@ 51bbb15e:b77a2290

Yeah, I’m sure everything in the file is legit. 👍 Let’s review the guard witness testimony…Oh wait, they weren’t at their posts despite 24/7 survellience instructions after another Epstein “suicide” attempt two weeks earlier. Well, at least the video of the suicide is in the file? Oh wait, a techical glitch. Damn those coincidences!

At this point, the Trump administration has zero credibility with me on anything related to the Epstein case and his clients. I still suspect the administration is using the Epstein files as leverage to keep a lot of RINOs in line, whereas they’d be sabotaging his agenda at every turn otherwise. However, I just don’t believe in ends-justify-the-means thinking. It’s led almost all of DC to toss out every bit of the values they might once have had.

@ c9badfea:610f861a

1. Install Sky Map (it's free and open source)
2. Launch the app and tap Accept, then tap OK
3. When asked to access the device's location, tap While Using The App
4. Tap somewhere on the screen to activate the menu, then tap ⁝ and select Settings
5. Disable Send Usage Statistics
6. Return to the main screen and enjoy stargazing!

ℹ️ Use the 🔍 icon in the upper toolbar to search for a specific celestial body, or tap the 👁️ icon to activate night mode

@ 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.

@ c3b2802b:4850599c

In einem Beitrag im Januar 2025 hatte ich das hier kurz schriftlich skizziert. Im April 2025 gab es die Gelegenheit, diese Zusammenhänge etwas ausführlicher im Café mit Katrin Huß darzustellen. Danke, liebe Katrin, für dieses Zusammenkommen in unserer Heimat Sachsen.

Wenn Sie sich für positive Psychologie und deren Einsatz beim Aufbau unserer Regionalgesellschaft interessieren, schauen Sie gern in das 45 -Minuten Gespräch!

Dieser Beitrag wurde mit dem Pareto-Client geschrieben.

@ 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)

@ cefb08d1:f419beff

Cat angels are the reason there are no mice angels.

Mel Brooks

https://stacker.news/items/985375

@ ffbcb706:b0574044

Just a client name test

@ fa984bd7:58018f52

This post has been deleted.

@ cefb08d1:f419beff

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OOmr2s-JPXo

The GWM Catch Up Day 3: Men's Quarterfinalists Locked, The Box delivers for pro surfing’s faithful:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Owe-rjECP3M

The Box dishes West Oz power, Main Break decides last Quarters draws I Stone & Wood Post Show Day 3:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qN3oi4kOGAA

Men 16 Round Results:

Source: https://www.worldsurfleague.com/events/2025/ct/326/western-australia-margaret-river-pro/results?roundId=24776

https://stacker.news/items/985339

@ 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.

@ 1bc70a01:24f6a411

{"url":"https://github.com/damus-io/damus","createdAt":1747812849570}

@ cefb08d1:f419beff

https://stacker.news/items/985298

@ 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.

@ 3f770d65:7a745b24

I’m Derek Ross, and I’m all-in on Nostr.

I started the Grow Nostr Initiative to help more people discover what makes Nostr so powerful: ✅ You own your identity ✅ You choose your social graph and algorithms ✅ You aren't locked into any single app or platform ✅ You can post, stream, chat, and build, all without gatekeepers

What we’re doing with Grow Nostr Initiative: 🌱 Hosting local meetups and mini-conferences to onboard people face-to-face 📚 Creating educational materials and guides to demystify how Nostr works 🧩 Helping businesses and creators understand how they can plug into Nostr (running media servers, relays, and using key management tools)

I believe Nostr is the foundation of a more open internet. It’s still early, but we’re already seeing incredible apps for social, blogging, podcasting, livestreaming, and more. And the best part is that they're all interoperable, censorship-resistant, and built on open standards. Nostr is the world's largest bitcoin economy by transaction volume and I truly believe that the purple pill helps the orange pill go down. Meaning, growing Nostr will also grow Bitcoin adoption.

If you’ve been curious about Nostr or are building something on it, or let’s talk. Whether you're just getting started or you're already deep in the ecosystem, I'm here to answer questions, share what I’ve learned, and hear your ideas. Check out https://nostrapps.com to find your next social decentralized experience.

Ask Me Anything about GNI, Nostr, Bitcoin, the upcoming #NosVegas event at the Bitcoin Conference next week, etc.!

– Derek Ross 🌐 https://grownostr.org npub18ams6ewn5aj2n3wt2qawzglx9mr4nzksxhvrdc4gzrecw7n5tvjqctp424

https://stacker.news/items/984689

@ 6e0ea5d6:0327f353

**Ascolta bene! ** A man's sentimental longing, though often disguised in noble language and imagination, is a sickness—not a virtue.

It begins as a slight inclination toward tenderness, cloaked in sweetness. Then it reveals itself as a masked addiction: a constant need to be seen by a woman, validated by her, and reciprocated—as if someone else's affection were the only anchor preventing the shipwreck of his emotions.

The man who understands the weight of leadership seeks no applause, no gratitude, not even romantic love. He knows that his role is not theatrical but structural. He is not measured by the emotion he evokes, but by the stability he ensures. Being a true man is not ornamental. He is not a decorative symbol in the family frame.

We live in an era where male roles have been distorted by an overindulgence in emotion. The man stopped guiding and began asking for direction. His firmness was exchanged for softness, his decisiveness for hesitation. Trying to please, many have given up authority. Trying to love, they’ve begun to bow. A man who begs for validation within his own home is not a leader—he is a guest. And when the patriarch has to ask for a seat at the table he should preside over and sustain, something has already been irreversibly inverted.

Unexamined longing turns into pleading. And all begging is the antechamber of humiliation. A man who never learned to cultivate dignified solitude will inevitably fall to his knees in desperation. And then, he yields. Yields to mediocre presence, to shallow affection, to constant disrespect. He smiles while he bleeds, praises the one who despises him, accepts crumbs and pretends it’s a banquet. All of it, cazzo... just to avoid the horror of being alone.

Davvero, amico mio, for the men who beg for romance, only the consolation of being remembered will remain—not with respect, but with pity and disgust.

The modern world feeds the fragile with illusions, but reality spits them out. Sentimental longing is now celebrated as sensitivity. But every man who nurtures it as an excuse will, sooner or later, pay for it with his dignity.

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!

@ 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.\  

@ 866e0139:6a9334e5

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

---

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

---

Wer einhundert Prozent seines Einkommens abgeben muss, ist sicher ein Sklave, oder? Aber ab wieviel Prozent Pflichtabgabe ist er denn kein Sklave mehr? Ab wann ist er frei und selbst-bestimmt?

Wer definieren möchte, was ein Sklave ist, sollte nicht bei Pflichtabgaben verweilen, denn die Fremdbestimmtheit geht viel weiter. Vielfach hat der gewöhnliche Mensch wenig Einfluss darauf, wie er und seine Familie misshandelt wird. Es wird verfügt, welche Bildung, welche Nahrung, welche Medikamente, welche Impfungen und welche Kriege er zu erdulden hat. Hierbei erkennt der gewöhnliche Mensch aber nur, wer ihm direkt etwas an-tut. So wie der Gefolterte bestenfalls seinen Folterer wahrnimmt, aber nicht den, in dessen Auftrag dieser handelt, so haben die vorbezeichnet Geschädigten mit Lehrern, „Experten“, Ärzten und Politikern zu tun. Ebenfalls ohne zu wissen, in wessen Auftrag diese Leute handeln. „Führungssysteme“ sind so konzipiert, dass für viele Menschen bereits kleinste wahrgenommene Vorteile genügen, um einem anderen Menschen Schlimmes anzutun.

Aber warum genau wird Menschen Schlimmes angetan? Die Gründe dafür sind stets dieselben. Der Täter hat ein Motiv und Motivlagen können vielfältig sein. 

Wer also ein Motiv hat, ein Geschehen zu beeinflussen, motiviert andere zur Unterstützung. Wem es gelingt, bei anderen den Wunsch zu erwecken, das zu tun, was er möchte, ist wirklich mächtig. Und es sind die Mächtigen im Hintergrund, welche die Darsteller auf den Bühnen dieser Welt dazu nutzen, die Interessen der wirklich Mächtigen durchzusetzen. Insbesondere die letzten fünf Jahre haben eindrucksvoll gezeigt, wie willfährig Politiker, Ärzte, Experten und viele weitere ihre jeweiligen Aufträge gegen die Bevölkerung durchsetz(t)en.

Und so geschieht es auch beim aktuellen Krieg, der stellvertretend auf dem europäischen Kontinent ausgetragen wird. Parolen wie „nie wieder Krieg“ gehören der Vergangenheit an. Stattdessen ist nunmehr wieder der Krieg und nur der Krieg geeignet, um „Aggressionen des Gegners abzuwehren“ und um „uns zu verteidigen“. 

Das hat mindestens drei gute Gründe:

1. Mit einem Krieg können Sie einem anderen etwas wegnehmen, was er freiwillig nicht herausrückt. Auf diese Weise kommen Sie an dessen Land, seine Rohstoffe und sein Vermögen. Sie können ihn beherrschen und Ihren eigenen Einfluss ausbauen. Je mehr Ihnen gehört, um so besser ist das für Sie. Sie müssen sich weniger abstimmen und Widersacher werden einfach ausgeschaltet.
2. Wenn etwas über einen langen Zeitraum aufgebaut wurde, ist es irgendwann auch einmal fertig. Um aber viel Geld verdienen und etwas nach eigenen Vorstellungen gestalten zu können, muss immer wieder etwas Neues erschaffen werden, und da stört das Alte nur. Demzufolge ist ein Krieg ein geeignetes Mittel, etwas zu zerstören. Und das Schöne ist, dass man von Beginn an viel Geld verdient. Denn man muss dem indoktrinierten Volk nur vormachen, dass der Krieg „unbedingt erforderlich“ sei, um das Volk dann selbst bereitwillig für diesen Krieg bezahlen und auch sonst engagiert mitwirken zu lassen. Dann kann in Rüstung und „Kriegstauglichkeit“ investiert werden. Deutschland soll dem Vernehmen nach bereits in einigen Jahren „kriegstauglich“ sein. Der Gegner wartet sicher gerne mit seinen Angriffen, bis es so weit ist.
3. Und nicht zu vergessen ist, dass man die vielen gewöhnlichen Menschen loswird. Schon immer wurden Populationen „reguliert“. Das macht bei Tieren ebenfalls so, indem man sie je nach „Erfordernis“ tötet. Und bei kollabierenden Systemen zu Zeiten von Automatisierung und KI unter Berücksichtigung der Klimarettung wissen doch mittlerweile alle, dass es viel zu viele Menschen auf dem Planeten gibt. Wenn jemand durch medizinische Misshandlungen oder auch durch einen Krieg direkt stirbt, zahlt dies auf die Lösung des Problems ein. Aber auch ein „Sterben auf Raten“ ist von großem Vorteil, denn durch die „fachmännische Behandlung von Verletzten“ bis zu deren jeweiligen Tode lässt sich am Leid viel verdienen.

Sie erkennen, dass es sehr vorteilhaft ist, Kriege zu führen, oder? Und diese exemplarisch genannten drei Gründe könnten noch beliebig erweitert werden. 

---

DIE FRIEDENSTAUBE FLIEGT AUCH IN IHR POSTFACH!

Hier können Sie die Friedenstaube abonnieren und bekommen die Artikel zugesandt, vorerst für alle kostenfrei, wir starten gänzlich ohne Paywall. (Die Bezahlabos fangen erst zu laufen an, wenn ein Monetarisierungskonzept für die Inhalte steht). Sie wollen der Genossenschaft beitreten oder uns unterstützen? Mehr Infos hier oder am Ende des Textes.

---

Das Einzige, was gegen Kriegsereignisse sprechen könnte, wäre, dass man selbst niemandem etwas wegnehmen möchte, was ihm gehört, und dass man seinen Mitmenschen nicht schaden, geschweige denn diese verletzen oder gar töten möchte. 

In diesem Zusammenhang könnte man auch erkennen, dass die, die nach Krieg rufen, selbst nicht kämpfen. Auch deren Kinder nicht. Man könnte erkennen, dass man selbst nur benutzt wird, um die Interessen anderer durchzusetzen. Wie beim Brettspiel Schach hat jede Figur eine Funktion und keinem Spieler ist das Fortbestehen eines Bauern wichtig, wenn seine Entnahme dem Spielgewinn dient. Wer Krieg spielt, denkt sicher ähnlich.

Meine beiden Großväter waren Soldaten im zweiten Weltkrieg und erlebten die Grausamkeiten des Krieges und der Gefangenschaft so intensiv, dass sie mit uns Enkeln zu keiner Zeit hierüber sprechen konnten, da sie wohl wussten, dass uns allein ihre Erzählungen zutiefst traumatisiert hätten. Die Opas waren analog dem, was wir ihnen an Information abringen konnten, angeblich nur Sanitäter. Sanitäter, wie auch die meisten Großväter aus der Nachbarschaft. Wer aber jemals beobachten konnte, wie unbeholfen mein Opa ein Pflaster aufgebracht hat, der konnte sich denken, dass seine vermeintliche Tätigkeit als Sanitäter eine Notlüge war, um uns die Wahrheit nicht vermitteln zu müssen.

Mein Opa war mein bester Freund und mir treibt es unverändert die Tränen in die Augen, sein erlebtes Leid nachzuempfinden. Und trotz aller seelischen und körperlichen Verletzungen hat er nach seiner Rückkehr aus der Kriegshölle mit großem Erfolg daran gearbeitet, für seine Familie zu sorgen.

Manchmal ist es m. E. besser, die Dinge vom vorhersehbaren Ende aus zu betrachten, um zu entscheiden, welche Herausforderungen man annimmt und welche man besser ablehnt. Es brauchte fast 80 Jahre, um die Deutschen erneut dafür zu begeistern, Ihre Leben „für die gute Sache“ zu opfern. Was heutzutage aber anders ist als früher: Einerseits sind die Politiker dieser Tage sehr durchschaubar geworden. Aber in einem ähnlichen Verhältnis, wie die schauspielerischen Leistungen der Politiker abgenommen haben, hat die Volksverblödung zugenommen. 

Denken Sie nicht nach. Denken Sie stattdessen vor. Und denken Sie selbst. Für sich, Ihre Lieben und alle anderen Menschen. Andernfalls wird die Geschichte, so wie sie von meinen Opas (und Omas) erlebt wurde, mit neuen Technologien und „zeitgemäßen Methoden“ wiederholt. Dies führt zweifelsfrei zu Not und Tod.

---

LASSEN SIE DER FRIEDENSTAUBE FLÜGEL WACHSEN!

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

Schon jetzt können Sie uns unterstützen:

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

Für Einzahlungen in CHF (Betreff: Friedenstaube):

Für Einzahlungen in Euro:

Milosz Matuschek

IBAN DE 53710520500000814137

BYLADEM1TST

Sparkasse Traunstein-Trostberg

Betreff: Friedenstaube

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

---

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

@ 3f770d65:7a745b24

🏌️ Monday, May 26 – Bitcoin Golf Championship & Kickoff Party

Location: Las Vegas, Nevada\ Event: 2nd Annual Bitcoin Golf Championship & Kick Off Party"\ Where: Bali Hai Golf Clubhouse, 5160 S Las Vegas Blvd, Las Vegas, NV 89119\ 🎟️ Get Tickets!

Details:

• The week tees off in style with the Bitcoin Golf Championship. Swing clubs by day and swing to music by night.

• Live performances from Nostr-powered acts courtesy of Tunestr, including Ainsley Costello and others.

• Stop by the Purple Pill Booth hosted by Derek and Tanja, who will be on-boarding golfers and attendees to the decentralized social future with Nostr.

---

💬 May 27–29 – Bitcoin 2025 Conference at the Las Vegas Convention Center

Location: The Venetian Resort\ Main Attraction for Nostr Fans: The Nostr Lounge\ When: All day, Tuesday through Thursday\ Where: Right outside the Open Source Stage\ 🎟️ Get Tickets!

Come chill at the Nostr Lounge, your home base for all things decentralized social. With seating for \~50, comfy couches, high-tops, and good vibes, it’s the perfect space to meet developers, community leaders, and curious newcomers building the future of censorship-resistant communication.

Bonus: Right across the aisle, you’ll find Shopstr, a decentralized marketplace app built on Nostr. Stop by their booth to explore how peer-to-peer commerce works in a truly open ecosystem.

Daily Highlights at the Lounge:

• ☕️ Hang out casually or sit down for a deeper conversation about the Nostr protocol

• 🔧 1:1 demos from app teams

• 🛍️ Merch available onsite

• 🧠 Impromptu lightning talks

• 🎤 Scheduled Meetups (details below)

---

🎯 Nostr Lounge Meetups

Wednesday, May 28 @ 1:00 PM

• Damus Meetup: Come meet the team behind Damus, the OG Nostr app for iOS that helped kickstart the social revolution. They'll also be showcasing their new cross-platform app, Notedeck, designed for a more unified Nostr experience across devices. Grab some merch, get a demo, and connect directly with the developers.

Thursday, May 29 @ 1:00 PM

• Primal Meetup: Dive into Primal, the slickest Nostr experience available on web, Android, and iOS. With a built-in wallet, zapping your favorite creators and friends has never been easier. The team will be on-site for hands-on demos, Q\&A, merch giveaways, and deeper discussions on building the social layer of Bitcoin.

---

🎙️ Nostr Talks at Bitcoin 2025

If you want to hear from the minds building decentralized social, make sure you attend these two official conference sessions:

1. FROSTR Workshop: Multisig Nostr Signing

• 🕚 Time: 11:30 AM – 12:00 PM

• 📅 Date: Wednesday, May 28

• 📍 Location: Developer Zone

• 🎤 Speaker: nostr:nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7etyv4hzumn0wd68ytnvv9hxgqgdwaehxw309ahx7uewd3hkcqpqs9etjgzjglwlaxdhsveq0qksxyh6xpdpn8ajh69ruetrug957r3qf4ggfm (Austin Kelsay) @ Voltage\ A deep-dive into FROST-based multisig key management for Nostr. Geared toward devs and power users interested in key security.

2. Panel: Decentralizing Social Media

• 🕑 Time: 2:00 PM – 2:30 PM

• 📅 Date: Thursday, May 29

• 📍 Location: Genesis Stage

• 🎙️ Moderator: nostr:nprofile1qyxhwumn8ghj7mn0wvhxcmmvqy08wumn8ghj7mn0wd68yttjv4kxz7fwv3jhyettwfhhxuewd4jsqgxnqajr23msx5malhhcz8paa2t0r70gfjpyncsqx56ztyj2nyyvlq00heps - Bitcoin Strategy @ Roxom TV

• 👥 Speakers:

• nostr:nprofile1qyt8wumn8ghj7etyv4hzumn0wd68ytnvv9hxgtcppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qqsy2ga7trfetvd3j65m3jptqw9k39wtq2mg85xz2w542p5dhg06e5qmhlpep – Early Bitcoin dev, CEO @ Sirius Business Ltd

• nostr:nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytndv9kxjm3wdahxcqg5waehxw309ahx7um5wfekzarkvyhxuet5qqsw4v882mfjhq9u63j08kzyhqzqxqc8tgf740p4nxnk9jdv02u37ncdhu7e3 – Analyst & Partner @ Ego Death Capital

Get the big-picture perspective on why decentralized social matters and how Nostr fits into the future of digital communication.

---

🌃 NOS VEGAS Meetup & Afterparty

Date: Wednesday, May 28\ Time: 7:00 PM – 1:00 AM\ Location: We All Scream Nightclub, 517 Fremont St., Las Vegas, NV 89101\ 🎟️ Get Tickets!

What to Expect:

• 🎶 Live Music Stage – Featuring Ainsley Costello, Sara Jade, Able James, Martin Groom, Bobby Shell, Jessie Lark, and other V4V artists

• 🪩 DJ Party Deck – With sets by nostr:nprofile1qy0hwumn8ghj7cmgdae82uewd45kketyd9kxwetj9e3k7mf6xs6rgqgcwaehxw309ahx7um5wgh85mm694ek2unk9ehhyecqyq7hpmq75krx2zsywntgtpz5yzwjyg2c7sreardcqmcp0m67xrnkwylzzk4 , nostr:nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7etyv4hzumn0wd68ytnvv9hxgqgkwaehxw309anx2etywvhxummnw3ezucnpdejqqg967faye3x6fxgnul77ej23l5aew8yj0x2e4a3tq2mkrgzrcvecfsk8xlu3 , and more DJs throwing down

• 🛰️ Live-streamed via Tunestr

• 🧠 Nostr Education – Talks by nostr:nprofile1qy88wumn8ghj7mn0wvhxcmmv9uq37amnwvaz7tmwdaehgu3dwfjkccte9ejx2un9ddex7umn9ekk2tcqyqlhwrt96wnkf2w9edgr4cfruchvwkv26q6asdhz4qg08pm6w3djg3c8m4j , nostr:nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7etyv4hzumn0wd68ytnvv9hxgqg7waehxw309anx2etywvhxummnw3ezucnpdejz7ur0wp6kcctjqqspywh6ulgc0w3k6mwum97m7jkvtxh0lcjr77p9jtlc7f0d27wlxpslwvhau , nostr:nprofile1qy88wumn8ghj7mn0wvhxcmmv9uq3vamnwvaz7tmwdaehgu3wd33xgetk9en82m30qqsgqke57uygxl0m8elstq26c4mq2erz3dvdtgxwswwvhdh0xcs04sc4u9p7d , nostr:nprofile1q9z8wumn8ghj7erzx3jkvmmzw4eny6tvw368wdt8da4kxamrdvek76mrwg6rwdngw94k67t3v36k77tev3kx7vn2xa5kjem9dp4hjepwd3hkxctvqyg8wumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytnhd9hx2qpqyaul8k059377u9lsu67de7y637w4jtgeuwcmh5n7788l6xnlnrgssuy4zk , nostr:nprofile1qy28wue69uhnzvpwxqhrqt33xgmn5dfsx5cqz9thwden5te0v4jx2m3wdehhxarj9ekxzmnyqqswavgevxe9gs43vwylumr7h656mu9vxmw4j6qkafc3nefphzpph8ssvcgf8 , and more.

• 🧾 Vendors & Project Booths – Explore new tools and services

• 🔐 Onboarding Stations – Learn how to use Nostr hands-on

• 🐦 Nostrich Flocking – Meet your favorite nyms IRL

• 🍸 Three Full Bars – Two floors of socializing overlooking vibrant Fremont Street

| | | | | ----------- | -------------------- | ------------------- | | Time | Name | Topic | | 7:30-7:50 | Derek | Nostr for Beginners | | 8:00-8:20 | Mark & Paul | Primal | | 8:30-8:50 | Terry | Damus | | 9:00-9:20 | OpenMike and Ainsley | V4V | | 09:30-09:50 | The Space | Space |

This is the after-party of the year for those who love freedom technology and decentralized social community. Don’t miss it.

---

Final Thoughts

Whether you're there to learn, network, party, or build, Bitcoin 2025 in Las Vegas has a packed week of Nostr-friendly programming. Be sure to catch all the events, visit the Nostr Lounge, and experience the growing decentralized social revolution.

🟣 Find us. Flock with us. Purple pill someone.

@ 2b24a1fa:17750f64

Ohne Meinungsfreiheit keine Pressefreiheit. Wo also Regierungen und deren mitunter als NGO getarnte Handlanger die Meinungsfreiheit einschränken, beschneiden sie auch die Pressefreiheit. In Artikel 5 des Grundgesetzes heißt es: „Die Pressefreiheit und die Freiheit der Berichterstattung durch Rundfunk und Film werden gewährleistet. Eine Zensur findet nicht statt.“ Wirklich? Was ist mit dem EU-weit geltende Digital Services Act (deutsch: Gesetz über digitale Dienste)? Laut politischem Establishment dient dieses Gesetz dem „Kampf gegen Desinformation und Hassrede“. Doch wer bestimmt, was Desinformation ist? Zählen dazu beispielsweise auch Aussagen von Gesundheitsministern über nicht vorhandene Nebenwirkungen von Covid-Impfungen? Und Wahlversprechen, die derjenige nur gemacht, um an Stimmen zu kommen, aber die Versprechen nie umsetzen wollte? Und was ist mit dem schwammigen Begriff „Hassrede“? Der Medienrechtsanwalt Joachim Steinhöfel schreibt: „Unser Strafgesetzbuch kennt den Begriff gar nicht.“ Dafür öffnet es staatlicher Willkür eine weitere Tür.\ In der Rangliste zur Pressefreiheit, die jedes Jahr von Reporter ohne Grenzen erstellt wird, finden diese Punkte kaum Beachtung. Keine Überraschung für unseren Autor, den Medienwissenschaftler Michael Meyen. Hören Sie seinen Beitrag „Der Westen gewinnt immer“, zuerst erschienen auf der Website der Freien Akademie für Medien und Journalismus sowie als Video verfügbar: www.freie-medienakademie.de/medien-plus…leerstellen und www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vp5YlGfJAm8

Sprecherin: Sabrina Khalil

Bild: ChatGPT im Auftrag von Radio München

@ c1831fbe:de4b39bf

What follows is my best effort to recall the details of an arguably supernatural encounter I experienced almost sixty years ago. I've told this story many times before, and while my recollection may not be perfect in every detail, my account is real and substantively factual.

It was early one long ago morning, in that twilit between-time shortly before dawn. As I dangled precariously in a quasi-aware state, hovering on the knife edge between wakefulness and sleep, I was transported in a dream to another place and time. Was it the Mediterranean coast? Perhaps ancient Greece?

In my mind's eye, I found myself climbing a rather steep, rocky hillside overlooking a sparkling bright blue sea. Ahead of me, and slightly higher, was what appeared to be a young shepherd boy, leading me ever higher up the hill.

As we wove our way upward,

skirting rocky outcroppings and zig-zagging because of the steepness of the slope, I heard the boy chanting:

"Ata, Ata, Archontos, Ata, Ata, Echousi, Ata, Ata, Archousi"

He kept repeating the mantra, over and over:

"Ata, Ata, Archontos, Ata, Ata, Echousi, Ata, Ata, Archousi"

\~ \~ \~

"Ata, Ata, Archontos, Ata, Ata, Echousi, Ata, Ata, Archousi"

I listened for a few cycles, and then took up the chant myself. After several attempts, when at last I got it right, the shepherd boy turned, looking back at me and smiling broadly to signal that I had finally mastered the cadence and the words.

Then I awoke.

Because my dream had been so vivid and unusual, I immediately found a pencil and paper to write down the chant phonetically before I could forget it.

A few days passed.

Life was busy. Then I remembered my friend in grad school, studying biblical Greek. That weekend, I went and hung out with him while he worked his night job at the college heating plant. Between his rounds inspecting and managing the steam boilers keeping students from freezing to death in the Arctic Midwest winter, I told him about my strange dream.

Pulling out an exhaustive Greek lexicon, one by one, my knowledgeable friend looked up the words from my dream, interpreting each according to its verb conjugation, tense, and mood.

"Ata, Ata" had no discernible meaning; we soon concluded that it was probably just meaningless vocables, added to give the chant rhythm and substance. My friend moved on to the first recognizable word of the chant...

"Archontos" - "They are ruled."

OK, so far, so good. He checked the next word:

"Echousi" - "They shed blood."

Hmmmm... This chant is beginning to appear to be more than random sounds.

"Archousi" - "They rule."

At this point, I almost fell out of my chair in shock. Far from being a meaningless chant, this cycle—repeating again and again—is the seemingly never-ending story of the entirety of human history...

"They Are Ruled, They Shed Blood, They Rule."

\~ \~ \~

"They Are Ruled, They Shed Blood, They Rule."

This concise mantra perfectly captures the endlessly repeating cycle of oppression, revolt, and revolution that always leaves us with a fresh set of oppressors all too ready to replace the last.

Who will rescue us?

Who will redeem us from this endless tedious cycle into which we have been born?

A long lifetime of study and reflection has persuaded me that this deadly cycle can and ultimately will be broken. If we follow the teachings of Jesus; if we love one another and live together in voluntary, local societies, serving each other; I am persuaded that we can break free of this desperately destructive cycle of endlessly seeking to dominate one another. It's past time for us to enter into a mutually beneficial life in the Kingdom of our Creator-God Jesus, the most authentically benevolent King the universe has ever known.

stories #politics #Christianity #supernatural #strange

@ c1e9ab3a:9cb56b43

Abstract

This document proposes a novel architecture that decouples the peer-to-peer (P2P) communication layer from the Bitcoin protocol and replaces or augments it with the Nostr protocol. The goal is to improve censorship resistance, performance, modularity, and maintainability by migrating transaction propagation and block distribution to the Nostr relay network.

Introduction

Bitcoin’s current architecture relies heavily on its P2P network to propagate transactions and blocks. While robust, it has limitations in terms of flexibility, scalability, and censorship resistance in certain environments. Nostr, a decentralized event-publishing protocol, offers a multi-star topology and a censorship-resistant infrastructure for message relay.

This proposal outlines how Bitcoin communication could be ported to Nostr while maintaining consensus and verification through standard Bitcoin clients.

Motivation

• Enhanced Censorship Resistance: Nostr’s architecture enables better relay redundancy and obfuscation of transaction origin.
• Simplified Lightweight Nodes: Removing the full P2P stack allows for lightweight nodes that only verify blockchain data and communicate over Nostr.
• Architectural Modularity: Clean separation between validation and communication enables easier auditing, upgrades, and parallel innovation.
• Faster Propagation: Nostr’s multi-star network may provide faster propagation of transactions and blocks compared to the mesh-like Bitcoin P2P network.

Architecture Overview

Components

1. Bitcoin Minimal Node (BMN):

   • Verifies blockchain and block validity.
   • Maintains UTXO set and handles mempool logic.
   • Connects to Nostr relays instead of P2P Bitcoin peers.

2. Bridge Node:

   • Bridges Bitcoin P2P traffic to and from Nostr relays.
   • Posts new transactions and blocks to Nostr.
   • Downloads mempool content and block headers from Nostr.

3. Nostr Relays:

   • Accept Bitcoin-specific event kinds (transactions and blocks).
   • Store mempool entries and block messages.
   • Optionally broadcast fee estimation summaries and tipsets.

Event Format

Proposed reserved Nostr kind numbers for Bitcoin content (NIP/BIP TBD):

| Nostr Kind | Purpose | |------------|------------------------| | 210000 | Bitcoin Transaction | | 210001 | Bitcoin Block Header | | 210002 | Bitcoin Block | | 210003 | Mempool Fee Estimates | | 210004 | Filter/UTXO summary |

Transaction Lifecycle

1. Wallet creates a Bitcoin transaction.
2. Wallet sends it to a set of configured Nostr relays.
3. Relays accept and cache the transaction (based on fee policies).
4. Mining nodes or bridge nodes fetch mempool contents from Nostr.
5. Once mined, a block is submitted over Nostr.
6. Nodes confirm inclusion and update their UTXO set.

Security Considerations

• Sybil Resistance: Consensus remains based on proof-of-work. The communication path (Nostr) is not involved in consensus.
• Relay Discoverability: Optionally bootstrap via DNS, Bitcoin P2P, or signed relay lists.
• Spam Protection: Relay-side policy, rate limiting, proof-of-work challenges, or Lightning payments.
• Block Authenticity: Nodes must verify all received blocks and reject invalid chains.

Compatibility and Migration

• Fully compatible with current Bitcoin consensus rules.
• Bridge nodes preserve interoperability with legacy full nodes.
• Nodes can run in hybrid mode, fetching from both P2P and Nostr.

Future Work

• Integration with watch-only wallets and SPV clients using verified headers via Nostr.
• Use of Nostr’s social graph for partial trust assumptions and relay reputation.
• Dynamic relay discovery using Nostr itself (relay list events).

Conclusion

This proposal lays out a new architecture for Bitcoin communication using Nostr to replace or augment the P2P network. This improves decentralization, censorship resistance, modularity, and speed, while preserving consensus integrity. It encourages innovation by enabling smaller, purpose-built Bitcoin nodes and offloading networking complexity.

---

This document may become both a Bitcoin Improvement Proposal (BIP-XXX) and a Nostr Improvement Proposal (NIP-XXX). Event kind range reserved: 210000–219999.

@ da8b7de1:c0164aee

„Európának a tettek mezejére kell lépnie a nukleáris energia támogatásában” – mondja a brüsszeli iparági csoport új vezetője

A cikk fő témája, hogy az európai nukleáris ipar új vezetője, Emmanuel Brutin (Nucleareurope), nagyobb elkötelezettséget vár el az Európai Bizottságtól a nukleáris energia támogatásában. Bár pozitív jelek mutatkoznak a nukleáris energia iránti nyitottság terén, Brutin szerint a gyakorlatban még mindig jelentős akadályok vannak, például a finanszírozási forrásokhoz való hozzáférésben és a projektengedélyezések lassúságában.

Főbb pontok:

• Politikai nyitottság, de gyakorlati akadályok: Az EU-ban nőtt a nukleáris energia elismerése, például bekerült a fenntartható befektetési taxonómiába és a Net-Zero Industry Act-be. Ugyanakkor a nukleáris energia továbbra is kizárt több fontos finanszírozási eszközből, mint az InvestEU vagy a Just Transition Fund.
• Technológiai semlegesség szükségessége: Brutin hangsúlyozza, hogy az EU-nak nemcsak nem szabad hátráltatnia a nukleáris energiát, hanem aktívan támogatnia is kellene, különösen a Clean Industrial Deal és az Affordable Energy Action Plan keretében.
• Finanszírozás és engedélyezés: A nukleáris ágazat számára kulcsfontosságú a finanszírozáshoz való jobb hozzáférés, mivel a beruházások tőkeigényesek. Brutin szerint gyorsítani kellene a nukleáris projektek engedélyezését, és lazítani az állami támogatási szabályokon.
• Stratégiai jelentőség: Európa teljes nukleáris értéklánccal rendelkezik, ami stratégiai autonómiát jelent, különösen a jelenlegi geopolitikai környezetben.
• Új PINC dokumentum: Nyáron várható a frissített PINC (Illustrative Nuclear Programme), amelynek konkrét lépéseket kell tartalmaznia a nukleáris beruházások támogatására.
• Iparági igények: Az energiaintenzív iparágak (pl. acél, cement) számára nem az energiaforrás típusa számít, hanem a megbízható, olcsó és dekarbonizált villamosenergia-ellátás.
• Tanulás a múlt hibáiból: Brutin elismeri, hogy a nukleáris projektek Európában gyakran szenvedtek késésektől és költségtúllépésektől, de az iparág dolgozik ezek megoldásán.

Forrás:

NucNet:
"Europe Must 'Walk The Talk' On Support For Nuclear Energy, Says New Head Of Brussels Industry Group"
Megjelenés dátuma: 2025. május 20.
Elérhető: NucNet honlapján

@ 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.

@ c631e267:c2b78d3e

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Titelbild: Pixabay]

---

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

@ 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

@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9

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

Concern

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

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

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

Optimism

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

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

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

Realism

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

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

@ c631e267:c2b78d3e

Information ohne Reflexion ist geistiger Flugsand. \ Ernst Reinhardt

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Titelbild: Pixabay]

---

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

@ c631e267:c2b78d3e

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Titelbild: Pixabay]

---

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

@ 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. 🫡

@ c631e267:c2b78d3e

Die Wahrheit verletzt tiefer als jede Beleidigung. \ Marquis de Sade

Sagen Sie niemals «Terroristin B.», «Schwachkopf H.», «korrupter Drecksack S.» oder «Meinungsfreiheitshasserin F.» und verkneifen Sie sich Memes, denn so etwas könnte Ihnen als Beleidigung oder Verleumdung ausgelegt werden und rechtliche Konsequenzen haben. Auch mit einer Frau M.-A. S.-Z. ist in dieser Beziehung nicht zu spaßen, sie gehört zu den Top-Anzeigenstellern.

«Politikerbeleidigung» als Straftatbestand wurde 2021 im Kampf gegen «Rechtsextremismus und Hasskriminalität» in Deutschland eingeführt, damals noch unter der Regierung Merkel. Im Gesetz nicht festgehalten ist die Unterscheidung zwischen schlechter Hetze und guter Hetze – trotzdem ist das gängige Praxis, wie der Titel fast schon nahelegt.

So dürfen Sie als Politikerin heute den Tesla als «Nazi-Auto» bezeichnen und dies ausdrücklich auf den Firmengründer Elon Musk und dessen «rechtsextreme Positionen» beziehen, welche Sie nicht einmal belegen müssen. [1] Vielleicht ernten Sie Proteste, jedoch vorrangig wegen der «gut bezahlten, unbefristeten Arbeitsplätze» in Brandenburg. Ihren Tweet hat die Berliner Senatorin Cansel Kiziltepe inzwischen offenbar dennoch gelöscht.

Dass es um die Meinungs- und Pressefreiheit in der Bundesrepublik nicht mehr allzu gut bestellt ist, befürchtet man inzwischen auch schon im Ausland. Der Fall des Journalisten David Bendels, der kürzlich wegen eines Faeser-Memes zu sieben Monaten Haft auf Bewährung verurteilt wurde, führte in diversen Medien zu Empörung. Die Welt versteckte ihre Kritik mit dem Titel «Ein Urteil wie aus einer Diktatur» hinter einer Bezahlschranke.

Unschöne, heutzutage vielleicht strafbare Kommentare würden mir auch zu einigen anderen Themen und Akteuren einfallen. Ein Kandidat wäre der deutsche Bundesgesundheitsminister (ja, er ist es tatsächlich immer noch). Während sich in den USA auf dem Gebiet etwas bewegt und zum Beispiel Robert F. Kennedy Jr. will, dass die Gesundheitsbehörde (CDC) keine Covid-Impfungen für Kinder mehr empfiehlt, möchte Karl Lauterbach vor allem das Corona-Lügengebäude vor dem Einsturz bewahren.

«Ich habe nie geglaubt, dass die Impfungen nebenwirkungsfrei sind», sagte Lauterbach jüngst der ZDF-Journalistin Sarah Tacke. Das steht in krassem Widerspruch zu seiner früher verbreiteten Behauptung, die Gen-Injektionen hätten keine Nebenwirkungen. Damit entlarvt er sich selbst als Lügner. Die Bezeichnung ist absolut berechtigt, dieser Mann dürfte keinerlei politische Verantwortung tragen und das Verhalten verlangt nach einer rechtlichen Überprüfung. Leider ist ja die Justiz anderweitig beschäftigt und hat außerdem selbst keine weiße Weste.

Obendrein kämpfte der Herr Minister für eine allgemeine Impfpflicht. Er beschwor dabei das Schließen einer «Impflücke», wie es die Weltgesundheitsorganisation – die «wegen Trump» in finanziellen Schwierigkeiten steckt – bis heute tut. Die WHO lässt aktuell ihre «Europäische Impfwoche» propagieren, bei der interessanterweise von Covid nicht mehr groß die Rede ist.

Einen «Klima-Leugner» würden manche wohl Nir Shaviv nennen, das ist ja nicht strafbar. Der Astrophysiker weist nämlich die Behauptung von einer Klimakrise zurück. Gemäß seiner Forschung ist mindestens die Hälfte der Erderwärmung nicht auf menschliche Emissionen, sondern auf Veränderungen im Sonnenverhalten zurückzuführen.

Das passt vielleicht auch den «Klima-Hysterikern» der britischen Regierung ins Konzept, die gerade Experimente zur Verdunkelung der Sonne angekündigt haben. Produzenten von Kunstfleisch oder Betreiber von Insektenfarmen würden dagegen vermutlich die Geschichte vom fatalen CO2 bevorzugen. Ihnen würde es besser passen, wenn der verantwortungsvolle Erdenbürger sein Verhalten gründlich ändern müsste.

In unserer völlig verkehrten Welt, in der praktisch jede Verlautbarung außerhalb der abgesegneten Narrative potenziell strafbar sein kann, gehört fast schon Mut dazu, Dinge offen anzusprechen. Im «besten Deutschland aller Zeiten» glaubten letztes Jahr nur noch 40 Prozent der Menschen, ihre Meinung frei äußern zu können. Das ist ein Armutszeugnis, und es sieht nicht gerade nach Besserung aus. Umso wichtiger ist es, dagegen anzugehen.

[Titelbild: Pixabay]

--- Quellen: ---

[1] Zur Orientierung wenigstens ein paar Hinweise zur NS-Vergangenheit deutscher Automobilhersteller:

• Volkswagen
• Porsche
• Daimler-Benz
• BMW
• Audi
• Opel
• Heute: «Auto-Werke für die Rüstung? Rheinmetall prüft Übernahmen»

---

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

@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9

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

The Status Quo

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

Nostr Requires Responsibility

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

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

Future Nostr Security Improvements

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

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

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

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

---

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

@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9

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

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

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

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

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

---

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

@ 70c48e4b:00ce3ccb

Dear readers,

“The direct use of force is such a poor solution to any problem, it is generally employed only by small children and large nations.” — David Friedman

What If we could enforce promises without force?

David Friedman, in his book The Machinery of Freedom, tosses out a pretty wild idea: that people can build systems of cooperation and justice without needing a government at all. These systems rely on voluntary agreements, social reputation, and mutual incentives. In such a world, contracts hold value because honoring a promise brings greater rewards than breaking it.

From Friedman to Bitcoin

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/e8zsFTV94bw/maxresdefault.jpg

This vision shaped the thinking behind Angor, a funding tool built on Bitcoin. Friedman’s ideas showed that systems of cooperation could work without central authority, and Bitcoin now provides the foundation to build them. It records transactions in a public and tamper-proof way. With features like Taproot, people can set clear rules for funding and accountability. Angor uses these tools to help founders and backers create agreements that are transparent and easy to verify.

The result is a new kind of marketplace where follow-through is visible, and reputation becomes a real asset. Instead of relying on enforcement from above, trust is earned through action and built into the system itself.

What happens after the project succeeds?

One important question kept returning throughout our work: what happens after a project succeeds? The founder raises the funds, delivers the product, and begins earning revenue. What mechanism ensures that revenue is shared as promised? How can investors protect their interests in an environment that relies on voluntary structure rather than external authority?

To explore possible answers, we looked at how libertarian thinkers approach contracts in stateless systems.

How libertarian thinkers approach contracts without the state?

Friedman, along with other libertarian thinkers like Murray Rothbard and Bruce Benson, describes voluntarily created legal systems where people make binding agreements and use private mechanisms to enforce them. These mechanisms include:

• Reputational risk
• Collateralized performance
• Community arbitration
• Decentralized insurance

Such tools can replace state-backed enforcement when trust is earned and incentives are aligned.

