@ df478568:2a951e67

XMMP is a protocol that allows journalists and plebs alike to create a phone number that is not tied to your identity. Why would you want to do this? Are you some kind of hacker? Well… yeah… we are hackers, technically. That doesn't mean we want to break the non-aggression principle and steal sats from OGs or anything. Perhaps it's better to call ourselves cybersecurity experts to placate neurotypical people.

Every Bitcoiner worth their sats knows phone numbers are a security hole. Sure, if you're a super cypherpunk with a 100% KYC-free stack or never intend to spend your “precious,” then this might not concern you. You can sell your sats on Bisq for paper cash trash and pay your water bill or whatever. It's a significant inconvenience, but I know some people who do this. Satoshi bless them! But the rest of us mere mortals find it easier to use bill-pay services with Strike. Unfortunately, the powers that be force us to use our telephone numbers as a de-facto identity system.

This phone number must be trusted to a third party, and as Nick Szabo famously said, "Trusted third parties are security holes." This guy I go pleb camping with thinks it's funny that Bitcoiners never want to give away their phone numbers. It's true because phone numbers create an attack surface—specifically, they may be used for SIM swaps to drain our Bitcoin bank accounts or the associated traditional bank accounts. This is not the only attack. Smishing is also a concern, but that threat requires diligence since anyone using SMS is susceptible to it. XMMP won't prevent smishing; however, it will provide a phone number people can use to text or call without tying the number to your identity. Thus, even if attackers somehow compromise this phone number, it can't be used to drain your accounts.

What Is XMMP?

XMMP is a protocol that functions similarly to cellular phone service on almost any device with internet access. I don't think it'll work on a Kindle, but to be honest, I haven't tried. XMMP can be used alongside your existing phone, laptop, and desktop computers. You can safely give this phone number to all your hardcore hacker friends without worrying. It's affordable too—the service costs \$5.00 per month, and the service I use accepts sats for payment. Though this doesn’t include data, you can easily use XMMP over Wi-Fi.

If you want a separate phone running GrapheneOS or CalyxOS, you can pay for data in multiple ways. Personally, I like Silent Link—it's run by a fellow pleb and accepts sats via the Lightning Network.

How To Set Up XMMP

If you identify as a non-technical person, you can buy a phone and suite from Above Phone*, which will help you set everything up. I'm more of a DIY-as-much-as-I-can kind of guy, so I opted to set mine up myself. I haven't personally tried Above Phone, but I've heard good things about their service.

If you already have a phone but want a secure method to call or text your contacts, here's what to do:

1. Install Cheogram on your Android phone. Sorry, but I don’t know if Apple's overlords allow this for iOS devices.

2. Choose a phone number with JMP. They charge \$5.00 monthly and accept Bitcoin as payment. While you could port your current phone number, the purpose of this article is to create a fresh, anonymous phone number that cannot be traced back to you as an instrument for draining your bank account—so we won't get into porting here.

3. Once you've paid, you will receive a message in the Cheogram app confirming your order. It might take some time since payments are on-chain—so be patient. You can also pay with a credit card if you prefer, but we use sats in this household.

How To Get Data

You might occasionally want to send messages away from 127.0.0.1. My favorite solution is to use the services provided by Silent Link. They offer an eSIM, and while you can also get a phone number from Silent Link, it's mainly useful for services like Signal. However, it costs around \$20 worth of sats per month rather than JMP's \$5/month. Assuming all Bitcoiners are cheapskates like me—well, you do you!

I chose Silent Link's data plan. Initially, I messed up this process because I refreshed the webpage on my phone. Don't do that, or you'll have to spend another twenty bucks to set it up again. If you carefully follow Silent Link's instructions, you should be fine. Patience is crucial, and admittedly, that's something I'm not good at—which explains why I paid more sats than needed.

/* Above Phone is an affiliate link and I may get a small commission if you use my referral link.

☮️

npub1marc26z8nh3xkj5rcx7ufkatvx6ueqhp5vfw9v5teq26z254renshtf3g0

Support Zap This Blog

896,168

Tip Sats

Got Questions?

As seen on https://zapthisblog.com/save-sats-with-on-sms-and-cellular-with-xmmp/

@ 3d073b19:4ae60f39

Markdown test:

1. italic
2. bold in openletter
3. Link: Nostr's current site

@ 3d073b19:4ae60f39

This is a test openletter

@ 34f1ddab:2ca0cf7c

Losing access to your cryptocurrency can feel like losing a part of your future. Whether it’s due to a forgotten password, a damaged seed backup, or a simple mistake in a transfer, the stress can be overwhelming. Fortunately, cryptrecver.com is here to assist! With our expert-led recovery services, you can safely and swiftly reclaim your lost Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies.

Why Trust Crypt Recver? 🤝 🛠️ Expert Recovery Solutions At Crypt Recver, we specialize in addressing complex wallet-related issues. Our skilled engineers have the tools and expertise to handle:

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

🚀 Fast and Efficient Recovery We understand that time is crucial in crypto recovery. Our optimized systems enable you to regain access to your funds quickly, focusing on speed without compromising security. With a success rate of over 90%, you can rely on us to act swiftly on your behalf.

🔒 Privacy is Our Priority Your confidentiality is essential. Every recovery session is conducted with the utmost care, ensuring all processes are encrypted and confidential. You can rest assured that your sensitive information remains private.

💻 Advanced Technology Our proprietary tools and brute-force optimization techniques maximize recovery efficiency. Regardless of how challenging your case may be, our technology is designed to give you the best chance at retrieving your crypto.

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

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

🛡️ Real-Time Dust Attack Protection Our services extend beyond recovery. We offer dust attack protection, keeping your activity anonymous and your funds secure, shielding your identity from unwanted tracking, ransomware, and phishing attempts.

🎉 Start Your Recovery Journey Today! Ready to reclaim your lost crypto? Don’t wait until it’s too late! 👉 cryptrecver.com

📞 Need Immediate Assistance? Connect with Us! For real-time support or questions, reach out to our dedicated team on: ✉️ Telegram: t.me/crypptrcver 💬 WhatsApp: +1(941)317–1821

Crypt Recver is your trusted partner in cryptocurrency recovery. Let us turn your challenges into victories. Don’t hesitate — your crypto future starts now! 🚀✨

Act fast and secure your digital assets with cryptrecver.com.Losing access to your cryptocurrency can feel like losing a part of your future. Whether it’s due to a forgotten password, a damaged seed backup, or a simple mistake in a transfer, the stress can be overwhelming. Fortunately, cryptrecver.com is here to assist! With our expert-led recovery services, you can safely and swiftly reclaim your lost Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies.

# Why Trust Crypt Recver? 🤝

🛠️ Expert Recovery Solutions\ At Crypt Recver, we specialize in addressing complex wallet-related issues. Our skilled engineers have the tools and expertise to handle:

• Partially lost or forgotten seed phrases
• Extracting funds from outdated or invalid wallet addresses
• Recovering data from damaged hardware wallets
• Restoring coins from old or unsupported wallet formats

You’re not just getting a service; you’re gaining a partner in your cryptocurrency journey.

🚀 Fast and Efficient Recovery\ We understand that time is crucial in crypto recovery. Our optimized systems enable you to regain access to your funds quickly, focusing on speed without compromising security. With a success rate of over 90%, you can rely on us to act swiftly on your behalf.

🔒 Privacy is Our Priority\ Your confidentiality is essential. Every recovery session is conducted with the utmost care, ensuring all processes are encrypted and confidential. You can rest assured that your sensitive information remains private.

💻 Advanced Technology\ Our proprietary tools and brute-force optimization techniques maximize recovery efficiency. Regardless of how challenging your case may be, our technology is designed to give you the best chance at retrieving your crypto.

Our Recovery Services Include: 📈

• Bitcoin Recovery: Lost access to your Bitcoin wallet? We help recover lost wallets, private keys, and passphrases.
• Transaction Recovery: Mistakes happen — whether it’s an incorrect wallet address or a lost password, let us manage the recovery.
• Cold Wallet Restoration: If your cold wallet is failing, we can safely extract your assets and migrate them into a secure new wallet.
• Private Key Generation: Lost your private key? Our experts can help you regain control using advanced methods while ensuring your privacy.

⚠️ What We Don’t Do\ While we can handle many scenarios, some limitations exist. For instance, we cannot recover funds stored in custodial wallets or cases where there is a complete loss of four or more seed words without partial information available. We are transparent about what’s possible, so you know what to expect

# Don’t Let Lost Crypto Hold You Back!

Did you know that between 3 to 3.4 million BTC — nearly 20% of the total supply — are estimated to be permanently lost? Don’t become part of that statistic! Whether it’s due to a forgotten password, sending funds to the wrong address, or damaged drives, we can help you navigate these challenges

🛡️ Real-Time Dust Attack Protection\ Our services extend beyond recovery. We offer dust attack protection, keeping your activity anonymous and your funds secure, shielding your identity from unwanted tracking, ransomware, and phishing attempts.

🎉 Start Your Recovery Journey Today!\ Ready to reclaim your lost crypto? Don’t wait until it’s too late!\ 👉 cryptrecver.com

📞 Need Immediate Assistance? Connect with Us!\ For real-time support or questions, reach out to our dedicated team on:\ ✉️ Telegram: t.me/crypptrcver\ 💬 WhatsApp: +1(941)317–1821

Crypt Recver is your trusted partner in cryptocurrency recovery. Let us turn your challenges into victories. Don’t hesitate — your crypto future starts now! 🚀✨

Act fast and secure your digital assets with cryptrecver.com.

@ 6c05c73e:c4356f17

Descrição da Embraer (EMBR3)

A Embraer é uma empresa brasileira que nasceu de uma iniciativa do governo brasileiro de implementar uma indústria aeronáutica no país. Após a iniciativa do oficial de aviação do exército, Casimiro Montenegro em convidar o engenheiro Focke-Wulf e seus engenheiros para que atuassem no CTA(Centro Técnico de Aeronáutica). Em, 1953. A empresa surgiu para substituir a importação de jatos para o país.

Mais tarde, sobre a direção de Ozires Silva. Nasce a Embraer SA, em 1969. Em uma sociedade de economia mista vinculada ao ministério da aeronáutica. Mas, em 1992 a empresa foi colocada na lista de empresas a serem privatizadas e em 1994, sob a tutela de Itamar Franco a empresa foi leiloada.

Portanto, os novos majoritários da empresa eram dois fundos de pensão; Previ(20%) e Sistel (20%) e a Cia Bozano, Simonsen(20%) e alguns minoritários tinham algo em torno de (20%) . Vale entender que antes de ser privatizada a empresa estava a passos fortes rumo à falência. E, teve que passar por renovações após se tornar privada.

Contudo, vale lembrar também que alguns anos após a privatização, a empresa passou a figurar como a terceira maior fabricante de jatos comerciais do mundo. E, uma das empresas mais valiosas da Bovespa.

Visão geral

Primordialmente, a Embraer é uma empresa que atua projetando, fabricando e vendendo suas próprias aeronaves. Nesse segmento, ela conta com algumas classes de aviões: Defesa e segurança, comercial e agro. Ademais, estende- se também a serviços e suportes prestados.

A Embraer também atua no desenvolvimento de softwares para a indústria aeronáutica e conta com um dos centros de realidade virtual mais avançados e tecnológicos do mundo.

Desde sua fundação a Embraer já entregou mais de 8.000 aeronaves mundo afora. Ela é a maior fabricante de jatos de até 150 lugares e a maior exportadora de bens de alto valor agregado. Ela detém escritórios, centros de serviços e distribuição na África, Ásia e Europa.

Mercado

Com um mundo cada vez mais rápido e mais globalizado. A frase: "tempo é dinheiro". Nunca antes na história fez mais sentido. A demanda por voos domésticos e internacionais segue cada vez maior e com demanda para muito mais.

Entretanto, as maiores vendas da empresa não vieram do setor comercial. Mas, sim em defesa e segurança. Com um aumento de 12% (-14% em 1T24 vs -2% 1 T 25) nas vendas por aeronaves de defesa. Esse segmento foi o que mais cresceu nos últimos meses. Em partes pelas tensões geopolíticas e em partes pelo reconhecimento do KC-390.

A demanda por aviões militares só aumenta e segundo pesquisas é um mercado que pode alcançar $29bi até 2034.

Oportunidades

1 - Pedidos aumentaram

Olhando esses cenários. Eu enxergo 3 grandes oportunidades dentro da Embraer. A primeira e mais óbvia é sobre as vendas de aeronaves de defesa e também a parte executiva.

Apesar de ter entregado 30 jatos no 1T25. A empresa reportou que tem pedidos na casa dos $26bi, o que representa um aumento de 25% em relação ao período similar do último ano. Isso é enorme para os acionistas!

Seguindo a lógica, quanto maiores as vendas de aeronaves. Mais demanda você terá por serviços e suportes. Essa jogada é muito esperta, você vende a solução e detém a ferramenta para manter ela. Apesar da empresa ter reportado prejuízo -R$429mi.

Estou otimista pois a empresa tem uma grande leva de pedidos para entregar, que vai ocasionar o nosso segundo item…

2 - Ativos em caixa

Para contextualizar, a empresa está sentada sobre um capital de giro de R$2.7bi em 1T25. Em função da sazonalidade. Seus ativos aumentaram, em razão de um estoque de R$1,9Bi. Que são respectivos a entrega de aeronaves para os próximos trimestres.

Isso elevou o fluxo de caixa livre para R$2.3bi em 1T2025. Soma se todo esse caixa a redução da dívida que saiu de 1,8 x para 0,5 x no mesmo período. Reduzindo a alavancagem da empresa.

3 - Aviões de defesa e segurança

Aqui é onde está o “pulo do gato”. A demanda por aeronaves desse tipo aumentou muito, como dito anteriormente. E, a Embraer está muito bem posicionada e consolidada como uma marca de prestígio global. Colômbia, clientes Africanos, Áustria e Holanda. São clientes confirmados que já encomendaram para a Embraer.

Riscos

Na minha visão, o maior risco hoje em se investir em Embraer. São as chamadas "golden shares” do governo. Esse é de longe o fator que mais me preocupa. Mesmo, não sendo majoritário. Mas, sabemos como as coisas por aqui funcionam.

Ademais, um risco menor que percebo. É justamente pelas ações estarem no "hype". Isso pode fazer com que o pequeno investidor embarque de cara nessa jornada e veja o preço de suas ações derreterem sistematicamente. Contudo, toda cautela deve ser tomada.

Catalisadores

Vários pontos me chamam a atenção na empresa, tais como:

• O aumento da demanda por aeronaves de defesa e segurança.
• Bom fluxo de vendas para aeronaves executivas.
• O bom fluxo de caixa da empresa.
• A redução de alavancagem.
• A premissa de entrega de várias unidades ao longo dos próximos trimestres.
• E, consequentemente, a variação cambial também pode contribuir e muito para aumentar as margens da empresa.

Concluindo quero destacar que a empresa tem muito estoque para entregar (R$1.9BI). Lembre-se, a empresa já vendeu as aeronaves. Por sazonalidade, ela não entregou ainda. E, quando isso ocorrer, vamos ver um volume de dinheiro cada vez maior dentro da empresa. Por isso, não me surpreende que a empresa tenha performado 97% vs 2% do IBOV no mesmo período. Eu olharia com bastante carinho para a empresa nos próximos meses.

FAQ

Quem é o maior acionista da Embraer?

O maior acionista individual da Embraer é a Brandes Investment Partners, LP. A Brandes possui 14,4% das ações da companhia.

Qual a participação do governo na Embraer RI?

O governo, apesar da privatização, detém uma participação acionária especial, conhecida como "golden share", que lhe concede direito de veto em decisões estratégicas da empresa.

Quem é o proprietário da Embraer?

Seus principais acionistas individuais são os fundos estrangeiros Brandes e Mondrian. Qual é o capital social da Embraer RI?

Bio

Investir não precisa ser um bicho de sete cabeças! Na Threedolar, democratizamos o acesso ao mundo dos investimentos, oferecendo conteúdo claro e prático. Comece hoje mesmo a construir seu futuro financeiro!

Disclaimer

Lembre-se: este não é um conselho de investimento. Faça sua própria pesquisa antes de investir. Resultados passados não garantem lucros futuros. Cuide do seu dinheiro!

Referências:

• https://www.fundamentus.com.br/detalhes.php?papel=EMBR3&h=1
• https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embraer#/media/Ficheiro:EMB-countries.png
• https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embraer
• https://embraer.com/media/tour/
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJFnHOYq6h4
• https://www.iata.org/en/pressroom/2025-releases/2025-01-30-01/
• https://www.precedenceresearch.com/military-aircraft-market
• https://www.edrotacultural.com.br/vendas-da-embraer-para-forcas-armadas-registram-alta/
• https://www.poder360.com.br/poder-economia/embraer-anuncia-venda-de-4-aeronaves-para-novo-cliente-africano/
• https://aeroin.net/colombia-deve-comprar-tres-jatos-kc-390-da-embraer-afirma-ministro/#google_vignette
• https://api.mziq.com/mzfilemanager/v2/d/12a56b3a-7b37-4dba-b80a-f3358bf66b71/64eb0439-65bb-2e7f-dd61-ac017ad03886?origin=1 *

@ 6c05c73e:c4356f17

Porque investir R$100

Um guia politicamente diferente de investimento

Você já certamente se pegou na seguinte situação. Paguei tudo o que devia. E, agora me sobrou cem reais para investir.

Principalmente, se você é novo e está no seu primeiro emprego. Isso é muito comum. Contudo, mesmo os mais experimentados passam por isso.

No entanto, vem aquela pergunta na cabeça. Será que eu realmente preciso investir esses cem reais? Afinal, é uma quantia pequena e qual seria o retorno disso?

Contudo, para responder sua dúvida. A resposta é sempre sim. Se, algum dia na sua vida. Você quiser acumular recursos e escapar desse círculo vicioso. Precisa acumular e investir.

Todavia, vamos analisar nesse artigo alguns outros aspectos que podem elevar x10 esse valor investido.

Quando investir R$100?

Agora, amanhã ou ano que vem?

Muitos pensam que todo dinheiro ganho precisa IMEDIATAMENTE ser investido. E, na verdade isso não precisa ser assim.

Portanto, todo o dinheiro ganho deve ser aplicado com diligência. Decidir quando investir o dinheiro é uma tarefa crucial. Mas, antes disso acontecer. Você precisa definir seus objetivos.

Sobretudo, aonde você vai colocar seu dinheiro. Vai determinar o ritmo como investe. E, isso é crucial em uma jornada de investimentos.

Aonde?

“Para manter uma fogueira, tem que botar mais lenha”

Espera um pouco. O que essa frase quer dizer? Vamos criar uma situação hipotética aqui e analisar três formas de investimento:

Investir em ações na bolsa de valores (renda variável) Investir em si mesmo (aumentar capacidade)

Primeira hipótese:

Você investiu R$100 o ano todo. Todos os meses. Isso gerou um bruto de R$1.200. Você estudo e se dedicou. Analisou ações, assistiu a vários vídeos e análises. E fez 15% de retorno no ano.

Nessa primeira hipótese, você acumulou R$1.200 + 15% de retorno (R$180). O que te rendeu R$1380 brutos. Com essa quantia a incidência de impostos não existe. Então, sem DARFS por aqui.

Compensou investir 2 horas por dia * 200 dias no ano =1.752.000 min. Para poder ganhar R$180?

Dahhhh, não. Você ficou mais experiente e aprendeu. Mas, a quantia é muito pequena e não faz cócegas. Tampouco te faz sorrir. E te tira dessa situação.

Segunda hipótese:

Eu não sei qual o seu ofício nesse momento. Mas, eu sei de duas coisas. Ou você gosta e quer se especializar. Ou você quer trocar de ofício logo logo. Então, meu consagrado(a). Você já sabe…

Agora, vamos pegar esses R$100 mensais e investir em um curso técnico. Pois, é mais rápido que uma faculdade. Será seu primeiro diploma oficial, te torna alguém e te dá um ofício.

Assim sendo, você tem grandes chances de trocar de trabalho. Ter aumento salarial é certamente no prazo de um ano. Você vai ganhar muitos mais que os R$180 brutos de rentabilidade do primeiro caso.

Agora, quer saber a real porque ninguém te fala isso no YouTube, Instagram e TikTok?

Meu consagrado, as pessoas só te recomendam o que é bom para elas. Não há nada de errado com isso. O que quero te fazer enxergar aqui. É que você está sozinho (ou tem que estar, para refletir) e precisa escolher o que é melhor para você.

Contudo, é importante para para pensar por um tempo e entender o que vai ser melhor para você. Qual melhor caminho seguir. E ponto, só você sabe o que é melhor para você.

Como?

Para fechar nosso raciocínio de hoje. Vamos a pergunta de um milhão de dólares. Mas, como eu faço isso? Meu querido(a), você vai fazer um exercício comigo logo menos.

Você vai deixar seu celular no silencioso. Colocar um timer de 15 minutos. Pegar um papel e caneta e anotar em uma folha o que você gosta + o que você você gostaria de fazer da sua vida.

Logo, essa lista tem que conter o SEU gosto. Não do seu amigo, do influenciador, da celebridade ou do atleta. Essas pessoas tem influência sobre sua vida? Claro! Mas, cabe a você refletir sobre o que realmente quer.

Naturalmente, você não vai colocar lá na sua lista; quero uma Ferrari esse ano. Porque não é assim que funciona. Na real, você pode querer a Ferrari. Sem problema algum.

Mas, saiba que antes da Ferrari. Vai ter que vir o Gol, o Civic, a 325, o 911 e daí a Ferrari. Tudo na vida é passo meu caro(a). Ou você acha que vai dar saltos quânticos na vida sem estar preparado? Não é assim que a vida funciona.

Em suma,

para concluir esse texto. Vamos fazer o resumão prático do que fazer com cem reais mensais:

*** Tire um tempo para entender o que quer e o que tu gosta. * Visualize e anote seus objetivos que quer em uma folha. * Invista em você incansavelmente. * Você vai chegar ao topo da montanha. Mas, tem que subir um nível por vez.**

Bio

Se chegou até aqui é porque gostou e quer mudar de vida. Manda pro teu colega que tá precisando desse tapa de luva. Obrigado pelo seu tempo.

@ 3c7dc2c5:805642a8

🧠Quote(s) of the week:

'Bitcoin is a high-IQ, low-time-preference asset in a world addicted to DoorDash, dopamine, and debt. Holding Bitcoin requires patience, conviction, and the ability to not panic when CNBC tells you it’s dead for the 47th time. That rules out, oh, I don’t know - 95% of the population? This isn’t some egalitarian revolution. This is a cognitive filter disguised as a monetary network. The rich, the strategic, the elite - those who understand volatility as an opportunity - will stack the hardest asset on Earth while the masses beg for interest rate cuts and $600 stimmies to buy groceries they can't afford.

It's not a level playing field. It's a time-preference war, and Bitcoin is the scoreboard. And every cycle, we watch it happen again. The media ridicules it, the politicians fear it, and the smart money buys more. While fiat punishes savers and rewards financial nihilism, Bitcoin inverts the whole structure. It’s a vault for those who can delay gratification, think generationally, and understand that true wealth is preserved rather than printed. The game isn’t rigged. It’s just calibrated for adults.' - Adam Livingston

'Bitcoin is an extremely simple thesis. If you think governments will stop debasing and debanking: number go down. If you think they won’t stop debasing and debanking: number go up'- Alex Gladstein

Something to ponder on.

🧡Bitcoin news🧡

On the 28th of April:

➡️Hunter Horsley: 'Bitcoin at $94k, yet — Google searches for "Bitcoin" near long-term lows. This hasn't been retail-driven. Institutions, advisors, corporations, and nations have come into the space. The types of investors buying Bitcoin are expanding.'

➡️Daniel Batten: 'Cambridge has just released their updated report on Bitcoin mining. For the first time, their report shows that most (52.4%) of the Bitcoin network is now powered by zero-emission energy sources (up from 37% in their last report).

Here's a summary of their findings:

https://x.com/DSBatten/status/1916903476610650202

You can read the full report here

➡️Arizona’s Bitcoin Reserve bill (SB 1025) just passed the House and now heads to the desk of Governor Katie Hobbs. However, Governor Hobbs has vowed to veto any legislation until a budget impasse over funding for disability services is resolved.

On the 29th of April:

➡️Bitcoin Archive: 'South Korea's ruling party to approve spot Bitcoin ETFs, scrap restrictive banking crypto rules, and introduce crypto-friendly framework THIS YEAR, if it wins the June election.'

➡️President Trump's Executive Director says there is a "space race" amongst countries to accumulate Bitcoin: "We view Bitcoin as digital gold."

➡️U.S. to "turbo-charge" Bitcoin mining growth by allowing Bitcoin miners to build power plants and data centres near natural gas fields - Howard Lutnick, Commerce Secretary

➡️Japanese clothing company ANAP Holdings Inc. bought 35 Bitcoins worth $3.3 million. ANAP now holds 51.7 BTC, joining Japan’s growing corporate Bitcoin treasury movement.

➡️Semler Scientific adds 165 BTC for $15.7M, bringing total holdings to 3,467 BTC. The company reports a 23.8% BTC yield year-to-date.

➡️The Bitcoin hashrate has already surged over 17% since the start of the year.

➡️'This shattered a major myth for me: gold production isn’t slowing down—it’s accelerating. According to NYDIG, annual gold mining has been steadily increasing over time, about 1.6% per year, thanks to better extraction technology. In fact, 2024 saw a 1% year-over-year increase, setting an all-time high in gold output (World Gold Council). So why do so many still believe the outdated narrative that gold is becoming harder to find? The truth is: gold is effectively unlimited in supply—we just get better at digging it up. If that surprises you, you're probably not nearly bullish enough on Bitcoin.' - Robert Hefner https://i.ibb.co/JWCHndQk/Gpu-W9-R1-Xw-AAiy-Cv.jpg

On the 30th of April:

➡️The Bank of Italy identifies Bitcoin as an emerging risk factor with concerns for the financial system.

"The strong growth of Bitcoin and other crypto-assets with high price volatility means risks not only for investors but also potentially for financial stability, given the growing interconnections between the digital asset ecosystem, the traditional financial sector, and the real economy,”

Tell me you are scared of Bitcoin without telling me you are scared of Bitcoin.

➡️4 major wirehouses managing $10 TRILLION to start offering Bitcoin ETFs to clients this year, says BitWise CIO Matt Hougan. Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley, Wells Fargo, and UBS are coming to the party.

➡️Roswell, New Mexico, becomes the 1st United States city to launch a strategic Bitcoin reserve.

➡️BlackRock’s Bitcoin ETF IBIT has hit 600,000 BTC!

➡️Semler Scientific bought 165 Bitcoins worth $15.7m. They now hold 3,467 BTC on their balance sheet.

➡️Bitcoin News: 'El Salvador is still buying Bitcoin despite an IMF loan deal that required it to stop. Economy Minister Maria Luisa Hayem confirmed ongoing accumulation, calling Bitcoin “an important project” and a key asset for both the government and private sector.'

➡️New whales are buying Bitcoin faster than ever before!

➡️'ZachXBT says the $330M Bitcoin theft involved an elderly U.S. victim targeted by social engineering. The stolen 3,520 BTC were laundered through six exchanges and swapped into Monero, triggering a 50% price spike due to thin liquidity.' -Bitcoin News

On the 1st of May:

➡️North Carolina Bitcoin Reserve Bill has passed the House! This bill enables state retirement funds to invest up to $ 13 B.

➡️Tether’s latest attestation states the company holds $7.6 billion in Bitcoin.

➡️Europe's largest Bitcoin treasury company, The Blockchain Group, aspires to hold 1% of the total Bitcoin supply by 2033.

➡️FiatHawk: 'Central banks create fake money to buy real gold, and we’re supposed to pretend this isn’t theft. The game is rigged. Their paper is trash. Gold knows it. Bitcoin ends it. Stop believing the lie.

https://i.ibb.co/mrBZtY5P/Gpl4kl-ak-AA-xv-D.png

When the debt bubble collapses, only sound money with zero counterparty risk matters. Currently, sound money is less than 5% of debt money, and Bitcoin is so tiny it is barely visible on the chart. Stay humble and keep stacking.' https://i.ibb.co/QF0Vf9k8/Gpu-CCIWa-YAAng1-U.png

On the 2nd of May:

➡️ Regarding the whole OP_Return debate.

