@ 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.

@ 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.

@ 21335073:a244b1ad

The other day, I had the privilege of sitting down with one of my favorite living artists. Our conversation was so captivating that I felt compelled to share it. I’m leaving his name out for privacy.

Since our last meeting, I’d watched a documentary about his life, one he’d helped create. I told him how much I admired his openness in it. There’s something strange about knowing intimate details of someone’s life when they know so little about yours—it’s almost like I knew him too well for the kind of relationship we have.

He paused, then said quietly, with a shy grin, that watching the documentary made him realize how “odd and eccentric” he is. I laughed and told him he’s probably the sanest person I know. Because he’s lived fully, chasing love, passion, and purpose with hardly any regrets. He’s truly lived.

Today, I turn 44, and I’ll admit I’m a bit eccentric myself. I think I came into the world this way. I’ve made mistakes along the way, but I carry few regrets. Every misstep taught me something. And as I age, I’m not interested in blending in with the world—I’ll probably just lean further into my own brand of “weird.” I want to live life to the brim. The older I get, the more I see that the “normal” folks often seem less grounded than the eccentric artists who dare to live boldly. Life’s too short to just exist, actually live.

I’m not saying to be strange just for the sake of it. But I’ve seen what the crowd celebrates, and I’m not impressed. Forge your own path, even if it feels lonely or unpopular at times.

It’s easy to scroll through the news and feel discouraged. But actually, this is one of the most incredible times to be alive! I wake up every day grateful to be here, now. The future is bursting with possibility—I can feel it.

So, to my fellow weirdos on nostr: stay bold. Keep dreaming, keep pushing, no matter what’s trending. Stay wild enough to believe in a free internet for all. Freedom is radical—hold it tight. Live with the soul of an artist and the grit of a fighter. Thanks for inspiring me and so many others to keep hoping. Thank you all for making the last year of my life so special.

@ 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.

@ 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.

@ 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.

@ 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.

@ 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.

@ 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

@ 6389be64:ef439d32

Most nematodes are beneficial and "graze" on black vine weevil, currant borer moth, fungus gnats, other weevils, scarabs, cutworms, webworms, billbugs, mole crickets, termites, peach tree borer and carpenter worm moths.

They also predate bacteria, recycling nutrients back into the soil and by doing so stimulates bacterial activity. They act as microbial taxis by transporting microbes to new locations of soil as they move through it while providing aeration.

https://stacker.news/items/988573

@ 3283ef81:0a531a33

This event has been deleted; your client is ignoring the delete request.

@ f7a1599c:6f2484d5

In March 2020, Lucas was afraid.

The economy was grinding to a halt. Markets were in freefall. In a sweeping response, the Federal Reserve launched an unprecedented intervention—buying everything from Treasury bonds and mortgages to corporate debt, expanding the money supply by $4 trillion. At the same time, the U.S. government issued over $800 billion in stimulus checks to households across the country.

These extraordinary measures may have averted a wave of business failures and bank runs—but they came at a cost: currency debasement and rising inflation. Alarmed by the scale of central bank intervention and its consequences for savers, Lucas decided to act.

In a state of mild panic, he withdrew $15,000 from his bank account and bought ten gold coins. Then he took another $10,000 and bought two bitcoins. If the dollar system failed, Lucas wanted something with intrinsic value he could use.

He mentioned his plan to his friend Daniel, who laughed.

“Why don’t you stock up on guns and cigarettes while you’re at it?” Daniel quipped. “The Fed is doing what it has to—stabilizing the economy in a crisis. Sure, $4 trillion is a lot of money, but it's backed by the most productive economy on Earth. Don’t panic. The world’s not ending.”

To prove his point, Daniel put $25,000 into the S&P 500—right at the pandemic bottom.

And he was right. Literally.

By Spring 2025, the stock market was near all-time highs. The world hadn’t ended. The U.S. economy kept moving, more or less as usual. Daniel’s investment had nearly tripled—his $25,000 had grown to $65,000.

But oddly enough, Lucas’ seemingly panicked reaction had been both prudent and profitable.

His gold coins had climbed from $1,500 to $3,300 apiece—a 120% gain. Bitcoin had soared from $5,000 to $90,000, making his two coins worth $180,000. Altogether, Lucas’s $25,000 allocation had grown to $213,000—a nearly 10x return. And his goal wasn’t even profit. It was safety.

With that kind of fortune, you’d expect Lucas to feel confident, even serene. He had more than enough to preserve his purchasing power, even in the face of years of inflation.

But in the spring of 2025, Lucas felt anything but calm.

He was uneasy—gripped by a sense that the 2020 crisis hadn’t been a conclusion, but a prelude.

In his mind, 2020 was just the latest chapter in a troubling sequence: the Asian financial crisis in 1998, the global financial crisis in 2008, the pandemic shock of 2020. Each crisis had been more sudden, more sweeping, and more dependent on emergency measures than the last.

And Lucas couldn’t shake the feeling that the next act—whenever it came—would be more disruptive, more severe, and far more damaging.

@ 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.

@ 15cf81d4:b328e146

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

# Why Trust Crypt Recver? 🤝

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

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

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

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

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

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

Our Recovery Services Include: 📈

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

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

# Don’t Let Lost Crypto Hold You Back!

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

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

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

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

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

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

@ 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.

@ 3283ef81:0a531a33

Why
is
this
not

on
separate
lines

@ 3283ef81:0a531a33

Aliquam eu turpis sed enim ultricies scelerisque\ Duis posuere congue faucibus

Praesent pretium orci ante, et faucibus lectus euismod a

@ 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

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.

@ 21335073:a244b1ad

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

@ c631e267:c2b78d3e

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Titelbild: Pixabay]

Dazu passend:

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

---

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

@ aa8de34f:a6ffe696

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

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

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

-- Denn es braucht keinen Untergrund mehr. --

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

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

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

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

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

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

@ 47c860d3:b3f71b74

ไขความลับรหัส 13 ตัวอักษรของ FT8: ศาสตร์แห่งการบีบอัดข้อมูลสื่อสารดิจิทัล คืนหนึ่ง ผมนั่งอยู่หน้าจอคอมพิวเตอร์ มองสัญญาณ FT8 กระพริบไปมา ส่งข้อความสั้นๆ ซ้ำไปซ้ำมา "CQ HS1IWX OK03" แล้วก็รอให้ใครสักคนตอบกลับ วนลูปไปอย่างไม่รู้จบ จนเกิดคำถามขึ้นมาในหัว... “นี่เรานั่งทำอะไรกันแน่?” FT8 มันควรเป็นอะไรมากกว่านี้ใช่ไหม? ไม่ใช่แค่การส่งคำสั้นๆ 13 ตัวอักษรไปมาเท่านั้น! เอ๊ะ! เดี๋ยวก่อน... 13 ตัวอักษร? ถ้าการส่งข้อความจำกัดที่ 13 ตัวอักษร แล้วทำไมข้อความอย่าง "CQ HS1IWX OK03" ซึ่งดูเหมือนจะมี 14 ตัวอักษร (รวมช่องว่าง) ถึงสามารถส่งได้? นี่มันต้องมีอะไรซ่อนอยู่! ระบบ FT8 ใช้เวทมนตร์อะไร หรือมันมีเทคนิคการเข้ารหัสแบบลับๆ ที่เรายังไม่รู้? และคำว่า "13 ตัวอักษร" ที่เขาพูดถึงนั้นหมายถึงอะไรกันแน่? แล้วลองนึกดูสิ... ถ้าเราอยู่ในสถานการณ์ฉุกเฉิน ต้องส่งข้อความที่สั้น กระชับ และมีความหมาย ในขณะที่แบตเตอรี่เหลือน้อย กำลังส่งต่ำ และอุปกรณ์มีเพียงเครื่องวิทยุขนาดเล็กกับสายอากาศชั่วคราวและมือถือ บางครั้ง FT8 อาจจะเป็นตัวเลือกเดียวที่ช่วยให้เราส่งสัญญาณขอความช่วยเหลือได้ เพราะมันสามารถถอดรหัสได้แม้สัญญาณอ่อนจนแทบจะมองไม่เห็น! ดังนั้น ผมต้องขุดลึกลงไป เพื่อไขความลับของรหัส 13 ตัวอักษรของ FT8 และหาคำตอบว่า ทำไม FT8 สามารถส่งข้อความบางอย่างที่ดูเหมือนยาวเกินขีดจำกัดได้? พร้อมกับสำรวจว่ามันสามารถช่วยเหลือเราในสถานการณ์ฉุกเฉินได้อย่างไร! อะไรคือความหมายที่แท้จริงของ 13 ตัวอักษร ? เมื่อเริ่มเจาะลึกลงไป ผมจึงได้รู้ว่า 13 ตัวอักษรที่เราพูดถึงนั้นหมายถึง ข้อความใน Free Text Mode หรือก็คือ ข้อความที่ไม่ได้ถูกเข้ารหัสในรูปแบบมาตรฐานของ FT8 หากเราส่งข้อความแบบอิสระ เช่น "HELLO WORLD!" หรือ "EMERGENCY CALL" เราจะถูกจำกัดแค่ 13 ตัวอักษรเท่านั้น เพราะข้อความเหล่านี้ไม่ได้ถูกเข้ารหัสให้เหมาะสมกับโปรโตคอลของระบบ FT8 แต่ถ้าเป็น ข้อความมาตรฐานที่ถูกกำหนดรูปแบบไว้แล้ว เช่น Callsign + Grid หรือ รายงาน SNR (-10, 599, RR73) ระบบ FT8 จะใช้การเข้ารหัส 77-bit Structured Message ซึ่งช่วยให้สามารถส่งข้อมูลได้มากกว่า 13 ตัวอักษร! อะไรคือ โครงสร้าง 77-bit Message ใน FT8 FT8 ใช้ 77 บิต สำหรับการเข้ารหัสข้อมูล โดยแบ่งออกเป็น 3 ส่วนหลัก: ส่วนของข้อมูล จำนวนบิต รายละเอียด Callsign 1 (ต้นทาง) 28 บิต รหัสสถานีที่ส่ง Callsign 2 (ปลายทาง) 28 บิต รหัสสถานีปลายทาง หรือ CQ Exchange Data 21 บิต Grid Locator หรือข้อมูลอื่น ๆ รวมทั้งหมด = 28 + 28 + 21 = 77 บิต การที่ FT8 ใช้โครงสร้างแบบนี้ ข้อความที่ถูกเข้ารหัสในมาตรฐาน FT8 จึงสามารถส่งได้มากกว่า 13 ตัวอักษร เช่น "CQ HS1IWX OK03" นั้นถูกเข้ารหัสให้อยู่ใน 77 บิต ไม่ใช่ Free Text แบบปกติ ทำให้สามารถส่งได้โดยไม่มีปัญหา! แต่ข้อสำคัญมันคือโปโตคอลของระบบ FT8 ในปัจจุบัน ถ้าเราต้องการ เข้ารหัสเองในรูปแบบของเราเราก็ต้องพัฒนาโปรแกรม FT8 ของเราเอง (ผมทำไม่เป็นครับ555) ก็ใช้ของเขาไปก็ได้ แล้วก็มาพัฒนาระบบ เทคนิคการส่งข้อมูลให้มีประสิทธิภาพภายใน 13 ตัวอักษร กันน่าจะสนุกกว่า ส่วนเรื่องรายละเอียดวิธีการเข้ารหัสผมคงไม่พูดถึงนะ เดี๋ยวจะวิชาการน่าเบื่อไปครับ ใครสนใจก็ไปศึกษาต่อกันเอาเองครับ การเข้ารหัสนี้จะใช้ร่วมกับเทคนิค FEC (Forward Error Correction) ใน FT8 ซึ่งเป็นหนึ่งในเทคนิคที่ทำให้ FT8 สามารถถอดรหัสข้อความได้แม้ในสภาวะสัญญาณอ่อน คือการใช้ Forward Error Correction (FEC) หรือ การแก้ไขข้อผิดพลาดล่วงหน้า ซึ่งช่วยให้สามารถกู้คืนข้อมูลที่อาจเกิดการสูญหายในระหว่างการส่งสัญญาณได้ โดย FT8 ใช้ Reed-Solomon (RS) Error Correction Code ซึ่งเป็นอัลกอริธึมที่เพิ่มบิตสำรองเพื่อช่วยตรวจจับและแก้ไขข้อผิดพลาดในข้อความที่ส่งไป และ ใช้ Convolutional Encoding และ Viterbi Decoding ซึ่งช่วยให้สามารถแก้ไขข้อมูลที่ผิดพลาดจากสัญญาณรบกวนได้ ซึ่งเมื่อสัญญาณอ่อน ข้อมูลบางส่วนอาจสูญหาย แต่ FEC ช่วยให้สามารถกู้คืนข้อความได้แม้ข้อมูลบางส่วนจะขาดหาย ทำให้ผลลัพธ์คือ FT8 สามารถทำงานได้แม้ระดับสัญญาณต่ำถึง -20 dB! ซึ่งส่วนนี้ผมก็ยังไม่เข้าใจมันดีเท่าไหร่ครับ อิอิ ฟังเขามาอีกที สิ่งที่เราทำได้ตอนนี้ในโปรแกรม FT8 ในปัจจุบันก็คือ เทคนิคการส่งข้อมูลให้มีประสิทธิภาพภายใน 13 ตัวอักษรถ้าเรา อยากส่งข้อความฉุกเฉินภายใน 13 ตัวอักษร ให้ได้ข้อมูลมากที่สุด เราต้องใช้เทคนิคต่อไปนี้: การใช้ตัวย่อและรหัสสากล • SOS 1234 BKK แทน "ขอความช่วยเหลือที่พิกัด 1234 ใกล้กรุงเทพ" • WX BKK T35C แทน "สภาพอากาศกรุงเทพ 35 องศา" • ALRT TSUNAMI แทน "เตือนภัยสึนามิ" ใช้ข้อความที่อ่านเข้าใจง่าย • ใช้โค้ดสั้นๆ เช่น "QRZ EMRG?" แทน "ใครรับสัญญาณฉุกเฉิน?" การส่งข้อความเป็นชุด • เฟรม 1: MSG1 BKK STORM1 • เฟรม 2: MSG2 BKK STORM2 • เฟรม 3: MSG3 BKK NOW “การฝึกฝนเพื่อทำความเข้าใจการสื่อสารเป็นสิ่งสำคัญ เพราะเมื่อได้รับข้อความเหล่านี้ เราจะสามารถถอดรหัสและติดตามข้อมูลได้อย่างทันท่วงที” ครั้งนี้อาจเป็นเพียงการค้นพบอีกด้านหนึ่งของ FT8… หรือมันอาจเปลี่ยนมุมมองของคุณที่มีต่อโหมดสื่อสารดิจิทัลไปตลอดกาลก็ได้ แต่เดี๋ยวก่อน—นี่มันอะไรกัน!? จู่ๆ บนจอคอมพิวเตอร์ของผมก็ปรากฏคอลซายที่ไม่คุ้นตา D1IFU—คอลซายที่ไม่มีอยู่ในฐานข้อมูลของ ITU แต่กลับปรากฏขึ้นบนคลื่นความถี่ของเรา D1…? มันมาได้ยังไง? แล้วทันใดนั้น ผมก็ฉุกคิดขึ้นมา—มันคือคอลซายจากพื้นที่ Donetsk หรือ Luhansk พื้นที่ที่เต็มไปด้วยความขัดแย้ง ดินแดนที่เราคิดว่าเงียบงันภายใต้เสียงระเบิดและความไม่แน่นอน แต่ตอนนี้ กลับมีสัญญาณเล็กๆ ปรากฏขึ้นบน FT8 มันคือใครกัน? เป็นทหาร? เป็นพลเรือนที่พยายามติดต่อโลกภายนอก? หรือเป็นเพียงนักวิทยุสมัครเล่นที่ยังคงเฝ้าฟังแม้โลกจะเต็มไปด้วยความวุ่นวาย? แต่สิ่งหนึ่งที่แน่ชัด… “นี่คือสัญญาณแห่งชีวิต” จบข่าว. 🚀📡

@ ae1008d2:a166d760

This is part one in a series of long-form content of my ideas as to what we are entering into in my opinion;The Roaring '20's 2.0 (working title). I hope you'll join me on this journey together.
"History does not repeat itself, but it often rhymes"; - Samuel Clemens, aka Mark Twain. My only class I received an A+ in high school was history, this opened up the opportunity for me to enroll in an AP (college level) history class my senior year. There was an inherent nature for me to study history. Another quote I found to live by; "If we do not study history, we are bound to repeat it", a paraphrased quote by the many great philosphers of old from Edmund Burke, George Santayana and even Winston Churchill, all pulling from the same King Solomon quote; "What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun". My curiousity of human actions, psychological and therefore economical behavior, has benefitted me greatly throughout my life and career, at such a young age. Being able to 'see around the curves' ahead I thought was a gift many had, but was sorely mistaken. People are just built different. One, if not my hardest action for me is to share. I just do things; act, often without even thinking about writing down or sharing in anyway shape or form what I just did here with friends, what we just built or how we formed these startups, etc., I've finally made the time, mainly for myself, to share my thoughts and ideas as to where we are at, and what we can do moving forward. It's very easy for us living a sovereign-lifestyle in Bitcoin, Nostr and other P2P, cryptographically-signed sovereign tools and tech-stacks alike, permissionless and self-hostable, to take all these tools for granted. We just live with them. Use them everyday. Do you own property? Do you have to take care of the cattle everyday? To live a sovereign life is tough, but most rewarding. As mentioned above, I'm diving into the details in a several part series as to what the roaring '20's were about, how it got to the point it did, and the inevitable outcome we all know what came to be. How does this possibly repeat itself almost exactly a century later? How does Bitcoin play a role? Are we all really going to be replaced by AI robots (again, history rhymes here)? Time will tell, but I think most of us actually using the tools will also forsee many of these possible outcomes, as it's why we are using many of these tools today. The next parts of this series will be released periodically, maybe once per month, maybe once per quarter. I'll also be releasing these on other platforms like Medium for reach, but Nostr will always be first, most important and prioritized.
I'll leave you with one of my favorite quotes I've lived by from one of the greatest traders of all time, especially during this roaring '20's era, Jesse Livermore; "Money is made by sitting, not trading".

@ 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.

@ 3283ef81:0a531a33

Vestibulum a nunc a sapien aliquam rhoncus\ Sed sem turpis, scelerisque sed augue ut, faucibus blandit lectus

Maecenas commodo, augue in placerat lacinia, lorem libero convallis mi, eu fringilla velit arcu id sem. In ac metus vitae sapien dignissim luctus

@ 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

@ 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.

@ 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.

@ 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.

@ 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.

@ 502ab02a:a2860397

บางครั้งพลังยิ่งใหญ่ที่สุดก็ไม่ใช่สิ่งที่เห็นได้ด้วยตาเปล่า เหมือนแสงแดดที่คนส่วนใหญ่มักจะกลัวเพราะกลัวผิวเสีย กลัวฝ้า กลัวร้อน แต่แท้จริงแล้วในแสงแดดมีบางสิ่งที่น่าเคารพอยู่ลึกๆ มันคือแสงที่มองไม่เห็น มันไม่แสบตา ไม่แสบผิว แต่มันลึก ถึงเซลล์ มันคือ “แสงอินฟราเรด” ที่ซ่อนตัวอย่างสุภาพในแดดยามเช้า

เฮียมักชอบพูดว่า แดดที่ดีไม่จำเป็นต้องแสบหลัง อาบแสงที่ลอดผ่านใบไม้ยามเช้าแบบไม่ต้องฝืนตาก็พอ แสงอินฟราเรดนี่แหละคือพระเอกตัวจริงในความเงียบ มันไม่ดัง ไม่โชว์ ไม่โฆษณา แต่มันลงลึกไปถึงระดับที่ร่างกายเรากำลังหิวโดยไม่รู้ตัวในระดับเซลล์

ในเซลล์ของเรา มีหน่วยผลิตพลังงานที่เรียกว่าไมโทคอนเดรีย เจ้านี่แหละคือโรงไฟฟ้าจิ๋วประจำบ้าน ที่ต้องตื่นมาทำงานทุกวันโดยไม่ได้หยุดเสาร์อาทิตย์ ยิ่งถ้าไมโทคอนเดรียทำงานไม่ดี ร่างกายก็จะเหมือนไฟตกทั้งระบบ—ง่วงง่าย เพลียไว ปวดนู่นปวดนี่เหมือนไฟในบ้านกระพริบตลอดเวลา

แล้วแสงอินฟราเรดเกี่ยวอะไรกับมัน? เฮียขอเล่าง่ายๆ ว่า ไมโทคอนเดรียมีตัวรับแสงตัวหนึ่งชื่อว่า cytochrome c oxidase เจ้านี่ตอบสนองต่อแสงอินฟราเรดช่วงคลื่นเฉพาะ คือประมาณ 600–900 นาโนเมตร พอโดนเข้าไป มันเหมือนได้จุดประกายให้โรงงานพลังงานในร่างกายกลับมาคึกคักอีกครั้ง ผลิตพลังงานได้มากขึ้น ระบบไหลเวียนเลือดก็ดีขึ้น เหมือนท่อน้ำที่เคยอุดตันก็กลับมาใสแจ๋ว ความอักเสบเล็กๆ ในร่างกายก็ลดลง คล้ายบ้านที่เคยอับชื้นแล้วได้เปิดหน้าต่างให้แสงแดดส่องเข้าไป

และที่น่ารักกว่านั้นคือ เราไม่ต้องไปถึงชายหาด ไม่ต้องจองรีสอร์ตริมทะเล แค่แดดเช้าอ่อนๆ ข้างบ้านหรือตามขอบระเบียง ก็ให้แสงอินฟราเรดได้แล้ว ถ้าใครอยู่ในเมืองใหญ่ที่มีแต่ตึกบังแดด แล้วจะเลือกใช้หลอดไฟ Red Light Therapy ก็ไม่ผิด แต่ต้องเลือกแบบรู้เท่าทันรู้ ไม่ใช่เห็นใครรีวิวก็ซื้อมาเปิดใส่หน้า หวังจะหน้าใสข้ามคืน ต้องเข้าใจทั้งความยาวคลื่น เวลาใช้งาน และจุดประสงค์ ไม่ใช่ใช้เพราะแค่กลัวแก่อยากหน้าตึง แต่ใช้เพราะอยากให้ร่างกายกลับไปทำงานอย่างเป็นธรรมชาติอีกครั้ง และอยู่ในประเทศหรือสถานที่ที่โดนแดดได้น้อยอยากได้เสริมเฉยๆ

แล้วเราจะรู้ได้ยังไงว่าไมโทคอนเดรียเรากลับมาทำงานดีขึ้น? เฮียว่าไม่ต้องรอผลเลือดจากแล็บไหนก็รู้ได้ อย่าไปยึดติดกับตัวเลขมากครับ เอาตัวเองเป็นหลัก ตั้งคำถามกับตัวเองว่ารู้สึกยังไงบ้าง ถ้าเริ่มนอนหลับลึกขึ้น ตื่นมาแล้วหัวไม่มึน ไม่หงุดหงิดตั้งแต่ยังไม่ลืมตา ถ้าปวดหลังปวดข้อที่เคยมีเริ่มหายไปแบบไม่ได้กินยา หรือแม้แต่ผิวที่ดูสดใสขึ้นแบบไม่ต้องง้อสกินแคร์ นั่นแหละคือเสียงขอบคุณเบาๆ จากไมโทคอนเดรียที่ได้แสงแดดแล้วกลับมามีชีวิตอีกครั้ง ถ้ามันดีก็คือดี

บางที เราไม่ต้องกินวิตามินเม็ดไหนเพิ่ม แค่เดินออกไปรับแดดเบาๆ ในเวลาเช้าๆ แล้วให้ร่างกายได้พูดคุยกับธรรมชาติบ้าง เพราะในความอบอุ่นเงียบๆ ของแสงอินฟราเรดนั้น มีเสียงเบาๆ ที่กำลังปลุกพลังในตัวเราให้กลับมาอีกครั้ง

แดดไม่ใช่ศัตรู ถ้าเรารู้จักมันในมุมที่ถูกต้อง เฮียแค่อยากชวนให้ลองเปลี่ยนจากคำว่า “กลัวแดด” เป็น “ฟังแดด” เพราะบางครั้งธรรมชาติไม่ได้พูดด้วยคำ แต่สื่อสารด้วยแสงที่แทรกผ่านหัวใจเราโดยไม่ต้องผ่านล่าม

บางคนอาจคิดในใจ “แหมเฮีย ก็ดีหรอก ถ้าได้ตื่นเช้า” 555555

เฮียเข้าใจดีเลยว่าไม่ใช่ทุกคนจะตื่นมาทันแดดยามเช้าได้เสมอไป ชีวิตคนเรามันไม่ได้เริ่มต้นพร้อมไก่ขันทุกวัน บางคนเพิ่งเข้านอนตอนตีสาม ตื่นอีกทีแดดก็แตะบ่ายเข้าไปแล้ว ไม่ต้องกังวลไปจ้ะ เพราะความมหัศจรรย์ของแสงอินฟราเรดยังมีให้เราได้ใช้แม้ในแดดยามเย็น

แดดช่วงเย็น โดยเฉพาะหลังสี่โมงเย็นไปจนเกือบหกโมง (หรือเร็วช้าตามฤดู) ก็ยังอุดมไปด้วยแสงอินฟราเรดในช่วงคลื่นที่ไมโทคอนเดรียชอบ แถมยังไม่มีรังสี UV ที่แรงจัดมารบกวนเหมือนตอนเที่ยง เรียกว่าเป็นแดดแบบละมุนๆ สำหรับคนที่อยาก “บำบัดใจ” แบบไม่ต้องร้อนจนหัวเปียก

เฮียเคยลองตากแดดเย็นเดินไปในสวนสาธารณะ แล้วรู้สึกว่ามันเหมือนได้รีเซ็ตจิตใจหลังวันเหนื่อยๆ ไปในตัว ยิ่งพอรู้ว่าในช่วงเวลานี้แสงที่ได้กำลังช่วยปลุกพลังงานในร่างกายแบบเงียบๆ ด้วยแล้ว มันทำให้เฮียยิ่งเคารพธรรมชาติมากขึ้นไปอีก เคยเห็นคนที่วันๆมีแต่ความเครียด ความโกรธ ความอาฆาตต่อโลกไหมหละ บางคนแค่โดนแดด แต่ไม่ได้ตากแดด การตากแดดคือปล่อยใจไปกับธรรมชาติ พูดคุยกับร่างกาย บอกเขาว่าเราจะทำตัวให้เป็นประโยชน์กับโลกใบนี้ ให้สมกับที่ใช้พลังงานของโลก

จะเช้าหรือเย็น สำคัญไม่เท่ากับความตั้งใจ เฮียว่าไม่ว่าชีวิตจะตื่นตอนไหน ถ้าเราให้เวลาแค่ 10–15 นาทีในแต่ละวัน ออกไปยืนให้แดดแตะหน้า แตะแขน หรือแค่ให้แสงลอดผ่านตาเบาๆ โดยไม่ต้องจ้องจ้าๆ ก็พอ แค่นี้ก็เป็นการให้ไมโทคอนเดรียได้หายใจ ได้ออกกำลังกายแบบของมัน และได้ส่งพลังกลับมาหาเราทั้งร่างกายและจิตใจ

สุดท้ายแล้ว แดดไม่ได้แบ่งชนชั้น ไม่เลือกว่าจะรักเฉพาะคนตื่นเช้า หรือโกรธคนตื่นสาย ขอแค่เรารู้จักเวลาและวิธีอยู่กับมันอย่างถูกจังหวะ แดดก็พร้อมจะให้เสมอ

#pirateketo #กูต้องรู้มั๊ย #ม้วนหางสิลูก #siamstr #SundaySpecialเราจะไปเป็นหมูแดดเดียว

@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9

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

Concern

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

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

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

Optimism

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

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

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

Realism

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

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

@ 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.

@ 52b4a076:e7fad8bd

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

Regular relays have challenges

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

NFDB: A scalable database for large relays

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

Search

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

Personalization

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

Other

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

Calcite: A local microrelay database

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

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

For zero-downtime, NFDB is recommended.

Noswhere SmartCache

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

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

routerd

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

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

Ending notes

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

A lot more is to come. 👀️️️️️️

@ 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. 🚀

@ 6389be64:ef439d32

GA, plebs. The latest episode of Bitcoin And is out, and, as always, the chicanery is running rampant. Let’s break down the biggest topics I covered, and if you want the full, unfiltered rant, make sure to listen to the episode linked below.

House Democrats’ MEME Act: A Bad Joke?

House Democrats are proposing a bill to ban presidential meme coins, clearly aimed at Trump’s and Melania’s ill-advised token launches. While grifters launching meme coins is bad, this bill is just as ridiculous. If this legislation moves forward, expect a retaliatory strike exposing how politicians like Pelosi and Warren mysteriously amassed their fortunes. Will it pass? Doubtful. But it’s another sign of the government’s obsession with regulating everything except itself.

Senate Banking’s First Digital Asset Hearing: The Real Target Is You

Cynthia Lummis chaired the first digital asset hearing, and—surprise!—it was all about control. The discussion centered on stablecoins, AML, and KYC regulations, with witnesses suggesting Orwellian measures like freezing stablecoin transactions unless pre-approved by authorities. What was barely mentioned? Bitcoin. They want full oversight of stablecoins, which is really about controlling financial freedom. Expect more nonsense targeting self-custody wallets under the guise of stopping “bad actors.”

Bank of America and PayPal Want In on Stablecoins

Bank of America’s CEO openly stated they’ll launch a stablecoin as soon as regulation allows. Meanwhile, PayPal’s CEO paid for a hat using Bitcoin—not their own stablecoin, Pi USD. Why wouldn’t he use his own product? Maybe he knows stablecoins aren’t what they’re hyped up to be. Either way, the legacy financial system is gearing up to flood the market with stablecoins, not because they love crypto, but because it’s a tool to extend U.S. dollar dominance.

MetaPlanet Buys the Dip

Japan’s MetaPlanet issued $13.4M in bonds to buy more Bitcoin, proving once again that institutions see the writing on the wall. Unlike U.S. regulators who obsess over stablecoins, some companies are actually stacking sats.

UK Expands Crypto Seizure Powers

Across the pond, the UK government is pushing legislation to make it easier to seize and destroy crypto linked to criminal activity. While they frame it as going after the bad guys, it’s another move toward centralized control and financial surveillance.

Bitcoin Tools & Tech: Arc, SatoChip, and Nunchuk

Some bullish Bitcoin developments: ARC v0.5 is making Bitcoin’s second layer more efficient, SatoChip now supports Taproot and Nostr, and Nunchuk launched a group wallet with chat, making multisig collaboration easier.

The Bottom Line

The state is coming for financial privacy and control, and stablecoins are their weapon of choice. Bitcoiners need to stay focused, keep their coins in self-custody, and build out parallel systems. Expect more regulatory attacks, but don’t let them distract you—just keep stacking and transacting in ways they can’t control.