If founders are anonymous:

When a founder chooses to remain pseudonymous, legal enforcement is not available. In this case, the agreement between the founder and investor can rely on cryptographic mechanisms such as performance bonds, revenue proofs, and public reputation systems.

1. Performance Bonds

• Founders deposit additional Bitcoin into a separate, time-locked contract. As they meet revenue-sharing milestones, they are allowed to unlock specific portions of this bond.

• If a revenue allocation is missed or a deadline passes without fulfillment, the contract redirects the bond to investors through a Taproot clause i.e. a feature in Bitcoin that lets you set up ‘if-this-then-that’ rules directly into a transaction, but privately. This creates a clear and automatic consequence, reinforcing accountability through financial incentives.

1. Revenue Proofs and Oracles

• Most founders, especially those running small businesses like cafes, games, or services, do not earn revenue in Bitcoin. Their income flows through fiat systems, which means automatic on-chain revenue streaming is not an option. The only way to maintain transparency is to prove income after the fact. This starts with exporting a sales report from a platform such as Stripe, Revolut, or a point-of-sale system. The founder hashes the file and posts that hash to the Bitcoin blockchain as a timestamped public reference.

• An oracle plays the role of a neutral verifier. This could be a trusted accountant or an observer chosen by the investor community. Their job is simple: compare the actual report with the hash recorded on-chain. If the data matches, the oracle signs a message that triggers the revenue-share payout using a Discreet Log Contract (DLC).

A DLC is similar to a smart contract, but built for Bitcoin. It allows two parties to agree on a specific outcome, such as how much revenue was made, and only releases funds when that outcome is confirmed by the oracle.

This process does not depend on central enforcement. Instead, it works through mutual agreement and the oracle’s reputation, or any collateral they may have provided in advance.

1. Reputation as collateral

• Every revenue-share payout is recorded on the Bitcoin blockchain, making it publicly visible and verifiable. Community-run indexers can scan the chain and track whether a founder consistently delivers payments on time. This performance history is then summarized into what is known as a “contract streak,” which refers to the number of consecutive payouts completed without delay.

• These streaks are published as signed events through protocols like Nostr, allowing anyone to verify a founder’s track record. A strong, uninterrupted streak builds credibility and can improve the chances of raising funds for future projects. In contrast, a broken streak signals risk, which discourages new investment and reduces access to support from the Angor community.

If founders are public:

When a founder uses a real identity, the parties can combine legal agreements with on-chain contracts. These hybrid arrangements allow for tools like enforceable smart contracts, voluntary arbitration, and potentially community-backed insurance.

1. Legally binding smart contracts

• This type of agreement formally identifies the founder’s legal entity and clearly links it to specific Taproot addresses used in the project. It outlines the rules for revenue sharing, describes what constitutes a breach, and specifies how disputes should be resolved. Because it is a formal legal document, it can be enforced in any relevant jurisdiction where the founder has a presence or assets.

1. Private arbitration

• During the contract setup, both parties can agree to a neutral arbitrator who will step in if a dispute arises. If a revenue payout is delayed or missed, the arbitrator reviews all relevant data, including on-chain records, oracle confirmations, and supporting documentation. Based on this evidence, the arbitrator issues a decision that determines whether funds should be released, held, or redirected. This method provides a clear resolution process without involving courts, while still maintaining a fair and structured outcome.

1. Equity sharing and traditional securities

• When founders are publicly identified and operating under a registered entity, they can also offer equity in the company as part of the funding arrangement. This can take the form of direct share issuance, convertible notes, or tokenized equity, depending on jurisdictional frameworks and investor preferences.

While Angor does not facilitate equity transfers directly, the on-chain agreement can reference these arrangements clearly. Investors may receive shares documented in a cap table, with accompanying legal agreements that govern dividend rights, voting power, or exit terms.

This method provides a more conventional form of investor alignment and is often well-understood by experienced backers. It can also be combined with on-chain revenue-sharing mechanisms to create hybrid models that balance transparency with long-term equity value.

Final Thought: Alignment Over Authority

The ideas in The Machinery of Freedom show how people can build cooperative systems without relying on centralized authority. Angor puts those ideas into action by applying them to decentralized crowdfunding. Each campaign becomes a contract. Each payout becomes a public signal of integrity. Reputation is built over time, through visible and verifiable performance.

This approach shifts enforcement from force to alignment. It rewards honesty and transparency while making misuse costly. By designing systems where trust is earned through action and recorded on-chain, we move toward a more resilient model of funding. This model is grounded in consent, shaped by shared incentives, and supported by the open logic of Bitcoin.

Bitcoin itself works this way. Miners follow the rules not because they are told to, but because breaking them wastes energy, time, and opportunity. The cost of cheating is built into the system. Angor adopts the same principle: integrity is not enforced from above, it is embedded in the architecture.

If you are building on Angor or exploring similar ideas, reach out. The tools are evolving, and the community is growing.

https://docs.angor.io/images/tools/hub.png

Have you tried Angor yet?

Thank you & Ciao. Guest writer: Paco nostr:npub1v67clmf4jrezn8hsz28434nc0y5fu65e5esws04djnl2kasxl5tskjmjjk

@ 2b24a1fa:17750f64

„Was wäre, wenn Bürger keine verzogenen und bösen Wähler wären? Was, wenn in jedem einzelnen von uns ein verantwortungsbewusster, motivierter und konstruktiver Bürger steckte? Oder anders gesagt: Was wäre, wenn eine echte Demokratie realisierbar wäre?“, schreibt der Historiker Rutger Bregman in seinem Buch Im Grunde gut und beantwortet die Frage mit einem Beispiel aus Venezuela, wo die Bürger „100 Prozent des Investitionsbudgets der Gemeinde“ selbst verwalten. Es geht hier nicht um ein Fünf-Seelen-Dorf, sondern immerhin um eine Gemeinde mit mehr als 200.000 Einwohnern. Bregmans Botschaft: Bregmans Botschaft: Demokratie wäre möglich.

https://soundcloud.com/radiomuenchen/great-reset-von-unten/s-8hVwq6ZwygB?

In Deutschland ist das nicht anders. Dabei enthält das als Provisorium gedachte Grundgesetz von 1949 ganz gute Ansätze. Doch bis heute fehlt ihm die demokratische Legitimation, die auch 1990 ausblieb, nach dem Beitritt der aufgelösten DDR. Um aus dem Grundgesetz eine gültige Verfassung zu machen, bedarf es einer Volksabstimmung, die nie erfolgte. Was wir tun können, um endlich eine Verfassung zu erhalten, die den Interessen der Menschen dient, darüber haben wir uns schon im Juli 2021 mit dem Autor und Demokratie-Aktivisten Ralph Boes unterhalten. Jetzt hat er ein Buch geschrieben: „Great Reset von unten – Die ultimative Delegitimierung unseres Staates und die konkreten Schritte, das ganze vom Grunde her in Ordnung zu bringen“.

Unser Autor Jonny Rieder hat es gelesen.

Sprecher: Ulrich Allroggen

Bild: ChatGPT im Auftrag von Radio München

@ c631e267:c2b78d3e

Es ist völlig unbestritten, dass der Angriff der russischen Armee auf die Ukraine im Februar 2022 strikt zu verurteilen ist. Ebenso unbestritten ist Russland unter Wladimir Putin keine brillante Demokratie. Aus diesen Tatsachen lässt sich jedoch nicht das finstere Bild des russischen Präsidenten – und erst recht nicht des Landes – begründen, das uns durchweg vorgesetzt wird und den Kern des aktuellen europäischen Bedrohungs-Szenarios darstellt. Da müssen wir schon etwas genauer hinschauen.

Der vorliegende Artikel versucht derweil nicht, den Einsatz von Gewalt oder die Verletzung von Menschenrechten zu rechtfertigen oder zu entschuldigen – ganz im Gegenteil. Dass jedoch der Verdacht des «Putinverstehers» sofort latent im Raume steht, verdeutlicht, was beim Thema «Russland» passiert: Meinungsmache und Manipulation.

Angesichts der mentalen Mobilmachung seitens Politik und Medien sowie des Bestrebens, einen bevorstehenden Krieg mit Russland geradezu herbeizureden, ist es notwendig, dieser fatalen Entwicklung entgegenzutreten. Wenn wir uns nur ein wenig von der herrschenden Schwarz-Weiß-Malerei freimachen, tauchen automatisch Fragen auf, die Risse im offiziellen Narrativ enthüllen. Grund genug, nachzuhaken.

Wer sich schon länger auch abseits der Staats- und sogenannten Leitmedien informiert, der wird in diesem Artikel vermutlich nicht viel Neues erfahren. Andere könnten hier ein paar unbekannte oder vergessene Aspekte entdecken. Möglicherweise klärt sich in diesem Kontext die Wahrnehmung der aktuellen (unserer eigenen!) Situation ein wenig.

Manipulation erkennen

Corona-«Pandemie», menschengemachter Klimawandel oder auch Ukraine-Krieg: Jede Menge Krisen, und für alle gibt es ein offizielles Narrativ, dessen Hinterfragung unerwünscht ist. Nun ist aber ein Narrativ einfach eine Erzählung, eine Geschichte (Latein: «narratio») und kein Tatsachenbericht. Und so wie ein Märchen soll auch das Narrativ eine Botschaft vermitteln.

Über die Methoden der Manipulation ist viel geschrieben worden, sowohl in Bezug auf das Individuum als auch auf die Massen. Sehr wertvolle Tipps dazu, wie man Manipulationen durchschauen kann, gibt ein Büchlein [1] von Albrecht Müller, dem Herausgeber der NachDenkSeiten.

Die Sprache selber eignet sich perfekt für die Manipulation. Beispielsweise kann die Wortwahl Bewertungen mitschwingen lassen, regelmäßiges Wiederholen (gerne auch von verschiedenen Seiten) lässt Dinge irgendwann «wahr» erscheinen, Übertreibungen fallen auf und hinterlassen wenigstens eine Spur im Gedächtnis, genauso wie Andeutungen. Belege spielen dabei keine Rolle.

Es gibt auffällig viele Sprachregelungen, die offenbar irgendwo getroffen und irgendwie koordiniert werden. Oder alle Redenschreiber und alle Medien kopieren sich neuerdings permanent gegenseitig. Welchen Zweck hat es wohl, wenn der Krieg in der Ukraine durchgängig und quasi wörtlich als «russischer Angriffskrieg auf die Ukraine» bezeichnet wird? Obwohl das in der Sache richtig ist, deutet die Art der Verwendung auf gezielte Beeinflussung hin und soll vor allem das Feindbild zementieren.

Sprachregelungen dienen oft der Absicherung einer einseitigen Darstellung. Das Gleiche gilt für das Verkürzen von Informationen bis hin zum hartnäckigen Verschweigen ganzer Themenbereiche. Auch hierfür gibt es rund um den Ukraine-Konflikt viele gute Beispiele.

Das gewünschte Ergebnis solcher Methoden ist eine Schwarz-Weiß-Malerei, bei der einer eindeutig als «der Böse» markiert ist und die anderen automatisch «die Guten» sind. Das ist praktisch und demonstriert gleichzeitig ein weiteres Manipulationswerkzeug: die Verwendung von Doppelstandards. Wenn man es schafft, bei wichtigen Themen regelmäßig mit zweierlei Maß zu messen, ohne dass das Publikum protestiert, dann hat man freie Bahn.

Experten zu bemühen, um bestimmte Sachverhalte zu erläutern, ist sicher sinnvoll, kann aber ebenso missbraucht werden, schon allein durch die Auswahl der jeweiligen Spezialisten. Seit «Corona» werden viele erfahrene und ehemals hoch angesehene Fachleute wegen der «falschen Meinung» diffamiert und gecancelt. [2] Das ist nicht nur ein brutaler Umgang mit Menschen, sondern auch eine extreme Form, die öffentliche Meinung zu steuern.

Wann immer wir also erkennen (weil wir aufmerksam waren), dass wir bei einem bestimmten Thema manipuliert werden, dann sind zwei logische und notwendige Fragen: Warum? Und was ist denn richtig? In unserem Russland-Kontext haben die Antworten darauf viel mit Geopolitik und Geschichte zu tun.

Ist Russland aggressiv und expansiv?

Angeblich plant Russland, europäische NATO-Staaten anzugreifen, nach dem Motto: «Zuerst die Ukraine, dann den Rest». In Deutschland weiß man dafür sogar das Datum: «Wir müssen bis 2029 kriegstüchtig sein», versichert Verteidigungsminister Pistorius.

Historisch gesehen ist es allerdings eher umgekehrt: Russland, bzw. die Sowjetunion, ist bereits dreimal von Westeuropa aus militärisch angegriffen worden. Die Feldzüge Napoleons, des deutschen Kaiserreichs und Nazi-Deutschlands haben Millionen Menschen das Leben gekostet. Bei dem ausdrücklichen Vernichtungskrieg ab 1941 kam es außerdem zu Brutalitäten wie der zweieinhalbjährigen Belagerung Leningrads (heute St. Petersburg) durch Hitlers Wehrmacht. Deren Ziel, die Bevölkerung auszuhungern, wurde erreicht: über eine Million tote Zivilisten.

Trotz dieser Erfahrungen stimmte Michail Gorbatschow 1990 der deutschen Wiedervereinigung zu und die Sowjetunion zog ihre Truppen aus Osteuropa zurück (vgl. Abb. 1). Der Warschauer Pakt wurde aufgelöst, der Kalte Krieg formell beendet. Die Sowjets erhielten damals von führenden westlichen Politikern die Zusicherung, dass sich die NATO «keinen Zentimeter ostwärts» ausdehnen würde, das ist dokumentiert. [3]

Expandiert ist die NATO trotzdem, und zwar bis an Russlands Grenzen (vgl. Abb. 2). Laut dem Politikberater Jeffrey Sachs handelt es sich dabei um ein langfristiges US-Projekt, das von Anfang an die Ukraine und Georgien mit einschloss. Offiziell wurde der Beitritt beiden Staaten 2008 angeboten. In jedem Fall könnte die massive Ost-Erweiterung seit 1999 aus russischer Sicht nicht nur als Vertrauensbruch, sondern durchaus auch als aggressiv betrachtet werden.

Russland hat den europäischen Staaten mehrfach die Hand ausgestreckt [4] für ein friedliches Zusammenleben und den «Aufbau des europäischen Hauses». Präsident Putin sei «in seiner ersten Amtszeit eine Chance für Europa» gewesen, urteilt die Journalistin und langjährige Russland-Korrespondentin der ARD, Gabriele Krone-Schmalz. Er habe damals viele positive Signale Richtung Westen gesendet.

Die Europäer jedoch waren scheinbar an einer Partnerschaft mit dem kontinentalen Nachbarn weniger interessiert als an der mit dem transatlantischen Hegemon. Sie verkennen bis heute, dass eine gedeihliche Zusammenarbeit in Eurasien eine Gefahr für die USA und deren bekundetes Bestreben ist, die «einzige Weltmacht» zu sein – «Full Spectrum Dominance» [5] nannte das Pentagon das. Statt einem neuen Kalten Krieg entgegenzuarbeiten, ließen sich europäische Staaten selber in völkerrechtswidrige «US-dominierte Angriffskriege» [6] verwickeln, wie in Serbien, Afghanistan, dem Irak, Libyen oder Syrien. Diese werden aber selten so benannt.

Speziell den Deutschen stünde außer einer Portion Realismus auch etwas mehr Dankbarkeit gut zu Gesicht. Das Geschichtsbewusstsein der Mehrheit scheint doch recht selektiv und das Selbstbewusstsein einiger etwas desorientiert zu sein. Bekanntermaßen waren es die Soldaten der sowjetischen Roten Armee, die unter hohen Opfern 1945 Deutschland «vom Faschismus befreit» haben. Bei den Gedenkfeiern zu 80 Jahren Kriegsende will jedoch das Auswärtige Amt – noch unter der Diplomatie-Expertin Baerbock, die sich schon länger offiziell im Krieg mit Russland wähnt, – nun keine Russen sehen: Sie sollen notfalls rausgeschmissen werden.

«Die Grundsatzfrage lautet: Geht es Russland um einen angemessenen Platz in einer globalen Sicherheitsarchitektur, oder ist Moskau schon seit langem auf einem imperialistischen Trip, der befürchten lassen muss, dass die Russen in fünf Jahren in Berlin stehen?»

So bringt Gabriele Krone-Schmalz [7] die eigentliche Frage auf den Punkt, die zur Einschätzung der Situation letztlich auch jeder für sich beantworten muss.

Was ist los in der Ukraine?

In der internationalen Politik geht es nie um Demokratie oder Menschenrechte, sondern immer um Interessen von Staaten. Diese These stammt von Egon Bahr, einem der Architekten der deutschen Ostpolitik des «Wandels durch Annäherung» aus den 1960er und 70er Jahren. Sie trifft auch auf den Ukraine-Konflikt zu, den handfeste geostrategische und wirtschaftliche Interessen beherrschen, obwohl dort angeblich «unsere Demokratie» verteidigt wird.

Es ist ein wesentliches Element des Ukraine-Narrativs und Teil der Manipulation, die Vorgeschichte des Krieges wegzulassen – mindestens die vor der russischen «Annexion» der Halbinsel Krim im März 2014, aber oft sogar komplett diejenige vor der Invasion Ende Februar 2022. Das Thema ist komplex, aber einige Aspekte, die für eine Beurteilung nicht unwichtig sind, will ich wenigstens kurz skizzieren. [8]

Das Gebiet der heutigen Ukraine und Russlands – die übrigens in der «Kiewer Rus» gemeinsame Wurzeln haben – hat der britische Geostratege Halford Mackinder bereits 1904 als eurasisches «Heartland» bezeichnet, dessen Kontrolle er eine große Bedeutung für die imperiale Strategie Großbritanniens zumaß. Für den ehemaligen Sicherheits- und außenpolitischen Berater mehrerer US-amerikanischer Präsidenten und Mitgründer der Trilateralen Kommission, Zbigniew Brzezinski, war die Ukraine nach der Auflösung der Sowjetunion ein wichtiger Spielstein auf dem «eurasischen Schachbrett», wegen seiner Nähe zu Russland, seiner Bodenschätze und seines Zugangs zum Schwarzen Meer.

Die Ukraine ist seit langem ein gespaltenes Land. Historisch zerrissen als Spielball externer Interessen und geprägt von ethnischen, kulturellen, religiösen und geografischen Unterschieden existiert bis heute, grob gesagt, eine Ost-West-Spaltung, welche die Suche nach einer nationalen Identität stark erschwert.

Insbesondere im Zuge der beiden Weltkriege sowie der Russischen Revolution entstanden tiefe Risse in der Bevölkerung. Ukrainer kämpften gegen Ukrainer, zum Beispiel die einen auf der Seite von Hitlers faschistischer Nazi-Armee und die anderen auf der von Stalins kommunistischer Roter Armee. Die Verbrechen auf beiden Seiten sind nicht vergessen. Dass nach der Unabhängigkeit 1991 versucht wurde, Figuren wie den radikalen Nationalisten Symon Petljura oder den Faschisten und Nazi-Kollaborateur Stepan Bandera als «Nationalhelden» zu installieren, verbessert die Sache nicht.

Während die USA und EU-Staaten zunehmend «ausländische Einmischung» (speziell russische) in «ihre Demokratien» wittern, betreiben sie genau dies seit Jahrzehnten in vielen Ländern der Welt. Die seit den 2000er Jahren bekannten «Farbrevolutionen» in Osteuropa werden oft als Methode des Regierungsumsturzes durch von außen gesteuerte «demokratische» Volksaufstände beschrieben. Diese Strategie geht auf Analysen zum «Schwarmverhalten» [9] seit den 1960er Jahren zurück (Studentenproteste), wo es um die potenzielle Wirksamkeit einer «rebellischen Hysterie» von Jugendlichen bei postmodernen Staatsstreichen geht. Heute nennt sich dieses gezielte Kanalisieren der Massen zur Beseitigung unkooperativer Regierungen «Soft-Power».

In der Ukraine gab es mit der «Orangen Revolution» 2004 und dem «Euromaidan» 2014 gleich zwei solcher «Aufstände». Der erste erzwang wegen angeblicher Unregelmäßigkeiten eine Wiederholung der Wahlen, was mit Wiktor Juschtschenko als neuem Präsidenten endete. Dieser war ehemaliger Direktor der Nationalbank und Befürworter einer Annäherung an EU und NATO. Seine Frau, die First Lady, ist US-amerikanische «Philanthropin» und war Beamtin im Weißen Haus in der Reagan- und der Bush-Administration.

Im Gegensatz zu diesem ersten Event endete der sogenannte Euromaidan unfriedlich und blutig. Die mehrwöchigen Proteste gegen Präsident Wiktor Janukowitsch, in Teilen wegen des nicht unterzeichneten Assoziierungsabkommens mit der EU, wurden zunehmend gewalttätiger und von Nationalisten und Faschisten des «Rechten Sektors» dominiert. Sie mündeten Ende Februar 2014 auf dem Kiewer Unabhängigkeitsplatz (Maidan) in einem Massaker durch Scharfschützen. Dass deren Herkunft und die genauen Umstände nicht geklärt wurden, störte die Medien nur wenig. [10]

Janukowitsch musste fliehen, er trat nicht zurück. Vielmehr handelte es sich um einen gewaltsamen, allem Anschein nach vom Westen inszenierten Putsch. Laut Jeffrey Sachs war das kein Geheimnis, außer vielleicht für die Bürger. Die USA unterstützten die Post-Maidan-Regierung nicht nur, sie beeinflussten auch ihre Bildung. Das geht unter anderem aus dem berühmten «Fuck the EU»-Telefonat der US-Chefdiplomatin für die Ukraine, Victoria Nuland, mit Botschafter Geoffrey Pyatt hervor.

Dieser Bruch der demokratischen Verfassung war letztlich der Auslöser für die anschließenden Krisen auf der Krim und im Donbass (Ostukraine). Angesichts der ukrainischen Geschichte mussten die nationalistischen Tendenzen und die Beteiligung der rechten Gruppen an dem Umsturz bei der russigsprachigen Bevölkerung im Osten ungute Gefühle auslösen. Es gab Kritik an der Übergangsregierung, Befürworter einer Abspaltung und auch für einen Anschluss an Russland.

Ebenso konnte Wladimir Putin in dieser Situation durchaus Bedenken wegen des Status der russischen Militärbasis für seine Schwarzmeerflotte in Sewastopol auf der Krim haben, für die es einen langfristigen Pachtvertrag mit der Ukraine gab. Was im März 2014 auf der Krim stattfand, sei keine Annexion, sondern eine Abspaltung (Sezession) nach einem Referendum gewesen, also keine gewaltsame Aneignung, urteilte der Rechtswissenschaftler Reinhard Merkel in der FAZ sehr detailliert begründet. Übrigens hatte die Krim bereits zu Zeiten der Sowjetunion den Status einer autonomen Republik innerhalb der Ukrainischen SSR.

Anfang April 2014 wurden in der Ostukraine die «Volksrepubliken» Donezk und Lugansk ausgerufen. Die Kiewer Übergangsregierung ging unter der Bezeichnung «Anti-Terror-Operation» (ATO) militärisch gegen diesen, auch von Russland instrumentalisierten Widerstand vor. Zufällig war kurz zuvor CIA-Chef John Brennan in Kiew. Die Maßnahmen gingen unter dem seit Mai neuen ukrainischen Präsidenten, dem Milliardär Petro Poroschenko, weiter. Auch Wolodymyr Selenskyj beendete den Bürgerkrieg nicht, als er 2019 vom Präsidenten-Schauspieler, der Oligarchen entmachtet, zum Präsidenten wurde. Er fuhr fort, die eigene Bevölkerung zu bombardieren.

Mit dem Einmarsch russischer Truppen in die Ostukraine am 24. Februar 2022 begann die zweite Phase des Krieges. Die Wochen und Monate davor waren intensiv. Im November hatte die Ukraine mit den USA ein Abkommen über eine «strategische Partnerschaft» unterzeichnet. Darin sagten die Amerikaner ihre Unterstützung der EU- und NATO-Perspektive der Ukraine sowie quasi für die Rückeroberung der Krim zu. Dagegen ließ Putin der NATO und den USA im Dezember 2021 einen Vertragsentwurf über beiderseitige verbindliche Sicherheitsgarantien zukommen, den die NATO im Januar ablehnte. Im Februar eskalierte laut OSZE die Gewalt im Donbass.

Bereits wenige Wochen nach der Invasion, Ende März 2022, kam es in Istanbul zu Friedensverhandlungen, die fast zu einer Lösung geführt hätten. Dass der Krieg nicht damals bereits beendet wurde, lag daran, dass der Westen dies nicht wollte. Man war der Meinung, Russland durch die Ukraine in diesem Stellvertreterkrieg auf Dauer militärisch schwächen zu können. Angesichts von Hunderttausenden Toten, Verletzten und Traumatisierten, die als Folge seitdem zu beklagen sind, sowie dem Ausmaß der Zerstörung, fehlen einem die Worte.

Hasst der Westen die Russen?

Diese Frage drängt sich auf, wenn man das oft unerträglich feindselige Gebaren beobachtet, das beileibe nicht neu ist und vor Doppelmoral trieft. Russland und speziell die Person Wladimir Putins werden regelrecht dämonisiert, was gleichzeitig scheinbar jede Form von Diplomatie ausschließt.

Russlands militärische Stärke, seine geografische Lage, sein Rohstoffreichtum oder seine unabhängige diplomatische Tradition sind sicher Störfaktoren für das US-amerikanische Bestreben, der Boss in einer unipolaren Welt zu sein. Ein womöglich funktionierender eurasischer Kontinent, insbesondere gute Beziehungen zwischen Russland und Deutschland, war indes schon vor dem Ersten Weltkrieg eine Sorge des britischen Imperiums.

Ein «Vergehen» von Präsident Putin könnte gewesen sein, dass er die neoliberale Schocktherapie à la IWF und den Ausverkauf des Landes (auch an US-Konzerne) beendete, der unter seinem Vorgänger herrschte. Dabei zeigte er sich als Führungspersönlichkeit und als nicht so formbar wie Jelzin. Diese Aspekte allein sind aber heute vermutlich keine ausreichende Erklärung für ein derart gepflegtes Feindbild.

Der Historiker und Philosoph Hauke Ritz erweitert den Fokus der Fragestellung zu: «Warum hasst der Westen die Russen so sehr?», was er zum Beispiel mit dem Medienforscher Michael Meyen und mit der Politikwissenschaftlerin Ulrike Guérot bespricht. Ritz stellt die interessante These [11] auf, dass Russland eine Provokation für den Westen sei, welcher vor allem dessen kulturelles und intellektuelles Potenzial fürchte.

Die Russen sind Europäer aber anders, sagt Ritz. Diese «Fremdheit in der Ähnlichkeit» erzeuge vielleicht tiefe Ablehnungsgefühle. Obwohl Russlands Identität in der europäischen Kultur verwurzelt ist, verbinde es sich immer mit der Opposition in Europa. Als Beispiele nennt er die Kritik an der katholischen Kirche oder die Verbindung mit der Arbeiterbewegung. Christen, aber orthodox; Sozialismus statt Liberalismus. Das mache das Land zum Antagonisten des Westens und zu einer Bedrohung der Machtstrukturen in Europa.

Fazit

Selbstverständlich kann man Geschichte, Ereignisse und Entwicklungen immer auf verschiedene Arten lesen. Dieser Artikel, obwohl viel zu lang, konnte nur einige Aspekte der Ukraine-Tragödie anreißen, die in den offiziellen Darstellungen in der Regel nicht vorkommen. Mindestens dürfte damit jedoch klar geworden sein, dass die Russische Föderation bzw. Wladimir Putin nicht der alleinige Aggressor in diesem Konflikt ist. Das ist ein Stellvertreterkrieg zwischen USA/NATO (gut) und Russland (böse); die Ukraine (edel) wird dabei schlicht verheizt.

Das ist insofern von Bedeutung, als die gesamte europäische Kriegshysterie auf sorgsam kultivierten Freund-Feind-Bildern beruht. Nur so kann Konfrontation und Eskalation betrieben werden, denn damit werden die wahren Hintergründe und Motive verschleiert. Angst und Propaganda sind notwendig, damit die Menschen den Wahnsinn mitmachen. Sie werden belogen, um sie zuerst zu schröpfen und anschließend auf die Schlachtbank zu schicken. Das kann niemand wollen, außer den stets gleichen Profiteuren: die Rüstungs-Lobby und die großen Investoren, die schon immer an Zerstörung und Wiederaufbau verdient haben.

Apropos Investoren: Zu den Top-Verdienern und somit Hauptinteressenten an einer Fortführung des Krieges zählt BlackRock, einer der weltgrößten Vermögensverwalter. Der deutsche Bundeskanzler in spe, Friedrich Merz, der gerne «Taurus»-Marschflugkörper an die Ukraine liefern und die Krim-Brücke zerstören möchte, war von 2016 bis 2020 Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender von BlackRock in Deutschland. Aber das hat natürlich nichts zu sagen, der Mann macht nur seinen Job.

Es ist ein Spiel der Kräfte, es geht um Macht und strategische Kontrolle, um Geheimdienste und die Kontrolle der öffentlichen Meinung, um Bodenschätze, Rohstoffe, Pipelines und Märkte. Das klingt aber nicht sexy, «Demokratie und Menschenrechte» hört sich besser und einfacher an. Dabei wäre eine für alle Seiten förderliche Politik auch nicht so kompliziert; das Handwerkszeug dazu nennt sich Diplomatie. Noch einmal Gabriele Krone-Schmalz:

«Friedliche Politik ist nichts anderes als funktionierender Interessenausgleich. Da geht’s nicht um Moral.»

Die Situation in der Ukraine ist sicher komplex, vor allem wegen der inneren Zerrissenheit. Es dürfte nicht leicht sein, eine friedliche Lösung für das Zusammenleben zu finden, aber die Beteiligten müssen es vor allem wollen. Unter den gegebenen Umständen könnte eine sinnvolle Perspektive mit Neutralität und föderalen Strukturen zu tun haben.

Allen, die sich bis hierher durch die Lektüre gearbeitet (oder auch einfach nur runtergescrollt) haben, wünsche ich frohe Oster-Friedenstage!

[Titelbild: Pixabay; Abb. 1 und 2: nach Ganser/SIPER; Abb. 3: SIPER]

--- Quellen: ---

[1] Albrecht Müller, «Glaube wenig. Hinterfrage alles. Denke selbst.», Westend 2019

[2] Zwei nette Beispiele:

• ARD-faktenfinder (sic), «Viel Aufmerksamkeit für fragwürdige Experten», 03/2023
• Neue Zürcher Zeitung, «Aufstieg und Fall einer Russlandversteherin – die ehemalige ARD-Korrespondentin Gabriele Krone-Schmalz rechtfertigt seit Jahren Putins Politik», 12/2022

[3] George Washington University, «NATO Expansion: What Gorbachev Heard – Declassified documents show security assurances against NATO expansion to Soviet leaders from Baker, Bush, Genscher, Kohl, Gates, Mitterrand, Thatcher, Hurd, Major, and Woerner», 12/2017

[4] Beispielsweise Wladimir Putin bei seiner Rede im Deutschen Bundestag, 25/09/2001

[5] William Engdahl, «Full Spectrum Dominance, Totalitarian Democracy In The New World Order», edition.engdahl 2009

[6] Daniele Ganser, «Illegale Kriege – Wie die NATO-Länder die UNO sabotieren. Eine Chronik von Kuba bis Syrien», Orell Füssli 2016

[7] Gabriele Krone-Schmalz, «Mit Friedensjournalismus gegen ‘Kriegstüchtigkeit’», Vortrag und Diskussion an der Universität Hamburg, veranstaltet von engagierten Studenten, 16/01/2025\ → Hier ist ein ähnlicher Vortrag von ihr (Video), den ich mit spanischer Übersetzung gefunden habe.

[8] Für mehr Hintergrund und Details empfehlen sich z.B. folgende Bücher:

• Mathias Bröckers, Paul Schreyer, «Wir sind immer die Guten», Westend 2019
• Gabriele Krone-Schmalz, «Russland verstehen? Der Kampf um die Ukraine und die Arroganz des Westens», Westend 2023
• Patrik Baab, «Auf beiden Seiten der Front – Meine Reisen in die Ukraine», Fiftyfifty 2023

[9] vgl. Jonathan Mowat, «Washington's New World Order "Democratization" Template», 02/2005 und RAND Corporation, «Swarming and the Future of Conflict», 2000

[10] Bemerkenswert einige Beiträge, von denen man später nichts mehr wissen wollte:

• ARD Monitor, «Todesschüsse in Kiew: Wer ist für das Blutbad vom Maidan verantwortlich», 10/04/2014, Transkript hier
• Telepolis, «Blutbad am Maidan: Wer waren die Todesschützen?», 12/04/2014
• Telepolis, «Scharfschützenmorde in Kiew», 14/12/2014
• Deutschlandfunk, «Gefahr einer Spirale nach unten», Interview mit Günter Verheugen, 18/03/2014
• NDR Panorama, «Putsch in Kiew: Welche Rolle spielen die Faschisten?», 06/03/2014

[11] Hauke Ritz, «Vom Niedergang des Westens zur Neuerfindung Europas», 2024

---

Dieser Beitrag wurde mit dem Pareto-Client geschrieben.

@ 2b24a1fa:17750f64

Wo läßt es sich trefflicher plaudern als am Küchentisch. Es muß ja nicht unbedingt der eigene sein. Hauptsache, es sitzen vergnügte Menschen reinen Herzens daran, wie zum Beispiel die Herren Helmut Schleich und Franz Esser.

https://soundcloud.com/radiomuenchen/queere-tiere-andere-gottentotten-am-kuchentisch-mit-esser-schleich?

@ 2f29aa33:38ac6f13

The Myth and the Magic

Picture this: a group of investors, huddled around a glowing computer screen, nervously watching Bitcoin’s price. Suddenly, someone produces a stick-no ordinary stick, but a magical one. With a mischievous grin, they poke the Bitcoin. The price leaps upward. Cheers erupt. The legend of the Bitcoin stick is born.

But why does poking Bitcoin with a stick make the price go up? Why does it only work for a lucky few? And what does the data say about this mysterious phenomenon? Let’s dig in, laugh a little, and maybe learn the secret to market-moving magic.

The Statistical Side of Stick-Poking

Bitcoin’s Price: The Wild Ride

Bitcoin’s price is famous for its unpredictability. In the past year, it’s soared, dipped, and soared again, sometimes gaining more than 50% in just a few months. On a good day, billions of dollars flow through Bitcoin trades, and the price can jump thousands in a matter of hours. Clearly, something is making this happen-and it’s not just spreadsheets and financial news.

What Actually Moves the Price?

• Scarcity: Only 21 million Bitcoins will ever exist. When more people want in, the price jumps.

• Big News: Announcements, rumors, and meme-worthy moments can send the price flying.

• FOMO: When people see Bitcoin rising, they rush to buy, pushing it even higher.

• Liquidations: When traders betting against Bitcoin get squeezed, it triggers a chain reaction of buying.

But let’s be honest: none of this is as fun as poking Bitcoin with a stick.

---

The Magical Stick: Not Your Average Twig

Why Not Every Stick Works

You can’t just grab any old branch and expect Bitcoin to dance. The magical stick is a rare artifact, forged in the fires of internet memes and blessed by the spirit of Satoshi. Only a chosen few possess it-and when they poke, the market listens.

Signs You Have the Magical Stick

• When you poke, Bitcoin’s price immediately jumps a few percent.

• Your stick glows with meme energy and possibly sparkles with digital dust.

• You have a knack for timing your poke right after a big event, like a halving or a celebrity tweet.

• Your stick is rumored to have been whittled from the original blockchain itself.

Why Most Sticks Fail

• No Meme Power: If your stick isn’t funny, Bitcoin ignores you.

• Bad Timing: Poking during a bear market just annoys the blockchain.

• Not Enough Hype: If the bitcoin community isn’t watching, your poke is just a poke.

• Lack of Magic: Some sticks are just sticks. Sad, but true.

---

The Data: When the Stick Strikes

Let’s look at some numbers:

• In the last month, Bitcoin’s price jumped over 20% right after a flurry of memes and stick-poking jokes.

• Over the past year, every major price surge was accompanied by a wave of internet hype, stick memes, or wild speculation.

• In the past five years, Bitcoin’s biggest leaps always seemed to follow some kind of magical event-whether a halving, a viral tweet, or a mysterious poke.

Coincidence? Maybe. But the pattern is clear: the stick works-at least when it’s magical.

---

The Role of Memes, Magic, and Mayhem

Bitcoin’s price is like a cat: unpredictable, easily startled, and sometimes it just wants to be left alone. But when the right meme pops up, or the right stick pokes at just the right time, the price can leap in ways that defy logic.

The bitcoin community knows this. That’s why, when Bitcoin’s stuck in a rut, you’ll see a flood of stick memes, GIFs, and magical thinking. Sometimes, it actually works.

---

The Secret’s in the Stick (and the Laughs)

So, does poking Bitcoin with a stick really make the price go up? If your stick is magical-blessed by memes, timed perfectly, and watched by millions-absolutely. The statistics show that hype, humor, and a little bit of luck can move markets as much as any financial report.

Next time you see Bitcoin stalling, don’t just sit there. Grab your stick, channel your inner meme wizard, and give it a poke. Who knows? You might just be the next legend in the world of bitcoin magic.

And if your stick doesn’t work, don’t worry. Sometimes, the real magic is in the laughter along the way.

-aco

@block height: 897,104

---

---

@ b83a28b7:35919450

This article was originally part of the sermon of Plebchain Radio Episode 110 (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

@ c239c0f9:fa4a5015

Block: #897676 - May 2025

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—the very first and most commented insights from around SN cypherspace. Every issue arrives with expert analysis, in-depth interview, and breaking news of the most significant advancements in the Bitcoin layer two solutions.

Two new things this month: A) zaps to these posts will be split to the top contributor to this territory B) As have stacked some cowboy credits lately, I'll give them away to the stackers commenting below anything meaningful, feedback to this newsletter, or suggestions to improve the territory

Subscribe to the territory and make sure you don’t miss anything about the Bitcoin 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. Liquidity requirements for Lightning payments: Ark servers and LSPs compared by @supratic 409 sats \ 8 comments \ 12 May

2. Wallet of Satoshi is coming back to US with non-custodial wallet by @k00b 906 sats \ 18 comments \ 18 May

3. How to offer Submarine Swaps — Electrum Documentation by @f321x7 836 sats \ 5 comments \ 13 May

4. Parallel channels are a mess - a rant by @C_Otto 1918 sats \ 5 comments \ 1 May

5. LNBig insight about running a LN node by @DarthCoin 1244 sats \ 10 comments \ 23 Apr

---

Top posts by comments

Excluding the ones already mentioned above, you can see them all here (excluding those already listed above):

1. I believe CoinOS will resolve itself, but this screenshot is a rug pull 💨 by @realBitcoinDog 411 sats \ 73 comments \ 13 May

2. CoinOS having some issues by @StillStackinAfterAllTheseYears 268 sats \ 24 comments \ 10 May

3. BOLT12 Suggestions? by @metadavid 516 sats \ 16 comments \ 28 Apr

4. Phoenix Wallet - Swap In by @02b58a1376 256 sats \ 15 comments \ 25 Apr

5. Clearnet+Tor LND in Docker with wireguard VPS for privacy by @klk 696 sats \ 14 comments \ 27 Apr

---

Top ~Lightning Boosts

Check them all here.

1. What is the Right LSP for You? [VIDEO] by @Jestopher_BTC 667 sats \ 30k boost \ 3 comments \ 15 May

2. Things Bitcoiners Don’t Want To Hear (2020) by @k00b 1553 sats \ 20k boost \ 15 comments \ 10 May

3. Liquidity Subscriptions: Automated Liquidity for Merchants by @Jestopher_BTC 448 sats \ 10k boost \ 4 comments \ 8 May lightning

---

Don't miss...

Lightning Network : our high-maintenance crazy-ex by @avbpod

Coinbase announces L402 copycat "x402" by @bounty_hunter

15% of Coinbase’s Bitcoin transactions run on the Lightning Network by @south_korea_ln

An Exposition of Pathfinding Strategies Within Lightning Network Clients by @supratic

How to censor users in cashu? by @kpa

@darthcoin by @Thecanadian88

Cashu Highlights Q1 by @supratic

---

Top Lightning posts outside ~Lightning

This month best posts about the Lightning Network outside ~Lightning territory:

1. Ultimate guide to LN routing and fee management. by @javier 21.6k sats \ 39 comments \ 6 May on ~bitcoin

2. Mobile (non-phone) Lightning Wallet? by @jasonb 565 sats \ 36 comments \ 30 Apr on ~bitcoin

3. Robosats Guide by @siggy47 33k sats \ 27 comments \ 22 Apr on ~bitcoin_beginners

4. LNemail: Private Disposable Email via Lightning by @lnemail 2758 sats \ 22 comments \ 18 May on ~privacy

5. Another explanation of how Ark works 1329 sats \ 10 comments \ @k00b 21 May on ~bitcoin

---

Forever top ~Lightning posts

La crème de la crème... check them all here. Nothing has changed this month!

1. 👨‍🚀 We're releasing 𝗔𝗟𝗕𝗬 𝗚𝗢 - the easiest lightning mobile wallet by @Alby 29.2k sats \ 41 comments \ @Alby 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 lightning 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

Ek's post rise at #5, congrats!

1. Rethinking Lightning by @benthecarman 51.7k sats \ 140 comments \ 6 Jan 2024 on ~bitcoin

2. Lightning Everywhere by @TonyGiorgio 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. Bisq2 adds lightning by @supertestnet 3019 sats \ 47 comments \ 19 Aug 2024 on ~bitcoin

5. Lightning Prediction Market MVP - delphi.market by @ek 34.1k sats \ 59 comments \ 4 Dec 2023 on ~bitcoin

---

@ 662f9bff:8960f6b2

April already and we are still refugees from the madness in HK. During March I had quite a few family matters that took priority and I also needed to work for two weeks. April is a similar schedule but we flew to Madeira for a change of scene and so that I could have a full 2-weeks off - my first real holiday in quite a few years!

We are staying in an airBnB in Funchal - an experience that I can totally recommend - video below! Nice to have an apartment that is fully equipped in a central location and no hassle for a few weeks. While here we are making the most of the great location and all the local possibiliites.

Elsewhere in the world

Things are clearly not going great around the world. If you are still confused as to why these things are happening, do go back and read the previous Letter from HK section "Why? How did we get here?"