Grok: ++Key Points: ++ * The OP_RETURN debate in Bitcoin centers on whether its blockchain should store data beyond financial transactions, with ongoing controversy. * It began in 2010 with concerns about blockchain bloat, intensified in 2014 with the "OP_Return Wars," and continues today. * Research suggests the debate reflects a balance between Bitcoin's monetary purpose and potential for broader applications like Dapps. * Compromises, like setting a 40-byte limit in 2014, aimed to address concerns but didn't fully resolve tensions, influencing platforms like Ethereum.

++Background++ OP_RETURN is a Bitcoin script opcode allowing small data storage in transactions, useful for timestamping or Dapps, but raising concerns about blockchain bloat.

++Historical Context++

The debate started in 2010 with the BitDNS proposal, where Satoshi Nakamoto worried about scalability, leading to Namecoin. It peaked in 2014 with Counterparty's use, leading to a 40-byte limit compromise, later adjusted to 83 bytes by 2016.

++Recent Developments++ By 2018-2019, high OP_RETURN usage (20% of transactions) sparked fee debates, but usage has since declined, though data remains, with recent 2023 controversies over size limits.

If you are interested in Bitcoin, then you should check out the following video.

Great video from @GrassFedBitcoin explaining the current OP_RETURN situation. The choice isn’t between bloating the UTXO set or increasing OP_RETURN, it’s whether we normalize spam or we reject it. Is Bitcoin for data storage or financial transactions? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=15biQH1H140 Every Bitcoiner needs to see this! Vires in Numeris.

A great counterargument by Seth for Privacy:

https://x.com/sethforprivacy/status/1919003009880616976

Personally, I tend to agree with Seth.

To sum it up:

If you are running a node, you should switch from Core to Knots immediately. It's very straightforward, and you don't need to redo the initial block download.

If you arent running a node you are a leech and need to get your shit together.

➡️Tether CEO defends skipping MiCA, calling EU stablecoin rules “very dangerous.” Ardoino: “The European Central Bank is more interested in pushing the digital euro to control people and how they spend their money.”

On the 3rd of May:

➡️Arizona Governor Katie Hobbs has vetoed the state’s Strategic Bitcoin Reserve legislation after it was passed by the House and Senate. She states: “Arizonans’ retirement funds are not the place for the state to try untested investments like virtual currency.”

Apparently, the Arizona State Retirement System already holds 53,097 shares of MSTR. You can’t make this shit up.

➡️Vitalik Buterin: 'One of the best things about Bitcoin is how simple it is. This simplicity has lots of benefits. Let's bring those benefits to Ethereum.' Almost like Bitcoin is eh......(checks notes)......better tech. Just use Bitcoin, dumbfuck! 'It's only taken a decade, but Ethereum's creator is having an inkling that he never should have created Ethereum, which destroyed billions of precious capital and instead focused on Bitcoin.' - Vijay Boyapati

There is no second best!

On the 4th of May:

➡️Eli Nagar:

Heads up, Bitcoin holders: The EU will ban anonymous crypto accounts by July 2027. Every transaction above €1,000 will need your ID. Privacy is becoming extinct. Every new restriction is a marketing campaign for Bitcoin. “Hi, we’re the EU. We’ll surveil you, control your money, and criminalise privacy.” By doing that, they have decided to help promote the black market...great work, EU! Oh, and remember, the EU can't ban what it has no control over: hold your own private keys.

➡️Cumulative inflows into the Bitcoin ETFs have hit a fresh ATH of $ 40.62 B.

On the 5th of May:

➡️Brown University invested $4.9M in Bitcoin via BlackRock's IBIT, as disclosed in a recent SEC filing. The university owns 105K IBIT shares ($5.8M), 2.3% of Brown's reported $216M equity holdings.

➡️Strategy acquires 1,895 BTC for $180.3 million at an average price of $95,167 per bitcoin. As of May 4, 2025, they hold 555,450 BTC acquired for $38.08 billion at an average price of $68,550 per bitcoin.

💸Traditional Finance / Macro:

On the 3rd of May:

👉🏽Berkshire Hathaway cash pile hits record $347.7bn in 1Q as Warren Buffett sells stocks for 10th quarter in a row. Buffett is still raising cash. https://i.ibb.co/1GK6Dvzx/Gq-Bp6q-BW4-AAKKlm.jpg

🏦Banks:

👉🏽 No news

🌎Macro/Geopolitics:

On the 27th of April:

👉🏽World central banks are diversifying their reserves: Foreign holdings of Treasuries as % of US government debt have fallen to ~23%, the lowest in 22 years. The percentage is down ~11 percentage points over the last 9 years. At the same time, gold holdings as a % of global international reserves have hit ~18%, the highest in 26 years. The share has risen by ~8 percentage points since 2015. China has been one of the biggest buyers of gold over the last few years. Since the beginning of 2023, China’s gold reserves as a % of total foreign reserves have doubled to 7.1%.

Everyone wants gold. https://i.ibb.co/NgX11DZh/Gp4-GKc-HWMAAa-FYu.jpg

On the 28th of April:

👉🏽TKL: 'Tariffs are hitting American meat exports.

China's cancellations of US pork shipments are skyrocketing: China cancelled shipments of ~12,000 metric tons of US pork last week, the most since the 2020 pandemic, when global supply chains were halted. As a result, overall US pork export sales dropped to their lowest level since October, according to Bloomberg. This comes as American pork imports to China now face a massive 172% tariff. This includes the duties first imposed during the 2018 trade war.'

On the 29th of April:

👉🏽The U.S. Treasury will now need to borrow $514 billion this quarter, an increase of 320% from its previous estimate.

On the 30th of April:

👉🏽'Bad news for electricity consumers: despite 84 hours of negative pricing (2024: 62 hours), the average electricity price in the Netherlands in April was €75/MWh — nearly 30% higher than a year ago.' - Martien Visser

https://i.ibb.co/VsrFdKy/Gps0l-Au-Xs-AA20-OA.png

👉🏽Tax cuts for the rich lead to higher income inequality. However, they do not have any significant effect on economic growth or unemployment. Empirical evidence for advanced economies over 1965-2015:

https://academic.oup.com/ser/article/20/2/539/6500315?login=false

Trickle down never worked.

👉🏽"Since February 2020, home prices have increased 45%," according to Zillow So has the broad money supply. Not your house is getting more expensive; The money is getting devalued.

Money supply= +40%

Median home= +40%

Experts: "What could have ever caused this????"

And some freaking guru on Instagram or Tiktok is trying to convince you to get his/her 'buying/renting a house' course. https://i.ibb.co/bMXfW3vp/Gp0-CXg-Ka-YAAIhq-J.jpg

👉🏽SUMMARY OF US Q1 GDP REPORT: 1. The U.S. economy contracted at an annual rate of -0.3% in the first quarter, compared to expectations for an increase of 0.2%. That’s down from the growth of 2.4% in Q4. 2. Real consumer spending rose by 1.8% Y/Y, after increasing 4.0% in Q4. 3. The GDP Price Index rose 3.7%, above estimates of 3.1%. 4. Core PCE Prices rose 3.5%, after increasing 2.6% in Q4.

• Key Takeaway: Fears of stagflation are growing as the economy grinds to a halt and inflation ticks higher. - Jesse Cohen

👉🏽World debt has now officially crossed $300 TRILLION, and still continues to climb aggressively. This will not end well…

https://i.ibb.co/Kxm2bJs6/Gpyi-Ouwa-YAEDg-Pq.jpg

👉🏽'March PCE inflation, the Fed's preferred inflation measure, FALLS to 2.3%, above expectations of 2.2%. Core PCE inflation FALLS to 2.6%, in line with expectations of 2.6%. February Core PCE inflation was revised up to 3.0%. All eyes are on the Fed next week.' - TKL

🎁If you have made it this far, I would like to give you a little gift, well, in this case, two gifts:

Smitty's Bitcoin Retirement Guide:

"Helping you develop a better Bitcoin stacking target for life planning." - Sminston With This is a fantastic tool. Very, very useful. I will keep mentioning it. Bitcoin is a savings vehicle. Period!

https://x.com/sminston_with/status/1917605539279954391

The best kind of retirement starts in diapers and ends in diapers, so start now. https://i.ibb.co/4RwFxR0W/Gpys-GQga-YAIxm-MX.jpg

nofinancialadvice

Credit: I have used multiple sources!

My savings account: Bitcoin The tool I recommend for setting up a Bitcoin savings plan: PocketBitcoin especially suited for beginners or people who want to invest in Bitcoin with an automated investment plan once a week or monthly.

Use the code SE3997

Get your Bitcoin out of exchanges. Save them on a hardware wallet, run your own node...be your own bank. Not your keys, not your coins. It's that simple. ⠀ ⠀

⠀⠀ ⠀ ⠀⠀⠀

Do you think this post is helpful to you?

If so, please share it and support my work with a zap.

▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃

⭐ Many thanks⭐

Felipe - Bitcoin Friday!

▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃

@ c9badfea:610f861a

1. Install Squircle (it's free and open source)
2. Launch the app, tap the ⁞ icon and select Settings
   • Configure your Git credentials as needed
   • Add any remote servers under Cloud & Servers
3. Return to the editor view and enjoy your mobile IDE

ℹ️ To clone a Git repository, tap ☰, long-press a directory in the file tree, and choose Clone

ℹ️ You may want to use it alongside Termux, a terminal emulator and Linux environment

@ 7459d333:f207289b

Come to our meetup to discuss the great Bitcoin Core debate!

The proposal to remove the 80-byte limit on OP_RETURN is getting people talking: should Bitcoin prioritize only monetary transactions or allow more data, such as notarizations?

Some argue that this simplifies the protocol and reflects what already happens in practice, with data stuffed in less efficient ways (as in Taproot).

Others fear it will overload the blockchain and take Bitcoin away from its essence....

Bring your opinion, enjoy a beer and let's debate the future of Bitcoin!

https://t.me/madridmeetup

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/976659

@ 6830c409:ff17c655

Disclaimer: I used Grammarly AI to correct my poor English to look polished. **

Preface: The motivation behind this note stems from a personal curiosity sparked by a few interactions with someone I know. After watching a YouTube video by Salvaveritate on Narcissistic Personality Disorder, I realized that what I was observing wasn’t purely NPD-it seemed to be intertwined with something else. I wanted to better understand this person’s thought process and what might be driving their behavior. At the end of this note, I’ve included the references I consulted to explore this phenomenon further.

We’ve all encountered that person who walks into a room like they own it-dismissing every idea but their own and expecting the world to revolve around them. There’s confidence, and then there’s a level of self-importance so exaggerated it becomes something darker. That, in a nutshell, is megalomania.

Though it’s no longer a formal psychological diagnosis (now categorized under narcissistic personality disorder), the term “megalomania” still resonates when we describe someone with delusional beliefs about their power, brilliance, or importance. It’s not just arrogance-it’s a complete departure from reality, where self-worth is inflated to cartoonish proportions.

The Many Faces of Megalomania

Megalomaniacs aren’t always easy to spot at first. They can be charismatic, persuasive, and even inspiring-until you begin to notice the patterns. Here are some of the archetypes you might recognize:

• The Political Power Player: From infamous historical figures to the neighborhood HOA president who rules like a tyrant, these individuals believe only they can save the day.

• The Corporate Climber: Ambition isn’t the issue here-it’s the willingness to trample anyone in their path. These folks take credit for others' work and treat colleagues like pawns.

• The Self-Proclaimed Guru: Think of that person who reads one book and suddenly thinks they’ve unlocked the secrets of the universe. They believe they alone hold the truth and must share it with the “less enlightened.”

• The Everyday Ego: Perhaps the most common. They're the friend who always turns the conversation back to themselves or the family member who demands special treatment at every gathering.

Warning Signs to Watch For

If you suspect someone in your orbit might be leaning into megalomaniac territory, here are some red flags:

• They crave admiration but rarely offer it in return.
• Criticism-even the gentle kind - triggers rage or defensiveness.
• They exaggerate achievements or name-drop to elevate their image.
• Rules are for everyone else - they believe they’re exempt.
• People are merely tools to further their personal agenda.

Often, the charm and confidence they exude can blind you to these signs until you're in too deep. Many learn this lesson through tough workplace dynamics, toxic relationships, or manipulative friendships.

How to Protect Yourself

If you're dealing with a megalomaniac, remember: you’re not powerless. Strategies that actually help include:

• Don't feed the ego - Respectful neutrality works better than flattery.
• Set firm boundaries - Be clear about what is and isn’t acceptable.
• Keep records - Especially in professional settings, documentation is crucial.
• Know when to walk away - Some relationships or environments can’t be fixed.
• Seek support - Therapy can equip you with the tools to cope and recover.

Trying to “change” a megalomaniac rarely works-focus instead on preserving your own mental health and emotional well-being.

A Look Through History-and the Mirror

From Hitler and Stalin’s destructive delusions of grandeur to modern business figures like Elizabeth Holmes, history is packed with cautionary tales of unchecked ego. Even pop culture gives us glimpses: Tony Montana in Scarface, Miranda Priestly in The Devil Wears Prada. These characters aren’t just dramatic-they’re psychological case studies in what happens when ego eclipses empathy.

But let’s be honest-none of us are immune to moments of inflated self-worth. The difference lies in self-awareness. True confidence coexists with humility. It laughs at karaoke fails and learns from criticism. Megalomania, by contrast, builds walls around insecurity and calls it a fortress.

Have you ever dealt with someone whose ego became their identity? Or maybe caught yourself slipping into that territory? Let’s unpack it together-your insights could help someone else recognize the signs early.

Here is what I read: 1. https://ebeni.wordpress.com/unethical-leaders/megalomania-and-narcissism-grandiose-vulnerable-clarke/ 2. https://keghart.org/demirdjian-megalomaniac-dictator/ 3. https://fastercapital.com/content/Megalomania--The-Ultimate-Form-of-Hubris.html 4. https://taylorandfrancis.com/knowledge/Medicine_and_healthcare/Psychiatry/Megalomania/ 5. https://www.encyclopedia.com/medicine/psychology/psychology-and-psychiatry/grandiosity 6. Salva Veritate's video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RtUFB3tf1lA&pp=ygUOc2FsdmEgdmVyaXRhdGU%3D

@ c066aac5:6a41a034

This is an article I wrote which originally appeared in the Pamphleteer, a publication run by a friend in Nashville. It has been edited from the published version, which I will link here for everyone to go check out the website and subscribe.

Step back fifty years in time with me if you will. A simpler time. You wake up in the house you could afford on a single income. Instead of blinding yourself with the light of your cell phone first thing in the morning, you wake up to make breakfast and coffee, your mind unencumbered by the stimulus of a thousand notifications. You can’t doom scroll (nor can you conceptualize what that even means).

You breathe in the moment, smelling your coffee with a deliberate, meditative inhale… As this brief moment of Nirvana passes, you decide to pick up the newspaper. You turn to page nine and see that Andy Kaufman, a comedian/performance artist you’ve seen on Taxi and Saturday Night Live, has declared himself “The Inter-Gender Wrestling Champion of the World.”

You are tempted to think this may be a joke, but suddenly you remember that you stepped back in time from the 21st century. You’re a modern person with evolved values. You ask yourself: is this an elaborate bit from Andy Kaufman, or was he simply ahead of his time? After all, you’re from the modern world where Imane Khelif is celebrated for his stunning and brave foray into women’s boxing (and where strangely, most news sources seem to deny that he’s a man).

All of a sudden, you abandon the bigotry of the past and invite Kaufman to come back with you to our present-day society. As you return to social media, endless notifications, a world full of stimulus, you ponder if Andy’s wrestling foray will be accepted for the beautiful thing that it is, rather than taken, without scrutiny, as a joke.

Exiting my narrative device now to speak to you directly: in the not-too-distant past, Andy Kaufman stepped into the ring and goaded women to wrestle with him. Back then, it was a bit. If such an act were to be replicated today, it would likely be celebrated and defended.

Inter-Gender sports pioneering aside, Kaufman's antics made Tennessee history; wrestling legend Jerry Lawler of Memphis went into the ring with Kaufman to relieve a female contestant and treated him to a Tennessee takedown.

Jerry invited the comedian to bring his act to Memphis. Leading up to the match, Kaufman relentlessly mocked his Southern audience, with jokes flexing his intelligence as "someone from Hollywood" and teaching Tennesseans how to use soap. After challenging a few women to wrestle, he was met with a famous Jerry Lawler Pilediver. This led to a staged feud between the two of them. The pair even reached the Letterman Show, with Kaufman in a neck brace.

As far as I know, Kaufman never identified as a woman. I don’t think he (or others from this period) could have fathomed the trans-sports drama occurring now. That said, there is something to be learned from his elaborate inter-gender wrestling bit: we’re watching the absurd unfold on the public stage. We should refuse to be gaslit and adopt Andy’s terminology and call this what it is: inter-gender sports. Whenever a biological man competes against a woman in any sporting event, we should all insist on letting everyone know that it is officially an inter-gender competition.

Maybe this modern dilemma could be solved if everyone surrounding these events treated the whole thing for what it was: an elaborate joke. Imagine if we treated it like WWE. The whole audience already knows it’s rigged anyway. Such rules of engagement would leave true biological women’s sports alone; it would keep their pride intact and be an assurance of physical protection.

That's the end of my original article. Just for fun, I wanted to add a response comment from my sister-in-law. She read the article and shared her thoughts with me, so I figured why not include them here.

I honestly believe mixed sports should be something that is encouraged more in our society—not because we should ignore biological differences and risks, especially in high-impact sports, but because normalizing this collaboration despite our different skill sets can strengthen women’s inclusivity not only as athletes, but in society as a whole. When I played mixed doubles in tennis and joined coed volleyball teams, I was pushed to improve and often held my own, even when the guys hit harder. And there are many sports like shooting, equestrian, archery, ect... that have nothing to do with “physical strength”. Training alongside men, whether in tennis, boxing, or volleyball, never has diminished my ability—it sharpened it, and that kind of mutual growth reflects a deeper value of inclusivity and respect that extends far beyond the sport. Thats my take! :)

@ b99efe77:f3de3616

asfadfadsf draft 1

afasdfasdfsadf

petrinet ;startDay () -> working ;stopDay working -> () ;startPause working -> paused ;endPause paused -> working ;goSmoke working -> smoking ;endSmoke smoking -> working ;startEating working -> eating ;stopEating eating -> working ;startCall working -> onCall ;endCall onCall -> working ;startMeeting working -> inMeetinga ;endMeeting inMeeting -> working ;logTask working -> working

@ c631e267:c2b78d3e

Information ohne Reflexion ist geistiger Flugsand. \ Ernst Reinhardt

Der lateinische Ausdruck «Quo vadis» als Frage nach einer Entwicklung oder Ausrichtung hat biblische Wurzeln. Er wird aber auch in unserer Alltagssprache verwendet, laut Duden meist als Ausdruck von Besorgnis oder Skepsis im Sinne von: «Wohin wird das führen?»

Der Sinn und Zweck von so mancher politischen Entscheidung erschließt sich heutzutage nicht mehr so leicht, und viele Trends können uns Sorge bereiten. Das sind einerseits sehr konkrete Themen wie die zunehmende Militarisierung und die geschichtsvergessene Kriegstreiberei in Europa, deren Feindbildpflege aktuell beim Gedenken an das Ende des Zweiten Weltkriegs beschämende Formen annimmt.

Auch das hohe Gut der Schweizer Neutralität scheint immer mehr in Gefahr. Die schleichende Bewegung der Eidgenossenschaft in Richtung NATO und damit weg von einer Vermittlerposition erhält auch durch den neuen Verteidigungsminister Anschub. Martin Pfister möchte eine stärkere Einbindung in die europäische Verteidigungsarchitektur, verwechselt bei der Argumentation jedoch Ursache und Wirkung.

Das Thema Gesundheit ist als Zugpferd für Geschäfte und Kontrolle offenbar schon zuverlässig etabliert. Die hauptsächlich privat finanzierte Weltgesundheitsorganisation (WHO) ist dabei durch ein Netzwerk von sogenannten «Collaborating Centres» sogar so weit in nationale Einrichtungen eingedrungen, dass man sich fragen kann, ob diese nicht von Genf aus gesteuert werden.

Das Schweizer Bundesamt für Gesundheit (BAG) übernimmt in dieser Funktion ebenso von der WHO definierte Aufgaben und Pflichten wie das deutsche Robert Koch-Institut (RKI). Gegen die Covid-«Impfung» für Schwangere, die das BAG empfiehlt, obwohl es fehlende wissenschaftliche Belege für deren Schutzwirkung einräumt, formiert sich im Tessin gerade Widerstand.

Unter dem Stichwort «Gesundheitssicherheit» werden uns die Bestrebungen verkauft, essenzielle Dienste mit einer biometrischen digitalen ID zu verknüpfen. Das dient dem Profit mit unseren Daten und führt im Ergebnis zum Verlust unserer demokratischen Freiheiten. Die deutsche elektronische Patientenakte (ePA) ist ein Element mit solchem Potenzial. Die Schweizer Bürger haben gerade ein Referendum gegen das revidierte E-ID-Gesetz erzwungen. In Thailand ist seit Anfang Mai für die Einreise eine «Digital Arrival Card» notwendig, die mit ihrer Gesundheitserklärung einen Impfpass «durch die Hintertür» befürchten lässt.

Der massive Blackout auf der iberischen Halbinsel hat vermehrt Fragen dazu aufgeworfen, wohin uns Klimawandel-Hysterie und «grüne» Energiepolitik führen werden. Meine Kollegin Wiltrud Schwetje ist dem nachgegangen und hat in mehreren Beiträgen darüber berichtet. Wenig überraschend führen interessante Spuren mal wieder zu internationalen Großbanken, Globalisten und zur EU-Kommission.

Zunehmend bedenklich ist aber ganz allgemein auch die manifestierte Spaltung unserer Gesellschaften. Angesichts der tiefen und sorgsam gepflegten Gräben fällt es inzwischen schwer, eine zukunftsfähige Perspektive zu erkennen. Umso begrüßenswerter sind Initiativen wie die Kölner Veranstaltungsreihe «Neue Visionen für die Zukunft». Diese möchte die Diskussionskultur reanimieren und dazu beitragen, dass Menschen wieder ohne Angst und ergebnisoffen über kontroverse Themen der Zeit sprechen.

Quo vadis – Wohin gehen wir also? Die Suche nach Orientierung in diesem vermeintlichen Chaos führt auch zur Reflexion über den eigenen Lebensweg. Das ist positiv insofern, als wir daraus Kraft schöpfen können. Ob derweil der neue Papst, dessen «Vorgänger» Petrus unsere Ausgangsfrage durch die christliche Legende zugeschrieben wird, dabei eine Rolle spielt, muss jede/r selbst wissen. Mir persönlich ist allein schon ein Führungsanspruch wie der des Petrusprimats der römisch-katholischen Kirche eher suspekt.

[Titelbild: Pixabay]

---

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

@ c9badfea:610f861a

1. Install Grayjay (it's free and open source)
2. Launch the app and navigate to the Sources tab
3. Enable the desired sources (and log in if needed by tapping on the source and scrolling down to Authentication)
4. Go to Android Settings > Apps, select Grayjay, and tap Open By Default and Add Link to automatically open supported links with Grayjay
5. Enjoy

ℹ️ If you are using Obtainium to install apps, search for Grayjay on Complex Apps

@ c1e9ab3a:9cb56b43

I. Historical Foundations of U.S. Monetary Architecture

The early monetary system of the United States was built atop inherited commodity money conventions from Europe’s maritime economies. Silver and gold coins—primarily Spanish pieces of eight, Dutch guilders, and other foreign specie—formed the basis of colonial commerce. These units were already integrated into international trade and piracy networks and functioned with natural compatibility across England, France, Spain, and Denmark. Lacking a centralized mint or formal currency, the U.S. adopted these forms de facto.

As security risks and the practical constraints of physical coinage mounted, banks emerged to warehouse specie and issue redeemable certificates. These certificates evolved into fiduciary media—claims on specie not actually in hand. Banks observed over time that substantial portions of reserves remained unclaimed for years. This enabled fractional reserve banking: issuing more claims than reserves held, so long as redemption demand stayed low. The practice was inherently unstable, prone to panics and bank runs, prompting eventual centralization through the formation of the Federal Reserve in 1913.

Following the Civil War and unstable reinstatements of gold convertibility, the U.S. sought global monetary stability. After World War II, the Bretton Woods system formalized the U.S. dollar as the global reserve currency. The dollar was nominally backed by gold, but most international dollars were held offshore and recycled into U.S. Treasuries. The Nixon Shock of 1971 eliminated the gold peg, converting the dollar into pure fiat. Yet offshore dollar demand remained, sustained by oil trade mandates and the unique role of Treasuries as global reserve assets.

II. The Structure of Fiduciary Media and Treasury Demand

Under this system, foreign trade surpluses with the U.S. generate excess dollars. These surplus dollars are parked in U.S. Treasuries, thereby recycling trade imbalances into U.S. fiscal liquidity. While technically loans to the U.S. government, these purchases act like interest-only transfers—governments receive yield, and the U.S. receives spendable liquidity without principal repayment due in the short term. Debt is perpetually rolled over, rarely extinguished.

This creates an illusion of global subsidy: U.S. deficits are financed via foreign capital inflows that, in practice, function more like financial tribute systems than conventional debt markets. The underlying asset—U.S. Treasury debt—functions as the base reserve asset of the dollar system, replacing gold in post-Bretton Woods monetary logic.

III. Emergence of Tether and the Parastatal Dollar

Tether (USDT), as a private issuer of dollar-denominated tokens, mimics key central bank behaviors while operating outside the regulatory perimeter. It mints tokens allegedly backed 1:1 by U.S. dollars or dollar-denominated securities (mostly Treasuries). These tokens circulate globally, often in jurisdictions with limited banking access, and increasingly serve as synthetic dollar substitutes.

If USDT gains dominance as the preferred medium of exchange—due to technological advantages, speed, programmability, or access—it displaces Federal Reserve Notes (FRNs) not through devaluation, but through functional obsolescence. Gresham’s Law inverts: good money (more liquid, programmable, globally transferable USDT) displaces bad (FRNs) even if both maintain a nominal 1:1 parity.

Over time, this preference translates to a systemic demand shift. Actors increasingly use Tether instead of FRNs, especially in global commerce, digital marketplaces, or decentralized finance. Tether tokens effectively become shadow base money.

IV. Interaction with Commercial Banking and Redemption Mechanics

Under traditional fractional reserve systems, commercial banks issue loans denominated in U.S. dollars, expanding the money supply. When borrowers repay loans, this destroys the created dollars and contracts monetary elasticity. If borrowers repay in USDT instead of FRNs:

• Banks receive a non-Fed liability (USDT).
• USDT is not recognized as reserve-eligible within the Federal Reserve System.
• Banks must either redeem USDT for FRNs, or demand par-value conversion from Tether to settle reserve requirements and balance their books.

This places redemption pressure on Tether and threatens its 1:1 peg under stress. If redemption latency, friction, or cost arises, USDT’s equivalence to FRNs is compromised. Conversely, if banks are permitted or compelled to hold USDT as reserve or regulatory capital, Tether becomes a de facto reserve issuer.

In this scenario, banks may begin demanding loans in USDT, mirroring borrower behavior. For this to occur sustainably, banks must secure Tether liquidity. This creates two options: - Purchase USDT from Tether or on the secondary market, collateralized by existing fiat. - Borrow USDT directly from Tether, using bank-issued debt as collateral.

The latter mirrors Federal Reserve discount window operations. Tether becomes a lender of first resort, providing monetary elasticity to the banking system by creating new tokens against promissory assets—exactly how central banks function.

V. Structural Consequences: Parallel Central Banking

If Tether begins lending to commercial banks, issuing tokens backed by bank notes or collateralized debt obligations: - Tether controls the expansion of broad money through credit issuance. - Its balance sheet mimics a central bank, with Treasuries and bank debt as assets and tokens as liabilities. - It intermediates between sovereign debt and global liquidity demand, replacing the Federal Reserve’s open market operations with its own issuance-redemption cycles.

