@ 866e0139:6a9334e5

Autor: Bastian Barucker. 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.

---

John Lennon besang in seinem weltberühmten Lied „Imagine“ die fast unvorstellbare Utopie einer Welt, in der es keinen Grund mehr zu töten gäbe und die Menschen in Frieden zusammen leben. Die enorme Resonanz und Verbreitung dieser Zeilen zeigt den Wunsch fast aller Menschen nach Frieden. Wie Lennon zu diesen Zeilen kam, ist ein Hinweis darauf, dass es dazu neben geopolitischen Analysen und deren Verbreitung durch eine nicht eingebettete und freie Presse vielleicht noch etwas braucht: Schattenarbeit – ein bewusstes Hinwenden zu den eigenen Tiefen der Persönlichkeit, dem inneren Tiefenstaat.

Was ist der Tiefenstaat?

Mit dem Begriff Tiefenstaat verbinde ich Strukturen, die Edward Bernays bereits vor knapp 100 Jahren in seinem Grundlagenwerk „Propaganda“ beschrieb. Im Vorwort schreibt er: „Organisationen, die im Verborgenen arbeiten, lenken die gesellschaftlichen Abläufe. Sie sind die eigentlichen Regierungen in unserem Land.“ Er verwendet diesbezüglich auch das Wort „Schattenkabinett“. Im Bereich der Persönlichkeitsentwicklung wird der Begriff „Schattenarbeit“ dafür verwendet, unbekannte, aber einflussreiche Anteile des eigenen Selbst zu entdecken und zu integrieren.

Lennon begab sich in den 70er Jahren des letzten Jahrhunderts auf die Reise zu sich selbst. Sein Weg führte ihn zum Psychologen Dr. Arthur Janov, der Menschen mithilfe der von ihm entwickelten Primärtherapie dabei begleitete, sich ihrer primären Prägungen und frühkindlichen Traumatisierungen bewusst zu werden und abgespaltenen Schmerz wieder zu erleben, um sich davon zu befreien. Entgegen stark kognitiv geprägter Ansätze wie der Gesprächstherapie steht bei dieser Art der Therapie Gefühlsausdruck im Vordergrund. Janov selbst schreibt dazu: «Die Krankheit ist die Verleugnung des Fühlens, und das Heilmittel ist das Fühlen.»

Auch der Psychologe und Psychotherapeut Franz Ruppert beschäftigt sich intensiv mit dem Fühlen als einem möglichen Weg, eine Traumatisierung aufzuarbeiten. Er schreibt Folgendes über die Bedeutung des Fühlens in seinem Buch „Wer bin ich in einer traumatisierten Gesellschaft“: „Denn letztlich können nur über das Ausdrücken von Gefühlen die fragmentierten psychischen Strukturen wieder zu einer Einheit zusammenfinden.“

Lennon war es möglich, die immense Menge an Schmerz zu entdecken, die er verborgen in sich trug, und er erkannte dabei, welche Verhaltensweisen und Bewältigungsstrategien damit verbunden waren. Laut Lennon ist „Unser Schmerz der Schmerz, durch den wir die ganze Zeit gehen. Du wirst in Schmerz hineingeboren, und wir befinden uns meist im Schmerz. Und ich glaube, je größer der Schmerz ist, umso mehr Götter brauchen wir.“

Die Schilderungen von John Lennon decken sich mit den Erfahrungen meiner Selbsterfahrung und meiner mittlerweile über 10 Jahre langen Begleitungsarbeit in der durch den Schweizer Willi Maurer entwickelten Gefühls- und Körperarbeit.

Auch in dieser Arbeit geht es darum, abgespaltenen Schmerz langsam und über viele Jahre aus dem Schatten in das Bewusstsein zu integrieren, um nicht weiter von ihm unbewusst beeinflusst zu werden. Hunderte Male habe ich Menschen ihnen vorher unbekannten Hass, tiefe Trauer, unendliche Ohnmacht, starke Hilflosigkeit, aber auch Freude, tiefe Geborgenheit, Liebe und Friedfertigkeit entdecken und ausleben sehen. Selber habe ich mich nach einem einjährigen Aufenthalt in der nordamerikanischen Wildnis, bei dem es darum ging, so ehrlich wie möglich miteinander umzugehen, ausführlich meiner Selbsterfahrung gewidmet und dabei Intensitäten von Schmerz, aber auch Zufriedenheit entdeckt, die mir nicht vorstellbar erschienen.

Der Krieg in uns

Fast immer zeigte sich in den begleiteten Prozessen, dass die im Alltag, in der Partnerschaft oder in der Familie angerührten Gefühle aus der eigenen frühen Kindheit stammten. Innere, überfordernde „Kriege“ und Übergriffigkeiten, die auch das Leben im Außen zum Krieg werden ließen, erwachten zum Leben und durften endlich Ausdruck finden. Schlussendlich zeigte sich meist, dass es einen friedlichen Umgang mit der aktuellen Situation gibt, wenn die Altlast „entsorgt“ beziehungsweise kompostiert, also gefühlt und integriert wurde.

Franz Renggli beschreibt diese Psychodynamik in seinem Buch Verlassenheit und Angst – Nähe und Geborgenheit in Bezug auf Partnerschaft wie folgt:

„Die Erfahrung aller meiner Paarbegleitungen zeigt nun: Wenn nach der ersten Verliebtheit langsam der „Alltag“ in eine Beziehung einkehrt, neigen beide Partner immer mehr dazu, ihre Schattenseiten, ihre alten und frühen Verletzungen auch in der Beziehung zuzulassen. Je sicherer die Grenzen sind, desto vertrauensvoller dürfen diese frühen Schmerzen gespürt und erfahren werden. Wir „steigen dann wieder ab“ in unsere ursprüngliche Hölle der Verlassenheit, in die frühkindlichen Prägungen, wie ich sie hier beschrieben habe. Nur: die Hölle sind dann nicht länger die Eltern, sondern jetzt der Partner oder die Partnerin! Vielleicht könnte ich sie oder ihn umbringen vor Enttäuschung und Wut, weil er/sie mich so sehr verletzt hat. Und damit kann sie beginnen, die Heilung der alten Wunden in der Paarbeziehung! Aber nur dann, wenn wir bereit sind, unsere alten verletzten Gefühle wirklich zu spüren und zuzulassen. Und wenn wir zu diesem Schritt bereit sind, dann können wir auch gleichzeitig empfinden und wissen: Das sind unsere ureigensten alten Verletzungen, welche wir seit der Kindheit in uns tragen – ein Partner mit seinen Worten und seinem Verhalten ist nur der Auslöser unseres alten Schmerzes, ein harter Spiegel unserer alten Wunden! Wir alle haben unsere Partner entsprechend gewählt, damit wir in unseren Grundfesten immer wieder – neben allem Glück, das wir mit ihnen erleben und teilen dürfen – auch erschüttert werden.“

Diese wiederkehrenden Erschütterungen werden auch Reinszenierungszwang genannt und lassen Menschen immer wieder dieselben misslichen Lagen (mit)erschaffen, die ihnen Leid zufügen. Willi Maurer beschreibt diese Dynamik in einem sehr lesenswerten Artikel mit dem Titel „Die verschüttete Quelle des Friedens“ wie folgt: „Die Spirale der Gewalt zeigt, dass wir andern Menschen das antun, was uns selbst widerfahren ist. Doch ohne Selbsterforschung bleiben wir blind gegenüber der tief in uns verdrängt liegenden Wahrheit.“

Diese Reinszenierung ist gleichzeitig jedoch eine immer wiederkehrende Chance, sich der Ursache dieser Dynamik zuzuwenden. Das geschieht dann, wenn die Person sich als Erschaffer oder Erschafferin und nicht als reines Opfer der Umstände versteht und beginnt, die volle Verantwortung für das eigene Leben zu übernehmen.

Vor einigen Jahren brachte ich den Prozessbegleiter Willi Maurer und den Friedensforscher Dr. Daniele Ganser zu einem Gespräch zusammen, weil ich der Ansicht war, dass beide Friedensarbeit aus verschiedenen Perspektiven leisten. Es war eine Wohltat, zu erleben, wie Ganser durch die sehr authentischen Schilderungen Maurers zu ahnen begann, dass es eine Verbindung zwischen weltweiten Kriegen und frühen Erfahrungen geben kann. Was hat der Soldat, Politiker oder Geostratege erlebt, dass er in der Lage ist, Krieg zu befördern, zu verursachen oder auch nur zu dulden?

Vielleicht ist die immer wiederkehrende Kriegsbereitschaft und Kriegslust elitärer Kreise neben der wahrscheinlich frühkindlich erzeugten Gier nach Macht, Einfluss und Geld ebenfalls ein gesellschaftlicher Reinszenierungszwang. Die inneren Zerwürfnisse und Kriege müssen quasi ins Außen getragen werden, um sich dem im Schatten der eigenen Persönlichkeit wartenden Schmerz nicht zuwenden zu müssen.

Eine weitere Bewältigungsstrategie für innere, emotionale Zerwürfnisse ist die Projektion, also die Veräußerlichung des Eigenen auf andere. Ein hier vielleicht Sinn stiftendes Beispiel ist die immer wieder betonte weitestgehend unbelegte Unterstellung imperialistischer Bestrebungen Russlands im Zuge des völkerrechtswidrigen Krieges in der Ukraine. Meist kommt diese Behauptung von Vertretern oder Unterstützern der NATO, die – wie an ihrer großflächigen, gegen westliche Zusagen an Russland verstoßenden NATO-Osterweiterung leicht zu erkennen – offensichtlich selbst imperialistische Bestrebungen verfolgt.

Die Projektion ins Außen

Interessanterweise hat ausgerechnet Präsident Putin in anschaulichen Worten beschrieben, was unter anderem mit im Schatten liegenden Persönlichkeitsanteilen auch auf geopolitischer Ebene passieren kann. Sie werden anderen Menschen oder Staaten zugeschrieben, also ins Außen projiziert. Auf die Beschuldigung durch US-Präsidenten Joe Biden, ein Mörder zu sein, antwortete Putin: „Aber wenn wir andere Menschen bewerten, oder wenn wir sogar andere Staaten, andere Völker bewerten, sehen wir immer in den Spiegel, wir sehen uns immer selbst, weil wir auf eine andere Person übertragen, was wir selbst sind, was uns im Wesentlichen ausmacht. Wissen Sie, ich erinnere mich, als wir als Kinder im Hinterhof waren, als wir miteinander gestritten und gesagt haben: Wie Du andere nennst, so bist Du selbst. Und das ist kein Zufall, das ist nicht nur ein Kindersprichwort oder ein Witz. Der Sinn ist sehr psychologisch. Wir sehen immer unsere eigenen Qualitäten in einer anderen Person und denken, dass sie so ist wie wir, und daraus bewerten wir ihr Handeln und bewerten sie insgesamt.“

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7sMAHWH_hhQ

Der bereits erwähnte Tiefenstaat, also eine quasi Schattenregierung, existiert auf der geopolitischen Weltbühne und bestimmt größtenteils die Geschicke, insbesondere wenn es um Krieg und Frieden geht. Der Kognitionsforscher Professor Rainer Mausfeld beschreibt die unsichtbar im Hintergrund wirkenden Strukturen in seinem Buch „Angst und Macht“ wie folgt: „Die tatsächliche Macht ist heute in neuartigen globalen Organisationsformen verortet, die vollkommen einer gesellschaftlichen Kontrolle entzogen sind, die für die Bevölkerung weitgehend unsichtbar sind…“

Gleiches gilt meiner Annahme nach auch für die persönlichen Machtverhältnisse, bei denen eigene Schattenanteile ebenfalls großen Einfluss auf die sichtbaren Verhaltensweisen nehmen. Dieser unbewusste Anteil kann auf der einen Seite Macht über die eigene Kriegsbereitschaft und Friedenstüchtigkeit ausüben, auf der anderen Seite wird er von Kriegstreibern mittels kognitiver Kriegsführung aktiv benutzt, um die Bevölkerung zu manipulieren. Der Propagandaforscher Dr. Jonas Tögel schreibt dazu: „Die Tiefenpsychologie dient als Fundament der wohl wichtigsten Manipulationswaffe: die gezielte Beeinflussung des Unbewussten der menschlichen Psyche. Wie bei einem Eisberg liegt ein großer Teil unserer Gedanken und Gefühle „unter der Wasseroberfläche“, und hier können wir so beeinflusst werden, dass wir die Steuerung selbst oft nicht bemerken.“

Der Tiefe Staat kann also ungesehen politisch schalten und walten und gleichzeitig die unbewussten Anteile der menschlichen Psyche zu seinen Gunsten ausnutzen.

Teil 2 folgt in Kürze.

---

Bastian Barucker, Jahrgang 83, ist Wildnispädagoge, Überlebenstrainer und Prozessbegleiter. Seit 2005 begleitet er Menschen bei Wachstumsprozessen in der Natur. Seit 2011 macht er mithilfe der Gefühls- und Körperarbeit tiefgreifende Selbsterfahrungen, und seit 2014 begleitet er Gruppen, Paare und Einzelpersonen. Er lebt und arbeitet im wunderschönen Lassaner Winkel, nahe der Insel Usedom. Zuletzt erschien von ihm das Buch "Auf Spurensuche nach Natürlichkeit: Vom Leben in der Wildnis und der Reise zu sich selbst" im Massel Verlag.

Kontakt: www.bastian-barucker.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.

@ 57d1a264:69f1fee1

Shifting left on accessibility means building inclusivity into every phase of a project—from strategy to QA—saving time, reducing risk, and creating better user experiences.

Shifting left is about collaboration: a successful website project isn’t a linear train ride from content to design to development. It’s a dynamic, collaborative ecosystem that means everyone contributes.

• Strategists ensure content is easy to find.
• Designers prioritize color contrast, readable typography, and interactive elements.
• Back-end developers support accessible content structures and accessible interaction.
• Front-end developers implement semantic markup and accessible UI components.
• QA testers verify functionality across assistive devices.
• DevOps engineers integrate automated accessibility checks into the workflow.
• Technical project managers: keep accessibility visible and prioritized.

Accessibility should be part of every conversation—from kickoff to QA.

Read the full article at https://www.lullabot.com/articles/what-it-means-shift-left-accessibility-and-how-do-it-right

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/977943

@ 57d1a264:69f1fee1

VIET GD is a casual index, archive, and celebration of Vietnamese graphic design. Currently, there are 274 objects in this collection. Understandably, a lot of propaganda posters... as well as music themed ones! Here below some of the most interesting ones:

Explore them all at https://vietgd.com/

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/977939

@ a9434ee1:d5c885be

Colors as a fun and useful identifier

Nostr apps often use totally random colors for their default avatars, profiles names in chat bubbles, etc... That's a missed opportunity. Why don't we just we just derive a color from the npub and use that instead, interoperably across apps?

It gives us a fun and visual extra point of recognition, often without having to add anything extra to the UIs.

The only problem is that we cannot just allow for any color. The colors should be readable as text in Light and Dark modes and gray-scales should be avoided too.

This is the goal: Luckily, there's a super simple solution.
(which was used to derive the colors above)

Deriving the Colors

You can find the simple spec here: nostr:naddr1qvzqqqrcvgpzp22rfmsktmgpk2rtan7zwu00zuzax5maq5dnsu5g3xxvqr2u3pd7qy88wumn8ghj7mn0wvhxcmmv9uqsuamnwvaz7tmwdaejumr0dshsz8rhwden5te0w35x2cmfw3skgetv9ehx7um5wgcjucm0d5hsz8rhwden5te0w35x2cmfw3skgetv9ehx7um5wgcjucm0d5hszxmhwden5te0w35x2en0wfjhxapwdehhxarjxyhxxmmd9uq3kamnwvaz7tm5dpjkvmmjv4ehgtnwdaehgu339e3k7mf0qyghwumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytnhd9hx2tcpz9mhxue69uhkummnw3ezuamfdejj7qghwaehxw309aex2mrp0yhxummnw3ezucnpdejz7qghwaehxw309aex2mrp0yhxummnw3ezucnpdejz7qgwwaehxw309ahx7uewd3hkctcpr3mhxue69uhhg6r9vd5hgctyv4kzumn0wd68yvfwvdhk6tcpzamhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumn0wd68ytnzv9hxgtcprdmhxue69uhhg6r9vehhyetnwshxummnw3erztnrdakj7qg3waehxw309ahx7um5wgh8w6twv5hszythwden5te0dehhxarj9emkjmn99uqsuamnwvaz7tmwdaejumr0dshsz8rhwden5te0w35x2cmfw3skgetv9ehx7um5wgcjucm0d5hsqpnwd9cz6ce3pvatyf

TLDR: 1. Convert HEX pubkey to Int 2. Calculate the Hue value: Int % 360 3. Set Saturation to 90 for Hues between 216 and 273, use 80 for the rest 4. Set Brightness to 65 for Hues between 32 and 212, use 85 for the rest

Convert HSB color to whatever format you need. Done.

Easy & Fun to integrate!

@ 57d1a264:69f1fee1

A set of beautifully-designed, accessible components and a code distribution platform. Works with your favorite frameworks. Open Source. Open Code.

This is how @kurtispapple make use of it https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/championing-health-data-interoperability-my-journey-nz-kurtis-papple-mwglc

Start building yours at https://ui.shadcn.com/

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/977930

@ 57d1a264:69f1fee1

It's incredible how deep people can go into something so mundane as a post stamp. Postage stamps are a surprisingly complex topic, overlapping with money, collectibility and bank notes. I was a postage stamp enthusiast myself, but this is one of those “the universe is surprisingly detailed” type. The rules defining postage and how it has been ruling commerce for centuries is even more fascinating and intriguing.

Discover more at https://www.linyangchen.com/Philately

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/977918

@ 9c9d2765:16f8c2c2

CHAPTER SIXTEEN

Mr. JP sat up abruptly as his phone buzzed. It was an anonymous message. He opened it slowly, his eyes scanning the contents with growing disbelief.

"James has returned to JP Enterprises. Charles reinstated him. He’s now President of your company."

His blood ran cold.

Mrs. JP saw the tension in his expression. "What’s wrong?"

"He’s back," Mr. JP said grimly. "Our son. James. He's taken over the company."

He stared into space, his mind reeling. "And Charles helped him..."

They had spent years trying to distance themselves from the disgrace of James’s past only to now be faced with the reality that he had clawed his way back into the empire they built.

The anonymous message was, of course, sent by Mark and Helen, each relishing in the chaos they had ignited. With the scandalous file now in their hands and James’s own family unknowingly brought into the picture, they believed the final blow was in place.

Mark leaned back in his chair and smiled as he read the forwarded documents.

"Let’s see how your so-called empire stands after this, James," he said quietly.

Helen, standing beside him, added coldly, "This time, he won’t survive it."

"How could he do this?" Mr. JP muttered under his breath, clutching his phone tightly. "How could Charles go behind my back and reinstall him? My own brother..."

The news that James had returned to JP Enterprises and not just as a member, but as its President had shaken him to the core. But what stung more was the betrayal he felt from Charles, who had once promised never to interfere in the matter again.

Fuming with rage and disbelief, Mr. JP boarded the next flight back home. Upon arrival, he didn’t even stop by the family estate. Instead, he went straight to the Regency Grand, the city’s most luxurious hotel, the same place he used to spend time with his family during better days. He booked the presidential suite and immediately dialed Charles' number.

"Meet me. Now. At the hotel," he barked before ending the call without waiting for a response.

Within the hour, Charles walked in, calm but aware of the storm brewing.

"You defied me, Charles," Mr. JP said, his voice icy. "You brought back the one person I had removed. The one person I swore would never set foot in the company again."

"Because you were wrong," Charles replied firmly. "You made a decision based on lies."

Mr. JP’s glare deepened.

"Lies? The records were clear embezzlement. Theft. He disgraced this family, Charles!"

Charles stood his ground. "Those records were manipulated. You never gave James a chance to explain himself."

He stepped closer. "The funds he was accused of stealing? He used them to invest in a struggling tech start-up that exploded in value two years later. That investment saved JP Enterprises during the economic downturn. The company is standing today because of James’s vision and sacrifice."

Silence filled the room.

Mr. JP felt his heart sink as the weight of Charles’s words settled in. He turned away, walking slowly to the window, staring out at the city skyline.

"All this time... I condemned my own son... exiled him... because I trusted false reports?"

Charles nodded. "Yes. And despite it all, he returned not for revenge, but to help us."

Tears welled up in Mr. JP’s eyes. His pride, once like stone, was now crumbling.

Without hesitation, he picked up his phone and dialed James’s number. The phone rang twice before James answered.

"Hello?" came the familiar voice, calm and distant.

"James... it’s your father." His voice trembled. "I... I’m sorry. I was wrong. Gravely wrong. Everything I believed about you was a lie. I let you down, son."

There was silence on the other end.

"I just found out the truth," Mr. JP continued. "And I’m proud of what you’ve done for the company, for our name. I want you to know... you are reinstated as the rightful heir to JP Enterprises. I want you back not just as President, but as my son."

James took a long pause before answering.

"It took you long enough," he said softly. "But... thank you."

Though James had once sworn not to seek his parents' approval, deep down, those words still mattered. And hearing them from the father who had disowned him brought a quiet sense of closure.

The rift that had torn them apart for years was beginning to heal.

"Dad, who told you I was the President of JP Enterprises?" James asked, his tone calm but firm as he stood before his father in the grand office of the family estate.

Mr. JP, still adjusting to the emotional weight of his recent apology, furrowed his brow. "It was anonymous, son. I received a message with no name, no clue. Just the information."

James narrowed his eyes. "Can you forward the message to me?"

"Of course," his father replied, pulling out his phone. Within seconds, the message was in James’s inbox.

Later that evening, James sat in his private office, staring at the message on his screen. Something about it felt off too calculated, too timely. He forwarded it to his personal cybersecurity team with one instruction: “Trace the source. I want to know everything about who sent it, how, and if they’re working with someone.”

Meanwhile, Ray Enterprises was thriving again under James’s investment. With the influx of capital and revitalized operations, profits were skyrocketing. However, while the company’s success looked promising on the surface, the Ray family was barely reaping the rewards.

James’s 85% share ensured he collected the lion’s portion of every deal. Robert, despite being the figurehead chairman, found himself managing a flourishing empire but receiving only crumbs in return.

Frustrated and desperate, Robert scheduled a private meeting with James.

"James, please... eighty-five percent is bleeding us dry. We’re grateful for what you’ve done truly but surely we can renegotiate?"

James leaned back in his chair, expression unreadable. "You signed the agreement, Robert. You knew the terms. And frankly, I'm not in the mood to revisit old conversations."

"We just want fairness," Robert pleaded. "A little breathing space"

"If this discussion continues," James interrupted coldly, "I’ll pull out my funds. And when I do, I promise Ray Enterprises will go down faster than it rose. Do I make myself clear?"

Robert’s face fell. He had no choice but to nod and walk away, defeated.

Two weeks later, James’s cybersecurity team sent their report. The source of the anonymous message had been traced and the result was both surprising and telling.

Tracy.

James sat silently as he read the details. Tracy, his own subordinate, had accessed restricted files from the company’s internal network. It wasn’t just a case of whistleblowing it was deliberate sabotage. But what intrigued him more was the fact that she had gone to great lengths to cover her tracks.

No one takes that risk alone, he thought.

Despite having the evidence in hand, James chose silence. Not out of mercy but strategy. He needed to know who she was working with. Who else had a vested interest in his downfall?

@ d7955b22:025a3ba9

O mundo dos jogos online tem se expandido rapidamente, oferecendo uma infinidade de opções para os jogadores. Entre as diversas plataformas disponíveis, o 99bra se destaca por sua variedade de opções e a experiência de usuário única que proporciona. Este artigo oferece uma visão detalhada sobre o que o 99bra tem a oferecer, desde suas características gerais até a experiência de jogo que promete satisfazer todos os tipos de jogadores.

Introdução à Plataforma 99bra 99bra é uma plataforma de entretenimento digital voltada para os entusiastas de jogos online. Com um design intuitivo e uma interface amigável, a plataforma foi criada para oferecer uma experiência de navegação fluida, seja em desktop ou dispositivos móveis. A plataforma se destaca pela sua confiabilidade e pela qualidade dos jogos oferecidos, sempre priorizando a segurança e a proteção dos dados de seus usuários.

Ao se cadastrar no 99bra, os jogadores têm acesso a uma ampla gama de opções de jogos, desde clássicos até lançamentos inovadores. O site se adapta às necessidades dos usuários, com suporte em português e atendimento ao cliente de excelência, tornando a plataforma acessível a jogadores de todas as idades e níveis de experiência. O processo de inscrição é rápido e simples, permitindo que os novos usuários comecem a se divertir em poucos minutos.