🎧 Listen to the full episode here: https://fountain.fm/episode/PYITCo18AJnsEkKLz2Ks

💰 Support the show by boosting sats on Podcasting 2.0! and I will see you on the other side.

@ 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.

@ dc4cd086:cee77c06

Have you ever wanted to learn from lengthy educational videos but found it challenging to navigate through hours of content? Our new tool addresses this problem by transforming long-form video lectures into easily digestible, searchable content.

Key Features:

Video Processing:

• Automatically downloads YouTube videos, transcripts, and chapter information
• Splits transcripts into sections based on video chapters

Content Summarization:

• Utilizes language models to transform spoken content into clear, readable text
• Formats output in AsciiDoc for improved readability and navigation
• Highlights key terms and concepts with [[term]] notation for potential cross-referencing

Diagram Extraction:

• Analyzes video entropy to identify static diagram/slide sections
• Provides a user-friendly GUI for manual selection of relevant time ranges
• Allows users to pick representative frames from selected ranges

Going Forward:

Currently undergoing a rewrite to improve organization and functionality, but you are welcome to try the current version, though it might not work on every machine. Will support multiple open and closed language models for user choice Free and open-source, allowing for personal customization and integration with various knowledge bases. Just because we might not have it on our official Alexandria knowledge base, you are still welcome to use it on you own personal or community knowledge bases! We want to help find connections between ideas that exist across relays, allowing individuals and groups to mix and match knowledge bases between each other, allowing for any degree of openness you care.

While designed with #Alexandria users in mind, it's available for anyone to use and adapt to their own learning needs.

Screenshots

Frame Selection

This is a screenshot of the frame selection interface. You'll see a signal that represents frame entropy over time. The vertical lines indicate the start and end of a chapter. Within these chapters you can select the frames by clicking and dragging the mouse over the desired range where you think diagram is in that chapter. At the bottom is an option that tells the program to select a specific number of frames from that selection.

Diagram Extraction

This is a screenshot of the diagram extraction interface. For every selection you've made, there will be a set of frames that you can choose from. You can select and deselect as many frames as you'd like to save.

Links

• repo: https://github.com/limina1/video_article_converter
• Nostr Apps 101: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Flxa_jkErqE

Output

And now, we have a demonstration of the final result of this tool, with some quick cleaning up. The video we will be using this tool on is titled Nostr Apps 101 by nostr:npub1nxy4qpqnld6kmpphjykvx2lqwvxmuxluddwjamm4nc29ds3elyzsm5avr7 during Nostrasia. The following thread is an analog to the modular articles we are constructing for Alexandria, and I hope it conveys the functionality we want to create in the knowledge space. Note, this tool is the first step! You could use a different prompt that is most appropriate for the specific context of the transcript you are working with, but you can also manually clean up any discrepancies that don't portray the video accurately. You can now view the article on #Alexandria https://next-alexandria.gitcitadel.eu/publication?d=nostr-apps-101

Initially published as chained kind 1's nostr:nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzp5r5hd579v2sszvvzfel677c8dxgxm3skl773sujlsuft64c44ncqy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnyv9kh2uewd9hj7qgwwaehxw309ahx7uewd3hkctcpzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumt0wd68ytnsw43z7qghwaehxw309aex2mrp0yhxummnw3ezucnpdejz7qgewaehxw309aex2mrp0yh8xmn0wf6zuum0vd5kzmp0qqsxunmjy20mvlq37vnrcshkf6sdrtkfjtjz3anuetmcuv8jswhezgc7hglpn

Or view on Coracle https://coracle.social /nevent1qqsxunmjy20mvlq37vnrcshkf6sdrtkfjtjz3anuetmcuv8jswhezgcppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qgsdqa9md83tz5yqnrqjw07hhkpmfjpkuv9hlh5v8yhu8z274w9dv7qnnq0s3

@ 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.

@ bf47c19e:c3d2573b

Ovaj post sam objavio 24.01.2024. godine na Redditu povodom tri decenije od uvođenja Novog dinara kao rešenja za hiperinflaciju u Saveznoj Republici Jugoslaviji na šta su pojedini besni nokoineri sa te društvene mreže osuli drvlje i kamenje na mene. Od starih budalaština da je Bitkoin bezvredan, da nije oblik novca već finansijsko ulaganje, preko pravdanja svrhe inflacije, sve do potpune nemoći da se argumentima opovrgne nepobitna istina i pozivanja moderatora da me banuju. 🙃

Cena Bitkoina tada je bila oko $40.000. :)

Osim glavnog posta, ovde ću navesti i moje odgovore na neutemeljene i neinformisane tvrdnje besnih nokoinera. :) Da se sačuva od zaborava!

---

Juče se navršilo 30 godina "Deda Avramove reforme".

Dan kada je rođen novi dinar, a Deda Avram sasekao hiperinflaciju

Kako nas je deda Avram spasio pre 30 godina: Neverovatno svedočenje tvorca „super dinara“ o jednoj od najgorih godina u istoriji Srbije

Dva jajeta – nedeljna profesorska plata: Kako se živelo u hiperinflaciji i šta je uradio Avramović

Vikipedija: Jugoslovenski dinar

„U julu '93. godine u Jugoslaviji nisi mogao skoro ništa da kupiš i niko za dinare nije hteo ništa da prodaje“, pisao je Avramović. Centralno-bankarska prevara se nastavlja jer je već do kraja 1995. dinar oslabio prema marki za 70% (1 dinar = 3.4 DM), a u decembru 2000. je taj kurs već bio 30.5 dinara za 1 DM (-96.7% od uvođenja novog dinara). To samo pokazuje da redenominacija valute tj. "brisanje nula" nije nikako čudo i viđano je puno puta kroz istoriju)

Ako je reformom iz januara '94 god. 1 novi dinar vredeo kao 1 nemačka marka, zatim od 2002. uveden evro čime je realna vrednost marke (samim tim i dinara) prepolovljena, a danas 1 EUR vredi oko 117 RSD, to znači da je "deda Avramov dinar" prema evru već obezvređen 59.91 puta za 30 godina. Dakle devalvacija dinara od 5991% od 1994. godine, a svakako još veća izražena kroz dobra i usluge jer su i nemačka marka do 2002. i evro od svog uvođenja iste godine prošli kroz sopstvenu inflaciju. Sam evro je izgubio oko 38% vrednosti od 2002. godine. Tako da se može reći da i "deda Avramov dinar" već uveliko prolazi kroz hiperinflaciju koja je samo razvučena na mnogo duži vremenski period (ne brinite - znam "zvaničnu" definiciju hiperinflacije - još jedan "gaslighting" centralno-bankarskog kartela da zabašuri šta se iza brda valja). Jer šta je inflacija od preko 5991% nego višedecenijska hiperinflacija?! Kako ne shvata gigantske razmere ove prevare?!

ISPRAVKA: Dinar nije nominalno izgubio 23400% (234x) vrednosti prema nemačkoj marki/evru od 1994. godine, već 59.91x odnosno 5991%. I danas na sajtu NBS postoji zvanični srednji kurs marke prema dinaru od 59,91:1. Realno, obezvređivanje dinara i evra prema robama i uslugama je puno veće, pošto su cene roba i usluga izražene u evrima ubrzo udvostručene u periodu nakon uvođenja evra. Hvala članu DejanJwtq na ispravci i izvinjenje svima od mene zbog greške.

Dafiment i Jugoskandik ("Dafina i Jezda") su bili samo državna konstrukcija da se izvuku devize iz ruku naivnih investitora da bi te devize nešto kasnije poslužile kao tobožnja rezerva za novi dinar. Ova gigantska prevara je unapred bila planirana, a Deda Avram iskorišćen kao marioneta tadašnjeg režima.

Inače lista država koje su izvršile redenominaciju valute kroz "brisanje nula" je poprilično dugačka i radi se o uobičajenoj pojavi kroz istoriju još od Haitija 1813. godine, a poslednji put su to uradile Sijera Leone i Kolumbija 2021. godine. Odavno je zaboravljeno da je (SR) Jugoslavija devedesetih to učinila još 1990. (10.000:1), 1992. (10:1), 1993. (1.000.000:1) i 1994. pre Avramovića (1.000.000.000∶1) ali je ovaj dinar trajao samo 23 dana. Tako da Deda Avram nije izmislio toplu vodu.

U SFRJ je izvršena jedna redenominacija 1966. godine u odnosu 10.000:1.

Wikipedia: Redenomination

Kome i dalje nije jasno zašto Bitkoin neka više puta pažljivo pročita ove tekstove iznad: oblik novca koji se ne može redenominirati, veoma lako konfiskovati i izdavati bez ikakve kontrole i pokrića. Potpuno nezavistan od kaprica korumpiranih i od realnosti otuđenih političara i centralnih bankara. Veoma je bitno da postoji ovakav oblik novca koji nije podložan ovakvim manipulacijama od strane ljudskog faktora i da postoji slobodan izbor da se taj oblik novca odabere za štednju i transakcije: barem od strane onih koji ga razumeju, ovi koji ne žele da razumeju neka i dalje pristaju da budu pljačkani - njima ionako nema pomoći.

---

Komentari

brainzorz: Da, ali ako cemo realno bitkoin ne sluzi kao oblik novca, vec kao finansijsko ulaganje.

Bar je tako za nas i vecinu ljudi po svetu u praktičnom smislu. Jer 99.99% ljudi ili koliko vec prime platu u svojoj lokalnoj valuti, trose istu na redovan zivot, a ostatak (ako ga ima) investiraju. Slazem se da lokalne valute imaju svoj neki rizik, koji je veci u banana drzavi i da cuvanje svog kapitala u turbulentnom periodu u istoj je jako losa ideja.

Kada tako posmatras onda se mogu vuci pararele izmedju ostalih aseta, poput ETFova na primer i onda dolazimo do gomile problema sa bitkoinom.

@BTCSRB: Bitkoin se ne može porediti sa ETF-ovima pošto ETF-ove i ostale investicione instrumente ne možeš koristiti kao novac jer oni nisu "bearer assets" kao što jeste BTC. BTC eliminiše potpuno inflaciju (jer džabe ti keš u slamarici kao "bearer asset" kada je podložan inflaciji) i potrebu za posrednikom kod elektronskih plaćanja.

brainzorz: Ali on to eleminise samo u teoriji, sad da odem u pekaru, moram platiti u lokalnoj valuti, sad da li cu prodati bitkoin ili etf, prilicno je slicno.

Jedino sto mogu bitkoin zamenuti uzivo (ilegalno) sa nekim, pa tu jeste zamenjen posrednik. Ali provizije povlacenja su uglavnom zanemarljive, naspram ostalih parametara investicionog sredstva.

Neke stvari se mogu direktno platiti za bitkoin, ali to je ekstremno retko u stvarnom zivotu vecine ljudi.

@BTCSRB: Slažem se ali u uslovima hiperinflacije i visoke inflacije kakvu danas imamo u Argentini, Venecueli, Zimbabveu, Libanu, Turskoj itd. sve više ljudi direktno vrši transakcije u kriptovalutama, naročito "stablecoinima" poput USDT Tethera. Priznajem da u tim transakcijama BTC zaostaje upravo zbog volatilnosti ali je vršenje brzih i jeftinih transakcija svakako moguće putem Lightning mreže. Sve te lokalne valute su izgubile značajnu vrednost i prema USDT i prema BTC-u, odnosno BTC konstantno probija rekordnu vrednost kada se denominuje u tim valutama. I u tim državama je adopcija kriptovaluta najraširenija.

HunterVD: Kako valuta u koju se upumpavaju nepostojeci dolari i evri moze biti realna i dobra. A USDT tek da ne spominjem. Mozes uvek revi jer joj ljudi veruju, al ta vera u nesto ide samo do odredjenog nivoa.

@BTCSRB: Godinama kupujem BTC od svake plate, praktično štedim u njemu i kupovna moć mi vremenom raste denominirana u evrima i dinarima. To isto rade na desetine hiljada ljudi širom sveta. Kako su ti realni dinari i evri koje ubacujem svakog meseca koje sam zaradio od svog realnog rada - "nepostojeći"?

Kako dolari i evri koji se štampaju ni iz čega mogu biti realni i dobri kao valuta?

HunterVD: Pa eto bas to. Ulaze se nepostojeci novac u BTC i onda se prica o nekoj novoj valuti. Nije sija nego vrat, BTC ima jedino vrednost dok se upumpava taj lazni novac u njega. FIAT novac kolko tolko nastaje radom i proizvodnjom dobara, ne sav FIAT novac al neki deo, dok se BTC zasniva skroz na upumpavanje tog istog FIAT novca i dobroj volji i zeljama da magicne brojke idu navise.

@BTCSRB: Itekako je moguće izraziti cenu svih ostalih dobara i usluga kroz BTC i postojanje i vrednost BTC-a uopšte ne zavisi od fiat novca. Štaviše, gotova sva dobra i usluge dugoročno postaju jeftiniji kada se mere kroz BTC. Sutra kada bi fiat novac nestao BTC bi i dalje imao vrednost, čak i veću nego danas.

https://www.pricedinbitcoin21.com/

HunterVD: Naravno da je moguce izraziti cene svakodnevnih proizvoda u BTCu. Cene svakodnevnih proizvoda je moguce izraziti u cemu god pozelis, evo npr broj radnih sati koji je potreban da se proizvede taj proizvod i onda se uporedi sa cenom radnih sati i cene na polici, mozes ga uracunavati i u dobrima , jedan iphone kosta tolko i tolko KG juneceg mesa..... nista cudno. Takodje cene proizvoda pokazuju pad u odnosu sa BTCom jer je BTC masivno porastao u poslednjih 5-6 godina. Sta ce biti kad BTC stagnira ili pada kako se u tom periodu odnose cene, a da BTC je store of value i namenjen je samo da se cuva izvinte molim vas moja greska. Ni druge kripto valute nisu nista bolje. Ljudi koji su zaradili na BTCu svaka cast eto imali su pameti i srece , al sad kako je cena sve veca, inflacija sve losija i kamatne stope sve vise postace sve teze i teze dolaziti do novca a kamo li intvestirati ga u nesto rizicno ko kripto valute tako da ce i BTC sve manje rasti sto zbog velicine market cap-a sto zbog toga sto ljudi i firme imaju sve manje novca za ulagati. Dal ce btc moci da se uzbori sa inflacijom i losim uslovima to tek treba da se vidi. Tako da videcemo u narednom periodu koliko ce se ta priva o BTC kao store of value i nacinu odbrane od inflacije obistiniti. Licno ne verujem da ce BTC ikad biti zvanicno sredstvo placanja.

@BTCSRB: Cena svega se može izraziti kroz sve ostalo ali šta od svega toga najbolje vrši funkciju novca? BTC bolje vrši funkciju novca u većini okolnosti od gotovo svih stvari.

Šta će biti sa BTC videće se i oni koji veruju u njega će biti najzaslužniji za njegov uspeh jer su obezbeđivali potražnju kada su kola išla nizbrdo i za to biti asimetrično nagrađeni, ali će i puno izgubiti ako se pokaže da nisu u pravu. Pukovnici ili pokojnici. Po meni je to cilj zbog koga vredi rizikovati, pa i bankrotirati a cilj je da se centralno-bankarski kartel učini manje relevantnim.

Znaš i sam da fiat sistem ne može da preživi i izbegne imploziju bez konstantnog uvećanja mase novca u opticaju i zato se uopšte ne plašim za BTC i spavam mirno. BTC sigurno neće rasti istom brzinom kao prvih 15 godina ali moje očekivanje je svakako ubedljivo nadmašivanje svetske inflacije i obezvređivanja. Ne vidim kako sistem može da opstane bez novog QE kada god se on desi, u suprotnom imamo deflatornu spiralu.

Ne mora da bude zvanično sredstvo plaćanja, dovoljno da meni kao pojedincu služi za to dok god ima ljudi koji ga prihvataju, a ima ih puno. I da niko u tome ne može da nas spreči.

---

loldurrr: Ali i BTC je postao, u neku ruku, berzanska roba. Imaš market cap izražen u dolarima, koji je danas, npr. 2 triliona $, za mjesec dana 500 milijardi. Isto kao i dolar, samo volatilnije. Zato i kažem, da je to sve rezultat ponude i tražnje. Hipotetički, ja da imam milion BTC i odlučim to danas prodati, enormno ću oboriti cenu BTC. Ako je to valuta nezavisna od vanjskih uticaja - zašto će pasti toliko, kada imamo ograničenu količinu BTC-a. Svima je i dalje u podsvesti vrednost BTC izražena u USD, tako da je to isto kao i dinar, franak, akcija CocaCola i sl. Bar za sada...

A mogućnosti za korištenje BTC za robna plaćanja su mizerna. Ima li na vidiku mogućnosti da se vrednost nafte počne izražavati u BTC?

@BTCSRB: Meriti Bitkoin direktno prema robama i uslugama je itekako moguće i kada ga tako meriš, a ne prema fiat novcu, dugoročno cene gotovo svih roba i usluga padaju prema Bitkoinu. Cene svega izražene kroz BTC neće nestati ni u slučaju nestanka fiat novca, dolar sutra da prestane da postoji nikoga ne sprečava da izražava cene svega kroz BTC. Dolar i ostale valute nisu potrebni Bitkoinu.

---

Unlikely-Put-5524: Imam samo jedno pitanje za one "koji vide iza svega" i pronikli su bankarsku prevare da porobi čovečanstvo... Kako ne postoji mogućnost da je BTC i kripto nastao iz iste kuhinje i predstavlja ultimativni način za porobljavanje?

2% novčanika poseduje 95% svog BTC-a koji nije izgubljen. Znači da centralizacija može biti maksimalna...

@BTCSRB: Količina BTC-a u posedu ne daje kontrolu nad pravilima protokola i većinski vlasnici ne mogu da štampaju nove novčiće i tako uvećaju konačnu količinu u opticaju. Mogu samo da kratkoročno obore cenu i tako samo ostanu sa manje BTC-a koji imaju pošto će tržište vremenom apsorbovati te dampovane koine.

Unlikely-Put-5524: A mogu i dugoročno da obore cenu. Hajde da kažemo da imaš sada 10 BTC-a gde svaki vredi 40k

Veliki dumpu-ju ceo svoj bag u kontinutitetu kao što sad radi GS i posle godinu dana tvoj BTC sad vredi 4k, zašto misliš da bi ljudi nastavili da ga drže? Posebno ako znamo da ga 97% kupuje da bi zaradili, a ne zato što žele da ga koriste kao sredstvo plaćanja.

Ja bih ore BTC gledao kao commodity, jer sa svojim deflatornim svojstvima ne može biti valuta za plaćanje.

Takođe postoji i doomsday scenario gde jednostavno mogu svi da se dogovore da je ilegalan i to je onda to. Ovo mi deluje kao gotovo neverovatno, ali po meni je bilo koji maksimalizam potpuno detinjasto razmišljanje.

@BTCSRB: Pa padao je toliko puta za preko 70% i uvek se vraćao jer si uvek imao ljude koji su bili spremni da ga kupuju po bilo kojoj ceni, uključujući i mene. Pošto se ne može štampati, na kraju će ovi prodavci ostati bez BTC-a za prodaju i tržište apsorbovati čak i njihov "sell pressure". A ovi veliki koji drže tolike količine itekako dobro znaju vrednost toga što poseduju i nema smisla da svu količinu koju drže prodaju za inflatorni novac - prodavaće da bi finansirali svoj životni stil ili investiraju u biznise ili će ga koristiti kao kolateral za fiat pozajmice - ako raspolažu tolikim količinama i mogu da kontrolišu tržište nemaju strah da će im kolateral biti likvidiran.

Većina ljudi su fiat maksimalisti samim tim što su 100% u fiat novcu pa ne razmišljaju u pravcu doomsday scenarija kakav je upravo bila hiperinflacija devedesetih.

---

Romeo_y_Cohiba: Niko ti ne brani da ulažeš u bitcoin pod uslovom da znaš da je rizičniji od gotovog novca, štednje po viđenju, oročene štednje, obveznica, nekretnina, akcija, raznoraznih etfova, private equitya i derivata.

Drugim rečima ako ti je ok da danas uložiš 1000e, da za nedelju dana to vredi 500e, za mesec 1500 a za pola godina 300e ili 0 samo napred. Većini ljudi to nije ok.

Razlog zašto pamtimo Avrama je jer njegov dinar i dan danas koristimo. Prethodne uzastopne reforme nisu uspele kao što si i sam primetio.

Takođe, nije u pitanju "centralno-bankarska" prevara jer se ništa od toga ne bi desilo da ovom "odozgo" nisu zatrebale pare za finansiranje izvesnih stvari.

I dan danas, izvesni političar(i) izađu na TV i kažu da su "našli" novac za neki svoj genijalni plan i ljudi to puše. To u prevodu najčešće znači da će da nagna centralnu banku da mu doštampa novca i to nema veze sa bankama nego politikom..

@BTCSRB: Za investicione instrumente koje si naveo treba videti koliko su uspešno nadvladavali inflaciju prethodnih decenija i da li su očuvali kupovnu moć. Za štednju u banci i obveznice se i iz daleka vidi da nisu. US obveznice su u septembru imale drawdown od 48% od ATH iz 2020, a kao važe sa sigurnu investiciju. Čak i u momentu dospeća posle 10-30 godina jako teško čuvaju vrednost od inflacije.

A sada se zapitaj: da li zaista misliš da političari kontrolišu banke i bankare ili je možda obrnuto? Nisu političari ti koji su vlasnici krupnog kapitala.

Romeo_y_Cohiba: Ne investiraju svi na 10-30 godina za potrebe penzije. To je samo jedan od mnogo vidova i razloga investiranja. Nadvladavanje inflacije je isto tako samo jedan od kriterijuma. Samo pogledaš u šta jedan penzioni fond u SAD-u investira(hint: nije btc i nisu samo akcije). Npr. neki penzioni fondovi su od skoro počeli da investiraju u private equity ali isključivo do 15% veličine portfolija. Počeće i sa kriptom u nekom trenutku ali mogu da potpišem da će biti u još manjem procentu nego PE. Niko nije blesav da grune teško stečeni novac u nešto tako rizično osim u jako malim iznosima.

Ne znam ko koga kontroliše ali Avram je bio daleko manji baja od Slobe 90ih i pitao se za stvari samo u meri koliko mu je bio dozvoljeno da se pita. Ratovanje košta i finansira se štampanjem novca, nisu to neke neshvatljive stvari. Da ne pričam da smo bili pod apsolutnim sankcijama celog sveta.

---

Virtual_Plenty_6047: Npr jedan od velikih uspeha Japana od pre par decenija je zahvaljujući devalvaciji njihove valute, pa samim tim izvoz im je bio relativno jeftin. Naš dinar je jak, i to odgovara uvozničkom lobiju.

Nažalost mi ionako ništa ne proizvodimo tako da ne verujem da bi nešto pomoglo ako bi devalvirali dinar. Al svakako ovo je jedna viša ekonomija za koju naši političari nisu dorasli.

@BTCSRB: Gde je običan čovek u tom velikom japanskom uspehu? Postali su zemlja starih i nesrećnih mladih ljudi koji ne mogu da pobegnu iz "hamster wheel-a". Imaju "debt to GDP" od preko 260%. Taj dug nikada neće vratiti, a uz to će povući u ambis pola sveta jer najveći držaoci američkog duga - 14.5%. Spolja gladac, iznutra jadac. Iako je malo degutantno da mi iz Srbije komentarišemo Japance, opet pitam: gde je prosečan Japanac u celoj ovoj igri?

Why Japan Is Facing a Financial Disaster

Preporučujem da pogledate dokumentarac "Princes of the Yen | The Hidden Power of Central Banks" snimljenom po istoimenoj knjizi profesora Riharda Vernera koji je otac kvantitativnog popuštanja (quantitative easing) i ekspert za japansku ekonomiju i bankarski sistem.

Virtual_Plenty_6047: Zato sam rekao od pre nekoliko decenija. Jer su do pre nekih 30 godina bili 50 godina ispred celog sveta, sad su 20 godina iza naprednog sveta. Japanci su svako specifični. Poenta mog komentara da postoji razlog za neke zemlje da oslabe svoju valutu, i može itekako dobro da radi ako se radi u sinergiji sa nekim drugim ekonomskim merama. Tako da odgovor na to opet pitam, ne znam gde je prosečni Japanac, uskoro tamo trebam da idem pa ću ti reći. :'D

Odgledao sam ja ovaj dokumentarac odavno, super je. Pročitao mnoge knjige, a ponajviše od Austrijske ekonomske škole gde su pojedinci (Hayek) bili prvi koji su zagovarali novu decentralizovanu valutu, bili su u toj školi mnogi koji su prvi pričali o problemu inflacije i šta je tačno inflacija, ali su bili i za kapitalizam. Ali ovo je zaista jedna visoka ekonomija, videćeš da nije baš sve tako jednostavno kao što misliš.

Malo si previše u kriptovalutama pa gledaš na sve drugo u ekonomiji sa prekorom, pogotovu na kapitalizam. Evo i ja sam sam dobro investiran u kripto (uglavnom u BTC) pa sam itekako svestan da sve to može na kraju da bude potpuna pizdarija.

p.s. Knjiga za preporuku: 23 stvari koje vam ne kazu o kapitalizmu

@BTCSRB: Nisam u kriptovalutama nego isključivo u BTC.

Nisam ja protiv kapitalizma samo što nije pravi kapitalizam kada ne postoji slobodno tržište novca, pa samim tim ne postoji uopšte slobodno tržište koliko god se činilo tako. Kada su ekonomski subjekti prisiljeni da koriste određeni oblik novca, a monetarna politika se centralno planira - po meni tu nema slobodnog tržišta niti kapitalizma. Npr. formiranje cene Bitkoina i transakcionih naknada je čisto slobodno tržište jer tu nema "bailout-a", a BTC mining industrija je pravi primer slobodnog tržišta u kapitalizmu. Čista ponuda i potražnja bez intervencionizma. Ako si neprofitabilan nema ti spasa i bankrotiraćeš i nema nikoga ko će ti priteći u pomoć. Niko nije "too big to fail".

Znam da sam se ovde usredsredio usko na jednu industriju ali se može primeniti na celokupnu ekonomiju. Države i centralne banke su suvišne i apsolutno pokvare sve čega se dotaknu pa će u slučaju potpune pizdarije odgovornost biti na njima, a ne na Bitkoinu i njegovim držaocima.

---

kutija_keksa: Evo zašto btc nije pogodan kao valuta:

-Volatilna vrednost. Vrednost btc se menja i do 200% godišnje, dok dolar ne trpi inflaciju vecu od 10% godišnje (mada je u redovnim uslovima tipa 3%). Čak i dinar, ako gledaš realnu kupovnu moć u prodavnici nema volatilnost preko 30% na godišnjem nivou (jedno 7 puta nižu od BTC) Ako danas kupim BTC u vrednosti od 15 USD ne znam da li ću sutra moći da kupim 10 ili 20 USD za isti taj BTC.

-„Gas fees” koji se plaćaju na svaku transakciju, u poređenjusa kešom koji nema takvih problema.

-Spor transfer novca. Arhitektura blockchaina ne dozvoljava mreži da procesuira više od 10 transakcija po sekundi, što značida na transakciju možete čekati i po nekoloo sati, u poređenju sa kešom (bez odugovlačenja) ili debitnim karticama (10 sekundi do 10 minuta). Visa i MasterCard procesuiraju hiljadu puta više transakcija po sekundi.

-Retko ko eksplicitno prima BTC, tako da ćete plaćati menjačnici na kursu u oba smera, i pritom čekati menjačnicu.

-Podložan je manipulacijama velikih igrača poput Ilona Maska i velikih banki koje su u zadnjih pet godina debelo uložile u kripto. Fiat je na milosti države i njenih građana, dok je BTC na milost privatnih investitora. Kome verujete više?

-SVE BTC transakcije su jsvne, ako neko zna koji novčanik je vaš lako zna i koliko para ste kada slali kome, dok fizičke novčanice nemaju taj problem.

-Vrednost i upotreljivost BTC ne garantuje niko, dok vrednost i upotrebljivost fiat valute barem donekle garantuje država. Na primer, Srbija garantuje da je dinar upotrebljiv jer zahteva da vodu, struju, poreze, namete i takse plaćaš u dinarima, a i javni sektor (10% čitavog stanovništva) isplaćuje isključivo u dinarima.

OP očigledno ima jako ostrašćenu ideološku perspektivu... Ja nisam stručnjak, ali je moj otac pisao naučne radove o blockchainu dok je bio na doktorskim studijama, još kad je pomisao o BTC vrednijem od sto dolada bila smešna, tako da znam nešto malo kroz priče sa njim. Uostalom, sve o čemu pričam lako je proveriti pomoću javnih podataka. Ono što OP piše je jednim delom tačno, ali su iznete samo one informacije koje idu u prilog BTC.

Kripto kao pobuna protiv fiata, centralnih banaka i vlada je imao ideološke korene kod anarhista na internetu devedestih, međutim od njihovih belih papira i špekulacija dobili smo nešto što je kao valuta beskorisno. BTC može biti investicija, ako su ljudi iskreni sa sobom, ali ideja o valuti je prevaziđena. Ako i neka kripto valuta drži do toga onda je to Monero koji bar ima anonimnost.

@BTCSRB: Ne ulazeći u sve iznete navode taksativno, ipak moram da prokomentarišem neke od nepreciznih ili netačnih navoda.

Transakcione naknade kod Bitkoina se ne zovu "gas fees" već "transaction fees". Kod keša nema takvih problema ali ga ne možete poslati putem komunikacionog kanala bez posrednika. To mora da ima svoju cenu pošto BTC majneri moraju da imaju neki podsticaj da uključe nečiju transakciju u blok koji je ograničene veličine. BTC "fee market" je najslobodnije tržište na svetu. Fiat novac nemate mogućnost da pošaljete na daljinu bez posrednika koji takođe naplaćuje nekada dosta skupe naknade.

Besmisleno je porediti blokčejn kao "settlement layer" sa Visom i Mastercardom koje ne služe za finalno poravnanje. Glavni Bitkoin blokčejn se može pre uporediti s SWIFT-om ili FedWire-om kod kojih je jednom poravnata transakcija nepovratna, a Mastercard/Visa sa BTC "Lightning Network-om" koji služi za brza i jeftina plaćanja. Otac je trebalo da Vas nauči o Lightning mreži, kako funkcioniše i da je sposobna da procesuira više miliona transakcija u sekundi. Lightning mreža takođe nudi veći nivo privatnosti od glavnog blokčejna ali puno manju sigurnost.

Ne bih se složio da je fiat na milosti isključivo države i građana, samo ću spomenuti Crnu sredu iz septembra 1992. godine i spekulativni napad na britansku funtu.