Simultaneously, if Tether purchases U.S. Treasuries with FRNs received through token issuance, it: - Supplies the Treasury with new liquidity (via bond purchases). - Collects yield on government debt. - Issues a parallel form of U.S. dollars that never require redemption—an interest-only loan to the U.S. government from a non-sovereign entity.

In this context, Tether performs monetary functions of both a central bank and a sovereign wealth fund, without political accountability or regulatory transparency.

VI. Endgame: Institutional Inversion and Fed Redundancy

This paradigm represents an institutional inversion:

• The Federal Reserve becomes a legacy issuer.
• Tether becomes the operational base money provider in both retail and interbank contexts.
• Treasuries remain the foundational reserve asset, but access to them is mediated by a private intermediary.
• The dollar persists, but its issuer changes. The State becomes a fiscal agent of a decentralized financial ecosystem, not its monetary sovereign.

Unless the Federal Reserve reasserts control—either by absorbing Tether, outlawing its instruments, or integrating its tokens into the reserve framework—it risks becoming irrelevant in the daily function of money.

Tether, in this configuration, is no longer a derivative of the dollar—it is the dollar, just one level removed from sovereign control. The future of monetary sovereignty under such a regime is post-national and platform-mediated.

@ 57d1a264:69f1fee1

Finale: once the industry-standard of music notation software, now a cautionary tale. In this video, I explore how it slowly lost its crown through decades of missed opportunities - eventually leading to creative collapse due to various bureaucratic intrigues, unforeseen technological changes and some of the jankiest UI/UX you've ever seen.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yqaon6YHzaU

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/976219

@ 57d1a264:69f1fee1

---

For generations before generative text, writers have used the em dash to hop between thoughts, emotions, and ideas. Dickens shaped his morality tales with it, Woolf’s stream-of-consciousness flowed through it, Kerouac let it drive his jazz-like prose. Today, Sally Rooney threads it through her quiet truths of the heart.

---

---

But this beloved punctuation mark has become a casualty of the algorithmic age. The em dash has been so widely adopted by AI-generated text that even when used by human hands, it begs the question: was this actually written or apathetically prompted?

---

---

The battle for the soul of writing is in full swing. And the human fightback starts here. With a new punctuation mark that serves as a symbol of real pondering, genuine daydreaming, and true editorial wordsmithery. Inspired by Descartes’ belief that thinking makes us human, the am dash is a small but powerful testament that the words you’ve painstakingly and poetically pulled together are unequivocally, certifiably, and delightfully your own.

---

---

Let's reclain writig from AI—oneam dash at time.

Download the fonts:

— Aereal https://bit.ly/3EO6fo8 — Times New Human https://bit.ly/4jQTcRS

---

---

Learn more about the am dash

https://www.theamdash.com

---

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/976218

@ 21335073:a244b1ad

Someone asked for my thoughts, so I’ll share them thoughtfully. I’m not here to dictate how to promote Nostr—I’m still learning about it myself. While I’m not new to Nostr, freedom tech is a newer space for me. I’m skilled at advocating for topics I deeply understand, but freedom tech isn’t my expertise, so take my words with a grain of salt. Nothing I say is set in stone.

Those who need Nostr the most are the ones most vulnerable to censorship on other platforms right now. Reaching them requires real-time awareness of global issues and the dynamic relationships between governments and tech providers, which can shift suddenly. Effective Nostr promoters must grasp this and adapt quickly.

The best messengers are people from or closely tied to these at-risk regions—those who truly understand the local political and cultural dynamics. They can connect with those in need when tensions rise. Ideal promoters are rational, trustworthy, passionate about Nostr, but above all, dedicated to amplifying people’s voices when it matters most.

Forget influencers, corporate-backed figures, or traditional online PR—it comes off as inauthentic, corny, desperate and forced. Nostr’s promotion should be grassroots and organic, driven by a few passionate individuals who believe in Nostr and the communities they serve.

The idea that “people won’t join Nostr due to lack of reach” is nonsense. Everyone knows X’s “reach” is mostly with bots. If humans want real conversations, Nostr is the place. X is great for propaganda, but Nostr is for the authentic voices of the people.

Those spreading Nostr must be so passionate they’re willing to onboard others, which is time-consuming but rewarding for the right person. They’ll need to make Nostr and onboarding a core part of who they are. I see no issue with that level of dedication. I’ve been known to get that way myself at times. It’s fun for some folks.

With love, I suggest not adding Bitcoin promotion with Nostr outreach. Zaps already integrate that element naturally. (Still promote within the Bitcoin ecosystem, but this is about reaching vulnerable voices who needed Nostr yesterday.)

To promote Nostr, forget conventional strategies. “Influencers” aren’t the answer. “Influencers” are not the future. A trusted local community member has real influence—reach them. Connect with people seeking Nostr’s benefits but lacking the technical language to express it. This means some in the Nostr community might need to step outside of the Bitcoin bubble, which is uncomfortable but necessary. Thank you in advance to those who are willing to do that.

I don’t know who is paid to promote Nostr, if anyone. This piece isn’t shade. But it’s exhausting to see innocent voices globally silenced on corporate platforms like X while Nostr exists. Last night, I wondered: how many more voices must be censored before the Nostr community gets uncomfortable and thinks creatively to reach the vulnerable?

A warning: the global need for censorship-resistant social media is undeniable. If Nostr doesn’t make itself known, something else will fill that void. Let’s start this conversation.

@ 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.

