@ 9e69e420:d12360c2

Secretary of State Marco Rubio issued new guidance halting spending on most foreign aid grants for 90 days, including military assistance to Ukraine. This immediate order shocked State Department officials and mandates “stop-work orders” on nearly all existing foreign assistance awards. While it allows exceptions for military financing to Egypt and Israel, as well as emergency food assistance, it restricts aid to key allies like Ukraine, Jordan, and Taiwan. The guidance raises potential liability risks for the government due to unfulfilled contracts. A report will be prepared within 85 days to recommend which programs to continue or discontinue.

@ 9e69e420:d12360c2

## Chef's notes # arbitray - test - of - chefs notes ## hedding 2 ## Details - ⏲️ Prep time: 20 - 🍳 Cook time: 1 hour - 🍽️ Servings: 5 ## Ingredients - Test ingredient - 2nd test ingredient ## Directions 1. Bake 2. Cool

@ 9e69e420:d12360c2

President Trump plans to withdraw 20,000 U.S. troops from Europe and expects European allies to contribute financially to the remaining military presence. Reported by ANSA, Trump aims to deliver this message to European leaders since taking office. A European diplomat noted, “the costs cannot be borne solely by American taxpayers.” The Pentagon hasn't commented yet. Trump has previously sought lower troop levels in Europe and had ordered cuts during his first term. The U.S. currently maintains around 65,000 troops in Europe, with total forces reaching 100,000 since the Ukraine invasion. Trump's new approach may shift military focus to the Pacific amid growing concerns about China. [Sauce](https://www.stripes.com/theaters/europe/2025-01-24/trump-europe-troop-cuts-16590074.html)

@ c8cf63be:86691cfe

### Mark Fishers ‘Acid Communism’ und der ‘Capitalist Realism’ > “it is easier to kill the living than to kill the undead”[1] Die lebenden sind wir Menschen, *the undead* ist der gegenwärtige neoliberalismus[2] Mark Fischers Analyse über den bestehenden Zustand ist erschütternd: > “let’s say music hello just go on music in the last 10 years one thing > one single thing that couldn’t have come out in the 20th century”[3] Es gibt nicht neues unter dem Himmel, alle Kreativität ist erschöpft, “die Verdinglichung” von der Horkheimer und Adorno sprachen, “…, ist so dicht geworden,…” die Wirklichkeit des ‘Capitalist Realism’ ist manifest und undurchdringlich, die Löcher, die kleinen alternativen, sind versiegelt. Schon im Denken sind die alternativen versperrt und das Denken ist ein gemeinsames, niemand kann für sich alleine Denken oder kreativ sein. Denken und kreativ sein sind das Ergebnis einer Gesellschaftlichen Voraussetzung. Es gibt keine neue Musik mehr weil die Musik untot ist. In immer neuer Auflagen, in der mechanische Reproduktion, wiederbelebt man die Toten, und erstickt das lebendige. > “… but there’s nothing about us that was good or better than you > you’re anybody it’s just that we were lucky and you all are unlucky > …”[4] Wenn eine junge Frau auf seine Feststellung reagiert mit Unglaube und Abwehr. > “… so what you’re basically saying is that i guess your generation or > the previous generation was better because you had more time to pursue > your own projects and you also think that you were more creative or > the previous generation was more creative …”[5] Dann weil sie die Enge der Umstände nicht erkennen kann, und vielleicht auch weil sie die Dinge auf sich persönlich bezieht, wie es das gegenwärtige Denken nahelegt: Sowohl der kompetitive Vergleich als auch die individuelle Schuldzuordnung findet sich in der Aussage. Fischer hingegen erklärt dies mit den Herrschenden Umständen die es den Menschen unmöglich machen sich den *wahren Sachverhalt* klar zu machen und damit jede Alternative im Denken versperren: > “.. but okay let’s be clear about what i’m saying creativity isn’t a > property of individuals ever it’s a property of a social or collective > scene like that you know that’s so that it’s not like the individuals > are less creative than they used to be that’s just not how creativity > works creativity is possible because of is possible because of social > conditions and those social conditions have been removed …”[6] Fischers Aufmerksamkeit richtet sich auf die die Umstände vor dem Capitalism Realism, denn dieser ist seiner Meinung nach schon eine Reaktion, eine Reaktion auf die “Counterculture” auf das “spectre of a world which could be free”[7]. Wenn es ein Gründungsereignis des Capital Realism geben sollte wäre dies nach Fischer der Putsch Pinochets in Chile 1973.[8] Seiner Zeit voraus war Hunter S. Thompson, seine Drogengeschwängerten Reflexionen fassen den Kern sehr genau, für ihn war 1971 schon der Moment an dem er die revision verortet: > “… wir ritten auf dem Kamm einer hohen und wunderschönen Welle … Und > jetzt, weniger als fünf Jahre später, kannst du auf einen steilen > Hügel in Las Vegas klettern und nach Westen blicken, und wenn du die > richtigen Augen hast, dann kannst du die Hochwassermarkierung fast > sehen -die Stelle, wo sich die Welle schließlich brach und > zurückrollte.”[9] Acid! Die psychedelische Zeit: > “Instead of seeking to overcome capital, we should focus on what > capital must always obstruct: the collective capacity to produce, care > and enjoy.”[10] und weiter > “The overcoming of capital has to be fundamentally based on the simple > insight that, far from being about “wealth creation”, capital > necessarily and always blocks the production of common wealth.” Der Zauber der Psycedlischen Zeit war die ignoranz, das Verweigern des bestehenden Narativs. Oder wie Fischer sagt, die Frage nach dem Bewustsein und seiner Beziehung dem dem was wir als Wiklichkeit wahrnemen.[11] > “turn on, tune in, drop out” [12] oder noch klarer Ken Kesey: > “There’s only one thing to do . > .. there’s only one thing’s gonna do any good at all… > And that’s everybody just look at it, > look at the war, and turn your backs and say … Fuck it..” [13] Die Imagination des *wahren Sachverhaltes* “look at it” sagt Kesey, überzeugt euch selbst. Es braucht nicht mehr als das Schauen des Krieges, bei ihm der Viatnam Krieg, um zu verstehen das nur die Verweigerung, das “Fuck it” geeignet ist dem ganzen seine legitimität zu verweigern. Das war der Zauber der psychedelichen Zeit, auch der der 90’er, die als unpolitsch gelten. Aus dieser Perspektive ist klar das das unpolitsche, das politsche war. Die love-Parade war nicht unpolitisch und die gesellschaflichenr Verändeung die durch diese Psychedleische Zeit in Bewegung gesetzt wurden können wir noch heute fühlen. Die Canabis Legalisierung, die veränderte Wahrnehmng von Homosexualität. Das “chill out”. Die tribal Tattoos.[14] Und auch die wärmste Kampange der Europawahl 2024, “Fickt euch doch alle.”[15] ist erst durch die psychedelische Zeit der 90’er möglich, hier wurde die Sinnlichkeit gestiftet die es braucht damit dieser Satz seine wärme bekommt. Die Demokratesierung der Neurologie durch die verwendung von Halozinogenen rücken die Frage nach der Wirklichkeit und des wahren Sachverhaltes in den Mittelpunkt. > “what they mainstreamed was this psychedelic consciousness with its > key notion of the plasticity of reality”[16] Sie ist auch eine Sekularisierung, eine demokratisierung des Sakralen, das vorher durch Klassen wie Schamanen oder Druiden kontroliert wurde wird zugänglich und erfahrbar. > “…, there was actually a demystificatory and materialist dimension to > this.”[17] Was sich so aussprechen läßt: > *“Wenn Gott liebe ist, dann ist er eine MDMA geschwängerte, psycedelic > trance Party, anfang der 90’er jahre des letzten Jahrtausend.”* Es loht sich also für uns ältere an die nicht so ferne Zeit der frühen 90’er Jahre zurück zu denken in der die Welt offen schien, die Polarität des kalten Krieges vergangen war, das Ende der Geschichte ausgerüfen wurde.[18] Da war die Idee das dies nicht der Siegt des Kapitalismus ist, sondern ein Sieg der Menschen die die Spirale des Schreckens und der Eskalation durchbrechen real. Es schien wie ein transzendieren des gegebenen Spiels und seiner Regeln wie es die AI in “war games”[19] realisiert, stattzufinden. Auf “No future”[20] folgte “No Paradise? Create it.”[21], es fand ein “unforgetting”[22] der alten, in den 60’er entwickelten Formen statt: Die Modulierung der 303, das Dayglow und das Strobo, alles Elemente des Acid Test[23]. *“the collective capacity to produce, care and enjoy”* ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ### References: [1] Fisher, M., Mark Fisher - DOCH Lectures 1 2011: <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-9nY5rboK8> 32m 42s [2] Fisher, M., How to kill a zombie: strategizing the end of neoliberalism 2013: <https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/how-to-kill-zombie-strategizing-end-of-neoliberalism/>. [3] Fisher, 1968., Mark, Cybertime Crisis 2013: <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOQgCg73sfQ> ab 1h 42m 12s [4] Fisher, 1968., Mark, ebenda ab 1h 35m 30s [5] Fisher, 1968., Mark, ebenda ab 1h 42m 12s [6] Fisher, 1968., Mark, ebenda ab 1h 47m 20s [7] Fisher, 1968., Mark et al., K-punk : the collected and unpublished writings of Mark Fisher (2004-2016) 2018. Abs. 153.5 [8] Fisher, 1968., Mark et al., ebenda. Abs. 153.7 “If there was a founding event of capitalist realism, it would be the violent destruction of the Allende government in Chile by General Pinochet’s American-backed coup.” [9] Hunter S. Thompson “Fear and loathing” Seite 89 [10] Fisher, 1968., Mark et al., K-punk : the collected and unpublished writings of Mark Fisher (2004-2016) 2018. Abs. 153.5 Statz 3 [11] Fisher, 1968., Mark et al., ebenda. Abs. 153.46 [12] Timothy Leary in 1966, der damals gefährlichste Mann der Welt.(Richard Nixxon) [13] Wolfe, Tom., The electric kool-aid acid test. 1999. Seite 360 [14] Christmann, K., Gruppen-Tattoo-Termin im Bundestag: 19 Abgeordnete zeigen vollen Körpereinsatz 2024: <https://www.tagesspiegel.de/politik/gruppen-tattoo-termin-im-bundestag-19-abgeordnete-zeigen-vollen-korpereinsatz-11665559.html>. [15] DiePartei, Fickt euch doch alle! (DINA1) 2024: <https://www.parteibedarf.de/Fickt-euch-doch-alle-DINA1/SW10115>. [16] Fisher, M., all of this is temporary: Mark Fisher 2016: <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=deZgzw0YHQI> 8 m 31 s [17] Fisher, 1968., Mark et al., K-punk : the collected and unpublished writings of Mark Fisher (2004-2016) 2018. Abs. 153.48 4. Satz [18] Fukuyama, F., The End of History and the Last Man 1992: <https://books.google.de/books?id=6KZmAAAAMAAJ>. [19] Parkes, L.L.F., WarGames: <https://www.imdb.com/de/title/tt0086567/> “A strange game. The only winning move is not to play.” [20] Wikipedia, No Future: <https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Future>. [21] Spirit zone https://www.platekompaniet.no/musikk/cd/space-tribe-shapeshifter-cd [22] Fisher, 1968., Mark et al., K-punk : the collected and unpublished writings of Mark Fisher (2004-2016) 2018. Abs. 153.21 Letzter Satz [23] Wikipedia, Acid Tests: <https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acid-Tests>.

@ 6be5cc06:5259daf0

A seguir, veja como instalar e configurar o **Privoxy** no **Pop!_OS**. --- ### **1. Instalar o Tor e o Privoxy** Abra o terminal e execute: ```bash sudo apt update sudo apt install tor privoxy ``` **Explicação:** - **Tor:** Roteia o tráfego pela rede Tor. - **Privoxy:** Proxy avançado que intermedia a conexão entre aplicativos e o Tor. --- ### **2. Configurar o Privoxy** Abra o arquivo de configuração do Privoxy: ```bash sudo nano /etc/privoxy/config ``` Navegue até a última linha (atalho: **`Ctrl`** + **`/`** depois **`Ctrl`** + **`V`** para navegar diretamente até a última linha) e insira: ```bash forward-socks5 / 127.0.0.1:9050 . ``` Isso faz com que o **Privoxy** envie todo o tráfego para o **Tor** através da porta **9050**. Salve (**`CTRL`** + **`O`** e **`Enter`**) e feche (**`CTRL`** + **`X`**) o arquivo. --- ### **3. Iniciar o Tor e o Privoxy** Agora, inicie e habilite os serviços: ```bash sudo systemctl start tor sudo systemctl start privoxy sudo systemctl enable tor sudo systemctl enable privoxy ``` **Explicação:** - **start:** Inicia os serviços. - **enable:** Faz com que iniciem automaticamente ao ligar o PC. --- ### **4. Configurar o Navegador Firefox** Para usar a rede **Tor** com o Firefox: 1. Abra o Firefox. 2. Acesse **Configurações** → **Configurar conexão**. 3. Selecione **Configuração manual de proxy**. 4. Configure assim: - **Proxy HTTP:** `127.0.0.1` - **Porta:** `8118` (porta padrão do **Privoxy**) - **Domínio SOCKS (v5):** `127.0.0.1` - **Porta:** `9050` 5. Marque a opção **"Usar este proxy também em HTTPS"**. 6. Clique em **OK**. --- ### **5. Verificar a Conexão com o Tor** Abra o navegador e acesse: ```text https://check.torproject.org/ ``` Se aparecer a mensagem **"Congratulations. This browser is configured to use Tor."**, a configuração está correta. --- ### **Dicas Extras** - **Privoxy** pode ser ajustado para bloquear anúncios e rastreadores. - Outros aplicativos também podem ser configurados para usar o **Privoxy**.

@ 9e69e420:d12360c2

Oregano oil is a potent natural compound that offers numerous scientifically-supported health benefits. ## Active Compounds The oil's therapeutic properties stem from its key bioactive components: - Carvacrol and thymol (primary active compounds) - Polyphenols and other antioxidant ## Antimicrobial Properties **Bacterial Protection** The oil demonstrates powerful antibacterial effects, even against antibiotic-resistant strains like MRSA and other harmful bacteria. Studies show it effectively inactivates various pathogenic bacteria without developing resistance. **Antifungal Effects** It effectively combats fungal infections, particularly Candida-related conditions like oral thrush, athlete's foot, and nail infections. ## Digestive Health Benefits Oregano oil supports digestive wellness by: - Promoting gastric juice secretion and enzyme production - Helping treat Small Intestinal Bacterial Overgrowth (SIBO) - Managing digestive discomfort, bloating, and IBS symptoms ## Anti-inflammatory and Antioxidant Effects The oil provides significant protective benefits through: - Powerful antioxidant activity that fights free radicals - Reduction of inflammatory markers in the body - Protection against oxidative stress-related conditions ## Respiratory Support It aids respiratory health by: - Loosening mucus and phlegm - Suppressing coughs and throat irritation - Supporting overall respiratory tract function ## Additional Benefits **Skin Health** - Improves conditions like psoriasis, acne, and eczema - Supports wound healing through antibacterial action - Provides anti-aging benefits through antioxidant properties **Cardiovascular Health** Studies show oregano oil may help: - Reduce LDL (bad) cholesterol levels - Support overall heart health **Pain Management** The oil demonstrates effectiveness in: - Reducing inflammation-related pain - Managing muscle discomfort - Providing topical pain relief ## Safety Note While oregano oil is generally safe, it's highly concentrated and should be properly diluted before use Consult a healthcare provider before starting supplementation, especially if taking other medications.

@ b17fccdf:b7211155

The past 26 August, Tor [introduced officially](https://blog.torproject.org/introducing-proof-of-work-defense-for-onion-services/) a proof-of-work (PoW) defense for onion services designed to prioritize verified network traffic as a deterrent against denial of service (DoS) attacks. ~ > This feature at the moment, is [deactivate by default](https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/core/tor/-/blob/main/doc/man/tor.1.txt#L3117), so you need to follow these steps to activate this on a MiniBolt node: * Make sure you have the latest version of Tor installed, at the time of writing this post, which is v0.4.8.6. Check your current version by typing ``` tor --version ``` **Example** of expected output: ``` Tor version 0.4.8.6. This build of Tor is covered by the GNU General Public License (https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.en.html) Tor is running on Linux with Libevent 2.1.12-stable, OpenSSL 3.0.9, Zlib 1.2.13, Liblzma 5.4.1, Libzstd N/A and Glibc 2.36 as libc. Tor compiled with GCC version 12.2.0 ``` ~ > If you have v0.4.8.X, you are **OK**, if not, type `sudo apt update && sudo apt upgrade` and confirm to update. * Basic PoW support can be checked by running this command: ``` tor --list-modules ``` Expected output: ``` relay: yes dirauth: yes dircache: yes pow: **yes** ``` ~ > If you have `pow: yes`, you are **OK** * Now go to the torrc file of your MiniBolt and add the parameter to enable PoW for each hidden service added ``` sudo nano /etc/tor/torrc ``` Example: ``` # Hidden Service BTC RPC Explorer HiddenServiceDir /var/lib/tor/hidden_service_btcrpcexplorer/ HiddenServiceVersion 3 HiddenServicePoWDefensesEnabled 1 HiddenServicePort 80 127.0.0.1:3002 ``` ~ > Bitcoin Core and LND use the Tor control port to automatically create the hidden service, requiring no action from the user. We have submitted a feature request in the official GitHub repositories to explore the need for the integration of Tor's PoW defense into the automatic creation process of the hidden service. You can follow them at the following links: * Bitcoin Core: https://github.com/lightningnetwork/lnd/issues/8002 * LND: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28499 --- More info: * https://blog.torproject.org/introducing-proof-of-work-defense-for-onion-services/ * https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/onion-services/onion-support/-/wikis/Documentation/PoW-FAQ --- Enjoy it MiniBolter! 💙

@ c8cf63be:86691cfe

### Das SNAFU des Reichtums Das SNAFU-Prinzip[1] sagt das Kommunikation nur unter gleichen möglich ist: > Adäquate Kommunikation fliesst nur zwischen Gleichen ungehindert. > Kommunikation zwischen Nicht-Gleichen ist missverständlich und von > Dominaz- und Unterwerfungsritualen gefärbt, die immer wieder zum > Zusammenbruch der Kommunikation führen und zu einem Spiel ohne Ende. > [2] So ist z. B. das Peter Prinzip [3] eine einfache Folge des SNAFU-Prinzips. Bezieht es sich in erster Linie auf Hierarchie lässt es sich hervorragend ausweiten auf den ökonomischen Bereich. Auch hier gilt, dass Kommunikation nur unter Gleichen möglich ist, hier ist die Hierarchie das ökonomische Ungleichgewicht. Kommunikation ist auch hier nur unter gleichen möglich, ungefähr gleich reich müssen sie sein. Ein zu großer Unterschied in den ökonomischen Verhältnissen verhindert den Aufbau einer menschlichen Beziehung. Hier ist das einfache Beispiel: Wäre ich Reich, würde ich mich Fragen, ob die Freunde da, nur kommen weil ich ihnen die Drinks ausgebe. Jeder, der nicht so viel Geld wie ich hat, will vielleicht nur mein Geld. So kann ein Bill Gates nur einen Jeff Besos als Freund haben oder treffender ein Elon Musk nur einen Mark Zuckerberg. Auch umgekehrt funktioniert diese Selektion: Wenn ich ein richtig cooler Typ wäre, würde ich mich fragen, ob ich den Reichen eigentlich gut finde, oder nur mit ihm rumhänge, weil er die Drinks bezahlt und weil ich zu Recht unsicher darüber sein kann, kann ich mich nur entziehen. Diejenigen, die wirklich freundschaftlich sind, sind die die sich einer solchen Situation nicht aussetzen. Und was bleibt dem Reichen? Nur die Gesellschaft der Reichen. Hier trifft der Reichtum auf eine totale Armut. Die Auswahl der Freunde ist sehr klein. Hier ist tatsächlich der Reichtum das Problem, bzw. das ökonomische Ungleichgewicht und es gibt eine einfache Lösung, der Unterschied muss kleiner werden, denn je kleiner der Unterschied desto mehr Auswahl an Freunden gibt es. Wie in der “Aufgeklärten Ökonomie” dargestellt ist die Ungleichheit, eine gesellschaftliche Entscheidung und eine konkrete Steuerung möglich. Wir können also den Reichen helfen und mehr Freiheit und Freunde schenken. Pathologisch wird dieses Phänomen, wenn sich der innere Antrieb um den Reichtum dreht. Was durch die momentane Verfasstheit der gesellschaftlichen Praktiken sogar unterstützt und gefördert wird und damit viele Menschen objektiv unglücklich macht. Dieses pathologische der Gesellschaft wirkt dann auf das Individuum zurück und macht es ebenfalls Krank. Wir haben einen ähnlichen Mechanismus in der Gewalt kennenlernen dürfen. Vgl. “Gewalt ist eine ansteckende Krankrankheit” <figure> <img src="!(image)[https://cdn.satellite.earth/ac54bd400867c63f14e151172422067dc1b19980b1e738a577ae6c7a6ea835ea.png]" style="width:50.0%" alt="Klarmachen ändert, Gier ist heilbar" /> <figcaption aria-hidden="true">Klarmachen ändert, Gier ist heilbar</figcaption> </figure> > Wenn sie sich leer fühlen, Erfolg ihnen kein Glück schenkt, keine > Befriedigung. Wenn sie mehr brauchen und mehr, dann leiden sie > wahrscheinlich auch an einer Dysfunktion der Belohnungssysteme, an > Habsucht. > Auch ihnen kann und muss geholfen werden, denn Gier ist heilbar. Und > ihrer Gier betrifft nicht nur sie. Ihre liebsten Menschen in Ihrer > Umgebung, Menschen mit denen sie niemals direkt in Berührung kommen, > sie alle leiden unter ihrer Krankheit. > Auch für sie kann es ein erfülltes Leben geben, einen Weg zurück in > die Gesellschaft, die Gesellschaft von Menschen. Machen sie > Psychotherapie, nehmen sie Pharmaka, buchen sie eine Kur und > entledigen sich ihres Wohlstandes.[4] ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ### References: [1] Wikipedia, SNAFU: <https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/SNAFU>. [2] Wilson, R.A., Der Neue Prometheus. Die Evolution unserer Intelligenz. - Volksausgabe/ Raubdruck. 1983. Seite 245-246 [3] Wikipedia, Peter Prinzip: <https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter-Prinzip>. [4] InvestmentWeek, Sucht im Luxus: Eine Nacht in der Klinik der Superreichen 2024: <https://www.investmentweek.com/sucht-im-luxus-eine-nacht-in-der-klinik-der-superreichen/>, „Viele Patienten hier leiden an Einsamkeit“ … “Viele Superreiche …wüssten nicht, ob sie wegen ihres Geldes oder ihrer Persönlichkeit gemocht werden” „Reich sein bedeutet oft, keinen echten Kontakt zu haben. Viele unserer Klienten haben keine echten Freunde.“

@ 6be5cc06:5259daf0

## Bitcoin: Um sistema de dinheiro eletrônico direto entre pessoas. Satoshi Nakamoto satoshin@gmx.com www.bitcoin.org --- ### Resumo O Bitcoin é uma forma de dinheiro digital que permite pagamentos diretos entre pessoas, sem a necessidade de um banco ou instituição financeira. Ele resolve um problema chamado **gasto duplo**, que ocorre quando alguém tenta gastar o mesmo dinheiro duas vezes. Para evitar isso, o Bitcoin usa uma rede descentralizada onde todos trabalham juntos para verificar e registrar as transações. As transações são registradas em um livro público chamado **blockchain**, protegido por uma técnica chamada **Prova de Trabalho**. Essa técnica cria uma cadeia de registros que não pode ser alterada sem refazer todo o trabalho já feito. Essa cadeia é mantida pelos computadores que participam da rede, e a mais longa é considerada a verdadeira. Enquanto a maior parte do poder computacional da rede for controlada por participantes honestos, o sistema continuará funcionando de forma segura. A rede é flexível, permitindo que qualquer pessoa entre ou saia a qualquer momento, sempre confiando na cadeia mais longa como prova do que aconteceu. --- ### 1. Introdução Hoje, quase todos os pagamentos feitos pela internet dependem de bancos ou empresas como processadores de pagamento (cartões de crédito, por exemplo) para funcionar. Embora esse sistema seja útil, ele tem problemas importantes porque é baseado em **confiança**. Primeiro, essas empresas podem reverter pagamentos, o que é útil em caso de erros, mas cria custos e incertezas. Isso faz com que pequenas transações, como pagar centavos por um serviço, se tornem inviáveis. Além disso, os comerciantes são obrigados a desconfiar dos clientes, pedindo informações extras e aceitando fraudes como algo inevitável. Esses problemas não existem no dinheiro físico, como o papel-moeda, onde o pagamento é final e direto entre as partes. No entanto, não temos como enviar dinheiro físico pela internet sem depender de um intermediário confiável. O que precisamos é de um **sistema de pagamento eletrônico baseado em provas matemáticas**, não em confiança. Esse sistema permitiria que qualquer pessoa enviasse dinheiro diretamente para outra, sem depender de bancos ou processadores de pagamento. Além disso, as transações seriam irreversíveis, protegendo vendedores contra fraudes, mas mantendo a possibilidade de soluções para disputas legítimas. Neste documento, apresentamos o **Bitcoin**, que resolve o problema do gasto duplo usando uma rede descentralizada. Essa rede cria um registro público e protegido por cálculos matemáticos, que garante a ordem das transações. Enquanto a maior parte da rede for controlada por pessoas honestas, o sistema será seguro contra ataques. --- ### 2. Transações Para entender como funciona o Bitcoin, é importante saber como as transações são realizadas. Imagine que você quer transferir uma "moeda digital" para outra pessoa. No sistema do Bitcoin, essa "moeda" é representada por uma sequência de registros que mostram quem é o atual dono. Para transferi-la, você adiciona um novo registro comprovando que agora ela pertence ao próximo dono. Esse registro é protegido por um tipo especial de assinatura digital. #### O que é uma assinatura digital? Uma assinatura digital é como uma senha secreta, mas muito mais segura. No Bitcoin, cada usuário tem duas chaves: uma "chave privada", que é secreta e serve para criar a assinatura, e uma "chave pública", que pode ser compartilhada com todos e é usada para verificar se a assinatura é válida. Quando você transfere uma moeda, usa sua chave privada para assinar a transação, provando que você é o dono. A próxima pessoa pode usar sua chave pública para confirmar isso. #### Como funciona na prática? Cada "moeda" no Bitcoin é, na verdade, uma cadeia de assinaturas digitais. Vamos imaginar o seguinte cenário: 1. A moeda está com o Dono 0 (você). Para transferi-la ao Dono 1, você assina digitalmente a transação com sua chave privada. Essa assinatura inclui o código da transação anterior (chamado de "hash") e a chave pública do Dono 1. 2. Quando o Dono 1 quiser transferir a moeda ao Dono 2, ele assinará a transação seguinte com sua própria chave privada, incluindo também o hash da transação anterior e a chave pública do Dono 2. 3. Esse processo continua, formando uma "cadeia" de transações. Qualquer pessoa pode verificar essa cadeia para confirmar quem é o atual dono da moeda. #### Resolvendo o problema do gasto duplo Um grande desafio com moedas digitais é o "gasto duplo", que é quando uma mesma moeda é usada em mais de uma transação. Para evitar isso, muitos sistemas antigos dependiam de uma entidade central confiável, como uma casa da moeda, que verificava todas as transações. No entanto, isso criava um ponto único de falha e centralizava o controle do dinheiro. O Bitcoin resolve esse problema de forma inovadora: ele usa uma rede descentralizada onde todos os participantes (os "nós") têm acesso a um registro completo de todas as transações. Cada nó verifica se as transações são válidas e se a moeda não foi gasta duas vezes. Quando a maioria dos nós concorda com a validade de uma transação, ela é registrada permanentemente na blockchain. #### Por que isso é importante? Essa solução elimina a necessidade de confiar em uma única entidade para gerenciar o dinheiro, permitindo que qualquer pessoa no mundo use o Bitcoin sem precisar de permissão de terceiros. Além disso, ela garante que o sistema seja seguro e resistente a fraudes. --- ### 3. Servidor Timestamp Para assegurar que as transações sejam realizadas de forma segura e transparente, o sistema Bitcoin utiliza algo chamado de "servidor de registro de tempo" (timestamp). Esse servidor funciona como um registro público que organiza as transações em uma ordem específica. Ele faz isso agrupando várias transações em blocos e criando um código único chamado "hash". Esse hash é como uma impressão digital que representa todo o conteúdo do bloco. O hash de cada bloco é amplamente divulgado, como se fosse publicado em um jornal ou em um fórum público. Esse processo garante que cada bloco de transações tenha um registro de quando foi criado e que ele existia naquele momento. Além disso, cada novo bloco criado contém o hash do bloco anterior, formando uma cadeia contínua de blocos conectados — conhecida como blockchain. Com isso, se alguém tentar alterar qualquer informação em um bloco anterior, o hash desse bloco mudará e não corresponderá ao hash armazenado no bloco seguinte. Essa característica torna a cadeia muito segura, pois qualquer tentativa de fraude seria imediatamente detectada. O sistema de timestamps é essencial para provar a ordem cronológica das transações e garantir que cada uma delas seja única e autêntica. Dessa forma, ele reforça a segurança e a confiança na rede Bitcoin. --- ### 4. Prova-de-Trabalho Para implementar o registro de tempo distribuído no sistema Bitcoin, utilizamos um mecanismo chamado prova-de-trabalho. Esse sistema é semelhante ao Hashcash, desenvolvido por Adam Back, e baseia-se na criação de um código único, o "hash", por meio de um processo computacionalmente exigente. A prova-de-trabalho envolve encontrar um valor especial que, quando processado junto com as informações do bloco, gere um hash que comece com uma quantidade específica de zeros. Esse valor especial é chamado de "nonce". Encontrar o nonce correto exige um esforço significativo do computador, porque envolve tentativas repetidas até que a condição seja satisfeita. Esse processo é importante porque torna extremamente difícil alterar qualquer informação registrada em um bloco. Se alguém tentar mudar algo em um bloco, seria necessário refazer o trabalho de computação não apenas para aquele bloco, mas também para todos os blocos que vêm depois dele. Isso garante a segurança e a imutabilidade da blockchain. A prova-de-trabalho também resolve o problema de decidir qual cadeia de blocos é a válida quando há múltiplas cadeias competindo. A decisão é feita pela cadeia mais longa, pois ela representa o maior esforço computacional já realizado. Isso impede que qualquer indivíduo ou grupo controle a rede, desde que a maioria do poder de processamento seja mantida por participantes honestos. Para garantir que o sistema permaneça eficiente e equilibrado, a dificuldade da prova-de-trabalho é ajustada automaticamente ao longo do tempo. Se novos blocos estiverem sendo gerados rapidamente, a dificuldade aumenta; se estiverem sendo gerados muito lentamente, a dificuldade diminui. Esse ajuste assegura que novos blocos sejam criados aproximadamente a cada 10 minutos, mantendo o sistema estável e funcional. --- ### 5. Rede A rede Bitcoin é o coração do sistema e funciona de maneira distribuída, conectando vários participantes (ou nós) para garantir o registro e a validação das transações. Os passos para operar essa rede são: 1. **Transmissão de Transações**: Quando alguém realiza uma nova transação, ela é enviada para todos os nós da rede. Isso é feito para garantir que todos estejam cientes da operação e possam validá-la. 2. **Coleta de Transações em Blocos**: Cada nó agrupa as novas transações recebidas em um "bloco". Este bloco será preparado para ser adicionado à cadeia de blocos (a blockchain). 3. **Prova-de-Trabalho**: Os nós competem para resolver a prova-de-trabalho do bloco, utilizando poder computacional para encontrar um hash válido. Esse processo é como resolver um quebra-cabeça matemático difícil. 4. **Envio do Bloco Resolvido**: Quando um nó encontra a solução para o bloco (a prova-de-trabalho), ele compartilha esse bloco com todos os outros nós na rede. 5. **Validação do Bloco**: Cada nó verifica o bloco recebido para garantir que todas as transações nele contidas sejam válidas e que nenhuma moeda tenha sido gasta duas vezes. Apenas blocos válidos são aceitos. 6. **Construção do Próximo Bloco**: Os nós que aceitaram o bloco começam a trabalhar na criação do próximo bloco, utilizando o hash do bloco aceito como base (hash anterior). Isso mantém a continuidade da cadeia. #### Resolução de Conflitos e Escolha da Cadeia Mais Longa Os nós sempre priorizam a cadeia mais longa, pois ela representa o maior esforço computacional já realizado, garantindo maior segurança. Se dois blocos diferentes forem compartilhados simultaneamente, os nós trabalharão no primeiro bloco recebido, mas guardarão o outro como uma alternativa. Caso o segundo bloco eventualmente forme uma cadeia mais longa (ou seja, tenha mais blocos subsequentes), os nós mudarão para essa nova cadeia. #### Tolerância a Falhas A rede é robusta e pode lidar com mensagens que não chegam a todos os nós. Uma transação não precisa alcançar todos os nós de imediato; basta que chegue a um número suficiente deles para ser incluída em um bloco. Da mesma forma, se um nó não receber um bloco em tempo hábil, ele pode solicitá-lo ao perceber que está faltando quando o próximo bloco é recebido. Esse mecanismo descentralizado permite que a rede Bitcoin funcione de maneira segura, confiável e resiliente, sem depender de uma autoridade central. --- ### 6. Incentivo O incentivo é um dos pilares fundamentais que sustenta o funcionamento da rede Bitcoin, garantindo que os participantes (nós) continuem operando de forma honesta e contribuindo com recursos computacionais. Ele é estruturado em duas partes principais: a recompensa por mineração e as taxas de transação. #### Recompensa por Mineração Por convenção, o primeiro registro em cada bloco é uma transação especial que cria novas moedas e as atribui ao criador do bloco. Essa recompensa incentiva os mineradores a dedicarem poder computacional para apoiar a rede. Como não há uma autoridade central para emitir moedas, essa é a maneira pela qual novas moedas entram em circulação. Esse processo pode ser comparado ao trabalho de garimpeiros, que utilizam recursos para colocar mais ouro em circulação. No caso do Bitcoin, o "recurso" consiste no tempo de CPU e na energia elétrica consumida para resolver a prova-de-trabalho. #### Taxas de Transação Além da recompensa por mineração, os mineradores também podem ser incentivados pelas taxas de transação. Se uma transação utiliza menos valor de saída do que o valor de entrada, a diferença é tratada como uma taxa, que é adicionada à recompensa do bloco contendo essa transação. Com o passar do tempo e à medida que o número de moedas em circulação atinge o limite predeterminado, essas taxas de transação se tornam a principal fonte de incentivo, substituindo gradualmente a emissão de novas moedas. Isso permite que o sistema opere sem inflação, uma vez que o número total de moedas permanece fixo. #### Incentivo à Honestidade O design do incentivo também busca garantir que os participantes da rede mantenham um comportamento honesto. Para um atacante que consiga reunir mais poder computacional do que o restante da rede, ele enfrentaria duas escolhas: 1. Usar esse poder para fraudar o sistema, como reverter transações e roubar pagamentos. 2. Seguir as regras do sistema, criando novos blocos e recebendo recompensas legítimas. A lógica econômica favorece a segunda opção, pois um comportamento desonesto prejudicaria a confiança no sistema, diminuindo o valor de todas as moedas, incluindo aquelas que o próprio atacante possui. Jogar dentro das regras não apenas maximiza o retorno financeiro, mas também preserva a validade e a integridade do sistema. Esse mecanismo garante que os incentivos econômicos estejam alinhados com o objetivo de manter a rede segura, descentralizada e funcional ao longo do tempo. --- ### 7. Recuperação do Espaço em Disco Depois que uma moeda passa a estar protegida por muitos blocos na cadeia, as informações sobre as transações antigas que a geraram podem ser descartadas para economizar espaço em disco. Para que isso seja possível sem comprometer a segurança, as transações são organizadas em uma estrutura chamada "árvore de Merkle". Essa árvore funciona como um resumo das transações: em vez de armazenar todas elas, guarda apenas um "hash raiz", que é como uma assinatura compacta que representa todo o grupo de transações. Os blocos antigos podem, então, ser simplificados, removendo as partes desnecessárias dessa árvore. Apenas a raiz do hash precisa ser mantida no cabeçalho do bloco, garantindo que a integridade dos dados seja preservada, mesmo que detalhes específicos sejam descartados. Para exemplificar: imagine que você tenha vários recibos de compra. Em vez de guardar todos os recibos, você cria um documento e lista apenas o valor total de cada um. Mesmo que os recibos originais sejam descartados, ainda é possível verificar a soma com base nos valores armazenados. Além disso, o espaço ocupado pelos blocos em si é muito pequeno. Cada bloco sem transações ocupa apenas cerca de 80 bytes. Isso significa que, mesmo com blocos sendo gerados a cada 10 minutos, o crescimento anual em espaço necessário é insignificante: apenas 4,2 MB por ano. Com a capacidade de armazenamento dos computadores crescendo a cada ano, esse espaço continuará sendo trivial, garantindo que a rede possa operar de forma eficiente sem problemas de armazenamento, mesmo a longo prazo. --- ### 8. Verificação de Pagamento Simplificada É possível confirmar pagamentos sem a necessidade de operar um nó completo da rede. Para isso, o usuário precisa apenas de uma cópia dos cabeçalhos dos blocos da cadeia mais longa (ou seja, a cadeia com maior esforço de trabalho acumulado). Ele pode verificar a validade de uma transação ao consultar os nós da rede até obter a confirmação de que tem a cadeia mais longa. Para isso, utiliza-se o ramo Merkle, que conecta a transação ao bloco em que ela foi registrada. Entretanto, o método simplificado possui limitações: ele não pode confirmar uma transação isoladamente, mas sim assegurar que ela ocupa um lugar específico na cadeia mais longa. Dessa forma, se um nó da rede aprova a transação, os blocos subsequentes reforçam essa aceitação. A verificação simplificada é confiável enquanto a maioria dos nós da rede for honesta. Contudo, ela se torna vulnerável caso a rede seja dominada por um invasor. Nesse cenário, um atacante poderia fabricar transações fraudulentas que enganariam o usuário temporariamente até que o invasor obtivesse controle completo da rede. Uma estratégia para mitigar esse risco é configurar alertas nos softwares de nós completos. Esses alertas identificam blocos inválidos, sugerindo ao usuário baixar o bloco completo para confirmar qualquer inconsistência. Para maior segurança, empresas que realizam pagamentos frequentes podem preferir operar seus próprios nós, reduzindo riscos e permitindo uma verificação mais direta e confiável. --- ### 9. Combinando e Dividindo Valor No sistema Bitcoin, cada unidade de valor é tratada como uma "moeda" individual, mas gerenciar cada centavo como uma transação separada seria impraticável. Para resolver isso, o Bitcoin permite que valores sejam combinados ou divididos em transações, facilitando pagamentos de qualquer valor. #### Entradas e Saídas Cada transação no Bitcoin é composta por: - **Entradas**: Representam os valores recebidos em transações anteriores. - **Saídas**: Correspondem aos valores enviados, divididos entre os destinatários e, eventualmente, o troco para o remetente. Normalmente, uma transação contém: - Uma única entrada com valor suficiente para cobrir o pagamento. - Ou várias entradas combinadas para atingir o valor necessário. O valor total das saídas nunca excede o das entradas, e a diferença (se houver) pode ser retornada ao remetente como **troco**. #### Exemplo Prático Imagine que você tem duas entradas: 1. 0,03 BTC 2. 0,07 BTC Se deseja enviar 0,08 BTC para alguém, a transação terá: - **Entrada**: As duas entradas combinadas (0,03 + 0,07 BTC = 0,10 BTC). - **Saídas**: Uma para o destinatário (0,08 BTC) e outra como troco para você (0,02 BTC). Essa flexibilidade permite que o sistema funcione sem precisar manipular cada unidade mínima individualmente. #### Difusão e Simplificação A difusão de transações, onde uma depende de várias anteriores e assim por diante, não representa um problema. Não é necessário armazenar ou verificar o histórico completo de uma transação para utilizá-la, já que o registro na blockchain garante sua integridade. --- ### 10. Privacidade O modelo bancário tradicional oferece um certo nível de privacidade, limitando o acesso às informações financeiras apenas às partes envolvidas e a um terceiro confiável (como bancos ou instituições financeiras). No entanto, o Bitcoin opera de forma diferente, pois todas as transações são publicamente registradas na blockchain. Apesar disso, a privacidade pode ser mantida utilizando **chaves públicas anônimas**, que desvinculam diretamente as transações das identidades das partes envolvidas. #### Fluxo de Informação - No **modelo tradicional**, as transações passam por um terceiro confiável que conhece tanto o remetente quanto o destinatário. - No **Bitcoin**, as transações são anunciadas publicamente, mas sem revelar diretamente as identidades das partes. Isso é comparável a dados divulgados por bolsas de valores, onde informações como o tempo e o tamanho das negociações (a "fita") são públicas, mas as identidades das partes não. #### Protegendo a Privacidade Para aumentar a privacidade no Bitcoin, são adotadas as seguintes práticas: 1. **Chaves Públicas Anônimas**: Cada transação utiliza um par de chaves diferentes, dificultando a associação com um proprietário único. 2. **Prevenção de Ligação**: Ao usar chaves novas para cada transação, reduz-se a possibilidade de links evidentes entre múltiplas transações realizadas pelo mesmo usuário. #### Riscos de Ligação Embora a privacidade seja fortalecida, alguns riscos permanecem: - Transações **multi-entrada** podem revelar que todas as entradas pertencem ao mesmo proprietário, caso sejam necessárias para somar o valor total. - O proprietário da chave pode ser identificado indiretamente por transações anteriores que estejam conectadas. --- ### 11. Cálculos Imagine que temos um sistema onde as pessoas (ou computadores) competem para adicionar informações novas (blocos) a um grande registro público (a cadeia de blocos ou blockchain). Este registro é como um livro contábil compartilhado, onde todos podem verificar o que está escrito. Agora, vamos pensar em um cenário: um atacante quer enganar o sistema. Ele quer mudar informações já registradas para beneficiar a si mesmo, por exemplo, desfazendo um pagamento que já fez. Para isso, ele precisa criar uma versão alternativa do livro contábil (a cadeia de blocos dele) e convencer todos os outros participantes de que essa versão é a verdadeira. Mas isso é extremamente difícil. #### Como o Ataque Funciona Quando um novo bloco é adicionado à cadeia, ele depende de cálculos complexos que levam tempo e esforço. Esses cálculos são como um grande quebra-cabeça que precisa ser resolvido. - Os “bons jogadores” (nós honestos) estão sempre trabalhando juntos para resolver esses quebra-cabeças e adicionar novos blocos à cadeia verdadeira. - O atacante, por outro lado, precisa resolver quebra-cabeças sozinho, tentando “alcançar” a cadeia honesta para que sua versão alternativa pareça válida. Se a cadeia honesta já está vários blocos à frente, o atacante começa em desvantagem, e o sistema está projetado para que a dificuldade de alcançá-los aumente rapidamente. #### A Corrida Entre Cadeias Você pode imaginar isso como uma corrida. A cada bloco novo que os jogadores honestos adicionam à cadeia verdadeira, eles se distanciam mais do atacante. Para vencer, o atacante teria que resolver os quebra-cabeças mais rápido que todos os outros jogadores honestos juntos. Suponha que: - A rede honesta tem **80% do poder computacional** (ou seja, resolve 8 de cada 10 quebra-cabeças). - O atacante tem **20% do poder computacional** (ou seja, resolve 2 de cada 10 quebra-cabeças). Cada vez que a rede honesta adiciona um bloco, o atacante tem que "correr atrás" e resolver mais quebra-cabeças para alcançar. #### Por Que o Ataque Fica Cada Vez Mais Improvável? Vamos usar uma fórmula simples para mostrar como as chances de sucesso do atacante diminuem conforme ele precisa "alcançar" mais blocos: P = (q/p)^z - **q** é o poder computacional do atacante (20%, ou 0,2). - **p** é o poder computacional da rede honesta (80%, ou 0,8). - **z** é a diferença de blocos entre a cadeia honesta e a cadeia do atacante. Se o atacante está 5 blocos atrás (z = 5): P = (0,2 / 0,8)^5 = (0,25)^5 = 0,00098, (ou, 0,098%) Isso significa que o atacante tem menos de 0,1% de chance de sucesso — ou seja, é muito improvável. Se ele estiver 10 blocos atrás (z = 10): P = (0,2 / 0,8)^10 = (0,25)^10 = 0,000000095, (ou, 0,0000095%). Neste caso, as chances de sucesso são praticamente **nulas**. #### Um Exemplo Simples Se você jogar uma moeda, a chance de cair “cara” é de 50%. Mas se precisar de 10 caras seguidas, sua chance já é bem menor. Se precisar de 20 caras seguidas, é quase impossível. No caso do Bitcoin, o atacante precisa de muito mais do que 20 caras seguidas. Ele precisa resolver quebra-cabeças extremamente difíceis e alcançar os jogadores honestos que estão sempre à frente. Isso faz com que o ataque seja inviável na prática. #### Por Que Tudo Isso é Seguro? - **A probabilidade de sucesso do atacante diminui exponencialmente.** Isso significa que, quanto mais tempo passa, menor é a chance de ele conseguir enganar o sistema. - **A cadeia verdadeira (honesta) está protegida pela força da rede.** Cada novo bloco que os jogadores honestos adicionam à cadeia torna mais difícil para o atacante alcançar. #### E Se o Atacante Tentar Continuar? O atacante poderia continuar tentando indefinidamente, mas ele estaria gastando muito tempo e energia sem conseguir nada. Enquanto isso, os jogadores honestos estão sempre adicionando novos blocos, tornando o trabalho do atacante ainda mais inútil. Assim, o sistema garante que a cadeia verdadeira seja extremamente segura e que ataques sejam, na prática, impossíveis de ter sucesso. --- ### 12. Conclusão Propusemos um sistema de transações eletrônicas que elimina a necessidade de confiança, baseando-se em assinaturas digitais e em uma rede peer-to-peer que utiliza prova de trabalho. Isso resolve o problema do gasto duplo, criando um histórico público de transações imutável, desde que a maioria do poder computacional permaneça sob controle dos participantes honestos. A rede funciona de forma simples e descentralizada, com nós independentes que não precisam de identificação ou coordenação direta. Eles entram e saem livremente, aceitando a cadeia de prova de trabalho como registro do que ocorreu durante sua ausência. As decisões são tomadas por meio do poder de CPU, validando blocos legítimos, estendendo a cadeia e rejeitando os inválidos. Com este mecanismo de consenso, todas as regras e incentivos necessários para o funcionamento seguro e eficiente do sistema são garantidos. --- Faça o download do whitepaper original em português: https://bitcoin.org/files/bitcoin-paper/bitcoin_pt_br.pdf

@ 3f770d65:7a745b24

The recent shutdown of TikTok in the United States due to a potential government ban serves as a stark reminder how fragile centralized platforms truly are under the surface. While these platforms offer convenience, a more polished user experience, and connectivity, they are ultimately beholden to governments, corporations, and other authorities. This makes them vulnerable to censorship, regulation, and outright bans. In contrast, Nostr represents a shift in how we approach online communication and content sharing. Built on the principles of decentralization and user choice, Nostr cannot be banned, because it is not a platform—it is a protocol. **PROTOCOLS, NOT PLATFORMS.** At the heart of Nostr's philosophy is **user choice**, a feature that fundamentally sets it apart from legacy platforms. In centralized systems, the user experience is dictated by a single person or governing entity. If the platform decides to filter, censor, or ban specific users or content, individuals are left with little action to rectify the situation. They must either accept the changes or abandon the platform entirely, often at the cost of losing their social connections, their data, and their identity. What's happening with TikTok could never happen on Nostr. With Nostr, the dynamics are completely different. Because it is a protocol, not a platform, no single entity controls the ecosystem. Instead, the protocol enables a network of applications and relays that users can freely choose from. If a particular application or relay implements policies that a user disagrees with, such as censorship, filtering, or even government enforced banning, they are not trapped or abandoned. They have the freedom to move to another application or relay with minimal effort. **THIS IS POWERFUL.** Take, for example, the case of a relay that decides to censor specific content. On a legacy platform, this would result in frustration and a loss of access for users. On Nostr, however, users can simply connect to a different relay that does not impose such restrictions. Similarly, if an application introduces features or policies that users dislike, they can migrate to a different application that better suits their preferences, all while retaining their identity and social connections. The same principles apply to government bans and censorship. A government can ban a specific application or even multiple applications, just as it can block one relay or several relays. China has implemented both tactics, yet Chinese users continue to exist and actively participate on Nostr, demonstrating Nostr's ability to resistant censorship. How? Simply, it turns into a game of whack-a-mole. When one relay is censored, another quickly takes its place. When one application is banned, another emerges. Users can also bypass these obstacles by running their own relays and applications directly from their homes or personal devices, eliminating reliance on larger entities or organizations and ensuring continuous access. **AGAIN, THIS IS POWERUFL.** Nostr's open and decentralized design makes it resistant to the kinds of government intervention that led to TikTok's outages this weekend and potential future ban in the next 90 days. There is no central server to target, no company to regulate, and no single point of failure. (Insert your CEO jokes here). As long as there are individuals running relays and applications, users continue creating notes and sending zaps. Platforms like TikTok can be silenced with the stroke of a pen, leaving millions of users disconnected and abandoned. Social communication should not be silenced so incredibly easily. No one should have that much power over social interactions. Will we on-board a massive wave of TikTokers in the coming hours or days? I don't know. TikTokers may not be ready for Nostr yet, and honestly, Nostr may not be ready for them either. The ecosystem still lacks the completely polished applications, tools, and services they’re accustomed to. This is where we say "we're still early". They may not be early adopters like the current Nostr user base. Until we bridge that gap, they’ll likely move to the next centralized platform, only to face another government ban or round of censorship in the future. But eventually, there will come a tipping point, a moment when they’ve had enough. When that time comes, I hope we’re prepared. If we’re not, we risk missing a tremendous opportunity to onboard people who genuinely need Nostr’s freedom. Until then, to all of the Nostr developers out there, keep up the great work and keep building. Your hard work and determination is needed. ###

@ cff1720e:15c7e2b2

**Einleitung**\ \ Schwierige Dinge einfach zu erklären ist der Anspruch von ELI5 (explain me like I'm 5). Das ist in unserer hoch technisierten Welt dringend erforderlich, denn nur mit dem Verständnis der Technologien können wir sie richtig einsetzen und weiter entwickeln.\ Ich starte meine Serie mit Nostr, einem relativ neuen Internet-Protokoll. Was zum Teufel ist ein Internet-Protokoll? Formal beschrieben sind es internationale Standards, die dafür sorgen, dass das Internet seit über 30 Jahren ziemlich gut funktioniert. Es ist die Sprache, in der sich die Rechner miteinander unterhalten und die auch Sie täglich nutzen, vermutlich ohne es bewusst wahrzunehmen. http(s) transportiert ihre Anfrage an einen Server (z.B. Amazon), und html sorgt dafür, dass aus den gelieferten Daten eine schöne Seite auf ihrem Bildschirm entsteht. Eine Mail wird mit smtp an den Mailserver gesendet und mit imap von ihm abgerufen, und da alle den Standard verwenden, funktioniert das mit jeder App auf jedem Betriebssystem und mit jedem Mail-Provider. Und mit einer Mail-Adresse wie <roland@pareto.space> können sie sogar jederzeit umziehen, egal wohin. **Cool, das ist state of the art!** Aber warum funktioniert das z.B. bei Chat nicht, gibt es da kein Protokoll? Doch, es heißt IRC (Internet Relay Chat → merken sie sich den Namen), aber es wird so gut wie nicht verwendet. Die Gründe dafür sind nicht technischer Natur, vielmehr wurden mit Apps wie Facebook, Twitter, WhatsApp, Telegram, Instagram, TikTok u.a. bewusst Inkompatibilitäten und Nutzerabhängigkeiten geschaffen um Profite zu maximieren.  **Warum Nostr?** Da das Standard-Protokoll nicht genutzt wird, hat jede App ihr eigenes, und wir brauchen eine handvoll Apps um uns mit allen Bekannten auszutauschen. Eine Mobilfunknummer ist Voraussetzung für jedes Konto, damit können die App-Hersteller die Nutzer umfassend tracken und mit dem Verkauf der Informationen bis zu 30 USD je Konto und Monat verdienen. Der Nutzer ist nicht mehr Kunde, er ist das Produkt! Der Werbe-SPAM ist noch das kleinste Problem bei diesem Geschäftsmodell. Server mit Millionen von Nutzerdaten sind ein “honey pot”, dementsprechend oft werden sie gehackt und die Zugangsdaten verkauft. 2024 wurde auch der Twitter-Account vom damaligen Präsidenten Joe Biden gehackt, niemand wusste mehr wer die Nachrichten verfasst hat (vorher auch nicht), d.h. die Authentizität der Inhalte ist bei keinem dieser Anbieter gewährleistet. Im selben Jahr wurde der Telegram-Gründer in Frankreich in Beugehaft genommen, weil er sich geweigert hatte Hintertüren in seine Software einzubauen. Nun kann zum Schutz **"unserer Demokratie”** praktisch jeder mitlesen, was sie mit wem an Informationen austauschen, z.B. darüber welches Shampoo bestimmte Politiker verwenden.   Und wer tatsächlich glaubt er könne Meinungsfreiheit auf sozialen Medien praktizieren, findet sich schnell in der Situation von Donald Trump wieder (seinerzeit amtierender Präsident), dem sein Twitter-Konto 2021 abgeschaltet wurde (Cancel-Culture). Die Nutzerdaten, also ihr Profil, ihre Kontakte, Dokumente, Bilder, Videos und Audiofiles - gehören ihnen ohnehin nicht mehr sondern sind Eigentum des Plattform-Betreibers; lesen sie sich mal die AGB's durch. Aber nein, keine gute Idee, das sind hunderte Seiten und sie werden permanent geändert. Alle nutzen also Apps, deren Technik sie nicht verstehen, deren Regeln sie nicht kennen, wo sie keine Rechte haben und die ihnen die Resultate ihres Handelns stehlen. Was würde wohl der Fünfjährige sagen, wenn ihm seine ältere Schwester anbieten würde, alle seine Spielzeuge zu “verwalten” und dann auszuhändigen wenn er brav ist? “Du spinnst wohl”, und damit beweist der Knirps mehr Vernunft als die Mehrzahl der Erwachsenen. \ \ **Resümee:** keine Standards, keine Daten, keine Rechte = keine Zukunft!  \ **Wie funktioniert Nostr?** Die Entwickler von Nostr haben erkannt dass sich das Server-Client-Konzept in ein Master-Slave-Konzept verwandelt hatte. Der Master ist ein Synonym für Zentralisierung und wird zum **“single point of failure”**, der zwangsläufig Systeme dysfunktional macht. In einem verteilten Peer2Peer-System gibt es keine Master mehr sondern nur gleichberechtigte Knoten (Relays), auf denen die Informationen gespeichert werden. Indem man Informationen auf mehreren Relays redundant speichert, ist das System in jeglicher Hinsicht resilienter. Nicht nur die Natur verwendet dieses Prinzip seit Jahrmillionen erfolgreich, auch das Internet wurde so konzipiert (das ARPAnet wurde vom US-Militär für den Einsatz in Kriegsfällen unter massiven Störungen entwickelt). Alle Nostr-Daten liegen auf Relays und der Nutzer kann wählen zwischen öffentlichen (zumeist kostenlosen) und privaten Relays, z.B. für geschlossene Gruppen oder zum Zwecke von Daten-Archivierung. Da Dokumente auf mehreren Relays gespeichert sind, werden statt URL's (Locator) eindeutige Dokumentnamen (URI's = Identifier) verwendet, broken Links sind damit Vergangenheit und Löschungen / Verluste ebenfalls.\ \ Jedes Dokument (Event genannt) wird vom Besitzer signiert, es ist damit authentisch und fälschungssicher und kann nur vom Ersteller gelöscht werden. Dafür wird ein Schlüsselpaar verwendet bestehend aus privatem (nsec) und öffentlichem Schlüssel (npub) wie aus der Mailverschlüsselung (PGP) bekannt. Das repräsentiert eine Nostr-Identität, die um Bild, Namen, Bio und eine lesbare Nostr-Adresse ergänzt werden kann (z.B. <roland@pareto.space> ), mehr braucht es nicht um alle Ressourcen des Nostr-Ökosystems zu nutzen. Und das besteht inzwischen aus über hundert Apps mit unterschiedlichen Fokussierungen, z.B. für persönliche verschlüsselte Nachrichten (DM → OxChat), Kurznachrichten (Damus, Primal), Blogbeiträge (Pareto), Meetups (Joinstr), Gruppen (Groups), Bilder (Olas), Videos (Amethyst), Audio-Chat (Nostr Nests), Audio-Streams (Tunestr), Video-Streams (Zap.Stream), Marktplätze (Shopstr) u.v.a.m. Die Anmeldung erfolgt mit einem Klick (single sign on) und den Apps stehen ALLE Nutzerdaten zur Verfügung (Profil, Daten, Kontakte, Social Graph → Follower, Bookmarks, Comments, etc.), im Gegensatz zu den fragmentierten Datensilos der Gegenwart.\ \ **Resümee:** ein offener Standard, alle Daten, alle Rechte = große Zukunft!  \ **Warum ist Nostr die Zukunft des Internet?** “Baue Dein Haus nicht auf einem fremden Grundstück” gilt auch im Internet - für alle App-Entwickler, Künstler, Journalisten und Nutzer, denn auch ihre Daten sind werthaltig. Nostr garantiert das Eigentum an den Daten, und überwindet ihre Fragmentierung. Weder die Nutzung noch die kreativen Freiheiten werden durch maßlose Lizenz- und Nutzungsbedingungen eingeschränkt. Aus passiven Nutzern werden durch Interaktion aktive Teilnehmer, Co-Creatoren in einer Sharing-Ökonomie **(Value4Value)**. OpenSource schafft endlich wieder Vertrauen in die Software und ihre Anbieter. Offene Standards ermöglichen den Entwicklern mehr Kooperation und schnellere Entwicklung, für die Anwender garantieren sie Wahlfreiheit. Womit wir letztmalig zu unserem Fünfjährigen zurückkehren. Kinder lieben Lego über alles, am meisten die Maxi-Box “Classic”, weil sie damit ihre Phantasie im Kombinieren voll ausleben können. Erwachsene schenken ihnen dann die viel zu teuren Themenpakete, mit denen man nur eine Lösung nach Anleitung bauen kann. “Was stimmt nur mit meinen Eltern nicht, wann sind die denn falsch abgebogen?" fragt sich der Nachwuchs zu Recht. Das Image lässt sich aber wieder aufpolieren, wenn sie ihren Kindern Nostr zeigen, denn die Vorteile verstehen sogar Fünfjährige.  \ **Das neue Internet ist dezentral. Das neue Internet ist selbstbestimmt. Nostr ist das neue Internet.** <https://nostr.net/> \ <https://start.njump.me/> **Hier das Interview zum Thema mit Radio Berliner Morgenröte** <https://www.podbean.com/ew/pb-yxc36-17bb4be>

@ 9e69e420:d12360c2

A new report from the National Sports Shooting Foundation (NSSF) shows that civilian firearm possession exceeded 490 million in 2022. The total from 1990 to 2022 is estimated at 491.3 million firearms. In 2022, over ten million firearms were domestically produced, leading to a total of 16,045,911 firearms available in the U.S. market. Of these, 9,873,136 were handguns, 4,195,192 were rifles, and 1,977,583 were shotguns. Handgun availability aligns with the concealed carry and self-defense market, as all states allow concealed carry, with 29 having constitutional carry laws.

