@ 2edbcea6:40558884

Happy Sunday #Nostr !

Here’s your #NostrTechWeekly newsletter brought to you by nostr:npub19mduaf5569jx9xz555jcx3v06mvktvtpu0zgk47n4lcpjsz43zzqhj6vzk written by nostr:npub1r3fwhjpx2njy87f9qxmapjn9neutwh7aeww95e03drkfg45cey4qgl7ex2

NostrTechWeekly is a weekly newsletter focused on the more technical happenings in the nostr-verse.

Let’s dive in!

Recent Upgrades to Nostr (AKA NIPs)

It’s been a while since a new NIP was merged but there's a lot of activity on some meaty proposed NIPs. Looking forward to the upgrades 💪

1) (Proposed) NIP 96: HTTP File Storage

One of the challenges of Nostr is where to store files (images, videos, PDFs, etc). Storing them on relays could bloat relays and lead to more centralization.

This NIP proposes a protocol to help third parties offer file hosting services to Nostr users. This NIP defines the necessary shape of the API of a third party offering file hosting services, so that these services can be easily used by Nostr clients to serve the content to users.

The proposal also defines an optional way for users to specify which File Storage servers they’d like the client to upload content to.

Author: arthurfranca, Semisol, staab, v0l, bndw, michaelhall923, fishcakeday, quentintaranpino

2) (Proposed) Updates to NIP 72: Moderated Communities (like Reddit)

Currently NIP 72 specifies that posts to moderated communities are of kind 1 which is the default kind which is for tweet-like content. Therefore posts to moderated communities would show up in many clients without enough context.

This proposal would update the default kind for moderated communities so that the content of moderated communities would not show up on the default feed for users. This paves the way for Reddit-like clients to provide an experience that’s focused on just posts to these communities.

Author: vivganes

3) (Proposed) NIP 91: IoT Sensors and Intents

Right now many “Internet of Things” devices require you to report that data from the IoT sensor to the device maker’s servers and write integrations with their ecosystem to take action based on that information.

This NIP reserves a set of event kinds for IoT sensors reporting data (8000 - 8999). For example 8003 would be for thermometers to report temperature in celsius as a number, separate from 8005 which would allow reporting a location as an array of two numbers: longitude and latitude.

This NIP would allow developers to offer IoT devices that report to Nostr relays which gives you more control over the data and the process of taking action based on that data.

Author: nostr:npub180cvv07tjdrrgpa0j7j7tmnyl2yr6yr7l8j4s3evf6u64th6gkwsyjh6w6, BlackCoffee, arcbtc

4) (Proposed) NIP 107: Nostr Powered IoT

In conjunction with NIP 91, this NIP will enable a robust IoT ecosystem on Nostr.

This NIP’s goal is to help facilitate the development of Nostr clients that are IoT controllers. That way a user and a device can essentially “DM” each other data and commands.

For example a user could install an IoT device that’s a switch for a light. There would be a Nostr client where you can “register” the new device and authorize some list of Nostr users that can utilize the device

Once registered any authorized device user would be able to toggle the light on and off from a Nostr client that supports IoT operations. This is entirely done via Nostr DMs, so you can do this from anywhere as long as you control the private key of a user that the device recognizes as a controller, and the data transferred and the commands are encrypted.

Author: arcbtc, BlackCoffee

Notable Projects

Shopstr 🛒

Shopstr is a classifieds app similar to Craigslist, you can post items for sale and facilitate transactions via lightning payments or DMs. Still early but this will be a useful addition to the Nostr-verse and a circular Bitcoin economy.

Author: nostr:npub16dhgpql60vmd4mnydjut87vla23a38j689jssaqlqqlzrtqtd0kqex0nkq

Shipyard 🚢

https://shipyard.pub/ is a client for composing and scheduling Nostr content, it’s easy to use and pretty slick. Many big content creators rely on such tools for legacy social media (Twitter, Instagram, etc).

This is a huge unlock for any big content creators that want to make the transition to Nostr but still preserve their ability to push content on a regular basis and monetize it.

Author: nostr:npub1l2vyh47mk2p0qlsku7hg0vn29faehy9hy34ygaclpn66ukqp3afqutajft

Nostr Design 🎨

nostr:npub1r0rs5q2gk0e3dk3nlc7gnu378ec6cnlenqp8a3cjhyzu6f8k5sgs4sq9ac has been offering resources and design help to Nostr devs for some time now via nostrdesign.org.

NostrDesign.org has set out to start conversations around the unique communication challenges of Nostr (keypairs, relays, signing extensions, etc) so that we can build some common patterns to help normies get started with Nostr without too much confusion or tutorial overhead. This will become more necessary as time and adoption goes on.

Good design can also make a huge difference in the success of a new product, especially if there aren’t exact analogs to draw from when building a Nostr app (like when you’re cloning an existing product). I for one am a dev that SUCKS at UX and could use some advice from a thoughtful partner that wants Nostr’s success just as much as I do.

Latest conversations: Design and Nostr adoption

There’s been some discussion lately about how necessary design is to the Nostr ecosystem, and I’ll posit that it depends on your desires for Nostr.

Why design matters

Great design does not necessitate that something be beautiful. Great design is about usability.

Great design strips away unnecessary functionality and information so that only what matters remains. Great design understands the user’s desires and intent and empowers them to achieve their goals. Great design communicates how something ought to work with minimal explanation. Great design empowers the user to try something unfamiliar.

Craigslist is well designed in this sense, so is HackerNews, and the Reddit of a few years ago. They aren’t beautiful but they provide immense value in a simple and intuitive way.

Developers aren’t always the best at designing experiences that solve for usability and good communication to the user. The help of a good designer can be a huge help; making an app usable by a broader audience.

Accessibility and adoption

Adoption, in a very rough sense, can be thought of as a function of both how useful something is and how accessible it is. Think of accessibility as both how easy it is to use, as well as how easy it is to access (from my device, in my legal jurisdiction, for a low enough price).

If something is incredibly useful but not very accessible, only some people will use it (IRC). If something is very accessible but not very useful, no one will use it (case in point: it’s hard to name any 😂). If something is very useful and very accessible, then it will get widely adopted (ChatGPT).

If we want Nostr to remain a niche community (with limited impact on the world) then we can ignore how easy our ecosystem is to use. I don’t think that’s anyone’s goal.

The 10X better app on Nostr

When trying to get adoption for a new product the rule of thumb is that it needs to be 10X better than alternatives for folks to start adopting it and leave a competitor. Nostr is 10X better for folks that care about freedom tech, which is why most of us are already here.

We’ve built Nostr-based clones of many of the most prominent internet offerings (Twitter, Reddit, Imgur, Bitly, Instagram, Medium, WhatsApp, Craiglist, etc) the list goes on and on but that’s not driving adoption. That’s probably because the nostr-versions are, at-best, as good in functionality but they’re only better than the original in that they’re on Nostr (and therefore freedom tech).

Much to our consternation most people don’t seem to care about freedom tech as much as they should. If we’re to drive mass adoption we also have to discover applications that are uniquely possible on Nostr that are new and valuable enough to attract folks to try Nostr to try that app.

At that moment we’ll also need the basics of Nostr to be accessible enough that people aren’t scared off by the new patterns (keypairs, no usernames, no email alerts, no reset-password flow, which relays do I join?, etc). If we don’t care about solving both problems we are giving a middle finger to a majority of the population of Earth.

What era of Nostr are we in?

From what I’m seeing Nostr is still in the era of experimentation and foundation building.

If our goal is a freedom-oriented ecosystem of micro-apps to compete with Big Tech then we’re doing all the right work.

We definitely need to provide all the same functionality folks are used to (micro blogging, blogging, group chat, moderated communities, meme sharing, monetizing content, etc). Building Nostr-based clones is helping with that.

We are working on tools to help developers build on Nostr (NDK, NAK, nostr-tools, etc).

We’re building general purpose browsers (Spring) to explore all corners of Nostr (current and future)

We’re experimenting with offerings unique to Nostr to see what killer app drives people to try Nostr en masse (Data Vending Machines, self-sovereign Internet of Things, uncensorable private and secure group chat, etc).

Good design doesn’t seem to be THE reason that adoption of Nostr isn’t exponential, but at some point it will become the bottleneck to adoption and it’s good to think ahead. The best time to plant a tree is ten years ago and all that.

Until next time 🫡

If you want to see something highlighted, if we missed anything, or if you’re building something we didn’t post about, let us know. DMs welcome at nostr:npub19mduaf5569jx9xz555jcx3v06mvktvtpu0zgk47n4lcpjsz43zzqhj6vzk

Stay Classy, Nostr.

@ f9cf4e94:96abc355

Scuttlebutt foi iniciado em maio de 2014 por Dominic Tarr ( dominictarr ) como uma rede social alternativa off-line, primeiro para convidados, que permite aos usuários obter controle total de seus dados e privacidade. Secure Scuttlebutt (ssb) foi lançado pouco depois, o que coloca a privacidade em primeiro plano com mais recursos de criptografia.

Se você está se perguntando de onde diabos veio o nome Scuttlebutt:

Este termo do século 19 para uma fofoca vem do Scuttlebutt náutico: “um barril de água mantido no convés, com um buraco para uma xícara”. A gíria náutica vai desde o hábito dos marinheiros de se reunir pelo boato até a fofoca, semelhante à fofoca do bebedouro.

Marinheiros se reunindo em torno da rixa. ( fonte )

Dominic descobriu o termo boato em um artigo de pesquisa que leu.

Em sistemas distribuídos, fofocar é um processo de retransmissão de mensagens ponto a ponto; as mensagens são disseminadas de forma análoga ao “boca a boca”.

Secure Scuttlebutt é um banco de dados de feeds imutáveis apenas para acréscimos, otimizado para replicação eficiente para protocolos ponto a ponto. Cada usuário tem um log imutável somente para acréscimos no qual eles podem gravar. Eles gravam no log assinando mensagens com sua chave privada. Pense em um feed de usuário como seu próprio diário de bordo, como um diário de bordo (ou diário do capitão para os fãs de Star Trek), onde eles são os únicos autorizados a escrever nele, mas têm a capacidade de permitir que outros amigos ou colegas leiam ao seu diário de bordo, se assim o desejarem.

Cada mensagem possui um número de sequência e a mensagem também deve fazer referência à mensagem anterior por seu ID. O ID é um hash da mensagem e da assinatura. A estrutura de dados é semelhante à de uma lista vinculada. É essencialmente um log somente de acréscimo de JSON assinado. Cada item adicionado a um log do usuário é chamado de mensagem.

Os logs do usuário são conhecidos como feed e um usuário pode seguir os feeds de outros usuários para receber suas atualizações. Cada usuário é responsável por armazenar seu próprio feed. Quando Alice assina o feed de Bob, Bob baixa o log de feed de Alice. Bob pode verificar se o registro do feed realmente pertence a Alice verificando as assinaturas. Bob pode verificar as assinaturas usando a chave pública de Alice.

Estrutura de alto nível de um feed

Pubs são servidores de retransmissão conhecidos como “super peers”. Pubs conectam usuários usuários e atualizações de fofocas a outros usuários conectados ao Pub. Um Pub é análogo a um pub da vida real, onde as pessoas vão para se encontrar e se socializar. Para ingressar em um Pub, o usuário deve ser convidado primeiro. Um usuário pode solicitar um código de convite de um Pub; o Pub simplesmente gerará um novo código de convite, mas alguns Pubs podem exigir verificação adicional na forma de verificação de e-mail ou, com alguns Pubs, você deve pedir um código em um fórum público ou chat. Pubs também podem mapear aliases de usuário, como e-mails ou nome de usuário, para IDs de chave pública para facilitar os pares de referência.

Depois que o Pub enviar o código de convite ao usuário, o usuário resgatará o código, o que significa que o Pub seguirá o usuário, o que permite que o usuário veja as mensagens postadas por outros membros do Pub, bem como as mensagens de retransmissão do Pub pelo usuário a outros membros do Pub.

Além de retransmitir mensagens entre pares, os Pubs também podem armazenar as mensagens. Se Alice estiver offline e Bob transmitir atualizações de feed, Alice perderá a atualização. Se Alice ficar online, mas Bob estiver offline, não haverá como ela buscar o feed de Bob. Mas com um Pub, Alice pode buscar o feed no Pub mesmo se Bob estiver off-line porque o Pub está armazenando as mensagens. Pubs são úteis porque assim que um colega fica online, ele pode sincronizar com o Pub para receber os feeds de seus amigos potencialmente offline.

Um usuário pode, opcionalmente, executar seu próprio servidor Pub e abri-lo ao público ou permitir que apenas seus amigos participem, se assim o desejarem. Eles também podem ingressar em um Pub público. Aqui está uma lista de Pubs públicos em que todos podem participar . Explicaremos como ingressar em um posteriormente neste guia. Uma coisa importante a observar é que o Secure Scuttlebutt em uma rede social somente para convidados significa que você deve ser “puxado” para entrar nos círculos sociais. Se você responder às mensagens, os destinatários não serão notificados, a menos que estejam seguindo você de volta. O objetivo do SSB é criar “ilhas” isoladas de redes pares, ao contrário de uma rede pública onde qualquer pessoa pode enviar mensagens a qualquer pessoa.

Perspectivas dos participantes

Scuttlebot

O software Pub é conhecido como servidor Scuttlebutt (servidor ssb ), mas também é conhecido como “Scuttlebot” e sbotna linha de comando. O servidor SSB adiciona comportamento de rede ao banco de dados Scuttlebutt (SSB). Estaremos usando o Scuttlebot ao longo deste tutorial.

Os logs do usuário são conhecidos como feed e um usuário pode seguir os feeds de outros usuários para receber suas atualizações. Cada usuário é responsável por armazenar seu próprio feed. Quando Alice assina o feed de Bob, Bob baixa o log de feed de Alice. Bob pode verificar se o registro do feed realmente pertence a Alice verificando as assinaturas. Bob pode verificar as assinaturas usando a chave pública de Alice.

Estrutura de alto nível de um feed

Pubs são servidores de retransmissão conhecidos como “super peers”. Pubs conectam usuários usuários e atualizações de fofocas a outros usuários conectados ao Pub. Um Pub é análogo a um pub da vida real, onde as pessoas vão para se encontrar e se socializar. Para ingressar em um Pub, o usuário deve ser convidado primeiro. Um usuário pode solicitar um código de convite de um Pub; o Pub simplesmente gerará um novo código de convite, mas alguns Pubs podem exigir verificação adicional na forma de verificação de e-mail ou, com alguns Pubs, você deve pedir um código em um fórum público ou chat. Pubs também podem mapear aliases de usuário, como e-mails ou nome de usuário, para IDs de chave pública para facilitar os pares de referência.

Depois que o Pub enviar o código de convite ao usuário, o usuário resgatará o código, o que significa que o Pub seguirá o usuário, o que permite que o usuário veja as mensagens postadas por outros membros do Pub, bem como as mensagens de retransmissão do Pub pelo usuário a outros membros do Pub.

Além de retransmitir mensagens entre pares, os Pubs também podem armazenar as mensagens. Se Alice estiver offline e Bob transmitir atualizações de feed, Alice perderá a atualização. Se Alice ficar online, mas Bob estiver offline, não haverá como ela buscar o feed de Bob. Mas com um Pub, Alice pode buscar o feed no Pub mesmo se Bob estiver off-line porque o Pub está armazenando as mensagens. Pubs são úteis porque assim que um colega fica online, ele pode sincronizar com o Pub para receber os feeds de seus amigos potencialmente offline.

Um usuário pode, opcionalmente, executar seu próprio servidor Pub e abri-lo ao público ou permitir que apenas seus amigos participem, se assim o desejarem. Eles também podem ingressar em um Pub público. Aqui está uma lista de Pubs públicos em que todos podem participar . Explicaremos como ingressar em um posteriormente neste guia. Uma coisa importante a observar é que o Secure Scuttlebutt em uma rede social somente para convidados significa que você deve ser “puxado” para entrar nos círculos sociais. Se você responder às mensagens, os destinatários não serão notificados, a menos que estejam seguindo você de volta. O objetivo do SSB é criar “ilhas” isoladas de redes pares, ao contrário de uma rede pública onde qualquer pessoa pode enviar mensagens a qualquer pessoa.

Perspectivas dos participantes

Pubs - Hubs

Pubs públicos

| Pub Name | Operator | Invite Code | | ------------------------------------------------------------ | ------------------------------------------------------------ | ------------------------------------------------------------ | | scuttle.us | @Ryan | scuttle.us:8008:@WqcuCOIpLtXFRw/9vOAQJti8avTZ9vxT9rKrPo8qG6o=.ed25519~/ZUi9Chpl0g1kuWSrmehq2EwMQeV0Pd+8xw8XhWuhLE= | | pub1.upsocial.com | @freedomrules | pub1.upsocial.com:8008:@gjlNF5Cyw3OKZxEoEpsVhT5Xv3HZutVfKBppmu42MkI=.ed25519~lMd6f4nnmBZEZSavAl4uahl+feajLUGqu8s2qdoTLi8= | | Monero Pub | @Denis | xmr-pub.net:8008:@5hTpvduvbDyMLN2IdzDKa7nx7PSem9co3RsOmZoyyCM=.ed25519~vQU+r2HUd6JxPENSinUWdfqrJLlOqXiCbzHoML9iVN4= | | FreeSocial | @Jarland | pub.freesocial.co:8008:@ofYKOy2p9wsaxV73GqgOyh6C6nRGFM5FyciQyxwBd6A=.ed25519~ye9Z808S3KPQsV0MWr1HL0/Sh8boSEwW+ZK+8x85u9w= | | ssb.vpn.net.br | @coffeverton | ssb.vpn.net.br:8008:@ze8nZPcf4sbdULvknEFOCbVZtdp7VRsB95nhNw6/2YQ=.ed25519~D0blTolH3YoTwSAkY5xhNw8jAOjgoNXL/+8ZClzr0io= | | gossip.noisebridge.info | Noisebridge Hackerspace @james.network | gossip.noisebridge.info:8008:@2NANnQVdsoqk0XPiJG2oMZqaEpTeoGrxOHJkLIqs7eY=.ed25519~JWTC6+rPYPW5b5zCion0gqjcJs35h6JKpUrQoAKWgJ4= |

Pubs privados

Você precisará entrar em contato com os proprietários desses bares para receber um convite.

| Pub Name | Operator | Contact | | --------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------ | ----------------------------------------------- | | many.butt.nz | @dinosaur | mikey@enspiral.com | | one.butt.nz | @dinosaur | mikey@enspiral.com | | ssb.mikey.nz | @dinosaur | mikey@enspiral.com | | ssb.celehner.com | @cel | cel@celehner.com |

Pubs muito grandes

Aviso: embora tecnicamente funcione usar um convite para esses pubs, você provavelmente se divertirá se o fizer devido ao seu tamanho (muitas coisas para baixar, risco para bots / spammers / idiotas)

| Pub Name | Operator | Invite Code | | --------------------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------ | | scuttlebutt.de | SolSoCoG | scuttlebutt.de:8008:@yeh/GKxlfhlYXSdgU7CRLxm58GC42za3tDuC4NJld/k=.ed25519~iyaCpZ0co863K9aF+b7j8BnnHfwY65dGeX6Dh2nXs3c= | | Lohn's Pub | @lohn | p.lohn.in:8018:@LohnKVll9HdLI3AndEc4zwGtfdF/J7xC7PW9B/JpI4U=.ed25519~z3m4ttJdI4InHkCtchxTu26kKqOfKk4woBb1TtPeA/s= | | Scuttle Space | @guil-dot | Visit scuttle.space | | SSB PeerNet US-East | timjrobinson | us-east.ssbpeer.net:8008:@sTO03jpVivj65BEAJMhlwtHXsWdLd9fLwyKAT1qAkc0=.ed25519~sXFc5taUA7dpGTJITZVDCRy2A9jmkVttsr107+ufInU= | | Hermies | s | net:hermies.club:8008~shs:uMYDVPuEKftL4SzpRGVyQxLdyPkOiX7njit7+qT/7IQ=:SSB+Room+PSK3TLYC2T86EHQCUHBUHASCASE18JBV24= |

GUI - Interface Gráfica do Utilizador(Usuário)

Patchwork - Uma GUI SSB (Descontinuado)

Patchwork é o aplicativo de mensagens e compartilhamento descentralizado construído em cima do SSB . O protocolo scuttlebutt em si não mantém um conjunto de feeds nos quais um usuário está interessado, então um cliente é necessário para manter uma lista de feeds de pares em que seu respectivo usuário está interessado e seguindo.