You should be in no doubt that the "Great Reset" with its supporting "Great Narrative" is in full swing.. This is it - it is not a drill. For additional insights the following are recommended.

• Jeff Booth discusses clearly and unemotionally with Pomp - Inflation is theft from humanity by the world governments

• James' summary of Day 2 of the Miami conference - Peter Thiel (wow) and a fantastic explainer from Saifedean on the costs of the current corrupt financial system

• James' summary of Day 3 of the Miami conference - listen in particular to the words of wisdom from Michael Saylor and Lyn Alden

• Layered Money - The corruption of the system will blow your mind once you understand it…

• This is BIG: Strike Is Bringing Freedom To Retail Merchants

• Mark summarises Ray's book: Things will go faster and slower than you want!

• Thoughtful words from George - evil is at work - be in no doubt..

• Wow - My mind is blown. Must listen to John Carvalho - what clear ambition and answers to every question!

• Related to the John Carvalho discussion. Likely these two options will end up complementing each other

On the personal and inspirational side

Advantage of time off work is that I have more time to read, listen and watch things that interest me. It really is a privilege that so much high quality material is so readily available. Do not let it go to waste. A few fabulous finds (and some re-finds) from this past week:

• Ali Abdaal's bookshelf review just blew my mind! For the full list of books with links see the text under his video. So many inspirations and his delivery is perfect.

• Gotta recommend Ali's 21 Life Lessons. I have been following him since he was student in Cambridge five years ago - his personal and professional growth and what he achieves (now with his team) is truely staggering.

• Also his 15 books to read in 2022 - especially this one!

• I also keep going back to Steve Jobs giving the 2005 Stanford Commencement address Three stories from his life - listen and be inspired - especially story #3

You will know that I am a fan of Audio Books and also Kindle - recently I am starting to use Whispersync where you get the Kindle- and Audio-books together for a nice price. This makes it easier to take notes (using Mac or iPad Kindle reader) while getting the benefit of having the book read to you by a professional reader.

I have also been inspired by a few people pushing themselves to do more reading - like this girl and Ali himself with his tips. Above all: just do it and do not get stuck on something that does not work for you!

Books that I am reading - Audio and Kindle!

• The Final Empire: Mistborn, Book 1 - this is a new genre for me - I rather feel that it might be a bit too complicated for my engineering mind - let's see

• Die with Zero: Getting All You Can from Your Money and Your Life - certainly provocative and obvious if you think about it but 99% do the opposite!

• Chariots of the Gods - a classic by Erich von Daniken (written in 1968) - I have been inspired by his recent YT video appearances. Thought provoking and leads you to many possibilities.

So what's it like in Funchal, Madeira?

Do check out HitTheRoadMadeira's walking tour around Funchal

My first impressions of Funchal 

and see my day out on Thursday!

Saturday - Funchal and Camar de Lobos

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 also email me at: LetterFrom@rogerprice.me

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

@ 7460b7fd:4fc4e74b

如果比特币发明了真正的钱，那么 Crypto 是什么？

引言

比特币诞生之初就以“数字黄金”姿态示人，被支持者誉为人类历史上第一次发明了真正意义上的钱——一种不依赖国家信用、总量恒定且不可篡改的硬通货。然而十多年过去，比特币之后蓬勃而起的加密世界（Crypto）已经远超“货币”范畴：从智能合约平台到去中心组织，从去央行的稳定币到戏谑荒诞的迷因币，Crypto 演化出一个丰富而混沌的新生态。这不禁引发一个根本性的追问：如果说比特币解决了“真金白银”的问题，那么 Crypto 又完成了什么发明？

Crypto 与政治的碰撞：随着Crypto版图扩张，全球政治势力也被裹挟进这场金融变革洪流（示意图）。比特币的出现重塑了货币信用，但Crypto所引发的却是一场更深刻的政治与治理结构实验。从华尔街到华盛顿，从散户论坛到主权国家，越来越多人意识到：Crypto不只是技术或金融现象，而是一种全新的政治表达结构正在萌芽。正如有激进论者所断言的：“比特币发明了真正的钱，而Crypto则在发明新的政治。”价格K线与流动性曲线，或许正成为这个时代社群意志和社会价值观的新型投射。

冲突结构：当价格挑战选票

传统政治中，选票是人民意志的载体，一人一票勾勒出民主治理的正统路径。而在链上的加密世界里，骤升骤降的价格曲线和真金白银的买卖行为却扮演起了选票的角色：资金流向成了民意走向，市场多空成为立场表决。价格行为取代选票，这听来匪夷所思，却已在Crypto社群中成为日常现实。每一次代币的抛售与追高，都是社区对项目决策的即时“投票”；每一根K线的涨跌，都折射出社区意志的赞同或抗议。市场行为本身承担了决策权与象征权——价格即政治，正在链上蔓延。

这一新生政治形式与旧世界的民主机制形成了鲜明冲突。bitcoin.org中本聪在比特币白皮书中提出“一CPU一票”的工作量证明共识，用算力投票取代了人为决策bitcoin.org。而今，Crypto更进一步，用资本市场的涨跌来取代传统政治的选举。支持某项目？直接购入其代币推高市值；反对某提案？用脚投票抛售资产。相比漫长的选举周期和层层代议制，链上市场提供了近乎实时的“公投”机制。但这种机制也引发巨大争议：资本的投票天然偏向持币多者（富者）的意志，是否意味着加密政治更为金权而非民权？持币多寡成为影响力大小，仿佛选举演变成了“一币一票”，巨鲸富豪俨然掌握更多话语权。这种与民主平等原则的冲突，成为Crypto政治形式饱受质疑的核心张力之一。

尽管如此，我们已经目睹市场投票在Crypto世界塑造秩序的威力：2016年以太坊因DAO事件分叉时，社区以真金白银“投票”决定了哪条链获得未来。arkhamintelligence.com结果是新链以太坊（ETH）成为主流，其市值一度超过2,800亿美元，而坚持原则的以太经典（ETC）市值不足35亿美元，不及前者的八十分之一arkhamintelligence.com。市场选择清楚地昭示了社区的政治意志。同样地，在比特币扩容之争、各类硬分叉博弈中，无不是由投资者和矿工用资金与算力投票，胜者存续败者黯然。价格成为裁决纷争的最终选票，冲击着传统“选票决胜”的政治理念。Crypto的价格民主，与现代代议民主正面相撞，激起当代政治哲思中前所未有的冲突火花。

治理与分配

XRP对决SEC成为了加密世界“治理与分配”冲突的经典战例。2020年底，美国证券交易委员会（SEC）突然起诉Ripple公司，指控其发行的XRP代币属于未注册证券，消息一出直接引爆市场恐慌。XRP价格应声暴跌，一度跌去超过60%，最低触及0.21美元coindesk.com。曾经位居市值前三的XRP险些被打入谷底，监管的强硬姿态似乎要将这个项目彻底扼杀。

然而XRP社区没有选择沉默。 大批长期持有者组成了自称“XRP军团”（XRP Army）的草根力量，在社交媒体上高调声援Ripple，对抗监管威胁。面对SEC的指控，他们集体发声，质疑政府选择性执法，声称以太坊当年发行却“逍遥法外”，只有Ripple遭到不公对待coindesk.com。正如《福布斯》的评论所言：没人预料到愤怒的加密散户投资者会掀起法律、政治和社交媒体领域的‘海啸式’反击，痛斥监管机构背弃了保护投资者的承诺crypto-law.us。这种草根抵抗监管的话语体系迅速形成：XRP持有者不但在网上掀起舆论风暴，还采取实际行动向SEC施压。他们发起了请愿，抨击SEC背离保护投资者初衷、诉讼给个人投资者带来巨大伤害，号召停止对Ripple的上诉纠缠——号称这是在捍卫全球加密用户的共同利益bitget.com。一场由民间主导的反监管运动就此拉开帷幕。

Ripple公司则选择背水一战，拒绝和解，在法庭上与SEC针锋相对地鏖战了近三年之久。Ripple坚称XRP并非证券，不应受到SEC管辖，即使面临沉重法律费用和业务压力也不妥协。2023年，这场持久战迎来了标志性转折：美国法庭作出初步裁决，认定XRP在二级市场的流通不构成证券coindesk.com。这一胜利犹如给沉寂已久的XRP注入强心针——消息公布当天XRP价格飙涨近一倍，盘中一度逼近1美元大关coindesk.com。沉重监管阴影下苟延残喘的项目，凭借司法层面的突破瞬间重获生机。这不仅是Ripple的胜利，更被支持者视为整个加密行业对SEC强权的一次胜仗。

XRP的对抗路线与某些“主动合规”的项目形成了鲜明对比。 稳定币USDC的发行方Circle、美国最大合规交易所Coinbase等选择了一条迎合监管的道路：它们高调拥抱现行法规，希望以合作换取生存空间。然而现实却给了它们沉重一击。USDC稳定币在监管风波中一度失去美元锚定，哪怕Circle及时披露储备状况也无法阻止恐慌蔓延，大批用户迅速失去信心，短时间内出现数十亿美元的赎回潮blockworks.co。Coinbase则更为直接：即便它早已注册上市、反复向监管示好，2023年仍被SEC指控为未注册证券交易所reuters.com，卷入漫长诉讼漩涡。可见，在迎合监管的策略下，这些机构非但未能换来监管青睐，反而因官司缠身或用户流失而丧失市场信任。 相比之下，XRP以对抗求生存的路线反而赢得了投资者的眼光：价格的涨跌成为社区投票的方式，抗争的勇气反过来强化了市场对它的信心。

同样引人深思的是另一种迥异的治理路径：技术至上的链上治理。 以MakerDAO为代表的去中心化治理模式曾被寄予厚望——MKR持币者投票决策、算法维持稳定币Dai的价值，被视为“代码即法律”的典范。然而，这套纯技术治理在市场层面却未能形成广泛认同，亦无法激发群体性的情绪动员。复杂晦涩的机制使得普通投资者难以参与其中，MakerDAO的治理讨论更多停留在极客圈子内部，在社会大众的政治对话中几乎听不见它的声音。相比XRP对抗监管所激发的铺天盖地关注，MakerDAO的治理实验显得默默无闻、难以“出圈”。这也说明，如果一种治理实践无法连接更广泛的利益诉求和情感共鸣，它在社会政治层面就难以形成影响力。

XRP之争的政治象征意义由此凸显： 它展示了一条“以市场对抗国家”的斗争路线，即通过代币价格的集体行动来回应监管权力的施压。在这场轰动业界的对决中，价格即是抗议的旗帜，涨跌映射着政治立场。XRP对SEC的胜利被视作加密世界向旧有权力宣告的一次胜利：资本市场的投票器可以撼动监管者的强权。这种“价格即政治”的张力，正是Crypto世界前所未有的社会实验：去中心化社区以市场行为直接对抗国家权力，在无形的价格曲线中凝聚起政治抗争的力量，向世人昭示加密货币不仅有技术和资本属性，更蕴含着不可小觑的社会能量和政治意涵。

不可归零的政治资本

Meme 币的本质并非廉价或易造，而在于其构建了一种“无法归零”的社群生存结构。 对于传统观点而言，多数 meme 币只是短命的投机游戏：价格暴涨暴跌后一地鸡毛，创始人套现跑路，投资者血本无归，然后“大家转去炒下一个”theguardian.com。然而，meme 币社群的独特之处在于——失败并不意味着终结，而更像是运动的逗号而非句号。一次币值崩盘后，持币的草根们往往并未散去；相反，他们汲取教训，准备东山再起。这种近乎“不死鸟”的循环，使得 meme 币运动呈现出一种数字政治循环的特质：价格可以归零，但社群的政治热情和组织势能不归零。正如研究者所指出的，加密领域中的骗局、崩盘等冲击并不会摧毁生态，反而成为让系统更加强韧的“健康应激”，令整个行业在动荡中变得更加反脆弱cointelegraph.com。对应到 meme 币，每一次暴跌和重挫，都是社群自我进化、卷土重来的契机。这个去中心化群体打造出一种自组织的安全垫，失败者得以在瓦砾上重建家园。对于草根社群、少数派乃至体制的“失败者”而言，meme 币提供了一个永不落幕的抗争舞台，一种真正反脆弱的政治性。正因如此，我们看到诸多曾被嘲笑的迷因项目屡败屡战：例如 Dogecoin 自2013年问世后历经八年沉浮，早已超越玩笑属性，成为互联网史上最具韧性的迷因之一frontiersin.org；支撑 Dogecoin 的正是背后强大的迷因文化和社区意志，它如同美国霸权支撑美元一样，为狗狗币提供了“永不中断”的生命力frontiersin.org。

“复活权”的数字政治意涵

这种“失败-重生”的循环结构蕴含着深刻的政治意涵：在传统政治和商业领域，一个政党选举失利或一家公司破产往往意味着清零出局，资源散尽、组织瓦解。然而在 meme 币的世界，社群拥有了一种前所未有的“复活权”。当项目崩盘，社区并不必然随之消亡，而是可以凭借剩余的人心和热情卷土重来——哪怕换一个 token 名称，哪怕重启一条链，运动依然延续。正如 Cheems 项目的核心开发者所言，在几乎无人问津、技术受阻的困境下，大多数人可能早已卷款走人，但 “CHEEMS 社区没有放弃，背景、技术、风投都不重要，重要的是永不言弃的精神”cointelegraph.com。这种精神使得Cheems项目起死回生，社区成员齐声宣告“我们都是 CHEEMS”，共同书写历史cointelegraph.com。与传统依赖风投和公司输血的项目不同，Cheems 完全依靠社区的信念与韧性存续发展，体现了去中心化运动的真谛cointelegraph.com。这意味着政治参与的门槛被大大降低：哪怕没有金主和官方背书，草根也能凭借群体意志赋予某个代币新的生命。对于身处社会边缘的群体来说，meme 币俨然成为自组织的安全垫和重新集结的工具。难怪有学者指出，近期涌入meme币浪潮的主力，正是那些对现实失望但渴望改变命运的年轻人theguardian.com——“迷茫的年轻人，想要一夜暴富”theguardian.com。meme币的炒作表面上看是投机赌博，但背后蕴含的是草根对既有金融秩序的不满与反抗：没有监管和护栏又如何？一次失败算不得什么，社区自有后路和新方案。这种由底层群众不断试错、纠错并重启的过程，本身就是一种数字时代的新型反抗运动和群众动员机制。

举例而言，Terra Luna 的沉浮充分展现了这种“复活机制”的政治力量。作为一度由风投资本热捧的项目，Luna 币在2022年的崩溃本可被视作“归零”的失败典范——稳定币UST瞬间失锚，Luna币价归零，数十亿美元灰飞烟灭。然而“崩盘”并没有画下休止符。Luna的残余社区拒绝承认失败命运，通过链上治理投票毅然启动新链，“复活”了 Luna 代币，再次回到市场交易reuters.com。正如 Terra 官方在崩盘后发布的推文所宣称：“我们力量永在社区，今日的决定正彰显了我们的韧性”reuters.com。事实上，原链更名为 Luna Classic 后，大批所谓“LUNC 军团”的散户依然死守阵地，誓言不离不弃；他们自发烧毁巨量代币以缩减供应、推动技术升级，试图让这个一度归零的项目重新燃起生命之火binance.com。失败者并未散场，而是化作一股草根洪流，奋力托举起项目的残迹。经过迷因化的叙事重塑，这场从废墟中重建价值的壮举，成为加密世界中草根政治的经典一幕。类似的案例不胜枚举：曾经被视为笑话的 DOGE（狗狗币）正因多年社群的凝聚而跻身主流币种，总市值一度高达数百亿美元，充分证明了“民有民享”的迷因货币同样可以笑傲市场frontiersin.org。再看最新的美国政治舞台，连总统特朗普也推出了自己的 meme 币 $TRUMP，号召粉丝拿真金白银来表达支持。该币首日即从7美元暴涨至75美元，两天后虽回落到40美元左右，但几乎同时，第一夫人 Melania 又发布了自己的 $Melania 币，甚至连就职典礼的牧师都跟风发行了纪念币theguardian.com！显然，对于狂热的群众来说，一个币的沉浮并非终点，而更像是运动的换挡——资本市场成为政治参与的新前线，你方唱罢我登场，meme 币的群众动员热度丝毫不减。值得注意的是，2024年出现的 Pump.fun 等平台更是进一步降低了这一循环的技术门槛，任何人都可以一键生成自己的 meme 币theguardian.com。这意味着哪怕某个项目归零，剩余的社区完全可以借助此类工具迅速复制一个新币接力，延续集体行动的火种。可以说，在 meme 币的世界里，草根社群获得了前所未有的再生能力和主动权，这正是一种数字时代的群众政治奇观：失败可以被当作梗来玩，破产能够变成重生的序章。

价格即政治：群众投机的新抗争

meme 币现象的兴盛表明：在加密时代，价格本身已成为一种政治表达。这些看似荒诞的迷因代币，将金融市场变成了群众宣泄情绪和诉求的另一个舞台。有学者将此概括为“将公民参与直接转化为了投机资产”cdn-brighterworld.humanities.mcmaster.ca——也就是说，社会运动的热情被注入币价涨跌，政治支持被铸造成可以交易的代币。meme 币融合了金融、技术与政治，通过病毒般的迷因文化激发公众参与，形成对现实政治的某种映射cdn-brighterworld.humanities.mcmaster.caosl.com。当一群草根投入全部热忱去炒作一枚毫无基本面支撑的币时，这本身就是一种大众政治动员的体现：币价暴涨，意味着一群人以戏谑的方式在向既有权威叫板；币价崩盘，也并不意味着信念的消亡，反而可能孕育下一次更汹涌的造势。正如有分析指出，政治类 meme 币的出现前所未有地将群众文化与政治情绪融入市场行情，价格曲线俨然成为民意和趋势的风向标cdn-brighterworld.humanities.mcmaster.ca。在这种局面下，投机不再仅仅是逐利，还是一种宣示立场、凝聚共识的过程——一次次看似荒唐的炒作背后，是草根对传统体制的不服与嘲讽，是失败者拒绝认输的呐喊。归根结底，meme 币所累积的，正是一种不可被归零的政治资本。价格涨落之间，群众的愤怒、幽默与希望尽显其中；这股力量不因一次挫败而消散，反而在市场的循环中愈发壮大。也正因如此，我们才说“价格即政治”——在迷因币的世界里，价格不只是数字，更是人民政治能量的晴雨表，哪怕归零也终将卷土重来。cdn-brighterworld.humanities.mcmaster.caosl.com

全球新兴现象：伊斯兰金融的入场

当Crypto在西方世界掀起市场治政的狂潮时，另一股独特力量也悄然融入这一场域：伊斯兰金融携其独特的道德秩序，开始在链上寻找存在感。长期以来，伊斯兰金融遵循着一套区别于世俗资本主义的原则：禁止利息（Riba）、反对过度投机（Gharar/Maysir）、强调实际资产支撑和道德投资。当这些原则遇上去中心化的加密技术，会碰撞出怎样的火花？出人意料的是，这两者竟在“以市场行为表达价值”这个层面产生了惊人的共鸣。伊斯兰金融并不拒绝市场机制本身，只是为其附加了道德准则；Crypto则将市场机制推向了政治高位，用价格来表达社群意志。二者看似理念迥异，实则都承认市场行为可以也应当承载社会价值观。这使得越来越多金融与政治分析人士开始关注：当虔诚的宗教伦理遇上狂野的加密市场，会塑造出何种新范式？

事实上，穆斯林世界已经在探索“清真加密”的道路。一些区块链项目致力于确保协议符合伊斯兰教法（Sharia）的要求。例如Haqq区块链发行的伊斯兰币（ISLM），从规则层面内置了宗教慈善义务——每发行新币即自动将10%拨入慈善DAO，用于公益捐赠，以符合天课（Zakat）的教义nasdaq.comnasdaq.com。同时，该链拒绝利息和赌博类应用，2022年还获得了宗教权威的教令（Fatwa）认可其合规性nasdaq.com。再看理念层面，伊斯兰经济学强调货币必须有内在价值、收益应来自真实劳动而非纯利息剥削。这一点与比特币的“工作量证明”精神不谋而合——有人甚至断言法定货币无锚印钞并不清真，而比特币这类需耗费能源生产的资产反而更符合教法初衷cointelegraph.com。由此，越来越多穆斯林投资者开始以道德投资的名义进入Crypto领域，将资金投向符合清真原则的代币和协议。

这种现象带来了微妙的双重合法性：一方面，Crypto世界原本奉行“价格即真理”的世俗逻辑，而伊斯兰金融为其注入了一股道德合法性，使部分加密资产同时获得了宗教与市场的双重背书；另一方面，即便在遵循宗教伦理的项目中，最终决定成败的依然是市场对其价值的认可。道德共识与市场共识在链上交汇，共同塑造出一种混合的新秩序。这一全球新兴现象引发广泛议论：有人将其视为金融民主化的极致表现——不同文化价值都能在市场平台上表达并竞争；也有人警惕这可能掩盖新的风险，因为把宗教情感融入高风险资产，既可能凝聚强大的忠诚度，也可能在泡沫破裂时引发信仰与财富的双重危机。但无论如何，伊斯兰金融的入场使Crypto的政治版图更加丰盈多元。从华尔街交易员到中东教士，不同背景的人们正通过Crypto这个奇特的舞台，对人类价值的表达方式进行前所未有的实验。

升华结语：价格即政治的新直觉

回顾比特币问世以来的这段历程，我们可以清晰地看到一条演进的主线：先有货币革命，后有政治发明。比特币赋予了人类一种真正自主的数字货币，而Crypto在此基础上完成的，则是一项前所未有的政治革新——它让市场价格行为承担起了类似政治选票的功能，开创了一种“价格即政治”的新直觉。在这个直觉下，市场不再只是冷冰冰的交易场所；每一次资本流动、每一轮行情涨落，都被赋予了社会意义和政治涵义。买入即表态，卖出即抗议，流动性的涌入或枯竭胜过千言万语的陈情。Crypto世界中，K线图俨然成为民意曲线，行情图就是政治晴雨表。决策不再由少数权力精英关起门来制定，而是在全球无眠的交易中由无数普通人共同谱写。这样的政治形式也许狂野，也许充满泡沫和噪音，但它不可否认地调动起了广泛的社会参与，让原本疏离政治进程的个体通过持币、交易重新找回了影响力的幻觉或实感。

“价格即政治”并非一句简单的口号，而是Crypto给予世界的全新想象力。它质疑了传统政治的正统性：如果一串代码和一群匿名投资者就能高效决策资源分配，我们为何还需要繁冗的官僚体系？它也拷问着自身的内在隐忧：当财富与权力深度绑定，Crypto政治如何避免堕入金钱统治的老路？或许，正是在这样的矛盾和张力中，人类政治的未来才会不断演化。Crypto所开启的，不仅是技术乌托邦或金融狂欢，更可能是一次对民主形式的深刻拓展和挑战。这里有最狂热的逐利者，也有最理想主义的社群塑梦者；有一夜暴富的神话，也有瞬间破灭的惨痛。而这一切汇聚成的洪流，正冲撞着工业时代以来既定的权力谱系。

当我们再次追问：Crypto究竟是什么？ 或许可以这样回答——Crypto是比特币之后，人类完成的一次政治范式的试验性跃迁。在这里，价格行为化身为选票，资本市场演化为广场，代码与共识共同撰写“社会契约”。这是一场仍在进行的文明实验：它可能无声地融入既有秩序，也可能剧烈地重塑未来规则。但无论结局如何，如今我们已经见证：在比特币发明真正的货币之后，Crypto正在发明真正属于21世纪的政治。它以数字时代的语言宣告：在链上，价格即政治，市场即民意，代码即法律。这，或许就是Crypto带给我们的最直观而震撼的本质启示。

参考资料：

• 中本聪. 比特币白皮书: 一种点对点的电子现金系统. (2008)bitcoin.org

• Arkham Intelligence. Ethereum vs Ethereum Classic: Understanding the Differences. (2023)arkhamintelligence.com

• Binance Square (@渔神的加密日记). 狗狗币价格为何上涨？背后的原因你知道吗？binance.com

• Cointelegraph中文. 特朗普的迷因币晚宴预期内容揭秘. (2025)cn.cointelegraph.com

• 慢雾科技 Web3Caff (@Lisa). 风险提醒：从 LIBRA 看“政治化”的加密货币骗局. (2025)web3caff.com

• Nasdaq (@Anthony Clarke). How Cryptocurrency Aligns with the Principles of Islamic Finance. (2023)nasdaq.comnasdaq.com

• Cointelegraph Magazine (@Andrew Fenton). DeFi can be halal but not DOGE? Decentralizing Islamic finance. (2023)cointelegraph.com

@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9

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

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

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

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

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

@ 2b24a1fa:17750f64

80 Jahre später und kein bisschen klüger. Dieser Eindruck drängt sich unmittelbar auf, mit Blick auf die heutige, desaströse Weltlage. Dabei hat man sich vor rund acht Dekaden weltweit ein „Nie wieder“ geschworen. „Nie wieder Krieg!“ Es sollte dabei nicht bei einem Lippenbekenntnis bleiben. Der Schwur wurde unter anderem in der Charta der Vereinten Nationen festgehalten. Doch wie kommt es, dass das Versprechen, die Waffen zukünftig schweigen zu lassen, seither unzählige Male gebrochen wurde? War es etwa manchen der Siegermächte nicht ernst damit, als sie sich kurz vor Kriegsende in Jalta zur gleichnamigen Konferenz trafen?

https://soundcloud.com/radiomuenchen/abgrunde-der-gier-von-roger-waters?

Hören Sie hierzu die Rede des Pink Floyd - Mitgründers Roger Waters anlässlich des 80. Jahrestags der Jalta-Konferenz, die auf Deutsch zuerst bei Manova unter dem Titel „Abgründe der Gier“ erschienen war. www.manova.news/artikel/abgrunde-der-gier

Sprecherin: Sabrina Khalil, Redaktion: N. Riedl

Bild: Wikipedia

@ bc6ccd13:f53098e4

This article is slightly outside my normal writing focus. But it’s something everyone deserves to know, and take advantage of if they like. Before you click away, this isn’t a sports betting “system” or “strategy”. This is for anyone living in or near a state that has legalized online sports betting. It’s a way to take advantage of the new customer sign up bonuses these online sportsbooks give, by using free online tools to convert those bonuses into $2,000 or more in cash per person, depending on your state. It doesn’t require you to know anything whatsoever about sports, gambling, sports betting, odds, math, or anything like that. It doesn’t involve taking risks with your money. All you need is some capital (around $3-5,000 would be ideal), a smartphone, a legal sports betting state, and this guide.

Concepts and Principles

Online sports betting is now legal in 30 US states. You can check legality in your state on the map here. If you’re in a state with legal mobile betting, or close enough that you’d be willing to drive there, you can benefit from this guide.

Most states with legalized betting have multiple different sports books competing for customers. To attract new customers, many of them offer various types of bonus offers when you initially sign up. The idea is that once you sign up and place a bet, you’re likely to continue betting in the future. So the sportsbook doesn’t mind losing money on your first wager, because they’ll make it back over time. That leaves an opportunity for someone to just take the free money and leave, if they want to do that. It’s completely legal, and if you follow this guide, also risk free.

The bonuses vary in size, but are usually larger the first few months after a state legalizes online betting, since sportsbooks are competing heavily to attract the new customers to their site. But most states will have a combined $3-5,000 in bonuses available at any time across 4-8 sportsbooks. You can find the available offers in your state by searching “covers sports betting promo offers \”. For example for Maryland, we’d end up up at covers.com on a page like this.

The basic concept is that we open accounts on multiple sites, sign up for their bonus offers, then bet both sides of the same sports game but on 2 different sites. That way it doesn’t matter which team wins, we collect the free bonus money with no risk.

Actually doing it is a bit more nuanced, but I’ll explain it step by step and illustrate with plenty of screenshots to make sure you can follow along.

First, you want to find the offers for your state, and sign up for the sites with the offers you want to convert. For Maryland, if we scroll on down at covers.com, we’ll find this list of offers.

The larger offers are of course more worthwhile, so if I were in Maryland, I would first sign up for Caesars, DraftKings, BetMGM, and ESPN BET. Since you’ll also want another site to hedge your bets, I’d also sign up for FanDuel. You can download their apps, set up your accounts, and familiarize yourself with the deposit methods that are available.

Risk-Free Bets

These are the most common bonus offers you’ll find. They’ll also be called No Sweat Bets, Second Chance Bets, First Bet Insurance, Bonus Bets, First Bets, etc. Always make sure you check the details of the promotion you’re using to make sure it’s a Risk-Free Bet, and what the terms and details of the offer are. The four offers from the sites above for Maryland all fall under the category of risk-free bets.

The concept of this offer is simple: you open an account, deposit some money, and make a bet. The very first bet (MAKE SURE YOU GET THIS RIGHT) will be your risk-free bet. If you win that first bet, cool, you get the winnings from that bet and can withdraw it. If you lose your first bet, the risk-free bet kicks in, and you get a free bet deposited into your account equal to the amount of your first bet. So you basically get a do-over if you lose the first one.

Now you won’t be able to just withdraw the free bet in cash if you lose and get your money back. That would be too easy. The risk-free bet is a bet, you can only use it to bet on another game. If you win that second wager, you can withdraw your winnings. But if you don’t, you can still win by hedging your bets on a different sportsbook. That’s what I’m going to show you.

To find which games to bet on and how much to bet, you’ll need to use a different free website. Go to Crazy Ninja Odds.

Go to Settings in the top right corner, uncheck the sites you aren’t using.

Now go back to Home. Click on Risk-free bet page.

Now we need to choose an offer to convert. Let’s choose our Caesars $1,000 First Bet. We can walk through the steps first, to see which game we want to bet and how much we need to deposit.

First, starting at the top, under “Reward” we’ll enter 100%. With this offer, if we lose our first bet, we get a free bonus bet of 100% of the amount of our first bet, up to $1,000.

Next, we’ll select “Free bet (70%)”. Our free bonus bet will be convertible at about 70%, but that’s not something we need to understand right now. Just check the box and move on.

Next, open “Risk Free Bet Sportsbook” and select Caesars.

Now the page should be filled out like this.

Click “Update” at the bottom. Scroll down, and you’ll see a chart like this.

If none of this means anything to you, that’s fine. I’ll walk you through exactly what to do.

The bets are sorted by ranking from best to worst value. So we always want to choose the top bets unless we have a reason not to. In this case, we are making our risk-free bet on Caesars, and we want to hedge on the site where we aren’t trying to convert any offers, FanDuel. So we want to look at the second column on the right, Hedge Bet Sportsbook. Go down the column until you find FanDuel. In that row, the third column from the left has a “Calc” button. I’ve highlighted the button here.

Click the button. You’ll get a popup that looks like this.

So this is an NHL hockey game between the Dallas Stars and the Edmonton Oilers. If you know absolutely nothing about hockey, perfect. Neither do I. The important thing is that this shows us which wagers to place, and for how much. The left column is our Risk-Free Bet on Caesars, and the right column is our Hedge on FanDuel.

Our first decision is how much to wager. You’ll see that the Caesars wager is currently set to $100. But remember, our First Bet offer is for up to $1,000. You can wager any amount up to $1,000, but you’ll only get one shot at this offer, so if you wager less than $1,000, you won’t get the full benefit of the offer, and you’ll never be able to go back and use the rest in the future. It’s one shot. So my advice is wager $1,000, there’s no good reason not to. So we’ll change the wager amount to $1,000.

Now you can see that our risk-free bet is Edmonton Oilers -1.5 for $1,000, and our hedge bet is Dallas Stars +1.5 for $1,604.93. If you don’t know what that means, that’s fine. What you need to know is that you’ll need to deposit at least $1,000 into your Caesars account, and at least $1,604.93 into your FanDuel account. When that’s done, you can check the bets on each site to make sure the odds are accurate. They change constantly, so it’s always good to check both sites just before placing a bet.

First, we’ll open up the Caesars app and search for “Edmonton Oilers.” Sure enough, the game pops up.

Then we’ll click on that game and open it up

There are four things we want to check on each bet before placing it. I’ve highlighted them above. We have the Edmonton Oilers -1.5, odds of +196, a wager of $1,000, and a payout of $2,960. If we compare that with the correct column in our Risk-Free Bet Calculator, we’ll see that everything is correct.

Now we want to do the same for the FanDuel hedge. We’ll open the FanDuels app and search for “Dallas Stars” and find the same game against the Oilers.

Here we can see the first problem. The spread we see here is -1.5, odds of +225. Our Risk-Free Bet Calculator is asking for Dallas Stars +1.5, odds -245. So we need to select a different line. Farther down the page you’ll see “Series Alternate Handicap.” Open that, and you’ll see Dallas Stars +1.5.

This is the bet we’re looking for. But you’ll also notice that the odds are -225 instead of -245. So we can select this bet, but we need to go back to our Risk-Free Bet Calculator and change the odds to get the correct amount to bet on this line.

So go back to the calculator and change -245 to -225. You’ll see this.

As you can see, the amount of the wager has changed to $1,564.62. So we can go back to FanDuel, select Dallas Stars +1.5, odds -225, and enter our updated wager amount.

As you can see, when we add the “Wager” and the “To Win” amount, we get $2,260.01. Looking at our calculator, that’s the exact number in our “Payout” row. So these are the bets we need to make.

Now that we’ve double checked everything, we can go back and make our $1,000 bet on Caesars, and immediately go make our $1,564.62 bet on FanDuel.

Awesome!

Now what? Well, our job is done. We just wait to see which team wins. Not that it matters to us either way. But which team wins will determine our next step.

Looking at our calculator again, there are two possible outcomes.

The first outcome is the Edmonton Oilers win. In that case, our Caesars bet will payout $2,960, while our FanDuel bet will be a total loss. Here’s how we do the math on that scenario.

We start with our $2,960 Caesars balance. We subtract our $1,564.62 FanDuel bet (which was a loss). Then we subtract the $1,000 we initially deposited and wagered on Caesars. This leaves us with a profit of $395.38! Not bad for a one day return on $2,564.62, while taking no risk.

Now for the second scenario. That would be if the Dallas Stars win. In that case, our Caesars bet is a total loss. Our FanDuel bet pays our $2,260.01

So to calculate our profit here, we start with our payout of $2,260.01, subtract our wager of $1,564.62, subtract our Caesars wager of $1,000 (which was a loss), and then add 70% of our free bonus Caesars bet of $1,000, or $700 (more on that in a minute). Once again, that gives us a profit of $395.39.

Now back to the free bonus bet. Since our Caesars bet lost, we qualified for the promotional payout. If we check the Caesars app, we should see a bonus bet of $1,000 in our balance. Remember I said that you can’t just withdraw the bonus bet? This situation is where that becomes an issue. So we have to place a $1,000 wager with Caesars before we can withdraw that money. The problem with that is, what if our second wager also loses? Then we lose money on the entire process. That’s where the 70% number comes in. We’ll use a similar process when making that $1,000 wager, by hedging on a second site once again. By doing that, we’ll be guaranteed to collect around 70% of the wager, or $700. I’ll explain that in the next section.

Free Bets

This is the name for the bet we get if we lose our initial bet on a site with a Risk-Free Bet offer. This is just what it sounds like, a free bet. You can bet the amount on a game, and if you win, the winnings are your money. You’re free to withdraw that cash.

How do we ensure we still make a profit, even if our free bet loses? Well, Crazy Ninja Odds can help once again. Go back to their homepage, and this time click on Free Bets instead of Risk Free Bets. This time all we need to do is enter the sportsbook, Caesars, and click “update.” We’ll get a chart like this.

You know the drill by now. We find the first option on our Hedge Bet Sportsbook, FanDuel. This time it’s highlighted on the second row. Click “Calc.”

This is a money line bet, so it’s slightly different than the first one, but you won’t have any trouble figuring it out this time. You can check Caesars, and you’ll find the money line bet of $1,000 on the Pacers at +222, with a payout of $2,220.

Make sure you select your free bonus bet when you make the wager. If you lost your initial $1,000 deposit and didn’t deposit again, that should be your only option. It will look slightly different than this, since when you use a free bet, your payout won’t include the initial $1,000 wager, so it will read $2,220 instead of $3,220. I don’t have the free offer in my account so I can’t show you the exact screenshot, but you’ll be able to figure it out.

Then jump over to the other side of the game on FanDuel.

You’ll notice that the line is -275 instead of -270 like your calculator said. By now you know how to go back and change the odds in the calculator to get this.

Once again, you’ll want to make a $1,628 wager on the Boston Celtics at -275 to hedge your $1,000 free bonus bet on the Indiana Pacers at +222.

I could go through the math again, but you know how to do it now. You can look at the profit line and see that both outcomes will pay $592. If you remember, our initial bet used 70% of $1,000, or $700, as a bonus bet profit target. So given the odds available on this particular day, you’ll end up with just over $100 less profit if you need to convert the bonus bet than you’ll make if your first Caesars bet wins. That’s unfortunate, but just a result of games and odds available on a particular day. Getting a higher conversion rate would require more complex strategies, and this guide is long enough already.

Next Steps

Once you’ve successfully completed your initial offer, you can continue to do the same process for each additional sportsbook available in your state. And as you work through the offers on one site, you can then use that site to hedge the next site you sign up for.

There are a few things to keep in mind. Your free bonus bets are usually time limited. That means if your first bet loses, you often have as little as 7 days to use the free bonus bet before it disappears. So make sure you stay on top of your offers and play them before they expire. If you aren’t sure whether you qualify for a specific promotional offer, reach out to customer support before placing any bets. They’ll be able to explain exactly which offers you qualify for and how to access them.

Once you sign up and start betting, you’ll likely start getting more offers in the apps. They might be free bets, in which case you already know how to play them. But there are other offers as well, some of which you can do in a risk free way. If this guide gets enough interest, I may write more about how to handle other types of offers.

These offers will be available once to each person. So you can play them once, and that’s it. But you can also help each member of your family or close friends sign up and show them how to play the offers, or do it for them. Just be careful with your money management, since there will be a significant capital investment up front. If you’re putting up the capital, make sure it’s someone you fully trust with control of that money.

If there’s enough interest, I may also put together a guide on how you can do this with family members or friends who live anywhere, even if they’re not in a state with legal sports betting.

Most of all, be safe, don’t tie up capital you need for your daily life, and make sure you understand each offer and how to exploit it before placing any wagers.

If you have any questions, feel free to reach out to me and I’ll do my best to help you in any way I can.

Best of luck!

@ 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.

@ 94215f42:7681f622

Value Creation at the Edge

The conversation around artificial intelligence has largely centered on the technology itself, the capabilities of large language models, the race for more parameters, and the competition between AI companies.

He with the most data / biggest model / biggest platform wins all.

As we're been exploring in recent "Good Stuff" podcasts, the true business model of AI may be much more straightforward. AI is after all a productivity tool with little technical moat, in fact the existence of AI coding and learning tools quickly chop away at this moat even quicker!.\ \ We believe that the it's about transforming traditional human heavy businesses by dramatically reducing operational costs while maintaining or increasing output.

AI is poised to create value not primarily for AI companies themselves, but for businesses that effectively implement AI to transform their operations, particularly small, local businesses that can become extraordinarily efficient through AI adoption.

The Value Shift: From AI Companies to AI-Enabled Traditional Businesses

A central insight from episode 1 of the podcast series, is that the value of AI isn't likely to accrue primarily to companies like OpenAI or other AI technology providers. Instead, the real winners will be traditional service businesses that can leverage AI to transform their operations and cost structures.

"I think we're gonna see this shift to traditional service businesses... that traditionally have pretty fixed low margins because of a dependency on language-heavy workflows that require a lot of humans as the medium of intelligence in the business."

The opportunity here is to use AI to manage the language dependency and shift the moments of intelligence, that currently exist in the heads of our staff, into software that can run 24x7 for fractions of a cost.\ \ The real limiting factor here is less a magic AGI, but instead detailed thinking and process redesign to move humans to the edge of the process. As it turns out if we think through what each person is doing in detail we see the specific decisions, outputs, moments of intelligence are actually quite constrained and can be replicated in LLM's if we break them down to a low enough level of fidelity and take each decisions one step at a time.\ \ The result? Businesses that have traditionally operated with fixed, low margins can potentially achieve "software-style margins" by dramatically reducing their operational expenses.

Transforming Traditional Service Businesses

We have developed three key heuristics for identifying businesses that could benefit most from AI transformation:

1. Language Intensity: Businesses where much of the work involves processing language (reading, writing, communicating). Language in, language out. If you are sat in a chair and typing all day, this could be you.

2. Labor Component: Where we see this language intensity so we find many people performing similar, standardized roles. For examples, if we have four people in the same role this is a big clue we have good process, checklists, role descriptions etc for how the work can be done in order to replicate work across multiple people.

3. Load in the Business: Taking these processes into account, what amount of the operational expense of the business do they represent? Where these language and labor-intensive operations represent a significant portion of the business cost, we can see there will be significant return.

Traditional service businesses that match these criteria—legal firms, accounting practices, consulting agencies, contract engineering, design agencies and others—could see dramatic transformations through AI implementation.

By automating these language-heavy processes, businesses can potentially reduce operational costs by 50-80% while maintaining similar levels of output.

The Power of Small

We believe that small businesses may have an inherent advantage in this transformation. While large enterprises face significant barriers to reducing their workforce (political pressure, media scrutiny, organizational complexity), smaller businesses can adapt more quickly and focus on growth rather than just cost-cutting.

If I'm in a 20,000 person business and I need to remove 10,000 people... that's hard. You can't do this without sending political shock waves in your local community.

If I'm a 10 person business and I need to double my revenue, nobody gives a shit. I can just do it.

For small businesses, AI removes growth constraints. When adding the "21st person" no longer represents a significant capital investment, small businesses can scale much more efficiently:

If the next nominal client that you onboard doesn't actually cause you any more additional pain, if you don't need to hire more people to service that client... you just take off the brakes off from a growth perspective.

This gives small business a unique advantage in capitalizing on AI.

From "Bionic Humans" to "Humans at the Edge"

We currently see this integration to business happening in one of two models:

1. The Bionic Human: Equipping workers with AI tools to make them more productive.

2. Human at the Edge: Redesigning processes to be AI-native, with humans entering the process only when needed (and often facilitated by bitcoin payments).

While many businesses are focused on the first approach and it can certainly see returns, it is still a process constrained by the human input. The real value unlock comes from fundamentally redesigning business processes with AI at the core.

Now we can purchase intelligence in buckets of $0.02 API calls, how would we operate different?

This represents a profound shift in how we think about work and processes. Rather than humans being central to processes with tools supporting them, AI becomes the backbone of operations with humans providing input only at critical junctures.