@ f9cf4e94:96abc355

Para esse exemplo iremos usar: | Nome | Imagem | Descrição | | --------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------ | ------------------------------------------------------------ | | Raspberry PI B+ |  | **Cortex-A53 (ARMv8) 64-bit a 1.4GHz e 1 GB de SDRAM LPDDR2,** | | Pen drive |  | **16Gb** | Recomendo que use o **Ubuntu Server** para essa instalação. Você pode baixar o Ubuntu para Raspberry Pi [aqui]( https://ubuntu.com/download/raspberry-pi). O passo a passo para a instalação do Ubuntu no Raspberry Pi está disponível [aqui]( https://ubuntu.com/tutorials/how-to-install-ubuntu-on-your-raspberry-pi). **Não instale um desktop** (como xubuntu, lubuntu, xfce, etc.). --- ## Passo 1: Atualizar o Sistema 🖥️ Primeiro, atualize seu sistema e instale o Tor: ```bash apt update apt install tor ``` --- ## Passo 2: Criar o Arquivo de Serviço `nrs.service` 🔧 Crie o arquivo de serviço que vai gerenciar o servidor Nostr. Você pode fazer isso com o seguinte conteúdo: ```unit [Unit] Description=Nostr Relay Server Service After=network.target [Service] Type=simple WorkingDirectory=/opt/nrs ExecStart=/opt/nrs/nrs-arm64 Restart=on-failure [Install] WantedBy=multi-user.target ``` --- ## Passo 3: Baixar o Binário do Nostr 🚀 Baixe o binário mais recente do Nostr [aqui no GitHub]( https://github.com/gabrielmoura/SimpleNosrtRelay/releases). --- ## Passo 4: Criar as Pastas Necessárias 📂 Agora, crie as pastas para o aplicativo e o pendrive: ```bash mkdir -p /opt/nrs /mnt/edriver ``` --- ## Passo 5: Listar os Dispositivos Conectados 🔌 Para saber qual dispositivo você vai usar, liste todos os dispositivos conectados: ```bash lsblk ``` --- ## Passo 6: Formatando o Pendrive 💾 Escolha o pendrive correto (por exemplo, `/dev/sda`) e formate-o: ```bash mkfs.vfat /dev/sda ``` --- ## Passo 7: Montar o Pendrive 💻 Monte o pendrive na pasta `/mnt/edriver`: ```bash mount /dev/sda /mnt/edriver ``` --- ## Passo 8: Verificar UUID dos Dispositivos 📋 Para garantir que o sistema monte o pendrive automaticamente, liste os UUID dos dispositivos conectados: ```bash blkid ``` --- ## Passo 9: Alterar o `fstab` para Montar o Pendrive Automáticamente 📝 Abra o arquivo `/etc/fstab` e adicione uma linha para o pendrive, com o UUID que você obteve no passo anterior. A linha deve ficar assim: ```fstab UUID=9c9008f8-f852 /mnt/edriver vfat defaults 0 0 ``` --- ## Passo 10: Copiar o Binário para a Pasta Correta 📥 Agora, copie o binário baixado para a pasta `/opt/nrs`: ```bash cp nrs-arm64 /opt/nrs ``` --- ## Passo 11: Criar o Arquivo de Configuração 🛠️ Crie o arquivo de configuração com o seguinte conteúdo e salve-o em `/opt/nrs/config.yaml`: ```yaml app_env: production info: name: Nostr Relay Server description: Nostr Relay Server pub_key: "" contact: "" url: http://localhost:3334 icon: https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u= https://public.bnbstatic.com/image/cms/crawler/COINCU_NEWS/image-495-1024x569.png base_path: /mnt/edriver negentropy: true ``` --- ## Passo 12: Copiar o Serviço para o Diretório de Systemd ⚙️ Agora, copie o arquivo `nrs.service` para o diretório `/etc/systemd/system/`: ```bash cp nrs.service /etc/systemd/system/ ``` Recarregue os serviços e inicie o serviço `nrs`: ```bash systemctl daemon-reload systemctl enable --now nrs.service ``` --- ## Passo 13: Configurar o Tor 🌐 Abra o arquivo de configuração do Tor `/var/lib/tor/torrc` e adicione a seguinte linha: ```torrc HiddenServiceDir /var/lib/tor/nostr_server/ HiddenServicePort 80 127.0.0.1:3334 ``` --- ## Passo 14: Habilitar e Iniciar o Tor 🧅 Agora, ative e inicie o serviço Tor: ```bash systemctl enable --now tor.service ``` O Tor irá gerar um endereço `.onion` para o seu servidor Nostr. Você pode encontrá-lo no arquivo `/var/lib/tor/nostr_server/hostname`. --- ## Observações ⚠️ - Com essa configuração, **os dados serão salvos no pendrive**, enquanto o binário ficará no cartão SD do Raspberry Pi. - O endereço `.onion` do seu servidor Nostr será algo como: `ws://y3t5t5wgwjif<exemplo>h42zy7ih6iwbyd.onion`. --- Agora, seu servidor Nostr deve estar configurado e funcionando com Tor! 🥳 Se este artigo e as informações aqui contidas forem úteis para você, convidamos a considerar uma doação ao autor como forma de reconhecimento e incentivo à produção de novos conteúdos.

@ 6389be64:ef439d32

## Black Locust can grow up to 170 ft tall ## Grows 3-4 ft. per year ## Native to North America ## Cold hardy in zones 3 to 8  ## Firewood - BLT wood, on a pound for pound basis is roughly half that of Anthracite Coal - Since its growth is fast, firewood can be plentiful ## Timber  - Rot resistant due to a naturally produced robinin in the wood - 100 year life span in full soil contact! (better than cedar performance) - Fence posts - Outdoor furniture - Outdoor decking - Sustainable due to its fast growth and spread - Can be coppiced (cut to the ground) - Can be pollarded (cut above ground) - Its dense wood makes durable tool handles, boxes (tool), and furniture - The wood is tougher than hickory, which is tougher than hard maple, which is tougher than oak. -  A very low rate of expansion and contraction - Hardwood flooring - The highest tensile beam strength of any American tree - The wood is beautiful ## Legume - Nitrogen fixer - Fixes the same amount of nitrogen per acre as is needed for 200-bushel/acre corn - Black walnuts inter-planted with locust as “nurse” trees were shown to rapidly increase their growth [[Clark, Paul M., and Robert D. Williams. (1978) Black walnut growth increased when interplanted with nitrogen-fixing shrubs and trees. Proceedings of the Indiana Academy of Science, vol. 88, pp. 88-91.]] ## Bees  - The edible flower clusters are also a top food source for honey bees ## Shade Provider  - Its light, airy overstory provides dappled shade - Planted on the west side of a garden it provides relief during the hottest part of the day - (nitrogen provider) - Planted on the west side of a house, its quick growth soon shades that side from the sun ## Wind-break  - Fast growth plus it's feathery foliage reduces wind for animals, crops, and shelters ## Fodder - Over 20% crude protein - 4.1 kcal/g of energy - Baertsche, S.R, M.T. Yokoyama, and J.W. Hanover (1986) Short rotation, hardwood tree biomass as potential ruminant feed-chemical composition, nylon bag ruminal degradation and ensilement of selected species. J. Animal Sci. 63 2028-2043

@ 6389be64:ef439d32

Bitcoin is more than money, more than an asset, and more than a store of value. Bitcoin is a Prime Mover, an enabler and it ignites imaginations. It certainly fueled an idea in my mind. The idea integrates sensors, computational prowess, actuated machinery, power conversion, and electronic communications to form an autonomous, machined creature roaming forests and harvesting the most widespread and least energy-dense fuel source available. I call it the Forest Walker and it eats wood, and mines Bitcoin. I know what you're thinking. Why not just put Bitcoin mining rigs where they belong: in a hosted facility sporting electricity from energy-dense fuels like natural gas, climate-controlled with excellent data piping in and out? Why go to all the trouble building a robot that digests wood creating flammable gasses fueling an engine to run a generator powering Bitcoin miners? It's all about synergy. Bitcoin mining enables the realization of multiple, seemingly unrelated, yet useful activities. Activities considered un-profitable if not for Bitcoin as the Prime Mover. This is much more than simply mining the greatest asset ever conceived by humankind. It’s about the power of synergy, which Bitcoin plays only one of many roles. The synergy created by this system can stabilize forests' fire ecology while generating multiple income streams. That’s the realistic goal here and requires a brief history of American Forest management before continuing. # Smokey The Bear In 1944, the Smokey Bear Wildfire Prevention Campaign began in the United States. “Only YOU can prevent forest fires” remains the refrain of the Ad Council’s longest running campaign. The Ad Council is a U.S. non-profit set up by the American Association of Advertising Agencies and the Association of National Advertisers in 1942. It would seem that the U.S. Department of the Interior was concerned about pesky forest fires and wanted them to stop. So, alongside a national policy of extreme fire suppression they enlisted the entire U.S. population to get onboard via the Ad Council and it worked. Forest fires were almost obliterated and everyone was happy, right? Wrong. Smokey is a fantastically successful bear so forest fires became so few for so long that the fuel load - dead wood - in forests has become very heavy. So heavy that when a fire happens (and they always happen) it destroys everything in its path because the more fuel there is the hotter that fire becomes. Trees, bushes, shrubs, and all other plant life cannot escape destruction (not to mention homes and businesses). The soil microbiology doesn’t escape either as it is burned away even in deeper soils. To add insult to injury, hydrophobic waxy residues condense on the soil surface, forcing water to travel over the ground rather than through it eroding forest soils. Good job, Smokey. Well done, Sir! Most terrestrial ecologies are “fire ecologies”. Fire is a part of these systems’ fuel load and pest management. Before we pretended to “manage” millions of acres of forest, fires raged over the world, rarely damaging forests. The fuel load was always too light to generate fires hot enough to moonscape mountainsides. Fires simply burned off the minor amounts of fuel accumulated since the fire before. The lighter heat, smoke, and other combustion gasses suppressed pests, keeping them in check and the smoke condensed into a plant growth accelerant called wood vinegar, not a waxy cap on the soil. These fires also cleared out weak undergrowth, cycled minerals, and thinned the forest canopy, allowing sunlight to penetrate to the forest floor. Without a fire’s heat, many pine tree species can’t sow their seed. The heat is required to open the cones (the seed bearing structure) of Spruce, Cypress, Sequoia, Jack Pine, Lodgepole Pine and many more. Without fire forests can’t have babies. The idea was to protect the forests, and it isn't working. So, in a world of fire, what does an ally look like and what does it do? # Meet The Forest Walker  For the Forest Walker to work as a mobile, autonomous unit, a solid platform that can carry several hundred pounds is required. It so happens this chassis already exists but shelved. Introducing the Legged Squad Support System (LS3). A joint project between Boston Dynamics, DARPA, and the United States Marine Corps, the quadrupedal robot is the size of a cow, can carry 400 pounds (180 kg) of equipment, negotiate challenging terrain, and operate for 24 hours before needing to refuel. Yes, it had an engine. Abandoned in 2015, the thing was too noisy for military deployment and maintenance "under fire" is never a high-quality idea. However, we can rebuild it to act as a platform for the Forest Walker; albeit with serious alterations. It would need to be bigger, probably. Carry more weight? Definitely. Maybe replace structural metal with carbon fiber and redesign much as 3D printable parts for more effective maintenance. The original system has a top operational speed of 8 miles per hour. For our purposes, it only needs to move about as fast as a grazing ruminant. Without the hammering vibrations of galloping into battle, shocks of exploding mortars, and drunken soldiers playing "Wrangler of Steel Machines", time between failures should be much longer and the overall energy consumption much lower. The LS3 is a solid platform to build upon. Now it just needs to be pulled out of the mothballs, and completely refitted with outboard equipment. # The Small Branch Chipper  When I say “Forest fuel load” I mean the dead, carbon containing litter on the forest floor. Duff (leaves), fine-woody debris (small branches), and coarse woody debris (logs) are the fuel that feeds forest fires. Walk through any forest in the United States today and you will see quite a lot of these materials. Too much, as I have described. Some of these fuel loads can be 8 tons per acre in pine and hardwood forests and up to 16 tons per acre at active logging sites. That’s some big wood and the more that collects, the more combustible danger to the forest it represents. It also provides a technically unlimited fuel supply for the Forest Walker system. The problem is that this detritus has to be chewed into pieces that are easily ingestible by the system for the gasification process (we’ll get to that step in a minute). What we need is a wood chipper attached to the chassis (the LS3); its “mouth”. A small wood chipper handling material up to 2.5 - 3.0 inches (6.3 - 7.6 cm) in diameter would eliminate a substantial amount of fuel. There is no reason for Forest Walker to remove fallen trees. It wouldn’t have to in order to make a real difference. It need only identify appropriately sized branches and grab them. Once loaded into the chipper’s intake hopper for further processing, the beast can immediately look for more “food”. This is essentially kindling that would help ignite larger logs. If it’s all consumed by Forest Walker, then it’s not present to promote an aggravated conflagration. I have glossed over an obvious question: How does Forest Walker see and identify branches and such? LiDaR (Light Detection and Ranging) attached to Forest Walker images the local area and feed those data to onboard computers for processing. Maybe AI plays a role. Maybe simple machine learning can do the trick. One thing is for certain: being able to identify a stick and cause robotic appendages to pick it up is not impossible. Great! We now have a quadrupedal robot autonomously identifying and “eating” dead branches and other light, combustible materials. Whilst strolling through the forest, depleting future fires of combustibles, Forest Walker has already performed a major function of this system: making the forest safer. It's time to convert this low-density fuel into a high-density fuel Forest Walker can leverage. Enter the gasification process. # The Gassifier  The gasifier is the heart of the entire system; it’s where low-density fuel becomes the high-density fuel that powers the entire system. Biochar and wood vinegar are process wastes and I’ll discuss why both are powerful soil amendments in a moment, but first, what’s gasification? Reacting shredded carbonaceous material at high temperatures in a low or no oxygen environment converts the biomass into biochar, wood vinegar, heat, and Synthesis Gas (Syngas). Syngas consists primarily of hydrogen, carbon monoxide, and methane. All of which are extremely useful fuels in a gaseous state. Part of this gas is used to heat the input biomass and keep the reaction temperature constant while the internal combustion engine that drives the generator to produce electrical power consumes the rest. Critically, this gasification process is “continuous feed”. Forest Walker must intake biomass from the chipper, process it to fuel, and dump the waste (CO2, heat, biochar, and wood vinegar) continuously. It cannot stop. Everything about this system depends upon this continual grazing, digestion, and excretion of wastes just as a ruminal does. And, like a ruminant, all waste products enhance the local environment. When I first heard of gasification, I didn’t believe that it was real. Running an electric generator from burning wood seemed more akin to “conspiracy fantasy” than science. Not only is gasification real, it’s ancient technology. A man named Dean Clayton first started experiments on gasification in 1699 and in 1901 gasification was used to power a vehicle. By the end of World War II, there were 500,000 Syngas powered vehicles in Germany alone because of fossil fuel rationing during the war. The global gasification market was $480 billion in 2022 and projected to be as much as $700 billion by 2030 (Vantage Market Research). Gasification technology is the best choice to power the Forest Walker because it’s self-contained and we want its waste products. # Biochar: The Waste  Biochar (AKA agricultural charcoal) is fairly simple: it’s almost pure, solid carbon that resembles charcoal. Its porous nature packs large surface areas into small, 3 dimensional nuggets. Devoid of most other chemistry, like hydrocarbons (methane) and ash (minerals), biochar is extremely lightweight. Do not confuse it with the charcoal you buy for your grill. Biochar doesn’t make good grilling charcoal because it would burn too rapidly as it does not contain the multitude of flammable components that charcoal does. Biochar has several other good use cases. Water filtration, water retention, nutrient retention, providing habitat for microscopic soil organisms, and carbon sequestration are the main ones that we are concerned with here. Carbon has an amazing ability to adsorb (substances stick to and accumulate on the surface of an object) manifold chemistries. Water, nutrients, and pollutants tightly bind to carbon in this format. So, biochar makes a respectable filter and acts as a “battery” of water and nutrients in soils. Biochar adsorbs and holds on to seven times its weight in water. Soil containing biochar is more drought resilient than soil without it. Adsorbed nutrients, tightly sequestered alongside water, get released only as plants need them. Plants must excrete protons (H+) from their roots to disgorge water or positively charged nutrients from the biochar's surface; it's an active process. Biochar’s surface area (where adsorption happens) can be 500 square meters per gram or more. That is 10% larger than an official NBA basketball court for every gram of biochar. Biochar’s abundant surface area builds protective habitats for soil microbes like fungi and bacteria and many are critical for the health and productivity of the soil itself. The “carbon sequestration” component of biochar comes into play where “carbon credits” are concerned. There is a financial market for carbon. Not leveraging that market for revenue is foolish. I am climate agnostic. All I care about is that once solid carbon is inside the soil, it will stay there for thousands of years, imparting drought resiliency, fertility collection, nutrient buffering, and release for that time span. I simply want as much solid carbon in the soil because of the undeniably positive effects it has, regardless of any climactic considerations. # Wood Vinegar: More Waste  Another by-product of the gasification process is wood vinegar (Pyroligneous acid). If you have ever seen Liquid Smoke in the grocery store, then you have seen wood vinegar. Principally composed of acetic acid, acetone, and methanol wood vinegar also contains ~200 other organic compounds. It would seem intuitive that condensed, liquefied wood smoke would at least be bad for the health of all living things if not downright carcinogenic. The counter intuition wins the day, however. Wood vinegar has been used by humans for a very long time to promote digestion, bowel, and liver health; combat diarrhea and vomiting; calm peptic ulcers and regulate cholesterol levels; and a host of other benefits. For centuries humans have annually burned off hundreds of thousands of square miles of pasture, grassland, forest, and every other conceivable terrestrial ecosystem. Why is this done? After every burn, one thing becomes obvious: the almost supernatural growth these ecosystems exhibit after the burn. How? Wood vinegar is a component of this growth. Even in open burns, smoke condenses and infiltrates the soil. That is when wood vinegar shows its quality. This stuff beefs up not only general plant growth but seed germination as well and possesses many other qualities that are beneficial to plants. It’s a pesticide, fungicide, promotes beneficial soil microorganisms, enhances nutrient uptake, and imparts disease resistance. I am barely touching a long list of attributes here, but you want wood vinegar in your soil (alongside biochar because it adsorbs wood vinegar as well). # The Internal Combustion Engine  Conversion of grazed forage to chemical, then mechanical, and then electrical energy completes the cycle. The ICE (Internal Combustion Engine) converts the gaseous fuel output from the gasifier to mechanical energy, heat, water vapor, and CO2. It’s the mechanical energy of a rotating drive shaft that we want. That rotation drives the electric generator, which is the heartbeat we need to bring this monster to life. Luckily for us, combined internal combustion engine and generator packages are ubiquitous, delivering a defined energy output given a constant fuel input. It’s the simplest part of the system. The obvious question here is whether the amount of syngas provided by the gasification process will provide enough energy to generate enough electrons to run the entire system or not. While I have no doubt the energy produced will run Forest Walker's main systems the question is really about the electrons left over. Will it be enough to run the Bitcoin mining aspect of the system? Everything is a budget. # CO2 Production For Growth  Plants are lollipops. No matter if it’s a tree or a bush or a shrubbery, the entire thing is mostly sugar in various formats but mostly long chain carbohydrates like lignin and cellulose. Plants need three things to make sugar: CO2, H2O and light. In a forest, where tree densities can be quite high, CO2 availability becomes a limiting growth factor. It’d be in the forest interests to have more available CO2 providing for various sugar formation providing the organism with food and structure. An odd thing about tree leaves, the openings that allow gasses like the ever searched for CO2 are on the bottom of the leaf (these are called stomata). Not many stomata are topside. This suggests that trees and bushes have evolved to find gasses like CO2 from below, not above and this further suggests CO2 might be in higher concentrations nearer the soil. The soil life (bacterial, fungi etc.) is constantly producing enormous amounts of CO2 and it would stay in the soil forever (eventually killing the very soil life that produces it) if not for tidal forces. Water is everywhere and whether in pools, lakes, oceans or distributed in “moist” soils water moves towards to the moon. The water in the soil and also in the water tables below the soil rise toward the surface every day. When the water rises, it expels the accumulated gasses in the soil into the atmosphere and it’s mostly CO2. It’s a good bet on how leaves developed high populations of stomata on the underside of leaves. As the water relaxes (the tide goes out) it sucks oxygenated air back into the soil to continue the functions of soil life respiration. The soil “breathes” albeit slowly. The gasses produced by the Forest Walker’s internal combustion engine consist primarily of CO2 and H2O. Combusting sugars produce the same gasses that are needed to construct the sugars because the universe is funny like that. The Forest Walker is constantly laying down these critical construction elements right where the trees need them: close to the ground to be gobbled up by the trees. # The Branch Drones  During the last ice age, giant mammals populated North America - forests and otherwise. Mastodons, woolly mammoths, rhinos, short-faced bears, steppe bison, caribou, musk ox, giant beavers, camels, gigantic ground-dwelling sloths, glyptodons, and dire wolves were everywhere. Many were ten to fifteen feet tall. As they crashed through forests, they would effectively cleave off dead side-branches of trees, halting the spread of a ground-based fire migrating into the tree crown ("laddering") which is a death knell for a forest. These animals are all extinct now and forests no longer have any manner of pruning services. But, if we build drones fitted with cutting implements like saws and loppers, optical cameras and AI trained to discern dead branches from living ones, these drones could effectively take over pruning services by identifying, cutting, and dropping to the forest floor, dead branches. The dropped branches simply get collected by the Forest Walker as part of its continual mission. The drones dock on the back of the Forest Walker to recharge their batteries when low. The whole scene would look like a grazing cow with some flies bothering it. This activity breaks the link between a relatively cool ground based fire and the tree crowns and is a vital element in forest fire control. # The Bitcoin Miner  Mining is one of four monetary incentive models, making this system a possibility for development. The other three are US Dept. of the Interior, township, county, and electrical utility company easement contracts for fuel load management, global carbon credits trading, and data set sales. All the above depends on obvious questions getting answered. I will list some obvious ones, but this is not an engineering document and is not the place for spreadsheets. How much Bitcoin one Forest Walker can mine depends on everything else. What amount of biomass can we process? Will that biomass flow enough Syngas to keep the lights on? Can the chassis support enough mining ASICs and supporting infrastructure? What does that weigh and will it affect field performance? How much power can the AC generator produce? Other questions that are more philosophical persist. Even if a single Forest Walker can only mine scant amounts of BTC per day, that pales to how much fuel material it can process into biochar. We are talking about millions upon millions of forested acres in need of fuel load management. What can a single Forest Walker do? I am not thinking in singular terms. The Forest Walker must operate as a fleet. What could 50 do? 500? What is it worth providing a service to the world by managing forest fuel loads? Providing proof of work to the global monetary system? Seeding soil with drought and nutrient resilience by the excretion, over time, of carbon by the ton? What did the last forest fire cost? # The Mesh Network  What could be better than one bitcoin mining, carbon sequestering, forest fire squelching, soil amending behemoth? Thousands of them, but then they would need to be able to talk to each other to coordinate position, data handling, etc. Fitted with a mesh networking device, like goTenna or Meshtastic LoRa equipment enables each Forest Walker to communicate with each other. Now we have an interconnected fleet of Forest Walkers relaying data to each other and more importantly, aggregating all of that to the last link in the chain for uplink. Well, at least Bitcoin mining data. Since block data is lightweight, transmission of these data via mesh networking in fairly close quartered environs is more than doable. So, how does data transmit to the Bitcoin Network? How do the Forest Walkers get the previous block data necessary to execute on mining? # Back To The Chain  Getting Bitcoin block data to and from the network is the last puzzle piece. The standing presumption here is that wherever a Forest Walker fleet is operating, it is NOT within cell tower range. We further presume that the nearest Walmart Wi-Fi is hours away. Enter the Blockstream Satellite or something like it. A separate, ground-based drone will have two jobs: To stay as close to the nearest Forest Walker as it can and to provide an antennae for either terrestrial or orbital data uplink. Bitcoin-centric data is transmitted to the "uplink drone" via the mesh networked transmitters and then sent on to the uplink and the whole flow goes in the opposite direction as well; many to one and one to many. We cannot transmit data to the Blockstream satellite, and it will be up to Blockstream and companies like it to provide uplink capabilities in the future and I don't doubt they will. Starlink you say? What’s stopping that company from filtering out block data? Nothing because it’s Starlink’s system and they could decide to censor these data. It seems we may have a problem sending and receiving Bitcoin data in back country environs. But, then again, the utility of this system in staunching the fuel load that creates forest fires is extremely useful around forested communities and many have fiber, Wi-Fi and cell towers. These communities could be a welcoming ground zero for first deployments of the Forest Walker system by the home and business owners seeking fire repression. In the best way, Bitcoin subsidizes the safety of the communities. # Sensor Packages ### LiDaR  The benefit of having a Forest Walker fleet strolling through the forest is the never ending opportunity for data gathering. A plethora of deployable sensors gathering hyper-accurate data on everything from temperature to topography is yet another revenue generator. Data is valuable and the Forest Walker could generate data sales to various government entities and private concerns. LiDaR (Light Detection and Ranging) can map topography, perform biomass assessment, comparative soil erosion analysis, etc. It so happens that the Forest Walker’s ability to “see,” to navigate about its surroundings, is LiDaR driven and since it’s already being used, we can get double duty by harvesting that data for later use. By using a laser to send out light pulses and measuring the time it takes for the reflection of those pulses to return, very detailed data sets incrementally build up. Eventually, as enough data about a certain area becomes available, the data becomes useful and valuable. Forestry concerns, both private and public, often use LiDaR to build 3D models of tree stands to assess the amount of harvest-able lumber in entire sections of forest. Consulting companies offering these services charge anywhere from several hundred to several thousand dollars per square kilometer for such services. A Forest Walker generating such assessments on the fly while performing its other functions is a multi-disciplinary approach to revenue generation. ### pH, Soil Moisture, and Cation Exchange Sensing  The Forest Walker is quadrupedal, so there are four contact points to the soil. Why not get a pH data point for every step it takes? We can also gather soil moisture data and cation exchange capacities at unheard of densities because of sampling occurring on the fly during commission of the system’s other duties. No one is going to build a machine to do pH testing of vast tracts of forest soils, but that doesn’t make the data collected from such an endeavor valueless. Since the Forest Walker serves many functions at once, a multitude of data products can add to the return on investment component. ### Weather Data  Temperature, humidity, pressure, and even data like evapotranspiration gathered at high densities on broad acre scales have untold value and because the sensors are lightweight and don’t require large power budgets, they come along for the ride at little cost. But, just like the old mantra, “gas, grass, or ass, nobody rides for free”, these sensors provide potential revenue benefits just by them being present. I’ve touched on just a few data genres here. In fact, the question for universities, governmental bodies, and other institutions becomes, “How much will you pay us to attach your sensor payload to the Forest Walker?” # Noise Suppression  Only you can prevent Metallica filling the surrounds with 120 dB of sound. Easy enough, just turn the car stereo off. But what of a fleet of 50 Forest Walkers operating in the backcountry or near a township? 500? 5000? Each one has a wood chipper, an internal combustion engine, hydraulic pumps, actuators, and more cooling fans than you can shake a stick at. It’s a walking, screaming fire-breathing dragon operating continuously, day and night, twenty-four hours a day, three hundred sixty-five days a year. The sound will negatively affect all living things and that impacts behaviors. Serious engineering consideration and prowess must deliver a silencing blow to the major issue of noise. It would be foolish to think that a fleet of Forest Walkers could be silent, but if not a major design consideration, then the entire idea is dead on arrival. Townships would not allow them to operate even if they solved the problem of widespread fuel load and neither would governmental entities, and rightly so. Nothing, not man nor beast, would want to be subjected to an eternal, infernal scream even if it were to end within days as the fleet moved further away after consuming what it could. Noise and heat are the only real pollutants of this system; taking noise seriously from the beginning is paramount. # Fire Safety  A “fire-breathing dragon” is not the worst description of the Forest Walker. It eats wood, combusts it at very high temperatures and excretes carbon; and it does so in an extremely flammable environment. Bad mix for one Forest Walker, worse for many. One must take extreme pains to ensure that during normal operation, a Forest Walker could fall over, walk through tinder dry brush, or get pounded into the ground by a meteorite from Krypton and it wouldn’t destroy epic swaths of trees and baby deer. I envision an ultimate test of a prototype to include dowsing it in grain alcohol while it’s wrapped up in toilet paper like a pledge at a fraternity party. If it runs for 72 hours and doesn’t set everything on fire, then maybe outside entities won’t be fearful of something that walks around forests with a constant fire in its belly. # The Wrap  How we think about what can be done with and adjacent to Bitcoin is at least as important as Bitcoin’s economic standing itself. For those who will tell me that this entire idea is without merit, I say, “OK, fine. You can come up with something, too.” What can we plug Bitcoin into that, like a battery, makes something that does not work, work? That’s the lesson I get from this entire exercise. No one was ever going to hire teams of humans to go out and "clean the forest". There's no money in that. The data collection and sales from such an endeavor might provide revenues over the break-even point but investment demands Alpha in this day and age. But, plug Bitcoin into an almost viable system and, voilà! We tip the scales to achieve lift-off. Let’s face it, we haven’t scratched the surface of Bitcoin’s forcing function on our minds. Not because it’s Bitcoin, but because of what that invention means. The question that pushes me to approach things this way is, “what can we create that one system’s waste is another system’s feedstock?” The Forest Walker system’s only real waste is the conversion of low entropy energy (wood and syngas) into high entropy energy (heat and noise). All other output is beneficial to humanity. Bitcoin, I believe, is the first product of a new mode of human imagination. An imagination newly forged over the past few millennia of being lied to, stolen from, distracted and otherwise mis-allocated to a black hole of the nonsensical. We are waking up. What I have presented is not science fiction. Everything I have described here is well within the realm of possibility. The question is one of viability, at least in terms of the detritus of the old world we find ourselves departing from. This system would take a non-trivial amount of time and resources to develop. I think the system would garner extensive long-term contracts from those who have the most to lose from wildfires, the most to gain from hyperaccurate data sets, and, of course, securing the most precious asset in the world. Many may not see it that way, for they seek Alpha and are therefore blind to other possibilities. Others will see only the possibilities; of thinking in a new way, of looking at things differently, and dreaming of what comes next.

@ e3ba5e1a:5e433365

My blog posts and reading material have both been on a decidedly economics-heavy slant recently. The topic today, incentives, squarely falls into the category of economics. However, when I say economics, I’m not talking about “analyzing supply and demand curves.” I’m talking about the true basis of economics: understanding how human beings make decisions in a world of scarcity. A fair definition of incentive is “a reward or punishment that motivates behavior to achieve a desired outcome.” When most people think about economic incentives, they’re thinking of money. If I offer my son $5 if he washes the dishes, I’m incentivizing certain behavior. We can’t guarantee that he’ll do what I want him to do, but we can agree that the incentive structure itself will guide and ultimately determine what outcome will occur. The great thing about monetary incentives is how easy they are to talk about and compare. “Would I rather make $5 washing the dishes or $10 cleaning the gutters?” But much of the world is incentivized in non-monetary ways too. For example, using the “punishment” half of the definition above, I might threaten my son with losing Nintendo Switch access if he doesn’t wash the dishes. No money is involved, but I’m still incentivizing behavior. And there are plenty of incentives beyond our direct control\! My son is *also* incentivized to not wash dishes because it’s boring, or because he has some friends over that he wants to hang out with, or dozens of other things. Ultimately, the conflicting array of different incentive structures placed on him will ultimately determine what actions he chooses to take. ## Why incentives matter A phrase I see often in discussions—whether they are political, parenting, economic, or business—is “if they could **just** do…” Each time I see that phrase, I cringe a bit internally. Usually, the underlying assumption of the statement is “if people would behave contrary to their incentivized behavior then things would be better.” For example: * If my kids would just go to bed when I tell them, they wouldn’t be so cranky in the morning. * If people would just use the recycling bin, we wouldn’t have such a landfill problem. * If people would just stop being lazy, our team would deliver our project on time. In all these cases, the speakers are seemingly flummoxed as to why the people in question don’t behave more rationally. The problem is: each group is behaving perfectly rationally. * The kids have a high time preference, and care more about the joy of staying up now than the crankiness in the morning. Plus, they don’t really suffer the consequences of morning crankiness, their parents do. * No individual suffers much from their individual contribution to a landfill. If they stopped growing the size of the landfill, it would make an insignificant difference versus the amount of effort they need to engage in to properly recycle. * If a team doesn’t properly account for the productivity of individuals on a project, each individual receives less harm from their own inaction. Sure, the project may be delayed, company revenue may be down, and they may even risk losing their job when the company goes out of business. But their laziness individually won’t determine the entirety of that outcome. By contrast, they greatly benefit from being lazy by getting to relax at work, go on social media, read a book, or do whatever else they do when they’re supposed to be working.  My point here is that, as long as you ignore the reality of how incentives drive human behavior, you’ll fail at getting the outcomes you want. If everything I wrote up until now made perfect sense, you understand the premise of this blog post. The rest of it will focus on a bunch of real-world examples to hammer home the point, and demonstrate how versatile this mental model is. ## Running a company Let’s say I run my own company, with myself as the only employee. My personal revenue will be 100% determined by my own actions. If I decide to take Tuesday afternoon off and go fishing, I’ve chosen to lose that afternoon’s revenue. Implicitly, I’ve decided that the enjoyment I get from an afternoon of fishing is greater than the potential revenue. You may think I’m being lazy, but it’s my decision to make. In this situation, the incentive–money–is perfectly aligned with my actions. Compare this to a typical company/employee relationship. I might have a bank of Paid Time Off (PTO) days, in which case once again my incentives are relatively aligned. I know that I can take off 15 days throughout the year, and I’ve chosen to use half a day for the fishing trip. All is still good. What about unlimited time off? Suddenly incentives are starting to misalign. I don’t directly pay a price for not showing up to work on Tuesday. Or Wednesday as well, for that matter. I might ultimately be fired for not doing my job, but that will take longer to work its way through the system than simply not making any money for the day taken off. Compensation overall falls into this misaligned incentive structure. Let’s forget about taking time off. Instead, I work full time on a software project I’m assigned. But instead of using the normal toolchain we’re all used to at work, I play around with a new programming language. I get the fun and joy of playing with new technology, and potentially get to pad my resume a bit when I’m ready to look for a new job. But my current company gets slower results, less productivity, and is forced to subsidize my extracurricular learning. When a CEO has a bonus structure based on profitability, he’ll do everything he can to make the company profitable. This might include things that actually benefit the company, like improving product quality, reducing internal red tape, or finding cheaper vendors. But it might also include destructive practices, like slashing the R\&D budget to show massive profits this year, in exchange for a catastrophe next year when the next version of the product fails to ship.  Or my favorite example. My parents owned a business when I was growing up. They had a back office where they ran operations like accounting. All of the furniture was old couches from our house. After all, any money they spent on furniture came right out of their paychecks\! But in a large corporate environment, each department is generally given a budget for office furniture, a budget which doesn’t roll over year-to-year. The result? Executives make sure to spend the entire budget each year, often buying furniture far more expensive than they would choose if it was their own money. There are plenty of details you can quibble with above. It’s in a company’s best interest to give people downtime so that they can come back recharged. Having good ergonomic furniture can in fact increase productivity in excess of the money spent on it. But overall, the picture is pretty clear: in large corporate structures, you’re guaranteed to have mismatches between the company’s goals and the incentive structure placed on individuals. Using our model from above, we can lament how lazy, greedy, and unethical the employees are for doing what they’re incentivized to do instead of what’s right. But that’s simply ignoring the reality of human nature. # Moral hazard Moral hazard is a situation where one party is incentivized to take on more risk because another party will bear the consequences. Suppose I tell my son when he turns 21 (or whatever legal gambling age is) that I’ll cover all his losses for a day at the casino, but he gets to keep all the winnings. What do you think he’s going to do? The most logical course of action is to place the largest possible bets for as long as possible, asking me to cover each time he loses, and taking money off the table and into his bank account each time he wins.  But let’s look at a slightly more nuanced example. I go to a bathroom in the mall. As I’m leaving, I wash my hands. It will take me an extra 1 second to turn off the water when I’m done washing. That’s a trivial price to pay. If I *don’t* turn off the water, the mall will have to pay for many liters of wasted water, benefiting no one. But I won’t suffer any consequences at all. This is also a moral hazard, but most people will still turn off the water. Why? Usually due to some combination of other reasons such as: 1. We’re so habituated to turning off the water that we don’t even consider *not* turning it off. Put differently, the mental effort needed to not turn off the water is more expensive than the 1 second of time to turn it off. 2. Many of us have been brought up with a deep guilt about wasting resources like water. We have an internal incentive structure that makes the 1 second to turn off the water much less costly than the mental anguish of the waste we created. 3. We’re afraid we’ll be caught by someone else and face some kind of social repercussions. (Or maybe more than social. Are you sure there isn’t a law against leaving the water tap on?) Even with all that in place, you may notice that many public bathrooms use automatic water dispensers. Sure, there’s a sanitation reason for that, but it’s also to avoid this moral hazard. A common denominator in both of these is that the person taking the action that causes the liability (either the gambling or leaving the water on) is not the person who bears the responsibility for that liability (the father or the mall owner). Generally speaking, the closer together the person making the decision and the person incurring the liability are, the smaller the moral hazard. It’s easy to demonstrate that by extending the casino example a bit. I said it was the father who was covering the losses of the gambler. Many children (though not all) would want to avoid totally bankrupting their parents, or at least financially hurting them. Instead, imagine that someone from the IRS shows up at your door, hands you a credit card, and tells you you can use it at a casino all day, taking home all the chips you want. The money is coming from the government. How many people would put any restriction on how much they spend? And since we’re talking about the government already… ## Government moral hazards As I was preparing to write this blog post, the California wildfires hit. The discussions around those wildfires gave a *huge* number of examples of moral hazards. I decided to cherry-pick a few for this post. The first and most obvious one: California is asking for disaster relief funds from the federal government. That sounds wonderful. These fires were a natural disaster, so why shouldn’t the federal government pitch in and help take care of people? The problem is, once again, a moral hazard. In the case of the wildfires, California and Los Angeles both had ample actions they could have taken to mitigate the destruction of this fire: better forest management, larger fire department, keeping the water reservoirs filled, and probably much more that hasn’t come to light yet. If the federal government bails out California, it will be a clear message for the future: your mistakes will be fixed by others. You know what kind of behavior that incentivizes? More risky behavior\! Why spend state funds on forest management and extra firefighters—activities that don’t win politicians a lot of votes in general—when you could instead spend it on a football stadium, higher unemployment payments, or anything else, and then let the feds cover the cost of screw-ups. You may notice that this is virtually identical to the 2008 “too big to fail” bail-outs. Wall Street took insanely risky behavior, reaped huge profits for years, and when they eventually got caught with their pants down, the rest of us bailed them out. “Privatizing profits, socializing losses.”  And here’s the absolute best part of this: I can’t even truly blame either California *or* Wall Street. (I mean, I *do* blame them, I think their behavior is reprehensible, but you’ll see what I mean.) In a world where the rules of the game implicitly include the bail-out mentality, you would be harming your citizens/shareholders/investors if you didn’t engage in that risky behavior. Since everyone is on the hook for those socialized losses, your best bet is to maximize those privatized profits. There’s a lot more to government and moral hazard, but I think these two cases demonstrate the crux pretty solidly. But let’s leave moral hazard behind for a bit and get to general incentivization discussions. # Non-monetary competition At least 50% of the economics knowledge I have comes from the very first econ course I took in college. That professor was amazing, and had some very colorful stories. I can’t vouch for the veracity of the two I’m about to share, but they definitely drive the point home. In the 1970s, the US had an oil shortage. To “fix” this problem, they instituted price caps on gasoline, which of course resulted in insufficient gasoline. To “fix” this problem, they instituted policies where, depending on your license plate number, you could only fill up gas on certain days of the week. (Irrelevant detail for our point here, but this just resulted in people filling up their tanks more often, no reduction in gas usage.) Anyway, my professor’s wife had a friend. My professor described in *great* detail how attractive this woman was. I’ll skip those details here since this is a PG-rated blog. In any event, she never had any trouble filling up her gas tank any day of the week. She would drive up, be told she couldn’t fill up gas today, bat her eyes at the attendant, explain how helpless she was, and was always allowed to fill up gas. This is a demonstration of *non-monetary compensation*. Most of the time in a free market, capitalist economy, people are compensated through money. When price caps come into play, there’s a limit to how much monetary compensation someone can receive. And in that case, people find other ways of competing. Like this woman’s case: through using flirtatious behavior to compensate the gas station workers to let her cheat the rules. The other example was much more insidious. Santa Monica had a problem: it was predominantly wealthy and white. They wanted to fix this problem, and decided to put in place rent controls. After some time, they discovered that Santa Monica had become *wealthier and whiter*, the exact opposite of their desired outcome. Why would that happen? Someone investigated, and ended up interviewing a landlady that demonstrated the reason. She was an older white woman, and admittedly racist. Prior to the rent controls, she would list her apartments in the newspaper, and would be legally obligated to rent to anyone who could afford it. Once rent controls were in place, she took a different tact. She knew that she would only get a certain amount for the apartment, and that the demand for apartments was higher than the supply. That meant she could be picky. She ended up finding tenants through friends-of-friends. Since it wasn’t an official advertisement, she wasn’t legally required to rent it out if someone could afford to pay. Instead, she got to interview people individually and then make them an offer. Normally, that would have resulted in receiving a lower rental price, but not under rent controls. So who did she choose? A young, unmarried, wealthy, white woman. It made perfect sense. Women were less intimidating and more likely to maintain the apartment better. Wealthy people, she determined, would be better tenants. (I have no idea if this is true in practice or not, I’m not a landlord myself.) Unmarried, because no kids running around meant less damage to the property. And, of course, white. Because she was racist, and her incentive structure made her prefer whites. You can deride her for being racist, I won’t disagree with you. But it’s simply the reality. Under the non-rent-control scenario, her profit motive for money outweighed her racism motive. But under rent control, the monetary competition was removed, and she was free to play into her racist tendencies without facing any negative consequences. ## Bureaucracy These were the two examples I remember for that course. But non-monetary compensation pops up in many more places. One highly pertinent example is bureaucracies. Imagine you have a government office, or a large corporation’s acquisition department, or the team that apportions grants at a university. In all these cases, you have a group of people making decisions about handing out money that has no monetary impact on them. If they give to the best qualified recipients, they receive no raises. If they spend the money recklessly on frivolous projects, they face no consequences. Under such an incentivization scheme, there’s little to encourage the bureaucrats to make intelligent funding decisions. Instead, they’ll be incentivized to spend the money where they recognize non-monetary benefits. This is why it’s so common to hear about expensive meals, gift bags at conferences, and even more inappropriate ways of trying to curry favor with those that hold the purse strings. Compare that ever so briefly with the purchases made by a small mom-and-pop store like my parents owned. Could my dad take a bribe to buy from a vendor who’s ripping him off? Absolutely he could\! But he’d lose more on the deal than he’d make on the bribe, since he’s directly incentivized by the deal itself. It would make much more sense for him to go with the better vendor, save $5,000 on the deal, and then treat himself to a lavish $400 meal to celebrate. # Government incentivized behavior This post is getting longer in the tooth than I’d intended, so I’ll finish off with this section and make it a bit briefer. Beyond all the methods mentioned above, government has another mechanism for modifying behavior: through directly changing incentives via legislation, regulation, and monetary policy. Let’s see some examples: * Artificial modification of interest rates encourages people to take on more debt than they would in a free capital market, leading to [malinvestment](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malinvestment) and a consumer debt crisis, and causing the boom-bust cycle we all painfully experience. * Going along with that, giving tax breaks on interest payments further artificially incentivizes people to take on debt that they wouldn’t otherwise. * During COVID-19, at some points unemployment benefits were greater than minimum wage, incentivizing people to rather stay home and not work than get a job, leading to reduced overall productivity in the economy and more printed dollars for benefits. In other words, it was a perfect recipe for inflation. * The tax code gives deductions to “help” people. That might be true, but the real impact is incentivizing people to make decisions they wouldn’t have otherwise. For example, giving out tax deductions on children encourages having more kids. Tax deductions on childcare and preschools incentivizes dual-income households. Whether or not you like the outcomes, it’s clear that it’s government that’s encouraging these outcomes to happen. * Tax incentives cause people to engage in behavior they wouldn’t otherwise (daycare+working mother, for example). * Inflation means that the value of your money goes down over time, which encourages people to spend more today, when their money has a larger impact. (Milton Friedman described this as [high living](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwNDd2_beTU).) # Conclusion The idea here is simple, and fully encapsulated in the title: incentives determine outcomes. If you want to know how to get a certain outcome from others, incentivize them to want that to happen. If you want to understand why people act in seemingly irrational ways, check their incentives. If you’re confused why leaders (and especially politicians) seem to engage in destructive behavior, check their incentives. We can bemoan these realities all we want, but they *are* realities. While there are some people who have a solid internal moral and ethical code, and that internal code incentivizes them to behave against their externally-incentivized interests, those people are rare. And frankly, those people are self-defeating. People *should* take advantage of the incentives around them. Because if they don’t, someone else will. (If you want a literary example of that last comment, see the horse in Animal Farm.) How do we improve the world under these conditions? Make sure the incentives align well with the overall goals of society. To me, it’s a simple formula: * Focus on free trade, value for value, as the basis of a society. In that system, people are always incentivized to provide value to other people. * Reduce the size of bureaucracies and large groups of all kinds. The larger an organization becomes, the farther the consequences of decisions are from those who make them. * And since the nature of human beings will be to try and create areas where they can control the incentive systems to their own benefits, make that as difficult as possible. That comes in the form of strict limits on government power, for example. And even if you don’t want to buy in to this conclusion, I hope the rest of the content was educational, and maybe a bit entertaining\!

@ 3f770d65:7a745b24

I’ve been using Notedeck for several months, starting with its extremely early and experimental alpha versions, all the way to its current, more stable alpha releases. The journey has been fascinating, as I’ve had the privilege of watching it evolve from a concept into a functional and promising tool. In its earliest stages, Notedeck was raw—offering glimpses of its potential but still far from practical for daily use. Even then, the vision behind it was clear: a platform designed to redefine how we interact with Nostr by offering flexibility and power for all users. I'm very bullish on Notedeck. Why? Because Will Casarin is making it! Duh! 😂 Seriously though, if we’re reimagining the web and rebuilding portions of the Internet, it’s important to recognize [the potential of Notedeck](https://damus.io/notedeck/). If Nostr is reimagining the web, then Notedeck is reimagining the Nostr client. Notedeck isn’t just another Nostr app—it’s more a Nostr browser that functions more like an operating system with micro-apps. How cool is that? Much like how Google's Chrome evolved from being a web browser with a task manager into ChromeOS, a full blown operating system, Notedeck aims to transform how we interact with the Nostr. It goes beyond individual apps, offering a foundation for a fully integrated ecosystem built around Nostr. As a Nostr evangelist, I love to scream **INTEROPERABILITY** and tout every application's integrations. Well, Notedeck has the potential to be one of the best platforms to showcase these integrations in entirely new and exciting ways. Do you want an Olas feed of images? Add the media column. Do you want a feed of live video events? Add the zap.stream column. Do you want Nostr Nests or audio chats? Add that column to your Notedeck. Git? Email? Books? Chat and DMs? It's all possible. Not everyone wants a super app though, and that’s okay. As with most things in the Nostr ecosystem, flexibility is key. Notedeck gives users the freedom to choose how they engage with it—whether it’s simply following hashtags or managing straightforward feeds. You'll be able to tailor Notedeck to fit your needs, using it as extensively or minimally as you prefer. Notedeck is designed with a local-first approach, utilizing Nostr content stored directly on your device via the local nostrdb. This will enable a plethora of advanced tools such as search and filtering, the creation of custom feeds, and the ability to develop personalized algorithms across multiple Notedeck micro-applications—all with unparalleled flexibility. Notedeck also supports multicast. Let's geek out for a second. Multicast is a method of communication where data is sent from one source to multiple destinations simultaneously, but only to devices that wish to receive the data. Unlike broadcast, which sends data to all devices on a network, multicast targets specific receivers, reducing network traffic. This is commonly used for efficient data distribution in scenarios like streaming, conferencing, or large-scale data synchronization between devices. > In a local first world where each device holds local copies of your nostr nodes, and each device transparently syncs with each other on the local network, each node becomes a backup. Your data becomes antifragile automatically. When a node goes down it can resync and recover from other nodes. Even if not all nodes have a complete collection, negentropy can pull down only what is needed from each device. All this can be done without internet. > > \-Will Casarin In the context of Notedeck, multicast would allow multiple devices to sync their Nostr nodes with each other over a local network without needing an internet connection. Wild. Notedeck aims to offer full customization too, including the ability to design and share custom skins, much like Winamp. Users will also be able to create personalized columns and, in the future, share their setups with others. This opens the door for power users to craft tailored Nostr experiences, leveraging their expertise in the protocol and applications. By sharing these configurations as "Starter Decks," they can simplify onboarding and showcase the best of Nostr’s ecosystem. Nostr’s “Other Stuff” can often be difficult to discover, use, or understand. Many users doesn't understand or know how to use web browser extensions to login to applications. Let's not even get started with nsecbunkers. Notedeck will address this challenge by providing a native experience that brings these lesser-known applications, tools, and content into a user-friendly and accessible interface, making exploration seamless. However, that doesn't mean Notedeck should disregard power users that want to use nsecbunkers though - hint hint. For anyone interested in watching Nostr be [developed live](https://github.com/damus-io/notedeck), right before your very eyes, Notedeck’s progress serves as a reminder of what’s possible when innovation meets dedication. The current alpha is already demonstrating its ability to handle complex use cases, and I’m excited to see how it continues to grow as it moves toward a full release later this year.

