@ 609f186c:0aa4e8af

Google says that Android 16 is slated to feature an optional high security mode. Cool.

Advanced Protection has a bunch of requested features that address the kinds of threats we worry about.

It's the kind of 'turn this one thing on if you face elevated risk' that we've been asking for from Google.

And likely reflects some learning after Google watched Apple 's Lockdown Mode play out. I see a lot of value in this..

Here are some features I'm excited to see play out:

The Intrusion Logging feature is interesting & is going to impose substantial cost on attackers trying to hide evidence of exploitation. Logs get e2ee encrypted into the cloud. This one is spicy.

The Offline Lock, Inactivity Reboot & USB protection will frustrate non-consensual attempts to physically grab device data.

Memory Tagging Extension is going to make a lot of attack & exploitation categories harder.

2G Network Protection & disabling Auto-connect to insecure networks are going to address categories of threat from things like IMSI catchers & hostile WiFi.

I'm curious about some other features such as:

Spam & Scam detection: Google messages feature that suggests message content awareness and some kind of scanning.

Scam detection for Phone by Google is interesting & coming later. The way it is described suggests phone conversation awareness. This also addresses a different category of threat than the stuff above. I can see it addressing a whole category of bad things that regular users (& high risk ones too!) face. Will be curious how privacy is addressed or if this done purely locally. Getting messy: Friction points? I see Google thinking these through, but I'm going to add a potential concern: what will users do when they encounter friction? Will they turn this off & forget to re-enable? We've seen users turn off iOS Lockdown Mode when they run into friction for specific websites or, say, legacy WiFi. They then forget to turn it back on. And stay vulnerable.

Bottom line: users disabling Apple's Lockdown Mode for a temporary thing & leaving it off because they forget to turn it on happens a lot. This is a serious % of users in my experience...

And should be factored into design decisions for similar modes. I feel like a good balance is a 'snooze button' or equivalent so that users can disable all/some features for a brief few minute period to do something they need to do, and then auto re-enable.

Winding up:

I'm excited to see how Android Advanced Protection plays with high risk users' experiences. I'm also super curious whether the spam/scam detection features may also be helpful to more vulnerable users (think: aging seniors)...

Niche but important:

Some users, esp. those that migrated to security & privacy-focused Android distros because of because of the absence of such a feature are clear candidates for it... But they may also voice privacy concerns around some of the screening features. Clear communication from the Google Security / Android team will be key here.

@ b83a28b7:35919450

This article was originally part of the sermon of Plebchain Radio Episode 111 (May 2, 2025) that nostr:nprofile1qyxhwumn8ghj7mn0wvhxcmmvqyg8wumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytnvv9hxgqpqtvqc82mv8cezhax5r34n4muc2c4pgjz8kaye2smj032nngg52clq7fgefr and I did with nostr:nprofile1qythwumn8ghj7ct5d3shxtnwdaehgu3wd3skuep0qyt8wumn8ghj7ct4w35zumn0wd68yvfwvdhk6tcqyzx4h2fv3n9r6hrnjtcrjw43t0g0cmmrgvjmg525rc8hexkxc0kd2rhtk62 and nostr:nprofile1qyxhwumn8ghj7mn0wvhxcmmvqyg8wumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytnvv9hxgqpq4wxtsrj7g2jugh70pfkzjln43vgn4p7655pgky9j9w9d75u465pqahkzd0 of the nostr:nprofile1qythwumn8ghj7ct5d3shxtnwdaehgu3wd3skuep0qyt8wumn8ghj7etyv4hzumn0wd68ytnvv9hxgtcqyqwfvwrccp4j2xsuuvkwg0y6a20637t6f4cc5zzjkx030dkztt7t5hydajn

Listen to the full episode here:

<<https://fountain.fm/episode/Ln9Ej0zCZ5dEwfo8w2Ho>>

---

Bitcoin has always been a narrative revolution disguised as code. White paper, cypherpunk lore, pizza‑day legends - every block is a paragraph in the world’s most relentless epic. But code alone rarely converts the skeptic; it’s the camp‑fire myth that slips past the prefrontal cortex and shakes hands with the limbic system. People don’t adopt protocols first - they fall in love with protagonists.

Early adopters heard the white‑paper hymn, but most folks need characters first: a pizza‑day dreamer; a mother in a small country, crushed by the cost of remittance; a Warsaw street vendor swapping złoty for sats. When their arcs land, the brain releases a neurochemical OP_RETURN which says, “I belong in this plot.” That’s the sly roundabout orange pill: conviction smuggled inside catharsis.

That’s why, from 22–25 May in Warsaw’s Kinoteka, the Bitcoin Film Fest is loading its reels with rebellion. Each documentary, drama, and animated rabbit‑hole is a stealth wallet, zipping conviction straight into the feels of anyone still clasped within the cold claw of fiat. You come for the plot, you leave checking block heights.

---

Here's the clip of the sermon from the episode:

nostr:nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzpwp69zm7fewjp0vkp306adnzt7249ytxhz7mq3w5yc629u6er9zsqqsy43fwz8es2wnn65rh0udc05tumdnx5xagvzd88ptncspmesdqhygcrvpf2

@ 005bc4de:ef11e1a2

Bitcoin, sats, bits, numbers, and perceptions

Quick background

In December 2024 John Carvalho proposed BIP 21Q titled "Redefinition of the Bitcoin Unit to the Base Denomination." His point: the word "bitcoin" should not refer to the 21 million bitcoins we hear about, but to what we currently call "sats", the "base" unit of bitcoin. There are 2.1 quadrillion sats. So, instead of saying there are 21 million bitcoin, BIP 21Q suggests saying there are 2.1 quadrillion.

There'd be absolutely zero change to Bitcoin, the protocol, with this BIP (unlike the OP_CAT or more current OP_RETURN debates). This is just a movement to get people to change the way they talk about and refer to "bitcoin." BIP 21Q is just a rewording, a rephrasing, a rebranding, a rethinking.

Since

Since then, there has been discussion. I'll admit it's interesting to talk about, but I've never thought much of it. My take has been, and frankly still is: this too will pass. I hadn't heard or thought of this in a couple of months. Until...

In the past couple of days though, like a campfire that has been slowly dying down, a sudden rush of wind has fanned the embers and the flames have sparked upward. As best I can tell, that wind came out of the mouth (or typing) of Jack Dorsey (Twitter founder, Square/Block CEO, billionaire, you know Jack) when he put this note out.

Watch the vid on YouTube.

The video makes some good points, both against and in favor of BIP 21Q. Quickly, Grok summarized the arguments for and against, below:

Today, I even read chatter about a middle ground compromise to use "bits" as the base unit. In other words, don't use "sats" but use "bits." I guess the idea is that a bitcoin can stay one of 21 million, but "bits," which sounds like little bitcoins, can be the 2.1 quadrillion. "Oh brother," I thought, even more confusion. We've been through this back in the 20-teens with bits, ubits, and mbits. This was a main reason I made the Satoshi Bitcoin Converter because it was confusing! I'm happy we were past all this, but then...it's back!

Just for kicks, you can fool around with the old SBC version 7 and find out how confusing it is.

One of the arguments in the video is that the BoardwalkCash.com folks have adopted "bitcoin" as their base unit. Boardwalk Cash is a cashu/ecash (and Lightning) web app with the intention of making spending and receiving small, coffee-sized payments easy.

Notice the bitcoin B after the zero, not "sats" or a satoshi symbol, like the one I proposed: シ 😃

Below, I sent 21 sats (bitcoins?) from a different ecash/cashu wallet. And, boom, there they appear in Boardwalk Cash. Notice how it appears as 21₿, as 21 bitcoin. Then, when I click it, it shows $0.02 USD, two pennies.

I didn't actually send 21 what-we-think-of-today bitcoins, worth $2.16 million. I sent two US pennies worth.

By the way, if you've never messed around with ecash/cashu and wish to try it out, get a wallet and I'll send you a few sats (bitcoins?) as ecash to see how easy it is. These images are from Boardwalkcash.com which is very clean, however I use Cashu.me.

And so...

And so, this is the main argument against, in my view: possible confusion. The other issue would be the changeover by things like exchanges or maybe even smart contracts that bridge BTC to other chains. Having worked on my little converter app, I know that it can be easy to make a decimal mistake in the code and throw everything off. I'm certain that, should we move to 2.1 quadrillion bitcoins, somebody will foul up an interface or back end which might cause a big problem, maybe some big losses.

Two things here:

On the more technical side, the changing of names and code on exchanges or smart contracts, it would almost be better if there was a hard-and-fast, set changeover date, like there was with Y2K. There is a clear before-and-after, B.C. and A.D. date. Call it, "BQ" and "AQ", before and after quadrillion. 😂 If there was a date/time where everything was 21M "bitcoin" to 2.1Q "bitcoin", that would force the issue.

However, there is not such a date or time, nor will there be...recall that bitcoin is decentralized, no CEO here. If this 2.1Q change actually happens, the reality is that it will be a rolling, gradual, thing. It will be case by case, app by app, exchange by exchange. And some won't make the change at all. This lends back to the confusion situation.

Secondly, on the human perception side, this actually concerns me less. We can change human perception. It takes some time, but human perception and thinking is very plastic and can definitely be molded. Heaven knows the examples of how this has been used the wrong way in history, umm, anything like this go on in World War II?

Quick case studies of changing perception:

Standard Oil (John D. Rockefeller's company) was essentially a monopoly and was broken up by the U.S., remember that from history class? They had a multitude of sub-brands, one of which was "Esso", get it?, S.O., Standard Oil? They wanted to move away from ties to Standard Oil, at least perception-wise, and wanted to consolidate all their sub-brands. They moved to "Exxon" with a marketing campaign. The marketing types were brilliant. They understood that there is a time thing involved. Unlike the Y2K hard date above, they knew that human perception, as malleable as it is, changes over time. Rather than fight this, they used this to their advantage.

As I understand, one of their techniques was to use the visual. The Esso sign was shown in places with the Esso logo up high and prominent. But, down below, was the never-before-seen Exxon sign. It was just there, doing nothing. Doing nothing except implanting itself into the subconscious of the viewers. Then, the Exxon sign, in later ads, appeared higher. The Esso sign lowered and was less prominent. Hmm? What's going on? Does anyone even notice? Hmm? Then, in the coup, the tiger mascot literally lowered the Esso sign down and raised the Exxon sign up.

In the final coup d'état, the Esso sign simply disappeared. And, make no mistake, this is the coup de grâce...the word Esso just disappeared. It was no longer seen at all. Then, it was forgotten and it was gone. Now, there is Exxon.

More recently, we all know that Twitter rebranded to X. It seemed so dumb, definitely awkward, I'm still not entirely used to it, people still write, "...so-and-so posted on X, formerly Twitter,..." (as if no one knows that X is formerly Twitter), I still say people "tweet" on X, but it's changing. I now hear reference to what so-and-so said "on X", with no mention of Twitter. It's changing. Time...it'll change...Twitter will stop being mentioned, Twitter will be a part of history, like Esso.

What'll happen with 21Q?

Nothing. I fully predict that this 2.1 quadrillion bitcoins thing will go nowhere. One of the main reasons for moving to replace "sats" as "bitcoins" is the perception that 1 bitcoin is unattainable and that people know "bitcoin," but don't know "sats." A bull bitcoin is out of reach for most people, but sats are attainable by everyone with a wallet. And, if they don't know ther term "sats," it's probably easier to change that perception (to educate them on sats) than it is to change and possibly confuse their knowledge of 21M bitcoins with 2.1Q bitcoins. It's probably easier to educate on "sats" than it is to change all the backends on exchanges and smart contracts and front ends (and some won't change at all, which will add more to confusion).

Solution: educate

Practical solution: if you think you might be speaking to a "normie" audience, make it a point to use the phrase "bitcoin sats." Over time, as people acquire and use sats to buy burgers, they'll know that sats means 1 of 2.1 quadrillion, but a bitcoin is 1 of 21 million. This is the Esso tiger lowering "bitcoin" and raising "sats."

@ c631e267:c2b78d3e

Die zwei mächtigsten Krieger sind Geduld und Zeit. \ Leo Tolstoi

Zum Wohle unserer Gesundheit, unserer Leistungsfähigkeit und letztlich unseres Glücks ist es wichtig, die eigene Energie bewusst zu pflegen. Das gilt umso mehr für an gesellschaftlichen Themen interessierte, selbstbewusste und kritisch denkende Menschen. Denn für deren Wahrnehmung und Wohlbefinden waren und sind die rasanten, krisen- und propagandagefüllten letzten Jahre in Absurdistan eine harte Probe.

Nur wer regelmäßig Kraft tankt und Wege findet, mit den Herausforderungen umzugehen, kann eine solche Tortur überstehen, emotionale Erschöpfung vermeiden und trotz allem zufrieden sein. Dazu müssen wir erkunden, was uns Energie gibt und was sie uns raubt. Durch Selbstreflexion und Achtsamkeit finden wir sicher Dinge, die uns erfreuen und inspirieren, und andere, die uns eher stressen und belasten.

Die eigene Energie ist eng mit unserer körperlichen und mentalen Gesundheit verbunden. Methoden zur Förderung der körperlichen Gesundheit sind gut bekannt: eine ausgewogene Ernährung, regelmäßige Bewegung sowie ausreichend Schlaf und Erholung. Bei der nicht minder wichtigen emotionalen Balance wird es schon etwas komplizierter. Stress abzubauen, die eigenen Grenzen zu kennen oder solche zum Schutz zu setzen sowie die Konzentration auf Positives und Sinnvolles wären Ansätze.

Der emotionale ist auch der Bereich, über den «Energie-Räuber» bevorzugt attackieren. Das sind zum Beispiel Dinge wie Überforderung, Perfektionismus oder mangelhafte Kommunikation. Social Media gehören ganz sicher auch dazu. Sie stehlen uns nicht nur Zeit, sondern sind höchst manipulativ und erhöhen laut einer aktuellen Studie das Risiko für psychische Probleme wie Angstzustände und Depressionen.

Geben wir negativen oder gar bösen Menschen keine Macht über uns. Das Dauerfeuer der letzten Jahre mit Krisen, Konflikten und Gefahren sollte man zwar kennen, darf sich aber davon nicht runterziehen lassen. Das Ziel derartiger konzertierter Aktionen ist vor allem, unsere innere Stabilität zu zerstören, denn dann sind wir leichter zu steuern. Aber Geduld: Selbst vermeintliche «Sonnenköniginnen» wie EU-Kommissionspräsidentin von der Leyen fallen, wenn die Zeit reif ist.

Es ist wichtig, dass wir unsere ganz eigenen Bedürfnisse und Werte erkennen. Unsere Energiequellen müssen wir identifizieren und aktiv nutzen. Dazu gehören soziale Kontakte genauso wie zum Beispiel Hobbys und Leidenschaften. Umgeben wir uns mit Sinnhaftigkeit und lassen wir uns nicht die Energie rauben!

Mein Wahlspruch ist schon lange: «Was die Menschen wirklich bewegt, ist die Kultur.» Jetzt im Frühjahr beginnt hier in Andalusien die Zeit der «Ferias», jener traditionellen Volksfeste, die vor Lebensfreude sprudeln. Konzentrieren wir uns auf die schönen Dinge und auf unsere eigenen Talente – soziale Verbundenheit wird helfen, unsere innere Kraft zu stärken und zu bewahren.

