@ 8d5ba92c:c6c3ecd5

"There are seasons to give and seasons to receive. The more we give when we can, the more we receive when we need to. That’s how great relationships work. That’s how resilient communities grow." (— Anja Schuetz )

On May 22 (Bitcoin Pizza Day, which this year in Warsaw, PL, makes a Day Zero for Bitcoin FilmFest 2025), Bitvocation, special cameos for this edition, will host a unique networking session — ₿-Social.

• Fast-paced, good vibes, to help all participants build closer connections, and for those who need it, to break free from the fiat job with high signal resources and guidance.

• Expect conversations that go beyond “What do you do?” and “How long have you been in Bitcoin?”

• Less small talk, more real connections with fellow Bitcoiners—filmmakers, musicians, artists, founders, builders, and creative souls. For everyone who wants to share, learn, give, take, meet others, and collaborate.

- Bitcoiners from all over Europe + Honduras, El Salvador, Thailand, the US, Canada, Australia, Turkey, Iran, Dubai, and other corners of the world.

---

As Anja, the founder of Bitvocation, once told me:

"Face-to-face interactions create real connections and trust—vital ingredients for Bitcoin’s social layer. The best opportunities come to those who truly show up."

Thus, hope to see you in Warsaw, at Bitcoin FilmFest 2025. Get your ticket here, if you haven't done so yet (🟠 use the code 'BITVOCATION' to get a 10% discount). The 3rd annual edition. Around 300 people. Orange-pill cinema, decentralized music, permissionless, art. No other way, it's going to be FUN!

💡 Check more about Bitvocation, a dynamic project empowering Bitcoiners with tools, guidance, and even hands-on work experience, for careers in Bitcoin-only markets.

---

BTC Your Mind. Let it Beat.... Şela

@ 7e538978:a5987ab6

Across Switzerland, customers at SPAR supermarkets are now able to pay for their groceries using Lightning on Bitcoin — a step towards everyday Bitcoin adoption. This rollout was led by DFX, a Bitcoin services company focused on onboarding businesses and individuals to Bitcoin. Behind the scenes LNbits plays a key role.

## Lightning at the Checkout

SPAR’s approach is simple: at the till, customers can scan a static QR code to pay in Bitcoin using the Lightning Network. Each checkout in each participating store has its own unique LNURL address — a reusable QR code designed for fast, low-friction Lightning payments.

To manage these LNURLs, DFX leverages LNbits. Using the LNbits Pay Links extension, DFX generates LNURLs for each till across the network of participating SPAR locations. The result is a robust, reliable setup that works at scale. Store staff do not interact with LNbits directly — instead, DFX manages the backend, ensuring each till has a dedicated LNURL without operational overhead for SPAR employees.

At SPAR we use static QR codes that meet the LNURL standard. Therefore we use LNbits. Each checkout has its own personal LNURL address which we generate with LNbits.

— Cyrill Thommen, CEO of DFX.Swiss— Cyrill Thommen, CEO of DFX.Swiss

## LNbits in Action

LNbits provided DFX with a modular, open-source solution that allows them to build only what they need, without locking into a rigid platform. For instance, DFX built custom monitoring around payment events using the LNbits API, while keeping full control over wallet infrastructure.

The ability to generate and manage LNURLs through the LNbits API, while layering additional monitoring and business logic on top, made LNbits a practical choice.

DFX’s setup highlights how open source software, Bitcoin and purpose-built tools can underpin enterprise-grade deployments. The system works reliably — without introducing friction for customers or staff.

Bitcoin in the Real World

Switzerland is already one of Europe’s most Bitcoin-friendly environments, with over 1,000 businesses accepting Bitcoin. But SPAR’s implementation is noteworthy for its scale and practicality: everyday purchases, completed with Bitcoin, at a national supermarket chain.

LNbits' flexible architecture, API-first design, and plug-in system make it well suited to precisely this kind of adoption.

As more retailers explore Lightning integration, SPAR’s rollout sets a precedent — showing how modular, open-source tools like LNbits can bring Bitcoin into daily life, seamlessly.

@ c3b2802b:4850599c

Heute, am 9. Mai 2025 – genau 80 Jahre nach dem Ende des Zweiten Weltkriegs, der 60 Millionen Menschen das Leben kostete, darunter 27 Millionen Sowjetbürgern, erheben wir, die Bürgerinnen und Bürger Europas, unsere Stimmen! Wir schämen uns für unsere Regierungen und die EU, die die Lehren des 20. Jahrhunderts nicht gelernt haben. Die EU, einst als Friedensprojekt gedacht, wurde pervertiert und hat damit den Wesenskern Europas verraten! Wir, die Bürger Europas, nehmen darum heute, am 9. Mai, unsere Geschicke und unsere Geschichte selbst in die Hand. Wir erklären die EU für gescheitert. Wir beginnen mit Bürger-Diplomatie und verweigern uns dem geplanten Krieg gegen Russland! Wir erkennen die Mitverantwortung des „Westens“, der europäischen Regierungen und der EU an diesem Konflikt an.

Wir, die Bürger Europas, treten mit dem European Peace Project der schamlosen Heuchlerei und den Lügen entgegen, die heute – am Europatag – auf offiziellen Festakten und in öffentlichen Sendern verbreitet werden.

Wir strecken den Bürgerinnen und Bürgern der Ukraine und Russlands die Hand aus. Ihr gehört zur europäischen Familie, und wir sind überzeugt, dass wir gemeinsam ein friedliches Zusammenleben auf unserem Kontinent organisieren können.

Wir haben die Bilder der Soldatenfriedhöfe vor Augen – von Wolgograd über Riga bis Lothringen. Wir sehen die frischen Gräber, die dieser sinnlose Krieg in der Ukraine und in Russland hinterlassen hat. Während die meisten EU-Regierungen und Verantwortlichen für den Krieg hetzen und verdrängen, was Krieg für die Bevölkerung bedeutet, haben wir die Lektion des letzten Jahrhunderts gelernt: Europa heißt „Nie wieder Krieg!“

Wir erinnern uns an die europäischen Aufbauleistungen des letzten Jahrhunderts und an die Versprechen von 1989 nach der friedlichen Revolution. Wir fordern ein europäisch-russisches Jugendwerk nach dem Vorbild des deutsch-französischen Jugendwerks von 1963, das die „Erbfeindschaft“ zwischen Deutschland und Frankreich beendet hat. Wir fordern ein Ende der Sanktionen und den Wiederaufbau der Nord Stream II-Pipeline. Wir weigern uns, unsere Steuergelder für Rüstung und Militarisierung zu verschwenden, auf Kosten von Sozialstandards und Infrastruktur. Im Rahmen einer OSZE-Friedenskonferenz fordern wir die Schaffung einer europäischen Sicherheitsarchitektur mit und nicht gegen Russland, wie in der Charta von Paris von 1990 festgelegt. Wir fordern ein neutrales, von den USA emanzipiertes Europa, das eine vermittelnde Rolle in einer multipolaren Welt einnimmt. Unser Europa ist post-kolonial und post-imperial.

Wir, die Bürger Europas, erklären diesen Krieg hiermit für beendet! Wir machen bei den Kriegsspielen nicht mit. Wir machen aus unseren Männern und Söhnen keine Soldaten, aus unseren Töchtern keine Schwestern im Lazarett und aus unseren Ländern keine Schlachtfelder.

Wir bieten an, sofort eine Abordnung europäischer Bürgerinnen und Bürger nach Kiew und Moskau zu entsenden, um den Dialog zu beginnen. Wir werden nicht länger zusehen, wie unsere Zukunft und die unserer Kinder auf dem Altar der Machtpolitik geopfert wird.

Es lebe Europa, es lebe der Friede, es lebe die Freiheit

Auf der Webseite der Initiative können Sie, liebe Leser, weitere Möglichkeiten erfahren, diese Friedensinitiative zu stärken! Danke an die IntiatorInnen und die bislang 15.000 Menschen, die das mitgestalten werden.

Dieser Beitrag wurde mit dem Pareto-Client geschrieben.

@ 29156f5e:3627e9c6

Trong thế giới giải trí số ngày càng phát triển, ABC88 nổi bật như một nền tảng đáng tin cậy, mang đến trải nghiệm giải trí trực tuyến hoàn hảo cho người dùng. Được xây dựng với công nghệ tiên tiến, ABC88 không chỉ cung cấp giao diện thân thiện, dễ sử dụng mà còn tối ưu hóa hiệu suất để người dùng có thể tận hưởng những giây phút thư giãn mượt mà và không gián đoạn. Nền tảng này phù hợp với tất cả đối tượng người dùng, từ người mới làm quen đến người có kinh nghiệm, nhờ vào sự dễ dàng trong việc điều hướng và truy cập các tính năng. Giao diện của ABC88 không chỉ trực quan mà còn được thiết kế sao cho phù hợp với mọi thiết bị, giúp người dùng dễ dàng tham gia và tương tác dù là qua máy tính hay điện thoại di động. Không chỉ vậy, nền tảng này còn tối ưu hóa tốc độ tải trang và độ mượt mà của các trò chơi, giúp người dùng có thể tận hưởng trải nghiệm giải trí với chất lượng cao mà không phải lo lắng về sự cố kỹ thuật.

ABC88 cung cấp một hệ sinh thái giải trí đa dạng và phong phú, từ các trò chơi sáng tạo, các chương trình giải trí tương tác đến các sự kiện và khuyến mãi đặc biệt. Nền tảng này không chỉ dừng lại ở việc cung cấp những trò chơi cơ bản, mà còn luôn cập nhật những nội dung mới nhất, đáp ứng đầy đủ sở thích của người dùng. Những trò chơi không chỉ mang tính giải trí mà còn giúp người chơi thử thách bản thân, kích thích tư duy sáng tạo và phát triển các kỹ năng cá nhân. Điều này khiến ABC88 trở thành một lựa chọn hấp dẫn không chỉ cho những ai muốn tìm một không gian thư giãn, mà còn cho những người muốn học hỏi và trải nghiệm những thử thách mới. Bên cạnh đó, các chương trình khuyến mãi và sự kiện đặc biệt của ABC88 được tổ chức thường xuyên, mang đến cho người dùng cơ hội nhận những phần quà giá trị. Những sự kiện này không chỉ là cơ hội để người tham gia có thể giành được các giải thưởng hấp dẫn mà còn là cơ hội để họ kết nối với cộng đồng người chơi, tạo ra một môi trường giải trí sôi động và đầy thú vị.

Không chỉ chú trọng vào nội dung và tính năng, ABC88 còn đặc biệt quan tâm đến vấn đề bảo mật và an toàn của người dùng. Với việc sử dụng các công nghệ bảo mật hiện đại, nền tảng này cam kết bảo vệ mọi thông tin cá nhân của người dùng một cách tối đa, giúp người tham gia yên tâm tuyệt đối khi tham gia các hoạt động trên nền tảng. Các giao dịch tài chính và thông tin cá nhân đều được mã hóa và bảo vệ an toàn, tránh xa những nguy cơ tiềm ẩn từ các cuộc tấn công mạng. Bên cạnh đó, đội ngũ hỗ trợ khách hàng của ABC88 luôn sẵn sàng hỗ trợ người dùng 24/7, giúp giải đáp mọi thắc mắc và xử lý nhanh chóng mọi vấn đề phát sinh trong quá trình sử dụng. Chất lượng dịch vụ khách hàng là một yếu tố quan trọng giúp ABC88 ghi điểm với người dùng, bởi người tham gia không chỉ cần một nền tảng giải trí tốt mà còn mong muốn nhận được sự hỗ trợ nhiệt tình và kịp thời. Chính vì vậy, ABC88 luôn không ngừng cải tiến và nâng cao chất lượng dịch vụ của mình để mang đến cho người dùng trải nghiệm tốt nhất.

@ 554ab6fe:c6cbc27e

What is consciousness, and can it be changed or enhanced? This is a question that humans have struggled with for a very long time. The question of consciousness alone is daunting. Some even argue that humans will never be able to find the answer. Regardless, the quest for knowledge is not always about the answer, rather it is the journey that is revealing. This is true not only for our society, but the individual as well. The search for the truth often leads one down a path of self-reflection, and can lead to conclusions previously thought to be ludicrous. Here, I will argue that consciousness can be interpreted as an interpretation of reality, where the interpretation may become clearer and more accurate through practices such as meditation.

Consciousness

To articulate this idea, the concept of consciousness must firstly be discussed. There is an incredibly interesting TED talk given by Anil Seth, where he describes consciousness as an illusion. He explains how the brain receives signals from both the internal and external environment of the body, makes an interpretation of those signals, which creates our conscious experience. In his scientific writing, he claims that the brain can be viewed as a prediction machine1. He argues that the brain is constantly making predictions and error correcting in order to gain understanding of the signals it is receiving. He is not alone in this theory, and many other researchers concur that the constant comparison of internal predictions and external stimuli is what generates the brain’s sensations of causal forces2. There are plenty of reasons to believe this is true. Imagine, the brain is receiving all kinds of neuronal signals both from external stimuli sensors and sensors for our internal systems. These signals all shoot up the spinal cord to the brain. It is unclear that these neuronal signals are stamped with an identifier of where they came from, so the brain has to make a predictive model for not only where the signal came from, but also why the signal came at all. The latter is important for survival: the use of our senses to accurately predict our environment would be a critical reason why consciousness developed in the first place. Imagine you are an ancient hominid walking in the wild: you see a tangled cord like thing around a branch on the tree. You need to process that information, determine if it is more branch or a snake and act accordingly. This is a potential biological reason for the manifestation of thought and problem solving. This is a very meta-cognitive example of our brain receiving information and then using previous knowledge to generate a predictive conclusion on the external reality.

There are also examples of this outside of the more obvious meta-cognitive examples. A good example is the famous rubber hand experiment. The first rubber hand experiment was conducted in 1998 by Botvinick and Cohen3. In this experiment, a subject places their hand on a table with a screen blocking their view of their own hand. A rubber hand is then placed on the other side of the screen where it is visible. The experimenter rubs both the rubber hand and real hand with a paint brush. By the end of the experiment, subjects begin to feel as if the rubber hand is their own limb3. The brain, using the visual senses, detects that a hand is being stroked with a brush while sensory neurons send signals that the hand is experiencing the touch of a paint brush. These two signals cause the predicting brain to think that the rubber hand is our hand. This experiment has been repeated many times in different ways. It has been observed that participants begin to react defensively to the threat of pain or damage to the rubber hand4. This illustrates the powerful extent at which the brain processes and reacts to information that it interprets from reality. Amazingly, some research suggests that the touch aspect of the experiment isn’t even necessary to produce the illusion5. Others have recreated this experience using virtual reality, citing that when the virtual hand changed color in response to the subject’s heartbeat, a significant sense of body ownership was generated6. Body ownership, and our sense of reality is arguably determined by our brain’s interpretation of both internal and external stimuli.

The Neuroscience and Meditation

It is hypothesized that the anterior insular cortex (AIC) is involved in the comparison of the stimuli to the predicted model1. Interestingly, the same brain region is associated with the anticipation of pain7. For those unaware, there is some research to suggest that much of the pain we experience is not due to the actual noxious stimuli (physical pain sensation), but from the anticipation of that pain. Evidence for this can be found in studies such as Al-Obaidi et al. from 2005, that concluded that the pain experienced in patients with chronic low back pain could not be solely attributed to the sensor signals, but from the anticipation of the pain8. Additionally, the anticipation of pain relief is the primary contributor to placebo analgesia (placebo pain killers)9. Furthermore, a large body of research has been conducted showing that meditators show a decreased anticipatory attitude towards pain, subsequently experiencing less unpleasant pain 7,10,11. For example, chronic pain in multiple areas such as the low back, neck, shoulder, and arms have been shown to reduce after meditation practice12. Finally, an extreme case study worth noting is of a yogi master who claimed to not experience pain at all13. When this master was brought into the lab, not only did he not experience pain, but his thalamus showed no additional activation following painful stimuli13. What is fascinating about this is that the thalamus is the main relay station for all incoming somatosensory information14, and some argue that this is a candidate for the location of consciousness15. To not have strong activation here after painful stimuli is to suggest a radical change in how the brain receives incoming stimuli, and perhaps is indicative in a dramatic shift in how this individual’s conscious experiences the world. Though this is but one small example, the previous studies outline a strong case for meditation’s ability to alter the way the brain processes information. Given meditation involves the active practice of generating an open and non-judgmental attitude towards all incoming stimuli, perhaps this alters the processing of incoming stimuli, thereby changing the predictive model. On a similar note, perhaps it relates to neuroplastic changes that occur within the brain. It has been noted that the AIC is activated during times of awareness of mind wandering16. This suggests that the AIC is in use frequently during meditation practices. Perhaps it is strengthened then by meditation, thereby also allowing for greater prediction model generation. Imagine the mind as a pond. If the pond is calm and still, one single rain drop rippling in the pond is clearly identifiable. One would easily know information about the droplet, because the ripple could be easily analyzed. Now imagine a pond during a rain storm, where an uncountable amount of rain drops is hitting the pond and there are ripples everywhere. One could not adequately make out where each ripple came from, because there would be too much overlap in the ripples. This may be how the brain functions as well. When the signals are low, and no extraneous thoughts and interpretations are created from signals, then the brain’s prediction model can easily determine where and why a signal it received came from. If, however, the mind is chaotic and full of internal noise, then the brain has a harder time creating an accurate understanding of incoming stimuli and generating a correct model.

Enlightenment

Enlightenment, from a scientific point of view, has been defined as a form of awareness where a person feels that s/he has gained a new understanding of reality 17. In this sense, it bears a striking relationship to the topic of consciousness. If consciousness can be defined as our interpretation of the external and internal environment through our mental prediction model, then experiences of enlightenment are defined by moments where our interpretation is completely changed in a profound way. The experiences are often characterized by the loss of individuality and consequent identification of being part of a greater oneness 18,19. As an interesting side note, this same experience is common amongst subjects, who in a double-blinded study, take psilocybin (the active ingredient in magic mushrooms)20,21. The neuroscience of enlightenment is particularly interesting. The temporo-parietal junction of the brain is involved with self-location and body ownership22. Unsurprisingly, this area is highly involved in the illusion of the rubber hand experiment23. This is the same brain area that is hypothesized to be related to these enlightened experiences of oneness 17. If this brain area, which handles the interpretation of where and what the body is, was to decrease in activation, then the brain would generate a more ambiguous interpretation that the self and the external environment are less distinct than previously thought. This is a possible explanation to why enlightenment experiences involve a feeling of oneness with everything. To bring this all home, meditation has been shown to decrease parietal lobe activation 4,24. Suggesting that meditation can be a method of adjusting the brain’s interpretation of stimuli to generate an outlook that is unifying in perceptive.

Closing Remarks

The evidence that meditation may lead to an altered conscious living has deep philosophical implications. Meditation is a practice that, in part, involves an open awareness to all incoming stimuli alongside the absence of any meta-cognitive interpretation or processing of said stimuli. This generation of a still mind may generate a more accurate prediction model of incoming stimuli, void of any corruption on the part of our thoughts. Given the observation that meditation, both scientifically and culturally, can lead to an understanding and experience of a greater oneness amongst all suggests that this interpretation of incoming stimuli is the more accurate interpretation. It is hard to imagine that anyone would not advocate the beauty and usefulness of this perspective. If more people had this perspective, we would have a much more peaceful, happy and unified society and planet. Ironically, our culture often aims to arrive to this philosophical perspective through analytical thought. However, given the evidence in this post, perhaps it is the absence of analytical thought, and the stillness of the mind that truly grants this perspective.

**References ** 1. Seth AK. Interoceptive inference, emotion, and the embodied self. Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 2013;17(11):565-573. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2013.09.007 2. Synofzik M, Thier P, Leube DT, Schlotterbeck P, Lindner A. Misattributions of agency in schizophrenia are based on imprecise predictions about the sensory consequences of one’s actions. Brain. 2010;133(1):262-271. doi:10.1093/brain/awp291 3. Botvinick M, Cohen JD. Rubber hand ‘feels’ what eyes see. Nature. 1998;391(February):756. 4. Newberg A, Alavi A, Baime M, Pourdehnad M, Santanna J, D’Aquili E. The measurement of regional cerebral blood flow during the complex cognitive task of meditation: A preliminary SPECT study. Psychiatry Research - Neuroimaging. 2001;106(2):113-122. doi:10.1016/S0925-4927(01)00074-9 5. Ferri F, Chiarelli AM, Merla A, Gallese V, Costantini M. The body beyond the body: Expectation of a sensory event is enough to induce ownership over a fake hand. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 2013;280(1765). doi:10.5061/dryad.8f251 6. Suzuki K, Garfinkel SN, Critchley HD, Seth AK. Multisensory integration across exteroceptive and interoceptive domains modulates self-experience in the rubber-hand illusion. Neuropsychologia. 2013;51(13):2909-2917. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2013.08.014 7. Zeidan F, Grant JA, Brown CA, McHaffie JG, Coghill RC. Mindfulness meditation-related pain relief: Evidence for unique brain mechanisms in the regulation of pain. Neuroscience Letters. 2012;520(2):165-173. doi:10.1016/j.neulet.2012.03.082 8. Al-Obaidi SM, Beattie P, Al-Zoabi B, Al-Wekeel S. The relationship of anticipated pain and fear avoidance beliefs to outcome in patients with chronic low back pain who are not receiving workers’ compensation. Spine. 2005;30(9):1051-1057. doi:10.1097/01.brs.0000160848.94706.83 9. Benedetti F, Mayberg HS, Wager TD, Stohler CS, Zubieta JK. Neurobiological mechanisms of the placebo effect. In: Journal of Neuroscience. Vol 25. Society for Neuroscience; 2005:10390-10402. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3458-05.2005 10. Gard T, Hölzel BK, Sack AT, et al. Pain attenuation through mindfulness is associated with decreased cognitive control and increased sensory processing in the brain. Cerebral Cortex. 2012;22(11):2692-2702. doi:10.1093/cercor/bhr352 11.Grant JA, Courtemanche J, Rainville P. A non-elaborative mental stance and decoupling of executive and pain-related cortices predicts low pain sensitivity in Zen meditators. Pain. 2011;152(1):150-156. doi:10.1016/j.pain.2010.10.006 12. Kabat-Zinn J, Lipworth L, Burney R. The clinical use of mindfulness meditation for the self-regulation of chronic pain. Journal of Behavioral Medicine. 1985;8(2):163-190. doi:10.1007/BF00845519 13. Kakigi R, Nakata H, Inui K, et al. Intracerebral pain processing in a Yoga Master who claims not to feel pain during meditation. European Journal of Pain. 2005;9(5):581. doi:10.1016/j.ejpain.2004.12.006 14. Steeds CE. The anatomy and physiology of pain. Surgery. 2009;27(12):507-511. doi:10.1016/j.mpsur.2009.10.013 15. Min BK. A thalamic reticular networking model of consciousness. Theoretical Biology and Medical Modelling. 2010;7(1):1-18. doi:10.1186/1742-4682-7-10 16. Hasenkamp W, Wilson-Mendenhall CD, Duncan E, Barsalou LW. Mind wandering and attention during focused meditation: A fine-grained temporal analysis of fluctuating cognitive states. NeuroImage. 2012;59(1):750-760. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.07.008 17. Newberg AB, Waldman MR. A neurotheological approach to spiritual awakening. International Journal of Transpersonal Studies. 2019;37(2):119-130. doi:10.24972/ijts.2018.37.2.119 18. Johnstone B, Cohen D, Konopacki K, Ghan C. Selflessness as a Foundation of Spiritual Transcendence: Perspectives From the Neurosciences and Religious Studies. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion. 2016;26(4):287-303. doi:10.1080/10508619.2015.1118328 19. Yaden DB, Haidt J, Hood RW, Vago DR, Newberg AB. The varieties of self-transcendent experience. Review of General Psychology. 2017;21(2):143-160. doi:10.1037/gpr0000102 20. Griffiths RR, Richards WA, McCann U, Jesse R. Psilocybin can occasion mystical-type experiences having substantial and sustained personal meaning and spiritual significance. Psychopharmacology. 2006;187(3):268-283. doi:10.1007/s00213-006-0457-5 21. Griffiths RR, Richards WA, Johnson MW, McCann UD, Jesse R. Mystical-type experiences occasioned by psilocybin mediate the attribution of personal meaning and spiritual significance 14 months later. Journal of Psychopharmacology. 2008;22(6):621-632. doi:10.1177/0269881108094300 22. Serino A, Alsmith A, Costantini M, Mandrigin A, Tajadura-Jimenez A, Lopez C. Bodily ownership and self-location: Components of bodily self-consciousness. Consciousness and Cognition. 2013;22(4):1239-1252. doi:10.1016/j.concog.2013.08.013 23. Tsakiris M, Costantini M, Haggard P. The role of the right temporo-parietal junction in maintaining a coherent sense of one’s body. Neuropsychologia. 2008;46(12):3014-3018. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2008.06.004 24. Herzog H, Leie VR, Kuweit T, Rota E, Ludwig K. Biological Psychology/Pharmacopsychology. Published online 1990:182-187.

@ 9c35fe6b:5977e45b

Sailing the Nile on the Dahabiya Gorgonia Nile Cruise offers an intimate way to experience the timeless beauty of Egypt. This elegant boat is ideal for travelers who seek calm, charm, and tradition. With only a few cabins onboard, guests can enjoy a more serene atmosphere compared to larger vessels. ETB Tours Egypt offers this unique cruise option as part of its Egypt vacation packages, blending cultural richness with comfort.

Cultural Encounters Along the Nile The Dahabiya Nile Cruises give you a chance to witness life along the riverbanks up close. Onboard the Gorgonia, travelers visit lesser-known villages, ancient temples, and local markets far from the tourist crowds. With ETB Tours Egypt, your itinerary includes authentic experiences guided by knowledgeable Egyptologists—an ideal choice for those seeking Egypt private tours.

Scenic Sailing with Modern Comfort Although traditional in style, the Dahabiya Gorgonia is equipped with modern amenities to ensure a pleasant journey. Guests enjoy spacious decks, elegant dining, and personalized service. Whether part of an All inclusive Egypt vacations or a custom-designed plan, this cruise ensures you travel in style without missing out on comfort.

Smart Choices for Smart Travelers ETB Tours Egypt also makes sure that the Dahabiya Gorgonia Nile Cruise is available as part of their Egypt budget tours, offering excellent value without compromising on experience. It's perfect for those who want to enjoy the best of Egypt without overspending. Flexible options are also available through their wide range of Egypt travel packages, making it easy to match your schedule and interests.

To Contact Us: E-Mail: info@etbtours.com Mobile & WhatsApp: +20 10 67569955 - +201021100873 Address: 4 El Lebeny Axis, Nazlet Al Batran, Al Haram, Giza, Egypt

@ 866e0139:6a9334e5

Autor: Nicolas Riedl. Dieser Beitrag wurde mit dem Pareto-Client geschrieben. Sie finden alle Texte der Friedenstaube und weitere Texte zum Thema Frieden hier. Die neuesten Pareto-Artikel finden Sie in unserem Telegram-Kanal.

Dieser Beitrag erschien zuerst bei Radio München.

---

Die neuesten Artikel der Friedenstaube gibt es jetzt auch im eigenen Friedenstaube-Telegram-Kanal.

---

Das Kriegsgrauen kriecht unter die Haut. Bilder von verstümmelten Beinen und Armen, von Kriegstraumatisierten schweigenden Männern, von Kriegsgräbern steigen auf. Als Mutter, Schwester, Tante, Großmutter wachsen die Ängste, dass sich ein Verwandter von der politischen und medialen Kriegslust anstecken lässt und tatsächlich die Beteiligung an den näher kommenden kriegerischen Auseinandersetzungen in Erwägung zieht. Einen wütenden Kommentar anlässlich der wachsenden Kriegstreiberei verfasste unser Autor Nicolas Riedl.

https://soundcloud.com/radiomuenchen/sofa-soldaten-an-die-front-von-nicolas-riedl?utm_source=clipboard&utm_campaign=wtshare&utm_medium=widget&utm_content=https%253A%252F%252Fsoundcloud.com%252Fradiomuenchen%252Fsofa-soldaten-an-die-front-von-nicolas-riedl

---

Nicolas Riedl, Jahrgang 1993, geboren in München, studierte Medien-, Theater- und Politikwissenschaften in Erlangen. Den immer abstruser werdenden Zeitgeist der westlichen Kultur dokumentiert und analysiert er in kritischen Texten. Darüber hinaus ist er Büchernarr, strikter Bargeldzahler und ein für seine Generation ungewöhnlicher Digitalisierungsmuffel. Entsprechend findet man ihn auf keiner Social-Media-Plattform. Von 2017 bis 2023 war er für die Rubikon-Jugendredaktion und Videoredaktion tätig.

---

LASSEN SIE DER FRIEDENSTAUBE FLÜGEL WACHSEN!

Hier können Sie die Friedenstaube abonnieren und bekommen die Artikel zugesandt.

Schon jetzt können Sie uns unterstützen:

• Für 50 CHF/EURO bekommen Sie ein Jahresabo der Friedenstaube.
• Für 120 CHF/EURO bekommen Sie ein Jahresabo und ein T-Shirt/Hoodie mit der Friedenstaube.
• Für 500 CHF/EURO werden Sie Förderer und bekommen ein lebenslanges Abo sowie ein T-Shirt/Hoodie mit der Friedenstaube.
• Ab 1000 CHF werden Sie Genossenschafter der Friedenstaube mit Stimmrecht (und bekommen lebenslanges Abo, T-Shirt/Hoodie).

Für Einzahlungen in CHF (Betreff: Friedenstaube):

Für Einzahlungen in Euro:

Milosz Matuschek

IBAN DE 53710520500000814137

BYLADEM1TST

Sparkasse Traunstein-Trostberg

Betreff: Friedenstaube

Wenn Sie auf anderem Wege beitragen wollen, schreiben Sie die Friedenstaube an: friedenstaube@pareto.space

---

Sie sind noch nicht auf Nostr and wollen die volle Erfahrung machen (liken, kommentieren etc.)? Zappen können Sie den Autor auch ohne Nostr-Profil! Erstellen Sie sich einen Account auf Start. Weitere Onboarding-Leitfäden gibt es im Pareto-Wiki.

@ 0edc2f47:730cff1b

Chef's notes

This started as a spontaneous kitchen experiment—an amalgamation of recipes from old cookbooks and online finds. My younger daughter wanted to surprise her sister with something quick but fancy ("It's a vibe, Mom."), and this is what we came up with. It’s quickly established itself as a go-to favorite: simple, rich, and deeply satisfying. It serves 4 (or 1, depending on the day; I am not here to judge). Tightly wrapped, it will keep up to 3 days in the fridge, but I bet it won't last that long!

Details

• ⏲️ Prep time: 10 min
• 🍳 Cook time: 0 min

Ingredients

• 1 cup (240mL) heavy whipping cream
• 1/4 cup (24g) cocoa powder
• 5 tbsp (38g) Confectioners (powdered) sugar
• 1/4 tsp (1.25mL) vanilla extract (optional)
• Flaky sea salt (optional, but excellent)

Directions

1. 1. Whip the cream until frothy.
2. 1. Sift in cocoa and sugar, fold or gently mix (add vanilla if using).
3. 1. Whip to medium peaks (or stiff peaks, if that's more your thing). Chill and serve (topped with a touch of sea salt if you’re feeling fancy).

@ 9063ef6b:fd1e9a09

🛠️ MkDocs on macOS

For my local documentation, I was looking for an open-source tool to create and manage my content. With MkDocs, I found a mature, widely used, and actively maintained solution.

I think this tool is worth writing an article about. I’m still new to it and don’t have much experience yet. What tools do you use to create your documentation locally?

📚 What is MkDocs?

MkDocs is an open source tool for building static websites from Markdown files, designed specifically for technical documentation.

---

✅ Key Features

| Feature | Description | |---------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------| | 📄 Markdown-based | Write content in .md files (e.g., with Zettlr, VS Code, Obsidian) | | 🌐 Static site output | MkDocs renders a full HTML site with navigation, search, and styling | | 🎨 Themes available | Most popular: Material for MkDocs | | 🔄 Live preview | Use mkdocs serve to view the docs locally in your browser | | 🔧 Simple configuration | Controlled via a single mkdocs.yml file | | 🔐 No cloud required | Fully local, ideal for privacy and offline work |

---

📦 Is MkDocs open source?

Yes. MkDocs is fully open source and licensed under the MIT License – free to use, modify, and redistribute.

• 🔗 GitHub: github.com/mkdocs/mkdocs
• 🔗 PyPI: pypi.org/project/mkdocs

---

🔧 What can you build with MkDocs?

Examples include:

• Internal IT or team documentation
• Project or API documentation (e.g., GitHub projects)
• Manuals, Wikis, or checklists
• Offline technical knowledge bases

---

✅ Requirements

• macOS (e.g., Ventura, Sonoma)
• Terminal basics
• Python installed

---

🔧 Step 1: Install MkDocs

Install MkDocs locally for your user:

bash pip3 install --user mkdocs

(Optional) Add the Material theme:

bash pip3 install --user mkdocs-material

This gives your documentation a modern, responsive design.

---

🧭 Step 2: Make the mkdocs command available

By default, pip installs MkDocs in a directory not included in your PATH. To fix that:

a) Check install location:

bash python3 -m site --user-base

Example output:

/Users/yourname/Library/Python/3.11

The relevant binary path is:

/Users/yourname/Library/Python/3.11/bin

b) Add to PATH permanently (zsh):

bash echo 'export PATH=$PATH:/Users/yourname/Library/Python/3.11/bin' >> ~/.zshrc source ~/.zshrc

Replace Python version if needed (3.11).

---

🚀 Step 3: Start a new MkDocs project

bash mkdocs new my-docs cd my-docs mkdocs serve

Now open: http://127.0.0.1:8000

---

🎨 Step 4: Enable the Material Theme

Edit mkdocs.yml:

yaml theme: name: material

Then restart:

bash mkdocs serve

---

🧩 Alternative: Run via Python module

If you see this error:

zsh: command not found: mkdocs

… you can always run MkDocs via:

bash python3 -m mkdocs serve

---

📚 MkDocs Awesome Pages Plugin

The awesome-pages plugin for MkDocs automatically builds navigation from your folder structure – no need to manually define nav: in mkdocs.yml.

---

✅ Open Source

• License: MIT
• Repo: github.com/lukasgeiter/mkdocs-awesome-pages-plugin

---

🛠️ Installation

Install with pip:

bash pip3 install mkdocs-awesome-pages-plugin

---

⚙️ Configure mkdocs.yml

Add the plugin:

yaml plugins: - search - awesome-pages

⚠️ Remove the nav: section if you use this plugin – it will otherwise be ignored.

---

📁 Folder structure & .pages files

Navigation is based on the folder structure under docs/.

Example structure:

docs/ ├── index.md ├── installation/ │ ├── prerequisites.md │ └── setup.md ├── usage/ │ ├── start.md │ └── features.md

→ The plugin auto-generates a menu from this.