@ 0d97beae:c5274a14

This article hopes to complement the article by Lyn Alden on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jk_HWmmwiAs ## The reason why we have broken money Before the invention of key technologies such as the printing press and electronic communications, even such as those as early as morse code transmitters, gold had won the competition for best medium of money around the world. In fact, it was not just gold by itself that became money, rulers and world leaders developed coins in order to help the economy grow. Gold nuggets were not as easy to transact with as coins with specific imprints and denominated sizes. However, these modern technologies created massive efficiencies that allowed us to communicate and perform services more efficiently and much faster, yet the medium of money could not benefit from these advancements. Gold was heavy, slow and expensive to move globally, even though requesting and performing services globally did not have this limitation anymore. Banks took initiative and created derivatives of gold: paper and electronic money; these new currencies allowed the economy to continue to grow and evolve, but it was not without its dark side. Today, no currency is denominated in gold at all, money is backed by nothing and its inherent value, the paper it is printed on, is worthless too. Banks and governments eventually transitioned from a money derivative to a system of debt that could be co-opted and controlled for political and personal reasons. Our money today is broken and is the cause of more expensive, poorer quality goods in the economy, a larger and ever growing wealth gap, and many of the follow-on problems that have come with it. ## Bitcoin overcomes the "transfer of hard money" problem Just like gold coins were created by man, Bitcoin too is a technology created by man. Bitcoin, however is a much more profound invention, possibly more of a discovery than an invention in fact. Bitcoin has proven to be unbreakable, incorruptible and has upheld its ability to keep its units scarce, inalienable and counterfeit proof through the nature of its own design. Since Bitcoin is a digital technology, it can be transferred across international borders almost as quickly as information itself. It therefore severely reduces the need for a derivative to be used to represent money to facilitate digital trade. This means that as the currency we use today continues to fare poorly for many people, bitcoin will continue to stand out as hard money, that just so happens to work as well, functionally, along side it. Bitcoin will also always be available to anyone who wishes to earn it directly; even China is unable to restrict its citizens from accessing it. The dollar has traditionally become the currency for people who discover that their local currency is unsustainable. Even when the dollar has become illegal to use, it is simply used privately and unofficially. However, because bitcoin does not require you to trade it at a bank in order to use it across borders and across the web, Bitcoin will continue to be a viable escape hatch until we one day hit some critical mass where the world has simply adopted Bitcoin globally and everyone else must adopt it to survive. Bitcoin has not yet proven that it can support the world at scale. However it can only be tested through real adoption, and just as gold coins were developed to help gold scale, tools will be developed to help overcome problems as they arise; ideally without the need for another derivative, but if necessary, hopefully with one that is more neutral and less corruptible than the derivatives used to represent gold. ## Bitcoin blurs the line between commodity and technology Bitcoin is a technology, it is a tool that requires human involvement to function, however it surprisingly does not allow for any concentration of power. Anyone can help to facilitate Bitcoin's operations, but no one can take control of its behaviour, its reach, or its prioritisation, as it operates autonomously based on a pre-determined, neutral set of rules. At the same time, its built-in incentive mechanism ensures that people do not have to operate bitcoin out of the good of their heart. Even though the system cannot be co-opted holistically, It will not stop operating while there are people motivated to trade their time and resources to keep it running and earn from others' transaction fees. Although it requires humans to operate it, it remains both neutral and sustainable. Never before have we developed or discovered a technology that could not be co-opted and used by one person or faction against another. Due to this nature, Bitcoin's units are often described as a commodity; they cannot be usurped or virtually cloned, and they cannot be affected by political biases. ## The dangers of derivatives A derivative is something created, designed or developed to represent another thing in order to solve a particular complication or problem. For example, paper and electronic money was once a derivative of gold. In the case of Bitcoin, if you cannot link your units of bitcoin to an "address" that you personally hold a cryptographically secure key to, then you very likely have a derivative of bitcoin, not bitcoin itself. If you buy bitcoin on an online exchange and do not withdraw the bitcoin to a wallet that you control, then you legally own an electronic derivative of bitcoin. Bitcoin is a new technology. It will have a learning curve and it will take time for humanity to learn how to comprehend, authenticate and take control of bitcoin collectively. Having said that, many people all over the world are already using and relying on Bitcoin natively. For many, it will require for people to find the need or a desire for a neutral money like bitcoin, and to have been burned by derivatives of it, before they start to understand the difference between the two. Eventually, it will become an essential part of what we regard as common sense. ## Learn for yourself If you wish to learn more about how to handle bitcoin and avoid derivatives, you can start by searching online for tutorials about "Bitcoin self custody". There are many options available, some more practical for you, and some more practical for others. Don't spend too much time trying to find the perfect solution; practice and learn. You may make mistakes along the way, so be careful not to experiment with large amounts of your bitcoin as you explore new ideas and technologies along the way. This is similar to learning anything, like riding a bicycle; you are sure to fall a few times, scuff the frame, so don't buy a high performance racing bike while you're still learning to balance.

@ 37fe9853:bcd1b039

yoyoaa

@ 62033ff8:e4471203

收录的内容中 kind=1的部分，实话说 质量不高。 所以我增加了kind=30023 长文的article，但是更新的太少，多个relays 的服务器也没有多少长文。 所有搜索nostr如果需要产生价值，需要有高质量的文章和新闻。 而且现在有很多机器人的文章充满着浪费空间的作用，其他作用都用不上。 https://www.duozhutuan.com 目前放的是给搜索引擎提供搜索的原材料。没有做UI给人类浏览。所以看上去是粗糙的。 我并没有打算去做一个发microblog的 web客户端，那类的客户端太多了。 我觉得nostr社区需要解决的还是应用。如果仅仅是microblog 感觉有点够呛 幸运的是npub.pro 建站这样的，我觉得有点意思。 yakihonne 智能widget 也有意思 我做的TaskQ5 我自己在用了。分布式的任务系统，也挺好的。

@ 23b0e2f8:d8af76fc

## **Necessário** - Um Android que você não use mais (a câmera deve estar funcionando). - Um cartão microSD (opcional, usado apenas uma vez). - Um dispositivo para acompanhar seus fundos (provavelmente você já tem um). ## **Algumas coisas que você precisa saber** - O dispositivo servirá como um assinador. Qualquer movimentação só será efetuada após ser assinada por ele. - O cartão microSD será usado para transferir o APK do Electrum e garantir que o aparelho não terá contato com outras fontes de dados externas após sua formatação. Contudo, é possível usar um cabo USB para o mesmo propósito. - A ideia é deixar sua chave privada em um dispositivo offline, que ficará desligado em 99% do tempo. Você poderá acompanhar seus fundos em outro dispositivo conectado à internet, como seu celular ou computador pessoal. --- ## **O tutorial será dividido em dois módulos:** - Módulo 1 - Criando uma carteira fria/assinador. - Módulo 2 - Configurando um dispositivo para visualizar seus fundos e assinando transações com o assinador. --- ## **No final, teremos:** - Uma carteira fria que também servirá como assinador. - Um dispositivo para acompanhar os fundos da carteira.  --- ## **Módulo 1 - Criando uma carteira fria/assinador** 1. Baixe o APK do Electrum na aba de **downloads** em <https://electrum.org/>. Fique à vontade para [verificar as assinaturas](https://electrum.readthedocs.io/en/latest/gpg-check.html) do software, garantindo sua autenticidade. 2. Formate o cartão microSD e coloque o APK do Electrum nele. Caso não tenha um cartão microSD, pule este passo.  3. Retire os chips e acessórios do aparelho que será usado como assinador, formate-o e aguarde a inicialização.  4. Durante a inicialização, pule a etapa de conexão ao Wi-Fi e rejeite todas as solicitações de conexão. Após isso, você pode desinstalar aplicativos desnecessários, pois precisará apenas do Electrum. Certifique-se de que Wi-Fi, Bluetooth e dados móveis estejam desligados. Você também pode ativar o **modo avião**.\ *(Curiosidade: algumas pessoas optam por abrir o aparelho e danificar a antena do Wi-Fi/Bluetooth, impossibilitando essas funcionalidades.)*  5. Insira o cartão microSD com o APK do Electrum no dispositivo e instale-o. Será necessário permitir instalações de fontes não oficiais.  6. No Electrum, crie uma carteira padrão e gere suas palavras-chave (seed). Anote-as em um local seguro. Caso algo aconteça com seu assinador, essas palavras permitirão o acesso aos seus fundos novamente. *(Aqui entra seu método pessoal de backup.)*  --- ## **Módulo 2 - Configurando um dispositivo para visualizar seus fundos e assinando transações com o assinador.** 1. Criar uma carteira **somente leitura** em outro dispositivo, como seu celular ou computador pessoal, é uma etapa bastante simples. Para este tutorial, usaremos outro smartphone Android com Electrum. Instale o Electrum a partir da aba de downloads em <https://electrum.org/> ou da própria Play Store. *(ATENÇÃO: O Electrum não existe oficialmente para iPhone. Desconfie se encontrar algum.)* 2. Após instalar o Electrum, crie uma carteira padrão, mas desta vez escolha a opção **Usar uma chave mestra**.  3. Agora, no assinador que criamos no primeiro módulo, exporte sua chave pública: vá em **Carteira &gt; Detalhes da carteira &gt; Compartilhar chave mestra pública**.  4. Escaneie o QR gerado da chave pública com o dispositivo de consulta. Assim, ele poderá acompanhar seus fundos, mas sem permissão para movimentá-los. 5. Para receber fundos, envie Bitcoin para um dos endereços gerados pela sua carteira: **Carteira &gt; Addresses/Coins**. 6. Para movimentar fundos, crie uma transação no dispositivo de consulta. Como ele não possui a chave privada, será necessário assiná-la com o dispositivo assinador.  7. No assinador, escaneie a transação não assinada, confirme os detalhes, assine e compartilhe. Será gerado outro QR, desta vez com a transação já assinada.  8. No dispositivo de consulta, escaneie o QR da transação assinada e transmita-a para a rede. --- ## **Conclusão** **Pontos positivos do setup:** - **Simplicidade:** Basta um dispositivo Android antigo. - **Flexibilidade:** Funciona como uma ótima carteira fria, ideal para holders. **Pontos negativos do setup:** - **Padronização:** Não utiliza seeds no padrão BIP-39, você sempre precisará usar o electrum. - **Interface:** A aparência do Electrum pode parecer antiquada para alguns usuários. Nesse ponto, temos uma carteira fria que também serve para assinar transações. O fluxo de assinar uma transação se torna: ***Gerar uma transação não assinada &gt; Escanear o QR da transação não assinada &gt; Conferir e assinar essa transação com o assinador &gt; Gerar QR da transação assinada &gt; Escanear a transação assinada com qualquer outro dispositivo que possa transmiti-la para a rede.*** Como alguns devem saber, uma transação assinada de Bitcoin é praticamente impossível de ser fraudada. Em um cenário catastrófico, você pode mesmo que sem internet, repassar essa transação assinada para alguém que tenha acesso à rede por qualquer meio de comunicação. Mesmo que não queiramos que isso aconteça um dia, esse setup acaba por tornar essa prática possível. ---

@ 1bda7e1f:bb97c4d9

### Tldr - Nostr is an open and interoperable protocol - You can integrate it with workflow automation tools to augment your experience - n8n is a great low/no-code workflow automation tool which you can host yourself - Nostrobots allows you to integrate Nostr into n8n - In this blog I create some workflow automations for Nostr - A simple form to delegate posting notes - Push notifications for mentions on multiple accounts - Push notifications for your favourite accounts when they post a note - All workflows are provided as open source with MIT license for you to use ### Inter-op All The Things Nostr is a new open social protocol for the internet. This open nature exciting because of the opportunities for interoperability with other technologies. In [Using NFC Cards with Nostr]() I explored the `nostr:` URI to launch Nostr clients from a card tap. The interoperability of Nostr doesn't stop there. The internet has many super-powers, and Nostr is open to all of them. Simply, there's no one to stop it. There is no one in charge, there are no permissioned APIs, and there are no risks of being de-platformed. If you can imagine technologies that would work well with Nostr, then any and all of them can ride on or alongside Nostr rails. My mental model for why this is special is Google Wave ~2010. Google Wave was to be the next big platform. Lars was running it and had a big track record from Maps. I was excited for it. Then, Google pulled the plug. And, immediately all the time and capital invested in understanding and building on the platform was wasted. This cannot happen to Nostr, as there is no one to pull the plug, and maybe even no plug to pull. So long as users demand Nostr, Nostr will exist, and that is a pretty strong guarantee. It makes it worthwhile to invest in bringing Nostr into our other applications. All we need are simple ways to plug things together. ### Nostr and Workflow Automation Workflow automation is about helping people to streamline their work. As a user, the most common way I achieve this is by connecting disparate systems together. By setting up one system to trigger another or to move data between systems, I can solve for many different problems and become way more effective. #### n8n for workflow automation Many workflow automation tools exist. My favourite is [n8n](https://n8n.io/). n8n is a low/no-code workflow automation platform which allows you to build all kinds of workflows. You can use it for free, you can self-host it, it has a user-friendly UI and useful API. Vs Zapier it can be far more elaborate. Vs Make.com I find it to be more intuitive in how it abstracts away the right parts of the code, but still allows you to code when you need to. Most importantly you can plug anything into n8n: You have built-in nodes for specific applications. HTTP nodes for any other API-based service. And community nodes built by individual community members for any other purpose you can imagine. #### Eating my own dogfood It's very clear to me that there is a big design space here just demanding to be explored. If you could integrate Nostr with anything, what would you do? In my view the best way for anyone to start anything is by solving their own problem first (aka "scratching your own itch" and "eating your own dogfood"). As I get deeper into Nostr I find myself controlling multiple Npubs – to date I have a personal Npub, a brand Npub for a community I am helping, an AI assistant Npub, and various testing Npubs. I need ways to delegate access to those Npubs without handing over the keys, ways to know if they're mentioned, and ways to know if they're posting. I can build workflows with n8n to solve these issues for myself to start with, and keep expanding from there as new needs come up. ### Running n8n with Nostrobots I am mostly non-technical with a very helpful AI. To set up n8n to work with Nostr and operate these workflows should be possible for anyone with basic technology skills. - I have a cheap VPS which currently runs my [HAVEN Nostr Relay](https://rodbishop.npub.pro/post/8ca68889/) and [Albyhub Lightning Node](https://rodbishop.npub.pro/post/setting-up-payments-on-nostr-7o6ls7/) in Docker containers, - My objective was to set up n8n to run alongside these in a separate Docker container on the same server, install the required nodes, and then build and host my workflows. #### Installing n8n Self-hosting n8n could not be easier. I followed n8n's [Docker-Compose installation docs](https://docs.n8n.io/hosting/installation/server-setups/docker-compose/)– - Install Docker and Docker-Compose if you haven't already, - Create your ``docker-compose.yml`` and `.env` files from the docs, - Create your data folder `sudo docker volume create n8n_data`, - Start your container with `sudo docker compose up -d`, - Your n8n instance should be online at port `5678`. n8n is free to self-host but does require a license. Enter your credentials into n8n to get your free license key. You should now have access to the Workflow dashboard and can create and host any kind of workflows from there. #### Installing Nostrobots To integrate n8n nicely with Nostr, I used the [Nostrobots](https://github.com/ocknamo/n8n-nodes-nostrobots?tab=readme-ov-file) community node by [Ocknamo](nostr:npub1y6aja0kkc4fdvuxgqjcdv4fx0v7xv2epuqnddey2eyaxquznp9vq0tp75l). In n8n parlance a "node" enables certain functionality as a step in a workflow e.g. a "set" node sets a variable, a "send email" node sends an email. n8n comes with all kinds of "official" nodes installed by default, and Nostr is not amongst them. However, n8n also comes with a framework for community members to create their own "community" nodes, which is where Nostrobots comes in. You can only use a community node in a self-hosted n8n instance (which is what you have if you are running in Docker on your own server, but this limitation does prevent you from using n8n's own hosted alternative). To install a community node, [see n8n community node docs](https://docs.n8n.io/integrations/community-nodes/installation/gui-install/). From your workflow dashboard– - Click the "..." in the bottom left corner beside your username, and click "settings", - Cilck "community nodes" left sidebar, - Click "Install", - Enter the "npm Package Name" which is `n8n-nodes-nostrobots`, - Accept the risks and click "Install", - Nostrobots is now added to your n8n instance. #### Using Nostrobots Nostrobots gives you nodes to help you build Nostr-integrated workflows– - **Nostr Write** – for posting Notes to the Nostr network, - **Nostr Read** – for reading Notes from the Nostr network, and - **Nostr Utils** – for performing certain conversions you may need (e.g. from bech32 to hex). Nostrobots has [good documentation](https://github.com/ocknamo/n8n-nodes-nostrobots?tab=readme-ov-file) on each node which focuses on simple use cases. Each node has a "convenience mode" by default. For example, the "Read" Node by default will fetch Kind 1 notes by a simple filter, in Nostrobots parlance a "Strategy". For example, with Strategy set to "Mention" the node will accept a pubkey and fetch all Kind 1 notes that Mention the pubkey within a time period. This is very good for quick use. What wasn't clear to me initially (until Ocknamo helped me out) is that advanced use cases are also possible. Each node also has an advanced mode. For example, the "Read" Node can have "Strategy" set to "RawFilter(advanced)". Now the node will accept json (anything you like that complies with [NIP-01](https://github.com/nostr-protocol/nips/blob/master/01.md)). You can use this to query Notes (Kind 1) as above, and also Profiles (Kind 0), Follow Lists (Kind 3), Reactions (Kind 7), Zaps (Kind 9734/9735), and anything else you can think of. #### Creating and adding workflows With n8n and Nostrobots installed, you can now create or add any kind of Nostr Workflow Automation. - Click "Add workflow" to go to the workflow builder screen, - If you would like to build your own workflow, you can start with adding any node. Click "+" and see what is available. Type "Nostr" to explore the Nostrobots nodes you have added, - If you would like to add workflows that someone else has built, click "..." in the top right. Then click "import from URL" and paste in the URL of any workflow you would like to use (including the ones I share later in this article). ### Nostr Workflow Automations It's time to build some things! #### A simple form to post a note to Nostr I started very simply. I needed to delegate the ability to post to Npubs that I own in order that a (future) team can test things for me. I don't want to worry about managing or training those people on how to use keys, and I want to revoke access easily. I needed a basic form with credentials that posted a Note. For this I can use a very simple workflow– - **A n8n Form node** – Creates a form for users to enter the note they wish to post. Allows for the form to be protected by a username and password. This node is the workflow "trigger" so that the workflow runs each time the form is submitted. - **A Set node** – Allows me to set some variables, in this case I set the relays that I intend to use. I typically add a Set node immediately following the trigger node, and put all the variables I need in this. It helps to make the workflows easier to update and maintain. - **A Nostr Write node** (from Nostrobots) – Writes a Kind-1 note to the Nostr network. It accepts Nostr credentials, the output of the Form node, and the relays from the Set node, and posts the Note to those relays. Once the workflow is built, you can test it with the testing form URL, and set it to "Active" to use the production form URL. That's it. You can now give posting access to anyone for any Npub. To revoke access, simply change the credentials or set to workflow to "Inactive". It may also be the world's simplest Nostr client. You can find the [Nostr Form to Post a Note workflow here](https://github.com/r0d8lsh0p/nostr-n8n/blob/main/Nostr_Form_to_Post_a_Note.json). #### Push notifications on mentions and new notes One of the things Nostr is not very good at is push notifications. Furthermore I have some unique itches to scratch. I want– - **To make sure I never miss a note addressed to any of my Npubs** – For this I want a push notification any time any Nostr user mentions any of my Npubs, - **To make sure I always see all notes from key accounts** – For this I need a push notification any time any of my Npubs post any Notes to the network, - **To get these notifications on all of my devices** – Not just my phone where my Nostr regular client lives, but also on each of my laptops to suit wherever I am working that day. I needed to build a Nostr push notifications solution. To build this workflow I had to string a few ideas together– - **Triggering the node on a schedule** – Nostrobots does not include a trigger node. As every workflow starts with a trigger we needed a different method. I elected to run the workflow on a schedule of every 10-minutes. Frequent enough to see Notes while they are hot, but infrequent enough to not burden public relays or get rate-limited, - **Storing a list of Npubs in a Nostr list** – I needed a way to store the list of Npubs that trigger my notifications. I initially used an array defined in the workflow, this worked fine. Then I decided to try Nostr lists ([NIP-51, kind 30000](https://github.com/nostr-protocol/nips/blob/master/51.md)). By defining my list of Npubs as a list published to Nostr I can control my list from within a Nostr client (e.g. [Listr.lol](https://listr.lol/npub1r0d8u8mnj6769500nypnm28a9hpk9qg8jr0ehe30tygr3wuhcnvs4rfsft) or [Nostrudel.ninja](https://nostrudel.ninja/#/lists)). Not only does this "just work", but because it's based on Nostr lists automagically Amethyst client allows me to browse that list as a Feed, and everyone I add gets notified in their Mentions, - **Using specific relays** – I needed to query the right relays, including my own HAVEN relay inbox for notes addressed to me, and wss://purplepag.es for Nostr profile metadata, - **Querying Nostr events** (with Nostrobots) – I needed to make use of many different Nostr queries and use quite a wide range of what Nostrobots can do– - I read the EventID of my Kind 30000 list, to return the desired pubkeys, - For notifications on mentions, I read all Kind 1 notes that mention that pubkey, - For notifications on new notes, I read all Kind 1 notes published by that pubkey, - Where there are notes, I read the Kind 0 profile metadata event of that pubkey to get the displayName of the relevant Npub, - I transform the EventID into a Nevent to help clients find it. - **Using the Nostr URI** – As I did with my NFC card article, I created a link with the `nostr:` URI prefix so that my phone's native client opens the link by default, - **Push notifications solution** – I needed a push notifications solution. I found many with n8n integrations and chose to go with [Pushover](https://pushover.net/) which supports all my devices, has a free trial, and is unfairly cheap with a $5-per-device perpetual license. Once the workflow was built, lists published, and Pushover installed on my phone, I was fully set up with push notifications on Nostr. I have used these workflows for several weeks now and made various tweaks as I went. They are feeling robust and I'd welcome you to give them a go. You can find the [Nostr Push Notification If Mentioned here](https://github.com/r0d8lsh0p/nostr-n8n/blob/main/Nostr_Push_Notify_If_Mentioned.json) and [If Posts a Note here](https://github.com/r0d8lsh0p/nostr-n8n/blob/main/Nostr_Push_Notify_If_Post_a_Note.json). In speaking with other Nostr users while I was building this, there are all kind of other needs for push notifications too – like on replies to a certain bookmarked note, or when a followed Npub starts streaming on zap.stream. These are all possible. #### Use my workflows I have open sourced all my workflows at my [Github](https://github.com/r0d8lsh0p/nostr-n8n) with MIT license and tried to write complete docs, so that you can import them into your n8n and configure them for your own use. To import any of my workflows– - Click on the workflow of your choice, e.g. "[Nostr_Push_Notify_If_Mentioned.json](https://github.com/r0d8lsh0p/nostr-n8n/blob/main/Nostr_Push_Notify_If_Mentioned.json "Nostr_Push_Notify_If_Mentioned.json")", - Click on the "raw" button to view the raw JSON, ex any Github page layout, - Copy that URL, - Enter that URL in the "import from URL" dialog [mentioned above](#creating-and-adding-workflows). To configure them– - Prerequisites, credentials, and variables are all stated, - In general any variables required are entered into a Set Node that follows the trigger node, - Pushover has some extra setup but is very straightforward and documented in the workflow. ### What next? Over my first four blogs I explored creating a good Nostr setup with [Vanity Npub](https://rodbishop.npub.pro/post/mining-your-vanity-pubkey-4iupbf/), [Lightning Payments](https://rodbishop.npub.pro/post/setting-up-payments-on-nostr-7o6ls7/), [Nostr Addresses at Your Domain](https://rodbishop.npub.pro/post/ee8a46bc/), and [Personal Nostr Relay](https://rodbishop.npub.pro/post/8ca68889/). Then in my latest two blogs I explored different types of interoperability [with NFC cards](https://rodbishop.npub.pro/post/edde8387/) and now n8n Workflow Automation. Thinking ahead n8n can power any kind of interoperability between Nostr and any other legacy technology solution. On my mind as I write this: - Further enhancements to posting and delegating solutions and forms (enhanced UI or different note kinds), - Automated or scheduled posting (such as auto-liking everything [Lyn Alden](nostr:npub1a2cww4kn9wqte4ry70vyfwqyqvpswksna27rtxd8vty6c74era8sdcw83a) posts), - Further enhancements to push notifications, on new and different types of events (such as notifying me when I get a new follower, on replies to certain posts, or when a user starts streaming), - All kinds of bridges, such as bridging notes to and from Telegram, Slack, or Campfire. Or bridging RSS or other event feeds to Nostr, - All kinds of other automation (such as [BlackCoffee](nostr:npub1dqepr0g4t3ahvnjtnxazvws4rkqjpxl854n29wcew8wph0fmw90qlsmmgt) [controlling a coffee machine](https://primal.net/e/note16fzhh5yfc3u4kufx0mck63tsfperdrlpp96am2lmq066cnuqutds8retc3)), - All kinds of AI Assistants and Agents, In fact I have already released an open source workflow for an [AI Assistant](https://primal.net/p/npub1ahjpx53ewavp23g5zj9jgyfrpr8djmgjzg5mpe4xd0z69dqvq0kq2lf353), and will share more about that in my next blog. Please be sure to let me know if you think there's another Nostr topic you'd like to see me tackle. GM Nostr.

@ 3f770d65:7a745b24

Here are my predictions for Nostr in 2025: **Decentralization:** The outbox and inbox communication models, sometimes referred to as the Gossip model, will become the standard across the ecosystem. By the end of 2025, all major clients will support these models, providing seamless communication and enhanced decentralization. Clients that do not adopt outbox/inbox by then will be regarded as outdated or legacy systems. **Privacy Standards:** Major clients such as Damus and Primal will move away from NIP-04 DMs, adopting more secure protocol possibilities like NIP-17 or NIP-104. These upgrades will ensure enhanced encryption and metadata protection. Additionally, NIP-104 MLS tools will drive the development of new clients and features, providing users with unprecedented control over the privacy of their communications. **Interoperability:** Nostr's ecosystem will become even more interconnected. Platforms like the Olas image-sharing service will expand into prominent clients such as Primal, Damus, Coracle, and Snort, alongside existing integrations with Amethyst, Nostur, and Nostrudel. Similarly, audio and video tools like Nostr Nests and Zap.stream will gain seamless integration into major clients, enabling easy participation in live events across the ecosystem. **Adoption and Migration:** Inspired by early pioneers like Fountain and Orange Pill App, more platforms will adopt Nostr for authentication, login, and social systems. In 2025, a significant migration from a high-profile application platform with hundreds of thousands of users will transpire, doubling Nostr’s daily activity and establishing it as a cornerstone of decentralized technologies.

@ e97aaffa:2ebd765d

Último dia do ano, momento para tirar o pó da bola de cristal, para fazer reflexões, previsões e desejos para o próximo ano e seguintes. Ano após ano, o Bitcoin evoluiu, foi ultrapassando etapas, tornou-se cada vez mais _mainstream_. Está cada vez mais difícil fazer previsões sobre o Bitcoin, já faltam poucas barreiras a serem ultrapassadas e as que faltam são altamente complexas ou tem um impacto profundo no sistema financeiro ou na sociedade. Estas alterações profundas tem que ser realizadas lentamente, porque uma alteração rápida poderia resultar em consequências terríveis, poderia provocar um retrocesso. # Código do Bitcoin No final de 2025, possivelmente vamos ter um _fork_, as discussões sobre os _covenants_ já estão avançadas, vão acelerar ainda mais. Já existe um consenso relativamente alto, a favor dos _covenants_, só falta decidir que modelo será escolhido. Penso que até ao final do ano será tudo decidido. Depois dos _covenants,_ o próximo foco será para a criptografia post-quantum, que será o maior desafio que o Bitcoin enfrenta. Criar uma criptografia segura e que não coloque a descentralização em causa. Espero muito de Ark, possivelmente a inovação do ano, gostaria de ver o Nostr a furar a bolha bitcoinheira e que o Cashu tivesse mais reconhecimento pelos _bitcoiners_. Espero que surjam avanços significativos no BitVM2 e BitVMX. Não sei o que esperar das layer 2 de Bitcoin, foram a maior desilusão de 2024. Surgiram com muita força, mas pouca coisa saiu do papel, foi uma mão cheia de nada. Uma parte dos projetos caiu na tentação da _shitcoinagem_, na criação de tokens, que tem um único objetivo, enriquecer os devs e os VCs. Se querem ser levados a sério, têm que ser sérios. > “À mulher de César não basta ser honesta, deve parecer honesta” Se querem ter o apoio dos _bitcoiners_, sigam o _ethos_ do Bitcoin. Neste ponto a atitude do pessoal da Ark é exemplar, em vez de andar a chorar no Twitter para mudar o código do Bitcoin, eles colocaram as mãos na massa e criaram o protocolo. É claro que agora está meio “coxo”, funciona com uma _multisig_ ou com os _covenants_ na Liquid. Mas eles estão a criar um produto, vão demonstrar ao mercado que o produto é bom e útil. Com a adoção, a comunidade vai perceber que o Ark necessita dos _covenants_ para melhorar a interoperabilidade e a soberania. É este o pensamento certo, que deveria ser seguido pelos restantes e futuros projetos. É seguir aquele pensamento do J.F. Kennedy: > “Não perguntem o que é que o vosso país pode fazer por vocês, perguntem o que é que vocês podem fazer pelo vosso país” Ou seja, não fiquem à espera que o bitcoin mude, criem primeiro as inovações/tecnologia, ganhem adoção e depois demonstrem que a alteração do código camada base pode melhorar ainda mais o vosso projeto. A necessidade é que vai levar a atualização do código. # Reservas Estratégicas de Bitcoin ## Bancos centrais Com a eleição de Trump, emergiu a ideia de uma Reserva Estratégia de Bitcoin, tornou este conceito _mainstream_. Foi um _pivot_, a partir desse momento, foram enumerados os políticos de todo o mundo a falar sobre o assunto. A Senadora Cynthia Lummis foi mais além e propôs um programa para adicionar 200 mil bitcoins à reserva ao ano, até 1 milhão de Bitcoin. Só que isto está a criar uma enorme expectativa na comunidade, só que pode resultar numa enorme desilusão. Porque no primeiro ano, o Trump em vez de comprar os 200 mil, pode apenas adicionar na reserva, os 198 mil que o Estado já tem em sua posse. Se isto acontecer, possivelmente vai resultar numa forte queda a curto prazo. Na minha opinião os bancos centrais deveriam seguir o exemplo de El Salvador, fazer um DCA diário. Mais que comprar bitcoin, para mim, o mais importante é a criação da Reserva, é colocar o Bitcoin ao mesmo nível do ouro, o impacto para o resto do mundo será tremendo, a teoria dos jogos na sua plenitude. Muitos outros bancos centrais vão ter que comprar, para não ficarem atrás, além disso, vai transmitir uma mensagem à generalidade da população, que o Bitcoin é “afinal é algo seguro, com valor”. Mas não foi Trump que iniciou esta teoria dos jogos, mas sim foi a primeira vítima dela. É o próprio Trump que o admite, que os EUA necessitam da reserva para não ficar atrás da China. Além disso, desde que os EUA utilizaram o dólar como uma arma, com sanção contra a Rússia, surgiram boatos de que a Rússia estaria a utilizar o Bitcoin para transações internacionais. Que foram confirmados recentemente, pelo próprio governo russo. Também há poucos dias, ainda antes deste reconhecimento público, Putin elogiou o Bitcoin, ao reconhecer que “Ninguém pode proibir o bitcoin”, defendendo como uma alternativa ao dólar. A narrativa está a mudar. Já existem alguns países com Bitcoin, mas apenas dois o fizeram conscientemente (El Salvador e Butão), os restantes têm devido a apreensões. Hoje são poucos, mas 2025 será o início de uma corrida pelos bancos centrais. Esta corrida era algo previsível, o que eu não esperava é que acontecesse tão rápido.  ## Empresas A criação de reservas estratégicas não vai ficar apenas pelos bancos centrais, também vai acelerar fortemente nas empresas em 2025.  Mas as empresas não vão seguir a estratégia do Saylor, vão comprar bitcoin sem alavancagem, utilizando apenas os tesouros das empresas, como uma proteção contra a inflação. Eu não sou grande admirador do Saylor, prefiro muito mais, uma estratégia conservadora, sem qualquer alavancagem. Penso que as empresas vão seguir a sugestão da BlackRock, que aconselha um alocações de 1% a 3%. Penso que 2025, ainda não será o ano da entrada das 6 magníficas (excepto Tesla), será sobretudo empresas de pequena e média dimensão. As magníficas ainda tem uma cota muito elevada de _shareholders_ com alguma idade, bastante conservadores, que têm dificuldade em compreender o Bitcoin, foi o que aconteceu recentemente com a Microsoft. Também ainda não será em 2025, talvez 2026, a inclusão nativamente de wallet Bitcoin nos sistema da Apple Pay e da Google Pay. Seria um passo gigante para a adoção a nível mundial. # ETFs Os ETFs para mim são uma incógnita, tenho demasiadas dúvidas, como será 2025. Este ano os _inflows_ foram superiores a 500 mil bitcoins, o IBIT foi o lançamento de ETF mais bem sucedido da história. O sucesso dos ETFs, deve-se a 2 situações que nunca mais se vão repetir. O mercado esteve 10 anos à espera pela aprovação dos ETFs, a procura estava reprimida, isso foi bem notório nos primeiros meses, os _inflows_ foram brutais. Também se beneficiou por ser um mercado novo, não existia _orderbook_ de vendas, não existia um mercado interno, praticamente era só _inflows_. Agora o mercado já estabilizou, a maioria das transações já são entre clientes dos próprios ETFs. Agora só uma pequena percentagem do volume das transações diárias vai resultar em _inflows_ ou _outflows_. Estes dois fenómenos nunca mais se vão repetir, eu não acredito que o número de _inflows_ em BTC supere os número de 2024, em dólares vai superar, mas em btc não acredito que vá superar. Mas em 2025 vão surgir uma infindável quantidade de novos produtos, derivativos, novos ETFs de cestos com outras criptos ou cestos com ativos tradicionais. O bitcoin será adicionado em produtos financeiros já existentes no mercado, as pessoas vão passar a deter bitcoin, sem o saberem. Com o fim da operação ChokePoint 2.0, vai surgir uma nova onda de adoção e de produtos financeiros. Possivelmente vamos ver bancos tradicionais a disponibilizar produtos ou serviços de custódia aos seus clientes. Eu adoraria ver o crescimento da adoção do bitcoin como moeda, só que a regulamentação não vai ajudar nesse processo. # Preço Eu acredito que o topo deste ciclo será alcançado no primeiro semestre, posteriormente haverá uma correção. Mas desta vez, eu acredito que a correção será muito menor que as anteriores, inferior a 50%, esta é a minha expectativa. Espero estar certo. # Stablecoins de dólar Agora saindo um pouco do universo do Bitcoin, acho importante destacar as _stablecoins_. No último ciclo, eu tenho dividido o tempo, entre continuar a estudar o Bitcoin e estudar o sistema financeiro, as suas dinâmicas e o comportamento humano. Isto tem sido o meu foco de reflexão, imaginar a transformação que o mundo vai sofrer devido ao padrão Bitcoin. É uma ilusão acreditar que a transição de um padrão FIAT para um padrão Bitcoin vai ser rápida, vai existir um processo transitório que pode demorar décadas. Com a re-entrada de Trump na Casa Branca, prometendo uma política altamente protecionista, vai provocar uma forte valorização do dólar, consequentemente as restantes moedas do mundo vão derreter. Provocando uma inflação generalizada, gerando uma corrida às _stablecoins_ de dólar nos países com moedas mais fracas. Trump vai ter uma política altamente expansionista, vai exportar dólares para todo o mundo, para financiar a sua própria dívida. A desigualdade entre os pobres e ricos irá crescer fortemente, aumentando a possibilidade de conflitos e revoltas. > “Casa onde não há pão, todos ralham e ninguém tem razão” Será mais lenha, para alimentar a fogueira, vai gravar os conflitos geopolíticos já existentes, ficando as sociedade ainda mais polarizadas. Eu acredito que 2025, vai haver um forte crescimento na adoção das _stablecoins_ de dólares, esse forte crescimento vai agravar o problema sistémico que são as _stablecoins_. Vai ser o início do fim das _stablecoins_, pelo menos, como nós conhecemos hoje em dia. ## Problema sistémico O sistema FIAT não nasceu de um dia para outro, foi algo que foi construído organicamente, ou seja, foi evoluindo ao longo dos anos, sempre que havia um problema/crise, eram criadas novas regras ou novas instituições para minimizar os problemas. Nestes quase 100 anos, desde os acordos de Bretton Woods, a evolução foram tantas, tornaram o sistema financeiro altamente complexo, burocrático e nada eficiente. Na prática é um castelo de cartas construído sobre outro castelo de cartas e que por sua vez, foi construído sobre outro castelo de cartas. As _stablecoins_ são um problema sistémico, devido às suas reservas em dólares e o sistema financeiro não está preparado para manter isso seguro. Com o crescimento das reservas ao longo dos anos, foi se agravando o problema. No início a Tether colocava as reservas em bancos comerciais, mas com o crescimento dos dólares sob gestão, criou um problema nos bancos comerciais, devido à reserva fracionária. Essas enormes reservas da Tether estavam a colocar em risco a própria estabilidade dos bancos. A Tether acabou por mudar de estratégia, optou por outros ativos, preferencialmente por títulos do tesouro/obrigações dos EUA. Só que a Tether continua a crescer e não dá sinais de abrandamento, pelo contrário. Até o próprio mundo cripto, menosprezava a gravidade do problema da Tether/_stablecoins_ para o resto do sistema financeiro, porque o _marketcap_ do cripto ainda é muito pequeno. É verdade que ainda é pequeno, mas a Tether não o é, está no top 20 dos maiores detentores de títulos do tesouros dos EUA e está ao nível dos maiores bancos centrais do mundo. Devido ao seu tamanho, está a preocupar os responsáveis/autoridades/reguladores dos EUA, pode colocar em causa a estabilidade do sistema financeiro global, que está assente nessas obrigações. Os títulos do tesouro dos EUA são o colateral mais utilizado no mundo, tanto por bancos centrais, como por empresas, é a charneira da estabilidade do sistema financeiro. Os títulos do tesouro são um assunto muito sensível. Na recente crise no Japão, do _carry trade_, o Banco Central do Japão tentou minimizar a desvalorização do iene através da venda de títulos dos EUA. Esta operação, obrigou a uma viagem de emergência, da Secretaria do Tesouro dos EUA, Janet Yellen ao Japão, onde disponibilizou liquidez para parar a venda de títulos por parte do Banco Central do Japão. Essa forte venda estava desestabilizando o mercado. Os principais detentores de títulos do tesouros são institucionais, bancos centrais, bancos comerciais, fundo de investimento e gestoras, tudo administrado por gestores altamente qualificados, racionais e que conhecem a complexidade do mercado de obrigações. O mundo cripto é seu oposto, é _naife_ com muita irracionalidade e uma forte pitada de loucura, na sua maioria nem faz a mínima ideia como funciona o sistema financeiro. Essa irracionalidade pode levar a uma “corrida bancária”, como aconteceu com o UST da Luna, que em poucas horas colapsou o projeto. Em termos de escala, a Luna ainda era muito pequena, por isso, o problema ficou circunscrito ao mundo cripto e a empresas ligadas diretamente ao cripto. Só que a Tether é muito diferente, caso exista algum FUD, que obrigue a Tether a desfazer-se de vários biliões ou dezenas de biliões de dólares em títulos num curto espaço de tempo, poderia provocar consequências terríveis em todo o sistema financeiro. A Tether é grande demais, é já um problema sistémico, que vai agravar-se com o crescimento em 2025. Não tenham dúvidas, se existir algum problema, o Tesouro dos EUA vai impedir a venda dos títulos que a Tether tem em sua posse, para salvar o sistema financeiro. O problema é, o que vai fazer a Tether, se ficar sem acesso às venda das reservas, como fará o _redeem_ dos dólares? Como o crescimento do Tether é inevitável, o Tesouro e o FED estão com um grande problema em mãos, o que fazer com o Tether? Mas o problema é que o atual sistema financeiro é como um curto cobertor: Quanto tapas a cabeça, destapas os pés; Ou quando tapas os pés, destapas a cabeça. Ou seja, para resolver o problema da guarda reservas da Tether, vai criar novos problemas, em outros locais do sistema financeiro e assim sucessivamente. ### Conta mestre Uma possível solução seria dar uma conta mestre à Tether, dando o acesso direto a uma conta no FED, semelhante à que todos os bancos comerciais têm. Com isto, a Tether deixaria de necessitar os títulos do tesouro, depositando o dinheiro diretamente no banco central. Só que isto iria criar dois novos problemas, com o Custodia Bank e com o restante sistema bancário. O Custodia Bank luta há vários anos contra o FED, nos tribunais pelo direito a ter licença bancária para um banco com _full-reserves_. O FED recusou sempre esse direito, com a justificativa que esse banco, colocaria em risco toda a estabilidade do sistema bancário existente, ou seja, todos os outros bancos poderiam colapsar. Perante a existência em simultâneo de bancos com reserva fracionária e com _full-reserves_, as pessoas e empresas iriam optar pelo mais seguro. Isso iria provocar uma corrida bancária, levando ao colapso de todos os bancos com reserva fracionária, porque no Custodia Bank, os fundos dos clientes estão 100% garantidos, para qualquer valor. Deixaria de ser necessário limites de fundos de Garantia de Depósitos. Eu concordo com o FED nesse ponto, que os bancos com _full-reserves_ são uma ameaça a existência dos restantes bancos. O que eu discordo do FED, é a origem do problema, o problema não está nos bancos _full-reserves_, mas sim nos que têm reserva fracionária. O FED ao conceder uma conta mestre ao Tether, abre um precedente, o Custodia Bank irá o aproveitar, reclamando pela igualdade de direitos nos tribunais e desta vez, possivelmente ganhará a sua licença. Ainda há um segundo problema, com os restantes bancos comerciais. A Tether passaria a ter direitos similares aos bancos comerciais, mas os deveres seriam muito diferentes. Isto levaria os bancos comerciais aos tribunais para exigir igualdade de tratamento, é uma concorrência desleal. Isto é o bom dos tribunais dos EUA, são independentes e funcionam, mesmo contra o estado. Os bancos comerciais têm custos exorbitantes devido às políticas de _compliance_, como o KYC e AML. Como o governo não vai querer aliviar as regras, logo seria a Tether, a ser obrigada a fazer o _compliance_ dos seus clientes. A obrigação do KYC para ter _stablecoins_ iriam provocar um terramoto no mundo cripto. Assim, é pouco provável que seja a solução para a Tether. ### FED Só resta uma hipótese, ser o próprio FED a controlar e a gerir diretamente as _stablecoins_ de dólar, nacionalizado ou absorvendo as existentes. Seria uma espécie de CBDC. Isto iria provocar um novo problema, um problema diplomático, porque as _stablecoins_ estão a colocar em causa a soberania monetária dos outros países. Atualmente as _stablecoins_ estão um pouco protegidas porque vivem num limbo jurídico, mas a partir do momento que estas são controladas pelo governo americano, tudo muda. Os países vão exigir às autoridades americanas medidas que limitem o uso nos seus respectivos países. Não existe uma solução boa, o sistema FIAT é um castelo de cartas, qualquer carta que se mova, vai provocar um desmoronamento noutro local. As autoridades não poderão adiar mais o problema, terão que o resolver de vez, senão, qualquer dia será tarde demais. Se houver algum problema, vão colocar a responsabilidade no cripto e no Bitcoin. Mas a verdade, a culpa é inteiramente dos políticos, da sua incompetência em resolver os problemas a tempo. Será algo para acompanhar futuramente, mas só para 2026, talvez… É curioso, há uns anos pensava-se que o Bitcoin seria a maior ameaça ao sistema ao FIAT, mas afinal, a maior ameaça aos sistema FIAT é o próprio FIAT(_stablecoins_). A ironia do destino. Isto é como uma corrida, o Bitcoin é aquele atleta que corre ao seu ritmo, umas vezes mais rápido, outras vezes mais lento, mas nunca pára. O FIAT é o atleta que dá tudo desde da partida, corre sempre em velocidade máxima. Só que a vida e o sistema financeiro não é uma prova de 100 metros, mas sim uma maratona. # Europa 2025 será um ano desafiante para todos europeus, sobretudo devido à entrada em vigor da regulamentação (MiCA). Vão começar a sentir na pele a regulamentação, vão agravar-se os problemas com os _compliance_, problemas para comprovar a origem de fundos e outras burocracias. Vai ser lindo. O _Travel Route_ passa a ser obrigatório, os europeus serão obrigados a fazer o KYC nas transações. A _Travel Route_ é uma suposta lei para criar mais transparência, mas prática, é uma lei de controle, de monitorização e para limitar as liberdades individuais dos cidadãos. O MiCA também está a colocar problemas nas _stablecoins_ de Euro, a Tether para já preferiu ficar de fora da europa. O mais ridículo é que as novas regras obrigam os emissores a colocar 30% das reservas em bancos comerciais. Os burocratas europeus não compreendem que isto coloca em risco a estabilidade e a solvência dos próprios bancos, ficam propensos a corridas bancárias. O MiCA vai obrigar a todas as exchanges a estar registadas em solo europeu, ficando vulnerável ao temperamento dos burocratas. Ainda não vai ser em 2025, mas a UE vai impor políticas de controle de capitais, é inevitável, as exchanges serão obrigadas a usar em exclusividade _stablecoins_ de euro, as restantes _stablecoins_ serão deslistadas. Todas estas novas regras do MiCA, são extremamente restritas, não é para garantir mais segurança aos cidadãos europeus, mas sim para garantir mais controle sobre a população. A UE está cada vez mais perto da autocracia, do que da democracia. A minha única esperança no horizonte, é que o sucesso das políticas cripto nos EUA, vai obrigar a UE a recuar e a aligeirar as regras, a teoria dos jogos é implacável. Mas esse recuo, nunca acontecerá em 2025, vai ser um longo período conturbado. # Recessão Os mercados estão todos em máximos históricos, isto não é sustentável por muito tempo, suspeito que no final de 2025 vai acontecer alguma correção nos mercados. A queda só não será maior, porque os bancos centrais vão imprimir dinheiro, muito dinheiro, como se não houvesse amanhã. Vão voltar a resolver os problemas com a injeção de liquidez na economia, é empurrar os problemas com a barriga, em de os resolver. Outra vez o efeito Cantillon. Será um ano muito desafiante a nível político, onde o papel dos políticos será fundamental. A crise política na França e na Alemanha, coloca a UE órfã, sem um comandante ao leme do navio. 2025 estará condicionado pelas eleições na Alemanha, sobretudo no resultado do AfD, que podem colocar em causa a propriedade UE e o euro. Possivelmente, só o fim da guerra poderia minimizar a crise, algo que é muito pouco provável acontecer. Em Portugal, a economia parece que está mais ou menos equilibrada, mas começam a aparecer alguns sinais preocupantes. Os jogos de sorte e azar estão em máximos históricos, batendo o recorde de 2014, época da grande crise, não é um bom sinal, possivelmente já existe algum desespero no ar. A Alemanha é o motor da Europa, quanto espirra, Portugal constipa-se. Além do problema da Alemanha, a Espanha também está à beira de uma crise, são os países que mais influenciam a economia portuguesa. Se existir uma recessão mundial, terá um forte impacto no turismo, que é hoje em dia o principal motor de Portugal. # Brasil Brasil é algo para acompanhar em 2025, sobretudo a nível macro e a nível político. Existe uma possibilidade de uma profunda crise no Brasil, sobretudo na sua moeda. O banco central já anda a queimar as reservas para minimizar a desvalorização do Real.  Sem mudanças profundas nas políticas fiscais, as reservas vão se esgotar. As políticas de controle de capitais são um cenário plausível, será interesse de acompanhar, como o governo irá proceder perante a existência do Bitcoin e _stablecoins_. No Brasil existe um forte adoção, será um bom _case study_, certamente irá repetir-se em outros países num futuro próximo. Os próximos tempos não serão fáceis para os brasileiros, especialmente para os que não têm Bitcoin. # Blockchain Em 2025, possivelmente vamos ver os primeiros passos da BlackRock para criar a primeira bolsa de valores, exclusivamente em _blockchain_. Eu acredito que a BlackRock vai criar uma própria _blockchain_, toda controlada por si, onde estarão os RWAs, para fazer concorrência às tradicionais bolsas de valores. Será algo interessante de acompanhar. ----------- Estas são as minhas previsões, eu escrevi isto muito em cima do joelho, certamente esqueci-me de algumas coisas, se for importante acrescentarei nos comentários. A maioria das previsões só acontecerá após 2025, mas fica aqui a minha opinião. Isto é apenas a minha opinião, **Don’t Trust, Verify**!

@ f9cf4e94:96abc355

Na era das grandes navegações, piratas ingleses eram autorizados pelo governo para roubar navios. A única coisa que diferenciava um pirata comum de um corsário é que o último possuía a “Carta do Corso”, que funcionava como um “Alvará para o roubo”, onde o governo Inglês legitimava o roubo de navios por parte dos corsários. É claro, que em troca ele exigia uma parte da espoliação. Bastante similar com a maneira que a Receita Federal atua, não? Na verdade, o caso é ainda pior, pois o governo fica com toda a riqueza espoliada, e apenas repassa um mísero salário para os corsários modernos, os agentes da receita federal. Porém eles “justificam” esse roubo ao chamá-lo de imposto, e isso parece acalmar os ânimos de grande parte da população, mas não de nós. Não é por acaso que 'imposto' é o particípio passado do verbo 'impor'. Ou seja, é aquilo que resulta do cumprimento obrigatório -- e não voluntário -- de todos os cidadãos. Se não for 'imposto' ninguém paga. Nem mesmo seus defensores. Isso mostra o quanto as pessoas realmente apreciam os serviços do estado. Apenas volte um pouco na história: os primeiros pagadores de impostos eram fazendeiros cujos territórios foram invadidos por nômades que pastoreavam seu gado. Esses invasores nômades forçavam os fazendeiros a lhes pagar uma fatia de sua renda em troca de "proteção". O fazendeiro que não concordasse era assassinado. Os nômades perceberam que era muito mais interessante e confortável apenas cobrar uma taxa de proteção em vez de matar o fazendeiro e assumir suas posses. Cobrando uma taxa, eles obtinham o que necessitavam. Já se matassem os fazendeiros, eles teriam de gerenciar por conta própria toda a produção da fazenda. Daí eles entenderam que, ao não assassinarem todos os fazendeiros que encontrassem pelo caminho, poderiam fazer desta prática um modo de vida. Assim nasceu o governo. Não assassinar pessoas foi o primeiro serviço que o governo forneceu. Como temos sorte em ter à nossa disposição esta instituição! Assim, não deixa de ser curioso que algumas pessoas digam que os impostos são pagos basicamente para impedir que aconteça exatamente aquilo que originou a existência do governo. O governo nasceu da extorsão. Os fazendeiros tinham de pagar um "arrego" para seu governo. Caso contrário, eram assassinados. Quem era a real ameaça? O governo. A máfia faz a mesma coisa. Mas existe uma forma de se proteger desses corsários modernos. Atualmente, existe uma propriedade privada que NINGUÉM pode tirar de você, ela é sua até mesmo depois da morte. É claro que estamos falando do Bitcoin. Fazendo as configurações certas, é impossível saber que você tem bitcoin. Nem mesmo o governo americano consegue saber. #brasil #bitcoinbrasil #nostrbrasil #grownostr #bitcoin

@ 16d11430:61640947

At the intersection of philosophy, theology, physics, biology, and finance lies a terrifying truth: the fiat monetary system, in its current form, is not just an economic framework but a silent, relentless force actively working against humanity's survival. It isn't simply a failed financial model—it is a systemic engine of destruction, both externally and within the very core of our biological existence. The Philosophical Void of Fiat Philosophy has long questioned the nature of value and the meaning of human existence. From Socrates to Kant, thinkers have pondered the pursuit of truth, beauty, and virtue. But in the modern age, the fiat system has hijacked this discourse. The notion of "value" in a fiat world is no longer rooted in human potential or natural resources—it is abstracted, manipulated, and controlled by central authorities with the sole purpose of perpetuating their own power. The currency is not a reflection of society’s labor or resources; it is a representation of faith in an authority that, more often than not, breaks that faith with reckless monetary policies and hidden inflation. The fiat system has created a kind of ontological nihilism, where the idea of true value, rooted in work, creativity, and family, is replaced with speculative gambling and short-term gains. This betrayal of human purpose at the systemic level feeds into a philosophical despair: the relentless devaluation of effort, the erosion of trust, and the abandonment of shared human values. In this nihilistic economy, purpose and meaning become increasingly difficult to find, leaving millions to question the very foundation of their existence. Theological Implications: Fiat and the Collapse of the Sacred Religious traditions have long linked moral integrity with the stewardship of resources and the preservation of life. Fiat currency, however, corrupts these foundational beliefs. In the theological narrative of creation, humans are given dominion over the Earth, tasked with nurturing and protecting it for future generations. But the fiat system promotes the exact opposite: it commodifies everything—land, labor, and life—treating them as mere transactions on a ledger. This disrespect for creation is an affront to the divine. In many theologies, creation is meant to be sustained, a delicate balance that mirrors the harmony of the divine order. Fiat systems—by continuously printing money and driving inflation—treat nature and humanity as expendable resources to be exploited for short-term gains, leading to environmental degradation and societal collapse. The creation narrative, in which humans are called to be stewards, is inverted. The fiat system, through its unholy alliance with unrestrained growth and unsustainable debt, is destroying the very creation it should protect. Furthermore, the fiat system drives idolatry of power and wealth. The central banks and corporations that control the money supply have become modern-day gods, their decrees shaping the lives of billions, while the masses are enslaved by debt and inflation. This form of worship isn't overt, but it is profound. It leads to a world where people place their faith not in God or their families, but in the abstract promises of institutions that serve their own interests. Physics and the Infinite Growth Paradox Physics teaches us that the universe is finite—resources, energy, and space are all limited. Yet, the fiat system operates under the delusion of infinite growth. Central banks print money without concern for natural limits, encouraging an economy that assumes unending expansion. This is not only an economic fallacy; it is a physical impossibility. In thermodynamics, the Second Law states that entropy (disorder) increases over time in any closed system. The fiat system operates as if the Earth were an infinite resource pool, perpetually able to expand without consequence. The real world, however, does not bend to these abstract concepts of infinite growth. Resources are finite, ecosystems are fragile, and human capacity is limited. Fiat currency, by promoting unsustainable consumption and growth, accelerates the depletion of resources and the degradation of natural systems that support life itself. Even the financial “growth” driven by fiat policies leads to unsustainable bubbles—inflated stock markets, real estate, and speculative assets that burst and leave ruin in their wake. These crashes aren’t just economic—they have profound biological consequences. The cycles of boom and bust undermine communities, erode social stability, and increase anxiety and depression, all of which affect human health at a biological level. Biology: The Fiat System and the Destruction of Human Health Biologically, the fiat system is a cancerous growth on human society. The constant chase for growth and the devaluation of work leads to chronic stress, which is one of the leading causes of disease in modern society. The strain of living in a system that values speculation over well-being results in a biological feedback loop: rising anxiety, poor mental health, physical diseases like cardiovascular disorders, and a shortening of lifespans. Moreover, the focus on profit and short-term returns creates a biological disconnect between humans and the planet. The fiat system fuels industries that destroy ecosystems, increase pollution, and deplete resources at unsustainable rates. These actions are not just environmentally harmful; they directly harm human biology. The degradation of the environment—whether through toxic chemicals, pollution, or resource extraction—has profound biological effects on human health, causing respiratory diseases, cancers, and neurological disorders. The biological cost of the fiat system is not a distant theory; it is being paid every day by millions in the form of increased health risks, diseases linked to stress, and the growing burden of mental health disorders. The constant uncertainty of an inflation-driven economy exacerbates these conditions, creating a society of individuals whose bodies and minds are under constant strain. We are witnessing a systemic biological unraveling, one in which the very act of living is increasingly fraught with pain, instability, and the looming threat of collapse. Finance as the Final Illusion At the core of the fiat system is a fundamental illusion—that financial growth can occur without any real connection to tangible value. The abstraction of currency, the manipulation of interest rates, and the constant creation of new money hide the underlying truth: the system is built on nothing but faith. When that faith falters, the entire system collapses. This illusion has become so deeply embedded that it now defines the human experience. Work no longer connects to production or creation—it is reduced to a transaction on a spreadsheet, a means to acquire more fiat currency in a world where value is ephemeral and increasingly disconnected from human reality. As we pursue ever-expanding wealth, the fundamental truths of biology—interdependence, sustainability, and balance—are ignored. The fiat system’s abstract financial models serve to disconnect us from the basic realities of life: that we are part of an interconnected world where every action has a reaction, where resources are finite, and where human health, both mental and physical, depends on the stability of our environment and our social systems. The Ultimate Extermination In the end, the fiat system is not just an economic issue; it is a biological, philosophical, theological, and existential threat to the very survival of humanity. It is a force that devalues human effort, encourages environmental destruction, fosters inequality, and creates pain at the core of the human biological condition. It is an economic framework that leads not to prosperity, but to extermination—not just of species, but of the very essence of human well-being. To continue on this path is to accept the slow death of our species, one based not on natural forces, but on our own choice to worship the abstract over the real, the speculative over the tangible. The fiat system isn't just a threat; it is the ultimate self-inflicted wound, a cultural and financial cancer that, if left unchecked, will destroy humanity’s chance for survival and peace.

