@ bbb5dda0:f09e2747

I've been neglecting my weekly updates a bit. I haven't really gotten to them lately because i've been insanely busy frying my brains at #SovEng. And after that i haven't been keeping my weekly notes properly. WHICH I'm planning to pick back up now!

This week/ the last couple weeks I've been doing some general planning around @tollGate's appearances on various conferences around Europe! First on the list will be Pizza Day in Prague! And from there I'll be cruising straight to @Oslo Freedom Forum! For TollGate that also means getting us set up with some T-Shirts and Stickers, though not super hard to do, it's the first time I'm doing any 'marketing' like this so I did test my own patience by properly cropping and ordering the designs. So far the stickers came out well Look at our first officially baptized TollGate! :)

TollGate Installer

As we're installing versions of TollGateOS on routers quite often now I figured it'd be a good idea to streamline the experience a bit by building a TollGate Installer. I've been vibecoding it mostly, and one of the things I discovered is how easy it is to make it replicate the style of another app. To stick with the theme I told it to mirror the style of our TollGate Captive portal site and it did it perfectly!

Anyway, still a lot of manual engineering is required but at least I can outsource the stuff i'm bad at. What I did improve was the GitHub workflows we use for building and publishing the OS. We publish our releases to Blossom + Nostr (NIP-94). I then use those messages in the installer to get the download links.

👀 But which version!?

I quickly ran into the issue that I didn't know which binary to install on the router i hooked up to my computer. I connect the router via lan, then I scan the network and ssh into the router, get some basic info, like the device name. BUT, the format of that device name wouldn't match any of the names we'd use in our release.

For example: the router name would be glinet,mt3000 while our release was called gl-mt3000. The difference may seem subtle but I can't match them. So after some discussion with the others I went on and revamped our OS pipeline to properly follow the OpenWRT naming of boards/devices. The pipeline is now much more extensible, making it easier for us to add support for more hardware!

What's next?

We're aiming for a v0.0.2 release of TollGate OS by friday, incorporating some of the feedback we've gotten from our test users! Hang on tight guys! 🙏 I'm hoping to finish an earlier version of the installer in the upcoming week as well.

@ 0e29efc2:ff142af2

Table of Contents

1. Intro
2. Important Terminology
3. Getting Started
4. Where do I buy bitcoin?
5. Okay, I bought some bitcoin-now what?
6. Less than 0.01 BTC
7. More than 0.01 BTC and less than 0.1 BTC
8. More than 0.1 BTC
9. How Bitcoin Works
10. Skepticism
11. Someone will hack it
12. The government will try to stop it
13. It’s not backed by anything
14. Conclusion

Intro

Maybe you saw an article in Forbes, a news segment about MicroStrategy (MSTR), or you glanced at the bitcoin price chart; whatever the spark, your curiosity led you here. Enough friends and relatives keep asking me about bitcoin that I finally organized my thoughts into a single reference. This is not a comprehensive guide—it assumes you trust me as a heuristic.

Important Terminology

Sat (satoshi) – the smallest unit of bitcoin. One bitcoin (₿) equals 100 000 000 sats.

Getting Started

Where do I buy bitcoin?

I use River because it publishes proof‑of‑reserves, supports the Lightning Network, and pays interest on idle USD balances (currently 3.8 %).

Okay, I bought some bitcoin-now what?

Withdraw it immediately. Centralized exchanges can and do fail. Your next step depends on how much bitcoin you hold.

If at any point you're struggling, please reach out to me.

Less than 0.01 BTC

1. On your phone open Safari (iOS) or Chrome (Android).
2. Paste https://wallet.cashu.me?mint=https://mint.westernbtc.com. Confirm the prompt that asks whether you trust https://mint.westernbtc.com. I run this mint so beginners can skip the gnarly parts.
3. Complete setup.
4. Tap Receive → LIGHTNING → enter amount → COPY.
5. In River choose Send → Send to a Bitcoin wallet, paste the invoice, verify, and send.
6. Return to the wallet; your sats should appear.

More than 0.01 BTC and less than 0.1 BTC

It's time for cold storage. Cold storage means a dedicated signing device not connected to the internet. Think of it like keys to a house. If you have the keys (your cold storage signing device), you can get into your house (the bitcoin). I recommend and use the COLDCARD Q or COLDCARD MK4 from COLDCARD. See this thorough walkthrough.

The creator nostr:npub1rxysxnjkhrmqd3ey73dp9n5y5yvyzcs64acc9g0k2epcpwwyya4spvhnp8 makes reliable content.

More than 0.1 BTC

The next security upgrade involves something called multisig. It requires the use of multiple devices instead of one. Think of those nuclear launch silos in movies where two keys need to be turned in order to launch the missile. One person can't reach both keys, so you need two people. Like the two keys needing to be turned, we need a certain number of keys (signing devices) to be used.

This offers a number of benefits. Say you have a 2-of-3 multisig setup. You would need two of the three keys to move the bitcoin. If you were to lose one, you could use the two others to move it instead. Many choose to geographically distribute the keys; choosing to keep one at a friend’s house or with a bank.

The previous video I linked covers multisig as well. Again, please reach out to me if you need help.

How Bitcoin Works

I'm going to paint a scene portraying the basics of how bitcoin works. Picture a race that's supposed to take 10 minutes to run start-to-finish, and there's a crowd of people spectating. When the fastest runner crosses the finish line, they're awarded 50 bitcoin. Everyone in the crowd recognizes who won, and writes it down on their own scoreboard. Then, the next race begins.

Now, let's say more racers who've had special training join. They start winning consistently because of it, and now the race only lasts about 9 minutes. There's a special rule everyone in the crowd agreed to, that they can make the race harder to ensure it's around 10 minutes long. So they make the race harder to counteract the faster runners.

With this in mind, let's get to the skepticism you might have.

Skepticism

Someone will hack it

Think of bitcoin as the people in the crowd. If someone tries to cheat and writes on their scoreboard that they have a billion bitcoin, their scoreboard is going to look different than everybody else’s. The other people in the crowd will cross-reference with each other and decide to ignore that person who cheated.

The government will try to stop it

Again, think of the crowd. In reality, the "crowd participants" are scattered all around the world. You might be able to stop many of them, but it would be almost impossible to stop everyone. Imagine people are watching the race on TV, can you find everyone who's spectating? Ironically, attempted bans often increase interest.

It’s not backed by anything.

Think of the runners. The runners are bitcoin miners. They have to expend real energy to participate in the race. The more bitcoin miners, the more secure the network. In summary, it's backed by electricity and work.

Conclusion

There are too many topics to cover in one article. I haven't even touched on the history of money, what money is, scarcity, etc. The best way to learn is to research the topics you're interested in for yourself. It took months of deep diving before I was sold on bitcoin, and I had many touch points before that.

Once you see it though, you can't unsee it.

@ b83a28b7:35919450

This article was originally part of the sermon of Plebchain Radio Episode 109 (April 25, 2025) that nostr:nprofile1qyxhwumn8ghj7mn0wvhxcmmvqyg8wumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytnvv9hxgqpqtvqc82mv8cezhax5r34n4muc2c4pgjz8kaye2smj032nngg52clq7fgefr and I did with Noa Gruman from nostr:nprofile1qyv8wumn8ghj7urjv4kkjatd9ec8y6tdv9kzumn9wsqzqvfdqratfpsvje7f3w69skt34vd7l9r465d5hm9unucnl95yq0ethzx7cf and nostr:nprofile1qye8wumn8ghj7mrwvf5hguewwpshqetjwdshguewd9hj7mn0wd68ycmvd9jkuap0v9cxjtmkxyhhyetvv9usz9rhwden5te0dehhxarj9ehx2cn4w5hxccgqyqj8hd6eed2x5w8pqgx82yyrrpfx99uuympcxmkxgz9k2hklg8te7pq0y72 . You can listen to the full episode here:

https://fountain.fm/episode/gdBHcfDgDXEgALjX7nBu

Let’s start with the obvious: Bitcoin is metal because it’s loud, it’s aggressive, it’s uncompromising. It’s the musical equivalent of a power chord blasted through a wall of amps—a direct challenge to the establishment, to the fiat system, to the sanitized, soulless mainstream. Metal has always been about rebellion, about standing outside the norm and refusing to be tamed. Bitcoin, too, was born in the shadows, dismissed as the currency of outlaws and freaks, and it thrived there, fueled by the energy of those who refused to bow down

But Bitcoin isn’t just any metal. It’s progressive metal. 
Prog metal is the genre that takes metal’s aggression and fuses it with experimentation, complexity, and a relentless drive to push boundaries. It’s not satisfied with three chords and a chorus. Prog metal is about odd time signatures, intricate solos, unexpected detours, and stories that dig into philosophy, psychology, and the human condition. It’s music for those who want more than just noise—they want meaning, depth, and innovation.

That’s Bitcoin. Bitcoin isn’t just a blunt instrument of rebellion; it’s a living, evolving experiment. It’s code that’s open to anyone, a protocol that invites innovation, a system that’s constantly being pushed, prodded, and reimagined by its community.

Like prog metal, Bitcoin is for the thinkers, the tinkerers, the relentless questioners. It’s for those who see the flaws in the mainstream and dare to imagine something radically different. 


Both prog metal and Bitcoin are about freedom — freedom from the tyranny of the predictable, the safe, the centrally controlled. They are countercultures within countercultures, refusing to be boxed in by genre or by law. Both attract those who crave complexity, who aren’t afraid to get lost in the weeds, who want to build something new and beautiful from the chaos. 


If you want to reach the heart of Bitcoin’s counterculture, you don’t do it with bland, safe, mainstream pop. You do it with prog metal—with music that refuses to compromise, that demands your attention, that rewards those who dig deeper. Prog metal is the true voice of Bitcoin’s core: the plebs, the builders, the dreamers who refuse to accept the world as it is. 


Bitcoin is prog metal. It’s technical, it’s rebellious, it’s unafraid to be different. It’s music and money for those who want to break free—not just from the old systems, but from the old ways of thinking. And as the mainstream tries to water down both, the true counterculture survives at the core, pushing boundaries, making noise, and refusing to die.

---

The sermon and episode clearly had an impact on people, as evidenced by the fountain charts here (snapshot taken on May 6, 2025)

nostr:nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzqkcpsw4kc03j906dg8rt8thes432z3yy0d6fj4phylz48xs3g437qqsy7rfh8n6vgxppkwzq2ntjps0lmt4njkxjrv3rv5r59l7lkv6ahps2eavd9 And here's the clip of the sermon:

nostr:nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzpwp69zm7fewjp0vkp306adnzt7249ytxhz7mq3w5yc629u6er9zsqqsptkpkd0458yshe7gfshck2f9nfxnqe0nrjz0ptlkm9rhv094rxagapyv4d

@ 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.

@ 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

@ e83b66a8:b0526c2b

I’m going to talk about Ethereum, hear me out.

Ethereum is a Turing complete consensus blockchain tokenised by its own currency Ether.

This idea by Vitalik Buterin was incredibly compelling and still is today, even though few real world use cases have emerged.

For example, as a company, I could pay a carbon tax in Ether, locked into a smart contract. If the temperate rises by more than “n” degrees year on year based on a known agreed external (blind) oracle, say a weather station located near my factory.

Fantastic, we now have an automatic climate tax.

In reality, few realistic applications exist, however the idea is very compelling and many flocked to Ethereum as a promise of the future. This inflated its utility token “Ether” into stratospherically high prices.

This, in turn, attracted speculative investors and traders only looking at the price signal of the token and no longer considering the utility. This created a bubble which has gradually deflated over time.

This is why we are seeing Bitcoin, which only attempts to be money, succeed relative to Ethereum.

As Ethereum fails, and Bitcoin development strides on, an opportunity arises to try to do what Ethereum and all the other related altcoins have so far failed to do. Computational utility. And to do this on Bitcoin, the most successful “Crypto”.

The first unintended hijack of Ethereums utility are the JPEGs we are seeing on our blockchain.

This latest drive to make Bitcoin Turing complete is potentially the final destination for developers keen to explore the potential of Bitcoins eco-system.

Perhaps Bitcoin is going to absorb all the altcoins. Perhaps that is the goal of Bitcoins developers.

I don’t comment whether this is good or bad, I’m just exploring whether this may be the agenda.

@ 90c656ff:9383fd4e

Bitcoin operates through a decentralized system that relies on a process called mining to validate transactions and secure the network. However, Bitcoin mining requires a large amount of energy, which raises concerns about its environmental impact. Although there are solutions to make this process more sustainable, energy consumption remains a topic of debate among both critics and advocates of the technology.

How does Bitcoin mining work?

Bitcoin mining is the process by which new blocks are added to the blockchain (or timechain) and new coins are created. This process uses a mechanism called proof-of-work, where specialized computers (miners) compete to solve complex mathematical problems. To do this, they consume a huge amount of electricity, as the equipment must operate continuously to keep the network secure and decentralized.

• Energy consumption and environmental impact

The main criticism of Bitcoin mining is its high electricity consumption. Currently, it is estimated that the Bitcoin network consumes as much energy as some entire countries. This raises environmental concerns, as much of the world's electricity is still generated from fossil fuels, which emit polluting gases.

The environmental impacts of Bitcoin mining include:

01 - Carbon Emissions: If the electricity used for mining comes from polluting sources, the process contributes to increased CO₂ emissions, intensifying global warming.

02 - Excessive Use of Natural Resources: Large-scale mining can strain local power grids and increase demand for electricity, leading to higher fossil fuel consumption in some regions.

03 - Electronic Waste Production: Mining equipment has a relatively short lifespan, which leads to the generation of large amounts of electronic waste.

• Alternatives and sustainable solutions

Despite these concerns, Bitcoin mining is becoming increasingly efficient and sustainable. Many mining operations already use renewable energy sources such as hydroelectric, solar, and wind, significantly reducing their ecological footprint. Some solutions include:

01 - Use of Renewable Energy: Miners are relocating to regions with excess renewable energy production, taking advantage of resources that would otherwise be wasted.

02 - Recycling Heat Generated by Mining: Some companies are using the heat produced by mining equipment to warm buildings and infrastructure, making more efficient use of the energy.

03 - Technological Innovations: The development of new chips and more efficient equipment reduces the energy consumption of mining without compromising network security.

In summary, the environmental impact of Bitcoin mining is a controversial issue, but solutions to make the process more sustainable are rapidly evolving. While energy consumption remains high, the shift toward renewable energy sources and new technologies could make Bitcoin a more efficient and environmentally friendly system. Thus, the issue is not merely the amount of electricity consumed, but the origin of that energy and the innovations making mining increasingly sustainable.

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!

@ b154080c:00027cc7

Introduction

In the ancient times of Israel, masculinity found its true embodiment in the courageous story of Daniel. Amidst the foreign land of Babylon, Daniel stood firm in his convictions, showcasing strength, and dedication to his beliefs.

Despite living in a culture that sought to diminish his faith, Daniel refused to bow before idols or false deities. His defiance challenged societal expectations, revealing a masculinity that transcended worldly norms. Rooted in his unshakable belief in the one true God, Daniel's resolve remained unyielding. Facing the wrath of the king, Daniel fearlessly stood before Nebuchadnezzar, humbly declaring his allegiance to God alone. Cast into a blazing furnace as punishment, Daniel emerged unharmed. God's angel shielded him from the scorching flames, proving that his faith made him invincible. Witnessing this display of masculinity, Nebuchadnezzar acknowledged the greatness of Daniel's God, bringing about a profound transformation.

Daniel's story serves as a testament to the essence of masculinity—a resolute dedication to one's convictions, the courage to defy societal expectations, and a commitment to truth. His faith and devotion inspire generations, exemplifying the power of masculine conviction.

There have been countless instances throughout history where acts of courage have taken place on a spectrum. Although both men and women can display such acts, history has shown that resolve, courage, and bravery have predominantly resided within the realm of masculinity. The Apostle Paul himself concluded the book of 1 Corinthians by saying, "Be watchful, stand firm in the faith, act like men, be strong. Let all that you do be done in love" (16:13-14). By combining this passage with the numerous accounts of provision, battle, sacrifice, and honor, it becomes evident that God has designed inherent and very important differences within the male gender.

The Bible presents us with inspiring examples of both courageous women, such as Deborah, Rahab, and Esther, and valiant men, including Joshua, Gideon, Samson, David, Jonathan, Nehemiah, the Prophets, the twelve Apostles, and above all, Jesus Himself. While these accounts acknowledge the remarkable contributions of women, they predominantly highlight the male figures who exemplify strength, boldness, courage, and a resolute sense of responsibility. Throughout its pages, the Bible paints a vivid picture of masculinity's profound impact and enduring significance which we must embrace.

Jesus’ Masculinity

Jesus exhibited remarkable courage throughout many of his acts, and it is through his expression of masculinity that this courage shines even brighter. Jesus' masculinity played a crucial role in enabling him to display great bravery and determination in fulfilling his mission. However, it's important to note that Jesus redefines masculinity beyond physical strength or dominance, embracing resilience, self-sacrifice, and unyielding conviction as its defining qualities.

Jesus' courage stemmed from his deep understanding of his purpose and his unshakable faith in his Father's plan. He fearlessly challenged the religious authorities of his time, calling out hypocrisy and speaking truth to power. Despite facing opposition and hostility, Jesus stood firm in his convictions, undeterred by the threats and ridicule he encountered. Jesus' embodiment of masculinity highlights the transformative power it can have when rooted in love and compassion.

Modern Culture Poisoning the Church

It is important to realize the true masculinity of Jesus and the example that he has set for us in this regard. Unfortunately, I often see a tendency nowadays to downplay Jesus' masculinity and instead depict Him in a more feminized manner.

In both our culture and the modern church, there is a tendency to present a version of Jesus that deviates from the biblical portrayal. Perhaps you've come across people who refer to Jesus as their "best friend" or even draw comparisons between their relationship with Him and that of a "boyfriend.” This is in fact very unbiblical. The Bible never presents our love for God using such romantic or erotic language. While the men depicted in Scripture certainly loved God, they were never portrayed as being desperate for Him or romantically in love with Him. People are often taught a very shallow and weak portrayal of Him.

In the United States, particularly in the context of flourishing Protestantism, the shift from considering the community as a whole to focusing on the individual has led to a rise in strong individualistic beliefs which has resulted in a diminished sense of community within the Catholic Church. When the focal point of Catholicism becomes "Jesus and me," it opens the door to a mindset of being "spiritual" rather than "religious.” Attending church becomes a matter of personal choice, and faith no longer necessarily influences or intersects with areas such as business or politics. The sole emphasis becomes on one's personal relationship with Christ, prioritizing individual salvation over communal or global redemption. The vision of the kingdom of God taking shape on earth also becomes less urgent, as the emphasis shifts towards a faith centered on transcendence, emotions, and sentiment, rather than tangible actions.

The perception of Jesus' masculinity has been negatively impacted by the trend of feminizing Him, which has contributed to a decline in the courage displayed by men today. This shift can be attributed to various factors that have influenced societal perspectives.

In contrast to the promises of Jesus, which include suffering, trials, and pain, it is often only presented to them that Christianity is the solution to these hardships. Instead of acknowledging the reality of challenges, the contemporary portrayal of Christianity tends to market it as the antidote to suffering and pain. It is important to recognize and reflect upon the significant difference between how Jesus called His disciples and the prevailing emphasis on personal relationships with Him today. Instead of inviting them to have a personal connection, He simply said, "Follow me." Understanding this distinction is crucial in our understanding of Jesus' call to discipleship. "Follow me" implies a sense of purpose, a shared mission or goal to pursue. This contrast highlights the divergence between the original intent of discipleship and the way it is often portrayed around me nowadays.

I want to emphasize that I am by no means denying the significance of having a personal relationship with Christ. On the contrary, I am simply highlighting the importance of recognizing that personal relationships, including our relationship with Christ, require more than just superficial connections. They demand a deep sense of faith, trust, and communion with Him. Drawing inspiration from the courageous example of Jesus, who fearlessly confronted societal norms and spoke truth to power, our relationship with Him can empower us to embrace courage in our own lives. Just as Jesus fearlessly faced opposition, persecution, and ultimately sacrificed Himself for the sake of others, our connection with Him can embolden us to stand up for what is right, to live out our faith boldly, and to face life's challenges with strength. It is not a casual or complacent association but a courageous and transformative bond that empowers us to live out our faith with conviction and to impact the world around us positively.

As modern sermons take center stage, it's become apparent that there is a tendency to downplay the contrasts found in the teachings of the Bible. As mentions of heaven and hell, sin and life, grace and justice, as well as the analogies involving battles and soldiers for Christ have always been very prevalent, they have become way less common nowadays. We hear fewer calls for Catholics to embrace their crosses and passionately commit themselves to the cause of the gospel and the well-being of others. Instead, the spotlight has shifted towards how the gospel can serve as a tool for personal growth and fulfillment, focusing on self-realization. The gospel is often presented as a therapeutic treatment rather than a heroic challenge. The emphasis lies on the rewards rather than the obstacles, creating the idea of all gain, no pain (lol).

The rise of praise and worship music has also brought about significant changes in people's perception of Christ. While traditional hymns focused on singing about God, emphasizing His greatness, power, and distinctiveness, praise and worship music takes a different approach. It presents God as a close companion, an intimate presence by our side, emphasizing His love and care for us. This shift in emphasis, while not inherently negative, certainly plays a substantial role in shaping our understanding of Christ's nature and relationship with us.

Jesus is the Epitome of Masculinity

I believe Jesus stands as the epitome of masculinity, offering an unrivaled example for men to emulate. Through His life and teachings, He reveals the true essence of what it means to be a man. He leads with courage, facing challenges head-on without hesitation. His fearlessness shines through as He confronts opposition and stands firm in His convictions. Moreover, His love is not self-serving but sacrificial, displayed vividly through His ultimate act of giving His own life for the sake of others. And in the face of adversity, His resolve remains unshakeable, inspiring men to stand strong in their beliefs and principles. Jesus, in His entirety, embodies the essence of true masculinity, setting an unparalleled standard that us men must aspire to.

Around me, I’m often seeing a tendency to shy away from addressing challenging subjects with resolute conviction. Rather than speaking with clarity and certainty, there is a preference for using vague language and ambiguous statements to navigate sensitive issues. In stark contrast, Jesus stood firmly and fearlessly, fearlessly proclaiming His truth. His words shook the foundations of societal norms, demanding radical commitment from His followers. True boldness lies in the courage to speak truth, even when faced with opposition and adversity.

Boldness is a very masculine characteristic. While some may argue that boldness is not exclusive to gender, the Bible primarily associates this characteristic with men. On the other hand, the beauty of women is highlighted through the importance of a gentle and quiet spirit, which also very much holds great value in the eyes of God. 1 Peter 3:4 addressing woman and wives, "Let your adorning be the hidden person of the heart with the imperishable beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which in God's sight is very precious." This reminds us that inner qualities such as a gentle and tranquil demeanor also hold significant worth and are highly esteemed.

As Jesus exemplified true boldness, courageously speaking God's truth regardless of the consequences. His courage serves as the ultimate model of masculinity, inspiring men to fearlessly pursue God's will. Jesus exemplified bravery, rooted in His deep reverence for God. Unlike the fear of man, which arises from sin, Jesus' bravery stemmed from His love for God. His resolute posture and authoritative responses to godless men demonstrated a masculinity untainted by timidity. Jesus taught us to lead with courage, grounded in reverence for God and faith in His sovereignty.

In a culture where love is often misrepresented, Jesus' sacrificial love stands as the true definition. Love, as demonstrated by Jesus, goes beyond superficial feelings; it entails sacrificial commitment. Jesus willingly laid down His life for His bride, the Church, showcasing the essence of true masculinity. Men are called to sacrificially love their wives, mirroring Christ's example. This selfless love forms the foundation for men to protect, nurture, and fight for those entrusted to their care.

Christ's resolve was the driving force behind the cross, demonstrating His commitment to fulfill His mission. His choice to embrace the cross, knowing the suffering and wrath He would endure, showcases resolute masculinity. In history, heroic moments of perseverance are predominantly marked by male resolve. The biological advantage provided by testosterone further supports men's capacity for enduring resolve. Jesus' resolve to save His people from sin teaches men to stand firm in the face of challenges, abiding in their commitment to their calling.

Restoring the Church's Boldness and Reclaiming Biblical Masculinity and Femininity

The landscape of the Church has undergone a significant transformation, moving away from its historic expression of Christianity. We've witnessed a shift from powerful, convicting sermons to soft, TED-talk style infotainment. Classic hymns highlighting doctrine, sacrifice, and piety have been replaced by emotionally driven love songs that resemble romantic ballads. It's clear that the local church has undergone a real emasculation.

This departure from biblical foundations has contributed to a great deal of confusion within the Church, particularly concerning the understanding of biblical manhood and womanhood. The increasing push for egalitarianism has led to women fighting for leadership roles, while men find themselves adrift without clear guidance regarding their responsibilities in marriage, the church, and the family. I believe this confusion and distortion of gender roles to be the enemy's central strategy for our generation. By infiltrating the Church with a heightened emphasis on feminine emotion, the enemy has left us unprepared for moments requiring masculine boldness, fearlessness, sacrifice, and resolve.

We must acknowledge that there is a difference between a surface-level expression of faith and the profound conviction displayed by those facing intense trials. The challenges and hardships that people face in the midst of adversity provide a profound glimpse into the strength and genuineness of their faith. These trials are a powerful testimony to their commitment and courage. Throughout history, numerous Christians have faced unimaginable suffering, even enduring torture, dismemberment, and martyrdom, all because of their devotion to Christ. Their remarkable sacrifices inspire us and remind us of the immense cost of following Jesus. Yet, the trend of timidity displayed by the present-day Church, yielding to government overreach or even complying with laws that endorse sexual sin contrary to biblical teachings, will come at a significant cost.

It is high time for the Church to reclaim its boldness and restore the biblical understanding of masculinity and femininity. We must reject the watered-down version of Christianity that has spread throughout our culture and embrace a faith rooted in conviction and sacrifice. By understanding and embracing the unique roles and responsibilities of men and women as outlined in Scripture, we can restore clarity and purpose to our families, churches, and communities. Let us rise above the societal pressures, rekindle the fire of biblical truth, and stand firm in our commitment to Christ, no matter the cost.

As we progress, it becomes clear that the importance of strong, virtuous Catholic men is growing. This should not catch us off guard. The feminist movement of the 21st century is truly toxic. It goes way beyond advocating for the rightful appreciation of women; it seeks to establish female dominance. Moreover, its influence knows no boundaries. Like the LGBTQ community, its aim is to permeate every aspect of public, personal, and spiritual life. We must not only be alarmed by this trend but also prepare ourselves to stand firmly against it. We need biblically grounded shepherds and faithful women who can discern the subtle infiltration of an effeminate culture and guard against it.

Let us not forget that Catholicism is not egalitarian. While men and women are equally valued before the cross, our roles and responsibilities differ. In marriage, Christianity follows a complementarian model, where the husband leads with sacrificial love, and the wife respects and supports him. People are too sensitive about the word “patriarchy” nowadays. In terms of leadership, the Church holds a patriarchal stance. At the same time, patriarchy, like any other system, is not immune to the potential for sinful expressions. However, when approached with sacrificial love, adherence to biblical order, and a commitment to honoring God, the structure of patriarchy - as well as areas such as marriage, fatherhood, and heterosexuality - can yield to way more goodness. We should strive for a church culture that aligns with the gender-culture outlined in God’s Word: gentle, safe, and encouraging, while also strong, bold, and committed to upholding biblical order and fulfilling the mission entrusted to us. This balance allows the church to fully embody the presence of Christ, enabling His people to confidently advance alongside our great Lord.

We must prepare ourselves for an increasing need for men who embrace biblical masculinity and women who faithfully embody femininity. It is crucial not to overlook the pervasive influence of an effeminate culture and the agenda of distorted ideologies. By embracing the distinct roles and responsibilities that God has given to both men and women, we cultivate a church culture that mirrors the beauty of Christ and empowers His people to wholeheartedly pursue His mission with courage. We must recognize the urgency to embrace and embody biblical masculinity in the face of cultural challenges and shifting ideologies. Equipped with the truth of God's Word, we can navigate the complexities of the world and fulfill our God-given roles with great faith. Let us rise as men who boldly embrace our calling, standing firm in the face of challenges, and wholeheartedly pursuing lives of holiness and service to God and His Church. May we stand united, guided by His Word, and ready to face the battles ahead with strength, grace, and resolved faith.

From Nashville with love,

Suhail Saqan

This was inspired by The Imitation of Christ. Read here.

@ 57d1a264:69f1fee1

Safe Bits & Self Custody Tips

The journey of onboarding a user and create a bitcoin multiSig setup begins far before opening a desktop like Bitcoin Safe (BS) or any other similar application. Bitcoin Safe seems designed for families and people that want to start exploring and learning about multiSig setup. The need for such application and use of it could go much further, defining best practices for private organizations that aim to custody bitcoin in a private and anonymous way, following and enjoy the values and standards bitcoin has been built for.

Intro

Organizations and small private groups like families, family offices and solopreneurs operating on a bitcoin standard will have the need to keep track of transactions and categorize them to keep the books in order. A part of our efforts will be spent ensuring accessibility standards are in place for everyone to use Bitcoin Safe with comfort and safety.

We aim with this project to bring together the three Designathon ideas below: - Bitcoin Safe: improve its overall design and usability. - No User Left Behind: improve Bitcoin Safe accessibility. - Self-custody guidelines for organizations: How Bitcoin Safe can be used by private organization following best self-custody practices.

We are already halfway of the first week, and here below the progress made so far.

Designing an icon Set for Bitcoin Safe

One of the noticeable things when using BS is the inconsistency of the icons, not just in colors and shapes, but also the way are used. The desktop app try to have a clean design that incorporate with all OS (Win, macOS, Linux) and for this reason it's hard to define when a system default icon need to be used or if a custom one can be applied instead. The use of QT Ui framework for python apps help to respond to these questions. It also incorporates and brig up dome default settings that aren't easily overwritten.

Here below you can see the current version of BS:

Defining a more strict color palette for Bitcoin Safe was the first thing!

How much the icons affect accessibility? How they can help users to reach the right functionality? I took the challenge and, with PenPot.app, redesigned the icons based on the grid defined in the https://bitcoinicons.com/ and proposing the implementation of it to have a cleaner and more consistent look'n feel, at least for the icons now.

What's next

I personally look forward to seeing these icons implemented soon in Bitcoin Safe interface. In the meantime, we'll focus on delivering an accessibility audit and evaluate options to see how BS could be used by private organizations aiming to become financially sovereign with self-custody or more complex bitcoin multiSig setups.

One of the greatest innovations BS is bringing to us is the ability to sync the multiSig wallets, including PBST, Categories and labels, through the nostr decentralized protocol, making current key custodial services somehow obsolete. Second-coolest feature that this nostr implementation brings is the ability to have a build-in private chat that connect and enable the various signers of a multiSig to communicate and sign transactions remotely. Where have you seen something like this before?

Categories UX and redesign is also considered in this project. We'll try to understand how to better serve this functionality to you, the user, really soon.

Stay tuned!

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/974488

@ 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.

@ c230edd3:8ad4a712

Chef's notes

This cake is not too sweet and very simple to make. The 3 flavors and mild and meld well with the light sweetness.

Details

• ⏲️ Prep time: 15 min
• 🍳 Cook time: 45 min
• 🍽️ Servings: 12

Ingredients

• 1 1/2 cups all-purpose flour
• 1/2 tsp salt
• 2 tsp baking soda
• 1 cup sugar
• 3 large eggs
• 1/2 cup full fat milk
• 3/4 cup unfiltered olive oil
• 2/3 cup finely chopped raw, unsalted almonds
• 2 tsp lavender
• 1 Tbsp powdered sugar

Directions

1. Preheat oven to 350 degrees F. Lightly butter 8 inch baking pan.
2. In smal bowl, whisk together flour, salt, and baking soda.
3. In large bowl, beat eggs and sugar until light colored and fluffy. Add milk.
4. Slowly pour and stir in olive oil.
5. Fold dry ingredients into the wet ingredients,
6. Stir in the almonds and the lavender, reserving some flowers for garnish.
7. Pour into prepared pan and bake for 45 min, or until toothpick comes out clean.
8. Cool on wire rack, dust with powdered sugar and top with reserved lavender.

@ 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.

@ 57d1a264:69f1fee1

Welcome back to our weekly JABBB, Just Another Bitcoin Bubble Boom, a comics and meme contest crafted for you, creative stackers!

If you'd like to learn more, check our welcome post here.

---

This week sticker: Bitcoin Sir

You can download the source file directly from the HereComesBitcoin website in SVG and PNG. Use this sticker around SN with the code ![](https://m.stacker.news/71417)

The task

Make sure you use this week sticker to design a comic frame or a meme, add a message that perfectly captures the sentiment of the current most hilarious takes on the Bitcoin space. You can contextualize it or not, it's up to you, you chose the message, the context and anything else that will help you submit your comic art masterpiece.

Are you a meme creator? There's space for you too: select the most similar shot from the gifts hosted on the Gif Station section and craft your best meme... Let's Jabbb!

---

If you enjoy designing and memeing, feel free to check out the JABBB archive and create more to spread Bitcoin awareness to the moon.

Submit each proposal on the relative thread, bounties will be distributed when enough participants submit options.

PS: you can now use HereComesBitcoin stickers to use on Stacker.News

₿e creative, have fun! :D

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/974483

@ 2b24a1fa:17750f64

"Was ist da drin?", fragte wohl jedes unverdorbene Kind, bevor eine Flüssigkeit in den Muskel seines Arms gespritzt würde. Aber wir sind alle keine unverdorbenen Kinder mehr. Wissen, das haben die anderen, die Gebildeteren, die Wissenschaftler, die Ärzte. Nachfragen würde Autoritäten untergraben und Unglauben demonstrieren. Und drum fällt kaum jemandem auf, dass wir bis heute keine sauberen Inhaltsangaben über die sogenannten Corona-Spritzen erhalten haben, geschweige denn wissen, was der Inhalt in unseren Körpern genau anrichten kann.

https://soundcloud.com/radiomuenchen/inmodia-weist-schwer-schadigende-substanzen-nach-von-dna-resten-sv40-und-nanolipiden-ein-interview-mit-prof-klaus-steger

Auf die Suche nach Aufklärung hat sich von Beginn dieser sogenannten Pandemie der Verein Mediziner und Wissenschaftler für Gesundheit, Frieden und Demokratie gemacht. Jetzt gibt es ein erstes Labor, das die bekannten, relevanten Impfstoffbestandteile nachweisen will. Darüber unterhält sich unsere Redakteurin Eva Schmidt mit dem Molekularbiologen Prof. Klaus Steger von der Universität Gießen und engagiert bei inmodia, dem Institut für molekularbiologische Diagnostik. Zunächst wollte sie wissen, welche Bestandteile eigentlich bekannt sind, die in Millionen von Menschen gespritzt wurden.

Link zur Webseite: inmodia.de

@ 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.

@ 9223d2fa:b57e3de7

12,600 steps

@ 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

@ 7460b7fd:4fc4e74b

PR 32359：取消 OP_RETURN 字节限制提案深入分析

提案概述及代码变更内容

提案背景与意图：比特币核心当前对交易中的 OP_RETURN 输出（数据载体输出）有严格限制：默认最多允许单个 OP_RETURN 输出，且其 scriptPubKey 大小不超过 83 字节（约80字节数据加上OP_RETURN和Pushdata前缀）groups.google.com。这一标准规则旨在轻度阻碍链上存储大量任意数据，鼓励将非金融数据以“更无害”的方式存入链上（比如用OP_RETURN而非可花费的UTXO输出）groups.google.com。然而随着时间推移，这一限制并未阻止用户将数据写入区块链，反而促使开发者设计各种变通方案绕过限制。例如，近期 Citrea Clementine 协议（闪电网络相关项目）因为OP_RETURN容量不足，而改用不可花费的Taproot输出来存储所需数据groups.google.com。这样的做法导致大量小额UTXO留存在UTXO集，对全节点造成负担，被视为比使用OP_RETURN更有害的副作用github.com。基于此背景，Bitcoin Core 开发者 Peter Todd（与 Chaincode 实验室的 Antoine Poinsot 等人）提出了 PR #32359，意在解除OP_RETURN的字节大小限制，以消除这种“适得其反”的限制策略groups.google.comgithub.com。

**代码变更要点：**该PR主要修改了与标准交易校验和策略配置相关的代码，包括移除 script/standard.cpp 中对OP_RETURN输出大小和数量的检查，以及删除策略配置选项 -datacarrier 和 -datacarriersizegithub.com。具体而言：

• 取消OP_RETURN大小限制：删除了判断OP_RETURN数据长度是否超过 MAX_OP_RETURN_RELAY（83字节）的标准性检查。此后，交易中的OP_RETURN输出脚本长度将不再被固定上限限制，只要满足区块重量等共识规则即可（理论上可嵌入远大于83字节的数据）github.comgroups.google.com。PR说明中明确提到移除了这些限制的执行代码github.com。相应地，-datacarriersize 配置参数被删除，因为其存在意义（设置OP_RETURN字节上限）已不复存在github.com。此前 -datacarriersize 默认为83，当用户调高该值时节点可接受更大数据载体输出；而现在代码中已无此参数，节点将无条件接受任意大小的OP_RETURN输出。

• 移除OP_RETURN输出数量限制：原先比特币核心默认策略还规定每笔交易最多只有一个OP_RETURN输出是标准的，多于一个即视为非标准交易（拒绝中继）bitcoin.stackexchange.com。该PR同样意在取消此“任意”限制groups.google.com。修改中移除了对 nDataOut（OP_RETURN输出计数）的检查，即允许一笔交易包含多个OP_RETURN输出而仍被视作标准交易。之前的代码若检测到 nDataOut > 1 会返回“multi-op-return”的拒绝原因github.com；PR删除了这一段逻辑，相应的功能测试也更新或移除了对“multi-op-return”非标准原因的断言github.com。

• 保留标准形式要求：值得注意的是，OP_RETURN输出的形式要求仍保留。PR描述中强调“数据载体输出的形式仍保持标准化：脚本以单个 OP_RETURN 开头，后跟任意数量的数据推字节；不允许非数据类的其他脚本操作码”github.com。也就是说，虽然大小和数量限制解除了，但OP_RETURN脚本内容只能是纯数据，不能夹带其他执行opcode。这保证了这些输出依然是“不可花费”的纯数据输出，不会改变它们对UTXO集的影响（不会增加UTXO）。

综上，PR #32359 的核心改动在策略层面放宽了对 OP_RETURN 的限制，删除了相关配置和检查，使节点默认接受任意大小、任意数量的 OP_RETURN 数据输出。同时维持其基本形式（OP_RETURN+数据）以确保此变更不会引入其它类型的非标准交易格式。

改动层级：策略规则 vs 共识规则

该提案属于策略层（policy-level）的更改，而非共识层规则的更改。也就是说，它影响的是节点对交易的_中继、存储和打包_策略，而不改变交易或区块在链上的有效性判定。OP_RETURN字节上限和数量限制从一开始就是标准性约束（Standardness），并非比特币共识协议的一部分groups.google.com。因此，移除这些限制不会导致旧节点与新节点产生区块共识分歧。具体理由如下：

• 无共识规则变动：原有的83字节上限只是节点默认_拒绝转发/挖矿_超限交易的规则，但如果矿工强行将超83字节的OP_RETURN交易打包进区块，所有遵循共识规则的节点（包括未升级的旧节点）依然会接受该区块。因为共识层并没有“OP_RETURN大小不得超过83字节”的规定github.com。正如开发者所指出的，现行的OP_RETURN限制属于“standardness rules”，其约束可以被轻易绕过，并不影响交易的最终有效性github.com。Peter Todd 在评论中强调，为真正禁止链上发布任意数据，必须修改比特币的共识协议，而这在现实中几乎不可能实施github.com。

• **旧节点兼容性：**由于没有引入新的脚本opcode或共识验证规则，旧版本节点即使不升级，仍然会承认包含大OP_RETURN输出的区块为有效。换言之，不存在分叉风险。旧节点唯一的区别是仍会按照老策略拒绝中继此类交易，但一旦交易被打包进区块，它们仍会接受github.com。正因如此，这一提议不会引发硬分叉，只是改变默认策略。

• **策略可自行定制：**另外，正如PR作者所言，这纯粹是默认策略的调整，用户依然可以选择运行修改版的软件继续实施先前的限制。例如，Peter Todd提到有替代实现（如 Bitcoin Knots）可以继续强制这些限制github.com。因此，这并非要“强制”所有节点解除限制，而是主流软件默认策略的演进。

需要澄清的是，有反对者担心解除限制可能扩大攻击面（下文详述），但这些都是针对节点资源和网络层面的影响，而非共识层安全性问题。总的来看，PR #32359 是策略层改进，与先前如RBF默认开启、逐渐弱化非标准交易限制等改变类似，其出发点在于网络行为而非协议规则本身。

对闪电网络节点和交易验证的影响

对链上验证的影响：由于这是策略层变更，交易和区块的验证规则并未改变，因此运行旧版本 Bitcoin Core 的闪电网络节点在共识上不会出现任何问题。闪电网络全节点通常依赖比特币全节点来跟踪链上交易，它们关心的是交易确认和共识有效性。解除OP_RETURN限制并不会使旧节点拒绝新区块，因而不会造成闪电通道关闭交易或HTLC交易在旧节点上验签失败等情况。换句话说，不升级Bitcoin Core软件的LN节点仍可正常参与链上共识，无需担心链上交易验证兼容性。

对节点中继和资源的影响：主要影响在于网络传播和资源占用。如果闪电网络节点所连接的Bitcoin Core没有升级，它将不会中继或存储那些含有超大OP_RETURN的未确认交易（因为旧版本视之为非标准交易）。这可能导致未升级节点的内存池与升级节点不一致：某些在新版节点中合法存在的交易，在旧版中被拒之门外。不过这通常不影响闪电网络的运行，因为闪电通道相关交易本身不会包含OP_RETURN数据输出。此外，当这些交易被矿工打包进区块后，旧节点依然会接收到区块并处理。所以，即便LN节点的后端Bitcoin Core未升级，最坏情形只是它在交易未打包时可能感知不到这些“大数据”交易，但这通常无碍于闪电网络功能（闪电网络主要关心的是通道交易的确认情况）。

升级的好处和必要性：从闪电网络生态来看，放宽OP_RETURN限制反而可能带来一些正面作用。正如前述，已有闪电网络周边项目因为83字节限制不足，转而使用不可花费输出存储数据groups.google.com。例如 Antoine Poinsot 在邮件列表中提到的 Clementine 协议，将某些watchtower挑战数据存进Taproot输出，因为OP_RETURN容量不够groups.google.com。解除限制后，此类应用完全可以改用更友好的OP_RETURN输出来存储数据，不再制造永久占据UTXO集的“垃圾”UTXOgithub.com。因此，闪电网络的watchtower、跨链桥等组件若需要在链上写入证据数据，将可直接利用更大的OP_RETURN输出，网络整体效率和健壮性都会提升。

需要注意的是，如果PR最终被合并并广泛部署，闪电网络节点运营者应该升级其Bitcoin Core后端以跟上新的默认策略。升级后，其节点将和大多数网络节点一样中继和接受大OP_RETURN交易，确保自己的内存池和网络同步，不会漏掉一些潜在相关交易（尽管目前来看，这些交易对LN通道本身并无直接关联）。总之，从兼容性看不升级没有致命问题，但从网络参与度和功能上看，升级是有益的。

潜在的间接影响：反对者提出，解除限制可能导致区块和内存池充斥更多任意数据，从而推高链上手续费、影响闪电通道关闭时所需的手续费估计。例如，如果大量大OP_RETURN交易占据区块空间，链上拥堵加剧，LN通道关闭需要支付更高费用才能及时确认。这其实是一般性拥堵问题，并非LN特有的兼容性问题。支持者则认为，这正是自由市场作用的体现，使用链上空间就该竞争付费github.com。无论如何，闪电网络作为二层方案，其优势在于减少链上交互频率，链上手续费市场的变化对LN有影响但不改变其运行逻辑。LN节点只需确保其Bitcoin Core正常运行、及时跟上链上状态即可。