---

🔍 Example mkdocs.yml with plugin

```yaml site_name: My Tech Docs theme: name: material

plugins: - search - awesome-pages

markdown_extensions: - admonition - toc: permalink: true ```

---

🔗 Further Resources

• 📘 GitHub: mkdocs-awesome-pages-plugin
• 📘 PyPI: pypi.org/project/mkdocs-awesome-pages-plugin

@ 7e538978:a5987ab6

Across Switzerland, customers at SPAR supermarkets are now able to pay for their groceries using Lightning on Bitcoin — a step towards everyday Bitcoin adoption. This rollout was led by DFX, a Bitcoin services company focused on onboarding businesses and individuals to Bitcoin. Behind the scenes LNbits plays a key role.

## Lightning at the Checkout

SPAR’s approach is simple: at the till, customers can scan a static QR code to pay in Bitcoin using the Lightning Network. Each checkout in each participating store has its own unique LNURL address — a reusable QR code designed for fast, low-friction Lightning payments.

To manage these LNURLs, DFX leverages LNbits. Using the LNbits Pay Links extension, DFX generates LNURLs for each till across the network of participating SPAR locations. The result is a robust, reliable setup that works at scale. Store staff do not interact with LNbits directly — instead, DFX manages the backend, ensuring each till has a dedicated LNURL without operational overhead for SPAR employees.

"At SPAR we use static QR codes that meet the LNURL standard. Therefore we use LNbits. Each checkout has its own personal LNURL address which we generate with LNbits."\ — Cyrill Thommen, CEO of DFX.Swiss

LNbits in Action

LNbits provided DFX with a modular, open-source solution that allows them to build only what they need, without locking into a rigid platform. For instance, DFX built custom monitoring around payment events using the LNbits API, while keeping full control over wallet infrastructure.

The ability to generate and manage LNURLs through the LNbits API, while layering additional monitoring and business logic on top, made LNbits a practical choice.

DFX’s setup highlights how open source software, Bitcoin and purpose-built tools can underpin enterprise-grade deployments. The system works reliably — without introducing friction for customers or staff.

Bitcoin in the Real World

Switzerland is already one of Europe’s most Bitcoin-friendly environments, with over 1,000 businesses accepting Bitcoin. But SPAR’s implementation is noteworthy for its scale and practicality: everyday purchases, completed with Bitcoin, at a national supermarket chain.

LNbits' flexible architecture, API-first design, and plug-in system make it well suited to precisely this kind of adoption.

As more retailers explore Lightning integration, SPAR’s rollout sets a precedent — showing how modular, open-source tools like LNbits can bring Bitcoin into daily life, seamlessly.

@ 38d2a406:ad9e5329

{"contract_id":"f5523a8f242339bdd8585e5491a82c2d9a72ff51f7fadc3f7c6f766afe9c0f19","title":"T2- Freelance Development Agreement","content":"# Freelance Development Agreement\n\n## Parties\n\nThis Freelance Development Agreement (the \"Agreement\") is entered into as of [DATE] by and between:\n\nClient: [CLIENT NAME], with an address at [CLIENT ADDRESS] (\"Client\")\n\nDeveloper: [DEVELOPER NAME], with an address at [DEVELOPER ADDRESS] (\"Developer\")\n\n## Services\n\nDeveloper agrees to provide the following services to Client (the \"Services\"):\n\n1. Design and develop a web application according to the specifications outlined in Attachment A.\n2. Provide regular progress updates on a weekly basis.\n3. Deliver the completed project by the deadline specified in the Timeline section.","version":1,"created_at":1746583812,"signers_required":2,"signatures":[{"pubkey":"306555fee4433582b32f6d46f11b644da33896595016893d7da18c75fd7fdf12","sig":"8ad3a9e2a4ef70515853e051882ab11ebc7d56f15be46deb1520d6292711bc4eeb29c723c46a251c98134d06b8950931d19f61f6f8836e4932f0d6682fe8159e","timestamp":1746583928},{"pubkey":"38d2a406f9ae6eebbeee9d35276c45538ed80083c859b28601279187ad9e5329","sig":"ef4802ea6966318774cb8554ed547692691d143cef48bc1049ef43546b77b3720908ec4e77e151117bafb676b96653cb5fcc70658116e96759d3a2a52ffd94da","timestamp":1746584026}]}

@ 57d1a264:69f1fee1

Wild parrots tend to fly in flocks, but when kept as single pets, they may become lonely and bored https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OHcAOlamgDc

Source: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/scientists-taught-pet-parrots-to-video-call-each-other-and-the-birds-loved-it-180982041/

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/973639

@ 2b24a1fa:17750f64

@ 812cff5a:5c40aeeb

مقدمة

في عالم اليوم الرقمي، تبرز منصات جديدة تهدف إلى تعزيز تجربة القراءة والتواصل بين محبي الكتب. تُعَدُّ Bookstr.xyz واحدة من هذه المنصات المبتكرة التي تسعى لربط القرّاء عبر شبكة Nostr، مما يمنحهم سيادة كاملة على بياناتهم ويتيح لهم بناء علاقات جديدة مع محبي الكتب الآخرين. 

الميزات الرئيسية لموقع Bookstr

• التحكم الكامل بالبيانات: توفر Bookstr.xyz للمستخدمين القدرة على التحكم الكامل في بياناتهم الشخصية، مما يضمن خصوصية وأمان المعلومات.
• التكامل مع Open Library: تستخدم المنصة واجهة برمجة التطبيقات الخاصة بـ Open Library للحصول على معلومات شاملة حول الكتب، مما يتيح للمستخدمين الوصول إلى مجموعة واسعة من البيانات الموثوقة.
• التواصل الاجتماعي: من خلال شبكة Nostr، يمكن للمستخدمين التواصل مع قرّاء آخرين، تبادل التوصيات، ومناقشة الكتب المفضلة لديهم. 

ما الذي يجعلها فريدة؟

تتميز Bookstr.xyz بدمجها بين مزايا الشبكات الاجتماعية ومصادر بيانات الكتب المفتوحة، مما يخلق بيئة تفاعلية وغنية بالمعلومات لمحبي القراءة. استخدامها لشبكة Nostr يمنح المستخدمين حرية أكبر في التحكم بتجربتهم الرقمية مقارنة بالمنصات التقليدية. 

جرب Bookstr

تُعَدُّ Bookstr.xyz إضافة قيمة لعالم القراءة الرقمي، حيث تجمع بين مزايا الشبكات الاجتماعية ومصادر البيانات المفتوحة، مع التركيز على خصوصية المستخدم والتحكم في البيانات. إذا كنت من عشاق الكتب وتبحث عن منصة تفاعلية وآمنة، فقد تكون Bookstr.xyz الخيار المثالي لك.

شاركوا كتبكم المفضلة!!

@ 306555fe:fd7fdf12

{"contract_id":"f5523a8f242339bdd8585e5491a82c2d9a72ff51f7fadc3f7c6f766afe9c0f19","title":"T2- Freelance Development Agreement","content":"# Freelance Development Agreement\n\n## Parties\n\nThis Freelance Development Agreement (the \"Agreement\") is entered into as of [DATE] by and between:\n\nClient: [CLIENT NAME], with an address at [CLIENT ADDRESS] (\"Client\")\n\nDeveloper: [DEVELOPER NAME], with an address at [DEVELOPER ADDRESS] (\"Developer\")\n\n## Services\n\nDeveloper agrees to provide the following services to Client (the \"Services\"):\n\n1. Design and develop a web application according to the specifications outlined in Attachment A.\n2. Provide regular progress updates on a weekly basis.\n3. Deliver the completed project by the deadline specified in the Timeline section.","version":1,"created_at":1746583812,"signers_required":2,"signatures":[{"pubkey":"306555fee4433582b32f6d46f11b644da33896595016893d7da18c75fd7fdf12","sig":"8ad3a9e2a4ef70515853e051882ab11ebc7d56f15be46deb1520d6292711bc4eeb29c723c46a251c98134d06b8950931d19f61f6f8836e4932f0d6682fe8159e","timestamp":1746583928}]}

@ a9e24cc2:597d8933

𝐌𝐄𝐒𝐒𝐀𝐆𝐄  BlackHat_Nexus 𝐅𝐎𝐑 𝐀𝐍𝐘 𝐊𝐈𝐍𝐃 𝐎𝐅 𝐒𝐄𝐑𝐕𝐈𝐂𝐄 𝐑𝐄𝐂𝐎𝐕𝐄𝐑 𝐘𝐎𝐔𝐑 𝐀𝐂𝐂𝐎𝐔𝐍𝐓Fast, Available and Reliable for any of the following services 🤳 Recovery of lost funds🤳 Facebook Hack🤳 WhatsApp Hack 🤳 Instagram Hack🤳 Spying🤳 Windows Hacking🤳 Recover lost wallet 🤳 Credit score trick 🤳 Recover Password🤳 Gmail Hack🤳 SnapChat Hacking 🤳 Cellphone Monitoring 🤳 Tik Tok Hack🤳 Twitter Hack🤳 Lost Phone Tracking🤳 Lost IaptopTracking🤳 Lost Car Tracking🤳 Cloning WhatsApp🤳 Cryptocurrency Wallet🤳 Hacking🤳 Iphone unlock 🤳 Got banned 🤳 Private Number available🤳 Telegram hacking 🤳 Websites hacking 🤳 Hack University 🤳 IOS and Android hack 🤳 Wifi Hacking 🤳 CCTV hacking🤳 Hack Bot Game 🤳 Free fire hack 🤳 Changing of school grades 🤳 Cards 💳hackingNo 🆓 services 🚫WhatsApp +1 3606068592Send a DM https://t.me/BlackHat_Nexus@BlackHat_Nexus

@ 878dff7c:037d18bc

Dutton Proposes Easing Home Loan Regulations

Summary:

Opposition Leader Peter Dutton plans to challenge the Albanese government by proposing changes to lending rules aimed at making it easier for first-time home buyers to access loans. The proposed adjustments include reducing serviceability buffers and addressing the treatment of HELP debt to improve housing access. Dutton argues that current regulations create a bias favoring inherited wealth, making it difficult for new buyers to enter the housing market. These proposals come as the Reserve Bank of Australia prepares for its upcoming interest rate decision, with the current cash rate target at 4.1% and predictions of a cut in May. Treasurer Jim Chalmers highlights the government's progress, noting falling inflation, rising real wages, and improving economic growth.

Sources: News.com.au - 1 April 2025, The Australian - 1 April 2025

Australia's Housing Market Hits New Record High

Summary:

Australia's property prices reached a new peak in March, following a rate cut that enhanced buyer optimism. CoreLogic reported a 0.4% monthly increase, bringing the average national property price to A$820,331. All capital cities, except Hobart, experienced price gains, with Sydney and Melbourne rising by 0.3% and 0.5%, respectively. The rate cut slightly improved borrowing capacity and mortgage serviceability. However, the sustainability of this upward trend is uncertain due to persistent affordability issues. While the market rebounded with the February rate cut by the Reserve Bank of Australia, significant improvements in home loan serviceability are necessary for substantial market growth.

Source: Reuters - 1 April 2025

AI Revolutionizes Business Operations

Summary:

Artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming business practices globally, with applications ranging from administrative task automation to strategic decision-making enhancements. Companies are increasingly integrating AI to streamline operations and gain competitive advantages. This shift necessitates a focus on ethical AI deployment and workforce upskilling to address potential job displacement.

Sources: Financial Times - April 1, 2025

Criticism of Bureau of Meteorology's Forecasting Capabilities

Summary:

The Bureau of Meteorology is facing criticism for inadequate weather radar coverage in western Queensland, which has led to unreliable forecasting during the recent floods. Federal Opposition Leader Peter Dutton has pledged $10 million for a new radar system to enhance forecasting accuracy, while local officials emphasize the need for improved infrastructure to better prepare for future natural disasters.

Sources: The Australian - April 1, 2025

Coalition Pledges $10 Million for Western Queensland Weather Radar

Summary:

As part of the federal election campaign, Opposition Leader Peter Dutton has promised $10 million for a new weather radar system in flood-affected western Queensland. This initiative aims to improve weather forecasting and preparedness in the region. Meanwhile, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has pledged $200 million for an upgrade to the St John of God Midland hospital in Perth, emphasizing healthcare improvements. Both leaders are focusing on key regional investments as the election approaches.

Source: The Guardian - April 1, 2025

Emergency Services Conduct Rescues Amid Queensland Floods

Summary:

Emergency services in Queensland have conducted over 40 rescues as floodwaters continue to rise, submerging communities and causing extensive damage. Efforts are focused on delivering essential supplies, evacuating residents, and ensuring the safety of those affected by the severe weather conditions.

Sources: The Courier-Mail - April 1, 2025

Six Key Crises Facing Australia Before the Election

Summary:

As the election nears, voters remain largely unaware of six looming crises that could significantly impact the nation. These include over-reliance on volatile commodity exports, challenges in renewable energy implementation, potential currency depreciation, and reduced foreign investment. Both major parties have focused on immediate cost-of-living relief, overshadowing these critical issues that demand urgent attention.

Sources: The Australian - April 1, 2025

Debate Intensifies Over Australia's Commitment to AUKUS

Summary:

Former Defence Department Secretary Dennis Richardson has urged Australia to persist with the AUKUS submarine agreement despite concerns about the reliability of the U.S. under President Donald Trump. Richardson warns that abandoning the deal now would undermine decades of defense planning. However, critics, including former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, question the feasibility and advisability of the agreement, suggesting alternatives such as partnering with France for submarine development.

Sources: The Guardian - April 1, 2025, The Australian - April 1, 2025

China Delays $23B Sale of Panama Canal Ports to US-Backed Consortium

Summary:

China has postponed the $23 billion sale of 43 global ports, including critical facilities at both ends of the Panama Canal, to a consortium led by US investment firm BlackRock. The delay follows an investigation by China’s State Administration for Market Regulation into potential anti-monopoly law violations. This unexpected move has heightened tensions between China and the US, as President Trump viewed the sale as a strategic victory in the ongoing power struggle between the two nations. The deal's future remains uncertain, causing political and economic ripples amid China's significant annual "two sessions" gathering.

Sources: New York Post - March 31, 2025

Australian Government's Handling of Suspected Chinese Spy Ship Raises Concerns

Summary:

The Australian government has assigned the monitoring of the suspected Chinese spy ship, Tan Suo Yi Hao, to the Australian Border Force, despite Prime Minister Anthony Albanese's assertion that the Australian Defence Force was managing the situation. Security experts believe the vessel is collecting undersea data for future Chinese submarine operations, highlighting national security concerns during an election period. The handling of this issue has led to criticism and confusion over which agency is in charge, with opposition figures condemning the government's lack of detailed information.

Sources: The Australian - April 1, 2025

Concerns Rise Over Schoolchildren Accessing Weight Loss Drugs

Summary:

Health experts are alarmed by reports of Australian schoolchildren accessing weight loss medications like semaglutide (Ozempic) through various means, including online purchases and taking them from home supplies. These substances are being linked to secretive and harmful diet clubs within schools, posing severe health risks such as potentially fatal overdoses. Advocates emphasize the need for stricter regulation of weight loss products and call for mandatory education programs on eating disorders in schools to address the growing issue.

Sources: The Courier-Mail - 1 April 2025

Recycling Plant Explosion Highlights Dangers of Improper Aerosol Disposal

Summary:

A Victorian company has been fined $35,000 after an explosion at its recycling plant injured six workers. The incident occurred when pressurized aerosol cans were improperly shredded, causing flames to spread up to 18 meters. Investigations revealed that the company failed to implement safety procedures such as emptying or puncturing the cans before shredding and ensuring adequate ventilation. This case underscores the critical importance of adhering to safety protocols when handling hazardous materials.

Sources: Herald Sun - 1 April 2025

Australia Enforces New Tobacco Controls from April 1

Summary:

As of April 1, 2025, Australia has implemented stringent tobacco control measures, including health warnings printed directly on individual cigarettes. These warnings feature phrases such as "CAUSES 16 CANCERS" and "DAMAGES YOUR LUNGS." Additionally, new graphic warnings on cigarette packs and health promotion inserts aim to encourage smoking cessation and raise awareness about the dangers of tobacco use.

Sources: Mirage News - April 1, 2025, 9News - April 1, 2025

OPEC+ Increases Oil Production Amid Global Uncertainties

Summary:

OPEC+ has announced the gradual unwinding of voluntary production cuts starting April 1, 2025, aiming to restore 2.2 million barrels per day of output by September 2026. Despite this increase, factors such as tighter U.S. sanctions on Iran and Russia, potential sanctions on Venezuelan oil buyers, and fears of a tariff-induced recession have sustained oil prices. Analysts predict limited downside risks to oil prices due to significant supply threats, mainly from Iran and Venezuela. While some strength in oil prices is expected during the summer, concerns over tariff-induced demand weakness persist.

Sources: MarketWatch - April 1, 2025

Iconic Australian Locations Declared 'No Go Zones'

Summary:

Several iconic Australian locations, including Uluru, Kakadu National Park, Cape York Peninsula, and others, are increasingly being declared "no go zones" due to cultural, environmental, and safety concerns. These measures aim to preserve the cultural significance and environmental integrity of these landmarks and ensure public safety. While traditional owners and local authorities support these restrictions to protect cultural heritage, debates have arisen over tourists' rights and the impact on local tourism industries. Sources: News.com.au - April 1, 2025

The Joe Rogan Experience #2297: Francis Foster & Konstantin Kisin

Summary:

In episode #2297 of The Joe Rogan Experience, Joe Rogan welcomes comedians and commentators Francis Foster and Konstantin Kisin, hosts of the podcast Triggernometry. The episode delivers a wide-ranging conversation covering free speech, comedy, media narratives, and societal tensions in the modern world.

Interesting Discussions and Insights:

• The State of Comedy:\ The trio discusses how comedy has changed in recent years, especially under the weight of cancel culture. They explore how comedians are navigating cultural sensitivities while still trying to push boundaries and remain authentic.

• Free Speech and Censorship:\ Konstantin and Francis share their experiences with censorship and self-censorship, emphasizing the risks of suppressing ideas, even if they’re controversial. They advocate for robust debate as a cornerstone of democracy.

• Migration and Identity Politics:\ The conversation touches on immigration policies in the UK and broader Western world, discussing how political correctness often silences real concerns. Both guests, with immigrant backgrounds, offer nuanced perspectives on national identity and inclusion.

• Media and Narrative Control:\ Joe, Francis, and Konstantin dive into how media outlets often frame stories with ideological slants, and the dangers of relying on one-sided narratives in forming public opinion.

• Creating Triggernometry:\ The guests talk about why they launched their podcast — to have honest, open conversations with a wide range of thinkers, especially those often excluded from mainstream platforms.

Key Takeaways:

• Honest conversation is essential for a healthy society, even when it's uncomfortable.
• Comedy still holds power to critique society but faces mounting challenges from cultural pressures.
• Free speech should be defended not just in principle, but in everyday life and dialogue.
• The media landscape is increasingly polarized, and critical thinking is more important than ever.

Source: The Joe Rogan Experience #2297 - Spotify

@ 57d1a264:69f1fee1

Your device, your data. TRMNL's architecture prevents outsiders (including us) from accessing your local network. TRMNAL achieve this through 1 way communication between client and server, versus the other way around. Learn more.

Learn more at https://usetrmnl.com/

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/973632

@ da0b9bc3:4e30a4a9

Hello Stackers!

Welcome on into the ~Music Corner of the Saloon!

A place where we Talk Music. Share Tracks. Zap Sats.

So stay a while and listen.

🚨Don't forget to check out the pinned items in the territory homepage! You can always find the latest weeklies there!🚨

🚨Subscribe to the territory to ensure you never miss a post! 🚨

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/973630

@ 57d1a264:69f1fee1

Here’s Sean Voisen writing about how programming is a feeling:

For those of us who enjoy programming, there is a deep satisfaction that comes from solving problems through well-written code, a kind of ineffable joy found in the elegant expression of a system through our favorite syntax. It is akin to the same satisfaction a craftsperson might find at the end of the day after toiling away on well-made piece of furniture, the culmination of small dopamine hits that come from sweating the details on something and getting them just right. Maybe nobody will notice those details, but it doesn’t matter. We care, we notice, we get joy from the aesthetics of the craft.

This got me thinking about the idea of satisfaction in craft. Where does it come from?

Continue Reading https://blog.jim-nielsen.com/2025/craft-and-satisfaction/

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/973628

@ 3c389c8f:7a2eff7f

You might see these terms used interchangeably throughout the Nostr network. Since Nostr is a decentralized protocol and not a platform, there is often a lack of consensus around particular terminologies. At times, it's important to differentiate between them, so that you can determine what is being stated. In the truest sense, there is no central entity to maintain a Nostr 'account' on your behalf, though some Nostr-based platforms may offer to do so. There's also no one to verify your 'identity'. This is something that you create, maintain and control. It is 100% yours. In a sense, you verify yourself through your interactions with others, with the network of clients and relays, and by protecting your nsec (secret key). A profile is generally considered to be a single place for displaying your content and any information about yourself that you've chosen to share, but its a little more complicated than that with Nostr. Let's take a closer look at all 3 terms:

Identity:

Your Nostr identity becomes yours from the moment you generate your key pair. The two parts each provide unique perspective and functionality. (Remember, there is no central entity to issue these key pairs. You can screw up and start over. You can maintain multiple key pairs for different purposes. If all of this is new and unfamiliar, start simply with the intention of trial and error.)

Half of the equation is your nsec. As long as you maintain control of that secret key, the identity is yours. You will use it to sign the notes and events that you create on Nostr. You will use it to access functionality of various tools and apps. You can use it to send monetary tips for content you find valuable. The reputation that you build through posting & interacting on Nostr will signal to others what type of person or profile this is, whether it's a genuine person, a bot (good or bad), a collection of works, etc. You might come across information that compares your nsec to a password. While a fair comparison, its important to remember that passwords can be reset, but your private key CANNOT. Lost access or control of your nsec means a loss of control over that identity. When you have decided to establish a more permanent identity, write it down, keep it safe, and use the appropriate security tools for interacting online.

The other half of this equation is your npub. This public key is used to find and display your notes and events to others. In short, your npub is how your identity is viewed by others and your nsec is how you control that identity.

Npub can also act a window into your world for whoever may choose to view it. As mentioned in a previous entry, npub login enables viewing Nostr's notes and other stuff in a read-only mode of any user's follow feed. Clients may or may not support this, some will even allow you to view and subscribe to these feeds while signed in as yourself via this function. It the basis of the metadata for your profile, too.

Profile:

Profile, in general, is a collection of things about you, which you have chosen to share. This might include your bio, chosen display name, other contact information, and a profile photo. Similar to traditional socials, veiwing Nostr profiles often includes a feed of the things you have posted and shared displayed as a single page. People will recognize you based on the aspects of your profile more than they will by your actual identity since an npub is a prefixed random string of characters . Your npub bridges a gap between strictly machine readable data and your human readable name, but it is not as simple as a name and picture. You will choose your photo and display name for your profile as you see fit, making you recognizable. These aspects are easy for copycat scammers to leverage, so your npub will help your friends and followers to verify that you are you, in the event that someone should try to copy your profile.

The Nostr protocol has another profile aspect that is important to know about, but as a general user, you shouldn't have to worry much about it. This is your nprofile. It combines your npub (or the machine readable hex verison of it) with hints to what relays you are using to publish your notes. This helps clients, crawlers, and relays find your stuff for your followers. You may notice nprofile when you share a profile link or used in other actions. When you update your relay list, your client will adjust your nprofile and send a new copy to the appropriate relays. If your believe that a client is not doing that correctly, you can visit metadata.nostr.com and manage it yourself.

Account:

Across Nostr, it is common to see the term 'account' used to refer to the combination of your identity and profile. It is a relatable term, though it may imply that some account issuer exists, but no one issues a Nostr account to you. You create and maintain it yourself.

There are situations where a traditional account will exist, such as with media servers, relay subscriptions, custodial wallet hosts, or NIP-05 providers. These things will almost always be paid services and storage that you choose to use. (Reminder: all of these things are possible to DIY with a little knowhow and an old computer)

What Is The Right Terminology?

There is no simple or correct answer here. Developers and writers will use whatever terms fit their scope and topic. Context will matter, so it's important to differentiate by that more than any actual term.

@ 57d1a264:69f1fee1

CryptPad

Collaboration and privacy. Yes, you can have both Flagship instance of CryptPad, the end-to-end encrypted and open-source collaboration suite. Cloud administered by the CryptPad development team. https://cryptpad.fr/

ONLYOFFICE DocSpace

Document collaboration made simpler. Easily collaborate with customizable rooms. Edit any content you have. Work faster using AI assistants. Protect your sensitive business data. Download or try STARTUP Cloud (Limited-time offer) FREE https://www.onlyoffice.com/

SeaFile

A new way to organize your files Beyond just syncing and sharing files, Seafile lets you add custom file properties and organize your files in different views. With AI-powered automation for generating properties, Seafile offers a smarter, more efficient way to manage your files. Try it Now, Free for up to 3 users https://seafile.com/

SandStorm

An open source platform for self-hosting web apps Self-host web-based productivity apps easily and securely. Sandstorm is an open source project built by a community of volunteers with the goal of making it really easy to run open source web applications. Try the Demo or Signup Free https://alpha.sandstorm.io/apps

NextCloud Hub

A new generation of online collaboration that puts you in control. Nextcloud offers a modern, on premise content collaboration platform with real-time document editing, video chat & groupware on mobile, desktop and web. Sign up for a free Nextcloud account https://nextcloud.com/sign-up/

LinShare

True Open Source Secure File Sharing Solution We are committed to providing a reliable Open Source file-sharing solution, expertly designed to meet the highest standards of diverse industries, such as government and finance Try the Demo https://linshare.app/

Twake Drive

The open-source alternative to Google Drive. Privacy-First Open Source Workplace. Twake workplace open source business. Improve your effeciency with truly Open Source, all-in-one digital suite. Enhance the security in every aspect of your professional and private life. Sign up https://sign-up.twake.app/

SpaceDrive

One Explorer. All Your Files. Unify files from all your devices and clouds into a single, easy-to-use explorer. Designed for creators, hoarders and the painfully disorganized. Download desktop app (mobile coming soon) https://www.spacedrive.com/

ente

Safe Home for your photos Store, share, and discover your memories with end-to-end encryption. End-to-end encryption, durable storage and simple sharing. Packed with these and much more into our beautiful open source apps. Get started https://web.ente.io

fileStash

Turn your FTP server into... Filestash is the enterprise-grade file manager connecting your storage with your identity provider and authorisations. Try the demo https://demo.filestash.app

STORJ

Disruptively fast.‍ Globally secure. S3-compatible distributed cloud services that make the most demanding workflows fast and affordable. Fast track your journey toward high performance cloud services. Storj pricing is consistent and competitive in meeting or exceeding your cloud services needs. Give the products a try to experience the benefits of the distributed cloud. Get Started https://www.storj.io/get-started

FireFile

The open‑source alternative to Dropbox. Firefiles lets you setup a cloud drive with the backend of your choice and lets you seamlessly manage your files across multiple providers. It revolutionizes cloud storage management by offering a unified platform for all your storage needs. Sign up Free https://beta.firefiles.app

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/973626

@ f3873798:24b3f2f3

Olá, nostrilianos!

O tema de hoje é inteligência artificial (IA), com foco em duas ferramentas que têm se destacado no mercado por sua capacidade de responder perguntas, auxiliar em tarefas e, em alguns casos, até gerar imagens.

Essas tecnologias estão cada vez mais presentes no dia a dia, ajudando desde a correção de textos até pesquisas rápidas e a criação de imagens personalizadas com base em prompts específicos.

Nesse cenário em expansão, duas IAs se sobressaem: o ChatGPT, desenvolvido pela OpenAI, e o Grok, criado pela xAI.

Ambas são ferramentas poderosas, cada uma com seus pontos fortes e limitações, e têm conquistado usuários ao redor do mundo. Neste artigo, compartilho minhas impressões sobre essas duas IAs, baseadas em minha experiência pessoal, destacando suas diferenças e vantagens.

Grok: Destaque na criação de imagens e fontes

O Grok me impressiona especialmente em dois aspectos.

Primeiro, sua capacidade de gerar imagens é um diferencial significativo. Enquanto o ChatGPT tem limitações nesse quesito, o Grok oferece uma funcionalidade mais robusta para criar visuais únicos a partir de prompts, o que pode ser uma vantagem para quem busca criatividade visual.

Segundo, o Grok frequentemente cita fontes ou indica a origem das informações que fornece, o que agrega credibilidade às suas respostas e facilita a verificação dos dados.

ChatGPT: Assertividade e clareza

Por outro lado, o ChatGPT se destaca pela assertividade e pela clareza em suas explicações. Suas respostas tendem a ser mais diretas e concisas, o que é ideal para quem busca soluções rápidas ou explicações objetivas.

Acredito que essa vantagem possa estar ligada ao fato de o ChatGPT estar em operação há mais tempo, tendo passado por anos de aprimoramento e ajustes com base em interações de usuários.Comparação e reflexões.

Em minha experiência, o Grok supera o ChatGPT na geração de imagens e na citação de fontes, enquanto o ChatGPT leva a melhor em precisão e simplicidade nas respostas.

Esses pontos refletem não apenas as prioridades de design de cada IA, mas também o tempo de desenvolvimento e os objetivos de suas respectivas empresas criadoras.

A OpenAI, por trás do ChatGPT, focou em refinamento conversacional, enquanto a xAI, com o Grok, parece investir em funcionalidades adicionais, como a criação de conteúdo visual.

Minha opinião

Não há um vencedor absoluto entre Grok e ChatGPT – a escolha depende do que você precisa. Se seu foco é geração de imagens ou rastreamento de fontes, o Grok pode ser a melhor opção. Se busca respostas rápidas e assertivas, o ChatGPT provavelmente atenderá melhor.

Ambas as IAs são ferramentas incríveis, e o mais fascinante é ver como elas continuam evoluindo, moldando o futuro da interação entre humanos e máquinas.

@ 21335073:a244b1ad

Please respect Virginia Giuffre’s memory by refraining from asking about the circumstances or theories surrounding her passing.

Since Virginia Giuffre’s death, I’ve reflected on what she would want me to say or do. This piece is my attempt to honor her legacy.

When I first spoke with Virginia, I was struck by her unshakable hope. I had grown cynical after years in the anti-human trafficking movement, worn down by a broken system and a government that often seemed complicit. But Virginia’s passion, creativity, and belief that survivors could be heard reignited something in me. She reminded me of my younger, more hopeful self. Instead of warning her about the challenges ahead, I let her dream big, unburdened by my own disillusionment. That conversation changed me for the better, and following her lead led to meaningful progress.

Virginia was one of the bravest people I’ve ever known. As a survivor of Epstein, Maxwell, and their co-conspirators, she risked everything to speak out, taking on some of the world’s most powerful figures.

She loved when I said, “Epstein isn’t the only Epstein.” This wasn’t just about one man—it was a call to hold all abusers accountable and to ensure survivors find hope and healing.

The Epstein case often gets reduced to sensational details about the elite, but that misses the bigger picture. Yes, we should be holding all of the co-conspirators accountable, we must listen to the survivors’ stories. Their experiences reveal how predators exploit vulnerabilities, offering lessons to prevent future victims.

You’re not powerless in this fight. Educate yourself about trafficking and abuse—online and offline—and take steps to protect those around you. Supporting survivors starts with small, meaningful actions. Free online resources can guide you in being a safe, supportive presence.

When high-profile accusations arise, resist snap judgments. Instead of dismissing survivors as “crazy,” pause to consider the trauma they may be navigating. Speaking out or coping with abuse is never easy. You don’t have to believe every claim, but you can refrain from attacking accusers online.

Society also fails at providing aftercare for survivors. The government, often part of the problem, won’t solve this. It’s up to us. Prevention is critical, but when abuse occurs, step up for your loved ones and community. Protect the vulnerable. it’s a challenging but a rewarding journey.

If you’re contributing to Nostr, you’re helping build a censorship resistant platform where survivors can share their stories freely, no matter how powerful their abusers are. Their voices can endure here, offering strength and hope to others. This gives me great hope for the future.

Virginia Giuffre’s courage was a gift to the world. It was an honor to know and serve her. She will be deeply missed. My hope is that her story inspires others to take on the powerful.

@ 8671a6e5:f88194d1

"I tried pasting my login key into the text field, but no luck—it just wouldn't work. Turns out, the login field becomes completely unusable whenever the on-screen keyboard shows up on my phone. So either no one ever bothered to test this on a phone, or they did and thought, ‘Eh, who needs to actually log in anyway?’."

### \ \ Develop and evolve

Any technology or industry at the forefront of innovation faces the same struggle. Idealists, inventors, and early adopters jump in first, working to make things usable for the technical crowd. Only later do the products begin to take shape for the average user.

Bitcoin’s dropping the Ball on usability (and user-experience)

First, we have to acknowledge the progress we've made. Bitcoin has come a long way in terms of usability—no doubt about it. Even if I still think it’s bad, it’s nowhere near as terrible as it was ten or more years ago. The days of printing a paper wallet from some shady website and hoping it would still work months or years later are behind us. The days of buggy software never getting fixed are mostly over.

The Bitcoin technology itself made progress through many BIPs (Bitcoin Improvement Proposals) and combined with an increasing number of apps, devs, websites and related networks (Liquid, Lightning, Nostr, ....) we can say that we're seeing a strong ecosystem going its way. The ecosystem is alive and expanding, and technically, things are clearly working. The problem is that we’re still building with a mindset where developers and project managers consider usability—but don’t truly care about it in practice. They don’t lead with it. (Yes, there are always exceptions.)

All that progress looks cool, when you see the latest releases of hardware wallets, software wallets, exchanges, nostr clients and services built purely for bitcoin, you're usually thinking that we've progressed nicely. But I want to focus on the downside of all these shiny tools. Because if Bitcoin has made it this far, it’s mostly thanks to people who deeply understand its value and are stubborn enough to push through the friction. They don’t give up when the user experience sucks.

Many bitcoiners completely lost their perspective on the software front in my opinion. Because we could have been so much further ahead, and we didn't because some of the most important components on the user-facing side of Bitcoin (arguably the most important part) hasn’t kept pace with the popularity and possible growth. And that should be a great concern, because Bitcoin is meant to be open and accessible. The blockchain is public. This is supposed to be for everyone. This is an open ledger technology so in theory everything is user-facing to one extent or another. Yet we fail on that front to make the glue stick. Somewhere, we’re easily amused by the tools we create, and often contains hurdles we can’t see or feel. While users reject it after 5 seconds tops.

We didn’t came a lot further yet, because we’ve ignored usability at its core (pun intended).

I’m not talking about usability in the “it works on my machine” sense. I’m talking about usability that meets the standard of modern apps. Think Spotify, Instagram, Uber, Gmail. Products that ordinary people use without reading a manual or digging through forums.

That’s the bar. We’re still far from it.

Bad UX scares your grandma away

… and that’s how many bitcoiners apparently like it.

Subsequently, when I say usability, I’m using it as an umbrella term. For me, it covers user experience, user interface, and real-life, full-cycle testing—from onboarding a brand new user to rolling out a new version of the app. And oh boy, our onboarding is so horrible. (“Hey wanna try bitcoin? Here’s an app that takes up to 4 minutes or more to get though, but wait, you’ll have to install a plugin, or wait I’ll send you an on-chain transaction…)

Take a look at the listings on Bitvocation, an excellent job board for Bitcoiners and related projects. You’ll quickly notice a pattern: almost no companies are hiring software testers. It’s marketing, more marketing, some sales, and of course, full-stack developers. But … No testers.

Because testing has become something that’s often skipped or automated in a hurry. Maybe the devs run a test locally to confirm that the feature they just built doesn’t crash outright. That’s it. And if testing does happen at a company, it’s usually shallow—focused only on the top five percent of critical bugs. The finer points that shape real user experience, like button placement, navigation flow, and responsiveness, are dumped on “the community.”

Which leads to some software being rushed out to production, and only then do teams discover how many problems exist in the real world. If there’s anyone left to care that is, since most teams are scattered all over the world and get paid by the hour by some VC firm on a small runway to a launch date.

This has real life consequences I’ve seen for myself with new users. Like a lightning wallet having a +5 minute onboarding time, and a fat on-screen error for the new users, or a hardware wallet stuck in an endless upgrade loop, just because nobody tested it on a device that was “old” (as in, one year old).

The result is clear: usability and experience testing are so low on the priority list, they may as well not exist. And that’s tragic, because the enthusiasm of new users gets crushed the moment they run into what I call Linux’plaining.

That’s when something obvious fails — like a lookup command that’s copied straight from their own help documentation but doesn’t work — and the answer you get as a user is something like: “Yeah, but first you have to…” followed by an explanation that isn’t mentioned anywhere in the interface or documentation. You were just supposed to know. No one updates the documentation, and no one cares. As most of the projects are very temporary or don’t really care if it succeeds or not, because they’re bitcoiners and bitcoin always wins. Just like PGP always was super cool and good, and users should just be smarter.

Lessons from the past usability disasters

We can always learn from the past especially when its precedents are still echoing through the systems we use today

So here goes, some examples from the legacy / fiat industry:

Lotus Notes, for example. Once a titan in enterprise communication software, which managed to capture about 145 million mailboxes. But its downfall is an example of what happens when you ignore and keep ignoring real-life user needs and fail to evolve with the market. Software like that doesn’t just fade, it collapses under the weight of its own inertia and bloat. If you think bitcoin can’t have that, yes… we’re of course not having a competitor in the market (hard money is hard money, not a mailbox or office software provider of course). But we can erode trust to the extent that it becomes LotusNotes’d.

Its archaic 1990s interface came with clunky navigation and a chaotic document management system. Users got frustrated fast—basic tasks took too long. Picture this: you're stuck in a cubicle, trying to find the calendar function in Lotus Notes while a giant office printer hisses and spits out stacks of paper behind you. The platform never made the leap to modern expectations. It failed to deliver proper mobile clients and clung to outdated tech like LotusScript and the Domino architecture, which made it vulnerable to security issues and incompatible with the web standards of the time. By 2012, IBM pulled the plug on the Lotus brand, as businesses moved en masse to cloud-based alternatives.

Another kind of usability failure has plagued PGP1 (and still does so after 34 years). PGP (Pretty Good Privacy) is a time-tested and rock-solid method for encryption and key exchange, but it’s riddled with usability problems, especially for anyone who isn’t technically inclined.

Its very nature and complexity are already steep hurdles (and yes, you can’t make it fully easy without compromising how it’s supposed to work—granted). But the real problem? Almost zero effort has gone into giving even the most eager new users a manageable learning curve. That neglect slowly killed off any real user base—except for the hardcore encryption folks who already know what they’re doing.

Ask anyone in a shopping street or the historic center of your city if they’ve heard of PGP. And on the off chance someone knows it’s not a trendy new fast-food joint called “Perfectly Grilled Poultry,” the odds of them having actually used it in the past six months are basically zero, unless you happen to bump into that one neckbeard guy in his 60s wearing a stained Star Wars T-shirt named Leonard.

The builders of PGP made one major mistake: they never treated usability as a serious design goal (that’s normal for people knee deep in encryption, I get that, it’s the way it is). PGP is fantastic on itself. Other companies and projects tried to build around it, but while they stumbled, tools like Signal and ProtonMail stepped in; offering the same core features of encryption and secure messaging, minus the headache. They delivered what PGP never could: powerful functionality wrapped in something regular people can actually use. Now, we’ve got encrypted communication flowing through apps like Signal, where all the complex tech is buried so deep in the background, the average user doesn’t even realize it’s there. ProtonMail went one step further even, integrating PGP so cleanly that users never need to exchange keys or understand the cryptography behind it all, yet still benefit from bulletproof encryption.

There’s no debate—this shift is a good thing. History shows that unusable software fades into irrelevance. Whether due to lack of interest, failure to reach critical mass, or a competitor swooping in to eat market share, clunky tools don’t survive. Now, to be clear, Bitcoin doesn’t have to worry about that kind of threat. There’s no real competition when it comes to hard money. Unless, of course, you genuinely believe that flashy shitcoins are a viable alternative—in which case, you might as well stop reading here and go get yourself scammed on the latest Solana airdrop or whatever hype train’s leaving the station today for the degens.

The main takeaway here is that Bitcoin must avoid becoming the next Lotus Notes, bloated with features but neglected by users—or the next PGP, sidelined by its own lack of usability. That kind of trajectory would erode trust, especially if usability and onboarding keep falling behind. And honestly, we’re already seeing signs of this in bitcoin. User adoption in Europe, especially in countries like Germany is noticeably lagging. The introduction of the EU’s MiCA regulations isn’t helping either. Most of the companies that were actually pushing adoption are now either shutting down, leaving the EU, or jumping through creative loopholes just to stay alive. And the last thing on anyone’s mind is improving UX. It takes time, effort, and specialized people to seriously think through how to build this properly, from the beginning, with this ease of use and onboarding in mind. That’s a luxury most teams can’t or won’t prioritize right now. Understandably when the lack of funds is still a major issue within the bitcoin space. (for people sitting on hard money, there’s surprisingly little money flowing into useful projects that aren’t hyped up empty boxes)

The number of nodes being set up by end users worldwide isn’t exactly skyrocketing either. Sure, there’s some growth but let’s not overstate it. Based on Bitnodes’ snapshots taken in March of each year, we’re looking at: 2022 : around 10500 2023 : around 17000 2024 : around 18500 2025 : around 21000 (I know there are different methods of measuring these, like read-only nodes, the % change is roughly the same nonetheless)

In my opinion, if we had non-clunky software that was actually released with proper testing and usability in mind, we could’ve easily doubled those node numbers. A bad user experience with a wallet spreads fast—and brings in exactly zero new users. The same goes for people trying to set up a miner or spin up a node, only to give up after a few frustrating steps. Sure, there are good people out there making guides and videos2 to help mitigate those hurdles, and that helps. But let’s be honest: there’s still very little “wow” factor when average users interact with most Bitcoin software. Almost every time they walk away, it’s because of one of two things—usability issues or bugs.

For the record: if a user can’t set up a wallet because the interface is so rotten or poorly tested, so they don’t know where to click or how to even select a seed word from a list, then that’s a problem — that’s a bug. Argue all you want: sure, it’s not a code-level bug and no, it’s not a system crash. But it is a usability failure. Call it onboarding friction, UX flaw, whatever fits your spreadsheet or circus Maximus of failures in your ticketing system. Bottom line: if your software doesn’t help users accomplish its core purpose, it’s broken. It’s a bug. Pretending it’s something a copywriter or marketing team can fix is pure deflection. The solution isn’t to relabel the problem, 1990’s telecom-style, just to avoid dealing with it. It’s to actually sit down, think, collaborate, and go through the issue, and getting real solutions out. ”No it’s not an issue, that’s how it works” like someone from a failing (and by now defunct) wallet told me once, is not a solution.

You got 21 seconds

The user can’t be onboarded because your software has an “issue”? In my book, that’s a bug. The usual response when you report it? “Yeah, that’s not a priority.” Well, guess what? It actually is a priority. All these small annoyances, hurdles, and bits of BS still plague this industry, and they make the whole experience miserable for regular people trying it out for the first time. The first 21 seconds (yeah, you see what I did there) are the most important when someone opens new software. If it doesn’t click right away—if they’re fiddling with sats or dollar signs, or hunting for some hidden setting buried behind a tiny arrow—it’s game over. They’re annoyed. They’re gone.

And this is exactly why we’re seeing a flood of shitcoin apps sweeping new users off their feet with "faster apps" or "nicer designs" apps that somehow can afford the UI specialists and slick, centralized setups to spread their lies and scams.

I hate to say it, but the Phantom wallet for example, for the Solana network, loaded with fake airdrop schemes and the most blatant scams — has a far better UX than most Bitcoin wallets and Lightning Wallets. Learn from it. Download that **** and get to know what we do wrong and how we can learn from the enemy.

That’s a hard truth. So, instead of just screaming “Uh, shitcooooin!” (yes, we know it is), maybe we should start learning from it. Their apps are better than ours in terms of UI and UX. They attract more people 5x faster (we know that’s also because of the fast gains and retardation playing with the marketing) but we can’t keep ignoring that. Somehow these apps attract more than our trustworthiness, our steady, secure, decentralized hard money truth.

It’s like stepping into one of the best Italian restaurants in town—supposedly. But then the menu’s a mess, the staff is scrolling on their phones, and something smells burnt coming from the kitchen. So, what do you do? You walk out. You cross the street to the fast food joint and order a burger and fries. And as you’re walking out with your food, someone from the Italian place yells at you: “Fast food is bad!” ”Yeah man I know, I wanted a nice Spaghetti aglio e olio, but here I am, digesting a cheeseburger that felt rather spongy.” (the problem is so gone so deep now, that users just walk past that Italian restaurant, don’t even recognize it as a restaurant because it doesn’t have cheeseburgers).

Fear of the dark

Technical people, not marketeers built bitcoin, it’s build on hundreds of small building blocks that interacted over time to have the bitcoin network and it’s immer evolving value. At one point David Chaum cooked up eCash, using blind signatures to let people send digital money anonymously — except it was still stuck on clunky centralized servers. Go back even further, to the 1970s, when Diffie, Hellman, and Rivest introduced public-key cryptography—the magic sauce that gave us secure digital signatures and authentication, making sure your messages stayed private and tamper-proof.

Fast forward to the 1990s, where peer-to-peer started to take off, decentralized networks getting started. Adam Back’s Hashcash in ‘97 used proof-of-work to fight email spam, and the cypherpunks were all about sticking it to the man with privacy-first, the invention 199 Human-Readable 128-bit keys3, decentralized systems. We started to swap files over p2p networks and later, torrents.

All these parts—anonymous cash, encryption, and leaderless networks finally clicked into place when Satoshi Nakamoto poured them into a chain of blocks, built on an ingenious “time-stamping” system: the timechain, or blockchain if you prefer. And just like that, Bitcoin was born—a peer-to-peer money system that didn’t need middlemen and actually worked without any central servers.

So yes, it’s only natural that Bitcoin and the many tools, born from math, obscurity, and cryptography, isn’t exactly always a user-interface darling. That’s also it’s charm for me in any case, as the core is robust and valuable beyond belief. That’s why we love to so see more use, more adoption.

But that doesn’t mean we can’t squash critical “show-stopper” bugs before releasing bitcoin-related software. And it sure as hell doesn’t mean we should act like jerks when a user points out something’s broken, confusing, or just doesn’t meet expectations. We can’t be complacent either about our role as builders of the next generations, as the core is hard money, and it would be a fatal mistake for the world to see it being used only for some rockstars from Wall Street and their counterparts to store their debt laden fiat. We can free people, make them better, make them elevate themselves. And yet, the people we try to elevate, we often alienate. All because we don’t test our stuff well enough. We should be so good, we blow the banking apps away. (they’re blowing themselves out of the market luckily with fiat “features” and overly over the top use of “analytics” to measure your carbon footprint for example).

We should be so damn professional that someone using Bitcoin apps for a full year wouldn’t even notice any bugs, because there wouldn’t be much to get annoyed by.

So… we have to do better. I’ve seen it time and time again — on Lightning tipping apps, Nostr plugins, wallets, hardware wallets, even metal plates we can screw up somehow … you name it. “It works on my machine”, isn’t enough anymore! Those days are over.

Even apps built with solid funding and strong dev and test teams like fedi.xyz4 can miss the mark. While the idea was good and the app itself ran fine without too much hurdles and usual bugs. But usability failed on a different front: there was just nothing meaningful to do in the app beyond poking around, chatting a bit, and sending a few sats back and forth. The communities it’s supposed to connect, just aren’t there, or weren’t there “yet”.

It’s a beautifully designed application and a strong proof-of-concept for federated community funds. But then… nothing. No one I know uses it. Their last blogpost was from beginning of October 2024, which doesn’t bode well, writing this than 6 months after. That said, they got some great onboarding going, usually under 20 seconds, which proves it can be done right (even if it was all a front-end for a more complex backend).

As you can see “usability” is a broad terminology, covering technical aspects, user-interface, but also use-cases. Even if you have a cool app that works really well and is well thought-out users won’t use it if there’s no real substance. You can’t get that critical mass by waiting for customers to come in or communities to embrace it. They won’t, because most of the individuals already had past experiences with bitcoin apps or services, and there’s a reason for them not being on-board already.

A lot of bitcoin companies build tools for new people. Never for the lapsed people, the persons that came in, thought of it as an investment or “a coin”… then left because of a bad experience or the price going down in fiat. All the while we have some software that usually isn’t so kind to new people, or causes loss of funds and time. Even if they make one little “mistake” of not knowing the system beforehand.

Bitcoin’s Moby Dick

\ Bitcoin itself has a big issue here. The user base could grow faster, and more robust, if there wasn’t software that worked as a sort of repellent against users.

I especially see a younger and less tech-savvy audience absolutely disliking the software we have now. No matter if it’s Electrum’s desktop wallet (hardly the sexiest tool out there, although I like it myself, but it lacks some features), Sparrow, or any lightning wallet out there (safe for WoS). I even saw people disliking Proton wallet, which I personally thought of as something really slick, well-made and polished. But even that doesn’t cut it for many people, as the “account” and “wallet” system wasn’t clear enough for them. (You see, we all have the same bias, because we know bitcoin, we look at it from a perspective of “facepalm, of course it’s a wallet named “account”, but when you sit next to a new user, it becomes clear that this is a hurdle. (please proton wallet: name a wallet a wallet, not “account”. But most users already in bitcoin, love what you’re doing)

Naturally disliking usability

The same technically brilliant people who maintain Bitcoin and build its apps haven’t quite tapped into their inner Steve Jobs—if that person even exists in the Bitcoin space. Let’s be honest: the next iOS-style wow moment, or the kind of frictionless usability seen in Spotify or Instagram, probably won’t come from hardcore Bitcoin devs alone. In fact, some builders in the space seem to actively disregard—or even look down on—discussions about usability. Just mention names like Wallet of Satoshi (yes, we all know it’s a custodial frontend) or the need for smoother interactions with Bitcoin, and you’ll get eye-rolls or defensive rants instead of curiosity or openness.

Moving more towards a better user interface for things like Sparrow or Bitcoin Core for example, would bring all kinds of “bad things” according to some, and on top of that, bring in new users (noobs) that ask questions like: “Do you burn all these sats when I make a transaction?” (Yes, that’s a real one.)

I get the “usability sucks” gripe — fear of losing key features, dumbing things down, or opening the door to unwanted changes (like BIP proposals real bitcoiners hate) that tweak bitcoin to suit any user’s whim. Close to no one in bitcoin (really in bitcoin!) wants that, including me.

That fear is however largely unfounded; because Bitcoin doesn’t change without consensus. Any change that would undermine its core use or value proposition simply won’t make it through. And let’s be honest: most of the users who crave these “faster,” centralized alternatives—those drawn to slick apps, one-click solutions, and dopamine-driven UI—will either stick with fiat, ape into the shitcoin-of-the-month, or praise the shiny new CBDC once it drops (“much fast, much cool”). These degen types, chasing fiat gains and jackpot dreams, aren’t relevant to this story, No matter what we build for bitcoin, they’ll always love the fiat-story and will always dislike bitcoin because it’s not a jackpot for them. (Honestly, why don’t they just gamble at a casino?)

People who fear that improving usability will somehow bring down the Bitcoin network are being a bit too paranoid—and honestly, they often don’t understand what usability or proper testing actually means.

They treat it like fluff, when in reality it's fundamental. Usability doesn't mean dumbing things down or compromising Bitcoin's core values; it means understanding why your fancy new app isn’t being used by anyone outside of your bubble. Testing is the beating heart of getting things out with confidence. Nothing more satisfying in software building than to proudly show even your beta versions to users, knowing it’s well tested. It’s much more than clicking a few buttons and tossing your code on GitHub. It's about asking real questions: can someone outside your Telegram group actually use this and will it they be using the software at all?

If you create a Nostr app that opens an in-app browser window and then tries to log you in with your NIPS05 or NIPS07 or whatever number it is that authenticates you, then you need to think about how it’s going to work in real life. Have people already visited this underlying website? Is that website using the exact same mechanism? Is it really working like we think it is in the real world? (Some notable good things are happening with the development of Keychat for example, I have the feeling they get it, it’s not all bad). And yes, there are still bugs and things to improve there, they’re just starting. (The browser section and nostr login need some work imho).

Guess what? You can test your stuff. But it takes time and effort. The kind of effort that, if skipped, gets multiplied across thousands of people. Thousands of people wasting their time trying to use your app, hitting errors, assuming they did something wrong, retrying, googling workarounds—only to eventually realize: it’s not them. It’s a bug. A bug you didn’t catch. Because you didn’t test. And now everyone loses. And guess what? Those users? They’re not coming back.