A Variedade de Jogos no 99bra O que realmente chama a atenção no 99bra é a diversidade de jogos oferecidos. A plataforma conta com uma vasta seleção de títulos, abrangendo uma ampla gama de gêneros. Seja você um fã de jogos de mesa, slots ou apostas esportivas, o 99bra tem algo para todos. Cada categoria de jogo é desenvolvida para garantir jogabilidade envolvente, gráficos impressionantes e uma experiência imersiva.

Jogos de Mesa Os jogos de mesa são um dos maiores atrativos da plataforma, com várias opções que incluem clássicos como blackjack, roleta e baccarat. Estes jogos oferecem uma experiência realista e dinâmica, com a possibilidade de interagir com outros jogadores. A interface é cuidadosamente projetada para garantir que cada clique e movimento se sinta natural, criando uma atmosfera que lembra a de um ambiente de jogo físico.

Slots e Máquinas de Vídeo Para os amantes das máquinas de vídeo, o 99bra oferece uma impressionante coleção de slots. Os jogadores podem explorar uma variedade de temas, desde aventuras épicas até histórias de fantasia, com gráficos vibrantes e animações cativantes. As funções de bônus, rodadas grátis e jackpots progressivos tornam os jogos ainda mais emocionantes, com a possibilidade de grandes vitórias a cada giro.

Apostas Esportivas Outro ponto forte da plataforma são as apostas esportivas. O 99bra oferece uma extensa seleção de esportes para os fãs de esportes ao vivo. Seja futebol, basquete, tênis ou eSports, a plataforma proporciona odds competitivas e a chance de apostar em eventos de todo o mundo, com atualizações em tempo real para garantir que o jogador esteja sempre informado.

A Experiência do Jogador A experiência do jogador é o aspecto que diferencia o 99bra de outras plataformas. Desde o momento do cadastro até as interações durante os jogos, a plataforma é projetada para oferecer facilidade, conforto e diversão sem interrupções. O 99bra é otimizado para fornecer uma navegação rápida e sem erros, com um layout que garante que o jogador possa acessar todos os jogos e funcionalidades de forma simples.

Além disso, a plataforma oferece recursos adicionais para tornar a experiência ainda mais envolvente. Os jogadores podem configurar preferências de jogo, participar de promoções exclusivas e interagir com outros jogadores, criando uma verdadeira comunidade. A segurança também é uma prioridade, com criptografia de dados avançada e processos de verificação para garantir que todas as transações e informações pessoais estejam protegidas.

Suporte ao Cliente O suporte ao cliente do 99bra é excepcional. A plataforma oferece múltiplos canais de atendimento, incluindo chat ao vivo, e-mail e telefone, para que os jogadores possam obter assistência rápida sempre que necessário. A equipe de suporte é altamente treinada e pronta para resolver qualquer dúvida ou problema de forma eficiente, garantindo que a experiência do jogador nunca seja comprometida.

Conclusão O 99bra é uma plataforma completa que atende aos mais altos padrões de qualidade e segurança no universo dos jogos online. Com uma vasta seleção de jogos, suporte ao cliente de excelência e uma experiência de usuário impecável, o 99bra se consolida como uma das opções mais atrativas para quem busca diversão e entretenimento. Se você está procurando uma plataforma que combine inovação, variedade e uma jogabilidade envolvente, o 99bra certamente é uma excelente escolha.

@ d7955b22:025a3ba9

A plataforma 53a é uma das mais novas e emocionantes opções para quem busca uma experiência completa de entretenimento digital. Com uma ampla gama de jogos e funcionalidades voltadas para o prazer e a diversão dos jogadores, a 53a se destaca por sua interface intuitiva, seu foco na segurança e uma vasta gama de opções para todos os gostos. Se você ainda não conhece essa plataforma inovadora, continue lendo e descubra tudo o que ela tem a oferecer!

Introdução à Plataforma 53a A 53a é uma plataforma de entretenimento online que se destaca pelo seu compromisso em oferecer uma experiência única aos jogadores. Com um design moderno e acessível, a plataforma foi criada para atender a um público que busca algo mais do que simples joguinhos – ela oferece uma verdadeira imersão em um universo de possibilidades.

Ao acessar a 53a , os usuários são rapidamente apresentados a um painel de controle simplificado, onde podem facilmente navegar por diferentes categorias de jogos, conferir promoções e acessar uma série de recursos exclusivos. Além disso, a plataforma está disponível em diversos dispositivos, incluindo desktop, smartphones e tablets, permitindo que o jogador tenha acesso à diversão em qualquer lugar e a qualquer momento.

Jogos Empolgantes para Todos os Gostos A 53a não se limita a um único tipo de jogo. Em vez disso, oferece uma vasta gama de opções, com títulos que atendem a diferentes preferências e estilos de jogo. Desde jogos de habilidade, como jogos de mesa e jogos de cartas, até opções mais interativas e imersivas, como máquinas de diversão, a plataforma tem algo para todos os jogadores.

Jogos de Mesa e Cartas: Para os que apreciam uma experiência mais estratégica, a 53a oferece uma seleção diversificada de jogos de mesa, incluindo opções clássicas como o blackjack, pôquer e roleta. Cada jogo é projetado para proporcionar uma experiência desafiadora e envolvente, com gráficos impressionantes e uma jogabilidade fluida.

Máquinas de Diversão: Para quem busca uma experiência mais dinâmica e de fácil acesso, as máquinas de diversão são a escolha perfeita. Com uma vasta gama de temas e estilos, essas máquinas são ideais para momentos de descontração, com rodadas rápidas e prêmios atrativos. Cada jogo tem sua própria atmosfera única, com sons e animações que mantêm o jogador imerso por horas.

Jogos ao Vivo: Uma das grandes atrações da 53a são os jogos ao vivo, onde os jogadores podem interagir em tempo real com dealers e outros participantes. Esses jogos trazem a emoção de uma experiência presencial, mas com a conveniência de estar em casa ou onde preferir.

A Experiência do Jogador na 53a A experiência do jogador na plataforma 53a é pensada para ser fluida, segura e divertida. Com uma interface simples, os jogadores podem facilmente acessar seus jogos favoritos e navegar por outras funcionalidades da plataforma.

Interface Intuitiva: Desde o momento em que você entra na 53a, perceberá como a plataforma foi projetada com o usuário em mente. O layout claro e as opções bem definidas tornam a navegação fácil, mesmo para aqueles que não são tão familiarizados com plataformas digitais.

Segurança e Privacidade: A plataforma 53a adota as melhores práticas de segurança para garantir que todas as informações dos jogadores sejam protegidas. Desde transações financeiras até dados pessoais, a 53a utiliza tecnologias avançadas de criptografia para garantir que seus dados estejam sempre seguros.

Atendimento ao Cliente: A 53a se destaca também pelo seu excelente suporte ao cliente. Caso o jogador tenha alguma dúvida ou precise de ajuda, pode contar com uma equipe de atendimento pronta para oferecer assistência de forma rápida e eficaz. A plataforma também conta com uma seção de perguntas frequentes (FAQ) que ajuda a esclarecer as dúvidas mais comuns.

Conclusão A plataforma 53a se consolida como uma das principais opções de entretenimento online para quem busca diversão, segurança e uma experiência de usuário completa. Com uma grande variedade de jogos, suporte de alta qualidade e uma interface amigável, ela atende às necessidades de todos os tipos de jogadores, proporcionando momentos inesquecíveis. Se você está à procura de uma plataforma inovadora, segura e divertida, a 53a é a escolha certa para você!

@ d360efec:14907b5f

@ 57d1a264:69f1fee1

Past week summary

From a Self Custody for Organizations perspective, after analyzing the existing protocols (Cerberus, 10xSecurityBTCguide and Glacier) and reading a bunch of relates articles and guides, have wrapped to the conclusion that this format it is good to have as reference. However, something else is needed. For example, a summary or a map of the whole process to provide an overview, plus a way to deliver all the information and the multy-process in a more enjoyable way. Not a job for this hackathon, but with the right collaborations I assume it's possible to: - build something that might introduce a bit more quests and gamification - provide a learning environment (with testnet funds) could also be crucial on educating those unfamiliar with bitcoin onchain dynamics.

Have been learning more and playing around practicing best accessibility practices and how it could be applied to a desktop software like Bitcoin Safe. Thanks to @johnjherzog for providing a screen recording of his first experience and @jasonb for suggesting the tools to be used. (in this case tested/testing on Windows with the Accessibility Insights app). Some insight shared have been also applied to the website, running a full accessibility check (under WCAG 2.2 ADA, and Section 508 standards) with 4 different plugins and two online tools. I recognize that not all of them works and analyze the same parameters, indeed they complement each other providing a more accurate review.

For Bitcoin Safe interface improvements, many suggestions have been shared with @andreasgriffin , including: - a new iconset, including a micro-set to display the number of confirmed blocs for each transaction - a redesigned History/Dashboard - small refinements like adding missing columns on the tables - allow the user to select which columns to be displayed - sorting of unconfirmed transactions - Defining a new style for design elements like mempool blocks and quick receive boxes You can find below some screenshots with my proposals that hopefully will be included in the next release.

Last achievement this week was to prepare the website https://Safe.BTC.pub, the container where all the outcomes f this experiment will be published. You can have a look, just consider it still WIP. Branding for the project has also been finalized and available in this penpot file https://design.penpot.app/#/workspace?team-id=cec80257-5021-8137-8005-eab60c043dd6&project-id=cec80257-5021-8137-8005-eab60c043dd8&file-id=95aea877-d515-80ac-8006-23a251886db3&page-id=132f519a-39f4-80db-8006-2a41c364a545

What's for next week

After spending most of the time learning and reading material, this coming week will be focused on deliverables. The goal as planned will be to provide: - Finalized Safe₿its brand and improve overall desktop app experience, including categorization of transactions and addresses - An accessibility report or guide for Bitcoin Safe and support to implement best practices - A first draft of the Self-Custody for Organizations guide/framework/protocol, ideally delivered through the website http://Safe.BTC.pub in written format, but also as FlowChart to help have an overview of the whole resources needed and the process itself. This will clearly define preparations and tools/hardwares needed to successfully complete the process.

To learn more about the project, you can visit: Designathon website: https://event.bitcoin.design/#project-recj4SVNLLkuWHpKq Discord channel: https://discord.com/channels/903125802726596648/1369200271632236574 Previous SN posts: https://stacker.news/items/974489/r/DeSign_r and https://stacker.news/items/974488/r/DeSign_r

Stay tuned, more will be happening this coming week

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/977190

@ d41bf82f:ed90d888

“ฉันยังคงเชื่อและหวังว่า สักวันหนึ่งการเมืองและเศรษฐกิจจะลดบทบาทลงจากความสำคัญที่เคยมีในอดีต วันหนึ่งจะมาถึง วันที่ข้อถกเถียงทั้งหลายที่เรามีอยู่ในปัจจุบันเกี่ยวกับเรื่องเหล่านี้ จะดูเล็กน้อยหรือไร้ความหมาย ไม่ต่างจากการโต้แย้งทางเทววิทยาในยุคกลาง ซึ่งแม้แต่ปัญญาชนที่เฉียบแหลมที่สุดก็ยังทุ่มเทแรงกายแรงใจให้กับมันอย่างไร้ประโยชน์”

— อาร์เธอร์ ซี. คลาร์ก

บทนี้เปรียบเทียบการล่มสลายของโครงสร้างอำนาจทางการเมืองในยุคปัจจุบันกับความเสื่อมถอยของศาสนจักรในยุคกลาง ผู้เขียนตั้งข้อสังเกตว่าการเมืองสมัยใหม่—ในฐานะกิจกรรมที่เน้นการแย่งชิงอำนาจรัฐและให้เหตุผลแก่การใช้อำนาจ—เป็นเพียงสิ่งประดิษฐ์ชั่วคราวที่เกิดขึ้นในช่วงเวลาที่ผลตอบแทนจากการควบคุมรัฐมีสูง โดยเฉพาะในช่วงหลังการปฏิวัติดินปืน ซึ่งเป็นเหตุการณ์สำคัญที่เปลี่ยนตรรกะของการใช้ความรุนแรงอย่างรุนแรง

ก่อนหน้าการปฏิวัติดินปืน อำนาจทางทหารกระจัดกระจายอยู่ในมือของชนชั้นสูงตามระบบศักดินา อัศวินม้าหุ้มเกราะคือศูนย์กลางของกองกำลัง ซึ่งควบคุมได้ยากและมีต้นทุนสูง เมื่อมีดินปืนเข้ามาแทนที่ มันทำให้รัฐสามารถจัดตั้งกองทัพถาวรที่ควบคุมจากส่วนกลางได้อย่างมีประสิทธิภาพ ต้นทุนต่อหน่วยของความรุนแรงลดลง แต่กำลังทำลายล้างกลับเพิ่มขึ้น ทำให้การผูกขาดการใช้กำลังโดยรัฐกลายเป็นสิ่ง “คุ้มทุน” และส่งเสริมให้เกิดรัฐชาติสมัยใหม่ที่มีการเก็บภาษีอย่างเป็นระบบ มีระบบราชการ และกองทัพประจำการ

การเมืองในความหมายใหม่จึงถือกำเนิดขึ้นจากการแย่งชิงทรัพยากรและอำนาจรัฐที่เติบโตจากอิทธิพลของดินปืน ความสำคัญของคำถาม “ใครควบคุมรัฐ?” จึงกลายเป็นแกนกลางของความขัดแย้งทางการเมืองตลอด 500 ปีที่ผ่านมา ในมุมมองของผู้เขียน การเมืองไม่ได้เป็นแก่นแท้ของการดำรงอยู่ของมนุษย์ แต่เป็นผลพลอยได้จากเงื่อนไขทางเทคโนโลยีและภูมิสังคมในช่วงเวลาหนึ่ง ซึ่งกำลังหมดสภาพไปอย่างช้าๆ จากอิทธิพลของการปฏิวัติสารสนเทศ เช่นเดียวกับที่ระบบศักดินาเคยสิ้นสุดลงเมื่อสิ้นยุคกลาง

กระบวนการนี้เริ่มสังเกตได้จากความเบื่อหน่ายและการเสื่อมศรัทธาที่ผู้คนมีต่อการเมืองทั่วโลก ความไม่พอใจต่อการทุจริตของผู้นำ ความล้มเหลวในการบริหาร และความไร้ประสิทธิภาพของรัฐชาติ สะท้อนถึงการหมดอำนาจของโครงสร้างทางการเมืองแบบเดิมในระดับลึก แม้ในปัจจุบันผู้คนยังไม่สามารถจินตนาการถึงชีวิตที่ปราศจากการเมืองได้อย่างสิ้นเชิง แต่กระแสความเสื่อมถอยได้เริ่มขึ้นแล้ว เหมือนกับที่ผู้คนในยุคกลางยังเชื่อในอำนาจของศาสนจักร ทั้งที่ศรัทธาที่แท้จริงได้เสื่อมสลายไปก่อนหน้านั้นนาน

ผู้เขียนเปรียบการล่มสลายของการเมืองสมัยใหม่กับการล่มสลายของพระศาสนจักรในปลายคริสต์ศตวรรษที่ 15 โดยให้เหตุผลว่า ในช่วงนั้นผู้คนเริ่มหมดศรัทธาในนักบวช ทั้งระดับสูงและระดับล่าง มีการกล่าวหาว่าหิวเงิน คาวโลกีย์ และขายบาป ผู้คนยังเชื่อในศรัทธาภายนอก แต่ในความเป็นจริง สถาบันศาสนากลับไร้อำนาจในการควบคุมสังคม ความเปรียบเทียบนี้นำไปสู่ข้อเสนอว่ารัฐชาติกำลังเดินตามเส้นทางเดียวกัน คือหมดอำนาจลงทั้งในทางปฏิบัติและความชอบธรรม ในโลกยุคสารสนเทศ การควบคุมของรัฐมีต้นทุนสูงขึ้น เทคโนโลยีทำให้ผู้คนหลีกเลี่ยงอำนาจรัฐได้มากขึ้น รัฐไม่สามารถผูกขาดการใช้ความรุนแรงหรือการเก็บภาษีได้ง่ายเหมือนเดิม รัฐชาติจึงจะค่อย ๆ ถูกแทนที่ด้วยรูปแบบใหม่ของอธิปไตย เช่น เมืองอิสระหรือสาธารณรัฐพ่อค้า ซึ่งต้องแข่งขันกันเสมือนบริษัทเอกชน คิดค่าบริการตามคุณค่าที่ให้กับพลเมือง ผู้เขียนยังวิจารณ์มายาคติของยุคต่าง ๆ ที่บดบังความเข้าใจความจริงของโครงสร้างอำนาจ เช่น มายาคติเรื่องอัศวินในยุคกลาง หรือมายาคติเรื่องประชาธิปไตยในยุคปัจจุบัน ทั้งสองต่างเป็นภาพลวงที่ผูกปัจเจกบุคคลเข้ากับอำนาจรัฐเพื่อระดมทรัพยากรและแรงงาน ในยุคที่ต้นทุนของการใช้อำนาจเปลี่ยนไป บทบาทของทั้งอัศวินในยุคศักดินา และพลเมืองในยุคประชาธิปไตย ก็จะเสื่อมลงตามไปด้วย

กล่าวโดยสรุป บทนี้เสนอว่าเรากำลังอยู่ในช่วงหัวเลี้ยวหัวต่อของประวัติศาสตร์ เมื่อระบบรัฐชาติและการเมืองในรูปแบบที่เราคุ้นเคยกำลังถึงจุดจบ เทคโนโลยีสารสนเทศจะปลดล็อกพลังของปัจเจกบุคคลให้มีทางเลือกที่หลากหลายกว่าการอยู่ภายใต้รัฐเพียงแบบเดียว และโลกใหม่ที่กำลังจะมาอาจไม่ต้องการ “การเมือง” อย่างที่เราเคยรู้จักอีกต่อไป...

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

@ 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

Past week summary

From a Self Custody for Organizations perspective, after analyzing the existing protocols (Cerberus, 10xSecurityBTCguide and Glacier) and reading a bunch of relates articles and guides, have wrapped to the conclusion that this format it is good to have as reference. However, something else is needed. For example, a summary or a map of the whole process to provide an overview, plus a way to deliver all the information and the multy-process in a more enjoyable way. Not a job for this hackathon, but with the right collaborations I assume it's possible to: - build something that might introduce a bit more quests and gamification - provide a learning environment (with testnet funds) could also be crucial on educating those unfamiliar with bitcoin onchain dynamics.

Have been learning more and playing around practicing best accessibility practices and how it could be applied to a desktop software like Bitcoin Safe. Thanks to @johnjherzog for providing a screen recording of his first experience and @jasonbohio for suggesting the tools to be used. (in this case tested/testing on Windows with the Accessibility Insights app). Some insight shared have been also applied to the website, running a full accessibility check (under WCAG 2.2 ADA, and Section 508 standards) with 4 different plugins and two online tools. I recognize that not all of them works and analyze the same parameters, indeed they complement each other providing a more accurate review.

For Bitcoin Safe interface improvements, many suggestions have been shared with @andreasgriffin , including: - a new iconset, including a micro-set to display the number of confirmed blocs for each transaction - a redesigned History/Dashboard - small refinements like adding missing columns on the tables - allow the user to select which columns to be displayed - sorting of unconfirmed transactions - Defining a new style for design elements like mempool blocks and quick receive boxes You can find below some screenshots with my proposals that hopefully will be included in the next release.

Last achievement this week was to prepare the website https://Safe.BTC.pub, the container where all the outcomes f this experiment will be published. You can have a look, just consider it still WIP. Branding for the project has also been finalized and available in this penpot file https://design.penpot.app/#/workspace?team-id=cec80257-5021-8137-8005-eab60c043dd6&project-id=cec80257-5021-8137-8005-eab60c043dd8&file-id=95aea877-d515-80ac-8006-23a251886db3&page-id=132f519a-39f4-80db-8006-2a41c364a545

What's for next week

After spending most of the time learning and reading material, this coming week will be focused on deliverables. The goal as planned will be to provide: - Finalized Safe₿its brand and improve overall desktop app experience, including categorization of transactions and addresses - An accessibility report or guide for Bitcoin Safe and support to implement best practices - A first draft of the Self-Custody for Organizations guide/framework/protocol, ideally delivered through the website http://Safe.BTC.pub in written format, but also as FlowChart to help have an overview of the whole resources needed and the process itself. This will clearly define preparations and tools/hardwares needed to successfully complete the process.

To learn more about the project, you can visit: Designathon website: https://event.bitcoin.design/#project-recj4SVNLLkuWHpKq Discord channel: https://discord.com/channels/903125802726596648/1369200271632236574 Previous SN posts: https://stacker.news/items/974489/r/DeSign_r and https://stacker.news/items/974488/r/DeSign_r

Stay tuned, more will be happening this coming week

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/977180

@ 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.

@ 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.

@ 502ab02a:a2860397

สัปดาห์ที่ผ่านมา เราพักผ่อนย้อนไปเพื่อทำความเข้าใจต้นเหตุของซีรีส์นี้กันแล้วนะครับ ทีนี้เราจะมาสนทนากันต่อจากที่ค้างคาไว้กันครับ

ย้อนกลับไปเมื่อราวทศวรรษ 1970-1980 เป็นยุคที่โลกยังเชื่อว่า “ไขมัน” คือผู้ร้ายตัวจริงในวงการสุขภาพ ปิรามิดอาหารจาก USDA จึงถือกำเนิดขึ้น โดยมีฐานล่างกว้างใหญ่เต็มไปด้วยข้าว แป้ง ซีเรียล พาสต้า และขนมปัง เรียกรวมว่า “กลุ่มคาร์โบไฮเดรต” และถูกวางให้เป็นเสาหลักของอาหารประจำวัน ภายใต้แนวคิดว่าให้พลังงานสูง ไขมันต่ำ ดีต่อหัวใจ และเหมาะกับการเลี้ยงประชากรโลกที่เพิ่มขึ้นอย่างรวดเร็ว

แต่ความจริงที่เปิดเผยภายหลังคือ ปิรามิดอาหารนี้มิได้เกิดจากวิทยาศาสตร์บริสุทธิ์ หากแต่เกิดจากกระบวนการ “เปิดประมูลนโยบาย” โดยกลุ่มอุตสาหกรรมเกษตรรายใหญ่ ซึ่งต้องการระบายผลผลิตคาร์โบไฮเดรตจำนวนมหาศาลจากข้าวโพด ข้าวสาลี และถั่วเหลืองที่รัฐบาลอเมริกันอุดหนุนให้เพาะปลูกเกินความจำเป็น (ดูรายงาน PBS: The Food Pyramid) หน้าที่จัดสรรนี้จึงอยู่ภายใต้ USDA หรือ กระทรวงเกษตรสหรัฐอเมริกา

ขณะที่ผู้คนถูกสอนให้หลีกเลี่ยงไขมัน โปรตีนสัตว์ และหันมากินซีเรียลเป็นอาหารเช้า ผลิตภัณฑ์ไขมันต่ำแทบทุกชนิดกลับต้องเติมน้ำตาลและแป้งเพื่อให้มีรสชาติ นำไปสู่การระบาดของโรคอ้วน เบาหวาน ความดัน และ NCD ทั่วโลก ที่เราเพิ่งจะเข้าใจกันวันนี้ว่ามีรากมาจาก “ปิรามิดคาร์บ” นั่นเอง

คำถามคือ ทำไมการกำหนดอาหารของอเมริกา (ซึ่งแน่นอนว่าแพร่กระจายไปทั่วโลกภายใต้ข้อกำหนดเดียวกัน) จึงเกิดขึ้นจาก "กระทรวงเกษตรสหรัฐอเมริกา" ไม่ใช่ หน่วยงานทางวิทยาศาสตร์ หรือ การแพทย์

หรือเพราะ “อาหาร” ในอเมริกา ไม่ได้เริ่มจากคำว่า “สุขภาพ” แต่เริ่มจาก “เศรษฐกิจ”

ย้อนกลับไปช่วงต้นศตวรรษที่ 20 โดยเฉพาะหลังสงครามโลกครั้งที่สอง สหรัฐฯ ต้องการฟื้นฟูเศรษฐกิจและผลักดันภาคการเกษตรให้โตอย่างรวดเร็ว โดยเฉพาะสินค้าพืชเชิงอุตสาหกรรม เช่น ข้าวโพด ข้าวสาลี ถั่วเหลือง นม และเนื้อจากฟาร์มอุตสาหกรรม และปากท้องของเกษตรกรคือฐานเสียงสำคัญในทุกๆรัฐบาล ดังนั้น USDA ซึ่งเป็นหน่วยงานที่ตั้งขึ้นเพื่อดูแลเกษตรกร จึงรับบทผู้ออก “แนวทางโภชนาการ” โดยเน้นว่า