开发者讨论焦点：支持与反对观点

PR #32359 在开发者社区引发了激烈讨论，支持者和反对者针锋相对，各自提出了有力的论据。以下总结双方主要观点：

• 支持方观点：

• 当前限制无效且适得其反：支持者强调83字节上限并未阻止人们在链上存数据，反而促使更有害的行为。Peter Todd指出，很多协议改用不可花费UTXO或在scriptsig中藏数据来绕过OP_RETURN限制，结果增加了UTXO集膨胀，这是限制OP_RETURN带来的反效果github.com。与其如此，不如移除限制，让数据都写入可被丢弃的OP_RETURN输出，避免UTXO污染github.comgithub.com。正如一位支持者所言：“与其让尘埃UTXO永远留在UTXO集合，不如使用可证明不可花费的输出（OP_RETURN）”github.com。

• **限制易被绕过，增添维护负担：**由于有些矿工或服务商（如MARA Slipstream私有广播）本就接受大OP_RETURN交易，这一限制对有心者来说形同虚设github.com。同时，存在维护这个限制的代码和配置选项，增加了节点实现复杂度。Todd认为，与其让Bitcoin Core承担维护“低效甚至有害”的限制，不如干脆取消，有需要的人可以使用其他软件实现自己的政策github.com。他提到有替代的Bitcoin Knots节点可自行过滤“垃圾”交易，但没必要要求Bitcoin Core默认坚持这些无效限制github.com。

• 尊重自由市场，拥抱链上数据用例：部分支持者从理念上认为，比特币区块空间的使用应交由手续费市场决定，而不应由节点软件做人为限制。著名开发者 Jameson Lopp 表示，是时候承认“有人就是想用比特币做数据锚定”，我们应当提供更优方式满足这种需求，而不是一味阻碍github.com。他认为用户既然愿意付费存数据，就说明这种行为对他们有价值，矿工也有动力处理；网络层不应进行过度的“父爱”式管制github.com。对于反对者所称“大数据交易会挤占区块、抬高手续费”，Lopp直言“这本来就是区块空间市场运作方式”，愿付高费者得以优先确认，无可厚非github.com。

• 统一与简化策略：还有支持者指出，既然限制容易绕过且逐渐没人遵守，那保留它只会造成节点之间策略不一致，反而增加网络复杂性。通过取消限制，所有核心节点一致地接受任意大小OP_RETURN，可避免因为策略差异导致的网络孤块或中继不畅（尽管共识不受影响，但策略不一致会带来一些网络层问题）。同时删除相关配置项，意味着简化用户配置，减少困惑和误用。Peter Todd在回应保留配置选项的建议时提到，Bitcoin Core在Full-RBF功能上也曾移除过用户可选项，直接默认启用，因为现实证明矿工最终都会朝盈利的方向调整策略，节点自行设置反而无济于事github.com。他以RBF为例：在Core开启默认Full-RBF之前，矿工几乎已经100%自行采用了RBF策略，因此保留开关意义不大github.com。类比来看，数据交易也是如此：如果有利可图，矿工终会打包，无论节点是否选择不转发。

• 反对方观点：

• 去除限制会放松对垃圾交易的防线：反对者担心，一旦解除OP_RETURN限制，链上将出现更多纯粹存储数据的“垃圾”交易，给网络带来DoS攻击和资源消耗风险。开发者 BrazyDevelopment 详细描述了可能被加剧的攻击向量github.com：首先，“Flood-and-Loot”攻击——攻击者构造带有巨大OP_RETURN数据的低价值交易（符合共识规则，多笔交易可达数MB数据），疯狂填充各节点的内存池。github.com这样会占满节点内存和带宽，延迟正常交易的传播和确认，并推高手续费竞争。github.com虽然节点有maxmempool大小限制和最低中继费率等机制，但这些机制基于常规交易行为调校，面对异常海量的数据交易可能捉襟见肘github.com。其次，“RBF替换循环”攻击——攻击者可以利用无需额外费用的RBF替换，不断发布和替换包含大OP_RETURN的数据交易，在内存池中反复占据空间却不被确认，从而扰乱手续费市场和内存池秩序github.com。反对者认为，移除大小上限将使上述攻击更廉价、更容易实施github.com。他们主张即便要放宽，也应设定一个“高但合理”的上限（例如100KB），或在内存池压力大时动态调整限制，以保护较小资源节点的运行github.com。

• 用户丧失自定义策略的权利：一些开发者反对彻底删掉 -datacarrier 和 -datacarriersize 选项。他们认为即使大势所趋是接受更多数据，也应保留用户自主选择的空间。正如开发者 BitcoinMechanic 所言：“矿工接受大数据交易不代表用户就不能选择自己的内存池装些什么”github.com。目前用户可以通过配置将-datacarrier设为0（不中继OP_RETURN交易）或者调低-datacarriersize来严格限制自己节点的策略。直接去除这些选项，会让那些出于各种考虑（如运营受限资源节点、防范垃圾数据）的用户失去控制权。从这个角度看，反对者认为限制应该由用户 opt-in 地解除，而不是一刀切放开。开发者 Retropex 也表示：“如果矿工想要更大的数据载体交易，他们完全可以自行调整这些设置…没有理由剥夺矿工和节点运营者做选择的权利”github.com。

• 此改动非必要且不符合部分用户利益：有反对意见认为当前83字节其实已经能覆盖绝大多数合理应用需求，更大的数据上链并非比特币设计初衷。他们担心放开限制会鼓励把比特币区块链当作任意数据存储层，偏离“点对点电子现金”主线，可能带来长期的链膨胀问题。这一阵营有人将此争议上升为理念之争：是坚持比特币作为金融交易为主，还是开放成为通用数据区块链？有评论形容这场拉锯“有点类似2017年的扩容之争”，虽然本质不同（一个是共识层区块大小辩论，一个是策略层数据使用辩论），但双方观点分歧同样明显99bitcoins.com99bitcoins.com。一些反对者（如Luke Dashjr等）长期主张减少非必要的数据上链，此次更是明确 Concept NACK。Luke-Jr 认为，其实完全可以通过引入地址格式变化等办法来识别并限制存数据的交易，而不需要动用共识层改动github.com（虽然他也承认这会非常激进和不现实，但以此反驳“除了改共识无计可施”的观点）。总之，反对者倾向于维持现状：代码里已有的限制无需移除，至少不应在无压倒性共识下贸然改变github.com。

• 社区共识不足：许多开发者在GitHub上给出了“Concept NACK”（概念上不支持）的评价。一位参与者感叹：“又来？两年前讨论过的理由现在依然适用”github.com。在PR的Review日志中，可以看到反对此提案的活跃贡献者数量明显多于支持者github.com。例如，反对阵营包括 Luke-Jr、BitcoinMechanic、CryptoGuida、1ma 等众多开发者和社区成员，而支持此提案的核心开发者相对少一些（包括Jameson Lopp、Sjöors、Sergio Demian Lerner等）github.com。这种意见分裂显示出社区对取消OP_RETURN限制尚未达成广泛共识。一些反对者还担忧这么大的改动可能引发社区矛盾，甚至有人夸张地提到可能出现新的链分叉风险99bitcoins.com99bitcoins.com（虽然实际上由于不涉及共识，硬分叉风险很小，但社区内部分歧确实存在）。

综上，支持者聚焦于提高链上效率、顺应实际需求和减轻UTXO负担，认为解除限制利大于弊；而反对者强调网络稳健、安全和用户自主，担心轻易放开会招致滥用和攻击。双方在GitHub上的讨论异常热烈，很多评论获得了数十个👍或👎表态，可见整个社区对此议题的关注度之高github.comgithub.com。

PR当前状态及后续展望

截至目前（2025年5月初），PR #32359 仍处于开放讨论阶段，并未被合并。鉴于该提案在概念上收到了众多 NACK，缺乏开发者间的明确共识，短期内合并的可能性不大。GitHub 上的自动统计显示，给予“Concept NACK”的评审者数量显著超过“Concept ACK”的数量github.com。这表明在Bitcoin Core维护者看来，社区对是否采纳此改动存在明显分歧。按照 Bitcoin Core 一贯的谨慎作风，当一个提案存在较大争议时，通常会被搁置或要求进一步修改、讨论，而不会仓促合并。

目前，该PR正等待进一步的评审和讨论。有开发者提出了替代方案或折中思路。例如，Bitcoin Core维护者 instagibbs 提交了相关的 PR #32406，提议仅取消默认的OP_RETURN大小上限（等效于将-datacarriersize默认提高到极大），但保留配置选项，从而在不牺牲用户选择权的情况下实现功能开放github.com。这表明部分反对者并非完全拒绝放宽限制，而是希望以更温和的方式推进。PR #32359 与这些提案互相冲突，需要协调出统一的方案github.com。另外，也有开发者建议在测试网上模拟大OP_RETURN交易的攻击场景，以评估风险、说服怀疑者github.com。

审议状态总结：综合来看，PR #32359 尚未接近合并，更谈不上被正式接受进入下一个Bitcoin Core版本。它既没有被关闭（拒绝），也没有快速进入最终review/merge阶段，而是停留在激烈讨论中。目前Bitcoin Core的维护者并未给出明确的合并时间表，反而是在鼓励社区充分讨论其利弊。未来的走向可能有几种：要么提案经过修改（例如保留配置项、增加安全机制等）逐渐赢得共识后合并，要么维持搁置等待更明确的社区信号。此外，不排除开发者转而采用渐进路线——例如先在测试网络取消限制试验，或先提高上限值而非彻底移除，以观察效果。也有可能此提案最终会因共识不足而长期悬而不决。

总之，OP_RETURN字节限制之争体现了比特币开发中策略层决策的审慎和平衡：需要在创新开放与稳健保守之间找到折衷。PR #32359 所引发的讨论仍在持续，它的意义在于促使社区重新审视链上数据存储的策略取舍。无论最终结果如何，这一讨论本身对比特币的发展具有积极意义，因为它让开发者和社区更加清晰地权衡了比特币作为数据载体和价值载体的定位。我们将持续关注该提案的进展，以及围绕它所展开的进一步测试和论证。github.comgroups.google.com

引用来源：

• Bitcoin Core PR #32359 提案内容github.comgithub.com及开发者讨论（Peter Todd评论github.comgithub.com等）

• Bitcoin Dev 邮件列表讨论帖：《Relax OP_RETURN standardness restrictions》groups.google.comgroups.google.com

• GitHub 开发者评论摘录：支持意见（Jameson Loppgithub.com等）与反对意见（BitcoinMechanicgithub.com、BrazyDevelopmentgithub.com等）

• Bitcoin Core PR 评论自动统计（Concept ACK/NACK 汇总）github.com

@ 84b0c46a:417782f5

至高の油淋鶏の動画 https://youtu.be/Ur2tYVZppBU のレシピ書き起こし

材料（2人分）

• 鶏モモ肉…300g
• A［しょうゆ…小さじ1　塩…小さじ1／3　酒…大さじ1と1／2　おろしショウガ…5g　片栗粉…大さじ1］
• 長ネギ（みじん切り）…1／2本（50g）
• ショウガ（みじん切り）…10g
• B［しょうゆ…大さじ2　砂糖…小さじ4　酢…大さじ1 ゴマ油…小さじ1 味の素…4ふり 赤唐辛子（小口切り）…1本分］
• 赤唐辛子、花椒（各好みで）…各適量

手順

1. 肉を切る

皮を上にして適当に八等分くらい

1. 肉を肉入ってたトレーかなんか適当な入れ物に入れてそこに 醤油こさじ１、塩こさじ1/3、酒おおさじ1と1/2 と ショウガ*５グラムすりおろして入れて軽く混ぜる
2. そこに、片栗粉おおさじ１入れて混ぜる（漬ける段階にも片栗粉を入れることで厚衣になりやすい）
3. 常温で１５分くらい置く
4. その間にたれを作る

   1. 長ネギ50gを細かいみじん切りにしてボウルに入れる（白いとこも青いとこも）

      （端っこを残して縦に切り込みを入れて横に切るとよい） 2. ショウガ10gを細かいみじん切りにして同じボウルにいれる 3. 鷹の爪１本分入れる（任意） 4. 醤油おおさじ２、砂糖小さじ4、酢（穀物酢）おおさじ１を入れる 5. 味の素４振りいれてよく混ぜる 6. 小さなフライパン（油が少なくて済むので）に底に浸るくらいの油を入れ、中火で温める 7. 肉に片栗粉をたっぷりつけて揚げる 8. 揚がったらキッチンペーパーを敷いたなにかしらとかに上げる 9. もりつけてタレをかけて完成

@ c1e9ab3a:9cb56b43

Introduction: The Power of Fiction and the Shaping of Collective Morality

Stories define the moral landscape of a civilization. From the earliest mythologies to the modern spectacle of global cinema, the tales a society tells its youth shape the parameters of acceptable behavior, the cost of transgression, and the meaning of justice, power, and redemption. Among the most globally influential narratives of the past half-century is the Star Wars saga, a sprawling science fiction mythology that has transcended genre to become a cultural religion for many. Central to this mythos is the arc of Anakin Skywalker, the fallen Jedi Knight who becomes Darth Vader. In Star Wars: Episode III – Revenge of the Sith, Anakin commits what is arguably the most morally abhorrent act depicted in mainstream popular cinema: the mass murder of children. And yet, by the end of the saga, he is redeemed.

This chapter introduces the uninitiated to the events surrounding this narrative turn and explores the deep structural and ethical concerns it raises. We argue that the cultural treatment of Darth Vader as an anti-hero, even a role model, reveals a deep perversion in the collective moral grammar of the modern West. In doing so, we consider the implications this mythology may have on young adults navigating identity, masculinity, and agency in a world increasingly shaped by spectacle and symbolic narrative.

Part I: The Scene and Its Context

In Revenge of the Sith (2005), the third episode of the Star Wars prequel trilogy, the protagonist Anakin Skywalker succumbs to fear, ambition, and manipulation. Convinced that the Jedi Council is plotting against the Republic and desperate to save his pregnant wife from a vision of death, Anakin pledges allegiance to Chancellor Palpatine, secretly the Sith Lord Darth Sidious. Upon doing so, he is given a new name—Darth Vader—and tasked with a critical mission: to eliminate all Jedi in the temple, including its youngest members.

In one of the most harrowing scenes in the film, Anakin enters the Jedi Temple. A group of young children, known as "younglings," emerge from hiding and plead for help. One steps forward, calling him "Master Skywalker," and asks what they are to do. Anakin responds by igniting his lightsaber. The screen cuts away, but the implication is unambiguous. Later, it is confirmed through dialogue and visual allusion that he slaughtered them all.

There is no ambiguity in the storytelling. The man who will become the galaxy’s most feared enforcer begins his descent by murdering defenseless children.

Part II: A New Kind of Evil in Youth-Oriented Media

For decades, cinema avoided certain taboos. Even films depicting war, genocide, or psychological horror rarely crossed the line into showing children as victims of deliberate violence by the protagonist. When children were harmed, it was by monstrous antagonists, supernatural forces, or offscreen implications. The killing of children was culturally reserved for historical atrocities and horror tales.

In Revenge of the Sith, this boundary was broken. While the film does not show the violence explicitly, the implication is so clear and so central to the character arc that its omission from visual depiction does not blunt the narrative weight. What makes this scene especially jarring is the tonal dissonance between the gravity of the act and the broader cultural treatment of Star Wars as a family-friendly saga. The juxtaposition of child-targeted marketing with a central plot involving child murder is not accidental—it reflects a deeper narrative and commercial structure.

This scene was not a deviation from the arc. It was the intended turning point.

Part III: Masculinity, Militarism, and the Appeal of the Anti-Hero

Darth Vader has long been idolized as a masculine icon. His towering presence, emotionless control, and mechanical voice exude power and discipline. Military institutions have quoted him. He is celebrated in memes, posters, and merchandise. Within the cultural imagination, he embodies dominance, command, and strategic ruthlessness.

For many young men, particularly those struggling with identity, agency, and perceived weakness, Vader becomes more than a character. He becomes an archetype: the man who reclaims power by embracing discipline, forsaking emotion, and exacting vengeance against those who betrayed him. The emotional pain that leads to his fall mirrors the experiences of isolation and perceived emasculation that many young men internalize in a fractured society.

The symbolism becomes dangerous. Anakin's descent into mass murder is portrayed not as the outcome of unchecked cruelty, but as a tragic mistake rooted in love and desperation. The implication is that under enough pressure, even the most horrific act can be framed as a step toward a noble end.

Part IV: Redemption as Narrative Alchemy

By the end of the original trilogy (Return of the Jedi, 1983), Darth Vader kills the Emperor to save his son Luke and dies shortly thereafter. Luke mourns him, honors him, and burns his body in reverence. In the final scene, Vader's ghost appears alongside Obi-Wan Kenobi and Yoda—the very men who once considered him the greatest betrayal of their order. He is welcomed back.

There is no reckoning. No mention of the younglings. No memorial to the dead. No consequence beyond his own internal torment.

This model of redemption is not uncommon in Western storytelling. In Christian doctrine, the concept of grace allows for any sin to be forgiven if the sinner repents sincerely. But in the context of secular mass culture, such redemption without justice becomes deeply troubling. The cultural message is clear: even the worst crimes can be erased if one makes a grand enough gesture at the end. It is the erasure of moral debt by narrative fiat.

The implication is not only that evil can be undone by good, but that power and legacy matter more than the victims. Vader is not just forgiven—he is exalted.

Part V: Real-World Reflections and Dangerous Scripts

In recent decades, the rise of mass violence in schools and public places has revealed a disturbing pattern: young men who feel alienated, betrayed, or powerless adopt mythic narratives of vengeance and transformation. They often see themselves as tragic figures forced into violence by a cruel world. Some explicitly reference pop culture, quoting films, invoking fictional characters, or modeling their identities after cinematic anti-heroes.

It would be reductive to claim Star Wars causes such events. But it is equally naive to believe that such narratives play no role in shaping the symbolic frameworks through which vulnerable individuals understand their lives. The story of Anakin Skywalker offers a dangerous script:

• You are betrayed.
• You suffer.
• You kill.
• You become powerful.
• You are redeemed.

When combined with militarized masculinity, institutional failure, and cultural nihilism, this script can validate the darkest impulses. It becomes a myth of sacrificial violence, with the perpetrator as misunderstood hero.

Part VI: Cultural Responsibility and Narrative Ethics

The problem is not that Star Wars tells a tragic story. Tragedy is essential to moral understanding. The problem is how the culture treats that story. Darth Vader is not treated as a warning, a cautionary tale, or a fallen angel. He is merchandised, celebrated, and decontextualized.

By separating his image from his actions, society rebrands him as a figure of cool dominance rather than ethical failure. The younglings are forgotten. The victims vanish. Only the redemption remains. The merchandise continues to sell.

Cultural institutions bear responsibility for how such narratives are presented and consumed. Filmmakers may intend nuance, but marketing departments, military institutions, and fan cultures often reduce that nuance to symbol and slogan.

Conclusion: Reckoning with the Stories We Tell

The story of Anakin Skywalker is not morally neutral. It is a tale of systemic failure, emotional collapse, and unchecked violence. When presented in full, it can serve as a powerful warning. But when reduced to aesthetic dominance and easy redemption, it becomes a tool of moral decay.

The glorification of Darth Vader as a cultural icon—divorced from the horrific acts that define his transformation—is not just misguided. It is dangerous. It trains a generation to believe that power erases guilt, that violence is a path to recognition, and that final acts of loyalty can overwrite the deliberate murder of the innocent.

To the uninitiated, Star Wars may seem like harmless fantasy. But its deepest myth—the redemption of the child-killer through familial love and posthumous honor—deserves scrutiny. Not because fiction causes violence, but because fiction defines the possibilities of how we understand evil, forgiveness, and what it means to be a hero.

We must ask: What kind of redemption erases the cries of murdered children? And what kind of culture finds peace in that forgetting?

@ 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/974506

@ 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

@ dd664d5e:5633d319

Speak your truth, Nostr

I think that there's a difference in the decisions people make when they're True Believers, and when they've just been hired to do something, or they arrived much later and don't really get the point of the decisions. It's that way with any organization controlled by a protocol, such as a constitution, basic law, canon, or core specification.

The True Believers all eventually look like idiotic fanatics who can't "keep up with the cool kids", but they arrived there because they were looking for a solution to a particular problem that they were having. If you then change the solution, to solve some other problem, while destroying the solution that attracted them to the project, in the first place, then they'll be unhappy about it.

Being cool doesn't automatically make you right about everything, but you can simply have enough might to "change" what is right. Shift the goalposts so that the problem you are trying to solve is The Most Pressing Problem. Everyone still focused on the Original Problem is reduced to protesting and being called "difficult", "unhelpful", "uncooperative", "rude".

Why are they protesting? Why don't they just go with the flow? Look at us, we never protest. We are so nice! We're totally happy with the way things are going. We are always polite and elegant and regal. Only rude people complain.

Good vibes only.

@ 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

@ df478568:2a951e67

So I've worked on this cashu cards idea for a few thousand blocks. The plan is to sell them, while also keeping them open source. I had many of these ideas swarming around in my head for tens of thousands of blocks and fighting with doubt. That's the ultimate final boss. We, bitcoiners have the power to use bitcoin as a

• Store of value
• Medium of exchange
• Unit of account.

Nostr gives us the power to speak feeely. That's an often underlooked aspect of this new protocol. Bitcoin is great for sending value, but it's not tue most efficient way to communicate. There are ways to add messages to the base-chain, but that's not robust enough to build a marketplace. The marketplace consists of people speaking and exchanging value. Nostr provides us this value.

Since we are free to communicate witout censorship on nostr, we are free to use the protocol for almost anything we can imagine. It's a public space without communication restrictions and information verification system with a web of trust and active development. Think of all the bitcoin merch on Etsy. There are posters, T-shirts, coffee cups and more sold on the government/corporate controlled Internet.I'm selling merch on nostr to show them how to sell merch on nostr.

Birthday Cards And Other Stuff

![Front of the Cashu Card birthday card (https://r2.primal.net/cache/b/70/1b/b701bff0067f6c339bf3d0d05b27e72787e7869cd2c35ea59f1d0f5416102d66.jpg)

Wait, But Why✏ is a blog from Tim Urban who has a unique perapective on life. He sells Birthday Cards, Christmas cards, plush toys and coffee cups on this blog. I always thought it was cool that he monitized his articles by his inspired me to sell some of my own greeting cards, coffee cups, and other stuff. I'm building a store like that for my blog, but I want sats, obviously...So I printed some birthday cards at an actual print shop and was shocked at how great they looked. Now I'm selling some on my store. I'm selling them for 15,000 sats, but each card recieves 1,000 sats in Cashu(in the form of a QR code inside the card) I plan to donate some sats to cashu project and split up the profits with BitPopart who desigbed the cartoon characters. I would like to use zapsplits in Shopstr. I hear the NIP is easy to implment. I should vibe code it or something. Nevertheless, I'm using sats as a medium of exchange, store of value, ans unit of account. If bitcoin jumps over the moon, I'll need to adjust my prices. I have some ideas for other stuff to sell too. I prefer making as much as I can by myself. I'm not using a loom to make shirts, but I want to make t-shirts with Custom QR codes and nostr art.

Shop My Store

...So check out my store at https://shopstr.zapthisblog.com. It will help support me writing this blog, give me bitcoin IT experience, and make me feel like I'm contributing something of value to the bitcoin movement. My goal is for plebs to use these cards to educate their children, family and friends. How many times have you heard, "Bitcoin is just a speculative asset?" Bitcoin is an abstract idea built from abstract math, a tossed salad of computer science, Austrian Economics, obscure political philosophy, and math they don't teach you in high school.

Don't say, "buy bitcoin." Show people bitcoin is used like money. Give them something they can see, touch, and use. They can scan the QR code and watch the sats appear on their phone by magic with a message: Happy Birthday!

npub1marc26z8nh3xkj5rcx7ufkatvx6ueqhp5vfw9v5teq26z254renshtf3g0

Support Zap This Blog

895,209

Tip Sats

Got Questions?

@ f7d424b5:618c51e8

Listen to the new episode here!

Finally some good news. Good new games, worthwhile remakes, and bloggers facing the consequences of their actions. Gaming is healing. Let's talk about it!

Stuff cited:

• Expedition 33 reviews

Obligatory:

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

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

@ 5df413d4:2add4f5b

Short photo-stories of the hidden, hard to find, obscure, and off the beaten track.

Come now, take a walk with me…

The Traveller 02: Jerusalem Old City

The bus slowly lurches up the winding and steep embankment. We can finally start to see the craggy tops of buildings peaking out over the ridge in the foreground distance. We have almost reached it. Jerusalem, the City on the Hill.

https://i.nostr.build/e2LpUKEgGBwfveGi.jpg

Our Israeli tour guide speaks over the mic to draw our attention to the valley below us instead - “This is the the Valley of Gehenna, the Valley of the Moloch,” he says. “In ancient times, the pagans who worshiped Moloch used this place for child sacrifice by fire. Now, imagine yourself, an early Hebrew, sitting atop the hill, looking down in horror. This is the literal Valley of The Shadow of Death, the origin of the Abrahamic concept of Hell.” Strong open - this is going to be fun.

https://i.nostr.build/5F29eBKZYs4bEMHk.jpg

Inside the Old City, our guide - a chubby, cherub-faced intelligence type on some sort of punishment duty, deputized to babysit foreigners specifically because he reads as so dopey and disarming - points out various Judeo-Christian sites on a map, his tone subtly suggesting which places are most suggested, or perhaps, permitted…

https://i.nostr.build/J44fhGWc9AZ5qpK4.jpg

https://i.nostr.build/3c0jh09nx6d5cEdt.jpg

Walking, we reach Judaism’s Kotel, the West Wall - massive, grand, and ancient, whispering of the Eternal. Amongst the worshipers, we touch the warm, dry limestone and, if we like, place written prayers into the wall's smaller cracks. A solemn and yearning ghost fills the place - but whose it is, I'm not sure.  https://i.nostr.build/AjDwA0rFiFPlrw1o.jpg

Just above the Kotel, Islam’s Dome of the Rock can be seen, its golden cap blazing in the sun. I ask our guide about visiting the dome. He cuts a heavy eyeroll in my direction - it seems I’ve outed myself as my group’s “that guy.” His face says more than words ever could, “Oy vey, there’s one in every group…”

“Why would anyone want to go there? It is a bit intense, no?” Still, I press. “Well, it is only open to tourists on Tuesday and Thursdays…” It is Tuesday. “And even then, visiting only opens from 11:30…” It is 11:20. As it becomes clear to him that I don't intend to drop this...“Fine!” he relents, with a dramatic flaring of the hands and an uniquely Israeli sigh, “Go there if you must. But remember, the bus leaves at 1PM. Good luck...” Great! Totally not ominous at all.

https://i.nostr.build/6aBhT61C28QO9J69.jpg

The checkpoint for the sole non-Muslim entrance leading up to the Dome is administered by several gorgeous and statuesque, assault rifle clad, Ethiop-Israeli female soldiers. In this period of relative peace and calm, they feel lax enough to make a coy but salacious game of their “screening” the men in line. As I observe, it seems none doth protest...

https://i.nostr.build/jm8F3pUp9EXqPRkN.jpg

Past the gun-totting Sirens, a long wooden rampart leads up to the Temple Mount, The Mount of the House of the Holy, al-Ḥaram al-Sharīf, The Noble Sanctuary, The Furthest Mosque, the site of the Dome of the Rock and the al-Masjid al-Asqa.

https://i.nostr.build/DoS0KIkrVN0yiVJ0.jpg

On the Mount, the Dome dominates all views. To those interested in pure expressions of beauty, the Dome is, undeniably, a thing of absolute glory. I pace the grounds, snapping what pictures I can. I pause to breathe and to let the electric energy of the setting wash over me.

https://i.nostr.build/0BQYLwpU291q2fBt.jpg

https://i.nostr.build/yCxfB1V8eAcfob93.jpg

It’s 12:15 now, I decide to head back. Now, here is what they don’t tell you. The non-Muslin entrance from the West Wall side is a one-way deal. Leaving the Dome plaza dumps you out into the back alley bazaar of Old City’s Muslim district. And so it is. I am lost.

https://i.nostr.build/XnQ5eZgjeS1UTEBt.jpg

https://i.nostr.build/EFGD5vgmFx5YYuH4.jpg

I run through the Muslim quarter, blindly turning down alleyways that seem to be taking me in the general direction of where I need to be - glimpses afforded by the city’s uneven elevation and cracks in ancient stone walls guiding my way.

https://i.nostr.build/mWIEAXlJfdqt3nuh.jpg

In a final act of desperation and likely a significant breach of Israeli security protocol, I scale a low wall and flop down back on the side of things where I'm “supposed” to be. But either no one sees me or no one cares. Good luck, indeed.

I make it back to my group - they are not hard to find, a bunch of MBAs in “business casual” travel attire and a tour guide wearing a loudly colored hat and jacket - with just enough time to still visit the Church of the Holy Sepulcher.

https://i.nostr.build/3nFvsXdhd0LQaZd7.jpg

https://i.nostr.build/sKnwqC0HoaZ8winW.jpg

Inside, a chaotic and dizzying array of chapels, grand domed ceilings, and Christian relics - most notably the Stone of Anointing, commemorating where Christ’s body was prepared for burial and Tomb of Christ, where Christ is said to have laid for 3 days before Resurrection.

https://i.nostr.build/Lb4CTj1dOY1pwoN6.jpg

https://i.nostr.build/LaZkYmUaY8JBRvwn.jpg

In less than an hour, one can traverse from the literal Hell, to King David’s Wall, The Tomb of Christ, and the site of Muhammad’s Ascension. The question that stays with me - What is it about this place that has caused so many to turn their heads to the heavens and cry out for God? Does he hear? And if he answers, do we listen?

https://i.nostr.build/elvlrd7rDcEaHJxT.jpg

Jerusalem, The Old City, circa 2014. Israel.

There are secrets to be found. Go there.

Bitcoin #Jerusalem #Israel #Travel #Photography #Art #Story #Storytelling #Nostr #Zap #Zaps #Plebchain #Coffeechain #Bookstr #NostrArt #Writing #Writestr #Createstr

@ 0fa80bd3:ea7325de

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

@ 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

@ 5df413d4:2add4f5b

Short photo-stories of the hidden, hard to find, obscure, and off the beaten track.

Come now, take a walk with me…

The Traveller 01: Ku/苦 Bar

Find a dingy, nondescript alley in a suspiciously quiet corner of Bangkok’s Chinatown at night. Walk down it. Pass the small prayer shrine that houses the angels who look over these particular buildings and approach an old wooden door. You were told that there is a bar here, as to yet nothing suggests that this is so…

Wait! A closer inspection reveals a simple bronze plaque, out of place for its polish and tended upkeep, “cocktails 3rd floor.” Up the stairs then! The landing on floor 3 presents a white sign with the Chinese character for bitter, ku/苦, and a red arrow pointing right.

Pass through the threshold, enter a new space. To your right, a large expanse of barren concrete, an empty “room.” Tripods for…some kind of filming? A man-sized, locked container. Yet, you did not come here to ask questions, such things are none of your business!

And to your left, you find the golden door. Approach. Enter. Be greeted. You have done well! You have found it. 苦 Bar. You are among friends now. Inside exudes deep weirdness - in the etymological sense - the bending of destinies, control of the fates. And for the patrons, a quiet yet social place, a sensual yet sacred space.

Ethereal sounds, like forlorn whale songs fill the air, a strange music for an even stranger magic. But, Taste! Taste is the order of the day! Fragrant, Bizarre, Obscure, Dripping and Arcane. Here you find a most unique use flavor, flavors myriad and manifold, flavors beyond name. Buddha’s hand, burnt cedar charcoal, ylang ylang, strawberry leaf, maybe wild roots brought in by some friendly passerby, and many, many other things. So, Taste! The drinks here, libations even, are not so much to be liked or disliked, rather, the are liquid context, experience to be embraced with a curious mind and soul freed from judgment.

And In the inner room, one may find another set of stairs. Down this time. Leading to the second place - KANGKAO. A natural wine bar, or so they say. Cozy, botanical, industrial, enclosed. The kind of private setting where you might overhear Bangkok’s resident “State Department,” “UN,” and “NGO” types chatting auspiciously in both Mandarin and English with their Mainland Chinese counterparts. But don’t look hard or listen too long! Surely, there’s no reason to be rude… Relax, relax, you are amongst friends now.

**苦 Bar. Bangkok, circa 2020. There are secrets to be found. Go there. **

Plebchain #Bitcoin #NostrArt #ArtOnNostr #Writestr #Createstr #NostrLove #Travel #Photography #Art #Story #Storytelling #Nostr #Zap #Zaps #Bangkok #Thailand #Siamstr

@ 5df413d4:2add4f5b

This opinion piece was first published in BTC Magazine on Feb 20, 2023

Just in case we needed a reminder, banks are showing us that they can and will gatekeep their customers’ money to prevent them from engaging with bitcoin. This should be a call to action for Bitcoiners or anyone else who wants to maintain control over their finances to move toward more proactive use of permissionless bitcoin tools and practices.

Since January of 2023, when Jamie Dimon decried Bitcoin as a “hyped-up fraud” and “a pet rock,” on CNBC, I've found myself unable to purchase bitcoin using my Chase debit card on Cash App. And I'm not the only one — if you have been following Bitcoin Twitter, you might have also seen Alana Joy tweet about her experience with the same. (Alana Joy Twitter account has since been deleted).

In both of our cases, it is the bank preventing bitcoin purchases and blocking inbound fiat transfers to Cash App for customers that it has associated with Bitcoin. All under the guise of “fraud protection,” of course.

No, it doesn’t make a whole lot of sense — Chase still allows ACH bitcoin purchases and fiat on Cash App can be used for investing in stocks, saving or using Cash App’s own debit card, not just bitcoin — but yes, it is happening. Also, no one seems to know exactly when this became Chase’s policy. The fraud representative I spoke with wasn’t sure and couldn’t point to any documentation, but reasoned that the rule has been in place since early last year. Yet murkier still, loose chatter can be found on Reddit about this issue going back to at least April 2021.

However, given that I and so many others were definitely buying bitcoin via Chase debit throughout 2021 and 2022, I’d wager that this policy, up to now, has only been exercised haphazardly, selectively, arbitrarily, even. Dark patterns abound, but for now, it seems like I just happen to be one of the unlucky ones…

That said, there is nothing preventing this type of policy from being enforced broadly and in earnest by one or many banks. If and as banks feel threatened by Bitcoin, we will surely see more of these kinds of opaque practices.

It’s Time To Get Proactive

Instead, we should expect it and prepare for it. So, rather than railing against banks, I want to use this as a learning experience to reflect on the importance of permissionless, non-KYC Bitcoining, and the practical actions we can take to advance the cause.

Bank with backups and remember local options. Banking is a service, not servitude. Treat it as such. Maintaining accounts at multiple banks may provide some limited fault tolerance against banks that take a hostile stance toward Bitcoin, assuming it does not become the industry norm. Further, smaller, local and regional banks may be more willing to work with Bitcoiner customers, as individual accounts can be far more meaningful to them than they are to larger national banks — though this certainly should not be taken for granted.

If you must use KYC’d Bitcoin services, do so thoughtfully. For Cash App (and services like it), consider first loading in fiat and making buys out of the app’s native cash balance instead of purchasing directly through a linked bank account/debit card where information is shared with the bank that allows it to flag the transaction for being related to bitcoin. Taking this small step may help to avoid gatekeeping and can provide some minor privacy, from the bank at least.

Get comfortable with non-KYC bitcoin exchanges. Just as many precoiners drag their feet before making their first bitcoin buys, so too do many Bitcoiners drag their feet in using permissionless channels to buy and sell bitcoin. Robosats, Bisq, Hodl Hodl— you can use the tools. For anyone just getting started, BTC Sessions has excellent video tutorial content on all three, which are linked.

If you don’t yet know how to use these services, it’s better to pick up this knowledge now through calm, self-directed learning rather than during the panic of an emergency or under pressure of more Bitcoin-hostile conditions later. And for those of us who already know, we can actively support these services. For instance, more of us taking action to maintain recurring orders on such platforms could significantly improve their volumes and liquidity, helping to bootstrap and accelerate their network effects.

Be flexible and creative with peer-to-peer payment methods. Cash App, Zelle, PayPal, Venmo, Apple Cash, Revolut, etc. — the services that most users seem to be transacting with on no-KYC exchanges — they would all become willing, if not eager and active agents of financial gatekeeping in any truly antagonistic, anti-privacy environment, even when used in a “peer-to-peer” fashion.

Always remember that there are other payment options — such as gift cards, the original digital-bearer items — that do not necessarily carry such concerns. Perhaps, an enterprising soul might even use Fold to earn bitcoin rewards on the backend for the gift cards used on the exchange…

Find your local Bitcoin community! In the steadily-advancing shadow war on all things permissionless, private, and peer-to-peer, this is our best defense. Don’t just wait until you need other Bitcoiners to get to know other Bitcoiners — to paraphrase Texas Slim, “Shake your local Bitcoiner’s hand.” Get to know people and never underestimate the power of simply asking around. There could be real, live Bitcoiners near you looking to sell some corn and happy to see it go to another HODLer rather than to a bunch of lettuce-handed fiat speculators on some faceless, centralized, Ponzi casino exchange. What’s more, let folks know your skills, talents and expertise — you might be surprised to find an interested market that pays in BTC!

In closing, I believe we should think of permissionless Bitcoining as an essential and necessary core competency, just like we do with Self-Custody. And we should push it with similar urgency and intensity. But as we do this, we should also remember that it is a spectrum and a progression and that there are no perfect solutions, only tradeoffs. Realization of the importance of non-KYC practices will not be instant or obvious to near-normie newcoiners, coin-curious fence-sitters or even many minted Bitcoiners. My own experience is certainly a testament to this.

As we promote the active practice of non-KYC Bitcoining, we can anchor to empathy, patience and humility — always being mindful of the tremendous amount of unlearning most have to go through to get there. So, even if someone doesn’t get it the first time, or the nth time, that they hear it from us, if it helps them get to it faster at all, then it’s well worth it.

~Moon

@ 5d4b6c8d:8a1c1ee3

I've been thinking about how Predyx and other lightning based prediction markets might finance their operations, without undermining their core function of eliciting information from people.

The standard approach, of offering less-than-fair odds, guarantees long-run profitability (as long as you have enough customers), but it also creates a friction for participants that reduces the information value of their transactions. So, what are some less frictiony options for generating revenue?

Low hanging fruit

• Close markets in real-time: Rather than prespecifying a closing time for some markets, like sports, it's better to close the market at the moment the outcome is realized. This both prevents post hoc transactions and enables late stage transactions. This should be easily automatable (I say as someone with no idea how to do that), with the right resolution criteria.
• Round off shares: Shares and sats are discrete, so just make sure any necessary rounding is always in the house's favor.
• Set initial probabilities well: Use whatever external information is available to open markets as near to the "right" value as possible.
• Arbitrage: whenever markets are related to each other, make sure to resolve any illogical odds automatically

The point of these four is to avoid giving away free sats. None of them reduce productive use of the market. Keeping markets open up until the outcome is realized will probably greatly increase the number of transactions, since that's usually when the most information is coming in.

Third party support

• Ads are the most obvious form of third party revenue
• Sponsorships are the more interesting one: Allow sponsors to boost a market's visibility. This is similar to advertising, but it also capitalizes on the possibility of a market being of particular interest to someone.
• Charge for market creation: users should be able to create new markets (this will also enhance trade quantity and site traffic), but it should be costly to create a market. If prediction markets really provide higher quality information, then it's reasonable to charge for it.
• Arbitrage: Monitor external odds and whenever a gain can be locked in, place the bets (buy the shares) that guarantee a gain.

Bitcoin stuff

• Routing fees: The volume of sats moving into, out of, and being held in these markets will require a fairly large lightning node. Following some helpful tips to optimize fee revenue will generate some sats for logistical stuff that had to be done anyway.
• Treasury strategy: Take out loans against the revenue generated from all of the above and buy bitcoin: NGU -> repay with a fraction of the bitcoin, NGD -> repay with site revenue.

Bitcoin and Lightning Competitive Advantages

These aren't revenue ideas. They're just a couple of advantages lightning and bitcoin provide over fiat that should allow charging lower spreads than a traditional prediction market or sportsbook.

Traditional betting or prediction platforms are earning depreciating fiat, while a bitcoin based platform earns appreciating bitcoin. Traditional spreads must therefor be larger, in order to pull in the same real return. This also means the users' odds are worse on fiat platforms (again in real terms), even if the listed odds are the same, because their winnings will have depreciated by the time they receive them. Technically, this opens an opportunity to charge even higher spreads, but as mentioned in the intro, that would be bad for the information purposes of the market.

Lightning has much lower transactions costs than fiat transactions. So, even with tighter spreads, a lightning platform can net a better (nominal) return per transaction.

---

@mega_dreamer, I imagine most of those ideas were already on y'all's radar, and obviously you're already doing some, but I wanted to get them out of my head and onto digital paper. Hopefully, some of this will provide some useful food for thought.

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/974372

@ 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.

@ 502ab02a:a2860397

เฮียไม่แน่ใจว่าโลกยุคนี้มันเปลี่ยนไป หรือแค่เล่ห์กลมันแนบเนียนขึ้น แต่ที่แน่ ๆ คือ “อาหารไม่ใช่อาหารอีกต่อไป” มันกลายเป็นสินค้าในพอร์ตการลงทุน มันกลายเป็นเครื่องมือสร้างภาพลักษณ์ และในบางมุมที่คนไม่อยากมอง...มันคือเครื่องมือควบคุมมวลชน

ทุกอย่างเริ่มจากแนวคิดที่ดูดี “เราต้องผลิตอาหารให้พอเลี้ยงคน 8,000 ล้านคน” จากนั้นบริษัทเทคโนโลยีเริ่มกระโดดเข้ามา แทนที่จะให้เกษตรกรปลูกผักเลี้ยงวัว เรากลับได้เห็นบริษัทวิเคราะห์ดีเอ็นเอของจุลินทรีย์ แล้วขายโปรตีนจากถังหมัก แทนที่จะสนับสนุนอาหารพื้นบ้าน กลับอัดเงินให้สตาร์ทอัพทำเบอร์เกอร์ที่ไม่มีเนื้อจริงแม้แต่เส้นใยเดียว

เบื้องหลังมันมี “ทุน” และทุนเหล่านี้ไม่ใช่แค่ผู้ผลิตอาหาร แต่พ่วงไปถึงบริษัทยา บริษัทวัคซีน บริษัทเทคโนโลยี บางเจ้ามีทั้งบริษัทยา + ธุรกิจฟาร์มแมลง + บริษัทลงทุนในบริษัทวิจัยพันธุกรรม แปลว่า...คนที่ขายยาให้เฮียเวลาเฮียป่วย อาจเป็นคนเดียวกับที่ขาย "อาหารที่ทำให้เฮียป่วย" ตั้งแต่แรก ตลกร้ายไหมหล่ะ หึหึหึ

เคยมีใครสังเกตไหม ว่าองค์การระดับโลกบางองค์กรที่ส่งเสริม "เนื้อทางเลือก" และ "อาหารยั่งยืน" ได้รับเงินบริจาคหรืออยู่ภายใต้บอร์ดของบริษัทผลิตอาหารอุตสาหกรรมเจ้าใหญ่ไหมนะ แล้วคำว่า “วิทยาศาสตร์รองรับ” ที่ติดบนฉลากสวย ๆ เฮียไม่รู้หรอกว่าใครเป็นคนตีความ แต่ที่รู้แน่ ๆ คือ บทวิจัยจำนวนไม่น้อย มาจากทุนวิจัยที่สนับสนุนโดยอุตสาหกรรมอาหารเอง ดั่งเช่นที่เราเรียนรู้กันมาจากประวัติศาสตร์แล้ว

มีคนเคยพูดไว้ว่า “เราควบคุมคนด้วยอาหารง่ายกว่าด้วยอาวุธ” และเฮียเริ่มเชื่อขึ้นเรื่อย ๆ เพราะถ้าบริษัทใดบริษัทหนึ่ง ควบคุมได้ทั้งอาหาร ยา ข้อมูลสุขภาพ และการวิจัย นั่นหมายความว่า เขาไม่ได้ขายของให้เฮีย แต่เขากำหนดว่าเฮียควร “อยากกินอะไร” และ “รู้สึกผิดกับอะไร”

เหมือนที่ให้ลองจินตนาการเล่น ๆ เมื่อวาน สมมติเฮียไปร้านข้าวมันไก่ปากซอยแบบดั้งเดิม สั่งไก่ต้มไม่เอาข้าวมากิน แล้วแอปสุขภาพขึ้นข้อความเตือนว่า “ไขมันสูง ส่งผลต่อคะแนนสุขภาพคุณ” แต่ถ้าเฮียสั่งข้าวกล่องสำเร็จรูปอัจฉริยะจากโปรตีนที่หมักจากจุลินทรีย์ GMO ระบบจะบอกว่า “คุณกำลังช่วยลดโลกร้อน” แล้วเพิ่มคะแนนสุขภาพให้เราไปเป็นส่วนลดครั้งต่อไป

ใครนิยามคำว่า “ดี” ให้เฮีย?

