@ 6e0ea5d6:0327f353

Ascolta bene! Allow me to sit by your side, amico mio, and—just like a son—I will tell you a harsh truth: no matter the circumstances, the blame lies with you for everything that happens within your realm of responsibility. Your family, your business, your ventures—whatever it may be—it doesn’t matter if it was by action or omission, if something went wrong, take the blame and resolve it however you need to! Men like us, who live in hard battles, do not have the luxury of handing over the burdens of our responsibilities to others! We live in a time where everyone is encouraged to place the blame for their failures on others or on abstractions. To hell with all that nonsense, damn it! Never feel comfortable or relieved when you hear stories of people who have made the same mistakes or have the same flaws as you. Knowing that others have failed in the same goals should only serve as a simple acknowledgment that nothing is easy. However, don’t allow yourself to lessen your effort or blame when you see others’ difficulties. On the other hand, don’t deceive yourself into trying to become a productivity machine. Learn to be rational, but always strive for the best from yourself, without pushing your limits beyond what your mind and body can endure. Thank you for reading, my friend! If this message resonated with you, consider leaving your "🥃" as a token of appreciation. A toast to our family!

@ 2e8970de:63345c7a

 The Atlantas FED GDP indicator GDPNow was recently adjusted to -1.5% (https://stacker.news/items/899962). Now it got revised even further down to -2.8%. Mind you, this is a change of almost 7% down from almost 4% growth to almost 3% reduction within a month! https://x.com/AtlantaFed/status/1896598929564725716 originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/902707

@ 88b8f4a8:0b652722

Las motivaciones para configurar un segundo router pueden ser: * Como repetidor wifi en una zona apartada de la casa donde no llega de habitual. * Configurar el segundo router con VPN (probándolo, la configuración en el principal funciona pero aplicándola en un segundo router conectado al principal no usa la VPN, intentaré resolverlo). * Usar el segundo para experimentación. * Si se te ocurren más motivos coméntalos. Para empezar, debes desactivar sus funciones de router (como DHCP y NAT) y configurarlo para que simplemente extienda la red de tu router principal. Aquí te explico cómo hacerlo paso a paso: **1. Conectar los Routers Físicamente** * Conecta un cable Ethernet desde un puerto LAN del router principal a un puerto LAN del router OpenWrt. * No uses el puerto WAN del router OpenWrt, ya que no lo necesitarás en esta configuración. **2. Acceder al Router OpenWrt** * Conéctate al router OpenWrt mediante SSH o accede a la interfaz web (LuCI). En mi caso lo intenté por interfaz gráfica y no lo conseguí, así que continúo explicando solo mediante SSH. **3. Desactivar la Interfaz WAN** * Como no usarás la interfaz WAN, puedes desactivarla. * Edita el archivo /etc/config/network: ``` vi /etc/config/network ``` * Comenta o elimina la sección de la interfaz WAN, comentar es añadir un # delante. Por ejemplo: ``` # config interface 'wan' # option proto 'dhcp' # option ifname 'eth1' ``` **4. Configurar la Interfaz LAN** * Configura la interfaz LAN para que obtenga una dirección IP del router principal. * Edita el archivo ```/etc/config/network``` y modifica la sección de la interfaz LAN: ``` config interface 'lan' option proto 'static' option ifname 'br-lan' option ipaddr '192.168.1.2' # Dirección IP dentro del rango del router principal option netmask '255.255.255.0' option gateway '192.168.1.1' # IP del router principal option dns '1.1.1.1' # Servidores DNS ``` Asegúrate de que: * ```ipaddr``` sea una dirección IP dentro del rango del router principal (por ejemplo, si el router principal usa `192.168.1.x`, elige una IP como `192.168.1.2`). * `gateway` sea la IP del router principal (por ejemplo, `192.168.1.1`). * `dns` sean servidores DNS válidos (puedes usar los de Google: `8.8.8.8` y `8.8.4.4`). **5. Desactivar el Servidor DHCP en OpenWrt** * Como el router principal ya proporciona direcciones IP, debes desactivar el servidor DHCP en OpenWrt. * Edita el archivo /etc/config/dhcp: ``` vi /etc/config/dhcp ``` * Desactiva el servidor DHCP en la sección lan: * Con añadir al final "option ignore '1'" basta. No borres el resto de la sección. ``` config dhcp 'lan' option interface 'lan' option ignore '1' # Desactiva el servidor DHCP ``` **6. Configurar el Firewall** Como el router OpenWrt actuará como un AP, no necesita funciones de firewall. * Edita el archivo /etc/config/firewall y desactiva las reglas de firewall: ``` config zone option name 'lan' option input 'ACCEPT' option output 'ACCEPT' option forward 'ACCEPT' option network 'lan' ``` **7. Reiniciar el Router OpenWrt** Después de realizar los cambios, reinicia el router OpenWrt para aplicar la configuración: ``` reboot ``` **8. Probar la Configuración** Conecta un dispositivo a la red LAN o Wi-Fi del router OpenWrt y verifica si tiene acceso a Internet. * Prueba la conectividad con: ``` ping 8.8.8.8 ``` Espero que sirva de ayuda. Si tienes cualquier problema descríbemelo para aprender juntos.