A good example (to stay positive here) is Fountain App, where the first versions were , eh… let’s say not so good, and then quickly evolved into a company and product that works really well, and also listens to their users and fixes their bugs. The interface can still be better in my opinion, but it’s getting there. And it’s super good now.

A bad example? Alby. (Sorry to say.) It still suffers from a bloated, clunky interface and an onboarding flow that utterly confuses new or returning users. It just doesn’t get the job done. Opinions may vary, sure, but hand this app to any non-technical user and ask them to get online and do a Nostr zap. Watch what happens. If they even manage to get through the initial setup, that is.

Another example? Bitkit. When I tried transferring funds from the "savings" to the "spending" account, the wallet silently opened a Lightning channel—no warning, no explanation—and suddenly my coins were locked up. To make things worse, the wallet still showed the full balance as spendable, even though part of it was now stuck in that channel. That was in November 2024, the last time I touched Bitkit. I wasted too much time trying to figure it out, I haven’t looked back (assuming the project is even still alive, I didn’t see them pop up anywhere).

Some metal BIP39 backup tools are great in theory but poorly executed. I bought one that didn’t even include a simple instruction on how to open it. The person I gave it to spent two hours trying to open it with a screwdriver and even attempted drilling. Turns out, it just slides open with some pressure. A simple instruction would’ve saved all that frustration.

Builders often assume users “just get it,” but a small guide could’ve prevented all the hassle. It’s a small step, but it’s crucial for better user experience. So why not avoid such situations and put a friggin cheap piece of paper in the box so people know how to open it? (The creators would probably facepalm if they read this, “how can users nòt see this?”). Yeah,… put a paper in there with instructions.

That’s natural, because as a creator you’re “in” it, you know. You don’t see how others would overlook something so obvious.

Bitcoiners are extremely bad on that front.

I’ll dive deeper into some examples in part 2 of this post.

By AVB

end of part 1

If you like to support independent thought and writings on bitcoin, follow this substack please https://coinos.io/allesvoorbitcoin/receive\ \ footnotes:

1 https://philzimmermann.com/EN/findpgp/

2 BTC sessions: set up a bitcoin node

3 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc1751

4 https://www.fedi.xyz/

@ 378562cd:a6fc6773

Bitcoin transaction fees might seem confusing, but don’t worry—I’ll break it down step by step in a simple way. 🚀

Unlike traditional bank fees, Bitcoin fees aren’t fixed. Instead, they depend on: ✔️ Transaction size (in bytes, not BTC!) ✔️ Network demand (more traffic = higher fees) ✔️ Fee rate (measured in satoshis per byte)

Let’s dive in! 👇

📌 Why Do Bitcoin Transactions Have Fees? Bitcoin miners process transactions and add them to the blockchain. Fees serve three key purposes:

🔹 Incentivize Miners – They receive fees + block rewards. 🔹 Prevent Spam – Stops the network from being flooded. 🔹 Prioritize Transactions – Higher fees = faster confirmations.

💰 How Are Bitcoin Fees Calculated? Bitcoin fees are not based on the amount of BTC you send. Instead, they depend on how much space your transaction takes up in a block.

🧩 1️⃣ Transaction Size (Bytes, Not BTC!) Bitcoin transactions vary in size (measured in bytes).

More inputs and outputs = larger transactions.

Larger transactions take up more block space, meaning higher fees.

📊 2️⃣ Fee Rate (Sats Per Byte) Fees are measured in satoshis per byte (sat/vB).

You set your own fee based on how fast you want the transaction confirmed.

When demand is high, fees rise as users compete for block space.

⚡ 3️⃣ Network Demand If the network is busy, miners prioritize transactions with higher fees.

Low-fee transactions may take hours or even days to confirm.

🔢 Example: Calculating a Bitcoin Transaction Fee Let’s say: 📦 Your transaction is 250 bytes. 💲 The current fee rate is 50 sat/vB.

Formula: 🖩 Transaction Fee = Size × Fee Rate = 250 bytes × 50 sat/vB = 12,500 satoshis (0.000125 BTC)

💡 If 1 BTC = $60,000, the fee would be: 0.000125 BTC × $60,000 = $7.50

🚀 How to Lower Bitcoin Fees? Want to save on fees? Try these tips:

🔹 Use SegWit Addresses – Reduces transaction size! 🔹 Batch Transactions – Combine multiple payments into one. 🔹 Wait for Low Traffic – Fees fluctuate based on demand. 🔹 Use the Lightning Network – Near-zero fees for small payments.

🏁 Final Thoughts Bitcoin fees aren’t fixed—they depend on transaction size, fee rate, and network demand. By understanding how fees work, you can save money and optimize your transactions!

🔍 Want real-time fee estimates? Check mempool.space for live data! 🚀

@ 2e8970de:63345c7a

https://x.com/beatmastermatt/status/1906329250115858750

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/930491

@ 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.

@ d0fbe941:bbce9a00

No cenário atual de entretenimento digital, a 119Bet vem ganhando destaque como uma plataforma inovadora e confiável, oferecendo uma experiência completa para jogadores que buscam diversão, emoção e praticidade. Com uma interface moderna, sistema de segurança avançado e uma variedade de jogos envolventes, a 119Bet se consolida como uma excelente opção para quem deseja explorar o mundo dos jogos online com comodidade e segurança.

Uma Plataforma Feita para o Jogador Brasileiro Desde o primeiro acesso, a 119Bet surpreende pela facilidade de navegação e o design adaptado para dispositivos móveis e computadores. A plataforma é totalmente otimizada para garantir uma experiência fluida, seja em smartphones Android, iPhones ou navegadores de desktop. Além disso, o site está disponível em português brasileiro, o que facilita ainda mais a interação dos usuários locais.

O processo de cadastro é simples e rápido, permitindo que novos usuários comecem a jogar em poucos minutos. A 119bettambém se destaca pelo suporte eficiente, com atendimento ao cliente disponível em diversos canais, incluindo chat ao vivo e WhatsApp, garantindo que qualquer dúvida ou problema seja resolvido com agilidade.

Variedade de Jogos para Todos os Gostos A diversidade de jogos é um dos pontos fortes da 119Bet. A plataforma oferece uma ampla seleção que inclui jogos de mesa, cartas, slots temáticos e opções ao vivo com crupiês reais. Tudo é fornecido por desenvolvedores reconhecidos no mercado, o que assegura gráficos de alta qualidade, som envolvente e mecânicas justas.

Os jogos de cartas, como o pôquer e o blackjack, são perfeitos para quem gosta de estratégia e tomada de decisão. Já os slots são indicados para quem busca uma experiência mais dinâmica e visualmente atraente, com temas variados que vão desde mitologia até aventuras futuristas. Para quem gosta de um toque mais realista, as salas ao vivo oferecem uma experiência imersiva e interativa.

Experiência do Jogador: Simples, Segura e Recompensadora A 119Bet foi desenvolvida pensando no conforto e na segurança do jogador. A plataforma utiliza criptografia de dados e tecnologias de proteção contra fraudes para garantir que todas as transações e informações pessoais estejam seguras.

Outro grande atrativo é o sistema de recompensas e promoções. A 119Bet oferece bônus de boas-vindas, rodadas grátis e programas de fidelidade para os jogadores mais frequentes. Tudo isso é estruturado de forma clara, sem complicações, permitindo que o usuário aproveite ao máximo cada benefício.

Além disso, os métodos de pagamento disponíveis incluem opções amplamente utilizadas no Brasil, como PIX, boleto bancário, transferências e carteiras digitais. Os saques são rápidos, e os depósitos caem quase que instantaneamente na conta do jogador.

Conclusão A 119Bet é mais do que uma plataforma de jogos — é um ambiente completo de entretenimento digital, que combina tecnologia, variedade e suporte ao usuário. Com seu compromisso com a segurança, a transparência e a diversão, ela conquista cada vez mais espaço entre os jogadores brasileiros.

Se você está em busca de uma nova experiência online, com jogos envolventes, atendimento de qualidade e ótimas recompensas, a 119Bet é uma escolha certeira. Prepare-se para se divertir com confiança e emoção em cada rodada.

@ bcbb3e40:a494e501

|| |:-:| |WAJDA, Andrzej; Cenizas y diamantes, 1958|

Presentamos una nueva reseña cinematográfica, y en esta ocasión hemos elegido «Cenizas y diamantes», una película polaca del célebre y prolífico director Andrzej Wajda (1926-2016), estrenada en el año 1958. Se trata de uno de los grandes clásicos del cine polaco. El filme refleja una etapa dramática desde la perspectiva histórica para la nación polaca, como es el final de la Segunda Guerra Mundial, a raíz de la capitulación alemana del 8 de mayo de 1945. El contexto en el que se desarrolla se ambienta en la celebración del final de la guerra con el aplastante triunfo de la URSS, con las tropas soviéticas ocupando toda la Europa oriental, y en particular Polonia, que vive un momento de oscuridad e incertidumbre. El protagonista, Maciek Chełmicki (interpretado magistralmente por Zbigniew Cybulski (1927-1967), apodado el «James Dean polaco»), es un joven nacionalista polaco, de orientación anticomunista, que se ve implicado en un complot urdido para asesinar a un líder comunista local. Maciek opera desde la clandestinidad, bajo el grupo Armia Krajowa (AK), el Ejército Nacional polaco, una organización de resistencia, primero contra los alemanes y, posteriormente, contra los soviéticos. Durante el metraje, se plantea una dicotomía permanente entre la libertad entendida como la defensa de la soberanía de Polonia, desde posturas nacionalistas, y quienes consideran la ocupación soviética como algo positivo. Estas circunstancias atrapan al protagonista, que se ve envuelto en una espiral de violencia y traición.

Maciek Chełmicki, nuestro protagonista, cuenta con todas las características del héroe trágico, pues tiene en sus manos una serie de acciones que comprometen el futuro de un pueblo, que consiste en cumplir la misión que le ha sido encomendada, pero en su camino se cruza una joven, Krystyna, una joven camarera de un hotel de la que se enamora en ese mismo día. Este último hecho sirve de punto de partida para todas las dudas, dilemas y dicotomías a las que hacemos referencia. Hay un dilema moral evidente en un mundo en ruinas, devastado por la guerra, la muerte y el nihilismo. En este sentido Wajda nos muestra un lenguaje cinematográfico muy evidente, a través de una técnica expresionista muy depurada, con el uso del blanco y negro, los contrastes generados por las sombras y la atmósfera opresiva que transmite angustia, desesperación y vulnerabilidad de los protagonistas. Además también destilan una fuerte carga emocional, donde no están exentos elementos poéticos y un poderoso lirismo.

|| |:-:| |Maciek Chełmicki, el protagonista.|

Hay elementos simbólicos que no podemos obviar, y que contribuyen a consolidar el análisis que venimos haciendo, como, por ejemplo, la estética del protagonista, con unas gafas oscuras, que actúan como una suerte de barrera frente al mundo que le rodea, como parte del anonimato tras el cual el joven Maciek vive de forma introspectiva su propio drama particular y el de toda una nación.

|| |:-:| |NITOGLIA, Curzio; En el mar de la nada: Metafísica y nihilismo a prueba en la posmodernidad; Hipérbola Janus, 2023|

Hay una escena especialmente poderosa, y casi mítica, en la que los dos jóvenes protagonistas, Maciek y Krystina, se encuentran entre las ruinas de una Iglesia, en la que se destaca en primer plano, ocupando buena parte de la pantalla, la imagen de un Cristo invertido sobre un crucifijo, donde también se encuentran dos cuerpos colgados hacia abajo en una estampa que refleja la devastación moral y espiritual de toda una época. De hecho, la imagen del crucifijo invertido refleja el máximo punto de subversión y profanación de lo sagrado, y que en el caso concreto de la película viene a representar la destrucción del orden moral y de valores cristianos que la propia guerra ha provocado. Polonia es una nación profundamente católica, convertida al Cristianismo en el 966 a raíz de la conversión del príncipe Miecislao I, contribuyendo de manera decisiva a la formación de la identidad nacional polaca. El catolicismo siempre ha sido un medio de cohesión y defensa frente a las influencias extranjeras y la ocupación de terceros países, una constante en la historia del país, como el que ilustra la propia película con la URSS. En este sentido, la imagen de una Iglesia en ruinas, el lugar donde se encuentra representado el principio de lo sagrado e inviolable, supone una forma de perversión de todo principio de redención y salvación frente a la tragedia, y al mismo tiempo viene a significar que la Tradición ha sido abandonada y pervertida. En la misma línea, el protagonista, Maciek, se encuentra atrapado en una espiral de violencia a través de sus actos terroristas perpetrados contra la autoridad soviética que ocupa su país. Los dos cuerpos anónimos que cuelgan boca abajo, de forma grotesca, también participan de este caos y desequilibrio de un orden dislocado, son parte de la deshumanización y el nihilismo que todo lo impregna.

|| |:-:| |Maciek y Krystina en una iglesia en ruinas|

Como ya hemos mencionado, la película se encuentra plagada de paradojas y dicotomías, en las que nuestro protagonista, el joven rebelde e inconformista, debe elegir permanentemente, en unas decisiones que resultan trascendentales para su futuro y el de la propia nación. La figura femenina que irrumpe en su vida, y que representa un principio disruptivo que provoca una fractura interior y una crisis, le suscita una toma de conciencia de su propia situación y le fuerza a tomar un camino entre la «felicidad», del «amor», la «esperanza» y la «vida», que le permita superar la deriva nihilista y autodestructiva de la lucha clandestina, la cual le aboca a un destino trágico (que no vamos a desentrañar para no hacer spoiler). En relación al propio título de la película, «Cenizas y diamantes», basada en el poema del poeta y dramaturgo polaco Cyprian Norwid (1821-1883) y en la novela del autor, también polaco, Jerzy Andrzejewski (1909-1983), nos destaca la dualidad de los dos elementos que lo componen, y que definen el contraste entre el mundo sombrío y oscuro (Cenizas) y la esperanza y la luz que representa susodicha figura femenina (diamantes). La segunda alternativa parece un imposible, una quimera irrealizable que se pliega ante un Destino implacable, irreversible y cruel.

En consecuencia, y a la luz de los elementos expuestos, podemos decir que se nos presentan dilemas propios de la filosofía existencialista, que conoce su punto álgido en esos años, con autores como Jean Paul Sartre (1905-1980), Albert Camus (1913-1960), Karl Jaspers (1883-1969) o Martin Heidegger (1889-1976) entre otros. Respecto a éste último, a Heidegger, podemos encontrar algunas claves interesantes a través de su filosofía en relación al protagonista, a Maciek, especialmente a través de la idea del Dasein, a la idea de haber sido arrojado al mundo (Geworfenheit), y la manera tan extrema y visceral en la que vive susodicha condición. Todos aquellos elementos que dan sentido a la vida colectiva se encuentran decaídos o destruidos en su esencia más íntima, la Patria, la religión o la propia idea de Comunidad orgánica. De modo que el protagonista se ha visto «arrojado» frente a una situación o destino indeseado, en unas coyunturas totalmente desfavorables en las que no queda otra elección. Sus decisiones están permanentemente condicionadas por la circunstancia descrita y, por tanto, vive en un mundo donde no controla nada, en lugar de ser sujeto es un mero objeto transportado por esas circunstancias ajenas a su voluntad. Sin embargo, y en coherencia con el Dasein heideggeriano, vemos como Maciek, a raíz de conocer a Krystyna, comienza a experimentar una catarsis interior, que muestra por momentos el deseo de superar ese «ser arrojado al mundo contra tu voluntad», trascendiendo esa condición absurda e irracional de unas decisiones enajenadas de su voluntad para dotar de una significación y un sentido la propia existencia.

|| |:-:| |Andrzej Wajda, el director de la película.|

Otro elemento característico de la filosofía heideggeriana lo podemos encontrar en la «angustia» (angst) a través de la ausencia de un sentido y fundamento último que justifique la existencia del protagonista. Es una angustia en a que el Dasein se enfrenta a la «nada», a ese vacío existencial que hace inútil toda la lucha que Maciek lleva a cabo en la clandestinidad, con asesinatos y actos de terrorismo que pretenden salvaguardar algo que ya no existe, y que simboliza muy bien la Iglesia en ruinas con sus símbolos religiosos invertidos de la que hablábamos con anterioridad. Recuerda un poco a esa dicotomía que se plantea entre ser conservador o reaccionario frente a una realidad como la del propio presente, en la que los valores tradicionales han sido totalmente destruidos, y más que conservar se impone la reacción para volver a construir de la nada.

|| |:-:| |Hipérbola Janus; Textos para la Tradición en tiempos del oscurecimiento: Artículos publicados entre 2014 y 2019 en hiperbolajanus.com; Hipérbola Janus, 2019|

Todas las dudas que asaltan al protagonista se ven incrementadas en el momento decisivo, cuando se dispone a dar muerte al líder comunista. Se produce una tensión interna en Maciek, que se encuentra ligado a la joven que ha conocido ese día, y en ella es donde encuentra ese leve destello de humanidad. Esa circunstancia le hace replantearse por un instante el cumplimiento de su misión, pero es un dilema que no tiene salida, y por ello le asalta nuevamente la angustia frente a esa «nada», ese mundo vacío e incomprensible que trasciende el marco de sus propias elecciones.

Uno de los conceptos centrales de Heidegger en Ser y tiempo es el Sein-zum-Tode (ser-para-la-muerte), la idea de que la muerte es la posibilidad más propia y definitiva del Dasein, y que enfrentarla auténticamente permite vivir de manera más plena. Y es que el protagonista se encuentra permanentemente sobre esa frontera entre la vida y la muerte, que afronta con todas sus consecuencias, conscientemente, y la acepta. Esta actitud podría leerse como una forma de Dasein inauténtico, una huida del ser-para-la-muerte mediante la distracción (das Man, el «se» impersonal). Sin embargo, su decisión de cumplir la misión sugiere un enfrentamiento final con esa posibilidad. Otro aspecto que podemos conectar con el pensamiento heideggeriano es la autenticidad o inautenticidad de la vida del protagonista. En relación a la inautenticidad vemos como al principio sigue las órdenes de sus superiores en la organización sin cuestionarlas, lo cual implica un comportamiento inequívocamente alienante. Respecto a aquello que resulta auténtico de su existencia son sus relaciones con Krystyna, que supone imponer su propia voluntad y decisión, mostrando un Dasein que asume su libertad.

|| |:-:| |Escena de la película.|

Otros aspectos más generales de la filosofía existencialista redundan sobre estos mismos aspectos, con la elección entre la libertad absoluta y la condena inevitable. La idea del hombre condenado a actuar, a una elección continua, aún cuando el hombre no es dueño de su destino, o las consecuencias de tales acciones son absurdas, irracionales e incomprensibles. El propio absurdo de la existencia frente al vacío y la ausencia de principios sólidos en los que cimentar la vida, no solo en sus aspectos cotidianos más básicos, sino en aquellos más profundos de la existencia. La soledad y la propia fatalidad frente a un Destino que, como ya hemos apuntado anteriormente, parece imponerse de manera irrevocable, y podríamos decir que brutalmente, al individuo aislado, incapaz de asirse en una guía, en unos valores que le permitan remontar la situación.

En términos generales «Cenizas y diamantes», además de ser una película de gran calidad en sus aspectos técnicos, en su fotografía, en la configuración de sus escenas y en el propio desarrollo argumental, bajo un guión espléndidamente ejecutado a lo largo de sus 98 minutos de duración, también nos invita a una reflexión profunda sobre la condición humana y la propia Modernidad. Y es algo que vemos en nuestros días, con las consecuencias de un pensamiento débil, con la promoción del individualismo, el hedonismo y lo efímero. La ausencia de estructuras sólidas, la subversión de toda forma de autoridad y jerarquía tradicionales. Paradójicamente, el mundo actual tiende a formas de poder y autoridad mucho más invasivas y coercitivas, tanto a nivel individual como colectivo, pero en la misma línea abstracta e impersonal que nos describe la película, abocándonos a la alienación y la inautenticidad de nuestras propias vidas. Y como Maciek, también nosotros, vivimos en un mundo dominado por la incertidumbre y la desesperanza, en el que el globalismo y sus perversas ideologías deshumanizantes actúan por doquier.

|| |:-:| |Carátula original de la película en polaco.|

---

Artículo original: Hipérbola Janus, Reseña de «Cenizas y Diamantes» (Andrzej Wajda, 1958) (TOR), 31/Mar/2025

@ 78b3c1ed:5033eea9

各ノードにポリシーがある理由 → ノードの資源（CPU、帯域、メモリ）を守り、無駄な処理を避けるため

なぜポリシーがコンセンサスルールより厳しいか 1.資源の節約 コンセンサスルールは「最終的に有効かどうか」の基準だが、全トランザクションをいちいち検証して中継すると資源が枯渇する。 ポリシーで「最初から弾く」仕組みが必要。

1. ネットワーク健全性の維持 手数料が低い、複雑すぎる、標準でないスクリプトのトランザクションが大量に流れると、全体のネットワークが重くなる。 これを防ぐためにノードは独自のポリシーで中継制限。

2. 開発の柔軟性 ポリシーはソフトウェアアップデートで柔軟に変えられるが、コンセンサスルールは変えるとハードフォークの危険がある。 ポリシーを厳しくすることで、安全に新しい制限を試すことができる。

---

標準ポリシーの意味は何か？ ノードオペレーターは自分でbitcoindの設定やコードを書き換えて独自のポリシーを使える。 理論上ポリシーは「任意」で、標準ポリシー（Bitcoin Coreが提供するポリシー）は単なるデフォルト値。 ただし、標準ポリシーには以下の大事な意味がある。

1. ネットワークの互換性を保つ基準 みんなが全く自由なポリシーを使うとトランザクションの伝播効率が落ちる。 標準ポリシーは「大多数のノードに中継される最小基準」を提供し、それを守ればネットワークに流せるという共通の期待値になる。

2. 開発・サービスの指針 ウォレット開発者やサービス提供者（取引所・支払いサービスなど）は、「標準ポリシーに準拠したトランザクションを作れば十分」という前提で開発できる。 もし標準がなければ全ノードの個別ポリシーを調査しないと流れるトランザクションを作れなくなる。

3. コミュニティの合意形成の場 標準ポリシーはBitcoin Coreの開発・議論で決まる。ここで新しい制限や緩和を入れれば、まずポリシーレベルで試せる。 問題がなければ、将来のコンセンサスルールに昇格させる議論の土台になる。

つまりデフォルトだけど重要。 確かに標準ポリシーは技術的には「デフォルト値」にすぎないが、実際にはネットワークの安定・互換性・開発指針の柱として重要な役割を果たす。

---

ビットコインノードにおける「無駄な処理」というのは、主に次のようなものを指す。 1. 承認される見込みのないトランザクションの検証 例: 手数料が極端に低く、マイナーが絶対にブロックに入れないようなトランザクション → これをいちいち署名検証したり、メモリプールに載せるのはCPU・RAMの無駄。

1. 明らかに標準外のスクリプトや形式の検証 例: 極端に複雑・非標準なスクリプト（non-standard script） → コンセンサス的には有効だが、ネットワークの他ノードが中継しないため、無駄な伝播になる。

2. スパム的な大量トランザクションの処理 例: 攻撃者が極小手数料のトランザクションを大量に送り、メモリプールを膨張させる場合 → メモリやディスクI/O、帯域の消費が無駄になる。

3. 明らかに無効なブロックの詳細検証 例: サイズが大きすぎるブロック、難易度条件を満たさないブロック → 早期に弾かないと、全トランザクション検証や署名検証で計算資源を浪費する。

これらの無駄な処理は、ノードの CPU時間・メモリ・ディスクI/O・帯域 を消耗させ、最悪の場合は DoS攻撃（サービス妨害攻撃） に悪用される。 そこでポリシーによって、最初の受信段階、または中継段階でそもそも検証・保存・転送しないように制限する。 まとめると、「無駄な処理」とはネットワークの大勢に受け入れられず、ブロックに取り込まれないトランザクションやブロックにノード資源を使うこと。

---

無駄な処理かどうかは、単に「ポリシーで禁止されているか」で決まるわけではない。

本質的には次の2つで判断される 1. ノードの資源（CPU、メモリ、帯域、ディスク）を過剰に使うか 2. 他のノード・ネットワーク・マイナーに受け入れられる見込みがあるか

将来のBitcoin CoreのバージョンでOP_RETURNの出力数制限やデータサイズ制限が撤廃されたとする。 この場合標準ポリシー的には通るので、中継・保存されやすくなる。 しかし、他のノードやマイナーが追随しなければ意味がない。大量に流せばやはりDoS・スパム扱いされ、無駄な資源消費になる。

最終的には、ネットワーク全体の運用実態。 標準ポリシーの撤廃だけでは、「無駄な処理ではない」とは断定できない。 実質的な「無駄な処理」の判定は、技術的制約＋経済的・運用的現実のセットで決まる。

@ d0fbe941:bbce9a00

Com o avanço da tecnologia e a popularização dos jogos digitais, plataformas de entretenimento online têm ganhado cada vez mais destaque no Brasil. Entre as opções que vêm conquistando o público, a 355Bet surge como uma alternativa moderna, segura e recheada de possibilidades para quem busca diversão e recompensas reais. Este artigo apresenta um panorama completo sobre a 355Bet, destacando seus principais diferenciais, os jogos disponíveis e a experiência dos jogadores brasileiros na plataforma.

Plataforma moderna e intuitiva A 355Bet foi desenvolvida com foco na usabilidade e na acessibilidade. Seu design responsivo permite que os usuários acessem todas as funcionalidades tanto pelo computador quanto por dispositivos móveis, sem comprometer a qualidade da navegação. A interface é limpa, organizada e intuitiva, facilitando a localização de jogos, promoções e opções de suporte ao cliente.

A segurança é outro ponto de destaque. A plataforma utiliza tecnologia de criptografia de ponta para garantir a proteção dos dados dos usuários, além de oferecer métodos de pagamento confiáveis e populares entre os brasileiros, como PIX, boleto bancário e carteiras digitais.

Variedade de jogos para todos os gostos Na 355bet, a diversidade de opções é um dos grandes atrativos. Os jogadores encontram uma ampla seleção de jogos, incluindo:

Slots (caça-níqueis): São dezenas de títulos temáticos, com gráficos envolventes e diferentes níveis de volatilidade. Ideais para quem busca diversão rápida e a chance de obter bons prêmios com pequenas apostas.

Jogos de mesa: Para os fãs de estratégias, há opções como roleta, blackjack e bacará, todos disponíveis em versões digitais com gráficos de alta definição.

Jogos ao vivo: Uma das grandes sensações da plataforma, os jogos com crupiês reais oferecem uma experiência imersiva, com transmissão em tempo real e interação com outros jogadores, elevando o nível de realismo e emoção.

Além disso, a 355Bet está sempre atualizando seu catálogo, trazendo novidades semanais e parcerias com provedores renomados da indústria de entretenimento digital.

Experiência do jogador brasileiro A experiência do usuário é prioridade na 355Bet. A plataforma oferece um atendimento ao cliente eficiente, com suporte em português disponível 24 horas por dia via chat ao vivo, e-mail ou WhatsApp. O processo de cadastro é simples e rápido, permitindo que novos jogadores comecem a se divertir em poucos minutos.

Outro ponto positivo são as promoções exclusivas para brasileiros. Bônus de boas-vindas, ofertas semanais, torneios com prêmios em dinheiro e programas de fidelidade tornam a jornada do jogador ainda mais recompensadora.

Jogadores relatam que a navegação fluida, os pagamentos ágeis e a diversidade de jogos tornam a 355Bet uma das plataformas mais completas do mercado. Seja para iniciantes ou experientes, a plataforma oferece uma experiência equilibrada entre diversão e oportunidade de ganhos.

Conclusão A 355Bet chegou ao Brasil para redefinir a forma como os jogadores interagem com o entretenimento digital. Com uma plataforma segura, acessível e repleta de jogos emocionantes, ela se posiciona como uma das principais escolhas para quem busca emoção, variedade e uma experiência de alta qualidade. Se você está em busca de uma nova forma de se divertir online, vale a pena conhecer tudo o que a 355Bet tem a oferecer.

@ bcbb3e40:a494e501

El 7 de febrero de 2025, Donald Trump firmó una orden ejecutiva que establecía una «Oficina de la Fe» en la Casa Blanca, dirigida por su asesora espiritual Paula White-Cain, la pastora de esa «teología de la prosperidad» (prosperity theology) que predica el «Evangelio de la salud y la riqueza» (health and wealth gospel^1). Investida de su nueva función, la reverenda pastora dijo: «Tengo la autoridad para declarar a la Casa Blanca un lugar santo. Es mi presencia la que la santifica»[^2]. Los siete rabinos del «Sanedrín Naciente» —la corte suprema que guiará a Israel cuando se reconstruya el Templo de Jerusalén— enviaron conmovedoras felicitaciones al presidente Trump por el establecimiento de esta Oficina. «Expresamos nuestra sincera gratitud —se lee en el mensaje oficial enviado a Trump desde el Monte Sión— por llevar la fe a la vanguardia de la cultura estadounidense y mundial mediante el establecimiento de la Oficina de la Fe en la Casa Blanca. Su reconocimiento de la importancia de la religión en la vida pública es un paso hacia la restauración de los valores morales y del liderazgo espiritual en el mundo[^3]. La carta del «Sanedrín Naciente», que augura el éxito a la «misión divina» del presidente estadounidense, reproduce las dos caras de una «moneda del Templo», acuñada en 2017 para celebrar el traslado de la embajada estadounidense a Jerusalén y, simultáneamente, el centenario de la Declaración Balfour. En el anverso se ven los perfiles de Donald Trump y Ciro el Grande, a quien la tradición judía atribuye la reconstrucción del templo destruido por los babilonios, con la inscripción (en hebreo e inglés) «Cyrus —Balfour— Trump Declaration 1917-2017»; en el reverso está la imagen del Templo de Jerusalén[^4]. Otra moneda, que lleva los perfiles de Trump y Ciro en el anverso y los de Trump y Netanyahu en el reverso, fue acuñada en 2018 para celebrar el septuagésimo aniversario de la independencia del «Estado de Israel»; se observa dos inscripciones en hebreo e inglés: «Y Él me encargó construirle una casa en Jerusalén» y «Guerra de los Hijos de la Luz contra los Hijos de las Tinieblas».

El tema de la «guerra de los Hijos de la Luz contra los Hijos de las Tinieblas» ha tenido una difusión particular en el imaginario y la propaganda trumpista. El 7 de junio de 2020, monseñor Carlo Maria Viganò, ex nuncio de la Santa Sede en los Estados Unidos, escribió una carta al presidente Donald Trump que comenzaba así: «Estamos asistiendo en los últimos meses a la formación de dos bandos, que los definiría bíblicos: los hijos de la luz y los hijos de las tinieblas»[^5]. El 1 de enero de 2021, el agitprop estadounidense Steve Bannon declaró en una entrevista con Monseñor Viganò: «Esta es una batalla de época entre los hijos de la Luz y los hijos de las Tinieblas»[^6].

Son numerosos los judíos sionistas que están en el círculo del presidente Trump: además de su hija Ivanka (convertida en 2009) y su yerno Jared Kushner (entonces Consejero Anciano del Presidente), el 19 de noviembre de 2024 el «The Jerusalem Post»[^7] publicó una lista de los más influyentes: Stephen Miller, subdirector del staff de la Casa Blanca y consejero de Seguridad Nacional de Estados Unidos; David Melech Friedman, a quien en 2016 Trump nombró embajador en Israel; el multimillonario «filántropo» Steven Charles Witkoff, enviado especial de Estados Unidos a Oriente Medio; Miriam Adelson, directora del periódico «Israel Hayom», clasificada por Bloomberg Billionaires como la quinta mujer más rica del mundo (con un patrimonio neto de 32,400 millones de dólares), financiadora de iniciativas políticas conservadoras en Estados Unidos e Israel; el banquero Boris Epshteyn, consejero estratégico de la campaña presidencial de Trump en 2020; Howard Williams Lutnick, presidente de la Cantor Fitzgerald del Grupo BGC, financista de las campañas presidenciales de Donald Trump en 2020 y 2024, ahora secretario de Comercio; la modelo Elizabeth Pipko, portavoz nacional del Partido Republicano y creadora de un «museo interactivo virtual» sobre la «Shoah» como parte del proyecto de Lest People Forget, cuyo objetivo es combatir el «antisemitismo» y la «negacionismo»; Lee Michael Zeldin, miembro republicano de la Cámara de Representantes por el estado de Nueva York del 2015 al 2023 y actualmente administrador de la EPA (Environmental Protection Agency); la columnista Laura Elizabeth Loomer, «orgullosamente islamófoba», activa patrocinadora de Trump en la campaña para las elecciones presidenciales de 2024; Sidney Ferris Rosenberg, influyente presentador de radio y periodista deportivo; William Owen Scharf, Asistente del Presidente y secretario del personal de la Casa Blanca; Marc Jeffrey Rowan, «filántropo» con un patrimonio neto valorado por Forbes en ocho mil ochocientos millones de dólares.

Además de estos, cabe mencionar al popular presentador de radio Mark Levin quien, en diciembre de 2019, durante la celebración de la fiesta de Janucá en la Casa Blanca, saludó a Donald Trump como «el primer presidente judío de los Estados Unidos»[^8]. Según un funcionario de alto nivel de la Casa Blanca, Donald Trump se convirtió al judaísmo dos años antes en la sinagoga de la secta Jabad Lubavitch en la ciudad de Nueva York. David Elias Goldberg, miembro del Jewish Center of Antisemitic Study, también entrevistó al funcionario, para quien «Trump fue “instado” por su hija Ivanka y su yerno Jared Kushner para abrazar la fe. Inicialmente, Trump se habría mostrado reacio, considerando que esto podría enfriar el apoyo del electorado evangélico». Luego, informa «Israel Today News», «cambió de opinión y se convirtió oficialmente a principios de 2017. La ceremonia se llevó a cabo en privado y se guardó celosamente durante casi dos años»[^9]. Pero ya en septiembre de 2015, el rabino millonario Kirt Schneider, invitado a la Trump Tower de Nueva York, había impuesto sus manos sobre la cabeza de Donald Trump y lo había bendecido en hebreo e inglés, declarando: «Las únicas dos naciones que tienen una relación privilegiada con Dios son Israel y los Estados Unidos de América»[^10].

El 7 de octubre de 2024, en el aniversario de la operación de Hamas «Diluvio de Al-Aqsa», Trump fue acompañado por un «superviviente de la Shoah» a la tumba de Menachem Mendel Schneerson, séptimo y último Rabino de los Hasidim de la secta Jabad Lubavitch, que en 1991 declaró a sus seguidores: «He hecho todo lo posible para provocar el arribo del Mesías, ahora les paso a ustedes esta misión; hagan todo lo que puedan para que Él venga»^11. En relación al evento mesiánico, el eminente rabino Yekutiel Fish atribuyó una misión decisiva a Trump: «Todo el mundo está centrado en Gaza, pero esa es solo una parte de la agenda del fin de los tiempos, que tiene a los judíos viviendo en las fronteras profetizadas de Israel; la Torá incluye explícitamente a Gaza. Lo que Trump está haciendo es limpiar Gaza de todos los odiadores de Israel. No podrán estar en Israel después de la venida del Mesías. (...) Esto incluirá a Gaza, la mitad del Líbano y gran parte de Jordania. Y vemos que casi lo hemos logrado. Siria cayó. Líbano está medio destruido. Gaza está destrozada. El escenario está casi listo para el Mesías. Pero, ¿cómo pueden los palestinos estar aquí cuando vayamos a recibir al Mesías? El Mesías necesita que alguien se ocupe de esto, y en este caso, es Donald Trump. Trump está simplemente llevando a cabo las tareas finales necesarias antes de que el Mesías sea revelado»[^12].

Esta inspiración escatológica está presente en las palabras de Pete Brian Hegseth, el pintoresco exponente del «Reconstruccionismo Cristiano»[^13] a quien Trump nombró secretario de Defensa. En un discurso pronunciado en 2019 en el Hotel Rey David de Jerusalén, con motivo de la conferencia anual del canal Arutz Sheva (Israel National News), Hegseth enalteció el «vínculo eterno» entre Israel y Estados Unidos, y enumeró los «milagros» que atestiguan el «apoyo divino» a la causa sionista, el último de los cuales será la reconstrucción del Templo judío en la zona donde actualmente se encuentra la mezquita de al-Aqsa: «La dignidad de capital adquirida por Jerusalén —dijo— fue un milagro, y no hay razón por la cual no sea posible el milagro de la restauración del Templo en el Monte del Templo».[^14]

Es conocido que el fundamentalismo evangélico pro-sionista[^15] comparte con el judaísmo la creencia en que la construcción del tercer Templo de Jerusalén marcará el comienzo de la era mesiánica; cuando la administración Trump trasladó la embajada de Estados Unidos a Jerusalén en 2017, Laurie Cardoza-Moore, exponente del evangelismo sionista, saludó así la «obediencia de Trump a la Palabra de Dios» en «Haaretz»: «Al establecer la Embajada en Jerusalén, el presidente Donald Trump está implementando una de las iniciativas históricas de dimensión bíblica en su presidencia. Al igual que muchos judíos en Israel y en todo el mundo, los cristianos reconocen el vínculo de los judíos con la Biblia a través del nombre de Jerusalén como la capital del antiguo Israel, así como el sitio del Primer y Segundo Templos. Según los profetas Ezequiel, Isaías y el apóstol Juan del Nuevo Testamento, todos los israelíes esperan la reconstrucción del Tercer Templo»[^16]. El 22 de mayo del mismo año, Donald Trump, acompañado de su esposa Melania, de su hija Ivanka y su yerno Jared Kushner, fue el primer presidente de los Estados Unidos en ejercicio en acudir al Muro de las Lamentaciones, anexionado ilegalmente a la entidad sionista.

En 2019, la administración Trump confirmó la posición de Estados Unidos al enviar en visita oficial para Jerusalén a Mike Pompeo, un secretario de Estado que —ironía de la Historia— lleva el mismo nombre del general romano que asaltó la ciudad en el año 63 a.C. «Por primera vez en la historia, un secretario de Estado norteamericano visitó la Ciudad Vieja de Jerusalén en compañía de un alto político israelí. Fue una visita histórica que reforzó las expectativas israelíes y constituyó un reconocimiento tácito de la soberanía israelí sobre el sitio del Monte del Templo y la Explanada de las Mezquitas. (…) Mike Pompeo, acompañado por el primer ministro Benjamin Netanyahu y el embajador de Estados Unidos en Israel, David Friedman, también visitó el túnel del Muro de las Lamentaciones y la sinagoga ubicada bajo tierra, en el presunto lugar del santuario del Templo[^17], donde se le mostró una maqueta del futuro Templo[^18]. En el transcurso de una entrevista concedida durante la fiesta del Purim (que celebra el exterminio de la clase política persa, ocurrido hace 2500 años), el secretario de Estado insinuó que «el presidente Donald Trump puede haber sido enviado por Dios para salvar al pueblo judío y que confiaba en que aquí el Señor estaba obrando»[^19].

Como observa Daniele Perra, en este mismo número de «Eurasia», el «mito movilizador» del Tercer Templo, atribuible a los «mitos teológicos» señalados por Roger Garaudy como mitos fundadores de la entidad sionista, «atribuye al judaísmo una especie de función sociológica de transmisión y proyección del conflicto palestino-israelí hacia el resto del mundo y confiere una inspiración apocalíptica al momento geopolítico actual».

|Info|| |:-|:-| |Autor| Claudio Mutti | |Fuente| I "Figli della Luce" alla Casa Bianca | |Fecha| 8/Mar/2025 | |Traducción| Francisco de la Torre |

[^2]: The White House, President Trump announces appointments to the White House Faith Office https://www.whitehouse.gov,, 7 de febrero de 2025; Trump establece la Oficina de la Fe con una foto de «La Última Cena» | Fue dirigida por la controvertida predicadora Paula White, https://www.tgcom24.mediaset.it, 10 de febrero de 2025.

[^3]: «We extend our heartfelt gratitude for bringing faith to the forefront of American and global culture through the establishment of the Faith Office in the White House. Your recognition of the importance of religion in public life is a step toward restoring moral values and spiritual leadership in the world» (Letter from the Nascent Sanhedrin to President Donald J. Trump, Jerusalem, Wednesday, February 12, 2025).

[^4]: Israeli group mints Trump coin to honor Jerusalem recognition, «The Times of Israel», https://www.timesofisrael.com, 28-2-2018.

[^5]: Mons. Viganò — Siamo nella battaglia tra figli della luce e figli delle tenebre, https://www.italiador.com, 7-6-2020

[^6]: TRANSCRIPT: Steve Bannon’s ‘War Room’ interview with Abp. Viganò, lifesitenews.com, 4-1-2021. Sulle origini e sulla fortuna di questo tema cfr. C. Mutti, Le sètte dell’Occidente, «Eurasia», 2/2021, pp. 12-15. (https://www.eurasia-rivista.com/las-sectas-de-occidente/)

[^7]: Luke Tress, The who’s who of Jews in Trump’s inner circle?, «The Jerusalem Post», https://www.jpost.com, 19-11-2024.

[^8]: Radio Talk Show Host Mark Levin Calls President Trump «the First Jewish President of the United States», https://www.c-span.org, 11-12-2019.

[^9]: «However, he had a change of heart and officially converted in early 2017. The ceremony was held in private, and closely guarded for nearly two years» (Donald Trump converted to Judaism two years ago, according to White House official, https://israeltodaynews.blogspot.com/2019/02).

[^10]: «El rabino Kirt Schneider (...) es un millonario judío, una figura televisiva de los “judíos mesiánicos”. Sus emisiones televisivas semanales son emitidas por más de treinta canales cristianos en unos doscientos países; entre ellos, los canales “Yes” y “Hot” en Israel. Solo en Estados Unidos, sus emisiones atraen a 1.600.000 telespectadores cada semana. Kirt Schneider dirige un imperio de telecomunicaciones que tiene un millón y medio de seguidores en Facebook, X (antes Twitter) y YouTube» (Pierre-Antoine Plaquevent — Youssef Hindi, El milenarismo teopolítico de Israel, Edizioni all'insegna del Veltro, Parma 2025, p. 31).

[^12]: «Everyone is focused on Gaza, but that is only one part of the end-of-days agenda, which has the Jews living in Israel’s prophesied borders. The Torah explicitly includes Gaza. What Trump is doing is cleaning out Gaza of all the haters of Israel. They cannot be in Israel after the Messiah comes. (…) This will include Gaza, half of Lebanon, and much of Jordan. And we see that we are almost there. Syria fell. Lebanon is half gone. Gaza is ripped up. The stage is nearly set for Messiah. But how can the Palestinians be here when we go to greet the Messiah? The Messiah needs someone to take care of this, and in this case, it is Donald Trump. Trump is merely carrying out the final tasks needed before Messiah is revealed» (Adam Eliyahu Berkowitz, Trump’s Gaza Plan is «The Final task before Messiah», https://israel365news.com, 5-2-2025).

[^13]: «A day after Hegseth was announced for the Cabinet position, Brooks Potteiger, a pastor within the Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches (CREC), posted on X that Hegseth is a member of the church in good standing. The CREC, a denomination of Christian Reconstructionism, is considered by some academics to be an extremist, Christian supremacist movement» (Shannon Bond e altri, What’s behind defense secretary pick Hegseth’s war on ‘woke’, https://www.npr.org, 14-11-2024.

[^14]: «The decoration of Jerusalem as a capital was a miracle, and there is no reason why the miracle of the re-establishment of Temple on the Temple Mount is not possible» (Pete Hegseth at Arutz Sheva Conference, youtube.com). Cfr. Daniele Perra, Paleotrumpismo, neotrumpismo e post-trumpismo, in: AA. VV., Trumpismo, Cinabro Edizioni, Roma 2025, pp. 22-23.

[^15]: Pierre-Antoine Plaquevent — Youssef Hindi, El milenarismo teopolítico de Israel, cit., págs. 82 a 96.

[^16]: «We American Christians Welcome Trump’s Obedience to God’s Word on Jerusalem», «Haaretz», 6-12-2017.

[^17]: Pierre-Antoine Plaquevent — Youssef Hindi, El milenarismo teopolítico de Israel, cit., pág. 97.

[^18]: Pompeo en visite historique au mur Occidental aux côtés de Netanyahu et Friedman, «The Times of Israel», https://fr.timesofisrael.com, 21-3-2019.

[^19]: Pompeo says Trump may have been sent by God to save Jews from Iran, «The Times of Israel», 22-3-2019.

@ 57d1a264:69f1fee1

Album art didn’t always exist. In the early 1900s, recorded music was still a novelty, overshadowed by sales of sheet music. Early vinyl records were vastly different from what we think of today: discs were sold individually and could only hold up to four minutes of music per side. Sometimes, only one side of the record was used. One of the most popular records of 1910, for example, was “Come, Josephine, in My Flying Machine”: it clocked in at two minutes and 39 seconds.

The invention of album art can get lost in the story of technological mastery. But among all the factors that contributed to the rise of recorded music, it stands as one of the few that was wholly driven by creators themselves. Album art — first as marketing material, then as pure creative expression — turned an audio-only medium into a multi-sensory experience.

This is the story of the people who made music visible.

Continue reading

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/972642

@ 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.

@ b6dcdddf:dfee5ee7

You can now fund projects on Geyser using Credit Cards, Apple Pay, Bank Transfers, and more.

The best part: 🧾 You pay in fiat and ⚡️ the creator receives Bitcoin.

You heard it right! Let's dive in 👇

First, how does it work? For contributors, it's easy! Once the project creator has verified their identity, anyone can contribute with fiat methods. Simply go through the usual contribution flow and select 'Pay with Fiat'. The first contribution is KYC-free.

Why does this matter? 1. Many Bitcoiners don't want to spend their Bitcoin: 👉 Number go up (NgU) 👉 Capital gains taxes With fiat contributions, there's no more excuse to contribute towards Bitcoin builders and creators! 2. Non-bitcoin holders want to support projects too. If someone loves your mission but only has a debit card, they used to be stuck. Now? They can back your Bitcoin project with familiar fiat tools. Now, they can do it all through Geyser!

So, why swap fiat into Bitcoin? Because Bitcoin is borderless. Fiat payouts are limited to certain countries, banks, and red tape. By auto-swapping fiat to Bitcoin, we ensure: 🌍 Instant payouts to creators all around the world ⚡️ No delays or restrictions 💥 Every contribution is also a silent Bitcoin buy

How to enable Fiat contributions If you’re a creator, it’s easy: - Go to your Dashboard → Wallet - Click “Enable Fiat Contributions” - Complete a quick ID verification (required by our payment provider) ✅ That’s it — your project is now open to global fiat supporters.

Supporting Bitcoin adoption At Geyser, our mission is to empower Bitcoin creators and builders. Adding fiat options amplifies our mission. It brings more people into the ecosystem while staying true to what we believe: ⚒️ Build on Bitcoin 🌱 Fund impactful initiatives 🌎 Enable global participation

**Support projects with fiat now! ** We've compiled a list of projects that currently have fiat contributions enabled. If you've been on the fence to support them because you didn't want to spend your Bitcoin, now's the time to do your first contribution!

Education - Citadel Dispatch: https://geyser.fund/project/citadel - @FREEMadeiraOrg: https://geyser.fund/project/freemadeira - @MyfirstBitcoin_: https://geyser.fund/project/miprimerbitcoin

Circular Economies - @BitcoinEkasi: https://geyser.fund/project/bitcoinekasi - Madagascar Bitcoin: https://geyser.fund/project/madagasbit - @BitcoinChatt : https://geyser.fund/project/bitcoinchatt - Uganda Gayaza BTC Market: https://geyser.fund/project/gayazabtcmarket

Activism - Education Bitcoin Channel: https://geyser.fund/project/streamingsats

Sports - The Sats Fighter Journey: https://geyser.fund/project/thesatsfighterjourney

Culture - Bitcoin Tarot Cards: https://geyser.fund/project/bitcointarotcard

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/973003

@ 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 .

@ c1e9ab3a:9cb56b43

If you're an engineer stepping into the Bitcoin space from the broader crypto ecosystem, you're probably carrying a mental model shaped by speed, flexibility, and rapid innovation. That makes sense—most blockchain platforms pride themselves on throughput, programmability, and dev agility.

But Bitcoin operates from a different set of first principles. It’s not competing to be the fastest network or the most expressive smart contract platform. It’s aiming to be the most credible, neutral, and globally accessible value layer in human history.

Here’s why that matters—and why Bitcoin is not just an alternative crypto asset, but a structural necessity in the global financial system.

1. Bitcoin Fixes the Triffin Dilemma—Not With Policy, But Protocol

The Triffin Dilemma shows us that any country issuing the global reserve currency must run persistent deficits to supply that currency to the world. That’s not a flaw of bad leadership—it’s an inherent contradiction. The U.S. must debase its own monetary integrity to meet global dollar demand. That’s a self-terminating system.

Bitcoin sidesteps this entirely by being:

• Non-sovereign – no single nation owns it
• Hard-capped – no central authority can inflate it
• Verifiable and neutral – anyone with a full node can enforce the rules

In other words, Bitcoin turns global liquidity into an engineering problem, not a political one. No other system, fiat or crypto, has achieved that.

2. Bitcoin’s “Ossification” Is Intentional—and It's a Feature

From the outside, Bitcoin development may look sluggish. Features are slow to roll out. Code changes are conservative. Consensus rules are treated as sacred.

That’s the point.

When you’re building the global monetary base layer, stability is not a weakness. It’s a prerequisite. Every other financial instrument, app, or protocol that builds on Bitcoin depends on one thing: assurance that the base layer won’t change underneath them without extreme scrutiny.

So-called “ossification” is just another term for predictability and integrity. And when the market does demand change (SegWit, Taproot), Bitcoin’s soft-fork governance process has proven capable of deploying it safely—without coercive central control.

3. Layered Architecture: Throughput Is Not a Base Layer Concern

You don’t scale settlement at the base layer. You build layered systems. Just as TCP/IP doesn't need to carry YouTube traffic directly, Bitcoin doesn’t need to process every microtransaction.

Instead, it anchors:

• Lightning (fast payments)
• Fedimint (community custody)
• Ark (privacy + UTXO compression)
• Statechains, sidechains, and covenants (coming evolution)

All of these inherit Bitcoin’s security and scarcity, while handling volume off-chain, in ways that maintain auditability and self-custody.

4. Universal Assayability Requires Minimalism at the Base Layer

A core design constraint of Bitcoin is that any participant, anywhere in the world, must be able to independently verify the validity of every transaction and block—past and present—without needing permission or relying on third parties.

This property is called assayability—the ability to “test” or verify the authenticity and integrity of received bitcoin, much like verifying the weight and purity of a gold coin.

To preserve this:

• The base layer must remain resource-light, so running a full node stays accessible on commodity hardware.
• Block sizes must remain small enough to prevent centralization of verification.
• Historical data must remain consistent and tamper-evident, enabling proof chains across time and jurisdiction.

Any base layer that scales by increasing throughput or complexity undermines this fundamental guarantee, making the network more dependent on trust and surveillance infrastructure.

Bitcoin prioritizes global verifiability over throughput—because trustless money requires that every user can check the money they receive.

5. Governance: Not Captured, Just Resistant to Coercion

The current controversy around OP_RETURN and proposals to limit inscriptions is instructive. Some prominent devs have advocated for changes to block content filtering. Others see it as overreach.

Here's what matters:

• No single dev, or team, can force changes into the network. Period.
• Bitcoin Core is not “the source of truth.” It’s one implementation. If it deviates from market consensus, it gets forked, sidelined, or replaced.
• The economic majority—miners, users, businesses—enforce Bitcoin’s rules, not GitHub maintainers.

In fact, recent community resistance to perceived Core overreach only reinforces Bitcoin’s resilience. Engineers who posture with narcissistic certainty, dismiss dissent, or attempt to capture influence are routinely neutralized by the market’s refusal to upgrade or adopt forks that undermine neutrality or openness.

This is governance via credible neutrality and negative feedback loops. Power doesn’t accumulate in one place. It’s constantly checked by the network’s distributed incentives.

6. Bitcoin Is Still in Its Infancy—And That’s a Good Thing

You’re not too late. The ecosystem around Bitcoin—especially L2 protocols, privacy tools, custody innovation, and zero-knowledge integrations—is just beginning.

If you're an engineer looking for:

• Systems with global scale constraints
• Architectures that optimize for integrity, not speed
• Consensus mechanisms that resist coercion
• A base layer with predictable monetary policy

Then Bitcoin is where serious systems engineers go when they’ve outgrown crypto theater.

Take-away

Under realistic, market-aware assumptions—where:

• Bitcoin’s ossification is seen as a stability feature, not inertia,
• Market forces can and do demand and implement change via tested, non-coercive mechanisms,
• Proof-of-work is recognized as the only consensus mechanism resistant to fiat capture,
• Wealth concentration is understood as a temporary distribution effect during early monetization,
• Low base layer throughput is a deliberate design constraint to preserve verifiability and neutrality,
• And innovation is layered by design, with the base chain providing integrity, not complexity...

Then Bitcoin is not a fragile or inflexible system—it is a deliberately minimal, modular, and resilient protocol.

Its governance is not leaderless chaos; it's a negative-feedback structure that minimizes the power of individuals or institutions to coerce change. The very fact that proposals—like controversial OP_RETURN restrictions—can be resisted, forked around, or ignored by the market without breaking the system is proof of decentralized control, not dysfunction.

Bitcoin is an adversarially robust monetary foundation. Its value lies not in how fast it changes, but in how reliably it doesn't—unless change is forced by real, bottom-up demand and implemented through consensus-tested soft forks.

In this framing, Bitcoin isn't a slower crypto. It's the engineering benchmark for systems that must endure, not entertain.

Final Word

Bitcoin isn’t moving slowly because it’s dying. It’s moving carefully because it’s winning. It’s not an app platform or a sandbox. It’s a protocol layer for the future of money.

If you're here because you want to help build that future, you’re in the right place.

nostr:nevent1qqswr7sla434duatjp4m89grvs3zanxug05pzj04asxmv4rngvyv04sppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qgs9tc6ruevfqu7nzt72kvq8te95dqfkndj5t8hlx6n79lj03q9v6xcrqsqqqqqp0n8wc2

nostr:nevent1qqsd5hfkqgskpjjq5zlfyyv9nmmela5q67tgu9640v7r8t828u73rdqpr4mhxue69uhkymmnw3ezucnfw33k76tww3ux76m09e3k7mf0qgsvr6dt8ft292mv5jlt7382vje0mfq2ccc3azrt4p45v5sknj6kkscrqsqqqqqp02vjk5

nostr:nevent1qqstrszamvffh72wr20euhrwa0fhzd3hhpedm30ys4ct8dpelwz3nuqpr4mhxue69uhkymmnw3ezucnfw33k76tww3ux76m09e3k7mf0qgs8a474cw4lqmapcq8hr7res4nknar2ey34fsffk0k42cjsdyn7yqqrqsqqqqqpnn3znl

@ 57d1a264:69f1fee1

I don’t like garlic. It’s not a dislike for the taste in the moment, so much as an extreme dislike for the way it stays with you—sometimes for days—after a particularly garlicky meal.

Interestingly enough, both of my brothers love garlic. They roast it by itself and keep it at the ready so they can have a very strong garlic profile in their cooking. When I prepare a dish, I don’t even see garlic on the ingredient list. I’ve cut it out of my life so completely that my brain genuinely skips over it in recipes. While my brothers are looking for ways to sneak garlic into everything they make, I’m subconsciously avoiding it altogether.

A few years back, when I was digging intensely into how design systems mature, I stumbled on the concept of a design system origin story. There are two extreme origin stories and an infinite number of possibilities between. On one hand you have the grassroots system, where individuals working on digital products are simply trying to solve their own daily problems. They’re frustrated with having to go cut and paste elements from past designs or with recreating the same layouts over and over, so they start to work more systematically. On the other hand, you have the top down system, where leadership is directing teams to take a more systematic approach, often forming a small partially dedicated core team to tackle some centralized assets and guidelines for all to follow. The influences in those early days bias a design system in interesting and impactful ways.

We’ve established that there are a few types of bias that are either intentionally or unintentionally embedded into our design systems. Acknowledging this is a great first step. But, what’s the impact of this? Does it matter?

I believe there are a few impacts design system biases, but there’s one that stands out. The bias in your design system makes some individuals feel the system is meant for them and others feel it’s not. This is a problem because, a design system cannot live up to it’s expected value until it is broadly in use. If individuals feel your design system is not for them, the won’t use it. And, as you know, it doesn’t matter how good your design system is if nobody is using it.

Continue reading

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/972641

@ 005bc4de:ef11e1a2

May 6 marks my "Nostr birthday." This means I've been on Nostr for two years now. See my initial "Running nostr" note timestamped and archived on the Hive blockchain at https://peakd.com/bitcoin/@crrdlx/running-nostr

Two years ago, I really had no idea what Nostr was. I was asking, "What is this Nostr thing?"

And, I had no idea what I was doing then while using the front end clients. The clients were clunky and since the protocol was rather plastic (still kinda is). As evidence to my ignorance, the spinning wheels on Coracle.social just kept spinning. I didn't realize that since I was only following two people, one being myself, there was nothing to load from relays except my one "Running nostr" note. Hence, the Coracle wheels just spun in their mesmerizing manner. At least they're soothing to watch.

Yet, despite my ignorance, I had an inkling of a notion that Nostr was indeed something different, maybe special. Otherwise, I wouldn't have taken the time to capture an animated gif and make that Hive post to chronicle my first Nostr note.

For fun, I made another "Running nostr" note yesterday using Coracle.social. It still has those muted, earthy tones, but the wheels are not there anymore for long. Coracle, like Nostr, has come a long way in two years. It loads much faster now, which means less wheel spinning. I kind of miss the wheels for some reason, they build the drama and expectation of what might appear.

---

!HBIT

@ e4950c93:1b99eccd

Qu'est-ce qu'une matière naturelle ? La question fait débat, et chacun-e privilégiera ses propres critères. Voici comment les matières sont classées sur ce site. La liste est régulièrement mise à jour en fonction des produits ajoutés. N'hésitez pas à partager votre avis !

---

✅ Matières naturelles

Matières d'origine végétale, animale ou minérale, sans transformation chimique altérant leur structure moléculaire.

🌱 Principaux critères : - Biodégradabilité - Non-toxicité - Présence naturelle nécessitant le minimum de transformation

🔍 Liste des matières naturelles : - Bois - Cellulose régénérée (cupra, lyocell, modal, viscose) - Chanvre - Coton - Cuir - Liège - Lin - Laine - Latex naturel, caoutchouc - Métal - Soie - Terre - Verre - … (Autres matières)

⚠️ Bien que "naturelles", ces matières peuvent générer des impacts négatifs selon leurs conditions de production (pollution par pesticides, consommation d’eau excessive, traitement chimique, exploitation animale…). Ces impacts sont mentionnés sur la fiche de chaque matière.

Les versions biologiques de ces matières (sans traitement chimique, maltraitance animale, etc.) sont privilégiées pour référencer les produits sur ce site, tel qu'indiqué sur la fiche de chaque matière (à venir).

Les versions conventionnelles ne sont référencées que tant que lorsqu'il n'a pas encore été trouvé d'alternative plus durable pour cette catégorie de produits.

---

🚫 Matières non naturelles

Matières synthétiques ou fortement modifiées, souvent issues de la pétrochimie.

📌 Principaux problèmes : - Toxicité et émissions de microplastiques - Dépendance aux énergies fossiles - Mauvaise biodégradabilité

🔍 Liste des matières non naturelles : - Acrylique - Élasthanne, lycra, spandex - Polyamides, nylon - Polyester - Silicone - … (Autres matières)

⚠️ Ces matières ne sont pas admises sur le site. Néanmoins, elles peuvent être présentes dans certains produits référencés lorsque :

• elles sont utilisées en accessoire amovible (ex. : élastiques, boutons… généralement non indiqué dans la composition par la marque) pouvant être retiré pour le recyclage ou compostage, et
• aucune alternative 100 % naturelle n’a encore été identifiée pour cette catégorie de produits.

Dans ce cas, un avertissement est alors affiché sur la fiche du produit.

---

Cet article est publié sur origine-nature.com 🌐 See this article in English

@ 502ab02a:a2860397

สัปดาห์นี้ถือว่าเป็นเบรคคั่นพักผ่อนแก้เครียดนิดหน่อยแล้วกันครับ เรามาเล่าย้อนอดีตกันนิดหน่อย เหมือนสตาร์วอส์ที่ฉายภาค 4-5-6 แล้วย้อนไป 1-2-3 ฮาๆๆๆ

เคยได้ยินคำว่า Nuremberg Trials ไหมครับ ย้อนความนิดนึงว่า Nuremberg (Nürnberg อ่านว่า เนือร์นแบร์ก) คือชื่อเมืองในเยอรมนีที่เคยเป็นเวทีพิจารณาคดีประวัติศาสตร์หลังสงครามโลกครั้งที่ 2

“Nuremberg Trials” คือการไต่สวนผู้มีส่วนเกี่ยวข้องกับ อาชญากรรมสงครามของนาซีเยอรมัน หลังสงครามโลกครั้งที่ 2 ในปี 1945–46 พันธมิตรผู้ชนะสงครามได้จับตัวผู้นำนาซี นักการเมือง หมอ นักวิทยาศาสตร์ มาขึ้นศาล ข้อหาของพวกเขาไม่ได้แค่ฆ่าคน แต่รวมถึงการละเมิดศีลธรรมมนุษย์ขั้นพื้นฐาน อย่างการทดลองทางการแพทย์กับนักโทษ โดยไม่มีการขอความยินยอม

จากการไต่สวนนี้ จึงเกิดหลักจริยธรรมที่ชื่อว่า “Nuremberg Code” ซึ่งกลายเป็นรากฐานของการทดลองทางการแพทย์ยุคใหม่ หัวใจของโค้ดนี้คือคำว่า “Informed Consent” แปลว่า ถ้าจะทำอะไรกับร่างกายใคร ต้องได้รับความยินยอมจากเขาอย่างเต็มใจ และมีข้อมูลครบถ้วน นี่แหละ คือบทเรียนจากบาดแผลของสงครามโลก

