@ 6ad3e2a3:c90b7740

I’ve written about MSTR twice already, https://www.chrisliss.com/p/mstr and https://www.chrisliss.com/p/mstr-part-2, but I want to focus on legendary short seller James Chanos’ current trade wherein he buys bitcoin (via ETF) and shorts MSTR, in essence to “be like Mike” Saylor who sells MSTR shares at the market and uses them to add bitcoin to the company’s balance sheet. After all, if it’s good enough for Saylor, why shouldn’t everyone be doing it — shorting a company whose stock price is more than 2x its bitcoin holdings and using the proceeds to buy the bitcoin itself?

Saylor himself has said selling shares at 2x NAV (net asset value) to buy bitcoin is like selling dollars for two dollars each, and Chanos has apparently decided to get in while the getting (market cap more than 2x net asset value) is good. If the price of bitcoin moons, sending MSTR’s shares up, you are more than hedged in that event, too. At least that’s the theory.

The problem with this bet against MSTR’s mNAV, i.e., you are betting MSTR’s market cap will converge 1:1 toward its NAV in the short and medium term is this trade does not exist in a vacuum. Saylor has described how his ATM’s (at the market) sales of shares are accretive in BTC per share because of this very premium they carry. Yes, we’ll dilute your shares of the company, but because we’re getting you 2x the bitcoin per share, you are getting an ever smaller slice of an ever bigger overall pie, and the pie is growing 2x faster than your slice is reducing. (I https://www.chrisliss.com/p/mstr how this works in my first post.)

But for this accretion to continue, there must be a constant supply of “greater fools” to pony up for the infinitely printable shares which contain only half their value in underlying bitcoin. Yes, those shares will continue to accrete more BTC per share, but only if there are more fools willing to make this trade in the future. So will there be a constant supply of such “fools” to keep fueling MSTR’s mNAV multiple indefinitely?

Yes, there will be in my opinion because you have to look at the trade from the prospective fools’ perspective. Those “fools” are not trading bitcoin for MSTR, they are trading their dollars, selling other equities to raise them maybe, but in the end it’s a dollars for shares trade. They are not selling bitcoin for them.

You might object that those same dollars could buy bitcoin instead, so they are surely trading the opportunity cost of buying bitcoin for them, but if only 5-10 percent of the market (or less) is buying bitcoin itself, the bucket in which which those “fools” reside is the entire non-bitcoin-buying equity market. (And this is not considering the even larger debt market which Saylor has yet to tap in earnest.)

So for those 90-95 percent who do not and are not presently planning to own bitcoin itself, is buying MSTR a fool’s errand, so to speak? Not remotely. If MSTR shares are infinitely printable ATM, they are still less so than the dollar and other fiat currencies. And MSTR shares are backed 2:1 by bitcoin itself, while the fiat currencies are backed by absolutely nothing. So if you hold dollars or euros, trading them for MSTR shares is an errand more sage than foolish.

That’s why this trade (buying BTC and shorting MSTR) is so dangerous. Not only are there many people who won’t buy BTC buying MSTR, there are many funds and other investment entities who are only able to buy MSTR.

Do you want to get BTC at 1:1 with the 5-10 percent or MSTR backed 2:1 with the 90-95 percent. This is a bit like medical tests that have a 95 percent accuracy rate for an asymptomatic disease that only one percent of the population has. If someone tests positive, it’s more likely to be a false one than an indication he has the disease*. The accuracy rate, even at 19:1, is subservient to the size of the respective populations.

At some point this will no longer be the case, but so long as the understanding of bitcoin is not widespread, so long as the dollar is still the unit of account, the “greater fools” buying MSTR are still miles ahead of the greatest fools buying neither, and the stock price and mNAV should only increase.

. . .

One other thought: it’s more work to play defense than offense because the person on offense knows where he’s going, and the defender can only react to him once he moves. Similarly, Saylor by virtue of being the issuer of the shares knows when more will come online while Chanos and other short sellers are borrowing them to sell in reaction to Saylor’s strategy. At any given moment, Saylor can pause anytime, choosing to issue convertible debt or preferred shares with which to buy more bitcoin, and the shorts will not be given advance notice.

If the price runs, and there is no ATM that week because Saylor has stopped on a dime, so to speak, the shorts will be left having to scramble to change directions and buy the shares back to cover. Their momentum might be in the wrong direction, though, and like Allen Iverson breaking ankles with a crossover, Saylor might trigger a massive short squeeze, rocketing the share price ever higher. That’s why he actually welcomes Chanos et al trying this copycat strategy — it becomes the fuel for outsized gains.

For that reason, news that Chanos is shorting MSTR has not shaken my conviction, though there are other more pertinent https://www.chrisliss.com/p/mstr-part-2 with MSTR, of which one should be aware. And as always, do your own due diligence before investing in anything.

* To understand this, consider a population of 100,000, with one percent having a disease. That means 1,000 have it, 99,000 do not. If the test is 95 percent accurate, and everyone is tested, 950 of the 1,000 will test positive (true positives), 50 who have it will test negative (false negatives.) Of the positives, 95 percent of 99,000 (94,050) will test negative (true negatives) and five percent (4,950) will test positive (false positives). That means 4,950 out of 5,900 positives (84%) will be false.

@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9

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

---

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

A Jurisdiction with Strong Property Rights

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

Abundant Access to Fresh Water

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

Grow Your Own Food

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

Guns

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

A Strong Community You Can Depend On

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

---

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

@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9

For years American bitcoin miners have argued for more efficient and free energy markets. It benefits everyone if our energy infrastructure is as efficient and robust as possible. Unfortunately, broken incentives have led to increased regulation throughout the sector, incentivizing less efficient energy sources such as solar and wind at the detriment of more efficient alternatives.

The result has been less reliable energy infrastructure for all Americans and increased energy costs across the board. This naturally has a direct impact on bitcoin miners: increased energy costs make them less competitive globally.

Bitcoin mining represents a global energy market that does not require permission to participate. Anyone can plug a mining computer into power and internet to get paid the current dynamic market price for their work in bitcoin. Using cellphone or satellite internet, these mines can be located anywhere in the world, sourcing the cheapest power available.

Absent of regulation, bitcoin mining naturally incentivizes the build out of highly efficient and robust energy infrastructure. Unfortunately that world does not exist and burdensome regulations remain the biggest threat for US based mining businesses. Jurisdictional arbitrage gives miners the option of moving to a friendlier country but that naturally comes with its own costs.

Enter AI. With the rapid development and release of AI tools comes the requirement of running massive datacenters for their models. Major tech companies are scrambling to secure machines, rack space, and cheap energy to run full suites of AI enabled tools and services. The most valuable and powerful tech companies in America have stumbled into an accidental alliance with bitcoin miners: THE NEED FOR CHEAP AND RELIABLE ENERGY.

Our government is corrupt. Money talks. These companies will push for energy freedom and it will greatly benefit us all.

@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9

There is something quietly rebellious about stacking sats. In a world obsessed with instant gratification, choosing to patiently accumulate Bitcoin, one sat at a time, feels like a middle finger to the hype machine. But to do it right, you have got to stay humble. Stack too hard with your head in the clouds, and you will trip over your own ego before the next halving even hits.

Small Wins

Stacking sats is not glamorous. Discipline. Stacking every day, week, or month, no matter the price, and letting time do the heavy lifting. Humility lives in that consistency. You are not trying to outsmart the market or prove you are the next "crypto" prophet. Just a regular person, betting on a system you believe in, one humble stack at a time. Folks get rekt chasing the highs. They ape into some shitcoin pump, shout about it online, then go silent when they inevitably get rekt. The ones who last? They stack. Just keep showing up. Consistency. Humility in action. Know the game is long, and you are not bigger than it.

Ego is Volatile

Bitcoin’s swings can mess with your head. One day you are up 20%, feeling like a genius and the next down 30%, questioning everything. Ego will have you panic selling at the bottom or over leveraging the top. Staying humble means patience, a true bitcoin zen. Do not try to "beat” Bitcoin. Ride it. Stack what you can afford, live your life, and let compounding work its magic.

Simplicity

There is a beauty in how stacking sats forces you to rethink value. A sat is worth less than a penny today, but every time you grab a few thousand, you plant a seed. It is not about flaunting wealth but rather building it, quietly, without fanfare. That mindset spills over. Cut out the noise: the overpriced coffee, fancy watches, the status games that drain your wallet. Humility is good for your soul and your stack. I have a buddy who has been stacking since 2015. Never talks about it unless you ask. Lives in a decent place, drives an old truck, and just keeps stacking. He is not chasing clout, he is chasing freedom. That is the vibe: less ego, more sats, all grounded in life.

The Big Picture

Stack those sats. Do it quietly, do it consistently, and do not let the green days puff you up or the red days break you down. Humility is the secret sauce, it keeps you grounded while the world spins wild. In a decade, when you look back and smile, it will not be because you shouted the loudest. It will be because you stayed the course, one sat at a time. \ \ Stay Humble and Stack Sats. 🫡

@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9

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

Part One: 2029–2032

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

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

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

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

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

Time Jump: 2032–2047

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

Part Two: 2047

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

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

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

Key Differences

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

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

@ 57c631a3:07529a8e

The Video: The World's Biggest Toddler

https://connect-test.layer3.press/articles/3f9d28a4-0876-4ee8-bdac-d1a56fa9cd02

@ cae03c48:2a7d6671

Bitcoin Magazine

Standard Chartered Backs $500K Bitcoin Target, Citing Growing Government Exposure Through MSTR

Sovereign investment in Bitcoin is accelerating—just not always in the most direct way. In a new report, Standard Chartered Bank says indirect exposure via Strategy (formerly MicroStrategy) is quietly increasing among government entities, reinforcing the bank’s long-standing price prediction that Bitcoin will reach $500,000 before President Donald Trump leaves office in 2029.

JUST IN: Standard Chartered says SEC 13F fillings support #Bitcoin reaching $500,000 by 2028 pic.twitter.com/MURg9bxLka

— Bitcoin Magazine (@BitcoinMagazine) May 20, 2025

“The latest 13F data from the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) supports our core thesis that Bitcoin (BTC) will reach the $500,000 level before Trump leaves office as it attracts a wider range of institutional buyers,” wrote Geoffrey Kendrick, Standard Chartered’s global head of digital assets research. “As more investors gain access to the asset and as volatility falls, we believe portfolios will migrate towards their optimal level from an underweight starting position in BTC.”

Q1 13F filings revealed a slowdown in direct bitcoin ETF buying—Wisconsin’s state fund exited its entire 3,400 BTC-equivalent IBIT position—while government-linked purchases of MSTR shares were on the rise. Abu Dhabi’s Mubadala, for instance, upped its IBIT exposure to 5,000 BTC equivalent, but Kendrick says the bigger story is elsewhere.

“We believe that in some cases, MSTR holdings by government entities reflect a desire to gain Bitcoin exposure where local regulations do not allow direct BTC holdings,” he said.

France and Saudi Arabia took first-time MSTR positions in Q1. Meanwhile, Norway’s Government Pension Fund, the Swiss National Bank, and South Korea’s public funds each added exposure equivalent to 700 BTC. U.S. retirement funds in states like California and New York added a combined 1,000 BTC equivalent via MSTR. Kendrick called the trend “very encouraging.”

“The quarterly 13F data is the best test of our thesis that BTC will attract new institutional buyer types as the market matures, helping the price reach our USD 500,000 level,” Kendrick said. “When institutions buy Bitcoin, prices tend to rise.”

SEC DATA BACKS BITCOIN $500K TARGET BY 2028: STANDARD CHARTERED

Standard Chartered's Geoff Kendrick says recent SEC 13F filings support a possible rise in Bitcoin to $500,000 by end-2028. While direct ETF holdings dipped in Q1, government entities boosted stakes in Strategy…

— *Walter Bloomberg (@DeItaone) May 20, 2025

This isn’t Kendrick’s first bullish call. Last month, he admitted his prior $120K forecast for Q2 2025 was “too low,” citing surging inflows into U.S. spot BTC ETFs—totaling $5.3 billion over just three weeks. At the time, Kendrick revised his 2025 year-end target to $200,000.

Standard Chartered’s latest analysis shows that Bitcoin’s role in institutional portfolios is maturing beyond tech volatility correlation—now increasingly seen as a macro hedge. “It is now all about flows,” Kendrick said. “And flows are coming in many forms.” 

This post Standard Chartered Backs $500K Bitcoin Target, Citing Growing Government Exposure Through MSTR first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Jenna Montgomery.

@ 2e8970de:63345c7a

https://www.wsj.com/tech/europe-big-tech-ai-1f3f862c?mod=hp_lead_pos7

https://stacker.news/items/984656

@ ecda4328:1278f072

An honest response to objections — and an answer to the most important question: why does any of this matter?

---

\ Statement: Deflation is not the enemy, but a natural state in an age of technological progress.\ Criticism: in real macroeconomics, long-term deflation is linked to depressions.\ Deflation discourages borrowers and investors, and makes debt heavier.\ Natural ≠ Safe.

1. “Deflation → Depression, Debt → Heavier”

This is true in a debt-based system. Yes, in a fiat economy, debt balloons to the sky, and without inflation it collapses.

But Bitcoin offers not “deflation for its own sake,” but an environment where you don’t need to be in debt to survive. Where savings don’t melt away.\ Jeff Booth said it clearly:

“Technology is inherently deflationary. Fighting deflation with the printing press is fighting progress.”

You don’t have to take on credit to live in this system. Which means — deflation is not an enemy, but an ally.

💡 People often confuse two concepts:

1. That deflation doesn’t work in an economy built on credit and leverage — that’s true.

2. That deflation itself is bad — that’s a myth.

📉 In reality, deflation is the natural state of a free market when technology makes everything cheaper.

Historical example:\ In the U.S., from the Civil War to the early 1900s, the economy experienced gentle deflation — alongside economic growth, employment expansion, and industrial boom.\ Prices fell: for example, a sack of flour cost \~$1.00 in 1865 and \~$0.50 in 1895 — and there was no crisis, because wages held and productivity increased.

Modern example:\ Consumer electronics over the past 20–30 years are a vivid example of technological deflation:\ – What cost $5,000 in 2000 (e.g., a 720p plasma TV) now costs $300 and delivers 10× better quality.\ – Phones, computers, cameras — all became far more powerful and cheaper at the same time.\ That’s how tech-driven deflation works: you get more for less.

📌 Bitcoin doesn’t make the world deflationary. It just doesn’t fight against deflation, unlike the fiat model that fights to preserve its debt pyramid.\ It stops punishing savers and rewards long-term thinkers.

Even economists often confuse organic tech deflation with crisis-driven (debt) deflation.

---

\ \ Statement: We’ve never lived in a truly free market — central banks and issuance always existed.\ Criticism: ideological statement.\ A truly “free” market is utopian.\ Banks and monetary issuance emerged in response to crises.\ A market without arbiters is not always fair, especially under imperfect competition.

2. “The Free Market Is a Utopia”

Yes, “pure markets” are rare. But what we have today isn’t regulation — it’s centralized power in the hands of central banks and cartels.

Bitcoin offers rules without rulers. 21 million. No one can change the issuance. It’s not ideology — it’s code instead of trust. And it has worked for 15 years.

---

\ \ Statement: Inflation is an invisible tax, especially on the poor and working class.\ Criticism: partly true: inflation can reduce debt burden, boost employment.\ The state indexes social benefits. Under stable inflation, compensators can work. Under deflation, things might be worse (mass layoffs, defaults).

3. “Inflation Can Help”

Theoretically — yes. Textbooks say moderate inflation can reduce debt burdens and stimulate consumption and jobs.\ But in practice — it works as a stealth tax, especially on those without assets. The wealthy escape — into real estate, stocks, funds.\ But the poor and working class lose purchasing power because their money is held in cash — and cash devalues.

💬 As Lyn Alden says:

“When your money can’t hold value, you’re forced to become an investor — even if you just want to save and live.”

The state may index pensions or benefits — but always with a lag, and always less than actual price increases.\ If bread rises 15% and your payment increase is 5%, you got poorer, even if the number on paper went up.

💥 We live in an inflationary system of everything:\ – Inflationary money\ – Inflationary products\ – Inflationary content\ – And now even inflationary minds

🧠 This is more than just rising prices — it’s a degradation of reality perception. You’re always rushing, everything loses meaning.\ But when did the system start working against you?

📉 What went wrong after 1971?

This chart shows that from 1948 to the early 1970s, productivity and wages grew together.\ But after the end of the gold standard in 1971 — the connection broke. Productivity kept rising, but real wages stalled.

👉 This means: you work more, better, faster — but buy less.

🔗 Source: wtfhappenedin1971.com

When you must spend today because tomorrow it’ll be worth less — that’s rewarding impulse and punishing long-term thinking.

Bitcoin offers a different environment:\ – Savings work\ – Long-term thinking is rewarded\ – The price of the future is calculated, not forced by a printing press

📌 Inflation can be a tool. But in government hands, it became a weapon — a slow, inevitable upward redistribution of wealth.

Indexing is weak compensation if bread is up 15% and your “increase” is only 5%.

---

\ \ Statement: War is not growth, but a reallocation of resources into destruction.

Criticism: war can spur technological leaps (Internet, GPS, nuclear energy — all from military programs). "Military Keynesianism" was a real model.

4. “War Drives R&D”

Yes, wars sometimes give rise to tech spin-offs: Internet, GPS, nuclear power — all originated from military programs.

But that doesn’t make war a source of progress — it makes tech a byproduct of catastrophe.

“War reallocates resources toward destruction — not growth.”

Progress doesn’t happen because of war — it happens despite it.

If scientific breakthroughs require a million dead and burnt cities — maybe you’ve built your economy wrong.

💬 Even Michael Saylor said:

“If you need war to develop technology — you’ve built civilization wrong.”

No innovation justifies diverting human labor, minds, and resources toward destruction.\ War is always the opposite of efficiency — more is wasted than created.

🧠 Bitcoin, on the other hand, is an example of how real R&D happens without violence.\ No taxes. No army. Just math, voluntary participation, and open-source code.

📌 Military Keynesianism is not a model of progress — it’s a symptom of a sick monetary system that needs destruction to reboot.

Bitcoin shows that coordination without violence is possible.\ This is R&D of a new kind: based not on destruction, but digital creation.

---

Statement: Bitcoin isn’t “Gold 1.0,” but an improved version: divisible, verifiable, unseizable.

Criticism: Bitcoin has no physical value; "unseizability" is a theory;\ Gold is material and autonomous.

5. “Bitcoin Has No Physical Value”

And gold does? Just because it shines?

Physical form is no guarantee of value.\ Real value lies in: scarcity, reliable transfer, verifiability, and non-confiscatability.

Gold is:\ – Hard to divide\ – Hard to verify\ – Expensive to store\ – Easy to seize

💡 Bitcoin is the first store of value in history that is fully free from physical limitations, and yet:\ – Absolutely scarce (21M, forever)\ – Instantly transferable over the Internet\ – Cryptographically verifiable\ – Controlled by no government

🔑 Bitcoin’s value lies in its liberation from the physical.\ It doesn’t need to be “backed” by gold or oil. It’s backed by energy, mathematics, and ongoing verification.

“Price is what you pay, value is what you get.” — Warren Buffett

When you buy bitcoin, you’re not paying for a “token” — you’re gaining access to a network of distributed financial energy.

⚡️ What are you really getting when you own bitcoin?\ – A key to a digital asset that can’t be faked\ – The ability to send “crystallized energy” anywhere on Earth\ – A role in a new accounting system that runs 24/7/365\ – Freedom: from banks, borders, inflation, and force

📉 Bitcoin doesn’t require physical value — because it creates value:\ Through trust, scarcity, and energy invested in mining.\ And unlike gold, it was never associated with slavery.

---

Statement: There’s no “income without risk” in Bitcoin: just hold — you preserve; want more — invest, risk, build.

Criticism: contradicts HODL logic; speculation remains dominant behavior.

6. “Speculation Dominates”

For now — yes. That’s normal for the early phase of a new technology. Awareness doesn’t come instantly.

What matters is not the motive of today’s buyer — but what they’re buying.

📉 A speculator may come and go — but the asset remains.\ And this asset is the only one in history that will never exist again. 21 million. Forever.

📌 Look deeper. Bitcoin has:\ – No CEO\ – No central issuer\ – No inflation\ – No “off switch”

💡 It’s not a stock. Not a startup. Not someone’s project.\ It’s a new foundation for trust.\ It’s opting out of a system where freedom is a privilege you’re granted under conditions.

🧠 People say: “Bitcoin can be copied.”\ Theoretically — yes.\ Practically — never.

Here’s what you’d need to recreate Bitcoin:\ – No pre-mine\ – A founder who disappears and never sells\ – No foundation or corporation\ – Tens of thousands of nodes worldwide\ – 701 million terahashes of hash power\ – Thousands of devs writing open protocols\ – Hundreds of global conferences\ – Millions of people defending digital sovereignty\ – All that without a single marketing budget

That’s all.

🔁 Everything else is an imitation, not a creation.\ Just like you can’t “reinvent fire” — Bitcoin can only exist once.

---

Statements:\ The Russia's '90s weren’t a free market — just anarchic chaos without rights protection.*\ Unlike fiat or even dollars, Bitcoin is the first asset with real defense — from governments, inflation, even thugs.\ And yes, even if your barber asks about Bitcoin — maybe it's not a bubble, but a sign that inflation has already hit everyone.

Criticism: Bitcoin’s protection isn’t universal — it works only with proper handling and isn’t available to all.\ Some just want to “get rich.”\ None of this matters because:

1. Bitcoin’s volatility (-30% in a week, +50% in a month) makes it unusable for price planning or contracts.

2. It can’t handle mass-scale usage.

3. To become currency, geopolitical will is needed — and without the first two, don’t even talk about the third.\ Also: “Bitcoin is too complicated for the average person.”

7. “It’s Too Complex for the Masses”

It’s complex — if you’re using L1 (Layer 1). But even grandmas use Telegram. In El Salvador, schoolkids buy lunch with Lightning. My barber installed Wallet of Satoshi in minutes right in front of me — and I now pay for my haircut via Lightning.

UX is just a matter of time. And it’s improving. Emerging tools:\ Cashu, Fedimint, Fedi, Wallet of Satoshi, Phoenix, Proton Wallet, Swiss Bitcoin Pay, Bolt Card / CoinCorner (NFC cards for Lightning payments).

This is like the internet in 1995:\ It started with modems — now it’s 4K streaming.

---

8. “Can’t Handle the Load”

A common myth.\ Yes, Bitcoin L1 processes about 7 transactions per second — intentionally. It’s not built to be Visa. It’s a financial protocol, just like TCP/IP is a network protocol. TCP/IP isn’t “fast” or “slow” — the experience depends on the infrastructure built on top: servers, routers, hardware. In the ’90s, it delivered text. Today, it streams Netflix. The protocol didn’t change — the stack did.

Same with Bitcoin: L1 defines rules, security, finality.\ Scaling and speed? That’s the second layer’s job.

To understand scale:

| Network | TPS (Transactions/sec) | | --- | --- | | Visa | up to 24,000 | | Mastercard | \~5,000 | | PayPal | \~193 | | Litecoin | \~56 | | Ethereum | \~20 | | Bitcoin | \~7 |

\ ⚡️ Enter Lightning Network — Bitcoin’s “fast lane.”\ It allows millions of transactions per second, instantly and nearly free.

And it’s not a sidechain.

❗️ Lightning is not a separate network.\ It uses real Bitcoin transactions (2-of-2 multisig). You can close the channel to L1 at any time. It’s not an alternative — it’s a native extension built into Bitcoin.\ Also evolving: Ark, Fedimint, eCash — new ways to scale and add privacy.

📉 So criticizing Bitcoin for “slowness” is like blaming TCP/IP because your old modem won’t stream YouTube.\ The protocol isn’t the problem — it’s the infrastructure.

🛡️ And by the way: Visa crashes more often than Bitcoin.

---

9. “We Need Geopolitical Will”

Not necessarily. All it takes is the will of the people — and leaders willing to act. El Salvador didn’t wait for G20 approval or IMF blessings. Since 2001, the country had used the US dollar as its official currency, abandoning its own colón. But that didn’t save it from inflation or dependency on foreign monetary policy. In 2021, El Salvador became the first country to recognize Bitcoin as legal tender. Since March 13, 2024, they’ve been purchasing 1 BTC daily, tracked through their public address:

🔗 Address\ 📅 First transaction

This policy became the foundation of their Strategic Bitcoin Reserve (SBR) — a state-led effort to accumulate Bitcoin as a national reserve asset for long-term stability and sovereignty.

Their example inspired others.

In March 2025, U.S. President Donald Trump signed an executive order creating the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve of the USA, to be funded through confiscated Bitcoin and digital assets.\ The idea: accumulate, don’t sell, and strategically expand the reserve — without extra burden on taxpayers.

Additionally, Senator Cynthia Lummis (Wyoming) proposed the BITCOIN Act, targeting the purchase of 1 million BTC over five years (\~5% of the total supply).\ The plan: fund it via revaluation of gold certificates and other budget-neutral strategies.

📚 More: Strategic Bitcoin Reserve — Wikipedia

👉 So no global consensus is required. No IMF greenlight.\ All it takes is conviction — and an understanding that the future of finance lies in decentralized, scarce assets like Bitcoin.

---

10. “-30% in a week, +50% in a month = not money”

True — Bitcoin is volatile. But that’s normal for new technologies and emerging money. It’s not a bug — it’s a price discovery phase. The world is still learning what this asset is.

📉 Volatility is the price of entry.\ 📈 But the reward is buying the future at a discount.

As Michael Saylor put it:

“A tourist sees Niagara Falls as chaos — roaring, foaming, spraying water.\ An engineer sees immense energy.\ It all depends on your mental model.”

Same with Bitcoin. Speculators see chaos. Investors see structural scarcity. Builders see a new financial foundation.

💡 Now consider gold:

👉 After the U.S. abandoned the gold standard in 1971, gold surged from \~$35 to over $800 in a decade — while suffering wild -40% to -60% crashes along the way.\ \ 📈 Gold Price Chart — Macrotrends\ \ Nobody said, “This can’t be money.” \ Because money is defined not by volatility, but by scarcity, adoption, and trust — which build over time.

📊 The more people save in Bitcoin, the more its volatility fades.

This is a journey — not a fixed state.

We don’t judge the internet by how it worked in 1994.\ So why expect Bitcoin to be the “perfect currency” in 2025?

It grows bottom-up — without regulators’ permission.\ And the longer it survives, the stronger it becomes.

Remember how many times it’s been declared dead.\ And how many times it came back — stronger.

---

📊 Gold vs. Bitcoin: Supply Comparison

This chart shows the key difference between the two hard assets:

🔹 Gold — supply keeps growing.\ Mining may be limited, but it’s still inflationary.\ Each year, there’s more — with no known cap: new mines, asteroid mining, recycling.

🔸 Bitcoin — capped at 21 million.\ The emission schedule is public, mathematically predictable, and ends completely around 2140.

🧠 Bottom line:\ Gold is good.\ Bitcoin is better — for predictability and scarcity.

💡 As Saifedean Ammous said:

“Gold was the best monetary good… until Bitcoin.”

While we argue — fiat erodes every day.

No matter your view on Bitcoin, just show me one other asset that is simultaneously:

– immune to devaluation by decree\ – impossible to print more of\ – impossible to confiscate by a centralized order\ – impossible to counterfeit\ – and, most importantly — transferable across borders without asking permission from a bank, a state, or a passport

💸 Try sending $10,000 through PayPal from Iran to Paraguay, or Bangladesh to Saint Lucia.\ Good luck. PayPal doesn't even work there.

Now open a laptop, type 12 words — and you have access to your savings anywhere on Earth.

🌍 Bitcoin doesn't ask for permission.\ It works for everyone, everywhere, all the time.

📌 There has never been anything like this before.

Bitcoin is the first asset in history that combines:

– digital nature\ – predictable scarcity\ – absolute portability\ – and immunity from tyranny

💡 As Michael Saylor said:

“Bitcoin is the first money in human history not created by bankers or politicians — but by engineers.”

You can own it with no bank.\ No intermediary.\ No passport.\ No approval.

That’s why Bitcoin isn’t just “internet money” or “crypto” or “digital gold.”\ It may not be perfect — but it’s incorruptible.\ And it’s not going away.\ It’s already here.\ It is the foundation of a new financial reality.

---

🔒 This is not speculation. This is a peaceful financial revolution.\ 🪙 This is not a stock. It’s money — like the world has never seen.\ ⛓️ This is not a fad. It’s a freedom protocol.

And when even the barber starts asking about Bitcoin — it’s not a bubble.\ It’s a sign that the system is breaking.\ And people are looking for an exit.

For the first time — they have one.

---

💼 This is not about investing. It’s about the dignity of work.

Imagine a man who cleans toilets at an airport every day.

Not a “prestigious” job.\ But a crucial one.\ Without him — filth, bacteria, disease.

He shows up on time. He works with his hands.

And his money? It devalues. Every day.

He doesn’t work less — often he works more than those in suits.\ But he can afford less and less — because in this system, honest labor loses value each year.

Now imagine he’s paid in Bitcoin.

Not in some “volatile coin,” but in hard money — with a limited supply.\ Money that can’t be printed, reversed, or devalued by central banks.

💡 Then he could:

– Stop rushing to spend, knowing his labor won’t be worth less tomorrow\ – Save for a dream — without fear of inflation eating it away\ – Feel that his time and effort are respected — because they retain value

Bitcoin gives anyone — engineer or janitor — a way out of the game rigged against them.\ A chance to finally build a future where savings are real.

This is economic justice.\ This is digital dignity.

📉 In fiat, you have to spend — or your money melts.\ 📈 In Bitcoin, you choose when to spend — because it’s up to you.

🧠 In a deflationary economy, both saving and spending are healthy:

You don’t scramble to survive — you choose to create.

🎯 That’s true freedom.

When even someone cleaning floors can live without fear —\ and know that their time doesn’t vanish... it turns into value.

@ 7e538978:a5987ab6

Chain Duel, a fast paced PvP game that takes inspiration from the classic snake game and supercharges it with Bitcoin’s Lightning Network. Imagine battling another player for dominance in a race to collect blocks, where the length of your chain isn’t just a visual cue. It represents real, staked satoshis. The player with the most Proof of Work wins, but it’s not just about gameplay; it’s about the seamless integration of the Lightning Network and real-time payments.

But how does Chain Duel manage these instant transactions with such efficiency? That’s where LNbits comes in. LNbits, an open-source wallet and payment infrastructure, handles all in-game payments making it easy for developers to focus on gameplay while LNbits takes care of everything from microtransactions to automated splits for developers and designers. In this article, we’ll dive deep into how Chain Duel leverages LNbits to streamline in-game payments and how other developers can take advantage of this powerful toolset to build the future of Lightning-powered gaming.

Let’s explore how LNbits transforms payment processing and why it’s quickly becoming a must-have for game developers working in the Bitcoin space.

Overview of Chain Duel

Chain Duel is a unique Lightning Network-inspired game that reimagines the classic snake game with a competitive twist, integrating real-time payments. Two players face off in real-time, racing to "catch" blocks and extend their chains. Each block added to the chain represents Proof of Work, and the player with the most Proof of Work wins the duel. The stakes are high, as the game represents satoshis (small units of Bitcoin) as points, with the winner taking home the prize.

The game is designed to be Lightning-native, meaning all payments within Chain Duel are processed through the Lightning Network. This ensures fast payments, reducing latency and making gameplay smooth. With additional features like practice mode, tournaments and highscores, Chain Duel creates an engaging and competitive environment for Bitcoin enthusiasts and gamers alike.

One of the standout aspects of Chain Duel is its deeper integration with the Lightning Network even at a design level. For example, actual Bitcoin blocks can appear on screen during matches, offering bonus points when mined in sync with the game. The game’s current version, still in beta, has already drawn attention within the Bitcoin community, gaining momentum at conferences and with a growing user base through its social networks. With its innovative combination of gaming, the Lightning Network, and competitive play, Chain Duel offers a glimpse into the future of Lightning-based gaming.

How LNbits is Used in Chain Duel

Seamless Integration with LNbits

At the core of Chain Duel’s efficient payment processing is LNbits, which handles in-game transactions smoothly and reliably. Chain Duel uses the LNbits LNURL-pay and LNURL-withdraw extensions to manage payments and rewards between players. Before each match, players send satoshis using LNURL-pay, which generates a static QR code or link for making the payment. LNURL-pay allows users to attach a note to the payment, which Chain Duel creatively uses as a way to insert the player name in-game. The simplicity of LNURL-pay ensures that users can quickly and easily initiate games, with fresh invoices being issued for every game. When players win, LNURL-withdraw enables them to seamlessly pull their earnings from the game, providing a quick payout system.

These extensions make it easy for players to send and receive Bitcoin with minimal latency, fully leveraging the power of the Lightning Network for fast and low-cost payments. The flexibility of LNbits’ tools means that game developers don’t need to worry about building custom payment systems from scratch—they can rely on LNbits to handle all financial transactions with precision.

Lightning Tournaments

Chain Duel tournaments leverage LNbits and its LNURL extensions to create a seamless and efficient experience for players. In Chain Duel tournaments, LNbits plays a crucial role in managing the overall economics. LNbits facilitates the generation of LNURL QR codes that participants can scan to register quickly or withdraw their winnings. LNbits allows Chain Duel to automatically handle multiple registrations through LNURL-pay, enabling players to participate in the tournament without additional steps. The Lightning Network's speed ensures that these payments occur in real-time, reducing wait times and allowing for a smoother flow in-game.

Splitting Payments

LNbits further simplifies revenue-sharing within Chain Duel. This feature allows the game to automatically split the satoshis sent by players into different shares for the game’s developer, designer, and host. Each time a payment is made to join a match, LNbits is used to automattically pay each of the contributors, according to pre-defined rules. This automated process ensures that everyone involved in the development and running of the game gets their fair share without manual intervention or complex bookkeeping.

Nostr Integration

Chain Duel also integrates with Nostr, a decentralized protocol for social interactions. Players can join games using "Zaps", small tips or micropayments sent over the Lightning Network within the Nostr ecosystem. Through NIP-57, which enables Nostr clients to request Zap invoices, players can use LNURL-pay enabled Zaps to register in P2P matches, further enhancing the Chain Duel experience. By using Zaps as a way to register in-game, Chain Duel automates the process of fetching players' identity, creating a more competitive and social experience. Zaps are public on the Nostr network, further expanding Chain Duel's games social reach and community engagement.

Game and Payment Synchronization

One of the key reasons Chain Duel developers chose LNbits is its powerful API that connects directly with the game’s logic. LNbits allows the game to synchronize payments with gameplay in real-time, providing a seamless experience where payments are an integrated part of the gaming mechanics.

With LNbits managing both the payment process and the Lightning Network’s complex infrastructure, Chain Duel developers are free to concentrate on enhancing the competitive and Lightning Network-related aspects of the game. This division of tasks is essential for streamlining development while still providing an innovative in-game payment experience that is deeply integrated with the Bitcoin network.

LNbits proves to be an indispensable tool for Chain Duel, enabling smooth in-game transactions, real-time revenue sharing, and seamless integration with Nostr. For developers looking to build Lightning-powered games, LNbits offers a powerful suite of tools that handle everything from micropayments to payment distribution—ensuring that the game's focus remains on fun and competition rather than complex payment systems.

LNBits facilitating Education and Adoption

This system contributes to educating users on the power of the Lightning Network. Since Chain Duel directly involve real satoshis and LNURL for registration and rewards, players actively experience how Lightning can facilitate fast, cheap, and permissionless payments. By incorporating LNbits into Chain Duel, the game serves as an educational tool that introduces users to the benefits of the Lightning Network. Players gain direct experience using Lightning wallets and LNURL, helping them understand how these tools work in real-world scenarios. The near-instant nature of these payments showcases the power of Lightning in a practical context, highlighting its potential beyond just gaming. Players are encouraged to set up wallets, explore the Lightning ecosystem, and eventually become familiar with Bitcoin and Lightning technology. By integrating LNbits, Chain Duel transforms in-game payments into a learning opportunity, making Bitcoin and Lightning more approachable for users worldwide.