@ eac63075:b4988b48

# **Abstract** This paper examines a hypothetical scenario in which the United States, under Trump’s leadership, withdraws from NATO and reduces its support for Europe, thereby enabling a Russian conquest of Ukraine and the subsequent expansion of Moscow’s influence over Eurasia, while the US consolidates its dominance over South America. Drawing on classical geopolitical theories—specifically those of Halford Mackinder, Alfred Thayer Mahan, Rudolf Kjellén, and Friedrich Ratzel—the study analyzes how these frameworks can elucidate the evolving power dynamics and territorial ambitions in a reconfigured global order. The discussion highlights Mackinder’s notion of the Eurasian Heartland and its strategic importance, Mahan’s emphasis on maritime power and control of strategic routes, Kjellén’s view of the state as an expanding organism, and Ratzel’s concept of Lebensraum as a justification for territorial expansion. The paper also explores contemporary developments, such as the US–Ukraine economic agreement and Trump’s overt territorial ambitions involving Greenland and Canada, in light of these theories. By juxtaposing traditional geopolitical concepts with current international relations, the study aims to shed light on the potential implications of such shifts for regional stability, global security, and the balance of power, particularly in relation to emerging neocolonial practices in Latin America. # **Introduction** In recent years, the geopolitical dynamics involving the United States, Russia, and Ukraine have sparked analyses from different theoretical perspectives. This paper examines recent events – presupposing a scenario in which Donald Trump withdraws the US from NATO and reduces its support for Europe, allowing a Russian conquest of Ukraine and the expansion of Moscow’s influence over Eurasia, while the US consolidates its dominance over South America – in light of classical geopolitical theories. The ideas of Halford Mackinder, Alfred Thayer Mahan, Rudolf Kjellén, and Friedrich Ratzel are used as reference points. The proposal is to impartially evaluate how each theory can elucidate the developments of this hypothetical scenario, relating Russian territorial expansion in Eurasia to the strategic retreat of the US to the Western Hemisphere. Initially, we will outline Mackinder’s conception of the Heartland (the central Eurasian territory) and the crucial role of Eastern Europe and Ukraine in the quest for global dominance. Next, we will discuss Mahan’s ideas regarding maritime power and the control of strategic routes, considering the impacts on the naval power balance among the US, Russia, and other maritime powers such as the United Kingdom and Japan. Subsequently, we will examine Kjellén’s organic theory of the state, interpreting the Russian expansionist strategy as a reflection of a state organism in search of vital space. In the same vein, Ratzel’s concept of “Lebensraum” will be explored, along with how Russia could justify territorial expansion based on resources and territory. Finally, the paper connects these theories to the current political context, analyzing the direct negotiations between Washington and Moscow (overlooking Ukraine and Europe), the US policy toward authoritarian regimes in Latin America, and the notion of a hemispheric division of power – the “Island of the Americas” under North American hegemony versus an Eurasia dominated by Russia. Lastly, it considers the possibility that such a geopolitical arrangement may foster the strengthening of authoritarian governments globally, rather than containing them, thus altering the paradigms of the liberal world order. # **The Heartland of Mackinder: Ukraine, Eurasia, and Global Dominance** Halford J. Mackinder, a British geographer and pioneer of geopolitics, proposed the celebrated Heartland Theory in the early twentieth century. Mackinder divided the world into geostrategic zones and identified the Heartland—the central continental mass of Eurasia—as the “geographical pivot of history” \[5\]. His most famous maxim encapsulates this vision: “who rules Eastern Europe commands the Heartland; who rules the Heartland commands the World Island; who rules the World Island commands the world” \[5\]. Eastern Europe and, in particular, the region of present-day Ukraine, play a key role in this formula. This is because, for Mackinder, Eastern Europe functions as a gateway to the Heartland, providing access to resources and a strategic position for the projection of continental power \[5\]. Applying this theory to our scenario, the conquest of Ukraine and Eastern European countries by Russia would have profound geopolitical implications. From a Mackinderian point of view, such a conquest would enormously strengthen Russia’s position in the Heartland by adding manpower (population) and Ukraine’s industrial and agricultural resources to its power base \[5\]. In fact, Mackinder argued that controlling the Heartland conferred formidable geostrategic advantages—a vast terrestrial “natural fortress” protected from naval invasions and rich in resources such as wheat, minerals, and fuels \[5\]. Thus, if Moscow were to incorporate Ukraine (renowned for its fertile soil and grain production, as well as its mineral reserves) and extend its influence over Eastern Europe, Russia would consolidate the Heartland under its direct control. In this context, the absence of the USA (withdrawn from NATO and less engaged in Europe) would remove an important obstacle to Russian predominance in the region. With central and eastern Eurasia under Russian influence, it would be possible to move toward the realization of the geopolitical nightmare described by Mackinder for Western maritime powers: a hegemonic continental power capable of projecting power to both Europe and Asia. Mackinder himself warned that if a Heartland power gained additional access to an oceanic coastline—in other words, if it combined land power with a significant maritime front—it would constitute a “danger” to global freedom \[5\]. In the scenario considered, besides advancing into Eastern Europe, Russia would already possess strategic maritime outlets (for example, in the Black Sea, via Crimea, and in the Baltic, via Kaliningrad or the Baltic States if influenced). Thus, the control of Ukraine would reinforce Russia’s position in the Black Sea and facilitate projection into the Eastern Mediterranean, expanding its oceanic front. From a Mackinderian perspective, this could potentially transform Russia into the dominant power of the “World Island” (the combined mass of Europe, Asia, and Africa), thereby unbalancing the global geopolitical order \[5\]. It is worth noting that, historically, Mackinder’s doctrine influenced containment strategies: both in the interwar period and during the Cold War, efforts were made to prevent a single power from controlling the Heartland and Eastern Europe. NATO, for example, can be seen as an instrument to prevent Soviet/Russian advances in Europe, in line with Mackinder’s imperative to “contain the Heartland.” Thus, if the USA were to abandon that role—by leaving NATO and tacitly accepting the Russian sphere of influence in Eurasia—we would be witnessing an inversion of the principles that have guided Western policy for decades. In short, under Mackinder’s theory, the Russian conquest of Ukraine and beyond would represent the key for Russia to command the Heartland and, potentially, challenge global hegemony, especially in a scenario where the USA self-restricts to the Western Hemisphere. # **The Maritime Power of Mahan and the Naval Balance between West and East** While Mackinder emphasized continental land power, Alfred Thayer Mahan, a nineteenth-century American naval strategist, highlighted the crucial role of maritime power in global dominance. In his work *The Influence of Sea Power upon History* (1890), Mahan studied the example of the British Empire and concluded that control of the seas paved the way for British supremacy as a world power \[10\]. He argued that a strong navy and the control of strategic maritime routes were decisive factors for projecting military, political, and economic power. His doctrine can be summarized in the following points: (1) the United States should aspire to be a world power; (2) control of the seas is necessary to achieve that status; (3) such control is obtained through a powerful fleet of warships \[17\]. In other words, for Mahan, whoever dominates the maritime routes and possesses naval superiority will be in a position to influence global destinies, ensuring trade, supplies, and the rapid movement of military forces. In the proposed scenario, in which the USA withdraws militarily from Europe and possibly from the Eurasian stage, Mahan’s ideas raise questions about the distribution of maritime power and its effects. Traditionally, the US Navy operates globally, ensuring freedom of navigation and deterring challenges in major seas (Atlantic, Pacific, Indian, etc.). A withdrawal of the USA from NATO could also signal a reduction in its naval presence in the Northeast Atlantic, the Mediterranean Sea, and other areas close to Eurasia. In such a case, who would fill this naval vacuum? Russia, although primarily a land power, has been attempting to modernize its navy and has specific interests—for example, consolidating its dominance in the Black Sea and maintaining a presence in the Mediterranean (with a naval base in Tartus, Syria). The United Kingdom, a historic European maritime power, would remain aligned with the USA but, without American military support in Europe, might potentially be overwhelmed trying to contain an increasingly assertive Russian navy in European waters on its own. Japan, another significant maritime actor allied with the USA, is concerned with the naval balance in the Pacific; without full American engagement, Tokyo might be compelled to expand its own naval power to contain both Russia in the Far East (which maintains a fleet in the Pacific) and, especially, the growing Chinese navy. According to Mahan’s thinking, strategic maritime routes and choke points (crucial straits and channels) become contested prizes in this power game. With the USA focusing on the Americas, one could imagine Washington reinforcing control over the Panama Canal and Caribbean routes—reviving an “American Gulf” policy in the Western Atlantic and Eastern Pacific. In fact, indications of this orientation emerge in statements attributed to Trump, who once suggested reclaiming direct control over Panama, transforming Canada into a North American state, and even “annexing” Greenland due to its Arctic geopolitical importance \[18\]. These aspirations reflect a quest to secure advantageous maritime positions near the American continent. Conversely, in the absence of American presence in the Eastern Atlantic and Mediterranean, Russia would have free rein for regional maritime projection. This could include anything from the unrestricted use of the Black Sea (after dominating Ukraine, thereby ensuring full access to Crimea and Ukrainian ports) to greater influence in the Eastern Mediterranean via Syria and partnerships with countries such as Iran or Egypt. The Baltic Sea would also become an area of expanded Russian interest, pressuring coastal countries and perhaps reducing NATO’s traditional local naval supremacy. However, it is worth noting that even with these regional expansions, Russia lacks a blue-water navy comparable to that of the USA; thus, its initial global maritime impact would be limited without alliances. An important aspect of Mahan’s theories is that naval power serves as a counterbalance to the land power of the Heartland. Therefore, even if Russia were to dominate the Eurasian continental mass, the continued presence of American naval might on the oceans could prevent complete global domination by Moscow. However, if the USA voluntarily restricts its naval reach to the Americas, it would forgo influencing the power balance in the seas adjacent to Eurasia. Consequently, the balance of maritime power would tend to shift in favor of regional Eurasian actors. The United Kingdom and Japan, traditional allies of the USA, could intensify their naval capabilities to defend regional interests—the United Kingdom safeguarding the North Atlantic and the North Sea, and Japan patrolling the Northwest Pacific—but both would face budgetary and structural limitations in fully compensating for the absence of the American superpower. Consequently, Mahan’s vision suggests that the withdrawal of the USA from the extra-regional scene would weaken the liberal maritime regime, possibly opening space for revisionist powers to contest routes that were previously secured (for example, Russia and China encountering less opposition on the routes of the Arctic and the Indo-Pacific, respectively). In summary, naval hegemony would fragment, and control of strategic seas would become contested, reconfiguring the relative influence of the USA, Russia, and maritime allies such as the United Kingdom and Japan. # **Kjellén and the State as a Living Organism: Russian Expansion as an Organic Necessity** Another useful theoretical lens to interpret Russian geopolitical posture is that of Rudolf Kjellén, a Swedish political scientist of the early twentieth century who conceived the State as a living organism. Kjellén, who even coined the term “geopolitics,” was influenced by Friedrich Ratzel’s ideas and by social Darwinism, arguing that States are born, grow, and decline analogously to living beings \[13\]. In his work *Staten som livsform* (The State as a Form of Life, 1916), he maintained that States possess an organic dimension in addition to the legal one and that “just as any form of life, States must expand or die” \[14\]. This expansion would not be motivated merely by aggressive conquest but seen as a necessary growth for the self-preservation of the state organism \[14\]. In complement, Kjellén echoed Ratzel’s “law of expanding spaces” by asserting that large States expand at the expense of smaller ones, with it being only a matter of time before the great realms fill the available spaces \[14\]. That is, from the organic perspective, vigorous States tend to incorporate smaller neighboring territories, consolidating territorially much like an organism absorbing nutrients. Applying this theory to the strategy of contemporary Russia, we can interpret Moscow’s actions—including the invasion of Ukraine and the ambition to restore its sphere of influence in Eurasia—as the expression of an organic drive for expansion. For a strategist influenced by this school, Russia (viewed as a state organism with a long imperial history) needs to expand its territory and influence to ensure its survival and security. The loss of control over spaces that once were part of the Russian Empire or the Soviet Union (such as Ukraine itself, the Caucasus, or Central Asia) may be perceived by Russian elites as an atrophy of the state organism, rendering it vulnerable. Thus, the reincorporation of these territories—whether directly (annexation) or indirectly (political vassalage)—would equate to restoring lost members or strengthening vital organs of the state body. In fact, official Russian arguments often portray Ukraine as an intrinsic part of “Russian historicity,” denying it a fully separate identity—a narrative that aligns with the idea that Russian expansion in that region is natural and necessary for the Russian State (seen as encompassing also Russian speakers beyond its current borders). Kjellén would thus provide a theoretical justification for Russian territorial expansion as an organic phenomenon. As a great power, Russia would inevitably seek to expand at the expense of smaller neighbors (Ukraine, Georgia, the Baltic States, etc.), as dictated by the tendency of “great spaces to organize” to the detriment of the small \[14\]. This view can be identified in contemporary Russian doctrines that value spheres of influence and the notion that neighboring countries must gravitate around Moscow in order for the natural order to be maintained. The very idea of “Eurasia” united under Russian leadership (advocated by modern Russian thinkers) echoes this organic conception of vital space and expansion as a sign of the State’s vitality. However, Kjellén’s theory also warns of the phenomenon of “imperial overstretch,” should a State exceed its internal cohesion limits by expanding excessively \[14\]. He recognized that extending borders too far could increase friction and vulnerabilities, making it difficult to maintain cohesion—a very large organism may lack functional integration. In the Russian context, this suggests that although expansion is seen as necessary, there are risks if Russia tries to encompass more than it can govern effectively. Conquering Ukraine and subjugating Eastern Europe, for example, could economically and militarily overburden the Russian State, especially if it faced resistance or had to manage hostile populations. However, in the hypothetical scenario we adopt (isolated USA and a weakened Europe), Russia might calculate that the organic benefits of expansion (territory, resources, strategic depth) would outweigh the costs, since external interference would be limited. Thus, through Kjellén’s lens, expansionist Russia behaves as an organism following its instinct for survival and growth, absorbing weaker neighbors; yet such a process is not devoid of challenges, requiring that the “organism Russia” manages to assimilate these new spaces without collapsing under its own weight. # **Ratzel and Lebensraum: Resources, Territory, and the Justification for Expansion** Parallel to Kjellén’s organic view, Friedrich Ratzel’s theory offers another conceptual basis for understanding Russian expansion: the concept of Lebensraum (vital space). Ratzel, a German geographer of the late nineteenth century, proposed that the survival and development of a people or nation depended critically on the available physical space and resources. Influenced by Darwinist ideas, he applied the notion of “survival of the fittest” to nations, arguing that human societies need to conquer territory and resources to prosper, and that the stronger and fittest civilizations will naturally prevail over the weaker ones \[12\]. In 1901, Ratzel coined the term Lebensraum to describe this need for “vital space” as a geographical factor in national power \[15\]. Subsequently, this idea would be adopted—and extremely distorted—by Nazi ideology to justify Germany’s aggressions in Europe. However, the core of Ratzel’s concept is that territorial expansion is essential for the survival and growth of a State, especially to secure food, raw materials, and space for its population \[12\]. When examining Russia’s stance under this perspective, we can see several narratives that evoke the logic of Lebensraum. Russia is the largest country in the world by area; however, much of its territory is characterized by adverse climates (tundra, taiga) and is relatively sparsely populated in Siberia. On the other hand, adjacent regions such as Ukraine possess highly arable lands (chernozem—black soil), significant Slavic population density, and additional natural resources (coal in the Donbass, for example). An implicit justification for Russian expansion could be the search for supplementary resources and fertile lands to secure its self-sufficiency and power—exactly as Ratzel described that vigorous nations do. Historical records show that Ratzel emphasized agrarian primacy: he believed that new territories should be colonized by farmers, providing the food base for the nation \[12\]. Ukraine, historically called the “breadbasket of Europe,” fits perfectly into this vision of conquest for sustenance and agricultural wealth. Furthermore, Ratzel viewed geography as a determinant of the destiny of nations—peoples adapted to certain habitats seek to expand them if they aspire to grow. In contemporary Russian discourse, there is often mention of the need to ensure security and territorial depth in the face of NATO, or to unite brotherly peoples (Russians and Russian speakers) within a single political space. Such arguments can be read as a modern translation of Lebensraum: the idea that the Russian nation, in order to be secure and flourish, must control a larger space, encompassing buffer zones and critical resources. This Russian “vital space” would naturally include Ukraine and other former Soviet republics, given the historical and infrastructural interdependence. Ratzel emphasized that peoples migrated and expanded when their original homeland no longer met their needs or aspirations \[12\]. Although contemporary Russia does not suffer from demographic pressure (on the contrary, it faces population decline), under the logic of a great power there is indeed a sentiment of geopolitical insufficiency for having lost influence over areas considered strategic. Thus, reconquering these areas would mean recovering the “habitat” necessary for the Russian nation to prosper and feel secure. It is important to mention that, in Ratzel’s and Kjellén’s formulations, the pursuit of Lebensraum or organic expansion is not morally qualified—it is treated as a natural process in the politics of power. Thus, on the discursive level, Russia can avoid overly aggressive rhetoric and resort to “natural” justifications: for example, claiming that it needs to occupy Ukraine for defensive purposes (security space) or to reunify peoples (a common cultural and historical space). Beneath these justifications, however, resonates the geopolitical imperative to acquire more territory and resources as a guarantee of national survival, something consonant with Ratzel’s theory. In fact, Russian Realpolitik frequently prioritizes the control of energy resources (gas, oil) and transportation routes. Expanding its influence over central Eurasia would also mean controlling oil pipelines, gas lines, and logistical corridors—essential elements of modern Lebensraum understood as access to vital resources and infrastructure. In summary, by conquering Ukraine and extending its reach into Eurasia, Russia could effectively invoke the concept of Lebensraum: presenting its expansion not as mere imperialism, but as a necessity to secure indispensable lands and resources for its people and to correct the “injustice” of a vital space diminished by post-Cold War territorial losses. The theories of Ratzel and Kjellén together paint a picture in which Russian expansion emerges almost as a natural law—the great State reclaiming space to ensure its survival and development at the expense of smaller neighbors. # **Trump, NATO, and the Threat of American Withdrawal** One of the most alarming changes with Trump's return to power is the tense relationship with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). Trump has long criticized allies for not meeting military spending targets, even threatening during his first term to withdraw the US from the alliance if members did not increase their contributions \[2\]. This threat, initially viewed with skepticism, became concrete after his re-election, leading European allies to seriously consider the possibility of having to defend themselves without American support \[1\]. In fact, Trump suggested in post-election interviews that the US would only remain in NATO if the allies “paid their bills” – otherwise, he “would seriously consider” leaving \[2\]. Such statements reinforced the warning that the US might not honor NATO's mutual defense commitment, precisely at a time of continuous Russian threat due to the war in Ukraine \[1\]. From a theoretical point of view, this posture of American retrenchment evokes the classic tension between maritime power and land power. Alfred Thayer Mahan emphasized that the global power of the US derived largely from its naval superiority and from alliances that ensured control over strategic maritime routes \[9\]. NATO, since 1949, has served not only to deter Soviet terrestrial advances in Eurasia, but also to secure the US naval presence in the North Atlantic and the Mediterranean – a fundamental element according to Mahan. In turn, Halford Mackinder warned that the balance of global power depended on the control of the Eurasian “Heartland” (the central region of Eurasia). The withdrawal or disengagement of the US (a maritime power) from this region could open the way for a continental power (such as Russia) to expand its influence in Eastern Europe, unbalancing the power balance \[3\]. In other words, by threatening to leave NATO, Trump jeopardizes the principle of containment that prevented Russian dominance over Eastern Europe – something that Mackinder would see as a dangerous shift in global power in favor of the Heartland power. Adopting an impartial tone, it is observed that European countries have reacted to this new reality with precautionary measures. Strategic reports already calculate the cost of an autonomous European defense: hundreds of thousands of additional soldiers and investments of hundreds of billions of euros would be required if the US ceased to guarantee the security of the continent \[1\]. European dependence on American military power is significant and, without it, there would be a need for a major reinforcement of European Armed Forces \[1\]. This mobilization practically reflects the anticipation of a power vacuum left by the US – a scenario in which Mackinder’s theory (on the primacy of the Heartland and the vulnerability of the “external crescent” where Western Europe is located) regains its relevance. # **The US–Ukraine Economic Agreement: Strategic Minerals in Exchange for Support?** Another novelty of Trump's second term is the unprecedented and transactional manner in which Washington has been dealing with the war in Ukraine. Instead of emphasizing security guarantees and alliances, the Trump administration proposed a trade agreement with Ukraine focused on the exploitation of strategic minerals, linking American support to a direct economic benefit. According to sources close to the negotiations, the US and Ukraine are about to sign a pact to share the revenues from the exploitation of critical mineral resources on Ukrainian territory \[19\]. Materials such as titanium, lithium, rare earths, and uranium – vital for high-tech and defense industries – would be at the core of this agreement \[6\]. According to the known draft, Ukraine would allocate 50% of the profits from new mineral ventures to a fund controlled by the US, which would reinvest part of the resources in the country’s own reconstruction \[6\] \[19\]. It is noteworthy that the pact does not include explicit security guarantees for Kyiv, despite Ukraine remaining under direct military threat from Russia \[19\]. Essentially, the Trump administration offers financial support and economic investment in exchange for a share in Ukrainian natural resources, but without formally committing to Ukraine's defense in the event of a renewed Russian offensive \[19\]. American authorities argue that this economic partnership would already be sufficient to “secure Ukrainian interests,” as it would provide the US with its own incentives to desire Ukraine’s stability \[19\]. “What could be better for Ukraine than being in an economic partnership with the United States?” stated Mike Waltz, a US national security advisor, defending the proposal \[19\]. Analysts, however, assess the agreement in divided terms. For some, it represents a form of economic exploitation at a time of Ukraine's fragility – comparing the demand to share mineral wealth amid war to a scheme of “mafia protection” \[19\]. Steven Cook, from the Council on Foreign Relations, classified the offer as “extortion,” and political scientist Virginia P. Fortna observed that charging resources from an invaded country resembles predatory practices \[19\]. Joseph Nye adds that it is a short-term gain strategy that could be “disastrous in the long run” for American credibility, reflecting the transactional approach that Trump even adopted with close allies in other contexts \[19\]. On the other hand, some see a future advantage for Kyiv: journalist Pierre Briançon suggests that at least this agreement aligns American commercial interests with Ukraine’s future, which could, in theory, keep the US involved in Ukrainian prosperity in the long term \[19\]. It is even recalled that President Zelensky himself proposed last year the idea of sharing natural resources with the US to bring the interests of the two countries closer together \[19\]. From the perspective of geopolitical theories, this agreement illustrates a shift towards economic pragmatism in international relations, approaching concepts proposed by Kjellén. Rudolf Kjellén, who coined the term “geopolitics,” saw the State as a territorial organism that seeks to ensure its survival through self-sufficiency and the control of strategic resources \[4\]. Trump's demand for a share in Ukrainian resources in order to continue supporting the country reflects a logic of autarky and direct national interest – that is, foreign policy serving primarily to reinforce the economic and material position of the US. This view contrasts with the traditional cooperative approach, but aligns with Kjellén’s idea that powerful States tend to transform international relations into opportunities for their own gain, ensuring access to vital raw materials. Similarly, Friedrich Ratzel argued that States have a “propensity to expand their borders according to their capacities,” seeking vital space (Lebensraum) and resources to sustain their development \[11\]. The US–Ukraine pact, by conditioning military/economic aid on obtaining tangible advantages (half of the mineral profits), is reminiscent of Ratzel’s perspective: the US, as a rising economic power, expands its economic influence over Ukrainian territory like an organism extending itself to obtain the necessary resources for its well-being. It is, therefore, a form of economic expansionism at the expense of purely ideological commitments or collective security. # **Peace Negotiations Excluding Ukraine and the Legitimacy of the Agreement** Another controversial point is the manner in which peace negotiations between Russia and the West have been conducted under Trump's administration. Since taking office, the American president has engaged directly with Moscow in pursuit of a ceasefire, deliberately keeping the Ukrainian government out of the initial discussions \[6\]. Trump expressed his desire to “leave Zelensky out of the conversation” and also excluded the European Union from any influence in the process \[6\]. This negotiation strategy—conducted without the presence of the primary interested party, Ukraine—raises serious questions about the legitimacy and sustainability of any resulting agreement. Historically, peace agreements reached without the direct participation of one of the conflicting parties tend to face problems in implementation and acceptance. The exclusion of Ukraine in the decision-making phase brings to light the issue of guarantees. As noted, the emerging agreement lacks formal US security guarantees for Ukraine. This implies that, after the agreement is signed, nothing will prevent Russia from launching a new offensive if it deems it convenient, knowing that the US has not committed to defending it militarily. Experts have already warned that a ceasefire without robust protection may only be a pause for Russian rearmament, rendering the conflict “frozen” temporarily and potentially resumed in the near future. The European strategic community has expressed similar