Fonte: scuttlebutt.nz

Quando você instala e executa o Patchwork, você só pode ver e se comunicar com seus pares em sua rede local. Para acessar fora de sua LAN, você precisa se conectar a um Pub. Um pub é apenas para convidados e eles retransmitem mensagens entre você e seus pares fora de sua LAN e entre outros Pubs.

Lembre-se de que você precisa seguir alguém para receber mensagens dessa pessoa. Isso reduz o envio de mensagens de spam para os usuários. Os usuários só veem as respostas das pessoas que seguem. Os dados são sincronizados no disco para funcionar offline, mas podem ser sincronizados diretamente com os pares na sua LAN por wi-fi ou bluetooth.

Patchbay - Uma GUI Alternativa

Patchbay é um cliente de fofoca projetado para ser fácil de modificar e estender. Ele usa o mesmo banco de dados que Patchwork e Patchfoo , então você pode facilmente dar uma volta com sua identidade existente.

Planetary - GUI para IOS

Planetary é um app com pubs pré-carregados para facilitar integração.

Manyverse - GUI para Android

Manyverse é um aplicativo de rede social com recursos que você esperaria: posts, curtidas, perfis, mensagens privadas, etc. Mas não está sendo executado na nuvem de propriedade de uma empresa, em vez disso, as postagens de seus amigos e todos os seus dados sociais vivem inteiramente em seu telefone .

Fontes

• https://scuttlebot.io/

• https://decentralized-id.com/decentralized-web/scuttlebot/#plugins

• https://medium.com/@miguelmota/getting-started-with-secure-scuttlebut-e6b7d4c5ecfd

• Secure Scuttlebutt : um protocolo de banco de dados global.

@ 5d4b6c8d:8a1c1ee3

Yesterday's edition https://stacker.news/items/607040/r/Undisciplined

Happy July 14th, everyone. America narrowly averted a civil war last night and I'm pretty happy about that. I was impressed by how well Stacker News covered the biggest breaking news event of the site's existence. People were pulling together lots of sources and offering generally measured thoughts.

• • -

July 14, 2023 📅

---

📝 TOP POST

Common psychological biases that bitcoiners have

Excerpt

One of the primary reasons I got involved with markets is my interest in psychology. Humans are a fickle bunch, and it's fascinating to observe the human condition in such a clear, mathematical way.

3217 sats \ 11 comments \ @birdeye21 \ ~bitcoin

---

💬 TOP COMMENT

https://stacker.news/items/208075/r/Undisciplined?commentId=208936

Excerpt

I get your point, but this seems to me one of the (rare) differences where "technically possible but empirically infeasible" vs "technically impossible" matters a lot.

1128 sats \ 3 replies \ @elvismercury

From Portable experiences by @k00b in ~nostr

---

🏆 TOP STACKER

2nd place @k00b (1st hiding, presumed @siggy47)

7947 stacked \ 10.5k spent \ 3 posts \ 12 comments \ 0 referrals

---

🗺️ TOP TERRITORY

~bitcoin

everything bitcoin related

founded by @k00b on Tue May 02 2023

37.3k stacked \ 0 revenue \ 51.8k spent \ 95 posts \ 214 comments

https://imgprxy.stacker.news/fsFoWlgwKYsk5mxx2ijgqU8fg04I_2zA_D28t_grR74/rs:fit:960:540/aHR0cHM6Ly9tLnN0YWNrZXIubmV3cy8yMzc5Ng

July 14, 2022 📅

---

📝 TOP POST

Pine – A bitcoin wallet w/ a messenger-like UI || A BTC Wallet UX for the masses

Link to https://pine.pm/

509 sats \ 15 comments \ @Spartan \ ~bitcoin

---

💬 TOP COMMENT

https://stacker.news/items/44747/r/Undisciplined?commentId=45060

Excerpt

The user @darthcoin has way to many guides from wich you can learn a lot IMO, he is active here to most of the time, though I dont know if I've @ him correctly.

300 sats \ 4 replies \ @bangbang_u_r_done

From Any Good Routing Node Strategies? by @andyleroy in ~bitcoin

---

🏆 TOP STACKER

1st place @nerd2ninja

544 stacked \ 1765 spent \ 3 posts \ 17 comments \ 0 referrals

---

🗺️ TOP TERRITORY

~bitcoin

everything bitcoin related

founded by @k00b on Tue May 02 2023

14.6k stacked \ 0 revenue \ 31.6k spent \ 133 posts \ 261 comments

https://imgprxy.stacker.news/fsFoWlgwKYsk5mxx2ijgqU8fg04I_2zA_D28t_grR74/rs:fit:960:540/aHR0cHM6Ly9tLnN0YWNrZXIubmV3cy8yMzc5Ng

July 14, 2021 📅

---

📝 TOP POST

How Bitcoin And Green Energy Can Save Ethiopia’s Economy

Link to https://stacker.news/items/320/r/Undisciplined

2 sats \ 1 comment \ @0268486dc4 \ ~bitcoin

---

💬 TOP COMMENT

https://stacker.news/items/332/r/Undisciplined?commentId=333

Excerpt

From the Twitter announcement

Students will learn how to build #Bitcoin applications from the ground up using the Rust programming language. […]

18 sats \ 0 replies \ @sha256

From Fodé Diop Launches a Bitcoin Academy by @sha256 in ~bitcoin

---

🏆 TOP STACKER

1st place @sha256

4 stacked \ 5 spent \ 2 posts \ 1 comment \ 0 referrals

---

🗺️ TOP TERRITORY

~bitcoin

everything bitcoin related

founded by @k00b on Tue May 02 2023

10 stacked \ 0 revenue \ 47 spent \ 9 posts \ 8 comments

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/608036

@ 6e24af77:b3f1350b

test

@ 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. 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 and Albyhub Lightning Node 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–

• 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 community node by Ocknamo.

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. 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 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). 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.

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). 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 or Nostrudel.ninja). 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 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 and If Posts a Note here.

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 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",
• 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.

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, Lightning Payments, Nostr Addresses at Your Domain, and Personal Nostr Relay.

Then in my latest two blogs I explored different types of interoperability with NFC cards 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 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 controlling a coffee machine),
• All kinds of AI Assistants and Agents,

In fact I have already released an open source workflow for an AI Assistant, 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.

@ b2caa9b3:9eab0fb5

The African sun is warming things up here at Kilimanjaro, but there's still a crispness in the morning air. My fleece jacket came in handy after a refreshing shower! I started my day with a perfect combo: coffee and breakfast on the rooftop, with a stunning view as my backdrop.

Speaking of tech, today was dedicated to getting my workspace set up. First on the agenda: Thunderbird, my trusty email client from my Linux days. It took a few hours to wrangle everything, especially the S/MIME encryption. Feeling a bit lost in the weeds, I decided to switch gears and embrace OpenPGP for end-to-end encryption – a simpler solution in my opinion.

Just as I finished conquering Thunderbird, Kilimanjaro itself decided to make an appearance! The clouds parted to reveal the majestic peak, and I couldn't resist capturing the moment with a couple of photos.

Today's another day with no set plans, just taking things minute by minute. Soaking up the beautiful scenery, the cool mornings, and the positive vibes. As soon as my foot heals, I'll be out exploring the town, snapping photos, and enjoying a delicious coffee at a local cafe.

Speaking of exploring, the world of NFTs has piqued my interest. I have a few on Opensea and WAX Blockchain, but I'm curious – where else are people showcasing their digital art? Let me know in the comments where you buy and sell your NFTs, or if they're just patiently waiting for a better future. I'd love to hear your NFT stories!

Life has a way of taking us on unexpected journeys. So, here's to embracing the unexpected, making the most of each situation, and maybe even finding a small online job to boost my budget. Wishing you all a wonderful day – and remember, don't stress yourself!

Online

Profile Page | Support Page

Feel free to support me by sending some sats via the lightning network to rubenstorm@sats.mobi

@ e97aaffa:2ebd765d

Estamos numa época tão estranha da humanidade…

Onde alguns querem reescrever a história, em vez de aprender e evoluir com a mesma. São com os erros que se cresce.

Onde o termo fascista é sinónimo de alguém com uma opinião diferente da sua, sem minimamente saber o real significado dessa palavra.

Onde defendem uma liberdade, que proíba o contraditório.

Onde não se discutem ideias, mas sim combatem ideias.

Onde o ambientalmente sustentável é substituir árvores e zonas verdes por estruturas em aço e zonas negras.

Onde os políticos constroem casas ou cidades, literalmente, em cima dos rios mas depois a culpa das cheias é as alterações climáticas.

Onde os alimentos tem menos importância que um peido de uma vaca.

Onde pessoas defendem que a solução para o aquecimento, é morrer de frio.

Onde a igualdade é favorecer um grupo, em detrimento de outro.

Onde o essencial é viver para consumir, em vez de usufruir.

Onde o importante é ser rico e ostentar essa mesma riqueza, mesmo que tenha de espezinhar outros para a conquistar.

Onde o mais importante é parecer em vez de ser.

Onde políticos defendem que o conhecimento pode levar a escolhas erradas, defendem o carneirismo.

Onde um político define o que é verdade ou mentira, limitando o que as pessoas podem expressar. Mas quem controla o controlador.

Onde os revisores da verdade deixaram de estar num gabinete, passando a ser um exército de jovens atrás de um teclado.

Onde, são propostas e aprovadas limitações de liberdade, sem esclarecimento ou divulgação pública. Pior que a obscuridade, é desinteresse da comunidade por liberdade.

Onde a censura é o novo normal, defender o contrário é que é censurável.

Onde a imprensa é tão livre como uma pomba dentro de sua gaiola.

Onde, quem comete o crime é protegido, quem o denúncia é perseguido.

Onde o certo é pensar com a cabeça dos outros, sem questionar.

Onde os pais delegaram o papel de educar às escolas e aos ecrãs azuis.

Onde a escola deixou de ser um lugar de conhecimento e/ou do desenvolvimento do espírito crítico.

Onde as crianças crescem doutrinados por políticos e por AI.

Onde a sociedade é programada e com um destino predefinido, como um rato dentro da sua roda.

Onde o maior erro, é pretender construir seres que não cometem erros, que não tenham vícios. Quando isso acontecer, deixamos de ser humanos. A imperfeição é a essência dos seres humanos, é o que nos difere das máquinas.

Onde só se ensina a não cair, em vez de ajudar e incentivar a levantar.

Onde se suspende a liberdade de circulação e os direitos mais básicos, sem ninguém questionar.

Onde a privacidade é crime.

Onde Satoshi é excomungado, mas Miguel Tiago é idoleterado.

Onde a moeda é utilizado como uma arma.

Onde uma guerra é digladiada entre zeros e uns, sem o comum mortal aperceber da sua existência.

Onde crianças caem em campos de batalha, como folhas em pleno outono.

Onde o direito ao Livre-arbítrio está sob ameaça.

@ 0b14a03f:3f0257c2

In 1925, someone said, "Let's stop making light bulbs that last 2,500 hours; let's make them last 1,000 instead so we can grow our profits."

Then the internet was created, and what happened? Everything on it was commercialized, even ourselves.

After that, Bitcoin appeared. What did we do? We treated it as a fiat currency and created the same old financial vehicles around it.

What today is Wall Street, in the past, it was located in Holland. After that, something similar was in France. They both disappeared, but humans replicated it in the US. We're now seeing how it will collapse.. once again.

Thus, repeating the same things and thinking that we will obtain different results is a bit childish.

It takes much more energy to create something -new.

A lot of energy from the brain to create new neurological patterns, as well as, a lot of energy from the reality to manifest it.

However, aren't we sick of the same old things already?

@ a95c6243:d345522c

Was du bist hängt von drei Faktoren ab: \ Was du geerbt hast, \ was deine Umgebung aus dir machte \ und was du in freier Wahl \ aus deiner Umgebung und deinem Erbe gemacht hast. \ Aldous Huxley

Das brave Mitmachen und Mitlaufen in einem vorgegebenen, recht engen Rahmen ist gewiss nicht neu, hat aber gerade wieder mal Konjunktur. Dies kann man deutlich beobachten, eigentlich egal, in welchem gesellschaftlichen Bereich man sich umschaut. Individualität ist nur soweit angesagt, wie sie in ein bestimmtes Schema von «Diversität» passt, und Freiheit verkommt zur Worthülse – nicht erst durch ein gewisses Buch einer gewissen ehemaligen Regierungschefin.

Erklärungsansätze für solche Entwicklungen sind bekannt, und praktisch alle haben etwas mit Massenpsychologie zu tun. Der Herdentrieb, also der Trieb der Menschen, sich – zum Beispiel aus Unsicherheit oder Bequemlichkeit – lieber der Masse anzuschließen als selbstständig zu denken und zu handeln, ist einer der Erklärungsversuche. Andere drehen sich um Macht, Propaganda, Druck und Angst, also den gezielten Einsatz psychologischer Herrschaftsinstrumente.

Aber wollen die Menschen überhaupt Freiheit? Durch Gespräche im privaten Umfeld bin ich diesbezüglich in der letzten Zeit etwas skeptisch geworden. Um die Jahreswende philosophiert man ja gerne ein wenig über das Erlebte und über die Erwartungen für die Zukunft. Dabei hatte ich hin und wieder den Eindruck, die totalitären Anwandlungen unserer «Repräsentanten» kämen manchen Leuten gerade recht.

«Desinformation» ist so ein brisantes Thema. Davor müsse man die Menschen doch schützen, hörte ich. Jemand müsse doch zum Beispiel diese ganzen merkwürdigen Inhalte in den Social Media filtern – zur Ukraine, zum Klima, zu Gesundheitsthemen oder zur Migration. Viele wüssten ja gar nicht einzuschätzen, was richtig und was falsch ist, sie bräuchten eine Führung.

Freiheit bedingt Eigenverantwortung, ohne Zweifel. Eventuell ist es einigen tatsächlich zu anspruchsvoll, die Verantwortung für das eigene Tun und Lassen zu übernehmen. Oder die persönliche Freiheit wird nicht als ausreichend wertvolles Gut angesehen, um sich dafür anzustrengen. In dem Fall wäre die mangelnde Selbstbestimmung wohl das kleinere Übel. Allerdings fehlt dann gemäß Aldous Huxley ein Teil der Persönlichkeit. Letztlich ist natürlich alles eine Frage der Abwägung.

Sind viele Menschen möglicherweise schon so «eingenordet», dass freiheitliche Ambitionen gar nicht für eine ganze Gruppe, ein Kollektiv, verfolgt werden können? Solche Gedanken kamen mir auch, als ich mir kürzlich diverse Talks beim viertägigen Hacker-Kongress des Chaos Computer Clubs (38C3) anschaute. Ich war nicht nur überrascht, sondern reichlich erschreckt angesichts der in weiten Teilen mainstream-geformten Inhalte, mit denen ein dankbares Publikum beglückt wurde. Wo ich allgemein hellere Köpfe erwartet hatte, fand ich Konformismus und enthusiastisch untermauerte Narrative.

Gibt es vielleicht so etwas wie eine Herdenimmunität gegen Indoktrination? Ich denke, ja, zumindest eine gestärkte Widerstandsfähigkeit. Was wir brauchen, sind etwas gesunder Menschenverstand, offene Informationskanäle und der Mut, sich freier auch zwischen den Herden zu bewegen. Sie tun das bereits, aber sagen Sie es auch dieses Jahr ruhig weiter.

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ 700c6cbf:a92816fd

... something else

This is the final image. Or is it? Likely, it is not. I have already started on a perfect version of my Mother Earth painting.

Of course, there is no such thing as a perfect painting. What I mean is that I already started on a vector version of Mother Earth. You're familiar with vector vs. pixel, right?

But let's start at the beginning, not the end.

This here is a pic from the sketching phase. I am not one who can just magically and with a few strokes produce an amazing sketch of something that resembles a human. There are artists out there that do this wonderfully. It's amazing but it is not me (unfortunately).

Here I am starting to color in the sketch with a watercolor brush. This is all done in Procreate App on an iPad Pro. The coloring is on a separate layer with the pencil sketch set to multiply to shine through the colors. That's why the pencil strokes now are black. I like that look.

And here, I am almost done. Just need to decide on the background color. And as you can see from the gif and video I didn't really decide. Though at the moment I am favoring that muted pinkish red - LOL

Which color is your favorite?

Here you can see the whole process in a timelapse. Above pictures were grabbed from it to detail the process a little.

https://cdn.satellite.earth/05774dcaaf4679c34cbeb46cb43b4c4f85553a3d2b4850a7256d26a871b0c4f3.mp4

And that's it my Nostr friends for my first longform post in this community.

I hope you enjoyed this post. Comments are encouraged an appreciated. Thank you.

Cheers, OceanBee

@ 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.

@ a95c6243:d345522c

Heute möchte ich ein Gedicht mit euch teilen. Es handelt sich um eine Ballade des österreichischen Lyrikers Johann Gabriel Seidl aus dem 19. Jahrhundert. Mir sind diese Worte fest in Erinnerung, da meine Mutter sie perfekt rezitieren konnte, auch als die Kräfte schon langsam schwanden.