Tools for Developers

LNbits is a versatile, open-source platform designed to simplify and enhance Bitcoin Lightning Network wallet management. For developers, particularly those working on Lightning-native games like Chain Duel, LNbits offers an invaluable set of tools that allow for seamless integration of Lightning payments without the need to build complex custom solutions from scratch. LNbits is built on a modular and extensible architecture, enabling developers to easily add or create functionality suited to their project’s needs.

Extensible Architecture for Customization

At the core of LNbits is a simple yet powerful wallet system that developers can access across multiple devices. What makes LNbits stand out is its extensible nature—everything beyond the core functionality is implemented as an extension. This modular approach allows users to customize their LNbits installation by enabling or building extensions to suit specific use cases. This flexibility is perfect for developers who want to add Lightning-based services to their games or apps without modifying the core codebase.

• Extensions for Every Use Case
  LNbits comes with a wide array of built-in extensions created by contributors, offering various services that can be plugged into your application. Some popular extensions include:
• Faucets: Distribute small amounts of Bitcoin to users for testing or promotional purposes.
• Paylinks: Create shareable links for instant payments.
• Points-of-sale (PoS): Allow users to set up shareable payment terminals.
• Paywalls: Charge users to access content or services.
• Event tickets: Sell tickets for events directly via Lightning payments.
• Games and services: From dice games to jukeboxes, LNbits offers entertaining and functional tools.

These ready-made solutions can be adapted and used in different gaming scenarios, for example in Chain Duel, where LNURL extensions are used for in game payments. The extensibility ensures developers can focus on building engaging gameplay while LNbits handles payment flows.

Developer-Friendly Customization

LNbits isn't just a plug-and-play platform. Developers can extend its functionality even further by creating their own extensions, giving full control over how the wallet system is integrated into their games or apps. The architecture is designed to make it easy for developers to build on top of the platform, adding custom features for specific requirements.

Flexible Funding Source Management

LNbits also offers flexibility in terms of managing funding sources. Developers can easily connect LNbits to various Lightning Network node implementations, enabling seamless transitions between nodes or even different payment systems. This allows developers to switch underlying funding sources with minimal effort, making LNbits adaptable for games that may need to scale quickly or rely on different payment infrastructures over time.

A Lean Core System for Maximum Efficiency

Thanks to its modular architecture, LNbits maintains a lean core system. This reduces complexity and overhead, allowing developers to implement only the features they need. By avoiding bloated software, LNbits ensures faster transactions and less resource consumption, which is crucial in fast-paced environments like Chain Duel where speed and efficiency are paramount.

LNbits is designed with developers in mind, offering a suite of tools and a flexible infrastructure that makes integrating Bitcoin payments easy. Whether you’re developing games, apps, or any service that requires Lightning Network transactions, LNbits is a powerful, open-source solution that can be adapted to fit your project.

Conclusion

Chain Duel stands at the forefront of Lightning-powered gaming, combining the excitement of competitive PvP with the speed and efficiency of the Lightning Network. With LNbits handling all in-game payments, from microtransactions to automated revenue splits, developers can focus entirely on crafting an engaging gaming experience. LNbits’ powerful API and extensions make it easy to manage real-time payments, removing the complexity of building payment infrastructure from scratch.

LNbits isn’t just a payment tool — it’s a flexible, developer-friendly platform that can be adapted to any gaming model. Whether you're developing a fast-paced PvP game like Chain Duel or any project requiring seamless Lightning Network integration, LNbits provides the ideal solution for handling instant payments with minimal overhead.

For developers interested in pushing the boundaries of Lightning-powered gaming, Chain Duel is a great example of how LNbits can enhance your game, letting you focus on the fun while LNbits manages real-time transactions.

Find out more

Curious about how Lightning Network payments can power your next game? Explore the following:

• Learn more about Chain Duel: Chain Duel
• Learn how LNbits can simplify payment handling in your project: LNbits
• Dive into decentralized communication with Nostr: Nostr

@ 58537364:705b4b85

Ikigai means "the meaning of life" or "the reason for being." Why were we born? What are we living for? When work is not seen as something separate from life.

The Japanese believe that everyone has their own ikigai. Those who discover it find meaning and value in life, leading to greater happiness, better moods, and a more fulfilling world.

Today, there are many books about ikigai, but the first one written by a Japanese author is:

“The Little Book of Ikigai: The Secret Japanese Way to Live a Happy and Long Life” by Ken Mogi (Thai translation by Wuttichai Krisanaprakankit)

Come explore the true world of ikigai through this Japanese neuroscientist’s insights, conveyed through conversations that challenge the idea of ikigai as something grand—showing instead that it starts with small personal joys.

Ken Mogi says that Jiro Ono, a 94-year-old sushi chef who still makes sushi today, was his inspiration for writing the book.

This sushi chef did not start the job out of passion or talent—but he dedicated every piece of sushi to bring happiness to his customers. That, Ken says, is the essence of ikigai.

Strangely, the word “ikigai” is not often used in daily conversations in Japan.

Because it’s something so natural that it doesn’t need to be said. In today’s world, we often talk about how to succeed, how to get promoted, how to become a CEO. But for the Japanese, success isn’t everything.

For example, many Japanese people are deeply passionate about hobbies or have kodawari. Others might not care what those hobbies are—as long as the person seems happy, that’s enough. Some are obsessed with trains, manga, or anime. These people don’t need fame or recognition from society. If they’re happy in their own way, that’s perfectly okay.

Kodawari means a deep dedication or meticulous attention to something. For example, someone obsessed with stationery might spend a lot of time selecting the perfect pens, notebooks, or pencils. They’ll research, analyze, and experiment to find the tools they love most.

Everyone’s ikigai can be different, because people value different things and live differently.

Ikigai is about diversity. Japanese society encourages children to discover their own ikigai. They don’t tell kids to pursue jobs only because they pay well. If you ask students what jobs they want, they rarely say it’s about money first.

Ikigai is not the same as "success." The Japanese know that life isn’t just about being successful. Ikigai matters more. You could be successful but lack ikigai. Conversely, you might not be “successful” but still have ikigai—and you might be happier.

Ken Mogi defines success as something society acknowledges and rewards. But ikigai comes from your own heart and personal happiness. Others may not recognize it as success, but that doesn’t matter.

Ikigai is personal. We can be happy in our own way. We don’t judge others’ happiness—let them find joy in their own path.

The key to ikigai is finding small moments of happiness, even from little things. For example, when Ken was a child, he loved studying butterflies. Now, when he’s out jogging and sees a beautiful butterfly, he feels ikigai. Or sometimes, it comes from small amusing moments—like hearing a child tell his dad, “Dad, you have to do it this way!”

So, if we want to find our own ikigai, where do we start? Start with noticing small pleasures in daily life. That’s the easiest place to begin.

In the brain, there's a chemical called dopamine. When we achieve even small things, dopamine is released, creating happiness. That’s why enjoying small things is so important.

For some, ikigai might seem hard to grasp—especially if life is difficult, if they feel hopeless or lack self-worth. So begin with tiny moments of joy.

Is it the same as positive thinking? Ikigai is a part of that. But when we talk about “positive thinking,” it can feel like pressure to some people. So instead, just notice small joys: making your morning coffee, running in the rain.

---

Lessons from Ken Mogi:

1. Ikigai is not about chasing success or wealth, but about feeling happiness in your own life, which gives your life personal meaning.

2. Ikigai is not defined by society. Everyone’s ikigai is different. Each person can be happy in their own way.

3. **Don’t judge or force others—**children, partners—to live how you think is right. Respect diversity.

4. Smile at people who are enjoying their ikigai, and support them if they struggle.

5. Ikigai exists on two levels:

6. Big ikigai: life purpose or work values.

7. Small ikigai: tiny joys in everyday life.

8. Ikigai starts with noticing small pleasures today.

---

Source: From the Cloud of Thoughts column An interview by Ajarn Katewadi from Marumura with Ken Mogi, author of the first Japanese book on ikigai.

@ 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

@ 7e538978:a5987ab6

🧑‍💻🚀 This bounty has now been claimed - Read more here   🧑‍💻🚀🧑‍💻🚀

Bounty Specification: Implement a Nostr Wallet Connect Funding Source for LNbits

Project Overview

This project involves the development of a funding source within LNbits that can use a remote NWC wallet service.

Objective

To create a NWC funding source for LNbits that allows for lightning network operations using a remote Nostr Wallet Connect wallet service. This funding source should implement all funding source functions using NWC as defined in the Void funding source stub - https://github.com/lnbits/lnbits/blob/dev/lnbits/wallets/void.py

Deliverables

1. NWC Funding Source: Robust funding source for LNbits that implements all funding source functions using NIP-47.
2. Documentation: Comprehensive guide including:
3. Installation and configuration processes.
4. Configuration guidelines to connect with various NWC wallet services.
5. Test Suite: Complete set of tests ensuring the functionality works under various scenarios and adheres to the NIP-47 protocol.
6. Demonstration: A working demonstration of LNbits acting as a NWC client, performing transactions using a NWC wallet service.

Requirements

• The extension should be implemented in Python to align with the existing LNbits platform.
• Follow the NIP-47 protocol.
• Integration should support asynchronous operations to handle real-time transaction confirmations.

Budget

• Total Bounty: 750,000 sats
• Payment will be made upon final delivery, after successful testing and documentation review.

Evaluation Criteria

• Adherence to the NIP-47 specifications and LNbits integration requirements.
• Security and efficiency of the implementation.
• Quality of documentation and ease of use.

How to Apply

Get in touch with us in the LNbits Telegram channel

@ 7e538978:a5987ab6

🧑‍💻🚀 This bounty has now been claimed - Read more here   🧑‍💻🚀

Bounty Specification: Build a Nostr Wallet Connect Wallet Service Extension for LNbits

Project Overview

This project aims to build a Nostr Wallet Connect (NWC) extension for LNbits to allow LNbits to act as a NWC Wallet Service as defined in NIP-47 https://github.com/nostr-protocol/nips/blob/master/47.md

LNbits has an example extension that can be used as a starting point on your extension development journey. Watch the extension build tutorial video here

Objective

To develop a fully functional NWC Wallet Service extension that adheres to the NIP-47 protocol specifications, enabling the following capabilities:

• Generation and handling of Nostr Wallet Connect URIs.
• Processing of payment requests including pay_invoice, make_invoice, lookup_invoice, list_transactions, get_balance, multi_pay_invoice, pay_keysend, multi_pay_keysend and get_info
• Creation and lookup of invoices.
• List and balance querying functionalities.
• Secure communication through encrypted events as per NIP04.
• Implementation of error codes
• Implementation of connection rules with control of the following: Maximum payment amount, maximum daily budget, connection expiry date (never expire should be an option) denominated in sats.

Deliverables

1. NWC Wallet Service Extension Code: Clean, commented, and secure codebase that uses the existing LNbits nostrclient.py functionality and an LNbits funding source to provide a NWC Wallet Service.
2. NWC Wallet Service Extension UI: A user interface within the extension that allows a user to connect a new app to the NWC wallet service and edit existing connections. The app connection should allow control of the following rules: Maximum payment amountMaximum daily budgetConnection expiry date (never expire should be an option)
3. Documentation: Documentation covering:
4. Setup and configuration instructions.
5. Usage examples.
6. Test Suite: A comprehensive test suite covering all key functionality

Technology Requirements

• The extension must be developed in Python, consistent with the LNbits platform.
• Use of existing LNbits libraries and adherence to its architectural style is required.
• NIP-47 specification must be adhered to.

Budget

• Total Bounty: 750,000 sats
• Payment will be made upon final delivery, after successful testing and documentation review.

Evaluation Criteria

• Adherence to the NIP-47 specifications and LNbits integration requirements.
• Security and efficiency of the implementation.
• Quality of documentation and ease of use.

How to Apply

Get in touch with us in the LNbits Telegram channel

@ bd32f268:22b33966

Recentemente tive conhecimento do mais recente flagelo cuja popularidade espelha bem o estado avançado de degeneração da nossa sociedade, o bebé reborn. Há uns anos certamente não passaria de uma piada de mau gosto quando alguém nos dissesse que decidiu adquirir um boneco para criar como se se tratasse de um filho, infelizmente em 2025 deixou de ser uma piada para se tornar algo assombroso.

Depois de fazer alguma pesquisa sobre o tema percebi que há pessoas que têm em curso processos litigantes judiciais relativos à, note-se com pasmo, guarda da boneca. A insanidade não fica por aqui uma vez que, algumas "mães" procuram atendimento médico para os seus bonecos. No Brasil, a câmara dos deputados recebeu três projetos destinados à criação de políticas públicas relacionadas com estes bonecos. As notícias sobre este fenómeno surreal multiplicam-se à medida que a insanidade se alastra como vírus pelas redes sociais.

Vivemos numa sociedade que há muito se divorciou da realidade, uma sociedade de pós-verdade, por isso de alguma forma não choca que este tipo de coisa possa acontecer. Podemos dizer que de alguma forma existe um primado do sentimento face à razão, preferimos, por vezes com consequências catastróficas, uma mentira "empática" do que uma verdade salvífica. Esta nossa tibieza em afirmar a verdade leva-nos consequentemente a uma crendice insustentável que é esta de, cada um tem a sua verdade. Graças a essa filosofia permitimos que um certo discurso lunático tenha mais alcance no espaço público. Por vezes ingenuamente podemos pensar que se trata de algo inofensivo, sem consequências de maior, contudo a experiência mostra-nos precisamente o contrário. Há por detrás destes fenómenos uma índole corrosiva que funciona como aguilhão para a disseminação das agendas políticas e ideológicas que visam a destruição da família. Considerando a excecional vulnerabilidade psíquica que observamos em cada vez mais pessoas neste tempo e a ampla disseminação destes fenómenos temos razão mais que suficientes para estarmos preocupados.

Uma outra elação que podemos retirar é que a nossa sociedade com as alegadas gerações "mais bem preparadas de sempre" está claramente a produzir um excesso de adultos que se comporta e, a todos os títulos são, crianças funcionais.

Com tudo isto fica cada vez mais difícil viver uma vida harmoniosa com a lei natural, pois vivemos em harmonia com algo considerado opressor pelos apologetas destes produtos do marxismo cultural. Com a pretensa igualdade que se pretende alcançar, equiparando inclusive um boneco a uma bebé, as famílias no sentido próprio do termo ficam em segundo plano relativamente a estes "novos" e esotéricos conceitos de família.

Importa perguntar, no meio de todas essas novas formas de se pensar uma família, qual é o ideal ?

Provavelmente os apologetas destas bizarrices ficarão em silêncio uma vez que coerentemente consideram que todas as formas são iguais e válidas.

Isto é apenas mais um sinal que nos é dado do declínio palpável dos valores que construíram a nossa sociedade e civilização. Façamos algo para que estas nocivas ideologias não entrem no nosso coração e em nossas casas, sob pena da corrupção dos nossos princípios e dos daqueles que nos são queridos. Estes fenómenos são de tal forma doentios que nos levam a crer que vivemos numa época tragicómica, o que me fez lembrar de uma história contada por Kierkgaard e que partilho de seguida.

“Certa vez, houve um incêndio num circo ambulante na Dinamarca. O director mandou imediatamente o palhaço, que já se encontrava vestido e maquilhado a preceito, para a vila mais próxima, à procura de ajuda, advertindo-o de que existia o perigo de o fogo se espalhar pelos campos ceifados e ressequidos, com risco iminente para as casas do próprio povoado. O palhaço correu até à vila e pediu aos moradores que viessem ajudar a apagar o incêndio que estava a destruir o circo. Mas os habitantes viram nos gritos do palhaço apenas um belo truque de publicidade que visaria levá-los a acorrer em grande número às sessões do circo; aplaudiam e desatavam a rir. Diante dessa reacção, o palhaço sentiu mais vontade de chorar do que de rir. Fez de tudo para convencer as pessoas de que não estava a representar, de que não se tratava de um truque e sim de um apelo da maior seriedade: estava realmente em causa um incêndio. Mas a sua insistência só fazia aumentar os risos; eles achavam que a performance estava excelente – até que o fogo alcançou de facto aquela vila. Aí já foi tarde, e o fogo acabou por destruir não só o circo, mas também a povoação”.

Soren Kierkgaard - Filósofo dinamarquês

@ cae03c48:2a7d6671

Bitcoin Magazine

Auradine Expands Bitcoin Mining Solutions with Advanced ASIC Chips, Cooling Systems, and Modular Megawatt Containers

Auradine Inc., a U.S.-based Bitcoin miner manufacturer, today announced it is unveiling a broadened portfolio of mining products at the Bitcoin 2025 Conference in Las Vegas, featuring high-performance ASIC chips, specialized cooling systems, and fully integrated modular containers engineered for scalable, megawatt-class mining operations, according to a press release sent to Bitcoin Magazine.

“Our goal is to democratize access to Bitcoin mining and enable innovative integrations,” said the CEO and Co-Founder of Auradine Rajiv Khemani. “Whether you’re running a megawatt container or building a small form-factor heater-miner for your home, we provide the chips, systems, and support to help you succeed. This new chapter is about giving miners the tools to innovate, scale, and operate efficiently.”

The new ASIC offerings, designed for both industrial and small-scale deployments, support customizable form factors and have already been adopted by operators including MARA Holdings, FutureBit, and Deep South Operating. Alongside the chips, Auradine continues to produce a full range of mining rigs to support a variety of deployment needs.

“Auradine’s ability to deliver both high-performance chips and scalable infrastructure aligns with MARA’s mission to stay at the forefront of bitcoin mining,” stated the Chief Technology Officer of MARA Holdings Ashu Swami. “We have been pleased with the partnership with Auradine with their leading edge engineering capability and innovation.”

Auradine’s modular 1 MW container units, developed in collaboration with Fog Hashing and FBox, are designed to accommodate 100–200 miners each. Merkle Standard, the first to deploy the system, reported improved energy efficiency and operational flexibility.

“We were the first to deploy Auradine’s container solution, and it immediately exceeded our expectations,” said the COO at Merkle Standard Monty Stahl. “The combination of performance, energy efficiency, and modular design gives us the flexibility to scale our operations faster and smarter than traditional infrastructure allows. This is the kind of innovation the mining industry has needed for a long time.”

Their recent $153 million Series C funding supports its push to offer flexible mining infrastructure and supplying ASIC chips for third-party integration. The company also plans to extend its hardware expertise to AI and networking through its AuraLinks initiative.

“We were one of the first to try Auradine’s ASIC chips and were immediately impressed by the support and customization that the team provided,”  added the CEO of Deep South Operating, LLC Brock Tompkins. “It helps miners like us to stay scalable and efficient while raising the standard for what decentralized mining looks like.”

This post Auradine Expands Bitcoin Mining Solutions with Advanced ASIC Chips, Cooling Systems, and Modular Megawatt Containers first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Oscar Zarraga Perez.

@ 0b118e40:4edc09cb

My week started off with a lovely message from a friend : “I often think about you. Especially during times when it requires me to be more resilient and have faith in myself. I always carry your note in the book you gave me, “what the dog saw” And it always gives me courage and I send a little prayer your way”.

This friend of mine was dealing with the undercurrent of discrimination in my alma mater when we first met, and I helped out. It's something anybody would have done, but surprisingly, nobody else showed up. We’ve stayed in touch over the years, and my friend went on to help a lot of other people along the way.

I don’t remember what I wrote in that note. It’s something I tend to do (write notes, give books, write notes in books). But the message boomeranged back to me at a time when I needed to hold the line. To keep the faith.

Most of us don’t talk about our struggles. And sometimes the smallest act, which could just be a kind word or a reminder of the person you are, can carry farther than we imagine.

On the act of giving

There’s a book called Give and Take by Adam Grant. I picked it up hoping to learn how to take, because it’s always been easier to give and harder to accept help. But what I learned was something else entirely.

Grant studied over 30,000 people across different companies and grouped them into three types: * Givers * Matchers * Takers

Based on his studies, givers often finish last... They struggle the most. They burn out. They get overlooked. They’re too trusting.

But oddly, they also rise to the very top.

Matchers are the scorekeepers, the “I’ll help you if you help me” kind. They make up most of the population. The fascinating thing about tit-for-tat is that if someone’s kind, they reciprocate. But if someone acts like a jerk, they return the energy, and over time, it becomes a pool of spoiled milk. Matchers are a lukewarm, forgettable kind of network.

Takers are the ones chasing attention, always aligning themselves with whoever looks powerful. They tend to float toward status and soak up what they can. But they often portray themselves as kind and giving.

One example Grant shared was Enron's Kenneth Lay, who was at the center of one of the biggest corporate scandals in U.S. history. He hung around wherever he’d get seen or validated. He funded both Bush and Clinton, hedging his bets on who might win by securing proximity. Sadly, when Enron crumbled, he died of a heart attack before his prison sentencing.

Most people steer clear from takers because they are just exhausting. And takers often collapse under the weight of their own games.

But takers aren’t the lowest performers. That spot belongs to a certain kind of giver—the self-neglecting kind. The ones with no boundaries, no clarity, and no self-awareness. They give in to avoid conflict, to feel worthy, or because they don’t know how to say no. And when life breaks them, they point fingers.

Then there’s the other kind of giver. The ones who build trust and build people up without asking for a receipt.

These givers: 1. Give without expectation, from a place of purpose 2. Build and uplift others without seeking credit 3. Set boundaries and walk away when giving turns into draining

This group of givers rarely talk much about what they do for others. But when you hear about it or see it, it stays with you. It makes you want to show up a little better.

Why open source environments feels like home

The more I thought about it, the more I saw how deeply open source reflects that kind of giving that ends up right at the top.

In open source, you don’t last if it’s just about ego. You can’t fake it. There are no titles, no awards. You either show up to build and help, or you don’t.

People who give without needing to be seen are the ones the community leans on. You can tell when someone’s pretending to care. It’s in their tone, their urgency and their sense of transaction. The genuine ones don’t need to brand themselves as generous. They just are.

Open source works because giving is the default setting. The work speaks volumes and generosity compounds. The system filters for people who show up with purpose and stay consistent.

It’s also why the ones who whine, posture, or manipulate rarely last. They might call themselves givers, but they’re not fooling anyone who’s actually doing the work.

Adam Grant found that for giver cultures to thrive, takers have to be removed. They need to be pruned. Because takers poison the well. They drain givers, shift the culture from contribution to calculation, and unravel the trust that holds open systems together.

When hope boomerangs

That note is something I don’t remember writing. But it found its way back to me, and it was a good reminder to take my own advice and keep the faith.

And maybe that’s the point.

You do a small thing. And years later, it circles back when it matters most. Not because you expected it. But because you mattered.

According to Grant, givers do best when they combine generosity with grit and strategy. They create networks built on goodwill, which eventually open doors others don’t even know exist.

So if you’re wondering where I’m going with this, do something genuinely kind for someone today. Even if it’s as simple as sending a kind note. Not for you to be seen or heard. And not for you to keep scores.

But, just because.

@ d360efec:14907b5f

🚀📉 #BTC วิเคราะห์ H2! พุ่งชน 105K แล้วเจอแรงขาย... จับตา FVG 100.5K เป็นจุดวัดใจ! 👀📊

จากากรวิเคราะห์ทางเทคนิคสำหรับ #Bitcoin ในกรอบเวลา H2:

สัปดาห์ที่แล้ว #BTC ได้เบรคและพุ่งขึ้นอย่างแข็งแกร่งค่ะ 📈⚡ แต่เมื่อวันจันทร์ที่ผ่านมา ราคาได้ขึ้นไปชนแนวต้านบริเวณ 105,000 ดอลลาร์ แล้วเจอแรงขายย่อตัวลงมาตลอดทั้งวันค่ะ 🧱📉

ตอนนี้ ระดับที่น่าจับตาอย่างยิ่งคือโซน H4 FVG (Fair Value Gap ในกราฟ 4 ชั่วโมง) ที่ 100,500 ดอลลาร์ ค่ะ 🎯 (FVG คือโซนที่ราคาวิ่งผ่านไปเร็วๆ และมักเป็นบริเวณที่ราคามีโอกาสกลับมาทดสอบ/เติมเต็ม)

👇 โซน FVG ที่ 100.5K นี้ ยังคงเป็น Area of Interest ที่น่าสนใจสำหรับมองหาจังหวะ Long เพื่อลุ้นการขึ้นในคลื่นลูกถัดไปค่ะ!

🤔💡 อย่างไรก็ตาม การตัดสินใจเข้า Long หรือเทรดที่บริเวณนี้ ขึ้นอยู่กับว่าราคา แสดงปฏิกิริยาอย่างไรเมื่อมาถึงโซน 100.5K นี้ เพื่อยืนยันสัญญาณสำหรับการเคลื่อนไหวที่จะขึ้นสูงกว่าเดิมค่ะ!

เฝ้าดู Price Action ที่ระดับนี้อย่างใกล้ชิดนะคะ! 📍

BTC #Bitcoin #Crypto #คริปโต #TechnicalAnalysis #Trading #FVG #FairValueGap #PriceAction #MarketAnalysis #ลงทุนคริปโต #วิเคราะห์กราฟ #TradeSetup #ข่าวคริปโต #ตลาดคริปโต

@ 7e538978:a5987ab6

LNbits now has full NWC support thanks to the work of contributor @riccardobl, who has claimed two LNbits bounties for implementing Nostr Wallet Connect (NWC) support in LNbits.

LNbits can now act both as a wallet service and as a funding source using the Nostr NWC protocol (NIP-47). This opens the door to new integrations with a growing ecosystem of Nostr clients and Lightning wallets.

Two Sides of NWC Integration

The work delivered by Riccardo B comprises two separate peices of work that together implement full support for NWC:

1. LNbits as a Wallet Service

This extension allows LNbits to operate as an always-on wallet service compatible with Nostr Wallet Connect clients such as Damus, Amethyst, or any app supporting NIP-47. Users can connect these Nostr clients to their LNbits instance and create and pay Lightning invoices through it.

This turns your LNbits wallet into a backend Lightning provider for your favourite Nostr app all self-hosted.

2. NWC as a Funding Source

The second piece of work flips the relationship. With this in place, LNbits can now act as an NWC client, meaning it can be funded from any NWC wallet service. This could be another LNbits, Alby, Minibits and more.

Why This Is a Big Deal for LNbits Users

These two bounties make LNbits one of the first applications in the Lightning ecosystem to offer bidirectional NWC support — as both a service and a client. This brings benefits such as:

• Fund any NWC-compatible app using your LNbits wallet.

• Fund LNbits using any wallet that supports Nostr Wallet Connect.

• Build NWC-native apps with LNbits as a backend, or power your own LNbits server using existing wallet infrastructure.

For developers, it’s a chance to build in flexible, interoperable ways. For users, it means more choice, more control, and less friction when managing Lightning payments across apps and devices.

Both of these features were developed and delivered by Riccardo B (@riccardobl), an contributor who took on and completed both LNbits bounties and was extremely helpful during the PR review process. We owe a huge thanks to Riccardo for his work here.

To try them out, read the full article detailing how NWC works with LNbits.

@ d360efec:14907b5f

@ 662f9bff:8960f6b2

Currently, and for the last three weeks, I am in Belfast. With the situation in HK becoming ever more crazy by the day we took the opportunity to escape from Hong Kong for a bit - I escaped with V and 3 suitcases. I also have some family matters that I am giving priority to at this time. We plan to stay a few more weeks in Northern Ireland and then after some time in Belgium we will be visiting some other European locations. I do hope that HK will be a place that we can go back to - we will see...

What's happening?

Quite a few significant events have happened in the last few weeks that deserve some deeper analysis and checking than you will ever get from the media propaganda circus that is running full force at the moment. You should be in no doubt that the "Great Reset" with its supporting "Great Narrative" is in full swing.

In most of the world the C19 story has run its course - for now. Most countries seem to have have "declared victory" and "moved on". Obviously HK is an exception (nothing happened there for the last two years) and I fear they will get to experience the whole 2-year thing in the coming 3-4 months. Watch out - the politicians everywhere are looking to permanently establish the "emergency controls" as "normal" - see previous Letter for some examples in Ireland and EU.

Invasion of Ukraine has led to so many lines being crossed - to the extent that clearly things will never be the same again in our lifetime.

Why? How did we get here?

I do not claim to know all the answers but some things are fairly clear if you look with open eyes and the wisdom that previous generations and civilisations have made available to us - even if most choose to ignore it (Plato on the flaws of democracy). Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it and even those who learn will have litle choice but to go along for much of the ride.

Perhaps my notes and the links below will help you to form an educated opinion rather than the pervasive propaganda we are all being fed.

The current situation is more than 100 years in the making and much (if not most) of what you thought was true is less veracious than you could ever imagine. No doubt we could (and maybe should) go back further but let's start in 1913 when the British Government asked the public no longer to request exchange of their pounds for gold coins at the post office. This led to the issuing of War Bonds and fractional reserve accounting that allowed the Bank of England essentially to print unlimited money to fight in WW1; without this devious action they would have been constrained to act within the limits of the country's reserves and WW1 would have been shorter. Read The Fiat Standard for more details on how this happened. Around this time, and likely no coincidence, the US bankers were scheming how to get around the constitutional controls against such actions in their own country - read more in The Creature from Jekyll Island.

Following WW1, Germany was forced to pay war reparations in Gold (hard money). This led to a decade of money printing and extravagant excesses and crashes as hyperinflation set in, ending in the bankrupting of the country and the nationalism that fed WW2 - the gory details of devaluation and hyperinflation in Weimar Germany are described in When Money Dies. Meanwhile the US bankers who had been preparing since 1913 stepped in with unlimited money printing to fund WW2 and then also in their Marshal Plan to cement in place the Bretton Woods post-war agreement that made US Dollar the global reserve currency.

Decades of boom and bust followed - well explained by Ray Dalio who portrays this as perfectly normal and to be expected - unfortunately it is for soft (non-hard) money based economies. The Fourth Turning will give many additional insights to this period too as well as cycles to watch for and their cause and nature. In 1961 Eisenhower tried to warn the population in his farewell address about the "Military Industrial Complex" and many believe that Robert Kennedy's assassination in 1963 may well be not entirely unrelated.

Things came to a head in August 1971 when the countries of the world realised that the US was (contrary to all promises) printing unlimited funds to (among other things) fight the Vietnam war and so undermining the expected and required convertibility of US dollars (the currency of global trade) for Gold (hard money). A French warship heading to NY to collect France's gold was the straw that caused Nixon to default on US Debt convertibility and "close the gold window".

This in turn led to further decades of increasing financialization, further fuelled (pun intended) by the PetroDollar creation and "exorbitant priviledge" that the US obtained by having the global reserve currency - benefiting those closest to the money supply (Cantillon effect) while hollowing out the US manufacturing and eventually devastating its middle and working classes (Triffin dilemma) - Arthur Hayes describes all this and much more as well as the likely outlook in his article - Energy Canceled. Absolutely required reading or listen to Guy Swan reading it and giving his additional interpetation.

Zoltan Pozsar of Credit Suisse explains how the money system is now being reset following the events of last few weeks and his article outlines a likely way forward - Bretton Woods III. His paper is somewhat dense, heavy reading and you might prefer to listen to Luc Gromen's more conversational explainer with Marty

All of this was well known to our forefathers

The writers of the American Constitution understood the dangers of money being controlled by any elite group and they did their best to include protections in the US constitution. It did take the bankers multiple decades and puppet presidents to circumvent these but do so they did. Thomas Jefferson could not have been more clear in his warning.

" If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around(these banks) will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered."

Islamic finace also recognised the dangers - you will likely be aware of the restrictions that forbid interest payments - read this interesting article from The Guardian

You will likely also be aware from schooldays that the Roman Empire collapsed because it expanded too much and the overhead became unbearable leading to the debasement of its money and inability to extract tax payments to support itself. Read more from Mises Institute. Here too, much of this will likely ring familiar.

So what can you do about it?

In theory Governments should respect Consent of the Governed and the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that "The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government".

For you to decide if and to what extent governments today are acting in line with these principles. If not, what can you do about it?

The options you have are basically - Loyalty, Voice or Exit. 1. You can be loyal and accept what you are told - 2. you may (or may not) be able to voice disagreement and 3. you may (or may not!) be able to exit. Authoritarian governments will make everything except Loyalty difficult or even impossible - if in doubt, read George Orwell 1984 - or look just around at recent events today in many countries.

I'll be happy to delve deeper into this in subsequent letters if there is interest - for now I recommend you to read Sovereign Individual. It is a long read but each chapter starts with a summary and you can read the summaries of each chapter as a first step. Also - I'm happy to discuss with you - just reach out and let me know!

For those who prefer a structured reading list, check References

That's it!

No one can be told what The Matrix is.\ You have to see it for yourself.**

Do share this newsletter with any of your friends and family who might be interested.

You can easily ask questions or discuss any topics in the newsletters in our Telegram group - click the link here to join the group.\ You can also email me at: LetterFrom@rogerprice.me

💡Enjoy the newsletters in your own language : Dutch, French, German, Serbian, Chinese Traditional & Simplified, Thai and Burmese.

@ d360efec:14907b5f

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

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

✨ ภาพรวมตลาดวันนี้ ✨

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

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

⚡ เปรียบเทียบแนวโน้มแต่ละ Timeframe ⚡

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

💡 วิธีคิดแบบ Market Slayer 💡

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

สรุปแนวโน้มวันนี้:

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

🗓️ Daily Trade Setup ประจำวันนี้ 🗓️

นี่คือตัวอย่าง Setup ที่ Lina เตรียมไว้ให้พิจารณาค่ะ (เน้นย้ำว่าเป็นเพียงแนวทาง ไม่ใช่คำแนะนำลงทุนนะคะ)

1️⃣ ตัวอย่างที่ 1: รอรับที่โซน Demand (ปลอดภัย, รอยืนยัน)

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

2️⃣ ตัวอย่างที่ 2: Follow Breakout (สายบู๊, รับความเสี่ยงได้)

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

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

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

⚠️ Disclaimer: การวิเคราะห์นี้เป็นเพียงความคิดเห็นส่วนตัวของ Lina เท่านั้น ไม่ถือเป็นคำแนะนำในการลงทุนนะคะ การลงทุนมีความเสี่ยง ผู้ลงทุนควรศึกษาข้อมูลเพิ่มเติมและตัดสินใจด้วยความรอบคอบค่ะ 🙏

ขอให้ทุกท่านโชคดีกับการเทรดในวันนี้ค่ะ! มีคำถามอะไรเพิ่มเติม ถามมาได้เลยนะคะ ยินดีเสมอค่ะ! 😊

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

@ 95543309:196c540e

Lets see if this works with the blossom upload and without markdown hassle.

:cat:

https://blossom.primal.net/73a099f931366732c18dd60da82db6ef65bb368eb96756f07d9fa7a8a3644009.mp4

@ 6ad3e2a3:c90b7740

I https://www.chrisliss.com/p/mstr a few months ago with the subtitle “The Only Stock,” and I’m starting to regret it. Now, it was trading at 396 on January 20 when I posted it and 404 now (even if it dipped 40 percent to 230 or so in between), but that’s not why I regret it. I pointed out it was not investable unless you’re willing to stomach large drawdowns, and anyone who bought then could exit with a small profit now had they not panic-sold along the way.

The reason I regret it is I don’t want to make public stock predictions because it adds stress to my life. I have not sold any of my shares yet, but something I’ve noticed recently has got me thinking about it, and stock tips are like a game of telephone wherein whoever is last in the chain might find out the wrong information and too late. And while every adult has agency and is responsible for his own financial decisions, I don’t want my readers losing money on account of anything I write.

My base case is still that MSTR becomes a trillion-dollar company, destroys the performance of the S&P, the Mag-7 and virtually any other equity portfolio most people would assemble. Michael Saylor is trading an infinitely-printable asset (his shares) for humanity’s best-ever, finite-supply digital gold, and that trade should be profitable for him and his shareholders in perpetuity.

I don’t know exactly what he plans to do when that trade is no longer available to him — either because no one takes fiat currency for bitcoin anymore or because his mNAV (market-cap-to-bitcoin-holding ratio) goes below one — but that’s not my main concern, either. At that point he’ll have so much bitcoin, he’ll probably become the world’s first and largest bitcoin bank and profit by making his pristine collateral available to individuals and institutions. Even at five percent interest, half a trillion in bitcoin would yield $25B in profits every year. Even at a modest 10x valuation, the stock would more than double from here.