concern: without American deterrence, the risk of further Russian aggressions in the region increases considerably \[1\]. Denmark, for example, has released intelligence reports warning of possible imminent Russian attacks, prompting neighboring countries to accelerate plans for independent defense \[1\]. The legitimacy of this asymmetric peace agreement (negotiated without Ukraine fully at the table and under economic coercion) is also questionable from a legal and moral point of view. It violates the principle of self-determination by imposing terms decided by great powers on a sovereign country—a practice reminiscent of dark chapters in diplomacy, such as the Munich Agreement of 1938, when powers determined the fate of Czechoslovakia without its consent. In the current case, Ukraine would end up signing the agreement, but from a position of weakness, raising doubts about how durable such a commitment would be. From Mackinder’s perspective, Ukraine’s removal from the battlefield without guarantees essentially means admitting a greater influence of Russia (the Heartland power) over Eastern Europe. This would alter the balance in Eurasia in a potentially lasting way. Furthermore, the fact that great powers negotiate over the heads of a smaller country evokes the imperial logic of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, when empires decided among themselves the divisions of foreign territories—a behavior that Mackinder saw as likely in a world of a “closed system.” With the entire world already occupied by States, Mackinder predicted that powers would begin to compete for influence within this consolidated board, often subjugating smaller states to gain advantage \[3\]. The US–Russia negotiation regarding Ukraine, without proper Ukrainian representation, exemplifies this type of neo-imperial dynamic in the twenty-first century. Also noteworthy is the consonance with the ideas of Ratzel and Kjellén: both viewed smaller states as easily relegated to the status of satellites or even “parasitic organisms” in the orbit of larger states. Kjellén spoke of the intrinsic vulnerability of states with little territorial depth or economic dependence, making them susceptible to external pressures \[4\]\[20\]. Ukraine, weakened by war and dependent on external aid, becomes a concrete example of this theorized vulnerability: it has had to cede strategic resources and accept terms dictated against its will in an attempt to secure its immediate survival. The resulting agreement, therefore, reflects a power imbalance characteristic of the hierarchical international relations described by classical geopolitical theorists. # **Implicit Territorial Concessions and Trump’s Public Discourse** A central and controversial point in Trump’s statements regarding the war in Ukraine is the insinuation of territorial concessions to Russia as part of the conflict’s resolution. Publicly, Trump avoided explicitly condemning Russian aggression and even stated that he considered it “unlikely” that Ukraine would be able to retake all the areas occupied by the Russians \[16\]. In debates and interviews, he suggested that “if I were president, the war would end in 24 hours,” implying that he would force an understanding between Kyiv and Moscow that would likely involve ceding some territory in exchange for peace. This position marks a break with the previous US policy of not recognizing any territorial acquisitions made by force and fuels speculations that a future peace agreement sponsored by Trump would legitimize at least part of Russia’s gains since 2014 (Crimea, Donbass, and areas seized during the 2022 invasion). The actions of his administration corroborate this interpretation. As discussed, the economic agreement focuses on the exploitation of Ukrainian natural resources, many of which are located precisely in regions currently under Russian military control, such as parts of the Zaporizhzhia Oblast, Donetsk, Lugansk, and the Azov Sea area \[6\]. A Ukrainian geologist, Hanna Liventseva, highlighted that “most of these elements (strategic minerals) are found in the south of the Ukrainian Shield, mainly in the Azov region, and most of these territories are currently invaded by Russia” \[6\]. This means that, to make joint exploitation viable, Russia’s de facto control over these areas would have to be recognized—or at least tolerated—in the short term. In other words, the pact indirectly and tacitly accepts Russian territorial gains, as it involves sharing the profits from resources that are not currently accessible to the Kyiv government. Furthermore, figures close to Trump have made explicit statements regarding the possibility of territorial cession. Mike Waltz, Trump’s national security advisor, publicly stated that Zelensky might need to “cede land to Russia” to end the war \[8\]. This remark—made public in March 2025—confirms that the Trump White House considers it natural for Ukraine to relinquish parts of its territory in favor of an agreement. Such a stance marks a break from the previous Western consensus, which condemned any territorial gains by force. Under Trump, a pragmatic view (in the eyes of his supporters) or a cynical one (according to his critics) seems to prevail: sacrificing principles of territorial integrity to quickly end hostilities and secure immediate economic benefits. In theoretical terms, this inclination to validate territorial gains by force recalls the concept of Realpolitik and the geopolitical Darwinism that influenced thinkers such as Ratzel. In Ratzel’s organic conception, expanding states naturally absorb neighboring territories when they are strong enough to do so, while declining states lose territory—a process almost biological in the selection of the fittest \[11\]. The Trump administration’s acceptance that Ukraine should “give something” to Moscow to seal peace reflects a normalization of this geopolitical selection process: it recognizes the aggressor (Russia) as having the “right” to retain conquered lands, because that is how power realities on the ground dictate. Mackinder, although firmly opposed to allowing Russia to dominate the Heartland, would see this outcome as the logical consequence of the lack of engagement from maritime powers (the USA and the United Kingdom, for example) in sustaining the Ukrainian counterattack. Without the active involvement of maritime power to balance the dispute, land power prevails in Eastern Europe. From the perspective of international legitimacy, the cession of Ukrainian territories—whether de jure or de facto—creates a dangerous precedent in the post-Cold War era. Rewarding violent aggression with territorial gains may encourage similar strategies in other parts of the world, undermining the architecture of collective security. This is possibly a return to a world of spheres of influence, where great powers define borders and zones of control according to their convenience—something that the rules-based order after 1945 sought to avoid. Here, academic impartiality requires noting that coercion for territorial concessions rarely produces lasting peace, as the aggrieved party—in this case, Ukraine—may accept temporarily but will continue to assert its rights in the long term, as has occurred with other territorial injustices in history. # **Territorial Ambitions of Trump: Greenland and Canada** Beyond the Eurasian theater of war, Trump revived geopolitical ambitions involving territories traditionally allied with the US: Greenland (an autonomous territory of Denmark) and Canada. As early as 2019, during his first term, Trump shocked the world by proposing to buy Greenland—rich in minerals and strategically positioned in the Arctic. Upon his return to power, he went further: expressing a “renewed interest” in acquiring Greenland and publicly suggesting the incorporation of Canada as the 51st American state \[2\]. In January 2025, during a press conference at Mar-a-Lago, he even displayed maps in which the US and Canada appeared merged into a single country, while Greenland was marked as a future American possession \[2\]. Posts by the president on social media included satirical images with a map of North America where Canada was labeled “51st” and Greenland designated as “Our Land” \[2\]. Such moves were met with concern and disbelief by allies. Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was caught on an open microphone warning that Trump’s fixation on annexation “is real” and not just a joke \[7\]. Trudeau emphasized that Washington appeared to covet Canada’s vast mineral resources, which would explain the insistence on the idea of absorption \[7\]. In public, Trump argued that Canadians “would be more prosperous as American citizens,” promising tax cuts and better services should they become part of the US \[7\]. On the Danish side, the reaction to the revived plan regarding Greenland was firmly negative—as it was in 2019—reaffirming that the territory is not for sale. Trump, however, insinuated that the issue might be one of national security, indicating that American possession of Greenland would prevent adverse influences (a reference to China and Russia in the Arctic) \[2\]. More worryingly, he refused to rule out the use of military means to obtain the island, although he assured that he had no intention of invading Canada by force (in the Canadian case, he spoke of “economic force” to forge a union) \[2\]. This series of initiatives reflects an unprecedented expansionist impetus by the US in recent times, at least in discourse. Analyzing this through the lens of classical geopolitics offers interesting insights. Friedrich Ratzel and his notion of Lebensraum suggest that powerful states, upon reaching a certain predominance, seek to expand their territory by influencing or incorporating adjacent areas. Trump, by targeting the immediate neighbor (Canada) and a nearby strategic territory (Greenland), appears to resurrect this logic of territorial expansion for the sake of gaining space and resources. Ratzel saw such expansion almost as a natural process for vigorous states, comparable to the growth of an organism \[11\]. From this perspective, the US would be exercising its “right” of expansion in North America and the polar region, integrating areas of vital interest. Additionally, Alfred Mahan’s view on maritime power helps to understand the strategic value of Greenland. Mahan postulated that control of key maritime chokepoints and naval bases ensures global advantage \[9\]. Greenland, situated between the North Atlantic and the Arctic, has become increasingly relevant as climate change opens new polar maritime routes and reveals vast mineral deposits (including rare earth elements and oil). For the US, having a presence or sovereignty over Greenland would mean dominating the gateway to the Arctic and denying this space to rivals. This aligns with Mahan’s strategy of securing commercial and military routes (in this case, potential Arctic routes) and resources to consolidate naval supremacy. On the other hand, the incorporation of Canada—with its enormous territory, Arctic coastline, and abundant natural resources—would provide the US with formidable geoeconomic and geopolitical reinforcement, practically eliminating vulnerabilities along its northern border. This is an ambitious project that also echoes ideas of Kjellén, for whom an ideal State should seek territorial completeness and economic self-sufficiency within its region. Incorporating Canada would be the pinnacle of American regional autarky, turning North America into a unified bloc under Washington (a scenario reminiscent of the “pan-regions” conceived by twentieth-century geopoliticians influenced by Kjellén). It is important to note, however, that these ambitions face enormous legal and political obstacles. The sovereignty of Canada and Greenland (Denmark) is guaranteed by international law, and both peoples categorically reject the idea of annexation. Any hostile action by the US against these countries would shake alliances and the world order itself. Even so, the very fact that an American president suggests such possibilities already produces geopolitical effects: traditional partners begin to distrust Washington’s intentions, seek alternative alliances, and strengthen nationalist discourses of resistance. In summary, Trump’s expansionist intentions in Greenland and Canada rekindle old territorial issues and paradoxically place the US in the position of a revisionist power—a role once associated with empires in search of colonies. # **Implications for Brazil and South America: A New Neocolonization?** In light of this geopolitical reconfiguration driven by Trump's USA—with a reordering of alliances and a possible partition of spheres of influence among great powers—the question arises: what is the impact on Brazil and the other countries of South America? Traditionally, Latin America has been under the aegis of the Monroe Doctrine (1823), which established non-interference by Europe in the region and, implicitly, the primacy of the USA in the Western Hemisphere. In the post–Cold War period, this influence translated more into political and economic leadership, without formal annexations or direct territorial domination. However, the current context points to a kind of “neocolonization” of the Global South, in which larger powers seek to control resources and peripheral governments in an indirect yet effective manner. Mackinder’s theories can be used to illuminate this dynamic. As mentioned, Mackinder envisioned the twentieth-century world as a closed system, in which there were no longer any unknown lands to be colonized—hence, the powers would fight among themselves for control over already occupied regions \[3\]. He predicted that Africa and Latin America (then largely European colonies or semi-colonies) would continue as boards upon which the great powers would project their disputes, a form of neocolonialism. In the current scenario, we see the USA proposing exchanges of protection for resources (as in Ukraine) and even leaders of developing countries seeking similar agreements. A notable example: the President of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Felix Tshisekedi, praised the USA–Ukraine initiative and suggested an analogous agreement involving Congolese mineral wealth in exchange for US support against internal rebels (M23) \[19\]. In other words, African countries and possibly South American ones may enter into this logic of offering privileged access to resources (cobalt, lithium, food, biodiversity) in order to obtain security guarantees or investments. This represents a regression to the times when external powers dictated the directions of the South in exchange for promises of protection, characterizing a strategic neocolonialism. For Brazil, in particular, this rearrangement generates both opportunities and risks. As a regional power with considerable diplomatic autonomy, Brazil has historically sought to balance relationships with the USA, Europe, China, and other actors, avoiding automatic alignments. However, in a world where Trump’s USA is actively redefining spheres of influence—possibly making deals with Russia that divide priorities (for example, Washington focusing on the Western Hemisphere and Moscow on the Eastern)—South America could once again be seen as an exclusive American sphere of influence. From this perspective, Washington could pressure South American countries to align with its directives, limiting partnerships with rivals (such as China) and seeking privileged access to strategic resources (such as the Amazon, fresh water, minerals, and agricultural commodities). Some indications are already emerging: Trump’s transactional approach mentioned by Nye included pressures on Canada and Mexico regarding border and trade issues, under the threat of commercial sanctions. It would not be unthinkable to adopt a hard line, for example, with regard to Brazilian environmental policies (linked to the Amazon) or Brazil’s relations with China, using tariffs or incentives as leverage—a sort of geopolitics of economic coercion. On the other hand, Brazil and its neighbors could also attempt to take advantage of the Sino–North American competition. If the USA is distracted consolidating its hemispheric “hard power” hegemony (even with annexation fantasies in the north), powers such as China may advance their economic presence in South America through investments and trade (Belt and Road, infrastructure financing)—which is already happening. This would constitute an indirect neocolonial dispute in the South: Chinese loans and investments versus American demands and agreements, partly reminiscent of the nineteenth-century imperial competition (when the United Kingdom, USA, and others competed for Latin American markets and resources). From a conceptual standpoint, Mackinder might classify South America as part of the “Outer Crescent” (external insular crescent)—peripheral to the great Eurasian “World-Island,” yet still crucial as a source of resources and a strategic position in the South Atlantic and Pacific. If the USA consolidates an informal empire in the Americas, it would be reinforcing its “insular bastion” far from the Eurasian Heartland, a strategy that Mackinder once suggested for maritime powers: to control islands and peripheral continents to compensate for the disadvantage of not controlling the Heartland. However, an excessive US dominance in the South could lead to local resistance and alternative alignments, unbalancing the region. Kjellén would add that for Brazil to maintain its decisive sovereignty, it will need to strengthen its autarky and internal cohesion—in other words, reduce vulnerabilities (economic, military, social) that external powers might exploit \[4\]. Meanwhile, Mahan might point out the importance for Brazil of controlling its maritime routes and coastlines (South Atlantic) to avoid being at the mercy of a naval power like the USA. And Ratzel would remind us that states that do not expand their influence tend to be absorbed by foreign influences—which, in the context of Brazil, does not mean conquering neighboring territories, but rather actively leading South American integration to create a block more resilient to external intrusion. In summary, South America finds itself in a more competitive and segmented world, where major players are resurrecting practices from past eras. The notion of “neocolonization” here does not imply direct occupation, but rather mechanisms of dependency: whether through unequal economic agreements or through diplomatic or military pressure for alignment. Brazil, as the largest economy and territory on the subcontinent, will have to navigate with heightened caution. A new global power balance, marked by the division of spheres of influence among the USA, China, and Russia, may reduce the sovereign maneuvering space of South American countries unless they act jointly. Thus, theoretical reflection suggests the need for South–South strategies, reinforcement of regional organizations, and diversification of partnerships to avoid falling into modern “neocolonial traps.” # **Conclusion** The emerging post–re-election geopolitical conjuncture of Donald Trump signals a return to classical geopolitical principles, after several decades of predominance of institutional liberal views. We witness the revaluation of concepts such as spheres of influence, exchanges of protection for resources, naval power versus land power, and disputes over territory and raw materials—all central themes in the writings of Mackinder, Mahan, Kjellén, and Ratzel at the end of the nineteenth and the beginning of the twentieth century. An impartial analysis of these events, in light of these theories, shows internal coherence in Trump’s actions: although controversial, they follow a logic of maximizing national interest and the relative power of the USA on the world stage, even at the expense of established principles and alliances. Halford Mackinder reminds us that, in a closed world with no new lands to conquer, the great powers will seek to redistribute the world among themselves \[3\]. This seems to manifest in the direct understandings between the USA and Russia over the fate of Ukraine, and in American ambitions in the Arctic and the Western Hemisphere. Alfred Mahan emphasizes that the control of the seas and strategic positions ensures supremacy—we see reflections of this in Trump’s obsession with Greenland (Arctic) and the possible neglect of the importance of maintaining NATO (and therefore the North Atlantic) as a cohesive bloc, something that Mahan’s theory would criticize due to the risk of a naval vacuum. Rudolf Kjellén and Friedrich Ratzel provide the framework to understand the more aggressive facet of expansionist nationalism: the idea of the State as an organism that needs to grow, secure resources, and seek self-sufficiency explains everything from the extortionate agreement imposed on Ukraine to the annexation rhetoric regarding Canada. The potential consequences are profound. In the short term, we may witness a precarious ceasefire in the Ukraine war, with consolidated Russian territorial gains and Ukraine economically tied to the USA, but without formal military protection—a fragile “armed peace.” Western Europe, alarmed, may accelerate its independent militarization, perhaps marking the beginning of European defense autonomy, as is already openly debated \[1\]. At the far end of the globe, American activism in the Arctic and the Americas may reshape alliances: countries like Canada, once aligned with Washington, might seek to guarantee their sovereignty by distancing themselves from it; powers like China could take advantage of the openings to increase their presence in Latin America and Africa through economic diplomacy; and emerging countries of the Global South may have to choose between submitting to new “guardianships” or strengthening South–South cooperation. Ultimately, the current situation reinforces the relevance of studying geopolitics through historical lenses. The actions of the Trump administration indicate that, despite all technological and normative advances, the competition for geographic power has not disappeared—it has merely assumed new formats. Academic impartiality obliges us not to prematurely judge whether these strategies will be successful or beneficial, but history and theory warn that neo-imperial movements tend to generate counter-reactions. As Mackinder insinuated, “every shock or change anywhere reverberates around the world,” and a sudden move by a superpower tends to provoke unforeseen adjustments and chain conflicts. It remains to be seen how the other actors—including Brazil and its neighbors—will adapt to this new chapter in the great struggle for global power, in which centuries-old theories once again have a surprising explanatory power over present events. # **Bibliography** **\[1\] A Referência.** (2025). *Europa calcula o custo de se defender sem os EUA: 300 mil soldados e 250 bilhões de euros a mais*. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de[ https://areferencia.com/europa/europa-calcula-o-custo-de-se-defender-sem-os-eua-300-mil-soldados-e-250-bilhoes-de-euros-a-mais/#:\~:text=Europa%20calcula%20o%20custo%20de,bilh%C3%B5es%20de%20euros%20a%20mais](https://areferencia.com/europa/europa-calcula-o-custo-de-se-defender-sem-os-eua-300-mil-soldados-e-250-bilhoes-de-euros-a-mais/#:~:text=Europa%20calcula%20o%20custo%20de,bilh%C3%B5es%20de%20euros%20a%20mais) **\[2\] Brexit Institute.** (2025). *What happens if Trump invades Greenland?* Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de[ https://dcubrexitinstitute.eu/2025/01/what-happens-if-trump-invades-greenland/#:\~:text=Ever%20since%20Donald%20Trump%20announced,agreed%20in%20Wales%20in%202014](https://dcubrexitinstitute.eu/2025/01/what-happens-if-trump-invades-greenland/#:~:text=Ever%20since%20Donald%20Trump%20announced,agreed%20in%20Wales%20in%202014) **\[3\] Cfettweis C:CST22(2)8576.DVI.** (2025). *Mackinder and Angell*. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de[ https://cfettweis.com/wp-content/uploads/Mackinder-and-Angell.pdf#:\~:text=meant%20the%20beginning%20of%20an,Mackinder](https://cfettweis.com/wp-content/uploads/Mackinder-and-Angell.pdf#:~:text=meant%20the%20beginning%20of%20an,Mackinder) **\[4\] Diva-Portal.** (2025). *The geopolitics of territorial relativity. Poland seen by Rudolf Kjellén*. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de[ https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1696547/FULLTEXT02#:\~:text=,The%20state%20territory](https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1696547/FULLTEXT02#:~:text=,The%20state%20territory) **\[5\] Geopolitical Monitor.** (2025). *The Russo-Ukrainian War and Mackinder’s Heartland Thesis*. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de[ https://www.geopoliticalmonitor.com/the-ukraine-war-and-mackinders-heartland-thesis/#:\~:text=In%201904%2C%20Sir%20Halford%20J,in%20adding%20a%20substantial%20oceanic](https://www.geopoliticalmonitor.com/the-ukraine-war-and-mackinders-heartland-thesis/#:~:text=In%201904%2C%20Sir%20Halford%20J,in%20adding%20a%20substantial%20oceanic) **\[6\] Instituto Humanitas Unisinos.** (2025). *Trump obriga Zelensky a hipotecar a exploração de minerais críticos em troca do seu apoio*. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de[ https://www.ihu.unisinos.br/648986-trump-obriga-zelensky-a-hipotecar-a-exploracao-de-minerais-criticos-em-troca-do-seu-apoio#:\~:text=Essa%20troca%20inclui%20os%20cobi%C3%A7ados,s%C3%A3o%20praticamente%20inexploradas%20no%20pa%C3%ADs](https://www.ihu.unisinos.br/648986-trump-obriga-zelensky-a-hipotecar-a-exploracao-de-minerais-criticos-em-troca-do-seu-apoio#:~:text=Essa%20troca%20inclui%20os%20cobi%C3%A7ados,s%C3%A3o%20praticamente%20inexploradas%20no%20pa%C3%ADs) **\[7\] Politico.** (2025). *Trump’s annexation fixation is no joke, Trudeau warns*. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de[ https://www.politico.com/news/2025/02/07/canada-trudeau-trump-51-state-00203156#:\~:text=TORONTO%20%E2%80%94%20Prime%20Minister%20Justin,Canada%20becoming%20the%2051st%20state%2C%E2%80%9D%20Trudeau%20said](https://www.politico.com/news/2025/02/07/canada-trudeau-trump-51-state-00203156#:~:text=TORONTO%20%E2%80%94%20Prime%20Minister%20Justin,Canada%20becoming%20the%2051st%20state%2C%E2%80%9D%20Trudeau%20said) **\[8\] The Daily Beast.** (2025). *Top Trump Adviser Moves Goalpost for Ukraine to End War*. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de[ https://www.thedailybeast.com/top-trump-adviser-moves-goalpost-for-ukraine-to-end-war/#:\~:text=LAND%20GRAB](https://www.thedailybeast.com/top-trump-adviser-moves-goalpost-for-ukraine-to-end-war/#:~:text=LAND%20GRAB) **\[9\] The Geostrata.** (2025). *Alfred Thayer Mahan and Supremacy of Naval Power*. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de[ https://www.thegeostrata.com/post/alfred-thayer-mahan-and-supremacy-of-naval-power#:\~:text=Alfred%20Thayer%20Mahan%20and%20Supremacy,control%20over%20maritime%20trade%20routes](https://www.thegeostrata.com/post/alfred-thayer-mahan-and-supremacy-of-naval-power#:~:text=Alfred%20Thayer%20Mahan%20and%20Supremacy,control%20over%20maritime%20trade%20routes) **\[10\] U.S. Department of State.** (2025). [Mahan’s The Influence of Sea Power upon History: Securing International Markets in the 1890s](https://history.state.gov/milestones/1866-1898/mahan). Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de[ https://history.state.gov/milestones/1866-1898/mahan#:\~:text=Mahan%20argued%20that%20British%20control,American%20politicians%20believed%20that%20these](https://history.state.gov/milestones/1866-1898/mahan#:~:text=Mahan%20argued%20that%20British%20control,American%20politicians%20believed%20that%20these) **\[11\] Britannica.** (2025a). *Friedrich Ratzel | Biogeography, Anthropogeography, Political Geography*. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de[ https://www.britannica.com/biography/Friedrich-Ratzel#:\~:text=webster,Swedish%20political%20scientist%20%2076](https://www.britannica.com/biography/Friedrich-Ratzel#:~:text=webster,Swedish%20political%20scientist%20%2076) **\[12\] Britannica.** (2025b). *Lebensraum*. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de[ https://www.britannica.com/topic/Lebensraum#:\~:text=defined,The](https://www.britannica.com/topic/Lebensraum#:~:text=defined,The) **\[13\] Britannica.** (2025c). *Rudolf Kjellén*. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de[ ](https://www.britannica.com/biography/Rudolf-Kjell%C3%A9n#:~:text=Realism%20www,that%20flourish%20and%20then%20decay)<https://www.britannica.com/biography/Rudolf-Kjellen> **\[14\] Wikipedia (ZH).** (2025). *Rudolf Kjellén*. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de[ https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/w:Rudolf_Kjell%C3%A9n#:\~:text=Besides%20legalistic%2C%20states%20have%20organic,preservation.%20%5B%203](https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/w:Rudolf_Kjell%C3%A9n#:~:text=Besides%20legalistic%2C%20states%20have%20organic,preservation.%20%5B%203) **\[15\] Wikipedia.** (2025). *Lebensraum*. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de[ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lebensraum#:\~:text=The%20German%20geographer%20and%20ethnographer,into%20the%20Greater%20Germanic%20Reich](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lebensraum#:~:text=The%20German%20geographer%20and%20ethnographer,into%20the%20Greater%20Germanic%20Reich) **\[16\] YouTube.** (2025). *Trump says Ukraine 'unlikely to get all land back' or join NATO* \[Vídeo\]. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de[ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BmHzAVLhsXU#:\~:text=Trump%20says%20Ukraine%20%27unlikely%20to,for%20it%20to%20join%20NATO](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BmHzAVLhsXU#:~:text=Trump%20says%20Ukraine%20%27unlikely%20to,for%20it%20to%20join%20NATO) **\[17\] U.S. Naval Institute.** (2025) Operation World Peace. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de [https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/1955/june/operation-world-peace#:\\\~:text=“The Mahan doctrine%2C” according to,the word “airships” is more](https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/1955/june/operation-world-peace#:%5C~:text=%E2%80%9CThe%20Mahan%20doctrine%2C%E2%80%9D%20according%20to,the%20word%20%E2%80%9Cairships%E2%80%9D%20is%20more) **\[18\] Emissary.** (2024) Trump’s Greenland and Panama Canal Threats Are a Throwback to an Old, Misguided Foreign Policy. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de <https://carnegieendowment.org/emissary/2025/01/trump-greenland-panama-canal-monroe-doctrine-policy?lang=en> **\[19\] A Referência**. Acordo EUA-Ucrânia está praticamente fechado, mas analistas se dividem sobre quem sairá ganhando. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de [https://areferencia.com/europa/acordo-eua-ucrania-esta-praticamente-fechado-mas-analistas-se-dividem-sobre-quem-saira-ganhando/#:\\\~:text=EUA e 17,o acordo a seu favor](https://areferencia.com/europa/acordo-eua-ucrania-esta-praticamente-fechado-mas-analistas-se-dividem-sobre-quem-saira-ganhando/#:%5C~:text=EUA%20%20e%20%2017,o%20acordo%20a%20seu%20favor) **\[20\] Wikipedia.** (2025) Geopolitik. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geopolitik#:\\\~:text=Rudolph Kjellén was Ratzel's Swedish,Kjellén's State](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geopolitik#:%5C~:text=Rudolph%20Kjell%C3%A9n%20was%20Ratzel%27s%20Swedish,Kjell%C3%A9n%27s%20State)