@ a367f9eb:0633efea

I’ll admit that I was wrong about Bitcoin. Perhaps in 2013. Definitely 2017. Probably in 2018-2019. And maybe even today. Being wrong about Bitcoin is part of finally understanding it. It will test you, make you question everything, and in the words of BTC educator and privacy advocate [Matt Odell](https://twitter.com/ODELL), “Bitcoin will humble you”. I’ve had my own stumbles on the way. In a very public fashion in 2017, after years of using Bitcoin, trying to start a company with it, using it as my primary exchange vehicle between currencies, and generally being annoying about it at parties, I let out the bear. In an article published in my own literary magazine *Devolution Review* in September 2017, I had a breaking point. The article was titled “[Going Bearish on Bitcoin: Cryptocurrencies are the tulip mania of the 21st century](https://www.devolutionreview.com/bearish-on-bitcoin/)”. It was later republished in *Huffington Post* and across dozens of financial and crypto blogs at the time with another, more appropriate title: “[Bitcoin Has Become About The Payday, Not Its Potential](https://www.huffpost.com/archive/ca/entry/bitcoin-has-become-about-the-payday-not-its-potential_ca_5cd5025de4b07bc72973ec2d)”. As I laid out, my newfound bearishness had little to do with the technology itself or the promise of Bitcoin, and more to do with the cynical industry forming around it: > In the beginning, Bitcoin was something of a revolution to me. The digital currency represented everything from my rebellious youth. > > It was a decentralized, denationalized, and digital currency operating outside the traditional banking and governmental system. It used tools of cryptography and connected buyers and sellers across national borders at minimal transaction costs. > > … > > The 21st-century version (of Tulip mania) has welcomed a plethora of slick consultants, hazy schemes dressed up as investor possibilities, and too much wishy-washy language for anything to really make sense to anyone who wants to use a digital currency to make purchases. While I called out Bitcoin by name at the time, on reflection, I was really talking about the ICO craze, the wishy-washy consultants, and the altcoin ponzis. What I was articulating — without knowing it — was the frame of NgU, or “numbers go up”. Rather than advocating for Bitcoin because of its uncensorability, proof-of-work, or immutability, the common mentality among newbies and the dollar-obsessed was that Bitcoin mattered because its price was a rocket ship. And because Bitcoin was gaining in price, affinity tokens and projects that were imperfect forks of Bitcoin took off as well. The price alone — rather than its qualities — were the reasons why you’d hear Uber drivers, finance bros, or your gym buddy mention Bitcoin. As someone who came to Bitcoin for philosophical reasons, that just sat wrong with me. Maybe I had too many projects thrown in my face, or maybe I was too frustrated with the UX of Bitcoin apps and sites at the time. No matter what, I’ve since learned something. **I was at least somewhat wrong.** My own journey began in early 2011. One of my favorite radio programs, Free Talk Live, began interviewing guests and having discussions on the potential of Bitcoin. They tied it directly to a libertarian vision of the world: free markets, free people, and free banking. That was me, and I was in. Bitcoin was at about $5 back then (NgU). I followed every article I could, talked about it with guests [on my college radio show](https://libertyinexile.wordpress.com/2011/05/09/osamobama_on_the_tubes/), and became a devoted redditor on r/Bitcoin. At that time, at least to my knowledge, there was no possible way to buy Bitcoin where I was living. Very weak. **I was probably wrong. And very wrong for not trying to acquire by mining or otherwise.** The next year, after moving to Florida, Bitcoin was a heavy topic with a friend of mine who shared the same vision (and still does, according to the Celsius bankruptcy documents). We talked about it with passionate leftists at **Occupy Tampa** in 2012, all the while trying to explain the ills of Keynesian central banking, and figuring out how to use Coinbase. I began writing more about Bitcoin in 2013, writing a guide on “[How to Avoid Bank Fees Using Bitcoin](http://thestatelessman.com/2013/06/03/using-bitcoin/),” discussing its [potential legalization in Germany](https://yael.ca/2013/10/01/lagefi-alternative-monetaire-et-legislation-de/), and interviewing Jeremy Hansen, [one of the first political candidates in the U.S. to accept Bitcoin donations](https://yael.ca/2013/12/09/bitcoin-politician-wants-to-upgrade-democracy-in/). Even up until that point, I thought Bitcoin was an interesting protocol for sending and receiving money quickly, and converting it into fiat. The global connectedness of it, plus this cypherpunk mentality divorced from government control was both useful and attractive. I thought it was the perfect go-between. **But I was wrong.** When I gave my [first public speech](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CtVypq2f0G4) on Bitcoin in Vienna, Austria in December 2013, I had grown obsessed with Bitcoin’s adoption on dark net markets like Silk Road. My theory, at the time, was the number and price were irrelevant. The tech was interesting, and a novel attempt. It was unlike anything before. But what was happening on the dark net markets, which I viewed as the true free market powered by Bitcoin, was even more interesting. I thought these markets would grow exponentially and anonymous commerce via BTC would become the norm. While the price was irrelevant, it was all about buying and selling goods without permission or license. **Now I understand I was wrong.** Just because Bitcoin was this revolutionary technology that embraced pseudonymity did not mean that all commerce would decentralize as well. It did not mean that anonymous markets were intended to be the most powerful layer in the Bitcoin stack. What I did not even anticipate is something articulated very well by noted Bitcoin OG [Pierre Rochard](https://twitter.com/BitcoinPierre): [Bitcoin as a *savings technology*](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BavRqEoaxjI)*.* The ability to maintain long-term savings, practice self-discipline while stacking stats, and embrace a low-time preference was just not something on the mind of the Bitcoiners I knew at the time. Perhaps I was reading into the hype while outwardly opposing it. Or perhaps I wasn’t humble enough to understand the true value proposition that many of us have learned years later. In the years that followed, I bought and sold more times than I can count, and I did everything to integrate it into passion projects. I tried to set up a company using Bitcoin while at my university in Prague. My business model depended on university students being technologically advanced enough to have a mobile wallet, own their keys, and be able to make transactions on a consistent basis. Even though I was surrounded by philosophically aligned people, those who would advance that to actually put Bitcoin into practice were sparse. This is what led me to proclaim that “[Technological Literacy is Doomed](https://www.huffpost.com/archive/ca/entry/technological-literacy-is-doomed_b_12669440)” in 2016. **And I was wrong again.** Indeed, since that time, the UX of Bitcoin-only applications, wallets, and supporting tech has vastly improved and onboarded millions more people than anyone thought possible. The entrepreneurship, coding excellence, and vision offered by Bitcoiners of all stripes have renewed a sense in me that this project is something built for us all — friends and enemies alike. While many of us were likely distracted by flashy and pumpy altcoins over the years (me too, champs), most of us have returned to the Bitcoin stable. Fast forward to today, there are entire ecosystems of creators, activists, and developers who are wholly reliant on the magic of Bitcoin’s protocol for their life and livelihood. The options are endless. The FUD is still present, but real proof of work stands powerfully against those forces. In addition, there are now [dozens of ways to use Bitcoin privately](https://fixthemoney.substack.com/p/not-your-keys-not-your-coins-claiming) — still without custodians or intermediaries — that make it one of the most important assets for global humanity, especially in dictatorships. This is all toward a positive arc of innovation, freedom, and pure independence. Did I see that coming? Absolutely not. Of course, there are probably other shots you’ve missed on Bitcoin. Price predictions (ouch), the short-term inflation hedge, or the amount of institutional investment. While all of these may be erroneous predictions in the short term, we have to realize that Bitcoin is a long arc. It will outlive all of us on the planet, and it will continue in its present form for the next generation. **Being wrong about the evolution of Bitcoin is no fault, and is indeed part of the learning curve to finally understanding it all.** When your family or friends ask you about Bitcoin after your endless sessions explaining market dynamics, nodes, how mining works, and the genius of cryptographic signatures, try to accept that there is still so much we have to learn about this decentralized digital cash. There are still some things you’ve gotten wrong about Bitcoin, and plenty more you’ll underestimate or get wrong in the future. That’s what makes it a beautiful journey. It’s a long road, but one that remains worth it.

@ e83b66a8:b0526c2b

I watched Tucker Carlson interview Roger Ver last night. I know we have our differences with Roger, and he has some less than pleasant personality traits, but he is facing 109 years in jail for tax evasion. While the charges may be technically correct, he should be able to pay the taxes and a fine and walk free. Even if we accept he did wrong, a minor prison term such as 6 months to 2 years would be appropriate in this case. We all know the severe penalty is an over reach by US authorities looking to make the whole crypto community scared about using any form of crypto as money. The US and many governments know they have lost the battle of Bitcoin as a hard asset, but this happened as a result of the Nash equilibrium, whereby you are forced to play a game that doesn’t benefit you, because not playing that game disadvantages you further. I.e. Governments loose control of the asset, but that asset is able to shore up their balance sheet and prevent your economy from failing (potentially). The war against Bitcoin (and other cryptos) as a currency, whereby you can use your Bitcoin to buy anything anywhere from a pint of milk in the local shop, to a house or car and everything in-between is a distant goal and one that is happening slowly. But it is happening and these are the new battle lines. Part of that battle is self custody, part is tax and part are the money transmitting laws. Roger’s case is also being used as a weapon of fear. I don’t hate Roger, the problem I have with Bitcoin cash is that you cannot run a full node from your home and if you can’t do this, it is left to large corporations to run the blockchain. Large corporations are much easier to control and coerce than thousands, perhaps millions of individuals. Just as China banned Bitcoin mining, so in this scenario it would be possible for governments to ban full nodes and enforce that ban by shutting down companies that attempted to do so. Also, if a currency like Bitcoin cash scaled to Visa size, then Bitcoin Cash the company would become the new Visa / Mastercard and only the technology would change. However, even Visa and Mastercard don’t keep transaction logs for years, that would require enormous amount of storage and have little benefit. Nobody needs a global ledger that keeps a record of every coffee purchased in every coffee shop since the beginning of blockchain time. This is why Bitcoin with a layer 2 payment system like Lightning is a better proposition than large blockchain cryptos. Once a payment channel is closed, the transactions are forgotten in the same way Visa and Mastercard only keep a transaction history for 1 or 2 years. This continues to allow the freedom for anybody, anywhere to verify the money they hold and the transactions they perform along with everybody else. We have consensus by verification.

@ 6389be64:ef439d32

Resilience is the ability to withstand shocks, adapt, and bounce back. It’s an essential quality in nature and in life. But what if we could take resilience a step further? What if, instead of merely surviving, a system could improve when faced with stress? This concept, known as anti-fragility, is not just theoretical—it’s practical. Combining two highly resilient natural tools, comfrey and biochar, reveals how we can create systems that thrive under pressure and grow stronger with each challenge. ### **Comfrey: Nature’s Champion of Resilience** Comfrey is a plant that refuses to fail. Once its deep roots take hold, it thrives in poor soils, withstands drought, and regenerates even after being cut down repeatedly. It’s a hardy survivor, but comfrey doesn’t just endure—it contributes. Known as a dynamic accumulator, it mines nutrients from deep within the earth and brings them to the surface, making them available for other plants. Beyond its ecological role, comfrey has centuries of medicinal use, earning the nickname "knitbone." Its leaves can heal wounds and restore health, a perfect metaphor for resilience. But as impressive as comfrey is, its true potential is unlocked when paired with another resilient force: biochar. ### **Biochar: The Silent Powerhouse of Soil Regeneration** Biochar, a carbon-rich material made by burning organic matter in low-oxygen conditions, is a game-changer for soil health. Its unique porous structure retains water, holds nutrients, and provides a haven for beneficial microbes. Soil enriched with biochar becomes drought-resistant, nutrient-rich, and biologically active—qualities that scream resilience. Historically, ancient civilizations in the Amazon used biochar to transform barren soils into fertile agricultural hubs. Known as *terra preta*, these soils remain productive centuries later, highlighting biochar’s remarkable staying power. Yet, like comfrey, biochar’s potential is magnified when it’s part of a larger system. ### **The Synergy: Comfrey and Biochar Together** Resilience turns into anti-fragility when systems go beyond mere survival and start improving under stress. Combining comfrey and biochar achieves exactly that. 1. **Nutrient Cycling and Retention**\ Comfrey’s leaves, rich in nitrogen, potassium, and phosphorus, make an excellent mulch when cut and dropped onto the soil. However, these nutrients can wash away in heavy rains. Enter biochar. Its porous structure locks in the nutrients from comfrey, preventing runoff and keeping them available for plants. Together, they create a system that not only recycles nutrients but amplifies their effectiveness. 2. **Water Management**\ Biochar holds onto water making soil not just drought-resistant but actively water-efficient, improving over time with each rain and dry spell. 3. **Microbial Ecosystems**\ Comfrey enriches soil with organic matter, feeding microbial life. Biochar provides a home for these microbes, protecting them and creating a stable environment for them to multiply. Together, they build a thriving soil ecosystem that becomes more fertile and resilient with each passing season. Resilient systems can withstand shocks, but anti-fragile systems actively use those shocks to grow stronger. Comfrey and biochar together form an anti-fragile system. Each addition of biochar enhances water and nutrient retention, while comfrey regenerates biomass and enriches the soil. Over time, the system becomes more productive, less dependent on external inputs, and better equipped to handle challenges. This synergy demonstrates the power of designing systems that don’t just survive—they thrive. ### **Lessons Beyond the Soil** The partnership of comfrey and biochar offers a valuable lesson for our own lives. Resilience is an admirable trait, but anti-fragility takes us further. By combining complementary strengths and leveraging stress as an opportunity, we can create systems—whether in soil, business, or society—that improve under pressure. Nature shows us that resilience isn’t the end goal. When we pair resilient tools like comfrey and biochar, we unlock a system that evolves, regenerates, and becomes anti-fragile. By designing with anti-fragility in mind, we don’t just bounce back, we bounce forward. By designing with anti-fragility in mind, we don’t just bounce back, we bounce forward.

@ e31e84c4:77bbabc0

*Bitcoin and Fixed Income was Written By Wyatt O’Rourke. If you enjoyed this article then support his writing, directly, by donating to his lightning wallet: ultrahusky3@primal.net* Fiduciary duty is the obligation to act in the client’s best interests at all times, prioritizing their needs above the advisor’s own, ensuring honesty, transparency, and avoiding conflicts of interest in all recommendations and actions. This is something all advisors in the BFAN take very seriously; after all, we are legally required to do so. For the average advisor this is a fairly easy box to check. All you essentially have to do is have someone take a 5-minute risk assessment, fill out an investment policy statement, and then throw them in the proverbial 60/40 portfolio. You have thousands of investment options to choose from and you can reasonably explain how your client is theoretically insulated from any move in the \~markets\~. From the traditional financial advisor perspective, you could justify nearly anything by putting a client into this type of portfolio. All your bases were pretty much covered from return profile, regulatory, compliance, investment options, etc. It was just too easy. It became the household standard and now a meme. As almost every real bitcoiner knows, the 60/40 portfolio is moving into psyop territory, and many financial advisors get clowned on for defending this relic on bitcoin twitter. I’m going to specifically poke fun at the ‘40’ part of this portfolio. The ‘40’ represents fixed income, defined as… > An investment type that provides regular, set interest payments, such as bonds or treasury securities, and returns the principal at maturity. It’s generally considered a lower-risk asset class, used to generate stable income and preserve capital. Historically, this part of the portfolio was meant to weather the volatility in the equity markets and represent the “safe” investments. Typically, some sort of bond. First and foremost, the fixed income section is most commonly constructed with U.S. Debt. There are a couple main reasons for this. Most financial professionals believe the same fairy tale that U.S. Debt is “risk free” (lol). U.S. debt is also one of the largest and most liquid assets in the market which comes with a lot of benefits. There are many brilliant bitcoiners in finance and economics that have sounded the alarm on the U.S. debt ticking time bomb. I highly recommend readers explore the work of Greg Foss, Lawrence Lepard, Lyn Alden, and Saifedean Ammous. My very high-level recap of their analysis: - A bond is a contract in which Party A (the borrower) agrees to repay Party B (the lender) their principal plus interest over time. - The U.S. government issues bonds (Treasury securities) to finance its operations after tax revenues have been exhausted. - These are traditionally viewed as “risk-free” due to the government’s historical reliability in repaying its debts and the strength of the U.S. economy - U.S. bonds are seen as safe because the government has control over the dollar (world reserve asset) and, until recently (20 some odd years), enjoyed broad confidence that it would always honor its debts. - This perception has contributed to high global demand for U.S. debt but, that is quickly deteriorating. - The current debt situation raises concerns about sustainability. - The U.S. has substantial obligations, and without sufficient productivity growth, increasing debt may lead to a cycle where borrowing to cover interest leads to more debt. - This could result in more reliance on money creation (printing), which can drive inflation and further debt burdens. In the words of Lyn Alden “Nothing stops this train” Those obligations are what makes up the 40% of most the fixed income in your portfolio. So essentially you are giving money to one of the worst capital allocators in the world (U.S. Gov’t) and getting paid back with printed money. As someone who takes their fiduciary responsibility seriously and understands the debt situation we just reviewed, I think it’s borderline negligent to put someone into a classic 60% (equities) / 40% (fixed income) portfolio without serious scrutiny of the client’s financial situation and options available to them. I certainly have my qualms with equities at times, but overall, they are more palatable than the fixed income portion of the portfolio. I don’t like it either, but the money is broken and the unit of account for nearly every equity or fixed income instrument (USD) is fraudulent. It’s a paper mache fade that is quite literally propped up by the money printer. To briefly be as most charitable as I can – It wasn’t always this way. The U.S. Dollar used to be sound money, we used to have government surplus instead of mathematically certain deficits, The U.S. Federal Government didn’t used to have a money printing addiction, and pre-bitcoin the 60/40 portfolio used to be a quality portfolio management strategy. Those times are gone. ### Now the fun part. How does bitcoin fix this? Bitcoin fixes this indirectly. Understanding investment criteria changes via risk tolerance, age, goals, etc. A client may still have a need for “fixed income” in the most literal definition – Low risk yield. Now you may be thinking that yield is a bad word in bitcoin land, you’re not wrong, so stay with me. Perpetual motion machine crypto yield is fake and largely where many crypto scams originate. However, that doesn’t mean yield in the classic finance sense does not exist in bitcoin, it very literally does. Fortunately for us bitcoiners there are many other smart, driven, and enterprising bitcoiners that understand this problem and are doing something to address it. These individuals are pioneering new possibilities in bitcoin and finance, specifically when it comes to fixed income. Here are some new developments – Private Credit Funds – The Build Asset Management Secured Income Fund I is a private credit fund created by Build Asset Management. This fund primarily invests in bitcoin-backed, collateralized business loans originated by Unchained, with a secured structure involving a multi-signature, over-collateralized setup for risk management. Unchained originates loans and sells them to Build, which pools them into the fund, enabling investors to share in the interest income. Dynamics - Loan Terms: Unchained issues loans at interest rates around 14%, secured with a 2/3 multi-signature vault backed by a 40% loan-to-value (LTV) ratio. - Fund Mechanics: Build buys these loans from Unchained, thus providing liquidity to Unchained for further loan originations, while Build manages interest payments to investors in the fund. Pros - The fund offers a unique way to earn income via bitcoin-collateralized debt, with protection against rehypothecation and strong security measures, making it attractive for investors seeking exposure to fixed income with bitcoin. Cons - The fund is only available to accredited investors, which is a regulatory standard for private credit funds like this. Corporate Bonds – MicroStrategy Inc. (MSTR), a business intelligence company, has leveraged its corporate structure to issue bonds specifically to acquire bitcoin as a reserve asset. This approach allows investors to indirectly gain exposure to bitcoin’s potential upside while receiving interest payments on their bond investments. Some other publicly traded companies have also adopted this strategy, but for the sake of this article we will focus on MSTR as they are the biggest and most vocal issuer. Dynamics - Issuance: MicroStrategy has issued senior secured notes in multiple offerings, with terms allowing the company to use the proceeds to purchase bitcoin. - Interest Rates: The bonds typically carry high-yield interest rates, averaging around 6-8% APR, depending on the specific issuance and market conditions at the time of issuance. - Maturity: The bonds have varying maturities, with most structured for multi-year terms, offering investors medium-term exposure to bitcoin’s value trajectory through MicroStrategy’s holdings. Pros - Indirect Bitcoin exposure with income provides a unique opportunity for investors seeking income from bitcoin-backed debt. - Bonds issued by MicroStrategy offer relatively high interest rates, appealing for fixed-income investors attracted to the higher risk/reward scenarios. Cons - There are credit risks tied to MicroStrategy’s financial health and bitcoin’s performance. A significant drop in bitcoin prices could strain the company’s ability to service debt, increasing credit risk. - Availability: These bonds are primarily accessible to institutional investors and accredited investors, limiting availability for retail investors.  Interest Payable in Bitcoin – River has introduced an innovative product, bitcoin Interest on Cash, allowing clients to earn interest on their U.S. dollar deposits, with the interest paid in bitcoin. Dynamics - Interest Payment: Clients earn an annual interest rate of 3.8% on their cash deposits. The accrued interest is converted to Bitcoin daily and paid out monthly, enabling clients to accumulate Bitcoin over time. - Security and Accessibility: Cash deposits are insured up to $250,000 through River’s banking partner, Lead Bank, a member of the FDIC. All Bitcoin holdings are maintained in full reserve custody, ensuring that client assets are not lent or leveraged. Pros - There are no hidden fees or minimum balance requirements, and clients can withdraw their cash at any time. - The 3.8% interest rate provides a predictable income stream, akin to traditional fixed-income investments. Cons - While the interest rate is fixed, the value of the Bitcoin received as interest can fluctuate, introducing potential variability in the investment’s overall return. - Interest rate payments are on the lower side Admittedly, this is a very small list, however, these types of investments are growing more numerous and meaningful. The reality is the existing options aren’t numerous enough to service every client that has a need for fixed income exposure. I challenge advisors to explore innovative options for fixed income exposure outside of sovereign debt, as that is most certainly a road to nowhere. It is my wholehearted belief and call to action that we need more options to help clients across the risk and capital allocation spectrum access a sound money standard. Additional Resources - [River: The future of saving is here: Earn 3.8% on cash. Paid in Bitcoin.](http://bitcoin%20and%20fixed%20ihttps//blog.river.com/bitcoin-interest-on-cash/ncome) - [Onramp: Bitcoin, The Emergent Asset Class](https://onrampbitcoin.docsend.com/view/j4wje7kgvw357tt9) - [MicroStrategy: MicroStrategy Announces Pricing of Offering of Convertible Senior Notes](https://www.microstrategy.com/press/microstrategy-announces-pricing-of-offering-of-convertible-senior-notes_09-18-2024) --- *Bitcoin and Fixed Income was Written By Wyatt O’Rourke. If you enjoyed this article then support his writing, directly, by donating to his lightning wallet: ultrahusky3@primal.net*

@ a849beb6:b327e6d2

<img src="https://blossom.primal.net/e306357a7e53c4e40458cf6fa5625917dc8deaa4d1012823caa5a0eefb39e53c.jpg"> \ \ It was another historic week for both bitcoin and the Ten31 portfolio, as the world’s oldest, largest, most battle-tested cryptocurrency climbed to new all-time highs each day to close out the week just shy of the $100,000 mark. Along the way, bitcoin continued to accumulate institutional and regulatory wins, including the much-anticipated approval and launch of spot bitcoin ETF options and the appointment of several additional pro-bitcoin Presidential cabinet officials. The timing for this momentum was poetic, as this week marked the second anniversary of the pico-bottom of the 2022 bear market, a level that bitcoin has now hurdled to the tune of more than 6x despite the litany of bitcoin obituaries published at the time. The entirety of 2024 and especially the past month have further cemented our view that bitcoin is rapidly gaining a sense of legitimacy among institutions, fiduciaries, and governments, and we remain optimistic that this trend is set to accelerate even more into 2025. Several Ten31 portfolio companies made exciting announcements this week that should serve to further entrench bitcoin’s institutional adoption. AnchorWatch, a first of its kind bitcoin insurance provider offering 1:1 coverage with its innovative use of bitcoin’s native properties, announced it has been designated a Lloyd’s of London Coverholder, giving the company unique, blue-chip status as it begins to write bitcoin insurance policies of up to $100 million per policy starting next month. Meanwhile, Battery Finance Founder and CEO Andrew Hohns appeared on CNBC to delve into the launch of Battery’s pioneering private credit strategy which fuses bitcoin and conventional tangible assets in a dual-collateralized structure that offers a compelling risk/return profile to both lenders and borrowers. Both companies are clearing a path for substantially greater bitcoin adoption in massive, untapped pools of capital, and Ten31 is proud to have served as lead investor for AnchorWatch’s Seed round and as exclusive capital partner for Battery. As the world’s largest investor focused entirely on bitcoin, Ten31 has deployed nearly $150 million across two funds into more than 30 of the most promising and innovative companies in the ecosystem like AnchorWatch and Battery, and we expect 2025 to be the best year yet for both bitcoin and our portfolio. Ten31 will hold a first close for its third fund at the end of this year, and investors in that close will benefit from attractive incentives and a strong initial portfolio. Visit ten31.vc/funds to learn more and get in touch to discuss participating.\ \ **Portfolio Company Spotlight**  [Primal](http://primal.net/) is a first of its kind application for the Nostr protocol that combines a client, caching service, analytics tools, and more to address several unmet needs in the nascent Nostr ecosystem. Through the combination of its sleek client application and its caching service (built on a completely open source stack), Primal seeks to offer an end-user experience as smooth and easy as that of legacy social media platforms like Twitter and eventually many other applications, unlocking the vast potential of Nostr for the next billion people. Primal also offers an integrated wallet (powered by [Strike BLACK](https://x.com/Strike/status/1755335823023558819)) that substantially reduces onboarding and UX frictions for both Nostr and the lightning network while highlighting bitcoin’s unique power as internet-native, open-source money.  ### **Selected Portfolio News** AnchorWatch announced it has achieved Llody’s Coverholder status, allowing the company to provide unique 1:1 bitcoin insurance offerings starting in [December](https://x.com/AnchorWatch/status/1858622945763131577).\ \ Battery Finance Founder and CEO Andrew Hohns appeared on CNBC to delve into the company’s unique bitcoin-backed [private credit strategy](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=26bOawTzT5U). Primal launched version 2.0, a landmark update that adds a feed marketplace, robust advanced search capabilities, premium-tier offerings, and many [more new features](https://primal.net/e/note1kaeajwh275kdwd6s0c2ksvj9f83t0k7usf9qj8fha2ac7m456juqpac43m). Debifi launched its new iOS app for Apple users seeking non-custodial [bitcoin-collateralized loans](https://x.com/debificom/status/1858897785044500642). ### **Media** Strike Founder and CEO Jack Mallers [joined Bloomberg TV](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i4z-2v_0H1k) to discuss the strong volumes the company has seen over the past year and the potential for a US bitcoin strategic reserve.  Primal Founder and CEO Miljan Braticevic [joined](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqR_IQfKic8) The Bitcoin Podcast to discuss the rollout of Primal 2.0 and the future of Nostr.  Ten31 Managing Partner Marty Bent [appeared on](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_WwZDEtVxOE&t=1556s) BlazeTV to discuss recent changes in the regulatory environment for bitcoin.  Zaprite published a customer [testimonial video](https://x.com/ZapriteApp/status/1859357150809587928) highlighting the popularity of its offerings across the bitcoin ecosystem.  ### **Market Updates** Continuing its recent momentum, bitcoin reached another new all-time high this week, clocking in just below $100,000 on Friday. Bitcoin has now reached a market cap of [nearly $2 trillion](https://companiesmarketcap.com/assets-by-market-cap/), putting it within 3% of the market caps of Amazon and Google.  After receiving SEC and CFTC approval over the past month, long-awaited options on spot bitcoin ETFs were fully [approved](https://finance.yahoo.com/news/bitcoin-etf-options-set-hit-082230483.html) and launched this week. These options should help further expand bitcoin’s institutional [liquidity profile](https://x.com/kellyjgreer/status/1824168136637288912), with potentially significant [implications](https://x.com/dgt10011/status/1837278352823972147) for price action over time. The new derivatives showed strong performance out of the gate, with volumes on options for BlackRock’s IBIT reaching [nearly $2 billion](https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2024/11/20/bitcoin-etf-options-introduction-marks-milestone-despite-position-limits/) on just the first day of trading despite [surprisingly tight](https://x.com/dgt10011/status/1858729192105414837) position limits for the vehicles.  Meanwhile, the underlying spot bitcoin ETF complex had yet another banner week, pulling in [$3.4 billion](https://farside.co.uk/btc/) in net inflows.  New reports [suggested](https://archive.is/LMr4o) President-elect Donald Trump’s social media company is in advanced talks to acquire crypto trading platform Bakkt, potentially the latest indication of the incoming administration’s stance toward the broader “crypto” ecosystem.  On the macro front, US housing starts [declined M/M again](https://finance.yahoo.com/news/us-single-family-housing-starts-134759234.html) in October on persistently high mortgage rates and weather impacts. The metric remains well below pre-COVID levels.  Pockets of the US commercial real estate market remain challenged, as the CEO of large Florida developer Related indicated that [developers need further rate cuts](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-11-19/miami-developer-says-real-estate-market-needs-rate-cuts-badly) “badly” to maintain project viability.  US Manufacturing PMI [increased slightly](https://www.fxstreet.com/news/sp-global-pmis-set-to-signal-us-economy-continued-to-expand-in-november-202411220900) M/M, but has now been in contraction territory (&lt;50) for well over two years. The latest iteration of the University of Michigan’s popular consumer sentiment survey [ticked up](https://archive.is/fY5j6) following this month’s election results, though so did five-year inflation expectations, which now sit comfortably north of 3%.  ### **Regulatory Update** After weeks of speculation, the incoming Trump administration appointed hedge fund manager [Scott Bessent](https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2024/11/22/donald-trump-chooses-hedge-fund-executive-scott-bessent-for-treasury-secretary.html) to head up the US Treasury. Like many of Trump’s cabinet selections so far, Bessent has been a [public advocate](https://x.com/EleanorTerrett/status/1856204133901963512) for bitcoin.  Trump also [appointed](https://www.axios.com/2024/11/19/trump-commerce-secretary-howard-lutnick) Cantor Fitzgerald CEO Howard Lutnick – another outspoken [bitcoin bull](https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2024/09/04/tradfi-companies-want-to-transact-in-bitcoin-says-cantor-fitzgerald-ceo/) – as Secretary of the Commerce Department.  Meanwhile, the Trump team is reportedly considering creating a new [“crypto czar”](https://archive.is/jPQHF) role to sit within the administration. While it’s unclear at this point what that role would entail, one report indicated that the administration’s broader “crypto council” is expected to move forward with plans for a [strategic bitcoin reserve](https://archive.is/ZtiOk). Various government lawyers suggested this week that the Trump administration is likely to be [less aggressive](https://archive.is/Uggnn) in seeking adversarial enforcement actions against bitcoin and “crypto” in general, as regulatory bodies appear poised to shift resources and focus elsewhere.  Other updates from the regulatory apparatus were also directionally positive for bitcoin, most notably FDIC Chairman Martin Gruenberg’s confirmation that he [plans to resign](https://www.politico.com/news/2024/11/19/fdics-gruenberg-says-he-will-resign-jan-19-00190373) from his post at the end of President Biden’s term.  Many critics have alleged Gruenberg was an architect of [“Operation Chokepoint 2.0,”](https://x.com/GOPMajorityWhip/status/1858927571666096628) which has created banking headwinds for bitcoin companies over the past several years, so a change of leadership at the department is likely yet another positive for the space. SEC Chairman Gary Gensler also officially announced he plans to resign at the start of the new administration. Gensler has been the target of much ire from the broader “crypto” space, though we expect many projects outside bitcoin may continue to struggle with questions around the [Howey Test](https://www.investopedia.com/terms/h/howey-test.asp). Overseas, a Chinese court ruled that it is [not illegal](https://www.benzinga.com/24/11/42103633/chinese-court-affirms-cryptocurrency-ownership-as-legal-as-bitcoin-breaks-97k) for individuals to hold cryptocurrency, even though the country is still ostensibly [enforcing a ban](https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-58678907) on crypto transactions.  ### **Noteworthy** The incoming CEO of Charles Schwab – which administers over $9 trillion in client assets – [suggested](https://x.com/matthew_sigel/status/1859700668887597331) the platform is preparing to “get into” spot bitcoin offerings and that he “feels silly” for having waited this long. As this attitude becomes more common among traditional finance players, we continue to believe that the number of acquirers coming to market for bitcoin infrastructure capabilities will far outstrip the number of available high quality assets.  BlackRock’s 2025 Thematic Outlook notes a [“renewed sense of optimism”](https://www.ishares.com/us/insights/2025-thematic-outlook#rate-cuts) on bitcoin among the asset manager’s client base due to macro tailwinds and the improving regulatory environment. Elsewhere, BlackRock’s head of digital assets [indicated](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TE7cAw7oIeA) the firm does not view bitcoin as a “risk-on” asset.  MicroStrategy, which was a sub-$1 billion market cap company less than five years ago, briefly breached a [$100 billion equity value](https://finance.yahoo.com/news/microstrategy-breaks-top-100-u-191842879.html) this week as it continues to aggressively acquire bitcoin. The company now holds nearly 350,000 bitcoin on its balance sheet.  Notably, Allianz SE, Germany’s largest insurer, [spoke for 25%](https://bitbo.io/news/allianz-buys-microstrategy-notes/) of MicroStrategy’s latest $3 billion convertible note offering this week, suggesting [growing appetite](https://x.com/Rob1Ham/status/1860053859181199649) for bitcoin proxy exposure among more restricted pools of capital.  The [ongoing meltdown](https://www.cnbc.com/2024/11/22/synapse-bankruptcy-thousands-of-americans-see-their-savings-vanish.html) of fintech middleware provider Synapse has left tens of thousands of customers with nearly 100% deposit haircuts as hundreds of millions in funds remain missing, the latest unfortunate case study in the fragility of much of the US’s legacy banking stack.  ### **Travel** - [BitcoinMENA](https://bitcoin2024.b.tc/mena), Dec 9-10 - [Nashville BitDevs](https://www.meetup.com/bitcoinpark/events/302533726/?eventOrigin=group_upcoming_events), Dec 10 - [Austin BitDevs](https://www.meetup.com/austin-bitcoin-developers/events/303476169/?eventOrigin=group_upcoming_events), Dec 19 - [Nashville Energy and Mining Summit](https://www.meetup.com/bitcoinpark/events/304092624/?eventOrigin=group_events_list), Jan 30

@ a39d19ec:3d88f61e

A state-controlled money supply can influence the development of socialist policies and practices in various ways. Although the relationship is not deterministic, state control over the money supply can contribute to a larger role of the state in the economy and facilitate the implementation of socialist ideals. ## Fiscal Policy Capabilities When the state manages the money supply, it gains the ability to implement fiscal policies that can lead to an expansion of social programs and welfare initiatives. Funding these programs by creating money can enhance the state's influence over the economy and move it closer to a socialist model. The Soviet Union, for instance, had a centralized banking system that enabled the state to fund massive industrialization and social programs, significantly expanding the state's role in the economy. ## Wealth Redistribution Controlling the money supply can also allow the state to influence economic inequality through monetary policies, effectively redistributing wealth and reducing income disparities. By implementing low-interest loans or providing financial assistance to disadvantaged groups, the state can narrow the wealth gap and promote social equality, as seen in many European welfare states. ## Central Planning A state-controlled money supply can contribute to increased central planning, as the state gains more influence over the economy. Central banks, which are state-owned or heavily influenced by the state, play a crucial role in managing the money supply and facilitating central planning. This aligns with socialist principles that advocate for a planned economy where resources are allocated according to social needs rather than market forces. ## Incentives for Staff Staff members working in state institutions responsible for managing the money supply have various incentives to keep the system going. These incentives include job security, professional expertise and reputation, political alignment, regulatory capture, institutional inertia, and legal and administrative barriers. While these factors can differ among individuals, they can collectively contribute to the persistence of a state-controlled money supply system. In conclusion, a state-controlled money supply can facilitate the development of socialist policies and practices by enabling fiscal policies, wealth redistribution, and central planning. The staff responsible for managing the money supply have diverse incentives to maintain the system, further ensuring its continuation. However, it is essential to note that many factors influence the trajectory of an economic system, and the relationship between state control over the money supply and socialism is not inevitable.

@ 87730827:746b7d35

Original: https://techreport.com/crypto-news/brazil-central-bank-ban-monero-stablecoins/ Brazilian’s Central Bank Will Ban Monero and Algorithmic Stablecoins in the Country =================================================================================== Brazil proposes crypto regulations banning Monero and algorithmic stablecoins and enforcing strict compliance for exchanges. * * * **KEY TAKEAWAYS** * The Central Bank of Brazil has proposed **regulations prohibiting privacy-centric cryptocurrencies** like Monero. * The regulations **categorize exchanges into intermediaries, custodians, and brokers**, each with specific capital requirements and compliance standards. * While the proposed rules apply to cryptocurrencies, certain digital assets like non-fungible tokens **(NFTs) are still ‘deregulated’ in Brazil**.  In a Notice of Participation announcement, the Brazilian Central Bank (BCB) outlines **regulations for virtual asset service providers (VASPs)** operating in the country. **_In the document, the Brazilian regulator specifies that privacy-focused coins, such as Monero, must be excluded from all digital asset companies that intend to operate in Brazil._** Let’s unpack what effect these regulations will have. Brazil’s Crackdown on Crypto Fraud ---------------------------------- If the BCB’s current rule is approved, **exchanges dealing with coins that provide anonymity must delist these currencies** or prevent Brazilians from accessing and operating these assets. The Central Bank argues that currencies like Monero make it difficult and even prevent the identification of users, thus creating problems in complying with international AML obligations and policies to prevent the financing of terrorism. According to the Central Bank of Brazil, the bans aim to **prevent criminals from using digital assets to launder money**. In Brazil, organized criminal syndicates such as the Primeiro Comando da Capital (PCC) and Comando Vermelho have been increasingly using digital assets for money laundering and foreign remittances. > … restriction on the supply of virtual assets that contain characteristics of fragility, insecurity or risks that favor fraud or crime, such as virtual assets designed to favor money laundering and terrorist financing practices by facilitating anonymity or difficulty identification of the holder. > > – [Notice of Participation](https://www.gov.br/participamaisbrasil/edital-de-participacao-social-n-109-2024-proposta-de-regulamentacao-do-) The Central Bank has identified that **removing algorithmic stablecoins is essential to guarantee the safety of users’ funds** and avoid events such as when Terraform Labs’ entire ecosystem collapsed, losing billions of investors’ dollars. The Central Bank also wants to **control all digital assets traded by companies in Brazil**. According to the current proposal, the [national regulator](https://techreport.com/cryptocurrency/learning/crypto-regulations-global-view/) will have the **power to ask platforms to remove certain listed assets** if it considers that they do not meet local regulations. However, the regulations will not include [NFTs](https://techreport.com/statistics/crypto/nft-awareness-adoption-statistics/), real-world asset (RWA) tokens, RWA tokens classified as securities, and tokenized movable or real estate assets. These assets are still ‘deregulated’ in Brazil. Monero: What Is It and Why Is Brazil Banning It? ------------------------------------------------ Monero ($XMR) is a cryptocurrency that uses a protocol called CryptoNote. It launched in 2013 and ‘erases’ transaction data, preventing the sender and recipient addresses from being publicly known. The Monero network is based on a proof-of-work (PoW) consensus mechanism, which incentivizes miners to add blocks to the blockchain.  Like Brazil, **other nations are banning Monero** in search of regulatory compliance. Recently, Dubai’s new digital asset rules prohibited the issuance of activities related to anonymity-enhancing cryptocurrencies such as $XMR. Furthermore, exchanges such as **Binance have already announced they will delist Monero** on their global platforms due to its anonymity features. Kraken did the same, removing Monero for their European-based users to comply with [MiCA regulations](https://techreport.com/crypto-news/eu-mica-rules-existential-threat-or-crypto-clarity/). Data from Chainalysis shows that Brazil is the **seventh-largest Bitcoin market in the world**.  In Latin America, **Brazil is the largest market for digital assets**. Globally, it leads in the innovation of RWA tokens, with several companies already trading this type of asset. In Closing ---------- Following other nations, Brazil’s regulatory proposals aim to combat illicit activities such as money laundering and terrorism financing. Will the BCB’s move safeguard people’s digital assets while also stimulating growth and innovation in the crypto ecosystem? Only time will tell. References ---------- Cassio Gusson is a journalist passionate about technology, cryptocurrencies, and the nuances of human nature. With a career spanning roles as Senior Crypto Journalist at CriptoFacil and Head of News at CoinTelegraph, he offers exclusive insights on South America’s crypto landscape. A graduate in Communication from Faccamp and a post-graduate in Globalization and Culture from FESPSP, Cassio explores the intersection of governance, decentralization, and the evolution of global systems. [View all articles by Cassio Gusson](https://techreport.com/author/cassiog/)

@ 5e5fc143:393d5a2c

Now test old reliable front end Stay tuned more later Keeping this as template long note for debugging in future as come across few NIP-33 post edit issues

@ af9c48b7:a3f7aaf4

## Chef's notes This simple, easy, no bake desert will surely be the it at you next family gathering. You can keep it a secret or share it with the crowd that this is a healthy alternative to normal pie. I think everyone will be amazed at how good it really is. ## Details - ⏲️ Prep time: 30 - 🍳 Cook time: 0 - 🍽️ Servings: 8 ## Ingredients - 1/3 cup of Heavy Cream- 0g sugar, 5.5g carbohydrates - 3/4 cup of Half and Half- 6g sugar, 3g carbohydrates - 4oz Sugar Free Cool Whip (1/2 small container) - 0g sugar, 37.5g carbohydrates - 1.5oz box (small box) of Sugar Free Instant Chocolate Pudding- 0g sugar, 32g carbohydrates - 1 Pecan Pie Crust- 24g sugar, 72g carbohydrates ## Directions 1. The total pie has 30g of sugar and 149.50g of carboydrates. So if you cut the pie into 8 equal slices, that would come to 3.75g of sugar and 18.69g carbohydrates per slice. If you decided to not eat the crust, your sugar intake would be .75 gram per slice and the carborytrates would be 9.69g per slice. Based on your objective, you could use only heavy whipping cream and no half and half to further reduce your sugar intake. 2. Mix all wet ingredients and the instant pudding until thoroughly mixed and a consistent color has been achieved. The heavy whipping cream causes the mixture to thicken the more you mix it. So, I’d recommend using an electric mixer. Once you are satisfied with the color, start mixing in the whipping cream until it has a consistent “chocolate” color thorough. Once your satisfied with the color, spoon the mixture into the pie crust, smooth the top to your liking, and then refrigerate for one hour before serving.

@ 41e6f20b:06049e45

Let me tell you a beautiful story. Last night, during the speakers' dinner at Monerotopia, the waitress was collecting tiny tips in Mexican pesos. I asked her, "Do you really want to earn tips seriously?" I then showed her how to set up a Cake Wallet, and she started collecting tips in Monero, reaching 0.9 XMR. Of course, she wanted to cash out to fiat immediately, but it solved a real problem for her: making more money. That amount was something she would never have earned in a single workday. We kept talking, and I promised to give her Zoom workshops. What can I say? I love people, and that's why I'm a natural orange-piller.

@ bcea2b98:7ccef3c9

Weekends are the perfect time to unwind, explore, or spend time doing what we love. How would you spend your ideal weekend? Would it be all about relaxation, or would you be out and about? For me, an ideal weekend would start with a slow Saturday morning, a good book and coffee. Then I would spend the afternoon exploring local trails and looking for snacks. Then always a slow Sunday night hopefully. originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/760492

@ fd208ee8:0fd927c1

## You have no idea I regularly read comments from people, on here, wondering how it's possible to marry -- or even simply be friends! -- with someone who doesn't agree with you on politics. I see this sentiment expressed quite often, usually in the context of Bitcoin, or whatever _pig is currently being chased through the village_, as they say around here.  It seems rather sensible, but I don't think it's as hard, as people make it out to be. Further, I think it's a dangerous precondition to set, for your interpersonal relationships, because the political field is constantly in flux. If you determine who you will love, by their opinions, do you stop loving them if their opinions change, or if the opinions they have become irrelevant and a new set of opinions are needed -- and their new ones don't match your new ones? We could see this happen to relationships en masse, during the Covid Era, and I think it happens every day, in a slow grind toward the disintegration of interpersonal discourse. I suspect many people do stop loving, at that point, as they never really loved the other person for their own sake, they loved the other person because they thought the other person was exactly like they are. But no two people are alike, and the longer you are in a relationship with someone else, the more the initial giddiness wears off and the trials and tribulations add up, the more you notice how very different you actually are. This is the point, where best friends and romantic couples say, _We just grew apart._ But you were always apart. You were always two different people. You just didn't notice, until now.  I've also always been surprised at how many same-party relationships disintegrate because of some disagreement over some particular detail of some particular topic, that they generally agree on. To me, it seems like an irrelevant side-topic, but _they can't stand to be with this person_... and they stomp off. So, I tend to think that it's less that opinions need to align to each other, but rather than opinions need to align in accordance with the level of interpersonal tolerance they can bring into the relationship. ## I was raised by relaxed revolutionaries Maybe I see things this way because my parents come from two diverging political, cultural, national, and ethnic backgrounds, and are prone to disagreeing about a lot of "important" (to people outside their marriage) things, but still have one of the healthiest, most-fruitful, and most long-running marriages of anyone I know, from that generation. My parents, you see, aren't united by their opinions. They're united by their relationship, which is something _outside_ of opinions. Beyond opinions. Relationships are what turn two different people into one, cohesive unit, so that they slowly grow together. Eventually, even their faces merge, and their biological clocks tick to the same rhythm. They eventually become one entity that contains differing opinions about the same topics. It's like magic, but it's the result of a mindset, not a worldview. Or, as I like to quip: > The best way to stay married, is to not get divorced.  My parents simply determined early on, that they would stay together, and whenever they would find that they disagreed on something that _didn't directly pertain to their day-to-day existence with each other_ they would just agree-to-disagree about that, or roll their eyes, and move on. You do you. Live and let live. My parents have some of the most strongly held personal opinions of any people I've ever met, but they're also incredibly tolerant and can get along with nearly anyone, so their friends are a confusing hodgepodge of _people we liked and found interesting enough to keep around_. Which makes their house parties really fun, and highly unusual, in this day and age of mutual-damnation across the aisle.  The things that did affect them, directly, like which school the children should attend or which country they should live in, etc. were things they'd sit down and discuss, and somehow one opinion would emerge, and they'd again... move on. And that's how my husband and I also live our lives, and it's been working surprisingly well. No topics are off-limits to discussion (so long as you don't drone on for too long), nobody has to give up deeply held beliefs, or stop agitating for the political decisions they prefer. You see, we didn't like that the other always had the same opinion. We liked that the other always held their opinions strongly. That they were passionate about their opinions. That they were willing to voice their opinions; sacrifice to promote their opinions. And that they didn't let anyone browbeat or cow them, for their opinions, not even their best friends or their spouse. But that they were open to listening to the other side, and trying to wrap their mind around the possibility that they _might just be wrong about something_.  We married each other because we knew: this person really cares, this person has thought this through, and they're in it, to win it. What "it" is, is mostly irrelevant, so long as it doesn't entail torturing small animals in the basement, or raising the children on a diet of Mountain Dew and porn, or something. Live and let live. At least, it's never boring. At least, there's always something to ~~argue~~ talk about. At least, we never think... we've just grown apart.

@ 4ba8e86d:89d32de4

Tutorial feito por Grom mestre⚡poste original abaixo: http://xh6liiypqffzwnu5734ucwps37tn2g6npthvugz3gdoqpikujju525yd.onion/240277/tutorial-criando-e-acessando-sua-conta-de-email-pela-i2p?show=240277#q240277 Bom dia/tarde/noite a todos os camaradas. Seguindo a nossa série de tutoriais referentes a tecnologias essenciais para a segurança e o anonimato dos usuários, sendo as primeiras a openPGP e a I2P, lhes apresento mais uma opção para expandir os seus conhecimentos da DW. Muitos devem conhecer os serviços de mail na onion como DNMX e mail2tor, mas e que tal um serviço de email pela I2P. Nesse tutorial eu vou mostrar a vocês como criar a sua primeira conta no hq.postman.i2p e a acessar essa conta. É importante que vocês tenham lido a minha primeira série de tutoriais a respeito de como instalar, configurar e navegar pela I2P nostr:nevent1qqsyjcz2w0e6d6dcdeprhuuarw4aqkw730y542dzlwxwssneq3mwpaspz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduhsygzt4r5x6tvh39kujvmu8egqdyvf84e3w4e0mq0ckswamfwcn5eduspsgqqqqqqsyp5vcq Esse tutorial é um pré-requisito para o seguinte e portanto recomendo que leia-os antes de prosseguir com o seguinte tutorial. O tutorial de Kleopatra nostr:nevent1qqs8h7vsn5j6qh35949sa60dms4fneussmv9jd76n24lsmtz24k0xlqzyp9636rd9ktcjmwfxd7ru5qxjxyn6uch2uhas8utg8wa5hvf6vk7gqcyqqqqqqgecq8f7 é complementar dado que é extremamente recomendado assinar e criptografar as mensagens que seguem por emails pela DW. Sem mais delongas, vamos ao tutorial de fato. ## 1. Criando uma conta de email no hq.postman Relembrando: Esse tutorial considera que você já tenha acesso à I2P. Entre no seu navegador e acesse o endereço hq.postman.i2p. O roteador provavelmente já contém esse endereço no seu addressbook e não haverá a necessidade de inserir o endereço b32 completo. Após entrar no site vá para a página '1 - Creating a mailbox' https://image.nostr.build/d850379fe315d2abab71430949b06d3fa49366d91df4c9b00a4a8367d53fcca3.jpg Nessa página, insira as credenciais de sua preferências nos campos do formulário abaixo. Lembre-se que o seu endereço de email aceita apenas letras e números. Clique em 'Proceed' depois que preencher todos os campos. https://image.nostr.build/670dfda7264db393e48391f217e60a2eb87d85c2729360c8ef6fe0cf52508ab4.jpg Uma página vai aparecer pedindo para confirmar as credenciais da sua nova conta. Se tudo estiver certo apenas clique em 'Confirm and Create Mailbox'. Se tudo ocorrer como conforme haverá uma confirmação de que a sua nova conta foi criada com sucesso. Após isso aguarde por volta de 5 minutos antes de tentar acessá-la, para que haja tempo suficiente para o servidor atualizar o banco de dados. https://image.nostr.build/ec58fb826bffa60791fedfd9c89a25d592ac3d11645b270c936c60a7c59c067f.jpg https://image.nostr.build/a2b7710d1e3cbb36431acb9055fd62937986b4da4b1a1bbb06d3f3cb1f544fd3.jpg Pronto! Sua nova conta de email na I2P foi criada. Agora vamos para a próxima etapa: como acessar a sua conta via um cliente de email. ## 2. Configurando os túneis cliente de SMTP e POP3 O hq.postman não possui um cliente web que nos permite acessar a nossa conta pelo navegador. Para isso precisamos usar um cliente como Thunderbird e configurar os túneis cliente no I2Pd que serão necessários para o Thunderbird se comunicar com o servidor pela I2P. Caso não tenha instalado o Thunderbird ainda, faça-o agora antes de prosseguir. Vamos configurar os túneis cliente do servidor de email no nosso roteador. Para isso abra um terminal ou o seu gestor de arquivos e vá para a pasta de configuração de túneis do I2P. Em Linux esse diretório se localiza em /etc/i2pd/tunnels.d. Em Windows, essa pasta se localiza em C:\users\user\APPDATA\i2pd. Na pasta tunnels.d crie dois arquivos: smtp.postman.conf e pop-postman.conf. Lembre-se que em Linux você precisa de permissões de root para escrever na pasta de configuração. Use o comando sudoedit <nome_do_arquivo> para isso. Edite-os conforme as imagens a seguir: Arquivo pop-postman.conf https://image.nostr.build/7e03505c8bc3b632ca5db1f8eaefc6cecb4743cd2096d211dd90bbdc16fe2593.jpg Arquivo smtp-postman.conf https://image.nostr.build/2d06c021841dedd6000c9fc2a641ed519b3be3c6125000b188842cd0a5af3d16.jpg Salve os arquivos e reinicie o serviço do I2Pd. Em Linux isso é feito pelo comando: ``` sudo systemctl restart i2pd ``` Entre no Webconsole do I2Pd pelo navegador (localhost:7070) e na seção I2P Tunnels, verifique se os túneis pop-postman e smtp-postman foram criados, caso contrário verifique se há algum erro nos arquivos e reinicie o serviço. Com os túneis cliente criados, vamos agora configurar o Thunderbird ## 3. Configurando o Thunderbird para acessar a nossa conta Abra o Thunderbird e clique em criar uma nova conta de email. Se você não tiver nenhum conta previamente presente nele você vai ser diretamente recebido pela janela de criação de conta a seguir. https://image.nostr.build/e9509d7bd30623716ef9adcad76c1d465f5bc3d5840e0c35fe4faa85740f41b4.jpg https://image.nostr.build/688b59b8352a17389902ec1e99d7484e310d7d287491b34f562b8cdd9dbe8a99.jpg Coloque as suas credenciais, mas não clique ainda em Continuar. Clique antes em Configure Manually, já que precisamos configurar manualmente os servidores de SMTP e POP3 para, respectivamente, enviar e receber mensagens. Preencha os campos como na imagem a seguir. Detalhe: Não coloque o seu endereço completo com o @mail.i2p, apenas o nome da sua conta. https://image.nostr.build/4610b0315c0a3b741965d3d7c1e4aff6425a167297e323ba8490f4325f40cdcc.jpg Clique em Re-test para verificar a integridade da conexão. Se tudo estiver certo uma mensagem irá aparecer avisando que as configurações do servidores estão corretas. Clique em Done assim que estiver pronto para prosseguir. https://image.nostr.build/8a47bb292f94b0d9d474d4d4a134f8d73afb84ecf1d4c0a7eb6366d46bf3973a.jpg A seguinte mensagem vai aparecer alertando que não estamos usando criptografia no envio das credenciais. Não há problema nenhum aqui, pois a I2P está garantindo toda a proteção e anonimato dos nossos dados, o que dispensa a necessidade de uso de TLS ou qualquer tecnologia similar nas camadas acima. Marque a opção 'I Understand the risks' e clique em 'Continue' https://image.nostr.build/9c1bf585248773297d2cb1d9705c1be3bd815e2be85d4342227f1db2f13a9cc6.jpg E por fim, se tudo ocorreu como devido sua conta será criada com sucesso e você agora será capaz de enviar e receber emails pela I2P usando essa conta. https://image.nostr.build/8ba7f2c160453c9bfa172fa9a30b642a7ee9ae3eeb9b78b4dc24ce25aa2c7ecc.jpg ## 4. Observações e considerações finais Como informado pelo próprio site do hq.postman, o domínio @mail.i2p serve apenas para emails enviados dentro da I2P. Emails enviados pela surface devem usar o domínio @i2pmai.org. É imprescindível que você saiba usar o PGP para assinar e criptografar as suas mensagens, dado que provavelmente as mensagens não são armazenadas de forma criptografada enquanto elas estão armazenadas no servidor. Como o protocolo POP3 delete as mensagens no imediato momento em que você as recebe, não há necessidade de fazer qualquer limpeza na sua conta de forma manual. Por fim, espero que esse tutorial tenha sido útil para vocês. Que seu conhecimento tenha expandido ainda mais com as informações trazidas aqui. Até a próxima.