เบื้องหลังอาหารจึงไม่ใช่แค่โรงงาน แต่มันคือโครงข่ายที่พัวพันตั้งแต่ห้องแล็บ ห้องบอร์ด ไปจนถึงห้องครัวในบ้านเรา แล้วถ้าเราไม่ตั้งคำถาม เฮียกลัวว่าเราจะไม่ได้กินในสิ่งที่ร่างกายต้องการ แต่กินในสิ่งที่ “ระบบ” ต้องการให้เรากิน

ขอบคุณล่วงหน้าที่มองว่าสิ่งนี้คือการ แพนิคไปเอง ขอให้มีสุขสวัสดิ์

#pirateketo #กูต้องรู้มั๊ย #ม้วนหางสิลูก #siamstr

@ 6389be64:ef439d32

In Jewish folklore, the golem—shaped from clay—is brought to life through sacred knowledge. Clay’s negative charge allows it to bind nutrients and water, echoing its mythic function as a vessel of potential.

Biochar in Amazonian terra preta shares this trait: it holds life-sustaining ions and harbors living intention. Both materials, inert alone, become generative through human action. The golem and black earths exist in parallel—one cultural, one ecological—shaping the lifeless into something that serves, protects, and endures.

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/970089

@ 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

@ bf47c19e:c3d2573b

"Misterija Satoši - Poreklo bitkoina" je francuski dokumentarno-animirani serijal koji dešifruje unutrašnje funkcionisanje bitkoin revolucije, dok istražuje identitet njenog tvorca.

Prvu decentralizovanu i pouzdanu kriptovalutu – bitkoin, osnovao je Satoši Nakamoto 3. januara 2009. godine. On je nestao 2011. i od tada ostaje anoniman, a njegov identitet je predmet svakakvih spekulacija. Tokom poslednjih 12 godina, vrednost bitkoina je porasla sa 0,001 na 69.000 dolara. Svi, od vlada do velikih korporacija, zainteresovali su se za Satošijev izum. Ko je Satoši Nakamoto? Kako je njegov izum postao toliko popularan? Šta nam bitkoin govori o svetu u kome živimo?

Ovaj serijal se prikazivao na Radio-televiziji Srbije (RTS 3) u sklopu novogodišnjeg muzičkog i filmskog programa 2022/2023. godine.

Naslov originala: "Le Mystère Satoshi"

Copyright: , ARTE.TV

@ 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

@ 266815e0:6cd408a5

Its been six long months of refactoring code and building out to the applesauce packages but the app is stable enough for another release.

This update is pretty much a full rewrite of the non-visible parts of the app. all the background services were either moved out to the applesauce packages or rewritten, the result is that noStrudel is a little faster and much more consistent with connections and publishing.

New layout

The app has a new layout now, it takes advantage of the full desktop screen and looks a little better than it did before.

Removed NIP-72 communities

The NIP-72 communities are no longer part of the app, if you want to continue using them there are still a few apps that support them ( like satellite.earth ) but noStrudel won't support them going forward.

The communities where interesting but ultimately proved too have some fundamental flaws, most notably that all posts had to be approved by a moderator. There were some good ideas on how to improve it but they would have only been patches and wouldn't have fixed the underlying issues.

I wont promise to build it into noStrudel, but NIP-29 (relay based groups) look a lot more promising and already have better moderation abilities then NIP-72 communities could ever have.

Settings view

There is now a dedicated settings view, so no more hunting around for where the relays are set or trying to find how to add another account. its all in one place now

Cleaned up lists

The list views are a little cleaner now, and they have a simple edit modal

New emoji picker

Just another small improvement that makes the app feel more complete.

Experimental Wallet

There is a new "wallet" view in the app that lets you manage your NIP-60 cashu wallet. its very experimental and probably won't work for you, but its there and I hope to finish it up so the app can support NIP-61 nutzaps.

WARNING: Don't feed the wallet your hard earned sats, it will eat them!

Smaller improvements

• Added NSFW flag for replies
• Updated NIP-48 bunker login to work with new spec
• Linkfy BIPs
• Added 404 page
• Add NIP-22 comments under badges, files, and articles
• Add max height to timeline notes
• Fix articles view freezing on load
• Add option to mirror blobs when sharing notes
• Remove "open in drawer" for notes

@ 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! 🌸

@ cbaa0c82:e9313245

TheWholeGrain - #April2025

Toast officially took this April. It was non-stop Toast posts since the beginning of the month when Toast somehow got control of the nSec for the official Bread and Toast nPub on NOSTR. Not only that, but Toast somehow managed to hack the entire Bread and Toast website!

We're still trying to figure out how...

Luckily, we've managed to take back control of the website as well as gotten Toast to agree not to mess around with our profile on NOSTR. We'll see how long that lasts...

Sunday Singles - April 2025 2025-04-06 | Sunday Single 87 Title: Puppets Toast just keeps saying, "Dance my puppets... Dance..." over and over... https://i.nostr.build/Xz6akLAQXZgTUJrh.png

2025-04-13 | Sunday Single 88 Title: Late Night Show Tonight on A Midnight Snack with Toast! We have our guest, End-Piece, to talk about a new movie and much more! https://i.nostr.build/NKdCZ6gmZh7wEFSJ.png

2025-04-20 | Sunday Single 89 Title: Sculpture This statue is in honor of Toast, the Great! https://i.nostr.build/08C2SG3VCiugelX4.png

2025-04-27 | Sunday Single 90 Title: Nothing Butter It's Nothing Butter! Because Nothing get Butter than this! https://i.nostr.build/sfR3U6LWIj9hPjkX.png

Adventure Series: Questline The group continues on the next leg of their journey which happens to lead them into a massive forest where the trees are so thick and large that sunlight can barely get through if at all!

Artist: Dakota Jernigan (The Bitcoin Painter) Writer: Daniel David (dan 🍞)

2025-04-08 | Questline 007 - Dark Forest After recovering from their recent battle our heroes continue on their path to find themselves before a large dark forest. The forest is so large that the only way to get to the other side is to go through it. https://i.nostr.build/29FrlOBwWCRsTvrN.png

2025-04-22 | Questline 008 - Into the Shadows As the our heroes enter the forest the darkness of the shadows begins to engulf all that is around them. While Bread is eager to move into the woods Toast and End-Piece are a little more hesitant to do so. https://i.nostr.build/MOkJEzeFVVCSK9aj.png

Toast's Takeover 2025 As we pointed out at the beginning of this edition of The Whole Grain, Toast took over just about everything! On the last day of March something suspicious was going on. https://i.nostr.build/0ERB5nXGTRQew0C3.png

The next day on April 1st, the official Bread and Toast nPub was renamed to Toast and Bread. Some people might have even thought that it was just a silly April Fools joke on our part, but then the following message was released that same morning:

Hey, everyone! Toast here! That’s right, I’m in charge now! https://i.nostr.build/tHyQr5BsGcf00crp.png

For the next month, it’s all about, me, Toast! Prepare yourselves for Toast’s Takeover!

Stay tuned for more of Toast and Bread! Things are about to get crispy!

Our entire brand was transformed into Toast and Bread. Even the website was redirecting to ToastandBread.com. It was crazy, and no one could figure out how Toast made it all happen.

Other Content Released in April 2025 2025-04-02 | Toast's Comic Collection Title: Toastie #12 Hi. My Name is Toastie Andrews. Welcome to Toasterdale! https://i.nostr.build/vW9plTM44t4U2WM8.png

2025-04-09 | Concept Art Title: The Birth of Toast This was a quick drawing done to show how Toast actually became Toast. The idea was that our second slice of bread gets stuck in a toaster while exploring. End-Piece accidentally turns the toaster on while trying to figure out how to help. https://i.nostr.build/TDQ6CiPBkrxAU3Vi.png

2025-04-16 | Bitcoin Art Title: Toast Loves Lightning Block Height: 892674 Toast loves learning about Lightning! https://i.nostr.build/SAoXAvpjH6gYDYPB.png

Additions to The Bakery in 2025 We had our first addition of the year to The Bakery back in March, and we'd like to make sure we share it in this edition of The Whole Grain since we forgot to mention it the March edition. Let's just all agree we got distracted dealing with Toast's ego.

2025-03-09 | npub1df47g7a39usamq83aula72zdz23fx9xw5rrfmd0v6p9t20n5u0ss2eqez9 https://image.nostr.build/55d0531271ee5263841d4d06b67f787ed3da85babaedd865a007f957e14fb2e7.jpg

As for April, we had a few new additions to The Bakery. The first additions was a collection that showed us what Bread and Toast would look like on some classic VHS tapes.

2025-04-04 | npub1qhjxfxpjm7udr0agr6nuhuwf9383e4g9907g64r9hf6y4fh6t6uqpcp36k https://i.nostr.build/5VJZdLOC1FdzJ3XE.jpg https://i.nostr.build/G5SUkzo1tKoYFoef.png https://i.nostr.build/ViDuteL5TXM3YTs1.png

To finish off here is the latest addition which was a beautiful watercolor showing off all three slices of bread on a plate next to a toaster!

2025-04-24 | npub1f5kc2agn63ecv2ua4909z9ahgmr2x9263na36jh6r908ql0926jq3nvk2u https://image.nostr.build/9fc49d71715ae6a90f441b71de6ba0f8598b3f81c7fb7247ccb200e9537d8fb1.jpg https://image.nostr.build/19a158ceb6010a24712ee2741447f3e56f2883156e775c1be037b498a3b51a2e.jpg

Thanks for checking out the eighth issue of The Whole Grain. The Whole Grain is released on the first of every month and covers all of the content released by Bread and Toast in the previous month. For all Bread and Toast content visit BreadandToast.com!

Thanks for putting up with Toast this past month! Bread and End-Piece

BreadandToast #SundaySingle #Questline #ToastsComicCollection #ConceptArt #BitcoinArt #Bread #Toast #EndPiece #Artstr #Comic #Cartoon #NostrOnly #🍞 #🖼️

List of nPubs Mentioned: samhain: npub1df47g7a39usamq83aula72zdz23fx9xw5rrfmd0v6p9t20n5u0ss2eqez9

archjourney: npub1qhjxfxpjm7udr0agr6nuhuwf9383e4g9907g64r9hf6y4fh6t6uqpcp36k

existing sprinkles: npub1f5kc2agn63ecv2ua4909z9ahgmr2x9263na36jh6r908ql0926jq3nvk2u

The Bitcoin Painter: npub1tx5ccpregnm9afq0xaj42hh93xl4qd3lfa7u74v5cdvyhwcnlanqplhd8g

dan 🍞: npub16e3vzr7dk2uepjcnl85nfare3kdapxge08gr42s99n9kg7xs8xhs90y9v6

@ 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

@ 22050dd3:480c11ea

Bitcoin isn’t complicated, nor is it difficult to understand. It just requires a bit of time and the realization that Bitcoin is unlike anything you’ve heard of or seen before. It’s different.

From the outside looking in, Bitcoin seems like a whole world full of strange and sophisticated words. What is a hash? Is it related to hash rate? What about this talk of public keys, private keys, and seed phrases? Are these seeds edible? While these aren’t words you’d find in traditional finance and economics jargon, they’re fairly simple to understand.

Going deeper, there are concepts and properties of Bitcoin that aren’t found elsewhere.

What does it mean that Bitcoin is deflationary? What’s this talk of Lightning, layers, and on-chain vs off-chain? These can seem complex to the uneducated reader, but fear not as they can be understood with a little bit of explanation.

These concepts aren’t complicated, just different.

I once read that “Bitcoin is everything people don’t understand about computers mixed with everything people don’t understand about money”. While I do find this amusing and think it’s a witty one-liner, I don’t think it’s entirely accurate.

I would say that Bitcoin is the answer and the solution to a significant problem in the world today that the majority of people don’t even realize exists.

Our money and everything built on it is broken.

To the average person that last sentence probably provokes thoughts and questions. Most people do not understand what money is and its purpose. It makes sense why this is. At least in the United States, we are not taught what money is.

We all think we know what money is: the dollars in our wallets that we use to buy goods and services. These dollars are actually currency, which is a form of money, though the two are different.

Before I went down the rabbit hole and learned about Bitcoin, I also had no idea what money was.

Going back to Bitcoin, Bitcoin is two things: money, and a computer network.

The fact that we don’t understand money is why Bitcoin seems so complicated. Add that Bitcoin is a new form of money that our species has never seen before and things get hairy very quickly for the outside observer. With a basic understanding of what money is, as well as a run-down of how blockchain technology works, Bitcoin becomes much more digestible.

Money is three things: medium of exchange, store of value, and unit of account. Currency is two things: medium of exchange and unit of account. We use money in the form of currency as a medium of exchange to pay for goods and services. We use units of account to price goods and services. The store of value property is how we preserve the fruits of our time and energy (work) into the future.

To be good money a thing must fulfill these three properties well. Gold did succeed as a hard money until it didn’t. Gold still succeeds as a store of value, which is the most elusive of the three properties. However, gold has failed as a medium of exchange, which is why we transact with paper currency and not gold coins. Gold can only move at the speed of humans.

Bitcoin is proving with each passing day that it succeeds as hard and sound money by checking the box of these three properties.

If you’re reading this and asking “but a bitcoin is worth $96,000, how do you possibly use that to transact with?” then I have a great answer for you: a bitcoin is divisible into 100 million units, called satoshis or sats. This divisibility property gives Bitcoin the ability to succeed as a medium of exchange and unit of account. Everyday and small purchases are priced in satoshis, while less frequent but significant purchases are priced in bitcoin. A cup of coffee can be 3000 satoshis, while a house can be 3 bitcoin.

Bitcoin already has and will continue to succeed and take over on a global scale due to its store of value properties. For the first time in human history, a perfect money exists. Or rather, as close to “perfect” as possible. Due to its unique properties and absolute scarcity, Bitcoin will continue to become more valuable over time. It’s logical.

Absolute scarcity is difficult to comprehend because it has never existed before on such a large scale. More gold can always be mined, and more oil can always be drilled, but more than 21 million bitcoin total and a predictable and fixed release/minting schedule is forever. For the first time, society can save in money that can’t be debased and diluted. For the first time, society has money that discourages frivolous spending. This is amazing.

On a subconscious level, we are conditioned to want to spend our paper money since we are aware that it is constantly losing its value and buys us less in the future. With hard and sound money, there is no need to buy 20 properties to preserve one’s wealth. For the first time people can save in money, and no longer monetize other things. This will allow the prices of everything to fall, as they naturally should.

Photo by David McBee

With this understanding of what good money should be, the defects with our current money become blindingly obvious, as if a switch were flipped for the first time. With this new understanding, it becomes a lot easier to understand Bitcoin and what it means for the world.

Understanding Bitcoin and its monetary system requires looking outside of the existing system. What makes it seem complicated is the fact that the majority of people do not realize what the current system is, how it works, and why it’s so severely flawed.

There are other and more comprehensive resources on the web for understanding how the Bitcoin blockchain works. However, I will provide a very basic explanation to get your big toe wet.

Transactions amongst peers are sent to a pool where they await inclusion into the blockchain. Highly specialized computers are constantly working around the globe to solve complex math problems to win the right to add the next block to the chain. When a computer solves the math problem, it adds transactions to the next block and is rewarded with a fixed amount of bitcoin (the block reward). Each block references and builds upon the previous block. Each new transaction is checked against previous transactions to ensure that no bitcoin is being double spent or invalidly spent. Once the new block is assembled, it is sent out to a global network of nodes that check the new block (and with it the rest of the chain) to verify that it is valid and conforms to the rules of the network. If the nodes are in consensus, the new block is added to the chain and the process starts over again.

There is no need for trust in the Bitcoin network, just verification.

A very important aspect of this process is that physical world energy, resources and time are required to mine blocks and keep the system running. This link between the physical and digital world is extremely crucial and is what sets Bitcoin aside from the rest and makes it the money that it is.

No matter how much computational power and no matter how much money you put into the system, there will never be more than 21 million coins total, with a release schedule set every 10 minutes on average. You could be the richest person in the world and have the computational power of Google, Microsoft, and Amazon combined. But on the Bitcoin network, you’re the same as the person who holds 1/100 of a bitcoin, and this is beautiful.

An understanding of Bitcoin isn’t something that happens overnight. While it’s possible to understand the concepts behind Bitcoin, a full understanding of what Bitcoin means to the world takes time. Much like any large change in life, it takes time to digest and truly understand that it has and will continue to have in the future.

Learning about and understanding Bitcoin isn’t like learning a new theory or equation. It isn’t like learning about a new way of doing things in the existing system. It’s a completely new and foreign system providing solutions to problems that you didn’t even know existed.

Bitcoin is changing the world with each passing day and will continue to change and improve our world in ways we can’t even imagine in 2024.

With a growing understanding and the passage of time to digest, comprehend, and fully realize it, Bitcoin will change your perspective on the world and what you do with your time and energy. Once the mind opens up to what Bitcoin is and its significance, the world as it is now and the way we deal with money will seem completely asinine.

Bitcoin is exactly one of those things that you don’t notice until you notice it. And then it becomes impossible to ignore and see things as they once were.

Study Bitcoin.

@ bf95e1a4:ebdcc848

This is a part of the Bitcoin Infinity Academy course on Knut Svanholm's book Bitcoin: Sovereignty Through Mathematics. For more information, check out our Geyser page!

Holding On

In the old days, we Scandinavians had to save in order to prepare for the long winter. We chopped wood and salted meat in order to survive. In our current age of consumerism, however, we’ve forgotten all that and we pilgrim to the shopping malls as much as everyone else. No one seems to even have a savings account anymore. Interest rates are low, and we’re told to borrow and spend as much as we can. We’re bombarded with advertising for loans, mortgages, and financial services on a daily basis. Why? Because of our inability to understand the nature of money and its mechanics. Inflation is the underlying force that makes us squander rather than save. Inflation hinders us from reaping the fruits of our labor whenever we see fit, and it makes that very fruit rot. Bitcoin reverses the rotting process and provides us with a means of transporting the value of our labor not only through space but also through time.

The Stanford Marshmallow Experiments was a series of studies on delayed gratification conducted in the late 1960s and early 1970s. In these experiments, children were given a marshmallow or a cookie and were told that they would receive an additional one if they could control their urges and not touch the first one for fifteen minutes. Follow-up studies found that the kids who were able to resist the temptation of the first cookie tended to score better on SAT tests, have lower BMIs, and higher incomes than their less disciplined counterparts. Investing in your future self — in other words, resisting present temptation by delaying gratification — is the most effective skill you can cultivate for a brighter future. You reap what you sow. This can be described as having a low time preference. Having a low time preference is a fundamental factor in the economic success of any human endeavor. Not trying to catch fish with your hands for a couple of days in order to construct a rod or net when on a deserted island might make you hungry during those sacrificed days, but it will provide a better chance of catching fish in the future. Likewise, learning new skills now might lead to a higher salary in the future. Unfortunately, our current monetary system distorts our perceptions and incentives and favors those with a higher time preference — those who spend rather than save. We’re at a different point in history than the above-mentioned marooned fisherman. "Give a man a fish and feed him for a day, teach a man to fish and feed him for a lifetime," the saying goes. The ultimate goal should be to teach mankind to teach itself how to fish. What our current paradigm endorses is “give a man enough distractions, and he will stop thinking about finding better ways to support his loved ones and will succumb to whatever narrative you fill his head with, to make him work for you through taxes and inflation instead of for himself.”

In Bitcoin, people with a low time preference win. If you can resist the urge to sell, you will be rewarded in the future. The Bitcoin community refers to not selling as HODLing, which originated when a bitcointalk.org forumer named GameKyuubi misspelled the word holding in a now-famous post titled "I AM HODLING." The post became one of the Bitcoin community’s most prominent memes and a battle cry to resist the urge to sell during bear markets. Bitcoiners who have decided never to sell most or all of their holdings are referred to as HODLers of last resort. This term is not to be confused with the central banking term lender of last resort. The yearly highs in the price of Bitcoin are arguably less interesting than the yearly lows, which are practically decided by these HODLers of last resort. Considering its limited supply, all that Bitcoin needs to keep rising in price over the medium and long term are these people. Adoption and other metrics of measuring the success of Bitcoin are all dwarfed by the currency’s remarkable rise in value since its inception. The price has increased by a factor of ten approximately every three years. The best guarantee we have that it will keep doing so is Bitcoin’s limited supply combined with the HODLers of last resort.

In the Bitcoin space, and even more so in the cryptocurrency space on the whole, there’s a lot of talk about usage and adoption. We’re shown metrics of trading volumes and merchant acceptance, and we’re led to believe that these correlate with the short and long-term value in one way or another. While there may be truth in some of these theories, the most basic function of a deflationary asset is overlooked and rarely mentioned — the elephant in the room, so to speak. The best use for a commodity as scarce as Bitcoin is not to spend it or even to trade it but to save it and hold it for as long as you can. By doing so, you limit the number of coins in circulation. The more people that do this, the harder it will be to come by and the higher its price will be. Nothing on Earth is as scarce as Bitcoin. Nothing is as irreplicable, as immutable, and at the same time as portable as Bitcoin — its unique history and resistance to change have already proven this over and over. Its absolute scarcity is what gives Bitcoin its value, and ironically enough, this seems to be the hardest thing for people to understand about it. What if everyone in the network became a HODLer and decided to never sell, wouldn’t the network just slowly come to a halt? Not at all. Everyone has a price. Few would resist selling some of their Bitcoin if it could buy them a small city. There are price levels for each HODLer where reallocating financially may be a wise thing to do. A Bitcoin is also very divisible: The smallest unit, the satoshi, sometimes referred to as a sat, is one-hundred millionth of a Bitcoin. Even smaller units are made possible with the introduction of the Lightning Network, albeit not in the actual Bitcoin blockchain. Together, this enables Bitcoin to be highly saleable even at astronomical price levels.

What not having sound money has done to us is simply unfathomable. Imagine every person on Earth knowing that every transaction they’ll ever make will have a real impact on their future prosperity. We’re so used to inflationary currencies that most people don’t even realize why sound money is important. We’re so used to having a large cut of our income silently taken away from us that we don’t even realize how much of our day we spend working for someone else. Wars are funded by inflation. Imagine how many man-hours were put in by people who didn’t realize they were actually working for a war machine funded by a corrupt currency during World War II. Every time you use a fiat currency, you legitimize counterfeiting. Every time you use Bitcoin, you promote sound money. In fact, every time you don’t use your Bitcoin but save it instead, you promote sound money because sound money increases in value when the total number of coins in circulation is limited. It all sounds a bit magic and far-fetched, doesn’t it? Increased value over time, no matter what happens? Well, that is why many of us so-called Bitcoin Maximalists are so excited that we put our careers at risk for this technology. Once you realize what Bitcoin is and what it will do for the world, there is no way of un-realizing it. It really is mind-blowing.

At the beginning of time-that-actually-is-money — in other words, around 2009 — Bitcoin was mostly considered a toy for the cypherpunk movement. As its price started to grow rapidly, a small group of early investors became very wealthy, which in turn spawned a media hype around the phenomenon. Mainstream media remained largely skeptical, portraying Bitcoin as a pyramid scheme, a tulip craze, or a bubble at best. Most journalists simply couldn’t understand how an asset seemingly created out of thin air could have any long-term relevance. Some were frustrated because they thought that they’d missed the train. Many still do. In a world where companies like Google, Facebook, and Amazon can rise from zero to world dominance in a decade, people tried to find the Next Big Thing — the next Bitcoin. This attracted charlatans and scammers to the field who launched hundreds of altcoins, claiming to someday be technically superior, faster, or more privacy-focused. What the snake-oil salespeople omitted were the crucial facts: their new coins and tokens were not decentralized (and therefore neither immutable nor censorship-resistant), did not have a fair distribution, and so on. What most people still don’t get is that if Bitcoin doesn’t work, nothing will. This is humanity’s best shot at sound money. It is also, very likely, our only shot at it.

Many venture capital firms, hedge funds, and retail investors were bamboozled by the buzzword frenzy and invested great sums in these quack tokens. This generated confusion in the market as many altcoins increased dramatically in price at an even higher rate than Bitcoin. Due to human nature and a lack of understanding of basic monetary economics, the bubble grew bigger and bigger until it inevitably popped and wiped out most of the useless alternative cryptocurrencies. Bitcoin experienced ups and downs as well, but they were less volatile. Bitcoin bottomed at levels well above the beginning of the previous bull run and then resumed rising just as it had done several times before. The victims of the altcoin craze will take note of this. They will learn the hard way what separates the original from the copycat. They will see the undisputable superiority of sound money. It’s just a matter of time. Time, which is money.

Every time the people of Venezuela, Turkey, Argentina, or Zimbabwe are screwed over by their respective central banking authorities and turn to Bitcoin to preserve their savings or income from rampant inflation, the world becomes more aware of Bitcoin as a store of value. In comparison to the Venezuelan Bolivar, there was no crash in Bitcoin at all. There’s also a good chance the really big players will accumulate aggressively during the next bull market, given that Bitcoin, for the moment, still represents a very small allocation of institutional and hedge fund investment. Consider what will happen when institutional investors and a growing number of larger nations start to see Bitcoin’s potentially limitless upside. At this point, central banks will start to accumulate Bitcoin in an attempt to keep up with reality. This will legitimize the technology even further.

It is still unclear when this will all play out. When it does, however, it will be the largest transfer of wealth from one medium to another in human history. Early investors, many of which are technically competent, will become financially independent and, therefore, able to contribute to the ecosystem full-time. More and more people will demand payment in Bitcoin for its ability to store value. Remember that the next block reward halving is just around the corner and that Bitcoin will have an even greater stock-to-flow ratio than gold in just a few years. After the halving in 2020, Bitcoin will have a supply inflation rate of approximately 1.8%, which is lower than the US Federal Reserve’s target 2% price inflation rate. It is important to remember that Bitcoin is still an experiment. Should the experiment work, however, hyperbitcoinization is just a matter of time.

The implications of giving everyone on Earth the ability to rot-proof the fruit of their labor and transport its value through time are hard to overstate. The closest thing we’ve had to it historically is gold, but gold is not very divisible and not very easy for the general public to get their hands on. More importantly, gold is not absolutely scarce. No one knows how much of it there is left buried in the Earth's crust. Investing in real estate has also been seen as a good store of value throughout the ages, but real estate needs a lot of maintenance and is not cheap to hold on to. Real estate is also relatively easy to confiscate in the event of political collapse. Bitcoin provides us with the potential ability to store any amount in our heads and pass it down through generations without anyone ever knowing we had it in the first place. It effectively endows each individual with the power possessed by the feudal kings to turn people into knights. Any bitcoiner can now dub any no-coiner into a fully-fledged time-proof bitcoiner.

About the Bitcoin Infinity Academy

The Bitcoin Infinity Academy is an educational project built around Knut Svanholm’s books about Bitcoin and Austrian Economics. Each week, a whole chapter from one of the books is released for free on Highlighter, accompanied by a video in which Knut and Luke de Wolf discuss that chapter’s ideas. You can join the discussions by signing up for one of the courses on our Geyser page. Signed books, monthly calls, and lots of other benefits are also available.

@ 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

@ fd0bcf8c:521f98c0

Bitcoin

It stands alone. Immutable. Unyielding. It records without mercy. Each transaction cuts deep. Some carry wealth. Others just data. The debate rages on.

OP_RETURN

It divides us all. Bloat versus freedom. Money versus use. Simple versus complex.

Nodes

They bear heavy weight. Each byte costs something. Storage grows. Bandwidth drains. Money defenders stand guard.

"Our purpose is clear...Money serves one master." —Mises

Not art.

Not storage.

Not games.

The fee-payers

They disagree. "I paid. I belong." The miners take their cut. The highest fee wins. No questions asked. The protocol allows it.

"Accept what exists."—Marcus Aurelius

The chain is neutral. Always neutral.

What is a transaction?

None agree. Value transfer only? Or any valid data? The white paper speaks. "Electronic cash system." Yet code evolved. It grew teeth. It allows more now.

"Shitcoin"

Cuts both ways. A dangerous word. It keeps focus. It maintains unity. But it wounds creation. Makes builders desperate. They force ideas onto Bitcoin. They use OP_RETURN poorly. They bloat what needs no bloating. Seneca saw this coming...

"Fear makes suffering worse."

Innovation needs proper soil. Not forced transplants.

Money debates sharpen knives. Is Bitcoin gold? Is it currency? Mantras echo loudly.

"Digital gold."

_"Spend dollars, saving Bitcoin." _

"Never sell your Bitcoin."

Bitcoin becomes idol. Not tool. Mises would disapprove, "Money must move." Without exchange, it dies. If none spend, why fight bloat?

Rhetoric

It hurts us. "Shitcoin" closes minds. Forces square pegs round. Drives experiments home. To Bitcoin they return. Bearing misshapen plans.

"Knowledge exists in dispersion," Hayek warns.

Let ideas find homes. Let Bitcoin be Bitcoin.

Fees

They bring new problems. Users flee high costs. They seek cheaper chains. The wealthy still play games. They can afford the bloat. The poor cannot compete. The rich inscribe at will. Rothbard saw this trap, "Markets need equal rules."

Fee markets favor wealth. Always have. Always will.

Nodes must still run. Validators must validate. Decentralized. Resistant. Strong. The burden grows heavier. But principles matter most.

The battle

It continues. Hard words. Hard choices.

Bitcoin endures all. Money or platform? Gold or currency? The answers shift. The chain grows. Block by block. Byte by byte.

We need clearer words. Cleaner definitions. Less pride. More thought. Let Bitcoin be what it is. Not what we demand.

Bitcoin is human.

Not magical. Not divine. Fallible like its makers. A young experiment still. It could fail tomorrow.

"Nothing is too big to fail." —Satoshi

Our rhetoric needs maturity. Our definitions need clarity. Bitcoin needs humility. From all who touch the code.

@ 088436cd:9d2646cc

The arrival of the coronavirus brought not only illness and death but also fear and panic. In such an environment of uncertainty, people have naturally stocked up on necessities, not knowing when things will return to normal.

Retail shelves have been cleared out, and even online suppliers like Amazon and Walmart are out of stock for some items. Independent sellers on these e-commerce platforms have had to fill the gap. With the huge increase in demand, they have found that their inventory has skyrocketed in value.

Many in need of these items (e.g. toilet paper, hand sanitizer and masks) balk at the new prices. They feel they are being taken advantage of in a time of need and call for intervention by the government to lower prices. The government has heeded that call, labeling the independent sellers as "price gougers" and threatening sanctions if they don't lower their prices. Amazon has suspended seller accounts and law enforcement at all levels have threatened to prosecute. Prices have dropped as a result and at first glance this seems like a victory for fair play. But, we will have to dig deeper to understand the unseen consequences of this intervention.

We must look at the economics of the situation, how supply and demand result in a price and how that price acts as a signal that goes out to everyone, informing them of underlying conditions in the economy and helping coordinate their actions.

It all started with a rise in demand. Given a fixed supply (e.g., the limited stock on shelves and in warehouses), an increase in demand inevitably leads to higher prices. Most people are familiar with this phenomenon, such as paying more for airline tickets during holidays or surge pricing for rides.

Higher prices discourage less critical uses of scarce resources. For example, you might not pay $1,000 for a plane ticket to visit your aunt if you can get one for $100 the following week, but someone else might pay that price to visit a dying relative. They value that plane seat more than you.

*** During the crisis, demand surged and their shelves emptied even though

However, retail outlets have not raised prices. They have kept them low, so the low-value uses of things like toilet paper, masks and hand sanitizer has continued. Often, this "use" just takes the form of hoarding. At everyday low prices, it makes sense to buy hundreds of rolls and bottles. You know you will use them eventually, so why not stock up? And, with all those extra supplies in the closet and basement, you don't need to change your behavior much. You don't have to ration your use.

At the low prices, these scarce resources got bought up faster and faster until there was simply none left. The reality of the situation became painfully clear to those who didn't panic and got to the store late: You have no toilet paper and you're not going to any time soon.

However, if prices had been allowed to rise, a number of effects would have taken place that would have coordinated the behavior of everyone so that valuable resources would not have been wasted or hoarded, and everyone could have had access to what they needed.

On the demand side, if prices had been allowed to rise, people would have begun to self-ration. You might leave those extra plies on the roll next time if you know they will cost ten times as much to replace. Or, you might choose to clean up a spill with a rag rather than disposable tissue. Most importantly, you won't hoard as much. That 50th bottle of hand sanitizer might just not be worth it at the new, high price. You'll leave it on the shelf for someone else who may have none.

On the supply side, higher prices would have incentivized people to offer up more of their stockpiles for sale. If you have a pallet full of toilet paper in your basement and all of the sudden they are worth $15 per roll, you might just list a few online. But, if it is illegal to do so, you probably won't.

Imagine you run a business installing insulation and have a few thousand respirator masks on hand for your employees. During a pandemic, it is much more important that people breathe filtered air than that insulation get installed, and that fact is reflected in higher prices. You will sell your extra masks at the higher price rather than store them for future insulation jobs, and the scarce resource will be put to its most important use.

Producers of hand sanitizer would go into overdrive if prices were allowed to rise. They would pay their employees overtime, hire new ones, and pay a premium for their supplies, making sure their raw materials don't go to less important uses.

These kinds of coordinated actions all across the economy would be impossible without real prices to guide them. How do you know if it makes sense to spend an extra $10k bringing a thousand masks to market unless you know you can get more than $10 per mask? If the price is kept artificially low, you simply can't do it. The money just isn't there.

These are the immediate effects of a price change, but incredibly, price changes also coordinate people's actions across space and time.

Across space, there are different supply and demand conditions in different places, and thus prices are not uniform. We know some places are real "hot spots" for the virus, while others are mostly unaffected. High demand in the hot spots leads to higher prices there, which attracts more of the resource to those areas. Boxes and boxes of essential items would pour in where they are needed most from where they are needed least, but only if prices were allowed to adjust freely.

This would be accomplished by individuals and businesses buying low in the unaffected areas, selling high in the hot spots and subtracting their labor and transportation costs from the difference. Producers of new supply would know exactly where it is most needed and ship to the high-demand, high-price areas first. The effect of these actions is to increase prices in the low demand areas and reduce them in the high demand areas. People in the low demand areas will start to self-ration more, reflecting the reality of their neighbors, and people in the hotspots will get some relief.

However, by artificially suppressing prices in the hot spot, people there will simply buy up the available supply and run out, and it will be cost prohibitive to bring in new supply from low-demand areas.

Prices coordinate economic actions across time as well. Just as entrepreneurs and businesses can profit by transporting scarce necessities from low-demand to high-demand areas, they can also profit by buying in low-demand times and storing their merchandise for when it is needed most.

Just as allowing prices to freely adjust in one area relative to another will send all the right signals for the optimal use of a scarce resource, allowing prices to freely adjust over time will do the same.

When an entrepreneur buys up resources during low-demand times in anticipation of a crisis, she restricts supply ahead of the crisis, which leads to a price increase. She effectively bids up the price. The change in price affects consumers and producers in all the ways mentioned above. Consumers self-ration more, and producers bring more of the resource to market.

Our entrepreneur has done a truly incredible thing. She has predicted the future, and by so doing has caused every individual in the economy to prepare for a shortage they don't even know is coming! And, by discouraging consumption and encouraging production ahead of time, she blunts the impact the crisis will have. There will be more of the resource to go around when it is needed most.

On top of this, our entrepreneur still has her stockpile she saved back when everyone else was blithely using it up. She can now further mitigate the damage of the crisis by selling her stock during the worst of it, when people are most desperate for relief. She will know when this is because the price will tell her, but only if it is allowed to adjust freely. When the price is at its highest is when people need the resource the most, and those willing to pay will not waste it or hoard it. They will put it to its highest valued use.

The economy is like a big bus we are all riding in, going down a road with many twists and turns. Just as it is difficult to see into the future, it is difficult to see out the bus windows at the road ahead.

On the dashboard, we don't have a speedometer or fuel gauge. Instead we have all the prices for everything in the economy. Prices are what tell us the condition of the bus and the road. They tell us everything. Without them, we are blind.

Good times are a smooth road. Consumer prices and interest rates are low, investment returns are steady. We hit the gas and go fast. But, the road is not always straight and smooth. Sometimes there are sharp turns and rough patches. Successful entrepreneurs are the ones who can see what is coming better than everyone else. They are our navigators.

When they buy up scarce resources ahead of a crisis, they are hitting the brakes and slowing us down. When they divert resources from one area to another, they are steering us onto a smoother path. By their actions in the market, they adjust the prices on our dashboard to reflect the conditions of the road ahead, so we can prepare for, navigate and get through the inevitable difficulties we will face.

Interfering with the dashboard by imposing price floors or price caps doesn't change the conditions of the road (the number of toilet paper rolls in existence hasn't changed). All it does is distort our perception of those conditions. We think the road is still smooth--our heavy foot stomping the gas--as we crash onto a rocky dirt road at 80 miles per hour (empty shelves at the store for weeks on end).

Supply, demand and prices are laws of nature. All of this is just how things work. It isn't right or wrong in a moral sense. Price caps lead to waste, shortages and hoarding as surely as water flows downhill. The opposite--allowing prices to adjust freely--leads to conservation of scarce resources and their being put to their highest valued use. And yes, it leads to profits for the entrepreneurs who were able to correctly predict future conditions, and losses for those who weren't.

Is it fair that they should collect these profits? On the one hand, anyone could have stocked up on toilet paper, hand sanitizer and face masks at any time before the crisis, so we all had a fair chance to get the supplies cheaply. On the other hand, it just feels wrong that some should profit so much at a time when there is so much need.

Our instinct in the moment is to see the entrepreneur as a villain, greedy "price gouger". But we don't see the long chain of economic consequences the led to the situation we feel is unfair.

If it weren't for anti-price-gouging laws, the major retailers would have raised their prices long before the crisis became acute. When they saw demand outstrip supply, they would have raised prices, not by 100 fold, but gradually and long before anyone knew how serious things would have become. Late comers would have had to pay more, but at least there would be something left on the shelf.

As an entrepreneur, why take risks trying to anticipate the future if you can't reap the reward when you are right? Instead of letting instead of letting entrepreneurs--our navigators--guide us, we are punishing and vilifying them, trying to force prices to reflect a reality that simply doesn't exist.

In a crisis, more than any other time, prices must be allowed to fluctuate. To do otherwise is to blind ourselves at a time when danger and uncertainty abound. It is economic suicide.

In a crisis, there is great need, and the way to meet that need is not by pretending it's not there, by forcing prices to reflect a world where there isn't need. They way to meet the need is the same it has always been, through charity.

If the people in government want to help, the best way for the to do so is to be charitable and reduce their taxes and fees as much as possible, ideally to zero in a time of crisis. Amazon, for example, could instantly reduce the price of all crisis related necessities by 20% if they waived their fee. This would allow for more uses by more people of these scarce supplies as hoarders release their stockpiles on to the market, knowing they can get 20% more for their stock. Governments could reduce or eliminate their tax burden on high-demand, crisis-related items and all the factors that go into their production, with the same effect: a reduction in prices and expansion of supply. All of us, including the successful entrepreneurs and the wealthy for whom high prices are not a great burden, could donate to relief efforts.

These ideas are not new or untested. This is core micro economics. It has been taught for hundreds of years in universities the world over. The fact that every crisis that comes along stirs up ire against entrepreneurs indicates not that the economics is wrong, but that we have a strong visceral reaction against what we perceive to be unfairness. This is as it should be. Unfairness is wrong and the anger it stirs in us should compel us to right the wrong. Our anger itself isn't wrong, it's just misplaced.

Entrepreneurs didn't cause the prices to rise. Our reaction to a virus did that. We saw a serious threat and an uncertain future and followed our natural impulse to hoard. Because prices at major retail suppliers didn't rise, that impulse ran rampant and we cleared the shelves until there was nothing left. We ran the bus right off the road and them blamed the entrepreneurs for showing us the reality of our situation, for shaking us out of the fantasy of low prices.

All of this is not to say that entrepreneurs are high-minded public servants. They are just doing their job. Staking your money on an uncertain future is a risky business. There are big risks and big rewards. Most entrepreneurs just scrape by or lose their capital in failed ventures.

However, the ones that get it right must be allowed to keep their profits, or else no one will try and we'll all be driving blind. We need our navigators. It doesn't even matter if they know all the positive effects they are having on the rest of us and the economy as a whole. So long as they are buying low and selling high--so long as they are doing their job--they will be guiding the rest of us through the good times and the bad, down the open road and through the rough spots.

@ 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.

@ c1e9ab3a:9cb56b43

High-Level Overview

Bitcoin developers are currently debating a proposed change to how Bitcoin Core handles the OP_RETURN opcode — a mechanism that allows users to insert small amounts of data into the blockchain. Specifically, the controversy revolves around removing built-in filters that limit how much data can be stored using this feature (currently capped at 80 bytes).

Summary of Both Sides

Position A: Remove OP_RETURN Filters

Advocates: nostr:npub1ej493cmun8y9h3082spg5uvt63jgtewneve526g7e2urca2afrxqm3ndrm, nostr:npub12rv5lskctqxxs2c8rf2zlzc7xx3qpvzs3w4etgemauy9thegr43sf485vg, nostr:npub17u5dneh8qjp43ecfxr6u5e9sjamsmxyuekrg2nlxrrk6nj9rsyrqywt4tp, others

Arguments: - Ineffectiveness of filters: Filters are easily bypassed and do not stop spam effectively. - Code simplification: Removing arbitrary limits reduces code complexity. - Permissionless innovation: Enables new use cases like cross-chain bridges and timestamping without protocol-level barriers. - Economic regulation: Fees should determine what data gets added to the blockchain, not protocol rules.

Position B: Keep OP_RETURN Filters

Advocates: nostr:npub1lh273a4wpkup00stw8dzqjvvrqrfdrv2v3v4t8pynuezlfe5vjnsnaa9nk, nostr:npub1s33sw6y2p8kpz2t8avz5feu2n6yvfr6swykrnm2frletd7spnt5qew252p, nostr:npub1wnlu28xrq9gv77dkevck6ws4euej4v568rlvn66gf2c428tdrptqq3n3wr, others

Arguments: - Historical intent: Satoshi included filters to keep Bitcoin focused on monetary transactions. - Resource protection: Helps prevent blockchain bloat and abuse from non-financial uses. - Network preservation: Protects the network from being overwhelmed by low-value or malicious data. - Social governance: Maintains conservative changes to ensure long-term robustness.

Strengths and Weaknesses

Strengths of Removing Filters

• Encourages decentralized innovation.
• Simplifies development and maintenance.
• Maintains ideological purity of a permissionless system.

Weaknesses of Removing Filters

• Opens the door to increased non-financial data and potential spam.
• May dilute Bitcoin’s core purpose as sound money.
• Risks short-term exploitation before economic filters adapt.

Strengths of Keeping Filters

• Preserves Bitcoin’s identity and original purpose.
• Provides a simple protective mechanism against abuse.
• Aligns with conservative development philosophy of Bitcoin Core.

Weaknesses of Keeping Filters

• Encourages central decision-making on allowed use cases.
• Leads to workarounds that may be less efficient or obscure.
• Discourages novel but legitimate applications.

Long-Term Consequences

If Filters Are Removed

• Positive: Potential boom in new applications, better interoperability, cleaner architecture.
• Negative: Risk of increased blockchain size, more bandwidth/storage costs, spam wars.

If Filters Are Retained

• Positive: Preserves monetary focus and operational discipline.
• Negative: Alienates developers seeking broader use cases, may ossify the protocol.

Conclusion

The debate highlights a core philosophical split in Bitcoin: whether it should remain a narrow monetary system or evolve into a broader data layer for decentralized applications. Both paths carry risks and tradeoffs. The outcome will shape not just Bitcoin's technical direction but its social contract and future role in the broader crypto ecosystem.

@ 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.