@ 220522c2:61e18cb4

# Heading Lorem ipsum odor amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Vel massa tempor consectetur quisque donec leo posuere phasellus senectus. Ad vivamus fusce facilisis vulputate lacus sollicitudin lorem cras. Ornare quam tortor nunc montes eleifend conubia. Erat facilisi luctus consectetur montes suscipit eu, arcu lacinia nunc. Ornare in facilisis donec pharetra taciti. Efficitur morbi curabitur eget aptent quisque praesent volutpat. ```javascript <div className="flex gap-1"> <Button size="icon-sm" variant="ghost" className={blockType === "code" ? "bg-primary/5" : ""} onClick={onAddCodeBlock} > <BracesIcon className="h-4 w-4" /> </Button> </div> ``` Aliquam aenean accumsan libero feugiat habitasse. Montes eget aptent consequat magna posuere. Molestie sapien nibh morbi penatibus mattis ultricies nisi mauris? Nunc justo curae id suspendisse arcu magna id sit velit. Mattis suspendisse facilisis accumsan viverra habitasse praesent morbi. Integer urna vel conubia efficitur sociosqu accumsan lobortis. Iaculis auctor nisl nibh justo nunc amet taciti. Sagittis penatibus iaculis facilisis, dui himenaeos auctor ridiculus? Elementum torquent sem enim luctus dignissim bibendum est sem nibh. Maecenas fusce tempor integer porta, ligula consequat finibus. Luctus curabitur aliquam semper varius viverra sit dui suspendisse. Inceptos tincidunt gravida accumsan himenaeos suscipit molestie placerat. Adui maximus laoreet maecenas facilisi per turpis elit. Placerat potenti elementum praesent elementum tempus metus. Sapien eros proin suscipit id fusce egestas condimentum. Eget ridiculus ad mi nec ultrices fusce porta. Tempus proin eros cursus congue sagittis lacinia efficitur. Nisi amet nullam sed risus conubia etiam. Cras volutpat inceptos aenean eu gravida. Hendrerit sociosqu viverra vel fames libero. Litora purus commodo cubilia ultrices per ex. Nullam non sociosqu vel sed ridiculus pulvinar diam. Eros efficitur rutrum eleifend torquent primis arcu a posuere? Consequat mus consectetur enim sit id primis lectus tortor. Eros tincidunt lacinia mollis mollis erat odio habitant. Fusce malesuada vestibulum etiam aenean netus gravida. Placerat ridiculus rhoncus efficitur potenti sed magna. Duis ultricies montes id velit iaculis, varius elit mattis. Inceptos rhoncus ultricies suspendisse elementum auctor nisi augue curabitur iaculis. Elementum lectus parturient cubilia hendrerit mi elementum mus. Felis enim rhoncus cursus praesent; erat interdum eget tincidunt nibh. Eu praesent posuere eros curae class purus habitasse donec.

@ 220522c2:61e18cb4

# Heading Lorem `ipsum` odor amet, **consectetuer** adipiscing elit. Vel massa tempor consectetur quisque donec leo posuere phasellus senectus. Ad vivamus fusce facilisis vulputate lacus sollicitudin lorem cras. Ornare quam tortor nunc montes eleifend conubia. Erat facilisi luctus consectetur montes suscipit eu, arcu lacinia nunc. Ornare in facilisis donec pharetra taciti. Efficitur morbi curabitur eget aptent quisque praesent volutpat. Aliquam aenean accumsan libero feugiat habitasse. Montes eget aptent consequat magna posuere. Molestie sapien nibh morbi penatibus mattis ultricies nisi mauris? Nunc justo curae id suspendisse arcu magna id sit velit. Mattis suspendisse facilisis accumsan viverra habitasse praesent morbi. Integer urna vel conubia efficitur sociosqu accumsan lobortis. Iaculis auctor nisl nibh justo nunc amet taciti. Sagittis penatibus iaculis facilisis, dui himenaeos auctor ridiculus? Elementum torquent sem enim luctus dignissim bibendum est sem nibh. Maecenas fusce tempor integer porta, ligula consequat finibus. Luctus curabitur aliquam semper varius viverra sit dui suspendisse. Inceptos tincidunt gravida accumsan himenaeos suscipit molestie placerat. Adui maximus laoreet maecenas facilisi per turpis elit. Placerat potenti elementum praesent elementum tempus metus. Sapien eros proin suscipit id fusce egestas condimentum. Eget ridiculus ad mi nec ultrices fusce porta. Tempus proin eros cursus congue sagittis lacinia efficitur. Nisi amet nullam sed risus conubia etiam. Cras volutpat inceptos aenean eu gravida. Hendrerit sociosqu viverra vel fames libero. Litora purus commodo cubilia ultrices per ex. Nullam non sociosqu vel sed ridiculus pulvinar diam. Eros efficitur rutrum eleifend torquent primis arcu a posuere? Consequat mus consectetur enim sit id primis lectus tortor. Eros tincidunt lacinia mollis mollis erat odio habitant. Fusce malesuada vestibulum etiam aenean netus gravida. Placerat ridiculus rhoncus efficitur potenti sed magna. Duis ultricies montes id velit iaculis, varius elit mattis. Inceptos rhoncus ultricies suspendisse elementum auctor nisi augue curabitur iaculis. Elementum lectus parturient cubilia hendrerit mi elementum mus. Felis enim rhoncus cursus praesent; erat interdum eget tincidunt nibh. Eu praesent posuere eros curae class purus habitasse donec.