@ a367f9eb:0633efea

Last week, an investigation by Reuters revealed that Chinese researchers have been using open-source AI tools to build nefarious-sounding models that may have some military application. The [reporting](https://www.reuters.com/technology/artificial-intelligence/chinese-researchers-develop-ai-model-military-use-back-metas-llama-2024-11-01/) purports that adversaries in the Chinese Communist Party and its military wing are taking advantage of the liberal software licensing of American innovations in the AI space, which could someday have capabilities to presumably harm the United States. > In a June paper reviewed by Reuters, six Chinese researchers from three institutions, including two under the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) leading research body, the Academy of Military Science (AMS), detailed how they had used an early version of Meta’s Llama as a base for what it calls “ChatBIT”. > > The researchers used an earlier Llama 13B large language model (LLM) from Meta, incorporating their own parameters to construct a military-focused AI tool to gather and process intelligence, and offer accurate and reliable information for operational decision-making. While I’m doubtful that today’s existing chatbot-like tools will be the ultimate battlefield for a new geopolitical war (queue up the computer-simulated war from the Star Trek episode “A Taste of Armageddon“), this recent exposé requires us to revisit why large language models are released as open-source code in the first place. Added to that, should it matter that an adversary is having a poke around and may ultimately use them for some purpose we may not like, whether that be China, Russia, North Korea, or Iran? The number of open-source AI LLMs continues to grow each day, with projects like Vicuna, LLaMA, BLOOMB, Falcon, and Mistral available for download. In fact, there are over one million open-source LLMs available as of writing this post. With some decent hardware, every global citizen can download these codebases and run them on their computer. With regard to this specific story, we could assume it to be a selective leak by a competitor of Meta which created the LLaMA model, intended to harm its reputation among those with cybersecurity and national security credentials. There are potentially trillions of dollars on the line. Or it could be the revelation of something more sinister happening in the military-sponsored labs of Chinese hackers who have already been caught attacking American infrastructure, data, and yes, your credit history? As consumer advocates who believe in the necessity of liberal democracies to safeguard our liberties against authoritarianism, we should absolutely remain skeptical when it comes to the communist regime in Beijing. We’ve written as much many times. At the same time, however, we should not subrogate our own critical thinking and principles because it suits a convenient narrative. Consumers of all stripes deserve technological freedom, and innovators should be free to provide that to us. And open-source software has provided the very foundations for all of this. Open-source matters When we discuss open-source software and code, what we’re really talking about is the ability for people other than the creators to use it. The various licensing schemes – ranging from GNU General Public License (GPL) to the MIT License and various public domain classifications – determine whether other people can use the code, edit it to their liking, and run it on their machine. Some licenses even allow you to monetize the modifications you’ve made. While many different types of software will be fully licensed and made proprietary, restricting or even penalizing those who attempt to use it on their own, many developers have created software intended to be released to the public. This allows multiple contributors to add to the codebase and to make changes to improve it for public benefit. Open-source software matters because anyone, anywhere can download and run the code on their own. They can also modify it, edit it, and tailor it to their specific need. The code is intended to be shared and built upon not because of some altruistic belief, but rather to make it accessible for everyone and create a broad base. This is how we create standards for technologies that provide the ground floor for further tinkering to deliver value to consumers. Open-source libraries create the building blocks that decrease the hassle and cost of building a new web platform, smartphone, or even a computer language. They distribute common code that can be built upon, assuring interoperability and setting standards for all of our devices and technologies to talk to each other. I am myself a proponent of open-source software. The server I run in my home has dozens of dockerized applications sourced directly from open-source contributors on GitHub and DockerHub. When there are versions or adaptations that I don’t like, I can pick and choose which I prefer. I can even make comments or add edits if I’ve found a better way for them to run. Whether you know it or not, many of you run the Linux operating system as the base for your Macbook or any other computer and use all kinds of web tools that have active repositories forked or modified by open-source contributors online. This code is auditable by everyone and can be scrutinized or reviewed by whoever wants to (even AI bots). This is the same software that runs your airlines, powers the farms that deliver your food, and supports the entire global monetary system. The code of the first decentralized cryptocurrency Bitcoin is also open-source, which has allowed thousands of copycat protocols that have revolutionized how we view money. You know what else is open-source and available for everyone to use, modify, and build upon? PHP, Mozilla Firefox, LibreOffice, MySQL, Python, Git, Docker, and WordPress. All protocols and languages that power the web. Friend or foe alike, anyone can download these pieces of software and run them how they see fit. Open-source code is speech, and it is knowledge. We build upon it to make information and technology accessible. Attempts to curb open-source, therefore, amount to restricting speech and knowledge. Open-source is for your friends, and enemies In the context of Artificial Intelligence, many different developers and companies have chosen to take their large language models and make them available via an open-source license. At this very moment, you can click on over to Hugging Face, download an AI model, and build a chatbot or scripting machine suited to your needs. All for free (as long as you have the power and bandwidth). Thousands of companies in the AI sector are doing this at this very moment, discovering ways of building on top of open-source models to develop new apps, tools, and services to offer to companies and individuals. It’s how many different applications are coming to life and thousands more jobs are being created. We know this can be useful to friends, but what about enemies? As the AI wars heat up between liberal democracies like the US, the UK, and (sluggishly) the European Union, we know that authoritarian adversaries like the CCP and Russia are building their own applications. The fear that China will use open-source US models to create some kind of military application is a clear and present danger for many political and national security researchers, as well as politicians. A bipartisan group of US House lawmakers want to put export controls on AI models, as well as block foreign access to US cloud servers that may be hosting AI software. If this seems familiar, we should also remember that the US government once classified cryptography and encryption as “munitions” that could not be exported to other countries (see The Crypto Wars). Many of the arguments we hear today were invoked by some of the same people as back then. Now, encryption protocols are the gold standard for many different banking and web services, messaging, and all kinds of electronic communication. We expect our friends to use it, and our foes as well. Because code is knowledge and speech, we know how to evaluate it and respond if we need to. Regardless of who uses open-source AI, this is how we should view it today. These are merely tools that people will use for good or ill. It’s up to governments to determine how best to stop illiberal or nefarious uses that harm us, rather than try to outlaw or restrict building of free and open software in the first place. Limiting open-source threatens our own advancement If we set out to restrict and limit our ability to create and share open-source code, no matter who uses it, that would be tantamount to imposing censorship. There must be another way. If there is a “Hundred Year Marathon” between the United States and liberal democracies on one side and autocracies like the Chinese Communist Party on the other, this is not something that will be won or lost based on software licenses. We need as much competition as possible. The Chinese military has been building up its capabilities with trillions of dollars’ worth of investments that span far beyond AI chatbots and skip logic protocols. The theft of intellectual property at factories in Shenzhen, or in US courts by third-party litigation funding coming from China, is very real and will have serious economic consequences. It may even change the balance of power if our economies and countries turn to war footing. But these are separate issues from the ability of free people to create and share open-source code which we can all benefit from. In fact, if we want to continue our way our life and continue to add to global productivity and growth, it’s demanded that we defend open-source. If liberal democracies want to compete with our global adversaries, it will not be done by reducing the freedoms of citizens in our own countries. Last week, an investigation by Reuters revealed that Chinese researchers have been using open-source AI tools to build nefarious-sounding models that may have some military application. The reporting purports that adversaries in the Chinese Communist Party and its military wing are taking advantage of the liberal software licensing of American innovations in the AI space, which could someday have capabilities to presumably harm the United States. > In a June paper reviewed by[ Reuters](https://www.reuters.com/technology/artificial-intelligence/chinese-researchers-develop-ai-model-military-use-back-metas-llama-2024-11-01/), six Chinese researchers from three institutions, including two under the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) leading research body, the Academy of Military Science (AMS), detailed how they had used an early version of Meta’s Llama as a base for what it calls “ChatBIT”. > > The researchers used an earlier Llama 13B large language model (LLM) from Meta, incorporating their own parameters to construct a military-focused AI tool to gather and process intelligence, and offer accurate and reliable information for operational decision-making. While I’m doubtful that today’s existing chatbot-like tools will be the ultimate battlefield for a new geopolitical war (queue up the computer-simulated war from the *Star Trek* episode “[A Taste of Armageddon](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Taste_of_Armageddon)“), this recent exposé requires us to revisit why large language models are released as open-source code in the first place. Added to that, should it matter that an adversary is having a poke around and may ultimately use them for some purpose we may not like, whether that be China, Russia, North Korea, or Iran? The number of open-source AI LLMs continues to grow each day, with projects like Vicuna, LLaMA, BLOOMB, Falcon, and Mistral available for download. In fact, there are over [one million open-source LLMs](https://huggingface.co/models) available as of writing this post. With some decent hardware, every global citizen can download these codebases and run them on their computer. With regard to this specific story, we could assume it to be a selective leak by a competitor of Meta which created the LLaMA model, intended to harm its reputation among those with cybersecurity and national security credentials. There are [potentially](https://bigthink.com/business/the-trillion-dollar-ai-race-to-create-digital-god/) trillions of dollars on the line. Or it could be the revelation of something more sinister happening in the military-sponsored labs of Chinese hackers who have already been caught attacking American[ infrastructure](https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/security/chinese-hackers-cisa-cyber-5-years-us-infrastructure-attack-rcna137706),[ data](https://www.cnn.com/2024/10/05/politics/chinese-hackers-us-telecoms/index.html), and yes, [your credit history](https://thespectator.com/topic/chinese-communist-party-credit-history-equifax/)? **As consumer advocates who believe in the necessity of liberal democracies to safeguard our liberties against authoritarianism, we should absolutely remain skeptical when it comes to the communist regime in Beijing. We’ve written as much[ many times](https://consumerchoicecenter.org/made-in-china-sold-in-china/).** At the same time, however, we should not subrogate our own critical thinking and principles because it suits a convenient narrative. Consumers of all stripes deserve technological freedom, and innovators should be free to provide that to us. And open-source software has provided the very foundations for all of this. ## **Open-source matters** When we discuss open-source software and code, what we’re really talking about is the ability for people other than the creators to use it. The various [licensing schemes](https://opensource.org/licenses) – ranging from GNU General Public License (GPL) to the MIT License and various public domain classifications – determine whether other people can use the code, edit it to their liking, and run it on their machine. Some licenses even allow you to monetize the modifications you’ve made. While many different types of software will be fully licensed and made proprietary, restricting or even penalizing those who attempt to use it on their own, many developers have created software intended to be released to the public. This allows multiple contributors to add to the codebase and to make changes to improve it for public benefit. Open-source software matters because anyone, anywhere can download and run the code on their own. They can also modify it, edit it, and tailor it to their specific need. The code is intended to be shared and built upon not because of some altruistic belief, but rather to make it accessible for everyone and create a broad base. This is how we create standards for technologies that provide the ground floor for further tinkering to deliver value to consumers. Open-source libraries create the building blocks that decrease the hassle and cost of building a new web platform, smartphone, or even a computer language. They distribute common code that can be built upon, assuring interoperability and setting standards for all of our devices and technologies to talk to each other. I am myself a proponent of open-source software. The server I run in my home has dozens of dockerized applications sourced directly from open-source contributors on GitHub and DockerHub. When there are versions or adaptations that I don’t like, I can pick and choose which I prefer. I can even make comments or add edits if I’ve found a better way for them to run. Whether you know it or not, many of you run the Linux operating system as the base for your Macbook or any other computer and use all kinds of web tools that have active repositories forked or modified by open-source contributors online. This code is auditable by everyone and can be scrutinized or reviewed by whoever wants to (even AI bots). This is the same software that runs your airlines, powers the farms that deliver your food, and supports the entire global monetary system. The code of the first decentralized cryptocurrency Bitcoin is also [open-source](https://github.com/bitcoin), which has allowed [thousands](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/business/bitcoin-is-money-for-enemies) of copycat protocols that have revolutionized how we view money. You know what else is open-source and available for everyone to use, modify, and build upon? PHP, Mozilla Firefox, LibreOffice, MySQL, Python, Git, Docker, and WordPress. All protocols and languages that power the web. Friend or foe alike, anyone can download these pieces of software and run them how they see fit. Open-source code is speech, and it is knowledge. We build upon it to make information and technology accessible. Attempts to curb open-source, therefore, amount to restricting speech and knowledge. ## **Open-source is for your friends, and enemies** In the context of Artificial Intelligence, many different developers and companies have chosen to take their large language models and make them available via an open-source license. At this very moment, you can click on over to[ Hugging Face](https://huggingface.co/), download an AI model, and build a chatbot or scripting machine suited to your needs. All for free (as long as you have the power and bandwidth). Thousands of companies in the AI sector are doing this at this very moment, discovering ways of building on top of open-source models to develop new apps, tools, and services to offer to companies and individuals. It’s how many different applications are coming to life and thousands more jobs are being created. We know this can be useful to friends, but what about enemies? As the AI wars heat up between liberal democracies like the US, the UK, and (sluggishly) the European Union, we know that authoritarian adversaries like the CCP and Russia are building their own applications. The fear that China will use open-source US models to create some kind of military application is a clear and present danger for many political and national security researchers, as well as politicians. A bipartisan group of US House lawmakers want to put [export controls](https://www.reuters.com/technology/us-lawmakers-unveil-bill-make-it-easier-restrict-exports-ai-models-2024-05-10/) on AI models, as well as block foreign access to US cloud servers that may be hosting AI software. If this seems familiar, we should also remember that the US government once classified cryptography and encryption as “munitions” that could not be exported to other countries (see[ The Crypto Wars](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Export_of_cryptography_from_the_United_States)). Many of the arguments we hear today were invoked by some of the same people as back then. Now, encryption protocols are the gold standard for many different banking and web services, messaging, and all kinds of electronic communication. We expect our friends to use it, and our foes as well. Because code is knowledge and speech, we know how to evaluate it and respond if we need to. Regardless of who uses open-source AI, this is how we should view it today. These are merely tools that people will use for good or ill. It’s up to governments to determine how best to stop illiberal or nefarious uses that harm us, rather than try to outlaw or restrict building of free and open software in the first place. ## **Limiting open-source threatens our own advancement** If we set out to restrict and limit our ability to create and share open-source code, no matter who uses it, that would be tantamount to imposing censorship. There must be another way. If there is a “[Hundred Year Marathon](https://www.amazon.com/Hundred-Year-Marathon-Strategy-Replace-Superpower/dp/1250081343)” between the United States and liberal democracies on one side and autocracies like the Chinese Communist Party on the other, this is not something that will be won or lost based on software licenses. We need as much competition as possible. The Chinese military has been building up its capabilities with [trillions of dollars’](https://www.economist.com/china/2024/11/04/in-some-areas-of-military-strength-china-has-surpassed-america) worth of investments that span far beyond AI chatbots and skip logic protocols. The [theft](https://www.technologyreview.com/2023/06/20/1075088/chinese-amazon-seller-counterfeit-lawsuit/) of intellectual property at factories in Shenzhen, or in US courts by [third-party litigation funding](https://nationalinterest.org/blog/techland/litigation-finance-exposes-our-judicial-system-foreign-exploitation-210207) coming from China, is very real and will have serious economic consequences. It may even change the balance of power if our economies and countries turn to war footing. But these are separate issues from the ability of free people to create and share open-source code which we can all benefit from. In fact, if we want to continue our way our life and continue to add to global productivity and growth, it’s demanded that we defend open-source. If liberal democracies want to compete with our global adversaries, it will not be done by reducing the freedoms of citizens in our own countries. *Originally published on the website of the [Consumer Choice Center](https://consumerchoicecenter.org/open-source-is-for-everyone-even-your-adversaries/).*

@ c8cf63be:86691cfe

- [Wie es zu dem Buch kam](#wie-es-zu-dem-buch-kam) - [Vor dem Vorwort eine Erklärung](#vor-dem-vorwort-eine-erklärung) - [Prolog](#prolog) - [Die Zukunft im Heute oder Warum sind die Kinder wichtig](#die-zukunft-im-heute-oder-warum-sind-die-kinder-wichtig) - [Politik an den Bedürfnissen der Kinder ausgerichtet](#politik-an-den-bedürfnissen-der-kinder-ausgerichtet) - [Ableiten der Prinzipien einer an Kindern ausgerichteten Politik](#ableiten-der-prinzipien-einer-an-kindern-ausgerichteten-politik) - [Grundbestimmungen](#grundbestimmungen) - [Pazifismus](#pazifismus) - [Säkularismus](#säkularismus) - [Gegenwartsbezogenheit](#gegenwartsbezogenheit) - [Strukturelle Unabgeschlossenheit](#strukturelle-unabgeschlossenheit) - [Erhalt der natürlichen Lebensgrundlagen](#erhalt-der-natürlichen-lebensgrundlagen) - [Solidarität](#solidarität) - [Gerechtigkeit](#gerechtigkeit) - [Lebenszeit als Schatz](#lebenszeit-als-schatz) - [Kooperation statt Wettbewerb](#kooperation-statt-wettbewerb) - [Bekenntnis zu den universellen Menschenrechten](#bekenntnis-zu-den-universellen-menschenrechten) - [Formale Überlegungen](#formale-überlegungen) - [Die Partei als Labor](#die-partei-als-labor) - [Wer wird wie und warum Politiker in Deutschland](#wer-wird-wie-und-warum-politiker-in-deutschland)  ## Wie es zu dem Buch kam Oder Warum nicht eine Partei? Weil dieses Buch auch das Buch eines persönlichen Scheiterns ist in dem das Scheitern des Parteiprojektes abgearbeitet und korrigiert werden soll. 2016 haben wir begonnen mit der Konzeption einer Partei in Deutschland, motiviert durch die Erfahrung mit den Piraten schien der Weg über die Institutionen gehbar, die Zeit reif für neue Parteien und klare Werte. Als universellen Wert haben wir die Verantwortung gegenüber unseren Kindern herausgearbeitet. Sehr erstaunlich war dies der einzige Wert den wir brauchten, alles weitere ließ sich aus diesem einfachen und klaren Wert ableiten. So begannen wir mit einer Konzeption die wir in einem Wiki abgelegt haben. Ein Wiki Export dieser Zeit ist als Archiv abgelegt[1]. Satzung, Grundsätze, Geschäftsordnungen, Programm, Namen: “Kreis für Umwelt, Erwachsene, Kinder und ernsthafte Nachhaltigkeit” KUEKeN Aus der Erfahrung die wir mit den Piraten sammeln durften war klar, wenn die Partei erfolgreich sein sollte würde sie in der selben Art wie die Piraten unterlaufen und ausgehöhlt werden. Anders als das BSW [2] haben wir uns für eine Formale Absicherung der Partei entschieden. So entstanden die Grundbestimmungen. In unsere Vorstellung kamen die ganzen “ungeborenes Leben Schützen” Christen zu uns und wollten mit machen, und klar ist, diese Christen verwechseln etwas. Zwei Kinder später war schon Ende 2019. Aus der KUEKEN-Partei wurde derKUEKeN der der Verletzlichkeit ein Maskulin voranstellt, was auch formal nicht falsch ist, ist es doch der Kreis, ein griffiges Motto entwickelt “radikal trivial” das sowohl die Einfachheit als auch die Kompromisslosigkeit kombiniert. Einem Dreiklang aus **Kinder Verantwortung Zukunft** mit der Verantwortung als das Durchreichende Prinzip das unsere Kinder in die Zukunft führt. Exemplarisch haben wir Kampagnen entworfen[3] um die politischen Positionen zu verdeutlichen. Im Mai ’20 wäre das Myfest[4] gewesen und wir hätten einen neuen Anlauf für eine Parteigründung unternommen.(Prospekte und Luftballons waren gedruckt) Stattdessen kam Corona und die Idee, sich mit 70 Menschen in einem geschlossenen Raum über Stunden zu treffen, die Gründungsveranstaltung, war nicht angesagt sondern abgesagt. Ein einfaches Sprichwort sagt, “Wenn dir etwas dreimal passiert, bist du selber schuld.” Nach dem zweiten Scheitern galt es also etwas zu verändern. Damit entstand die Idee für dieses Buch. In diesem Buch kann ich, ein erster Wechsel der Perspektive[5], dem Gedanken, der den Kern der Partei ausmacht, nachgehen und entfalten. Die Universalität darstellen und, hier kommt der zweite Wechsel der Perspektive in einem Hoffmanneschen Sinne, mich an dich, wehrten Leser wenden. Ich möchte dich warnen fortzufahren. Wie Rokos Baselisk[6] hat das Folgende Konsequenzen. Denn Wissen kann nicht zurück genommen werden. In dieser Situation war ich, aber Wissen kann weiter gegeben werden und es verdoppelt sich. Und so kann es dann dir gehen: Wie es mir geht. Wir können wissen was wir tun sollten und sogar warum. Damit zu leben ist gar nicht so einfach, daher die eindringliche Warnung, noch, geneigter Leser, kannst du umkehren, das Buch zu schlagen und vergessen. Für mich ist es zu spät, meine Perspektive ist geschärft, so wie das Lernen der Schrift eine Veränderung im Gehirn bewirkt, die es uns unmöglich macht etwas nicht als einen Buchstaben oder als ein Wort zu erkennen so kann sich deine Anschauung der Wirklichkeit ändern. Die Differenz zwischen dem Erkannten und dem Wirklichen ist groß und wird größer. Diese Differenz wird eine Leerstelle werden die schmerzt. Aber vielleicht kennst du diesen Scherz auch schon.  ## Vor dem Vorwort eine Erklärung > *„Die Verdinglichung, kraft deren die einzig durch die Passivität der > Massen ermöglichte Machtstruktur diesen selbst als eiserne > Wirklichkeit entgegentritt, ist so dicht geworden, daß jede > Spontanität, ja die bloße Vorstellung vom wahren Sachverhalt notwendig > zur verstiegenen Utopie, zum abwegigen Sektierertum geworden ist. Der > Schein hat sich so konzentriert, daß ihn zu durchschauen objektiv den > Charakter der Halluzination gewinnt.“*[7] Wir unternehmen hier den Versuch eines *abwegigen Sektierertum*, wir skizzieren eine politische Kraft, in Form einer Partei, **mit dem Kindeswohle im Mittelpunkt**. Wir versuchen uns den *wahren Sachverhalt* klar zu machen: Wir sind auf einem sinkenden Schiff, seit je her war hier die Formel “Kinder und Frauen zuerst”. Unser Raumschiff Erde [8] ist in einem schlechten Zustand. [9] Die Skizze umfasst einen theoretischen Teil, der sich mit der Begründung für eine solche, “das Kindeswohl in den Mittelpunkt der politischen Aufmerksamkeit stellenden”, Politische Position und den sich daraus ergebenden Konsequenzen befasst. Wir entwickeln die Metaphysik einer *verstiegenen Utopie* [10]. Beispielhaft entwickeln wir ein Programm, das den Charakter einer “das Kindeswohl in den Mittelpunkt der Aufmerksamkeit stellenden Politik” anhand konkreter legeslativer Änderungen deutlich macht. Am Ende des Buches ist ein konkreter Bastelabschnitt, in dem die notwendigen formalen Strukturen beschrieben sind, um eine solche Partei in Deutschland zu gründen. Weil wir uns *abwegig* bewegen, werden sich viele, einfache Vorstellungen im ersten Moment fremd anfühlen, *abwegig* und *verstiegen*; hier hilft nur das Üben. Im Kapitel “Digging Deeper” gehen wir diesen Vorstellungen nach, in einem mehr praktischen Teil, den FAQ und den Erörterungen zur Begründung der “Kaderschule”. Begründung sind wichtig und dürfen nicht vernachlässigt werden, nur in der Erörterung und der schriftlichen Begründung öffnet sich das Kritische Denken.[11] Was sind *“wahre Sachverhalte”*? Die Antwort darauf kann nicht sein, es gibt keine. Poppers Beispiel ist einfach: Die Negation eines Falschen Satzes ist ein wahrer Satz.[12] Bescheiden können wir sagen, es gibt wahre Sätze, aber wir können die wahren nicht von den falschen unterscheiden [13]. Die Frage nach den wahren Sätzen ist eine Frage nach der Wirklichkeit. Eine schöne Frage: **Was ist wirklich?** Gibt es Staaten und Betriebe, wie Deutschland und Volkswagen? Oder gibt es nicht vielmehr, oder sagen wir weniger, nur Menschen und Dinge, wie Häuser, Produktionsanlagen und dergleichen. Wenn wir uns die einfache Wirklichkeit vorstellen, d.h. die Erde, wie sie um die Sonne kreist, die Menschen ,die Wesen und der Stoff aus dem wir alle gemacht sind, dann existieren diese Dinge wie Staaten, Betriebe u.ä. nicht. Sie existieren nur dadurch, das Menschen sie praktizieren. Wir Menschen produzieren diese *“eiserne Wirklichkeit”* die uns da *“entgegentritt”*. Genau deswegen ist sie eine zweite Wirklichkeit, keine erste. Eine von Menschen produzierte und wie alle Produkte menschlichen Handelns ist sie maßgeblich dadurch bestimmt was wir von der ersten Wirklichkeit, der wirklichen Wirklichkeit, glauben zu wissen. So wissen wir, das wir diese Dinge ändern können. Das die *Halluzination* die Wirklichkeit konkreter, schöner und wahrer beschreiben und formen kann -in ihrem Bilde-. Das Motto dieses *abwegigen Sektieretums* wird diese einfache Wirklichkeit sein: *radikal trivial* ist ihr Slogan.[14] Und Nichts weniger als “das Retten der Welt” und Ewiger Frieden” das erklärte Ziel.  ## Prolog Die Partei ist ein Vehikel, den öffentlichen Diskurs auf das relevante Thema der Gesellschaft zu lenken. Das relevante Thema, das uns angeht, ist die Zukunft; denn dies ist der Raum, der durch die Gegenwart gestaltbar ist. Hier liegt der Unterschied zwischen Verwaltung und Politik: Verwaltet wird die Gegenwart, das Primat der Politik ist die Gestaltung der Zukunft. Das klarste Zeichen der Zukunft sind die Kinder. Es sind unsere Kinder und sie sind immer auch Kinder der Gesellschaft. In ihnen zeichnet sich Verantwortung am deutlichsten ab. Diese Verantwortlichkeit liegt bei uns, den mündigen Bürgern etwa als Eltern, Großeltern, Erziehern und auch Politikern. Der Ausgangspunkt soll einfach sein, er soll bei der Frage liegen: Wie kann unsere Gesellschaft aufgebaut und strukturiert sein, sodass sie unseren Kindern eine gute Gesellschaft und Gemeinschaft bietet? Als gute Gesellschaft möge die Fähigkeit gelten, unsere Kinder zu wahreren, klügeren und besseren Menschen zu machen, als wir es sind. Es ist ein Freude anzuschauen. Ausgangspunkt jeden politischen Handelns wird so die Frage nach der Zweckhaftigkeit für unsere Kinder. Das ist ein radikaler Wandel der Perspektive. Wir folgen im ersten Schritt Hans Jonas, Fürsorge für den Nachwuchs: “Hier ist der Archetyp alles verantwortlichen Handelns \[…\]”.[15] Jeder von uns war ein Säugling, dessen Bedürftigkeit angenommen und entsprochen, dessen Anspruch auf Leben angenommen und positiv beantwortet wurde. Selbst in den tragischen Schicksalen von Ausgrenzung und Verstoßung sind wir Zeichen dieser Verantwortung, die, wenn nicht von den konkreten Menschen ausgeübt, durch Institutionen angenommen wird. Hier ist eine einfache und klare Natur des Menschen erkennbar : „Verantwortung im ursprünglichsten und massivsten Sinn folgt aus der Urheberschaft des Seins, an der über die aktuellen Erzeuger hinaus alle beteiligt sind, die der Fortpflanzung durch Nichtwiderruf ihres Fiat im eigen Fall beipflichten, also alle, die sich selber das Leben erlauben“.[16] Das sind wir: die erwachsenen und mündigen Bürger. Mit dieser Verantwortung gegenüber unseren Kindern nehmen wir auch die Verantwortung für uns selbst wahr. Denn wir selbst sind das notwendige Hilfsmittel, durch das sich diese Verantwortung realisiert. Wir sind uns selbst gegenüber verantwortlich, weil wir unseren Kindern gegenüber verantwortlich sind und niemand sonst diese Verantwortung übernehmen könnte. Eine Politik, die sich an den Kindern ausrichtet, ist somit immer auch eine Politik, die sich an den Menschen ausrichtet. So wenden wir uns wieder unserer eigentlichen Verantwortung den Menschen und zuvorderst den Kindern der Gesellschaft zu, unseren Kindern. Mit einer konsequenten Verfolgung der Kindesinteressen werden also ebenso die Interessen aller Mitglieder einer Gesellschaft vertreten und gleichzeitig eine zukunftsfähige und nachhaltige Politik betrieben. In einer aufgeklärten Demokratie kommt der kritischen Öffentlichkeit eine spezifische Funktion zu: die der Selbstkontrolle. Diese Funktion kann nur mit und durch die Mündigen und ihren kritischen Einsatz des Verstandes erreicht werden. Auch dieser kritischen Öffentlichkeit muss unsere Sorge gelten. Und dies in zweierlei Hinsicht: Ist es nach Kant zum Einen die ‘Feigheit und Faulheit’ in uns, die unsere Mündigkeit zeitlebens bedroht, und damit auch die Öffentlichkeit, deren unentbehrlicher Teil jeder von uns ist, zum anderen in der Erziehung der noch nicht mündigen, der Kinder. Sie allein bilden nach uns diese kritische Öffentlichkeit. So weist das durch die Verantwortung gestiftete Sorge-System eine differenzierte Struktur auf. Es sind die Mündigen, deren Aufgabe und Pflicht es ist, den Unmündigen zur Mündigkeit zu verhelfen. Unserer aufgeklärte Gesellschaft, ihr ganzes demokratisches System hängt von der Fähigkeit ab, diese Mündigkeit zu bewahren. Im Strom der vergehenden Zeit bedeutet bewahren, dass die nächste Generation von Menschen mindestens so mündig ist wie wir. Die nächste Generation von Menschen ist die unserer Kinder. Das sind keine Fremden: Wir sind ihre Eltern und Großeltern, ihrer Verwandten und die Freunde dieser Menschen. Immer sind wir den Kindern gegenüber in der Pflicht, die sich aus dieser Verantwortung ableitet. Es besteht ein generativer Vertrag, der sich zwischen Eltern und Kindern, aber im Besonderen auch zwischen Kindern und Großeltern entfaltet. Sie verbinden die Kinder mit dem Vergangenen und angereichertem Kulturellen, dem symbolischen Milieu. Erst in diesem generativen Gefüge ist es den Kindern möglich, eine konkrete Beziehung mit dem gesellschaftlichen, dem symbolischen Milieu, aufzunehmen und selbst in der Abfolge der Generationen diese Rollen ausüben zu können. Durch die Verbindung der Kinder mit den Alten schließt sich der Kreis der Generationen. Durch sie wird der Kreislauf des Werdens und Vergehens, der das Leben ist, erfahrbar. Es sind die langen Kreisläufe, die sich durch dieses intergeneratives Verhältnis erleben und erfahren lassen und nur die langen weiten Kreisläufe sind als Narration geeignet, den Sinn zu stiften. „Die noch lebende Elterngeneration vermittelt ihm \[dem Kind\] auf diese Weise die durch Generationen angehäufte Erfahrung, die es mit seinen verstorbenen Vorfahren in Verbindung setzt“.[17] Eine auf den verantwortlichen Zweck bezogene Wirtschaft ist bedürfnisorientiert. Die Bedürfnisse ergeben sich aus unserer Art und Weise, wie wir auf diese Welt bezogen sind. Dies sind die objektiven Zwecke die Wirtschaft begründen können. Das Produzieren von Bedürfnissen, die Basis unsere absatzorientierten Wirtschaft hat keinen Zweck innerhalb dieser Verantwortung. In einer Welt, in der die materiellen Grundbedürfnisse übererfüllt werden, bauen wir Maschinen nicht, um mehr Güter herstellen zu können. Wir bauen Maschinen, um mehr Zeit zu haben. Zeit, die wir unseren Kindern widmen können, wie es unsere Verantwortung ist. Da diese Verantwortung ein originärer Teil unseres Daseins ist, ist hier auch Lust und in der Lust auch Befriedigung, echte Befriedigung, wie sie der Konsum nicht zu leisten vermag. „Mit der Tochter oder dem Enkel spielen bedeutet Lachen und sich mit ihnen *<die Zeit zu vertreiben>* - ihnen ein wenig von der eigene Zeit zu widmen, und zwar nicht nur für ihr Gehirn, sondern auch für die Entwicklung ihre minderjährigen Aufmerksamkeit …“[18] Die Norm wird heute nicht mehr von dem Menschen definiert. Sie ist ein vom Marketing gestiftetes Produkt. Entsprechend enthält sie keine andere Zweckhaftigkeit als die des Konsums. Das Marketing richtet sich speziell an die Kinder und Jugendlichen, um ihre Aufmerksamkeit zu binden. Es zerstört den Generationenvertrag, indem es die Jugendlichen zu Vorbildern für uns Erwachsene macht. Krieg widerspricht dem Lebenszweck und leugnet unsere Verantwortung gegenüber dem Leben. Wir müssen aufhören mit Krieg und demnach mit der Produktion von Kriegsgerät. Auch hier wird so viel Lebenszeit investiert, die unwiederbringlich verloren geht. Die Zeit, die diese Erwachsenen nicht mit den Kindern verbringen, ist verloren, für die Kinder und auch für die Erwachsenen. Sie ist verloren für uns alle. Es ist die verlorene Zukunft, die wir alle erleben, der Krieg wütet überall auf der Welt. Das Leid und die Verzweiflung wachsen. Dies alles sind Kapriolen des Rationalen - Die Dialektik der Aufklärung. Diese Rationalität ist auf sich selbst bezogen und nicht mehr auf das Leben, so wird diese übersteigerte Rationalität irrational. “Nicht indem sie ihm die ganze Befriedigung gewährt, haben die losgelassenen Produktionskolosse das Individuum überwunden, sondern indem sie es als Subjekt auslöschten. Eben darin besteht ihre vollendete Rationalität, die mit ihrer Verrücktheit zusammenfällt.”[19] Sie sind das Ergebnis einer Rationalität, die sich abgelöst hat vom Zweck und damit auch von der Welt und den Menschen. An diesen Stellen können uns die Kinder helfen, die Welt und die Menschen wieder in den Blick zu nehmen, die Bedürftigkeit zu objektivieren und zu begründen. Die Kinder in den Fokus zu rücken, bewahrt uns vor dem Überschlag des Denkens, sogar vor dem popeligen *<eigenen Vorteil>*. Hans Johnas “Sieh hin und du weißt”[20] können wir als Vorwegnahme des Spiegeleuronennprinzips verstehen. Wir sind bestens ausgestattet, die Bedürftigkeit in anderen zu erkennen, zu reflektieren und sie zu unseren eigenen zu machen. In der Verantwortung für unsere Kinder finden wir eine ähnliche Subjekt-Entlastung wie im Ritus oder im Spiel. Denn sie macht uns zum Teil eines größeren Systems, eines „Sorge-Systems“. Es entsteht ein generativer Vertrag, der die Geschichte stiftet, in der wir alle eine Heimat finden: Denn was bleibt, sind die bunten Geschichten. Die eigene individuelle Geschichte ist auf Wohl und Wehe mit der Kollektiven verknüpft, die zu Ende ginge ohne unsere Kinder. Traurig und leer wird die Welt der letzten Menschen sein. ## Die Zukunft im Heute oder Warum sind die Kinder wichtig Beginnen wir mit den letzten Menschen, wie wir im letzten Abschnitt mit ihnen geschlossen haben. *“Traurig und leer wird die Welt der letzten Menschen sein,”* denn sie haben keine Zukunft. Ein großer Teil des Möglichkeitsraumes im Denken ist geschlossen und die Welt ist auf der einen Seite klein, auf der anderen Seite aber weit, leer und aufgegeben, stumm - in dem Sinne das sie nicht mehr antwortet auf den Menschen, ihm nichts mehr zu sagen hat. Wir finden diese Vorstellung in “Im Land der leeren Häuser”[21] von P.D. James und anschaulich in “Children of Men”[22] dargestellt. Obwohl in der Gegenwart verhaftet, scheint uns die Zukunft wichtig zu sein. Samuel Scheffler untersucht die Beziehung, die wir Gegenwärtigen mit dieser unseren Zukunft haben in “Der Tod und das Leben danach”[23]. Er entwickelt ein einfaches Gedankenexperiment: “Würde es uns etwas ausmachen, wenn wir wüssten, das 30 Tagen nach unserem,persönlichen Tot die Welt der Menschen enden würde?”[24] Naiv lässt sich antworten, “natürlich nicht, denn eine Prämisse ist ja, ich merke es nicht, es geschieht nach meinem Tod.” Ist dem so? Richtig ist, es geschieht nach meinem Tod, und richtig ist auch, nach meinem Tod merke ich nichts;[25] aber das Wissen ändert etwas. [26] Es wäre nur egal, wüsste ich nicht davon. Eine triviale Aussage. Wenn das Wissen um den Untergang einen, Unterschied macht, dann weil Wissen eine Art des Merkens ist. Wir würden bis an unser Lebensende merken, dass die Welt untergeht. Die Naive Antwort ist also nur ein Schlussfehler, sie hat eine falsche Prämisse. Nun ist Merken ein ganz neutraler Begriff, ich kann merken, wie es weh tut, oder wie schön es ist. Es bedarf also weiterer Überlegungen über das, wie es sich anfühlt, was wir merken, wenn wir Wissen, dass unsere Welt untergehen wird. Würde es uns glücklich machen oder eher traurig? Wäre es eine relevante Information in dem Sinne das sie beständig bleibt? Das wohl, denn sie hätte einen direkten Bezug zu jeder meiner folgenden Tätigkeiten. Markiert es den Endpunkt meiner Wirkunsmächtigkeit. Nichts was ich tun kann, wird über diese 30 Jahre hinaus bestehen, in einem sehr interessanten Sinne. Wenn wir sagen, “nicht über die 30 Jahre hinaus bestehen”, dann ist das formal nicht richtig, natürlich würde eine Büste oder ein Buch u.v.a. über diese 30 Jahre hinaus bestehen, aber, erstaunlicherweise, ist das nicht was wir meinen, was wir meinen ist: Es braucht einen Betrachter, ein Buch, einen Leser u.s.w.u.s.f., erst dieser Andere schafft einen Kontext, der, gefühlt, meine Bedeutung in die Dinge bringt auf das sie -meine Bedeutung- erhalten bleibt. Diese zutiefst konservative Natur unsere Gefühle wird uns noch öfter begegnen. Interessant ist auch die Abhängigkeit in der wir Heutigen zu diesen uns Nachfolgenden stehen, dieser Andere schafft für uns den Kontext, in dem wir uns in der Zukunft, einer Vorgestellten, zu Hause fühlen können. Hier sind wir Ahnen und wir hoffen auch in Zukunft zu der Gemeinschaft zu gehören, eine offene Tür zu finden, eine Heimat und Vertrautheit. “Wenn uns das überrascht, liegt das weniger daran das wir blind für unseren eigenen Altruismus wären, sondern vielmehr daran, dass wir unsere Unabhängigkeit und Selbstgenügsamkeit überschätzt haben”[27] … “Aus dieser Perspektive tritt weniger ihrer Abhängigkeit von uns als unsere Abhängigkeit von ihnen in den Vordergrund.”[28] Hier läßt sich einwenden, das eine Büste oder ein Buch ein recht spezifischer Gegenstand ist, der, in sich, den Betrachter voraussetzt. “Betrachten wir, um ein Repräsentatives Beispiel zu wählen, das Projekt nach einer Heilmethode gegen Krebs. Dieses Projekt ist aus mindestens zwei Gründen anfällig. Zum einen ist es ein Projekt, für das klar ist, dass der letztendliche Erfolg noch weit in der Zukunft liegen könnte. … Zweitens liegt der Wert dieses Projekts zuallererst in der Aussicht, einmal in der Lage zu sein, die Krankheit zu heilen und den Tot und das Leid zu verhindern, die sie verursacht.”[29] Was ist mit dem Straßenbau? Es ist eine Straße in das Nirgendwo, hören wir auf die Straße zu befahren verliert sie ihre Richtung, ihren Anfang und ihr Ende, sie führt von Nirgends nach Nirgends. Alle diese Infrastrukturprojekte sie gleichen dieser Straße in das Nirgendwo. So viele der Tätigkeiten und Projekte hängt an der Zukunft. Uns bliebe nur zu “warten bis die Zeit vergeht”.[30] Hier zeigt sich der universale Zugang, den unsere Kinder für uns bereiten, sie gewähren uns den Zugang zu unserer Zukunft, die, erst durch sie, zu der Unsrigen wird. Nur durch diese gestiftete Verbindung wird das bloße Vergehen von Zeit zu einer Geschichte, zu unsere Geschichte. Nicht nur für die Eltern, für uns alle, die wir jetzt und hier leben. Deswegen sind diese Kinder nicht nur die Kinder ihrer Eltern, sie sind auch die Kinder der Gesellschaft. Als narrative Wesen sind wir Menschen an den Zauber der Geschichte und des Erzählens gebunden: > *„Nur im Rahmen einer Narration kann das Ende als Vollendung > erscheinen. Ohne jeden narrativen Schein ist das Ende immer ein > absoluter Verlust, ein absoluter Mangel.“*[31]  # Politik an den Bedürfnissen der Kinder ausgerichtet oder Warum eine Partei? Das relevante Thema, das uns angeht, ist also die Zukunft. Das klarste Zeichen der Zukunft sind die Kinder. Es sind unsere Kinder, und sie sind immer auch Kinder der Gesellschaft. Wäre es nicht angebracht, bei 20% armen oder armutgefährdeten Kindern, Kinderhilfsvereine zu gründen und aktiv den Kindern zu helfen, vor Ort und bei den Kindern? Das tun wir bereits und schon lange und wir können all diesen Menschen dankbar sein für ihre Arbeit. Die traurige Feststellung ist, dass es keinen Einfluss hat. Das die Armut weiter wächst die Klima Katasrophe sich ausweitet, Kriege die Welt überziehen. Mit Hilfsvereinen Kindern helfen hilft Kindern. Wir brauchen mehr. Das Primat der Politik ist die Gestaltung der Zukunft. Das klarste Zeichen der Zukunft sind die Kinder. Die Kampage “Samstag gehört Vati mir” [32] der IG Metall war der erfolgreichste Arbeitskampf, der geführt wurde. Wenn die Bedürfnisse der Kinder in den Fokus der Aufmerksamkeit gestellt werden, lässt sich erfolgreich Politik für alle Menschen machen. Wiederholen wir aus dem Prolog: Der Ausgangspunkt soll einfach sein, er soll bei der Frage liegen: **Wie kann unsere Gesellschaft aufgebaut und strukturiert sein, sodass sie unseren Kindern eine gute Gesellschaft und Gemeinschaft bietet?** Ausgangspunkt jeden politischen Handelns wird so die Frage nach der Zweckhaftigkeit für unsere Kinder. Das ist ein **radikaler Wandel** der Perspektive. Hier steckt der radikale Wandel, den wir brauchen, er vollzieht sich nicht in der ersten Wirklichkeit, sondern in der Zweiten. Denn der Wandel ist ein Wandel der Perspektive, diese Perspektive nimmt die Sorge in den Fokus und setzt uns als werantwortliche Wesen, die wir sind, voraus. Deutschland ist eine Parteiendemokratie, der öffentliche Diskurs wird massgeblich durch die Parteienlandschaft geprägt. Sehr gut erkennbar ist das bei den Piraten gewesen, die für eine Zeit, ohne parlamentarische Mehrheiten, gar Sitze überhaupt, einen starken Einfluss auf den allgemeinen politischen Diskurs hatten, indem sie die anderen Parteien vor sich her trieben. Diese haben sich in der Zeit die Augen gerieben, und überlegt was sie tun können, begannen zu adaptieren, aber auch zu intrigieren. Erkennbar war schon hier: Die etablierten Parteien sind Fähnchen im Wind und wir können der Wind sein der Weht. “The Wind of Change” [33]. Das selbe Phänomen das wir nun, 2023, mit der AFD beobachten dürfen. Der FPD Chef: Das der “Sozialstaat mit seinen im europäischen Vergleich sehr hohen Leistungen wie ein Magnet wirkt.” [34] oder der amtierende Bundeskanzler: “Wir müssen schneller abschieben” [35] Wir müssen von den Piraten viel lernen, und versuchen deren Fehler zu vermeiden. Viele Fehler der Piraten waren formaler Natur, so erstaunlich das klingt. Die Form wird durch die Strukturen bestimmt, und diese Strukturen waren nicht fest, so hat sich die Form geändert. [36] es ist das selbe Schicksal das die Grünen ereilte, die den ersten deutschen Angriffskrieg geführt haben. Alternative Positionen werden systematisch aus dem politischen Geschehen entfernt wie der Name ‘Alternative Liste’ aus den Namen der Grünen verschwunden ist, oder der Frieden aus dem Programm der Grünen.  ## Ableiten der Prinzipien einer an Kindern ausgerichteten Politik Oder: Die Grundbestimmungen als der feste Anker in der realen Politik. Das Bestimmen des Grundes ist die die Basis der Erklärung und damit die Basis der kritischen Auseinandersetzung. Erst ein bestimmter Grund liefert die Basis auf der sich eine Argumentation und zwangsläufiges Handeln aufspannen lassen. Diese Gründe sind nicht geboten, denn Gebote werden gegeben, aber wir müssen Bestimmen, denn es gibt keine Instanz neben uns, hier sind wir allein und in der Verantwortung und damit müssen wir die Gründe bestimmen nach denen wir Handeln. Um eine Unterwanderung und Umdeutung vorzubeugen, werden die zentralen Kerne aus Prinzipien abgeleitet die sich in der Satzung als Grundbestimmungen wiederfinden bzw. aufgenommen werden, diese können nach Satzung [37] nur schwerlich geändert werden, wie das Grundgesetz für alle Parteien nur, deutlich spezifischer. Das Ziel ist es, das Grundgesetz diesen Grundbestimmungen anzunähern. Siehe: “*Die Partei ist ein Labor*”. Diese Grundbestimmungen sind die Meßlatte, an denen sich die Politik zu orientieren hat, sie sind der Wertekanon der Partei, sie sind im Schiedsgericht einklagbar. Kein Vorsitzender kann mit einer kleinen Mehrheit einen Parteikurs gestalten, der den Grundbestimmungen zuwider läuft, nicht ohne aus dem Amt geklagt zu werden. Es wird nicht die Ankündigung geben, Kinderrechte in das Grundgesetz zu schreiben [38], um dann, eine Legislatur Periode später, 100 Milliarden für den Krieg bereit zu stellen [39], Grundgesetztlich verankert, anstelle der Kinderrechte. Hier sehen wir wie wichtig diese Formalitäten sind. Wie genau es eine Satzung zu konstruieren gilt, dass sie nicht hackbar ist, ist nur ganz bedingt Gegenstand unserer Überlegungen. Ein Beispiel ist im Bastelabschnitt niedergelegt. [40] Bei den Grundbestimmungen dürfen wir nicht sparen, sie müssen **radikal trivial**, also eingängig, herausfordernd und umfassend sein, sie bilden den Kern des *abwegigen Sektierertums* dem wir uns verschrieben haben. Der zentrale Kern, der alle Grundbestimmungen ausmacht, ist die **Sorge für unsere Kinder**, es ist die Frage aus dem Prolog: **Wie kann unsere Gesellschaft aufgebaut und strukturiert sein, sodass sie unseren Kindern eine gute Gesellschaft und Gemeinschaft bietet?** Das ist der Grund für unser Handeln. Es ist eine universelle Frage, sie ist uns Menschen gegeben, unabhängig von Kultur und Glaube, unabhängig vom Ort, ja sogar der Zeit, denn wir haben gesehen wie sehr **wir Alle**, also **jeder von uns**, abhängig von der Zukunft ist. Aber nicht nur diese Zukunftsabhänigkeit ist eine universelle, wichtiger ist diese einfache Wahrheit: Das **jeder von uns** ein Kind war. Wir Erwachsene waren Kinder, die in dieser Gesellschaft und Gemeinschaft aufgewachsen sind. Universell ist der Erfahrungszugang eines jeden von uns. Nicht *Was* aber *Das* wir eine Erfahrung vom Kindsein haben, ist uns Allen gemeinsam. Diese individuelle Erfahrung ist zugleich eine Kollektive und Universelle. Wir Menschen werden geboren und (be/um)sorgt, unserer Hilflosigkeit wird entsprochen. Wir alle tragen das Mal, an dem wir uns erkennen können. [41] Dieses Mal markiert die von Camus gesuchte “*Natur des Menschen*”. Es ist die Hilflosigkeit, das Angewiesen sein, um Leben zu können. > *„Die Analyse der Revolte führt mindestens zum Verdacht, dass es, wie > die Griechen dachten, im Gegensatz zu den Postulaten des heutigen > Denkens eine menschliche Natur gibt.“* [42] Und gleichzeitig ist diese Natur das Annehmen, die andere Seite unserer Hilflosigkeit, die Entsprechung dieser. Wenn wir leben, dann nur weil wir angenommen wurden. Weil es jemanden gab, einen Menschen, der für uns Verantwortung getragen hat. Diese Grundbestimmungen sollen Antworten sein auf genau diese Frage der Verantwortung. Zusammen ergeben sie den Entwurf einer *verstiegenen Utopie* einer Gesellschaft, die das Wohle der lebenden Kinder und damit der lebenden Menschen im Auge hat. Die Verantwortung für **unsere** Kinder unterscheidet diesen Entwurf von vermeintlich ähnlichen Entwürfen wie ‘Longtermism’ [43], die eine abstrakte Menschheit vor Augen haben. Dies ist eine utopische Vorstellung, die nicht die **Gegenwart von uns Allen** in den Blick nimmt, sondern abschweift in ein diffuses Morgen, immer bereit das Heute für die versprochenen Zukunft zu opfern, wie all die anderen der utopistischen Entwürfe. Dabei vollzieht sich doch der Wechsel kontinuierlich, im Hier und Jetzt, stetig. Ohne Lücke und Sprung. Diese Zukunft wird durch die Gegenwart gestaltet, deswegen ist sie kein Ziel, unsere Zukunft ist nicht fixiert, sie entsteht mit unserem Handeln. Die Verantwortung im Hier und Jetzt bringt uns die Gegenwartsbezogenheit, aber auch eine Unabgeschlossenheit, was die Zukunft und unsere Vorstellung von ihr angeht. In der Fragestellung verbirgt sich eine elementare Grundaussage: **Das Leben hat für uns Lebenden einen Wert** [44], dieser einfachen Feststellung folgenden ergibt sich die Verantwortung gegenüber den Kindern. > *„Verantwortung im ursprünglichsten und massivsten Sinn folgt aus der > Urheberschaft des Seins, an der über die aktuellen Erzeuger hinaus > alle beteiligt sind, die der Fortpflanzung durch Nichtwiderruf ihres > Fiat im eigen Fall beipflichten, also alle, die sich selber das Leben > erlauben“*[45] Wir, die wir das Leben als einen Wert erklären, verpflichten uns, diesem Leben gegenüber, dieses Leben ist nicht nur unser eigenes, es ist das Leben Aller dem wir so verpflichtet sind. > *„\[..\] das Neugeborene , dessen bloßes Athmen unwiedersprechlich ein > Soll an die Umwelt richtet, nämlich sich seiner anzunehemen. \[..\] Da > hier das Sein eines einfachen otischen Daseinden ein Soll für andere > immanent und ersichtlich beinhaltet, \[…\]“*[46] Wir waren diese Neugeborenen, ein Soll für die anderen, wir wurden angenommen. Nur durch diese Annahme leben wir heute. In dem, was wir hier als Leben bezeichnen, steckt noch ein wenig mehr, wir haben eine Empfindung für das Leben, nur von Empfindung kommt Bedeutung, und ein konkretes Beispiel: Unser eigenes Leben. Die Fähigkeit zur Empfindung, hier versteckt sich die alte Frage nach dem Bewusstsein, und sie ist wichtig für uns. [47] Definiert Harari das Bewustsein über die Fähigkeit zum Leiden, was für sich völlig richtig ist, schlagen wir eine positive Begriffsbestimmung vor, die wenigstens für das Erste reicht. Wahr ist aber auch, das wir nicht nur staunen und lieben können, auch frustriert wie der Frosch [48] können wir uns fühlen, verraten und verkauft … einsam. Uvm. Die daraus folgende Ethik kann nur sein, das man empfindsamen Lebewesen keine schlechten Gefühle zufügt. Und da sind wir doch beim Leid das wir fähig sind zu empfinden, von dem Harari gesprochen hat. Wenn wir einen Hauch einer Vorstellung von Bewusstsein entwickeln wollen, an dieser Stelle, dann scheint eine “non computable”, in der Quantenmechanik verankerte Vorstellung, wie die “Orchestrated objective reduction” [49] eine geeignete Wahl. Das Bewustsein ist es, was uns miteinander interagieren läßt, so Roy Baumeister [50]. Einfacher auf den Punkt gebracht liest es sich: <figure> <img src="resources/klarmachen/klamachen-Polis.png" style="width:50.0%" alt="Der Mensch ist ein Wesen der Gemeinschaft …" /> <figcaption aria-hidden="true">Der Mensch ist ein Wesen der Gemeinschaft …</figcaption> </figure> Für uns Menschen ist unser Bewustsein nicht von der Gemeinschaft trennbar, die Gemeinschaft formt das Bewustsein, das Bewustsein stiftet die Gemeinschaft. Und so antworten wir der neoliberalen Marget Thatcher auf ihre Aussage, “there is no such thing as society” [51] “there is no such thing as a single person, this person could not even call them self a person” Das Bewustsein läßt sich, für uns, nicht von der Gemeinschaft trennen. Nachdem wir uns mit der Natur des Bewusstseins auseinandergesetzt haben und die Bedeutung des Lebens sowie der verantwortungsvollen Verbindung zwischen den Generationen betrachtet haben, kehren wir zurück zu den Grundbestimmungen. Das Bewusstsein, als treibende Kraft für Interaktion und Gemeinschaft, wirft Licht auf die fundamentalen Werte, die den Kern unserer politischen Ausrichtung bilden. Unsere Grundbestimmungen sind nicht nur ein Kompass, sondern auch eine Reflexion darüber, wie wir unser Bewusstsein in konkrete Handlungen umsetzen können. In einer Welt, die oft von Unsicherheit und Wettbewerb geprägt ist, dienen diese Bestimmungen als Leuchtturm für Solidarität, Gerechtigkeit und den Schutz unserer natürlichen Lebensgrundlagen. Der Übergang vom individuellen Bewusstsein zu kollektiven Werten verdeutlicht, dass unsere Verantwortung nicht nur auf persönlicher Ebene liegt, sondern sich auch in der Gestaltung unserer Gesellschaft und der Sicherung einer nachhaltigen Zukunft für kommende Generationen manifestiert. - Pazifismus - Säkularismus - Gegenwartsbezogenheit - Strukturelle Unabgeschlossenheit - Erhalt der natürlichen Lebensgrundlagen - Solidarität - Gerechtigkeit - Lebenszeit als Schatz - Kooperation statt Wettbewerb - Bekenntnis zu den universellen Menschenrechten ## Grundbestimmungen Die Grundbestimmungen werden in einem eigenen Abschnitt in der Parteisatzung erklärt[52]. Sie drücken die Zentralen Werte der Partei aus. Sie sind konkret, deswegen braucht es einige, aber auch derartig allgemein, dass sie gemeinsam das ganze Feld der Werte abdecken können. Das für jeden etwas dabei ist. ### Pazifismus Pazifismus ist die konsequente Folge aus der Verantwortung für unsere Kinder. Er muss in dem Sinne radikal sein, als wir verstehen müssen, dass Krieg nur mit Kriegsgerät stattfinden kann und wir damit aufhören müssen, es zu produzieren und zu nutzen. Auf den Punkt gebracht ist der Anspruch: **Frieden ist eine Verantwortung gegenüber unseren Kindern**, denn Kinder können keine Feinde sein, sie sind immer Kinder der Gesellschaft und bedürfen unser aller Verantwortung. > *If the russian love their children too …* [53] Und wenn sie es tun, die Russen, wenn sie ihre Kinder lieben, wenn sie Teil der selben Verantwortung sind wie wir, wie können wir mit ihnen kriegführen? Wie überhaupt, wenn das Leben einen Zweck darstellt für uns Lebenden, können wir Kriegführen? Doch nur, weil wir uns dieser Verantwortung nicht stellen. Das ist die nihilistische Alternative, die Camus skizziert: > *„Aber wenn wir allein sind unter einem leeren Himmel, wenn wir für > immer sterben müssen, wie können wir da wirklich sein? Die > metaphysische Revolte versuchte dann, das Sein abzuleiten aus dem > Erscheinen. Worauf das rein geschichtliche Denken sagte: Sein ist Tun. > Wir waren nicht, aber wir mussten mit allen Mitteln sein. Unsere > Revolution ist ein Versuch, ein neues Sein zu erobern, durch das Tun, > außerhalb jedes Moralgesetzes. Aus diesem Grund verurteilt sie sich > dazu, nur für die Geschichte und im Terror zu leben.“* [54] Das Ausmaß, das wir hier ansprechen ist gewaltig, die Welt ist voller nutzloser Rüstungsgüter. Nutzlos bezogen auf die Verantwortung die wir inne haben, und wir Alle müssen deshalb abrüsten. Abrüstungsvertrag um Abrüstungsvertrag. Ewiger Friede, eine *verstiegene Utopie* und gleichzeitig eine Aufforderung zur Verantwortung, an der wir uns zu ,messen haben. Bild von “Das ist <s>nicht</s> unser Krieg” [55] beschreibt sowohl diese Aufforderung als auch die Verantwortung genau. Es ist unser Krieg, er ist unser aller Verantwortung, und wir könnten ihn beenden. Und deshalb ist es nicht unser Krieg, wir sollten ihn beenden. Wir führen keine Kriege, wenn wir die Verantwortung gegenüber unseren Kindern annehmen. Und wenn wir wissen das wir keine Kriege führen, wozu würden wir Kriegsgüter brauchen? ### Säkularismus Auch der Säkularismus ist eine Folge dieser Verantwortung. Wenn wir ein höheres Wesen, einen Gott, annehmen, dann trägt dieses höhere Wesen am Ende die Verantwortung, die Verantwortung für den Zustand der Welt. Die Verantwortung, insbesondere der menschlichen Gesellschaft und unseren Kinder gegenüber, selbst zu übernehmen, erscheint hingegen natürlich. Der zentrale Punkt ist also die Selbstbestimmung, die zentral für die Mündigkeit ist. Durch die Verortung des Bewustseins in dieser Welt, sind wir nicht angewiesen auf metaphysishe Stiftung. Wir heißen keinen Pabst eine Stellvertreter Gottes. Der Liberalismus hat den Glauben in die Privatsphäre verlegt, aber wenn wir sagen das Private ist Politisch, dann ist auch die Religion Politisch. Deswegen ist der Glaube durchaus eine Politische Sache, die es zu diskutieren gilt. Es gibt hier auch einen Bezug zu der ersten Grundbestimmung, dem Frieden, es scheint eingänig das die Vorstellung eines Jenseits und damit eine abkehr vom Wirklichen Leben den Jungen Männern erst den Krieg schackhaft machen kann, wenn der Tot nicht als eine absoluter Verlust erlebt wird, wenn er ein Tor zu eine anderen viel besseren Welt ist, dann erscheint er nicht als schrecklich, als vermeidenswert. So ist die Bereitschaft aller Glaubensrichtungen ihrer Krieger zu Segnen, die jungen Männer in den Krieg und ihrem Tod zu schicken, verbrieft und darf getrost als offenes Bekennis verstanden werden. ### Gegenwartsbezogenheit Wir müssen in der Verantwortung bei den existierenden Menschen bleiben, die Gegenwart ist der Raum, in der die Zukunft gestaltbar ist, nicht die Zukunft. Konkrete Menschen können Ziel unserer Verantwortung sein, nicht mögliche Menschen. Das ist die Aufforderung des Zarathustras, uns unsere Sterblichkeit zu klar zu machen, und ein Teil der wirklichen Welt zu sein, nicht einer Möglichen und Vorgestellten. > *„Ich beschwöre euch, meine Brüder, bleibt der Erde treu und glaubt > Denen nicht, welche euch von überirdischen Hoffnungen reden! > Giftmischer sind es, ob sie es wissen oder nicht.“*[56] Das ist ein zentraler Kern, das wir Kinder haben führt uns auch unsere Sterblichkeit vor Augen. Sie zeigen auf den Übergang den wir darstellen, der über uns hinaus, und hinweg führt und gleichzeitig ein sprudelnden Quell der Erneuerung darstellt. Wir werden sterben, auch unsere Kinder werden sterben, aber auch sie werden Kinder haben, das ist der Strudel, der schaudernde Abgrund in den wir schauen können, aber in der Vertikalen da entfaltet er sich als Spirale. Der Wasser durchflossene Strudel ist ein einfaches Bild für das Dasein als offenes System die Materie die er ist, verschwindet, sie ist nur im Moment ein Teil, im nächsten Moment verschwindet sie im Abfluss, sie wird ersetzt durch nachströmende Materie, die Struktur des Strudel selbst ist nie die Materie selbst diese ist nur tempörärer Gast. Eine Abker vom Jenseitigem ist ebnfalls eine abker vom Krieg und der Relligion, die Vorstellung des Jenseits, eines anderen Lebens, nach dem Leben, läßt den jungen Mann sorglos sein Leben wegwerfen, für eine höheres Ziel, bzw. einer Belohnung im Jenseits. Wir wissen um unsere Sterblichkeit und um den Schatz den unser Lebenzeit darstellt. Denn dieser kann erst im richtigen Licht und im richtigen Blickwinkel funkeln und scheinen, und das Herz mit Glück erfüllen. Erst mit der einmaligkeit des Momentes, mit seiner Unwiederbringlichkeit, wird er schön und bedeutsam. Die Ewigkeit ist schaal dagegen, sie ist Alles und das immer wieder. Die Fülle wird so zur Leere. Hier wird der Utopische Entwurf ausgeschlossen der uns bei den Linken begenet aber auch wie James Grey gezeigt hat[57] bei den Markradikalen. > Yet the utopian faith in a condition of future harmony is a Christian > inheritance, and so is the modern idea of progress. Aber auch bei den Liberalen, den Gärtnern[58], ist dieses Utopische Denken verborgen. ### Strukturelle Unabgeschlossenheit Wir, als lebende Menschen, sind strukturell unabgeschlossen. Darin genau besteht unsere Möglichkeit zur Entwicklung. Jedes unserer sozialen Produkte gleicht uns darin: Die Partei ist strukturell unabgeschlossen, unablässig müssen wir die Strukturen der Partei verändern, so auch die der Gesellschaft. Es kann nicht unser Ziel sein, eine perfekte Gesellschaft zu bauen, eine solche kann es unter diesen Voraussetzungen nicht geben. Unser Ziel kann nur die positive und nachhaltige Entwicklung der Gesellschaft sein. Wenn wir selbst ein Übergang sind, dann ist jedes Ziel das wir haben können auch nur ein Übergang, ohne die endgültige Bestimmung bleiben wir immer unabgechlossen und unfertig, damit sind wir offen für die Entwicklung, für Neues, für unser Kinder und die Welt. Hier ist kein Leitfaden, der klein um klein genau beschreibt wie die Welt ist, kein fertiges Ergebnis an dem nicht zu rütteln ist. Wir sind bescheidene kritsche Rationalisten die wissen das sie wenig von der Welt wissen können, das wissenschaftliche Erkenntnisse nur wiederlegt werden können, das ein Anspruch auf Wahrheit das Gegenteil von ihr darstellt. Auch die Unabgeschlossenheit stellt eine klare Absage an den trivialen Fortschitts Gendanken dem wir gerade bei den Utopisten aller collouer begenen durften. Denn der Uptopist ist auch ein Ideologie, denn die Beschreibung der Zielwirklichkeit wirkt gerade zuürck und fordert eine spezifische Ausrichtung. Hier ist das Provisorische, das immer alles Handeln des Menschen bestimmt hat. Keine usere Sachen hat dauerhaften Bestand, alles ist entweder im Wandel, wie Theseus Schiff[59], oder vergeht, wie der Name der in den Strand geritzt, weggespühlt und in der allegemeinen Verteilung der Sandkörner des Strandes verschwindet, wie das Echo das verhallt. ### Erhalt der natürlichen Lebensgrundlagen Ein konservierender Umgang mit - bzw. die Wiederherstellung - einer gesunden und reichhaltigen Umwelt leitet sich zwangsläufig aus der Verantwortung für unsere Kinder und alle künftigen Generationen ab und hängt eng mit dem Begriff der [Nachhaltigkeit](/wiki/Nachhaltigkeit.md) zusammen. Die natürlichen Lebensgrundlagen sind unsere Ressource, die das menschliche Leben auf dem Planeten Erde erst ermöglicht. Hieran, aus kurzfristigem Profitstreben heraus, Raubbau zu betreiben, ist Raub an den nachkommenden Generationen, erschwert diesen sogar das Überleben und muss daher als verantwortungsloses Handeln gegen unsere Kinder und Kindeskinder gewertet werden. Wir bekennen uns zum Antropozän und der daraus resultierenden Verantwortung. Die Wirkung von uns Menschen auf die Erde ist inzwischen so groß, dass wir Hans Jonas Erweiterung des Kategorischen Imperativs berücksichtigen müssen, “Handle so, daß die Wirkungen deiner Handlungen verträglich sind mit der Permanenz echten menschlichen Lebens auf Erden.”[60] Es geht nicht um eine romantsiche Vorstellung der Natur, es geht um unsere Lebensgrundlage, nur diese können wir zerstören, nur die *Permanenz echten menschlichen Lebens auf Erden* können wir gefährden. Die Welt und die Natur können wir nicht gefährden [61], sie würde über uns hinweggehen wie über die Dinosaurier oder die Trilobiten. ### Solidarität Der Mensch ist ein Wesen der Gemeinschaft. Deshalb gilt unsere Sorge der Gemeinschaft, wie sie dem Individuum gelten muss. In der Solidarität drückt sich u.a. der verbindende Generationenvertrag aus. > *„Es gibt nur Identifikation mit dem Schicksal und Parteiergreifung. > Das Individuum stellt demnach nicht an sich den Wert dar, den es > verteidigen will. Um ihn zu bilden, bedarf es mindestens aller > Menschen. In der Revolte übersteigert sich der Mensch im andern, von > diesem Gesichtspunkt aus ist die menschliche Solidarität eine > metaphysische.“* [62] Die Solitarität und die Gerechtigkeit hängen zusammen. Die Indifferenz der Welt gegenüber unseren Wünschen und Vorstellungen läßt sich sich nur durch die Anteilnahme der anderen Menschen ausgleichen oder wenigstens durch Trost ertragen. Wir alle teilen das Schicksal [63], unser Schicksal, denn die Erde ist eine Kugel und alle Wirkungen betreffen uns Alle. So bedauerlich der Eine oder Andere das finden mag, so einfach und wahr ist dieser Zusammenhang. Wir alle Teilen ein Schicksal hier auf der Erde. Hier geht die Solidarität in die Gerechtigkeit über. ### Gerechtigkeit Nur in einer Gesellschaft, die strukturbedingte Benachteiligungen in den Möglichkeiten der individuellen Teilhabe ausgleicht, und so jedem Menschen die gesellschaftliche Teilhabe ermöglicht, können Kinder kulturangemessen aufwachsen und zu mündigen und gesellschaftskundigen Menschen heranreifen. Die Gerechtigkeit zusammen mit der “Lebenszeit als Schatz” sind die Basis des Leistungsprinzips und damit auch die Basis jeder Vertragstheorie. ### Lebenszeit als Schatz Dass die Lebenszeit ein entscheidender Wert ist, folgt aus der Feststellung Hans Jonas, wonach das Leben einen Zweck für das Leben darstellt [64], wie aus der Gegenwartsbezogenheit. Die Zeit unseres Lebens ist unwiederbringlich und vergeht, darum ist sie ein Schatz. Ein Schatz den es zu teilen gilt, mit den Kindern, mit den Menschen, den Lieben. Als Primaten [65] sind wir Wesen der Gemeinschaft und Lebenszeit, verbracht mit anderen Menschen, ist ein Geschenk. Also müssen wir weniger Geld ausgeben, weniger Produkte verbrauchen - nicht nur aus Nachhaltigkeitsgründen. Wenn wir weniger Geld ausgeben, müssen wir weniger Geld verdienen und haben mehr freie Zeit. Die Schwäbische Hausfrau spart am Anfang und nicht am Ende. ### Kooperation statt Wettbewerb Der Wettbewerb ist ein Feind der Gemeinschaft. Er fördert die Vereinzelung des Menschen und stört die natürliche Offenheit und die kooperativen Fähigkeiten der Menschen. Damit macht er alle Menschen unglücklich, denn Menschen sind Wesen der Gemeinschaft. Der Wettbewerb den der Pastor Gauck so lobpreist[66] ist der kleine Bruder des Neides und Neid ist keine schönes Gefühl, keine produktive Kraft, er ist zersetzend für Gemeinschaften, schon der Gott der Christen wussten das und hat ihn verboten. Aus der Scham geboren erzeugt der Neid noch mehr Scham, und in dieser Scham wenden wir uns ab von den Menschen. Wir können uns nicht länger in die Augenschauen und sehen “das dieses absurde Leben auch anderen etwas bedeutet”, nicht länger diesen Trost erfahren. Die Kooperation ist die Hinwenung zu den anderen, wie die Solidarität. ### Bekenntnis zu den universellen Menschenrechten Die universellen Menschenrechte[67] bilden die basale Grundlage für den Umgang der Menschen miteinander. Jedem Menschen diese Rechte zuzugestehen und ein dementsprechendes gesellschaftliches, juristisches und politisches Umfeld zu schaffen, bildet wiederum das wesentliche Fundament, auf dem sich mündige, aufgeklärte und selbstständige Persönlichkeiten verantwortlich entwickeln können. Die Erziehung unserer Nachkommen zielt seit Generationen auf ebendiese Attribute ab. Die universellen Menschenrechte schützen das Individuum, wie die Gesamtheit der Bürgerinnen und Bürger, vor unverhältnismäßigen Eingriffen in ihre ureigenen Angelegenheiten sowie vor staatlicher Willkür. Daher ist ein Bekenntnis zu den universellen Menschenrechten ebenso ein Bekenntnis zu Rechtsstaatlichkeit und Mitbestimmung.  # Formale Überlegungen Da die Grundbestimmungen in die Satzung direkt einfließen, in ihrem eigen Abschnitt, [68] müssen sich die Prinzipien dieser Bestimmungen auch in der formalen Struktur der Partei wiederfinden lassen. Mit der ‘Strukturelle Unabgeschlossenheit’ haben wir eine Grundbestimmung, die direkt zurückwirkt auf die Art und Weise wie wir eine Partei organisieren. ## Die Partei als Labor Durch unsere strukturelle Unabgeschlossenheit ist es uns möglich, neuartige Verfahren in government and management auszuprobieren und zu evaluieren. So kann die sich den aktuellen Gegebenheiten anzupassende Parteistruktur als Blaupause für gesellschaftliche Veränderung angesehen werden und es lassen sich aus unseren Partei Erfahrungen, konkrete Handlungsvorgaben und Empfehlungen ableiten. Dinge dürfen und müssen ausprobiert werden. Beginnen wir mit den Personenwahlen, die in Parteien statt zu finden haben, um die verschiedenen Ämter und Funktionen zu bestimmen. Die Grundbestimmungen der *Kooperation statt Wettbewerb* der *Gerechtigkeit* und der *Lebenszeit als Schatz* fordern uns auf diese Personenwahlen genauer zu betrachten: Wer einmal Personenwahlen in einer Partei erlebt hat der weiß: Ein zermürbender, zeitraubender Prozess mit fast ausschließlich Verlieren. Wir schlagen statt der Personenenwahl ein einfaches verfahren vor, dass all diese negativen Eigenschaften nicht aufweist. Ein freiwilliges Losvervahren[69] soll die gemeine Personenwahl ersetzen. Ein freiwilliges Losverfahren gewährleistet, dass verschiedene Gruppen innerhalb der Partei angemessen repräsentiert sind, beispielsweise in Bezug auf Geschlecht, Alter, sozialen Hintergrund oder ethnische Zugehörigkeit. Die Gerechtigkeit des Losverfahrens liegt darin, dass alle Mitglieder, die sich zur Verfügung stellen, die gleiche Chance haben, ausgewählt zu werden, unabhängig von ihren persönlichen Netzwerken oder ihrer Popularität. Die Schnelligkeit des Losverfahrens trägt zur Effizienz bei, da zeitaufwändige Wahlkämpfe vermieden werden. Dadurch lassen sich diese Entscheidungen auch leicht wieder korrigieren, denn es geht schnell. Konkret kann das bedeuten, dass die Bestimmten Menschen in kurzen Zeiträumen bestätigt werden, zb. über eine ständige Mitglieder Konferenz, oder auch nicht. Das Losverfahren wirkt auch auf eine andere weise im Sinne der “Kooperations statt Wettbewerb” Grundbestimmung. Es nimmt die Schärfe aus der Konkurrenz, der Ambitionierte wie der Machthungrige beide können sicher sein auch einmal dran zu sein, damit muss die Auseinandersetzung um die Macht, die im Hinterzimmer, oder Füsselnd unter dem Tisch, ausgefochten wird nicht in aller Schärfe, um jeden Preis geführt werden. Die Gewissheit das jeden das Los treffen kann macht die Siegstrategie einfach. Komplizierte Konstruktionen sozialer Beziehungen, Abhängigkeiten und Belohnungen braucht es nicht. Kein Gespinst aus Lügen, Versprechungen, Drohungen. Das macht das Leben in der Partei freundlicher. Sind wir freundlicher, wird die Politik die wir machen auch Freundlich sein. Wir übernehmen die Idee einer elektronischen ‘ständigen Mitglieder Konferenz’ von den Piraten, denn der Kern der Partei kann nur basis Demokatisch sein[70]. Um auf die Gegenwart bezogen zu sein, muß die Partei mit den örtlichen Bürgerinitativen in Kommunikation sein. Mit einem “Koordinationsrat” auf der entsprechenden Ebene, “Bund,Land,Kreis” werden die Vorschläge der Bürgerinitativen in den Parteiinternen politischen Prozess eingearbeitet. Die Partei kann auch direkt organisatorisch unterstützend wirken. Ein andere Aspekt ist die tiefe Verwurzelung Deutschland in die Christiche Tradition, aus dieser erklären wir das verklemmte Verhältnis der Menschen zur Schuld. Schuld ist uns unangenehm und wir unternehemen viel nicht schuld zu sein. Wir halten es mit Camus [71] und habe daher die Schuld formalisiert, eine Formale Schuld ist interessanter Weise viel einfacher anzunehmen als eine Zuweisung durch Menschen. Deswegen ist der erste Vorsitzende per Satzung Schuldig und seine Stellvertreter teilschuldig. Damit erübrigt sich jede Überlegung nach der Schuld, denn diese ist festgestellt, und es stellt sich die wirklich relevante Frage der Verantwortung. Wer übernimmt die Verantwortung, wie korrigieren wir die Situation und was wird daraus gelernt? ## Wer wird wie und warum Politiker in Deutschland > When it rain’s > the dirt don’t go away [72] Wir frage hier nach dem Selektionsprozess mit dem wir die Menschen bestimmen die Politik betreiben. Diese Frage ist in so fern eine wichtige, da hier der erste echte Filter ist: Nur die die zur Auswahl stehen können überhaupt gewählt werden. Wenn wir dem Deutschen Politkpersonal keine gute Note ausstellen, dann liegt es aber nicht am Personal, es liegt an den Verfahren die wir einsetzen um dieses Personal zu bestimmen. In der Deutschen Standard Partei ist es in etwa wie folgt, die untersten Ebenen, meist die Kreis Gruppen, bestimmten die nächste Ebene in dem sie aus ihrer Mitte Delegierte auswählen die dann als neues Gremium den selben Mechanismus anwenden um ihrerseits die nächste Ebene zu bestimmen. In Jeder dieser Ebene wird der selbe Filter angewendet, wie in der Homeopatie, durch die expotentielle Verdünnung, ist am Ende nichts mehr da, kein Einziger Fähiger, kein Molekül. Ob sich der Geist, die Schwingung, bzw. die Wirkung des nicht vorhandenen in dem Trägermaterial noch zeitigt muss an dieser stelle offen bleiben. Wir haben es mit einem Klassischen Rahmenfehler [73] zu tun. Jede Ebene der Delegation ist ein Rahmenfehler der als Filter wirkt, er selektiert genau jene nicht die am geeigneten wären, eine Verantwortungsvolle Position anzunehmen und umzusetzen. Delegierte werden aus anderen Motiven heraus bestimmt. Scheinbar ist diese Auswahl sehr einfach, so scheinen kleine Kinder, aufgefordert den Kaptain zu bestimmen, ein gutes Händchen zu haben den Kandidaten zu bestimmen, der am Ende auch das Rennen gemacht hat.[74] Da, zurecht, vorausgesetzt werden kann das die kleinen Kinder in keiner weise Inhaltlich bezug nehmen können kann man schließen das die Kinder das selbe Kriterium verwenden wie die erwachsenen Menschen. Es sagt also wenig über unsere Kinder, es sagt viel über uns Erwachsene. [1] https://github.com/KuekenPartei/test-wiki-export [2] Bündnis Sarah Wagenknecht, es betreibt aktive Einlass Kontrolle [3] https://github.com/KuekenPartei/media-stuff/tree/master/plakate-derKUEKeN [4] https://www.berlin.de/kultur-und-tickets/tipps/maifeiertag/2971249-2970764-myfest-berlin.html [5] vom wir zum mir [6] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roko%27s\_basilisk [7] Max (1895-1973) Horkheimer, Theodor W. (1903-1969) Adorno: Dialektik der Aufklärung: philosophische Fragmente, Ungekürzte Ausg., 21. Aufl., Frankfurt am Main 2013 (Fischer ; 7404. , Teil), S. 214, [http://digitale-objekte.hbz-nrw.de/storage2/2015/04/21/file\\128/6138298.pdf](http://digitale-objekte.hbz-nrw.de/storage2/2015/04/21/file\_128/6138298.pdf). [8] R. B. Fuller, J. Krausse, Bedienungsanleitung für das Raumschiff Erde und andere Schriften, 2010 (Fundus-Bücher), <https://books.google.de/books?id=cUIKOAAACAAJ>. [9] Diese Bild ist nicht so weit hergeholt wie es im ersten Moment scheint, diese Welt ist voller Wasser und die Kontinente sind Inseln, oder Schiffe in diesen Ozeanen, und diese Schiffe sinken. [10] Wir werden später sehen das uns die Utopie nicht zugänglich ist und warum wir auf sie verzichten müssen. [11] Karl Popper, All Life is Problem Solving, 2001. Seite 39 “Einstein said somewhere: ‘My pencil is more intelligent than I.’ What is expressed, or even better what is written down, has become an object we can criticize and investigate for mistakes.” [12] K Popper [13] vgl. diggingdeeper/Kaderschule/Denken ist Glücksache [14] das Meme [15] Hans Verfasser Jonas: Das Prinzip Verantwortung. Versuch einer Ethik für die technologische Zivilisation, 1. Aufl., Frankfurt am Main 2003 (Suhrkamp Taschenbuch, Teil 3492), S. 85, <https://d-nb.info/966483308/04>. [16] Ebd., S. 241. [17] Bernard (1952-2020) Stiegler: Verlust der Aufklärung durch Technik und Medien, Orig.-Ausg., 1. Aufl., Frankfurt am Main 2008 (Spiegel online; Die Logik der Sorge / Bernard Stiegler; Edition Unseld, Teil 1,1, Teil 6), S. 21, [http://digitale-objekte.hbz-nrw.de/storage/2009/03/05/file\\84/2875206.pdf](http://digitale-objekte.hbz-nrw.de/storage/2009/03/05/file\_84/2875206.pdf). [18] Ebd., S. 30. [19] Horkheimer, Adorno \[Anm. 7\], S. 215. [20] Jonas \[Anm. 15\], S. 235. [21] Phyllis Dorothy James, P. D. James, Phyllis D. James, u. a.: Im Land der leeren Häuser: Roman, 1. Aufl., München 1993. [22] Alfonso Cuarón: Children of Men, 2006, <https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0206634/>. [23] Samuel Scheffler, Björn Brodowski: Der Tod und das Leben danach, 1. Auflage, Berlin 2015, [http://www.content-select.com/index.php?id=bib\_view&ean=9783518741092; https://content-select.com/portal/media/view/55119d96-67dc-45dc-b10c-6090b0dd2d03; https://content-select.com/portal/media/cover\_image/55119d96-67dc-45dc-b10c-6090b0dd2d03/500](http://www.content-select.com/index.php?id=bib_view&ean=9783518741092; https://content-select.com/portal/media/view/55119d96-67dc-45dc-b10c-6090b0dd2d03; https://content-select.com/portal/media/cover_image/55119d96-67dc-45dc-b10c-6090b0dd2d03/500). [24] Ebd., S. 16 frei Zitiert. [25] so möchten wir hier den Tot verstehen [26] Klarmachen ändert … [27] Scheffler, Brodowski \[Anm. 23\], S. 104. [28] Ebd., S. 105. [29] Ebd., S. 24–25. [30] “Déjà vu” Spliff, Album 85555, CBS 1982 [31] Pyong-ch’ol Han: Transparenzgesellschaft, 1. Aufl., Berlin 2012, S. 52. [32] https://www.hdg.de/lemo/bestand/medien/video-samstags-gehoert-vati-mir.html IGMetal 1956 [33] Skorpions, Crazy World 1990 [34] https://www.tagesschau.de/inland/innenpolitik/lindner-asylbewerber-leistungen-100.html [35] https://www.tagesschau.de/inland/innenpolitik/scholz-abschiebungen-100.html [36] https://www.heise.de/tp/features/Die-Piraten-und-der-Krieg-3399579.html?seite=all [37] vgl. Satzung … 3/4 Mehrheit [38] Koalitionsvertrag cdu spd 2017 2021 [39] GG änderung Grüne/spd 2021 [40] Abschnitt 2 Basterl… [41] vgl. das Kartesische Subjekt und sein Bauchnabel [42] Albert Camus, Justus Streller, Georges Schlocker, Der Mensch in der Revolte: Essays, 30. Aufl., Reinbek bei Hamburg 2013 (Rororo ; 22193). Seite 30 [43] https://globalprioritiesinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/Greaves\_MacAskill\_strong\_longtermism.pdf [44] vgl. vom Konsens der lebenden [45] Jonas \[Anm. 15\], S. 241. [46] Ebd., S. 235. [47] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1rtS2OEV6bM The Politics of Consciousness | video lecture with Yuval Noah Harari [48] Verhaltenbiologie 7 Klasse Abbruch des Appetenzverhalten [49] Roger Penrose, Consciousness and the universe: quantum physics, evolution, brain & mind, Cambridge, MA 2017 “1. Consciousness in the Universe: Neuroscience, Quantum Space-Time Geometry and Orch OR Theory” [50] Roy Baumeister - Why Did Consciousness Emerge? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TpRVvRpySkk [51] Thatcher, Margaret. 1987. ’Interview for “Woman’s Own” (“No Such Thing as Society”). https://newlearningonline.com/new-learning/chapter-4/neoliberalism-more-recent-times/margaret-thatcher-theres-no-such-thing-as-society [52] vgl. Satzung/Abschnitt B Grundbestimmungen [53] “Russians”, The Dream of the Blue Turtles, A&M Records, Sting, Pete Smith , 1985 [54] Camus, Streller, Schlocker, \[Anm. 42\]. Seite 325 [55] Russland Urkaine Krieg 2022 [56] Friedrich Nietzsche: Also sprach Zarathustra: ein Buch für Alle und Keinen, Chemnitz 1883, S. 15, <https://www.deutschestextarchiv.de/book/view/nietzsche_zarathustra01_1883>. [57] J. Gray, Black Mass: Apocalyptic Religion and the Death of Utopia, 2007, <https://books.google.de/books?id=qNAnAAAAYAAJ>. [58] https://www.berliner-zeitung.de/politik-gesellschaft/eu-aussenbeauftragter-josep-borrell-schockiert-mit-kolonialistischer-rede-vor-studenten-europa-ist-ein-garten-li.277450 [59] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schiff\_des\_Theseus [60] Jonas, \[Anm. 15\]. Seite 85 [61] vorausgesetzt wir können keine sog. runnaway Greenhouse effect erzeugen [62] Camus, Streller, Schlocker, \[Anm. 42\]. Seite 325 [63] “shared faith” [64] Jonas, \[Anm. 15\]. Seite 142 [65] vgl. Kaderschule/der Mensch als Primat [66] https://www.bundespraesident.de/SharedDocs/Reden/DE/Joachim-Gauck/Reden/2014/01/140116-Walter-Eucken\_Institut.html [67] http://www.ohchr.org/EN/UDHR/Documents/UDHR\_Translations/ger.pdf [68] vgl. Satzung/Abschnitt B: Grundbestimmungen [69] Satzung \_Die\_Bundesgesamtkonferenz &10 Absatz (1) und (2). [70] vgl. faq/Wieso ist “ohne Ausnahme” so zentral? [71] “Wo es Verantwortung gibt, gibt es keine Schuld.” [72] Chris Korda, “When it Rains” International Deejay Gigolo Records – Gigolo 86, 2002 [73] Personen haben per se keine Möglichkeit in Stichprobe zu gelangen, https://www.studydrive.net/de/flashcards/population-stichprobe-selektionsfehler-stichprobenauswahl-deduktion-induktion-studiendesigns/47855 [74] John Antonakis, Olaf Dalgas, Predicting Elections: Child’s Play!, in: Science (New York, N.Y.), 323, 2009, S. 1183. Die Entscheidungen der Kinder sagten in 71 % der Fälle die tatsächlichen Wahlergebnisse richtig voraus. --------------------------------------------