แต่แล้ว...ในปี 2020 โลกก็เข้าสู่ยุคที่ใครบางคนบอกว่า “ต้องเชื่อผู้เชี่ยวชาญ” ใครกังวล = คนไม่รักสังคม ใครถามเยอะ = คนต่อต้านวิทยาศาสตร์ การยินยอมโดยสมัครใจ เริ่มกลายเป็นแค่คำเชิงสัญลักษณ์

ในช่วงหลังนี้เราอาจจะได้ยินข่าวหรือทฤษฎีในอินเตอร์เนทเกี่ยวกับคำว่า Nuremberg 2.0 กันนะครับ เพราะเริ่มผุดขึ้นตามกระทู้เงียบ ๆ คลิปใต้ดิน และเวทีเสวนาแปลก ๆ ที่ไม่มีใครอยากอ้างชื่อบนเวที TED Talk ซึ่ง กลุ่มที่ใช้คำนี้มักจะหมายถึงความต้องการให้มีการ “ไต่สวน” หรือ “เอาผิด” กับนักการเมือง นักวิทยาศาสตร์ แพทย์ หรือองค์กรที่เกี่ยวข้องกับ การออกคำสั่ง การบังคับ การเซ็นเซอร์ข้อมูลที่ขัดแย้งกับแนวทางรัฐ การเผยแพร่ข้อมูลโดยไม่โปร่งใส พวกเขามองว่า นโยบายเหล่านั้นละเมิดสิทธิเสรีภาพของประชาชนในระดับที่เปรียบได้กับ “อาชญากรรมต่อมนุษยชาติ” จึงเสนอแนวคิด “Nuremberg 2.0”

พวกเขาไม่ได้เรียกร้องแค่ความโปร่งใส แต่เขาอยากเห็นการทบทวน ว่าใครกันแน่ที่ละเมิดหลักจริยธรรมที่โลกเคยตกลงกันไว้เมื่อ 80 ปีก่อน

Nuremberg คือการไต่สวนคนที่ใช้อำนาจรัฐฆ่าคนอย่างจงใจ Nuremberg 2.0 คือคำเตือนว่า “การใช้ความกลัวครอบงำเสรีภาพ” อาจไม่ต่างกันนัก

ทีนี้เคยสงสัยไหม แล้วมันเกี่ยวอะไรกับอาหาร?

เพราะจากวิกฤตโรคระบาด เราเริ่มเห็น “วิทยาศาสตร์แบบผูกขาด” คุมเกมส์ บริษัทเทคโนโลยีเริ่มเข้ามาทำอาหาร ชื่อใหม่ของเนื้อสเต๊กกลายเป็น “โปรตีนทางเลือก” อาหารจากแล็บกลายเป็น “ทางรอดของโลก” สารเคมีอัดลงไปแทนเนื้อจริง ๆ แต่มีฉลากติดว่า "รักษ์โลก ปลอดภัย ยั่งยืน"

แต่ถ้ามองให้ลึกลงไปอีกนิด บางกลุ่มคนกลับเริ่มเห็นอะไรบางอย่างที่ขนลุกกว่า เพราะมันคือ “ระบบควบคุมสุขภาพ” ที่อาศัย “ความกลัว” เป็นหัวเชื้อ และ “วิทยาศาสตร์แบบผูกขาด” เป็นกลไก

จากนั้น…ทุกอย่างก็จะถูกเสิร์ฟอย่างสวยงามในรูปแบบ "นวัตกรรมเพื่ออนาคต" ไม่ว่าจะเป็นอาหารเสริมชนิดใหม่ เนื้อสัตว์ปลูกในแล็บ หรืออาหารที่ไม่ต้องเคี้ยว

ลองคิดเล่น ๆครับ ถ้าสารอาหารถูกควบคุมได้ เหมือนที่เราเคยถูกบังคับกับบางอย่างได้ล่ะ? วันหนึ่ง เราอาจถูกขอให้ "กิน" ในสิ่งที่ระบบสุขภาพอนาคตเขาบอกว่าดี แล้วถ้าเฮียบอกว่าไม่อยากกิน...เขาอาจไม่ห้าม แต่ App สุขภาพจะเตือนว่า “คุณมีพฤติกรรมเสี่ยงต่อโลกใบนี้” แต้มเครดิตจะสุขภาพจะลดลงและส่วนลดข้าวกล่องเนื้อจากจุลินทรีย์จะไม่เข้าบัญชีเฮียอีกเลย

ใช่…มันไม่เหมือนการบังคับ แต่มันคือการสร้าง “ระบบทางเดียว” ที่ทำให้คนที่อยากเดินออกนอกแถว เหมือนเดินลงเหว

Nuremberg 2.0 จึงไม่ใช่แค่เรื่องของอดีตหรือโรคระบาด แต่มันเป็นกระจกที่สะท้อนว่า “ถ้าเราไม่เรียนรู้จากประวัติศาสตร์ เราอาจกินซ้ำรอยมันเข้าไปในมื้อเย็น”

อนาคตของอาหารอาจไม่ได้อยู่ในจาน แต่อยู่ในนโยบาย อยู่ในบริษัทที่ผลิตโปรตีนจากอากาศ อยู่ในทุนที่ซื้อนักวิทยาศาสตร์ไว้ทั้งวงการ และถ้าเราหลับตาอีกครั้ง หลายคนก็กลัวว่า...บทไต่สวน Nuremberg รอบใหม่ อาจไม่สามารถเกิดขึ้นอีกต่อไป เพราะคราวนี้ คนร้ายจะไม่ได้ถือปืน แต่อาจถือใบรับรองโภชนาการระดับโลกในมือแทน

#pirateketo #กูต้องรู้มั๊ย #ม้วนหางสิลูก #siamstr

@ bcbb3e40:a494e501

|| |:-:| |MISSIAGGIA, Pietro; Jean Thiriart, el caballero euroasiático y la Joven Europa; Hipérbola Janus, 2025|

Desde nuestros inicios los autores y temáticas relacionadas con la geopolítica nos han procurado atención e interés por parte del gran público y de los mass media, y no hay más que recordar el efecto que han venido teniendo nuestras obras de Aleksandr Duguin, en especial La geopolítica de Rusia y Proyecto Eurasia: teoría y praxis, sobre todo a raíz de nuestra presentación en Casa de Rusia en un ya lejano 2016, con la inestimable colaboración de Jordi de la Fuente como prologuista, trabajo que siempre reivindicamos desde nuestros medios por el prestigio, la calidad y brillantez de exposición del mismo.

Más allá de las obras del prestigioso y afamado filósofo y politólogo ruso, también hemos realizado otras incursiones en esta vertiente, que podríamos llamar «geopolítica alternativa», introduciendo las obras de otros notables autores como Claudio Mutti, Carlo Terracciano o Boris Nad. Con estos autores hemos tratado de profundizar en esa vía que se opone frontalmente, y radicalmente si se quiere, a los planteamientos derivados de la geopolítica atlantista y liberal que tiene su principal polo en Estados Unidos, haciendo especial hincapié en el subyugamiento que vienen ejerciendo desde 1945 en adelante respecto a una Europa convertida en un protectorado en una mera colonia.

Es por este motivo por el que la publicación de Jean Thiriart, el caballero euroasiático y la Joven Europa nos parece una obra totalmente pertinente en estos momentos, forma parte del desarrollo lógico de la línea editorial en la que estamos encauzados desde nuestros inicios, y viene a representar una de las múltiples vías en las que confluye la idea, profundamente schmittiana, de la política de los grandes espacios. En este caso la idea de una Europa unida, bajo un vasto proyecto que traspasa los estrechos límites del continente concebido como un apéndice más del «Occidente», de ese subproducto ideológico decadente y funcional a los intereses del otro lado del Atlántico. Para comprender la idea de una Europa unida, que comprenda a Rusia, y su enorme extensión territorial a lo largo de 17 millones de kilómetros cuadrados, y la importancia estratégica de su ubicación, es necesario recurrir al legado de Jean Thiriart, conocer su obra, pero también al hombre, pues una no se comprende sin el otro, en este caso hablamos de elementos correlativos.

|| |:-:| |Jean Thiriart (1922-1992)|

¿Pero quién fue Jean Thiriart? Esta obra nos permite adentrarnos en aspectos biográficos, algunos de ellos poco conocidos para el gran público de habla hispana, y saber de su trayectoria, de la maduración de sus ideas, de su proyecto político y de las etapas que componen el desarrollo del mismo y que aparecen claramente diferenciadas: hablamos del proyecto político de unidad europea, que alcanza su concreción teórica en ¡Arriba Europa!: Una Europa unida: un imperio de 400 millones de hombres (1965, Editorial Mateu, Barcelona), en pleno apogeo de la organización Jeune Europe, que se convirtió en el órgano político a partir del cual creyó poder implementar su proyecto unitario a escala europeo, manteniendo una posición de independencia respecto a los dos pretendidos bloques antagónicos de Guerra Fría: Estados Unidos y la Unión Soviética. En esa época, estamos hablando del ecuador de los años 60, todo el mundo de la Contracultura, falsamente contestatario, estaba articulando su propio discurso, que tendría su expresión más nítida a través del ya conocido Mayo del 68 francés o la Primavera de Praga, durante el mismo año. Y si el movimiento de Nueva Derecha liderado por Alain de Benoist surgiría en lo sucesivo, ya en la década de los años 70, como una «reacción» frente a la «rebelión contracultural», no podemos obviar la importancia de un movimiento político como Jeune Europe, una organización política transnacional, a escala de la Europa occidental, con sus diferentes delegaciones en países como Francia, Italia, Alemania, la propia España además de, como es obvio, Bélgica, país de origen de nuestro autor.

Jean Thiriart ha sido etiquetado con reiteración como un político y teórico de «extrema derecha», se han hecho numerosos discursos interesados para vincularlo, por cuestiones de orden biográfico muy circunscritas a determinado periodo, con el fascismo y el nacionalsocialismo de entreguerras. Sin embargo, y como el lector podrá descubrir a lo largo de la presente obra, el pensamiento de nuestro autor está muy lejos de ser reducible a meras etiquetas, y en ningún caso mostró las filiaciones que se le atribuyen desde posicionamientos ideológicos, sino que, muy al contrario, vemos a un hombre de pensamiento racional y pragmático, poderosamente influenciado por la geopolítica y abierto a alianzas estratégicas más variadas, más allá de todo fundamentalismo ideológico. Es por este motivo que veremos a un Thiriart buscando sinergias y entendimiento entre círculos de izquierdas, antiimperialistas en una lucha concebida como «cuatricontinental». No en vano, muchos de los cuadros políticos que se formaron en Giovane Europa, la rama italiana, terminaron por militar incluso en organizaciones de extrema izquierda de inspiración maoísta. En el caso de España hubo un notable apoyo a la organización por parte de los falangistas más disidentes. De manera que Jean Thiriart representa una figura política compleja, con influencias variadas, que van desde los hermanos Strasser, pasando por Ernst Niekish o Vilfredo Pareto, e incluso, por Sieyès o Robespierre.

Es a partir de Jeune Europe cuando el nacionalismo europeo, la idea de una Europa unida desde Brest a Bucarest toma cuerpo. En la obra mencionada con anterioridad (¡Arriba Europa!: Una Europa unida: un imperio de 400 millones de hombres) Jean Thiriart ya nos presenta a través de unos trazos muy definidos el proyecto del comunitarismo nacional-europeo, la piedra angular de su proyecto político. La idea de un socialismo aristocrático y europeo, trascendiendo las fronteras del Estado-nación liberal decimonónico, y los particularismos nacionales, concebidos como formas obsoletas y «estrechas de miras», obstáculos a superar en la convergencia del Imperio europeo. Porque vemos a un Thiriart que potencia la estructura del Estado, del aparato de poder, tratando de potenciar, y restaurar naturalmente, el papel y la preponderancia de Europa como espacio de civilización en el mundo. Es un nacionalismo europeo que viene determinado por razones puramente geopolíticas, algo que también fue objeto de críticas, concretamente por parte del geopolítico austriaco Heinrich von Lohausen, y que también recogemos en el presente volúmen de la obra.

|| |:-:| |Ejemplar de una de las publicaciones más importantes de Joven Europa (Jeune Europe) cuya portada refleja el antiamericanismo y antiimperialismo característicos del nacionalismo europeo de la organización.|

En este sentido, Thiriart no andaba nada desencaminado, en la medida que pensaba que solo los Estados de dimensiones continentales podrían ser capaces de defender su independencia y soberanía, y ejercer un poder en el mundo, frente a los antiguos nacionalismos europeos, totalmente anacrónicos y un factor de ruptura y desintegración del potencial europeo. En este contexto, se hace necesario eliminar el orden establecido en Yalta en 1945, que convierte a Europa en un vasallo de las grandes potencias vencedoras de la Segunda Guerra Mundial. De modo que luchar contra la ocupación estadounidense por un lado, y soviética por otro lado, fuese el principal leitmotiv del Partido Revolucionario Europeo, un partido histórico señala Thiriart, encargado de llevar a término la acción unificadora continental. Y es con este propósito con el que se tratan de concertar una serie de alianzas internacionales que llevó a Thiriart y su organización a tratar con personal diplomático y gubernamental de los países árabes no alineados, del régimen de Fidel Castro o incluso con emisarios del gobierno chino, como ocurrió en el famoso encuentro propiciado por Ceaucescu en Bucarest con Zhou En-Lai.

Quizás, uno de los puntos donde más desacuerdos encontramos con las teorías thiriartianas se encuentra en ciertos fundamentos que la articulan, en un modelo racionalista, materialista y pragmático, de hecho no debemos olvidar que Maquiavelo era uno de sus referentes, y con éste la posterior hornada de autores neomaquiavélicos como Vilfredo Pareto. El excesivo pragmatismo de sus planteamientos, un estatalismo exacerbado y sin concesiones a las particularidades de los pueblos, una suerte de centralismo jacobino, y la ausencia de un elemento trascendente capaz de dar una justificación metafísica a todo el proyecto nacional europeo constituyen, en nuestra opinión, una parte discutible y reformulable.

En otro terreno, como pueda ser el puramente económico, encontramos un proyecto anticapitalista en muchos de sus aspectos, frente al democratismo parlamentario liberal, y apoyándose en las teorías económicas de Johann G. Fichte o Friedrich List, rechazando cualquier organización económica transnacional que pueda mediatizar o convertir a Europa en objeto de sus actividades usurocráticas y depredatorias, colocando la soberanía e independencia económica europea en una de las máximas prioridades en este terreno.

Debemos destacar, porque es un elemento de debate especialmente interesante, el apartado del libro que se corresponde al escrito de Luc Michel, publicado en Italia bajo el título Da Jeune Europe alle Brigate Rosse, en el libro Parte II Historia de Jeune Europe (1962-1969), en el que se detallan las colaboraciones que comenzaron a sucederse entre la militancia de la delegación italiana, Giovane Europa, y círculos de extrema izquierda maoísta, y cómo muchos de los antiguos militantes nacional-europeos terminaron militando en organizaciones de esta facción ideológica, y nos referimos a casos tan representativos en la época como Claudio Orsoni o Pino Bolzano entre otros muchos.

La actividad proselitista de Jeune Europe en el último lustro de la década de los años 60, con la fundación del Partido Comunitario Europeo, nos legó una gran cantidad de publicaciones, entre las cuales destacaron La Nation Européenne, La Nazione Europea o Europa Combattente, cuyas portadas han servido para ilustrar las páginas interiores de nuestra obra, y que procuraron una actividad proselitista y de difusión de ideas que llegaron a imprimir semanal y mensualmente varios miles de ejemplares en Francia o en Italia.

Tras agotar todas las vías posibles de alianzas y convergencias, con encuentros poco afortunados, vemos a un Thiriart que prefiere adoptar otras vías para seguir construyendo el proyecto nacional-europeo más allá de la fórmula activista y del partido político. Este es el motivo por el cual, en los siguientes años, ya en la última etapa de su vida, veremos esa transición del político activista al teórico y al ideólogo como parte de una nueva estrategia dentro del proyecto político al que consagró buena parte de su vida, y es un hecho que comienza a apreciarse desde mediados de los años 70. Durante esta época la «Europa de Brest a Bucarest» se transforma y amplía en una «Europa desde Dublín a Vladivostok». Thiriart aborda ya abiertamente la integración del espacio soviético en una Europa unida que abarca un inmenso espacio territorial, capaz de unir el Océano Atlántico y el Océano Pacífico de un extremo a otro, el «Imperio Eurosoviético». No obstante, Thiriart siempre piensa en términos geopolíticos, y considera que este proceso de integración debe llevarse a cabo desde una revisión de la ideología soviética, desde una marcada desmarxistización de su socialismo, purgado de todo dogmatismo y elementos condicionantes derivados de la teoría del Estado formulada por el marxismo-leninismo para tomar en su lugar aquella de Thomas Hobbes.

A partir de este momento solamente hay un enemigo, el que representa el poder estadounidense y el dominio que éste ejerce sobre la Europa occidental. A partir de ese momento la URSS, bajo las premisas apuntadas por Thiriart, y desde una ideología soviética «desmarxistizada», es la que debe asumir el proyecto de integración europea. Todo este enfoque terminará conociendo su colofón final al final de la vida de Jean Thiriart, cuando éste se encuentre ya en sus último año de vida, en 1992, con una Unión Soviética ya periclitada y disuelta, con un país sumido en una crisis económica, política y social bajo el gobierno decadente de Yeltsin, con un poder notablemente menguado y a merced de las potencias extranjeras y las apetencias de las organizaciones financieras transnacionales. En este contexto tendrá lugar el conocido viaje de Jean Thiriart a Moscú, donde se encontrará, además de con la disidencia de Yeltsin, encabezada por el Partido Comunista dirigido por Gennadij Ziuganov y numerosas personalidades públicas del ámbito ruso, entre las que destacará por encima de todos el filósofo y politólogo Aleksandr Duguin, quien en la presente obra también reivindica la figura del belga como un contribuidor directo del pensamiento euroasiático. Además de medios de prensa, políticos e intelectuales rusos, nuestro autor también compartirá espacio con una pequeña delegación de la revista italiana «Orion», especializada en temática geopolítica, y representada por el padre de la geopolítica italiana, Carlo Terracciano. El encuentro no tendrá mayores consecuencias, y vendrá a significar el último acto de servicio de Jean Thiriart en su denodado esfuerzo por lograr la integración de Europa y Rusia en un poderoso bloque geopolítico capaz de hacer frente a la hegemonía estadounidense en el mundo.

Terminaremos este breve y sintético escrito de presentación con un fragmento de la obra que Jean Thiriart publicó en 1965 bajo el título ¡Arriba Europa!: Una Europa unida: un imperio de 400 millones de hombres, que nos parece de lo más adecuado para poner el punto final al presente texto:

Europa, este MILAGRO en la historia del hombre, este milagro que siguió al milagro griego, ha dado vida, con la prodigiosa fecundidad de su civilización irrepetible, a una cultura adoptada por el mundo entero. En la competencia surgida entre las grandes civilizaciones —occidental, india, china y japonesa— la nuestra ha aplastado a las demás.

La civilización es creadora de cultura. La cultura, en cambio, jamás ha creado civilización.

SOLO Europa posee la civilización; de ahí deriva su supremacía sobre los Estados Unidos y la Rusia comunista, que poseen únicamente la cultura nacida de nuestra civilización, como ha demostrado magistralmente Oswald Spengler.

Esta cultura, separada de su civilización, está condenada a la esterilidad, la cual se manifestará primero mediante una esclerosis y, posteriormente, mediante un retorno a la barbarie.

Políticamente dominada por Moscú o por Washington, la civilización europea se ve asfixiada y corre el riesgo de estancarse en su estado de simple cultura. Basta notar que todos los descubrimientos en el campo nuclear y astronáutico son obra de europeos. Todos buscan a los científicos europeos.

Solo una Europa políticamente unida puede proveer los medios de poder que garantizarán las condiciones históricas indispensables para la supervivencia de esta civilización.

Ninguna otra potencia, por otra parte, podría sustituir a Europa en su misión hacia la humanidad.

---

Artículo original: Hipérbola Janus, Presentación de «Jean Thiriart, el caballero euroasiático y la Joven Europa», de Pietro Missiaggia (TOR), 18/Mar/2025

@ d61f3bc5:0da6ef4a

I remember the first gathering of Nostr devs two years ago in Costa Rica. We were all psyched because Nostr appeared to solve the problem of self-sovereign online identity and decentralized publishing. The protocol seemed well-suited for textual content, but it wasn't really designed to handle binary files, like images or video.

The Problem

When I publish a note that contains an image link, the note itself is resilient thanks to Nostr, but if the hosting service disappears or takes my image down, my note will be broken forever. We need a way to publish binary data without relying on a single hosting provider.

We were discussing how there really was no reliable solution to this problem even outside of Nostr. Peer-to-peer attempts like IPFS simply didn't work; they were hopelessly slow and unreliable in practice. Torrents worked for popular files like movies, but couldn't be relied on for general file hosting.

Awesome Blossom

A year later, I attended the Sovereign Engineering demo day in Madeira, organized by Pablo and Gigi. Many projects were presented over a three hour demo session that day, but one really stood out for me.

Introduced by hzrd149 and Stu Bowman, Blossom blew my mind because it showed how we can solve complex problems easily by simply relying on the fact that Nostr exists. Having an open user directory, with the corresponding social graph and web of trust is an incredible building block.

Since we can easily look up any user on Nostr and read their profile metadata, we can just get them to simply tell us where their files are stored. This, combined with hash-based addressing (borrowed from IPFS), is all we need to solve our problem.

How Blossom Works

The Blossom protocol (Blobs Stored Simply on Mediaservers) is formally defined in a series of BUDs (Blossom Upgrade Documents). Yes, Blossom is the most well-branded protocol in the history of protocols. Feel free to refer to the spec for details, but I will provide a high level explanation here.

The main idea behind Blossom can be summarized in three points:

1. Users specify which media server(s) they use via their public Blossom settings published on Nostr;
2. All files are uniquely addressable via hashes;
3. If an app fails to load a file from the original URL, it simply goes to get it from the server(s) specified in the user's Blossom settings.

Just like Nostr itself, the Blossom protocol is dead-simple and it works!

Let's use this image as an example:

If you look at the URL for this image, you will notice that it looks like this:

blossom.primal.net/c1aa63f983a44185d039092912bfb7f33adcf63ed3cae371ebe6905da5f688d0.jpg

All Blossom URLs follow this format:

[server]/[file-hash].[extension]

The file hash is important because it uniquely identifies the file in question. Apps can use it to verify that the file they received is exactly the file they requested. It also gives us the ability to reliably get the same file from a different server.

Nostr users declare which media server(s) they use by publishing their Blossom settings. If I store my files on Server A, and they get removed, I can simply upload them to Server B, update my public Blossom settings, and all Blossom-capable apps will be able to find them at the new location. All my existing notes will continue to display media content without any issues.

Blossom Mirroring

Let's face it, re-uploading files to another server after they got removed from the original server is not the best user experience. Most people wouldn't have the backups of all the files, and/or the desire to do this work.

This is where Blossom's mirroring feature comes handy. In addition to the primary media server, a Blossom user can set one one or more mirror servers. Under this setup, every time a file is uploaded to the primary server the Nostr app issues a mirror request to the primary server, directing it to copy the file to all the specified mirrors. This way there is always a copy of all content on multiple servers and in case the primary becomes unavailable, Blossom-capable apps will automatically start loading from the mirror.

Mirrors are really easy to setup (you can do it in two clicks in Primal) and this arrangement ensures robust media handling without any central points of failure. Note that you can use professional media hosting services side by side with self-hosted backup servers that anyone can run at home.

Using Blossom Within Primal

Blossom is natively integrated into the entire Primal stack and enabled by default. If you are using Primal 2.2 or later, you don't need to do anything to enable Blossom, all your media uploads are blossoming already.

To enhance user privacy, all Primal apps use the "/media" endpoint per BUD-05, which strips all metadata from uploaded files before they are saved and optionally mirrored to other Blossom servers, per user settings. You can use any Blossom server as your primary media server in Primal, as well as setup any number of mirrors:

## Conclusion

For such a simple protocol, Blossom gives us three major benefits:

1. Verifiable authenticity. All Nostr notes are always signed by the note author. With Blossom, the signed note includes a unique hash for each referenced media file, making it impossible to falsify.
2. File hosting redundancy. Having multiple live copies of referenced media files (via Blossom mirroring) greatly increases the resiliency of media content published on Nostr.
3. Censorship resistance. Blossom enables us to seamlessly switch media hosting providers in case of censorship.

Thanks for reading; and enjoy! 🌸

@ 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.

@ 57d1a264:69f1fee1

The European Accessibility Act is coming, now is a great time for accessibility trainings!. In my Accessibility for Designer workshop, you will learn how to design accessible mockups that prevent issues in visual design, interactions, navigation, and content. You will be able to spot problems early, fix them in your designs, and communicate accessibility clearly with your team. This is a practical workshop with hands-on exercises, not just theory. You’ll actively apply accessibility principles to real design scenarios and mockups. And will get access to my accessibility resources: checklists, annotation kits and more.

When? 4 sessions of 2 hours + Q and As, on: - Mon, June 16, - Tue, June 17, Mon, - June 23 and Tue, - June 24. 9:30 – 12:00 PM PT or 18:30 – 21:00 CET

Register with 15% discount ($255) https://ti.to/smashingmagazine/online-workshops-2022/with/87vynaoqc0/discount/welcometomyworkshop

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/971772

@ 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.

@ e4950c93:1b99eccd

Contenu à venir.

En savoir plus sur Wikipedia

@ bbef5093:71228592

*Holtec új atomenergetikai együttműködése Utah államban*

Az amerikai Holtec International stratégiai megállapodást kötött Utah állammal és a Hi Tech Solutions nukleáris szolgáltatóval, hogy elősegítse saját fejlesztésű, SMR-300 típusú kis moduláris reaktorainak (SMR) telepítését Utahban és az Egyesült Államok Mountain West régiójában. A megállapodás értelmében 2028-ig állandó képzési központot hoznak létre Utahban, amely az üzemeltetéshez, karbantartáshoz és az új generációs nukleáris technológiákhoz szükséges munkaerő képzését célozza, szoros együttműködésben helyi egyetemekkel, főiskolákkal és szakiskolákkal.

A projekt Utah állam energetikai stratégiájának („Operation Gigawatt” és „Built Here”) része, amely a következő tíz évben megduplázná az állam energiatermelését, kiemelt szerepet szánva a tiszta nukleáris energiának. A Holtec Utah-t választotta nyugati gyártóbázisának is, ezzel erősítve az amerikai nukleáris ellátási láncot és hosszú távú munkahelyeket teremtve. A cég a 2030-as években akár 4 GW összkapacitású SMR-300 telepítését tervezi főként Utahban és Wyomingban.

Az SMR-300 egy nyomottvizes reaktor, amely 300 MW villamos vagy 1050 MW hőteljesítményt biztosít, és a Holtec tervei szerint kulcsszerepet játszhat a tiszta, szén-dioxid-mentes energiatermelésben.

*Amerikai SMR-piac helyzete*

Az SMR-technológia az utóbbi években került a figyelem középpontjába, mivel gyorsabban és olcsóbban telepíthető, mint a hagyományos atomerőművek, és lehetőséget kínál magánbefektetők számára is. Ugyanakkor az első amerikai SMR-projekt, a NuScale és a Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems közös beruházása költségnövekedés miatt meghiúsult, ami rávilágított a technológia gazdasági kihívásaira.

Nemzetközi fejlemények és további hírek

• Az ausztrál Okapi Resources és az Urenco együttműködési megállapodást kötött új urán dúsítási technológia fejlesztésére, amely tisztább és olcsóbb dúsítási eljárást ígér.
• Az Argonne National Laboratory sikeresen kicserélt egy 30 éves kulcsfontosságú alkatrészt a nátriumhűtésű gyorsreaktor-tesztberendezésében, ami hozzájárulhat a gyorsreaktor-technológia fejlesztéséhez az Egyesült Államokban.
• A Tennessee Egyetem ösztöndíjprogramot indít a Fülöp-szigeteki nukleáris szakemberek képzésére, támogatva ezzel a délkelet-ázsiai ország nukleáris energiafejlesztési törekvéseit.
• Bulgáriában a Westinghouse Electric Company helyi beszállítókkal kötött megállapodásokat két új AP1000 típusú reaktor építéséhez a kozloduji atomerőműben.

@ 000002de:c05780a7

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CIMZH7DEPPQ

I really enjoy listening to non-technical people talk about technology when they get the bigger picture impacts and how it relates to our humanity.

I was reminded of this video by @k00b's post about an AI generated video of a victim forgiving his killer.

Piper says, "Computers are better at words than you. Than I". But they are machines. They cannot feel. They cannot have emotion.

This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me

~ Matthew 15:8

Most of us hate it when people are fake with us. When they say things they don't mean. When they say things just to get something they want from us. Yet, we are quickly falling into this same trap with technology. Accepting it as real and human. I'm not suggesting we can't use technology but we have to be careful that we do not fall into this mechanical trap and forget what makes humans special.

We are emotional and spiritual beings. Though AI didn't exist during the times Jesus walked the earth read the verse above in a broader context.

Then Pharisees and scribes came to Jesus from Jerusalem and said, “Why do your disciples break the tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands when they eat.” He answered them, “And why do you break the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition? For God commanded, ‘Honor your father and your mother,’ and, ‘Whoever reviles father or mother must surely die.’ But you say, ‘If anyone tells his father or his mother, “What you would have gained from me is given to God,” he need not honor his father.’ So for the sake of your tradition you have made void the word of God. You hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy of you, when he said:

“‘This people honors me with their lips,

but their heart is far from me;

in vain do they worship me,

teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’”

Empty words. Words without meaning because they are not from a pure desire and love. You may not be a Christian but don't miss the significance of this. There is a value in being real. Sharing true emotion and heart. Don't fall into the trap of the culture of lies that surrounds us. I would rather hear true words with mistakes and less eloquence any day over something fake. I would rather share a real moment with the ones I love than a million fake moments. Embrace the messy imperfect but real world.

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/973324

@ 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.

@ 57d1a264:69f1fee1

Crabtree's Framework for Evaluating Human-Centered Research

Picture this: You've spent three weeks conducting qualitative research for a finance app redesign. You carefully recruited 12 participants, conducted in-depth interviews, and identified patterns around financial anxiety and decision paralysis. You're excited to present your findings when the inevitable happens:

"But are these results statistically significant?"

"Just 12 people? How can we make decisions that affect thousands of users based on conversations with just 12 people?"

As UX professionals, we regularly face stakeholders who evaluate our qualitative research using criteria designed for quantitative methods... This misalignment undermines the unique value qualitative research brings to product development.

Continue reading https://uxpsychology.substack.com/p/beyond-numbers-how-to-properly-evaluate

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/971767

@ c631e267:c2b78d3e

Du bist recht appetitlich oben anzuschauen, \ doch unten hin die Bestie macht mir Grauen. \ Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

Wie wenig bekömmlich sogenannte «Ultra-Processed Foods» wie Fertiggerichte, abgepackte Snacks oder Softdrinks sind, hat kürzlich eine neue Studie untersucht. Derweil kann Fleisch auch wegen des Einsatzes antimikrobieller Mittel in der Massentierhaltung ein Problem darstellen. Internationale Bemühungen, diesen Gebrauch zu reduzieren, um die Antibiotikaresistenz bei Menschen einzudämmen, sind nun möglicherweise gefährdet.

Leider ist Politik oft mindestens genauso unappetitlich und ungesund wie diverse Lebensmittel. Die «Corona-Zeit» und ihre Auswirkungen sind ein beredtes Beispiel. Der Thüringer Landtag diskutiert gerade den Entwurf eines «Coronamaßnahmen-Unrechtsbereinigungsgesetzes» und das kanadische Gesundheitsministerium versucht, tausende Entschädigungsanträge wegen Impfnebenwirkungen mit dem Budget von 75 Millionen Dollar unter einen Hut zu bekommen. In den USA soll die Zulassung von Covid-«Impfstoffen» überdacht werden, während man sich mit China um die Herkunft des Virus streitet.

Wo Corona-Verbrecher von Medien und Justiz gedeckt werden, verfolgt man Aufklärer und Aufdecker mit aller Härte. Der Anwalt und Mitbegründer des Corona-Ausschusses Reiner Fuellmich, der seit Oktober 2023 in Untersuchungshaft sitzt, wurde letzte Woche zu drei Jahren und neun Monaten verurteilt – wegen Veruntreuung. Am Mittwoch teilte der von vielen Impfschadensprozessen bekannte Anwalt Tobias Ulbrich mit, dass er vom Staatsschutz verfolgt wird und sich daher künftig nicht mehr öffentlich äußern werde.

Von der kommenden deutschen Bundesregierung aus Wählerbetrügern, Transatlantikern, Corona-Hardlinern und Russenhassern kann unmöglich eine Verbesserung erwartet werden. Nina Warken beispielsweise, die das Ressort Gesundheit übernehmen soll, diffamierte Maßnahmenkritiker als «Coronaleugner» und forderte eine Impfpflicht, da die wundersamen Injektionen angeblich «nachweislich helfen». Laut dem designierten Außenminister Johann Wadephul wird Russland «für uns immer der Feind» bleiben. Deswegen will er die Ukraine «nicht verlieren lassen» und sieht die Bevölkerung hinter sich, solange nicht deutsche Soldaten dort sterben könnten.

Eine wichtige Personalie ist auch die des künftigen Regierungssprechers. Wenngleich Hebestreit an Arroganz schwer zu überbieten sein wird, dürfte sich die Art der Kommunikation mit Stefan Kornelius in der Sache kaum ändern. Der Politikchef der Süddeutschen Zeitung «prägte den Meinungsjournalismus der SZ» und schrieb «in dieser Rolle auch für die Titel der Tamedia». Allerdings ist, anders als noch vor zehn Jahren, die Einbindung von Journalisten in Thinktanks wie die Deutsche Atlantische Gesellschaft (DAG) ja heute eher eine Empfehlung als ein Problem.

Ungesund ist definitiv auch die totale Digitalisierung, nicht nur im Gesundheitswesen. Lauterbachs Abschiedsgeschenk, die «abgesicherte» elektronische Patientenakte (ePA) ist völlig überraschenderweise direkt nach dem Bundesstart erneut gehackt worden. Norbert Häring kommentiert angesichts der Datenlecks, wer die ePA nicht abwähle, könne seine Gesundheitsdaten ebensogut auf Facebook posten.

Dass die staatlichen Kontrolleure so wenig auf freie Software und dezentrale Lösungen setzen, verdeutlicht die eigentlichen Intentionen hinter der Digitalisierungswut. Um Sicherheit und Souveränität geht es ihnen jedenfalls nicht – sonst gäbe es zum Beispiel mehr Unterstützung für Bitcoin und für Initiativen wie die der Spar-Supermärkte in der Schweiz.

[Titelbild: Pixabay]

---

Dieser Beitrag wurde mit dem Pareto-Client geschrieben und ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ 52524fbb:ae4025dc

To most of us it's all about the sound of freedom, the innovation, it's technical implication, what if feels like in a decentralised environment. Now let's head into that which brings our fantasies to reality, Nostr which stands for "Notes and other stuffs Transmitted by Relays", is an open protocol designed for decentralised social networking

Nost most Amazing Features:##

1. Decentralisation: compared to traditional social media platforms like like Twitter (X) and Instagram that rely on centralised servers, Nostr operates through a network of relays. These relays serves as servers that store and forward messages. This amazing feature of decentralisation aims to make the network completely resistant to censorship, most people would say how? To answer your question it's because no single individual control's it

2. User Control: ever thought of the purest feeling of freedom, well Nostr just gave you the space to experience. User's have total control over their data and identity.

3. Simplicity: why get stressed when Nostr got you covered? This protocol is designed to be relatively simple, making it easier for developers to build applications on top of it.

Nostr Relation to Bitcoin##

Who wouldn't want to be part of a community that embraces it's ethics in a dignified manner. Nostr has gained popularity within the Bitcoin community, and the Bitcoin Lightning Network is used for features like "Zaps" (which represents small payments or tips). There are also similarities in the philosophy of decentralization, that both bitcoin and Nostr share. Just like the saying goes, birds of the same feather flock together. This leads me to one of the best magnificent project, focused on building decentralisation media infrastructure, particularly within the Nostr ecosystem.

Yakihonne the future of the world##

YakiHonne is an amazing project focused on building decentralized media infrastructure, particularly within the Nostr ecosystem. It's mind blowing features includes:

1. Decentralized Media: YakiHonne aims to provide tools and platforms that support freedom and automation in content creation, curation, article writing and reporting. It leverages the decentralized nature of the Nostr protocol to achieve this amazing feat.

2. Nostr and Bitcoin Integration: YakiHonne is closely tied to the Nostr network, and it also incorporates Bitcoin functionality. This integration includes features related to the Lightning Network, enabling things like "zaps" (small Bitcoin payments) within the platform.

3. Mobile Application: YakiHonne offers a mobile application with an eye catching user interface simply designed to provide users with a smooth and intuitive Nostr experience. This app includes features like: -Support for various login options. -Content curation tools. -Lightning Network integration. -Long form article support.

Disadvantages of Traditional social media##

Lets go back to a world without the flute of freedom echoing in our hearts, where implementations are controlled by certain entities, reasons why traditional social media platforms hold not even a single stance compared to Nostr:

1. Privacy Concerns:

Data Collection: Social media platforms collect vast amounts of user data, often without full transparency. This data can be used for targeted advertising, and sometimes, it can be compromised in data breaches. Which won't happen or be possible on yakihonne

1. Social Comparison and Low Self-Esteem: The over hyped and often unrealistic portrayals of life on social media can lead to feelings of inadequacy and low self-esteem. But on yakihonne you get to connect and grow with a community with specified goals bent on implementation

2. Misinformation and Fake News:

Spread of False Information: Social media platforms can be breeding grounds for misinformation and fake news, which can spread rapidly and have significant real-world consequences. Is that possible on yakihonne, well we all know the answer. 4. Centralized Control:

Censorship: Centralized platforms have the power to censor content, raising concerns about freedom of speech. Algorithm Bias: Algorithms can be biased, leading to unfair or discriminatory outcomes. This tells us why a decentralised media platform like yakihonne stands out to be the only media with a future.

Why Chose Nostr why chose yakihonne##

When considering Nostr and related projects like YakiHonne, the appeal stems largely from a desire for greater control, privacy, and freedom in online communication. Which from the points aligned above, gives us no second chance of thought, but the thought of being part of the Nostr community, active on a platform like yakihonne.

@ 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.

@ 34f1ddab:2ca0cf7c

Losing access to your cryptocurrency can feel like losing a part of your future. Whether it’s a forgotten password, a damaged seed backup, or simply one wrong transfer, the stress can be overwhelming. But there’s a silver lining — crypptrcver.com is here to help! With our expert-led recovery services, you can reclaim your lost Bitcoin and other cryptos safely and swiftly.

Why Trust Crypt Recver? 🤝 🛠️ Expert Recovery Solutions At Crypt Recver, we specialize in resolving some of the most complex wallet-related issues. Our team of skilled engineers has the tools and expertise to tackle:

Partially lost or forgotten seed phrases Extracting funds from outdated or invalid wallet addresses Recovering data from damaged hardware wallets Restoring coins from old or unsupported wallet formats You’re not just getting a service; you’re gaining a partner in your cryptocurrency journey.

🚀 Fast and Efficient Recovery We understand that time is critical in crypto recovery. Our optimized systems ensure that you can regain access to your funds quickly, aiming for speed without sacrificing security. With a 90%+ success rate, you can trust us to fight against the clock on your behalf.

🔒 Privacy is Our Priority Your confidentiality matters. Every recovery session is handled with the utmost care, ensuring all processes are encrypted and confidential. You can rest easy, knowing your sensitive information stays private.

💻 Advanced Technology Our proprietary tools and brute-force optimization techniques allow for maximum efficiency in recovery. No matter how challenging your case may be, our technology is designed to give you the best chance at getting your crypto back.

Our Recovery Services Include: 📈 Bitcoin Recovery: Lost access to your Bitcoin wallet? We help recover lost wallets, private keys, and passphrases. Transaction Recovery: Mistakes happen — whether it’s an incorrect wallet address or a lost password, let us handle the recovery. Cold Wallet Restoration: If your cold wallet is failing, we can safely extract your assets and migrate them into a secure, new wallet. Private Key Generation: Lost your private key? Don’t worry. Our experts can help you regain control using advanced methods — all while ensuring your privacy remains intact. ⚠️ What We Don’t Do While we can handle many scenarios, there are some limitations. For example, we cannot recover funds stored in custodial wallets, or cases where there is a complete loss of four or more seed words without any partial info available. We’re transparent about what’s possible, so you know what to expect.

Don’t Let Lost Crypto Hold You Back! ⏳ Did you know that 3 to 3.4 million BTC — nearly 20% of the total supply — are estimated to be permanently lost? Don’t become part of that statistic! Whether it’s due to a forgotten password, sending funds to the wrong address, or damaged drives, we can help you navigate through it all.

🛡️ Real-Time Dust Attack Protection Protecting your privacy goes beyond just recovery. Our services include dust attack protection, which keeps your activity anonymous and your funds secure. Our suite will shield your identity from unwanted tracking, ransomware, and phishing attempts.

🎉 Start Your Recovery Journey Today! Are you ready to reclaim your lost crypto? Don’t wait until it’s too late!

👉 Request Wallet Recovery Help Now! crypptrcver.com

📞 Need Immediate Assistance? Connect with Us! For real-time support or questions, reach out to our dedicated team on:

✉️ Telegram: Chat with Us on Telegram @crypptrcver 💬 WhatsApp: Message Us on WhatsApp Crypt Recver is your trusted partner in the world of cryptocurrency recovery. Let us turn your challenges into victories. Don’t hesitate — your crypto future starts now! 🚀✨

Act fast and secure your digital assets with Crypt Recver!Losing access to your cryptocurrency can feel like losing a part of your future. Whether it’s a forgotten password, a damaged seed backup, or simply one wrong transfer, the stress can be overwhelming. But there’s a silver lining — crypptrcver.com is here to help! With our expert-led recovery services, you can reclaim your lost Bitcoin and other cryptos safely and swiftly.

Why Trust Crypt Recver? 🤝\ 🛠️ Expert Recovery Solutions\ At Crypt Recver, we specialize in resolving some of the most complex wallet-related issues. Our team of skilled engineers has the tools and expertise to tackle:

Partially lost or forgotten seed phrases\ Extracting funds from outdated or invalid wallet addresses\ Recovering data from damaged hardware wallets\ Restoring coins from old or unsupported wallet formats\ You’re not just getting a service; you’re gaining a partner in your cryptocurrency journey.

🚀 Fast and Efficient Recovery\ We understand that time is critical in crypto recovery. Our optimized systems ensure that you can regain access to your funds quickly, aiming for speed without sacrificing security. With a 90%+ success rate, you can trust us to fight against the clock on your behalf.

🔒 Privacy is Our Priority\ Your confidentiality matters. Every recovery session is handled with the utmost care, ensuring all processes are encrypted and confidential. You can rest easy, knowing your sensitive information stays private.

💻 Advanced Technology\ Our proprietary tools and brute-force optimization techniques allow for maximum efficiency in recovery. No matter how challenging your case may be, our technology is designed to give you the best chance at getting your crypto back.

Our Recovery Services Include: 📈\ Bitcoin Recovery: Lost access to your Bitcoin wallet? We help recover lost wallets, private keys, and passphrases.\ Transaction Recovery: Mistakes happen — whether it’s an incorrect wallet address or a lost password, let us handle the recovery.\ Cold Wallet Restoration: If your cold wallet is failing, we can safely extract your assets and migrate them into a secure, new wallet.\ Private Key Generation: Lost your private key? Don’t worry. Our experts can help you regain control using advanced methods — all while ensuring your privacy remains intact.\ ⚠️ What We Don’t Do\ While we can handle many scenarios, there are some limitations. For example, we cannot recover funds stored in custodial wallets, or cases where there is a complete loss of four or more seed words without any partial info available. We’re transparent about what’s possible, so you know what to expect.

Don’t Let Lost Crypto Hold You Back! ⏳\ Did you know that 3 to 3.4 million BTC — nearly 20% of the total supply — are estimated to be permanently lost? Don’t become part of that statistic! Whether it’s due to a forgotten password, sending funds to the wrong address, or damaged drives, we can help you navigate through it all.

🛡️ Real-Time Dust Attack Protection\ Protecting your privacy goes beyond just recovery. Our services include dust attack protection, which keeps your activity anonymous and your funds secure. Our suite will shield your identity from unwanted tracking, ransomware, and phishing attempts.

🎉 Start Your Recovery Journey Today!\ Are you ready to reclaim your lost crypto? Don’t wait until it’s too late!

👉 Request Wallet Recovery Help Now! crypptrcver.com

📞 Need Immediate Assistance? Connect with Us!\ For real-time support or questions, reach out to our dedicated team on:

✉️ Telegram: Chat with Us on Telegram @crypptrcver\ 💬 WhatsApp: Message Us on WhatsApp\ Crypt Recver is your trusted partner in the world of cryptocurrency recovery. Let us turn your challenges into victories. Don’t hesitate — your crypto future starts now! 🚀✨

Act fast and secure your digital assets with Crypt Recver!

@ 5d4b6c8d:8a1c1ee3

One of the best first rounds in recent memory just concluded. Let's recap our playoff contests.

Bracket Challenge

In our joint contest with Global Sports Central, @WeAreAllSatoshi is leading the way with 85 points, while me and some nostr jabroni are tied for second with 80 points.

The bad news is that they are slightly ahead of us, with an average score of 62 to our 60.8. We need to go back in time and make less stupid picks.

Points Challenge

With the Warriors victory, I jumped into a commanding lead over @grayruby. LA sure let most of you down. I say you hold @realBitcoinDog responsible for his beloved hometown's failures.

I still need @Car and @Coinsreporter to make their picks for this round. The only matchup they can choose from is Warriors (7) @ Timberwolves (6). Lucky for them, that's probably the best one to choose from.

| Stacker | Points | |---------|--------| | @Undisciplined | 25| | @grayruby | 24| | @Coinsreporter | 19 | | @BlokchainB | 19| | @Carresan | 18 | | @gnilma | 18 | | @WeAreAllSatoshi | 12 | | @fishious | 11 | | @Car | 1 |

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/973284

@ bcbb3e40:a494e501

|| |:-:| |BÉRARD, Bruno y LA FATA, Aldo; ¿Qué es el esoterismo?: Entre verdades y falsificacioines; Hipérbola Janus, 2025|

Nos complace presentar al lector en lengua española una novedad de primer orden, y sobre un tema que viene siendo objeto de interés por parte de nuestra línea editorial, como es el esoterismo, que hemos abordado recientemente a través de un nuevo recopilatorio de la obra evoliana en Ensayos filosóficos, esotéricos y religiosos 1925-1931, donde hemos tratado de rescatar los textos de las primeras etapas en la formulación del pensamiento del Maestro Romano. No obstante, no es la primera aventura que hemos emprendido en este terreno, siempre complejo y acompañado de la etiqueta, popular y quizás vulgarizada, de lo «misterioso» y lo «oculto», aunque no somos nada sospechosos en ese sentido por banalizar o tratar de ofrecer un enfoque puramente literario del asunto, y ni mucho menos de simpatizar con aquellas vías que entroncan con el New age, donde las mixtificaciones y la voluntad de convertir el fenómeno esotérico en un producto de consumo más, como demanda el mercado, para satisfacer demandas materiales o simples modas de una masa sobresocializada son norma habitual.

Podríamos citar multitud de obras que están presentes en nuestro catálogo, como son El pensamiento esotérico de Leonardo, de Paul Vulliaud, El mundo mágico de los héroes, de Cesare della Riviera, una joya del esoterismo italiano del siglo XVII, en El maestro de la tradición perenne, de René Guénon, o en el ensayo de Gianluca Marletta OVNIS y alienígenas. Origen, historia y prodigio de una pseudorreligión, un ensayo de notable originalidad donde se abordan aspectos esotéricos, aunque sea de un modo más tangencial. También en la literatura, con la obra del gran mitólogo y literato Boris Nad, Una historia de Agartha y La muerte púrpura de Gustav Meyrink encontramos nuevas referencias al ámbito esotérico. De modo que podemos concluir en que el esoterismo forma parte esencial de nuestras publicaciones e intereses como editores, y contribuimos activamente a su difusión.

|| |:-:| |EVOLA, Julius; Ensayos filosóficos, esotéricos y religiosos: 1925-1931, Hiperbola Janus, 2024|

Una obra original

Por eso la presente obra, la que nos disponemos a presentar, cuyo título es ¿Qué es el esoterismo?: Entre verdades y falsificaciones, de Bruno Bérard y Aldo La Fata, viene a ser una obra muy necesaria y clarificadora en la comprensión del esoterismo en todas sus dimensiones, en la complejidad de sus particulares, y en sus múltiples manifestaciones. Quizás en el mundo de habla hispana el esoterismo es un fenómeno que no ha obtenido su merecida atención, y nuestros autores en este ámbito, como es el caso de un Ramón Llull entre otros, no sean objeto de la atención que merece, y las actividades esotéricas, a nivel de asociaciones, comunidades u otras formas de organización, tampoco sean especialmente conocidas, ni cuenten con una actividad reconocida. Es posible, como señala La Fata, que haya ciertas reticencias dentro del mundo católico, acostumbrado a la ortodoxia y la guía espiritual de la Iglesia, y que cualquier tipo de «desviación» hacia formas más individuales y «libres» de vivir ciertas formas iniciáticas, mucho más sutiles, provoquen el rechazo y la incomprensión general. No obstante, como también se encargan de aclarar nuestros autores, el esoterismo comprende una dimensión diferenciada, implica un esfuerzo que no todos están dispuestos a acometer, y finalmente, no es tampoco un camino de felicidad y de frutos seguros, implica una transformación interior y la asunción de unas prácticas y procedimientos que no son aptos para cualquiera. Digamos que el esoterismo es un camino, una vía, que a diferencia de las «religiones populares», exotéricas, supone un arduo camino que viene marcado por un principio vertical y aristocrático de la existencia, o al menos así queremos verlo nosotros. El incremento de la capacidad de discernimiento, aunar lo visible con lo invisible, y ser capaz de superar límites vedados al común, no por simple vanidad ni por «crecimiento personal», tal y como se concibe en las aburguesadas y decadentes sociedades actuales, sino como parte de un proceso de aprendizaje, de autoconocimiento y de liberación. No nos cabe duda alguna de la necesidad de restaurar los antiguos vínculos con lo Alto, las vías que quedaron cerradas y que nos han limitado progresivamente al exclusivo y estrecho ámbito de la materialidad.

|| |:-:| |RIVIERA, Cesare della; El mundo mágico de los héroes; Hipérbola Janus, 2022|

La obra emplea el recurso de la entrevista/diálogo, que aporta frescura y fluidez al texto «simplificando», o más bien haciendo más accesibles y comprensibles elementos relacionados con el esoterismo, que de otro modo resultarían excesivamente complejos para una parte del público lector poco familiarizado con la materia. Este dinamismo se ve complementado por la riqueza de matices e ideas que se van introduciendo de manera progresiva, evitando que el lector pueda verse abrumado por la avalancha de ideas y contenidos. Las preguntas de Bruno Bérard, siempre inteligentes, incisivas y pertinentes, además de ordenadas y bien estructuradas, favorecen la continuidad y el dinamismo en la exposición de los temas, ejerciendo de guía en la conversación. De ahí que el libro sea apto para diferentes niveles, tanto para aquellos que desconocen el esoterismo, como para quienes se encuentran familiarizados con el tema. Aldo La Fata, de acuerdo con su dilatada y extensa trayectoria en la materia, nos hace reflexiones teóricas de enorme valor, que entrelaza con su propia experiencia y trayectoria en el estudio del esoterismo. Sin lugar a dudas este aspecto nos permite ver una vertiente más humana e íntima, en la que se incluyen anécdotas personales y biográficas que siempre permiten una mayor conexión con el lector a través de la mezcla de hechos vitales y erudición teórica.

La entrevista que nos ofrecen Bruno Bérard y Aldo La Fata nos permite explorar la relación dialéctica que se genera entre el esoterismo y otros ámbitos como la religión, la ciencia o la filosofía. Todas las cuestiones se abordan desde enfoques muy concretos, abordando problemáticas particulares, que dan lugar a reflexiones más amplias evitando las simplificaciones e invitando a reflexiones mucho más profundas. De ahí la función de introducción y guía a la que nos venimos refiriendo.

Estos aspectos que acabamos de enumerar con anterioridad revelan un notable esfuerzo pedagógico por parte de los autores para acercarnos al estudio del esoterismo, nos aporta las herramientas necesarias, parafraseando el título de la obra, para discernir entre un verdadero esoterismo y sus falsificaciones.

Más allá de estos aspectos formales, que consideramos que es importante destacar, porque en ellos reside el éxito de la obra, en un planteamiento que resulta original, a la par que ameno y de gran interés, debemos considerar otros aspectos que hacen más referencia al contenido. «¿Qué es el esoterismo? Entre verdades y falsificaciones» pretende, como decíamos, clarificar qué es el esoterismo, cuales son sus particulares, sus características y atributos, su naturaleza más íntima, como fenómeno espiritual y filosófico en sus aspectos más profundos, que podemos remontar a épocas muy remotas y lejanas en el tiempo. Pero el esoterismo aparece en ocasiones fuertemente imbricado en otras estructuras de pensamiento, de tipo tradicional, como son las grandes religiones (Cristianismo, Islam, Judaísmo etc) y otros conceptos como la mística y la metafísica, cuyas relaciones hay que desentrañar.

La importancia de René Guénon

Aldo La Fata nos libera desde el principio de posibles equívocos al enfatizar que el verdadero esoterismo no es una simple acumulación de conocimientos secretos o rituales exóticos, sino una vía de trascendencia espiritual basada en el rigor y la autenticidad. A este respecto René Guénon aparece como uno de los grandes esoteristas de nuestro tiempo, en la medida que fue el gran intérprete y codificador de estos conocimientos, una figura que marcó un antes y un después en la comprensión de este ámbito, especialmente por su rigor conceptual y su capacidad para distinguir entre lo auténtico y lo falso en las tradiciones espirituales. A tal respecto podemos poner como ejemplo sus contundentes análisis de las corrientes ocultistas, especialmente del espiritismo o del teosofismo, en diferentes obras. Podemos decir a este respecto que Guénon hizo una distinción entre esoterismo y ocultismo, disociando el significado del primero de prácticas superficiales y desviadas, mientras que definió el esoterismo como una vía de conocimiento sagrado y trascendente. En este sentido fue una labor fundamental para evitar confusiones con mixtificaciones modernas y pseudoesoterismos como aquellos relacionados con el New Age.

|| |:-:| |GUÉNON, René; El Maestro de la Tradición Perenne: Antología de artículos guenonianos; Hipérbola Janus, 2021|

Paralelamente, y con ello queremos dignificar la figura de René Guénon, el tradicionalista francés también nos abrió las fuentes de un vasto conocimiento espiritual, expresión de una «Tradición primordial», a cuyos orígenes prístinos siempre deberíamos aspirar, y cuya impronta impregna por completo religiones, culturas y formas de civilización no modernas, claro está. Y otro elemento fundamental, y que en la presente obra se considera de vital importancia, es que René Guénon considera el esoterismo no como una vía interna propia de la religión, sino como una vía complementaria que permite acceder a la esencia divina más allá de las formas externas. Para Aldo La Fata no se trata de una mera referencia intelectual, sino una figura que marcó su propio rumbo dentro del estudio del esoterismo. A través de obras como Los símbolos de la ciencia sagrada, La Fata descubrió la profundidad y la coherencia del pensamiento guenoniano, así como la idea de que el esoterismo actúa como el «pegamento» que conecta todas las tradiciones espirituales. Esta visión le permitió entender el esoterismo como algo inseparable de la religión, aunque con una profundidad y una exigencia mayores.

¿Qué es el esoterismo?

El término esoterismo tiene sus raíces etimológicas en el griego esôterikos, que implica un «ir hacia dentro» y que se contrapone a una variante exterior que definimos como «exoterismo», que se encuentra más vinculado al ámbito de la religión. Se trata de un conocimiento que no atiende a un principio puramente intelectual y discursivo sino que apunta a una vivencia directa y sapiencial de lo trascendente. Lejos de la acumulación de saberes ocultos y rituales, lo que prima en la experiencia de lo esotérico es la conexión directa con lo trascendente y lo divino a través de la práctica espiritual.

De hecho hay tres aspectos que nuestros autores destacan a lo largo de la obra respecto al esoterismo, y que nos parecen fundamentales:

• Interioridad: Supone un movimiento continuo hacia el interior, de exploración e introspección, en el que se tratan de derribar límites y obstáculos. Atendiendo a un dinamismo que huye de lo fijo y de lo estático.
• Profundización: La búsqueda de significados más profundos tras la realidad cotidiana, buscando ir más allá de la pura exterioridad de las cosas
• Relación con el exoterismo: Podemos considerarlo opuesto en sentido relativo al esoterismo, como una dimensión más externa y visible de las religiones, aunque este último (el esoterismo), no puede sobrevivir sin el apoyo de una tradición religiosa.

En relación al último punto debemos destacar, como advierten Bérard y La Fata, que pese a todo no podemos entender el esoterismo como una parte de las religiones, sino que tiene su propia función y objetivos, que no es otro que el que ya hemos mencionado con anterioridad: establecer una conexión directa con la verdad que irradia del principio universal y divino.

|| |:-:| |VULLIAUD, Paul; El pensamiento esotérico de Leonardo da Vinci; Hipérbola Janus, 2024|

Otro aspecto interesante de la obra es el que nos habla de las relaciones entre esoterismo y metafísica, en el que el primero pretende ser también una vía de acceso al dominio del segundo. El esoterismo, como ya hemos visto, tiene como principal propósito trascender las categorías del mundo material para proyectarse en lo universal, y en este sentido comparte también objetivos con la metafísica, que pretende superar las limitaciones de la experiencia humana ordinaria y de acceder a las verdades primordiales que estructuran la realidad. Ambos apuntan a la raíz de todo lo existente, al absoluto. Las divergencias las hallamos en la forma o en el método para alcanzar estas verdades trascendentes, que en el caso del esoterismo nos remiten a símbolos, rituales y experiencias vivenciales que permiten al practicante interiorizar verdades universales.

De este modo, esoterismo y metafísica se nos presentan como realidades no opuestas, sino complementarias. La metafísica nos ofrece un marco conceptual y doctrinal para entender lo absoluto, mientras que el esoterismo se centra en su realización interna. En términos guenonianos, el esoterismo representa los aspectos operativos de la metafísica.

De modo que podemos decir que la metafísica aborda el tema trascendente desde una perspectiva conceptual, sin esa parte vivida de la experiencia en el conocimiento de lo universal. El esoterismo, por su parte, aporta esa contraparte que nos remite a la experiencia humana que permite al individuo acceder o ponerse en conexión con lo divino a través de su propio ser, de manera directa y vívida. Es un camino que el sujeto individual emprende para lograr una transformación interior.