This is "a complete mental shift" that challenges our fundamental assumptions about how businesses operate. The human becomes "the interface with the real world" for AI systems rather than the primary processor of information and decision-maker.

The Value Trap: Understanding the Competitive Dynamic

So what happens next? Here we have developed the concept of the Value Trap to explain how the competitive landscape will evolve as AI adoption increases..\ \

Initially, early adopters of AI and "Human at the Edge" business processes, will see dramatic benefits.

If your costs have dropped from 90 to 20 this creates an immediate competitive advantage where the early adopter is "now making 80 units of profit versus your 10 units of profit.

They gain massive pricing power in the industry and can compete for growth with an unfair advantage.

Over time, and here we believe this is likely a 5-10 year period although we believe the quicker side, competitive pressures will erode these advantages.\ \ As competitors adopt similar AI strategies, price competition will intensify, and revenues will decline. The business that initially saw its costs drop from 90 to 20 units might see its revenue decline from 100 to 30 units, resulting in similar margins but much lower overall revenue, often destroying the enterprise value of the company at these new revenue / profit levels!

This evolution creates an imperative for businesses to adopt AI early, not just to maintain perpetual advantage, but simply to survive the transition. Worse they're hit with a second challenge of the value trap, how do I keep hold of the value I generate along the way.\ \ If you're reading this on Nostr you may already suspect a way out of this value trap.\ \ If not I would invite you to consider storing the immediate short term returns you pull forwards in something that would be inflation resistant, hard to seize and ideally portable.\ \ We refer to this as a 'The big orange arbitrage".

Implications for Business Owners and Capital Allocators

For business owners, especially those running small to medium-sized enterprises, the message is clear: understand how AI could transform your industry and begin planning your transition now.\ \ This might involve creating an "AI-native twin" of your current business—similar to how Netflix developed streaming alongside its DVD business—to eventually replace your current operations. If you want help please ask, I heavily favor more small businesses in the world and would love to help make this a reality.

For capital allocation, the emerging opportunity we see if in "transformation led private equity". The acquisition of traditional service businesses and applying AI to dramatically reduce operational costs and increase enterprise value.\ \ This approach treats AI not as a product but as a transformation strategy for existing businesses with proven product-market fit.

Transformation led PE is venture style returns without the risk of product market fit.

So the lesson?

The business model of AI isn't all about selling AI technology, adding a RAG chatbot to a new DB or collecting everyone's data.\ \ Consider the humble cash flow business, use AI to transform the operational processes and save into everyone's favorite orange coin.

@ 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.

@ c631e267:c2b78d3e

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Titelbild: Pixabay]

---

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

@ e3ba5e1a:5e433365

Prelude

I wrote this post differently than any of my others. It started with a discussion with AI on an OPSec-inspired review of separation of powers, and evolved into quite an exciting debate! I asked Grok to write up a summary in my overall writing style, which it got pretty well. I've decided to post it exactly as-is. Ultimately, I think there are two solid ideas driving my stance here:

1. Perfect is the enemy of the good
2. Failure is the crucible of success

Beyond that, just some hard-core belief in freedom, separation of powers, and operating from self-interest.

Intro

Alright, buckle up. I’ve been chewing on this idea for a while, and it’s time to spit it out. Let’s look at the U.S. government like I’d look at a codebase under a cybersecurity audit—OPSEC style, no fluff. Forget the endless debates about what politicians should do. That’s noise. I want to talk about what they can do, the raw powers baked into the system, and why we should stop pretending those powers are sacred. If there’s a hole, either patch it or exploit it. No half-measures. And yeah, I’m okay if the whole thing crashes a bit—failure’s a feature, not a bug.

The Filibuster: A Security Rule with No Teeth

You ever see a firewall rule that’s more theater than protection? That’s the Senate filibuster. Everyone acts like it’s this untouchable guardian of democracy, but here’s the deal: a simple majority can torch it any day. It’s not a law; it’s a Senate preference, like choosing tabs over spaces. When people call killing it the “nuclear option,” I roll my eyes. Nuclear? It’s a button labeled “press me.” If a party wants it gone, they’ll do it. So why the dance?

I say stop playing games. Get rid of the filibuster. If you’re one of those folks who thinks it’s the only thing saving us from tyranny, fine—push for a constitutional amendment to lock it in. That’s a real patch, not a Post-it note. Until then, it’s just a vulnerability begging to be exploited. Every time a party threatens to nuke it, they’re admitting it’s not essential. So let’s stop pretending and move on.

Supreme Court Packing: Because Nine’s Just a Number

Here’s another fun one: the Supreme Court. Nine justices, right? Sounds official. Except it’s not. The Constitution doesn’t say nine—it’s silent on the number. Congress could pass a law tomorrow to make it 15, 20, or 42 (hitchhiker’s reference, anyone?). Packing the court is always on the table, and both sides know it. It’s like a root exploit just sitting there, waiting for someone to log in.

So why not call the bluff? If you’re in power—say, Trump’s back in the game—say, “I’m packing the court unless we amend the Constitution to fix it at nine.” Force the issue. No more shadowboxing. And honestly? The court’s got way too much power anyway. It’s not supposed to be a super-legislature, but here we are, with justices’ ideologies driving the bus. That’s a bug, not a feature. If the court weren’t such a kingmaker, packing it wouldn’t even matter. Maybe we should be talking about clipping its wings instead of just its size.

The Executive Should Go Full Klingon

Let’s talk presidents. I’m not saying they should wear Klingon armor and start shouting “Qapla’!”—though, let’s be real, that’d be awesome. I’m saying the executive should use every scrap of power the Constitution hands them. Enforce the laws you agree with, sideline the ones you don’t. If Congress doesn’t like it, they’ve got tools: pass new laws, override vetoes, or—here’s the big one—cut the budget. That’s not chaos; that’s the system working as designed.

Right now, the real problem isn’t the president overreaching; it’s the bureaucracy. It’s like a daemon running in the background, eating CPU and ignoring the user. The president’s supposed to be the one steering, but the administrative state’s got its own agenda. Let the executive flex, push the limits, and force Congress to check it. Norms? Pfft. The Constitution’s the spec sheet—stick to it.

Let the System Crash

Here’s where I get a little spicy: I’m totally fine if the government grinds to a halt. Deadlock isn’t a disaster; it’s a feature. If the branches can’t agree, let the president veto, let Congress starve the budget, let enforcement stall. Don’t tell me about “essential services.” Nothing’s so critical it can’t take a breather. Shutdowns force everyone to the table—debate, compromise, or expose who’s dropping the ball. If the public loses trust? Good. They’ll vote out the clowns or live with the circus they elected.

Think of it like a server crash. Sometimes you need a hard reboot to clear the cruft. If voters keep picking the same bad admins, well, the country gets what it deserves. Failure’s the best teacher—way better than limping along on autopilot.

States Are the Real MVPs

If the feds fumble, states step up. Right now, states act like junior devs waiting for the lead engineer to sign off. Why? Federal money. It’s a leash, and it’s tight. Cut that cash, and states will remember they’re autonomous. Some will shine, others will tank—looking at you, California. And I’m okay with that. Let people flee to better-run states. No bailouts, no excuses. States are like competing startups: the good ones thrive, the bad ones pivot or die.

Could it get uneven? Sure. Some states might turn into sci-fi utopias while others look like a post-apocalyptic vidya game. That’s the point—competition sorts it out. Citizens can move, markets adjust, and failure’s a signal to fix your act.

Chaos Isn’t the Enemy

Yeah, this sounds messy. States ignoring federal law, external threats poking at our seams, maybe even a constitutional crisis. I’m not scared. The Supreme Court’s there to referee interstate fights, and Congress sets the rules for state-to-state play. But if it all falls apart? Still cool. States can sort it without a babysitter—it’ll be ugly, but freedom’s worth it. External enemies? They’ll either unify us or break us. If we can’t rally, we don’t deserve the win.

Centralizing power to avoid this is like rewriting your app in a single thread to prevent race conditions—sure, it’s simpler, but you’re begging for a deadlock. Decentralized chaos lets states experiment, lets people escape, lets markets breathe. States competing to cut regulations to attract businesses? That’s a race to the bottom for red tape, but a race to the top for innovation—workers might gripe, but they’ll push back, and the tension’s healthy. Bring it—let the cage match play out. The Constitution’s checks are enough if we stop coddling the system.

Why This Matters

I’m not pitching a utopia. I’m pitching a stress test. The U.S. isn’t a fragile porcelain doll; it’s a rugged piece of hardware built to take some hits. Let it fail a little—filibuster, court, feds, whatever. Patch the holes with amendments if you want, or lean into the grind. Either way, stop fearing the crash. It’s how we debug the republic.

So, what’s your take? Ready to let the system rumble, or got a better way to secure the code? Hit me up—I’m all ears.

@ c631e267:c2b78d3e

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Vorlage Titelbild: Pixabay]

---

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

@ 2b24a1fa:17750f64

„Reibung erzeugt Wärme“ – war das Kredo unserer Streitkultur, bis es meist aus dem Ruder lief und einer gekränkt vom Tisch verschwand. Themen nicht anzusprechen war allerdings keine Option. Was bedeutet diese Auseinandersetzung zwischen den Menschen und warum ist sie so wichtig?

https://soundcloud.com/radiomuenchen/die-schnellen-urteile-verzogern-von-markus-langemann?

Vom Streiten, Kommunizieren und dem Schmerz des Menschseins schreibt der Publizist und Herausgeber des Clubs der klaren Worte Markus Langemann.

Sabrina Khalil hat den Text für uns gelesen.

clubderklarenworte.de

@ 5d4b6c8d:8a1c1ee3

https://youtu.be/US9iYJNTOkU

I had no idea Tosh was still doing anything, much less that he talks about sports.

https://stacker.news/items/984547

@ bc6ccd13:f53098e4

The credit/debt fiat money system is broken. If you haven’t been living under a rock, I’m sure you’re aware that something is really messed up in the financial system. Hopefully you’re at least somewhat aware of the reasons why and are placing blame squarely on the structure of the monetary system and not on politics or “capitalism” or “socialism” or corporations or billionaires or any of the other red herrings the bankers desperately hope to distract you with.

If you’re still obsessing over any of those things, that’s okay too, and you’re the reason I started this newsletter. It’s impossible to make good decisions without understanding the relevant information, and when it comes to money, almost no one understands the relevant information. My goal is to change that for as many people as I can reach, to grow the small group of people who are knowledgeable and empowered to make better decisions on money and finance.

Previous articles have been focused on economic theory and how money works at a conceptual level. That’s critically important to understand, and if you haven’t taken the time to read those articles, I know it will open your eyes to the world in a way you’ve never considered before. That understanding will give you a huge advantage in benefiting from what I’m about to describe. But today’s subject is strictly practical, actionable information on one specific financial instrument, and how you can use it to game the broken money system to benefit YOU.

Money Is Not Scarce

If you read my previous articles, you’ll understand that one of the biggest problems with the credit/debt money system is that money is not scarce in this system. In fact, the quantity of money is basically unlimited. That’s because money is created by banks every time they make a loan. Unlike everything you’ve ever thought, banks don’t lend out money that’s given to them by depositors. They create new money, out of thin air, with a computer keystroke, every time they make a new loan. That means in practical terms that the amount of money is only limited by the willingness of banks to make loans. And since banks profit by charging interest to loan out money they can create at zero cost, they’re incentivized to make a LOT of loans.

Now as you can easily see, things that aren’t scarce don’t have a lot of value. The less scarce and more easily available something is, the less valuable it becomes. If you and a friend were standing on the shore of Lake Michigan and you reached down and scooped up a cup full of water, turned to your friend, and said “I’ll trade you this cup of water for your Rolex watch,” he’d look at you like you lost your mind. And rightly so, since a cup of water on the shore of a giant lake is so abundant and easily accessible that it has no value compared to a Rolex watch, which are deliberately produced in very limited amounts to increase their scarcity and value.

The difference between money and the water in that example is that money is not scarce, but it is selectively scarce. If you’re a bank, you have access to as much money as you choose to loan out, at zero cost. On the other hand, if you aren’t a bank, money is only available if the bank decides to create some and loan it to you, or you work hard to earn money someone else already has.

This selective scarcity of money is the root cause of the massive wealth inequality we see today. Money is essential to survive in the modern economy, but access to that money is very unevenly distributed.

So how does this benefit certain people? You might be thinking, but don’t borrowers have to pay the loan back with interest? Of course it’s easy to see how the banks benefit, but plenty of wealthy people are not bankers. And that’s a good point. Here’s how.

Because of the incentives banks have to make loans, the amount of money in circulation tends to keep rising exponentially. The amount of most real goods in the economy, however, typically doesn’t rise as fast. When you have more money circulating in the economy without more goods available, the prices people are willing to pay for those goods will go up. That means prices of some scarce goods rise very consistently over time. Those with access to newly created money in the form of loans benefit by using that money to buy assets that are more scarce than the money they borrowed to buy the asset. So they may buy an asset for $1 million, but by the time the loan is due to be repaid, the continuous inflation caused by the increasing money supply might have pushed the price of that asset up to $1.5 million. So subtract the interest paid from $500,000, and there’s your profit, all for doing nothing but convincing a banker to create some money and let you borrow it. The concept that those closest to the source of new money will benefit the most, because they can buy things before the prices rise, is called the Cantillon effect.

Benefitting from the Cantillon Effect

So how can you benefit? You can see that borrowing a bunch of money and buying a good asset with it would be the perfect way to take advantage of the Cantillon effect. But the problem for most people is, if they go to the bank and ask to borrow a few hundred thousand dollars, they’ll be declined in a millisecond. If you’re not already wealthy, you’re going to have a really tough time getting a big loan at a low interest rate, which is what it takes to make this system work in your favor. Most people only have access to loans in the form of a credit card or personal loan, which will be for a small amount and a very high interest rate. That’s not helpful. Luckily there’s one exception, one way almost anyone can borrow a big chunk of money at a low interest rate, and buy an asset that will increase in price over time as the money supply grows: a mortgage.

If you have the income and credit to support a mortgage payment, it can be a great way to take advantage of the broken monetary system to accumulate some long term wealth. However, there are a few caveats and some simple tricks that can make all the difference.

First, while the constant demand for houses fueled by easy access to newly created money means house prices tend to rise consistently over time, there are no guarantees. The housing market often has periods of boom and bust, and falling prices can last for years. Borrowing is always risky, and you shouldn’t take a risk you don’t understand or aren’t comfortable with. While no one can time the housing market, it’s always good to at least be aware that the housing market does rise and fall in cycles, and try to avoid buying when all signs point to housing being extremely overpriced.

Second, just because houses are rising in price doesn’t mean they’re rising in value. It’s a simple concept, but one most people miss. Like Warren Buffet says, price is what you pay, value is what you get. If you buy a house today for $400,000, and in 10 years that same house sells for $700,000, how much did the value of the house change? The price went up, but the house is still the same house in the same location, it’s just a decade older. And a decade of wear and tear is a decrease in value, not an increase. Think of it this way. You can sell for $700,000 and you have $300,000 of “profit”. But if you want the same house back, you can’t buy it for $400,000 again and pocket the $300,000. You can only get the same house back for the full price you received. You haven’t increased your purchasing power at all in terms of housing with that “profit”. Your house hasn’t become more valuable, your money has just become less valuable when measured against houses. In that sense, you probably can’t increase your purchasing power by buying a house to live in, but you can at least avoid losing purchasing power. If you just save money in the bank to buy a house later, house prices will probably rise faster than you can save. That’s especially true if you’re paying rent at the same time. At least with a mortgage, if you pay long enough you own a house eventually. You can pay rent your whole life and you’ll still own nothing at the end.

Understanding Amortization

The key to making a mortgage work for you is to understand and manipulate the amount of principal and interest you pay over the term of the loan. To do this, you need to understand how a mortgage amortization schedule works. An amortization schedule is basically a big chart of your mortgage payments each month, showing how much of each payment is applied to paying down the principal and how much is paying interest. The payment size is the same each month, but the amount of principal and interest varies over the term of the loan, and that’s key to understanding how to manipulate the system.

To understand amortization, you need a good amortization calculator. There are plenty of different ones available online, but I’m going to use the one here to illustrate. In this example, I’m going to arbitrarily choose a mortgage size of $500,000 and an interest rate of 7%, but you can of course use your own numbers. When we enter this into the calculator with a loan term of 30 years and click “calculate”, we get something that looks like this.

You can see the monthly payment of $3,326.51, and the total payments over 30 years of almost $1.2 million, almost $700,000 of which is interest. So you end up paying more in interest than the total amount of principal you borrowed. Gulp.

That seems terrible, and it is. But this is where understanding the amortization schedule, that scary looking chart to the left, is going to pay big dividends. First, change the amortization schedule from an annual schedule to a monthly schedule. You’ll see something that looks like this.

So now for each month, you can see how much of the payment is interest, how much is principal, and how much of your original $500,000 balance is still outstanding. As you can see in month one, you’re paying over $2,900 in interest and only $400 in principal, leaving you with a balance of $499,590.15. The reason the interest is so high initially is that you have to pay interest on the full principal balance. As the principal gets paid down, you are now paying interest on a smaller balance. If you scroll down to year 29, you’ll see the opposite situation. In month 338 you’ll pay $2,900 of principal and only $400 of interest. That’s because you’re now paying interest on a balance of only $68,000 instead of $500,000.

As you can see, getting into the later years of the mortgage is a much better situation than paying huge amounts of interest in the first few years. Is there a way to get closer to the end fast? Yes there is, and you may be surprised how easy it is.

Go back to the annual amortization schedule. Suppose you want to take 5 years off your mortgage. How much would it cost to do, and how much would you save in interest? There are two ways to do this, and we’ll cover both.

First, the easiest way to get 5 years off your mortgage is to move straight down the amortization schedule to year 6. How can you do that? Look at the annual amortization schedule for year 5. Your ending balance is a little over $470,000. That means to get to that point in the loan repayment schedule, you need to pay $30,000 of principal. So let’s see where a lump sum payment of $30,000 gets us. Inside the box where you entered your loan terms you’ll see a little checkbox labeled “Optional: make extra payments”. Click that box. In the “Extra one-time pay” box, enter $30,000. Click calculate. You’ll see this.

And viola, with the extra payment, the loan will be paid off in 25 years, and you’ll save $172,362 in interest. Pretty amazing results for a one-time $30,000 payment.

Of course for the sake of simplicity, that’s assuming you pay the $30,000 at the very beginning of the loan. Paying the lump sum later into the loan term will change the exact amount of the savings. You can play around with other payment sizes, or even multiple lump sum payments, and see how much each one will save.

But most of you will be thinking, “Where am I going to get $30,000? That’s never going to happen.” If that’s you, don’t worry. We can do the exact same thing a different way.

Go back to your calculator, remove the lump sum payment, and leave everything else the same, except the loan term. Change the loan term to 25 years instead of 30 years. Click calculate. Now look at just one number, the payment size. You’ll see it’s $3,533.90. Don’t worry about anything else, just note that number. Now reset to your original calculation of a 30 year term. You’ll see the payment size is back down to $3,326.51. Now get out your calculator and subtract $3,326.51 from $3,533.90. You’ll get $207.39. Go back to your “make extra payments” box and enter an “extra monthly pay” of $207.39. Click calculate.

As you can see, just by paying an extra $207 of principal every month, you’ll pay the loan off 5 years faster and save $137,379 in interest.

You’ll save a little less that way than the lump sum payment, because you’re not paying the principal down as much early in the loan. But paying an extra $200 a month is much easier for most people than accumulating thousands of dollars to make a large lump sum payment. A few hundred dollars is only about 6% of the size of this mortgage payment, so it’s really a small difference. And if you can’t afford to pay a few percent of your payment size extra each month, the mortgage is probably bigger than you can reasonably afford.

You can play around with these numbers in all kinds of ways. It’s a good way to help you think about your financial decisions, and the real impact they might have over time. Say for example, you’re considering buying a new grill for the backyard. You only grill a few times a month during the summer, and a replacement model of the basic charcoal grill you have now would be perfectly serviceable. It’s available for $119 on Amazon. But your brother-in-law just bought one of those Big Green Eggs and he keeps bragging about how amazing it is. They’re $1,950, but you can afford it, you just got a nice little bonus at work. So why not?

But before you get out the checkbook, let’s take a quick look at the mortgage calculator. Let’s see how much that extra $1,831 spent on a grill you don’t really need will actually cost you. Again, input your mortgage size, term, and interest rate, and add an extra one-time payment of $1,831.

Hopefully you’re still using that Big Green Egg in 30 years, because by that time, it will have cost you almost $13,000 in additional interest payments.

You can fill in the blank with your own discretionary purchases and see whether they’re really worth the cost. It’s just another little tool to help plan your financial decisions. It’s free to do, and can make a very significant difference in your financial well-being down the road. But almost no one takes advantage of the opportunity, so you’ll have a huge leg up on most people just by knowing this simple concept.

The Bottom Line

To take advantage of the opportunity to build wealth with a mortgage, there are only two simple rules.

1. Use a mortgage to buy a reasonably priced house that you couldn’t otherwise afford.

2. Take advantage of amortization to pay that mortgage off as fast as possible, so you pay as little interest as possible while still capturing the increase in price of the house.

If you already own a home, you can use the same concept. Take out a mortgage for whatever amount you’re comfortable with, and use the money to buy an asset that will increase in price with inflation. Choose your asset wisely, and don’t take on more debt than you can afford. But if you make good decisions, you can take advantage of the broken financial system, using this little mortgage cheat code to get the Cantillon effect on your side. The wealthy are doing it every day, so don’t miss the opportunity to lock in long-term, fixed rate debt and acquire hard assets. As the debt/credit fiat system implodes, the opportunity to do this will disappear. Take advantage of it while you can.

@ c066aac5:6a41a034

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

My Background: A Small Side Story

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

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

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

Nicolas Cage: Actor

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

Nick Cave: Songwriter

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

Jim Jarmusch: Director

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

NOSTR: We Need Bold Art

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

@ c631e267:c2b78d3e

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Titelbild: Pixabay]

Dazu passend:

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

---

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

@ 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.

@ ee6ea13a:959b6e74

Reposted without permission from Business Insider.

Bitcoin Is A Joke

Joe Weisenthal Nov 6, 2013, 10:42 PM UTC

REUTERS/Eliana Aponte

Bitcoin is back in the news, as the digital currency has surged to new all-time highs in recent weeks.

A few weeks ago, it was just above $100. Today it's over $260.

This surge has prompted Timothy B Lee at The Washington Post to ask whether those who have called it a bubble in the past should retract and admit that they were wrong.

Well I'm not totally sure if I've called it a bubble, but I have spoken negatively of it, and I'll say that I still think it's a joke, and probably in a bubble.

Now first of all, I find the premise of Lee's post to be hilarious. The currency has been surging several percent every day lately, and that's evidence that it's not in a bubble?

Before going on, I want to be clear that saying something is a bubble is not saying it will go down. It could go to $500 or $1000 or $10,000. That's the nature of manias.

But make no mistake, Bitcoin is not the currency of the future. It has no intrinsic value.

Now this idea of "intrinsic value" when it comes to currency bothers people, and Bitcoin Bugs will immediately ask why the U.S. dollar has intrinsic value. There's an answer to that. The U.S. Dollar has intrinsic value because the U.S. government which sets the laws of doing business in the United States says it has intrinsic value. If you want to conduct commerce in the United States you have to pay taxes, and there's only one currency you're allowed to pay taxes in: U.S. dollars. There's no getting around this fact. Furthermore, if you want to use the banking system at all, there's no choice but to use U.S. dollars, because that's the currency of the Fed which is behind the whole thing.

On top of all these laws requiring the U.S. dollar to be used, the United States has a gigantic military that can force people around the world to use dollars (if it came to that) so yes, there's a lot of real-world value behind greenbacks.

Bitcoin? Nada. There's nothing keeping it being a thing. If people lose faith in it, it's over. Bitcoin is fiat currency in the most literal sense of the word.

But it gets worse. Bitcoin is mostly just a speculative vehicle. Yes, there are PR stunts about bars and other shops accepting bitcoins. And there is a Bitcoin ATM for some reason. But mostly Bitcoin is a speculative vehicle. And really, you'd be insane to actually conduct a sizable amount of commerce in bitcoins. That's because the price swings so wildly, that the next day, there's a good chance that one of the parties will have gotten royally screwed. Either the purchaser of the good will have ended up totally blowing a huge opportunity (by not holding longer) or the seller will be totally screwed (if Bitcoin instantly plunges). The very volatility that excited people to want to play the Bitcoin game is death when it comes to real transactions in the real world.

Again, Bitcoin might go up a lot more before it ultimately ends. That's the nature of bubbles. The dotcom bubble crashed a bunch of times on its way up. Then one day it ended. The same will happen with this.

In the meantime, have fun speculating!

@ aa8de34f:a6ffe696

In seinem Beitrag vom 30. März 2025 fragt Henning Rosenbusch auf Telegram angesichts zunehmender digitaler Kontrolle und staatlicher Allmacht:

„Wie soll sich gegen eine solche Tyrannei noch ein Widerstand formieren können, selbst im Untergrund? Sehe ich nicht.“\ (Quelle: t.me/rosenbusch/25228)

Er beschreibt damit ein Gefühl der Ohnmacht, das viele teilen: Eine Welt, in der Totalitarismus nicht mehr mit Panzern, sondern mit Algorithmen kommt. Wo Zugriff auf Geld, Meinungsfreiheit und Teilhabe vom Wohlverhalten abhängt. Der Bürger als kontrollierbare Variable im Code des Staates.\ Die Frage ist berechtigt. Doch die Antwort darauf liegt nicht in alten Widerstandsbildern – sondern in einer neuen Realität.

-- Denn es braucht keinen Untergrund mehr. --

Der Widerstand der Zukunft trägt keinen Tarnanzug. Er ist nicht konspirativ, sondern transparent. Nicht bewaffnet, sondern mathematisch beweisbar. Bitcoin steht nicht am Rand dieser Entwicklung – es ist ihr Fundament. Eine Bastion aus physikalischer Realität, spieltheoretischem Schutz und ökonomischer Wahrheit. Es ist nicht unfehlbar, aber unbestechlich. Nicht perfekt, aber immun gegen zentrale Willkür.

Hier entsteht kein „digitales Gegenreich“, sondern eine dezentrale Renaissance. Keine Revolte aus Wut, sondern eine stille Abkehr: von Zwang zu Freiwilligkeit, von Abhängigkeit zu Selbstverantwortung. Diese Revolution führt keine Kriege. Sie braucht keine Führer. Sie ist ein Netzwerk. Jeder Knoten ein Individuum. Jede Entscheidung ein Akt der Selbstermächtigung.

Weltweit wachsen Freiheits-Zitadellen aus dieser Idee: wirtschaftlich autark, digital souverän, lokal verankert und global vernetzt. Sie sind keine Utopien im luftleeren Raum, sondern konkrete Realitäten – angetrieben von Energie, Code und dem menschlichen Wunsch nach Würde.

Der Globalismus alter Prägung – zentralistisch, monopolistisch, bevormundend – wird an seiner eigenen Hybris zerbrechen. Seine Werkzeuge der Kontrolle werden ihn nicht retten. Im Gegenteil: Seine Geister werden ihn verfolgen und erlegen.

Und während die alten Mächte um Erhalt kämpfen, wächst eine neue Welt – nicht im Schatten, sondern im Offenen. Nicht auf Gewalt gebaut, sondern auf Mathematik, Physik und Freiheit.

Die Tyrannei sieht keinen Widerstand.\ Weil sie nicht erkennt, dass er längst begonnen hat.\ Unwiderruflich. Leise. Überall.

@ 866e0139:6a9334e5

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

---

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

---

„Warum der Weltfrieden von Deutschland abhängt“ steht auf dem Cover. Sicher: Ein Verlag will verkaufen. Superlative machen sich da immer gut. Der Weltfrieden und Deutschland. „Wie das“, wird mancher fragen, über den Atlantik schauen, nach Kiew oder gar nach Moskau und nach Peking, und die 24 Euro ausgeben. Ich kann nur sagen: Das ist gut investiert, wenn man verstehen will, was uns die Nachrichtensprecher und ihre Kritiker im Moment alles um die Ohren hauen. Ich durfte die Texte von Hauke Ritz schon lesen und ein Vorwort schreiben, in dem es nicht nur um Krieg und Frieden geht, sondern auch um die Frage, warum sich manche, die einst „links“ zu stehen glaubten, inzwischen mit einigen Konservativen besser vertragen als mit den alten Genossen – nicht nur bei der Gretchenfrage auf dem Cover. Nun aber zu meinem Vorwort.    

1. Der Leser

Hauke Ritz hat meinen Blick auf die Welt verändert. In diesem Satz stecken zwei Menschen. Ich fange mit dem Leser an, weil jeder Text auf einen Erfahrungsberg trifft, gewachsen durch all das, was Herkunft, soziale Position und Energievorrat ermöglichen. Ob ein Autor dort auf Resonanz stößt, kann er nicht beeinflussen. Also zunächst etwas zu mir. Ich bin auf der Insel Rügen aufgewachsen – in einer kommunistischen Familie und mit Karl Marx. Das Sein bestimmt das Bewusstsein. In der Schule haben wir Kinder uns über ein anderes Marx-Zitat amüsiert, das in einem der Räume groß an der Wand stand. „Die Philosophen haben die Welt nur verschieden interpretiert, es kömmt drauf an, sie zu verändern.“ Kömmt. Dieser Marx. Was der sich traut.

Das Schulhaus ist nach 1990 schnell abgerissen worden. Bauland mit Meerblick, fünf Minuten bis zum Strand. Marx stand nun zwar kaum noch in der Zeitung, Eltern, Freunde und Bekannte waren sich aber trotzdem sicher, dass er Recht hat. Das Sein bestimmt das Bewusstsein. Hier die Ostdeutschen, auf Jahre gebunden im Kampf um Arbeitsplatz und Qualifikationsnachweise, Rente und Grundstück, und dort Glücksritter aus dem Westen, die sich das Dorf kaufen und nach ihrem Bilde formen. Das Kapital live in Aktion gewissermaßen.

Ich selbst bin damals eher durch Zufall an der Universität gelandet und habe dort eine Spielart der Medienforschung kennengelernt, die in den USA erfunden worden war, um den Zweiten Weltkrieg nicht nur auf dem Schlachtfeld zu gewinnen, sondern auch in den Köpfen. Diese akademische Disziplin konnte und wollte nach ihrer Ankunft in der alten Bundesrepublik nichts mit Marx am Hut haben. Zum einen war da dieser neue Freund auf der anderen Atlantikseite, moralisch sauber und damit ein Garant gegen den Vorwurf, mitgemacht zu haben und vielleicht sogar Goebbels und sein Postulat von den Medien als Führungsmittel immer noch in sich zu tragen. Je lauter dieser Vorwurf wurde, desto stärker zog es deutsche Propagandaforscher, die sich zur Tarnung Kommunikations- oder Publizistikwissenschaftler nannten, in die USA.

Zum anderen verbannte der Radikalenerlass jeden Hauch von Marxismus aus dem universitären Leben. Selbst Postmarxisten wie Adorno und Horkheimer mit ihrer Frankfurter Schule, Karl Mannheim oder Pierre Bourdieu, auf die ich bei der Suche nach einer neuen intellektuellen Heimat fast zwangsläufig gestoßen bin, spielten in den Lehrveranstaltungen kaum eine Rolle und damit auch nicht in Dissertationen, Habilitationen, Fachzeitschriften. Peer Review wird schnell zur Farce, wenn jeder Gutachter weiß, dass bestimmte Texte nur von mir und meinen Schülern zitiert werden. Ich habe dann versucht, die Kollegen mit Foucault zu überraschen, aber auch das hat nicht lange funktioniert.

Zu Hauke Ritz ist es von da immer noch weit. Ich habe eine Lungenembolie gebraucht (2013), zwei Auftritte bei KenFM (2018) und die Attacken, die auf diese beiden Interviews zielten sowie auf meinen Blog Medienrealität, gestartet 2017 und zeitgleich mit großen Abendveranstaltungen aus der virtuellen Welt in die Uni-Wirklichkeit geholt, um bereit zu sein für diesen Denker. Corona nicht zu vergessen. Ich erinnere mich noch genau an diesen Abend. Narrative Nummer 16 im August 2020. Hauke Ritz zu Gast bei Robert Cibis, Filmemacher und Kopf von Ovalmedia. Da saß jemand, der mühelos durch die Geschichte spazierte und es dabei schaffte, geistige und materielle Welt zusammenzubringen. Meine Götter Marx, Bourdieu und Foucault, wenn man so will, angereichert mit mehr als einem Schuss Religionswissen, um die jemand wie ich, als Atheist erzogen und immer noch aufgeregt, wenn er vor einer Kirche steht, eher einen Bogen macht. Dazu all das, was ich in tapsigen Schritten auf dem Gebiet der historischen Forschung zu erkunden versucht hatte – nur in weit längeren Zeiträumen und mit der Vogelperspektive, die jede gute Analyse braucht. Und ich kannte diesen Mann nicht. Ein Armutszeugnis nach mehr als einem Vierteljahrhundert in Bewusstseinsindustrie und Ideologieproduktion.

2. Der Autor

Und damit endlich zu diesem Autor, der meinen Blick auf die Welt verändert hat. Hauke Ritz, Jahrgang 1975, ist ein Kind der alten deutschen Universität. Er hat an der FU Berlin studiert, als man dort noch Professoren treffen konnte, denen Eigenständigkeit wichtiger war als Leistungspunkte, Deadlines und politische Korrektheit. Seine Dissertation wurzelt in diesem ganz anderen akademischen Milieu. Ein dickes Buch, in dem es um Geschichtsphilosophie geht und um die Frage, welchen Reim sich die Deutschen vom Ersten Weltkrieg bis zum Fall der Berliner Mauer auf den Siegeszug von Wissenschaft und Technik gemacht haben. Das klingt sehr akademisch, wird aber schnell politisch, wenn man die Aufsätze liest, die Hauke Ritz ab den späten Nullerjahren auf diesem Fundament aufgebaut hat und die hier nun in einer Art Best-of in die Öffentlichkeit zurückgeholt werden aus dem Halbdunkel von Publikationsorten, deren Reputation inzwischen zum Teil gezielt zerstört worden ist, und die so hoffentlich ein großes und neues Publikum erreichen. In den Texten, die auf dieses Vorwort folgen, geht es um den tiefen Staat und den neuen kalten Krieg, um Geopolitik und Informationskriege und dabei immer wieder auch um die geistige Krise der westlichen Welt sowie um den fehlenden Realitätssinn deutscher Außenpolitik. 

Bevor ich darauf zurückkomme, muss ich die Doppelbiografie abrunden, mit der ich eingestiegen bin. Im Februar 2022, wir erinnern uns auch mit Hilfe des Interviews, das Paul Schreyer mit ihm führte, war Hauke Ritz gerade in Moskau, als Universitätslehrer auf Zeit mit einem DAAD-Stipendium. Im November 2024, als ich diese Zeilen schreibe, ist er wieder einmal in China, mit familiären Verbindungen. Das heißt auch: Hauke Ritz hat mehr gesehen, als einem in den Kongresshotels der US-dominierten Forschergemeinschaften je geboten werden kann. Und er muss weder um Zitationen buhlen noch um irgendwelche Fördertöpfe und damit auch nicht um das Wohlwollen von Kollegen.

Ein Lehrstuhl oder eine Dozentenstelle, hat er mir im Frühsommer 2021 auf Usedom erzählt, wo wir uns das erste Mal gesehen haben, so eine ganz normale akademische Karriere sei für ihn nicht in Frage gekommen. Der Publikationsdruck, die Denkschablonen. Lieber ökonomisch unsicher, aber dafür geistig frei. Ich habe mir diesen Satz gemerkt, weil er einen Beamten wie mich zwingt, seinen Lebensentwurf auf den Prüfstand zu stellen. Bin ich beim Lesen, Forschen, Schreiben so unabhängig, wie ich mir das stets einzureden versuche? Wo sind die Grenzen, die eine Universität und all die Zwänge setzen, die mit dem Kampf um Reputation verbunden sind? Und was ist mit dem Lockmittel Pension, das jeder verspielt, der das Schiff vor der Zeit verlassen will? 

---

DIE FRIEDENSTAUBE FLIEGT AUCH IN IHR POSTFACH!

Hier können Sie die Friedenstaube abonnieren und bekommen die Artikel zugesandt, vorerst für alle kostenfrei, wir starten gänzlich ohne Paywall. (Die Bezahlabos fangen erst zu laufen an, wenn ein Monetarisierungskonzept für die Inhalte steht). Sie wollen der Genossenschaft beitreten oder uns unterstützen? Mehr Infos hier oder am Ende des Textes.

---

Hauke Ritz, das zeigen die zehn Aufsätze, die in diesem Buch versammelt sind, hat alles richtig gemacht. Hier präsentiert sich ein Autor, der „von links“ aufgebrochen ist und sich immer noch so sieht (so beschreibt er das dort, wo es um die aktuelle Theorieschwäche des einst gerade hier so dominanten Lagers geht), aber trotzdem keine Angst hat, für ein Wertesystem zu werben, das eher konservativ wirkt. Herkunft und Familie zum Beispiel. Verankerung und Zugehörigkeit, sowohl geografisch als auch intellektuell. Mehr noch: Wenn ich Hauke Ritz richtig verstanden habe, dann braucht es ein Amalgam aus den Restbeständen der »alten« Linken und dem christlich geprägten Teil des konservativen Lagers, um eine Entwicklung aufzuhalten und vielleicht sogar umzukehren, die in seinen Texten das Etikett »Postmoderne« trägt. Grenzen sprengen, Identitäten schleifen, Traditionen vergessen. Umwertung aller Werte. Transgender und Trans- oder sogar Posthumanismus. Wer all das nicht mag, findet in diesem Buch ein Reiseziel. Gerechtigkeit und Utopie, Wahrheitssuche, der Glaube an die Schöpferkraft des Menschen und die geistige Regulierung politischer Macht – verwurzelt in der Topografie Europas, die Konkurrenz erzwang, und vor allem im Christentum, weitergetragen in weltlichen Religionen wie dem Kommunismus, und so attraktiv, dass Hauke Ritz von Universalismus sprechen kann, von der Fähigkeit dieser Kultur, ein Leitstern für die Welt zu sein.

Ich habe die Texte im Frühling 2022 gelesen, allesamt in einem Rutsch, um mich auf das Gespräch vorzubereiten, das ich mit Hauke Ritz dann im Juni für die Plattform Apolut geführt habe, den Nachfolger von KenFM. Ich weiß, dass das ein Privileg ist. Lesen, worauf man Lust hat, und dafür auch noch bezahlt werden. Ich weiß auch, dass ich ohne die Vorgeschichte, ohne Corona und all das, was mich und dieses Land dorthin geführt hat, niemals das Glück hätte empfinden können, das mit der Entdeckung eines Autors wie Hauke Ritz verbunden ist. Ohne all das wäre ich wahrscheinlich weiter zu irgendwelchen hochwichtigen Tagungen in die USA geflogen und hätte mich mit Aufsätzen für Fachzeitschriften gequält, die für einen winzigen Kreis von Eingeweihten gemacht und selbst von diesem Kreis allenfalls registriert, aber nicht studiert werden.

Lange Gespräche mit Köpfen wie Hauke Ritz hatten bei Ovalmedia oder Apolut in den Coronajahren sechsstellige Zuschauerzahlen. Ein großes Publikum, wenn man die Komplexität und die Originalität mitdenkt, die jeder Leser gleich genießen kann. Man findet diese Videos noch, allerdings nicht beim De-facto-Monopolisten YouTube, der Zensur sei Dank. Im Bermudadreieck zwischen Berlin, Brüssel und dem Silicon Valley verschwindet alles, was die hegemonialen Narrative herausfordert und das Potenzial hat, Menschenmassen erst zu erreichen und dann zu bewegen. Ich habe Hauke Ritz deshalb schon im Studio und am Abend nach unserem Dreh ermutigt und wahrscheinlich sogar ein wenig gedrängt, aus seinen Aufsätzen ein Buch zu machen. Das war auch ein wenig egoistisch gedacht: Ich wollte mein Aha-Erlebnis mit anderen teilen und so Gleichgesinnte heranziehen. Der Mensch ist ein Herdentier und mag es nicht, allein und isoliert zu sein. 

3. Ein neuer Blick auf Macht

Drei Jahre später gibt es nicht nur die Aufsatzsammlung, die Sie gerade in den Händen halten, sondern auch ein Buch, das ich als „großen Wurf“ beschrieben habe – als Werk eines Autors, der die Wirklichkeit nicht ignoriert (Geografie, Reichtum und die Geschichte mit ihren ganz realen Folgen), sich aber trotzdem von der Vorstellung löst, dass der Mensch in all seinem Streben und Irren nicht mehr sei als ein Produkt der Umstände. Hauke Ritz dreht den Spieß um: Die Geschichte bewegt nicht uns, sondern wir bewegen sie. Was passiert, das passiert auch und vielleicht sogar in erster Linie, weil wir ganz bestimmte Vorstellungen von der Vergangenheit und unserem Platz in dieser Welt verinnerlicht haben. Von diesem Axiom ist es nur ein klitzekleiner Schritt zur Machtpolitik: Wenn es stimmt, dass das historische Bewusstsein mindestens genauso wichtig ist wie Atomsprengköpfe, Soldaten oder Gasfelder, dann können sich die Geheimdienste nicht auf Überwachung und Kontrolle beschränken. Dann müssen sie in die Ideenproduktion eingreifen. Und wir? Wir müssen die Geistesgeschichte neu schreiben, Politik anders sehen und zuallererst begreifen, dass der Mensch das Sein verändern kann, wenn er denn versteht, wer und was seinen Blick bisher gelenkt hat. Ich bin deshalb besonders froh, dass es auch das Herz der Serie „Die Logik des neuen kalten Krieges“ in dieses Buch geschafft hat, ursprünglich 2016 bei RT-Deutsch erschienen. Diese Stücke sind exemplarisch für das Denken von Hauke Ritz. Der Neoliberalismus, um das nur an einem Beispiel zu illustrieren, wird dort von ihm nicht ökonomisch interpretiert, „sondern als ein Kulturmodell“, das zu verstehen hilft, wie es zu der Ehe von Kapitalismus und „neuer Linker“ kommen konnte und damit sowohl zu jener „aggressiven Dominanz des Westens“, die auch den Westend-Verlag umtreibt und so diese Publikation ermöglicht, als auch zur „Vernachlässigung der sozialen Frage“. 