BTC transakcije su javne ali su pseudonimne što znači da je jako teško utvrditi identitet ukoliko adresa nije povezana sa identitetom korisnika. Generisanje BTC adrese ne zahteva nikakvu identifikaciju ("krvnu sliku") za razliku od otvaranja bankovnog računa. Može se generisati neograničen broj adresa i na razne načine prekinuti i zamaskirati veza transakcija između njih radi očuvanja privatnosti. Ponovo, fizičke novčanice ne možemo slati putem komunikacionog kanala bez posrednika, podložne su konfiskaciji, uništenju i obezvređivanju.

Upotrebljivost Bitkoina garantuje "open source" kod, energija, matematika i kriptografija. To su mnogo jače garancije nego obećanja bilo koje države koja su toliko puta u istoriji izigrale poverenje sopstvenog stanovništva - poput Jugoslavije devedesetih.

Ja sam BTC spomenuo kao potencijalno rešenje za (hiper)inflaciju tek u kraćem delu na kraju teksta, a od Vas i od ostalih komentatora sam dobio nesrazmeran odgovor usmeren na Bitkoin, a puno manje usmeren na navode iz najvećeg dela posta.

Tako ste i vi izneli isključivo informacije koje ne idu u prilog BTC-a, a potpuno ignorisali sve očigledne nedostatke fiat novca (kako u fizičkom, tako i u digitalnom obliku) koji su se i ispoljili tokom hiperinflacije devedesetih, a ispoljavaju se i dan-danas.

Svako dobro!

kutija_keksa: Zato su i „Gas fees” pod navodnicima.

Ne vidim zašto bi bilo dobro imati „slobodno tržište” kada se radi o kopačima.

Ali, čak i da je dobro imati slobodno tržište, morate primetiti da BTC kopanje nije tako slobodno. Postojanje ASIC mašina znači da se kopanje prevashodno isplati velikim igračima (ne mislim na likove sa 3 riser kartice u PC, nego na kineze sa skladištima teških preko milion u opremi). Takođe, te velike operacije organi vlasti mogu zaustaviti kad im se prohte (Kina).

Jako je teško izvući BTC anonimno bez gubitka kod menjača -- pojedinca ili non KYC institucije.

Što se upotrebljivosti BTC tiče, šta meni garantuje da ću imati na šta da potrošim BTC? To je ključno pitanje. A kasa Jugoslovenski fiat nije bio upotebljiv, vidim da Nemački jeste. Isto tako, mislim da će USD biti upotrebljiv dugo, a kada USD bude neupotrebljiv društvo će ionako biti u apokalipsi gde papir nije važan koliko i hrana, utočište, voda, radio, municija, lekovi i vatreno oružje.

Naravno da iznosim samo informacije koje proizilaze iz nedostataka, to je balans postu i komentarima. Da su ljudi samo blatili kripto moj komentar bi mnogo više ličio na originalni post nego na moj prošli komentar. Ja se sa mnogim tvrdnjama u postu slažem delimično ili potpuno, samo želim da pružim kontekst za tumačenje toga.

Ideološki su mi Cryptopunks potpuno zanimljivi, ali cinizam je opravdan kada se u obzir uzme priča. Ljudi su želeli da se odupru bankama, vladama, kontroli i prismotri. Izmislili su tehnologiju. Počeli su da koriste i popularizuju tu tehnologiju. U prostor su ušle banke i vlade, kupovanjem, prodajom i praćenjem samog tržišta (danas sve velike menjačnice imaju KYC procedure). Kao u matriksu, kontrolisana opozicija. Ok, ovo je lična teorija zavere u koju ni ja ne verujem u potpunosti.

Ako govorimo o crypto kao valuti mislim da je XMR mnogo bolja VALUTA od BTC, dok je mnogo gora investicija. Jednostavno se slažem sa političkim i ideološkim ciljevima pionira kripto valuta, ali smatram da su oni ogromnim delom iznevereni zbog ulaska banaka i država u celu priču, te njihova stara rešenja više ne rešavaju originalne probleme.

@BTCSRB: BTC kao neutralni novac je za svakoga, pa i za bankare i države. Ne možemo ih sprečiti da ga kupe na tržištu i stave ga u kakav god instrument, pa i ETF. Ne možemo ih sprečiti da ga konfiskuju od onih koji nisu dobro obezbedili svoje ključeve. Države su regulisale ono što su mogle, poput menjačnica, kroz AML/KYC procedure ali kakve to veze ima sa BTC-om? Na protokol kao protokol nisu mogle da utiču.

Ko želi i dalje može koristiti BTC kako je i prvobitno predviđeno - za p2p transakcije i skladištenje vrednosti u "self custody-u". Bitkoin je i dalje "bearer asset" otporan na cenzuru i konfiskaciju. Ne vidim da je taj pravac promenjen samo zato što su ušle banke i države. Možda nije u duhu Bitkoina da ga kupuju fondovi pa ga prodaju upakovanog u ETF. Najmanje je u duhu bitkoina da se nekome zabrani da ga kupuje.

Kako to mislite "ne vidite zašto bi bilo dobro imati „slobodno tržište” kada se radi o kopačima? Na decentralizaciji mininga se radi (StratumV2 protkol, Ocean pool...), a kineski primer je samo pokazatelj koliko je otporno: nakon zabrane raširilo se dodatno po svetu, a u Kini se i dalje nalazi 21% hešrejta. Majneri imaju veoma male margine profita zbog same prirode rudarenja i halvinga pa će bilo kakav "fck around" poput cenzure transakcija verovatno značiti bankrot.

Možemo do sutra pričati o XMR vs BTC i navešću puno razloga zašto XMR ne može i neće zaživeti kao novac, a pre svega je manjak decentralizacije (neograničena veličina blokčejna) i otpornost na državni napad - sve što Bitkoin ima. Kada je novac u pitanju pobednik nosi sve i tu je Monero već izgubio, dok će BTC poboljšanu privatnost obezbediti na ostalim nivoima, sidechainovima itd (Lightning, Liquid, Cashu, Fedimint, Ark i ko zna šta sve što još i ne postoji - nivo developmenta u Bitkoin prostoru je ogroman).

Dolar će uvek u nekom obliku biti upotrebljiv ali ne znači da će zauvek ostati svetska rezervna valuta, kao što i danas postoji funta ali odavno nije više ono što je bila na vrhuncu Britanske imperije.

kutija_keksa: Pa ti protokoli sprečavaju pljude da anonimno kupe BTC.

Mislim, BTC realno ima neku primenu, ali ja ga danas npr. imam čisto kao neku malu investicijicu, i to još od doba kad je kopanje sa 2 grafičke u kućnom PC bilo isplativo po skupoj struji. Ali BTC prosto nije dobra alternativa fizičkom novcu na nivou države zbog volatilnosti i manjka kontrole. Jedna ogromna poluga države je puštanje u promet novog novca, i tako se kontroliše inflacija, pored menjanja kamatnih stopa. Bez mogućnosti štampe gubi se i taj faktor kontrole. A inflacija od 2-3% godišnje je zdrava, dok je za ekonomiju deflacija (kojoj je BTC bar delimično sklon) haos, jer smanjuje ekonomsku aktivnost i investicije...

Što se tiče državnog napada na XMR, misliš na to kako jedna država može da realistično sprovede 51% napad?

XMR nije vrhovna valuta ali meni se sviđa kako za njega nema ASIC mašina, kako je anoniman u smislu da ne možeš lako da provališ ko kome koliko i kada šalje šta... Mislim da će XMR sigurno u toj privacy niši zameniti neka druga valuta kroz 10-15 godina koja ima bolji algoritam i tehnologiju...

Dobra dosetka za veličinu blockchaina, ali ona je trenutno 160GB cela / 50 GB pruned, tako nešto. Sve dok nije preko 10TB (100x) veća može je pohraniti najveći hard disk namenjen „običnim ljudima”, a kad se dođe do tad verovatno će i cene tih diskova biti pristupačnije nego danas. Sa druge strane, agresivan pruning je takođe opcija. A da ne govorimo o sidechainovima koji takođe postoje za XMR.

Da, to za dolar je i moja poenta, nekako će biti upotrebljiv uvek, dok je kripto neupotrebljiv bez neta, a i nema mnogo šta da se kupi kriptom u poređenju sa fiatom. I

@BTCSRB: Ima bezbroj načina da se nabavi non-KYC Bitkoin: coinjoin, coinmixing, rudarenje u non-KYC pulu, nabavka nekog drugog kripta putem KYC menjačnice pa "trustless atomic swap" za BTC, nabavka KYC BTC-a putem Lightning-a pa "submarine swap" on-chain, zatim nabavka bilo kog KYC kripta ili Lightning ili on-chain BTC-a pa swap na sidechain Liquid BTC gde su transakcije tajne slično XMR-u i nazad swap na on-chain. Naravno i stara narodska razmena na ulici. XMR se isto može koristiti za svrhu nabavke non-KYC Bitkoina. U svim ovim slučajevima se adrese koje su krajnje destinacije tih sredstava ne mogu ili jako teško povezati sa KYC identitetom korisnika. Više na: kycnot.me

Diskusija o tome da li je zdrava i potrebna inflacija i da li je uopšte potreban državni intervencionizam u ekonomiji je stara diskusija između Kejnzijanske i Austrijske ekonomske škole. Po meni svaka inflacija je pljačka. Da ne govorimo da centralni bankari ne snose nikakvu odgovornost za gubitak kontrole nad inflacijom koji se meri u stotinama procenata "omaška" jer kada je ciljana inflacija 2%, a imamo inflaciju od 10% to je onda promašaj od 500%. A svi vodeći centralni bankari su i dalje na svojim funkcijama od početka inflacije negde 2020. godine iako su izneverili sva očekivanja. Nisu izabrani od strane naroda i nemoguće ih je smeniti od strane naroda, a utiču na živote svih!

Usled tehnološkog napretka i rasta produktivnosti, prirodno stanje slobodnog tržišta je pad cena, a ne njihov konstantan rast kroz inflaciju. Ne postoji nikakva "poželjna" ili "neophodna" inflacija, svaka "ciljana" inflacija je pljačka koji onemogućava populaciju da uživa u plodovima sopstvene produktivnosti u obliku nižih cena svih roba i usluga. Bitkoin zbog svoje fiksne ponude novca u opticaju (21 milion novčića = apsolutna digitalna oskudnost) nameće ovu disciplinu slobodnog tržišta i tehnološkog napretka. Dok je postojeći dužnički fiat sistem dizajniran da krade plodove produktivnosti, Bitkoin omogućava populaciji da ih zadrži u obliku nižih cena.

Kada nema rasta cena, inflacija je 0% i cene su stabilne. Krađa i tada postoji, jer cene prirodno padaju zbog povećanja efikasnosti proizvodnje/usluga, gde bi se tada veca količina robe/usluga, takmičila za istu (fiksnu) količinu novča od 21M BTC-a.

Kakav je ishod ove diskusije nije bitno, bitno je da sada svako ima slobodu izbora kakav novac želi da koristi a ne da bude prisiljen da koristi isključivo inflatorni novac. Ako se neko ne slaže sa modernom monetarnom teorijom, sada ima alternativu koju nekada nije imao (zlato je odavno izgubilo bitku sa MMT) pre postojanja Bitkoina.

kutija_keksa: Neki od ovih non kyc nacina su mi vec bili poznati, neki nisu, ovo je bas informativan komentar.

A što je inflacija pljačka? Bez obzira na inflaciju, broj novčanica u novčaniku ostaje isti, to što se one sada mogu zameniti za manje robe je druga priča. Da li je onda i zlato pljačka, jer neko kupi, na primer, 100g zlata danas, a sutra na tržištu cena zlata padne? Da li je onda pljačka i BTC, jer i danas i kad je BTC bio na vrhuncu cene imam isti broj satoshija, samo je danas njihova vrednost manja?

Ne vidim zašto bi centralni bankari snosili odgovornost zbog inflacije. Oni ugrobo imaju dve poluge za kontrolu inflacije: kamatne stope i štampanje novca. U realnosti na inflaciju utiče mnogo faktora na koje centralna banka nema uticaj, niti koje može da predvidi: pandemije, ratovi, državni budžeti i zaduživanja, trgovina u datoj valuti (i izvoz i uvoz), porast i pad produktivnosti... Oni imaju donekle uticaj, ali nisu svemoćni.

Što se tiče izbora, ovo već zalazi u politiku a ne u finansije, ali ni direktor pošte, ni direktor EPS, ni direktor vodovoda nisu birani na izborima na kojima glasaju svi, a utiču na živote svih!

Ne verujem u kripto kao spasioce kapitalizma ili pojedinca. Ovo je sada više politički, ali zaista mislim da u kapitalizmu prosečna osoba nema slobode, a da je kripto u najbolju ruku jedna mala stavka koja omogućava skladištenje stečenog kapitala (ovo se dobija ako prihvatimo sve kripto pozitivne teze), ali ne rešava problem radnika koji čine 95% društva i doprinose 99% vrednosti a kapitala kontrolišu višestruko manje.

Otkud znam, ono, da rezimiram: kripto je koristan alat koji još nije dostigao svoj vrhunac, ali neće nešto mnogo promeniti svet. To je neko moje viđenje.

@BTCSRB: Kako nije pljačka? Broj novčanica u novčaniku ostaje isti ali ukupan broj novca u opticaju se uvećava i tako obezvređuje tvoje novčanice. Inače, znaš vrlo dobro da fizički keš čini manje od 10% ukupnog novca u opticaju, a ostalo je digitalno. Dakle "money supply" se uvećava pritiskom na dugme tastature računara u FED/ECB/NBS... Neko stvara novac ni iz čega za koji svi moramo da radimo trošeći svoje dragoceno i ograničeno vreme na ovom svetu. Tako nam efektivno krade vreme pošto tvoj radni sat iz prošlosti konstantno može da kupi manje roba i usluga u budućnosti, a zbog tehnološkog napretka i rasta produktivnosti bi realno cene trebaju da budu niže vremenom

Kako možeš da porediš fiat, zlato i BTC u tom smislu? Vrednost fiata prevashodno smanjuje ljudska manipulacija sa strane ponude koja se uvek uvećava, dok je potražnja permanentno rastuća zbog zakona o "legal tenderu" i rasta privrede i broja stanovnika. Ovo sa BTC je strana potražnje koju reguliše slobodno tržište dok ukupna ponuda nije podložna ljudskoj manipulaciji. Dugoročno, vrednost zlata i BTC raste sa rastućom potražnjom jer nema manipulacije ponude.

Centralni bankari će optužiti sve druge faktore da bi skrenuli pažnju sa svoje odgovornosti za inflaciju, a za ratove se može reći da su čak i saučesnici pošto tokovi novca mogu utvrditi veoma zanimljivu vezu između njih i vojno-industrijskog kompleksa. Na stranu to, dolarska monetarna masa je samo između februara i aprila 2020. uvećana za 1.39 biliona/triliona što je više nego ukupna monetarna masa iz 2008-09 krize. U krizi 2008-09 su od septembra 2008. do januara 2009. naštampali 803 milijarde i tako uvećali monetarnu masu za 88% sa 909 milijardi na 1712 milijardi - to znači da su 4 meseca naštampali skoro isto novca kao tokom celih 95 prethodnig godina sopstvenog postojanja Federalnih rezervi. Te 2020. su i potpuno ukinuli obavezne rezerve u komercijalnim bankama.

ECB je naštampala 1T evra "zbog kovida". A kao naštampali su jer je bila zatvorena celokupna privreda, pa što ste tako agresivno zatvarali privredu - trebalo je da pustite ljude da rade a ne da se igrate Mao Ce Tunga. I uprkos nezapamćenom štampanju ti isti centralni bankari su nazivali inflaciju "prolaznom" - dakle ni zrnce odgovornosti.

Ako u kapitalizmu prosečna osoba nema slobode, šta reći za komunizam gde ne da nema slobode nego nema ni života pošto su komunistički režimi pobili na desetine miliona ljudi?

Na hipotetičkom BTC standardu zbog fiksne količine novca u opticaju bi se popravio položaj radnika jer kapitalisti ne mogu da beskonačno uvećavaju svoj BTC kapital i kupovna moć i radnika i kapitalista bi procentualno podjednako rasla i običan radnik bi imao mnogo bolje šanse da i sam postane kapitalista nego danas. Imao bi mogućnost da štedi od svoje plate jer mu novac ne bi gubio vrednost i u nekom trenutku bi iz svoje štednje finansirao neki biznis, a ne zaduživanjem. Tako bi se ravnomernije rasporedilo društveno bogatstvo ali ne centralnim planiranjem nego kroz slobodno tržište.

@ 6be5cc06:5259daf0

A seguir, veja como instalar e configurar o Privoxy no Pop!_OS.

---

1. Instalar o Tor e o Privoxy

Abra o terminal e execute:

bash sudo apt update sudo apt install tor privoxy

Explicação:

• Tor: Roteia o tráfego pela rede Tor.
• Privoxy: Proxy avançado que intermedia a conexão entre aplicativos e o Tor.

---

2. Configurar o Privoxy

Abra o arquivo de configuração do Privoxy:

bash sudo nano /etc/privoxy/config

Navegue até a última linha (atalho: Ctrl + / depois Ctrl + V para navegar diretamente até a última linha) e insira:

bash forward-socks5 / 127.0.0.1:9050 .

Isso faz com que o Privoxy envie todo o tráfego para o Tor através da porta 9050.

Salve (CTRL + O e Enter) e feche (CTRL + X) o arquivo.

---

3. Iniciar o Tor e o Privoxy

Agora, inicie e habilite os serviços:

bash sudo systemctl start tor sudo systemctl start privoxy sudo systemctl enable tor sudo systemctl enable privoxy

Explicação:

• start: Inicia os serviços.
• enable: Faz com que iniciem automaticamente ao ligar o PC.

---

4. Configurar o Navegador Firefox

Para usar a rede Tor com o Firefox:

1. Abra o Firefox.
2. Acesse Configurações → Configurar conexão.
3. Selecione Configuração manual de proxy.
4. Configure assim:
   • Proxy HTTP: 127.0.0.1
   • Porta: 8118 (porta padrão do Privoxy)
   • Domínio SOCKS (v5): 127.0.0.1
   • Porta: 9050
5. Marque a opção "Usar este proxy também em HTTPS".
6. Clique em OK.

---

5. Verificar a Conexão com o Tor

Abra o navegador e acesse:

text https://check.torproject.org/

Se aparecer a mensagem "Congratulations. This browser is configured to use Tor.", a configuração está correta.

---

Dicas Extras

• Privoxy pode ser ajustado para bloquear anúncios e rastreadores.
• Outros aplicativos também podem ser configurados para usar o Privoxy.

@ c631e267:c2b78d3e

Die grauenvollste Aussicht ist die der Technokratie – \ einer kontrollierenden Herrschaft, \ die durch verstümmelte und verstümmelnde Geister ausgeübt wird. \ Ernst Jünger

«Davos ist nicht mehr sexy», das Weltwirtschaftsforum (WEF) mache Davos kaputt, diese Aussagen eines Einheimischen las ich kürzlich in der Handelszeitung. Während sich einige vor Ort enorm an der «teuersten Gewerbeausstellung der Welt» bereicherten, würden die negativen Begleiterscheinungen wie Wohnungsnot und Niedergang der lokalen Wirtschaft immer deutlicher.

Nächsten Montag beginnt in dem Schweizer Bergdorf erneut ein Jahrestreffen dieses elitären Clubs der Konzerne, bei dem man mit hochrangigen Politikern aus aller Welt und ausgewählten Vertretern der Systemmedien zusammenhocken wird. Wie bereits in den vergangenen vier Jahren wird die Präsidentin der EU-Kommission, Ursula von der Leyen, in Begleitung von Klaus Schwab ihre Grundsatzansprache halten.

Der deutsche WEF-Gründer hatte bei dieser Gelegenheit immer höchst lobende Worte für seine Landsmännin: 2021 erklärte er sich «stolz, dass Europa wieder unter Ihrer Führung steht» und 2022 fand er es bemerkenswert, was sie erreicht habe angesichts des «erstaunlichen Wandels», den die Welt in den vorangegangenen zwei Jahren erlebt habe; es gebe nun einen «neuen europäischen Geist».

Von der Leyens Handeln während der sogenannten Corona-«Pandemie» lobte Schwab damals bereits ebenso, wie es diese Woche das Karlspreis-Direktorium tat, als man der Beschuldigten im Fall Pfizergate die diesjährige internationale Auszeichnung «für Verdienste um die europäische Einigung» verlieh. Außerdem habe sie die EU nicht nur gegen den «Aggressor Russland», sondern auch gegen die «innere Bedrohung durch Rassisten und Demagogen» sowie gegen den Klimawandel verteidigt.

Jene Herausforderungen durch «Krisen epochalen Ausmaßes» werden indes aus dem Umfeld des WEF nicht nur herbeigeredet – wie man alljährlich zur Zeit des Davoser Treffens im Global Risks Report nachlesen kann, der zusammen mit dem Versicherungskonzern Zurich erstellt wird. Seit die Globalisten 2020/21 in der Praxis gesehen haben, wie gut eine konzertierte und konsequente Angst-Kampagne funktionieren kann, geht es Schlag auf Schlag. Sie setzen alles daran, Schwabs goldenes Zeitfenster des «Great Reset» zu nutzen.

Ziel dieses «großen Umbruchs» ist die totale Kontrolle der Technokraten über die Menschen unter dem Deckmantel einer globalen Gesundheitsfürsorge. Wie aber könnte man so etwas erreichen? Ein Mittel dazu ist die «kreative Zerstörung». Weitere unabdingbare Werkzeug sind die Einbindung, ja Gleichschaltung der Medien und der Justiz.

Ein «Great Mental Reset» sei die Voraussetzung dafür, dass ein Großteil der Menschen Einschränkungen und Manipulationen wie durch die Corona-Maßnahmen praktisch kritik- und widerstandslos hinnehme, sagt der Mediziner und Molekulargenetiker Michael Nehls. Er meint damit eine regelrechte Umprogrammierung des Gehirns, wodurch nach und nach unsere Individualität und unser soziales Bewusstsein eliminiert und durch unreflektierten Konformismus ersetzt werden.

Der aktuelle Zustand unserer Gesellschaften ist auch für den Schweizer Rechtsanwalt Philipp Kruse alarmierend. Durch den Umgang mit der «Pandemie» sieht er die Grundlagen von Recht und Vernunft erschüttert, die Rechtsstaatlichkeit stehe auf dem Prüfstand. Seiner dringenden Mahnung an alle Bürger, die Prinzipien von Recht und Freiheit zu verteidigen, kann ich mich nur anschließen.

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ 3283ef81:0a531a33

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit\ enean magna lorem, dignissim et nisl a, iaculis eleifend dolor

uspendisse potenti

@ 9e69e420:d12360c2

A new report from the National Sports Shooting Foundation (NSSF) shows that civilian firearm possession exceeded 490 million in 2022. The total from 1990 to 2022 is estimated at 491.3 million firearms. In 2022, over ten million firearms were domestically produced, leading to a total of 16,045,911 firearms available in the U.S. market.

Of these, 9,873,136 were handguns, 4,195,192 were rifles, and 1,977,583 were shotguns. Handgun availability aligns with the concealed carry and self-defense market, as all states allow concealed carry, with 29 having constitutional carry laws.

@ c631e267:c2b78d3e

Herzlichen Glückwunsch zum dritten Geburtstag, liebe Denk Bar! Wieso zum dritten? Das war doch 2022 und jetzt sind wir im Jahr 2024, oder? Ja, das ist schon richtig, aber bei Geburtstagen erinnere ich mich immer auch an meinen Vater, und der behauptete oft, der erste sei ja schließlich der Tag der Geburt selber und den müsse man natürlich mitzählen. Wo er recht hat, hat er nunmal recht. Konsequenterweise wird also heute dieser Blog an seinem dritten Geburtstag zwei Jahre alt.

Das ist ein Grund zum Feiern, wie ich finde. Einerseits ganz einfach, weil es dafür gar nicht genug Gründe geben kann. «Das Leben sind zwei Tage», lautet ein gängiger Ausdruck hier in Andalusien. In der Tat könnte es so sein, auch wenn wir uns im Alltag oft genug von der Routine vereinnahmen lassen.

Seit dem Start der Denk Bar vor zwei Jahren ist unglaublich viel passiert. Ebenso wie die zweieinhalb Jahre davor, und all jenes war letztlich auch der Auslöser dafür, dass ich begann, öffentlich zu schreiben. Damals notierte ich:

«Seit einigen Jahren erscheint unser öffentliches Umfeld immer fragwürdiger, widersprüchlicher und manchmal schier unglaublich - jede Menge Anlass für eigene Recherchen und Gedanken, ganz einfach mit einer Portion gesundem Menschenverstand.»

Wir erleben den sogenannten «großen Umbruch», einen globalen Coup, den skrupellose Egoisten clever eingefädelt haben und seit ein paar Jahren knallhart – aber nett verpackt – durchziehen, um buchstäblich alles nach ihrem Gusto umzukrempeln. Die Gelegenheit ist ja angeblich günstig und muss genutzt werden.

Nie hätte ich mir träumen lassen, dass ich so etwas jemals miterleben müsste. Die Bosheit, mit der ganz offensichtlich gegen die eigene Bevölkerung gearbeitet wird, war früher für mich unvorstellbar. Mein (Rest-) Vertrauen in alle möglichen Bereiche wie Politik, Wissenschaft, Justiz, Medien oder Kirche ist praktisch komplett zerstört. Einen «inneren Totalschaden» hatte ich mal für unsere Gesellschaften diagnostiziert.

Was mich vielleicht am meisten erschreckt, ist zum einen das Niveau der Gleichschaltung, das weltweit erreicht werden konnte, und zum anderen die praktisch totale Spaltung der Gesellschaft. Haben wir das tatsächlich mit uns machen lassen?? Unfassbar! Aber das Werkzeug «Angst» ist sehr mächtig und funktioniert bis heute.

Zum Glück passieren auch positive Dinge und neue Perspektiven öffnen sich. Für viele Menschen waren und sind die Entwicklungen der letzten Jahre ein Augenöffner. Sie sehen «Querdenken» als das, was es ist: eine Tugend.

Auch die immer ernsteren Zensurbemühungen sind letztlich nur ein Zeichen der Schwäche, wo Argumente fehlen. Sie werden nicht verhindern, dass wir unsere Meinung äußern, unbequeme Fragen stellen und dass die Wahrheit peu à peu ans Licht kommt. Es gibt immer Mittel und Wege, auch für uns.

---

Danke, dass du diesen Weg mit mir weitergehst!

@ e31e84c4:77bbabc0

Bitcoin and Fixed Income was Written By Wyatt O’Rourke. If you enjoyed this article then support his writing, directly, by donating to his lightning wallet: ultrahusky3@primal.net

Fiduciary duty is the obligation to act in the client’s best interests at all times, prioritizing their needs above the advisor’s own, ensuring honesty, transparency, and avoiding conflicts of interest in all recommendations and actions.

This is something all advisors in the BFAN take very seriously; after all, we are legally required to do so. For the average advisor this is a fairly easy box to check. All you essentially have to do is have someone take a 5-minute risk assessment, fill out an investment policy statement, and then throw them in the proverbial 60/40 portfolio. You have thousands of investment options to choose from and you can reasonably explain how your client is theoretically insulated from any move in the \~markets\~. From the traditional financial advisor perspective, you could justify nearly anything by putting a client into this type of portfolio. All your bases were pretty much covered from return profile, regulatory, compliance, investment options, etc. It was just too easy. It became the household standard and now a meme.

As almost every real bitcoiner knows, the 60/40 portfolio is moving into psyop territory, and many financial advisors get clowned on for defending this relic on bitcoin twitter. I’m going to specifically poke fun at the ‘40’ part of this portfolio.

The ‘40’ represents fixed income, defined as…

An investment type that provides regular, set interest payments, such as bonds or treasury securities, and returns the principal at maturity. It’s generally considered a lower-risk asset class, used to generate stable income and preserve capital.

Historically, this part of the portfolio was meant to weather the volatility in the equity markets and represent the “safe” investments. Typically, some sort of bond.

First and foremost, the fixed income section is most commonly constructed with U.S. Debt. There are a couple main reasons for this. Most financial professionals believe the same fairy tale that U.S. Debt is “risk free” (lol). U.S. debt is also one of the largest and most liquid assets in the market which comes with a lot of benefits.

There are many brilliant bitcoiners in finance and economics that have sounded the alarm on the U.S. debt ticking time bomb. I highly recommend readers explore the work of Greg Foss, Lawrence Lepard, Lyn Alden, and Saifedean Ammous. My very high-level recap of their analysis:

• A bond is a contract in which Party A (the borrower) agrees to repay Party B (the lender) their principal plus interest over time.

• The U.S. government issues bonds (Treasury securities) to finance its operations after tax revenues have been exhausted.

• These are traditionally viewed as “risk-free” due to the government’s historical reliability in repaying its debts and the strength of the U.S. economy

• U.S. bonds are seen as safe because the government has control over the dollar (world reserve asset) and, until recently (20 some odd years), enjoyed broad confidence that it would always honor its debts.

• This perception has contributed to high global demand for U.S. debt but, that is quickly deteriorating.

• The current debt situation raises concerns about sustainability.

• The U.S. has substantial obligations, and without sufficient productivity growth, increasing debt may lead to a cycle where borrowing to cover interest leads to more debt.

• This could result in more reliance on money creation (printing), which can drive inflation and further debt burdens.

In the words of Lyn Alden “Nothing stops this train”

Those obligations are what makes up the 40% of most the fixed income in your portfolio. So essentially you are giving money to one of the worst capital allocators in the world (U.S. Gov’t) and getting paid back with printed money.

As someone who takes their fiduciary responsibility seriously and understands the debt situation we just reviewed, I think it’s borderline negligent to put someone into a classic 60% (equities) / 40% (fixed income) portfolio without serious scrutiny of the client’s financial situation and options available to them. I certainly have my qualms with equities at times, but overall, they are more palatable than the fixed income portion of the portfolio. I don’t like it either, but the money is broken and the unit of account for nearly every equity or fixed income instrument (USD) is fraudulent. It’s a paper mache fade that is quite literally propped up by the money printer.

To briefly be as most charitable as I can – It wasn’t always this way. The U.S. Dollar used to be sound money, we used to have government surplus instead of mathematically certain deficits, The U.S. Federal Government didn’t used to have a money printing addiction, and pre-bitcoin the 60/40 portfolio used to be a quality portfolio management strategy. Those times are gone.

Now the fun part. How does bitcoin fix this?

Bitcoin fixes this indirectly. Understanding investment criteria changes via risk tolerance, age, goals, etc. A client may still have a need for “fixed income” in the most literal definition – Low risk yield. Now you may be thinking that yield is a bad word in bitcoin land, you’re not wrong, so stay with me. Perpetual motion machine crypto yield is fake and largely where many crypto scams originate. However, that doesn’t mean yield in the classic finance sense does not exist in bitcoin, it very literally does. Fortunately for us bitcoiners there are many other smart, driven, and enterprising bitcoiners that understand this problem and are doing something to address it. These individuals are pioneering new possibilities in bitcoin and finance, specifically when it comes to fixed income.