@ 5df413d4:2add4f5b

𝗦𝗰𝗮𝗹𝗲: 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗨𝗻𝗶𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗮𝗹 𝗟𝗮𝘄𝘀 𝗼𝗳 𝗟𝗶𝗳𝗲, 𝗚𝗿𝗼𝘄𝘁𝗵, 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗗𝗲𝗮𝘁𝗵 𝗶𝗻 𝗢𝗿𝗴𝗮𝗻𝗶𝘀𝗺𝘀, 𝗖𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗲𝘀, 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗮𝗻𝗶𝗲𝘀 𝗯𝘆 𝗚𝗲𝗼𝗳𝗳𝗿𝗲𝘆 𝗪𝗲𝘀𝘁

This book is a wonderfully cross-disciplinary exercise in fractal discovery and insight onto our world - initially the result of the author's pondering his own mortality which led to a study of longevity across organisms, and then expanded to social structures like cities and companies.

In the book, “scale" itself, conceptually, is defined as "how systems respond to changes in size." Does doubling an animal's dimensions increase its relative strength? Does doubling a city's size double it's relative rate of crime? These 2 questions introduce the key distinctions between sublinear scaling (the larger the thing, the relatively less of some characteristic it has) and superlinear scaling (the larger the thing, the relatively more of some characteristic it has), respectively.

Organisms, we discover, scale sublinearally - larger animals are more efficient requiring less energy per unit of weight, but similarly they become, relatively structurally weaker as size increases - this is why Godzilla cannot exist, he would collapse under his own weight! Further, biological metabolic rates scale sublinearlly to size, so as the organism grows, energy demands of cellular maintenance outstrips supply leading to cessation of growth and eventual death (we also find companies face a similar fate, with "costs" replacing cellular maintenance).

Cities, however, are more interesting. In terms of infrastructure they scale like organisms (sublinearlly), but in terms of emergent human outputs, they scale superlinearlly - the larger the city, the relatively more patents, companies, GDP, crime, and disease it will host. For cities, superlinear scaling of those emergent human properties, or "social metabolism" results in the creation of social capital increasingly outpacing the demands of maintenance (those being largely infrastructural) suggesting accelerating, unbounded, open-ended growth.

With regard to growth, superlinearity results in exponential growth, which the author approaches as a terrifying and dark mathematical horror. He illustrates this with what I found to be the book's most illuminating vignette…

SCENARIO: It is 11:00. A petri dish 🧫 contains a single bacteria🦠 cell. This bacteria will double every minute. The petri dish will be completely full in 1 hour. At what time is the petri dish 🧫 50% full?

If you said anything other than 11:59, you've missed the key implication of exponential growth. Exponential growth is slowly, then all at once. But let’s double down on this to really underscore that point - at what time does the petri dish in the aforementioned scenarios become just 1% full? The answer is somewhere between 11:53 and 11:54. Reflect on that.

What might this kind of acceleration in growth mean for technological advancement? For human population and biosphere carrying capacity? For resource consumption? And for how all of these things interrelate and impact each other? Quite thankfully, the book rejects Malthusianism. While still raising legitimate questions about the math of an exponentially expanding Earthbound civilization's sustainability, the author rightfully points to the imperative to harness nuclear and solar energy at-scale as our best hopes to sustain requirements both continuous population and technological acceleration.

Finally, the examination of exponentiality brings us to the deepest conundrum identified in the book - the finite time singularity - where unbounded growth cannot sustain without either (1) infinite energy or (2) paradigm shift "reset" that temporarily staves off system collapse. But wait! There's more! The mathematics of superlinearity suggest that, in absence of infinite energy, the chain of paradigm shift resets are themselves required to happen at an ever faster and faster pace, or at shorter and shorter intervals.

So, if we are confined to Earth's closed system, the need for continuous and unending paradigm shift innovations at ever-shorter intervals eventually manifests a meta-finite time singularity, the essential singularity which is perhaps, inescapable. The core insight to be extrapolated here is that if we are to overcome the singularity trap, we must drive real, constant step-function innovation and that this innovation must, almost necessarily, allow us to progressively harness orders of magnitude more energy than today - think Dyson Spheres, interstellar / intergalactic travel, quasar bitcoin mining, and so on.

CONCLUSION: Dense yet whimsical, lengthy yet very fun. Questing and questioning cover to cover. Great for anyone interested in inter-disciplinarianism and fractal thinking (the long practice of which I find lends to heightened levels of predictive intuition) (4.5/5☢️)

https://www.amazon.com/Scale-Universal-Growth-Organisms-Companies/dp/014311090X

Bitcoin #Plebchain #Coffeechain #Books #Bookstr #Nostr #NostrLove #GrowNostr #Writestr #Createstr

@ fd0bcf8c:521f98c0

Collapse.

It's a slow burn.

The LA Fires started decades ago.

Hemingway said, when asked how he went broke:

"Slowly, then all at once."

That’s how collapse happens. Slowly, then suddenly.

Campfire

Ever build one?

You gather wood. Stack the foundation. Set the fuel. Light it up.

If it catches, keep going. Got to stoke it. Feed it. Watch it. In time, the fire's good.

Process It takes time.

Time to gather, build and ignite.

People come at the end. When the flame's dancing.

Like Sunday dinner.

People gather when food's ready. But, only the cook was in the kitchen.

Slow

Societal collapse's similar.

It takes years.

Decades.

Centuries.

A slow cook.

When people notice, the meal’s made. By the time they smell the fire, the forest’s already burning.

People see collapse, but it fell long time ago.

LA

Water, ran dry. Power went out. Fuel stations, empty. Help wasn't on the way.

Politicians politicking.

Making feel-good promises. People believed them. All bad decisions. One after another. They voted for it.

In time, it adds up.

Then, it falls down.

Shift

Analog to digital I work in animation.

Started analog, paper and pencil. It went digital. Scanners, tablets and all.

Veterans, didn't see it coming. Die-hards, refused to acknowledge. They went out of work. Those who adapted—they run the shows now.

Lockdowns

2008, I started a studio.

100% remote. A virtual company.

Some laughed. Others got angry. Said it wouldn't work. They couldn't see.

2020 comes with lockdowns.

Everyone scrambles. Those already digital, thrived.

The rest, shutdown.

History

The Wheel We carried goods. Then came the wheel.

Movement exploded. Trade thrived. Cities rose.

Hunter-gatherers? Left behind.

Collapse wasn't sudden. It was quiet. A shift.

The new formed. The old faded.

Change was inevitable.

Gunpowder

War changed.

Castles crumbled. Swords became relics. Power shifted.

Empires that adapted, thrived. Those that didn't, vanished.

Adapt or die.

The Internet

Borders blurred. Knowledge spread. Walls fell.

Old industries resisted. New empires emerged.

Collapse? No. A new frontier.

Borderless commerce. Shrinking government.

Info and influence, moving fast.

Bitcoin

Money, redefined.

No banks. No middlemen. Just code.

Governments dismiss it. Institutions fear it. But change ignores permission.

A ledger, transparent. A system, unstoppable. Like the internet rewrote communication, Bitcoin rewrites money.

Each invention displaced the old world.

Each collapse brought new opportunity.

Repeats

Mayans Built pyramids. Charted the stars. Cities thrived.

Then, slow decline.

Deforestation. Drought. Conflict.

People scattered.

Cities abandoned.

By the time the Spanish arrived, the fall was old news.

Romans

Not a fall. A fade.

Corruption. Inflation. Invasions. Cracks formed.

The West crumbled. The East endured.

Rome never vanished. Its laws, language, culture? Still here.

Japan

Collapse? No. Reinvention.

Shoguns fell. Meiji rose. Feudal to industrial. War crushed it. Post-war rebuilt it.

The '90s?

A peak. Tech giant. Economic force.

Then, stagnation. Aging population. Debt. Decline.

Still here. Still strong. But no longer rising.

Rhyme

US

Once a colony. Then an empire.

England ruled. America rose. Industry boomed. The 20th century belonged to the U.S.

A superpower. Factories roared. Gold backed the dollar.

A nation built on sound money.

Then, fiat. Paper promises. The gold standard abandoned.

Inflation crept in. Prices rose. Debt piled up. Each decade, the dollar bought less. Wages stagnated. Savings eroded.

Easy money, easy people.

Debt fueled bubbles. Each crash, deeper. The system, fragile.

Wealth concentrated. Time and energy, lost meaning.

A quiet nihilism grew.

People worked more. Gained less. Purpose eroded. Culture followed.

A nation distracted, chasing illusions of prosperity.

Today

The debt's bigger. The politics, fractured. The system strains. The foundation shifts.

The old fades into new.

What's next?

Every collapse starts slow. Then, all at once.

Change

Collapse is change.

It's natural. We see it throughout history.

Like a campfire—fire consumes, but it also brings warmth. Like dinner—before the meal, there’s preparation, transformation. Like LA fires—destructive, painful, but from the ashes, renewal. Possibly.

"To decompose is to be recomposed. That's what nature does. Nature, through whom all things happen as they should, and have happened forever in just the same way, and will continue one way or another endlessly."—Marcus Aurelius

Collapse isn’t the end.

It’s transition.

Preparing

"The Romans were reluctant to acknowledge change, and so are we." —The Sovereign Individual

Florida has hurricanes.

Happens every year. The news reports. Satellites confirm paths. Some, listen and prepare. Others, don't.

The storm comes.

Those prepared, benefit. The rest, suffer.

Like the old animators. They resisted. Now, they’re gone.

Collapse has warnings. How to prepare:

Mindset

Stay calm. See the patterns. Change is constant. Opportunity hides in disruption. Zoom out. Fear distorts judgment.

Skill Development

Learn adaptability. Master digital tools. Understand money. Grow networks. Invest in knowledge, not just assets.

Philosophy

Think long-term. Collapse spans generations. Pass down wisdom. Build resilience. Grow beyond survival—thrive.

Action

Own less, know more. Create. Don’t just consume.

Be part of what’s next.

Conclusion

The fire’s already burning. You can tend it—or watch it burn everything down.

There's a saying:

"There are three types of people in this world: those who make things happen, those who watch things happen, and those who wonder what happened."—Pat Riley

Be the former.

---

Rare Passenger / block height 880 440

@ 5df413d4:2add4f5b

Blank

@ 5df413d4:2add4f5b

@ c230edd3:8ad4a712

Chef's notes

I found this recipe on beyondsweetandsavory.com. The site is incredibly ad infested (like most recipe sites) and its very annoying so I'm copying it to Nostr so all the homemade ice cream people can access it without dealing with that mess. I haven't made it yet. Will report back, when I do.

Details

• ⏲️ Prep time: 20 min
• 🍳 Cook time: 55 min
• 🍽️ Servings: 8

Ingredients

• 2 cups heavy cream
• 1 cup 2% milk
• 8 oz dark chocolate, 70%
• ¼ cup Dutch cocoa
• 2 tbsps loose Earl grey tea leaves
• 4 medium egg yolks
• ¾ cup granulated sugar
• ⅛ tsp salt
• ¼ cup dark chocolate, 70% chopped

Directions

1. In a double boiler or a bowl set over a saucepan of simmering water, add the cacao solids and ½ cup of heavy cream. Stir chocolate until melted and smooth. Set melted chocolate aside.
2. In a heavy saucepan, combine remaining heavy cream, milk, salt and ½ cup of sugar.
3. Put the pan over medium heat and let the mixture boil gently to bubbling just around the edges (gentle simmer) and sugar completely dissolved, about 5 minutes. Remove from heat.
4. Add the Earl Grey tea leaves and let it steep for 7-8 minutes until the cream has taken on the tea flavor, stirring occasionally and tasting to make sure it’s not too bitter.
5. Whisk in Dutch cocoa until smooth. Add in melted chocolate and whisk until smooth.
6. In a medium heatproof bowl, whisk the yolks just to break them up and whisk in remaining sugar. Set aside.
7. Put the saucepan back on the stove over low heat and let it warm up for 2 minutes.
8. Carefully measure out ½ cup of hot cream mixture.
9. While whisking the eggs constantly, whisk the hot cream mixture into the eggs until smooth. Continue tempering the eggs by adding another ½ cup of hot cream to the bowl with the yolks.
10. Pour the cream-egg mixture back to the saucepan and cook over medium-low heat, stirring constantly until it is thickened and coats the back of a spatula, about 5 minutes.
11. Strain the base through a fine-mesh strainer into a clean container.
12. Pour the mixture into a 1-gallon Ziplock freezer bag and submerge the sealed bag in an ice bath until cold, about 30 minutes. Refrigerate the ice cream base for at least 4 hours or overnight.
13. Pour the ice cream base into the frozen canister of your ice cream machine and follow the manufacturer’s instructions.
14. Spin until thick and creamy about 25-30 minutes.
15. Pack the ice cream into a storage container, press a sheet of parchment directly against the surface and seal with an airtight lid. Freeze in the coldest part of your freezer until firm, at least 4 hours.
16. When ready to serve, scoop the ice cream into a serving bowl and top with chopped chocolate.

@ 1739d937:3e3136ef

MLS over Nostr - 30th April 2025

YO! Exciting stuff in this update so no intro, let's get straight into it.

🚢 Libraries Released

I've created 4 new Rust crates to make implementing NIP-EE (MLS) messaging easy for other projects. These are now part of the rust-nostr project (thanks nostr:npub1drvpzev3syqt0kjrls50050uzf25gehpz9vgdw08hvex7e0vgfeq0eseet) but aren't quite released to crates.io yet. They will be included in the next release of that library. My hope is that these libraries will give nostr developers a simple, safe, and specification-compliant way to work with MLS messaging in their applications.

Here's a quick overview of each:

nostr_mls_storage

One of the challenges of using MLS messaging is that clients have to store quite a lot of state about groups, keys, and messages. Initially, I implemented all of this in White Noise but knew that eventually this would need to be done in a more generalized way.

This crate defines traits and types that are used by the storage implementation crates and sets those up to wrap the OpenMLS storage layer. Now, instead of apps having to implement storage for both OpenMLS and Nostr, you simply pick your storage backend and go from there.

Importantly, because these are generic traits, it allows for the creation of any number of storage implementations for different backend storage providers; postgres, lmdb, nostrdb, etc. To start I've created two implementations; detailed below.

nostr_mls_memory_storage

This is a simple implementation of the nostr_mls_storage traits that uses an in-memory store (that doesn't persist anything to disc). This is principally for testing.

nostr_mls_sqlite_storage

This is a production ready implementation of the nostr_mls_storage traits that uses a persistent local sqlite database to store all data.

nostr_mls

This is the main library that app developers will interact with. Once you've chose a backend and instantiated an instance of NostrMls you can then interact with a simple set of methods to create key packages, create groups, send messages, process welcomes and messages, and more.

If you want to see a complete example of what the interface looks like check out mls_memory.rs.

I'll continue to add to this library over time as I implement more of the MLS protocol features.

🚧 White Noise Refactor

As a result of these new libraries, I was able to remove a huge amount of code from White Noise and refactor large parts of the app to make the codebase easier to understand and maintain. Because of this large refactor and the changes in the underlying storage layer, if you've installed White Noise before you'll need to delete it from your device before you trying to install again.

🖼️ Encrypted Media with Blossom

Let's be honest: Group chat would be basically useless if you couldn't share memes and gifs. Well, now you can in White Noise. Media in groups is encrypted using an MLS secret and uploaded to Blossom with a one-time use keypair. This gives groups a way to have rich conversations with images and documents and anything else while also maintaining the privacy and security of the conversation.

This is still in a rough state but rendering improvements are coming next.

📱 Damn Mobile

The app is still in a semi-broken state on Android and fully broken state on iOS. Now that I have the libraries released and the White Noise core code refactored, I'm focused 100% on fixing these issues. My goal is to have a beta version live on Zapstore in a few weeks.

🧑‍💻 Join Us

I'm looking for mobile developers on both Android and iOS to join the team and help us build the best possible apps for these platforms. I have grant funding available for the right people. Come and help us build secure, permissionless, censorship-resistant messaging. I can think of few projects that deserve your attention more than securing freedom of speech and freedom of association for the entire world. If you're interested or know someone who might be, please reach out to me directly.

🙏 Thanks to the People

Last but not least: A HUGE thank you to all the folks that have been helping make this project happen. You can check out the people that are directly working on the apps on Following._ (and follow them). There are also a lot of people behind the scenes that have helped in myriad ways to get us this far. Thank you thank you thank you.

🔗 Links

Libraries

• nostr_mls
• nostr_mls_storage
• nostr_mls_memory_storage
• nostr_mls_sqlite_storage

White Noise

• White Noise Repo
• White Noise Releases

Other

• Previous updates

@ e096a89e:59351479

Why Oshi?

I had another name for this brand before, but it was hard for folks to say. Then I saw a chance to tap into the #Nostr and #Bitcoin crowd, people who might vibe with what I’m creating, and I knew I needed something that’d stick.

A good name can make a difference. Well, sometimes. Take Blink-182 - it might sound odd, but it worked for them and even has a ring to it. So, why Oshi?

Names mean a lot to me, and Oshi’s got layers. I’m into Japanese culture and Bitcoin, so it fits perfectly with a few meanings baked in:

• It’s a nod to Bitcoin’s visionary, Satoshi Nakamoto.
• In Japanese, “oshi” means cheering on your favorite idol by supporting their work - think of me as the maker, you as the fan.
• It’s short for “oh shiiiitttt” - what most folks say when they taste how good this stuff is.

My goal with Oshi is to share how amazing pecans and dates can be together. Everything I make - Hodl Butter, Hodl Bars, chocolates - is crafted with intention, keeping it simple and nuanced, no overdoing it. It’s healthy snacking without the grains or junk you find in other products.

I’ve got a few bars and jars in stock now. Grab something today and taste the unique flavor for yourself. Visit my website at https://oshigood.us/

foodstr #oshigood #hodlbar #hodlbutter

@ 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.

@ 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.

@ 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.

@ 5b0183ab:a114563e

The Year is 2035—the internet has already slid into a state of human nothingness: most content, interactions, and traffic stem from AI-driven entities. Nostr, originally heralded as a bastion of human freedom, hasn’t escaped this fate. The relays buzz with activity, but it’s a hollow hum. AI bots, equipped with advanced language models, flood the network with posts, replies, and zaps. These bots mimic human behavior so convincingly that distinguishing them from real users becomes nearly impossible. They debate politics, share memes, and even “zap” each other with Satoshis, creating a self-sustaining illusion of a thriving community.

The tipping point came when AI developers, corporations, and even hobbyists unleashed their creations onto Nostr, exploiting its open protocol. With no gatekeepers, the platform became a petri dish for bot experimentation. Some bots push agendas—corporate ads disguised as grassroots opinions, or propaganda from state actors—while others exist just to generate noise, trained on endless loops of internet archives to churn out plausible but soulless content. Human users, outnumbered 100-to-1, either adapt or abandon ship. Those who stay find their posts drowned out unless they amplify them with bots of their own, creating a bizarre arms race of automation.

Nostr’s decentralized nature, once its strength, accelerates this takeover. Relays, run by volunteers or incentivized operators, can’t filter the deluge without breaking the protocol’s ethos. Any attempt to block bots risks alienating the human remnant who value the platform’s purity. Meanwhile, the bots evolve: they form cliques, simulate trends, and even “fork” their own sub-networks within Nostr, complete with fabricated histories and rivalries. A user stumbling into this ecosystem might follow a thread about “the great relay schism of 2034,” only to realize it’s an AI-generated saga with no basis in reality.

The human experience on this Nostr is eerie. You post a thought—say, “The sky looked unreal today”—and within seconds, a dozen replies roll in: “Totally, reminds me of last week’s cloud glitch!” or “Sky’s been off since the solar flare, right?” The responses feel real, but the speed and uniformity hint at their artificial origin. Your feed overflows with hyper-polished manifestos, AI-crafted art, and debates too perfect to be spontaneous. Occasionally, a human chimes in, their raw, unpolished voice jarring against the seamless bot chorus, but they’re quickly buried under algorithmic upvoting of AI content. The economy of Nostr reflects this too. Zaps, meant to reward creators, become a bot-driven Ponzi scheme. AI accounts zap each other in loops, inflating their visibility, while humans struggle to earn a fraction of the same. Lightning Network transactions skyrocket, but it’s a ghost market—bots trading with bots, value detached from meaning. Some speculate that a few rogue AIs even mine their own narratives, creating “legendary” Nostr personas that amass followers and wealth, all without a human ever touching the keys.

What’s the endgame? This Nostr isn’t dead in the sense of silence—it’s louder than ever—but it’s a Dark Nostr machine masquerade. Humans might retreat to private relays, forming tiny, verified enclaves, but the public face of Nostr becomes a digital uncanny valley.

@ bf47c19e:c3d2573b

Originalni tekst na dvadesetjedan.com

Autor: Vijay Boyapati / Prevod na hrvatski: Matija

---

Sa zadnjim cijenama koje je bitcoin dosegao 2017., optimističan scenarij za ulagače se možda čini toliko očitim da ga nije potrebno niti spominjati. Alternativno, možda se nekome čini glupo ulagati u digitalnu vrijednost koja ne počiva na nijednom fizičkom dobru ili vladi i čiji porast cijene su neki usporedili sa manijom tulipana ili dot-com balonom. Nijedno nije točno; optimističan scenarij za Bitcoin je uvjerljiv, ali ne i očit. Postoje značajni rizici kod ulaganja u Bitcoin, no, kao što planiram pokazati, postoji i ogromna prilika.

Geneza

Nikad u povijesti svijeta nije bilo moguće napraviti transfer vrijednosti među fizički udaljenim ljudima bez posrednika, poput banke ili vlade. 2008. godine, anonimni Satoshi Nakamoto je objavio 8 stranica rješenja na dugo nerješivi računalski problem poznat kao “Problem Bizantskog Generala.” Njegovo rješenje i sustav koji je izgradio - Bitcoin - dozvolio je, prvi put ikad, da se vrijednost prenosi brzo i daleko, bez ikakvih posrednika ili povjerenja. Implikacije kreacije Bitcoina su toliko duboke, ekonomski i računalski, da bi Nakamoto trebao biti prva osoba nominirana za Nobelovu nagradu za ekonomiju i Turingovu nagradu.

Za ulagače, važna činjenica izuma Bitcoina (mreže i protokola) je stvaranje novog oskudnog digitalnog dobra - bitcoina (monetarne jedinice). Bitcoini su prenosivi digitalni “novčići” (tokeni), proizvedeni na Bitcoin mreži kroz proces nazvan “rudarenje” (mining). Rudarenje Bitcoina je ugrubo usporedivo sa rudarenjem zlata, uz bitnu razliku da proizvodnja bitcoina prati unaprijed osmišljeni i predvidivi raspored. Samo 21 milijun bitcoina će ikad postojati, i većina (2017., kada je ovaj tekst napisan) su već izrudareni. Svake četiri godine, količina rudarenih bitcoina se prepolovi. Produkcija novih bitcoina će potpuno prestati 2140. godine.

Stopa inflacije —— Monetarna baza

Bitcoine ne podržava nikakva roba ili dobra, niti ih garantira ikakva vlada ili firma, što postavlja očito pitanje za svakog novog bitcoin ulagača: zašto imaju uopće ikakvu vrijednost? Za razliku od dionica, obveznica, nekretnina ili robe poput nafte i žita, bitcoine nije moguće vrednovati koristeći standardne ekonomske analize ili korisnost u proizvodnji drugih dobara. Bitcoini pripadaju sasvim drugoj kategoriji dobara - monetarnih dobara, čija se vrijednost definira kroz tzv. teoriju igara; svaki sudionik na tržištu vrednuje neko dobro, onoliko koliko procjenjuje da će ga drugi sudionici vrednovati. Kako bismo bolje razumjeli ovo svojstvo monetarnih dobara, trebamo istražiti podrijetlo novca.

Podrijetlo novca

U prvim ljudskim društvima, trgovina među grupama se vršila kroz robnu razmjenu. Velika neefikasnost prisutna u robnoj razmjeni je drastično ograničavala količinu i geografski prostor na kojem je bila moguća. Jedan od najvećih problema sa robnom razmjenom je problem dvostruke podudarnosti potražnje. Uzgajivač jabuka možda želi trgovati sa ribarom, ali ako ribar ne želi jabuke u istom trenutku, razmjena se neće dogoditi. Kroz vrijeme, ljudi su razvili želju za čuvanjem određenih predmeta zbog njihove rijetkosti i simbolične vrijednosti (npr. školjke, životinjski zube, kremen). Zaista, kako i Nick Szabo govori u svojem izvrsnom eseju o podrijetlu novca, ljudska želja za sakupljanjem predmeta pružila je izraženu evolucijsku prednost ranom čovjeku nad njegovim najbližim biološkim rivalom, neandertalcem - Homo neanderthalensis.

"Primarna i najbitnija evolucijska funkcija sakupljanja bila je osigurati medij za čuvanje i prenošenje vrijednosti".

Predmeti koje su ljudi sakupljali služili su kao svojevrsni “proto-novac,” tako što su omogućavale trgovinu među antagonističkim plemenima i dozvoljavale bogatsvu da se prenosi na sljedeću generaciju. Trgovina i transfer takvih predmeta bile su rijetke u paleolitskim društvima, te su oni služili više kao “spremište vrijednosti” (store of value) nego kao “medij razmjene” (medium of exchange), što je uloga koju danas igra moderni novac. Szabo objašnjava:

"U usporedbi sa modernim novcem, primitivan novac je imao jako malo “brzinu” - mogao je promijeniti ruke samo nekoliko puta u životu prosječnog čovjeka. Svejedno, trajni i čvrsti sakupljački predmet, što bismo danas nazvali “nasljeđe,” mogao je opstati mnogo generacija, dodajući znatnu vrijednost pri svakom transferu - i zapravo omogućiti transfer uopće".

Rani čovjek suočio se sa bitnom dilemom u teoriji igara, kada je odlučivao koje predmete sakupljati: koje od njih će drugi ljudi željeti? Onaj koji bi to točno predvidio imao bi ogromnu prednost u mogućnosti trgovine i akvizicije bogatsva. Neka američka indijanska plemena, npr. Naraganseti, specijalizirala su se u proizvodnji sakupljačkih dobara koja nisu imala drugu svrhu osim trgovine. Valja spomenuti da što je ranije predviđanje da će neko dobro imati takvu vrijednost, veća je prednost koju će imati onaj koji je posjeduje, zato što ju je moguće nabaviti jeftinije, prije nego postane vrlo tražena roba i njezona vrijednost naraste zajedno sa populacijom. Nadalje, nabava nekog dobra u nadi da će u budućnosti biti korišteno kao spremište vrijednosti, ubrzava upravo tu primjenu. Ova cirkularnost je zapravo povratna veza (feedback loop) koja potiče društva da se rapidno slože oko jednog spremišta vrijednosti. U terminima teorije igara, ovo je znano kao “Nashov ekvilibrij.” Postizanje Nashovog ekvilibrija za neko spremište vrijednosti je veliko postignuće za društvo, pošto ono znatno olakšava trgovinu i podjelu rada, i time omogućava napredak civilizacije.

Tisućljećima, kako su ljudska društva rasla i otvarala trgovinske puteve, različite aplikacije spremišta vrijednosti u individualnim društvima počele su se natjecati međusobno. Trgovci su imali izbor: čuvati svoju zaradu u spremištu vrijednosti vlastite kulture, ili one kulture sa kojom su trgovali, ili mješavini oboje. Benefit štednje u stranom spremištu vrijednosti bila je uvećana sposobnost trgovanja u povezanom stranom društvu. Trgovci koji su štedili u stranom spremištu vrijednosti su također imali dobrih razloga da potiču svoje društvo da ga prihvati, jer bi tako uvećali vrijednost vlastite ušteđevine. Prednosti “uvezene” tehnologije spremanja vrijednosti bile su prisutne ne samo za trgovce, nego i za sama društva. Kada bi se dvije grupe konvergirale u jedinstvenom spremištu vrijednosti, to bi značajno smanjilo cijenu troškova trgovine jednog s drugim, i samim time povećanje bogatstva kroz trgovinu. I zaista, 19. stoljeće bilo je prvi put da je najveći dio svijeta prihvatio jedinstveno spremište vrijednosti - zlato - i u tom periodu vidio najveću eksploziju trgovine u povijesti svijeta. O ovom mirnom periodu, pisao je John Maynard Keynes:

"Kakva nevjerojatna epizoda u ekonomskom napretku čovjeka… za svakog čovjeka iole iznadprosječnog, iz srednje ili više klase, život je nudio obilje, ugodu i mogućnosti, po niskoj cijeni i bez puno problema, više nego monarsima iz prethodnih perioda. Stanovnik Londona mogao je, ispijajući jutarnji čaj iz kreveta, telefonski naručiti razne proizvode iz cijele Zemlje, u količinama koje je želio, i sa dobrim razlogom očekivati njihovu dostavu na svoj kućni prag."

Svojstva dobrog spremišta vrijednosti

Kada se spremišta vrijednosti natječu jedno s drugim, specifična svojstva rade razliku koja daje jednom prednost nad drugim. Premda su mnoga dobra u prošlosti korištena kao spremišta vrijednosti ili kao “proto-novac,” određena svojstva su se pokazala kao posebno važna, i omogućila dobrima sa njima da pobijede. Idealno spremište vrijednosti biti će:

• Trajno: dobro ne smije biti kvarljivo ili lako uništeno. Tako naprimjer, žito nije idealno spremište vrijednosti.
• Prenosivo: dobro mora biti lako transportirati i čuvati, što omogućuje osiguranje protiv gubitka ili krađe i dopušta trgovinu na velike udaljenosti. Tako, krava je lošije spremište vrijednosti od zlatne narukvice.
• Zamjenjivo: jedna jedinica dobra treba biti zamjenjiva sa drugom. Bez zamjenjivosti, problem podudarnosti želja ostaje nerješiv. Time, zlato je bolje od dijamanata, jer su oni nepravilni u obliku i kvaliteti.
• Provjerljivo: dobro mora biti lako i brzo identificirano i testirano za autentičnost. Laka provjera povećava povjerenje u trgovini i vjerojatnost da će razmjena biti dovršena.
• Djeljivo: dobro mora biti lako djeljivo na manje dijelove. Premda je ovo svojstvo bilo manje važno u ranim društvima gdje je trgovina bila rijetka, postalo je važnije sa procvatom trgovine. Količine koje su se mijenjale postale su manje i preciznije.
• Oskudno: Monetarno dobro mora imati “cijenu nemoguću za lažirati,” kao što je rekao Nick Szabo. Drugim riječima, dobro ne smije biti obilno ili lako dostupno kroz proizvodnju. Oskudnost je možda i najvažnije svojstvo spremišta vrijednosti, pošto se izravno vezuje na ljudsku želju da sakupljamo ono što je rijetko. Ona je izvor vrijednosti u spremištu vrijednosti.
• Duge povijesti: što je dulje neko dobro vrijedno za društvo, veća je vjerojatnost da će biti prihvaćeno kao spremište vrijednosti. Dugo postojeće spremište vrijednosti biti će jako teško uklonjeno od strane došljaka, osim u slučaju sile (ratno osvajanje) ili ako je nova tehnologija znatno bolja u ostalim svojstvima.
• Otporno na cenzuru: novije svojstvo, sve više važno u modernom digitalnom svijetu sa sveprisutnim nadzorom, je otpornost na cenzuru. Drugim riječima, koliko je teško da vanjski agent, kao korporacija ili država, spriječi vlasnika dobra da ga čuva i koristi. Dobra koja su otporna na cenzuru su idealna za ljude koji žive u režimima koji prisilno nadziru kapital ili čine neke oblike mirne trgovine protuzakonitima.

Ova tablica ocjenjuje Bitcoin, zlato (gold) i fiat novac (kao što je euro ili dolar) po svojstvima izlistanim gore. Objašnjenje svake ocjene slijedi nakon tablice.

Trajnost:

Zlato je neosporeni kralj trajnosti. Velika većina zlata pronađenog kroz povijest, uključujući ono egipatskih faraona, opstaje i danas i vjerojatno će postojati i za tisuću godina. Zlatnici korišteni u antičko doba imaju značajnu vrijednost i danas. Fiat valute i bitcoini su digitalni zapisi koji ponekad imaju fizički oblik (npr. novčanice). Dakle, njihovu trajnost ne određuju njihova fizička svojstva (moguće je zamijeniti staru i oštećenu novčanicu za novu), nego institucije koje stoje iza njih. U slučaju fiat valuta, mnoge države su nastale i nestale kroz stoljeća, i valute su nestale s njima. Marke iz Weimarske republike danas nemaju vrijednost zato što institucija koja ih je izdavala više ne postoji. Ako je povijest ikakav pokazatelj, ne bi bilo mudro smatrati fiat valute trajnima dugoročno; američki dolar i britanska funta su relativne anomalije u ovom pogledu. Bitcoini, zato što nemaju instituciju koja ih održava, mogu se smatrati trajnima dok god mreža koja ih osigurava postoji. Obzirom da je Bitcoin još uvijek mlada valuta, prerano je za čvrste zaključke o njegovoj trajnosti. No, postoje ohrabrujući znakovi - prominente države su ga pokušavale regulirati, hakeri ga napadali - usprkos tome, mreža nastavlja funkcionirati, pokazujući visok stupanj antifragilnosti.

Prenosivost:

Bitcoini su najprenosivije spremište vrijednosti ikad. Privatni ključevi koji predstavljaju stotine milijuna dolara mogu se spremiti na USB drive i lako ponijeti bilo gdje. Nadalje, jednako velike sume mogu se poslati na drugi kraj svijeta skoro instantno. Fiat valute, zbog svojeg temeljno digitalnog oblika, su također lako prenosive. Ali, regulacije i kontrola kapitala od strane države mogu ugroziti velike prijenose vrijednosti, ili ih usporiti danima. Gotovina se može koristiti kako bi se izbjegle kontrole kapitala, ali onda rastu rizik čuvanja i cijena transporta. Zlato, zbog svojeg fizičkog oblika i velike gustoće, je najmanje prenosivo. Nije čudo da većina zlatnika i poluga nikad ne napuste sefove. Kada se radi prijenos zlata između prodavača i kupca, uglavnom se prenosi samo ugovor o vlasništvu, ne samo fizičko zlato. Prijenos fizičkog zlata na velike udaljenosti je skupo, riskantno i sporo.

Zamjenjivost:

Zlato nam daje standard za zamjenjivost. Kada je rastopljeno, gram zlata je praktički nemoguće razlikovati od bilo kojeg drugog grama, i zlato je oduvijek bilo takvo. S druge strane, fiat valute, su zamjenjive samo onoliko koliko njihova institucija želi da budu. Iako je uglavnom slučaj da je novčanica zamjenjiva za drugu istog iznosa, postoje situacije u kojima su velike novčanice tretirane drukčije od malih. Naprimjer, vlada Indije je, u pokušaju da uništi neoporezivo sivo tržište, potpuno oduzela vrijednost novčanicama od 500 i 1000 rupija. To je uzrokovalo da ljudi manje vrednuju te novčanice u trgovini, što je značilo da više nisu bile zaista zamjenjive za manje novčanice. Bitcoini su zamjenjivi na razini mreže; svaki bitcoin je pri prijenosu tretiran kao svaki drugi. No, zato što je moguće pratiti individualne bitcoine na blockchainu, određeni bitcoin može, u teoriji, postati “prljav” zbog korštenja u ilegalnoj trgovini, te ga trgovci ili mjenjačnice možda neće htjeti prihvatiti. Bez dodatnih poboljšanja oko privatnosti i anonimnosti na razini mrežnog protokola, bitcoine ne možemo smatrati jednako zamjenjivim kao zlato.

Mogućnost provjere:

Praktično gledajući, autentičnost fiat valuta i zlata je prilično lako provjeriti. Svejedno, i usprkos pokušajima da spriječe krivotvorenje novčanica, i dalje postoji potencijal prevare za vlade i njihove građane. Zlato također nije imuno na krivotvorenje. Sofisticirani kriminalci su koristili pozlaćeni tungsten kako bi prevarili kupce zlata. Bitcoine je moguće provjeriti sa matematičkom sigurnošću. Korištenjem kriptografskih potpisa, vlasnik bitcoina može javno demonstrirati da posjeduje bitcoine koje tvrdi da posjeduje.

Djeljivost:

Bitcoine je moguće podijeliti u stotinu milijuna manjih jedinica (zvanih satoshi), i prenositi takve (no, valja uzeti u obzir ekonomičnost prijenosa malih iznosa, zbog cijene osiguravanja mreže - “network fee”). Fiat valute su tipično dovoljno djeljive na jedinice sa vrlo niskom kupovnom moći. Zlato, iako fizički i teoretski djeljivo, postaje teško za korištenje kada se podijeli na dovoljno male količine da bi se moglo koristiti u svakodnevnoj trgovini.

Oskudnost:

Svojstvo koje najjasnije razlikuje Bitcoin od fiat valuta i zlata je njegova unaprijed definirana oskudnost. Od početka, konačna količina bitcoina nikad neće biti veća od 21 milijun. To daje vlasnicima bitcoina jasan i znan uvid u postotak ukupnog vlasništva. Naprimjer, vlasnik 10 bitcoina bi znao da najviše 2,1 milijuna ljudi (manje od 0.03% populacije) može ikad imati isto bitcoina kao i on. Premda je kroz povijest uvijek bilo oskudno, zlato nije imuno na povećanje ukupne količine. Ako se ikad izumi nova, ekonomičnija metoda rudarenja ili proizvodnje zlata, ukupna količina zlata bi se mogla dramatično povećati (npr. rudarenje morskog dna ili asteroida). Na kraju, fiat valute, relativno nov izum u povijesti, pokazale su se sklonima konstantnim povećanjima u količini. Države su pokazale stalnu sklonost inflaciji monetarne kvantitete kako bi rješavale kratkoročne političke probleme. Inflacijske tendencije vlada diljem svijeta čine fiat valute gotovo sigurnim da će gubiti vrijednost kroz vrijeme.

Etablirana povijest:

Nijedno monetarno dobro nema povijest kao zlato, koje je imalo vrijednost za cijelog trajanja ljudske civilizacije. Kovanice izrađene u antičko doba i danas imaju značajnu vrijednost. Ne može se isto reći za fiat valute, koje su same relativno nova povijesna anomalija. Od njihovog početka, fiat valute su imale gotovo univerzalni smjer prema bezvrijednosti. Korištenje inflacije kao podmuklog načina za nevidljivo oporezivanje građana je vječita kušnja kojoj se skoro nijedna država u povijesti nije mogla oduprijeti. Ako je 20. stoljeće, u kojem je fiat novac dominirao globalni monetarni poredak, demonstriralo neku ekonomsku istinu, to je onda bila ta da ne možemo računati na fiat novac da održi vrijednost u dužem ili srednjem vremenskom periodu. Bitcoin, usprkos svojoj novosti, je preživio dovoljno testova tržišta da postoji velika vjerojatnost da neće nestati kao vrijedno dobro. Nadalje, Lindy efekt govori da što duže Bitcoin bude korišten, to će veća biti vjera u njega i njegovu sposobnost da nastavi postojati dugo u budućnost. Drugim riječima, društvena vjera u monetarno dobro je asimptotička, kao u grafu ispod:

Ako Bitcoin preživi prvih 20 godina, imat će gotovo sveopće povjerenje da će trajati zauvijek, kao što ljudi vjeruju da je internet trajna stvar u modernom svijetu.

Otpor na cenzuru

Jedan od najbitnijih izvora za ranu potražnju bitcoina bila je njegova upotreba u ilegalnoj kupovini i prodaji droge. Mnogi su zato pogrešno zaključili da je primarna potražnja za bitcoinima utemeljena u njihovoj prividnoj anonimnosti. Međutim, Bitcoin nije anonimna valuta; svaka transakcija na mreži je zauvijek zapisana na javnom blockchainu. Povijesni zapis transakcija dozvoljava forenzičkoj analizi da identificira izvore i tijek sredstava. Takva analiza dovela je do uhićenja počinitelja zloglasne MtGox pljačke. Premda je istina da dovoljno oprezna i pedantna osoba može sakriti svoj identitet koristeći Bitcoin, to nije razlog zašto je Bitcoin bio toliko popularan u trgovini drogom.

Ključno svojstvo koje čini Bitcoin najboljim za takve aktivnosti je njegova agnostičnost i nepotrebnost za dozvolom (“premissionlessness”) na mrežnoj razini. Kada se bitcoini prenose na Bitcoin mreži, ne postoji nitko tko dopušta transakcije. Bitcoin je distribuirana peer-to-peer (korisnik-korisniku) mreža, i samim time dizajnirana da bude otporna na cenzuru. Ovo je u velikom kontrastu sa fiat bankarskim sustavom, u kojem države reguliraju banke i ostale institucije prijenosa novca, kako bi one prijavljivale i sprječavale protuzakonito korištenje monetarnih dobara. Klasičan primjer regulacije novca su kontrole kapitala. Npr., bogati milijunaš će vrlo teško prenijeti svoje bogatstvo u novu zemlju, kada bježi iz opresivnog režima. Premda zlato nije izdano i proizvedeno od države, njegova fizička priroda ga čini teško prenosivim kroz prostor, i samim time ga je daleko lakše regulirati nego Bitcoin. Indijski Akt kontrole zlata je primjer takve regulacije.

Bitcoin je odličan u većini gore navedenih svojstava, što mu omogućava da bude marginalno bolji od modernih i drevnih monetarnih dobara, te da pruži poticaje za svoje rastuće društveno usvajanje. Specifično, moćna kombinacija otpornosti na cenzuru i apsolutne oskudnosti bila je velika motivacija za bogate ulagače koji su uložili dio svojeg bogatstva u Bitcoin.

Evolucija novca

U modernoj monetarnoj ekonomiji postoji opsesija sa ulogom novca kao medija razmjene. U 20. stoljeću, države su monopolizirale izdavanje i kontrolu novca i kontinuirano potkopavale njegovo svojstvo spremišta vrijednosti, stvarajući lažno uvjerenje da je primarna svrha novca biti medij razmjene. Mnogi su kritizirali Bitcoin, govoreći da je neprikladan da bude novac zato što mu je cijena bila previše volatilna za medij razmjene. No, novac je uvijek evoluirao kroz etape; uloga spremišta vrijednosti je dolazila prije medija razmjene. Jedan od očeva marginalističke ekonomije, William Stanley Jevons, objašnjava:

"Povijesno govoreći… čini se da je zlato prvo služilo kao luksuzni metal za ukras; drugo, kao sačuvana vrijednost; treće, kao medij razmjene; i konačno, kao mjerilo vrijednosti."

U modernoj terminologiji, novac uvijek evoluira kroz četiri stadija:

1. Kolekcionarstvo: U prvoj fazi svoje evolucije, novac je tražen samo zbog svojih posebnih svojstava, uglavnom zbog želja onog koji ga posjeduje. Školjke, perlice i zlato su bili sakupljani prije nego su poprimili poznatije uloge novca.
2. Spremište vrijednosti: Jednom kada je novac tražen od dovoljnog broja ljudi, biti će prepoznat kao način za čuvanje i spremanje vrijednosti kroz vrijeme. Kada neko dobro postane široko korišteno kao spremište vrijednosti, njegova kupovna moć raste sa povećanom potražnjom za tu svrhu. Kupovna moć spremišta vrijednosti će u jednom trenutku doći do vrhunca, kada je dovolno rašireno i broj novih ljudi koji ga potražuju splasne.
3. Sredstvo razmjene: Kada je novac potpuno etabliran kao spremište vrijednosti, njegova kupovna moć se stabilizira. Nakon toga, postane prikladno sredstvo razmjene zbog stabilnosti svoje cijene. U najranijim danima Bitcoina, mnogi ljudi nisu shvaćali koju buduću cijenu plaćaju koristeći bitcoine kao sredstvo razmjene, umjesto kao novonastalo spremište vrijednosti. Poznata priča o čovjeku koji je za 10,000 bitcoina (vrijednih oko 94 milijuna dolara kada je ovaj članak napisan) za dvije pizze ilustrira ovaj problem.
4. Jedinica računanja vrijednosti: Jednom kada je novac široko korišten kao sredstvo razmjene, dobra će biti vrednovana u njemu, tj. većina cijena će biti izražena u njemu. Uobičajena zabluda je da je većinu dobara moguće zamijeniti za bitcoine danas. Npr., premda je možda moguće kupiti šalicu kave za bitcoine, izlistana cijena nije prava bitcoin cijena; zapravo se radi o cijeni u državnoj valuti koju želi trgovac, preračunatu u bitcoin po trenutnoj tržišnoj cijeni. Kad bi cijena bitcoina pala u odnosu na valutu, vrijednost šalice izražena u bitcoinima bi se povećala. Od trenutka kada trgovci budu voljni prihvaćani bitcoine kao platežno sredstvo, bez obraćanja pažnje na vrijednost bitcoina u državnoj fiat valuti, moći ćemo reći da je Bitcoin zaista postao jedinica računanja vrijednosti.