Hauke Ritz holt die geistige Dimension von Herrschen und Beherrschtwerden ins Scheinwerferlicht und fragt nach der „Macht des Konzepts“. Diese Macht, sagt Hauke Ritz nicht nur in seinem Aufsatz über die „kulturelle Dimension des Kalten Krieges“, hat 1989/90 den Zweikampf der Systeme entschieden. Nicht die Ökonomie, nicht das Wohlstandsgefälle, nicht das Wettrüsten. Ein Riesenreich wie die Sowjetunion, kaum verschuldet, autark durch Rohstoffe und in der Lage, jeden Feind abzuschrecken, habe weder seine Satellitenstaaten aufgeben müssen noch sich selbst – wenn da nicht der Sog gewesen wäre, der von der Rockmusik ausging, von Jeans und Hollywood, von bunten Schaufenstern und von einem Märchen, das das andere Lager als Hort von Mitbestimmung, Pressefreiheit und ganz privatem Glück gepriesen hat. Als selbst der erste Mann im Kreml all das für bare Münze nahm und Glasnost ausrief (das, was der Westen für seinen Journalismus bis heute behauptet, aber schon damals nicht einlösen konnte und wollte), sei es um den Gegenentwurf geschehen gewesen. Die Berliner Mauer habe der Psychologie nicht standhalten können.

Fast noch wichtiger: All das war kein Zufall, sondern Resultat strategischer und vor allem geheimdienstlicher Arbeit. Hauke Ritz kann sich hier unter anderem auf Francis Stonor Saunders und Michael Hochgeschwender stützen und so herausarbeiten, wie die CIA über den Kongress für kulturelle Freiheit in den 1950ern und 1960ern Schriftsteller und Journalisten finanzierte, Musiker und Maler, Zeitschriften, Galerien, Filme – und damit Personal, Denkmuster, Symbole. Die „neue“ Linke, „nicht-kommunistisch“, also nicht mehr an der System- und Eigentumsfrage interessiert, diese „neue“ Linke ist, das lernen wir bei Hauke Ritz, genauso ein Produkt von Ideenmanagement wie das positive US-Bild vieler Westeuropäer oder eine neue französische Philosophie um Michel Foucault, Claude Lévi-Strauss oder Bernard-Henri Lévy, die Marx und Hegel abwählte, stattdessen auf Nietzsche setzte und so ein Fundament schuf für das „Projekt einer Umwertung aller Werte“.

Natürlich kann man fragen: Was hat all das mit uns zu tun? Mit dem Krieg in der Ukraine, mit der Zukunft Europas oder gar mit der These auf dem Buchcover, dass nichts weniger als der „Weltfrieden“ ausgerechnet von uns, von Deutschland abhängt? Warum sollen wir uns mit Kämpfen in irgendwelchen Studierstübchen beschäftigen, die höchstens zwei Handvoll Gelehrte verstehen? Hauke Ritz sagt: Wer die Welt beherrschen will, muss den Code der europäischen Kultur umschreiben. Wie weit dieses „Projekt“ schon gediehen ist, sieht jeder, der die Augen öffnet. In der Lesart von Hauke Ritz ist Europa Opfer einer „postmodernen Fehlinterpretation seiner eigenen Kultur“, importiert aus den USA und nur abzuwehren mit Hilfe von Russland, das zwar zu Europa gehöre, sich vom Westen des Kontinents aber unterscheide und deshalb einen Gegenentwurf liefern könne. Stichworte sind hier Orthodoxie und Sozialismus sowie eine Vergangenheit als Imperium, ohne die, so sieht das Hauke Ritz, neben diplomatischen Erfahrungen die „politischen Energien“ fehlen, die nötig sind, um Souveränität auch da zu bewahren, wo die „Macht des Konzepts“ beginnt. China und der Iran ja, Indien und Lateinamerika nein.

Keine Angst, ich schreibe hier kein zweites Buch. Diese Appetithäppchen sollen Lust machen auf einen Autor, der die Hektik der Gegenwart hinter sich lässt und aus den Tiefen der Geschichte eine Interpretation anbietet, die die hegemoniale Ideologie in ein ganz neues Licht rückt und sie so als „Rechtfertigungslehre“ enttarnt (Werner Hofmann) oder als „Machtinterpretation der Wirklichkeit“ (Václav Havel), die sich zwangsläufig „ritualisiert“ und „von der Wirklichkeit emanzipiert“, um als „Alibi“ für alle funktionieren zu können, die mit der Macht marschieren. Ich weiß nicht mehr, wie ich das Marx-Zitat mit dem komischen Wort „kömmt“ als kleiner Junge gedeutet habe. Ich wusste wenig von Philosophie und gar nichts von der Welt. Hauke Ritz blickt nicht nur in Abgründe, die ich vorher allenfalls aus dem Augenwinkel gesehen hatte, sondern bietet zugleich eine Lösung an. Als Gleichung und in seinen Worten formuliert: „klassische Arbeiterbewegung“ plus „christlich orientierte Wertkonservative“ ist gleich Hoffnung und Neustart. Und nun Vorhang auf für einen Philosophen, der nicht nur Deutschland einen Weg weist in Richtung Veränderung und Frieden.

---

Michael Meyen ist Medienforscher, Ausbilder und Journalist. Seit 2002 ist er Universitätsprofessor an der LMU München. https://www.freie-medienakademie.de/

Der Link zum Buch von Hauke Ritz

---

LASSEN SIE DER FRIEDENSTAUBE FLÜGEL WACHSEN!

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

Schon jetzt können Sie uns unterstützen:

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

Für Einzahlungen in CHF (Betreff: Friedenstaube):

Für Einzahlungen in Euro:

Milosz Matuschek

IBAN DE 53710520500000814137

BYLADEM1TST

Sparkasse Traunstein-Trostberg

Betreff: Friedenstaube

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

---

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

@ f6488c62:c929299d

ปี 2568 ตลาดคริปโตยังคงเต็มไปด้วยความร้อนแรงและโอกาส Bitcoin พุ่งแตะ 106,595.5 ดอลลาร์ (ณ วันที่ 21 พ.ค. 2568) ขณะที่เหรียญมีมอย่าง KPEPE ก็กลายเป็นที่จับตามองของเหล่านักลงทุนรายใหญ่ แต่ท่ามกลางกระแสความร้อนแรง คำถามสำคัญยังคงอยู่: ตลาดคริปโตอยู่ช่วงไหนของวัฏจักร? และโอกาสใหญ่กำลังมาหรือใกล้จบลงแล้ว?

หนึ่งในเสียงที่ดังที่สุดในชุมชนคริปโตตอนนี้คือชื่อที่หลายคนอาจยังไม่รู้จักแน่ชัด – James Wynn เขาโพสต์ข้อความเมื่อวันที่ 31 มีนาคม 2568 ว่า

“The best is yet to come.” หรือ “สิ่งที่ดีที่สุดยังมาไม่ถึง” – คำพูดที่จุดประกายความหวังในชุมชนนักเทรดทั่วโลก

แม้เขาจะถูกยกย่องว่าเป็น “วาฬคริปโต” จากการถือครองมูลค่ามหาศาล แต่ในความเป็นจริง เรายังไม่รู้ว่าเขาคือใคร – ชื่อ James Wynn อาจเป็นเพียงนามแฝง หรือ persona บนโลกออนไลน์ก็เป็นได้

ในบทความนี้ เราจะวิเคราะห์มุมมองของเขาอย่างมีวิจารณญาณ พร้อมแนะแนวทางที่นักเทรดควรเตรียมตัวเพื่อคว้าโอกาสในช่วงขาขึ้นนี้

ภาพรวมตลาดคริปโตในปี 2568 ปีนี้ถือเป็นช่วงขาขึ้นที่เกิดจากหลายปัจจัยสำคัญ:

การอนุมัติ Bitcoin Spot ETFs ในสหรัฐฯ

การเข้ารับตำแหน่งของ Donald Trump พร้อมนโยบายที่เป็นมิตรต่อคริปโต เช่น การผลักดันให้ Bitcoin เป็นสินทรัพย์สำรองของชาติ

ปัจจัยเหล่านี้ได้ดึงดูดทั้งนักลงทุนรายย่อยและสถาบันเข้าสู่ตลาด ส่งผลให้ราคาของ BTC และเหรียญมีมอย่าง KPEPE พุ่งสูงขึ้นอย่างรวดเร็ว สะท้อนถึงโมเมนตัมที่ยังคงแข็งแกร่ง

มุมมองจาก ‘James Wynn’: ปลายวัฏจักร? หรือแค่เริ่มต้น? แม้จะไม่มีใครรู้แน่ชัดว่า James Wynn คือใคร แต่เขากลายเป็นบุคคลที่มีอิทธิพลในชุมชนคริปโตจากการเปิดเผยมุมมองที่เฉียบคมและพอร์ตการลงทุนขนาดใหญ่

เขาโพสต์ไว้ว่า

“ถ้าใครคิดว่าเราอยู่ท้ายวัฏจักรแล้ว คุณคิดผิด”

โดยให้เหตุผลหลัก 3 ข้อ:

การพุ่งขึ้นของราคาส่วนใหญ่เกิดจาก ข่าวดีภายนอก เช่น ETF ยังไม่ใช่ "กระแสล้นตลาด"

นโยบายรัฐบาล Trump ส่งผลเชิงจิตวิทยาเชิงบวกต่อทั้งนักลงทุนและตลาด

ยังไม่เกิด Altcoin Season หรืออารมณ์ตลาดช่วง “Euphoria” ตามแผนภาพ Psychology of a Market Cycle

เขาประเมินว่าตลาดน่าจะอยู่ช่วง “Optimism → Thrill” ซึ่งเป็นช่วงกลางของวัฏจักรที่นักลงทุนเริ่มตื่นเต้น แต่ยังไม่ถึงจุดสูงสุด

เขาเป็นใคร? วาฬตัวจริงหรือบุคคลลึกลับ? แม้ James Wynn จะได้รับความสนใจอย่างมาก แต่ตัวตนของเขายังคลุมเครือ:

ไม่มีข้อมูลยืนยันตัวตนชัดเจน

ไม่รู้ว่าเขาเป็นบุคคล กลุ่ม หรือองค์กร

ใช้นามแฝงออนไลน์ และบัญชีเทรดที่ระบุไว้ไม่ผูกกับตัวตนจริง

ถึงอย่างนั้น พฤติกรรมการลงทุนของเขาก็ไม่ธรรมดา:

Long BTC-USD ด้วยเลเวอเรจ 40x กว่า 5,200 BTC (มูลค่ากว่า 546 ล้านดอลลาร์)

Long KPEPE-USD ด้วยเลเวอเรจ 10x มูลค่ากว่า 32.8 ล้านดอลลาร์

รวมกำไรจากการเทรดกว่า 20.2 ล้านดอลลาร์ (ราว 687 ล้านบาท)

ใช้แพลตฟอร์ม Hyperliquid และแสดงจุดยืนต่อต้าน CEX บางแห่งอย่าง Bybit ที่เขาเคยกล่าวหาว่ามีการ manipulate ตลาด

สิ่งที่น่าสนใจคือ Wynn มักจะลดตำแหน่งและล็อกกำไรอย่างเป็นระบบ เช่น วันที่ 20 พ.ค. 2568 เขาลดตำแหน่ง BTC ลง 1,142 BTC และถอน USDC กลับวอลเล็ตส่วนตัว – สะท้อนถึงการบริหารความเสี่ยงที่รอบคอบ

แนวทางสำหรับนักเทรด: ถ้า "สิ่งที่ดีที่สุด" ยังมาไม่ถึง... หากมุมมองของ Wynn ถูกต้อง และตลาดยังไม่ถึงจุดสูงสุด ต่อไปนี้คือตัวอย่างแนวทางที่นักเทรดควรพิจารณา:

🔹 วางแผนรับ pullback: หากอยู่ในช่วง "Thrill" ตลาดอาจมีการพักตัวชั่วคราว – เป็นโอกาสในการ “ซื้อซ้ำ” ก่อนเข้าสู่จุดพีค

🔹 จับตา altcoin season: การที่เหรียญมีมอย่าง KPEPE พุ่งขึ้น อาจเป็นสัญญาณล่วงหน้าของ Altcoin Season ที่กำลังจะเริ่ม – เตรียมลิสต์เหรียญที่มีศักยภาพ

🔹 เน้นการบริหารความเสี่ยง: ใช้ stop-loss และเลเวอเรจอย่างระมัดระวัง อย่าลืมว่าวัฏจักรคริปโตสามารถเปลี่ยนแปลงอย่างรวดเร็ว

🔹 ติดตามความเคลื่อนไหวของวาฬ (แม้จะไม่รู้ว่าเขาคือใคร): เช่น ที่อยู่กระเป๋า 0x5078C2FbeA2B2aD61bcB40BC0233E5Ce56EDb6 ซึ่งเชื่อว่าเป็นของ Wynn – การเคลื่อนไหวของกระเป๋านี้อาจบ่งชี้แนวโน้มตลาดล่วงหน้า

สรุป แม้เราจะยังไม่รู้แน่ชัดว่า James Wynn คือใคร หรือแม้กระทั่งเขามีอยู่จริงหรือไม่ แต่คำพูดของเขาก็สอดคล้องกับทิศทางตลาดในปัจจุบันที่ยังคงอยู่ในขาขึ้น

“The best is yet to come.” – ถ้าเขาพูดถูก โอกาสที่ดีที่สุดในตลาดคริปโตปี 2568 ก็ยังไม่มาถึง

นักเทรดควร:

ติดตามสัญญาณตลาดอย่างรอบคอบ

จัดพอร์ตให้พร้อมสำหรับการเปลี่ยนแปลง

และที่สำคัญ — อย่าหลงกระแส โดยไม่มีแผนรองรับ

วาฬที่แท้จริงอาจไม่มีชื่อเสียง… และนั่นแหละคือสิ่งที่ทำให้พวกเขาน่าจับตายิ่งกว่าใคร

@ c631e267:c2b78d3e

Der Irrsinn ist bei Einzelnen etwas Seltenes – \ aber bei Gruppen, Parteien, Völkern, Zeiten die Regel. \ Friedrich Nietzsche

Erinnern Sie sich an die Horrorkomödie «Scary Movie»? Nicht, dass ich diese Art Filme besonders erinnerungswürdig fände, aber einige Szenen daraus sind doch gewissermaßen Klassiker. Dazu zählt eine, die das Verhalten vieler Protagonisten in Horrorfilmen parodiert, wenn sie in Panik flüchten. Welchen Weg nimmt wohl die Frau in der Situation auf diesem Bild?

Diese Szene kommt mir automatisch in den Sinn, wenn ich aktuelle Entwicklungen in Europa betrachte. Weitreichende Entscheidungen gehen wider jede Logik in die völlig falsche Richtung. Nur ist das hier alles andere als eine Komödie, sondern bitterernst. Dieser Horror ist leider sehr real.

Die Europäische Union hat sich selbst über Jahre konsequent in eine Sackgasse manövriert. Sie hat es versäumt, sich und ihre Politik selbstbewusst und im Einklang mit ihren Wurzeln auf dem eigenen Kontinent zu positionieren. Stattdessen ist sie in blinder Treue den vermeintlichen «transatlantischen Freunden» auf ihrem Konfrontationskurs gen Osten gefolgt.

In den USA haben sich die Vorzeichen allerdings mittlerweile geändert, und die einst hoch gelobten «Freunde und Partner» erscheinen den europäischen «Führern» nicht mehr vertrauenswürdig. Das ist spätestens seit der Münchner Sicherheitskonferenz, der Rede von Vizepräsident J. D. Vance und den empörten Reaktionen offensichtlich. Große Teile Europas wirken seitdem wie ein aufgescheuchter Haufen kopfloser Hühner. Orientierung und Kontrolle sind völlig abhanden gekommen.

Statt jedoch umzukehren oder wenigstens zu bremsen und vielleicht einen Abzweig zu suchen, geben die Crash-Piloten jetzt auf dem Weg durch die Sackgasse erst richtig Gas. Ja sie lösen sogar noch die Sicherheitsgurte und deaktivieren die Airbags. Den vor Angst dauergelähmten Passagieren fällt auch nichts Besseres ein und so schließen sie einfach die Augen. Derweil übertrumpfen sich die Kommentatoren des Events gegenseitig in sensationslüsterner «Berichterstattung».

Wie schon die deutsche Außenministerin mit höchsten UN-Ambitionen, Annalena Baerbock, proklamiert auch die Europäische Kommission einen «Frieden durch Stärke». Zu dem jetzt vorgelegten, selbstzerstörerischen Fahrplan zur Ankurbelung der Rüstungsindustrie, genannt «Weißbuch zur europäischen Verteidigung – Bereitschaft 2030», erklärte die Kommissionspräsidentin, die «Ära der Friedensdividende» sei längst vorbei. Soll das heißen, Frieden bringt nichts ein? Eine umfassende Zusammenarbeit an dauerhaften europäischen Friedenslösungen steht demnach jedenfalls nicht zur Debatte.

Zusätzlich brisant ist, dass aktuell «die ganze EU von Deutschen regiert wird», wie der EU-Parlamentarier und ehemalige UN-Diplomat Michael von der Schulenburg beobachtet hat. Tatsächlich sitzen neben von der Leyen und Strack-Zimmermann noch einige weitere Deutsche in – vor allem auch in Krisenzeiten – wichtigen Spitzenposten der Union. Vor dem Hintergrund der Kriegstreiberei in Deutschland muss eine solche Dominanz mindestens nachdenklich stimmen.

Ihre ursprünglichen Grundwerte wie Demokratie, Freiheit, Frieden und Völkerverständigung hat die EU kontinuierlich in leere Worthülsen verwandelt. Diese werden dafür immer lächerlicher hochgehalten und beschworen.

Es wird dringend Zeit, dass wir, der Souverän, diesem erbärmlichen und gefährlichen Trauerspiel ein Ende setzen und die Fäden selbst in die Hand nehmen. In diesem Sinne fordert uns auch das «European Peace Project» auf, am 9. Mai im Rahmen eines Kunstprojekts den Frieden auszurufen. Seien wir dabei!

[Titelbild: Pixabay]

---

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

@ 21335073:a244b1ad

I want to see Nostr succeed. If you can think of a way I can help make that happen, I’m open to it. I’d like your suggestions.

My schedule’s shifting soon, and I could volunteer a few hours a week to a Nostr project. I won’t have more total time, but how I use it will change.

Why help? I care about freedom. Nostr’s one of the most powerful freedom tools I’ve seen in my lifetime. If I believe that, I should act on it.

I don’t care about money or sats. I’m not rich, I don’t have extra cash. That doesn’t drive me—freedom does. I’m volunteering, not asking for pay.

I’m not here for clout. I’ve had enough spotlight in my life; it doesn’t move me. If I wanted clout, I’d be on Twitter dropping basic takes. Clout’s easy. Freedom’s hard. I’d rather help anonymously. No speaking at events—small meetups are cool for the vibe, but big conferences? Not my thing. I’ll never hit a huge Bitcoin conference. It’s just not my scene.

That said, I could be convinced to step up if it’d really boost Nostr—as long as it’s legal and gets results.

In this space, I’d watch for social engineering. I watch out for it. I’m not here to make friends, just to help. No shade—you all seem great—but I’ve got a full life and awesome friends irl. I don’t need your crew or to be online cool. Connect anonymously if you want; I’d encourage it.

I’m sick of watching other social media alternatives grow while Nostr kinda stalls. I could trash-talk, but I’d rather do something useful.

Skills? I’m good at spotting social media problems and finding possible solutions. I won’t overhype myself—that’s weird—but if you’re responding, you probably see something in me. Perhaps you see something that I don’t see in myself.

If you need help now or later with Nostr projects, reach out. Nostr only—nothing else. Anonymous contact’s fine. Even just a suggestion on how I can pitch in, no project attached, works too. 💜

Creeps or harassment will get blocked or I’ll nuke my simplex code if it becomes a problem.

https://simplex.chat/contact#/?v=2-4&smp=smp%3A%2F%2FSkIkI6EPd2D63F4xFKfHk7I1UGZVNn6k1QWZ5rcyr6w%3D%40smp9.simplex.im%2FbI99B3KuYduH8jDr9ZwyhcSxm2UuR7j0%23%2F%3Fv%3D1-2%26dh%3DMCowBQYDK2VuAyEAS9C-zPzqW41PKySfPCEizcXb1QCus6AyDkTTjfyMIRM%253D%26srv%3Djssqzccmrcws6bhmn77vgmhfjmhwlyr3u7puw4erkyoosywgl67slqqd.onion

@ 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).

@ 044da344:073a8a0e

Die Frisur auf einem Cover. Das muss man erstmal schaffen. Ich könnte auch schreiben: Darauf muss man erstmal kommen, aber die Agentur Buchgut hat das so ähnlich ja schon bei Walter van Rossum ausprobiert und seinem Bestseller „Meine Pandemie mit Professor Drosten“.

Nun als Gabriele Krone-Schmalz. Ich habe mich gefühlt wie früher, wenn jemand mit einem Überraschungsei kam. Die Verpackung: ein Versprechen. Dann die Schokolade. Hier: ein paar tolle Fotos, die einen Bogen spannen von 1954 bis in die Gegenwart, Texte der Liedermacherin Gabriele Krone-Schmalz, geschrieben 1965 bis 1972, die Biografie in Schlagworten und zwei Vorworte. Jeweils zwei Seiten, mehr nicht. Und dann kommt das, worum es bei einem solchen Überraschungsei eigentlich geht: das Spielzeug. Hier ein Film.

Bevor ich dazu komme, muss ich die beiden Vorworte würdigen. „Resignieren ist keine Lösung“ steht über dem Text von Gabriele Krone-Schmalz. Damit ist viel gesagt. Sie fragt sich, „wozu das Ganze gut sein soll“. Die Antwort in einem Satz:

Vielleicht ist dieser Film mit dem wunderbar doppeldeutigen Titel „Gabriele Krone-Schmalz – Verstehen“ eine Art Vermächtnis: mein Leben, meine Arbeit und vielleicht für den einen oder anderen eine Ermunterung, sich nicht verbiegen zu lassen, nicht aufzugeben, sich einzumischen und nicht zuletzt ein Beispiel dafür, dass es möglich ist, mit einem Menschen fünfzig Jahre lang glücklich zu sein.

Als Gabriele Krone-Schmalz im Mai 2018 in meine Reihe Medienrealität live an die LMU kam, lebte ihr Mann noch. Wir hatten einen vollen Hörsaal, viele Fans und jede Menge Gegenwind aus dem eigenen Haus. Die Osteuropa-Forschung, erschienen in Mannschaftsstärke und mit Zetteln, die abgelesen werden wollten. Haltung zeigen, anstatt miteinander zu sprechen. Als wir hinterher zum Griechen um die Ecke gingen, saßen die Kollegen am Nachbartisch und würdigten uns keines Blickes. Wozu sich austauschen, wenn man ohnehin weiß, was richtig ist und was falsch? Vier Jahre später hatten die gleichen Kollegen noch mehr Oberwasser und haben auf allen Kanälen daran erinnert, welcher Teufel da einst in den heiligen Hallen der Universität erschienen war – auf Einladung dieses Professors. Sie wissen schon.

Das zweite Vorwort kommt vom Filmemacher. „Mein Name ist Ralf Eger“ steht oben auf der Seite. Eger, 1961 am Rande Münchens geboren, erzählt von seinem Jugend-Vorsatz, „niemals für die Rüstungsindustrie zu arbeiten“, von einer langen Laufbahn im öffentlich-rechtlichen Rundfunk und davon, wie diese beiden Dinge plötzlich nicht mehr zusammenpassten. Schlaflose Nächte, Debatten im BR („eine Beschreibung meiner Anläufe würde mühelos dieses Booklet füllen“) und schließlich die Idee für ein Porträt, umgesetzt auf eigene Faust mit drei Gleichgesinnten, ganz ohne Rundfunksteuer im Rücken.

Was soll ich sagen? Großartig. Für mich sowieso. Eine Heimat nach der anderen. Gabriele Krone-Schmalz ist in Lam zur Welt gekommen, im Bayerischen Wald, nur ein paar Kilometer entfernt von dem Dorf, in dem ich jetzt lebe. Ralf Eger geht mit ihr durch den Ort, in dem sie einen Teil ihrer Kindheit verbrachte und noch Leute aus ihrer Schulzeit kennt. Ein Fest für meine Ohren und für die Augen sowieso. Die Landschaft, der Dialekt. Dass Eger mit Untertiteln arbeitet, sei ihm verziehen. Er lässt ein altes Paar sprechen, einen Café-Betreiber von einst, eine Wirtin von heute. So sind die Menschen, mit denen ich hier jeden Tag zu tun habe. Geradeaus, warm, in der Wirklichkeit verankert.

Dann geht es zum Pleisweiler Gespräch und damit zu Albrecht Müller, dem Gründer und Herausgeber der Nachdenkseiten. Jens Berger am Lenkrad, Albrecht Müller am Saalmikrofon und abends in der Weinstube, dazu Markus Karsten, Westend-Verleger, mit seinem Tiger und Roberto De Lapuente am Büchertisch, festgehalten für die Ewigkeit in 1A-Bild- und Tonqualität. Später im Film wird Gabriele Krone-Schmalz auch in Ulm sprechen. Ich kenne dieses Publikum. Nicht mehr ganz jung, aber immer noch voller Energie. Diese Menschen füllen die Räume, wenn jemand wie Gabriele Krone-Schmalz kommt, weil sie unzufrieden sind mit dem, was ihnen die Leitmedien über die Welt erzählen wollen, weil sie nach Gleichgesinnten suchen und vor allem, weil sie etwas tun wollen, immer noch. Ich bin weder Filmemacher noch Filmkritiker, aber ich weiß: Diese Stimmung kann man kaum besser einfangen als Ralf Eger.

Überhaupt. Die Kameras. Vier allein beim Auftritt im Wohnzimmer der Nachdenkseiten. Damit lässt sich ein Vortrag so inszenieren, dass man auch daheim auf dem Sofa gern zuhört, wenn der Star über Geopolitik spricht. „Gabriele Krone-Schmalz – Verstehen“: Der Titel zielt auf mehr. Russland und Deutschland, Vergangenheit, Gegenwart, Zukunft: alles schön und gut. Dieser Film hat eine zweite und eine dritte Ebene. Die Musik kommt von – Krone-Schmalz. Gesungen in den frühen 1970ern, festgehalten auf einem Tonband und wiedergefunden für Ralf Eger. Und dann sind da Filmaufnahmen aus der Sowjetunion der späten 1980er, als Krone-Schmalz für die ARD in Moskau war und ihr Mann die Kamera dabeihatte, wenn die Mutter zu Besuch kam oder wenn es auf Tour ging. Eisfischen im Polarmeer, eine orthodoxe Taufe mit der Patin Krone-Schmalz, die Rückkehr der Roten Armee aus Afghanistan. Wer das alles gesehen und erlebt hat, wird nie und nimmer einstimmen in den Ruf nach Kriegstüchtigkeit.

Gabriele Krone-Schmalz - Verstehen. Ein Dokumentarfilm von Ralf Egner. Frankfurt am Main: Westend 2025, Blue-Ray Disc + 32 Seiten Booklet, 28 Euro.

Michael Meyen: Videos

Freie Akademie für Medien & Journalismus

Unterstützen

Bildquellen: Screenshot (GKS am kleinen Arbersee)

@ c631e267:c2b78d3e

Wir werden nicht zulassen, dass technisch manches möglich ist, \ aber der Staat es nicht nutzt. \ Angela Merkel

Die Modalverben zu erklären, ist im Deutschunterricht manchmal nicht ganz einfach. Nicht alle Fremdsprachen unterscheiden zum Beispiel bei der Frage nach einer Möglichkeit gleichermaßen zwischen «können» im Sinne von «die Gelegenheit, Kenntnis oder Fähigkeit haben» und «dürfen» als «die Erlaubnis oder Berechtigung haben». Das spanische Wort «poder» etwa steht für beides.

Ebenso ist vielen Schülern auf den ersten Blick nicht recht klar, dass das logische Gegenteil von «müssen» nicht unbedingt «nicht müssen» ist, sondern vielmehr «nicht dürfen». An den Verkehrsschildern lässt sich so etwas meistens recht gut erklären: Manchmal muss man abbiegen, aber manchmal darf man eben nicht.

Dieses Beispiel soll ein wenig die Verwirrungstaktik veranschaulichen, die in der Politik gerne verwendet wird, um unpopuläre oder restriktive Maßnahmen Stück für Stück einzuführen. Zuerst ist etwas einfach innovativ und bringt viele Vorteile. Vor allem ist es freiwillig, jeder kann selber entscheiden, niemand muss mitmachen. Später kann man zunehmend weniger Alternativen wählen, weil sie verschwinden, und irgendwann verwandelt sich alles andere in «nicht dürfen» – die Maßnahme ist obligatorisch.

Um die Durchsetzung derartiger Initiativen strategisch zu unterstützen und nett zu verpacken, gibt es Lobbyisten, gerne auch NGOs genannt. Dass das «NG» am Anfang dieser Abkürzung übersetzt «Nicht-Regierungs-» bedeutet, ist ein Anachronismus. Das war vielleicht früher einmal so, heute ist eher das Gegenteil gemeint.

In unserer modernen Zeit wird enorm viel Lobbyarbeit für die Digitalisierung praktisch sämtlicher Lebensbereiche aufgewendet. Was das auf dem Sektor der Mobilität bedeuten kann, haben wir diese Woche anhand aktueller Entwicklungen in Spanien beleuchtet. Begründet teilweise mit Vorgaben der Europäischen Union arbeitet man dort fleißig an einer «neuen Mobilität», basierend auf «intelligenter» technologischer Infrastruktur. Derartige Anwandlungen wurden auch schon als «Technofeudalismus» angeprangert.

Nationale Zugangspunkte für Mobilitätsdaten im Sinne der EU gibt es nicht nur in allen Mitgliedsländern, sondern auch in der Schweiz und in Großbritannien. Das Vereinigte Königreich beteiligt sich darüber hinaus an anderen EU-Projekten für digitale Überwachungs- und Kontrollmaßnahmen, wie dem biometrischen Identifizierungssystem für «nachhaltigen Verkehr und Tourismus».

Natürlich marschiert auch Deutschland stracks und euphorisch in Richtung digitaler Zukunft. Ohne vernetzte Mobilität und einen «verlässlichen Zugang zu Daten, einschließlich Echtzeitdaten» komme man in der Verkehrsplanung und -steuerung nicht aus, erklärt die Regierung. Der Interessenverband der IT-Dienstleister Bitkom will «die digitale Transformation der deutschen Wirtschaft und Verwaltung vorantreiben». Dazu bewirbt er unter anderem die Konzepte Smart City, Smart Region und Smart Country und behauptet, deutsche Großstädte «setzen bei Mobilität voll auf Digitalisierung».

Es steht zu befürchten, dass das umfassende Sammeln, Verarbeiten und Vernetzen von Daten, das angeblich die Menschen unterstützen soll (und theoretisch ja auch könnte), eher dazu benutzt wird, sie zu kontrollieren und zu manipulieren. Je elektrischer und digitaler unsere Umgebung wird, desto größer sind diese Möglichkeiten. Im Ergebnis könnten solche Prozesse den Bürger nicht nur einschränken oder überflüssig machen, sondern in mancherlei Hinsicht regelrecht abschalten. Eine gesunde Skepsis ist also geboten.

[Titelbild: Pixabay]

---

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

@ 21335073:a244b1ad

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

@ 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.

@ 374ee93a:36623347

Chef's notes

Lovely tart rhubarb jam with the extra firey kick of fresh root ginger.

Technically a vegetable rhubarb has low pectin content so be sure to include a high pectin fruit such as lemon/cooking apple/redcurrant/gooseberry. It also quite watery so we use a slightly higher fruit to sugar ratio (1.2:1) and evaporate off some water at the beginning.

Testing for setting point: put a saucer in the freezer to chill whilst cooking the fruit, after 5 mins of a high boil with the sugar put a small blob of jam on the cold saucer and return to the freezer for 2 minutes. If the jam forms a solid wrinkle when pushed with a spoon it is ready, if it is runny continue cooking and retest every 5 mins

The recipe can be halved for a small batch but if you have lots of rhubarb to process it is better to cook double batches in separate pans because it will take much longer to heat through, this affects the colour and flavour - the jam will taste warm and mellow rather than zingy

Sterilise glass jars in a 120c oven and pot the jam hot leaving 1/4 inch head space, it will keep for 5 years unopened if the lids are well sealed and does not require water bath canning

Details

• ⏲️ Prep time: 20 mins
• 🍳 Cook time: 30 mins
• 🍽️ Servings: 6 (jars)

Ingredients

• 1.2kg Rhubarb
• 200g Grated Root Ginger
• 100g Chopped Crystalised Ginger
• 1kg Sugar
• 1 Lemon

Directions

1. Chop the rhubarb into 1/2 inch pieces, peel and finely grate the fresh root ginger, chop crystalised ginger into tiny bits. Juice and quarter a lemon (discard pips) and add all these to a pan with a small amount of water
2. Simmer gently for 20 mins until the lemon and rhubarb are soft then add the sugar, stir until fully dissolved
3. Boil on high to reach setting point, usually at 105 degrees c or when a small blob of jam wrinkles on a cold plate instead of being runny
4. Remove the lemon pieces and pot into sterilised jars

@ c1e9ab3a:9cb56b43

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

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

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

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

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

Bitcoin sidesteps this entirely by being:

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

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

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

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

That’s the point.

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

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

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

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

Instead, it anchors:

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

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

4. Universal Assayability Requires Minimalism at the Base Layer

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

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

To preserve this:

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

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

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

5. Governance: Not Captured, Just Resistant to Coercion

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

Here's what matters:

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

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

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

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

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

If you're an engineer looking for:

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

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

Take-away

Under realistic, market-aware assumptions—where:

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

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

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

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

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

Final Word

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

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

nostr:nevent1qqswr7sla434duatjp4m89grvs3zanxug05pzj04asxmv4rngvyv04sppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qgs9tc6ruevfqu7nzt72kvq8te95dqfkndj5t8hlx6n79lj03q9v6xcrqsqqqqqp0n8wc2

nostr:nevent1qqsd5hfkqgskpjjq5zlfyyv9nmmela5q67tgu9640v7r8t828u73rdqpr4mhxue69uhkymmnw3ezucnfw33k76tww3ux76m09e3k7mf0qgsvr6dt8ft292mv5jlt7382vje0mfq2ccc3azrt4p45v5sknj6kkscrqsqqqqqp02vjk5

nostr:nevent1qqstrszamvffh72wr20euhrwa0fhzd3hhpedm30ys4ct8dpelwz3nuqpr4mhxue69uhkymmnw3ezucnfw33k76tww3ux76m09e3k7mf0qgs8a474cw4lqmapcq8hr7res4nknar2ey34fsffk0k42cjsdyn7yqqrqsqqqqqpnn3znl

@ a296b972:e5a7a2e8

Man stelle sich vor, es droht Frieden auszubrechen. Wie stehen wir, die Deutschen, die Europäer denn dann da? Ja, wie die letzten Deppen, die ihr auch seid!

Wen wundert es, wenn nach erfolgreicher Friedensverhinderung durch Boris Johnson in 2022 und den durch den Westen zahlreichen überschrittenen Roten Linien Russland skeptisch ist?

Am russischen Misstrauen haben die hinter der Ukraine stehenden westlichen Staaten jahrelang erfolgreich gearbeitet.

„Besonderer Dank“ gilt hier vor allem der von allen Mitgliedern bedenkenlos hingenommenen NATO-Osterweiterung.

Die Aussage von Frau Merkel, man habe nie vorgehabt, das Minsk-Abkommen umzusetzen, stattdessen habe man gewollt, der Ukraine Zeit zu verschaffen, sich aufzurüsten, kann nur von jemandem, der weniger als eine Gehirnzelle hat, als vertrauensbildende Maßnahme bewertet werden.

Die immer wieder im Raum stehende Debatte um eine deutsche Lieferung von Kampf-Stieren, demnächst wohlmöglich unter Ausschluss der Öffentlichkeit (das könnte Teile der Bevölkerung verunsichern), ein weiteres Beispiel von friedenstüchtiger Diplomatie.

Wie schon beim klaglosen Hinnehmen der terroristischen Sprengung der Nordstream2 Pipelines, wozu Präsident Trump schon geäußert hat, dass es die Russen sicher nicht waren, wird auch brav von Deutschland hingenommen, dass von Wiesbaden aus, die Koordination der Raketenangriffe von der Ukraine auf Russland durch die USA, innerhalb der Task Force Dragon, gesteuert werden.

Die Verletzung des 2+4-Vertrages durch die Stationierung von Nicht-NATO-Truppen in Rostock, die an die Umbenennung eines Schokoriegels von Raider in Twixx erinnert.

Das strikte Einhalten der deutschen Maxime: „Von Deutschland soll nur noch Frieden ausgehen.“

Dazu die Lieferung von Raketen mit mittlerer Reichweite durch die Franzosen und Briten nach dem Motto: Ich habe nur das Messer auf den Tisch gelegt, zugestochen hat ein anderer.

All das trägt dazu bei, dass Russland vertrauensvoll nach europäischen Friedensvorschlägen geradezu lechzt. Unterstrichen werden diese übermenschlichen Anstrengungen durch ein weiteres, das bereit 17. Sanktionspaket. Dümmer geht’s nimmer.

Auch diplomatisch nicht zu überbietende Aussagen, wie „Russland wird immer unser Feind sein“, oder „Russland wird Deutschland in spätestens 5 Jahren angreifen“, oder „Deutschland muss wieder kriegstüchtig werden“, unterstreichen den unbedingten Willen, das sinnlose Sterben auf beiden Seiten schnellst möglich beenden zu wollen.

Außerhalb Deutschlands kann man nur zu der Überzeugung gelangen, dass es sich bei diesem Land um eine Freiluft-Irrenanstalt handeln muss. Und wer will schon mit geistig verwirrten Insassen über so ernste Themen wie Krieg und Frieden verhandeln, bei denen Verstand gebraucht wird.

Derartige Weltfremde ist nur mit Sarkasmus zu ertragen.

Bewundernswert der Langmut, den Russland bis heute an den Tag legt. Wäre die Situation umgekehrt, hätte der Westen schon lange dem „bösen“ Russen gezeigt, wo der US-Hammer hängt, und dass man so mit der sogenannten Wertegemeinschaft nicht umgehen kann.

Ja, der russische Einmarsch in die Ukraine war völkerrechtswidrig, genau so wie die US-amerikanischen „Besuche“ der USA in Vietnam, in Libyen und im Irak, auf sehr unschöne Weise. Wer hat nicht noch die Bilder vom Blitzgewitter der Bomben auf Bagdad im Gedächtnis. „Immer schön drauf, Stärke zeigen!“

Die zentrale Frage ist, wie man Deutschland „möglichst schonend“ beibringen kann, ohne, dass es einen größeren psychischen Staatsschaden davonträgt, dass es als Geisterfahrer auf der Friedensautobahn unterwegs ist.

Von russischer Seite sind nicht gerade die Vorstände der Kaninchenzüchter-Vereine nach Istanbul entsandt worden. Im Gegenteil, es handelt sich wohl eher um Personen, die bestens über das Kriegsgeschehen vor Ort Bescheid wissen.

Es darf nicht vergessen werden, dass es sich um einen Stellvertreterkrieg zwischen den von der Vorgängerregierung angezettelten USA und Russland, auf dem Rücken der Ukraine handelt.

In Istanbul haben sich zunächst die beiden Länder getroffen, deren Soldaten tatsächlich aufeinander schießen. Nicht die Strategen im Hintergrund. Und selbstverständlich beobachten die USA sehr wachsam, was vor sich geht und wie der Verlauf ist.

Es wäre fern der Realität, wenn im Hintergrund nicht weitere Fäden gesponnen würden, die der Öffentlichkeit zunächst vorenthalten werden. In diesem Fall kann das sogar von Vorteil sein, weil zu viele System-Journalisten den Brei mit dämlichen Kommentaren verderben könnten.

Zunächst soll zwischen den aktiv kämpfenden Parteien der Dialog wieder aufgenommen und eine Grundlage geschaffen werden, was schon ein großer Fortschritt ist, weil man sich seit 2022 überhaupt wieder erst einmal an einen gemeinsamen Tisch gesetzt hat und endlich wieder miteinander redet.

Wie immer im Krieg, wird auch hier strategisch vorgegangen und peinlichst darauf geachtet, dass alle Beteiligten möglichst weitgehend ihr Gesicht bewahren. Wer geglaubt hat, dass hier gleich Friedenstauben aufsteigen und alles mit einem Bruderkuss besiegelt wird, der ist wirklich ziemlich naiv.

Erst, wenn Sondierungsgespräche und Vorverhandlungen so weit gediehen sind, dass „nur“ noch eine Unterschrift fehlt, treten Putin und Trump als Friedensbringer auf die Bühne und besiegeln den „Deal“. Wie man jetzt an dem Vorführen Selenskyjs durch Putin gesehen hat, dient dieser nur noch als Spielball, der beim Ping-Pong um den Frieden hin- und hergeworfen wird. Trump hatte zuvor Selensky bei seinem Besuch im Weißen Haus ganz deutlich gesagt, dass er die Karten nicht in der Hand hat.

Jeder, der bei Verstand geblieben ist, wünscht sich endlich ein Ende dieses sinnlosen Sterbens, doch der Druck muss im Kessel langsam und kontrolliert abgelassen werden.

Entgegen der im Westen weitverbreiteten Propaganda-Lüge, der Konflikt in der Ukraine habe im Februar 2022 angefangen, hat sich die Situation über Jahre, mindestens mit der NATO-Osterweiterung aufgebaut. Da kann niemand erwarten, dass die Wiederherstellung eines Gleichgewichts jetzt in kürzester Zeit erreicht werden kann.

Urheber dieser Tragödie ist die NATO, die Russland immer mehr auf die Pelle gerückt ist. Hätte sie sich seinerzeit, wie der Warschauer Pakt, aufgrund der veränderten Kräfteverhältnisse ebenfalls aufgelöst, würden heute rund 1 Million Männer auf beiden Seiten sehr wahrscheinlich noch leben. Es wäre zu wünschen, dass nach dem exemplarischen Desaster in der Ukraine neue Überlegungen angestrengt werden würden, ob nicht die NATO, als Relikt aus alten Zeiten und aus Missachtung ihres Gründungsgedanken, ein Verteidigungsbündnis sein zu wollen, von der Zeit eingeholt wurde und ihrer Auflösung entgegensehen muss.