Here are some new developments –

Private Credit Funds – The Build Asset Management Secured Income Fund I is a private credit fund created by Build Asset Management. This fund primarily invests in bitcoin-backed, collateralized business loans originated by Unchained, with a secured structure involving a multi-signature, over-collateralized setup for risk management. Unchained originates loans and sells them to Build, which pools them into the fund, enabling investors to share in the interest income.

Dynamics

• Loan Terms: Unchained issues loans at interest rates around 14%, secured with a 2/3 multi-signature vault backed by a 40% loan-to-value (LTV) ratio.
• Fund Mechanics: Build buys these loans from Unchained, thus providing liquidity to Unchained for further loan originations, while Build manages interest payments to investors in the fund.

Pros

• The fund offers a unique way to earn income via bitcoin-collateralized debt, with protection against rehypothecation and strong security measures, making it attractive for investors seeking exposure to fixed income with bitcoin.

Cons

• The fund is only available to accredited investors, which is a regulatory standard for private credit funds like this.

Corporate Bonds – MicroStrategy Inc. (MSTR), a business intelligence company, has leveraged its corporate structure to issue bonds specifically to acquire bitcoin as a reserve asset. This approach allows investors to indirectly gain exposure to bitcoin’s potential upside while receiving interest payments on their bond investments. Some other publicly traded companies have also adopted this strategy, but for the sake of this article we will focus on MSTR as they are the biggest and most vocal issuer.

Dynamics

• Issuance: MicroStrategy has issued senior secured notes in multiple offerings, with terms allowing the company to use the proceeds to purchase bitcoin.

• Interest Rates: The bonds typically carry high-yield interest rates, averaging around 6-8% APR, depending on the specific issuance and market conditions at the time of issuance.

• Maturity: The bonds have varying maturities, with most structured for multi-year terms, offering investors medium-term exposure to bitcoin’s value trajectory through MicroStrategy’s holdings.

Pros

• Indirect Bitcoin exposure with income provides a unique opportunity for investors seeking income from bitcoin-backed debt.

• Bonds issued by MicroStrategy offer relatively high interest rates, appealing for fixed-income investors attracted to the higher risk/reward scenarios.

Cons

• There are credit risks tied to MicroStrategy’s financial health and bitcoin’s performance. A significant drop in bitcoin prices could strain the company’s ability to service debt, increasing credit risk.

• Availability: These bonds are primarily accessible to institutional investors and accredited investors, limiting availability for retail investors.

Interest Payable in Bitcoin – River has introduced an innovative product, bitcoin Interest on Cash, allowing clients to earn interest on their U.S. dollar deposits, with the interest paid in bitcoin.

Dynamics

• Interest Payment: Clients earn an annual interest rate of 3.8% on their cash deposits. The accrued interest is converted to Bitcoin daily and paid out monthly, enabling clients to accumulate Bitcoin over time.

• Security and Accessibility: Cash deposits are insured up to $250,000 through River’s banking partner, Lead Bank, a member of the FDIC. All Bitcoin holdings are maintained in full reserve custody, ensuring that client assets are not lent or leveraged.

Pros

• There are no hidden fees or minimum balance requirements, and clients can withdraw their cash at any time.

• The 3.8% interest rate provides a predictable income stream, akin to traditional fixed-income investments.

Cons

• While the interest rate is fixed, the value of the Bitcoin received as interest can fluctuate, introducing potential variability in the investment’s overall return.

• Interest rate payments are on the lower side

Admittedly, this is a very small list, however, these types of investments are growing more numerous and meaningful. The reality is the existing options aren’t numerous enough to service every client that has a need for fixed income exposure. I challenge advisors to explore innovative options for fixed income exposure outside of sovereign debt, as that is most certainly a road to nowhere. It is my wholehearted belief and call to action that we need more options to help clients across the risk and capital allocation spectrum access a sound money standard.

Additional Resources

• River: The future of saving is here: Earn 3.8% on cash. Paid in Bitcoin.

• Onramp: Bitcoin, The Emergent Asset Class

• MicroStrategy: MicroStrategy Announces Pricing of Offering of Convertible Senior Notes

---

Bitcoin and Fixed Income was Written By Wyatt O’Rourke. If you enjoyed this article then support his writing, directly, by donating to his lightning wallet: ultrahusky3@primal.net

@ 3c7dc2c5:805642a8

🧠Quote(s) of the week:

'The Cantillon Effect: When new money is printed, those closest to the source (banks, elites) benefit first, buying assets before prices rise. Others lose purchasing power as inflation hits later. If people find out how this works, they will riot.' -Bitcoin for Freedom

Just think about it. Your employer gives you a 5% raise. The Fed (central banks in general) prints 7% more dollars/euros/Fiat. You just got a 2% pay cut. This isn't a conspiracy theory. This is how fiat money steals from the working class every single day. This is why I support Bitcoin.

Anilsaidso: 'Saving in fiat currency is no longer an option. A 2% inflation rate means you lose 1/3 of your purchasing power over 20yrs. At 5% inflation, you lose 60%. And at 10% you've burnt 85%. Reduce your uncertainty. Save in Bitcoin.' https://i.ibb.co/N661BdVp/Gr-Rwdg-OXc-AAWPVE.jpg

🧡Bitcoin news🧡

“Education increases conviction.

Conviction increases allocation.

Allocation increases freedom.” —Gigi

https://i.ibb.co/Q3trHk8Y/Gr-Arv-Ioa-AAAF5b0.jpg

On the 12th of May:

➡️Google searches for "Digital Gold" are at all-time highs. Bitcoin Croesus: "This is the second wave of the Digital Revolution - the digitization of value to complement the Internet's digitization of information. It wasn't possible to own a slice of the Internet itself, but it is possible with Bitcoin, the internet of value." "...It feels like you're late to Bitcoin. But this is a bigger game playing out than most realize, and we are much earlier than casual observers know. If you're reading this, you're here on the frontier early. And you have a chance to stake a claim before 99% of the world shows up. This is a land grab. This is the digital gold rush. Make your descendants proud."

https://i.ibb.co/5XXbNQ8S/Gqw-X4-QRWs-AEd5-Uh-1.jpg

➡️ 'A new holding company ‘Nakamoto’ just raised $710 million to buy more Bitcoin and will merge with KindlyMD to establish a Bitcoin Treasury company. Saylor playbook!' - Bitcoin Archive

➡️American Bitcoin, backed by Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump, will go public via an all-stock merger with Gryphon Digital Mining. Post-merger, Trump affiliates and Hut 8 will retain 98% ownership. GRYP tripled to $2.19, Hut 8 jumped 11% to $15.45. The deal closes in Q3 2025.

➡️Phoenix Wallet: 'Phoenix 0.6.0 is out: offers can now have a custom description simple close (set an exact mutual close tx fee rate) native support for Linux arm64 This is the server version. Phoenix mobile release is around the corner. '

On the 13th of May:

➡️Corporate Bitcoin purchases have now outweighed the supply of new Bitcoin by 3.3x in 2025. https://i.ibb.co/fVdgQhyY/Gq1ck-XRXUAAsg-Ym.jpg

➡️ Publicly listed Next Technology disclosed buying 5,000 Bitcoin for $180m, now HODLs 5,833 $BTC worth +$600m.

➡️ After rejecting the Arizona Strategic Bitcoin Reserve Act, Governor Katie Hobbs vetoed Bill SB 1373, which proposed a digital asset reserve fund. "Current volatility in the cryptocurrency markets does not make a prudent fit for general fund dollars."

➡️Meanwhile in Paris, France the kidnapping of a woman with her 2-year-old child morning on the streets of Paris - the target is allegedly the daughter of a crypto CEO. 3 masked men tried forcing them into a fake delivery van, before being fought off by her partner and bystanders. One of whom grabbed a dropped gun and aimed it back.

➡️ 'Bitcoin illiquid supply hit a new all-time high of $1.4B Are you HODLing too, anon?' - Bitcoin News

➡️Why Coinbase entering the S&P 500 matters. Boomers will have Bitcoin / CrApTo exposure, whether they like it or not. Anyway, remember what happened in 2021. The COIN IPO, and they’re still trading about 35% below their IPO-day high. Oh and please read the 'Coinbase" hack below haha.

➡️ Nasdaq listed GD Culture Group to sell up to $300 million shares to buy Bitcoin.

➡️ A Bitcoin wallet untouched since April 2014 just moved 300 BTC worth $31M for the first time in 11 years. This is how you HODL.

➡️ Bitcoin's realized price is steadily increasing, mirroring behaviors seen in past bull markets, according to CryptoQuant.

➡️ Bitcoin whales and sharks (10-10K BTC) accumulated 83,105 BTC in the last 30 days, while small retail holders (<0.1 BTC) sold 387 BTC, according to Santiment.

Bitcoin Whales have been AGGRESSIVELY accumulating BTC recently! With at least 240,000+ Bitcoin transferred to wallets with at least 100 BTC. The largest market participants are trying to buy as much as possible, what do they think comes next...

➡️'The average cost of mining 1 BTC for miners is currently $36.8K. The spread between the current market price and the cost of one coin = 182%. This is essentially the average profitability. This corresponds to the beginning of the bull cycle in November 2022 and the peaks of this cycle >$100K. A price increase above this level will allow miners to fully recover after the last halving and reach excess profits comparable to the beginning of the bull rally in January 2023.' -Axel Adler Jr.

➡️ Remember last week's segment on Coinbase..."Coinbase just disclosed in their Q1 filing: that they have custody of 2.68 million Bitcoin. That’s over 13% of all Bitcoin in circulation, on one platform. Is this the greatest honeypot in financial history? Yes, it is...read next week's Weekly Bitcoin update."

Well, here you go.

Coinbase estimates $180-$400 million in losses, remediation costs, and reimbursement following today’s cyber attack. https://i.ibb.co/jkysLtZ1/Gq-C7zl-W4-AAJ0-N6.jpg

Coinbase didn't get hacked. Coinbase employees sold customer data on the black market. Coinbase failed to protect customer data. This is why KYC is useless. The criminals have our driver's license scans. They have AI tools that can generate fake images and videos. KYC puts our identities at risk, makes onboarding more difficult, and rewards criminals. To make it even worse. Coinbase knew about the hack as early as January but only disclosed it publicly after being added to the S&P 500.

I will say it one more time! Don't buy your Bitcoin on KYC exchanges. KYC means handing over your identity to be leaked, sold, or extorted.

It was 2 days ago, see the bit on the 13th of May, that we saw a violent attack in Paris. Minimize the data you share with centralized tools. Store as much as you can locally. Always ask yourself what data am I giving and to whom? Remove the need for trust.

And for the love of God, Allah, or whatever god you are praying to...

DON'T LEAVE YOUR COINS ON A FREAKING EXCHANGE!!!!

Clear!

➡️ Sam Callahan: Bitcoin CAGRs over rolling four-year holding periods since 2012:

10th percentile: 33%

25th percentile: 50% 40th percentile: 75%

Said differently, for 90% of the time, Bitcoin’s four-year CAGR was higher than 33%. For comparison, here are the single best four-year CAGRs over the same period for:

Gold: 17%

Silver: 20%

S&P 500: 24%

Apple: 52%

Two lessons here:

1.) Even when Bitcoin underperforms, it still outperforms.

2.) Bitcoin holding goals are best measured in halving cycles.'

https://i.ibb.co/9m6q2118/Gq1-Ie2-Ob-AAIJ8-Kf.jpg

➡️ Deutsche Bank Aktiengesellschaft has bought 96,870 Strategy₿ stocks for 30 Million dollars at an Average Price Of $310 Per Share In Q1 2025, Their Total Holdings Is 518,000 Shares Worth Over 214 Million Dollars.

➡️Senator Lummis urges the U.S. Treasury to eliminate taxes on unrealized gains for Bitcoin.

On the 14th of May:

➡️At $168,000, Bitcoin will surpass Microsoft, the world's largest company.

➡️Fidelity tells institutions to buy Bitcoin if they can’t match Bitcoin’s 65% return on capital.

➡️Michigan has adopted House Resolution 100, declaring May 13 2025 as "Digital Asset Awareness Day." The resolution encourages "activities and programs that foster a deeper understanding of digital assets and their impact on our society and economy."

➡️Publicly traded Vinanz raises funding to buy $2 million in #Bitcoin assets.

➡️Bitcoin News: "Investor Jim Chanos is shorting MicroStrategy while going long on Bitcoin, calling the stock overvalued relative to its BTC holdings. “We’re selling MicroStrategy and buying Bitcoin, basically buying something for $1 and selling it for $2.50," he told CNBC

On the 15th of May:

➡️The Abu Dhabi sovereign wealth fund disclosed owning $511 million in Bitcoin through BlackRock’s ETF.

➡️UK public company Coinsilium Group raises £1.25 million to adopt a Bitcoin treasury strategy.

➡️Chinese Textile company Addentax issues stock to buy 8,000 Bitcoin.

➡️14 US states have reported $632m in $MSTR exposure for Q1, in public retirement and treasury funds. A collective increase of $302m in one quarter. The average increase in holding size was 44%.

➡️Chinese public company DDC Enterprise to adopt a Bitcoin Reserve with 5,000 BTC.

On the 16th of May:

➡️Brazilian listed company Méliuz buys $28.4 million Bitcoin to become the nation's first Bitcoin Treasury Company. Shareholders voted to approve the strategy by an "overwhelming majority".

➡️13F Filings show Texas Retirement System owns MSTR. The day MSTR enters the S&P 500, every pension fund will follow.

➡️'Wealthy Investors Shift Up to 5% into Bitcoin as confidence in fiat falters. UBS, a Swiss banking giant says Bitcoin and digital assets are becoming key hedges against inflation and systemic risk, marking a dramatic shift in modern portfolio strategy.' -CarlBMenger

➡️River: "Above all, Bitcoin is money for the people." https://i.ibb.co/Jj8MVQwr/Gr-Ew-EPp-XAAA1-TVN.jpg

On the 17th of May:

➡️Illicit activity is now down to 0.14% of transaction volume across all crypto.

Context: World Bank, IMF suggests 1.5–4% of global GDP is laundered yearly through traditional banking Of that 0.14%:

63% of illicit trade was stablecoins.

13% was Bitcoin (declining each year)

Source: The 2025 Crypto Crime Report, Chainalysis 2025

Yet another confirmation that Bitcoin's use in facilitating illicit activities is a rounding error on a rounding error.

On the 18th of May:

➡️JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon said they will allow clients to buy Bitcoin. The repeal of SAB 121 is a bigger deal than most realize. “I will fire any employee buying or trading Bitcoin for being stupid” - Jamie Dimon (2017) https://i.ibb.co/b5tnkb15/Gr-Vxxc-OXk-AA7cyo.jpg

On the 19th of May.

➡️Bookmark the following stuff from Daniel Batten if you want to combat climate change (fanatics)...

'That Bitcoin mining is not only not harmful, but beneficial to the environment is now supported by:

7 independent reports

20 peer-reviewed papers

As a result * 90% of climate-focused magazines * 87.5% of media coverage on Bitcoin & the environment is now positive * source 7 independent reports https://x.com/DSBatten/status/1922666207754281449… * 20 peer-reviewed papers https://x.com/DSBatten/status/1923014527651615182… * 10 climate-focused magazines https://x.com/DSBatten/status/1919518338092323260… * 16 mainstream media articles https://x.com/DSBatten/status/1922628399551434755

➡️Saifedean Ammous: '5 years ago at the height of corona hysteria, everyone worried about their savings.

If you put $10,000 in "risk-free" long-term US government bonds, you'd have $6,000 today.

If you put the $10,000 in "risky speculative tulip" bitcoin, you'd have $106,000.

HFSP, bondcucks!'

I love how Saifedean always put it so eloquently. haha

➡️An Australian judge rules Bitcoin is “just another form of money.” This could make it exempt from capital gains tax. Potentially opening the door to millions in refunds across the country. - AFR

If upheld, the decision could trigger up to $1B in refunds and overturn the Australian Tax Office’s crypto tax approach.

➡️Publicly traded Vinanz buys 16.9 Bitcoin for $1.75 Million for their treasury.

➡️Bitcoin just recorded its highest weekly close ever, while the Global Economic Policy Uncertainty Index hit its highest level in history.

➡️4 in 5 Americans want the U.S. to convert part of its gold reserves to Bitcoin. - The Nakamoto Project

"or background, the survey question was: "Assuming the United States was thinking of converting some of their gold reserves into Bitcoin, what percentage would you advise they convert?" Respondents were provided a slider used to choose between 0% and 100%. Our survey consisted of a national sample of 3,345 respondents recruited in partnership with Qualtrics, a survey and data collection company"

Context: https://x.com/thetrocro/status/1924552097565180107 https://i.ibb.co/fGDw06MC/Gr-VYDIdb-AAI7-Kxd.jpg

➡️Michael Saylor's STRATEGY bought another $764.9m Bitcoin. They now HODL 576,230 Bitcoin, acquired for $40.18 billion at $69,726 per Bitcoin.

➡️The German Government sold 49,858 BTC for $2.89B, at an average price of $57,900. If they had held it, their BTC would now be worth $5.24B.

➡️A record 63% of all the Bitcoin that exist have not transacted or moved from their wallets this year. - Wicked

https://i.ibb.co/j9nvbvmP/Gq3-Z-x6-Xw-AAv-Bhg.jpg

💸Traditional Finance / Macro:

On the 12th of May:

👉🏽The S&P 500 has closed more than 20% above its April low, technically beginning a new bull market. We are now up +1,000 points in one month.

On the 13th of May:

👉🏽 Nvidia announces a partnership with Humain to build "AI factories of the future" in Saudi Arabia. Just one hour ago, Saudi Arabia signed an economic agreement with President Trump to invest $600 billion in the US.

🏦Banks:

👉🏽 No news

🌎Macro/Geopolitics:

On the 12th of May:

👉🏽Huge pressure is on the European Union to reach a trade deal. Equities and commodities bounce hard on news of China-US trade deal. "We have reached an agreement on a 90-day pause and substantially moved down the tariff levels — both sides, on the reciprocal tariffs, will move their tariffs down 115%." - Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent

Dollar and Yuan strong bounce. Gold corrects.

👉🏽After reaching a high of 71% this year, recession odds are now back down to 40%. The odds of the US entering a recession in 2025 fall to a new low of 40% following the US-China trade deal announcement.

👉🏽'Truly incredible:

1. Trump raises tariffs: Yields rise because inflation is back
2. Trump cuts tariffs: Yields rise because growth is back
3. Trump does nothing: Yields rise because the Fed won't cut rates Today, the bond market becomes Trump and Bessent's top priority.' - TKL

President Trump’s biggest problem persists even as trade deals are announced. Tariffs have been paused for 90 days, the US-China trade deal has been announced, and inflation data is down. Yet, the 10Y yield is nearing 4.50% again. Trump needs lower rates, but rates won’t fall.

👉🏽Last week a lot of talk on Japan’s Debt Death Spiral: Japan’s 40-year yield is detonating and the myth of consequence-free debt just died with it. One of the best explanations, you can read here:

👉🏽Michael A. Arouet: 'Eye-opening chart. Can a country with a services-based economy remain a superpower? Building back US manufacturing base makes a lot of strategic and geopolitical sense.' https://i.ibb.co/Q3zJY9Fc/Gqxc6-Pt-WQAI73c.jpg

On the 13th of May:

👉🏽There is a possibility of a “big, beautiful” economic rebalancing, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent says at an investment forum in Saudi Arabia. The “dream scenario” would be if China and the US can work together on rebalancing, he adds

Luke Gromen: It does roll off the tongue a whole lot nicer than "We want to significantly devalue USD v. CNY, via a gold reference point."

Ergo: The price of gold specifically would rise in USD much more than it would in CNY, while prices for other goods and services would not, or would do so to a lesser degree.

👉🏽 Dutch inflation rises to 4.1 percent in April | CBS – final figure. Unchanged compared to the estimate.

👉🏽Philipp Heimberger: This interesting new paper argues that cuts to taxes on top incomes disproportionately benefit the financial sector. The finance industry gains more from top-income tax cuts than other industries. "Cuts in top income tax rates increase the (relative) size of the financial sector"

Source

Kinda obvious, innit?

👉🏽US CPI data released. Overall good results and cooler than expected month-over-month and year-over-year (outside of yearly core). U.S. inflation is down to 2.3%, lower than expected.

On the 14th of May:

👉🏽'The US government cannot afford a recession: In previous economic cycles, the US budget deficit widened by ~4% of GDP on average during recessions. This would imply a ~$1.3 trillion deterioration of US government finances if a recession hits in 2025. That said, if the US enters a recession, long-term interest rates will likely go down.

A 2-percentage-point decrease in interest rates would save ~$568 billion in annual interest payments. However, this means government finances would worsen by more than DOUBLE the amount saved in interest due to a recession. An economic downturn would be incredibly costly for the US government.' -TKL

On the 15th of May:

👉🏽'In the Eurozone and the UK, households hold more than 30% of their financial assets in fiat currencies and bank deposits. This means that they (unknowingly?) allow inflation to destroy their purchasing power. The risks of inflation eating up your wealth increase in a debt-driven economic system characterized by fiscal dominance, where interest rates are structurally low and inflation levels and risks are high. There is so much forced and often failed regulation to increase financial literacy, but this part is never explained. Why is that, you think?' - Jeroen Blokland https://i.ibb.co/zWRpNqhz/Gq-jn-Bn-X0-AAmplm.png

On the 16th of May:

👉🏽'For the first time in a year, Japan's economy shrank by -0.7% in Q1 2025. This is more than double the decline expected by economists. Furthermore, this data does NOT include the reciprocal tariffs imposed on April 2nd. Japan's economy is heading for a recession.' -TKL

👉🏽'246 US large companies have gone bankrupt year-to-date, the most in 15 years. This is up from 206 recorded last year and more than DOUBLE during the same period in 2022. In April alone, the US saw 59 bankruptcy filings as tariffs ramped up. So far this year, the industrials sector has seen 41 bankruptcies, followed by 31 in consumer discretionary, and 17 in healthcare. According to S&P Global, consumer discretionary companies have been hit the hardest due to market volatility, tariffs, and inflation uncertainty. We expect a surge in bankruptcies in 2025.' -TKL

👉🏽'Moody's just downgraded the United States' credit rating for the FIRST time in history. The reason: An unsustainable path for US federal debt and its resulting interest burden. Moody's notes that the US debt-to-GDP ratio is on track to hit 134% by 2035. Federal interest payments are set to equal ~30% of revenue by 2035, up from ~18% in 2024 and ~9% in 2021. Furthermore, deficit spending is now at World War 2 levels as a percentage of GDP. The US debt crisis is our biggest issue with the least attention.' - TKL

Still, this is a nothing burger. In August 2023, when Fitch downgraded the US to AA+, and S&P (2011) the US became a split-rated AA+ country. This downgrade had almost no effect on the bond market. The last of the rating agencies, Moodys, pushed the US down to AA+ today. So technically it didn’t even change the US’s overall credit rating because it was already split-rated AA+, now it’s unanimous AA+.

Ergo: Nothing changed. America now shares a credit rating with Austria and Finland. Hard assets don’t lie. Watch Gold and Bitcoin.

https://i.ibb.co/Q7DcWY2P/Gr-K66i-EXIAAKh-MR.jpg

RAY DALIO: Credit Agencies are UNDERSTATING sovereign credit risks because "they don't include the greater risk that the countries in debt will print money to pay their debts" with devalued currency.

👉🏽US consumer credit card serious delinquencies are rising at a CRISIS pace: The share of US credit card debt that is past due at least 90 days hit 12.3% in Q1 2025, the highest in 14 YEARS. The percentage has risen even faster than during the Great Financial Crisis.' - Global Markets Investor

https://i.ibb.co/nNH9CxVK/Gr-E838o-XYAIk-Fyn.png

On the 18th of May:

👉🏽Michael A. Arouet: 'Look at ten bottom of this list. Milei has not only proven that real free market reforms work, but he has also proven that they work fast. It’s bigger than Argentina now, no wonder that the left legacy media doesn’t like him so much.' https://i.ibb.co/MDnBCDSY/Gr-Npu-KKWMAAf-Pc.jpg

On the 19th of May: 👉🏽Japan's 40-year bond yield just hit its highest level in over 20 years. Japan’s Prime Minister Ishiba has called the situation “worse than Greece.” All as Japan’s GDP is contracting again. You and your mother should be scared out of your fucking minds. https://i.ibb.co/rGZ9cMtv/GTXx-S7-Cb-MAAOu-Vt.png

👉🏽 TKL: 'Investors are piling into gold funds like never before: Gold funds have posted a record $85 BILLION in net inflows year-to-date. This is more than DOUBLE the full-year record seen in 2020. At this pace, net inflows will surpass $180 billion by the end of 2025. Gold is now the best-performing major asset class, up 22% year-to-date. Since the low in October 2022, gold prices have gained 97%. Gold is the global hedge against uncertainty.'

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

What Bitcoin Did - IS THE FED LOSING CONTROL? With Matthew Mezinskis

'Matthew Mezinskis is a macroeconomic researcher, host of the Crypto Voices podcast, and creator of Porkopolis Economics. In this episode, we discuss fractional reserve banking, why it's controversial among Bitcoiners, the historical precedent for banking practices, and whether fractional reserve banking inherently poses systemic risks. We also get into the dangers and instabilities introduced by central banking, why Bitcoin uniquely offers a pathway to financial sovereignty, the plumbing of the global financial system, breaking down money supply metrics, foreign holdings of US treasuries, and how all these elements indicate growing instability in the dollar system.'

https://youtu.be/j-XPVOl9zGc

Credit: I have used multiple sources!

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

Use the code SE3997

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

⠀⠀ ⠀ ⠀⠀⠀

Do you think this post is helpful to you?

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

▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃

⭐ Many thanks⭐

Felipe - Bitcoin Friday!

▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Nostr: a quick introduction, attempt #2

Nostr doesn't subscribe to any ideals of "free speech" as these belong to the realm of politics and assume a big powerful government that enforces a common ruleupon everybody else.

Nostr instead is much simpler, it simply says that servers are private property and establishes a generalized framework for people to connect to all these servers, creating a true free market in the process. In other words, Nostr is the public road that each market participant can use to build their own store or visit others and use their services.

(Of course a road is never truly public, in normal cases it's ran by the government, in this case it relies upon the previous existence of the internet with all its quirks and chaos plus a hand of government control, but none of that matters for this explanation).

More concretely speaking, Nostr is just a set of definitions of the formats of the data that can be passed between participants and their expected order, i.e. messages between clients (i.e. the program that runs on a user computer) and relays (i.e. the program that runs on a publicly accessible computer, a "server", generally with a domain-name associated) over a type of TCP connection (WebSocket) with cryptographic signatures. This is what is called a "protocol" in this context, and upon that simple base multiple kinds of sub-protocols can be added, like a protocol for "public-square style microblogging", "semi-closed group chat" or, I don't know, "recipe sharing and feedback".

@ 58537364:705b4b85

“Any society that sets intellectual development as its goal will continually progress, without end—until life is liberated from problems and suffering. All problems can ultimately be solved through wisdom itself.

The signpost pointing toward ‘wisdom’ is the ability to think—or what is called in Dhamma terms, ‘yoniso-manasikāra,’ meaning wise or analytical reflection. Thinking is the bridge that connects information and knowledge with insight and understanding. Refined or skillful thinking enables one to seek knowledge and apply it effectively.

The key types of thinking are:

• Thinking to acquire knowledge
• Thinking to apply knowledge effectively In other words, thinking to gain knowledge and thinking to use that knowledge. A person with knowledge who doesn’t know how to think cannot make that knowledge useful. On the other hand, a person who thinks without having or seeking knowledge will end up with nothing but dreamy, deluded ideas. When such dreamy ideas are expressed as opinions, they become nonsensical and meaningless—mere expressions of personal likes or dislikes.

In this light, the ‘process of developing wisdom’ begins with the desire to seek knowledge, followed by the training of thinking skills, and concludes with the ability to express well-founded opinions. (In many important cases, practice, testing, or experimentation is needed to confirm understanding.)

Thus, the thirst for knowledge and the ability to seek knowledge are the forerunners of intellectual development. In any society where people lack a love for knowledge and are not inclined to search for it, true intellectual growth will be difficult. That society will be filled with fanciful, delusional thinking and opinions based merely on personal likes and dislikes. For the development of wisdom, there must be the guiding principle that: ‘Giving opinions must go hand-in-hand with seeking knowledge. And once knowledge is gained, thinking must be refined and skillful.’”

— Somdet Phra Buddhaghosacariya (P.A. Payutto) Source: Dhamma treatise “Organizing Society According to the Ideals of the Sangha”

Note: “Pariyosāna” means the complete conclusion or the final, all-encompassing end.

---

“We must emphasize the pursuit of knowledge more than merely giving opinions. Opinions must be based on the most solid foundation of knowledge.

Nowadays, we face so many problems because people love to express opinions without ever seeking knowledge.”

— Somdet Phra Buddhaghosacariya (P.A. Payutto)

@ 76c71aae:3e29cafa

On social media and in the Nostr space in particular, there’s been a lot of debate about the idea of supporting deletion and editing of notes.

Some people think they’re vital features to have, others believe that more honest and healthy social media will come from getting rid of these features. The discussion about these features quickly turns to the feasibility of completely deleting something on a decentralized protocol. We quickly get to the “We can’t really delete anything from the internet, or a decentralized network.” argument. This crowds out how Delete and Edit can mimic elements of offline interactions, how they can be used as social signals.

When it comes to issues of deletion and editing content, what matters more is if the creator can communicate their intentions around their content. Sure, on the internet, with decentralized protocols, there’s no way to be sure something’s deleted. It’s not like taking a piece of paper and burning it. Computers make copies of things all the time, computers don’t like deleting things. In particular, distributed systems tend to use a Kafka architecture with immutable logs, it’s just easier to keep everything around, as deleting and reindexing is hard. Even if the software could be made to delete something, there’s always screenshots, or even pictures of screens. We can’t provably make something disappear.

What we need to do in our software is clearly express intention. A delete is actually a kind of retraction. “I no longer want to associate myself with this content, please stop showing it to people as part of what I’ve published, stop highlighting it, stop sharing it.” Even if a relay or other server keeps a copy, and keeps sharing it, being able to clearly state “hello world, this thing I said, was a mistake, please get rid of it.” Just giving users the chance to say “I deleted this” is a way of showing intention. It’s also a way of signaling that feedback has been heard. Perhaps the post was factually incorrect or perhaps it was mean and the person wants to remove what they said. In an IRL conversation, for either of these scenarios there is some dialogue where the creator of the content is learning something and taking action based on what they’ve learned.

Without delete or edit, there is no option to signal to the rest of the community that you have learned something because of how the content is structured today. On most platforms a reply or response stating one’s learning will be lost often in a deluge of replies on the original post and subsequent posts are often not seen especially when the original goes viral. By providing tools like delete and edit we give people a chance to signal that they have heard the feedback and taken action.