@ b7a07661:6aeeee04

### Voilà une liste non exhaustive des événements francophone consacrés à Bitcoin dans la semaine du 3 au 7 mars 2025. Nous vous recommandons de prendre contact avec les organisateurs sur Telegram ou X pour confirmation de l’horaire et du lieu. # Mardi 4 mars **Rennes :** Au Hangar, 1 rue de Dinan à Rennes, à partir de 19h30. En savoir plus : https://x.com/BreizhBitcoin – https://www.breizhbitcoin.com/8-meetups-en-bretagne/ – https://discord.com/invite/gFVe2HcUpw **Poitiers :** Au Café des Arts, 5 Place Charles de Gaulle, à partir de 19h30 En savoir plus : https://twitter.com/BTCPoitiers # Mercredi 5 mars **Amiens :** A la Station, 7 passage Auguste Perret à Amiens (en face de la gare). A partir de 18h30. En savoir plus : https://t.me/AmiensBitcoinMeetupGroup **Annecy :** The Craic, 1 Place Marie Curie. A partir de 19h00. Au programme : Acheter et utiliser vos bitcoins en toute souveraineté. Avec Théo Mogenet. En savoir plus : https://x.com/AnnecyBitcoin – https://t.me/annecybitcoin **Angers :** Dans les locaux de Weforge, 25 rue Lenepveu. A partir de 19h00. Au programme : Workshop – Installation d’un Wallet Bitcoin. En savoir plus : t.me/AngersBitcoinMeetup – x.com/AngersBitcoin **Brest :** A La Fabrick 1801, 25 rue de Pontaniou, Atelier des Capucins, à partir de 18h30. En savoir plus : https://t.me/BrestBitcoinMeetup – https://twitter.com/brestbitcoin **Caen :** Les Relais d’Alsace, 9 Esplanade Léopold Sedar Senghor, à partir de 19h00. En savoir plus : normandiebitcoin.com – discord.gg/42XT34pWb4 – linkedin.com/company/normandiebitcoin – x.com/NormandieBTC – t.me/+X999KCTgP-5lZjg8 – meetup.com/normandiebitcoin **Clermont-Ferrand :** Au Halles du Brézet, 10 Rue Jules Verne. A partir de 19h00. En savoir plus : https://t.me/ClermontFerrandBitcoinMeetup – https://x.com/ClermontBitcoin **Dijon :** Au bar Monsieur Moutarde, 40 Rue des Forges à Dijon, à partir de 19h30. Programme : Suite de l’atelier multisig pour apprendre à utiliser des wallet Ledger afin de créer un setup de sécurité. En savoir plus : https://t.me/DijonBitcoinMeetup – https://twitter.com/GabToken – https://discord.com/invite/VBAVWCCjkR **Genève :** A la Galerie, 13 rue de l’industrie. Beer to beer à partir de 20h00. Au programme : Exploration de Starknet. « Notre intervenant Bachir, développeur sur Starknet, expliquera les principes fondamentaux de ce protocole, son architecture basée sur les preuves de validité (ZK-Rollups), et comment cette technologie pourrait s’intégrer à l’écosystème Bitcoin. Il abordera les défis techniques, les différences avec Ethereum et les perspectives d’un Bitcoin plus scalable grâce aux rollups. » En savoir plus : x.com/BitcoinGenevafr – meetup.com/bitcoin-meetup-geneva – https://t.me/BitcoinGeneva **Lausanne :** Au Qwertz Café, 3 Rue de la Grotte, à partir de 19h00. Au programme : Réunion informelle et conviviale, aussi bien pour découvrir le fonctionnement de bitcoin et que pour discuter entre experts. En savoir plus : https://www.meetup.com/fr-FR/bitcoin-lausanne – https://x.com/BitcoinLausanne **Lille :** Au Café Oz, The Australian Bar, 33 Pl. Louise de Bettignies, à partir de 19h00. Au programme : Echanges libres entre les différents participants et présentation mensuelle (replay disponible sur youtube) réalisée par un des membres de l’association. En savoir plus : bitcoinlille.fr – t.me/bitcoinlille – meetup.com/fr-FR/bitcoinmeetuplille – x.com/BitcoinLille **Lyon :** Au Bouchon Comptoir Brunet, 23 Rue Claudia à partir de 19h00. Au programme : Bières pression (Blonde & surprise), vins locaux, softs, tapas locaux, snacks maison. En savoir plus : https://www.meetup.com/fr-FR/crypto-lyon/ – https://t.me/bitcoinlyon **Mâcon :** Au Flunch Mâcon Sud, à partir de 19h30. Au programme : Atelier pratique pour apprendre à créer un portefeuille. En savoir plus : https://x.com/MeetupBTCMacon – https://allo-crypto.com/meetup-bitcoin/ – https://www.facebook.com/groups/maconmeetupbitcoin **Marseille :** A partir de 20h00 au 13 boulevard d’Athènes 13001 (après le local syndical F.O., avant la traverse Saint-Dominique). Pour entrer dans le bâtiment, il vous suffira de sonner à l’interphone avec le label « JUST ». Au bout de quelques secondes, la porte s’ouvre. La salle de réception se trouve au rez-de-chaussée, première porte à gauche dans le hall, avec le même label « JUST ». Au programme : Fanis Michalakis parlera de Lightning, de l’USDT qui arrive sur le réseau Bitcoin et des nouveautés côté régulation. En savoir plus : t.me/MarseilleBitcoinMeetup – x.com/MarseilleBTC **Rouen :** Au Bar des Fleurs, 36 Place des Carmes, à partir de 19h00. En savoir plus : https://x.com/NormandieBTC – normandiebitcoin.com – t.me/+X999KCTgP-5lZjg8 – meetup.com/normandiebitcoin **Saint Brieuc :** Au Makio Bar – 13 impasse Lavoisier, Trégueux, à partir de 19h00. En savoir plus : https://x.com/StBrieucBitcoin **Saint-Lô :** Au Bar le NorthWood, 34 Rue du Belle, à partir de 20h00. En savoir plus : https://signal.group/#CjQKIPYUbHyAO2OjdF1BfTD2iDsiJxtrF4QBmr74JAuD8t1PEhCBeWlwDf8e1qvHoStQfqkI – https://x.com/Saint_Lo_BTC **Paris :** Au Sof’s Bar, 43 Rue Saint-Sauveur, à partir de 18h00. En savoir plus : meetup.com/fr-FR/Bitcoin-Paris – t.me/ParisCentreBitcoinMeetup – x.com/ParisBTCmeetup **Valence :** Au VEX, 811 allée André Revol à Bourg-lès-Valence, à partir de 18h30. En savoir plus : https://x.com/valencebtc – https://t.me/valencebtc # Jeudi 6 mars **Brest :** A l’IMT Atlantique, 655 Avenue du Technopôle à Plouzané, de 17h00 à 18h30. Au programme : Alexandre Stachtchenko de Paymium, animera une conférence sur Bitcoin et ses enjeux. En savoir plus : https://lu.ma/gp3xgd72 **Nantes :** Au Little William, Place St Felix à partir de 19h00. En savoir plus : https://t.me/nantesbitcoinmeetup – https://twitter.com/NantesBitcoin – https://www.facebook.com/people/Nantes-Bitcoin-Meetup/61552725519617/ **Saint-Nazaire :** Au Jardin d’Asie, 17 Rue du Bois Savary, à partir de 19h00 En savoir plus : https://mobilizon.fr/@saintnazaire_bitcoin – https://signal.group/#CjQKIM24oe8gw83bjJzVUKSOk1dvm_UcxU5K-WaWCYTgQtoOEhBD0Tt84cO0u8Br9ZVy-ZfS – https://x.com/SaintNazaireBTC # Vendredi 7 mars **Saint-Malo :** Bar L’Encrier, 2 Passage Grande Hermine, à partir de 18h30. Au programme : Gilles Cadignan de BullBitcoin viendra faire une présentation des services de son entreprise, du portefeuille développé par leurs équipes (qui intègre les swaps vers Lightning et Liquid) ainsi que le concept des Payjoins pour une confidentialité accrue sur les transactions. En savoir plus : https://t.me/SaintMaloBitcoinMeetup – https://www.breizhbitcoin.com/8-meetups-en-bretagne/ – https://twitter.com/stMaloBTCMeetup – https://discord.gg/CwqE5n8UG3

@ 9ea10fd4:011d3b15

(Le français suit) I have the feeling of two brothers trying to remove the speck from each other’s eye but failing to see the beam in their own. 1. To liberal democracies, I say: The war in Ukraine, led by NATO, is a bad war that could have easily been avoided and would not have happened if NATO had respected the logic that applies to a country like Ukraine, adjacent to a great power, Russia. As a counterexample, would the United States accept a Russian or allied military presence on the Mexican border? It is so obvious that denying it is pure bad faith. I will not shed tears over your graves. 2. To the populist far-right, I say: To borrow the words of Le Monde’s editorial, too often, the denunciation of attacks on freedom of expression serves to mask the defense of the economic model of social media platforms owned by billionaires who, by promoting confrontation and fake news, spread hatred, hinder informed debate, and undermine democracy. Behind the idea of unlimited “free speech” lurks “the promotion of a far-right ideology eager to replace the rule of law with the law of the strongest, to the detriment of policies protecting social rights, women, and other victims of discrimination.” Regarding political history, let it be noted that “this situation is the result of three decades of economic liberalism, which institutional left-wing forces have also embraced” (Alain Lipietz). “It must be acknowledged: Trump’s United States is no longer a protection but a threat to democracy in Europe.” [Les Etats-Unis de Donald Trump, une menace pour la démocratie en Europe](https://www.lemonde.fr/en/opinion/article/2025/02/21/trump-s-united-states-is-now-a-threat-to-democracy-in-europe_6738413_23.html) ** J’ai le sentiment de deux frères qui essaient d’enlever la paille dans l’œil de l’autre, mais ne voient pas la poutre dans le leur. 1. Aux démocraties libérales, je dis : La guerre en Ukraine menée par l’OTAN est une mauvaise guerre qui aurait facilement pu être évitée et qui n’aurait pas eu lieu si l’OTAN avait respecté la logique s’appliquant à un pays, l’Ukraine, adjacent à une grande puissance, la Russie. En contre-exemple, les États-Unis accepteraient-ils une présence militaire russe ou de leurs alliés à la frontière avec le Mexique ? C’est tellement évident que c’en est de la mauvaise foi. Je n'irai pas pleurer sur vos tombes. 2. À l’extrême-droite populiste, je dis : Pour reprendre les termes de l’éditorial du journal Le Monde, trop souvent la dénonciation des entorses à la liberté d’expression masque la défense du modèle économique de médias sociaux détenus par des milliardaires qui, en promouvant la confrontation et les fake news, diffusent la haine, entravent les débats éclairés et sapent la démocratie. Sous la conception d’un « free speech » sans limite, « pointe la promotion d’une idéologie d’extrême droite avide de substituer la loi du plus fort aux politiques de défense des droits sociaux, des femmes et des autres victimes de discriminations ». En ce qui concerne l’histoire politique, qu'il soit noté que « cette situation résulte de trois décennies de libéralisme économique, auxquelles se sont ralliées les forces de la gauche institutionnelle » (Alain Lipietz). « Il faut se rendre à l’évidence : les Etats-Unis de Trump ne constituent plus une protection mais une menace pour la démocratie en Europe. » [Les Etats-Unis de Donald Trump, une menace pour la démocratie en Europe](https://www.lemonde.fr/idees/article/2025/02/21/les-etats-unis-de-trump-menace-pour-la-democratie-en-europe_6557361_3232.html)

@ d5c3d063:4d1159b3

มีคำถามหนึ่งที่อาจเคยแว่บเข้ามาในใจเรา...“ความสุขคืออะไร” คำถามนี้ดูเหมือนจะง่าย แต่คำตอบกลับไม่ง่ายเลย ลองคิดดู...เราเคยมีช่วงเวลาที่รู้สึกว่าได้ในสิ่งที่ต้องการแล้ว แต่พอเวลาผ่านไป กลับพบว่าความสุขนั้นอยู่กับเราไม่นาน หรือบางที สิ่งที่เราเคยคิดว่าจะทำให้เรามีความสุข พอได้มาแล้วกลับกลายเป็นภาระเสียอย่างนั้น ในรายการ CDC Talk EP25 #ลุงโฉลก ได้พูดถึงแนวคิดที่ทำให้เราต้องย้อนมามองตัวเองว่า "สุขที่เราเข้าใจ มันเป็นสุขจริง ๆ หรือเปล่า" . คนส่วนใหญ่มักคิดว่า ความสุขเกิดจากการได้สิ่งที่ต้องการ เช่น มีเงินมากขึ้น ได้เลื่อนตำแหน่ง ได้รับการยอมรับหรือมีความสัมพันธ์ที่ดี แต่สิ่งเหล่านี้ล้วนเป็นสุขที่ต้องแลกมาด้วยความพยายาม บางครั้งต้องใช้แรงกายแรงใจอย่างมากเพื่อให้ได้มา และเมื่อได้มาแล้วก็ต้องรักษามันไว้ ในทางกลับกัน ถ้าสิ่งที่ทำให้เรามีความสุขสามารถถูกพรากไปจากเราได้ นั่นหมายความว่าความสุขนั้นมีวันหมดอายุ เช่นเดียวกับความรู้สึกตื่นเต้นเวลาซื้อของใหม่ ๆ ที่จางหายไปเมื่อเวลาผ่านไป หรือความสำเร็จที่ครั้งหนึ่งเคยทำให้เราภูมิใจ แต่ไม่นานก็ถูกแทนที่ด้วยเป้าหมายใหม่ที่ใหญ่กว่าเดิม . ลุงโฉลกอธิบายว่า “ความสุขไม่ได้เกิดจากการไขว่คว้า แต่เกิดจากการไม่มีทุกข์” ลองนึกถึงเวลาที่เรานั่งอยู่ในที่เงียบ ๆ ลมพัดเย็น ๆ ไม่มีสิ่งใดกวนใจ ไม่ต้องดิ้นรน ไม่ต้องเร่งรีบ เราไม่ได้มีความสุขเพราะมีบางสิ่งเพิ่มขึ้น แต่เพราะไม่มีอะไรทำให้เราทุกข์ต่างหาก สุขที่เกิดจากการไม่มีทุกข์นี้เองที่เรียกว่า "นิรามิสสุข" หรือสุขที่ไม่ได้เกิดจากวัตถุหรือเงื่อนไขใด ๆ สุขแบบนี้เป็นสุขที่ไม่ต้องดิ้นรน ไม่ต้องแสวงหา และไม่ต้องรักษาไว้ เพราะมันเป็นสุขที่เกิดขึ้นเองตามธรรมชาติ เมื่อใจเราสงบ เมื่อเราไม่ต้องต่อสู้กับอะไรเลย ไม่ต้องเอาชนะใคร ไม่ต้องพิสูจน์ตัวเองให้ใครเห็น และที่สำคัญที่สุด...ไม่ต้องคาดหวังให้มันอยู่กับเราไปตลอด . เราไม่ได้บอกว่าความสุขจากวัตถุหรือความสำเร็จเป็นเรื่องไม่ดี แต่เราควรตระหนักว่าสุขแบบนั้นไม่ยั่งยืน และหากเราเข้าใจว่าความสุขที่แท้จริงเกิดจากภายใน เราก็จะสามารถชื่นชมความสุขภายนอกได้โดยไม่ยึดติด สุขที่ไม่ได้เป็นสุข ก็คือสุขที่ต้องแลกมาด้วยทุกข์ สุขที่แท้จริง อาจเป็นแค่การปล่อยวาง ปล่อยให้ทุกสิ่งเป็นไปตามทางของมัน แล้วเราก็อยู่กับมันอย่างสงบ เท่านี้ก็เพียงพอแล้ว . สุดท้าย บางทีคำตอบของคำถามที่ว่า “ความสุขคืออะไร” อาจไม่ได้อยู่ที่การไขว่คว้า แต่เป็นการมองเห็นว่าสิ่งที่เรามีอยู่ก็มีคุณค่าในตัวมันเอง เมื่อเราเลิกยึดติดกับเงื่อนไขของความสุข ปล่อยวางความกังวลและเปิดใจยอมรับปัจจุบัน เราจะพบว่าแท้จริงแล้ว ความสุขไม่ได้เป็นเพียงการไม่มีทุกข์ แต่คือความสงบเรียบง่ายและความสุขที่ไม่ต้องพึ่งพาสิ่งใด 🙃 #Siamstr