@ 30611079:ecac89f8

Um Shell Script simples para facilitar backups bip39 baseados nos números das palavras, coloque o script na mesma pasta que o arquivo contendo as palavras, passe o idioma no 1º argumento (Ex. english) e as palavras em sequência, a saída serão os números correspondentes as palavras passadas no idioma selecionado

```

!/bin/bash

Enter in correct diretory

if [ ${0%/} == $0 ]; then cd ${PWD} elif [ -e ${PWD}/${0%/} ]; then cd ${PWD}/${0%/} else cd ${0%/} fi

file="$1.txt"

index=0 numbers=() for word in "$@"; do while IFS= read -r linha; do if [[ "$linha" == "$word" ]]; then numbers+=($index) break fi ((index++)) done < "$file" index=0 done echo "${numbers[@]}" ```

Fiz para aprender um pouco de Shell Script, podem dizer se está bom e se dá para melhorar algo?

Também fiz outro que faz o processo reverso

@ 91bea5cd:1df4451c

O Contexto Legal Brasileiro e o Consentimento

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

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

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

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

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

Outros riscos:

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

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

Riscos de Falsas Acusações e Alegação de Coação Futura

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

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

Estratégias de Prevenção e Mitigação

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

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

2. Documentação do Consentimento:

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

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

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

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

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

Observações Importantes

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

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

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

O que vem a ser consentimento viciado

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Isso tem duas implicações sérias:

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

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

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

Conclusão

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

---

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

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

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

@ 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.

@ 57d1a264:69f1fee1

Consider the following two charts from A History of Clojure which detail the introduction and retention of new code by release for both Clojure and for Scala.

While this doesn't necessarily translate to library stability, it's reasonable to assume that the attitude of the Clojure maintainers will seep into the community. And that assumption is true.

Consider a typical Javascript program. What is it comprised of? Objects, objects, and more objects. Members of those objects must be either introspected or divined. Worse, it's normal to monkeypatch those objects, so the object members may (or may not) change over time.

Now, consider a typical Clojure program. What is it comprised of? Namespaces. Those namespaces contain functions and data. Functions may be dynamically generated (via macros), but it is extremely rare to "monkeypatch" a namespace. If you want to know what functions are available in a namespace, you can simply read the source file.

Continue reading https://potetm.com/devtalk/stability-by-design.html

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/976215

@ d360efec:14907b5f

Disclaimer: * การวิเคราะห์นี้เป็นเพียงแนวทาง ไม่ใช่คำแนะนำในการซื้อขาย * การลงทุนมีความเสี่ยง ผู้ลงทุนควรตัดสินใจด้วยตนเอง

@ 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

@ 91bea5cd:1df4451c

Básico

bash lsblk # Lista todos os diretorios montados.

Para criar o sistema de arquivos:

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

Criando um subvolume:

bash btrfs subvolume create SubVol

Montando Sistema de Arquivos:

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

Lista os discos formatados no diretório:

bash btrfs filesystem show /mnt

Adiciona novo disco ao subvolume:

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

Lista novamente os discos do subvolume:

bash btrfs filesystem show /mnt

Exibe uso dos discos do subvolume:

bash btrfs filesystem df /mnt

Balancea os dados entre os discos sobre raid1:

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

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

iniciar o processo de depuração :

bash btrfs scrub start /mnt

ver o status do processo de depuração Btrfs em execução:

bash btrfs scrub status /mnt

ver o status do scrub Btrfs para cada um dos dispositivos

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

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

btrfs scrub resume / data

Listando os subvolumes:

bash btrfs subvolume list /Reports

Criando um instantâneo dos subvolumes:

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

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

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

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

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

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

bash btrfs filsystem sync /Reports

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

bash btrfs device delete /dev/sdc /Reports

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

bash btrfs scrub status -dR / Relatórios

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

bash $ sudo btrfs scrub cancel / Reports

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

bash sudo btrfs scrub resume /Reports

mostra o uso do dispositivo de armazenamento:

btrfs filesystem usage /data

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

sudo btrfs balance start --full-balance /data

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

Opções importantes de montagem Btrfs

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

As opções de montagem Btrfs mais importantes são:

**1. acl e noacl

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

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

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

**2. autodefrag e noautodefrag

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

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

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

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

**3. compactar e compactar-forçar

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

**4. subvol e subvolid

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

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

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

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

**5. dispositivo

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

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

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

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

Por exemplo,

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

**6. degraded

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

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

**7. commit

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

O padrão é definido como 30 segundos.

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

**8. ssd e nossd

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

A opção de montagem nossd desativa a otimização do SSD.

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

**9. ssd_spread e nossd_spread

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

A opção de montagem nossd_spread desativa o recurso ssd_spread .

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

**10. descarte e nodiscard

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

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

Por padrão, a opção de montagem nodiscard é usada.

**11. norecovery

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

**12. usebackuproot e nousebackuproot

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

**14. skip_balance

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

**15. datacow e nodatacow

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

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

**16. datasum e nodatasum

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

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

Perfis Btrfs

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

Os perfis Btrfs disponíveis são os seguintes:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

@ 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

@ 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.

@ 866e0139:6a9334e5

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

---

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

---

Wir halten uns für erwacht, weil wir das Coronanarrativ durchschaut haben, regierungskritisch unterwegs sind und Russland nicht für den ärgsten Feind der Demokratie halten? Wir informieren uns in alternativen und unabhängigen Medien, folgen geistigen Führern und sehen Spiritualität als einen Teil unseres Daseins auf der Erde? Vielleicht sind wir mit Meditationstechniken vertraut, machen Yoga oder nehmen bewusstseinserweiternde Substanzen zu uns? Wir denken, andere würden noch schlafen, weil sie das nicht tun? Dann haben wir noch einen weiten Weg vor uns.

Aufwachen — wir tun es jeden Morgen und oft auch während der Nacht. Der Kopf ist schwer, vielleicht ein wenig verwirrt, wie in einem Nebel. Die Schleier der Träume hängen noch an uns. Wir sind noch nicht ganz da und brauchen eine Dusche, einen Kaffee oder frische Luft, um langsam durchzukommen und den Tag zu beginnen. In den seltensten Fällen ist es so, dass wir die Augen aufschlagen und hellwach sind, vollkommen präsent und klar. So passt die Metapher auf das, was heute auf den Bewusstseinszustand der Menschen angewendet wird.

Was bedeutet es, wach zu sein? Ein waches Bewusstsein zu haben? Was ist Bewusstsein? Eine der großen Referenzen für Psychologie und Pädagogik hat einen eher beschränkten und materialistisch orientierten Bewusstseinsbegriff. Demnach reiche Bewusstsein nicht über das normale Denken hinaus. Bewusstsein habe ein Mensch immer dann, wenn er in der Lage ist, zu bedenken, ob das, was er tut, vernünftig ist. Das Bewusstsein sei an das Gehirn gebunden. Ein Bewusstsein ohne Aktivität von Nervenzellen im menschlichen Gehirn gebe es nicht. Das sei wissenschaftlicher Konsens. Über noch etwas ist man sich einig:

Nach Jahrhunderten der Bemühung von Neurowissenschaftlern, Psychologen und Philosophen bleibt zu der Frage, wie das Gehirn uns denn Bewusstsein verleiht, wie es Empfindungen, Gefühle und Subjektivität entstehen lässt, nur eine Gewissheit: Wir haben keine Ahnung (1).

Mehr Ahnung haben wir, wenn es darum geht, das menschliche Bewusstsein zu manipulieren. Voraussetzung ist, die zu manipulierende Person in Unkenntnis zu lassen. Es wird ein Gefühl von Machtlosigkeit in ihr erzeugt und ein System von Belohnung und Strafe aufgebaut, um eine autoritäre Machtstruktur, die kein Feedback und keine Änderung ohne Zustimmung oder Anordnung der Führung zulässt, zu installieren. Hierfür ist keine Gewaltanwendung erforderlich. Für eine mentale Umprogrammierung reicht es, jede Form von Kritik zu unterdrücken und Kritiker zu diffamieren, indem man ihnen persönliche Rachemotive oder menschliche Schwäche andichtet (2).

Manipulation mit Angst

Angst ist eines der wirksamsten Mittel, um das Bewusstsein der Menschen zu manipulieren. Wer Angst hat, lässt sich leicht täuschen. Das Bewusstsein verengt sich regelrecht. Damit ergibt sich ein nahezu unerschöpflicher Fundus von Methoden zur Bewusstseinskontrolle. Welche, das erleben wir täglich: die Erschaffung einer Unterhaltungsindustrie und die Verbreitung von Filmen, in denen es vor allem um Mord, Verrat, Krankheit und Betrug geht; Medien, die maximale Verwirrung schaffen; giftige Substanzen in Nahrungsmitteln und Wasser; ein knechtendes Finanzsystem; Medikamente, von denen wir möglichst früh und möglichst lange abhängig sind.

Wer das Bewusstsein der Menschen und damit die Welt in den Griff bekommen will, fängt früh an. Er erfindet zum Beispiel Religionen, die sich nach Möglichkeit gegenseitig bekämpfen.

Er erzählt Geschichten, in denen die eine Hälfte der Menschheit der anderen per se unterlegen sein soll, erfindet Götter, die die einen privilegieren und die anderen bestrafen, und ein Paradies, das irgendwoanders ist als dort, wo wir gerade sind.

Alles ist darauf ausgerichtet, dass der Mensch sich klein, unwürdig, schuldig und vor allem ohnmächtig fühlt. Auf keinen Fall darf er sich seiner angeborenen Möglichkeiten bewusstwerden! Hierfür werden Kinder so früh wie möglich von den Eltern getrennt, bekommen in staatlichen Schulen ihre Kreativität und Eigenmacht aberzogen, werden von technischen Geräten abhängig gemacht und durch Geschlechterverwirrung davon abgehalten, ihre Identität zu entwickeln. So werden sie darauf vorbereitet, zu guten Soldaten des Systems zu werden und in jeden Krieg zu ziehen, der ihnen als notwendig verkauft wird.

Project Blue Beam

Immer mehr Menschen wissen das. Immer mehr erkennen, was auf der Bühne des Welttheaters gespielt wird. Doch sind wir deshalb erwacht? Reicht es, alternative Medien zu konsumieren, bewusstseinserweiternde Substanzen zu sich zu nehmen und regelmäßig zu meditieren, um das eigene Bewusstsein zu entwickeln? Reichen die Bücher, die Workshops und die charismatischen Führer, die überall zu finden sind? Sind wir erwacht, nur weil der Nachbar noch schläft?

Wie würden wir zum Beispiel reagieren, wenn das Projekt „Blue Beam“ durchgespielt werden würde? Natürlich soll es sich hierbei um eine Verschwörungstheorie handeln. Aber nur mal angenommen. Es geht darum, durch das Erschaffen einer allgemeinen Unsicherheit und Hysterie eine neue Weltordnung durchzusetzen.

In einer ersten Etappe sollen künstlich erschaffene Naturkatastrophen dafür sorgen, dass die Menschen sämtliche religiöse Fundamente in Frage stellen. In einer zweiten Etappe werden mittels dreidimensionaler Hologramme verschiedene Gottesbilder in den Himmel projiziert mit dem Ziel, eine Einheitsreligion zu proklamieren. In einer dritten Etappe sollen mittels Niederfrequenzen und per Satellit Gedankengänge gezielt beeinflusst werden, und in einem letzten Schritt soll die Menschheit davon überzeugt werden, dass in allen großen Städten der Welt eine Invasion Außerirdischer nahe bevorsteht.

Jede große Nation soll dazu aufgefordert werden, ihr nukleares Potenzial als Abwehr zu benutzen. Es soll sich jedoch um ein Fake-Manöver handeln. Den Nationen, nun ihrer Waffen entledigt, bliebe nur noch die Hoffnung auf einen göttlichen Eingriff. Alle „erwachten“ Menschen würden von „guten“ außerirdischen Kräften „gerettet“ und entführt werden — womit der neuen Weltordnung auf Erden nichts mehr im Wege stünde. Der Rest der Menschheit würde mittels über elektronische Geräte verbreiteter böser Geister in den Wahnsinn und die totale Hoffnungslosigkeit getrieben werden.

Selbstwirksamkeit?

Die Geschichte ist haarsträubend. Doch wer könnte beschwören, dass sie technisch nicht möglich wäre? Wer könnte sich sicher sein, einer False-Flag-Aktion nicht auf den Leim zu gehen? Wer könnte von sich behaupten, so erwacht, so in seinem Bewusstsein verankert zu sein, dass er sich nicht manipulieren ließe, wenn es darauf ankommt? Wer griffe nicht in der Verzweiflung nach einem Heiligenbild, das am Himmel aufsteigt? Wer wäre erhaben über jede Art von Mind Control?

So möge der stille werden, der sich rühmt, erwacht zu sein. Möge er sich den Schlaf aus den Augen reiben und sich an die Arbeit machen. Denn das Erwachen ist nur der allererste Schritt. Dann geht es erst richtig los.

Dann können wir üben, in die Selbstwirksamkeit zu kommen: das Vertrauen in die eigenen Möglichkeiten, Aufgabenanforderungen wirksam zu bewältigen und auch in Extremsituationen gewünschte Handlungen selbst ausführen zu können.

Die Frage ist nicht, wie erwacht wir uns im Vergleich mit anderen fühlen, sondern welches Selbst- und Menschenbild wir haben und wie wir von unserer natürlichen Schöpferkraft Gebrauch machen. Nicht der ist erwacht, der sich von Katastrophenmeldungen einlullen lässt und sich gemütlich in seinen vier Wänden auf den Weltuntergang vorbereitet, sondern der, der sich darauf besinnt, dass Bewusstsein mehr ist als ein paar Synapsen im Gehirn. Er weiß, dass er über einen freien Willen verfügt, der ihn dazu befähigt, in eine andere Richtung zu gehen.

Außen wie innen

Bewusstsein hängt von keinem spirituellen Führer ab und auch von keinem Gott, der in den Himmel projiziert wird. Bewusstsein ist göttlich. Es ist die Fähigkeit, Dinge wahr-zu-nehmen, ihren Wahrheitsgehalt zu erkennen, die Gabe, aus sich heraus feinfühlig zu sein, hellsichtig, verstehend. Im individuellen Bewusstsein sind das Menschliche und das Göttliche eins. Nichts steht trennend dazwischen. Niemand muss die Erlaubnis für diesen Erkenntnisprozess geben.

Wer bei Bewusstsein ist, den kann man nicht in ein Gedankengefängnis einsperren oder ihn mit Hierarchien beeindrucken. Er weiß, dass das Wesentliche sich im Innen abspielt und dass allein er für das verantwortlich ist, was er erlebt.

Ein hoch entwickeltes Bewusstsein bedeutet, sich von jeder Erwartung zu lösen, dass sich im Außen etwas ändert. Wer sich auf das Außen konzentriert, der hat schon verloren. Er drückt sich selbst den Stempel der Ohnmacht und des Mangels auf oder befeuert die Kriegsmaschinerie, die alles in die Zerstörung treibt.

Im Inneren gilt es, für Harmonie zu sorgen und sich auf die Frequenzen des Schöpferischen einzustellen. So darf sich jeder fragen: Wie sieht es bei mir aus? Bin ich von Menschen umgeben, die mich erniedrigen oder die mich erhöhen? Lebe ich das Leben, das ich mir wünsche? Bin ich im Mangel oder im Überfluss? Bin ich krank oder gesund? Ängstlich oder vertrauend? Zynisch oder liebevoll? Wie halte ich es? Wie ist meine Stimmung? Wie fühle ich mich in dieser Zeit, in dieser Welt? Wage ich es, Nein zu sagen, wenn alle Ja sagen, und Ja, wenn alle Nein sagen?

Wie selbstwirksam bin ich? Wie benutze ich die mir angeborene Schöpferkraft? Lasse ich mit mir machen oder mache ich selbst? Welche Menschen und Ereignisse ziehe ich an? Auf welcher Ebene schwingt meine Energie? Mit welchen Kräften stehe ich in Kontakt? Welche Informationen empfange ich? Wie viel Individualität wage ich? Nicht eine Individualität, die andere ausschließt, sondern eine, die alles miteinschließt und von dem Bewusstsein geleitet wird, dass alles eins ist.

Fühle ich mich getrennt oder verbunden? Fühle ich, dass ich unteilbar bin: in-dividuum? Spüre ich, wie ich aus der Kraft dieser Unteilbarkeit heraus unermessliche Möglichkeiten habe, mein Leben und damit die Welt zu gestalten? Bin ich wirklich erwacht oder halte ich mich nur für etwas Besseres, um bei der nächstbesten Gelegenheit genau das zu tun, was ich an anderen kritisiert habe: mein Heil von außen zu erwarten?

Angst- oder Christusmatrix?

Was auch kommt in der nächsten Zeit: Es wird uns überraschen. Jede Menge Möglichkeiten wird es geben, in denen wir unser Bewusstsein und unsere Individualität auf die Probe stellen können. Auf uns kommt es an! Jeder Mensch, der sich selbst aus der Ohnmacht befreit, befreit auch die Welt ein wenig mehr. Jeder, der sich nicht von schlechten Nachrichten nach unten ziehen lässt, jeder, der darauf achtet, seine Energie möglichst hoch schwingen zu lassen, jeder, der in sich selbst die Lösung sucht, ist ein Segen für diese Zeit, ein Tor für das Göttliche auf Erden.

Göttlich, so die Bewusstseinstrainerin Sandra Weber, ist alles, was natürlich ist, alles, was liebt, was pulsiert, leuchtet und verbunden ist. Wir haben die Wahl, uns per Genmanipulation und künstlicher Intelligenz (KI) immer mehr entmenschlichen zu lassen oder unser multidimensionales Potenzial zu entdecken, unsere Fähigkeit zu Telepathie, Telekinese und Teleportation. Angst- oder Christusmatrix — wofür entscheiden wir uns? Lassen wir durch KI die eigene Lichtkörperaktivierung unterbrechen oder wählen wir die Erhebung und das Vertrauen in unsere Göttlichkeit (3)?

Von hier aus können wir die Bühne überblicken. Wir erkennen: Wir müssen da nicht mitmachen. Wir müssen nicht in das Welttheater einsteigen. Wir müssen nicht die Lichtschwerter auspacken und für das Gute kämpfen. Das Gute kämpft nicht. Das Gute ist. Was wir tun können, ist, uns von den Altlasten zu befreien, die uns unten halten, innere Kämpfe ein für alle Mal zu befrieden und unsere Schatten ins Licht zu bringen.

Erleuchtung ist, wenn die inneren Schatten aufgelöst sind und man alles überblicken kann. Er-innern wir uns. Gehen wir nach innen und bauen wir hier unsere Tempel.

Fassen wir den Mut, wir selbst zu sein. Gehen wir in unsere Herzensmitte, werden wir uns der Bewertungen bewusst, mit der wir unsere Welt in Gut und Böse einteilen, und nehmen wir einen neutralen Standpunkt ein. So kommen wir aus der Dualität zurück in die Polarität, aus einer Welt, in der sich die Dinge gegenseitig vernichten, in eine Welt, in der sie sich ergänzen und kreativ zusammenwirken.

---

Quellen und Anmerkungen:

(1) https://lexikon.stangl.eu/887/bewusstsein\ (2) https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gehirnw%C3%A4sche\ (3) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=grAFeprqzhs&t=13s

---

Kerstin Chavent ist Sprachlehrerin und lebt in Südfrankreich. Sie schreibt Artikel, Essays und autobiographische Erzählungen. Ihre Schwerpunkte sind der Umgang mit Krisensituationen und Krankheit und die Sensibilisierung für das schöpferische Potential im Menschen. Auf Deutsch erschienen sind Die wilde Göttin, Der Königsweg, Die Enthüllung, In guter Gesellschaft, Die Waffen niederlegen, Das Licht fließt dahin, wo es dunkel ist, Krankheit heilt, Was wachsen will muss Schalen abwerfen, Und Freitags kommt der Austernwagen. Weitere Informationen auf kerstinchavent.de.

---

LASSEN SIE DER FRIEDENSTAUBE FLÜGEL WACHSEN!

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

Schon jetzt können Sie uns unterstützen:

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

Für Einzahlungen in CHF (Betreff: Friedenstaube):

Für Einzahlungen in Euro:

Milosz Matuschek

IBAN DE 53710520500000814137

BYLADEM1TST

Sparkasse Traunstein-Trostberg

Betreff: Friedenstaube

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

---

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

@ dc4152b3:dc737a27

181BET là một nền tảng trực tuyến nổi bật, cung cấp cho người dùng những trải nghiệm giải trí đa dạng và đầy sáng tạo. Với một giao diện thân thiện và dễ sử dụng, nền tảng này không chỉ hấp dẫn người tham gia nhờ vào tính năng dễ dàng tiếp cận mà còn bởi chất lượng dịch vụ vượt trội. Bằng cách tối ưu hóa trải nghiệm người dùng, 181BET đã nhanh chóng trở thành một trong những lựa chọn hàng đầu của những ai yêu thích các hoạt động giải trí trực tuyến. Nền tảng này cung cấp một loạt các trò chơi và hoạt động tương tác đa dạng, giúp người tham gia có thể thư giãn, giải trí và tận hưởng những giây phút thư thái. Các trò chơi được thiết kế một cách sáng tạo, kết hợp giữa tính giải trí cao và độ thử thách, tạo ra không gian thú vị cho người chơi. Bên cạnh đó, 181BET cũng chú trọng đến việc tạo ra một môi trường an toàn và bảo mật cao, giúp người dùng có thể hoàn toàn yên tâm khi tham gia vào các hoạt động giải trí trực tuyến mà không lo ngại về sự an toàn thông tin cá nhân hay giao dịch.

Điều làm nên sự khác biệt của 181BET chính là khả năng tạo ra một cộng đồng gắn kết và thân thiện, nơi mà người tham gia không chỉ có thể tham gia vào các trò chơi mà còn có thể giao lưu, kết nối và chia sẻ những khoảnh khắc vui vẻ. Nền tảng này cung cấp không chỉ những trò chơi đơn giản mà còn những hoạt động tương tác xã hội, giúp mọi người có thể giao lưu với nhau, học hỏi và tạo ra những mối quan hệ mới. Các tính năng giao lưu được thiết kế để mọi người có thể dễ dàng kết nối và chia sẻ với nhau, tạo ra một cộng đồng trực tuyến thân thiện và đầy sức sống. Mỗi thành viên có thể tham gia vào các hoạt động nhóm, trò chuyện và kết bạn với những người có cùng sở thích, từ đó xây dựng một mạng lưới bạn bè trực tuyến. Bên cạnh đó, 181BET còn cung cấp các tính năng nâng cao, giúp người dùng có thể dễ dàng theo dõi tiến trình và thành tích của mình trong các trò chơi, từ đó tạo động lực cho người tham gia tiếp tục khám phá và trải nghiệm những thử thách mới.

Ngoài những tính năng vượt trội về giải trí và kết nối cộng đồng, 181BET còn chú trọng đến việc bảo vệ quyền lợi và bảo mật cho người sử dụng. Nền tảng này sử dụng công nghệ bảo mật tiên tiến để đảm bảo rằng mọi thông tin cá nhân và giao dịch đều được bảo vệ một cách nghiêm ngặt. Các hệ thống mã hóa dữ liệu và bảo vệ thông tin giúp người dùng yên tâm tham gia vào các hoạt động mà không lo lắng về việc bị lộ thông tin cá nhân hay gặp phải các vấn đề bảo mật. Đặc biệt, 181BET luôn nỗ lực nâng cấp hệ thống bảo mật để phù hợp với các tiêu chuẩn cao nhất của ngành công nghệ hiện nay, tạo nên một môi trường giải trí trực tuyến an toàn và đáng tin cậy. Bên cạnh đó, nền tảng này còn cung cấp dịch vụ hỗ trợ khách hàng 24/7, sẵn sàng giải đáp mọi thắc mắc và giúp đỡ người tham gia trong suốt quá trình trải nghiệm. Với đội ngũ nhân viên hỗ trợ chuyên nghiệp và tận tâm, 181BET cam kết mang đến cho người dùng một trải nghiệm trực tuyến mượt mà và không gặp phải bất kỳ trở ngại nào. Sự kết hợp giữa công nghệ bảo mật hiện đại, dịch vụ hỗ trợ khách hàng tận tình và một nền tảng giải trí đa dạng đã giúp 181BET trở thành một lựa chọn lý tưởng cho những ai tìm kiếm một không gian giải trí trực tuyến chất lượng và an toàn.

@ a296b972:e5a7a2e8

***Satiretüchtigkeit***

Deutschland hat den Satirikern den Krieg erklärt, in dem es Realitäten schafft, die die Phantasie der Autoren überbieten soll. Dazu hat das neu geschaffene Satireministerium die Satiretüchtigkeit ganz oben auf die Agenda gesetzt.

***Notlage***

Die Notlage in Deutschland ist in eine Notlage geraten. Das Ausrufen einer Notlage ist Gebot der Stunde, in der die Notlage der Notlage bekämpft werden kann.

***Grenzsicherung***

Nachdem als eine der ersten Amtshandlungen die deutschen Außengrenzen neu vermessen worden sind, hat sich herausgestellt, dass die Grenzen nur gesichert offenbleiben können. Der Bundesgrenzschutz hat ab sofort die Aufgabe übernommen, ausländisches CO2 an der Grenze aufzuhalten.

***Demokratiebeleidigungsparagraph***

Nach intensiver Recherche des Verfassungsschutzes hat sich herausgestellt, dass die Opposition die seinerzeitige Bundesregierung als „Diktatur“ und „totalitär“ bezeichnet hat. Das ist Demokratiebeleidigung. Ein neuer Paragraph ist bereits in der Ausarbeitung.

***Einhaltung des Koalitionsvertrags***

Aus gesicherten Quellen ist durchgesickert, dass der erste Bundeskanzler zweiter Wahl nun doch nicht sein Amt wahrnehmen will, weil das so nicht im Koalitionsvertrag steht. Schließlich halte man sich an selbigen und die Glaubwürdigkeit dürfe unter keinen Umständen infrage gestellt werden.

***Bundesamt für Fassungslosigkeit***

Das Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz soll nach dem Willen der Bürger in Bundesamt für Fassungslosigkeit umbenannt werden. Es soll ein deutliches Zeichen gesetzt werden, dass Bürgerbeteiligung in Zukunft ein wichtiger Bestandteil der Politik sein wird.

***Brüssel – Zentrum Belgiens***

Der Bundeskanzler mit Blackrock-Hintergrund hat als eine seiner ersten Amtshandlungen die Neugestaltung des Finanzmarktes in Brüssel angeregt. Der Euro soll in den allermeisten Europäischen Staaten durch den Blackrock-Taler ersetzt werden.

***Salutokratie***

Die WHO hat größte Zustimmung bei der Einführung der Salutokratie erfahren. Die Europäer jubeln und ziehen zu Tausenden mit der EU-Fahne durch die europäischen Hauptstädte. Auf vielen Plakaten ist der folgende Text zu lesen: Die Pharmaindustrie ist ein wichtiger Wirtschaftszweig. Durch unsere Erkrankungen tragen wir einen wichtigen Teil dazu bei, dass sie zu unserem Wohle weiter forschen und neue Medikamente auf den Markt bringen kann.

***Elektronische Patientenakte***

Nach für die Ärzte verpflichtender Einführung der elektronischen Patientenakte konnten letzte Lücken in der Datenoffenheit beseitigt werden. Eine vollständige Transparenz ist jetzt für jedermann gewährleistet. Die Krankenkassen jubeln, weil Ferndiagnosen noch effizienter praktiziert werden können.

***Übermenschliche Leistungen***

Die neue Wirtschaftsministerin hat ihre eigene Messlatte sehr hoch angelegt. Sie will die übermenschlichen Leistungen ihres Vorgängers noch übermenschlicher übertreffen. Ihre Mitarbeiter arbeiten fieberhaft an einer neuen Wortschöpfung, die über den Begriff Übermenschlichkeit hinausgeht. Es ist größte Eile geboten, da eine Neuwahl der Regierung schon in den nächsten Monaten zu erwarten ist.

***Lieferprobleme***

Der brutale Umzug der ehemaligen Außen-Dings in die genderunfreundlichen USA verzögert sich, weil ein bekanntes Versandunternehmen die Lieferkette von feministischen Umzugskartons nicht nachweisen kann. Außerdem wurde von Lagerengpässen für die bevorstehende Auslieferung mobiler Toiletten nach Afrika berichtet.

***Erwischt***

Der ehemalige Corona-Minister II. wurde auf der Rückfahrt nach Berlin (1. Klasse, die ist noch pünktlich) dabei gesehen, wie er im Bistro-Wagen mit Genuss eine leicht versalzene Bockwurst gegessen hat. Nach Ankunft in Berlin musste der Vorrat an erlesenem, durstlöschendem Rotwein aufgefüllt werden.

***Verkauf aus Gewissensgründen***

Der Corona-Minister I. bekannt und berühmt geworden durch seine kaufmännisch geschickt eingefädelten Masken-Deals in bedarfsgerechter Anzahl, sucht derzeit nach einem Käufer für seine bescheidene Hütte in Hamburg, weil er mit dem Erlös den bankkaufmanntechnischen Gewinnüberhang ausgleichen will.

***Drohnennahverkehr***

Das zu verstaatlichende Staatsunternehmen Bahn will spätestens 2028 den Drohnennahverkehr im Halbstundentakt bundesweit einführen. In einer Pressekonferenz wurde bekannt, dass man mit den Logistikfragen im Umgang mit den angeschlossenen Glasfaserkabeln schon sehr große Fortschritte gemacht habe.

***Merz-Frisur***

Vollhaar-Inhaber in der CDU wollen sich zur Unterstützung und als Zeichen der Loyalität eine Merz-Frisur bei einem bekannten Star-Friseur schneiden lassen. Die Wartezeiten betragen derzeit rund 5 Tage. Die Friseur-Innung arbeitet an einem Schnellkurs: Merz-Frisur-tüchtig in drei Wochen!

***Bestsellerliste***

Die ehemalige Bundesmutti hat weitere Prosa in zwei Bänden angekündigt: Die Titel lauten „Einigkeit“ und „Recht“. Derzeit laufen die Maschinen der papierverarbeitenden Hygieneindustrie auf Hochtouren (gut für die Wirtschaft!), da die Bestellliste schon 1000 Seiten lang ist, die jedoch aufgrund der Gleichbehandlung nicht veröffentlicht werden kann.

***Autoindustrie mehrheitlich positiv***

Die Umsätze der deutschen Autoindustrie sollen angeblich um rund 30% eingebrochen sein. Das bedeutet, dass die Mehrheit, also rund 70% noch vorhanden ist, was für die Wirtschaft allgemein sehr gute Nachrichten sind. Außerdem können freie Kapazitäten jetzt zur Produktion von Tankfahrzeugen für Panzer genutzt werden.

***Unterbringungsprobleme gelöst***

Durch die anhaltende Insolvenzwelle deutscher Unternehmen werden Werkshallen frei, die in kürzester Zeit zu weltoffenen Unterkünften umgebaut werden. Erfahrungen aus der Plattenbauweise der ehemaligen DDR konnten hier erfolgreich eingesetzt werden.

***Pandemiebekämpfung***

Deutschland ist zepterhaltend in Präventionsmaßnahmen für zukünftig geplante Pandemien. Federführend soll das virenverseuchte Bargeld stufenweise abgeschafft werden. Ein neues Panik-Paper sieht bereits seiner gut durchdachten Vollendung entgegen.

***Verband der Schreib-Fachkräfte***

Der in Anlehnung des bekannten Satzes von Peter Scholl-Latour formulierte Satz: -Wer Begriffe wie „Kriegstüchtigkeit“ und „Hass und Hetze“ aus dunklen Zeiten verwendet, wird selbst zur dunklen Zeit-, wurde vom Verband der Schreib-Fachkräfte als umstritten eingeordnet.

***Leitkultur***

Experten für den unfallfreien Verzehr von Bananen haben in einer teleskopierten Studie herausgefunden, dass das Wort Leitkultur aus den Worten Leitkuh und Kultur künstlich in einem französischen Labor für Gain-of-Word-Forschung zusammengesetzt wurde. Beweis dafür ist das fehlende Ha, das so in der Natur nicht vorkommt. Der Laborsprung konnte so eindeutig nachgewiesen werden.

***Reformvorschlag***

Bisher galt: Alle Bürgerrechte sind Abwehrrechte gegen den Staat. In einer Ausschusstagung soll jetzt darüber befunden werden, ob diese Formulierung aus Gründen der Delegitimierung des Staates nicht geändert werden kann. Der Reformvorschlag lautet: In einer angestrebten Unseredemokratie soll die Hoheit über die Abwehrrechte der Bürger beim Staat liegen. In demokratischen Einzelverfahren soll darüber entschieden werden, wann und in welchem Umfang sie gegen die Bürger zur Anwendung kommen sollen.

Dieser Artikel wurde mit dem Pareto-Client geschrieben

* *

(Bild von pixabay)

@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9

Capitalism is the most effective system for scaling innovation. The pursuit of profit is an incredibly powerful human incentive. Most major improvements to human society and quality of life have resulted from this base incentive. Market competition often results in the best outcomes for all.

That said, some projects can never be monetized. They are open in nature and a business model would centralize control. Open protocols like bitcoin and nostr are not owned by anyone and if they were it would destroy the key value propositions they provide. No single entity can or should control their use. Anyone can build on them without permission.

As a result, open protocols must depend on donation based grant funding from the people and organizations that rely on them. This model works but it is slow and uncertain, a grind where sustainability is never fully reached but rather constantly sought. As someone who has been incredibly active in the open source grant funding space, I do not think people truly appreciate how difficult it is to raise charitable money and deploy it efficiently.

Projects that can be monetized should be. Profitability is a super power. When a business can generate revenue, it taps into a self sustaining cycle. Profit fuels growth and development while providing projects independence and agency. This flywheel effect is why companies like Google, Amazon, and Apple have scaled to global dominance. The profit incentive aligns human effort with efficiency. Businesses must innovate, cut waste, and deliver value to survive.