The Nostr Protocol supports delete and expiring notes. It was one of the reasons we switched from secure scuttlebutt to build on Nostr. Our nos.social app offers delete and while we know that not all relays will honor this, we believe it’s important to provide social signaling tools as a means of making the internet more humane.

We believe that the power to learn from each other is more important than the need to police through moral outrage which is how the current platforms and even some Nostr clients work today.

It’s important that we don’t say Nostr doesn’t support delete. Not all apps need to support requesting a delete, some might want to call it a retraction. It is important that users know there is no way to enforce a delete and not all relays may honor their request.

Edit is similar, although not as widely supported as delete. It’s a creator making a clear statement that they’ve created a new version of their content. Maybe it’s a spelling error, or a new version of the content, or maybe they’re changing it altogether. Freedom online means freedom to retract a statement, freedom to update a statement, freedom to edit your own content. By building on these freedoms, we’ll make Nostr a space where people feel empowered and in control of their own media.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Drivechain

Understanding Drivechain requires a shift from the paradigm most bitcoiners are used to. It is not about "trustlessness" or "mathematical certainty", but game theory and incentives. (Well, Bitcoin in general is also that, but people prefer to ignore it and focus on some illusion of trustlessness provided by mathematics.)

Here we will describe the basic mechanism (simple) and incentives (complex) of "hashrate escrow" and how it enables a 2-way peg between the mainchain (Bitcoin) and various sidechains.

The full concept of "Drivechain" also involves blind merged mining (i.e., the sidechains mine themselves by publishing their block hashes to the mainchain without the miners having to run the sidechain software), but this is much easier to understand and can be accomplished either by the BIP-301 mechanism or by the Spacechains mechanism.

How does hashrate escrow work from the point of view of Bitcoin?

A new address type is created. Anything that goes in that is locked and can only be spent if all miners agree on the Withdrawal Transaction (WT^) that will spend it for 6 months. There is one of these special addresses for each sidechain.

To gather miners' agreement bitcoind keeps track of the "score" of all transactions that could possibly spend from that address. On every block mined, for each sidechain, the miner can use a portion of their coinbase to either increase the score of one WT^ by 1 while decreasing the score of all others by 1; or they can decrease the score of all WT^s by 1; or they can do nothing.

Once a transaction has gotten a score high enough, it is published and funds are effectively transferred from the sidechain to the withdrawing users.

If a timeout of 6 months passes and the score doesn't meet the threshold, that WT^ is discarded.

What does the above procedure mean?

It means that people can transfer coins from the mainchain to a sidechain by depositing to the special address. Then they can withdraw from the sidechain by making a special withdraw transaction in the sidechain.

The special transaction somehow freezes funds in the sidechain while a transaction that aggregates all withdrawals into a single mainchain WT^, which is then submitted to the mainchain miners so they can start voting on it and finally after some months it is published.

Now the crucial part: the validity of the WT^ is not verified by the Bitcoin mainchain rules, i.e., if Bob has requested a withdraw from the sidechain to his mainchain address, but someone publishes a wrong WT^ that instead takes Bob's funds and sends them to Alice's main address there is no way the mainchain will know that. What determines the "validity" of the WT^ is the miner vote score and only that. It is the job of miners to vote correctly -- and for that they may want to run the sidechain node in SPV mode so they can attest for the existence of a reference to the WT^ transaction in the sidechain blockchain (which then ensures it is ok) or do these checks by some other means.

What? 6 months to get my money back?

Yes. But no, in practice anyone who wants their money back will be able to use an atomic swap, submarine swap or other similar service to transfer funds from the sidechain to the mainchain and vice-versa. The long delayed withdraw costs would be incurred by few liquidity providers that would gain some small profit from it.

Why bother with this at all?

Drivechains solve many different problems:

It enables experimentation and new use cases for Bitcoin

Issued assets, fully private transactions, stateful blockchain contracts, turing-completeness, decentralized games, some "DeFi" aspects, prediction markets, futarchy, decentralized and yet meaningful human-readable names, big blocks with a ton of normal transactions on them, a chain optimized only for Lighting-style networks to be built on top of it.

These are some ideas that may have merit to them, but were never actually tried because they couldn't be tried with real Bitcoin or inferfacing with real bitcoins. They were either relegated to the shitcoin territory or to custodial solutions like Liquid or RSK that may have failed to gain network effect because of that.

It solves conflicts and infighting

Some people want fully private transactions in a UTXO model, others want "accounts" they can tie to their name and build reputation on top; some people want simple multisig solutions, others want complex code that reads a ton of variables; some people want to put all the transactions on a global chain in batches every 10 minutes, others want off-chain instant transactions backed by funds previously locked in channels; some want to spend, others want to just hold; some want to use blockchain technology to solve all the problems in the world, others just want to solve money.

With Drivechain-based sidechains all these groups can be happy simultaneously and don't fight. Meanwhile they will all be using the same money and contributing to each other's ecosystem even unwillingly, it's also easy and free for them to change their group affiliation later, which reduces cognitive dissonance.

It solves "scaling"

Multiple chains like the ones described above would certainly do a lot to accomodate many more transactions that the current Bitcoin chain can. One could have special Lightning Network chains, but even just big block chains or big-block-mimblewimble chains or whatnot could probably do a good job. Or even something less cool like 200 independent chains just like Bitcoin is today, no extra features (and you can call it "sharding"), just that would already multiply the current total capacity by 200.

Use your imagination.

It solves the blockchain security budget issue

The calculation is simple: you imagine what security budget is reasonable for each block in a world without block subsidy and divide that for the amount of bytes you can fit in a single block: that is the price to be paid in satoshis per byte. In reasonable estimative, the price necessary for every Bitcoin transaction goes to very large amounts, such that not only any day-to-day transaction has insanely prohibitive costs, but also Lightning channel opens and closes are impracticable.

So without a solution like Drivechain you'll be left with only one alternative: pushing Bitcoin usage to trusted services like Liquid and RSK or custodial Lightning wallets. With Drivechain, though, there could be thousands of transactions happening in sidechains and being all aggregated into a sidechain block that would then pay a very large fee to be published (via blind merged mining) to the mainchain. Bitcoin security guaranteed.

It keeps Bitcoin decentralized

Once we have sidechains to accomodate the normal transactions, the mainchain functionality can be reduced to be only a "hub" for the sidechains' comings and goings, and then the maximum block size for the mainchain can be reduced to, say, 100kb, which would make running a full node very very easy.

Can miners steal?

Yes. If a group of coordinated miners are able to secure the majority of the hashpower and keep their coordination for 6 months, they can publish a WT^ that takes the money from the sidechains and pays to themselves.

Will miners steal?

No, because the incentives are such that they won't.

Although it may look at first that stealing is an obvious strategy for miners as it is free money, there are many costs involved:

1. The cost of ceasing blind-merged mining returns -- as stealing will kill a sidechain, all the fees from it that miners would be expected to earn for the next years are gone;
2. The cost of Bitcoin price going down: If a steal is successful that will mean Drivechains are not safe, therefore Bitcoin is less useful, and miner credibility will also be hurt, which are likely to cause the Bitcoin price to go down, which in turn may kill the miners' businesses and savings;
3. The cost of coordination -- assuming miners are just normal businesses, they just want to do their work and get paid, but stealing from a Drivechain will require coordination with other miners to conduct an immoral act in a way that has many pitfalls and is likely to be broken over the months;
4. The cost of miners leaving your mining pool: when we talked about "miners" above we were actually talking about mining pools operators, so they must also consider the risk of miners migrating from their mining pool to others as they begin the process of stealing;
5. The cost of community goodwill -- when participating in a steal operation, a miner will suffer a ton of backlash from the community. Even if the attempt fails at the end, the fact that it was attempted will contribute to growing concerns over exaggerated miners power over the Bitcoin ecosystem, which may end up causing the community to agree on a hard-fork to change the mining algorithm in the future, or to do something to increase participation of more entities in the mining process (such as development or cheapment of new ASICs), which have a chance of decreasing the profits of current miners.

Another point to take in consideration is that one may be inclined to think a newly-created sidechain or a sidechain with relatively low usage may be more easily stolen from, since the blind merged mining returns from it (point 1 above) are going to be small -- but the fact is also that a sidechain with small usage will also have less money to be stolen from, and since the other costs besides 1 are less elastic at the end it will not be worth stealing from these too.

All of the above consideration are valid only if miners are stealing from good sidechains. If there is a sidechain that is doing things wrong, scamming people, not being used at all, or is full of bugs, for example, that will be perceived as a bad sidechain, and then miners can and will safely steal from it and kill it, which will be perceived as a good thing by everybody.

What do we do if miners steal?

Paul Sztorc has suggested in the past that a user-activated soft-fork could prevent miners from stealing, i.e., most Bitcoin users and nodes issue a rule similar to this one to invalidate the inclusion of a faulty WT^ and thus cause any miner that includes it in a block to be relegated to their own Bitcoin fork that other nodes won't accept.

This suggestion has made people think Drivechain is a sidechain solution backed by user-actived soft-forks for safety, which is very far from the truth. Drivechains must not and will not rely on this kind of soft-fork, although they are possible, as the coordination costs are too high and no one should ever expect these things to happen.

If even with all the incentives against them (see above) miners do still steal from a good sidechain that will mean the failure of the Drivechain experiment. It will very likely also mean the failure of the Bitcoin experiment too, as it will be proven that miners can coordinate to act maliciously over a prolonged period of time regardless of economic and social incentives, meaning they are probably in it just for attacking Bitcoin, backed by nation-states or something else, and therefore no Bitcoin transaction in the mainchain is to be expected to be safe ever again.

Why use this and not a full-blown trustless and open sidechain technology?

Because it is impossible.

If you ever heard someone saying "just use a sidechain", "do this in a sidechain" or anything like that, be aware that these people are either talking about "federated" sidechains (i.e., funds are kept in custody by a group of entities) or they are talking about Drivechain, or they are disillusioned and think it is possible to do sidechains in any other manner.

No, I mean a trustless 2-way peg with correctness of the withdrawals verified by the Bitcoin protocol!

That is not possible unless Bitcoin verifies all transactions that happen in all the sidechains, which would be akin to drastically increasing the blocksize and expanding the Bitcoin rules in tons of ways, i.e., a terrible idea that no one wants.

What about the Blockstream sidechains whitepaper?

Yes, that was a way to do it. The Drivechain hashrate escrow is a conceptually simpler way to achieve the same thing with improved incentives, less junk in the chain, more safety.

Isn't the hashrate escrow a very complex soft-fork?

Yes, but it is much simpler than SegWit. And, unlike SegWit, it doesn't force anything on users, i.e., it isn't a mandatory blocksize increase.

Why should we expect miners to care enough to participate in the voting mechanism?

Because it's in their own self-interest to do it, and it costs very little. Today over half of the miners mine RSK. It's not blind merged mining, it's a very convoluted process that requires them to run a RSK full node. For the Drivechain sidechains, an SPV node would be enough, or maybe just getting data from a block explorer API, so much much simpler.

What if I still don't like Drivechain even after reading this?

That is the entire point! You don't have to like it or use it as long as you're fine with other people using it. The hashrate escrow special addresses will not impact you at all, validation cost is minimal, and you get the benefit of people who want to use Drivechain migrating to their own sidechains and freeing up space for you in the mainchain. See also the point above about infighting.

See also

• Podcast episode with Ruben Somsen and Aaron van Wirdum explaining Drivechain
• Alternatives to Drivechain
• Drivechain comparison with Ethereum

@ 3283ef81:0a531a33

Suspendisse quis rutrum nisi Integer nec augue quis ex euismod blandit ut ac mi

Curabitur suscipit vulputate volutpat Donec ornare, risus non tincidunt malesuada, elit magna feugiat diam, id faucibus libero libero efficitur mauris

@ 21335073:a244b1ad

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

TL;DR please educate your children about online safety.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Personagens de jogos e símbolos

A sensação de "ser" um personagem em um jogo ou uma brincadeira talvez seja o mais próximo que eu tenha conseguido chegar do entendimento de um símbolo religioso.

A hóstia consagrada é, segundo a religião, o corpo de Cristo, mas nossa mente moderna só consegue concebê-la como sendo uma representação do corpo de Cristo. Da mesma forma outras culturas e outras religiões têm símbolos parecidos, inclusive nos quais o próprio participante do ritual faz o papel de um deus ou de qualquer coisa parecida.

"Faz o papel" é de novo a interpretação da mente moderna. O sujeito ali é a coisa, mas ele ao mesmo tempo que é também sabe que não é, que continua sendo ele mesmo.

Nos jogos de videogame e brincadeiras infantis em que se encarna um personagem o jogador é o personagem. não se diz, entre os jogadores, que alguém está "encenando", mas que ele é e pronto. nem há outra denominação ou outro verbo. No máximo "encarnando", mas já aí já é vocabulário jornalístico feito para facilitar a compreensão de quem está de fora do jogo.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

A Causa

o Princípios de Economia Política de Menger é o único livro que enfatiza a CAUSA o tempo todo. os cientistas todos parecem não saber, ou se esquecer sempre, que as coisas têm causa, e que o conhecimento verdadeiro é o conhecimento da causa das coisas.

a causa é uma categoria metafísica muito superior a qualquer correlação ou resultado de teste de hipótese, ela não pode ser descoberta por nenhum artifício econométrico ou reduzida à simples antecedência temporal estatística. a causa dos fenômenos não pode ser provada cientificamente, mas pode ser conhecida.

o livro de Menger conta para o leitor as causas de vários fenômenos econômicos e as interliga de forma que o mundo caótico da economia parece adquirir uma ordem no momento em que você lê. é uma sensação mágica e indescritível.

quando eu te o recomendei, queria é te imbuir com o espírito da busca pela causa das coisas. depois de ler aquilo, você está apto a perceber continuidade causal nos fenômenos mais complexos da economia atual, enxergar as causas entre toda a ação governamental e as suas várias consequências na vida humana. eu faço isso todos os dias e é a melhor sensação do mundo quando o caos das notícias do caderno de Economia do jornal -- que para o próprio jornalista que as escreveu não têm nenhum sentido (tanto é que ele escreve tudo errado) -- se incluem num sistema ordenado de causas e consequências.

provavelmente eu sempre erro em alguns ou vários pontos, mas ainda assim é maravilhoso. ou então é mais maravilhoso ainda quando eu descubro o erro e reinsiro o acerto naquela racionalização bela da ordem do mundo econômico que é a ordem de Deus.

em scrap para T.P.

@ bf47c19e:c3d2573b

Originalni tekst na bitcoin-balkan.com.

---

Pregled sadržaja

1. Odakle Potiče Bitcoin?
2. Koje Probleme Rešava Bitcoin?
3. Kako se Bitcoin razvijao u poslednjoj deceniji?

---

Bitcoin je peer to peer elektronski keš, novi oblik digitalnog novca koji se može prenositi između ljudi ili računara, bez potrebe za učestvovanjem pouzdanog posrednika (kao što je banka) i čije izdavanje nije pod kontrolom nijedne stranke.

Zamislite papirni dolar ili metalni novčić. Kad taj novac date drugoj osobi, ona ne mora da zna ko ste vi.

On samo treba da veruju da novac koji dobiju od vas nije falsifikat. Obično, proveravanje falsifikata „fizičkog“ novca, ljudi rade koristeći samo oči i prste ili koristeći specijalnu opremu za testiranje ukoliko se radi o značajnijoj sumi novca.

Većina plaćanja u našem digitalnom društvu vrši se putem Interneta korišćenjem neke posredničke usluge: kompanije za izdavanje kreditnih kartica poput Visa, snabdevača digitalnih plaćanja kao što je PayPal ili Apple Pay ili mrežne platforme poput WeChat u Kini.

Kretanje ka digitalnom plaćanju sa sobom donosi oslanjanje na nekog centralnog aktera koji mora odobriti i verifikovati svaku uplatu.

Priroda novca se promenila od fizičkog predmeta koji možete da nosite, prenesete i autentifikujete do digitalnih bitova koje mora da čuva i verifikuje treća strana koja kontroliše njihov prenos.

Odricanjem od gotovine u korist „udobnih“ digitalnih plaćanja, mi takođe stvaramo sistem u kome dajemo ogromna ovlašćenja onima koji bi poželeli da nas tlače.

Platforme za digitalno plaćanje postale su osnova distopijskih autoritarnih metoda kontrole, poput onih koje kineska vlada koristi za nadgledanje disidenata i sprečava građane, čije ponašanje im se ne svidja, da kupuju robu i plaćaju usluge.

Bitcoin nudi alternativu centralno kontrolisanom digitalnom novcu sa sistemom koji nam vraća prirodu korišćenja keša – čovek čoveku, ali u digitalnom obliku.

Bitcoin je digitalno sredstvo koje se izdaje i prenosi preko mreže međusobno povezanih računara, od koji svaki od njih samostalno potvrđuje da svi ostali igraju po pravilima.

Bitcoin Mreža

Odakle Potiče Bitcoin?

Bitcoin je izumela osoba ili grupa poznata pod pseudonimom Satoshi Nakamoto, oko 2008. godine.

Niko ne zna Satoshijev identitet, a koliko znamo, oni su nestali i o njima se godinama ništa nije čulo.

11.februara 2009. godine, Satoshi je pisao o ranoj verziji Bitcoin-a na mrežnom forumu za cypher­punkere, ljude koji rade na tehnologiji kriptografije i koji su zabrinuti za privatnost i slobodu pojedinca.

Iako ovo nije prvo zvanično objavljivanje Bitcoin-a, sadrži dobar rezime Satoshi-jevih motiva.

Razvio sam novi P2P sistem e-keša otvorenog koda pod nazivom Bitcoin. Potpuno je decentralizovan, bez centralnog servera ili pouzdanih stranki, jer se sve zasniva na kripto dokazima umesto na poverenju. […]

Osnovni problem konvencionalne valute je potpuno poverenje koje je potrebno za njeno funkcionisanje. Centralnoj banci se mora verovati da neće devalvirati valutu, ali istorija tradicionalnih valuta je puna primera kršenja tog poverenja. Bankama se mora verovati da drže naš novac i prenose ga elektronskim putem, ali one ga daju u talasima kreditnih balona sa delićem rezerve. Moramo im verovati sa našom privatnošću, verovati im da neće dozvoliti da kradljivci identiteta pokradu naše račune. Njihovi ogromni režijski troškovi onemogućavaju mikro plaćanja.

Generaciju ranije, višekorisnički time-sharing računarski sistemi imali su sličan problem. Pre pojave jake enkripcije, korisnici su morali da imaju pouzdanje u zaštitu lozinkom kako bi zaštitili svoje fajlove […]

Tada je jaka enkripcija postala dostupna širokim masama i više nije bilo potrebno poverenje. Podaci bi se mogli osigurati na način koji je fizički bio nemoguć za pristup drugima, bez obzira iz kog razloga, bez obzira koliko je dobar izgovor, bez obzira na sve.

Vreme je da imamo istu stvar za novac. Uz e-valutu zasnovanu na kriptografskom dokazu, bez potrebe da verujete posredniku treće strane, novac može biti siguran i transakcije mogu biti izvršene bez napora. […]

Rešenje Bitcoin-a je korišćenje peer-to-peer mreže za proveru dvostruke potrošnje. Ukratko, mreža radi poput distribuiranog servera vremenskih žigova, obeležavajući prvu transakciju koja je potrošila novčić. Potrebna je prednost prirode informacije koju je lako širiti, ali je teško ugušiti. Za detalje o tome kako to funkcioniše, pogledajte članak o dizajnu na bitcoin.org

Satoshi Nakamoto

Koje Probleme Rešava Bitcoin?

Razdvojimo neke od Satoshi-jevih postova kako bismo uvideli razloge njegove motivacije.

„Razvio sam novi P2P sistem e-keša otvorenog koda.“

P2P je skraćenica za peer to peer i ukazuje na sistem u kojem jedna osoba može da komunicira sa drugom bez ikoga u sredini, kao medjusobno jednaki.

Možete se setiti P2P tehnologija za razmenu datoteka poput Napster-a, Kazaa-e i BitTorrrent-a, koje su prve omogućile ljudima da dele muziku i filmove bez posrednika.

Satoshi je dizajnirao Bitcoin kako bi omogućio ljudima da razmenjuju e-keš, elektronski keš, bez prolaska preko posrednika na približno isti način.

Softver je otvorenog koda, što znači da svako može videti kako funkcioniše i doprineti tome.

Ne treba da verujemo ni u šta što je Satoshi napisao u svom postu o tome kako softver radi.

Možemo pogledati kod i sami proveriti kako to funkcioniše. Štaviše, možemo promeniti funkcionalnost sistema promenom koda.

„Potpuno je decentralizovan, bez centralnog servera ili pouzdanih stranki …“

Satoshi napominje da je sistem decentralizovan kako bi se razlikovao od sistema koji imaju centralnu kontrolu.

Prethodne pokušaje stvaranja digitalne gotovine poput DigiCash-a od strane Davida Chaum-a podržavao je centralni server, računar ili skup računara koji je bio odgovoran za izdavanje i verifikaciju plaćanja pod kontrolom jedne korporacije.

Takve, centralno kontrolisane privatne šeme novca, bile su osuđene na propast; ljudi se ne mogu osloniti na novac koji može nestati kada kompanija prestane sa poslovanjem, bude hakovana, pretrpi pad servera ili je zatvori vlada.

Bitcoin održava mreža pojedinaca i kompanija širom sveta.

Da bi se Bitcoin isključio, bilo bi potrebno isključiti desetine do stotine hiljada računara širom sveta u isto vreme, zauvek, od kojih su mnogi na nepoznatim lokacijama.

Bila bi to beznadežna igra, jer bi svaki napad ove prirode jednostavno podstakao stvaranje novih Bitcoin čvorova ili računara na mreži.

„… sve se zasniva na kripto dokazima umesto na poverenju“

Internet, a u stvari i većina savremenih računarskih sistema, izgrađeni su na kriptografiji, metodi prikrivanja informacija, tako da je može dekodirati samo primalac informacije.

Kako se Bitcoin oslobađa potrebe za poverenjem? Umesto da verujemo nekome ko kaže „Ja sam Alisa“ ili „Imam 10 $ na računu“, možemo koristiti kriptografsku matematiku da bismo izneli iste činjenice na način koji je vrlo lako verifikovati od strane primaoca dokaza ali ga je nemoguće falsifikovati.

Bitcoin u svom dizajnu koristi kriptografsku matematiku kako bi učesnicima omogućio da provere ponašanje svih ostalih učesnika, bez poverenja u bilo koju centralnu stranku.

„Moramo im verovati [bankama] sa našom privatnošću, verovati im da neće dozvoliti da kradljivci identiteta pokradu naše račune“

Za razliku od korišćenja vašeg bankovnog računa, sistema digitalnog plaćanja ili kreditne kartice, Bitcoin omogućava dvema stranama da obavljaju transakcije bez davanje bilo kakvih ličnih podataka.

Centralizovana skladišta potrošačkih podataka koji se čuvaju u bankama, kompanijama sa kreditnim karticama, procesorima plaćanja i vladama, predstavljaju pravu poslasticu za hakere.

Kao dokaz Satoshi-jeve poente služi primer iz 2017. godine kada je Equifax masovono kompromitovan, kada su hakeri ukrali identifikacione i finansijske podatke za više od 140 miliona ljudi.

Bitcoin odvaja finansijske transakcije od stvarnih identiteta.

Na kraju krajeva, kada nekome damo fizički novac, on nema potrebu da zna ko smo, niti treba da brinemo da će nakon naše razmene moći da iskoristi neke informacije koje smo mu dali da ukrade još našeg novca.

Zašto ne bismo očekivali isto, ili čak i bolje, od digitalnog novca?

„Centralnoj banci se mora verovati da neće devalvirati valutu, ali istorija tradicionalnih valuta je puna primera kršenja tog poverenja.“

Pojam tradicionalna valuta, odnosi se na valutu izdatu od strane vlade i centralne banke, koju vlada proglašava zakonskim sredstvom plaćanja.

Istorijski, novac je nastao od stvari koje je bilo teško proizvesti, koje su bile lake za proveravanje i transport, poput školjki, staklenih perli, srebra i zlata.

Kad god bi se nešto koristilo kao novac, postojalo je iskušenje da se stvori više toga.

Ako bi neko pronašao vrhunsku tehnologiju za brzo stvaranje velike količine nečega, ta stvar bi izgubila vrednost.

Evropski naseljenici uspeli su da liše afrički kontinent bogatstva trgujući staklenim perlicama koje su se lako proizvodile za ljudske robove.

Isto se dogodilo sa američkim indijancima, kada su kolonisti otkrili način brze proizvodnje vampum školjki, koje su starosedeoci smatrali retkim.

Vremenom, širom sveta ljudi su shvatili da je samo zlato dovoljno retko da deluje kao novac, bez straha da bi neko drugi mogao da ga stvori u velikim količinama.

Polako smo prešli sa svetske ekonomije koja je koristila zlato kao novac na onu gde su banke izdavale papirne sertifikate kao dokaz posedovanja tog zlata.

Nixon je okončao međunarodnu konvertibilnost američkog dolara u zlato 1971. godine, privremenim rešenjem, koje je ubrzo postalo trajno.

Kraj zlatnog standarda omogućio je vladama i centralnim bankama da imaju punu dozvolu da povećavaju novčanu masu po svojoj volji, razredjujući vrednost svake novčanice u opticaju, poznatije kao umanjenje vrednosti.

Iako je izdata od strane vlade, suštinska tradicionalna valuta je novac koji svi znamo i svakodnevno koristimo, ipak je relativno novo iskustvo u opsegu svetske istorije.

Moramo verovati našim vladama da ne zloupotrebljavaju njegovo štamparije, i ne treba nam puno muke da nadjemo primere kršenja tog poverenja.

U autokratskim i centralno planiranim režimima gde vlada ima prst direktno na mašini za novac, kao što je Venecuela, valuta je postala gotovo bezvredna.

Venecuelanski Bolivar prešao je sa 2 bolivara za 1 američki dolar, koliko je vredeo 2009. godine, na 250.000 bolivara za 1 američki dolar 2019. godine.

Pogledajte koliko novčanica je bilo potrebno za kupovinu piletine u Venecueli posle hiperinflacije.

Satoshi je želeo da ponudi alternativu tradicionalnoj valuti čija se ponuda uvek nepredvidivo širi.

Da bi sprečilo umanjenje vrednosti, Satoshi je dizajnirao novčani sistem gde je zaliha bila fiksna i izdavana po predvidljivoj i nepromenjivoj stopi.

Postojaće samo 21 milion Bitcoin-a.

Međutim, svaki Bitcoin se može podeliti na 100 miliona jedinica koje se sada nazivaju satoshis (sats-ovi), što će činiti ukupno 2,1 kvadriliona satoshi-a u opticaju oko 2140. godine.

Pre Bitcoin-a nije bilo moguće sprečiti beskrajnu reprodukciju digitalnih sredstava.

Kopirati digitalnu knjigu, audio datoteku ili video zapis i poslati ga prijatelju, je jeftino i lako.

Jedini izuzeci od toga su digitalna sredstva koja kontrolišu posrednici.

Na primer, kada iznajmite film sa iTunes-a, možete ga gledati na vašem uređaju samo zato što iTunes kontroliše distribuciju tog filma i može ga zaustaviti nakon perioda njegovog iznajmljivanja.

Slično tome, vaša banka kontroliše vaš digitalni novac. Zadatak banke je da vodi evidenciju koliko novca imate.

Ako ga prenesete nekom drugom, oni će odobriti ili odbiti takav prenos.

Bitcoin je prvi digitalni sistem koji sprovodi oskudicu bez posrednika i prvo je sredstvo poznato čovečanstvu čija je nepromenljiva ponuda i raspored izdavanja poznat unapred.

Ni plemeniti metali poput zlata nemaju ovo svojstvo, jer uvek možemo iskopati sve više i više zlata ukoliko je to isplativo.

Zamislite da otkrijemo asteroid koji sadrži deset puta više zlata nego što ga imamo na zemlji.

Šta bi se dogodilo sa cenom zlata uzimajući u obzir tako obilnu ponudu? Bitcoin je imun na takva otkrića i manipulisanje nabavkom.

Jednostavno je nemoguće proizvesti više od toga (21 miliona).

„Podaci bi se mogli osigurati na način koji je fizički bio nemoguć za pristup drugima, bez obzira iz kog razloga, bez obzira koliko je dobar izgovor, bez obzira na sve. […] Vreme je da imamo istu stvar za novac “

Naše trenutne metode obezbeđivanja novca, poput stavljanja u banku, oslanjaju se na poverenje nekome drugom da će obaviti taj posao.

Poverenje u takvog posrednika ne zahteva samo sigurnost da on neće učiniti nešto zlonamerno ili glupo, već i da vlada neće zapleniti ili zamrznuti vaša sredstva vršeći pritisak na ovog posrednika.

Međutim, videli smo bezbroj puta da vlade mogu, i zaista uskraćuju pristup novcu kada se osećaju ugroženo.

Nekom ko živi u Sjedinjenim Državama ili nekoj drugoj visoko regulisanoj ekonomiji možda zvuči glupo da razmišlja da se probudi sa oduzetim novcem, ali to se događa stalno.

PayPal mi je zamrzao sredstva jednostavno zato par meseci nisam koristio svoj račun.

Trebalo mi je više od nedelju dana da vratim pristup „svom“ novcu.

Srećan sam što živim u Europi, gde bih se bar mogao nadati da ću potražiti neko pravno rešenje ako mi PayPal zamrzne sredstva i gde imam osnovno poverenje da moja vlada i banka neće ukrasti moj novac.

Mnogo gore stvari su se dogodile, i trenutno se dešavaju, u zemljama sa manje slobode.

Banke su se zatvorile tokom kolapsa valuta u Grčkoj.

Banke na Kipru su koristile kaucije da konfiskuju sredstva od svojih klijenata.

Indijska vlada je proglasila određene novčanice bezvrednim.

Bivši SSSR, u kojem sam odrastao, imao je ekonomiju pod kontrolom vlade što je dovelo do ogromnih nestašica robe.

Bilo je nezakonito posedovati strane valute kao što je američki dolar.

Kada smo poželeli da odemo, mojoj porodici je bilo dozvoljeno da zameni samo ograničenu količinu novca po osobi za američke dolare po zvaničnom kursu koji je bio u velikoj meri različit od pravog kursa slobodnog tržišta.

U stvari, vlada nam je oduzela ono malo bogatstva koje smo imali koristeći gvozdeni stisak na ekonomiji i kretanju kapitala.

Autokratske zemlje imaju tendenciju da sprovode strogu ekonomsku kontrolu, sprečavajući ljude da na slobodnom tržištu povuku svoj novac iz banaka, iznesu ga iz zemlje ili da ga razmene u ne još uvek bezvredne valute poput američkog dolara.

To omogućava vladinoj slobodnoj vladavini da primeni sulude ekonomske eksperimente poput socijalističkog sistema SSSR-a.

Bitcoin se ne oslanja na poverenje u treću stranu da bi osigurao vaš novac.