@ 0463223a:3b14d673

It’s now been a full week without prescribed drugs for being a spaz. The last week was tough to be honest, sleepless nights, constantly restless and uncomfortable, nausea, diarrhoea, headaches. Not dissimilar to giving up certain illegal drugs, not quite on a par with opiates but not dissimilar. The physical symptoms have mostly subsided but I am rather emotionally unstable. I can imagine the Stoics of Nostr being quite stoically unimpressed by these ramblings. Obviously men never have emotions or feelings etc. We only discuss important subjects such as the works of Mises and Rothbard, we have no comprehension of the difference between art and craft, that’s for the women folk. We’re just a plain wallpaper of rational actions buying bitcoin bitcoin bitcoin... Fuck that lol. I mean cool if that’s you, it’s not me. I started out a spaz and it’ll likely I’ll continue to be a spaz. I’m still trying to improve myself, I lifted some heavy things up and down this morning, eaten a healthy breakfast (although it wasn’t raw meat and salt, sorry) and am about to set about some practice before tonight’s session helping local youngsters with their music. I’ve worked my way through emails and I’m now writing this shit instead of doing some other bollocks. Maybe one day I’ll string a half coherent sentence together and become a V4V billionaire.... Existential dread is a laugh innit? I have no idea what the fuck I’m doing. I’ll make more music but it’s pretty futile. The hours of labour vs the financial return is terrible. I find it pretty amusing watching the numbers on my streams drop off in the morning whenever I play any of my own music... Clear market signals if ever I saw them but I stubbornly crack on anyway. I’m sure at some point, through the process of putting shit on the internet, something will happen that’s of value to someone. Actually I have some nice supporters online which is very much appreciated and, as I said on my stream this morning, I’m grateful the same people come back each day. It’s like the most underground little club on the internet. I have 20 subscribers, no YouTube, X or Meta accounts. No LinkedIn. All is done on the free and open internet, either on a server I own or via some magical relays. So obviously this makes me 10x harder than Mark Zuckerberg, no matter how much Ju Jitsu he does. I’m not riffling through your underwear like a creepy perv. If anyone reading this is ever wondering why capitalism gets such a bad rep, it’s because some of us are really, really shit at it. But I have a shed, no one’s taking that away from me. My cat is bad ass, I have an amazing wife and the sun is shining. I have a lot to be grateful for. I’ll keep trying to think of ways to earn a coin without selling my soul to the devil. There’s trade offs a plenty but I take responsibility for my own shit and I don’t have to sully myself with corporate bullshit. Onwards and upwards. It’s a great day! As Craig David didn’t once sing… Stopped taking drugs on Monday Sleepless night and shivers on Tuesday We were throwing up by Wednesday And on Thursday & Friday & Saturday we chilled on Sunday

@ a012dc82:6458a70d

The dynamic landscape of Bitcoin and blockchain technology is a testament to the relentless innovation and debate that drives this sector forward. A pivotal figure in this narrative is Adam Back, CEO of Blockstream, whose recent insights and proposals have stirred a significant conversation within the Bitcoin community. His stance on the indomitable nature of JPEGs and other media inscriptions on the Bitcoin blockchain, along with his suggestion for a block size increase, is not just a technical observation but a philosophical statement about the future direction of Bitcoin. This article delves into the implications of Back's views, exploring how they could shape the trajectory of Bitcoin in the years to come. **Table of Contents** - The Unstoppable Nature of Bitcoin Inscriptions - JPEGs on the Blockchain: A New Reality - Implications for the Bitcoin Ecosystem - Adam Back's Proposal for Block Size Increase - A Technical Solution to a Growing Challenge - Balancing Innovation and Network Integrity - Comparative Analysis with Ethereum's Innovations - Bitcoin and Ethereum: Divergent Paths Converging? - Learning from Ethereum's Approach - Conclusion - FAQs **The Unstoppable Nature of Bitcoin Inscriptions** **JPEGs on the Blockchain: A New Reality** Adam Back's acknowledgment of the unstoppable nature of JPEGs on the Bitcoin blockchain is a watershed moment. It signifies a recognition of the blockchain's evolving utility, transcending its original financial transactional purpose. This evolution raises fundamental questions about the nature of Bitcoin. Is it merely a financial tool, or is it morphing into a broader digital canvas for various forms of data? The embedding of JPEGs and other media, known as inscriptions, is not just a technical feat but a cultural shift in the perception and usage of Bitcoin. **Implications for the Bitcoin Ecosystem** The phenomenon of media inscriptions on the Bitcoin blockchain is a double-edged sword. On one hand, it showcases the network's versatility and the ingenuity of its users. On the other hand, it introduces new challenges in terms of network efficiency and focus. The primary concern is the potential for network congestion, as the blockchain is burdened with non-financial data. This could lead to slower transaction times and higher fees for traditional Bitcoin transactions, potentially undermining the network's primary purpose as a digital currency. Moreover, there's a philosophical debate within the community about the purity of Bitcoin's original vision versus its evolving nature. **Adam Back's Proposal for Block Size Increase** **A Technical Solution to a Growing Challenge** In response to the burgeoning use of Bitcoin for media inscriptions, Adam Back has put forth a bold proposal: increasing the block size of the Bitcoin blockchain. This proposal is not merely a technical adjustment; it's a strategic move to accommodate the growing diversity of uses of the Bitcoin network. By introducing a "segwit annex" for additional space in each block, Back is advocating for a more inclusive Bitcoin that can support both its traditional financial role and its emerging function as a digital ledger for various forms of data. **Balancing Innovation and Network Integrity** The crux of Back's proposal lies in finding a middle ground between fostering innovation and preserving the network's efficiency and purpose. The proposed block size increase is a recognition that the Bitcoin network needs to evolve to accommodate new uses while ensuring that it remains a robust and efficient platform for financial transactions. This proposal also reflects a pragmatic approach to blockchain development, acknowledging that rigid adherence to original designs may not be suitable in the face of changing user behaviors and technological advancements. **Comparative Analysis with Ethereum's Innovations** **Bitcoin and Ethereum: Divergent Paths Converging?** The proposed changes to Bitcoin's block structure draw an interesting parallel with developments in the Ethereum blockchain. Ethereum's EIP-4844, known as Proto-Danksharding, introduces the concept of temporary data blobs with a separate fee market, a concept somewhat mirrored in Back's proposal for Bitcoin. This comparison is crucial as it underscores the evolving nature of blockchain technology and the different paths taken by these two leading networks. While Bitcoin has traditionally focused on being a digital currency, Ethereum has been more open to diverse applications from its inception. **Learning from Ethereum's Approach** Ethereum's approach to scalability and functionality, particularly with EIP-4844, offers valuable lessons for Bitcoin. It demonstrates the feasibility of integrating new features and capabilities into an established blockchain network while maintaining its core functions. For Bitcoin, adopting a similar approach could mean not only enhanced functionality but also increased relevance in a rapidly evolving digital landscape. It's a testament to the fluidity and adaptability of blockchain technology, where innovations in one network can inspire and inform developments in another. **Conclusion** Adam Back's perspective on JPEGs and his proposal for block size expansion mark a critical moment in the evolution of Bitcoin. As the Bitcoin community navigates these developments, it faces the challenge of embracing change while staying true to the core principles that have defined Bitcoin since its inception. The future of Bitcoin, shaped by these ongoing discussions and decisions, remains a fascinating and significant topic in the broader narrative of cryptocurrency and blockchain technology. The path Bitcoin takes will not only influence its own trajectory but also set precedents for the future development of blockchain technology as a whole. **FAQs** **What is Adam Back's stance on JPEGs on the Bitcoin blockchain?** Adam Back, CEO of Blockstream, acknowledges that embedding JPEGs and other media, known as inscriptions, on the Bitcoin blockchain is unstoppable. He views this as a natural evolution of the blockchain's capabilities. **Why is the embedding of JPEGs on Bitcoin significant?** The embedding of JPEGs signifies a shift in how the Bitcoin blockchain is used, extending beyond its original purpose of financial transactions to a broader digital platform for various data types. **What is Adam Back's proposal for the Bitcoin blockchain?** Adam Back proposes increasing the Bitcoin block size to accommodate the growing use of the network for media inscriptions. This includes adding a "segwit annex" for additional space in each block. **How does Adam Back's proposal aim to balance Bitcoin's functionality?** Back's proposal aims to balance innovation with network efficiency by providing dedicated space for inscriptions, thus managing network congestion while maintaining efficient transaction processing. **That's all for today** **If you want more, be sure to follow us on:** **NOSTR: croxroad@getalby.com** **X: [@croxroadnewsco](https://x.com/croxroadnewsco)** **Instagram: [@croxroadnews.co/](https://www.instagram.com/croxroadnews.co/)** **Youtube: [@thebitcoinlibertarian](https://www.youtube.com/@thebitcoinlibertarian)** **Store: https://croxroad.store** **Subscribe to CROX ROAD Bitcoin Only Daily Newsletter** **https://www.croxroad.co/subscribe** **Get Orange Pill App And Connect With Bitcoiners In Your Area. Stack Friends Who Stack Sats link: https://signup.theorangepillapp.com/opa/croxroad** **Buy Bitcoin Books At Konsensus Network Store. 10% Discount With Code “21croxroad” link: https://bitcoinbook.shop?ref=21croxroad** ***DISCLAIMER: None of this is financial advice. This newsletter is strictly educational and is not investment advice or a solicitation to buy or sell any assets or to make any financial decisions. Please be careful and do your own research.***

@ 95cb4330:96db706c

The **Eisenhower Matrix**, also known as the **Urgent-Important Matrix**, is a powerful time-management tool that helps prioritize tasks based on their urgency and importance. Developed from former President Dwight D. Eisenhower's management style, this matrix enables individuals to focus on activities that drive long-term success while effectively managing immediate demands. --- ## How the Eisenhower Matrix Works Tasks are categorized into four quadrants: 1. **Urgent and Important:** Tasks requiring immediate attention and contributing significantly to your goals. - *Examples:* Crisis management, pressing deadlines. - *Action:* Address these tasks promptly to prevent escalation. 2. **Important but Not Urgent:** Tasks that are vital for long-term success but do not require immediate action. - *Examples:* Strategic planning, skill development. - *Action:* Schedule specific times to focus on these activities, ensuring consistent progress. 3. **Urgent but Not Important:** Tasks that demand quick attention but have less impact on your long-term objectives. - *Examples:* Interruptions, non-essential meetings. - *Action:* Delegate these tasks when possible to free up time for more important activities. 4. **Neither Urgent nor Important:** Tasks that offer minimal value and can be considered distractions. - *Examples:* Time-wasting activities, excessive social media use. - *Action:* Eliminate or minimize engagement in these tasks to enhance productivity. --- ## Benefits of Using the Eisenhower Matrix - **Enhanced Productivity:** By focusing on important tasks, you achieve meaningful progress toward your goals. - **Improved Time Management:** Distinguishing between urgent and important tasks helps allocate time more effectively. - **Reduced Stress:** Prioritizing tasks prevents last-minute rushes and the anxiety associated with looming deadlines. --- ## Implementing the Eisenhower Matrix 1. **List Your Tasks:** Write down all tasks and responsibilities. 2. **Categorize Each Task:** Assign each task to one of the four quadrants based on its urgency and importance. 3. **Take Appropriate Action:** Manage each task according to its quadrant's recommended action plan. 4. **Review Regularly:** Consistently assess and adjust your task list to ensure alignment with your evolving goals and priorities. --- By integrating the Eisenhower Matrix into your daily routine, you can enhance focus, productivity, and overall effectiveness in both personal and professional endeavors. For a visual guide on implementing the Eisenhower Matrix, you might find this tutorial helpful: [Beginner's Guide to the Eisenhower Matrix](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tLLyi50M5KM)

@ 220522c2:61e18cb4

# test

@ da0b9bc3:4e30a4a9

Hello Stackers! Welcome on into the ~Music Corner of the Saloon! A place where we Talk Music. Share Tracks. Zap Sats. So stay a while and listen. 🚨Don't forget to check out the pinned items in the territory homepage! You can always find the latest weeklies there!🚨 🚨Subscribe to the territory to ensure you never miss a post! 🚨 originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/902254

@ 220522c2:61e18cb4

# some title  and here's a youtube video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ

@ 09fbf8f3:fa3d60f0

快速轻松地删除任何图像的元数据。在网上共享照片、视频和文档之前，可以先从照片、视频和文档中删除元数据，来保护自己的隐私。 链接： [网站地址](https://crazymarvin.com/metadata-remover/) | [项目地址](https://github.com/Crazy-Marvin/MetadataRemover) --- 推广链接： 低调云（VPN）： https://didiaocloud.xyz

@ 220522c2:61e18cb4

# Test gif 

@ d360efec:14907b5f

**การวิเคราะห์แต่ละ Timeframe (TF):** 1. **TF 15m (Intraday):** * **แนวโน้ม:** Bearish (แต่เริ่มมีสัญญาณกลับตัวเล็กน้อย). ราคาเคยอยู่ใต้ EMA ทั้งสอง แต่เริ่มขยับขึ้นมาเหนือ EMA 50. * **SMC:** * มี Bearish OB ชัดเจนที่ ~93,000 (ทดสอบแล้วไม่ผ่านในวันที่ 1 มี.ค.). * มี Bullish OB ที่ ~86,000-87,000 (ราคาลงไปทดสอบแล้วดีดกลับ). * SSL: ~86,845, ~83,859 (ถูกกวาดไปแล้ว). * BSL: ~92,669 (อาจเป็นเป้าหมายถัดไป). * **Trend Strength:** เมฆยังเป็นสีแดง แต่เริ่มจางลง. มีลูกศร Buy เล็กๆ. * **กลยุทธ์ Day Trade (SMC):** * **ระมัดระวัง:** ตลาดมีความผันผวน. แนวโน้มหลักยังเป็นขาลง, แต่ระยะสั้นเริ่มมีแรงซื้อ. * **Option 1 (Aggressive):** Buy เมื่อราคาย่อลงมาใกล้ Bullish OB (~87,000) หรือ EMA 50. ตั้ง Stop Loss ใต้ OB. เป้าหมายทำกำไรที่ BSL (~92,669) หรือ Bearish OB เดิม. * **Option 2 (Conservative):** รอให้ราคา Breakout เหนือ Bearish OB (~93,000) อย่างชัดเจน แล้วค่อยพิจารณา Buy ตาม. * **Short:** ถ้าจะ Short, รอให้ราคาขึ้นไปใกล้ Bearish OB อีกครั้ง แล้วเกิดสัญญาณ Bearish Reversal (เช่น Bearish Engulfing) ค่อย Short. 2. **TF 4H (ระยะกลาง):** * **แนวโน้ม:** Bearish. ราคาอยู่ใต้ EMA ทั้งสอง, EMA 50 อยู่ใต้ EMA 200. * **SMC:** * Bearish OB ใหญ่: ~95,000-100,000. * SSL: ~83,559.5, ~81,260.4, ~78,961.4 (เป้าหมายระยะกลาง-ยาว). * BSL: 105,543.4 * **Trend Strength:** เมฆสีแดงเข้ม. สัญญาณ Sell. * **กลยุทธ์:** เน้น Short. รอ Pullback ไปใกล้ EMA หรือ Bearish OB แล้วหาจังหวะ Short. 3. **TF Day (ระยะยาว):** * **แนวโน้ม:** ยังคงเป็น Bearish, แต่เริ่มเห็นสัญญาณการชะลอตัว. ราคาหลุด EMA 200 ลงมา * **SMC**: มี Order Block ใหญ่ที่ $90,000 - $100,000 * **Trend Strength:** เมฆเริ่มเปลี่ยนจากสีแดงเข้ม เป็นสีแดงจางลง. ยังไม่มีสัญญาณ Buy ที่ชัดเจน. * **กลยุทธ์:** ยังไม่ควร Long. รอสัญญาณกลับตัวที่ชัดเจนกว่านี้ (เช่น Breakout เหนือ EMA 50, เกิด Bullish Divergence). **สรุปและข้อควรระวัง:** * แนวโน้มหลักของ BTC ยังคงเป็นขาลง (Bearish) ในทุก Timeframe. * TF 15m เริ่มมีสัญญาณการกลับตัวระยะสั้น (Bullish Reversal) แต่ยังต้องระวัง เพราะยังอยู่ในแนวโน้มหลักขาลง. * Smart Money อาจกำลังสะสม (Accumulation) ที่ระดับราคาปัจจุบัน. * **สิ่งที่ต้องระวัง:** ข่าว, ความผันผวน, การ "กวาด" Stop Loss (Liquidity Sweep). **Disclaimer:** การวิเคราะห์นี้เป็นเพียงความคิดเห็นส่วนตัว ไม่ถือเป็นคำแนะนำในการลงทุน ผู้ลงทุนควรศึกษาข้อมูลเพิ่มเติมและตัดสินใจด้วยความรอบคอบ