Contrast this with non monetized projects. Without profit, they lean on external support, which can dry up or shift with donor priorities. A profit driven model, on the other hand, is inherently leaner and more adaptable. It is not charity but survival. When survival is tied to delivering what people want, scale follows naturally.

The real magic happens when profitable, sustainable businesses are built on top of open protocols and software. Consider the many startups building on open source software stacks, such as Start9, Mempool, and Primal, offering premium services on top of the open source software they build out and maintain. Think of companies like Block or Strike, which leverage bitcoin’s open protocol to offer their services on top. These businesses amplify the open software and protocols they build on, driving adoption and improvement at a pace donations alone could never match.

When you combine open software and protocols with profit driven business the result are lean, sustainable companies that grow faster and serve more people than either could alone. Bitcoin’s network, for instance, benefits from businesses that profit off its existence, while nostr will expand as developers monetize apps built on the protocol.

Capitalism scales best because competition results in efficiency. Donation funded protocols and software lay the groundwork, while market driven businesses build on top. The profit incentive acts as a filter, ensuring resources flow to what works, while open systems keep the playing field accessible, empowering users and builders. Together, they create a flywheel of innovation, growth, and global benefit.

@ 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

@ c9badfea:610f861a

1. Install FUTO Keyboard (it's free and open source)
2. Launch the app, tap Switch Input Methods and select FUTO Keyboard
3. For voice input, choose FUTO Keyboard (needs mic permission) and grant permission While Using The App
4. Configure keyboard layouts under Languages & Models as needed

Adding Support for Non-English Languages

Voice Input

1. Download voice input models from the FUTO Keyboard Add-Ons page
   • For languages like Chinese, German, Spanish, Russian, French, Portuguese, Korean, and Japanese, download the Multilingual-74 model
   • For other languages, download Multilingual-244
2. Open FUTO Keyboard, go to Languages & Models, and import the downloaded model under Voice Input

Dictionaries

1. Get dictionary files from AOSP Dictionaries
2. Open FUTO Keyboard, navigate to Languages & Models, and import the dictionary under Dictionary

ℹ️ When typing, tap the microphone icon to use voice input

@ 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

@ 2e8970de:63345c7a

What gear are you using? Any new/used stuff you are currently trying to buy/sell?

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/976340

@ 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

@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9

One of the most common criticisms leveled against nostr is the perceived lack of assurance when it comes to data storage. Critics argue that without a centralized authority guaranteeing that all data is preserved, important information will be lost. They also claim that running a relay will become prohibitively expensive. While there is truth to these concerns, they miss the mark. The genius of nostr lies in its flexibility, resilience, and the way it harnesses human incentives to ensure data availability in practice.

A nostr relay is simply a server that holds cryptographically verifiable signed data and makes it available to others. Relays are simple, flexible, open, and require no permission to run. Critics are right that operating a relay attempting to store all nostr data will be costly. What they miss is that most will not run all encompassing archive relays. Nostr does not rely on massive archive relays. Instead, anyone can run a relay and choose to store whatever subset of data they want. This keeps costs low and operations flexible, making relay operation accessible to all sorts of individuals and entities with varying use cases.

Critics are correct that there is no ironclad guarantee that every piece of data will always be available. Unlike bitcoin where data permanence is baked into the system at a steep cost, nostr does not promise that every random note or meme will be preserved forever. That said, in practice, any data perceived as valuable by someone will likely be stored and distributed by multiple entities. If something matters to someone, they will keep a signed copy.

Nostr is the Streisand Effect in protocol form. The Streisand effect is when an attempt to suppress information backfires, causing it to spread even further. With nostr, anyone can broadcast signed data, anyone can store it, and anyone can distribute it. Try to censor something important? Good luck. The moment it catches attention, it will be stored on relays across the globe, copied, and shared by those who find it worth keeping. Data deemed important will be replicated across servers by individuals acting in their own interest.

Nostr’s distributed nature ensures that the system does not rely on a single point of failure or a corporate overlord. Instead, it leans on the collective will of its users. The result is a network where costs stay manageable, participation is open to all, and valuable verifiable data is stored and distributed forever.

@ 84b0c46a:417782f5

https://long-form-editor.vercel.app/

β版のため予期せぬ動作が発生する可能性があります。記事を修正する際は事前にバックアップを取ることをおすすめします

機能

• nostr:npub1sjcvg64knxkrt6ev52rywzu9uzqakgy8ehhk8yezxmpewsthst6sw3jqcw や、 nostr:nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzq4jsz7zew5j7jr4pdfxh483nwq9vyw9ph6wm706sjwrzj2we58nqqyxhwumn8ghj77tpvf6jumt9qys8wumn8ghj7un9d3shjtt2wqhxummnw3ezuamfwfjkgmn9wshx5uqpr4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumn0wd68ytnhd9ex2erwv46zu6nsqyxhwumn8ghj7mn0wvhxcmmvqqsgcn99jyn5tevxz5zxsrkd7h0sx8fwnqztula423xh83j9wau7cms3vg9c7 のようにnostr:要素を挿入できる

• :monoice:のようにカスタム絵文字を挿入できる(メニューの😃アイコンから←アイコン変えるかも)

:monopaca_kao:

:kubipaca_karada:

• 新規記事作成と、既存記事の修正ができる

やることやったこと

• [x] nostr:を投稿するときにtagにいれる

• [x] 画像をアップロードできるようにする できる

• [x] 投稿しましたログとかをトースト的なやつでだすようにする
• [ ] レイアウトを整える
• [ ] あとなんか

@ 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

@ 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.

@ 7459d333:f207289b

Description: Just as Bitcoin enabled sovereignty over money, a decentralized shipping protocol would enable sovereignty over trade. An LN/Bisq inspired shipping protocol could create an unstoppable free market.

---

Bitcoin gave us monetary sovereignty, freeing us from central bank manipulation, inflation, and censorship. But there's a missing link in our freedom journey: the physical world of goods.

The Problem: Even with Bitcoin, global trade remains at the mercy of: - Arbitrary tariffs and import restrictions - Political censorship of goods - Privacy invasion of shipping information - Centralized shipping carriers

The Vision: A decentralized shipping protocol with these properties:

• "Onion-routed" packages: Each carrier only knows the previous and next hop
• Bitcoin-secured multi-sig escrow: Funds locked until package delivery confirmed
• Incentive alignment: Carriers set their own fees based on risk assessment
• Privacy tiers: Options for inspected vs. sealed packages with appropriate pricing
• End-to-end sovereignty: Sender and receiver maintain control, intermediate carriers just fulfill their role

How it could work:

1. Sender creates shipping request with package details and destination
2. Protocol finds optimal route through independent carriers
3. Each hop secured by multi-sig deposits larger than package value
4. Carriers only see next hop, not ultimate destination
5. Reputation systems and economic incentives maintain integrity

This creates a free market where any individual can participate as a carrier, earning Bitcoin for facilitating trade. Just like Lightning Network nodes, anyone can open "channels" with trusted partners.

Impact: This would enable true free market principles globally, making artificial trade barriers obsolete and empowering individuals to engage in voluntary exchange regardless of geographic or political boundaries.

There are a lot of challenges. But the first question is if this is a real problem and if its worth solving it.

What components would need development first? How would you solve the physical handoff challenges?

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/976326

@ 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

@ 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.

@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9

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

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

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

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

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

---

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

@ a3c6f928:d45494fb

In today's hyper-connected world, the concept of freedom has taken on new dimensions. With every click, swipe, and search, we contribute to a vast digital footprint that shapes how we are seen and how we interact with the world. But as technology advances, so too does the tension between digital convenience and the right to personal privacy.

The Digital Landscape

The rise of the internet has democratized information, connecting billions of people across the globe. Social media platforms allow for unprecedented levels of communication, giving a voice to the voiceless and a platform for activism. However, this connectivity comes with a price—our personal information.

The Cost of Convenience

From targeted ads to personalized recommendations, our online behaviors are tracked, analyzed, and sometimes exploited. While this can enhance user experience, it also raises questions about how much of our freedom is being surrendered in exchange for convenience. Are we willingly giving up our privacy for the sake of digital ease?

Privacy vs. Security

Governments and corporations argue that data collection is necessary for security and better services. However, this often blurs the lines between protection and intrusion. When is it acceptable for private information to be shared, and where should the boundaries be drawn?

Protecting Digital Freedom

1. Know Your Rights: Understand the privacy policies of the platforms you use.

2. Use Encryption: Protect your personal communications with encrypted services.

3. Limit Data Sharing: Be mindful of the information you share online.

4. Support Digital Rights: Advocate for stronger data protection laws.

The Path Forward

As technology continues to evolve, so must our understanding of freedom in the digital realm. True digital freedom is not just about access; it is about control—control over our information, our choices, and our online identities.

---

“The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.” — Thomas Jefferson

In this digital age, that vigilance must extend to the virtual world, where our freedoms are just as valuable and just as fragile.

@ 66675158:1b644430

In the twilight of his days, Myrddin sat upon the weathered stone bench overlooking what remained of Libertalia. His ancient hands—once steady enough to craft the most intricate mechanisms known to the Free Realms—now trembled as they rested upon the gnarled walking stick he had carved from windfall oak. The city below, once a marvel of independent districts connected by the invisible threads of mutual cooperation, had become something else entirely. Something monstrous.

The sun was setting, casting long shadows across the Grand Plaza where the Central Authority's banners now flew. Myrddin's eyes, still sharp despite his five hundred and seventy years, could make out the uniformed guards patrolling in perfect synchronicity. The sight made his stomach turn.

"I built the foundations for freedom," he whispered to himself, "and they have erected prisons upon them."

A figure approached from behind, footsteps deliberately heavy to announce their presence. Myrddin did not turn.

"Master Myrddin," came the voice of Thalion, one of his few remaining former apprentices not yet captured by the Authority. "The Council of Remnants awaits your wisdom."

Myrddin scoffed. "Wisdom? What wisdom can I offer now? I who planted the seeds of our destruction through my own shortsightedness?"

"You could not have known—"

"I should have known!" Myrddin's voice cracked with the force of his outburst. "Every great civilization before us fell to the same disease. Centralization. The pooling of power into fewer and fewer hands until the many are crushed beneath the weight of the few. I knew this. I studied the ancient texts. I designed our systems specifically to prevent this very outcome."

Thalion remained silent, allowing the old engineer his moment of self-recrimination.

"Come," Myrddin finally said, rising with difficulty. "Let us not keep your Council waiting. Though what good words can do against the machinery of oppression, I cannot say."

As they walked the hidden path down from the overlook, Myrddin's mind drifted back to the beginning, to the founding of Libertalia four centuries earlier...

---

The Founding Council had gathered beneath the great oak that would later mark the center of Libertalia. Twelve visionaries from twelve different traditions, united by a single purpose: to create a society where no person would rule over another.

Young Myrddin, barely forty years old but already renowned for his brilliance, unrolled the plans he had spent a decade perfecting.

"The Nexus System," he explained, pointing to the intricate diagrams. "A method of connection that requires no central authority. Each district, each guild, each family unit can connect to the whole while maintaining complete sovereignty over their own affairs."

Lorien the Sage, eldest among them, leaned forward with interest. "You propose that trade, communication, defense—all can function without a ruling body?"

"Not only can they function," Myrddin replied with the confidence of youth, "they will function better. A decentralized system is resilient. Cut one connection, and a hundred others remain. Attack one node, and the system routes around the damage. But most importantly, when power is distributed, corruption finds no fertile ground in which to take root."

"And what prevents a group from seizing control?" asked Marwen the Warrior. "From forcing others to submit to their will?"

Myrddin smiled. "The architecture itself. See here—" he pointed to a complex series of interlocking mechanisms, "—the Consensus Protocol. Any attempt to exert control beyond one's rightful domain triggers automatic resistance from the system. The more one tries to centralize power, the more difficult it becomes."

"You speak of mechanisms as if they have will," Marwen said skeptically.

"Not will, but design," Myrddin corrected. "Like water flowing downhill. I have designed a system where power naturally disperses rather than concentrates."

The Council debated through the night, questioning every aspect of Myrddin's design. By morning, they had agreed to build their new society upon his principles. Libertalia would be a constellation of sovereign individuals and voluntary associations, connected but never controlled.

For three generations, it worked exactly as Myrddin had envisioned. The Free Realms prospered as never before. Innovation flourished in the absence of restrictive oversight. Disputes were resolved through mutual arbitration rather than imposed judgment. The Nexus System facilitated trade and communication while preserving the independence of all participants.

Myrddin, his lifespan extended by the alchemical discoveries his system had made possible, watched with pride as Libertalia became the envy of the known world.

But he had made one critical error.

---

"You created a system that required vigilance," Thalion said as they descended toward the hidden meeting place. "Perhaps that was the flaw."

"No," Myrddin replied. "The flaw was in believing that making something difficult would make it impossible. I should have made centralization not merely hard, but unachievable by any means."

They reached the abandoned mill that served as the Council's current hiding place. Inside, two dozen faces turned toward them—the last free thinkers in a land that once celebrated independence above all else.

Myrddin took his seat at the rough-hewn table. "Tell me," he said without preamble, "how much worse has it become since we last met?"

A woman named Sera, who had once been the foremost architect in the Eastern District, spoke first. "The Authority has implemented the Unified Identification Protocol. No citizen may trade, travel, or even purchase food without presenting their Authority Crystal for scanning."

"And these crystals track their movements?" Myrddin asked, though he already knew the answer.

"Every step," confirmed Sera. "Every transaction. Every word spoken near an Echo Stone."

Myrddin closed his eyes briefly. Echo Stones—his invention, meant to record important discoveries and preserve the wisdom of the ages. Now perverted into tools of surveillance.

"The schools have been consolidated," added a younger man named Ferris. "All children now learn from the same Authority-approved texts. The history of Libertalia is being rewritten. They claim you designed the Nexus System to eventually unite under central guidance."

"A lie," Myrddin spat.

"But a believable one," Thalion said gently. "You did build the infrastructure that made this possible, however unintentional."

Myrddin could not deny it. The Nexus System, designed for voluntary connection, had been gradually modified over the centuries. What began as simple efficiency improvements eventually created vulnerabilities. The Consensus Protocol, once the guardian of decentralization, had been subverted by those who understood its mechanics but not its purpose.

"The disease always begins the same way," Myrddin said, addressing the Council. "With promises of efficiency. Of security. Of protection from unseen threats. The centralizers never announce their true intentions. They speak of unity while forging chains."

"We know this, Master Myrddin," said Sera impatiently. "What we need is a solution, not a history lesson."

Myrddin smiled sadly. "The history is the solution, if only we would heed it. Every great civilization before us fell to centralization. The Aurelian Empire, whose emperors claimed divine right to rule all lands beneath the twin moons. The Dynasty of Eternal Harmony, whose bureaucracy grew so vast it consumed half the realm's production. The Jade Confederation, whose Council of Nine became a single Overlord within three generations."

He paused, gathering his thoughts.

"In every case, the pattern was identical. Power, once distributed among many, gradually accumulated in the hands of few. Those few, corrupted by their unnatural position, made decisions that benefited themselves rather than the whole. Resources were misallocated. Innovation stagnated. The system became brittle rather than resilient. And when crisis came—whether famine, war, or natural disaster—the centralized structure collapsed under its own weight."

"Yet people never learn," said Ferris bitterly.

"Because the benefits of centralization are immediate and visible, while its costs are delayed and diffuse," Myrddin replied. "The Authority provides convenience today at the cost of freedom tomorrow. They offer solutions to problems that would resolve themselves naturally in a decentralized system."

"What was your mistake, then?" asked Thalion. "Where in your design did you leave the opening for this disease to take hold?"

Myrddin's face darkened with regret. "I built a system that was resistant to centralization, but not immune to it. I created tools of such power and efficiency that they became irresistible targets for those who would control others. And most critically, I failed to encode the philosophical foundations of decentralization into the system itself."

He looked around at the faces of the Council, seeing in them the last embers of the fire that had once burned so brightly in Libertalia.

"I believed that people would choose freedom if given the option. I did not account for how seductive the promises of centralization would be. How easily people would trade liberty for convenience. How willingly they would accept security over sovereignty."

---

The decline had been gradual, almost imperceptible at first. It began two centuries after the founding, with the creation of the Coordination Council.

"Merely to improve efficiency," its proponents had argued. "To eliminate redundancies in our wonderfully decentralized system."

Myrddin, by then well into his second century, had voiced concerns but was overruled by younger generations who found the original Nexus System too cumbersome for their modern needs. The Coordination Council was given limited authority to standardize certain protocols across districts.

Within a decade, those standards became requirements. Requirements became regulations. Regulations became laws. The Council, originally composed of representatives who returned to their districts after brief terms of service, gradually transformed into a permanent body of administrators.

By the time Myrddin recognized the pattern, the disease had already taken root. The Coordination Council had become the Central Authority. The voluntary associations that once formed the backbone of Libertalian society were now subordinate to its dictates.

He had tried to warn them. He had written treatises on the dangers of centralization, had spoken at public forums, had even attempted to modify the Nexus System to restore its decentralizing functions. But he was dismissed as an outdated thinker, unable to appreciate the "improvements" of modern governance.

Now, four hundred years after the founding, Libertalia was Libertalia in name only. The Authority controlled all aspects of life. The districts, once proudly independent, were administrative zones whose boundaries could be redrawn at the Authority's whim. The guilds, once self-governing bodies of skilled craftspeople, were now licensing bureaus that enforced Authority standards.

And the people—the free, sovereign individuals for whom Myrddin had designed his system—had become subjects. Citizens, they were called, but the word had lost its original meaning of self-governance and had come to signify merely a registered and tracked unit of the Authority.

---

"We cannot defeat the Authority directly," Myrddin told the Council of Remnants. "They control too much. The military, the food supply, the Nexus itself. Any direct confrontation would be suicidal."

"Then what hope remains?" asked Sera.

"We must build anew," Myrddin said, his voice finding strength in purpose. "Not reform, but replace. The old system cannot be saved—it is too thoroughly corrupted. We must create a parallel system that makes centralization not merely difficult, but impossible by its very nature."

"How?" several voices asked at once.

Myrddin reached into his worn leather satchel and withdrew a small crystal, unlike the Authority Crystals in both color and cut. "I have spent the last fifty years designing what should have been built from the beginning. A truly decentralized system that cannot be subverted because its very operation depends on remaining distributed."

He placed the crystal in the center of the table. It pulsed with a soft blue light.

"The Arx," he explained. "Each crystal contains the complete system, yet functions as only one node within it. No node can control another. No group of nodes can outvote or overpower the minority. Consensus is achieved not through majority rule, but through voluntary participation."

Thalion picked up the crystal, examining it skeptically. "The Authority will never allow this."

"They need not allow what they cannot detect," Myrddin replied. "The Arx operates on principles the Authority's systems cannot recognize. It exists alongside their network but remains invisible to it."

"And what can this network do?" asked Ferris. "How does it help us against the might of the Authority?"

"It allows us to trade without their knowledge. To communicate without their oversight. To organize without their permission. And most importantly, to remember who we truly are—sovereign individuals who require no masters."

Myrddin stood, his ancient frame seeming to straighten with the weight of his purpose.

"Centralization is not merely inefficient or unjust—it is a disease that infects and ultimately kills any society it touches. It promises order but delivers stagnation. It promises security but creates vulnerability. It promises prosperity but ensures that wealth flows only to those who control the center."

He looked each Council member in the eye.

"I made a mistake in believing that making centralization difficult would be enough. This time, we will make it impossible. The Arx cannot be centralized because its very operation depends on distribution. Any attempt to control it causes it to fragment and reform beyond the controller's reach."

"And if the Authority discovers these crystals?" Sera asked.

"They can destroy individual crystals, but the network will continue. They can imprison those who carry them, but more will take their place. The design is now the important thing, not the designer. I have encoded the knowledge of how to create these crystals within the crystals themselves. The idea cannot be killed."

Myrddin sat back down, suddenly looking every one of his many years.

"I cannot undo the damage my oversight has caused. I cannot restore the Libertalia I helped to build. But I can give you the tools to create something better—something truly resistant to the disease of centralization."

The Council members looked at one another, hope kindling in eyes that had known only despair for too long.

"How do we begin?" Thalion asked.

Myrddin smiled. "We begin by remembering what we have forgotten. That no person has the right to rule another. That voluntary cooperation always outperforms forced compliance. That systems must serve individuals, not the reverse. That decentralization is not merely a technical architecture but a moral imperative."

He gestured to the crystal, still glowing in Thalion's palm.

"And we begin by building connections that cannot be controlled. Person to person. District to district. Free association by free association. The Authority believes itself invincible because it sits at the center of all things. But when there is no center, there is nothing to seize, nothing to corrupt, nothing to control."

As night fell over Libertalia, the Council of Remnants listened as the ancient engineer outlined his vision for a truly decentralized future. Outside, the Authority's patrols marched in perfect order, their uniformity a testament to the disease that had consumed what was once the freest society in the known world.

Myrddin knew he would not live to see his new design reach fruition. But for the first time in decades, he felt something like peace. He had identified his error. He had created a solution. And most importantly, he had ensured that the knowledge would outlive him.

Centralization was indeed a disease—perhaps the most persistent and destructive disease ever to afflict human societies. But like all diseases, it could be overcome with the right medicine. And the medicine was not more centralization, not better rulers, not wiser authorities.

The medicine was decentralization. Complete, uncompromising, and irreversible decentralization.

As the meeting concluded and the Council members departed with their crystals, Myrddin remained seated at the table. Thalion lingered behind.

"You know they will come for you eventually," his former apprentice said. "You are too significant a symbol to ignore forever."

Myrddin nodded. "Let them come. An old man is a small price to pay for the rebirth of freedom."

"Your new system," Thalion said hesitantly, "you are certain it cannot be centralized? That we are not simply repeating the cycle?"

"Nothing created by human hands can be perfect," Myrddin admitted. "But I have learned from my mistake. The Arx does not merely resist centralization—it actively works against it. The more one tries to control it, the more it disperses. It is not merely a technical solution but a philosophical one."

He placed a hand on Thalion's shoulder. "Remember always: centralization benefits only those at the center. For everyone else—the 99.999% who stand at the periphery—it is nothing but chains disguised as safety. Never again can we allow the disease to take root by promising efficiency at the cost of sovereignty."

Thalion nodded solemnly. "I will remember."

As his former apprentice departed, Myrddin turned to look out the small window at the city below. The Authority's lights blazed from the central towers, pushing back the natural darkness of night. So much power, concentrated in so few hands. So much potential, wasted in the service of control rather than creation.

He had lived long enough to see his greatest work corrupted. With what time remained to him, he would ensure that his final creation could not suffer the same fate. The Arx would spread, node by node, person by person, until the very concept of centralized authority became as obsolete as the diseases his earlier inventions had eradicated.

Myrddin Myrddin, Master Engineer of the Free Realms, closed his eyes and allowed himself, just for a moment, to imagine a world reborn in true freedom. A world where the disease of centralization had finally been cured.

It would not happen in his lifetime. Perhaps not even in Thalion's. But it would happen. Of that, he was certain.

For the truth that the Authority and all centralizers before them had never understood was simple: humans were not meant to be controlled. They were meant to be free. And in the end, that natural state would reassert itself, no matter how elaborate the systems of control became.

Centralization was a disease. And like all diseases, it would eventually meet a cure.

@ 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

@ 6d8e2a24:5faaca4c

North American nations have been at the forefront of Bitcoin adoption; however, Nigeria, Kenya and South Africa have recently emerged as leaders in Africa.

There’s an increasing acceptance of Bitcoin on the African continent. More businesses, individuals and even financial organizations are using cryptocurrency to transact as an alternative to traditional banking systems. With the economies of the continent experiencing a lot of currency instability, poor banking infrastructure and exorbitantly priced remittances, Bitcoin is coming up as a viable solution financially. Analyzing Bitcoin price trends is crucial for investors, traders and businesses in Africa who want to implement digital assets in their operations.

The Impact of Bitcoin on the African Economy

North American nations have been at the forefront of Bitcoin adoption; however, Nigeria, Kenya and South Africa have recently emerged as leaders in Africa. Peer-to-peer cryptocurrency trading across the continent reached over $100 billion in 2023, making Africa one of the fastest-growing markets for blockchain technology, according to a report by Chainalysis. Several factors that fuel this growth include:

⚪ Less Dependable Fiat Currency : Zimbabwe and Nigeria have poor liquidity currencies, which makes it prudent for citizens to invest in Bitcoin to minimize losses due to devaluation over time.

⚪ Payments for Foreign Worker Remittances: Bitcoin is useful for relocating payments since it eliminates the need for using bitcoin remittance centers that charge ridiculous fees for payment processing.

⚪ Financial Inclusion : A large portion of the African population does not use banks. This makes bitcoin an ideal alternative, as it offers a decentralized and unbanked-friendly option for conducting transactions.

How Bitcoin’s Price Trends Affect the African Market

Businesses and individuals’ activities with bitcoin are directly proportional to its price trends and different nations have different ways through which they analyze this. Take Nigeria, for instance, where the e-commerce platform Patricia and several local sellers on Jumia have had to change their prices multiple times a day to keep in line with the fluctuating value of bitcoin. This has led to the platform’s volatility driving the pricing strategy of freelancers and remote workers who are paid in bitcoin and the currency has to be converted before being spent. As investor sentiment increases, so too does Bitcoin’s value, reaching 71,333 dollars in April of 2024, according to estimates from CoinMarketCap. The volatility, however, remains high and so there is a lot of uncertainty for African investors and businesses hoping to capitalize on the price movement.

Amongst the factors that impact the price movement of bitcoin, these are the most significant:

⚪ Global Adoption and Institutional Investments: An increase in spending by corporations leads to a higher demand and price for bitcoin.

⚪ Regulatory Changes : The law about cryptocurrency in different African countries is a vital influencer of regard and value for bitcoin.

⚪ Market Speculation and Trading Activity: The volatility of Bitcoin's price remains dependent on investor sentiment, especially in the emerging markets.

African Governments and Cryptocurrency Regulation

The policies for regulating Bitcoin are different in various countries in Africa. While countries like South Africa and Kenya are skeptical but working towards adjusting their policies to incorporate cryptocurrency into their economies, other nations remain hesitant. The following is a summary of the most important changes:

⚪ South Africa: The Financial Sector Conduct Authority (FSCA) offered more structured regulations by classifying crypto assets as financial products. This is a notable development towards more stringent regulations.

⚪ Nigeria: The Central Bank of Nigeria has previously restricted banks from supporting the facilitation of crypto transactions but is in the process of allowing it due to newly offered licenses to cryptocurrency exchanges, which under certain guidelines allow them to conduct regulated crypto activities.

⚪ Kenya: The Capital Markets Authority is seeking ways to regulate the security features of Bitcoin to enable it to reduce fraud. Bitcoin’s Impact on E-commerce and Small Businesses in Africa

With the rise of cryptocurrency acceptance, small-scale businesses and e-commerce businesses are increasing the option of paying for goods and services in Bitcoin. Businesses can reduce costs by:

⚪ Decreased Transaction Fees: Payments made using Bitcoin are usually cheaper than those made through credit cards. For example, some merchants in Ghana are beginning to use Bitcoin to bypass high fee payment processing, increase their profit margins and improve overall business profitability.