Umesto toga, Bitcoin onemogućava drugima pristup vašim novčićima bez jedinstvenog ključa koji imate samo vi, bez obzira iz kog razloga, bez obzira koliko je dobar izgovor, bez obzira na sve.

Držeći Bitcoin, držite ključeve sopstvene finansijske slobode. Bitcoin razdvaja novac i državu

„Rešenje Bitcoin-a je korišćenje peer-to-peer mreže za proveru dvostruke potrošnje […] poput distribuiranog servera vremenskih žigova, obeležavajući prvu transakciju koja je potrošila novčić“

Mreža se odnosi na ideju da je gomila računara povezana i da mogu međusobno slati poruke.

Reč distribuirano znači da ne postoji centralna stranka koja kontroliše, već da svi učesnici koordiniraju medjusobno kako bi mreža bila uspešna.

U sistemu bez centralne kontrole, bitno je znati da niko ne vara. Ideja dvostruke potrošnje odnosi se na mogućnost trošenja istog novca dva puta.

Fizički novac odlazi iz vaše ruke kad ga potrošite. Međutim, digitalne transakcije se mogu kopirati baš kao muzika ili filmovi.

Kada novac šaljete preko banke, oni se pobrinu da isti novac ne možete da prebacujete dva puta.

U sistemu bez centralne kontrole potreban nam je način da sprečimo ovu vrstu dvostruke potrošnje, koja je u suštini ista kao i falsifikovanje novca.

Satoshi opisuje da učesnici u Bitcoin mreži rade zajedno kako bi vremenski označili (doveli u red) transakcije kako bismo znali šta je bilo prvo.

Zbog toga možemo odbiti sve buduće pokušaje trošenja istog novca.

Satoshi se uhvatio u koštac sa nekoliko zanimljivih tehničkih problema kako bi rešio probleme privatnosti, uništavanja vrednosti i centralne kontrole u ​​trenutnim monetarnim sistemima.

Na kraju je stvorio peer to peer mrežu kojoj se svako mogao pridružiti bez otkrivanja svog identiteta ili potrebe da veruje bilo kom drugom učesniku.

Kako se Bitcoin razvijao u poslednjoj deceniji?

Doprinosi izvornom kodu Bitcoina

Kada je Bitcoin pokrenut, samo nekolicina ljudi ga je koristila i pokrenula Bitcoin softver na svojim računarima za napajanje Bitcoin mreže.

Većina ljudi u to vreme mislila je da je to šala ili da će se otkriti ozbiljni nedostaci u dizajnu sistema koji će ga učiniti neizvodljivim.

Vremenom se mreži pridružilo sve više ljudi koji su pomoću svojih računara dodali sigurnost mreži.

Ljudi su počeli da menjaju Bitcoin-e za robu i usluge, dajući mu stvarnu vrednost. Pojavile su se menjačnice valuta koje su menjale Bitcoin-e za gotovo sve tradicionalne valute na svetu.

Deset godina nakon izuma, Bitcoin koriste milioni ljudi sa desetinama do stotinama hiljada čvorova koji pokreću besplatni Bitcoin softver, koji se razvija od strane stotina dobrovoljaca i kompanija širom sveta.

Bitcoin mreža je porasla kako bi obezbedila vrednost veću od stotine biliona dolara.

Računari koji učestvuju u zaštiti Bitcoin mreže poznati su kao rudari/majneri.

Oni rade u industrijskim operacijama širom sveta, ulažući milione dolara u specijalni rudarski hardver koji radi samo jedno: pobrinuti se da je Bitcoin najsigurnija mreža na planeti.

Rudari troše električnu energiju kako bi transakcije Bitcoin-a učinile sigurnim od modifikacija. Budući da se rudari međusobno takmiče za oskudan broj Bitcoin-a proizvedenih dnevno, oni uvek moraju da pronalaze najjeftinije izvore energije na planeti da bi ostali profitabilni.

Rudari rade na različitim mestima, od hidroelektrana u dalekim krajevima Kine do vetroparkova u Teksasu, do kanadskih naftnih polja koja proizvode gas koji bi u suprotnom bio odzračen ili spaljen u atmosferi.

Iako je Bitcoin popularna tema i o njemu se često raspravlja u medijima, procenjujemo da je samo nekoliko miliona ljudi na svetu počelo da redovno štedi Bitcoin.

Za mnoge ljude, posebno za one koji nikada nisu živeli pod represivnim režimima, ovaj izum novog oblika digitalnog novca izvan kontrole vlade može biti veoma izazovan za razumevanje i prihvatanje.

Zato sam ja ovde. Želim da vam pomognem da razumete Bitcoin i budete gospodar svoje budućnosti!

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Veterano não é dono de bixete

"VETERANO NÃO É DONO DE BIXETE". A frase em letras garrafais chama a atenção dos transeuntes neófitos. Paira sobre um cartaz amarelo que lista várias reclamações contra os "trotes machistas", que, na opinião do responsável pelo cartaz, "não é brincadeira, é opressão".

Eis aí um bizarro exemplo de como são as coisas: primeiro todos os universitários aprovam a idéia do trote, apoiam sua realização e até mesmo desejam sofrer o trote -- com a condição de o poderem aplicar eles mesmos depois --, louvam as maravilhas do mundo universitário, onde a suprema sabedoria se esconde atrás de rituais iniciáticos fora do alcance da imaginação do homem comum e rude, do pobre e do filhinho-de-papai das faculdades privadas; em suma: fomentam os mais baixos, os mais animalescos instintos, a crueldade primordial, destroem em si mesmos e nos colegas quaisquer valores civilizatórios que tivessem sobrado ali, ficando todos indistingüíveis de macacos agressivos e tarados.

Depois vêm aí com um cartaz protestar contra os assédios -- que sem dúvida acontecem em larguíssima escala -- sofridos pelas calouras de 17 anos e que, sendo também novatas no mundo universitário, ainda conservam um pouco de discernimento e pudor.

A incompreensão do fenômeno, porém, é tão grande, que os trotes não são identificados como um problema mental, uma doença que deve ser tratada e eliminada, mas como um sintoma da opressão machista dos homens às mulheres, um produto desta civilização paternalista que, desde que Deus é chamado "o Pai" e não "a Mãe", corrompe a benéfica, pura e angélica natureza do homem primitivo e o torna esta tão torpe criatura.

Na opinião dos autores desse cartaz é preciso, pois, continuar a destruir o que resta da cultura ocidental, e então esperar que haja trotes menos opressores.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

neuron.vim

I started using this neuron thing to create an update this same zettelkasten, but the existing vim plugin had too many problems, so I forked it and ended up changing almost everything.

Since the upstream repository was somewhat abandoned, most users and people who were trying to contribute upstream migrate to my fork too.

• https://github.com/fiatjaf/neuron.vim

@ 21335073:a244b1ad

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

TL;DR please educate your children about online safety.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

On "zk-rollups" applied to Bitcoin

ZK rollups make no sense in bitcoin because there is no "cheap calldata". all data is already ~~cheap~~ expensive calldata.

There could be an onchain zk verification that allows succinct signatures maybe, but never a rollup.

What happens is: you can have one UTXO that contains multiple balances on it and in each transaction you can recreate that UTXOs but alter its state using a zk to compress all internal transactions that took place.

The blockchain must be aware of all these new things, so it is in no way "L2".

And you must have an entity responsible for that UTXO and for conjuring the state changes and zk proofs.

But on bitcoin you also must keep the data necessary to rebuild the proofs somewhere else, I'm not sure how can the third party responsible for that UTXO ensure that happens.

I think such a construct is similar to a credit card corporation: one central party upon which everybody depends, zero interoperability with external entities, every vendor must have an account on each credit card company to be able to charge customers, therefore it is not clear that such a thing is more desirable than solutions that are truly open and interoperable like Lightning, which may have its defects but at least fosters a much better environment, bringing together different conflicting parties, custodians, anyone.

@ 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!

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Splitpages

The simplest possible service: it splitted PDF pages in half.

Created specially to solve the problem of those scanned books that come with two pages side-by-side as if they were a single page and are much harder to read on Kindle because of that.

It required me to learn about Heroku Buildpacks though, and fork or contribute to a Heroku Buildpack that embedded a mupdf binary.

• https://github.com/fiatjaf/splitpages
• https://splitpages.herokuapp.com/

@ 6c05c73e:c4356f17

Descrição da empresa

Fundada em 1961, a WEG é uma empresa global de equipamentos eletroeletrônicos, atuando principalmente no setor de bens de capital com soluções em máquinas elétricas, automação e tintas, para diversos setores, incluindo infraestrutura, siderurgia, papel e celulose, petróleo e gás, mineração, entre muitos outros.

A WEG se destaca em inovação pelo desenvolvimento constante de soluções para atender as grandes tendências voltadas a eficiência energética, energias renováveis e mobilidade elétrica. Com operações industriais em 17 países e presença comercial em mais de 135 países, a companhia possui mais de 47.000 mil colaboradores distribuídos pelo mundo.

Em 2024, a WEG atingiu faturamento líquido de R$38,0 bilhões, destes 57,0% proveniente das vendas realizadas fora do Brasil.

acao wege3

Vendendo soluções para os clientes

"Na febre do ouro, muito garimpeiros corriam atrás de ouro para ficar ricos. Enquanto isso, muita gente enriqueceu vendendo pás, roupas, bebidas, cigarros e mantimentos para eles…”

Em um mundo dominado cada vez mais por Inteligência Artificial, carros elétricos e tecnologias quânticas. A Wege segue se destacando por oferecer equipamentos e parte da estrutura pode detrás para que essas tecnologias possam existir. Focada em inovação e performance. A empresa oferece soluções de ponta a ponta para os mais variados setores da indústria.

Visão geral da empresa

A Wege atua no setor de máquinas e equipamentos. Se formos fazer um refino, podemos dizer que ela atua em subsetores tais como: motores, compressores e outros.

Mercado que atua

O setor de máquinas e equipamentos no Brasil em 2024 enfrentou um cenário desafiador, com uma queda na receita líquida, mas também mostrou sinais de recuperação e algumas perspectivas positivas em segmentos específicos e no início de 2025.

A WEG é gigante no mundo todo. Os caras têm fábricas e filiais em mais de 40 países, espalhados por todos os continentes. A estratégia dos caras é expandir sempre, comprando outras empresas e investindo pesado em mercados-chave. A empresa foca em: Expansão, inovação e sustentabilidade.

Mercado

Grana Alta: Em 2024, o mercado global de máquinas e equipamentos valeu uns US$ 205,67 bilhões. Já a parte de motores elétricos, chegou a uns US$ 152,2 bilhões. A parada é que a automação industrial, que é a cara do futuro, estava em uns US$ 192,02 bilhões em 2024. É muita grana rolando!

As empresas estão investindo cada vez mais em IA (Inteligência artificial), IOT (internet das coisas, robótica e fabricação sustentável.

Perspectiva de crescimento A parada é que esse mercado tá com gás total pra crescer nos próximos anos, parceiro:

Máquinas e Equipamentos: A expectativa é que o mercado global de máquinas e equipamentos cresça cerca de 6,57% ao ano até 2033, podendo chegar a uns US$ 364,66 bilhões.

Motores Elétricos: Esse setor tá prometendo um crescimento de uns 6,3% ao ano até 2029, podendo bater uns US$ 206,4 bilhões. A demanda por carros elétricos tá puxando muito esse crescimento.

Automação Industrial: Essa é a cereja do bolo! A expectativa é que o mercado de automação industrial dispare uns 9,1% ao ano até 2033, alcançando uns US$ 420,49 bilhões. A busca por mais produtividade, menos erros e mais eficiência tá impulsionando essa onda.

Materia sobre carros eletricos

Oportunidades que o ativo traz

Na minha visão, as maiores oportunidades que a Wege nos traz são:

1. Equipamentos Eletroeletrônicos Industriais

   Esta área inclui os motores elétricos, drives e equipamentos e serviços de automação industrial e serviços de manutenção. Os motores elétricos e demais equipamentos têm aplicação em praticamente todos os segmentos industriais, em equipamentos como compressores, bombas e ventiladores.

2. Geração Transmissão e Distribuição de Energia (GTD)

   Os produtos e serviços incluídos nesta área são os geradores elétricos para usinas hidráulicas e térmicas (biomassa), turbinas hidráulicas (PCH e CGH), aerogeradores, transformadores, subestações, painéis de controle e serviços de integração de sistemas.

3. Motores Comerciais e Appliance

   O foco de atuação nesta área é o mercado de motores monofásicos para bens de consumo durável, como lavadoras de roupas, aparelhos de ar condicionado, bombas de água, entre outros.

cotacao wege3

Desde Janeiro/25, podemos observar que o gráfico teve uma queda no seu preço. Contudo, continua se mantendo acima da ema200 e com ótimo volume negociado. Isso tudo caracteriza que a tendência majoritária ainda é compradora. Então, devemos pensar em atuar somente nesse sentido.

Riscos

Os maiores riscos que vejo hoje, para uma empresa tão sólida como Wege são:

1. Instabilidade Econômica Global e Regional, qualquer flutuação em mercado chave atuante pode representar um risco.
2. Inflação e Custo de Insumos, principalmente aço e cobre que são matérias prima base.
3. Políticas Tarifárias e Protecionismo, se o homem laranja dos EUA impor tarifas. Pode afetar sim os negócios da empresa como um todo.

trump

Catalisadores

Na minha visão, os catalisadores da empresa. Que impulsionam e continuaram dando força a ela são:

distribuicao receita

• Forte diversificação de receita, 53% vem em dólar.
• Boa perspectiva do aumento do valor do dólar. Isso representa mais caixa.
• As aquisiçõess feitas recentemente, que vão impulsionar a receita da empresa.

aquisicao wege

Faq

Qual foi o desempenho da WEGE3 nas últimas 52 semanas?

13.95% foi desempenho das ações da WEGE3 até o momento.

WEGE3 paga dividendos? Qual o Dividend Yield (DY) da WEGE3?

Sim, WEGE3 (WEG) paga dividendos e juros sobre capital próprio (JCP). O Dividend Yield (DY) da WEGE3 tem variado ao longo do tempo, mas geralmente se encontra entre 1,4% e 1,8%, dependendo da cotação atual das ações e dos valores de dividendos e JCP distribuídos.

O que é a WEG? Qual o setor de atuação da WEG?

A WEG é uma empresa global de equipamentos eletroeletrônicos, que atua principalmente no setor de bens de capital. A empresa se destaca por suas soluções em máquinas elétricas, automação, tintas e sistemas de energia, com foco em eficiência energética e sustentabilidade.

Quais produtos a WEG fabrica?

A WEG produz uma vasta gama de produtos e soluções, abrangendo desde equipamentos elétricos e eletrônicos até tintas e vernizes.

Qual é o P/L (Preço sobre Lucro) da WEGE3?

O P/L (Preço sobre Lucro) da WEGE3, conforme indicadores de mercado, está em torno de 29,32.

Bio

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

Disclaimer

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

Referencia

https://api.mziq.com/mzfilemanager/v2/d/50c1bd3e-8ac6-42d9-884f-b9d69f690602/161a9930-5b12-3b03-758b-3b6d2b725211?origin=1

https://www.fundamentus.com.br/detalhes.php?papel=WEGE3&h=1

https://ri.weg.net/a-weg/perfil-corporativo/

https://ri.weg.net/a-weg/por-que-a-weg/

https://www.cnnbrasil.com.br/auto/carros-eletrificados-registram-85-de-aumento-nas-vendas-de-2024/

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

tempreites

My first library to get stars on GitHub, was a very stupid templating library that used just HTML and HTML attributes ("DSL-free"). I was inspired by http://microjs.com/ at the time and ended up not using the library. Probably no one ever did.

• https://github.com/fiatjaf/tempreites

@ bf47c19e:c3d2573b

Originalni tekst na bitcoin-balkan.com.

---

Pregled sadržaja

1. Definisanje novca
2. Šta je sredstvo razmene?
3. Šta je obračunska jedinica?
4. Šta je zaliha vrednosti?
5. Zašto su važne funkcije novca?
6. Novac Gubi Funkciju: Alhemičar iz Njutonije
7. Eksploatacija pomoću Novca: Agri Perle
8. Novac Gubi Funkciju 2. Deo: Kejnslandski Bankar
9. Da li nas novac danas eksploatiše?
10. Šta je novac, i zašto trebate da brinete?
11. Efikasnija Ušteda Novca
12. Zasluge
13. Molim vas da šerujete!

---

Google izveštava o stalnom povećanju interesa u svetu za pitanje „Šta je novac?“ koji se postavlja iz godine u godinu, od 2004. do 2021., a sa naglim porastom nakon finansijske krize 2008. godine.

I izgleda se da niko nema dobar odgovor za to.

Godišnji proseci mesečnih interesa za pretragu. 100 predstavlja najveći interes za pretragu tokom čitavog perioda, koji se dogodio u decembru 2019. Podaci sa Google Trends-a.

Međutim, odgovaranje na ovo naizgled jednostavno pitanje pomoći će vam da razjasnite ulogu novca u vašem životu. Jednom kada shvatite kako novac funkcioniše, tačno ćete videti i zašto svet danas ludi – i šta učiniti povodom toga. Zato hajde da se udubimo u to.

Na pitanje šta je novac, većina ljudi otvori svoje novčanike i pokaže nekoliko novčanica – “evo, ovo je novac!”

Ali po čemu se ove novčanice razlikuju od stranica vaše omiljene knjige? Pa, naravno, zavod za izradu novčanica te zemlje je odštampao te novčanice iz vašeg novčanika kako bi se oduprla falsifikovanju, i svi ih koriste da bi kupili odredjene stvari.

Međutim, Nemačka Marka imala je sva ova svojstva u prošlosti – ali preduzeća danas ne prihvataju te novčanice. Zapravo, građani Nemačke su početkom dvadesetih godina prošlog veka spaljivali papirne Marke kako bi grejali svoje domove. Marka je imala veću vrednost kao papir za potpalu nego kao novac!

1923. nemačka valuta poznata kao Marka bila je jeftinija od uglja i drveta!

Pa šta to čini novac, novcem?

Ispostavilo se da ovo nije pitanje na koje je lako dati odgovor.

Definisanje novca

Novac nije fizička stvar poput novčanice dolara. Novac je društveni sistem koji koristimo da bismo olakšali trgovinu robom i uslugama. Međutim, tokom istorije fizička monetarna dobra igrala su ključnu ulogu u društvenom sistemu novca, često kao znakovi koji predstavljaju vrednost u monetarnom sistemu. Ovaj sistem ima tri funkcije: 1) Sredstvo Razmene, 2) Obračunsku Jedinicu i 3) Zalihu Vrednosti.

Odakle dolaze ove funkcije, i zašto su one vredne?

Šta je sredstvo razmene?

Sredstvo razmene je neko dobro koje se obično razmenjuje za drugo dobro. Najčešće objašnjenje za to kako su se pojavila sredstva razmene glasi otprilike ovako: Boris ima ječam i želeo bi da kupi ovcu od Marka. Marko ima ovce, ali želi samo piliće. Ana ima piliće, ali ona ne želi ječam ili ovce.

To se naziva problem sticaja potreba: dve strane moraju da žele ono što druga ima da bi mogle da trguju. Ako se želje dve osobe ne podudaraju, oni moraju da pronađu druge ljude sa kojima će trgovati dok svi ne pronađu dobro koje žele.

Ljudi koji trguju robom i uslugama moraju da imaju potrebe koje se podudaraju.

Vremenom, veoma je verovatno da će se određena vrsta robe, poput pšenice, pojaviti kao sredstvo razmene jer su je mnogi ljudi želeli. Uzimajući pšenicu kao primer: pšenica je rešila “sticaje potreba” u mnogim zanatima, jer čak i ako onaj koji prima pšenicu a nije želeo da je koristi za sebe, znao je da će je neko drugi želeti.

Ovo nazivamo prodajnost imovine.

Pšenica je dobar primer dobra za prodaju jer svi moraju da jedu, a od pšenice se pravi hleb. Pšenica ima vrednost kao sastojak hleba i kao dobro koje olakšava trgovinu rešavanjem problema „sticaja potreba“.

Razmislite o svojoj želji da dobijete više novčanica u eurima ili drugoj valuti. Ne možete da jedete novčanice da biste preživeli, a i ne bi vam bile od velike koristi ako poželite da ih koristite kao građevinski materijal za vašu kuću. Međutim, znate da sa tim novčanicama možete da kupite hranu i kuću.

Stvarne fizičke novčanice su beskorisne za vas. Novčanice su vam dragocene samo zato što će ih drugi prihvatiti za stvari koje su vama korisne.

Tokom dugog perioda istorije, novac je evoluirao do te mere da monetarno dobro može imati vrednost, a da to dobro ne služi za bilo koju drugu ‘suštinsku’ upotrebu, poput hrane ili energije. Umesto toga, njegova upotreba je zaliha vrednosti i jednostavna zamena za drugu robu u bilo kom trenutku koji poželite.

Šta jedno dobro čini poželjnijim i prodajnijim od drugog dobra?

Deljivost

Definicija: Sposobnost podele dobra na manje količine.

Loš Primer: Dijamante je teško podeliti na manje komade. Za zajednicu od hiljada ljudi koji dnevno izvrše milione transakcija, dijamanti čine loše sredstvo razmene. Previše su retki i nedeljivi da bi se koristili za mnoge transakcije.

Ujednačenost

Definicija: Sličnost pojedinačnih jedinica odredjenog dobra.

Loš Primer: Krave nisu ujednačene – neke su veće, neke manje, neke bolesne, neke zdrave. Sa druge strane, unca čistog zlata je jednolična – jedna unca je potpuno ista kao sledeća. Ovo svojstvo se takođe često naziva zamenljivost.

Prenosivost

Definicija: Lakoća transporta dobra.

Loš Primer: Krava nije baš prenosiva. Zlatnici su prilično prenosivi. Papirne novčanice su još prenošljivije. Knjiga u kojoj se jednostavno beleži vlasništvo nad tim vrednostima (poput Rai kamenog sistema ili digitalnog bankovnog računa) je neverovatno prenosiva, jer nema fizičkog dobra koje treba nositi sa sobom za kupovinu. Postoji samo sistem za evidentiranje vlasništva nad tim vrednostima u nematerijalnom obliku.

Kako dobro postaje sredstvo razmene?

Dobra postaju, i ostaju sredstva razmene zbog svoje univerzalne potražnje, takođe poznate kao njihova prodajnost, čemu pomažu svojstva koja su gore nabrojana.

Mnogo različitih dobara mogu u različitoj meri delovati kao sredstva razmene u ekonomiji. Danas, naša globalna ekonomija koristi valute koje izdaju države, zlato, pa čak i robu poput nafte kao sredstvo razmene.

---

Šta je obračunska jedinica?

Stvari se komplikuju kada u ekonomiji postoji mnogo robe koja se prodaje. Čak i sa samo 5 dobara, postoji 10 “kurseva razmene” između svake robe kojih svi u ekonomiji moraju da se sete: 1 svinja se menja za 15 pilića, 1 pile se menja za 15 litara mleka, desetak jaja se menja za 15 litara mleka, i tako dalje. Ako ekonomija ima 50 dobara, među njima postoji 1.225 “kurseva razmene”!

Sredstvo za merenje vrednosti

Zamislite obračunsku jedinicu kao sredstvo za merenje vrednosti. Umesto da se sećamo vrednosti svakog dobra u poredjenju sa drugim dobrima, mi samo treba da se setimo vrednosti svakog dobra u poredjenju sa jednim dobrom – obračunskom jedinicom.

Umesto da se setimo 1.225 kurseva razmene kada imamo 50 proizvoda na tržištu, mi treba da zapamtimo samo 50 cena.

Na primer, ne treba da se sećamo da litar mleka vredi 1/15 piletine ili desetak jaja, možemo da se samo setimo da litar mleka košta 1USD.

Poređenje dobara je lakše sa obračunskom jedinicom

Obračunska jedinica takođe olakšava upoređivanje vrednosti i donošenje odluka. Zamislite da pokušavate da kupite par Nike Air Jordan patika kada ih jedan prodavac prodaje za jedno pile, a drugi za 50 klipova kukuruza.

Šta je zaliha vrednosti?

Do sada smo gledali samo primere transakcija koje se odvijaju u određenom trenutku u vremenu.

Međutim, ljudi vrše transakcije tokom vremena – oni štede novac i troše ga kasnije. Da bi odredjeno dobro moglo da funkcioniše pravilno kao monetarno dobro, ono treba da održi vrednost tokom vremena.

Novac koji vremenom dobro drži vrednost daje njegovom imaocu više izbora kada će taj novac da potroši.

To znači da prodajnost dobra uključuje njegovu sposobnost da održi vrednost tokom vremena.

Šta jedno dobro čini boljom zalihom vrednosti od drugog dobra?

Trajnost

Definicija: Sposobnost dobra da vremenom zadrži svoj oblik.

Loš Primer: Jagode čine lošu zalihu vrednosti jer se lako oštete i brzo trunu.

Odluka je daleko lakša ako jedan prodavac naplaćuje 150 USD, a drugi 200 USD – odmah je očigledno koja je bolja ponuda jer su vrednosti izražene u istoj jedinici.

Teške za Proizvodnju

Definicija: Teškoće koje ljudi imaju u proizvodnji veće količine dobra.

Loš Primer: Papirne novčanice predstavljaju lošu zalihu vrednosti jer banke i vlade mogu jeftino da ih naprave.

Sa zlatom je suprotno – u ponudi se nalazi ograničena količina uprkos velikoj potražnji za njim, jednostavno zato što ga je vrlo teško iskopati iz zemlje. Ova ograničena ponuda osigurava da svaka jedinica zlata održi vrednost tokom vremena.

Kako dobra postaju zalihe vrednosti?

Dobro postaje zaliha vrednosti ako se vremenom pokaže trajnim i teškim za proizvodnju.

Samo će vreme pokazati da li je neko dobro zaista trajno i da li ga je teško proizvesti. Zbog toga neki oblici novca su postojali vekovima pre nego što je neko otkrio način da ih proizvede više, i na kraju se to dobro više nije koristilo kao novac.

Ovo je priča o školjkama, Rai kamenju i mnogim drugim oblicima novca tokom istorije.

Zlato je primer dobra koje je hiljadama godina služilo kao dobra zaliha vrednosti. Zlato se ne razgrađuje tokom vremena i još uvek ga je teško proizvesti. Hiljadama godina alhemičari su bezuspešno pokušavali da sintetišu zlato iz jeftinih materijala.

Čak i sa današnjim naprednim rudarskim tehnikama, svake godine svi svetski rudnici zlata zajedno mogu da proizvedu samo 2% od ukupne ponude zlata u prometu.

Teškoće u proizvodnji zlata daju izuzetno visok odnos “zaliha i protoka”: zaliha je broj postojećih jedinica, a protok su nove jedinice stvorene tokom određenog vremenskog perioda. Svake godine se stvori vrlo malo novih jedinica zlata, iako je potražnja za zlatom obično vrlo velika.

Kombinujući ovo sa deljivošću, ujednačenošću i prenosivošću zlata, nije ni čudo što je zlato čovečanstvu služilo kao monetarno dobro tokom poslednjih 5.000 godina. Pošto je zlato teško proizvesti, možemo ga nazvati teškim novcem (hard money).

Kao rezultat toga, svoju vrednost je u velikoj meri zadržao kroz milenijume. Cena većine dobara i usluga u pogledu zlata zapravo se vremenom smanjivala kao rezultat tehnoloških inovacija, koje sve proizvode čine jeftinijim.

Uzmimo na primer cene hrane prema praćenju Kancelarije za hranu i poljoprivredu UN-a: sa obzirom na skokove u poljoprivrednoj tehnologiji tokom poslednjih 60 godina, cene hrane drastično su pale kada se procenjuju u zlatu. To čak i važi uprkos činjenici da obični ljudi retko koriste zlato za kupovinu stvari.

Cene hrane su padale u pogledu zlata tokom proteklih 60 godina, i mnogo pre toga (FAO Indeks Cena Hrane u Zlatu)

Zaliha vrednosti omogućava ljudima da uštede novac kako bi mogli da ga ulažu u pokretanje preduzeća i obrazovanje, povećavajući produktivnost društva.

Monetarna dobra koja dobro čuvaju vrednost takođe podstiču dugoročniji pogled na život, ili kratke vremenske preference. Pojedinac može da radi 10 godina, uštedi odredjeno monetarno dobro koje je dobra zaliha vrednosti, i nema potrebe da se plaši da će njegova ušteđevina biti izbrisana krahom tržišta ili povećanjem ponude tog dobra.

Zašto su važne funkcije novca?

Kada neki oblik novca izgubi bilo koju od svojih važnih funkcija kao što su sredstvo razmene, obračunska jedinica i zaliha vrednosti, celokupna ekonomija i društvo mogu da se rastrgnu.

Tokom istorije često vidimo grupe ljudi koje eksploatišu druge iskorišćavajući nesporazume o novcu i važnosti njegovih funkcija.

Sledeće, proći ću kroz istoriju novca, prvo hipotetički da bih ilustrovao poentu, a zatim ću preći na stvarne istorijske primere. Kroz ove primere videćemo štetne efekte na društva u slučajevima kada se izgubi samo jedna od tih ključnih funkcija novca.

Novac Gubi Funkciju: Alhemičar iz Njutonije

Kroz istoriju, mnoga dobra su dolazila i odlazila kao oblici novca. Na žalost, kada se neki oblik novca ukine, ponekad postoji grupa ljudi koja eksploatiše drugi oblik manipulišući tim novcem.

Hajde da pogledamo hipotetičko selo zvano Njutonija da bismo razumeli kako dolazi do ove eksploatacije.

Zelene perle postaju Novac

Tokom stotina godina ribolova u obližnjoj reci, stanovnici Njutonije sakupljali su zelene perle iz vode. Zrnca su mala, lagana, izdržljiva, jednolična i retko se pojavljuju u reci. Ljudi prvo priželjkuju perle zbog svoje lepote. Na kraju, seljani shvataju da svi drugi žele perle – one se vrlo lako mogu prodati. Zrnca uskoro postaju sredstvo razmene i obračunska jedinica u selu: pile je 5 zrna, vreća jabuka 2 zrna, krava 80 zrna.

Ukupna ponuda perli je prilično konstantna i cene se vremenom ne menjaju mnogo. Seoski starešina je uveren da može da se opustiti u poslednjim danima živeći od svoje velike zalihe perli.

Alhemičar stvara više perli

Seoski alhemičar je poželeo da bude bogat čovek, ali nije voleo da vredno radi na tome. Umesto da traži perle u reci ili da prodaje vrednu robu drugim seljanima, on sedeo je u svojoj laboratoriji. Na kraju je otkrio kako da lako stvori stotine perli sa malo peska i vatre.

Seljani koji su tragali za perlama u reci bili su srećni ako bi svaki dan pronašli po 1 zrno. Alhemičar je mogao da proizvede stotine uz malo napora.