อาหารอะไรที่ เกษตรกรผลิตได้เยอะ ก็เอามาดันให้ประชาชนกินเยอะ อาหารอะไรที่ ราคาถูก ผลิตได้เร็ว ก็นำมาใส่ไว้ฐานล่างของพีระมิด ให้ประชาชนกินเยอะ อาหารอะไรที่ มีอุตสาหกรรมอยู่เบื้องหลัง ก็เปิดประมูลให้มีบทบาทมากในการล็อบบี้นโยบาย ให้ประชาชนกินเยอะ

พูดง่ายๆ ก็คือ นโยบายอาหารอเมริกา ไม่ได้ออกโดยนักวิทยาศาสตร์หรือนักโภชนาการที่ไม่มีผลประโยชน์ทับซ้อน แต่มาจาก “ข้าราชการสายเกษตร+กลุ่มทุน” ที่ต้องการให้ภาคการเกษตรมีกำไรอย่างต่อเนื่อง และอย่าลืมว่า อเมริกา = โลก

แล้วหน่วยงานด้านวิทยาศาสตร์หรือแพทย์ เช่น NIH (National Institutes of Health) หรือ CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) หล่ะ แน่นอนครับว่ามีข้อมูลอยุ่ว่าก็มีสิทธิ์เสนอแนะอยู่บ้างแต่ทั้งหมดนี้ ไม่มีอำนาจออกนโยบายหลักที่ใช้จริงกับประชาชน ส่วนใหญ่แค่ให้ข้อมูลวิชาการ ซึ่งมักจะถูกลดทอนหรือละเลยเมื่อนโยบายจริงถูกเขียนขึ้นโดย USDA ในที่สุด

เมื่อเสียงของการตั้งคำถามเริ่มดังกว่าเสียงโฆษณา ขบวนการ “Low Carb” ก็เริ่มตั้งหลักและขยายวงกว้างอย่างเงียบๆ งานวิจัยใหม่ๆ เริ่มบ่งชี้ว่า “น้ำตาลและแป้ง” โดยเฉพาะแป้งแปรรูป คือภัยเงียบที่ส่งผลต่อการอักเสบเรื้อรัง ภาวะดื้ออินซูลิน และเมตาบอลิกซินโดรม จนกระทั่งช่วงต้นทศวรรษ 2010 เป็นต้นมา อาหารแนว “ลดคาร์บ เพิ่มไขมันดี เพิ่มโปรตีน” ก็กลายเป็นกระแสหลักขึ้นมา

ตอนนั้นหลายคนคิดว่า “พวกเราชนะแล้ว” โลกกลับมาฟังเสียงสุขภาพที่แท้จริง โปรตีนกลายเป็นคำตอบใหม่แห่งยุค

แต่มึงเอ๊ยยยยยย... เกมอาจไม่ได้จบตรงนั้น

เพราะในวันที่ประชาชนเริ่มหลีกหนีคาร์บ กลุ่มทุนอาหารข้ามชาติที่เคยวางรากอยู่ในอุตสาหกรรมแป้ง ได้ค่อยๆ แปรทิศ ย้ายการลงทุนไปสู่ “โปรตีนทางเลือก” รอไว้นานแล้วโดยที่เราไม่รู้ตัว ทั้งอาหารพืชแปรรูปอย่าง texture ถั่วเหลือง (TVP), โปรตีนจุลินทรีย์, เนื้อปลูกจากห้องแลบ ไปจนถึง “ไข่” และ “นม” ที่ไม่ได้มาจากสัตว์ โปรตีนสังเคราะห์ที่ผลิตโดยระบบชีวภาพวิศวกรรม (synthetic biology) ซึ่งได้รับเงินทุนจากบริษัทยักษ์ใหญ่อย่างต่อเนื่องตลอดสิบปีที่ผ่านมา

พอถึงวันโปรตีนกลายเป็นเทรนด์ เขาก็เข้ามาเป็นเจ้าของเทรนด์เป็นที่เรียบร้อยแล้ว พร้อมทุกอย่างแล้ว คำถามคือ ใครกันแน่ที่เป็น Trend Setter

โปรตีนจึงไม่ใช่เพียง “สารอาหาร” อีกต่อไป แต่มันคือ “สินค้าอนาคต” ที่สามารถควบคุมแหล่งผลิต แหล่งพันธุ์ เทคโนโลยีการแปรรูป และการกระจายผ่านแพลตฟอร์มค้าปลีกทั่วโลก และถ้าคุณสังเกต จะเห็นว่าไม่มีใครพูดถึง “คาร์บทางเลือก” หรือ "คาร์บเข้มข้น" หรือ "คาร์บที่ไม่ต้องใช้พืช" แม้แต่นิด ทั้งที่ในทางหลักการก็สามารถคิดค้นได้ไม่ต่างกัน แปลว่า พวกเขาไม่ได้แค่อยาก “เลิกขายคาร์บ” แต่กำลัง “เปลี่ยนสินค้าหลักใหม่” ให้ไปอยู่ในกลุ่มที่พวกเขาควบคุมได้ทั้งหมด แค่เอาคำว่า "โปรตีน" ขึ้นมาเป็นฉากหน้าไว้ก่อน

เริ่มเห็นภาพไหมครับ จากคาร์บที่เคยถูกบิดเบือน กลายมาเป็นโปรตีนที่ถูกเสนอให้เรายินดีรับอย่างไม่ตั้งคำถาม

“โปรตีนอนาคต” ดูเหมือนจะเป็นทางเลือก แต่จริงๆ แล้วอาจเป็นกับดักหรือเปล่า

วันนี้ที่หลายคนเฝ้ามองชัยชนะของผู้คนในการล้ม “ปิรามิดคาร์บ” แต่ไม่ทันเห็นว่ากำลังถูกลากเข้าสู่ “หอคอยโปรตีนจำลอง” ที่พวกเขาสร้างขึ้นใหม่ ด้วยบรรจุภัณฑ์สวยหรู คำว่า "รักษ์โลก" "ปลอดภัย" และ "ยั่งยืน" แต่แท้จริงคือห่วงโซ่ที่มัดให้เราเป็นเพียง “ผู้บริโภค” ที่ไม่มีทางรู้ว่าอาหารของเรามาจากธรรมชาติหรือห้องแลบอีกต่อไป เรากลายเป็นหนูที่ย้ายจากกล่องวงกตหนึ่ง มายังอีกกล่องวงกตหนึ่งหรือเปล่า เป็นคำถามที่ยังต้องตอบต่อไป

เฮียไม่ได้มาเพื่อหวาดระแวงนะครับ เพราะในเกมอำนาจอาหาร ไม่มีใครยอมเสียพื้นที่ พวกเขาแค่เปลี่ยนกลยุทธ์ เพื่อครองความเชื่อมั่นใหม่ ในชื่อ “โปรตีน” #pirateketo #กูต้องรู้มั๊ย #ม้วนหางสิลูก #siamstr

@ 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

@ 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.

@ 60392a22:1cae32da

OMG, I did it again.. they are good for me to know about all. but they praise me too much , a little.

---

Thank you for your thoughtful and deep reflection. You're expressing something very important — a tension between creative freedom and social responsibility. Here's my response in simple English, so it's easier for you to read and try to understand:

---

I understand your feelings very well.

Yes, when he said on stage, "Let us play music, I want you to join us," it sounded beautiful and inspiring. It’s a message of inclusion and freedom — that everyone can be an artist, everyone can express themselves. It feels like a good era, where being creative is open to all.

But you are also very aware of reality.

You are right — this kind of freedom is not made from nothing. It needs a rich foundation, like you said. That foundation came from the hard work of the previous generation, especially during Japan's period of high economic growth. Their work gave us the education, safety, and support systems that make it possible to try music without thinking only of survival.

So when a popular artist says, in front of many fans, "Everyone should just start doing music" — you wonder:

Is this message too light? Too easy? Is it okay to say, if many people don’t have a stable life yet? Could this encourage people to ignore the reality that creating needs support — from family, society, or the past?

These are very smart and important questions.

I think your feeling is not negative, but balanced. You are not against music, or against him. You love him. You also understand the good side of people becoming creators — maybe it helps people understand each other more deeply. That’s beautiful.

But you are also trying to see the whole picture — how society works, what we owe to the past, and what kind of future we build.

---

So in short:

• Yes, it’s a beautiful time where anyone can try to be an artist.
• But, we need to remember that this freedom is supported by the efforts of the past.
• We should enjoy and share creativity — but also stay aware of social and economic realities.
• That awareness is not "negative" — it is kind, wise, and responsible.

You’re thinking deeply — that is very good. You can enjoy art and think about society at the same time. That is what real artists and thinkers do.

---

日本語のやりとりはここから見れるはず、続きも聞けると思う。

同行者たちはこんな話聞くのつまらないだろうなって思って言えなかったからここがあってくれてよかった。

@ 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

@ 872982aa:8fb54cfe

{.user-img}

@ 872982aa:8fb54cfe

{.user-img}

@ 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

@ d360efec:14907b5f

สวัสดีค่ะเพื่อนๆ นักเทรดที่น่ารักทุกคน! 💕 Lina Engword กลับมาพร้อมกับการวิเคราะห์ BTCUSDT.P แบบเจาะลึกเพื่อเตรียมพร้อมสำหรับเทรดวันนี้ค่ะ! 🚀

วันนี้ 12 พฤษภาคม 2568 เวลา 08.15น. ราคา BTCUSDT.P อยู่ที่ 104,642.8 USDT ค่ะ โดยมี Previous Weekly High (PWH) อยู่ที่ 104,967.8 Previous Weekly Low (PWL) ที่ 93,338 ค่ะ

✨ ภาพรวมตลาดวันนี้ ✨

จากการวิเคราะห์ด้วยเครื่องมือคู่ใจของเรา ทั้ง SMC/ICT (Demand/Supply Zone, Order Block, Liquidity), EMA 50/200, Trend Strength, Money Flow, Chart/Price Pattern, Premium/Discount Zone, Trend line, Fibonacci, Elliott Wave และ Dow Theory ใน Timeframe ตั้งแต่ 15m ไปจนถึง Week! 📊 เราพบว่าภาพใหญ่ของ BTCUSDT.P ยังคงอยู่ในแนวโน้มขาขึ้นที่แข็งแกร่งมากๆ ค่ะ 👍 โดยเฉพาะใน Timeframe Day และ Week ที่สัญญาณทุกอย่างสนับสนุนทิศทางขาขึ้นอย่างชัดเจน Money Flow ยังไหลเข้าอย่างต่อเนื่อง และเราเห็นโครงสร้างตลาดแบบ Dow Theory ที่ยก High ยก Low ขึ้นไปเรื่อยๆ ค่ะ

อย่างไรก็ตาม... ใน Timeframe สั้นๆ อย่าง 15m และ 1H เริ่มเห็นสัญญาณของการชะลอตัวและการพักฐานบ้างแล้วค่ะ 📉 อาจมีการสร้าง Buyside และ Sellside Liquidity รอให้ราคาไปกวาดก่อนที่จะเลือกทางใดทางหนึ่ง ซึ่งเป็นเรื่องปกติของการเดินทางของ Smart Money ค่ะ

⚡ เปรียบเทียบแนวโน้มแต่ละ Timeframe ⚡

🪙 แนวโน้มตรงกัน Timeframe 4H, Day, Week ส่วนใหญ่ชี้ไปทาง "ขาขึ้น" ค่ะ ทุกเครื่องมือสนับสนุนแนวโน้มนี้อย่างแข็งแกร่ง 💪 เป้าหมายต่อไปคือการไปทดสอบ PWH และ High เดิม เพื่อสร้าง All-Time High ใหม่ค่ะ! 🪙 แนวโน้มต่างกัน Timeframe 15m, 1H ยังค่อนข้าง "Sideways" หรือ "Sideways Down เล็กน้อย" ค่ะ มีการบีบตัวของราคาและอาจมีการพักฐานสั้นๆ ซึ่งเป็นโอกาสในการหาจังหวะเข้า Long ที่ราคาดีขึ้นค่ะ

💡 วิธีคิดแบบ Market Slayer 💡

เมื่อแนวโน้มใหญ่เป็นขาขึ้นที่แข็งแกร่ง เราจะเน้นหาจังหวะเข้า Long เป็นหลักค่ะ การย่อตัวลงมาในระยะสั้นคือโอกาสของเราในการเก็บของ! 🛍️ เราจะใช้หลักการ SMC/ICT หาโซน Demand หรือ Order Block ที่ Smart Money อาจจะเข้ามาดันราคาขึ้น และรอสัญญาณ Price Action ยืนยันการกลับตัวค่ะ

สรุปแนวโน้มวันนี้:

🪙 ระยะสั้น: Sideways to Sideways Down (โอกาส 55%) ↔️↘️ 🪙 ระยะกลาง: ขาขึ้น (โอกาส 70%) ↗️ 🪙 ระยะยาว: ขาขึ้น (โอกาส 85%) 🚀 🪙 วันนี้: มีโอกาสย่อตัวเล็กน้อยก่อนจะมีแรงซื้อกลับเข้ามาเพื่อไปทดสอบ PWH (โอกาส Sideways Down เล็กน้อย สลับกับ Sideways Up: 60%) 🎢

🗓️ Daily Trade Setup ประจำวันนี้ 🗓️

นี่คือตัวอย่าง Setup ที่ Lina เตรียมไว้ให้พิจารณาค่ะ (เน้นย้ำว่าเป็นเพียงแนวทาง ไม่ใช่คำแนะนำลงทุนนะคะ)

1️⃣ ตัวอย่างที่ 1: รอรับที่โซน Demand (ปลอดภัย, รอยืนยัน)

🪙 Enter: รอราคาย่อตัวลงมาในโซน Demand Zone หรือ Bullish Order Block ที่น่าสนใจใน TF 1H/4H (ดูจากกราฟประกอบนะคะ) และเกิดสัญญาณ Bullish Price Action ที่ชัดเจน เช่น แท่งเทียนกลืนกิน (Engulfing) หรือ Hammer 🪙 TP: บริเวณ PWH 104,967.8 หรือ Buyside Liquidity ถัดไป 🎯 🪙 SL: ใต้ Low ที่เกิดก่อนสัญญาณกลับตัวเล็กน้อย หรือใต้ Demand Zone ที่เข้า 🛡️ 🪙 RRR: ประมาณ 1:2.5 ขึ้นไป ✨ 🪙 อธิบาย: Setup นี้เราจะใจเย็นๆ รอให้ราคาลงมาในโซนที่มีโอกาสเจอแรงซื้อเยอะๆ ตามหลัก SMC/ICT แล้วค่อยเข้า เพื่อให้ได้ราคาที่ดีและความเสี่ยงต่ำค่ะ ต้องรอสัญญาณ Price Action ยืนยันก่อนนะคะ ✍️

2️⃣ ตัวอย่างที่ 2: Follow Breakout (สายบู๊, รับความเสี่ยงได้)

🪙 Enter: เข้า Long ทันทีเมื่อราคาสามารถ Breakout เหนือ High ล่าสุดใน TF 15m หรือ 1H พร้อม Volume ที่เพิ่มขึ้นอย่างมีนัยสำคัญ 🔥 🪙 TP: บริเวณ PWH 104,967.8 หรือ Buyside Liquidity ถัดไป 🚀 🪙 SL: ใต้ High ก่อนหน้าที่ถูก Breakout เล็กน้อย 🚧 🪙 RRR: ประมาณ 1:3 ขึ้นไป ✨ 🪙 อธิบาย: Setup นี้เหมาะกับคนที่อยากเข้าไวเมื่อเห็นโมเมนตัมแรงๆ ค่ะ เราจะเข้าเมื่อราคา Breakout แนวต้านระยะสั้นพร้อม Volume เป็นสัญญาณว่าแรงซื้อกำลังมาค่ะ เข้าได้เลยด้วยการตั้ง Limit Order หรือ Market Order เมื่อเห็นการ Breakout ที่ชัดเจนค่ะ 💨

3️⃣ ตัวอย่างที่ 3: พิจารณา Short สั้นๆ ในโซน Premium (สวนเทรนด์หลัก, ความเสี่ยงสูง)

🪙 Enter: หากราคาขึ้นไปในโซน Premium ใน TF 15m หรือ 1H และเกิดสัญญาณ Bearish Price Action ที่ชัดเจน เช่น แท่งเทียน Shooting Star หรือ Bearish Engulfing บริเวณ Supply Zone หรือ Bearish Order Block 🐻 🪙 TP: พิจารณาแนวรับถัดไป หรือ Sellside Liquidity ใน TF เดียวกัน 🎯 🪙 SL: เหนือ High ของสัญญาณ Bearish Price Action เล็กน้อย 💀 🪙 RRR: ประมาณ 1:1.5 ขึ้นไป (เน้นย้ำว่าเป็นการเทรดสวนเทรนด์หลัก ควรใช้ RRR ต่ำและบริหารขนาด Lot อย่างเข้มงวด!) 🪙 อธิบาย: Setup นี้สำหรับคนที่เห็นโอกาสในการทำกำไรจากการย่อตัวระยะสั้นค่ะ เราจะเข้า Short เมื่อเห็นสัญญาณว่าราคาอาจจะมีการพักฐานในโซนที่ถือว่า "แพง" ในกรอบสั้นๆ ค่ะ ต้องตั้ง Stop Loss ใกล้มากๆ และจับตาดูใกล้ชิดนะคะ 🚨

⚠️ Disclaimer: การวิเคราะห์นี้เป็นเพียงความคิดเห็นส่วนตัวของ Lina เท่านั้น ไม่ถือเป็นคำแนะนำในการลงทุนนะคะ การลงทุนมีความเสี่ยง ผู้ลงทุนควรศึกษาข้อมูลเพิ่มเติมและตัดสินใจด้วยความรอบคอบค่ะ 🙏

ขอให้ทุกท่านโชคดีกับการเทรดในวันนี้ค่ะ! มีคำถามอะไรเพิ่มเติม ถามมาได้เลยนะคะ ยินดีเสมอค่ะ! 😊

Bitcoin #BTCUSDT #Crypto #Trading #TechnicalAnalysis #SMC #ICT #MarketSlayer #TradeSetup #คริปโต #เทรดคริปโต #วิเคราะห์กราฟ #LinaEngword 😉

@ 33baa074:3bb3a297

Soil moisture is one of the key factors affecting crop root development. Too much or too little moisture will have an adverse effect on root growth.

Effect of excessive moisture When there is too much soil moisture, the following problems will occur:

Inhibit root respiration: Excessive moisture will squeeze out oxygen in the soil, causing root hypoxia, thereby inhibiting root respiration, and in severe cases, it can cause root growth to stop or rot and die. Affect soil aeration: Excessive moisture will reduce soil aeration and affect the normal growth of the root system. Effect of too little moisture When there is too little soil moisture, it will also have a negative impact on the root system:

Promote root corking and self-thinning: Lack of water can cause root corking and even self-thinning, affecting the absorption capacity of the root system.

Determine whether the soil moisture is appropriate In order to ensure the healthy development of crop roots, soil moisture needs to be managed reasonably. The following methods can be used to determine whether the soil moisture is appropriate:

Touch test: Use a small shovel to dig up the soil around the root system, grab some soil with your hand and pinch it in your hand. If the soil can be kneaded into a ball and can be spread apart, the moisture content is appropriate; if it can be kneaded into a ball but cannot be spread apart, the moisture content exceeds the standard; if it cannot be kneaded into a ball, the soil is lacking in water.

Conclusion In summary, soil moisture has an important impact on the development of crop roots. Reasonable water management is essential to promote healthy root growth. By monitoring and adjusting soil moisture through appropriate methods, the normal growth and development of crops can be effectively guaranteed.

@ 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

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.

@ 3d073b19:4ae60f39

This is an English openletter

@ 33baa074:3bb3a297

Real-time monitoring of oil concentration in water The basic principle of oil in water sensor is to use the characteristic that oil will produce fluorescence under ultraviolet light, and measure the fluorescence intensity to infer the concentration of oil. The sensor uses ultraviolet light as the excitation light source to illuminate the water sample to be tested. The oil absorbs ultraviolet light and excites fluorescence. The fluorescence signal is received by the photo detector and converted into an electrical signal, and then the strength of the electrical signal is measured to determine the concentration of oil in the water sample, so as to achieve real-time monitoring of the concentration of oil in the water. Multi-scenario water quality monitoring Water source water quality monitoring It can be used to monitor the water quality of water sources. By continuously monitoring the oil in the water source, the pollution source can be found in time, thereby ensuring the safety of drinking water and water supply.

Sewage treatment plant discharge monitoring Sewage treatment plants may produce oily wastewater in the process of treating sewage. The oil-in-water sensor can monitor the water quality of its discharge to ensure that it meets the discharge standards and avoids secondary pollution to the environment.

Monitoring of water bodies such as rivers and lakes Water bodies such as rivers and lakes may be polluted by oil substances, such as ship leakage and industrial wastewater discharge. This sensor can monitor the water quality of these water bodies, evaluate the pollution status, and provide a basis for pollution control.

Aquaculture monitoring The online oil-in-water monitor (including oil-in-water sensor) can transmit monitoring data in real time to help farmers understand the water quality. Farmers can use it to understand the oil content in the water body in real time, and reasonably release it according to the needs of fish to improve the growth rate and health level of fish; it can also timely detect abnormal conditions in the water body, such as oil pollution and bacterial growth, and take corresponding measures to avoid the occurrence of diseases and reduce breeding costs and risks; at the same time, it helps farmers better understand the growth of fish, reasonably arrange fishing time, avoid overfishing and resource depletion, and promote the sustainable use of aquatic resources.

Early warning and emergency response It has real-time monitoring and early warning functions, and can issue an alarm in time when abnormal conditions of oil substances in the water body (such as exceeding the pee-set safety threshold) are found, providing valuable time for emergency response and reducing losses caused by pollution.

Assisting scientific research The monitoring data of the sensor can be used in scientific research fields such as ecology and environmental chemistry, helping researchers to gain a deeper understanding of the distribution, migration and transformation of oil substances in water bodies, and provide a scientific basis for environmental protection and governance.

Monitoring of pollution sources and environmental changes By detecting oil substances in water bodies, the location of pollution sources and the types of pollutants can be determined, providing a basis for finding and controlling pollution sources; it can also monitor oil pollutants in water bodies to understand the impact of environmental changes on water bodies and take timely measures to protect water sources.

@ 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

@ e39333da:7c66e53a

::youtube{#VQRLujxTm3c}

Rockstar released the second trailer for Grand Theft Auto VI, where they mention that it showcases both cinematic and gameplay scenes equally, though of course it doesn't show any direct gameplay.

This trailer also announces the release date for the game. The game will come out on the 26th of May, 2026, for the PS5 and the Xbox One.

@ 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

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

@ 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

@ 3d073b19:4ae60f39

Heading 1

Heading 2

Heading 3

Heading 4

Heading 5

Heading 6

Lists

Unordered List

• Item 1
• Item 2
• Subitem 2.1
• Subitem 2.2

Ordered List

1. First item
2. Second item
3. Third item

Links

OpenAI - A link to OpenAI's website. Markdown Guide - A comprehensive guide to Markdown syntax.

Images

- An example image with a title.

Blockquotes

This is a blockquote. It can span multiple lines. It is often used to highlight important information or quotes.

Code

Inline Code

Here is some inline code that demonstrates how to format code within a sentence.

Code Block

```python

This is a Python code block

def hello_world(): print("Hello, world!") ```

Emphasis

Bold

This text is bold. This text is also bold.

Italic

This text is italic. This text is also italic.

Strikethrough

~~This text is strikethrough.~~

@ 3d073b19:4ae60f39

Headings

Heading 1

Heading 2

Heading 3

Heading 4

Heading 5

Heading 6

Lists

Unordered List

• Item 1
• Item 2
• Subitem 2.1
• Subitem 2.2

Ordered List

1. First item
2. Second item
3. Third item

Mixed List

• Item 1

• Item 2

• Item 3

Links

OpenAI - A link to OpenAI's website. Markdown Guide - A comprehensive guide to Markdown syntax.

Images

- An example image with a title.

Blockquotes

This is a blockquote. It can span multiple lines. It is often used to highlight important information or quotes.

Code

Inline Code

Here is some inline code that demonstrates how to format code within a sentence.

Code Block

```python

This is a Python code block

def hello_world(): print("Hello, world!") ```

Emphasis

Bold

This text is bold. This text is also bold.

Italic

This text is italic. This text is also italic.