I am also not overly concerned with Saylor’s present amount of convertible debt which is at low or zero rates and is only https://www.strategy.com/. He’s been conservative on that front and only issuing on favorable terms. I don’t doubt Saylor’s prescience, intelligence or business sense one bit.

What got me thinking were some Twitter posts by a former Salomon Brothers trader/prophet Josh Mandell https://x.com/JoshMandell6/status/1921597739458339193 recently. In November when bitcoin was mooning after the election, he predicted that on March 14th it would close at $84,000, and if it did it would then go on an epic run up to $444,000 this cycle.

A lot of people make predictions, a few of them come true, but rarely do they come true on the dot (it closed at exactly $84K according to some exchanges) and on such a specific timeframe. Now, maybe he just got lucky, or maybe he is a skilled trader who made one good prediction, but the reason he gave for his prediction, insofar as he gave one, was not some technical chart or quantitative analysis, but a memory he had from 30 years ago that got into his mind that he couldn’t shake. He didn’t get much more specific than that, other than that he was tuned into something that if he explained fully would make too many people think he had gone insane. And then the prediction came true on the dot months later.

Now I believe in the paranormal more than the average person. I do not think things are random, and insofar as they appear that way it’s only because we have incomplete information — even a coin toss is predictable if you knew the exact force and spin that was put on the coin. I think for whatever reason, this guy is plugged into something, and while I would never invest a substantial amount of money on that belief — not only are earnestly-made prophecies often delusions or even if correct wrongly interpreted — that he sold makes me think.

He gave more substantive reasons for selling than prophecy, by the way — he seems to think Saylor’s perpetual issuance of shares ATM (at the market) to buy more bitcoin is putting too much downward pressure on the stock. Obviously, selling shares — even if to buy the world’s most pristine collateral at a 2x-plus mNAV — reduces the short-term appreciation of those shares.

His thesis seems to be that Saylor is doing this even if he would be better off letting the price appreciate more, attracting more investors, squeezing more shorts, etc because he needs to improve his credit rating to tap into the convertible debt market to the extent he has promised ($42 billion more over the next few years) at favorable terms. But in doing this, he is souring common stock investors because they are not seeing the near-term appreciation they should on their holdings.

Now this is a trivial concern if over the long haul MSTR does what it has the last couple years which is to outperform by a wide margin not only every large cap stock and the S&P but bitcoin itself. And the bigger his stack of bitcoin, the more his stock should appreciate as bitcoin goes up. But markets do not operate linearly and rationally. Should he sour prospective buyers to a great enough extent, should he attract shorts (and supply them with available shares to borrow) to a great enough extent, perhaps there might be an mNAV-crushing cascade that drives people into other bitcoin treasury companies, ETFs or bitcoin itself.

Now Saylor as first mover and by far the largest publicly-traded treasury company has a significant advantage. Institutions are far less likely to invest in size in smaller treasury companies with shorter track records, and many of them are not allowed to invest in ETFs or bitcoin at all. And even if a lot of money did go into any of those vehicles, it would only drive the value of his assets up and hence his stock price, no matter the mNAV. But Josh Mandell sold his shares prior to a weekend where bitcoin went from 102K to 104K, the US announced a deal with China, the mag-7 had a big spike (AAPL was up 6.3 percent) and then MSTR’s stock went down from 416 to 404. As I said, he is on to something.

So what’s the real long-term risk? I don’t know. Maybe there’s something about the nature of bitcoin that long-term is not really amenable to third-party custody and administration. It’s a bearer asset (“not your keys, not your coins”), and introducing counterparty risk is antithetical to its core purpose, the separation of money and state, or in this case money and bank.

With the bitcoin network you can literally “be your own bank.” To transact in digital dollars you need a bank account — or at least a stable coin one mediated by a centralized entity like Tether. You can’t hold digital dollars in your mind via some memorized seed words like you can bitcoin, accessible anywhere in the world, the ledger of which is maintained by tens of thousands of individually-run nodes. This property which democratizes value storage in the way gold did, except now you can wield your purchasing power globally, might be so antithetical to communal storage via corporation or bank that doing so is doomed to catastrophe.

We’ve already seen this happen with exchanges via FTX and Mt. Gox. Counterparty risk is one of the problems bitcoin was created to solve, so moving that risk from a fractionally reserved international banking system to corporate balance sheets still very much a part of that system is probably not the seismic advancement integral to the technology’s promise.

But this is more of a philosophical concern rather than a concrete one. To get more specific, it’s easy to imagine Coinbase, if indeed that’s where MSTR custodies its coins, gets hacked or https://www.chrisliss.com/p/soft-landing, i.e., seized by an increasingly desperate and insolvent government. Or maybe Coinbase simply doesn’t have the coins it purports like FTX, or a rogue band of employees, working on behalf of some powerful faction for “https://www.chrisliss.com/national-security-and-public-healt” executes the rug pull. Even if you deem these scenarios unlikely, they are not unfathomable.

Beyond outright counterparty malfeasance, there are other risks — what if owning common stock in an enterprise that simply holds bitcoin falls out of favor? Imagine if some new individual custody solution emerges wherein you have direct access to the coins themselves in an “even a boomer can do this” kind of way wherein there’s no compelling reason to own common stock with its junior claims to the capital stack in the event of insolvency? Why stand in line behind debt holders and preferred shares when you can invest in something that’s directly withdrawable and accessible if world events spike volatility to a systemic breaking point?

Things need not even get that rocky for this to be a concern — just the perception that they might could spook people into realizing common stock of a corporate balance sheet might be less than ideal as your custody solution.

Moreover, Saylor himself presents some risk. He could be compromised or blackmailed, he could lose his cool or get into an accident. These are low-probability scenarios, but also not unfathomable as any single point of failure is a target, especially for those factions who stand to lose unimaginable wealth and power should his speculative attack on the system succeed at scale.

Finally, even if Saylor remains free to operate as he sees fit, there is what I’d call the Icarus risk — he might be too ambitious, too hell-bent on acquiring bitcoin at all costs, too much of a maniac in service of his vision. Remember, he initially bought bitcoin during the covid crash and concomitant massive money print upon his prescient realization that businesses providing goods and services couldn’t possibly keep pace with inflation over the long haul. He was merely playing defense to preserve his capital, and now, despite his sizable lead and secured position is still throwing forward passes in the fourth quarter rather than running out the clock and securing the W.

Saylor is now arguably less a bitcoin maximalist and advocate, articulately making the case for superior money and individual sovereignty, but a corporate titan hell-bent on world domination via apex-predator-status balance sheet. When is enough enough? Many of the greatest conquerors in history pushed their empires too far until they fractured. In fact, 25 years ago MSTR was a big winner before the dot-com crash during which its stock price and most of Saylor’s fortune were wiped out when he was sued by the SEC for accounting fraud (he subsequently settled).

Now it’s possible, he learned from that experience, got up off the mat and figured out how to avoid his youthful mistakes. But it’s also possible his character is such that he will repeat it again, only this time at scale.

But as I said, my base case is MSTR is a trillion-dollar market cap, and the stock runs in parallel with bitcoin’s ascendance over the next decade. Saylor has been https://www.strategy.com/, prescient, bold and responsible so far over this iteration. I view Mandell’s concerns as valid, but similar to Wall St’s ones about AMZN’s Jeff Bezos who relentlessly ignored their insistence on profitability for a decade as he plowed every dollar into building out productive capacity and turned the company into the $2T world-dominating retail giant it is now.

Again, I haven’t (yet) sold any of my shares or even call options. But because I posted about this in January I felt I should at least follow-up with a more detailed rundown of what I take to be the risks. As always, do your own due diligence with any prospective investment.

@ 6ad3e2a3:c90b7740

When I was a kid, I wanted to be rich, but found the prospect of hard work tedious, pointless and soul-crushing. Instead of studying for exams, getting some job and clawing your way up the ladder, I wondered why we couldn’t just build a device that measured your brain capacity and awarded you the money you would have made had you applied yourself. Eliminate the middleman, so to speak, the useless paper pushing evoked by the word “career.”

But when you think about it, it’s not really money you’re after, as money is but purchasing power, and so it’s the things money can provide like a nice lifestyle and the peace of mind that comes from not worrying about it. And it’s not really the lifestyle or financial independence, per se, since moment to moment what’s in your bank account isn’t determining your mental state, but the feeling those things give you — a sense of expansiveness and freedom.

But if you did have such a machine, and it awarded you the money, you probably wouldn’t have that kind of expansiveness and freedom, especially if you did nothing to achieve those things. You would still feel bored, distracted and unsatisfied despite unrestricted means to travel or dine out as you saw fit. People who win the lottery, for example, tend to revert to their prior level of satisfaction in short order.

The feeling you really want then is the sense of rising to a challenge, negotiating and adapting to your environment, persevering in a state of uncertainty, tapping into your resourcefulness and creativity. It’s only while operating at the edge of your capacity you could ever be so fulfilled. In fact, in such a state the question of your satisfaction level would never come up. You wouldn’t even think to wonder about it you’d be so engrossed.

So what you really crave is a mind device that encourages you to adapt to your environment using your full creative capabilities in the present moment, so much so you realize if you do not do this, you have the sense of squandering your life in a tedious, pointless and soul-crushing way. You need to be totally stuck, without the option of turning back. In sum, you need to face reality exactly as it is, without any escape therefrom.

The measure of your mind in that case is your reality itself. The device is already with you — it’s the world you are presently creating with the consciousness you have, providing you avenues to escape, none of which are satisfactory, none that can lead to the state you truly desire. You have a choice to pursue them fruitlessly and wind up at square one, or to abandon them and attain your freedom. No matter how many times you go down a false road, you wind up at the same place until you give up on the Sisyphean task and proceed in earnest.

My childhood fantasy was real, it turns out, only I had misunderstood its meaning.

@ d360efec:14907b5f

Disclaimer: * การวิเคราะห์นี้เป็นเพียงแนวทาง ไม่ใช่คำแนะนำในการซื้อขาย * การลงทุนมีความเสี่ยง ผู้ลงทุนควรตัดสินใจด้วยตนเอง

@ 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.

@ bbb5dda0:f09e2747

My week 19 started with a celebration of 80 years of liberation from the Germans (we love you guys now tho 🫶🏼). It feels conflicting, we're celebrating freedom, whilst cutting down those freedoms day by day more rapidly as time progresses. Should we still celebrate...?

The current path back to freedom can be mundane in the day to day but I wouldn't wanna have it any other way. These last couple weeks I've continued working on our TollGate pipelines to facilitate our release cycle, make it faster and easier to release in quick succession. There's been a lot of details to get right, because our releases are nostr based and once people start relying on the structure of the events we can't easily change it.

A TollGateOS release event now looks like this NIP-94 file metadata event:

json { "id": "a867f15ca7edc95a69e1557539a624466147584f68c62a16c47fe9bca3778312", "pubkey": "5075e61f0b048148b60105c1dd72bbeae1957336ae5824087e52efa374f8416a", "created_at": 1747475980, "kind": 1063, "tags": [ [ "url", "https://blossom.swissdash.site/9e5e8c48810a1b59cf10fa56486f311e048a0305eb58444992b6133fd19fcb3e.bin" ], [ "m", "application/octet-stream" ], [ "x", "9e5e8c48810a1b59cf10fa56486f311e048a0305eb58444992b6133fd19fcb3e" ], [ "ox", "9e5e8c48810a1b59cf10fa56486f311e048a0305eb58444992b6133fd19fcb3e" ], [ "architecture", "aarch64_cortex-a53" ], [ "device_id", "glinet_gl-mt3000" ], [ "supported_devices", "glinet,gl-mt3000 glinet,mt3000-snand" ], [ "openwrt_version", "24.10.1" ], [ "tollgate_os_version", "v0.0.2" ], [ "release_channel", "stable" ] ], "content": "TollGate OS Firmware for glinet_gl-mt3000", "sig": "1d050233428304685d202e954cb48714c800a7ca5f2d6a8d8fd657a775b9c51bf83364505311859c846e25098168a8ff309af2308712aafe634fcbdc96fcd84a" }

One of the missing links was the supported_devices tag. That is because the installer checks the device name by ssh-ing into the router and it returns the glinet,gl-mt3000 which doesn't properly translate into the device_id, which is what's used for compiling the OS. So this helps us to do the lookups and compatibility checks in the installer.

I also worked on: - getting the versioning of the tollgate-basic package's naming in line with the OpenWRT naming convention. - Rework versioning for dev builds into [branchname].[commit_height].[commit_hash] which will show up on the dev release_channel releases. - Getting an initial release of the tollgate-installer done, so we can easily flash a bunch of routers to become TollGates.

Bright minds in Prague

I met up with some bright minds from the space in Prague where @cobrador and i did a workshop on turning routers into TollGates and start earning sats. As is part of building things, things break and people make us aware of issues that we wouldn't foresee. Like for some reason Minibits cashu tokens being rejected, which is likely because of the memo's but we still need to dive into that issue.

Also we released [v0.0.2] of TollGate OS, which now includes an updater feature, again for faster release cycles. Currently we're focussing on getting a v0.0.3 out quickly with fixes for the user feedback we've gathered so far!

Receipt.Cash

I also, kind of unplanned, saw an opportunity to shill Receipt.Cash. I'd made a few improvements recently and it's ready enough for reckless people to try it out ;).

| | | | | | Payer Scans any fiat receipt & Share link with friends | Friends tap what they had, price is auto-converted to sats, then pay by Lightning or Cashu. | If you want to try it, BE CAREFUL! It is highly experimental and you might lose your sats, no refunds!

Source Code here.

@ 3770c235:16042bcc

In recent years, a remarkable transformation has taken place in the way people view and utilize their homes. No longer confined to the four walls of traditional interior spaces, homeowners are increasingly turning their attention outward—toward their own backyards. The concept of outdoor living has evolved from mere patio furniture and barbecues to fully functional living environments, equipped with kitchens, entertainment systems, and even workspaces.

This growing trend is not just a design choice; it reflects changing lifestyles, shifting priorities, and a reimagining of what it means to feel at home. The rise of outdoor living is more than a fad—it's a movement, and it's here to stay.

**A Shift in Lifestyle and Values ** At the heart of the outdoor living boom is a deeper shift in how people value their time, environment, and personal space. The COVID-19 pandemic played a significant role in this evolution. Lockdowns and restrictions forced many to reassess their living situations, seeking ways to make the most of what they already had. The backyard, once overlooked, suddenly became a sanctuary—a space to breathe, gather, and escape the monotony of indoor life.

According to a 2021 study by the International Casual Furnishings Association, over 90% of Americans with outdoor living space report that it is more valuable to them than ever before, with nearly 60% saying they upgraded their outdoor spaces during the pandemic source.

This change in perception is not solely pandemic-related. There's a growing emphasis on wellness, mindfulness, and balance. People are looking to nature for inspiration and relaxation. Outdoor living spaces—be they modest balconies or expansive decks—allow homeowners to connect with nature without leaving the comfort of home.

Redefining the Backyard: From Playgrounds to Living Rooms

Traditionally, the backyard has served specific purposes—gardening, children’s play areas, maybe a grill tucked in the corner. Today, backyards are being reimagined as multi-functional extensions of the home.

1. Outdoor Kitchens and Dining Areas Once considered a luxury, outdoor kitchens have become increasingly common. With built-in grills, pizza ovens, refrigerators, sinks, and full countertops, these outdoor culinary spaces rival their indoor counterparts. The convenience of preparing and serving meals outside is matched by the social benefit: cooking becomes a shared experience.

2. Living and Lounge Areas Outdoor seating now goes far beyond foldable lawn chairs. Modular sectionals, fire pits, weather-resistant rugs, and even smart lighting have turned patios into legitimate living rooms under the sky. Some include mounted TVs, Bluetooth speakers, and retractable canopies or pergolas for all-weather comfort.

3. Work and Study Zones Remote work has blurred the boundaries between office and home. Now, it’s expanding into the outdoors. With Wi-Fi extenders, weather-protected furniture, and shade structures, backyards are becoming viable home office environments, perfect for Zoom calls with a natural backdrop.

4. Wellness Retreats From hot tubs and saunas to yoga decks and meditation gardens, outdoor spaces are being tailored to support wellness. These personal sanctuaries offer solitude and stress relief, all within the perimeter of one's property.

The Role of Technology and Innovation Modern outdoor spaces owe much of their versatility to advances in technology and materials. Weather-resistant fabrics, composite decking, solar lighting, and smart irrigation systems have all expanded what's possible in backyard design.

Smart home technology has also made its way outdoors. Lighting can be automated or voice-controlled. Outdoor speakers can be synced across zones. Even grills can be connected to apps that monitor cooking temperatures. These innovations allow outdoor living to be both luxurious and convenient, requiring minimal maintenance while offering maximum comfort.

**Economic Impact and Value Addition ** Investing in outdoor living isn't just about lifestyle—it’s also smart economics. Outdoor upgrades can significantly boost a home's resale value. A well-designed patio or outdoor kitchen can yield a return on investment (ROI) of up to 80%, according to the National Association of Realtors. In fact, data from Houzz shows that nearly 57% of homeowners are investing in their outdoor spaces specifically to increase resale value source.

This financial motivation has fueled demand for landscape architects, outdoor furniture designers, and construction professionals specializing in outdoor living projects. As a result, the industry surrounding outdoor enhancements—from pergola manufacturers to luxury fire pit designers—has seen exponential growth.

Environmental Considerations and Sustainability As outdoor living becomes more popular, so does the demand for environmentally conscious design. Homeowners are increasingly incorporating sustainable elements into their outdoor plans, including: • Native plant landscaping: Reduces water usage and supports local ecosystems. • Rainwater harvesting systems: Collect and store rain for garden irrigation. • Solar-powered lighting: Minimizes energy consumption while maximizing ambiance. • Permeable paving materials: Reduce runoff and promote groundwater recharge. Green living isn't just a buzzword—it’s influencing how people design their outdoor sanctuaries. Eco-conscious homeowners are prioritizing sustainability as much as aesthetics, ensuring their outdoor spaces are in harmony with nature, not in conflict with it.

The Social Connection

Outdoor living also taps into our basic need for connection. From summer barbecues to cozy firepit gatherings, the backyard is an ideal setting for meaningful social interactions. During a time when indoor gatherings have been restricted or limited, outdoor spaces have offered a safer, more accessible alternative.

Community ties can also be strengthened through outdoor living. In urban settings, rooftop terraces or shared gardens create communal spaces for neighbors to engage, collaborate, and unwind. For families, these outdoor extensions offer a way to spend quality time together—whether through games, meals, or simply enjoying the open air. For individuals, they provide a space to recharge, free from the digital and physical clutter of indoor life.

Customization and Personalization

One of the most appealing aspects of outdoor living is the high degree of customization available. Unlike interior spaces that may be limited by architectural constraints, outdoor areas can often be more flexible in layout and design.

Homeowners can craft outdoor environments that reflect their personalities and values: • The entertainer may opt for a bar area, ambient lighting, and surround sound. • The minimalist might choose clean lines, neutral tones, and eco-friendly materials. • The nature-lover may emphasize greenery, water features, and natural textures. DIY options also abound, allowing for creative freedom and budget-friendly upgrades. Raised garden beds, handmade furniture, repurposed materials, and vertical planters give individuals the opportunity to leave their personal mark on the space.

The Influence of Global Design Trends Outdoor living isn’t confined to North America. Around the world, cultures have long embraced outdoor spaces—from Japanese zen gardens to Mediterranean courtyards. The current global design conversation draws inspiration from a variety of traditions and climates.

Scandinavian principles of simplicity and functionality influence clean-lined, open-air designs, while tropical resorts have inspired lush, greenery-filled retreats in suburban settings. The blending of international styles enables homeowners to create outdoor spaces that are both eclectic and functional.

Looking Ahead: The Future of Outdoor Living The trajectory of outdoor living points to continued growth, innovation, and integration. Here are some trends likely to define the next decade:

1. Year-Round Use With heating lamps, insulated pergolas, and all-weather furniture, outdoor spaces are becoming viable in all seasons. Expect to see more designs tailored for winter, including hot tubs, enclosed lounges, and warm lighting features.
2. Outdoor Smart Hubs Technology will play an even greater role, with integrated outdoor control systems for lighting, security, irrigation, and entertainment—managed through a single device or app.
3. Edible Landscaping Gardens will not only be for beauty but also for sustenance. Raised vegetable beds, fruit trees, and herb walls will become staples in functional outdoor design.
4. Modular Design Portable and adaptable elements like movable walls, foldable furniture, and hybrid indoor-outdoor structures will offer more flexibility, especially in smaller spaces.
5. Wellness Integration Expect an even stronger emphasis on health and well-being—cold plunge pools, outdoor gyms, meditation pods, and immersive natural soundscapes will take center stage.

---

Conclusion The rise of outdoor living is not just a design phenomenon—it’s a cultural shift. Homeowners are recognizing the value of outdoor spaces as extensions of their identities, routines, and dreams. Whether it's a serene garden, a vibrant entertainment hub, or a cozy work nook, the backyard is being redefined as a vital part of the home. In a world that often feels fast-paced and digitally overloaded, outdoor living offers a much-needed antidote: space to breathe, relax, connect, and thrive. It’s about more than upgrading the home—it’s about enhancing the human experience. As this trend continues to evolve, one thing is clear: the best room in the house may not be inside at all.

@ 472f440f:5669301e

Marty's Bent

via me

Don't sleep on what's happening in Japan right now. We've been covering the country and the fact that they've lost control of their yield curve since late last year. After many years of making it a top priority from a monetary policy perspective, last year the Bank of Japan decided to give up on yield curve control in an attempt to reel inflation. This has sent yields for the 30-year and 40-year Japanese government bonds to levels not seen since the early 2000s in the case of the 30-year and levels never before seen for the 40-year, which was launched in 2007. With a debt to GDP ratio that has surpassed 250% and a population that is aging out with an insufficient amount of births to replace the aging workforce, it's hard to see how Japan can get out of this conundrum without some sort of economic collapse.

This puts the United States in a tough position considering the fact that Japan is one of the largest holders of U.S. Treasury bonds with more than 1,135 sats | $1.20 trillion in exposure. If things get too out of control in Japan and the yield curve continues to drift higher and inflation continues to creep higher Japan can find itself in a situation where it's a forced seller of US Treasuries as they attempt to strengthen the yen. Another aspect to consider is the fact that investors may see the higher yields on Japanese government bonds and decide to purchase them instead of US Treasuries. This is something to keep an eye on in the weeks to come. Particularly if higher rates drive a higher cost of capital, which leads to even more inflation. As producers are forced to increase their prices to ensure that they can manage their debt repayments.

It's never a good sign when the Japanese Prime Minister is coming out to proclaim that his country's financial situation is worse than Greece's, which has been a laughing stock of Europe for the better part of three decades. Japan is a very proud nation, and the fact that its Prime Minister made a statement like this should not be underappreciated.

As we noted last week, the 10-year and 30-year U.S. Treasury bonds are drifting higher as well. Earlier today, the 30-year bond yield surpassed 5%, which has been a psychological level that many have been pointed to as a critical tipping point. When you take a step back and look around the world it seems pretty clear that bond markets are sending a very strong signal. And that signal is that something is not well in the back end of the financial system.

This is even made clear when you look at the private sector, particularly at consumer debt. In late March, we warned of the growing trend of buy now, pay later schemes drifting down market as major credit card companies released charge-off data which showed charge-off rates reaching levels not seen since the 2008 great financial crisis. At the time, we could only surmise that Klarna was experiencing similar charge-off rates on the bigger-ticket items they financed and started doing deals with companies like DoorDash to finance burrito deliveries in an attempt to move down market to finance smaller ticket items with a higher potential of getting paid back. It seems like that inclination was correct as Klarna released data earlier today showing more losses on their book as consumers find it extremely hard to pay back their debts.

via NewsWire

This news hit the markets on the same day as the average rate of the 30-year mortgage in the United States rose to 7.04%. I'm not sure if you've checked lately, but real estate prices are still relatively elevated outside of a few big cities who expanded supply significantly during the COVID era as people flooded out of blue states towards red states. It's hard to imagine that many people can afford a house based off of sticker price alone, but with a 7% 30-year mortgage rate it's becoming clear that the ability of the Common Man to buy a house is simply becoming impossible.

via Lance Lambert

The mortgage rate data is not the only thing you need to look at to understand that it's becoming impossible for the Common Man of working age to buy a house. New data has recently been released that highlights That the median home buyer in 2007 was born in 1968, and the median home buyer in 2024 was born in 1968. Truly wild when you think of it. As our friend Darth Powell cheekily highlights below, we find ourselves in a situation where boomers are simply trading houses and the younger generations are becoming indentured slaves. Forever destined to rent because of the complete inability to afford to buy a house.

via Darth Powell

via Yahoo Finance

Meanwhile, Bitcoin re-approached all-time highs late this evening and looks primed for another breakout to the upside. This makes sense if you're paying attention. The high-velocity trash economy running on an obscene amount of debt in both the public and private sectors seems to be breaking at the seams. All the alarm bells are signaling that another big print is coming. And if you hope to preserve your purchasing power or, ideally, increase it as the big print approaches, the only thing that makes sense is to funnel your money into the hardest asset in the world, which is Bitcoin.

via Bitbo

Buckle up, freaks. It's gonna be a bumpy ride. Stay humble, Stack Sats.

Trump's Middle East Peace Strategy: Redefining U.S. Foreign Policy

In his recent Middle East tour, President Trump signaled what our guest Dr. Anas Alhajji calls "a major change in US policy." Trump explicitly rejected the nation-building strategies of his predecessors, contrasting the devastation in Afghanistan and Iraq with the prosperity of countries like Saudi Arabia and UAE. This marks a profound shift from both Republican and Democratic foreign policy orthodoxy. As Alhajji noted, Trump's willingness to meet with Syrian President Assad follows a historical pattern where former adversaries eventually become diplomatic partners.

"This is really one of the most important shifts in US foreign policy to say, look, sorry, we destroyed those countries because we tried to rebuild them and it was a big mistake." - Dr. Anas Alhajji

The administration's new approach emphasizes negotiation over intervention. Rather than military solutions, Trump is engaging with groups previously considered off-limits, including the Houthis, Hamas, and Iran. This pragmatic stance prioritizes economic cooperation and regional stability over ideological confrontation. The focus on trade deals and investment rather than regime change represents a fundamental reimagining of America's role in the Middle East.

Check out the full podcast here for more on the Iran nuclear situation, energy market predictions, and why AI development could create power grid challenges. Only on TFTC Studio.

Headlines of the Day

Bitcoin Soars to 100,217 sats | $106.00K While Bonds Lose 40% Since 2020 - via X

US Senate Advances Stablecoin Bill As America Embraces Bitcoin - via X

Get our new STACK SATS hat - via tftcmerch.io

Texas House Debates Bill For State-Run Bitcoin Reserve - via X

---

Take the First Step Off the Exchange

Bitkey is an easy, secure way to move your Bitcoin into self-custody. With simple setup and built-in recovery, it’s the perfect starting point for getting your coins off centralized platforms and into cold storage—no complexity, no middlemen.

Take control. Start with Bitkey.

Use the promo code “TFTC20” during checkout for 20% off

---

Ten31, the largest bitcoin-focused investor, has deployed 158,469 sats | $150.00M across 30+ companies through three funds. I am a Managing Partner at Ten31 and am very proud of the work we are doing. Learn more at ten31.vc/invest.

---

Final thought...

Don't let the noise consume you. Focus on making your life 1% better every day.

---

Get this newsletter sent to your inbox daily: https://www.tftc.io/bitcoin-brief/

Subscribe to our YouTube channels and follow us on Nostr and X:

@ b04082ac:29b5c55b

Money has always been more than a medium of exchange. It reflects what societies value, how they organize trust, and what they choose to remember. This article explores the idea that money functions as a form of collective memory, and how Bitcoin may be restoring this role in a new way.

The Asante Example

In the Asante Empire, which flourished in West Africa during the 18th and 19th centuries, gold dust served as the primary medium of exchange. To measure it, traders used ornate spoons made of brass. These spoons were often carved with birds, animals, or abstract symbols. They were not currency themselves, but tools used to handle gold dust accurately.

Importantly, these spoons also carried meaning. Symbols and proverbs embedded in the spoons conveyed lessons about honesty, community, and continuity. For example, the Sankofa bird, shown turning its head backward to retrieve an egg from its back, represented the proverb, “It is not wrong to go back for that which you have forgotten.” This was a reminder to learn from the past.

The spoons reflect an understanding that money and its instruments are not just practical tools. They are cultural artifacts that store shared values. In the Asante context, even measurement was ritualized and tied to ethics and memory.

Money as a Cultural Medium

This connection between money and cultural meaning is not unique to the Asante Empire. Modern fiat currencies also carry symbols, phrases, and designs that reflect national identity and political values.

The U.S. dollar includes Latin phrases and national symbols meant to convey stability and purpose. The British pound features royal iconography, reinforcing the idea of continuity and sovereignty. When the euro was introduced, it deliberately avoided specific national references. Itsdesign used bridges and windowsto suggest openness and cooperation across the continent.

These design choices show that societies still embed meaning into their money. Even in a digital or fiat context, money is used to transmit a story about who we are, where authority lies, and what we value.

The Fragility of Fiat Memory

While fiat money carries cultural symbols, the narratives behind those symbols can be fragile.

In 2021, the central bank of the Philippines removed democratic leaders from its banknotes,triggering public criticism. In the United States, attempts to replace Andrew Jackson with Harriet Tubman on the $20 billfaced repeated delays. These examples show how political control over money includes control over what stories are told and remembered.

Unlike objects passed down through generations, fiat memory can be edited or erased. In this sense, it is vulnerable. The meaning encoded in fiat systems can shift depending on who holds power.

Bitcoin as a New Form of Memory

Bitcoin is described as digital money. But it also introduces a different model of how societies can record value and preserve meaning.

The Bitcoin network launched in 2009 with a small message embedded in its first block: “Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks.” This was a reference to a newspaper headline that day and a clear sign of protest against financial bailouts, centralized monetary policy, and forever wars.

This moment marked the beginning of a system where memory is stored differently. Instead of relying on governments or institutions, Bitcoin stores its history on a public ledger maintained by a decentralized network of participants. Its memory is not symbolic or political; it is structural. Every transaction, every block, is preserved through time-stamped computation and consensus.

No single authority can change it. The rules are clear and publicly auditable. In this way, Bitcoin offers a version of money where memory is both neutral and resilient.

Cultural Expression and Community Values

Even though Bitcoin lacks the traditional symbols found on banknotes, it has developed its own culture. Phrases like “Don’t trust, verify” or “Stay humble, stack sats” are shared widely in the Bitcoin community. These ideas reflect a focus on self-responsibility, verification, and long-term thinking.

These proverbs can be compared to the carved messages on the Asante spoons. While the contexts are very different, the underlying idea is similar: a community using language and symbols to reinforce its shared values.

Bitcoin also has a well established and growing art scene. Bitcoin conferences often feature dedicated sections for art inspired by the protocol and its culture. Statues of Satoshi Nakamoto have been installed in cities like Budapest, Lugano, and Fornelli. These physical works reflect the desire to link Bitcoin’s abstract values to something tangible.

Looking Back to Look Forward

The Asante example helps us see that money has long been tied to memory and meaning. Their spoons were practical tools but also cultural anchors. Bitcoin, while new and digital, may be playing a similar role.

Instead of relying on political symbols or national myths, Bitcoin uses code, transparency, and global consensus to create trust. In doing so, it offers a way to preserve economic memory that does not depend on power or politics.

It’s still early to know what kind of legacy Bitcoin will leave. But if it succeeds, it may not just change how money works. It may also change how civilizations remember.

@ 40bdcc08:ad00fd2c

Introduction

Bitcoin’s OP_RETURN opcode, a mechanism for embedding small data in transactions, has ignited a significant debate within the Bitcoin community. Originally designed to support limited metadata while preserving Bitcoin’s role as a peer-to-peer electronic cash system, OP_RETURN is now at the center of proposals that could redefine Bitcoin’s identity. The immutable nature of Bitcoin’s timechain makes it an attractive platform for data storage, creating tension with those who prioritize its monetary function. This discussion, particularly around Bitcoin Core pull request #32406 (GitHub PR #32406), highlights a critical juncture for Bitcoin’s future.

What is OP_RETURN?

Introduced in 2014, OP_RETURN allows users to attach up to 80 bytes of data to a Bitcoin transaction. Unlike other transaction outputs, OP_RETURN outputs are provably unspendable, meaning they don’t burden the Unspent Transaction Output (UTXO) set—a critical database for Bitcoin nodes. This feature was a compromise to provide a standardized, less harmful way to include metadata, addressing earlier practices that embedded data in ways that bloated the UTXO set. The 80-byte limit and restriction to one OP_RETURN output per transaction are part of Bitcoin Core’s standardness rules, which guide transaction relay and mining but are not enforced by the network’s consensus rules (Bitcoin Stack Exchange).

Standardness vs. Consensus Rules

Standardness rules are Bitcoin Core’s default policies for relaying and mining transactions. They differ from consensus rules, which define what transactions are valid across the entire network. For OP_RETURN: - Consensus Rules: Allow OP_RETURN outputs with data up to the maximum script size (approximately 10,000 bytes) and multiple outputs per transaction (Bitcoin Stack Exchange). - Standardness Rules: Limit OP_RETURN data to 80 bytes and one output per transaction to discourage excessive data storage and maintain network efficiency.

Node operators can adjust these policies using settings like -datacarrier (enables/disables OP_RETURN relay) and -datacarriersize (sets the maximum data size, defaulting to 83 bytes to account for the OP_RETURN opcode and pushdata byte). These settings allow flexibility but reflect Bitcoin Core’s default stance on limiting data usage.

The Proposal: Pull Request #32406

Bitcoin Core pull request #32406, proposed by developer instagibbs, seeks to relax these standardness restrictions (GitHub PR #32406). Key changes include: - Removing Default Size Limits: The default -datacarriersize would be uncapped, allowing larger OP_RETURN data without a predefined limit. - Allowing Multiple Outputs: The restriction to one OP_RETURN output per transaction would be lifted, with the total data size across all outputs subject to a configurable limit. - Deprecating Configuration Options: The -datacarrier and -datacarriersize settings are marked as deprecated, signaling potential removal in future releases, which could limit node operators’ ability to enforce custom restrictions.

This proposal does not alter consensus rules, meaning miners and nodes can already accept transactions with larger or multiple OP_RETURN outputs. Instead, it changes Bitcoin Core’s default relay policy to align with existing practices, such as miners accepting non-standard transactions via services like Marathon Digital’s Slipstream (CoinDesk).

Node Operator Flexibility

Currently, node operators can customize OP_RETURN handling: - Default Settings: Relay transactions with one OP_RETURN output up to 80 bytes. - Custom Settings: Operators can disable OP_RETURN relay (-datacarrier=0) or adjust the size limit (e.g., -datacarriersize=100). These options remain in #32406 but are deprecated, suggesting that future Bitcoin Core versions might not support such customization, potentially standardizing the uncapped policy.

Arguments in Favor of Relaxing Limits

Supporters of pull request #32406 and similar proposals argue that the current restrictions are outdated and ineffective. Their key points include: - Ineffective Limits: Developers bypass the 80-byte limit using methods like Inscriptions, which store data in other transaction parts, often at higher cost and inefficiency (BitcoinDev Mailing List). Relaxing OP_RETURN could channel data into a more efficient format. - Preventing UTXO Bloat: By encouraging OP_RETURN use, which doesn’t affect the UTXO set, the proposal could reduce reliance on harmful alternatives like unspendable Taproot outputs used by projects like Citrea’s Clementine bridge. - Supporting Innovation: Projects like Citrea require more data (e.g., 144 bytes) for security proofs, and relaxed limits could enable new Layer 2 solutions (CryptoSlate). - Code Simplification: Developers like Peter Todd argue that these limits complicate Bitcoin Core’s codebase unnecessarily (CoinGeek). - Aligning with Practice: Miners already process non-standard transactions, and uncapping defaults could improve fee estimation and reduce reliance on out-of-band services, as noted by ismaelsadeeq in the pull request discussion.

In the GitHub discussion, developers like Sjors and TheCharlatan expressed support (Concept ACK), citing these efficiency and innovation benefits.