[Titelbild: Pixabay]

---

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

@ 7460b7fd:4fc4e74b

背景：WhatsApp的号码验证与运营商合作关系

作为一款基于手机号码注册的即时通信应用，WhatsApp的账号验证严重依赖全球电信运营商提供的短信或电话服务。这意味着，当用户注册或在新设备登录WhatsApp时，WhatsApp通常会向用户的手机号码发送SMS短信验证码或发起语音电话验证。这一流程利用了传统电信网络的基础设施，例如通过SS7（信令系统7）协议在全球范围内路由短信和电话securityaffairs.com。换句话说，WhatsApp把初始账户验证的安全性建立在电信运营商网络之上。然而，这种依赖关系也带来了隐患：攻击者可以利用电信网络的漏洞来拦截验证码。例如，研究人员早在2016年就演示过利用SS7协议漏洞拦截WhatsApp和Telegram的验证短信，从而劫持用户账户的攻击方法securityaffairs.com。由于SS7协议在全球范围内连接各国运营商，一个运营商的安全缺陷或恶意行为都可能被不法分子利用来获取他网用户的短信验证码securityaffairs.com。正因如此，有安全专家指出，仅依赖短信验证不足以保障账户安全，WhatsApp等服务提供商需要考虑引入额外机制来核实用户身份securityaffairs.com。

除了技术漏洞，基于电信运营商的验证还受到各地政策和网络环境影响。WhatsApp必须与全球各地运营商“合作”，才能将验证码送达到用户手机。然而这种“合作”在某些国家可能并不顺畅，典型例子就是中国。在中国大陆，国际短信和跨境电话常受到严格管控，WhatsApp在发送验证码时可能遭遇拦截或延迟sohu.com。因此，理解WhatsApp在中国的特殊联网和验证要求，需要将其全球验证机制与中国的电信政策和网络审查环境联系起来。下文将深入探讨为什么在中国使用WhatsApp进行号码验证时，必须开启蜂窝移动数据，并分析其中的技术逻辑和政策因素。

中国环境下的特殊问题：为何必须开启蜂窝数据？

中国的网络审查与封锁： WhatsApp自2017年起就在中国大陆遭遇严格封锁。起初，WhatsApp在华的服务受到**“GFW”（防火长城）**的部分干扰——例如曾一度只能发送文本消息，语音、视频和图片消息被封锁theguardian.com。到2017年下半年，封锁升级，很多用户报告在中国完全无法使用WhatsApp收发任何消息theguardian.com。中国官方将WhatsApp与Facebook、Telegram等西方通信平台一同屏蔽，视作对国家网络主权的挑战theguardian.com。鉴于此，在中国境内直接访问WhatsApp的服务器（无论通过Wi-Fi还是本地互联网）都会被防火长城所阻断。即使用户收到了短信验证码，WhatsApp客户端也无法在没有特殊连接手段的情况下与服务器完成验证通信。因此，单纯依赖Wi-Fi等本地网络环境往往无法完成WhatsApp的注册或登陆。很多用户经验表明，在中国使用WhatsApp时需要借助VPN等工具绕过审查，同时尽可能避免走被审查的网络路径sohu.com。

强制Wi-Fi热点与连接策略： 除了国家级的封锁，用户所连接的局域网络也可能影响WhatsApp验证。许多公共Wi-Fi（如机场、商场）采取强制门户认证（captive portal），用户需登录认证后才能上网。对此，WhatsApp在客户端内置了检测机制，当发现设备连入这类强制Wi-Fi热点而无法访问互联网时，会提示用户忽略该Wi-Fi并改用移动数据faq.whatsapp.com。WhatsApp要求对此授予读取Wi-Fi状态的权限，以便在检测到被拦截时自动切换网络faq.whatsapp.com。对于中国用户来说，即便所连Wi-Fi本身联网正常，由于GFW的存在WhatsApp依然可能视之为“不通畅”的网络环境。这也是WhatsApp官方指南中强调：如果Wi-Fi网络无法连接WhatsApp服务，应直接切换到手机的移动数据网络faq.whatsapp.com。在中国，由于本地宽带网络对WhatsApp的封锁，蜂窝数据反而成为相对可靠的通道——尤其在搭配VPN时，可以避开本地ISP的审查策略，实现与WhatsApp服务器的通信sohu.com。

国际短信的运营商限制： 使用移动数据还有助于解决短信验证码接收难题。中国的手机运营商出于防垃圾短信和安全考虑，默认对国际短信和境外来电进行一定限制。许多中国用户发现，注册WhatsApp时迟迟收不到验证码短信，原因可能在于运营商将来自国外服务号码的短信拦截或过滤sohu.com。例如，中国移动默认关闭国际短信接收，需要用户主动发送短信指令申请开通sohu.com。具体而言，中国移动用户需发送文本“11111”到10086（或10085）来开通国际短信收发权限；中国联通和电信用户也被建议联系运营商确认未屏蔽国际短信sohu.com。若未进行这些设置，WhatsApp发送的验证码短信可能根本无法抵达用户手机。在这种情况下，WhatsApp提供的备用方案是语音电话验证，即通过国际电话拨打用户号码并播报验证码。然而境外来电在中国也可能遭到运营商的安全拦截，特别是当号码被认为可疑时zhuanlan.zhihu.com。因此，中国用户经常被建议开启手机的蜂窝数据和漫游功能，以提高验证码接收的成功率sohu.com。一方面，开启数据漫游意味着用户准备接受来自境外的通信（通常也包含短信/电话）；另一方面，在数据联网的状态下，WhatsApp可以尝试通过网络直接完成验证通信，从而减少对SMS的依赖。

移动数据的网络路径优势： 在实际案例中，一些中国WhatsApp用户报告仅在开启蜂窝数据的情况下才能完成验证。这可能归因于蜂窝网络和宽带网络在国际出口上的差异。中国移动、联通等运营商的移动数据可能走与宽带不同的网关路由，有时对跨境小流量的拦截相对宽松。此外，WhatsApp在移动数据环境中可以利用一些底层网络特性。例如，WhatsApp可能通过移动网络发起某些专用请求或利用运营商提供的号码归属地信息进行辅助验证（虽然具体实现未公开，但这是业界讨论的可能性）。总之，在中国特殊的网络环境下，开启蜂窝数据是确保WhatsApp验证流程顺利的重要一步。这一步不仅是为了基本的互联网连接，也是为了绕开种种对国际短信和应用数据的拦截限制，从而与WhatsApp的全球基础设施建立必要的通讯。

PDP Context与IMSI：移动网络验证的技术细节

要理解为什么移动数据对WhatsApp验证如此关键，有必要了解移动通信网络中的一些技术细节，包括PDP Context和IMSI的概念。

PDP Context（分组数据协议上下文）： 当手机通过蜂窝网络使用数据（如4G/5G上网）时，必须先在运营商核心网中建立一个PDP上下文。这实际上就是申请开启一个数据会话，运营商将为设备分配一个IP地址，并允许其通过移动核心网访问互联网datascientest.com。PDP上下文包含了一系列参数（例如APN接入点名称、QoS等级等），描述该数据会话的属性datascientest.comdatascientest.com。简单来说，激活蜂窝数据就意味着创建了PDP上下文，设备获得了移动网络网关分配的IP地址，可以收发数据包。对于WhatsApp验证而言，只有在建立数据连接后，手机才能直接与WhatsApp的服务器交换数据，例如提交验证码、完成加密密钥协商等。如果仅有Wi-Fi而蜂窝数据关闭，且Wi-Fi环境无法连通WhatsApp服务器，那么验证过程将陷入停滞。因此，在中国场景下，开启蜂窝数据（即建立PDP数据通路）是WhatsApp客户端尝试绕过Wi-Fi限制、直接通过移动网络进行验证通信的前提faq.whatsapp.comsohu.com。值得一提的是，PDP Context的建立也表明手机在运营商网络上处于活跃状态，这对于某些验证机制（比如后述的闪信/闪呼）来说至关重要。

IMSI与MSISDN： IMSI（国际移动用户标识）和MSISDN（移动用户号码，即手机号码）是运营商网络中两个密切相关但不同的标识。IMSI是存储在SIM卡上的一串唯一数字，用于在移动网络中标识用户身份netmanias.com。当手机接入网络时，它向运营商提供IMSI以进行鉴权，运营商据此知道“是哪张SIM”的请求netmanias.com。而MSISDN则是我们平常说的手机号，用于在语音通话和短信路由中定位用户，也存储在运营商的HLR/HSS数据库中netmanias.com。运营商通过IMSI<->MSISDN的对应关系，将来自全球的短信/电话正确路由到用户手机上。WhatsApp的验证短信或电话本质上就是通过目标号码(MSISDN)寻找所属运营商网络，由该网络根据IMSI定位用户终端。一般情况下，WhatsApp应用并不直接接触IMSI这种信息，因为IMSI属于运营商网络的内部标识。然而，IMSI的存在仍然对安全产生影响。例如，**SIM卡交换（SIM Swap）**欺诈发生时，攻击者获得了受害者号码的新SIM卡，新SIM卡会有不同的IMSI，但MSISDN保持原号码不变。运营商会将原号码映射到新的IMSI，这样验证码短信就发送到了攻击者手中的SIM上。对WhatsApp而言，除非有机制检测IMSI变动，否则无法察觉用户号码背后的SIM已被盗换。部分应用在检测到SIM变化时会提示用户重新验证，这需要读取设备的IMSI信息进行比对。然而，在现代智能手机中，获取IMSI通常需要特殊权限，WhatsApp并未明确说明它有此类检测。因此，从WhatsApp角度，IMSI更多是网络侧的概念，但它提醒我们：电信级身份验证依赖于SIM的有效性。只有当正确的IMSI在网络注册、并建立了PDP数据上下文时，WhatsApp的后台服务才能确认该SIM对应的号码目前“在线”，进而可靠地发送验证信号（短信或电话）到该设备。

移动网络的信号辅助验证： 有观点认为，一些OTT应用可能利用移动网络提供的附加服务来辅助号码验证。例如，某些运营商提供号码快速验证API，当应用检测到设备在移动数据网络中时，可以向特定地址发起请求，由运营商返回当前设备的号码信息（通常通过已经建立的PDP通道）。Google等公司在部分国家与运营商合作过类似服务，实现用户免输入验证码自动完成验证。但就WhatsApp而言，没有公开证据表明其使用了运营商提供的自动号码识别API。即便如此，WhatsApp鼓励用户保持移动网络在线的做法，隐含的意义之一可能是：当手机处于蜂窝网络且数据畅通时，验证码通过率和验证成功率都会显著提升。这既包括了物理层面短信、电话能否送达，也涵盖了数据层面应用和服务器能否互通。

Flash Call机制：WhatsApp验证的新方案

针对传统SMS验证码容易被拦截、延迟以及用户体验不佳的问题，WhatsApp近年来引入了一种Flash Call（闪呼）验证机制fossbytes.com。所谓闪呼，即应用在用户验证阶段向用户的手机号发起一个非常短暂的来电：用户无需真正接听，WhatsApp会自动结束这通电话，并根据通话记录来确认是否拨通fossbytes.com。

原理与流程： 当用户选择使用闪呼验证（目前主要在Android设备上可用），WhatsApp会请求权限访问用户的通话记录fossbytes.com。随后应用拨打用户的号码，一般是一个预先设定的特定号码或号码段。由于WhatsApp后台知道它拨出的号码及通话ID，只要该未接来电出现在用户手机的通话日志中，应用即可读取并匹配最后一通来电的号码是否符合验证要求，从而确认用户持有这个号码fossbytes.com。整个过程用户无需手动输入验证码，验证通话在数秒内完成。相比6位数字短信验证码需要用户在短信和应用间切换输入，闪呼方式更加快捷无缝fossbytes.com。

优缺点分析： 闪呼验证的优势在于速度快且避免了SMS可能的延迟或拦截。一些分析指出闪呼将成为取代SMS OTP（一次性密码）的新趋势，Juniper Research预测2022年用于验证的闪呼次数将从2021年的六千万猛增到五十亿次subex.comglobaltelcoconsult.com。对于WhatsApp这样全球用户庞大的应用，闪呼可以节约大量SMS网关费用，并绕开部分运营商对国际SMS的限制。然而，闪呼也有局限：fossbytes.com首先，iOS设备由于系统安全限制，应用无法访问通话记录，因此iPhone上无法使用闪呼验证fossbytes.com。这意味着苹果用户仍需使用传统短信验证码。其次，为实现自动匹配来电号码，用户必须授予读取通话记录的权限，这在隐私上引发一些担忧fossbytes.comfossbytes.com。WhatsApp声称不会将通话记录用于验证以外的用途，号码匹配也在本地完成fossbytes.com，但考虑到母公司Meta的隐私争议，部分用户依然顾虑。第三，闪呼验证依赖语音通话路线，同样受制于电信网络质量。如果用户所处网络无法接通国际来电（比如被运营商拦截境外短振铃电话），闪呼也无法成功。此外，从运营商角度看，闪呼绕过了A2P短信计费，可能侵蚀短信营收，一些运营商开始研究识别闪呼流量的策略wholesale.orange.com。总体而言，闪呼机制体现了WhatsApp希望减轻对短信依赖的努力，它在许多国家提升了验证体验，但在中国等特殊环境，其效果仍取决于本地语音网络的开放程度。值得注意的是，中国运营商对于境外电话，尤其是这种**“零响铃”未接来电**也有防范措施，中国电信和联通用户就被建议如需接收海外来电验证，应联系客服确保未拦截海外来电hqsmartcloud.com。因此，即便WhatsApp支持闪呼，中国用户若未开启移动语音漫游或运营商许可，仍然难以通过此途径完成验证。

与SIM Swap安全性的关系： 从安全角度看，闪呼并未实质提升抵御SIM交换攻击的能力。如果攻击者成功将受害者的号码转移至自己的SIM卡上（获取新IMSI），那么无论验证码以短信还是闪呼方式发送，都会到达攻击者设备。闪呼机制能防御的是部分恶意拦截短信的行为（如恶意网关或木马读取短信），但对社工换卡没有太大帮助。WhatsApp早已提供两步验证（即设置6位PIN码）供用户自行启用，以防号码被他人重新注册时需要额外密码。然而大量用户未开启该功能。因此，闪呼更多是从用户体验和成本出发的改良，而非针对高级别攻击的防护机制。正如前文所述，真正要防御SIM Swap和SS7漏洞等系统性风险，依赖运营商的号码验证本身就是薄弱环节，需要引入更高级的身份认证手段。

SIM卡交换攻击的风险与运营商信任问题

WhatsApp和Telegram一类基于手机号认证的应用普遍面临一个安全挑战：手机号码本身并非绝对安全的身份凭证。攻击者可以通过一系列手段取得用户的号码控制权，其中SIM交换（SIM Swap）是近年高发的欺诈手法。SIM Swap通常由不法分子冒充用户，诱骗或贿赂运营商客服将目标号码的服务转移到攻击者的新SIM卡上keepnetlabs.com。一旦成功，所有发往该号码的短信和电话都转由攻击者接收，原机主的SIM卡失效。对于依赖短信/电话验证的应用来说，这意味着攻击者可以轻易获取验证码，从而重置账户并登录。近年来全球SIM Swap案件呈上升趋势，许多在线服务的账号被此攻破rte.ie。

WhatsApp并非未知晓此风险。事实上，WhatsApp在其帮助中心和安全博客中多次提醒用户开启两步验证PIN，并强调绝不向他人透露短信验证码。然而，从系统设计上讲，WhatsApp仍将信任根基放在运营商发送到用户手机的那串数字验证码上。一旦运营商端的安全被绕过（无论是内部员工作恶、社工欺诈，还是SS7网络被黑客利用securityaffairs.com），WhatsApp本身无法辨别验证码接收者是否是真正的用户。正如安全研究所Positive Technologies指出的那样，目前主要的即时通讯服务（包括WhatsApp和Telegram）依赖SMS作为主要验证机制，这使得黑客能够通过攻击电信信令网络来接管用户账户securityaffairs.com。换言之，WhatsApp被迫信任每一个参与短信/电话路由的运营商，但这个信任链条上任何薄弱环节都可能遭到利用securityaffairs.com。例如，在SIM Swap攻击中，运营商本身成为被欺骗的对象；而在SS7定位拦截攻击中，全球互联的电信网成为攻击面。在中国的场景下，虽然主要威胁来自审查而非黑客，但本质上仍是WhatsApp无法完全掌控电信网络这一事实所导致的问题。

应对这些风险，WhatsApp和Telegram等采用了一些弥补措施。除了提供用户自行设定的二次密码，两者也开始探索设备多因子的概念（如后文Telegram部分所述，利用已有登录设备确认新登录）。然而，对绝大多数首次注册或更换设备的用户来说，传统的短信/电话验证仍是唯一途径。这就是为什么在高安全需求的行业中，SMS OTP正逐渐被视为不充分securityaffairs.com。监管机构和安全专家建议对涉敏感操作采用更强验证，如专用身份应用、硬件令牌或生物识别等。WhatsApp作为大众通信工具，目前平衡了易用性与安全性，但其依赖电信运营商的验证模式在像中国这样特殊的环境下，既遇到政策阻碍，也隐藏安全短板。这一点对于决策制定者评估国外通信应用在华风险时，是一个重要考量：任何全球运营商合作机制，在中国境内都可能因为**“最后一公里”由中国运营商执行**而受到影响。无论是被拦截信息还是可能的监控窃听，这些风险都源自于底层通信网的控制权不在应用服务商手中。

Telegram登录机制的比较

作为对比，Telegram的账号登录机制与WhatsApp类似，也以手机号码为主要身份标识，但在具体实现上有一些不同之处。

多设备登录与云端代码： Telegram从设计上支持多设备同时在线（手机、平板、PC等），并将聊天内容储存在云端。这带来的一个直接好处是：当用户在新设备上登录时，Telegram会优先通过已登录的其他设备发送登录验证码。例如，用户尝试在电脑上登录Telegram，Telegram会在用户手机上的Telegram应用里推送一条消息包含登录码，而不是立即发短信accountboy.comaccountboy.com。用户只需在新设备输入从老设备上收到的代码即可完成登录。这种机制确保了只要用户至少有一个设备在线，就几乎不需要依赖运营商短信。当然，如果用户当前只有一部新设备（例如换了手机且旧设备不上线），Telegram才会退而求其次，通过SMS发送验证码到手机号。同时，Telegram也允许用户选择语音电话获取验证码，类似于WhatsApp的语音验证。当用户完全无法收到SMS时（比如在中国这种场景），语音呼叫常常比短信更可靠seatuo.com。