Dem originalen Titel «Die Uhr» habe ich für mich immer das Wort «innere» hinzugefügt. Denn der Zeitmesser – hier vermutliche eine Taschenuhr – symbolisiert zwar in dem Kontext das damalige Zeitempfinden und die Umbrüche durch die industrielle Revolution, sozusagen den Zeitgeist und das moderne Leben. Aber der Autor setzt sich philosophisch mit der Zeit auseinander und gibt seinem Werk auch eine klar spirituelle Dimension.

Das Ticken der Uhr und die Momente des Glücks und der Trauer stehen sinnbildlich für das unaufhaltsame Fortschreiten und die Vergänglichkeit des Lebens. Insofern könnte man bei der Uhr auch an eine Sonnenuhr denken. Der Rhythmus der Ereignisse passt uns vielleicht nicht immer in den Kram.

Was den Takt pocht, ist durchaus auch das Herz, unser «inneres Uhrwerk». Wenn dieses Meisterwerk einmal stillsteht, ist es unweigerlich um uns geschehen. Hoffentlich können wir dann dankbar sagen: «Ich habe mein Bestes gegeben.»

Ich trage, wo ich gehe, stets eine Uhr bei mir; \ Wieviel es geschlagen habe, genau seh ich an ihr. \ Es ist ein großer Meister, der künstlich ihr Werk gefügt, \ Wenngleich ihr Gang nicht immer dem törichten Wunsche genügt.

Ich wollte, sie wäre rascher gegangen an manchem Tag; \ Ich wollte, sie hätte manchmal verzögert den raschen Schlag. \ In meinen Leiden und Freuden, in Sturm und in der Ruh, \ Was immer geschah im Leben, sie pochte den Takt dazu.

Sie schlug am Sarge des Vaters, sie schlug an des Freundes Bahr, \ Sie schlug am Morgen der Liebe, sie schlug am Traualtar. \ Sie schlug an der Wiege des Kindes, sie schlägt, will's Gott, noch oft, \ Wenn bessere Tage kommen, wie meine Seele es hofft.

Und ward sie auch einmal träger, und drohte zu stocken ihr Lauf, \ So zog der Meister immer großmütig sie wieder auf. \ Doch stände sie einmal stille, dann wär's um sie geschehn, \ Kein andrer, als der sie fügte, bringt die Zerstörte zum Gehn.

Dann müßt ich zum Meister wandern, der wohnt am Ende wohl weit, \ Wohl draußen, jenseits der Erde, wohl dort in der Ewigkeit! \ Dann gäb ich sie ihm zurücke mit dankbar kindlichem Flehn: \ Sieh, Herr, ich hab nichts verdorben, sie blieb von selber stehn.

Johann Gabriel Seidl (1804-1875)

@ 9edd72eb:cb697b0a

If one knows exactly what to do to alleviate one's pain, comfort oneself, and emerge more or less unscathed from Adversity, I think it can be said that one has reached a fairly high level of Wisdom in Life.

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/607422

@ 7f29628d:e160cccc

Der gut informierte Bürger denkt bei der Pandemie sofort an Intensivstationen, an die Bilder aus Bergamo und erinnert sich an die Berichterstattung damals – also muss es wohl ein Maximum gewesen sein. Manche Skeptiker behaupten jedoch das Gegenteil. Klarheit sollte ein Blick nach Wiesbaden, zum Statistischen Bundesamt, schaffen. Schließlich sitzen dort gut bezahlte Profis, die seit vielen Jahrzehnten die Sterbestatistik pflegen und veröffentlichen. Jeder Todesfall wird in Deutschland über die Standesämter exakt erfasst.

Doch die Überraschung: Das Statistische Bundesamt liefert uns auf diese einfache Frage zwei extrem unterschiedliche Antworten – ein Minimum und ein Maximum. Das Ergebnis hängt davon ab, wie tief man in die Veröffentlichungen des Bundesamtes eintaucht. Betrachtet man nur die Webseiten und Pressemitteilungen, erhält man den Eindruck eines Maximums. Schaut man jedoch etwas tiefer in die Tabellen und Rohdaten, zeigt sich plötzlich ein Minimum. Aber wie kann das sein? Beides gleichzeitig geht ja wohl kaum. Wer lügt hier – die Tabellen des Amtes oder die Pressemitteilungen? Gehen wir dieser Frage Schritt für Schritt auf den Grund.

2020: Ein historisches Maximum?

Schauen wir uns die vielen Hundert Veröffentlichungen des Statistischen Bundesamtes aus dieser Zeit an. Oder wir kürzen ab und fragen ChatGPT, da die KI auf diesen Daten trainiert wurde und das gesamte Material kennt. Die Frage an ChatGPT lautet also: Wie war das Sterbegeschehen im Jahr 2020 im Vergleich zu den Vorjahren?

ChatGPT antwortet: »Im Jahr 2020 war die Sterblichkeit in Deutschland höher als in den Jahren zuvor. Es gab eine Übersterblichkeit von etwa 982.000 Todesfällen, das sind rund 46.000 mehr als der Durchschnitt der Vorjahre (2016 bis 2019). Dieser Anstieg wurde überwiegend im Zusammenhang mit der COVID-19-Pandemie gesehen. Während die Sterbezahlen in den Vorjahren schwankten, war ein solch signifikanter Anstieg wie 2020 bisher nicht zu beobachten.«

Wir fragen konkreter: Ist es ein Fakt, dass wir eine so ernste Lage im Sterbegeschehen wie im Frühjahr 2020 noch nie erlebt haben?

ChatGPT bestätigt: »Ja, die COVID-19-Pandemie führte im Frühjahr 2020 zu einer außergewöhnlichen Situation im Sterbegeschehen in Deutschland. Die dramatische Übersterblichkeit, die ab der 13. Kalenderwoche auftrat, veranlasste das Statistische Bundesamt, besonders eindringliche Warnungen zu veröffentlichen. Der damalige Vizepräsident des Amtes und andere führende Stimmen wiesen öffentlich darauf hin, dass die Todesfallzahlen stark vom Durchschnitt abwichen. Diese klare Warnung richtete sich an die Öffentlichkeit und die Politik gleichermaßen. Die Medien berichteten intensiv über diese Warnungen, was das Bewusstsein für die Schwere der Pandemie erheblich schärfte. In den vergangenen Jahrzehnten hatte es keine vergleichbare Übersterblichkeit gegeben, die eine solch umfangreiche Kommunikation durch das Statistische Bundesamt erforderlich gemacht hätte.«

Ein gut informierter Zeitungsleser wird sich an dieser Stelle bestätigt fühlen: Ja, so war es damals. Ein Maximum im Sterbegeschehen – wegen der Pandemie. Oder etwa nicht?

2020: Ein historisches Minimum?

Tauchen wir in die Rohdaten des Statistischen Bundesamtes ein. Die Tabellen, die das Amt seit Jahrzehnten verlässlich veröffentlicht, nennen sich Sterbetafeln. Diese werden jährlich bereitgestellt und stehen auf der Website des Bundesamtes zum Download bereit. Ein erster Blick in die Sterbetafeln mag den Laien abschrecken, doch mit einer kurzen Erklärung wird alles verständlich. Wir gehen schrittweise vor.

Nehmen wir die Sterbetafel des Jahres 2017. Sie enthält zwei große Tabellen – eine für Männer und eine für Frauen. Jede Zeile der Tabelle steht für einen Jahrgang, zum Beispiel zeigt die Zeile 79 die Daten der 79-jährigen Männer. Besonders wichtig ist nun die zweite Spalte, in der der Wert 0,05 eingetragen ist. Das bedeutet, dass 5 Prozent der 79-jährigen Männer im Jahr 2017 verstorben sind. Das ist die wichtige Kennzahl. Wenn wir diesen exakten Wert, den man auch als Sterberate bezeichnet, nun in ein Säulendiagramm eintragen, erhalten wir eine leicht verständliche visuelle Darstellung (Grafik 1).

Es ist wichtig zu betonen, dass dieser Wert weder ein Schätzwert noch eine Modellrechnung oder Prognose ist, sondern ein exakter Messwert, basierend auf einer zuverlässigen Zählung. Sterberaten (für die Fachleute auch Sterbewahrscheinlichkeiten qx) sind seit Johann Peter Süßmilch (1707–1767) der Goldstandard der Sterbestatistik. Jeder Aktuar wird das bestätigen. Fügen wir nun die Sterberaten der 79-jährigen Männer aus den Jahren davor und danach hinzu, um das Gesamtbild zu sehen (Grafik 2). Und nun die entscheidende Frage: Zeigt das Jahr 2020 ein Maximum oder ein Minimum?

Ein kritischer Leser könnte vermuten, dass die 79-jährigen Männer eine Ausnahme darstellen und andere Jahrgänge im Jahr 2020 ein Maximum zeigen würden. Doch das trifft nicht zu. Kein einziger Jahrgang verzeichnete im Jahr 2020 ein Maximum. Im Gegenteil: Auch die 1-Jährigen, 2-Jährigen, 3-Jährigen, 9-Jährigen, 10-Jährigen, 15-Jährigen, 18-Jährigen und viele weitere männliche Jahrgänge hatten ihr Minimum im Jahr 2020. Dasselbe gilt bei den Frauen. Insgesamt hatten 31 Jahrgänge ihr Minimum im Jahr 2020. Wenn wir schließlich alle Jahrgänge in einer einzigen Grafik zusammenfassen, ergibt sich ein klares Bild: Das Minimum im Sterbegeschehen lag im Jahr 2020 (Grafik 3).

Ein kritischer Leser könnte nun wiederum vermuten, dass es innerhalb des Jahres 2020 möglicherweise starke Ausschläge nach oben bei einzelnen Jahrgängen gegeben haben könnte, die später durch Ausschläge nach unten ausgeglichen wurden – und dass diese Schwankungen in der jährlichen Übersicht nicht sichtbar sind. Doch auch das trifft nicht zu. Ein Blick auf die wöchentlichen Sterberaten zeigt, dass die ersten acht Monate der Pandemie keine nennenswerten Auffälligkeiten aufweisen. Es bleibt dabei: Die Rohdaten des Statistischen Bundesamtes bestätigen zweifelsfrei, dass die ersten acht Monate der Pandemie das historische Minimum im Sterbegeschehen darstellen. (Für die Fachleute sei angemerkt, dass im gleichen Zeitraum die Lebenserwartung die historischen Höchststände erreicht hatte – Grafik 4.)

So konstruierte das Amt aus einem Minimum ein Maximum:

Zur Erinnerung: Die Rohdaten des Statistischen Bundesamtes, die in den jährlichen Sterbetafeln zweifelsfrei dokumentiert sind, zeigen für das Jahr 2020 eindeutig ein Minimum im Sterbegeschehen. Aus diesen »in Stein gemeißelten« Zahlen ein Maximum zu »konstruieren«, ohne die Rohdaten selbst zu verändern, scheint auf den ersten Blick eine unlösbare Aufgabe. Jeder Student würde an einer solchen Herausforderung scheitern. Doch das Statistische Bundesamt hat einen kreativen Weg gefunden - ein Meisterstück gezielter Manipulation. In fünf Schritten zeigt sich, wie diese Täuschung der Öffentlichkeit umgesetzt wurde:

(1) Ignorieren der Sterberaten: Die präzisen, objektiven und leicht verständlichen Sterberaten aus den eigenen Sterbetafeln wurden konsequent ignoriert und verschwiegen. Diese Daten widersprachen dem gewünschten Narrativ und wurden daher gezielt ausgeklammert.

(2) Fokus auf absolute Todeszahlen: Die Aufmerksamkeit wurde stattdessen auf die absolute Zahl der Todesfälle gelenkt. Diese wirkt allein durch ihre schiere Größe dramatisch und emotionalisiert die Diskussion. Ein entscheidender Faktor wurde dabei ignoriert: Die absolute Zahl der Todesfälle steigt aufgrund der demografischen Entwicklung jedes Jahr an. Viele Menschen verstehen diesen Zusammenhang nicht und verbinden die steigenden Zahlen fälschlicherweise mit der vermeintlichen Pandemie.

(3) Einführung der Übersterblichkeit als neue Kennzahl: Erst ab Beginn der „Pandemie“ wurde die Kennzahl "Übersterblichkeit" eingeführt – und dies mit einer fragwürdigen Methode, die systematisch überhöhte Werte lieferte. Diese Kennzahl wurde regelmäßig, oft monatlich oder sogar wöchentlich, berechnet und diente als ständige Grundlage für alarmierende Schlagzeilen.

(4) Intensive Öffentlichkeitsarbeit: Durch eine breit angelegte Kampagne wurden die manipulativen Kennzahlen gezielt in den Fokus gerückt. Pressemitteilungen, Podcasts und öffentliche Auftritte konzentrierten sich fast ausschließlich auf die absoluten Todeszahlen und die Übersterblichkeit. Ziel war es, den Eindruck einer dramatischen Situation in der Öffentlichkeit zu verstärken.

(5) Bekämpfen kritischer Stimmen: Kritiker, die die Schwächen und manipulativen Aspekte dieser Methoden aufdeckten, wurden systematisch diskreditiert. Ihre Glaubwürdigkeit und Kompetenz wurden öffentlich infrage gestellt, um das sorgsam konstruierte Narrativ zu schützen.

Ohne diesen begleitenden Statistik-Betrug wäre das gesamte Pandemie-Theater meiner Meinung nach nicht möglich gewesen. Wer aus einem faktischen Minimum ein scheinbares Maximum "erschafft", handelt betrügerisch. Die Folgen dieses Betruges sind gravierend. Denken wir an die Angst, die in der Bevölkerung geschürt wurde – die Angst, bald sterben zu müssen. Denken wir an Masken, Abstandsregeln, isolierte ältere Menschen, Kinderimpfungen und all die Maßnahmen, die unter anderem auf diese falsche Statistik zurückgehen.

Wollen wir Bürger uns das gefallen lassen?

Wenn wir als Bürger zulassen, dass ein derart offensichtlicher und nachprüfbarer Täuschungsversuch ohne Konsequenzen bleibt, dann gefährdet das nicht nur die Integrität unserer Institutionen – es untergräbt das Fundament unserer Gesellschaft. In der DDR feierte man öffentlich Planerfüllung und Übererfüllung, während die Regale leer blieben. Damals wusste jeder: Statistik war ein Propagandainstrument. Niemand traute den Zahlen, die das Staatsfernsehen verkündete.

Während der Pandemie war es anders. Die Menschen vertrauten den Mitteilungen des Statistischen Bundesamtes und des RKI – blind. Die Enthüllungen durch den "RKI-Leak" haben gezeigt, dass auch das Robert-Koch-Institut nicht der Wissenschaft, sondern den Weisungen des Gesundheitsministers und militärischen Vorgaben folgte. Warum sollte es beim Statistischen Bundesamt anders gewesen sein? Diese Behörde ist dem Innenministerium unterstellt und somit ebenfalls weisungsgebunden.

Die Beweise für Täuschung liegen offen zutage. Es braucht keinen Whistleblower, keine geheimen Enthüllungen: Die Rohdaten des Statistischen Bundesamtes sprechen für sich. Sie sind öffentlich einsehbar – klar und unmissverständlich. Die Daten, die Tabellen, die Veröffentlichungen des Amtes selbst – sie sind die Anklageschrift. Sie zeigen, was wirklich war. Nicht mehr und nicht weniger.

Und wir? Was tun wir? Schweigen wir? Oder fordern wir endlich ein, was unser Recht ist? Wir Bürger dürfen das nicht hinnehmen. Es ist Zeit, unsere Behörden zur Rechenschaft zu ziehen. Diese Institutionen arbeiten nicht für sich – sie arbeiten für uns. Wir finanzieren sie, und wir haben das Recht, Transparenz und Verantwortung einzufordern. Manipulationen wie diese müssen aufgearbeitet werden und dürfen nie wieder geschehen. Die Strukturen, die solche Fehlentwicklungen in unseren Behörden ermöglicht haben, müssen offengelegt werden. Denn eine Demokratie lebt von Vertrauen – und Vertrauen muss verdient werden. Jeden Tag aufs Neue.

.

.

MARCEL BARZ, Jahrgang 1975, war Offizier der Bundeswehr und studierte Wirtschafts- und Organisationswissenschaften sowie Wirtschaftsinformatik. Er war Gründer und Geschäftsführer einer Softwarefirma, die sich auf Datenanalyse und Softwareentwicklung spezialisiert hatte. Im August 2021 veröffentlichte Barz den Videovortrag »Die Pandemie in den Rohdaten«, der über eine Million Aufrufe erzielte. Seitdem macht er als "Erbsenzähler" auf Widersprüche in amtlichen Statistiken aufmerksam.

@ fd208ee8:0fd927c1

I just read this, and found it enlightening.

Jung... notes that intelligence can be seen as problem solving at an everyday level..., whereas creativity may represent problem solving for less common issues

Other studies have used metaphor creation as a creativity measure instead of divergent thinking and a spectrum of CHC components instead of just g and have found much higher relationships between creativity and intelligence than past studies

https://www.mdpi.com/2079-3200/3/3/59

I'm unusually intelligent (Who isn't?), but I'm much more creative, than intelligent, and I think that confuses people. The ability to apply intelligence, to solve completely novel problems, on the fly, is something IQ tests don't even claim to measure. They just claim a correlation.

Creativity requires taking wild, mental leaps out into nothingness; simply trusting that your brain will land you safely. And this is why I've been at the forefront of massive innovation, over and over, but never got rich off of it.

I'm a starving autist.

Zaps are the first time I've ever made money directly, for solving novel problems. Companies don't do this because there is a span of time between providing a solution and the solution being implemented, and the person building the implementation (or their boss) receives all the credit for the existence of the solution. At best, you can hope to get pawned off with a small bonus.

Nobody can remember who came up with the solution, originally, and that person might not even be there, anymore, and probably never filed a patent, and may have no idea that their idea has even been built. They just run across it, later, in a tech magazine or museum, and say, "Well, will you look at that! Someone actually went and built it! Isn't that nice!"

Universities at least had the idea of cementing novel solutions in academic papers, but that: 1) only works if you're an academic, and at a university, 2) is an incredibly slow process, not appropriate for a truly innovative field, 3) leads to manifestations of perverse incentives and biased research frameworks, coming from 'publish or perish' policies.

But I think long-form notes and zaps solve for this problem. #Alexandria, especially, is being built to cater to this long-suffering class of chronic underachievers. It leaves a written, public, time-stamped record of Clever Ideas We Have Had.

Because they are clever, the ideas. And we have had them.