⚪ Reduced Transaction Delays: Banking transactions processed through the blockchain do away with delays associated with traditional banking.

⚪ Access to Global Markets: Businesses in Africa have no issues engaging with foreign clients because there is no currency conversion needed.

For instance, Yellow Card is a cryptocurrency exchange that operates in several countries in Africa and allows the trading of Bitcoins. In 2024, Yellow Card received more compliance approvals, which allowed the business to serve more than 20 countries in Africa. It now stands as a central player in the regional ecosystem of crypto. The platform allows businesses or individuals to transact efficiently with Bitcoin.

Challenges and Risks of Bitcoin Adoption in Africa

Unlike the advantages, there are several challenges regarding the adoption of Bitcoin in Africa:

⚪ Regulatory Uncertainty: The considerable flux of policies is difficult for businesses and investors to navigate, although some countries are beginning to put clearer policies into place, such as South Africa and Nigeria. As an example, Nigeria has plans to regulate the exchange of digital assets and put some control over it through the issuing of licenses for crypto exchanges, which are expected to be released in 2024.

⚪ Price Volatility: Changes in the price of Bitcoin can affect savings and transactions for businesses.

⚪ Limited Infrastructure: Internet and computer skills are primary requirements for greater acceptance.

Conclusion

Bitcoin is increasingly becoming a key component of Africa’s financial ecosystem by providing banking services or alternatives, facilitating financial remittances and supporting inclusion. Experts expect that Africa will increasingly adopt Bitcoin as a major tool of payment and remittance service across borders and for digital financial transactions. This will be the case if the regulations supporting its growth are put in place. While price volatility and regulatory challenges persist, knowing how prices behave and the developments within the Bitcoin ecosystem will help investors and businesses understand the new economy Africa is adopting. Africa indeed has the chance to use strategic adoption of technology to improve economic development and innovation through Bitcoin if action is taken.

2025Content from a Premium Partner InfoWire https://allafrica.com/stories/202503240689.html

@ 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! 🌸

@ 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

@ eac63075:b4988b48

Listen the Podcast:

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

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

Abstract

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

Introduction

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Trump, NATO, and the Threat of American Withdrawal

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Peace Negotiations Excluding Ukraine and the Legitimacy of the Agreement

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

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

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

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

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

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

Implicit Territorial Concessions and Trump’s Public Discourse

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

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

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

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

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

Territorial Ambitions of Trump: Greenland and Canada

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

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

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

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

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

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

Implications for Brazil and South America: A New Neocolonization?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Conclusion

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

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

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

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

Bibliography

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

@ d41bf82f:ed90d888

บทที่ 3: ตะวันออกแห่งเอเดน (East of Eden)

บทนี้เจาะลึกต้นกำเนิดของโครงสร้างอำนาจในมนุษยชาติผ่านมุมมองเชิงประวัติศาสตร์และเศรษฐศาสตร์ โดยเฉพาะการเปลี่ยนแปลงครั้งสำคัญที่เรียกว่า การปฏิวัติเกษตรกรรม ซึ่งพลิกโฉมวิถีชีวิตมนุษย์จากการเป็นนักล่าสัตว์และเก็บของป่า มาสู่สังคมที่ตั้งถิ่นฐานถาวร สะสมทรัพย์สิน และมีแนวโน้มที่จะใช้ความรุนแรงและจัดองค์กรทางอำนาจที่ซับซ้อนมากขึ้น

การเปลี่ยนผ่านดังกล่าวสามารถเห็นภาพได้อย่างคมชัดผ่านสัญลักษณ์ในพระคัมภีร์ไบเบิล จากเรื่องราวของคาอินและอาเบล:

“และพระเจ้าตรัสกับคาอินว่า ‘อาเบล น้องชายของเจ้าอยู่ที่ไหน?’ คาอินตอบว่า ‘ข้าพระองค์ไม่ทราบ ข้าพระองค์เป็นผู้ดูแลน้องชายของข้าหรือ?’ พระเจ้าตรัสว่า ‘เจ้าทำอะไรลงไป? เสียงเลือดของน้องชายเจ้าร้องต่อเรามาจากพื้นดิน’” (ปฐมกาล 4:9-10)

นี่ไม่ใช่เพียงบทสนทนาทางศาสนา แต่สามารถตีความในเชิงสัญลักษณ์ว่าเป็นการบันทึกครั้งแรกของอาชญากรรมที่เกิดจากตรรกะของการเป็นเจ้าของและความรุนแรง คาอิน ผู้เป็น “ชาวนา” ได้สังหารน้องชายของตนเองจากแรงริษยาและการแข่งขันในบริบทของการถวายผลผลิต ความเปรียบเปรยนี้สะท้อนถึงความเปลี่ยนแปลงของตรรกะทางสังคมเมื่อมนุษย์เข้าสู่ยุคเกษตรกรรม

ในยุคก่อนเกษตรกรรม มนุษย์อยู่กันเป็นกลุ่มเล็ก ๆ พึ่งพาทรัพยากรธรรมชาติในพื้นที่กว้าง ไม่มีแรงจูงใจจะใช้ความรุนแรง เพราะไม่มีทรัพย์สินให้แย่งชิง อาหารต้องบริโภคทันที ไม่มีการสะสม ทำให้ไม่มีใครร่ำรวยหรือยากจนอย่างชัดเจน โครงสร้างสังคมจึงเท่าเทียมและร่วมมือกันได้ดี

แต่เมื่อมนุษย์เริ่มเพาะปลูกและเลี้ยงสัตว์ พื้นที่การผลิตอาหารต้องได้รับการดูแลต่อเนื่อง ทำให้ไม่สามารถอพยพหนีภัยได้ง่าย และเมื่อมีผลผลิตมากขึ้น ก็ยิ่งเป็นเป้าหมายของการปล้นสะดม ส่งผลให้กลุ่มนักรบผู้ใช้ความรุนแรงสามารถสะสมทรัพยากรและอำนาจได้มากขึ้น และบางกลุ่มก็พัฒนาเป็นรัฐ ระบบการป้องกันและการเก็บส่วยในรูปแบบของรัฐจึงค่อยๆ ก่อตัวขึ้นจากพันธมิตรระหว่างนักรบกับนักบวช

ทรัพย์สิน ส่วนตัวซึ่งไม่เคยมีความสำคัญในสังคมนักล่าสัตว์ กลายเป็นสิ่งที่จำเป็นในสังคมเกษตรกรรม เพราะไม่มีใครจะเพาะปลูกด้วยแรงงานของตนเองหากรู้ว่าจะถูกปล้นไป ความชัดเจนของกรรมสิทธิ์จึงเป็นสิ่งจำเป็น แต่ขณะเดียวกัน กลไกของความรุนแรงก็ทำให้สิทธิในทรัพย์สินตกอยู่ในความเสี่ยง ระบบของรัฐในยุคแรกจึงเป็นการผูกขาดความรุนแรงในนามของความคุ้มครอง

ในสังคมเกษตรกรรมที่ผลิตภาพต่ำ ผู้คนจำนวนมากต้องพึ่งพารูปแบบการป้องกันทางเศรษฐกิจที่เรียกว่า “หมู่บ้านปิด” ซึ่งความเสี่ยงถูกกระจายระหว่างเจ้าของที่ดินกับชาวนา โดยมีหัวหน้าหมู่บ้านเป็นตัวกลางในความสัมพันธ์ทางเศรษฐกิจ การจ่ายค่าเช่าที่ดินในรูปแบบผลผลิตแทนเงิน ช่วยให้เจ้าของที่ดินและผู้เช่าสามารถรับมือกับภัยพิบัติร่วมกันได้ในปีที่ผลผลิตตกต่ำ

พฤติกรรมหลีกเลี่ยงความเสี่ยงนี้จำกัดการเติบโตและนวัตกรรมในระบบเศรษฐกิจ เนื่องจากโอกาสในการอยู่รอดมีค่าสูงกว่าความหวังต่อความมั่งคั่ง และนำไปสู่การครอบงำของวัฒนธรรมที่กดทับพฤติกรรมแปลกแยก วัฒนธรรมจึงเป็นกลไกปรับตัวที่เหมาะสมกับความแร้นแค้น ไม่ใช่เครื่องมือในการเปิดโอกาส

ในพื้นที่ที่เกษตรกรรมมีผลิตภาพสูง เช่น กรีซโบราณ กรรมสิทธิ์ส่วนตัว การออม และการเลื่อนสถานะทางสังคมก็เริ่มปรากฏ แต่ในพื้นที่ส่วนใหญ่ของโลก ระบบศักดินาครอบงำ เพราะผลิตภาพต่ำและมีความจำเป็นต้องพึ่งพาอำนาจผูกขาดความรุนแรง

บทนี้ยังวิเคราะห์การเปลี่ยนผ่านจากยุคโรมันไปสู่ยุคกลาง โดยเฉพาะ การปฏิวัติศักดินา ราวปี ค.ศ. 1000 การล่มสลายของจักรวรรดิโรมันทำให้รัฐอ่อนแอ และเปิดโอกาสให้ชาวนารายย่อยมีอิสระมากขึ้นในยุคมืด แต่เมื่อประชากรเพิ่มขึ้น ภูมิอากาศแปรปรวน และภัยพิบัติเกิดขึ้นต่อเนื่อง ผลผลิตตกต่ำ ชาวนาไม่สามารถรักษากรรมสิทธิ์ของตนไว้ได้ ต้องมอบที่ดินให้กับผู้มีอำนาจเพื่อแลกกับความคุ้มครอง กระบวนการนี้ค่อย ๆ เปลี่ยนเจ้าของที่ดินรายย่อยให้กลายเป็นไพร่ในระบบศักดินา

กองกำลังติดอาวุธ เช่น อัศวินม้า มีบทบาทสำคัญในการรวมอำนาจ เพราะมีต้นทุนการจัดหาสูงจนชาวนาทั่วไปไม่สามารถแข่งขันได้ โบสถ์จึงเข้ามามีบทบาทในการจำกัดความรุนแรงผ่านขบวนการ สันติภาพของพระเจ้า และยังมีบทบาทในเชิงโครงสร้างอื่น ๆ เช่น การศึกษา การจัดเก็บความรู้ การพัฒนาเกษตรกรรม และการก่อสร้างโครงสร้างพื้นฐาน เช่น ถนน เขื่อน และโรงสี

ตรรกะของความรุนแรงเปลี่ยนไปอย่างสิ้นเชิงในยุคเกษตรกรรม เพราะทรัพย์สินสามารถแย่งชิงได้ มีต้นทุนในการปกป้อง และผลตอบแทนที่คุ้มต่อการลงทุนในอาวุธ ความรุนแรงจึงกลายเป็นสิ่งที่ “คุ้มค่า” ทางเศรษฐศาสตร์เป็นครั้งแรกในประวัติศาสตร์

บทสรุปของบทนี้ชี้ให้เห็นว่า การเปลี่ยนแปลงจากยุคนักล่าสัตว์มาสู่การเกษตรคือจุดเริ่มต้นของระบบอำนาจ และเสรีภาพส่วนบุคคลถูกลดทอนลงเรื่อย ๆ เพื่อตอบสนองต่อความมั่นคงของทรัพย์สิน ในแง่นี้ เรื่องราวของคาอินผู้สังหารน้องชาย ซึ่งเป็นคนเลี้ยงสัตว์ สะท้อนถึงการก้าวเข้าสู่ยุคใหม่ที่การเพาะปลูกไม่เพียงสร้างอารยธรรม แต่ยังเปิดประตูสู่ตรรกะของการใช้ความรุนแรงอย่างเป็นระบบ

สามารถไปติดตามเนื้อหาแบบ short vdo ที่สรุปประเด็นสำคัญจากแต่ละบท พร้อมกราฟิกและคำอธิบายกระชับ เข้าใจง่าย ได้ที่ TikTok ช่อง https://www.tiktok.com/@moneyment1971

@ fbf0e434:e1be6a39

Hackathon 概要

Stellar Build Better Hackathon 已圆满落幕，共有 220 名注册开发者参与，84 个项目获得批准。本次活动旨在通过 Stellar 的智能合约推动实际应用，强调社区合作与技术进步。参赛者在三个类别中展开角逐，总奖金为 25000 美元的 USDC，类别包括：Better Finance、Better Creativity 和 Better Access。

开发者探索了 DeFi 可及性工具、跨境支付解决方案、创作者经济平台和身份解决方案等领域。Hackathon 为与全球开发者交流及知名加密公司曝光提供了契机。此外，还设有技术研讨会和现场 demo 环节，为参赛者提供支持。

在成果方面，一等奖 12,000 USDC 授予了提升金融可及性的项目。二、三等奖分别获得 8,000 和 5,000 USDC 的奖励，以表彰其在创意工具和可访问性解决方案方面的创新。通过这些奖励，此次活动凸显了 Stellar 在促进实用创新及扩展其生态系统中智能合约应用方面的作用。

Hackathon 获奖者

第一名

• PayZoll_Stellar - PayZoll 在 Stellar 生态系统中集成了AI和区块链，提供安全、自动化和透明的全球薪资服务，提升了薪资管理的效率和可靠性。

第二名

• StellarFinance - 该平台在Stellar区块链上促进用户与财务顾问之间的连接，提供专注于诚信和用户参与的安全透明的金融服务。

第三名

• Soroban to MCP Server in seconds + Policy Signers Playground - 此解决方案将Stellar Soroban智能合约转换为MCP服务器，实现自然语言交互，支持AI代理执行并增强智能合约功能。

前往 DoraHacks 查看参与hackathon的所有项目。

关于主办方

Stellar Development Foundation

Stellar Development Foundation 力求促进 Stellar 网络的增长和发展，这是一种旨在促进高效跨境交易的区块链平台。基金会专注于去中心化金融（DeFi），实施推进全球金融包容性的项目。通过与广泛的网络合作，该组织推广可扩展的区块链解决方案，确保金融服务的可及性和可靠性。其使命是通过创新的开源技术，为全球经济提供公平的通道。

@ 21335073:a244b1ad

Before I saw those X right-wing political “influencers” parading their Epstein binders in that PR stunt, I’d already posted this on Nostr, an open protocol. 

“Today, the world’s attention will likely fixate on Epstein, governmental failures in addressing horrific abuse cases, and the influential figures who perpetrate such acts—yet few will center the victims and survivors in the conversation. The survivors of Epstein went to law enforcement and very little happened. The survivors tried to speak to the corporate press and the corporate press knowingly covered for him. In situations like these social media can serve as one of the only ways for a survivor’s voice to be heard. 

It’s becoming increasingly evident that the line between centralized corporate social media and the state is razor-thin, if it exists at all. Time and again, the state shields powerful abusers when it’s politically expedient to do so. In this climate, a survivor attempting to expose someone like Epstein on a corporate tech platform faces an uphill battle—there’s no assurance their voice would even break through. Their story wouldn’t truly belong to them; it’d be at the mercy of the platform, subject to deletion at a whim. Nostr, though, offers a lifeline—a censorship-resistant space where survivors can share their truths, no matter how untouchable the abuser might seem. A survivor could remain anonymous here if they took enough steps. 

Nostr holds real promise for amplifying survivor voices. And if you’re here daily, tossing out memes, take heart: you’re helping build a foundation for those who desperately need to be heard.“

That post is untouchable—no CEO, company, employee, or government can delete it. Even if I wanted to, I couldn’t take it down myself. The post will outlive me on the protocol. 

The cozy alliance between the state and corporate social media hit me hard during that right-wing X “influencer” PR stunt. Elon owns X. Elon’s a special government employee. X pays those influencers to post. We don’t know who else pays them to post. Those influencers are spurred on by both the government and X to manage the Epstein case narrative. It wasn’t survivors standing there, grinning for photos—it was paid influencers, gatekeepers orchestrating yet another chance to re-exploit the already exploited.

The bond between the state and corporate social media is tight. If the other Epsteins out there are ever to be unmasked, I wouldn’t bet on a survivor’s story staying safe with a corporate tech platform, the government, any social media influencer, or mainstream journalist. Right now, only a protocol can hand survivors the power to truly own their narrative.

I don’t have anything against Elon—I’ve actually been a big supporter. I’m just stating it as I see it. X isn’t censorship resistant and they have an algorithm that they choose not the user. Corporate tech platforms like X can be a better fit for some survivors. X has safety tools and content moderation, making it a solid option for certain individuals. Grok can be a big help for survivors looking for resources or support! As a survivor, you know what works best for you, and safety should always come first—keep that front and center.

That said, a protocol is a game-changer for cases where the powerful are likely to censor. During China's # MeToo movement, survivors faced heavy censorship on social media platforms like Weibo and WeChat, where posts about sexual harassment were quickly removed, and hashtags like # MeToo or "woyeshi" were blocked by government and platform filters. To bypass this, activists turned to blockchain technology encoding their stories—like Yue Xin’s open letter about a Peking University case—into transaction metadata. This made the information tamper-proof and publicly accessible, resisting censorship since blockchain data can’t be easily altered or deleted.

I posted this on X 2/28/25. I wanted to try my first long post on a nostr client. The Epstein cover up is ongoing so it’s still relevant, unfortunately.

If you are a survivor or loved one who is reading this and needs support please reach out to: National Sexual Assault Hotline 24/7 https://rainn.org/

Hours: Available 24 hours

@ 95543309:196c540e

:bob:

rant

why the fuck bunkers and stuff try to enctypt long text articles with nip 44

end rant

@ 0c469779:4b21d8b0

Sobre el amor

Mi percepción del amor cambió con el tiempo. Leer literatura rusa, principalmente a Dostoevsky, te cambia la perspectiva sobre el amor y la vida en general.

Por mucho tiempo mi visión sobre la vida es que la misma se basa en el sufrimiento: también la Biblia dice esto. El amor es igual, en el amor se sufre y se banca a la otra persona. El problema es que hay una distinción de sufrimientos que por mucho tiempo no tuve en cuenta. Está el sufrimiento del sacrificio y el sufrimiento masoquista. Para mí eran indistintos.

Para mí el ideal era Aliosha y Natasha de Humillados y Ofendidos: estar con alguien que me amase tanto como Natasha a Aliosha, un amor inclusive autodestructivo para Natasha, pero real. Tiene algo de épico, inalcanzable. Un sufrimiento extremo, redentor, es una vara altísima que en la vida cotidiana no se manifiesta. O el amor de Sonia a Raskolnikov, quien se fue hasta Siberia mientras estuvo en prisión para que no se quede solo en Crimen y Castigo.

Este es el tipo de amor que yo esperaba. Y como no me pasó nada tan extremo y las situaciones que llegan a ocurrir en mi vida están lejos de ser tan extremas, me parecía hasta poco lo que estaba pidiendo y que nadie pueda quedarse conmigo me parecía insuficiente.

Ahora pienso que el amor no tiene por qué ser así. Es un pensamiento nuevo que todavía estoy construyendo, y me di cuenta cuando fui a la iglesia, a pesar de que no soy cristiano. La filosofía cristiana me gusta. Va conmigo. Tiene un enfoque de humildad, superación y comunidad que me recuerda al estoicismo.

El amor se trata de resaltar lo mejor que hay en el otro. Se trata de ser un plus, de ayudar. Por eso si uno no está en su mejor etapa, si no se está cómodo con uno mismo, no se puede amar de verdad. El amor empieza en uno mismo.

Los libros son un espejo, no necesariamente vas a aprender de ellos, sino que te muestran quién sos. Resaltás lo que te importa. Por eso a pesar de saber los tipos de amores que hay en los trabajos de Dostoevsky, cometí los mismos errores varias veces.

Ser mejor depende de uno mismo y cada día se pone el granito de arena.

@ 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

@ 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.

@ 318ebaba:9a262eae

Relays play a crucial role in the Nostr communication protocol, serving as the backbone of its decentralized architecture. Here’s an overview of their functions and significance:

Functions of Nostr Relays

• Data Storage and Broadcasting: Relays act as intermediaries that store and distribute messages between users. When a user sends a message, it is transmitted to one or more relays, which then broadcast that message to other connected clients. This decentralized approach ensures that no single entity controls the flow of information, enhancing censorship resistance[1][2][6].

• Interoperability: Users can connect to multiple relays simultaneously, allowing them to access the same content across different applications. This interoperability means that messages can be shared and retrieved from various clients without being tied to a specific platform, promoting a more flexible user experience[4][11].

• User Control: Anyone can run their own relay, which empowers users to maintain control over their data and interactions. By operating a personal relay, users can ensure that their messages are stored and accessible without relying on third-party services, thus enhancing privacy and security[3][7][11].

• Performance and Reliability: The performance of a Nostr client can be influenced by the relays it connects to. If a relay is slow or unreliable, it can affect the overall user experience. Users are encouraged to choose or add multiple relays to improve message delivery speed and reliability[7][8][11].

Types of Relays

• Public and Private Relays: There are both public and private relays available. Public relays are free to use, while private relays may charge fees. Paid relays often provide better performance and reduced spam, as the cost can deter malicious users from flooding the network with unwanted content[6][7][14].

• Self-Hosted Relays: For those who want maximum control and privacy, setting up a self-hosted relay is an option. This allows users to manage their own data and ensure that their communications are not subject to external censorship or data loss[4][7].

In summary, relays are essential to the Nostr protocol, facilitating decentralized communication by storing, broadcasting, and managing messages across a network of users. They enhance user autonomy, improve performance, and contribute to the overall resilience of the Nostr ecosystem. [1] https://www.voltage.cloud/blog/the-essential-guide-to-nostr-relays [2] https://substack.com/home/post/p-158872714?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web [3] https://www.purplerelay.com/how-to-run-a-nostr-relay-a-step-by-step-guide/ [4] https://medium.com/@michael.leigh.stewart/nostr-series-part-3-setting-up-a-relay-6f9ca426e43e [5] https://www.voltage.cloud/blog/understanding-nostr-data-storage-relays-and-decentralization [6] https://www.ccn.com/education/what-is-nostr-and-how-to-start-using-nostr/ [7] https://nostr.how/en/relays [8] https://blog.theya.us/what-is-nostr/ [9] https://www.cointribune.com/en/nostr-pour-les-debutants-tout-ce-que-vous-devez-savoir-sur-le-protocole-2/ [10] https://community.umbrel.com/t/introducing-the-official-nostr-relay-app/11339 [11] https://nostr.com/ [12] https://www.habyb.com/blog/nostr-what-is-this-protocol-and-how-does-it-work/ [13] https://www.reddit.com/r/nostr/comments/15jmhpi/purpose_of_free_vs_paid_relay/ [14] https://nostr.com/relays [15] https://www.reddit.com/r/nostr/comments/115cgcu/whats_the_point_of_adding_more_and_more_relays_do/ [16] https://messari.io/copilot/share/understanding-nostr-f00aa3df-d02c-4381-91f5-9a103b8e25ce

@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9

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

---

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

A Jurisdiction with Strong Property Rights

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

Abundant Access to Fresh Water

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

Grow Your Own Food

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

Guns

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

A Strong Community You Can Depend On

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

---

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

@ b99efe77:f3de3616

asfadfadsf draft

afasdfasdfsadf

petrinet ;startDay () -> working ;stopDay working -> () ;startPause working -> paused ;endPause paused -> working ;goSmoke working -> smoking ;endSmoke smoking -> working ;startEating working -> eating ;stopEating eating -> working ;startCall working -> onCall ;endCall onCall -> working ;startMeeting working -> inMeetinga ;endMeeting inMeeting -> working ;logTask working -> working

@ 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.

@ 318ebaba:9a262eae

Nostr, which stands for "Notes and Other Stuff Transmitted by Relays," is a decentralized communication protocol designed to facilitate the exchange of messages without relying on centralized servers. This innovative framework allows users to create, broadcast, and receive messages freely, emphasizing user empowerment and censorship resistance.

Key Features of Nostr

• Decentralization: Unlike traditional social media platforms, Nostr operates on a network of relays, which are servers that anyone can run. This structure eliminates the control that a single entity can exert over the platform, thereby reducing the risk of censorship and enhancing user privacy[1][4][5].

• Open Protocol: Nostr is not an application itself but a protocol that developers can use to build various applications. This openness allows for a wide range of services, from social media to messaging, all built on the same underlying technology. Users can access multiple applications using a single public/private key pair, making it easier to manage their online identities[2][3][4].

• Censorship Resistance: One of the primary motivations behind Nostr's creation is to provide a platform where users can communicate without fear of censorship. This is particularly appealing to those disillusioned with traditional social media platforms that often impose restrictions on content[5][10].

• User Control: Nostr empowers users by allowing them to control their data and interactions. Users can choose which relays to connect to and can run their own relays, ensuring that they are not dependent on any single service provider[4][5][7].

• Cryptographic Security: The protocol employs public-key cryptography to secure messages and verify identities, similar to how Bitcoin operates. This ensures that messages are authentic and have not been tampered with during transmission[5][10].

Applications and Community

Nostr has gained traction among various communities, particularly within the cryptocurrency space, where figures like Jack Dorsey and Edward Snowden have expressed support for its potential to reshape online communication. The protocol's design allows for a variety of applications, including social media platforms, chat services, and content sharing tools, all of which can interoperate seamlessly[2][3][5].

In summary, Nostr represents a significant shift in how digital communication can be structured, prioritizing decentralization, user autonomy, and resistance to censorship, making it a compelling alternative to conventional social media platforms. [1] https://threenine.blog/posts/what-is-nostr [2] https://www.forbes.com/sites/digital-assets/2023/04/11/how-to-get-started-with-nostr/ [3] https://www.forbes.com/sites/digital-assets/2024/07/17/your-guide-to-nostr-the-decentralized-network-for-everything/ [4] https://www.ledger.com/academy/glossary/nostr [5] https://river.com/learn/what-is-nostr/ [6] https://www.cointribune.com/en/comment-utiliser-nostr-guide-pour-debutants-2/ [7] https://www.ccn.com/education/what-is-nostr-and-how-to-start-using-nostr/ [8] https://nostr.com/ [9] https://mylessnider.com/articles/why-im-excited-about-nostr [10] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nostr [11] https://nostr.how/en/what-is-nostr [12] https://nostr.org/ [13] https://medium.com/@colaru/an-introduction-to-nostr-protocol-dbc774ac797c [14] https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/what-nostr-manfred-van-doorn-nf9ce [15] https://www.cointribune.com/en/nostr-pour-les-debutants-tout-ce-que-vous-devez-savoir-sur-le-protocole-2/ [16] https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/17j5glg/do_people_in_this_sub_know_about_nostr/ [17] https://www.voltage.cloud/blog/the-essential-guide-to-nostr-relays [18] https://www.reddit.com/r/nostr/comments/1i6t4g7/explain_how_nostr_works_like_im_a_5_year_old/ [19] https://github.com/nostr-protocol/nostr

@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9

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

Part One: 2029–2032

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

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

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

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

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

Time Jump: 2032–2047

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

Part Two: 2047

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

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

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

Key Differences

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

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

@ 4857600b:30b502f4

Mitch McConnell, a senior Republican senator, announced he will not seek reelection.

At 83 years old and with health issues, this decision was expected. After seven terms, he leaves a significant legacy in U.S. politics, known for his strategic maneuvering.

McConnell stated, “My current term in the Senate will be my last.” His retirement marks the end of an influential political era.

@ f5369849:f34119a0

Hackathon Summary

The Stellar Build Better Hackathon concluded successfully, attracting 220 registered developers and approving 84 projects. This event aimed to utilize Stellar's smart contracts for practical applications, emphasizing community collaboration and technological progress. Participants competed for a total prize pool of $25,000 in USDC, distributed among three categories: Better Finance, Better Creativity, and Better Access.

Developers explored areas such as DeFi accessibility tools, cross-border payment solutions, creator economy platforms, and identity solutions. The hackathon facilitated networking opportunities with global developers and exposure to leading crypto companies. Additionally, technical workshops and live demo sessions were provided to support participants.

In terms of achievements, the first-place prize of 12,000 USDC was awarded to a project enhancing financial accessibility. Second and third place winners received prizes valued at 8,000 and 5,000 USDC, respectively, acknowledging innovations in creative tools and accessibility solutions. Through these awards, the event underscored Stellar’s role in fostering practical innovations that expand smart contract applications within its ecosystem.

Hackathon Winners

Build Better Prizes

The prizes recognized the best projects across categories.

First Place

PayZoll_Stellar - PayZoll integrates AI and blockchain within the Stellar ecosystem to offer secure, automated, and transparent global payroll services, enhancing payroll management efficiency and reliability.

Second Place

StellarFinance - This platform facilitates connections between users and financial advisors on the Stellar blockchain, providing secure and transparent financial services focused on integrity and user engagement.

Third Place

Soroban to MCP Server in seconds + Policy Signers Playground - This solution transforms Stellar Soroban smart contracts into MCP servers for natural language interactions, enabling AI agent execution and enhancing smart contract functionality.

View all projects from the hackathon at DoraHacks.

Organization

About the Organizer: Stellar Development Foundation

The Stellar Development Foundation strives to promote the growth and development of the Stellar network, a blockchain platform aimed at facilitating efficient cross-border transactions. With a focus on decentralized finance (DeFi), the foundation implements projects that advance financial inclusion worldwide. By partnering with a broad network, the organization promotes scalable blockchain solutions, ensuring accessibility and reliability in financial services. Its mission is to provide equitable access to the global economy through innovative, open-source technology.

@ 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.

@ 9e69e420:d12360c2

Federal employees must remove pronouns from email signatures by the end of the day. This directive comes from internal memos tied to two executive orders signed by Donald Trump. The orders target diversity and equity programs within the government.

CDC, Department of Transportation, and Department of Energy employees were affected. Staff were instructed to make changes in line with revised policy prohibiting certain language.

One CDC employee shared frustration, stating, “In my decade-plus years at CDC, I've never been told what I can and can't put in my email signature.” The directive is part of a broader effort to eliminate DEI initiatives from federal discourse.

@ 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.

@ 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.

@ 8173f6e1:e488ac0f

asdasdsad

@ c631e267:c2b78d3e

Zwei mal drei macht vier, \ widewidewitt und drei macht neune, \ ich mach mir die Welt, \ widewide wie sie mir gefällt. \ Pippi Langstrumpf

Egal, ob Koalitionsverhandlungen oder politischer Alltag: Die Kontroversen zwischen theoretisch verschiedenen Parteien verschwinden, wenn es um den Kampf gegen politische Gegner mit Rückenwind geht. Wer den Alteingesessenen die Pfründe ernsthaft streitig machen könnte, gegen den werden nicht nur «Brandmauern» errichtet, sondern der wird notfalls auch strafrechtlich verfolgt. Doppelstandards sind dabei selbstverständlich inklusive.

In Frankreich ist diese Woche Marine Le Pen wegen der Veruntreuung von EU-Geldern von einem Gericht verurteilt worden. Als Teil der Strafe wurde sie für fünf Jahre vom passiven Wahlrecht ausgeschlossen. Obwohl das Urteil nicht rechtskräftig ist – Le Pen kann in Berufung gehen –, haben die Richter das Verbot, bei Wahlen anzutreten, mit sofortiger Wirkung verhängt. Die Vorsitzende des rechtsnationalen Rassemblement National (RN) galt als aussichtsreiche Kandidatin für die Präsidentschaftswahl 2027.

Das ist in diesem Jahr bereits der zweite gravierende Fall von Wahlbeeinflussung durch die Justiz in einem EU-Staat. In Rumänien hatte Călin Georgescu im November die erste Runde der Präsidentenwahl überraschend gewonnen. Das Ergebnis wurde später annulliert, die behauptete «russische Wahlmanipulation» konnte jedoch nicht bewiesen werden. Die Kandidatur für die Wahlwiederholung im Mai wurde Georgescu kürzlich durch das Verfassungsgericht untersagt.

Die Veruntreuung öffentlicher Gelder muss untersucht und geahndet werden, das steht außer Frage. Diese Anforderung darf nicht selektiv angewendet werden. Hingegen mussten wir in der Vergangenheit bei ungleich schwerwiegenderen Fällen von (mutmaßlichem) Missbrauch ganz andere Vorgehensweisen erleben, etwa im Fall der heutigen EZB-Chefin Christine Lagarde oder im «Pfizergate»-Skandal um die Präsidentin der EU-Kommission Ursula von der Leyen.

Wenngleich derartige Angelegenheiten formal auf einer rechtsstaatlichen Grundlage beruhen mögen, so bleibt ein bitterer Beigeschmack. Es stellt sich die Frage, ob und inwieweit die Justiz politisch instrumentalisiert wird. Dies ist umso interessanter, als die Gewaltenteilung einen essenziellen Teil jeder demokratischen Ordnung darstellt, während die Bekämpfung des politischen Gegners mit juristischen Mitteln gerade bei den am lautesten rufenden Verteidigern «unserer Demokratie» populär zu sein scheint.

Die Delegationen von CDU/CSU und SPD haben bei ihren Verhandlungen über eine Regierungskoalition genau solche Maßnahmen diskutiert. «Im Namen der Wahrheit und der Demokratie» möchte man noch härter gegen «Desinformation» vorgehen und dafür zum Beispiel den Digital Services Act der EU erweitern. Auch soll der Tatbestand der Volksverhetzung verschärft werden – und im Entzug des passiven Wahlrechts münden können. Auf europäischer Ebene würde Friedrich Merz wohl gerne Ungarn das Stimmrecht entziehen.

Der Pegel an Unzufriedenheit und Frustration wächst in großen Teilen der Bevölkerung kontinuierlich. Arroganz, Machtmissbrauch und immer abstrusere Ausreden für offensichtlich willkürliche Maßnahmen werden kaum verhindern, dass den etablierten Parteien die Unterstützung entschwindet. In Deutschland sind die Umfrageergebnisse der AfD ein guter Gradmesser dafür.

[Vorlage Titelbild: Pixabay]

---

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

@ c631e267:c2b78d3e

Spanien bleibt einer der Vorreiter im europäischen Prozess der totalen Überwachung per Digitalisierung. Seit Mittwoch ist dort der digitale Personalausweis verfügbar. Dabei handelt es sich um eine Regierungs-App, die auf dem Smartphone installiert werden muss und in den Stores von Google und Apple zu finden ist. Per Dekret von Regierungschef Pedro Sánchez und Zustimmung des Ministerrats ist diese Maßnahme jetzt in Kraft getreten.

Mit den üblichen Argumenten der Vereinfachung, des Komforts, der Effizienz und der Sicherheit preist das Innenministerium die «Innovation» an. Auch die Beteuerung, dass die digitale Variante parallel zum physischen Ausweis existieren wird und diesen nicht ersetzen soll, fehlt nicht. Während der ersten zwölf Monate wird «der Neue» noch nicht für alle Anwendungsfälle gültig sein, ab 2026 aber schon.

Dass die ganze Sache auch «Risiken und Nebenwirkungen» haben könnte, wird in den Mainstream-Medien eher selten thematisiert. Bestenfalls wird der Aspekt der Datensicherheit angesprochen, allerdings in der Regel direkt mit dem Regierungsvokabular von den «maximalen Sicherheitsgarantien» abgehandelt. Dennoch gibt es einige weitere Aspekte, die Bürger mit etwas Sinn für Privatsphäre bedenken sollten.

Um sich die digitale Version des nationalen Ausweises besorgen zu können (eine App mit dem Namen MiDNI), muss man sich vorab online registrieren. Dabei wird die Identität des Bürgers mit seiner mobilen Telefonnummer verknüpft. Diese obligatorische fixe Verdrahtung kennen wir von diversen anderen Apps und Diensten. Gleichzeitig ist das die Basis für eine perfekte Lokalisierbarkeit der Person.