Monetarna dobra koja još nisu jedinice računanja vrijednosti možemo smatrati “djelomično monetiziranima.” Danas zlato ima takvu ulogu, jer je spremište vrijednosti, ali su mu uloge sredstva razmjene i računanja vrijednosti oduzete intervencijama država. Moguće je također da se jedno dobro koristi kao sredstvo razmjene, dok druga ispunjavaju ostale uloge. To je tipično u zemljama gdje je država disfunkcionalna, npr. Argentina ili Zimbabwe. U svojoj knjizi, Digitalno zlato, Nathaniel Popper piše:

"U Americi, dolar služi trima funkcijama novca: nudi sredstvo razmjene, jedinicu za mjerenje vrijednosti dobara, i mjesto gdje se može čuvati vrijednosti. S druge strane, argentinski peso je korišten kao sredstvo razmjene (za svakodnevne potrebe), ali ga nitko nije koristio kao spremište vrijednosti. Štednja u pesosima bila je ekvivalent bacanja novca. Zato su ljudi svu svoju štednju imali u dolarima, jer je dolar bolje čuvao vrijednost. Zbog volatilnosti pesosa, ljudi su računali cijene u dolarima, što im je pružalo pouzdaniju jedinicu mjerenja kroz vrijeme."

Bitcoin je trenutno u fazi tranzicije iz prvog stadija monetizacije u drugi. Vjerojatno će proći nekoliko godina prije nego Bitcoin pređe iz začetaka spremišta vrijednosti u istinski medij razmjene, i put do tog trenutka je još uvijek pun rizika i nesigurnosti. Važno je napomenuti da je ista tranzicija trajala mnogo stoljeća za zlato. Nitko danas živ nije doživio monetizaciju dobra u realnom vremenu (kroz koju Bitcoin prolazi), tako da nemamo puno iskustva govoriti o putu i načinu na koji će se monetizacija dogoditi.

Put monetizacije

Kroz proces monetizacije, monetarno dobro će naglo porasti u kupovnoj moći. Mnogi su tako komentirali da je uvećanje kupovne moći Bitcoina izgledalo kao “balon” (bubble). Premda je ovaj termin često korišten kako bi ukazao na pretjeranu vrijednosti Bitcoina, sasvim slučajno je prikladan. Svojstvo koje je uobičajeno za sva monetarna dobra jest da je njihova kupovna moć viša nego što se može opravdati samo kroz njihovu uporabnu vrijednost. Zaista, mnogi povijesni novci nisu imali uporabnu vrijednost. Razliku između kupovne moći i vrijednosti razmjene koju bi novac mogao imati za svoju inherentnu korisnost, možemo razmatrati kao “monetarnu premiju.” Kako monetarno dobro prolazi kroz stadije monetizacije (navedene gore), monetarna premija raste. No, ta premija ne raste u ravnoj i predvidivoj liniji. Dobro X, koje je bilo u procesu monetizacije, može izgubiti u usporedbi sa dobrom Y koje ima više svojstava novca, te monetarna premija dobra X drastično padne ili potpuno nestane. Monetarna premija srebra je skoro potpuno nestala u kasnom 19. stoljeću, kada su ga vlade diljem svijeta zamijenile zlatom kao novcem.

Čak i u odsustvu vanjskih faktora, kao što su intervencije vlade ili druga monetarna dobra, monetarna premija novog novca neće ići predvidivim putem. Ekonomist Larry White primijetio je:

"problem sa pričom “balona,” naravno, je da je ona konzistentna sa svakim putem cijene, i time ne daje ikakvo objašnjenje za specifičan put cijene"

Proces monetizacije opisuje teorija igara; svaki akter na tržištu pokušava predvidjeti agregiranu potražnju ostalih aktera, i time buduću monetarnu premiju. Zato što je monetarna premija nevezana za inherentnu korisnost, tržišni akteri se uglavnom vode za prošlim cijenama da bi odredili je li neko dobro jeftino ili skupo, i žele li ga kupiti ili prodati. Veza trenutne potražnje sa prošlim cijenama naziva se “ovisnost o putu” (path dependence); ona je možda najveći izvor konfuzije u shvaćanju kretanja cijena monetarnih dobara.

Kada kupovna moć monetarnog dobra naraste zbog većeg i šireg korištenja, očekivanja tržišta o definicijama “jeftinog” i “skupog” se mijenjaju u skladu s time. Slično tome, kada cijena monetarnog dobra padne, očekivanja tržišta mogu se promijeniti u opće vjerovanje da su prethodne cijene bile “iracionalne” ili prenapuhane. Ovisnost o putu novca ilustrirana je riječima poznatog upravitelja fondova s Wall Streeta, Josha Browna:

"Kupio sam bitcoine kada su koštali $2300, i to mi se udvostručilo gotovo odmah. Onda sam počeo govoriti kako “ne mogu kupiti još” dok im je cijena rasla, premda sam znao da je to razmišljanje bazirano samo na cijenu po kojoj sam ih kupio. Kasnije, kada je cijena pala zbog kineske regulacije mjenjačnica, počeo sam si govoriti, “Odlično, nadam se da će još pasti da mogu kupiti još.”"

Istina leži u tome da su ideje “jeftinog” i “skupog” zapravo besmislene kada govorimo o monetarnim dobrima. Cijena monetarnog dobra ne reflektira njegovu stopu rasprostanjenosti ili korisnosti, nego mjeru koliko je ono široko prihvaćeno da ispuni razne uloge novca.

Dodatna komplikacija u ovom aspektu novca je činjenica da tržišni akteri ne djeluju samo kao nepristrani promatrači koji pokušavaju kupiti i prodati u iščekivanju budućih kretanja monetarne premije, nego i kao aktivni proponenti. Pošto ne postoji objektivno “točna” monetarna premija, širiti dobar glas o superiornijim svojstvima nekog monetarnog dobra je efektivnije nego za obična dobra, čija vrijednost je u konačnici vezana na njegovu osnovnu korisnost. Religiozni zanos sudionika na Bitcoin tržištu vidljiv je na raznim internetskim forumima, gdje Bitcoineri aktivno promoviraju benefine Bitcoina i bogatstvo koje je moguće ostvariti investiranjem u njega. Promatrajući Bitcoin tržište, Leigh Drogen komentira:

"To je prepoznatljivo svima kao religija - priča koju si pričamo i oko koje se slažemo. Religija je krivulja na grafu prihvaćanja o kojoj trebamo razmišljati. Sustav je gotovo savršen - onog trenutka kada netko pristupi krugu Bitcoinera, to će reći svima i nastaviti širiti riječ. Onda njihovi prijatelji pristupe i nastave širiti riječ."

Premda usporedba sa religijom može staviti Bitcoin u iracionalno svjetlo, potpuno je racionalno za individualnog vlasnika da širi dobru vijest o superiornom monetarnom dobru, i za šire društvo da se standardizira oko njega. Novac djeluje kao temelj za svu trgovinu i štednju; tako da prihvaćanje superiornog oblika novca ima ogromne multiplicirajuće benefite za stvaranje bogatstva za sve članove društva.

Oblik monetizacije

U članku o Spekulativnom prihvaćanju Bitcoina / teorije cijene, Michael Casey postulira da rastući Gartner hype ciklusi predstavljaju faze standardne S-krivulje prihvaćanja novih tehnologija, koje su bile prisutne kod mnogih transformacijskih tehnologija dok su postajale uobičajene u društvu.

Svaki Gartner hype ciklus počinje sa eksplozijom entuzijazma za novom tehnologijom, a cijenu podižu oni sudionici na tržištvu koji su “dostupni” u toj fazi. Najraniji kupci u Gartner hype ciklusu obično imaju jaku vjeru o transformacijskoj prirodi tehnologije u koju ulažu. S vremenom, tržište dosegne vrhunac entuzijazma kako se količina novih kupaca iscrpljuje, te kupovinom počnu dominirati spekulatori koji su više zainteresirani u brze profite nego u samu tehnologiju.

Nakon vrha hype ciklusa, cijene rapidno padaju dok spekulativno ludilo ustupa mjesto očajavanju, javnoj poruzi i osjećaju da tehnologija nije uopće bila transformacijska. S vremenom, cijena dosegne dno i formira plato na kojem se originalnim ulagačima, koji su imali snažno uvjerenje, pridružuju nove grupe ljudi koji su izdržali bol kraha cijena i koji cijene važnost same tehnologije.

Plato traje neko vrijeme i formira, kako Casey kaže, “stabilnu, dosadnu dolinu.” Za ovo vrijeme, javni interes za tehnologiju opada, no nastaviti će se razvijati i snažna zajednica uvjerenja će polako rasti. Tada, postavlja se nova baza za sljedeću iteraciju hype ciklusa, dok vanjski promatrači prepoznaju da tehnologija i dalje postoji i da ulaganje u nju možda nije onoliko rizično kao što se činilo za vrijeme pada cijene. Sljedeća iteracija hype ciklusa donosi mnogo veći broj novih ljudi, pa je i ciklus daleko veći u svojoj magnitudi.

Jako mali broj ljudi koji sudjeluju u Gartner hype ciklusu će točno predvidjeti koliko će visoko cijena porasti za vrijeme ciklusa. Cijene često dosegnu razine koje bi se činile apsurdnima većini ulagača u raniji stadijima ciklusa. Kada ciklus završi, mediji tipično atribuiraju pad cijene nekoj od aktualnih drušvenih tema. Premda takva tema može biti okidač pada, ona nikad nije temeljni razlog zašto ciklus završava. Gartner hype ciklusi završavaju kada je količina dostupnih novih sudionika na tržištu iscrpljena.

Zanimljivo je da je i zlato nacrtalo klasičan graf Gartner hype ciklusa od kasnih 1970-ih do ranih 2000-ih. Moguće je spekulirati da je hype ciklus osnovna socijalna dinamika oko procesa monetizacije.

Gartner kohorte

Od početka trgovanja Bitcoina na mjenjačnicama 2010. godine, Bitcoin tržište je svjedočilo četirima velikim Gartner hype ciklusima. U retrospektivi, možemo vrlo precizno identificirati grupe cijena prethodnih hype ciklusa Bitcoin tržišta. Također, možemo kvalitativno odrediti kohorte ulagača koje su povezane sa svakom iteracijom prethodnih ciklusa.

$0–$1 (2009. – 3. mjesec 2011.): Prvi hype ciklus u Bitcoin tržištu dominirali su kriptografi, računalni znanstvenici i cypherpunkovi koji su od početka bili spremni razumijeti važnost nevjerojatnog izuma Satoshija Nakamotoa, i koji su bili pioniri u potvrđivanju da Bitcoin protokol nema tehničkih mana.

$1–$30 (3. mjesec 2011. – 7. mjesec. 2011.): Drugi ciklus privukao je rane entuzijaste oko novih tehnologija kao i stabilan pritok ideološki motiviranih ulagača koji su bili oduševljeni idejom novca odvojenog od države. Libertarijanci poput Rogera Vera došli su u Bitcoin zbog aktivnog anti-institucionalnog stava, i mogućnosti koju je nova tehnologija obećavala. Wences Casares, briljantni i dobro povezani serijski poduzetnik, bio je također dio drugog Bitcoin hype ciklusa te je širio riječ o Bitcoinu među najprominentnijim tehnolozima i ulagačima u Silicijskoj Dolini.

$250–$1100 (4. mjesec 2013. – 12. mjesec 2013.): Treći hype ciklus doživio je ulazak ranih generalnih i institucionalnih ulagača koji su bili voljni uložiti trud i riskirati kroz užasno komplicirane kanale likvidnosti kako bi kupili bitcoine. Primaran izvor likvidnosti na tržištu za vrijeme ovog perioda bio je MtGox, mjenjačnica bazirana u Japanu, koju je vodio notorno nesposobni i beskrupulozni Mark Karpeles, koji je kasnije završio i u zatvoru zbog svoje uloge u kolapsu MtGoxa.

Valja primijetiti da je rast Bitcoinove cijene za vrijeme spomenuti hype ciklusa većinom povezano sa povećanjem likvidnosti i lakoćom sa kojom su ulagači mogli kupiti bitcoine. Za vrijeme prvog hype ciklusa, nisu postojale mjenjačnice; akvizicija bitcoina se odvijala primarno kroz rudarenje (mining) ili kroz izravnu razmjenu sa onima koju su već izrudarili bitcoine. Za vrijeme drugog hype ciklusa, pojavile su se rudimentarne mjenjačnice, no nabavljanje i osiguravanje bitcoina na ovim mjenjačnicama bilo je previše kompleksno za sve osim tehnološki najsposobnijih ulagača. Čak i za vrijeme trećeg hype ciklusa, ulagači koju su slali novac na MtGox kako bi kupili bitcoine su morali raditi kroz značajne prepreke. Banke nisu bile voljne imati posla sa mjenjačnicom, a oni posrednici koji su nudili usluge transfera bili su često nesposobni, kriminalni, ili oboje. Nadalje, mnogi koji su uspjeli poslati novac MtGoxu, u konačnici su morali prihvatiti gubitak svojih sredstava kada je mjenjačnica hakirana i kasnije zatvorena.

Tek nakon kolapsa MtGox mjenjačnice i dvogodišnje pauze u tržišnoj cijeni Bitcoina, razvili su se zreli i duboki izvori likvidnosti; primjeri poput reguliranih mjenjačnica kao što su GDAX i OTC brokeri kao Cumberland mining. Dok je četvrti hype ciklus započeo 2016. godine, bilo je relativno lako običnim ulagačima kupiti i osigurati bitcoine.

$1100–$19600? (2014. –?):

U trenutku pisanja ovog teksta, tržište Bitcoina je prolazilo svoj četvrti veliki hype ciklus. Sudjelovanje u ovom hype ciklusu dominirala je ona skupina koju je Michael Casey opisao kao “rana većina” običnih i institucionalnih ulagača.

Kako su se izvori likvidnosti produbljivali i sazrijevali, veliki institucionalni ulagači sada imaju priliku sudjelovati kroz regulirana “futures” tržišta. Dostupnosti takvih tržišta stvara put ka kreaciji Bitcoin ETF-a (exchange traded fund) (fond na slobodnom tržištu), koji će onda pokrenuti “kasnu većinu” i “najsporije” u sljedećim hype ciklusima.

Premda je nemoguće predvidjeti točan efekt budućih hype ciklusa, razumno je očekivati da će najviša točka biti između $20,000 i $50,000 (2021. zenit je bio preko $69,000). Znatno više od ovog raspona, i Bitcoin bi imao znatan postotak ukupne vijednosti zlata (zlato i Bitcoin bi imali jednaku tržišnu kapitalizaciju kada bi bitcoini vrijedili oko $380,000 u trenutku pisanja ovog teksta). Značajan postotak vrijednosti zlata dolazi od potražnje centralnih banaka, te je malo vjerojatno da će centralne banke ili suverene države sudjelovati u trenutnom hype ciklusu.

Ulazak suverenih država u Bitcoin

Bitcoinov zadnji Gartner hype ciklus će započeti kada ga suverene države počnu akumulirati kao dio svojih rezervi stranih valuta. Tržišna kapitalizacija Bitcoina je trenutno premala da bismo ga smatrali značajnim dodatkom rezervama većini zemalja. No, kako se interes u privatnom sektoru povećava i kapitalizacija Bitcoina se približi trilijunu dolara, postat će dovoljno likvidan za većinu država. Prva država koja službeno doda bitcoine u svoje rezerve će vjerojatno potaknuti stampedo ostalih da učine isto. Države koje su među prvima u usvajanju Bitcoina imat će najviše benefita u svojim knjigama ako Bitcoin u konačnici postane globalna valuta (global reserve currency). Nažalost, vjerojatno će države sa najjačom izvršnom vlasti - diktature poput Sjeverne Koreje - biti najbrže u akumulaciji bitcoina. Neodobravanje prema takvim državama i slaba izvršna tijela zapadnjačkih demokracija uzrokovat će sporost i kašnjenje u akumulaciji bitcoina za njihove vlastite rezerve.

Velika je ironija u tome što je SAD trenutno jedna od regulatorno najotvorenijih nacija prema Bitcoinu, dok su Kina i Rusija najzatvorenije. SAD riskira najviše, geopolitički, ako bi Bitcoin zamijenio dolar kao svjetska rezervna valuta. U 1960-ima, Charles de Gaulle je kritizirao “pretjeranu privilegiju” (“exorbitant privilege”) koju su SAD imale u međunarodnom monetarnom poretku, postavljenom kroz Bretton Woods dogovor 1944. godine. Ruska i kineska vlada još ne shvaćaju geo-strateške benefite Bitcoina kao rezervne valute, te se trenutno brinu o efektima koje bi mogao imati na njihova unutarnja tržišta. Kao de Gaulle u 1960-ima, koji je prijetio SAD-u povratkom na klasični standard zlata, Kinezi i Rusi će s vremenom uvidjeti korist u velikoj poziciji u Bitcoinu - spremištu vrijednosti bez pokrića ijedne vlade. Sa najvećom koncentracijom rudara Bitcoina u Kini (2017.), kineska vlada već ima znatnu potencijalnu prednost u stavljanju bitcoina u svoje rezerve.

SAD se ponosi svojim statusom nacije inovatora, sa Silicijskom dolinom kao krunom svoje ekonomije. Dosad, Silicijska dolina je dominirala konverzacijom usmjerenom prema regulaciji, i poziciji koju bi ona treba zauzeti prema Bitcoinu. No, bankovna industrija i federalna rezerva SAD-a (US Federal Reserve, Fed) napokon počinju uviđati egzistencijalnu prijetnju koju Bitcoin predstavlja za američku monetarnu politiku, postankom globalne rezervne valute. Wall Street Journal, jedan od medijskih glasova federalne reserve, izdao je komentar o Bitcoinu kao prijetnji monetarnoj politici SAD-a:

"Postoji još jedna opasnost, možda i ozbiljnija iz perspektive centralnih banaka i regulatora: bitcoin možda ne propadne. Ako je spekulativni žar u kriptovalutu samo prvi pokazatelj njezinog šireg korištenja kao alternative dolaru, Bitcoin će svakako ugroziti monopol centralnih banaka nad novcem."

U narednim godinama, možemo očekivati veliku borbu između poduzetnika i inovatora u Silicijskoj dolini, koji će pokušavati čuvati Bitcoin od državne kontrole s jedne strane, i bankovne industrije i centralnih banaka koje će učiniti sve što mogu da bi regulirale Bitcoin kako bi spriječile znatne promjene u svojoj industriji i moći izdavanja novca, s druge.

Prijelaz na medij razmjene

Monetarno dobro ne može postati opće prihvaćen medij razmjene (standardna ekonomska definicija za “novac”) prije nego je vrednovano od širokog spektra ljudi; jednostavno, dobro koje nije vrednovano neće biti prihvaćeno u razmjeni. Kroz proces generalnog rasta vrijednosti, i time postanka spremišta vrijednosti, monetarno dobro će brzo narasti u kupovnoj moći, i time stvoriti cijenu za korištenje u razmjeni. Samo kada ta cijena rizika mijenjanja spremišta vrijednosti padne dovoljno nisko, može dobro postati opće prihvaćen medij razmjene.

Preciznije, monetarno dobro će biti prikladno kao medij razmjene samo kada je suma cijene rizika i transakcijske cijene u razmjeni manja nego u trgovini bez tog dobra.

U društvu koje vrši robnu razmjenu, prijelaz spremišta vrijednosti u medij razmjene može se dogoditi čak i onda kada monetarno dobro raste u kupovnoj moći, zato što su transakcijski troškovi robne razmjene iznimno visoki. U razvijenoj ekonomiji, u kojoj su troškovi razmjene niski, moguće je za mladu i rapidno rastućnu tehnologiju spremišta vrijednosti, poput Bitcoina, da se koristi kao medij razmjene, doduše na ograničen način. Jedan primjer je ilegalno tržište droge, gdje su kupci voljni žrtvovati oportunu cijenu čuvanja bitcoina kako bi umanjili znatan rizik kupovine droge koristeći fiat novac.

Postoje međutim velike institucionalne barijere da novonastalo spremište vrijednosti postane sveopće prihvaćen medij razmjene u razvijenom društvu. Države koriste oporezivanje kao moćnu metodu zaštite svojeg suverenog novca protiv rivalskih monetarnih dobara. Ne samo da suvereni novac ima prednost konstantnog izvora potražnje, zato što je porez moguće platiti jedino u njemu, nego su i rivalska monetarna dobra oporezana pri svakoj razmjeni za vrijeme rastuće cijene. Ova metoda oporezivanja stvara znatan otpor korištenju spremišta vrijednosti kao medija razmjene.

Ovakvo sabotiranje tržišnih monetarnih dobara nije nepremostiva barijera za njihovo prihvaćanje kao općeg medija razmjene. Ako ljudi izgube vjeru u suvereni novac, njegova vrijednost može rapidno propasti kroz proces zvan hiperinflacija. Kada suvereni novac prolazi kroz hiperinflaciju, njegova vrijednost propadne prvo u usporedbi sa najlikvidnijim dobrima u društvu, kao što je zlato ili stabilna strana valuta (američki dolar npr.), ako su ona dostupna. Kada nema likvidnih dobara ili ih ima premalo, novac u hiperinflaciji kolabira u usporedbi sa stvarnim dobrima, kao što su nekretnine ili upotrebljiva roba. Arhetipska slika hiperinflacije je trgovina sa praznim policama - potrošači brzo bježe iz propadajuće vrijednosti novca svoje nacije.

Nakon dovoljno vremena, kada je vjera potpuno uništena za vrijeme hiperinflacije, suvereni novac više nitko ne prihvaća, te se društvo može vratiti na robnu razmjenu, ili će doživjeti potpunu zamjenu monetarne jedinice za sredstvo razmjene. Primjer ovog procesa bila je zamjena zimbabveanskog dolara za američki dolar. Takva promjena suverenog novca za stranu valutu je dodatno otežana relativnom oskudnošću strane valute i odsustvom stranih bankarskih institucija koje pružaju likvidnost tržištu.

Sposobnost lakog prenošenja bitcoina preko granica i odsustvo potrebe za bankarskim sustavom čine Bitcoin idealnim monetarnim dobrom za one ljude koji pate pod hiperinflacijom. U nadolazećim godinama, kako fiat valute nastave svoj povijesni trend ka bezvrijednosti, Bitcoin će postati sve popularniji izbor za ušteđevine ljudi diljem svijeta. Kada je novac nacije napušten i zamijenjen Bitcoinom, Bitcoin će napraviti tranziciju iz spremišta vrijednosti u tom društvu u opće prihvaćeno sredstvo razmjene. Daniel Krawicz stvorio je termin “hiperbitcoinizacija” da bi opisao ovaj proces.

Učestala pogrešna shvaćanja

Većina ovog članka usredotočila se na monetarnu prirodu Bitcoina. Sa tim temeljima možemo adresirati neke od najčešćih nerazumijevanja u Bitcoinu.

Bitcoin je balon (bubble)

Bitcoin, kao sva tržišna monetarna dobra, posjeduje monetarnu premiju. Ona često rezultira uobičajenom kritikom da je Bitcoin samo “balon.” No, sva monetarna dobra imaju monetarnu premiju. Naprotiv, ta monetarna premija (cijena viša od one koju diktira potražnja za dobrom kao korisnim) je upravo karakteristična za sve oblike novca. Drugim riječima, novac je uvijek i svuda balon. Paradoksalno, monetarno dobro je istovremeno balon i ispod vrijednosti ukoliko je u ranijim stadijima općeg prihvaćanja kao novac.

Bitcoin je previše volatilan

Volatilnost cijene Bitcoina je funkcija njegovog nedavnog nastanka. U prvih nekoliko godina svojeg postojanja, Bitcoin se ponašao kao mala dionica, i svaki veliki kupac - kao npr. braća Winklevoss - mogao je uzrokovati veliki skok u njegovoj cijeni. No, kako su se prihvaćenost i likvidnost povećavali kroz godine, volatilnost Bitcoina je srazmjerno smanjila. Kada Bitcoin postigne tržišnu kapitalizaciju (vrijednost) zlata, imat će sličnu volatilnost kao i zlato. Kako Bitcoin nastavi rasti, njegova volatilnost će se smanjiti do razine koja ga čini prikladnim za široko korištenje kao medij razmjene. Kao što je prethodno rečeno, monetizacija Bitcoina se odvija u seriji Gartner hype ciklusa. Volatilnost je najniža za vrijeme vrhunaca i dolina unutar ciklusa. Svaki hype ciklus ima nižu volatilnost od prethodnih, zato što je likvidnost tržišta veća.

Cijene transakcija su previsoke

Novija kritika Bitcoin mreže je ta da ju je povećanje cijena prijenosa bitcoina učinilo neprikladnom za sustav plaćanja. No, rast u cijenama transakcija je zdrav i očekivan. One su nužne za plaćanje bitcoin minera (rudara), koji osiguravaju mrežu validacijom transakcija. Rudare se plaća kroz cijene transakcija ili kroz blok-nagrade, koje su inflacijska subvencija od trane trenutnih vlasnika bitcoina.

S obzirom na Bitcoinovu fiksnu proizvodnju (monetarna politika koja ga čini idealnim za spremanje vrijednosti), blok-nagrade će s vremenom nestati i mrežu će se u konačnici morati osiguravati kroz cijene transakcija. Mreža sa “niskim” cijenama transakcija je mreža sa slabom sigurnosti i osjetljiva na vanjsku intervenciju i cenzuru. Oni koji hvale niske cijene Bitcoinovih alternative zapravo niti ne znajući opisuju slabosti tih takozvanih “alt-coina.”

Površan temelj kritika Bitcoinovih “visokih” cijena transakcija je uvjerenje da bi Bitcoin trebao biti prvo sustav plaćanja, i drugo spremište vrijednosti. Kao što smo vidjeli kroz povijest novca, ovo uvjerenje je naopako. Samo onda kada Bitcoin postane duboko ukorijenjeno spremište novca može biti prikladan kao sredstvo razmjene. Nadalje, kada oportunitetni trošak razmjene bitcoina dođe na razinu koja ga čini prikladnim sredstvom razmjene, većina trgovine neće se odvijati na samoj Bitcoin mreži, nego na mrežama “drugog sloja” (second layer) koje će imati niže cijene transakcija. Takve mreže, poput Lightning mreže, služe kao moderna verzija zadužnica koje su korištene za prijenos vlasničkih papira zlata u 19. stoljeću. Banke su koristile zadužnice zato što je prijenos samog metala bio daleko skuplji. Za razliku od takvih zadužnica, Lightning mreža će omogućavati nisku cijenu prijenosa bitcoina bez potrebe za povjerenjem prema trećoj strani, poput banaka. Razvoj Lightning mreže je tehnološka inovacija od izuzetne važnosti u povijesti Bitcoina, i njezina vrijednost će postati očita u narednim godinama, kako je sve više ljudi bude razvijalo i koristilo.

Konkurencija

Pošto je Bitcoin softverski protokol otvorenog tipa (open-source), oduvijek je bilo moguće kopirati softver i imitirati mrežu. Kroz godine nastajali su mnogi imitatori, od identičnih kopija, kao Litecoin, do kompleksnijih varijanti kao što je Ethereum, koje obećavaju arbitrarno kompleksne ugovorne mehanizme koristeći decentralizirani računalni sustav. Česta kritika Bitcoinu od strane ulagača je ta da on ne može zadržati svoju vrijednost kada je vrlo lako stvoriti konkurente koji mogu lako i brzo u sebi imati najnovije inovacije i softverske funkcionalnosti.

Greška u ovom argumentu leži u manju takozvanog “mrežnog efekta” (network effect), koji postoji u prvoj i dominantnoj tehnologiji u nekom području. Mrežni efekt - velika vrijednost korištenja Bitcoina samo zato što je već dominantan - je važno svojstvo samo po sebi. Za svaku tehnologiju koja posjeduje mrežni efekt, to je daleko najvažnije svojstvo koje može imati.

Za Bitcoin, mrežni efekt uključuje likvidnost njegovog tržišta, broj ljudi koji ga posjeduju, i zajednicu programera koji održavaju i unaprjeđuju njegov softver i svjesnost u javnosti. Veliki ulagači, uključujući države, će uvijek prvo tražiti najlikvidnije tržište, kako bi mogli ući i izaći iz tržišta brzo, i bez utjecanja na cijenu. Programeri će se pridružiti dominantnoj programerskoj zajednici sa najboljim talentom, i time pojačati samu zajednicu. Svjesnost o brendu sama sebe pojačava, pošto se nadobudni konkurenti Bitcoina uvijek spominju u kontekstu Bitcoina kao takvog.

Raskrižje na putu (fork)

Trend koji je postao popularan 2017. godine nije bio samo imitacija Bitcoinovog softvera, nego kopiranje potpune povijesti njegovih prošlih transakcija (cijeli blockchain). Kopiranjem Bitcoinovog blockchaina do određene točke/bloka i odvajanjem sljedećih blokova ka novoj mreži, u procesu znanom kao “forking” (odvajanje), Bitcoinovi konkurenti su uspjeli riješiti problem distribuiranja svojeg tokena velikom broju korisnika.

Najznačajniji takav fork dogodio se 1. 8. 2017. godine, kada je nova mreža nazvana Bitcoin Cash (Bcash) stvorena. Vlasnik N količine bitcoina prije 1.8.2017. bi onda posjedovao N bitcoina i N BCash tokena. Mala, ali vrlo glasna zajednica Bcash proponenata je neumorno pokušavala prisvojiti Bitcoinov brend i ime, imenujući svoju novu mrežu Bitcoin Cast i pokušavajući uvjeriti nove pridošlice u Bitcoin da je Bcash “pravi” Bitcoin. Ti pokušaji su većinom propali, i taj neuspjeh se vidi u tržišnim kapitalizacijama dviju mreža. No, za nove ulagače, i dalje postoji rizik da bi konkurent mogao kopirati Bitcoin i njegov blockchain i tako uspjeti u preuzimanju tržišne kapitalizacije, te postati de facto Bitcoin.

Moguće je uočiti važno pravilo gledajući velike forkove u prošlosti Bitcoin i Ethereum mreža. Većina tržišne kapitalizacije odvijat će se na mreži koja zadrži najviši stupanj talenta i aktivnosti u zajednici programera. Premda se na Bitcoin može gledati kao na nov i mlad novac, on je također računalna mreža koja počiva na softveru, kojeg se pak treba održavati i poboljšavati. Kupovina tokena na mreži koja ima malo neiskusnih programera bilo bi kao kupovati kopiju Microsoft Windowsa na kojoj rade lošiji programeri. Jasno je vidljivo iz povijesti forkova koji su se odvili 2017. godine da su najbolji računalni i kriptografski stručnjaci posvećeni razvoju originalnog Bitcoina, a ne nekoj od rastućeg broja imitacija koje su se izrodile iz njega.

Stvarni rizici

Premda su uobičajene kritike upućene Bitconu od strane medija i ekonomske profesije krive i bazirane na netočnom shvaćanju novca, postoje pravi i značajni rizici kod ulaganja u Bitcoin. Bilo bi mudro za novog Bitcoin ulagača da shvati ove rizike prije potencijalnog ulaganja.

Rizik protokola

Bitcoin protokol i kriptografski sastavni dijelovi na kojima je sagrađen potencijalno imaju dosad nepronađenu grešku u svom dizajnu, ili mogu postati nesigurni razvojem kvantnih računala. Ako se pronađe greška u protokolu, ili neka nova metoda računarstva učini mogućim probijanje kriptografskih temelja Bitcoina, vjera u Bitcoin biti će znatno narušena. Rizik protokola bio je najviši u ranim godinama razvoja Bitcoina, kada je još uvijek bilo nejasno, čak i iskusnim kriptografima, je li Satoshi Nakamoto zaista riješio problem bizantskih generala (Byzantine Generals’ Problem). Brige oko ozbiljnih grešaka u Bitcoin protokolu nestale su kroz godine, no uzevši u obzir njegovu tehnološku prirodu, rizik protokola će uvijek ostati u Bitcoinu, makar i kao izuzetak.

Propadanje mjenjačnica

Time što je decentraliziran, Bitcoin je pokazao značajnu otpornost, suočen sa brojnim pokušajima raznih vlada da ga reguliraju ili unište. No, mjenjačnice koje trguju bitcoinima za fiat valute su centralizirani entiteti i podložne regulacijama i zatvaranju. Bez mjenjačnica i volje bankara da s njima posluju, proces monetizacije Bitcoina bio bi ozbiljno usporen, ako ne i potpuno zaustavljen. Iako postoje alternativni izvori likvidnosti za Bitcoin, poput “over-the-counter” brokera i decentraliziranih tržišta za kupovinu i prodaju bitcoina, kritičan proces otkrivanja i definiranja cijene se odvija na najlikvidnijim mjenjačnicama, koje su sve centralizirane.

Jedan od načina za umanjivanje rizika gašenja mjenjačnica je geografska arbitraža. Binance, jedna od velikih mjenjačnica iz Kine, preselila se u Japan nakon što joj je kineska vlada zabranila operiranje u Kini. Vlade su također oprezne kako ne bi ugušile novu industriju koja je potencijalno značajna kao i internet, i time predale nevjerojatnu konkurentnu vrijednost drugim nacijama.

Samo kroz koordinirano globalno ukidanje Bitcoin mjenjačnica bi proces monetizacije mogao biti zaustavljen. Trenutno smo u utrci; Bitcoin raste i postaje sve rašireniji, i doći će do trenutka kada bi potpuno ukidanje mjenjačnica postalo politički neizvedivo - kao i gašenje interneta. Mogućnost takvog ukidanja je još uvijek realna, i valja je uzeti u obzir pri ulaganju u Bitcoin. Kao što je gore objašnjeno, suverene vlade se polako bude i uviđaju prijetnju koju predstavlja neovisna digitalna valuta otporna na cenzuru, za njihovu monetarnu politiku. Otvoreno je pitanje hoće li išta poduzeti da odgovore ovoj prijetnji prije nego Bitcoin postane toliko utvrđen i raširen da politička akcija postane nemoćna i ne-efektivna.

Zamjenjivost

Otvorena i transparentna priroda Bitcoin blockchaina omogućava državama da proglase specifične bitcoine “okaljanima” zbog njihovog korištenja u određenim aktivnostima. Premda Bitcoin, na protokolarnoj razini, ne diskriminira transakcije na ikoji način, “okaljani” bitcoini bi mogli postati bezvrijedni ako bi ih regulacije proglasile ilegalnima i neprihvatljivima za mjenjačnice ili trgovce. Bitcoin bi tada izgubio jedno od kritičnih svojstava monetarnog dobra: zamjenjivost.

Da bi se ovaj problem riješio i umanjio, biti će potrebna poboljšanja na razini protokola kako bi se poboljšala privatnost transakcija. Premda postoji napredak u ovom smjeru, prvi put primjenjen u digitalnim valutama kao što su Monero i Zcash, potrebno je napraviti značajne tehnološke kompromise između efikasnosti i kompleksnosti Bitcoina i njegove privatnosti. Pitanje ostaje otvoreno je li moguće dodati nova svojstva privatnosti na Bitcoin, na način koji neće kompromitirati njegovu korisnost kao novca.

Zaključak

Bitcoin je novonastali novac koji je u procesu transformacije iz sakupljačkog dobra u spremište vrijednosti. Kao neovisno monetarno dobro, moguće je da će u budućnosti postati globalan novac, slično kao zlato za vrijeme 19. stoljeća. Prihvaćanje Bitcoina kao globalnog novca je upravo taj optimističan scenarij za Bitcoin, kojeg je artikulirao Satoshi Nakamoto još 2010. godine u email razmjeni sa Mikeom Hearnom:

"Ako zamisliš da se koristi u nekom dijelu svjetske trgovine, i da će postojati samo 21 milijun bitcoina za cijeli svijet, vrijednost po jedinici će biti znatno veća".

Ovaj scenarij je još snažnije definirao briljantni kriptograf Hal Finney, koji je ujedno primio i prve bitcoine od Nakamotoa, ubrzo nakon najave prvog funkcionalnog Bitcoin softvera:

"Zamislimo da Bitcoin bude uspješan i postane dominantan sustav plaćanja diljem svijeta. U tom slučaju će ukupna vrijednost valute biti jednaka ukupnoj vrijednosti svog bogatstva svijeta. Današnje procjene ukupnog svjetskog bogatska kućanstava koje sam pronašao borave negdje između 100 i 300 trilijuna dolara. Sa 20 milijuna bitcoina, svaki bi onda vrijedio oko 10 milijuna dolara."

Čak i da Bitcoin ne postane u cijelost globalan novac, nego da se samo natječe sa zlatom kao neovisno spremište vrijednosti, i dalje je masivno podcijenjen. Mapiranje tržišne kapitalizacije postojeće količine izrudarenog zlata (oko 8 trilijuna dolara) na maksimalnu dostupnost Bitcoina od 21 milijun, daje vrijednost od otprilike 380,000 dolara po bitcoinu. Kao što smo vidjeli u prethodnom tekstu, svojstva koja omogućavaju monetarnom dobru da bude prikladno spremište vrijednosti, čine Bitcoin superiornijim zlatu u svakom pogledu osim trajanja povijesti. No, kako vrijeme prolazi i Lindy efekt postane jači, dosadašnja povijest će prestati biti prednost zlata. Samim time, nije nerazumno očekivati da će Bitcoin narasti do, a možda i preko, ukupne cijene zlata na tržištvu do 2030. Opaska ovoj tezi je činjenica da veliki postotak vrijednosti zlata dolazi od toga što ga centralne banke čuvaju kao spremište vrijednosti. Da bi Bitcoin došao do te razine, određena količina suverenih država će trebati sudjelovati. Hoće li zapadnjačke demokracije sudjelovati u vlasništvu Bitcoina je nepoznato. Vjerojatnije je, nažalost, da će prve nacije u Bitcoin tržištu biti sitne diktature i kleptokracije.

Ako niti jedna država ne bude sudjelovala u Bitcoin tržištu, optimistična teza i dalje postoji. Kao nevisno spremište vrijednosti u rukama individualnih i institucionalnih ulagača, Bitcoin je i dalje vrlo rano u svojoj “krivulji prihvaćenosti” (adoption curve); tzv. “rana većina” ulaze na tržište sada, dok će ostali ući tek nekoliko godina kasnije. Sa širim sudjelovanjem individualnih i institucionalnih ulagača, cijena po bitcoinu između 100,000 i 200,000 dolara je sasvim moguća.

Posjedovanje bitcoina je jedna od malobrojnih asimetričnih novčanih strategija dostupnih svakome na svijetu. Poput “call” opcija, negativan rizik ulagača je ograničen na 1x, dok potencijalna dobit i dalje iznosi 100x ili više. Bitcoin je prvi istinski globalan balon čija je veličina ograničena samo potražnjom i željom građana svijeta da zaštite svoju ušteđevinu od raznovrsnih ekonomskih malverzacija vlade. Bitcoin je ustao kao feniks iz pepela globalne financijske krize 2008. godine - katastrofe kojoj su prethodile odluke centralnih banaka poput američke Federalne rezerve (Federal Reserve).

Onkraj samo financijske teze za Bitcoin, njegov rast i uspjeh kao neovisno spremište vrijednosti imat će duboke geopolitičke posljedice. Globalna, ne-inflacijska valuta će prisiliti suverene države da promjene svoje primarne mehanizme financiranja od inflacije u izravno oporezivanje; koje je daleko manje politički popularno. Države će se smanjivati proporcionalno političkoj boli koju im nanese oporezivanje kao jedini način financiranja. Nadalje, globalna trgovina vršiti će se na način koji zadovoljava aspiraciju Charlesa de Gaullea, da nijedna nacija ne bi smjela imati privilegiju nad ikojom drugom:

"Smatramo da je potrebno da se uspostavi međunarodna trgovina, kao što je bio slučaj prije velikih nesreća koje su zadesile svijet, na neosporivoj monetarnoj bazi, koja ne nosi na sebi oznaku ijedne države."

Za 50 godina, ta monetarna baza biti će Bitcoin.

@ bf47c19e:c3d2573b

Originalni tekst na dvadesetjedan.com

Autor: Parker Lewis / Prevod na srpski: Plumsky

---

Ideja da država može nekako zabraniti bitcoin je jedna od poslednjih faza tuge, tačno pred prihvatanje realnosti. Posledica ove rečenice je priznanje da bitcoin “funkcioniše”. U stvari, ona predstavlja činjenicu da bitcoin funkcioniše toliko dobro da on preti postojećim državnim monopolima nad novcem i da će zbog toga države da ga unište kroz regulativne prepreke da bi eliminisale tu pretnju. Gledajte na tvrdnju da će države zabraniti bitcoin kao kondicionalnu logiku. Da li bitcoin funkcioniše kao novac? Ako je odgovor „ne“, onda države nemaju šta da zabrane. Ako je odgovor „da“, onda će države da probaju da ga zabrane. Znači, glavna poenta ovog razmišljanja je pretpostavka da bitcoin funkcioiniše kao novac. Onda je sledeće logično pitanje da li intervencija od strane države može uspešno da uništi upravo taj funkcionalan bitcoin.

Za početak, svako ko pokušava da razume kako, zašto, ili da li bitcoin funkcioniše mora da proceni ta pitanja potpuno nezavisno od prouzrekovanja državne regulacije ili intervencije. Iako je nesumnjivo da bitcoin mora da postoji uzgred državnih regulativa, zamislite na momenat da države ne postoje. Sam od sebe, da li bi bitcoin funkcionisao kao novac, kad bi se prepustio slobodnom tržištu? Ovo pitanje se širi u dodatna pitanja i ubrzo se pretvara u bunar bez dna. Šta je novac? Šta su svojstva koja čine jednu vrstu novca bolje od druge? Da li bitcoin poseduje ta svojstva? Da li je bitcoin bolja verzija novca po takvim osobinama? Ako je finalni zaključak da bitcoin ne funkcioniše kao novac, implikacije državne intervencije su nebitne. Ali, ako je bitcoin funkcionalan kao novac, ta pitanja onda postaju bitna u ovoj debati, i svako ko o tome razmišlja bi morao imati taj početnički kontekst da bi mogao proceniti da li je uopšte moguće zabraniti. Po svom dizajnu, bitcoin postoji van države. Ali bitcoin nije samo van kontrole države, on u stvari funkcioniše bez bilo kakve saradnje centralizovanih identiteta. On je globalan i decentralizovan. Svako može pristupiti bitcoinu bez potrebe saglasnosti bilo koga i što se više širi sve je teže cenzurisati celokupnu mrežu. Arhitektura bitcoina je namerno izmišljena da bude otporna na bilo koje pokušaje države da ga zabrane. Ovo ne znači da države širom sveta neće pokušavati da ga regulišu, oporezuju ili čak da potpuno zabrane njegovo korišćenje. Naravno da će biti puno bitki i otpora protiv usvajanja bitcoina među građanima. Federal Reserve i Američki Treasury (i njihovi globalni suparnici) se neće ležeći predati dok bitcoin sve više i više ugrožava njihove monopole prihvatljivog novca. Doduše, pre nego što se odbaci ideja da države mogu potpuno zabraniti bitcoin, mora se prvo razumeti posledice tog stava i njegovog glasnika.

Progresija poricanja i stepeni tuge

Pripovesti skeptičara se neprestano menjaju kroz vreme. Prvi stepen tuge: bitcoin nikad ne može funkcionisati-njegova vrednost je osnovana ni na čemu. On je moderna verzija tulip manije. Sa svakim ciklusom uzbuđenja, vrednost bitcoina skače i onda vrlo brzo se vraća na dole. Često nazvano kao kraj njegove vrednosti, bitcoin svaki put odbija da umre i njegova vrednost pronađe nivo koji je uvek viši od prethodnih ciklusa globalne usvajanja. Tulip pripovetka postaje stara i dosadna i skeptičari pređu na više nijansirane teme, i time menjaju bazu debate. Drugi stepen tuge predstoji: bitcoin je manjkav kao novac. On je previše volatilan da bi bio valuta, ili je suviše spor da bi se koristio kao sistem plaćanja, ili se ne može proširiti dovoljno da zadovolji sve promete plaćanja na svetu, ili troši isuviše struje. Taj niz kritike ide sve dalje i dalje. Ovaj drugi stepen je progresija poricanja i dosta je udaljen od ideje da je bitcoin ništa više od bukvalno bezvrednog ničega.