@ 4ba8e86d:89d32de4

Tutorial feito por nostr:nostr:npub1rc56x0ek0dd303eph523g3chm0wmrs5wdk6vs0ehd0m5fn8t7y4sqra3tk poste original abaixo:

Parte 1 : http://xh6liiypqffzwnu5734ucwps37tn2g6npthvugz3gdoqpikujju525yd.onion/263585/tutorial-debloat-de-celulares-android-via-adb-parte-1

Parte 2 : http://xh6liiypqffzwnu5734ucwps37tn2g6npthvugz3gdoqpikujju525yd.onion/index.php/263586/tutorial-debloat-de-celulares-android-via-adb-parte-2

Quando o assunto é privacidade em celulares, uma das medidas comumente mencionadas é a remoção de bloatwares do dispositivo, também chamado de debloat. O meio mais eficiente para isso sem dúvidas é a troca de sistema operacional. Custom Rom’s como LineageOS, GrapheneOS, Iodé, CalyxOS, etc, já são bastante enxutos nesse quesito, principalmente quanto não é instalado os G-Apps com o sistema. No entanto, essa prática pode acabar resultando em problemas indesejados como a perca de funções do dispositivo, e até mesmo incompatibilidade com apps bancários, tornando este método mais atrativo para quem possui mais de um dispositivo e separando um apenas para privacidade.   Pensando nisso, pessoas que possuem apenas um único dispositivo móvel, que são necessitadas desses apps ou funções, mas, ao mesmo tempo, tem essa visão em prol da privacidade, buscam por um meio-termo entre manter a Stock rom, e não ter seus dados coletados por esses bloatwares. Felizmente, a remoção de bloatwares é possível e pode ser realizada via root, ou mais da maneira que este artigo irá tratar, via adb.

O que são bloatwares?

Bloatware é a junção das palavras bloat (inchar) + software (programa), ou seja, um bloatware é basicamente um programa inútil ou facilmente substituível — colocado em seu dispositivo previamente pela fabricante e operadora — que está no seu dispositivo apenas ocupando espaço de armazenamento, consumindo memória RAM e pior, coletando seus dados e enviando para servidores externos, além de serem mais pontos de vulnerabilidades.

O que é o adb?

O Android Debug Brigde, ou apenas adb, é uma ferramenta que se utiliza das permissões de usuário shell e permite o envio de comandos vindo de um computador para um dispositivo Android exigindo apenas que a depuração USB esteja ativa, mas também pode ser usada diretamente no celular a partir do Android 11, com o uso do Termux e a depuração sem fio (ou depuração wifi). A ferramenta funciona normalmente em dispositivos sem root, e também funciona caso o celular esteja em Recovery Mode.

Requisitos:

Para computadores:

• Depuração USB ativa no celular; • Computador com adb; • Cabo USB;

Para celulares:

• Depuração sem fio (ou depuração wifi) ativa no celular; • Termux; • Android 11 ou superior;

Para ambos:

• Firewall NetGuard instalado e configurado no celular; • Lista de bloatwares para seu dispositivo;

Ativação de depuração:

Para ativar a Depuração USB em seu dispositivo, pesquise como ativar as opções de desenvolvedor de seu dispositivo, e lá ative a depuração. No caso da depuração sem fio, sua ativação irá ser necessária apenas no momento que for conectar o dispositivo ao Termux.

Instalação e configuração do NetGuard

O NetGuard pode ser instalado através da própria Google Play Store, mas de preferência instale pela F-Droid ou Github para evitar telemetria.

F-Droid: https://f-droid.org/packages/eu.faircode.netguard/

Github: https://github.com/M66B/NetGuard/releases

Após instalado, configure da seguinte maneira:

Configurações → padrões (lista branca/negra) → ative as 3 primeiras opções (bloquear wifi, bloquear dados móveis e aplicar regras ‘quando tela estiver ligada’);

Configurações → opções avançadas → ative as duas primeiras (administrar aplicativos do sistema e registrar acesso a internet);

Com isso, todos os apps estarão sendo bloqueados de acessar a internet, seja por wifi ou dados móveis, e na página principal do app basta permitir o acesso a rede para os apps que você vai usar (se necessário). Permita que o app rode em segundo plano sem restrição da otimização de bateria, assim quando o celular ligar, ele já estará ativo.

Lista de bloatwares

Nem todos os bloatwares são genéricos, haverá bloatwares diferentes conforme a marca, modelo, versão do Android, e até mesmo região.

Para obter uma lista de bloatwares de seu dispositivo, caso seu aparelho já possua um tempo de existência, você encontrará listas prontas facilmente apenas pesquisando por elas. Supondo que temos um Samsung Galaxy Note 10 Plus em mãos, basta pesquisar em seu motor de busca por:

Samsung Galaxy Note 10 Plus bloatware list

Provavelmente essas listas já terão inclusas todos os bloatwares das mais diversas regiões, lhe poupando o trabalho de buscar por alguma lista mais específica.

Caso seu aparelho seja muito recente, e/ou não encontre uma lista pronta de bloatwares, devo dizer que você acaba de pegar em merda, pois é chato para um caralho pesquisar por cada aplicação para saber sua função, se é essencial para o sistema ou se é facilmente substituível.

De antemão já aviso, que mais para frente, caso vossa gostosura remova um desses aplicativos que era essencial para o sistema sem saber, vai acabar resultando na perda de alguma função importante, ou pior, ao reiniciar o aparelho o sistema pode estar quebrado, lhe obrigando a seguir com uma formatação, e repetir todo o processo novamente.

Download do adb em computadores

Para usar a ferramenta do adb em computadores, basta baixar o pacote chamado SDK platform-tools, disponível através deste link: https://developer.android.com/tools/releases/platform-tools. Por ele, você consegue o download para Windows, Mac e Linux.

Uma vez baixado, basta extrair o arquivo zipado, contendo dentro dele uma pasta chamada platform-tools que basta ser aberta no terminal para se usar o adb.

Download do adb em celulares com Termux.

Para usar a ferramenta do adb diretamente no celular, antes temos que baixar o app Termux, que é um emulador de terminal linux, e já possui o adb em seu repositório. Você encontra o app na Google Play Store, mas novamente recomendo baixar pela F-Droid ou diretamente no Github do projeto.

F-Droid: https://f-droid.org/en/packages/com.termux/

Github: https://github.com/termux/termux-app/releases

Processo de debloat

Antes de iniciarmos, é importante deixar claro que não é para você sair removendo todos os bloatwares de cara sem mais nem menos, afinal alguns deles precisam antes ser substituídos, podem ser essenciais para você para alguma atividade ou função, ou até mesmo são insubstituíveis.

Alguns exemplos de bloatwares que a substituição é necessária antes da remoção, é o Launcher, afinal, é a interface gráfica do sistema, e o teclado, que sem ele só é possível digitar com teclado externo. O Launcher e teclado podem ser substituídos por quaisquer outros, minha recomendação pessoal é por aqueles que respeitam sua privacidade, como Pie Launcher e Simple Laucher, enquanto o teclado pelo OpenBoard e FlorisBoard, todos open-source e disponíveis da F-Droid.

Identifique entre a lista de bloatwares, quais você gosta, precisa ou prefere não substituir, de maneira alguma você é obrigado a remover todos os bloatwares possíveis, modifique seu sistema a seu bel-prazer. O NetGuard lista todos os apps do celular com o nome do pacote, com isso você pode filtrar bem qual deles não remover.

Um exemplo claro de bloatware insubstituível e, portanto, não pode ser removido, é o com.android.mtp, um protocolo onde sua função é auxiliar a comunicação do dispositivo com um computador via USB, mas por algum motivo, tem acesso a rede e se comunica frequentemente com servidores externos. Para esses casos, e melhor solução mesmo é bloquear o acesso a rede desses bloatwares com o NetGuard.

MTP tentando comunicação com servidores externos:

Executando o adb shell

No computador

Faça backup de todos os seus arquivos importantes para algum armazenamento externo, e formate seu celular com o hard reset. Após a formatação, e a ativação da depuração USB, conecte seu aparelho e o pc com o auxílio de um cabo USB. Muito provavelmente seu dispositivo irá apenas começar a carregar, por isso permita a transferência de dados, para que o computador consiga se comunicar normalmente com o celular.

Já no pc, abra a pasta platform-tools dentro do terminal, e execute o seguinte comando:

./adb start-server

O resultado deve ser:

daemon not running; starting now at tcp:5037 daemon started successfully

E caso não apareça nada, execute:

./adb kill-server

E inicie novamente.

Com o adb conectado ao celular, execute:

./adb shell

Para poder executar comandos diretamente para o dispositivo. No meu caso, meu celular é um Redmi Note 8 Pro, codinome Begonia.

Logo o resultado deve ser:

begonia:/ $

Caso ocorra algum erro do tipo:

adb: device unauthorized. This adb server’s $ADB_VENDOR_KEYS is not set Try ‘adb kill-server’ if that seems wrong. Otherwise check for a confirmation dialog on your device.

Verifique no celular se apareceu alguma confirmação para autorizar a depuração USB, caso sim, autorize e tente novamente. Caso não apareça nada, execute o kill-server e repita o processo.

No celular

Após realizar o mesmo processo de backup e hard reset citado anteriormente, instale o Termux e, com ele iniciado, execute o comando:

pkg install android-tools

Quando surgir a mensagem “Do you want to continue? [Y/n]”, basta dar enter novamente que já aceita e finaliza a instalação

Agora, vá até as opções de desenvolvedor, e ative a depuração sem fio. Dentro das opções da depuração sem fio, terá uma opção de emparelhamento do dispositivo com um código, que irá informar para você um código em emparelhamento, com um endereço IP e porta, que será usado para a conexão com o Termux.

Para facilitar o processo, recomendo que abra tanto as configurações quanto o Termux ao mesmo tempo, e divida a tela com os dois app’s, como da maneira a seguir:

Para parear o Termux com o dispositivo, não é necessário digitar o ip informado, basta trocar por “localhost”, já a porta e o código de emparelhamento, deve ser digitado exatamente como informado. Execute:

adb pair localhost:porta CódigoDeEmparelhamento

De acordo com a imagem mostrada anteriormente, o comando ficaria “adb pair localhost:41255 757495”.

Com o dispositivo emparelhado com o Termux, agora basta conectar para conseguir executar os comandos, para isso execute:

adb connect localhost:porta

Obs: a porta que você deve informar neste comando não é a mesma informada com o código de emparelhamento, e sim a informada na tela principal da depuração sem fio.

Pronto! Termux e adb conectado com sucesso ao dispositivo, agora basta executar normalmente o adb shell:

adb shell

Remoção na prática Com o adb shell executado, você está pronto para remover os bloatwares. No meu caso, irei mostrar apenas a remoção de um app (Google Maps), já que o comando é o mesmo para qualquer outro, mudando apenas o nome do pacote.

Dentro do NetGuard, verificando as informações do Google Maps:

Podemos ver que mesmo fora de uso, e com a localização do dispositivo desativado, o app está tentando loucamente se comunicar com servidores externos, e informar sabe-se lá que peste. Mas sem novidades até aqui, o mais importante é que podemos ver que o nome do pacote do Google Maps é com.google.android.apps.maps, e para o remover do celular, basta executar:

pm uninstall –user 0 com.google.android.apps.maps

E pronto, bloatware removido! Agora basta repetir o processo para o resto dos bloatwares, trocando apenas o nome do pacote.

Para acelerar o processo, você pode já criar uma lista do bloco de notas com os comandos, e quando colar no terminal, irá executar um atrás do outro.

Exemplo de lista:

Caso a donzela tenha removido alguma coisa sem querer, também é possível recuperar o pacote com o comando:

cmd package install-existing nome.do.pacote

Pós-debloat

Após limpar o máximo possível o seu sistema, reinicie o aparelho, caso entre no como recovery e não seja possível dar reboot, significa que você removeu algum app “essencial” para o sistema, e terá que formatar o aparelho e repetir toda a remoção novamente, desta vez removendo poucos bloatwares de uma vez, e reiniciando o aparelho até descobrir qual deles não pode ser removido. Sim, dá trabalho… quem mandou querer privacidade?

Caso o aparelho reinicie normalmente após a remoção, parabéns, agora basta usar seu celular como bem entender! Mantenha o NetGuard sempre executando e os bloatwares que não foram possíveis remover não irão se comunicar com servidores externos, passe a usar apps open source da F-Droid e instale outros apps através da Aurora Store ao invés da Google Play Store.

Referências: Caso você seja um Australopithecus e tenha achado este guia difícil, eis uma videoaula (3:14:40) do Anderson do canal Ciberdef, realizando todo o processo: http://odysee.com/@zai:5/Como-remover-at%C3%A9-200-APLICATIVOS-que-colocam-a-sua-PRIVACIDADE-E-SEGURAN%C3%87A-em-risco.:4?lid=6d50f40314eee7e2f218536d9e5d300290931d23

Pdf’s do Anderson citados na videoaula: créditos ao anon6837264 http://eternalcbrzpicytj4zyguygpmkjlkddxob7tptlr25cdipe5svyqoqd.onion/file/3863a834d29285d397b73a4af6fb1bbe67c888d72d30/t-05e63192d02ffd.pdf

Processo de instalação do Termux e adb no celular: https://youtu.be/APolZrPHSms

@ 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.

@ 6f170f27:711e26dd

This century has known a stunning decrease in global income inequality, bringing it down to levels not seen in well over a century. That's the conclusion that Branko Milanovic, one of the world's foremost inequality researchers, comes to in an important essay for Foreign Affairs.

https://www.axios.com/2024/07/11/world-income-inequality-ubs-wealth-report

https://www.axios.com/2023/06/14/global-economic-inequality

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/607318

@ bc8a4b4f:112ce9c4

El Mirador San Nicolás es el espacio correcto para iniciar la previa al tour por Granada, en España. Con un par de flamencos cantando con una buena guitarra acústica, se armoniza la experiencia de mi primer atardecer en la ciudad y para todos los turistas que estamos en pleno diciembre, frente a la cordillera de Sierra Nevada.

El Mirador San Nicolás es el espacio correcto para iniciar la previa al tour por Granada, en España. Con un par de flamencos cantando con una buena guitarra acústica, se armoniza la experiencia de mi primer atardecer en la ciudad y para todos los turistas que estamos en pleno diciembre, frente a la cordillera de Sierra Nevada.

\ Recordemos que Granada fue habitada en sus tiempos mozos por los árabes en el siglo VIII, durante la conquista musulmana de la Península Ibérica. Tras la fragmentación del Califato de Córdoba, en 1238, Muhammad I fundó la dinastía nazarí, dando inicio a uno de los períodos más destacados de la ciudad.

Durante la dominación nazarí, Granada floreció como un centro cultural, económico y artístico. Se construyó la majestuosa Alhambra, un espectáculo arquitectónico e ingenieril que simboliza la cumbre del arte islámico en España. Además, la ciudad destacó por ser un cosmo religioso, siendo hogar de comunidades musulmanas, cristianas y judías.

Fue así que en la reconquista, en 1492, los Reyes Católicos, Isabel y Fernando, pusieron fin a casi 800 años de dominio musulmán en la región, que incluyó la expulsión de judíos y musulmanes o su conversión al cristianismo. Aunque el dominio musulmán terminó, su legado perdura de manera viva en la ciudad con la arquitectura, la gastronomía y la cultura de Granada. La Alhambra, el Generalife y el Albaicín son testigos vivos de este pasado glorioso y constituyen un patrimonio invaluable que atrae a millones de visitantes de todo el mundo.

Ya cayendo la noche, bajando por el Albaicín, se aprecian las calles estrechas y de adoquines, con distintas puertas interesantes y entradas que hacen vivir la experiencia de un autóctono barrio árabe. Entre medio, el Balcón de San Nicolás, que te invita a ser parte del espectáculo que es ver la Alhambra de noche, que desde afuera son la invitación perfecta para disfrutar con café o un buen trago, esa postal que parece pintada por algún artista desconocido del 1.900.

Mezquita Mayor de Granada. Café en el Balcón San Nicolás. Luego del café y con un poco de calor en el cuerpo, continúa la caminata camino al centro hasta donde vas encontrando por el camino una serie de vestigios del mundo árabe que permiten reforzar que Granada seguirá siendo centro del reino nazarí. Su arquitectura es un recuerdo vivo y un encuentro con los particulares mercados que ofrecen menaje, lámparas, zapatillas y una serie de artículos que me transportan a oriente, incluyendo centros de estudios que me instan a querer volver.

Finalmente, logro llegar al centro de Granada y como bien escribió Federico García Lorca, orgulloso Granadino; «Granada está indefensa ante la gente, porque ante los halagos, nada ni nadie tiene modo de defenderse», y esta es tan solo la primera parte de un viaje en el tiempo y espacio en la grandiosa España.

Continuará…Recordemos que Granada fue habitada en sus tiempos mozos por los árabes en el siglo VIII, durante la conquista musulmana de la Península Ibérica. Tras la fragmentación del Califato de Córdoba, en 1238, Muhammad I fundó la dinastía nazarí, dando inicio a uno de los períodos más destacados de la ciudad.

Durante la dominación nazarí, Granada floreció como un centro cultural, económico y artístico. Se construyó la majestuosa Alhambra, un espectáculo arquitectónico e ingenieril que simboliza la cumbre del arte islámico en España. Además, la ciudad destacó por ser un cosmo religioso, siendo hogar de comunidades musulmanas, cristianas y judías.

Fue así que en la reconquista, en 1492, los Reyes Católicos, Isabel y Fernando, pusieron fin a casi 800 años de dominio musulmán en la región, que incluyó la expulsión de judíos y musulmanes o su conversión al cristianismo.

Aunque el dominio musulmán terminó, su legado perdura de manera viva en la ciudad con la arquitectura, la gastronomía y la cultura de Granada. La Alhambra, el Generalife y el Albaicín son testigos vivos de este pasado glorioso y constituyen un patrimonio invaluable que atrae a millones de visitantes de todo el mundo.

Ya cayendo la noche, bajando por el Albaicín, se aprecian las calles estrechas y de adoquines, con distintas puertas interesantes y entradas que hacen vivir la experiencia de un autóctono barrio árabe. Entre medio, el Balcón de San Nicolás, que te invita a ser parte del espectáculo que es ver la Alhambra de noche, que desde afuera son la invitación perfecta para disfrutar con café o un buen trago, esa postal que parece pintada por algún artista desconocido del 1.900.

Luego del café y con un poco de calor en el cuerpo, continúa la caminata camino al centro hasta donde vas encontrando por el camino una serie de vestigios del mundo árabe que permiten reforzar que Granada seguirá siendo centro del reino nazarí. Su arquitectura es un recuerdo vivo y un encuentro con los particulares mercados que ofrecen menaje, lámparas, zapatillas y una serie de artículos que me transportan a oriente, incluyendo centros de estudios que me instan a querer volver.

Finalmente, logro llegar al centro de Granada y como bien escribió Federico García Lorca, orgulloso Granadino; «Granada está indefensa ante la gente, porque ante los halagos, nada ni nadie tiene modo de defenderse», y esta es tan solo la primera parte de un viaje en el tiempo y espacio en la grandiosa España.