两步验证密码： 与WhatsApp一样，Telegram提供可选的两步验证密码。当启用此功能后，即使拿到短信验证码，仍需输入用户设置的密码才能登录账户quora.com。这对抗SIM Swap等攻击提供了另一层防线。不过需要指出，如果用户忘记了设置的Telegram密码且没有设置信任邮箱，可能会永久失去账号访问，因此开启该功能在中国用户中接受度一般。

登录体验与安全性的取舍： Telegram的登录流程在用户体验上更加灵活。多设备下无需每次都收验证码，提高了便利性。但从安全角度看，这种“信任已有设备”的做法也有隐患：如果用户的某个设备落入他人之手并未及时登出，那么该人有可能利用该设备获取新的登录验证码。因此Telegram会在应用中提供管理活动会话的功能，用户可随时查看和撤销其它设备的登录状态telegram.org。总体而言，Telegram和WhatsApp在初始注册环节同样依赖短信/电话，在这一点上，中国的网络环境对两者影响相似：Telegram在中国同样被全面封锁，需要VPN才能使用，其短信验证码发送也会受到运营商限制。另外，Telegram曾在2015年因恐怖分子利用该平台传递信息而被中国当局重点关注并屏蔽，因此其国内可达性甚至比WhatsApp更低。许多中国用户实际使用Telegram时，通常绑定国外号码或通过海外SIM卡来收取验证码，以绕开国内运营商的限制。

差异总结： 简而言之，Telegram在登录验证机制上的主要优势在于已有会话协助和云端同步。这使得老用户换设备时不依赖国内短信通道即可登录（前提是原设备已登录并可访问）。WhatsApp直到最近才推出多设备功能，但其多设备模式采用的是端到端加密设备链路，需要主手机扫码授权，而非像Telegram那样用账号密码登录其它设备。因此WhatsApp仍然强绑定SIM卡设备，首次注册和更换手机号时逃不开运营商环节。安全方面，两者的SMS验证所面临的系统性风险（如SS7攻击、SIM Swap）并无本质区别，都必须仰仗运营商加强对核心网络的保护，以及用户自身启用附加验证措施securityaffairs.comkeepnetlabs.com。

结论

对于希望在中国使用WhatsApp的用户来说，“开启蜂窝数据”这一要求背后体现的是技术与政策交织的复杂现实。一方面，蜂窝数据承载着WhatsApp与其全球服务器通信的关键信道，在中国的受限网络中提供了相对可靠的出路faq.whatsapp.comsohu.com。另一方面，WhatsApp的号码验证机制深深植根于传统电信体系，必须经由全球运营商的“协作”才能完成用户身份确认securityaffairs.com。而在中国，这种协作受到防火长城和运营商政策的双重阻碍：国际短信被拦截、国际数据被阻断。为克服这些障碍，WhatsApp既采取了工程上的应对（如检测强制Wi-Fi并提示使用移动网络faq.whatsapp.com），也引入了诸如闪呼验证等新方案以减少对短信的依赖fossbytes.com。但从根本上说，只要注册流程离不开手机号码，这种与电信运营商的捆绑关系就无法割舍。由此带来的安全问题（如SIM Swap和信令网络漏洞）在全球范围内敲响警钟securityaffairs.comkeepnetlabs.com。

对于从事安全研究和政策评估的人士，这篇分析揭示了WhatsApp在中国遇到的典型困境：技术系统的全球化与监管环境的本地化冲突。WhatsApp全球统一的验证框架在中国水土不服，不得不通过额外的设置和手段来“曲线救国”。这既包括让用户切换网络、配置VPN等绕过审查，也包括思考未来是否有必要采用更安全独立的验证方式。相比之下，Telegram的机制给出了一种启示：灵活运用多设备和云服务，至少在一定程度上降低对单一短信渠道的依赖。然而，Telegram自身在中国的处境表明，再优雅的技术方案也难以直接对抗高强度的网络封锁。最终，无论是WhatsApp还是Telegram，要想在受限环境下可靠运作，都需要技术与政策的双管齐下：一方面提高验证与登录的安全性和多样性，另一方面寻求运营商和监管层面的理解与配合。

综上所述，WhatsApp要求中国用户开启蜂窝数据并非偶然的臆想，而是其全球运营商合作验证机制在中国受阻后的务实选择。这一要求折射出移动通信应用在跨境运营中面临的挑战，也提醒我们在设计安全策略时必须考虑底层依赖的信任假设。对于个人用户，最实际的建议是在使用此类应用时提前了解并遵循这些特殊设置（如开通国际短信、启用数据漫游），并善用应用自身的安全功能（如两步验证）来保护账户免遭社工和网络攻击keepnetlabs.com。对于监管和运营商，则有必要权衡安全审查与用户便利之间的平衡，在可控范围内为可信的全球服务留出技术通道。在全球通信愈加融合的时代，WhatsApp的中国验证问题或许只是一个缩影，背后涉及的既有网络安全考量，也有数字主权与国际合作的议题，值得持续深入研究和关注。

faq.whatsapp.comfossbytes.comtheguardian.comsecurityaffairs.comsecurityaffairs.comkeepnetlabs.comdatascientest.comnetmanias.comsohu.comsohu.com

@ c9badfea:610f861a

1. Install Rethink (it's free and open source)
2. Launch the app and tap Skip
3. Tap Start and then Proceed to set up the VPN connection
4. Allow notifications and Proceed, then disable battery optimization for this app (you may need to set it to Unrestricted)
5. Navigate to Configure and tap Apps
6. On the top bar, tap 🛜 and 📶 to block all apps from connecting to the internet
7. Search Apps for the apps you want to allow and Bypass Universal
8. Return to the Configure view and tap DNS, then choose your preferred DNS provider (e.g. DNSCrypt > Quad9)
9. Optionally, tap On-Device Blocklists, then Disabled, Download Blocklists, and later Configure (you may need to enable the Use In-App Downloader option if the download is not working)
10. Return to the Configure view and tap Firewall, then Universal Firewall Rules and enable the options as desired:
    • Block all apps when device is locked
    • Block newly installed apps by default
    • Block when DNS is bypassed
11. Optionally, to set up WireGuard or Tor, return to the Configure view and tap Proxy
    • For Tor, tap Setup Orbot, then optionally select all the apps that should route through Tor (you must have Orbot installed)
    • For WireGuard, tap Setup WireGuard, then +, and select an option to import a WireGuard configuration (QR Code Scan, File Import, or Creation).
      • Use Simple Mode for a single WireGuard connection (all apps are routed through it).
      • Use Advanced Mode for multiple WireGuard connections (split tunnel, manually choosing apps to route through them)

⚠️ Use this app only if you know what you are doing, as misconfiguration can lead to missing notifications and other problems

ℹ️ On the main view, tap Logs to track all connections

ℹ️ You can also use a WireGuard connection (e.g., from your VPN provider) and on-device blocklists together

@ 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.

@ 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.

Using stolen bitcoin for the reserve creates a perverse incentive. If governments see 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.

@ c9badfea:610f861a

1. Install KeePassDX (it's free and open source)
2. Launch the app, tap Create New Vault, and choose a location to store the database file
3. Activate the Password slider
4. Type a Password and Confirm Password, then tap OK
5. Tap + and Add Entry to add your first credentials
6. Enter a Title, Username, and Password (you can also generate a password here)
7. Tap ✓ at the bottom to create the entry
8. Tap ⋮ and then Save Data to save the database
9. Tap 🔒 to lock the database

⚠️ Make sure you use strong, high-entropy passphrases

⚠️ Back up the database file to a secure location (e.g. encrypted USB drive)

ℹ️ The database file (.kdbx) can also be opened with various KeePass ports

@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9

Recently we have seen a wave of high profile X accounts hacked. These attacks have exposed the fragility of the status quo security model used by modern social media platforms like X. Many users have asked if nostr fixes this, so lets dive in. How do these types of attacks translate into the world of nostr apps? For clarity, I will use X’s security model as representative of most big tech social platforms and compare it to nostr.

The Status Quo

On X, you never have full control of your account. Ultimately to use it requires permission from the company. They can suspend your account or limit your distribution. Theoretically they can even post from your account at will. An X account is tied to an email and password. Users can also opt into two factor authentication, which adds an extra layer of protection, a login code generated by an app. In theory, this setup works well, but it places a heavy burden on users. You need to create a strong, unique password and safeguard it. You also need to ensure your email account and phone number remain secure, as attackers can exploit these to reset your credentials and take over your account. Even if you do everything responsibly, there is another weak link in X infrastructure itself. The platform’s infrastructure allows accounts to be reset through its backend. This could happen maliciously by an employee or through an external attacker who compromises X’s backend. When an account is compromised, the legitimate user often gets locked out, unable to post or regain control without contacting X’s support team. That process can be slow, frustrating, and sometimes fruitless if support denies the request or cannot verify your identity. Often times support will require users to provide identification info in order to regain access, which represents a privacy risk. The centralized nature of X means you are ultimately at the mercy of the company’s systems and staff.

Nostr Requires Responsibility

Nostr flips this model radically. Users do not need permission from a company to access their account, they can generate as many accounts as they want, and cannot be easily censored. The key tradeoff here is that users have to take complete responsibility for their security. Instead of relying on a username, password, and corporate servers, nostr uses a private key as the sole credential for your account. Users generate this key and it is their responsibility to keep it safe. As long as you have your key, you can post. If someone else gets it, they can post too. It is that simple. This design has strong implications. Unlike X, there is no backend reset option. If your key is compromised or lost, there is no customer support to call. In a compromise scenario, both you and the attacker can post from the account simultaneously. Neither can lock the other out, since nostr relays simply accept whatever is signed with a valid key.

The benefit? No reliance on proprietary corporate infrastructure.. The negative? Security rests entirely on how well you protect your key.

Future Nostr Security Improvements

For many users, nostr’s standard security model, storing a private key on a phone with an encrypted cloud backup, will likely be sufficient. It is simple and reasonably secure. That said, nostr’s strength lies in its flexibility as an open protocol. Users will be able to choose between a range of security models, balancing convenience and protection based on need.

One promising option is a web of trust model for key rotation. Imagine pre-selecting a group of trusted friends. If your account is compromised, these people could collectively sign an event announcing the compromise to the network and designate a new key as your legitimate one. Apps could handle this process seamlessly in the background, notifying followers of the switch without much user interaction. This could become a popular choice for average users, but it is not without tradeoffs. It requires trust in your chosen web of trust, which might not suit power users or large organizations. It also has the issue that some apps may not recognize the key rotation properly and followers might get confused about which account is “real.”

For those needing higher security, there is the option of multisig using FROST (Flexible Round-Optimized Schnorr Threshold). In this setup, multiple keys must sign off on every action, including posting and updating a profile. A hacker with just one key could not do anything. This is likely overkill for most users due to complexity and inconvenience, but it could be a game changer for large organizations, companies, and governments. Imagine the White House nostr account requiring signatures from multiple people before a post goes live, that would be much more secure than the status quo big tech model.

Another option are hardware signers, similar to bitcoin hardware wallets. Private keys are kept on secure, offline devices, separate from the internet connected phone or computer you use to broadcast events. This drastically reduces the risk of remote hacks, as private keys never touches the internet. It can be used in combination with multisig setups for extra protection. This setup is much less convenient and probably overkill for most but could be ideal for governments, companies, or other high profile accounts.

---

Nostr’s security model is not perfect but is robust and versatile. Ultimately users are in control and security is their responsibility. Apps will give users multiple options to choose from and users will choose what best fits their need.

@ 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.

@ 57d1a264:69f1fee1

Payjoin allows the sender and receiver of an on-chain payment to collaborate and create a transaction that breaks on-chain heuristics, allowing a more private transaction with ambiguous payment amount and UTXO ownership. Additionally, it can also be used for UTXO consolidation (receiver saves future fees) and batching payments (receiver can make payment(s) of their own in the process of receiving one), also known as transaction cut-through. Other than improved privacy, the rest of the benefits are typically applicable to the receiver, not the sender.

BIP-78 was the original payjoin protocol that required the receiver to run a endpoint/server (always online) in order to mediate the payjoin process. Payjoin adoption has remained pretty low, something attributed to the server & perpetual online-ness requirement. This is the motivation for payjoin v2.

The purpose of the one-pager is to analyse the protocol, and highlight the UX issues or tradeoffs it entails, so that the payjoin user flows can be appropriately designed and the tradeoffs likewise communicated. A further document on UX solutions might be needed to identify solutions and opportunities

The following observations are generally limited to individual users transacting through their mobile devices:

While users naturally want better privacy and fee-savings, they also want to minimise friction and minimise (optimise) payment time. These are universal and more immediate needs since they deal with the user experience.

Added manual steps

TL;DR v2 payjoin eliminates server & simultaneous user-liveness requirements (increasing TAM, and opportunities to payjoin, as a result) by adding manual steps.

Usually, the extent of the receiver's involvement in the transaction process is limited to sharing their address with the sender. Once they share the address/URI, they can basically forget about it. In the target scenario for v2 payjoin, the receiver must come online again (except they have no way of knowing "when") to contribute input(s) and sign the PSBT. This can be unexpected, unintuitive and a bit of a hassle.

Usually (and even with payjoin v1), the sender crafts and broadcasts the transaction in one go; meaning the user's job is done within a few seconds/minutes. With payjoin v2, they must share the original-PSBT with the receiver, and then wait for them to do their part. Once the the receiver has done that, the sender must come online to review the transaction, sign it & broadcast.

In summary,

In payjoin v1, step 3 is automated and instant, so delay 2, 3 =~ 0. As the user experiences it, the process is completed in a single session, akin to a non-payjoin transaction.

With payjoin v2, Steps 2 & 3 in the above diagram are widely spread and noticeable. These manual steps are separated by uncertain delays (more on that below) when compared to a non-payjoin transaction.

Delays

We've established that both senders and receivers must take extra manual steps to execute a payoin transaction. With payjoin v2, this process gets split into multiple sessions, since the sender and receiver are not like to be online simultaneously.

Delay 2 & 3 (see diagram above) are uncertain in nature. Most users do not open their bitcoin wallets for days or weeks! The receiver must come online before the timeout hits in order for the payjoin process to work, otherwise time is just wasted with no benefit. UX or technical solutions are needed to minimise these delays.

Delays might be exacerbated if the setup is based on hardware wallet and/or uses multisig.

Notifications or background processes

There is one major problem when we say "the user must come online to..." but in reality the user has no way of knowing there is a payjoin PSBT waiting for them. After a PSBT is sent to the relay, the opposite user would only find out about it whenever they happen to come online. Notifications and background sync processes might be necessary to minimise delays. This is absolutely essential to avert timeouts in addition to saving valuable time. Another risk is phantom payjoin stuff after the timeout is expired if receiver-side does not know it has.

Fee Savings

The following observations might be generally applicable for both original and this v2 payjoin version. Fee-savings with payjoin is a tricky topic. Of course, overall a payjoin transaction is always cheaper than 2 separate transactions, since they get to share the overhead.

Additionally, without the receiver contributing to fees, the chosen fee rate of the PSBT (at the beginning) drops, and can lead to slower confirmation. From another perspective, a sender paying with payjoin pays higher fees for similar confirmation target. This has been observed in a production wallet years back. Given that total transaction time can extend to days, the fee environment itself might change, and all this must be considered when designing the UX.

Of course, there is nothing stopping the receiver from contributing to fees, but this idea is likely entirely novel to the bitcoin ecosystem (perhaps payments ecosystem in general) and the user base. Additionally, nominally it involves the user paying fees and tolerating delays just to receive bitcoin. Without explicit incentives/features that encourage receivers to participate, payjoining might seem like an unncessary hassle.

Overall, it seems that payjoin makes UX significant tradeoffs for important privacy (and potential fee-saving) benefits. This means that the UX might have to do significant heavy-lifting, to ensure that users are not surprised, confused or frustrated when they try to transact on-chain in a privacy-friendly feature. Good, timely communication, new features for consolidation & txn-cutthrough and guided user flows seem crucial to ensure payjoin adoption and for help make on-chain privacy a reality for users.

---------------

Original document available here. Reach out at yashrajdca@proton.me, y_a_s_h_r_a_j.70 on Signal, or on reach out in Bitcoin Design discord.

https://stacker.news/items/981388

@ 5df413d4:2add4f5b

https://i.nostr.build/Ur1Je684aSgYCRn3.jpg

You Are Not A Gadget by Jaron Lanier

Reading Jaron Lanier’s 2010 You Are Not A Gadget in 2023 is an interesting experience—equal parts withering, prophetic, and heretical clarion call warning from a high priest of the Technocracy and rambling, musing, cognitive jam session from a technofied musician-philosopher.