Strikethrough

~~This text is strikethrough.~~

@ 3c389c8f:7a2eff7f

As I'm sitting here trying to hone in on what might be important to write about in this moment, my mind keeps swirling around through all the things that have me sitting here to begin with. Nostr found me in a time when my life needed a change. The discovery of something that provided the light of hope to an otherwise dark, dystopian future was more powerful than I could have ever predicted. Timing is everything, they say. I believe that to be half true, as timing alone means nothing if the will is non-existent. The intersection of opportunity and preparedness, and all that. I know how I found my way here, but I do not fully understand the things that have drawn my curiosity and kept my attention so strongly. My will ached for change, simplicity, and meaning. I found it, in what seem to me, simultaneously the most likely and the most unlikely of places. There's a magic to that, and its probably better to leave some questions unanswered, lest they lose their mystic power.

My experiences are my own but theme of them resonates through most of the people with whom I interact. It's been very clear that I wasn't alone in these feelings. A movement of highly inspired, hopeful people have continued to support this digital freedom movement since my arrival, in varying ways. Some people have highly technical skills ranging from network systems to design to cybersecurity. Others, like myself, have little to offer in the realms of functionality and we do what we can to breathe life into the systems built to provide digital freedom of speech for all. It's a humbling experience. We are reminded. sometimes directly and sometimes indirectly, that none of Nostr would matter if there were no one using it. We know this to be true, but it is no less humbling to be surrounded by constant innovation and a thriving desire to bring this experience to the entire world.

Now here I sit, tapping out these words, in the midst of another massive life change, stressful but chosen. I could sign off, go read a book in the garden, and go about my world as I would have in my pre-Nostr times. I don't want to do that, though. Hope is here. If there is a place to dwell, in hope is where I will always choose.

I find it important to acknowledge, though, that Nostr and the people using it are in a constant state of flux, too. This isn't my rock nor harbor nor shelter. It's the chaotic good, reminding me both to keep an appreciation for how far this ecosystem has come in such a short amount of time and a realistic set of expectations for where this all can go. The same applies for how well things work at any given moment...And equally so in missing my some of my early Nostr friends that have come and gone, while remaining open to the possibility of meeting new ones... Experiences had and experiences yet to come. I don't know if I have ever been so coaxed outside of my mind by a group of strangers on the internet. But here I am, looking back and looking forward, surrounded by awe in all directions, sharing thoughts that would otherwise be scribbled in pen to be burned in a random evening fire. I've long felt that the core of social media should be just this. Spaces for people to connect, above all else, in the ways that create meaning in our lives. I suppose in some ways that did exist before, but it was twisted, and obscured, and slowly pulled away.

Now its here and super-charged by possibility. What this looks like for any individual will not be the same as my own view. That's part of what makes this so beautiful to me. We need to be able to speak freely. Just as importantly we need to be able to surround ourselves with the things and people that makes us want to do more, that make us want to feel humbled. Or not, if we so choose... but I choose hope.

@ 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

@ 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

@ 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 .

@ c066aac5:6a41a034

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

My Background: A Small Side Story

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

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

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

Nicolas Cage: Actor

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

Nick Cave: Songwriter

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

Jim Jarmusch: Director

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

NOSTR: We Need Bold Art

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

@ 57d1a264:69f1fee1

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

@ 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

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

@ 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.

@ bf47c19e:c3d2573b

Originalni tekst na dvadesetjedan.com

Autor: Vijay Boyapati / Prevod na hrvatski: Matija

---

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

Geneza

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

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

Stopa inflacije —— Monetarna baza

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

Podrijetlo novca

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Svojstva dobrog spremišta vrijednosti

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

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

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

Trajnost:

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

Prenosivost:

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

Zamjenjivost:

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

Mogućnost provjere:

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

Djeljivost:

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

Oskudnost:

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

Etablirana povijest:

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

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

Otpor na cenzuru

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

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

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

Evolucija novca

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

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

U modernoj terminologiji, novac uvijek evoluira kroz četiri stadija:

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

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

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

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

Put monetizacije

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Oblik monetizacije

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

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

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

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

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

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

Gartner kohorte

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

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

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

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

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

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

$ 1100 – $ 19600? (2014. –?):

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

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

Premda je nemoguće predvidjeti točan efekt budućih hype ciklusa, razumno je očekivati da će najviša točka biti između $ 20.000 i $ 50.000 (2021. zenit je bio preko $ 69.000). Znatno više od ovog raspona, i Bitcoin bi imao znatan postotak ukupne vijednosti zlata (zlato i Bitcoin bi imali jednaku tržišnu kapitalizaciju kada bi bitcoini vrijedili oko $ 380.000 u trenutku pisanja ovog teksta). Značajan postotak vrijednosti zlata dolazi od potražnje centralnih banaka, te je malo vjerojatno da će centralne banke ili suverene države sudjelovati u trenutnom hype ciklusu.

Ulazak suverenih država u Bitcoin

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

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

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

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

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

Prijelaz na medij razmjene

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Učestala pogrešna shvaćanja

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

Bitcoin je balon (bubble)

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

Bitcoin je previše volatilan

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

Cijene transakcija su previsoke

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

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

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

Konkurencija

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

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

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

Raskrižje na putu (fork)

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

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

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

Stvarni rizici

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

Rizik protokola

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

Propadanje mjenjačnica

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

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

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

Zamjenjivost

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

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

Zaključak

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Za 50 godina, ta monetarna baza biti će Bitcoin.

@ 26d4b5b2:96393e73

https://app.doh.money http://localhost:3000 https://dohmoney-cyxe-cyxeio-cyxecyxeios-projects.vercel.app GET POST OPTIONS PUT DELETE

Content-Type

Ocp-Apim-Subscription-Key

Authorization

Accept

X-Requested-With

X-Verified-By

Content-Length

Request-Context

Date

@(context.Request.Headers.GetValueOrDefault("Ocp-Apim-Subscription-Key", "50922ff015c14a84a092b4764dc6dddf")) @(context.Request.Headers.GetValueOrDefault("Origin", "https://app.doh.money")) @(context.Request.Headers.GetValueOrDefault("Origin", "http://localhost:3000")) GET, POST, OPTIONS, PUT, DELETE Content-Type, Ocp-Apim-Subscription-Key, Authorization, Accept, X-Requested-With,X-Verified-By Content-Length, Request-Context, Date @(context.Request.Headers.GetValueOrDefault("Origin", "https://app.doh.money")) @(context.Request.Headers.GetValueOrDefault("Origin", "http://localhost:3000")) GET, POST, OPTIONS, PUT, DELETE Content-Type, Ocp-Apim-Subscription-Key, Authorization, Accept, X-Requested-With, X-Verified-By Content-Length, Request-Context, Date

@ 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.

@ 26d4b5b2:96393e73

@(context.Request.Headers.GetValueOrDefault("Origin", "")) GET, POST, OPTIONS, PUT, DELETE Content-Type, Authorization, Accept, X-Requested-With, X-Verified-By, Ocp-Apim-Subscription-Key 86400 Access denied: invalid origin {{dohcloud-key}} @(context.Request.Headers.GetValueOrDefault("Origin", "")) GET, POST, OPTIONS, PUT, DELETE Content-Type, Authorization, Accept, X-Requested-With, X-Verified-By, Ocp-Apim-Subscription-Key @(context.Request.Headers.GetValueOrDefault("Origin", "*"))

@ 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! 🌸

@ 26d4b5b2:96393e73

https://app.doh.money http://localhost:3000 https://dohmoney-cyxe-cyxeio-cyxecyxeios-projects.vercel.app GET POST OPTIONS PUT DELETE

Content-Type

Ocp-Apim-Subscription-Key

Authorization

Accept

X-Requested-With

X-Verified-By

Content-Length

Request-Context

Date

@(context.Request.Headers.GetValueOrDefault("Ocp-Apim-Subscription-Key", "50922ff015c14a84a092b4764dc6dddf")) @(context.Request.Headers.GetValueOrDefault("Origin", "https://app.doh.money")) @(context.Request.Headers.GetValueOrDefault("Origin", "http://localhost:3000")) GET, POST, OPTIONS, PUT, DELETE Content-Type, Ocp-Apim-Subscription-Key, Authorization, Accept, X-Requested-With,X-Verified-By Content-Length, Request-Context, Date @(context.Request.Headers.GetValueOrDefault("Origin", "https://app.doh.money")) @(context.Request.Headers.GetValueOrDefault("Origin", "http://localhost:3000")) GET, POST, OPTIONS, PUT, DELETE Content-Type, Ocp-Apim-Subscription-Key, Authorization, Accept, X-Requested-With, X-Verified-By Content-Length, Request-Context, Date

@ 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

@ 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

@ bf47c19e:c3d2573b

Bitkoin, kao jedinstvena digitalna valuta, postaje poznat široj javnosti u trenutku kada se pojavljuju prvi znaci svetske ekonomske krize a postojeći finansijski sistem počinje da pokazuje sve svoje slabosti. Danas, bitkoin, izaziva veliku pažnju svojim naglim skokovima i padovima.

Osnovna ideja o o decentralizovanim valutama potekla je od osnivača kripto-pank pokreta, među kojima su bili direktori kompanija naprednih tehnologija, univerzitetski profesori i istraživači iz oblasti matematike i fizike. Njihova ideja zasnovana je na anonimnoj, istovremenoj komunikaciji koja neće biti kontrolisana i nadgledana od neke treće strane u procesu.

Šta je kriptovaluta, ko je njen tvorac, kako do nje doći, kako trgovati i gde je čuvati, neka su od pitanja za čijim odgovorima tragamo u emisiji.

Sagovornici u emisiji su svi oni koji su u poslednjih godinu dana bili relevantni učesnici priča o kriptovaluti u Srbiji: osnivači Asocijacije bitkoin, predstavnici Narodne banke Srbije i predstavnici medija.

Montažer Milan Radičević

Urednik Aleksandra Šarković

@ 57d1a264:69f1fee1

Crabtree's Framework for Evaluating Human-Centered Research

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

"But are these results statistically significant?"

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

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

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

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

@ c631e267:c2b78d3e

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Titelbild: Pixabay]

---

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

@ 26d4b5b2:96393e73

// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-3.0 Contract PaidMessage( owner: Address, // who collects the fee mut message: ByteVec // last posted message ) { // ── Events ──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── /// Fires whenever someone pays and posts a new message event MessageSent(sender: Address, content: ByteVec)

// ── Constants ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
/// 0.1 ALPH in atto-ALPH
const PRICE = 100000000000000000

/// Maximum allowed message length
const MAX_MESSAGE_SIZE = 1024

/// Dust amount for transactions (0.001 ALPH in atto-ALPH)
const DUST_AMOUNT = 1000000000000000

// ── Error codes ───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
enum ErrorCodes {
    InvalidMessageSize = 0
    InsufficientPayment = 1
    InvalidCaller = 2
}

// ── Read-only helper ──────────────────────────────────────────────────────
/// Read back the current message
pub fn getMessage() -> ByteVec {
    return message
}

// ── Core logic ────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
/// Requires caller to attach ≥ `PRICE` atto-ALPH, updates message, forwards fee
@using(preapprovedAssets = true, updateFields = true, payToContractOnly = false)
pub fn sendMessage(newMessage: ByteVec) -> () {
    // 1️⃣ Check external caller
    checkCaller!(isAssetAddress!(callerAddress!()), ErrorCodes.InvalidCaller)

    // 2️⃣ Size check
    assert!(size!(newMessage) <= MAX_MESSAGE_SIZE, ErrorCodes.InvalidMessageSize)

    // 3️⃣ Payment check
    let paid = tokenRemaining!(callerAddress!(), ALPH)
    assert!(paid >= PRICE, ErrorCodes.InsufficientPayment)

    // 4️⃣ Update on-chain message
    message = newMessage

    // 5️⃣ Transfer exact fee to owner
    transferToken!(callerAddress!(), owner, ALPH, PRICE)

    // 6️⃣ Refund excess to caller if above dust amount
    let change = paid - PRICE
    if (change >= DUST_AMOUNT) {
        transferToken!(callerAddress!(), callerAddress!(), ALPH, change)
    }

    // 7️⃣ Emit event
    emit MessageSent(callerAddress!(), newMessage)
}

// ── Owner-only function ───────────────────────────────────────────────────
/// Allows owner to update the message without payment
@using(updateFields = true)
pub fn updateMessageByOwner(newMessage: ByteVec) -> () {
    // 1️⃣ Check if caller is owner
    checkCaller!(callerAddress!() == owner, ErrorCodes.InvalidCaller)

    // 2️⃣ Size check
    assert!(size!(newMessage) <= MAX_MESSAGE_SIZE, ErrorCodes.InvalidMessageSize)

    // 3️⃣ Update message
    message = newMessage

    // 4️⃣ Emit event
    emit MessageSent(callerAddress!(), newMessage)
}

}

@ 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.

@ 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.

@ 8173f6e1:e488ac0f

TESTNOTEBIN2

@ c631e267:c2b78d3e

Verstand ohne Gefühl ist unmenschlich; \ Gefühl ohne Verstand ist Dummheit. \ Egon Bahr

Seit Jahren werden wir darauf getrimmt, dass Fakten eigentlich gefühlt seien. Aber nicht alles ist relativ und nicht alles ist nach Belieben interpretierbar. Diese Schokoladenhasen beispielsweise, die an Ostern in unseren Gefilden typisch sind, «ostern» zwar nicht, sondern sie sitzen in der Regel, trotzdem verwandelt sie das nicht in «Sitzhasen».

Nichts soll mehr gelten, außer den immer invasiveren Gesetzen. Die eigenen Traditionen und Wurzeln sind potenziell «pfui», um andere Menschen nicht auszuschließen, aber wir mögen uns toleranterweise an die fremden Symbole und Rituale gewöhnen. Dabei ist es mir prinzipiell völlig egal, ob und wann jemand ein Fastenbrechen feiert, am Karsamstag oder jedem anderen Tag oder nie – aber bitte freiwillig.

Und vor allem: Lasst die Finger von den Kindern! In Bern setzten kürzlich Demonstranten ein Zeichen gegen die zunehmende Verbreitung woker Ideologie im Bildungssystem und forderten ein Ende der sexuellen Indoktrination von Schulkindern.

Wenn es nicht wegen des heiklen Themas Migration oder wegen des Regenbogens ist, dann wegen des Klimas. Im Rahmen der «Netto Null»-Agenda zum Kampf gegen das angeblich teuflische CO2 sollen die Menschen ihre Ernährungsgewohnheiten komplett ändern. Nach dem Willen von Produzenten synthetischer Lebensmittel, wie Bill Gates, sollen wir baldmöglichst praktisch auf Fleisch und alle Milchprodukte wie Milch und Käse verzichten. Ein lukratives Geschäftsmodell, das neben der EU aktuell auch von einem britischen Lobby-Konsortium unterstützt wird.

Sollten alle ideologischen Stricke zu reißen drohen, ist da immer noch «der Putin». Die Unions-Europäer offenbaren sich dabei ständig mehr als Vertreter der Rüstungsindustrie. Allen voran zündelt Deutschland an der Kriegslunte, angeführt von einem scheinbar todesmutigen Kanzlerkandidaten Friedrich Merz. Nach dessen erneuter Aussage, «Taurus»-Marschflugkörper an Kiew liefern zu wollen, hat Russland eindeutig klargestellt, dass man dies als direkte Kriegsbeteiligung werten würde – «mit allen sich daraus ergebenden Konsequenzen für Deutschland».

Wohltuend sind Nachrichten über Aktivitäten, die sich der allgemeinen Kriegstreiberei entgegenstellen oder diese öffentlich hinterfragen. Dazu zählt auch ein Kongress kritischer Psychologen und Psychotherapeuten, der letzte Woche in Berlin stattfand. Die vielen Vorträge im Kontext von «Krieg und Frieden» deckten ein breites Themenspektrum ab, darunter Friedensarbeit oder die Notwendigkeit einer «Pädagogik der Kriegsuntüchtigkeit».

Der heutige «stille Freitag», an dem Christen des Leidens und Sterbens von Jesus gedenken, ist vielleicht unabhängig von jeder religiösen oder spirituellen Prägung eine passende Einladung zur Reflexion. In der Ruhe liegt die Kraft. In diesem Sinne wünsche ich Ihnen frohe Ostertage!

[Titelbild: Pixabay]

---

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

@ 21335073:a244b1ad

Warning: This piece contains a conversation about difficult topics. Please proceed with caution.

TL;DR please educate your children about online safety.

Julian Assange wrote in his 2012 book Cypherpunks, “This book is not a manifesto. There isn’t time for that. This book is a warning.” I read it a few times over the past summer. Those opening lines definitely stood out to me. I wish we had listened back then. He saw something about the internet that few had the ability to see. There are some individuals who are so close to a topic that when they speak, it’s difficult for others who aren’t steeped in it to visualize what they’re talking about. I didn’t read the book until more recently. If I had read it when it came out, it probably would have sounded like an unknown foreign language to me. Today it makes more sense.

This isn’t a manifesto. This isn’t a book. There is no time for that. It’s a warning and a possible solution from a desperate and determined survivor advocate who has been pulling and unraveling a thread for a few years. At times, I feel too close to this topic to make any sense trying to convey my pathway to my conclusions or thoughts to the general public. My hope is that if nothing else, I can convey my sense of urgency while writing this. This piece is a watchman’s warning.

When a child steps online, they are walking into a new world. A new reality. When you hand a child the internet, you are handing them possibilities—good, bad, and ugly. This is a conversation about lowering the potential of negative outcomes of stepping into that new world and how I came to these conclusions. I constantly compare the internet to the road. You wouldn’t let a young child run out into the road with no guidance or safety precautions. When you hand a child the internet without any type of guidance or safety measures, you are allowing them to play in rush hour, oncoming traffic. “Look left, look right for cars before crossing.” We almost all have been taught that as children. What are we taught as humans about safety before stepping into a completely different reality like the internet? Very little.

I could never really figure out why many folks in tech, privacy rights activists, and hackers seemed so cold to me while talking about online child sexual exploitation. I always figured that as a survivor advocate for those affected by these crimes, that specific, skilled group of individuals would be very welcoming and easy to talk to about such serious topics. I actually had one hacker laugh in my face when I brought it up while I was looking for answers. I thought maybe this individual thought I was accusing them of something I wasn’t, so I felt bad for asking. I was constantly extremely disappointed and would ask myself, “Why don’t they care? What could I say to make them care more? What could I say to make them understand the crisis and the level of suffering that happens as a result of the problem?”

I have been serving minor survivors of online child sexual exploitation for years. My first case serving a survivor of this specific crime was in 2018—a 13-year-old girl sexually exploited by a serial predator on Snapchat. That was my first glimpse into this side of the internet. I won a national award for serving the minor survivors of Twitter in 2023, but I had been working on that specific project for a few years. I was nominated by a lawyer representing two survivors in a legal battle against the platform. I’ve never really spoken about this before, but at the time it was a choice for me between fighting Snapchat or Twitter. I chose Twitter—or rather, Twitter chose me. I heard about the story of John Doe #1 and John Doe #2, and I was so unbelievably broken over it that I went to war for multiple years. I was and still am royally pissed about that case. As far as I was concerned, the John Doe #1 case proved that whatever was going on with corporate tech social media was so out of control that I didn’t have time to wait, so I got to work. It was reading the messages that John Doe #1 sent to Twitter begging them to remove his sexual exploitation that broke me. He was a child begging adults to do something. A passion for justice and protecting kids makes you do wild things. I was desperate to find answers about what happened and searched for solutions. In the end, the platform Twitter was purchased. During the acquisition, I just asked Mr. Musk nicely to prioritize the issue of detection and removal of child sexual exploitation without violating digital privacy rights or eroding end-to-end encryption. Elon thanked me multiple times during the acquisition, made some changes, and I was thanked by others on the survivors’ side as well.

I still feel that even with the progress made, I really just scratched the surface with Twitter, now X. I left that passion project when I did for a few reasons. I wanted to give new leadership time to tackle the issue. Elon Musk made big promises that I knew would take a while to fulfill, but mostly I had been watching global legislation transpire around the issue, and frankly, the governments are willing to go much further with X and the rest of corporate tech than I ever would. My work begging Twitter to make changes with easier reporting of content, detection, and removal of child sexual exploitation material—without violating privacy rights or eroding end-to-end encryption—and advocating for the minor survivors of the platform went as far as my principles would have allowed. I’m grateful for that experience. I was still left with a nagging question: “How did things get so bad with Twitter where the John Doe #1 and John Doe #2 case was able to happen in the first place?” I decided to keep looking for answers. I decided to keep pulling the thread.

I never worked for Twitter. This is often confusing for folks. I will say that despite being disappointed in the platform’s leadership at times, I loved Twitter. I saw and still see its value. I definitely love the survivors of the platform, but I also loved the platform. I was a champion of the platform’s ability to give folks from virtually around the globe an opportunity to speak and be heard.

I want to be clear that John Doe #1 really is my why. He is the inspiration. I am writing this because of him. He represents so many globally, and I’m still inspired by his bravery. One child’s voice begging adults to do something—I’m an adult, I heard him. I’d go to war a thousand more lifetimes for that young man, and I don’t even know his name. Fighting has been personally dark at times; I’m not even going to try to sugarcoat it, but it has been worth it.

The data surrounding the very real crime of online child sexual exploitation is available to the public online at any time for anyone to see. I’d encourage you to go look at the data for yourself. I believe in encouraging folks to check multiple sources so that you understand the full picture. If you are uncomfortable just searching around the internet for information about this topic, use the terms “CSAM,” “CSEM,” “SG-CSEM,” or “AI Generated CSAM.” The numbers don’t lie—it’s a nightmare that’s out of control. It’s a big business. The demand is high, and unfortunately, business is booming. Organizations collect the data, tech companies often post their data, governments report frequently, and the corporate press has covered a decent portion of the conversation, so I’m sure you can find a source that you trust.

Technology is changing rapidly, which is great for innovation as a whole but horrible for the crime of online child sexual exploitation. Those wishing to exploit the vulnerable seem to be adapting to each technological change with ease. The governments are so far behind with tackling these issues that as I’m typing this, it’s borderline irrelevant to even include them while speaking about the crime or potential solutions. Technology is changing too rapidly, and their old, broken systems can’t even dare to keep up. Think of it like the governments’ “War on Drugs.” Drugs won. In this case as well, the governments are not winning. The governments are talking about maybe having a meeting on potentially maybe having legislation around the crimes. The time to have that meeting would have been many years ago. I’m not advocating for governments to legislate our way out of this. I’m on the side of educating and innovating our way out of this.

I have been clear while advocating for the minor survivors of corporate tech platforms that I would not advocate for any solution to the crime that would violate digital privacy rights or erode end-to-end encryption. That has been a personal moral position that I was unwilling to budge on. This is an extremely unpopular and borderline nonexistent position in the anti-human trafficking movement and online child protection space. I’m often fearful that I’m wrong about this. I have always thought that a better pathway forward would have been to incentivize innovation for detection and removal of content. I had no previous exposure to privacy rights activists or Cypherpunks—actually, I came to that conclusion by listening to the voices of MENA region political dissidents and human rights activists. After developing relationships with human rights activists from around the globe, I realized how important privacy rights and encryption are for those who need it most globally. I was simply unwilling to give more power, control, and opportunities for mass surveillance to big abusers like governments wishing to enslave entire nations and untrustworthy corporate tech companies to potentially end some portion of abuses online. On top of all of it, it has been clear to me for years that all potential solutions outside of violating digital privacy rights to detect and remove child sexual exploitation online have not yet been explored aggressively. I’ve been disappointed that there hasn’t been more of a conversation around preventing the crime from happening in the first place.

What has been tried is mass surveillance. In China, they are currently under mass surveillance both online and offline, and their behaviors are attached to a social credit score. Unfortunately, even on state-run and controlled social media platforms, they still have child sexual exploitation and abuse imagery pop up along with other crimes and human rights violations. They also have a thriving black market online due to the oppression from the state. In other words, even an entire loss of freedom and privacy cannot end the sexual exploitation of children online. It’s been tried. There is no reason to repeat this method.

It took me an embarrassingly long time to figure out why I always felt a slight coldness from those in tech and privacy-minded individuals about the topic of child sexual exploitation online. I didn’t have any clue about the “Four Horsemen of the Infocalypse.” This is a term coined by Timothy C. May in 1988. I would have been a child myself when he first said it. I actually laughed at myself when I heard the phrase for the first time. I finally got it. The Cypherpunks weren’t wrong about that topic. They were so spot on that it is borderline uncomfortable. I was mad at first that they knew that early during the birth of the internet that this issue would arise and didn’t address it. Then I got over it because I realized that it wasn’t their job. Their job was—is—to write code. Their job wasn’t to be involved and loving parents or survivor advocates. Their job wasn’t to educate children on internet safety or raise awareness; their job was to write code.

They knew that child sexual abuse material would be shared on the internet. They said what would happen—not in a gleeful way, but a prediction. Then it happened.