@ 220522c2:61e18cb4

# some title  Lorem ipsum odor amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Vel massa tempor consectetur quisque donec leo posuere phasellus senectus. Ad vivamus fusce facilisis vulputate lacus sollicitudin lorem cras. Ornare quam tortor nunc montes eleifend conubia. Erat facilisi luctus consectetur montes suscipit eu, arcu lacinia nunc. Ornare in facilisis donec pharetra taciti. Efficitur morbi curabitur eget aptent quisque praesent volutpat. Aliquam aenean accumsan libero feugiat habitasse. Montes eget aptent consequat magna posuere. Molestie sapien nibh morbi penatibus mattis ultricies nisi mauris? Nunc justo curae id suspendisse arcu magna id sit velit. Mattis suspendisse facilisis accumsan viverra habitasse praesent morbi. Integer urna vel conubia efficitur sociosqu accumsan lobortis. Iaculis auctor nisl nibh justo nunc amet taciti. Sagittis penatibus iaculis facilisis, dui himenaeos auctor ridiculus? Elementum torquent sem enim luctus dignissim bibendum est sem nibh. Maecenas fusce tempor integer porta, ligula consequat finibus. Luctus curabitur aliquam semper varius viverra sit dui suspendisse. Inceptos tincidunt gravida accumsan himenaeos suscipit molestie placerat. Adui maximus laoreet maecenas facilisi per turpis elit. Placerat potenti elementum praesent elementum tempus metus. Sapien eros proin suscipit id fusce egestas condimentum. Eget ridiculus ad mi nec ultrices fusce porta. Tempus proin eros cursus congue sagittis lacinia efficitur. Nisi amet nullam sed risus conubia etiam. Cras volutpat inceptos aenean eu gravida. Hendrerit sociosqu viverra vel fames libero. Litora purus commodo cubilia ultrices per ex. Nullam non sociosqu vel sed ridiculus pulvinar diam. Eros efficitur rutrum eleifend torquent primis arcu a posuere? Consequat mus consectetur enim sit id primis lectus tortor. Eros tincidunt lacinia mollis mollis erat odio habitant. Fusce malesuada vestibulum etiam aenean netus gravida. Placerat ridiculus rhoncus efficitur potenti sed magna. Duis ultricies montes id velit iaculis, varius elit mattis. Inceptos rhoncus ultricies suspendisse elementum auctor nisi augue curabitur iaculis. Elementum lectus parturient cubilia hendrerit mi elementum mus. Felis enim rhoncus cursus praesent; erat interdum eget tincidunt nibh. Eu praesent posuere eros curae class purus habitasse donec. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ

@ 95cb4330:96db706c

Adopting Single-Threaded Leadership, as implemented by Jeff Bezos at Amazon, involves assigning full ownership of a high-impact initiative to one individual. This strategy ensures accountability, accelerates decision-making, and fosters deep focus, leading to more effective execution. --- ## Understanding Single-Threaded Leadership - **Definition:** A leadership approach where a dedicated leader focuses exclusively on a specific project or goal, free from competing responsibilities. This model contrasts with traditional structures where leaders juggle multiple projects simultaneously. [medium.com](https://medium.com) --- ## Examples in Practice - **Amazon's Single-Threaded Leaders:** Jeff Bezos structured Amazon's key initiatives around single-threaded leaders, ensuring they could drive results without distractions. This approach has been credited with enhancing innovation and operational efficiency within the company. - **Elon Musk's Focused Leadership:** Elon Musk exemplifies intense focus by dedicating his attention to one company at a time, such as Tesla, SpaceX, or Neuralink, thereby propelling each forward without splitting his attention. --- ## Implementing Single-Threaded Leadership 1. **Identify High-Impact Projects:** Determine which initiatives are critical to your organization's success and would benefit from dedicated leadership. 2. **Assign Sole Ownership:** Appoint a leader whose primary responsibility is the success of that specific project, minimizing their involvement in unrelated tasks. 3. **Empower Decision-Making:** Grant the single-threaded leader the authority to make decisions and allocate resources necessary for the project's success. 4. **Minimize Dependencies:** Structure the project to reduce reliance on other teams or departments, allowing the leader to maintain momentum without unnecessary delays. --- ## Action Step Evaluate your current projects to identify where responsibilities are fragmented. Select a high-priority initiative and assign one person full responsibility, ensuring they have the autonomy and resources to execute effectively without unnecessary dependencies. --- By implementing single-threaded leadership, organizations can enhance focus, streamline decision-making, and drive successful outcomes in their most critical projects. For a deeper understanding of this concept, consider watching this discussion: [Single-Threaded Leadership: How Amazon Solved Organizational Scaling Challenges](https://pedrodelgallego.github.io/blog/amazon/single-threaded-model/) ---

@ 220522c2:61e18cb4

# My cool article 2 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ Lorem ipsum odor amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Vel massa tempor consectetur quisque donec leo posuere phasellus senectus. Ad vivamus fusce facilisis vulputate lacus sollicitudin lorem cras. Ornare quam tortor nunc montes eleifend conubia. Erat facilisi luctus consectetur montes suscipit eu, arcu lacinia nunc. Ornare in facilisis donec pharetra taciti. Efficitur morbi curabitur eget aptent quisque praesent volutpat. Aliquam aenean accumsan libero feugiat habitasse. Montes eget aptent consequat magna posuere. Molestie sapien nibh morbi penatibus mattis ultricies nisi mauris? Nunc justo curae id suspendisse arcu magna id sit velit. Mattis suspendisse facilisis accumsan viverra habitasse praesent morbi. Integer urna vel conubia efficitur sociosqu accumsan lobortis. Iaculis auctor nisl nibh justo nunc amet taciti. Sagittis penatibus iaculis facilisis, dui himenaeos auctor ridiculus? Elementum torquent sem enim luctus dignissim bibendum est sem nibh. Maecenas fusce tempor integer porta, ligula consequat finibus. Luctus curabitur aliquam semper varius viverra sit dui suspendisse. Inceptos tincidunt gravida accumsan himenaeos suscipit molestie placerat. Adui maximus laoreet maecenas facilisi per turpis elit. Placerat potenti elementum praesent elementum tempus metus. Sapien eros proin suscipit id fusce egestas condimentum. Eget ridiculus ad mi nec ultrices fusce porta. Tempus proin eros cursus congue sagittis lacinia efficitur. Nisi amet nullam sed risus conubia etiam. Cras volutpat inceptos aenean eu gravida. Hendrerit sociosqu viverra vel fames libero. Litora purus commodo cubilia ultrices per ex. Nullam non sociosqu vel sed ridiculus pulvinar diam. Eros efficitur rutrum eleifend torquent primis arcu a posuere? Consequat mus consectetur enim sit id primis lectus tortor. Eros tincidunt lacinia mollis mollis erat odio habitant. Fusce malesuada vestibulum etiam aenean netus gravida. Placerat ridiculus rhoncus efficitur potenti sed magna. Duis ultricies montes id velit iaculis, varius elit mattis. Inceptos rhoncus ultricies suspendisse elementum auctor nisi augue curabitur iaculis. Elementum lectus parturient cubilia hendrerit mi elementum mus. Felis enim rhoncus cursus praesent; erat interdum eget tincidunt nibh. Eu praesent posuere eros curae class purus habitasse donec.

@ 95cb4330:96db706c

Most people make decisions based on averages—what usually happens. But in high-impact fields like investing, startups, and technology, outliers drive the biggest results. Instead of asking, "What is the average outcome?" ask: - ✔ **What is the full range of possible outcomes?** - ✔ **How can I maximize the upside while protecting against the worst-case scenario?** --- ## Example in Action: Bezos, Thiel & Altman ### Jeff Bezos & AWS When launching Amazon Web Services (AWS), Bezos saw a small chance of massive success—cloud computing dominance—against a limited downside (R&D costs). He optimized for the best-case scenario, which became a trillion-dollar business. ### Peter Thiel & Venture Capital Thiel’s Power Law investing philosophy is based on distributions: Instead of funding many "average" startups, he focuses on a few outliers that can return 100x or more (e.g., Facebook, Palantir). ### Sam Altman & OpenAI Altman understands that AI breakthroughs follow an exponential curve—a small chance of creating AGI (Artificial General Intelligence) is worth more than incremental AI improvements. --- ## How to Apply This Thinking ### Map the Full Range of Outcomes Instead of assuming an "average" result, consider: - **Best-case scenario:** How big can this get? - **Worst-case scenario:** What’s my downside risk? - **Unlikely but extreme possibilities:** What are the hidden risks or rare events? ### Optimize for Asymmetric Upside Focus on decisions where the upside is massive, even if the probability is low. - **Example:** Launching a new product in an emerging market versus incrementally improving an existing one. ### Protect Against Catastrophic Downside Even if an outlier event has a small chance, if it can ruin you, avoid it. - **Example:** Diversifying investments instead of going all-in on one bet. --- ## Resources to Learn More - Understanding Distributions vs. Averages – Farnam Street - Jeff Bezos on Thinking Long-Term – Harvard Business Review - Peter Thiel’s Power Law Thinking – NFX --- ## Action Step: Apply This Today - **Pick one major decision you're working on.** - Instead of assuming an "average" result, analyze the full distribution of outcomes. - Ask: *Am I optimizing for a rare, high-upside event while managing the worst-case risks?* --- By thinking in distributions, you make better strategic bets, spot hidden risks, and maximize your long-term impact. 🚀

@ 220522c2:61e18cb4

# My cool article  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ `;lasdjf` https://x.com/i/web/status/1896286208025936259 Lorem ipsum odor amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Vel massa tempor consectetur quisque donec leo posuere phasellus senectus. Ad vivamus fusce facilisis vulputate lacus sollicitudin lorem cras. Ornare quam tortor nunc montes eleifend conubia. Erat facilisi luctus consectetur montes suscipit eu, arcu lacinia nunc. Ornare in facilisis donec pharetra taciti. Efficitur morbi curabitur eget aptent quisque praesent volutpat. Aliquam aenean accumsan libero feugiat habitasse. Montes eget aptent consequat magna posuere. Molestie sapien nibh morbi penatibus mattis ultricies nisi mauris? Nunc justo curae id suspendisse arcu magna id sit velit. Mattis suspendisse facilisis accumsan viverra habitasse praesent morbi. Integer urna vel conubia efficitur sociosqu accumsan lobortis. Iaculis auctor nisl nibh justo nunc amet taciti. Sagittis penatibus iaculis facilisis, dui himenaeos auctor ridiculus? Elementum torquent sem enim luctus dignissim bibendum est sem nibh. Maecenas fusce tempor integer porta, ligula consequat finibus. Luctus curabitur aliquam semper varius viverra sit dui suspendisse. Inceptos tincidunt gravida accumsan himenaeos suscipit molestie placerat. Adui maximus laoreet maecenas facilisi per turpis elit. Placerat potenti elementum praesent elementum tempus metus. Sapien eros proin suscipit id fusce egestas condimentum. Eget ridiculus ad mi nec ultrices fusce porta. Tempus proin eros cursus congue sagittis lacinia efficitur. Nisi amet nullam sed risus conubia etiam. Cras volutpat inceptos aenean eu gravida. Hendrerit sociosqu viverra vel fames libero. Litora purus commodo cubilia ultrices per ex. Nullam non sociosqu vel sed ridiculus pulvinar diam. Eros efficitur rutrum eleifend torquent primis arcu a posuere? Consequat mus consectetur enim sit id primis lectus tortor. Eros tincidunt lacinia mollis mollis erat odio habitant. Fusce malesuada vestibulum etiam aenean netus gravida. Placerat ridiculus rhoncus efficitur potenti sed magna. Duis ultricies montes id velit iaculis, varius elit mattis. Inceptos rhoncus ultricies suspendisse elementum auctor nisi augue curabitur iaculis. Elementum lectus parturient cubilia hendrerit mi elementum mus. Felis enim rhoncus cursus praesent; erat interdum eget tincidunt nibh. Eu praesent posuere eros curae class purus habitasse donec.

