s Dirty Little Secret

A. Mixers, Bridges, and the Art of Spycraft

Once the ETH was stolen, Lazarus laundered it at lightspeed: 1. Mixers (eXch) – Obfuscating transaction trails. 2. Bridges (Chainflip) – Swapping ETH for Bitcoin because that’s the only exit that matters.

Bitcoin Reality Check: Bitcoin’s privacy tools (like CoinJoin) are self-custodial—no third-party mixers. You keep control, not some “decentralized” website waiting to be hacked.

Ethereum’s “bridges” are burning rope ladders. Bitcoin’s privacy? An underground tunnel only you control.

B. The $1.5B Lie: “Decentralized” Exchanges Are a Myth

Bybit’s “cold wallet” was on Safe.global—a so-called “decentralized” custodian. Translation? A website with extra steps. • When Safe.global got breached, the private keys were stolen instantly. • “Decentralized” means nothing if your funds depend on one website, one server, one weak link.

Bitcoin’s Answer: Self-custody. Hardware wallets. Cold storage. No trusted third parties.

Using Safe.global is like hiding your life savings in a gym locker labeled “STEAL ME.”

III. The Culprits: State-Sponsored Hackers & Crypto’s Original Sin

A. Lazarus Group: Crypto’s Robin Hood (For Dictators)

North Korea’s hackers didn’t break cryptography—they broke people. • Phishing emails disguised as job offers. • Bribes & social engineering targeting insiders. • DeFi governance manipulation (because Proof-of-Stake is just shareholder voting in disguise).

Bitcoin’s Shield: No CEO to bribe. No “upgrade buttons” to exploit. No governance tokens to manipulate. Code is law—and Bitcoin’s law is written in stone.

Ethereum’s security model is “trust us.” Bitcoin’s is “verify.”

B. The $3B Elephant: Altcoins Fund Dictators

Since 2017, Lazarus has stolen $3B+ in crypto, funding North Korea’s missile program.

Why? Because Ethereum, Solana, and XRP are built on Proof-of-Stake (PoS)—which centralizes power in the hands of a few rich validators. • Bitcoin’s Proof-of-Work: Miners secure the network through energy-backed cryptography. • Altcoins’ Proof-of-Stake: Security is dictated by who owns the most tokens.

Proof-of-Stake secures oligarchs. Proof-of-Work secures money. That’s why Lazarus can drain altcoin treasuries but hasn’t touched Bitcoin’s network.

IV. Bybit’s Survival: A Centralized Circus

A. The Bailout: Banks 2.0

Bybit took bridge loans from “undisclosed partners” (read: Wall Street vultures). • Just like a traditional bank, Bybit printed liquidity out of thin air to stay solvent. • If that sounds familiar, it’s because crypto exchanges are just banks in hoodies.

Bitcoin Contrast: No loans. No bailouts. No “trust.” Just 21 million coins, mathematically secured.

Bybit’s solvency is a confidence trick. Bitcoin’s solvency is math.

B. The Great Withdrawal Panic

Within hours, 350,000+ users scrambled to withdraw funds.

A digital bank run—except this isn’t a bank. It’s an exchange that pretended to be decentralized.

Bitcoin fixes this: your wallet isn’t an IOU. It’s actual money.

Bybit = a TikTok influencer promising riches. Bitcoin = the gold in your basement.

V. The Fallout: Regulators vs Reality

A. ETH’s 8% Crash vs Bitcoin’s Unshakable Base

Ethereum tanked because it’s a tech stock, not money. Bitcoin? Dropped 2% and stabilized.

No CEO, no headquarters, no attack surface.

B. The Regulatory Trap

Now the bureaucrats come in demanding: 1. Wallet audits (they don’t understand public ledgers). 2. Mixer bans (criminalizing privacy). 3. KYC everything (turning crypto into a surveillance state).

Bitcoin’s Rebellion: You can’t audit what’s already transparent. You can’t ban what’s unstoppable.

VI. Conclusion: Burn the Altcoins, Stack the Sats

The Bybit hack isn’t a crypto problem. It’s an altcoin problem.

Ethereum’s smart contracts, DeFi bridges, and “decentralized” wallets are Swiss cheese for hackers. Bitcoin? A titanium vault.

The Only Lessons That Matter:

✅ Multisig isn’t enough unless it’s Bitcoin’s hardware-enforced version. ✅ Complexity kills—every altcoin “innovation” is a security risk waiting to happen.

Lazarus Group won this round because “crypto” ignored Bitcoin’s design. The solution isn’t better regulations—it’s better money.

Burn the tokens. Unplug the servers. Bitcoin is the exit.

Take your money off exchanges. Be sovereign.

@ 5a261a61:2ebd4480

Tom stopped and nodded to Jiro with a smile. "Just wanted to see how it's going," he said as he approached the counter.

"People need to eat and I have food. Can't complain," replied the ever-smiling Jiro. "Are you heading out to make some money, or should I put it on your tab again?" he continued without pausing his stirring.

Tom might have been short on cash, but his pride (and caution) never allowed him to leave debts with friends. And Jiro was about the closest thing to a friend among all his acquaintances.

"I can still afford it today," Tom smiled tiredly, "but if you know of something that might bring in some metal, I could stop by tomorrow too."

"There might be something, but nothing that would pay the bills today. You might have better luck across the street. They're having another party today, and as a good neighbor and main supplier of coconut oil, I have a magic piece of paper that will get you on the guest list."

"And here comes the 'but'?"

"If you're this impatient with women too, I'm not surprised you don't have one to make a home out of those four walls... Have I told you about my niece Noi?" Juri asked with his typical mischievous smile.

Tom raised an eyebrow. "Maybe. But I have a feeling you're going to tell me again anyway."

Juri laughed. "See, that's why I like you. You always know what's coming." He leaned closer across the counter. "Noi is a smart girl, studying journalism. But she needs a bit of... how to put it... social training."

"And by that, you mean exactly what?" Tom asked cautiously.

"Nothing bad, don't worry," Juri waved his hand dismissively. "She just needs someone to take her into better society. You know, to see how things work. And, as it happens, she has tickets to tonight's party at The Beach."

Tom sighed. He already suspected where this was heading. "Juri, I'm not exactly—"

"The perfect gentleman who could show my niece how to behave in higher circles?" Juri cut him off. "Come on, Tom. You're a detective. You know how to adapt to wherever the wind blows. And she has those tickets. You want to go to the party, she needs a guide. Everyone will be happy."

Tom remained silent for a moment, considering his options. On one hand, he wasn't in the mood to babysit some naive student. On the other hand, those tickets would really come in handy... especially since he had nothing better going on.

Where to next?

• accept offer to get out of the stale water
• find another way other than babysitting

@ ed5774ac:45611c5c

Trump and Vance Expose Zelensky: The West’s Narrative Machine Meets Reality

In the modern era, the West has perfected the art of ruling through narratives. Stories, carefully crafted and disseminated, have become the primary tool for shaping public perception, justifying actions, and maintaining control. This narrative-driven approach to governance has been the cornerstone of Western power since the 20th century, and nowhere is this more evident than in the ongoing conflict in Ukraine. Enter Volodymyr Zelensky, the comedian-turned-president, who has become a poster child for this narrative-driven world order. But in a recent confrontation with Donald Trump and J.D. Vance, Zelensky’s carefully constructed facade crumbled, exposing the fragility of the Western storytelling empire.

The West’s Narrative Machine

As Alastair Crooke astutely observes in his article The Western Way of War: Owning the Narrative Trumps Reality ( https://www.unz.com/article/the-western-way-of-war-owning-the-narrative-trumps-reality), the West’s power lies not in its military or economic might alone but in its ability to control the narrative. Crooke argues that the West has mastered the art of “owning the story,” creating a reality that serves its interests, regardless of facts on the ground. This narrative dominance ensures that the general public—often referred to as the masses—follows along without questioning, accepting the official line as gospel truth.

To maintain this control, the West relies on carefully curated protagonists who can sell its stories to the world. Take, for example, the story of Volodymyr Zelensky, a former actor whose rise to power was itself a narrative triumph. Portrayed as a relatable outsider who defeated the corrupt establishment, Zelensky promised hope and reform. But behind this carefully crafted image lay darker forces. Oligarch Ihor Kolomoisky, one of Ukraine’s most powerful and controversial figures, played a pivotal role in Zelensky’s ascent. Kolomoisky, who owned the TV channel that aired Zelensky’s show Servant of the People, used his media empire to propel the political novice into the spotlight. This was not a grassroots movement but a calculated maneuver by Ukraine’s oligarchic elite to maintain control under a new, more palatable face.

Zelensky’s Rise and the West’s Geopolitical Strategy

Zelensky’s rise was not just a domestic political shift; it was a calculated move by the West to advance its long-standing goal of containing Russia and dominating Eurasia. The West, particularly the EU and NATO, saw Ukraine as a critical piece in its geopolitical chess game. By installing a pro-Western leader like Zelensky, the West aimed to pull Ukraine firmly into its orbit, knowing full well that such a move would antagonize Moscow. This was not an accidental escalation but a deliberate provocation, designed to create a pretext for further Western intervention.

To polish Zelensky’s image and present him as a beacon of hope for peace and the Westernization of Ukraine, the West also needed to whitewash Ukraine’s darker realities. This meant turning a blind eye to the corruption and oligarchic influence that underpinned Zelensky’s presidency. Equally ignored were the neo-Nazi crimes and policies that had been well-documented before 2014, such as the rise of far-right groups like Svoboda and the Azov Battalion, their glorification of Nazi collaborator Stepan Bandera, and their violent attacks on ethnic minorities, political opponents, and LGBTQ+ communities. These atrocities, once reported in Western media, were suddenly erased from the narrative after 2014, as if they had never existed, to preserve the image of Ukraine as an innocent victim in the West’s geopolitical chess game.

The Grand Chessboard: Ukraine as a Proxy

The West’s use of Ukraine as a geopolitical pawn is not a recent development. Its roots can be traced back to Zbigniew Brzezinski’s 1997 book The Grand Chessboard, in which the former U.S. National Security Advisor laid out a blueprint for American dominance in Eurasia. He famously wrote, “The one who rules the heartland rules the world, the one who rules East Europe rules the heartland, the one who rules Ukraine rules East Europe.” This statement foreshadowed the West’s strategic interest in Ukraine as a tool to contain and destabilize Russia—a goal that has driven Western policy for decades.

Even in 2008, Western leaders like Angela Merkel and Nicolas Sarkozy opposed Ukraine’s NATO membership, recognizing that such a move would provoke Russia. Classified cables from William Burns, the U.S. Ambassador to Russia at the time, echoed this sentiment. Burns warned that NATO expansion into Ukraine was a “red line” for Moscow, succinctly stating, “Nyet means nyet.” The West was fully aware that it was playing with fire, risking a direct confrontation with Russia that could escalate into a potential World War III. Yet, despite these warnings, the West pushed forward with its agenda, pulling Ukraine into its orbit. The stakes were simply too high to abandon the plan.

At the heart of this strategy lies the West’s desperate need to sustain its faltering economic system. Since the 2008 financial crisis, the Western debt-driven financial model has teetered on the brink of collapse. Sovereign debt crises loom large, and the banking industry, reliant on endless money printing, urgently needs new collateral to back its ever-expanding debt. Russia’s vast resource-rich territories—filled with oil, gas, minerals, and rare earth metals—offer a tempting solution.

By dominating Russia and seizing control of its natural wealth, the West could issue resource-backed bonds, financial instruments tied directly to Russia’s oil and gas reserves. These bonds would allow the West to leverage Russia’s resources as collateral, providing a stable foundation for its debt-ridden financial system. Controlling access to these resources would ensure currency stability and keep Western economies functioning, even as debt levels soar.

But the West’s ambitions extend beyond economic survival. Controlling Russia’s resources would also allow it to sever China’s access to critical raw materials, undermining Beijing’s economic and military development. By dominating Russia’s energy exports, the West could manipulate global energy prices, stabilizing its own economies while weakening rivals like China, which relies heavily on Russian energy. The U.S. and EU view China as the greatest geopolitical challenge of the 21st century, and by encircling and weakening Russia, they aim to isolate and contain Beijing. In this grand strategy, Ukraine is not merely a pawn but a critical linchpin in the West’s efforts to reshape the global order—even at the risk of catastrophic conflict.