Arguments Against Relaxing Limits

Opponents, including prominent developers and community members, raise significant concerns about the implications of these changes: - Deviation from Bitcoin’s Purpose: Critics like Luke Dashjr, who called the proposal “utter insanity,” argue that Bitcoin’s base layer should prioritize peer-to-peer cash, not data storage (CoinDesk). Jason Hughes warned it could turn Bitcoin into a “worthless altcoin” (BeInCrypto). - Blockchain Bloat: Additional data increases the storage and processing burden on full nodes, potentially making node operation cost-prohibitive and threatening decentralization (CryptoSlate). - Network Congestion: Unrestricted data could lead to “spam” transactions, raising fees and hindering Bitcoin’s use for financial transactions. - Risk of Illicit Content: The timechain’s immutability means data, including potentially illegal or objectionable content, is permanently stored on every node. The 80-byte limit acts as a practical barrier, and relaxing it could exacerbate this issue. - Preserving Consensus: Developers like John Carvalho view the limits as a hard-won community agreement, not to be changed lightly.

In the pull request discussion, nsvrn and moth-oss expressed concerns about spam and centralization, advocating for gradual changes. Concept NACKs from developers like wizkid057 and Luke Dashjr reflect strong opposition.

Community Feedback

The GitHub discussion for pull request #32406 shows a divided community: - Support (Concept ACK): Sjors, polespinasa, ismaelsadeeq, miketwenty1, TheCharlatan, Psifour. - Opposition (Concept NACK): wizkid057, BitcoinMechanic, Retropex, nsvrn, moth-oss, Luke Dashjr. - Other: Peter Todd provided a stale ACK, indicating partial or outdated support.

Additional discussions on the BitcoinDev mailing list and related pull requests (e.g., #32359 by Peter Todd) highlight similar arguments, with #32359 proposing a more aggressive removal of all OP_RETURN limits and configuration options (GitHub PR #32359).

| Feedback Type | Developers | Key Points | |---------------|------------|------------| | Concept ACK | Sjors, ismaelsadeeq, others | Improves efficiency, supports innovation, aligns with mining practices. | | Concept NACK | Luke Dashjr, wizkid057, others | Risks bloat, spam, centralization, and deviation from Bitcoin’s purpose. | | Stale ACK | Peter Todd | Acknowledges proposal but with reservations or outdated support. |

Workarounds and Their Implications

The existence of workarounds, such as Inscriptions, which exploit SegWit discounts to embed data, is a key argument for relaxing OP_RETURN limits. These methods are costlier and less efficient, often costing more than OP_RETURN for data under 143 bytes (BitcoinDev Mailing List). Supporters argue that formalizing larger OP_RETURN data could streamline these use cases. Critics, however, see workarounds as a reason to strengthen, not weaken, restrictions, emphasizing the need to address underlying incentives rather than accommodating bypasses.

Ecosystem Pressures

External factors influence the debate: - Miners: Services like Marathon Digital’s Slipstream process non-standard transactions for a fee, showing that market incentives already bypass standardness rules. - Layer 2 Projects: Citrea’s Clementine bridge, requiring more data for security proofs, exemplifies the demand for relaxed limits to support innovative applications. - Community Dynamics: The debate echoes past controversies, like the Ordinals debate, where data storage via inscriptions raised similar concerns about Bitcoin’s purpose (CoinDesk).

Bitcoin’s Identity at Stake

The OP_RETURN debate is not merely technical but philosophical, questioning whether Bitcoin should remain a focused monetary system or evolve into a broader data platform. Supporters see relaxed limits as a pragmatic step toward efficiency and innovation, while opponents view them as a risk to Bitcoin’s decentralization, accessibility, and core mission. The community’s decision will have lasting implications, affecting node operators, miners, developers, and users.

Conclusion

As Bitcoin navigates this crossroads, the community must balance the potential benefits of relaxed OP_RETURN limits—such as improved efficiency and support for new applications—against the risks of blockchain bloat, network congestion, and deviation from its monetary roots. The ongoing discussion, accessible via pull request #32406 on GitHub (GitHub PR #32406). Readers are encouraged to explore the debate and contribute to ensuring that any changes align with Bitcoin’s long-term goals as a decentralized, secure, and reliable system.

@ a296b972:e5a7a2e8

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Dieser Artikel wurde mit dem Pareto-Client geschrieben

* *

(Bild von pixabay)

@ 88cc134b:5ae99079

content

nostr:nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzpkygz22lv3pdey6gr7ygmk67wjh24hdvj3t797mm6z0x3ax4erdhqqsdxy48qm3tces0tu90shwltcg20zsprejkahklwftpzyhytcf32tc9sm779

@ a296b972:e5a7a2e8

Die Natur strebt nach einem Gleichgewicht durch Ausgleich von nicht zueinander passenden Verhältnissen. Die Gesellschaft ist ein sozialer Organismus, der ebenso nach Ausgleich und einer Stimmigkeit der Verhältnisse strebt. Das sind Naturgesetze, die keine Regierung auf Dauer imstande ist, außer Kraft zu setzen.

Weder oppositionelle Kräfte, noch Kräfte innerhalb des Souveräns haben die Absicht, die Demokratie abzuschaffen. Es geht vielmehr darum, sie wieder in der Form herzustellen, in der sie ihren Namen auch verdient. Dazu gehört, dass alle Macht vom Volke ausgeht, was derzeit nicht der Fall ist.

Ein durch den Staat vorgegebenes Bildungssystem hat Menschen vor allem zu gefügigen Rädchen im Wirtschaftsgetriebe und nicht zu alles kritisch hinterfragenden Bürgern erzogen, die ständig der Regierung auf die Finger schauen.

Wenn die Bürger, der Souverän, eine Regierung immer mehr „machen lässt“ und glaubt, es sei genug, alle 4 Jahre sein Wahl-Kreuzchen zu machen, entfernt er sich immer mehr von der Kontrolle der durch ihn beauftragten Vertreter, und diese entfernen sich so immer mehr vom Alltag der Bürger.

Zu wenig Gegenrede des Souveräns führt zu immer mehr Übermut der Regierung, die sich immer sicherer wird, mit jedem Unsinn durchzukommen.

Ist dann die Schmerzgrenze des Souveräns erreicht, beginnt er, die Opposition zu stärken. In einer funktionierenden Demokratie würde das dazu führen, dass die Opposition die Regierung bildet, die dann die Chance hat, Fehlentwicklungen abzustellen und ausgleichend tätig zu werden.

Derzeit findet sowohl beim Souverän, als auch bei den Parteien, die bisher Regierungen zusammengestellt haben, ein Erwachen statt.

Da die ehemaligen Volks-Parteien unbedingt an der Macht festhalten wollen, seitens des Souveräns auf zu wenig Widerstand stoßen, wird mit der Macht, einer Demokratie nicht würdig, umgegangen. Dem sollte dringend Einhalt geboten werden.

Der Missbrauch äußert sich in brutalen (Lieblingswort der Ex-Außen-Dings) Einschränkungen der Grundrechte (Corona-Zeit), in der Einschränkung der Meinungsfreiheit (D S A), in Tendenzen zunehmender Kontrolle und Überwachung, Förderung von Denunzianten-Portalen, Kapern des öffentlich-rechtlichen Rundfunks, Förderung von NGOs, die als Sprechpuppen genutzt werden. Besetzt von Menschen, die entweder tatsächlich überzeugt sind von dem, was sie ideologisch vertreten, oder die über Charaktereigenschaften verfügen, die noch sehr viel Optimierungspotenzial in sich bergen. Gepaart mit fachlicher Inkompetenz ist das ein gefährlicher Cocktail.

Erst jüngst sogar durch Ausreiseverbote, wie in einem Staat, mit dem man das derzeitige Deutschland nicht vergleichen darf. So groß ist inzwischen schon die Angst geworden, die Kontrolle über die Macht zu verlieren. Alles, was an Kritik geäußert werden will, gilt als Delegitimierung des Staates. Auf keinen Fall darf sie im Ausland geäußert werden, damit es ja nichts davon mitbekommt, was in Deutschland abgeht. Das ist so wie ein Kind, dass sich die Hände vor die Augen hält und meint, es würde nicht gesehen werden.

Die Regierung ist übergriffig geworden. Je lauter sie Demokratie schreit, desto totalitärer wird sie.

Durch fehlende Kontrolle des Souveräns sind charakterlich und fachlich ungeeignete Personen in die Politik gelangt, deren ständige Überforderung dazu führt, dass sich deren Entscheidungen immer weiter von der Lebensrealität des Souveräns entfernen.

Bislang haben rund 25% des Souveräns diese Schieflage erkannt und wollen einer Opposition, die so stark geworden ist, weil die Alt-Parteien über Jahre Fehler an Fehler aneinandergereiht haben, die Gelegenheit geben, diese Fehler zu beheben und auszugleichen. Offen bleibt die Frage, ob sie dazu wirklich in der Lage sind, oder ob die Gefahr besteht, dass sie von einem möglicherweise grundsätzlich kranken System vereinnahmt werden.

Da es seitens der Alt-Parteien keine Einsicht gibt, dass sie in der Regierung nicht mehr den Willen des Souveräns vertreten, derzeit auch besonders gut zu sehen an dem Friedenswillen des Souveräns im Vergleich zur Kriegstreiberei der Regierung, bleibt nur, der Opposition zumindest die Chance zu geben, es besser zu machen und den Willen des Souveräns umzusetzen. Gelänge das nicht, ist die Demokratie, wie wir sie bislang verstanden haben, gescheitert.

Eine daraus resultierende Staatsform stünde dem Freiheitsgedanken diametral gegenüber.

Die Verteidigung von Unseredemokratie seitens der Regierung entlarvt das eigentliche, was damit gemeint ist, nämlich die Erhaltung der eigenen Macht, verbunden mit allen Vorzügen und Privilegien. Sie richtet sich gegen das eigene Volk, das mit einer ganz normal funktionierenden Demokratie schon sehr zufrieden wäre. Unseredemokratie ist nicht unsere Demokratie!

In Anlehnung an die berühmt gewordene Lüge Walter Ulbrichs: „Niemand hat die Absicht eine Mauer zu errichten“, hat derzeit niemand die Absicht, die sogenannte Brandmauer einzureißen, bzw. sie so lange stehen zu lassen, wie es eben geht, um die herrschenden Machtverhältnisse so lange wie möglich aufrechtzuerhalten. Die Geschichte hat jedoch zum Glück gezeigt, dass selbst eine Berliner Mauer nicht ewig hält.

Wie sich aus dem absurd-lächerlichen Gutachten, einer der Regierung gegenüber weisungsgebundenen Behörde herausgestellt hat, gibt es keinerlei Anzeichen dafür, dass die Opposition die demokratische Grundordnung weder gefährden noch beseitigen will.

Da die ehemaligen Volksparteien augenscheinlich nicht in der Lage sind, politische, wirtschaftliche und gesellschaftliche Verhältnisse zum Wohle des Deutschen Volkes herzustellen, ist der demokratische Weg, die Opposition hierzu zu ermächtigen.

Wird das weiterhin verhindert, wird der Unmut des Souveräns weiter zunehmen, und spätestens, wenn die zunehmenden Schikanen die Schmerzgrenze überschritten haben, wird der Souverän nach geeigneten Mitteln und Möglichkeiten suchen, diese Schieflage zu beheben und auszugleichen.

Derzeit stehen sich ein in der Zahl und im Befinden zunehmend unzufrieden werdender Souverän und eine immer absurdere Entscheidungen treffende Regierung im lebendigen Tauziehen um Interessen gegenüber. Je mehr Bockmist die Alt-Parteien bauen, um so stärker wird die Opposition.

Aufgrund der jetzt schon vorhandenen Anzahl wacher Bürger und der Anzahl der in der Politik Unfähigen, ist eigentlich schon jetzt klar, wer in diesem Tauziehen die größere Kraft hat und wer das „Spiel“ nach demokratischen Regeln am Ende gewinnen wird. Das ist eindeutig der Souverän. Verliert er, wider Erwarten, verliert auch die Demokratie.

Dem Souverän fehlt nur noch ein wenig mehr Selbstvertrauen und ein Bewusstsein für die Macht, über die er tatsächlich verfügt.

Je mehr absurde Entscheidungen seitens der Regierung getroffen werden, und man arbeitet ja sehr fleißig daran, besonders, wenn es um Frieden geht, desto stärker wird das Selbstbewusstsein des Souveräns werden und ein natürlicher, friedlicher Ausgleich der Schieflage kann stattfinden. Der Start der neuen Regierung war jedenfalls schon einmal sehr "Keine-4-Jahre".

Wer sich in die steile und eisglatte Abfahrtspiste Deutschlands vertiefen will, hier eine Rezension zu dem Buch „Im Taumel des Niedergangs“ von dem von mir sehr geschätzten und akribisch arbeitenden Uwe Froschauer:

https://www.manova.news/artikel/abwarts

oder

https://wassersaege.com/blogbeitraege/abwaerts-rezension-des-buches-im-taumel-des-niedergangs-von-uwe-froschauer/

Dieser Artikel wurde mit dem Pareto-Client geschrieben

* *

(Bild von pixabay)

@ 91bea5cd:1df4451c

Contexto e início

O precursor direto do avivamento foi William J. Seymour, um pregador afro-americano filho de ex-escravos, influenciado pelos ensinamentos de Charles Parham, que pregava o "batismo no Espírito Santo" com evidência do falar em línguas.

Em 1906, Seymour foi convidado para pregar em uma igreja em Los Angeles. Após ser rejeitado por alguns por sua pregação sobre o batismo com o Espírito Santo, ele começou a liderar reuniões de oração na casa da família Asberry. Em abril de 1906, durante uma dessas reuniões, os participantes começaram a experimentar manifestações intensas do Espírito Santo, incluindo glossolalia (falar em línguas), curas e profecias.

A Rua Azusa

Logo, o número de participantes cresceu tanto que foi necessário mudar para um antigo prédio da Igreja Metodista Africana Episcopal, no número 312 da Rua Azusa, no centro de Los Angeles. Esse local se tornou o epicentro do avivamento.

Características marcantes

Cultos espontâneos e fervorosos, muitas vezes sem ordem pré-definida.

Diversidade étnica e social: negros, brancos, latinos, asiáticos, ricos e pobres adoravam juntos — algo radical para os padrões da época.

Ênfase nas manifestações espirituais, como línguas, curas, visões e profecias.

Igualdade de gênero e raça no ministério, com mulheres e homens de diversas origens pregando e liderando.

Impacto

O avivamento da Rua Azusa marcou o nascimento e expansão global do pentecostalismo, hoje uma das maiores forças do cristianismo mundial. Missionários saíram de Azusa para várias partes do mundo, levando a mensagem pentecostal. Movimentos como as Assembleias de Deus e Igreja do Evangelho Quadrangular têm raízes nesse avivamento.

Tensão e Interpretação entre Reformistas e Pentecostalistas

Evangelhos e Atos

João Batista profetiza: “Ele vos batizará com o Espírito Santo e com fogo” (Mateus 3:11).

Em Atos 2, no Pentecostes, os discípulos falam em línguas e recebem poder (Atos 1:8; 2:4).

Outros episódios: Atos 10 (Casa de Cornélio) e Atos 19 (Éfeso).

Cartas Paulinas

Paulo não relaciona diretamente o “batismo com o Espírito” ao falar em línguas. Em 1 Coríntios 12:13 ele diz: “Pois em um só Espírito todos nós fomos batizados em um corpo”.

A glossolalia aparece como um dom entre outros, mas não como evidência obrigatória (1 Coríntios 12:30).

Tensão

Pentecostais veem o batismo com o Espírito como uma segunda experiência após a conversão, evidenciada por línguas. Reformados geralmente interpretam que o batismo com o Espírito ocorre na conversão e que línguas não são obrigatórias ou cessaram com os apóstolos.

Reformadores e o Batismo com o Espírito Santo

Martinho Lutero, João Calvino e outros reformadores não falavam em línguas nem davam ênfase a experiências carismáticas.

Cessacionismo: Doutrina comum entre reformados que diz que os dons sobrenaturais (línguas, profecias, curas) cessaram com a era apostólica.

Continuação (posição pentecostal): Os dons continuam hoje.

Filmes / Documentários

“Azusa Street: The Origins of Pentecostalism” (2006) – Documentário com imagens históricas e entrevistas.

“Wesley” (2009) – Biografia de John Wesley, precursor do metodismo e influência indireta no pentecostalismo.

“The Cross and the Switchblade” (1970) – História de David Wilkerson e a conversão de Nicky Cruz; enfatiza a obra do Espírito.

Série “God in America” (PBS) – Episódio sobre o pentecostalismo (não só Azusa, mas seu impacto cultural).

@ 6e64b83c:94102ee8

Nostr-static is a powerful static site generator that transforms long-form Nostr content into beautiful, standalone websites. It makes your content accessible to everyone, even those not using Nostr clients. For more information check out my previous blog post How to Create a Blog Out of Nostr Long-Form Articles

What's New in Version 0.7?

RSS and Atom Feeds

Version 0.7 brings comprehensive feed support with both RSS and Atom formats. The system automatically generates feeds for your main content, individual profiles, and tag-specific pages. These feeds are seamlessly integrated into your site's header, making them easily discoverable by feed readers and content aggregators.

This feature bridges the gap between Nostr and traditional web publishing, allowing your content to reach readers who prefer feed readers or automated content distribution systems.

Smart Content Discovery

The new tag discovery system enhances your readers' experience by automatically finding and recommending relevant articles from the Nostr network. It works by:

1. Analyzing the tags in your articles
2. Fetching popular articles from Nostr that share these tags
3. Using configurable weights to rank these articles based on:
4. Engagement metrics (reactions, reposts, replies)
5. Zap statistics (amount, unique zappers, average zap size)
6. Content quality signals (report penalties)

This creates a dynamic "Recommended Articles" section that helps readers discover more content they might be interested in, all while staying within the Nostr ecosystem.

See the new features yourself by visiting our demo at: https://blog.nostrize.me

@ e4950c93:1b99eccd

Contenu à venir.

En savoir plus sur Wikipedia

@ a296b972:e5a7a2e8

Derzeit formiert sich ein neues Gruselkabinett, als Folge einer Pandemie der Ungeeigneten. Kostproben der Unfähigkeit konnte man schon in den aktuellen „Quassel-Shows“ des Staatsfunks „genießen“. Die Riege der Universal-Dilettanten, die noch schnell hochgelobt wurde, macht gerade Platz für Rekruten aus dem Milieu der überzeugten Realitätsverweigerer.

Impfpflichtbefürworter, ideologisch vergiftete Klima- und Gender-Gagaisten, Verteidiger des Russen-Dauer-Feindbilds, Finanzwirtschafts-Ahnungslose, zahllose „Südamerika-Experten“, die davon überzeugt sind, solche zu sein, weil sie unfallfrei eine Banane essen können und weitere, die als einzige Qualifikation das Prädikat „Untauglich“ auszeichnet, geben sich ein neues Stelldichein.

Nach Vorbild des öffentlich-rechtlichen Unfugs bilden sie ein in sich geschlossenes System, das sich gegen Kritik abschotten will, in dem es alles, was sich nach Nicht-nach-dem-Maul geredet anhört, als Hass und Hetze bezeichnet und sich als Hüter der Wahrheit aufspielt.

Begriffe wie „Hass und Hetze“ und „Kriegstüchtigkeit“ werden einem Wortschatz entlehnt, die dem bisher dunkelsten Kapitel der deutschen Geschichte entnommen sind. Zur Abschreckung verwendete Begriffe, im Sinne von „Wehret den Anfängen!“, wie die Anlehnung „Impfen macht frei“ hingegen, werden mit Geldbußen und Haft belegt. Es kommt eben immer darauf an, von wem diese verbrannten Begriffe verwendet werden.

Wenn aus einer Demokratie „Unseredemokratie“ wird, müssen alle Alarmglocken schrillen, weil so Tür und Tor weit aufgerissen werden, um Tendenzen und Ideologien den Einzug zu ermöglichen, die in einer freiheitlich-demokratischen Grundordnung nichts, aber auch rein gar nichts zu suchen haben, weil die Auslegung davon, was „Unseredemokratie“ bedeutet, in den Händen derjenigen liegt, die sich zwar noch als Volksvertreter ausgeben, aber den Willen des Souveräns nicht mehr umsetzen.

Die Meinung und der Wille des Volkes werden maximal ignoriert und unterdrückt. Mit einem „weiter so“ manifestiert sich die Verachtung der Wähler, die in ihrer unterstellten Dummheit bestenfalls noch als Stimmvieh taugen, ansonsten aber zu vernachlässigen sind, wenn das Ziel erreicht ist: Die Macht!

Eine Absichtserklärung, genannt Koalitionsvertrag, ist die Grundlage für „alles kann, nichts muss“. Er lässt so eine unbegrenzte Flexibilität in jede Richtung zu, alles ist möglich. ALLES!

Die Basis der Koalition beruht auf Lügen, sei es in der Migrationspolitik oder in der Neuverschuldung. Das gemeinsame Klüngeln hat schon begonnen, bevor der eigentliche Regierungsauftrag überhaupt erteilt wurde.

Das wirklich einzige, gemeinsame Ziel ist, mit allen Mitteln an der Macht zu bleiben, koste es, was es wolle und eine demokratisch gewählte Opposition, die rund ein Viertel der Wählerstimmen ausmacht, wo immer es geht zu delegitimieren und so klein zu halten, wie es nur eben geht.

Hirngespinste sollen weiter vorangetrieben, die Rückkehr zur Vernunft soll unter allen Umständen verhindert werden, bzw. ist aufgrund mangelnder Kenntnisse und Einsicht gar nicht möglich.

Das Lügen bleibt den Nicht-Volksvertretern vorbehalten, die definieren, was Lüge ist und was nicht, sofern die Kritik vom Volk kommt. Berichtet man über die Politik, spricht man von Unwahrheiten, spricht die Politik über das Volk, sind es Lügen. Überall wird mit zweierlei Maß gemessen.

Die Verachtung des Souveräns wirkt wie ein Bumerang und wird wie durch einen Spiegel auf die Versender zurückgeworfen.

Ein zukünftiger Ex-Bundeskanzler verliert bereits den Rückhalt, noch bevor er in sein Amt eingesetzt wird. Grisu, der kleine Drache, will unbedingt, nur einmal im Leben, Feuerwehrmann werden. Phrasen-Dreschen wird zur Staatsräson.

Ministerposten werden nach maximaler Fachferne verschachert.

Gut ausgebildete Kräfte verlassen das Land, die Wirtschaft stagniert, massive Einbrüche in der Auto-Industrie, der einstigen Vorzeige-Marken in der ganzen Welt. Ja, Autos bauen, das könnten die Deutschen, wenn sie noch dürften.

Wer kann, wandert ab ins Ausland, wo Energiekosten und Steuern ein unternehmerisches Handeln ermöglichen, statt es mit aller Kraft durch gezielte Wirtschaftsvernichtung abzuwürgen. Wo ist der massive Widerstand seitens der Wirtschaftsverbände, der Industrie- und Handelskammern und Groß-Unternehmen? Geht es denen immer noch zu gut?

Recht haben und Recht bekommen waren noch nie so weit auseinander, wie heute.

Die Kirche, in einem christlich geprägten Land, schreibt ihre eigene Lehre um: „Gott ist queer!“ Grenzt das schon an Gotteslästerung aus den eigenen Reihen? Dabei merkt sie offensichtlich nicht, dass sie sich damit selbst abschafft. Wieder einmal springt sie auf den Zug der vorgegebenen Staatsdoktrin auf. Unvergessen die Hakenkreuzfahne über dem Hauptportal am Kölner Dom in der bisher dunkelsten Zeit Deutschlands.

Eine Überzeugung, und seien die Beweggründe mit noch so guten Absichten verbunden, darf nie wieder zu einer Ideologie werden, die nur in die Irre führen kann. Deshalb ist es demokratische Pflicht, auf die Gefahr hinzuweisen, wenn auch nur der leiseste Hauch Anlass zu solchen Befürchtungen gibt. Das gilt für die Kirche, die Politik, die Rechtsprechung und Menschen, von denen man den Eindruck hat, dass sie sich verirrt haben.

Das Zuviel an Fremden wird nicht gestoppt. Eine Minderheit, die bei Verstand geblieben ist, verlässt das Land, wenn es ihr finanziell möglich ist. Andere, die sich das nicht leisten können, müssen ausharren und dabei zusehen, wie ein Land vor die Hunde geht.

Gut integrierte „Gastarbeiter“ schämen sich für den Plebs, der nach Deutschland kommt. Natürlich unter dem Deckmantel der Menschlichkeit, der die Menschlichkeit gegenüber den Bio-Deutschen mit Füßen tritt. Ihr Ansehen, ihr Fleiß und ihre Dankbarkeit, dass sich ihre Vätergeneration hier eine neue Existenz aufbauen konnte, wird mit Füßen getreten. Sie geraten unter einen Generalverdacht, der ihnen schadet. Auch sie haben Jahrzehnte in die Krankenkassen eingezahlt und ihre Steuern brav entrichtet.

Der Polizei sind von staatlicher Seite die Hände gebunden gegen Clan-Kriminalität und asozialem Verhalten durchzugreifen. Sie bilden Parallel-Gesellschaften mit eigenen Regeln und eigenen Gesetzen und die Polizei muss tatenlos dabei zusehen. Banden in Berlin und Duisburg stellen sich über herrschende Gesetze, Roma terrorisieren Kiel, benehmen sich, wie die Axt im Walde. „An Leib und Leben gefährdete Migranten“ werfen, wie in Bochum, Ziegel von Dächern, und gefährden die Bevölkerung an Leib und Leben. Anschließend setzen sie sich mit einem Gartenstuhl auf einem Kamin in die Sonne und träumen vermutlich vom Ausblick auf dem Kilimandscharo. Statt sie bei Kopf und Kragen zu fassen und sofort aus dem Land zu werfen, werden solche irren Taten mit psychischen Problemen aufgrund der Erfahrungen in ihrem Heimatland entschuldigt. Würden sich solche Bekloppte in ihrem eigenen Land vergleichbare Handlungen erlauben, würde sie die Dorfgemeinschaft wahrscheinlich den Löwen zum Fraß vorwerfen.

Jeder, der nicht das in Deutschland geltende Recht akzeptiert und stattdessen seine eigene Auffassung von Recht durchsetzen will, gehört unverzüglich des Landes verwiesen, und es ist Aufgabe des Staates, dafür zu sorgen, dass solche Personen nie wieder einen Fuß über die Grenzen des Landes setzen dürfen. Stattdessen werden die Fahnder verfolgt und die Täter laufen gelassen. Der Staat lässt so zu, dass geltendes Recht unterwandert und außer Kraft gesetzt wird. Seine abschreckende Wirkung geht verloren, weil es in den einschlägigen Kreisen bekannt ist, dass sich jeder aufführen kann, wie er will, ohne, dass es Konsequenzen nach sich zieht.

Gepaart mit Willkür ist das hoch gefährliches Dynamit, dass die Gesellschaft sprengt und eine Gefahr in sich birgt, dass die Gesellschaft ab dem Punkt, wo es unerträglich geworden ist, zur Selbstjustiz greift, und das wäre möglicherweise der Anfang eines Bürgerkriegs.

Für alles ist Geld da. Es werden Schulden in atemberaubender Höhe aufgenommen, vor allem, um die Kriegswirtschaft anzukurbeln, um vor einem Feind - Russland gewappnet zu sein, das nicht das geringste Interesse an einem Land hat, das nichts unversucht lässt, auf irgendeine Art und Weise Selbstmord zu begehen. Einmal muss es doch gelingen!

Und natürlich müssen auch die westlichen Werte im Stellvertreterkrieg zwischen den USA und Russland in der Ukraine verteidigt werden.

Kein Geld ist allerdings für die eigenen Leute da. Im Gegenteil: Wer Flaschen sammelt, muss ab einer bestimmten Höhe der Einnahmen ein Gewerbe anmelden. Aber sonst haben die Sesselfurzer nichts zu tun, oder? Es sollte Geld in die Hand genommen werden, die zunehmende Armut in der Bevölkerung nachhaltig zu stoppen, aus dem Abfahrtsvorschlags-Plan der Bahn wieder einen richtigen Fahrplan zu machen, die Schlagloch-Nostalgie á la DDR abzuschaffen, Brücken wieder ihrem Wesen zuzuführen, nämlich, dass man drüberfahren kann, das ganze Land einer dringenden Generalüberholung zu unterziehen, die Gewinnorientierung aus dem Gesundheitssystem wieder abzuschaffen, die Fallpauschalen samt dem Verursacher in die Wüste zu schicken, Deutschland steuer-sexy zu machen.

Das ist wohl zu viel verlangt, denn diejenigen, die das bewirken könnten, haben keine Not. Die einzige Not, die sie kennen, ist, wie sie immer genug Leim auf Vorrat haben können, um an ihrem Pöstchen kleben zu bleiben. Solche Menschen können nur in einem geschützten Rahmen existieren, weil sie in der Welt da draußen gar nicht zurecht kämen, geschweige denn in der Lage wären, für ihren Lebensunterhalt mit einer wirklichen Arbeit selbst zu sorgen.

Der Staat erfüllt nicht mehr seine Aufgabe für die Sicherheit seiner Bürger zu sorgen. Statt Messer-Attacken und Terror-Anschläge aufzuklären und damit den Bürgern ein Gefühl von Sicherheit zu vermitteln, wird die Aufklärung auf dem Mond im Meer der Stille versenkt. Transparenz: Fehlanzeige. Im besten Fall werden Symptom-Bekämpfungs-Maßnahmen ergriffen, statt die Ursachen zu verunmöglichen. Schilder an Messerverbots-Zonen aufzustellen, manifestieren bestenfalls die Gewissheit der Lächerlichkeit und Unfähigkeit seitens der Messerfachkräfte und der selbstfahrenden Autos, die von niemandem gesteuert werden.

Gleiches gilt für das Nennen der hinlänglich bekannten Verursacher der Sprengung der Nordstream 2-Pipelines, die dem scheidenden Bundeskanzler, an dessen Namen man sich schon jetzt nicht mehr erinnern kann, bekannt gewesen sein müssen. Selbst Trump soll sich auf die Frage, ob die USA maßgeblich daran beteiligt waren, geäußert haben, dass, wenn er auf diese Frage antworten würde, er seinem Land sehr schaden würde. Er könne aber mit Gewissheit sagen, dass es die Russen nicht waren. Immerhin ist eine für ganz Europa wichtige Energieversorgung absichtlich, bewusst und mutwillig zerstört worden. Aber aus Rücksicht darauf, dass die Wahrheit Teile der deutschen Bevölkerung verunsichern könnte, verzichtet man in Berlin auf eine Stellungnahme, lügt wiederholt, dass die Ermittlungen noch andauern und glaubt, dass man die Bürger damit ahnungslos halten kann. Die doofen Deutschen werden auch das noch schlucken.

Vergessen die Verpflichtung: Von deutschem Boden soll nur noch Frieden ausgehen. Vergessen die grauen Gesichter der Männer mit einem hochgeklappten Hosenbein, in der Kinderzeit. Wer von den aktuellen Kriegstreibern war live bei einem Gemetzel dabei, in dem Körperteile herumfliegen und Blut spritzt, in dem Menschen zerfetzt werden oder in ihren Panzern bei lebendigem Leib verbrennen? Viele Dümmste unter den Dummen kennen Krieg nur aus Video-Spielen. Nur einmal live als Zaungast dabei sein, und sehen, wie der halbe Darm aus dem Körper heraushängt, dann würde sich ihr großes Maul schon von alleine schließen.

Immer mehr Deutsche sagen: Das ist nicht mehr mein Staat. Kann man es ihnen verdenken?

Deutschland ist ein Paradebeispiel dafür, wie man in der heutigen Zeit, ein einst in aller Welt hochangesehenes Land, im Handumdrehen wirtschaftlich, politisch, rechtsstaatlich, gesundheitlich, und nicht zuletzt auch gesellschaftlich zerstören kann.

Sowohl innen- als auch außenpolitisch wurde nichts unterlassen, um Deutschland, vom Ausland aus gesehen, in die absolute Lächerlichkeit zu überführen.

Die Dummheit, gepaart mit unerträglicher Überheblichkeit, haben ein Maß erreicht, dass in die Gefährlichkeit übergegangen ist. Deutschland braucht gar keinen Feind von außen, denn der Feind sitzt im eigenen Land und zerstört es von innen heraus.

Der Eindruck taucht auf, dass spätestens mit dem Corona-Ereignis das Schleusentor des Wahnsinns sperrangelweit aufgerissen wurde, und keiner vermag es derzeit wieder zu schließen.

Entweder schließen sich Kräfte zusammen, die noch vorhanden sind, dieses Land von innen heraus zu retten, hierzu tragen auch die Neuen Medien erheblich bei, oder Deutschland ist noch einmal darauf angewiesen, von außen gerettet zu werden.

Zukunftsplanungen werden verunmöglicht. Mindestens eine Generation wird die komplette Lebensplanung geraubt. Man ist gezwungen, von einem Tag auf den anderen zu leben, weil alles derartig unberechenbar geworden ist. Eine junge Familie überlegt sich drei Mal, ob sie noch Kinder in diese Welt setzen will. Wo soll das enden?

Der Alltag in Deutschland gleicht einer Dauer-Vorstellung eines Theater-Stücks. Irgendwie läuft es noch, jedoch es fehlt der Rückhalt. Man versucht seinen Alltag zu meistern, Normalität zu leben, doch über allem schwebt das Damokles-Schwert. Keiner weiß, wie lange was noch gut geht und welchen Irrsinn sich die Realitätsverweigerer als Nächstes ausdenken werden. Manchen gelingt das Verdrängen recht gut. Manche schotten sich vollkommen von schlechten Nachrichten ab. Die Psychologie sagt jedoch, dass jedes erlebte Trauma den Menschen früher oder später einholen wird.

Wetten, wie lange die unheilvolle Allianz der Neuen Nullen halten wird, können ab sofort entgegengenommen werden. Und dann? Wie geht es weiter?

Dieser Beitrag wurde mit dem Pareto-Client geschrieben.

(Bild von pixabay)

@ 4961e68d:a2212e1c

热死人了

@ 56f27915:5fee3024

Buchbeschreibung:\ \ Dieses Buch ist ein Appell. 

Es richtet sich nicht nur an den Kopf des Lesers, sondern auch an seinen Willen.\ \ Es ist ein Appell an Volk und Leser, die Lenkung der Geschicke direkt selbst in die Hand zu nehmen. Nicht nur: "Was ist?" sondern vor allem: "Was können wir tun?" ist in diesem Buch die große Frage.\ \ Mit dem Blick auf diese Frage wird das Grundgesetz betrachtet und gezeigt, dass es absolut noch nicht der gediegene Glockenguss ist, als der es uns von "oben" immer vorgestellt wurde, sondern dass in ihm auch extrem gegenläufige, bemessen an seinen freiheitlich-demokratischen Idealen sogar als extrem verfassungs-widrig zu bezeichnende Tendenzen wirken, die heute in seine Zerstörung führen.\ \ Vor allem die unselige Übermacht des Parteienwesens und die damit verbundene systemische Entmündigung des Souveräns, des Volkes, ist das Ergebnis dieser verfassungs-widrigen Tendenzen.\ \ Es wird aber auch gezeigt, wo in den Idealen des Grundgesetzes und in den Entscheidungen der Mütter und Väter dieses Grundgesetzes die Ansatzpunkte liegen, durch die der Zerstörung des Grundgesetzes wirkungsvoll begegnet werden kann. Und diese Ansatzpunkte werden im Buch allseits zur Entfaltung gebracht.\ \ "Wer die Demokratie verteidigen will, der muss sie weiter entwickeln." Im Sinne dieses Wortes wird dem Leser ein praktikabler Weg gewiesen, auf dem er unmittelbar helfen kann, das Grundgesetz den wirkenden Zerstörungskräften zu entwinden, durch Einrichtung der direkten Bürgerbeteiligung an den entscheidenden Fragen unserer Republik die Position des Souveräns gegenüber der Parteienmacht zu stärken, Freiheitsrechte, Demokratie und Rechtsstaat auf eine wesentlich höhere Stufe als bisher zu bringen und sich durch eine verfassungs-klärende Versammlung seine Basis selbst und neu zu geben.