Alhemičar troši svoje perle

Budući da je bio prilično zao, alhemičar nije svoj metod pravljenja zrna delio ni sa kim drugim. Stvorio je sebi još više perli i počeo da ih troši za dobra na tržištu u Njutoniji. Tokom sledećih meseci, alhemičar je kupio farmu pilića, nekoliko krava, finu svilu, posteljine i ogromno imanje. On je imao priliku da kupi ova dobra po normalnim cenama na tržištu.

Alhemičarevo trošenje ostavljalo je seljanima mnogo perli, ali malo njihove vredne robe.

Svi seljani su se osećali bogatima – imali su tone perli! Međutim, polako su primetili da i svi ostali takodje imaju tone.

Cene počinju da rastu

Uzgajivač pilića primetio je da sva roba koju je trebalo da kupi na pijaci poskupela. Džak jabuka sada se prodaje za 100 perli – 50 puta više od njihove cene pre nekoliko meseci!

Iako je sada imao hiljade perli, uskoro bi mogao da ostane bez njih zbog ovih cena. Pitao se – da li zaista može sebi da priušti da prodaje svoje piliće za samo 5 perli po komadu? Morao je i on da podigne svoje cene.

Jednostavno rečeno, kao rezultat alhemičarevog trošenja njegovih novostvorenih perli, bilo je previše perli koje su jurile premalo dobara – pa su cene porasle.

Kupci robe bili su spremni da potroše više perli da bi kupili potrebna dobra. Prodavci robe su trebali da naplate više da bi bili sigurni da su zaradili dovoljno da kupe potrebna dobra za sebe.

Budući da su cene svih dobara porasle, možemo reći da se vrednost svake perle smanjila.

Nejednakost bogatstva raste

Seoski starešina, koji je vredno radio da sačuva hiljade perli, sada se našao osiromašenim i gladnim. U međuvremenu, alhemičar je udobno sedeo na svom velikom imanju sa kravama, pilićima i slugama koji su se brinuli za svaki njegov hir.

Alhemičar je efikasno ukrao bogatstvo celog sela, tako što je jeftino proizvodio perle i koristio ih za kupovinu vredne robe.

Ono što je najvažnije, kupio je robu pre nego što je tržište shvatilo da je više perli u opticaju i da ima manje robe, što je dovelo do rasta cena. Ova dodatna proizvodnja perli nije dodala korisnu robu ili usluge selu.

Eksploatacija pomoću Novca: Agri Perle

Nažalost, priča o alhemičaru iz Njutonije nije u potpunosti hipotetička. Ovaj prenos bogatstva kroz stvaranje novca ima istorijske i moderne presedane.

Na primer, afrička plemena su nekada koristila staklene perle, poznate kao “agri perle”, kao sredstvo razmene. U to vreme plemenskim ljudima je bilo veoma teško da prave staklene perle, i one su predstavljale težak novac unutar njihovog plemenskog društva.

Niko nije mogao jeftino da proizvede perle i koristiti ih za kupovinu skupe, vredne robe poput kuća, hrane i odeće.

Sve se promenilo kada su stigli Evropljani, i primetili upotrebu staklenih perli kao novca.

U to vreme, Evropljani su mogli jeftino da stvaraju staklo u velikim količinama. Kao rezultat toga, Evropljani su počeli tajno da uvoze perle i koriste ih za kupovinu dobara, usluga i robova od Afrikanaca.

Vremenom se iz Afrike izvlačila vredna roba i ljudi, dok je plemenima ostajalo mnogo perli i malo robe.

Perle su izgubile veći deo vrednosti zbog inflacije uzrokovane snabdevanjem od strane Evropljana.

Rezultat je bio osiromašenje afričkih plemena i bogaćenje Evropljana, kako to ovde objašnjava monetarni istoričar Bezant Denier.

Dragocena roba je kupljena jeftino proizvedenim monetarnim dobrom.

Profitiranje na proizvodnji novca: Emisiona dobit

Ova priča ilustruje kako se bogatstvo prenosi kada jedna grupa može jeftino da proizvodi monetarno dobro.

Razlika između troškova proizvodnje monetarnog dobra i vrednosti tog monetarnog dobra poznata je kao emisiona dobit, eng. seignorage.

Kada je monetarno dobro mnogo vrednije od troškova proizvodnje, ljudi će proizvesti više od monetarnog dobra da bi uhvatili profit od emisione dobiti.

Na kraju će ova povećana ponuda dovesti do pada vrednosti monetarnog dobra. To je zbog zakona ponude i potražnje: kada se ponuda povećava, cena (poznata i kao vrednost) dobra opada.

Novac Gubi Funkciju 2. Deo: Kejnslandski Bankar

U priči o Njutoniji, alhemičar je otkrio način da se od malo peska jeftino stvori više zelenih perli. To se u stvarnosti odigralo kroz trgovinu između Evropljana i Afrikanaca, pričom o agri perlama. Međutim, ove priče su pomalo zastarele – mi više ne trgujemo robom za perle.

Da bismo nas doveli do modernog doba, hajde da promenimo neka imena u našoj priči:

1. Selo Njutonija postaje država koja se zove Kejnsland
2. Alhemičar postaje bankar
3. Seoski starešina postaje penzioner
4. Zelene perle postaju zlato, koje niko ne može jeftinije da stvori – čak ni bankar.

Bankar Menja Papirne Novčanice za Zlato

Kao i u stvarnosti, bankar u ovoj priči nema formulu ili trik da stvori više zlata. Međutim, bankar bezbedno čuva zlato u vlasništvu svakog građanina Kejnslanda. Bankar daje svakom građaninu po jednu potvrdu za svaku uncu zlata koje ima u svom trezoru.

Te potvrde se mogu iskoristiti u bilo koje vreme za stvarno zlato. Papirne potvrde ili novčanice su mnogo pogodnije za plaćanje nego nošenje zlata kroz supermarket.

Građani su srećni – oni imaju prikladno sredstvo plaćanja u vidu bankarevih novčanica, i znaju da niko ne može da ukrade njihovo bogatstvo falsifikujući više zlata.

Građani na kraju počinju da plaćaju u potpunosti papirnim novčanicama, ne trudeći se nikad da zamene svoje novčanice za zlato. Na kraju, novčanice postaju “dobre kao i zlato” – svaka predstavlja fiksnu količinu zlata u bankarevom trezoru.

Ukupno kruži 1.000.000 novčanica, od kojih je svaka otkupljiva za jednu uncu zlata. 1.000.000 unci zlata sedi u bankarevom trezoru. Svaka novčanica je u potpunosti podržana u zlatu.

Starešina koji je sačuvao sve svoje perle u priči o Njutoniji sada je penzioner u Kejnslandu, koji svoje zlato drži u banci i planira da ugodno živi od novčanica koje je dobio zauzvrat.

Hajde da u ovu priču dodamo i novi lik: premijera Kejnslanda. Premijer naplaćuje porez od građana i koristi ga za plaćanje javnih usluga poput policije i vojske. Premijer takođe drži vladino zlato kod bankara.

Bankar Menja Papirne Novčanice za Dug

Premijer želi da osigura da nacionalno zlato ostane na sigurnom, pa banku štiti policijom. Bankar i premijer se zbog toga zbližavaju, pa premijer traži uslugu. Traži od bankara da kreira 200.000 novčanica za premijera, uz obećanje da će mu premijer vratiti za pet godina. Premijeru su novčanice potrebne za finansiranje rata. Građani Kejnslanda borili su se protiv većih poreza zbog finansiranja rata, pa je morao da se obrati bankaru.

Bankar se slaže da izradi novčanice, ali pod jednim uslovom: bankar uzima deo od 10.000 novčanica za sebe. Premijer prihvata posao kojim bankar ’kupuje državni dug’. Sada je u opticaju 1.200.000 novčanica, potpomognutih kombinacijom 1.000.000 unci zlata i ugovorom o dugu sa vladom za 200.000 novčanica.

Premijer troši svoje nove novčanice na bombe kupujući ih od dobavljača iz domaće vojne industrije, a bankar sebi kupuje veliki luksuzni stan.

Dobavljač iz vojne industrije koristi sve nove novčanice koje je dobio od premijera da kupi amonijum nitrat (đubrivo koje se koristi u bombama) za proizvodnju bombi. Sve njegove kupovine povećavaju cenu đubriva za uzgajivače pšenice u Kejnslandu, pa oni podižu cenu pšenice.

Kao uzrok toga, pekar koji kupuje pšenicu treba da podigne cenu svog hleba da bi ostao u poslu. Na taj način cene u Kejnslandu počinju da rastu, baš kao što su to činile u Njutoniji kada su nove perle ušle u opticaj.

Papirne Novčanice Više Ne Predstavljaju Zlato

Penzioner nailazi na finansijski časopis u kojem se pominje premijerov dogovor da se zaduži za finansiranje rata. Obzirom da je mudar, on zna da bombe loše vraćaju ulaganje i sumnja da će premijer ikada da vrati svoj dug.

Ako on ‘podmiri’ svoj dug, to bi ostavilo 1.200.000 novčanica u opticaju sa samo 1.000.000 unci zlata da bi ih podržalo, obezvređujući njegovu ušteđevinu. Već oseća stisak u džepu zbog porasta cena, i on odlučuje da se uputi u lokalnu banku i preda svoje novčanice i zameni ih za zlato, koje niko ne može da napravi u većoj količini.

Kada penzioner stigne u banku, on zatiče i mnoge druge okupljene oko banke. Svi oni se nadaju da će uzeti zlato koje predstavljaju njihove novčanice. Građani Kejnslanda sa pravom se plaše da njihove novčanice gube na vrednosti – oni to već osećaju zbog porasta cena.

Vrata su zaključana, sa obaveštenjem bankara na njima:

Po nalogu premijera, onom koji se plaši za stabilnost ove bankarske institucije, ova banka više neće podržavati konvertibilnost papirnih novčanica u zlato. Hvala vam!

Gomila se razilazi, ostavljena sa jednim izborom: da zadrže svoje novčanice, koje sada vrede manje od 1 unce zlata. Građani sa dovoljno finansijske stabilnosti odlučuju da ulože svoje novčanice u kupovinu akcija banke i kompanija vojne industrije, koje dobro posluju jer mogu da kupuju stvari pre nego što se povećaju tržišne cene.

Mnogi ljudi nisu u mogućnosti da investiraju – oni moraju da gledaju kako njihove zarade stagniraju i kako njihova ušteđevina polako ali sigurno gubi vrednost.

Penzioner, koji se nadao da će živeti od novčanica koje je zaradio tokom svojih 40 radnih godina, sada 40 sati nedeljno provodi iza kase u lokalnoj prodavnici, pitajući se gde je sve pošlo po zlu.

Dug Nikada Nije Otplaćen

Prošlo je nekoliko godina, a premijerov dug prema banci dolazi na naplatu. Budući da je potrošio svih 200.000 novčanica na bombe, koje nemaju baš dobar povraćaj ulaganja, on nema novčanice koje može da vrati banci. Plus, premijer želi da kupi još bombi za svoj rat.

Bankar uverava premijera da je sve u redu. Bankar će napraviti novi ugovor o dugu za 600.000 novčanica, koji bi trebao da stigne na naplatu u narednih 5 godina. Premijer može da iskoristi 200.000 od tih novih 600.000 novčanica da vrati svoj prvobitni dug prema banci, zadrži još 300.000 da kupi još bombi i da 100.000 bankaru da bi mu platio njegove usluge.

To nastavlja da se dešava – svaki put kada dug dospeva na naplatu, bankar stvara više novčanica za vraćanje starijih dugova i daje premijeru još više novca za trošenje. Ovaj ciklus se nastavlja.

Šta se dešava u Kejnslandu?

• Oni koji prvi dobiju nove novčanice, gledaju kako se njihovo bogatstvo povećava
• To uključuje bankara, premijera, vladu i sve one koji mogu da pristupe mogućnostima za investiranje u preduzeća koja prva dobiju nove novčanice (finansijske, vojne itd.).
• Cene roba rastu
• Cene se ne povećavaju ravnomerno – one se povećavaju gde god nove novčanice prvo uđu u ekonomiju i od tog trenutka imaju efekat talasa na tržišta. U našem primeru prvo raste cena amonijum nitrata, zatim cena pšenice, pa cena hleba. A tek na kraju zarade običnih ljudi.
• Štednja i životni standard opšte populacije se smanjuju
• Najviše pate oni koji žive od plate do plate i ne mogu da ulažu. Čak i oni koji su u mogućnosti da investiraju podložni su hirovima tržišta. Mnogi su prisiljeni da prodaju svoje investicije po niskim cenama tokom pada tržišta samo da bi platili svoje dnevne potrebe.
• Razlika u prihodima i bogatstvu između bogatih i siromašnih se povećava
• Bogatstvo opšte populacije se smanjuje, dok se bogatstvo onih koji su blizu mesta gde se troše nove novčanice povećava. Rezultat je disparitet koji se vremenom samo proširuje.

Da li nas novac danas eksploatiše?

Priča o Njutoniji i stvarna priča o agri perlama u Africi deluju pomalo zastarelo. Priča o Kejnslandu, međutim, deluje neobično poznato. U našem svetu cene robe uvek rastu, i vidimo rekordne nivoe nejednakosti u bogatstvu.

U poslednjem odeljku ovog našeg članka Šta je novac, proći ću kroz nastanak bankarstva i korake koji su bili potrebni da se dođe do današnjeg sistema, gde banke i vlade sarađuju u kontroli ekonomije i samog novca.

Šta su banke, i odakle su one došle?

Pojava bankarstva verovatno se dogodila da bi olakšala poljoprivrednu trgovinu i da bi povećala pogodnosti. Iako su se mnoga društva na kraju konvergirala ka upotrebi zlata i srebra kao novca, ovi metali su bili teški i opasni za nošenje kao tovar. Međutim, u mnogim slučajevima ih nije ni trebalo prevoziti. Uzmite ovaj primer:

Grad treba da plati poljoprivrednicima na selu za žito, a poljoprivrednici gradskoj vojsci za zaštitu od varvara. U ovom dogovoru zlato se kreće u oba smera: prema poljoprivrednicima u selu kako bi im se platilo žito, i nazad u grad da bi se platila vojska. Da bi olakšali ove transakcije, preduzetnici su stvorili koncept banke. Banka je zlato čuvala u sigurnom trezoru i izdavala novčanice od papira. Svaka priznanica je predstavljala potvrdu da njen imaoc poseduje određenu količinu zlata u banci. Imaoc novčanice je u svako doba mogao da uzme svoje zlato nazad vraćanjem te novčanice banci.

Korisnici banke mogli su lakše da trguju sa novčanicama od papira, i onaj koji poseduje novčanice mogao je da preuzme njihovo fizičko zlato u bilo kom trenutku. To je te novčanice učinilo “dobrim kao i zlato”.

Banke su izdržavale svoje poslovanje naplaćujući od kupaca naknadu za skladištenje zlata ili pozajmljivanjem dela zlata i zaračunavanjem kamata na njega. Trgovina na ovaj način je mogla da se odvija sa laganim novčanicama od papira umesto sa teškim vrećama zlatnika.

Ovakva praksa sa transakcijama, korišćenjem papirne valute potpomognute monetarnim dobrima, verovatno je započela u Kini u 7. veku.

Na kraju se proširila Evropom 1600-ih, a svoj zalet dobila je u Holandiji sa bankama poput Amsterdamske Wisselbanke. Novčanice Wisselbank-e često su vredele više od zlata koje ih je podržavalo, zbog dodane vrednosti njihovih pogodnosti.

Uspon nacionalnih ‘centralnih banaka’

Tokom vekova, zlato je počelo da se sakuplja u trezorima banaka, jer su ljudi više voleli pogodnosti transakcija sa novčanicama.

Na kraju, nacionalne banke u vlasništvu vlada preuzele su ulogu čuvanja zlata od privatnih banaka koje su započeli preduzetnici.

Nacionalne papirne valute potpomognute zlatnim rezervama u nacionalnim bankama zamenile su novčanice iz privatnih banaka. Sve nacionalne valute bile su jednostavno potvrde za zlato koje se nalazilo u trezoru nacionalne banke.

Ovaj sistem je poznat kao zlatni standard – sve valute su jednostavno predstavljale različite težine zlata.

U gornjem levom uglu novčanice možete videti da piše da je novčanica “zamenljiva za zlato”. Savremeni dolari nemaju ovaj natpis, ali inače izgledaju vrlo slično. Izvor

Zlatni sistem je postojao veći deo vremena, sve do Prvog svetskog rata. Vladama je bilo teško da prikupe novac za ovaj rat putem poreza, pa su morale da budu kreativne.

Kada vlade troše više nego što zarađuju na porezima, to se naziva deficitna potrošnja.

Kako vlade mogu ovo da urade? Vlade to rade tako što pozajmljuju novac prodavajući svoj dug.

Tokom Prvog svetskog rata, vlade su građanima i preduzećima prodavale vrstu duga koja se naziva ratna obveznica. Kada građanin kupi ratnu obveznicu, on preda svoj novac vladi i dobije papir u kojem je stajalo vladino obećanje da će vlasniku obveznice vratiti novac, plus kamate, za nekoliko godina.

Plakat koji obaveštava građane, tražeći od njih da kupe ratne obveznice – što predstavlja zajam vladi. Izvor

Centralne banke ‘monetizuju’ državni dug

Međutim, građani i preduzeća nisu bili voljni da kupe dovoljno ratnih obveznica za finansiranje Prvog svetskog rata.

Vlade se nisu predale – pa su zatražile od svojih nacionalnih ‘centralnih banaka’ da one kupe ove obveznice. Centralne banke su otkupile obveznice, ali ih nisu platile valutom potpomognutom postojećim zlatnim rezervama, kao što su to činili građani i banke prilikom kupovine obveznica.

Centralne banke su umesto toga davale vladi novu, sveže štampanu papirnu valutu potpomognutu samo obveznicom. Ovu valutu podržalo je samo obećanje da će im vlada vratiti dugove. Ovo je poznato kao monetizacija duga.

Budući da su ratne obveznice i valuta samo komadi papira, one su lake i jeftine za proizvodnju i mogu se napraviti u ogromnim količinama. Ono što ograničava proizvodnju i jednog i drugog je poverenje.

Ima smisla da se neko rastane od svog teško stečenog novca da kupi državnu obveznicu, samo ako veruje da će vlada da vrati svoj dug, plus kamate. Centralna banka je “krajnji kupac”, što znači da će ona da kupi državne obveznice kada to niko drugi neće da uradi.

Zapamtite, centralnu banku gotovo da ništa ne košta da kupi državne obveznice, jer oni sami štampaju valutu da bi ih kupili.

Zamislite da pridjete najskupljem automobilu u autosalonu – koji košta 100.000 USD. Mislite da je automobil lep, ali taj novac biste radije potrošili na lepši stan – tako da ste spremni da platite samo 40.000 USD za taj auto.

Sada, hajde da zamislimo da imate štampač za novac i da vas košta samo 50 USD za mastilo i papir da bi ištampali 1.000.000 USD. Vi biste odmah kupili auto, čak i ako biste morali da se cenkate sa drugim čovekom, i da ga na kraju platite 150.000 USD!

Ista stvar se dešava kada centralna banka kupuje obveznice (dugove) od vlade. Centralna banka može da stvori valutu toliko jeftino, da su spremni da plate i više nego što bi drugi platili ove obveznice i nastaviće da ih kupuju čak i kada niko drugi ne bude želeo.

Monetizacija duga uzrokuje inflaciju

Kada centralne banke monetizuju državni dug, funkcija novca kao zalihe vrednosti počinje da se nagriza. Vlada troši novi novac koji je dobila od svoje centralne banke na ratnu robu, obroke i još mnogo toga.

Cene roba rastu od ove novoštampane valute koja kruži kroz ekonomiju. Kada se cene povećavaju, to znači da se vrednost svake jedinice valute smanjuje. Svi koji drže valutu sada imaju manje vrednosti. Danas to nazivamo sporim gubitkom funkcije zalihe vrednosti u novčanoj inflaciji.

Za Nemačku nakon Prvog svetskog rata monetizacija duga izazvala je totalni slom Nemačke ekonomije i stvorila uslove za rast fašizma.

Kao deo sporazuma o prekidu vatre koji je okončao Prvi svetski rat, Nemačka je pobednicima morala da plati ogroman novac. Nemačkoj vladi je bio preko potreban novac, pa su prodale obveznice (dug) Rajhsbanci, nemačkoj centralnoj banci.

Ovaj postupak doveo je do toga da je vlada štampala toliko maraka (tadašnja nemačka valuta) da je tempo inflacije u Nemačkoj ubrzan u hiperinflaciju početkom 1920-ih. Cena vekne hleba za samo 4 godine popela se sa 1,2 marke na 428 biliona maraka.

Tokom i posle Prvog svetskog rata, SAD, Britanija, Francuska i mnoge druge vlade pratile su Nemačku u štampanju valute potpomognute državnim dugom.

To je dovelo do toga da su građani želeli da svoju papirnu valutu zamene za zlato, baš kao i penzioner iz priče o Kejnslandu.

Međutim, mnoge vlade su suspendovale konvertibilnost svojih valuta u zlato. Ovim potezom vlade su primorale svoje građane da drže nacionalnu papirnu valutu i gledaju kako se njihova ušteda smanjuje u vrednosti.

Da bi mogle da nastave da štampaju novac i da bi ga trošile na nepopularne programe za koje nisu mogle da skupljaju poreze za finansiranje – poput ratova.

Bretton Woods: Novi monetarni sistem

Nakon razaranja koja su donela dva svetska rata, vlade su uspostavile novi globalni monetarni sistem prema Bretton Woods-ovom sporazumu iz 1944. godine.

Prema ovom sporazumu, valuta svake države konvertovala se po fiksnom kursu sa američkim dolarom. Američki dolar je zauzvrat predstavljao zlato po stopi od 35 USD za jednu trojsku uncu zlata*.

Sve globalne valute su stoga još uvek bile jednostavna reprezentacija zlata, putem američkih dolara kao posrednika. Redovni građani više nisu mogli da otkupljuju svoje valute za zlato iz Sjedinjenih Država. Međutim, strane centralne banke mogle bi da dođu u Sjedinjene Države da bi zamenile dolare za zlato po stopi od 35 USD za jednu uncu zlata.

Međutim, vlada Sjedinjenih Država nije uvek držala dovoljno zlata da podrži sve dolare u opticaju. Američka vlada nastavila je da finansira proširene socijalne i vojne programe prodajom državnog duga svojoj centralnoj banci, Federalnim rezervama, koja je povećala ponudu dolara bez povećanja ponude zlata koja podupire te dolare.

*Trojna unca je standardna mera čistog zlata i ima malo veću težinu od normalne unce.

Propast Bretton Woods-a

Tokom 1970-ih, sve veći troškovi rata u Vijetnamu i stranih vlada koje su otkupljivale svoje dolare za zlato, stvorili su pritisak na Trezor Sjedinjenih Država.

Ponuda dolara je porasla, dok je zlato u posedu Sjedinjenih Država opalo. Od 1950. pa do početka 1970-ih, rezerve zlata koje je držala vlada Sjedinjenih Država smanjile su se za više od 50%, sa 20 metričkih tona na samo 8 metričkih tona.

Godine 1970. država je imala zlata u vrednosti od samo 12 biliona dolara po zvaničnom kursu od 35 dolara za trojsku uncu zlata. Tokom ovog istog vremenskog perioda, ukupna ponuda američkih dolara otišla je sa oko 32 biliona USD na skoro 70 biliona USD.

Zvanične rezerve zlata u SAD-u su naglo padale od 1950. do 1970. godine, dok su se dolari u opticaju povećavali. Izvor: Wikipedia, DollarDaze.org

Američka vlada nije bila u stanju da potkrepi dolare zlatom od 35 dolara po trojnoj unci, što dovelo do rizika za čitav globalni monetarni sistem.

Početkom sedamdesetih godina, trojna unca zlata trebala je da vredi 200 USD da bi u potpunosti podržala sve američke dolare u opticaju. Rečeno na drugi način, Sjedinjene Države su pokušavale da kažu svetu da jedan dolar vredi 1/35 trojne unce zlata, ali u stvarnosti dolar je vredeo samo 1/200 trojne unce.

Kad su strane vlade trebale da pribave dolare za međunarodnu trgovinu i rezerve, bile su opelješene. Francuska vlada je to shvatila šezdesetih godina prošlog veka i počela je da prodaje svoje američke dolare za zlato po zvaničnom kursu od 35 dolara za trojsku uncu zlata.

Zemlje su počinjale da se bude iz šeme američke vlade. SAD su krale bogatstvo putem emisione dobiti, prodajući dolare za 1/35 trojne unce zlata, kada su vredeli samo 1/200 trojske unce.

Nixonov Šok ulazi u ’tradicionalni’ novac

Da bi kuća od karata mogla da ostane na mestu, predsednik Nixon je 1971. najavio da će američka vlada privremeno da obustavi konvertibilnost dolara u zlato.

Strane vlade više nisu mogle da polažu pravo na zlato svojim papirnim dolarima, a dolar više nije bio “poduprt” zlatom. Nixon je tvrdio da će ovo stabilizovati dolar.

50 godina kasnije, kristalno je jasno da je ovo samo pomoglo dolaru da izgubi vrednost i da ovaj “privremeni” program još uvek traje.

Pre 1971. godine, sve globalne valute bile su vezane za američki dolar putem Bretton Woods-ovog sporazuma. Kada je Nixon promenio američki dolar iz dolara podržanog u zlatu u dolar podržan dugom, ovim je promenio i svaku drugu valutu na Zemlji.

Sam je učinio da se celokupna svetska ekonomija zasniva na dugovima. Valute više nisu predstavljale zlato, već su predstavljale vrednost državnog duga.

Zlatni Standard se nikada nije vratio

Konvertibilnost američkih dolara u zlato – zlatni standard – nikada se nije vratio.

Od 1971. godine, čitav globalni monetarni sistem pokreće se tradicionalnim “fiat” valutama: poverenjem u vladine institucije da održavaju valutni sistem.

Većina valuta podržana je kombinacijom duga njihove vlade i drugih tradicionalnih valuta poput dolara i evra. Papirne valute više nisu podržane zlatom, imovinom koja je više od 5000 godina služila kao težak novac.

Danas vas vlade prisiljavaju da plaćate porez u njihovoj valuti i manipulišu saznanjima oko novca kako bi osigurale da potražnja za njihovom valutom ostane velika.

To im omogućava da neprestano štampaju više valuta, da bi je potrošili na vladine projekte, uzrokujući inflaciju cena koja jede i smanjuje bogatstvo i plate.

Američka vlada sada prodaje državne obveznice (dugove), poznate kao obveznice Trezora SAD, eng. US Treasuries, komercijalnim bankama u zamenu za američke dolare.

Vlada koristi te dolare za finansiranje svog budžetskog deficita. Komercijalne banke prodaju mnoge obveznice Trezora SAD, koje su kupile, američkoj centralnoj banci, Federalnim Rezervama.

Federalne rezerve plaćaju komercijalnim bankama sveže štampanim novcem “pomoću računara i upisivanjem količine na račun”, kako je rekao bivši predsednik Fed-a Ben Bernanke.

Ove komercijalne banke često zarađuju samo kupujući obveznice Trezora SAD od države i prodajući ih centralnoj banci. Kupujte nisko, prodajte visoko.

Centralne banke ovaj proces kupovine državnog duga – odnosno pozajmljivanja novca državi – nazivaju operacijama otvorenog tržišta.

Kada centralna banka odjednom kupi velike iznose duga, oni to nazivaju kvantitativnim ublažavanjem. Centralne banke javno najavljuju kupovinu državnog duga, ali vrlo malo ljudi razume šta to zapravo znači.

Euro, jen i svaka druga valuta koja se danas koristi funkcionišu slično kao američki dolar.

Da li će SAD ikada vratiti svoj nacionalni dug? Neobična stvar u vezi sa državnim dugom SAD-a je ta što vlada poseduje štampariju potrebnu za njegovu otplatu.

Kao rezultat toga, kada vlada duguje novac, oni samo pozajme još više novca da bi otplatile taj dug, povećavajući nacionalni dug.

Ako vam ovo zvuči kao Ponzijeva piramidalna šema, to je zato što ona to i jeste – najveća Ponzijeva šema u istoriji. Kao i svaka Ponzijeva šema, nastaviće se sve dok su ljudi koji kupuju Ponzijevu šemu budu uvereni da će im biti plaćeno nazad.

Ako ljudi i nacije prestanu da se zadužuju i koriste američke dolare jer nemaju poverenja u američku vladu ili vide da cena robe raste (tj. dolar postaje sve manje vredan), potražnja za dolarom će opadati, što će izazvati začaranu spiralu.

Ova spirala često završi u hiperinflaciji, kao što smo videli u novijoj istoriji sa Jugoslavijom, Venecuelom, Argentinom, Zimbabveom i mnogim drugim državama.

Ovo je način kako funkcioniše novac na vašem bankovnom računu. Novac svake nacije na svetu pati od istih problema kao i perle i novčanice u pričama o Njutoniji i Kejnslandu.

Kako banke i vlade kradu tvoj novac?

Tokom vekova, stigli smo do monetarnog sistema u kojem banke i vlade mogu da štampaju novu valutu za finansiranje svojih operacija i svojih prijatelja u zločinu, dok kradu bogatstvo svojih građana.

Šta će se desiti sa svetom kada novac bude mogao da štampa svaki narod na planeti?

• Bogatstvo onih koji su blizu pravljenja nove valute se povećava
• Vlada i politički povlašćena klasa ljudi, imaju pristup novoštampanom novcu pre svih ostalih, pa mogu da ga potroše pre nego što cene porastu. Na ovaj efekat pokazao je ekonomista Richard Cantillon sredinom 1700-ih i poznat je kao Cantillonov Efekat.
• Cena robe raste (poznato kao inflacija
• Ne raste sve roba istovremeno u ceni. Roba blizu mesta gde se proizvodi nova valuta – finansijski sektor i vlada – prva raste, i odatle uzrokuje efekt talasa na cene.
• Inflacija se često predstavlja kao promena cene potrošačke korpe, poznata kao Indeks Potrošačkih Cena, eng. Consumer Price Index (CPI). Vlada ima alate za manipulisanje ovim brojem kako bi osigurala da se ona čini niskom i stabilnom, kao što je objašnjeno u našem članku o inflaciji.
• Finansijska imovina često primećuje ogromnu inflaciju, ali bankari to ne nazivaju inflacijom – oni kažu da naša ekonomija cveta! Nakon što su američke Federalne rezerve učetvorostručile ponudu američkih dolara u šest godina nakon finansijske krize 2008. godine, banke koje su dobile te nove dolare, kupile su akcije i obveznice, stvarajući ogroman balon u cenama ove imovine.
• Štednja i životni standard stanovništva se smanjuju
• Plate su jedna od poslednjih “cena” u ekonomiji koja se prilagođava, jer se često povećavaju samo jednom godišnje. U međuvremenu, cene dnevnih potrepština te osobe koja zaradjuje platu neprestano rastu kako novi novac kruži ekonomijom.
• Najviše su pogođeni oni koji žive od plate do plate – a to je 70% Amerikanaca.
• Razlike u prihodima između bogatih i siromašnih se povećavaju, kao što se vidi na grafikonu ispod.