Zelensky’s Role in the West’s Strategy

To execute this high-stakes strategy, the West needed a compelling narrative—one that could justify its actions, rally public support, and obscure its true motives. Therefore, they created the narrative around Volodymyr Zelensky, casting him as a global symbol of resistance, a hero fighting against the “evil” of Putin’s Russia. The West, particularly the EU and NATO, embraced this narrative, using it to justify billions in aid—much of which served as a cover for money laundering—sanctions on Russia, and the broader geopolitical agenda outlined above. Zelensky became the face of this narrative, a willing participant in the West’s grand strategy, even as his own country was turned into a battlefield.

Zelensky’s narrative, however, is built on shaky ground. Take, for example, the claim that Putin is “non-agreement capable”—a talking point frequently parroted by Western media and politicians. This assertion is not only baseless but laughably ironic. Unlike the West, which has a long history of signing agreements only to disregard them (e.g., the Minsk agreements, the Istanbul peace deal in March 2022, or NATO’s broken promise not to expand eastward), Putin has consistently honored the contracts and treaties he has signed. The West, not Russia, is the true exemplar of “non-agreement capable” behavior.

Yet, Zelensky and his Western backers continue to peddle these lies, confident that the general public will follow. The narrative is simple: Ukraine is the victim, Russia is the aggressor, and any suggestion to the contrary is dismissed as propaganda. This black-and-white storytelling leaves no room for nuance, truth, or accountability.

Trump and Vance: Slapping Down the Narrative

Enter Donald Trump and J.D. Vance. In a recent meeting with Zelensky, the duo did what few in the West have dared to do: they called out the narrative for what it is—a fabrication. Trump, known for his blunt rhetoric, and Vance, a rising voice of realism in foreign policy, confronted Zelensky with the uncomfortable truth. They exposed the contradictions in his claims, highlighting the West’s role in prolonging the conflict and the absurdity of expecting the world to believe in a one-sided story.

Zelensky, accustomed to the adulation of Western elites and the uncritical support of the media, was unprepared for this reality check. His carefully rehearsed lines fell flat, his confidence wavered, and the mask slipped. The confrontation was a rare moment of clarity in a sea of narrative-driven fog, a reminder that truth, when spoken boldly, can still shatter even the most entrenched lies.

The Meltdown of a Narrative Puppet

Zelensky’s meltdown in the face of Trump and Vance’s truth-telling is emblematic of a larger crisis in the West’s narrative-driven order. For decades, the West has relied on storytelling to maintain its dominance, but this approach is increasingly unsustainable. The rise of alternative media, the growing skepticism of the public, and the emergence of leaders like Trump and Vance who refuse to play along are exposing the cracks in the narrative machine.

Zelensky, the figurehead who believed he could sell his lies to 8 billion people, is a cautionary tale. He is not the master of his narrative but a puppet, manipulated by his masters in the EU and NATO. His failure to withstand scrutiny is a testament to the hollowness of the stories he tells and the fragility of the system that props him up.

Conclusion: The End of Narrative Dominance?

The confrontation between Trump/Vance and Zelensky is more than just a political spat; it is a microcosm of the broader struggle between narrative and reality. The West’s reliance on storytelling as a tool of governance is reaching its limits. As Crooke warns, when the narrative diverges too far from reality, it risks collapsing under its own weight.

The general public, once content to follow blindly, is beginning to question. Leaders like Trump and Vance are challenging the status quo, forcing the world to confront uncomfortable truths. Zelensky’s meltdown is a sign of things to come—a harbinger of the end of narrative dominance and the return of reality-based governance. The question is, will the West adapt, or will it cling to its stories until the very end?

@ 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/

@ 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!

@ 4857600b:30b502f4

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

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

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

@ 94a6a78a:0ddf320e

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

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

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

---

1️⃣ Use Nostr Daily

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

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

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

---

2️⃣ Run Your Own Nostr Relay

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

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

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

---

3️⃣ Support Paid Relays & Infrastructure

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

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

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

---

4️⃣ Zap Developers, Creators & Builders

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

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

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

---

5️⃣ Develop New Nostr Apps & Tools

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

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

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

---

6️⃣ Promote & Educate Others About Nostr

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

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

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

---

7️⃣ Support Open-Source Nostr Projects

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

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

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

---

🚀 Every Contribution Strengthens Nostr

Whether you:

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

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

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

@ 9e69e420:d12360c2

President Trump has intensified immigration enforcement, likening it to a wartime effort. Despite pouring resources into the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), arrest numbers are declining and falling short of goals. ICE fell from about 800 daily arrests in late January to fewer than 600 in early February.

Critics argue the administration is merely showcasing efforts with ineffectiveness, while Trump seeks billions more in funding to support his deportation agenda. Increased involvement from various federal agencies is intended to assist ICE, but many lack specific immigration training.

Challenges persist, as fewer immigrants are available for quick deportation due to a decline in illegal crossings. Local sheriffs are also pressured by rising demands to accommodate immigrants, which may strain resources further.

@ ed5774ac:45611c5c

Bitcoin as Collateral for U.S. Debt: A Deep Dive into the Financial Mechanics

The U.S. government’s proposal to declare Bitcoin as a 'strategic reserve' is a calculated move to address its unsustainable debt obligations, but it threatens to undermine Bitcoin’s original purpose as a tool for financial freedom. To fully grasp the implications of this plan, we must first understand the financial mechanics of debt creation, the role of collateral in sustaining debt, and the historical context of the petro-dollar system. Additionally, we must examine how the U.S. and its allies have historically sought new collateral to back their debt, including recent attempts to weaken Russia through the Ukraine conflict.

The Vietnam War and the Collapse of the Gold Standard

The roots of the U.S. debt crisis can be traced back to the Vietnam War. The war created an unsustainable budget deficit, forcing the U.S. to borrow heavily to finance its military operations. By the late 1960s, the U.S. was spending billions of dollars annually on the war, leading to a significant increase in public debt. Foreign creditors, particularly France, began to lose confidence in the U.S. dollar’s ability to maintain its value. In a dramatic move, French President Charles de Gaulle sent warships to New York to demand the conversion of France’s dollar reserves into gold, as per the Bretton Woods Agreement.

This demand exposed the fragility of the U.S. gold reserves. By 1971, President Richard Nixon was forced to suspend the dollar’s convertibility to gold, effectively ending the Bretton Woods system. This move, often referred to as the "Nixon Shock," declared the U.S. bankrupt and transformed the dollar into a fiat currency backed by nothing but trust in the U.S. government. The collapse of the gold standard marked the beginning of the U.S.’s reliance on artificial systems to sustain its debt. With the gold standard gone, the U.S. needed a new way to back its currency and debt—a need that would lead to the creation of the petro-dollar system.

The Petro-Dollar System: A New Collateral for Debt

In the wake of the gold standard’s collapse, the U.S. faced a critical challenge: how to maintain global confidence in the dollar and sustain its ability to issue debt. The suspension of gold convertibility in 1971 left the dollar as a fiat currency—backed by nothing but trust in the U.S. government. To prevent a collapse of the dollar’s dominance and ensure its continued role as the world’s reserve currency, the U.S. needed a new system to artificially create demand for dollars and provide a form of indirect backing for its debt.

The solution came in the form of the petro-dollar system. In the 1970s, the U.S. struck a deal with Saudi Arabia and other OPEC nations to price oil exclusively in U.S. dollars. In exchange, the U.S. offered military protection and economic support. This arrangement created an artificial demand for dollars, as countries needed to hold USD reserves to purchase oil. Additionally, oil-exporting nations reinvested their dollar revenues in U.S. Treasuries, effectively recycling petro-dollars back into the U.S. economy. This recycling of petrodollars provided the U.S. with a steady inflow of capital, allowing it to finance its deficits and maintain low interest rates.

To further bolster the system, the U.S., under the guidance of Henry Kissinger, encouraged OPEC to dramatically increase oil prices in the 1970s. The 1973 oil embargo and subsequent price hikes, masterminded by Kissinger, quadrupled the cost of oil, creating a windfall for oil-exporting nations. These nations, whose wealth surged significantly due to the rising oil prices, reinvested even more heavily in U.S. Treasuries and other dollar-denominated assets. This influx of petrodollars increased demand for U.S. debt, enabling the U.S. to issue more debt at lower interest rates. Additionally, the appreciation in the value of oil—a critical global commodity—provided the U.S. banking sector with the necessary collateral to expand credit generation. Just as a house serves as collateral for a mortgage, enabling banks to create new debt, the rising value of oil boosted the asset values of Western corporations that owned oil reserves or invested in oil infrastructure projects. This increase in asset values allowed these corporations to secure larger loans, providing banks with the collateral needed to expand credit creation and inject more dollars into the economy. However, these price hikes also caused global economic turmoil, disproportionately affecting developing nations. As the cost of energy imports skyrocketed, these nations faced mounting debt burdens, exacerbating their economic struggles and deepening global inequality.

The Unsustainable Debt Crisis and the Search for New Collateral

Fast forward to the present day, and the U.S. finds itself in a familiar yet increasingly precarious position. The 2008 financial crisis and the 2020 pandemic have driven the U.S. government’s debt to unprecedented levels, now exceeding $34 trillion, with a debt-to-GDP ratio surpassing 120%. At the same time, the petro-dollar system—the cornerstone of the dollar’s global dominance—is under significant strain. The rise of alternative currencies and the shifting power dynamics of a multipolar world have led to a decline in the dollar’s role in global trade, particularly in oil transactions. For instance, China now pays Saudi Arabia in yuan for oil imports, while Russia sells its oil and gas in rubles and other non-dollar currencies. This growing defiance of the dollar-dominated system reflects a broader trend toward economic independence, as nations like China and Russia seek to reduce their reliance on the U.S. dollar. As more countries bypass the dollar in trade, the artificial demand for dollars created by the petro-dollar system is eroding, undermining the ability of US to sustain its debt and maintain global financial hegemony.

In search of new collateral to carry on its unsustainable debt levels amid declining demand for the U.S. dollar, the U.S., together with its Western allies—many of whom face similar sovereign debt crises—first attempted to weaken Russia and exploit its vast natural resources as collateral. The U.S. and its NATO allies used Ukraine as a proxy to destabilize Russia, aiming to fragment its economy, colonize its territory, and seize control of its natural resources, estimated to be worth around $75 trillion. By gaining access to these resources, the West could have used them as collateral for the banking sector, enabling massive credit expansion. This, in turn, would have alleviated the sovereign debt crisis threatening both the EU and the U.S. This plan was not unprecedented; it mirrored France’s long-standing exploitation of its former African colonies through the CFA franc system.

For decades, France has maintained economic control over 14 African nations through the CFA franc, a currency pegged to the euro and backed by the French Treasury. Under this system, these African countries are required to deposit 50% of their foreign exchange reserves into the French Treasury, effectively giving France control over their monetary policy and economic sovereignty. This arrangement allows France to use African resources and reserves as implicit collateral to issue debt, keeping its borrowing costs low and ensuring demand for its bonds. In return, African nations are left with limited control over their own economies, forced to prioritize French interests over their own development. This neo-colonial system has enabled France to sustain its financial dominance while perpetuating poverty and dependency in its former colonies.

Just as France’s CFA franc system relies on the economic subjugation of African nations to sustain its financial dominance, the U.S. had hoped to use Russia’s resources as a lifeline for its debt-ridden economy. However, the plan ultimately failed. Russia not only resisted the sweeping economic sanctions imposed by the West but also decisively defeated NATO’s proxy forces in Ukraine, thwarting efforts to fragment its economy and seize control of its $75 trillion in natural resources. This failure left the U.S. and its allies without a new source of collateral to back their unsustainable debt levels. With this plan in ruins, the U.S. has been forced to turn its attention to Bitcoin as a potential new collateral for its unsustainable debt.

Bitcoin as Collateral: The U.S. Government’s Plan

The U.S. government’s plan to declare Bitcoin as a strategic reserve is a modern-day equivalent of the gold standard or petro-dollar system. Here’s how it would work:

1. Declaring Bitcoin as a Strategic Reserve: By officially recognizing Bitcoin as a reserve asset, the U.S. would signal to the world that it views Bitcoin as a store of value akin to gold. This would legitimize Bitcoin in the eyes of institutional investors and central banks.