Paralelamente, no podemos obviar dentro de todos estos procesos la participación de un elemento fundamental, como es la intuición suprarracional, que podríamos considerar como la herramienta que conecta al esoterista directamente con la fuente del conocimiento trascendente y universal, en lugar de hacerlo directamente a través de teorías o conceptos que siempre resultan más abstractos y difíciles de comprender en su vertiente más «discursiva». Al mismo tiempo, las relaciones que se establecen entre esoterismo y metafísica nos permiten poner en contacto las tradiciones religiosas con el conocimiento universal. Según La Fata, inspirándose en el legado de la obra de Frithjoff Schuon, cada tradición espiritual tiene una dimensión metafísica que puede ser comprendida y realizada a través del esoterismo, como un medio para acceder a la esencia inmutable de todas las formas religiosas.

Otro aspecto que esoterismo y metafísica comparten es la meta de superar la dualidad entre sujeto y objeto: Mientras que la metafísica conceptualiza esta unión como una verdad última, el esoterismo busca experimentarla directamente a través de la contemplación, el símbolo y la práctica espiritual.

Los autores

|| |:-:| |Aldo La Fata|

Aldo La Fata (1964) es un estudioso del esoterismo, el simbolismo y la mística religiosa, con una trayectoria de varias décadas dedicada al análisis y divulgación de estas disciplinas. Ha sido jefe de redacción de la revista Metapolitica, fundada por Silvano Panunzio, y actualmente dirige Il Corriere Metapolitico. Su trabajo destaca por una aproximación rigurosa y una mirada crítica a las corrientes contemporáneas del esoterismo, rescatando su sentido más profundo y tradicional. Entre sus obras más relevantes se encuentran Silvano Panunzio: vita e pensiero (2021) y Nella luce dei libri (2022), donde explora la intersección entre espiritualidad, simbolismo y pensamiento tradicional.

|| |:-:| |Bruno Bérard|

Bruno Bérard (1958), es doctor en Religiones y Sistemas de Pensamiento por la École Pratique des Hautes Études (EPHE), es un destacado especialista en metafísica. Autor de múltiples ensayos, ha desarrollado una profunda reflexión sobre la naturaleza del conocimiento espiritual y su relación con las tradiciones religiosas. Algunas de sus obras más importantes, traducidas a diversas lenguas, incluyen A Metaphysics of the Christian Mystery (2018) y Métaphysique du paradoxe (2019). Actualmente, dirige la colección Métaphysique au quotidien en la editorial L’Harmattan de París, consolidándose como una referencia en el estudio de la metafísica contemporánea.

En ¿Qué es el esoterismo?: Entre verdades y falsificaciones, asistimos a una presentación del tema tratado desde un conocimiento profundo y dilatado del tema, en la que ambos autores combinan la experiencia y el conocimiento que atesoran sobre el esoterismo y otros temas anejos, ofreciéndonos sus interpretaciones y enfoques particulares, y al mismo tiempo mostrando una gran capacidad de síntesis en la exposición de los temas tratados, que se inscriben en una multitud de tradiciones religiosas y espirituales de enorme complejidad. En este último punto reside también gran parte del valor de la obra, que constituye una novedad editorial especialmente relevante en su ámbito en lengua hispana.

---

Artículo original: Hipérbola Janus, Presentación de «¿Qué es el esoterismo?: Entre verdades y falsificaciones» (TOR), 6/Feb/2025

@ 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.

@ c631e267:c2b78d3e

Die Wahrheit verletzt tiefer als jede Beleidigung. \ Marquis de Sade

Sagen Sie niemals «Terroristin B.», «Schwachkopf H.», «korrupter Drecksack S.» oder «Meinungsfreiheitshasserin F.» und verkneifen Sie sich Memes, denn so etwas könnte Ihnen als Beleidigung oder Verleumdung ausgelegt werden und rechtliche Konsequenzen haben. Auch mit einer Frau M.-A. S.-Z. ist in dieser Beziehung nicht zu spaßen, sie gehört zu den Top-Anzeigenstellern.

«Politikerbeleidigung» als Straftatbestand wurde 2021 im Kampf gegen «Rechtsextremismus und Hasskriminalität» in Deutschland eingeführt, damals noch unter der Regierung Merkel. Im Gesetz nicht festgehalten ist die Unterscheidung zwischen schlechter Hetze und guter Hetze – trotzdem ist das gängige Praxis, wie der Titel fast schon nahelegt.

So dürfen Sie als Politikerin heute den Tesla als «Nazi-Auto» bezeichnen und dies ausdrücklich auf den Firmengründer Elon Musk und dessen «rechtsextreme Positionen» beziehen, welche Sie nicht einmal belegen müssen. [1] Vielleicht ernten Sie Proteste, jedoch vorrangig wegen der «gut bezahlten, unbefristeten Arbeitsplätze» in Brandenburg. Ihren Tweet hat die Berliner Senatorin Cansel Kiziltepe inzwischen offenbar dennoch gelöscht.

Dass es um die Meinungs- und Pressefreiheit in der Bundesrepublik nicht mehr allzu gut bestellt ist, befürchtet man inzwischen auch schon im Ausland. Der Fall des Journalisten David Bendels, der kürzlich wegen eines Faeser-Memes zu sieben Monaten Haft auf Bewährung verurteilt wurde, führte in diversen Medien zu Empörung. Die Welt versteckte ihre Kritik mit dem Titel «Ein Urteil wie aus einer Diktatur» hinter einer Bezahlschranke.

Unschöne, heutzutage vielleicht strafbare Kommentare würden mir auch zu einigen anderen Themen und Akteuren einfallen. Ein Kandidat wäre der deutsche Bundesgesundheitsminister (ja, er ist es tatsächlich immer noch). Während sich in den USA auf dem Gebiet etwas bewegt und zum Beispiel Robert F. Kennedy Jr. will, dass die Gesundheitsbehörde (CDC) keine Covid-Impfungen für Kinder mehr empfiehlt, möchte Karl Lauterbach vor allem das Corona-Lügengebäude vor dem Einsturz bewahren.

«Ich habe nie geglaubt, dass die Impfungen nebenwirkungsfrei sind», sagte Lauterbach jüngst der ZDF-Journalistin Sarah Tacke. Das steht in krassem Widerspruch zu seiner früher verbreiteten Behauptung, die Gen-Injektionen hätten keine Nebenwirkungen. Damit entlarvt er sich selbst als Lügner. Die Bezeichnung ist absolut berechtigt, dieser Mann dürfte keinerlei politische Verantwortung tragen und das Verhalten verlangt nach einer rechtlichen Überprüfung. Leider ist ja die Justiz anderweitig beschäftigt und hat außerdem selbst keine weiße Weste.

Obendrein kämpfte der Herr Minister für eine allgemeine Impfpflicht. Er beschwor dabei das Schließen einer «Impflücke», wie es die Weltgesundheitsorganisation – die «wegen Trump» in finanziellen Schwierigkeiten steckt – bis heute tut. Die WHO lässt aktuell ihre «Europäische Impfwoche» propagieren, bei der interessanterweise von Covid nicht mehr groß die Rede ist.

Einen «Klima-Leugner» würden manche wohl Nir Shaviv nennen, das ist ja nicht strafbar. Der Astrophysiker weist nämlich die Behauptung von einer Klimakrise zurück. Gemäß seiner Forschung ist mindestens die Hälfte der Erderwärmung nicht auf menschliche Emissionen, sondern auf Veränderungen im Sonnenverhalten zurückzuführen.

Das passt vielleicht auch den «Klima-Hysterikern» der britischen Regierung ins Konzept, die gerade Experimente zur Verdunkelung der Sonne angekündigt haben. Produzenten von Kunstfleisch oder Betreiber von Insektenfarmen würden dagegen vermutlich die Geschichte vom fatalen CO2 bevorzugen. Ihnen würde es besser passen, wenn der verantwortungsvolle Erdenbürger sein Verhalten gründlich ändern müsste.

In unserer völlig verkehrten Welt, in der praktisch jede Verlautbarung außerhalb der abgesegneten Narrative potenziell strafbar sein kann, gehört fast schon Mut dazu, Dinge offen anzusprechen. Im «besten Deutschland aller Zeiten» glaubten letztes Jahr nur noch 40 Prozent der Menschen, ihre Meinung frei äußern zu können. Das ist ein Armutszeugnis, und es sieht nicht gerade nach Besserung aus. Umso wichtiger ist es, dagegen anzugehen.

[Titelbild: Pixabay]

--- Quellen: ---

[1] Zur Orientierung wenigstens ein paar Hinweise zur NS-Vergangenheit deutscher Automobilhersteller:

• Volkswagen
• Porsche
• Daimler-Benz
• BMW
• Audi
• Opel
• Heute: «Auto-Werke für die Rüstung? Rheinmetall prüft Übernahmen»

---

Dieser Beitrag wurde mit dem Pareto-Client geschrieben und ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ a296b972:e5a7a2e8

Zur Gründung der Bundesrepublik Deutschland wurde infolge der Auswirkungen des 2. Weltkriegs auf einem Teil des ehemaligen Deutschen Reiches (nicht des 3. Reiches!) auf Initiative der westlichen Alliierten, federführend die USA als stärkste Kraft, eine  demokratische Grundordnung erarbeitet, die wir als das Grundgesetz für die Bundesrepublik Deutschland kennen und schätzen gelernt haben. Da man zum damaligen Zeitpunkt, im Gegensatz zu heute, noch sehr genau mit der Sprache war, hat das Wort „für“ größere Bedeutung, als ihm heute zugesprochen wird. Hätte der unter westlich-alliierter Besatzung stehende Rumpf des Deutschen Reiches eigenständig eine Verfassung erstellen können, wäre es nicht Grundgesetz (das laut Definition einen provisorischen Charakter hat) genannt worden, sondern eben Verfassung. Und hätte diese Verfassung eigenständig erarbeitet werden können, hätte sie geheißen: Verfassung der Bundesrepublik Deutschland.

Es heißt zum Beispiel auch: Costituzione della Repubblica Italiana. also Konstitution der Republik Italien, und nicht Costituzione per La Repubblica Italiana.

Es ist nachvollziehbar, dass die Bedenken der westlichen Alliierten aufgrund der Nazi-Zeit so groß waren, dass man den „Deutschen“ nicht zutraute, selbständig eine Verfassung zu erstellen.

Zum vorbeugenden Schutz, es sollte verunmöglicht werden, dass ein Regime noch einmal in der Lage sei, die Macht zu ergreifen, wurde als Kontrollinstanz der Verfassungsschutz gegründet. Dieser ist dem Innenministerium gegenüber weisungsgebunden. Die jüngste Aussage, auf den letzten Metern der Innenministerin Faeser, der Verfassungsschutz sei selbständig, ist eine manipulative Beschreibung, die davon ablenken soll, dass das Innenministerium dem Verfassungsschutz sehr wohl übergeordnet ist. Das Wort „selbständig“ soll Eigenständigkeit vorgaukeln, hat aber in der Hierarchie keinerlei Bedeutung.

Im Jahre 1949 herrschte ein anderer Zeitgeist. Werte wie Ehrlichkeit, Redlichkeit und Anständigkeit hatten noch eine andere Bedeutung als heute. Politiker waren noch von einem anderen Schlag und hatten weitgehend den Anspruch zum Wohle des Volkes zu entscheiden und zu handeln. Diese Werte reichten noch mindestens bis in das Agieren des Bundeskanzlers Helmut Schmidt hinein.

Niemand konnte sich deshalb zum damaligen Zeitpunkt vorstellen, dass dieser eigentlich als Kontrollinstanz gedachte Verfassungsschutz einmal von der Politik missbraucht werden könnte, um oppositionelle Kräfte auszuschalten zu versuchen, wie es mit der Einstufung der AfD als gesichert rechtsextrem geschehen ist. Rechtlich hat das noch keine Konsequenzen, aber es geht in erster Linie darum, dem Image der AfD zu schaden, um weiteren Zulauf zu verhindern. Diese Art von Durchtriebenheit kam in den Gedanken und dem Ehrgefühl der damals verantwortlichen Politiker noch nicht vor.

Die ehemaligen Volksparteien, man kann auch sagen, die Alt-Parteien, sehen ihre Felle schon seit einiger Zeit davonschwimmen. Die Opposition hat derzeit die Zustimmung einer ehemaligen Volkspartei überholt und ist sogar stärkste Kraft geworden. Sie repräsentiert aktuell rund 10 Millionen der Wähler. Tendenz steigend. Und das die folglich auch gesichert rechtsextrem gewählt haben, oder gar gesichert rechtsextrem sind, wird ihnen vielleicht nicht besonders schmeicheln.

Parallel dazu haben die Alt-Parteien die Medienlandschaft gekapert und versuchen mit Einschränkungen der Meinungsfreiheit, sofern sich Kritik gegen sie richtet und durch selbstermächtigte Entscheidung über das, was Wahrheit und Lüge ist, unliebsame Stimmen mundtot zu machen, um unter allen Umständen an der Macht zu bleiben.

Diese Vorgehensweise widerspricht dem demokratischen Verständnis, das aus dem, wenn auch „nur“ Grundgesetz, statt Verfassung, hervorgeht und die Nachkriegsgenerationen im besten Sinne beeinflusst und demokratisch geprägt hat.

Aus dieser Sicht können die Aktivitäten der Alt-Parteien nur als Angriff auf die Demokratie, wie sie diese Generationen verstehen, gesehen werden.

Daher führt jeder Angriff der Alt-Parteien auf die Demokratie dazu, dass die Opposition immer mehr an Stimmen gewinnt und wohl weiterhin gewinnen wird.

Es erschließt sich nicht, warum die Alt-Parteien nicht auf die denkbar einfachste Lösung kommen, Vertrauen in ihre Politik zurückzugewinnen, in dem sie eine Politik machen würden, die dem Willen der Bürger entspricht. Mit dem Gegenteil machen sich die Volksvertreter zu Vertretern ohne den Rückhalt vom Volk, und man muss sich fragen, wessen Interessen sie derzeit wirklich vertreten. Bestenfalls die eigenen, schlimmstenfalls die des global agierenden Tiefen Staates, der ihnen ins Ohr flüstert, was sie zu tun haben.

Mit jeder vernunftbegabten Entscheidung, die dem Willen des Souveräns entspräche, würden sie die Opposition zunehmend schwächen. Da dies nicht geschieht, kann man nur zu der Schlussfolgerung kommen, dass sich hier auch selbstzerstörerische, suizidale Kräfte festgesetzt haben. Es ist wie eine Sucht, von der man nicht mehr loslassen kann.

Solange die Alt-Parteien nicht in der Lage sind, die Unzufriedenheit in der Bevölkerung wahr- und ernst zu nehmen, werden sie die Opposition stärken und zu immer rigideren Maßnahmen greifen müssen, um ihre Macht zu erhalten und sich damit immer mehr von demokratischen Verhältnissen entfernen, und zwar genau in die Richtung vor der die Alt-Parteien in ihrer ideologischen Verirrung warnen.

Seitens der Opposition gibt es in der Gesamtschau keine Anzeichen dafür, dass die Demokratie abgeschafft werden soll, im Gegenteil, es wird für mehr Bürgerbeteiligung plädiert, was ein sicheres Merkmal für demokratische Absichten ist.

Aus Sicht der Alt-Parteien macht die Brandmauer Sinn, weil sie sie vor ihrem eigenen Machtverlust schützt. Der Fall der Berliner Mauer sollte ihnen eigentlich eine Warnung sein.

Fairerweise darf nicht unterschlagen werden, dass es in der Opposition einige Verirrte gibt, wobei noch interessant wäre zu erfahren, welche davon als V-Männer des Verfassungsschutzes eingeschleust wurden. Diese jedoch zum Anlass zu nehmen, die Opposition unter Generalverdacht zu stellen, steht einem demokratischen Handeln diametral entgegen.

Das Grundgesetz wird so nicht geschützt, sondern bis kurz vor der Sollbruchstelle verbogen.

Die Einstufung der Opposition als gesichert rechts-extrem beruht auf einem mutmaßlich 1000 Seiten starken Papier, das offensichtlich nur ein erlesener Kreis zu sehen bekommen soll. Dazu gehört nicht die Bevölkerung, die sicher nur einmal mehr nicht zu Teilen verunsichert werden soll. Und selbstverständlich schon gar nicht diejenigen, die es betrifft, nämlich die Opposition.

Eine eindeutige Fragwürdigkeit der Aktivitäten des Verfassungsschutzes wäre schwerer festzustellen, wenn es gleichwohl Parteien gäbe, die als gesichert links-extrem oder zumindest als links-extremer Verdachtsfall eingestuft würden. Nicht ganz unberechtigte Gründe hierfür könnten schon gefunden werden, wenn der politische Wille es wollte.

Auch die seltsam-umstrittene Installierung des Präsidenten des Bundesamtes für Verfassungsschutz (genau genommen für Grundgesetzschutz) lässt Fragen offen.

Generell müsste es eine unabhängige Überprüfung geben, ob die Gewaltenteilung in Deutschland noch gewährleistet ist, da es durch das augenscheinliche Zusammenspiel in der Richterschaft, der Gesetzgebung und der vierten Gewalt, den Medien, Anlass zu Zweifel gibt.

Diese Zweifel sind nicht demokratiegefährdend, sondern im Gegenteil, es ist demokratische Pflicht, den Verantwortlichen kritisch auf die Finger zu schauen, ob im Sinne des Souveräns entschieden und gehandelt wird. Zweifel könnte man dadurch ausräumen, in dem eindeutig bewiesen würde, das alles seine Richtigkeit hat.

Das wäre vornehmlich die Aufgabe der Alt-Medien, die derzeit durch Totalversagen glänzen, weil alles mit allem zusammenhängt, jeder jeden kennt und man es sich über Jahre so eingerichtet hat, dass man gerne unter sich bleibt und Pöstchen-Hüpfen von einem Lager ins andere spielt.

Vielleicht ist es sogar nötig, dass zur unabhängigen Überprüfung, die Alliierten, inklusive Russland, noch einmal, nach rund 80 Jahren, auf den Plan gerufen werden müssen, um sozusagen eine Zwischenbilanz zu ziehen, inwieweit sich das einst etablierte, demokratische System bewährt hat, und ob es derzeit noch im ursprünglichen Sinne umgesetzt und gelebt wird. Es ist anzunehmen, dass hier ein gewaltiges Optimierungspotenzial zum Vorschein kommen könnte.

Viele Bürger in Deutschland haben den Wunsch, wieder in einer Demokratie zu leben, die ihre Namen auch verdient hat. Sie wollen wieder frei ihre Meinung jeglicher Art aussprechen können, miteinander diskutieren, auch einmal Unsinn reden, ohne, dass sie der Blockwart gleich bei einem Denunzierungsportal anschwärzt, oder sie Gefahr laufen, dass ihr Konto gekündigt wird, oder sie morgens um 6 Uhr Besuch bekommen, der noch nicht einmal frische Semmeln mitbringt.

Dieser Artikel wurde mit dem Pareto-Client geschrieben

* *

(Bild von pixabay)

@ c9badfea:610f861a

1. Install SherpaTTS (it's free and open source)
2. Launch the app and download the first AI model for your language (see recommendations below)
3. Tap the + icon below the language selection to add more models
4. Enjoy offline text-to-speech synthesis

Model Recommendations

• English: en_US-ryan-medium
• Chinese: zh-CN-huayan-medium
• German: de_DE-thorsten-medium
• Spanish: es_ES-sharvard-medium
• Portuguese: pt_BR-faber-medium
• French: fr_FR-tom-medium
• Dutch: nl_BE-rdh-medium
• Russian: ru_RU-dmitri-medium
• Arabic: ar-JO-kareem-medium
• Romanian: ro_RO-mihai-medium
• Bulgarian: bg-cv
• Turkish: tr_TR-fahrettin-medium

ℹ️ An internet connection is only needed for the initial download

ℹ️ You can use TTS Util to read text and files aloud

@ eac63075:b4988b48

Listen the Podcast:

https://open.spotify.com/episode/7lJWc1zaqA9CNhB8coJXaL?si=4147bca317624d34

https://www.fountain.fm/episode/YEGnlBLZhvuj96GSpuk9

Abstract

This paper examines a hypothetical scenario in which the United States, under Trump’s leadership, withdraws from NATO and reduces its support for Europe, thereby enabling a Russian conquest of Ukraine and the subsequent expansion of Moscow’s influence over Eurasia, while the US consolidates its dominance over South America. Drawing on classical geopolitical theories—specifically those of Halford Mackinder, Alfred Thayer Mahan, Rudolf Kjellén, and Friedrich Ratzel—the study analyzes how these frameworks can elucidate the evolving power dynamics and territorial ambitions in a reconfigured global order. The discussion highlights Mackinder’s notion of the Eurasian Heartland and its strategic importance, Mahan’s emphasis on maritime power and control of strategic routes, Kjellén’s view of the state as an expanding organism, and Ratzel’s concept of Lebensraum as a justification for territorial expansion. The paper also explores contemporary developments, such as the US–Ukraine economic agreement and Trump’s overt territorial ambitions involving Greenland and Canada, in light of these theories. By juxtaposing traditional geopolitical concepts with current international relations, the study aims to shed light on the potential implications of such shifts for regional stability, global security, and the balance of power, particularly in relation to emerging neocolonial practices in Latin America.

Introduction

In recent years, the geopolitical dynamics involving the United States, Russia, and Ukraine have sparked analyses from different theoretical perspectives. This paper examines recent events – presupposing a scenario in which Donald Trump withdraws the US from NATO and reduces its support for Europe, allowing a Russian conquest of Ukraine and the expansion of Moscow’s influence over Eurasia, while the US consolidates its dominance over South America – in light of classical geopolitical theories. The ideas of Halford Mackinder, Alfred Thayer Mahan, Rudolf Kjellén, and Friedrich Ratzel are used as reference points. The proposal is to impartially evaluate how each theory can elucidate the developments of this hypothetical scenario, relating Russian territorial expansion in Eurasia to the strategic retreat of the US to the Western Hemisphere.

Initially, we will outline Mackinder’s conception of the Heartland (the central Eurasian territory) and the crucial role of Eastern Europe and Ukraine in the quest for global dominance. Next, we will discuss Mahan’s ideas regarding maritime power and the control of strategic routes, considering the impacts on the naval power balance among the US, Russia, and other maritime powers such as the United Kingdom and Japan. Subsequently, we will examine Kjellén’s organic theory of the state, interpreting the Russian expansionist strategy as a reflection of a state organism in search of vital space. In the same vein, Ratzel’s concept of “Lebensraum” will be explored, along with how Russia could justify territorial expansion based on resources and territory. Finally, the paper connects these theories to the current political context, analyzing the direct negotiations between Washington and Moscow (overlooking Ukraine and Europe), the US policy toward authoritarian regimes in Latin America, and the notion of a hemispheric division of power – the “Island of the Americas” under North American hegemony versus an Eurasia dominated by Russia. Lastly, it considers the possibility that such a geopolitical arrangement may foster the strengthening of authoritarian governments globally, rather than containing them, thus altering the paradigms of the liberal world order.

The Heartland of Mackinder: Ukraine, Eurasia, and Global Dominance

Halford J. Mackinder, a British geographer and pioneer of geopolitics, proposed the celebrated Heartland Theory in the early twentieth century. Mackinder divided the world into geostrategic zones and identified the Heartland—the central continental mass of Eurasia—as the “geographical pivot of history” [5]. His most famous maxim encapsulates this vision: “who rules Eastern Europe commands the Heartland; who rules the Heartland commands the World Island; who rules the World Island commands the world” [5]. Eastern Europe and, in particular, the region of present-day Ukraine, play a key role in this formula. This is because, for Mackinder, Eastern Europe functions as a gateway to the Heartland, providing access to resources and a strategic position for the projection of continental power [5].

Applying this theory to our scenario, the conquest of Ukraine and Eastern European countries by Russia would have profound geopolitical implications. From a Mackinderian point of view, such a conquest would enormously strengthen Russia’s position in the Heartland by adding manpower (population) and Ukraine’s industrial and agricultural resources to its power base [5]. In fact, Mackinder argued that controlling the Heartland conferred formidable geostrategic advantages—a vast terrestrial “natural fortress” protected from naval invasions and rich in resources such as wheat, minerals, and fuels [5]. Thus, if Moscow were to incorporate Ukraine (renowned for its fertile soil and grain production, as well as its mineral reserves) and extend its influence over Eastern Europe, Russia would consolidate the Heartland under its direct control. In this context, the absence of the USA (withdrawn from NATO and less engaged in Europe) would remove an important obstacle to Russian predominance in the region.

With central and eastern Eurasia under Russian influence, it would be possible to move toward the realization of the geopolitical nightmare described by Mackinder for Western maritime powers: a hegemonic continental power capable of projecting power to both Europe and Asia. Mackinder himself warned that if a Heartland power gained additional access to an oceanic coastline—in other words, if it combined land power with a significant maritime front—it would constitute a “danger” to global freedom [5]. In the scenario considered, besides advancing into Eastern Europe, Russia would already possess strategic maritime outlets (for example, in the Black Sea, via Crimea, and in the Baltic, via Kaliningrad or the Baltic States if influenced). Thus, the control of Ukraine would reinforce Russia’s position in the Black Sea and facilitate projection into the Eastern Mediterranean, expanding its oceanic front. From a Mackinderian perspective, this could potentially transform Russia into the dominant power of the “World Island” (the combined mass of Europe, Asia, and Africa), thereby unbalancing the global geopolitical order [5].

It is worth noting that, historically, Mackinder’s doctrine influenced containment strategies: both in the interwar period and during the Cold War, efforts were made to prevent a single power from controlling the Heartland and Eastern Europe. NATO, for example, can be seen as an instrument to prevent Soviet/Russian advances in Europe, in line with Mackinder’s imperative to “contain the Heartland.” Thus, if the USA were to abandon that role—by leaving NATO and tacitly accepting the Russian sphere of influence in Eurasia—we would be witnessing an inversion of the principles that have guided Western policy for decades. In short, under Mackinder’s theory, the Russian conquest of Ukraine and beyond would represent the key for Russia to command the Heartland and, potentially, challenge global hegemony, especially in a scenario where the USA self-restricts to the Western Hemisphere.

The Maritime Power of Mahan and the Naval Balance between West and East

While Mackinder emphasized continental land power, Alfred Thayer Mahan, a nineteenth-century American naval strategist, highlighted the crucial role of maritime power in global dominance. In his work The Influence of Sea Power upon History (1890), Mahan studied the example of the British Empire and concluded that control of the seas paved the way for British supremacy as a world power [10]. He argued that a strong navy and the control of strategic maritime routes were decisive factors for projecting military, political, and economic power. His doctrine can be summarized in the following points: (1) the United States should aspire to be a world power; (2) control of the seas is necessary to achieve that status; (3) such control is obtained through a powerful fleet of warships [17]. In other words, for Mahan, whoever dominates the maritime routes and possesses naval superiority will be in a position to influence global destinies, ensuring trade, supplies, and the rapid movement of military forces.

In the proposed scenario, in which the USA withdraws militarily from Europe and possibly from the Eurasian stage, Mahan’s ideas raise questions about the distribution of maritime power and its effects. Traditionally, the US Navy operates globally, ensuring freedom of navigation and deterring challenges in major seas (Atlantic, Pacific, Indian, etc.). A withdrawal of the USA from NATO could also signal a reduction in its naval presence in the Northeast Atlantic, the Mediterranean Sea, and other areas close to Eurasia. In such a case, who would fill this naval vacuum? Russia, although primarily a land power, has been attempting to modernize its navy and has specific interests—for example, consolidating its dominance in the Black Sea and maintaining a presence in the Mediterranean (with a naval base in Tartus, Syria). The United Kingdom, a historic European maritime power, would remain aligned with the USA but, without American military support in Europe, might potentially be overwhelmed trying to contain an increasingly assertive Russian navy in European waters on its own. Japan, another significant maritime actor allied with the USA, is concerned with the naval balance in the Pacific; without full American engagement, Tokyo might be compelled to expand its own naval power to contain both Russia in the Far East (which maintains a fleet in the Pacific) and, especially, the growing Chinese navy.

According to Mahan’s thinking, strategic maritime routes and choke points (crucial straits and channels) become contested prizes in this power game. With the USA focusing on the Americas, one could imagine Washington reinforcing control over the Panama Canal and Caribbean routes—reviving an “American Gulf” policy in the Western Atlantic and Eastern Pacific. In fact, indications of this orientation emerge in statements attributed to Trump, who once suggested reclaiming direct control over Panama, transforming Canada into a North American state, and even “annexing” Greenland due to its Arctic geopolitical importance [18]. These aspirations reflect a quest to secure advantageous maritime positions near the American continent.

Conversely, in the absence of American presence in the Eastern Atlantic and Mediterranean, Russia would have free rein for regional maritime projection. This could include anything from the unrestricted use of the Black Sea (after dominating Ukraine, thereby ensuring full access to Crimea and Ukrainian ports) to greater influence in the Eastern Mediterranean via Syria and partnerships with countries such as Iran or Egypt. The Baltic Sea would also become an area of expanded Russian interest, pressuring coastal countries and perhaps reducing NATO’s traditional local naval supremacy. However, it is worth noting that even with these regional expansions, Russia lacks a blue-water navy comparable to that of the USA; thus, its initial global maritime impact would be limited without alliances.

An important aspect of Mahan’s theories is that naval power serves as a counterbalance to the land power of the Heartland. Therefore, even if Russia were to dominate the Eurasian continental mass, the continued presence of American naval might on the oceans could prevent complete global domination by Moscow. However, if the USA voluntarily restricts its naval reach to the Americas, it would forgo influencing the power balance in the seas adjacent to Eurasia. Consequently, the balance of maritime power would tend to shift in favor of regional Eurasian actors. The United Kingdom and Japan, traditional allies of the USA, could intensify their naval capabilities to defend regional interests—the United Kingdom safeguarding the North Atlantic and the North Sea, and Japan patrolling the Northwest Pacific—but both would face budgetary and structural limitations in fully compensating for the absence of the American superpower. Consequently, Mahan’s vision suggests that the withdrawal of the USA from the extra-regional scene would weaken the liberal maritime regime, possibly opening space for revisionist powers to contest routes that were previously secured (for example, Russia and China encountering less opposition on the routes of the Arctic and the Indo-Pacific, respectively). In summary, naval hegemony would fragment, and control of strategic seas would become contested, reconfiguring the relative influence of the USA, Russia, and maritime allies such as the United Kingdom and Japan.

Kjellén and the State as a Living Organism: Russian Expansion as an Organic Necessity

Another useful theoretical lens to interpret Russian geopolitical posture is that of Rudolf Kjellén, a Swedish political scientist of the early twentieth century who conceived the State as a living organism. Kjellén, who even coined the term “geopolitics,” was influenced by Friedrich Ratzel’s ideas and by social Darwinism, arguing that States are born, grow, and decline analogously to living beings [13]. In his work Staten som livsform (The State as a Form of Life, 1916), he maintained that States possess an organic dimension in addition to the legal one and that “just as any form of life, States must expand or die” [14]. This expansion would not be motivated merely by aggressive conquest but seen as a necessary growth for the self-preservation of the state organism [14]. In complement, Kjellén echoed Ratzel’s “law of expanding spaces” by asserting that large States expand at the expense of smaller ones, with it being only a matter of time before the great realms fill the available spaces [14]. That is, from the organic perspective, vigorous States tend to incorporate smaller neighboring territories, consolidating territorially much like an organism absorbing nutrients.

Applying this theory to the strategy of contemporary Russia, we can interpret Moscow’s actions—including the invasion of Ukraine and the ambition to restore its sphere of influence in Eurasia—as the expression of an organic drive for expansion. For a strategist influenced by this school, Russia (viewed as a state organism with a long imperial history) needs to expand its territory and influence to ensure its survival and security. The loss of control over spaces that once were part of the Russian Empire or the Soviet Union (such as Ukraine itself, the Caucasus, or Central Asia) may be perceived by Russian elites as an atrophy of the state organism, rendering it vulnerable. Thus, the reincorporation of these territories—whether directly (annexation) or indirectly (political vassalage)—would equate to restoring lost members or strengthening vital organs of the state body. In fact, official Russian arguments often portray Ukraine as an intrinsic part of “Russian historicity,” denying it a fully separate identity—a narrative that aligns with the idea that Russian expansion in that region is natural and necessary for the Russian State (seen as encompassing also Russian speakers beyond its current borders).

Kjellén would thus provide a theoretical justification for Russian territorial expansion as an organic phenomenon. As a great power, Russia would inevitably seek to expand at the expense of smaller neighbors (Ukraine, Georgia, the Baltic States, etc.), as dictated by the tendency of “great spaces to organize” to the detriment of the small [14]. This view can be identified in contemporary Russian doctrines that value spheres of influence and the notion that neighboring countries must gravitate around Moscow in order for the natural order to be maintained. The very idea of “Eurasia” united under Russian leadership (advocated by modern Russian thinkers) echoes this organic conception of vital space and expansion as a sign of the State’s vitality.

However, Kjellén’s theory also warns of the phenomenon of “imperial overstretch,” should a State exceed its internal cohesion limits by expanding excessively [14]. He recognized that extending borders too far could increase friction and vulnerabilities, making it difficult to maintain cohesion—a very large organism may lack functional integration. In the Russian context, this suggests that although expansion is seen as necessary, there are risks if Russia tries to encompass more than it can govern effectively. Conquering Ukraine and subjugating Eastern Europe, for example, could economically and militarily overburden the Russian State, especially if it faced resistance or had to manage hostile populations. However, in the hypothetical scenario we adopt (isolated USA and a weakened Europe), Russia might calculate that the organic benefits of expansion (territory, resources, strategic depth) would outweigh the costs, since external interference would be limited. Thus, through Kjellén’s lens, expansionist Russia behaves as an organism following its instinct for survival and growth, absorbing weaker neighbors; yet such a process is not devoid of challenges, requiring that the “organism Russia” manages to assimilate these new spaces without collapsing under its own weight.

Ratzel and Lebensraum: Resources, Territory, and the Justification for Expansion

Parallel to Kjellén’s organic view, Friedrich Ratzel’s theory offers another conceptual basis for understanding Russian expansion: the concept of Lebensraum (vital space). Ratzel, a German geographer of the late nineteenth century, proposed that the survival and development of a people or nation depended critically on the available physical space and resources. Influenced by Darwinist ideas, he applied the notion of “survival of the fittest” to nations, arguing that human societies need to conquer territory and resources to prosper, and that the stronger and fittest civilizations will naturally prevail over the weaker ones [12]. In 1901, Ratzel coined the term Lebensraum to describe this need for “vital space” as a geographical factor in national power [15].

Subsequently, this idea would be adopted—and extremely distorted—by Nazi ideology to justify Germany’s aggressions in Europe. However, the core of Ratzel’s concept is that territorial expansion is essential for the survival and growth of a State, especially to secure food, raw materials, and space for its population [12].

When examining Russia’s stance under this perspective, we can see several narratives that evoke the logic of Lebensraum. Russia is the largest country in the world by area; however, much of its territory is characterized by adverse climates (tundra, taiga) and is relatively sparsely populated in Siberia. On the other hand, adjacent regions such as Ukraine possess highly arable lands (chernozem—black soil), significant Slavic population density, and additional natural resources (coal in the Donbass, for example). An implicit justification for Russian expansion could be the search for supplementary resources and fertile lands to secure its self-sufficiency and power—exactly as Ratzel described that vigorous nations do. Historical records show that Ratzel emphasized agrarian primacy: he believed that new territories should be colonized by farmers, providing the food base for the nation [12]. Ukraine, historically called the “breadbasket of Europe,” fits perfectly into this vision of conquest for sustenance and agricultural wealth.

Furthermore, Ratzel viewed geography as a determinant of the destiny of nations—peoples adapted to certain habitats seek to expand them if they aspire to grow. In contemporary Russian discourse, there is often mention of the need to ensure security and territorial depth in the face of NATO, or to unite brotherly peoples (Russians and Russian speakers) within a single political space. Such arguments can be read as a modern translation of Lebensraum: the idea that the Russian nation, in order to be secure and flourish, must control a larger space, encompassing buffer zones and critical resources. This Russian “vital space” would naturally include Ukraine and other former Soviet republics, given the historical and infrastructural interdependence. Ratzel emphasized that peoples migrated and expanded when their original homeland no longer met their needs or aspirations [12]. Although contemporary Russia does not suffer from demographic pressure (on the contrary, it faces population decline), under the logic of a great power there is indeed a sentiment of geopolitical insufficiency for having lost influence over areas considered strategic. Thus, reconquering these areas would mean recovering the “habitat” necessary for the Russian nation to prosper and feel secure.

It is important to mention that, in Ratzel’s and Kjellén’s formulations, the pursuit of Lebensraum or organic expansion is not morally qualified—it is treated as a natural process in the politics of power. Thus, on the discursive level, Russia can avoid overly aggressive rhetoric and resort to “natural” justifications: for example, claiming that it needs to occupy Ukraine for defensive purposes (security space) or to reunify peoples (a common cultural and historical space). Beneath these justifications, however, resonates the geopolitical imperative to acquire more territory and resources as a guarantee of national survival, something consonant with Ratzel’s theory. In fact, Russian Realpolitik frequently prioritizes the control of energy resources (gas, oil) and transportation routes. Expanding its influence over central Eurasia would also mean controlling oil pipelines, gas lines, and logistical corridors—essential elements of modern Lebensraum understood as access to vital resources and infrastructure.

In summary, by conquering Ukraine and extending its reach into Eurasia, Russia could effectively invoke the concept of Lebensraum: presenting its expansion not as mere imperialism, but as a necessity to secure indispensable lands and resources for its people and to correct the “injustice” of a vital space diminished by post-Cold War territorial losses. The theories of Ratzel and Kjellén together paint a picture in which Russian expansion emerges almost as a natural law—the great State reclaiming space to ensure its survival and development at the expense of smaller neighbors.

Trump, NATO, and the Threat of American Withdrawal

One of the most alarming changes with Trump's return to power is the tense relationship with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). Trump has long criticized allies for not meeting military spending targets, even threatening during his first term to withdraw the US from the alliance if members did not increase their contributions [2]. This threat, initially viewed with skepticism, became concrete after his re-election, leading European allies to seriously consider the possibility of having to defend themselves without American support [1]. In fact, Trump suggested in post-election interviews that the US would only remain in NATO if the allies “paid their bills” – otherwise, he “would seriously consider” leaving [2]. Such statements reinforced the warning that the US might not honor NATO's mutual defense commitment, precisely at a time of continuous Russian threat due to the war in Ukraine [1].

From a theoretical point of view, this posture of American retrenchment evokes the classic tension between maritime power and land power. Alfred Thayer Mahan emphasized that the global power of the US derived largely from its naval superiority and from alliances that ensured control over strategic maritime routes [9]. NATO, since 1949, has served not only to deter Soviet terrestrial advances in Eurasia, but also to secure the US naval presence in the North Atlantic and the Mediterranean – a fundamental element according to Mahan. In turn, Halford Mackinder warned that the balance of global power depended on the control of the Eurasian “Heartland” (the central region of Eurasia). The withdrawal or disengagement of the US (a maritime power) from this region could open the way for a continental power (such as Russia) to expand its influence in Eastern Europe, unbalancing the power balance [3]. In other words, by threatening to leave NATO, Trump jeopardizes the principle of containment that prevented Russian dominance over Eastern Europe – something that Mackinder would see as a dangerous shift in global power in favor of the Heartland power.

Adopting an impartial tone, it is observed that European countries have reacted to this new reality with precautionary measures. Strategic reports already calculate the cost of an autonomous European defense: hundreds of thousands of additional soldiers and investments of hundreds of billions of euros would be required if the US ceased to guarantee the security of the continent [1]. European dependence on American military power is significant and, without it, there would be a need for a major reinforcement of European Armed Forces [1]. This mobilization practically reflects the anticipation of a power vacuum left by the US – a scenario in which Mackinder’s theory (on the primacy of the Heartland and the vulnerability of the “external crescent” where Western Europe is located) regains its relevance.

The US–Ukraine Economic Agreement: Strategic Minerals in Exchange for Support?

Another novelty of Trump's second term is the unprecedented and transactional manner in which Washington has been dealing with the war in Ukraine. Instead of emphasizing security guarantees and alliances, the Trump administration proposed a trade agreement with Ukraine focused on the exploitation of strategic minerals, linking American support to a direct economic benefit. According to sources close to the negotiations, the US and Ukraine are about to sign a pact to share the revenues from the exploitation of critical mineral resources on Ukrainian territory [19]. Materials such as titanium, lithium, rare earths, and uranium – vital for high-tech and defense industries – would be at the core of this agreement [6]. According to the known draft, Ukraine would allocate 50% of the profits from new mineral ventures to a fund controlled by the US, which would reinvest part of the resources in the country’s own reconstruction [6] [19].

It is noteworthy that the pact does not include explicit security guarantees for Kyiv, despite Ukraine remaining under direct military threat from Russia [19]. Essentially, the Trump administration offers financial support and economic investment in exchange for a share in Ukrainian natural resources, but without formally committing to Ukraine's defense in the event of a renewed Russian offensive [19]. American authorities argue that this economic partnership would already be sufficient to “secure Ukrainian interests,” as it would provide the US with its own incentives to desire Ukraine’s stability [19]. “What could be better for Ukraine than being in an economic partnership with the United States?” stated Mike Waltz, a US national security advisor, defending the proposal [19].

Analysts, however, assess the agreement in divided terms. For some, it represents a form of economic exploitation at a time of Ukraine's fragility – comparing the demand to share mineral wealth amid war to a scheme of “mafia protection” [19]. Steven Cook, from the Council on Foreign Relations, classified the offer as “extortion,” and political scientist Virginia P. Fortna observed that charging resources from an invaded country resembles predatory practices [19]. Joseph Nye adds that it is a short-term gain strategy that could be “disastrous in the long run” for American credibility, reflecting the transactional approach that Trump even adopted with close allies in other contexts [19]. On the other hand, some see a future advantage for Kyiv: journalist Pierre Briançon suggests that at least this agreement aligns American commercial interests with Ukraine’s future, which could, in theory, keep the US involved in Ukrainian prosperity in the long term [19]. It is even recalled that President Zelensky himself proposed last year the idea of sharing natural resources with the US to bring the interests of the two countries closer together [19].

From the perspective of geopolitical theories, this agreement illustrates a shift towards economic pragmatism in international relations, approaching concepts proposed by Kjellén. Rudolf Kjellén, who coined the term “geopolitics,” saw the State as a territorial organism that seeks to ensure its survival through self-sufficiency and the control of strategic resources [4]. Trump's demand for a share in Ukrainian resources in order to continue supporting the country reflects a logic of autarky and direct national interest – that is, foreign policy serving primarily to reinforce the economic and material position of the US. This view contrasts with the traditional cooperative approach, but aligns with Kjellén’s idea that powerful States tend to transform international relations into opportunities for their own gain, ensuring access to vital raw materials. Similarly, Friedrich Ratzel argued that States have a “propensity to expand their borders according to their capacities,” seeking vital space (Lebensraum) and resources to sustain their development [11]. The US–Ukraine pact, by conditioning military/economic aid on obtaining tangible advantages (half of the mineral profits), is reminiscent of Ratzel’s perspective: the US, as a rising economic power, expands its economic influence over Ukrainian territory like an organism extending itself to obtain the necessary resources for its well-being. It is, therefore, a form of economic expansionism at the expense of purely ideological commitments or collective security.

Peace Negotiations Excluding Ukraine and the Legitimacy of the Agreement

Another controversial point is the manner in which peace negotiations between Russia and the West have been conducted under Trump's administration. Since taking office, the American president has engaged directly with Moscow in pursuit of a ceasefire, deliberately keeping the Ukrainian government out of the initial discussions [6]. Trump expressed his desire to “leave Zelensky out of the conversation” and also excluded the European Union from any influence in the process [6]. This negotiation strategy—conducted without the presence of the primary interested party, Ukraine—raises serious questions about the legitimacy and sustainability of any resulting agreement.

Historically, peace agreements reached without the direct participation of one of the conflicting parties tend to face problems in implementation and acceptance.

The exclusion of Ukraine in the decision-making phase brings to light the issue of guarantees. As noted, the emerging agreement lacks formal US security guarantees for Ukraine. This implies that, after the agreement is signed, nothing will prevent Russia from launching a new offensive if it deems it convenient, knowing that the US has not committed to defending it militarily. Experts have already warned that a ceasefire without robust protection may only be a pause for Russian rearmament, rendering the conflict “frozen” temporarily and potentially resumed in the near future. The European strategic community has expressed similar concern: without American deterrence, the risk of further Russian aggressions in the region increases considerably [1]. Denmark, for example, has released intelligence reports warning of possible imminent Russian attacks, prompting neighboring countries to accelerate plans for independent defense [1].

The legitimacy of this asymmetric peace agreement (negotiated without Ukraine fully at the table and under economic coercion) is also questionable from a legal and moral point of view. It violates the principle of self-determination by imposing terms decided by great powers on a sovereign country—a practice reminiscent of dark chapters in diplomacy, such as the Munich Agreement of 1938, when powers determined the fate of Czechoslovakia without its consent. In the current case, Ukraine would end up signing the agreement, but from a position of weakness, raising doubts about how durable such a commitment would be.

From Mackinder’s perspective, Ukraine’s removal from the battlefield without guarantees essentially means admitting a greater influence of Russia (the Heartland power) over Eastern Europe. This would alter the balance in Eurasia in a potentially lasting way. Furthermore, the fact that great powers negotiate over the heads of a smaller country evokes the imperial logic of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, when empires decided among themselves the divisions of foreign territories—a behavior that Mackinder saw as likely in a world of a “closed system.” With the entire world already occupied by States, Mackinder predicted that powers would begin to compete for influence within this consolidated board, often subjugating smaller states to gain advantage [3]. The US–Russia negotiation regarding Ukraine, without proper Ukrainian representation, exemplifies this type of neo-imperial dynamic in the twenty-first century.

Also noteworthy is the consonance with the ideas of Ratzel and Kjellén: both viewed smaller states as easily relegated to the status of satellites or even “parasitic organisms” in the orbit of larger states. Kjellén spoke of the intrinsic vulnerability of states with little territorial depth or economic dependence, making them susceptible to external pressures [4][20]. Ukraine, weakened by war and dependent on external aid, becomes a concrete example of this theorized vulnerability: it has had to cede strategic resources and accept terms dictated against its will in an attempt to secure its immediate survival. The resulting agreement, therefore, reflects a power imbalance characteristic of the hierarchical international relations described by classical geopolitical theorists.

Implicit Territorial Concessions and Trump’s Public Discourse

A central and controversial point in Trump’s statements regarding the war in Ukraine is the insinuation of territorial concessions to Russia as part of the conflict’s resolution. Publicly, Trump avoided explicitly condemning Russian aggression and even stated that he considered it “unlikely” that Ukraine would be able to retake all the areas occupied by the Russians [16]. In debates and interviews, he suggested that “if I were president, the war would end in 24 hours,” implying that he would force an understanding between Kyiv and Moscow that would likely involve ceding some territory in exchange for peace. This position marks a break with the previous US policy of not recognizing any territorial acquisitions made by force and fuels speculations that a future peace agreement sponsored by Trump would legitimize at least part of Russia’s gains since 2014 (Crimea, Donbass, and areas seized during the 2022 invasion).

The actions of his administration corroborate this interpretation. As discussed, the economic agreement focuses on the exploitation of Ukrainian natural resources, many of which are located precisely in regions currently under Russian military control, such as parts of the Zaporizhzhia Oblast, Donetsk, Lugansk, and the Azov Sea area [6]. A Ukrainian geologist, Hanna Liventseva, highlighted that “most of these elements (strategic minerals) are found in the south of the Ukrainian Shield, mainly in the Azov region, and most of these territories are currently invaded by Russia” [6]. This means that, to make joint exploitation viable, Russia’s de facto control over these areas would have to be recognized—or at least tolerated—in the short term. In other words, the pact indirectly and tacitly accepts Russian territorial gains, as it involves sharing the profits from resources that are not currently accessible to the Kyiv government.

Furthermore, figures close to Trump have made explicit statements regarding the possibility of territorial cession. Mike Waltz, Trump’s national security advisor, publicly stated that Zelensky might need to “cede land to Russia” to end the war [8]. This remark—made public in March 2025—confirms that the Trump White House considers it natural for Ukraine to relinquish parts of its territory in favor of an agreement. Such a stance marks a break from the previous Western consensus, which condemned any territorial gains by force. Under Trump, a pragmatic view (in the eyes of his supporters) or a cynical one (according to his critics) seems to prevail: sacrificing principles of territorial integrity to quickly end hostilities and secure immediate economic benefits.

In theoretical terms, this inclination to validate territorial gains by force recalls the concept of Realpolitik and the geopolitical Darwinism that influenced thinkers such as Ratzel. In Ratzel’s organic conception, expanding states naturally absorb neighboring territories when they are strong enough to do so, while declining states lose territory—a process almost biological in the selection of the fittest [11]. The Trump administration’s acceptance that Ukraine should “give something” to Moscow to seal peace reflects a normalization of this geopolitical selection process: it recognizes the aggressor (Russia) as having the “right” to retain conquered lands, because that is how power realities on the ground dictate. Mackinder, although firmly opposed to allowing Russia to dominate the Heartland, would see this outcome as the logical consequence of the lack of engagement from maritime powers (the USA and the United Kingdom, for example) in sustaining the Ukrainian counterattack. Without the active involvement of maritime power to balance the dispute, land power prevails in Eastern Europe.

From the perspective of international legitimacy, the cession of Ukrainian territories—whether de jure or de facto—creates a dangerous precedent in the post-Cold War era. Rewarding violent aggression with territorial gains may encourage similar strategies in other parts of the world, undermining the architecture of collective security. This is possibly a return to a world of spheres of influence, where great powers define borders and zones of control according to their convenience—something that the rules-based order after 1945 sought to avoid. Here, academic impartiality requires noting that coercion for territorial concessions rarely produces lasting peace, as the aggrieved party—in this case, Ukraine—may accept temporarily but will continue to assert its rights in the long term, as has occurred with other territorial injustices in history.

Territorial Ambitions of Trump: Greenland and Canada

Beyond the Eurasian theater of war, Trump revived geopolitical ambitions involving territories traditionally allied with the US: Greenland (an autonomous territory of Denmark) and Canada. As early as 2019, during his first term, Trump shocked the world by proposing to buy Greenland—rich in minerals and strategically positioned in the Arctic. Upon his return to power, he went further: expressing a “renewed interest” in acquiring Greenland and publicly suggesting the incorporation of Canada as the 51st American state [2].

In January 2025, during a press conference at Mar-a-Lago, he even displayed maps in which the US and Canada appeared merged into a single country, while Greenland was marked as a future American possession [2]. Posts by the president on social media included satirical images with a map of North America where Canada was labeled “51st” and Greenland designated as “Our Land” [2].

Such moves were met with concern and disbelief by allies. Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was caught on an open microphone warning that Trump’s fixation on annexation “is real” and not just a joke [7]. Trudeau emphasized that Washington appeared to covet Canada’s vast mineral resources, which would explain the insistence on the idea of absorption [7]. In public, Trump argued that Canadians “would be more prosperous as American citizens,” promising tax cuts and better services should they become part of the US [7]. On the Danish side, the reaction to the revived plan regarding Greenland was firmly negative—as it was in 2019—reaffirming that the territory is not for sale. Trump, however, insinuated that the issue might be one of national security, indicating that American possession of Greenland would prevent adverse influences (a reference to China and Russia in the Arctic) [2]. More worryingly, he refused to rule out the use of military means to obtain the island, although he assured that he had no intention of invading Canada by force (in the Canadian case, he spoke of “economic force” to forge a union) [2].

This series of initiatives reflects an unprecedented expansionist impetus by the US in recent times, at least in discourse. Analyzing this through the lens of classical geopolitics offers interesting insights. Friedrich Ratzel and his notion of Lebensraum suggest that powerful states, upon reaching a certain predominance, seek to expand their territory by influencing or incorporating adjacent areas. Trump, by targeting the immediate neighbor (Canada) and a nearby strategic territory (Greenland), appears to resurrect this logic of territorial expansion for the sake of gaining space and resources. Ratzel saw such expansion almost as a natural process for vigorous states, comparable to the growth of an organism [11]. From this perspective, the US would be exercising its “right” of expansion in North America and the polar region, integrating areas of vital interest.

Additionally, Alfred Mahan’s view on maritime power helps to understand the strategic value of Greenland. Mahan postulated that control of key maritime chokepoints and naval bases ensures global advantage [9]. Greenland, situated between the North Atlantic and the Arctic, has become increasingly relevant as climate change opens new polar maritime routes and reveals vast mineral deposits (including rare earth elements and oil). For the US, having a presence or sovereignty over Greenland would mean dominating the gateway to the Arctic and denying this space to rivals. This aligns with Mahan’s strategy of securing commercial and military routes (in this case, potential Arctic routes) and resources to consolidate naval supremacy. On the other hand, the incorporation of Canada—with its enormous territory, Arctic coastline, and abundant natural resources—would provide the US with formidable geoeconomic and geopolitical reinforcement, practically eliminating vulnerabilities along its northern border. This is an ambitious project that also echoes ideas of Kjellén, for whom an ideal State should seek territorial completeness and economic self-sufficiency within its region. Incorporating Canada would be the pinnacle of American regional autarky, turning North America into a unified bloc under Washington (a scenario reminiscent of the “pan-regions” conceived by twentieth-century geopoliticians influenced by Kjellén).