@ 5e5fc143:393d5a2c

We are now given a choice of digital freedom #nostr . Creativity for every nostrich is now unleashed from the cage of bigtech censorship , rules and algo. But freedom comes with responsibility so pick right one(s). I will try share here some learning experience both technical and also from fundamental point of view. Just wanted kick start this article n fill as we go like living reference document. Nostr itself is an application layer protocol that can used beyond just social media mirco or long blogging. Each nostr client heavily dependent on back-end servers call nostr "Relay servers" or in short "rs" or "relays" Relays can hosted anywhere in clearnet internet, onion net , vpn , i2p , nym Relays are controlled by their respective admins based NIP specs that they select to implement according to own decisions. Relays can have certain ToS (Terms of Service) Rules to adhered too. New users can choose and pick client or app (ios / android/ windows) with preset of relays in the simplest form , but other advanced users need to do a regular manual relay management. Relay management is an active regular task based on where when n how you are using. Relay list are saved within you npub profile backup file which can edited and broadcast anytime. Relay management is an active regular task based on where when and how you are using. Relay list always need to be updated time to time as and when needed. 2 Users MUST a common RELAY between them even if one only need to follow another. Occasionally you may notice certain npub accounts you are following already but cannot see frequent notes publish by them – one of cause maybe you not sharing a common relay Most nostr client applications has SETTINGS where user choose add/remove relays Also user choose which function to enable - READ or WRITE Relay list for your account is always saved within you npub profile backup file which can edited and broadcast anytime. Hence any app or browser when u login with you npub the same relay list will be enforced. There could valid reasons why u need have list for if you trying to save bandwidth and traveling. Functions in app.getcurrent.io and primal.net app for mobile apple or android are ideal for user traveling abroad and wanted to save bandwidth since relay management is done the providers in backend and saves hassle for basic usage. Remember if someone is selecting relay on your behalf then you may not be necessarily able to pull and get some specific and special content that you may need. Such providers like coracle and nostrid also give option to override the default relays they selected. Relay types: They can be categorized by various features or policy or technologies. FREE PUBLIC Relays vs PAID PUBLIC Relays PAID relays provide unrestricted access / write / filtering options than FREE relays but both are public clearnet relays. Just subscribing to PAID relays will not solve all problems unless you choose the relays properly and enable settings correctly. Private Replay or Tor Relays – normally not easily visible until unless someone tell you. You can also host own private relay not opened to internet of archive and back of your own notes. The technical landscape in nostr can be fast changing as more NIPs get proposed or updated. Relays admin can choose implement certain NIPs or not based on policy or technical limitations. Example NIP33 defines “long notes” aka blogs as you now reading this in habla site which #1 UI and site for "Editable" long notes – some relays donot implement or allow this. NIP07 is used for client authentication like nos2x and is implemented by all relays in fact. Nostr is so fasting changing-hence many links many broken Pushing long note again. To be continued again ... reference pics will added later also Hope this help you understand "why when what" to tune and maintain active set of proper relays. Relay Proxy, Relay aggregator or Relay multiplexer – Paid, Public, Free, Private, Event, Relays That’s all for now n more later ... Thank you 🙏 ! ⚡️ https://getalby.com/p/captjack ⚡️ PV 💜 🤙 References: https://habla.news/relays https://relay.exchange/ https://relays.vercel.app/ https://nostr.info/relays/ https://nostrudel.ninja/#/relays Related Articles: https://thebitcoinmanual.com/articles/types-nostr-relays/ nostr:naddr1qqd5c6t8dp6xu6twvukkvctnwss92jfqvehhygzwdaehguszyrtp7w79k045gq80mtnpdxjuzl9t7vjxk52rv80f888y5xsd5mh55qcyqqq823cf39s98 https://habla.news/u/current@getcurrent.io/1694434022411

@ 460c25e6:ef85065c

In the early days of Nostr, developers often competed to see who could implement the most NIPs. Although all were optional (except NIP-01), it became a point of pride and vital for the ecosystem's growth. Back then, there were only a few dozen relatively simple NIPs to implement. Fast forward to today, with nearly 100 NIPs, maintaining and implementing everything has become nearly impossible. Yet, the drive among developers to "code all things Nostr" remains as strong as ever. nostr:nprofile1qqsrhuxx8l9ex335q7he0f09aej04zpazpl0ne2cgukyawd24mayt8gprfmhxue69uhhq7tjv9kkjepwve5kzar2v9nzucm0d5hszxmhwden5te0wfjkccte9emk2um5v4exucn5vvhxxmmd9uq3xamnwvaz7tmhda6zuat50phjummwv5hsx7c9z9 raised the point that everyone, even I, agrees: nostr:nevent1qqsqqqp2zrs7836tyjlsfe7aj9c4d97zrxxqyayagkdwlcur96t4laspzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumt0wd68ytnsw43z7q3q80cvv07tjdrrgpa0j7j7tmnyl2yr6yr7l8j4s3evf6u64th6gkwsxpqqqqqqzgcrrrp But how big is too big? How can we better understand the range of options available for devs out there? I went out for a hunt in my own brain to figure out how to clarify the situation. I came up with the following 4 categories for Nostr Clients: - **Super Clients**: These apps merge vastly different domains into a single application, offering basic support for reading, writing, configuration, and data management for each use case within each domains. An example would be an app that combines a Marketplace and Live Streams under one roof. - **Clients**: These apps provide comprehensive support for a single domain, handling all its use cases in a single home. They manage the complete set of reading, writing, configuration, and long-term data management within that domain. An example is a marketplace app that helps users manage product catalogs, process orders, collect payments, and handle fulfillment and reports. - **Mini Clients**: These apps focus on read and write functionality for a single use case, including configuration management and any actions related to that specific task. For example, a fulfillment app that helps users view orders placed from another client to then pack and ship them. - **Micro Clients**: These apps have a single interface and perform one specific action. Viewing and creating a record is handled by separate micro apps. An example is an app that simply scans an order's QR code and marks it as shipped. Based on my made-up categories described at the end, this is how I would split our most known apps. **Super Clients** - [amethyst](https://amethyst.social) - [nostrudel](https://nostrudel.ninja) - [coracle](https://coracle.social) **Clients** - [damus](https://damus.io) - twitter - [primal](https://primal.net) - twitter - [snort](https://snort.social) - twitter - [gossip](https://github.com/mikedilger/gossip) - twitter - [lume](https://lume.nu) - twitter - [ditto](https://soapbox.pub/ditto/) - twitter - [rabbit](https://rabbit.syusui.net) - twitter - [freefrom](https://freefrom.space) - twitter - [nos](https://nos.social) - twitter - [flycat](https://flycat.club) - twitter - [straylight](https://straylight.cafe) - twitter - [nostter](https://nostter.app) - twitter - [iris](https://iris.to) - twitter - [nostur](https://nostur.com) - twitter - [nostrmo](https://apps.apple.com/us/app/nostrmo/id6447441761) - twitter - [yana](https://yana.do) - twitter - [openvibe](https://openvibe.social) - twitter - [freerse](https://freerse.com) - twitter - [0xchat](https://0xchat.com) - chats - [cornychat](https://cornychat.com) - chats - [coop](https://github.com/lumehq/coop) - chats - [nostrchat](https://nostrchat.io) - chats - [blowater](https://blowater.deno.dev) - chats - [habla](https://habla.news) - blogs - [yakihonne](https://yakihonne.com) - blogs - [highlighter](https://highlighter.com) - blogs - [blogstack](https://blogstack.io) - blogs - [stemstr](https://stemstr.app) - music - [wavlake](https://wavlake.com) - music - [fountain](https://fountain.fm) - podcasts - [zap.stream](https://zap.stream) - live streaming - [shopstr](https://shopstr.store) - marketplace - [plebeian.market](https://plebeian.market) - marketplace - [flotilla](https://flotilla.coracle.social) - communities - [satellite](https://satellite.earth) - communities - [zapddit](https://zapddit.com) - communities - [nostr.kiwi](https://nostr.kiwi) - communities - [hivetalk](https://hivetalk.org) - video calls - [flare](https://flare.pub) - long-form videos - [nostrnests](https://nostrnests.com) - audio spaces - [wherostr](https://wherostr.social) - location - [yondar](https://go.yondar.me) - location - [stacker.news](https://stacker.news) - news - [flockstr](https://flockstr.com) - events - [nostrocket](https://nostrocket.org) - issue tracker - [docstr](https://docstr.app) - docs - [satshoot](https://satshoot.com) - freelance - [wikifreedia](https://wikifreedia.xyz) - wiki - [formstr](https://formstr.app) - forms - [chesstr](https://chesstr.pages.dev) - chess - [memestr](https://memestr.app) - meme feed - [npub.cash](https://npub.cash) - wallet - [npub.pro](https://npub.pro) - websites - [gitworkshop](https://gitworkshop.dev) - dev tools - [onosendai](https://onosendai.tech) - metaverse - [degmods](https://degmods.com) - games - [turdsoup](https://turdsoup.com) - prompts **Mini Clients** - [amber](https://github.com/greenart7c3/Amber) - signer - [alby](https://getalby.com) - signer - [nos2x](https://github.com/fiatjaf/nos2x) - signer - [nsec.app](https://nsec.app) - signer - [keys.band](https://keys.band) - signer - [nostrame](https://github.com/Anderson-Juhasc/nostrame) - signer - [nokakoi](https://nokakoi.com) - anon - [zap.cooking](https://zap.cooking) - recipes - [anonostr](https://anonostr.com) - anon - [getwired](https://getwired.app) - anon - [lowent](https://lowent.xyz) - anon - [creatr](https://creatr.nostr.wine) - exclusive content - [lightning.video](https://lightning.video) - exclusive content - [zaplinks](https://zaplinks.lol/slides) - slides - [listr](https://listr.lol) - lists - [zap.store](https://zap.store) - app store - [badges.page](https://badges.page) - badges - [oddbean](https://oddbean.com) - news - [dtan](https://dtan.xyz) - torrents - [nosta](https://nosta.me) - user pages - [pinstr](https://pinstr.app) - pinterest - [pollerama](https://pollerama.fun) - polls - [swarmstr](https://swarmstr.com) - trending - [nostrapp](https://nostrapp.link) - apps manager - [noogle](https://noogle.lol) - search - [ostrich.work](https://ostrich.work) - job postings - [emojito](https://emojito.meme) - emoji manager - [nostree](https://nostree.me) - links - [citrine](https://github.com/greenart7c3/citrine) - local relay - [joinstr](https://joinstr.xyz) - coinjoins - [heya](https://heya.fund) - crowdfunding - [zapplepay](https://zapplepay.com) - zaps - [nosbin](https://nosbin.com) - clipboard - [shipyard](https://shipyard.pub) - scheduler - [tunestr](https://tunestr.io) - live streams - [filestr](https://filestr.vercel.app) - files - [nostrcheck.me](https://nostrcheck.me/) - media hosting - [sheetstr](https://sheetstr.amethyst.social) - spreadsheets - [crafters](https://crafters.amethyst.social) - curriculum vitae **Micro Clients** - [w3](https://w3.do) - url shortener - [nosdrive](https://nosdrive.app) - backups - [zaplife](https://zaplife.lol) - zaps dashboard - [zapper.fun](https://zapper.fun) - payments - [nostrends](https://nostrends.vercel.app) - trends - [zephyr](https://zephyr.coracle.social) - trends - [wavman](https://wavman.app) - music player - [nostrrr](https://nostrrr.com) - relay info - [nosdump](https://github.com/jiftechnify/nosdump) - relay info - [notestack](https://notestack.com) - blogs - [nostr.build](https://nostr.build) - media hosting - [nostr.watch](https://nostr.watch) - relay info - [nostr hours](https://snowcait.github.io/nostr-hours/) - use reports - [lazereyes](https://lazereyes.nosfabrica.com) - vision prescriptions - [snakestr](https://satoshipuzzles.github.io/Snakestr) - games - [deletestr](https://zaplinks.lol/deletestr) - deletion requests - [2048str](https://zaplinks.lol/2048str) - games - [nostrqr](https://zaplinks.lol/nostrqr) - qr generator - [notanostrclient](https://zaplinks.lol/notanostrclient) - anon Super apps will try to do everything, but can't really do most things super well. Regular-sized Clients will try to manage most of a given domain but are likely to centralize users on themselves, an unwanted effect inside of Nostr. If we want Nostr to grow in a decentralized fashion, we have to start betting on and using more **Mini** and **Micro** clients.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

# How to do curation and businesses on Nostr Suppose you want to start a Nostr business. You might be tempted to make a closed platform that reuses Nostr identities and grabs (some) content from the external Nostr network, only to imprison it inside your thing -- and then you're going to run an amazing AI-powered algorithm on that content and "surface" only the best stuff and people will flock to your app. This will be specially good if you're going after one of the many unexplored niches of Nostr in which reading immediately from people you know doesn't work as you generally want to discover new things from the outer world, such as: - food recipe sharing; - sharing of long articles about varying topics; - markets for used goods; - freelancer work and job offers; - specific in-game lobbies and matchmaking; - directories of accredited professionals; - sharing of original music, drawings and other artistic creations; - restaurant recommendations - and so on. But that is not the correct approach and damages the freedom and interoperability of Nostr, posing a centralization threat to the protocol. Even if it "works" and your business is incredibly successful it will just enshrine you as the head of a _platform_ that controls users and thus is prone to all the bad things that happen to all these platforms. Your company will start to display ads and shape the public discourse, you'll need a big legal team, the FBI will talk to you, advertisers will play a big role and so on. If you are interested in Nostr today that must be because you appreciate the fact that it is not owned by any companies, so it's safe to assume you don't want to be that company that owns it. **So what should you do instead?** Here's an idea in two steps: 1. **Write a Nostr client tailored to the niche you want to cover** If it's a music sharing thing, then the client will have a way to play the audio and so on; if it's a restaurant sharing it will have maps with the locations of the restaurants or whatever, you get the idea. Hopefully there will be a NIP or a NUD specifying how to create and interact with events relating to this niche, or you will write or contribute with the creation of one, because without interoperability this can't be Nostr. The client should work independently of any special backend requirements and ideally be open-source. It should have a way for users to configure to which relays they want to connect to see "global" content -- i.e., they might want to connect to `wss://nostr.chrysalisrecords.com/` to see only the latest music releases accredited by that label or to `wss://nostr.indiemusic.com/` to get music from independent producers from that community. 2. **Run a relay that does all the magic** This is where your value-adding capabilities come into play: if you have that magic sauce you should be able to apply it here. Your service -- let's call it `wss://magicsaucemusic.com/` -- will charge people or do some KYM (know your music) validation or use some very advanced AI sorcery to filter out the spam and the garbage and display the best content to your users who will request the global feed from it (`["REQ", "_", {}]`), and this will cause people to want to publish to your relay while others will want to read from it. You set your relay as the default option in the client and let things happen. Your relay is like your "website" and people are free to connect to it or not. You don't own the network, you're just competing against other websites on a leveled playing field, so you're not responsible for it. Users get seamless browsing across multiple websites, unified identities, a unified interface (that could be different in a different client) and social interaction capabilities that work in the same way for all, and **they do not depend on you, therefore they're more likely to trust you**. --- Does this centralize the network still? But this a simple and easy way to go about the matter and scales well in all aspects. Besides allowing users to connect to specific relays for getting a feed of curated content, such clients should also do all kinds of "social" (i.e. following, commenting etc) activities (if they choose to do that) using the outbox model -- i.e. if I find a musician I like under `wss://magicsaucemusic.com` and I decide to follow them I should keep getting updates from them even if they get banned from that relay and start publishing on `wss://nos.lol` or `wss://relay.damus.io` or whatever relay that doesn't even know anything about music. The hardcoded defaults and manual typing of relay URLs can be annoying. But I think it works well at the current stage of Nostr development. Soon, though, we can create events that recommend other relays or share relay lists specific to each kind of activity so users can get in-app suggestions of relays their friends are using to get their music from and so on. That kind of stuff can go a long way.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

# Nostr: a quick introduction, attempt #2 Nostr doesn't subscribe to any ideals of "free speech" as these belong to the realm of politics and assume a big powerful government that enforces a common ruleupon everybody else. Nostr instead is much simpler, it simply says that servers are private property and establishes a generalized framework for people to connect to all these servers, creating a true free market in the process. In other words, Nostr is the public road that each market participant can use to build their own store or visit others and use their services. (Of course a road is never truly public, in normal cases it's ran by the government, in this case it relies upon the previous existence of the internet with all its quirks and chaos plus a hand of government control, but none of that matters for this explanation). More concretely speaking, Nostr is just a set of definitions of the formats of the data that can be passed between participants and their expected order, i.e. messages between _clients_ (i.e. the program that runs on a user computer) and _relays_ (i.e. the program that runs on a publicly accessible computer, a "server", generally with a domain-name associated) over a type of TCP connection (WebSocket) with cryptographic signatures. This is what is called a "protocol" in this context, and upon that simple base multiple kinds of sub-protocols can be added, like a protocol for "public-square style microblogging", "semi-closed group chat" or, I don't know, "recipe sharing and feedback".

@ 0176967e:1e6f471e

Objavte, ako avatari a pseudonymné identity ovplyvňujú riadenie kryptokomunít a decentralizovaných organizácií (DAOs). V tejto prednáške sa zameriame na praktické fungovanie decentralizovaného rozhodovania, vytváranie a správu avatarových profilov, a ich rolu v online reputačných systémoch. Naučíte sa, ako si vytvoriť efektívny pseudonymný profil, zapojiť sa do rôznych krypto projektov a využiť svoje aktivity na zarábanie kryptomien. Preskúmame aj príklady úspešných projektov a stratégie, ktoré vám pomôžu zorientovať sa a uspieť v dynamickom svete decentralizovaných komunít.

@ 0176967e:1e6f471e

Jan Kolčák pochádza zo stredného Slovenska a vystupuje pod umeleckým menom Deepologic. Hudbe sa venuje už viac než 10 rokov. Začínal ako DJ, ktorý s obľubou mixoval klubovú hudbu v štýloch deep-tech a afrohouse. Stále ho ťahalo tvoriť vlastnú hudbu, a preto sa začal vzdelávať v oblasti tvorby elektronickej hudby. Nakoniec vydal svoje prvé EP s názvom "Rezonancie". Učenie je pre neho celoživotný proces, a preto sa neustále zdokonaľuje v oblasti zvuku a kompozície, aby jeho skladby boli kvalitné na posluch aj v klube. V roku 2023 si založil vlastnú značku EarsDeep Records, kde dáva príležitosť začínajúcim producentom. Jeho značku podporujú aj etablované mená slovenskej alternatívnej elektronickej scény. Jeho prioritou je sloboda a neškatulkovanie. Ako sa hovorí v jednej klasickej deephouseovej skladbe: "We are all equal in the house of deep." So slobodou ide ruka v ruke aj láska k novým technológiám, Bitcoinu a schopnosť udržať si v digitálnom svete prehľad, odstup a anonymitu. V súčasnosti ďalej produkuje vlastnú hudbu, venuje sa DJingu a vedie podcast, kde zverejňuje svoje mixované sety. Na Lunarpunk festivale bude hrať DJ set tvorený vlastnou produkciou, ale aj skladby, ktoré sú blízke jeho srdcu. [Podcast](https://fountain.fm/show/eYFu6V2SUlN4vC5qBKFk) [Bandcamp](https://earsdeep.bandcamp.com/) [Punk Nostr website](https://earsdeep-records.npub.pro/) alebo nprofile1qythwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnwdaehgu3wvfskuep0qy88wumn8ghj7mn0wvhxcmmv9uq3xamnwvaz7tmsw4e8qmr9wpskwtn9wvhsz9thwden5te0wfjkccte9ejxzmt4wvhxjme0qyg8wumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytnddakj7qghwaehxw309aex2mrp0yh8qunfd4skctnwv46z7qpqguvns4ld8k2f3sugel055w7eq8zeewq7mp6w2stpnt6j75z60z3swy7h05

@ 0176967e:1e6f471e

Workshop je zameraný pre všetkých, ktorí sa potýkajú s vysvetľovaním Bitcoinu svojej rodine, kamarátom, partnerom alebo kolegom. Pri námietkach z druhej strany väčšinou ideme do protiútoku a snažíme sa vytiahnuť tie najlepšie argumenty. Na tomto workshope vás naučím nový prístup k zvládaniu námietok a vyskúšate si ho aj v praxi. Know-how je aplikovateľné nie len na komunikáciu Bitcoinu ale aj pre zlepšenie vzťahov, pri výchove detí a celkovo pre lepší osobný život.