2. Driving Up Bitcoin’s Price: To make Bitcoin a viable collateral, its price must rise significantly. The U.S. would achieve this by encouraging regulatory clarity, promoting institutional adoption, and creating a state-driven FOMO (fear of missing out). This would mirror the 1970s oil price hikes that bolstered the petro-dollar system.

3. Using Bitcoin to Back Debt: Once Bitcoin’s price reaches a sufficient level, the U.S. could use its Bitcoin reserves as collateral for issuing new debt. This would restore confidence in U.S. Treasuries and allow the government to continue borrowing at low interest rates.

The U.S. government’s goal is clear: to use Bitcoin as a tool to issue more debt and reinforce the dollar’s role as the global reserve currency. By forcing Bitcoin into a store-of-value role, the U.S. would replicate the gold standard’s exploitative dynamics, centralizing control in the hands of large financial institutions and central banks. This would strip Bitcoin of its revolutionary potential and undermine its promise of decentralization. Meanwhile, the dollar—in digital forms like USDT—would remain the primary medium of exchange, further entrenching the parasitic financial system.

Tether plays a critical role in this strategy. As explored in my previous article (here: [https://ersan.substack.com/p/is-tether-a-bitcoin-company]), Tether helps sustaining the current financial system by purchasing U.S. Treasuries, effectively providing life support for the U.S. debt machine during a period of declining demand for dollar-denominated assets. Now, with its plans to issue stablecoins on the Bitcoin blockchain, Tether is positioning itself as a bridge between Bitcoin and the traditional financial system. By issuing USDT on the Lightning Network, Tether could lure the poor in developing nations—who need short-term price stability for their day to day payments and cannot afford Bitcoin’s volatility—into using USDT as their primary medium of exchange. This would not only create an artificial demand for the dollar and extend the life of the parasitic financial system that Bitcoin was designed to dismantle but would also achieve this by exploiting the very people who have been excluded and victimized by the same system—the poor and unbanked in developing nations, whose hard-earned money would be funneled into sustaining the very structures that perpetuate their oppression.

Worse, USDT on Bitcoin could function as a de facto central bank digital currency (CBDC), where all transactions can be monitored and sanctioned by governments at will. For example, Tether’s centralized control over USDT issuance and its ties to traditional financial institutions make it susceptible to government pressure. Authorities could compel Tether to implement KYC (Know Your Customer) rules, freeze accounts, or restrict transactions, effectively turning USDT into a tool of financial surveillance and control. This would trap users in a system where every transaction is subject to government oversight, effectively stripping Bitcoin of its censorship-resistant and decentralized properties—the very features that make it a tool for financial freedom.

In this way, the U.S. government’s push for Bitcoin as a store of value, combined with Tether’s role in promoting USDT as a medium of exchange, creates a two-tiered financial system: one for the wealthy, who can afford to hold Bitcoin as a hedge against inflation, and another for the poor, who are trapped in a tightly controlled, surveilled digital economy. This perpetuates the very inequalities Bitcoin was designed to dismantle, turning it into a tool of oppression rather than liberation.

Conclusion: Prolonging the Parasitic Financial System

The U.S. government’s plan to declare Bitcoin as a strategic reserve is not a step toward financial innovation or freedom—it is a desperate attempt to prolong the life of a parasitic financial system that Bitcoin was created to replace. By co-opting Bitcoin, the U.S. would gain a new tool to issue more debt, enabling it to continue its exploitative practices, including proxy wars, economic sanctions, and the enforcement of a unipolar world order.

The petro-dollar system was built on the exploitation of oil-exporting nations and the global economy. A Bitcoin-backed system would likely follow a similar pattern, with the U.S. using its dominance to manipulate Bitcoin’s price and extract value from the rest of the world. This would allow the U.S. to sustain its current financial system, in which it prints money out of thin air to purchase real-world assets and goods, enriching itself at the expense of other nations.

Bitcoin was designed to dismantle this parasitic system, offering an escape hatch for those excluded from or exploited by traditional financial systems. By declaring Bitcoin a strategic reserve, the U.S. government would destroy Bitcoin’s ultimate purpose, turning it into another instrument of control. This is not a victory for Bitcoin or bitcoiners—it is a tragedy for financial freedom and global equity.

The Bitcoin strategic reserve plan is not progress—it is a regression into the very system Bitcoin was designed to dismantle. As bitcoiners, we must resist this co-option and fight to preserve Bitcoin’s original vision: a decentralized, sovereign, and equitable financial system for all. This means actively working to ensure Bitcoin is used as a medium of exchange, not just a store of value, to fulfill its promise of financial freedom.

@ 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

@ 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

@ 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.

@ 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.

@ 3f770d65:7a745b24

The recent shutdown of TikTok in the United States due to a potential government ban serves as a stark reminder how fragile centralized platforms truly are under the surface. While these platforms offer convenience, a more polished user experience, and connectivity, they are ultimately beholden to governments, corporations, and other authorities. This makes them vulnerable to censorship, regulation, and outright bans. In contrast, Nostr represents a shift in how we approach online communication and content sharing. Built on the principles of decentralization and user choice, Nostr cannot be banned, because it is not a platform—it is a protocol.

PROTOCOLS, NOT PLATFORMS.

At the heart of Nostr's philosophy is user choice, a feature that fundamentally sets it apart from legacy platforms. In centralized systems, the user experience is dictated by a single person or governing entity. If the platform decides to filter, censor, or ban specific users or content, individuals are left with little action to rectify the situation. They must either accept the changes or abandon the platform entirely, often at the cost of losing their social connections, their data, and their identity.

What's happening with TikTok could never happen on Nostr. With Nostr, the dynamics are completely different. Because it is a protocol, not a platform, no single entity controls the ecosystem. Instead, the protocol enables a network of applications and relays that users can freely choose from. If a particular application or relay implements policies that a user disagrees with, such as censorship, filtering, or even government enforced banning, they are not trapped or abandoned. They have the freedom to move to another application or relay with minimal effort.

THIS IS POWERFUL.

Take, for example, the case of a relay that decides to censor specific content. On a legacy platform, this would result in frustration and a loss of access for users. On Nostr, however, users can simply connect to a different relay that does not impose such restrictions. Similarly, if an application introduces features or policies that users dislike, they can migrate to a different application that better suits their preferences, all while retaining their identity and social connections.

The same principles apply to government bans and censorship. A government can ban a specific application or even multiple applications, just as it can block one relay or several relays. China has implemented both tactics, yet Chinese users continue to exist and actively participate on Nostr, demonstrating Nostr's ability to resistant censorship.

How? Simply, it turns into a game of whack-a-mole. When one relay is censored, another quickly takes its place. When one application is banned, another emerges. Users can also bypass these obstacles by running their own relays and applications directly from their homes or personal devices, eliminating reliance on larger entities or organizations and ensuring continuous access.

AGAIN, THIS IS POWERUFL.

Nostr's open and decentralized design makes it resistant to the kinds of government intervention that led to TikTok's outages this weekend and potential future ban in the next 90 days. There is no central server to target, no company to regulate, and no single point of failure. (Insert your CEO jokes here). As long as there are individuals running relays and applications, users continue creating notes and sending zaps.

Platforms like TikTok can be silenced with the stroke of a pen, leaving millions of users disconnected and abandoned. Social communication should not be silenced so incredibly easily. No one should have that much power over social interactions.

Will we on-board a massive wave of TikTokers in the coming hours or days? I don't know.

TikTokers may not be ready for Nostr yet, and honestly, Nostr may not be ready for them either. The ecosystem still lacks the completely polished applications, tools, and services they’re accustomed to. This is where we say "we're still early". They may not be early adopters like the current Nostr user base. Until we bridge that gap, they’ll likely move to the next centralized platform, only to face another government ban or round of censorship in the future. But eventually, there will come a tipping point, a moment when they’ve had enough. When that time comes, I hope we’re prepared. If we’re not, we risk missing a tremendous opportunity to onboard people who genuinely need Nostr’s freedom.

Until then, to all of the Nostr developers out there, keep up the great work and keep building. Your hard work and determination is needed.

@ 9e69e420:d12360c2

Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelensky called for an "army of Europe" to defend against Russian threats, emphasizing that the US may not continue its traditional support for Europe. Speaking at the Munich Security Conference, he warned against peace deals made without Ukraine's involvement.

US Vice President JD Vance echoed this sentiment, urging Europe to enhance its defense efforts.

Zelensky stated, "I really believe the time has come - the armed forces of Europe must be created." He highlighted changing dynamics in US-Europe relations and noted that "the old days are over" regarding American support.

Despite discussions around NATO, Zelensky stated he wouldn't rule out NATO membership for Ukraine.

@ 3eacaa76:bac66fe4

Few days back this track get on Top of list on #wavlake. It's nice , but not a point. at all.

The message is clear. like Real Talk should be !

We know, specialy on #nostr, that solutions are available. However, the world is not yet aware of them.

100% of the donations for this remix will be sent to my friend Yusef who is on the ground and has been providing food, water, and shelter for children in Gaza even before or the psyop with October 07 took a place. Israel has enforced a blockade on Gaza for over decade. And Just past year completly destroyed 90% of land. Like to the ground , no schools , no hospitals ... hard to find anything what surrvived those daily airstrikes without 1h of pause since 350 days. WTF

It's heartbreaking to see children dying daily in houreds and the lack of action from the public and authorities of other nations. The statistics are alarming, and it's essential to address this issue and find ways to make progress. it's crucial to raise awareness and take action to prevent further tragedies. Let's remember that every child's life is precious and deserves our attention and support.

In most apocaliptic condition , where is-real controling all money supply (check lastest news about banknotes in there) , the #Bitcoin is one and only solution can help them in daily bases. It was helping them before with great succes. Why you ask ? becuse even if they close all platforms You can still send them some sats.

How fookin cool is that !!

I know it doesn't sound funny.

Those People pushed to the limit , now they have a tool that fulfills exactly what was created for A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System.

No Middle man .

``` On the middle is only a finger whitch WE the PEOPLE can give to those Scumbagz in Goverments and Banks, Full stop.

```

Many people are only recently realizing the truth about Gaza being an open-air prison from like 75 years. Not 3, not 5 or even 20 ..... but seventy five fookin years.

This music mix was created to share the truth and provoke to critical thinking, which has been lacking for the past decade. and even more.

I wonder why we can watch live streams of the ongoing genocide in 4K HD and stil be silent. not all but many.

Why are we surprised that normies don't understand Bitcoin and still use fiat shit currency? Whitch is fudament of All war crimes. We should ask ourselves.

Our own ignorance and the banking system are the cancers of this world.

If we lose Palestine, we will lose much more than we think.

You will be next - One way or another

Thank you for your support, not for me but for those in need who can gain hope from our efforts.

Respect to you all.

LISTEN HERE and suport directly in upper links

FreePalestine

Thanks

be blessed

MadMunky

@ 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

@ 714f9dc3:76659adb

Last week, I was reading “The Air We Breathe”, by Glen Scrivener. It’s about “How We All Came to Believe in Freedom, Kindness, Progress, and Equality”, and it explores the Christian roots of the values we prize in today's western society. It’s all around us, but we don’t really know where it came from: It’s the air we’re breathing. The ideas and ethics behind Christianity, whether you believe in them or not, are embedded in our culture.

As I was reading this, I saw so many parallels with Bitcoin, so wanted to list them below and share some of my thoughts. Can Bitcoin also become “The Air We Breathe”? Or in plebs words: hyperbitcoinization? Can Bitcoin become so ubiquitous that it becomes normal? Can there be a world in which we don’t even know where Bitcoin came from? It would be a world with many similar views as with today's view on Christianity. It becomes the air we breathe, something that used to be a counterculture that over time became ubiquitous. What can we learn from it?

These are my ten parallels of Bitcoin with the early days of Christianity. 1. Separation from state 2. From obscure counterculture to dominant force 3. Exponential grassroots growth 4. Conversion of emperors/politicians 5. Sudden tolerance and protection for ideology 6. Fall of the empire, end of the status quo 7. Missionaries spreading the word 8. Persuasion and education are key 9. Age of Enlightenment

Note: I’m no expert on Christianity, nor a historian of the Roman Empire, and I know just a bit about Bitcoin. See this as a thought experiment.