Continuará…

@ 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 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.

@ 5d4b6c8d:8a1c1ee3

Yesterday's edition https://stacker.news/items/605773/r/Undisciplined

We have a confessional from a professional shitcoiner, today. That's fun.

• • -

July 13, 2023 📅

---

📝 TOP POST

Validating Lightning Signer - AMA

Excerpt

VLS is a nifty piece of software that helps boost the security of the Bitcoin Lightning Network. 🛡️

11k sats \ 33 comments \ @devrandom \ ~bitcoin

---

💬 TOP COMMENT

https://stacker.news/items/208442/r/Undisciplined?commentId=208454

Excerpt

Ever bought a computer or cell phone? Why? Why not wait until your money is worth more later compared to the price of that cell phone?

1441 sats \ 7 replies \ @02674f045a

From Opinion: Why BTC can't become the reserve currency by @0xBTC in ~bitcoin

---

🏆 TOP STACKER

1st place @k00b

5838 stacked \ 7855 spent \ 3 posts \ 19 comments \ 0 referrals

---

🗺️ TOP TERRITORY

~bitcoin

everything bitcoin related

founded by @k00b on Tue May 02 2023

27k stacked \ 0 revenue \ 40.6k spent \ 108 posts \ 281 comments

https://imgprxy.stacker.news/fsFoWlgwKYsk5mxx2ijgqU8fg04I_2zA_D28t_grR74/rs:fit:960:540/aHR0cHM6Ly9tLnN0YWNrZXIubmV3cy8yMzc5Ng

July 13, 2022 📅

---

📝 TOP POST

Any Good Routing Node Strategies?

Excerpt

For people who have/are running nodes, are there any strategies that have been most effective for you for earning routing fees? From my very limited routing experience so far it seems there are a few main questions:

1232 sats \ 33 comments \ @andyleroy \ ~bitcoin

---

💬 TOP COMMENT

https://stacker.news/items/44747/r/Undisciplined?commentId=44755

Excerpt

Obligatory not a node routing expert, but this guy is a good follow: https://mobile.twitter.com/cold_sats

276 sats \ 1 reply \ @Cornleone

From Any Good Routing Node Strategies? by @andyleroy in ~bitcoin

---

🏆 TOP STACKER

1st place @k00b

37.3k stacked \ 15.2k spent \ 1 post \ 29 comments \ 0 referrals

---

🗺️ TOP TERRITORY

~bitcoin

everything bitcoin related

founded by @k00b on Tue May 02 2023

27.4k stacked \ 0 revenue \ 34.7k spent \ 117 posts \ 279 comments

https://imgprxy.stacker.news/fsFoWlgwKYsk5mxx2ijgqU8fg04I_2zA_D28t_grR74/rs:fit:960:540/aHR0cHM6Ly9tLnN0YWNrZXIubmV3cy8yMzc5Ng

July 13, 2021 📅

---

📝 TOP POST

I joined a shitcoin project full time couple of months ago

Excerpt

I though it would be exciting and fun. But I think I'm wasting my time.

3 sats \ 9 comments \ @03785de7ab \ ~bitcoin

---

💬 TOP COMMENT

https://stacker.news/items/306/r/Undisciplined?commentId=316

Excerpt

There are many companies working with Bitcoin but it's not their main focus. I did implement Bitgo sevices for one e-wallet provider but that was it. What I'm looking for is a project which build useful things for user with current Bitcoin features, […]

2 sats \ 1 reply \ @03785de7ab

From I joined a shitcoin project full time couple of months ago by @03785de7ab in ~bitcoin

---

🏆 TOP STACKER

No top stacker

---

🗺️ TOP TERRITORY

~bitcoin

everything bitcoin related

founded by @k00b on Tue May 02 2023

37 stacked \ 0 revenue \ 60 spent \ 6 posts \ 10 comments

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/607040

@ e771af0b:8e8ed66f

I have searched the web for "Find bitcoin block number from historical date" maybe 100 times in my life.

Never again.

You'll need a bitcoin node for this to work. The script is fast.

Install

WoT Install

one liner ```

curl

curl -o fjb.sh https://gist.githubusercontent.com/dskvr/18252c16cf85c06c1ee6cb5ae04a3197/raw/34bad6a35d98501978c8cd0c25b1628db1191cfe/fjb.sh && chmod +x fjb.sh

wget

wget -O fjb.sh https://gist.githubusercontent.com/dskvr/18252c16cf85c06c1ee6cb5ae04a3197/raw/34bad6a35d98501978c8cd0c25b1628db1191cfe/fjb.sh && chmod +x fjb.sh ```

Trust no one.

create file ``` vi fjb.sh

or

nano fjb.sh ```

review, copy and past into file ``` TIMESTAMP=$1 LOWER=0 UPPER=$(bitcoin-cli getblockcount)

while (( LOWER <= UPPER )); do MID=$(( (LOWER + UPPER) / 2 )) BLOCKHASH=$(bitcoin-cli getblockhash $MID) BLOCKTIME=$(bitcoin-cli getblockheader $BLOCKHASH | jq .time)

if (( BLOCKTIME < TIMESTAMP )); then
    LOWER=$(( MID + 1 ))
elif (( BLOCKTIME > TIMESTAMP )); then
    UPPER=$(( MID - 1 ))
else
    echo "$BLOCKTIME"
    exit 0
fi

done

echo "$UPPER" ```

give executable permissions chmod +x ./fjb.sh

Usage

./fjb.sh <timestampSeconds> It returns block number only

Example

$: ./fjb.sh 1668779310 763719

@ 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!

@ 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, “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”.

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”.

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, 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,” discussing its potential legalization in Germany, and interviewing Jeremy Hansen, one of the first political candidates in the U.S. to accept Bitcoin donations.

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 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: Bitcoin as a savings technology.

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” 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 — 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.

@ e771af0b:8e8ed66f

Have you ever seen a relay and out of curiosity visited the https canonical of a relay by swapping out the wss with https? I sure have, and I believe others have too. When I ran https://nostr.sandwich.farm in late 2022/2023, I had thousands of hits to my relay's https canonical. Since then, I've dreamed of improving the look and feel of these generic default landing pages.

With the release of myrelay.page v0.2, relays can now host their own customizable micro-client at their https canonical.

Transform your relay's landing page from this:

or this:

to something like this:

I say "something like this" because each page is customizable at runtime via the page itself.

In a nutshell

myrelay.page is a self-configuring, Client-Side Rendered (CSR) micro-client specifically built to be hosted at relay canonicals, customizable at runtime via NIP-78. Check out a live example.

Features:

1. Dark or light theme
2. Join relay
3. Relay operator profile and feed
4. Zap relay operator
5. See people you follow who are on the relay
6. Customizable by the relay operator
7. Enable/disable blocks
8. Sort blocks
9. Add HTML blocks
10. Add image blocks
11. Add markdown blocks
12. Add feed blocks, with two layouts (grid/list) and customizable filters.

You can find a full list of features complete and todo here

Why I created myrelay.page

For several different reasons.

Firstly, the default, bland relay pages always seemed like a missed opportunity. I jotted down an idea to build a relay micro-client in early January 2023, but never had the time to start it.

Next, I've been ramping up the refactor of nostr.watch and first need to catch up on client-side technologies and validate a few of my ideas. To do this, I have been conducting short research & development projects to prepare and validate ideas before integrating them into an app I intend to support long-term. One of those R&D projects is myrelay.page.

Additionally, I wanted to explore NIP-78 a bit more, a NIP that came into fruition after a conversation I had with @fiatjaf on February 23rd, 2023. It stemmed from the desire to store application-specific data for app customization. I have seen clients use NIP-78, but from what I've seen, their implementations are limited and do not demonstrate the full potential of NIP-78. There's more on NIP-78 towards the end of this article

The convergence of these needs and ideas, in addition to having an itch I needed to scratch, resulted in the creation of myrelay.page.

*Could be wrong, please let me know in the comments if you have examples of nostr clients that utilize NIP-78 for propagating customizations to other visitors.

Editor Flow

Now I'm going to give you a brief example of the Editor Flow on myrelay.page. There's a lot that isn't covered here, but I want to be as brief as possible.

Note: myrelay.page is alpha, there are bugs, quality of life issues and things are far from perfect.

Login

Presently, myrelay.page only supports NIP-07 authentication, but other authentication methods will be implemented at a later date.

In order to customize your page, you need to have a valid NIP-11 document that provides a valid hex pubkey value that is the same as the key you use to login.

Click "Edit"

Add a block

For brevity, I'm going to add a markdown block

Configure the block

Add a title to the block and a sentence with markdown syntax.

Publish the configuration

Click publish and confirm the event, once it's been published to relays the page will refresh.

Note: Again it's alpha, so the page doesn't refresh after a few seconds, the publish probably failed. Press publish until it refreshes. Error handling here will improve with time.

Confirm state persistence

After reload, you should see your block persisted. Anyone who visits your page will see your newly configured page. Big caveat: Given the blessing of relays who store your configuration note, if your configuration cannot be found or you cannot connect to your relays, visitors will only see your relay's NIP-11.

Interested?

myrelay.page is alpha and only has two releases, so if you want to be an early adopter, you'll need the skillset and patience of an early adopter. That said, as long as you have some basic development and sysadmin skills as well as understand your reverse-proxy of choice, it's a quick, easy and low-risk side project that can be completed in about 20 minutes.

1. Build

yarn build or npm run build or pnpm run build (note: I had issues with pnpm and cannot guarantee they are resolved!)

2. Deploy

Move the contents of build folder to your relay server (or another server that you can reverse-proxy to from your relay)

3. Update your reverse-proxy configuration

You'll need to split your relay traffic from the http traffic, this ranges from easy to difficult, depending on your server of choice. - caddy: By far the easiest, see an example configuration for strfry here (easily adapted by those with experience to other relay software) - nginx: A little more stubborn, here's the most recent nginx config I got to work. You'll need to serve the static site from an internal port (8080 in the aforementioned nginx conf) - haproxy: Should be easier than nginx or maybe even caddy, haven't tried yet. - no reverse-proxy: shrugs

If any of that's over your head, I'll be providing detailed guides for various deployment shapes within the next few weeks.

Exploring NIP-78

One of the special things about NIP-78 is that it is application specific, meaning, you don't need to conform to any existing NIP to make magic happen. Granted there are limits to this, as interoperability reigns supreme on nostr. However, there are many use cases where interoperability is not particularly desirable nor beneficial. It doesn't change the care needed to craft events, but it does enable a bunch of unique opportunities.

1. A nostr client that is fully configurable and customized by the user.
2. A nostr powered CMS that can be edited entirely on the client-side.
3. Any use case where an application has special functionality or complex data structures that present no benefit in the context of interoperability (since they are "Application Specific").

Final thoughts

I was surprised at how quickly I was able to get myrelay.page customizable and loading within an acceptable timeframe; NIP-11, the operator's NIP-65 and the myrelay.page NIP-78 events all need to be fetched before the page is hydrated! While there is much to do around optimization, progressive page-loading, and general functionality, I'm very happy with the outcome of this short side project.

I'll be shifting my focus over to another micro-app to validate a few concepts, and then on to the next nostr.watch. Rebuilding nostr.watch has been a high-priority item since shortly after Jack lit a flame under nostr in late 2022, but due to personal circumstances in 2023, I was unable to tackle it. Thanks to @opensats I am able to realize my ideas and explore ideas that have been keeping me up at night for a year or more.

Also, if you're a relay developer and are curious about making it easier for developers to deploy myrelay.page, get in touch.

Next article will likely be about the micro-app I briefly mentioned and nostr.watch. Until then, be well.

@ a95c6243:d345522c

Falls du beim Lesen des Titels dieses Newsletters unwillkürlich an positive Neuigkeiten aus dem globalen polit-medialen Irrenhaus oder gar aus dem wirtschaftlichen Umfeld gedacht hast, darf ich dich beglückwünschen. Diese Assoziation ist sehr löblich, denn sie weist dich als unverbesserlichen Optimisten aus. Leider muss ich dich diesbezüglich aber enttäuschen. Es geht hier um ein anderes Thema, allerdings sehr wohl ein positives, wie ich finde.

Heute ist ein ganz besonderer Tag: die Wintersonnenwende. Genau gesagt hat heute morgen um 10:20 Uhr Mitteleuropäischer Zeit (MEZ) auf der Nordhalbkugel unseres Planeten der astronomische Winter begonnen. Was daran so außergewöhnlich ist? Der kürzeste Tag des Jahres war gestern, seit heute werden die Tage bereits wieder länger! Wir werden also jetzt jeden Tag ein wenig mehr Licht haben.

Für mich ist dieses Ereignis immer wieder etwas kurios: Es beginnt der Winter, aber die Tage werden länger. Das erscheint mir zunächst wie ein Widerspruch, denn meine spontanen Assoziationen zum Winter sind doch eher Kälte und Dunkelheit, relativ zumindest. Umso erfreulicher ist der emotionale Effekt, wenn dann langsam die Erkenntnis durchsickert: Ab jetzt wird es schon wieder heller!

Natürlich ist es kalt im Winter, mancherorts mehr als anderswo. Vielleicht jedoch nicht mehr lange, wenn man den Klimahysterikern glauben wollte. Mindestens letztes Jahr hat Väterchen Frost allerdings gleich zu Beginn seiner Saison – und passenderweise während des globalen Überhitzungsgipfels in Dubai – nochmal richtig mit der Faust auf den Tisch gehauen. Schnee- und Eischaos sind ja eigentlich in der Agenda bereits nicht mehr vorgesehen. Deswegen war man in Deutschland vermutlich in vorauseilendem Gehorsam schon nicht mehr darauf vorbereitet und wurde glatt lahmgelegt.

Aber ich schweife ab. Die Aussicht auf nach und nach mehr Licht und damit auch Wärme stimmt mich froh. Den Zusammenhang zwischen beidem merkt man in Andalusien sehr deutlich. Hier, wo die Häuser im Winter arg auskühlen, geht man zum Aufwärmen raus auf die Straße oder auf den Balkon. Die Sonne hat auch im Winter eine erfreuliche Kraft. Und da ist jede Minute Gold wert.

Außerdem ist mir vor Jahren so richtig klar geworden, warum mir das südliche Klima so sehr gefällt. Das liegt nämlich nicht nur an der Sonne als solcher, oder der Wärme – das liegt vor allem am Licht. Ohne Licht keine Farben, das ist der ebenso simple wie gewaltige Unterschied zwischen einem deprimierenden matschgraubraunen Winter und einem fröhlichen bunten. Ein großes Stück Lebensqualität.

Mir gefällt aber auch die Symbolik dieses Tages: Licht aus der Dunkelheit, ein Wendepunkt, ein Neuanfang, neue Möglichkeiten, Übergang zu neuer Aktivität. In der winterlichen Stille keimt bereits neue Lebendigkeit. Und zwar in einem Zyklus, das wird immer wieder so geschehen. Ich nehme das gern als ein Stück Motivation, es macht mir Hoffnung und gibt mir Energie.

Übrigens ist parallel am heutigen Tag auf der südlichen Halbkugel Sommeranfang. Genau im entgegengesetzten Rhythmus, sich ergänzend, wie Yin und Yang. Das alles liegt an der Schrägstellung der Erdachse, die ist nämlich um 23,4º zur Umlaufbahn um die Sonne geneigt. Wir erinnern uns, gell?

Insofern bleibt eindeutig festzuhalten, dass “schräg sein” ein willkommener, wichtiger und positiver Wert ist. Mit anderen Worten: auch ungewöhnlich, eigenartig, untypisch, wunderlich, kauzig, … ja sogar irre, spinnert oder gar “quer” ist in Ordnung. Das schließt das Denken mit ein.

In diesem Sinne wünsche ich euch allen urige Weihnachtstage!

---

Dieser Beitrag ist letztes Jahr in meiner Denkbar erschienen.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Nostr is not decentralized nor censorship-resistant

Peter Todd has been saying this 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 and on my NIP-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 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
• A vision for content discovery and relay usage for basic social-networking in Nostr

@ d5c3d063:4d1159b3

โพสที่อาจารย์พิริยะ บอกว่า “If you are angry at something... maybe it's just you.”