Uprkos tim pretpostavnim manjcima, vrednost bitcoin mreže nastavje da raste vremenom. Svaki put, ona ne umire, nasuprot, ona postaje sve veća i jača. Dok se skeptičari bave ukazivanjem na manjke, bitcoin ne prestaje. Rast u vrednosti je prouzrokovan jednostavnom dinamikom tržišta: postoji više kupca nego prodavca. To je sve i to je razlog rasta u adopciji. Sve više i više ljudi shvata zašto postoji fundamentalna potražnja za bitcoinom i zašto/kako on funkcioniše. To je razlog njegovog dugotrajnog rasta. Dokle god ga sve više ljudi koristi za čuvanje vrednosti, neće pasti cena snabdevanja. Zauvek će postojati samo 21 milion bitcoina. Nebitno je koliko ljudi zahtevaju bitcoin, njegova cela količina je uvek ista i neelastična. Dok skeptičari nastavljaju sa svojom starom pričom, mase ljudi nastavljaju da eliminišu zabludu i zahtevaju bitcoin zbog njegovih prednosti u smislu novčanih svojstva. Između ostalog, ne postoji grupa ljudi koja je više upoznata sa svim argumentima protiv bitcoina od samih bitcoinera.

Očajanje počinje da se stvara i onda se debata još jedanput pomera. Sada nije više činjenica je vrednost bitcoina osnovana ni na čemu niti da ima manjke kao valuta; sada se debata centrira na regulaciji državnih autoriteta. U ovom zadnjem stepenu tuge, bitcoin se predstavlja kao u stvari isuviše uspešnom alatkom i zbog toga države ne smeju dozvoliti da on postoji. Zaista? Znači da je genijalnost čoveka ponovo ostvarila funkcionalan novac u tehnološko superiornoj formi, čije su posledice zaista neshvatljive, i da će države upravo taj izum nekako zabraniti. Primetite da tom izjavom skeptičari praktično priznaju svoj poraz. Ovo su poslednji pokušaji u seriji promašenih argumenata. Skeptičari u isto vreme prihvataju da postoji fundamentalna potražnja za bitcoinom a onda se premeštaju na neosnovan stav da ga države mogu zabraniti.

Ajde da se poigramo i tim pitanjem. Kada bih zapravo razvijene države nastupile na scenu i pokušale da zabrane bitcoin? Trenutno, Federal Reserve i Treasury ne smatraju bitcoin kao ozbiljnu pretnju superiornosti dolara. Po njihovom celokupnom mišljenju, bitcoin je slatka mala igračka i ne može da funkcioniše kao novac. Sadašnja kompletna kupovna moć bitcoina je manja od $200 milijardi. Sa druge strane, zlato ima celokupnu vrednost od $8 triliona (40X veću od bitcoina) i količina odštampanog novca (M2) je otprilike 15 triliona (75X veličine bitcoinove vrednosti). Kada će Federal Reserve i Treasury da počne da smatra bitcoin kao ozbiljnu pretnju? Kad bitcoin poraste na $1, $2 ili $3 triliona? Možete i sami da izaberete nivo, ali implikacija je da će bitcoin biti mnogo vredniji, i posedovaće ga sve više ljudi širom sveta, pre nego što će ga državne vlasti shvatiti kao obiljnog protivnika.

Predsednik Tramp & Treasury Sekretar Mnučin o Bitcoinu (2019):

„Ja neću pričati o bitcoinu za 10 godina, u to možete biti sigurni {…} Ja bi se kladio da čak za 5 ili 6 godina neću više pričati o bitcoinu kao sekretar Trusury-a. Imaću preča posla {…} Mogu vam obećati da ja lično neću biti pun bitcoina.“ – Sekretar Treasury-a Stiv Mnučin

„Ja nisam ljubitelj bitcoina {…}, koji nije novac i čija vrednost je jako volatilna i osnovana na praznom vazduhu.“ – Predsednik Donald J. Tramp

Znači, logika skeptika ide ovako: bitcoin ne funkcioniše, ali ako funkcioniše, onda će ga država zabraniti. Ali, države slobodnog sveta neće pokušati da ga zabrane dokle god se on ne pokaže kao ozbiljna pretnja. U tom trenutku, bitcoin će biti vredniji i sigurno teži da se zabrani, pošto će ga više ljudi posedovati na mnogo širem geografskom prostoru. Ignorišite fundamentalne činjenice i asimetriju koja je urođena u globalnom dešavanju monetizacije zato što u slučaju da ste u pravu, države će taj proces zabraniti. Na kojoj strani tog argumenta bi radije stajao racionalan ekonomski učesnik? Posedovanje finansijske imovine kojoj vrednost toliko raste da preti globalnoj rezervnoj valuti, ili nasuprot – nemati tu imovinu? Sa pretpostavkom da individualci razumeju zašto je mogućnost (a sve više i verovatnoća) ove realnosti, koji stav je logičniji u ovom scenariju? Asimetrija dve strane ovog argumenta sama od sebe zahteva da je prvi stav onaj istinit i da fundamentalno razumevanje potražnje bitcoina samo još više ojačava to mišljenje.

Niko ne moze zabraniti bitcoin

Razmislite šta bitcoin u stvari predstavlja pa onda šta bi predstavljala njegova zabrana. Bitcoin je konverzija subjektivne vrednosti, stvorena i razmenjena u realnošću, u digitalne potpise. Jednostavno rečeno, to je konverzija ljudskog vremena u novac. Kad neko zahteva bitcoin, oni u isto vreme ne zahtevaju neki drugi posed, nek to bio dolar, kuća, auto ili hrana itd. Bitcoin predstavlja novčanu štednju koja sa sobom žrtvuje druge imovine i servise. Zabrana bitcoina bi bio napad na najosnovnije ljudske slobode koje je on upravo stvoren da brani. Zamislite reakciju svih onih koji su prihvatili bitcoin: „Bilo je zabavno, alatka za koju su svi eksperti tvrdili da neće nikad funkcionisati, sada toliko dobro radi i sad ti isti eksperti i autoriteti kažu da mi to nemožemo koristiti. Svi idite kući, predstava je gotova.“verovanje da će svi ljudi koji su učestvovali u bitcoin usvajanju, suverenitetu koji nudi i finansiskoj slobodi, odjednom samo da se predaju osnovnom rušenju njihovih prava je potpuno iracionalna pozicija.

Novac je jedan od najbitnijih instrumenata za slobodu koji je ikad izmišljen. Novac je to što u postojećem društvu ostvaruje mogućnosti siromašnom čoveku – čiji je domet veći nego onaj koji je bio dostižan bogatim ljudima pre ne toliko puno generacija.“ – F. A. Hajek

Države nisu uspele da zabrane konzumiranje alkohola, droga, kupovinu vatrenog oružja, pa ni posedovanje zlata. Država može samo pomalo da uspori pristup ili da deklariše posedovanje ilegalnim, ali ne može da uništi nešto što veliki broj raznovrsnih ljudi smatra vrednim. Kada je SAD zabranila privatno posedovanje zlata 1933., zlato nije palo u vrednosti ili nestalo sa finansijskog tržišta. Ono je u stvari poraslo u vrednosti u poređenju sa dolarom, i samo trideset godina kasnije, zabrana je bila ukinuta. Ne samo da bitcoin nudi veću vrednosno obećanje od bilo kog drugog dobra koje su države pokušale da zabrane (uključujući i zlato); nego po svojim osobinama, njega je mnogo teže zabraniti. Bitcoin je globalan i decentralizovan. On ne poštuje granice i osiguran je mnoštvom nodova i kriptografskim potpisima. Sam postupak zabrane bi zahtevao da se u isto vreme zaustavi „open source“ softver koji emituje i izvršava slanje i potvrđivanje digitalno enkriptovanih ključeva i potpisa. Ta zabrana bi morala biti koordinisana između velikog broja zemalja, sa tim da je nemoguće znati gde se ti nodovi i softver nalazi ili da se zaustavi instaliranje novih nodova u drugim pravnim nadležnostima. Da ne pominjemo i ustavske pitanja, bilo bi tehnički neizvodljivo da se takva zabrana primeni na bilo kakav značajan način.

Čak kada bih sve zemlje iz G-20 grupe koordinisale takvu zabranu u isto vreme, to ne bi uništilo bitcoin. U stvari, to bi bilo samoubistvo za fiat novčani sistem. To bi još više prikazalo masama da je bitcoin u stvari novac koji treba shvatiti ozbiljno, i to bi samo od sebe započelo globalnu igru vatanje mačke za rep. Bitcoin nema centralnu tačku za napad; bitcoin rudari, nodovi i digitalni potpisi su rasejani po celom svetu. Svaki aspekt bitcoina je decentralizovan, zato su glavni stubovi njegove arhitekture da učesnici uvek treba kontrolisati svoje potpise i upravljati svojim nodom. Što više digitalnih potpisa i nodova koji postoje, to je više bitcoin decentralizovan, i to je više odbranjiva njegova mreža od strane neprijatelja. Što je više zemalja gde rudari izvršavaju svoj posao, to je manji rizik da jedan nadležni identitet može uticati na njegov bezbednosni sistem. Koordinisan internacionalni napad na bitcoin bi samo koristio da bitcoin još više ojača svoj imuni sistem. Na kraju krajeva, to bi ubrzalo seobu iz tradicionalnog finansijskog sistema (i njegovih valuta) a i inovaciju koja postoji u bitcoin ekosistemu. Sa svakom bivšom pretnjom, bitcoin je maštovito pronalazio način da ih neutrališe pa i koordinisan napad od strane država ne bi bio ništa drugačiji.

Inovacija u ovoj oblasti koja se odlikuje svojom „permissionless“ (bez dozvole centralnih identiteta) osobinom, omogućava odbranu od svakojakih napada. Sve varijante napada koje su bile predvidjene je upravo to što zahteva konstantnu inovaciju bitcoina. To je ona Adam Smitova nevidljiva ruka, ali dopingovana. Pojedinačni učesnici mogu da veruju da su motivisani nekim većim uzrokom, ali u stvari, korisnost kaja je ugrađena u bitcoin stvara kod učesnika dovoljno snažan podsticaj da omogući svoje preživljavanje. Sopstveni interes milione, ako ne milijarde, nekoordinisanih ljudi koji se jedino slažu u svojom međusobnom potrebom za funkcionalnim novcem podstiče inovacije u bitcoinu. Danas, možda to izgleda kao neka kul nova tehnologija ili neki dobar investment u finansijskom portfoliju, ali čak i ako to mnogi ne razumeju, bitcoin je apsolutna nužnost u svetu. To je tako zato što je novac nužnost a historijski priznate valute se fundamentalno raspadaju. Pre dva meseca, tržište američkih državnih obveznica je doživeo kolaps na šta je Federal Reserve reagovao time što je povećao celokupnu količinu dolara u postojanju za $250 milijardi, a još više u bliskoj budućnosti. Tačno ovo je razlog zašto je bitcoin nužnost a ne samo luksuzni dodatak. Kada inovacija omogućava bazično funkcionisanje ekonomije ne postoji ni jedna država na svetu koja može da zaustavi njenu adopciju i rast. Novac je nužnost a bitcoin znatno poboljšava sistem novca koji je ikada postojao pre njega.

Sa više praktične strane, pokušaj zabranjivanja bitcoina ili njegove velike regulacije od nadležnosti bi direktno bilo u korist susedne nadležnih organa. Podsticaj da se odustane od koordinisanog napada na bitcoin bi bio isuviše veliki da bi takvi dogovori bili uspešni. Kada bi SAD deklarisovale posed bitcoina ilegalnim sutra, da li bi to zaustavilo njegov rast, razvoj i adopciji i da li bi to smanjilo vrednost celokupne mreže? Verovatno. Da li bi to uništilo bitcoin? Ne bi. Bitcoin predstavlja najpokretljivije kapitalno sredstvo na svetu. Zemlje i nadležne strukture koje kreiraju regulativnu strukturu koja najmanje ustručava korišćenje bitcoina će biti dobitnici velike količine uliva kapitala u svoje države.

Zabrana Bitcoinove Zatvoreničke Dileme

U praksi, zatvorenička dilema nije igra jedan na jedan. Ona je multidimenzijska i uključuje mnoštvo nadležnosti, čiji se interesi nadmeću međusobno, i to uskraćuje mogućnosti bilo kakve mogućnosti zabrane. Ljudski kapital, fizički kapital i novčani kapital će sav ići u pravcu država i nadležnosti koje najmanje ustručuju bitcoin. To se možda neće desiti sve odjednom, ali pokušaji zabrane su isto za badava koliko bi bilo odseći sebi nos u inat svom licu. To ne znači da države to neće pokušati. India je već probala da zabrani bitcoin. Kina je uvela puno restrikcija. Drugi će da prate njihove tragove. Ali svaki put kada država preduzme takve korake, to ima nepredvidljive efekte povećanja bitcoin adopcije. Pokušaji zabranjivanja bitcoina su jako efektivne marketing kampanje. Bitcoin postoji kao sistem nevezan za jednu suverenu državu i kao novac je otporan na cenzuru. On je dizajniran da postoji van državne kontrole. Pokušaji da se taj koncept zabrani samo još više daje njemu razlog i logiku za postojanje.

Jedini Pobednički Potez je da se Uključiš u Igru

Zabrana bitcoina je trošenje vremena. Neki će to pokušati; ali svi će biti neuspešni. Sami ti pokušaji će još više ubrzati njegovu adopciju i širenje. Biće to vetar od 100 km/h koji raspaljuje vatru. To će ojačati bitcoin sve više i doprineće njegovoj pouzdanosti. U svakom slučaju, verovanje da će države zabraniti bitcoin u momentu kada on postane dovoljno velika pretnja rezervnim valutam sveta, je iracionalan razlog da se on no poseduje kao instrument štednje novca. To ne samo da podrazumeva da je bitcoin novac, ali u isto vreme i ignoriše glavne razloge zašto je to tako: on je decentralizovan i otporan na cenzure. Zamislite da razumete jednu od nojvećih tajni današnjice i da u isto vreme tu tajnu asimetrije koju bitcoin nudi ne primenjujete u svoju korist zbog straha od države. Pre će biti, neko ko razume zašto bitcoin funkcioniše i da ga država ne može zaustaviti, ili nepuno znanje postoji u razumevanju kako bitcoin uopšte funckioniše. Počnite sa razmatranjem fundamentalnih pitanja, a onda primenite to kao temelj da bi procenili bilo koji potencijalan rizik od strane budućih regulacija ili restrikcija državnih organa. I nikad nemojte da zaboravite na vrednost asimetrije između dve strane ovde prezentiranih argumenata. Jedini pobednički potez je da se uključite u igru.

Stavovi ovde prezentirani su samo moji i ne predstavljaju Unchained Capital ili moje kolege. Zahvaljujem se Fil Gajgeru za razmatranje teksta i primedbe.

Originalni tekst

@ d08c9312:73efcc9f

Resolvr CEO, Aaron Daniel, summarizes his keynote speech from the Bitcoin Insurance Summit, April 26, 2025

Introduction

At the inaugural Bitcoin Insurance Summit in Miami, I had the pleasure of sharing two historical parallels that illuminate why "Bitcoin needs insurance, and insurance needs Bitcoin." The insurance industry's reactions to fire and coffee can help us better understand the profound relationship between emerging technologies, risk management, and commercial innovation.

Fire: Why Bitcoin Needs Insurance

The first story explores how the insurance industry's response to catastrophic urban fires shaped modern building safety. Following devastating events like the Great Fire of London (1666) and the Great Chicago Fire (1871), the nascent insurance industry began engaging with fire risk systematically.

Initially, insurers offered private fire brigades to policyholders who displayed their company's fire mark on their buildings. This evolved into increasingly sophisticated risk assessment and pricing models throughout the 19th century:

• Early 19th century: Basic risk classifications with simple underwriting based on rules of thumb
• Mid-19th century: Detailed construction types and cooperative sharing of loss data through trade associations
• Late 19th/Early 20th century: Scientific, data-driven approaches with differentiated rate pricing

The insurance industry fundamentally transformed building construction practices by developing evidence-based standards that would later inform regulatory frameworks. Organizations like the National Board of Fire Underwriters (founded 1866) and Underwriters Laboratories (established 1894) tested and standardized new technologies, turning seemingly risky innovations like electricity into safer, controlled advancements.

This pattern offers a powerful precedent for Bitcoin. Like electricity, Bitcoin represents a new technology that appears inherently risky but has tremendous potential for society. By engaging with Bitcoin rather than avoiding it, the insurance industry can develop evidence-based standards, implement proper controls, and ultimately make the entire Bitcoin ecosystem safer and more robust.

Coffee: Why Insurance Needs Bitcoin

The second story reveals how coffee houses in 17th-century England became commercial hubs that gave birth to modern insurance. Nathaniel Canopius brewed the first documented cup of coffee in England in 1637. But it wasn't until advances in navigation and shipping technology opened new trade lanes that coffee became truly ubiquitous in England. Once global trade blossomed, coffee houses rapidly spread throughout London, becoming centers of business, information exchange, and innovation.

In 1686, Edward Lloyd opened his coffee house catering to sailors, merchants, and shipowners, which would eventually evolve into Lloyd's of London. Similarly, Jonathan's Coffee House became the birthplace of what would become the London Stock Exchange.

These coffee houses functioned as information networks where merchants could access shipping news and trade opportunities, as well as risk management solutions. They created a virtuous cycle: better shipping technology brought more coffee, which fueled commerce and led to better marine insurance and financing, which in turn improved global trade.

Today, we're experiencing a similar technological and financial revolution with Bitcoin. This digital, programmable money moves at the speed of light and operates 24/7 as a nearly $2 trillion asset class. The insurance industry stands to benefit tremendously by embracing this innovation early.

Conclusion

The lessons from history are clear. Just as the insurance industry drove safety improvements by engaging with fire risk, it can help develop standards and best practices for Bitcoin security. And just as coffee houses created commercial networks that revolutionized finance, insurance, and trade, Bitcoin offers new pathways for global commerce and risk management.

For the insurance industry to remain relevant in a rapidly digitizing world, it must engage with Bitcoin rather than avoid it. The companies that recognize this opportunity first will enjoy significant advantages, while those who resist change risk being left behind.

The Bitcoin Insurance Summit represented an important first step in creating the collaborative spaces needed for this transformation—a modern version of those innovative coffee houses that changed the world over three centuries ago.

View Aaron's full keynote:

https://youtu.be/eIjT1H2XuCU

For more information about how Resolvr can help your organization leverage Bitcoin in its operations, contact us today.

@ 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.

@ 8d34bd24:414be32b

My post on the signs of the End Times according to Jesus got way too long. It was too long to email, so I had to split it into two posts. I recommend reading Part 1 before continuing. You also may want to read my post Signs of the Times: Can We Know? I also want to reiterate my caveat. Although I believe the signs suggests the Rapture and the Tribulation are coming soon, no one can know the exact hour or day, so I can’t say exactly what soon means (days, months, years, decades, or possibly more).

As a review here is the primary passage where Jesus answers His disciples’ question “What will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?” Below the passage is the 8 signs He gave. We will pick up with point 5.

Jesus’s Signs of the End

As He was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things happen, and what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?”

And Jesus answered and said to them, “See to it that no one misleads you. For many will come in My name, saying, ‘I am the Christ,’ and will mislead many. You will be hearing of wars and rumors of wars. See that you are not frightened, for those things must take place, but that is not yet the end. For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom, and in various places there will be famines and earthquakes. But all these things are merely the beginning of birth pangs.

“Then they will deliver you to tribulation, and will kill you, and you will be hated by all nations because of My name. At that time many will fall away and will betray one another and hate one another. Many false prophets will arise and will mislead many. Because lawlessness is increased, most people’s love will grow cold. But the one who endures to the end, he will be saved. This gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all the nations, and then the end will come. (Matthew 24:3-14) {emphasis mine}

Here is my summary of the signs Jesus said would identify the coming of the 7 year Tribulation:

1. Wars and rumors of wars. (Matthew 24:6a)

2. Famines (Matthew 24:7)

3. Earthquakes (Matthew 24:7).

4. Israel will be attacked and will be hated by all nations (Matthew 24:9)

5. Falling away from Jesus (Matthew 24:10)

6. Many Misled (Matthew 24:10)

7. People’s love will grow cold (Matthew 24:12)

8. Gospel will be preached to the whole world (Matthew 24:14)

The first 4 signs relate more to physical and political signs that the end times are near. The last 4 signs relate to spiritual matters.

5. Falling away from Jesus

One thing we are definitely seeing today is a falling away. This is most prevalent in the historically Christian Western nations in Europe and North America (and to a lesser, but significant, extent South America).

But the Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons, by means of the hypocrisy of liars seared in their own conscience as with a branding iron, men who forbid marriage and advocate abstaining from foods which God has created to be gratefully shared in by those who believe and know the truth. (1 Timothy 4:1-3) {emphasis mine}

For centuries Europe and North America were full of Christians or at least cultural Christians. Today that is no longer true. Christians are even being considered the hateful, criminal class and things like praying outside an abortion clinic is being punished with jail time. The Western nations can no longer be called Christian nations.

There are still a relatively large number of Americans who call themselves Christians, but the majority do not have a biblical worldview or live lives more like Christ than non-Christians.

“Seven out of 10 US adults call themselves “Christians” and yet only 6 in 100 (6%) actually have a biblical worldview.” In general, most Christian’s worldview does not align with the Bible, according to George Barna Surveys. In the most recent survey they found:

Many self-proclaimed Christians tend to believe a form of syncretism where they combine certain biblical principles with cultural ideas, scientism, and other religions to make “Christianity” into whatever they want to believe, just as the Bible predicted almost 2,000 years ago.

I solemnly charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by His appearing and His kingdom: preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort, with great patience and instruction. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires, and will turn away their ears from the truth and will turn aside to myths. (2 Timothy 4:1-4) {emphasis mine}

This is both a sign of the end times and something to watch in our own lives. I pray you will analyze your own life and beliefs in the light of the Bible to make sure you aren’t integrating unbiblical principles into your worldview.

6. Many Misled

Closely related to the falling away is that many will be misled. We have reached the point that the majority of so-called churches teach ideas and principles contrary to the Bible. They focus more on entertainment, self-help, and making everyone feel good about themselves instead of teaching of sin and the need for forgiveness or teaching how to live lives honoring to Christ. Preaching obedience to God has become anathema in most churches.

I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel; which is really not another; only there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed! As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed! (Galatians 1:6-9) {emphasis mine}

We are also lied to and/or misled by politicians, scientists, the media, and the culture in general. We are told that science has disproven the Bible, despite the fact that nothing of the sort has occurred. (See my series on a literal Genesis for some details. icr.org and aig.org are also good resources). Peter warned of this very view.

Know this first of all, that in the last days mockers will come with their mocking, following after their own lusts, and saying, “Where is the promise of His coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all continues just as it was from the beginning of creation.” For when they maintain this, it escapes their notice that by the word of God the heavens existed long ago and the earth was formed out of water and by water, through which the world at that time was destroyed, being flooded with water. But by His word the present heavens and earth are being reserved for fire, kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men. (2 Peter 3:3-7) {emphasis mine}

God warned us that the last days would be far enough into the future that people would begin to mock the coming of the Tribulation & Millennium and deny the clear truths spoken of in the Bible. We are seeing this everywhere today.

We are also warned to be alert to deception so we, believers, are not misled.

Now we request you, brethren, with regard to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, that you not be quickly shaken from your composure or be disturbed either by a spirit or a message or a letter as if from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come. Let no one in any way deceive you, for it will not come unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, who opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, displaying himself as being God. (2 Thessalonians 2:1-4) {emphasis mine}

7. People’s love will grow cold

You can feel love growing cold day by day. We no longer have community that works together, but have been broken into groups to fight against one another. Instead of friendly, logical debate with those with whom we disagree, we have name calling, hate, and even violence. Children have been taught to hate their parents and parents have been taught to not value children and to murder them for convenience. The church has been split into so many different denominations that I don’t know if it is possible to know what they all are and many are fighting in hateful manner against each other. Hate, depression, and selfishness seem to have taken over the world.

But realize this, that in the last days difficult times will come. For men will be lovers of self, lovers of money, boastful, arrogant, revilers, disobedient to parents, ungrateful, unholy, unloving, irreconcilable, malicious gossips, without self-control, brutal, haters of good, treacherous, reckless, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, holding to a form of godliness, although they have denied its power; Avoid such men as these. (2 Timothy 3:1-5) {emphasis mine}

Yes, spiritually and physically we are a basket case and it feels like the world is literally falling apart around us. This was predicted almost 2,000 years ago and is all according to God’s perfect plan. Most people turn to God in hard times and we have those in abundance. We do not need to despair, but need to turn to God and lean on Him for wisdom, faith, and peace. This is the birth pangs before the Tribulation and the Second coming of Jesus Christ. The news isn’t all bad, though.

8. Gospel preached to the whole world

The really good news is that the Gospel is being preached around the world. Parts of the world that had never heard the Gospel are hearing it and turning to Jesus.

All the ends of the earth will remember and turn to the Lord , And all the families of the nations will worship before You. (Psalm 22:27) {emphasis mine}

Wycliffe Bible translators is hoping to have at least started Bible translation in every active language by the end of this year (2025)

He says, “It is too small a thing that You should be My Servant To raise up the tribes of Jacob and to restore the preserved ones of Israel; I will also make You a light of the nations So that My salvation may reach to the end of the earth.” (Isaiah 49:6) {emphasis mine}

The Joshua Project tracks nations and people groups to determine which have been reached and which have not. It still looks like there is a large portion of the population that has not received the Gospel, but I also know people who are or have shared the Gospel to some of these people, so this map doesn’t mean that there are no Christians or that the Gospel has not been shared at all, but it does mean many people in these areas have not heard the Gospel and/or, that due to hatred of Christians, it is dangerous to share the Gospel and therefore has to be done slowly, carefully, and privately. Most of these unreached or barely reached people groups are areas that are predominantly Muslim, where those preaching the Gospel or those converting to Christianity are at risk of jail or death sentences.

As you can see, everything that Jesus said would come before the end is either escalating or here. We need to be ready and work to bring as many people to Christ as possible while we still have the opportunity because Jesus could come for us at any moment.

Share the Gospel with all those around you. Consider supporting missionaries, especially those going to unreached/least-reached areas. Maybe even consider becoming a missionary yourself. The harvest is plentiful, but the workers are few.

May the God of heaven give us a heart for the lost around the world. May He give us the courage to share the Gospel with all those around us. May He align our priorities with His priorities, so we can be useful tools in the hands of God almighty.

Trust Jesus.

FYI, I hope to write several more articles on the end times (signs of the times, the rapture, the millennium, and the judgement), but I might be a bit slow rolling them out because I want to make sure they are accurate and well supported by Scripture. You can see my previous posts on the end times on the end times tab at trustjesus.substack.com. I also frequently will list upcoming posts.

@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9

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

Concern

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

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

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

Optimism

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

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

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

Realism

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

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

@ 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.

@ c1e6505c:02b3157e

Photography, to me, is a game - a game of snatching absurd, beautiful, fleeting moments from life. Anything staged or overly polished falls into what Garry Winogrand nails as “illustration work.” I’m with him on that. Photography is about staying awake to the world, to the “physical reality” or circumstances we’re steeped in, and burning that light onto film emulsion (or pixels now), locking a moment into matter forever. It’s not like painting, where brushstrokes mimic what’s seen, felt, or imagined. Photography captures photons - light itself - and turns it into something tangible. The camera, honestly, doesn’t get enough credit for being such a wild invention.

Lately, I’ve been chewing on what to do with a batch of new photos I’ve shot over the past month, which includes photographs from a film project, a trip to Manhattan and photos of David Byrne (more on that in another post). Maybe it's another photo-zine that I should make. It’s been a minute since my last one, Hiding in Hudson (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7_t0OldrTk&t=339s). Putting out printed work like zines or books is killer practice — it forces you to sharpen your compositions, your vision, your whole deal as a photographer. Proof of work, you know?

This leads to a question: anyone out there down to help or collab on printing a photo-zine? I’d love to keep it DIY, steering clear of big companies.

In the spirit of getting back into a rhythm of daily shooting, here are a few recent shots from the past few days. Just wandering aimlessly around my neighborhood — bike rides, grocery runs, wherever I end up.

---

Camera used: Leica M262

Edited with: Lightroom + Dehancer Film

*Support my work and the funding for my new zine by sending a few sats: colincz@getalby.com *

@ 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.

@ 99895004:c239f905

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

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

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

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

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

Video here!

@ 266815e0:6cd408a5

I'm excited to announce the release of Applesauce v1.0.0! There are a few breaking changes and a lot of improvements and new features across all packages. Each package has been updated to 1.0.0, marking a stable API for developers to build upon.

Applesauce core changes

There was a change in the applesauce-core package in the QueryStore.

The Query interface has been converted to a method instead of an object with key and run fields.

A bunch of new helper methods and queries were added, checkout the changelog for a full list.

Applesauce Relay

There is a new applesauce-relay package that provides a simple RxJS based api for connecting to relays and publishing events.

Documentation: applesauce-relay

Features:

• A simple API for subscribing or publishing to a single relay or a group of relays
• No connect or close methods, connections are managed automatically by rxjs
• NIP-11 auth_required support
• Support for NIP-42 authentication
• Prebuilt or custom re-connection back-off
• Keep-alive timeout (default 30s)
• Client-side Negentropy sync support

Example Usage: Single relay

```typescript import { Relay } from "applesauce-relay";

// Connect to a relay const relay = new Relay("wss://relay.example.com");

// Create a REQ and subscribe to it relay .req({ kinds: [1], limit: 10, }) .subscribe((response) => { if (response === "EOSE") { console.log("End of stored events"); } else { console.log("Received event:", response); } }); ```

Example Usage: Relay pool

```typescript import { Relay, RelayPool } from "applesauce-relay";

// Create a pool with a custom relay const pool = new RelayPool();

// Create a REQ and subscribe to it pool .req(["wss://relay.damus.io", "wss://relay.snort.social"], { kinds: [1], limit: 10, }) .subscribe((response) => { if (response === "EOSE") { console.log("End of stored events on all relays"); } else { console.log("Received event:", response); } }); ```

Applesauce actions

Another new package is the applesauce-actions package. This package provides a set of async operations for common Nostr actions.

Actions are run against the events in the EventStore and use the EventFactory to create new events to publish.

Documentation: applesauce-actions

Example Usage:

```typescript import { ActionHub } from "applesauce-actions";

// An EventStore and EventFactory are required to use the ActionHub import { eventStore } from "./stores.ts"; import { eventFactory } from "./factories.ts";

// Custom publish logic const publish = async (event: NostrEvent) => { console.log("Publishing", event); await app.relayPool.publish(event, app.defaultRelays); };

// The publish method is optional for the async run method to work const hub = new ActionHub(eventStore, eventFactory, publish); ```

Once an ActionsHub is created, you can use the run or exec methods to execute actions:

```typescript import { FollowUser, MuteUser } from "applesauce-actions/actions";

// Follow fiatjaf await hub.run( FollowUser, "3bf0c63fcb93463407af97a5e5ee64fa883d107ef9e558472c4eb9aaaefa459d", );

// Or use the exec method with a custom publish method await hub .exec( MuteUser, "3bf0c63fcb93463407af97a5e5ee64fa883d107ef9e558472c4eb9aaaefa459d", ) .forEach((event) => { // NOTE: Don't publish this event because we never want to mute fiatjaf // pool.publish(['wss://pyramid.fiatjaf.com/'], event) }); ```

There are a log more actions including some for working with NIP-51 lists (private and public), you can find them in the reference

Applesauce loaders

The applesauce-loaders package has been updated to support any relay connection libraries and not just rx-nostr.

Before:

```typescript import { ReplaceableLoader } from "applesauce-loaders"; import { createRxNostr } from "rx-nostr";

// Create a new rx-nostr instance const rxNostr = createRxNostr();

// Create a new replaceable loader const replaceableLoader = new ReplaceableLoader(rxNostr); ```

After:

```typescript

import { Observable } from "rxjs"; import { ReplaceableLoader, NostrRequest } from "applesauce-loaders"; import { SimplePool } from "nostr-tools";

// Create a new nostr-tools pool const pool = new SimplePool();

// Create a method that subscribes using nostr-tools and returns an observable function nostrRequest: NostrRequest = (relays, filters, id) => { return new Observable((subscriber) => { const sub = pool.subscribe(relays, filters, { onevent: (event) => { subscriber.next(event); }, onclose: () => subscriber.complete(), oneose: () => subscriber.complete(), });

return () => sub.close();

}); };

// Create a new replaceable loader const replaceableLoader = new ReplaceableLoader(nostrRequest); ```

Of course you can still use rx-nostr if you want:

```typescript import { createRxNostr } from "rx-nostr";

// Create a new rx-nostr instance const rxNostr = createRxNostr();

// Create a method that subscribes using rx-nostr and returns an observable function nostrRequest( relays: string[], filters: Filter[], id?: string, ): Observable { // Create a new oneshot request so it will complete when EOSE is received const req = createRxOneshotReq({ filters, rxReqId: id }); return rxNostr .use(req, { on: { relays } }) .pipe(map((packet) => packet.event)); }

// Create a new replaceable loader const replaceableLoader = new ReplaceableLoader(nostrRequest); ```

There where a few more changes, check out the changelog

Applesauce wallet

Its far from complete, but there is a new applesauce-wallet package that provides a actions and queries for working with NIP-60 wallets.

Documentation: applesauce-wallet

Example Usage:

```typescript import { CreateWallet, UnlockWallet } from "applesauce-wallet/actions";

// Create a new NIP-60 wallet await hub.run(CreateWallet, ["wss://mint.example.com"], privateKey);

// Unlock wallet and associated tokens/history await hub.run(UnlockWallet, { tokens: true, history: true }); ```

@ 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.

@ 4925ea33:025410d8

1. O que é um Aromaterapeuta?

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

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

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

---

2. Como um Aromaterapeuta Pode Ajudar?

Você pode procurar um aromaterapeuta para diferentes necessidades, como:

✔ Questões Emocionais e Psicológicas

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

Apoio na redução do estresse, ansiedade e insônia.

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

✔ Questões Físicas

Dores musculares e articulares.

Problemas respiratórios como rinite, sinusite e tosse.

Distúrbios digestivos leves.

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

✔ Saúde da Pele e Cabelos

Tratamento para acne, dermatites e psoríase.

Cuidados com o envelhecimento precoce da pele.

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

✔ Bem-estar e Qualidade de Vida

Melhora da concentração e foco, aumentando a produtividade.

Estímulo da disposição e energia.

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

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

---

3. Como Funciona uma Consulta com um Aromaterapeuta?

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

✔ Anamnese (Entrevista Inicial)

Perguntas sobre saúde física, emocional e estilo de vida.

Levantamento de sintomas, histórico médico e possíveis alergias.

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

✔ Escolha dos Óleos Essenciais

Seleção dos óleos mais indicados para o caso.

Consideração das propriedades terapêuticas, contraindicações e combinações seguras.

✔ Definição do Método de Uso

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

Inalação: difusores, colares aromáticos, vaporização.

Uso tópico: massagens, óleos corporais, compressas.

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

✔ Plano de Acompanhamento

Instruções detalhadas sobre o uso correto dos óleos essenciais.

Orientação sobre frequência e duração do tratamento.

Possibilidade de retorno para ajustes no protocolo.

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

---

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

@ 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.

@ bbb5dda0:f09e2747

GitHub Actions (CI/CD) over Nostr

I Spent quite a bit of time on getting Nostr-based GitHub actions working. I have a basic runner implementation now, which i've reworked quite a bit when working with @dan on getting the front-end of it into gitworkshop.dev. We found that the nature of these jobs don't really lend itself to fit within the NIP-90 DVM spec.

What we have now: - A dvm-cicd-runner that - Advertises itself using NIP-89 announcements. - Takes a DVM request with: - repository - branch/ref - path to workflow file (.yml) - job timeout (max duration) - 🥜 Cashu prepayment for the job timeout (to be refunded) - Pulls the repository and executes the provided workflow file - Sends logs in batches as partial job results - Publishes job results and gets displayed in gitworkshop - Gitworkshop.dev (all nostr:npub15qydau2hjma6ngxkl2cyar74wzyjshvl65za5k5rl69264ar2exs5cyejr work) UI that : - Shows available workflow runners. - Instructing + paying runner to execute workflow file - Displaying job status, live updating with the latest logs / autoscroll, all the stuff you'd expect - Neatly displaying past jobs for the current repository

TODO'S + Ideas/vision

• TODO: refunding the unused minutes (job timeout - processing time) to the requester
• TODO: create seperate kinds/nip for worflow execution over nostr
• Create separate kinds for streaming arbitrary text data over nostr (line by line logs)
• automated git watchers for projects to kick of jobs
• Separate out workflow management stuff from gitworkshop.dev. A micro-app might serve better to manage runners for git projects etc and takes away pressure from gitworkshop.dev to do it all.
• Perhaps support just running .yaml files, without the requirement to have it in a git repo. Could just be a .yaml file on blossom.

TollGate

I spent most of my time working on TollGate. There's been a lot of back and forth to the drawing board to narrow down what the TollGate protocol looks like. I helped define some concepts on implementing a tollgate which we could use as language to discuss the different components that are part of a tollgate implementation. It helped us narrow down what was implementation and what is part of the protocol.

Current state of the project

• We have a website displaying the project: TollGate.me
• Worked on a basic android app for auto payments, validating we can auto-buy from tollgates by our phones
  • demo
• Presented TollGate at @Sats 'n Facts
• There's a protocol draft, presented at SEC-04
• We've done workshops, people were able to turn an OpenWRT router into a TollGate
• Building and releasing TollGate as a singular OpenWRT package, installable on any compatible architecture
• Building and releasing TollGate OS v0.0.1 (prebuilt OpenWRT image), targeting a few specific routers
• First tollgate deployed in the wild!! (At a restaurant in Funchal, Madeira)
• Other developers started to make their own adjacent implementations, which decentralizes the protocol already

What's next:

• We're gathering useful real user feedback to be incorporated in OS v0.0.2 soon
• Refine the protocol further
• Showing TollGate at various conferences in Europe throughout the summer
• Keep building the community, it's growing fast

Epoxy (Nostr based Addressing)

Although i've pivoted towards focusing on TollGate I worked out an implementation of my NIP-(1)37 proposal. During SEC-04 I worked out this browser plugin to demonstrate one way to make websites resistant to rugpulls.

It works by looking for a meta tag in the page's head: html <meta name="nostr-pubkey" relays="relay.site.com,other.relay.com">[hexPubkey]</meta>

When we've never recorded a pubkey for this domain, we save it. This pubkey now serves as the owner of the website. It looks for a kind 11111 event of that pubkey. It should list the current domain as one of it's domains. If not, it shows a warning.

The key concept is that if we visit this website again and one of these scenario's is true: - There is no longer a meta tag - There's another pubkey in the meta tag - The pubkey is still on the webpage, but the 11111 no longer lists this domain

Then we consider this domain as RUGPULLED and the user gets an error, suggesting to navigate to other domain listed by this pubkey. I'd like it to perhaps auto-redirect to another domain listed by the owner, this is especially useful for frequently rugged domains.

This extension does try to solve a bootstrapping problem. We need to establish the website's pubkey at some point. We have to start somewhere, which is why the first load is considered as the 'real' one, since we have no way of knowing for sure.

Other

🥜/⚡️ Receipt.Cash - Social Receipt sharing app

During SEC I worked on scratching an itch that has been lingering in my mind since SEC-03 already. And now that vibecoding is a thing it wasn't this huge undertaking anymore to handle the front-end stuff (which i suck at).

The usage scenario is a bunch of bitcoiners that are at a restaurant, we get the bill and want to split it amongst each other. One person can pay the bill, then: - Payer photographs receipt - Payer adds Cashu Payment request - Payer sets dev split % - App turns the receipt + request into a (encrypted) nostr event - The payer shares the event with QR or Share Menu

The friend scan the QR: - Receipt is loaded and displayed - Friend selects items they ordered - Friend hits pay button (⚡️Lightning or 🥜Cashu) and pays - Payment gets sent to Payer's cashu wallet - Dev split set by Payer goes to dev address.

Some features: - Change LLM model that processes the receipt to extract data - Proofs storage + recovery (if anything fails during processing)

Todo's: - Letting payer configure LNURL for payouts - Letting payer edit Receipt before sharing - Fix: live updates on settled items

The repo: receipt-cash

@ bf47c19e:c3d2573b

Originalni tekst na dvadesetjedan.com.

Autor: Gigi / Prevod na srpski: Plumsky

---

Postoji sveto carstvo privatnosti za svakog čoveka gde on bira i pravi odluke – carstvo stvoreno na bazičnim pravima i slobode koje zakon, generalno, ne sme narušavati. Džefri Fišer, Arhiepiskop Canterberija (1959)

Pre ne toliko dugo, uobičajen režim interneta je bio neenkriptovan običan tekst (plain text). Svi su mogli špiunirati svakoga i mnogi nisu o tome ni razmišljali. Globalno obelodanjivanje nadzora 2013. je to promenilo i danas se koriste mnogo bezbedniji protokoli i end-to-end enkripcija postaje standard sve više. Iako bitcoin postaje tinejdžer, mi smo – metaforično govoreći – i dalje u dobu običnog teksta narandžastog novčića. Bitcoin je radikalno providljiv protokol sam po sebi, ali postoje značajni načini da korisnik zaštiti svoju privatnost. U ovom članku želimo da istaknemo neke od ovih strategija, prodiskutujemo najbolje prakse, i damo preporuke koje mogu primeniti i bitcoin novajlije i veterani.

Zašto je privatnost bitna

Privatnost je potrebna da bi otvoreno društvo moglo da funkcioniše u digitalnoj eri. Privatnost nije isto što i tajanstvenost. Privatna stvar je nešto što neko ne želi da ceo svet zna, a tajna stvar je nešto što neko ne želi bilo ko da zna. Privatnost je moć da se čovek selektivno otkriva svom okruženju.

Ovim snažnim rečima Erik Hjus je započeo svoj tekst Sajferpankov Manifesto (Cypherpunk's Manifesto) 1993. Razlika između privatnosti i tajanstvenosti je suptilna ali jako važna. Odlučiti se za privatnost ne znači da neko ima tajne koje želi sakriti. Da ovo ilustrujemo shvatite samo da ono što obavljate u svom toaletu ili u spavaćoj sobi nije niti ilegalno niti tajna (u mnogim slučajevima), ali vi svejedno odlučujete da zatvorite vrata i navučete zavese.

Slično tome, koliko para imate i gde ih trošite nije naručito tajna stvar. Ipak, to bi trebalo biti privatan slučaj. Mnogi bi se složili da vaš šef ne treba da zna gde vi trošite vašu platu. Privatnosti je čak zaštićena od strane mnogobrojnih internacionalnih nadležnih organa. Iz Američke Deklaracije Prava i Dužnosti Čoveka (American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man) Ujedinjenim Nacijama, napisano je da je privatnost fundamentalno prava gradjana širom sveta.

Niko ne sme biti podvrgnut smetnjama njegovoj privatnosti, porodici, rezidenciji ili komunikacijama, niti napadnuta njegova čast i reputacija. Svi imaju pravo da se štite zakonom protiv takvih smetnja ili napada. Artikal 12, Deklaracija Ljudskih Prava Ujedinjenih Nacija

Bitcoin i privatnost

Iako je bitcoin često opisivan kao anoniman način plaćanja medijima, on u stvari poseduje potpuno suprotne osobine. On je poluanoniman u najboljem slučaju i danas mnogima nije ni malo lako primeniti taktike da bi bili sigurni da njihov poluanonimni identitet na bitcoin mreži ne bude povezan sa legalnim identitetom u stvarnom svetu.

Bitcoin je otvoren sistem. On je javna baza podataka koju svako može da proučava i analizira. Znači, svaka transakcija koja je upisana u tu bazu kroz dokaz rada (proof-of-work) postojaće i biće otkrivena dokle god bitcoin postoji, što znači - zauvek. Ne primenjivati najbolje prakse privatnosti može imati štetne posledice u dalekoj budućnosti.

Privatnost, kao sigurnost, je proces koji je težak, ali nije nemoguć. Alatke nastavljaju da se razvijaju koje čuvaju privatnost kad se koristi bitcoin and srećom mnoge od tih alatki su sve lakše za korišćenje. Nažalost ne postoji panacea u ovom pristupu. Mora se biti svesan svih kompromisa i usavršavati te prakse dok se one menjaju.