1. Separation from state In all fairness, I’m not the first to draw this first parallel. It was Satoshi Nakamoto themself who made the connection even before Bitcoin was available to the public, with several hints pointing back to important dates and moments in Christian history. The big parallel here is the “separation of money and state” and “separation of church and state”.

Before going back to the early days of Christianity in the first centuries AD, I first want to draw this parallel with Satoshi.

It’s 1517. The German Priest Maarten Luther writes his Ninety-five Theses, and nails this on the church doors in Wittenberg. The theses are also known as the “Disputation on the Power and Efficacy of Indulgences”. He kickstarted a movement with a radical new idea for that time: The separation of the church from the state.

The Catholic Church had become one with the state. Via the means of indulgences, there was an ability to pay for your redemption. The church was corrupted by money, power and politics. The church and indulgences replaced the need for personal responsibility and an individual faith with money and perverse structures.

Reformation Day is a Protestant Christian religious holiday celebrated on 31 October in remembrance of the onset of the Reformation. But the 31st of October is also the day in which Satoshi shared his pamphlet with the world: in 2008 they published the Bitcoin Whitepaper. It kickstarted a movement with a radical new idea for that time: The separation of the money from the state.

But this was not Satoshi’s only hint. Another one is the date of Bitcoin’s Genesis Block: January 3, 2009. It was the day that the idea of the separation of money and the state became reality, more than just an idea in an individual's mind.

Did you know that Maarten Luther was excommunicated from the Catholic Church in 1521 by Pope Leo X for sparking this revolutionary new way of thinking (and being). It happened on January 3 as well. I bet Satoshi Nakamoto knew.

To be fair, this parallel is not new and known by many bitcoiners. But it’s a good introduction to the topic, and after reading “The Air We Breathe: How We All Came to Believe in Freedom, Kindness, Progress, and Equality”, I automatically started to see more parallels between (the early days of) Christianity and todays adoption of Bitcoin. Because it was of course not Maarten Luther who sparked these rebellious thoughts in 1500, but it was Jesus himself approx. 2000 years ago.

Let’s go back from the 1500s to the first decades AD to the beginning of this radical new belief system. During the dominance of the Roman empire in the Mediterranean and much of Europe, Western Asia and North Africa, someone told a story that opposed every mainstream paradigm.

Jesus’ idea was radically different from the belief systems of that day. He preached Freedom, Kindness, Progress, and Equality in a world that was full of Debauchery and Violence, with Gladiator Games, Slavery, Public Crucifixion, and Brutalities. The belief system of that time was not like todays. There were superior races (Greek/Romans over barbarians), superior sexes (man over women), superior classes (free man over slaves) and the concept of justice was more something in the realm of “restoring rights of those that were superior”, than “equality for all, men and women, Greek and barbarian, free and slave”.

Jesus opposed the status quo. It started small and irrelevant; as a counterculture. But it didn’t stay that way.

2. From obscure counterculture to dominant force In “The Air We Breathe”, Scrivener asks the question: “How did the obscure, marginal Jesus movement of the 1st century become the dominant religious force in the Western world in a few centuries?”

Important to know, is that the Christian faith was the opposite of the narrative. Concepts like Freedom, Kindness, Progress, and Equality didn’t exist in the Roman Empire. Human rights neither. Individual rights neither. The emperor was almost de facto God himself.

Early Christians were persecuted for preaching a different story: that God is NOT the ruler of the empire. Jesus preached the separation of politics from God; separating faith from the state. As a result, he was crucified, and many of his followers were killed by Nero (between 54 and 68 AD), Domitian (81–96 AD), Trajan (98–117 AD) and Decius (249–251 AD). This new narrative was a thread for the Roman rulers.

Draw the parallels of how there have been many attempts to “kill” bitcoin, not with physical persecution but with an information war. Not by physical violence, but by misinformation. Bitcoin threatens the status quo, just like Christianity threatened the Roman Empire.

You see?

But how is the obscure movement of Bitcoin in the 20th century becoming the dominant force, similar to the question that Scrivener asked about Christianity? Perhaps the answer lies in the following parallel.

3. Exponential grassroots growth Sociologist Rodney Stark estimates in “The Rise of Christianity” that from the time of the first Easter, the church began growing at a rate of 40% per decade, a modest but relentless 3.4% per year. By the year 300, Christians numbered perhaps 6 million: about a tenth of the empire.

Despite pushbacks, the army of believers continued to grow. Grassroots, peer-to-peer. It was not the state-religion, it was a peaceful army of believers that spread the word, resulting in an exponential growth of its followers. The counterculture became more and more dominant.

You may see what I’m doing here. It was basically the meme that all Bitcoiners know: Gradually, then suddenly. Against the current.

4. Conversion of emperors/politicians In 312 a big change happened: Emperor Constantine converted to Christianity. As Stark writes, "Constantine's conversion would better be seen as a response to the massive exponential wave in progress, not as its cause".

Are we living in that same era, where nation states start to embrace Bitcoin? Where politicians don’t oppose as strongly anymore, but are flirting with the idea of embracing it? And again the parallel: it’s responsive to the exponential wave of progress, not as its cause.

Whether Constantine is Nayib Bukele, Donald Trump, or Milei: it doesn’t matter. It’s the dynamic that matters. The counterculture becomes so dominant, that the “rulers” of the world are wanting to be part of it. Which will be followed by “rules” that favour the ideology, movement, and beliefs.

5. Tolerance and protection for ideology In 313 Constatines Edict of Milan granted freedom to Christians that were remarkable for that time and a model for religious toleration for the coming centuries.

The tide was turning, and by 380 Emperor Theodosius made Christianity Rome's official religion, more than half the population had already converted. In a few short centuries Christianity had gone from radical counterculture to dominant cultural power. This was an extraordinary shift in the church's relationship with the world. The edict expressly grants religious liberty to Christians, who had been the object of special persecution, but also goes even further and grants liberty to all other religions. And then, in 410, the world itself changed.

It changed from grassroots, bottom-up adoption to some kind of nation state adoption. One that was driven by decrees and edicts, instead of the analog cyberhornets of that day. Actually, the ideas of Indulgences were introduced via these Edicts, something that Maarten Luther actually was fighting against in the 1500s.

The world changed from the state-less Christian belief and moved (back) towards a system in which the state and church were connected again. Yes — the Roman Catholic Church. Until the previously mentioned critics during the Reformation.

6. Fall of the empire, end of the status quo When people speak of the fall of the Roman Empire, they usually mean in the 5th century when the western half fell. But there was also an eastern half, known as the Byzantine Empire (with its capital in what is modern-day Istanbul).

How did this relate to the movement that once was Cult, and now suddenly had become Culture?

It was Augustine, the north African bishop (354-430), who laid the foundation for a new philosophical, theological, and legal system. He distinguished between the fragile earthly realm and the eternal heavenly kingdom. Rome was “a city of man”, which fell. But the “city of God” was forever. He continued to separate the Roman Catholic Church from the faith that it once was. This distinction was vital, and it gave rise to the concept of "the secular realm". He planted the first ideas of "the separation of church and state" again, which started to spread throughout Europe during the supposedly "sandy desert" of the Middle Ages.

The parallel and lesson here might be that narratives can be taken over, for the worse. And that it takes centuries to take back the narrative, but/and only after an empire has fallen. Whether we refer to “The Fourth Turning” by William Strauss and Neil Howe or “Changing World Orders” by Ray Dalio. There is something to preserve, and it needs active monitoring and pushbacks!

7. Missionary, spreading the word The way the church sought to spread its influence would become a question that would take many centuries (and many failures) to settle. In the past, empires sought to spread their influence almost always by force. Christianity has been a missionary faith from the beginning. It was for this reason that Pope Gregory the Great sent Augustine to Britain to convert the Anglo-Saxons.

Augustine was commanded by Gregory to use only "gentle means". His goal was persuasion. His method was teaching and preaching. And he was successful, converting King Aethelbert of Kent and becoming the first Archbishop of Canterbury.

You see what I’m talking about again: the parallel is simple. Bitcoin is a similar peaceful revolution, a missionary movement, of those that wish to see their Cult turn into a Culture. “Genle means”, teachings, persuasions. Or in pleb terminology: Orangepilling.

8. Persuasion and education are key Over the next decades and centuries, this movement continued. English Benedictine monk (675-754) Boniface was sent from the previously “barbarian” Britain to “orangepill the East” – in this case the Saxons in the Germanic lands. In the words of his advisor, the Bishop of Winchester, his goal was "to convince them by many documents and arguments". This mission of persuasion and education was largely successful. Today he’s better known as “the Apostle to the Germans". He was killed in The Netherlands (Dokkum).

Boniface kept to a policy of non-violence and non-retaliation, even to the point of death. Another famous writer about this topic, Tom Holland, summarises the lesson we learn from Boniface: "to convert was to educate".

In the following century this lesson was sorely needed by the Frankish king Charles the Great, aka Charlemagne (742-814). Charlemagne's path to power was a brutal one. When the Saxons stood in his way, Charlemagne beheaded 4,500 of them in a single day. There are concrete reasons why "getting medieval" might be associated today with brutality.

Is “Bitcoin as Legal Tender”, whether this is peaceful or violently, the way to go? Are we “getting medieval” with these kind of measures, in order to go from Cult to Culture, from counterculture to dominant culture, in which we lose the true essence of our revolution of separation of the state from the matter?

9. Age of Enlightenment Alcuin of York (735-804), was bold enough to write to Charlemagne directly with his criticism. "A person can be drawn into the faith, not forced into it". Be a lighthouse, not a tugboat!

The church's official teaching would later agree with Alcuin's position. In the 12th century all "harsh means" were forbidden since faith arises from the will, not compulsion. Enlightenment comes through education and persuasion.

There’s work to do. Grassroots. Education. Peer-to-peer. Not directed by politicians, nor opposed by those in power. Through education and persuasion. Rules without rulers. Because eventually, with the Crusades and the Spanish Inquisition, there are stark examples of the church using “harsh means" again. Forcing Bitcoin on people will never be the way: it’s a cheat code to the end goal. In order to succeed, we’ll need to be a missionary.

Final words I don’t want in any way to compare Christianity in itself as a faith, and Bitcoin as a technology, with each other. I enjoyed exploring the sociological phenomena between two countercultures, the grassroots movement and missionary parallels between both of them. Satoshi gave the first assist, with the 31st of October (Whitepaper Day) and the Genesis Block on January 3rd.

Let’s not mix religion with monetary systems, even though there are many similarities between certain movements. That’s not my goal for sharing this brain dump. But let’s learn from the past, from Constatine’s Edict and from Augustine, from Charlemagne (and especially Alcuin of York), from Boniface and from Maarten Luther. And from Satoshi Nakamoto.

@ 0fa80bd3:ea7325de

intro

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

@ 3a8a16a7:f4c3b0b4

lkhkjhlk

!?

@ 9e69e420:d12360c2

Vice President J.D. Vance addressed the Munich Security Conference, criticizing European leaders for undermining free speech and traditional values. He claimed that the biggest threat to Europe is not from external enemies but from internal challenges. Vance condemned the arrest of a British man for praying near an abortion clinic and accused European politicians of censorship.

He urged leaders to combat illegal immigration and questioned their democratic practices. “There is a new sheriff in town,” he said, referring to President Trump. Vance's remarks were unexpected, as many anticipated discussions on security or Ukraine. His speech emphasized the need for Europe to share the defense burden to ensure stability and security.

@ a1c19849:daacbb52

Introduction

nostr:npub1nj5v9hfxegyuqz4z9vfpgu9lxpgald066wspxadywmhslasuw2gsnyrxzg shared a great thread on X about what the Dutch Noderunners did to push Bitcoin adoption. Since it took him quite some time and he didn’t want to redo it on #nostr I’m happy to share his thread here as well, since it has a lot of cool stuff in it. Here we go:

---

Noderunners 2024 Recap

by nostr:npub1nj5v9hfxegyuqz4z9vfpgu9lxpgald066wspxadywmhslasuw2gsnyrxzg

Here it is, the 2024 Noderunners recap! As we are preparing for our annual party on the third day of Christmas I’d like to reflect to all the great stuff we’ve build together to push bitcoin adoption from bottom up. I’m proud we’ve made it this far and we’re just starting! 🔥 We like to come together as often as possible to chat about bitcoin and drink a beer so we started even more meetups. We now do meetups in Roermond, Leiden, Eindhoven, Utrecht, Breda, Friesland, Zaandam. And an occasional party in Arnhem or Den Bosch. Feel free to join us anytime.