Dieser Artikel wurde mit dem Pareto-Client geschrieben

* *

(Bild von pixabay)

@ 866e0139:6a9334e5

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

---

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

---

Teil 1 des Artikels lesen Sie hier.

Wo Begehren herrscht, bleibt wahre Begegnung aus. Entsteht Frieden in der Sexualität doch immer erst dort, wo das Wollen endet und reines Sein beginnt. Hier wird die Vereinigung nicht länger als Erfüllung eines Mangels erfahren, sondern als Ausdruck innerer Fülle. In diesem Wandel offenbart sich die Liebe als ein Weg zur Wahrheit und damit als Anleitung zum Frieden.

Der Ursprung der Trennung als Anfang vom Krieg

In dem Sinne, wie der erste Teil dieses Texts mit dem Ausblick auf die Fähigkeit des Einzelnen endete, Angst und Abwehr abzubauen, sich selbst zu spüren – und andere nicht als Bedrohung, sondern als lebendige Gegenüber wahrzunehmen, beginnt dieser Text mit der Frage, warum wir dazu nicht mehr in der Lage zu sein scheinen? Wo ist die Lebendigkeit? Warum können wir sie weder in uns, noch in anderen annehmen?

Folgen wir dem australischen Autor Barry Long, so finden sexuelle Frustration wie Krieg ihrer beiden Ursprung darin, dass der Mann seine göttliche Stellung gegenüber der Frau eingebüßt hat und sie aufgrund dessen körperlich nicht mehr erreichen kann. Er sei es, der vergessen hat, wie man liebt und dadurch seine ursprüngliche, göttliche Autorität aufgegeben und die sexuelle Kontrolle über sich verloren hat. Was daraus entstanden sei, sei die beständige Unzufriedenheit in der Frau und eine ständige Ruhelosigkeit im Mann, derer beider eigentliches Leiden keiner von beiden mehr zuordnen kann. Zu abgeschnitten und korrumpiert sei derweilen die Vorstellung der Frau, ein Liebesakt könne ihre feinsten und tiefsten Energien sammeln und freisetzen.

Was beide stattdessen täten, sei diese Energien zu verdrehen und sie stattdessen in Sexbesessenheit, in zwanghaftem sexuellen Fantasieren sowie chronischem Onanieren «auszuleben», oder gleich ganz zu unterdrücken, was zweifelsohne zu Wut und Gewalt führe, wie auch universelle Symptome wie Arbeitswut oder die Gier nach Geld mit sich zöge. Womit wir, nebenbei bemerkt, auch wieder bei Fromm sind, für den unsere Konsumgesellschaft ebenfalls nur ein Deckmantel für unsere Unfähigkeit zu lieben oder gar unsere Furcht vor der Liebe war. Was diese Vernachlässigung der Liebe als Vernachlässigung der Frau wiederum laut Long beim Mann auslöse, sei jene Spirale aus vorzeitiger Ejakulation, Schuldgefühlen, Ängstlichkeit, Selbstzweifeln, Impotenz, sexueller Verkümmerung, die sich als sexuelles Desinteresse maskiert, sexuelle Abstinenz aufgrund von unterdrückter Versagensangst, sexueller Angeberei und Mangel an wahrem Wissen. All dies, schreibt Long, mute «er der Frau zu und verschlimmert damit ihre grundlegende Unzufriedenheit und seine eigene Unruhe». Für den Mann sei dies, als würde er sein inneres Leiden zum Leben erwecken: Für ihn sei «die weibliche Furie der Emotion die Hölle auf Erden. Dies ist der Teil in ihr, mit dem er nicht umgehen und den er nicht verstehen kann. Der Dämon seines eigenen Versagens in der Liebe wird lebendig, um ihn zu verschmähen, herunterzumachen und zu quälen.»

Wiederum nicht selten jedoch gäbe der Mann, des lieben Friedens willen, auf – und damit die letzten Überreste seiner Männlichkeit und Autorität. Dann, so Long «werden beide gemeinsam alt und fühlen sich sicher, aber halb tot, indem sie sich in der schrecklichen Welt des Kompromisses aufeinander stützen». Dabei wird «die Furie den Mann nie sein Versagen, die Frau richtig zu lieben, vergessen lassen». Die Frau, so stellt Long hervor, «muss geliebt werden». Die Zukunft der Menschheit hänge davon ab, «dass die Frau geliebt wird. Denn nur wenn die Frau wirklich geliebt wird, kann der Mann wirklich er selbst sein und seine verlorene Autorität zurückgewinnen. Nur dann kann auf Erden wieder Frieden einkehren. Doch die Frau, wie sie jetzt ist, kann nicht lange oder für immer – von dem Mann, wie er jetzt ist, geliebt werden. Zusammen sind sie in einem Teufelskreis gefangen. Und wenn sie ihren eigenen Vorstellungen von der Liebe überlassen werden, gibt es keinen Ausweg.»

Was einst Liebe war

Ursprünglich, so Long, verkörperten Mann und Frau zwei Pole reiner spiritueller Liebe: Die Frau war der heitere, empfangende Ausdruck reiner Liebe, der Mann der aktive, schützende Pol, dessen Autorität der Bewahrung dieser göttlichen Qualität diente. Ihre Kommunikation geschah durch ein goldenes Energiefeld – die Glorie –, das sie in stiller, unmittelbarer Verbindung hielt, unabhängig von Raum und Zeit. Wenn ihre Energien Erneuerung brauchten, vereinten sie sich körperlich in heiliger Liebe, die sie nicht nur regenerierte, sondern zudem mit Gott verband. Doch mit dem wachsenden Fokus auf den äußeren Aufbau der Welt begannen sie, das unmittelbare Lieben zu vergessen; die Glorie verlor ihre Strahlkraft, Sprache trat an die Stelle wortloser Verständigung, und aus Worten wuchsen Missverständnisse und Entfremdung. Die Frau wurde unzufrieden und verwirrt, der Mann seiner wahren Autorität beraubt, suchte Ersatz durch Macht und zwang die Frau in soziale Unterordnung, was in ihr Zorn und Unversöhnlichkeit entfachte. Damit begann der Wettlauf der Menschheit – ein Weg in die Zeit und fort von der ursprünglichen Einheit.

Dieser Wettlauf um Macht, Zorn und Unterdrückung ist zugleich die Geschichte, wie der Mensch sich selbst zum Wolf wurde und den Krieg gegen sich selbst begann. Um nicht länger an den Verlust seiner einstigen Einheit erinnert zu werden, hat er sich eine Welt geschaffen, die auf der Verwechslung von Liebe mit Manipulation, auf Reiz und Täuschung, wie auch auf der Reduktion von Sexualität auf bloße Befriedigung beruht. Schon fernab jeder Wirklichkeit, flieht er in lieblose Fantasien, Sexträume oder in deren Ausleben durch flüchtige Flirts und wechselnde Partner. Er flieht immer weiter – nur um sich immer weniger eingestehen zu müssen, dass in seinem Leben keine Liebe herrscht. Er tut alles, um der Konfrontation auszuweichen, dass nicht die anderen es sind, sondern er selbst, der keine Verantwortung für die Liebe in seinem Leben übernimmt. Nicht die Welt verweigert ihm die Liebe – er selbst ist es, der noch nicht dafür bereit ist, sich der Wahrheit zu stellen, dass die Liebe im Hier und Jetzt vollzogen werden will und nicht in einer imaginären Zukunft oder einem vulgären Traum.

Wie Liebe entsteht

Das wahre Leben findet in deinem Körper, in deinen Gefühlen und Empfindungen statt – nicht in deinem Kopf. In deinem Kopf kannst Du dir noch so oft und viel einreden, dass Du emanzipiert bist; dass Du auch ohne Partner in deinem Leben auskommst; dass Du emotional-physisch nicht abhängig bist; dass die Partnerschaft, in der Du dich befindest, frei ist; dass das, was Du und dein Partner da miteinander habt, Liebe sei; und dass Du glücklich bist mit dem, was Du für Liebe hältst. Dein Kopf kann das alles. Den leisen Schmerz, die Sehnsucht, dass dir trotz allem etwas fehlt, was kein Gelübte und keine Gelüste werden stillen können – den kannst Du nur fühlen.

Das Wissen um den Ursprung, von dem Du einst getrennt wurdest, ist kein Wissen, das deinem Verstand entspringt. Deshalb kommt für jeden die Zeit – und sie kommt immer schneller –, in der sein Selbst sterben muss, wie alles, was dem Leben unterliegt. Es ist die Zeit, in der Du erkennst, dass dein Verstand keine Brücken baut, sondern Mauern – und dass diese Mauern dich dem Leben nicht näherbringen, sondern es aussperren. Der Moment jedoch, indem Du beginnst, diese Mauern niederzureißen, ist zugleich der Moment, in dem die Liebe tiefer in deinen Körper dringt und dort dein Selbst sich auflöst. In dem nun auch du jemanden in dein Leben lassen kannst, dessen Blicke dich nicht nur anschauen, sondern so sehen, wie auch du ihn siehst, und dessen Berührungen mehr als nur deinen Körper streicheln.

Dieser Prozess ist schmerzhaft und traumatisch; und in einer verwirrten, unwissenden Zeit wie der unseren ist es alles andere als leicht, zum goldenen Zustand der Liebe zurückzukehren. Diesen Weg zu gehen, heißt, verletzlich zu werden: dich nicht länger selbst abzuschneiden oder zu verhärten aus Angst vor alten Wunden. Sondern den Mut aufzubringen, den Weg zu dir selbst zu gehen – zunächst allein, und dann mit jemandem, dessen Liebe reicht, ihn aufrichtig mit dir zu teilen und weiterzugehen. Ohne Spielchen, ohne falsche Egos, ohne die vielen Ersatzbefriedigungen, die uns doch nur weiter von uns selbst entfernen.

Vergeude deine Zeit und Energie also nicht weiter mit jemandem, für den Du nur ein Kompromiss bist, und sei ehrlich gegenüber denjenigen, die dies für dich sind. Stumpf nicht ab an emotionaler Unschärfe oder körperlicher Oberflächlichkeit. Lass’ dir nicht einreden, Du hättest nicht mehr verdient oder könntest nicht mehr geben. Praktiziere die Liebe, die Du selber erfahren willst. Gleich wie jede Veränderung und jeder Frieden vollzieht auch sie sich nur, wenn Du sie nicht inflationär gebrauchst, sondern um ihrer selbst willen lebst. Ihren Weg zu gehen, bedeutet, Verantwortung zu übernehmen. Für die Liebe, aber auch für den Frieden in dieser Welt. Genauso wie die Liebe lässt sich dieser nämlich auch nicht in die Zukunft und ihre möglichen Szenarien verlagern. Frieden ist keine Utopie. Frieden will gelebt werden. Hier, Jetzt und Heute. Und auch nicht von irgendwem anders, sondern von Dir.

Kinder wissen das. Finden sie auch keine Ausreden dafür, warum Frieden jetzt noch nicht möglich sei. Sie sind Frieden. Weil sie den Krieg noch nicht in sich tragen.

Legen also auch wir die Waffen nieder – auf allen Schlachtfeldern, von denen wir als Menschheit glauben, wir müssten sie führen.

Fangen wir lieber an, Frieden mit uns selbst zu schließen.

---

Wer Barry Longs vollständige «Anleitung zum Sex» lesen möchte, dem empfehle ich die hier zitierte Lektüre von «Sexuelle Liebe auf göttliche Weise».

---

Lilly Gebert betreibt den Substack-Blog "Treffpunkt im Unendlichen" und schreibt regelmäßig für "die Freien" und Manova. Zuletzt erschien von ihr "Das Gewicht der Welt". Im Herbst erscheint "Sein statt Haben. Enzyklopädie für eine neue Zeit." (vorbestellbar).

---

LASSEN SIE DER FRIEDENSTAUBE FLÜGEL WACHSEN!

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

Schon jetzt können Sie uns unterstützen:

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

Für Einzahlungen in CHF (Betreff: Friedenstaube):

Für Einzahlungen in Euro:

Milosz Matuschek

IBAN DE 53710520500000814137

BYLADEM1TST

Sparkasse Traunstein-Trostberg

Betreff: Friedenstaube

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

---

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

@ 502ab02a:a2860397

หลายคนอาจแปลกใจว่า ทำไมน้ำมันจากผลไม้แบบอโวคาโดถึงกล้าขึ้นชั้น “ไขมันดี” ไปเทียบกับน้ำมันมะกอกได้ ทั้งที่ฟังดูไม่หรูเท่า แต่ความจริงแล้ว น้ำมันอโวคาโดคือหนึ่งในไม่กี่ชนิดของน้ำมันพืชที่สกัดจาก “เนื้อผล” ไม่ใช่เมล็ด ทำให้มีโครงสร้างไขมันที่ต่างจาก seed oils ทั่วไป ทั้งในแง่กรดไขมัน สารต้านอนุมูลอิสระ และวิธีที่มันตอบสนองต่อความร้อน

น้ำมันอโวคาโดมีกรดไขมันไม่อิ่มตัวตำแหน่งเดียว (MUFA) เป็นหลัก โดยเฉพาะ กรดโอเลอิก (Oleic acid) ซึ่งคิดเป็นประมาณ 65–70% ของไขมันทั้งหมด ใกล้เคียงน้ำมันมะกอกเลย แต่เหนือกว่าเล็กน้อยในแง่ของ ค่าควัน (smoke point) ที่สูงถึง 250°C (แบบ refined) และราว 190–200°C (แบบ cold-pressed) ทำให้เหมาะกับการผัดหรือทอดแบบเบา ๆ โดยไม่ทำให้เกิดสารพิษจากไขมันไหม้เร็วเท่าน้ำมันที่ค่าควันต่ำ

นอกจาก MUFA แล้ว น้ำมันอโวคาโดยังมี PUFA อยู่เล็กน้อย ประมาณ 10–14% ส่วนใหญ่คือ โอเมก้า-6 (linoleic acid) ซึ่งก็มีปริมาณไม่มากจนถึงขั้นต้องห่วงเรื่องการอักเสบ เหมือนที่เจอกับพวกน้ำมันรำข้าวหรือถั่วเหลืองที่ PUFA พุ่งสูงเกิน 50% ขึ้นไป และที่สำคัญ...โอเมก้า-3 ในอโวคาโดก็มีอยู่บ้างในรูปของ ALA แม้ไม่เยอะ แต่ก็บอกได้ว่าโครงสร้างโดยรวมของมันสมดุลพอควร ถ้ามองในรูปแบบพลังงานไขมัน ก็ถือว่าใช้ได้เลย

อโวคาโดออยล์แบบไม่ผ่านกระบวนการ (unrefined) ยังมีพวก วิตามินอี (tocopherols) ในระดับประมาณ 13–20 มก. ต่อ 100 กรัม และสารโพลีฟีนอลบางชนิดราวๆ 30–50 mg GAE/100 กรัม เช่น catechins และ procyanidins อยู่บ้าง ซึ่งช่วยลดการเกิดอนุมูลอิสระตอนเจอความร้อน และยังดีต่อผิวหนังในมิติของ skincare ด้วยนะ

ถ้าใช้แบบ cold-pressed, unrefined กลิ่นมันจะออกคล้ายอะโวคาโดสุก ๆ หน่อย มีความเขียวอ่อน ๆ และครีมมี่เล็ก ๆ ซึ่งเหมาะกับการคลุกหรือปรุงแบบ low heat มากกว่าการทอดแรง ส่วนถ้าจะใช้ทำอาหารจริงจัง น้ำมันอโวคาโดแบบ refined ก็จะกลิ่นอ่อนลง สีใสขึ้น และทนไฟได้ดีขึ้นมาก เหมาะจะเอาไปทำ steak หรือผัดไฟกลางได้แบบไม่กังวล อันนี้ก็แล้วแต่จะเลือกนะครับ

ถ้าจะพูดให้ตรง… น้ำมันอโวคาโดคือ “ไขมันผลไม้สายกลาง” ที่ทั้งทนไฟพอใช้ ทำครัวได้หลากหลาย และไม่บิดเบือนสัดส่วนไขมันในร่างกายเราจนเกินไป และถ้าเลือกแบบที่ผลิตดี ไม่โดนสารเคมี ไม่โดนไฮโดรเจนเสริม ก็ถือว่าเป็นน้ำมันดีอีกตัวที่วางใจได้ในครัวจริง ๆ

ใครอยากลองทำเองที่บ้านก็ได้นะ แบบง่ายๆแค่มีผ้าขาวบาง https://youtu.be/gwHGgoMuRnI?si=ehcQceabdbMGfkwG

นอกจากนี้บางคนอาจเคยเห็นโฆษณาสินค้าที่มีน้ำมันจากเมล็ดและเปลือกด้วยใช่ไหมครับ

เมล็ดอโวคาโดนั้นอุดมไปด้วย ไขมันน้อยกว่ามาก เมื่อเทียบกับเนื้อผล แต่มีสารพฤกษเคมีบางชนิดที่นักวิจัยสนใจ เช่น ฟีนอลิกส์ (phenolics), ฟลาโวนอยด์, สารต้านจุลชีพ และ ไฟเบอร์ละลายน้ำสูง การสกัดน้ำมันจากเมล็ดมักจะใช้ ตัวทำละลาย (solvent extraction) หรือ วิธี supercritical CO₂ ไม่ค่อยทำแบบ cold-pressed เพราะน้ำมันน้อยเกิน ปริมาณน้ำมันจากเมล็ดนั้นต่ำมาก คือไม่ถึง 5% ของน้ำหนักแห้ง ทำให้ไม่ค่อยนิยมในเชิงพาณิชย์ น้ำมันจากเมล็ดมักไม่ได้เอาไว้ปรุงอาหาร แต่เอาไปใช้ ด้านเวชสำอาง หรือ functional food มากกว่า เช่น ครีมทาผิว แชมพู หรือผลิตภัณฑ์ชะลอวัย

เปลือกอโวคาโดมี สารต้านจุลชีพและสารต้านออกซิเดชัน บางชนิดเช่นกัน แต่มีไขมันน้อยมากแทบจะไม่มีเลย บางงานวิจัยพยายามสกัดพวก polyphenols หรือสารสีธรรมชาติจากเปลือก เพื่อใช้ในอาหารเสริม หรือผลิตภัณฑ์สุขภาพ ไม่ได้สกัดน้ำมันโดยตรง แบบเนื้อผล แต่ใช้เปลือกเป็นวัตถุดิบเสริมมากกว่า เช่น ผสมในน้ำมันหลักเพื่อเพิ่มคุณสมบัติด้านสุขภาพ

ส่วนตัวคิดว่าไม่ต้องทำเองหรอกครับ ซื้อกินเหอะ 555 เจ้านี้ดีนะ อยู่คู่วงการสุขภาพมาแต่แรกๆเลย https://s.shopee.co.th/8zsnEsLrvh

#pirateketo #กูต้องรู้มั๊ย #ม้วนหางสิลูก #siamstr

@ 95543309:196c540e

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

:cat:

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

@ 662f9bff:8960f6b2

Let's start with some important foundational thinking - based on natural law. Money should be separate from the State - if not history shows that governments and human greed will always take over and manipulate the system in their favour and the expense of their populations. For extensive references, read The Sovereign Individual and The Creature from Jeckyll Island.

• The Separation of State and Money is the most important thing you can listen to this week. Thanks to Allen Farrington - his paper is here for those who prefer to read. Wake up, folks!

• The American Forefathers knew this when the wrote the American Constitution. Thomas Jefferson said: “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 them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their Fathers conquered... I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies... The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people to whom it properly belongs.” Mark Moss explains it well here. Charlie Robinsons take here.

The situation in Canada explifies the issues

Governments have have long used "international economic sanctions" against other nations to enforce their positions. Now in Canada, and soon in your country too, they are applying such sanctions their own citizens - disconnecting them from the financial system and removing their ability to use their own life savings as they wish. Canadians spoke with their money - in one week they raised more money in support of the truckers for peaceful protest than were raised in support of all Canadian political parties in the election of last year - only to have it confiscated and blocked by those politicians.

• CPL. Daniel Bulford (Justin Trudeau's body guard) is particularly clear and eloquent - https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=3123688351279364

• Nick & Greg (two Canadians in Canada) explain the situation to Peter McCormack - https://youtu.be/QBWYp-cBr4o

• Dr Jordan Peterson and Dr Julie Ponesse (also Canadians in Canada) speak openly about what is going on https://t.co/2T7A4VEek1

• Even Canadians living in China speak up: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvDvJWdlD1E

Meanwhile in Turkey...

Joe Blogs has been giving blow by blow updates of the deteriorating sitation over the last weeks. What is happening to Turkey will come to many countries - sooner than you might imagine. Watch and learn here, here and here - more on his channel.

EU Citizens should be aware and lobby their MPs

Dropping of all C-19 restrictions is a tactic to stop people thinking about them; meanwhile the politicians are taking steps to get all of the emergency restrictions codified into normal law so that they can be deployed on you any time or all the time in future.\ Act now - or lose all freedoms - your choice - watch here or click below for the explainer.

More on war - recall our discussion last week

War steals and destroys the wealth of generations. We have been here before - remember World Wars 1 and 2...

• Dr Mattias Desmet explains how mass formation psychosis happens and how he became aware: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRo-ieBEw-8

• Be aware of this well known and much abused psycholgical experiment - rats in a cage - explained by Dr Christ Martensen: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7kSBdMXQkPI

To remain silent is wrong - to deny the rights of others to discuss and challenge (and even to punish or coerce them) is a crime in support of the biger crime. Each of us has a choice - choose wisely.

Could you have known about this?

"The Matrix is a system, Neo. That system is our enemy. But when you're inside, you look around, what do you see? Businessmen, teachers, lawyers, carpenters. The very minds of the people we are trying to save. But until we do, these people are still a part of that system and that makes them our enemy. You have to understand, most of these people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inert, so hopelessly dependent on the system that they will fight to protect it."

"Unfortunately, no one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself."

A closing thought...

Look closely at the cover of the Economist magazine released in December 2018 - The World in 2019 - see how many of those things have already come true.

In case this is too difficult for you - some things to note: Four horsemen of the apacalypse, Statue of Liberty wearing a facemask, Vetruvian Man with QR code (Vaccine passport), DNA mark on his arm, wearing virtual reality glasses... The animal bottom right is a Pangolin. Scales of Justice are well tipped/skewed, facial recognition, electric cars, Putin's pipelines, China and Brexit feature highly along with the lieing media (Pinnochio) and #metoo. I smell Predictive Programming.

• More insights in the explainer here (backup copy here) - including why it is backwards...

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 also email me at: LetterFrom@rogerprice.me

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

@ 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.

@ a5ee4475:2ca75401

clients #link #list #english #article #finalversion #descentralismo

*These clients are generally applications on the Nostr network that allow you to use the same account, regardless of the app used, keeping your messages and profile intact.

**However, you may need to meet certain requirements regarding access and account NIP for some clients, so that you can access them securely and use their features correctly.

---

CLIENTS

---

Twitter like

• Nostrmo - [source] 🌐💻(🐧🪟🍎)🍎🤖(on zapstore)
• Coracle - Super App [source] 🌐🤖(on zapstore)
• Amethyst - Super App with note edit, delete and other stuff with Tor [source] 🤖(on zapstore)
• Primal - Social and wallet [source] 🌐🍎🤖(on zapstore)
• Iris - [source] 🌐🤖🍎
• Current - [source] 🤖🍎
• FreeFrom 🤖🍎
• Openvibe - Nostr and others (new Plebstr) [source] 🤖🍎
• Snort 🌐(🤖[early access]) [onion] [source]
• Damus 🍎 [source]
• Nos 🍎 [source]
• Nostur 🍎 [source]
• NostrBand 🌐 [info] [source]
• Yana [source] 🌐💻(🐧) 🍎🤖(on zapstore)
• Nostribe [on development] 🌐 [source]
• Lume 💻(🐧🪟🍎) [info] [source]
• Gossip - [source] 💻(🐧🪟🍎)
• noStrudel - Gamified Experience [onion] [info/source] 🌐
• [Nostrudel Next] - [onion]
• moStard - Nostrudel with Monero [onion] [info/source] 🌐
• Camelus - [source] 🤖 [early access]

---

Community

• CCNS - Community Curated Nostr Stuff [source]
• Nostr Kiwi [creator] 🌐
• Satellite [info] 🌐
• Flotilla - [source] 🌐🐧🤖(on zapstore)
• Chachi - [source] 🌐
• Futr - Coded in haskell [source] 🐧 (others soon)
• Soapbox - Comunnity server [info] [source] 🌐
• Ditto - Soapbox community server 🌐 [source] 🌐
• Cobrafuma - Nostr brazilian community on Ditto [info] 🌐
• Zapddit - Reddit like [source] 🌐
• Voyage (Reddit like) [on development] 🤖

---

Wiki

• Wikifreedia - Wiki Dark mode [source] 🌐
• Wikinostr - Wiki with tabs clear mode [source] 🌐
• Wikistr - Wiki clear mode [info] [source] 🌐

---

Search

• Keychat - Signal-like chat with AI and browser [source] 💻(🐧🪟🍎) - 📱(🍎🤖{on zapstore})
• Spring - Browser for Nostr apps and other sites [source] 🤖 (on zapstore)
• Advanced nostr search - Advanced note search by isolated terms related to a npub profile [source] 🌐
• Nos Today - Global note search by isolated terms [info] [source] 🌐
• Nostr Search Engine - API for Nostr clients [source]
• Ntrends - Trending notes and profiles 🌐

---

Website

• Nsite - Nostr Site [onion] [info] [source]
• Nsite Gateway - Nostr Site Gateway [source]
• Npub pro - Your site on Nostr [source]

---

App Store

ZapStore - Permitionless App Store [source] 🤖 💻(🐧🍎)

---

Video and Live Streaming

• Flare - Youtube like 🌐 [source]
• ZapStream - Lives, videos, shorts and zaps (NIP-53) [source] 🌐 🤖(lives only | Amber | on zapstore)
• Swae - Live streaming [source] (on development) ⏳

Post Aggregator - Kinostr - Nostr Cinema with #kinostr [english] [author] 🌐 - Stremstr - Nostr Cinema with #kinostr [english] [source] 📱 (on development) ⏳

Link Agreggator - Kinostr - #kinostr - Nostr Cinema Profile with links [English] - Equinox - Nostr Cinema Community with links [Portuguese]

---

Audio and Podcast Transmission

• Castr - Your npub as podcast feed [source]
• Nostr Nests - Audio Chats [source] 🌐
• Fountain - Podcast [source] 🤖🍎
• Corny Chat - Audio Chat [source] 🌐

---

Music

• Tidal - Music Streaming [source] [about] [info] 🤖🍎🌐
• Wavlake - Music Streaming [source] 🌐(🤖🍎 [early access])
• Tunestr - Musical Events [source] [about] 🌐
• Stemstr - Musical Colab (paid to post) [source] [about] 🌐

---

Images

• Lumina - Trending images and pictures [source] 🌐
• Pinstr - Pinterest like [source] 🌐
• Slidestr - DeviantArt like [source] 🌐
• Memestr - ifunny like [source] 🌐

---

Download and Upload

• DTAN - Distributed Torrent Archive on Nostr [info] [source] 🌐

---

Documents, graphics and tables

• Mindstr - Mind maps [source] 🌐
• Docstr - Share Docs [info] [source] 🌐
• Formstr - Share Forms [info] 🌐
• Sheetstr - Share Spreadsheets [source] 🌐
• Slide Maker - Share slides 🌐 [Advice: Slide Maker https://zaplinks.lol/ site is down]

---

Health

• Sobrkey - Sobriety and mental health [source] 🌐
• Runstr - Running app [source] 🌐
• NosFabrica - Finding ways for your health data 🌐
• LazerEyes - Eye prescription by DM [source] 🌐

---

Forum

• OddBean - Hacker News like [info] [source] 🌐
• LowEnt - Forum [info] 🌐
• Swarmstr - Q&A / FAQ [info] 🌐
• Staker News - Hacker News like 🌐 [info]

---

Direct Messenges (DM)

• 0xchat 🤖🍎 [source]
• Nostr Chat 🌐🍎 [source]
• Blowater 🌐 [source]
• Anigma (new nostrgram) - Telegram based [on development] [source]

---

Reading

• Oracolo - A minimalist Nostr html blog [source]
• nRSS - Nostr RSS reader 🌐
• Highlighter - Insights with a highlighted read [info] 🌐
• Zephyr - Calming to Read [info] 🌐
• Flycat - Clean and Healthy Feed [info] 🌐
• Nosta - Check Profiles [on development] [info] 🌐
• Alexandria - e-Reader and Nostr Knowledge Base (NKB) [source] 🌐

---

Writing

• Habla - Blog [info] 🌐
• Blogstack - Blog [info]🌐
• YakiHonne - Articles and News [info] 🌐🍎🤖(on zapstore)

---

Lists

• Following - Users list [source] 🌐
• Nostr Unfollower - Nostr Unfollower
• Listr - Lists [source] 🌐
• Nostr potatoes - Movies List [source] 💻(numpy)

---

Market and Jobs

• Shopstr - Buy and Sell [onion] [source] 🌐
• Nostr Market - Buy and Sell 🌐
• Plebeian Market - Buy and Sell [source] 🌐
• Ostrich Work - Jobs [source] 🌐
• Nostrocket - Jobs [source] 🌐

---

Data Vending Machines - DVM (NIP90)

(Data-processing tools)

• Noogle - [source] 🌐
• Vendata - [source] 🌐
• TaskTiger 🌐
• Malware DVMs 🌐

---

Games

• Chesstr - Chess 🌐 [source]
• Jestr - Chess [source] 🌐
• Snakestr - Snake game [source] 🌐
• Snakes on a Relay - Multiplayer Snake game like slither.io [source] 🌐

ENGINES - DEG Mods - Decentralized Game Mods [info] [source] 🌐 - NG Engine - Nostr Game Engine [source] 🌐 - JmonkeyEngine - Java game engine [source] 🌐

---

Customization

• Emojito - Send Funny Stickers to React 🌐 [creator]

---

Like other Services

• Olas - Instagram like [source] 🌐🍎🤖(on zapstore)
• Nostree - Linktree like 🌐
• Rabbit - TweetDeck like [info] 🌐
• Zaplinks - Nostr links 🌐
• Omeglestr - Omegle-like Random Chats [source] 🌐

---

General Uses

• Njump - HTML text gateway source 🌐
• Filestr - HTML midia gateway [source] 🌐
• W3 - Nostr URL shortener [source] 🌐
• Playground - Test Nostr filters [source] 🌐

---

Places

• Wherostr - Travel and show where you are
• Arc Map (Mapstr) - Bitcoin Map [info]

---

Driver and Delivery

• RoadRunner - Uber like [on development] ⏱️
• Nostrlivery - iFood like [on development] ⏱️

⚠️ SCAM ⚠️ | Arcade City - Uber like [source]

---

OTHER STUFF

---

Lightning Wallets (zap)

• Alby - Native and extension [info] 🌐
• ZBD - Gaming and Social [info] [source] 🤖🍎
• Wallet of Satoshi - Simplest Lightning Wallet [info] 🤖🍎
• Minibits - Cashu mobile wallet [info] 🤖
• Blink - Opensource custodial wallet (KYC over 1000 usd) [source] 🤖🍎
• LNbits - App and extesion [source] 🤖🍎💻
• Zeus - [info] [source] 🤖🍎

Without Zap - Wassabi Wallet - Privacy-focused and non-custodial with Nostr Update Manager [source]

---

Exchange

• Mostro - P2P lightning exchange on Nostr [info] 🌐
• Emptio - Bitcoin P2P on Nostr [on development]

---

Media Server (Upload Links)

audio, image and video

Connected with Nostr (NIP):

• Nostr Build - Free and paid Upload [info] [source] 🌐
• NostrMedia - Written in Go with Nip 96 / Blossom (free and paid) [info] [source]
• Nostr Check - [info] [source] 🌐
• NostPic - [info] [source] 🌐
• Sovbit - Free and paid upload [info] [source] 🌐
• Voidcat - Nip-96 and Blossom [source] 🌐
• Primal Media - Primal Media Uploader [source] 🌐

Blossom - Your Media Safer

• Primal Blossom 🌐
• NostrBuild Blossom - Free upload (max 100MiB) and paid [info] [source] 🌐

Paid Upload Only

• Satellite CDN - prepaid upload (max 5GB each) [info] [source] 🌐

Without Nostr NIP:

• Pomf - Upload larger videos (max 1GB) [source]
• Catbox - max 200 MB [source]
• x0 - max 512 MiB [source]

---

Donation and payments

• Zapper - Easy Zaps [source] 🌐
• Autozap [source] 🌐
• Zapmeacoffee 🌐
• Nostr Zap 💻(numpy)
• Creatr - Creators subscription 🌐
• Geyzer - Crowdfunding [info] [source] 🌐
• Heya! - Crowdfunding [source]

---

Security

• Secret Border - Generate offline keys 💻(java)
• Umbrel - Your private relay [source] 🌐

---

Key signing/login and Extension

• Amber - Key signing [source] 🤖(on zapstore)
• Nowser - Account access keys 📱(🤖🍎) 💻(🐧🍎🪟)
• Nos2x - Account access keys 🌐
• Nsec.app 🌐 [info]
• Lume - [info] [source] 🐧🪟🍎
• Satcom - Share files to discuss - [info] 🌐
• KeysBand - Multi-key signing [source] 🌐

---

Code

• Stacks - AI Templates [info] [source] 🌐
• Nostrify - Share Nostr Frameworks 🌐
• Git Workshop (github like) [experimental] 🌐
• Gitstr (github like) [on development] ⏱️
• Osty [on development] [info] 🌐
• Python Nostr - Python Library for Nostr
• Sybil - Creating, managing and test Nostr events [on development] ⏱️

---

Relay Check and Cloud

• Nostr Watch - See your relay speed 🌐
• NosDrive - Nostr Relay that saves to Google Drive

---

Bidges and Getways

• Matrixtr Bridge - Between Matrix & Nostr
• Mostr - Between Nostr & Fediverse
• Nostrss - RSS to Nostr
• Rsslay - Optimized RSS to Nostr [source]
• Atomstr - RSS/Atom to Nostr [source]

Useful Profiles and Trends

nostr-voice - Voice note (just some clients)

---

NOT RELATED TO NOSTR

---

Voca - Text-to-Speech App for GrapheneOS [source] 🤖(on zapstore)

Android Keyboards

• Futo - Gboard like [source]
• Florisboard - [source]
• Heliboard - Openboard based [source]

---

Personal notes and texts

• Joplin - privacy-focused note taking app with sync capabilities [source] 📱(🤖🍎) - 💻 (🐧🪟🍎)

---

Front-ends

• Nitter - Twitter / X without your data [source]
• NewPipe - Youtube, Peertube and others, without account & your data [source] 🤖
• Piped - Youtube web without you data [source] 🌐

---

Other Services

• Brave - Browser [source]
• DuckDuckGo - Search [source]
• LLMA - Meta - Meta open source AI [source]
• DuckDuckGo AI Chat - Famous AIs without Login [source]
• Proton Mail - Mail [source]

Other open source index: Degoogled Apps

---

Some other Nostr index on:

Nostr Apps | Nostorg | Awesome Nostr

@ aa8de34f:a6ffe696

19. März 2025

🔐 1. SHA-256 is Quantum-Resistant

Bitcoin’s proof-of-work mechanism relies on SHA-256, a hashing algorithm. Even with a powerful quantum computer, SHA-256 remains secure because:

• Quantum computers excel at factoring large numbers (Shor’s Algorithm).
• However, SHA-256 is a one-way function, meaning there's no known quantum algorithm that can efficiently reverse it.
• Grover’s Algorithm (which theoretically speeds up brute force attacks) would still require 2¹²⁸ operations to break SHA-256 – far beyond practical reach.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

🔑 2. Public Key Vulnerability – But Only If You Reuse Addresses

Bitcoin uses Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm (ECDSA) to generate keys.

• A quantum computer could use Shor’s Algorithm to break SECP256K1, the curve Bitcoin uses.
• If you never reuse addresses, it is an additional security element
• 🔑 1. Bitcoin Addresses Are NOT Public Keys

Many people assume a Bitcoin address is the public key—this is wrong.

• When you receive Bitcoin, it is sent to a hashed public key (the Bitcoin address).
• The actual public key is never exposed because it is the Bitcoin Adress who addresses the Public Key which never reveals the creation of a public key by a spend
• Bitcoin uses Pay-to-Public-Key-Hash (P2PKH) or newer methods like Pay-to-Witness-Public-Key-Hash (P2WPKH), which add extra layers of security.

🕵️♂️ 2.1 The Public Key Never Appears

• When you send Bitcoin, your wallet creates a digital signature.
• This signature uses the private key to prove ownership.
• The Bitcoin address is revealed and creates the Public Key
• The public key remains hidden inside the Bitcoin script and Merkle tree.

This means: ✔ The public key is never exposed. ✔ Quantum attackers have nothing to target, attacking a Bitcoin Address is a zero value game.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

🔄 3. Bitcoin Can Upgrade

Even if quantum computers eventually become a real threat:

• Bitcoin developers can upgrade to quantum-safe cryptography (e.g., lattice-based cryptography or post-quantum signatures like Dilithium).
• Bitcoin’s decentralized nature ensures a network-wide soft fork or hard fork could transition to quantum-resistant keys.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

⏳ 4. The 10-Minute Block Rule as a Security Feature

• Bitcoin’s network operates on a 10-minute block interval, meaning:Even if an attacker had immense computational power (like a quantum computer), they could only attempt an attack every 10 minutes.Unlike traditional encryption, where a hacker could continuously brute-force keys, Bitcoin’s system resets the challenge with every new block.This limits the window of opportunity for quantum attacks.

---

🎯 5. Quantum Attack Needs to Solve a Block in Real-Time

• A quantum attacker must solve the cryptographic puzzle (Proof of Work) in under 10 minutes.
• The problem? Any slight error changes the hash completely, meaning:If the quantum computer makes a mistake (even 0.0001% probability), the entire attack fails.Quantum decoherence (loss of qubit stability) makes error correction a massive challenge.The computational cost of recovering from an incorrect hash is still incredibly high.

---

⚡ 6. Network Resilience – Even if a Block Is Hacked

• Even if a quantum computer somehow solved a block instantly:The network would quickly recognize and reject invalid transactions.Other miners would continue mining under normal cryptographic rules.51% Attack? The attacker would need to consistently beat the entire Bitcoin network, which is not sustainable.

---

🔄 7. The Logarithmic Difficulty Adjustment Neutralizes Threats

• Bitcoin adjusts mining difficulty every 2016 blocks (\~2 weeks).
• If quantum miners appeared and suddenly started solving blocks too quickly, the difficulty would adjust upward, making attacks significantly harder.
• This self-correcting mechanism ensures that even quantum computers wouldn't easily overpower the network.

---

🔥 Final Verdict: Quantum Computers Are Too Slow for Bitcoin

✔ The 10-minute rule limits attack frequency – quantum computers can’t keep up.

✔ Any slight miscalculation ruins the attack, resetting all progress.

✔ Bitcoin’s difficulty adjustment would react, neutralizing quantum advantages.

Even if quantum computers reach their theoretical potential, Bitcoin’s game theory and design make it incredibly resistant. 🚀

@ 7459d333:f207289b

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

---

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

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

The Vision: A decentralized shipping protocol with these properties:

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

How it could work:

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

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

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

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

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

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

@ 21335073:a244b1ad

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Hours: Available 24 hours

@ 4925ea33:025410d8

1. O que é um Aromaterapeuta?

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

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

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

---

2. Como um Aromaterapeuta Pode Ajudar?

Você pode procurar um aromaterapeuta para diferentes necessidades, como:

✔ Questões Emocionais e Psicológicas

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

Apoio na redução do estresse, ansiedade e insônia.

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

✔ Questões Físicas

Dores musculares e articulares.

Problemas respiratórios como rinite, sinusite e tosse.

Distúrbios digestivos leves.

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

✔ Saúde da Pele e Cabelos

Tratamento para acne, dermatites e psoríase.

Cuidados com o envelhecimento precoce da pele.

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

✔ Bem-estar e Qualidade de Vida

Melhora da concentração e foco, aumentando a produtividade.

Estímulo da disposição e energia.

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

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

---

3. Como Funciona uma Consulta com um Aromaterapeuta?

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

✔ Anamnese (Entrevista Inicial)

Perguntas sobre saúde física, emocional e estilo de vida.

Levantamento de sintomas, histórico médico e possíveis alergias.

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

✔ Escolha dos Óleos Essenciais

Seleção dos óleos mais indicados para o caso.

Consideração das propriedades terapêuticas, contraindicações e combinações seguras.

✔ Definição do Método de Uso

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

Inalação: difusores, colares aromáticos, vaporização.

Uso tópico: massagens, óleos corporais, compressas.

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

✔ Plano de Acompanhamento

Instruções detalhadas sobre o uso correto dos óleos essenciais.

Orientação sobre frequência e duração do tratamento.

Possibilidade de retorno para ajustes no protocolo.

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

---

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

@ 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:

@ 472f440f:5669301e

Marty's Bent

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p0Sj1sG05VQ

Here's a great presentation from our good friend nostr:nprofile1qyx8wumn8ghj7cnjvghxjmcpp4mhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mqqyz2hj3zg2g3pqwxuhg69zgjhke4pcmjmmdpnndnefqndgqjt8exwj6ee8v7 , President of The Nakamoto Institute titled Hodl for Good. He gave it earlier this year at the BitBlockBoom Conference, and I think it's something everyone reading this should take 25 minutes to watch. Especially if you find yourself wondering whether or not it's a good idea to spend bitcoin at any given point in time. Michael gives an incredible Austrian Economics 101 lesson on the importance of lowering one's time preference and fully understanding the importance of hodling bitcoin. For the uninitiated, it may seem that the hodl meme is nothing more than a call to hoard bitcoins in hopes of getting rich eventually. However, as Michael points out, there's layers to the hodl meme and the good that hodling can bring individuals and the economy overall.

The first thing one needs to do to better understand the hodl meme is to completely flip the framing that is typically thrust on bitcoiners who encourage others to hodl. Instead of ceding that hodling is a greedy or selfish action, remind people that hodling, or better known as saving, is the foundation of capital formation, from which all productive and efficient economic activity stems. Number go up technology is great and it really matters. It matters because it enables anybody leveraging that technology to accumulate capital that can then be allocated toward productive endeavors that bring value to the individual who creates them and the individual who buys them.