It is important to note, however, that these ambitions face enormous legal and political obstacles. The sovereignty of Canada and Greenland (Denmark) is guaranteed by international law, and both peoples categorically reject the idea of annexation. Any hostile action by the US against these countries would shake alliances and the world order itself. Even so, the very fact that an American president suggests such possibilities already produces geopolitical effects: traditional partners begin to distrust Washington’s intentions, seek alternative alliances, and strengthen nationalist discourses of resistance. In summary, Trump’s expansionist intentions in Greenland and Canada rekindle old territorial issues and paradoxically place the US in the position of a revisionist power—a role once associated with empires in search of colonies.

Implications for Brazil and South America: A New Neocolonization?

In light of this geopolitical reconfiguration driven by Trump's USA—with a reordering of alliances and a possible partition of spheres of influence among great powers—the question arises: what is the impact on Brazil and the other countries of South America? Traditionally, Latin America has been under the aegis of the Monroe Doctrine (1823), which established non-interference by Europe in the region and, implicitly, the primacy of the USA in the Western Hemisphere. In the post–Cold War period, this influence translated more into political and economic leadership, without formal annexations or direct territorial domination. However, the current context points to a kind of “neocolonization” of the Global South, in which larger powers seek to control resources and peripheral governments in an indirect yet effective manner.

Mackinder’s theories can be used to illuminate this dynamic. As mentioned, Mackinder envisioned the twentieth-century world as a closed system, in which there were no longer any unknown lands to be colonized—hence, the powers would fight among themselves for control over already occupied regions [3]. He predicted that Africa and Latin America (then largely European colonies or semi-colonies) would continue as boards upon which the great powers would project their disputes, a form of neocolonialism. In the current scenario, we see the USA proposing exchanges of protection for resources (as in Ukraine) and even leaders of developing countries seeking similar agreements. A notable example: the President of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Felix Tshisekedi, praised the USA–Ukraine initiative and suggested an analogous agreement involving Congolese mineral wealth in exchange for US support against internal rebels (M23) [19]. In other words, African countries and possibly South American ones may enter into this logic of offering privileged access to resources (cobalt, lithium, food, biodiversity) in order to obtain security guarantees or investments. This represents a regression to the times when external powers dictated the directions of the South in exchange for promises of protection, characterizing a strategic neocolonialism.

For Brazil, in particular, this rearrangement generates both opportunities and risks. As a regional power with considerable diplomatic autonomy, Brazil has historically sought to balance relationships with the USA, Europe, China, and other actors, avoiding automatic alignments. However, in a world where Trump’s USA is actively redefining spheres of influence—possibly making deals with Russia that divide priorities (for example, Washington focusing on the Western Hemisphere and Moscow on the Eastern)—South America could once again be seen as an exclusive American sphere of influence. From this perspective, Washington could pressure South American countries to align with its directives, limiting partnerships with rivals (such as China) and seeking privileged access to strategic resources (such as the Amazon, fresh water, minerals, and agricultural commodities). Some indications are already emerging: Trump’s transactional approach mentioned by Nye included pressures on Canada and Mexico regarding border and trade issues, under the threat of commercial sanctions. It would not be unthinkable to adopt a hard line, for example, with regard to Brazilian environmental policies (linked to the Amazon) or Brazil’s relations with China, using tariffs or incentives as leverage—a sort of geopolitics of economic coercion.

On the other hand, Brazil and its neighbors could also attempt to take advantage of the Sino–North American competition. If the USA is distracted consolidating its hemispheric “hard power” hegemony (even with annexation fantasies in the north), powers such as China may advance their economic presence in South America through investments and trade (Belt and Road, infrastructure financing)—which is already happening. This would constitute an indirect neocolonial dispute in the South: Chinese loans and investments versus American demands and agreements, partly reminiscent of the nineteenth-century imperial competition (when the United Kingdom, USA, and others competed for Latin American markets and resources).

From a conceptual standpoint, Mackinder might classify South America as part of the “Outer Crescent” (external insular crescent)—peripheral to the great Eurasian “World-Island,” yet still crucial as a source of resources and a strategic position in the South Atlantic and Pacific. If the USA consolidates an informal empire in the Americas, it would be reinforcing its “insular bastion” far from the Eurasian Heartland, a strategy that Mackinder once suggested for maritime powers: to control islands and peripheral continents to compensate for the disadvantage of not controlling the Heartland. However, an excessive US dominance in the South could lead to local resistance and alternative alignments, unbalancing the region.

Kjellén would add that for Brazil to maintain its decisive sovereignty, it will need to strengthen its autarky and internal cohesion—in other words, reduce vulnerabilities (economic, military, social) that external powers might exploit [4]. Meanwhile, Mahan might point out the importance for Brazil of controlling its maritime routes and coastlines (South Atlantic) to avoid being at the mercy of a naval power like the USA. And Ratzel would remind us that states that do not expand their influence tend to be absorbed by foreign influences—which, in the context of Brazil, does not mean conquering neighboring territories, but rather actively leading South American integration to create a block more resilient to external intrusion.

In summary, South America finds itself in a more competitive and segmented world, where major players are resurrecting practices from past eras. The notion of “neocolonization” here does not imply direct occupation, but rather mechanisms of dependency: whether through unequal economic agreements or through diplomatic or military pressure for alignment. Brazil, as the largest economy and territory on the subcontinent, will have to navigate with heightened caution. A new global power balance, marked by the division of spheres of influence among the USA, China, and Russia, may reduce the sovereign maneuvering space of South American countries unless they act jointly. Thus, theoretical reflection suggests the need for South–South strategies, reinforcement of regional organizations, and diversification of partnerships to avoid falling into modern “neocolonial traps.”

Conclusion

The emerging post–re-election geopolitical conjuncture of Donald Trump signals a return to classical geopolitical principles, after several decades of predominance of institutional liberal views. We witness the revaluation of concepts such as spheres of influence, exchanges of protection for resources, naval power versus land power, and disputes over territory and raw materials—all central themes in the writings of Mackinder, Mahan, Kjellén, and Ratzel at the end of the nineteenth and the beginning of the twentieth century. An impartial analysis of these events, in light of these theories, shows internal coherence in Trump’s actions: although controversial, they follow a logic of maximizing national interest and the relative power of the USA on the world stage, even at the expense of established principles and alliances.

Halford Mackinder reminds us that, in a closed world with no new lands to conquer, the great powers will seek to redistribute the world among themselves [3]. This seems to manifest in the direct understandings between the USA and Russia over the fate of Ukraine, and in American ambitions in the Arctic and the Western Hemisphere. Alfred Mahan emphasizes that the control of the seas and strategic positions ensures supremacy—we see reflections of this in Trump’s obsession with Greenland (Arctic) and the possible neglect of the importance of maintaining NATO (and therefore the North Atlantic) as a cohesive bloc, something that Mahan’s theory would criticize due to the risk of a naval vacuum. Rudolf Kjellén and Friedrich Ratzel provide the framework to understand the more aggressive facet of expansionist nationalism: the idea of the State as an organism that needs to grow, secure resources, and seek self-sufficiency explains everything from the extortionate agreement imposed on Ukraine to the annexation rhetoric regarding Canada.

The potential consequences are profound. In the short term, we may witness a precarious ceasefire in the Ukraine war, with consolidated Russian territorial gains and Ukraine economically tied to the USA, but without formal military protection—a fragile “armed peace.” Western Europe, alarmed, may accelerate its independent militarization, perhaps marking the beginning of European defense autonomy, as is already openly debated [1]. At the far end of the globe, American activism in the Arctic and the Americas may reshape alliances: countries like Canada, once aligned with Washington, might seek to guarantee their sovereignty by distancing themselves from it; powers like China could take advantage of the openings to increase their presence in Latin America and Africa through economic diplomacy; and emerging countries of the Global South may have to choose between submitting to new “guardianships” or strengthening South–South cooperation.

Ultimately, the current situation reinforces the relevance of studying geopolitics through historical lenses. The actions of the Trump administration indicate that, despite all technological and normative advances, the competition for geographic power has not disappeared—it has merely assumed new formats. Academic impartiality obliges us not to prematurely judge whether these strategies will be successful or beneficial, but history and theory warn that neo-imperial movements tend to generate counter-reactions. As Mackinder insinuated, “every shock or change anywhere reverberates around the world,” and a sudden move by a superpower tends to provoke unforeseen adjustments and chain conflicts. It remains to be seen how the other actors—including Brazil and its neighbors—will adapt to this new chapter in the great struggle for global power, in which centuries-old theories once again have a surprising explanatory power over present events.

Bibliography

[1] A Referência. (2025). Europa calcula o custo de se defender sem os EUA: 300 mil soldados e 250 bilhões de euros a mais. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de https://areferencia.com/europa/europa-calcula-o-custo-de-se-defender-sem-os-eua-300-mil-soldados-e-250-bilhoes-de-euros-a-mais/#:\~:text=Europa%20calcula%20o%20custo%20de,bilh%C3%B5es%20de%20euros%20a%20mais

[2] Brexit Institute. (2025). What happens if Trump invades Greenland? Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de https://dcubrexitinstitute.eu/2025/01/what-happens-if-trump-invades-greenland/#:\~:text=Ever%20since%20Donald%20Trump%20announced,agreed%20in%20Wales%20in%202014

[3] Cfettweis C:CST22(2)8576.DVI. (2025). Mackinder and Angell. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de https://cfettweis.com/wp-content/uploads/Mackinder-and-Angell.pdf#:\~:text=meant%20the%20beginning%20of%20an,Mackinder

[4] Diva-Portal. (2025). The geopolitics of territorial relativity. Poland seen by Rudolf Kjellén. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1696547/FULLTEXT02#:\~:text=,The%20state%20territory

[5] Geopolitical Monitor. (2025). The Russo-Ukrainian War and Mackinder’s Heartland Thesis. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de https://www.geopoliticalmonitor.com/the-ukraine-war-and-mackinders-heartland-thesis/#:\~:text=In%201904%2C%20Sir%20Halford%20J,in%20adding%20a%20substantial%20oceanic

[6] Instituto Humanitas Unisinos. (2025). Trump obriga Zelensky a hipotecar a exploração de minerais críticos em troca do seu apoio. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de https://www.ihu.unisinos.br/648986-trump-obriga-zelensky-a-hipotecar-a-exploracao-de-minerais-criticos-em-troca-do-seu-apoio#:\~:text=Essa%20troca%20inclui%20os%20cobi%C3%A7ados,s%C3%A3o%20praticamente%20inexploradas%20no%20pa%C3%ADs

[7] Politico. (2025). Trump’s annexation fixation is no joke, Trudeau warns. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de https://www.politico.com/news/2025/02/07/canada-trudeau-trump-51-state-00203156#:\~:text=TORONTO%20%E2%80%94%20Prime%20Minister%20Justin,Canada%20becoming%20the%2051st%20state%2C%E2%80%9D%20Trudeau%20said

[8] The Daily Beast. (2025). Top Trump Adviser Moves Goalpost for Ukraine to End War. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de https://www.thedailybeast.com/top-trump-adviser-moves-goalpost-for-ukraine-to-end-war/#:\~:text=LAND%20GRAB

[9] The Geostrata. (2025). Alfred Thayer Mahan and Supremacy of Naval Power. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de https://www.thegeostrata.com/post/alfred-thayer-mahan-and-supremacy-of-naval-power#:\~:text=Alfred%20Thayer%20Mahan%20and%20Supremacy,control%20over%20maritime%20trade%20routes

[10] U.S. Department of State. (2025). Mahan’s The Influence of Sea Power upon History: Securing International Markets in the 1890s. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de https://history.state.gov/milestones/1866-1898/mahan#:\~:text=Mahan%20argued%20that%20British%20control,American%20politicians%20believed%20that%20these

[11] Britannica. (2025a). Friedrich Ratzel | Biogeography, Anthropogeography, Political Geography. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de https://www.britannica.com/biography/Friedrich-Ratzel#:\~:text=webster,Swedish%20political%20scientist%20%2076

[12] Britannica. (2025b). Lebensraum. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de https://www.britannica.com/topic/Lebensraum#:\~:text=defined,The

[13] Britannica. (2025c). Rudolf Kjellén. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de https://www.britannica.com/biography/Rudolf-Kjellen

[14] Wikipedia (ZH). (2025). Rudolf Kjellén. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/w:Rudolf_Kjell%C3%A9n#:\~:text=Besides%20legalistic%2C%20states%20have%20organic,preservation.%20%5B%203

[15] Wikipedia. (2025). Lebensraum. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lebensraum#:\~:text=The%20German%20geographer%20and%20ethnographer,into%20the%20Greater%20Germanic%20Reich

[16] YouTube. (2025). Trump says Ukraine 'unlikely to get all land back' or join NATO [Vídeo]. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BmHzAVLhsXU#:\~:text=Trump%20says%20Ukraine%20%27unlikely%20to,for%20it%20to%20join%20NATO

[17] U.S. Naval Institute. (2025) Operation World Peace. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/1955/june/operation-world-peace#:\\~:text=“The Mahan doctrine%2C” according to,the word “airships” is more

[18] Emissary. (2024) Trump’s Greenland and Panama Canal Threats Are a Throwback to an Old, Misguided Foreign Policy. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de https://carnegieendowment.org/emissary/2025/01/trump-greenland-panama-canal-monroe-doctrine-policy?lang=en

[19] A Referência. Acordo EUA-Ucrânia está praticamente fechado, mas analistas se dividem sobre quem sairá ganhando. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de https://areferencia.com/europa/acordo-eua-ucrania-esta-praticamente-fechado-mas-analistas-se-dividem-sobre-quem-saira-ganhando/#:\\~:text=EUA e 17,o acordo a seu favor

[20] Wikipedia. (2025) Geopolitik. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geopolitik#:\\~:text=Rudolph Kjellén was Ratzel's Swedish,Kjellén's State

@ c631e267:c2b78d3e

Es ist völlig unbestritten, dass der Angriff der russischen Armee auf die Ukraine im Februar 2022 strikt zu verurteilen ist. Ebenso unbestritten ist Russland unter Wladimir Putin keine brillante Demokratie. Aus diesen Tatsachen lässt sich jedoch nicht das finstere Bild des russischen Präsidenten – und erst recht nicht des Landes – begründen, das uns durchweg vorgesetzt wird und den Kern des aktuellen europäischen Bedrohungs-Szenarios darstellt. Da müssen wir schon etwas genauer hinschauen.

Der vorliegende Artikel versucht derweil nicht, den Einsatz von Gewalt oder die Verletzung von Menschenrechten zu rechtfertigen oder zu entschuldigen – ganz im Gegenteil. Dass jedoch der Verdacht des «Putinverstehers» sofort latent im Raume steht, verdeutlicht, was beim Thema «Russland» passiert: Meinungsmache und Manipulation.

Angesichts der mentalen Mobilmachung seitens Politik und Medien sowie des Bestrebens, einen bevorstehenden Krieg mit Russland geradezu herbeizureden, ist es notwendig, dieser fatalen Entwicklung entgegenzutreten. Wenn wir uns nur ein wenig von der herrschenden Schwarz-Weiß-Malerei freimachen, tauchen automatisch Fragen auf, die Risse im offiziellen Narrativ enthüllen. Grund genug, nachzuhaken.

Wer sich schon länger auch abseits der Staats- und sogenannten Leitmedien informiert, der wird in diesem Artikel vermutlich nicht viel Neues erfahren. Andere könnten hier ein paar unbekannte oder vergessene Aspekte entdecken. Möglicherweise klärt sich in diesem Kontext die Wahrnehmung der aktuellen (unserer eigenen!) Situation ein wenig.

Manipulation erkennen

Corona-«Pandemie», menschengemachter Klimawandel oder auch Ukraine-Krieg: Jede Menge Krisen, und für alle gibt es ein offizielles Narrativ, dessen Hinterfragung unerwünscht ist. Nun ist aber ein Narrativ einfach eine Erzählung, eine Geschichte (Latein: «narratio») und kein Tatsachenbericht. Und so wie ein Märchen soll auch das Narrativ eine Botschaft vermitteln.

Über die Methoden der Manipulation ist viel geschrieben worden, sowohl in Bezug auf das Individuum als auch auf die Massen. Sehr wertvolle Tipps dazu, wie man Manipulationen durchschauen kann, gibt ein Büchlein [1] von Albrecht Müller, dem Herausgeber der NachDenkSeiten.

Die Sprache selber eignet sich perfekt für die Manipulation. Beispielsweise kann die Wortwahl Bewertungen mitschwingen lassen, regelmäßiges Wiederholen (gerne auch von verschiedenen Seiten) lässt Dinge irgendwann «wahr» erscheinen, Übertreibungen fallen auf und hinterlassen wenigstens eine Spur im Gedächtnis, genauso wie Andeutungen. Belege spielen dabei keine Rolle.

Es gibt auffällig viele Sprachregelungen, die offenbar irgendwo getroffen und irgendwie koordiniert werden. Oder alle Redenschreiber und alle Medien kopieren sich neuerdings permanent gegenseitig. Welchen Zweck hat es wohl, wenn der Krieg in der Ukraine durchgängig und quasi wörtlich als «russischer Angriffskrieg auf die Ukraine» bezeichnet wird? Obwohl das in der Sache richtig ist, deutet die Art der Verwendung auf gezielte Beeinflussung hin und soll vor allem das Feindbild zementieren.

Sprachregelungen dienen oft der Absicherung einer einseitigen Darstellung. Das Gleiche gilt für das Verkürzen von Informationen bis hin zum hartnäckigen Verschweigen ganzer Themenbereiche. Auch hierfür gibt es rund um den Ukraine-Konflikt viele gute Beispiele.

Das gewünschte Ergebnis solcher Methoden ist eine Schwarz-Weiß-Malerei, bei der einer eindeutig als «der Böse» markiert ist und die anderen automatisch «die Guten» sind. Das ist praktisch und demonstriert gleichzeitig ein weiteres Manipulationswerkzeug: die Verwendung von Doppelstandards. Wenn man es schafft, bei wichtigen Themen regelmäßig mit zweierlei Maß zu messen, ohne dass das Publikum protestiert, dann hat man freie Bahn.

Experten zu bemühen, um bestimmte Sachverhalte zu erläutern, ist sicher sinnvoll, kann aber ebenso missbraucht werden, schon allein durch die Auswahl der jeweiligen Spezialisten. Seit «Corona» werden viele erfahrene und ehemals hoch angesehene Fachleute wegen der «falschen Meinung» diffamiert und gecancelt. [2] Das ist nicht nur ein brutaler Umgang mit Menschen, sondern auch eine extreme Form, die öffentliche Meinung zu steuern.

Wann immer wir also erkennen (weil wir aufmerksam waren), dass wir bei einem bestimmten Thema manipuliert werden, dann sind zwei logische und notwendige Fragen: Warum? Und was ist denn richtig? In unserem Russland-Kontext haben die Antworten darauf viel mit Geopolitik und Geschichte zu tun.

Ist Russland aggressiv und expansiv?

Angeblich plant Russland, europäische NATO-Staaten anzugreifen, nach dem Motto: «Zuerst die Ukraine, dann den Rest». In Deutschland weiß man dafür sogar das Datum: «Wir müssen bis 2029 kriegstüchtig sein», versichert Verteidigungsminister Pistorius.

Historisch gesehen ist es allerdings eher umgekehrt: Russland, bzw. die Sowjetunion, ist bereits dreimal von Westeuropa aus militärisch angegriffen worden. Die Feldzüge Napoleons, des deutschen Kaiserreichs und Nazi-Deutschlands haben Millionen Menschen das Leben gekostet. Bei dem ausdrücklichen Vernichtungskrieg ab 1941 kam es außerdem zu Brutalitäten wie der zweieinhalbjährigen Belagerung Leningrads (heute St. Petersburg) durch Hitlers Wehrmacht. Deren Ziel, die Bevölkerung auszuhungern, wurde erreicht: über eine Million tote Zivilisten.

Trotz dieser Erfahrungen stimmte Michail Gorbatschow 1990 der deutschen Wiedervereinigung zu und die Sowjetunion zog ihre Truppen aus Osteuropa zurück (vgl. Abb. 1). Der Warschauer Pakt wurde aufgelöst, der Kalte Krieg formell beendet. Die Sowjets erhielten damals von führenden westlichen Politikern die Zusicherung, dass sich die NATO «keinen Zentimeter ostwärts» ausdehnen würde, das ist dokumentiert. [3]

Expandiert ist die NATO trotzdem, und zwar bis an Russlands Grenzen (vgl. Abb. 2). Laut dem Politikberater Jeffrey Sachs handelt es sich dabei um ein langfristiges US-Projekt, das von Anfang an die Ukraine und Georgien mit einschloss. Offiziell wurde der Beitritt beiden Staaten 2008 angeboten. In jedem Fall könnte die massive Ost-Erweiterung seit 1999 aus russischer Sicht nicht nur als Vertrauensbruch, sondern durchaus auch als aggressiv betrachtet werden.

Russland hat den europäischen Staaten mehrfach die Hand ausgestreckt [4] für ein friedliches Zusammenleben und den «Aufbau des europäischen Hauses». Präsident Putin sei «in seiner ersten Amtszeit eine Chance für Europa» gewesen, urteilt die Journalistin und langjährige Russland-Korrespondentin der ARD, Gabriele Krone-Schmalz. Er habe damals viele positive Signale Richtung Westen gesendet.

Die Europäer jedoch waren scheinbar an einer Partnerschaft mit dem kontinentalen Nachbarn weniger interessiert als an der mit dem transatlantischen Hegemon. Sie verkennen bis heute, dass eine gedeihliche Zusammenarbeit in Eurasien eine Gefahr für die USA und deren bekundetes Bestreben ist, die «einzige Weltmacht» zu sein – «Full Spectrum Dominance» [5] nannte das Pentagon das. Statt einem neuen Kalten Krieg entgegenzuarbeiten, ließen sich europäische Staaten selber in völkerrechtswidrige «US-dominierte Angriffskriege» [6] verwickeln, wie in Serbien, Afghanistan, dem Irak, Libyen oder Syrien. Diese werden aber selten so benannt.

Speziell den Deutschen stünde außer einer Portion Realismus auch etwas mehr Dankbarkeit gut zu Gesicht. Das Geschichtsbewusstsein der Mehrheit scheint doch recht selektiv und das Selbstbewusstsein einiger etwas desorientiert zu sein. Bekanntermaßen waren es die Soldaten der sowjetischen Roten Armee, die unter hohen Opfern 1945 Deutschland «vom Faschismus befreit» haben. Bei den Gedenkfeiern zu 80 Jahren Kriegsende will jedoch das Auswärtige Amt – noch unter der Diplomatie-Expertin Baerbock, die sich schon länger offiziell im Krieg mit Russland wähnt, – nun keine Russen sehen: Sie sollen notfalls rausgeschmissen werden.

«Die Grundsatzfrage lautet: Geht es Russland um einen angemessenen Platz in einer globalen Sicherheitsarchitektur, oder ist Moskau schon seit langem auf einem imperialistischen Trip, der befürchten lassen muss, dass die Russen in fünf Jahren in Berlin stehen?»

So bringt Gabriele Krone-Schmalz [7] die eigentliche Frage auf den Punkt, die zur Einschätzung der Situation letztlich auch jeder für sich beantworten muss.

Was ist los in der Ukraine?

In der internationalen Politik geht es nie um Demokratie oder Menschenrechte, sondern immer um Interessen von Staaten. Diese These stammt von Egon Bahr, einem der Architekten der deutschen Ostpolitik des «Wandels durch Annäherung» aus den 1960er und 70er Jahren. Sie trifft auch auf den Ukraine-Konflikt zu, den handfeste geostrategische und wirtschaftliche Interessen beherrschen, obwohl dort angeblich «unsere Demokratie» verteidigt wird.

Es ist ein wesentliches Element des Ukraine-Narrativs und Teil der Manipulation, die Vorgeschichte des Krieges wegzulassen – mindestens die vor der russischen «Annexion» der Halbinsel Krim im März 2014, aber oft sogar komplett diejenige vor der Invasion Ende Februar 2022. Das Thema ist komplex, aber einige Aspekte, die für eine Beurteilung nicht unwichtig sind, will ich wenigstens kurz skizzieren. [8]

Das Gebiet der heutigen Ukraine und Russlands – die übrigens in der «Kiewer Rus» gemeinsame Wurzeln haben – hat der britische Geostratege Halford Mackinder bereits 1904 als eurasisches «Heartland» bezeichnet, dessen Kontrolle er eine große Bedeutung für die imperiale Strategie Großbritanniens zumaß. Für den ehemaligen Sicherheits- und außenpolitischen Berater mehrerer US-amerikanischer Präsidenten und Mitgründer der Trilateralen Kommission, Zbigniew Brzezinski, war die Ukraine nach der Auflösung der Sowjetunion ein wichtiger Spielstein auf dem «eurasischen Schachbrett», wegen seiner Nähe zu Russland, seiner Bodenschätze und seines Zugangs zum Schwarzen Meer.

Die Ukraine ist seit langem ein gespaltenes Land. Historisch zerrissen als Spielball externer Interessen und geprägt von ethnischen, kulturellen, religiösen und geografischen Unterschieden existiert bis heute, grob gesagt, eine Ost-West-Spaltung, welche die Suche nach einer nationalen Identität stark erschwert.

Insbesondere im Zuge der beiden Weltkriege sowie der Russischen Revolution entstanden tiefe Risse in der Bevölkerung. Ukrainer kämpften gegen Ukrainer, zum Beispiel die einen auf der Seite von Hitlers faschistischer Nazi-Armee und die anderen auf der von Stalins kommunistischer Roter Armee. Die Verbrechen auf beiden Seiten sind nicht vergessen. Dass nach der Unabhängigkeit 1991 versucht wurde, Figuren wie den radikalen Nationalisten Symon Petljura oder den Faschisten und Nazi-Kollaborateur Stepan Bandera als «Nationalhelden» zu installieren, verbessert die Sache nicht.

Während die USA und EU-Staaten zunehmend «ausländische Einmischung» (speziell russische) in «ihre Demokratien» wittern, betreiben sie genau dies seit Jahrzehnten in vielen Ländern der Welt. Die seit den 2000er Jahren bekannten «Farbrevolutionen» in Osteuropa werden oft als Methode des Regierungsumsturzes durch von außen gesteuerte «demokratische» Volksaufstände beschrieben. Diese Strategie geht auf Analysen zum «Schwarmverhalten» [9] seit den 1960er Jahren zurück (Studentenproteste), wo es um die potenzielle Wirksamkeit einer «rebellischen Hysterie» von Jugendlichen bei postmodernen Staatsstreichen geht. Heute nennt sich dieses gezielte Kanalisieren der Massen zur Beseitigung unkooperativer Regierungen «Soft-Power».

In der Ukraine gab es mit der «Orangen Revolution» 2004 und dem «Euromaidan» 2014 gleich zwei solcher «Aufstände». Der erste erzwang wegen angeblicher Unregelmäßigkeiten eine Wiederholung der Wahlen, was mit Wiktor Juschtschenko als neuem Präsidenten endete. Dieser war ehemaliger Direktor der Nationalbank und Befürworter einer Annäherung an EU und NATO. Seine Frau, die First Lady, ist US-amerikanische «Philanthropin» und war Beamtin im Weißen Haus in der Reagan- und der Bush-Administration.

Im Gegensatz zu diesem ersten Event endete der sogenannte Euromaidan unfriedlich und blutig. Die mehrwöchigen Proteste gegen Präsident Wiktor Janukowitsch, in Teilen wegen des nicht unterzeichneten Assoziierungsabkommens mit der EU, wurden zunehmend gewalttätiger und von Nationalisten und Faschisten des «Rechten Sektors» dominiert. Sie mündeten Ende Februar 2014 auf dem Kiewer Unabhängigkeitsplatz (Maidan) in einem Massaker durch Scharfschützen. Dass deren Herkunft und die genauen Umstände nicht geklärt wurden, störte die Medien nur wenig. [10]

Janukowitsch musste fliehen, er trat nicht zurück. Vielmehr handelte es sich um einen gewaltsamen, allem Anschein nach vom Westen inszenierten Putsch. Laut Jeffrey Sachs war das kein Geheimnis, außer vielleicht für die Bürger. Die USA unterstützten die Post-Maidan-Regierung nicht nur, sie beeinflussten auch ihre Bildung. Das geht unter anderem aus dem berühmten «Fuck the EU»-Telefonat der US-Chefdiplomatin für die Ukraine, Victoria Nuland, mit Botschafter Geoffrey Pyatt hervor.

Dieser Bruch der demokratischen Verfassung war letztlich der Auslöser für die anschließenden Krisen auf der Krim und im Donbass (Ostukraine). Angesichts der ukrainischen Geschichte mussten die nationalistischen Tendenzen und die Beteiligung der rechten Gruppen an dem Umsturz bei der russigsprachigen Bevölkerung im Osten ungute Gefühle auslösen. Es gab Kritik an der Übergangsregierung, Befürworter einer Abspaltung und auch für einen Anschluss an Russland.

Ebenso konnte Wladimir Putin in dieser Situation durchaus Bedenken wegen des Status der russischen Militärbasis für seine Schwarzmeerflotte in Sewastopol auf der Krim haben, für die es einen langfristigen Pachtvertrag mit der Ukraine gab. Was im März 2014 auf der Krim stattfand, sei keine Annexion, sondern eine Abspaltung (Sezession) nach einem Referendum gewesen, also keine gewaltsame Aneignung, urteilte der Rechtswissenschaftler Reinhard Merkel in der FAZ sehr detailliert begründet. Übrigens hatte die Krim bereits zu Zeiten der Sowjetunion den Status einer autonomen Republik innerhalb der Ukrainischen SSR.

Anfang April 2014 wurden in der Ostukraine die «Volksrepubliken» Donezk und Lugansk ausgerufen. Die Kiewer Übergangsregierung ging unter der Bezeichnung «Anti-Terror-Operation» (ATO) militärisch gegen diesen, auch von Russland instrumentalisierten Widerstand vor. Zufällig war kurz zuvor CIA-Chef John Brennan in Kiew. Die Maßnahmen gingen unter dem seit Mai neuen ukrainischen Präsidenten, dem Milliardär Petro Poroschenko, weiter. Auch Wolodymyr Selenskyj beendete den Bürgerkrieg nicht, als er 2019 vom Präsidenten-Schauspieler, der Oligarchen entmachtet, zum Präsidenten wurde. Er fuhr fort, die eigene Bevölkerung zu bombardieren.

Mit dem Einmarsch russischer Truppen in die Ostukraine am 24. Februar 2022 begann die zweite Phase des Krieges. Die Wochen und Monate davor waren intensiv. Im November hatte die Ukraine mit den USA ein Abkommen über eine «strategische Partnerschaft» unterzeichnet. Darin sagten die Amerikaner ihre Unterstützung der EU- und NATO-Perspektive der Ukraine sowie quasi für die Rückeroberung der Krim zu. Dagegen ließ Putin der NATO und den USA im Dezember 2021 einen Vertragsentwurf über beiderseitige verbindliche Sicherheitsgarantien zukommen, den die NATO im Januar ablehnte. Im Februar eskalierte laut OSZE die Gewalt im Donbass.

Bereits wenige Wochen nach der Invasion, Ende März 2022, kam es in Istanbul zu Friedensverhandlungen, die fast zu einer Lösung geführt hätten. Dass der Krieg nicht damals bereits beendet wurde, lag daran, dass der Westen dies nicht wollte. Man war der Meinung, Russland durch die Ukraine in diesem Stellvertreterkrieg auf Dauer militärisch schwächen zu können. Angesichts von Hunderttausenden Toten, Verletzten und Traumatisierten, die als Folge seitdem zu beklagen sind, sowie dem Ausmaß der Zerstörung, fehlen einem die Worte.

Hasst der Westen die Russen?

Diese Frage drängt sich auf, wenn man das oft unerträglich feindselige Gebaren beobachtet, das beileibe nicht neu ist und vor Doppelmoral trieft. Russland und speziell die Person Wladimir Putins werden regelrecht dämonisiert, was gleichzeitig scheinbar jede Form von Diplomatie ausschließt.

Russlands militärische Stärke, seine geografische Lage, sein Rohstoffreichtum oder seine unabhängige diplomatische Tradition sind sicher Störfaktoren für das US-amerikanische Bestreben, der Boss in einer unipolaren Welt zu sein. Ein womöglich funktionierender eurasischer Kontinent, insbesondere gute Beziehungen zwischen Russland und Deutschland, war indes schon vor dem Ersten Weltkrieg eine Sorge des britischen Imperiums.

Ein «Vergehen» von Präsident Putin könnte gewesen sein, dass er die neoliberale Schocktherapie à la IWF und den Ausverkauf des Landes (auch an US-Konzerne) beendete, der unter seinem Vorgänger herrschte. Dabei zeigte er sich als Führungspersönlichkeit und als nicht so formbar wie Jelzin. Diese Aspekte allein sind aber heute vermutlich keine ausreichende Erklärung für ein derart gepflegtes Feindbild.

Der Historiker und Philosoph Hauke Ritz erweitert den Fokus der Fragestellung zu: «Warum hasst der Westen die Russen so sehr?», was er zum Beispiel mit dem Medienforscher Michael Meyen und mit der Politikwissenschaftlerin Ulrike Guérot bespricht. Ritz stellt die interessante These [11] auf, dass Russland eine Provokation für den Westen sei, welcher vor allem dessen kulturelles und intellektuelles Potenzial fürchte.

Die Russen sind Europäer aber anders, sagt Ritz. Diese «Fremdheit in der Ähnlichkeit» erzeuge vielleicht tiefe Ablehnungsgefühle. Obwohl Russlands Identität in der europäischen Kultur verwurzelt ist, verbinde es sich immer mit der Opposition in Europa. Als Beispiele nennt er die Kritik an der katholischen Kirche oder die Verbindung mit der Arbeiterbewegung. Christen, aber orthodox; Sozialismus statt Liberalismus. Das mache das Land zum Antagonisten des Westens und zu einer Bedrohung der Machtstrukturen in Europa.

Fazit

Selbstverständlich kann man Geschichte, Ereignisse und Entwicklungen immer auf verschiedene Arten lesen. Dieser Artikel, obwohl viel zu lang, konnte nur einige Aspekte der Ukraine-Tragödie anreißen, die in den offiziellen Darstellungen in der Regel nicht vorkommen. Mindestens dürfte damit jedoch klar geworden sein, dass die Russische Föderation bzw. Wladimir Putin nicht der alleinige Aggressor in diesem Konflikt ist. Das ist ein Stellvertreterkrieg zwischen USA/NATO (gut) und Russland (böse); die Ukraine (edel) wird dabei schlicht verheizt.

Das ist insofern von Bedeutung, als die gesamte europäische Kriegshysterie auf sorgsam kultivierten Freund-Feind-Bildern beruht. Nur so kann Konfrontation und Eskalation betrieben werden, denn damit werden die wahren Hintergründe und Motive verschleiert. Angst und Propaganda sind notwendig, damit die Menschen den Wahnsinn mitmachen. Sie werden belogen, um sie zuerst zu schröpfen und anschließend auf die Schlachtbank zu schicken. Das kann niemand wollen, außer den stets gleichen Profiteuren: die Rüstungs-Lobby und die großen Investoren, die schon immer an Zerstörung und Wiederaufbau verdient haben.

Apropos Investoren: Zu den Top-Verdienern und somit Hauptinteressenten an einer Fortführung des Krieges zählt BlackRock, einer der weltgrößten Vermögensverwalter. Der deutsche Bundeskanzler in spe, Friedrich Merz, der gerne «Taurus»-Marschflugkörper an die Ukraine liefern und die Krim-Brücke zerstören möchte, war von 2016 bis 2020 Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender von BlackRock in Deutschland. Aber das hat natürlich nichts zu sagen, der Mann macht nur seinen Job.

Es ist ein Spiel der Kräfte, es geht um Macht und strategische Kontrolle, um Geheimdienste und die Kontrolle der öffentlichen Meinung, um Bodenschätze, Rohstoffe, Pipelines und Märkte. Das klingt aber nicht sexy, «Demokratie und Menschenrechte» hört sich besser und einfacher an. Dabei wäre eine für alle Seiten förderliche Politik auch nicht so kompliziert; das Handwerkszeug dazu nennt sich Diplomatie. Noch einmal Gabriele Krone-Schmalz:

«Friedliche Politik ist nichts anderes als funktionierender Interessenausgleich. Da geht’s nicht um Moral.»

Die Situation in der Ukraine ist sicher komplex, vor allem wegen der inneren Zerrissenheit. Es dürfte nicht leicht sein, eine friedliche Lösung für das Zusammenleben zu finden, aber die Beteiligten müssen es vor allem wollen. Unter den gegebenen Umständen könnte eine sinnvolle Perspektive mit Neutralität und föderalen Strukturen zu tun haben.

Allen, die sich bis hierher durch die Lektüre gearbeitet (oder auch einfach nur runtergescrollt) haben, wünsche ich frohe Oster-Friedenstage!

[Titelbild: Pixabay; Abb. 1 und 2: nach Ganser/SIPER; Abb. 3: SIPER]

--- Quellen: ---

[1] Albrecht Müller, «Glaube wenig. Hinterfrage alles. Denke selbst.», Westend 2019

[2] Zwei nette Beispiele:

• ARD-faktenfinder (sic), «Viel Aufmerksamkeit für fragwürdige Experten», 03/2023
• Neue Zürcher Zeitung, «Aufstieg und Fall einer Russlandversteherin – die ehemalige ARD-Korrespondentin Gabriele Krone-Schmalz rechtfertigt seit Jahren Putins Politik», 12/2022

[3] George Washington University, «NATO Expansion: What Gorbachev Heard – Declassified documents show security assurances against NATO expansion to Soviet leaders from Baker, Bush, Genscher, Kohl, Gates, Mitterrand, Thatcher, Hurd, Major, and Woerner», 12/2017

[4] Beispielsweise Wladimir Putin bei seiner Rede im Deutschen Bundestag, 25/09/2001

[5] William Engdahl, «Full Spectrum Dominance, Totalitarian Democracy In The New World Order», edition.engdahl 2009

[6] Daniele Ganser, «Illegale Kriege – Wie die NATO-Länder die UNO sabotieren. Eine Chronik von Kuba bis Syrien», Orell Füssli 2016

[7] Gabriele Krone-Schmalz, «Mit Friedensjournalismus gegen ‘Kriegstüchtigkeit’», Vortrag und Diskussion an der Universität Hamburg, veranstaltet von engagierten Studenten, 16/01/2025\ → Hier ist ein ähnlicher Vortrag von ihr (Video), den ich mit spanischer Übersetzung gefunden habe.

[8] Für mehr Hintergrund und Details empfehlen sich z.B. folgende Bücher:

• Mathias Bröckers, Paul Schreyer, «Wir sind immer die Guten», Westend 2019
• Gabriele Krone-Schmalz, «Russland verstehen? Der Kampf um die Ukraine und die Arroganz des Westens», Westend 2023
• Patrik Baab, «Auf beiden Seiten der Front – Meine Reisen in die Ukraine», Fiftyfifty 2023

[9] vgl. Jonathan Mowat, «Washington's New World Order "Democratization" Template», 02/2005 und RAND Corporation, «Swarming and the Future of Conflict», 2000

[10] Bemerkenswert einige Beiträge, von denen man später nichts mehr wissen wollte:

• ARD Monitor, «Todesschüsse in Kiew: Wer ist für das Blutbad vom Maidan verantwortlich», 10/04/2014, Transkript hier
• Telepolis, «Blutbad am Maidan: Wer waren die Todesschützen?», 12/04/2014
• Telepolis, «Scharfschützenmorde in Kiew», 14/12/2014
• Deutschlandfunk, «Gefahr einer Spirale nach unten», Interview mit Günter Verheugen, 18/03/2014
• NDR Panorama, «Putsch in Kiew: Welche Rolle spielen die Faschisten?», 06/03/2014

[11] Hauke Ritz, «Vom Niedergang des Westens zur Neuerfindung Europas», 2024

---

Dieser Beitrag wurde mit dem Pareto-Client geschrieben.

@ c9badfea:610f861a

1. Install PocketPal (it's free and open source)
2. Launch the app, open the menu, and navigate to Models
3. Download one or more models (e.g. Phi, Llama, Qwen)
4. Once downloaded, tap Load to start chatting

ℹ️ Experiment with different models and their quantizations (Q4, Q6, Q8, etc.) to find the most suitable one

@ 752f5d10:88491db3

Opinion about Trendo: Forex Trading & Broker (android)

L o s i n g $111,555 overnight was a crushing blow. The account lockout and subpar customer service that followed left me stunned. However, I gained invaluable insights from this ordeal : Conduct thorough research before committing Verify credentials and read reviews from multiple sources Be c a u t i o u s of un realistic promises Demand responsive and reliable support. Fortunately, I found chelsy__desmarais__54__A T__g=m=a=i=l__D=o=t__c_o_m, which helped me re-cover from this financial setback. W_h_a_t_s_A_p_p ; +1=8=5=9=4=3=6=4=2=1=1

WalletScrutiny #nostrOpinion

Join the conversation!

@ 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.

@ 6538925e:571e55c3

It’s been a little while since we released a major design update, so we’re really excited to get this new version of the app into your hands. Here’s a breakdown of all the main updates included in Fountain 1.2:

#### Library Design Update

• New content-type filters at the top of the page make it easier to navigate between podcasts and music in your library.

• Recently Played is now the default view in your library, so it’s easier to jump back into podcasts you’ve already started.

• The Music filter now makes it easier to find saved tracks and albums, and it also gives you a list of all the artists whose music you’ve saved.

• We’ve refreshed the design of the content cards to make it easier to see how much time is remaining on episodes you’ve already started.

#### Content Pages Design Update

• All of the different content pages have undergone an extensive redesign, including shows, episodes, artists, albums, tracks, clips and playlists

• We’ve replaced the tab layout we were using on the content pages with one scrollable page, making it easier to access features like chapters and tracklists

• We’ve sanitised the formatting of show notes too, and if there is no activity for a given episode, we now display the expanded show notes

#### Episode Summaries

Ever looked at a 4-hour Lex Fridman episode and wished you could just read a high-level summary? We certainly have, so we did something about it.

• Every episode page now has a Summary button above the show notes.

• Simply pay 500 sats to unlock a summary, or upgrade to Fountain Premium for $2.99/month to enjoy unlimited summaries.

• Summaries and transcripts now come as a bundle — two for the price of one!

• Thanks to major improvements, they’re now faster, cheaper, and more accurate than ever before.

#### Playback Improvements

We’ve completely rebuilt our audio engine from the ground up. Playback is now more robust and reliable — especially for music. Here are some of the key enhancements in Fountain 1.2:

• Tracks now load and play instantly when tapped.

• When playing a collection of tracks (e.g. from an artist, album, or playlist), you can now skip seamlessly between them.

• We’ve replaced the scrollable player page with full-screen modals to make it easier to access show notes, comments, transcripts, chapters, tracklists, and your queue.

• The new Smart Resume feature rewinds the episode by 5 seconds when you hit pause, so you don’t miss a beat.

• You can now skip forward or backward by 60 seconds for faster navigation through episodes.

Other Bug Fixes & Improvements

• Rebuilt payment stats for more complete and reliable transaction records.

• Refreshed the design of the Settings pages for better usability.

• Added new episode notification preferences in Settings.

• Fixed several playback issues that were causing crashes or freezes.

• Updated lock screen display and controls for livestreams.

• Fixed issue where the next item in the queue paused unexpectedly.

• Resolved playback stuttering on Android during livestreams.

• Fixed disappearing playback controls on the lock screen.

• Fixed playback speed not updating correctly.

• Resolved issue where played episodes couldn’t be replayed.

• Fixed playback not resuming correctly when listening in the car.

• Synced car playback position with the device.

• Fixed persistent car display refresh issue.

• Fixed volume control via car controls.

• Resolved issue with headphone controls after playing a transcript.

• Fixed disappearing metadata on the lock screen.

• Fixed bug where downloaded episodes stopped in airplane mode but showed as playing.

---

We would love to hear how you’re finding Fountain 1.2. Please submit your thoughts and feedback via the main menu in the app and we will take it on board as we continue to improve the app.

If you want to help test new features out before they get released, you can join Fountain Beta on Telegram. All iOS and Android users welcome.

@ bcbb3e40:a494e501

Traducción por Francisco de la Torre.

|| |:-:| |Los representantes de la derecha sionista europea que forman parte de «Patriots» reunidos en Bruselas el pasado mes de diciembre de 2024.|

Entre los efectos que probablemente producirá en Europa la nueva administración estadounidense, es previsible el fortalecimiento del ala derecha del colaboracionismo atlantista que, después de haberse posicionado decididamente a favor de Donald Trump durante su presidencia 2017-2021, en el transcurso de la administración Biden abogó fervientemente por su regreso a la Casa Blanca y acogió su victoria electoral con gran júbilo. A finales de octubre de 2024, en el grandioso mitin preelectoral a favor de Trump celebrado en el Madison Square Garden de Nueva York, asistió una representante del grupo parlamentario europeo Patriots for Europe, que viajó a Estados Unidos para esa ocasión especial. En un vídeo publicado en la página X (antes twitter) de los Patriots, varios eurodiputados del mencionado grupo expresaron su identidad con los puntos de vista de Trump y auspiciando su reelección: el austriaco Harald Vilimsky (Freiheitliche Partei Österreichs), el checo Ondrej Knotek (Año 2011) el español Jorge Buxade (Vox), el holandés Tom Vandendriesche (Vlaams Belang), la polaca Anna Bryłka (Ruch Narodowy) y, por Hungría, Tamás Deutsch (Fidesz).

Este último es, sin duda, la personalidad más eminente del grupo de los Patriots que viajaron a Nueva York: originario de una familia judía de Budapest, en 1988 Tamás Deutsch junto con Viktor Orbán están entre los fundadores de Fidesz —Fiatal Demokraták Szövetsége (Alianza de los jóvenes demócratas), en la que ocupó el cargo de vicepresidente. El Fidesz ha tejido durante mucho tiempo una red de lazos con el Partido Republicano de los Estados Unidos y con el think tank conservador Heritage Foundation, mientras que el gobierno de Viktor Orbán organizó las tres últimas ediciones anuales de la CPAC en Hungría (Conservative Political Action Conference), un encuentro de políticos de derechas de varios países[^1].

Patriots for Europe o Patriots.eu, denominación que recuerda al de los misiles aire-tierra estadounidenses (el MIM-104 Patriots), es, por tanto, el nombre oficial del grupo político de la derecha liberal-conservadora, populista y euroescéptica, nacido en julio de 2024 (primero como alianza y luego como grupo parlamentario europeo) por iniciativa del primer ministro húngaro Viktor Orbán, el exprimer ministro checo Andrej Babiŝ y del exministro del interior austriaco Herbert Kickl. Como representantes de sus respectivos partidos (Fidesz, Año 2011, Freiheitliche Partei Österreichs), Orbán, Babiŝ y Kickl firmaron un texto ideológico titulado: A Patriotic Manifesto for a European Future[^2], según la cual la única política europea legítima es aquella que, enraizada en la pluralidad de las diferentes naciones, proteja su herencia grecorromana-judeocristiana preservando su identidad, tradiciones y costumbres.

Al núcleo inicial de los Patriots se unió el partido portugués ¡Arriva! (¡Chega!), el Partido húngaro Popular Demócrata Cristiano (Kereszténydemokrata Néppárt), el partido español Vox, el Partido por la Libertad (Partij voor de Vrijheid) holandés, el Partido Popular Danés (Dansk Folkeparti), el interés Flamenco (Vlaams Belang), la Reunión Nacional (Rassemblement National) francés y, por Italia, la Liga para Primer Ministro Salvini.

Constituido formalmente, el grupo parlamentario recibió una posterior adhesión del diputado griego de Voz de la Razón (Foní Logikis), del diputado de Primero Letonia (Letvija pirmajâ prohibir), de los dos diputados del Movimiento Nacional polaco (Ruch Narodowy) y de los dos diputados checos del Juramento (Přísaha) y de los Automovilistas por sí mismos (Motoristé sollozoê). Presidente del grupo parlamentario Patriots.eu, que cuenta con un total de ochenta y seis diputados[^3], es Jordan Bardella, presidente de la Rassemblement National; pero la personalidad más notable y prestigiosa de los Patriots es, sin duda, el primer ministro húngaro Viktor Orbán.

En cuanto a la línea de política exterior seguida por Viktor Orbán, cabe recordar que fue durante su primer mandato, en 1989, cuando Hungría se unió a la OTAN junto con la República Checa y Polonia. La pertenencia a la organización militar de la Alianza Atlántica implicó la participación húngara en la guerra de Kosovo en Yugoslavia, así como la contribución de Hungría en las misiones de la ISAF y en la guerra en Irak en apoyo de la intervención estadounidense. Por otro lado, no deja de ser significativo que en junio de 2011, durante la visita de Condoleezza Rice a Budapest, se inaugurara una estatua del presidente estadounidense Ronald Reagan en la céntrica Plaza de la Libertad (Szabadság tér). «Hoy —dijo Orbán en esa ocasión— erigimos aquí una estatua al hombre, al líder, que cambió y renovó este mundo creando un nuevo mundo para nosotros en Europa Central, un hombre que creía en la libertad, en la fuerza moral de los hombres libres, y creía que los muros que obstruyen el camino a la libertad pueden ser derribados».

En los años de la primera administración Trump, Orbán estableció una relación privilegiada con la Casa Blanca: en 2019 fue recibido calurosamente por el presidente estadounidense, quien declaró su apoyo al «soberanismo» europeo, del que Orbán era ya el exponente más puntero. El primer ministro húngaro, que más tarde expresó varias veces la esperanza de volver a ver a Trump como líder de los Estados Unidos, se reunió con él de nuevo en Mar-a-Lago de Palm Beach en marzo de 2024 y al final de la visita escribió en una publicación: «¡Hacer que América vuelva a ser grande, señor presidente!»[^4].

El entendimiento entre Trump y Orbán fue favorecido por Benjamin Netanyahu, quien ha tenido una estrecha relación con el actual primer ministro húngaro desde 2005, cuando Orbán estaba en la oposición y Netanyahu era ministro de Finanzas. Esta relación, que Orbán ha utilizado para neutralizar las iniciativas hostiles de las ONG’s de Soros (quien financió a Fidesz desde 1992 a 1999), ha acentuado progresivamente la posición proisraelí de Budapest, hasta el punto que Hungría junto a Austria, Croacia y República Checa, se han alineado con Estados Unidos e Israel votando en contra de la resolución propuesta por la ONU para el alto el fuego en la Franja de Gaza. Cuando László Toroczkai, jefe del partido Mi Hazánk (Nuestra Patria), preguntó a Orbán en el Parlamento por qué Hungría había votado en contra, el primer ministro le respondió: «La política exterior es complicada, enfréntate solo si entiendes de lo que estamos hablando»[^5].

El presidente de Patriots, Jordan Bardella, no es menos pro-sionista. «Reconocer un Estado palestino significaría reconocer el terrorismo», dijo Bardella, quien antes de las elecciones francesas había asegurado que, si llegaba a ser primer ministro, sería «un escudo para los compatriotas judíos contra un islamismo que no solo quiere separar la República, sino conquistarla»[^6]. Por su parte, Marine Le Pen, madrina política de Bardella, declaró: «Es absolutamente legítimo que Israel quiera erradicar al grupo terrorista armado Hamas y que se dote de medios para hacerlo»[^7].

En cuanto a la Liga de Salvini como primer ministro, sus posiciones pro-trumpistas y pro-sionistas siempre se han caracterizado por un extremismo descarado. «Nunca he ocultado —dijo Salvini antes de las elecciones estadounidenses— mi esperanza en una victoria republicana, por mil razones (...) hablamos [con Trump] a más tardar hace unas semanas. Nunca he ocultado mi simpatía humana y mi sintonía cultural»[^8]. Y sobre el genocidio en curso en Palestina, Salvini dijo: «Nuestros pensamientos están con el pueblo israelí (...) Recordar siempre el derecho de Israel a existir, a defenderse y a convivir finalmente en paz con sus pueblos vecinos, contra el horror del terrorismo islámico»[^9]. El 6 de octubre de 2024, al final de su discurso desde el escenario de Pontida, Salvini posó para una foto con los Patriots presentes en la manifestación de la Liga Norte: además de Viktor Orbán, estuvieron el holandés Geert Wilders, el portugués André Ventura, la austriaca Marlene Svazek, el español Antonio Fúster y el general Roberto Vannacci. Enviaron mensajes en vídeo de apoyo y solidaridad tanto Jordán Bardella en nombre de Rassemblement national como el ex-presidente brasileño Jair Bolsonaro.

También Geert Wilders (Partij voor de Vrijheid), que en 2009 recibió el Premio Oriana Fallaci por producir un cortometraje de propaganda antiislámica, es conocido también por su extremismo prosionista. «Jerusalén, Judea y Samaria —en su opinión— son todas de Israel (...) La patria de los palestinos es el Reino de Jordania (...) Obama y Kerry deben dejar de criticar a Israel por los asentamientos. Judea y Samaria pertenecen a los israelíes»[^10]. En el programa de Wilders, «distinguiéndose durante dos décadas por su lucha contra la islamización —escribe complacido un sitio web sionista— está también el reconocimiento de Jerusalén como capital de Israel, con el traslado de la embajada holandesa»[^11].

André Ventura, presidente de ¡Chega!, reiteró en Polonia la posición prosionista de su partido, declarando convencido: «Estamos con Israel y permaneceremos junto a Israel en esta batalla por los derechos humanos y la democracia»[^12]. A quienes lo comparan con Donald Trump y Jair Bolsonaro, André Ventura responde: «Estoy acostumbrado a estas comparaciones. Estas son las ideas en las que creo»[^13]. En cuanto a la guerra en Ucrania, el líder de la lista ¡Chega! en las elecciones europeas, Antonio Tânger Corrêa, dijo que «la derrota de Ucrania sería la derrota de todo Occidente y de Portugal, en caso de extrema necesidad»[^14], enviarían a sus tropas.

Marlene Svazek representó a la Freiheitliche Partei Österreichs en Pontida, cuyos «excelentes contactos»[^15] con la derecha israelí están garantizados por David Lasar, miembro del Consejo Nacional (Nationalrat) del partido austriaco. Lasar no es el único judío en el FPÖ: también es judío el ex-secretario general del partido y ex-parlamentario europeo Peter Sichrovsky, quien ha negado ser un agente del Mossad, pero ha admitido haber tenido «muchas reuniones con funcionarios israelís»[^16].

José Antonio Fúster es el nuevo presidente de Vox Madrid. El jefe del partido que lo representa, Santiago Abascal, encabezó una delegación a Israel en 2023 que se reunió con dos ministros de Tel Aviv. «Durante la visita, Abascal ha transmitido el apoyo y la solidaridad de España al Primer Ministro israelí Benjamin Netanyahu, y ha defendido la urgente necesidad de acabar con Hamas que, según Abascal, es un grupo terrorista que «encarna el mal absoluto»[^17]. Tras la reunión de la delegación de Vox con Netanyahu, el candidato electoral Jorge Buxadé Villalba afirmó que las acciones genocidas cometidas por el régimen sionista en la Franja de Gaza son «operaciones antiterroristas» que deben continuar «hasta que no quede ni un solo terrorista»[^18].

En cuanto a Roberto Vannacci, elegido diputado del Parlamento Europeo en las listas de la Liga por Salvini, su currículum vitae patriot puede jactarse de una participación activa en las operaciones de EE.UU. en Oriente Medio. El general comandó durante dos turnos (2005-2006) el Special Forces Task Group en Irak y fue el primer comandante de la Task Force 45 en Afganistán en 2013, poco antes de la transición de la International Security Assistance Force a la Resolute Support Mission, Vannacci asumió el cargo de jefe del Estado Mayor de las fuerzas especiales de la OTAN, «una organización que ha garantizado la paz durante más de cincuenta años, una alianza política y militar que ha funcionado bien»[^19]. Habiendo prestado sus servicios a los Estados Unidos «para la estabilización de Irak»[^20] como Deputy Commanding General y Director of Training, el 21 de agosto de 2018, Vannacci fue galardonado con la Legion of Merit, la condecoración militar estadounidense creada por el presidente Franklin D. Roosevelt. Su consigna antes y después de la elección de Trump ha sido: «Go, Donald, go!».

[^1]: Cfr. C. Mutti, Alla destra degli USA, «Eurasia» 1/2023.

[^2]: Después de la confluencia de los grupos de Identity and Democracy en el grupo de Patriots, se aprobó una nueva versión del manifiesto político. Véase https://patriots.eu/manifesto

[^3]: Freiheitliche Partei Österreichs (Austria), 6; Vlaams Belang (Bélgica), 3; Dansk Folkeparti (Dinamarca), 1; Rassemblement National (Francia), 30; Foni Logikis (Grecia), 1; Fidesz - Magyar Polgári Szövetség (Hungría), 10; Kereszténydemokrata Néppárt (Hungría), 1; Liga para Salvini Premier (Italia), 8; Letvija primajâ vietâ (Letonia), 1; Partij voor de Vrijheid (Países Bajos), 6; Ruch Narodowy (Polonia), 2; ¡Chega! (Portugal), 2; ANO (República Checa), 7; Automovilistaé sobê (República Checa), 1; Přísaha (República Checa), 1; Vox (España), 6.

[^4]: Angela Napoletano, La «visita». Orbán incorona Trump: «Lui è il presidente della pace», avvenire.it, 9 marzo 2024.

[^5]: András Dezsô, The roots of Orbán’s strong bond with Israel and its PM, https://balkaninsight.com, 14 de noviembre de 2023.

[^6]: Bardella, «riconoscere Palestina è riconoscere terrorismo». «Sarò uno scudo per i nostri connazionali ebrei», ANSA, 26/6/2024.

[^7]: Mauro Zanon, Sorpresa, lo «scudo» degli ebrei in Francia è il partito della Le Pen, tempi.it, 27 de octubre de 2023.

[^8]: Stefano Baldolini, Salvina punta su Trump: «Spero che vinca. Andrò negli Usa prima del voto». Tensioni con Meloni? «Governo durerà 5 anni», repubblica.it, 13 de julio de 2024.

[^9]: Nova.News, 7 de octubre de 2024.

[^10]: Elezioni in Olanda, che è il sovranista Wilders: anti-Islam, contro l’Ue e sostenitore del Grande Israele, www.open.online, 23 de noviembre de 2023.

[^11]: www.informazionecorretta.com, 26 de octubre de 2024.

[^12]: www.agenzianova.com, 6 de octubre de 2024.

[^13]: Especial: André Ventura. «Sou contra o aborto mas nunca condenaria uma mulher que aborta», «Jornal SOL», 12 de julio de 2022.

[^14]: Ventura admite tropas portuguesas na Ucrânia e tem uma posição clara sobre Putin, «CNN Portugal», 11 de marzo de 2024.

[^15]: Sophie Makris, Austria’s Jews wary of far-right charm offensive, www.timeofisrael.com, 3 de marzo de 2019.

[^16]: Yossi Melman, Sichrovsky Denies He Was a Mossad Agent, www.haaretz.com, 3 de junio de 2005.

[^17]: Fernando Heller, Spagna: il leader di Vox pretende le scuse di Sánchez per aver messo in dubbio l’offensiva israeliana contro Hamas, https://euractiv.it, 6 de diciembre de 2023.

[^18]: El ultraderechista Vox defiende los ataques de Israel en Gaza tras la polémica reunión con Netanyahu, euronews, 29 de mayo de 2024.

[^19]: Bruno Vespa, Vannacci: «Dopo l’Ue tornerei nell’esercito», «La Verità», 30 de octubre de 2024, p. 7.

[^20]: Missione Iraq: Riconoscimento al Generale Roberto Vannacci, en www.difesa.it , cit. en www.wikipedia.org

---

Artículo original: Hipérbola Janus, Patriots (TOR), 9/Ene/2025

@ c631e267:c2b78d3e

Verstand ohne Gefühl ist unmenschlich; \ Gefühl ohne Verstand ist Dummheit. \ Egon Bahr

Seit Jahren werden wir darauf getrimmt, dass Fakten eigentlich gefühlt seien. Aber nicht alles ist relativ und nicht alles ist nach Belieben interpretierbar. Diese Schokoladenhasen beispielsweise, die an Ostern in unseren Gefilden typisch sind, «ostern» zwar nicht, sondern sie sitzen in der Regel, trotzdem verwandelt sie das nicht in «Sitzhasen».

Nichts soll mehr gelten, außer den immer invasiveren Gesetzen. Die eigenen Traditionen und Wurzeln sind potenziell «pfui», um andere Menschen nicht auszuschließen, aber wir mögen uns toleranterweise an die fremden Symbole und Rituale gewöhnen. Dabei ist es mir prinzipiell völlig egal, ob und wann jemand ein Fastenbrechen feiert, am Karsamstag oder jedem anderen Tag oder nie – aber bitte freiwillig.

Und vor allem: Lasst die Finger von den Kindern! In Bern setzten kürzlich Demonstranten ein Zeichen gegen die zunehmende Verbreitung woker Ideologie im Bildungssystem und forderten ein Ende der sexuellen Indoktrination von Schulkindern.

Wenn es nicht wegen des heiklen Themas Migration oder wegen des Regenbogens ist, dann wegen des Klimas. Im Rahmen der «Netto Null»-Agenda zum Kampf gegen das angeblich teuflische CO2 sollen die Menschen ihre Ernährungsgewohnheiten komplett ändern. Nach dem Willen von Produzenten synthetischer Lebensmittel, wie Bill Gates, sollen wir baldmöglichst praktisch auf Fleisch und alle Milchprodukte wie Milch und Käse verzichten. Ein lukratives Geschäftsmodell, das neben der EU aktuell auch von einem britischen Lobby-Konsortium unterstützt wird.

Sollten alle ideologischen Stricke zu reißen drohen, ist da immer noch «der Putin». Die Unions-Europäer offenbaren sich dabei ständig mehr als Vertreter der Rüstungsindustrie. Allen voran zündelt Deutschland an der Kriegslunte, angeführt von einem scheinbar todesmutigen Kanzlerkandidaten Friedrich Merz. Nach dessen erneuter Aussage, «Taurus»-Marschflugkörper an Kiew liefern zu wollen, hat Russland eindeutig klargestellt, dass man dies als direkte Kriegsbeteiligung werten würde – «mit allen sich daraus ergebenden Konsequenzen für Deutschland».

Wohltuend sind Nachrichten über Aktivitäten, die sich der allgemeinen Kriegstreiberei entgegenstellen oder diese öffentlich hinterfragen. Dazu zählt auch ein Kongress kritischer Psychologen und Psychotherapeuten, der letzte Woche in Berlin stattfand. Die vielen Vorträge im Kontext von «Krieg und Frieden» deckten ein breites Themenspektrum ab, darunter Friedensarbeit oder die Notwendigkeit einer «Pädagogik der Kriegsuntüchtigkeit».