On our meetups and in the wild we meet the most awesome bitcoiners. To show them our respect we honor them by knighting them as an Honorary Noderunner. This year nostr:npub1nw5vdz8sj89y3h3tp7dunx8rhsm2qzfpf8ujq9m8mfvjsjth0uwqs9n2gn nostr:npub13ql75nq8rldygpkjke47y893akh5tglqtqzs6cspancaxktthsusvfqcg7 nostr:npub1cn4t4cd78nm900qc2hhqte5aa8c9njm6qkfzw95tszufwcwtcnsq7g3vle and nostr:npub1uaj9phu5lpxpczm3vaayt46m0yv0pduxzy7z6quwd2uggxue7fmqx9665u joined our ranks! 🧡

As you can imagine, we were pleasantly surprised when we saw an honorary Noderunner wearing his pin in the courtroom in the case against fAkEtOsHi! Nice to meet again in Amsterdam nostr:npub1qg8j6gdwpxlntlxlkew7eu283wzx7hmj32esch42hntdpqdgrslqv024kw !

The Bitcoin conference in Amsterdam was full of Noderunners. On and off stage. On stage we had nostr:npub1jqs0u7zhh53e94gyhm4eu458wm6sw7z0kk66jjhhkhh346tcq2ysfgr247 nostr:npub1h0fd5xu8rfhwdkkjr78ssdhm7rdjyf97hhjqr9acwv77ux0uvf8q23kvcg nostr:npub17tyke9lkgxd98ruyeul6wt3pj3s9uxzgp9hxu5tsenjmweue6sqq4y3mgl Tom Lamoen and others.

In the panel there was nostr:npub1art8cs66ffvnqns5zs5qa9fwlctmusj5lj38j94lv0ulw0j54wjqhpm0w5 who asked a cheeky question… 🤓 He wrote the awesome “The Genesis Book” in which he describes the people and technology that led to the birth of bitcoin. Hope to see you 3kd Aaron!

Proof of work is the thing Noderunners value the most. We do the work on and offline. In Amsterdam we had several projects to display! Of course the BitcoinTaps, the bitcoin bitaxe B at the entrance, The nostr:npub1kd3nlw09ufkgmts2kaf0x8m4mq57exn6l8rz50v5ngyr2h3j5cfswdsdth arcade and the video of @npub1f59dz0ru0l8zpsl4cryj5ch2rahwxeex3mr7lpl2ltzxsfwsdwastu6nqk!

Personally I was very exited nostr:npub1qg5a5l3t7pakmm4r4up2e764xecsw62fk3rntevm24fwyczhndtsdrvc4x Edward and Stef of Connect The World Podcast allowed us to bring the Arcade to the afterparty at Braai where we played some tournaments with nostr:npub1jt97tpsul3fp8hvf7zn0vzzysmu9umcrel4hpgflg4vnsytyxwuqt8la9y nostr:npub1j8y6tcdfw3q3f3h794s6un0gyc5742s0k5h5s2yqj0r70cpklqeqjavrvg and many others!

Hopefully we can create a Noderunners lounge or such next year at @npub13e6qu4kdjsyysrfl5an558rawvqg0rx2xuat9ca706spcdqjzhuqq6md43! Connections were made!

This year there was also the first edition of nostr:npub1uv2tr83c5y7k82af6zdzlqs8m0klcmndd8u5vmlg2eyrskld6uzsv4rmr8 organized by nostr:npub14mge80nm5r0zj0gncxvpunlr28jyku95547q0m82ec475x3yy92skvjgm5 and Bitcoin Stad. It was an awesome event with great speakers but the best thing was the Noderunners Lounge in the basement where Hester Bais tapped a beer.. 🍺

There was some trouble in paradise when the GitHub page of nostr:npub1k5f85zx0xdskyayqpfpc0zq6n7vwqjuuxugkayk72fgynp34cs3qfcvqg2 got canceled due to false copyright claims.. He makes the most beautiful, full open source BTClock! He’s a good frend and very productive Noderunner! 🧡

nostr:npub1k5f85zx0xdskyayqpfpc0zq6n7vwqjuuxugkayk72fgynp34cs3qfcvqg2 also did a lot behind the scenes for the Noderunners SOLO Mining Pool! http://pool.noderunners.network

As we are also very enthusiastic about NOSTR nostr:npub1p6xyr6u5vet33r4x724vxmp9uwfllax5zjdgxeujyrtxt90lp74qvah0rm has set up our own nostr relay: wss://relay.noderunners.network

Noderunner nostr:npub1yn84ur49llj7pp9a7uv477f7vrpj0rj7df5pnfncvkusaxgy6jqsj9xgfl set up a mixer where he organizes a weekly coinjoin every sunday for more anonymous bitcoin transactions. https://coinjoin.nl

Our Belgian Noderunner Kim de Vos made the infamous “Big Mac index” where he expresses the price of bitcoin in Big Macs.. He also runs the AVBpodcast (my personal favorite).

We have several members who have their own podcasts. Also a lot of Noderunners appeared in podcasts as a guest. nostr:npub1agyf7kae8nkxqrd7rvvxt6nh9vwpcqzen2mc9dl3u38a04awpjcq09n23f educates bitcoin beginners. Tom Lamoen talks about libertarianism.

nostr:npub1gfxgylgst4lcemkjth6xdvcvq7le8rtlrym7wayml63qrjggngaqkqescl interviews bitcoiners from all over the world.

And nostr:npub1kj2ngxmm0zccswfqplff87rpgvmq9utvk0g726wc0h8pv4kwm8ss6zgm4n laughs at 🤡🌍

After months, even years of hard work nostr:npub1w98ems6ryhpv7zvmhwp5sv65p0pwrnvzw4lucn0ch776qan9ntdstscwpx launched the best bitcoin board game ever!

nostr:npub1w98ems6ryhpv7zvmhwp5sv65p0pwrnvzw4lucn0ch776qan9ntdstscwpx is also involved with the Dutch bitcoin magazine BitcoinFocus which features a lot of Noderunner builds and articles.

Of course I should mention our frens at nostr:npub1ua6fxn9ktc4jncanf79jzvklgjftcdrt5etverwzzg0lgpmg3hsq2gh6v6 where you can pay a few sats to play your favorite songs! http://radio.noderunners.org

LightningPlaces is working hard making entrepreneurs accepting bitcoin and putting them on their website! 🔥💪🏼

nostr:npub1lhufm09wzp42y67t3s8axlewwna8rmetak68w38yal7xjrwktpsscpt08x is also hooking up webshops and physical shops (and bars) to accept bitcoin! Connect them if you’re looking for a custom solution! https://lightningcheckout.eu/nl/

Maybe we should create an open source HW Wallet too but for now we have the man, the myth, the legend nostr:npub17tyke9lkgxd98ruyeul6wt3pj3s9uxzgp9hxu5tsenjmweue6sqq4y3mgl in our midst.. A real honor as we all share the same values and ethics in life but especially in bitcoin! We’ve been building seedsigners from scratch by the dozen!

Most of us are very entrepreneurial. Several bitcoin shops are run by Noderunners.

nostr:npub1qvwdl9rp7a5ghrxv57wnml5ehg2whjh708vys6kaxpkgu0z3aclsuy2h4p - https://bitcoinbrabant.com

nostr:npub1k00lff0ahjv4d2kwuwxy040d2282yjmzj6eeu5ghav054s4yrfzsplyc86 - https://bitsaga.be

nostr:npub1837pplcuwcjn35zwmpuy62ekcfdtvklajn6pueus3am09s27vu6smuj6v9 - https://miningwholesale.eu

A special shoutout to our junior Noderunner Esramsterdam who is organizing a bitcoin event focused on women. Because bitcoin is not only for men. More info: https://vanbanknaarbitcoin.nl

Also a special shoutout to @npub17k8u7c6kfjgtd380890zx0m4adu8vl53m9fvtc7lal4j9gp74xqqkguha4! The only way to get free sats. Drank not enough beer with nostr:npub1pzurm7nx3q08894wl6uautryq95sku5jhzgwjjrskwdafcwxekuq4n7vtu this year.. but we really need to set up a collaborative project!

Ok I’m done. Forgot a lot but this sums it up quite well. Greetings and love to everyone involved with the Noderunners I forgot to mention. I love you all and hope to build a lot more together! 🧡🔥

nostr:npub103uy2vsk5hrnldwdu0nztmsg7g6207cfqu744rnrnalauns6facsgj5ddp

nostr:npub1l9evr9vx4u2xefesmfu6gyypfdu7k8zwdw7rrnh5ckdds8fqx59sy3ferg

nostr:npub1cwzduskqu6yuxjs2a75uptj3vzfa84gv5q3xlkcpzs6usjfey24qvk70dv

nostr:npub1etuf22z5jwp765m8dqcw7rx5egjzjnwm9xwm4m367e9hxkd9vvaq04duqw

nostr:npub1mw6tm8kery0dwmz670vvg74z0xzttwt3y7yppya5rulufpkkaj7qmg2922

nostr:npub12qw34mucxxk200835d8qt5mshfukd39vvz4s94f0e6xthg0xpjmq3wvjlw

nostr:npub1d5axlx84ajq7q5yn4u86m9xgnmssgq5c6ktjfmu6qtw7jah24hzs57tmvz

nostr:npub1vnlkmja076ft0h2ppme4pvcyfh8zmwl4l7hpfm4du0jagwck04lq8rkr0w

Jan Burgers

nostr:npub1r35gr0g93gxpkcq77v9sx97d5aqg4edr0qwhdj2xr4xxt6slp7nswgahlx

Short Non-Bitcoin

nostr:npub12786tz9vyzuhe5jdjc9esd64vqh3pvqe34u9a3dyegudv5chkx9sexz86w

Joep Laser Sheep - Elden Lord 3x

nostr:npub12xtq7ufn6kjppvl24dnvezsny872u8xacfsy640fzd69446kgczsp8v5nm

nostr:npub1m0yz3tvsa8cwheqhkqj96zr9kget8j8yda0vfmrah5c0dafj6xcq4l4az6

@Erik Dutch

nostr:npub1kvfz8rglvpsqevznlt86ukcz0s9uap3pypjwd3tnmkn2pgjmjujqlncy2c

nostr:npub1l5pxvjzhw77h86tu0sml2gxg8jpwxch7fsj6d05n7vuqpq75v34syk4q0n

Noderunners Shop

nostr:npub1ylnqfg0neysvsesen9je80wmsv9r5204x30mgd5ev6dr3q95xpxq3nmcxd

nostr:npub1ap78x7mvw0vu9s7yltflmkqphx8rt8hsk9gdg0k42vwnmnpvpe2qptxewe

nostr:npub1n2ph08n4pqz4d3jk6n2p35p2f4ldhc5g5tu7dhftfpueajf4rpxqfjhzmc

@Bitcmonkey

@Roynode

nostr:npub18n56f28efvmsjcl80lv2ngtmkl3y6q2rg0m2zqas3kw4jwkrsvdqxnmver

nostr:npub135q6dvnjah9023xszmjs2wvd4gqhn2trku52wt2lv8cl4hc8ltjsk0w4sq

nostr:npub1837u93v8am8q2rauvkqfk9sf6xfq07p9m4m82jueqh5u4qzkg25qesqrr4

nostr:npub1pkmp7vtgfwg7g0pt4xdd4r2npz2p8yweeq0yx7xm590h4nuszynqq2e2r3

nostr:npub19r33crtgdt4spqxl5a3nhqx2ucdputtqcnnxkplnp4mv2dqldqqs39j5eq

nostr:npub19z9g9ymx3aalx3h0jr2cskehvhgppznv2lpqsrpgggpeueesq4lsknsp8r

nostr:npub1jlvtd4zmq7ukjcytqxu2gy5myp2uataupjk4a3l467fj7pxpk3xq5p3w0j

@HeroVanKampen

nostr:npub16htmakd0gvsmwjnravfvfn5mh2x7wjd0vxq20z2c0979e7xh0a8q6ssnew

nostr:npub1xw6jekvethghmrlv0chkx5p78h3wk2ep5x588ga854d68cugr40qxuwt5e

nostr:npub1zakkum8w7uancehpev0drxuly3e74fg5v7q4n0zpxcdn72wakpjs9cgpve

and all others I can’t find here or I forgot.. 🧡🔥💪🏼 LFG, see you soon!