When one internalizes this, it enables them to turn to personal praxis and focus on minimizing present consumption while thinking of ways to maximize long-term value creation. Live below your means, stack sats, and use the time that you're buying to think about things that you want in the future. By lowering your time preference and saving in a harder money you will have the luxury of demanding higher quality goods in the future. Another way of saying this is that you will be able to reshape production by voting with your sats. Initially when you hold them off the market by saving them - signaling that the market doesn't have goods worthy of your sats - and ultimately by redeploying them into the market when you find higher quality goods that meet the standards desire.

The first part of this equation is extremely important because it sends a signal to producers that they need to increase the quality of their work. As more and more individuals decide to use bitcoin as their savings technology, the signal gets stronger. And over many cycles we should begin to see low quality cheap goods exit the market in favor of higher quality goods that provide more value and lasts longer and, therefore, make it easier for an individual to depart with their hard-earned and hard-saved sats. This is only but one aspect that Michael tries to imbue throughout his presentation.

The other is the ability to buy yourself leisure time when you lower your time preference and save more than you spend. When your savings hit a critical tipping point that gives you the luxury to sit back and experience true leisure, which Michael explains is not idleness, but the contemplative space to study, create art, refine taste, and to find what "better goods" actually are. Those who can experience true leisure while reaping the benefits of saving in a hard asset that is increasing in purchasing power significantly over the long term are those who build truly great things. Things that outlast those who build them. Great art, great monuments, great institutions were all built by men who were afforded the time to experience leisure. Partly because they were leveraging hard money as their savings and the place they stored the profits reaped from their entrepreneurial endeavors.

If you squint and look into the future a couple of decades, it isn't hard to see a reality like this manifesting. As more people begin to save in Bitcoin, the forces of supply and demand will continue to come into play. There will only ever be 21 million bitcoin, there are around 8 billion people on this planet, and as more of those 8 billion individuals decide that bitcoin is the best savings vehicle, the price of bitcoin will rise.

When the price of bitcoin rises, it makes all other goods cheaper in bitcoin terms and, again, expands the entrepreneurial opportunity. The best part about this feedback loop is that even non-holders of bitcoin benefit through higher real wages and faster tech diffusion. The individuals and business owners who decide to hodl bitcoin will bring these benefits to the world whether you decide to use bitcoin or not.

This is why it is virtuous to hodl bitcoin. The potential for good things to manifest throughout the world increase when more individuals decide to hodl bitcoin. And as Michael very eloquently points out, this does not mean that people will not spend their bitcoin. It simply means that they have standards for the things that they will spend their bitcoin on. And those standards are higher than most who are fully engrossed in the high velocity trash economy have today.

In my opinion, one of those higher causes worthy of a sats donation is nostr:nprofile1qyfhwumn8ghj7enjv4jhyetvv9uju7re0gq3uamnwvaz7tmfdemxjmrvv9nk2tt0w468v6tvd3skwefwvdhk6qpqwzc9lz2f40azl98shkjewx3pywg5e5alwqxg09ew2mdyeey0c2rqcfecft . Consider donating so they can preserve and disseminate vital information about bitcoin and its foundations.

The Shell Game: How Health Narratives May Distract from Vaccine Risks

In our recent podcast, Dr. Jack Kruse presented a concerning theory about public health messaging. He argues that figures like Casey and Callie Means are promoting food and exercise narratives as a deliberate distraction from urgent vaccine issues. While no one disputes healthy eating matters, Dr. Kruse insists that focusing on "Froot Loops and Red Dye" diverts attention from what he sees as immediate dangers of mRNA vaccines, particularly for children.

"It's gonna take you 50 years to die from processed food. But the messenger jab can drop you like Damar Hamlin." - Dr Jack Kruse

Dr. Kruse emphasized that approximately 25,000 children per month are still receiving COVID vaccines despite concerns, with 3 million doses administered since Trump's election. This "shell game," as he describes it, allows vaccines to remain on childhood schedules while public attention fixates on less immediate health threats. As host, I believe this pattern deserves our heightened scrutiny given the potential stakes for our children's wellbeing.

Check out the full podcast here for more on Big Pharma's alleged bioweapons program, the "Time Bank Account" concept, and how Bitcoin principles apply to health sovereignty.

Headlines of the Day

Aussie Judge: Bitcoin is Money, Possibly CGT-Exempt - via X

JPMorgan to Let Clients Buy Bitcoin Without Direct Custody - via X

Get our new STACK SATS hat - via tftcmerch.io

Mubadala Acquires 384,239 sats | $408.50M Stake in BlackRock Bitcoin ETF - 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...

I've been walking from my house around Town Lake in Austin in the mornings and taking calls on the walk. Big fan of a walking call.

---

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:

@ bc6ccd13:f53098e4

I recently listened to an episode of The Progressive Bitcoiner podcast featuring guest Scott Santens discussing the topic of universal basic income, or UBI. It was an excellent show, and I’d encourage everyone to check it out here. The hosts, Trey Walsh and Margot Paez, and their guest definitely don’t share my worldview, so it’s always interesting and challenging to hear a different perspective. I’m going to share a few salient points that stood out to me from the episode, and explain how I agree and disagree.

The concept of UBI has been around for a long time, but recently had a resurgence in popular exposure by presidential candidate Andrew Yang. The buzz died down since his campaign, but the topic is once again getting some airtime in relation to the potential labor market disruptions caused by AI. So I think it’s worth taking a look at the topic, since it will probably become a political issue again at some point.

Why Consider UBI?

When discussing a complex topic like this, I think it’s important to establish a foundational baseline of goal or purpose first. That provides an opportunity to really define a vision, and make sure that vision is fundamentally solid and valid. Otherwise it’s easy to blindly head down the path toward a destination we don’t actually want. I was a little disappointed this wasn’t discussed in more depth, but here’s what host Trey Walsh had to say on the topic of why we need UBI.

You know, we wanna assist people who need it. We wanna make sure that people have their basic needs met, especially in somewhere like the United States. People shouldn't be in poverty. There shouldn't be the homeless crisis that we're dealing with, all of these things. Right?

All that sounds well and good on the surface. Of course no one wants more poverty. That’s the quintessential strawman of collectivist politics, “I’m against poverty.” Well of course, so is every non-psychopath on the planet. The implication, of course, is that if you disagree with them in any way, you must be for poverty, and therefore a murderous and uncaring psychopath.

I reject that framing. Here’s why.

The world operates by cause and effect. Outcomes are the result of actions. People shouldn’t be in poverty, not in a perfect situation. People also shouldn’t be locked in a cage and have all their freedoms restricted. Yet we incarcerate people every day. People shouldn’t be killed. Yet we execute people regularly. And rational people are aware of and support these things, with of course disagreement on the details. Why? Because people take actions that have consequences, and sometimes those consequences can be as serious as socially enforced prison or even death.

But most consequences aren’t enforced by people in that way, they’re enforced by the laws of the universe itself. You touch the hot stove, you get burned. You jump into the deep end without knowing how to swim, you drown. You waste time being unproductive while spending too much, you fall into poverty.

So while nobody wants more poverty, the reality is that sometimes poverty is a result of choices made. You can argue how often it’s a justified consequence versus how often it’s an unfortunate outcome of tragic events outside someone’s control. But the thing is, UBI doesn’t differentiate. That’s the whole point. UBI attempts to solve the poverty “problem” by making it impossible for anyone to ever be in poverty.

This is the economic equivalent of solving the pain “problem” by injecting everyone with a dose of morphine every day. It fails to acknowledge that poverty and pain are not only problems, but often a warning that suboptimal actions were taken, and changes need to be made in the future to achieve desired outcomes. Sure, you could “solve” your pain with a shot of morphine. But it’s really just telling you to take your hand off the stove before your skin burns away, or get that nagging headache checked out to make sure it’s just allergies and not a brain tumor.

Same with poverty, it’s often just a reminder and motivator to get off the couch and do something useful, or put in more than 32 hours at work, or stop buying those cigarettes and lotto tickets when you have $10k in credit card debt and rent due tomorrow. Again, I’m not insinuating that every person in poverty makes those choices. But the idea behind UBI is that if they do, they shouldn’t feel the pain of consequences. I fundamentally disagree with that premise. I believe incentives strongly determine outcomes, and distorting natural incentives in a large-scale way like UBI does, is going to lead to some very undesirable outcomes.

Incentives

It’s not that Scott doesn’t understand incentives. He goes on to say this:

So when it comes to traditional welfare benefits, what usually happens is let's say you wanna make sure that only those in need get this assistance. So then you have some kind of test. You say, okay, if the poverty line is $12,000 per year, then we wanna make sure that we only get this assistance to those who are earning less than $12,000 a year. So that sounds like on its face, like, a good idea. Like, you just wanna make sure that it goes to people in need.

But there are a couple outcomes from that. One of them is actually something that conservatives tend to understand pretty well, which is that there's a disincentive effect from welfare. So if you only get something if you have an income under $12,000 per year, then you're essentially encouraged to keep your income below $12,000 a year in order to keep getting it.

This has been a common theme among UBI advocates. They promote UBI as a solution to the disincentive to productivity caused by traditional welfare, while denying that UBI is also a disincentive to productivity.

The typical argument is anecdotal, pointing to trials or experiences showing that UBI recipients are more likely to start a business or do something unpaid like volunteer work or additional school. But to me this isn’t a convincing argument. For one, starting a business is not an automatic net good. A lot of businesses fail. The alleged benefit of UBI is that it encourages more people to start a business in spite of the risk of failure, knowing that if it does fail they’ll still be able to survive off the UBI payment. The thing is, businesses fail because they don’t provide value. If they provide value as determined by the market, they’ll make a profit and succeed. The fact that they fail is just proof that more value was being consumed than produced, so the enterprise was a net detriment to society. So starting a business should carry significant real risk to entrepreneurs, because it carries the potential of wasting a lot of resources if it doesn’t serve a real demand in the market.

As Scott goes on to say:

Whereas with UBI, if you have a $1,000 per month at UBI and a job offers you a $1,000 per month, you've just doubled your income. And that's where the incentive comes from to work, which is also why if you look at all the pilots, all the evidence shows that work does not decrease significantly at all with basic income and actually often increases, like, with the entrepreneurship impacts. You see just a lot of people starting up their businesses. That's one of the main impacts is that even if people work less in wage labor, a lot of the impact goes to self employment and even doing something like unpaid care work or school where it makes an investment in future work or actually focusing on unpaid work that isn't recognized as work.

Again, this is just assuming that the self employment or unpaid work or school are automatically a net good. If those things aren’t bringing in enough income to justify without the UBI, what’s the basis for concluding that they’re a net benefit to society and something we want to incentivize? It all comes back to the central planning, collectivist mindset, the idea that my particular assessment of what is and isn’t valuable outweighs the opinion of every market actor as determined by what is and isn’t profitable. The fact that anecdotally some of the businesses started because of UBI are successful, doesn’t make the whole enterprise a net benefit. So to me, it’s an unconvincing argument overall.

If people are currently in poverty, of course excluding those who are actually unable to work, then the reality of poverty isn’t a strong enough incentive to change their production or consumption behavior enough to afford the basics of life. If affording basic necessities isn’t enough incentive, how will affording slightly nicer non-necessities be an incentive when UBI provides the necessities without requiring any effort at all? I’m skeptical.

Inflation

Scott lists three main objections to UBI.

So the the three primary, oppositional arguments to basic income are that people will stop working, that it will cause inflation, and that we can't afford it.

On inflation, he starts by arguing that inflation won’t be an issue because it hasn’t been in Alaska, and they have an annual dividend payment to each resident of $1-2,000 per year. Of course this is significantly less than the $1,000 or more per month he uses as a UBI example throughout the conversation. But putting that aside, his explanation for why Alaska hasn’t seen increased inflation directly contradicts his explanation for why the US as a whole has seen significant inflation recently.

And every year when the dividend sales go out, businesses actually drop their prices. They have, you know, dividend sales and they're all trying to compete over people to spend at their business instead of some other business. You know, it's just like with Christmas where you think, you know, everyone wants to spend money and you can think that, well, businesses should actually raise their prices because everyone has money to spend and they're willing to spend it now. No. They actually lower prices because of competition.

So one element of this, of course, is that competitive aspect. You know, competition does matter. And, if you raise your prices because people have more money, then your competitor could lower their prices or not raise their prices and then could actually put you out of business, because you decided to do that.

But then, talking about US inflation the past few years:

And what we didn't do, and one one of the reasons why we saw this inflation too was the result of not doing something like a windfall tax or, you know, excess inflation tax or excess profits tax. And that's the kind of tax that isn't about, you know, raising revenue. It's about just discouraging companies from seeking excess profits. You know, a bunch of what we saw with sellers inflation, which is that businesses in this environment of inflation due to lower supply and therefore costlier components, they raise their prices way beyond what they actually needed to do because why not? You know, if prices are going up anyways because they need to, might as well capture a much larger percentage of your profits by raising your prices even more. We could have discouraged that. We just didn't do that.

These types of contradictory arguments are frustrating to respond to. So which is it? Extra money doesn’t cause inflation in Alaska because businesses lower their prices to stay competitive, but when we see inflation in the US after massive stimulus payments it’s because businesses just raised their prices because why wouldn’t they? You can’t have it both ways. Either businesses respond to market incentives and charge as much as possible while still remaining competitive, or businesses just do whatever they want without regard to market incentives and the whole concept of economics is a fraud.

Earlier in the conversation Scott pointed out that UBI can increase demand for goods and services, but at the time he was using that as a potential benefit. He uses the example of a woman who used her UBI payment to start a baking business.

But the basic income meant that her entire village was full of customers, full of people that had money to actually buy her goods. And if she had gotten this in a vacuum where, you know, she just got a start up loan, would she have succeeded in a village full of people that couldn't buy her stuff? Well, arguably, she likely could have failed or at least she would have done a lot worse. But because everyone in the village had basic income too, then they were all able to buy her stuff and they loved her baked goods and that ended up leading to her income from her business being, I think it was 3 or 4 times the amount of the basic income.

Lower supply and higher demand both act to move prices up. So arguing that lower supply during the past few years was the main cause of higher prices, and UBI wouldn’t have the same effect, while simultaneously touting the increased demand as a benefit of UBI, doesn’t compute. You can’t use the effects of market forces to argue in favor of UBI, and then act like that effect doesn’t exist when you’re downplaying objections to UBI.

Overall, I remain unconvinced by the arguments made as to why UBI wouldn’t cause inflation.

Freedom and Homesteading

The podcast also touches on the empowerment UBI would provide in the job market.

But, you know, a lot what I find really fascinating about a lot of people who claim to be libertarians is that they overlook the authoritarian coercive aspect of the employer employee relationship. And it's really interesting because it's not just, you know, true freedom is not just freedom from coercion from your government. It ought to be freedom from coercion from all forms of oppression. Right? And in the job, in the workplace, and in the labor market, if you're going to be on an equal footing with the employer, you ought to have a way to say no and to exercise your right to escape that type of coercion from being forced to take a job or to take hours with wages that are not suitable for you. And what you're saying, Scott, to me, is like liberty maximization on the across the board, to create an even playing field within all all markets in a market system. You can't refuse domination without an empowered status, and that's what basic income provides.

This seems like a reasonable argument. My objection on this point would be that it once again assumes that market forces don’t work. Because in the labor market, you do have a way to say no to your employer. It’s very simple, you just quit that job and take a job elsewhere. If the pay being offered is less than the value of your work, you can offer your work to the market somewhere else and get what it’s actually worth. By definition. If you don’t think that’s true, you’re arguing that the market doesn’t work. That’s a different argument.

You could say the UBI provides the security to be able to quit your job and survive while finding a better job elsewhere. But if you’re really so undercompensated, you can easily find a better offer before quitting your current job. That’s the normal practice. And when it comes to worry about being fired, we already have generous unemployment compensation for precisely that reason. I don’t see what role UBI fills in increasing freedom in the marketplace, except to provide support and remove incentive for those who aren’t contributing sufficient value to be successful in the labor market.

UBI just shifts dependency from the incentives of the market to the choices of the state. Instead of depending on the compensation the market provides for your effort, you’re depending on the goodwill of the central planners to keep sending that check every month. Of course this provides a strong incentive to support the apparatus of the state, which is a huge unspoken benefit of UBI to those who favor increased centralized control over the economy by central planners at the state level.

Then there’s this point:

This actually leads into another libertarian argument is that we kind of remove the ability for people to live just like off the land, you know, doing their own kind of work. What we did is if you go back to, like, the enclosures, you know, you look at the common land, you know, even back in the day in the US, when everyone was, like, moving west, you could actually, with homestead grants, you could actually just claim land as yours, and it was just free. And you could actually just live off the land. That was an option. Now there is no such thing. Like, you can't just claim land as yours. It belongs to someone else.

And in this kind of situation, it's the owners of the land that have that power over you. They can say, no. You're like, if you work for me, then I will give you access to what the land provides. And is that freedom? No. Like, as soon as we enclosed the land and prevented people from actually sustaining themselves off of it with the fruit of their own, you know, enjoying the fruits of their own labor and making it so that it was the choice between the the non owners being dominated by the owners.

So the argument is that we need UBI now as a replacement for the ability to just get free land and homestead the American West. It would be amazing if there were a way to interview an 1800’s homesteader today and get their opinion on this theory. My guess is they’d laugh themselves sick. I have to conclude that people have no concept of what was involved in surviving as a homesteader, and what kind of lifestyle you could expect even if you managed to do it successfully.

Suffice to say that anyone who puts in the amount of effort today that it took to survive on a parcel of “free” land in the 1800’s, will be far wealthier than any UBI check could ever make them. Realistically, most of the people living in “poverty” today in the US have a lifestyle of ease and luxury an 1800’s homesteader couldn’t even imagine, much less achieve. It certainly wasn’t something you’d just decide to do as an easy way to get by between jobs, it was backbreaking physical labor from daylight to dark, and a lifestyle of the barest subsistence at best, and complete failure and the prospect of actual death if the weather didn’t cooperate or the grasshoppers or hail destroyed the wheat crop or the Indians attacked and destroyed your homestead or you cut your hand and got an infection or a million other things the modern “poor” never have to worry about.

Votes in the Market

The way that the markets are supposed to work and that we imagined were the reason that markets do work is that essentially, money acts as like a vote. And that, you know, if one business is doing something that you like, then you go there, you vote for that business with your dollars, and that business can continue to do business. And then a business that doesn't have any people voting for it, that goes out of business, and then a new business pops up, and then people get to vote. Do you like that business or don't you?

So that's the way that that markets work. But, of course, the kind of underlying mechanism is this vote, which is the dollar. And so we don't actually have a system where everybody can vote, but we have a system where some people can vote and they can vote, like, a lot. Like, they have, like, all kinds they have billions of ballots that they can use to vote. And, it's very disproportionate.

They go on to discuss how UBI would be beneficial by giving everyone some “votes” in the market, so the market could fill their demand.

The part that’s ignored is that these votes work both ways. In a free market, having a lot of money is a result of a lot of people “voting” to support the work and business you’re doing. Not having money is the result of people “voting” that what you’re doing isn’t valuable enough. You’re the same as the business that doesn’t have any people voting for it, which like he says, goes out of business and gets replaced by a business people are willing to support. So the UBI argument, once again, contradicts itself. How is giving free “votes” to people who haven’t provided value in the economy good, while allowing a business to fail or be forced to adapt because of a lack of market support is also good? They’re both a result of the same market forces. And if a business does a good job and gets a lot of “votes”, that’s going to result in the business owner becoming wealthy, and everything staying just as disproportionate as before. See how this is illogical? How is the market supposed to function by this “voting” system if the “votes” don’t actually mean anything because we continuously take the money away from the “vote” winners and redistribute it equally back to everyone through UBI?

One could argue that those who have a lot of money haven’t earned it by fulfilling market demands, but by corruption of the money system, regulatory capture, corporate/government collusion, etc. I completely agree, but that’s a problem of a lack of market forces, not a problem caused by market forces. The solution is to eliminate things that interfere with market forces, not to add even more market-distorting effects in the form of wealth redistribution through UBI.

Redistribution

In relation to a discussion about who should benefit from AI and tech advancements, Trey had this to say:

But, really quick with what Scott said, I think that is one of the things that I'm curious your thoughts on this. For someone to come to UBI, I think there might be one stipulation. And I think that stipulation would be what you just said, that we believe that we should live in a world where everyone is kind of a part of creating this world that has been throughout the variety of ways that are typically taken for granted. And everyone deserves a fair contribution of that, whatever that looks like. Because some people coming to the table or some folks in Bitcoin that I might disagree with on this point think, well, they didn't do x y z, so they don't deserve x y z. Right? And I can quote Marx, and they'll dismiss me and and all of this stuff. Right?

So I think that might be one condition to being open to this conversation is do we want or do we believe we should live in a world where that sort of system exists, whether you call it redistribution of some kind or whatever. I almost view it as kind of a fact of life at this point as we were talking about.

And Scott responds,

Yeah. It's funny that you mentioned redistribution again. It's definitely like a bad word. You know, we've come to the point where, you just don't say redistribution. You know that people oppose that.

And Alaska's dividend, a lot of Alaskans see this as a form of predistribution. And the way that they see that as predistribution is that because money goes directly from the government to people, you know, it doesn't first go to politicians and then to people. You know, it doesn't go to politicians for them to decide where it should go. Instead, it's distributed directly to people, and then people get to spend it in ways that whatever they wish. And that's money that the government isn't deciding for them.

So I would say that the redistribution is when it's, like, gone through the process of going through a politician. You know, it's like welfare as a form of redistribution because it's going through a politician, and the politician sets up a bureaucracy, and the bureaucracy says, this person deserves it. This person doesn't. This comes with these conditions.

So they’re well aware that people oppose wealth redistribution, and no quotes from Marx will convince them to support it. So they’re trying to reframe the word and argue that UBI isn’t redistribution, because the government doesn’t decide who deserves it and how they can use it.

But earlier in the episode, Scott said,

There's again kind of a misunderstanding of basic income, in regards to, like, yes, it's true that everyone universally receives whatever the basic income is.

And let's say it's $1200 per month is the basic income. That does not mean that everyone's disposable income has increased by $1200 per month. That depends on the taxes that have been paired with it, the welfare reforms that have been paired with it, the tax expenditure reforms. It means that there's some amount of net increase or decrease after taxes that has to be taken into account. So in a case of, like, Bill Gates, Elon Musk and, you know, the other billionaires, like, yes, they'll get the $1200 per month, but their taxes would have gone up much further than $1200 per month.

They will not see a disposable income boost. Then if you look at, you know, there's, depending on design, there's some, you know, person, that is receiving just as much in UBI as they're paying in additional new taxes. And, so let's say that person is around, $120,000 or something where they are receiving $1200 per month in EBI, but their new taxes are $1200 per month. So they are 0. They don't benefit from basic income financially, and they don't pay higher taxes either on net. Instead, they're like the you know, they experience the greater security of basic income.

They don't see a boost. And so then go below that. So everyone below that net neutral point are receiving some amount of disposable income boost. And for the middle class, that won't be $1200 per month. It'll be, you know, something like, say, $600 per month or $500 or something, on net.

And with only those earning 0, getting the full amount of net benefit.

If everyone gets the same UBI check, that doesn’t mean it’s not redistribution. Not even according to their own redefining of the word. Not if it’s paired with tax increases on the wealthy, which Scott is admitting it will be. Because if you give someone a monthly check, but then tax them for more than the amount of the check, that’s not really what we’ve been sold as UBI, is it? At the end of the day, as Scott admits, it’s the net change in disposable income that matters. If you give everyone an equal monthly check, but then raise taxes on the wealthy by more than they receive, and don’t raise taxes on the poor, what have you achieved? The net change in disposable income is identical to just raising taxes on the wealthy and redistributing it to the poor through different sized monthly checks based on income. In other words, exactly the same as every other wealth redistributing welfare program we already have.

This completely obliterates the argument that UBI won’t reduce the incentive to work like income based welfare payments do. It’s the net change in disposable income that matters. So having more of your UBI taxed away because you increased your income creates identical incentives to having your welfare payments reduced because you increased your income.

I don’t know what else to say on this. If you want to discuss whether wealth redistribution is good or bad, that’s a different conversation. If you quote Marx as a credible source, I already have a good idea how that conversation will go. But it’s intellectually dishonest to claim that UBI is anything other than the standard collectivist wealth redistribution scheme, just because you try to compartmentalize away the increased progressive taxes it’s inevitably paired with. As far as I’m concerned, this is as damning an argument against UBI as anyone could make.

Earlier in the show Scott pointed out that income taxes are not the best form of taxes. I completely agree, I think the incentives of income taxes are absolutely awful. But when it comes down to the mechanics of funding UBI, Scott seems to admit that it will be funded by higher taxes on the wealthy. Well of course, because that’s the only way to gain support for it. There are a lot fewer wealthy people than poor and middle class people, so UBI sells with the same marketing campaign every other economic proposal relies on: we’ll take money away from “the rich” and give it to you for free. Of course that’s going to be popular with voters. That doesn’t make it a good idea though. In fact, it’s exactly the type of idea that makes pure democracy an unsustainable and short-lived form of government.

Control

One of the common concerns about UBI is that is could lead to a threatening level of government control and coercion, if a large percentage of the population is dependent on the monthly UBI payment. This is addressed in the episode as well.

One of the most annoying things to me most recently is, how, like, coming out of the pandemic, you've got, like, the conspiracy crowd who have decided that basic income is, like, some kind of control mechanism tool, you know, that was created by elites and pushed by, like, the World Economic Forum or something.

And that the entire point of it is to, like, control people. And they'll even say stuff like, you know, a basic income will have conditions. And that's so frustrating to me because, I mean, definitionally speaking, a basic income can't have conditions. It's like they're afraid of welfare, and welfare has all sorts of conditions, and we know that.

But, like, the entire point of a basic income is to remove the conditions. So if it has conditions, then we haven't won basic income, and we should still keep fighting for basic income. You know, it's just if you're concerned about that, it's just all the more reason to be for actual basic income, not for fake basic income.

That sounds well and good. But building on the previous point, how can you say there are no conditions if you’re funding the UBI with progressive taxation to determine who actually gets a boost in net disposable income and who doesn’t? I already made the point that this is no different than the current welfare system and the conditions it entails.

You could argue that you’re going to fund the UBI with some other form of taxes. Maybe like Margot suggested,

And I think that solves a lot of concerns around how can we afford a UBI, how do we, you know, avoid inflating the money supply in order to provide money for everyone at this basic level? And I think that's really great because then I think about climate change, and then I think, well, we should just tax 100% of profits from all fossil fuel companies and then use that for UBI because they have truly benefited in ways using those natural resources like fossil fuels in a way that has been extremely detrimental to society and to the environment, and this is one way to pay back what is owed to everyone for the damage that has been done.

So UBI has no conditions, except that if you’re producing “fossil fuels” we’re going to tax away every bit of your profits and redistribute it through UBI? This isn’t the place to get into a whole conversation about “climate change” and the claim that using coal, oil, and natural gas “has been extremely detrimental to society and to the environment,” but suffice to say that this kind of ideological market control and manipulation is exactly what people are concerned about when they look at UBI proposals and how they might be funded.

Or even more concerning, something like Scott’s proposal:

When it comes to the environment, I also think carbon taxes make a lot of sense to do, because, again, you want to discourage people from having a large carbon footprint, and it would be hugely impactful to reducing greenhouse gas emissions to tax that. The issue is that, you know, usually so many people push against carbon taxes because, yeah, it would raise prices of stuff. You know, if you make this gasoline more expensive, then that means that also it may be more expensive to get to and from work. But now transport's more expensive, which means everything transported goes up in price, which means foods go up, which means all these other goods go up and services go up.

So it causes higher prices. But if you have a basic income component that's paired with the carbon tax, then that means that usually depending on design, about the bottom two-thirds actually end up receiving more in the basic income than, you know, they pay in this carbon tax. And, again, it depends on design. But only those at the top, those ones who have the largest carbon footprints are the ones who are paying more in taxes than getting back in basic income. That, I think, makes all the sense in the world.

So now we’re not just taxing “fossil fuel” companies, we’re all the way to the globalist wet dream: a universal carbon tax paired with UBI, so that if you use too much energy, you get taxed and have your wealth redistributed to people who use less energy, through the mechanism of a UBI system. If that isn’t government control and coercion, I don’t know what is. Again, I’m not going to debate the premise here. If you think CO2 is a real, serious threat and this level of coercion is acceptable in an attempt to “solve” it, that’s up to you. I’d just like to point out that this is exactly the outcome critics of UBI object to, and claiming UBI won’t be a control mechanism rings very hollow when you propose a system like this.

Final Thoughts

There are more points I could touch on here, but this article is long enough already. I encourage everyone to go listen to the episode yourself. Agree or disagree, this is an issue that’s going to come up again and again in the political discourse, and it’s worth understanding the mindset of supporters and proponents of UBI.

For myself, I’m opposed to the idea. I tried to address some of my main criticisms, based on views and comments taken from the episode.

The main point in favor of UBI that I could support unfortunately wasn’t addressed at all, at least not that I heard. That’s the idea that UBI could reduce waste in welfare program administration by eliminating the need to have a bunch of complex overlapping programs with massive overhead costs. Welfare reform was mentioned in passing, but what I’m talking about requires welfare elimination. It’s pretty clear that’s not on the table for most UBI proponents.

And I think the reason comes out in the redistribution and control sections: UBI is essentially just a cover story for an expansion and entrenchment of the welfare system. As described, it would be redistributive, would have conditions, would require more government control and coercion, and at the end of the day isn’t fundamentally different than the existing welfare system. If you look at the actual net changes in purchasing power, it’s the same model we already have, and not the fundamentally new and different system we’re being sold. In fact, I find it ironic that once you strip away the “same size monthly check to everyone” obfuscation and focus on net purchasing power, the UBI system that’s described doesn’t even meet the definition of “real UBI” given by the proponents themselves.

@ 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!

@ 87f5e1d9:e251d8f4

In the realm of cryptocurrency, the stakes are incredibly high, and losing access to your digital assets can be a daunting experience. But don’t worry — cryptrecver.com is here to transform that nightmare into a reality! With expert-led recovery services and leading-edge technology, Crypt Recver specializes in helping you regain access to your lost Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies.

Why Choose Crypt Recver? 🤔 🔑 Expertise You Can Trust At Crypt Recver, we blend advanced technology with skilled engineers who have a solid track record in crypto recovery. Whether you’ve forgotten your passwords, lost your private keys, or encountered issues with damaged hardware wallets, our team is ready to assist.

⚡ Fast Recovery Process Time is crucial when recovering lost funds. Crypt Recver’s systems are designed for speed, enabling quick recoveries — allowing you to return to what matters most: trading and investing.

🎯 High Success Rate With a success rate exceeding 90%, our recovery team has aided numerous clients in regaining access to their lost assets. We grasp the complexities of cryptocurrency and are committed to providing effective solutions.

🛡️ Confidential & Secure Your privacy is paramount. All recovery sessions at Crypt Recver are encrypted and completely confidential. You can trust us with your information, knowing we uphold the highest security standards.

🔧 Advanced Recovery Tools We employ proprietary tools and techniques to tackle complex recovery scenarios, from retrieving corrupted wallets to restoring coins from invalid addresses. No matter the challenge, we have a solution.

Our Recovery Services Include: 📈 Bitcoin Recovery: Lost access to your Bitcoin wallet? We can assist in recovering lost wallets, private keys, and passphrases. Transaction Recovery: Mistaken transfers, lost passwords, or missing transaction records — let us help you reclaim your funds! Cold Wallet Restoration: Did your cold wallet fail? We specialize in safely extracting assets. Private Key Generation: Forgotten your private key? We can help you generate new keys linked to your funds without compromising security. Don’t Let Lost Crypto Ruin Your Day! 🕒 With an estimated 3 to 3.4 million BTC lost forever, it’s essential to act quickly when facing access issues. Whether you’ve been affected by a dust attack or simply forgotten your key, Crypt Recver provides the support you need to reclaim your digital assets.

🚀 Start Your Recovery Now! Ready to retrieve your cryptocurrency? Don’t let uncertainty hold you back! 👉 Request Wallet Recovery Help Today!cryptrecver.com

Need Immediate Assistance? 📞 For quick queries or support, connect with us on: ✉️ Telegram: t.me/crypptrcver 💬 WhatsApp: +1(941)317–1821

Trust Crypt Recver for the best crypto recovery service — get back to trading with confidence! 💪In the realm of cryptocurrency, the stakes are incredibly high, and losing access to your digital assets can be a daunting experience. But don’t worry — cryptrecver.com is here to transform that nightmare into a reality! With expert-led recovery services and leading-edge technology, Crypt Recver specializes in helping you regain access to your lost Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies.

# Why Choose Crypt Recver? 🤔

🔑 Expertise You Can Trust\ At Crypt Recver, we blend advanced technology with skilled engineers who have a solid track record in crypto recovery. Whether you’ve forgotten your passwords, lost your private keys, or encountered issues with damaged hardware wallets, our team is ready to assist.

⚡ Fast Recovery Process\ Time is crucial when recovering lost funds. Crypt Recver’s systems are designed for speed, enabling quick recoveries — allowing you to return to what matters most: trading and investing.

🎯 High Success Rate\ With a success rate exceeding 90%, our recovery team has aided numerous clients in regaining access to their lost assets. We grasp the complexities of cryptocurrency and are committed to providing effective solutions.

🛡️ Confidential & Secure\ Your privacy is paramount. All recovery sessions at Crypt Recver are encrypted and completely confidential. You can trust us with your information, knowing we uphold the highest security standards.

🔧 Advanced Recovery Tools\ We employ proprietary tools and techniques to tackle complex recovery scenarios, from retrieving corrupted wallets to restoring coins from invalid addresses. No matter the challenge, we have a solution.

# Our Recovery Services Include: 📈

• Bitcoin Recovery: Lost access to your Bitcoin wallet? We can assist in recovering lost wallets, private keys, and passphrases.
• Transaction Recovery: Mistaken transfers, lost passwords, or missing transaction records — let us help you reclaim your funds!
• Cold Wallet Restoration: Did your cold wallet fail? We specialize in safely extracting assets.
• Private Key Generation: Forgotten your private key? We can help you generate new keys linked to your funds without compromising security.

Don’t Let Lost Crypto Ruin Your Day! 🕒

With an estimated 3 to 3.4 million BTC lost forever, it’s essential to act quickly when facing access issues. Whether you’ve been affected by a dust attack or simply forgotten your key, Crypt Recver provides the support you need to reclaim your digital assets.

🚀 Start Your Recovery Now!\ Ready to retrieve your cryptocurrency? Don’t let uncertainty hold you back!\ 👉 Request Wallet Recovery Help Today!cryptrecver.com

Need Immediate Assistance? 📞

For quick queries or support, connect with us on:\ ✉️ Telegram: t.me/crypptrcver\ 💬 WhatsApp: +1(941)317–1821

Trust Crypt Recver for the best crypto recovery service — get back to trading with confidence! 💪

@ 57d1a264:69f1fee1

As a product builder over too many years to mention, I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve seen promising ideas go from zero to hero in a few weeks, only to fizzle out within months.

The problem with most finance apps, however, is that they often become a reflection of the internal politics of the business rather than an experience solely designed around the customer. This means that the focus is on delivering as many features and functionalities as possible to satisfy the needs and desires of competing internal departments, rather than providing a clear value proposition that is focused on what the people out there in the real world want. As a result, these products can very easily bloat to become a mixed bag of confusing, unrelated and ultimately unlovable customer experiences—a feature salad, you might say.

Financial products, which is the field I work in, are no exception. With people’s real hard-earned money on the line, user expectations running high, and a crowded market, it’s tempting to throw as many features at the wall as possible and hope something sticks. But this approach is a recipe for disaster.

Here’s why: https://alistapart.com/article/from-beta-to-bedrock-build-products-that-stick/

https://stacker.news/items/985285

@ c1e9ab3a:9cb56b43

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

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

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

Part I: The Scene and Its Context

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Part IV: Redemption as Narrative Alchemy

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

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

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

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

Part V: Real-World Reflections and Dangerous Scripts

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

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

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

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

Part VI: Cultural Responsibility and Narrative Ethics

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

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

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

Conclusion: Reckoning with the Stories We Tell

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

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

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

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

@ d61f3bc5:0da6ef4a

I remember the first gathering of Nostr devs two years ago in Costa Rica. We were all psyched because Nostr appeared to solve the problem of self-sovereign online identity and decentralized publishing. The protocol seemed well-suited for textual content, but it wasn't really designed to handle binary files, like images or video.

The Problem

When I publish a note that contains an image link, the note itself is resilient thanks to Nostr, but if the hosting service disappears or takes my image down, my note will be broken forever. We need a way to publish binary data without relying on a single hosting provider.

We were discussing how there really was no reliable solution to this problem even outside of Nostr. Peer-to-peer attempts like IPFS simply didn't work; they were hopelessly slow and unreliable in practice. Torrents worked for popular files like movies, but couldn't be relied on for general file hosting.

Awesome Blossom

A year later, I attended the Sovereign Engineering demo day in Madeira, organized by Pablo and Gigi. Many projects were presented over a three hour demo session that day, but one really stood out for me.

Introduced by hzrd149 and Stu Bowman, Blossom blew my mind because it showed how we can solve complex problems easily by simply relying on the fact that Nostr exists. Having an open user directory, with the corresponding social graph and web of trust is an incredible building block.

Since we can easily look up any user on Nostr and read their profile metadata, we can just get them to simply tell us where their files are stored. This, combined with hash-based addressing (borrowed from IPFS), is all we need to solve our problem.

How Blossom Works

The Blossom protocol (Blobs Stored Simply on Mediaservers) is formally defined in a series of BUDs (Blossom Upgrade Documents). Yes, Blossom is the most well-branded protocol in the history of protocols. Feel free to refer to the spec for details, but I will provide a high level explanation here.

The main idea behind Blossom can be summarized in three points:

1. Users specify which media server(s) they use via their public Blossom settings published on Nostr;
2. All files are uniquely addressable via hashes;
3. If an app fails to load a file from the original URL, it simply goes to get it from the server(s) specified in the user's Blossom settings.

Just like Nostr itself, the Blossom protocol is dead-simple and it works!

Let's use this image as an example:

If you look at the URL for this image, you will notice that it looks like this:

blossom.primal.net/c1aa63f983a44185d039092912bfb7f33adcf63ed3cae371ebe6905da5f688d0.jpg

All Blossom URLs follow this format:

[server]/[file-hash].[extension]

The file hash is important because it uniquely identifies the file in question. Apps can use it to verify that the file they received is exactly the file they requested. It also gives us the ability to reliably get the same file from a different server.

Nostr users declare which media server(s) they use by publishing their Blossom settings. If I store my files on Server A, and they get removed, I can simply upload them to Server B, update my public Blossom settings, and all Blossom-capable apps will be able to find them at the new location. All my existing notes will continue to display media content without any issues.

Blossom Mirroring

Let's face it, re-uploading files to another server after they got removed from the original server is not the best user experience. Most people wouldn't have the backups of all the files, and/or the desire to do this work.

This is where Blossom's mirroring feature comes handy. In addition to the primary media server, a Blossom user can set one one or more mirror servers. Under this setup, every time a file is uploaded to the primary server the Nostr app issues a mirror request to the primary server, directing it to copy the file to all the specified mirrors. This way there is always a copy of all content on multiple servers and in case the primary becomes unavailable, Blossom-capable apps will automatically start loading from the mirror.

Mirrors are really easy to setup (you can do it in two clicks in Primal) and this arrangement ensures robust media handling without any central points of failure. Note that you can use professional media hosting services side by side with self-hosted backup servers that anyone can run at home.

Using Blossom Within Primal

Blossom is natively integrated into the entire Primal stack and enabled by default. If you are using Primal 2.2 or later, you don't need to do anything to enable Blossom, all your media uploads are blossoming already.

To enhance user privacy, all Primal apps use the "/media" endpoint per BUD-05, which strips all metadata from uploaded files before they are saved and optionally mirrored to other Blossom servers, per user settings. You can use any Blossom server as your primary media server in Primal, as well as setup any number of mirrors:

## Conclusion

For such a simple protocol, Blossom gives us three major benefits:

1. Verifiable authenticity. All Nostr notes are always signed by the note author. With Blossom, the signed note includes a unique hash for each referenced media file, making it impossible to falsify.
2. File hosting redundancy. Having multiple live copies of referenced media files (via Blossom mirroring) greatly increases the resiliency of media content published on Nostr.
3. Censorship resistance. Blossom enables us to seamlessly switch media hosting providers in case of censorship.

Thanks for reading; and enjoy! 🌸

@ 52b4a076:e7fad8bd

Introduction

Me and Fishcake have been working on infrastructure for Noswhere and Nostr.build. Part of this involves processing a large amount of Nostr events for features such as search, analytics, and feeds.

I have been recently developing nosdex v3, a newer version of the Noswhere scraper that is designed for maximum performance and fault tolerance using FoundationDB (FDB).

Fishcake has been working on a processing system for Nostr events to use with NB, based off of Cloudflare (CF) Pipelines, which is a relatively new beta product. This evening, we put it all to the test.

First preparations

We set up a new CF Pipelines endpoint, and I implemented a basic importer that took data from the nosdex database. This was quite slow, as it did HTTP requests synchronously, but worked as a good smoke test.

Asynchronous indexing

I implemented a high-contention queue system designed for highly parallel indexing operations, built using FDB, that supports: - Fully customizable batch sizes - Per-index queues - Hundreds of parallel consumers - Automatic retry logic using lease expiration

When the scraper first gets an event, it will process it and eventually write it to the blob store and FDB. Each new event is appended to the event log.

On the indexing side, a Queuer will read the event log, and batch events (usually 2K-5K events) into one work job. This work job contains: - A range in the log to index - Which target this job is intended for - The size of the job and some other metadata

Each job has an associated leasing state, which is used to handle retries and prioritization, and ensure no duplication of work.

Several Workers monitor the index queue (up to 128) and wait for new jobs that are available to lease.

Once a suitable job is found, the worker acquires a lease on the job and reads the relevant events from FDB and the blob store.

Depending on the indexing type, the job will be processed in one of a number of ways, and then marked as completed or returned for retries.

In this case, the event is also forwarded to CF Pipelines.

Trying it out

The first attempt did not go well. I found a bug in the high-contention indexer that led to frequent transaction conflicts. This was easily solved by correcting an incorrectly set parameter.

We also found there were other issues in the indexer, such as an insufficient amount of threads, and a suspicious decrease in the speed of the Queuer during processing of queued jobs.