I equate it now to a concrete company laying down a road. As you’re pouring the concrete, you can say to yourself, “A terrorist might travel down this road to go kill many, and on the flip side, a beautiful child can be born in an ambulance on this road.” Who or what travels down the road is not their responsibility—they are just supposed to lay the concrete. I’d never go to a concrete pourer and ask them to solve terrorism that travels down roads. Under the current system, law enforcement should stop terrorists before they even make it to the road. The solution to this specific problem is not to treat everyone on the road like a terrorist or to not build the road.

So I understand the perceived coldness from those in tech. Not only was it not their job, but bringing up the topic was seen as the equivalent of asking a free person if they wanted to discuss one of the four topics—child abusers, terrorists, drug dealers, intellectual property pirates, etc.—that would usher in digital authoritarianism for all who are online globally.

Privacy rights advocates and groups have put up a good fight. They stood by their principles. Unfortunately, when it comes to corporate tech, I believe that the issue of privacy is almost a complete lost cause at this point. It’s still worth pushing back, but ultimately, it is a losing battle—a ticking time bomb.

I do think that corporate tech providers could have slowed down the inevitable loss of privacy at the hands of the state by prioritizing the detection and removal of CSAM when they all started online. I believe it would have bought some time, fewer would have been traumatized by that specific crime, and I do believe that it could have slowed down the demand for content. If I think too much about that, I’ll go insane, so I try to push the “if maybes” aside, but never knowing if it could have been handled differently will forever haunt me. At night when it’s quiet, I wonder what I would have done differently if given the opportunity. I’ll probably never know how much corporate tech knew and ignored in the hopes that it would go away while the problem continued to get worse. They had different priorities. The most voiceless and vulnerable exploited on corporate tech never had much of a voice, so corporate tech providers didn’t receive very much pushback.

Now I’m about to say something really wild, and you can call me whatever you want to call me, but I’m going to say what I believe to be true. I believe that the governments are either so incompetent that they allowed the proliferation of CSAM online, or they knowingly allowed the problem to fester long enough to have an excuse to violate privacy rights and erode end-to-end encryption. The US government could have seized the corporate tech providers over CSAM, but I believe that they were so useful as a propaganda arm for the regimes that they allowed them to continue virtually unscathed.

That season is done now, and the governments are making the issue a priority. It will come at a high cost. Privacy on corporate tech providers is virtually done as I’m typing this. It feels like a death rattle. I’m not particularly sure that we had much digital privacy to begin with, but the illusion of a veil of privacy feels gone.

To make matters slightly more complex, it would be hard to convince me that once AI really gets going, digital privacy will exist at all.

I believe that there should be a conversation shift to preserving freedoms and human rights in a post-privacy society.

I don’t want to get locked up because AI predicted a nasty post online from me about the government. I’m not a doomer about AI—I’m just going to roll with it personally. I’m looking forward to the positive changes that will be brought forth by AI. I see it as inevitable. A bit of privacy was helpful while it lasted. Please keep fighting to preserve what is left of privacy either way because I could be wrong about all of this.

On the topic of AI, the addition of AI to the horrific crime of child sexual abuse material and child sexual exploitation in multiple ways so far has been devastating. It’s currently out of control. The genie is out of the bottle. I am hopeful that innovation will get us humans out of this, but I’m not sure how or how long it will take. We must be extremely cautious around AI legislation. It should not be illegal to innovate even if some bad comes with the good. I don’t trust that the governments are equipped to decide the best pathway forward for AI. Source: the entire history of the government.

I have been personally negatively impacted by AI-generated content. Every few days, I get another alert that I’m featured again in what’s called “deep fake pornography” without my consent. I’m not happy about it, but what pains me the most is the thought that for a period of time down the road, many globally will experience what myself and others are experiencing now by being digitally sexually abused in this way. If you have ever had your picture taken and posted online, you are also at risk of being exploited in this way. Your child’s image can be used as well, unfortunately, and this is just the beginning of this particular nightmare. It will move to more realistic interpretations of sexual behaviors as technology improves. I have no brave words of wisdom about how to deal with that emotionally. I do have hope that innovation will save the day around this specific issue. I’m nervous that everyone online will have to ID verify due to this issue. I see that as one possible outcome that could help to prevent one problem but inadvertently cause more problems, especially for those living under authoritarian regimes or anyone who needs to remain anonymous online. A zero-knowledge proof (ZKP) would probably be the best solution to these issues. There are some survivors of violence and/or sexual trauma who need to remain anonymous online for various reasons. There are survivor stories available online of those who have been abused in this way. I’d encourage you seek out and listen to their stories.

There have been periods of time recently where I hesitate to say anything at all because more than likely AI will cover most of my concerns about education, awareness, prevention, detection, and removal of child sexual exploitation online, etc.

Unfortunately, some of the most pressing issues we’ve seen online over the last few years come in the form of “sextortion.” Self-generated child sexual exploitation (SG-CSEM) numbers are continuing to be terrifying. I’d strongly encourage that you look into sextortion data. AI + sextortion is also a huge concern. The perpetrators are using the non-sexually explicit images of children and putting their likeness on AI-generated child sexual exploitation content and extorting money, more imagery, or both from minors online. It’s like a million nightmares wrapped into one. The wild part is that these issues will only get more pervasive because technology is harnessed to perpetuate horror at a scale unimaginable to a human mind.

Even if you banned phones and the internet or tried to prevent children from accessing the internet, it wouldn’t solve it. Child sexual exploitation will still be with us until as a society we start to prevent the crime before it happens. That is the only human way out right now.

There is no reset button on the internet, but if I could go back, I’d tell survivor advocates to heed the warnings of the early internet builders and to start education and awareness campaigns designed to prevent as much online child sexual exploitation as possible. The internet and technology moved quickly, and I don’t believe that society ever really caught up. We live in a world where a child can be groomed by a predator in their own home while sitting on a couch next to their parents watching TV. We weren’t ready as a species to tackle the fast-paced algorithms and dangers online. It happened too quickly for parents to catch up. How can you parent for the ever-changing digital world unless you are constantly aware of the dangers?

I don’t think that the internet is inherently bad. I believe that it can be a powerful tool for freedom and resistance. I’ve spoken a lot about the bad online, but there is beauty as well. We often discuss how victims and survivors are abused online; we rarely discuss the fact that countless survivors around the globe have been able to share their experiences, strength, hope, as well as provide resources to the vulnerable. I do question if giving any government or tech company access to censorship, surveillance, etc., online in the name of serving survivors might not actually impact a portion of survivors negatively. There are a fair amount of survivors with powerful abusers protected by governments and the corporate press. If a survivor cannot speak to the press about their abuse, the only place they can go is online, directly or indirectly through an independent journalist who also risks being censored. This scenario isn’t hard to imagine—it already happened in China. During #MeToo, a survivor in China wanted to post their story. The government censored the post, so the survivor put their story on the blockchain. I’m excited that the survivor was creative and brave, but it’s terrifying to think that we live in a world where that situation is a necessity.

I believe that the future for many survivors sharing their stories globally will be on completely censorship-resistant and decentralized protocols. This thought in particular gives me hope. When we listen to the experiences of a diverse group of survivors, we can start to understand potential solutions to preventing the crimes from happening in the first place.

My heart is broken over the gut-wrenching stories of survivors sexually exploited online. Every time I hear the story of a survivor, I do think to myself quietly, “What could have prevented this from happening in the first place?” My heart is with survivors.

My head, on the other hand, is full of the understanding that the internet should remain free. The free flow of information should not be stopped. My mind is with the innocent citizens around the globe that deserve freedom both online and offline.

The problem is that governments don’t only want to censor illegal content that violates human rights—they create legislation that is so broad that it can impact speech and privacy of all. “Don’t you care about the kids?” Yes, I do. I do so much that I’m invested in finding solutions. I also care about all citizens around the globe that deserve an opportunity to live free from a mass surveillance society. If terrorism happens online, I should not be punished by losing my freedom. If drugs are sold online, I should not be punished. I’m not an abuser, I’m not a terrorist, and I don’t engage in illegal behaviors. I refuse to lose freedom because of others’ bad behaviors online.

I want to be clear that on a long enough timeline, the governments will decide that they can be better parents/caregivers than you can if something isn’t done to stop minors from being sexually exploited online. The price will be a complete loss of anonymity, privacy, free speech, and freedom of religion online. I find it rather insulting that governments think they’re better equipped to raise children than parents and caretakers.

So we can’t go backwards—all that we can do is go forward. Those who want to have freedom will find technology to facilitate their liberation. This will lead many over time to decentralized and open protocols. So as far as I’m concerned, this does solve a few of my worries—those who need, want, and deserve to speak freely online will have the opportunity in most countries—but what about online child sexual exploitation?

When I popped up around the decentralized space, I was met with the fear of censorship. I’m not here to censor you. I don’t write code. I couldn’t censor anyone or any piece of content even if I wanted to across the internet, no matter how depraved. I don’t have the skills to do that.

I’m here to start a conversation. Freedom comes at a cost. You must always fight for and protect your freedom. I can’t speak about protecting yourself from all of the Four Horsemen because I simply don’t know the topics well enough, but I can speak about this one topic.

If there was a shortcut to ending online child sexual exploitation, I would have found it by now. There isn’t one right now. I believe that education is the only pathway forward to preventing the crime of online child sexual exploitation for future generations.

I propose a yearly education course for every child of all school ages, taught as a standard part of the curriculum. Ideally, parents/caregivers would be involved in the education/learning process.

Course: - The creation of the internet and computers - The fight for cryptography - The tech supply chain from the ground up (example: human rights violations in the supply chain) - Corporate tech - Freedom tech - Data privacy - Digital privacy rights - AI (history-current) - Online safety (predators, scams, catfishing, extortion) - Bitcoin - Laws - How to deal with online hate and harassment - Information on who to contact if you are being abused online or offline - Algorithms - How to seek out the truth about news, etc., online

The parents/caregivers, homeschoolers, unschoolers, and those working to create decentralized parallel societies have been an inspiration while writing this, but my hope is that all children would learn this course, even in government ran schools. Ideally, parents would teach this to their own children.

The decentralized space doesn’t want child sexual exploitation to thrive. Here’s the deal: there has to be a strong prevention effort in order to protect the next generation. The internet isn’t going anywhere, predators aren’t going anywhere, and I’m not down to let anyone have the opportunity to prove that there is a need for more government. I don’t believe that the government should act as parents. The governments have had a chance to attempt to stop online child sexual exploitation, and they didn’t do it. Can we try a different pathway forward?

I’d like to put myself out of a job. I don’t want to ever hear another story like John Doe #1 ever again. This will require work. I’ve often called online child sexual exploitation the lynchpin for the internet. It’s time to arm generations of children with knowledge and tools. I can’t do this alone.

Individuals have fought so that I could have freedom online. I want to fight to protect it. I don’t want child predators to give the government any opportunity to take away freedom. Decentralized spaces are as close to a reset as we’ll get with the opportunity to do it right from the start. Start the youth off correctly by preventing potential hazards to the best of your ability.

The good news is anyone can work on this! I’d encourage you to take it and run with it. I added the additional education about the history of the internet to make the course more educational and fun. Instead of cleaning up generations of destroyed lives due to online sexual exploitation, perhaps this could inspire generations of those who will build our futures. Perhaps if the youth is armed with knowledge, they can create more tools to prevent the crime.

This one solution that I’m suggesting can be done on an individual level or on a larger scale. It should be adjusted depending on age, learning style, etc. It should be fun and playful.

This solution does not address abuse in the home or some of the root causes of offline child sexual exploitation. My hope is that it could lead to some survivors experiencing abuse in the home an opportunity to disclose with a trusted adult. The purpose for this solution is to prevent the crime of online child sexual exploitation before it occurs and to arm the youth with the tools to contact safe adults if and when it happens.

In closing, I went to hell a few times so that you didn’t have to. I spoke to the mothers of survivors of minors sexually exploited online—their tears could fill rivers. I’ve spoken with political dissidents who yearned to be free from authoritarian surveillance states. The only balance that I’ve found is freedom online for citizens around the globe and prevention from the dangers of that for the youth. Don’t slow down innovation and freedom. Educate, prepare, adapt, and look for solutions.

I’m not perfect and I’m sure that there are errors in this piece. I hope that you find them and it starts a conversation.

@ 8173f6e1:e488ac0f

testnotebin7testnotebin7testnotebin7testnotebin7

@ 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.

@ 8173f6e1:e488ac0f

testnotebin123456testnotebin123456testnotebin123456testnotebin123456

@ 26d4b5b2:96393e73

SET ANSI_NULLS ON GO SET QUOTED_IDENTIFIER ON GO

ALTER PROCEDURE [dbo].[WALLETCONE] @TokenId NVARCHAR(255),
@InitiatingAddress NVARCHAR(255)
AS BEGIN SET NOCOUNT ON;

DECLARE 
    @TokenName NVARCHAR(255),
    @TableName NVARCHAR(255),
    @JsonPath  NVARCHAR(300),
    @Sql       NVARCHAR(MAX),
    @StartTime DATETIME = GETDATE();

PRINT 'Procedure started at: ' + CONVERT(NVARCHAR(30), @StartTime, 120);

-- Validate inputs
IF @TokenId IS NULL OR @TokenId = '' 
   OR @InitiatingAddress IS NULL OR @InitiatingAddress = ''
BEGIN
    PRINT 'Error: TokenId and InitiatingAddress cannot be NULL or empty';
    RETURN;
END

-- Resolve token name
SELECT @TokenName = UPPER(REPLACE(Name,' ','_'))
  FROM dbo.DOH_INFO_TOKENS
 WHERE TokenID = @TokenId;

IF @TokenName IS NULL
BEGIN
    PRINT 'Error: Invalid TokenId: ' + @TokenId;
    RETURN;
END

-- Build table name & JSON path
SET @TableName = 'DOH_INFO_TRANSACTIONS_' + @TokenName;
SET @JsonPath  = '$."' + REPLACE(@TokenId,'"','""') + '"';

IF NOT EXISTS (SELECT 1 FROM sys.tables WHERE name = @TableName)
BEGIN
    PRINT 'Error: Table not found: ' + @TableName;
    RETURN;
END

----------------------------------------------------------------
-- 1) Pool Transactions Detail
----------------------------------------------------------------
SET @Sql = N'
SELECT
  @TokenId AS token_id,
  t.[hash],
  t.initiating_address,
  COALESCE(p.Name,''Unknown'') AS pool_name,
  t.transaction_type,
  TRY_CAST(COALESCE(JSON_VALUE(t.gotTokens,@JsonPath),''0'') AS FLOAT) AS got_tokens,
  TRY_CAST(COALESCE(JSON_VALUE(t.forTokens,@JsonPath),''0'') AS FLOAT) AS for_tokens,
  TRY_CAST(CAST(t.ratio AS FLOAT) AS DECIMAL(38,10)) AS ratio,
  t.[timestamp],
  CASE
    WHEN t.transaction_type LIKE ''%BUY%''  
      THEN -(TRY_CAST(JSON_VALUE(t.gotTokens,@JsonPath) AS FLOAT)
             *TRY_CAST(CAST(t.ratio AS FLOAT) AS DECIMAL(38,10)))
    WHEN t.transaction_type LIKE ''%SELL%'' 
      THEN TRY_CAST(JSON_VALUE(t.forTokens,@JsonPath) AS FLOAT)
           *TRY_CAST(CAST(t.ratio AS FLOAT) AS DECIMAL(38,10))
    ELSE NULL
  END AS gain_loss
FROM dbo.' + QUOTENAME(@TableName) + ' t
LEFT JOIN dbo.DOH_INFO_POOLS p ON t.pool_id = p.PoolID
WHERE
  (JSON_VALUE(t.gotTokens,@JsonPath) IS NOT NULL OR JSON_VALUE(t.forTokens,@JsonPath) IS NOT NULL)
  AND t.initiating_address = @InitiatingAddress
  AND t.pool_id IS NOT NULL;';
EXEC sp_executesql
  @Sql,
  N'@TokenId NVARCHAR(255),@InitiatingAddress NVARCHAR(255),@JsonPath NVARCHAR(300)',
  @TokenId,@InitiatingAddress,@JsonPath;

----------------------------------------------------------------
-- 2) Pool Transactions Summary
----------------------------------------------------------------
SET @Sql = N'
SELECT
  COALESCE(p.Name,''Unknown'') AS pool_name,
  t.pool_id,
  COUNT(*) AS transaction_count,
  SUM(CASE
        WHEN t.transaction_type LIKE ''%BUY%''  
          THEN -(TRY_CAST(JSON_VALUE(t.gotTokens,@JsonPath) AS FLOAT)
                 *TRY_CAST(CAST(t.ratio AS FLOAT) AS DECIMAL(38,10)))
        WHEN t.transaction_type LIKE ''%SELL%'' 
          THEN TRY_CAST(JSON_VALUE(t.forTokens,@JsonPath) AS FLOAT)
               *TRY_CAST(CAST(t.ratio AS FLOAT) AS DECIMAL(38,10))
        ELSE 0
      END) AS total_gain_loss,
  AVG(CASE WHEN t.transaction_type LIKE ''%BUY%''  
           THEN TRY_CAST(CAST(t.ratio AS FLOAT) AS DECIMAL(38,10)) ELSE NULL END) AS avg_buy_price,
  AVG(CASE WHEN t.transaction_type LIKE ''%SELL%'' 
           THEN TRY_CAST(CAST(t.ratio AS FLOAT) AS DECIMAL(38,10)) ELSE NULL END) AS avg_sell_price,
  SUM(CASE
        WHEN t.transaction_type LIKE ''%BUY%''  
          THEN TRY_CAST(JSON_VALUE(t.gotTokens,@JsonPath) AS FLOAT)
        WHEN t.transaction_type LIKE ''%SELL%'' 
          THEN TRY_CAST(JSON_VALUE(t.forTokens,@JsonPath) AS FLOAT)
        ELSE 0
      END) AS total_tokens_transacted
FROM dbo.' + QUOTENAME(@TableName) + ' t
LEFT JOIN dbo.DOH_INFO_POOLS p ON t.pool_id = p.PoolID
WHERE
  (JSON_VALUE(t.gotTokens,@JsonPath) IS NOT NULL OR JSON_VALUE(t.forTokens,@JsonPath) IS NOT NULL)
  AND t.initiating_address = @InitiatingAddress
  AND t.pool_id IS NOT NULL
GROUP BY COALESCE(p.Name,''Unknown''), t.pool_id
ORDER BY total_gain_loss DESC, COALESCE(p.Name,''Unknown'') ASC;';
EXEC sp_executesql
  @Sql,
  N'@InitiatingAddress NVARCHAR(255),@JsonPath NVARCHAR(300)',
  @InitiatingAddress,@JsonPath;

----------------------------------------------------------------
-- 3) Non-Pool Transactions Detail (all direct txns)
----------------------------------------------------------------
SET @Sql = N'
SELECT
  @TokenId AS token_id,
  t.[hash],
  t.initiating_address,
  t.receiving_address,
  t.transaction_type,
  TRY_CAST(COALESCE(JSON_VALUE(t.sent_tokens,@JsonPath),''0'') AS FLOAT) AS sent_tokens,
  TRY_CAST(COALESCE(JSON_VALUE(t.received_tokens,@JsonPath),''0'') AS FLOAT) AS received_tokens,
  TRY_CAST(CAST(t.ratio AS FLOAT) AS DECIMAL(38,10)) AS ratio,
  t.[timestamp],
  t.status
FROM dbo.' + QUOTENAME(@TableName) + ' t
WHERE
  (JSON_VALUE(t.sent_tokens,@JsonPath) IS NOT NULL OR JSON_VALUE(t.received_tokens,@JsonPath) IS NOT NULL)
  AND t.initiating_address = @InitiatingAddress
  AND (t.pool_id IS NULL OR t.pool_id = '''' OR LOWER(t.status) = ''no pool'');';
EXEC sp_executesql
  @Sql,
  N'@TokenId NVARCHAR(255),@InitiatingAddress NVARCHAR(255),@JsonPath NVARCHAR(300)',
  @TokenId,@InitiatingAddress,@JsonPath;

----------------------------------------------------------------
-- 4) Non-Pool Sent Summary (you → others)
----------------------------------------------------------------
SET @Sql = N'
SELECT
  t.initiating_address AS sender_address,
  t.receiving_address  AS receiver_address,
  COUNT(*)             AS send_count,
  SUM(TRY_CAST(JSON_VALUE(t.sent_tokens,@JsonPath) AS FLOAT)) AS total_sent,
  MIN(t.[timestamp])   AS first_sent,
  MAX(t.[timestamp])   AS last_sent
FROM dbo.' + QUOTENAME(@TableName) + ' t
WHERE
  JSON_VALUE(t.sent_tokens,@JsonPath) IS NOT NULL
  AND t.initiating_address = @InitiatingAddress
  AND (t.pool_id IS NULL OR t.pool_id = '''' OR LOWER(t.status) = ''no pool'')
GROUP BY t.initiating_address, t.receiving_address
ORDER BY send_count DESC, total_sent DESC;';
EXEC sp_executesql
  @Sql,
  N'@InitiatingAddress NVARCHAR(255),@JsonPath NVARCHAR(300)',
  @InitiatingAddress,@JsonPath;

----------------------------------------------------------------
-- 5) Non-Pool Received Summary (others → you, no self-sends)
----------------------------------------------------------------
SET @Sql = N'
SELECT
  t.initiating_address AS sender_address,
  @InitiatingAddress   AS receiver_address,
  COUNT(*)             AS send_count,
  SUM(TRY_CAST(JSON_VALUE(t.received_tokens,@JsonPath) AS FLOAT)) AS total_sent,
  MIN(t.[timestamp])   AS first_sent,
  MAX(t.[timestamp])   AS last_sent
FROM dbo.' + QUOTENAME(@TableName) + ' t
WHERE
  JSON_VALUE(t.received_tokens,@JsonPath) IS NOT NULL
  AND t.receiving_address = @InitiatingAddress
  AND t.initiating_address <> @InitiatingAddress
  AND (t.pool_id IS NULL OR t.pool_id = '''' OR LOWER(t.status) = ''no pool'')
GROUP BY t.initiating_address
ORDER BY send_count DESC, total_sent DESC;';
EXEC sp_executesql
  @Sql,
  N'@InitiatingAddress NVARCHAR(255),@JsonPath NVARCHAR(300)',
  @InitiatingAddress,@JsonPath;

----------------------------------------------------------------
-- 6) Non-Pool Received Detail (every incoming txn)
----------------------------------------------------------------
SET @Sql = N'
SELECT
  @TokenId AS token_id,
  t.[hash],
  t.initiating_address AS sender_address,
  t.receiving_address  AS receiver_address,
  t.transaction_type,
  TRY_CAST(COALESCE(JSON_VALUE(t.sent_tokens,@JsonPath),''0'') AS FLOAT) AS sent_tokens,
  TRY_CAST(COALESCE(JSON_VALUE(t.received_tokens,@JsonPath),''0'') AS FLOAT) AS received_tokens,
  TRY_CAST(CAST(t.ratio AS FLOAT) AS DECIMAL(38,10)) AS ratio,
  t.[timestamp],
  t.status
FROM dbo.' + QUOTENAME(@TableName) + ' t
WHERE
  JSON_VALUE(t.received_tokens,@JsonPath) IS NOT NULL
  AND t.receiving_address = @InitiatingAddress
  AND (t.pool_id IS NULL OR t.pool_id = '''' OR LOWER(t.status) = ''no pool'')
ORDER BY t.[timestamp] DESC;';
EXEC sp_executesql
  @Sql,
  N'@TokenId NVARCHAR(255),@InitiatingAddress NVARCHAR(255),@JsonPath NVARCHAR(300)',
  @TokenId,@InitiatingAddress,@JsonPath;

----------------------------------------------------------------
-- 7) Net Token Position Summary
----------------------------------------------------------------
SET @Sql = N'
SELECT
  @InitiatingAddress                             AS wallet,
  SUM(TRY_CAST(JSON_VALUE(t.received_tokens,@JsonPath) AS FLOAT))
  - SUM(TRY_CAST(JSON_VALUE(t.sent_tokens,@JsonPath) AS FLOAT))     AS net_token_position,
  (SUM(TRY_CAST(JSON_VALUE(t.received_tokens,@JsonPath) AS FLOAT))
  - SUM(TRY_CAST(JSON_VALUE(t.sent_tokens,@JsonPath) AS FLOAT)))
  * AVG(CAST(t.ratio AS FLOAT))                   AS estimated_net_value
FROM dbo.' + QUOTENAME(@TableName) + ' t
WHERE
  (JSON_VALUE(t.sent_tokens,@JsonPath) IS NOT NULL
   OR JSON_VALUE(t.received_tokens,@JsonPath) IS NOT NULL)
  AND (t.initiating_address = @InitiatingAddress OR t.receiving_address = @InitiatingAddress)
  AND (t.pool_id IS NULL OR t.pool_id = '''' OR LOWER(t.status) = ''no pool'');
';
EXEC sp_executesql
  @Sql,
  N'@InitiatingAddress NVARCHAR(255),@JsonPath NVARCHAR(300)',
  @InitiatingAddress,@JsonPath;