Bonus: This has never aired but @DanielMol was doubtful of our impact to more bitcoin adoption.. I know we are a bit toxic but we have our hearts on the right place and help anyone who is serious about it.. Happy days Daniel! 🧡

@ e3ba5e1a:5e433365

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Libertas magnitudo est

@ 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.

@ 94a6a78a:0ddf320e

The backbone of your Nostr experience lies in relays—servers that transmit your notes, zaps, and private messages across the decentralized network. Azzamo offers three specialized relays to suit different user needs, ensuring reliability, performance, and privacy.

1. Free Relay

• URL: wss://nostr.azzamo.net
• Overview: Azzamo’s Free Relay is perfect for newcomers to Nostr. It’s open-access, reliable, and ensures fair use with moderate rate limits.
• Key Features:
• Free to use.
• Notes older than one month are purged daily.
• Accessible gateway for decentralized communication.

---

2. Paid Relay

• URL: wss://relay.azzamo.net
• Overview: Designed for power users, the Paid Relay offers unmatched performance with 99.9% uptime and low latency.
• Key Features:
• Scalable for heavy users.
• Fewer users for faster, consistent connections.
• Premium support included for paid users.

---

3. Inbox Relay

• URL: wss://inbox.azzamo.net
• Overview: Never miss a private message again with the Inbox Relay, optimized for secure, spam-free direct messaging.
• Key Features:
• Guaranteed message delivery.
• Optimized for NIP-17 private messages.
• Optimized for NIP-19 group chats.
• Premium users enjoy advanced support.

---

Why Choose Azzamo Relays?

Life on Nostr is easier with Azzamo relays. They’re fast, reliable, and built to handle whatever you throw at them. The Paid Relay keeps your connections strong, the Inbox Relay makes sure no private message gets lost, and the Free Relay is always there to get you started. Supporting Azzamo by going premium helps keep this decentralized network growing—and you get priority support while you’re at it. Azzamo has your back on Nostr!

🔗 Start now:

• Free Relay: wss://nostr.azzamo.net
• Paid Relay: azzamo.net/pay
• Inbox Relay: azzamo.net/inbox

Support the network and upgrade your experience—add time to your account via the Azzamo Dashboard. Choose Azzamo, and take control of your Nostr journey today!

@ dc4cd086:cee77c06

Have you ever wanted to learn from lengthy educational videos but found it challenging to navigate through hours of content? Our new tool addresses this problem by transforming long-form video lectures into easily digestible, searchable content.

Key Features:

Video Processing:

• Automatically downloads YouTube videos, transcripts, and chapter information
• Splits transcripts into sections based on video chapters

Content Summarization:

• Utilizes language models to transform spoken content into clear, readable text
• Formats output in AsciiDoc for improved readability and navigation
• Highlights key terms and concepts with [[term]] notation for potential cross-referencing

Diagram Extraction:

• Analyzes video entropy to identify static diagram/slide sections
• Provides a user-friendly GUI for manual selection of relevant time ranges
• Allows users to pick representative frames from selected ranges

Going Forward:

Currently undergoing a rewrite to improve organization and functionality, but you are welcome to try the current version, though it might not work on every machine. Will support multiple open and closed language models for user choice Free and open-source, allowing for personal customization and integration with various knowledge bases. Just because we might not have it on our official Alexandria knowledge base, you are still welcome to use it on you own personal or community knowledge bases! We want to help find connections between ideas that exist across relays, allowing individuals and groups to mix and match knowledge bases between each other, allowing for any degree of openness you care.

While designed with #Alexandria users in mind, it's available for anyone to use and adapt to their own learning needs.

Screenshots

Frame Selection

This is a screenshot of the frame selection interface. You'll see a signal that represents frame entropy over time. The vertical lines indicate the start and end of a chapter. Within these chapters you can select the frames by clicking and dragging the mouse over the desired range where you think diagram is in that chapter. At the bottom is an option that tells the program to select a specific number of frames from that selection.

Diagram Extraction

This is a screenshot of the diagram extraction interface. For every selection you've made, there will be a set of frames that you can choose from. You can select and deselect as many frames as you'd like to save.

Links

• repo: https://github.com/limina1/video_article_converter
• Nostr Apps 101: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Flxa_jkErqE

Output

And now, we have a demonstration of the final result of this tool, with some quick cleaning up. The video we will be using this tool on is titled Nostr Apps 101 by nostr:npub1nxy4qpqnld6kmpphjykvx2lqwvxmuxluddwjamm4nc29ds3elyzsm5avr7 during Nostrasia. The following thread is an analog to the modular articles we are constructing for Alexandria, and I hope it conveys the functionality we want to create in the knowledge space. Note, this tool is the first step! You could use a different prompt that is most appropriate for the specific context of the transcript you are working with, but you can also manually clean up any discrepancies that don't portray the video accurately. You can now view the article on #Alexandria https://next-alexandria.gitcitadel.eu/publication?d=nostr-apps-101

Initially published as chained kind 1's nostr:nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzp5r5hd579v2sszvvzfel677c8dxgxm3skl773sujlsuft64c44ncqy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnyv9kh2uewd9hj7qgwwaehxw309ahx7uewd3hkctcpzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumt0wd68ytnsw43z7qghwaehxw309aex2mrp0yhxummnw3ezucnpdejz7qgewaehxw309aex2mrp0yh8xmn0wf6zuum0vd5kzmp0qqsxunmjy20mvlq37vnrcshkf6sdrtkfjtjz3anuetmcuv8jswhezgc7hglpn

Or view on Coracle https://coracle.social /nevent1qqsxunmjy20mvlq37vnrcshkf6sdrtkfjtjz3anuetmcuv8jswhezgcppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qgsdqa9md83tz5yqnrqjw07hhkpmfjpkuv9hlh5v8yhu8z274w9dv7qnnq0s3

@ ec42c765:328c0600

カスタム絵文字とは

任意のオリジナル画像を絵文字のように文中に挿入できる機能です。
また、リアクション（Twitterの いいね のような機能）にもカスタム絵文字を使えます。

カスタム絵文字の対応状況（2025/02/06）

カスタム絵文字を使うためにはカスタム絵文字に対応したクライアントを使う必要があります。

※表は一例です。クライアントは他にもたくさんあります。

使っているクライアントが対応していない場合は、クライアントを変更する、対応するまで待つ、開発者に要望を送る（または自分で実装する）などしましょう。

対応クライアント

• Amethyst
• FreeFrom
• nostter
• Rabbit
• Lumilumi
• Nos Haiku
• Snort
• noStrudel

ここではnostterを使って説明していきます。

準備

カスタム絵文字を使うための準備です。

• Nostrエクステンション（NIP-07）を導入する
• 使いたいカスタム絵文字をリストに登録する

Nostrエクステンション（NIP-07）を導入する

Nostrエクステンションは使いたいカスタム絵文字を登録する時に必要になります。

また、環境（パソコン、iPhone、androidなど）によって導入方法が違います。

Nostrエクステンションを導入する端末は、実際にNostrを閲覧する端末と違っても構いません（リスト登録はPC、Nostr閲覧はiPhoneなど）。

Nostrエクステンション（NIP-07）の導入方法は以下のページを参照してください。

ログイン拡張機能 (NIP-07)を使ってみよう | Welcome to Nostr! ～ Nostrをはじめよう！ ～

少し面倒ですが、これを導入しておくとNostr上の様々な場面で役立つのでより快適になります。

使いたいカスタム絵文字をリストに登録する

以下のサイトで行います。

emojito

右上のGet startedからNostrエクステンションでログインしてください。

例として以下のカスタム絵文字を導入してみます。

実際より絵文字が少なく表示されることがありますが、古い状態のデータを取得してしまっているためです。その場合はブラウザの更新ボタンを押してください。

generalJP | カスタム絵文字

• 右側のOptionsからBookmarkを選択

これでカスタム絵文字を使用するためのリストに登録できます。

カスタム絵文字を使用する

例としてブラウザから使えるクライアント nostter から使用してみます。

nostter

nostterにNostrエクステンションでログイン、もしくは秘密鍵を入れてログインしてください。

文章中に使用

1. 投稿ボタンを押して投稿ウィンドウを表示
2. 顔😀のボタンを押し、絵文字ウィンドウを表示
3. ＊タブを押し、カスタム絵文字一覧を表示
4. カスタム絵文字を選択
5. : 記号に挟まれたアルファベットのショートコードとして挿入される

この状態で投稿するとカスタム絵文字として表示されます。

カスタム絵文字対応クライアントを使っている他ユーザーにもカスタム絵文字として表示されます。

対応していないクライアントの場合、ショートコードのまま表示されます。

ショートコードを直接入力することでカスタム絵文字の候補が表示されるのでそこから選択することもできます。

リアクションに使用

1. 任意の投稿の顔😀のボタンを押し、絵文字ウィンドウを表示
2. ＊タブを押し、カスタム絵文字一覧を表示
3. カスタム絵文字を選択

カスタム絵文字リアクションを送ることができます。

カスタム絵文字を探す

先述したemojitoからカスタム絵文字を探せます。

例えば任意のユーザーのページ emojito ロクヨウ から探したり、 emojito Browse all からnostr全体で最近作成、更新された絵文字を見たりできます。

また、以下のリンクは日本語圏ユーザーが作ったカスタム絵文字を集めたリストです（2025/02/06）

※漏れがあるかもしれません

日本ユーザー作 カスタム絵文字

各絵文字セットにあるOpen in emojitoのリンクからemojitoに飛び、使用リストに追加できます。

---

以上です。

次：Nostrのカスタム絵文字の作り方

Yakihonneリンク Nostrのカスタム絵文字の作り方

Nostrリンク nostr:naddr1qqxnzdesxuunzv358ycrgveeqgswcsk8v4qck0deepdtluag3a9rh0jh2d0wh0w9g53qg8a9x2xqvqqrqsqqqa28r5psx3

---

仕様

NIP-30 Custom Emoji

NIP-30 カスタム絵文字（和訳）

@ dff95033:862fbf40

This event has been deleted; your client is ignoring the delete request.

@ c4f5e7a7:8856cac7

Best viewed on Habla, YakiHonne or Highlighter.

TL;DR

This article explores the links between public, community-driven data sources (such as OpenStreetMap) and private, cryptographically-owned data found on networks such as Nostr.

The following concepts are explored:

1. Attestations: Users signalling to their social graph that they believe something to be true by publishing Attestations. These social proofs act as a decentralised verification system that leverages your web-of-trust.
2. Proof of Place: An oracle-based system where physical letters are sent to real-world locations, confirming the corresponding digital ownership via cryptographic proofs. This binds physical locations in meatspace with their digital representations in the Nostrverse.
3. Check-ins: Foursquare-style check-ins that can be verified using attestations from place owners, ensuring authenticity. This approach uses web-of-trust to validate check-ins and location ownership over time.

The goal is to leverage cryptographic ownership where necessary while preserving the open, collaborative nature of public data systems.

Open Data in a public commons has a place and should not be thrown out with the Web 2.0 bathwater.

Cognitive Dissonance

Ever since discovering Nostr in August of 2022 I've been grappling with how BTC Map - a project that helps bitcoiners find places to spend sats - should most appropriately use this new protocol.

I am assuming, dear reader, that you are somewhat familiar with Nostr - a relatively new protocol for decentralised identity and communication. If you don’t know your nsec from your npub, please take some time to read these excellent posts: Nostr is Identity for the Internet and The Power of Nostr by @max and @lyn, respectively. Nostr is so much more than a short-form social media replacement.

The social features (check-ins, reviews, etc.) that Nostr unlocks for BTC Map are clear and exciting - all your silos are indeed broken - however, something fundamental has been bothering me for a while and I think it comes down to data ownership.