@ 0176967e:1e6f471e

Ak ste v Bitcoine už nejaký ten rok, možno máte pocit, že už všetkému rozumiete a že vás nič neprekvapí. Viete čo je to peňaženka, čo je to seed a čo adresa, možno dokonca aj čo je to sha256. Ste si istí? Táto prednáška sa vám to pokúsi vyvrátiť. 🙂

@ 0176967e:1e6f471e

Bojovať s rakovinou metabolickou metódou znamená použiť metabolizmus tela proti rakovine. Riadenie cukru a ketónov v krvi stravou a pohybom, časovanie rôznych typov cvičení, včasná kombinácia klasickej onko-liečby a hladovania. Ktoré vitamíny a suplementy prijímam a ktorým sa napríklad vyhýbam dajúc na rady mojej dietologičky z USA Miriam (ktorá sa špecializuje na rakovinu). Hovori sa, že čo nemeriame, neriadime ... Ja som meral, veľa a dlho ... aj grafy budú ... aj sranda bude, hádam ... 😉

@ 0176967e:1e6f471e

Predikčné trhy predstavujú praktický spôsob, ako môžeme nahliadnuť do budúcnosti bez nutnosti spoliehať sa na tradičné, často nepresné metódy, ako je veštenie z kávových zrniek. V prezentácii sa ponoríme do histórie a vývoja predikčných trhov, a popíšeme aký vplyv mali a majú na dostupnosť a kvalitu informácií pre širokú verejnosť, a ako menia trh s týmito informáciami. Pozrieme sa aj na to, ako tieto trhy umožňujú obyčajným ľuďom prístup k spoľahlivým predpovediam a ako môžu prispieť k lepšiemu rozhodovaniu v rôznych oblastiach života.

@ 0176967e:1e6f471e

AI hype vnímame asi všetci okolo nás — už takmer každá appka ponúka nejakú “AI fíčuru”, AI startupy raisujú stovky miliónov a Európa ako obvykle pracuje na regulovaní a našej ochrane pred nebezpečím umelej inteligencie. Pomaly sa ale ukazuje “ovocie” spojenia umelej inteligencie a človeka, kedy mnohí ľudia reportujú signifikantné zvýšenie produktivity v práci ako aj kreatívnych aktivitách (aj napriek tomu, že mnohí hardcore kreatívci by každého pri spomenutí skratky “AI” najradšej upálili). V prvej polovici prednášky sa pozrieme na to, akými rôznymi spôsobmi nám vie byť AI nápomocná, či už v práci alebo osobnom živote. Umelé neuróny nám už vyskakujú pomaly aj z ovsených vločiek, no to ako sa k nám dostávajú sa veľmi líši. Hlavne v tom, či ich poskytujú firmy v zatvorených alebo open-source modeloch. V druhej polovici prednášky sa pozrieme na boom okolo otvorených AI modelov a ako ich vieme využiť.

@ 0176967e:1e6f471e

Čo vznikne keď spojíš hru SNAKE zo starej Nokie 3310 a Bitcoin? - hra [Chain Duel](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hCI2MzxOzE)! Jedna z najlepších implementácií funkcionality Lightning Networku a gamingu vo svete Bitcoinu. Vyskúšať si ju môžete s kamošmi [na tomto odkaze](https://game.chainduel.net/). Na stránke nájdeš aj základné pravidlá hry avšak odporúčame pravidlá pochopiť [aj priamo hraním](https://game.chainduel.net/gamemenu) Chain Duel si získava hromady fanúšikov po bitcoinových konferenciách po celom svete a práve na Lunarpunk festival ho prinesieme tiež. Multiplayer 1v1 hra, kde nejde o náhodu, ale skill, vás dostane. Poďte si zmerať sily s ďalšími bitcoinermi a vyhrať okrem samotných satoshi rôzne iné ceny. Príďte sa zúčastniť prvého oficiálneho Chain Duel turnaja na Slovensku! Pre účasť na turnaji je [potrebná registrácia dopredu](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScq96a-zM2i9FCkd3W3haNVcdKFTbPkXObNDh4vJwbmADsb0w/viewform).

@ 0176967e:1e6f471e

Co se nomádská rodina již 3 roky utíkající před kontrolou naučila o kontrole samotné? Co je to vlastně svoboda? Může koexistovat se strachem? S konfliktem? Zkusme na chvíli zapomenout na daně, policii a stát a pohlédnout na svobodu i mimo hranice společenských ideologií. Zkusme namísto hledání dalších odpovědí zjistit, zda se ještě někde neukrývají nové otázky. Možná to bude trochu ezo. Karel provozuje již přes 3 roky se svou ženou, dvěmi dětmi a jedním psem minimalistický život v obytné dodávce. Na cestách spolu začali tvořit youtubový kanál "[Karel od Martiny](https://www.youtube.com/@KarelodMartiny)" o svobodě, nomádství, anarchii, rodičovství, drogách a dalších normálních věcech. Nájdete ho aj [na nostr](nostr:npub1y2se87uxc7fa0aenfqfx5hl9t2u2fjt4sp0tctlcr0efpauqtalqxfvr89).

@ 0176967e:1e6f471e

Lístky na festival Lunarpunku sú už v predaji [na našom crowdfunding portáli](https://pay.cypherpunk.today/apps/maY3hxKArQxMpdyh5yCtT6UWMJm/crowdfund). V predaji sú dva typy lístkov - štandardný vstup a špeciálny vstup spolu s workshopom oranžového leta. Neváhajte a zabezpečte si lístok, čím skôr to urobíte, tým bude festival lepší. Platiť môžete Bitcoinom - Lightningom aj on-chain. Vaša vstupenka je e-mail adresa (neposielame potvrdzujúce e-maily, ak platba prešla, ste in). [Kúpte si lístok](https://pay.cypherpunk.today/apps/maY3hxKArQxMpdyh5yCtT6UWMJm/crowdfund)

@ 0176967e:1e6f471e

Čo nám prinášajú exotické protokoly ako Nostr, Cashu alebo Reticulum? Šifrovanie, podpisovanie, peer to peer komunikáciu, nové spôsoby šírenia a odmeňovania obsahu. Ukážeme si kúl appky, ako sa dajú jednotlivé siete prepájať a ako spolu súvisia.

@ 0176967e:1e6f471e

Podnikanie je jazyk s "crystal clear" pravidlami. Inštrumentalisti vidia podnikanie staticky, a toto videnie prenášajú na spoločnosť. Preto nás spoločnosť vníma často negatívne. Skutoční podnikatelia sú však "komunikátori". Jozef Martiniak je zakladateľ AUSEKON - Institute of Austrian School of Economics

@ 0176967e:1e6f471e

Ako sa snažím praktizovať LunarPunk bez budovania opcionality "odchodom" do zahraničia. Nie každý je ochotný alebo schopný meniť "miesto", ako však v takom prípade minimalizovať interakciu so štátom? Nie návod, skôr postrehy z bežného života.

@ 0176967e:1e6f471e

Tento rok vás čaká workshop na tému "oranžové leto" s Jurajom Bednárom a Mariannou Sádeckou. Dozviete sa ako mení naše vnímanie skúsenosť s Bitcoinom, ako sa navigovať v dnešnom svete a odstrániť mentálnu hmlu spôsobenú fiat životom. Na workshop je potrebný [extra lístok](https://pay.cypherpunk.today/apps/maY3hxKArQxMpdyh5yCtT6UWMJm/crowdfund) (môžete si ho dokúpiť aj na mieste). Pre viac informácií o oranžovom lete odporúčame pred workshopom vypočuťi si [podcast na túto tému](https://juraj.bednar.io/podcast/2024/04/13/oranzove-leto-stanme-sa-tvorcami-svojho-zivota-s-mariannou-sadeckou/).

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

# Why relay hints are important Recently [Coracle has removed support](nostr:nevent1qqsfmgthccjuz7quucel20wjanh80sp8nxf5ujgpj5hwdzk8japavzgpzemhxue69uhky6t5vdhkjmn9wgh8xmmrd9skcq3qjlrs53pkdfjnts29kveljul2sm0actt6n8dxrrzqcersttvcuv3qca68ht) for following relay hints in Nostr event references. Supposedly Coracle is now relying only on public key hints and `kind:10002` events to determine where to fetch events from a user. That is a catastrophic idea that destroys much of Nostr's flexibility for no gain at all. * Someone makes a post inside a community (either a NIP-29 community or a NIP-87 community) and others want to refer to that post in discussions in the external Nostr world of `kind:1`s -- now that cannot work because the person who created the post doesn't have the relays specific to those communities in their outbox list; * There is a discussion happening in a niche relay, for example, a relay that can only be accessed by the participants of a conference for the duration of that conference -- since that relay is not in anyone's public outbox list, it's impossible for anyone outside of the conference to ever refer to these events; * Some big public relays, say, _relay.damus.io_, decide to nuke their databases or periodically delete old events, a user keeps using that big relay as their outbox because it is fast and reliable, but chooses to archive their old events in a dedicated archival relay, say, _cellar.nostr.wine_, while prudently not including that in their outbox list because that would make no sense -- now it is impossible for anyone to refer to old notes from this user even though they are publicly accessible in _cellar.nostr.wine_; * There are [topical relays](nostr:naddr1qqyrze35vscrzvfcqyghwumn8ghj7enfv96x5ctx9e3k7mgzyqalp33lewf5vdq847t6te0wvnags0gs0mu72kz8938tn24wlfze6qcyqqq823c0z85e2) that curate content relating to niche (non-microblogging) topics, say, cooking recipes, and users choose to publish their recipes to these relays only -- but now they can't refer to these relays in the external Nostr world of `kind:1`s because these topical relays are not in their outbox lists. * Suppose a user wants to maintain two different identities under the same keypair, say, one identity only talks about soccer in English, while the other only talks about art history in French, and the user very prudently keeps two different `kind:10002` events in two different sets of "indexer" relays (or does it in some better way of announcing different relay sets) -- now one of this user's audiences cannot ever see notes created by him with their other persona, one half of the content of this user will be inacessible to the other half and vice-versa. * If for any reason a relay does not want to accept events of a certain kind a user may publish to other relays, and it would all work fine if the user referenced that externally-published event from a normal event, but now that externally-published event is not reachable because the external relay is not in the user's outbox list. * If someone, say, Alex Jones, is hard-banned everywhere and cannot event broadcast `kind:10002` events to any of the commonly used index relays, that person will now appear as banned in most clients: in an ideal world in which clients followed `nprofile` and other relay hints Alex Jones could still live a normal Nostr life: he would print business cards with his `nprofile` instead of an `npub` and clients would immediately know from what relay to fetch his posts. When other users shared his posts or replied to it, they would include a relay hint to his personal relay and others would be able to see and then start following him on that relay directly -- now Alex Jones's events cannot be read by anyone that doesn't already know his relay.

@ 6871d8df:4a9396c1

# Embracing AI: A Case for AI Accelerationism In an era where artificial intelligence (AI) development is at the forefront of technological innovation, a counter-narrative championed by a group I refer to as the 'AI Decels'—those advocating for the deceleration of AI advancements— seems to be gaining significant traction. After tuning into a recent episode of the [Joe Rogan Podcast](https://fountain.fm/episode/0V35t9YBkOMVM4WRVLYp), I realized that the prevailing narrative around AI was heading in a dangerous direction. Rogan had Aza Raskin and Tristan Harris, technology safety advocates, who released a talk called '[The AI Dilemma](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xoVJKj8lcNQ),' on for a discussion. You may know them from the popular documentary '[The Social Dilemma](https://www.thesocialdilemma.com/)' on the dangers of social media. It became increasingly clear that the cautionary stance dominating this discourse might be tipping the scales too far, veering towards an over-regulated future that stifles innovation rather than fostering it.  ## Are we moving too fast? While acknowledging AI's benefits, Aza and Tristan fear it could be dangerous if not guided by ethical standards and safeguards. They believe AI development is moving too quickly and that the right incentives for its growth are not in place. They are concerned about the possibility of "civilizational overwhelm," where advanced AI technology far outpaces 21st-century governance. They fear a scenario where society and its institutions cannot manage or adapt to the rapid changes and challenges introduced by AI. They argue for regulating and slowing down AI development due to rapid, uncontrolled advancement driven by competition among companies like Google, OpenAI, and Microsoft. They claim this race can lead to unsafe releases of new technologies, with AI systems exhibiting unpredictable, emergent behaviors, posing significant societal risks. For instance, AI can inadvertently learn tasks like sentiment analysis or human emotion understanding, creating potential for misuse in areas like biological weapons or cybersecurity vulnerabilities. Moreover, AI companies' profit-driven incentives often conflict with the public good, prioritizing market dominance over safety and ethics. This misalignment can lead to technologies that maximize engagement or profits at societal expense, similar to the negative impacts seen with social media. To address these issues, they suggest government regulation to realign AI companies' incentives with safety, ethical considerations, and public welfare. Implementing responsible development frameworks focused on long-term societal impacts is essential for mitigating potential harm. ## This isn't new Though the premise of their concerns seems reasonable, it's dangerous and an all too common occurrence with the emergence of new technologies. For example, in their example in the podcast, they refer to the technological breakthrough of oil. Oil as energy was a technological marvel and changed the course of human civilization. The embrace of oil — now the cornerstone of industry in our age — revolutionized how societies operated, fueled economies, and connected the world in unprecedented ways. Yet recently, as ideas of its environmental and geopolitical ramifications propagated, the narrative around oil has shifted. Tristan and Aza detail this shift and claim that though the period was great for humanity, we didn't have another technology to go to once the technological consequences became apparent. The problem with that argument is that we did innovate to a better alternative: nuclear. However, at its technological breakthrough, it was met with severe suspicions, from safety concerns to ethical debates over its use. This overregulation due to these concerns caused a decades-long stagnation in nuclear innovation, where even today, we are still stuck with heavy reliance on coal and oil. The scare tactics and fear-mongering had consequences, and, interestingly, they don't see the parallels with their current deceleration stance on AI. These examples underscore a critical insight: the initial anxiety surrounding new technologies is a natural response to the unknowns they introduce. Yet, history shows that too much anxiety can stifle the innovation needed to address the problems posed by current technologies. The cycle of discovery, fear, adaptation, and eventual acceptance reveals an essential truth—progress requires not just the courage to innovate but also the resilience to navigate the uncertainties these innovations bring. Moreover, believing we can predict and plan for all AI-related unknowns reflects overconfidence in our understanding and foresight. History shows that technological progress, marked by unexpected outcomes and discoveries, defies such predictions. The evolution from the printing press to the internet underscores progress's unpredictability. Hence, facing AI's future requires caution, curiosity, and humility. Acknowledging our limitations and embracing continuous learning and adaptation will allow us to harness AI's potential responsibly, illustrating that embracing our uncertainties, rather than pretending to foresee them, is vital to innovation. The journey of technological advancement is fraught with both promise and trepidation. Historically, each significant leap forward, from the dawn of the industrial age to the digital revolution, has been met with a mix of enthusiasm and apprehension. Aza Raskin and Tristan Harris's thesis in the 'AI Dilemma' embodies the latter. ## Who defines "safe?" When slowing down technologies for safety or ethical reasons, the issue arises of who gets to define what "safe" or “ethical” mean? This inquiry is not merely technical but deeply ideological, touching the very core of societal values and power dynamics. For example, the push for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives shows how specific ideological underpinnings can shape definitions of safety and decency. Take the case of the initial release of Google's AI chatbot, Gemini, which chose the ideology of its creators over truth. Luckily, the answers were so ridiculous that the pushback was sudden and immediate. My worry, however, is if, in correcting this, they become experts in making the ideological capture much more subtle. Large bureaucratic institutions' top-down safety enforcement creates a fertile ground for ideological capture of safety standards.  I claim that the issue is not the technology itself but the lens through which we view and regulate it. Suppose the gatekeepers of 'safety' are aligned with a singular ideology. In that case, AI development would skew to serve specific ends, sidelining diverse perspectives and potentially stifling innovative thought and progress. In the podcast, Tristan and Aza suggest such manipulation as a solution. They propose using AI for consensus-building and creating "shared realities" to address societal challenges. In practice, this means that when individuals' viewpoints seem to be far apart, we can leverage AI to "bridge the gap." How they bridge the gap and what we would bridge it toward is left to the imagination, but to me, it is clear. Regulators will inevitably influence it from the top down, which, in my opinion, would be the opposite of progress. In navigating this terrain, we must advocate for a pluralistic approach to defining safety, encompassing various perspectives and values achieved through market forces rather than a governing entity choosing winners. The more players that can play the game, the more wide-ranging perspectives will catalyze innovation to flourish. ## Ownership & Identity Just because we should accelerate AI forward does not mean I do not have my concerns. When I think about what could be the most devastating for society, I don't believe we have to worry about a Matrix-level dystopia; I worry about freedom. As I explored in "[Whose data is it anyway?](https://cwilbzz.com/whose-data-is-it-anyway/)," my concern gravitates toward the issues of data ownership and the implications of relinquishing control over our digital identities. This relinquishment threatens our privacy and the integrity of the content we generate, leaving it susceptible to the inclinations and profit of a few dominant tech entities. To counteract these concerns, a paradigm shift towards decentralized models of data ownership is imperative. Such standards would empower individuals with control over their digital footprints, ensuring that we develop AI systems with diverse, honest, and truthful perspectives rather than the massaged, narrow viewpoints of their creators. This shift safeguards individual privacy and promotes an ethical framework for AI development that upholds the principles of fairness and impartiality. As we stand at the crossroads of technological innovation and ethical consideration, it is crucial to advocate for systems that place data ownership firmly in the hands of users. By doing so, we can ensure that the future of AI remains truthful, non-ideological, and aligned with the broader interests of society. ## But what about the Matrix? I know I am in the minority on this, but I feel that the concerns of AGI (Artificial General Intelligence) are generally overblown. I am not scared of reaching the point of AGI, and I think the idea that AI will become so intelligent that we will lose control of it is unfounded and silly. Reaching AGI is not reaching consciousness; being worried about it spontaneously gaining consciousness is a misplaced fear. It is a tool created by humans for humans to enhance productivity and achieve specific outcomes. At a technical level, large language models (LLMs) are trained on extensive datasets and learning patterns from language and data through a technique called "unsupervised learning" (meaning the data is untagged). They predict the next word in sentences, refining their predictions through feedback to improve coherence and relevance. When queried, LLMs generate responses based on learned patterns, simulating an understanding of language to provide contextually appropriate answers. They will only answer based on the datasets that were inputted and scanned. AI will never be "alive," meaning that AI lacks inherent agency, consciousness, and the characteristics of life, not capable of independent thought or action. AI cannot act independently of human control. Concerns about AI gaining autonomy and posing a threat to humanity are based on a misunderstanding of the nature of AI and the fundamental differences between living beings and machines. AI spontaneously developing a will or consciousness is more similar to thinking a hammer will start walking than us being able to create consciousness through programming. Right now, there is only one way to create consciousness, and I'm skeptical that is ever something we will be able to harness and create as humans. Irrespective of its complexity — and yes, our tools will continue to become evermore complex — machines, specifically AI, cannot transcend their nature as non-living, inanimate objects programmed and controlled by humans.  The advancement of AI should be seen as enhancing human capabilities, not as a path toward creating autonomous entities with their own wills. So, while AI will continue to evolve, improve, and become more powerful, I believe it will remain under human direction and control without the existential threats often sensationalized in discussions about AI's future. With this framing, we should not view the race toward AGI as something to avoid. This will only make the tools we use more powerful, making us more productive. With all this being said, AGI is still much farther away than many believe. Today's AI excels in specific, narrow tasks, known as narrow or weak AI. These systems operate within tightly defined parameters, achieving remarkable efficiency and accuracy that can sometimes surpass human performance in those specific tasks. Yet, this is far from the versatile and adaptable functionality that AGI represents. Moreover, the exponential growth of computational power observed in the past decades does not directly translate to an equivalent acceleration in achieving AGI. AI's impressive feats are often the result of massive data inputs and computing resources tailored to specific tasks. These successes do not inherently bring us closer to understanding or replicating the general problem-solving capabilities of the human mind, which again would only make the tools more potent in _our_ hands. While AI will undeniably introduce challenges and change the aspects of conflict and power dynamics, these challenges will primarily stem from humans wielding this powerful tool rather than the technology itself. AI is a mirror reflecting our own biases, values, and intentions. The crux of future AI-related issues lies not in the technology's inherent capabilities but in how it is used by those wielding it. This reality is at odds with the idea that we should slow down development as our biggest threat will come from those who are not friendly to us. ## AI Beget's AI While the unknowns of AI development and its pitfalls indeed stir apprehension, it's essential to recognize the power of market forces and human ingenuity in leveraging AI to address these challenges. History is replete with examples of new technologies raising concerns, only for those very technologies to provide solutions to the problems they initially seemed to exacerbate. It looks silly and unfair to think of fighting a war with a country that never embraced oil and was still primarily getting its energy from burning wood.  The evolution of AI is no exception to this pattern. As we venture into uncharted territories, the potential issues that arise with AI—be it ethical concerns, use by malicious actors, biases in decision-making, or privacy intrusions—are not merely obstacles but opportunities for innovation. It is within the realm of possibility, and indeed, probability, that AI will play a crucial role in solving the problems it creates. The idea that there would be no incentive to address and solve these problems is to underestimate the fundamental drivers of technological progress. Market forces, fueled by the demand for better, safer, and more efficient solutions, are powerful catalysts for positive change. When a problem is worth fixing, it invariably attracts the attention of innovators, researchers, and entrepreneurs eager to solve it. This dynamic has driven progress throughout history, and AI is poised to benefit from this problem-solving cycle. Thus, rather than viewing AI's unknowns as sources of fear, we should see them as sparks of opportunity. By tackling the challenges posed by AI, we will harness its full potential to benefit humanity. By fostering an ecosystem that encourages exploration, innovation, and problem-solving, we can ensure that AI serves as a force for good, solving problems as profound as those it might create. This is the optimism we must hold onto—a belief in our collective ability to shape AI into a tool that addresses its own challenges and elevates our capacity to solve some of society's most pressing issues. ## An AI Future The reality is that it isn't whether AI will lead to unforeseen challenges—it undoubtedly will, as has every major technological leap in history. The real issue is whether we let fear dictate our path and confine us to a standstill or embrace AI's potential to address current and future challenges. The approach to solving potential AI-related problems with stringent regulations and a slowdown in innovation is akin to cutting off the nose to spite the face. It's a strategy that risks stagnating the U.S. in a global race where other nations will undoubtedly continue their AI advancements. This perspective dangerously ignores that AI, much like the printing press of the past, has the power to democratize information, empower individuals, and dismantle outdated power structures. The way forward is not less AI but more of it, more innovation, optimism, and curiosity for the remarkable technological breakthroughs that will come. We must recognize that the solution to AI-induced challenges lies not in retreating but in advancing our capabilities to innovate and adapt. AI represents a frontier of limitless possibilities. If wielded with foresight and responsibility, it's a tool that can help solve some of the most pressing issues we face today. There are certainly challenges ahead, but I trust that with problems come solutions. Let's keep the AI Decels from steering us away from this path with their doomsday predictions. Instead, let's embrace AI with the cautious optimism it deserves, forging a future where technology and humanity advance to heights we can't imagine.

@ 266815e0:6cd408a5

> NOTE: this is just a quick technical guide. sorry for the lack of details ## Install NodeJS Download it from the official website https://nodejs.org/en/download Or use nvm https://github.com/nvm-sh/nvm?tab=readme-ov-file#install--update-script ```bash wget -qO- https://raw.githubusercontent.com/nvm-sh/nvm/v0.39.7/install.sh | bash nvm install 20 ``` ## Clone example config.yml ```bash wget https://raw.githubusercontent.com/hzrd149/blossom-server/master/config.example.yml -O config.yml ``` ## Modify config.yml ```bash nano config.yml # or if your that type of person vim config.yml ``` ## Run blossom-server ```bash npx blossom-server-ts # or install it locally and run using npm npm install blossom-server-ts ./node_modules/.bin/blossom-server-ts ``` Now you can open http://localhost:3000 and see your blossom server And if you set the `dashboard.enabled` option in the `config.yml` you can open http://localhost:3000/admin to see the admin dashboard

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

# Censorship-resistant relay discovery in Nostr In [Nostr is not decentralized nor censorship-resistant](nostr:naddr1qqyrsdmpxgcrsepeqyghwumn8ghj7enfv96x5ctx9e3k7mgzyqalp33lewf5vdq847t6te0wvnags0gs0mu72kz8938tn24wlfze6qcyqqq823c4n8rw6) I said Nostr is centralized. Peter Todd thinks it is centralized by design, but I disagree. Nostr wasn't designed to be centralized. The idea was always that clients would follow people in the relays they decided to publish to, even if it was a single-user relay hosted in an island in the middle of the Pacific ocean. But the Nostr explanations never had any guidance about how to do this, and the protocol itself never had any enforcement mechanisms for any of this (because it would be impossible). My original idea was that clients would use some undefined combination of relay hints in reply tags and the (now defunct) `kind:2` relay-recommendation events plus some form of manual action ("it looks like Bob is publishing on relay X, do you want to follow him there?") to accomplish this. With the expectation that we would have a better idea of how to properly implement all this with more experience, Branle, my first working client didn't have any of that implemented, instead it used a stupid static list of relays with read/write toggle -- although it did publish relay hints and kept track of those internally and supported `kind:2` events, these things were not really useful. [Gossip](https://github.com/mikedilger/gossip) was the first client to implement a [truly censorship-resistant relay discovery mechanism](https://mikedilger.com/gossip-relay-model.mp4) that used NIP-05 hints (originally proposed by [Mike Dilger](nprofile1qqswuyd9ml6qcxd92h6pleptfrcqucvvjy39vg4wx7mv9wm8kakyujgua442w)) relay hints and `kind:3` relay lists, and then with the simple insight of [NIP-65](https://nips.nostr.com/65) that got much better. After seeing it in more concrete terms, it became simpler to reason about it and the approach got popularized as the "gossip model", then implemented in clients like [Coracle](https://coracle.social) and [Snort](https://snort.social). Today when people mention the "gossip model" (or "outbox model") they simply think about NIP-65 though. Which I think is ok, but too restrictive. I still think there is a place for the NIP-05 hints, `nprofile` and `nevent` relay hints and specially relay hints in event tags. All these mechanisms are used together in [ZBD Social](nostr:naddr1qqyxgvek8qmryc3eqyghwumn8ghj7enfv96x5ctx9e3k7mgzyqalp33lewf5vdq847t6te0wvnags0gs0mu72kz8938tn24wlfze6qcyqqq823chekfst), for example, but I believe also in the clients listed above. I don't think we should stop here, though. I think there are other ways, perhaps drastically different ways, to approach content propagation and relay discovery. I think manual action by users is underrated and could go a long way if presented in a nice UX (not conceived by people that think users are dumb animals), and who knows what. Reliance on third-parties, hardcoded values, social graph, and specially a mix of multiple approaches, is what Nostr needs to be censorship-resistant and what I hope to see in the future.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

# Nostr is not decentralized nor censorship-resistant Peter Todd has been [saying this](nostr:nevent1qqsq5zzu9ezhgq6es36jgg94wxsa2xh55p4tfa56yklsvjemsw7vj3cpp4mhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mqpr4mhxue69uhkummnw3ez6ur4vgh8wetvd3hhyer9wghxuet5qy8hwumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytnddaksz9rhwden5te0dehhxarj9ehhsarj9ejx2aspzfmhxue69uhk7enxvd5xz6tw9ec82cspz3mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduq3vamnwvaz7tmjv4kxz7fwdehhxarj9e3xzmnyqy28wumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnwdaehgu3wvfnsz9nhwden5te0wfjkccte9ec8y6tdv9kzumn9wspzpn92tr3hexwgt0z7w4qz3fcch4ryshja8jeng453aj4c83646jxvxkyvs4) for a long time and all the time I've been thinking he is misunderstanding everything, but I guess a more charitable interpretation is that he is right. Nostr _today_ is indeed centralized. Yesterday I published two harmless notes with the exact same content at the same time. In two minutes the notes had a noticeable difference in responses:  The top one was published to `wss://nostr.wine`, `wss://nos.lol`, `wss://pyramid.fiatjaf.com`. The second was published to the relay where I generally publish all my notes to, `wss://pyramid.fiatjaf.com`, and that is announced on my [NIP-05 file](https://fiatjaf.com/.well-known/nostr.json) and on my [NIP-65](https://nips.nostr.com/65) relay list. A few minutes later I published that screenshot again in two identical notes to the same sets of relays, asking if people understood the implications. The difference in quantity of responses can still be seen today:  These results are skewed now by the fact that the two notes got rebroadcasted to multiple relays after some time, but the fundamental point remains. What happened was that a huge lot more of people saw the first note compared to the second, and if Nostr was really censorship-resistant that shouldn't have happened at all. Some people implied in the comments, with an air of obviousness, that publishing the note to "more relays" should have predictably resulted in more replies, which, again, shouldn't be the case if Nostr is really censorship-resistant. What happens is that most people who engaged with the note are _following me_, in the sense that they have instructed their clients to fetch my notes on their behalf and present them in the UI, and clients are failing to do that despite me making it clear in multiple ways that my notes are to be found on `wss://pyramid.fiatjaf.com`. If we were talking not about me, but about some public figure that was being censored by the State and got banned (or shadowbanned) by the 3 biggest public relays, the sad reality would be that the person would immediately get his reach reduced to ~10% of what they had before. This is not at all unlike what happened to dozens of personalities that were banned from the corporate social media platforms and then moved to other platforms -- how many of their original followers switched to these other platforms? Probably some small percentage close to 10%. In that sense Nostr today is similar to what we had before. Peter Todd is right that if the way Nostr works is that you just subscribe to a small set of relays and expect to get everything from them then it tends to get very centralized very fast, and this is the reality today. Peter Todd is wrong that Nostr is _inherently_ centralized or that it needs a _protocol change_ to become what it has always purported to be. He is in fact wrong today, because what is written above is not valid for all clients of today, and if we [drive in the right direction](bc63c348b) we can successfully make Peter Todd be more and more wrong as time passes, instead of the contrary. --- See also: - [Censorship-resistant relay discovery in Nostr](nostr:naddr1qqykycekxd3nxdpcvgq3zamnwvaz7tmxd9shg6npvchxxmmdqgsrhuxx8l9ex335q7he0f09aej04zpazpl0ne2cgukyawd24mayt8grqsqqqa2803ksy8) - [A vision for content discovery and relay usage for basic social-networking in Nostr](nostr:naddr1qqyrxe33xqmxgve3qyghwumn8ghj7enfv96x5ctx9e3k7mgzyqalp33lewf5vdq847t6te0wvnags0gs0mu72kz8938tn24wlfze6qcyqqq823cywwjvq)

@ 6871d8df:4a9396c1

In an era where data seems to be as valuable as currency, the prevailing trend in AI starkly contrasts with the concept of personal data ownership. The explosion of AI and the ensuing race have made it easy to overlook where the data is coming from. The current model, dominated by big tech players, involves collecting vast amounts of user data and selling it to AI companies for training LLMs. Reddit recently penned a 60 million dollar deal, Google guards and mines Youtube, and more are going this direction. But is that their data to sell? Yes, it's on their platforms, but without the users to generate it, what would they monetize? To me, this practice raises significant ethical questions, as it assumes that user data is a commodity that companies can exploit at will. The heart of the issue lies in the ownership of data. Why, in today's digital age, do we not retain ownership of our data? Why can't our data follow us, under our control, to wherever we want to go? These questions echo the broader sentiment that while some in the tech industry — such as the blockchain-first crypto bros — recognize the importance of data ownership, their "blockchain for everything solutions," to me, fall significantly short in execution. Reddit further complicates this with its current move to IPO, which, on the heels of the large data deal, might reinforce the mistaken belief that user-generated data is a corporate asset. Others, no doubt, will follow suit. This underscores the urgent need for a paradigm shift towards recognizing and respecting user data as personal property. In my perfect world, the digital landscape would undergo a revolutionary transformation centered around the empowerment and sovereignty of individual data ownership. Platforms like Twitter, Reddit, Yelp, YouTube, and Stack Overflow, integral to our digital lives, would operate on a fundamentally different premise: user-owned data. In this envisioned future, data ownership would not just be a concept but a practice, with public and private keys ensuring the authenticity and privacy of individual identities. This model would eliminate the private data silos that currently dominate, where companies profit from selling user data without consent. Instead, data would traverse a decentralized protocol akin to the internet, prioritizing user control and transparency. The cornerstone of this world would be a meritocratic digital ecosystem. Success for companies would hinge on their ability to leverage user-owned data to deliver unparalleled value rather than their capacity to gatekeep and monetize information. If a company breaks my trust, I can move to a competitor, and my data, connections, and followers will come with me. This shift would herald an era where consent, privacy, and utility define the digital experience, ensuring that the benefits of technology are equitably distributed and aligned with the users' interests and rights. The conversation needs to shift fundamentally. We must challenge this trajectory and advocate for a future where data ownership and privacy are not just ideals but realities. If we continue on our current path without prioritizing individual data rights, the future of digital privacy and autonomy is bleak. Big tech's dominance allows them to treat user data as a commodity, potentially selling and exploiting it without consent. This imbalance has already led to users being cut off from their digital identities and connections when platforms terminate accounts, underscoring the need for a digital ecosystem that empowers user control over data. Without changing direction, we risk a future where our content — and our freedoms by consequence — are controlled by a few powerful entities, threatening our rights and the democratic essence of the digital realm. We must advocate for a shift towards data ownership by individuals to preserve our digital freedoms and democracy.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

# Pequenos problemas que o Estado cria para a sociedade e que não são sempre lembrados - **vale-transporte**: transferir o custo com o transporte do funcionário para um terceiro o estimula a morar longe de onde trabalha, já que morar perto é normalmente mais caro e a economia com transporte é inexistente. - **atestado médico**: o direito a faltar o trabalho com atestado médico cria a exigência desse atestado para todas as situações, substituindo o livre acordo entre patrão e empregado e sobrecarregando os médicos e postos de saúde com visitas desnecessárias de assalariados resfriados. - **prisões**: com dinheiro mal-administrado, burocracia e péssima alocação de recursos -- problemas que empresas privadas em competição (ou mesmo sem qualquer competição) saberiam resolver muito melhor -- o Estado fica sem presídios, com os poucos existentes entupidos, muito acima de sua alocação máxima, e com isto, segundo a bizarra corrente de responsabilidades que culpa o juiz que condenou o criminoso por sua morte na cadeia, juízes deixam de condenar à prisão os bandidos, soltando-os na rua. - **justiça**: entrar com processos é grátis e isto faz proliferar a atividade dos advogados que se dedicam a criar problemas judiciais onde não seria necessário e a entupir os tribunais, impedindo-os de fazer o que mais deveriam fazer. - **justiça**: como a justiça só obedece às leis e ignora acordos pessoais, escritos ou não, as pessoas não fazem acordos, recorrem sempre à justiça estatal, e entopem-na de assuntos que seriam muito melhor resolvidos entre vizinhos. - **leis civis**: as leis criadas pelos parlamentares ignoram os costumes da sociedade e são um incentivo a que as pessoas não respeitem nem criem normas sociais -- que seriam maneiras mais rápidas, baratas e satisfatórias de resolver problemas. - **leis de trãnsito**: quanto mais leis de trânsito, mais serviço de fiscalização são delegados aos policiais, que deixam de combater crimes por isto (afinal de contas, eles não querem de fato arriscar suas vidas combatendo o crime, a fiscalização é uma excelente desculpa para se esquivarem a esta responsabilidade). - **financiamento educacional**: é uma espécie de subsídio às faculdades privadas que faz com que se criem cursos e mais cursos que são cada vez menos recheados de algum conhecimento ou técnica útil e cada vez mais inúteis. - **leis de tombamento**: são um incentivo a que o dono de qualquer área ou construção "histórica" destrua todo e qualquer vestígio de história que houver nele antes que as autoridades descubram, o que poderia não acontecer se ele pudesse, por exemplo, usar, mostrar e se beneficiar da história daquele local sem correr o risco de perder, de fato, a sua propriedade. - **zoneamento urbano**: torna as cidades mais espalhadas, criando uma necessidade gigantesca de carros, ônibus e outros meios de transporte para as pessoas se locomoverem das zonas de moradia para as zonas de trabalho. - **zoneamento urbano**: faz com que as pessoas percam horas no trânsito todos os dias, o que é, além de um desperdício, um atentado contra a sua saúde, que estaria muito melhor servida numa caminhada diária entre a casa e o trabalho. - **zoneamento urbano**: torna ruas e as casas menos seguras criando zonas enormes, tanto de residências quanto de indústrias, onde não há movimento de gente alguma. - **escola obrigatória + currículo escolar nacional**: emburrece todas as crianças. - **leis contra trabalho infantil**: tira das crianças a oportunidade de aprender ofícios úteis e levar um dinheiro para ajudar a família. - **licitações**: como não existem os critérios do mercado para decidir qual é o melhor prestador de serviço, criam-se comissões de pessoas que vão decidir coisas. isto incentiva os prestadores de serviço que estão concorrendo na licitação a tentar comprar os membros dessas comissões. isto, fora a corrupção, gera problemas reais: __(i)__ a escolha dos serviços acaba sendo a pior possível, já que a empresa prestadora que vence está claramente mais dedicada a comprar comissões do que a fazer um bom trabalho (este problema afeta tantas áreas, desde a construção de estradas até a qualidade da merenda escolar, que é impossível listar aqui); __(ii)__ o processo corruptor acaba, no longo prazo, eliminando as empresas que prestavam e deixando para competir apenas as corruptas, e a qualidade tende a piorar progressivamente. - **cartéis**: o Estado em geral cria e depois fica refém de vários grupos de interesse. o caso dos taxistas contra o Uber é o que está na moda hoje (e o que mostra como os Estados se comportam da mesma forma no mundo todo). - **multas**: quando algum indivíduo ou empresa comete uma fraude financeira, ou causa algum dano material involuntário, as vítimas do caso são as pessoas que sofreram o dano ou perderam dinheiro, mas o Estado tem sempre leis que prevêem multas para os responsáveis. A justiça estatal é sempre muito rígida e rápida na aplicação dessas multas, mas relapsa e vaga no que diz respeito à indenização das vítimas. O que em geral acontece é que o Estado aplica uma enorme multa ao responsável pelo mal, retirando deste os recursos que dispunha para indenizar as vítimas, e se retira do caso, deixando estas desamparadas. - **desapropriação**: o Estado pode pegar qualquer propriedade de qualquer pessoa mediante uma indenização que é necessariamente inferior ao valor da propriedade para o seu presente dono (caso contrário ele a teria vendido voluntariamente). - **seguro-desemprego**: se há, por exemplo, um prazo mínimo de 1 ano para o sujeito ter direito a receber seguro-desemprego, isto o incentiva a planejar ficar apenas 1 ano em cada emprego (ano este que será sucedido por um período de desemprego remunerado), matando todas as possibilidades de aprendizado ou aquisição de experiência naquela empresa específica ou ascensão hierárquica. - **previdência**: a previdência social tem todos os defeitos de cálculo do mundo, e não importa muito ela ser uma forma horrível de poupar dinheiro, porque ela tem garantias bizarras de longevidade fornecidas pelo Estado, além de ser compulsória. Isso serve para criar no imaginário geral a idéia da __aposentadoria__, uma época mágica em que todos os dias serão finais de semana. A idéia da aposentadoria influencia o sujeito a não se preocupar em ter um emprego que faça sentido, mas sim em ter um trabalho qualquer, que o permita se aposentar. - **regulamentação impossível**: milhares de coisas são proibidas, há regulamentações sobre os aspectos mais mínimos de cada empreendimento ou construção ou espaço. se todas essas regulamentações fossem exigidas não haveria condições de produção e todos morreriam. portanto, elas não são exigidas. porém, o Estado, ou um agente individual imbuído do poder estatal pode, se desejar, exigi-las todas de um cidadão inimigo seu. qualquer pessoa pode viver a vida inteira sem cumprir nem 10% das regulamentações estatais, mas viverá também todo esse tempo com medo de se tornar um alvo de sua exigência, num estado de terror psicológico. - **perversão de critérios**: para muitas coisas sobre as quais a sociedade normalmente chegaria a um valor ou comportamento "razoável" espontaneamente, o Estado dita regras. estas regras muitas vezes não são obrigatórias, são mais "sugestões" ou limites, como o salário mínimo, ou as 44 horas semanais de trabalho. a sociedade, porém, passa a usar esses valores como se fossem o normal. são raras, por exemplo, as ofertas de emprego que fogem à regra das 44h semanais. - **inflação**: subir os preços é difícil e constrangedor para as empresas, pedir aumento de salário é difícil e constrangedor para o funcionário. a inflação força as pessoas a fazer isso, mas o aumento não é automático, como alguns economistas podem pensar (enquanto alguns outros ficam muito satisfeitos de que esse processo seja demorado e difícil). - **inflação**: a inflação destrói a capacidade das pessoas de julgar preços entre concorrentes usando a própria memória. - **inflação**: a inflação destrói os cálculos de lucro/prejuízo das empresas e prejudica enormemente as decisões empresariais que seriam baseadas neles. - **inflação**: a inflação redistribui a riqueza dos mais pobres e mais afastados do sistema financeiro para os mais ricos, os bancos e as megaempresas. - **inflação**: a inflação estimula o endividamento e o consumismo. - **lixo:** ao prover coleta e armazenamento de lixo "grátis para todos" o Estado incentiva a criação de lixo. se tivessem que pagar para que recolhessem o seu lixo, as pessoas (e conseqüentemente as empresas) se empenhariam mais em produzir coisas usando menos plástico, menos embalagens, menos sacolas. - **leis contra crimes financeiros:** ao criar legislação para dificultar acesso ao sistema financeiro por parte de criminosos a dificuldade e os custos para acesso a esse mesmo sistema pelas pessoas de bem cresce absurdamente, levando a um percentual enorme de gente incapaz de usá-lo, para detrimento de todos -- e no final das contas os grandes criminosos ainda conseguem burlar tudo.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

# Drivechain Understanding Drivechain requires a shift from the paradigm most bitcoiners are used to. It is not about "trustlessness" or "mathematical certainty", but game theory and incentives. (Well, Bitcoin in general is also that, but people prefer to ignore it and focus on some illusion of trustlessness provided by mathematics.) Here we will describe the basic mechanism (simple) and incentives (complex) of ["hashrate escrow"](https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0300.mediawiki) and how it enables a 2-way peg between the mainchain (Bitcoin) and various sidechains. The full concept of "Drivechain" also involves blind merged mining (i.e., the sidechains mine themselves by publishing their block hashes to the mainchain without the miners having to run the sidechain software), but this is much easier to understand and can be accomplished either by [the BIP-301 mechanism](https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0301.mediawiki) or by [the Spacechains mechanism](https://gist.github.com/RubenSomsen/5e4be6d18e5fa526b17d8b34906b16a5). ## How does hashrate escrow work from the point of view of Bitcoin? A new address type is created. Anything that goes in that is locked and can only be spent if all miners agree on the _Withdrawal Transaction_ (`WT^`) that will spend it for 6 months. There is one of these special addresses for each sidechain. To gather miners' agreement `bitcoind` keeps track of the "score" of all transactions that could possibly spend from that address. On every block mined, for each sidechain, the miner can use a portion of their coinbase to either increase the score of one `WT^` by 1 while decreasing the score of all others by 1; or they can decrease the score of all `WT^`s by 1; or they can do nothing. Once a transaction has gotten a score high enough, it is published and funds are effectively transferred from the sidechain to the withdrawing users. If a timeout of 6 months passes and the score doesn't meet the threshold, that `WT^` is discarded. ## What does the above procedure _mean_? It means that people can transfer coins from the mainchain to a sidechain by depositing to the special address. Then they can withdraw from the sidechain by making a special withdraw transaction in the sidechain. The special transaction somehow freezes funds in the sidechain while a transaction that aggregates all withdrawals into a single mainchain `WT^`, which is then submitted to the mainchain miners so they can start voting on it and finally after some months it is published. Now the crucial part: _the validity of the `WT^` is not verified by the Bitcoin mainchain rules_, i.e., if Bob has requested a withdraw from the sidechain to his mainchain address, but someone publishes a wrong `WT^` that instead takes Bob's funds and sends them to Alice's main address there is no way the mainchain will know that. What determines the "validity" of the `WT^` is the miner vote score and only that. It is the job of miners to vote correctly -- and for that they may want to run the sidechain node in SPV mode so they can attest for the existence of a reference to the `WT^` transaction in the sidechain blockchain (which then ensures it is ok) or do these checks by some other means. ## What? 6 months to get my money back? Yes. But no, in practice anyone who wants their money back will be able to use an atomic swap, submarine swap or other similar service to transfer funds from the sidechain to the mainchain and vice-versa. The long delayed withdraw costs would be incurred by few liquidity providers that would gain some small profit from it. ## Why bother with this at all? Drivechains solve many different problems: ### It enables experimentation and new use cases for Bitcoin Issued assets, fully private transactions, stateful blockchain contracts, turing-completeness, decentralized games, some "DeFi" aspects, prediction markets, futarchy, decentralized and yet meaningful human-readable names, big blocks with a ton of normal transactions on them, a chain optimized only for Lighting-style networks to be built on top of it. These are some ideas that may have merit to them, but were never _actually_ tried because they couldn't be tried with real Bitcoin or inferfacing with real bitcoins. They were either relegated to the shitcoin territory or to custodial solutions like Liquid or RSK that may have failed to gain network effect because of that. ### It solves conflicts and infighting Some people want fully private transactions in a UTXO model, others want "accounts" they can tie to their name and build reputation on top; some people want simple multisig solutions, others want complex code that reads a ton of variables; some people want to put all the transactions on a global chain in batches every 10 minutes, others want off-chain instant transactions backed by funds previously locked in channels; some want to spend, others want to just hold; some want to use blockchain technology to solve all the problems in the world, others just want to solve money. With Drivechain-based sidechains all these groups can be happy simultaneously and don't fight. Meanwhile they will all be using the same money and contributing to each other's ecosystem even unwillingly, it's also easy and free for them to change their group affiliation later, which reduces cognitive dissonance. ### It solves "scaling" Multiple chains like the ones described above would certainly do a lot to accomodate many more transactions that the current Bitcoin chain can. One could have special Lightning Network chains, but even just big block chains or big-block-mimblewimble chains or whatnot could probably do a good job. Or even something less cool like 200 independent chains just like Bitcoin is today, no extra features (and you can call it "sharding"), just that would already multiply the current total capacity by 200. Use your imagination. ### It solves the blockchain security budget issue The calculation is simple: you imagine what security budget is reasonable for each block in a world without block subsidy and divide that for the amount of bytes you can fit in a single block: that is the price to be paid in _satoshis per byte_. In reasonable estimative, the price necessary for every Bitcoin transaction goes to very large amounts, such that not only any day-to-day transaction has insanely prohibitive costs, but also Lightning channel opens and closes are impracticable. So without a solution like Drivechain you'll be left with only one alternative: pushing Bitcoin usage to trusted services like Liquid and RSK or custodial Lightning wallets. With Drivechain, though, there could be thousands of transactions happening in sidechains and being all aggregated into a sidechain block that would then pay a very large fee to be published (via blind merged mining) to the mainchain. Bitcoin security guaranteed. ### It keeps Bitcoin decentralized Once we have sidechains to accomodate the normal transactions, the mainchain functionality can be reduced to be only a "hub" for the sidechains' comings and goings, and then the maximum block size for the mainchain can be reduced to, say, 100kb, which would make running a full node very very easy. ## Can miners steal? Yes. If a group of coordinated miners are able to secure the majority of the hashpower and keep their coordination for 6 months, they can publish a `WT^` that takes the money from the sidechains and pays to themselves. ## Will miners steal? No, because the incentives are such that they won't. Although it may look at first that stealing is an obvious strategy for miners as it is free money, there are many costs involved: 1. The cost of **ceasing blind-merged mining returns** -- as stealing will kill a sidechain, all the fees from it that miners would be expected to earn for the next years are gone; 2. The cost of **Bitcoin price going down**: If a steal is successful that will mean Drivechains are not safe, therefore Bitcoin is less useful, and miner credibility will also be hurt, which are likely to cause the Bitcoin price to go down, which in turn may kill the miners' businesses and savings; 3. The cost of **coordination** -- assuming miners are just normal businesses, they just want to do their work and get paid, but stealing from a Drivechain will require coordination with other miners to conduct an immoral act in a way that has many pitfalls and is likely to be broken over the months; 4. The cost of **miners leaving your mining pool**: when we talked about "miners" above we were actually talking about mining pools operators, so they must also consider the risk of miners migrating from their mining pool to others as they begin the process of stealing; 5. The cost of **community goodwill** -- when participating in a steal operation, a miner will suffer a ton of backlash from the community. Even if the attempt fails at the end, the fact that it was attempted will contribute to growing concerns over exaggerated miners power over the Bitcoin ecosystem, which may end up causing the community to agree on a hard-fork to change the mining algorithm in the future, or to do something to increase participation of more entities in the mining process (such as development or cheapment of new ASICs), which have a chance of decreasing the profits of current miners. Another point to take in consideration is that one may be inclined to think a newly-created sidechain or a sidechain with relatively low usage may be more easily stolen from, since the blind merged mining returns from it (point 1 above) are going to be small -- but the fact is also that a sidechain with small usage will also have less money to be stolen from, and since the other costs besides 1 are less elastic at the end it will not be worth stealing from these too. All of the above consideration are valid only if miners are stealing from _good sidechains_. If there is a sidechain that is doing things wrong, scamming people, not being used at all, or is full of bugs, for example, that will be perceived as a bad sidechain, and then miners can and will safely steal from it and kill it, which will be perceived as a good thing by everybody. ## What do we do if miners steal? Paul Sztorc has suggested in the past that a user-activated soft-fork could prevent miners from stealing, i.e., most Bitcoin users and nodes issue a rule [similar to this one](https://twitter.com/LukeDashjr/status/1126221228182843398) to invalidate the inclusion of a faulty `WT^` and thus cause any miner that includes it in a block to be relegated to their own Bitcoin fork that other nodes won't accept. This suggestion has made people think Drivechain is a sidechain solution _backed by user-actived soft-forks for safety_, which is very far from the truth. Drivechains must not and will not rely on this kind of soft-fork, although they are possible, as the coordination costs are too high and no one should ever expect these things to happen. If even with all the incentives against them (see above) miners do still steal from a _good sidechain_ that will mean _the failure of the Drivechain experiment_. It will very likely also mean _the failure of the Bitcoin experiment_ too, as it will be proven that miners can coordinate to act maliciously over a prolonged period of time regardless of economic and social incentives, meaning they are probably in it just for attacking Bitcoin, backed by nation-states or something else, and therefore no Bitcoin transaction in the mainchain is to be expected to be safe ever again. ## Why use this and not a full-blown trustless and open sidechain technology? Because it is impossible. If you ever heard someone saying "just use a sidechain", "do this in a sidechain" or anything like that, be aware that these people are either talking about "federated" sidechains (i.e., funds are kept in custody by a group of entities) or they are talking about Drivechain, or they are disillusioned and think it is possible to do sidechains in any other manner. ### No, I mean a trustless 2-way peg with correctness of the withdrawals verified by the Bitcoin protocol! That is not possible unless Bitcoin verifies all transactions that happen in all the sidechains, which would be akin to drastically increasing the blocksize and expanding the Bitcoin rules in tons of ways, i.e., a terrible idea that no one wants. ### What about the Blockstream sidechains whitepaper? Yes, that was a way to do it. The Drivechain hashrate escrow is a conceptually simpler way to achieve the same thing with improved incentives, less junk in the chain, more safety. ## Isn't the hashrate escrow a very complex soft-fork? Yes, but it is much simpler than SegWit. And, unlike SegWit, it doesn't force anything on users, i.e., it isn't a mandatory blocksize increase. ## Why should we expect miners to care enough to participate in the voting mechanism? Because it's in their own self-interest to do it, and it costs very little. Today over half of the miners mine RSK. It's not blind merged mining, it's a [very convoluted process that requires them to run a RSK full node](https://developers.rsk.co/rsk/architecture/mining/implementation-guide/). For the Drivechain sidechains, an SPV node would be enough, or maybe just getting data from a block explorer API, so much much simpler. ## What if I still don't like Drivechain even after reading this? That is the entire point! You don't have to like it or use it as long as you're fine with other people using it. The hashrate escrow special addresses will not impact you at all, validation cost is minimal, and you get the benefit of people who want to use Drivechain migrating to their own sidechains and freeing up space for you in the mainchain. See also the point above about infighting. ## See also * [Podcast episode with Ruben Somsen and Aaron van Wirdum explaining Drivechain](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DhU6nsB5Z-0) * [Alternatives to Drivechain](nostr:naddr1qqyrqenzvvukvcfkqyghwumn8ghj7enfv96x5ctx9e3k7mgzyqalp33lewf5vdq847t6te0wvnags0gs0mu72kz8938tn24wlfze6qcyqqq823csjg2t6) * [Drivechain comparison with Ethereum](nostr:naddr1qqyx2dp58qcx2wpjqyghwumn8ghj7enfv96x5ctx9e3k7mgzyqalp33lewf5vdq847t6te0wvnags0gs0mu72kz8938tn24wlfze6qcyqqq823cane7px)

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

# Maybe a new approach to the Austrian Business Cycle Theory, some disorganized thoughts This approach is loosely based on the guido-hulsmann concept of "cluster of errors" and on general ideas about capital heterogeneity taken from Lachmann. * Interest is just another price. Let's consider just flow of money and changes in relative prices instead. * Monetary policy is just one possible cause of relative prices misalignment. * The base interest rate is not very important, if there's a big flow of money to one specific sector that's what matters. There will be an unsustainable boom there. * Of course if there's a general reduction in interest rates that means there's a general flow of money to multiple sectors (those with lengthier production processes) or even disequilibria inside sectors towards more roundaboutness in an unsustainable manner (to talk about sectors is an oversimplification, these things don't exist in fact). * The standard ABCT formulation gives too much importance to the banking sector, as if it had a role in the economy much more important than anything else. That may not be the case. And even without banks at all still boom-bust cycles would happen if a new flow of printed money is directed somewhere (anywhere). This new approach solves: * Critiques of the theory like "oh, entrepreneurs are rational, they will know the monetary policy and don't overinvest" because now we can make it clear that they will follow relative prices. * The problem with talking about one single interest rate, as in the real world there multiple interest rates -- or in fact multiple interest rates for each agent at each point on time. * The problem with hayekian triangles. We can ignore these now because the concept of a general lengthening of a general production process is not the characteristic of the cycle anymore. That is just one possible example of cycle -- one that's probably very rare. * Garrison's powerpoint fundamental problem: it ignores the fundamental insight from Solow's growth model according to which economic growth can't be explained by considering just aggregate savings/investments. ### Networks of circles of production Instead of thinking in triangles[^hayekiantriangles] we can think in networks of circles of variable sizes. If we imagine there's a circle which represents one kind of good produced and for some reason there's an stimulus for the production of that good (for example, a governmental program that uses newly-printed money to subsidize loans for that specifically) that circle will get bigger. In the process of getting bigger it will also make bigger the circles that were already around it, and the biggerness will gradually spread. That means new investment is being made on each of these industries, malinvestiment. People and resources are migrating from other, more distant circles, to these circles nearer the epicenter of malinvestment. Representing the cycle that way we're free to oversimplify as you can just say: the real world is like this, but with many more circles and more complex relationships between them. You can also alternate between considering the circles sectors, industries or individual companies. ### No sequential "steps" of production, just plans Instead of imagining production princesses with discrete sequential steps we should also consider actually just plans. Entrepreneurs predict there will be demand and predict there well be suppliers with reasonable prices for them to complete a plan. The plan can be arbitrarily divided into production and sale of a good, but actually often these parts are not so simply detached from each other. In the network of circles the plan can be visualized as one circle looking around and seeing the other circles and estimating their future behavior. The boom stops and the bust happens when the predictions fail. They fail because the unsustainable stimulus that was causing some of the circles to increase continuously stops. [^hayekiantriangles]: Hayekian triangles: <https://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Hayekian_triangle>