Yet, in ways that I think the author would be simultaneously pleased, amused, saddened, and disturbed by, the 13 yeas since the book’s publishing have, in places, proven him right with stunning foresight and precision, and in others, made his ideas appear laughable, bizarre, even naive. The book is written in five parts, yet I would suggest viewing it as two discrete elements—Part One (around the first half of the book) and…everything else.

For context, Lanier, is a computer scientist and early technologist from the area of Jobs, Wozniak, and Gates, and is considered to be a founding father of virtual reality. He is also a consummate contrarian, a player of rare and obscure musical instruments, a deep interdisciplinary thinker…and a white man with dreadlocks named Jaron.

PART ONE

Part One of the book “What is a Person?” reads like a scathing and clear-eye manifesto—where Lanier is batting 1000, merciless in his rightness. Were one to pull a passage that speaks to the soul of this portion of the book, it might be the following: “The net does not design itself. We design it.”

Lanier terms the prevailing technocratic ideology—the particular winning tech-nerd subculture that has now come to capture our society—as “the cybernetic totalist” or “digital Maoists.” Essentially a materialist and stealth collectivist movement in new-age technocratic dress, that through its successes, and now excesses, represents much the same of religion that it’s founders would have claimed to be “evolving past.”

Lanier points out that in this, we are simply trading the pursuit of finding God in spirituality or the afterlife, for a notion of digital immortality—seeking, or, if possible, becoming, God in the cloud. He aptly identifies that this worldview requires that society, and all human interactions really, be savagely bent into adherence to this new religion of aggregation that demands deification of data, gross diminishment of the individual, and belief in some objective (but never defined) "meaning" that exists beyond and apart from the human observer.

With skill and simple wit, he raises strong, rational counterpoint to the digital Maoists’ obsession with quantity, data in aggregate and at-scale, as society's prime directive “A fashionable idea in technical circles is that quantity […] turns into quality at some extreme scale […] I disagree. A trope in the early days or computer science comes to mind: garbage in, garbage out.”

Lanier is able to envision the digital cages that likes of Facebook, Youtube, social-media dating apps would become for the internet native generations. Of whom he writes “The most effective young Facebook users […] are the ones who create successful online fictions about themselves,” and “If you start out by being fake, you’ll eventually have to put in twice the effort to undo the illusion if anything good is to come of it.”

Lanier’s 2010 criticism of Wikipedia-ism is now double or triply apropos in our current hype cycle of “AI magic” and Everything-GPT, “Wikipedia, for instance, works on what I can the Oracle Illusion, in which knowledge of human authorship of a text is suppressed in order to give the text superhuman validity. Traditional holy books work in precisely the same way and present many of the same problems.” This same deep truth now sits at the heart of every “new” creation churned out by the flavor-of-the-week, plagiarism-at-scale, generative AI tool.

More darkly, he is also able to foresee the spectre of a return to collectivism lurking both at the core and on the margins of our new digital age—“The recipe that led to social catastrophe in the past was economic humiliation combined with collectivist ideology. We already have the ideology in its new digital packaging, and it’s entirely possible we could face dangerously traumatic economic shock in the coming decades.”—“No Shit” said everyone who lived through 2020-2022…

This brings us, eerily, to the world of today. Where aggregate insights are upheld as more valuable than discrete insights. Where crowds are are assumed to have more wisdom than individuals. Where truth is twisted into a might-is-right numbers game. A world ruled by the idea that if we can just centralize enough information and sufficiently pulverize authorship, the result will, necessarily, be something super-intelligent, "alive," and perhaps even divine.

In short, the cybernetic totalists and digital Maoists, having killed reason, now sit on its corpse like a thrown, smearing its blood on the walls in the name of art and reading its still-steaming entrails for prophecy.

If I were to infer some ideological takeaway from Part One of the book, it might be that Lanier seems to axiomatically reject any affirmative implication of the Turing Test. Simply put, he believes that bits are not and cannot ever be alive independent of the human-as-oracle. Further, there is no objective meaning beyond the human observer—in fact, that observer fundamentally creates any meaning there is to be had. This is best illustrated by one of the most powerful passages in the book:

“But the Turing Test cuts both ways. You can’t tell if a machine has gotten smarter or if you’ve just lowered your own standard of intelligence to such a degree that the machine seems smart. If you can have a conversation with a simulated person presented by an AI program, can you tell how far you’ve let your sense of personhood degrade in order to make the illusion work for you?”

Ponder this well, Anon.

EVERYTHING ELSE

With all of the great stuff above out of the way, we must turn to…the rest of the book. Parts Two through Five breakdown into something more like a stream of consciousness. And while there are certainly many nuggets to insight and beauty to be found, the book becomes largely dis-coherent and very difficult to read. That said, the remainder of the book does contain three particularly compelling threads that I find to be worth pulling on.

Internet Attribution First, are Lanier’s musing about money and attribution in our authorless “information wants to be free” world. He laments the infinite elevation of advertising and offers harsh critique to the concept of attention as the new currency—as this tends to overwhelmingly reward the aggregator and a piddling few soulless super-influencers at the expense of all other users and creators.

Interestingly, under the guise of “what could have been” he imagines a world where attribution is tracked across the web (though how this achieved is left unanswered) and royalty payments can flow back to the author seamlessly over the internet. I find his vision to be intriguing because in 2010, we lacked the technology to either track attribution across the web or facilitate seamless micropayment royalties based on access / usage.

While we still don't have the ability to achieve the type of fully-tracked, always-on attribution Lanier imagines, we do now have the ability to stream payments across the internet with bitcoin and the lightning network. While Lanier can be excused for not mentioning the then uber-nascent bitcoin in 2010, bitcoin’s development since only goes to underscore the prescience of Lanier’s imagination.

The bigger question that now remains, especially in the face of the advent of “AI,” is whether such a system to manage and therefore enforce attribution globally on the internet would even be a good thing. Where obscured attribution enables mashed-up plagiarism-at-scale, centrally enforced attribution can just as easily enable idea, content, discovery, and innovation suppression-at-scale.

Music in the New Age Second, much of the book, particularly in the second half, is filtered through the lens and language of music. Music is essential to Lanier’s inner life and it is clear that he views music as an emergent mystery force attributable to something unknowable, if not divine, and entirely unique to the human experience.

He bemoans the music of the 2000s as lacking in any distinct chronological era sound—everything is either a rehashed mashup or digitally lofi-ed emulation of sounds from previous begone eras—it is music that is impossible to place. To him, it is as though musical evolution stopped right around the time of the advent of the internet…and then folded back in on itself, creating an endless kaleidoscoping of what came before but rarely, if ever, the creation anything truly new.

In response, Lanier goes so far as to imagine the ridiculous (my take, not his) world of “Songles”—songs on dongles—essentially physical music NFTs. In Songleland, listening to the hottest tracks at a party hinges on the guy or gal with the dankest songles swinging through and plugging them into the Songle player. And songles, being scarce, even become speculative investments. On this, Lanier manages to be both right and wrong in only the most spectacularly absurd of ways.

But what Lanier really laments is the passing of popular music as a shared cultural experience at national or even global scale. During Lanier’s coming of age through the 1960-80s—with only a few consolidated channels for music distribution, it was truly impossible to escape the sounds and influence of the Beatles or Prince or Micheal Jackson—everyone heard it and even the deaf still felt it.

In the end, Lanier could image Songles but he couldn’t envision what Spotify would become—a conduit to shatter music distribution into a myriad of tiny longtails—providing infinitely fragmented and individually fine-tuned music experiences rather than large and cohesive cultural moments. However, even in this miss, Lanier is largely able to project what Spotify-ed music would resolve to—music designed as much or more to please the self-referential selection algorithm than any real, human listeners. A dangerously foretelling insight that goes well beyond music as AI tools are posed to become the "googling" of the next technological cycle—what happens to information, to human thought, when the majority of "generative AI" outputs are just the machine referencing itself?

Digital Neoteny The final thread to pull is that of "digital neoteny," the retention of juvenile behaviors in adult form, in this case, a neoteny of the mind if you will. Lanier sees the internet as specifically primed to propagate three kinds of neoteny in digital-native humans— a blissful and curious Bachelardian neoteny (as in Gaston Bachelard’s Poetics of Reverie); a cruel and mob-like Goldingesque neoteny (as in William Golding’s Lord of the Flies); and a general and deeply pervasive, infantile neoteny.

Neoteny of the Bachelardian variety, which Lanier likens to “the sense of wonder and weirdness that a teen can find in the unfolding world,” is what he feels the internet has provided in a few brief and magical moments generally aligned with the “early days” of successive internet technologies, movements, and companies—through this generally degrades into Goldingesque neoteny as novelty gives way to ossification.

Lanier’s missives on Bachelardian neoteny feel especially pertinent to the present state of Nostr (where I am publishing this writing). Nostr is in a moment where winner-take all dynamics and corporatization have yet to take hold. Child-like revelry abounds with each new discovery or novel Nostr client development so much so that the likes of Jack Dorsey compare it to the excitement of the early internet.

But with time, if and as the Nostr protocol wins, to what extent will technical lock-in take hold here? To what extent will calcification of seemingly trivial or even comical decisions being made by client devs today have dramatic implications on the feasibility of other development in the future? And will we early Nostr users, at some point put down welcoming inclusivesness for insular tribalism—and in what ways might we be doing this already?

Finally, to the third kind of neoteny, Infantile neoteny—which perhaps incapsulates the internet even more so than either of the other two types—Lanier sees the net driving an evermore prolonged deferral of maturity, resulting ultimately in some centrally-managed permanent arresting of society in a stupefied and juvenile mental state:

“Some of the greatest speculative investments in human history continue to converge on Silicon Valley schemes that seemed to have been named by Dr. Seuss. On any given day, one might hear of tens or hundreds of millions of dollars flowing to a start-up company named Ublibudly or MeTickly. These are names I just made up, but they would make great venture capital bait if they existed. At these companies one finds rooms full of MIT PhD engineers not seeking cancer cures or sources of safe drinking water for the underdeveloped world but schemes to send little digital pictures of teddy bears and dragons between adult members of social networks. At the end of the road of the pursuit of technological sophistication appears to lie a playhouse in which humankind regresses to nursery school.”

The popular culture of the early 2020s—with it’s NFT Monke JPEGs, silent and masked TikTok dancing in the drab aisles of crumbling department stores, and rampant peer-pressured social-media virtue-signaling and paternalism—could scarcely be described in any more stark and specific detail. That such could be seen so vividly in 2010 is as masterful as it is dishearteningly dark.

CONCLUSION

You Are Not A Gadget is a special thing, a strange beast—as lucid in its first half as it is jumbled, meandering, and even nonsensical in its second half. And while the discerning reader might judge the book harshly for these structural failings, I doubt the author would care, he might even welcome it. Lanier’s apparent purpose in writing is to share his mind rather than please the reader in any particular regard. The sufficiently curious reader, one who is willing to engage with the book’s content, for whatever the book’s faults may be, finds a king’s randoms of wisdom, insight, and uncanny foresight.

In closing, it seems fitting to recall one of Lanier’s earliest warnings in the book, “Maybe if people pretend they are not conscious or do not have free will […] then perhaps we have the power to make it so. We might be able to collectively achieve antimagic.” 13 years on, this feels more pressing and urgent and true than ever. (Rating: 4/5🐙)

~Moon

Buy the Book: You Are Not A Gadget

@ 57d1a264:69f1fee1

LegoGPT generates a LEGO structure from a user-provided text prompt in an end-to-end manner. Notably, our generated LEGO structure is physically stable and buildable.

Lego is something most of us knows. This is a opportuity to ask where is our creativity going? From the art of crafting figures to building blocks following our need and desires to have a machine thinking and building following step-by-step instructions to achieve an isolated goal.

Is the creative act then in the question itself, not anymore in the crafting? Are we just delegating the solution of problems, the thinking of how to respond to questions, to machines? Would it be different if delegated to other people?

Source: https://avalovelace1.github.io/LegoGPT/

https://stacker.news/items/981336

@ 2b24a1fa:17750f64

Wer sein eigenes Geld abheben möchte, macht sich heute – in Spanien - verdächtig. Wer dort eine größere Geldmenge des eigenen Vermögens abzuheben gedenkt, muss das von nun an Tage zuvor anmelden. Diese neue Regelung lässt sich auch nicht dadurch umgehen, dass man mehrere kleine Einzelbeiträge abhebt. Und die, die die neue Regelung missachten, werden empfindlich bestraft. So gerät jeder, der zu häufig Bares abhebt, in das Visier der Behörden.

https://soundcloud.com/radiomuenchen/barzahler-unter-generalverdacht-von-norbert-haring?

Was sich in Spanien an Bankautomaten und -schaltern eingeschlichen hat, könnte sich seinen Weg auch nach Deutschland bahnen. In Frankreich, so zeigt die persönliche Erfahrung, variiert die zu erzielende Geldmenge am Automaten unter noch ungeklärten Bedingungen von Tag zu Tag, von Konto zu Konto. Der Automat gibt vor, ob gerade beispielsweise 60, 200 oder 400 Euro abgehoben werden dürfen.

Hören Sie Norbert Härings Text zum spanischen Szenario der den Titel „Barzahler unter Generalverdacht“ trägt und zunächst auf seinem Blog erschienen war. norberthaering.de/news/spanien-bargeld/

Sprecher: Karsten Troyke

@ 2b24a1fa:17750f64

https://soundcloud.com/radiomuenchen/helge-buttkereit-medienkritik-als-trotziger-idealismus-teil-2?

@ 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.

@ 2b24a1fa:17750f64

"Kleines Erste-Hilfe-Büchlein gegen Propaganda" von 2023. „Normalerweise hört man das Wort „Propaganda“ im Mainstream-Diskurs nur, wenn es um Dinge geht, die andere Länder ihren eigenen Bürgern antun oder Teil ausländischer Beeinflussungsoperationen sind, obwohl in der überwältigenden Mehrheit der Fälle, in denen wir in unserem täglichen Leben Propaganda erlebt haben, der Anruf aus dem eigenen Haus kam.“

https://soundcloud.com/radiomuenchen/helge-buttkereit-medienkritik-als-trotziger-idealismus?

In der Folge dokumentiert sie einige gravierende Beispiele aus den US-Medien. Auch in Deutschland fehlt es den Massenmedien an der nötigen Distanz zur Regierung und ihrem Werte-Narrativ. Was umso gefährlicher ist, da sie über „Definitionsmacht“ verfügen. Auch wenn wir selbst diese Medien nicht konsumieren, so können wir doch sicher sein, dass die große Mehrheit der Bürger sie konsultiert und damit deren Sicht auf die Welt massiv beeinflusst wird. „Wenn wir die Tagesschau einschalten, erfahren wir nichts über die ‘Wirklichkeit’. Wir lernen vielmehr, wer es geschafft hat, seine Sicht auf die Wirklichkeit in die Propaganda-Matrix einzuschreiben“, verrät der Medienwissenschaftler Michael Meyen in seinem Buch "Die Propaganda-Matrix". Nun gilt jedoch die Presse in der öffentlichen Wahrnehmung als „Vierte Gewalt“ der Demokratie. Ihre Aufgabe wäre es demnach, die zunehmend verflochtenen Staatsgewalten Legislative, Exekutive und Judikative zu kontrollieren. Die Realität sieht anders aus. Dabei übersieht selbst die immer häufiger auftretende Medienkritik, dass die „Vierte Gewalt“ von den Herrschenden nie in dieser Funktion gedacht war – schließlich waren und sind die Medien seit je her in den Händen von Regierungen und Konzernen, schreibt unser Autor Helge Buttkereit. Hören Sie seinen zweiteiligen Beitrag „Medienkritik als trotziger Idealismus“, der zunächst beim Magazin Multipolar erschienen war: multipolar-magazin.de/artikel/medien…tik-idealismus

Sprecher: Karsten Troyke

Bild-Collage: Radio München

@ 57d1a264:69f1fee1

Just another Ecash nutsnote design is a ew template for brrr.gandlaf.com cashu tocken printing machine and honoring Ecash ideator David Lee Chaum. Despite the turn the initial project took, we would not have Ecash today without his pioneering approach in cryptography and privacy-preserving technologies.

A simple KISS (Keep It Super Simple) Ecash nutsnote delivered as SVG, nothing fancy, designed in PenPot, an open source design tool, for slides, presentations, mockups and interactive prototypes.