For those unfamiliar, BTC Map uses OpenStreetMap (OSM) as its main geographic database. OSM is centred on the concept of a commons of objectively verifiable data that is maintained by a global community of volunteer editors; a Wikipedia for maps. There is no data ownership; the data is free (as in freedom) and anyone can edit anything. It is the data equivalent of FOSS (Free and Open Source Software) - FOSD if you will, but more commonly referred to as Open Data.

In contrast, Notes and Other Stuff on Nostr (Places in this cartographic context) are explicitly owned by the controller of the private key. These notes are free to propagate, but they are owned.

How do we reconcile the decentralised nature of Nostr, where data is cryptographically owned by individuals, with the community-managed data commons of OpenStreetMap, where no one owns the data?

Self-sovereign Identity

Before I address this coexistence question, I want to talk a little about identity as it pertains to ownership. If something is to be owned, it has to be owned by someone or something - an identity.

All identities that are not self-sovereign are, by definition, leased to you by a 3rd party. You rent your Facebook identity from Meta in exchange for your data. You rent your web domain from your DNS provider in exchange for your money.

Taken to the extreme, you rent your passport from your Government in exchange for your compliance. You are you at the pleasure of others. Where Bitcoin separates money from the state; Nostr separates identity from the state.

Or, as @nvk said recently: "Don't build your house on someone else's land.".

https://i.nostr.build/xpcCSkDg3uVw0yku.png

While we’ve had the tools for self-sovereign digital identity for decades (think PGP keys or WebAuthN), we haven't had the necessary social use cases nor the corresponding social graph to elevate these identities to the mainstream. Nostr fixes this.

Nostr is PGP for the masses and will take cryptographic identities mainstream.

Full NOSTARD?

Returning to the coexistence question: the data on OpenStreetMap isn’t directly owned by anyone, even though the physical entities the data represents might be privately owned. OSM is a data commons.

We can objectively agree on the location of a tree or a fire hydrant without needing permission to observe and record it. Sure, you could place a tree ‘on Nostr’, but why should you? Just because something can be ‘on Nostr’ doesn’t mean it should be.

https://i.nostr.build/s3So2JVAqoY4E1dI.png

There might be a dystopian future where we can't agree on what a tree is nor where it's located, but I hope we never get there. It's at this point we'll need a Wikifreedia variant of OpenStreetMap.

While integrating Nostr identities into OpenStreetMap would be valuable, the current OSM infrastructure, tools, and community already provide substantial benefits in managing this data commons without needing to go NOSTR-native - there's no need to go Full NOSTARD. H/T to @princeySOV for the original meme.

https://i.nostr.build/ot9jtM5cZtDHNKWc.png

So, how do we appropriately blend cryptographically owned data with the commons?

If a location is owned in meatspace and it's useful to signal that ownership, it should also be owned in cyberspace. Our efforts should therefore focus on entities like businesses, while allowing the commons to manage public data for as long as it can successfully mitigate the tragedy of the commons.

The remainder of this article explores how we can:

1. Verify ownership of a physical place in the real world;
2. Link that ownership to the corresponding digital place in cyberspace.

As a side note, I don't see private key custodianship - or, even worse, permissioned use of Places signed by another identity's key - as any more viable than the rented identities of Web 2.0.

And as we all know, the Second Law of Infodynamics (no citation!) states that:

"The total amount of sensitive information leaked will always increase over time."

This especially holds true if that data is centralised.

Not your keys, not your notes. Not your keys, not your identity.

Places and Web-of-Trust

@Arkinox has been leading the charge on the Places NIP, introducing Nostr notes (kind 37515) that represent physical locations. The draft is well-crafted, with bonus points for linking back to OSM (and other location repositories) via NIP-73 - External Content IDs (championed by @oscar of @fountain).

However, as Nostr is permissionless, authenticity poses a challenge. Just because someone claims to own a physical location on the Internet doesn’t necessarily mean they have ownership or control of that location in the real world.

Ultimately, this problem can only be solved in a decentralised way by using Web-of-Trust - using your social graph and the perspectives of trusted peers to inform your own perspective. In the context of Places, this requires your network to form a view on which digital identity (public key / npub) is truly the owner of a physical place like your local coffee shop.

This requires users to:

1. Verify the owner of a Place in cyberspace is the owner of a place in meatspace.
2. Signal this verification to their social graph.

Let's look at the latter idea first with the concept of Attestations ...

Attestations

A way to signal to your social graph that you believe something to be true (or false for that matter) would be by publishing an Attestation note. An Attestation note would signify to your social graph that you think something is either true or false.

Imagine you're a regular at a local coffee shop. You publish an Attestation that says the shop is real and the owner behind the Nostr public key is who they claim to be. Your friends trust you, so they start trusting the shop's digital identity too.

However, attestations applied to Places are just a single use case. The attestation concept could be more widely applied across Nostr in a variety of ways (key rotation, identity linking, etc).

Here is a recent example from @lyn that would carry more signal if it were an Attestation:

https://i.nostr.build/lZAXOEwvRIghgFY4.png

Parallels can be drawn between Attestations and transaction confirmations on the Bitcoin timechain; however, their importance to you would be weighted by clients and/or Data Vending Machines in accordance with:

1. Your social graph;
2. The type or subject of the content being attested and by whom;
3. Your personal preferences.

They could also have a validity duration to be temporally bound, which would be particularly useful in the case of Places.

NIP-25 (Reactions) do allow for users to up/downvote notes with optional content (e.g., emojis) and could work for Attestations, but I think we need something less ambiguous and more definitive.

‘This is true’ resonates more strongly than ‘I like this.’.

https://i.nostr.build/s8NIG2kXzUCLcoax.jpg

There are similar concepts in the Web 3 / Web 5 world such as Verified Credentials by tdb. However, Nostr is the Web 3 now and so wen Attestation NIP?

https://i.nostr.build/Cb047NWyHdJ7h5Ka.jpg

That said, I have seen @utxo has been exploring ‘smart contracts’ on nostr and Attestations may just be a relatively ‘dumb’ subset of the wider concept Nostr-native scripting combined with web-of-trust.

Proof of Place

Attestations handle the signalling of your truth, but what about the initial verification itself?

We already covered how this ultimately has to be derived from your social graph, but what if there was a way to help bootstrap this web-of-trust through the use of oracles? For those unfamiliar with oracles in the digital realm, they are simply trusted purveyors of truth.

Introducing Proof of Place, an out–of-band process where an oracle (such as BTC Map) would mail - yes physically mail- a shared secret to the address of the location being claimed in cyberspace. This shared secret would be locked to the public key (npub) making the claim, which, if unlocked, would prove that the associated private key (nsec) has physical access to the location in meatspace.

One way of doing this would be to mint a 1 sat cashu ecash token locked to the npub of the claimant and mail it to them. If they are able to redeem the token then they have cryptographically proven that they have physical access to the location.

Proof of Place is really nothing more than a weighted Attestation. In a web-of-trust Nostrverse, an oracle is simply a npub (say BTC Map) that you weigh heavily for its opinion on a given topic (say Places).

In the Bitcoin world, Proof of Work anchors digital scarcity in cyberspace to physical scarcity (energy and time) in meatspace and as @Gigi says in PoW is Essential:

"A failure to understand Proof of Work, is a failure to understand Bitcoin."

In the Nostrverse, Proof of Place helps bridge the digital and physical worlds.

@Gigi also observes in Memes vs The World that:

"In Bitcoin, the map is the territory. We can infer everything we care about by looking at the map alone."

https://i.nostr.build/dOnpxfI4u7EL2v4e.png

This isn’t true for Nostr.

In the Nostrverse, the map IS NOT the territory. However, Proof of Place enables us to send cryptographic drones down into the physical territory to help us interpret our digital maps. 🤯

Check-ins

Although not a draft NIP yet, @Arkinox has also been exploring the familiar concept of Foursquare-style Check-ins on Nostr (with kind 13811 notes).

For the uninitiated, Check-ins are simply notes that signal the publisher is at a given location. These locations could be Places (in the Nostr sense) or any other given digital representation of a location for that matter (such as OSM elements) if NIP-73 - External Content IDs are used.

Of course, not everyone will be a Check-in enjoyooor as the concept will not sit well with some people’s threat models and OpSec practices.

Bringing Check-ins to Nostr is possible (as @sebastix capably shows here), but they suffer the same authenticity issues as Places. Just because I say I'm at a given location doesn't mean that I am.

Back in the Web 2.0 days, Foursquare mitigated this by relying on the GPS position of the phone running their app, but this is of course spoofable.

How should we approach Check-in verifiability in the Nostrverse? Well, just like with Places, we can use Attestations and WoT. In the context of Check-ins, an Attestation from the identity (npub) of the Place being checked-in to would be a particularly strong signal. An NFC device could be placed in a coffee shop and attest to check-ins without requiring the owner to manually intervene - I’m sure @blackcoffee and @Ben Arc could hack something together over a weekend!

Check-ins could also be used as a signal for bonafide Place ownership over time.

Summary: Trust Your Bros

So, to recap, we have:

Places: Digital representations of physical locations on Nostr.

Check-ins: Users signalling their presence at a location.

Attestations: Verifiable social proofs used to confirm ownership or the truth of a claim.

You can visualise how these three concepts combine in the diagram below:

https://i.nostr.build/Uv2Jhx5BBfA51y0K.jpg

And, as always, top right trumps bottom left! We have:

Level 0 - Trust Me Bro: Anyone can check-in anywhere. The Place might not exist or might be impersonating the real place in meatspace. The person behind the npub may not have even been there at all.

Level 1 - Definitely Maybe Somewhere: This category covers the middle-ground of ‘Maybe at a Place’ and ‘Definitely Somewhere’. In these examples, you are either self-certifying that you have checked-in at an Attested Place or you are having others attest that you have checked-in at a Place that might not even exist IRL.

Level 2 - Trust Your Bros: An Attested Check-in at an Attested Place. Your individual level of trust would be a function of the number of Attestations and how you weigh them within your own social graph.

https://i.nostr.build/HtLAiJH1uQSTmdxf.jpg

Perhaps the gold standard (or should that be the Bitcoin standard?) would be a Check-in attested by the owner of the Place, which in itself was attested by BTC Map?

Or perhaps not. Ultimately, it’s the users responsibility to determine what they trust by forming their own perspective within the Nostrverse powered by web-of-trust algorithms they control. ‘Trust Me Bro’ or ‘Trust Your Bros’ - you decide.

As we navigate the frontier of cryptographic ownership and decentralised data, it’s up to us to find the balance between preserving the Open Data commons and embracing self-sovereign digital identities.

Thanks

With thanks to Arkinox, Avi, Ben Gunn, Kieran, Blackcoffee, Sebastix, Tomek, Calle, Short Fiat, Ben Weeks and Bitcoms for helping shape my thoughts and refine content, whether you know it or not!

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Bitcoin transactions explained

A transaction is a piece of data that takes inputs and produces outputs. Forget about the blockchain thing, Bitcoin is actually just a big tree of transactions. The blockchain is just a way to keep transactions ordered.

Imagine you have 10 satoshis. That means you have them in an unspent transaction output (UTXO). You want to spend them, so you create a transaction. The transaction should reference unspent outputs as its inputs. Every transaction has an immutable id, so you use that id plus the index of the output (because transactions can have multiple outputs). Then you specify a script that unlocks that transaction and related signatures, then you specify outputs along with a script that locks these outputs.

As you can see, there's this lock/unlocking thing and there are inputs and outputs. Inputs must be unlocked by fulfilling the conditions specified by the person who created the transaction they're in. And outputs must be locked so anyone wanting to spend those outputs will need to unlock them.

For most of the cases locking and unlocking means specifying a public key whose controller (the person who has the corresponding private key) will be able to spend. Other fancy things are possible too, but we can ignore them for now.

Back to the 10 satoshis you want to spend. Since you've successfully referenced 10 satoshis and unlocked them, now you can specify the outputs (this is all done in a single step). You can specify one output of 10 satoshis, two of 5, one of 3 and one of 7, three of 3 and so on. The sum of outputs can't be more than 10. And if the sum of outputs is less than 10 the difference goes to fees. In the first days of Bitcoin you didn't need any fees, but now you do, otherwise your transaction won't be included in any block.