เป็นคำกล่าวที่เตือนให้เรามองกลับเข้ามาในตัวเองว่า "ความโกรธ" มีต้นกำเนิดจากจิตใจของเราเอง การใช้สติและการตระหนักถึงความคาดหวังที่เรามีต่อผู้อื่นจะช่วยให้เราสามารถจัดการกับความโกรธได้อย่างสร้างสรรค์และมีเหตุผล แนวคิดของอริยสัจ ๔ ช่วยให้เราเข้าใจถึงต้นเหตุและวิธีการดับทุกข์ และผมนำแนวคิดอิสรนิยมมาช่วยเสริมให้เราได้ตระหนักถึงความรับผิดชอบในชีวิตของตนเองและการเคารพเสรีภาพของผู้อื่นในการนำไปใช้ทางโลกได้จริง

เมื่อเราฝึกเดินด้วยเมตตา ปล่อยวางโทสะ และไม่หลงด้วยโมหะ เราจะสามารถสร้างความสงบสุขในจิตใจและในความสัมพันธ์กับผู้อื่นได้อย่างแท้จริง ทั้งหมดนี้นำไปสู่ชีวิตที่มีความสุขและเสรีภาพอย่างสมดุลในทุกมิติของการดำรงอยู่

เริ่มจาก...อริยสัจ ๔ คือการค้นหาต้นเหตุแห่งทุกข์ในจิตใจ

พระพุทธศาสนาสอนว่าความโกรธไม่ได้เกิดจากสิ่งภายนอกโดยตรง แต่มีรากฐานมาจาก สมุทัยหรือ "เหตุแห่งทุกข์" ที่เกิดจากภายในจิตใจของเราเอง เช่น - ตัณหา (ความยึดมั่นถือมั่น) ที่ทำให้เราคาดหวังว่าสิ่งต่าง ๆ จะต้องเป็นไปตามใจเรา - อวิชชา (ความไม่รู้) ทำให้เรามองไม่เห็นว่าความโกรธไม่ได้ทำให้ปัญหาแก้ไขได้ แต่กลับเผาผลาญจิตใจเราเอง การดับความโกรธ (นิโรธ) จึงเริ่มต้นจากการมีสติรู้ตัวและปล่อยวางความยึดมั่น โดยการฝึกสมาธิและการเจริญเมตตาเป็นเครื่องมือสำคัญที่ช่วยให้เรามองเห็นความเป็นจริงและลดทอนพลังทำลายของความโกรธ

...ต่อมาคือแนวคิดอิสรนิยม ที่เน้นถึงการรับผิดชอบต่อตนเองและเสรีภาพในการเลือก ปัจเจกบุคคลต้องรับผิดชอบต่อชีวิตของตนเองและไม่พึ่งพิงปัจจัยภายนอกเกินไป ความโกรธในมุมมองนี้สามารถมองได้ว่าเป็นผลลัพธ์ของการละเลยความรับผิดชอบต่ออารมณ์ของตัวเองและการพึ่งพิงสิ่งภายนอกเกินไป เช่น การโกรธที่ผู้อื่นไม่ทำตามที่เราต้องการ สะท้อนถึงการพยายามควบคุมสิ่งที่อยู่นอกเหนืออำนาจของเรา ซึ่งขัดกับหลักการเสรีภาพส่วนบุคคลของอิสรนิยม หลักการสำคัญของอิสรนิยมคือ Non-Aggression Principle (หลักการไม่รุกราน) ที่สอนว่าความรุนแรงและการบีบบังคับผู้อื่นเป็นสิ่งที่ควรหลีกเลี่ยง ความโกรธจึงถือเป็นการรุกรานจิตใจของเราเองก่อน เพราะเป็นการสร้างภาระให้กับจิตใจโดยไม่จำเป็น

แนวทางการปฏิบัติที่อาจารย์ได้ใส่ # ไว้ 1. #เดินด้วยเมตตา - มุมมองจากอริยสัจ ๔ #เมตตา คือการยอมรับและปรารถนาดีต่อทั้งตัวเองและผู้อื่น การให้ความรักและความปรารถนาดีจะช่วยลดพลังของโทสะในจิตใจ ทำให้เรามีมุมมองที่เปิดกว้างและมีความสุขที่แท้จริง - การเชื่อมโยงในอิสรนิยม เสรีภาพของแต่ละบุคคลรวมถึงการเคารพเสรีภาพของผู้อื่น เมตตาได้ช่วยส่งเสริมการอยู่ร่วมกันในสังคมโดยไม่ก้าวก่ายสิทธิและเสรีภาพของกันและกัน เมตตาในแง่นี้จึงเป็นการสร้างสมดุลระหว่างเสรีภาพของเราและของผู้อื่น เช่น การเคารพในความคิดหรือการกระทำของผู้อื่น แม้จะเขาจะเห็นต่างจากเรา 2. #อย่าเดินด้วยโทสะ - มุมมองจากอริยสัจ ๔ #โทสะ เป็นเหมือนยาพิษที่เราดื่มเองและทำให้เราเป็นทุกข์ ความโกรธไม่ได้ทำร้ายผู้อื่นเท่าที่มันทำลายจิตใจและร่างกายของเราเอง การฝึกเจริญสติช่วยให้เราเห็นถึงอารมณ์โกรธตั้งแต่เริ่มต้น และตัดวงจรของความคิดและการกระทำที่เป็นพิษ - การเชื่อมโยงในอิสรนิยม ความโกรธหรือการใช้อารมณ์ ไม่ควรเป็นเหตุผลในการละเมิดสิทธิหรือเสรีภาพของผู้อื่น หลักการ Non-Aggression Principle (NAP) ของอิสรนิยมเตือนเราว่าการใช้อารมณ์รุนแรงหรือโทสะมักนำไปสู่การบีบบังคับหรือทำร้ายผู้อื่น ซึ่งเป็นสิ่งที่ขัดแย้งกับความเคารพในเสรีภาพของทุกคน การไม่เดินด้วยโทสะจึงเป็นการเคารพในเสรีภาพของทั้งตัวเราและผู้อื่น 3. #อย่าหลงด้วยโมหะ - มุมมองจากอริยสัจ ๔ #โมหะ หรือความหลง ทำให้เรามองสิ่งต่าง ๆ อย่างผิดเพี้ยนและติดอยู่ในภาพลวงตา เช่น การโทษผู้อื่นว่าเป็นต้นเหตุของความทุกข์ทั้งหมด ทั้งที่แท้จริงแล้วความทุกข์มักเกิดจากจิตใจและความคาดหวังของเราเอง - การเชื่อมโยงกับอิสรนิยม สอนว่าความสุขและความสงบในชีวิต ไม่ได้ขึ้นอยู่กับสิ่งภายนอก แต่ขึ้นอยู่กับเสรีภาพในการเลือกและการรับผิดชอบชีวิตของตนเอง การหลุดพ้นจากโมหะเป็นการยอมรับว่าเราไม่สามารถควบคุมผู้อื่นหรือโลกภายนอกได้ แต่สามารถควบคุมปฏิกิริยาและการตอบสนองของเราได้ การไม่หลงด้วยโมหะจึงช่วยให้เราเป็นอิสระจากความยึดมั่นในสิ่งที่อยู่นอกเหนือการควบคุม

ทีนี้มาลองดูตัวอย่างในชีวิตประจำวันกันดูบ้าง

1. เดินด้วยเมตตา หากเราพยายามอธิบายเรื่องบิตคอยน์ให้คนอื่นเข้าใจ แต่เขายังเชื่อมั่นในระบบการเงินของรัฐ การใช้เมตตาจะช่วยให้เราเข้าใจว่าการเปลี่ยนแปลงความคิดต้องใช้เวลาและกระบวนการขั้นตอน ไม่ใช่ทุกคนจะพร้อมเปิดรับแนวคิดใหม่ในทันที การพูดคุยด้วยความรักและปรารถนาดีแทนการตำหนิ จะช่วยสร้างบทสนทนาที่สร้างสรรค์

2. อย่าเดินด้วยโทสะ หากเรารู้สึกโกรธเมื่อคนอื่นยังคงเชื่อในระบบเศรษฐกิจแบบเคนส์หรือสังคมนิยม อาจใช้โอกาสนี้แหละ ในการฝึกเจริญสติและตระหนักว่าเราควบคุมความเชื่อของผู้อื่นไม่ได้ แต่สามารถเลือกอธิบายด้วยเหตุผลและความเคารพ หรือเลือกที่จะปล่อยวางเมื่อสถานการณ์ไม่เอื้ออำนวย

3. อย่าหลงด้วยโมหะ หากเราหงุดหงิดที่ผู้อื่นไม่ยอมรับแนวคิดของบิตคอยน์ การตระหนักว่าความคาดหวังของเราที่ต้องการให้ผู้อื่นเข้าใจในทันทีนั้นเป็นภาพลวงตา มันก็จะช่วยให้เรามองเห็นความจริงที่ว่า การเปลี่ยนแปลงทางความคิด เป็นกระบวนการที่ต้องใช้เวลาและเกิดจากเสรีภาพในการตัดสินใจของแต่ละบุคคล

……..……..……..

ความโกรธ เป็นหนึ่งในอารมณ์พื้นฐานที่มนุษย์ทุกคนต้องเผชิญในชีวิต แต่การจัดการความโกรธนั้นไม่ใช่เพียงเรื่องของการควบคุมอารมณ์ หากยังสะท้อนถึงการทำความเข้าใจตัวตนและธรรมชาติของสิ่งต่าง ๆ รอบตัวเรา ประโยคที่อาจารย์พิริยะบอกว่า “If you are angry at something... maybe it's just you.” ไม่ได้เป็นเพียงคำกล่าวเตือนใจ แต่ยังเป็นการเชื้อเชิญให้เราไตร่ตรองถึงรากฐานของความโกรธ ซึ่งซุปขอเชื่อมโยงเข้ากับหลักอริยสัจ ๔ ในพระพุทธศาสนาและแนวคิดอิสรนิยม (#Libertarianism) ที่เน้นความรับผิดชอบส่วนบุคคลและเสรีภาพในชีวิต

Siamstr

@ a95c6243:d345522c

Das Betriebsklima ist das einzige Klima, \ das du selbst bestimmen kannst. \ Anonym

Eine Strategie zur Anpassung an den Klimawandel hat das deutsche Bundeskabinett diese Woche beschlossen. Da «Wetterextreme wie die immer häufiger auftretenden Hitzewellen und Starkregenereignisse» oft desaströse Auswirkungen auf Mensch und Umwelt hätten, werde eine Anpassung an die Folgen des Klimawandels immer wichtiger. «Klimaanpassungsstrategie» nennt die Regierung das.

Für die «Vorsorge vor Klimafolgen» habe man nun erstmals klare Ziele und messbare Kennzahlen festgelegt. So sei der Erfolg überprüfbar, und das solle zu einer schnelleren Bewältigung der Folgen führen. Dass sich hinter dem Begriff Klimafolgen nicht Folgen des Klimas, sondern wohl «Folgen der globalen Erwärmung» verbergen, erklärt den Interessierten die Wikipedia. Dabei ist das mit der Erwärmung ja bekanntermaßen so eine Sache.

Die Zunahme schwerer Unwetterereignisse habe gezeigt, so das Ministerium, wie wichtig eine frühzeitige und effektive Warnung der Bevölkerung sei. Daher solle es eine deutliche Anhebung der Nutzerzahlen der sogenannten Nina-Warn-App geben.

Die ARD spurt wie gewohnt und setzt die Botschaft zielsicher um. Der Artikel beginnt folgendermaßen:

«Die Flut im Ahrtal war ein Schock für das ganze Land. Um künftig besser gegen Extremwetter gewappnet zu sein, hat die Bundesregierung eine neue Strategie zur Klimaanpassung beschlossen. Die Warn-App Nina spielt eine zentrale Rolle. Der Bund will die Menschen in Deutschland besser vor Extremwetter-Ereignissen warnen und dafür die Reichweite der Warn-App Nina deutlich erhöhen.»

Die Kommunen würden bei ihren «Klimaanpassungsmaßnahmen» vom Zentrum KlimaAnpassung unterstützt, schreibt das Umweltministerium. Mit dessen Aufbau wurden das Deutsche Institut für Urbanistik gGmbH, welches sich stark für Smart City-Projekte engagiert, und die Adelphi Consult GmbH beauftragt.

Adelphi beschreibt sich selbst als «Europas führender Think-and-Do-Tank und eine unabhängige Beratung für Klima, Umwelt und Entwicklung». Sie seien «global vernetzte Strateg*innen und weltverbessernde Berater*innen» und als «Vorreiter der sozial-ökologischen Transformation» sei man mit dem Deutschen Nachhaltigkeitspreis ausgezeichnet worden, welcher sich an den Zielen der Agenda 2030 orientiere.

Über die Warn-App mit dem niedlichen Namen Nina, die möglichst jeder auf seinem Smartphone installieren soll, informiert das Bundesamt für Bevölkerungsschutz und Katastrophenhilfe (BBK). Gewarnt wird nicht nur vor Extrem-Wetterereignissen, sondern zum Beispiel auch vor Waffengewalt und Angriffen, Strom- und anderen Versorgungsausfällen oder Krankheitserregern. Wenn man die Kategorie Gefahreninformation wählt, erhält man eine Dosis von ungefähr zwei Benachrichtigungen pro Woche.

Beim BBK erfahren wir auch einiges über die empfohlenen Systemeinstellungen für Nina. Der Benutzer möge zum Beispiel den Zugriff auf die Standortdaten «immer zulassen», und zwar mit aktivierter Funktion «genauen Standort verwenden». Die Datennutzung solle unbeschränkt sein, auch im Hintergrund. Außerdem sei die uneingeschränkte Akkunutzung zu aktivieren, der Energiesparmodus auszuschalten und das Stoppen der App-Aktivität bei Nichtnutzung zu unterbinden.

Dass man so dramatische Ereignisse wie damals im Ahrtal auch anders bewerten kann als Regierungen und Systemmedien, hat meine Kollegin Wiltrud Schwetje anhand der Tragödie im spanischen Valencia gezeigt. Das Stichwort «Agenda 2030» taucht dabei in einem Kontext auf, der wenig mit Nachhaltigkeitspreisen zu tun hat.

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ 9bcc5462:eb501d90

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

@ e771af0b:8e8ed66f

The last 6 months has been full full of unexpected surprises, of the unpleasant variety. So it was welcomed news that nostrwatch was awarded a grant by OpenSats recently which has allowed me to revisit this project and build out my original vision, the one I had before nostr went vertical.

The last month has been a bit of a joyride, in that I have met little friction meeting goals. For example I was able to rewrite nostrwatch-js in an evening, tests another evening and did most of the Typescript conversion in 30 minutes (thanks AI!)

Here's a quick summary of the last month, I'm probably missing a handful of details, but these are the important bits.

1. Went through all the new NIPs, prototyped and experimented
2. Nearly completed a full rewrite of nostrwatch-js, now nocap. Presently porting to Typescript. Still alpha, don’t use it.
3. Released nostrawl, a wrapper for nostr-fetch that has Queue adapters for persistent fetching. Nothing special, but needed to factor out the functionality from the legacy trawler and the requirements were general enough to make it a package.
4. Starting porting the nostr.watch trawler, cache layer and rest API, but much work is still needed there. Aiming to have the current infrastructure updated with new daemons by end of year.
5. In concert with the cache layer testing, I ran some experiments by patching in a rough trend engine prototype from earlier this year and a novel outbox solution, both with promising results.
6. Wrote a few small CLI tools to assist with developments, got acquainted with ink, and reacquainted myself with wonderful world of ES Module conflicts.

The rest of this year will be mostly backend work, tests and data engineering. Early next year I will begin iterative development on a new GUI and a string of CLI tools.

Luckily, nostr.watch and it's underlying infrastructure, as abysmal as it is, hasn't completely sank. Traffic is much lower than the ATH but still hovering between 2-3k unique visitors a month. I can't express in words how happy I will be when I can put the legacy nostr.watch to rest.

Next update will include a bit more of the why and how, and where I am trying to get to with this project.

Until next time.

@ 42342239:1d80db24

The EU's regulations aimed at combating disinformation raise questions about who is really being protected and also about the true purpose of the "European Democracy Shield".

In recent years, new regulations have been introduced, purportedly to combat the spread of false or malicious information. Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, has been keen to push forward with her plans to curb online content and create a "European Democracy Shield" aimed at detecting and removing disinformation.

Despite frequent discussions about foreign influence campaigns, we often tend to overlook the significant impact that domestic actors and mass media have on news presentation (and therefore also on public opinion). The fact that media is often referred to as the fourth branch of government, alongside the legislative, executive, and judicial branches, underscores its immense importance.

In late 2019, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) seized a laptop from a repair shop. The laptop belonged to the son of then-presidential candidate Biden. The FBI quickly determined that the laptop was the son's and did not appear to have been tampered with.

Almost a year later, the US presidential election took place. Prior to the election, the FBI issued repeated warnings to various companies to be vigilant against state-sponsored actors [implying Russia] that could carry out "hack-and-leak campaigns". Just weeks before the 2020 presidential election, an October surprise occurred when the NY Post published documents from the laptop. The newspaper's Twitter account was locked down within hours. Twitter prevented its users from even sharing the news. Facebook (now Meta) took similar measures to prevent the spread of the news. Shortly thereafter, more than 50 former high-ranking intelligence officials wrote about their deep suspicions that the Russian government was behind the story: "if we're right", "this is about Russia trying to influence how Americans vote". Presidential candidate Biden later cited these experts' claims in a debate with President Trump.

In early June this year, the president's son was convicted of lying on a gun license application. The laptop and some of its contents played a clear role in the prosecutors' case. The court concluded that parts of the laptop's contents were accurate, which aligns with the FBI's assessment that the laptop did not appear to have been tampered with. The president's son, who previously filed a lawsuit claiming that the laptop had been hacked and that data had been manipulated, has now withdrawn this lawsuit, which strengthens the image that the content is true.

This raises questions about the true purpose of the "European Democracy Shield". Who is it really intended to protect? Consider the role of news editors in spreading the narrative that the laptop story was Russian disinformation. What impact did social media's censorship of the news have on the outcome of the US election? And if the laptop's contents were indeed true - as appears to be the case - what does it say about the quality of the media's work that it took almost four years for the truth to become widely known, despite the basic information being available as early as 2020?

@ a95c6243:d345522c

Die Ungerechtigkeit ist uns nur in dem Falle angenehm,\ dass wir Vorteile aus ihr ziehen;\ in jedem andern hegt man den Wunsch,\ dass der Unschuldige in Schutz genommen werde.\ Jean-Jacques Rousseau

Politiker beteuern jederzeit, nur das Beste für die Bevölkerung zu wollen – nicht von ihr. Auch die zahlreichen unsäglichen «Corona-Maßnahmen» waren angeblich zu unserem Schutz notwendig, vor allem wegen der «besonders vulnerablen Personen». Daher mussten alle möglichen Restriktionen zwangsweise und unter Umgehung der Parlamente verordnet werden.

Inzwischen hat sich immer deutlicher herausgestellt, dass viele jener «Schutzmaßnahmen» den gegenteiligen Effekt hatten, sie haben den Menschen und den Gesellschaften enorm geschadet. Nicht nur haben die experimentellen Geninjektionen – wie erwartet – massive Nebenwirkungen, sondern Maskentragen schadet der Psyche und der Entwicklung (nicht nur unserer Kinder) und «Lockdowns und Zensur haben Menschen getötet».

Eine der wichtigsten Waffen unserer «Beschützer» ist die Spaltung der Gesellschaft. Die tiefen Gräben, die Politiker, Lobbyisten und Leitmedien praktisch weltweit ausgehoben haben, funktionieren leider nahezu in Perfektion. Von ihren persönlichen Erfahrungen als Kritikerin der Maßnahmen berichtete kürzlich eine Schweizerin im Interview mit Transition News. Sie sei schwer enttäuscht und verspüre bis heute eine Hemmschwelle und ein seltsames Unwohlsein im Umgang mit «Geimpften».

Menschen, die aufrichtig andere schützen wollten, werden von einer eindeutig politischen Justiz verfolgt, verhaftet und angeklagt. Dazu zählen viele Ärzte, darunter Heinrich Habig, Bianca Witzschel und Walter Weber. Über den aktuell laufenden Prozess gegen Dr. Weber hat Transition News mehrfach berichtet (z.B. hier und hier). Auch der Selbstschutz durch Verweigerung der Zwangs-Covid-«Impfung» bewahrt nicht vor dem Knast, wie Bundeswehrsoldaten wie Alexander Bittner erfahren mussten.

Die eigentlich Kriminellen schützen sich derweil erfolgreich selber, nämlich vor der Verantwortung. Die «Impf»-Kampagne war «das größte Verbrechen gegen die Menschheit». Trotzdem stellt man sich in den USA gerade die Frage, ob der scheidende Präsident Joe Biden nach seinem Sohn Hunter möglicherweise auch Anthony Fauci begnadigen wird – in diesem Fall sogar präventiv. Gibt es überhaupt noch einen Rest Glaubwürdigkeit, den Biden verspielen könnte?