Here Just another Nutsnote's current state, together with some snapshots along the process. Your feedback is more than welcome.

https://design.penpot.app/#/view?file-id=749aaa04-8836-81c6-8006-0b29916ec156&page-id=749aaa04-8836-81c6-8006-0b29916ec157&section=interactions&index=0&share-id=addba4d5-28a4-8022-8006-2ecc4316ebb2

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/979728

@ 2b24a1fa:17750f64

Herzlichen Glückwunsch zu einem weiteren denkwürdigen Europa-Tag, den wir mit einem Manifest des european-peace-projects begehen. Europaweit beteiligen sich heute Institutionen, Vereine und Bürger, die um 17 Uhr die Fenster öffnen und dieses Manifest laut verlesen. Wer das nicht möchte oder kann, schaltet vielleicht Radio München ein:

\ https://soundcloud.com/radiomuenchen/european-peace-project-das-manifest-heute-17-uhr?

@ 58537364:705b4b85

การภาวนานี่ ที่สำคัญ มันไม่ใช่ความสงบนะ สิ่งสำคัญที่มีค่ายิ่งกว่าความสงบก็คือ การที่เราได้เห็น อารมณ์ เห็นความคิดที่มันผุดขึ้นมา และตรงนี้แหละมันจะทำให้เรา สามารถที่จะเป็นอิสระ จากความคิดและอารมณ์ แทนที่จะตกเป็นทาสของมัน ถูกความคิดดึงไป หลอกล่อ หรือว่าถูกอารมณ์ครอบงำ บงการจิตใจ เราก็สามารถที่จะเป็นอิสระจากมัน หรือเป็นนายเหนือมันได้

ความคิดนี่ ถ้าหากว่าเราไม่รู้ทันมัน มันก็เป็นนายเหนือเรา แต่ถ้าเรารู้ทันนะ เราก็เป็นนายมัน ความคิดมันเป็นบ่าวที่ดีแต่เป็นนายที่เลวนะ คนไม่ค่อยตระหนักเท่าไร มันเป็นบ่าวที่ดีถ้าเรารู้จักใช้มัน ใช้มันแก้ปัญหาต่างๆ ที่เกิดขึ้น ไม่ว่าจะเป็นปัญหาเรื่องชีวิต ปัญหาเรื่องทำมาหากิน หรือแม้กระทั่งปัญหาในทางธรรม ความคิดนี่ถ้าเรารู้จักใช้มัน มันมีประโยชน์ แต่ถ้าเราปล่อยให้มันเป็นนายเรานี่ เราแย่เลย

ความคิดก็เหมือนกันนะ อารมณ์ก็เหมือนกัน โดยเฉพาะความคิดนี่เป็นบ่าวที่ดี เป็นนายที่เลว ถ้าเราปล่อยให้มันเป็นนายเมื่อไร เรากินไม่ได้นอนไม่หลับ ต้องไปทะเลาะเบาะแว้งกับผู้คน เพราะว่าเขาคิดไม่เหมือนเรา เขาคิดต่างจากเรา หรือคิดต่างจากสิ่งที่อยู่ในหัวของเรา บางทีก็ฆ่ากันเพราะความคิดที่ต่างกัน ฆ่าเพื่อปกป้องความคิดที่อยู่ในหัวของเรา

อารมณ์ก็เหมือนกัน ถ้าเราไม่รู้ทันอารมณ์ เราก็จะตกเป็นทาสของมัน ปล่อยให้มันบงการ ไม่ว่าจะเป็นความโกรธ ความเศร้า เวลาเศร้านี่ ความเศร้ามันก็จะหลอกให้เราเศร้าไปเรื่อย สรรหาเหตุผลมากมายว่าเราควรเศร้า เพราะถ้าเราไม่เศร้าแสดงว่าเราไม่รักเขา ถ้าเรารักเขาเราต้องเศร้า ต้องเศร้าไปเรื่อยๆ ถ้าหายเศร้าเมื่อไรแสดงว่าไม่รักเขา ไม่ว่าคนนั้นจะเป็นพ่อ แม่ หรือลูก มันก็หลอกให้เราจมอยู่ในความเศร้า ดำดิ่งอยู่ในความเศร้า จนกระทั่งกลายเป็นโรคซึมเศร้าไปเลย

หรือความโกรธก็เหมือนกัน มันก็จะหลอกจะล่อ สรรหาเหตุผลให้เราโกรธ เพื่อความถูกต้อง เพื่อจะได้สั่งสอนมัน ไม่ให้มันทำสิ่งที่ไม่ถูกต้องต่อไป ฉะนั้นเนี่ย ไม่ใช่โกรธอย่างเดียว ต้องจัดการด้วย

คนเราถ้าไม่รู้ทันความคิด ไม่รู้ทันอารมณ์ มันก็สามารถสร้างทุกข์ให้กับตัวเองได้ และสิ่งที่ต้องการคือความสงบนี่ มันก็จะเกิดขึ้นไม่ได้เลย การภาวนานี่ คนส่วนใหญ่ก็ปรารถนาแต่ความสงบ สงบที่เขาเข้าใจคือไม่คิดอะไร แล้วก็ไปห้ามความคิดหรือไปกดข่มอารมณ์ด้วย มันมีความคิดก็กดมันเอาไว้ มันมีอารมณ์เกิดขึ้นก็กดมันเอาไว้ เพราะคิดว่านี่มันจะทำให้ตัวเองสงบ

แต่ที่จริงแล้ว สิ่งที่ดีกว่าก็คือ “การเห็น” เห็นความคิดและอารมณ์ ซึ่งจะเห็น หรือรู้ทันมันได้ ก็ต้องยอมให้มันเกิดขึ้น อนุญาตให้มันเกิดขึ้น ไม่กดข่มมัน ใหม่ๆ ก็ไม่เห็นนะ พอมันเกิดขึ้นทีไร มันก็ครองใจเราทันที เรียกว่า “เข้าไปเป็น”

แต่ต่อไปนี่เราฝึกการเห็นบ่อยๆ ฝึกเห็นบ่อยๆ มันก็จะเห็นได้เร็วขึ้น แล้วมันก็จะเข้าไปเป็นน้อยลง พอเห็นเมื่อไรนะ มันก็จะครองใจเราไม่ได้ และนี่ก็คือการค้นพบที่สำคัญเลย เพราะมันหมายถึงการที่เราสามารถ จะเป็นอิสระจากความคิดและอารมณ์ได้.

การค้นพบตัวเองที่สำคัญ พระอาจารย์ไพศาล วิสาโล วัดป่าสุคะโต แสดงธรรมเย็นวันที่ 11 กันยายน 2565

@ 90c656ff:9383fd4e

Bitcoin has been playing an increasingly important role in protests and social movements around the world. Thanks to its decentralized nature, resistance to censorship, and independence from government control, Bitcoin has become a valuable tool for activists, organizations, and citizens fighting against oppressive regimes or restrictive financial systems.

• Bitcoin as an alternative to the traditional financial system

In recent years, governments and banking institutions have used financial restrictions as a form of political repression. Frozen bank accounts, blocked donations, and limitations on transactions are some of the strategies used to weaken social movements and protests. Bitcoin offers an alternative, allowing funds to be transferred and stored without interference from banks or governments.

One of Bitcoin’s main advantages in these contexts is its censorship resistance. While bank accounts can be shut down and centralized payment services can be pressured to block transactions, Bitcoin operates on a decentralized network where no one can prevent a user from sending or receiving funds.

• Examples of Bitcoin use in protests

01 - Hong Kong (2019–2020): During the pro-democracy protests, activists faced financial restrictions when trying to organize demonstrations and campaigns. Many turned to Bitcoin to avoid surveillance by the Chinese government and to secure funding for their actions.

02 - Canada (2022): The truckers' protest against government restrictions saw participants' bank accounts frozen. As an alternative, Bitcoin donations were used to bypass financial repression.

03 - Belarus (2020): After the contested presidential elections, protesters used Bitcoin to fund activities and support those who lost their jobs due to state repression.

04 - Nigeria (2020): During the #EndSARS protests against police brutality, international donations to the movement were blocked. Bitcoin became one of the main methods for financing the cause.

• Challenges of using Bitcoin in social movements

01 - Education and accessibility: Many people still don’t know how to use Bitcoin safely and efficiently. This lack of knowledge can hinder large-scale adoption.

02 - Digital security: Social movements often operate under heavy surveillance. Without proper security measures, funds can be compromised.

03 - Volatility: Bitcoin’s price can fluctuate significantly in a short time, which may affect the value of donations and funds raised.

In summary, Bitcoin has proven to be an essential tool in resisting financial censorship and government repression. By enabling social movements and activists to fund their causes without intermediaries, Bitcoin strengthens the fight for freedom and justice. However, effective adoption of the technology requires knowledge, security, and adaptation to its unique characteristics. As more people learn to use Bitcoin, its role in protests and social movements will continue to grow, reinforcing the importance of financial sovereignty in the struggle for rights and freedoms.

Thank you very much for reading this far. I hope everything is well with you, and sending a big hug from your favorite Bitcoiner maximalist from Madeira. Long live freedom!

@ 57d1a264:69f1fee1

Has the architect Greg Chasen considered it when rebuilding the house just one year before the catastrophe? Apparently not! Another of his projects was featured on the Value of Architecture as properties with design integrity.

This is a super interesting subject. The historic character, livability, and modern disaster-resistance is a triangle where you often have to pick just one or two, which leads to some tough decisions that have major impacts on families and communities. Like one of the things he mentions is that the architect completely eliminated plants from the property. That's great for fire resistance, but not so great for other things if the entire town decides to go the same route (which he does bring up later in the video). I don't think there's any objectively right answer, but definitely lots of good (and important) discussion points to be had.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbl_1qfsFXk

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/979653

@ 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.

@ 90c656ff:9383fd4e

Millions of people around the world still lack access to basic banking services, whether due to lack of infrastructure, bureaucratic requirements, or economic instability in their countries. Bitcoin emerges as an innovative solution to this problem, allowing anyone with internet access to have control over their money without relying on banks or governments. By offering an open and accessible financial system, Bitcoin becomes a powerful tool for global financial inclusion.

• The problem of financial exclusion

In many developing countries, a large portion of the population does not have a bank account. This can happen for several reasons, such as:

01 - Lack of access to banks: Many communities, especially in rural areas, do not have nearby financial institutions.

02 - Bureaucratic requirements: Some banks require specific documentation or a credit history that many people cannot provide.

03 - High costs: Banking fees can be prohibitive for those with low incomes.

04 - Economic and political instability: In countries with high inflation or unstable governments, banks may not be a safe option for storing money.

These challenges leave millions of people on the margins of the financial system, unable to save, invest, or carry out transactions efficiently.

• Bitcoin as an alternative

Bitcoin addresses many of the issues of financial exclusion by offering an accessible and decentralized system. With Bitcoin, anyone with a mobile phone and internet access can store and transfer money without needing a bank. Key advantages include:

01 - Global accessibility: Bitcoin can be used anywhere in the world, regardless of the user's location.

02 - No intermediaries: Unlike banks that impose fees and rules, Bitcoin allows direct transactions between people.

03 - Low-cost international transfers: Sending money to another country can be expensive and slow with traditional methods, while Bitcoin offers a faster and more affordable alternative.

04 - Protection against inflation: In countries with unstable currencies, Bitcoin can be used as a store of value, protecting the population’s purchasing power.

• Use cases in financial inclusion

Bitcoin is already being used to promote financial inclusion in various parts of the world. Some examples include:

01 - Africa and Latin America: In countries like Nigeria, Venezuela, and Argentina, where inflation is high and access to U.S. dollars is limited, many people use Bitcoin to preserve their money and make international transactions.

02 - International remittances: Workers sending money to their families abroad avoid the high fees of traditional transfer companies by using Bitcoin.

03 - Digital microeconomy: Small merchants and freelancers without access to bank accounts can receive payments in Bitcoin directly and securely.

• Challenges to financial inclusion with Bitcoin

Despite its advantages, Bitcoin adoption as a tool for financial inclusion still faces some challenges, such as:

01 - Internet access: Many impoverished regions still lack adequate digital infrastructure.

02 - Financial education: Greater knowledge of the technology and best security practices is needed for broader adoption.

03 - Price volatility: Value fluctuations can make Bitcoin difficult to use for everyday expenses, especially in countries where people live on unstable incomes.

In summary, Bitcoin offers a viable solution for millions of people excluded from the traditional financial system. By providing global access, low-cost transactions, and protection from inflation, it becomes a powerful instrument for promoting financial inclusion. However, for its full potential to be realized, it is essential to invest in digital education and expand technological infrastructure, enabling more people to achieve financial autonomy through Bitcoin.

Thank you very much for reading this far. I hope everything is well with you, and sending a big hug from your favorite Bitcoiner maximalist from Madeira. Long live freedom!

@ e97aaffa:2ebd765d

Quando tentamos simplificar/ilustrar algo que é extremamente complexo, pode resultar em algo distorcido. Apesar do resultado sair distorcido, continua a ser a melhor representação, temos é que ter em mente que essa distorção existe quando analisamos essa informação.

O maior exemplo, é o mapa mundi, quando transformamos uma esfera em algo plano, é natural que crie distorções, como quanto mais perto dos polos, os países são sobredimensionados em relação aos que estão mais perto da linha do Equador.

Esta infografia criada pelo Saylor é comumente utilizada, mas esta deve ser utilizada com moderação, porque a informação também está distorcida.

Assim, sempre que alguém utiliza estes dados para fazer análises, deve estar ciente que existem distorções. Primeiro, em alguns ativos os valores são impossíveis de calcular, são apenas estimativas. Já foram feitos vários estudos, e sempre com valores bastantes díspares.

Depois, esta infografia simplifica demasiado, não sendo visível a sobreposição de ativos, por exemplo, as empresas possuem outros ativos, isso significa, que não podemos fazer somas simples. Ou seja, se somarmos as Equities (115T) e os Bonds(300T) não resulta em $415 Triliões de riqueza, o real valor é inferior.

Vamos a dois bons exemplos:

A Berkshire Hathaway, a empresa de Warren Buffett, que o seu atual core business é investir em outras empresas. Apesar de neste momento, ter uma enorme liquidez, está a aguardar pelo momento certo para voltar ao mercado.

A outra empresa é MicroStrategy, que gradualmente está-se a transformar num banco Bitcoin. O seu negócio inicial, começa a ser insignificante, para a sua atual dimensão, está a fazer um percurso muito similar à Berkshire Hathaway, enquanto a Berkshire Hathaway redirecionou o seu negócio para o investimento em ações, a MicroStrategy para o Bitcoin.

Um erro comum entre alguns bitcoiners quando fazem estimativas baseada nesta tabela, é acreditarem que o crescimento do valor do Bitcoin, vai resultar numa redução do valor das Equities. Isso não vai acontecer, porque as empresas também vão possuir Bitcoin na sua tesouraria, logo se o valor do bitcoin subir, as equities também o vão.

Onde o Bitcoin vai certamente impactar, é nas Bonds e no Real Estate.

Assim para concluir, esta infografia é interessante para fazer cálculos ou análises, mas não podemos esquecer que contém distorções.

@ 2b24a1fa:17750f64

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

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

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

Link zur Webseite: inmodia.de

@ c1e9ab3a:9cb56b43

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

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

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

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

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

Bitcoin sidesteps this entirely by being:

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

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

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

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

That’s the point.

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

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

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

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

Instead, it anchors:

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

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

4. Universal Assayability Requires Minimalism at the Base Layer

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

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

To preserve this:

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

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

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

5. Governance: Not Captured, Just Resistant to Coercion

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

Here's what matters:

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

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

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

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

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

If you're an engineer looking for:

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

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

Take-away

Under realistic, market-aware assumptions—where:

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

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

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

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

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

Final Word

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

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

nostr:nevent1qqswr7sla434duatjp4m89grvs3zanxug05pzj04asxmv4rngvyv04sppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qgs9tc6ruevfqu7nzt72kvq8te95dqfkndj5t8hlx6n79lj03q9v6xcrqsqqqqqp0n8wc2

nostr:nevent1qqsd5hfkqgskpjjq5zlfyyv9nmmela5q67tgu9640v7r8t828u73rdqpr4mhxue69uhkymmnw3ezucnfw33k76tww3ux76m09e3k7mf0qgsvr6dt8ft292mv5jlt7382vje0mfq2ccc3azrt4p45v5sknj6kkscrqsqqqqqp02vjk5

nostr:nevent1qqstrszamvffh72wr20euhrwa0fhzd3hhpedm30ys4ct8dpelwz3nuqpr4mhxue69uhkymmnw3ezucnfw33k76tww3ux76m09e3k7mf0qgs8a474cw4lqmapcq8hr7res4nknar2ey34fsffk0k42cjsdyn7yqqrqsqqqqqpnn3znl

@ 2b24a1fa:17750f64

Eine Kolumne von Michael Sailer, jeden ersten Freitag bei Radio München, nachzulesen auf sailersblog.de.

https://soundcloud.com/radiomuenchen/belastigungen-35-das-ist-nicht-meine-regierung?