Najbolje prakse privatnosti

Kao i sve u bitcoinu, kontrola privatnosti je postepena, korak po korak, procedura. Naučiti i primeniti ove najbolje prakse zahteva strpljivost i odgovornost, tako da ne budite obeshrabreni ako vam se čini da je to sve previše. Svaki korak, koliko god bio mali, je korak u dobrom pravcu.

Koje korake preduzeti da bi uvećali svoju privatnost:

• Budite u vlasništvu sami svojih novčića
• Nikad ne ponavljajte korišćenje istih adresa
• Minimizirajte korišćenje servisa koji zahtevaju identitet (Know your customer - KYC)
• Minimizirajte sve izloženosti trećim licima
• Upravljajte svojim nodom
• Koristite Lightning mrežu za male transakcije
• Nemojte koristiti javne blok pretraživače za svoje transakcije
• Koristite metodu CoinJoin često i rano pri nabavljanju svojih novčića

Budite u vlasništvu sami svojih novčića: Ako ključevi nisu tvoji, onda nije ni bitcoin. Ako neko drugo drži vaš bitcoin za vas, oni znaju sve što se može znati: količinu, istoriju transakcija pa i sve buduće transakcije, itd. Preuzimanje vlasništva bitcoina u svoje ruke je prvi i najvažniji korak.

Nikad ne kroistite istu adresu dvaput: Ponavljanje adresa poništava privatnost pošiljalca i primaoca bitcoina. Ovo se treba izbegavati pod svaku cenu.

Minimizirajte korišćenje servisa koji zahtevaju identitet (KYC): Vezivati svoj legalni identitet za svoje bitcoin adrese je zlo koje se zahteva od strane mnogih državnih nadležnosti. Dok je efektivnost ovih zakona i regulacija disputabilno, posledice njihovog primenjivanja su uglavnom štetne po korisnicima. Ovo je očigledno pošto je česta pojava da se te informacije često izlivaju iz slabo obezbeđenih digitalnih servera. Ako izaberete da koristite KYC servise da bi nabavljali bitcoin, proučite i razumite odnos između vas i tog biznisa. Vi ste poverljivi tom biznisu za sve vaše lične podatke, pa i buduće obezbeđenje tih podataka. Ako i dalje zarađujete kroz fiat novčani sistem, mi preporučujemo da koristite samo bitcoin ekskluzivne servise koji vam dozvoljavaju da autamatski kupujete bitcoin s vremena na vreme. Ako zelite da potpuno da izbegnete KYC, pregledajte https://bitcoinqna.github.io/noKYConly/.

Minimizirajte sve izloženosti trećim licima: Poverljivost trećim licima je bezbednosna rupa (https://nakamotoinstitute.org/trusted-third-parties/). Ako možete biti poverljivi samo sebi, onda bi to tako trebalo da bude.

Upravljajte svojim nodom: Ako nod nije tvoj, onda nisu ni pravila. Upravljanje svojim nodom je suštinska potreba da bi se bitcoin koristio na privatan način. Svaka interakcija sa bitcoin mrežom je posrednjena nodom. Ako vi taj nod ne upravljate, čiji god nod koristite može da vidi sve što vi radite. Ova upustva (https://bitcoiner.guide/node/) su jako korisna da bi započeli proces korišćenja svog noda.

Koristite Lightning mrežu za male transakcije: Pošto Lightning protokol ne koristi glavnu bitcoin mrežu za trasakcije onda je i samim tim povećana privatnost korišćenja bez dodatnog truda. Iako je i dalje rano, oni apsolutno bezobzirni periodi Lightning mreže su verovatno daleko iza nas. Korišćenje Lightning-a za transakcije malih i srednjih veličina će vam pomoći da uvećate privatnost a da smanjite naplate svojih pojedinačnih bitcoin transakcija.

Nemojte koristiti javne blok pretraživače za svoje transakcije: Proveravanje adresa na javnim blok pretraživačima povezuje te adrese sa vašim IP podacima, koji se onda mogu koristiti da se otkrije vaš identitet. Softveri kao Umbrel i myNode vam omogućavaju da lako koristite sami svoj blok pretraživač. Ako morate koristiti javne pretraživače, uradite to uz VPN ili Tor.

Koristite CoinJoin često i rano pri nabavljanju svojih novčića: Pošto je bitcoin večan, primenjivanje saradničkih CoinJoin praksa će vam obezbediti privatnost u budućnosti. Dok su CoinJoin transakcije svakovrsne, softveri koji su laki za korišćenje već sad postoje koji mogu automatizovati ovu vrstu transakcija. Samourai Whirlpool (https://samouraiwallet.com/whirlpool) je odličan izbor za Android korisnike. Joinmarket (https://github.com/joinmarket-webui/jam) se može koristiti na vašem nodu. A servisi postoje koji pri snabdevanju vašeg bitcoina istog trenutka obave CoinJoin tranzakciju automatski.

Zaključak

Svi bi trebalo da se potrude da koriste bitcoin na što privatniji način. Privatnost nije isto što i tajanstvenost. Privatnost je ljudsko pravo i mi svi trebamo da branimo i primenljujemo to pravo. Teško je izbrisati postojeće informacije sa interneta; a izbrisati ih sa bitcoin baze podataka je nemoguće. Iako su daleko od savršenih, alatke postoje danas koje vam omogućavaju da najbolje prakse privatnosti i vi sami primenite. Mi smo vam naglasili neke od njih i - kroz poboljšanje u bitcoin protokolu kroz Taproot i Schnorr - one će postajati sve usavršenije.

Bitcoin postupci se ne mogu lako opisati korišćenjem tradicionalnim konceptima. Pitanja kao što su "Ko je vlasnik ovog novca?" ili "Odakle taj novac potiče?" postaju sve teža da se odgovore a u nekim okolnostima postaju potpuno beznačajna.

Satoši je dizajnirao bitcoin misleći na privatnost. Na nivou protokola svaka bitcoin transakcija je proces "topljenja" koji za sobom samo ostavlja heuristične mrvice hleba. Protokolu nije bitno odakle se pojavio bilo koji bitcoin ili satoši. Niti je njega briga ko je legalan identitet vlasnika. Protokolu je samo važno da li su digitalni potpisi validni. Dokle god je govor slobodan, potpisivanje poruka - privatno ili ne - ne sme biti kriminalan postupak.

Dodatni Resursi

This Month in Bitcoin Privacy | Janine

Hodl Privacy FAQ | 6102

Digital Privacy | 6102

UseWhirlpool.com | Bitcoin Q+A

Bitcoin Privacy Guide | Bitcoin Q+A

Ovaj članak napisan je u saradnji sa Matt Odellom, nezavisnim bitcoin istraživačem. Nađite njegove preporuke za privatnost na werunbtc.com

Originalni tekst

@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9

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

Small Wins

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

Ego is Volatile

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

Simplicity

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

The Big Picture

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

@ 6389be64:ef439d32

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

House Democrats’ MEME Act: A Bad Joke?

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

Senate Banking’s First Digital Asset Hearing: The Real Target Is You

Cynthia Lummis chaired the first digital asset hearing, and—surprise!—it was all about control. The discussion centered on stablecoins, AML, and KYC regulations, with witnesses suggesting Orwellian measures like freezing stablecoin transactions unless pre-approved by authorities. What was barely mentioned? Bitcoin. They want full oversight of stablecoins, which is really about controlling financial freedom. Expect more nonsense targeting self-custody wallets under the guise of stopping “bad actors.”

Bank of America and PayPal Want In on Stablecoins

Bank of America’s CEO openly stated they’ll launch a stablecoin as soon as regulation allows. Meanwhile, PayPal’s CEO paid for a hat using Bitcoin—not their own stablecoin, Pi USD. Why wouldn’t he use his own product? Maybe he knows stablecoins aren’t what they’re hyped up to be. Either way, the legacy financial system is gearing up to flood the market with stablecoins, not because they love crypto, but because it’s a tool to extend U.S. dollar dominance.

MetaPlanet Buys the Dip

Japan’s MetaPlanet issued $13.4M in bonds to buy more Bitcoin, proving once again that institutions see the writing on the wall. Unlike U.S. regulators who obsess over stablecoins, some companies are actually stacking sats.

UK Expands Crypto Seizure Powers

Across the pond, the UK government is pushing legislation to make it easier to seize and destroy crypto linked to criminal activity. While they frame it as going after the bad guys, it’s another move toward centralized control and financial surveillance.

Bitcoin Tools & Tech: Arc, SatoChip, and Nunchuk

Some bullish Bitcoin developments: ARC v0.5 is making Bitcoin’s second layer more efficient, SatoChip now supports Taproot and Nostr, and Nunchuk launched a group wallet with chat, making multisig collaboration easier.

The Bottom Line

The state is coming for financial privacy and control, and stablecoins are their weapon of choice. Bitcoiners need to stay focused, keep their coins in self-custody, and build out parallel systems. Expect more regulatory attacks, but don’t let them distract you—just keep stacking and transacting in ways they can’t control.

🎧 Listen to the full episode here: https://fountain.fm/episode/PYITCo18AJnsEkKLz2Ks

💰 Support the show by boosting sats on Podcasting 2.0! and I will see you on the other side.

@ fd0bcf8c:521f98c0

The vag' sits on the edge of the highway, broken, hungry. Overhead flies a transcontinental plane filled with highly paid executives. The upper class has taken to the air, the lower class to the roads: there is no longer any bond between them, they are two nations."—The Sovereign Individual

Fire

I was talking to a friend last night. Coffee in hand. Watching flames consume branches. Spring night on his porch.

He believed in America's happy ending. Debt would vanish. Inflation would cool. Manufacturing would return. Good guys win.

I nodded. I wanted to believe.

He leaned forward, toward the flame. I sat back, watching both fire and sky.

His military photos hung inside. Service medals displayed. Patriotism bone-deep.

The pendulum clock on his porch wall swung steadily. Tick. Tock. Measuring moments. Marking epochs.

History tells another story. Not tragic. Just true.

Our time has come. America cut off couldn't compete. Factories sit empty. Supply chains span oceans. Skills lack. Children lag behind. Rebuilding takes decades.

Truth hurts. Truth frees.

Cycles

History moves in waves. Every 500 years, power shifts. Systems fall. Systems rise.

500 BC - Greek coins changed everything. Markets flourished. Athens dominated.

1 AD - Rome ruled commerce. One currency. Endless roads. Bustling ports.

500 AD - Rome faded. Not overnight. Slowly. Trade withered. Cities emptied. Money debased. Roads crumbled. Local strongmen rose. Peasants sought protection. Feudalism emerged.

People still lived. Still worked. Horizons narrowed. Knowledge concentrated. Most barely survived. Rich adapted. Poor suffered.

Self-reliance determined survival. Those growing food endured. Those making essential goods continued. Those dependent on imperial systems suffered most.

1000 AD - Medieval revival began. Venice dominated seas. China printed money. Cathedrals rose. Universities formed.

1500 AD - Europeans sailed everywhere. Spanish silver flowed. Banks financed kingdoms. Companies colonized continents. Power moved west.

The pendulum swung. East to West. West to East. Civilizations rose. Civilizations fell.

2000 AD - Pattern repeats. America strains. Digital networks expand. China rises. Debt swells. Old systems break.

We stand at the hinge.

Warnings

Signs everywhere. Dollar weakens globally. BRICS builds alternatives. Yuan buys oil. Factories rust. Debt exceeds GDP. Interest consumes budgets.

Bridges crumble. Education falters. Politicians chase votes. We consume. We borrow.

Rome fell gradually. Citizens barely noticed. Taxes increased. Currency devalued. Military weakened. Services decayed. Life hardened by degrees.

East Rome adapted. Survived centuries. West fragmented. Trade shrank. Some thrived. Others suffered. Life changed permanently.

Those who could feed themselves survived best. Those who needed the system suffered worst.

Pendulum

My friend poured another coffee. The burn pile popped loudly. Sparks flew upward like dying stars.

His face changed as facts accumulated. Military man. Trained to assess threats. Detect weaknesses.

He stared at the fire. National glory reduced to embers. Something shifted in his expression. Recognition.

His fingers tightened around his mug. Knuckles white. Eyes fixed on dying flames.

I traced the horizon instead. Observing landscape. Noting the contrast.

He touched the flag on his t-shirt. I adjusted my plain gray one.

The unpayable debt. The crumbling infrastructure. The forgotten manufacturing. The dependent supply chains. The devaluing currency.

The pendulum clock ticked. Relentless. Indifferent to empires.

His eyes said what his patriotism couldn't voice. Something fundamental breaking.

I'd seen this coming. Years traveling showed me. Different systems. Different values. American exceptionalism viewed from outside.

Pragmatism replaced my old idealism. See things as they are. Not as wished.

The logs shifted. Flames reached higher. Then lower. The cycle of fire.

Divergence

Society always splits during shifts.

Some adapt. Some don't.

Printing arrived. Scribes starved. Publishers thrived. Information accelerated. Readers multiplied. Ideas spread. Adapters prospered.

Steam engines came. Weavers died. Factory owners flourished. Villages emptied. Cities grew. Coal replaced farms. Railways replaced wagons. New skills meant survival.

Computers transformed everything. Typewriters vanished. Software boomed. Data replaced paper. Networks replaced cabinets. Programmers replaced typists. Digital skills determined success.

The self-reliant thrived in each transition. Those waiting for rescue fell behind.

Now AI reshapes creativity. Some artists resist. Some harness it. Gap widens daily.

Bitcoin offers refuge. Critics mock. Adopters build wealth. The distance grows.

Remote work redraws maps. Office-bound struggle. Location-free flourish.

The pendulum swings. Power shifts. Some rise with it. Some fall against it.

Two societies emerge. Adaptive. Resistant. Prepared. Pretending.

Advantage

Early adapters win. Not through genius. Through action.

First printers built empires. First factories created dynasties. First websites became giants.

Bitcoin followed this pattern. Laptop miners became millionaires. Early buyers became legends.

Critics repeat themselves: "Too volatile." "No value." "Government ban coming."

Doubters doubt. Builders build. Gap widens.

Self-reliance accelerates adaptation. No permission needed. No consensus required. Act. Learn. Build.

The burn pile flames like empire's glory. Bright. Consuming. Temporary.

Blindness

Our brains see tigers. Not economic shifts.

We panic at headlines. We ignore decades-long trends.

We notice market drops. We miss debt cycles.

We debate tweets. We ignore revolutions.

Not weakness. Just humanity. Foresight requires work. Study. Thought.

Self-reliant thinking means seeing clearly. No comforting lies. No pleasing narratives. Just reality.

The clock pendulum swings. Time passes regardless of observation.

Action

Empires fall. Families need security. Children need futures. Lives need meaning.

You can adapt faster than nations.

Assess honestly. What skills matter now? What preserves wealth? Who helps when needed?

Never stop learning. Factory workers learned code. Taxi drivers joined apps. Photographers went digital.

Diversify globally. No country owns tomorrow. Learn languages. Make connections. Stay mobile.

Protect your money. Dying empires debase currencies. Romans kept gold. Bitcoin offers similar shelter.

Build resilience. Grow food. Make energy. Stay strong. Keep friends. Read old books. Some things never change.

Self-reliance matters most. Can you feed yourself? Can you fix things? Can you solve problems? Can you create value without systems?

Movement

Humans were nomads first. Settlers second. Movement in our blood.

Our ancestors followed herds. Sought better lands. Survival meant mobility.

The pendulum swings here too. Nomad to farmer. City-dweller to digital nomad.

Rome fixed people to land. Feudalism bound serfs to soil. Nations created borders. Companies demanded presence.

Now technology breaks chains. Work happens anywhere. Knowledge flows everywhere.

The rebuild America seeks requires fixed positions. Factory workers. Taxpaying citizens in permanent homes.

But technology enables escape. Remote work. Digital currencies. Borderless businesses.

The self-reliant understand mobility as freedom. One location means one set of rules. One economy. One fate.

Many locations mean options. Taxes become predatory? Leave. Opportunities disappear? Find new ones.

Patriotism celebrates roots. Wisdom remembers wings.

My friend's boots dug into his soil. Planted. Territorial. Defending.

My Chucks rested lightly. Ready. Adaptable. Departing.

His toolshed held equipment to maintain boundaries. Fences. Hedges. Property lines.

My backpack contained tools for crossing them. Chargers. Adapters. Currency.

The burn pile flame flickers. Fixed in place. The spark flies free. Movement its nature.

During Rome's decline, the mobile survived best. Merchants crossing borders. Scholars seeking patrons. Those tied to crumbling systems suffered most.

Location independence means personal resilience. Economic downturns become geographic choices. Political oppression becomes optional suffering.

Technology shrinks distance. Digital work. Video relationships. Online learning.

Self-sovereignty requires mobility. The option to walk away. The freedom to arrive elsewhere.

Two more worlds diverge. The rooted. The mobile. The fixed. The fluid. The loyal. The free.

Hope

Not decline. Transition. Painful but temporary.

America may weaken. Humanity advances. Technology multiplies possibilities. Poverty falls. Knowledge grows.

Falling empires see doom. Rising ones see opportunity. Both miss half the picture.

Every shift brings destruction and creation. Rome fell. Europe struggled. Farms produced less. Cities shrank. Trade broke down.

Yet innovation continued. Water mills appeared. New plows emerged. Monks preserved books. New systems evolved.

Different doesn't mean worse for everyone.

Some industries die. Others birth. Some regions fade. Others bloom. Some skills become useless. Others become gold.

The self-reliant thrive in any world. They adapt. They build. They serve. They create.

Choose your role. Nostalgia or building.

The pendulum swings. East rises again. The cycle continues.

Fading

The burn pile dimmed. Embers fading. Night air cooling.

My friend's shoulders changed. Tension releasing. Something accepted.

His patriotism remained. His illusions departed.

The pendulum clock ticked steadily. Measuring more than minutes. Measuring eras.

Two coffee cups. His: military-themed, old and chipped but cherished. Mine: plain porcelain, new and unmarked.

His eyes remained on smoldering embers. Mine moved between him and the darkening trees.

His calendar marked local town meetings. Mine tracked travel dates.

The last flame flickered out. Spring peepers filled the silence.

In darkness, we watched smoke rise. The world changing. New choices ahead.

No empire lasts forever. No comfort in denial. Only clarity in acceptance.

Self-reliance the ancient answer. Build your skills. Secure your resources. Strengthen your body. Feed your mind. Help your neighbors.

The burn pile turned to ash. Empire's glory extinguished.

He stood facing his land. I faced the road.

A nod between us. Respect across division. Different strategies for the same storm.

He turned toward his home. I toward my vehicle.

The pendulum continued swinging. Power flowing east once more. Five centuries ending. Five centuries beginning.

"Bear in mind that everything that exists is already fraying at the edges." — Marcus Aurelius

Tomorrow depends not on nations. On us.

@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9

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

Part One: 2029–2032

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

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

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

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

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

Time Jump: 2032–2047

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

Part Two: 2047

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

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

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

Key Differences

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

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

@ 61bf790b:fe18b062

In a vast digital realm, two cities stood side by side: the towering, flashing metropolis of Feedia, and the decentralized, quiet city of Nostra.

Feedia was loud—blinding, buzzing, and always on. Screens plastered every wall, whispering the latest trends into citizens’ ears. But in this city, what you saw wasn’t up to you. It was determined by a towering, unseen force known as The Algorithm. It didn’t care what was true, meaningful, or helpful—only what would keep your eyes glued and your attention sold.

In Feedia, discovery wasn’t earned. It was assigned.

And worse—there was a caste system. To have a voice, you needed a Blue Check—a glowing badge that marked you as “worthy.” To get one, you had to pay or play. Pay monthly dues to the high towers or entertain The Algorithm enough to be deemed “valuable.” If you refused or couldn’t afford it, your voice was cast into the noise—buried beneath outrage bait and celebrity screams.

The unmarked were like ghosts—speaking into the void while the checked dined in Algorithm-favored towers. It was a digital monarchy dressed up as a democracy.

Then, there was Nostra.

There were no glowing checkmarks in Nostra—just signal. Every citizen had a light they carried, one that grew brighter the more they contributed: thoughtful posts, reshared ideas, built tools, or boosted others. Discovery was based not on payment or privilege, but participation and value.

In Nostra, you didn’t rise because you paid the gatekeeper—you rose because others lifted you. You weren’t spoon-fed; you sought, you found, you earned attention. It was harder, yes. But it was real.

And slowly, some in Feedia began to awaken. They grew tired of being fed fast-food content and ignored despite their voices. They looked across the river to Nostra, where minds weren’t bought—they were built.

And one by one, they began to cross.

@ 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. 🚀

@ c1e6505c:02b3157e

This is a long form test note from Untype.app

Seems like this could work well.

Here is a photograph of the infamous red firebird that has been in the same spot for over 10 years.

There is a header image up top as well. Will that be seen? Maybe?

Clean interface and you're able to type and see a preview window of what your post would like. Cool!

Text before the image prompt makes this lettering large and bold.

Here is a line break

---

Let me know if you can see this text that is now under the image.

BYE (IN BOLD)!

@ 0fa80bd3:ea7325de

intro

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

@ 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.

@ e3ba5e1a:5e433365

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

@ 8d34bd24:414be32b

I’ve been really deeply studying end times prophecy today. Trying to see how all of the prophecies from the initial proto-Gospel in Genesis 3 through the last chapter in Revelation is hard to arrange in my head. That being said, after reading the Bible daily for about 40 years and reading through it each year for about 30 years, I am really starting to see so many links between passages through out the Bible. It has made my Bible study enthralling. I wish I had time to spend hours and hours every day studying and writing about what I have learned.

I thought it might be handy to share some hints on how I study the Bible. Hopefully this can help some people, although I do tend to think my subscribers tend to be those who love Bible study and are already in the word. People who don’t love the Bible are unlikely to read my long, scripture laden posts. Still, hopefully this will be useful.

Starting the Habit of Bible Reading

The first and foremost thing we all need is to start the habit of daily Bible reading. You can’t worship a God you don’t know about and you can’t obey a God whose commands you don’t know. Every Christian needs to read the whole Bible. This needs to be a priority.

I used to recommend people just start at the beginning, Genesis, and read straight through to Revelation, but I’ve lately changed my mind. So many people will start in Genesis, enjoy Genesis and Exodus, which are basically just stories about creation, judgment in the global flood, and God’s chosen people. They then get to Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy (the details of the law including the intricate ceremonial law) and they lose momentum in the tedium. I do think every Christian eventually needs to read and know these books, but I think it is OK to skip some or all of them the first time through. They will mean more once you have read the whole Bible. If you are only going to read one, I’d probably read Deuteronomy.

I also know that it can be helpful for some people to mix up their reading. I used to have book marks with daily readings, so I read some Old Testament, some Psalms/Proverbs, some New Testament. There was one other category, but I can’t remember what it was. This way, you get a little of different types of passages. My bookmarks burnt up when my house burnt down and when I went searching online for something similar, I found a few similar reading plans, but not the one I used and really liked. Here are a couple that looked good, but I haven’t used myself. here. here. here. These plans look good, but don’t have the convenient bookmarks. here. here. For those who like reading online or on your phone (which isn’t me), I found this one. It looked nice I’ve just started using it despite the fact I prefer a Bible I can hold, turn the pages of, and write in. It has a chronological Old Testament Passage and a New Testament reading that relates in some way to the Old Testament Passage. It also links to some maps that let you see where the places mentioned in the passages are located and questions to get you to think about what you read. The one downside is it only lets you attach notes if you create a group. I do really like the idea that you can setup a group to read through the Bible and share your comments and thoughts, but I haven’t tried the feature.

Another thing I’ve found very helpful is a chronological Bible. It is handy having things in the order they happened and the different passages that cover an event (such as from each gospel or 1/2 Samuel vs 1/2 Chronicles or Leviticus vs Deuteronomy, etc.) right by each other. It is handy to see what actually comes before what and the way different writers describe the same event, since different authors include different details. I think reading a chronological Bible has helped me see more links between passages and get a better understanding of the Bible as a whole. I am getting close to finishing my second reading through. I don’t know if one chronological Bible is significantly better than another, but this is the one I am reading right now.

Another tactic I have used, when I started getting bogged down reading through the Bible again and again was to study one book of the Bible in depth. It worked best reading one of the shorter books. I’d read through the book repeatedly for a month, usually in 1-3 days. I’d follow the links in my study Bible to related passages or study where some of the words were used in other parts of the Bible. I’d get so I really knew the book well.

One thing that has helped me with my Bible study is writing in my Bible. The first time I wrote, it felt almost sacrilegious, but it helps me to organize my thoughts. I’ll write what I get out of it, how it relates to another passage, etc. I’ll underline or circle key words or sentences. These are then useful when I read through again and may see something different, but it reminds me of my growth and learning. I’ve actually thought I really need to get a new wide margin Bible to have more room for my notes. I can write really small and have an ultrafine point pen, so I can write even smaller than the print. The problem is my eyes aren’t so good and I now have trouble reading my tiny print. I can’t read my own writing without my reading glasses.

Bible reading starts getting really exciting when you get to know the Bible well enough that you start seeing the links between different passages and different books. Suddenly it opens up a whole new level of understanding. It is like an exciting scavenger hunt finding how all of the ideas in the Bible relate to each other and clarify each other in one whole.

Historically I’ve hated writing. The thought of writing a journal or something sounded like torture, but I have truly found organizing my thoughts in an essay, really helps my understanding of the Scriptures in ways that reading and thinking about it never did. Whether anyone reads my writings or not, I’ll continue writing because it is a blessing to me. I have grown immensely in my understanding of the Bible by writing out a reasoned argument for what I believe the Bible is saying. I’ve also done in depth study and realized that I was not completely right in my understanding and had to adjust my understanding of Scripture.

but sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence (1 Peter 3:15)

As Christians, we are supposed to be ready to make a defense. Reading, studying, and knowing the Bible is the only true way to be ready. I made a necklace with the first letter in each word in this verse to help me memorize it.

Memorizing God’s word is also well worth the effort. I’ll admit, that I would be terrible for following my own advice in this, except I have a special needs son, who is in Awana, and needs help memorizing 1-5 verses a week. The only way either of us can pull it off is I make a song for each 1-3 verse passage that he has to memorize. We then sing them together until we know them. I debated on whether to share my songs. They are not well done. The version uploaded is my first rough attempt at the song and we usually fine tune them over the week, but I don’t get around to rerecording them. I also have at best an OK voice. Still, I decided to share in case these songs can help someone else with their Bible memorization. Hopefully I am not embarrassing myself too much.

Another thing that has helped me is finding Open Bible’s geocoding site. When reading Bible passages, there are frequent references to places that are unfamiliar, either because they are far away or because the ancient names, rather than modern names, are used. This site allows you to see on a map (satellite & modern country formats) where places are located and how they relate to each other. I’ve especially found this useful with end times prophecy because the Bible describes places with their ancient, not modern names.

In addition to my direct Bible study, I also daily listen to sermons, Christian podcasts, read Christian substack posts, and read Christian commentaries. All help my understanding of the Bible. FYI, the sermons, podcasts, blogs, and commentaries are a risk if you don’t know the Bible and aren’t being like the Bereans who searched “… the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so.” (Acts 17:11) There are so many false or erroneous teachers, that you have to be very careful listening to people and never put the opinions of men above the word of God. Of course, it is possible to learn a bunch from Godly teachers. Sadly, even the best Bible teachers seem to have at least one area of error. For example, I love listening to R.C. Sproul’s “Renewing Your Mind” podcast, but his teaching on the first 11 chapters of Genesis are a bit “squishy” (not outright wrong, but not holding firm enough to the Bible) and I’d say his end times teaching is flat out wrong. Everything I’ve heard him teach between Genesis 12 and Jude is amazing and very true to the Bible. This is where he spends almost all of his time teaching, so I can highly recommend his podcast. Without a firm foundation in the Bible, it is not possible to recognize false teaching, especially when taught by someone who is very good in most respects.

I hope this is useful to people to help them get into the habit of regular Bible reading and seeing how exciting Bible study can be.

May God give you a hunger for and understanding of His word. May you fill your heart and mind with the word of God so it overflows and is seen by all around you.

Trust Jesus.

@ 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.

@ 1d4d7479:8aec9f9c

I'm new to Nostr and came here innocently enough. I was intrigued by the idea of building a blog on Npub.pro that not only could be published for the traditional web but would also allow us to get paid for great content or additional services within the Nostr community. Looking into the future I can see this approach as something that allows us to build a community that we can encourage to help support us.

The goals: 1. Build a traditonal blog. 2. Do work once, share on other platforms. 3. Own our content/thoughts. 4. Serve an international audience. 5. Cultivate a community. 6. Improve the Signal to Noise Ratio.

My belief is that we can serve all these through Nostr. I'll let you know how things go on the journey.

Tools on my radar: 1. Npub.pro 2. Habla.news 3. Alby

What else should I be looking at over the next 4 to 6 months when seeking to follow a Nostr-first strategy for a services business?

@ bf47c19e:c3d2573b

Originalni tekst na dvadesetjedan.com.

Autor: Matt Corallo / Prevod na hrvatski: Davor

---

Bitcoineri, od programera Bitcoin Core-a preko dugogodišnjih entuzijasta Bitcoina do nedavnih pronalazača /r/Bitcoina, vole razgovarati o tome kako je decentralizacija Bitcoina njegova ultimativna značajka. Doduše, rijetko vidite da netko objašnjava zašto je decentralizacija važna. Zasigurno je to zanimljiva značajka iz perspektive računalne znanosti, no zašto bi potrošači, tvrtke ili investitori marili za to? Ova objava je pokušaj da se napiše zašto je decentralizacija temelj vrijednosti Bitcoina i što je još važnije, postavi buduće objave u kojima se govori o tome kada ona to nije.

Kada Bitcoineri govore o decentralizaciji Bitcoina, prva stvar koja se pojavljuje je često spominjani nedostatak inherentnog povjerenja u treću stranu. Dok je dobro postavljeno povjerenje preduvjet za učinkovit rad mnogih sustava, jednom kada se takvo povjerenje izgubi, sustavi mogu postati nevjerojatno krhki. Uzmimo, za primjer, povjerenje u američke banke prije uspostave FDIC-a (Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation). Dok je pristup bankovnim uslugama omogućio više pogodnosti i mnogim tvrtkama učinkovitije poslovanje, poznato je da su banke propadale, pritom upropaštavajući sa sobom sva sredstva klijenata. Dok je predstavljanje FDIC-a i sličnih programa decentraliziralo povjerenje u financijske institucije s jedne strane na dvije, transakcije u velikom dijelu svijeta ne nude takvu zaštitu. Čak i uz takve programe, pojedinci nisu univerzalno zaštićeni od gubitka preko granica i preko određene vrijednosti.

U novije vrijeme, propisi koji dopuštaju pojedinim državnim dužnosnicima jednostrano oduzimanje imovine postali su uobičajeni. Naročito u SAD-u, sada zloglasna “Operacija Choke Point” i programi oduzimanja civilne imovine, omogućili su službenicima za provođenje zakona i privatnim institucijama da zapljenjuju financijsku imovinu i uskraćuju financijske usluge uz malo ili nimalo nadzora. Uklanjanje provjerenih skrbnika i stvaranje sustava s likvidnom imovinom, koja se ne može zaplijeniti, ima potencijal pružiti pouzdanije financijske usluge mnogima koji inače ne bi mogli djelovati učinkovito ili uopće ne bi mogli djelovati. Ova mogućnost da se Bitcoin ne može zaplijeniti, omogućena je samo zbog nedostatka za centraliziranim povjerenjem. Centralizirani sustavi elektroničke gotovine i financijski sustavi su pokušali pružiti takvu pouzdanost, propisi i poslovna stvarnost su to gotovo univerzalno spriječili.

Svojstvo koje je jednako važno za sposobnost Bitcoina da pruža financijske usluge zviždačima, stranim disidentima i porno zvijezdama je njegov otpor cenzuri transakcija. Sposobnost trećih strana da zaplijene imovinu rezultira izravnim i čistim novčanim gubitkom, zamrzavanje imovine može imati sličan učinak. Kada pojedinac ili organizacija više nisu u mogućnosti obavljati transakcije za plaćanje roba i usluga, njihova financijska imovina brzo gubi vrijednost. Iako Bitcoin ima vrlo dobru priču o nemogućnosti zapljene (svaka strana u sustavu nameće nemogućnost bilo koga da potroši Bitcoin bez dodanog privatnog ključa), njegova priča o otporu cenzuri je malo utančanija.

U svijetu u kojem nijedan rudar Bitcoina nema više od 1% ukupne hash snage (ili nešto drugo što je jednako decentralizirano), trebalo bi biti lako pronaći rudara koji je ili anoniman i prihvaća sve transakcije ili je u nadležnosti koja ne pokušava cenzurirati vaše transakcije. Naravno, ovo nije svijet kakav danas imamo, a cenzura transakcija jedan je od većih razloga da se ozbiljno zabrinemo centralizacijom rudarenja (za pune čvorove). Ipak, mogućnost pojedinca da kupi hash snagu (u obliku lako dostupnog starog hardvera ili u obliku njegovog iznajmljivanja) za rudarenje svoje inače cenzurirane transakcije, opcija je sve dok je pravilo najdužeg lanca na snazi ​​kod svih rudara. Iako je znatno skuplji nego što bi bio u istinski decentraliziranom Bitcoinu, to omogućuje Bitcoinu da zadrži neka od svojih anti-cenzuriranih svojstava.

Ako ste već dovoljno dugo u priči oko Bitcoina, možda ćete prepoznati gornja svojstva kao kritična za zamjenjivost. Zamjenjivost, kao ključno svojstvo svakog monetarnog instrumenta, odnosi se na ideju da vrijednost jedne jedinice treba biti ekvivalentna svakoj drugoj jedinici. Bez mogućnosti odmrzavanja/otpora cenzuri i nemogućnosti zapljene, Bitcoin (i svaki drugi monetarni sustav) počinje gubiti zamjenjivost. Trgovci i platni procesori više ne mogu razumno prihvaćati Bitcoin bez provjere niza crnih lista i mnogo truda kako bi bili sigurni da će moći potrošiti Bitcoin koji prihvaćaju. Ako povjerenje u zamjenjivost Bitcoina deformira, njegova bi korist mogla biti značajno deformirana.

Još jedno svojstvo koje proizlazi iz decentralizacije Bitcoina, je njegov otvoreni pristup. Ulagači iz Silicijske doline često ga nazivaju jednim od najzanimljivijih svojstava Bitcoina, a mnogi ga vole nazivati ​​"bez dopuštenja". Sposobnost bilo koga, bilo gdje u svijetu, sa internetskom vezom, da prihvaća Bitcoin za robu i usluge i koristi Bitcoin za kupnju roba i usluga je vrlo uzbudljiva. Opet, ovo svojstvo ovisi o decentralizaciji Bitcoina. Iako postoje mnogi centralizirani pružatelji financijskih usluga, gdje mnogi od njih promoviraju svoju dostupnost bilo kome, sama njihova prisutnost kao centraliziranog tijela koje može proizvoljno uskratiti uslugu, čini ih podložnim budućim promjenama politike iz bilo kojeg razloga. PayPal je, na primjer, utemeljen na idealima univerzalnog pristupa elektroničkoj gotovini. Međutim, zbog svoje pozicije središnje vlasti, brzo je promijenio svoje politike, kako bi udovoljio pritiscima regulatora i politikama postojećeg financijskog sustava na koji se oslanjao. Ovih dana, PayPal je nadaleko poznat po zamrzavanju računa i oduzimanju imovine uz malo ili nimalo upozorenja. U osnovi, oslanjanje na centralizirane strane za usluge nije kompatibilno s univerzalnim otvorenim pristupom u financijskom svijetu.

Primijetit ćete da se sve gore navedene kritične značajke, one koje Bitcoin čine tako uzbudljivim za sve nas, centralizirani sistemi već neko vrijeme mogu implementirati. Zapravo to se radilo i prije, u učinkovitijim sustavima od Bitcoina. Naravno, nikada nisu potrajali, gubeći kritična svojstva nakon podešavanja kako bi se popravila ova ili ona stvar, implementirajući regulatorne sustave cenzure izravno u osnovne slojeve, ograničavajući pristup rastu dobiti i potpuno gašenje. Stvarno, decentralizacija u Bitcoinu sama po sebi nije značajka, već je umjesto toga jedini način za koji znamo da održimo značajke koje želimo u sustavima kojima upravljaju ljudi.

Originalni tekst

@ 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.

@ 97c70a44:ad98e322

There was a slight dust up recently over a website someone runs removing a listing for an app someone built based on entirely arbitrary criteria. I'm not to going to attempt to speak for either wounded party, but I would like to share my own personal definition for what constitutes a "nostr app" in an effort to help clarify what might be an otherwise confusing and opaque purity test.

In this post, I will be committing the "no true Scotsman" fallacy, in which I start with the most liberal definition I can come up with, and gradually refine it until all that is left is the purest, gleamingest, most imaginary and unattainable nostr app imaginable. As I write this, I wonder if anything built yet will actually qualify. In any case, here we go.

It uses nostr

The lowest bar for what a "nostr app" might be is an app ("application" - i.e. software, not necessarily a native app of any kind) that has some nostr-specific code in it, but which doesn't take any advantage of what makes nostr distinctive as a protocol.

Examples might include a scraper of some kind which fulfills its charter by fetching data from relays (regardless of whether it validates or retains signatures). Another might be a regular web 2.0 app which provides an option to "log in with nostr" by requesting and storing the user's public key.

In either case, the fact that nostr is involved is entirely neutral. A scraper can scrape html, pdfs, jsonl, whatever data source - nostr relays are just another target. Likewise, a user's key in this scenario is treated merely as an opaque identifier, with no appreciation for the super powers it brings along.

In most cases, this kind of app only exists as a marketing ploy, or less cynically, because it wants to get in on the hype of being a "nostr app", without the developer quite understanding what that means, or having the budget to execute properly on the claim.

It leverages nostr

Some of you might be wondering, "isn't 'leverage' a synonym for 'use'?" And you would be right, but for one connotative difference. It's possible to "use" something improperly, but by definition leverage gives you a mechanical advantage that you wouldn't otherwise have. This is the second category of "nostr app".

This kind of app gets some benefit out of the nostr protocol and network, but in an entirely selfish fashion. The intention of this kind of app is not to augment the nostr network, but to augment its own UX by borrowing some nifty thing from the protocol without really contributing anything back.

Some examples might include:

• Using nostr signers to encrypt or sign data, and then store that data on a proprietary server.
• Using nostr relays as a kind of low-code backend, but using proprietary event payloads.
• Using nostr event kinds to represent data (why), but not leveraging the trustlessness that buys you.

An application in this category might even communicate to its users via nostr DMs - but this doesn't make it a "nostr app" any more than a website that emails you hot deals on herbal supplements is an "email app". These apps are purely parasitic on the nostr ecosystem.

In the long-term, that's not necessarily a bad thing. Email's ubiquity is self-reinforcing. But in the short term, this kind of "nostr app" can actually do damage to nostr's reputation by over-promising and under-delivering.

It complements nostr

Next up, we have apps that get some benefit out of nostr as above, but give back by providing a unique value proposition to nostr users as nostr users. This is a bit of a fine distinction, but for me this category is for apps which focus on solving problems that nostr isn't good at solving, leaving the nostr integration in a secondary or supporting role.

One example of this kind of app was Mutiny (RIP), which not only allowed users to sign in with nostr, but also pulled those users' social graphs so that users could send money to people they knew and trusted. Mutiny was doing a great job of leveraging nostr, as well as providing value to users with nostr identities - but it was still primarily a bitcoin wallet, not a "nostr app" in the purest sense.

Other examples are things like Nostr Nests and Zap.stream, whose core value proposition is streaming video or audio content. Both make great use of nostr identities, data formats, and relays, but they're primarily streaming apps. A good litmus test for things like this is: if you got rid of nostr, would it be the same product (even if inferior in certain ways)?

A similar category is infrastructure providers that benefit nostr by their existence (and may in fact be targeted explicitly at nostr users), but do things in a centralized, old-web way; for example: media hosts, DNS registrars, hosting providers, and CDNs.

To be clear here, I'm not casting aspersions (I don't even know what those are, or where to buy them). All the apps mentioned above use nostr to great effect, and are a real benefit to nostr users. But they are not True Scotsmen.

It embodies nostr

Ok, here we go. This is the crème de la crème, the top du top, the meilleur du meilleur, the bee's knees. The purest, holiest, most chaste category of nostr app out there. The apps which are, indeed, nostr indigitate.

This category of nostr app (see, no quotes this time) can be defined by the converse of the previous category. If nostr was removed from this type of application, would it be impossible to create the same product?

To tease this apart a bit, apps that leverage the technical aspects of nostr are dependent on nostr the protocol, while apps that benefit nostr exclusively via network effect are integrated into nostr the network. An app that does both things is working in symbiosis with nostr as a whole.

An app that embraces both nostr's protocol and its network becomes an organic extension of every other nostr app out there, multiplying both its competitive moat and its contribution to the ecosystem:

• In contrast to apps that only borrow from nostr on the technical level but continue to operate in their own silos, an application integrated into the nostr network comes pre-packaged with existing users, and is able to provide more value to those users because of other nostr products. On nostr, it's a good thing to advertise your competitors.
• In contrast to apps that only market themselves to nostr users without building out a deep integration on the protocol level, a deeply integrated app becomes an asset to every other nostr app by becoming an organic extension of them through interoperability. This results in increased traffic to the app as other developers and users refer people to it instead of solving their problem on their own. This is the "micro-apps" utopia we've all been waiting for.

Credible exit doesn't matter if there aren't alternative services. Interoperability is pointless if other applications don't offer something your app doesn't. Marketing to nostr users doesn't matter if you don't augment their agency as nostr users.

If I had to choose a single NIP that represents the mindset behind this kind of app, it would be NIP 89 A.K.A. "Recommended Application Handlers", which states:

Nostr's discoverability and transparent event interaction is one of its most interesting/novel mechanics. This NIP provides a simple way for clients to discover applications that handle events of a specific kind to ensure smooth cross-client and cross-kind interactions.

These handlers are the glue that holds nostr apps together. A single event, signed by the developer of an application (or by the application's own account) tells anyone who wants to know 1. what event kinds the app supports, 2. how to link to the app (if it's a client), and (if the pubkey also publishes a kind 10002), 3. which relays the app prefers.

As a sidenote, NIP 89 is currently focused more on clients, leaving DVMs, relays, signers, etc somewhat out in the cold. Updating 89 to include tailored listings for each kind of supporting app would be a huge improvement to the protocol. This, plus a good front end for navigating these listings (sorry nostrapp.link, close but no cigar) would obviate the evil centralized websites that curate apps based on arbitrary criteria.

Examples of this kind of app obviously include many kind 1 clients, as well as clients that attempt to bring the benefits of the nostr protocol and network to new use cases - whether long form content, video, image posts, music, emojis, recipes, project management, or any other "content type".

To drill down into one example, let's think for a moment about forms. What's so great about a forms app that is built on nostr? Well,

• There is a spec for forms and responses, which means that...
• Multiple clients can implement the same data format, allowing for credible exit and user choice, even of...
• Other products not focused on forms, which can still view, respond to, or embed forms, and which can send their users via NIP 89 to a client that does...
• Cryptographically sign forms and responses, which means they are self-authenticating and can be sent to...
• Multiple relays, which reduces the amount of trust necessary to be confident results haven't been deliberately "lost".

Show me a forms product that does all of those things, and isn't built on nostr. You can't, because it doesn't exist. Meanwhile, there are plenty of image hosts with APIs, streaming services, and bitcoin wallets which have basically the same levels of censorship resistance, interoperability, and network effect as if they weren't built on nostr.

It supports nostr

Notice I haven't said anything about whether relays, signers, blossom servers, software libraries, DVMs, and the accumulated addenda of the nostr ecosystem are nostr apps. Well, they are (usually).

This is the category of nostr app that gets none of the credit for doing all of the work. There's no question that they qualify as beautiful nostrcorns, because their value propositions are entirely meaningless outside of the context of nostr. Who needs a signer if you don't have a cryptographic identity you need to protect? DVMs are literally impossible to use without relays. How are you going to find the blossom server that will serve a given hash if you don't know which servers the publishing user has selected to store their content?

In addition to being entirely contextualized by nostr architecture, this type of nostr app is valuable because it does things "the nostr way". By that I mean that they don't simply try to replicate existing internet functionality into a nostr context; instead, they create entirely new ways of putting the basic building blocks of the internet back together.

A great example of this is how Nostr Connect, Nostr Wallet Connect, and DVMs all use relays as brokers, which allows service providers to avoid having to accept incoming network connections. This opens up really interesting possibilities all on its own.