Buch bestellen: https://great-reset-von-unten.de/

\ Und nicht vergessen, abzustimmen! Die Zeit ist reif. Packen wir's an.\  

@ 4961e68d:a2212e1c

热死人了！

@ cae03c48:2a7d6671

Bitcoin Magazine

Ben Allen Receives Maelstrom Bitcoin Developer Grant to Advance Payjoin Tech

Ben Allen has been named the third recipient of the Maelstrom Bitcoin Developer Grant, the family office of Arthur Hayes announced in a recent press release sent to Bitcoin Magazine. Over the next year, Allen will focus on enhancing the Payjoin Dev Kit project, a privacy-focused Bitcoin transaction tool designed to improve user anonymity and network scalability.

Payjoin, first introduced in 2019 by Nicolas Dorier in BIP 78, allows both the sender and receiver to contribute inputs to a single Bitcoin transaction. This disrupts common assumptions used by financial surveillance firms, namely the idea that multiple transaction inputs must come from a single entity. By breaking this assumption, even limited adoption of Payjoin can bolster privacy across the Bitcoin network.

“Maelstrom would like to congratulate Ben Allen on this grant,” said Arthur Hayes, Chief Investment Officer of Maelstrom. “The great thing about Payjoin, is that if only a small amount of adoption is achieved, it breaks a key assumption used by financial surveillance companies. The assumption they have is that if a Bitcoin transaction has multiple inputs, all the inputs must all belong to the same entity. Therefore, Payjoin adoption improves the privacy of even the people who don’t use it. We are excited to support Ben Allen’s work on open-source tools and software to increase Payjoin adoption.” 

Allen, who will be working alongside Dan Gould, aims to expand the implementation of Payjoin so it can be integrated into more Bitcoin wallets. He acknowledged the technical complexities of the project—including the requirement for receivers to be online—but expressed optimism about overcoming these challenges.

“I’m deeply grateful to Arthur Hayes and Maelstrom for generously providing me with this grant to support my work on the Payjoin Dev Kit project,” said Allen. “With this funding, I can dedicate myself full-time to enhancing the Payjoin implementation, improving testing, and ensuring that the dev kit remains robust, well-documented, and maintainable for the future.”

Allen also emphasized the broader mission of his work: “Improving privacy for bitcoin is an area where continued improvement allows for a better experience by empowering users to control their financial data and foster greater peace of mind when using bitcoin day to day. This is an exciting opportunity to contribute to Bitcoin’s privacy and scalability, and I’m looking forward to continuing to collaborate with the community to make Payjoin more widely adopted.”

Maelstrom, which is focused on supporting digital asset infrastructure, is led by Arthur Hayes, co-founder of BitMEX. Through grants like this one, the firm is investing in the foundational tools that promote a more private, scalable, and decentralized Bitcoin ecosystem.

This post Ben Allen Receives Maelstrom Bitcoin Developer Grant to Advance Payjoin Tech first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Jenna Montgomery.

@ cae03c48:2a7d6671

Bitcoin Magazine

Proof of Reserves Should Be the Standard for Bitcoin Treasury Companies

“The root problem with conventional currency is all the trust that’s required to make it work. The central bank must be trusted not to debase the currency, but the history of fiat currencies is full of breaches of that trust. Banks must be trusted to hold our money and transfer it electronically, but they lend it out in waves of credit bubbles with barely a fraction in reserve.”
— Satoshi Nakamoto (2009)

---

Bitcoin was created to eliminate the need for trusted intermediaries. It replaced opaque, permissioned systems with transparency, auditability, and decentralized verification. The ethos was clear from day one: don’t trust—verify.

And yet, many of the institutions now holding Bitcoin—custodians, exchanges, ETFs, even public companies—continue to rely on trust-based assumptions, the very problem Bitcoin was designed to solve.

For Bitcoin treasury companies, this contradiction is especially glaring. These are firms that claim to operate on a Bitcoin standard—yet without verifiable Proof of Reserves (PoR), there’s no way for shareholders to know whether the Bitcoin is actually there.

The Problem: Unproven Bitcoin Is Just Another IOU

Bitcoin is designed to be verifiable—but most corporate disclosures aren’t. When companies report BTC holdings without public wallet visibility or on-chain proof, investors are left to trust balance sheets, auditors, and custodians.

That opens the door to systemic risks:

• Rehypothecation: BTC pledged or lent behind the scenes
• Custodial failure: Centralized services operating without 1:1 backing
• “Paper Bitcoin”: Multiple claims on the same BTC, echoing legacy financial opacity

The mere presence of Bitcoin on a balance sheet is not a guarantee. Without verification, it’s no different than a fiat-denominated claim—an IOU dressed up in BTC terms.

What We Learned from Gold: The Paper Problem

Bitcoin is not the first hard asset to face this challenge. The gold market offers a cautionary tale.

For decades, gold investors have dealt with “paper gold” systems—unallocated accounts, synthetic ETFs, and derivatives with little or no linkage to actual metal. These claims often outnumber real reserves many times over, leading to widespread suspicion of price distortion and systemic misrepresentation.

Most gold investors don’t own gold—they own a claim to gold. And they have no way to prove it.

Bitcoin gives us the tools to break this cycle. But only if companies choose to use them.

Bitcoin Is Built for Proof—and Companies Should Use It

Unlike legacy assets, Bitcoin is designed to make proof of ownership and solvency a native function of the asset itself. Through public key cryptography, on-chain auditability, and permissionless transparency, Bitcoin enables real-time, trust-minimized verification.

This isn’t just a technical capability—it’s a governance feature. Bitcoin allows companies to demonstrate, cryptographically and without intermediaries, that their reserves exist, are intact, and are unencumbered. No bank statements. No opaque custodial claims. Just data, on-chain.

That’s a radical shift—and it’s one that Bitcoin treasury companies are uniquely positioned to take advantage of. In doing so, they can reduce audit complexity, strengthen shareholder communication, and align their internal capital practices with the trustless architecture of the asset they’re holding.

And it’s already happening. Metaplanet, Premiere Member of Bitcoin For Corporations, publicly discloses its BTC reserve addresses and transaction history. Anyone in the world—including shareholders, analysts, and regulators—can independently verify the existence and movement of their treasury. That’s not just compliance. That’s Bitcoin, applied. View the snapshot of Metaplanet’s proof of reserves dashboard below.

Public Companies Face the Greatest Responsibility

Public companies don’t operate in a vacuum. Their disclosures shape market perception, influence investor behavior, and—especially when Bitcoin is involved—serve as a proxy for the maturity of the asset class itself.

When a publicly traded company holds Bitcoin but offers no visibility into how that Bitcoin is held or verified, it exposes itself to multiple levels of risk: legal, reputational, operational, and strategic. It undermines trust at the very moment it claims to be embracing a trustless system.

More importantly, public companies send signals. Whether they like it or not, they become de facto representatives of the Bitcoin strategy they’ve adopted. Their behavior becomes part of the playbook for others considering similar moves.

That’s why the responsibility is higher. Transparency isn’t optional for companies who lead with Bitcoin. It’s a duty. And companies that choose opacity not only take on unnecessary risk—they weaken the credibility of the entire movement.e.

What Proof of Reserves Should Actually Include

For Proof of Reserves to have real integrity, it must go beyond vague references to “custody partners” or internal assurance statements. The key is verifiability—independent, data-driven, and actionable by any shareholder or auditor.

At a minimum, Bitcoin treasury companies should provide:

• Custody model clarity: Is the company using self-custody, shared multisig, or third-party solutions? Who controls the keys, and under what governance?
• On-chain transparency: Whether through view-only wallet addresses or cryptographic attestations (like Merkle tree proofs), companies must make it possible to verify balances against public disclosures.
• Encumbrance disclosure: Reserves that are pledged, lent out, or locked in yield strategies should be disclosed clearly, with timelines and risk parameters attached.
• Routine updates: Proof should be refreshed regularly—not once per year in an audit footnote, but as part of ongoing financial communication.
• Reconciliation framework: Companies should explain how on-chain data maps to reported BTC NAV in filings or investor materials.

For boards and CFOs, this doesn’t need to introduce operational risk. Tools already exist—xpub view-only wallets, custody APIs, third-party validators—to provide assurance without compromising security. The obstacle isn’t capability. It’s willingness.

Setting the Industry Benchmark: Where Bitcoin Treasury Companies Must Lead

Bitcoin treasury companies are not just financial outliers—they are structural pioneers. Their decision to hold BTC signals not only a belief in long-term value, but a rejection of legacy capital inefficiency. That’s why they must also lead on standards of integrity.

By adopting PoR voluntarily and early, companies can position themselves as trustworthy, sophisticated, and future-ready. This will matter more as institutional capital rotates into Bitcoin, as index inclusion expands, and as regulators begin asking sharper questions about crypto asset disclosures on balance sheets.

PoR isn’t just a way to comply with future standards—it’s a way to shape them. The companies that lead now will not only avoid future scrutiny—they’ll attract capital from allocators who are seeking transparency but don’t yet know where to find it.

At BFC, we believe the market rewards clarity. Bitcoin treasury companies have a chance to bake transparency into their structure, not as an afterthought, but as a strategic differentiator.

Shareholders Must Demand It

Proof of Reserves isn’t just a company initiative—it’s a shareholder obligation. When a public company holds Bitcoin on its balance sheet, it is acting as a fiduciary for shareholder capital denominated in one of the hardest, most transparent assets in history. To accept opacity in that context is to forfeit the very advantage Bitcoin offers.

If you’re an investor in a Bitcoin treasury company and you can’t verify the Bitcoin, you don’t own a monetary reserve—you own a narrative. You’re trusting that someone else is telling the truth, rather than requiring the proof Bitcoin makes possible.

That’s not aligned with the principles of sound capital stewardship.

Institutional allocators, activist shareholders, and governance professionals have a growing role to play here. Just as proxy advisors and investor coalitions have pushed for climate disclosures, board transparency, and ESG clarity in the past decade, it’s time to apply that same rigor to Bitcoin disclosures—especially for companies who claim to operate on a Bitcoin standard.

Demand direct answers:

• Can we verify the holdings on-chain?
• Are reserves fully collateralized and unencumbered?
• Has manageme

@ c1e9ab3a:9cb56b43

High-Level Overview

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

Summary of Both Sides

Position A: Remove OP_RETURN Filters

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

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

Position B: Keep OP_RETURN Filters

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

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

Strengths and Weaknesses

Strengths of Removing Filters

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

Weaknesses of Removing Filters

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

Strengths of Keeping Filters

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

Weaknesses of Keeping Filters

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

Long-Term Consequences

If Filters Are Removed

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

If Filters Are Retained

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

Conclusion

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

@ 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. 👀️️️️️️

@ 39cc53c9:27168656

Read the original blog post

The new website is finally live! I put in a lot of hard work over the past months on it. I'm proud to say that it's out now and it looks pretty cool, at least to me!

Why rewrite it all?

The old kycnot.me site was built using Python with Flask about two years ago. Since then, I've gained a lot more experience with Golang and coding in general. Trying to update that old codebase, which had a lot of design flaws, would have been a bad idea. It would have been like building on an unstable foundation.

That's why I made the decision to rewrite the entire application. Initially, I chose to use SvelteKit with JavaScript. I did manage to create a stable site that looked similar to the new one, but it required Jav aScript to work. As I kept coding, I started feeling like I was repeating "the Python mistake". I was writing the app in a language I wasn't very familiar with (just like when I was learning Python at that mom ent), and I wasn't happy with the code. It felt like spaghetti code all the time.

So, I made a complete U-turn and started over, this time using Golang. While I'm not as proficient in Golang as I am in Python now, I find it to be a very enjoyable language to code with. Most aof my recent pr ojects have been written in Golang, and I'm getting the hang of it. I tried to make the best decisions I could and structure the code as well as possible. Of course, there's still room for improvement, which I'll address in future updates.

Now I have a more maintainable website that can scale much better. It uses a real database instead of a JSON file like the old site, and I can add many more features. Since I chose to go with Golang, I mad e the "tradeoff" of not using JavaScript at all, so all the rendering load falls on the server. But I believe it's a tradeoff that's worth it.

What's new

• UI/UX - I've designed a new logo and color palette for kycnot.me. I think it looks pretty cool and cypherpunk. I am not a graphic designer, but I think I did a decent work and I put a lot of thinking on it to make it pleasant!
• Point system - The new point system provides more detailed information about the listings, and can be expanded to cover additional features across all services. Anyone can request a new point!
• ToS Scrapper: I've implemented a powerful automated terms-of-service scrapper that collects all the ToS pages from the listings. It saves you from the hassle of reading the ToS by listing the lines that are suspiciously related to KYC/AML practices. This is still in development and it will improve for sure, but it works pretty fine right now!
• Search bar - The new search bar allows you to easily filter services. It performs a full-text search on the Title, Description, Category, and Tags of all the services. Looking for VPN services? Just search for "vpn"!
• Transparency - To be more transparent, all discussions about services now take place publicly on GitLab. I won't be answering any e-mails (an auto-reply will prompt to write to the corresponding Gitlab issue). This ensures that all service-related matters are publicly accessible and recorded. Additionally, there's a real-time audits page that displays database changes.
• Listing Requests - I have upgraded the request system. The new form allows you to directly request services or points without any extra steps. In the future, I plan to enable requests for specific changes to parts of the website.
• Lightweight and fast - The new site is lighter and faster than its predecessor!
• Tor and I2P - At last! kycnot.me is now officially on Tor and I2P!

How?

This rewrite has been a labor of love, in the end, I've been working on this for more than 3 months now. I don't have a team, so I work by myself on my free time, but I find great joy in helping people on their private journey with cryptocurrencies. Making it easier for individuals to use cryptocurrencies without KYC is a goal I am proud of!

If you appreciate my work, you can support me through the methods listed here. Alternatively, feel free to send me an email with a kind message!

Technical details

All the code is written in Golang, the website makes use of the chi router for the routing part. I also make use of BigCache for caching database requests. There is 0 JavaScript, so all the rendering load falls on the server, this means it needed to be efficient enough to not drawn with a few users since the old site was reporting about 2M requests per month on average (note that this are not unique users).

The database is running with mariadb, using gorm as the ORM. This is more than enough for this project. I started working with an sqlite database, but I ended up migrating to mariadb since it works better with JSON.

The scraper is using chromedp combined with a series of keywords, regex and other logic. It runs every 24h and scraps all the services. You can find the scraper code here.

The frontend is written using Golang Templates for the HTML, and TailwindCSS plus DaisyUI for the CSS classes framework. I also use some plain CSS, but it's minimal.

The requests forms is the only part of the project that requires JavaScript to be enabled. It is needed for parsing some from fields that are a bit complex and for the "captcha", which is a simple Proof of Work that runs on your browser, destinated to avoid spam. For this, I use mCaptcha.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Redistributing Git with Nostr

Every time someone tries to "decentralize" Git -- like many projects tried in the past to do it with BitTorrent, IPFS, ScuttleButt or custom p2p protocols -- there is always a lurking comment: "but Git is already distributed!", and then the discussion proceeds to mention some facts about how Git supports multiple remotes and its magic syncing and merging abilities and so on.

Turns out all that is true, Git is indeed all that powerful, and yet GitHub is the big central hub that hosts basically all Git repositories in the giant world of open-source. There are some crazy people that host their stuff elsewhere, but these projects end up not being found by many people, and even when they do they suffer from lack of contributions.

Because everybody has a GitHub account it's easy to open a pull request to a repository of a project you're using if it's on GitHub (to be fair I think it's very annoying to have to clone the repository, then add it as a remote locally, push to it, then go on the web UI and click to open a pull request, then that cloned repository lurks forever in your profile unless you go through 16 screens to delete it -- but people in general seem to think it's easy).

It's much harder to do it on some random other server where some project might be hosted, because now you have to add 4 more even more annoying steps: create an account; pick a password; confirm an email address; setup SSH keys for pushing. (And I'm not even mentioning the basic impossibility of offering push access to external unknown contributors to people who want to host their own simple homemade Git server.)

At this point some may argue that we could all have accounts on GitLab, or Codeberg or wherever else, then those steps are removed. Besides not being a practical strategy this pseudo solution misses the point of being decentralized (or distributed, who knows) entirely: it's far from the ideal to force everybody to have the double of account management and SSH setup work in order to have the open-source world controlled by two shady companies instead of one.

What we want is to give every person the opportunity to host their own Git server without being ostracized. at the same time we must recognize that most people won't want to host their own servers (not even most open-source programmers!) and give everybody the ability to host their stuff on multi-tenant servers (such as GitHub) too. Importantly, though, if we allow for a random person to have a standalone Git server on a standalone server they host themselves on their wood cabin that also means any new hosting company can show up and start offering Git hosting, with or without new cool features, charging high or low or zero, and be immediately competing against GitHub or GitLab, i.e. we must remove the network-effect centralization pressure.

External contributions

The first problem we have to solve is: how can Bob contribute to Alice's repository without having an account on Alice's server?

SourceHut has reminded GitHub users that Git has always had this (for most) arcane git send-email command that is the original way to send patches, using an once-open protocol.

Turns out Nostr acts as a quite powerful email replacement and can be used to send text content just like email, therefore patches are a very good fit for Nostr event contents.

Once you get used to it and the proper UIs (or CLIs) are built sending and applying patches to and from others becomes a much easier flow than the intense clickops mixed with terminal copypasting that is interacting with GitHub (you have to clone the repository on GitHub, then update the remote URL in your local directory, then create a branch and then go back and turn that branch into a Pull Request, it's quite tiresome) that many people already dislike so much they went out of their way to build many GitHub CLI tools just so they could comment on issues and approve pull requests from their terminal.

Replacing GitHub features

Aside from being the "hub" that people use to send patches to other people's code (because no one can do the email flow anymore, justifiably), GitHub also has 3 other big features that are not directly related to Git, but that make its network-effect harder to overcome. Luckily Nostr can be used to create a new environment in which these same features are implemented in a more decentralized and healthy way.

Issues: bug reports, feature requests and general discussions

Since the "Issues" GitHub feature is just a bunch of text comments it should be very obvious that Nostr is a perfect fit for it.

I will not even mention the fact that Nostr is much better at threading comments than GitHub (which doesn't do it at all), which can generate much more productive and organized discussions (and you can opt out if you want).

Search

I use GitHub search all the time to find libraries and projects that may do something that I need, and it returns good results almost always. So if people migrated out to other code hosting providers wouldn't we lose it?

The fact is that even though we think everybody is on GitHub that is a globalist falsehood. Some projects are not on GitHub, and if we use only GitHub for search those will be missed. So even if we didn't have a Nostr Git alternative it would still be necessary to create a search engine that incorporated GitLab, Codeberg, SourceHut and whatnot.

Turns out on Nostr we can make that quite easy by not forcing anyone to integrate custom APIs or hardcoding Git provider URLs: each repository can make itself available by publishing an "announcement" event with a brief description and one or more Git URLs. That makes it easy for a search engine to index them -- and even automatically download the code and index the code (or index just README files or whatever) without a centralized platform ever having to be involved.

The relays where such announcements will be available play a role, of course, but that isn't a bad role: each announcement can be in multiple relays known for storing "public good" projects, some relays may curate only projects known to be very good according to some standards, other relays may allow any kind of garbage, which wouldn't make them good for a search engine to rely upon, but would still be useful in case one knows the exact thing (and from whom) they're searching for (the same is valid for all Nostr content, by the way, and that's where it's censorship-resistance comes from).

Continuous integration

GitHub Actions are a very hardly subsidized free-compute-for-all-paid-by-Microsoft feature, but one that isn't hard to replace at all. In fact there exists today many companies offering the same kind of service out there -- although they are mostly targeting businesses and not open-source projects, before GitHub Actions was introduced there were also many that were heavily used by open-source projects.

One problem is that these services are still heavily tied to GitHub today, they require a GitHub login, sometimes BitBucket and GitLab and whatnot, and do not allow one to paste an arbitrary Git server URL, but that isn't a thing that is very hard to change anyway, or to start from scratch. All we need are services that offer the CI/CD flows, perhaps using the same framework of GitHub Actions (although I would prefer to not use that messy garbage), and charge some few satoshis for it.

It may be the case that all the current services only support the big Git hosting platforms because they rely on their proprietary APIs, most notably the webhooks dispatched when a repository is updated, to trigger the jobs. It doesn't have to be said that Nostr can also solve that problem very easily.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Report of how the money Jack donated to the cause in December 2022 has been misused so far.

Bounties given

March 2025

• Dhalsim: 1,110,540 - Work on Nostr wiki data processing

February 2025

• BOUNTY* NullKotlinDev: 950,480 - Twine RSS reader Nostr integration
• Dhalsim: 2,094,584 - Work on Hypothes.is Nostr fork
• Constant, Biz and J: 11,700,588 - Nostr Special Forces

January 2025

• Constant, Biz and J: 11,610,987 - Nostr Special Forces
• BOUNTY* NullKotlinDev: 843,840 - Feeder RSS reader Nostr integration
• BOUNTY* NullKotlinDev: 797,500 - ReadYou RSS reader Nostr integration

December 2024

• BOUNTY* tijl: 1,679,500 - Nostr integration into RSS readers yarr and miniflux
• Constant, Biz and J: 10,736,166 - Nostr Special Forces
• Thereza: 1,020,000 - Podcast outreach initiative

November 2024

• Constant, Biz and J: 5,422,464 - Nostr Special Forces

October 2024

• Nostrdam: 300,000 - hackathon prize
• Svetski: 5,000,000 - Latin America Nostr events contribution
• Quentin: 5,000,000 - nostrcheck.me

June 2024

• Darashi: 5,000,000 - maintaining nos.today, searchnos, search.nos.today and other experiments
• Toshiya: 5,000,000 - keeping the NIPs repo clean and other stuff

May 2024

• James: 3,500,000 - https://github.com/jamesmagoo/nostr-writer
• Yakihonne: 5,000,000 - spreading the word in Asia
• Dashu: 9,000,000 - https://github.com/haorendashu/nostrmo

February 2024

• Viktor: 5,000,000 - https://github.com/viktorvsk/saltivka and https://github.com/viktorvsk/knowstr
• Eric T: 5,000,000 - https://github.com/tcheeric/nostr-java
• Semisol: 5,000,000 - https://relay.noswhere.com/ and https://hist.nostr.land relays
• Sebastian: 5,000,000 - Drupal stuff and nostr-php work
• tijl: 5,000,000 - Cloudron, Yunohost and Fraidycat attempts
• Null Kotlin Dev: 5,000,000 - AntennaPod attempt

December 2023

• hzrd: 5,000,000 - Nostrudel
• awayuki: 5,000,000 - NOSTOPUS illustrations
• bera: 5,000,000 - getwired.app
• Chris: 5,000,000 - resolvr.io
• NoGood: 10,000,000 - nostrexplained.com stories

October 2023

• SnowCait: 5,000,000 - https://nostter.vercel.app/ and other tools
• Shaun: 10,000,000 - https://yakihonne.com/, events and work on Nostr awareness
• Derek Ross: 10,000,000 - spreading the word around the world
• fmar: 5,000,000 - https://github.com/frnandu/yana
• The Nostr Report: 2,500,000 - curating stuff
• james magoo: 2,500,000 - the Obsidian plugin: https://github.com/jamesmagoo/nostr-writer

August 2023

• Paul Miller: 5,000,000 - JS libraries and cryptography-related work
• BOUNTY tijl: 5,000,000 - https://github.com/github-tijlxyz/wikinostr
• gzuus: 5,000,000 - https://nostree.me/

July 2023

• syusui-s: 5,000,000 - rabbit, a tweetdeck-like Nostr client: https://syusui-s.github.io/rabbit/
• kojira: 5,000,000 - Nostr fanzine, Nostr discussion groups in Japan, hardware experiments
• darashi: 5,000,000 - https://github.com/darashi/nos.today, https://github.com/darashi/searchnos, https://github.com/darashi/murasaki
• jeff g: 5,000,000 - https://nostr.how and https://listr.lol, plus other contributions
• cloud fodder: 5,000,000 - https://nostr1.com (open-source)
• utxo.one: 5,000,000 - https://relaying.io (open-source)
• Max DeMarco: 10,269,507 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aA-jiiepOrE
• BOUNTY optout21: 1,000,000 - https://github.com/optout21/nip41-proto0 (proposed nip41 CLI)
• BOUNTY Leo: 1,000,000 - https://github.com/leo-lox/camelus (an old relay thing I forgot exactly)

June 2023

• BOUNTY: Sepher: 2,000,000 - a webapp for making lists of anything: https://pinstr.app/
• BOUNTY: Kieran: 10,000,000 - implement gossip algorithm on Snort, implement all the other nice things: manual relay selection, following hints etc.
• Mattn: 5,000,000 - a myriad of projects and contributions to Nostr projects: https://github.com/search?q=owner%3Amattn+nostr&type=code
• BOUNTY: lynn: 2,000,000 - a simple and clean git nostr CLI written in Go, compatible with William's original git-nostr-tools; and implement threaded comments on https://github.com/fiatjaf/nocomment.
• Jack Chakany: 5,000,000 - https://github.com/jacany/nblog
• BOUNTY: Dan: 2,000,000 - https://metadata.nostr.com/

April 2023

• BOUNTY: Blake Jakopovic: 590,000 - event deleter tool, NIP dependency organization
• BOUNTY: koalasat: 1,000,000 - display relays
• BOUNTY: Mike Dilger: 4,000,000 - display relays, follow event hints (Gossip)
• BOUNTY: kaiwolfram: 5,000,000 - display relays, follow event hints, choose relays to publish (Nozzle)
• Daniele Tonon: 3,000,000 - Gossip
• bu5hm4nn: 3,000,000 - Gossip
• BOUNTY: hodlbod: 4,000,000 - display relays, follow event hints

March 2023

• Doug Hoyte: 5,000,000 sats - https://github.com/hoytech/strfry
• Alex Gleason: 5,000,000 sats - https://gitlab.com/soapbox-pub/mostr
• verbiricha: 5,000,000 sats - https://badges.page/, https://habla.news/
• talvasconcelos: 5,000,000 sats - https://migrate.nostr.com, https://read.nostr.com, https://write.nostr.com/
• BOUNTY: Gossip model: 5,000,000 - https://camelus.app/
• BOUNTY: Gossip model: 5,000,000 - https://github.com/kaiwolfram/Nozzle
• BOUNTY: Bounty Manager: 5,000,000 - https://nostrbounties.com/

February 2023

• styppo: 5,000,000 sats - https://hamstr.to/
• sandwich: 5,000,000 sats - https://nostr.watch/
• BOUNTY: Relay-centric client designs: 5,000,000 sats https://bountsr.org/design/2023/01/26/relay-based-design.html
• BOUNTY: Gossip model on https://coracle.social/: 5,000,000 sats
• Nostrovia Podcast: 3,000,000 sats - https://nostrovia.org/
• BOUNTY: Nostr-Desk / Monstr: 5,000,000 sats - https://github.com/alemmens/monstr
• Mike Dilger: 5,000,000 sats - https://github.com/mikedilger/gossip

January 2023

• ismyhc: 5,000,000 sats - https://github.com/Galaxoid-Labs/Seer
• Martti Malmi: 5,000,000 sats - https://iris.to/
• Carlos Autonomous: 5,000,000 sats - https://github.com/BrightonBTC/bija
• Koala Sat: 5,000,000 - https://github.com/KoalaSat/nostros
• Vitor Pamplona: 5,000,000 - https://github.com/vitorpamplona/amethyst
• Cameri: 5,000,000 - https://github.com/Cameri/nostream

December 2022

• William Casarin: 7 BTC - splitting the fund
• pseudozach: 5,000,000 sats - https://nostr.directory/
• Sondre Bjellas: 5,000,000 sats - https://notes.blockcore.net/
• Null Dev: 5,000,000 sats - https://github.com/KotlinGeekDev/Nosky
• Blake Jakopovic: 5,000,000 sats - https://github.com/blakejakopovic/nostcat, https://github.com/blakejakopovic/nostreq and https://github.com/blakejakopovic/NostrEventPlayground

@ 39cc53c9:27168656

Read the original blog post

Know Your Customer is a regulation that requires companies of all sizes to verify the identity, suitability, and risks involved with maintaining a business relationship with a customer. Such procedures fit within the broader scope of anti-money laundering (AML) and counterterrorism financing (CTF) regulations.

Banks, exchanges, online business, mail providers, domain registrars... Everyone wants to know who you are before you can even opt for their service. Your personal information is flowing around the internet in the hands of "god-knows-who" and secured by "trust-me-bro military-grade encryption". Once your account is linked to your personal (and verified) identity, tracking you is just as easy as keeping logs on all these platforms.

Rights for Illusions

KYC processes aim to combat terrorist financing, money laundering, and other illicit activities. On the surface, KYC seems like a commendable initiative. I mean, who wouldn't want to halt terrorists and criminals in their tracks?

The logic behind KYC is: "If we mandate every financial service provider to identify their users, it becomes easier to pinpoint and apprehend the malicious actors."

However, terrorists and criminals are not precisely lining up to be identified. They're crafty. They may adopt false identities or find alternative strategies to continue their operations. Far from being outwitted, many times they're several steps ahead of regulations. Realistically, KYC might deter a small fraction – let's say about 1% ^1 – of these malefactors. Yet, the cost? All of us are saddled with the inconvenient process of identification just to use a service.

Under the rhetoric of "ensuring our safety", governments and institutions enact regulations that seem more out of a dystopian novel, gradually taking away our right to privacy.

To illustrate, consider a city where the mayor has rolled out facial recognition cameras in every nook and cranny. A band of criminals, intent on robbing a local store, rolls in with a stolen car, their faces obscured by masks and their bodies cloaked in all-black clothes. Once they've committed the crime and exited the city's boundaries, they switch vehicles and clothes out of the cameras' watchful eyes. The high-tech surveillance? It didn’t manage to identify or trace them. Yet, for every law-abiding citizen who merely wants to drive through the city or do some shopping, their movements and identities are constantly logged. The irony? This invasive tracking impacts all of us, just to catch the 1% ^1 of less-than-careful criminals.

KYC? Not you.

KYC creates barriers to participation in normal economic activity, to supposedly stop criminals. ^2

KYC puts barriers between many users and businesses. One of these comes from the fact that the process often requires multiple forms of identification, proof of address, and sometimes even financial records. For individuals in areas with poor record-keeping, non-recognized legal documents, or those who are unbanked, homeless or transient, obtaining these documents can be challenging, if not impossible.

For people who are not skilled with technology or just don't have access to it, there's also a barrier since KYC procedures are mostly online, leaving them inadvertently excluded.

Another barrier goes for the casual or one-time user, where they might not see the value in undergoing a rigorous KYC process, and these requirements can deter them from using the service altogether.

It also wipes some businesses out of the equation, since for smaller businesses, the costs associated with complying with KYC norms—from the actual process of gathering and submitting documents to potential delays in operations—can be prohibitive in economical and/or technical terms.

You're not welcome

Imagine a swanky new club in town with a strict "members only" sign. You hear the music, you see the lights, and you want in. You step up, ready to join, but suddenly there's a long list of criteria you must meet. After some time, you are finally checking all the boxes. But then the club rejects your membership with no clear reason why. You just weren't accepted. Frustrating, right?

This club scenario isn't too different from the fact that KYC is being used by many businesses as a convenient gatekeeping tool. A perfect excuse based on a "legal" procedure they are obliged to.

Even some exchanges may randomly use this to freeze and block funds from users, claiming these were "flagged" by a cryptic system that inspects the transactions. You are left hostage to their arbitrary decision to let you successfully pass the KYC procedure. If you choose to sidestep their invasive process, they might just hold onto your funds indefinitely.

Your identity has been stolen

KYC data has been found to be for sale on many dark net markets^3. Exchanges may have leaks or hacks, and such leaks contain very sensitive data. We're talking about the full monty: passport or ID scans, proof of address, and even those awkward selfies where you're holding up your ID next to your face. All this data is being left to the mercy of the (mostly) "trust-me-bro" security systems of such companies. Quite scary, isn't it?

As cheap as $10 for 100 documents, with discounts applying for those who buy in bulk, the personal identities of innocent users who passed KYC procedures are for sale. ^3

In short, if you have ever passed the KYC/AML process of a crypto exchange, your privacy is at risk of being compromised, or it might even have already been compromised.

(they) Know Your Coins

You may already know that Bitcoin and most cryptocurrencies have a transparent public blockchain, meaning that all data is shown unencrypted for everyone to see and recorded forever. If you link an address you own to your identity through KYC, for example, by sending an amount from a KYC exchange to it, your Bitcoin is no longer pseudonymous and can then be traced.

If, for instance, you send Bitcoin from such an identified address to another KYC'ed address (say, from a friend), everyone having access to that address-identity link information (exchanges, governments, hackers, etc.) will be able to associate that transaction and know who you are transacting with.

Conclusions

To sum up, KYC does not protect individuals; rather, it's a threat to our privacy, freedom, security and integrity. Sensible information flowing through the internet is thrown into chaos by dubious security measures. It puts borders between many potential customers and businesses, and it helps governments and companies track innocent users. That's the chaos KYC has stirred.

The criminals are using stolen identities from companies that gathered them thanks to these very same regulations that were supposed to combat them. Criminals always know how to circumvent such regulations. In the end, normal people are the most affected by these policies.

The threat that KYC poses to individuals in terms of privacy, security and freedom is not to be neglected. And if we don’t start challenging these systems and questioning their efficacy, we are just one step closer to the dystopian future that is now foreseeable.

Edited 20/03/2024 * Add reference to the 1% statement on Rights for Illusions section to an article where Chainalysis found that only 0.34% of the transaction volume with cryptocurrencies in 2023 was attributable to criminal activity ^1

@ 39cc53c9:27168656

Read the original blog post

Over the past few months, I've dedicated my time to a complete rewrite of the kycnot.me website. The technology stack remains unchanged; Golang paired with TailwindCSS. However, I've made some design choices in this iteration that I believe significantly enhance the site. Particularly to backend code.

UI Improvements

You'll notice a refreshed UI that retains the original concept but has some notable enhancements. The service list view is now more visually engaging, it displays additional information in a more aesthetically pleasing manner. Both filtering and searching functionalities have been optimized for speed and user experience.

Service pages have been also redesigned to highlight key information at the top, with the KYC Level box always accessible. The display of service attributes is now more visually intuitive.

The request form, especially the Captcha, has undergone substantial improvements. The new self-made Captcha is robust, addressing the reliability issues encountered with the previous version.

Terms of Service Summarizer

A significant upgrade is the Terms of Service summarizer/reviewer, now powered by AI (GPT-4-turbo). It efficiently condenses each service's ToS, extracting and presenting critical points, including any warnings. Summaries are updated monthly, processing over 40 ToS pages via the OpenAI API using a self-crafted and thoroughly tested prompt.

Nostr Comments

I've integrated a comment section for each service using Nostr. For guidance on using this feature, visit the dedicated how-to page.

Database

The backend database has transitioned to pocketbase, an open-source Golang backend that has been a pleasure to work with. I maintain an updated fork of the Golang SDK for pocketbase at pluja/pocketbase.

Scoring

The scoring algorithm has also been refined to be more fair. Despite I had considered its removal due to the complexity it adds (it is very difficult to design a fair scoring system), some users highlighted its value, so I kept it. The updated algorithm is available open source.

Listings

Each listing has been re-evaluated, and the ones that were no longer operational were removed. New additions are included, and the backlog of pending services will be addressed progressively, since I still have access to the old database.

API

The API now offers more comprehensive data. For more details, check here.

About Page

The About page has been restructured for brevity and clarity.

Other Changes

Extensive changes have been implemented in the server-side logic, since the whole code base was re-written from the ground up. I may discuss these in a future post, but for now, I consider the current version to be just a bit beyond beta, and additional updates are planned in the coming weeks.

@ a39d19ec:3d88f61e

Die Debatte um Migration, Grenzsicherung und Abschiebungen wird in Deutschland meist emotional geführt. Wer fordert, dass illegale Einwanderer abgeschoben werden, sieht sich nicht selten dem Vorwurf des Rassismus ausgesetzt. Doch dieser Vorwurf ist nicht nur sachlich unbegründet, sondern verkehrt die Realität ins Gegenteil: Tatsächlich sind es gerade diejenigen, die hinter jeder Forderung nach Rechtssicherheit eine rassistische Motivation vermuten, die selbst in erster Linie nach Hautfarbe, Herkunft oder Nationalität urteilen.