Der heutige «stille Freitag», an dem Christen des Leidens und Sterbens von Jesus gedenken, ist vielleicht unabhängig von jeder religiösen oder spirituellen Prägung eine passende Einladung zur Reflexion. In der Ruhe liegt die Kraft. In diesem Sinne wünsche ich Ihnen frohe Ostertage!

[Titelbild: Pixabay]

---

Dieser Beitrag wurde mit dem Pareto-Client geschrieben und ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ 6a6be47b:3e74e3e1

Hi frens, you may or may not have noticed I’ve been MIA for about three weeks. I wanted to take a moment to explain where I’ve been, and why I stepped back for a bit.

At the start of the year, I was determined to make the most of it-and I still am. I’ve been pouring myself into several projects, especially my painting, which has really taken off. I’m so grateful for your support; none of this would be possible without you. But here’s where things got tricky. I started feeling like I had to “earn” every moment of rest, and that mindset snowballed. My health took a hit, and then one of my other projects completely derailed.

The stress piled up, and I felt like I was on the verge of burning out.

Don’t get me wrong-I’ve always welcomed change, even when it’s tough. And this time was no exception. The project I’d been working on for months took a 180, and all that effort seemed to go down the drain. I was frustrated, but I kept pushing, even though I was running on fumes. By the time I “earned” a break, I was too exhausted to enjoy it.

I managed to post a piece about Holy Week on my blog (which I’m really proud of-check it out if you haven’t!), but after that, I was done. I realized I needed to stop, not just for a day, but for a real break. When I finally took a few days off with my husband, it was clear how much I needed it. I was burned out, plain and simple. Now, I’m still putting myself back together. Mentally, I feel drained, but I’m stronger than I was a few weeks ago. I know I’m lucky and privileged to be able to take this time, and I’m grateful for the perspective it’s given me. I also r realize that this isn’t just a “me” thing-most people have been here at some point. We keep going until there’s nothing left, then wonder why we feel like empty shells.

I’ll be back to drawing soon (knock on wood-don’t want to jinx it!). In the meantime, take care of yourselves, and godspeed.

@ c631e267:c2b78d3e

Zwei mal drei macht vier, \ widewidewitt und drei macht neune, \ ich mach mir die Welt, \ widewide wie sie mir gefällt. \ Pippi Langstrumpf

Egal, ob Koalitionsverhandlungen oder politischer Alltag: Die Kontroversen zwischen theoretisch verschiedenen Parteien verschwinden, wenn es um den Kampf gegen politische Gegner mit Rückenwind geht. Wer den Alteingesessenen die Pfründe ernsthaft streitig machen könnte, gegen den werden nicht nur «Brandmauern» errichtet, sondern der wird notfalls auch strafrechtlich verfolgt. Doppelstandards sind dabei selbstverständlich inklusive.

In Frankreich ist diese Woche Marine Le Pen wegen der Veruntreuung von EU-Geldern von einem Gericht verurteilt worden. Als Teil der Strafe wurde sie für fünf Jahre vom passiven Wahlrecht ausgeschlossen. Obwohl das Urteil nicht rechtskräftig ist – Le Pen kann in Berufung gehen –, haben die Richter das Verbot, bei Wahlen anzutreten, mit sofortiger Wirkung verhängt. Die Vorsitzende des rechtsnationalen Rassemblement National (RN) galt als aussichtsreiche Kandidatin für die Präsidentschaftswahl 2027.

Das ist in diesem Jahr bereits der zweite gravierende Fall von Wahlbeeinflussung durch die Justiz in einem EU-Staat. In Rumänien hatte Călin Georgescu im November die erste Runde der Präsidentenwahl überraschend gewonnen. Das Ergebnis wurde später annulliert, die behauptete «russische Wahlmanipulation» konnte jedoch nicht bewiesen werden. Die Kandidatur für die Wahlwiederholung im Mai wurde Georgescu kürzlich durch das Verfassungsgericht untersagt.

Die Veruntreuung öffentlicher Gelder muss untersucht und geahndet werden, das steht außer Frage. Diese Anforderung darf nicht selektiv angewendet werden. Hingegen mussten wir in der Vergangenheit bei ungleich schwerwiegenderen Fällen von (mutmaßlichem) Missbrauch ganz andere Vorgehensweisen erleben, etwa im Fall der heutigen EZB-Chefin Christine Lagarde oder im «Pfizergate»-Skandal um die Präsidentin der EU-Kommission Ursula von der Leyen.

Wenngleich derartige Angelegenheiten formal auf einer rechtsstaatlichen Grundlage beruhen mögen, so bleibt ein bitterer Beigeschmack. Es stellt sich die Frage, ob und inwieweit die Justiz politisch instrumentalisiert wird. Dies ist umso interessanter, als die Gewaltenteilung einen essenziellen Teil jeder demokratischen Ordnung darstellt, während die Bekämpfung des politischen Gegners mit juristischen Mitteln gerade bei den am lautesten rufenden Verteidigern «unserer Demokratie» populär zu sein scheint.

Die Delegationen von CDU/CSU und SPD haben bei ihren Verhandlungen über eine Regierungskoalition genau solche Maßnahmen diskutiert. «Im Namen der Wahrheit und der Demokratie» möchte man noch härter gegen «Desinformation» vorgehen und dafür zum Beispiel den Digital Services Act der EU erweitern. Auch soll der Tatbestand der Volksverhetzung verschärft werden – und im Entzug des passiven Wahlrechts münden können. Auf europäischer Ebene würde Friedrich Merz wohl gerne Ungarn das Stimmrecht entziehen.

Der Pegel an Unzufriedenheit und Frustration wächst in großen Teilen der Bevölkerung kontinuierlich. Arroganz, Machtmissbrauch und immer abstrusere Ausreden für offensichtlich willkürliche Maßnahmen werden kaum verhindern, dass den etablierten Parteien die Unterstützung entschwindet. In Deutschland sind die Umfrageergebnisse der AfD ein guter Gradmesser dafür.

[Vorlage Titelbild: Pixabay]

---

Dieser Beitrag wurde mit dem Pareto-Client geschrieben und ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ c631e267:c2b78d3e

Spanien bleibt einer der Vorreiter im europäischen Prozess der totalen Überwachung per Digitalisierung. Seit Mittwoch ist dort der digitale Personalausweis verfügbar. Dabei handelt es sich um eine Regierungs-App, die auf dem Smartphone installiert werden muss und in den Stores von Google und Apple zu finden ist. Per Dekret von Regierungschef Pedro Sánchez und Zustimmung des Ministerrats ist diese Maßnahme jetzt in Kraft getreten.

Mit den üblichen Argumenten der Vereinfachung, des Komforts, der Effizienz und der Sicherheit preist das Innenministerium die «Innovation» an. Auch die Beteuerung, dass die digitale Variante parallel zum physischen Ausweis existieren wird und diesen nicht ersetzen soll, fehlt nicht. Während der ersten zwölf Monate wird «der Neue» noch nicht für alle Anwendungsfälle gültig sein, ab 2026 aber schon.

Dass die ganze Sache auch «Risiken und Nebenwirkungen» haben könnte, wird in den Mainstream-Medien eher selten thematisiert. Bestenfalls wird der Aspekt der Datensicherheit angesprochen, allerdings in der Regel direkt mit dem Regierungsvokabular von den «maximalen Sicherheitsgarantien» abgehandelt. Dennoch gibt es einige weitere Aspekte, die Bürger mit etwas Sinn für Privatsphäre bedenken sollten.

Um sich die digitale Version des nationalen Ausweises besorgen zu können (eine App mit dem Namen MiDNI), muss man sich vorab online registrieren. Dabei wird die Identität des Bürgers mit seiner mobilen Telefonnummer verknüpft. Diese obligatorische fixe Verdrahtung kennen wir von diversen anderen Apps und Diensten. Gleichzeitig ist das die Basis für eine perfekte Lokalisierbarkeit der Person.

Für jeden Vorgang der Identifikation in der Praxis wird später «eine Verbindung zu den Servern der Bundespolizei aufgebaut». Die Daten des Individuums werden «in Echtzeit» verifiziert und im Erfolgsfall von der Polizei signiert zurückgegeben. Das Ergebnis ist ein QR-Code mit zeitlich begrenzter Gültigkeit, der an Dritte weitergegeben werden kann.

Bei derartigen Szenarien sträuben sich einem halbwegs kritischen Staatsbürger die Nackenhaare. Allein diese minimale Funktionsbeschreibung lässt die totale Überwachung erkennen, die damit ermöglicht wird. Jede Benutzung des Ausweises wird künftig registriert, hinterlässt also Spuren. Und was ist, wenn die Server der Polizei einmal kein grünes Licht geben? Das wäre spätestens dann ein Problem, wenn der digitale doch irgendwann der einzig gültige Ausweis ist: Dann haben wir den abschaltbaren Bürger.

Dieser neue Vorstoß der Regierung von Pedro Sánchez ist ein weiterer Schritt in Richtung der «totalen Digitalisierung» des Landes, wie diese Politik in manchen Medien – nicht einmal kritisch, sondern sehr naiv – genannt wird. Ebenso verharmlosend wird auch erwähnt, dass sich das spanische Projekt des digitalen Ausweises nahtlos in die Initiativen der EU zu einer digitalen Identität für alle Bürger sowie des digitalen Euro einreiht.

In Zukunft könnte der neue Ausweis «auch in andere staatliche und private digitale Plattformen integriert werden», wie das Medienportal Cope ganz richtig bemerkt. Das ist die Perspektive.

[Titelbild: Pixabay]

Dazu passend:

Nur Abschied vom Alleinfahren? Monströse spanische Überwachungsprojekte gemäß EU-Norm

---

Dieser Beitrag wurde mit dem Pareto-Client geschrieben und ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ bbef5093:71228592

India csökkentené az atomerőművek építési idejét ambiciózus nukleáris céljai eléréséhez

India célja, hogy a jelenlegi 10 évről a „világszínvonalú” 6 évre csökkentse atomerőművi projektjeinek kivitelezési idejét, hogy elérje a 2047-re kitűzött, 100 GW beépített nukleáris kapacitást.

Az SBI Capital Markets (az Indiai Állami Bank befektetési banki leányvállalata) jelentése szerint ez segítene mérsékelni a korábbi költségtúllépéseket, és vonzóbbá tenné az országot a globális befektetők számára.

A jelentés szerint a jelenlegi, mintegy 8 GW kapacitás és a csak 7 GW-nyi építés alatt álló kapacitás mellett „jelentős gyorsítás” szükséges a célok eléréséhez.

A kormány elindította a „nukleáris energia missziót”, amelyhez körülbelül 2,3 milliárd dollárt (2 milliárd eurót) különített el K+F-re és legalább öt Bharat kis moduláris reaktor (BSMR) telepítésére, de további kihívásokat kell megoldania a célok eléréséhez.

Az építési idők csökkentése kulcsfontosságú, de a jelentés átfogó rendszerszintű reformokat is javasol, beleértve a gyorsabb engedélyezést, a földszerzési szabályok egyszerűsítését, az erőművek körüli védőtávolság csökkentését, és a szabályozó hatóság (Atomic Energy Regulatory Board) nagyobb önállóságát.

A jelentés szerint a nemzet korlátozott uránkészletei miatt elengedhetetlen az üzemanyagforrások diverzifikálása nemzetközi megállapodások révén, valamint az indiai nukleáris program 2. és 3. szakaszának felgyorsítása.

India háromlépcsős nukleáris programja célja egy zárt üzemanyagciklus kialakítása, amely a természetes uránra, a plutóniumra és végül a tóriumra épül. A 2. szakaszban gyorsneutronos reaktorokat használnak, amelyek több energiát nyernek ki az uránból, kevesebb bányászott uránt igényelnek, és a fel nem használt uránt új üzemanyaggá alakítják. A 3. szakaszban fejlett reaktorok működnek majd India hatalmas tóriumkészleteire alapozva.

2025 januárjában az indiai Nuclear Power Corporation (NPCIL) pályázatot írt ki Bharat SMR-ek telepítésére, először nyitva meg a nukleáris szektort indiai magáncégek előtt.

Eddig csak az állami tulajdonú NPCIL építhetett és üzemeltethetett kereskedelmi atomerőműveket Indiában.

A Bharat SMR-ek (a „Bharat” hindiül Indiát jelent) telepítése a „Viksit Bharat” („Fejlődő India”) program része.

Engedélyezési folyamat: „elhúzódó és egymásra épülő”

A Bharat atomerőmű fejlesztésének részletei továbbra sem világosak, de Nirmala Sitharaman pénzügyminiszter júliusban elmondta, hogy az állami National Thermal Power Corporation és a Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited közös vállalkozásában valósulna meg a fejlesztés.

Sitharaman hozzátette, hogy a kormány a magánszektorral közösen létrehozna egy Bharat Small Reactors nevű céget, amely SMR-ek és új nukleáris technológiák kutatás-fejlesztésével foglalkozna.

Az SBI jelentése szerint javítani kell az SMR programot, mert az engedélyezési folyamat jelenleg „elhúzódó és egymásra épülő”, és aránytalan kockázatot jelent a magánszereplők számára a reaktorfejlesztés során.

A program „stratégiailag jó helyzetben van a sikerhez”, mert szigorú belépési feltételeket támaszt, így csak komoly és alkalmas szereplők vehetnek részt benne.

A kormánynak azonban be kellene vezetnie egy kártérítési záradékot, amely védi a magáncégeket az üzemanyag- és nehézvíz-ellátás hiányától, amely az Atomenergia Minisztérium (DAE) hatáskörébe tartozik.

A jelentés szerint mind az üzemanyag, mind a nehézvíz ellátása a DAE-től függ, és „a hozzáférés hiánya” problémát jelenthet. India legtöbb kereskedelmi atomerőműve hazai fejlesztésű, nyomottvizes nehézvizes reaktor.

A jelentés szerint: „A meglévő szabályozási hiányosságok kezelése kulcsfontosságú, hogy a magánszektor vezethesse a kitűzött 100 GW nukleáris kapacitás 50%-ának fejlesztését 2047-ig.”

Az NPCIL nemrégiben közölte, hogy India 2031–32-ig további 18 reaktort kíván hozzáadni az energiamixhez, ezzel az ország nukleáris kapacitása 22,4 GW-ra nő.

A Nemzetközi Atomenergia-ügynökség adatai szerint Indiában 21 reaktor üzemel kereskedelmi forgalomban, amelyek 2023-ban az ország áramtermelésének körülbelül 3%-át adták. Hat egység van építés alatt.

---

Roszatom pert indított a leállított Hanhikivi-1 projekt miatt Finnországban

Az orosz állami Roszatom atomenergetikai vállalat pert indított Moszkvában a finn Fortum és Outokumpu cégek ellen, és 227,8 milliárd rubel (2,8 milliárd dollár, 2,4 milliárd euró) kártérítést követel a finnországi Hanhikivi-1 atomerőmű szerződésének felmondása miatt – derül ki bírósági dokumentumokból és a Roszatom közleményéből.

A Roszatom a „mérnöki, beszerzési és kivitelezési (EPC) szerződés jogellenes felmondása”, a részvényesi megállapodás, az üzemanyag-ellátási szerződés megsértése, valamint a kölcsön visszafizetésének megtagadása miatt követel kártérítést.

A Fortum a NucNetnek e-mailben azt írta, hogy „nem kapott hivatalos értesítést orosz perről”.

A Fortum 2025. április 29-i negyedéves jelentésében közölte, hogy a Roszatom finn leányvállalata, a Raos Project, valamint a Roszatom nemzetközi divíziója, a JSC Rusatom Energy International, illetve a Fennovoima (a Hanhikivi projektért felelős finn konzorcium) között a Hanhikivi EPC szerződésével kapcsolatban nemzetközi választottbírósági eljárás zajlik.

2025 februárjában a választottbíróság úgy döntött, hogy nincs joghatósága a Fortummal szembeni követelések ügyében. „Ez a döntés végleges volt, így a Fortum nem része a választottbírósági eljárásnak” – közölte a cég.

A Fortum 2015-ben kisebbségi tulajdonos lett a Fennovoima projektben, de a teljes tulajdonrészt 2020-ban leírta.

A Fennovoima konzorcium, amelyben a Roszatom a Raos-on keresztül 34%-os kisebbségi részesedéssel rendelkezett, 2022 májusában felmondta a Hanhikivi-1 létesítésére vonatkozó szerződést az ukrajnai háború miatti késedelmek és megnövekedett kockázatok miatt.

A projekt technológiája az orosz AES-2006 típusú nyomottvizes reaktor lett volna.

2021 áprilisában a Fennovoima közölte, hogy a projekt teljes beruházási költsége 6,5–7 milliárd euróról 7–7,5 milliárd euróra nőtt.

2022 augusztusában a Roszatom és a Fennovoima kölcsönösen milliárdos kártérítési igényt nyújtott be egymás ellen a projekt leállítása miatt.

A Fennovoima nemzetközi választottbírósági eljárást indított 1,7 milliárd euró előleg visszafizetéséért. A Roszatom 3 milliárd eurós ellenkeresetet nyújtott be. Ezek az ügyek jelenleg is nemzetközi bíróságok előtt vannak.

---

Dél-koreai delegáció Csehországba utazik nukleáris szerződés aláírására

Egy dél-koreai delegáció 2025. május 6-án Csehországba utazik, hogy részt vegyen egy több milliárd dolláros szerződés aláírásán, amely két új atomerőmű építéséről szól a Dukovany telephelyen – közölte a dél-koreai kereskedelmi, ipari és energetikai minisztérium.

A delegáció, amelyben kormányzati és parlamenti tisztviselők is vannak, kétnapos prágai látogatásra indul, hogy részt vegyen a szerdára tervezett aláírási ceremónián.

A küldöttség találkozik Petr Fiala cseh miniszterelnökkel és Milos Vystrcil szenátusi elnökkel is, hogy megvitassák a Dukovany projektet.

Fiala múlt héten bejelentette, hogy Prága május 7-én írja alá a Dukovany szerződést a Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power (KHNP) céggel.

A cseh versenyhivatal nemrég engedélyezte a szerződés aláírását a KHNP-vel, miután elutasította a francia EDF fellebbezését.

A versenyhivatal április 24-i döntése megerősítette a korábbi ítéletet, amelyet az EDF megtámadott, miután 2024 júliusában elvesztette a tenderpályázatot a KHNP-vel szemben.

Ez lehetővé teszi, hogy a két dél-koreai APR1400 reaktor egység szerződését aláírják Dukovanyban, Dél-Csehországban. A szerződés az ország történetének legnagyobb energetikai beruházása, értéke legalább 400 milliárd korona (16 milliárd euró, 18 milliárd dollár).

A szerződést eredetileg márciusban írták volna alá, de a vesztes pályázók (EDF, Westinghouse) fellebbezései, dél-koreai politikai bizonytalanságok és a cseh cégek lokalizációs igényei miatt csúszott.

A KHNP januárban rendezte a szellemi tulajdonjogi vitát a Westinghouse-zal, amely korábban azt állította, hogy a KHNP az ő technológiáját használja az APR1400 reaktorokban.

A szerződés aláírása Dél-Korea első külföldi atomerőmű-építési projektje lesz 2009 óta, amikor a KHNP négy APR1400 reaktort épített az Egyesült Arab Emírségekben, Barakahban.

Csehországban hat kereskedelmi reaktor működik: négy orosz VVER-440-es Dukovanyban, két nagyobb VVER-1000-es Temelínben. Az IAEA szerint ezek az egységek a cseh áramtermelés mintegy 36,7%-át adják.

---

Az USA-nak „minél előbb” új reaktort kell építenie – mondta a DOE jelöltje a szenátusi bizottság előtt

Az USA-nak minél előbb új atomerőművet kell építenie, és elő kell mozdítania a fejlett reaktorok fejlesztését, engedélyezését és telepítését – hangzott el a szenátusi energiaügyi bizottság előtt.

Ted Garrish, aki a DOE nukleáris energiaügyi helyettes államtitkári posztjára jelöltként jelent meg, elmondta: az országnak új reaktort kell telepítenie, legyen az nagy, kis moduláris vagy mikroreaktor.

Az USA-ban jelenleg nincs épülő kereskedelmi atomerőmű, az utolsó kettő, a Vogtle-3 és Vogtle-4 2023-ban, illetve 2024-ben indult el Georgiában.

„A nukleáris energia kivételes lehetőség a növekvő villamosenergia-igény megbízható, megfizethető és biztonságos kielégítésére” – mondta Garrish, aki tapasztalt atomenergetikai vezető. Szerinte az USA-nak nemzetbiztonsági okokból is fejlesztenie kell a hazai urándúsító ipart.

Vizsgálni kell a nemzetközi piacot és a kormányközi megállapodások lehetőségét az amerikai nukleáris fejlesztők és ellátási láncok számára, valamint meg kell oldani a kiégett fűtőelemek elhelyezésének problémáját.

1987-ben a Kongresszus a nevadai Yucca Mountain-t jelölte ki a kiégett fűtőelemek végleges tárolóhelyének, de 2009-ben az Obama-adminisztráció leállította a projektet.

Az USA-ban az 1950-es évek óta mintegy 83 000 tonna radioaktív hulladék, köztük kiégett fűtőelem halmozódott fel, amelyet jelenleg acél- és betonkonténerekben tárolnak az erőművek telephelyein.

Garrish korábban a DOE nemzetközi ügyekért felelős helyettes államtitkára volt (2018–2021), jelenleg az Egyesült Haladó Atomenergia Szövetség igazgatótanácsának elnöke.

---

Egyéb hírek

Szlovénia közös munkát sürget az USA-val a nukleáris energiában:
Az USA és Horvátország tisztviselői együttműködésről tárgyaltak Közép- és Délkelet-Európa energiaellátásának diverzifikálása érdekében, különös tekintettel a kis moduláris reaktorokra (SMR). Horvátország és Szlovénia közösen tulajdonolja a szlovéniai Krško atomerőművet, amely egyetlen 696 MW-os nyomottvizes reaktorával Horvátország áramfogyasztásának 16%-át, Szlovéniáénak 20%-át adja. Szlovénia fontolgatja egy második blokk építését, de tavaly elhalasztotta az erről szóló népszavazást.

Malawi engedélyezi a Kayelekera uránbánya újraindítását:
A Malawi Atomenergia Hatóság kiadta a sugárbiztonsági engedélyt a Lotus (Africa) Limited számára, így újraindulhat a Kayelekera uránbánya, amely több mint egy évtizede, 2014 óta állt a zuhanó uránárak és biztonsági problémák miatt. A bánya 85%-át az ausztrál Lotus Resources helyi leányvállalata birtokolja. A Lotus szerint a bánya újraindítása teljesen finanszírozott, kb. 43 millió dollár (37 millió euró) tőkével.

Venezuela és Irán nukleáris együttműködést tervez:
Venezuela és Irán a nukleáris tudomány és technológia terén való együttműködésről tárgyalt. Az iráni állami média szerint Mohammad Eslami, az Iráni Atomenergia Szervezet vezetője és Alberto Quintero, Venezuela tudományos miniszterhelyettese egyetemi és kutatási programok elindításáról egyeztetett. Venezuelában nincs kereskedelmi atomerőmű, de 2010-ben Oroszországgal írt alá megállapodást új atomerőművek lehetőségéről. Iránnak egy működő atomerőműve van Bushehr-1-nél, egy másik ugyanott épül, mindkettőt Oroszország szállította.

@ aa8de34f:a6ffe696

In seinem Beitrag vom 30. März 2025 fragt Henning Rosenbusch auf Telegram angesichts zunehmender digitaler Kontrolle und staatlicher Allmacht:

„Wie soll sich gegen eine solche Tyrannei noch ein Widerstand formieren können, selbst im Untergrund? Sehe ich nicht.“\ (Quelle: t.me/rosenbusch/25228)

Er beschreibt damit ein Gefühl der Ohnmacht, das viele teilen: Eine Welt, in der Totalitarismus nicht mehr mit Panzern, sondern mit Algorithmen kommt. Wo Zugriff auf Geld, Meinungsfreiheit und Teilhabe vom Wohlverhalten abhängt. Der Bürger als kontrollierbare Variable im Code des Staates.\ Die Frage ist berechtigt. Doch die Antwort darauf liegt nicht in alten Widerstandsbildern – sondern in einer neuen Realität.

-- Denn es braucht keinen Untergrund mehr. --

Der Widerstand der Zukunft trägt keinen Tarnanzug. Er ist nicht konspirativ, sondern transparent. Nicht bewaffnet, sondern mathematisch beweisbar. Bitcoin steht nicht am Rand dieser Entwicklung – es ist ihr Fundament. Eine Bastion aus physikalischer Realität, spieltheoretischem Schutz und ökonomischer Wahrheit. Es ist nicht unfehlbar, aber unbestechlich. Nicht perfekt, aber immun gegen zentrale Willkür.

Hier entsteht kein „digitales Gegenreich“, sondern eine dezentrale Renaissance. Keine Revolte aus Wut, sondern eine stille Abkehr: von Zwang zu Freiwilligkeit, von Abhängigkeit zu Selbstverantwortung. Diese Revolution führt keine Kriege. Sie braucht keine Führer. Sie ist ein Netzwerk. Jeder Knoten ein Individuum. Jede Entscheidung ein Akt der Selbstermächtigung.

Weltweit wachsen Freiheits-Zitadellen aus dieser Idee: wirtschaftlich autark, digital souverän, lokal verankert und global vernetzt. Sie sind keine Utopien im luftleeren Raum, sondern konkrete Realitäten – angetrieben von Energie, Code und dem menschlichen Wunsch nach Würde.

Der Globalismus alter Prägung – zentralistisch, monopolistisch, bevormundend – wird an seiner eigenen Hybris zerbrechen. Seine Werkzeuge der Kontrolle werden ihn nicht retten. Im Gegenteil: Seine Geister werden ihn verfolgen und erlegen.

Und während die alten Mächte um Erhalt kämpfen, wächst eine neue Welt – nicht im Schatten, sondern im Offenen. Nicht auf Gewalt gebaut, sondern auf Mathematik, Physik und Freiheit.

Die Tyrannei sieht keinen Widerstand.\ Weil sie nicht erkennt, dass er längst begonnen hat.\ Unwiderruflich. Leise. Überall.

@ fe02e8ec:f07fbe0b

\ Und genau dafür wirst auch du gedrillt werden: Menschen zu jagen und töten. Unbekannte, die auch nicht wissen, was sie hier tun. Oder Unschuldige, die nicht rechtzeitig fliehen konnten. Einfach töten. Alle. Ohne zu fragen. Denn das ist deine Aufgabe, Soldat: Töte Menschen!

Egal, was du vorher warst, Heizungsmonteur, KFZ-Mechaniker, Veganer, Marketing-Manager, Friseur, Verkäufer, Kindergärtner: Es ist egal. Jetzt musst du töten. Denn du hast mitgemacht. Entweder, weil du es nicht ernst genommen hast, weil du dich nie für Politik interessiert hast. Oder weil du gedacht hast, das alles betrifft dich nicht. Weil du gedacht hast, Wahlen könnten etwas verändern. Oder weil du immer das Maul gehalten hast, damit dich keiner als «Rechter» bezeichnet. Egal. Jetzt musst du töten. Das ist das Spiel.

Ja, es ist ein Spiel. Grausam, abartig, menschenverachtend. Dennoch hat es Regeln: Diejenigen, die das Spiel beginnen, müssen niemals selbst auf das Schlachtfeld. Das ist die erste Regel. Ihre Söhne auch nicht, nicht die Söhne der anderen Politiker, nicht die der EU-Abgeordneten, nicht die der Parteibonzen. Auch nicht die der Banker, der Vorstandsvorsitzenden, der Chefredakteure. Denn alle wissen, wie man das Spiel spielt. Nur du nicht.

Du bist einfach eine Figur auf dem Spielfeld, die es verpasst hat, NEIN zu sagen, als noch Gelegenheit war. Jetzt bist du verwandelt worden in eine menschliche Drohne. Wenn sie sagen: töte!, dann tötest du. Denken kannst du, wenn alles vorbei ist. Falls du je wieder nach Hause kommst. Vielleicht sogar mit beiden Beinen und beiden Armen. Vielleicht auch nicht. Egal. Wer hätte Mitleid mit einer Spielfigur?

Nein, du musst töten. Das ist deine Aufgabe. Sie sagen es nun schon seit Monaten, warum glaubst du es nicht? Sie meinen es ernst. Wenn du den Brief in Händen hältst ist es zu spät. Es gilt dann das Notstandsrecht und keiner kann mehr verweigern. Da hättest du dich vorher drum kümmern müssen. Oder auf eine Demo gehen. Oder laut und mit klarer Stimme in jedem Gespräch den Wahnsinn anprangern. Hast du aber nicht.

Jetzt musst du töten oder du wirst getötet. Das ist das Spiel. Du hättest selbst denken können. Hast du aber nicht. Hast deine Zeit mit sinnlosen Videos vertan, Netflix geguckt und hast Influencerinnen geliked. Die müssen nicht an die Front. Aber du. Morgen, wenn du aufstehst, die Uniform anziehst und rausgehst, dann wirst du Befehle ausführen oder erschossen werden. Also wirst du Menschen töten. Dein Leben wird nie wieder so sein, wie zuvor. Dein Schmerz, deine Schuld, dein Leid: sie gehen ein in die unendliche Reihe der Soldaten, die seit Jahrhunderten dasselbe Schicksal erlitten. Deren Schreie noch immer durch den ewigen Raum hallen. Deren Opfer von den Herren des Spiels mit einem Lächeln entgegengenommen wurde. Deren Gliedmaßen auf den Schlachtfeldern liegen geblieben waren. Zum Dank erhielten sie eine Medaille. Ein Stück Blech für den rechten Arm, einen Grabstein für den Vater, den Bruder, den Sohn. Für das Vaterland. Für Europa. Für die Demokratie. Der Hohn tropft aus jedem Politikerwort, doch die Menschen glauben noch immer die uralte Geschichte von Freund und Feind, von Gut und Böse.

\ Wer nicht aufwachen will muss töten. Du. Nicht am Bildschirm. In der echten Welt. Wo man nicht auf Replay drücken kann. Wo man den Gegner nicht nach links oder rechts swipen kann, denn er ist echt, real, lebendig. Noch. Entweder er oder du. Jetzt ist es zu spät für Entscheidungen. Kannst du es spüren? Die Work-Life Balance wird zur Kill-or-be-Killed balance. Es gibt kein Entrinnen. Denn du hast mitgemacht. Schweigen ist Zustimmung. Sich-nicht-drumkümmern ist Zustimmung. Kriegsparteien zu wählen ist noch mehr Zustimmung.

Heute.

Heute lässt sich noch etwas ändern.

Es hat nichts zu tun mit rechts oder links. Nur mit Menschlichkeit versus Hass, Macht und dem ganz großen Geld. Das sind die Gründe, für die du töten oder sterben musst.

Wie entscheidest du dich?

@ b4403b24:83542d4e

🚀 Bitcoin Enthusiasts! Tomorrow the price of #BTCPrague2025 tickets goes up so take advantage of the 10% discount using code from the video - BTCBULGARIA.

✅ Network with leaders ✅ Learn blockchain strategies ✅ Gain crypto insights

Secure your spot NOW!

Bitcoin #BTC #BTCPrague

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/930210

@ c9badfea:610f861a

1. Install Kiwix (it's free and open source)
2. Download ZIM files from the Kiwix Library (you will find complete offline versions of Wikipedia, Stack Overflow, Bitcoin Wiki, DevDocs and many more)
3. Open the downloaded ZIM files within the Kiwix app

ℹ️ You can also package any website using either Kiwix Zimit (online tool) or the Zimit Docker Container (for technical users)

ℹ️ .zim is the file format used for packaged websites

@ 66675158:1b644430

In the twilight of his days, Myrddin sat upon the weathered stone bench overlooking what remained of Libertalia. His ancient hands—once steady enough to craft the most intricate mechanisms known to the Free Realms—now trembled as they rested upon the gnarled walking stick he had carved from windfall oak. The city below, once a marvel of independent districts connected by the invisible threads of mutual cooperation, had become something else entirely. Something monstrous.

The sun was setting, casting long shadows across the Grand Plaza where the Central Authority's banners now flew. Myrddin's eyes, still sharp despite his five hundred and seventy years, could make out the uniformed guards patrolling in perfect synchronicity. The sight made his stomach turn.

"I built the foundations for freedom," he whispered to himself, "and they have erected prisons upon them."

A figure approached from behind, footsteps deliberately heavy to announce their presence. Myrddin did not turn.

"Master Myrddin," came the voice of Thalion, one of his few remaining former apprentices not yet captured by the Authority. "The Council of Remnants awaits your wisdom."

Myrddin scoffed. "Wisdom? What wisdom can I offer now? I who planted the seeds of our destruction through my own shortsightedness?"

"You could not have known—"

"I should have known!" Myrddin's voice cracked with the force of his outburst. "Every great civilization before us fell to the same disease. Centralization. The pooling of power into fewer and fewer hands until the many are crushed beneath the weight of the few. I knew this. I studied the ancient texts. I designed our systems specifically to prevent this very outcome."

Thalion remained silent, allowing the old engineer his moment of self-recrimination.

"Come," Myrddin finally said, rising with difficulty. "Let us not keep your Council waiting. Though what good words can do against the machinery of oppression, I cannot say."

As they walked the hidden path down from the overlook, Myrddin's mind drifted back to the beginning, to the founding of Libertalia four centuries earlier...

---

The Founding Council had gathered beneath the great oak that would later mark the center of Libertalia. Twelve visionaries from twelve different traditions, united by a single purpose: to create a society where no person would rule over another.

Young Myrddin, barely forty years old but already renowned for his brilliance, unrolled the plans he had spent a decade perfecting.

"The Nexus System," he explained, pointing to the intricate diagrams. "A method of connection that requires no central authority. Each district, each guild, each family unit can connect to the whole while maintaining complete sovereignty over their own affairs."

Lorien the Sage, eldest among them, leaned forward with interest. "You propose that trade, communication, defense—all can function without a ruling body?"

"Not only can they function," Myrddin replied with the confidence of youth, "they will function better. A decentralized system is resilient. Cut one connection, and a hundred others remain. Attack one node, and the system routes around the damage. But most importantly, when power is distributed, corruption finds no fertile ground in which to take root."

"And what prevents a group from seizing control?" asked Marwen the Warrior. "From forcing others to submit to their will?"

Myrddin smiled. "The architecture itself. See here—" he pointed to a complex series of interlocking mechanisms, "—the Consensus Protocol. Any attempt to exert control beyond one's rightful domain triggers automatic resistance from the system. The more one tries to centralize power, the more difficult it becomes."

"You speak of mechanisms as if they have will," Marwen said skeptically.

"Not will, but design," Myrddin corrected. "Like water flowing downhill. I have designed a system where power naturally disperses rather than concentrates."

The Council debated through the night, questioning every aspect of Myrddin's design. By morning, they had agreed to build their new society upon his principles. Libertalia would be a constellation of sovereign individuals and voluntary associations, connected but never controlled.

For three generations, it worked exactly as Myrddin had envisioned. The Free Realms prospered as never before. Innovation flourished in the absence of restrictive oversight. Disputes were resolved through mutual arbitration rather than imposed judgment. The Nexus System facilitated trade and communication while preserving the independence of all participants.

Myrddin, his lifespan extended by the alchemical discoveries his system had made possible, watched with pride as Libertalia became the envy of the known world.

But he had made one critical error.

---

"You created a system that required vigilance," Thalion said as they descended toward the hidden meeting place. "Perhaps that was the flaw."

"No," Myrddin replied. "The flaw was in believing that making something difficult would make it impossible. I should have made centralization not merely hard, but unachievable by any means."

They reached the abandoned mill that served as the Council's current hiding place. Inside, two dozen faces turned toward them—the last free thinkers in a land that once celebrated independence above all else.

Myrddin took his seat at the rough-hewn table. "Tell me," he said without preamble, "how much worse has it become since we last met?"

A woman named Sera, who had once been the foremost architect in the Eastern District, spoke first. "The Authority has implemented the Unified Identification Protocol. No citizen may trade, travel, or even purchase food without presenting their Authority Crystal for scanning."

"And these crystals track their movements?" Myrddin asked, though he already knew the answer.

"Every step," confirmed Sera. "Every transaction. Every word spoken near an Echo Stone."

Myrddin closed his eyes briefly. Echo Stones—his invention, meant to record important discoveries and preserve the wisdom of the ages. Now perverted into tools of surveillance.

"The schools have been consolidated," added a younger man named Ferris. "All children now learn from the same Authority-approved texts. The history of Libertalia is being rewritten. They claim you designed the Nexus System to eventually unite under central guidance."

"A lie," Myrddin spat.

"But a believable one," Thalion said gently. "You did build the infrastructure that made this possible, however unintentional."

Myrddin could not deny it. The Nexus System, designed for voluntary connection, had been gradually modified over the centuries. What began as simple efficiency improvements eventually created vulnerabilities. The Consensus Protocol, once the guardian of decentralization, had been subverted by those who understood its mechanics but not its purpose.

"The disease always begins the same way," Myrddin said, addressing the Council. "With promises of efficiency. Of security. Of protection from unseen threats. The centralizers never announce their true intentions. They speak of unity while forging chains."

"We know this, Master Myrddin," said Sera impatiently. "What we need is a solution, not a history lesson."

Myrddin smiled sadly. "The history is the solution, if only we would heed it. Every great civilization before us fell to centralization. The Aurelian Empire, whose emperors claimed divine right to rule all lands beneath the twin moons. The Dynasty of Eternal Harmony, whose bureaucracy grew so vast it consumed half the realm's production. The Jade Confederation, whose Council of Nine became a single Overlord within three generations."

He paused, gathering his thoughts.

"In every case, the pattern was identical. Power, once distributed among many, gradually accumulated in the hands of few. Those few, corrupted by their unnatural position, made decisions that benefited themselves rather than the whole. Resources were misallocated. Innovation stagnated. The system became brittle rather than resilient. And when crisis came—whether famine, war, or natural disaster—the centralized structure collapsed under its own weight."

"Yet people never learn," said Ferris bitterly.

"Because the benefits of centralization are immediate and visible, while its costs are delayed and diffuse," Myrddin replied. "The Authority provides convenience today at the cost of freedom tomorrow. They offer solutions to problems that would resolve themselves naturally in a decentralized system."

"What was your mistake, then?" asked Thalion. "Where in your design did you leave the opening for this disease to take hold?"

Myrddin's face darkened with regret. "I built a system that was resistant to centralization, but not immune to it. I created tools of such power and efficiency that they became irresistible targets for those who would control others. And most critically, I failed to encode the philosophical foundations of decentralization into the system itself."

He looked around at the faces of the Council, seeing in them the last embers of the fire that had once burned so brightly in Libertalia.

"I believed that people would choose freedom if given the option. I did not account for how seductive the promises of centralization would be. How easily people would trade liberty for convenience. How willingly they would accept security over sovereignty."

---

The decline had been gradual, almost imperceptible at first. It began two centuries after the founding, with the creation of the Coordination Council.

"Merely to improve efficiency," its proponents had argued. "To eliminate redundancies in our wonderfully decentralized system."

Myrddin, by then well into his second century, had voiced concerns but was overruled by younger generations who found the original Nexus System too cumbersome for their modern needs. The Coordination Council was given limited authority to standardize certain protocols across districts.

Within a decade, those standards became requirements. Requirements became regulations. Regulations became laws. The Council, originally composed of representatives who returned to their districts after brief terms of service, gradually transformed into a permanent body of administrators.

By the time Myrddin recognized the pattern, the disease had already taken root. The Coordination Council had become the Central Authority. The voluntary associations that once formed the backbone of Libertalian society were now subordinate to its dictates.

He had tried to warn them. He had written treatises on the dangers of centralization, had spoken at public forums, had even attempted to modify the Nexus System to restore its decentralizing functions. But he was dismissed as an outdated thinker, unable to appreciate the "improvements" of modern governance.

Now, four hundred years after the founding, Libertalia was Libertalia in name only. The Authority controlled all aspects of life. The districts, once proudly independent, were administrative zones whose boundaries could be redrawn at the Authority's whim. The guilds, once self-governing bodies of skilled craftspeople, were now licensing bureaus that enforced Authority standards.

And the people—the free, sovereign individuals for whom Myrddin had designed his system—had become subjects. Citizens, they were called, but the word had lost its original meaning of self-governance and had come to signify merely a registered and tracked unit of the Authority.

---

"We cannot defeat the Authority directly," Myrddin told the Council of Remnants. "They control too much. The military, the food supply, the Nexus itself. Any direct confrontation would be suicidal."

"Then what hope remains?" asked Sera.

"We must build anew," Myrddin said, his voice finding strength in purpose. "Not reform, but replace. The old system cannot be saved—it is too thoroughly corrupted. We must create a parallel system that makes centralization not merely difficult, but impossible by its very nature."

"How?" several voices asked at once.

Myrddin reached into his worn leather satchel and withdrew a small crystal, unlike the Authority Crystals in both color and cut. "I have spent the last fifty years designing what should have been built from the beginning. A truly decentralized system that cannot be subverted because its very operation depends on remaining distributed."

He placed the crystal in the center of the table. It pulsed with a soft blue light.

"The Arx," he explained. "Each crystal contains the complete system, yet functions as only one node within it. No node can control another. No group of nodes can outvote or overpower the minority. Consensus is achieved not through majority rule, but through voluntary participation."

Thalion picked up the crystal, examining it skeptically. "The Authority will never allow this."

"They need not allow what they cannot detect," Myrddin replied. "The Arx operates on principles the Authority's systems cannot recognize. It exists alongside their network but remains invisible to it."

"And what can this network do?" asked Ferris. "How does it help us against the might of the Authority?"

"It allows us to trade without their knowledge. To communicate without their oversight. To organize without their permission. And most importantly, to remember who we truly are—sovereign individuals who require no masters."

Myrddin stood, his ancient frame seeming to straighten with the weight of his purpose.

"Centralization is not merely inefficient or unjust—it is a disease that infects and ultimately kills any society it touches. It promises order but delivers stagnation. It promises security but creates vulnerability. It promises prosperity but ensures that wealth flows only to those who control the center."

He looked each Council member in the eye.

"I made a mistake in believing that making centralization difficult would be enough. This time, we will make it impossible. The Arx cannot be centralized because its very operation depends on distribution. Any attempt to control it causes it to fragment and reform beyond the controller's reach."

"And if the Authority discovers these crystals?" Sera asked.

"They can destroy individual crystals, but the network will continue. They can imprison those who carry them, but more will take their place. The design is now the important thing, not the designer. I have encoded the knowledge of how to create these crystals within the crystals themselves. The idea cannot be killed."

Myrddin sat back down, suddenly looking every one of his many years.

"I cannot undo the damage my oversight has caused. I cannot restore the Libertalia I helped to build. But I can give you the tools to create something better—something truly resistant to the disease of centralization."

The Council members looked at one another, hope kindling in eyes that had known only despair for too long.

"How do we begin?" Thalion asked.

Myrddin smiled. "We begin by remembering what we have forgotten. That no person has the right to rule another. That voluntary cooperation always outperforms forced compliance. That systems must serve individuals, not the reverse. That decentralization is not merely a technical architecture but a moral imperative."

He gestured to the crystal, still glowing in Thalion's palm.

"And we begin by building connections that cannot be controlled. Person to person. District to district. Free association by free association. The Authority believes itself invincible because it sits at the center of all things. But when there is no center, there is nothing to seize, nothing to corrupt, nothing to control."

As night fell over Libertalia, the Council of Remnants listened as the ancient engineer outlined his vision for a truly decentralized future. Outside, the Authority's patrols marched in perfect order, their uniformity a testament to the disease that had consumed what was once the freest society in the known world.

Myrddin knew he would not live to see his new design reach fruition. But for the first time in decades, he felt something like peace. He had identified his error. He had created a solution. And most importantly, he had ensured that the knowledge would outlive him.

Centralization was indeed a disease—perhaps the most persistent and destructive disease ever to afflict human societies. But like all diseases, it could be overcome with the right medicine. And the medicine was not more centralization, not better rulers, not wiser authorities.

The medicine was decentralization. Complete, uncompromising, and irreversible decentralization.

As the meeting concluded and the Council members departed with their crystals, Myrddin remained seated at the table. Thalion lingered behind.

"You know they will come for you eventually," his former apprentice said. "You are too significant a symbol to ignore forever."

Myrddin nodded. "Let them come. An old man is a small price to pay for the rebirth of freedom."

"Your new system," Thalion said hesitantly, "you are certain it cannot be centralized? That we are not simply repeating the cycle?"

"Nothing created by human hands can be perfect," Myrddin admitted. "But I have learned from my mistake. The Arx does not merely resist centralization—it actively works against it. The more one tries to control it, the more it disperses. It is not merely a technical solution but a philosophical one."

He placed a hand on Thalion's shoulder. "Remember always: centralization benefits only those at the center. For everyone else—the 99.999% who stand at the periphery—it is nothing but chains disguised as safety. Never again can we allow the disease to take root by promising efficiency at the cost of sovereignty."

Thalion nodded solemnly. "I will remember."

As his former apprentice departed, Myrddin turned to look out the small window at the city below. The Authority's lights blazed from the central towers, pushing back the natural darkness of night. So much power, concentrated in so few hands. So much potential, wasted in the service of control rather than creation.

He had lived long enough to see his greatest work corrupted. With what time remained to him, he would ensure that his final creation could not suffer the same fate. The Arx would spread, node by node, person by person, until the very concept of centralized authority became as obsolete as the diseases his earlier inventions had eradicated.

Myrddin Myrddin, Master Engineer of the Free Realms, closed his eyes and allowed himself, just for a moment, to imagine a world reborn in true freedom. A world where the disease of centralization had finally been cured.

It would not happen in his lifetime. Perhaps not even in Thalion's. But it would happen. Of that, he was certain.

For the truth that the Authority and all centralizers before them had never understood was simple: humans were not meant to be controlled. They were meant to be free. And in the end, that natural state would reassert itself, no matter how elaborate the systems of control became.

Centralization was a disease. And like all diseases, it would eventually meet a cure.

@ 91d8dece:3453543b

https://drewztools.com/ flash USDT Are you tired of the long wait times and excessive fees associated with traditional cryptocurrency transactions? Look no further! Flash USDT from @drewztooolz is here to ease the way you send and receive crypto. Experience lightning-fast transfers, total anonymity, and zero fees with this state-of-the-art service. This flash last in the wallet for 90 t0 360 days before it disappears . Just so you know this coin is tradeable , swappable and transferable to many wallet type Flash USDT is not just another crypto tool; it’s a game-changer for anyone involved in cryptocurrency trading, particularly for OTC traders, P2P dealmakers, and cold wallet testers. Here’s why you should consider making it a part of your crypto toolkit: 🔥 Instant Transfers With Flash USDT, you can send high-value USDT to any wallet in under 60 seconds. Imagine the convenience of having your funds appear instantly without the typical delay caused by blockchain confirmations. Still have questions? Reach out via Telegram for 1-on-1 support. Our team is ready to assist you with anything you need! https://drewztools.com/ 💬 @drewztooolz 📲+1 (770) 666–2531

@ c631e267:c2b78d3e

Der Irrsinn ist bei Einzelnen etwas Seltenes – \ aber bei Gruppen, Parteien, Völkern, Zeiten die Regel. \ Friedrich Nietzsche

Erinnern Sie sich an die Horrorkomödie «Scary Movie»? Nicht, dass ich diese Art Filme besonders erinnerungswürdig fände, aber einige Szenen daraus sind doch gewissermaßen Klassiker. Dazu zählt eine, die das Verhalten vieler Protagonisten in Horrorfilmen parodiert, wenn sie in Panik flüchten. Welchen Weg nimmt wohl die Frau in der Situation auf diesem Bild?

Diese Szene kommt mir automatisch in den Sinn, wenn ich aktuelle Entwicklungen in Europa betrachte. Weitreichende Entscheidungen gehen wider jede Logik in die völlig falsche Richtung. Nur ist das hier alles andere als eine Komödie, sondern bitterernst. Dieser Horror ist leider sehr real.

Die Europäische Union hat sich selbst über Jahre konsequent in eine Sackgasse manövriert. Sie hat es versäumt, sich und ihre Politik selbstbewusst und im Einklang mit ihren Wurzeln auf dem eigenen Kontinent zu positionieren. Stattdessen ist sie in blinder Treue den vermeintlichen «transatlantischen Freunden» auf ihrem Konfrontationskurs gen Osten gefolgt.

In den USA haben sich die Vorzeichen allerdings mittlerweile geändert, und die einst hoch gelobten «Freunde und Partner» erscheinen den europäischen «Führern» nicht mehr vertrauenswürdig. Das ist spätestens seit der Münchner Sicherheitskonferenz, der Rede von Vizepräsident J. D. Vance und den empörten Reaktionen offensichtlich. Große Teile Europas wirken seitdem wie ein aufgescheuchter Haufen kopfloser Hühner. Orientierung und Kontrolle sind völlig abhanden gekommen.

Statt jedoch umzukehren oder wenigstens zu bremsen und vielleicht einen Abzweig zu suchen, geben die Crash-Piloten jetzt auf dem Weg durch die Sackgasse erst richtig Gas. Ja sie lösen sogar noch die Sicherheitsgurte und deaktivieren die Airbags. Den vor Angst dauergelähmten Passagieren fällt auch nichts Besseres ein und so schließen sie einfach die Augen. Derweil übertrumpfen sich die Kommentatoren des Events gegenseitig in sensationslüsterner «Berichterstattung».

Wie schon die deutsche Außenministerin mit höchsten UN-Ambitionen, Annalena Baerbock, proklamiert auch die Europäische Kommission einen «Frieden durch Stärke». Zu dem jetzt vorgelegten, selbstzerstörerischen Fahrplan zur Ankurbelung der Rüstungsindustrie, genannt «Weißbuch zur europäischen Verteidigung – Bereitschaft 2030», erklärte die Kommissionspräsidentin, die «Ära der Friedensdividende» sei längst vorbei. Soll das heißen, Frieden bringt nichts ein? Eine umfassende Zusammenarbeit an dauerhaften europäischen Friedenslösungen steht demnach jedenfalls nicht zur Debatte.

Zusätzlich brisant ist, dass aktuell «die ganze EU von Deutschen regiert wird», wie der EU-Parlamentarier und ehemalige UN-Diplomat Michael von der Schulenburg beobachtet hat. Tatsächlich sitzen neben von der Leyen und Strack-Zimmermann noch einige weitere Deutsche in – vor allem auch in Krisenzeiten – wichtigen Spitzenposten der Union. Vor dem Hintergrund der Kriegstreiberei in Deutschland muss eine solche Dominanz mindestens nachdenklich stimmen.

Ihre ursprünglichen Grundwerte wie Demokratie, Freiheit, Frieden und Völkerverständigung hat die EU kontinuierlich in leere Worthülsen verwandelt. Diese werden dafür immer lächerlicher hochgehalten und beschworen.

Es wird dringend Zeit, dass wir, der Souverän, diesem erbärmlichen und gefährlichen Trauerspiel ein Ende setzen und die Fäden selbst in die Hand nehmen. In diesem Sinne fordert uns auch das «European Peace Project» auf, am 9. Mai im Rahmen eines Kunstprojekts den Frieden auszurufen. Seien wir dabei!

[Titelbild: Pixabay]

---

Dieser Beitrag wurde mit dem Pareto-Client geschrieben und ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ 66675158:1b644430

I don't believe in "vibe coding" – it's just the newest Silicon Valley fad trying to give meaning to their latest favorite technology, LLMs. We've seen this pattern before with blockchain, when suddenly Non Fungible Tokens appeared, followed by Web3 startups promising to revolutionize everything from social media to supply chains. VCs couldn't throw money fast enough at anything with "decentralized" (in name only) in the pitch deck. Andreessen Horowitz launched billion-dollar crypto funds, while Y Combinator batches filled with blockchain startups promising to be "Uber for X, but on the blockchain."

The metaverse mania followed, with Meta betting its future on digital worlds where we'd supposedly hang out as legless avatars. Decentralized (in name only) autonomous organizations emerged as the next big thing – supposedly democratic internet communities that ended up being the next scam for quick money.

Then came the inevitable collapse. The FTX implosion in late 2022 revealed fraud, Luna/Terra's death spiral wiped out billions (including my ten thousand dollars), while Celsius and BlockFi froze customer assets before bankruptcy.

By 2023, crypto winter had fully set in. The SEC started aggressive enforcement actions, while users realized that blockchain technology had delivered almost no practical value despite a decade of promises.

Blockchain's promises tapped into fundamental human desires – decentralization resonated with a generation disillusioned by traditional institutions. Evangelists presented a utopian vision of freedom from centralized control. Perhaps most significantly, crypto offered a sense of meaning in an increasingly abstract world, making the clear signs of scams harder to notice.

The technology itself had failed to solve any real-world problems at scale. By 2024, the once-mighty crypto ecosystem had become a cautionary tale. Venture firms quietly scrubbed blockchain references from their websites while founders pivoted to AI and large language models.

---

Most reading this are likely fellow bitcoiners and nostr users who understand that Bitcoin is blockchain's only valid use case. But I shared that painful history because I believe the AI-hype cycle will follow the same trajectory.

Just like with blockchain, we're now seeing VCs who once couldn't stop talking about "Web3" falling over themselves to fund anything with "AI" in the pitch deck. The buzzwords have simply changed from "decentralized" to "intelligent."

"Vibe coding" is the perfect example – a trendy name for what is essentially just fuzzy instructions to LLMs. Developers who've spent years honing programming skills are now supposed to believe that "vibing" with an AI is somehow a legitimate methodology.

This might be controversial to some, but obvious to others:

Formal, context-free grammar will always remain essential for building precise systems, regardless of how advanced natural language technology becomes

The mathematical precision of programming languages provides a foundation that human language's ambiguity can never replace. Programming requires precision – languages, compilers, and processors operate on explicit instructions, not vibes. What "vibe coding" advocates miss is that beneath every AI-generated snippet lies the same deterministic rules that have always governed computation.

LLMs don't understand code in any meaningful sense—they've just ingested enormous datasets of human-written code and can predict patterns. When they "work," it's because they've seen similar patterns before, not because they comprehend the underlying logic.

This creates a dangerous dependency. Junior developers "vibing" with LLMs might get working code without understanding the fundamental principles. When something breaks in production, they'll lack the knowledge to fix it.

Even experienced developers can find themselves in treacherous territory when relying too heavily on LLM-generated code. What starts as a productivity boost can transform into a dependency crutch.

The real danger isn't just technical limitations, but the false confidence it instills. Developers begin to believe they understand systems they've merely instructed an AI to generate – fundamentally different from understanding code you've written yourself.

We're already seeing the warning signs: projects cobbled together with LLM-generated code that work initially but become maintenance nightmares when requirements change or edge cases emerge.

The venture capital money is flowing exactly as it did with blockchain. Anthropic raised billions, OpenAI is valued astronomically despite minimal revenue, and countless others are competing to build ever-larger models with vague promises. Every startup now claims to be "AI-powered" regardless of whether it makes sense.

Don't get me wrong—there's genuine innovation happening in AI research. But "vibe coding" isn't it. It's a marketing term designed to make fuzzy prompting sound revolutionary.

Cursor perfectly embodies this AI hype cycle. It's an AI-enhanced code editor built on VS Code that promises to revolutionize programming by letting you "chat with your codebase." Just like blockchain startups promised to "revolutionize" industries, Cursor promises to transform development by adding LLM capabilities.

Yes, Cursor can be genuinely helpful. It can explain unfamiliar code, suggest completions, and help debug simple issues. After trying it for just an hour, I found the autocomplete to be MAGICAL for simple refactoring and basic functionality.

But the marketing goes far beyond reality. The suggestion that you can simply describe what you want and get production-ready code is dangerously misleading. What you get are approximations with:

• Security vulnerabilities the model doesn't understand
• Edge cases it hasn't considered
• Performance implications it can't reason about
• Dependency conflicts it has no way to foresee

The most concerning aspect is how such tools are marketed to beginners as shortcuts around learning fundamentals. "Why spend years learning to code when you can just tell AI what you want?" This is reminiscent of how crypto was sold as a get-rich-quick scheme requiring no actual understanding.

When you "vibe code" with an AI, you're not eliminating complexity—you're outsourcing understanding to a black box. This creates developers who can prompt but not program, who can generate but not comprehend.

The real utility of LLMs in development is in augmenting existing workflows:

• Explaining unfamiliar codebases
• Generating boilerplate for well-understood patterns
• Suggesting implementations that a developer evaluates critically
• Assisting with documentation and testing

These uses involve the model as a subordinate assistant to a knowledgeable developer, not as a replacement for expertise. This is where the technology adds value—as a sophisticated tool in skilled hands.

Cursor is just a better hammer, not a replacement for understanding what you're building. The actual value emerges when used by developers who understand what happens beneath the abstractions. They can recognize when AI suggestions make sense and when they don't because they have the fundamental knowledge to evaluate output critically.

This is precisely where the "vibe coding" narrative falls apart.

@ 2e8970de:63345c7a

https://www.epi.org/blog/wage-growth-since-1979-has-not-been-stagnant-but-it-has-definitely-been-suppressed/

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/972959

@ 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

@ 88cc134b:5ae99079

Text

@ c631e267:c2b78d3e

Wir werden nicht zulassen, dass technisch manches möglich ist, \ aber der Staat es nicht nutzt. \ Angela Merkel

Die Modalverben zu erklären, ist im Deutschunterricht manchmal nicht ganz einfach. Nicht alle Fremdsprachen unterscheiden zum Beispiel bei der Frage nach einer Möglichkeit gleichermaßen zwischen «können» im Sinne von «die Gelegenheit, Kenntnis oder Fähigkeit haben» und «dürfen» als «die Erlaubnis oder Berechtigung haben». Das spanische Wort «poder» etwa steht für beides.

Ebenso ist vielen Schülern auf den ersten Blick nicht recht klar, dass das logische Gegenteil von «müssen» nicht unbedingt «nicht müssen» ist, sondern vielmehr «nicht dürfen». An den Verkehrsschildern lässt sich so etwas meistens recht gut erklären: Manchmal muss man abbiegen, aber manchmal darf man eben nicht.

Dieses Beispiel soll ein wenig die Verwirrungstaktik veranschaulichen, die in der Politik gerne verwendet wird, um unpopuläre oder restriktive Maßnahmen Stück für Stück einzuführen. Zuerst ist etwas einfach innovativ und bringt viele Vorteile. Vor allem ist es freiwillig, jeder kann selber entscheiden, niemand muss mitmachen. Später kann man zunehmend weniger Alternativen wählen, weil sie verschwinden, und irgendwann verwandelt sich alles andere in «nicht dürfen» – die Maßnahme ist obligatorisch.

Um die Durchsetzung derartiger Initiativen strategisch zu unterstützen und nett zu verpacken, gibt es Lobbyisten, gerne auch NGOs genannt. Dass das «NG» am Anfang dieser Abkürzung übersetzt «Nicht-Regierungs-» bedeutet, ist ein Anachronismus. Das war vielleicht früher einmal so, heute ist eher das Gegenteil gemeint.

In unserer modernen Zeit wird enorm viel Lobbyarbeit für die Digitalisierung praktisch sämtlicher Lebensbereiche aufgewendet. Was das auf dem Sektor der Mobilität bedeuten kann, haben wir diese Woche anhand aktueller Entwicklungen in Spanien beleuchtet. Begründet teilweise mit Vorgaben der Europäischen Union arbeitet man dort fleißig an einer «neuen Mobilität», basierend auf «intelligenter» technologischer Infrastruktur. Derartige Anwandlungen wurden auch schon als «Technofeudalismus» angeprangert.