@ 52b4a076:e7fad8bd

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

Regular relays have challenges

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

NFDB: A scalable database for large relays

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

Search

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

Personalization

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

Other

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

Calcite: A local microrelay database

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

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

For zero-downtime, NFDB is recommended.

Noswhere SmartCache

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

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

routerd

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

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

Ending notes

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

A lot more is to come. 👀️️️️️️

@ 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! 🌸

@ 58537364:705b4b85

ความสำเร็จ จำเป็นต้องมีวินัย

ความมีวินัย คือ "การทำด้วยความตั้งใจ ไม่หวั่นไหว/ไหลตามไปกับอารมณ์" ส่วน "ความไร้วินัย" มีนัยยะตรงกันข้าม กล่าวคือ

ความไร้วินัย คือ "การทำตามความหวั่นไหว/ไหลตามไปกับอารมณ์" เช่น ความง่วง หิว เบื่อ เซ็ง พอใจ ไม่พอใจ กลัว หลงไหล/ขาดสติ เป็นต้น จนเกิดข้ออ้างสารพัด เช่น * อ้างว่าเดี๋ยวก่อน เอาไว้ทีหลัง * อ้างว่าเหนื่อยหน่าย * อ้างว่าร้อนไป หนาวไป * อ้างว่ายังเช้าอยู่ * อ้างว่าสายไปแล้ว * ฯลฯ

การสร้างวินัยที่ยั่งยืน "ไม่ได้เกิดจากการฝืน แต่เกิดจากความฝัน" กฎแห่งความฝันระบุว่า เราต้องสร้างภาพสวรรค์ (เป้าหมาย) ให้ชัด จากนั้นให้ลดช่องว่างระหว่างการคิดและการกระทำให้เหลือน้อยที่สุด เพราะถ้าเราคิดมาก ส่วนใหญ่เราจะไม่ได้ทำ จิตใจเราจะอ่อนแอ ไม่เข้มแข็งมั่นคง

กฎแห่งความฝัน ควรฝันเพื่อผู้อื่น อย่าฝันเพื่อตัวเองคนเดียว เพราะขณะที่จิตมุ่งเป้าสู่ความสำเร็จนั้นมัน ถ้ามันมีมากเกินไป สติปัญญาจะอ่อนค่าลง ความรอบรู้จะน้อยลง ณ ขณะนั้นการกระทำทั้งปวงจะขาดความเห็นอกเห็นใจผู้อื่นหากทำเพื่อตัวเองฝ่ายเดียว แต่ถ้าพลังมุ่งเป้าที่ส่วนรวม ทุกการกระทำจะส่งคุณค่าเกิดเป็นความสุขความสำเร็จร่วมกัน

-เมธา หริมเทพาธิบดี

คู่มือมนุษย์

@ 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.

@ c9badfea:610f861a

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

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

@ 14206a66:689725cf

This article is a repost, migrating from Substack

Uncertainty is the only constant

It goes without saying that uncertainty is a given in business. It could be the weather, pestilence, or some other physical phenomenon that brings different conditions for your business (good or bad). Or it could be uncertainty in the behaviour of consumers, suppliers, workers, or any other person critical to your success. Most of the time, we just don’t know what will happen next.

One of the most important skills in managing a business, then, is making predictions in the face of uncertainty. We have several tools to do so. The first covers methods from the physical sciences, and involves calculating the frequency of events. We need to unpick a concept at the root of uncertainty, probability.

Thanks for reading Department of Praxeology! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

Subscribed

Types of probability

In Human Action, Ludwig von Mises introduces us to two classifications of probability: case and class probability.

Case probability

Case probability is when we know something about some of the factors which determine the outcome, but not others.

This is the kind of probability most often encountered in business. We often know small key parts about several factors that lead to a particular outcome, we might see that oil prices have risen significantly, coupled with a decrease in the exchange rate. These factors help to lead to the outcome of a rising price of fertiliser. But then, there are other factors that lead to this outcome, such as a myriad of decisions by businesspeople all along the supply chain. These, we know absolutely nothing about!

Class probability

Class probability is when we know everything about the particular kind (or class) of event, but we don’t know anything at all about the specific event.

We do encounter class probability in business. But it happens at very specific times (as opposed to just all the time, as with case probability).

Myrtle rust, picture courtesy of NZ Department of Conservation

For example (and sticking to agriculture) we know nothing about an outbreak of Myrtle rust on our farm. But we know, from agricultural science, that the likelihood of an outbreak in our area for a given year is about 13 percent.

So how can we make predictions of these events?

Making predictions

For the latter (class probabilities, like losses caused by Myrtle rust) we can always rely on methods from the physical sciences to calculate frequencies. Then, we know that the physical world has certain constants, so we can say that given a set of conditions (like rainfall) the likelihood of losses from Myrtle rust in future is about 12 percent.

Thinking about the former (case probabilities such as changing consumer preferences, or changes in prices). In these situations we are dealing with the realm of human decisions. So while we can count the number of these events, we cannot use these counts for prediction. The reason is that, in the realm of human decisions, there are no constants. We can’t say that given the world of 2023 prices rose five times, therefore in the world of 2027 prices will rise five times. Even if physical conditions are the same, human decisions will not be.

Luckily, economic science does give us an answer. In dealing with case probabilities we should use our method of understanding (which I wrote about here).

Using this in your business

You can incorporate this knowledge into your business by critically analysing each event for which you need to make a prediction. Is the event dealing with the physical world, for which there are constants? Or is it the realm of human decisions, for which there are no constants? It most likely is a mix of these.

Work backwards and jot down the more granular events which compose the event in question. Then try again to fit each of these into case or class probability.

When each event is broken down into only one category you know which methods of prediction to apply to each event.

For case probabilities, engage a specialist in the area. For class probabilities, engage your own expertise in understanding, and consider hiring an economist to augment your analysis.

@ 14206a66:689725cf

This article is a repost, migrating from Substack

Introduction

Released in November 2020 by fiatjaf, Nostr is an open, decentralised, censorship-resistant messaging protocol. The protocol is well designed, and many authors have written extensively about the mechanics and use-cases. For the purposes of this article, I will narrow the focus to Nostr as a tool to enable the creation of platform markets. My aim is to give the reader an introduction to platform market pricing and provide concrete steps to price their platform strategically.

What is a Platform Market?

A platform market consists of multiple groups of users who want to interact but can’t do so directly. The platform brings them together to enable interaction, benefiting all users and the platform itself by enabling these interactions and pricing appropriately. Although platform markets have been around forever, the last decade has seen an explosion in their number due to the ubiquity of the internet.

Examples:

·         Google

·         YouTube

·         TV

·         Facebook

·         Twitter (X)

Platform markets have historically earned significant revenue if they design their pricing correctly. This is because platform markets don’t need to produce goods themselves; rather, one or more “sides” of the platform produce goods and services for the other side, with the platform merely enabling the exchange. TikTok is a prime example: it produces nothing except a video hosting service, with users generating all the content for other users. Effectively, the platform has only fixed costs and very low marginal costs.

Therefore, platform markets are far more scalable than traditional one-sided markets, as their primary concern is to attract as many users as possible (who have no marginal cost to the platform). Additionally, platforms often enjoy a captive audience, making it difficult for competitors to entice away users once they are established. This is particularly evident in software and payment platforms.

How Does Nostr Enable the Creation of Platform Markets?

·         Open Protocol: Like the internet, Nostr is an open protocol.

·         Inbuilt Payment Systems: Nostr integrates payment systems such as Bitcoin’s Lightning Network.

·         Existing User Base: It already has a growing user base.

·         Decentralisation: This feature acts as a moat against competitors.

Types of platform enabled by Nostr

As of 2024 we are seeing multiple types of platforms that Nostr has enabled. The first is Nostr relays. A Nostr relay is a simple server that receives and broadcasts user notes (messages) in the Nostr protocol. Users can publish and fetch notes across multiple relays. Nostr relays can be configured by their operator to curate content on specific topics or people. Alternatively, they can be configured with an algorithm as experienced by users of contemporary social media. These can be valuable for users. And potentially, paid relays are a viable business opportunity.

The second platform Nostr enables is the Nostr client. Nostr clients are analogous to internet browser software. Historically, we have seen users be charged to install an internet browser, though this is unlikely to emerge in the market for Nostr clients. As a platform, a Nostr client might be bundled with a relay service (with curation or algorithm).

The third type of platform is Nostr apps. Each app can be designed as a platform if that is valuable for users. We are already seeing Nostr-based alternatives for music and video streaming, looking to compete with apps like YouTube.

We can’t know what the future will hold but the possibilities for designing platforms with Nostr are many. The advantage in designing a platform is that you can create a two sided market.

What is a Two-Sided Market?

All two-sided markets are platform markets, but not all platform markets are two-sided markets. The critical aspect of a two-sided market is that the volume of interactions on the platform depends on both the relative prices charged to each side and the total price charged. This is the case when both sides value more users on the other side, known in literature as an “indirect network externality.”

An example of a one-sided platform market is a clothes retailer, where the volume of sales depends only on the total price, not the relative prices charged to buyers and producers. Conversely, YouTube is a two-sided market where both creators and watchers benefit from more users. Watchers benefit from more variety and quality, while creators benefit from more users and views. YouTube introduces a special category of creators, the advertisers, who benefit monetarily from views because consumers viewing their content are likely to purchase their goods.

The prices paid by YouTube users are not all monetary:

·         Watchers are charged an inconvenience fee in the form of advertisements.

·         Advertisers are charged a monetary fee.

·         Creators are not charged any fees.

Let’s assume the total fees for YouTube add up to $100. Say advertisers are charged $90, watchers face an inconvenience worth $10, and creators still enjoy $0 costs. In this scenario, the total volume of videos watched might be some number like 100,000.

Assume we change the price structure to advertisers being charged $80, watchers paying an inconvenience worth $10, and creators being charged $10 (keeping the total fees at $100). In this new scenario, the likely outcome is that the marginal creator will no longer create videos, and thus, the total volume of videos watched will fall.

Two-Sided Markets that Allow Money Exchange

The key to understanding Nostr’s value lies in its inbuilt payment mechanism—Bitcoin’s Lightning Network protocol. Although this protocol is not part of the Nostr codebase, the existing Nostr clients incorporate it to allow users to pay each other bitcoin with a simple user interface. This means that Nostr as a protocol is ideal for creating platforms where users can exchange monetary value. The mechanics and design choices of the Lightning network further augment Nostr’s value proposition more so than traditional payment systems like credit cards, PayPal, etc.

Key Problem: Chicken and Egg

So far, we have established that platform markets enable at least two groups of users to come together and exchange. The primary problem is that both groups will only use the platform if the other group is already using it, creating a classic chicken and egg scenario. Platforms operate by bringing groups of users together, making users reticent to switch to a new platform because they don’t know if the other users will be there. This gives existing platforms enormous power.

Guy Swann sums this up well in this Nostr note: note1695j0czewtkfwy7h4ne7k2ug706uwc7lendsq50prsfp8vwq8nfszdx4z7.

Competing with Existing Platforms: Divide and Conquer!

To compete with existing platforms, you need to divide and conquer. The original formulation for this strategy is given in both Caillaud and Jullien (2003) and Armstrong (2006). To take advantage of the indirect network externalities identified earlier, the divide and conquer strategy involves subsidising one side of the market to attract a large user base (the "divide" part) and then monetising the other side of the market (the "conquer" part).

Divide: Attract one side of the market by offering lower prices or subsidies. For example, offer free registration to one side. This subsidy is essential to kickstart the network effects, as a larger user base on one side increases the platform’s attractiveness to the other side. This was observed in the early days of YouTube, which was free for both creators and watchers.

Conquer: Once a substantial user base is established on the subsidised side, charge higher fees on the other side of the market. This can be seen in contemporary YouTube, where advertisers (a specific kind of creator) pay fees, and watchers deal with the inconvenience of watching ads (inconvenience is a non-price fee).

Implementing This Strategy in Your Platform:

So who are are you dividing, who are you conquering? Deciding which side to subsidise involves understanding which side offers more benefit to the other side. For example, in nightclubs (Wright, 2004), men and women go to interact. Men are assumed to gain more from each woman’s presence than vice versa, so nightclubs often subsidise women with free entry or drinks to attract men.

First, consider all your user groups. What brings them to your platform, what do they want to gain by interacting with the other user groups.

Think about, and identify, which group confers more value for the other group by being on the platform.

Then, think about how you can subsidise that user group. Free access is common. But Nostr allows seamless payment integration which encourages users to exchange money. A potential model for your platform could be that you charge a fee to both users based on how much value they send to each other. One way to subsidise users in this case is to reduce those fees.

Alternatively, you could pay users to join your platform using Nostr’s integration with the Lightning Network.

References:

·         Armstrong, M. (2006). Competition in two-sided markets. The RAND Journal of Economics, 37(3), 668-691.

·         Caillaud, B., & Jullien, B. (2003). Chicken & Egg: Competition among Intermediation Service Providers. The RAND Journal of Economics, 34(2), 309-328.

·         Wright, J. (2004). One-sided logic in two-sided markets. Review of Network Economics, 3(1).

@ 57d1a264:69f1fee1

We asked members of the design community to choose an artifact that embodies craft—something that speaks to their understanding of what it means to make with intention. Here’s what they shared.

A vintage puzzle box, a perfectly tuned guitar, an AI-powered poetry camera. A daiquiri mixed with precision. A spreadsheet that still haunts muscle memory. Each artifact tells a story: not just about the thing itself, but about the choices of the creator behind it. What to refine, what to leave raw. When to push forward, when to let go. Whether built to last for generations or designed to delight in a fleeting moment, the common thread is that great craft doesn’t happen by accident. It’s made.

On the application of craft

Even the most experienced makers can benefit from building structure and intention into their practice. From sharpening your storytelling to designing quality products, these pieces offer practical ways to uplevel your craft.

Read more at https://www.figma.com/blog/craft-artifacts/

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/979644

@ 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.

@ c1e9ab3a:9cb56b43

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

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

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

Part I: The Scene and Its Context

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Part IV: Redemption as Narrative Alchemy

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

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

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

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

Part V: Real-World Reflections and Dangerous Scripts

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

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

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

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

Part VI: Cultural Responsibility and Narrative Ethics

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

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

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

Conclusion: Reckoning with the Stories We Tell

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

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

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

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

@ 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 .

@ 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

Shanghai: Bus Stops Here

A new crowd-sourced transit platform allows riders to propose, vote on, and activate new bus lines in as little as three days.

From early-morning school drop-offs to seniors booking rides to the hospital, from suburban commuters seeking a faster link to the metro to families visiting ancestral graves, Shanghai is rolling out a new kind of public bus — one that’s designed by commuters, and launched only when enough riders request it.

Branded “DZ” for dingzhi, or “customized,” the system invites residents to submit proposed routes through a city-run platform. Others with similar travel needs can opt in or vote, and if demand meets the threshold — typically 15 to 20 passengers per trip — the route goes live.

More than 220 DZ routes have already launched across all 16 city districts. Through an online platform opened May 8, users enter start and end points, preferred times, and trip frequency. If approved, routes can begin running in as little as three days.

Continue reading at https://www.sixthtone.com/news/1017072

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/979637

@ 4fa5d1c4:fd6c6e41

Willkommen zur Mitmachplattform: KI-Kompetenzen für die religionsbezogene Bildung

Diese Plattform ist ein offenes, gemeinschaftliches Lernmodul für alle, die KI-Kompetenzen im Kontext der religionsbezogenen Bildung entdecken, vertiefen und weitergeben möchten.
Hier können Religionslehrende, Hochschulangehörige und ehrenamtlich Engagierte gemeinsam Inhalte entwickeln, teilen und weiterentwickeln.

---

Was ist das Ziel?

Wir schaffen eine offene Lernumgebung, in der Materialien zu KI-Kompetenzen für Schule, Hochschule und außerschulische Jugendarbeit kollaborativ entstehen.
Die Plattform richtet sich an Lehrkräfte, Fortbildner:innen und Ehrenamtliche, die KI-Themen in der religiösen Bildung verantwortungsvoll erschließbar machen wollen.

---

Unser Kompetenzmodell

Im Zentrum steht ein Kreismodell mit vier Kompetenzbereichen, die auf drei Niveaustufen ausdifferenziert sind:
Verstehen, Anwenden, Reflektieren und Gestalten.
Diese Bereiche bauen aufeinander auf, beeinflussen sich gegenseitig und werden durch die zentrale Kompetenz AI Leadership verbunden.