Das Recht steht über Emotionen

Deutschland ist ein Rechtsstaat. Das bedeutet, dass Regeln nicht nach Bauchgefühl oder politischer Stimmungslage ausgelegt werden können, sondern auf klaren gesetzlichen Grundlagen beruhen müssen. Einer dieser Grundsätze ist in Artikel 16a des Grundgesetzes verankert. Dort heißt es:

„Auf Absatz 1 [Asylrecht] kann sich nicht berufen, wer aus einem Mitgliedstaat der Europäischen Gemeinschaften oder aus einem anderen Drittstaat einreist, in dem die Anwendung des Abkommens über die Rechtsstellung der Flüchtlinge und der Europäischen Menschenrechtskonvention sichergestellt ist.“

Das bedeutet, dass jeder, der über sichere Drittstaaten nach Deutschland einreist, keinen Anspruch auf Asyl hat. Wer dennoch bleibt, hält sich illegal im Land auf und unterliegt den geltenden Regelungen zur Rückführung. Die Forderung nach Abschiebungen ist daher nichts anderes als die Forderung nach der Einhaltung von Recht und Gesetz.

Die Umkehrung des Rassismusbegriffs

Wer einerseits behauptet, dass das deutsche Asyl- und Aufenthaltsrecht strikt durchgesetzt werden soll, und andererseits nicht nach Herkunft oder Hautfarbe unterscheidet, handelt wertneutral. Diejenigen jedoch, die in einer solchen Forderung nach Rechtsstaatlichkeit einen rassistischen Unterton sehen, projizieren ihre eigenen Denkmuster auf andere: Sie unterstellen, dass die Debatte ausschließlich entlang ethnischer, rassistischer oder nationaler Kriterien geführt wird – und genau das ist eine rassistische Denkweise.

Jemand, der illegale Einwanderung kritisiert, tut dies nicht, weil ihn die Herkunft der Menschen interessiert, sondern weil er den Rechtsstaat respektiert. Hingegen erkennt jemand, der hinter dieser Kritik Rassismus wittert, offenbar in erster Linie die „Rasse“ oder Herkunft der betreffenden Personen und reduziert sie darauf.

Finanzielle Belastung statt ideologischer Debatte

Neben der rechtlichen gibt es auch eine ökonomische Komponente. Der deutsche Wohlfahrtsstaat basiert auf einem Solidarprinzip: Die Bürger zahlen in das System ein, um sich gegenseitig in schwierigen Zeiten zu unterstützen. Dieser Wohlstand wurde über Generationen hinweg von denjenigen erarbeitet, die hier seit langem leben. Die Priorität liegt daher darauf, die vorhandenen Mittel zuerst unter denjenigen zu verteilen, die durch Steuern, Sozialabgaben und Arbeit zum Erhalt dieses Systems beitragen – nicht unter denen, die sich durch illegale Einreise und fehlende wirtschaftliche Eigenleistung in das System begeben.

Das ist keine ideologische Frage, sondern eine rein wirtschaftliche Abwägung. Ein Sozialsystem kann nur dann nachhaltig funktionieren, wenn es nicht unbegrenzt belastet wird. Würde Deutschland keine klaren Regeln zur Einwanderung und Abschiebung haben, würde dies unweigerlich zur Überlastung des Sozialstaates führen – mit negativen Konsequenzen für alle.

Sozialpatriotismus

Ein weiterer wichtiger Aspekt ist der Schutz der Arbeitsleistung jener Generationen, die Deutschland nach dem Zweiten Weltkrieg mühsam wieder aufgebaut haben. Während oft betont wird, dass die Deutschen moralisch kein Erbe aus der Zeit vor 1945 beanspruchen dürfen – außer der Verantwortung für den Holocaust –, ist es umso bedeutsamer, das neue Erbe nach 1945 zu respektieren, das auf Fleiß, Disziplin und harter Arbeit beruht. Der Wiederaufbau war eine kollektive Leistung deutscher Menschen, deren Früchte nicht bedenkenlos verteilt werden dürfen, sondern vorrangig denjenigen zugutekommen sollten, die dieses Fundament mitgeschaffen oder es über Generationen mitgetragen haben.

Rechtstaatlichkeit ist nicht verhandelbar

Wer sich für eine konsequente Abschiebepraxis ausspricht, tut dies nicht aus rassistischen Motiven, sondern aus Respekt vor der Rechtsstaatlichkeit und den wirtschaftlichen Grundlagen des Landes. Der Vorwurf des Rassismus in diesem Kontext ist daher nicht nur falsch, sondern entlarvt eine selektive Wahrnehmung nach rassistischen Merkmalen bei denjenigen, die ihn erheben.

@ 39cc53c9:27168656

Read the original blog post

I'm launching a new service review section on this blog in collaboration with OrangeFren. These reviews are sponsored, yet the sponsorship does not influence the outcome of the evaluations. Reviews are done in advance, then, the service provider has the discretion to approve publication without modifications.

Sponsored reviews are independent from the kycnot.me list, being only part of the blog. The reviews have no impact on the scores of the listings or their continued presence on the list. Should any issues arise, I will not hesitate to remove any listing.

---

The review

WizardSwap is an instant exchange centred around privacy coins. It was launched in 2020 making it old enough to have weathered the 2021 bull run and the subsequent bearish year.

| Pros | Cons | |------|------| | Tor-friendly | Limited liquidity | | Guarantee of no KYC | Overly simplistic design | | Earn by providing liquidity | |

Rating: ★★★★★ Service Website: wizardswap.io

Liquidity

Right off the bat, we'll start off by pointing out that WizardSwap relies on its own liquidity reserves, meaning they aren't just a reseller of Binance or another exchange. They're also committed to a no-KYC policy, when asking them, they even promised they would rather refund a user their original coins, than force them to undergo any sort of verification.

On the one hand, full control over all their infrastructure gives users the most privacy and conviction about the KYC policies remaining in place.

On the other hand, this means the liquidity available for swapping isn't huge. At the time of testing we could only purchase at most about 0.73 BTC with XMR.

It's clear the team behind WizardSwap is aware of this shortfall and so they've come up with a solution unique among instant exchanges. They let you, the user, deposit any of the currencies they support into your account and earn a profit on the trades made using your liquidity.

Trading

Fees on WizardSwap are middle-of-the-pack. The normal fee is 2.2%. That's more than some exchanges that reserve the right to suddenly demand you undergo verification, yet less than half the fees on some other privacy-first exchanges. However as we mentioned in the section above you can earn almost all of that fee (2%) if you provide liquidity to WizardSwap.

It's good that with the current Bitcoin fee market their fees are constant regardless of how much, or how little, you send. This is in stark contrast with some of the alternative swap providers that will charge you a massive premium when attempting to swap small amounts of BTC away.

Test trades

Test trades are always performed without previous notice to the service provider.

During our testing we performed a few test trades and found that every single time WizardSwap immediately detected the incoming transaction and the amount we received was exactly what was quoted before depositing. The fees were inline with what WizardSwap advertises.

• Monero payment proof
• Bitcoin received
• Wizardswap TX link - it's possible that this link may cease to be valid at some point in the future.

ToS and KYC

WizardSwap does not have a Terms of Service or a Privacy Policy page, at least none that can be found by users. Instead, they offer a FAQ section where they addresses some basic questions.

The site does not mention any KYC or AML practices. It also does not specify how refunds are handled in case of failure. However, based on the FAQ section "What if I send funds after the offer expires?" it can be inferred that contacting support is necessary and network fees will be deducted from any refund.

UI & Tor

WizardSwap can be visited both via your usual browser and Tor Browser. Should you decide on the latter you'll find that the website works even with the most strict settings available in the Tor Browser (meaning no JavaScript).

However, when disabling Javascript you'll miss the live support chat, as well as automatic refreshing of the trade page. The lack of the first means that you will have no way to contact support from the trade page if anything goes wrong during your swap, although you can do so by mail.

One important thing to have in mind is that if you were to accidentally close the browser during the swap, and you did not save the swap ID or your browser history is disabled, you'll have no easy way to return to the trade. For this reason we suggest when you begin a trade to copy the url or ID to someplace safe, before sending any coins to WizardSwap.

The UI you'll be greeted by is simple, minimalist, and easy to navigate. It works well not just across browsers, but also across devices. You won't have any issues using this exchange on your phone.

Getting in touch

The team behind WizardSwap appears to be most active on X (formerly Twitter): https://twitter.com/WizardSwap_io

If you have any comments or suggestions about the exchange make sure to reach out to them. In the past they've been very receptive to user feedback, for instance a few months back WizardSwap was planning on removing DeepOnion, but the community behind that project got together ^1 and after reaching out WizardSwap reversed their decision ^2.

You can also contact them via email at: support @ wizardswap . io

Disclaimer

None of the above should be understood as investment or financial advice. The views are our own only and constitute a faithful representation of our experience in using and investigating this exchange. This review is not a guarantee of any kind on the services rendered by the exchange. Do your own research before using any service.

@ 6e0ea5d6:0327f353

Ascolta.

We live in times where the average man is measured by the speeches he gives — not by the commitments he keeps. People talk about dreams, goals, promises… but what truly remains is what’s honored in the silence of small gestures, in actions that don’t seek applause, in attitudes unseen — yet speak volumes.

Punctuality, for example. Showing up on time isn’t about the clock. It’s about respect. Respect for another’s time, yes — but more importantly, respect for one’s own word. A man who is late without reason is already running late in his values. And the one who excuses his own lateness with sweet justifications slowly gets used to mediocrity.

Keeping your word is more than fulfilling promises. It is sealing, with the mouth, what the body must later uphold. Every time a man commits to something, he creates a moral debt with his own dignity. And to break that commitment is to declare bankruptcy — not in the eyes of others, but in front of himself.

And debts? Even the small ones — or especially the small ones — are precise thermometers of character. A forgotten sum, an unpaid favor, a commitment left behind… all of these reveal the structure of the inner building that man resides in. He who neglects the small is merely rehearsing for his future collapse.

Life, contrary to what the reckless say, is not built on grand deeds. It is built with small bricks, laid with almost obsessive precision. The truly great man is the one who respects the details — recognizing in them a code of conduct.

In Sicily, especially in the streets of Palermo, I learned early on that there is more nobility in paying a five-euro debt on time than in flaunting riches gained without word, without honor, without dignity.

As they say in Palermo: L’uomo si conosce dalle piccole cose.

So, amico mio, Don’t talk to me about greatness if you can’t show up on time. Don’t talk to me about respect if your word is fickle. And above all, don’t talk to me about honor if you still owe what you once promised — no matter how small.

Thank you for reading, my friend!

If this message resonated with you, consider leaving your "🥃" as a token of appreciation.

A toast to our family!

@ 39cc53c9:27168656

Read the original blog post

Bitcoin enthusiasts frequently and correctly remark how much value it adds to Bitcoin not to have a face, a leader, or a central authority behind it. This particularity means there isn't a single person to exert control over, or a single human point of failure who could become corrupt or harmful to the project.

Because of this, it is said that no other coin can be equally valuable as Bitcoin in terms of decentralization and trustworthiness. Bitcoin is unique not just for being first, but also because of how the events behind its inception developed. This implies that, from Bitcoin onwards, any coin created would have been created by someone, consequently having an authority behind it. For this and some other reasons, some people refer to Bitcoin as "The Immaculate Conception".

While other coins may have their own unique features and advantages, they may not be able to replicate Bitcoin's community-driven nature. However, one other cryptocurrency shares a similar story of mystery behind its creation: Monero.

History of Monero

Bytecoin and CryptoNote

In March 2014, a Bitcointalk thread titled "Bytecoin. Secure, private, untraceable since 2012" was initiated by a user under the nickname "DStrange"^1^. DStrange presented Bytecoin (BCN) as a unique cryptocurrency, in operation since July 2012. Unlike Bitcoin, it employed a new algorithm known as CryptoNote.

DStrange apparently stumbled upon the Bytecoin website by chance while mining a dying bitcoin fork, and decided to create a thread on Bitcointalk^1^. This sparked curiosity among some users, who wondered how could Bytecoin remain unnoticed since its alleged launch in 2012 until then^2^.

Some time after, a user brought up the "CryptoNote v2.0" whitepaper for the first time, underlining its innovative features^4^. Authored by the pseudonymous Nicolas van Saberhagen in October 2013, the CryptoNote v2 whitepaper^5^ highlighted the traceability and privacy problems in Bitcoin. Saberhagen argued that these flaws could not be quickly fixed, suggesting it would be more efficient to start a new project rather than trying to patch the original^5^, an statement simmilar to the one from Satoshi Nakamoto^6^.

Checking with Saberhagen's digital signature, the release date of the whitepaper seemed correct, which would mean that Cryptonote (v1) was created in 2012^7^, although there's an important detail: "Signing time is from the clock on the signer's computer" ^9^.

Moreover, the whitepaper v1 contains a footnote link to a Bitcointalk post dated May 5, 2013^10^, making it impossible for the whitepaper to have been signed and released on December 12, 2012.

As the narrative developed, users discovered that a significant 80% portion of Bytecoin had been pre-mined^11^ and blockchain dates seemed to be faked to make it look like it had been operating since 2012, leading to controversy surrounding the project.

The origins of CryptoNote and Bytecoin remain mysterious, leaving suspicions of a possible scam attempt, although the whitepaper had a good amount of work and thought on it.

The fork

In April 2014, the Bitcointalk user thankful_for_today, who had also participated in the Bytecoin thread^12^, announced plans to launch a Bytecoin fork named Bitmonero^13^.

The primary motivation behind this fork was "Because there is a number of technical and marketing issues I wanted to do differently. And also because I like ideas and technology and I want it to succeed"^14^. This time Bitmonero did things different from Bytecoin: there was no premine or instamine, and no portion of the block reward went to development.

However, thankful_for_today proposed controversial changes that the community disagreed with. Johnny Mnemonic relates the events surrounding Bitmonero and thankful_for_today in a Bitcointalk comment^15^:

When thankful_for_today launched BitMonero [...] he ignored everything that was discussed and just did what he wanted. The block reward was considerably steeper than what everyone was expecting. He also moved forward with 1-minute block times despite everyone's concerns about the increase of orphan blocks. He also didn't address the tail emission concern that should've (in my opinion) been in the code at launch time. Basically, he messed everything up. Then, he disappeared.

After disappearing for a while, thankful_for_today returned to find that the community had taken over the project. Johnny Mnemonic continues:

I, and others, started working on new forks that were closer to what everyone else was hoping for. [...] it was decided that the BitMonero project should just be taken over. There were like 9 or 10 interested parties at the time if my memory is correct. We voted on IRC to drop the "bit" from BitMonero and move forward with the project. Thankful_for_today suddenly resurfaced, and wasn't happy to learn the community had assumed control of the coin. He attempted to maintain his own fork (still calling it "BitMonero") for a while, but that quickly fell into obscurity.

The unfolding of these events show us the roots of Monero. Much like Satoshi Nakamoto, the creators behind CryptoNote/Bytecoin and thankful_for_today remain a mystery^17^, having disappeared without a trace. This enigma only adds to Monero's value.

Since community took over development, believing in the project's potential and its ability to be guided in a better direction, Monero was given one of Bitcoin's most important qualities: a leaderless nature. With no single face or entity directing its path, Monero is safe from potential corruption or harm from a "central authority".

The community continued developing Monero until today. Since then, Monero has undergone a lot of technological improvements, migrations and achievements such as RingCT and RandomX. It also has developed its own Community Crowdfundinc System, conferences such as MoneroKon and Monerotopia are taking place every year, and has a very active community around it.

Monero continues to develop with goals of privacy and security first, ease of use and efficiency second. ^16^

This stands as a testament to the power of a dedicated community operating without a central figure of authority. This decentralized approach aligns with the original ethos of cryptocurrency, making Monero a prime example of community-driven innovation. For this, I thank all the people involved in Monero, that lead it to where it is today.

If you find any information that seems incorrect, unclear or any missing important events, please contact me and I will make the necessary changes.

Sources of interest

• https://forum.getmonero.org/20/general-discussion/211/history-of-monero
• https://monero.stackexchange.com/questions/852/what-is-the-origin-of-monero-and-its-relationship-to-bytecoin
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monero
• https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.0
• https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=563821.0
• https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=233561
• https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=512747.0
• https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=740112.0
• https://monero.stackexchange.com/a/1024
• https://inspec2t-project.eu/cryptocurrency-with-a-focus-on-anonymity-these-facts-are-known-about-monero/
• https://medium.com/coin-story/coin-perspective-13-riccardo-spagni-69ef82907bd1
• https://www.getmonero.org/resources/about/
• https://www.wired.com/2017/01/monero-drug-dealers-cryptocurrency-choice-fire/
• https://www.monero.how/why-monero-vs-bitcoin
• https://old.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/u8e5yr/satoshi_nakamoto_talked_about_privacy_features/

@ 9727846a:00a18d90

李承鹏：什么加税导致社会巨变，揭竿而起……都不说三千年饿殍遍野，易子而食，只要给口吃的就感谢皇恩浩荡。就说本朝，借口苏修卡我们脖子，几亿人啃了三年树皮，民兵端着枪守在村口，偷摸逃出去的都算勇士。

也不说98年总理大手一挥，一句“改革”，六千万工人下岗，基本盘稳得很。就像电影《钢的琴》里那群东北下岗工人，有的沦落街头，有的拉起乐队在婚礼火葬场做红白喜事，有的靠倒卖废弃钢材被抓，有的当小偷撬门溜锁，还有卖猪肉的，有去当小姐的……但人们按着中央的话语，说这叫“解放思想”。

“工人要替国家想，我不下岗谁下岗”，这是1999年春晚黄宏的小品，你现在觉得反人性，那时台下一片掌声，民间也很亢奋，忽然觉得自己有了力量。人们很容易站在国家立场把自己当炮灰，人民爱党爱国，所以操心什么加税，川普还能比斯大林同志赫鲁晓夫同志更狠吗，生活还能比毛主席时代更糟吗。不就是农产品啊牛肉啊芯片贵些，股票跌些，本来就生存艰难的工厂关的多些，大街上发呆眼神迷茫的人多些，跳楼的年轻人密集些，河里总能捞出不明来历的浮尸……但十五亿人民，会迅速稀释掉这些人和事。比例极小，信心极大，我们祖祖辈辈在从人到猪的生活转换适应力上，一直为世间翘楚。

民心所向，正好武统。

这正是想要的。没有一个帝王会关心你的生活质量，他只关心权力和帝国版图是否稳当。

而这莫名其妙又会和人民的想法高度契合，几千年来如此。所以聊一会儿就会散的，一定散的，只是会在明年春晚以另一种高度正能量的形式展现。

您保重。 25年4月9日

@ f7f4e308:b44d67f4

https://sns-video-hw.xhscdn.com/stream/1/110/258/01e7ec7be81a85850103700195f3c4ba45_258.mp4

@ 39cc53c9:27168656

Read the original blog post

“The future is there... staring back at us. Trying to make sense of the fiction we will have become.” — William Gibson.

This month is the 4th anniversary of kycnot.me. Thank you for being here.

Fifteen years ago, Satoshi Nakamoto introduced Bitcoin, a peer-to-peer electronic cash system: a decentralized currency free from government and institutional control. Nakamoto's whitepaper showed a vision for a financial system based on trustless transactions, secured by cryptography. Some time forward and KYC (Know Your Customer), AML (Anti-Money Laundering), and CTF (Counter-Terrorism Financing) regulations started to come into play.

What a paradox: to engage with a system designed for decentralization, privacy, and independence, we are forced to give away our personal details. Using Bitcoin in the economy requires revealing your identity, not just to the party you interact with, but also to third parties who must track and report the interaction. You are forced to give sensitive data to entities you don't, can't, and shouldn't trust. Information can never be kept 100% safe; there's always a risk. Information is power, who knows about you has control over you.

Information asymmetry creates imbalances of power. When entities have detailed knowledge about individuals, they can manipulate, influence, or exploit this information to their advantage. The accumulation of personal data by corporations and governments enables extensive surveillances.

Such practices, moreover, exclude individuals from traditional economic systems if their documentation doesn't meet arbitrary standards, reinforcing a dystopian divide. Small businesses are similarly burdened by the costs of implementing these regulations, hindering free market competition^1:

How will they keep this information safe? Why do they need my identity? Why do they force businesses to enforce such regulations? It's always for your safety, to protect you from the "bad". Your life is perpetually in danger: terrorists, money launderers, villains... so the government steps in to save us.

‟Hush now, baby, baby, don't you cry Mamma's gonna make all of your nightmares come true Mamma's gonna put all of her fears into you Mamma's gonna keep you right here, under her wing She won't let you fly, but she might let you sing Mamma's gonna keep baby cosy and warm” — Mother, Pink Floyd

We must resist any attack on our privacy and freedom. To do this, we must collaborate.

If you have a service, refuse to ask for KYC; find a way. Accept cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin and Monero. Commit to circular economies. Remove the need to go through the FIAT system. People need fiat money to use most services, but we can change that.

If you're a user, donate to and prefer using services that accept such currencies. Encourage your friends to accept cryptocurrencies as well. Boycott FIAT system to the greatest extent you possibly can.

This may sound utopian, but it can be achieved. This movement can't be stopped. Go kick the hornet's nest.

“We must defend our own privacy if we expect to have any. We must come together and create systems which allow anonymous transactions to take place. People have been defending their own privacy for centuries with whispers, darkness, envelopes, closed doors, secret handshakes, and couriers. The technologies of the past did not allow for strong privacy, but electronic technologies do.” — Eric Hughes, A Cypherpunk's Manifesto

The anniversary

Four years ago, I began exploring ways to use crypto without KYC. I bookmarked a few favorite services and thought sharing them to the world might be useful. That was the first version of kycnot.me — a simple list of about 15 services. Since then, I've added services, rewritten it three times, and improved it to what it is now.

kycnot.me has remained 100% independent and 100% open source^2 all these years. I've received offers to buy the site, all of which I have declined and will continue to decline. It has been DDoS attacked many times, but we made it through. I have also rewritten the whole site almost once per year (three times in four years).

The code and scoring algorithm are open source (contributions are welcome) and I can't arbitrarly change a service's score without adding or removing attributes, making any arbitrary alterations obvious if they were fake. You can even see the score summary for any service's score.

I'm a one-person team, dedicating my free time to this project. I hope to keep doing so for many more years. Again, thank you for being part of this.

@ 8bad797a:8461b4bc

Frank Palmer Purcell

I claim to be a Catholic American; even though I now follow the Russian Orthodox tradition, I do so in a small sui juris Church in communion with Rome, not Constantinople. When I was a little kid, knee high to a trilobite, some folks still had a problem with that, with being Catholic and American, I mean; Orthodoxy was beyond our horizon. My mother was one of those who had the problem. As long as I was a Catholic like my father (and her own mother, as a little girl in Ireland and on the lower East Side), I couldn't be a real American like her father, a bookbinder replaced by a machine, disowned by his family for marrying out of caste, who spent his days in the nearest tavern. "Pop" Palmer died at 78, and four years later I was born and named for him, or at least that was my mother's intention. The priest baptized me in Latin, as was the custom in those dark days, and pronounced "Frank" so that it sounded like the nickname ("Frenchy") of a (doubtless) dirty medieval Italian beggar baptized Giovanni.

My early spirituality, to use a ten dollar word for a fifty cent thing, was more American than Franciscan. Emerson and Thoreau, Melville and Whitman spoke and still speak to me as no European voice can, and when I came to study philosophy in a serious way I found the Americans, Josiah Royce, Rufus Jones and Ernest Hocking, C. I. (not C. S.) Lewis and Brand (not Paul) Blanshard, speaking a language that was my own, though by then the professoriate resonated to other tonalities. Though I fell in love with Schopenhauer and Kierkegaard, as every teenager who meets them must, and inhaled the sweet incense and felt the calming breeze of the shrines of the East, as my generation did, and was introduced to the mysteries of Thomas Aquinas by the subtle writings of Jacques Maritain, as we should all be, when I came to take hold of the great tradition of Western theology in a personal way, I found the distinctly American perspectives of Paul Tillich and Richard (not Reinhold) Niebuhr most helpful.

Back in 1963, in the New Jersey family television room, Joseph Campbell's urbane mythological sermons on Channel 13 (still a Newark station) touched something deep inside me an hour after Bishop Sheen's passionate exhortations on Channel 5 had left me (perhaps deplorably) cold. I would go up to my room and say my prayers after a fashion in time for the nightly racetrack bugle and exhilarating nostalgia of Arthur Fiedler's performance of the Bahnfrei Polka of Edouard Strauss, which introduced the nightly raconteurship of the incomparable Jean Shepherd, and, if I were still awake, the more outre world of Long John Nebel and his, ah, eccentric guests. You can't get more American than that. Or more New Jersey.

As the child of a mixed marriage and a pupil of the public schools I was not warmly welcome in the Catholic ghetto. Still, in those years of the civil rights revolution and the Vietnam War, with the polarized positions of right and left equally abstract and inhumane, I found my take on national affairs reflecting the distinctly Catholic perspectives of Dorothy Day and Thomas Merton on the one hand and Frederick Wilhelmsen and Erik Maria, Ritter von Kuehnelt-­Leddihn on the other. And, though the writings of Rufus Jones, to which I even now frequently turn for inspiration, had led me to seek out a Quaker education, I found it was the Catholic scholars and pioneers of the spirit who were beginning the interreligious dialogue which was then and is now one of the pressing needs of humanity. In graduate school I became a devoted Americanist, that is, a scholar dedicated to using the tools of the historian of ideas to get some sense of what this place is all about, this gallimaufry of peoples who have somehow, in spite of all learned and astute prognostications, made themselves and each other into a kind of unity, a unity which it may take someone like the present [at the time of writing] Pope (and there isn't really anyone else very much like him) to discern.

I do not speak of Joseph Ratzinger, Benedict XVI, as a theologian nor even as a philosopher, but I must note that in New York and Washington in 2008 he revealed himself as an historian of ideas of astonishing and exquisite discernment. By this I mean, among other things, of course, that he strongly confirmed the discoveries and intimations of my own forty years of brooding in and on America. I was fortunate indeed to turn up at Columbia University's Teachers College when Douglas Sloan was putting the finishing touches on his groundbreaking study of the Scottish Enlightenment as the great inspiration of the American colonists, especially the intellectual elite, in the age of the War of Independence. Sloan's insights would eventually be popularized, without their scholarly context and qualifications, in Garry Wills' bestselling Inventing America, and it is now taken for granted that our Founding Father Across the Sea was not John Locke, but the Ulster Scot Francis Hutcheson (1694-­1746).

Indeed, the Evangelical position seems to be that it was Hutcheson who corrupted American civilization at the root, turning us from the Calvinist faith once delivered to Jonathan Edwards (himself a notorious Lockean, but never mind). In fact, Oxford University Press recently published a six hundred page tract to that effect, authored at Wheaton. Hutcheson, and the Scottish school of Common Sense which he inspired, held that all human beings, Pagan and Christian, Protestant and Catholic, share a basic ability to come to an understanding of certain fundamental truths, and can come to agreement upon these with the aid of reason. Calvinism, especially the neo­Calvinism which is the unquestioned (because unquestionable) paradigm of the Evangelical academy, holds that the elect have a unique and divinely sanctioned "world view" which stands in judgment of all others in all particulars. To these zealots the very idea that there can be any common human ground between believers and unbelievers is itself a damnable heresy. Still, it is the damnable heresy on which American society and civilization are built, and the Calvinism which so despises it is a near kin of those varieties of Islam that Benedict so boldly challenged at Regensburg in 2006.

When the same Benedict addressed the United Nations a year and a half later, he pointed out how the principles of that august body, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights whose anniversary he was commemorating, grew out of the Natural Law philosophy of CounterReformation Scholasticism, particularly as formulated by Francisco de Vitoria (1492?–1546). Needless to say, the "Scottish Philosophy" of a later age grew out of this tradition as well, and many of the American founders were directly familiar with Natural Law theory as expounded by Catholic ­­ and Protestant ­­ Scholastics. On the same visit Benedict made ample use of the language of sacred architecture, as if in conscious homage to the fact that he was honoring a country founded by Freemasons, who used that language to teach the conformity of right living to the law of nature and nature's God. If he was giving a Catholic interpretation to this symbolism, so did the Catholic Jacobites who were prominent in the Craft before the Masonic movement became identified with indifferentism, anticlericalism, and finally (at least on the Continent) atheism. It was striking indeed that to one steeped in American tradition it was the Pope of Rome of all people who was speaking our own language in a familiar tone, and the neo­Calvinist Evangelicals who jibbered and muttered in an outlandish and menacing jargon more Muslim than Christian. I sure wonder what Mommy would think.

Natural Law. What is that to us today; what was it to me in what we call the Vietnam era? In 2008 the issue was torture, and a President of the United States who took pleasure in his presumed power to order it, to physically degrade his enemies, to morally degrade our own soldiers. I am proud that when Mr. Bush asked our military for advice on the subject, they replied that he has no such power, that such actions are contrary to our laws and the traditions of our armed services, and, moreover, ineffectual. (The latter point is an important indication that powerful men order torture not to accomplish anything, but to pleasure themselves.) And I am ashamed that he chose to take the advice of Israeli advisors, who hold to another morality, one going back to ancient Assyria, and profoundly alien to our own Christian civilization.

In my youth the overriding issue was not torture, but terrorism. Not that torture didn't take place. At graduate school I knew a former naval officer who had interrogated captured Viet Minh and Viet Cong; the "extraordinary means" had been applied by our allies by the time he was introduced to his prisoners, and the specialists who had softened them up had already moved on or backed off. The issues before us then were atrocious acts of war against civilian populations in North and South Vietnam, in Laos and Cambodia, in Central and South America, even in Germany and Japan a generation before, not to mention the subversion and corruption of constitutional government in America by a regime that felt justified in using any means necessary to keep power away from the Communists and their sympathizers, the Democrats and liberal Republicans.

Nor was such evil a monopoly of the so­called right. A young antiwar activist formerly associated with Martin Luther King even went so far as to criticize the sainted Che Guevara for not being enough of a terrorist to tear the peasantry away from their conformity to a "fascist" state. (Two generations later the man was advising George Bush.) In my undergraduate days I had been a loyal member of the conservative movement, back when the Intercollegiate Studies Institute was still called the Intercollegiate Society of Individualists, some members of the Students for a Democratic Society still honored democracy, and Murray Rothbard and Carl Ogelsby were moving "beyond left and right." If I got nothing more from the conservatives, and in fact I got a great deal more, it was an ever deepening admiration for Edmund Burke. Burke was prized by the cold warriors because his Letters on a Regicide Peace could be used to justify a war of extermination against the Soviet Union, the Peoples Republic of China, and any other people so temerarious as not join the alliance against these forces of absolute evil and subordinate their interests to those of the United States. A superficial reading, I need hardly remark. But Burke was not only the acute critic of the French Revolution who predicted the Terror from its earliest signs, he also was a tireless advocate for Irish freedom, particularly freedom of conscience, and a loyal ally of the American colonies in Parliament. But Burke's finest hour came at the end of his long career, when he boldly fought against the depredations of Warren Hastings and the British East India Company. Anyone who wants to know what natural law meant to the men of the Eighteenth Century, including those who liberated the American colonies and forged their political constitution can get a good sense of it from the eighth day (!) of his impeachment of Hastings before the House of Lords, which, I warn you, I have quoted before and shall no doubt quote again:

No man can lawfully govern himself according to his own will—much less can one person be governed by the will of another. We are all born in subjection—all born equally, high and low, governors and governed, in subjection to one great, immutable, preexistent law, prior to all our devices, and prior to all our contrivances, paramount to all our ideas and to all our sensations, antecedent to our very existence, by which we are knit and connected in the eternal frame of the universe, out of which we can not stir. This great law does not arise from our conventions or compacts; on the contrary, it gives to our conventions and compacts all the force and sanction they can have: it does not arise from our vain institutions. Every good gift is of God, all power is of God; and He who has given the power, and from whom alone it originates, will never suffer the exercise of it to be practised upon any less solid foundation than the power itself. If, then, all dominion of man over man is the effect of the divine disposition, it is bound by the eternal laws of Him that gave it, with which no human authority can dispense; neither he that exercises it, nor even those who are subject to it; and, if they were mad enough to make an express compact, that should release their magistrate from 5 his duty, and should declare their lives, liberties and properties, dependent upon, not rules and laws, but his mere capricious will, that covenant would be void. This arbitrary power is not to be had by conquest. Nor can any sovereign have it by succession; for no man can succeed to fraud, rapine, and violence. Those who give and those who receive arbitrary power are alike criminal; and there is no man but is bound to resist it to the best of his power, wherever it shall show its face to the world.

Mr. Jefferson couldn't have put it better. Human rights are inalienable --­­ you can't give them away, and when they are taken away there is not only the right of rebellion, but the solemn duty to resist. The difficulty of natural law theory, of course, is in the details. Back in '68 Pope Paul VI had announced that artificial contraception was against the natural law, but this decision did not immediately commend itself to the common sense of many of those who were not subject to his religious authority. I don't mean he was wrong, or that he exceeded his authority, or even that his decision was inopportune. But when the Supreme Court, alarmed by the birthrate of blacks and an end to white domination of the nation and the world, soon mandated abortion on demand, it was all too easy to dismiss arguments in favor of the human being of the embryonic human as religious dogma rather than an honest attempt to think things through. Since then the concept of natural law is often dismissed by feminists and homosexualists (to use Mr. Vidal's eloquent term) as a mere excuse for oppression. It does seem to me, however, that the insistent denial of the very idea of human rights does nothing to advance the liberation of humanity or any part of it. But maybe that's just me.

In any case, I don't think America was ever anything like the sort of Catholic nation that, say, Portugal was under the late Dr. Salazar, or is very likely to get there any time soon, despite the best wishes and even efforts of some of my friends. I do think that for a good part of our history a great many people in public life would have said that the words of Burke I have quoted express their most basic political convictions and sentiments as well as anyone ever could, and this puts America right at the center of the great tradition of Western civilization. And this was true long after old Europe had gone down other ways, the ways of the French revolution, the reaction against it, and the nationalism that synthesized the worst of both. To be sure, we have had nationalists here, and have them today, and have preached our crusades to end slavery, make the world safe for democracy, eradicate the evil empire of the moment, but there is, if not always a ringing and uncontested affirmation of civilized values, by which I mean the values of our civilization, at least a powerful nostalgia for them, and a sincere wish that one could believe in them with a good conscience, a good conscience which postmodernist deconstructionism denies us. A good conscience which Joseph Ratzinger Benedict XVI, who has suffered modernity as few of us have and thought more deeply about it, was offering us back.

To be perfectly frank, it took the Catholic Church a good long time to recognize the Christian virtues of Enlightenment, even the Scottish one, and Revolution, even the American one. Better late than never. And despite the mantric invocation of John Courtney Murray, the Church in America has not always been on the side of the angels. The theology of the American Church has always been Jansenist, not Catholic, combining the worst of Pelagius and Calvin, making Boston Irish the kissing cousins of Cotton Mather. The American Church never permitted itself to be organized according to canon law because this would limit the despotism of prelates. The American Church refused to acknowledge the priesthood of Eastern Catholics ordained as married men, driving the Catholic Ruthenians into communion with the Patriarch of Moscow (the present Orthodox Church in America), and later blackmailing a bankrupt papacy into forbidding married priests throughout the Western hemisphere, driving a second group of Ruthenians into communion with the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople (the present American Carpatho­Russian Orthodox Diocese).

They American Cathholic Church wouldn't even allow American women to become real nuns, or foreign nuns to come to America without renouncing their vows. The vast majority of Catholic women called nuns are nothing of the sort, but religious sisters first organized as cheap labor at the beck and call of the clergy, and now loose cannons like the Papessas Mother Angelica and Sister Joan. Yes, one or two real abbeys for women were founded in the last century, but the American Church continues to hold the contemplative life in deepest contempt, even for women. Women religious lead the crusade against contemplative traditions, and now rail against the Church as an organ of worldly power from which they are unjustly excluded.