Der Gedanke, den ehemaligen wissenschaftlichen Chefberater des US-Präsidenten und Direktor des National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) vorsorglich mit einem Schutzschild zu versehen, dürfte mit der vergangenen Präsidentschaftswahl zu tun haben. Gleich mehrere Personalentscheidungen des designierten Präsidenten Donald Trump lassen Leute wie Fauci erneut in den Fokus rücken.

Das Buch «The Real Anthony Fauci» des nominierten US-Gesundheitsministers Robert F. Kennedy Jr. erschien 2021 und dreht sich um die Machenschaften der Pharma-Lobby in der öffentlichen Gesundheit. Das Vorwort zur rumänischen Ausgabe des Buches schrieb übrigens Călin Georgescu, der Überraschungssieger der ersten Wahlrunde der aktuellen Präsidentschaftswahlen in Rumänien. Vielleicht erklärt diese Verbindung einen Teil der Panik im Wertewesten.

In Rumänien selber gab es gerade einen Paukenschlag: Das bisherige Ergebnis wurde heute durch das Verfassungsgericht annuliert und die für Sonntag angesetzte Stichwahl kurzfristig abgesagt – wegen angeblicher «aggressiver russischer Einmischung». Thomas Oysmüller merkt dazu an, damit sei jetzt in der EU das Tabu gebrochen, Wahlen zu verbieten, bevor sie etwas ändern können.

Unsere Empörung angesichts der Historie von Maßnahmen, die die Falschen beschützen und für die meisten von Nachteil sind, müsste enorm sein. Die Frage ist, was wir damit machen. Wir sollten nach vorne schauen und unsere Energie clever einsetzen. Abgesehen von der Umgehung von jeglichem «Schutz vor Desinformation und Hassrede» (sprich: Zensur) wird es unsere wichtigste Aufgabe sein, Gräben zu überwinden.

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ 9bcc5462:eb501d90

Beyond Legacy

Louis Sullivan was a legendary architect, known as the "father of skyscrapers". He was among the first to embrace new tech, like steel frames and elevators which changed infrastructure development forever. Despite this, people want to see him as a cautionary tale since he wasn’t financially successful in his later years. Nikola Tesla too, suffered a lack of funds when he died. Even when brilliance doesn't always equal wealth, let's not overlook the fact that Sullivan's buildings still stand strong and kiss the sky. Meanwhile, electric cars today bear Tesla's name. These men were ahead of their time and noble for it. A testament that bank accounts die and visions live on.

Frank Lloyd Wright was Sullivan's protege and battled his fair share of demons as well, including scandals, professional criticism and debts until the day of his death. Yet, he was loyal to his mentor's vision of "form follows function" despite the brutal criticisms of it at the time. Like Sullivan, he refused the status quo of mimicking the ornamental European traditions. Instead, he developed his own "organic architecture" style, integrating the site and surroundings with the building. Using the aesthetic of horizontal lines, it would become known as his signature "Prairie Style". Wright would go on to produce innovative homes like Falling Water and Taliesin, which now serve as timeless beacons of unique American architecture.

Their memory challenges me: Do I have the cojones to put everything on the line for my startup, as they did for their vision? Although Learning Producers is in the field of learning experience design, we've been guided by "form follows function" in a landscape hellbent on mimicking conventional models. Bootstrapping as a first time founder feels like entering battle, armor clanking and shield raised. My enemy, a Goliath of stagnation.

I'm reminded in the scene from the movie Troy, where Achilles is made aware of a large enemy soldier he must combat. A boy commented to him, "The Thessalonian you're fighting, he's the biggest man I've ever seen. I wouldn't want to fight him." To which Achilles savagely replies, "That's why no one will remember your name."

@ b2caa9b3:9eab0fb5

I woke up in my dorm this morning to the sound of rain – a rarity in Africa, but a common occurrence here around Mount Kilimanjaro. The climate is much like a European summer, with comfortable temperatures ranging from 18 to 30 degrees Celsius. Unlike the rest of Africa, this region receives more rainfall, creating a lush and scenic environment.

After a quick shower, I stepped out onto the balcony to find myself greeted by a chilly rain. Not ideal weather for exploring, but it did present a different perspective of the majestic Kilimanjaro. The mountain, often shrouded in clouds, occasionally peeks through, and on a clear day, might even be bathed in sunshine. From this vantage point, it's hard to imagine the countless hikers making their way up its slopes.

Did you know that Kilimanjaro, Africa's tallest mountain and a dormant volcano, once held a unique title? Back in 1910, during the German Empire, it was considered the empire's highest peak. While Mount Everest holds the title of the world's highest mountain overall, Kilimanjaro takes the crown for the tallest freestanding mountain – any higher peak is likely part of a mountain range or group.

Gazing at Kilimanjaro, I'm struck by its history – a single, towering volcano, once a part of the German Empire. Traces of that era linger in Moshi, with some colonial-era buildings, some in disrepair, others beautifully restored. Arusha, another nearby town, boasts an impressive art gallery and a fascinating National Museum. This museum, housed in a former German fort, offers a glimpse into the past. One particularly intriguing resident is a giant tortoise, discovered by German colonists as a hatchling in Kilimanjaro National Park. This living relic has witnessed a century of change, a silent observer of a bygone era.

Today promises to be a relaxing one. I'll spend time soaking up the views from the rooftop, hoping to catch a glimpse of Kilimanjaro in all its glory. On a more practical note, I'm also on the hunt for a remote job to help with some financial constraints. Finding the right opportunity seems to be a bit more challenging than anticipated.

As I wrap up this post, the weather has taken a turn for the better. The rain has stopped, the temperature has risen, and the sun is beginning to peek through the clouds. Here's to a wonderful day for everyone – enjoy yours!

(P.S. Be sure to check out the photos – one captures Kilimanjaro from yesterday evening, the other is a picture of me with the giant tortoise from my previous trip here in December 2022).

Online

Profile Page | Support Page

Feel free to support me by sending some sats via the lightning network to rubenstorm@sats.mobi

@ b2caa9b3:9eab0fb5

The year had barely begun when we, a group of four from the hostel, decided to explore Moshi's Uhuru Park. Located conveniently in the city center, it was just a short walk away, making it an easy and inviting destination.

A Stroll Through Uhuru Park

We entered through the main gate and began to wander around the park. The first area we encountered was small buildings with stores, restaurants, and a cozy beer garden. After some browsing, we ventured further into the heart of the park and stumbled upon a playground. It was a bit run-down — a place I wouldn’t let my kids play, especially not on the slide — but that didn’t stop us. As adults, we unleashed our inner children, playing on the equipment and snapping countless photos.

In the middle of our playground adventure, we spotted a tree with a ladder and a sign requesting payment to use the playground. Surprisingly, they accepted Mastercard and Visa! Yet, given the state of the equipment, I couldn’t imagine parents willingly paying for such a risky setup.

Unexpected Sights and Big Discoveries

As we moved on, the park began to reveal its quirky charm. We admired creatively maintained corners and came across a unique “Christmas tree”. Unlike traditional evergreens, this local tree earned its festive name because it only blooms during the holiday season. Nearby, we marveled at massive termite hills — some taller than me — that left me feeling small. While I was curious, I didn’t dig around to confirm if any termites were home.

A Smoothie Haven: The Wishing Tree

We eventually reached a cluster of houses within the park. One spot stood out to me — The Wishing Tree. I’d discovered it one evening during a failed attempt to attend a BBQ festival when the police turned me away. The Wishing Tree seemed like an oasis, but it was closed at night, so I promised myself I’d return.

That day, I kept my promise. The Wishing Tree lived up to its name, offering a serene, green space with soft music perfect for meditation. The smoothies were freshly made, organic, and worth the wait. With my first sip, I was blown away — absolutely delicious, even if a bit pricey. We lingered there, savoring every moment and every drop.

Chipsiei and Colonial Echoes

After leaving the oasis, we wandered back to the beer garden. One of my companions, a man from Switzerland, ordered Chipsiei. It’s a local dish of fries and eggs, with “Ei” (the German word for egg) being a linguistic remnant of Tanzania’s time as German East Africa. Traces of this colonial past still linger in buildings, language, and even some food traditions.

I opted for a beer with lemon, similar to a Radler, while others chose soda or beer. After finishing our drinks, we continued our walk, eventually passing the bus station. Here, the Swiss traveler bought a ticket for his next destination, though not without encountering the infamous “mzungu price” — a common overcharge for foreigners. Despite having the correct price from the internet, he couldn’t negotiate it down.

A Market Adventure

Back at the hostel, I decided to visit the market, and the Swiss man joined me. I needed bananas, while he sought natural baobab fruit. Unlike the colored and sugary versions sold on the street, market baobab is organic and white. It was the perfect place to find fresh, unaltered produce.

Wrapping Up the Day

After the market, we returned to the hostel to relax at the bar, reflecting on our day. While writing this, I realized I captured so many interesting photos. I’ll share a few here and save the rest for my upcoming online gallery — stay tuned for updates!

Moving On

Tomorrow, I’ll check out and continue my journey through Africa. After nearly two months in Moshi, my foot has healed, and it’s time to move forward. Along the way, I’ll need to replace my GoPro battery (the old one blew up) and get a power bank after my Google Pixel met its end with a faulty one. I also need to pick up a hat to protect myself from the increasingly harsh sun and maybe a sheet to use as a multi sheet (Towel, Beach Towel and other things).

The road ahead promises new adventures, stories, and photos. Stay tuned to follow my travels as I explore more of this beautiful continent!

@ cd408a69:797e8162

Nostrasia Hackathon

Welcome FOSS hackers and creatives who care deeply about freedom technology!

自由のテクノロジーに深い関わりたい FOSS ハッカーとクリエイター、あつまれ！

We're joining forces with Bolt.Fun for a month-long hackathon bridging Bitcoin and NOSTR (Notes and Other Stuff Transmitted by Relays), culminating with a special three day sprint and live event in Tokyo at the Nostrasia Conference.

私たちは、Bolt.Fun と協力して、ビットコインと Nostrを橋渡しする ハッカソンを、1 か月間かけて開催します。 クライマックスは東京で開催されるNostrasia Tokyo が舞台。3日間の特別なスプリントとライブ イベントで最高潮に達します。

Be a Part of the Early Days of Nostr

Nostr の創成期を共に作り上げましょう

Help build the future of Nostr! Like the early days of Bitcoin or of the Internet, Nostr is nascent open technology shaping new types of social experiences to connect people across the globe. It carries a foundation of principles similar to Bitcoin, like decentralization, simplicity, and censorship-resistance.

Nostr の未来を築くのに協力してください！ビットコインやインターネットの初期と同じように、Nostr は世界中の人々をつなぐ新しいソーシャル体験を形成するオープン テクノロジーの初期段階にあります。 Nostr には「分散化」「シンプルさ」「検閲耐性」など、ビットコインと同様の原則が組み込まれています。

Orange-Pill people through the Purple-Nostr-Pill

オレンジピル（ビットコイン）から紫の Nostr のピルへ

Bitcoin and Nostr communities are in synergy. What started as a social protocol is quickly transforming into a space for exploration on ways to support content creators through bitcoin lightning micro payments, often referred to as zaps. Bitcoin integration to the nostr protocol strengthens Bitcoin's use case as a currency of exchange. It carves new paths to a culture of value4value.

ビットコインと Nostr のコミュニティは相乗効果を発揮します。 Nostr はソーシャルプロトコルとしてはじまりましたが、今では Zap （ビットコイン の ライトニング マイクロペイメント）を通じてコンテンツ クリエイターをサポートする方法を模索する空間へと急速に進化しています。 Nostr プロトコルにビットコインが組み合わさることで、交換通貨としてのビットコインの働きが強化されます。 それは、"value4value" の文化への新しい道を切り開くでしょう。

Help People HODL their Keys (Social+Monetary)

人々が自分のキーを HODL （長期保有）できるように支援します （ソーシャル + 金銭的に）

Nostr exists outside of the rule of platforms and those who seek to control them. HODLing your nostr keys is hodling your identity and social graph, outside of KYC. By helping develop and educate on NOSTR, you are helping people escape walled gardens & gain control and choice over their identities & their money. The Internet, over time, has become centralized, help Nostr stay decentralized by supporting the growth of an ecosystem of apps, websites, microapps, relay services...

Nostr はプラットフォームやそれを制御しようとする人々の支配の外にあります。 Nostr keys を持つことは、KYC （本人確認）以外であなたのアイデンティティとソーシャル グラフを保持することになります。 Nostr の開発や教育に貢献することは、人々が束縛から解放され、アイデンティティやお金に対する主導権を得られるよう支援することにもなるのです。 時間の経過とともに集中化されてきたインターネットですが、Nostr のアプリ／Web サイト／マイクロアプリ／リレー サービスのエコシステムの成長をサポートすることで、Nostr の分散化を維持できるようになります。

Permissionless Building

許可を必要としない構築

Opportunities abound in an environment ripe for innovation:

• Develop & design new nostr white label clients, middleware, microapps...
• Help improve existing Nostr FOSS projects
• Contribute directly to protocol development through NIPs (Nostr Implementation Possibilities)
• Encourage nostr and bitcoin adoption through art, education, and any way you like

イノベーションの機が熟した環境には、チャンスが溢れています。

• Nostr の真新しい クライアント、ミドルウェア、マイクロアプリを開発したりデザインする
• 既存の Nostr FOSS プロジェクトの改善に寄与する
• NIP (Nostr Implementation Possibilities) を通じたプロトコル開発に直接貢献する
• 芸術、教育、その他好きな方法を通じて Nostr とビットコインの普及を推進する

Hack in a Supportive Environment

サポートされた環境でハックしよう

We have a growing list of knowledgeable people with skin-in-the-game to mentor and support your journey. Once your project matures, you may also have 1-on-1 guidance to help you reach your vision and discover ways of growing and funding it.

私たちは、あなたの道のりを指導しサポートしてくれる知識豊富なメンターを増やしています。 プロジェクトが成熟した暁には、1対1のガイダンスを受けられる可能性もあります。それは、あなたのビジョンを達成し、成長させて資金を得る方法を発見するのに役立つでしょう。

Nostr has a blossoming community open to innovation. It is also a great testing ground, as people in the community are open to giving and receiving feedback. It is an environment encouraging conversation on feature ideas as well as possible solutions to social media issues and product bugs.

Nostr には、イノベーションに対してオープンで、発展しているコミュニティがあります。 コミュニティの人々はフィードバックの授受にオープンであるため、優れた実験の場にもなります。 機能のアイデアや、ソーシャル メディアの課題や製品のバグの解決策についての会話を促進する環境です。

NostrHack Tracks

You have 3 options

NostrHack Tracks には3つのオプションがあります

Track 1: Builder's Track - Reimagine Nostr

トラック1 : ビルダーのトラック - Nostr を再考しよう

If you can think of it, it can be engineered! Nostr encourages permissionless building while staying mindful of interoperability and network support. Help BUIDL, design, and improve an area you are passionate about. Reimagine and BUIDL features, tools, clients... Help solve issues and create new experiences in social media.

思いつくことができれば、エンジニアリングできる！ Nostr は、相互運用性とネットワーク サポートに留意しながら、パーミッションレスな構築 (BUIDL) を奨励しています。 あなたが情熱を注いでいる分野での構築、設計、改善に貢献してください。 機能やツール、クライアントを再考して構築 (BUIDL) し、ソーシャル メディアでの課題を解決して新しい体験を生み出すのに協力してください。

Possibilities...

これを踏まえて…

BUILD on the NOSTR Protocol

The Nostr Implementation Possibilities (NIPs) are optional protocol features anyone can add to their clients. Improve and strengthen existing NIPs or build on new ones. NOSTR is a balance of simplicity, interoperability, backward-compatibility and innovation.

NIPs は、誰でもクライアントに追加できるオプションのプロトコル機能です。 既存の NIP を改善および強化するか、新しい NIP を構築してください。 Nostr は、シンプルさ、相互運用性、下位互換性、革新性のバランスを保っています。

Focus on UX

Nostr is made up of a wide range of clients and tools. To make NOSTR scalable, you can help improve its user experience and education.

Nostr は幅広いクライアントとツールで形成されています。 Nostr をスケーラブルにするために、UX と教育の改善に協力してください。

Help shape a Web of Trust

Nostr cares about removing the KYC tied to our identities. To use Nostr you do not need to give up your phone number, email, financial information, or any metadata tied to your real world identity to be later harvested and sold. You are not the product. What are ways that trust can be earned to prevent impersonation, spam...?

Nostr は、私たちの身元に関連付けられた KYC （個人情報）を取り除けるようにしています。 Nostr を使用しても、電話番号、電子メール、財務情報、または現実世界のアイデンティティに関連付けられたメタデータを、収集されたり販売されたりして手放すことになる心配がありません。 あなたは商品ではないのです。 その中で、なりすましやスパムを防ぐために、信頼を獲得するにはどうすればよいでしょうか...?

NIP05/Nostr address

One of the solutions to build a web of trust used today, is to tie your nostr hex public key to a domain. Although this makes it harder for bots to have nostr addresses, it is not a perfect solution. Domains are centralized through DNS. To help people who do not have their own domains or cannot easily add a NIP05 on their sites, your nostr address can be hosted as a service along with other people's. At this moment, you can highlight just one nostr address per profile. In the future, could it include your website, where you work, and other identifiers... What are other possible solutions?

現在使用されている信頼獲得のための解決策の 1 つは、Nostr の HEX 公開鍵をドメインに結び付けることです。 これにより、完璧な解決策ではないものの、bot などが Nostr アドレスを持つことが難しくなります。 ドメインは DNS を通じて一元化されています。 独自のドメインを持っていない人や、自分では NIP-05 を簡単に追加できない人のために、あなたの Nostr アドレスをサービスとして他の人のものと一緒にホストすることも可能です。 現時点では、プロフィールごとに1つの Nostr アドレスのみを強調表示できますが、将来的には、Web サイト、勤務先、その他の識別情報も含められるようになる可能性があります...この他にも考えられる解決策は何かありますか？

On Decentralization & Discoverability

分散化と発見可能性について

Your identity in NOSTR is tied to your keys, but your information needs to be shared and found across a network of relays. To promote decentralization and censorship resistance, relays need to be easy to setup, lightweight, and sustainable. Relays get to choose what information passes through them, so they are also a form of spam prevention that could potentially also become censoring, so both the relay-runners and the individuals connecting to relays need to have choice and policies cannot be homogenous one-size-fits-all. What are possible solutions to make setting up relays easier, to make running a relay sustainable, to have new ways of discovering information...