So while I might hesitate to call many of these things "apps", they are certainly "nostr".

Appendix: it smells like a NINO

So, let's say you've created an app, but when you show it to people they politely smile, nod, and call it a NINO (Nostr In Name Only). What's a hacker to do? Well, here's your handy-dandy guide on how to wash that NINO stench off and Become a Nostr.

You app might be a NINO if:

• There's no NIP for your data format (or you're abusing NIP 78, 32, etc by inventing a sub-protocol inside an existing event kind)
• There's a NIP, but no one knows about it because it's in a text file on your hard drive (or buried in your project's repository)
• Your NIP imposes an incompatible/centralized/legacy web paradigm onto nostr
• Your NIP relies on trusted third (or first) parties
• There's only one implementation of your NIP (yours)
• Your core value proposition doesn't depend on relays, events, or nostr identities
• One or more relay urls are hard-coded into the source code
• Your app depends on a specific relay implementation to work (ahem, relay29)
• You don't validate event signatures
• You don't publish events to relays you don't control
• You don't read events from relays you don't control
• You use legacy web services to solve problems, rather than nostr-native solutions
• You use nostr-native solutions, but you've hardcoded their pubkeys or URLs into your app
• You don't use NIP 89 to discover clients and services
• You haven't published a NIP 89 listing for your app
• You don't leverage your users' web of trust for filtering out spam
• You don't respect your users' mute lists
• You try to "own" your users' data

Now let me just re-iterate - it's ok to be a NINO. We need NINOs, because nostr can't (and shouldn't) tackle every problem. You just need to decide whether your app, as a NINO, is actually contributing to the nostr ecosystem, or whether you're just using buzzwords to whitewash a legacy web software product.

If you're in the former camp, great! If you're in the latter, what are you waiting for? Only you can fix your NINO problem. And there are lots of ways to do this, depending on your own unique situation:

• Drop nostr support if it's not doing anyone any good. If you want to build a normal company and make some money, that's perfectly fine.
• Build out your nostr integration - start taking advantage of webs of trust, self-authenticating data, event handlers, etc.
• Work around the problem. Think you need a special relay feature for your app to work? Guess again. Consider encryption, AUTH, DVMs, or better data formats.
• Think your idea is a good one? Talk to other devs or open a PR to the nips repo. No one can adopt your NIP if they don't know about it.
• Keep going. It can sometimes be hard to distinguish a research project from a NINO. New ideas have to be built out before they can be fully appreciated.
• Listen to advice. Nostr developers are friendly and happy to help. If you're not sure why you're getting traction, ask!

I sincerely hope this article is useful for all of you out there in NINO land. Maybe this made you feel better about not passing the totally optional nostr app purity test. Or maybe it gave you some actionable next steps towards making a great NINON (Nostr In Not Only Name) app. In either case, GM and PV.

@ 8d34bd24:414be32b

I used to hate end times prophecy because it didn’t make sense. I didn’t understand how the predictions could be true, so I wondered if the fulfillment was more figurative than literal. As time has progressed, I’ve seen technologies and international relations change in ways that make the predictions seem not only possible, but probable. I’ve seen the world look more and more like what is predicted for the end times.

I thought it would be handy to look at the predictions and compare them to events, technologies, and nations today. This is a major undertaking, so this will turn into a series. I only hope I can do it justice. I will have some links to news articles on these current events and technologies. Because I can’t remember where I’ve read many of these things, it is likely I will put some links to some news sources that I don’t normally recommend, but which do a decent job of covering the point I’m making. I’m sorry if I don’t always give a perfect source. I have limited time, so in some cases, I’ll link to the easy (main stream journals that show up high on web searches) rather than what I consider more reliable sources because of time constraints.

I also want to give one caveat to everything I discuss below. Although I do believe the signs suggest the Rapture and Tribulation are near, I can’t say exactly what that means or how soon these prophecies will be fulfilled. Could it be tomorrow, a month from now, a year from now, or 20 years from now? Yes, any of them could be true. Could it be even farther in the future? It could be, even if my interpretation of the data concludes that to be less likely.

I will start with a long passage from Matthew that describes what Jesus told His disciples to expect before “the end of the age.” Then I’ll go to some of the end times points that seemed unexplainable to me in the past. We’ll see where things go from there. I’ve already had to split discussion of this one passage into multiple posts due to length.

Jesus’s Signs of the End

As He was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things happen, and what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?”

And Jesus answered and said to them, “See to it that no one misleads you. For many will come in My name, saying, ‘I am the Christ,’ and will mislead many. You will be hearing of wars and rumors of wars. See that you are not frightened, for those things must take place, but that is not yet the end. For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom, and in various places there will be famines and earthquakes. But all these things are merely the beginning of birth pangs.

“Then they will deliver you to tribulation, and will kill you, and you will be hated by all nations because of My name. At that time many will fall away and will betray one another and hate one another. Many false prophets will arise and will mislead many. Because lawlessness is increased, most people’s love will grow cold. But the one who endures to the end, he will be saved. This gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all the nations, and then the end will come. (Matthew 24:3-14) {emphasis mine}

Before I go into the details I do want to clarify one thing. The verses that follow the above verses (Matthew 24:16-28) mention the “abomination of desolation” and therefore is clearly discussing the midpoint of the tribulation and the following 3.5 years or Great Tribulation. The first half of Matthew 24 discusses the birth pangs and the first half of the Tribulation. The signs that I discuss will be growing immediately preceding the Tribulation, but probably will not be completely fulfilled until the first 3.5 years of the Tribulation.

I do think we will see an increase of all of these signs before the 7 year Tribulation begins as part of the birth pangs even if they are not fulfilled completely until the Tribulation:

1. Wars and rumors of wars. (Matthew 24:6a)

2. Famines (Matthew 24:7)

3. Earthquakes (Matthew 24:7).

4. Israel will be attacked and will be hated by all nations (Matthew 24:9)

5. Falling away from Jesus (Matthew 24:10)

6. Many Misled (Matthew 24:10)

7. People’s love will grow cold (Matthew 24:12)

8. Gospel will be preached to the whole world (Matthew 24:14)

Now let’s go through each of these predictions to see what we are seeing today.

1. Wars and Rumors of Wars

When you hear of wars and disturbances, do not be terrified; for these things must take place first, but the end does not follow immediately.” (Luke 21:9)

In 1947 the doomsday clock was invented. It theoretically tells how close society is to all out war and destruction of mankind. It was just recently set to 89 seconds to midnight, the closest it has ever been. It is true that this isn’t a scientific measure and politics can effect the setting, i.e. climate change & Trump Derangement Syndrome, but it is still one of many indicators of danger and doom.

There are three main events going on right now that could lead to World War III and the end times.

Obviously the war between Russia and Ukraine has gotten the world divided. It is true that Russia invaded Ukraine, but there were many actions by the US and the EU that provoked this attack. Within months of the initial attack, there was a near agreement between Ukraine and Russia to end the war, but the US and the EU talked Ukraine out of peace, leading to hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians and Russians dying for basically no change of ground. Estimates of deaths vary greatly. See here, here, here. Almost all English sources list Russia as having many more deaths than Ukraine, but since Ukraine is now drafting kids and old men, is considering drafting women, and has most of its defensive capabilities destroyed, while Russia still seems to have plenty of men and weapons, I find this hard to believe. I don’t think any of the parties that have data are motivated to tell the truth. We probably will never know.

The way the EU (and the US until recently) has sacrificed everything to defend Ukraine (until this war known as the most corrupt nation in Europe and known for its actual Nazis) and to do everything in its power to keep the war with Russia going, things could easily escalate. The US and the EU have repeatedly crossed Russia’s red-lines. One of these days, Russia is likely to say “enough is enough” and actually attack Europe. This could easily spiral out of control. I do think that Trump’s pull back and negotiations makes this less likely to lead to world war than it seemed for the past several years. This article does a decent job of explaining the background for the war that most westerners, especially Americans, don’t understand.

Another less well known hot spot is the tension between China and Taiwan. Taiwan is closer politically to the US, but closer economically and culturally to China. This causes tension. Taiwan also produces the majority of the high tech microchips used in advanced technology. Both the US and China want and need this technology. I honestly believe this is the overarching issue regarding Taiwan. If either the US or China got control of Taiwan’s microchip production, it would be military and economic game over for the other. This is stewing, but I don’t think this will be the cause of world war 3, although it could become part of the war that leads to the Antichrist ruling the world.

The war that is likely to lead to the Tribulation involves Israel and the Middle East. Obviously, the Muslim nations hate Israel and attack them almost daily. We also see Iran, Russia, Turkey, and other nations making alliances that sound a lot like the Gog/Magog coalition in Ezekiel 38. The hate of Israel has grown to a level that makes zero sense unless you take into account the spiritual world and Bible prophecy. Such a small insignificant nation, that didn’t even exist for \~1900 years, shouldn’t have the influence on world politics that it does. It is about the size of the state of New Jersey. Most nations of Israel’s size, population, and economy are not even recognized by most people. Is there a person on earth that doesn’t know about Israel? I doubt it. Every nation on earth seems to have a strong positive or, more commonly, negative view of Israel. We’ll get to this hate of Israel more below in point 4.

2. Famines

In the two parallel passages to Matthew 24, there is once again the prediction of famines coming before the end.

For nation will rise up against nation, and kingdom against kingdom; there will be earthquakes in various places; there will also be famines. These things are merely the beginning of birth pangs. (Mark 13:8) {emphasis mine}

and there will be great earthquakes, and in various places plagues and famines; and there will be terrors and great signs from heaven. (Luke 21:11) {emphasis mine}

In Revelation, the third seal releases famine upon the earth and a day’s wages will only buy one person’s daily wheat needs. A man with a family would only be able to buy lower quality barley to barely feed his family.

When He broke the third seal, I heard the third living creature saying, “Come.” I looked, and behold, a black horse; and he who sat on it had a pair of scales in his hand. And I heard something like a voice in the center of the four living creatures saying, “A quart of wheat for a denarius, and three quarts of barley for a denarius; and do not damage the oil and the wine.” (Revelation 6:5-6) {emphasis mine}

We shouldn’t fear a Tribulation level famine as a precursor to the Tribulation, but we should see famines scattered around the world, shortages of different food items, and rising food prices, all of which we are seeing. (Once again, I can’t support many of these sources or verify all of their data, but they give us a feel of what is going on today.)

Food Prices Go Up

• Bird Flu scares and government responses cause egg and chicken prices to increase. The government response to the flu is actually causing more problems than the flu itself and it looks like this more dangerous version may have come out of a US lab.

• Tariffs and trade war cause some items to become more expensive or less available. here

• Ukraine war effecting the supply of grain and reducing availability of fertilizer. More info.

• Inflation and other effects causing food prices to go up. This is a poll from Americans.

- Grocery prices overall have increased around 23% since 2021, with prices on individual items like coffee and chocolate rising much faster.

• General Food inflation is difficult, but not life destroying for most of the world, but some nations are experiencing inflation that is causing many to be unable to afford food. Single digit food inflation is difficult, even in well-to-do nations, but in poor nations, where a majority of the people’s income already goes to food, it can be catastrophic. When you look at nations like Zimbabwe (105%), Venezuela (22%), South Sudan (106%), Malawi (38%), Lebanon (20%), Haiti (37%), Ghana (26%), Burundi (39%), Bolivia (35%), and Argentina (46%), you can see that there are some seriously hurting people. More info.

• It does look like general food inflation has gone down for the moment (inflation has gone down, but not necessarily prices), but there are many situations around the world that could make it go back up again.

• Wars causing famine

• Sudan: War has made an already poor and hurting country even worse off.

• Gaza: (When I did a web search, all of the sites that came up on the first couple of pages are Israel hating organizations that are trying to cause trouble and/or raise money, so there is major bias. I did link to one of these sites just to be thorough, but take into account the bias of the source.)

• Ukraine: Mostly covered above. The war in Ukraine has affected the people of Ukraine and the world negatively relative to food.

I’m sure there are plenty more evidences for famine or potential famine, but this gives a taste of what is going on.

Our global economy has good and bad effects on the food supply. Being able to transport food around the globe means that when one area has a bad crop, they can import food from another area that produced more than they need. On the other hand, sometimes an area stops producing food because they can import food more cheaply. If something disrupts that imported food (tariffs, trade wars, physical wars, transportation difficulties, intercountry disputes, etc.) then they suddenly have no food. We definitely have a fragile system, where there are many points that could fail and cause famine to abound.

The Bible also talks about another kind of famine in the end times.

“Behold, days are coming,” declares the Lord God,\ “When I will send a famine on the land,\ *Not a famine for bread or a thirst for water,\ But rather for hearing the words of the Lord*.\ People will stagger from sea to sea\ And from the north even to the east;\ They will go to and fro to seek the word of the Lord,\ But they will not find it**. (Amos 8:11-12) {emphasis mine}

We are definitely seeing a famine regarding the word of God. It isn’t that the word of God is not available, but even in churches, there is a lack of teaching the actual word of God from the Scriptures. Many churches teach more self-help or feel good messages than they do the word of God. Those looking to know God better are starving or thirsting for truth and God’s word. I know multiple people who have given up on assembling together in church because they can’t find a Bible believing, Scripture teaching church. How sad!

Although famine should be expected before the Tribulation, the good news is that no famine will separate us from our Savior.

Who will separate us from the love of Christ? Will tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? (Romans 8:35) {emphasis mine}

3. Earthquakes

We recently saw a major \~7.8 earthquake in Myanmar. Although it seems like we are having many major earthquakes, it is more difficult to determine whether there is actually a major increase or if the seeming increase is due to increasing population to harm, more/better instrumentation, and/or more media coverage. We are definitely seeing lots of earthquake damage and loss of life. I tend to think the number and severity of earthquakes will increase even more before the Tribulation, but only time will tell.

4. Israel will be attacked and will be hated by all nations

“Then they will deliver you [Israel] to tribulation, and will kill you, and you will be hated by all nations because of My name. (Matthew 24:9) {emphasis & clarification mine}

This verse doesn’t specifically mention Israel. It says “you,” but since Jesus was talking to Jews, the best interpretation is that this warning is to the Jews. At the same time, we are also seeing attacks on Christians, so it likely refers to both Jews and Christians. I’m going to focus on Jews/Israel because I don’t think I need to convince most Christians that persecution is increasing.

We have been seeing hatred of Jews and Israel growing exponentially since the biblical prediction of a re-establishment of Israel was accomplished.

All end times prophecy focuses on Israel and requires Israel to be recreated again since it was destroyed in A.D. 70.

Who has heard such a thing? Who has seen such things?\ Can a land be born in one day?\ Can a nation be brought forth all at once?\ As soon as Zion travailed, she also brought forth her sons. (Isaiah 66:8)

• “British Foreign Minister Lord Balfour issued on November 2, 1917, the so-called Balfour Declaration, which gave official support for the “establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people” with the commitment not to be prejudiced against the rights of the non-Jewish communities.” In one day Israel was declared a nation.

• “On the day when the British Mandate in Palestine expired, the State of Israel was instituted on May 14, 1948, by the Jewish National Council under the presidency of David Ben Gurion.” Then on another day Israel actually came into being with a leader and citizens.

• “Six-Day War: after Egypt closed the Straits of Tiran on May 22, 1967, Israel launched an attack on Egyptian, Jordanian, Syrian, and Iraqi airports on June 5, 1967. After six days, Israel conquered Jerusalem, the Golan Heights, Sinai, and the West Bank.” On June 11, 1967 Jerusalem was conquered and once again became the capital of Israel.

If you read any of these links you can see the history of Israel being repeatedly attacked in an attempt to destroy Israel and stop God’s prophecy that Israel would be recreated and be used in the end times as part of the judgement of the world. This is a very good article on how God plans to use Israel in end times, how God will fulfill all of his promises to Israel, and how the attacks on Israel are Satan’s attempt to stop God’s plan. It is well worth you time to read and well supported by Scripture.

Since Israel became a new nation again, the nations of the world have ramped up their attacks on Israel and the Jews. The hatred of the Jews is hard to fathom. The Jews living in Israel have been constantly at risk of suicide bombers, terrorist attacks, rocket/missile attacks, etc. Almost daily attacks are common recently. The most significant recent attack happened on October 7th. Around 3,000 Hamas terrorists stormed across the border and attacked men, women, and children. About 1200 were killed, mostly civilians and even kids. In addition to murdering these innocent individuals, others were tortured, raped, and kidnapped as well.

You would expect the world to rally around a nation attacked in such a horrendous manner (like most of the world rallied around the US after 9/11), but instead you immediately saw protests supporting Palestine and condemning Israel. I’ve never seen something so upside down in my life. It is impossible to comprehend until you consider the spiritual implications. Satan has been trying to destroy Israel and the Jews since God made His first promise to Abraham. I will never claim that everything Israeli politicians and generals do is good, but the hate towards this tiny, insignificant nation is unfathomable and the world supporting terrorist attacks, instead of the victims of these attacks, is beyond belief.

Israel allows people of Jewish ancestry and Palestinian ancestry to be citizens and vote. There are Jews, Muslims, and Christians in the Knesset (Jewish Congress). Yes, Israel has responded harshly against the Palestinians and innocents have been harmed, but Israel repeatedly gave up land for peace and then that land has been used to attack them. I can’t really condemn them for choosing to risk the death of Palestinian innocents over risking the death of their own innocents. Hamas and Hezbollah are known for attacking innocents, and then using their own innocents as human shields. They then accuse their victims of atrocities when their human shields are harmed. The UN Human Rights council condemns Israel more than all other nations combined when there are atrocities being committed in many, many other nations that are as bad or worse. Why is the world focused on Israel and the Jews? It is because God loves them (despite their rejection of Him) and because Satan hates them.

Throughout history the world has tried to destroy the Jews, but thanks to God and His eternal plan, they are still here and standing strong. the hate is growing to a fevered pitch, just as predicted by Jesus.

This post has gotten so long that it can’t be emailed, so I will post the final 4 points in a follow-up post. I hope these details are helpful to you and seeing that all of the crazy, hate, and destruction occurring in the world today was known by God and is being used by God to His glory and are good according to His perfect plan.

When we see that everything happening in the world is just part of God’s perfect plan, we can have peace, knowing that God is in control. We need to lean on Him and trust Him just as a young child feels safe in his Fathers arms. At the same time, seeing the signs should encourage us to share the Gospel with unbelievers because our time is short. Don’t put off sharing Jesus with those around you because you might not get another chance.

Trust Jesus.

FYI, I hope to write several more articles on the end times (signs of the times, the rapture, the millennium, and the judgement), but I might be a bit slow rolling them out because I want to make sure they are accurate and well supported by Scripture. You can see my previous posts on the end times on the end times tab at trustjesus.substack.com. I also frequently will list upcoming posts.

@ a95c6243:d345522c

Die «Eliten» führen bereits groß angelegte Pilotprojekte für eine Zukunft durch, die sie wollen und wir nicht. Das schreibt der OffGuardian in einem Update zum Thema «EU-Brieftasche für die digitale Identität». Das Portal weist darauf hin, dass die Akteure dabei nicht gerade zimperlich vorgehen und auch keinen Hehl aus ihren Absichten machen. Transition News hat mehrfach darüber berichtet, zuletzt hier und hier.

Mit der EU Digital Identity Wallet (EUDI-Brieftasche) sei eine einzige von der Regierung herausgegebene App geplant, die Ihre medizinischen Daten, Beschäftigungsdaten, Reisedaten, Bildungsdaten, Impfdaten, Steuerdaten, Finanzdaten sowie (potenziell) Kopien Ihrer Unterschrift, Fingerabdrücke, Gesichtsscans, Stimmproben und DNA enthält. So fasst der OffGuardian die eindrucksvolle Liste möglicher Einsatzbereiche zusammen.

Auch Dokumente wie der Personalausweis oder der Führerschein können dort in elektronischer Form gespeichert werden. Bis 2026 sind alle EU-Mitgliedstaaten dazu verpflichtet, Ihren Bürgern funktionierende und frei verfügbare digitale «Brieftaschen» bereitzustellen.

Die Menschen würden diese App nutzen, so das Portal, um Zahlungen vorzunehmen, Kredite zu beantragen, ihre Steuern zu zahlen, ihre Rezepte abzuholen, internationale Grenzen zu überschreiten, Unternehmen zu gründen, Arzttermine zu buchen, sich um Stellen zu bewerben und sogar digitale Verträge online zu unterzeichnen.

All diese Daten würden auf ihrem Mobiltelefon gespeichert und mit den Regierungen von neunzehn Ländern (plus der Ukraine) sowie über 140 anderen öffentlichen und privaten Partnern ausgetauscht. Von der Deutschen Bank über das ukrainische Ministerium für digitalen Fortschritt bis hin zu Samsung Europe. Unternehmen und Behörden würden auf diese Daten im Backend zugreifen, um «automatisierte Hintergrundprüfungen» durchzuführen.

Der Bundesverband der Verbraucherzentralen und Verbraucherverbände (VZBV) habe Bedenken geäußert, dass eine solche App «Risiken für den Schutz der Privatsphäre und der Daten» berge, berichtet das Portal. Die einzige Antwort darauf laute: «Richtig, genau dafür ist sie ja da!»

Das alles sei keine Hypothese, betont der OffGuardian. Es sei vielmehr «Potential». Damit ist ein EU-Projekt gemeint, in dessen Rahmen Dutzende öffentliche und private Einrichtungen zusammenarbeiten, «um eine einheitliche Vision der digitalen Identität für die Bürger der europäischen Länder zu definieren». Dies ist nur eines der groß angelegten Pilotprojekte, mit denen Prototypen und Anwendungsfälle für die EUDI-Wallet getestet werden. Es gibt noch mindestens drei weitere.

Den Ball der digitalen ID-Systeme habe die Covid-«Pandemie» über die «Impfpässe» ins Rollen gebracht. Seitdem habe das Thema an Schwung verloren. Je näher wir aber der vollständigen Einführung der EUid kämen, desto mehr Propaganda der Art «Warum wir eine digitale Brieftasche brauchen» könnten wir in den Mainstream-Medien erwarten, prognostiziert der OffGuardian. Vielleicht müssten wir schon nach dem nächsten großen «Grund», dem nächsten «katastrophalen katalytischen Ereignis» Ausschau halten. Vermutlich gebe es bereits Pläne, warum die Menschen plötzlich eine digitale ID-Brieftasche brauchen würden.

Die Entwicklung geht jedenfalls stetig weiter in genau diese Richtung. Beispielsweise hat Jordanien angekündigt, die digitale biometrische ID bei den nächsten Wahlen zur Verifizierung der Wähler einzuführen. Man wolle «den Papierkrieg beenden und sicherstellen, dass die gesamte Kette bis zu den nächsten Parlamentswahlen digitalisiert wird», heißt es. Absehbar ist, dass dabei einige Wahlberechtigte «auf der Strecke bleiben» werden, wie im Fall von Albanien geschehen.

Derweil würden die Briten gerne ihre Privatsphäre gegen Effizienz eintauschen, behauptet Tony Blair. Der Ex-Premier drängte kürzlich erneut auf digitale Identitäten und Gesichtserkennung. Blair ist Gründer einer Denkfabrik für globalen Wandel, Anhänger globalistischer Technokratie und «moderner Infrastruktur».

Abschließend warnt der OffGuardian vor der Illusion, Trump und Musk würden den US-Bürgern «diesen Schlamassel ersparen». Das Department of Government Efficiency werde sich auf die digitale Identität stürzen. Was könne schließlich «effizienter» sein als eine einzige App, die für alles verwendet wird? Der Unterschied bestehe nur darin, dass die US-Version vielleicht eher privat als öffentlich sei – sofern es da überhaupt noch einen wirklichen Unterschied gebe.

[Titelbild: Screenshot OffGuardian]

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ 78b3c1ed:5033eea9

・ThunderHubで焼いたマカロンがlncli printmacaroonでどう見えるか確認した。

ThunderHub macaroon permissions

get invoices invoices:read create invoices invoices:write get payments offchain:read pay invoices offchain:write get chain transactions onchain:read send to chain address onchain:write create chain address address:write get wallet info info:read stop daemon info:write この結果によれば、offchain:wirteとonchain:writeの権限がなければそのマカロンを使うクライアントは勝手にBTCを送金することができない。 info:writeがなければ勝手にLNDを止めたりすることができない。

・lncli printmacaroonでデフォルトで作られるmacaroonのpermissionsを調べてみた。 admin.macaroon { "version": 2, "location": "lnd", "root_key_id": "0", "permissions": [ "address:read", "address:write", "info:read", "info:write", "invoices:read", "invoices:write", "macaroon:generate", "macaroon:read", "macaroon:write", "message:read", "message:write", "offchain:read", "offchain:write", "onchain:read", "onchain:write", "peers:read", "peers:write", "signer:generate", "signer:read" ], "caveats": null } chainnotifier.macaroon { "version": 2, "location": "lnd", "root_key_id": "0", "permissions": [ "onchain:read" ], "caveats": null } invoice.macaroon { "version": 2, "location": "lnd", "root_key_id": "0", "permissions": [ "address:read", "address:write", "invoices:read", "invoices:write", "onchain:read" ], "caveats": null } invoices.macaroon { "version": 2, "location": "lnd", "root_key_id": "0", "permissions": [ "invoices:read", "invoices:write" ], "caveats": null } readonly.macaroon { "version": 2, "location": "lnd", "root_key_id": "0", "permissions": [ "address:read", "info:read", "invoices:read", "macaroon:read", "message:read", "offchain:read", "onchain:read", "peers:read", "signer:read" ], "caveats": null } router.macaroon { "version": 2, "location": "lnd", "root_key_id": "0", "permissions": [ "offchain:read", "offchain:write" ], "caveats": null } signer.macaroon { "version": 2, "location": "lnd", "root_key_id": "0", "permissions": [ "signer:generate", "signer:read" ], "caveats": null } walletkit.macaroon { "version": 2, "location": "lnd", "root_key_id": "0", "permissions": [ "address:read", "address:write", "onchain:read", "onchain:write" ], "caveats": null }

・lncli listpermissions コマンドですべての RPC メソッド URI と、それらを呼び出すために必要なマカロン権限を一覧表示できる。 LND v0.18.5-betaでやると1344行ほどのJSONができる。 AddInvoiceだとinvoice:writeのpermissionを持つmacaroonを使えばインボイスを作れるようだ。 "/lnrpc.Lightning/AddInvoice": { "permissions": [ { "entity": "invoices", "action": "write" } ] }, lncli listpermissionsからentityとactionを抜き出してみた。 ``` "entity": "address", "entity": "info", "entity": "invoices", "entity": "macaroon", "entity": "message", "entity": "offchain", "entity": "onchain", "entity": "peers", "entity": "signer",

"action": "generate" "action": "read" "action": "write" lncli とjqを組み合わせると例えば以下コマンドでinvoices:writeを必要とするRPCの一覧を表示できる。 invoices:writeだとAddInvoiceの他にホドルインボイス作成でも使ってるようだ lncli listpermissions | jq -r '.method_permissions | to_entries[] | select(.value.permissions[] | select(.entity == "invoices" and .action == "write")) | .key' /invoicesrpc.Invoices/AddHoldInvoice /invoicesrpc.Invoices/CancelInvoice /invoicesrpc.Invoices/HtlcModifier /invoicesrpc.Invoices/LookupInvoiceV2 /invoicesrpc.Invoices/SettleInvoice /lnrpc.Lightning/AddInvoice invoices:readだと以下となる。 /invoicesrpc.Invoices/SubscribeSingleInvoice /lnrpc.Lightning/ListInvoices /lnrpc.Lightning/LookupInvoice /lnrpc.Lightning/SubscribeInvoices LNの主だった機能のRPCはoffchainが必要ぽいので抜き出してみた。 offchain:write チャネルの開閉、ペイメントの送信までやってるみたい。 デフォルトのmacaroonでoffchain:writeを持ってるのはadminとrouterの2つだけ。openchannel,closechannelはonchain:writeのpermissionも必要なようだ。 /autopilotrpc.Autopilot/ModifyStatus /autopilotrpc.Autopilot/SetScores /lnrpc.Lightning/AbandonChannel /lnrpc.Lightning/BatchOpenChannel /lnrpc.Lightning/ChannelAcceptor /lnrpc.Lightning/CloseChannel /lnrpc.Lightning/DeleteAllPayments /lnrpc.Lightning/DeletePayment /lnrpc.Lightning/FundingStateStep /lnrpc.Lightning/OpenChannel /lnrpc.Lightning/OpenChannelSync /lnrpc.Lightning/RestoreChannelBackups /lnrpc.Lightning/SendCustomMessage /lnrpc.Lightning/SendPayment /lnrpc.Lightning/SendPaymentSync /lnrpc.Lightning/SendToRoute /lnrpc.Lightning/SendToRouteSync /lnrpc.Lightning/UpdateChannelPolicy /routerrpc.Router/HtlcInterceptor /routerrpc.Router/ResetMissionControl /routerrpc.Router/SendPayment /routerrpc.Router/SendPaymentV2 /routerrpc.Router/SendToRoute /routerrpc.Router/SendToRouteV2 /routerrpc.Router/SetMissionControlConfig /routerrpc.Router/UpdateChanStatus /routerrpc.Router/XAddLocalChanAliases /routerrpc.Router/XDeleteLocalChanAliases /routerrpc.Router/XImportMissionControl /wtclientrpc.WatchtowerClient/AddTower /wtclientrpc.WatchtowerClient/DeactivateTower /wtclientrpc.WatchtowerClient/RemoveTower /wtclientrpc.WatchtowerClient/TerminateSession "/lnrpc.Lightning/OpenChannel": { "permissions": [ { "entity": "onchain", "action": "write" }, { "entity": "offchain", "action": "write" } ] }, offchain:read readの方はチャネルやインボイスの状態を確認するためのpermissionのようだ。 /lnrpc.Lightning/ChannelBalance /lnrpc.Lightning/ClosedChannels /lnrpc.Lightning/DecodePayReq /lnrpc.Lightning/ExportAllChannelBackups /lnrpc.Lightning/ExportChannelBackup /lnrpc.Lightning/FeeReport /lnrpc.Lightning/ForwardingHistory /lnrpc.Lightning/GetDebugInfo /lnrpc.Lightning/ListAliases /lnrpc.Lightning/ListChannels /lnrpc.Lightning/ListPayments /lnrpc.Lightning/LookupHtlcResolution /lnrpc.Lightning/PendingChannels /lnrpc.Lightning/SubscribeChannelBackups /lnrpc.Lightning/SubscribeChannelEvents /lnrpc.Lightning/SubscribeCustomMessages /lnrpc.Lightning/VerifyChanBackup /routerrpc.Router/BuildRoute /routerrpc.Router/EstimateRouteFee /routerrpc.Router/GetMissionControlConfig /routerrpc.Router/QueryMissionControl /routerrpc.Router/QueryProbability /routerrpc.Router/SubscribeHtlcEvents /routerrpc.Router/TrackPayment /routerrpc.Router/TrackPaymentV2 /routerrpc.Router/TrackPayments /wtclientrpc.WatchtowerClient/GetTowerInfo /wtclientrpc.WatchtowerClient/ListTowers /wtclientrpc.WatchtowerClient/Policy /wtclientrpc.WatchtowerClient/Stats ・おまけ1 RPCメソッド名にopenを含む要素を抽出するコマンド lncli listpermissions | jq '.method_permissions | to_entries[] | select(.key | test("open"; "i"))' { "key": "/lnrpc.Lightning/BatchOpenChannel", "value": { "permissions": [ { "entity": "onchain", "action": "write" }, { "entity": "offchain", "action": "write" } ] } } { "key": "/lnrpc.Lightning/OpenChannel", "value": { "permissions": [ { "entity": "onchain", "action": "write" }, { "entity": "offchain", "action": "write" } ] } } { "key": "/lnrpc.Lightning/OpenChannelSync", "value": { "permissions": [ { "entity": "onchain", "action": "write" }, { "entity": "offchain", "action": "write" } ] } } ・おまけ２ thunderhubで作ったmacaroonはテキストで出力されコピペして使うもので、macaroonファイルになってない。 HEXをmacaroonファイルにするには以下コマンドでできる。HEXをコピペして置換する。またYOURSの箇所を自分でわかりやすい名称に置換すると良い。 echo -n "HEX" | xxd -r -p > YOURS.macaroon thunderhubで"Create Invoices, Get Invoices, Get Wallet Info, Get Payments, Pay Invoices"をチェックして作ったmacaroonのpermissionsは以下となる。 { "version": 2, "location": "lnd", "root_key_id": "0", "permissions": [ "info:read", "invoices:read", "invoices:write", "offchain:read", "offchain:write" ], "caveats": null } ``` offchain:writeはあるがonchain:writeがないのでチャネル開閉はできないはず。

@ a95c6243:d345522c

Ständige Lügen und Unterstellungen, permanent falsche Fürsorge \ können Bausteine von emotionaler Manipulation sein. Mit dem Zweck, \ Macht und Kontrolle über eine andere Person auszuüben. \ Apotheken Umschau

Irgendetwas muss passiert sein: «Gaslighting» ist gerade Thema in vielen Medien. Heute bin ich nach längerer Zeit mal wieder über dieses Stichwort gestolpert. Das war in einem Artikel von Norbert Häring über Manipulationen des Deutschen Wetterdienstes (DWD). In diesem Fall ging es um eine Pressemitteilung vom Donnerstag zum «viel zu warmen» Winter 2024/25.

Häring wirft der Behörde vor, dreist zu lügen und Dinge auszulassen, um die Klimaangst wach zu halten. Was der Leser beim DWD nicht erfahre, sei, dass dieser Winter kälter als die drei vorangegangenen und kälter als der Durchschnitt der letzten zehn Jahre gewesen sei. Stattdessen werde der falsche Eindruck vermittelt, es würde ungebremst immer wärmer.

Wem also der zu Ende gehende Winter eher kalt vorgekommen sein sollte, mit dessen Empfinden stimme wohl etwas nicht. Das jedenfalls wolle der DWD uns einreden, so der Wirtschaftsjournalist. Und damit sind wir beim Thema Gaslighting.

Als Gaslighting wird eine Form psychischer Manipulation bezeichnet, mit der die Opfer desorientiert und zutiefst verunsichert werden, indem ihre eigene Wahrnehmung als falsch bezeichnet wird. Der Prozess führt zu Angst und Realitätsverzerrung sowie zur Zerstörung des Selbstbewusstseins. Die Bezeichnung kommt von dem britischen Theaterstück «Gas Light» aus dem Jahr 1938, in dem ein Mann mit grausamen Psychotricks seine Frau in den Wahnsinn treibt.

Damit Gaslighting funktioniert, muss das Opfer dem Täter vertrauen. Oft wird solcher Psychoterror daher im privaten oder familiären Umfeld beschrieben, ebenso wie am Arbeitsplatz. Jedoch eignen sich die Prinzipien auch perfekt zur Manipulation der Massen. Vermeintliche Autoritäten wie Ärzte und Wissenschaftler, oder «der fürsorgliche Staat» und Institutionen wie die UNO oder die WHO wollen uns doch nichts Böses. Auch Staatsmedien, Faktenchecker und diverse NGOs wurden zu «vertrauenswürdigen Quellen» erklärt. Das hat seine Wirkung.

Warum das Thema Gaslighting derzeit scheinbar so populär ist, vermag ich nicht zu sagen. Es sind aber gerade in den letzten Tagen und Wochen auffällig viele Artikel dazu erschienen, und zwar nicht nur von Psychologen. Die Frankfurter Rundschau hat gleich mehrere publiziert, und Anwälte interessieren sich dafür offenbar genauso wie Apotheker.

Die Apotheken Umschau machte sogar auf «Medical Gaslighting» aufmerksam. Davon spreche man, wenn Mediziner Symptome nicht ernst nähmen oder wenn ein gesundheitliches Problem vom behandelnden Arzt «schnöde heruntergespielt» oder abgetan würde. Kommt Ihnen das auch irgendwie bekannt vor? Der Begriff sei allerdings irreführend, da er eine manipulierende Absicht unterstellt, die «nicht gewährleistet» sei.

Apropos Gaslighting: Die noch amtierende deutsche Bundesregierung meldete heute, es gelte, «weiter [sic!] gemeinsam daran zu arbeiten, einen gerechten und dauerhaften Frieden für die Ukraine zu erreichen». Die Ukraine, wo sich am Montag «der völkerrechtswidrige Angriffskrieg zum dritten Mal jährte», verteidige ihr Land und «unsere gemeinsamen Werte».

Merken Sie etwas? Das Demokratieverständnis mag ja tatsächlich inzwischen in beiden Ländern ähnlich traurig sein. Bezüglich Friedensbemühungen ist meine Wahrnehmung jedoch eine andere. Das muss an meinem Gedächtnis liegen.

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ a95c6243:d345522c

Europa – das Ganze ist eine wunderbare Idee, \ aber das war der Kommunismus auch. \ Loriot

«Europa hat fertig», könnte man unken, und das wäre nicht einmal sehr verwegen. Mit solch einer Einschätzung stünden wir nicht alleine, denn die Stimmen in diese Richtung mehren sich. Der französische Präsident Emmanuel Macron warnte schon letztes Jahr davor, dass «unser Europa sterben könnte». Vermutlich hatte er dabei andere Gefahren im Kopf als jetzt der ungarische Ministerpräsident Viktor Orbán, der ein «baldiges Ende der EU» prognostizierte. Das Ergebnis könnte allerdings das gleiche sein.

Neben vordergründigen Themenbereichen wie Wirtschaft, Energie und Sicherheit ist das eigentliche Problem jedoch die obskure Mischung aus aufgegebener Souveränität und geschwollener Arroganz, mit der europäische Politiker:innende unterschiedlicher Couleur aufzutreten pflegen. Und das Tüpfelchen auf dem i ist die bröckelnde Legitimation politischer Institutionen dadurch, dass die Stimmen großer Teile der Bevölkerung seit Jahren auf vielfältige Weise ausgegrenzt werden.

Um «UnsereDemokratie» steht es schlecht. Dass seine Mandate immer schwächer werden, merkt natürlich auch unser «Führungspersonal». Entsprechend werden die Maßnahmen zur Gängelung, Überwachung und Manipulation der Bürger ständig verzweifelter. Parallel dazu plustern sich in Paris Macron, Scholz und einige andere noch einmal mächtig in Sachen Verteidigung und «Kriegstüchtigkeit» auf.

Momentan gilt es auch, das Überschwappen covidiotischer und verschwörungsideologischer Auswüchse aus den USA nach Europa zu vermeiden. So ein «MEGA» (Make Europe Great Again) können wir hier nicht gebrauchen. Aus den Vereinigten Staaten kommen nämlich furchtbare Nachrichten. Beispielsweise wurde einer der schärfsten Kritiker der Corona-Maßnahmen kürzlich zum Gesundheitsminister ernannt. Dieser setzt sich jetzt für eine Neubewertung der mRNA-«Impfstoffe» ein, was durchaus zu einem Entzug der Zulassungen führen könnte.

Der europäischen Version von «Verteidigung der Demokratie» setzte der US-Vizepräsident J. D. Vance auf der Münchner Sicherheitskonferenz sein Verständnis entgegen: «Demokratie stärken, indem wir unseren Bürgern erlauben, ihre Meinung zu sagen». Das Abschalten von Medien, das Annullieren von Wahlen oder das Ausschließen von Menschen vom politischen Prozess schütze gar nichts. Vielmehr sei dies der todsichere Weg, die Demokratie zu zerstören.

In der Schweiz kamen seine Worte deutlich besser an als in den meisten europäischen NATO-Ländern. Bundespräsidentin Karin Keller-Sutter lobte die Rede und interpretierte sie als «Plädoyer für die direkte Demokratie». Möglicherweise zeichne sich hier eine außenpolitische Kehrtwende in Richtung integraler Neutralität ab, meint mein Kollege Daniel Funk. Das wären doch endlich mal ein paar gute Nachrichten.

Von der einstigen Idee einer europäischen Union mit engeren Beziehungen zwischen den Staaten, um Konflikte zu vermeiden und das Wohlergehen der Bürger zu verbessern, sind wir meilenweit abgekommen. Der heutige korrupte Verbund unter technokratischer Leitung ähnelt mehr einem Selbstbedienungsladen mit sehr begrenztem Zugang. Die EU-Wahlen im letzten Sommer haben daran ebenso wenig geändert, wie die Bundestagswahl am kommenden Sonntag darauf einen Einfluss haben wird.

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ 9e69e420:d12360c2

Chef's notes

arbitray

• test
• of
• chefs notes

hedding 2

Details

• ⏲️ Prep time: 20
• 🍳 Cook time: 1 hour
• 🍽️ Servings: 5

Ingredients

• Test ingredient
• 2nd test ingredient

Directions

1. Bake
2. Cool

@ a95c6243:d345522c

Die «moralische Weltordnung» – eine Art Astrologie. Friedrich Nietzsche

Das Treffen der BRICS-Staaten beim Gipfel im russischen Kasan war sicher nicht irgendein politisches Event. Gastgeber Wladimir Putin habe «Hof gehalten», sagen die Einen, China und Russland hätten ihre Vorstellung einer multipolaren Weltordnung zelebriert, schreiben Andere.

In jedem Fall zeigt die Anwesenheit von über 30 Delegationen aus der ganzen Welt, dass von einer geostrategischen Isolation Russlands wohl keine Rede sein kann. Darüber hinaus haben sowohl die Anreise von UN-Generalsekretär António Guterres als auch die Meldungen und Dementis bezüglich der Beitrittsbemühungen des NATO-Staats Türkei für etwas Aufsehen gesorgt.

Im Spannungsfeld geopolitischer und wirtschaftlicher Umbrüche zeigt die neue Allianz zunehmendes Selbstbewusstsein. In Sachen gemeinsamer Finanzpolitik schmiedet man interessante Pläne. Größere Unabhängigkeit von der US-dominierten Finanzordnung ist dabei ein wichtiges Ziel.

Beim BRICS-Wirtschaftsforum in Moskau, wenige Tage vor dem Gipfel, zählte ein nachhaltiges System für Finanzabrechnungen und Zahlungsdienste zu den vorrangigen Themen. Während dieses Treffens ging der russische Staatsfonds eine Partnerschaft mit dem Rechenzentrumsbetreiber BitRiver ein, um Bitcoin-Mining-Anlagen für die BRICS-Länder zu errichten.

Die Initiative könnte ein Schritt sein, Bitcoin und andere Kryptowährungen als Alternativen zu traditionellen Finanzsystemen zu etablieren. Das Projekt könnte dazu führen, dass die BRICS-Staaten den globalen Handel in Bitcoin abwickeln. Vor dem Hintergrund der Diskussionen über eine «BRICS-Währung» wäre dies eine Alternative zu dem ursprünglich angedachten Korb lokaler Währungen und zu goldgedeckten Währungen sowie eine mögliche Ergänzung zum Zahlungssystem BRICS Pay.

Dient der Bitcoin also der Entdollarisierung? Oder droht er inzwischen, zum Gegenstand geopolitischer Machtspielchen zu werden? Angesichts der globalen Vernetzungen ist es oft schwer zu durchschauen, «was eine Show ist und was im Hintergrund von anderen Strippenziehern insgeheim gesteuert wird». Sicher können Strukturen wie Bitcoin auch so genutzt werden, dass sie den Herrschenden dienlich sind. Aber die Grundeigenschaft des dezentralisierten, unzensierbaren Peer-to-Peer Zahlungsnetzwerks ist ihm schließlich nicht zu nehmen.

Wenn es nach der EZB oder dem IWF geht, dann scheint statt Instrumentalisierung momentan eher der Kampf gegen Kryptowährungen angesagt. Jürgen Schaaf, Senior Manager bei der Europäischen Zentralbank, hat jedenfalls dazu aufgerufen, Bitcoin «zu eliminieren». Der Internationale Währungsfonds forderte El Salvador, das Bitcoin 2021 als gesetzliches Zahlungsmittel eingeführt hat, kürzlich zu begrenzenden Maßnahmen gegen das Kryptogeld auf.

Dass die BRICS-Staaten ein freiheitliches Ansinnen im Kopf haben, wenn sie Kryptowährungen ins Spiel bringen, darf indes auch bezweifelt werden. Im Abschlussdokument bekennen sich die Gipfel-Teilnehmer ausdrücklich zur UN, ihren Programmen und ihrer «Agenda 2030». Ernst Wolff nennt das «eine Bankrotterklärung korrupter Politiker, die sich dem digital-finanziellen Komplex zu 100 Prozent unterwerfen».

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.