Für jeden Vorgang der Identifikation in der Praxis wird später «eine Verbindung zu den Servern der Bundespolizei aufgebaut». Die Daten des Individuums werden «in Echtzeit» verifiziert und im Erfolgsfall von der Polizei signiert zurückgegeben. Das Ergebnis ist ein QR-Code mit zeitlich begrenzter Gültigkeit, der an Dritte weitergegeben werden kann.

Bei derartigen Szenarien sträuben sich einem halbwegs kritischen Staatsbürger die Nackenhaare. Allein diese minimale Funktionsbeschreibung lässt die totale Überwachung erkennen, die damit ermöglicht wird. Jede Benutzung des Ausweises wird künftig registriert, hinterlässt also Spuren. Und was ist, wenn die Server der Polizei einmal kein grünes Licht geben? Das wäre spätestens dann ein Problem, wenn der digitale doch irgendwann der einzig gültige Ausweis ist: Dann haben wir den abschaltbaren Bürger.

Dieser neue Vorstoß der Regierung von Pedro Sánchez ist ein weiterer Schritt in Richtung der «totalen Digitalisierung» des Landes, wie diese Politik in manchen Medien – nicht einmal kritisch, sondern sehr naiv – genannt wird. Ebenso verharmlosend wird auch erwähnt, dass sich das spanische Projekt des digitalen Ausweises nahtlos in die Initiativen der EU zu einer digitalen Identität für alle Bürger sowie des digitalen Euro einreiht.

In Zukunft könnte der neue Ausweis «auch in andere staatliche und private digitale Plattformen integriert werden», wie das Medienportal Cope ganz richtig bemerkt. Das ist die Perspektive.

[Titelbild: Pixabay]

Dazu passend:

Nur Abschied vom Alleinfahren? Monströse spanische Überwachungsprojekte gemäß EU-Norm

---

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

@ 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.

@ 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.

@ 84da1875:0088fe3c

O mundo do entretenimento digital está em constante evolução, e o 90PMBET surge como uma das plataformas mais promissoras para quem busca diversão, praticidade e uma experiência envolvente. Com uma interface moderna, ampla variedade de jogos e suporte eficiente, o 90PMBET conquista cada vez mais jogadores brasileiros que desejam explorar novas formas de lazer online com total segurança e acessibilidade.

Conheça a Plataforma 90PMBET A proposta do 90PMBET é simples e objetiva: oferecer um ambiente online completo, onde o usuário pode aproveitar diferentes modalidades de jogos com total comodidade. A plataforma é totalmente otimizada para dispositivos móveis e computadores, garantindo uma navegação fluida e intuitiva em qualquer tela. Desde o primeiro acesso, é possível perceber o cuidado com a experiência do usuário — os menus são bem organizados, as categorias são de fácil acesso e todas as funções principais estão a poucos cliques de distância.

Outro ponto que merece destaque é a segurança. O 90pmbetadota tecnologias avançadas de proteção de dados, como criptografia SSL e autenticação de conta, garantindo que os dados dos usuários estejam protegidos o tempo todo. Além disso, os métodos de pagamento são diversificados e incluem as opções mais populares entre os brasileiros, como PIX, transferência bancária e carteiras digitais.

Variedade de Jogos para Todos os Gostos Um dos maiores atrativos do 90PMBET é a impressionante seleção de jogos disponíveis. A plataforma reúne títulos desenvolvidos pelos principais estúdios do mercado, o que garante qualidade gráfica, boa jogabilidade e mecânicas justas.

Entre os jogos mais populares, destacam-se:

Slots modernos com temáticas variadas, efeitos visuais marcantes e rodadas bônus;

Jogos ao vivo que permitem uma experiência imersiva e interativa com apresentadores reais;

Jogos de mesa tradicionais, como roleta, blackjack e pôquer, em versões otimizadas para o ambiente digital;

Apostas esportivas, com cobertura de eventos nacionais e internacionais em diferentes modalidades, incluindo futebol, basquete e eSports.

Independentemente do estilo de jogo preferido, o 90PMBET oferece opções para todos os perfis de jogadores — desde os mais estratégicos até os que preferem partidas rápidas e dinâmicas.

Uma Experiência do Jogador Realmente Diferenciada A experiência do jogador no 90PMBET é marcada por praticidade, suporte de qualidade e constantes oportunidades de bônus e promoções. A equipe de atendimento está disponível 24 horas por dia, 7 dias por semana, por meio de chat ao vivo e e-mail, sempre pronta para solucionar dúvidas e oferecer suporte técnico.

Outro diferencial é o sistema de recompensas e promoções diárias, que valoriza tanto os novos jogadores quanto os usuários mais antigos. Bônus de boas-vindas, giros gratuitos, cashback e torneios semanais são apenas alguns exemplos das vantagens oferecidas pela plataforma.

Além disso, o 90PMBET promove um ambiente responsável, com ferramentas de controle de tempo de jogo e limites de depósito, ajudando os usuários a manterem uma relação saudável com o entretenimento online.

Conclusão O 90PMBET é mais do que apenas uma plataforma de jogos — é um verdadeiro centro de entretenimento digital pensado para o público brasileiro. Com sua estrutura moderna, ampla variedade de opções, promoções atrativas e foco total na experiência do usuário, o 90PMBET se firma como uma das melhores escolhas para quem busca diversão e emoção no mundo virtual.

Se você ainda não conhece, essa é a hora perfeita para explorar o universo de possibilidades que o 90PMBET tem a oferecer. A diversão está a apenas um clique de distância!

@ 9e69e420:d12360c2

Secretary of State Marco Rubio issued new guidance halting spending on most foreign aid grants for 90 days, including military assistance to Ukraine. This immediate order shocked State Department officials and mandates “stop-work orders” on nearly all existing foreign assistance awards.

While it allows exceptions for military financing to Egypt and Israel, as well as emergency food assistance, it restricts aid to key allies like Ukraine, Jordan, and Taiwan. The guidance raises potential liability risks for the government due to unfulfilled contracts.

A report will be prepared within 85 days to recommend which programs to continue or discontinue.

@ 66675158:1b644430

I don't believe in "vibe coding" – it's just the newest Silicon Valley fad trying to give meaning to their latest favorite technology, LLMs. We've seen this pattern before with blockchain, when suddenly Non Fungible Tokens appeared, followed by Web3 startups promising to revolutionize everything from social media to supply chains. VCs couldn't throw money fast enough at anything with "decentralized" (in name only) in the pitch deck. Andreessen Horowitz launched billion-dollar crypto funds, while Y Combinator batches filled with blockchain startups promising to be "Uber for X, but on the blockchain."

The metaverse mania followed, with Meta betting its future on digital worlds where we'd supposedly hang out as legless avatars. Decentralized (in name only) autonomous organizations emerged as the next big thing – supposedly democratic internet communities that ended up being the next scam for quick money.

Then came the inevitable collapse. The FTX implosion in late 2022 revealed fraud, Luna/Terra's death spiral wiped out billions (including my ten thousand dollars), while Celsius and BlockFi froze customer assets before bankruptcy.

By 2023, crypto winter had fully set in. The SEC started aggressive enforcement actions, while users realized that blockchain technology had delivered almost no practical value despite a decade of promises.

Blockchain's promises tapped into fundamental human desires – decentralization resonated with a generation disillusioned by traditional institutions. Evangelists presented a utopian vision of freedom from centralized control. Perhaps most significantly, crypto offered a sense of meaning in an increasingly abstract world, making the clear signs of scams harder to notice.

The technology itself had failed to solve any real-world problems at scale. By 2024, the once-mighty crypto ecosystem had become a cautionary tale. Venture firms quietly scrubbed blockchain references from their websites while founders pivoted to AI and large language models.

---

Most reading this are likely fellow bitcoiners and nostr users who understand that Bitcoin is blockchain's only valid use case. But I shared that painful history because I believe the AI-hype cycle will follow the same trajectory.

Just like with blockchain, we're now seeing VCs who once couldn't stop talking about "Web3" falling over themselves to fund anything with "AI" in the pitch deck. The buzzwords have simply changed from "decentralized" to "intelligent."

"Vibe coding" is the perfect example – a trendy name for what is essentially just fuzzy instructions to LLMs. Developers who've spent years honing programming skills are now supposed to believe that "vibing" with an AI is somehow a legitimate methodology.

This might be controversial to some, but obvious to others:

Formal, context-free grammar will always remain essential for building precise systems, regardless of how advanced natural language technology becomes

The mathematical precision of programming languages provides a foundation that human language's ambiguity can never replace. Programming requires precision – languages, compilers, and processors operate on explicit instructions, not vibes. What "vibe coding" advocates miss is that beneath every AI-generated snippet lies the same deterministic rules that have always governed computation.

LLMs don't understand code in any meaningful sense—they've just ingested enormous datasets of human-written code and can predict patterns. When they "work," it's because they've seen similar patterns before, not because they comprehend the underlying logic.

This creates a dangerous dependency. Junior developers "vibing" with LLMs might get working code without understanding the fundamental principles. When something breaks in production, they'll lack the knowledge to fix it.

Even experienced developers can find themselves in treacherous territory when relying too heavily on LLM-generated code. What starts as a productivity boost can transform into a dependency crutch.

The real danger isn't just technical limitations, but the false confidence it instills. Developers begin to believe they understand systems they've merely instructed an AI to generate – fundamentally different from understanding code you've written yourself.

We're already seeing the warning signs: projects cobbled together with LLM-generated code that work initially but become maintenance nightmares when requirements change or edge cases emerge.

The venture capital money is flowing exactly as it did with blockchain. Anthropic raised billions, OpenAI is valued astronomically despite minimal revenue, and countless others are competing to build ever-larger models with vague promises. Every startup now claims to be "AI-powered" regardless of whether it makes sense.

Don't get me wrong—there's genuine innovation happening in AI research. But "vibe coding" isn't it. It's a marketing term designed to make fuzzy prompting sound revolutionary.

Cursor perfectly embodies this AI hype cycle. It's an AI-enhanced code editor built on VS Code that promises to revolutionize programming by letting you "chat with your codebase." Just like blockchain startups promised to "revolutionize" industries, Cursor promises to transform development by adding LLM capabilities.

Yes, Cursor can be genuinely helpful. It can explain unfamiliar code, suggest completions, and help debug simple issues. After trying it for just an hour, I found the autocomplete to be MAGICAL for simple refactoring and basic functionality.

But the marketing goes far beyond reality. The suggestion that you can simply describe what you want and get production-ready code is dangerously misleading. What you get are approximations with:

• Security vulnerabilities the model doesn't understand
• Edge cases it hasn't considered
• Performance implications it can't reason about
• Dependency conflicts it has no way to foresee

The most concerning aspect is how such tools are marketed to beginners as shortcuts around learning fundamentals. "Why spend years learning to code when you can just tell AI what you want?" This is reminiscent of how crypto was sold as a get-rich-quick scheme requiring no actual understanding.

When you "vibe code" with an AI, you're not eliminating complexity—you're outsourcing understanding to a black box. This creates developers who can prompt but not program, who can generate but not comprehend.

The real utility of LLMs in development is in augmenting existing workflows:

• Explaining unfamiliar codebases
• Generating boilerplate for well-understood patterns
• Suggesting implementations that a developer evaluates critically
• Assisting with documentation and testing

These uses involve the model as a subordinate assistant to a knowledgeable developer, not as a replacement for expertise. This is where the technology adds value—as a sophisticated tool in skilled hands.

Cursor is just a better hammer, not a replacement for understanding what you're building. The actual value emerges when used by developers who understand what happens beneath the abstractions. They can recognize when AI suggestions make sense and when they don't because they have the fundamental knowledge to evaluate output critically.

This is precisely where the "vibe coding" narrative falls apart.

@ 9e69e420:d12360c2

President Trump plans to withdraw 20,000 U.S. troops from Europe and expects European allies to contribute financially to the remaining military presence. Reported by ANSA, Trump aims to deliver this message to European leaders since taking office. A European diplomat noted, “the costs cannot be borne solely by American taxpayers.”

The Pentagon hasn't commented yet. Trump has previously sought lower troop levels in Europe and had ordered cuts during his first term. The U.S. currently maintains around 65,000 troops in Europe, with total forces reaching 100,000 since the Ukraine invasion. Trump's new approach may shift military focus to the Pacific amid growing concerns about China.

Sauce

@ 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.

@ 84da1875:0088fe3c

No cenário atual do entretenimento digital, a plataforma CC999 vem se destacando como uma das mais inovadoras e completas opções para quem busca emoção, segurança e variedade em um só lugar. Com uma proposta moderna e acessível, o site oferece uma experiência diferenciada, reunindo jogos envolventes, atendimento de qualidade e uma navegação simples e rápida, ideal tanto para iniciantes quanto para jogadores mais experientes.

Conheça a Plataforma CC999 Desde o primeiro acesso, é fácil perceber que a CC999 foi desenvolvida com foco no usuário. Seu layout é intuitivo, com menus organizados e compatibilidade total com dispositivos móveis, permitindo que você aproveite tudo o que a plataforma oferece diretamente do seu celular, tablet ou computador.

Além disso, o processo de cadastro é rápido e descomplicado. Em poucos minutos, você já pode criar sua conta e começar a explorar os recursos disponíveis. Outro diferencial é o compromisso com a segurança dos dados, utilizando criptografia de ponta e sistemas confiáveis de autenticação para garantir a tranquilidade de todos os usuários.

Jogos para Todos os Gostos A variedade de jogos disponíveis no CC999 é um dos grandes atrativos da plataforma. Ela conta com uma seleção que vai desde jogos clássicos e tradicionais até opções modernas com gráficos impressionantes e mecânicas envolventes. Alguns dos destaques incluem:

Roleta Virtual: Ideal para quem gosta de adrenalina e sorte, com várias versões disponíveis.

Slots Online: Máquinas de giro com temas variados, efeitos visuais marcantes e grandes chances de ganho.

Cartas e Estratégia: Jogos como pôquer e blackjack oferecem experiências desafiadoras para quem curte usar o raciocínio lógico.

Títulos Ao Vivo: Com interação em tempo real, esses jogos garantem uma imersão total e realista, aproximando o jogador da atmosfera presencial.

A CC999 trabalha com provedores renomados, garantindo qualidade, fluidez e jogabilidade de alto nível em todos os títulos. Isso significa que, além da diversão, o jogador tem acesso a conteúdos justos e auditados.

Experiência do Jogador: Conectividade e Recompensas A experiência dos usuários na plataforma é constantemente aprimorada com base em feedbacks e atualizações tecnológicas. O atendimento ao cliente está disponível 24 horas por dia, todos os dias da semana, pronto para resolver qualquer dúvida ou problema com agilidade e cordialidade.

Outro ponto que merece destaque são as promoções e bônus oferecidos pela CC999. Desde o primeiro depósito até campanhas sazonais, os jogadores têm acesso a recompensas atrativas, o que torna a jornada ainda mais interessante. O sistema de fidelidade também premia a constância dos usuários, oferecendo vantagens exclusivas para membros frequentes.

Conclusão A CC999 chega como uma excelente alternativa para quem busca entretenimento online de qualidade. Com uma interface moderna, jogos variados, suporte eficiente e promoções constantes, a plataforma conquista pela seriedade e compromisso com a diversão do usuário. Seja você um veterano ou alguém começando agora nesse universo, o CC999 tem tudo o que você precisa para se divertir com segurança e emoção.

@ 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. 🚀

@ 6be5cc06:5259daf0

A seguir, veja como instalar e configurar o Privoxy no Pop!_OS.

---

1. Instalar o Tor e o Privoxy

Abra o terminal e execute:

bash sudo apt update sudo apt install tor privoxy

Explicação:

• Tor: Roteia o tráfego pela rede Tor.
• Privoxy: Proxy avançado que intermedia a conexão entre aplicativos e o Tor.

---

2. Configurar o Privoxy

Abra o arquivo de configuração do Privoxy:

bash sudo nano /etc/privoxy/config

Navegue até a última linha (atalho: Ctrl + / depois Ctrl + V para navegar diretamente até a última linha) e insira:

bash forward-socks5 / 127.0.0.1:9050 .

Isso faz com que o Privoxy envie todo o tráfego para o Tor através da porta 9050.

Salve (CTRL + O e Enter) e feche (CTRL + X) o arquivo.

---

3. Iniciar o Tor e o Privoxy

Agora, inicie e habilite os serviços:

bash sudo systemctl start tor sudo systemctl start privoxy sudo systemctl enable tor sudo systemctl enable privoxy

Explicação:

• start: Inicia os serviços.
• enable: Faz com que iniciem automaticamente ao ligar o PC.

---

4. Configurar o Navegador Firefox

Para usar a rede Tor com o Firefox:

1. Abra o Firefox.
2. Acesse Configurações → Configurar conexão.
3. Selecione Configuração manual de proxy.
4. Configure assim:
   • Proxy HTTP: 127.0.0.1
   • Porta: 8118 (porta padrão do Privoxy)
   • Domínio SOCKS (v5): 127.0.0.1
   • Porta: 9050
5. Marque a opção "Usar este proxy também em HTTPS".
6. Clique em OK.

---

5. Verificar a Conexão com o Tor

Abra o navegador e acesse:

text https://check.torproject.org/

Se aparecer a mensagem "Congratulations. This browser is configured to use Tor.", a configuração está correta.

---

Dicas Extras

• Privoxy pode ser ajustado para bloquear anúncios e rastreadores.
• Outros aplicativos também podem ser configurados para usar o Privoxy.

@ 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.

@ 9e69e420:d12360c2

Oregano oil is a potent natural compound that offers numerous scientifically-supported health benefits.

Active Compounds

The oil's therapeutic properties stem from its key bioactive components: - Carvacrol and thymol (primary active compounds) - Polyphenols and other antioxidant

Antimicrobial Properties

Bacterial Protection The oil demonstrates powerful antibacterial effects, even against antibiotic-resistant strains like MRSA and other harmful bacteria. Studies show it effectively inactivates various pathogenic bacteria without developing resistance.

Antifungal Effects It effectively combats fungal infections, particularly Candida-related conditions like oral thrush, athlete's foot, and nail infections.

Digestive Health Benefits

Oregano oil supports digestive wellness by: - Promoting gastric juice secretion and enzyme production - Helping treat Small Intestinal Bacterial Overgrowth (SIBO) - Managing digestive discomfort, bloating, and IBS symptoms

Anti-inflammatory and Antioxidant Effects

The oil provides significant protective benefits through: - Powerful antioxidant activity that fights free radicals - Reduction of inflammatory markers in the body - Protection against oxidative stress-related conditions

Respiratory Support

It aids respiratory health by: - Loosening mucus and phlegm - Suppressing coughs and throat irritation - Supporting overall respiratory tract function

Additional Benefits

Skin Health - Improves conditions like psoriasis, acne, and eczema - Supports wound healing through antibacterial action - Provides anti-aging benefits through antioxidant properties

Cardiovascular Health Studies show oregano oil may help: - Reduce LDL (bad) cholesterol levels - Support overall heart health

Pain Management The oil demonstrates effectiveness in: - Reducing inflammation-related pain - Managing muscle discomfort - Providing topical pain relief

Safety Note

While oregano oil is generally safe, it's highly concentrated and should be properly diluted before use Consult a healthcare provider before starting supplementation, especially if taking other medications.

@ 4cebd4f5:0ac3ed15

TỔNG QUAN HACKATHON

Stellar Build Better Hackathon kết thúc thành công với 220 developervà84 dự ánđược phê duyệt. Sự kiện tập trung ứng dụngsmart contractscủa Stellar vào giải pháp thực tế, thúc đẩy hợp tác cộng đồng và tiến bộ công nghệ. Tổng giải thưởng 25.000 USD (USDC) được phân bổ cho 3 hạng mục: Better Finance (Tài chính tốt hơn), Better Creativity (Sáng tạo tốt hơn) và Better Access (Tiếp cận tốt hơn).

Các developer khám phá nhiều lĩnh vực như công cụ tiếp cận DeFi, giải pháp thanh toán xuyên biên giới, nền tảng cho creator economy, và hệ thống định danh số. Hackathon còn mang đến cơ hội kết nối với developer toàn cầu và các công ty crypto hàng đầu, cùng workshop kỹ thuật và demo trực tiếp.

Thành tựu nổi bật:

• Giải Nhất (12.000 USDC): Dự án cải thiện tiếp cận tài chính.

• Giải Nhì (8.000 USDC): Đổi mới công cụ sáng tạo.

• Giải Ba (5.000 USDC): Giải pháp tiếp cận đột phá.

Sự kiện khẳng định vai trò của Stellar trong thúc đẩy ứng dụng smart contracts mở rộng hệ sinh thái.

CÁC DỰ ÁN ĐOẠT GIẢI

Build Better Prizes

Giải Nhất
PayZoll_Stellar: Tích hợp AI và blockchain trong hệ sinh thái Stellar, cung cấp dịch vụ payroll toàn cầu tự động, minh bạch và bảo mật – nâng cao hiệu quả quản lý lương.

Giải Nhì
StellarFinance: Kết nối người dùng với cố vấn tài chính trên blockchain Stellar, đảm bảo dịch vụ tài chính minh bạch, tập trung vào tính toàn vẹn và trải nghiệm người dùng.

Giải Ba
Soroban to MCP Server in seconds + Policy Signers Playground: Chuyển đổi smart contracts Soroban (Stellar) thành máy chủ MCP cho tương tác ngôn ngữ tự nhiên, kích hoạt AI agents nâng cao chức năng hợp đồng thông minh.

Xem toàn bộ dự án tại DoraHacks.

THÔNG TIN ĐƠN VỊ TỔ CHỨC

Stellar Development Foundation

Tổ chức thúc đẩy phát triển mạng lưới Stellar – nền tảng blockchain tối ưu giao dịch xuyên biên giới. Với trọng tâm DeFi, Stellar triển khai dự án mở rộng tài chính toàn diện toàn cầu. Thông qua mạng lưới đối tác rộng lớn, tổ chức xây dựng giải pháp blockchain mở rộng, đảm bảo khả năng tiếp cận và độ tin cậy cho dịch vụ tài chính. Sứ mệnh của Stellar là kiến tạo cơ hội công bằng trong nền kinh tế toàn cầu qua công nghệ open-source đột phá.

@ e516ecb8:1be0b167

Recentemente, o podcast Scicast apresentou um episódio sobre aposentadoria, descrevendo os diferentes sistemas e sua história. Acho que, embora tenha sido um episódio interessante, foi muito injusto com o sistema de financiamento privado, que, afinal de contas, para um podcast voltado para a ciência (e que mencionou várias vezes que o sistema de repartição era matematicamente inviável), achei que alguns pontos precisavam ser esclarecidos.

Não estou dizendo que o sistema chileno é perfeito, não é, mas ele tinha potencial para melhorar e a classe política só o tornou cada vez pior.

Por exemplo, Otto von Bismarck sabia que tornaria a população idosa (os poucos que atingiram a idade de aposentadoria) dependente do Estado, e foi isso que fez com que Franco adotasse o sistema na Espanha, onde hoje é preciso aumentar os impostos para manter artificialmente o sistema de repartição.

A rentabilidade é baixa no sistema chileno, porque há lacunas (meses sem pagar) e porque você só contribui com 10%. Ou seja, se seu salário for 100, mas você contribuir com 10 em janeiro e mais nenhum mês. No final da sua vida profissional (45 anos) você terá 450 mais os rendimentos 1350, e esse total dividido pela expectativa de vida que está cada vez mais alta: 20 anos (24 meses) dá um salário de 56,25. Muito baixo, porque para o cálculo o salário era 100. Ainda mais baixo se a inflação for levada em conta. Mas o fato de haver meses sem contribuições não é levado em conta.

Deve-se considerar na rentabilidade que, em média, para cada 1 peso contribuído, são obtidos 3 pesos.Según cálculos de comissões

Várias comissões foram criadas para estudar como melhorar o sistema no Chile, e todas concluem a mesma coisa:

1- contribuir com 10% é muito baixo em comparação com outros sistemas

2- não se deve tolerar lacunas (a idade de aposentadoria não deve ser a idade natural, mas os anos de contribuição)

3- deve haver ajustes para cada aumento na expectativa de vida.

Esses três pontos acima não são tocados pelos políticos, porque são impopulares e eles vivem para a próxima eleição. Assim, eles preferem buscar outras formas, como o PGU (o salário básico universal que você já mencionou no podcast), que matematicamente já foi calculado como inviável no longo prazo.

Considere que 10% é baixo, mas ainda assim o Chile está muito bem classificado e poderia melhorar se os políticos tivessem a coragem de assumir os resultados das comissões que eles mesmos solicitaram.

https://www.65ymas.com/economia/pensiones/10-paises-con-mejores-sistemas-pensiones_22627_102.html

Foi mencionada a complexidade dos investimentos, o que é um mito, pois há fundos em que as contribuições são feitas de acordo com a idade do trabalhador (Fundo A para jovens, mais rentável, mas mais arriscado, e Fundo E, menos rentável, mas também menos arriscado). Na crise, as pessoas que perderam muito dinheiro foram porque estavam em um fundo que não correspondia à sua idade. Se você for jovem, poderá recuperar os retornos em um fundo de risco. Mas se for idoso na época da crise e não estiver em um fundo estável, já terá perdido sem poder se recuperar antes dos 65 anos.

Além disso, não se considera que há também um fundo voluntário adicional para o qual cada pessoa pode contribuir (APV), que tem benefícios como contribuições anuais do Estado para recompensar aqueles que contribuem para ele, e que também paga retornos.

Por outro lado, foi possível retirar dinheiro dos fundos individuais durante a crise pandêmica, algo que seria impossível em um fundo de repartição em que cada unidade monetária depositada por um trabalhador ativo é gasta ao mesmo tempo por um aposentado.

O modelo de repartição militar no Chile exige 20 anos de contribuições sem intervalos, qualquer intervalo e a pensão é de US$ 0, algo que não acontece no sistema civil (e não poderia acontecer porque o dinheiro lá é seu).

O sistema de capitalização individual no Chile permite que os trabalhadores possuam ativos de investimento, ativos de empresas que ajudaram o país a se desenvolver, algo que os políticos que querem derrubar o sistema parecem não entender.

E quanto à inflação? Investir em ativos que geram renda é útil tanto para mitigar a inflação quanto para ser proprietário, e esse último aspecto será relevante quando a automação chegar. Em vez de manter um registro artificial de quanto um robô produz, é mais transparente lucrar com os dividendos produzidos pela empresa em questão.

O sistema nórdico foi mencionado (que, afinal de contas, é praticamente o único sistema europeu que não está à beira do colapso). Vale a pena considerar que o dinheiro que a Noruega ganha com o petróleo vai para um fundo de investimento semelhante ao que temos individualmente no Chile, e a partir dele é paga grande parte do estado de bem-estar social norueguês. Mas isso é algo que parece muito distante, com a classe política latino-americana mais inclinada a desperdiçá-lo em bobagens populistas.

O modelo de distribuição é piramidal, embora possa parecer uma narrativa perigosa, é bom que as pessoas o vejam dessa forma (se um cidadão tirasse dinheiro dos jovens para dar aos idosos, provavelmente acabaria preso por um esquema ponzi), e a taxa de natalidade cada vez menor é um problema que o Estado não pode resolver, por mais totalitário que seja (estímulos fiscais e monetários etc. foram tentados com resultados ruins e míopes).

Além disso, por mais demonizado que seja na narrativa, o sistema chileno é um sistema misto com um pilar de solidariedade para aqueles que não contribuíram bem.

Na Argentina, passou-se da capitalização individual para o sistema de repartição, e o dinheiro foi usado pelos políticos quando não podiam pagar a conta de um Estado cada vez maior e corrupto, deixando os aposentados à mercê das migalhas dadas pelos políticos em cada campanha eleitoral. Você não confia no mercado, eu não confio no Estado.

@ 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.

@ 6be5cc06:5259daf0

Bitcoin: Um sistema de dinheiro eletrônico direto entre pessoas.

Satoshi Nakamoto
satoshin@gmx.com
www.bitcoin.org

---

Resumo

O Bitcoin é uma forma de dinheiro digital que permite pagamentos diretos entre pessoas, sem a necessidade de um banco ou instituição financeira. Ele resolve um problema chamado gasto duplo, que ocorre quando alguém tenta gastar o mesmo dinheiro duas vezes. Para evitar isso, o Bitcoin usa uma rede descentralizada onde todos trabalham juntos para verificar e registrar as transações.

As transações são registradas em um livro público chamado blockchain, protegido por uma técnica chamada Prova de Trabalho. Essa técnica cria uma cadeia de registros que não pode ser alterada sem refazer todo o trabalho já feito. Essa cadeia é mantida pelos computadores que participam da rede, e a mais longa é considerada a verdadeira.

Enquanto a maior parte do poder computacional da rede for controlada por participantes honestos, o sistema continuará funcionando de forma segura. A rede é flexível, permitindo que qualquer pessoa entre ou saia a qualquer momento, sempre confiando na cadeia mais longa como prova do que aconteceu.

---

1. Introdução

Hoje, quase todos os pagamentos feitos pela internet dependem de bancos ou empresas como processadores de pagamento (cartões de crédito, por exemplo) para funcionar. Embora esse sistema seja útil, ele tem problemas importantes porque é baseado em confiança.

Primeiro, essas empresas podem reverter pagamentos, o que é útil em caso de erros, mas cria custos e incertezas. Isso faz com que pequenas transações, como pagar centavos por um serviço, se tornem inviáveis. Além disso, os comerciantes são obrigados a desconfiar dos clientes, pedindo informações extras e aceitando fraudes como algo inevitável.

Esses problemas não existem no dinheiro físico, como o papel-moeda, onde o pagamento é final e direto entre as partes. No entanto, não temos como enviar dinheiro físico pela internet sem depender de um intermediário confiável.

O que precisamos é de um sistema de pagamento eletrônico baseado em provas matemáticas, não em confiança. Esse sistema permitiria que qualquer pessoa enviasse dinheiro diretamente para outra, sem depender de bancos ou processadores de pagamento. Além disso, as transações seriam irreversíveis, protegendo vendedores contra fraudes, mas mantendo a possibilidade de soluções para disputas legítimas.

Neste documento, apresentamos o Bitcoin, que resolve o problema do gasto duplo usando uma rede descentralizada. Essa rede cria um registro público e protegido por cálculos matemáticos, que garante a ordem das transações. Enquanto a maior parte da rede for controlada por pessoas honestas, o sistema será seguro contra ataques.

---

2. Transações

Para entender como funciona o Bitcoin, é importante saber como as transações são realizadas. Imagine que você quer transferir uma "moeda digital" para outra pessoa. No sistema do Bitcoin, essa "moeda" é representada por uma sequência de registros que mostram quem é o atual dono. Para transferi-la, você adiciona um novo registro comprovando que agora ela pertence ao próximo dono. Esse registro é protegido por um tipo especial de assinatura digital.

O que é uma assinatura digital?

Uma assinatura digital é como uma senha secreta, mas muito mais segura. No Bitcoin, cada usuário tem duas chaves: uma "chave privada", que é secreta e serve para criar a assinatura, e uma "chave pública", que pode ser compartilhada com todos e é usada para verificar se a assinatura é válida. Quando você transfere uma moeda, usa sua chave privada para assinar a transação, provando que você é o dono. A próxima pessoa pode usar sua chave pública para confirmar isso.

Como funciona na prática?

Cada "moeda" no Bitcoin é, na verdade, uma cadeia de assinaturas digitais. Vamos imaginar o seguinte cenário:

1. A moeda está com o Dono 0 (você). Para transferi-la ao Dono 1, você assina digitalmente a transação com sua chave privada. Essa assinatura inclui o código da transação anterior (chamado de "hash") e a chave pública do Dono 1.
2. Quando o Dono 1 quiser transferir a moeda ao Dono 2, ele assinará a transação seguinte com sua própria chave privada, incluindo também o hash da transação anterior e a chave pública do Dono 2.
3. Esse processo continua, formando uma "cadeia" de transações. Qualquer pessoa pode verificar essa cadeia para confirmar quem é o atual dono da moeda.

Resolvendo o problema do gasto duplo

Um grande desafio com moedas digitais é o "gasto duplo", que é quando uma mesma moeda é usada em mais de uma transação. Para evitar isso, muitos sistemas antigos dependiam de uma entidade central confiável, como uma casa da moeda, que verificava todas as transações. No entanto, isso criava um ponto único de falha e centralizava o controle do dinheiro.

O Bitcoin resolve esse problema de forma inovadora: ele usa uma rede descentralizada onde todos os participantes (os "nós") têm acesso a um registro completo de todas as transações. Cada nó verifica se as transações são válidas e se a moeda não foi gasta duas vezes. Quando a maioria dos nós concorda com a validade de uma transação, ela é registrada permanentemente na blockchain.

Por que isso é importante?

Essa solução elimina a necessidade de confiar em uma única entidade para gerenciar o dinheiro, permitindo que qualquer pessoa no mundo use o Bitcoin sem precisar de permissão de terceiros. Além disso, ela garante que o sistema seja seguro e resistente a fraudes.