*Koncentracija dohotka na vrhu naglo je porasla od 1970-ih

Zašto i dalje imamo isti monetarni sistem?

Ako ovaj sistem bogate još više obogaćuje, a siromašne još više osiromašuje, dovodeći do političke nestabilnosti, zašto ga onda ne bismo promenili?

Najveći razlog zašto se ništa ne menja je verovatno to što puno toga ne znamo o samom sistemu. Svi svakodnevno koristimo valute svojih vlada, ali većina nas ne razume kako sistem funkcioniše i šta on čini našim društvima.

Obrazovni sistem, mediji i finansijski stručnjaci neprestano nam govore da je monetarni sistem previše komplikovan da bi ga normalni ljudi razumeli. Mnogi od nas se zato i ne trude da pokušaju.

Još nekoliko razloga zašto ovaj sistem nastavlja da opstaje:

• Mnogo je ljudi koji imaju direktnu korist od štampanja novog novca.
• Ti ljudi ne žele nikakve promene i bore se da zadrže tu moć.
• Nacionalne valute su često pogodne
• Kreditne kartice, online bankarstvo i još mnogo toga čine upravljanje nacionalnim valutama i njihovo trošenje lakim i jednostavnim.
• Građani moraju da plaćaju porez u svojoj nacionalnoj valuti
• To stvara potražnju za tom valutom od svih građana, povećavajući njenu vrednost.
• Glavna međunarodna tržišta, poput nafte, denominirana su u dolarima.
• Nafta je potrebna svakoj zemlji na planeti, ali pošto mnogi ne mogu da je proizvode, moraju da je kupuju na međunarodnim berzama. Od 1970-ih na ovim berzama gotovo sva nafta se prodaje za dolare, što stvara potražnju za dolarima. Da bi se odmaknule od ovog sistema, zemlje bi trebale da pronađu novu valutu ili robu za trgovinu naftom, što zahteva vreme i rizike.
• Nije postojala dobra alternativa
• Uz globalnu ekonomiju u realnom vremenu, naš sistem digitalnog bankarstva koji koristi nacionalne valute je pogodan. Transakcija u tvrdom novcu poput zlata bila bi previše nezgrapna za današnji svet. Digitalna valuta pod nazivom Bitcoin, predstavljena 2009. godine, je rastuća alternativa koja nudi čvrst novac koji se kreće brzinom interneta.

Šta je novac, i zašto trebate da brinete?

Novac je alat koji olakšava razmenu dobara. Kao i svako drugo dobro, novac se pridržava zakona ponude i potražnje – povećanje potražnje povećaće njegovu vrednost, a povećanje ponude smanjiće njegovu vrednost.

Na ovaj način novac se ne razlikuje od kuće ili piletine. Međutim, velika prodajnost novca znači da je potražnja za njim uvek velika. Kao rezultat, novac mora biti težak za proizvodnju (a samim tim i ograničen u ponudi) ili će ga onaj ko ga može napraviti, stvoriti toliko, da vremenom više neće služiti kao zaliha vrednosti. Uskoro će izgubiti svoje funkcije kao sredstvo razmene i obračunske jedinice.

Najbolji novac u datoj ekonomiji je onaj koji se najslobodnije kreće – svi ga žele, lako je obaviti transakcije sa njim i koji sa vremenom dobro drži svoju vrednost. Nijedan novac nije savršen u svemu ovome, a neki ističu jednu funkciju novca na štetu drugih.

Iako se istorija ne ponavlja, ona se rimuje, a usponi i padovi monetarnih sistema imaju jasne ritmove. Uspon i pad monetarnog sistema često sledi opšti obrazac koji smo videli u pričama o agri perlama i Kejnslandu: pojavljuje se odredjenji oblik novca koji pomaže ljudima da efikasnije trguju i štede, ali na kraju gubi na vrednosti kada neko shvati kako da ga jeftino stvori u velikoj količini. Međutim, tokom dugog perioda vremena, monetarni sistemi su se poboljšali u sve tri funkcije novca.

Na primer, zlato je tokom vremena dobro služilo kao zaliha vrednosti. Međutim, naša međusobno povezana ekonomija ne bi mogla efikasno da funkcioniše ako bi trebalo da fizičko zlato zamenimo robom i uslugama. Mnogo je lakše kretati se na papirnom i digitalnom novcu, ali istorija nam govori da su vlade i bankari iskoristili ove oblike novca za krađu bogatstva putem inflacije.

Današnji globalni monetarni sistem je vrlo zgodan, a digitalna plaćanja i kreditne kartice olakšavaju trošenje novca. Ovo skriva stalnu inflaciju koja nagriza vrednost svake jedinice novca i dovodi do sve većeg jaza u bogatstvu.

Nadam se da je ovaj članak proširio vaše razumevanje novca i njegove uloge u društvu. Ovo je samo početak svega što treba istražiti o novcu: za kasnije su sačuvane teme o inflaciji, kamatnim stopama, pozajmljivanju, poslovnim ciklusima i još mnogo toga.

Efikasnija Ušteda Novca

Možda se pitate kako zaštititi svoju štednju kada svaki oblik često korišćenog novca i investicija pati od inflacije ponude – koja umanjuje vrednost i prenosi bogatstvo onima koji mogu da stvore novac ili investiciju. Možda se čini da se ništa na planeti danas ne može kvalifikovati kao ‘težak’ novac, ali dve stvari ipak ostaju: zlato i njegov noviji rođak Bitcoin. Obe ove stvari je neverovatno teško proizvesti, a jedna od njih se kreće brzinom interneta i može se čuvati u vašem mozgu.

Ako želite da saznate više o Bitcoin-u kao sredstvu za zaštitu vaše ušteđevine, pročitajte ovde. Ako ste već spremni za kupovinu Bitcoin-a, pogledajte moj vodič za kupovinu Bitcoin-a. Možete početi sa investiranjem sa samo 5 ili 10 €.

Zasluge

Hvala svima koji su pomogli u izradi i uređivanju ove serije o novcu: @ck_SNARKS, @CryptoRothbard, Neil Woodfine, Emil Sandstedt, Taylor Pearson, Parker Lewis, Jason Choi, mojoj porodici i mnogim drugima.

Hvala svima koji su ovo inspirisali i razvili ključne ideje koje su ovde primenjene: Friedrich Hayek, Carl Menger, Ludwig Von Mises, Murray Rothbard, Saifedean Ammous, Dan Held, Pierre Rochard, Stephan Livera, Michael Goldstein, i mnogi drugi.

Molim vas da šerujete! Ako vam je ovaj članak otvorio oči o tome kako funkcioniše naš novac i finansijski sistem, kontaktirajte me ili ostavite komentar!

Ako vam se sviđa moj rad, molim vas da ga podelite sa svojim prijateljima i porodicom. Cilj mi je da svima pružim pogled u ekonomiju i na to kako ona utiče na njihov život.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

litepub

A Go library that abstracts all the burdensome ActivityPub things and provides just the right amount of helpers necessary to integrate an existing website into the "fediverse" (what an odious name). Made for the gravity integration.

• https://godoc.org/github.com/fiatjaf/litepub

See also

-

@ 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.

@ fd208ee8:0fd927c1

E-cash are coupons or tokens for Bitcoin, or Bitcoin debt notes that the mint issues. The e-cash states, essentially, "IoU 2900 sats".

They're redeemable for Bitcoin on Lightning (hard money), and therefore can be used as cash (softer money), so long as the mint has a good reputation. That means that they're less fungible than Lightning because the e-cash from one mint can be more or less valuable than the e-cash from another. If a mint is buggy, offline, or disappears, then the e-cash is unreedemable.

It also means that e-cash is more anonymous than Lightning, and that the sender and receiver's wallets don't need to be online, to transact. Nutzaps now add the possibility of parking transactions one level farther out, on a relay. The same relays that cannot keep npub profiles and follow lists consistent will now do monetary transactions.

What we then have is * a transaction on a relay that triggers * a transaction on a mint that triggers * a transaction on Lightning that triggers * a transaction on Bitcoin.

Which means that every relay that stores the nuts is part of a wildcat banking system. Which is fine, but relay operators should consider whether they wish to carry the associated risks and liabilities. They should also be aware that they should implement the appropriate features in their relay, such as expiration tags (nuts rot after 2 weeks), and to make sure that only expired nuts are deleted.

There will be plenty of specialized relays for this, so don't feel pressured to join in, and research the topic carefully, for yourself.

https://github.com/nostr-protocol/nips/blob/master/60.md

@ eb0157af:77ab6c55

Vivek Ramaswamy’s company bets on distressed bitcoin claims as its Bitcoin treasury strategy moves forward.

Strive Enterprises, an asset management firm co-founded by Vivek Ramaswamy, is exploring the acquisition of distressed bitcoin claims, with particular interest in around 75,000 BTC tied to the Mt. Gox bankruptcy estate. This move is part of the company’s broader strategy to build a Bitcoin treasury ahead of its planned merger with Asset Entities.

According to a document filed on May 20 with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Strive has partnered with 117 Castell Advisory Group to “identify and evaluate” distressed Bitcoin claims with confirmed legal judgments. Among these are approximately 75,000 BTC connected to Mt. Gox, with an estimated market value of $8 billion at current prices.

Essentially, Strive aims to acquire rights to bitcoins currently tied up in legal disputes, which can be purchased at a discount by those willing to take on the risk and wait for eventual recovery.

In a post on X, Strive’s CFO, Ben Pham, stated:

“Strive intends to use all available mechanisms, including novel financial strategies not used by other Bitcoin treasury companies, to maximize its exposure to the asset.”

The company also plans to buy cash at a discount by merging with publicly traded companies holding more cash than their stock value, using the excess funds to purchase additional Bitcoin.

Mt. Gox, the exchange that collapsed in 2014, is currently in the process of repaying creditors, with a deadline set for October 31, 2025.

In its SEC filing, Strive declared:

“This strategy is intended to allow Strive the opportunity to purchase Bitcoin exposure at a discount to market price, enhancing Bitcoin per share and supporting its goal of outperforming Bitcoin over the long run.”

At the beginning of May, Strive announced its merger plan with Asset Entities, a deal that would create the first publicly listed asset management firm focused on Bitcoin. The resulting company aims to join the growing number of firms adopting a Bitcoin treasury strategy.

The corporate treasury trend

Strive’s initiative to accumulate bitcoin mirrors that of other companies like Strategy and Japan’s Metaplanet. On May 19, Strategy, led by Michael Saylor, announced the purchase of an additional 7,390 BTC for $764.9 million, raising its total holdings to 576,230 BTC. On the same day, Metaplanet revealed it had acquired another 1,004 BTC, increasing its total to 7,800 BTC.

The post Bitcoin in Strive’s sights: 75,000 BTC from Mt. Gox among its targets appeared first on Atlas21.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

questo.email

This was a thing done in a brief period I liked the idea of "indiewebcamp", a stupid movement of people saying everybody should have their site and post their lives in it.

From the GitHub postmortem:

questo.email was a service that integrated email addresses into the indieweb ecosystem by providing email-to-note and email-to-webmention triggers, which could be used for people to comment through webmention using their email addresses, and be replied, and also for people to send messages from their sites directly to the email addresses of people they knew; Questo also worked as an IndieAuth provider that used people's email addresses and Mozilla Persona.

It was live from December 2014 through December 2015.

Here's how the home page looked:

• https://github.com/fiatjaf/questo.email

See also

• jekmentions, another thing related to "indieweb"

@ e3ba5e1a:5e433365

My favorite line in any Marvel movie ever is in “Captain America.” After Captain America launches seemingly a hopeless assault on Red Skull’s base and is captured, we get this line:

“Arrogance may not be a uniquely American trait, but I must say, you do it better than anyone.”

Yesterday, I came across a comment on the song Devil Went Down to Georgia that had a very similar feel to it:

America has seemingly always been arrogant, in a uniquely American way. Manifest Destiny, for instance. The rest of the world is aware of this arrogance, and mocks Americans for it. A central point in modern US politics is the deriding of racist, nationalist, supremacist Americans.

That’s not what I see. I see American Arrogance as not only a beautiful statement about what it means to be American. I see it as an ode to the greatness of humanity in its purest form.

For most countries, saying “our nation is the greatest” is, in fact, twinged with some level of racism. I still don’t have a problem with it. Every group of people should be allowed to feel pride in their accomplishments. The destruction of the human spirit since the end of World War 2, where greatness has become a sin and weakness a virtue, has crushed the ability of people worldwide to strive for excellence.

But I digress. The fears of racism and nationalism at least have a grain of truth when applied to other nations on the planet. But not to America.

That’s because the definition of America, and the prototype of an American, has nothing to do with race. The definition of Americanism is freedom. The founding of America is based purely on liberty. On the God-given rights of every person to live life the way they see fit.

American Arrogance is not a statement of racial superiority. It’s barely a statement of national superiority (though it absolutely is). To me, when an American comments on the greatness of America, it’s a statement about freedom. Freedom will always unlock the greatness inherent in any group of people. Americans are definitionally better than everyone else, because Americans are freer than everyone else. (Or, at least, that’s how it should be.)

In Devil Went Down to Georgia, Johnny is approached by the devil himself. He is challenged to a ridiculously lopsided bet: a golden fiddle versus his immortal soul. He acknowledges the sin in accepting such a proposal. And yet he says, “God, I know you told me not to do this. But I can’t stand the affront to my honor. I am the greatest. The devil has nothing on me. So God, I’m gonna sin, but I’m also gonna win.”

Libertas magnitudo est

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

idea: Rumple

a payments network based on trust channels

This is the description of a Lightning-like network that will work only with credit or trust-based channels and exist alongside the normal Lightning Network. I imagine some people will think this is undesirable and at the same time very easy to do (such that if it doesn't exist yet it must be because no one cares), but in fact it is a very desirable thing -- which I hope I can establish below -- and at the same time a very non-trivial problem to solve, as the history of Ryan Fugger's Ripple project and posterior copies of it show.

Read these first to get the full context:

1. Ryan Fugger's Ripple
2. Ripple and the problem of the decentralized commit
3. The Lightning Network solves the problem of the decentralized commit
4. Parallel Chains

Explanation about the name

Since we're copying the fundamental Ripple idea from Ryan Fugger and since the name "Ripple" is now associated with a scam coin called XRP, and since Ryan Fugger has changed the name of his old website "Ripplepay" to "Rumplepay", we will follow his lead here. If "Ripplepay" was the name of a centralized prototype to the open peer-to-peer network "Ripple", now that the centralized version is called "Rumplepay" the peer-to-peer version must be called "Rumple".

Now the idea

Basically we copy the Lightning Network, but without HTLCs or channels being opened and closed with funds committed to them on multisig Bitcoin transactions published to the blockchain. Instead we use pure trust relationships like the original Ripple concept.

And we use the blockchain commit method, but instead of spending an absurd amount of money to use the actual Bitcoin blockchain instead we use a parallel chain.

How exactly -- a protocol proposal attempt

It could work like this:

The parallel chain, or "Rumple Chain"

1. We define a parallel chain with a genesis block;
2. Following blocks must contain a. the ID of the previous block; b. a list of up to 32768 entries of arbitrary 32-byte values; c. an ID constituted by sha256(the previous block ID + the merkle root of all the entries)
3. To be mined, each parallel block must be included in the Bitcoin chain according as explained above.

Now that we have a structure for a simple "blockchain" that is completely useless, just blocks over blocks of meaningless values, we proceed to the next step of assigning meaning to these values.

The off-chain payments network, or "Rumple Network"

1. We create a network of nodes that can talk to each other via TCP messages (all details are the same as the Lightning Network, except where mentioned otherwise);
2. These nodes can create trust channels to each other. These channels are backed by nothing except the willingness of one peer to pay the other what is owed.
3. When Alice creates a trust channel with Bob (Alice trusts Bob), contrary to what happens in the Lightning Network, it's A that can immediately receive payments through that channel, and everything A receives will be an IOU from Bob to Alice. So Alice should never open a channel to Bob unless Alice trusts Bob. But also Alice can choose the amount of trust it has in Bob, she can, for example, open a very small channel with Bob, which means she will only lose a few satoshis if Bob decides to exit scam her. (in the original Ripple examples these channels were always depicted as friend relationships, and they can continue being that, but it's expected -- given the experience of the Lightning Network -- that the bulk of the channels will exist between users and wallet provider nodes that will act as hubs).
4. As Alice receive a payment through her channel with Bob, she becomes a creditor and Bob a debtor, i.e., the balance of the channel moves a little to her side. Now she can use these funds to make payments over that channel (or make a payment that combines funds from multiple channels using MPP).
5. If at any time Alice decides to close her channel with Bob, she can send all the funds she has standing there to somewhere else (for example, another channel she has with someone else, another wallet somewhere else, a shop that is selling some good or service, or a service that will aggregate all funds from all her channels and send a transaction to the Bitcoin chain on her behalf).
6. If at any time Bob leaves the network Alice is entitled by Bob's cryptographic signatures to knock on his door and demand payment, or go to a judge and ask him to force Bob to pay, or share the signatures and commitments online and hurt Bob's reputation with the rest of the network (but yes, none of these things is good enough and if Bob is a very dishonest person none of these things is likely to save Alice's funds).

The payment flow

1. Suppose there exists a route Alice->Bob->Carol and Alice wants to send a payment to Carol.
2. First Alice reads an invoice she received from Carol. The invoice (which can be pretty similar or maybe even the same as BOLT11) contains a payment hash h and information about how to reach Carol's node, optionally an amount. Let's say it's 100 satoshis.
3. Using the routing information she gathered, Alice builds an onion and sends it to Bob, at the same time she offers to Bob a "conditional IOU". That stands for a signed commitment that Alice will owe Bob an 100 satoshis if in the next 50 blocks of the Rumple Chain there appears a block containing the preimage p such that sha256(p) == h.
4. Bob peels the onion and discovers that he must forward that payment to Carol, so he forwards the peeled onion and offers a conditional IOU to Carol with the same h. Bob doesn't know Carol is the final recipient of the payment, it could potentially go on and on.
5. When Carol gets the conditional IOU from Bob, she makes a list of all the nodes who have announced themselves as miners (which is not something I have mentioned before, but nodes that are acting as miners will must announce themselves somehow) and are online and bidding for the next Rumple block. Each of these miners will have previously published a random 32-byte value v they they intend to include in their next block.
6. Carol sends payments through routes to all (or a big number) of these miners, but this time the conditional IOU contains two conditions (values that must appear in a block for the IOU to be valid): p such that sha256(p) == h (the same that featured in the invoice) and v (which must be unique and constant for each miner, something that is easily verifiable by Carol beforehand). Also, instead of these conditions being valid for the next 50 blocks they are valid only for the single next block.
7. Now Carol broadcasts p to the mempool and hopes one of the miners to which she sent conditional payments sees it and, allured by the possibility of cashing in Carol's payment, includes p in the next block. If that does not happen, Carol can try again in the next block.

Why bother with this at all?

1. The biggest advantage of Lightning is its openness

   It has been said multiple times that if trust is involved then we don't need Lightning, we can use Coinbase, or worse, Paypal. This is very wrong. Lightning is good specially because it serves as a bridge between Coinbase, Paypal, other custodial provider and someone running their own node. All these can transact freely across the network and pay each other without worrying about who is in which provider or setup.

   Rumple inherits that openness. In a Rumple Network anyone is free to open new trust channels and immediately route payments to anyone else.

   Also, since Rumple payments are also based on the reveal of a preimage it can do swaps with Lightning inside a payment route from day one (by which I mean one can pay from Rumple to Lightning and vice-versa).

2. Rumple fixes Lightning's fragility

   Lightning is too fragile.

   It's known that Lightning is vulnerable to multiple attacks -- like the flood-and-loot attack, for example, although not an attack that's easy to execute, it's still dangerous even if failed. Given the existence of these attacks, it's important to not ever open channels with random anonymous people. Some degree of trust must exist between peers.

   But one does not even have to consider attacks. The creation of HTLCs is a liability that every node has to do multiple times during its life. Every initiated, received or forwarded payment require adding one HTLC then removing it from the commitment transaction.

   Another issue that makes trust needed between peers is the fact that channels can be closed unilaterally. Although this is a feature, it is also a bug when considering high-fee environments. Imagine you pay $2 in fees to open a channel, your peer may close that unilaterally in the next second and then you have to pay another $15 to close the channel. The opener pays (this is also a feature that can double as a bug by itself). Even if it's not you opening the channel, a peer can open a channel with you, make a payment, then clone the channel, and now you're left with, say, an output of 800 satoshis, which is equal to zero if network fees are high.

   So you should only open channels with people you know and know aren't going to actively try to hack you and people who are not going to close channels and impose unnecessary costs on you. But even considering a fully trusted Lightning Network, even if -- to be extreme -- you only opened channels with yourself, these channels would still be fragile. If some HTLC gets stuck for any reason (peer offline or some weird small incompatibility between node softwares) and you're forced to close the channel because of that, there are the extra costs of sweeping these UTXO outputs plus the total costs of closing and reopening a channel that shouldn't have been closed in the first place. Even if HTLCs don't get stuck, a fee renegotiation event during a mempool spike may cause channels to force-close, become valueless or settle for very high closing fee.

   Some of these issues are mitigated by Eltoo, others by only having channels with people you trust. Others referenced above, plus the the griefing attack and in general the ability of anyone to spam the network for free with payments that can be pending forever or a lot of payments fail repeatedly makes it very fragile.

   Rumple solves most of these problems by not having to touch the blockchain at all. Fee negotiation makes no sense. Opening and closing channels is free. Flood-and-loot is a non-issue. The griefing attack can be still attempted as funds in trust channels must be reserved like on Lightning, but since there should be no theoretical limit to the number of prepared payments a channel can have, the griefing must rely on actual amounts being committed, which prevents large attacks from being performed easily.

3. Rumple fixes Lightning's unsolvable reputation issues

   In the Lightning Conference 2019, Rusty Russell promised there would be pre-payments on Lightning someday, since everybody was aware of potential spam issues and pre-payments would be the way to solve that. Fast-forward to November 2020 and these pre-payments have become an apparently unsolvable problem[^thread-402]: no one knows how to implement them reliably without destroying privacy completely or introducing worse problems.

   Replacing these payments with tables of reputation between peers is also an unsolved problem[^reputation-lightning], for the same reasons explained in the thread above.

4. Rumple solves the hot wallet problem

   Since you don't have to use Bitcoin keys or sign transactions with a Rumple node, only your channel trust is at risk at any time.

5. Rumple ends custodianship

   Since no one is storing other people's funds, a big hub or wallet provider can be used in multiple payment routes, but it cannot be immediately classified as a "custodian". At best, it will be a big debtor.

6. Rumple is fun

   Opening channels with strangers is boring. Opening channels with friends and people you trust even a little makes that relationship grow stronger and the trust be reinforced. (But of course, like it happens in the Lightning Network today, if Rumple is successful the bulk of trust will be from isolated users to big reliable hubs.)

Questions or potential issues

1. So many advantages, yes, but trusted? Custodial? That's easy and stupid!

   Well, an enormous part of the current Lightning Network (and also onchain Bitcoin wallets) already rests on trust, mainly trust between users and custodial wallet providers like ZEBEDEE, Alby, Wallet-of-Satoshi and others. Worse: on the current Lightning Network users not only trust, they also expose their entire transaction history to these providers[^hosted-channels].

   Besides that, as detailed in point 3 of the previous section, there are many unsolvable issues on the Lightning protocol that make each sovereign node dependent on some level of trust in its peers (and the network in general dependent on trusting that no one else will spam it to death).

   So, given the current state of the Lightning Network, to trust peers like Rumple requires is not a giant change -- but it is still a significant change: in Rumple you shouldn't open a large trust channel with someone just because it looks trustworthy, you must personally know that person and only put in what you're willing to lose. In known brands that have reputation to lose you can probably deposit more trust, same for long-term friends, and that's all. Still it is probably good enough, given the existence of MPP payments and the fact that the purpose of Rumple is to be a payments network for day-to-day purchases and not a way to buy real estate.

2. Why would anyone run a node in this parallel chain?

   I don't know. Ideally every server running a Rumple Network node will be running a Bitcoin node and a Rumple chain node. Besides using it to confirm and publish your own Rumple Network transactions it can be set to do BMM mining automatically and maybe earn some small fees comparable to running a Lightning routing node or a JoinMarket yield generator.

   Also it will probably be very lightweight, as pruning is completely free and no verification-since-the-genesis-block will take place.

3. What is the maturity of the debt that exists in the Rumple Network or its legal status?

   By default it is to be understood as being payable on demand for payments occurring inside the network (as credit can be used to forward or initiate payments by the creditor using that channel). But details of settlement outside the network or what happens if one of the peers disappears cannot be enforced or specified by the network.

   Perhaps some standard optional settlement methods (like a Bitcoin address) can be announced and negotiated upon channel creation inside the protocol, but nothing more than that.

[^thread-402]: Read at least the first 10 messages of the thread to see how naïve proposals like you and me could have thought about are brought up and then dismantled very carefully by the group of people most committed to getting Lightning to work properly. [^reputation-lightning]: See also the footnote at Ripple and the problem of the decentralized commit. [^hosted-channels]: Although that second part can be solved by hosted channels.

@ e3ba5e1a:5e433365

I got into a friendly discussion on X regarding health insurance. The specific question was how to deal with health insurance companies (presumably unfairly) denying claims? My answer, as usual: get government out of it!

The US healthcare system is essentially the worst of both worlds:

• Unlike full single payer, individuals incur high costs
• Unlike a true free market, regulation causes increases in costs and decreases competition among insurers

I'm firmly on the side of moving towards the free market. (And I say that as someone living under a single payer system now.) Here's what I would do:

• Get rid of tax incentives that make health insurance tied to your employer, giving individuals back proper freedom of choice.
• Reduce regulations significantly.

• In the short term, some people will still get rejected claims and other obnoxious behavior from insurance companies. We address that in two ways:

  1. Due to reduced regulations, new insurance companies will be able to enter the market offering more reliable coverage and better rates, and people will flock to them because they have the freedom to make their own choices.
  2. Sue the asses off of companies that reject claims unfairly. And ideally, as one of the few legitimate roles of government in all this, institute new laws that limit the ability of fine print to allow insurers to escape their responsibilities. (I'm hesitant that the latter will happen due to the incestuous relationship between Congress/regulators and insurers, but I can hope.)

Will this magically fix everything overnight like politicians normally promise? No. But it will allow the market to return to a healthy state. And I don't think it will take long (order of magnitude: 5-10 years) for it to come together, but that's just speculation.

And since there's a high correlation between those who believe government can fix problems by taking more control and demanding that only credentialed experts weigh in on a topic (both points I strongly disagree with BTW): I'm a trained actuary and worked in the insurance industry, and have directly seen how government regulation reduces competition, raises prices, and harms consumers.

And my final point: I don't think any prior art would be a good comparison for deregulation in the US, it's such a different market than any other country in the world for so many reasons that lessons wouldn't really translate. Nonetheless, I asked Grok for some empirical data on this, and at best the results of deregulation could be called "mixed," but likely more accurately "uncertain, confused, and subject to whatever interpretation anyone wants to apply."

https://x.com/i/grok/share/Zc8yOdrN8lS275hXJ92uwq98M

@ eb0157af:77ab6c55

According to the ECB Executive Board member, the launch of the digital euro depends on the timing of the EU regulation.

The European Central Bank (ECB) is making progress in preparing for the digital euro. According to Piero Cipollone, ECB Executive Board member and coordinator of the project, the technical phase “is proceeding quickly and on schedule,” but moving to operational implementation still requires political approval of the regulation at the European level.

Speaking at the ‘Voices on the Future’ event organized by Ansa and Asvis, Cipollone outlined a possible timeline:

“If the regulation is approved at the start of 2026 — in the best-case scenario for the European legislative process — we could see the first transactions with the digital euro by mid-2028.”

Cipollone also highlighted Europe’s current dependence on electronic payment systems managed by non-European companies:

“Today in Europe, whenever we don’t use cash, any transaction online or at the supermarket has to go through credit cards, with their fees. The payment system relies on companies that aren’t based in Europe. You can see why it would make sense to have a system fully under our control.”

For the ECB board member, the digital euro would act as a direct alternative to cash in the digital world, working like “a banknote you can spend anywhere in Europe for any purpose.”

The digital euro project is part of the ECB’s broader strategy to strengthen the independence of Europe’s financial system. According to Cipollone and the Central Bank, Europe’s digital currency would be a key step toward greater autonomy in electronic payments, reducing reliance on infrastructure and services outside the European Union.

The post ECB: digital euro by mid-2028, says Cipollone appeared first on Atlas21.

@ eb0157af:77ab6c55

A new study reveals: 4 out of 5 Americans would like the US to convert some of its gold into Bitcoin.

A recent survey conducted by the Nakamoto Project revealed that a majority of Americans support converting a portion of the United States’ gold reserves into Bitcoin. The survey, carried out online by Qualtrics between February and March 2025, involved 3,345 participants with demographic characteristics representative of US census standards. Most respondents expressed a desire to convert between 1% and 30% of the gold reserves into BTC.

Troy Cross, co-founder of the Nakamoto Project, stated:

“When given a slider and asked to advise the US government on the right proportion of Bitcoin and gold, subjects were very reluctant to put that slider on 0% Bitcoin and 100% gold. Instead, they settled around 10% Bitcoin.”

One significant finding from the research is the correlation between age and openness to Bitcoin: younger respondents showed a greater inclination toward the cryptocurrency compared to older generations.

A potential US strategy

Bo Hines, a White House advisor, is promoting an initiative for the Treasury Department to acquire Bitcoin by selling off a portion of its gold. Under the proposed plan, the government could acquire up to 1 million BTC over the next five years.

To finance these purchases, the government plans to sell Federal Reserve gold certificates. The proposal aligns with Senator Cynthia Lummis’ 2025 Bitcoin Act, which aims to declare Bitcoin a critical national strategic asset.

Currently, the United States holds 8,133 metric tons of gold, valued at over $830 billion, and about 200,000 BTC, valued at $21 billion.

The post The majority in the US wants to convert part of the gold reserves into Bitcoin appeared first on Atlas21.

@ 9e69e420:d12360c2

Secretary of State Marco Rubio issued new guidance halting spending on most foreign aid grants for 90 days, including military assistance to Ukraine. This immediate order shocked State Department officials and mandates “stop-work orders” on nearly all existing foreign assistance awards.

While it allows exceptions for military financing to Egypt and Israel, as well as emergency food assistance, it restricts aid to key allies like Ukraine, Jordan, and Taiwan. The guidance raises potential liability risks for the government due to unfulfilled contracts.

A report will be prepared within 85 days to recommend which programs to continue or discontinue.