Deprived of traditional spiritual direction, a lamentable number of priests "demythologized" the Faith while looking to worldly culture for a way of salvation. Many found it in the gospel of orgasm, and undertook to liberate the young men in their care by sharing the only joy they thought worth having, with results we see today.

Catholic involvement in American public life has not been edifying either. The American bishops turned their backs on Benedict XV's attempt to end the slaughter in the trenches and refused to make any move to bring Woodrow Wilson over to the side of peace. As patriotic Americans, they in effect signed on to the WASP jihad to extirpate the Catholic powers of the Old World. A couple of generations later millions of Catholic schoolchildren were forced to write letters demanding that the Senate not censure that great American Joseph McCarthy, who was probably the Soviet Union's most valuable (presumably unwitting) asset in American public life, who had discredited all responsible criticism of Communism and its supporters by viciously slandering the United States Army, the Department of State, and the Protestant clergy as nests of traitors. Some years later Catholic activists succeeded in driving the voices of moderation out of the Republican Party, and the urban ethnic social conservatives out of the Democratic, and the forms of civility from the public square.

Americans can be forgiven for not rushing to enlist in the nearest Roman Catholic parish. There are other conversions needed, perhaps beginning with American Catholics themselves. Back in the days of Reagan a fellow named Alan Bloom made an almost persuasive case that the American Mind was closed to the Great Tradition of Western Civilization, and needed to be reopened. Alas, Bloom was a Neoconservative, a follower of their guru Leo Strauss, and a teacher of a a number of shady operatives of the Program for the New American Century type, as Saul Bellow's last novel so amusingly portrays him. Bloom's Great Tradition was something cobbled together by Machiavelli and others out of the misunderstood shards of ancient paganism; thinkers and writers tainted by the Christian gospel remained under embargo. (Mortimer Adler was less fearful, more intellectually curious, but look where he ended up.) It took a Bavarian Pope to remind us that the basic principles of our cherished hopes of international organization and human rights, and indeed of the American founding itself, go back to the Iberian scholastics of the Catholic Reformation. ("Counter­Reformation" is misleadingly negative.)

Benedict's reminder harmonized well with my own studies in the history of philosophy. I began some five decades ago with the riddle, the riddles, of Charles Sanders Peirce (1839­ - 1914), our own and only philosopher to be ranked with the likes of Aristotle and Kant. What was this Common Sense he went on and on about? (The Scottish Philosophy was studiously ignored in the academy; it still is.) As I said, I was lucky to find out. Now John Deely has been showing that any postmodern philosophy worthy of the name, one founded on semeiology rather than Cartesian (or empiricist) methodologism, needs to go back to Peirce and with Peirce back to the very beginnings of the theory of signification as we find them in John Poinsot (1589 ­ 1644). Poinsot, as it happens, is part of the same Iberian Renaissance to which Benedict has now called our attention. Indeed, under another name (John of St. Thomas) Poinsot inspired the neo Thomism of Jacques Maritain which undergirded the Christian Humanism of Paul VI and many other Fathers of the Second Vatican Council. (His treatise on *The Gifts of the Holy Spirit, as interpreted by theologians often dismissed as too conservative, is behind the rather daring notion that all Christians are called to holiness in this life, and, indeed to the mystical path of acquired contemplation, and thus such more recent developments as Centering Prayer, the World Community for Christian Meditation, and the ommunion and Liberation movement.

As if all this were not enough, Murray Rothbard, no Christian he, though personally excommunicated and anathematized by Ayn Rand for not repudiating his openly Christian wife, has argued that the Austrian School of Economics, the Old Liberalism of von Mises and Hayek, goes back not so much to Adam Smith (who missed a few points), as to the scholastic philosophers of Spain and Portugal in the early modern period. Mention Iberian philosophy to the American of average education and he will look at you as though you had spoken of Uzbek grand opera ­­ or (indeed) the Scottish Enlightenment. He might even tell you that Spanish ignorance, superstition, and bigotry are precisely what God sent Englishmen into the New World to stamp out: the legenda negra. Needless to say, this is not a view of history a good many newcomers to the United States are likely to tolerate with equanimity, and it is just as well that it isn't true.

Once we retire that vulgar prejudice against Hispanidad we might just get a fair hearing for the work of Xavier Zubiri, the only European thinker of the last century who compares with Peirce for breadth of learning and depth of discernment ­­ as well as sheer unadulterated difficulty. If nothing else, the challenge of Catholicity invites Americans to break down the walls of the Anglo­Saxon ghetto, which do not serve us well now, if they ever did. But it may also provoke a new interest in our own Golden Age of (Protestant) theology. Let me set the stage for this with an extended quotation from Joseph Ratzinger's 1977 essay, "Is Faith Really Good News?" (Now translated in Principles of Catholic Theology:

Truth is not always comfortable for man, but it is only truth that makes him free and only freedom that brings him joy. Now, however, we must ask more precisely: What makes a man joyful? What robs him of joy? What puts him at odds with himself? What opens him to himself and to others? When we want to describe the most extreme form of being at odds with existence, we often say of an individual that he does not like himself. But whom or what is he to like who does not like himself? Something very importamt makes its appearance here: egoism, certainly, is natural to man and needs no encouragement; but this is not true of self­acceptance. The former must be overcome; the latter must be discovered, and it is assuredly one of the most dangerous errors of Christian teachers and moralists that they have all too often confused the two and, by exorcizing the affirmation of self, have enabled egoism to avenge such a betrayal by becoming all the more rampant ­­ this, ultimately, of what the French have labeled the maladie catholique: one who wants to live only on the supernatural level and to the exclusion of self will be, in the end, without a self but not, for that reason, selfless. (79)

Reading this a day or two after Ratzinger's papification I couldn't help thinking of our own Paul Tillich, whose seminal sermon "You are Accepted" baptized the human potential movement (as it was called), whose Courage to Be is a perennial best seller even after half a century, whose Systematic Theology Martin Luther King had asked for in his Georgia prison cell, and I myself poured over eagerly as an Earlham undergraduate. Of course the problematic goes back to Kierkegaard's penetrating analysis of despair, and, indeed to Luther's experience of divine wrath and mercy. Now it is all very well to say we must accept our acceptance, somehow (mysticism? art?) so ground ourselves in the very Ground of Being as to powerfully affirm our being against the powers of nonbeing. But is it true? That is the question haunting Tillich, Martin Luther King, and modern American culture down to our own time, which Ratzinger, challenged by Nietzsche and Camus, dared to speak aloud:

We come now to the all­important question: Is it true, then, when someone says to me: "It is good that you exist"? Is it really good? Is it not possible that that person's love, which wills my existence, is just a tragic error? If the love that gives me courage to exist is not based on truth, then I must, in the end, come to curse the love that deceives me that maintains in existence something that were better destroyed. This dilemma could be 10 strikingly illustrated by reference to the interpretations of the contemporary experience of life in Sartre or Camus or in the attitudes of the new Left. Even without such evidence, it is obvious, however, that the apparently so simple act of liking myself, of being at one with myself, actually raises the question of the whole universe It raises the question of truth: Is it good that I exist? Is it good that anything at all exists? is the world good? How many persons today would dare to affirm this question from the heart ­­ to believe it is good that they exist? That is the source of the anxiety and despair that incessantly affect mankind. Love alone is of no avail. It serves no purpose if truth is not on its side. Only when truth and love are in harmony can man know joy. For it is truth that makes man free. (80)

And the question of truth won't leave us alone. For Tillich the Christian faith was perhaps a true myth, but, perhaps true only the way that other myths are true. He tended to sacramentalize modern art, leftish politics, and sexual liberation; the president of Union Seminary had to remind him that it looked bad for their most eminent theologian not to go to church. The tragedy of attempting to make a religion of art, politics, or sex is obvious by now, and it as a sad circumstance that the leadership of the American Catholic Church were seminarians at a time when Catholic theology looked to the Protestants for validation, and Tillich was at the height of his prestige in the liberal denominations. The painful story of Tillich's sexual obsessions is now well known enough from his wife's two memoirs, Dr. King's escapades have stained the memory of the civil rights movement as much as his infatuation with the Soviet power, ­­ and the sexual scandals of the American Church are unspeakably worse, blighting the lives of tens (hundreds?) of thousands of children. That is something Benedict, on his recent visit, would not allow us to forget for even a moment. But at least he offers a remedy in that confrontation with the truth of our being which liberal theology, Catholic and Protestant (though perhaps not Orthodox),attempted to evade:

The content of the Christian evangelium reads: God finds man so important that he himself has suffered for man. The Cross, which was for Nietzche the most detestable expression of the negative character of the Christian religion, is in truth the center of the evangelium, the glad tidings: "It is good that you exist" ­­ No, "It is necessary that you exist." The Cross is the approbation of our existence, not in words, but in an act so completely radical that it caused God to become flesh and pierced this flesh to the quick; that, to God, it was worth the death of his incarnate Son. One who is so loved that the other identifies his life with this love and no longer desires to live if he is deprived of it; one who is loved even unto death ­­ such a one knows that he is truly loved. But if God so loves, then we are loved in truth. Then love is truth, and truth is love. Then life is worth living. This is the evangelium. (81)

The whole idea of the Cross as God's affirmation of man will strike many an American as shocking, ludicrous even. It the ca­ross not the stock in trade of a thousand "evangelists" as the ultimate proof of our total depravity, the ultimate refutation of all aspirations for human freedom and dignity? Surely Nietzsche got that from his preacher father, though it is hard to find any such slander of humanity in either the written scriptures or the teaching of the Fathers of the Church (except for Augustine, and that on a bad day he later repented). I am happy to note that Ratzinger's point of view, scriptural, patristic, and Benedictine in every sense of the term is very close to what some in the Evangelical churches are calling "gracious Christianity," for that is what it is. That movement is still a prophetic minority in the churches and the academy, and we still need to come to terms with the main stream of American spirituality as represented, for better and worse, by Tillich. And Ratzinger, even in his early days as a professor, has given us the means to do just that. Not everything in the American theological mainstream, and not everything in Tillich, needs to be discarded wholesale.

A follower of Ratiznger's good friend Don Liugi Giussani who studies Tillich's theology will find close analogies between Tillich's method of correlation and the principle of correspondence which Giussani urged on members of the Communion and Liberation movement he founded, a movement in which the Ratzinger Pope (to use the Catholic in­jargon) takes more than a passing interest ­­ he is said even now to take part in a weekly School of Community in which movement people use that method to explore the meaning of the Gospel in relation to their own day to day lives, and the meaning of their lives in relation to the Gospel, though his episcopal orders forbid his formal membership in the Fraternity. I do not mean to imply that Benedict is a follower of Giussani in matters of pure theology, but it seems clear that he recognizes Giussani's method as the best practical application of the theological principles both men learned from such masters of La Nouvelle Theologie as de Lubac, von Balthasar, and (with reservations) Rahner.

But before I move away from the idea of correspondence, the method of correlation, I should mention that this became the life work of two American philosophers, Ira Progoff, with whom and with whose students I was privileged to do postdoctoral work, and Eugene Gendlin, both known as psychologists for the contributions they have made to psychology, who offer what I can only describe as means of spiritual direction. The few folks who remember Tillich today often contrast him with Reinhold Niebuhr, his colleague at Union, who inspired the Cold war mainstream much as Tillich inspired the New Left, and whom Don Gius was fond of quoting.

But the man to rediscover is Reinhold's brother Richard, a theologian's theologian, that is, one whose writings were never taken up by the movers and shakers of middlebrow culture. His Meaning of Revelation shows the kind of emphasis the Catholic Church in Europe is coming around to, or coming back to, as it is very much in the spirit of the Fathers of the Church, the Eastern Fathers in particular. For many of us what may be most prophetic in his life work is his refusal of the temptation of neo­conservatism to which Reinhold gave in to his fame and profit. Reinhold ostentatiously resigned from the Fellowship of Reconciliation in the early '30s in righteous indignation that some Christians did not demand that the government do something (what?) about the Japanese in China. Richard, on the other hand, had no hope for the efficacy of political, economic, and military power exercised by the United States against Japan. Sensing that Western Christendom was going the way of old Rome, he thought that the best Christian response was that pioneered by St. Benedict, from whom of course among others the last pontiff took his name. For him the issue was not Japan against China, or the United States against Japan, but, to cite the title of a 1935 book to which he contributed, The Church Against the World. A few years later Dietrich von Hildebrand, in his villa in Florence, was giving the retreats later published as Transformation in Christ to Christian activists who intended to remain behind in Nazi Germany to keep the light of Christian civilization burning in that dark time, and Dietrich Bonhoeffer would take refuge with the Benedictines in his own effort to do the same. A few pages before the long passage I have quoted, Ratzinger's Principles of Catholic Theology gives a lengthy exegesis of Hildebrand's text as the model for Christian repentance. I can't help wondering if this forbidden book is one that his father had hidden around the house, as Evangelicals might have concealed Bonhoeffer's Cost of Discipleship. Discipleship and transformation are not matters of effortful striving, but the response to a calling which is a revelation.

Richard ­­ is particularly enlightening on revelation as calling. He shows that it is not the communication of some kind of knowldege, however supernatural or esoteric, by possession of which we are justified, elevated from the companionship of our neighbors, saved from the world; that would be Gnosticism. Rather, revelation is participation in an ongoing event, a relationship with a person previously unknown, or at least unrecognized. Some words toward the end of The Meaning of Revelation put the matter thus:

Revelation means the moment in our history through which we know ourselves to be known from beginning to end, in which we are apprehended by the knower; it means the the self­disclosure of the judge. Revelation means that we find ourselves to be valued rather than valuing and that all our values are transvaluated by the activity of a universal valuer. When a price is put upon our heads, which is not our price, when the unfairness of all the fair prices we have placed on things is shown up, when the great riches of God reduce our wealth to poverty, that is revelation. When we find out that we are no longer thinking him, but that he first thought us, that is revelation. Revelation is the emergence of the person on whose external garments and body we had looked as objects of our masterful and curious understanding. Revelation means that in our common history the fate that lowers over us as persons in our communities reveals itself to be a person in community with us. What this means for us cannot be expressed in the impersonal ways of creeds or other propositions but only in responsive acts of a personal character. we acknowledge revelation by no third person proposition, such as that there is a God, but only in the direct confession of the heart, "Thou art my God."... From this point forward we must listen for the remembered voice in all the sounds that assail our ears, and look for the remembered activity in all the actions of the world upon us. The God who reveals himself in Jesus Christ is now trusted and known in the contemporary God, revealing himself in every event, but we do not understand how we could tract his working in these happenings if he did not make himself known to us through the memory of Jesus Christ; nor do we know how we should be able to interpret all the words we read as words of God save by the aid of this Rosetta stone. (80 -­ 81)

Catholics who remember the discourses of the Pope Benedict will find the flavor of this passage very Benedictine ­­ in both senses of the term. Those who follow the way of Luigi Giussani find their spirit particularly familiar, for those of them who live in community, including the little band that managed Benedict's household and conduct the School of Community he attended, are known precisely as Memores Domini, those who strive to keep the Lord constantly in mind, and allow their own memory and mindfulness, personal and collective, painful and pleasing, on the surface of association or deeply hidden, to be transformed by their relationship with God in Christ, their participation in the ongoing incarnation of the Word of God: the God who is the author of our nature, and an incarnation that runs to meet the deepest desire of that nature with more that could have been imagined. What this means in the experience of living our life is well stated at the conclusion of Niebuhr's great work:

The God who reveals himself in Jesus Christ meets no unresponsive will but the living spirit of men in search of all good. And he fulfills our need. Here is the one for whose sake all life and every life is worth living, even lives that seem bereft of beauty, of truth and of goodness. The glimpse of his great glory in the face of Jesus Christ, its reflections in the darkened mirrors of the saints' adorations intimate a God who is good beyond all that is good and fair beyond all fairness. Yet the goodness that shines upon us through the moment of revelation is not the glory or the goodness we had expected in our thoughts about deity. The essential goodness of the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ is the simple everyday goodness of love ­­ the value which belongs to a person rather [than] the value we find in an idea or a pattern; it is the goodness which exists as pure activity. He fulfills our expectation of the intrinsic good and yet this adorable goodness differs from everything we had expected, and puts our expectations to shame. We sought a good to love and were found by a good that loved us. And therewith all our religious ambitions are brought low, all our desires to be ministers of God are humbled; he is our minister. By that revelation we are convicted of having corrupted our religious life through our unquenchable desire to keep ourselves with our love of our good in the center of the picture. Here is the goodness that empties itself, and makes itself of no reputation, a goodness that is all outgoing, reserving nothing for itself, yet having all things. So we must begin to rethink all our definitions of deity and convert all our worship and our prayers. Revelation is not the development and not the elimination of our natural religion; it is the revolution of the religious life. (98 -­ 99)

But what does all this mean to one who stands outside the light of revelation, who relies on the reason of Western Civilization, the common sense of the founding Fathers? If believers and unbelievers are to take part in one community, what do we have to say to each other? This is the point of Benedict's challenge to the Muslim world, the question of what could make the libertine Doctor Franklin and the evangelical President Witherspoon active participants in the same foundational dialog. Niebuhr has an answer, and it is the same answer as Benedict:

The pure reason does not need to be limited in order that room be made for faith, but faith emancipates the pure reason from the necessity of defending and guarding the interests of selves, which are now found to be established and guarded, not by nature, but by the God of revelation whose garment nature is. (91 ­- 92)

It is faith that liberates and, indeed, inspires us to invent, develop, explore, and test scientific understandings which would otherwise be too much for the vain imaginings of our all too human hearts:

To know the person is to lose all sense of shame because of kinship with the clod and the ape. The mind is freed to pursue its knowledge of the external world disinterestedly not by the conviction that nothing matters, but by the faith that nothing God has made is mean or unclean. Hence any failure of Christians to develop scientific knowledge of the world is not an indication of their loyalty to the revealed God but of their unbelief. (90 -­ 91)

Seven going on eight decades after these words were published, ministers of "religion" are still attempting to prevent the teaching of ascertained facts of human biology in order to retain the authority of their own stupidly selectively literalistic reading of the Bible; some of the more advanced institutions of Evangelical learning defiantly profess a form of Calvinism in which some sort of theology remains the queen of the sciences in an unconstitutional monarchy, with no other discipline permitted its own proper autonomy and integrity; while in more numerous groves of Academus, even the Roman Catholic plantations, men and women of faith are quickly brushed off as obvious enemies of intellect.

My own mother, as I have said already, doubted that you can be a good Catholic and a real American at the same time. Pope Benedict warned his flock that they will not be good Catholics until they are Americans to the extent of acknowledging the law of nature and of nations as developed by Victoria (among others, some of them Scots), and aspiring to live in local, regional national and international communities under that law, in which the freedom and dignity of the human person are given the first priority. On the other hand I do not see how we can be real Americans without realizing that the aspirations of 1776 and 1789 are grounded in that natural law, and grew up as the fruit of a civilization in which the reason of Greece and Rome reached full maturity in the care of Mother Church, a church whose members, including the hierarchy, were not always consistently faithful to it, calling forth reformations, enlightenments, and even revolutions. I think we must all be Catholic at least in the wider sense of loyalty to that civilization, and our best way may well be to reappropriate the riches of the golden age of American philosophy and theology, of which the work of H. Richard Niebuhr is a small but important part.

Sources quoted: Edmund Burke, Impeachment of Warren Hastings before the House of Lords (numerous editions), eighth day. Joseph Ratzinger, Principles of Catholic Theology. San Fransisco: Ignatius, 1987. H. Richard Niebuhr, The Meaning of Revelation [1941]. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2006.

© FP Purcell

@ 2dd9250b:6e928072

Vi recentemente um post onde a pessoa diz que aquele final do filme O Doutrinador (2019) não faz sentido porque mesmo o protagonista explodindo o Palácio dos Três Poderes, não acaba com a corrupção no Brasil.

Progressistas não sabem ler e não conseguem interpretar textos corretamente. O final de Doutrinador não tem a ver com isso, tem a ver com a relação entre o Herói e a sua Cidade.

Nas histórias em quadrinhos há uma ligação entre a cidade e o Super-Herói. Gotham City por exemplo, cria o Batman. Isso é mostrado em The Batman (2022) e em Batman: Cavaleiro das Trevas, quando aquele garoto no final, diz para o Batman não fugir, porque ele queria ver o Batman de novo. E o Comissário Gordon diz que o "Batman é o que a cidade de Gotham precisa."

Batman: Cavaleiro das Trevas Ressurge mostra a cidade de Gotham sendo tomada pela corrupção e pela ideologia do Bane. A Cidade vai definhando em imoralidade e o Bruce, ao olhar da prisão a cidade sendo destruída, decide que o Batman precisa voltar porque se Gotham for destruída, o Batman é destruído junto. E isso o da forças para consegue fugir daquele poço e voltar para salvar Gotham.

Isso também é mostrado em Demolidor. Na série Demolidor o Matt Murdock sempre fala que precisa defender a cidade Cozinha do Inferno; que o Fisk não vai dominar a cidade e fazer o que ele quiser nela. Inclusive na terceira temporada isso fica mais evidente na luta final na mansão do Fisk, onde Matt grita que agora a cidade toda vai saber o que ele fez; a cidade vai ver o mal que ele é para Hell's Kitchen, porque a gente sabe que o Fisk fez de tudo para a imagem do Demolidor entrar e descrédito perante os cidadãos, então o que acontece no final do filme O Doutrinador não significa que ele está acabando com a corrupção quando explode o Congresso, ele está praticamente interrompendo o ciclo do sistema, colocando uma falha em sua engrenagem.

Quando você ouve falar de Brasília, você pensa na corrupção dos políticos, onde a farra acontece,, onde corruptos desviam dinheiro arrecadado dos impostos, impostos estes que são centralizados na União. Então quando você ouve falarem de Brasília, sempre pensa que o pessoal que mora lá, mora junto com tudo de podre que acontece no Brasil.

Logo quando o Doutrinador explode tudo ali, ele está basicamente destruindo o mecanismo que suja Brasília. Ele está fazendo isso naquela cidade. Porque o símbolo da cidade é justamente esse, a farsa de que naquele lugar o povo será ouvido e a justiça será feita. Ele está destruindo a ideologia de que o Estado nos protege, nos dá segurança, saúde e educação. Porque na verdade o Estado só existe para privilegiar os políticos, funcionários públicos de auto escalão, suas famílias e amigos. Enquanto que o povo sofre para sustentar a elite política. O protagonista Miguel entendeu isso quando a filha dele morreu na fila do SUS.

@ a93d7cd3:ae5ce5dd

Test Nostr

@ cd17b2d6:8cc53332

🚀 Instantly Send Spendable Flash BTC, ETH, & USDT — Fully Blockchain-Verifiable!

Welcome to the cutting edge of crypto innovation: the ultimate tool for sending spendable Flash Bitcoin (BTC), Ethereum (ETH), and USDT transactions. Our advanced blockchain simulation technology employs 🔥 Race/Finney-style mechanisms, producing coins indistinguishable from authentic blockchain-confirmed tokens. Your transactions are instantly trackable and fully spendable for durations from 60 to 360 days!

🌐 Visit cryptoflashingtool.com for complete details.

🌟 Why Choose Our Crypto Flashing Service? Crypto Flashing is perfect for crypto enthusiasts, blockchain developers, ethical hackers, security professionals, and digital entrepreneurs looking for authenticity combined with unparalleled flexibility.

🎯 Our Crypto Flashing Features: ✅ Instant Blockchain Verification: Transactions appear completely authentic, complete with real blockchain confirmations, transaction IDs, and wallet addresses.

🔒 Maximum Security & Privacy: Fully compatible with VPNs, TOR, and proxy servers, ensuring absolute anonymity and protection.

🖥️ Easy-to-Use Software: Designed for Windows, our intuitive platform suits both beginners and experts, with detailed, step-by-step instructions provided.

📅 Customizable Flash Durations: Control your transaction lifespan precisely, from 60 to 360 days.

🔄 Universal Wallet Compatibility: Instantly flash BTC, ETH, and USDT tokens to SegWit, Legacy, or BCH32 wallets.

💱 Spendable on Top Exchanges: Flash coins seamlessly accepted on leading exchanges like Kraken and Huobi.

📊 Proven Track Record: ✅ Over 79 Billion flash transactions completed. ✅ 3000+ satisfied customers worldwide. ✅ 42 active blockchain nodes for fast, reliable transactions. 📌 Simple Step-by-Step Flashing Process: Step 1️⃣: Enter Transaction Details

Choose coin (BTC, ETH, USDT: TRC-20, ERC-20, BEP-20) Specify amount & flash duration Provide wallet address (validated automatically) Step 2️⃣: Complete Payment & Verification

Pay using the cryptocurrency you wish to flash Scan the QR code or paste the payment address Upload payment proof (transaction hash & screenshot) Step 3️⃣: Initiate Flash Transaction

Our technology simulates blockchain confirmations instantly Flash transaction appears authentic within seconds Step 4️⃣: Verify & Spend Immediately

Access your flashed crypto instantly Easily verify transactions via provided blockchain explorer links 🛡️ Why Our Technology is Trusted: 🔗 Race/Finney Attack Logic: Creates realistic blockchain headers. 🖥️ Private iNode Cluster: Guarantees fast synchronization and reliable transactions. ⏰ Live Timer System: Ensures fresh wallet addresses and transaction legitimacy. 🔍 Genuine Blockchain TX IDs: Authentic transaction IDs included with every flash ❓ Frequently Asked Questions: Is flashing secure? ✅ Yes, encrypted with full VPN/proxy support. Can I flash from multiple devices? ✅ Yes, up to 5 Windows PCs per license. Are chargebacks possible? ❌ No, flash transactions are irreversible. How long are flash coins spendable? ✅ From 60–360 days, based on your chosen plan. Verification after expiry? ❌ Transactions can’t be verified after the expiry. Support available? ✅ Yes, 24/7 support via Telegram & WhatsApp.

🔐 Transparent, Reliable & Highly Reviewed:

CryptoFlashingTool.com operates independently, providing unmatched transparency and reliability. Check out our glowing reviews on ScamAdvisor and leading crypto forums!

📲 Get in Touch Now: 📞 WhatsApp: +1 770 666 2531 ✈️ Telegram: @cryptoflashingtool

🎉 Ready to Start?

💰 Buy Flash Coins Now 🖥️ Get Your Flashing Software

Experience the smartest, safest, and most powerful crypto flashing solution on the market today!

CryptoFlashingTool.com — Flash Crypto Like a Pro.

 Instantly Send Spendable Flash BTC, ETH, & USDT — Fully Blockchain-Verifiable!

Welcome to the cutting edge of crypto innovation: the ultimate tool for sending spendable Flash Bitcoin (BTC), Ethereum (ETH), and USDT transactions. Our advanced blockchain simulation technology employs 

 Race/Finney-style mechanisms, producing coins indistinguishable from authentic blockchain-confirmed tokens. Your transactions are instantly trackable and fully spendable for durations from 60 to 360 days!

 Visit cryptoflashingtool.com for complete details.

Why Choose Our Crypto Flashing Service?

Crypto Flashing is perfect for crypto enthusiasts, blockchain developers, ethical hackers, security professionals, and digital entrepreneurs looking for authenticity combined with unparalleled flexibility.

Our Crypto Flashing Features:

 Instant Blockchain Verification: Transactions appear completely authentic, complete with real blockchain confirmations, transaction IDs, and wallet addresses.

 Maximum Security & Privacy: Fully compatible with VPNs, TOR, and proxy servers, ensuring absolute anonymity and protection.

 Easy-to-Use Software: Designed for Windows, our intuitive platform suits both beginners and experts, with detailed, step-by-step instructions provided.

 Customizable Flash Durations: Control your transaction lifespan precisely, from 60 to 360 days.

 Universal Wallet Compatibility: Instantly flash BTC, ETH, and USDT tokens to SegWit, Legacy, or BCH32 wallets.

 Spendable on Top Exchanges: Flash coins seamlessly accepted on leading exchanges like Kraken and Huobi.

Proven Track Record:

• Over 79 Billion flash transactions completed.
• 3000+ satisfied customers worldwide.
• 42 active blockchain nodes for fast, reliable transactions.

Simple Step-by-Step Flashing Process:

Step : Enter Transaction Details

• Choose coin (BTC, ETH, USDT: TRC-20, ERC-20, BEP-20)
• Specify amount & flash duration
• Provide wallet address (validated automatically)

Step : Complete Payment & Verification

• Pay using the cryptocurrency you wish to flash
• Scan the QR code or paste the payment address
• Upload payment proof (transaction hash & screenshot)

Step : Initiate Flash Transaction

• Our technology simulates blockchain confirmations instantly
• Flash transaction appears authentic within seconds

Step : Verify & Spend Immediately

• Access your flashed crypto instantly
• Easily verify transactions via provided blockchain explorer links

Why Our Technology is Trusted:

• Race/Finney Attack Logic: Creates realistic blockchain headers.
• Private iNode Cluster: Guarantees fast synchronization and reliable transactions.
• Live Timer System: Ensures fresh wallet addresses and transaction legitimacy.
• Genuine Blockchain TX IDs: Authentic transaction IDs included with every flash

Frequently Asked Questions:

• Is flashing secure? 

 Yes, encrypted with full VPN/proxy support. - Can I flash from multiple devices? 

 Yes, up to 5 Windows PCs per license. - Are chargebacks possible? 

 No, flash transactions are irreversible. - How long are flash coins spendable? 

 From 60–360 days, based on your chosen plan. - Verification after expiry? 

 Transactions can’t be verified after the expiry.

Support available? 

 Yes, 24/7 support via Telegram & WhatsApp.

 Transparent, Reliable & Highly Reviewed:

CryptoFlashingTool.com operates independently, providing unmatched transparency and reliability. Check out our glowing reviews on ScamAdvisor and leading crypto forums!

Get in Touch Now:

 WhatsApp: +1 770 666 2531

 Telegram: @cryptoflashingtool

 Ready to Start?

 Buy Flash Coins Now

 Get Your Flashing Software

Experience the smartest, safest, and most powerful crypto flashing solution on the market today!

CryptoFlashingTool.com — Flash Crypto Like a Pro.

@ c239c0f9:fa4a5015

Block: #888777 - March 2025

The Monthly Thunderbolt Dispatch On Bitcoin layers two innovations, aggregating the Best posts about the ~Lightning Network and others Bitcoin L2 solution- Exclusively on Stacker.News

It's again that time of the month, time to catch up with the latest features and trends that are shaping the future of Bitcoin. Each issue covers the latest trends and greatest advancements dictating the future of Bitcoin adoption—the very first and most commented insights from around the SN world. In every issue arrives expert analysis, in-depth interview, and breaking news of the most significant advancements in the Bitcoin layer two solutions.

Subscribe and make sure you don’t miss anything about the ~Lightning Revolution!

Now let's focus on the top five items for each category, an electrifying selection that hope you'll be able to read before next edition.

Happy Zapping!

---

Top ~Lightning posts

Most zapranked posts this month:

1. Underrated privacy tools on Lightning by @DarthCoin 4750 sats \ 21 comments \ 10 Mar on ~lightning

2. ngx_l402: L402 Authentication for Nginx with LNURL, LND & NWC Support by @dhananjay 3602 sats \ 11 comments \ 11 Mar on ~lightning

3. LNBϟG discusses fees and routing node management by @C_Otto 908 sats \ 3 comments \ 15 Mar on ~lightning

4. New Release: Breez SDK - Nodeless 0.7.1 by @_ds 264 sats \ 1 comment \ 19 Feb on ~lightning

5. Alby Hub Lightning Channel Stats the first 6 months by @k00b 376 sats \ 8 comments \ 27 Feb on ~lightning

---

Top posts by comments

This month we replaced the top posts by sats with these most commented posts (excluding those already listed above):

1. Cowbold Beta available for Testing: The best P2P Bitcoin alternativ to SplitWise by @supratic 699 sats \ 24 comments \ 1 Mar on ~lightning

2. Nwc alternative to coinos, testing by @dingding541 150 sats \ 22 comments \ 17 Mar on ~lightning

3. Payments below dust limit not trustless by @BallLightning 2141 sats \ 18 comments \ 11 Mar on ~lightning

4. Question of trust regarding LSPs by @Fiatrevelation 385 sats \ 18 comments \ 14 Mar on ~lightning

5. Question For CLN Start9 Users? by @siggy47 617 sats \ 15 comments \ 4 Mar on ~lightning

---

Top ~Lightning Boosts

Check them all here.

1. Try out the Ark protocol on signet by @nwoodfine 2083 sats \ 30k boost \ 12 comments \ 19 Mar on ~lightning

2. Amboss CEO On Growth Of The Lightning Network, Tether (USDT) On Lightning by @Jestopher_BTC 577 sats \ 20k boost \ 10 comments \ 19 Feb on ~lightning

3. Building Self Custody Lightning in 2025 by @k00b 2293 sats \ 10k boost \ 8 comments \ 23 Jan on ~lightning

---

Top Lightning posts outside ~Lightning

This month best posts about the Lightning Network outside ~Lightning territory:

1. SN is a badass use case for noncustodial lightning by @Fiatrevelation 1998 sats \ 15 comments \ 19 Feb on ~meta

2. Alby Hub: Improving the Self-Custodial Lightning Experience by @teemupleb 4642 sats \ 8 comments \ 8 Mar on ~meta

3. SN is a badass use case for noncustodial lightning by @Fiatrevelation 1834 sats \ 13 comments \ 20 Feb on ~meta

4. Bitcoin Users... and especially Lightning users live in a Total Bubble (sofar) by @028559d218 1304 sats \ 24 comments \ 8 Mar on ~bitcoin

5. 🚀 New Geocaching Meets Lightning App ⚡ by @questforsats 4518 sats \ 170k boost \ 86 comments \ 20 Feb on ~builders

---

Forever top ~Lightning posts

La crème de la crème... check them all here. Plenty of new entries this month too at #1, #2, #4 and #5! This means old posts get still zaps... well done zappers 💪

1. 👨‍🚀 We're releasing 𝗔𝗟𝗕𝗬 𝗚𝗢 - the easiest lightning mobile wallet by @Alby 29.2k sats \ 41 comments \ 25 Sep 2024 on ~lightning

2. Building Self Custody Lightning in 2025 by @k00b 2303 sats \ 8 comments \ 22 Jan on ~lightning

3. Lightning Wallets: Self-Custody Despite Poor Network - Apps Tested in Zimbabwe by @anita 72.8k sats \ 39 comments \ 28 Jan 2024 on ~lightning

4. How to Attach Your self-hosted LNbits wallet to SEND/RECEIVE sats to/from SN by @supratic 1765 sats \ 18 comments \ 23 Sep 2024 on ~lightning

5. A Way to Use Stacker News to improve your Zap Receiving by @bzzzt 1652 sats \ 22 comments \ 15 Jul 2024 on ~lightning

---

Forever top Lightning posts outside ~Lightning

Lot of changes here, but probably due to the recent relevance search and unbusting search functionality changes:

1. Rethinking Lightning by @benthecarman with 51.6k sats \ 137 comments \ 6 Jan 2024 on ~bitcoin

2. Lightning Everywhere by @TonyGiorgio with 12k sats \ 27 comments \ 24 Jul 2023 on ~bitcoin

3. Lightning is dead, long live the Lightning! by @supertestnet and zaps forwarded to @anita (50%) @k00b (50%) 6321 sats \ 28 comments \ @tolot 27 Oct 2023 on ~bitcoin

4. Lightning Is Doomed by @Rsync25 2450 sats \ 15 comments \ 27 Nov 2023 on ~bitcoin

5. We Need More Apps with Lightning, Not More Lightning Apps by @kr 5030 sats \ 22 comments \ @kr 12 May 2023 on ~bitcoin

---

@ dfc7c785:4c3c6174

![[0B745064-2D34-4A3C-8393-AD033910E6D7.jpeg]]![[0C3FA837-E1BA-497F-8D44-9EC1CD723970.jpeg]]

@ 90c656ff:9383fd4e

Since its creation in 2008, Bitcoin has been seen as a direct challenge to the traditional banking system. Developed as a decentralized alternative to fiat money, Bitcoin offers a way to store and transfer value without relying on banks, governments, or other financial institutions. This characteristic has made it a symbol of resistance against a financial system that, over time, has been marked by crises, manipulation, and restrictions imposed on citizens.