Along with fixing these issues, I also implemented other optimizations, such as deprioritizing Worker DB accesses, and increasing the batch size.

To fix the degraded Queuer performance, I ran the backfill job by itself, and then started indexing after it had completed.

Bottlenecks, bottlenecks everywhere

After implementing these fixes, there was an interesting problem: The DB couldn't go over 80K reads per second. I had encountered this limit during load testing for the scraper and other FDB benchmarks.

As I suspected, this was a client thread limitation, as one thread seemed to be using high amounts of CPU. To overcome this, I created a new client instance for each Worker.

After investigating, I discovered that the Go FoundationDB client cached the database connection. This meant all attempts to create separate DB connections ended up being useless.

Using OpenWithConnectionString partially resolved this issue. (This also had benefits for service-discovery based connection configuration.)

To be able to fully support multi-threading, I needed to enabled the FDB multi-client feature. Enabling it also allowed easier upgrades across DB versions, as FDB clients are incompatible across versions:

FDB_NETWORK_OPTION_EXTERNAL_CLIENT_LIBRARY="/lib/libfdb_c.so" FDB_NETWORK_OPTION_CLIENT_THREADS_PER_VERSION="16"

Breaking the 100K/s reads barrier

After implementing support for the multi-threaded client, we were able to get over 100K reads per second.

You may notice after the restart (gap) the performance dropped. This was caused by several bugs: 1. When creating the CF Pipelines endpoint, we did not specify a region. The automatically selected region was far away from the server. 2. The amount of shards were not sufficient, so we increased them. 3. The client overloaded a few HTTP/2 connections with too many requests.

I implemented a feature to assign each Worker its own HTTP client, fixing the 3rd issue. We also moved the entire storage region to West Europe to be closer to the servers.

After these changes, we were able to easily push over 200K reads/s, mostly limited by missing optimizations:

It's shards all the way down

While testing, we also noticed another issue: At certain times, a pipeline would get overloaded, stalling requests for seconds at a time. This prevented all forward progress on the Workers.

We solved this by having multiple pipelines: A primary pipeline meant to be for standard load, with moderate batching duration and less shards, and high-throughput pipelines with more shards.

Each Worker is assigned a pipeline on startup, and if one pipeline stalls, other workers can continue making progress and saturate the DB.

The stress test

After making sure everything was ready for the import, we cleared all data, and started the import.

The entire import lasted 20 minutes between 01:44 UTC and 02:04 UTC, reaching a peak of: - 0.25M requests per second - 0.6M keys read per second - 140MB/s reads from DB - 2Gbps of network throughput

FoundationDB ran smoothly during this test, with: - Read times under 2ms - Zero conflicting transactions - No overloaded servers

CF Pipelines held up well, delivering batches to R2 without any issues, while reaching its maximum possible throughput.

Finishing notes

Me and Fishcake have been building infrastructure around scaling Nostr, from media, to relays, to content indexing. We consistently work on improving scalability, resiliency and stability, even outside these posts.

Many things, including what you see here, are already a part of Nostr.build, Noswhere and NFDB, and many other changes are being implemented every day.

If you like what you are seeing, and want to integrate it, get in touch. :)

If you want to support our work, you can zap this post, or register for nostr.land and nostr.build today.

@ c631e267:c2b78d3e

Nur wenn wir aufeinander zugehen, haben wir die Chance \ auf Überwindung der gegenseitigen Ressentiments! \ Dr. med. dent. Jens Knipphals

In Wolfsburg sollte es kürzlich eine Gesprächsrunde von Kritikern der Corona-Politik mit Oberbürgermeister Dennis Weilmann und Vertretern der Stadtverwaltung geben. Der Zahnarzt und langjährige Maßnahmenkritiker Jens Knipphals hatte diese Einladung ins Rathaus erwirkt und publiziert. Seine Motivation:

«Ich möchte die Spaltung der Gesellschaft überwinden. Dazu ist eine umfassende Aufarbeitung der Corona-Krise in der Öffentlichkeit notwendig.»

Schon früher hatte Knipphals Antworten von den Kommunalpolitikern verlangt, zum Beispiel bei öffentlichen Bürgerfragestunden. Für das erwartete Treffen im Rathaus formulierte er Fragen wie: Warum wurden fachliche Argumente der Kritiker ignoriert? Weshalb wurde deren Ausgrenzung, Diskreditierung und Entmenschlichung nicht entgegengetreten? In welcher Form übernehmen Rat und Verwaltung in Wolfsburg persönlich Verantwortung für die erheblichen Folgen der politischen Corona-Krise?

Der Termin fand allerdings nicht statt – der Bürgermeister sagte ihn kurz vorher wieder ab. Knipphals bezeichnete Weilmann anschließend als Wiederholungstäter, da das Stadtoberhaupt bereits 2022 zu einem Runden Tisch in der Sache eingeladen hatte, den es dann nie gab. Gegenüber Multipolar erklärte der Arzt, Weilmann wolle scheinbar eine öffentliche Aufarbeitung mit allen Mitteln verhindern. Er selbst sei «inzwischen absolut desillusioniert» und die einzige Lösung sei, dass die Verantwortlichen gingen.

Die Aufarbeitung der Plandemie beginne bei jedem von uns selbst, sei aber letztlich eine gesamtgesellschaftliche Aufgabe, schreibt Peter Frey, der den «Fall Wolfsburg» auch in seinem Blog behandelt. Diese Aufgabe sei indes deutlich größer, als viele glaubten. Erfreulicherweise sei der öffentliche Informationsraum inzwischen größer, trotz der weiterhin unverfrorenen Desinformations-Kampagnen der etablierten Massenmedien.

Frey erinnert daran, dass Dennis Weilmann mitverantwortlich für gravierende Grundrechtseinschränkungen wie die 2021 eingeführten 2G-Regeln in der Wolfsburger Innenstadt zeichnet. Es sei naiv anzunehmen, dass ein Funktionär einzig im Interesse der Bürger handeln würde. Als früherer Dezernent des Amtes für Wirtschaft, Digitalisierung und Kultur der Autostadt kenne Weilmann zum Beispiel die Verknüpfung von Fördergeldern mit politischen Zielsetzungen gut.

Wolfsburg wurde damals zu einem Modellprojekt des Bundesministeriums des Innern (BMI) und war Finalist im Bitkom-Wettbewerb «Digitale Stadt». So habe rechtzeitig vor der Plandemie das Projekt «Smart City Wolfsburg» anlaufen können, das der Stadt «eine Vorreiterrolle für umfassende Vernetzung und Datenerfassung» aufgetragen habe, sagt Frey. Die Vereinten Nationen verkauften dann derartige «intelligente» Überwachungs- und Kontrollmaßnahmen ebenso als Rettung in der Not wie das Magazin Forbes im April 2020:

«Intelligente Städte können uns helfen, die Coronavirus-Pandemie zu bekämpfen. In einer wachsenden Zahl von Ländern tun die intelligenten Städte genau das. Regierungen und lokale Behörden nutzen Smart-City-Technologien, Sensoren und Daten, um die Kontakte von Menschen aufzuspüren, die mit dem Coronavirus infiziert sind. Gleichzeitig helfen die Smart Cities auch dabei, festzustellen, ob die Regeln der sozialen Distanzierung eingehalten werden.»

Offensichtlich gibt es viele Aspekte zu bedenken und zu durchleuten, wenn es um die Aufklärung und Aufarbeitung der sogenannten «Corona-Pandemie» und der verordneten Maßnahmen geht. Frustration und Desillusion sind angesichts der Realitäten absolut verständlich. Gerade deswegen sind Initiativen wie die von Jens Knipphals so bewundernswert und so wichtig – ebenso wie eine seiner Kernthesen: «Wir müssen aufeinander zugehen, da hilft alles nichts».

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ 4857600b:30b502f4

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

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

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

@ 9c9d2765:16f8c2c2

CHAPTER TWENTY FOUR

Back at JP Towers, James had already anticipated the move. He had cameras and witness accounts from the anniversary event, stored securely in multiple locations. He knew the public had a short memory but a long hunger for drama. One misstep could tilt public sentiment.

But James was no longer playing to survive.

He was playing to reign.

Later that night, he stood before a mirror, adjusting the cuffs of his suit. In his reflection, he saw more than his own face; he saw the faces of those who had mocked, betrayed, and underestimated him. And he saw the legacy he was building not just for himself, but for those who once believed justice was a myth.

He whispered to the reflection, “Let them come. Let them burn what’s left of their dignity. I’ll rise through the smoke again. Because I always do.”

Outside, the wind howled like a prophecy through the high-rises.

The days that followed carried a subtle tension that coiled around the city's heartbeat. JP Enterprises thrived outwardly, stock prices climbed, investor confidence surged, and the company continued to solidify its dominion over the corporate landscape. But beneath the facade of calm and progress, a tempest brewed in silence.

James, the man once ridiculed and ostracized, now sat at the summit of power, yet his enemies, battered but unbroken, plotted from the shadows.

In an undisclosed meeting room within the Executive Wing, James convened with his most trusted circle Charles, Rita, and Sandra. The room was dimly lit, the atmosphere sober, with every eye locked onto the digital presentation being displayed.

On the screen were surveillance stills, financial records, and intercepted messages.

Rita, ever composed, began, “We’ve confirmed that Helen and Mark are using a shell media outlet in a nearby province to rewrite the narrative surrounding the anniversary incident. They’re laundering stories through third-party publications to make it appear as if you orchestrated the bribery and the public drama.”

Sandra added, her voice laced with concern, “The young woman from the event she’s set to appear in a televised interview in two days. The preview clips suggest she’ll claim coercion, manipulation… that you paid her to falsely accuse Mark and Helen.”

Charles sat back in his chair, folding his arms. “It’s a desperate move,” he muttered, “but one that could sway public opinion if left unchecked.”

James didn’t flinch. His gaze was cold and calculated. “Let them speak,” he said. “Let her appear on screen, let the nation watch but when the time is right, we’ll release the real footage. Every confession, every whispered transaction, every threat they issued. And when we do, it won’t just be public opinion they lose, it'll be their freedom.”

The room fell silent. The weight of the plan was immense. James wasn’t simply fighting a smear campaign he was orchestrating the downfall of those who had haunted his past and jeopardized his future.

Across town, in a luxurious yet shadowy apartment, Helen paced furiously. Mark sat slouched on the couch, phone in hand, monitoring the latest headlines.

“She hasn’t confirmed the script yet,” Mark grumbled, referring to the woman they’d bribed. “She’s stalling. You think she’s flipping again?”

“She better not,” Helen spat. “We gave her a second chance, more money, more protection. If she dares cross us again...”

“Then we make her disappear,” Mark said coldly.

Helen paused. “Or we pin everything on her. Let her take the fall.”

Their desperation bled into their decisions. The empire they tried to build with lies and manipulation was already on unstable ground. They didn’t realize James wasn’t just steps ahead. Two days later, as the nation sat glued to their screens, the controversial interview aired. The woman, visibly tense, spoke her lines.

“Yes… he promised to protect me… he told me to say Mark and Helen bribed me… I was scared of what he might do if I didn’t cooperate…”

The hosts gasped, commentators argued, and the news cycle erupted.

For an hour, James’s name trended for all the wrong reasons.

And then the storm came.

JP Enterprises’ official communication channels released a statement followed by a seven-minute clip, unedited, raw, and crystal clear. It captured everything: the lady kneeling, pointing to Mark and Helen, the whispered confessions, the crowd’s reaction, Helen’s furious outburst. And, most damning of all, a covert recording of Helen threatening the woman in a private meeting.

The tide turned instantly.

Social media exploded not with outrage toward James, but with condemnation of the real culprits. Hashtags flipped. Influencers, journalists, and even rival corporations came to James’s defense. The woman fled the city within hours. Mark and Helen, now disgraced, faced not just the wrath of public judgment, but the immediate interest of law enforcement.

Back at the JP tower, James watched it all unfold. The screen reflected in his eyes as headlines changed: “President Vindicated,” “Corporate Sabotage Exposed,” “Justice Prevails in High-Stakes Feud.”

Charles walked in slowly, a faint smile on his lips. “It’s done.”

James nodded, his voice a calm murmur. “No. It’s only the beginning. I haven’t just protected my name, I've carved a legacy.”

He stood up, walking toward the window where the city stretched out beneath him, unaware of how close it had come to being ruled by lies.

Behind him, the quiet echo of Charles’s voice lingered: “Your enemies are falling, one by one.”

@ 91bea5cd:1df4451c

Instruções:

1. Leia cada pergunta cuidadosamente.
2. Escolha a opção (A, B, C ou D) que melhor descreve você na maioria das situações. Seja o mais honesto possível.
3. Anote a letra correspondente à sua escolha para cada pergunta.
4. No final, some quantas vezes você escolheu cada letra (A, B, C, D).
5. Veja a seção de resultados para interpretar sua pontuação.

---

Teste de Temperamento

1. Em um evento social (festa, reunião), como você geralmente se comporta? A) Sou o centro das atenções, converso com todos, faço piadas e animo o ambiente. B) Tomo a iniciativa, organizo atividades ou discussões, e gosto de liderar conversas. C) Prefiro observar, conversar em grupos menores ou com pessoas que já conheço bem, e analiso o ambiente. D) Sou tranquilo, ouvinte, evito chamar atenção e me adapto ao ritmo do grupo.

2. Ao enfrentar um novo projeto ou tarefa desafiadora no trabalho ou estudo: A) Fico entusiasmado com a novidade, tenho muitas ideias iniciais, mas posso me distrair facilmente. B) Defino metas claras, crio um plano de ação rápido e foco em alcançar resultados eficientemente. C) Analiso todos os detalhes, planejo meticulosamente, prevejo possíveis problemas e busco a perfeição. D) Abordo com calma, trabalho de forma constante e organizada, e prefiro um ambiente sem pressão.

3. Como você geralmente reage a críticas? A) Tento levar na esportiva, talvez faça uma piada, mas posso me magoar momentaneamente e logo esqueço. B) Defendo meu ponto de vista vigorosamente, posso ficar irritado se sentir injustiça, mas foco em corrigir o problema. C) Levo muito a sério, analiso profundamente, posso me sentir magoado por um tempo e repenso minhas ações. D) Escuto com calma, considero a crítica objetivamente e tento não levar para o lado pessoal, buscando a paz.

4. Qual seu estilo de tomada de decisão? A) Sou impulsivo, decido rapidamente com base no entusiasmo do momento, às vezes me arrependo depois. B) Sou decidido e rápido, foco no objetivo final, às vezes sem considerar todos os detalhes ou sentimentos alheios. C) Sou ponderado, analiso todas as opções e consequências, demoro para decidir buscando a melhor escolha. D) Sou cauteloso, prefiro evitar decisões difíceis, busco consenso ou adio se possível.

5. Como você lida com rotina e repetição? A) Acho entediante rapidamente, preciso de variedade e novidade constante para me manter engajado. B) Tolero se for necessário para atingir um objetivo, mas prefiro desafios e mudanças que eu controlo. C) Aprecio a ordem e a previsibilidade, me sinto confortável com rotinas bem estabelecidas. D) Adapto-me bem à rotina, acho confortável e seguro, não gosto de mudanças bruscas.

6. Em uma discussão ou conflito: A) Tento aliviar a tensão com humor, expresso meus sentimentos abertamente, mas não guardo rancor. B) Sou direto e assertivo, defendo minha posição com firmeza, posso parecer confrontador. C) Evito confronto direto, mas fico remoendo o problema, analiso os argumentos e posso guardar ressentimento. D) Busco a conciliação, tento entender todos os lados, sou diplomático e evito o conflito a todo custo.

7. Como você expressa seus sentimentos (alegria, tristeza, raiva)? A) Expresso de forma aberta, intensa e visível, minhas emoções mudam rapidamente. B) Expresso de forma direta e forte, principalmente a raiva ou a determinação, controlo emoções "fracas". C) Tendo a internalizar, minhas emoções são profundas e duradouras, posso parecer reservado. D) Sou contido na expressão emocional, mantenho a calma externamente, mesmo que sinta algo internamente.

8. Qual seu nível de energia habitual? A) Alto, sou muito ativo, falante e entusiasmado, gosto de estar em movimento. B) Muito alto e direcionado, tenho muita energia para perseguir meus objetivos e liderar. C) Variável, posso ter picos de energia para projetos que me interessam, mas também preciso de tempo quieto para recarregar. D) Moderado e constante, sou calmo, tranquilo, prefiro atividades menos agitadas.

9. Como você organiza seu espaço de trabalho ou sua casa? A) Pode ser um pouco caótico e desorganizado, com muitas coisas interessantes espalhadas. B) Organizado de forma funcional para máxima eficiência, focado no essencial para as tarefas. C) Extremamente organizado, metódico, cada coisa em seu lugar, prezo pela ordem e estética. D) Confortável e prático, não necessariamente impecável, mas funcional e sem excessos.

10. O que mais te motiva? A) Reconhecimento social, diversão, novas experiências e interações. B) Poder, controle, desafios, alcançar metas ambiciosas e resultados concretos. C) Qualidade, significado, fazer as coisas da maneira certa, compreensão profunda. D) Paz, estabilidade, harmonia nos relacionamentos, evitar estresse e pressão.

11. Como você reage a imprevistos ou mudanças de plano? A) Adapto-me rapidamente, às vezes até gosto da novidade, embora possa atrapalhar meus planos iniciais. B) Fico irritado com a perda de controle, mas rapidamente busco uma solução alternativa para manter o objetivo. C) Sinto-me desconfortável e ansioso, preciso de tempo para reavaliar e replanejar cuidadosamente. D) Aceito com calma, sou flexível e me ajusto sem muito alarde, desde que não gere conflito.

12. Qual o seu maior medo (em termos gerais)? A) Ser rejeitado, ignorado ou ficar entediado. B) Perder o controle, parecer fraco ou incompetente. C) Cometer erros graves, ser inadequado ou imperfeito. D) Conflitos, pressão, tomar decisões erradas que afetem a estabilidade.

13. Como você costuma passar seu tempo livre? A) Socializando, saindo com amigos, buscando atividades novas e divertidas. B) Engajado em atividades produtivas, esportes competitivos, planejando próximos passos. C) Lendo, estudando, refletindo, dedicando-me a hobbies que exigem atenção e cuidado. D) Relaxando em casa, assistindo filmes, lendo tranquilamente, passando tempo com a família de forma calma.

14. Ao trabalhar em equipe: A) Sou o animador, trago ideias, conecto as pessoas, mas posso ter dificuldade em focar nos detalhes. B) Assumo a liderança naturalmente, delego tarefas, foco nos resultados e mantenho todos na linha. C) Sou o planejador e o crítico construtivo, atento aos detalhes, garanto a qualidade, mas posso ser muito exigente. D) Sou o pacificador e o colaborador, ajudo a manter a harmonia, realizo minhas tarefas de forma confiável.

15. Como você lida com prazos? A) Muitas vezes deixo para a última hora, trabalho melhor sob a pressão do prazo final, mas posso me atrapalhar. B) Gosto de terminar bem antes do prazo, vejo o prazo como um desafio a ser superado rapidamente. C) Planejo o tempo cuidadosamente para cumprir o prazo com qualidade, fico ansioso se o tempo fica curto. D) Trabalho em ritmo constante para cumprir o prazo sem estresse, não gosto de correria.

16. Qual destas frases mais te descreve? A) "A vida é uma festa!" B) "Se quer algo bem feito, faça você mesmo (ou mande fazer do seu jeito)." C) "Tudo tem um propósito e um lugar certo." D) "Devagar se vai ao longe."

17. Em relação a regras e procedimentos: A) Gosto de flexibilidade, às vezes acho as regras limitantes e tento contorná-las. B) Uso as regras a meu favor para atingir objetivos, mas não hesito em quebrá-las se necessário e se eu puder controlar as consequências. C) Sigo as regras rigorosamente, acredito que elas garantem ordem e qualidade. D) Respeito as regras para evitar problemas, prefiro seguir o fluxo estabelecido.

18. Como você reage quando alguém está emocionalmente abalado? A) Tento animar a pessoa, conto piadas, ofereço distração e companhia. B) Ofereço soluções práticas para o problema, foco em resolver a situação que causou o abalo. C) Escuto com empatia, ofereço apoio profundo e tento compreender a dor da pessoa. D) Mantenho a calma, ofereço um ouvido atento e um ombro amigo, sem me deixar abalar muito.

19. Que tipo de filme ou livro você prefere? A) Comédias, aventuras, romances leves, algo que me divirta e me mantenha entretido. B) Ação, suspense, biografias de líderes, estratégias, algo que me desafie ou inspire poder. C) Dramas profundos, documentários, mistérios complexos, ficção científica filosófica, algo que me faça pensar e sentir. D) Histórias tranquilas, dramas familiares, romances amenos, natureza, algo que me relaxe e traga conforto.

20. O que é mais importante para você em um relacionamento (amizade, amoroso)? A) Diversão, cumplicidade, comunicação aberta e espontaneidade. B) Lealdade, objetivos em comum, apoio mútuo nas ambições. C) Compreensão profunda, fidelidade, apoio emocional e intelectual. D) Harmonia, estabilidade, aceitação mútua e tranquilidade.

21. Se você ganhasse na loteria, qual seria sua primeira reação/ação? A) Faria uma grande festa, viajaria pelo mundo, compraria presentes para todos! B) Investiria estrategicamente, planejaria como multiplicar o dinheiro, garantiria o controle financeiro. C) Pesquisaria as melhores opções de investimento, faria um plano detalhado de longo prazo, doaria para causas significativas. D) Guardaria a maior parte em segurança, faria algumas melhorias práticas na vida, evitaria mudanças drásticas.

22. Como você se sente em relação a riscos? A) Gosto de arriscar se a recompensa parecer divertida ou excitante, sou otimista. B) Calculo os riscos e assumo-os se acreditar que a recompensa vale a pena e que posso controlar a situação. C) Evito riscos desnecessários, prefiro a segurança e a previsibilidade, analiso tudo antes de agir. D) Desgosto de riscos, prefiro caminhos seguros e comprovados, a estabilidade é mais importante.

23. Sua memória tende a focar mais em: A) Momentos divertidos, pessoas interessantes, experiências marcantes (embora possa esquecer detalhes). B) Sucessos, fracassos (para aprender), injustiças cometidas contra você, quem te ajudou ou atrapalhou. C) Detalhes precisos, conversas significativas, erros cometidos (por você ou outros), sentimentos profundos. D) Fatos objetivos, rotinas, informações práticas, geralmente de forma neutra.

24. Quando aprende algo novo, você prefere: A) Experimentar na prática imediatamente, aprender fazendo, mesmo que cometa erros. B) Entender o objetivo e a aplicação prática rapidamente, focar no essencial para usar o conhecimento. C) Estudar a fundo a teoria, entender todos os porquês, buscar fontes confiáveis e dominar o assunto. D) Aprender em um ritmo calmo, com instruções claras e passo a passo, sem pressão.

25. Se descreva em uma palavra (escolha a que mais se aproxima): A) Entusiasmado(a) B) Determinado(a) C) Criterioso(a) D) Pacífico(a)

26. Como você lida com o silêncio em uma conversa? A) Sinto-me desconfortável e tento preenchê-lo rapidamente com qualquer assunto. B) Uso o silêncio estrategicamente ou o interrompo para direcionar a conversa. C) Posso apreciar o silêncio para refletir, ou me sentir um pouco ansioso dependendo do contexto. D) Sinto-me confortável com o silêncio, não sinto necessidade de preenchê-lo.

27. O que te deixa mais frustrado(a)? A) Tédio, falta de reconhecimento, ser ignorado. B) Incompetência alheia, falta de controle, obstáculos aos seus planos. C) Desorganização, falta de qualidade, injustiça, superficialidade. D) Conflitos interpessoais, pressão excessiva, desordem emocional.

28. Qual a sua relação com o passado, presente e futuro? A) Foco no presente e nas oportunidades imediatas, otimista em relação ao futuro, esqueço o passado facilmente. B) Foco no futuro (metas) e no presente (ações para alcançá-las), aprendo com o passado mas não me prendo a ele. C) Reflito muito sobre o passado (aprendizados, erros), analiso o presente e planejo o futuro com cautela, às vezes com preocupação. D) Vivo o presente de forma tranquila, valorizo a estabilidade e a continuidade do passado, vejo o futuro com serenidade.

29. Se você tivesse que organizar um evento, qual seria seu papel principal? A) Relações públicas, divulgação, animação, garantir que todos se divirtam. B) Coordenação geral, definição de metas, delegação de tarefas, garantir que tudo aconteça conforme o planejado (por você). C) Planejamento detalhado, logística, controle de qualidade, garantir que nada dê errado. D) Suporte, resolução de problemas de forma calma, garantir um ambiente harmonioso.

30. Qual ambiente de trabalho te agrada mais? A) Dinâmico, social, com muita interação, flexibilidade e novidades. B) Competitivo, desafiador, focado em resultados, onde eu possa liderar ou ter autonomia. C) Estruturado, quieto, onde eu possa me concentrar, com padrões claros de qualidade e tempo para análise. D) Estável, cooperativo, sem pressão, com relacionamentos harmoniosos e tarefas previsíveis.

---

Calculando seus Resultados:

Agora, conte quantas vezes você escolheu cada letra:

• Total de A: ______
• Total de B: ______
• Total de C: ______
• Total de D: ______

A letra (ou as letras) com a maior pontuação indica(m) seu(s) temperamento(s) dominante(s).

---

Interpretação dos Resultados:

• Se sua maior pontuação foi A: Temperamento SANGUÍNEO Dominante

  • Características: Você é extrovertido, otimista, sociável, comunicativo, entusiasmado e adora novidades. Gosta de ser o centro das atenções, faz amigos facilmente e contagia os outros com sua energia. É criativo e espontâneo.
  • Pontos Fortes: Carismático, inspirador, adaptável, bom em iniciar relacionamentos e projetos, perdoa facilmente.
  • Desafios Potenciais: Pode ser indisciplinado, desorganizado, impulsivo, superficial, ter dificuldade em focar e terminar tarefas, e ser muito dependente de aprovação externa.

• Se sua maior pontuação foi B: Temperamento COLÉRICO Dominante

  • Características: Você é enérgico, decidido, líder nato, orientado para metas e resultados. É ambicioso, assertivo, direto e não tem medo de desafios ou confrontos. Gosta de estar no controle e é muito prático.
  • Pontos Fortes: Determinado, eficiente, líder natural, bom em tomar decisões e resolver problemas, autoconfiante.
  • Desafios Potenciais: Pode ser impaciente, dominador, teimoso, insensível aos sentimentos alheios, propenso à raiva e a "atropelar" os outros para atingir seus objetivos.

• Se sua maior pontuação foi C: Temperamento MELANCÓLICO Dominante

  • Características: Você é introvertido, analítico, sensível, perfeccionista e profundo. É leal, dedicado, aprecia a beleza e a ordem. Tende a ser pensativo, criterioso e busca significado em tudo. Leva as coisas a sério.
  • Pontos Fortes: Detalhista, organizado, criativo (em profundidade), leal, empático, comprometido com a qualidade e a justiça.
  • Desafios Potenciais: Pode ser pessimista, excessivamente crítico (consigo e com os outros), indeciso (pela análise excessiva), guardar ressentimentos, ser propenso à tristeza e ao isolamento.

• Se sua maior pontuação foi D: Temperamento FLEUMÁTICO Dominante

  • Características: Você é calmo, tranquilo, equilibrado e diplomático. É observador, paciente, confiável e fácil de conviver. Evita conflitos, busca harmonia e estabilidade. É um bom ouvinte e trabalha bem sob rotina.
  • Pontos Fortes: Pacífico, estável, confiável, bom ouvinte, diplomático, eficiente em tarefas rotineiras, mantém a calma sob pressão.
  • Desafios Potenciais: Pode ser indeciso, procrastinador, resistente a mudanças, parecer apático ou sem entusiasmo, ter dificuldade em se impor e expressar suas próprias necessidades.

Combinações de Temperamentos:

É muito comum ter pontuações altas em duas letras. Isso indica uma combinação de temperamentos. Por exemplo:

• Sanguíneo-Colérico: Extrovertido, enérgico, líder carismático, mas pode ser impulsivo e dominador.
• Sanguíneo-Fleumático: Sociável e agradável, mas pode ter dificuldade com disciplina e iniciativa.
• Colérico-Melancólico: Líder focado e detalhista, muito capaz, mas pode ser excessivamente crítico e exigente.
• Melancólico-Fleumático: Quieto, confiável, analítico, mas pode ser indeciso e resistente a riscos.

Importante: Este teste é uma ferramenta de autoconhecimento. Ninguém se encaixa perfeitamente em uma única caixa. Use os resultados para entender melhor suas tendências naturais, seus pontos fortes e as áreas onde você pode buscar equilíbrio e desenvolvimento.

@ 30b99916:3cc6e3fe

For all you COVID COWARDS out there perhaps you can redeem yourself by supporting America's Frontline Docters

History will show that the defeat of COVID tyranny wasn’t granted – it was won, case by case, voice by voice – and your support for America’s Frontline Doctors played an important role in this fight.  

America 2020 – our nation faced a moment of truth.  

Public health soldiers working for deep-state globalists unleashed tyranny in response to a virus - to terrorize us and dismantle our Constitution.  

When I look back on the forces arrayed against us, I’m amazed more people did NOT stand up for their rights:

_Government agencies...hospitals...universities...corporations..._

...the state acting as our “savior” ...

...and Big Tech as the enforcer...

All joined forces to impose sweeping authoritarian mandates under the banners of public health and settled science.

_They declared freedom and liberty non-essential._

_They silenced, fired, shamed, and canceled ANYONE who dared question them._

ANYONE who resisted the masking, the lockdowns, the forced mRNA injections, are HEROS.

It angers me just thinking about what happened next.

Everyday Americans lost their livelihoods.

Parents watched as their children deteriorated after being locked out of their schools.  

Doctors – some of the best in the country – were hunted down by their own licensing boards for practicing ACTUAL medicine instead of government-approved pseudoscience.  

I hate to admit it, but tyranny triumphed.

The people had surrendered so much liberty that I didn’t recognize the nation our founders had forged.  

I’m sure you didn’t either.  

But while we can’t undo the past, we can make sure we don’t repeat it. 

That is why America’s Frontline Doctors and I – with you alongside us – have been fighting back.  

And together, we’ve been doing it case by case, supporting legal challenges against these unconstitutional, totalitarian mandates.

@ 21335073:a244b1ad

Please respect Virginia Giuffre’s memory by refraining from asking about the circumstances or theories surrounding her passing.

Since Virginia Giuffre’s death, I’ve reflected on what she would want me to say or do. This piece is my attempt to honor her legacy.

When I first spoke with Virginia, I was struck by her unshakable hope. I had grown cynical after years in the anti-human trafficking movement, worn down by a broken system and a government that often seemed complicit. But Virginia’s passion, creativity, and belief that survivors could be heard reignited something in me. She reminded me of my younger, more hopeful self. Instead of warning her about the challenges ahead, I let her dream big, unburdened by my own disillusionment. That conversation changed me for the better, and following her lead led to meaningful progress.

Virginia was one of the bravest people I’ve ever known. As a survivor of Epstein, Maxwell, and their co-conspirators, she risked everything to speak out, taking on some of the world’s most powerful figures.

She loved when I said, “Epstein isn’t the only Epstein.” This wasn’t just about one man—it was a call to hold all abusers accountable and to ensure survivors find hope and healing.

The Epstein case often gets reduced to sensational details about the elite, but that misses the bigger picture. Yes, we should be holding all of the co-conspirators accountable, we must listen to the survivors’ stories. Their experiences reveal how predators exploit vulnerabilities, offering lessons to prevent future victims.

You’re not powerless in this fight. Educate yourself about trafficking and abuse—online and offline—and take steps to protect those around you. Supporting survivors starts with small, meaningful actions. Free online resources can guide you in being a safe, supportive presence.

When high-profile accusations arise, resist snap judgments. Instead of dismissing survivors as “crazy,” pause to consider the trauma they may be navigating. Speaking out or coping with abuse is never easy. You don’t have to believe every claim, but you can refrain from attacking accusers online.

Society also fails at providing aftercare for survivors. The government, often part of the problem, won’t solve this. It’s up to us. Prevention is critical, but when abuse occurs, step up for your loved ones and community. Protect the vulnerable. it’s a challenging but a rewarding journey.

If you’re contributing to Nostr, you’re helping build a censorship resistant platform where survivors can share their stories freely, no matter how powerful their abusers are. Their voices can endure here, offering strength and hope to others. This gives me great hope for the future.

Virginia Giuffre’s courage was a gift to the world. It was an honor to know and serve her. She will be deeply missed. My hope is that her story inspires others to take on the powerful.

@ 5d4b6c8d:8a1c1ee3

https://youtu.be/EPiE-Ruhohg

I'm pretty sure Ben called Caruso the "Bald Mamba" in this video, which is an awesome nickname for him.

Great walkthrough of the adjustments made over the course of seven games to try to disrupt Joker, culminating with putting Caruso (who's 100 lbs lighter and 6 inches shorter) on him.

https://stacker.news/items/984227

@ 4c96d763:80c3ee30

Changes

William Casarin (19):

• dave: add screenshot to readme
• dave: fix image in readme
• columns: remove spamming info logs about writing to cache
• columns: never truncate notes you're replying to
• windows: don't show terminal window
• mention: show username instead of display_name
• chrome: switch from ALPHA to BETA
• ui: make post replies selectable
• dave: include anonymous user identifier in api call
• dave: add trial mode
• dave: fix sidebar click
• dave: nudge avatar when you click
• dave: hide media in dave note previews
• chrome: fix theme persistence
• ui: fix a bunch of missing hover pointers
• Release Notedeck Beta v0.4.0
• release: changelog
• timeline: show media on universe timeline
• clippy: fix lint related to iterator

kernelkind (28):

• add trust_media_from_pk2 method
• add hashbrown
• introduce & use JobPool
• introduce JobsCache
• add blurhash dependency
• introduce blur
• note: remove unnecessary derive macros from NoteAction
• propagate JobsCache
• ImagePulseTint -> PulseAlpha
• images: move fetch to fn
• add TexturesCache
• images: make MediaCache hold MediaCacheType
• images: make promise payload optional to take easily
• post: unnest
• notedeck_ui: move carousel to note/media.rs
• note media: only show full screen when loaded
• note media: unnest full screen media
• pass NoteAction by value instead of reference
• propagate Images to actionbar
• add one shot error message
• make Widget impl ProfilePic mutably
• implement blurring
• don't show zap button if no wallet
• display name should wrap
• make styled button toggleable
• method to get current default zap amount
• add CustomZapView
• use CustomZapView

pushed to notedeck:refs/heads/master

@ 9223d2fa:b57e3de7

12,600 steps

@ a5ee4475:2ca75401

lista #descentralismo #compilado #portugues

*Algumas destas listas ainda estão sendo trocadas, portanto as versões mais recentes delas só estão visíveis no Amethyst por causa da ferramenta de edição.

Clients do Nostr e Outras Coisas

nostr:naddr1qq245dz5tqe8w46swpphgmr4f3047s6629t45qg4waehxw309aex2mrp0yhxgctdw4eju6t09upzpf0wg36k3g3hygndv3cp8f2j284v0hfh4dqgqjj3yxnreck2w4qpqvzqqqr4guxde6sl

---

Modelos de IA e Ferramentas

nostr:naddr1qq24xwtyt9v5wjzefe6523j32dy5ga65gagkjqgswaehxw309ahx7um5wghx6mmd9upzpf0wg36k3g3hygndv3cp8f2j284v0hfh4dqgqjj3yxnreck2w4qpqvzqqqr4guk62czu

---

Iniciativas de Bitcoin

nostr:naddr1qvzqqqr4gupzpf0wg36k3g3hygndv3cp8f2j284v0hfh4dqgqjj3yxnreck2w4qpqq2nvmn5va9x2nrxfd2k5smyf3ux7vesd9znyqxygt4

---

Profissionais Brasileiros no Nostr

nostr:naddr1qq24qmnkwe6y67zlxgc4sumrxpxxce3kf9fn2qghwaehxw309aex2mrp0yhxummnw3ezucnpdejz7q3q5hhygatg5gmjyfkkguqn54f9r6k8m5m6ksyqffgjrf3uut982sqsxpqqqp65wp8uedu

---

Comunidades em Português no Nostr

nostr:naddr1qq2hwcejv4ykgdf3v9gxykrxfdqk753jxcc4gqg4waehxw309aex2mrp0yhxgctdw4eju6t09upzpf0wg36k3g3hygndv3cp8f2j284v0hfh4dqgqjj3yxnreck2w4qpqvzqqqr4gu455fm3

---

Grupos em Português no Nostr

nostr:nevent1qqs98kldepjmlxngupsyth40n0h5lw7z5ut5w4scvh27alc0w86tevcpzpmhxue69uhkummnw3ezumt0d5hsygy7fff8g6l23gp5uqtuyqwkqvucx6mhe7r9h7v6wyzzj0v6lrztcspsgqqqqqqs3ndneh

---

Jogos de Código Aberto

Open Source Games nostr:naddr1qvzqqqr4gupzpf0wg36k3g3hygndv3cp8f2j284v0hfh4dqgqjj3yxnreck2w4qpqq2kvwp3v4hhvk2sw3j5sm6h23g5wkz5ddzhz8x40v0

---

Itens Úteis com Esquemas Disponíveis

nostr:naddr1qqgrqvp5vd3kycejxask2efcv4jr2qgswaehxw309ahx7um5wghx6mmd9upzpf0wg36k3g3hygndv3cp8f2j284v0hfh4dqgqjj3yxnreck2w4qpqvzqqqr4guc43v6c

---

Formatação de Texto em Markdown

(Amethyst, Yakihone e outros) nostr:naddr1qvzqqqr4gupzpf0wg36k3g3hygndv3cp8f2j284v0hfh4dqgqjj3yxnreck2w4qpqq2454m8dfzn26z4f34kvu6fw4rysnrjxfm42wfpe90

---

Outros Links

nostr:nevent1qqsrm6ywny5r7ajakpppp0lt525n0s33x6tyn6pz0n8ws8k2tqpqracpzpmhxue69uhkummnw3ezumt0d5hsygp6e5ns0nv3dun430jky25y4pku6ylz68rz6zs7khv29q6rj5peespsgqqqqqqsmfwa78

@ 94a6a78a:0ddf320e

Nostr is a revolutionary protocol that enables decentralized, censorship-resistant communication. Unlike traditional social networks controlled by corporations, Nostr operates without central servers or gatekeepers. This openness makes it incredibly powerful—but also means its success depends entirely on users, developers, and relay operators.

If you believe in free speech, decentralization, and an open internet, there are many ways to support and strengthen the Nostr ecosystem. Whether you're a casual user, a developer, or someone looking to contribute financially, every effort helps build a more robust network.

Here’s how you can get involved and make a difference.

---

1️⃣ Use Nostr Daily

The simplest and most effective way to contribute to Nostr is by using it regularly. The more active users, the stronger and more valuable the network becomes.

✅ Post, comment, and zap (send micro-payments via Bitcoin’s Lightning Network) to keep conversations flowing.\ ✅ Engage with new users and help them understand how Nostr works.\ ✅ Try different Nostr clients like Damus, Amethyst, Snort, or Primal and provide feedback to improve the experience.

Your activity keeps the network alive and helps encourage more developers and relay operators to invest in the ecosystem.

---

2️⃣ Run Your Own Nostr Relay

Relays are the backbone of Nostr, responsible for distributing messages across the network. The more independent relays exist, the stronger and more censorship-resistant Nostr becomes.

✅ Set up your own relay to help decentralize the network further.\ ✅ Experiment with relay configurations and different performance optimizations.\ ✅ Offer public or private relay services to users looking for high-quality infrastructure.

If you're not technical, you can still support relay operators by subscribing to a paid relay or donating to open-source relay projects.

---

3️⃣ Support Paid Relays & Infrastructure

Free relays have helped Nostr grow, but they struggle with spam, slow speeds, and sustainability issues. Paid relays help fund better infrastructure, faster message delivery, and a more reliable experience.

✅ Subscribe to a paid relay to help keep it running.\ ✅ Use premium services like media hosting (e.g., Azzamo Blossom) to decentralize content storage.\ ✅ Donate to relay operators who invest in long-term infrastructure.

By funding Nostr’s decentralized backbone, you help ensure its longevity and reliability.

---

4️⃣ Zap Developers, Creators & Builders

Many people contribute to Nostr without direct financial compensation—developers who build clients, relay operators, educators, and content creators. You can support them with zaps! ⚡

✅ Find developers working on Nostr projects and send them a zap.\ ✅ Support content creators and educators who spread awareness about Nostr.\ ✅ Encourage builders by donating to open-source projects.

Micro-payments via the Lightning Network make it easy to directly support the people who make Nostr better.

---

5️⃣ Develop New Nostr Apps & Tools

If you're a developer, you can build on Nostr’s open protocol to create new apps, bots, or tools. Nostr is permissionless, meaning anyone can develop for it.

✅ Create new Nostr clients with unique features and user experiences.\ ✅ Build bots or automation tools that improve engagement and usability.\ ✅ Experiment with decentralized identity, authentication, and encryption to make Nostr even stronger.

With no corporate gatekeepers, your projects can help shape the future of decentralized social media.

---

6️⃣ Promote & Educate Others About Nostr

Adoption grows when more people understand and use Nostr. You can help by spreading awareness and creating educational content.

✅ Write blogs, guides, and tutorials explaining how to use Nostr.\ ✅ Make videos or social media posts introducing new users to the protocol.\ ✅ Host discussions, Twitter Spaces, or workshops to onboard more people.

The more people understand and trust Nostr, the stronger the ecosystem becomes.

---

7️⃣ Support Open-Source Nostr Projects

Many Nostr tools and clients are built by volunteers, and open-source projects thrive on community support.

✅ Contribute code to existing Nostr projects on GitHub.\ ✅ Report bugs and suggest features to improve Nostr clients.\ ✅ Donate to developers who keep Nostr free and open for everyone.

If you're not a developer, you can still help with testing, translations, and documentation to make projects more accessible.

---

🚀 Every Contribution Strengthens Nostr

Whether you:

✔️ Post and engage daily\ ✔️ Zap creators and developers\ ✔️ Run or support relays\ ✔️ Build new apps and tools\ ✔️ Educate and onboard new users

Every action helps make Nostr more resilient, decentralized, and unstoppable.

Nostr isn’t just another social network—it’s a movement toward a free and open internet. If you believe in digital freedom, privacy, and decentralization, now is the time to get involved.

@ 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.