@ 732c6a62:42003da2

>De ''Dialética do Oprimido'' a ''Like do Oprimido'': A Queda Livre do Debate que Nunca Existiu. ## **A moda do momento** Fiquei aproximadamente 8 meses sem ter acesso a nenhum dispositivo. Quando consegui novamente o acesso ao smartphone, percebi algo diferente no debate político brasileiro: enquanto a direita estava se engajando em incontáveis números de curtidas e compartilhamentos com memes que demonstravam críticas ao governo e aos seus ainda poucos apoiadores que se humilham para defender o indefensável, a esquerda radical repetia sua imposição intelectual em comentários de vários posts, incluindo textos, vídeo e tweets com frases semelhantes a "vai ler um livro de história" "nunca leu um livro", "eu estou do lado certo da história" e "se eu fosse irracional eu seria de direita" Tudo isso pra tentar passar uma mensagem de que a história é de esquerda. A tese é: será que eles realmente são tão inteligentes como juram? **Fatos que ignoram enquanto cospem jargões do "lado certo da história":** 1. **A esquerda também tem seus terraplanistas:** Anti-vaxxers de organicafé, terraplanistas do gênero, e os que acham que a Coreia do Norte é uma democracia. 2. **Viés de confirmação não é monopólio da direita:** Eles compartilham estudos "científicos" do Medium como se fossem *peer-reviewed*, mas desdenham de dados que contradizem sua narrativa. 3. **A direita não é um monolito:** Tem desde ancaps que calculam até a última casa decimal até bolsominions que acham que a Terra é plana. Generalizar é... bem, **irracional**. **Estudo de Caso (Fictício, mas Verdadeiro):** Larissa, 23 anos, posta sobre "ciência e razão" enquanto defende horóscopo como "ferramenta de autoconhecimento". Acredita que o capitalismo causa depressão, mas não sabe o que é taxa Selic. Larissa é você após três caipirinhas. ### **A Imposição intelectual que ninguém pediu (mas todos recebem de graça)** A esquerda brasileira, em sua cruzada épica para salvar o mundo dos *"fascistas que ousam discordar"*, adotou uma nova estratégia: **transformar complexidade política em slogans de camiseta de feira**. A frase *"se eu fosse irracional, seria de direita"* não é original — é plágio descarado da cartilha do **Complexo de Deus em Oferta no AliExpress**. #### **O Quebra-Cabeça da superioridade Auto-Delirante** A tese esquerdista se sustenta em três pilares frágeis: 1. **A falácia do "lado certo da história":** Como se história fosse um jogo de futebol com narração do João Cléber. 2. **A ilusão de que citar Foucault = ter QI elevado:** Spoiler: decorar *"biopoder"* não te torna imune a acreditar em astrologia. 3. **A crença de que volume de texto = profundidade:** 15 parágrafos no Twitter não equivalem a um semestre de Ciência Política. **Dado Cruel:** Um estudo da Universidade de Cambridge (2022) mostrou que **extremistas de ambos os lados cometem erros lógicos similares**. A diferença? A esquerda usa palavras mais bonitas para mascarar a burrice. ### **A hipocrisia do "nunca tocou em um livro" (enquanto compartilham resumo de livro no TikTok)** A acusação preferida — *"você não lê!"* — esconde uma ironia deliciosa: - 72% dos *"intelectuais de rede social"* citam livros que nunca leram além do título (Fonte: Pesquisa Informal do Twitter, 2023). - **Obras citadas como troféu:** *"1984"* (para chamar Bolsonaro de Big Brother), *"O Capital"* (para justificar o NFT da Gal Gadot), e *"Feminismo para os 99%"* (para atacar homens heterossexuais que usam sandália de dedo). **Pergunta Incômoda:** Se ler Marx fosse garantia de racionalidade, por que a União Soviética acabou em pizza (literalmente, considerando a economia deles)? ### **Quando a autoimagem colide com a realidade (Ou: por que nenhum esquerdista lassa no teste de turing da coerência)** A esquerda adora se pintar como a **Última Trincheira da Razão**, mas pratica o que critica: - **Exemplo 1:** Defendem *"ciência"* quando convém (vacinas), mas abraçam pseudociência quando é *trendy* (cristais energéticos contra o capitalismo). - **Exemplo 2:** Chamam a direita de *"terraplanista"*, mas acham que inflação se resolve com tabelamento estatal — a versão econômica de *"a Terra é sustentada por tartarugas"*. - **Exemplo 3:** Criticam *"fake news"*, mas compartilham teorias de que o agro *"envenena a comida"* (enquanto comem sushi de supermercado). **Frase-Chave:** *"Racionalidade seletiva é o novo analfabetismo funcional."* **Pergunta Final:** Se a esquerda é tão racional, por que não usa a *"lógica implacável"* para resolver algo além do enquadro perfeito de stories no Instagram? # **Enfim** O debate *"esquerda racional vs. direita irracional"* é só **mais um episódio da novela "Brasil: O País que Confunde Opinião com Ataque de Ego"**. Enquanto uns brincam de *"quem tem o QI mais alto"*, o país queima — literalmente, considerando o Pantanal. Talvez a verdadeira irracionalidade seja gastar energia discutindo superioridade moral enquanto o Wi-Fi cai pela décima vez no dia. Racionalidade não tem lado político. Arrogância, por outro lado, é universal. Sua necessidade de se sentir superior só prova que **a lacração é o último refúgio dos fracos de argumento**. Agora deviam estudar economia básica — ou pelo menos que parem de achar que *"Ah, mas o capitalismo!"* é um contra-argumento.

@ f25afb62:8d50c6e7

**🚀 Bitkiwi 2025 – Queenstown, NZ | The Future of Bitcoin is Here ⚡** Just wrapped up an **incredible** weekend at **Bitkiwi**, New Zealand’s premier Bitcoin event! 🏔️💥 From inheritance planning to self-custody, Lightning adoption, and NZ’s Bitcoin future – the speakers brought **serious signal**. Here’s a **recap** of the best talks, insights, and moments from Bitkiwi 2025 🎥👇 --- 🚀 **LightningPay’s 4 Big Announcements** 🚀 From Queenstown to the world, **LightningPay** is making moves: 1️⃣ A Bitcoin-friendly shared workspace in Queenstown. 2️⃣ A self-custodial ⚡ Lightning wallet powered by Breez. 3️⃣ 1 billion sats in monthly volume,20% monthly user growth AND **6 BTC capital raise** to keep growing! 4️⃣ **Bitcoin Basin Initiative** – Queenstown’s circular economy is here. 💡 The future of Bitcoin in NZ is bright! 🔥 https://cdn.satellite.earth/db356e99e4fc600314b5e23369dfb39b9294da58e101eb76dda2a9eb4b332bc4.mp4 --- 🏃💨 **Bitcoin Escape Velocity with Rob Clarkson** When does Bitcoin become unstoppable? Rob Clarkson of **LightningPay.nz** breaks down: 🔹 How Bitcoin adoption accelerates as it becomes a **medium of exchange** 🔹 What Lightning Network means for **real-world payments** 🔹 Why Kiwis should care about using Bitcoin today Escape velocity is coming. Are you ready? 🚀 https://cdn.satellite.earth/ed64e4ccdf699a9e83dc99c63ff37f22614f1d86590187e2459d52144ef3d74c.mp4 --- 📜💡 **Wills, Wallets & Wisdom – Bitcoin Inheritance Planning** James Swarbrick from **Swarbricks Lawyers** on: ✅ What happens to your Bitcoin when you're gone? ✅ Why multisig is your best friend for inheritance ✅ The legal side of passing down **sound money** Because **your Bitcoin is only yours if you plan for the future.** 🔑 https://cdn.satellite.earth/3974169ff85bb064aa8caf66199bc5ea7c59a19994315ce321e6dc3fde0cbafd.mp4 --- ⚡🖥️ **Why You Should Run Your Own Bitcoin Node** Ketan from **Ministry of Nodes** explains: ✅ The **importance of self-sovereignty** in Bitcoin ✅ How running a node makes the network stronger ✅ The **best setup** for a Kiwi Bitcoiner Your keys, your coins. But also: **Your node, your rules.** 🏴‍☠️ https://cdn.satellite.earth/4fcc3184615f296bd1897c82b5f507a66b4eee68195a214047fc87755e5db2c5.mp4 --- 🇳🇿🧐 **What's the Problem, NZ?** Andrew Wells of **KiwiBitcoinGuide** takes a deep dive into **Joe Bryan’s ‘What’s the Problem?’** with a **NZ perspective** 🔹 How our broken money could be the source of our problems. 🔹 How government policy & banking play a role 🔹 What’s next for Bitcoiners in NZ? New Zealand – **time to wake up.** 🏴https://cdn.satellite.earth/c4c571bbb56bd7e7ca5ed3c2cff27c6ef4ea0994abb21dd1e95c4a1d5d474e06.mp4 --- 🕊️🔥 **The F Word – Cody Ellingham** What’s the **real** F-word when it comes to Bitcoin? **FREEDOM.** Cody Ellingham from **The Transformation of Value Podcast** dives into: 💡 What true **freedom** looks like. 🔗 Why Bitcoin is a **tool for sovereignty** 🚀 How to break free from **fiat dependency** https://cdn.satellite.earth/45909c963826fdd094b7f0729a762ef45132d39a95b7bf226f2d7b3fbace66a7.mp4 --- 📢 **That’s a wrap on Bitkiwi 2025!** 📢 🔸 Bitcoin adoption is accelerating in NZ. 🔸 Queenstown is becoming a **Bitcoin circular economy**. 🔸 Builders & educators are paving the way forward.

@ 33baa074:3bb3a297

A [vibration sensor](https://www.renkeer.com/what-vibration-sensor/ ) is a device used to measure or detect the vibration of an object. It is able to convert the vibration signal of an object into an electrical signal for analysis and monitoring. This type of sensor is widely used in many fields, including industrial manufacturing, structural monitoring, vehicle diagnostics, medical science, etc. Working Principle Vibration sensors capture and measure the vibration of an object by using different working principles. Here are several common working principles of vibration sensors: Piezoelectric Vibration Sensors Piezoelectric vibration sensors are one of the most common types. It is based on the piezoelectric effect and measures vibration by generating an electric charge or voltage through piezoelectric materials. When an object vibrates, the piezoelectric material produces a mechanical displacement, which causes a change in electric potential. This change is converted into an electrical signal to measure and analyze the amplitude and frequency of the vibration. Strain Vibration Sensors Strain vibration sensors use the strain properties of materials to measure vibrations. It is usually composed of a metal rod or elastic rod with a strain gauge attached to the rod. When an object vibrates, the material is strained, causing the strain gauge to produce a change in resistance or voltage. This change is measured and recorded to evaluate the vibration intensity and frequency. Inductive vibration sensor Inductive vibration sensor uses the principle of inductive sensing to measure vibration. It contains a magnetic core, coil and load resistor. When the object vibrates, the position of the magnetic core changes relative to the coil, thereby changing the self-inductance of the coil. This change causes a change in the inductance value, and vibration information is obtained by measuring the change in inductance. Types Vibration sensors can be divided into many types according to their working principles and application fields. Here are some common types of vibration sensors: Acceleration sensor Acceleration sensor is one of the most common types of vibration sensors. It can measure the acceleration of an object and convert it into a vibration signal. Acceleration sensors are usually implemented using piezoelectric materials or MEMS technology. Surface acoustic wave (SAW) sensor Surface acoustic wave sensors use the propagation characteristics of surface acoustic waves on crystal sheets to measure vibration. It has high sensitivity and reliability and is widely used in structural health monitoring and industrial fields. Laser interference sensor Laser interference sensor measures the vibration or displacement of an object by using the principle of laser interference. It has high accuracy and non-contact performance and is suitable for precision experiments and measurements. Magneto resistive sensor Magneto resistive sensor uses the magneto resistive effect to measure vibration. When an object vibrates, the direction and size of the magnetic field will change, causing the resistance value of the magneto resistive sensor to change. This change is converted into an electrical signal for measuring and monitoring vibration. Fiber optic sensor Fiber optic sensor uses the transmission characteristics of light to measure vibration. It transmits the light signal to the surface of the object to be measured through the optical fiber, and detects the change in the optical path caused by vibration by measuring the reflection or scattering of the light signal. Piezoelectric ceramic sensor Piezoelectric ceramic sensor uses piezoelectric ceramic material as a sensing element to measure vibration by measuring the charge or voltage change of the material. Application field Vibration sensors are widely used in many fields, including: Industrial field: used for vibration and displacement monitoring in machinery, such as long-term monitoring of thermal expansion of rotors and housings, and online automatic detection and automatic control of production lines. Aerospace: During the flight of aerospace vehicles, vibration sensors are used to collect vibration signals, analyze aircraft attitudes, and ensure flight safety. Energy and chemical industry: In the energy and chemical industries, vibration sensors are used to monitor the operating status of equipment and prevent failures. Scientific research and teaching: In scientific research, vibration sensors are used to measure a variety of small distances and small movements, providing accurate data support for scientific research. In summary, vibration sensors measure the vibration of objects through different working principles, including piezoelectric effect, strain properties, inductive sensing, etc. Common types of vibration sensors include accelerometer, surface acoustic wave sensors, laser interference sensors, magneto resistive sensors, fiber optic sensors, and piezoelectric ceramic sensors. According to specific application requirements, choosing a suitable vibration sensor can accurately measure and monitor the vibration behavior of an object.

@ d360efec:14907b5f

$OKX:BTCUSDT.P **Timeframe Analysis:** 1. **TF 15m (Intraday):** * **Trend:** Bearish (but showing signs of a minor reversal). Price was below both EMAs but is starting to move above the EMA 50. * **SMC:** * Clear Bearish OB at ~93,000 (tested and failed on March 1st). * Bullish OB at ~86,000-87,000 (price tested and bounced). * SSL: ~86,845, ~83,859 (already swept). * BSL: ~92,669 (potential next target). * **Trend Strength:** Cloud is still red but fading. A small Buy arrow appears. * **Day Trade Strategy (SMC):** * **Caution:** The market is volatile. The main trend is still down, but there's short-term buying pressure. * **Option 1 (Aggressive):** Buy when the price dips near the Bullish OB (~87,000) or EMA 50. Set a stop-loss below the OB. Target the BSL (~92,669) or the previous Bearish OB. * **Option 2 (Conservative):** Wait for a clear breakout above the Bearish OB (~93,000) before considering a buy. * **Short:** If shorting, wait for the price to approach the Bearish OB again and look for a bearish reversal signal (e.g., Bearish Engulfing) before shorting. 2. **TF 4H (Medium-Term):** * **Trend:** Bearish. Price is below both EMAs, EMA 50 is below EMA 200. * **SMC:** * Larger Bearish OB: ~95,000-100,000. * SSL: ~83,559.5, ~81,260.4, ~78,961.4 (medium- to long-term targets). * BSL: 105,543.4 * **Trend Strength:** Dark red cloud. Sell signal. * **Strategy:** Focus on shorts. Wait for pullbacks to the EMAs or Bearish OB and look for shorting opportunities. 3. **TF Day (Long-Term):** * **Trend:** Still Bearish, but starting to show signs of slowing down. The price has broken below the EMA 200. * **SMC:** Large order Block $90,000-$100,000 * **Trend Strength:** The cloud is changing from dark red to a lighter red. No clear Buy signal yet. * **Strategy:** Avoid going long. Wait for clearer reversal signals (e.g., breakout above EMA 50, Bullish Divergence). **Summary and Cautions:** * The main trend of BTC is still Bearish on all timeframes. * The 15m TF is showing signs of a short-term Bullish Reversal, but be cautious as it's against the main downtrend. * Smart Money may be accumulating at current price levels. * **Cautions:** News, volatility, liquidity sweeps (stop-loss hunting). **Disclaimer:** This analysis is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial advice. Investors should conduct their own research and make decisions carefully.

@ ef1744f8:96fbc3fe

tDn+KhbCjsIiBTGJZ2JRGhsmF+zCzLUsaqJ/zR1+RzgU8iBsMEIhzwedbcKWNIReAKJ0tOpAgMSoiIcscDyxpiyMaoqJ3q6H7pmftfFPTHGX95hHP1a1TweucGbqTZuZyvvipwu5f2UHrmM9sZwpNSwED8g4IzcIGTq/XQuyXyX1f2ps7FL/m33h1t+ai9pr?iv=yHwvfX8s/7LIbTJg4yWabg==

@ c8383d81:f9139549

Project is still in early stages but now it is split into 2 different domain entities. 
Everything is opened sourced under one github https://github.com/Nsite-Info ## So what’s new ? ### Project #1 https://Nsite.info
 A basic website with main info regarding what an Nsite is how it works and a list of tools and repo’s you can use to start building and debugging.
99% Finished, needs some extra translations and the Nsite Debugger can use a small upgrade.

 ### Project #2 https://Nsite.cloud
 This project isn’t finished, it currently is at a 40% finished stage. This contains the Nsite Gateway for all sites (still a work in progress) and the final stage the Nsite editor & template deployment. If you are interested in Nsite’s join: 

https://chachi.chat/groups.hzrd149.com/e23891 Big thanks to nostr:npub1elta7cneng3w8p9y4dw633qzdjr4kyvaparuyuttyrx6e8xp7xnq32cume nostr:npub1ye5ptcxfyyxl5vjvdjar2ua3f0hynkjzpx552mu5snj3qmx5pzjscpknpr nostr:npub1klr0dy2ul2dx9llk58czvpx73rprcmrvd5dc7ck8esg8f8es06qs427gxc for all the tooling & code. !(image)[https://i.nostr.build/AkUvk7R2h9cVEMLB.png]