The 2008 financial crisis and the birth of Bitcoin

Bitcoin emerged in response to the 2008 financial crisis—a collapse that exposed the flaws of the global banking system. Central banks printed massive amounts of money to bail out irresponsible financial institutions, while millions of people lost their homes, savings, and jobs. In this context, Bitcoin was created as an alternative financial system, where no central authority could manipulate the economy for its own benefit.

In the first block of the Bitcoin blockchain or timechain, Satoshi Nakamoto included the following message:

“The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks.”

This phrase, taken from a newspaper headline of the time, symbolizes Bitcoin’s intent to offer a financial system beyond the control of banks and governments.

• Key reasons why Bitcoin resists the banking system

01 - Decentralization: Unlike money issued by central banks, Bitcoin cannot be created or controlled by any single entity. The network of users validates transactions transparently and independently.

02 - Limited Supply: While central banks can print money without limit—causing inflation and currency devaluation—Bitcoin has a fixed supply of 21 million units, making it resistant to artificial depreciation.

03 - Censorship Resistance: Banks can freeze accounts and block transactions at any time. With Bitcoin, anyone can send and receive funds without needing permission from third parties.

04 - Self-Custody: Instead of entrusting funds to a bank, Bitcoin users can store their own coins without the risk of account freezes or bank failures.

• Conflict between banks and Bitcoin

01 - Media Attacks: Large financial institutions often label Bitcoin as risky, volatile, or useless, attempting to discourage its adoption.

02 - Regulation and Crackdowns: Some governments, influenced by the banking sector, have implemented restrictions on Bitcoin usage, making it harder to buy and sell.

03 - Creation of Centralized Alternatives: Many central banks are developing digital currencies (CBDCs) that maintain control over digital money but do not offer Bitcoin’s freedom and decentralization.

In summary, Bitcoin is not just a digital currency—it is a movement of resistance against a financial system that has repeatedly failed to protect ordinary citizens. By offering a decentralized, transparent, and censorship-resistant alternative, Bitcoin represents financial freedom and challenges the banking monopoly over money. As long as the traditional banking system continues to impose restrictions and control the flow of capital, Bitcoin will remain a symbol of independence and financial sovereignty.

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!

@ 21335073:a244b1ad

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

TL;DR please educate your children about online safety.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

@ a39d19ec:3d88f61e

Nun da das deutsche Bundesregime den Ruin Deutschlands beschlossen hat, der sehr wahrscheinlich mit dem Werkzeug des Geld druckens "finanziert" wird, kamen mir so viele Gedanken zur Geldmengenausweitung, dass ich diese für einmal niedergeschrieben habe.

Die Ausweitung der Geldmenge führt aus klassischer wirtschaftlicher Sicht immer zu Preissteigerungen, weil mehr Geld im Umlauf auf eine begrenzte Menge an Gütern trifft. Dies lässt sich in mehreren Schritten analysieren:

1. Quantitätstheorie des Geldes

Die klassische Gleichung der Quantitätstheorie des Geldes lautet:

M • V = P • Y

wobei:
- M die Geldmenge ist,
- V die Umlaufgeschwindigkeit des Geldes,
- P das Preisniveau,
- Y die reale Wirtschaftsleistung (BIP).

Wenn M steigt und V sowie Y konstant bleiben, muss P steigen – also Inflation entstehen.

2. Gütermenge bleibt begrenzt

Die Menge an real produzierten Gütern und Dienstleistungen wächst meist nur langsam im Vergleich zur Ausweitung der Geldmenge. Wenn die Geldmenge schneller steigt als die Produktionsgütermenge, führt dies dazu, dass mehr Geld für die gleiche Menge an Waren zur Verfügung steht – die Preise steigen.

3. Erwartungseffekte und Spekulation

Wenn Unternehmen und Haushalte erwarten, dass mehr Geld im Umlauf ist, da eine zentrale Planung es so wollte, können sie steigende Preise antizipieren. Unternehmen erhöhen ihre Preise vorab, und Arbeitnehmer fordern höhere Löhne. Dies kann eine sich selbst verstärkende Spirale auslösen.

4. Internationale Perspektive

Eine erhöhte Geldmenge kann die Währung abwerten, wenn andere Länder ihre Geldpolitik stabil halten. Eine schwächere Währung macht Importe teurer, was wiederum Preissteigerungen antreibt.

5. Kritik an der reinen Geldmengen-Theorie

Der Vollständigkeit halber muss erwähnt werden, dass die meisten modernen Ökonomen im Staatsauftrag argumentieren, dass Inflation nicht nur von der Geldmenge abhängt, sondern auch von der Nachfrage nach Geld (z. B. in einer Wirtschaftskrise). Dennoch zeigt die historische Erfahrung, dass eine unkontrollierte Geldmengenausweitung langfristig immer zu Preissteigerungen führt, wie etwa in der Hyperinflation der Weimarer Republik oder in Simbabwe.

@ bd4ae3e6:1dfb81f5

@ b2d670de:907f9d4a

onion-service-nostr-relays

A list of nostr relays exposed as onion services.

The list

| Relay name | Description | Onion url | Operator | Payment URL | Payment options | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | nostr.oxtr.dev | Same relay as clearnet relay nostr.oxtr.dev | ws://oxtrdevav64z64yb7x6rjg4ntzqjhedm5b5zjqulugknhzr46ny2qbad.onion | operator | N/A | N/A | | relay.snort.social | Same relay as clearnet relay relay.snort.social | wss://skzzn6cimfdv5e2phjc4yr5v7ikbxtn5f7dkwn5c7v47tduzlbosqmqd.onion | operator | N/A | N/A | | nostr.thesamecat.io | Same relay as clearnet relay nostr.thesamecat.io | ws://2jsnlhfnelig5acq6iacydmzdbdmg7xwunm4xl6qwbvzacw4lwrjmlyd.onion | operator | N/A | N/A | | nostr.land | The nostr.land paid relay (same as clearnet) | ws://nostrland2gdw7g3y77ctftovvil76vquipymo7tsctlxpiwknevzfid.onion | operator | Payment URL | BTC LN | | bitcoiner.social | No auth required, currently | ws://bitcoinr6de5lkvx4tpwdmzrdfdpla5sya2afwpcabjup2xpi5dulbad.onion | operator | N/A | N/A | | relay.westernbtc.com | The westernbtc.com paid relay | ws://westbtcebhgi4ilxxziefho6bqu5lqwa5ncfjefnfebbhx2cwqx5knyd.onion | operator | Payment URL | BTC LN | | freelay.sovbit.host | Free relay for sovbit.host | ws://sovbitm2enxfr5ot6qscwy5ermdffbqscy66wirkbsigvcshumyzbbqd.onion | operator | N/A | N/A | | nostr.sovbit.host | Paid relay for sovbit.host | ws://sovbitgz5uqyh7jwcsudq4sspxlj4kbnurvd3xarkkx2use3k6rlibqd.onion | operator | N/A | N/A | | nostr.wine | 🍷 nostr.wine relay | ws://nostrwinemdptvqukjttinajfeedhf46hfd5bz2aj2q5uwp7zros3nad.onion | operator | Payment URL | BTC LN, BTC, Credit Card/CashApp (Stripe) | | inbox.nostr.wine | 🍷 inbox.nostr.wine relay | ws://wineinboxkayswlofkugkjwhoyi744qvlzdxlmdvwe7cei2xxy4gc6ad.onion | operator | Payment URL | BTC LN, BTC | | filter.nostr.wine | 🍷 filter.nostr.wine proxy relay | ws://winefiltermhqixxzmnzxhrmaufpnfq3rmjcl6ei45iy4aidrngpsyid.onion | operator | Payment URL | BTC LN, BTC | | N/A | N/A | ws://pzfw4uteha62iwkzm3lycabk4pbtcr67cg5ymp5i3xwrpt3t24m6tzad.onion:81 | operator | N/A | N/A | | nostr.fractalized.net | Free relay for fractalized.net | ws://xvgox2zzo7cfxcjrd2llrkthvjs5t7efoalu34s6lmkqhvzvrms6ipyd.onion | operator | N/A | N/A | | nfrelay.app | nfrelay.app aggregator relay (nostr-filter-relay) | ws://nfrelay6saohkmipikquvrn6d64dzxivhmcdcj4d5i7wxis47xwsriyd.onion | operator | N/A | N/A | relay.nostr.net | Public relay from nostr.net (Same as clearnet) | ws://nostrnetl6yd5whkldj3vqsxyyaq3tkuspy23a3qgx7cdepb4564qgqd.onion | operator | N/A | N/A | | nerostrator | Free to read, pay XMR to relay | ws://nerostrrgb5fhj6dnzhjbgmnkpy2berdlczh6tuh2jsqrjok3j4zoxid.onion | operator |Payment URL | XMR | | nostr.girino.org | Public relay from nostr.girino.org | ws://gnostr2jnapk72mnagq3cuykfon73temzp77hcbncn4silgt77boruid.onion | operator | N/A | N/A | | wot.girino.org | WoT relay from wot.girino.org | ws://girwot2koy3kvj6fk7oseoqazp5vwbeawocb3m27jcqtah65f2fkl3yd.onion | operator | N/A | N/A | | haven.girino.org/{outbox, inbox, chat, private} | Haven smart relay from haven.girino.org | ws://ghaven2hi3qn2riitw7ymaztdpztrvmm337e2pgkacfh3rnscaoxjoad.onion/{outbox, inbox, chat, private} | operator | N/A | N/A | | relay.nostpy.lol | Free Web of Trust relay (Same as clearnet) | ws://pemgkkqjqjde7y2emc2hpxocexugbixp42o4zymznil6zfegx5nfp4id.onion | operator |N/A | N/A | | Poster.place Nostr Relay | N/A | ws://dmw5wbawyovz7fcahvguwkw4sknsqsalffwctioeoqkvvy7ygjbcuoad.onion | operator | N/A | N/A | | Azzamo Relay | Azzamo Premium Nostr relay. (paid) | ws://q6a7m5qkyonzb5fk5yv4jyu3ar44hqedn7wjopg737lit2ckkhx2nyid.onion | operator | Payment URL | BTC LN | | Azzamo Inbox Relay | Azzamo Group and Private message relay. (Freemium) | ws://gp5kiwqfw7t2fwb3rfts2aekoph4x7pj5pv65re2y6hzaujsxewanbqd.onion | operator | Payment URL | BTC LN | | Noderunners Relay | The official Noderunners Nostr Relay. | ws://35vr3xigzjv2xyzfyif6o2gksmkioppy4rmwag7d4bqmwuccs2u4jaid.onion | operator | Payment URL | BTC LN |

Contributing

Contributions are encouraged to keep this document alive. Just open a PR and I'll have it tested and merged. The onion URL is the only mandatory column, the rest is just nice-to-have metadata about the relay. Put N/A in empty columns.

If you want to contribute anonymously, please contact me on SimpleX or send a DM on nostr using a disposable npub.

Operator column

It is generally preferred to use something that includes a NIP-19 string, either just the string or a url that contains the NIP-19 string in it (e.g. an njump url).

@ bd4ae3e6:1dfb81f5

@ 98912a0b:c1f46ab6

Jo, blomster kommer i alle farger og fasonger. Her har du to eksempler:

@ b2d670de:907f9d4a

This is a list of nostr clients exposed as onion services. The list is currently actively maintained on GitHub. Contributions are always appreciated!

| Client name | Onion URL | Source code URL | Admin | Description | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Snort | http://agzj5a4be3kgp6yurijk4q7pm2yh4a5nphdg4zozk365yirf7ahuctyd.onion | https://git.v0l.io/Kieran/snort | operator | N/A | | moStard | http://sifbugd5nwdq77plmidkug4y57zuqwqio3zlyreizrhejhp6bohfwkad.onion/ | https://github.com/rafael-xmr/nostrudel/tree/mostard | operator | minimalist monero friendly nostrudel fork | | Nostrudel | http://oxtrnmb4wsb77rmk64q3jfr55fo33luwmsyaoovicyhzgrulleiojsad.onion/ | https://github.com/hzrd149/nostrudel | operator | Runs latest tagged docker image | | Nostrudel Next | http://oxtrnnumsflm7hmvb3xqphed2eqpbrt4seflgmdsjnpgc3ejd6iycuyd.onion/ | https://github.com/hzrd149/nostrudel | operator | Runs latest "next" tagged docker image | | Nsite | http://q457mvdt5smqj726m4lsqxxdyx7r3v7gufzt46zbkop6mkghpnr7z3qd.onion/ | https://github.com/hzrd149/nsite-ts | operator | Runs nsite. You can read more about nsite here. | | Shopstr | http://6fkdn756yryd5wurkq7ifnexupnfwj6sotbtby2xhj5baythl4cyf2id.onion/ | https://github.com/shopstr-eng/shopstr-hidden-service | operator | Runs the latest serverless branch build of Shopstr. |

@ 98912a0b:c1f46ab6

Skjønner du? Bare tekst.

@ fb3d3798:371f711a

Jo, blomster kommer i alle farger og fasonger. Her har du to eksempler:

@ 460c25e6:ef85065c

If you don't know where your posts are, you might as well just stay in the centralized Twitter. You either take control of your relay lists, or they will control you. Amethyst offers several lists of relays for our users. We are going to go one by one to help clarify what they are and which options are best for each one.

Public Home/Outbox Relays

Home relays store all YOUR content: all your posts, likes, replies, lists, etc. It's your home. Amethyst will send your posts here first. Your followers will use these relays to get new posts from you. So, if you don't have anything there, they will not receive your updates.

Home relays must allow queries from anyone, ideally without the need to authenticate. They can limit writes to paid users without affecting anyone's experience.

This list should have a maximum of 3 relays. More than that will only make your followers waste their mobile data getting your posts. Keep it simple. Out of the 3 relays, I recommend: - 1 large public, international relay: nos.lol, nostr.mom, relay.damus.io, etc. - 1 personal relay to store a copy of all your content in a place no one can delete. Go to relay.tools and never be censored again. - 1 really fast relay located in your country: paid options like http://nostr.wine are great

Do not include relays that block users from seeing posts in this list. If you do, no one will see your posts.

Public Inbox Relays

This relay type receives all replies, comments, likes, and zaps to your posts. If you are not getting notifications or you don't see replies from your friends, it is likely because you don't have the right setup here. If you are getting too much spam in your replies, it's probably because your inbox relays are not protecting you enough. Paid relays can filter inbox spam out.

Inbox relays must allow anyone to write into them. It's the opposite of the outbox relay. They can limit who can download the posts to their paid subscribers without affecting anyone's experience.

This list should have a maximum of 3 relays as well. Again, keep it small. More than that will just make you spend more of your data plan downloading the same notifications from all these different servers. Out of the 3 relays, I recommend: - 1 large public, international relay: nos.lol, nostr.mom, relay.damus.io, etc. - 1 personal relay to store a copy of your notifications, invites, cashu tokens and zaps. - 1 really fast relay located in your country: go to nostr.watch and find relays in your country

Terrible options include: - nostr.wine should not be here. - filter.nostr.wine should not be here. - inbox.nostr.wine should not be here.

DM Inbox Relays

These are the relays used to receive DMs and private content. Others will use these relays to send DMs to you. If you don't have it setup, you will miss DMs. DM Inbox relays should accept any message from anyone, but only allow you to download them.

Generally speaking, you only need 3 for reliability. One of them should be a personal relay to make sure you have a copy of all your messages. The others can be open if you want push notifications or closed if you want full privacy.

Good options are: - inbox.nostr.wine and auth.nostr1.com: anyone can send messages and only you can download. Not even our push notification server has access to them to notify you. - a personal relay to make sure no one can censor you. Advanced settings on personal relays can also store your DMs privately. Talk to your relay operator for more details. - a public relay if you want DM notifications from our servers.

Make sure to add at least one public relay if you want to see DM notifications.

Private Home Relays

Private Relays are for things no one should see, like your drafts, lists, app settings, bookmarks etc. Ideally, these relays are either local or require authentication before posting AND downloading each user\'s content. There are no dedicated relays for this category yet, so I would use a local relay like Citrine on Android and a personal relay on relay.tools.

Keep in mind that if you choose a local relay only, a client on the desktop might not be able to see the drafts from clients on mobile and vice versa.

Search relays:

This is the list of relays to use on Amethyst's search and user tagging with @. Tagging and searching will not work if there is nothing here.. This option requires NIP-50 compliance from each relay. Hit the Default button to use all available options on existence today: - nostr.wine - relay.nostr.band - relay.noswhere.com

Local Relays:

This is your local storage. Everything will load faster if it comes from this relay. You should install Citrine on Android and write ws://localhost:4869 in this option.

General Relays:

This section contains the default relays used to download content from your follows. Notice how you can activate and deactivate the Home, Messages (old-style DMs), Chat (public chats), and Global options in each.

Keep 5-6 large relays on this list and activate them for as many categories (Home, Messages (old-style DMs), Chat, and Global) as possible.

Amethyst will provide additional recommendations to this list from your follows with information on which of your follows might need the additional relay in your list. Add them if you feel like you are missing their posts or if it is just taking too long to load them.

My setup

Here's what I use: 1. Go to relay.tools and create a relay for yourself. 2. Go to nostr.wine and pay for their subscription. 3. Go to inbox.nostr.wine and pay for their subscription. 4. Go to nostr.watch and find a good relay in your country. 5. Download Citrine to your phone.

Then, on your relay lists, put:

Public Home/Outbox Relays: - nostr.wine - nos.lol or an in-country relay. - .nostr1.com

Public Inbox Relays - nos.lol or an in-country relay - .nostr1.com

DM Inbox Relays - inbox.nostr.wine - .nostr1.com

Private Home Relays - ws://localhost:4869 (Citrine) - .nostr1.com (if you want)

Search Relays - nostr.wine - relay.nostr.band - relay.noswhere.com

Local Relays - ws://localhost:4869 (Citrine)

General Relays - nos.lol - relay.damus.io - relay.primal.net - nostr.mom

And a few of the recommended relays from Amethyst.

Final Considerations

Remember, relays can see what your Nostr client is requesting and downloading at all times. They can track what you see and see what you like. They can sell that information to the highest bidder, they can delete your content or content that a sponsor asked them to delete (like a negative review for instance) and they can censor you in any way they see fit. Before using any random free relay out there, make sure you trust its operator and you know its terms of service and privacy policies.

@ fb3d3798:371f711a

Skjønner du? Bare tekst.

@ b8851a06:9b120ba1

The digital guillotine has fallen. The Bybit hack wasn’t just a theft—it was a surgical strike exposing the fatal flaw of “crypto” that isn’t Bitcoin. This wasn’t a bug. It was a feature of a system designed to fail.

Here’s how North Korea’s Lazarus Group stole $1.5B in ETH, why “decentralized finance” is a joke, and how Bitcoin remains the only exit from this circus.

I. The Heist: How Centralized “Crypto” Betrayed Its Users

A. The Multisig Mousetrap (Or: Why You’re Still Using a Bank)

Bybit’s Ethereum cold wallet used multisig, requiring multiple approvals for transactions. Sounds secure, right? Wrong. • The Con: Hackers didn’t pick the lock; they tricked the keyholders using a UI masking attack. The wallet interface showed “SEND TO BYBIT”, but the smart contract was whispering “SEND TO PYONGYANG.” • Bitcoin Parallel: Bitcoin’s multisig is enforced on hardware, not a website UI. No browser spoofing, no phishing emails—just raw cryptography.

Ethereum’s multisig is a vault with a touchscreen PIN pad. Bitcoin’s is a mechanical safe with a key only you hold. Guess which one got robbed?

B. Smart Contracts: Dumb as a Bag of Hammers

The thieves didn’t “hack” Ethereum—they exploited its smart contract complexity. • Bybit’s security depended on a Safe.global contract. Lazarus simply tricked Bybit into approving a malicious upgrade. • Imagine a vending machine that’s programmed to take your money but never give you a soda. That’s Ethereum’s “trustless” tech.

Why Bitcoin Wins: Bitcoin doesn’t do “smart contracts” in the Ethereum sense. Its scripting language is deliberately limited—less code, fewer attack vectors.

Ethereum is a Lego tower; Bitcoin is a granite slab. One topples, one doesn’t.

II. The Laundering: Crypto’s Dirty Little Secret

A. Mixers, Bridges, and the Art of Spycraft

Once the ETH was stolen, Lazarus laundered it at lightspeed: 1. Mixers (eXch) – Obfuscating transaction trails. 2. Bridges (Chainflip) – Swapping ETH for Bitcoin because that’s the only exit that matters.

Bitcoin Reality Check: Bitcoin’s privacy tools (like CoinJoin) are self-custodial—no third-party mixers. You keep control, not some “decentralized” website waiting to be hacked.

Ethereum’s “bridges” are burning rope ladders. Bitcoin’s privacy? An underground tunnel only you control.

B. The $1.5B Lie: “Decentralized” Exchanges Are a Myth

Bybit’s “cold wallet” was on Safe.global—a so-called “decentralized” custodian. Translation? A website with extra steps. • When Safe.global got breached, the private keys were stolen instantly. • “Decentralized” means nothing if your funds depend on one website, one server, one weak link.

Bitcoin’s Answer: Self-custody. Hardware wallets. Cold storage. No trusted third parties.

Using Safe.global is like hiding your life savings in a gym locker labeled “STEAL ME.”

III. The Culprits: State-Sponsored Hackers & Crypto’s Original Sin

A. Lazarus Group: Crypto’s Robin Hood (For Dictators)

North Korea’s hackers didn’t break cryptography—they broke people. • Phishing emails disguised as job offers. • Bribes & social engineering targeting insiders. • DeFi governance manipulation (because Proof-of-Stake is just shareholder voting in disguise).

Bitcoin’s Shield: No CEO to bribe. No “upgrade buttons” to exploit. No governance tokens to manipulate. Code is law—and Bitcoin’s law is written in stone.

Ethereum’s security model is “trust us.” Bitcoin’s is “verify.”

B. The $3B Elephant: Altcoins Fund Dictators

Since 2017, Lazarus has stolen $3B+ in crypto, funding North Korea’s missile program.

Why? Because Ethereum, Solana, and XRP are built on Proof-of-Stake (PoS)—which centralizes power in the hands of a few rich validators. • Bitcoin’s Proof-of-Work: Miners secure the network through energy-backed cryptography. • Altcoins’ Proof-of-Stake: Security is dictated by who owns the most tokens.

Proof-of-Stake secures oligarchs. Proof-of-Work secures money. That’s why Lazarus can drain altcoin treasuries but hasn’t touched Bitcoin’s network.

IV. Bybit’s Survival: A Centralized Circus

A. The Bailout: Banks 2.0

Bybit took bridge loans from “undisclosed partners” (read: Wall Street vultures). • Just like a traditional bank, Bybit printed liquidity out of thin air to stay solvent. • If that sounds familiar, it’s because crypto exchanges are just banks in hoodies.

Bitcoin Contrast: No loans. No bailouts. No “trust.” Just 21 million coins, mathematically secured.

Bybit’s solvency is a confidence trick. Bitcoin’s solvency is math.

B. The Great Withdrawal Panic

Within hours, 350,000+ users scrambled to withdraw funds.

A digital bank run—except this isn’t a bank. It’s an exchange that pretended to be decentralized.

Bitcoin fixes this: your wallet isn’t an IOU. It’s actual money.

Bybit = a TikTok influencer promising riches. Bitcoin = the gold in your basement.

V. The Fallout: Regulators vs Reality

A. ETH’s 8% Crash vs Bitcoin’s Unshakable Base

Ethereum tanked because it’s a tech stock, not money. Bitcoin? Dropped 2% and stabilized.

No CEO, no headquarters, no attack surface.

B. The Regulatory Trap

Now the bureaucrats come in demanding: 1. Wallet audits (they don’t understand public ledgers). 2. Mixer bans (criminalizing privacy). 3. KYC everything (turning crypto into a surveillance state).

Bitcoin’s Rebellion: You can’t audit what’s already transparent. You can’t ban what’s unstoppable.

VI. Conclusion: Burn the Altcoins, Stack the Sats

The Bybit hack isn’t a crypto problem. It’s an altcoin problem.

Ethereum’s smart contracts, DeFi bridges, and “decentralized” wallets are Swiss cheese for hackers. Bitcoin? A titanium vault.

The Only Lessons That Matter:

✅ Multisig isn’t enough unless it’s Bitcoin’s hardware-enforced version. ✅ Complexity kills—every altcoin “innovation” is a security risk waiting to happen.

Lazarus Group won this round because “crypto” ignored Bitcoin’s design. The solution isn’t better regulations—it’s better money.

Burn the tokens. Unplug the servers. Bitcoin is the exit.

Take your money off exchanges. Be sovereign.

@ 6e0ea5d6:0327f353

"Malcolm Forbes recounts that a lady, wearing a faded cotton dress, and her husband, dressed in an old handmade suit, stepped off a train in Boston, USA, and timidly made their way to the office of the president of Harvard University. They had come from Palo Alto, California, and had not scheduled an appointment. The secretary, at a glance, thought that those two, looking like country bumpkins, had no business at Harvard.
— We want to speak with the president — the man said in a low voice.
— He will be busy all day — the secretary replied curtly.
— We will wait.
The secretary ignored them for hours, hoping the couple would finally give up and leave. But they stayed there, and the secretary, somewhat frustrated, decided to bother the president, although she hated doing that.
— If you speak with them for just a few minutes, maybe they will decide to go away — she said.
The president sighed in irritation but agreed. Someone of his importance did not have time to meet people like that, but he hated faded dresses and tattered suits in his office. With a stern face, he went to the couple.
— We had a son who studied at Harvard for a year — the woman said. — He loved Harvard and was very happy here, but a year ago he died in an accident, and we would like to erect a monument in his honor somewhere on campus.

— My lady — said the president rudely —, we cannot erect a statue for every person who studied at Harvard and died; if we did, this place would look like a cemetery.

— Oh, no — the lady quickly replied. — We do not want to erect a statue. We would like to donate a building to Harvard.

The president looked at the woman's faded dress and her husband's old suit and exclaimed:

— A building! Do you have even the faintest idea of how much a building costs? We have more than seven and a half million dollars' worth of buildings here at Harvard.

The lady was silent for a moment, then said to her husband:

— If that’s all it costs to found a university, why don’t we have our own?

The husband agreed.

The couple, Leland Stanford, stood up and left, leaving the president confused. Traveling back to Palo Alto, California, they established there Stanford University, the second-largest in the world, in honor of their son, a former Harvard student."

Text extracted from: "Mileumlivros - Stories that Teach Values."

Thank you for reading, my friend! If this message helped you in any way, consider leaving your glass “🥃” as a token of appreciation.

A toast to our family!

@ 8b4456a7:ba913035

Jo, blomster kommer i alle farger og fasonger. Her har du to eksempler:

@ 09fbf8f3:fa3d60f0

🌟 深度探索：在Cloudflare上免费部署DeepSeek-R1 32B大模型

🌍 一、 注册或登录Cloudflare平台（CF老手可跳过）

1️⃣ 进入Cloudflare平台官网：

。www.cloudflare.com/zh-cn/
登录或者注册账号。

2️⃣ 新注册的用户会让你选择域名，无视即可，直接点下面的Start building。

3️⃣ 进入仪表盘后，界面可能会显示英文，在右上角切换到[简体中文]即可。

---

🚀 二、正式开始部署Deepseek API项目。

1️⃣ 首先在左侧菜单栏找到【AI】下的【Wokers AI】，选择【Llama 3 Woker】。

2️⃣ 为项目取一个好听的名字，后点击部署即可。

3️⃣ Woker项目初始化部署好后，需要编辑替换掉其原代码。

4️⃣ 解压出提供的代码压缩包，找到【32b】的部署代码，将里面的文本复制出来。

下载地址：
📁 夸克
📁 UC网盘
📁 迅雷网盘

5️⃣ 接第3步，将项目里的原代码清空，粘贴第4步复制好的代码到编辑器。

6️⃣ 代码粘贴完，即可点击右上角的部署按钮。

7️⃣ 回到仪表盘，点击部署完的项目名称。

8️⃣ 查看【设置】，找到平台分配的项目网址，复制好备用。

---

💻 三、选择可用的UI软件，这边使用Chatbox AI演示。

1️⃣ 根据自己使用的平台下载对应的安装包，博主也一并打包好了全平台的软件安装包。

2️⃣ 打开安装好的Chatbox，点击左下角的设置。

3️⃣ 选择【添加自定义提供方】。

4️⃣ 按照图片说明填写即可，【API域名】为之前复制的项目网址(加/v1)；【改善网络兼容性】功能务必开启；【API密钥】默认为”zhiyuan“，可自行修改；填写完毕后保存即可。

5️⃣ Cloudflare项目部署好后，就能正常使用了，接口仿照OpenAI API具有较强的兼容性，能导入到很多支持AI功能的软件或插件中。

6️⃣ Cloudflare的域名默认被墙了，需要自己准备一个域名设置。

---

转自微信公众号：纸鸢花的小屋
推广：低调云（梯子VPN）
。www.didiaocloud.xyz

@ 42342239:1d80db24

Almost 150 years ago, the British newspaper editor William Thomas Stead wrote that "the editorial pen is a sceptre of power, compared with which the sceptre of many a monarch is but a gilded lath". He had begun to regard journalism as something more than just conveying information - the journalist or editor could become a ruler.

Times had certainly changed compared to a few hundred years earlier. Before Gutenberg's invention of the printing press, it was mainly the church that controlled the dissemination of information in Europe, but when Stead put pen to paper, this control had shifted to newspapers, schools, and universities. Eventually, technologies like radio and TV entered the scene, but the power dynamics remained asymmetrical - only a few could send information to the many.

However, with the emergence of the internet, and especially with the spread of social media, a significant change followed. Instead of only a few being able to send information to the many, many could send to many. Almost anyone could now create their own newspaper, radio, or TV channel. The power over information dissemination was decentralised.

Ten years ago, Roberta Alenius, who was then press secretary for Sweden's Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt of the Moderate Party, shared her experiences with Social Democratic and Moderate Party internet activists on social media. She reported that social media played a significant role in how news "comes out" and is shaped, and that journalism was now downstream of social media. Five years later, NATO's then-Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said that "NATO must be prepared for both conventional and hybrid threats: from tanks to tweets." This finally underscores the importance of social media.

Elon Musk, who took over X (formerly Twitter) in 2022, has claimed that "it's absolutely fundamental and transformative that the people actually get to decide the news and narrative and what's important," and that citizen journalism is the future.

While his platform allows most expressions - for better or worse - the reach of messages is instead limited ("freedom of speech does not mean freedom of reach "). X has also opened its recommendation algorithm to the outside world by making it open-source. Although this is a welcome step, the fact remains that it's impossible to know which code is actually used and what adjustments are made by humans or algorithms.

William Thomas Stead's "sceptre of power", which has wandered from the church to newspaper and TV editorial offices, and now to citizens according to Elon Musk, risks being transferred to algorithms' opaque methods?

Instead of talking about "toxic algorithms" and TikTok bans, like the so many do today, we should ask ourselves more fundamental questions. What happens when algorithms are no longer objective (how can they ever be?), but instead become tools for shaping our reality? Perhaps our greatest challenge today is not deciding who should govern the information landscape, but instead recognising that no one is up to the task - not even well-ventilated computers.

@ fd208ee8:0fd927c1

E-cash are coupons or tokens for Bitcoin, or Bitcoin debt notes that the mint issues. The e-cash states, essentially, "IoU 2900 sats".

They're redeemable for Bitcoin on Lightning (hard money), and therefore can be used as cash (softer money), so long as the mint has a good reputation. That means that they're less fungible than Lightning because the e-cash from one mint can be more or less valuable than the e-cash from another. If a mint is buggy, offline, or disappears, then the e-cash is unreedemable.

It also means that e-cash is more anonymous than Lightning, and that the sender and receiver's wallets don't need to be online, to transact. Nutzaps now add the possibility of parking transactions one level farther out, on a relay. The same relays that cannot keep npub profiles and follow lists consistent will now do monetary transactions.

What we then have is * a transaction on a relay that triggers * a transaction on a mint that triggers * a transaction on Lightning that triggers * a transaction on Bitcoin.

Which means that every relay that stores the nuts is part of a wildcat banking system. Which is fine, but relay operators should consider whether they wish to carry the associated risks and liabilities. They should also be aware that they should implement the appropriate features in their relay, such as expiration tags (nuts rot after 2 weeks), and to make sure that only expired nuts are deleted.

There will be plenty of specialized relays for this, so don't feel pressured to join in, and research the topic carefully, for yourself.

https://github.com/nostr-protocol/nips/blob/master/60.md https://github.com/nostr-protocol/nips/blob/master/61.md

@ 8b4456a7:ba913035

Skjønner du? Bare tekst.

@ dc4cd086:cee77c06

Have you ever wanted to learn from lengthy educational videos but found it challenging to navigate through hours of content? Our new tool addresses this problem by transforming long-form video lectures into easily digestible, searchable content.

Key Features:

Video Processing:

• Automatically downloads YouTube videos, transcripts, and chapter information
• Splits transcripts into sections based on video chapters

Content Summarization:

• Utilizes language models to transform spoken content into clear, readable text
• Formats output in AsciiDoc for improved readability and navigation
• Highlights key terms and concepts with [[term]] notation for potential cross-referencing

Diagram Extraction:

• Analyzes video entropy to identify static diagram/slide sections
• Provides a user-friendly GUI for manual selection of relevant time ranges
• Allows users to pick representative frames from selected ranges

Going Forward:

Currently undergoing a rewrite to improve organization and functionality, but you are welcome to try the current version, though it might not work on every machine. Will support multiple open and closed language models for user choice Free and open-source, allowing for personal customization and integration with various knowledge bases. Just because we might not have it on our official Alexandria knowledge base, you are still welcome to use it on you own personal or community knowledge bases! We want to help find connections between ideas that exist across relays, allowing individuals and groups to mix and match knowledge bases between each other, allowing for any degree of openness you care.

While designed with #Alexandria users in mind, it's available for anyone to use and adapt to their own learning needs.

Screenshots

Frame Selection

This is a screenshot of the frame selection interface. You'll see a signal that represents frame entropy over time. The vertical lines indicate the start and end of a chapter. Within these chapters you can select the frames by clicking and dragging the mouse over the desired range where you think diagram is in that chapter. At the bottom is an option that tells the program to select a specific number of frames from that selection.

Diagram Extraction

This is a screenshot of the diagram extraction interface. For every selection you've made, there will be a set of frames that you can choose from. You can select and deselect as many frames as you'd like to save.

Links

• repo: https://github.com/limina1/video_article_converter
• Nostr Apps 101: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Flxa_jkErqE

Output

And now, we have a demonstration of the final result of this tool, with some quick cleaning up. The video we will be using this tool on is titled Nostr Apps 101 by nostr:npub1nxy4qpqnld6kmpphjykvx2lqwvxmuxluddwjamm4nc29ds3elyzsm5avr7 during Nostrasia. The following thread is an analog to the modular articles we are constructing for Alexandria, and I hope it conveys the functionality we want to create in the knowledge space. Note, this tool is the first step! You could use a different prompt that is most appropriate for the specific context of the transcript you are working with, but you can also manually clean up any discrepancies that don't portray the video accurately. You can now view the article on #Alexandria https://next-alexandria.gitcitadel.eu/publication?d=nostr-apps-101

Initially published as chained kind 1's nostr:nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzp5r5hd579v2sszvvzfel677c8dxgxm3skl773sujlsuft64c44ncqy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnyv9kh2uewd9hj7qgwwaehxw309ahx7uewd3hkctcpzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumt0wd68ytnsw43z7qghwaehxw309aex2mrp0yhxummnw3ezucnpdejz7qgewaehxw309aex2mrp0yh8xmn0wf6zuum0vd5kzmp0qqsxunmjy20mvlq37vnrcshkf6sdrtkfjtjz3anuetmcuv8jswhezgc7hglpn

Or view on Coracle https://coracle.social /nevent1qqsxunmjy20mvlq37vnrcshkf6sdrtkfjtjz3anuetmcuv8jswhezgcppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qgsdqa9md83tz5yqnrqjw07hhkpmfjpkuv9hlh5v8yhu8z274w9dv7qnnq0s3