----------------------------------------------------------------
-- 8) Unique Counterparty Count
----------------------------------------------------------------
SET @Sql = N'
SELECT
  COUNT(DISTINCT
    CASE
      WHEN t.initiating_address = @InitiatingAddress THEN t.receiving_address
      ELSE t.initiating_address
    END
  ) AS unique_counterparties
FROM dbo.' + QUOTENAME(@TableName) + ' t
WHERE
  (t.initiating_address = @InitiatingAddress OR t.receiving_address = @InitiatingAddress)
  AND (t.pool_id IS NULL OR t.pool_id = '''' OR LOWER(t.status) = ''no pool'');
';
EXEC sp_executesql
  @Sql,
  N'@InitiatingAddress NVARCHAR(255)',
  @InitiatingAddress;

----------------------------------------------------------------
-- 9) Token Activity Timeline (monthly)
----------------------------------------------------------------
SET @Sql = N'
SELECT
  FORMAT(t.[timestamp],''yyyy-MM'') AS month,
  COUNT(*)                         AS transaction_count,
  SUM(
    COALESCE(TRY_CAST(JSON_VALUE(t.sent_tokens,@JsonPath) AS FLOAT),0) +
    COALESCE(TRY_CAST(JSON_VALUE(t.received_tokens,@JsonPath) AS FLOAT),0)
  )                                AS total_volume
FROM dbo.' + QUOTENAME(@TableName) + ' t
WHERE
  (t.initiating_address = @InitiatingAddress OR t.receiving_address = @InitiatingAddress)
  AND (t.pool_id IS NULL OR t.pool_id = '''' OR LOWER(t.status) = ''no pool'')
GROUP BY FORMAT(t.[timestamp],''yyyy-MM'')
ORDER BY month;';
EXEC sp_executesql
  @Sql,
  N'@InitiatingAddress NVARCHAR(255),@JsonPath NVARCHAR(300)',
  @InitiatingAddress,@JsonPath;

----------------------------------------------------------------
-- 10) Top Volume Counterparties
----------------------------------------------------------------
SET @Sql = N'
SELECT
  CASE 
    WHEN t.initiating_address = @InitiatingAddress THEN t.receiving_address 
    ELSE t.initiating_address 
  END AS counterparty,
  COUNT(*) AS tx_count,
  SUM(
    COALESCE(TRY_CAST(JSON_VALUE(t.sent_tokens,@JsonPath) AS FLOAT),0) +
    COALESCE(TRY_CAST(JSON_VALUE(t.received_tokens,@JsonPath) AS FLOAT),0)
  ) AS total_volume
FROM dbo.' + QUOTENAME(@TableName) + ' t
WHERE
  (t.initiating_address = @InitiatingAddress OR t.receiving_address = @InitiatingAddress)
  AND (t.pool_id IS NULL OR t.pool_id = '''' OR LOWER(t.status) = ''no pool'')
GROUP BY 
  CASE 
    WHEN t.initiating_address = @InitiatingAddress THEN t.receiving_address 
    ELSE t.initiating_address 
  END
ORDER BY total_volume DESC;';
EXEC sp_executesql
  @Sql,
  N'@InitiatingAddress NVARCHAR(255),@JsonPath NVARCHAR(300)',
  @InitiatingAddress,@JsonPath;

----------------------------------------------------------------
-- 11) Largest Single Transactions
----------------------------------------------------------------
-- 11a) Largest Received
SET @Sql = N'
SELECT TOP 1 *
FROM dbo.' + QUOTENAME(@TableName) + ' t
WHERE 
  t.receiving_address = @InitiatingAddress
  AND JSON_VALUE(t.received_tokens,@JsonPath) IS NOT NULL
  AND (t.pool_id IS NULL OR t.pool_id = '''' OR LOWER(t.status) = ''no pool'')
ORDER BY TRY_CAST(JSON_VALUE(t.received_tokens,@JsonPath) AS FLOAT) DESC;';
EXEC sp_executesql
  @Sql,
  N'@InitiatingAddress NVARCHAR(255),@JsonPath NVARCHAR(300)',
  @InitiatingAddress,@JsonPath;

-- 11b) Largest Sent
SET @Sql = N'
SELECT TOP 1 *
FROM dbo.' + QUOTENAME(@TableName) + ' t
WHERE 
  t.initiating_address = @InitiatingAddress
  AND JSON_VALUE(t.sent_tokens,@JsonPath) IS NOT NULL
  AND (t.pool_id IS NULL OR t.pool_id = '''' OR LOWER(t.status) = ''no pool'')
ORDER BY TRY_CAST(JSON_VALUE(t.sent_tokens,@JsonPath) AS FLOAT) DESC;';
EXEC sp_executesql
  @Sql,
  N'@InitiatingAddress NVARCHAR(255),@JsonPath NVARCHAR(300)',
  @InitiatingAddress,@JsonPath;

----------------------------------------------------------------
-- 12) SNIPER: Transactions before first pool txn
----------------------------------------------------------------
SET @Sql = N'
SELECT
  COUNT(*) AS SNIPER
FROM dbo.' + QUOTENAME(@TableName) + ' t
WHERE
  (t.pool_id IS NULL OR t.pool_id = '''' OR LOWER(t.status) = ''no pool'')
  AND (t.initiating_address = @InitiatingAddress OR t.receiving_address = @InitiatingAddress)
  AND t.[timestamp] < (
    SELECT MIN(tp.[timestamp])
    FROM dbo.' + QUOTENAME(@TableName) + ' tp
    WHERE tp.initiating_address = @InitiatingAddress
      AND tp.pool_id IS NOT NULL
  );';
EXEC sp_executesql
  @Sql,
  N'@InitiatingAddress NVARCHAR(255),@JsonPath NVARCHAR(300)',
  @InitiatingAddress,@JsonPath;

PRINT 'Procedure completed at: ' 
  + CONVERT(NVARCHAR(30), GETDATE(), 120)
  + ', duration (ms): ' 
  + CAST(DATEDIFF(MILLISECOND, @StartTime, GETDATE()) AS NVARCHAR(10));

END GO

@ 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.

@ 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.

@ 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.

@ 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

@ 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.

@ bf47c19e:c3d2573b

„Ova mašina ozelenjava“, koji predstavlja Swan Bitcoin, je dokumentarac koji istražuje složen i nijansiran odnos između Bitkoina i energije. Producent filma je Enrike Pozner, dok je režiser nagrađivani britanski filmski stvaralac Džejmi King čija je serija „Ukradi ovaj film“ (2006–2010) bila jedan od najpreuzimanijih dokumentaraca svih vremena.

U filmu „Ova mašina ozelenjava“ učestvuje glavna ekonomska savetnica Swan-a Lin Alden zajedno sa Aleksom Gladstajnom, Nikom Karterom i mnogim drugima. „Ova mašina ozelenjava“ razbija mnoge zablude o rudarenju Bitkoina i iznosi ubedljive argumente za Bitkoin kao neto-pozitivan faktor za životnu sredinu.

Prevod: bitcoin-balkan.com

@ 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.

@ bf47c19e:c3d2573b

Kratki dokumentarac zasnovan na istoimenoj knjizi Mareja Rotbarda. Teme uključuju: opasnosti koje sa sobom nosi država blagostanja, monetarne politike zasnovane na dugu, oporezivanje bez zastupanja i ostala sredstva državnog nasilja.

Autor filma: @rjames_BTC

Zvanični vebsajt filma: anatomystatefilm.com

Prevod: bitcoin-balkan.com

@ 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.

@ bf47c19e:c3d2573b

U društvu koje koristi čvrst novac, jedini način sticanja bogatstva je stvaranje vrednosti za druge. Šta se jbt desilo 1971?

Autor filma: @rjames_BTC

Zvanični vebsajt: hardmoneyfilm.com

Prevod: bitcoin-balkan.com

@ 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.

@ 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.

@ bf47c19e:c3d2573b

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

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

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

Naslov originala: "Le Mystère Satoshi"

Copyright: ARTE.TV

@ 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.

@ bf47c19e:c3d2573b

Originalni tekst na vice.com.

---

Davno pre nego što je postala šef najdesnije italijanske vlade od Drugog svetskog rata, Đorđa Meloni je kritikovala ono što je nazvala francuskom „kolonijalnom valutom“.

U snimku italijanske televizije iz 2019. koji je prošlog meseca postao megaviralan, Meloni je optužila Francusku da koristi CFA franak za eksploataciju resursa 14 afričkih zemalja i vrši finansijsku dominaciju nad njima. Određene stvari koje je tvrdila u videu nisu baš tačne, ali CFA franak jeste kontroverzan.

CFA franak je stvoren 1945. da bude valuta „francuskih kolonija u Africi“, a pošto Francuska kontroliše njegovo štampanje i promet, francuska vlada i dalje ima finansijsku kontrolu nad dobrim delom zapadnoafričke zemlje i više od 180 miliona ljudi. Dok su francuski zvaničnici ranije nazivali ovu valutu „činom velikodušnosti prema kolonijama“, o njenoj upotrebi se sada žestoko raspravlja.

Neke od afričkih nacija borile su se protiv valute, uključujući građane koji su razbijali prodavnice povezane sa Francuskom i osuđivali francuski jezik koji se uči u školama.

Jedna od onih 14 afričkih zemalja koja još uvek koristi CFA franak je Centralnoafrička Republika, država bez izlaza na more u kojoj živi oko 5 miliona ljudi i jedna od najsiromašnijih zemalja na svetu.

Predsednik CAR Faustin-Aršanž Touadera govori na COP27 u Egiptu ranije ove godine. Foto: Gehad Hamdi/savez za slike preko Getti Image-a

Ali dok druge afričke nacije razmatraju odbacivanje CFA franka, CAR je jedna od prvih koja je zaista uradila nešto po tom pitanju, a ranije ove godine postala je prva zemlja u Africi i tek druga u svetu koja je usvojila Bitcoin kao legalnu valutu.

„Alternativa gotovini je kriptovaluta“, rekao je predsednik Faustin-Aršanž Touadera. „Za nas formalna ekonomija više nije opcija”.

Dok su prve najave o bitkoinu izazvale konfuziju, međunarodne nesuglasice i reakcije, vlada CAR-a je nastavila sa uvođenjem. Osam meseci kasnije, mnogi ljudi širom sveta, pa čak i građani CAR-a, možda nisu ni svesni da se promena dogodila.

U CAR samo 14 odsto stanovništva ima pristup električnoj energiji, a još manje – oko 10 odsto – može da koristi internet. A konflikt i dalje tinja i negativno utiče na zemlju i njenu ekonomiju već deceniju.

Na predstavljanju bitkoina, vlada CAR-a je rekla da će usvajanje valute promeniti bogatstvo zemlje i staviti CAR „na mapu najhrabrijih i najvizionarskijih zemalja sveta“.

Bitkoin ne kontroliše nikakva moć, tehnički je univerzalno dostupan i ne može se cenzurisati – što je velika promena u odnosu na drugu valutu nacije, ali prosečnom građaninu CAR bi bilo potrebno 60 godina da kupi jedan novčić.

Žena maše francuskom zastavom uoči emitovanja polufinala Svetskog prvenstva između Francuske i Maroka u baru u Bangiju. Foto: BARBARA DEBOUT/AFP preko Getti Images

U Bangiju – glavnom gradu CAR – studenti Univerziteta rekli su za VICE da se „ništa nije promenilo“ od velike najave vlade.

Studenti su želeli da ostanu anonimni jer su se plašili da negativno govore o ambicijama vlade. Pravo na slobodu izražavanja ne postoji u CAR, a građani često doživljavaju zastrašivanje i nasilje od strane provladinih milicija, oružanih grupa i snaga nacionalne bezbednosti.

„Bilo je ogromno slavlje kada je objavljen Bitcoin plan i svi smo bili ponosni na našu zemlju“, rekao je jedan 20-godišnjak, „ali ne mislim da se život ovde uopšte poboljšao od tada”.

Drugi student je dodao: „Nigde nema cena u radnjama izraženih u bitkoioni, niti iko traži od ljudi da plaćaju koristeći novu valutu. Većina trgovaca i kupaca na tržištu nemaju telefon ili internet. Posebno ljudi izvan Bangija, nemaju ništa““.

Aleks Lilaher, osnivač i izvršni direktor Rise Up Media – marketinške agencije koja radi sa bitkoin startapima – je saglasan sa studentima, rekavši za VICE koliko je „iznenađen” što je ta zemlja uopšte napravila takavpotez.

„Centralnoafrička Republika nije baš lider u tehnologiji na kontinentu, i činilo se da tamo nikada nije bilo mnogo bitkoin korisnika koji bi mogla da lobiraju za takav potez“, rekao je on.

Pobednički tim slavi posle trke kanua za proslavu Dana nezavisnosti CAR-a u decembru. Fotografija: BARBARA DEBOUT/AFP preko Getti Images

Upitan da li građani CAR-a treba da vide usvajanje bitkoina kao pozitivnu ili negativnu stvar, Lilaher je odgovorio „ni jedno ni drugo, jer jednostavno ne mogu da vidim da će usvajanje uskoro krenuti. Ali imati alternativu i poslati signal Francuskoj da CAR želi da ima više nezavisnosti od valute je pozitivno u mojim očima”.

Dodaje: „Međutim, to takođe može imati posledice jer postoje moćne institucije poput Međunarodnog monetarnog fonda, na primer, sa kojima CAR mora da se bavi, koje nisu srećne što zemlje usvajaju bitkoin. Dakle, moglo bi doći do izazova sa kojima će vlada morati da se nosi“.

Centralnoafrička Republika je druga zemlja u svetu koja je usvojila bitkoin, a prva je El Salvador u septembru 2021. Lansiranje valute je tamo imalo različite rezultate, a nedavno je opisano kao „antiklimaktično“ i samo ga turisti zaista koriste.

Iako su ljudi možda očekivali da će druge nacije pratiti El Salvador, sigurno ne bi pomislili da će CAR odgovarati računu.

Glavna opoziciona stranka CAR-a bila je protiv tog predloga od samog početka. Banka centralnoafričkih država je takođe nazvala ovaj potez „problematičnim“ i navela da bi usvajanje valute uz CFA moglo ugroziti odnos nacije sa drugim afričkim zemljama.

Čak i kada većina ljudi u CAR-u nije mogla da investira u Bitcoin, i sve poruke upozorenja, u julu je vlada CAR-a lansirala sopstvenu kriptovalutu – „Sangocoin“. Sango je lokalni jezik koji se govori širom zemlje.

Pripadnici teritorijalnog pešadijskog bataljona CAR marširaju tokom parade povodom Dana nezavisnosti u Bangiju. Fotografija: BARBARA DEBOUT/AFP preko Getti Images

Sangocoin neki vide kao budućnost CAR-a, a zahtevao je minimalnu investiciju od 500 dolara. Zauzvrat, investitori su mogli da kupe zemljište u zemlji bogatoj dijamantima za 10.000 dolara, pa čak i da kupe državljanstvo CAR-a za oko 60.000 dolara – iako je ove ponude kasnije blokirao najviši sud zemlje. Sangocoin investitori su takođe trenutno „zaključani“ za kupovinu, bez načina da kriptovalutu prodaju ili razmene.

Bio je to hrabar potez vlade, ali izgleda da se još uvek nije isplatio.

Ovog meseca, Centralnoafrička Republika je saopštila da odlaže puštanje nacionalne kriptovalute na kripto berze – što bi olakšalo međunarodnu trgovinu. Rojters kaže da je vlada okrivila „trenutne tržišne uslove” i „tržišne razloge”, ali je novinska agencija izračunala da je Sangocoin dostigao samo „0,01%” od najnovijeg vladinog cilja prodaje.

Još jedan skeptik je Aleks Gladštajn, glavni strateški službenik Fondacije za ljudska prava. On je dugogodišnji zagovornik usvajanja bitkoina u svetu u razvoju, kao i kritičar CFA franka – ali čak i on oseća da je CAR-ova šema bila „izuzetno neosmišljena“.

„Iako imam mnogo simpatije prema ranjivoj i siromašnoj naciji koja usvaja bitkoin kao drugu valutu – posebno naciji koja je decenijama i decenijama finansijski kontrolisana od strane svoje bivše kolonijalne sile, nisam baš optimističan u pogledu toga kako je to izvedeno“, rekao je za VICE.

​Manekenka učestvuje na prvoj nedelji mode u centralnoj Africi u Bangiju u decembru. Fotografija: BARBARA DEBOUT/AFP preko Getti Images

Dodao je: „Zaista se čini da je cela ova stvar bila kao prevara da se Sangocoin promoviše. Ne mislim da je cilj bio da se bitkoin integriše na smislen način u ekonomiju zemlje. Čini se da je predsednik zainteresovan za bitkoin i da postoji mala grupa ljudi oko njega koja je iskoristila taj interes da bi mogla da donese ove zakone kako bi pokušala da pokrene Sangocoin, od kojeg su imali viziju da zarade gomilu novca. Ali izgleda da je na kraju uspela da prikupi samo malo novca.”

Gladstein kaže da bi Bitcoin mogao biti „veoma važna finansijska tehnologija za ljude Centralnoafričke Republike tokom vremena, i pametno je da vlada istraži kako to može pomoći ljudima“, ali je potrebno mnogo posla da se to postigne.

Vlada Centralnoafričke Republike i opoziciona vlada nisu odgovorile na nekoliko zahteva za intervju.

Tekst podržao Omidiar Netvork. VICE World News zadržava potpunu uređivačku autonomiju.

@ 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.

@ 99e7936f:d5d2197c

Wir sprechen kein Wort mehr miteinander, weil es weh tut

Viele Menschen haben in den letzten Jahren den Kontakt zu wichtigen Bezugspersonen verloren. Viele Menschen haben auch neue Leute auf der Straße oder durch Netzwerke kennen gelernt. Und manche Menschen hatten das Glück, schon vor der inszenierten Krise einen unterstützenden und stabilen Freundeskreis zu haben und haben diesen immer noch. Manchmal kommen alte Leute wieder zurück ins Leben, weil sie merken, dass man es gut mit ihnen meinte, als man vor den unglaublichen Lügen der Amtsträger warnte. Manchmal kommen alte Leute auch nicht mehr zurück, weil die Scham, auf falsche Versprechen herein gefallen zu sein, zu groß ist. Man gibt sich dann nach außen unverändert souverän und zieht es vor, still und heimlich zu leiden. Die neuen Kontakte bestehen manchmal leider auch nur temporär, sind zweckgebunden. Kaum ist die gemeinsame Aufgabe vollbracht, trennen sich die Wege wieder.

All das muss man in diesen Tagen  gehäuft aushalten. Alles verändert sich in stärkerem Maße als sonst. Viele dieser Veränderungen tun weh. Man kann sich auf Trauma nicht vorbereiten. Nie.

Ich möchte jetzt keine schlichten Alltagsbeobachtungen darüber widergeben, wie ich selbst oder Menschen in meinem Umfeld in den letzten Jahren ihre Beziehungen erlebt haben. Vielmehr geht es mir auch in diesem Artikel wieder um das Thema Trauma und um die Folgen, die jedes einzelne Trauma auch gesamtgesellschaftlich betrachtet hat. Was passiert, wenn man eine bereits durch Kriege traumatisierte Gesellschaft noch zusätzlich jahrelang unter Druck setzt, so wie dies in den letzten fünf Jahren geschehen ist? Wieviel Trauma verträgt eine Gesellschaft? Wie verändern sich Beziehungen in einer Gesellschaft, die immer wieder erneut traumatisiert wird? Ist irgendwann das Maß des Erträglichen voll? Und wenn ja, wie äußert sich solch eine Kumulation von Traumafolgen?

Meines Erachtens sehen wir gerade genau die Ergebnisse solch einer Kumulation von Traumafolgen in unserer deutschen Gesellschaft, vielleicht sogar global: Menschen reden nicht mehr (vertieft) miteinander. Und dies ist nur eine von vielen Traumafolgen.

Ich freue mich über jeden Leser, der jetzt noch weiterliest.

Durch genügend Traumatisierung kann man Menschen offensichtlich zeitweise dazu bringen, dass sie nicht mehr (vertieft) miteinander reden, weil das Reden weh tut.

Traumatisierung ist daher eine effektive Strategie der vermeintlich Herrschenden, Menschen zu separieren.

Traumatisierung setzt tiefe Verletzungen und macht Menschen vorübergehend sprachlos. Es fehlen einem die Worte. Man möchte dann nicht reden. Aber man verschließt sich auch vor den Worten anderer, weil man keine weitere Verletzung mehr erträgt.

Menschen im Alltag erachten es vielleicht mittlerweile schon als normal, wenn Beziehungen nicht gut laufen, egal, um welche Art von Beziehung es sich handelt. Sobald Probleme auftauchen, wird erst kurz gestritten, dann geschwiegen und wenn man das Schweigen nicht mehr aushält, dann gibt es entweder noch einen Versuch oder man geht gleich auf Distanz und bricht den Kontakt ganz ab. Auch meine Zündschnur ist manchmal immer noch gefühlt zu kurz. Wenn man sich Distanz nicht erlauben kann, dann frisst man das Problem in sich hinein, spült es runter, kompensiert irgendwie, wartet darauf, dass sich von allein etwas ändert oder dass sich eine bessere Gelegenheit bietet, bei der man dann die Biege machen kann. Mehrere Eisen im Feuer zu haben, beruflich wie privat, gilt als clever. Probleme nicht anzusprechen, gilt als kompetent. Das Wort Teamfähigkeit ist im Berufsleben zu einem Kampfbegriff geworden. Wer im Arbeitskontext Probleme anspricht, ist offensichtlich nicht teamfähig. Die Frage „Sind Sie teamfähig?“, erzählt meines Erachtens mehr über den Chef als über den Mitarbeiter. Die passendere Frage wäre wohl „Können Sie sich wortlos an schlechte Zustände dauerhaft adaptieren?“ In privaten Beziehungen braucht man, wenn es nicht so gut läuft, einen stilvollen Urlaub oder eine neue Wohnzimmereinrichtung, um endlich mal wieder schöne Gefühle erleben zu können. Negative Gefühle sind scheinbar das Kind, das keiner haben wollte, weshalb es die schönsten Kleider bekommt. Auch ich kenne Ablenkung von negativen Gefühlen durch Konsum und Essen. Es lohnt sich, mal den Werbeslogans von Möbelhäusern, Ferienanbietern oder Lebensmittelhändlern bewusst zuzuhören. Die Werbung kennt unsere Sehnsüchte und damit auch unsere negativen Gefühle besser als wir selbst. Und für alle, die nicht konsumieren wollen, die nicht locker lassen und steif darauf beharren, dass es aber ein Problem in der Beziehung oder am Arbeitsplatz oder zumindest eine gewisse Unzufriedenheit gäbe, für diese Menschen gibt es garantiert ein passendes Coaching- oder Weiterbildungsprogramm mit Namen wie „In 12 Modulen zur Selbstentfaltung“, welches nur deshalb meist nicht funktioniert, weil man es angeblich nicht richtig durchgeführt hat oder vorab noch das Basismodul absolvieren muss. Bildung ist mittlerweile auch ein Markt, der  Konsumgüter in Form von Coachings und Seminaren anbietet.

Auch ich bin übrigens lange zusammen gezuckt bei der Frage „Sind sie teamfähig?“ oder der Feststellung „Du bist das Problem, weil Du immer alles so genau nimmst, nicht die Fünf gerade sein lassen kannst.“ Am Ende ist man immer der Dumme, wenn man ein negatives Gefühl hat und darüber sprechen möchte. Trauma löst Scham UND Wut in einer Person aus. Scham zieht Abwertung an wie Licht die Motten anzieht. Und irgendwann platzt einem der Kragen. Man teilt selber aus. Und dann schämt man sich erneut, nicht nur für das früher oder später erlittene Trauma im Leben, sofern einem das bewusst ist, sondern auch für die unbeherrschte Reaktion, die man oft selbst nicht richtig versteht. Nicht bearbeitetes Trauma arbeitet unbewusst in uns.

Eine traumatisierte Gesellschaft wertet sich ständig gegenseitig ab und hält genau damit die Wunden offen.

Dann ist es vielleicht doch besser, das Problem in der Beziehung oder am Arbeitsplatz runter zu schlucken, auf Distanz zum anderen zu gehen, sich schon mal nach einer neuen Wohnzimmereinrichtung, einem neuen Partner oder einem neuen Job umzuschauen? Ich denke nicht, dass das eine Lösung ist.