---

3. Servidor Timestamp

Para assegurar que as transações sejam realizadas de forma segura e transparente, o sistema Bitcoin utiliza algo chamado de "servidor de registro de tempo" (timestamp). Esse servidor funciona como um registro público que organiza as transações em uma ordem específica.

Ele faz isso agrupando várias transações em blocos e criando um código único chamado "hash". Esse hash é como uma impressão digital que representa todo o conteúdo do bloco. O hash de cada bloco é amplamente divulgado, como se fosse publicado em um jornal ou em um fórum público.

Esse processo garante que cada bloco de transações tenha um registro de quando foi criado e que ele existia naquele momento. Além disso, cada novo bloco criado contém o hash do bloco anterior, formando uma cadeia contínua de blocos conectados — conhecida como blockchain.

Com isso, se alguém tentar alterar qualquer informação em um bloco anterior, o hash desse bloco mudará e não corresponderá ao hash armazenado no bloco seguinte. Essa característica torna a cadeia muito segura, pois qualquer tentativa de fraude seria imediatamente detectada.

O sistema de timestamps é essencial para provar a ordem cronológica das transações e garantir que cada uma delas seja única e autêntica. Dessa forma, ele reforça a segurança e a confiança na rede Bitcoin.

---

4. Prova-de-Trabalho

Para implementar o registro de tempo distribuído no sistema Bitcoin, utilizamos um mecanismo chamado prova-de-trabalho. Esse sistema é semelhante ao Hashcash, desenvolvido por Adam Back, e baseia-se na criação de um código único, o "hash", por meio de um processo computacionalmente exigente.

A prova-de-trabalho envolve encontrar um valor especial que, quando processado junto com as informações do bloco, gere um hash que comece com uma quantidade específica de zeros. Esse valor especial é chamado de "nonce". Encontrar o nonce correto exige um esforço significativo do computador, porque envolve tentativas repetidas até que a condição seja satisfeita.

Esse processo é importante porque torna extremamente difícil alterar qualquer informação registrada em um bloco. Se alguém tentar mudar algo em um bloco, seria necessário refazer o trabalho de computação não apenas para aquele bloco, mas também para todos os blocos que vêm depois dele. Isso garante a segurança e a imutabilidade da blockchain.

A prova-de-trabalho também resolve o problema de decidir qual cadeia de blocos é a válida quando há múltiplas cadeias competindo. A decisão é feita pela cadeia mais longa, pois ela representa o maior esforço computacional já realizado. Isso impede que qualquer indivíduo ou grupo controle a rede, desde que a maioria do poder de processamento seja mantida por participantes honestos.

Para garantir que o sistema permaneça eficiente e equilibrado, a dificuldade da prova-de-trabalho é ajustada automaticamente ao longo do tempo. Se novos blocos estiverem sendo gerados rapidamente, a dificuldade aumenta; se estiverem sendo gerados muito lentamente, a dificuldade diminui. Esse ajuste assegura que novos blocos sejam criados aproximadamente a cada 10 minutos, mantendo o sistema estável e funcional.

---

5. Rede

A rede Bitcoin é o coração do sistema e funciona de maneira distribuída, conectando vários participantes (ou nós) para garantir o registro e a validação das transações. Os passos para operar essa rede são:

1. Transmissão de Transações: Quando alguém realiza uma nova transação, ela é enviada para todos os nós da rede. Isso é feito para garantir que todos estejam cientes da operação e possam validá-la.

2. Coleta de Transações em Blocos: Cada nó agrupa as novas transações recebidas em um "bloco". Este bloco será preparado para ser adicionado à cadeia de blocos (a blockchain).

3. Prova-de-Trabalho: Os nós competem para resolver a prova-de-trabalho do bloco, utilizando poder computacional para encontrar um hash válido. Esse processo é como resolver um quebra-cabeça matemático difícil.

4. Envio do Bloco Resolvido: Quando um nó encontra a solução para o bloco (a prova-de-trabalho), ele compartilha esse bloco com todos os outros nós na rede.

5. Validação do Bloco: Cada nó verifica o bloco recebido para garantir que todas as transações nele contidas sejam válidas e que nenhuma moeda tenha sido gasta duas vezes. Apenas blocos válidos são aceitos.

6. Construção do Próximo Bloco: Os nós que aceitaram o bloco começam a trabalhar na criação do próximo bloco, utilizando o hash do bloco aceito como base (hash anterior). Isso mantém a continuidade da cadeia.

Resolução de Conflitos e Escolha da Cadeia Mais Longa

Os nós sempre priorizam a cadeia mais longa, pois ela representa o maior esforço computacional já realizado, garantindo maior segurança. Se dois blocos diferentes forem compartilhados simultaneamente, os nós trabalharão no primeiro bloco recebido, mas guardarão o outro como uma alternativa. Caso o segundo bloco eventualmente forme uma cadeia mais longa (ou seja, tenha mais blocos subsequentes), os nós mudarão para essa nova cadeia.

Tolerância a Falhas

A rede é robusta e pode lidar com mensagens que não chegam a todos os nós. Uma transação não precisa alcançar todos os nós de imediato; basta que chegue a um número suficiente deles para ser incluída em um bloco. Da mesma forma, se um nó não receber um bloco em tempo hábil, ele pode solicitá-lo ao perceber que está faltando quando o próximo bloco é recebido.

Esse mecanismo descentralizado permite que a rede Bitcoin funcione de maneira segura, confiável e resiliente, sem depender de uma autoridade central.

---

6. Incentivo

O incentivo é um dos pilares fundamentais que sustenta o funcionamento da rede Bitcoin, garantindo que os participantes (nós) continuem operando de forma honesta e contribuindo com recursos computacionais. Ele é estruturado em duas partes principais: a recompensa por mineração e as taxas de transação.

Recompensa por Mineração

Por convenção, o primeiro registro em cada bloco é uma transação especial que cria novas moedas e as atribui ao criador do bloco. Essa recompensa incentiva os mineradores a dedicarem poder computacional para apoiar a rede. Como não há uma autoridade central para emitir moedas, essa é a maneira pela qual novas moedas entram em circulação. Esse processo pode ser comparado ao trabalho de garimpeiros, que utilizam recursos para colocar mais ouro em circulação. No caso do Bitcoin, o "recurso" consiste no tempo de CPU e na energia elétrica consumida para resolver a prova-de-trabalho.

Taxas de Transação

Além da recompensa por mineração, os mineradores também podem ser incentivados pelas taxas de transação. Se uma transação utiliza menos valor de saída do que o valor de entrada, a diferença é tratada como uma taxa, que é adicionada à recompensa do bloco contendo essa transação. Com o passar do tempo e à medida que o número de moedas em circulação atinge o limite predeterminado, essas taxas de transação se tornam a principal fonte de incentivo, substituindo gradualmente a emissão de novas moedas. Isso permite que o sistema opere sem inflação, uma vez que o número total de moedas permanece fixo.

Incentivo à Honestidade

O design do incentivo também busca garantir que os participantes da rede mantenham um comportamento honesto. Para um atacante que consiga reunir mais poder computacional do que o restante da rede, ele enfrentaria duas escolhas:

1. Usar esse poder para fraudar o sistema, como reverter transações e roubar pagamentos.
2. Seguir as regras do sistema, criando novos blocos e recebendo recompensas legítimas.

A lógica econômica favorece a segunda opção, pois um comportamento desonesto prejudicaria a confiança no sistema, diminuindo o valor de todas as moedas, incluindo aquelas que o próprio atacante possui. Jogar dentro das regras não apenas maximiza o retorno financeiro, mas também preserva a validade e a integridade do sistema.

Esse mecanismo garante que os incentivos econômicos estejam alinhados com o objetivo de manter a rede segura, descentralizada e funcional ao longo do tempo.

---

7. Recuperação do Espaço em Disco

Depois que uma moeda passa a estar protegida por muitos blocos na cadeia, as informações sobre as transações antigas que a geraram podem ser descartadas para economizar espaço em disco. Para que isso seja possível sem comprometer a segurança, as transações são organizadas em uma estrutura chamada "árvore de Merkle". Essa árvore funciona como um resumo das transações: em vez de armazenar todas elas, guarda apenas um "hash raiz", que é como uma assinatura compacta que representa todo o grupo de transações.

Os blocos antigos podem, então, ser simplificados, removendo as partes desnecessárias dessa árvore. Apenas a raiz do hash precisa ser mantida no cabeçalho do bloco, garantindo que a integridade dos dados seja preservada, mesmo que detalhes específicos sejam descartados.

Para exemplificar: imagine que você tenha vários recibos de compra. Em vez de guardar todos os recibos, você cria um documento e lista apenas o valor total de cada um. Mesmo que os recibos originais sejam descartados, ainda é possível verificar a soma com base nos valores armazenados.

Além disso, o espaço ocupado pelos blocos em si é muito pequeno. Cada bloco sem transações ocupa apenas cerca de 80 bytes. Isso significa que, mesmo com blocos sendo gerados a cada 10 minutos, o crescimento anual em espaço necessário é insignificante: apenas 4,2 MB por ano. Com a capacidade de armazenamento dos computadores crescendo a cada ano, esse espaço continuará sendo trivial, garantindo que a rede possa operar de forma eficiente sem problemas de armazenamento, mesmo a longo prazo.

---

8. Verificação de Pagamento Simplificada

É possível confirmar pagamentos sem a necessidade de operar um nó completo da rede. Para isso, o usuário precisa apenas de uma cópia dos cabeçalhos dos blocos da cadeia mais longa (ou seja, a cadeia com maior esforço de trabalho acumulado). Ele pode verificar a validade de uma transação ao consultar os nós da rede até obter a confirmação de que tem a cadeia mais longa. Para isso, utiliza-se o ramo Merkle, que conecta a transação ao bloco em que ela foi registrada.

Entretanto, o método simplificado possui limitações: ele não pode confirmar uma transação isoladamente, mas sim assegurar que ela ocupa um lugar específico na cadeia mais longa. Dessa forma, se um nó da rede aprova a transação, os blocos subsequentes reforçam essa aceitação.

A verificação simplificada é confiável enquanto a maioria dos nós da rede for honesta. Contudo, ela se torna vulnerável caso a rede seja dominada por um invasor. Nesse cenário, um atacante poderia fabricar transações fraudulentas que enganariam o usuário temporariamente até que o invasor obtivesse controle completo da rede.

Uma estratégia para mitigar esse risco é configurar alertas nos softwares de nós completos. Esses alertas identificam blocos inválidos, sugerindo ao usuário baixar o bloco completo para confirmar qualquer inconsistência. Para maior segurança, empresas que realizam pagamentos frequentes podem preferir operar seus próprios nós, reduzindo riscos e permitindo uma verificação mais direta e confiável.

---

9. Combinando e Dividindo Valor

No sistema Bitcoin, cada unidade de valor é tratada como uma "moeda" individual, mas gerenciar cada centavo como uma transação separada seria impraticável. Para resolver isso, o Bitcoin permite que valores sejam combinados ou divididos em transações, facilitando pagamentos de qualquer valor.

Entradas e Saídas

Cada transação no Bitcoin é composta por:

• Entradas: Representam os valores recebidos em transações anteriores.
• Saídas: Correspondem aos valores enviados, divididos entre os destinatários e, eventualmente, o troco para o remetente.

Normalmente, uma transação contém:

• Uma única entrada com valor suficiente para cobrir o pagamento.
• Ou várias entradas combinadas para atingir o valor necessário.

O valor total das saídas nunca excede o das entradas, e a diferença (se houver) pode ser retornada ao remetente como troco.

Exemplo Prático

Imagine que você tem duas entradas:

1. 0,03 BTC
2. 0,07 BTC

Se deseja enviar 0,08 BTC para alguém, a transação terá:

• Entrada: As duas entradas combinadas (0,03 + 0,07 BTC = 0,10 BTC).
• Saídas: Uma para o destinatário (0,08 BTC) e outra como troco para você (0,02 BTC).

Essa flexibilidade permite que o sistema funcione sem precisar manipular cada unidade mínima individualmente.

Difusão e Simplificação

A difusão de transações, onde uma depende de várias anteriores e assim por diante, não representa um problema. Não é necessário armazenar ou verificar o histórico completo de uma transação para utilizá-la, já que o registro na blockchain garante sua integridade.

---

10. Privacidade

O modelo bancário tradicional oferece um certo nível de privacidade, limitando o acesso às informações financeiras apenas às partes envolvidas e a um terceiro confiável (como bancos ou instituições financeiras). No entanto, o Bitcoin opera de forma diferente, pois todas as transações são publicamente registradas na blockchain. Apesar disso, a privacidade pode ser mantida utilizando chaves públicas anônimas, que desvinculam diretamente as transações das identidades das partes envolvidas.

Fluxo de Informação

• No modelo tradicional, as transações passam por um terceiro confiável que conhece tanto o remetente quanto o destinatário.
• No Bitcoin, as transações são anunciadas publicamente, mas sem revelar diretamente as identidades das partes. Isso é comparável a dados divulgados por bolsas de valores, onde informações como o tempo e o tamanho das negociações (a "fita") são públicas, mas as identidades das partes não.

Protegendo a Privacidade

Para aumentar a privacidade no Bitcoin, são adotadas as seguintes práticas:

1. Chaves Públicas Anônimas: Cada transação utiliza um par de chaves diferentes, dificultando a associação com um proprietário único.
2. Prevenção de Ligação: Ao usar chaves novas para cada transação, reduz-se a possibilidade de links evidentes entre múltiplas transações realizadas pelo mesmo usuário.

Riscos de Ligação

Embora a privacidade seja fortalecida, alguns riscos permanecem:

• Transações multi-entrada podem revelar que todas as entradas pertencem ao mesmo proprietário, caso sejam necessárias para somar o valor total.
• O proprietário da chave pode ser identificado indiretamente por transações anteriores que estejam conectadas.

---

11. Cálculos

Imagine que temos um sistema onde as pessoas (ou computadores) competem para adicionar informações novas (blocos) a um grande registro público (a cadeia de blocos ou blockchain). Este registro é como um livro contábil compartilhado, onde todos podem verificar o que está escrito.

Agora, vamos pensar em um cenário: um atacante quer enganar o sistema. Ele quer mudar informações já registradas para beneficiar a si mesmo, por exemplo, desfazendo um pagamento que já fez. Para isso, ele precisa criar uma versão alternativa do livro contábil (a cadeia de blocos dele) e convencer todos os outros participantes de que essa versão é a verdadeira.

Mas isso é extremamente difícil.

Como o Ataque Funciona

Quando um novo bloco é adicionado à cadeia, ele depende de cálculos complexos que levam tempo e esforço. Esses cálculos são como um grande quebra-cabeça que precisa ser resolvido.

• Os “bons jogadores” (nós honestos) estão sempre trabalhando juntos para resolver esses quebra-cabeças e adicionar novos blocos à cadeia verdadeira.
• O atacante, por outro lado, precisa resolver quebra-cabeças sozinho, tentando “alcançar” a cadeia honesta para que sua versão alternativa pareça válida.

Se a cadeia honesta já está vários blocos à frente, o atacante começa em desvantagem, e o sistema está projetado para que a dificuldade de alcançá-los aumente rapidamente.

A Corrida Entre Cadeias

Você pode imaginar isso como uma corrida. A cada bloco novo que os jogadores honestos adicionam à cadeia verdadeira, eles se distanciam mais do atacante. Para vencer, o atacante teria que resolver os quebra-cabeças mais rápido que todos os outros jogadores honestos juntos.

Suponha que:

• A rede honesta tem 80% do poder computacional (ou seja, resolve 8 de cada 10 quebra-cabeças).
• O atacante tem 20% do poder computacional (ou seja, resolve 2 de cada 10 quebra-cabeças).

Cada vez que a rede honesta adiciona um bloco, o atacante tem que "correr atrás" e resolver mais quebra-cabeças para alcançar.

Por Que o Ataque Fica Cada Vez Mais Improvável?

Vamos usar uma fórmula simples para mostrar como as chances de sucesso do atacante diminuem conforme ele precisa "alcançar" mais blocos:

P = (q/p)^z

• q é o poder computacional do atacante (20%, ou 0,2).
• p é o poder computacional da rede honesta (80%, ou 0,8).
• z é a diferença de blocos entre a cadeia honesta e a cadeia do atacante.

Se o atacante está 5 blocos atrás (z = 5):

P = (0,2 / 0,8)^5 = (0,25)^5 = 0,00098, (ou, 0,098%)

Isso significa que o atacante tem menos de 0,1% de chance de sucesso — ou seja, é muito improvável.

Se ele estiver 10 blocos atrás (z = 10):

P = (0,2 / 0,8)^10 = (0,25)^10 = 0,000000095, (ou, 0,0000095%).

Neste caso, as chances de sucesso são praticamente nulas.

Um Exemplo Simples

Se você jogar uma moeda, a chance de cair “cara” é de 50%. Mas se precisar de 10 caras seguidas, sua chance já é bem menor. Se precisar de 20 caras seguidas, é quase impossível.

No caso do Bitcoin, o atacante precisa de muito mais do que 20 caras seguidas. Ele precisa resolver quebra-cabeças extremamente difíceis e alcançar os jogadores honestos que estão sempre à frente. Isso faz com que o ataque seja inviável na prática.

Por Que Tudo Isso é Seguro?

• A probabilidade de sucesso do atacante diminui exponencialmente. Isso significa que, quanto mais tempo passa, menor é a chance de ele conseguir enganar o sistema.
• A cadeia verdadeira (honesta) está protegida pela força da rede. Cada novo bloco que os jogadores honestos adicionam à cadeia torna mais difícil para o atacante alcançar.

E Se o Atacante Tentar Continuar?

O atacante poderia continuar tentando indefinidamente, mas ele estaria gastando muito tempo e energia sem conseguir nada. Enquanto isso, os jogadores honestos estão sempre adicionando novos blocos, tornando o trabalho do atacante ainda mais inútil.

Assim, o sistema garante que a cadeia verdadeira seja extremamente segura e que ataques sejam, na prática, impossíveis de ter sucesso.

---

12. Conclusão

Propusemos um sistema de transações eletrônicas que elimina a necessidade de confiança, baseando-se em assinaturas digitais e em uma rede peer-to-peer que utiliza prova de trabalho. Isso resolve o problema do gasto duplo, criando um histórico público de transações imutável, desde que a maioria do poder computacional permaneça sob controle dos participantes honestos. A rede funciona de forma simples e descentralizada, com nós independentes que não precisam de identificação ou coordenação direta. Eles entram e saem livremente, aceitando a cadeia de prova de trabalho como registro do que ocorreu durante sua ausência. As decisões são tomadas por meio do poder de CPU, validando blocos legítimos, estendendo a cadeia e rejeitando os inválidos. Com este mecanismo de consenso, todas as regras e incentivos necessários para o funcionamento seguro e eficiente do sistema são garantidos.

---

Faça o download do whitepaper original em português: https://bitcoin.org/files/bitcoin-paper/bitcoin_pt_br.pdf

@ 3f770d65:7a745b24

The recent shutdown of TikTok in the United States due to a potential government ban serves as a stark reminder how fragile centralized platforms truly are under the surface. While these platforms offer convenience, a more polished user experience, and connectivity, they are ultimately beholden to governments, corporations, and other authorities. This makes them vulnerable to censorship, regulation, and outright bans. In contrast, Nostr represents a shift in how we approach online communication and content sharing. Built on the principles of decentralization and user choice, Nostr cannot be banned, because it is not a platform—it is a protocol.

PROTOCOLS, NOT PLATFORMS.

At the heart of Nostr's philosophy is user choice, a feature that fundamentally sets it apart from legacy platforms. In centralized systems, the user experience is dictated by a single person or governing entity. If the platform decides to filter, censor, or ban specific users or content, individuals are left with little action to rectify the situation. They must either accept the changes or abandon the platform entirely, often at the cost of losing their social connections, their data, and their identity.

What's happening with TikTok could never happen on Nostr. With Nostr, the dynamics are completely different. Because it is a protocol, not a platform, no single entity controls the ecosystem. Instead, the protocol enables a network of applications and relays that users can freely choose from. If a particular application or relay implements policies that a user disagrees with, such as censorship, filtering, or even government enforced banning, they are not trapped or abandoned. They have the freedom to move to another application or relay with minimal effort.

THIS IS POWERFUL.

Take, for example, the case of a relay that decides to censor specific content. On a legacy platform, this would result in frustration and a loss of access for users. On Nostr, however, users can simply connect to a different relay that does not impose such restrictions. Similarly, if an application introduces features or policies that users dislike, they can migrate to a different application that better suits their preferences, all while retaining their identity and social connections.

The same principles apply to government bans and censorship. A government can ban a specific application or even multiple applications, just as it can block one relay or several relays. China has implemented both tactics, yet Chinese users continue to exist and actively participate on Nostr, demonstrating Nostr's ability to resistant censorship.

How? Simply, it turns into a game of whack-a-mole. When one relay is censored, another quickly takes its place. When one application is banned, another emerges. Users can also bypass these obstacles by running their own relays and applications directly from their homes or personal devices, eliminating reliance on larger entities or organizations and ensuring continuous access.

AGAIN, THIS IS POWERUFL.

Nostr's open and decentralized design makes it resistant to the kinds of government intervention that led to TikTok's outages this weekend and potential future ban in the next 90 days. There is no central server to target, no company to regulate, and no single point of failure. (Insert your CEO jokes here). As long as there are individuals running relays and applications, users continue creating notes and sending zaps.

Platforms like TikTok can be silenced with the stroke of a pen, leaving millions of users disconnected and abandoned. Social communication should not be silenced so incredibly easily. No one should have that much power over social interactions.

Will we on-board a massive wave of TikTokers in the coming hours or days? I don't know.

TikTokers may not be ready for Nostr yet, and honestly, Nostr may not be ready for them either. The ecosystem still lacks the completely polished applications, tools, and services they’re accustomed to. This is where we say "we're still early". They may not be early adopters like the current Nostr user base. Until we bridge that gap, they’ll likely move to the next centralized platform, only to face another government ban or round of censorship in the future. But eventually, there will come a tipping point, a moment when they’ve had enough. When that time comes, I hope we’re prepared. If we’re not, we risk missing a tremendous opportunity to onboard people who genuinely need Nostr’s freedom.

Until then, to all of the Nostr developers out there, keep up the great work and keep building. Your hard work and determination is needed.

@ 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.

@ 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.

@ 9e69e420:d12360c2

A new report from the National Sports Shooting Foundation (NSSF) shows that civilian firearm possession exceeded 490 million in 2022. The total from 1990 to 2022 is estimated at 491.3 million firearms. In 2022, over ten million firearms were domestically produced, leading to a total of 16,045,911 firearms available in the U.S. market.

Of these, 9,873,136 were handguns, 4,195,192 were rifles, and 1,977,583 were shotguns. Handgun availability aligns with the concealed carry and self-defense market, as all states allow concealed carry, with 29 having constitutional carry laws.

@ b6524158:8e898a89

Looking to break away from the defaults? In this tutorial, BTC Sessions show you how to run Bitcoin Knots (or switch over from Bitcoin Core) https://youtu.be/zT4NuAaH3EM?si=1MSNIqnicrkKBWBS

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/976079

@ 318ebaba:9a262eae

When connecting to multiple relays in the Nostr protocol, users may encounter several challenges that can affect their overall experience. Here are some of the key issues:

Challenges of Connecting to Multiple Relays

• Performance Issues: The lightweight design of Nostr relays can lead to performance bottlenecks, especially when many users are connected simultaneously. This can result in slow message delivery or even failures in posting messages if the relays are overwhelmed[1][2][32].

• Reliability and Connectivity: Users may experience connectivity problems with certain relays, which can lead to inconsistent access to messages or delays in communication. If a relay goes offline or has connectivity issues, it can disrupt the flow of information, making it difficult for users to send or receive messages reliably[3][4][18].

• Data Synchronization: As users connect to multiple relays, ensuring that data is synchronized across these relays can be challenging. Inconsistent data states may arise if different relays store messages differently or if there are delays in message propagation. This can lead to confusion about which messages have been sent or received[7][41].

• Configuration Complexity: Managing connections to multiple relays requires a certain level of technical knowledge. Users need to configure their clients properly to connect to various relays, which can be daunting for those less familiar with the technology. Misconfigurations can lead to connection failures or suboptimal performance[4][21].

• Spam and Quality Control: With the open nature of Nostr, some relays may be more susceptible to spam or low-quality content. Users connecting to multiple relays might encounter a higher volume of irrelevant or unwanted messages, which can detract from the overall user experience[6][32].

• Security Concerns: When using multiple relays, users must be cautious about the security of their connections. Not all relays may implement the same level of security, and connecting to less secure relays could expose users to risks such as data interception or unauthorized access to their messages[26][27].

In summary, while connecting to multiple relays in Nostr offers benefits such as redundancy and improved access to information, users must navigate various challenges related to performance, reliability, configuration, and security. Addressing these issues is crucial for a smooth and effective experience on the Nostr network.

[1] https://forum.dfinity.org/t/introducing-replicatr-enhancing-nostr-with-internet-computer-integration/31861 [2] https://medium.com/coinmonks/a-deep-dive-into-nostr-clients-with-technical-insights-and-code-snippets-b1666bb11fac [3] https://nostr.com/nevent1qqsfvjvg73wxdn7mda28m704r2zv9lnzlcdgh8r0g52lfvy2wj7uw4czyq32rylmsmre84lhxdypy6jlu4dt3fxfwkq9a0p0lqdl9y8hsp0hur4fuw4 [4] https://www.reddit.com/r/nostr/comments/1e6nm68/new_nostream_relay_created_problems_with_publish/ [5] https://www.lynalden.com/the-power-of-nostr/ [6] https://bitcoinmagazine.com/technical/how-nostr-can-improve-bitcoin-privacy [7] https://barelybuggy.blog/2024/11/26/mostr-offline/ [8] https://github.com/scsibug/nostr-rs-relay/issues/126 [9] https://community.umbrel.com/t/nostr-relay-troubleshooting/17828 [10] https://research.dorahacks.io/2024/04/30/nostr-relay-incentive/ [11] https://community.start9.com/t/issue-confirming-nostr-relay/1682 [12] https://arxiv.org/html/2402.05709v1 [13] https://community.umbrel.com/t/nostr-relay-not-connecting/11401 [14] https://www.purplerelay.com/troubleshooting-common-issues-with-nostr-relay-server-a-users-guide/ [15] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35694029 [16] https://substack.com/home/post/p-158872714?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web [17] https://stacker.news/items/142013 [18] https://www.reddit.com/r/nostr/comments/1h6admk/are_these_relays_working/ [19] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33746360 [20] https://github.com/scsibug/nostr-rs-relay/issues/195 [21] https://www.purplerelay.com/how-to-run-a-nostr-relay-a-step-by-step-guide/ [22] https://denostr.medium.com/the-future-of-social-communication-nostrs-origins-and-the-next-destination-in-social-networking-27f0c901d7ae [23] https://nostr.com/nevent1qqsqwklh29cvf3z0skhh77xyqf3m53xkppcttf3c8nuc2jqteulfx0czyqcgr7epv9hha2v9afp99l5wl0ljna0zum59fzyhl9v8pgv5xlhf5ava642 [24] https://www.reddit.com/r/nostr/comments/15fyr6r/pervasive_private_key_sharing_seems_dangerous/ [25] https://whtwnd.com/agoracitizen.network/3l2fysaripd2q [26] https://ron.stoner.com/nostr_Security_and_Privacy/ [27] https://forums.puri.sm/t/about-what-is-nostr/20764 [28] https://github.com/nostr-protocol/nips/issues/107 [29] https://medium.com/@volodymyrpavlyshyn/security-features-of-nostr-a0276a22e815 [30] https://nostr.com/nevent1qqspd8fh3tplxtfhjpka3y3glzh63v3ygsdhacyq8dvyrnxtvl09lpczyr2v7dprke9lad2qk0svug55vxguqv7n3dwn9vm63u8n5n84znxjxedjf6c [31] https://nostr.com/nevent1qqs8e2su6n8m2xtg45qdjw7rdcq6w3g5guvt085h52qhg25wxn755sczyrh26kg89z95jqaz4xkex7kaw2t36twtc75vmrfx2k3p3jqvhfa8vzan82f [32] https://www.cointribune.com/en/nostr-et-la-censure-pourquoi-un-reseau-social-decentralise-est-essentiel-2/ [33] https://nostr.com/nevent1qqsv86d756zcw32x0zcvqmr924y5sltvwqud0dywny83ndee30zzrmczyrh26kg89z95jqaz4xkex7kaw2t36twtc75vmrfx2k3p3jqvhfa8vwpfv29 [34] https://github.com/nbd-wtf/nostr-tools/issues [35] https://www.voltage.cloud/blog/the-growth-of-nostr-the-era-of-decentralization [36] https://medium.com/@BingVentures/status-quo-challenges-and-prospect-of-decentralized-social-networks-18f9584f2e8d [37] https://www.reddit.com/r/RedditAlternatives/comments/14s8ao4/greetings_im_here_to_tell_you_about_nostr_a/ [38] https://bitcoinmagazine.com/culture/nostr-the-importance-of-censorship-resistant-communication-for-innovation-and-human-progress- [39] https://github.com/mayneyao/eidos/issues/129 [40] https://www.reddit.com/r/nostr/comments/115a8et/data_duplication_and_distribution_in_nostr_relays/ [41] https://github.com/open-nostr/nostar [42] https://nostr.com/nevent1qqsryg8zuc9rdwldat385al24mdt56wanc6g6hfymy8l9tgtmzsc4nspzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhg85cx73 [43] https://ckbcn.xlog.app/Nostr-sheng-tai-fa-zhan-xian-zhuang-ji-wen-ti?locale=en [44] https://nostr.com/naddr1qqc92mnvda3kk6twvuk5ummnw3ez6ued2phhgetww35kzmpdwa5hg6pdfehhgetyv43kktt08p5hscnkqgsr7acdvhf6we9fch94qwhpy0nza36e3tgrtkpku25ppuu80f69kfqrqsqqqa28aknkml

@ 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.

@ b8851a06:9b120ba1

The global financial system is creaking under its own weight. The IMF is urging banks to shore up capital, cut risk, and brace for impact. Basel III is their answer, a last-ditch effort to reinforce a brittle foundation.

But behind the scenes, a quieter revolution is under way.

Bitcoin, the world’s first stateless digital asset, is no longer on the sidelines. It’s entering the Basel conversation: not by invitation, but by inevitability.

Basel III: The System’s Self-Diagnosis

Basel III is more than a technical rulebook. It’s a confession: an admission that the global banking system is vulnerable. Created in the aftermath of 2008, it calls for: • Stronger capital reserves: So banks can survive losses. • Lower leverage: To reduce the domino effect of overexposure. • Liquidity buffers: To weather short-term shocks without collapsing.

But here’s the kicker: these rules are hostile to anything outside the fiat system. Bitcoin gets hit with a punitive 1,250% risk weight. That means for every $1 of exposure, banks must hold $1 in capital. The message from regulators? “You can hold Bitcoin, but you’ll pay for it.”

Yet that fear: based framing misses a bigger truth: Bitcoin doesn’t just survive in this environment. It thrives in it.

Bitcoin: A Parallel System, Built on Hard Rules

Where Basel III imposes “fiat discipline” from the top down, Bitcoin enforces it from the bottom up: with code, math, and transparency.

Bitcoin is not just a hedge. It’s a structural antidote to systemic fragility.

Volatility: A Strategic Asset

Yes, Bitcoin is volatile. But in a system that devalues fiat on a schedule, volatility is simply the cost of freedom. Under Basel III, banks are expected to build capital buffers during economic expansions.

What asset allows you to build those buffers faster than Bitcoin in a bull market?

When the cycle turns, those reserves act as shock absorbers: converting volatility into resilience. It’s anti-fragility in motion.

Liquidity: Real, Deep, and Global

Bitcoin settled over $19 trillion in transactions in 2024. That’s not hypothetical liquidity. it’s real, measurable flow. Unlike traditional high-quality liquid assets (HQLAs), Bitcoin is: • Available 24/7 • Borderless • Not dependent on central banks

By traditional definitions, Bitcoin is rapidly qualifying for HQLA status. Even if regulators aren’t ready to admit it.

Diversification: Breaking the Fiat Dependency

Basel III is designed to pull banks back into the fiat matrix. But Bitcoin offers an escape hatch. Strategic Bitcoin reserves are not about speculation, they’re insurance. For family offices, institutions, and sovereign funds, Bitcoin is the lifeboat when the fiat ship starts taking on water.

Regulatory Realignment: The System Reacts

The Basel Committee’s new rules on crypto exposures went live in January 2025. Around the world, regulators are scrambling to define their stance. Every new restriction placed on Bitcoin only strengthens its legitimacy, as more institutions ask: Why so much resistance, if it’s not a threat?

Bitcoin doesn’t need permission. It’s already being adopted by over 150 public companies, forward-looking states, and a new class of self-sovereign individuals.

Conclusion: The Real Question

This isn’t just about Bitcoin fitting into Basel III.

The real question is: How long can Basel III remain relevant in a world where Bitcoin exists?

Bitcoin is not the risk. It’s the reality check. And it might just be the strongest capital buffer the system has ever seen.

Gradually then suddenly.