If you're still interested in transactions maybe you could take a look at this small chapter of that Andreas Antonopoulos book.

If you hate Andreas Antonopoulos because he is a communist shitcoiner or don't want to read more than half a page, go here: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Coin_analogy

@ 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

@ 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

@ 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

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Nostr is not decentralized nor censorship-resistant

Peter Todd has been saying this for a long time and all the time I've been thinking he is misunderstanding everything, but I guess a more charitable interpretation is that he is right.

Nostr today is indeed centralized.

Yesterday I published two harmless notes with the exact same content at the same time. In two minutes the notes had a noticeable difference in responses:

The top one was published to wss://nostr.wine, wss://nos.lol, wss://pyramid.fiatjaf.com. The second was published to the relay where I generally publish all my notes to, wss://pyramid.fiatjaf.com, and that is announced on my NIP-05 file and on my NIP-65 relay list.

A few minutes later I published that screenshot again in two identical notes to the same sets of relays, asking if people understood the implications. The difference in quantity of responses can still be seen today:

These results are skewed now by the fact that the two notes got rebroadcasted to multiple relays after some time, but the fundamental point remains.

What happened was that a huge lot more of people saw the first note compared to the second, and if Nostr was really censorship-resistant that shouldn't have happened at all.

Some people implied in the comments, with an air of obviousness, that publishing the note to "more relays" should have predictably resulted in more replies, which, again, shouldn't be the case if Nostr is really censorship-resistant.

What happens is that most people who engaged with the note are following me, in the sense that they have instructed their clients to fetch my notes on their behalf and present them in the UI, and clients are failing to do that despite me making it clear in multiple ways that my notes are to be found on wss://pyramid.fiatjaf.com.

If we were talking not about me, but about some public figure that was being censored by the State and got banned (or shadowbanned) by the 3 biggest public relays, the sad reality would be that the person would immediately get his reach reduced to ~10% of what they had before. This is not at all unlike what happened to dozens of personalities that were banned from the corporate social media platforms and then moved to other platforms -- how many of their original followers switched to these other platforms? Probably some small percentage close to 10%. In that sense Nostr today is similar to what we had before.

Peter Todd is right that if the way Nostr works is that you just subscribe to a small set of relays and expect to get everything from them then it tends to get very centralized very fast, and this is the reality today.

Peter Todd is wrong that Nostr is inherently centralized or that it needs a protocol change to become what it has always purported to be. He is in fact wrong today, because what is written above is not valid for all clients of today, and if we drive in the right direction we can successfully make Peter Todd be more and more wrong as time passes, instead of the contrary.

---

See also:

• Censorship-resistant relay discovery in Nostr
• A vision for content discovery and relay usage for basic social-networking in Nostr

@ 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.

@ 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.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Bolo

It seems that from 1987 to around 2000 there was a big community of people who played this game called "Bolo". It was a game in which people controlled a tank and killed others while trying to capture bases in team matches. Always 2 teams, from 2 to 16 total players, games could last from 10 minutes to 12 hours. I'm still trying to understand all this.

The game looks silly from some videos you can find today, but apparently it was very deep in strategy because people developed strategy guides and wrote extensively about it and Netscape even supported bolo: URLs out of the box.

The two most important elements on the map are pillboxes and bases. Pillboxes are originally neutral, meaning that they shoot at every tank that happens to get in its range. They shoot fast and with deadly accuracy. You can shoot the pillbox with your tank, and you can see how damaged it is by looking at it. Once the pillbox is subdued, you may run over it, which will pick it up. You may place the pillbox where you want to put it (where it is clear), if you've enough trees to build it back up. Trees are harvested by sending your man outside your tank to forest the trees. Your man (also called a builder) can also lay mines, build roads, and build walls. Once you have placed a pillbox, it will not shoot at you, but only your enemies. Therefore, pillboxes are often used to protect your bases.

That quote was taken from this "augmented FAQ" written by some user. Apparently there were many FAQs for this game. A FAQ is after all just a simple, clear and direct to the point way of writing about anything, previously known as summa[^summa-k], it doesn't have to be related to any actually frequently asked question.

More unexpected Bolo writings include an etiquette guide, an anthropology study and some wonderings on the reverse pill war tactic.

[^summa-k]: It's not the same thing, but I couldn't help but notice the similarity.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

IPFS problems: Community

I was an avid IPFS user until yesterday. Many many times I asked simple questions for which I couldn't find an answer on the internet in the #ipfs IRC channel on Freenode. Most of the times I didn't get an answer, and even when I got it was rarely by someone who knew IPFS deeply. I've had issues go unanswered on js-ipfs repositories for year – one of these was raising awareness of a problem that then got fixed some months later by a complete rewrite, I closed my own issue after realizing that by myself some couple of months later, I don't think the people responsible for the rewrite were ever acknowledge that he had fixed my issue.

Some days ago I asked some questions about how the IPFS protocol worked internally, sincerely trying to understand the inefficiencies in finding and fetching content over IPFS. I pointed it would be a good idea to have a drawing showing that so people would understand the difficulties (which I didn't) and wouldn't be pissed off by the slowness. I was told to read the whitepaper. I had already the whitepaper, but read again the relevant parts. The whitepaper doesn't explain anything about the DHT and how IPFS finds content. I said that in the room, was told to read again.

Before anyone misread this section, I want to say I understand it's a pain to keep answering people on IRC if you're busy developing stuff of interplanetary importance, and that I'm not paying anyone nor I have the right to be answered. On the other hand, if you're developing a super-important protocol, financed by many millions of dollars and a lot of people are hitting their heads against your software and there's no one to help them; you're always busy but never delivers anything that brings joy to your users, something is very wrong. I sincerely don't know what IPFS developers are working on, I wouldn't doubt they're working on important things if they said that, but what I see – and what many other users see (take a look at the IPFS Discourse forum) is bugs, bugs all over the place, confusing UX, and almost no help.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Castas hindus em nova chave

Shudras buscam o máximo bem para os seus próprios corpos; vaishyas o máximo bem para a sua própria vida terrena e a da sua família; kshatriyas o máximo bem para a sociedade e este mundo terreno; brâmanes buscam o máximo bem.

@ 0fa80bd3:ea7325de

"Degeneration" or "Вырождение" ![[photo_2025-01-29 23.23.15.jpeg]]

A once-functional object, now eroded by time and human intervention, stripped of its original purpose. Layers of presence accumulate—marks, alterations, traces of intent—until the very essence is obscured. Restoration is paradoxical: to reclaim, one must erase. Yet erasure is an impossibility, for to remove these imprints is to deny the existence of those who shaped them.

The work stands as a meditation on entropy, memory, and the irreversible dialogue between creation and decay.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Economics

Just a bunch of somewhat-related notes.

• notes on "Economic Action Beyond the Extent of the Market", Per Bylund
• Mises' interest rate theory
• Profits, not wages, as the originary factor
• Reisman on opportunity cost
• Money Supply Measurement
• Per Bylund's insight
• Maybe a new approach to the Austrian Business Cycle Theory, some disorganized thoughts
• An argument according to which fractional-reserve banking is merely theft and nothing else
• Conjecture and criticism
• Qual é o economista? (piadas)
• UBI calculations
• Donations on the internet

@ 0fa80bd3:ea7325de

Lyn Alden - биткойн евангелист или евангелистка, я пока не понял npub1a2cww4kn9wqte4ry70vyfwqyqvpswksna27rtxd8vty6c74era8sdcw83a

Thomas Pacchia - PubKey owner - X - @tpacchia npub1xy6exlg37pw84cpyj05c2pdgv86hr25cxn0g7aa8g8a6v97mhduqeuhgpl

calvadev - Shopstr npub16dhgpql60vmd4mnydjut87vla23a38j689jssaqlqqlzrtqtd0kqex0nkq

Calle - Cashu founder npub12rv5lskctqxxs2c8rf2zlzc7xx3qpvzs3w4etgemauy9thegr43sf485vg

Джек Дорси npub1sg6plzptd64u62a878hep2kev88swjh3tw00gjsfl8f237lmu63q0uf63m

21 ideas npub1lm3f47nzyf0rjp6fsl4qlnkmzed4uj4h2gnf2vhe3l3mrj85vqks6z3c7l

Много адресов. Хз кто надо сортировать https://github.com/aitechguy/nostr-address-book

ФиатДжеф - создатель Ностр - https://github.com/fiatjaf npub180cvv07tjdrrgpa0j7j7tmnyl2yr6yr7l8j4s3evf6u64th6gkwsyjh6w6

EVAN KALOUDIS Zues wallet npub19kv88vjm7tw6v9qksn2y6h4hdt6e79nh3zjcud36k9n3lmlwsleqwte2qd

Программер Коди https://github.com/CodyTseng/nostr-relay npub1syjmjy0dp62dhccq3g97fr87tngvpvzey08llyt6ul58m2zqpzps9wf6wl

Anna Chekhovich - Managing Bitcoin at The Anti-Corruption Foundation https://x.com/AnyaChekhovich npub1y2st7rp54277hyd2usw6shy3kxprnmpvhkezmldp7vhl7hp920aq9cfyr7

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Thoughts on Nostr key management

On Why I don't like NIP-26 as a solution for key management I talked about multiple techniques that could be used to tackle the problem of key management on Nostr.

Here are some ideas that work in tandem:

• NIP-41 (stateless key invalidation)
• NIP-46 (Nostr Connect)
• NIP-07 (signer browser extension)
• Connected hardware signing devices
• other things like musig or frostr keys used in conjunction with a semi-trusted server; or other kinds of trusted software, like a dedicated signer on a mobile device that can sign on behalf of other apps; or even a separate protocol that some people decide to use as the source of truth for their keys, and some clients might decide to use that automatically
• there are probably many other ideas

Some premises I have in my mind (that may be flawed) that base my thoughts on these matters (and cause me to not worry too much) are that

• For the vast majority of people, Nostr keys aren't a target as valuable as Bitcoin keys, so they will probably be ok even without any solution;
• Even when you lose everything, identity can be recovered -- slowly and painfully, but still --, unlike money;
• Nostr is not trying to replace all other forms of online communication (even though when I think about this I can't imagine one thing that wouldn't be nice to replace with Nostr) or of offline communication, so there will always be ways.
• For the vast majority of people, losing keys and starting fresh isn't a big deal. It is a big deal when you have followers and an online persona and your life depends on that, but how many people are like that? In the real world I see people deleting social media accounts all the time and creating new ones, people losing their phone numbers or other accounts associated with their phone numbers, and not caring very much -- they just find a way to notify friends and family and move on.

We can probably come up with some specs to ease the "manual" recovery process, like social attestation and explicit signaling -- i.e., Alice, Bob and Carol are friends; Alice loses her key; Bob sends a new Nostr event kind to the network saying what is Alice's new key; depending on how much Carol trusts Bob, she can automatically start following that and remove the old key -- or something like that.

---

One nice thing about some of these proposals, like NIP-41, or the social-recovery method, or the external-source-of-truth-method, is that they don't have to be implemented in any client, they can live in standalone single-purpose microapps that users open or visit only every now and then, and these can then automatically update their follow lists with the latest news from keys that have changed according to multiple methods.

@ 0fa80bd3:ea7325de

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

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

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

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

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

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

IPFS problems: Shitcoinery

IPFS was advertised to the Ethereum community since the beggining as a way to "store" data for their "dApps". I don't think this is harmful in any way, but for some reason it may have led IPFS developers to focus too much on Ethereum stuff. Once I watched a talk showing libp2p developers – despite being ignored by the Ethereum team (that ended up creating their own agnostic p2p library) – dedicating an enourmous amount of work on getting a libp2p app running in the browser talking to a normal Ethereum node.

The always somewhat-abandoned "Awesome IPFS" site is a big repository of "dApps", some of which don't even have their landing page up anymore, useless Ethereum smart contracts that for some reason use IPFS to store whatever the useless data their users produce.

Again, per se it isn't a problem that Ethereum people are using IPFS, but it is at least confusing, maybe misleading, that when you search for IPFS most of the use-cases are actually Ethereum useless-cases.

See also

• Bitcoin, the only non-shitcoin