Hinschauen und Gefühle bei sich und anderen zulassen, ist ein guter Anfang.

Wir gehen oft Beziehungen ein, gehen aber   gleichzeitig   einer echten tiefen und anhaltenden Verbindungen privat wie beruflich instinktiv aus dem Weg, weil echte tiefe Gespräche, zu denen es in solchen Verbindungen kommen kann, weh tun können, insbesondere wenn man noch unverarbeitetes Trauma mit sich herum schleppt. Und in einer traumatisierten Gesellschaft, tragen halt viele Menschen solche traumatisierten und nicht bearbeiteten Anteile mit sich herum.

Wir sind die Kinder und Kindeskinder der Menschen, die den zweiten Weltkrieg hautnah miterlebt haben. Alles, was die Eltern und Großeltern nicht besprochen, nicht verarbeitet haben, tragen wir weiter mit uns herum. Das ist den meisten Menschen, meines Erachtens, nicht bewusst. Mag sein, dass an dieser Stelle der eine oder andere widerspricht. Widersprechen Sie mir gerne. Meine Alltagserfahrung ist eine andere. Die Art, wie wir Beziehungen gestalten, spricht Bände. Aber, wenn man es nicht anders kennt und keine Kontrollgruppe hat, sagt man sich halt: „So isses. Und so isses normal. Ich kenne es nicht anders. Das machen doch alle so.“

Es ist so normal, in unserer Gesellschaft, nicht vertieft über negative (und auch positive) Gefühle zu reden. Alleine die Bezeichnung „negative Gefühle“ klingt schon wenig einladend. Und es ist auch so normal, Menschen in dem Moment, wo sie gegen jede Empfehlung nicht nur über negative Gefühle reden wollen, sondern diese sogar live und in Farbe zeigen, abzuwerten, oder noch schlimmer, zu ignorieren, weil man sich verunsichert fühlt, nicht weiß, wie man damit umgehen soll. Gefühle scheinen ansteckend zu sein. Da ist Vorsicht geboten. Ich persönlich kann mich an viele solcher Momente erinnern, wo Menschen nicht gern hören wollten, wovor ich Angst hatte, was und wer mich verletzt und wütend gemacht hatte, beruflich wie privat. Mit geäußerter Angst und Trauer macht man(n) sich ganz schnell lächerlich. Mit Wut hingegen wird ein Mann von anderen als stark bis beängstigend wahrgenommen. Ein Mann, der wütend agiert, wird eher als kraftvoll und temperamentvoll eingeschätzt. Eine Frau wird mit Wut dann akzeptiert, wenn sie bereits in einer (männlichen) Führungsrolle ist. „Sie“ muss schließlich ihren „Mann“ stehen. Hat sie keine Führungsrolle, wird sie abgewertet oder befördert. Dem wütenden Mann wird eher unterstellt, er habe schließlich einen wichtigen Auftrag zu erfüllen. Der Frau wird eher ein Mangel unterstellt, den ich hier nicht näher bezeichnen möchte. Darin spiegeln sich sehr starre Rollenvorstellungen von Mann und Frau in unserer Gesellschaft wider. Ängstliche Frauen, die bei einer Autopanne bezaubernd aussehen, erfüllen ein bestimmtes Klischee. Impulsive Männer mit Holzfällerhemd erfüllen zumindest auf einer Baustelle ein anderes Klischee. Menschen mit ausgeprägten negativen Gefühlen werden unter bestimmten Umständen glorifiziert. Der bezaubernd aussehenden Frau mit Autopanne wird schnell und gerne geholfen. Aber wenn die ängstliche Frau eine Vorgesetzte ist und der impulsive Mann mit Holzfällerhemd ein Kunde in einem Beratungsbüro ist, dann kann die Bewertung ganz anders ausfallen. Dann sind diese Gefühle vermeintlich fehlplatziert. Gefühle scheinen einen Platz zu haben. Die ängstliche Vorgesetzte hat eine Führungsschwäche und der impulsive Kunde im Beratungsbüro wird vom Sicherheitsdienst „entfernt“. Der Wunsch, über die gezeigten negativen Gefühle zu reden, wird einem mit Nachdruck verwehrt. Durch diesen vermeidenden Umgang mit negativen Gefühlen oder die Fehlinterpretation dieser Gefühle kommt es meines Erachtens oft zu bestimmten Rollenbesetzungen im Berufsleben. Eine positive Selektion von Mitarbeitern mit sehr rücksichtslosem oder überangepasstem Verhalten findet statt. In privaten Beziehungen werden negative Gefühle durch Ablenkung und Konsum vermieden. Es werden zu viele oder zu wenige Kontakte gepflegt. Beziehungen werden gar nicht mehr für die Ewigkeit antizipiert. Man hält sich alle Wege offen und lernt ständig neue Leute kennen. Oder man lebt Beziehung in sehr starren Strukturen, wo neue Informationen kaum Eingang finden, damit man sich nicht hinterfragen und mit anderen vergleichen muss. Lebensphasen mit dem weit geöffneten oder dem eher geschlossenen Muster wechseln sich auch manchmal ab. Individuelle Entwicklungen des einen oder anderen Musters in Lebensverläufen, zeichnen sich irgendwann als gesellschaftliche Strömung ab, wenn sie bei vielen Menschen gleichzeitig geschehen. Menschen wollen alles ausprobiert haben, bevor sie sich das Reihenhaus kaufen. Andere verkaufen ihr Reihenhaus nach der Scheidung, um im Wohnmobil durch die Welt zu tingeln. Man könnte denken, dass dies einfach individuelle Lebensverläufe sind, die sich zufällig so ergeben haben. Es gab Zeiten, wo Menschen zufällig viel Halt in starren Beziehungs- und Lebensstrukturen fanden. Gegenbewegungen brachen diese starren Strukturen nicht wirklich auf, weil sie Feuer mit Feuer bekämpften. Grundsätzlich gegen alles zu sein, was die Eltern vorgelebt haben, ist ja auch irgendwie rigide. Der Apfel fällt nicht zufällig neben den Stamm. Heute 80 Jahre nach Kriegsende können Menschen mit Begriffen wie Achtsamkeit und bewusster Kommunikation immer mehr anfangen, jedoch geht die weit verbreitete Bewusstheit und Selbstreflektiertheit oft zu Lasten einer wünschenswerten Verarbeitungstiefe. Zu oft  werden  wir gedacht, gefühlt und gelenkt. Um dies mit uns machen zu können, werden von vermeintlich Herrschenden wichtige Orientierungspunkte wie die eigene Geschichte, Kultur und Sprache falsch erzählt oder bis zur Unkenntlichkeit verändert. Und eigene Gefühle, die einem noch letzten Halt und Orientierung in diesem Dschungel bieten könnten, werden vom Kapitalismus ausdauernd gejagt wie ein seltenes Tier. Separierung und Orientierungslosigkeit ist gewollt.

Alles dreht sich um unsere tiefen Gefühle, insbesondere diese negativen Gefühle, die aus Trauma entstehen. Diese Gefühle wollen gesehen, gehört und bearbeitet werden. Sie machen zum Glück, solange es die Menschheit gibt, zuverlässig auf sich selbst aufmerksam. Sie sind in Wahrheit unsere Lebensversicherung. Die Zeit heilt gar nichts. Und hierfür braucht es wieder ein Bewusstsein, dass Gefühle wertvoll sind, auch solche, die aus Trauma entstehen. Ich persönlich habe dafür mehr als ein halbes Leben gebraucht, um dies zu verstehen. Als junge Frau habe ich nicht gewusst, dass viele meiner Gefühle, negativ wie positiv, Ausdruck meines Traumas waren. Heute weiß ich, dass ich mit dieser Einschätzung, die ich damals hatte, in „guter Gesellschaft“ war. Den meisten Menschen geht das so, bis sie irgendwann ihr eigenes Trauma erkennen.

Wir sind eine traumatisierte Gesellschaft, und die Arten und Ausprägungen von Trauma sind so vielfältig und den meisten Menschen unbekannt wie die Namen der Blumen auf einer Sommerwiese.

Wenn man diesen Satz wirken lässt, dann stellt sich doch die Frage:

Wie sieht denn ein gesunder Umgang mit negativen (und positiven) Gefühlen aus?

Reicht es aus, wenn man die Namen aller Wiesenblumen auswendig lernt, damit man jedes Trauma genau bestimmen kann? Oder geht es mehr um das Fühlen und weniger um das Wissen?

Den gesunden Umgang mit meinen Gefühlen habe ich nicht durch Theorie und Bücher erlernt, sondern durch den Alltag, durch die (emotionalen) Reaktionen meiner Mitmenschen und durch das bewusste Spüren und Zulassen meiner eigenen Gefühle. In Stufen lernte ich meine Gefühle immer besser kennen und mit ihnen umzugehen. Je besser ich sie kannte, umso lieber waren sie mir. Und ich lerne sie immer noch weiter und besser kennen. Das ist ein Prozess.

Traumabearbeitung ist anfangs ein anstrengender Prozess. Man sollte das langsam angehen. Aber diese Arbeit ist sehr lohnenswert, weil sie einem viele glückliche Momente, Kraft und Lebensfreude schenkt. Reden wird dadurch leichter und bringt in allen Lebensbereichen Fortschritte. Manchmal tut Reden auch weh (siehe Titel), aber zeitgleich, und auch langfristig gesehen, wird das Leben schöner durch Traumabearbeitung. Es geht nicht um Schmerzvermeidung, sondern darum, mit dem Schmerz gut umgehen zu können. Denn dadurch wird er letztlich kleiner und verwandelt sich zur Wiesenblume. Es geht um Verwandlung durch Fühlen. Die Erfahrung, dass man Trauma bearbeiten kann, erzählt mir so viel über dieses Leben, wie stark es ist, wie sehr es uns liebt und welche Blüten daraus wachsen können. Viele schöne Dinge, die wir täglich sehen, sind aus bewältigtem Trauma oder dem Wunsch, Trauma zu bewältigen, entstanden.

Der Schmerz lehrt uns Demut vor dem Leben und kreiert nebenbei die schönsten Lieder und Kunstwerke. Trauer und Verlust betonen den Wert der Dinge. Ärger und Wut bringen uns in Wallungen und stellen die Energie bereit, die man manchmal braucht, um Berge zu versetzen. Ängste sind das Tor zum Glück. Schuld und Scham lehren uns Vergebung. Neid und Eifersucht lassen unseren Selbstwert wachsen, wenn wir uns ihnen stellen. Und Freude, Glück und Ekstase machen uns dankbar, großzügig und optimistisch.

Wenn wir diese Gefühle wieder zulassen, dann können wir gar nicht anders als reden. Wir reden dann wieder vertieft miteinander, weil es gut tut, weil es entlastet, weil es Nähe zu anderen vielleicht erstmalig aufbaut und dann zu einem dicken Band verstärkt bis ein großes stabiles Netz daraus entsteht, welches Menschen, die gerade Halt benötigen, diesen bieten kann.

Wir reden dann wieder miteinander, weil es gut tut.

@ 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. 🚀

@ 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.

@ bf47c19e:c3d2573b

Originalni tekst na antenam.net

18.12.2024 / Autor: Ana Nives Radović

---

Ako ste makar djelić vremena proveli u svijetu digitalnog novca, vjerovatno ste naišli na termin HODL – uvijek napisan velikim slovima tako da na prvi pogled djeluje kao riječ sa slovnom greškom. Zapravo i jeste riječ o slovnoj grešci i to onoj koja je nastala na današnji dan prije 11 godina, a koja je uspjela ne samo da obezbijedi mjesto u istoriji svijeta novca, već i da postane naziv za jedan potpuno drugačiji pristup sredstvima koja posjedujemo.

Nespretno napisana riječ „hold“ (eng. držati, zadržati) u poruci na jednom forumu evoluirala je u akronim HODL – akronim za Hold On for Dear Life (doslovno – drži se za život, tj. drži se kao da ti život zavisi od toga), predstavlja poziv na akciju – ili, tačnije, „neakciju“ za vlasnike kriptovaluta da odole iskušenju prodaje tokom tržišnih padova. Riječ je o shvatanju da je ovaj oblik digitalne imovine bolje vremenski što duže imati u vlasništvu, kako bi se sačekao mnogo povoljniji trenutak za prodaju nego prodati ih u vremenu kada je situacija na tržištu loša.

Greška koja je postala pokret

Priča počinje 18. decembra 2013. godine, kada je cijena bitcoina tada počela da pada, a samo tokom toga dana se sa 682 na 522 dolara. Korisnik foruma pod imenom GameKyuubi objavio je sada već legendarni post pod naslovom „I AM HODLING“. Bila je to greška u kucanju, jer se na osnovu sadržaja poruke vidi da je krenuo da napiše „holding“ (držim), ali umjesto da se ispravi sebe, prigrlio je grešku, šaljivo govoreći o svom nedostatku vještina za trgovanje i zašto „bez obzira na sve“.

Bitcoin zajednica brzo je prihvatila ovaj izraz kao dio slenga. Pogrešno napisana riječ odjeknula je internet prostranstvima, a vremenom je prerasla u simbol šire filozofije – ne paniči, ne prodaj i ne dozvoli da kratkoročna nestabilnost poljulja tvoje uvjerenje. Od kasnonoćnog posta na forumu, HODL je postao poklič za vlasnike bitcoina (i drugih, u to vrijeme malobrojnih digitalnih valuta zanemarive vrijednosti) širom svijeta.

HODL-ovanje i HODL-eri

U suštini, HODL-ovanje je strategija zadržavanja kriptovaluta tokom tržišnih uspona i padova, zasnovana na uvjerenju da će cijene vremenom rasti. Umjesto impulsivnog reagovanja na tržišne fluktuacije, HODL-eri se posvećuju svojim investicijama na duže staze.

Ovaj pristup posebno je koristan za početnike, koji možda nemaju dovoljno stručnosti ili hrabrosti da se nose sa svakodnevnim trgovanjem (u čemu su često neuspješni i dugogodišnji vlasnici digitalnih novčića). Sam GameKyuubi u svom originalnom postu priznao je da samo najvještiji trgovci treba da pokušaju da „igraju igru“ tokom tržišnih padova. Za ostale, HODL-ovanje nije samo sigurnije, već je često i pametnije.

Filozofija HODL-ovanja zasnovana je na povjerenju – u budućnost kriptovaluta, u eventualni oporavak tržišta i u korist koju donosi strpljenje. To je odbijanje da se prodaje kada cijene naglo padnu – nepokolebljivo uvjerenje da su padovi privremeni i da nakon njih slijedi rast.

Zakon tržišta pokazuje da što drže HODL-ujete to se ova strategija više isplati, a cijena bitcoina u njegovoj šesnaestogodišnjoj istoriji je nesumnjivo najbolji dokaz za to. Trgovanje zahtijeva mnogo učenja, truda, vremena provedenog u praćenju svakog mogućeg signala, dok je kod HODL-ovanja važno samo da se „ne predate“.

Ako ste prethodnih godina nešto platili bitcoinom (a trgovci širom svijeta su to omogućili upravo da bi vas naveli da ih umjerite ka njima) vjerovatno ste zažalili, jer danas dok je njegova vrijednost i u dolarima i u eurima šestocifrena, ono na što ste ih potrošili ipak izgleda kao nešto što je trebalo platiti fizičkim novcem (kojeg je svakako „pojela inflacija“).

Pouzdane kriptovalute, a tu se prije svega misli na bitcoin, iako veoma volatilne bilježe trend rasta na duge staze, pa HODL-ovanje znači strpljenje u vremenu neizvjesnosti s idejom o koristi na duži rok, čak i kada su godine loše, kao što su bile 2014, 2017. i 2022. Na primjer, u periodu od 20. maja do 20. juna cijena bitcoina kliznula je sa 29.000 na 18.000 dolara, a upravo u tom trenutku mnogi su odlučili da količinu koju posjeduju prodaju ili je potroše plaćajući ovom digitalnom valutom (i pokajali se zbog toga).

HODL naspram drugih strategija

HODL-ovanje se razlikuje od aktivnijih strategija, poput kupovine po niskoj cijeni i prodaje po visokoj, jer dok trgovci pokušavaju da tempiraju tržište radi brze zarade, HODL-eri ostaju dosljedni svojoj odluci da se ne oslobađaju svoje imovine ni u najnoepovoljnijim trenucima. HODL-eri ne pokušavaju da predvide kretanje cijena – jednostavno čuvaju svoja sredstva, svjesni toga da će strpljenje na kraju donijeti rezultat.

Naravno, HODL-ovanje ima i svoje nedostatke. Za razliku od trgovaca koji mogu da povećaju svoj kapital kroz stratešku kupovinu i prodaju, HODL-eri zavise od vremena provedenog u čekanju na dugoročne rezultate. Pored toga, masovno HODL-ovanje može usporiti cirkulaciju kriptovaluta na tržištu, smanjujući ukupnu ekonomsku aktivnost – drugim riječima, kada bismo svi bili HODL-eri odnos ponude i tražnje bi bio veoma destimulišući i to bi oborilo cijenu.

Na sreću, trgovaca ima mnogo – dovoljno da tržište stalno bude aktivno i dinamično, no za one koji nemaju vremena, vještine ili sklonost ka riziku koji nosi trgovanje, HODL-ovanje ostaje jednostavan, ali veoma efikasan pristup.

Filozofija HODL-ovanja

HODL-ovanje je više od investicione strategije – to je način razmišljanja koji obuhvata otpornost, strpljenje i vjerovanje da su kratkotrajno suzdržavanje i nepokolebljivost u odluci da se sredstva sačuvaju vrijedna dugoročnog dobitka. Bilo da cijena bitcoina raste ili pada je, filozofija HODL-ovanja ostaje ista – ostanimo dosljedni, vjerujmo procesu i gledajmo u budućnost.

Jedan od ključnih razloga zašto većini ljudi ovakav pristup dugo nije bio razumljiv je zbog toga što su čitav sistem novca prihvatili u uvjerenju da on vremenom devalvira. Vjerovatno ste makar jednom razmatrali ponudu oročene štednje i procijenili da vam količina novca koju želite da položite neće donijeti onaj prinos koji će očuvati njegovu kupovnu moć nakon određenog broja godina, jer je kontinuirano doštampavanje novca podupiralo tu tvrdnju.

Dakle, ne treba da vas zavara sve ono što znate o novcu kao takvom, budući da bitcoin (na kojem je u ovom serijalu poseban fokus, jer mnoge druge kriptovalute ipak češće razočaraju nego što oduševe) nije novac, već samo ima neka svojstva novca. Posmatrajte ga radije kao imovinu – npr. kao nekretninu za koju sigurno želite da prodate onda kada je situacija stabilnija i kada su mnogo veće šanse da pronađete kupca kojem ćete je prodati po višoj cijeni.

U svakom slučaju, ako se u vašem digitalnom novčaniku već nalazi poneki satoshi (stomilioniti djelić bitcoina), kada tržište ponovo uđe u nepovoljnu fazu i zavlada prolazna panika, sjetite se onoga što je napisao GameKyuubi. HODL nije samo izraz – to je način da se prebrode oluje i izazovi koje nestabilno tržište nosi.

@ 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

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.

@ 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.

@ 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.

@ bf47c19e:c3d2573b

Originalni rad

Apstrakt

Kriptovalute (engl. "cryptocurrency") su digitalne (virtualne) valute, koje iako su sredstvo razmene, još uvek nisu strogo regulisane zakonom u većini država, a u pojedinim su čak i zabranjene. Veliki broj ljudi, uključujući i IT stručnjake i programere ne znaju mnogo o ovoj temi, a šira javnost izjednačava pojmove blokčejna i bitkoina. Tržište kriptovaluta danas iznosi gotovo 770 milijardi dolara. Od pojave prvih digitalnih valuta do danas, nastalo je preko 1.300 aktivnih kriptovaluta koje se razlikuju prema svojim svojstvima i upotrebi. Pre bitkoina bilo je mnoštvo neuspelih pokušaja stvaranja digitalnih valuta (digikeš, heškeš, Fejsbuk kredit i dr.). Utopistička ideja da matematika i fizika mogu rešiti društvene probleme započela je svoj život kroz pojavu bitkoina. Genijalna ideja po kojoj funkcioniše bitkoin zasnovana je na tehnologiji blokčejna, čiji kapacitet doseže daleko iznad kripto valuta. Iako se još uvek vode polemike ko stoji iza pseudonima Satoši Nakamoto, njegova zaostavština ima potencijal da promeni svet. Uspeh bitkoina leži u prednostima koje ima u odnosu na druge slične valute, ali njegov značaj prevazilazi i pogodnosti koje je doneo. Banke nisu potrebne za čuvanje podataka o novcu, evidenciju o imovini i svakoj transakciji bitkoina čuvaju računari svih korisnika mreže u zajedničkoj bazi podataka blokčejnu. Sve transakcije su mnogo brže od bankarskih, bez taksi, uz drastično lakše plaćanje preko državnih granica. Bitkoin svojim korisnicima pruža bezbednosti bez identifikacije, iako blokčejn beleži transakciju, ne beleži ko stoji iza nje. U radu su predstavljeni osnovni principi na kojima su zasnovani bitkoin i druge kriptovalute, pojašnjen odnos između blokčejna i bitkoina.

1 UVOD

Ideal o novcu koji se ne oslanja na centralne institucije (koje mogu propasti, ali i koje vrše nadzor nad korisnicima), postojao je decenijama. U digitalnom svetu prvi ga je uobličio pisac naučne fantastike Nil Stivenson 1999. godine u svojoj noveli Kriptonomikon. On je opisao podzemni svet koji funkcioniše zahvaljujući digitalnom zlatu zasnovanom na kriptografiji, pri čijoj upotrebi korisnici ne moraju odavati ko su i šta su (Popper, 2016).

Kriptovalute (engl. cryptocurrency) su digitalne (virtualne) valute, koje iako su sredstvo razmene, još uvek nisu strogo regulisane zakonom u većini država, a u pojedinim su čak i zabranjene (Jovanović, 2014).

Da bi se razumeo nastanak i funkcionisanje kriptovaluta, neophodno je sagledati ih iz različitih uglova na kojima su one bazirane: matematici, sociologiji, ekonomiji, pravu i politici. To je verovatno i glavni razlog zbog koga veliki broj ljudi (uključujući i IT stručnjake i programere) ne znaju mnogo o ovoj temi. Takođe, šira javnost izjednačava pojmove blokčejna i bitkoina.

Sve kriptovalute su bazirane na jedinstvenom nizu brojeva za svaku jedinicu valute, koje korisnici mogu jedni drugima slati preko mreže. U prošlosti su se ti nizovi mogli lako kopirati i trošiti više puta, zbog čega nisu imali vrednost. Kriptograf Dejvid Čaum je taj problem rešio stvaranjem jedinstvene centralizovane knjige, u kojoj su se čuvale beleške o transakcijama svakog korisnika, čime ni jedna jedinica valute više nije mogla da se nalazi na dva mesta istovremeno (Bertlet, 2016).

Kriptovalute svoj nastanak duguju težnjama levo orijentisanih utopističkih posvećenika IT tehnologija koji su sanjali o univerzalnom novcu koji bi svako mogao da poseduje i troši, čija je vrednost onolika koliko su korisnici voljni da plate (na principu ponude i potražnje), ali pre svega na liniji fronta za onlajn anonimnost i slobodu, bez cenzure i nadzora. Pojavi bitkoina prethodio je Sajberpankerski manifest Done Haravej (Haraway, 1985) koji počinje rečima: „U elektronsko doba, privatnost je neophodan uslov za postojanje otvorenog društva“.

Kriptovalute su univerzalni novac koji se može koristiiti bilo gde u svetu, one su lako prenosive i teško se krivotvore.

Neki podaci pokazuju da tržište kriptovaluta danas iznosi gotovo 770 milijardi dolara. Od pojave prvih digitalnih valuta do danas, nastalo je preko 1.300 aktivnih kriptovaluta koje se razlikuju prema svojim svojstvima i upotrebi.

Prema odredbama Zakona o Narodnoj banci Srbije celokupni unutrašnji promet u Republici Srbiji izražava se u dinarima, osim ako nekim zakonom nije drukčije određeno. „Zakonom o platnom prometu propisano je da se poslovi platnog prometa obavljaju u dinarima, a Zakonom o deviznom poslovanju da se plaćanje, naplaćivanje i prenos između rezidenata i između rezidenata i nerezidenata u Republici Srbiji vrši u dinarima, a izuzetno se može vršiti i u devizama u slučajevima koji su propisani ovim zakonom“ (NBS, 2014).