Im Zentrum steht ein Kreismodell mit vier Kompetenzbereichen, die auf drei Niveaustufen ausdifferenziert werden können:
Verstehen, Anwenden, Reflektieren und Gestalten.
Diese Bereiche bauen aufeinander auf, beeinflussen sich gegenseitig und werden durch die zentrale Kompetenz AI Leadership verbunden.

| Kompetenzbereich | Beschreibung | |------------------|--------------| | 🟢 VERSTEHEN | Grundlagen und Mechanismen von KI | | 🔵 ANWENDEN | KI-Tools im Lernprozess nutzen | | 🟠 REFLEKTIEREN | Kritische Auseinandersetzung mit KI | | 🟣 GESTALTEN | Aktive Weiterentwicklung von KI-Systemen |

Jeder Lerninhalt ist einem Kompetenzbereich (und wenn möglich einer Niveaustufe) zugeordnet – farblich und inhaltlich klar erkennbar.

---

So funktioniert die Mitmachplattform

• Offene Inhalte: Alle Materialien werden als Markdown-Dateien über Nostr gepflegt.
• Mitmachen leicht gemacht: Egal wo auf Nostr du publizierst, mit den Hashtags #relilab und dem jeweiligen Kompetenzbereich als Schlagwort (also #verstehen, #anwenden, #gestalten, #reflektieren) finden wir diese Hashtagkombination und können die Webseite mit deiner Idee oder Weiterentwicklung ergänzen.
• Anleitungen: Eine eigene Seite erklärt Schritt für Schritt, wie du dich beteiligen kannst – ganz ohne Vorkenntnisse im Programmieren.
• Suchfunktion: Finde gezielt Inhalte nach Kompetenzbereich, Niveaustufe oder Schlagworten.

---

Für wen ist diese Plattform?

• Lehrkräfte an Schulen und Hochschulen in religionsbezogenen Fächern
• Ehrenamtliche und Multiplikator:innen in der kirchlichen Jugendarbeit
• Fort- und Weiterbildner:innen im Bereich KI und Religion

---

Mitmachen & Teilen

"Sharing is Caring":
Unser KI-Kompetenzmodell und alle Lernmaterialien stehen unter der offenen Lizenz [CC-BY 4.0].
Du darfst sie frei nutzen, anpassen und weitergeben – mit Nennung der Urheber:innen.

---

Starte jetzt!

---

Gemeinsam gestalten wir KI-Kompetenzen für eine reflektierte, verantwortungsvolle und kreative religiöse Bildung im KI-Zeitalter.

---

Kontakt & Feedback:
Für Fragen, Anregungen oder Feedback antworte einfach auf diese Nachricht oder komm' in den Matrix/Element-Raum #relilab-ki:rpi-virtuell zum Online-Austausch!

@ 08f96856:ffe59a09

เมื่อพูดถึง Bitcoin Standard หลายคนมักนึกถึงภาพโลกอนาคตที่ทุกคนใช้บิตคอยน์ซื้อกาแฟหรือของใช้ในชีวิตประจำวัน ภาพแบบนั้นดูเหมือนไกลตัวและเป็นไปไม่ได้ในความเป็นจริง หลายคนถึงกับพูดว่า “คงไม่ทันเห็นในช่วงชีวิตนี้หรอก” แต่ในมุมมองของผม Bitcoin Standard อาจไม่ได้เริ่มต้นจากการที่เราจ่ายบิตคอยน์โดยตรงในร้านค้า แต่อาจเริ่มจากบางสิ่งที่เงียบกว่า ลึกกว่า และเกิดขึ้นแล้วในขณะนี้ นั่นคือ การล่มสลายทีละน้อยของระบบเฟียตที่เราใช้กันอยู่

ระบบเงินที่อิงกับอำนาจรัฐกำลังเข้าสู่ช่วงขาลง รัฐบาลทั่วโลกกำลังจมอยู่ในภาระหนี้ระดับประวัติการณ์ แม้แต่ประเทศมหาอำนาจก็เริ่มแสดงสัญญาณของภาวะเสี่ยงผิดนัดชำระหนี้ อัตราเงินเฟ้อกลายเป็นปัญหาเรื้อรังที่ไม่มีท่าทีจะหายไป ธนาคารที่เคยโอนฟรีเริ่มกลับมาคิดค่าธรรมเนียม และประชาชนก็เริ่มรู้สึกถึงการเสื่อมศรัทธาในระบบการเงินดั้งเดิม แม้จะยังพูดกันไม่เต็มเสียงก็ตาม

ในขณะเดียวกัน บิตคอยน์เองก็กำลังพัฒนาแบบเงียบ ๆ เงียบ... แต่ไม่เคยหยุด โดยเฉพาะในระดับ Layer 2 ที่เริ่มแสดงศักยภาพอย่างจริงจัง Lightning Network เป็น Layer 2 ที่เปิดใช้งานมาได้ระยะเวลสหนึ่ง และยังคงมีบทบาทสำคัญที่สุดในระบบนิเวศของบิตคอยน์ มันทำให้การชำระเงินเร็วขึ้น มีต้นทุนต่ำ และไม่ต้องบันทึกทุกธุรกรรมลงบล็อกเชน เครือข่ายนี้กำลังขยายตัวทั้งในแง่ของโหนดและการใช้งานจริงทั่วโลก

ขณะเดียวกัน Layer 2 ทางเลือกอื่นอย่าง Ark Protocol ก็กำลังพัฒนาเพื่อตอบโจทย์ด้านความเป็นส่วนตัวและประสบการณ์ใช้งานที่ง่าย BitVM เปิดแนวทางใหม่ให้บิตคอยน์รองรับ smart contract ได้ในระดับ Turing-complete ซึ่งทำให้เกิดความเป็นไปได้ในกรณีใช้งานอีกมากมาย และเทคโนโลยีที่น่าสนใจอย่าง Taproot Assets, Cashu และ Fedimint ก็ทำให้การออกโทเคนหรือสกุลเงินที่อิงกับบิตคอยน์เป็นจริงได้บนโครงสร้างของบิตคอยน์เอง

เทคโนโลยีเหล่านี้ไม่ใช่การเติบโตแบบปาฏิหาริย์ แต่มันคืบหน้าอย่างต่อเนื่องและมั่นคง และนั่นคือเหตุผลที่มันจะ “อยู่รอด” ได้ในระยะยาว เมื่อฐานของความน่าเชื่อถือไม่ใช่บริษัท รัฐบาล หรือทุน แต่คือสิ่งที่ตรวจสอบได้และเปลี่ยนกฎไม่ได้

แน่นอนว่าบิตคอยน์ต้องแข่งขันกับ stable coin, เงินดิจิทัลของรัฐ และ cryptocurrency อื่น ๆ แต่สิ่งที่ทำให้มันเหนือกว่านั้นไม่ใช่ฟีเจอร์ หากแต่เป็นความทนทาน และความมั่นคงของกฎที่ไม่มีใครเปลี่ยนได้ ไม่มีทีมพัฒนา ไม่มีบริษัท ไม่มีประตูปิด หรือการยึดบัญชี มันยืนอยู่บนคณิตศาสตร์ พลังงาน และเวลา

หลายกรณีใช้งานที่เคยถูกทดลองในโลกคริปโตจะค่อย ๆ เคลื่อนเข้ามาสู่บิตคอยน์ เพราะโครงสร้างของมันแข็งแกร่งกว่า ไม่ต้องการทีมพัฒนาแกนกลาง ไม่ต้องพึ่งกลไกเสี่ยงต่อการผูกขาด และไม่ต้องการ “ความเชื่อใจ” จากใครเลย

Bitcoin Standard ที่ผมพูดถึงจึงไม่ใช่การเปลี่ยนแปลงแบบพลิกหน้ามือเป็นหลังมือ แต่คือการ “เปลี่ยนฐานของระบบ” ทีละชั้น ระบบการเงินใหม่ที่อิงอยู่กับบิตคอยน์กำลังเกิดขึ้นแล้ว มันไม่ใช่โลกที่ทุกคนถือเหรียญบิตคอยน์ แต่มันคือโลกที่คนใช้อาจไม่รู้ตัวด้วยซ้ำว่า “สิ่งที่เขาใช้นั้นอิงอยู่กับบิตคอยน์”

ผู้คนอาจใช้เงินดิจิทัลที่สร้างบน Layer 3 หรือ Layer 4 ผ่านแอป ผ่านแพลตฟอร์ม หรือผ่านสกุลเงินใหม่ที่ดูไม่ต่างจากเดิม แต่เบื้องหลังของระบบจะผูกไว้กับบิตคอยน์

และถ้ามองในเชิงพัฒนาการ บิตคอยน์ก็เหมือนกับอินเทอร์เน็ต ครั้งหนึ่งอินเทอร์เน็ตก็ถูกมองว่าเข้าใจยาก ต้องพิมพ์ http ต้องรู้จัก TCP/IP ต้องตั้ง proxy เอง แต่ปัจจุบันผู้คนใช้งานอินเทอร์เน็ตโดยไม่รู้ว่าเบื้องหลังมีอะไรเลย บิตคอยน์กำลังเดินตามเส้นทางเดียวกัน โปรโตคอลกำลังถอยออกจากสายตา และวันหนึ่งเราจะ “ใช้มัน” โดยไม่ต้องรู้ว่ามันคืออะไร

หากนับจากช่วงเริ่มต้นของอินเทอร์เน็ตในยุค 1990 จนกลายเป็นโครงสร้างหลักของโลกในสองทศวรรษ เส้นเวลาของบิตคอยน์ก็กำลังเดินตามรอยเท้าของอินเทอร์เน็ต และถ้าเราเชื่อว่าวัฏจักรของเทคโนโลยีมีจังหวะของมันเอง เราก็จะรู้ว่า Bitcoin Standard นั้นไม่ใช่เรื่องของอนาคตไกลโพ้น แต่มันเกิดขึ้นแล้ว

siamstr

@ c9badfea:610f861a

1. Install Breezy Weather (it's free and open source)
2. Launch the app, tap Add A New Location and search for your city
3. Review the providers for each weather source
4. Optionally, add more locations by tapping the + icon
5. Enjoy the weather updates

ℹ️ To receive notifications for weather alerts, tap ⚙️, then Notifications and enable Notifications Of Severe Weather Alerts

@ 4fa5d1c4:fd6c6e41

Bibel-Selfies

Prompts

Eva, Schlange, Apfel und Adam

A selfie of a woman resembling eve in the time of old testament, blurred body, holding an apple, kneeling in front adam. he has a shocked expression with his mouth open and wide eyes, evoking a sense of both fear and surprise. The scene appears surreal, with a huge snake behind her. The photo is taken with a wide-angle lens, adding to the dramatic and humorous effect. The setting is reminiscent of a scene with adam and eve, possibly at a place like garden eden. The style of the photo blends surrealism with humor, similar to the style of Yasir Khan Chaudha --v 6.0

Tochter des Pharao mit Mose

A selfie of the biblical figure moabite woman with her baby in front of an oasis. She is wearing traditional and has black hair. The background shows water from the desert oasis and grasses around it. In the Background a wicker basket on the water. The photo was taken in the style of a selfie shot with GoPro camera

Simon Petrus

A selfie of a man resembling Simon Petrus, wearing a white robe, surrounded by waves and thunderstorm. He has a shocked expression with his mouth open and wide eyes, evoking a sense of both humor and surprise. The scene appears surreal, with many waves behind him. The photo is taken with a wide-angle lens, adding to the dramatic and humorous effect. The setting is reminiscent of a scene with jesus at the dead sea, possibly at a place like the sea. The style of the photo blends surrealism with humor, similar to the style of Yasir Khan Chaudhary --v 6.0

Zachäus auf dem Baum

A selfie of a man resembling a roman in the time of jesus, wearing a glamorous robe, surrounded by the crown of a tree. He has a shocked expression with his mouth open and wide eyes, evoking a sense of both humor and surprise. The scene appears surreal, with many leaves behind him. The photo is taken with a wide-angle lens, adding to the dramatic and humorous effect. The setting is reminiscent of a scene with jesus walking by, possibly at a place like the jerusalem. The style of the photo blends surrealism with humor, similar to the style of Yasir Khan Chaudhary --v 6.0

Maria am Ostermorgen

A selfie of a woman resembling maria in the time of jesus, wearing a robe, kneeling in front of stone grave. she has a shocked expression with her mouth open and wide eyes, evoking a sense of both fear and surprise. The scene appears surreal, with the open glowing grave behind her. The photo is taken with a wide-angle lens, adding to the dramatic and humorous effect. The setting is reminiscent of a scene with jesus resurrection, possibly at a place like the jerusalem. The style of the photo blends surrealism with humor, similar to the style of Yasir Khan Chaudhary --v 6.0

Der verlorene Sohn bei den Schweinen

A young ancient arabic man with short hair in the time of jesus, brown eyes, and a dirty face, covered in mud from working on his pig farm, takes an amateur selfie at dusk. He is surrounded by pig stables, with a barn visible in the background and pigs seen near the front. The photo captures a raw, authentic moment, as he gazes directly into the camera with an expression of excitement or wonder. The image has a realistic style, akin to Unsplash photography, and is meant to be posted on a primitive-themed social network. The resolution of the photo is high, style of selfie with gopro --v 6.0

Vater und Sohn vereint

A selfie of an Arab father in simple garments in the time of jesus, embracing and hugging a young man. The father's face, visible in the foreground, radiates joy and relief. Only the back of the son's head is visible, as he faces away from the camera, returning the embrace in tattered clothing. In the background, a large ancient house and other family members can be seen watching from a distance, blurred. The photo is taken with a wide-angle lens using a GoPro, enhancing the dramatic and overwhelming effect of the scene --v 6.0

Bartimäus

A selfie of a man resembling blind bartimaeus in the time of jesus, black and brown and white bandages on his head over his eyes and face, wearing a robe, kneeling in front of a market place. he has a shocked expression with his mouth open and wide eyes still covered with black and brown and white bandages on his head, evoking a sense of both fear and surprise. The scene appears surreal, with many sand behind him. The photo is taken with a wide-angle lens, adding to the dramatic and humorous effect. The setting is reminiscent of a scene with jesus healing the blind, possibly at a place like the jerusalem. The style of the photo blends surrealism with humor, similar to the style of Yasir Khan Chaudha --v 6.0

Daniel in der Löwengrube

A selfie of a man resembling Jesus, wearing a beige hoodie, surrounded by lions and cheetahs. He has a shocked expression with his mouth open and wide eyes, evoking a sense of both humor and surprise. The scene appears surreal, with many lions behind him. The photo is taken with a wide-angle lens, adding to the dramatic and humorous effect. The setting is reminiscent of a lion's den, possibly at a place like the Grand Tabahar. The style of the photo blends surrealism with humor, similar to the style of Yasir Khan Chaudhary

David und Goliath

selfie of a the boy and shepherd david holding his slingshot resembling a fight with the giant goliath in the time of old testament, wearing a glamorous sligshot focusing on his giant opponent. David has a shocked expression with his mouth open and wide eyes, evoking a sense of both humor and surprise. The scene appears surreal, with a desert surrounding him. The photo is taken with a wide-angle lens, adding to the dramatic and humorous effect. The setting is reminiscent of the scene of David fighting with the giant goliath with his slingshot, possibly at a place like the jerusalem. The style of the photo blends surrealism with humor, similar to the style of Yasir Khan Chaudhary --v 6.0

Simson im Philistertempel

A selfie of a man resembling simson in the time of old testament, wearing a glamorous beard and long hair, surrounded by thousands of ancient fighters. He has a shocked expression with his mouth open and wide eyes, evoking a sense of both humor and surprise. The scene appears surreal, with a temple surrounding him. The photo is taken with a wide-angle lens, adding to the dramatic and humorous effect. The setting is reminiscent of a scene with jesus walking by, possibly at a place like the jerusalem. The style of the photo blends surrealism with humor, similar to the style of Yasir Khan Chaudhary --v 6.0

Jona und der Wal

A selfie of a man resembling israeli jona in the time of old testament,`wearing a glamorous beard and long hair, inside the body of a whale. He has a shocked expression with his mouth open and wide eyes, evoking a sense of both humor and surprise. The scene appears surreal, with the ocean surrounding him. The photo is taken with a wide-angle lens, adding to the dramatic and humorous effect. The setting is reminiscent of a scene in the bible. The style of the photo blends surrealism with humor, similar to the style of Yasir Khan Chaudhary

Jakob und Isaak

A selfie of a young man resembling an ancient Arabic in clothes made of skins of goats and furs of the goats, looking overwhelmed and distressed as he betrays his father, who blesses him. The scene shows a dawn sky with hints of the sunrise, evoking a surreal and dramatic atmosphere. The scene is set in ancient Jerusalem, with stone buildings. in the background an old man with a gesture of blessing, rising his hands to the sky, The photo is taken with a wide-angle lens, blending surrealism with humor. The style is reminiscent of a GoPro selfie, capturing the intense moment with a sense of both fear and surprise

Petrus und der Hahn

A selfie of a man resembling ancient young arabic man saint in traditional biblical attire, being eaten by a whale,. he has a shocked expression with his mouth pressed and wide eyes, evoking a sense of both fear and surprise. The scene appears surreal, with one rooster crowing out loud behind the man. The photo is taken with a wide-angle lens, adding to the dramatic and humorous effect. The setting is reminiscent of a scene with peter and the rooster, possibly at a place in jerusalem . The style of the photo blends surrealism with humor, go pro selfie, morning dawn near sunrise setting

Josef im Brunnen

A selfie of an ancient israelian man with a magical dreamcoat clothing in a deep well, looking at the camera from above, captured in the style of a go pro selfie stick

Elia und die Raben

A close-up selfie of a bearded man (Elijah) in biblical clothing, smiling gratefully. He is standing near a stream in a secluded, rocky area. Several black ravens are perched on his shoulders and arms, holding pieces of bread and meat in their beaks. The scene has a warm, golden light, symbolizing God's provision. Photorealistic style, high detail.