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

# IPFS problems: Pinning "Pin" is a nice word the IPFS team has come up with to designate the act of telling your node to store some content permanently and don't garbage-collect it. The idea is that you'll store everything you fetch and reroute this to others automatically, but every once in a while all content you have on your node that is not explicitly "pinned" will be erased, so you shouldn't worry about storing too much of other people's things, but also can contribute to keep alive content you like. Pinning has a big problem, however: you can't know what you've pinned. Every pin you add is going to be saved on your computer, you won't be able to unpin stuff because you don't know what is what, in the end you'll be left with a disk full of pinned stuff and probably lose that disk or delete everything to open up space for other things after getting frustrated with the entire IPFS experiment. Examine the incentives in this model: we're relying on sharing being made by people that do that unwillingly and unknowngly. Users spend electricity on nodes that are supposed to be always running and serving content to others. Links are only kept unbroken if someone decides to pin them, but since there's no order, the pins are doomed to be erased everywhere.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

# IPFS problems: Conceit IPFS is trying to do many things. The IPFS leaders are revolutionaries who think they're smarter than the rest of the entire industry. The fact that they've first proposed a protocol for peer-to-peer distribution of immutable, content-addressed objects, then later tried to fix [that same problem](nostr:naddr1qqyrqen9xf3nvdpeqyghwumn8ghj7enfv96x5ctx9e3k7mgzyqalp33lewf5vdq847t6te0wvnags0gs0mu72kz8938tn24wlfze6qcyqqq823cmdjnnj) using their own half-baked solution (IPNS) is one example. Other examples are their odd appeal to decentralization in a very non-specific way, their excessive [flirtation with Ethereum](nostr:naddr1qqyxxdpev5cnsvpkqyghwumn8ghj7enfv96x5ctx9e3k7mgzyqalp33lewf5vdq847t6te0wvnags0gs0mu72kz8938tn24wlfze6qcyqqq823cta4a2e) and their never-to-be-finished can-never-work-as-advertised _Filecoin_ project. They could have focused on just making the infrastructure for distribution of objects through hashes (not saying this would actually be a good idea, but it had some potential) over a peer-to-peer network, but in trying to reinvent the entire internet they screwed everything up.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

# Cultura Inglesa e aprendizado extra-escolar Em 2005 a Cultura Inglesa me classificou como nível 2 em proficiência de inglês, numa escala de 1 a 14 ou coisa parecida. De modo que eu precisaria de 6 anos de aulas com eles pra ficar bom. 2 anos depois, sem fazer nenhuma aula ou ter qualquer tipo de treinamento intensivo eu era capaz de compreender textos técnicos em inglês sem nenhuma dificuldade. Mais 2 anos e eu era capaz de compreender qualquer coisa e me expressar com razoável qualidade. Tudo isso pra documentar mais um exemplo, que poderia passar despercebido, de aprendizado de tipo escolar que se deu fora de uma escola.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

# A Canção do Cavaleiro Bolsonaro > em meio ao caos, às trevas e à imundície > da esquerda atroz, que a pó a nação reduz > surge um guerreiro cavalgando as planícies > pra libertar a Terra de Santa Cruz > > tendo sua liberdade ameaçada > o povo prostra-se em pia oração > deus lhes envia com armadura prateada > o herói Jair, dos justos o bastião > > Bolsonaro mito > Bolsonaro mito > defende a liberdade neste conflito > > à serpente vermelha quem resiste? > são China e ONU seus braços de terror > mas Bolsomito com sua espada em riste > rasga o inimigo com a audácia de um condor > > por sua honra não se acovarda ou falha > imbuído está de intrepidez viril > vá Bolsonaro, vença essa batalha! > destrua o mal, salve o povo do Brasil > > Bolsonaro mito > Bolsonaro mito > defende a liberdade neste conflito Letra de Paulo Kogos, cantada por ele em <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1BBY9e-__s>

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

# Não tem solução O melhor presidente dos últimos 50 anos, o melhor congresso, o melhor governador, os melhores ministros, um resultado eleitoral muito melhor do que o melhor dos meus sonhos e nada acontece. A única solução que nos resta é o Bitcoin. Vale talvez a pena dar a vida pra tentar popularizar esse negócio.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

# A podridão É razoável dizer que há três tipos de reações à menção do nome [O que é Bitcoin?](nostr:naddr1qqrky6t5vdhkjmspz9mhxue69uhkv6tpw34xze3wvdhk6q3q80cvv07tjdrrgpa0j7j7tmnyl2yr6yr7l8j4s3evf6u64th6gkwsxpqqqp65wp3k3fu) no Brasil: 1. A reação das pessoas velhas Muito sabiamente, as pessoas velhas que já ouviram falar de Bitcoin o encaram ou como uma coisa muito distante e reservada ao conhecimento dos seus sobrinhos que entendem de computador ou como um golpe que se deve temer e do qual o afastamento é imperativo, e de qualquer modo isso não as deve afetar mesmo então para que perder o seu tempo. Essas pessoas estão erradas: nem o sobrinho que entende de computador sabe nada sobre Bitcoin, nem o Bitcoin é um golpe, e nem é o Bitcoin uma coisa totalmente irrelevante para elas. É razoável ter cautela diante do desconhecido, no que as pessoas velhas fazem bem, mas creio eu que também muito do medo que essas pessoas têm vem da ignorância que foi criada e difundida durante os primeiros 10 anos de Bitcoin por jornalistas analfabetos e desinformados em torno do assunto. 2. A reação das pessoas pragmáticas "Já tenho um banco e já posso enviar dinheiro, pra que Bitcoin? O quê, eu ainda tenho que pagar para transferir bitcoins? Isso não é vantagem nenhuma!" Enquanto querem parecer muito pragmáticas e racionais, essas pessoas ignoram vários aspectos das suas próprias vidas, a começar pelo fato de que o uso dos bancos comuns não é gratuito, e depois que a existência desse sistema financeiro no qual elas se crêem muito incluídas e confortáveis é baseada num grande esquema chamado Banco Central, que tem como um dos seus fundamentos a possibilidade da inflação ilimitada da moeda, que torna todas as pessoas mais pobres, incluindo essas mesmas, tão pragmáticas e racionais. Mais importante é notar que essas pessoas tão racionais foram também ludibriadas pela difusão da ignorância sobre Bitcoin como sendo um sistema de transferência de dinheiro. O Bitcoin não é e não pode ser um sistema de transferência de dinheiro porque ele só pode transferir-se a si mesmo, não pode transferir "dinheiro" no sentido comum dessa palavra (tenho em mente o dinheiro comum no Brasil, os reais). O fato de que haja hoje pessoas que conseguem "transferir dinheiro" usando o Bitcoin é uma coisa totalmente inesperada: a existência de pessoas que trocam bitcoins por reais (e outros dinheiros de outros lugares) e vice-versa. Não era necessário que fosse assim, não estava determinado em lugar nenhum, 10 anos atrás, que haveria demanda por um bem digital sem utilidade imediata nenhuma, foi assim por um milagre. Porém, o milagre só estará completo quando esses bitcoins se tornarem eles mesmo o dinheiro comum. E aí assim será possível usar o sistema Bitcoin para transferir dinheiro de fato. Antes disso, chamar o Bitcoin de sistema de pagamentos ou qualquer coisa que o valha é perverter-lhe o sentido, é confundir um acidente com a essência da coisa. 3. A reação dos jovens analfabetos Os jovens analfabetos são as pessoas que usam a expressão "criptos" e freqüentam sítios que dão notícias totalmente irrelevantes sobre "criptomoedas" o dia inteiro. Não sei muito bem como eles vivem porque não lhes suporto a presença, mas são pessoas que estão muito empolgadas com toda a "onda das criptomoedas" e acham tudo muito incrível, tão incrível que acabam se interessando e então comprando todos os tokens vagabundos que inventam. Usam a palavra "decentralizado", um anglicismo muito feio que deveria significar que não existe um centro controlador da moeda x ou y e que o seu protocolo continuaria funcionando mesmo que vários operadores saíssem do ar, mas como o aplicam aos tokens que são literalmente emitidos por um centro controlador com uma figura humana no centro que toma todas as decisões sobre tudo -- como o Ethereum e conseqüentemente todos os milhares de tokens ERC20 criados dentro do sistema Ethereum -- essa palavra não faz mais sentido. Na sua empolgação e completo desconhecimento sobre como um ente nocivo poderia destruir cadauma das suas criptomoedas tão decentralizadas, ou como mesmo sem ninguém querer uma falha fundamental no protocolo e no sistema de incentivos poderia pôr tudo abaixo, sem imaginar que toda a valorização do token XYZ pode ter sido fabricada de caso pensado pelos seus próprios emissores ou só ser mesmo uma bolha, acabam esses jovens por igualar o token XYZ, ou ETH, BCH ou o que for, ao Bitcoin, ignorando todas as diferenças qualitativas e apenas mencionando de leve as quantitativas. Misturada à sua empolgação, e como um bônus, surge a perspectiva de ficar rico. Se um desses por algum golpe de sorte surfou em alguma bolha como a de 2017 e conseguiu multiplicar um dinheiro por 10 comprando e vendendo EOS, já começa logo a usar como argumento para convencer os outros de que "criptomoedas são o futuro" o fato de que ele ficou rico. Não subestime a burrice humana. --- Há jovens no grupo das pessoas velhas, velhas no grupo das pessoas jovens, pessoas que não estão em nenhum dos grupos e pessoas que estão em mais de um grupo, isso não importa.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

# idea: Hosted-channels Lightning wallet that runs in the browser Communicates over HTTP with a server that is actually connected to the Lightning Network, but generates preimages and onions locally, doing everything like the [Hosted Channels protocol](https://github.com/btcontract/hosted-channels-rfc) says. Just the communication method changes. Could use this library: <https://www.npmjs.com/package/bolt04>

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

# Scala is such a great language Scala is amazing. The type system has the perfect balance between flexibility and powerfulness. `match` statements are great. You can write imperative code that looks very nice and expressive (and I haven't tried writing purely functional things yet). Everything is easy to write and cheap and neovim integration works great. But Java is not great. And the fact that Scala is a JVM language doesn't help because over the years people have written stuff that depends on Java libraries -- and these Java libraries are not as safe as the Scala libraries, they contain reflection, slowness, runtime errors, all kinds of horrors. Scala is also very tightly associated with Akka, the actor framework, and Akka is a giant collection of anti-patterns. Untyped stuff, reflection, dependency on JVM, basically a lot of javisms. I just arrived and I don't know anything about the Scala history or ecosystem or community, but I have the impression that Akka has prevent more adoption of Scala from decent people that aren't Java programmers. But luckily there is a solution -- or two solutions: ScalaJS is a great thing that exists. It transpiles Scala code into JavaScript and it runs on NodeJS or in a browser! Scala Native is a much better deal, though, it compiles to LLVM and then to binary code and you can have single binaries that run directly without a JVM -- not that the single JARs are that bad though, they are great and everybody has Java so I'll take that anytime over C libraries or NPM-distributed software, but direct executables even better. Scala Native just needs a little more love and some libraries and it will be the greatest thing in a couple of years.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

# Firefox in comparison with Chrome as of 2018 Better - Faster page loads - Displays `<table>`s better by default - Using the same browser on multiple places actually makes your experience better, because you can list and send tabs from one device to another - Firefox for Android is vastly superior: - It is much faster - It allows you to install browser extensions, which means you get to use uBlock Origin on Android - It allows you to send and receive tabs from the desktop - It has a built-in QR code scanner - Telegram notifications actually work - I'm not forced to see the neverending super-animated left-inclined special Google Doodles on my new tab page Basically the same thing - JavaScript speed - Overall stability - JavaScript new features support - All major browser extensions seem to be available for both platforms (although I'm not a huge extensions user so I don't know) Worse - Chrome has that nice OpenSearch support that allows you to type the beggining of a site's URL, hit tab and then perform a search query on that site if it supports OpenSearch (Firefox has OpenSearch support, but it works differently, in I way that feels odd to me) - Developer tools are much slower, so I use Chromium for debugging JavaScript apps and nothing more - CodeMirror doesn't allow me to paste using the middle-click on Linux, while in Chrome it does, who knows why? There's an issue open on GitHub, but no solution for the near future (I'm forced to call `xsel -p -o | xsel -b` before pasting stuff from the terminal)

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

# The "Drivechain will replace altcoins" argument The argument that [Drivechain](nostr:naddr1qq9xgunfwejkx6rpd9hqzythwden5te0ve5kzar2v9nzucm0d5pzqwlsccluhy6xxsr6l9a9uhhxf75g85g8a709tprjcn4e42h053vaqvzqqqr4gumtjfnp) will replace shitcoins is _not_ that people will [sell their shitcoins](https://twitter.com/craigwarmke/status/1680371502246514688) or that the existing shitcoins will instantly vanish. The argument is about a change _at the margin_ that eventually ends up killing the shitcoins or reducing them to their original insignificance. **What does "at the margin" mean?** For example, when the price of the coconut drops a little in relation to bananas, does that mean that everybody will stop buying bananas and will buy only coconuts now? No. Does it mean there will be [zero](https://twitter.com/GoingParabolic/status/1680319173744836609) increase in the amount of coconuts sold? Also no. What happens is that there is a small number of people who would have preferred to buy coconuts if only they were a little less expensive but end up buying bananas instead. When the price of coconut drops these people buy coconuts and don't buy bananas. The argument is that the same thing will happen when Drivechain is activated: there are some people today (yes, believe me) that would have preferred to work within the Bitcoin ecosystem but end up working on shitcoins. In a world with Drivechain these people would be working on the Bitcoin ecosystem, for the benefit of Bitcoin and the Bitcoiners. Why would they prefer Bitcoin? Because Bitcoin has a bigger network-effect. When these people come, they increase Bitocin's network-effect even more, and if they don't go to the shitcoins they reduce the shitcoins' network-effect. Those changes in network-effect contribute to bringing others who were a little further from the margin and the thing compounds until the shitcoins are worthless. Who are these people at the margin? I don't know, but they certainly exist. I would guess the Stark people are one famous example, but there are many others. In the past, examples included Roger Ver, Zooko Wilcox, Riccardo Spagni and Vitalik Buterin. And before you start screaming that these people are shitcoiners (which they are) imagine how much bigger Bitcoin could have been today if they and their entire communities (yes, I know, of awful people) were using and working for Bitcoin today. Remember that phrase about Bitcoin being for enemies? ### But everything that has been invented in the altcoin world is awful, we don't need any of that! You and me should not be the ones judging what is good and what is not for others, but both you and me and others will benefit if these things can be done in a way that increases Bitcoin network-effect and pays fees to Bitcoin miners. Also, there is a much stronger point you may have not considered: if you believe all altcoiners are scammers that means we have only seen the things that were invented by scammers, since all honest people that had good ideas decided to not implement them as the only way to do it would be to create a scammy shitcoin. One example is [Bitcoin Hivemind](nostr:naddr1qqyxs6tkv4kkjmnyqyghwumn8ghj7enfv96x5ctx9e3k7mgzyqalp33lewf5vdq847t6te0wvnags0gs0mu72kz8938tn24wlfze6qcyqqq823cd3vm3c). If it is possible to do these ideas without creating shitcoins we may start to see new things that are actually good.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

# Como conversar com esquerdistas (notas de uma conversa com P.S., 12/3/17) Escutar o que ele está falando. E se o discurso dele é só uma coleção de lugares-comuns da esquerda (como deve ser, provavelmente), não tem problema. Fazer perguntas que tentam esclarecer o sentimento por trás do discurso (por exemplo, perguntar se o esquerdista tem medo de que Michel Temer vá empobrecer o Estado), e se a resposta for, de novo, um discurso pronto, repetir o processo (por exemplo, perguntar se o esquerdista tem medo de que o Estado pobre não poderá prover educação para a população), até chegar às raízes íntimas da inquietação que aquele esquerdista sente que tem alguma relação com aquele ponto. Quando chega-se a esse ponto, o serviço já está feito. O serviço de neutralizar a neurose para deixar a pessoa lidar com suas causas que se escondiam por baixo de um mar de racionalizações e discursos políticos. Um exemplo é o de que a pessoa foi assaltada. Nos momentos que se seguiram ao assalto, o sentimento de impotência e desorientação que ela experimentou era grande demais para ser tolerado ("por que eu? por que agora?") e então ela usou discursos que tinha ouvido para criar uma explicação para tudo aquilo, e a explicação acabou sendo a de que a falta de educação básica é que cria assaltantes, e essa educação precisa ser fornecida pelo Estado etc. Também não precisa ser tão traumático assim. Pode ser um fato que não envolveu nenhuma violência física, como a dor que ela sentiu ao ouvir um tio, que era professor infantil, numa roda de conversa, narrar, com alguma tristeza que ele tentava esconder, o fato de que fora demitido. Talvez este seja o processo que Olavo tentou fazer, sempre sem sucesso (já que, imagino, sem muito empenho), ao perguntar às pessoas "de onde elas tiraram essa idéia". É bastante importante, talvez a parte mais importante, a cada momento deste processo (e de todos, mas estamos falando deste), notar em nós mesmos que o que o que estamos fazendo, essas perguntas todas, é de certa forma também um discurso (perceba que tem até um manual ensinando, que é este texto mesmo), e que ele também deve ter suas origens neuróticas.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

# Qual é o economista? (piadas) O economista americano rapper ficou triste quando sua banda brasileira favorita encerrou suas atividades por crer que a demanda por discos de rap seria cada vez pior. Resposta: Robert Lucas e as expectativas dos Racionais. O economista inglês queria muito arrumar uma namorada. Resposta: John Maynard Keynes e a demanda afetiva. Quando o filho do economista austríaco chegou em casa todo sujo ele sem nem pensar ordenou que o moleque fosse tomar banho. Resposta: Friedrich Hayek e a ordem espontânea. O economista americano tinha muito orgulho de ter em sua casa um valiosíssimo quadro de um impressionista francês. Resposta: Milton Friedman e o Monet raríssimo. O economista austríaco jurou aos seus filhos que todos eles se mudariam para Brasília. Resposta: Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk e o “eu juro” da capital. O economista alemão organizou um evento meio sertanejo meio religioso e colocou como organizador uma executiva que tinha quebrado suas últimas 4 empresas por má administração. Resposta: Karl Marx e a expo-oração da que mais-falia.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

# TiddlyWiki remoteStorage [TiddlyWiki](https://tiddlywiki.com/) is very good and useful, but since at this time I used multiple computers during the week, it wouldn't work for me to use it as a single file on my computer, so I had to hack its internal tiddler saving mechanism to instead save the raw data of each tiddler to [remoteStorage](https://remotestorage.io/) and load them from that place also (ok, there was in theory a plugin system, but I had to read and understand the entire unformatted core source-code anyway). There was also a [server](https://github.com/fiatjaf/tiddlywiki-remotestorage-server) that fetched tiddlywikis from anyone's remoteStorage buckets (after authorization) and served these to the world, a quick and nice way to publish a TiddlyWiki -- which is a problem all people in TiddlyWiki struggle against. - <https://github.com/fiatjaf/tiddlywiki-remotestorage> - <https://tiddly.alhur.es/> ## See also - [hledger-web](nostr:naddr1qqyrsefkvvck2efkqyghwumn8ghj7enfv96x5ctx9e3k7mgzyqalp33lewf5vdq847t6te0wvnags0gs0mu72kz8938tn24wlfze6qcyqqq823cffvz7c) - [LessPass remoteStorage](nostr:naddr1qqyrsctpxfjnqepeqyghwumn8ghj7enfv96x5ctx9e3k7mgzyqalp33lewf5vdq847t6te0wvnags0gs0mu72kz8938tn24wlfze6qcyqqq823cfa6z2z)

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

# O Bitcoin como um sistema social humano Afinal de contas, o que é o Bitcoin? Não vou responder a essa pergunta explicando o que é uma "blockchain" ou coisa que o valha, como todos fazem muito pessimamente. [A melhor explicação em português que eu já vi está aqui](nostr:naddr1qqrky6t5vdhkjmspz9mhxue69uhkv6tpw34xze3wvdhk6q3q80cvv07tjdrrgpa0j7j7tmnyl2yr6yr7l8j4s3evf6u64th6gkwsxpqqqp65wp3k3fu), mas mesmo assim qualquer explicação jamais será definitiva. A explicação apenas do protocolo, do que faz um programa `bitcoind` sendo executado em um computador e como ele se comunica com outros em outros computadores, e os incentivos que estão em jogo para garantir com razoável probabilidade que se chegará a um consenso sobre quem é dono de qual parte de qual transação, apesar de não ser complicada demais, exigirá do iniciante que seja compreendida muitas vezes antes que ele se possa se sentir confortável para dizer que entende um pouco. E essa parte _técnica_, apesar de ter sido o insight fundamental que gerou o evento miraculoso chamado Bitcoin, não é a parte mais importante, hoje. Se fosse, várias dessas outras moedas seriam concorrentes do Bitcoin, mas não são, e jamais poderão ser, porque elas não estão nem próximas de ter os outros elementos que compõem o Bitcoin. São eles: 1. A estrutura O Bitcoin é um sistema composto de partes independentes. Existem programadores que trabalham no protocolo e aplicações, e dia após dia novos programadores chegam e outros saem, e eles trabalham às vezes em conjunto, às vezes sem que um se dê conta do outro, às vezes por conta própria, às vezes pagos por empresas interessadas. Existem os usuários que realizam validação completa, isto é, estão rodando algum programa do Bitcoin e contribuindo para a difusão dos blocos, das transações, rejeitando usuários malignos e evitando ataques de mineradores mal-intencionados. Existem os poupadores, acumuladores ou os proprietários de bitcoins, que conhecem as possibilidades que o mundo reserva para o Bitcoin, esperam o dia em que o padrão-Bitcoin será uma realidade mundial e por isso mesmo atributem aos seus bitcoins valores muito mais altos do que os preços atuais de mercado, agarrando-se a eles. Especuladores de "criptomoedas" não fazem parte desse sistema, nem tampouco empresas que [aceitam pagamento](https://bitpay.com/) em bitcoins para imediatamente venderem tudo em troca de dinheiro estatal, e menos ainda [gente que usa bitcoins](https://www.investimentobitcoin.com/) e [a própria marca Bitcoin](https://www.xdex.com.br/) para aplicar seus golpes e coisas parecidas. 2. A cultura Mencionei que há empresas que pagam programadores para trabalharem no código aberto do BitcoinCore ou de outros programas relacionados à rede Bitcoin -- ou mesmo em aplicações não necessariamente ligadas à camada fundamental do protocolo. Nenhuma dessas empresas interessadas, porém, controla o Bitcoin, e isso é o elemento principal da cultura do Bitcoin. O propósito do Bitcoin sempre foi ser uma rede aberta, sem chefes, sem política envolvida, sem necessidade de pedir autorização para participar. O fato do próprio Satoshi Nakamoto ter voluntariamente desaparecido das discussões foi fundamental para que o Bitcoin não fosse visto como um sistema dependente dele ou que ele fosse entendido como o chefe. Em outras "criptomoedas" nada disso aconteceu. O chefe supremo do Ethereum continua por aí mandando e desmandando e inventando novos elementos para o protocolo que são automaticamente aceitos por toda a comunidade, o mesmo vale para o Zcash, EOS, Ripple, Litecoin e até mesmo para o Bitcoin Cash. Pior ainda: Satoshi Nakamoto saiu sem nenhum dinheiro, nunca mexeu nos milhares de bitcoins que ele gerou nos primeiros blocos -- enquanto os líderes dessas porcarias supramencionadas cobraram uma fortuna pelo direito de uso dos seus primeiros usuários ou estão aí a até hoje receber dividendos. Tudo isso e mais outras coisas -- a mentalidade anti-estatal e entusiasta de sistemas p2p abertos dos membros mais proeminentes da comunidade, por exemplo -- faz com que um ar de liberdade e suspeito de tentativas de centralização da moeda sejam percebidos e execrados. 3. A história A noção de que o Bitcoin não pode ser controlado por ninguém passou em 2017 por [dois testes](https://www.forbes.com/sites/ktorpey/2019/04/23/this-key-part-of-bitcoins-history-is-what-separates-it-from-competitors/#49869b41ae5e) e saiu deles muito reforçada: o primeiro foi a divisão entre Bitcoin (BTC) e Bitcoin Cash (BCH), uma obra de engenharia social que teve um sucesso mediano em roubar parte da marca e dos usuários do verdadeiro Bitcoin e depois a tentativa de tomada por completo do Bitcoin promovida por mais ou menos as mesmas partes interessadas chamada SegWit2x, que fracassou por completo, mas não sem antes atrapalhar e difundir mentiras para todos os lados. Esses dois fracassos provaram que o Bitcoin, mesmo sendo uma comunidade desorganizada, sem líderes claros, está imune à [captura por grupos interessados](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture), o que é mais um milagre -- ou, como dizem, um [ponto de Schelling](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focal_point_(game_theory)). Esse período crucial na história do Bitcoin fez com ficasse claro que _hard-forks_ são essencialmente incompatíveis com a natureza do protocolo, de modo que no futuro não haverá a possibilidade de uma sugestão como a de imprimir mais bitcoins do que o que estava programado sejam levadas a sério (mas, claro, sempre há a possibilidade da cultura toda se perder, as pessoas esquecerem a história e o Bitcoin ser cooptado, eis a importância da auto-educação e da difusão desses princípios).

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

# nix Pra instalar o [neuron](797984e3.md) fui forçado a baixar e instalar o [nix](https://nixos.org/download.html). Não consegui me lembrar por que não estava usando até hoje aquele maravilhoso sistema de instalar pacotes desde a primeira vez que tentei, anos atrás. Que sofrimento pra fazer funcionar com o `fish`, mas até que bem menos sofrimento que da outra vez. Tive que instalar um tal de `fish-foreign-environment` (usando o próprio nix!, já que a outra opção era o `oh-my-fish` ou qualquer outra porcaria dessas) e aí usá-lo para aplicar as definições de shell para bash direto no `fish`. E aí lembrei também que o `/nix/store` fica cheio demais, o negócio instala tudo que existe neste mundo a partir do zero. É só para computadores muito ricos, mas vamos ver como vai ser. Estou gostando do neuron (veja, estou usando como diário), então vou ter que deixar o nix aí.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

# hledger-web A Haskell app that uses [Miso](https://hackage.haskell.org/package/miso) and [hledger's Haskell libraries](https://hledger.org/) plus [ghcjs](https://github.com/ghcjs/ghcjs) to be compiled to a web page, and then adds [optional remoteStorage](https://remotestorage.io/) so you can store your ledger data somewhere else. This was my introduction to Haskell and also built at a time I thought remoteStorage was a good idea that solved many problems, and that it could use some help in the form of just yet another somewhat-useless-but-cool project using it that could be [added to their wiki](https://wiki.remotestorage.io/Apps). - <https://hledger.alhur.es/> - <https://github.com/fiatjaf/hledger-web> ## See also - [My stupid introduction to Haskell](nostr:naddr1qqyrxveevscrqcmrqyghwumn8ghj7enfv96x5ctx9e3k7mgzyqalp33lewf5vdq847t6te0wvnags0gs0mu72kz8938tn24wlfze6qcyqqq823cxd5qyk) - [LessPass remoteStorage](nostr:naddr1qqyrsctpxfjnqepeqyghwumn8ghj7enfv96x5ctx9e3k7mgzyqalp33lewf5vdq847t6te0wvnags0gs0mu72kz8938tn24wlfze6qcyqqq823cfa6z2z) - [TiddlyWiki remoteStorage](nostr:naddr1qqyxxve4x33nqerrqyghwumn8ghj7enfv96x5ctx9e3k7mgzyqalp33lewf5vdq847t6te0wvnags0gs0mu72kz8938tn24wlfze6qcyqqq823cat32d3)

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

# A memória está nas coisas A memória está nas coisas, mas se você tiver muitas memórias já mesma coisa parece que uma se sobrepõe à outra, de modo que se vive quiser acumular mais memórias é melhor mudar de casa todo ano.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

# Castas hindus em nova chave Shudras buscam o máximo bem para os seus próprios corpos; vaishyas o máximo bem para a sua própria vida terrena e a da sua família; kshatriyas o máximo bem para a sociedade e este mundo terreno; brâmanes buscam o máximo bem.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

# busca múltipla na estante virtual  A single-page app made in Elm with a Go backend that scrapped estantevirtual.com.br in real-time for search results of multiple different search terms and aggregated the results per book store, so when you want to buy many books you can find the stores that have the biggest part of what you want and buy everything together, paying less for the delivery fee. It had a very weird unicode issue I never managed to solve, something with the encoding estantevirtual.com.br used. I also planned to build the entire checkout flow directly in this UI, but then decided it wasn't worth it. The search flow only was already good enough. - <https://estantevirtual.alhur.es/> - <https://github.com/fiatjaf/estantevirtual>

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

# Um algoritmo imbecil da evolução Suponha que você queira escrever a palavra BANANA partindo de OOOOOO e usando só alterações aleatórias das letras. As alterações se dão por meio da multiplicação da palavra original em várias outras, cada uma com uma mudança diferente. No primeiro período, surgem BOOOOO e OOOOZO. E então o ambiente decide que todas as palavras que não começam com um B estão eliminadas. Sobra apenas BOOOOO e o algoritmo continua. É fácil explicar conceber a evolução das espécies acontecendo dessa maneira, se você controlar sempre a parte em que o ambiente decide quem vai sobrar. Porém, há apenas duas opções: 1. Se o ambiente decidir as coisas de maneira aleatória, a chance de você chegar na palavra correta usando esse método é tão pequena que pode ser considerada nula. 2. Se o ambiente decidir as coisas de maneira pensada, caímos no //design inteligente//. Acredito que isso seja uma enunciação decente do argumento ["no free lunch"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_free_lunch_in_search_and_optimization) aplicado à crítica do darwinismo por William Dembski. A resposta darwinista consiste em dizer que não existe essa BANANA como objetivo final. Que as palavras podem ir se alterando aleatoriamente, e o que sobrar sobrou, não podemos dizer que um objetivo foi atingido ou deixou de sê-lo. E aí os defensores do design inteligente dirão que o resultado ao qual chegamos não pode ter sido fruto de um processo aleatório. BANANA é qualitativamente diferente de AYZOSO, e aí há várias maneiras de "provar" que sim usando modelos matemáticos e tal. Fico com a impressão, porém, de que essa coisa só pode ser resolvida como sim ou não mediante uma discussão das premissas, e chega um ponto em que não há mais provas matemáticas possíveis, apenas subjetividade. Daí eu me lembro da minha humilde solução ao problema do cão que aperta as teclas aleatoriamente de um teclado e escreve as obras completas de Shakespeare: mesmo que ele o faça, nada daquilo terá sentido sem uma inteligência de tipo humano ali para lê-las e perceber que não se trata de uma bagunça, mas sim de um texto com sentido para ele. O milagre se dá não no momento em que o cão tropeça no teclado, mas no momento em que o homem olha para a tela. Se o algoritmo da evolução chegou à palavra BANANA ou UXJHTR não faz diferença pra ela, mas faz diferença para nós, que temos uma inteligência humana, e estamos observando aquilo. O homem também pensaria que há //algo// por trás daquele evento do cão que digita as obras de Shakespeare, e como seria possível alguém em sã consciência pensar que não?

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

# Timeu Os quatro elementos, a esfera como a forma mais perfeita, os cinco sentidos, a dor como perturbação e o prazer como retorno, o demiurgo que cria da melhor maneira possível com a matéria que tem, o conceito de duro e mole, todas essas coisas que ensinam nas escolas e nos desenhos animados ou sei lá como entram na nossa consciência como se fossem uma verdade, mas sempre uma verdade provisória, infantil -- como os nomes infantis dos dedos (mata-piolho, fura-bolo etc.) --, que mesmo as crianças sabem que não é verdade mesmo. Parece que todas essas coisas estão nesse livro. Talvez até mesmo a classificação dos cinco dedos como mata-piolho e tal, mas talvez eu tenha dormido nessa parte. Me pergunto se essas coisas não eram ensinadas tradicionalmente na idade média como sendo verdade absoluta (pois afinal estava lá o Platão dizendo, em sua única obra) e persistiram até hoje numa tradição que se mantém aos trancos e barrancos, contra tudo e contra todos, sem ninguém saber como, um conhecimento em que ninguém acredita mas acha bonito mesmo assim, harmonioso, e vem despida de suas origens e fontes primárias e de todo o seu contexto perturbar o entendimento do mundo pelas crianças.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

# Module Linker  A browser extension that reads source code on GitHub and tries to find links to imported dependencies so you can click on them and navigate through either GitHub or package repositories or base language documentation. Works for many languages at different levels of completeness. - <https://github.com/fiatjaf/module-linker> - <https://module-linker.alhur.es/> - <https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/addon/module-linker> - <https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/dglofghjinifeolcpjfjmfdnnbaanggn>

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

# Conjecture and criticism I heard about this epistemological method _conjecture and criticism_ in [this video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OPP_sYY2RPg). Oddly, it was portrayed as something that goes against the Austrian method by Paul Sztorc, while the other guy, JW Weatherman, was championing the "praxeological" method of pure logical deduction from first principles as the basis of all economic knowledge. It has always seemed to me that this pure logical reasoning was somewhat weird, specially in light of Carl Menger's _empiricism_ (which is not the same empiricism from modern sciences). Conjecture and criticism seems to fit better with Menger's method and whatever Austrians actually do. No one really reasons with pure logical deduction. What people do is spot something in the real world and try to come up with a reasonable explanation that is logically consistent. The entire logical impenetrability of every Austrian theory comes after the theory is conceived (conjected?) by a human mind, not -- like some praxeological claims would imply -- deducted as if by a computer. - [A Causa](nostr:naddr1qqyryvtrv5enyc3eqyghwumn8ghj7enfv96x5ctx9e3k7mgzyqalp33lewf5vdq847t6te0wvnags0gs0mu72kz8938tn24wlfze6qcyqqq823c2jlyzx)

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

# Temperos "Templates as a service", or "temperaas", changed to "temperos" later because it was a nice pun in Portuguese. The ideas was that it would take an URL with any file and some querystring parameters, then replace `{{paramName}}` with the parameters from the querystring and serve it, all stateless. Created to make it easy for people to embed scripts on [Websites For Trello](nostr:naddr1qqyrydpkvverwvehqyghwumn8ghj7enfv96x5ctx9e3k7mgzyqalp33lewf5vdq847t6te0wvnags0gs0mu72kz8938tn24wlfze6qcyqqq823c9d4yku) (but of course it was too hard for most people). - <https://github.com/fiatjaf/temperos> - <https://temperos.alhur.es/>

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

# Flowi.es At the time I thought [Workflowy][workflowy] had the ideal UI for everything. I wanted to implement my [custom app maker](nostr:naddr1qqyxgcejv5unzd33qyghwumn8ghj7enfv96x5ctx9e3k7mgzyqalp33lewf5vdq847t6te0wvnags0gs0mu72kz8938tn24wlfze6qcyqqq823cz3va32) on it, but ended up doing this: a platform for enhancing Workflowy with extra features: - An email reminder based on dates input in items - A website generator, similar to [Websites For Trello](nostr:naddr1qqyrydpkvverwvehqyghwumn8ghj7enfv96x5ctx9e3k7mgzyqalp33lewf5vdq847t6te0wvnags0gs0mu72kz8938tn24wlfze6qcyqqq823c9d4yku), also based on [Classless Templates](nostr:naddr1qqyxyv35vymk2vfsqyghwumn8ghj7enfv96x5ctx9e3k7mgzyqalp33lewf5vdq847t6te0wvnags0gs0mu72kz8938tn24wlfze6qcyqqq823cqwgdau) Also, I didn't remember this was also based on CouchDB and had some _couchapp_ functionalities.  - <https://flowi.es> - <https://github.com/fiatjaf/flowies> [workflowy]: <https://workflowy.com/>

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

# Zettelkasten <https://writingcooperative.com/zettelkasten-how-one-german-scholar-was-so-freakishly-productive-997e4e0ca125> (um artigo meio estúpido, mas útil). Esta incrível técnica de salvar notas sem categorias, sem pastas, sem hierarquia predefinida, mas apenas fazendo referências de uma nota à outra e fazendo supostamente surgir uma ordem (ou heterarquia, disseram eles) a partir do caos parece ser o que faltava pra eu conseguir anotar meus pensamentos e idéias de maneira decente, veremos. Ah, e vou usar esse tal [`neuron`](https://github.com/srid/neuron) que também gera sites a partir das notas?, acho que vai ser bom.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

# Obra aqui do lado Tem quase um ano que estão fazendo uma obra aqui do lado e eu não ganhei nenhuma indenização. Numa sociedade sem Estado isso jamais teria acontecido.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

# Google, Uber e ostracismo Pensando sobre como o Google poderia implementar uma solução "pure software" para o problema dos programinhas de carona paga -- já que agora parece que o Waze vai virar tipo um Uber -- me vi pensando em que poderia haver punições bastante severas e para-legais para infratores dos regulamentos internos do serviço. Digamos, por exemplo, que é proibido pelas regras do serviço que o motorista ou o passageiro agridam um ao outro de qualquer maneira. Para ser qualificado como um potencial usuário, tanto o motorista quanto o passageiro devem ser usuários de longa data dos serviços do Google, possuir um email no Gmail com trocentas mensagens sendo recebidas e enviadas todos os dias, um enorme arquivo, coisas guardadas no Google Drive e/ou outros serviços do Google sendo usados. Caso o sujeito agrida o motorista, roube-o ou faça qualquer outra coisa não-permitida, o Google pode, imediatamente, cancelar seu acesso a todos os serviços. Depois, com mais calma, pode-se tentar alguma coisa por meio da justiça estatal, mas essa punição seria tão imediata e tão incondicional (bom, poderia haver um julgamento interno dentro do Google para avaliar o que aconteceu mesmo, mas pronto, nada de milanos na justiça penal e depois uma punição fajuta qualquer.) Esse tipo de punição imediata já desencorajaria a maioria dos infratores, imagino eu. É a própria idéia anarquista da punição por ostracismo. O cara fica excluído da sociedade até que a sociedade (neste caso, o Google) decida perdoá-lo por qualquer motivo. A partir daí é possível imaginar que os outros vários "silos" deste mundo -- Facebook, Vivo, Diamond Mall, SuperNosso -- possam também aderir, caso concordem com o julgamento do Google, e vice-versa, e também impedirem o infrator de usar os seus serviços. Mas o grande tchans disto aqui é que esse processo pode começar com um único agente, desde que ele seja grande o suficiente para que a sua ostracização, sozinha, já seja uma punição quase suficiente para o infrator.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

# The illusion of checks and balances The website history.com has [a list of some of the most important "checks and balances"](https://www.history.com/topics/us-government/checks-and-balances) put in place by the United States Constitution. Here are some of them and how they are not real _checks_, they're flawed and easily bypassed by malicious peers that manage to enter the network. > The president (head of the executive branch) serves as commander in chief of the military forces, but Congress (legislative branch) appropriates funds for the military and votes to declare war. As it has happened [multiple times](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_war_by_the_United_States#Undeclared_wars), the United States has engaged in many undeclared wars -- and many other military encounters that don't get enough media coverage and weren't even formally acknowledged by the Congress. > Congress has the power of the purse, as it controls the money used to fund any executive actions. There's a separate power called Federal Reserve which is more-or-less under the influence of the executive branch that is controlled by a single man and has the power of creating unlimited money. It was softly abused by the executive branch since its creation, but since 2008 it has been increasingly having its scope expanded from just influencing the banking sector to also directly using its money to buy all sorts of things and influence all sorts of markets and other actors. > Veto power. Once Congress has passed a bill, the president has the power to veto that bill. In turn, Congress can override a regular presidential veto by a two-thirds vote of both houses. If you imagine that both the executive and the legislative are 100% dedicated to go against each other the president could veto all bills, but then the legislative could enact them all anyway. Congress has the absolute power here (which can be justified by fact that the congress itself is split into multiple voters, but still this "veto" rule seems more like a gimmick to obscure the process than any actual check). > The Supreme Court and other federal courts (judicial branch) can declare laws or presidential actions unconstitutional, in a process known as judicial review. This rule gives absolute power to the Supreme Court over any matter. It can use their own personal judgement to veto any bill, cancel any action by the executive, reinterpret any existing law in any manner. There's no check against bad interpretations or judgements, so any absurd thing must be accepted. This should be obvious, and yet the entire system which most people believe to be "checked" is actually dependent on the good will and sanity of the judicial branch. > In turn, the president checks the judiciary through the power of appointment, which can be used to change the direction of the federal courts If the president and congress are being attacked by the judicial power, this isn't of much help as its effects are very long term. On the other hand, a president can single-handedly and arbitrarily use this rule to slowly poison the judicial system such that will turn malicious for the rest of the system after some time. > By passing amendments to the Constitution, Congress can effectively check the decisions of the Supreme Court. What is written in the Constitution can be easily ignored or misread by the members of the Supreme Court without any way for these interpretations to be checked or reverted. Basically the Supreme Court has absolute power over all things if we consider this. > Congress (considered the branch of government closest to the people) can impeach both members of the executive and judicial branches. Again (like in the presidential veto rule), this gives the congress unlimited power. There are no checks here -- except of course the fact that the congress is composed by multiple different voting heads of which a majority has to agree for the congress to do anything, which is the only thing preventing overabuse of this rule. --- As shown above, most rules that compose the "checks and balances" system can be abused and if given enough time they will. They aren't real checks. Ultimately, the stability and decency of a [democracy](nostr:naddr1qqyrxvtxxf3nse3sqyghwumn8ghj7enfv96x5ctx9e3k7mgzyqalp33lewf5vdq847t6te0wvnags0gs0mu72kz8938tn24wlfze6qcyqqq823ccyra4y) relies on the majority rule (so congress votes are never concentrated in dictatorial measures) and the common sense of the powerful people (president and judges). There probably hasn't been a single year in any democracy in which one of these powers didn't abused or violated one of the rules, but still in most cases the overall system stays in place because of the general culture, splitted views about most issues, overall common sense and fear of public shame. The checks and balances system itself is an illusion. All the complex "democracy" construct depends on the goodwill of all the participants and have only worked so far (when it did) by miracle and by the power of human cooperation and love.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

# Gold is not useless If there's something all common people believe about gold is that it is useless[^1]. Austrian economists and libertarians in general that argue against central banks or defend a primitive gold standard are often charged with that accusation: that gold is useless, it has no use in the industry, it serves no purpose besides ornamental, so it is a silly commodity, a luxurious one, and that it would be almost immoral to have such a thing in a so central position in an economy such as the position of money. I've seen libertarians in general argue such things as: "it is used in some dental operations", which means people make dental prosthesis of gold, something that fits in same category of jewelry, I would say. There's also the argument of electronic connectors. That's something that appears to be true, but wouldn't suffice the anti-gold arguments. The fact remains that, besides its uses as money -- because gold is still considered to be a form money even now that it doesn't have that position formally in any country (otherwise it wouldn't be considered as an "investment" or "value store" everywhere) -- gold is used mainly for ornamental purposes[^2]. All that is a hassle for libertarians in general. Even the Mises Regression Theory wouldn't solve that problem of people skeptical of gold due to its immoral nature. That problem is solved once you read what is written in the chapter 17 from Richard Cantillon's _Essay on Economic Theory[^3]_ (page 103): > Gold and silver are capable of serving not only the same purpose as tin and copper, but also most of the purposes of lead and iron. They have this further advantage over other metals in that they are not consumed by fire and are so durable that they may be considered permanent. It is not surprising, therefore, that the men who found the other metals useful, valued gold and silver even before they were used in exchange. So gold is indeed useful. Everybody should already know that. You can even do forks and spoons with gold. You can do furniture with gold, and many other useful stuff. As soon as you grasp this, gold is useful again. It is an useful commodity. Answering the next question becomes easy: why isn't anyone making gold forks anywhere? The questioner already knows the answer: because it is too expensive for that. And now the Regression Theory comes with its full force: why is it expensive? Because it has gained a lot of value in the process of becoming money. The value of gold as money is much greater than as a metal used in fork production. --- [^1]: see <http://www.salon.com/2014/02/02/ignore_sean_hannity_gold_is_useless_partner/> or all answers on <https://www.quora.com/Why-is-gold-considered-so-precious-and-why-does-it-have-such-high-prices>. [^2]: this <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold#Modern_applications> section on the Wikipedia page for gold is revealing. [^3]: <https://mises.org/library/essay-economic-theory-0>

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

# Lightning and its fake HTLCs Lightning is terrible but can be very good with two tweaks. ## How Lightning would work without HTLCs In a world in which HTLCs didn't exist, Lightning channels would consist only of balances. Each commitment transaction would have two outputs: one for peer `A`, the other for peer `B`, according to the current state of the channel. When a payment was being attempted to go through the channel, peers would just trust each other to update the state when necessary. For example: 1. Channel `AB`'s balances are `A[10:10]B` (in sats); 2. `A` sends a 3sat payment through `B` to `C`; 3. `A` asks `B` to route the payment. Channel `AB` doesn't change at all; 4. `B` sends the payment to `C`, `C` accepts it; 5. Channel `BC` changes from `B[20:5]C` to `B[17:8]C`; 6. `B` notifies `A` the payment was successful, `A` acknowledges that; 7. Channel `AB` changes from `A[10:10]B` to `A[7:13]B`. This in the case of a success, everything is fine, no glitches, no dishonesty. But notice that `A` could have refused to acknowledge that the payment went through, either because of a bug, or because it went offline forever, or because it is malicious. Then the channel `AB` would stay as `A[10:10]B` and `B` would have lost 3 satoshis. ## How Lightning would work with HTLCs HTLCs are introduced to remedy that situation. Now instead of commitment transactions having always only two outputs, one to each peer, now they can have HTLC outputs too. These HTLC outputs could go to either side dependending on the circumstance. Specifically, the peer that is sending the payment can redeem the HTLC after a number of blocks have passed. The peer that is receiving the payment can redeem the HTLC if they are able to provide the preimage to the hash specified in the HTLC. Now the flow is something like this: 1. Channel `AB`'s balances are `A[10:10]B`; 2. `A` sends a 3sat payment through `B` to `C`: 3. `A` asks `B` to route the payment. Their channel changes to `A[7:3:10]B` (the middle number is the HTLC). 4. `B` offers a payment to `C`. Their channel changes from `B[20:5]C` to `B[17:3:5]C`. 5. `C` tells `B` the preimage for that HTLC. Their channel changes from `B[17:3:5]C` to `B[17:8]C`. 6. `B` tells `A` the preimage for that HTLC. Their channel changes from `A[7:3:10]B` to `A[7:13]B`. Now if `A` wants to trick `B` and stop responding `B` doesn't lose money, because `B` knows the preimage, `B` just needs to publish the commitment transaction `A[7:3:10]B`, which gives him 10sat and then redeem the HTLC using the preimage he got from `C`, which gives him 3 sats more. `B` is fine now. In the same way, if `B` stops responding for any reason, `A` won't lose the money it put in that HTLC, it can publish the commitment transaction, get 7 back, then redeem the HTLC after the certain number of blocks have passed and get the other 3 sats back. ## How Lightning doesn't really work The example above about how the HTLCs work is very elegant but has a fatal flaw on it: transaction fees. Each new HTLC added increases the size of the commitment transaction and it requires yet another transaction to be redeemed. If we consider fees of 10000 satoshis that means any HTLC below that is as if it didn't existed because we can't ever redeem it anyway. In fact the Lightning protocol explicitly dictates that if HTLC output amounts are below the fee necessary to redeem them they shouldn't be created. What happens in these cases then? Nothing, the amounts that should be in HTLCs are moved to the commitment transaction miner fee instead. So considering a transaction fee of 10000sat for these HTLCs if one is sending Lightning payments below 10000sat that means they operate according to the _unsafe protocol_ described in the first section above. It is actually worse, because consider what happens in the case a channel in the middle of a route has a glitch or one of the peers is unresponsive. The other node, thinking they are operating in the _trustless protocol_, will proceed to publish the commitment transaction, i.e. close the channel, so they can redeem the HTLC -- only then they find out they are actually in the _unsafe protocol_ realm and there is no HTLC to be redeemed at all and they lose not only the money, but also the channel (which costed a lot of money to open and close, in overall transaction fees). One of the biggest features of the _trustless protocol_ are the payment proofs. Every payment is identified by a hash and whenever the payee releases the preimage relative to that hash that means the payment was complete. The incentives are in place so all nodes in the path pass the preimage back until it reaches the payer, which can then use it as the proof he has sent the payment and the payee has received it. This feature is also lost in the _unsafe protocol_: if a glitch happens or someone goes offline on the preimage's way back then there is no way the preimage will reach the payer because no HTLCs are published and redeemed on the chain. The payee may have received the money but the payer will not know -- but the payee will lose the money sent anyway. ## The end of HTLCs So considering the points above you may be sad because in some cases Lightning doesn't use these magic HTLCs that give meaning to it all. But the fact is that no matter what anyone thinks, HTLCs are destined to be used less and less as time passes. The fact that over time Bitcoin transaction fees tend to rise, and also the fact that multipart payment (MPP) are increasedly being used on Lightning for good, we can expect that soon no HTLC will ever be big enough to be actually worth redeeming and we will be at a point in which not a single HTLC is real and they're all fake. Another thing to note is that the current _unsafe protocol_ kicks out whenever the HTLC amount is below the Bitcoin transaction fee would be to redeem it, but this is not a reasonable algorithm. It is not reasonable to lose a channel and then pay 10000sat in fees to redeem a 10001sat HTLC. At which point does it become reasonable to do it? Probably in an amount many times above that, so it would be reasonable to even increase the threshold above which real HTLCs are made -- thus making their existence more and more rare. These are good things, because we don't actually need HTLCs to make a functional Lightning Network. ## We must embrace the _unsafe protocol_ and make it better So the _unsafe protocol_ is not necessarily very bad, but the way it is being done now is, because it suffers from two big problems: 1. Channels are lost all the time for no reason; 2. No guarantees of the proof-of-payment ever reaching the payer exist. The first problem we fix by just stopping the current practice of closing channels when there are no real HTLCs in them. That, however, creates a new problem -- or actually it exarcebates the second: now that we're not closing channels, what do we do with the expired payments in them? These payments should have either been canceled or fulfilled before some block x, now we're in block x+1, our peer has returned from its offline period and one of us will have to lose the money from that payment. That's fine because it's only 3sat and it's better to just lose 3sat than to lose both the 3sat and the channel anyway, so either one would be happy to eat the loss. Maybe we'll even split it 50/50! No, that doesn't work, because it creates an attack vector with peers becoming unresponsive on purpose on one side of the route and actually failing/fulfilling the payment on the other side and making a profit with that. So we actually need to know who is to blame on these payments, even if we are not going to act on that imediatelly: we need some kind of arbiter that both peers can trust, such that if one peer is trying to send the preimage or the cancellation to the other and the other is unresponsive, when the unresponsive peer comes back, the arbiter can tell them they are to blame, so they can willfully eat the loss and the channel can continue. Both peers are happy this way. If the unresponsive peer doesn't accept what the arbiter says then the peer that was operating correctly can assume the unresponsive peer is malicious and close the channel, and then blacklist it and never again open a channel with a peer they know is malicious. Again, the differences between this scheme and the current Lightning Network are that: a. In the current Lightning we always close channels, in this scheme we only close channels in case someone is malicious or in other worst case scenarios (the arbiter is unresponsive, for example). b. In the current Lightning we close the channels without having any clue on who is to blame for that, then we just proceed to reopen a channel with that same peer even in the case they were actively trying to harm us before. ## What is missing? An arbiter. The Bitcoin blockchain is the ideal arbiter, it works in the best possible way if we follow the _trustless protocol_, but as we've seen we can't use the Bitcoin blockchain because it is expensive. Therefore we need a new arbiter. That is the hard part, but not unsolvable. Notice that we don't need an absolutely perfect arbiter, anything is better than nothing, really, even an unreliable arbiter that is offline half of the day is better than what we have today, or an arbiter that lies, an arbiter that charges some satoshis for each resolution, anything. Here are some suggestions: - random nodes from the network selected by an algorithm that both peers agree to, so they can't cheat by selecting themselves. The only thing these nodes have to do is to store data from one peer, try to retransmit it to the other peer and record the results for some time. - a set of nodes preselected by the two peers when the channel is being opened -- same as above, but with more handpicked-trust involved. - some third-party cloud storage or notification provider with guarantees of having open data in it and some public log-keeping, like Twitter, GitHub or a [Nostr](https://github.com/fiatjaf/nostr) relay; - peers that get paid to do the job, selected by the fact that they own some token (I know this is stepping too close to the shitcoin territory, but could be an idea) issued in a [Spacechain](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2ow4Q34Jeg); - a Spacechain itself, serving only as the storage for a bunch of `OP_RETURN`s that are published and tracked by these Lightning peers whenever there is an issue (this looks wrong, but could work). ## Key points 1. Lightning with HTLC-based routing was a cool idea, but it wasn't ever really feasible. 2. HTLCs are going to be abandoned and that's the natural course of things. 3. It is actually good that HTLCs are being abandoned, but 4. We must change the protocol to account for the existence of fake HTLCs and thus make the bulk of the Lightning Network usage viable again. ## See also - [Ripple and the problem of the decentralized commit](nostr:naddr1qqyrxcmzxa3nxv34qyghwumn8ghj7enfv96x5ctx9e3k7mgzyqalp33lewf5vdq847t6te0wvnags0gs0mu72kz8938tn24wlfze6qcyqqq823cjrqar6) - [The Lightning Network solves the problem of the decentralized commit](nostr:naddr1qqyx2vekxg6rsvejqyghwumn8ghj7enfv96x5ctx9e3k7mgzyqalp33lewf5vdq847t6te0wvnags0gs0mu72kz8938tn24wlfze6qcyqqq823ccs2twc)

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

# Bitcoin, not you Bitcoin is not here to delight you. Bitcoin doesn't exist so you can receive money and trustlessly verify that you received money in your own node, which you _use_. Bitcoin is not about your desire of being "self-sovereign" and "your own bank". Bitcoin is a gift from God that will bring the end of all inflation, all its other characteristics are secondary. Bitcoin is not money if not for the others.