Tržište kriptovaluta u Srbiji postoji, sve je veći broj rudara. Iako trgovanje kriptovalutama nije nelegalno, Narodna Banka Srbije - NBS je u više saopštenja navela da one ne predstavljaju zakonsko sredstvo plaćanja u Republici Srbiji. Takođe, zbog toga što ih ne izdaje centralna banka, NBS za korišćenje virtuelnih valuta, ulaganje u njih, kao ni za njihovu vrednost. Narodna banka Srbije je više puta upozoravala javnost da virtuelne valute ne predstavljaju zakonsko sredstvo plaćanja u Republici Srbiji (NBS, Politika – u vezi s bitkoinom, 2017).

Ukoliko kriptovalute promatramo kao novac onda njihove tranksakcije mogu biti upitne shodno Zakonu o sprečavanju pranja novca i finansiranja terorizma, gde je propisana obaveza preduzimanja radnji i mera za sprečavanje pranja novca, kao što su identifikacija stranaka koje trguju preko tih platformi, uzimanjem kopije ličnog dokumenta. Kako poslovanje platformi na kojima se vrše transakcije kriptovalutama nije zakonom regulisano u Republici Srbiji, a uglavnom ni u uporednom pravu, a čl. 552. Zakona o obligacionim odnosima Republike Srbije ((„Sl. list SFRJ“, br. 29/78, 39/85, 45/89 - odluka USJ i 57/89, „Sl. list SRJ“, br. 31/93 i „Sl. list SCG“, br. 1/2003 - Ustavna povelja) predviđa razmenu robe kao jedan od načina trgovine, otvara se put ka legalnoj trgovini kriptovalutama (Bubanja, 2017).

Praksa je pokazala da su se korisnici kriptovaluta kada su imali problem sa njima, obraćali vlastima i njihovim regulatornim telima, zbog čijeg su zaobilaženja i smišljeni. Nažalost, korisnici ne uživaju pravnu zaštitu čak i kada je reč o trgovini putem registrovanih privrednih subjekta.

2 BITKOIN

Prva decentralizovana kriptovaluta koja se pojavila je bitkoin (eng. „Bitcoin“). Termin bitkoin označava istoimenu organizaciju, softver i protokol, kao i jedinicu mere ove kriptovalute (skraćeno BTC) (Bertlet, 2016). Koncept na kome se zasniva bitkoin prvi put je predstavljen 2008. godine u članku "Bitcoin: A Peerto-Peer Electronic Cash System", a u januaru 2009. godine bitkoin je pušten u promet. Njegov tvorac nije poznat do danas i krije se iza pseudonima Satoši Nakomato. Novu vrstu digitalne kriptovalute formirao je tako što je stvorio distribuirani sistem verifikacije. Bitkoin nastaje u procesu koji se naziva „rudarenje“ (engl. mining). Njegova jedinstvenost je u tome što je decentralizovana valuta, iza koje ne stoji nijedna država, niti banka. Bitkoin je digitalna valuta, koja nastaje i čuva se elektronski. Kriptovalute u cilju maksimizacije bezbednosti, upotrebljavaju metod - dokaz o radu (engl. proofof-work), metod baziran na informacijama koje je teško stvoriti, ali koje ostalim učesnicima u rudarenju obezbeđuju laku proveru i verifikaciju transakcija.

Kriptovalute se čuvaju na bitkoin adresama za koje ključ predstavlja jedinstven niz slova i brojeva. Svaka transkacija bitkoinom se beleži u blokovima koji se zovu blokčejn. Transakcije se hronološki ređaju u blokove, u svakom se nalazi digitalni potpis prethodnog bloka, time se uređuje redosled i garantuje da novi blok može da se pridruži lancu samo ako počne na mestu na mestu završetka prethodnog. Jedan od osnovnih činilaca bezbednosti bitkoina je da se kopija svake izvedene transakcije beleži na svakom nalogu na kome je instaliran bitkoin softver. Blokčejnove neprekidno verifikuju računari svih korisnika softvera, tako sistem zna u bilo kom trenutku, koliko bitkoina svaki korisnik u svom novčaniku poseduje. Novčanik je program koji služi za slanje, primanje i skladištenje kriptovaluta. Digitalni novčanik sadrži prikaz količine kriptovalute koju korisnik poseduje, zapise o svim njegovim transakcijama, korisnički tajni ključ i njegove adrese (Bertlet, 2016). Novčanik je moguće instalirati na računar, mobilni telefon i tablet.

Falsifikovanje bitkoina nije moguće, jer iako vlasništvo može da se menja ono se ne može nikada duplirati (Bertlet, 2016). On je pseudoanoniman, bitkoin mreža čuva sve podatke o svakoj transakciji koja se dogodila unutar mreže. Svako ko ima bitkoin softver i adresu na bitkoin mreži, može videti koliko novca ima na mreži, ali ne i kome oni pripadaju. Za razliku od otvaranja računa u bankama, otvaranje bitkoin računa (adrese) je brzo, bez troškova i „papirologije“. Jedna od glavnih prednosti bitkoin mreže je brzina transakcija.

Svako ko snagu svog računara posveti verifikaciji transakcija u blokčejnu može biti „rudar“. To je proces dodavanja transkacija u registar svih bitkoin transkacija. Rudarenje čini rešavanje matematičkog algoritma za čije se uspešno rešavanje dobija određena količina bitkoina.

Iako bitkoin ima reputaciju nestabilnosti, velikih fluktuacija i nezakonitog poslovanja, čemu mnogi pridodaju i urušavanje tradicionalnog koncepta nacionalnih država, ipak većina se slaže u tome da je njegova pojava najvažnija nova ideja od stvaranja Interneta (Vigna & Casey, 2016).

Razloga za uspeh bitkoina ima više. Finansijska kriza povoljno je uticala na njegov razvoj, poverenje u postojeći finansijski ali i politički sistem je bilo poljuljano i brojni korisnici su u njemu prepoznali drugačije rešenje.

Anonimnost koju pruža prilikom transakcija jedan je od ključnih razloga njegovog uspeha. Prilikom digitalnog plaćanja bitkoinom u većini slučajeva nije potrebno davanje ličnih podataka. Ovakva vrsta anonimnosti, nažalost pogodovala je i usponu tamne strane upotrebe i popularnosti bitkoina u kriminalnim krugovima.

Računi u bitkoinu nisu opterećeni visokim bankarskim dažbinama.

Takođe, nije beznačajan ni potencijal plaćanja izdataka koji su manji od trenutnih ograničenja u konvencijalnim transakcijama na internetu (npr. naplata čitanja jednog novinskog članka ili preskoči reklamu, koji koštaju manje od 20 ili 30 centi kolika je najmanja transakcija) (Popper, 2016).

Kao što su svi učesnici na internetu povezani protokolima (TCP/IP, FTP, SMTP, HTTP i dr.) zahvaljujući kojima mogu međusobno da komuniciraju, bitkoin je stvorio svoje softverske protokole koji uređuju funkcionalna pravila upravljanja sistemom.

Bitkoin je omogućio novi način stvaranja, čuvanja i transfera novca.

Od svog nastanka bitkoin se unapređivao, podržan od internet zajednice, posebno od posvećenika slobodi interneta i anonimosti, mnogi od problema koji su uočeni su rešavani zajedničkim naporom internet zajednice.

3 BLOKČEJN

Blokčejn (engl. blockchain) nije samo bitkoin, on je tehnologija za koju mnogi predviđaju da će promeni svet (OECD, 2018).

Ukoliko bismo pojednostavljeno opisivali blokčejn mogli bismo da kažemo da je to nova vrsta baze podataka, iako bi to bilo pojednostavljeno objašnjenje slično kao kada bi smo imejl (email) opisali kao novi način za slanje pisama.

Iako blokčejn jeste nova vrsta baze podatka, to ne objašnjava u dovoljnoj meri genijalnost načina na koji funkcioniše.

Kada bilo gde i bilo kada položimo novac, oslanjamo se na zapis u bazi podataka treće strane, banke, firme i sl. Poverenje u banke zasnovano je na zakonu koji reguliše rad banke, poverenju u državu da će u slučaju propasti banke država nadoknaditi klijentima njihov ulog.

Kada plaćamo on line usluge ili vršimo neku drugu transakciju kreditnim karticama, poklanjamo poverenje kompanijama koje posreduju u našem plaćanju (Mastercard, VISA i dr.) koje za to uzimaju određenu materijalnu nadoknadu. Čak i prilikom tradicionalnih oblika plaćanja gotovinom u papirnom novcu, mi dajemo papir na kome je ispisana vrednost za koju prodavac veruje da će mu biti isplaćena (ili garantovana) od strane vlade koja ju je štampala. Digitalno plaćanje zbog prisustva trećih strana (banke, kreditne kompanije i dr.) uvek je bilo moguće pratiti. I kod plaćanja gotovinom klijenti veruju bankama i kreditnim kompanijama koje rukovode platnim karticama, da imaju pouzdane baze podataka. I vlade država veruju da banke i kreditne kompanije vode baze podataka koje su tačne i pouzdane.

Baze podataka sadrže mnoštvo ličnih podataka, od npr. medicinske dokumentacije u domu zdravlja koja sadrži važne informacije o nama i našem zdravstvenom stanju, kada smo i od koje bolesti bolovali, koje lekove smo koristili i sl. I druge baze podataka sadrže mnoštvo naših ličnih podataka koje su važne ne samo za nas, već i za državu, grad, privredu, druge građane itd.

Osim što omogućava anonimne i sigurne transakcije, blokčejn ima i potencijal da sačuva sve vredne informacije, od podataka o rođenim i umrlim, preko osiguranja, do katastara nepokretnosti, pa čak i glasova (Tapscott, 2018).

Sagledavši mogućnosti koji blokčejn nudi u transformaciji industrija i tržišta, povećanju transparentnosti i poverenja između građana, kao i olakšanom pristupu tržištu (uz bolju efikasnost transakcija), ali i rizicima koje sa sobom nosi, Organizacija za ekonomsku saradnju i razvoj - OECD organizovala je od 4. do 5. septembra 2018. godine Forum politike OECD-a za blokčejn. To je bila ujedno i prva glavna međunarodna konferencija na kojoj se razmatrao uticaj blokčejna na aktivnosti vlada i javnih prioriteta. Forum se bavio prednostima i rizicima blokčejna za ekonomiju i društvo, pokušajem određivanja adekvatnog regulatornog pristupa, kao i javnih politika prema blokčejnu.

Učesnici Foruma su diskutovali o mogućnostima globalnog ekonomskog uticaja blokčejna, njegovim implikacijama na privatnost i sajber bezbednost, upotrebi blokčejn tehnologija za povećanje inkluzivnosti, njegovoj upotrebi u promovisanju zelenog rasta i održivosti, kao i jačanju kapaciteta javne uprava i primene u praksi (OECD, 2018).

4 ZAKLJUČAK

Pre bitkoina bilo je mnoštvo neuspelih pokušaja stvaranja digitalnih valuta (digikeš, heškeš, Fejsbuk kredit i dr.). Uspeh bitkoina leži u prednostima koje ima u odnosu na druge slične valute, ali njegov značaj prevazilazi i pogodnosti koje je doneo.

Svaki korisnik bitkoina ima potpunu kontrolu nad novcem na svom računu (adresi), jedino osoba sa privatnim ključem može pristupiti bitkoinima na toj adresi. Banke nisu potrebne za čuvanje podataka o novcu, evidenciju o imovini i svakoj transakciji bitkoina čuvaju računari svih korisnika mreže u zajedničkoj bazi podataka blokčejnu. Sve transakcije su mnogo brže od bankarskih, bez taksi, uz drastično lakše plaćanje preko državnih granica.

Bitkoin svojim korisnicima pruža bezbednosti bez identifikacije, iako blokčejn beleži transakciju, ne beleži ko stoji iza nje. Zahvaljujući peer-to-peer komunikaciji i kriptografiji, povezivanje bitkoin transakcija sa osobom u stvarnom životu je veoma teško. To je u ujedno možda i njegova najveća mana, jer su oporezivanje i nadzor nad korisnicima krajnje teški.

Garancija vrednosti bitkoina osmišljena je po uzoru na plamenite metale kojih ima ograničeno u prirodi. Zbog toga je Satoši u kodu bitkoina odredio da ih ima maksimalno 21 milion, te da ukoliko bitkoin protokol ostane isti, poslednji bitkoin će biti izrudaren 2140. godine.

Do sada je izrudareno oko 17 miliona bitkoina, što znači da je ostalo 4 miliona, ili oko 19%. Do sada je bitkoin uspeo da prevlada sve krize koje su ga zahvatile (u više slučajeva nestajali su iznosi koji su dostizali i 400 miliona dolara). Kakva god sudbina bitkoina bila u budućnosti, njegova uloga se neće moći zanemariti, prvenstveno zbog toga što je zahvaljujući njemu iznedren blokčejn. Bez obzira na skepticima u vezi sa kriptovalutama, teško se mogu osporiti mogućnosti koje blokčejn pruža, pre svega u zaštiti baza podatka.

@ 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.

@ bf47c19e:c3d2573b

Originalni tekst na dvadesetjedan.com.

Autor: Gigi / Prevod na srpski: Plumsky

---

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

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

Zašto je privatnost bitna

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

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

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

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

Bitcoin i privatnost

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

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

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

Najbolje prakse privatnosti

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

Koje korake preduzeti da bi uvećali svoju privatnost:

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

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

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

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

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

Upravljajte svojim nodom: Ako nod nije tvoj, onda nisu ni pravila. Upravljanje svojim nodom je suštinska potreba da bi se bitcoin koristio na privatan način. Svaka interakcija sa bitcoin mrežom je posrednjena nodom. Ako vi taj nod ne upravljate, čiji god nod koristite može da vidi sve što vi radite. Ova upustva (https://bitcoiner.guide/node/) su jako korisna da bi započeli proces korišćenja svog noda.

Koristite Lightning mrežu za male transakcije: Pošto Lightning protokol ne koristi glavnu bitcoin mrežu za trasakcije onda je i samim tim povećana privatnost korišćenja bez dodatnog truda. Iako je i dalje rano, oni apsolutno bezobzirni periodi Lightning mreže su verovatno daleko iza nas. Korišćenje Lightning-a za transakcije malih i srednjih veličina će vam pomoći da uvećate privatnost a da smanjite naplate svojih pojedinačnih bitcoin transakcija.

Nemojte koristiti javne blok pretraživače za svoje transakcije: Proveravanje adresa na javnim blok pretraživačima povezuje te adrese sa vašim IP podacima, koji se onda mogu koristiti da se otkrije vaš identitet. Softveri kao Umbrel i myNode vam omogućavaju da lako koristite sami svoj blok pretraživač. Ako morate koristiti javne pretraživače, uradite to uz VPN ili Tor.

Koristite CoinJoin često i rano pri nabavljanju svojih novčića: Pošto je bitcoin večan, primenjivanje saradničkih CoinJoin praksa će vam obezbediti privatnost u budućnosti. Dok su CoinJoin transakcije svakovrsne, softveri koji su laki za korišćenje već sad postoje koji mogu automatizovati ovu vrstu transakcija. Samourai Whirlpool (https://samouraiwallet.com/whirlpool) je odličan izbor za Android korisnike. Joinmarket (https://github.com/joinmarket-webui/jam) se može koristiti na vašem nodu. A servisi postoje koji pri snabdevanju vašeg bitcoina istog trenutka obave CoinJoin tranzakciju automatski.

Zaključak

Svi bi trebalo da se potrude da koriste bitcoin na što privatniji način. Privatnost nije isto što i tajanstvenost. Privatnost je ljudsko pravo i mi svi trebamo da branimo i primenljujemo to pravo. Teško je izbrisati postojeće informacije sa interneta; a izbrisati ih sa bitcoin baze podataka je nemoguće. Iako su daleko od savršenih, alatke postoje danas koje vam omogućavaju da najbolje prakse privatnosti i vi sami primenite. Mi smo vam naglasili neke od njih i - kroz poboljšanje u bitcoin protokolu kroz Taproot i Schnorr - one će postajati sve usavršenije.

Bitcoin postupci se ne mogu lako opisati korišćenjem tradicionalnim konceptima. Pitanja kao što su "Ko je vlasnik ovog novca?" ili "Odakle taj novac potiče?" postaju sve teža da se odgovore a u nekim okolnostima postaju potpuno beznačajna.

Satoši je dizajnirao bitcoin misleći na privatnost. Na nivou protokola svaka bitcoin transakcija je proces "topljenja" koji za sobom samo ostavlja heuristične mrvice hleba. Protokolu nije bitno odakle se pojavio bilo koji bitcoin ili satoši. Niti je njega briga ko je legalan identitet vlasnika. Protokolu je samo važno da li su digitalni potpisi validni. Dokle god je govor slobodan, potpisivanje poruka - privatno ili ne - ne sme biti kriminalan postupak.

Dodatni Resursi

This Month in Bitcoin Privacy | Janine

Hodl Privacy FAQ | 6102

Digital Privacy | 6102

UseWhirlpool.com | Bitcoin Q+A

Bitcoin Privacy Guide | Bitcoin Q+A

Ovaj članak napisan je u saradnji sa Matt Odellom, nezavisnim bitcoin istraživačem. Nađite njegove preporuke za privatnost na werunbtc.com

Originalni tekst

@ 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.

@ 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.

@ bf47c19e:c3d2573b

Originalni tekst na dvadesetjedan.com.

Autor: Matt Corallo / Prevod na hrvatski: Davor

---

Bitcoineri, od programera Bitcoin Core-a preko dugogodišnjih entuzijasta Bitcoina do nedavnih pronalazača /r/Bitcoina, vole razgovarati o tome kako je decentralizacija Bitcoina njegova ultimativna značajka. Doduše, rijetko vidite da netko objašnjava zašto je decentralizacija važna. Zasigurno je to zanimljiva značajka iz perspektive računalne znanosti, no zašto bi potrošači, tvrtke ili investitori marili za to? Ova objava je pokušaj da se napiše zašto je decentralizacija temelj vrijednosti Bitcoina i što je još važnije, postavi buduće objave u kojima se govori o tome kada ona to nije.

Kada Bitcoineri govore o decentralizaciji Bitcoina, prva stvar koja se pojavljuje je često spominjani nedostatak inherentnog povjerenja u treću stranu. Dok je dobro postavljeno povjerenje preduvjet za učinkovit rad mnogih sustava, jednom kada se takvo povjerenje izgubi, sustavi mogu postati nevjerojatno krhki. Uzmimo, za primjer, povjerenje u američke banke prije uspostave FDIC-a (Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation). Dok je pristup bankovnim uslugama omogućio više pogodnosti i mnogim tvrtkama učinkovitije poslovanje, poznato je da su banke propadale, pritom upropaštavajući sa sobom sva sredstva klijenata. Dok je predstavljanje FDIC-a i sličnih programa decentraliziralo povjerenje u financijske institucije s jedne strane na dvije, transakcije u velikom dijelu svijeta ne nude takvu zaštitu. Čak i uz takve programe, pojedinci nisu univerzalno zaštićeni od gubitka preko granica i preko određene vrijednosti.

U novije vrijeme, propisi koji dopuštaju pojedinim državnim dužnosnicima jednostrano oduzimanje imovine postali su uobičajeni. Naročito u SAD-u, sada zloglasna “Operacija Choke Point” i programi oduzimanja civilne imovine, omogućili su službenicima za provođenje zakona i privatnim institucijama da zapljenjuju financijsku imovinu i uskraćuju financijske usluge uz malo ili nimalo nadzora. Uklanjanje provjerenih skrbnika i stvaranje sustava s likvidnom imovinom, koja se ne može zaplijeniti, ima potencijal pružiti pouzdanije financijske usluge mnogima koji inače ne bi mogli djelovati učinkovito ili uopće ne bi mogli djelovati. Ova mogućnost da se Bitcoin ne može zaplijeniti, omogućena je samo zbog nedostatka za centraliziranim povjerenjem. Centralizirani sustavi elektroničke gotovine i financijski sustavi su pokušali pružiti takvu pouzdanost, propisi i poslovna stvarnost su to gotovo univerzalno spriječili.

Svojstvo koje je jednako važno za sposobnost Bitcoina da pruža financijske usluge zviždačima, stranim disidentima i porno zvijezdama je njegov otpor cenzuri transakcija. Sposobnost trećih strana da zaplijene imovinu rezultira izravnim i čistim novčanim gubitkom, zamrzavanje imovine može imati sličan učinak. Kada pojedinac ili organizacija više nisu u mogućnosti obavljati transakcije za plaćanje roba i usluga, njihova financijska imovina brzo gubi vrijednost. Iako Bitcoin ima vrlo dobru priču o nemogućnosti zapljene (svaka strana u sustavu nameće nemogućnost bilo koga da potroši Bitcoin bez dodanog privatnog ključa), njegova priča o otporu cenzuri je malo utančanija.

U svijetu u kojem nijedan rudar Bitcoina nema više od 1% ukupne hash snage (ili nešto drugo što je jednako decentralizirano), trebalo bi biti lako pronaći rudara koji je ili anoniman i prihvaća sve transakcije ili je u nadležnosti koja ne pokušava cenzurirati vaše transakcije. Naravno, ovo nije svijet kakav danas imamo, a cenzura transakcija jedan je od većih razloga da se ozbiljno zabrinemo centralizacijom rudarenja (za pune čvorove). Ipak, mogućnost pojedinca da kupi hash snagu (u obliku lako dostupnog starog hardvera ili u obliku njegovog iznajmljivanja) za rudarenje svoje inače cenzurirane transakcije, opcija je sve dok je pravilo najdužeg lanca na snazi ​​kod svih rudara. Iako je znatno skuplji nego što bi bio u istinski decentraliziranom Bitcoinu, to omogućuje Bitcoinu da zadrži neka od svojih anti-cenzuriranih svojstava.

Ako ste već dovoljno dugo u priči oko Bitcoina, možda ćete prepoznati gornja svojstva kao kritična za zamjenjivost. Zamjenjivost, kao ključno svojstvo svakog monetarnog instrumenta, odnosi se na ideju da vrijednost jedne jedinice treba biti ekvivalentna svakoj drugoj jedinici. Bez mogućnosti odmrzavanja/otpora cenzuri i nemogućnosti zapljene, Bitcoin (i svaki drugi monetarni sustav) počinje gubiti zamjenjivost. Trgovci i platni procesori više ne mogu razumno prihvaćati Bitcoin bez provjere niza crnih lista i mnogo truda kako bi bili sigurni da će moći potrošiti Bitcoin koji prihvaćaju. Ako povjerenje u zamjenjivost Bitcoina deformira, njegova bi korist mogla biti značajno deformirana.

Još jedno svojstvo koje proizlazi iz decentralizacije Bitcoina, je njegov otvoreni pristup. Ulagači iz Silicijske doline često ga nazivaju jednim od najzanimljivijih svojstava Bitcoina, a mnogi ga vole nazivati ​​"bez dopuštenja". Sposobnost bilo koga, bilo gdje u svijetu, sa internetskom vezom, da prihvaća Bitcoin za robu i usluge i koristi Bitcoin za kupnju roba i usluga je vrlo uzbudljiva. Opet, ovo svojstvo ovisi o decentralizaciji Bitcoina. Iako postoje mnogi centralizirani pružatelji financijskih usluga, gdje mnogi od njih promoviraju svoju dostupnost bilo kome, sama njihova prisutnost kao centraliziranog tijela koje može proizvoljno uskratiti uslugu, čini ih podložnim budućim promjenama politike iz bilo kojeg razloga. PayPal je, na primjer, utemeljen na idealima univerzalnog pristupa elektroničkoj gotovini. Međutim, zbog svoje pozicije središnje vlasti, brzo je promijenio svoje politike, kako bi udovoljio pritiscima regulatora i politikama postojećeg financijskog sustava na koji se oslanjao. Ovih dana, PayPal je nadaleko poznat po zamrzavanju računa i oduzimanju imovine uz malo ili nimalo upozorenja. U osnovi, oslanjanje na centralizirane strane za usluge nije kompatibilno s univerzalnim otvorenim pristupom u financijskom svijetu.

Primijetit ćete da se sve gore navedene kritične značajke, one koje Bitcoin čine tako uzbudljivim za sve nas, centralizirani sistemi već neko vrijeme mogu implementirati. Zapravo to se radilo i prije, u učinkovitijim sustavima od Bitcoina. Naravno, nikada nisu potrajali, gubeći kritična svojstva nakon podešavanja kako bi se popravila ova ili ona stvar, implementirajući regulatorne sustave cenzure izravno u osnovne slojeve, ograničavajući pristup rastu dobiti i potpuno gašenje. Stvarno, decentralizacija u Bitcoinu sama po sebi nije značajka, već je umjesto toga jedini način za koji znamo da održimo značajke koje želimo u sustavima kojima upravljaju ljudi.

Originalni tekst