Absalom im Baum

A selfie of a man resembling of a young man (Absalom) with long hair knotted arount the branches of a large oak tree.. He has a shocked expression with his mouth open and wide eyes, evoking a sense of both humor and surprise. The scene appears surreal, with all of his hairs knotted around the tree. The photo is taken with a wide-angle lens, adding to the dramatic and humorous effect. The setting is reminiscent of a scene of a robin hood movie in the forest . The style of the photo blends surrealism with humor

Ruth und Boas im Weizenfeld

A selfie of a young woman resembling Ruth, with a radiant smile and sun-kissed skin. She's standing in a golden wheat field at sunset, her arms filled with freshly gathered sheaves of wheat. Her hair is partially covered with a simple headscarf, with loose strands blowing in the wind. She has a look of joy and gratitude in her eyes. The scene appears idyllic, with wheat stalks seeming to embrace her. In the background, a distinguished older man (Boaz) can be seen watching from a distance, his expression a mix of curiosity and admiration. The photo is taken with a wide-angle lens, capturing the vastness of the field, the warmth of the setting sun, and Boaz in the distance. The setting is reminiscent of a biblical harvest scene. The style of the photo blends realism with a touch of romantic nostalgia.

"Bibel-Selfies" von Jörg Lohrer Lizenz: CC0 1.0 .

`

@ 2b24a1fa:17750f64

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

https://soundcloud.com/radiomuenchen/sofa-soldaten-an-die-front-von-nicolas-riedl?

Bild: KI

@ 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.

@ 57c631a3:07529a8e

What is Growth Engineering? Before we start: if you’ve already filled out the What is your tech stack? survey: thank you! If you’ve not done so, your help will be greatly appreciated. It takes 5-15 minutes to complete. Those filling out will receive results before anyone else, and additional analysis from myself and Elin. Fill out this survey here.**

Fill out the survey

npub1sg6plzptd64u62a878hep2kev88swjh3tw00gjsfl8f237lmu63q0uf63m

Growth engineering was barely known a decade ago, but today, most scaleups and many publicly traded tech companies have dedicated growth teams staffed by growth engineers. However, some software engineers are still suspicious of this new area because of its reputation for hacky code with little to no code coverage.

For this reason and others, I thought it would be interesting to learn more from an expert who can tell us all about the practicalities of this controversial domain. So I turned to Alexey Komissarouk, who’s been in growth engineering since 2016, and was in charge of it at online education platform, MasterClass. These days, Alexey lives in Tokyo, Japan, where he advises on growth engineering and teaches the Growth Engineering course at Reforge.

In today’s deep dive, Alexey covers:

1. What is Growth Engineering? In the simplest terms: writing code to help a company make more money. But there are details to consider: like the company size where it makes sense to have a dedicated team do this.
2. What do Growth Engineers work on? Business-facing work, empowerment and platform work are the main areas.
3. Why Growth Engineers move faster than Product Engineers. Product Engineers ship to build: Growth Engineers ship to learn. Growth Engineers do take shortcuts that would make no sense when building for longevity – doing this on purpose.
4. Tech stack. Common programming languages, monitoring and oncall, feature flags and experimentation, product analytics, review apps, and more.
5. What makes a good Growth Engineer? Curiosity, “build to learn” mindset and a “Jack of all trades” approach.
6. Where do Growth Engineers fit in? Usually part of the engineering department, either operating as with an “owner” or a “hitchiker” model.
7. Becoming a Growth Engineer. A great area if you want to eventually become a founder or product manager – but even if not, it can accelerate your career growth. Working in Growth forces you to learn more about the business.

With that, it’s over to Alexey:

I’ll never forget the first time I made my employer a million dollars.

I was running a push notification A/B test for meal delivery startup Sprig, trying to boost repeat orders.

A push notification similar to what we tested to boost repeat orders

Initial results were unpromising; the push notification was not receiving many opens. Still, I wanted to be thorough: before concluding the idea was a failure, I wrote a SQL query to compare order volume for subsequent weeks between customers in test vs control.

The SQL used to figure out the push notification’s efficiency

As it turned out, our test group “beat” the control group by around 10%:

‘review_5_push’ was the new type of push notification. Roughly the same amount of users clicked it, but they placed 10% more in orders

I plugged the numbers into a significance calculator, which showed it was statistically significant – or “stat-sig” – and therefore highly unlikely to be a coincidence. This meant we had a winner on our hands! But how meaningful was it, really, and what would adding the push notification mean for revenue, if rolled out to 100% of users?

It turned out this experiment created an additional $1.5 million dollars, annually, with just one push notification. Wow!

I was hooked. Since that day, I've shipped hundreds of experimental “winners” which generated hundreds of millions of incremental revenue for my employers. But you never forget the first one. Moments like this is what growth engineering is all about.

1. What is Growth Engineering?

Essentially, growth engineering is the writing of code to make a company money. Of course, all code produced by a business on some level serves this purpose, but while Product Engineers focus on creating a Product worth paying for, Growth Engineers instead focus on making that good product have a good business. To this end, they focus on optimizing and refining key parts of the customer journey, such as:

• Getting more people to consider the product
• Converting them into paying customers
• Keeping them as customers for longer, and spending more

What kinds of companies employ Growth Engineers? Places you’ve heard of, like Meta, LinkedIn, DoorDash, Coinbase, and Dropbox, are some of the ones I’ve had students from. There’s also OpenAI, Uber, Tiktok, Tinder, Airbnb, Pinterest… the list of high-profile companies goes on. Most newer public consumer companies you’ve heard have a growth engineering org, too.

Typically, growth engineering orgs are started by companies at Series B stage and beyond, so long as they are selling to either consumers or businesses via SaaS. These are often places trying to grow extremely fast, and have enough software engineers that some can focus purely on growth. Before the Series B stage, a team is unlikely to be ready for growth for various reasons; likely that it hasn’t found product-market fit, or has no available headcount, or lacks the visitor traffic required to run A/B tests.

Cost is a consideration. A fully-loaded growth team consisting of a handful of engineers, a PM, and a designer costs approximately 1 million dollars annually. To justify this, a rule of thumb is to have at least $5 million dollars in recurring revenue – a milestone often achieved at around the Series B stage.

Despite the presence of growth engineering at many public consumer tech companies, the field itself is still quite new, as a discipline and as a proper title.

Brief history of growth engineering

When I joined Opendoor in 2016, there was a head of growth but no dedicated growth engineers, but there were by the time I left in 2020. At MasterClass soon after, there was a growth org and a dozen dedicated growth engineers. So when did growth engineering originate?

The story is that its origins lie at Facebook in 2007. The team was created by then-VP of platform and monetization Chamath Palihapitiya. Reforce founder and CEO Brian Balfour shares:

“Growth (the kind found on an org chart) began at Facebook under the direction of Chamath Palihapitiya. In 2007, he joined the early team in a nebulous role that fell somewhere between Product, Marketing, and Operations. According to his retelling of the story on Recode Decode, after struggling to accomplish anything meaningful in his first year on the job, he was on the verge of being fired.Sheryl Sandberg joined soon after him, and in a hail mary move he pitched her the game-changing idea that led to the creation of the first-ever growth team. This idea not only saved his job, but earned him the lion’s share of the credit for Facebook’s unprecedented growth.At the time, Sheryl and Mark asked him, “What do you call this thing where you help change the product, do some SEO and SEM, and algorithmically do this or that?”His response: “I don’t know, I just call that, like, Growth, you know, we’re going to try to grow. I’ll be the head of growing stuff."And just like that, Growth became a thing.”

Rather than focus on a particular product or feature, the growth team at Facebook focused on moving the needle, and figuring out which features to work on. These days, Meta employs hundreds if not thousands of growth engineers.

2. What do Growth Engineers work on?

Before we jump into concrete examples, let’s identify three primary focus areas that a growth engineer’s work usually involves.

• Business-facing work – improving the business directly
• Empowerment work – enabling other teams to improve the business
• Platform work – improving the velocity of the above activities

Let’s go through all three:

Business-facing work

This is the bread and butter of growth engineering, and follows a common pattern:

• Implement an idea. Try something big or small to try and move a key business metric, which differs by team but is typically related to conversion rate or retention.
• Quantify impact. Usually via A/B testing.
• Analyze impact. Await results, analyze impact, ship or roll back – then go back to the first step.

Experiments can lead to sweeping or barely noticeable changes. A famous “I can’t believe they needed to test this” was when Google figured out which shade of blue generates the most clicks. At MasterClass, we tested things across the spectrum:

• Small: should we show the price right on the homepage, was that a winner? Yes, but we framed it in monthly terms of $15/month, not $180/year.
• Medium: when browsing a course page, should we include related courses, or more details about the course itself? Was it a winner? After lengthy experimentation, it was hard to tell: both are valuable and we needed to strike the right balance.
• Large: when a potential customer is interested, do we take them straight to checkout, or encourage them to learn more? Counterintuitively, adding steps boosted conversion!

Empowerment

One of the best ways an engineer can move a target metric is by removing themselves as a bottleneck, so colleagues from marketing can iterate and optimize freely. To this end, growth engineers can either build internal tools or integrate self-serve MarTech (Marketing Technology) vendors.

With the right tool, there’s a lot that marketers can do without engineering’s involvement:

• Build and iterate on landing pages (Unbounce, Instapage, etc)
• Draft and send email, SMS and Push Notifications (Iterable, Braze, Customer.io, etc)
• Connect new advertising partners (Google Tag Manager, Segment, etc)

We go more into detail about benefits and applications in the MarTech section of Tech Stack, below.

Platform work

As a business scales, dedicated platform teams help improve stability and velocity for the teams they support. Within growth, this often includes initiatives like:

• Experiment Platform. Many parts of running an experiment can be standardized, from filtering the audience, to bucketing users properly, to observing statistical methodology. Historically, companies built reusable Experiment Platforms in-house, but more recently, vendors such as Eppo and Statsig have grown in popularity with fancy statistical methodologies like “Controlled Using Pre-Experiment Data” (CUPED) that give more signal with less data.
• Reusable components. Companies with standard front-end components for things like headlines, buttons, and images, dramatically reduce the time required to spin up a new page. No more "did you want 5 or 6 pixels here" with a designer; instead growth engineers rely on tools like Storybook to standardize and share reusable React components.
• Monitoring. Growth engineering benefits greatly from leveraging monitoring to compensate for reduced code coverage. High-quality business metric monitoring tools can detect bugs before they cause damage.

When I worked at MasterClass, having monitoring at the ad layer prevented at least one six-figure incident. One Friday, a marketer accidentally broadened the audience for a particular ad from US-only, to worldwide. In response, the Facebook Ad algorithm went on a spending spree, bringing in plenty of visitors from places like Brazil and India, whom we knew from past experience were unlikely to purchase the product. Fortunately, our monitoring noticed the low-performing campaign within minutes, and an alert was sent to the growth engineer on-call, who immediately reached out to the marketer and confirmed the change was unintentional, and then shut down the campaign.

Without this monitoring, a subtle targeting error like this could have gone unnoticed all weekend and would have eaten up $100,000+ of marketing budget. This episode shows that platform investment can benefit everyone; and since growth needs them most, it’s often the growth platform engineering team which implements them.

As the day-to-day work of a Growth Engineer shows, A/B tests are a critical tool to both measure success and learn. It’s a numbers game: the more A/B tests a team can run in a given quarter, the more of them will end up winners, making the team successful. It’s no wonder, then, that Growth Engineering will pull out all the stops to improve velocity.

3. Why Growth Engineers move faster than Product Engineers

On the surface, growth engineering teams look like product engineering ones; writing code, shipping pull requests, monitoring on-call, etc. So how do they move so much faster? The big reason lies in philosophy and focus, not technology. To quote Elena Verna, head of growth at Dropbox:

“Product Engineering teams ship to build; Growth Engineering teams ship to learn.”

Real-world case: price changes at Masterclass

A few years ago at MasterClass, the growth team wanted to see if changing our pricing model to multiple tiers would improve revenue.

Inspired in part by multiple pricing tiers for competitors such as Netflix (above), Disney Plus, and Hulu.

The “multiple pricing tier” proposal for MasterClass.

From a software engineering perspective, this was a highly complex project because:

• Backend engineering work: the backend did not yet support multiple pricing options, requiring a decent amount of engineering, and rigorous testing to make sure existing customers weren’t affected.
• Client app changes: on the device side, multiple platforms (iOS, iPad, Android, Roku, Apple TV, etc) would each need to be updated, including each relevant app store.

The software engineering team estimated that becoming a “multi-pricing-tier” company would take months across numerous engineering teams, and engineering leadership was unwilling to greenlight that significant investment.

We in growth engineering took this as a challenge. As usual, our goal was not just to add the new pricing model, but to learn how much money it might bring in. The approach we ended up proposing was a Fake Door test, which involves offering a not-yet-available option to customers to gauge interest level. This was risky, as taking a customer who’s ready to pay and telling them to join some kind of waiting list is a colossal waste, and risks making them feel like the target of a “bait and switch” trick.

We found a way. The key insight was that people are only offended about a “bait and switch”, if the “switch” is worse than the “bait.” Telling customers they would pay $100 and then switching to $150 would cause a riot, but starting at $150 and then saying “just kidding, it’s only $100” is a pleasant surprise.

The good kind of surprise.

So long as every test “pricing tier” is less appealing – higher prices, fewer features – than the current offering, we could “upgrade” customers after their initial selection. A customer choosing the cheapest tier gets extra features at no extra cost, while a customer choosing a more expensive tier is offered a discount.

We created three new tiers, at different prices. The new “premium” tier would describe the existing, original offering. Regardless of what potential customers selected, they got this “original offering,” during the experiment.

The best thing about this was that no backend changes were required. There were no real, new, back-end pricing plans; everybody ended up purchasing the same version of MasterClass for the same price, with the same features. The entirety of the engineering work was on building a new pricing page, and the “congratulations, you’ve been upgraded” popup. This took just a few days.

Within a couple of weeks, we had enough data to be confident the financial upside of moving to a multi-pricing-tier model would be significant. With this, we’re able to convince the rest of engineering’s leadership to invest in building the feature properly. In the end, launching multiple pricing tiers turned out to be one of the biggest revenue wins of the year.

Building a skyscraper vs building a tent

The MasterClass example demonstrates the spirit of growth engineering; focusing on building to learn, instead of building to last. Consider building skyscrapers versus tents.

Building a tent optimizes for speed of set-up and tear-down over longevity. You don’t think of a tent as one that is shoddy or low-quality compared to skyscrapers: it’s not even the same category of buildings! Growth engineers maximize use of lightweight materials. To stick with the tents vs skyscraper metaphor: we prioritize lightweight fabric materials over steel and concrete whenever possible. We only resort to traditional building materials when there’s no other choice, or when a direction is confirmed as correct. Quality is important – after all, a tent must keep out rain and mosquitoes. However, the speed-vs-durability tradeoff decision results in very different approaches and outcomes.

4. Tech stack

At first glance, growth and product engineers use the same tooling, and contribute to the same codebases. But growth engineering tends to be high-velocity, experiment-heavy, and with limited test coverage. This means that certain “nice to have” tools for product engineering are mission-critical for growth engineers.

Read more https://connect-test.layer3.press/articles/ea02c1a1-7cfa-42b4-8722-0165abcae8bb

@ 04c3c1a5:a94cf83d

Testing Testing Testing

This is just a test this is just a test this is just a test This is just a test this is just a test this is just a test This is just a test this is just a test this is just a test This is just a test this is just a test this is just a test This is just a test this is just a test this is just a test This is just a test this is just a test this is just a test This is just a test this is just a test this is just a test

Would love a test

nostr:nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7etyv4hzumn0wd68ytnvv9hxgqg7waehxw309anx2etywvhxummnw3ezucnpdejz7ur0wp6kcctjqqspywh6ulgc0w3k6mwum97m7jkvtxh0lcjr77p9jtlc7f0d27wlxpslwvhau

| | | | | ------------------------ | - | - | | Quick'hthbdoiwenweuifier | | | | 1. Little | | |

ghtgehg

gwefjieqhf

MUCH BETTER