Nationale Zugangspunkte für Mobilitätsdaten im Sinne der EU gibt es nicht nur in allen Mitgliedsländern, sondern auch in der Schweiz und in Großbritannien. Das Vereinigte Königreich beteiligt sich darüber hinaus an anderen EU-Projekten für digitale Überwachungs- und Kontrollmaßnahmen, wie dem biometrischen Identifizierungssystem für «nachhaltigen Verkehr und Tourismus».

Natürlich marschiert auch Deutschland stracks und euphorisch in Richtung digitaler Zukunft. Ohne vernetzte Mobilität und einen «verlässlichen Zugang zu Daten, einschließlich Echtzeitdaten» komme man in der Verkehrsplanung und -steuerung nicht aus, erklärt die Regierung. Der Interessenverband der IT-Dienstleister Bitkom will «die digitale Transformation der deutschen Wirtschaft und Verwaltung vorantreiben». Dazu bewirbt er unter anderem die Konzepte Smart City, Smart Region und Smart Country und behauptet, deutsche Großstädte «setzen bei Mobilität voll auf Digitalisierung».

Es steht zu befürchten, dass das umfassende Sammeln, Verarbeiten und Vernetzen von Daten, das angeblich die Menschen unterstützen soll (und theoretisch ja auch könnte), eher dazu benutzt wird, sie zu kontrollieren und zu manipulieren. Je elektrischer und digitaler unsere Umgebung wird, desto größer sind diese Möglichkeiten. Im Ergebnis könnten solche Prozesse den Bürger nicht nur einschränken oder überflüssig machen, sondern in mancherlei Hinsicht regelrecht abschalten. Eine gesunde Skepsis ist also geboten.

[Titelbild: Pixabay]

---

Dieser Beitrag wurde mit dem Pareto-Client geschrieben. Er ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ 9dd283b1:cf9b6beb

Do you still feel anxiety when Bitcoin's price drops significantly, even though you're in fiat profit (100% +) ? Why or why not? And when did you truly stop feeling any emotional attachment to the price fluctuations?

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/930139

@ 6e64b83c:94102ee8

Nostr-static is a powerful static site generator that transforms long-form Nostr content into beautiful, standalone websites. It makes your content accessible to everyone, even those not using Nostr clients. For more information check out my previous blog post How to Create a Blog Out of Nostr Long-Form Articles

What's New in Version 0.7?

RSS and Atom Feeds

Version 0.7 brings comprehensive feed support with both RSS and Atom formats. The system automatically generates feeds for your main content, individual profiles, and tag-specific pages. These feeds are seamlessly integrated into your site's header, making them easily discoverable by feed readers and content aggregators.

This feature bridges the gap between Nostr and traditional web publishing, allowing your content to reach readers who prefer feed readers or automated content distribution systems.

Smart Content Discovery

The new tag discovery system enhances your readers' experience by automatically finding and recommending relevant articles from the Nostr network. It works by:

1. Analyzing the tags in your articles
2. Fetching popular articles from Nostr that share these tags
3. Using configurable weights to rank these articles based on:
4. Engagement metrics (reactions, reposts, replies)
5. Zap statistics (amount, unique zappers, average zap size)
6. Content quality signals (report penalties)

This creates a dynamic "Recommended Articles" section that helps readers discover more content they might be interested in, all while staying within the Nostr ecosystem.

See the new features yourself by visiting our demo at: https://blog.nostrize.me

@ 40bdcc08:ad00fd2c

Introduction

Bitcoin’s OP_RETURN opcode, a mechanism for embedding small data in transactions, has ignited a significant debate within the Bitcoin community. Originally designed to support limited metadata while preserving Bitcoin’s role as a peer-to-peer electronic cash system, OP_RETURN is now at the center of proposals that could redefine Bitcoin’s identity. The immutable nature of Bitcoin’s timechain makes it an attractive platform for data storage, creating tension with those who prioritize its monetary function. This discussion, particularly around Bitcoin Core pull request #32406 (GitHub PR #32406), highlights a critical juncture for Bitcoin’s future.

What is OP_RETURN?

Introduced in 2014, OP_RETURN allows users to attach up to 80 bytes of data to a Bitcoin transaction. Unlike other transaction outputs, OP_RETURN outputs are provably unspendable, meaning they don’t burden the Unspent Transaction Output (UTXO) set—a critical database for Bitcoin nodes. This feature was a compromise to provide a standardized, less harmful way to include metadata, addressing earlier practices that embedded data in ways that bloated the UTXO set. The 80-byte limit and restriction to one OP_RETURN output per transaction are part of Bitcoin Core’s standardness rules, which guide transaction relay and mining but are not enforced by the network’s consensus rules (Bitcoin Stack Exchange).

Standardness vs. Consensus Rules

Standardness rules are Bitcoin Core’s default policies for relaying and mining transactions. They differ from consensus rules, which define what transactions are valid across the entire network. For OP_RETURN: - Consensus Rules: Allow OP_RETURN outputs with data up to the maximum script size (approximately 10,000 bytes) and multiple outputs per transaction (Bitcoin Stack Exchange). - Standardness Rules: Limit OP_RETURN data to 80 bytes and one output per transaction to discourage excessive data storage and maintain network efficiency.

Node operators can adjust these policies using settings like -datacarrier (enables/disables OP_RETURN relay) and -datacarriersize (sets the maximum data size, defaulting to 83 bytes to account for the OP_RETURN opcode and pushdata byte). These settings allow flexibility but reflect Bitcoin Core’s default stance on limiting data usage.

The Proposal: Pull Request #32406

Bitcoin Core pull request #32406, proposed by developer instagibbs, seeks to relax these standardness restrictions (GitHub PR #32406). Key changes include: - Removing Default Size Limits: The default -datacarriersize would be uncapped, allowing larger OP_RETURN data without a predefined limit. - Allowing Multiple Outputs: The restriction to one OP_RETURN output per transaction would be lifted, with the total data size across all outputs subject to a configurable limit. - Deprecating Configuration Options: The -datacarrier and -datacarriersize settings are marked as deprecated, signaling potential removal in future releases, which could limit node operators’ ability to enforce custom restrictions.

This proposal does not alter consensus rules, meaning miners and nodes can already accept transactions with larger or multiple OP_RETURN outputs. Instead, it changes Bitcoin Core’s default relay policy to align with existing practices, such as miners accepting non-standard transactions via services like Marathon Digital’s Slipstream (CoinDesk).

Node Operator Flexibility

Currently, node operators can customize OP_RETURN handling: - Default Settings: Relay transactions with one OP_RETURN output up to 80 bytes. - Custom Settings: Operators can disable OP_RETURN relay (-datacarrier=0) or adjust the size limit (e.g., -datacarriersize=100). These options remain in #32406 but are deprecated, suggesting that future Bitcoin Core versions might not support such customization, potentially standardizing the uncapped policy.

Arguments in Favor of Relaxing Limits

Supporters of pull request #32406 and similar proposals argue that the current restrictions are outdated and ineffective. Their key points include: - Ineffective Limits: Developers bypass the 80-byte limit using methods like Inscriptions, which store data in other transaction parts, often at higher cost and inefficiency (BitcoinDev Mailing List). Relaxing OP_RETURN could channel data into a more efficient format. - Preventing UTXO Bloat: By encouraging OP_RETURN use, which doesn’t affect the UTXO set, the proposal could reduce reliance on harmful alternatives like unspendable Taproot outputs used by projects like Citrea’s Clementine bridge. - Supporting Innovation: Projects like Citrea require more data (e.g., 144 bytes) for security proofs, and relaxed limits could enable new Layer 2 solutions (CryptoSlate). - Code Simplification: Developers like Peter Todd argue that these limits complicate Bitcoin Core’s codebase unnecessarily (CoinGeek). - Aligning with Practice: Miners already process non-standard transactions, and uncapping defaults could improve fee estimation and reduce reliance on out-of-band services, as noted by ismaelsadeeq in the pull request discussion.

In the GitHub discussion, developers like Sjors and TheCharlatan expressed support (Concept ACK), citing these efficiency and innovation benefits.

Arguments Against Relaxing Limits

Opponents, including prominent developers and community members, raise significant concerns about the implications of these changes: - Deviation from Bitcoin’s Purpose: Critics like Luke Dashjr, who called the proposal “utter insanity,” argue that Bitcoin’s base layer should prioritize peer-to-peer cash, not data storage (CoinDesk). Jason Hughes warned it could turn Bitcoin into a “worthless altcoin” (BeInCrypto). - Blockchain Bloat: Additional data increases the storage and processing burden on full nodes, potentially making node operation cost-prohibitive and threatening decentralization (CryptoSlate). - Network Congestion: Unrestricted data could lead to “spam” transactions, raising fees and hindering Bitcoin’s use for financial transactions. - Risk of Illicit Content: The timechain’s immutability means data, including potentially illegal or objectionable content, is permanently stored on every node. The 80-byte limit acts as a practical barrier, and relaxing it could exacerbate this issue. - Preserving Consensus: Developers like John Carvalho view the limits as a hard-won community agreement, not to be changed lightly.

In the pull request discussion, nsvrn and moth-oss expressed concerns about spam and centralization, advocating for gradual changes. Concept NACKs from developers like wizkid057 and Luke Dashjr reflect strong opposition.

Community Feedback

The GitHub discussion for pull request #32406 shows a divided community: - Support (Concept ACK): Sjors, polespinasa, ismaelsadeeq, miketwenty1, TheCharlatan, Psifour. - Opposition (Concept NACK): wizkid057, BitcoinMechanic, Retropex, nsvrn, moth-oss, Luke Dashjr. - Other: Peter Todd provided a stale ACK, indicating partial or outdated support.

Additional discussions on the BitcoinDev mailing list and related pull requests (e.g., #32359 by Peter Todd) highlight similar arguments, with #32359 proposing a more aggressive removal of all OP_RETURN limits and configuration options (GitHub PR #32359).

| Feedback Type | Developers | Key Points | |---------------|------------|------------| | Concept ACK | Sjors, ismaelsadeeq, others | Improves efficiency, supports innovation, aligns with mining practices. | | Concept NACK | Luke Dashjr, wizkid057, others | Risks bloat, spam, centralization, and deviation from Bitcoin’s purpose. | | Stale ACK | Peter Todd | Acknowledges proposal but with reservations or outdated support. |

Workarounds and Their Implications

The existence of workarounds, such as Inscriptions, which exploit SegWit discounts to embed data, is a key argument for relaxing OP_RETURN limits. These methods are costlier and less efficient, often costing more than OP_RETURN for data under 143 bytes (BitcoinDev Mailing List). Supporters argue that formalizing larger OP_RETURN data could streamline these use cases. Critics, however, see workarounds as a reason to strengthen, not weaken, restrictions, emphasizing the need to address underlying incentives rather than accommodating bypasses.

Ecosystem Pressures

External factors influence the debate: - Miners: Services like Marathon Digital’s Slipstream process non-standard transactions for a fee, showing that market incentives already bypass standardness rules. - Layer 2 Projects: Citrea’s Clementine bridge, requiring more data for security proofs, exemplifies the demand for relaxed limits to support innovative applications. - Community Dynamics: The debate echoes past controversies, like the Ordinals debate, where data storage via inscriptions raised similar concerns about Bitcoin’s purpose (CoinDesk).

Bitcoin’s Identity at Stake

The OP_RETURN debate is not merely technical but philosophical, questioning whether Bitcoin should remain a focused monetary system or evolve into a broader data platform. Supporters see relaxed limits as a pragmatic step toward efficiency and innovation, while opponents view them as a risk to Bitcoin’s decentralization, accessibility, and core mission. The community’s decision will have lasting implications, affecting node operators, miners, developers, and users.

Conclusion

As Bitcoin navigates this crossroads, the community must balance the potential benefits of relaxed OP_RETURN limits—such as improved efficiency and support for new applications—against the risks of blockchain bloat, network congestion, and deviation from its monetary roots. The ongoing discussion, accessible via pull request #32406 on GitHub (GitHub PR #32406). Readers are encouraged to explore the debate and contribute to ensuring that any changes align with Bitcoin’s long-term goals as a decentralized, secure, and reliable system.

@ 5ffa0470:9c3e760a

@ aa8de34f:a6ffe696

19. März 2025

🔐 1. SHA-256 is Quantum-Resistant

Bitcoin’s proof-of-work mechanism relies on SHA-256, a hashing algorithm. Even with a powerful quantum computer, SHA-256 remains secure because:

• Quantum computers excel at factoring large numbers (Shor’s Algorithm).
• However, SHA-256 is a one-way function, meaning there's no known quantum algorithm that can efficiently reverse it.
• Grover’s Algorithm (which theoretically speeds up brute force attacks) would still require 2¹²⁸ operations to break SHA-256 – far beyond practical reach.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

🔑 2. Public Key Vulnerability – But Only If You Reuse Addresses

Bitcoin uses Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm (ECDSA) to generate keys.

• A quantum computer could use Shor’s Algorithm to break SECP256K1, the curve Bitcoin uses.
• If you never reuse addresses, it is an additional security element
• 🔑 1. Bitcoin Addresses Are NOT Public Keys

Many people assume a Bitcoin address is the public key—this is wrong.

• When you receive Bitcoin, it is sent to a hashed public key (the Bitcoin address).
• The actual public key is never exposed because it is the Bitcoin Adress who addresses the Public Key which never reveals the creation of a public key by a spend
• Bitcoin uses Pay-to-Public-Key-Hash (P2PKH) or newer methods like Pay-to-Witness-Public-Key-Hash (P2WPKH), which add extra layers of security.

🕵️♂️ 2.1 The Public Key Never Appears

• When you send Bitcoin, your wallet creates a digital signature.
• This signature uses the private key to prove ownership.
• The Bitcoin address is revealed and creates the Public Key
• The public key remains hidden inside the Bitcoin script and Merkle tree.

This means: ✔ The public key is never exposed. ✔ Quantum attackers have nothing to target, attacking a Bitcoin Address is a zero value game.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

🔄 3. Bitcoin Can Upgrade

Even if quantum computers eventually become a real threat:

• Bitcoin developers can upgrade to quantum-safe cryptography (e.g., lattice-based cryptography or post-quantum signatures like Dilithium).
• Bitcoin’s decentralized nature ensures a network-wide soft fork or hard fork could transition to quantum-resistant keys.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

⏳ 4. The 10-Minute Block Rule as a Security Feature

• Bitcoin’s network operates on a 10-minute block interval, meaning:Even if an attacker had immense computational power (like a quantum computer), they could only attempt an attack every 10 minutes.Unlike traditional encryption, where a hacker could continuously brute-force keys, Bitcoin’s system resets the challenge with every new block.This limits the window of opportunity for quantum attacks.

---

🎯 5. Quantum Attack Needs to Solve a Block in Real-Time

• A quantum attacker must solve the cryptographic puzzle (Proof of Work) in under 10 minutes.
• The problem? Any slight error changes the hash completely, meaning:If the quantum computer makes a mistake (even 0.0001% probability), the entire attack fails.Quantum decoherence (loss of qubit stability) makes error correction a massive challenge.The computational cost of recovering from an incorrect hash is still incredibly high.

---

⚡ 6. Network Resilience – Even if a Block Is Hacked

• Even if a quantum computer somehow solved a block instantly:The network would quickly recognize and reject invalid transactions.Other miners would continue mining under normal cryptographic rules.51% Attack? The attacker would need to consistently beat the entire Bitcoin network, which is not sustainable.

---

🔄 7. The Logarithmic Difficulty Adjustment Neutralizes Threats

• Bitcoin adjusts mining difficulty every 2016 blocks (\~2 weeks).
• If quantum miners appeared and suddenly started solving blocks too quickly, the difficulty would adjust upward, making attacks significantly harder.
• This self-correcting mechanism ensures that even quantum computers wouldn't easily overpower the network.

---

🔥 Final Verdict: Quantum Computers Are Too Slow for Bitcoin

✔ The 10-minute rule limits attack frequency – quantum computers can’t keep up.

✔ Any slight miscalculation ruins the attack, resetting all progress.

✔ Bitcoin’s difficulty adjustment would react, neutralizing quantum advantages.

Even if quantum computers reach their theoretical potential, Bitcoin’s game theory and design make it incredibly resistant. 🚀

@ 866e0139:6a9334e5

---

Autor: Carlos A. Gebauer. Dieser Beitrag wurde mit dem Pareto-Client geschrieben. Sie finden alle Texte der Friedenstaube und weitere Texte zum Thema Frieden hier.**

---

Am 18. März 1924 schenkte meine Großmutter ihren Töchtern einen kleinen Bruder. Weil sein Vater fürchtete, der Junge könnte unter seinen vier Schwestern verweichlichen, schickte er den Kleinen zu Wochenendfreizeiten einer örtlichen Pfadfindergruppe. Ein Weltkriegsveteran veranstaltete dort mit den Kindern Geländespiele quer durch die schlesischen Wälder. Man lernte, Essbares zu finden, Pilze zu bestimmen, sich im Freien zu orientieren und Feuer zu machen.

Bald wurde deutlich, dass der Heranwachsende auch nicht mehr in den Blockflötenkreis seiner Schwestern und ihrer Freundinnen passte. Das Umfeld befürwortete, sein besonderes musikalisches Talent auf das Klavierspiel und das Flügelhorn zu richten. Kontakte bei der anschließenden Kirchenmusik mündeten schließlich in den elterlichen Entschluss, den nun 14-jährigen in ein Musikschulinternat zu schicken.

Es begann der Zweite Weltkrieg

Ein Jahr später, das erste Heimweh hatte sich langsam beruhigt, änderten sich die Verhältnisse schlagartig. Es begann der Zweite Weltkrieg. Mitschüler unter den jungen Musikern erfuhren, dass ihre älteren Brüder nun Soldaten werden mussten. Noch hielt sich die Gemeinschaft der jetzt 15-jährigen im Internat aber an einer Hoffnung fest: Bis sie selbst in das wehrfähige Alter kommen würden, müsste der Krieg längst beendet sein. In dieser Stimmungslage setzten sie ihre Ausbildung fort.

Es kam anders. Für den 18-jährigen erfolgte die befürchtete Einberufung in Form des „Gestellungsbefehls“. Entsprechend seiner Fähigkeiten sah man ihn zunächst für ein Musikkorps vor und schickte ihn zu einer ersten Grundausbildung nach Südfrankreich. Bei Nizza fand er sich nun plötzlich zwischen Soldaten, die Handgranaten in das Mittelmeer warfen, um Fische zu fangen. Es war das erste Mal, dass er fürchtete, infolge Explosionslärms sein Gehör zu verlieren. In den kommenden Jahren sollte er oft die Ohren zu- und den Mund offenhalten müssen, um sich wenigstens die Möglichkeit der angezielten Berufsausübung zu erhalten – wenn es überhaupt je dazu kommen würde.

---

DIE FRIEDENSTAUBE FLIEGT AUCH IN IHR POSTFACH!

Hier können Sie die Friedenstaube abonnieren und bekommen die Artikel zugesandt, vorerst für alle kostenfrei, wir starten gänzlich ohne Paywall. (Die Bezahlabos fangen erst zu laufen an, wenn ein Monetarisierungskonzept für die Inhalte steht). Sie wollen der Genossenschaft beitreten oder uns unterstützen? Mehr Infos hier oder am Ende des Textes.

---

Schon nach kurzer Zeit änderte sich die Befehlslage wieder. Der Musikstudent wurde nun zum Infanteristen und nach Russland an die Front verbracht. Vor ihm lagen jetzt drei Kriegsjahre: Gewalt, Dreck, Gewehrkugeln, Panzerschlachten, Granatsplitter, Luftangriffe, Entbehrungen, Hunger, Kälte, sieben Verwundungen, Blut und Schmerzen, Sterbende überall, Tote, Schreiende. Verzweiflung. Sorgen. Ängste. Todesangst. Zurückweichen? Verboten! Und die stets klare Ansage dazu: Wer nicht da vorne gegen den Feind um sein Leben kämpft, dem wird es ganz sicher da hinten von den eigenen Kameraden genommen.

Ein gewährter Fronturlaub 1944 versprach glückliche Momente. Zurück zu den Eltern, zurück zu den Schwestern, zurück nach Freiburg. Doch die Familie war nicht zu Hause, die Türen verschlossen. Eine Nachbarin öffnete ihr Fenster und rief dem Ratlosen zu: „Beeil‘ dich! Renn‘ zum Friedhof. Der Vater ist tot. Sie sind alle bei der Beerdigung!“ Wieder hieß es, qualvoll Abschied nehmen. Zurück an die Front.

Nach einem weiteren russischen Winter brach sich unübersehbar die Erkenntnis Bahn, dass der Krieg nun seinem Ende zugehe. Doch das Bemühen im Rückzug, sich mit einem versprengten Haufen irgendwie Richtung Heimat orientieren zu können, wurde doppelt jäh unterbrochen. Fanatische Vorgesetzte befahlen die längst Geschlagenen wieder gen Osten. Kurz darauf fielen sie heranrückenden russischen Truppen in die Hände. 

Kriegsgefangenschaft: Tabakration gegen Brot

Drei Jahre dem Tod entgangen, schwer verletzt und erschöpft war der 21-jährige also nun ein Kriegsgefangener. Jetzt lagen drei Jahre russischer Kriegsgefangenschaft vor ihm. Ständig war unklar, wie es weiterginge. Unmöglich jedenfalls, sich noch wie ein Pfadfinder aus den Wäldern zu ernähren. Es begannen die Jahre des Schlafens auf Brettern, die Zeit der ziellosen Zugtransporte an unbekannte Orte. Niemand sprach. Nur der Sonnenstand machte klar: Es ging nie Richtung Heimat, sondern immer weiter nach Osten. Weil der Blechbläser nicht rauchte, konnte er seine Tabakration gegen Brot tauschen. So überlebte er auch die Zeit des Hungers und der Morde in den Lagern, die Horrorbilder der nachts Erschlagenen und in die Latrinen geworfenen Toten, der sinnlosen Zwangsarbeiten und der allgegenwärtigen Wanzen. Wer versuchte zu fliehen, der wurde erschossen und sein Körper zur Abschreckung in den Fangdrähten belassen. Im Sommer stanken die dort verwesenden Leichen, wenn nicht Vögel sie rechtzeitig gefressen hatten.

Als der 24-jährige schließlich sechs Jahre nach seiner Einberufung aus russischer Kriegsgefangenschaft entlassen wurde, gab es kein Zurück mehr in seine schlesische Heimat. Abgemagert reiste er der vertriebenen Mutter nach, die mit seinen Schwestern und Millionen anderen Flüchtlingen im Westen Deutschlands verteilt worden war. Kraft Ordnungsverfügung wohnte sie jetzt im sauerländischen Bad Laasphe in einem schimmligen Garagenanbau. Als ihn ein Passant auf dieser Reise morgens allein, nur mit einem Becher an der Schnur um den Hals, auf Krücken durch Berlin ziehen sah, gab er ihm schweigend sein Butterbrot.

Der kleine, sanfte Junge aus dem schlesischen Freiburg hat danach noch 60 Jahre gelebt. Es dauerte zunächst sechs Jahre, bis er wieder kräftig genug war, ein Instrument zu spielen. 30-jährig saß er dann endlich in einem Orchester und begann ein normales Berufsleben. Aber sein Körper und seine Seele waren für immer aus jeder Normalität gerissen.

Irgendwo in Russland war ihm die linke Hüfte so versteift worden, dass sich seine Beine im Liegen an Wade und Schienbein überkreuzten. Er musste also stets den Oberkörper vorbeugen, um überhaupt laufen zu können. Über die Jahrzehnte verzog sich so sein gesamter Knochenbau. Jeder Tag brachte neue orthopädische Probleme und Schmerzen. Ärzte, Masseure, Physiotherapeuten, Schmerzmittel und Spezialausrüstungen aller Art prägten die Tagesabläufe. Asymmetrisch standen seine Schuhe nebeneinander, die ein Spezialschuster ihm mit erhöhter Sohle und Seitenstabilisierung am Knöchel fertigte. Sessel oder Sofas waren ihm nicht nutzbar, da er nur auf einem Spezialstuhl mit halb abgesenkter Sitzfläche Ruhe fand. Auf fremden Stühlen konnte er nur deren Vorderkante nutzen.

In den Nächten schrie er im Schlaf

Und auch wenn er sich ohne Krankheitstage bis zuletzt durch seinen Berufsalltag kämpfte, so gab es doch viele Tage voller entsetzlicher Schmerzen, wenn sich seine verdrehte Wirbelsäule zur Migräne in den Kopf bohrte. Bei alledem hörte man ihn allerdings niemals über sein Schicksal klagen. Er ertrug den ganzen Wahnsinn mit einer unbeschreiblichen Duldsamkeit. Nur in den Nächten schrie er bisweilen im Schlaf. In einem seiner Alpträume fürchtete er, Menschen getötet zu haben. Aber auch das erzählte er jahrzehntelang einzig seiner Frau.

Als sich einige Jahre vor seinem Tod der orthopädische Zustand weiter verschlechterte, konsultierte er einen Operateur, um Entlastungsmöglichkeiten zu erörtern. Der legte ihn auf eine Untersuchungsliege und empfahl, Verbesserungsversuche zu unterlassen, weil sie die Lage allenfalls verschlechtern konnten. In dem Moment, als er sich von der Liege erheben sollte, wurde deutlich, dass ihm dies nicht gelang. Die gereichte Hand, um ihn hochzuziehen, ignorierte er. Stattdessen rieb er seinen Rumpf ganz alleine eine quälend lange Minute über die Fläche, bis er endlich einen Winkel fand, um sich selbst in die Senkrechte zu bugsieren. Sich nicht auf andere verlassen, war sein Überlebenskonzept. Jahre später, als sich sein Zustand noch weiter verschlechtert hatte, lächelte er über seine Behinderung: „Ich hätte schon vor 60 Jahren tot auf einem Acker in Russland liegen können.“ Alles gehe irgendwann vorbei, tröstete er sich. Das war das andere Überlebenskonzept: liebevoll, friedfertig und sanft anderen gegenüber, unerbittlich mit sich selbst.

Sechs Monate vor seinem Tod saß er morgens regungslos auf seinem Spezialstuhl. Eine Altenpflegerin fand ihn und schlug Alarm. Mit allen Kunstgriffen der medizinischen Technik wurde er noch einmal in das Leben zurückkatapultiert. Aber seine Kräfte waren erschöpft. Es schob sich das Grauen der Vergangenheit zwischen ihn und die Welt. Bettlägerig kreiste er um sich selbst, erkannte niemanden und starrte mit weit offenen Augen an die Decke. „Die Russen schmeißen wieder Brandbomben!“, war einer seiner letzten Sätze.

Der kleine Junge aus Schlesien ist nicht zu weich geraten. Er hat sein Leid mit unbeugsamer Duldsamkeit ertragen. Er trug es wohl als Strafe für das Leid, das er anderen anzutun genötigt worden war. An seinem Geburtstag blühen immer die Magnolien. In diesem Jahr zum hundertsten Mal.

Dieser Text wurde am 23.3.2024 erstveröffentlicht auf „eigentümlich frei“.

---

Carlos A. Gebauer studierte Philosophie, Neuere Geschichte, Sprach-, Rechts- und Musikwissenschaften in Düsseldorf, Bayreuth und Bonn. Sein juristisches Referendariat absolvierte er in Düsseldorf, u.a. mit Wahlstationen bei der Landesrundfunkanstalt NRW, bei der Spezialkammer für Kassenarztrecht des Sozialgerichtes Düsseldorf und bei dem Gnadenbeauftragten der Staatsanwaltschaft Düsseldorf.

Er war unter anderem als Rechtsanwalt und Notarvertreter bis er im November 2003 vom nordrhein-westfälischen Justizministerium zum Richter am Anwaltsgericht für den Bezirk der Rechtsanwaltskammer Düsseldorf ernannt wurde. Seit April 2012 arbeitet er in der Düsseldorfer Rechtsanwaltskanzlei Lindenau, Prior & Partner. Im Juni 2015 wählte ihn die Friedrich-August-von-Hayek-Gesellschaft zu ihrem Stellvertretenden Vorsitzenden. Seit Dezember 2015 ist er Richter im Zweiten Senat des Anwaltsgerichtshofes NRW.

1995 hatte er parallel zu seiner anwaltlichen Tätigkeit mit dem Verfassen gesellschaftspolitischer und juristischer Texte begonnen. Diese erschienen seither unter anderem in der Neuen Juristischen Wochenschrift (NJW), der Zeitschrift für Rechtspolitik (ZRP) in der Frankfurter Allgemeinen Zeitung, der Freien Presse Chemnitz, dem „Schweizer Monat“ oder dem Magazin für politische Kultur CICERO. Seit dem Jahr 2005 ist Gebauer ständiger Kolumnist und Autor des Magazins „eigentümlich frei“.

Gebauer glaubt als puristischer Liberaler unverbrüchlich an die sittliche Verpflichtung eines jeden einzelnen, sein Leben für sich selbst und für seine Mitmenschen verantwortlich zu gestalten; jede Fremdbestimmung durch Gesetze, staatliche Verwaltung, politischen Einfluss oder sonstige Gewalteinwirkung hat sich demnach auf ein ethisch vertretbares Minimum zu beschränken. Die Vorstellung eines europäischen Bundesstaates mit zentral detailsteuernder, supranationaler Staatsgewalt hält er für absurd und verfassungswidrig. 

\ Aktuelle Bücher:

Hayeks Warnung vor der Knechtschaft (2024) – hier im Handel

Das Prinzip Verantwortungslosigkeit (2023) – hier im Handel

---

LASSEN SIE DER FRIEDENSTAUBE FLÜGEL WACHSEN!

Hier können Sie die Friedenstaube abonnieren und bekommen die Artikel zugesandt.

Schon jetzt können Sie uns unterstützen:

• Für 50 CHF/EURO bekommen Sie ein Jahresabo der Friedenstaube.
• Für 120 CHF/EURO bekommen Sie ein Jahresabo und ein T-Shirt/Hoodie mit der Friedenstaube.
• Für 500 CHF/EURO werden Sie Förderer und bekommen ein lebenslanges Abo sowie ein T-Shirt/Hoodie mit der Friedenstaube.
• Ab 1000 CHF werden Sie Genossenschafter der Friedenstaube mit Stimmrecht (und bekommen lebenslanges Abo, T-Shirt/Hoodie).

Für Einzahlungen in CHF (Betreff: Friedenstaube):

Für Einzahlungen in Euro:

Milosz Matuschek

IBAN DE 53710520500000814137

BYLADEM1TST

Sparkasse Traunstein-Trostberg

Betreff: Friedenstaube

Wenn Sie auf anderem Wege beitragen wollen, schreiben Sie die Friedenstaube an: milosz@pareto.space

---

Sie sind noch nicht auf Nostr and wollen die volle Erfahrung machen (liken, kommentieren etc.)? Zappen können Sie den Autor auch ohne Nostr-Profil! Erstellen Sie sich einen Account auf Start. Weitere Onboarding-Leitfäden gibt es im Pareto-Wiki.

@ 8f69ac99:4f92f5fd

A concepção popular de "anarquia" evoca frequentemente caos, colapso e violência. Mas e se anarquia significasse outra coisa? E se representasse um mundo onde as pessoas cooperam e se coordenam sem autoridades impostas? E se implicasse liberdade, ordem voluntária e resiliência—sem coerção?

Bitcoin é um dos raros exemplos funcionais de princípios anarquistas em acção. Não tem CEO, nem Estado, nem planeador central—e, no entanto, o sistema funciona. Faz cumprir regras. Propõe um novo modelo de governação e oferece uma exploração concreta do anarcocapitalismo.

Para o compreendermos, temos de mudar de perspectiva. Bitcoin não é apenas software ou um instrumento de investimento—é um sistema vivo: uma ordem espontânea.

Ordem Espontânea, Teoria dos Jogos e o Papel dos Incentivos Económicos

Na política e economia contemporâneas, presume-se geralmente que a ordem tem de vir de cima. Governos, corporações e burocracias são vistos como essenciais para organizar a sociedade em grande escala.

Mas esta crença nem sempre se verifica.

Os mercados surgem espontaneamente da troca. A linguagem evolui sem supervisão central. Projectos de código aberto prosperam graças a contribuições voluntárias. Nenhum destes sistemas precisa de um rei—e, no entanto, têm estrutura e funcionam.

Bitcoin insere-se nesta tradição de ordens emergentes. Não é ditado por uma entidade única, mas é governado através de código, consenso dos utilizadores e incentivos económicos que recompensam a cooperação e penalizam a desonestidade.

Código Como Constituição

Bitcoin funciona com base num conjunto de regras de software transparentes e verificáveis. Estas regras determinam quem pode adicionar blocos, com que frequência, o que constitui uma transacção válida e como são criadas novas moedas.

Estas regras não são impostas por exércitos nem pela polícia. São mantidas por uma rede descentralizada de milhares de nós, cada um a correr voluntariamente software que valida o cumprimento das regras. Se alguém tentar quebrá-las, o resto da rede simplesmente rejeita a sua versão.

Isto não é governo por maioria—é aceitação baseada em regras.

Cada operador de nó escolhe qual versão do software quer executar. Se uma alteração proposta não tiver consenso suficiente, não se propaga. Foi assim que as "guerras do tamanho do bloco" foram resolvidas—não por votação, mas através de sinalização do que os utilizadores estavam dispostos a aceitar.

Este modelo de governação ascendente é voluntário, sem permissões, e extraordinariamente resiliente. Representa um novo paradigma de sistemas autorregulados.

Mineiros, Incentivos e a Segurança Baseada na Teoria dos Jogos

Bitcoin assegura a sua rede utilizando a Teoria de Jogos. Os mineiros que seguem o protocolo são recompensados financeiramente. Quem tenta enganar—como reescrever blocos ou gastar duas vezes—sofre perdas financeiras e desperdiça recursos.

Agir honestamente é mais lucrativo.

A genialidade de Bitcoin está em alinhar incentivos egoístas com o bem comum. Elimina a necessidade de confiar em administradores ou esperar benevolência. Em vez disso, torna a fraude economicamente irracional.

Isto substitui o modelo tradicional de "confiar nos líderes" por um mais robusto: construir sistemas onde o mau comportamento é desencorajado por design.

Isto é segurança anarquista—não a ausência de regras, mas a ausência de governantes.

Associação Voluntária e Confiança Construída em Consenso

Qualquer pessoa pode usar Bitcoin. Não há controlo de identidade, nem licenças, nem processo de aprovação. Basta descarregar o software e começar a transaccionar.

Ainda assim, Bitcoin não é um caos desorganizado. Os utilizadores seguem regras rigorosas do protocolo. Porquê? Porque é o consenso que dá valor às "moedas". Sem ele, a rede fragmenta-se e falha.

É aqui que Bitcoin desafia as ideias convencionais sobre anarquia. Mostra que sistemas voluntários podem gerar estabilidade—não porque as pessoas são altruístas, mas porque os incentivos bem desenhados tornam a cooperação a escolha racional.

Bitcoin é sem confiança (trustless), mas promove confiança.

Uma Prova de Conceito Viva

Muitos acreditam que, sem controlo central, a sociedade entraria em colapso. Bitcoin prova que isso não é necessariamente verdade.

É uma rede monetária global, sem permissões, capaz de fazer cumprir direitos de propriedade, coordenar recursos e resistir à censura—sem uma autoridade central. Baseia-se apenas em regras, incentivos e participação voluntária.

Bitcoin não é um sistema perfeito. É um projecto dinâmico, em constante evolução. Mas isso faz parte do que o torna tão relevante: é real, está a funcionar e continua a melhorar.

Conclusão

A anarquia não tem de significar caos. Pode significar cooperação sem coerção. Bitcoin prova isso.

Procuramos, desesperados, por alternativas às instituições falhadas, inchadas e corruptas. Bitcoin oferece mais do que dinheiro digital. É uma prova viva de que podemos construir sociedades descentralizadas, eficientes e justas.

E isso, por si só, já é revolucionário.

---

Photo by Floris Van Cauwelaert on Unsplash

@ 0c469779:4b21d8b0

Sobre el amor

Mi percepción del amor cambió con el tiempo. Leer literatura rusa, principalmente a Dostoevsky, te cambia la perspectiva sobre el amor y la vida en general.

Por mucho tiempo mi visión sobre la vida es que la misma se basa en el sufrimiento: también la Biblia dice esto. El amor es igual, en el amor se sufre y se banca a la otra persona. El problema es que hay una distinción de sufrimientos que por mucho tiempo no tuve en cuenta. Está el sufrimiento del sacrificio y el sufrimiento masoquista. Para mí eran indistintos.

Para mí el ideal era Aliosha y Natasha de Humillados y Ofendidos: estar con alguien que me amase tanto como Natasha a Aliosha, un amor inclusive autodestructivo para Natasha, pero real. Tiene algo de épico, inalcanzable. Un sufrimiento extremo, redentor, es una vara altísima que en la vida cotidiana no se manifiesta. O el amor de Sonia a Raskolnikov, quien se fue hasta Siberia mientras estuvo en prisión para que no se quede solo en Crimen y Castigo.

Este es el tipo de amor que yo esperaba. Y como no me pasó nada tan extremo y las situaciones que llegan a ocurrir en mi vida están lejos de ser tan extremas, me parecía hasta poco lo que estaba pidiendo y que nadie pueda quedarse conmigo me parecía insuficiente.

Ahora pienso que el amor no tiene por qué ser así. Es un pensamiento nuevo que todavía estoy construyendo, y me di cuenta cuando fui a la iglesia, a pesar de que no soy cristiano. La filosofía cristiana me gusta. Va conmigo. Tiene un enfoque de humildad, superación y comunidad que me recuerda al estoicismo.

El amor se trata de resaltar lo mejor que hay en el otro. Se trata de ser un plus, de ayudar. Por eso si uno no está en su mejor etapa, si no se está cómodo con uno mismo, no se puede amar de verdad. El amor empieza en uno mismo.

Los libros son un espejo, no necesariamente vas a aprender de ellos, sino que te muestran quién sos. Resaltás lo que te importa. Por eso a pesar de saber los tipos de amores que hay en los trabajos de Dostoevsky, cometí los mismos errores varias veces.

Ser mejor depende de uno mismo y cada día se pone el granito de arena.

@ a95c6243:d345522c

Bald werde es verboten, alleine im Auto zu fahren, konnte man dieser Tage in verschiedenen spanischen Medien lesen. Die nationale Verkehrsbehörde (Dirección General de Tráfico, kurz DGT) werde Alleinfahrern das Leben schwer machen, wurde gemeldet. Konkret erörtere die Generaldirektion geeignete Sanktionen für Personen, die ohne Beifahrer im Privatauto unterwegs seien.

Das Alleinfahren sei zunehmend verpönt und ein Mentalitätswandel notwendig, hieß es. Dieser «Luxus» stehe im Widerspruch zu den Maßnahmen gegen Umweltverschmutzung, die in allen europäischen Ländern gefördert würden. In Frankreich sei es «bereits verboten, in der Hauptstadt allein zu fahren», behauptete Noticiastrabajo Huffpost in einer Zwischenüberschrift. Nur um dann im Text zu konkretisieren, dass die sogenannte «Umweltspur» auf der Pariser Ringautobahn gemeint war, die für Busse, Taxis und Fahrgemeinschaften reserviert ist. Ab Mai werden Verstöße dagegen mit einem Bußgeld geahndet.

Die DGT jedenfalls wolle bei der Umsetzung derartiger Maßnahmen nicht hinterherhinken. Diese Medienberichte, inklusive des angeblich bevorstehenden Verbots, beriefen sich auf Aussagen des Generaldirektors der Behörde, Pere Navarro, beim Mobilitätskongress Global Mobility Call im November letzten Jahres, wo es um «nachhaltige Mobilität» ging. Aus diesem Kontext stammt auch Navarros Warnung: «Die Zukunft des Verkehrs ist geteilt oder es gibt keine».

Die «Faktenchecker» kamen der Generaldirektion prompt zu Hilfe. Die DGT habe derlei Behauptungen zurückgewiesen und klargestellt, dass es keine Pläne gebe, Fahrten mit nur einer Person im Auto zu verbieten oder zu bestrafen. Bei solchen Meldungen handele es sich um Fake News. Teilweise wurde der Vorsitzende der spanischen «Rechtsaußen»-Partei Vox, Santiago Abascal, der Urheberschaft bezichtigt, weil er einen entsprechenden Artikel von La Gaceta kommentiert hatte.

Der Beschwichtigungsversuch der Art «niemand hat die Absicht» ist dabei erfahrungsgemäß eher ein Alarmzeichen als eine Beruhigung. Walter Ulbrichts Leugnung einer geplanten Berliner Mauer vom Juni 1961 ist vielen genauso in Erinnerung wie die Fake News-Warnungen des deutschen Bundesgesundheitsministeriums bezüglich Lockdowns im März 2020 oder diverse Äußerungen zu einer Impfpflicht ab 2020.

Aber Aufregung hin, Dementis her: Die Pressemitteilung der DGT zu dem Mobilitätskongress enthält in Wahrheit viel interessantere Informationen als «nur» einen Appell an den «guten» Bürger wegen der Bemühungen um die Lebensqualität in Großstädten oder einen möglichen obligatorischen Abschied vom Alleinfahren. Allerdings werden diese Details von Medien und sogenannten Faktencheckern geflissentlich übersehen, obwohl sie keineswegs versteckt sind. Die Auskünfte sind sehr aufschlussreich, wenn man genauer hinschaut.

Digitalisierung ist der Schlüssel für Kontrolle

Auf dem Kongress stellte die Verkehrsbehörde ihre Initiativen zur Förderung der «neuen Mobilität» vor, deren Priorität Sicherheit und Effizienz sei. Die vier konkreten Ansätze haben alle mit Digitalisierung, Daten, Überwachung und Kontrolle im großen Stil zu tun und werden unter dem Euphemismus der «öffentlich-privaten Partnerschaft» angepriesen. Auch lassen sie die transhumanistische Idee vom unzulänglichen Menschen erkennen, dessen Fehler durch «intelligente» technologische Infrastruktur kompensiert werden müssten.

Die Chefin des Bereichs «Verkehrsüberwachung» erklärte die Funktion des spanischen National Access Point (NAP), wobei sie betonte, wie wichtig Verkehrs- und Infrastrukturinformationen in Echtzeit seien. Der NAP ist «eine essenzielle Web-Applikation, die unter EU-Mandat erstellt wurde», kann man auf der Website der DGT nachlesen.

Das Mandat meint Regelungen zu einem einheitlichen europäischen Verkehrsraum, mit denen die Union mindestens seit 2010 den Aufbau einer digitalen Architektur mit offenen Schnittstellen betreibt. Damit begründet man auch «umfassende Datenbereitstellungspflichten im Bereich multimodaler Reiseinformationen». Jeder Mitgliedstaat musste einen NAP, also einen nationalen Zugangspunkt einrichten, der Zugang zu statischen und dynamischen Reise- und Verkehrsdaten verschiedener Verkehrsträger ermöglicht.

Diese Entwicklung ist heute schon weit fortgeschritten, auch und besonders in Spanien. Auf besagtem Kongress erläuterte die Leiterin des Bereichs «Telematik» die Plattform «DGT 3.0». Diese werde als Integrator aller Informationen genutzt, die von den verschiedenen öffentlichen und privaten Systemen, die Teil der Mobilität sind, bereitgestellt werden.

Es handele sich um eine Vermittlungsplattform zwischen Akteuren wie Fahrzeugherstellern, Anbietern von Navigationsdiensten oder Kommunen und dem Endnutzer, der die Verkehrswege benutzt. Alle seien auf Basis des Internets der Dinge (IOT) anonym verbunden, «um der vernetzten Gemeinschaft wertvolle Informationen zu liefern oder diese zu nutzen».

So sei DGT 3.0 «ein Zugangspunkt für einzigartige, kostenlose und genaue Echtzeitinformationen über das Geschehen auf den Straßen und in den Städten». Damit lasse sich der Verkehr nachhaltiger und vernetzter gestalten. Beispielsweise würden die Karten des Produktpartners Google dank der DGT-Daten 50 Millionen Mal pro Tag aktualisiert.

Des Weiteren informiert die Verkehrsbehörde über ihr SCADA-Projekt. Die Abkürzung steht für Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition, zu deutsch etwa: Kontrollierte Steuerung und Datenerfassung. Mit SCADA kombiniert man Software und Hardware, um automatisierte Systeme zur Überwachung und Steuerung technischer Prozesse zu schaffen. Das SCADA-Projekt der DGT wird von Indra entwickelt, einem spanischen Beratungskonzern aus den Bereichen Sicherheit & Militär, Energie, Transport, Telekommunikation und Gesundheitsinformation.

Das SCADA-System der Behörde umfasse auch eine Videostreaming- und Videoaufzeichnungsplattform, die das Hochladen in die Cloud in Echtzeit ermöglicht, wie Indra erklärt. Dabei gehe es um Bilder, die von Überwachungskameras an Straßen aufgenommen wurden, sowie um Videos aus DGT-Hubschraubern und Drohnen. Ziel sei es, «die sichere Weitergabe von Videos an Dritte sowie die kontinuierliche Aufzeichnung und Speicherung von Bildern zur möglichen Analyse und späteren Nutzung zu ermöglichen».

Letzteres klingt sehr nach biometrischer Erkennung und Auswertung durch künstliche Intelligenz. Für eine bessere Datenübertragung wird derzeit die Glasfaserverkabelung entlang der Landstraßen und Autobahnen ausgebaut. Mit der Cloud sind die Amazon Web Services (AWS) gemeint, die spanischen Daten gehen somit direkt zu einem US-amerikanischen «Big Data»-Unternehmen.

Das Thema «autonomes Fahren», also Fahren ohne Zutun des Menschen, bildet den Abschluss der Betrachtungen der DGT. Zusammen mit dem Interessenverband der Automobilindustrie ANFAC (Asociación Española de Fabricantes de Automóviles y Camiones) sprach man auf dem Kongress über Strategien und Perspektiven in diesem Bereich. Die Lobbyisten hoffen noch in diesem Jahr 2025 auf einen normativen Rahmen zur erweiterten Unterstützung autonomer Technologien.

Wenn man derartige Informationen im Zusammenhang betrachtet, bekommt man eine Idee davon, warum zunehmend alles elektrisch und digital werden soll. Umwelt- und Mobilitätsprobleme in Städten, wie Luftverschmutzung, Lärmbelästigung, Platzmangel oder Staus, sind eine Sache. Mit dem Argument «emissionslos» wird jedoch eine Referenz zum CO2 und dem «menschengemachten Klimawandel» hergestellt, die Emotionen triggert. Und damit wird so ziemlich alles verkauft.

Letztlich aber gilt: Je elektrischer und digitaler unsere Umgebung wird und je freigiebiger wir mit unseren Daten jeder Art sind, desto besser werden wir kontrollier-, steuer- und sogar abschaltbar. Irgendwann entscheiden KI-basierte Algorithmen, ob, wann, wie, wohin und mit wem wir uns bewegen dürfen. Über einen 15-Minuten-Radius geht dann möglicherweise nichts hinaus. Die Projekte auf diesem Weg sind ernst zu nehmen, real und schon weit fortgeschritten.

[Titelbild: Pixabay]

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ 88cc134b:5ae99079

sdsd

@ a95c6243:d345522c

Was nützt die schönste Schuldenbremse, wenn der Russe vor der Tür steht? \ Wir können uns verteidigen lernen oder alle Russisch lernen. \ Jens Spahn

In der Politik ist buchstäblich keine Idee zu riskant, kein Mittel zu schäbig und keine Lüge zu dreist, als dass sie nicht benutzt würden. Aber der Clou ist, dass diese Masche immer noch funktioniert, wenn nicht sogar immer besser. Ist das alles wirklich so schwer zu durchschauen? Mir fehlen langsam die Worte.

Aktuell werden sowohl in der Europäischen Union als auch in Deutschland riesige Milliardenpakete für die Aufrüstung – also für die Rüstungsindustrie – geschnürt. Die EU will 800 Milliarden Euro locker machen, in Deutschland sollen es 500 Milliarden «Sondervermögen» sein. Verteidigung nennen das unsere «Führer», innerhalb der Union und auch an «unserer Ostflanke», der Ukraine.

Das nötige Feindbild konnte inzwischen signifikant erweitert werden. Schuld an allem und zudem gefährlich ist nicht mehr nur Putin, sondern jetzt auch Trump. Europa müsse sich sowohl gegen Russland als auch gegen die USA schützen und rüsten, wird uns eingetrichtert.

Und während durch Diplomatie genau dieser beiden Staaten gerade endlich mal Bewegung in die Bemühungen um einen Frieden oder wenigstens einen Waffenstillstand in der Ukraine kommt, rasselt man im moralisch überlegenen Zeigefinger-Europa so richtig mit dem Säbel.

Begleitet und gestützt wird der ganze Prozess – wie sollte es anders sein – von den «Qualitätsmedien». Dass Russland einen Angriff auf «Europa» plant, weiß nicht nur der deutsche Verteidigungsminister (und mit Abstand beliebteste Politiker) Pistorius, sondern dank ihnen auch jedes Kind. Uns bleiben nur noch wenige Jahre. Zum Glück bereitet sich die Bundeswehr schon sehr konkret auf einen Krieg vor.

Die FAZ und Corona-Gesundheitsminister Spahn markieren einen traurigen Höhepunkt. Hier haben sich «politische und publizistische Verantwortungslosigkeit propagandistisch gegenseitig befruchtet», wie es bei den NachDenkSeiten heißt. Die Aussage Spahns in dem Interview, «der Russe steht vor der Tür», ist das eine. Die Zeitung verschärfte die Sache jedoch, indem sie das Zitat explizit in den Titel übernahm, der in einer ersten Version scheinbar zu harmlos war.

Eine große Mehrheit der deutschen Bevölkerung findet Aufrüstung und mehr Schulden toll, wie ARD und ZDF sehr passend ermittelt haben wollen. Ähnliches gelte für eine noch stärkere militärische Unterstützung der Ukraine. Etwas skeptischer seien die Befragten bezüglich der Entsendung von Bundeswehrsoldaten dorthin, aber immerhin etwa fifty-fifty.

Eigentlich ist jedoch die Meinung der Menschen in «unseren Demokratien» irrelevant. Sowohl in der Europäischen Union als auch in Deutschland sind die «Eliten» offenbar der Ansicht, der Souverän habe in Fragen von Krieg und Frieden sowie von aberwitzigen astronomischen Schulden kein Wörtchen mitzureden. Frau von der Leyen möchte über 150 Milliarden aus dem Gesamtpaket unter Verwendung von Artikel 122 des EU-Vertrags ohne das Europäische Parlament entscheiden – wenn auch nicht völlig kritiklos.

In Deutschland wollen CDU/CSU und SPD zur Aufweichung der «Schuldenbremse» mehrere Änderungen des Grundgesetzes durch das abgewählte Parlament peitschen. Dieser Versuch, mit dem alten Bundestag eine Zweidrittelmehrheit zu erzielen, die im neuen nicht mehr gegeben wäre, ist mindestens verfassungsrechtlich umstritten.

Das Manöver scheint aber zu funktionieren. Heute haben die Grünen zugestimmt, nachdem Kanzlerkandidat Merz läppische 100 Milliarden für «irgendwas mit Klima» zugesichert hatte. Die Abstimmung im Plenum soll am kommenden Dienstag erfolgen – nur eine Woche, bevor sich der neu gewählte Bundestag konstituieren wird.

Interessant sind die Argumente, die BlackRocker Merz für seine Attacke auf Grundgesetz und Demokratie ins Feld führt. Abgesehen von der angeblichen Eile, «unsere Verteidigungsfähigkeit deutlich zu erhöhen» (ausgelöst unter anderem durch «die Münchner Sicherheitskonferenz und die Ereignisse im Weißen Haus»), ließ uns der CDU-Chef wissen, dass Deutschland einfach auf die internationale Bühne zurück müsse. Merz schwadronierte gefährlich mehrdeutig:

«Die ganze Welt schaut in diesen Tagen und Wochen auf Deutschland. Wir haben in der Europäischen Union und auf der Welt eine Aufgabe, die weit über die Grenzen unseres eigenen Landes hinausgeht.»

[Titelbild: Tag des Sieges]

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ 90c656ff:9383fd4e

Bitcoin has been gaining increasing acceptance as a means of payment, evolving from being just a digital investment asset to becoming a viable alternative to traditional currencies. Today, many companies around the world already accept Bitcoin, providing consumers with greater financial freedom and reducing reliance on traditional banking intermediaries.

• Global companies that accept Bitcoin

Over the years, several well-known companies have begun accepting Bitcoin, recognizing its benefits such as security, transparency, and low transaction fees. Among the most prominent are:

01 - Microsoft: The tech giant allows users to add funds to their Microsoft accounts using Bitcoin. This enables the purchase of digital content such as games, apps, and software available in the Microsoft Store. 02 - Overstock: One of the largest online retailers that accepts Bitcoin for the purchase of furniture, electronics, and home goods. Overstock was an early adopter, signaling a strong commitment to financial innovation. 03 - AT&T: The U.S. telecommunications company was the first in its industry to accept Bitcoin payments, giving customers the option to pay their bills with cryptocurrency through BitPay. 04 - Twitch: While Twitch does not natively support Bitcoin donations or payments, many streamers use third-party services like NOWPayments, Streamlabs (with Coinbase integration), or Plisio to accept crypto tips and donations. This opens a path for Bitcoin support through external platforms, especially within the content creator community. 05 - Namecheap: A leading domain registrar and web hosting provider that accepts Bitcoin for domain registration and hosting services, showcasing Bitcoin’s usefulness in the digital economy.

• Small businesses and local commerce

Beyond large corporations, a growing number of small businesses and local merchants are embracing Bitcoin, particularly in cities that are becoming hubs for digital innovation.

01 - Restaurants and cafés: In cities like Lisbon, London, and New York, several cafés and eateries accept Bitcoin as payment, attracting tech-savvy customers. 02 - Hotels and tourism: Certain hotel chains and travel platforms now accept Bitcoin, simplifying bookings and removing the need for currency exchange for international travelers. 03 - Online stores: Many small e-commerce businesses offer Bitcoin as a payment option or even operate exclusively using cryptocurrency, benefiting from borderless, fast transactions.

• Advantages for businesses and consumers

The growing acceptance of Bitcoin is largely driven by its advantages:

01 - Lower transaction fees: Businesses can reduce costs associated with credit card fees and payment processors. 02 - No intermediaries: Direct peer-to-peer payments cut down on bureaucracy and reduce fraud risks. 03 - Global access: Bitcoin allows for cross-border payments without the need for currency exchange, ideal for international transactions.

In summary, the adoption of Bitcoin as a means of payment continues to expand, with companies of all sizes recognizing its strategic value. From large enterprises to independent creators and local shops, Bitcoin is gradually becoming a more practical and accepted financial tool. While challenges such as volatility and regulatory uncertainty remain, the broader trend points toward a future where paying with Bitcoin could be a common part of everyday life.

Thank you very much for reading this far. I hope everything is well with you, and sending a big hug from your favorite Bitcoiner maximalist from Madeira. Long live freedom!

@ 65038d69:1fff8852

Artificial intelligence is upon us and not showing any signs of slowing. The most common concern from those in the workforce is being replaced by one of these “thinking machines”. But what if AI wasn’t coming for your job? What if it was coming for your boss’s job instead?

I happened across the following post on X: https://x.com/BrianRoemmele/status/1905754986795151629 Brian describes having installed an AI system that provides an omniscient “shadow” to each of the executives at a client company, which can then be queried by the CEO for reports. The CEO seems to like it so far, and if it leads to less time spent writing internal reports I’m sure the executives like it too. But many of you may be recoiling at the thought of an always-on nanycam who’s sole purpose seems to be to snitch on you to your boss, and judging by the replies to Brian’s post, you’re not alone. If your supervisor has a history of targeting you your fears may not be misplaced. Workplace surveillance tools are often coyly marketed for this.

What if instead of your boss using an AI tool to spy on you, your boss was completely replaced by an AI? Would your supervisor having no biases or favouritism sway your opinion? What about being able to tailor its communication specifically to you? Expressing no judgement at your clarifying questions? Being immediately available 24/7? Perfectly equitable expectations and performance reviews? Just writing that almost has me convinced this would usher in a workplace utopia.

In practice guaranteeing zero bias is extremely difficult. After all, these things are programmed by humans and learn from human data. Their “weights” could also be intentionally adjusted to favour or target. If the AI’s supervisor follows the Pareto Principle (also known as the 80/20 Rule) they may be tempted to ask it for a list of the lowest performing employees to be laid off on a regular basis. Not keeping yourself in the top 20% of performers (by whatever metrics the AI has been programmed to look for) may mean your job. The dystopian-future videogame “Cyberpunk 2077” tells a story of a company that brings in an AI only to have it fire all the human workers in favour of automation and copies of itself. Clearly it’s implementers forgot to set hard limits on its executive powers. The shareholders were happy with all-time high profits though…

When technology is blamed for these sorts of existential problems the IT industry collectively sighs and repeats the mantra, “The problem is not the technology. The problem is the people.” A quote from a 1979 IBM presentation is likewise summoned; “A computer can never be held accountable, therefore a computer must never make a management decision.” As a darker example, the Nuremberg trials post-WWII saw the precedent set that acting under “superior orders” is not a valid defence for war crimes or crimes against humanity. It seems responsibility can’t be passed to others, whether man or machine. The endless task of generating reports and presentations can probably be automated away though.

Would you work under an AI, or “hire” an AI to manage others? We can help you with that; you can find us at scalebright.ca.

@ a95c6243:d345522c

«Wir brauchen eine digitale Brandmauer gegen den Faschismus», schreibt der Chaos Computer Club (CCC) auf seiner Website. Unter diesem Motto präsentierte er letzte Woche einen Forderungskatalog, mit dem sich 24 Organisationen an die kommende Bundesregierung wenden. Der Koalitionsvertrag müsse sich daran messen lassen, verlangen sie.

In den drei Kategorien «Bekenntnis gegen Überwachung», «Schutz und Sicherheit für alle» sowie «Demokratie im digitalen Raum» stellen die Unterzeichner, zu denen auch Amnesty International und Das NETTZ gehören, unter anderem die folgenden «Mindestanforderungen»:

• Verbot biometrischer Massenüberwachung des öffentlichen Raums sowie der ungezielten biometrischen Auswertung des Internets.
• Anlasslose und massenhafte Vorratsdatenspeicherung wird abgelehnt.
• Automatisierte Datenanalysen der Informationsbestände der Strafverfolgungsbehörden sowie jede Form von Predictive Policing oder automatisiertes Profiling von Menschen werden abgelehnt.
• Einführung eines Rechts auf Verschlüsselung. Die Bundesregierung soll sich dafür einsetzen, die Chatkontrolle auf europäischer Ebene zu verhindern.
• Anonyme und pseudonyme Nutzung des Internets soll geschützt und ermöglicht werden.
• Bekämpfung «privaten Machtmissbrauchs von Big-Tech-Unternehmen» durch durchsetzungsstarke, unabhängige und grundsätzlich föderale Aufsichtsstrukturen.
• Einführung eines digitalen Gewaltschutzgesetzes, unter Berücksichtigung «gruppenbezogener digitaler Gewalt» und die Förderung von Beratungsangeboten.
• Ein umfassendes Förderprogramm für digitale öffentliche Räume, die dezentral organisiert und quelloffen programmiert sind, soll aufgelegt werden.

Es sei ein Irrglaube, dass zunehmende Überwachung einen Zugewinn an Sicherheit darstelle, ist eines der Argumente der Initiatoren. Sicherheit erfordere auch, dass Menschen anonym und vertraulich kommunizieren können und ihre Privatsphäre geschützt wird.

Gesunde digitale Räume lebten auch von einem demokratischen Diskurs, lesen wir in dem Papier. Es sei Aufgabe des Staates, Grundrechte zu schützen. Dazu gehöre auch, Menschenrechte und demokratische Werte, insbesondere Freiheit, Gleichheit und Solidarität zu fördern sowie den Missbrauch von Maßnahmen, Befugnissen und Infrastrukturen durch «die Feinde der Demokratie» zu verhindern.

Man ist geneigt zu fragen, wo denn die Autoren «den Faschismus» sehen, den es zu bekämpfen gelte. Die meisten der vorgetragenen Forderungen und Argumente finden sicher breite Unterstützung, denn sie beschreiben offenkundig gängige, kritikwürdige Praxis. Die Aushebelung der Privatsphäre, der Redefreiheit und anderer Grundrechte im Namen der Sicherheit wird bereits jetzt massiv durch die aktuellen «demokratischen Institutionen» und ihre «durchsetzungsstarken Aufsichtsstrukturen» betrieben.

Ist «der Faschismus» also die EU und ihre Mitgliedsstaaten? Nein, die «faschistische Gefahr», gegen die man eine digitale Brandmauer will, kommt nach Ansicht des CCC und seiner Partner aus den Vereinigten Staaten. Private Überwachung und Machtkonzentration sind dabei weltweit schon lange Realität, jetzt endlich müssen sie jedoch bekämpft werden. In dem Papier heißt es:

«Die willkürliche und antidemokratische Machtausübung der Tech-Oligarchen um Präsident Trump erfordert einen Paradigmenwechsel in der deutschen Digitalpolitik. (...) Die aktuellen Geschehnisse in den USA zeigen auf, wie Datensammlungen und -analyse genutzt werden können, um einen Staat handstreichartig zu übernehmen, seine Strukturen nachhaltig zu beschädigen, Widerstand zu unterbinden und marginalisierte Gruppen zu verfolgen.»

Wer auf der anderen Seite dieser Brandmauer stehen soll, ist also klar. Es sind die gleichen «Feinde unserer Demokratie», die seit Jahren in diese Ecke gedrängt werden. Es sind die gleichen Andersdenkenden, Regierungskritiker und Friedensforderer, die unter dem großzügigen Dach des Bundesprogramms «Demokratie leben» einem «kontinuierlichen Echt- und Langzeitmonitoring» wegen der Etikettierung «digitaler Hass» unterzogen werden.

Dass die 24 Organisationen praktisch auch die Bekämpfung von Google, Microsoft, Apple, Amazon und anderen fordern, entbehrt nicht der Komik. Diese fallen aber sicher unter das Stichwort «Machtmissbrauch von Big-Tech-Unternehmen». Gleichzeitig verlangen die Lobbyisten implizit zum Beispiel die Förderung des Nostr-Netzwerks, denn hier finden wir dezentral organisierte und quelloffen programmierte digitale Räume par excellence, obendrein zensurresistent. Das wiederum dürfte in der Politik weniger gut ankommen.

[Titelbild: Pixabay]

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.