Nostr での ID はキーに関連付けられていますが、その情報はリレーのネットワーク全体で共有され、検索できる必要があります。 分散化と検閲耐性を促進するために、リレーはセットアップが簡単で、軽量で、持続可能である必要があります。 リレーは通過する情報を選択できるため、スパム防止の一形態である一方で検閲にもなり得ます。そのため、リレー管理者とリレーに接続する個人の両方に選択権が必要で、ポリシーが全てに対し画一的になってはいけません。 リレーのセットアップを容易にし、リレーの実行を持続可能にし、情報を発見する新しい方法を実現するには、どのような解決策が考えられるでしょうか...？

Buidl tools to connect to Git, as a decentralized alternative to GitHub

GitHub の分散型代替手段として、Git に接続するための BUIDL ツール

Media Uploads

To keep relays lightweight, images are hosted by uploading them to the web, and keeping only the links to them in the data within individual nostr notes. This has led to developing image uploading services specific to nostr, but they carry the risk of centralization or censorship. Some product makers and relay runners are looking into direct uploads to Cloud services. What are possible solutions to the handling of media (images, videos, music...)?

リレーを軽量に保つために、画像は Web にアップロードしてホストされ、各投稿のデータには画像へのリンクのみが保持されます。そんな中で、Nostr に特化した画像アップロード サービスが開発されましたが、集中化や検閲のリスクが伴います。 一部のプロダクト開発者やリレー管理者は、クラウド サービスへの直接アップロードを検討しています。 メディア（画像、ビデオ、音楽など）の処理について、考えられるよい解決策はありますか？

Social Signals

People have the choice to block and mute others, this gives signals to relays, which can reenact policies based on those and other signals. Relays need to be able to differentiate real signals from those wanting to game the system for censorship. Relay runners need to have the capacity to make decisions on what to allow or reject.

ユーザーは他のユーザーをブロックしたりミュートできます。ユーザーの設定内容はリレーに送信され、リレーはその設定に基づいてそれぞれのポリシーを再現できます。 リレーは、実際の設定と、検閲のためにシステムを操作しようとする設定を区別する必要があります。 リレーの管理者には、何を許可し、何を拒否するかを決定する能力が必要です。

Track 2 : Marketplaces & Value4Value

Make freedom of exchange fun again! Nostr extends beyond social. It is integrating ways for content creators to be supported through lightning micropayments, called zaps, for their creations. The possibilities of building niche value4value economies through the exchange of products, services, and ideas, is growing through various avenues: Marketplaces, fundraising, blogs, music, streaming... devise new robust ways of integrating NOSTR and Bitcoin of monetary and skill exchange. Seek to explore distributed, digital reciprocity and free trade. Encourage a culture of value4value.

自由な交流を再び楽しく！ Nostr はソーシャルを超えて広がります。 Zap と呼ばれるマイクロペイメントを通じて、コンテンツクリエイターの作品をサポートできる方法を兼ね備えています。 製品、サービス、アイデアの交換を通じてニッチな価値と価値（value4value）の経済を構築する可能性は、さまざまな手段を通じて拡大しています : マーケットプレイス、資金調達、ブログ、音楽、ストリーミングなど... Nostr とビットコインを組み合わせて、金銭とスキルの交換を行う新しい堅牢な方法を考案します。分散型、デジタル相互主義、自由貿易を探究してください。 価値対価値（value4value）の文化を促進してください。

A value4value culture is not only about the individuals using NOSTR products and services, but also about the developers and creatives building sustainable projects. What are ways of sustaining NOSTR through Bitcoin that do NOT make the individual user the product and that are privacy mindful?

value4value の文化は、Nostr の製品やサービスを使用する個人だけでなく、持続可能なプロジェクトを構築する開発者やクリエイターにも関係します。 個人ユーザーを製品にすることなくプライバシーに配慮しながら、ビットコインを通じて Nostr を持続させる方法は何ですか？

Possibilities...

On Social and Economic Signals

Zaps

Many nostr clients have implemented lightning zap payments. Imagine instead of liking a nostr note, you can zap someone's note and they can receive bits/sats in appreciation for their content. It is a strong signal to creators of the kind of content their audiences are looking for. The Apple App Store has recently banned the zapping of specific notes, per Apple's policy that makes the sale of digital content prohibited except when paid through their services. Fortunately, Nostr exists in many decentralized forms outside of app stores and the community is creating new and innovative ways to send bitcoin and free speech from relay to relay, circumventing barriers as they appear. What are solutions that can make NOSTR and zaps ubiquitous?

多くの Nostr クライアントが Zap を導入しています。Nostr での投稿を「いいね」する代わりに Zap すると、その内容に対する感謝としてビットコイン（サトシ）を受け取ることができるイメージです。 これは、フォロワーがどのような種類のコンテンツを求めているかをクリエイターに伝える強力なシグナルになります。 Apple App Storeは最近、サービスを通じて支払われる場合を除きデジタルコンテンツの販売を禁止するというAppleのポリシーに従い、特定の投稿への Zap を禁止しました。 幸い、Nostr は多くが App Store の外で分散型で存在しているため、コミュニティは障壁を回避しながら、ビットコインと言論の自由をリレーからリレーに送信するための革新的な方法を生み出しています。 Nostr と Zaps をユビキタスにするソリューションとは何ですか？

Track 3 : Empower Communities

Give choice and control back to the individual! Create paths forward to help onboard millions of new users and restore free and uncensored speech to the world

選択とコントロールを個人に返そう。 何百万人もの新規ユーザーの参加を支援し、自由で検閲されていない言論を世界に取り戻すための道筋を作り出してください。

Possibilities...

On Security, Privacy & Self-Custody

Private Communication

Direct Messages on NOSTR are encrypted, but metadata is leaked. If someone's key is compromised, whoever has access to that account can read those messages. Integrating secure and reliable encrypted communication protocols, like the SimpleX messaging protocol, is especially desired by the community, as many in Nostr are aware of the risks of surveillance, authoritarianism, government and Big Tech overreach... Private communication is important for individual rights, in particular for activists and journalists across the globe.

Nostr のダイレクト メッセージは暗号化されていますが、メタデータは漏洩します。 誰かのキーが侵害された場合、そのアカウントにアクセスできる人は誰でもそれらのメッセージを読むことができてしまうのです。Nostr の多くの人が監視、権威主義、政府とビッグテックの行き過ぎのリスクを認識しているため、 SimpleX メッセージング プロトコルのような安全で信頼性の高い暗号化通信プロトコルの統合が、コミュニティによって特に望まれています...プライベート通信は個人の権利にとって重要です 、特に世界中の活動家やジャーナリストにとって。

Zaps & Privacy

Current lightning zap payments tend to be custodial and not mindful of privacy, though they are helping onboard people unto lightning. What are ways that people can grow into non-custodial solutions? A wider adoption of Bolt-12 would improve zap payment privacy, what are ways to encourage that development? What are other possible solutions?

現在のザップの支払いは、ライトニングペイメントに出会うのに役立っているものの、カストディアル（管理的）でプライバシーに配慮していない傾向にあります。 ノンカストディアル（非監護的）なものになるよう解決する方法はありませんか？ Bolt-12 が広く採用されれば、Zap 支払いのプライバシーが向上しますが、その開発を促進するにはどのような方法がありますか？また、他に考えられる解決策はありませんか？

Closing Live 3-Day Sprint at the Nostrasia Conference

Nostrasia Tokyo 3日間のライブスプリントによる締めくくり

Tokyo | Nov 1-3 (you can also join virtually)

If you heard of the Nostrica unconference, which happened in Costa Rica in March of this year, Nostrasia is the second Nostr World conference, bringing NOSTR and Bitcoin awareness to the heart of Asia, where freedom communication and freedom money are direly needed.

今年の3月にコスタリカで開催された Nostrica のことをご存知の方もいると思いますが、ノストラジアは2回目の Nostr 世界カンファレンスです。自由なコミュニケーションと自由なお金が切実に必要とされているアジアの中心にNostr とビットコインの認識をもたらします。

Tokyo and Hong Kong are beautiful cultural hubs with budding Nostr and thriving Bitcoin communities of their own. We are eager to spread NOSTR education and development in those regions and beyond. We will close this Nostrasia month-long hackathon with a 3-day sprint at the Nostrasia Conference in Tokyo.

東京と香港は、新進気鋭のNostrと繁栄する独自のビットコインコミュニティを持つ美しい文化の中心地です。 私たちは、Nostr の教育と開発をこれらの地域やその他の地域に広めることに熱心に取り組んでいます。 この Nostrasia の 1 か月にわたるハッカソンは、Nostrasia Tokyo での 3 日間のスプリントをもって終了します。

We will have a dedicated workshop area and food for you to hack away on the final details of your projects. On the last day of the conference, the most robust projects will get time on stage to present. We will close the Nostrasia Hackathon with a special presentation.

プロジェクトの最終的な詳細を検討するための専用のワークショップ エリアと食事をご用意します。 カンファレンスの最終日には、最も強力なプロジェクトがステージ上でプレゼンテーションを行う時間が与えられます。 Nostrasia Hackathon は特別なプレゼンテーションで締めくくられます。

We cannot wait to see what new and exciting projects are proposed for the Nostrasia Hackathon. We’re eager to welcome devs and non-devs alike to contribute to this space and help #grownostr in any small way to help onboard Asia, and the rest of the world to this robust open communication protocol and decentralized freedom of speech tool.

Nostrasia Hackathon ではどんな斬新でエキサイティングなプロジェクトが提案されるのか楽しみです。 私たちは、開発者も非開発者も同様にこの分野に貢献し、アジアやその他の世界をこの堅牢なオープン通信プロトコルと分散型言論の自由ツールに参加させるために、どんな小さな方法でも #grownostr を支援してくれることを心から歓迎しています。

@ b9af65f8:443fbde5

AE789 là một trong những nền tảng giải trí trực tuyến được ưa chuộng, mang đến cho người tham gia một không gian giải trí đầy hấp dẫn và thú vị. Với giao diện dễ sử dụng, dễ tiếp cận, AE789 nhanh chóng chiếm được lòng tin của người tham gia nhờ vào sự đa dạng trong các trò chơi cũng như cam kết bảo mật tuyệt đối. Nền tảng này không chỉ cung cấp các trò chơi phong phú mà còn tạo ra một môi trường an toàn và bảo mật cho người dùng.

Một trong những điểm mạnh lớn nhất của AE789 chính là sự đa dạng trong các trò chơi mà nền tảng này cung cấp. Người tham gia có thể dễ dàng tìm thấy một loạt các trò chơi từ đơn giản đến phức tạp, đáp ứng nhu cầu giải trí của nhiều đối tượng khác nhau. Các trò chơi trên AE789 không chỉ về mặt thể loại mà còn có sự đầu tư mạnh mẽ vào đồ họa và âm thanh. Những trò chơi được thiết kế đẹp mắt và có gameplay mượt mà, mang lại cảm giác chân thực, như thể người chơi đang tham gia vào một thế giới thực tế. Điều này tạo nên một trải nghiệm thú vị và không thể thiếu đối với những ai tìm kiếm một nền tảng giải trí chất lượng.

Bên cạnh các trò chơi phong phú, ae666 còn thu hút người tham gia với các chương trình khuyến mãi và sự kiện đặc biệt. Các sự kiện này mang đến cơ hội cho người tham gia nhận được những phần thưởng hấp dẫn và khám phá thêm nhiều tính năng mới của nền tảng. Đặc biệt, những chương trình khuyến mãi của AE789 không chỉ dành cho người tham gia mới mà còn áp dụng cho người chơi lâu dài, giúp duy trì sự hào hứng và thúc đẩy người chơi quay lại với nền tảng này. Các sự kiện này không chỉ tạo ra những cơ hội mới mẻ mà còn giúp người tham gia kết nối và giao lưu với cộng đồng giải trí sôi động trên AE789.

Bảo mật là yếu tố quan trọng được AE789 đặt lên hàng đầu. Nền tảng này sử dụng các công nghệ bảo mật tiên tiến nhất để bảo vệ thông tin cá nhân và giao dịch của người tham gia. Mọi dữ liệu đều được mã hóa và lưu trữ an toàn, giúp người tham gia hoàn toàn yên tâm khi sử dụng dịch vụ. AE789 cam kết cung cấp một môi trường bảo mật tuyệt đối, giúp người dùng không phải lo lắng về các rủi ro về thông tin cá nhân. Điều này tạo ra niềm tin vững chắc cho người tham gia, từ đó tăng cường sự trung thành và mức độ hài lòng với nền tảng.

Cuối cùng, AE789 cũng nổi bật với dịch vụ chăm sóc khách hàng tận tâm và chuyên nghiệp. Đội ngũ hỗ trợ khách hàng của nền tảng luôn sẵn sàng giải đáp mọi thắc mắc và hỗ trợ người tham gia trong suốt quá trình sử dụng dịch vụ. Với sự nhiệt tình và chuyên nghiệp, đội ngũ chăm sóc khách hàng của AE789 giúp người tham gia giải quyết nhanh chóng các vấn đề phát sinh, từ đó nâng cao trải nghiệm sử dụng nền tảng. Sự hỗ trợ chu đáo này cũng là một trong những yếu tố quan trọng giúp AE789 trở thành một nền tảng giải trí trực tuyến được yêu thích và tin tưởng.

Với tất cả những yếu tố trên, AE789 xứng đáng là lựa chọn hàng đầu cho những ai tìm kiếm một không gian giải trí trực tuyến chất lượng và an toàn. Với sự đa dạng trong các trò chơi, chương trình khuyến mãi hấp dẫn, bảo mật tuyệt đối và dịch vụ hỗ trợ khách hàng tận tâm, AE789 cam kết mang đến cho người tham gia một trải nghiệm giải trí trọn vẹn và tuyệt vời.

@ a38a5cd0:92b1b8f0

I was born and raised in Europe—Switzerland, to be exact—and we’ve always had a special relationship with Europe or the EU. Although Switzerland is in the middle of Europe, it has always been isolated—not politically speaking, but through clever negotiations and an attractive financial marketplace.

But it’s still part of Europe, and whenever we drove to Germany, Austria (where I now live), or Italy, we always felt at home. Everyone was welcoming and accepted that Switzerland is the ‘special kid’ on the continent.

This is one of Europe’s superpowers. It lives off its different cultures. Other than America, I’m sorry to compare it, but it feels like many Americans have never left their own country; we can drive somewhere for three hours and pass two or even three countries.

Citizens speak different languages in each country, but we get along because there is a certain ‘European Vibe’ around. These different cultures and societies enable you to find communities where you feel at home and can be the best version of yourself—at least, that’s what I believe and have experienced.

However, the last 15 years have been challenging. Not only from a business standpoint, we tend to regulate and not innovate, but also from a political standpoint.

The EU and specific countries such as Sweden, Germany, and even Austria are fighting with high immigration, the Euro crisis – casually losing over 65% of its purchasing power this past decade – and ever-increasing debt.

Combine that with a keen interest by the majority of the population in Europe for Communism or Socialism. Please don’t ask me why it’s so popular in Europe. I think it could be an outcome of the world war situations where we never wanted to shift extremely right again. Or maybe the openness of the European spirit invites this thoughtfulness.

These ideologies don’t want the individual to succeed. For the better of all, it has always been at the center of these political movements. Inevitably, this idea leads to more poverty, more centralization, and, in the end, less democracy (the favorite word of any left-leaning politician in Europe) with a dictator at the whelm.

For some weird reason, we don’t want individual Europeans to succeed; instead, we have a collectivism that punishes brilliant ideas and nurtures the ever-increasing state.

So, why are you writing this essay then, Joël? Are you a right winger who’s just here to tell us Communism failed and we should do something else? NO! While my political views can definitely be described as conservative, I’m not associated with the right side of the aisle and would describe myself as a libertarian. However, for the European standard, I might be categorized as ‘right-wing,’ but who isn’t these days?!

But to answer the question, I think we have a secret weapon. Many of these freaks are either ignoring or deliberately downplaying because they’re scared of losing power and trying everything to forbid it.

You might have guessed by the title this secret weapon is Bitcoin!

There are apparent reasons why Bitcoin is the ultimate solution for Europe. These reasons are well known, from its scarcity to its natural state as the best reserve asset and its average value increase of 45% each year for the past decade. From a monetary perspective, these points make perfect sense.

However, there is more to the orange coin, especially from a polarization perspective. In Europe, the left and right are so far apart that it’s laughable. Bitcoin is the only asset or ecosystem enabling people from two corners to reunite and agree on something.

In Europe, in particular, this is something like human rights and privacy for every individual on the continent. It doesn’t matter whether you’re in Switzerland, Germany, or Portugal. Every citizen of these countries is rooting for human rights and the right to protect your most precious secrecies from third parties, aka the ever-increasing security state.

If you take a closer look at most political debates in Europe, both the left and the right agree that citizens should be able to protect their physical or digital properties and how to be more independent. Bitcoin enables you to do all of these things.

Additionally, mining can be an excellent catalyst for all parties to unite if you examine topics such as energy independence. Lefties can choose renewable energy, while right-wingers can embrace a free and healthy energy market. Bitcoin also enables this.

However, the most significant and crucial point is that Bitcoin will enable all nations to be independent again. Many countries lost their sovereignty mainly due to the EU and the Euro.

We no longer talk about each country’s interests; instead, we insert the sentence, ‘Anything that’s good for the EU.’ While the EEA (European Economic Area) was a noble idea that facilitated trade and economic output in Europe, it was abused and became a regulatory superpower with the EU.

You can see the consequences of this from the sheer number of companies who left Europe or international companies who treat Europe as a secondary market with little interest.

If Nations can regain sovereignty again and nurture their economic or sociological advantages, every citizen in these countries will have a new outlook on life.

All it takes for each of them to make the most important step in their Bitcoin journey; being curious enough to learn more about it, spending some time learning the fundamentals, and getting off zero!

One European nation with great potential for this is my home country, Switzerland. We’re the golden European standard for democracy, sovereignty, a strong economy, and a country where everyone can succeed.

After all, fellow Bitcoiners have already taken the initiative to add Bitcoin to the Swiss National Bank (SNB) ’s balance sheet and have already invested in MicroStrategy.

All it takes is the last step, which is to stack Sats as a strategic treasury reserve asset. As a fellow Swiss citizen and someone who works at a Swiss Bitcoin-only company, I would welcome this step and would love to help out!

To quote Walt Disney: ‘The way to get started is to quit talking and begin doing.’ So go ahead, Europe, and get started! Block space is limited, and 2140 is edging closer every ten minutes with a new block!

@ 1f9e547c:8af216ed

Opinion about Bitcoin Wallet Crypto Ethereum (android)

For archival purposes

Atomic Wallet suffers hack on June 2023

Sources

Cointelegraph

Atomic Wallet users have been left wanting more answers, despite the decentralized wallet provider finally releasing a full “event statement” about the June exploit — which some estimate has run up to $100 million in losses.

In a June 20 blog post — the first major update from the firm since the June 3 exploit — Atomic Wallet claimed there have been no new confirmed cases after initial reports of the hack.

Coindesk:

Atomic Wallet Was Breached by North Korean Hackers: Elliptic

Atomic Wallet users might have fallen victim to Lazarus, the infamous North Korean hacking group, said blockchain intelligence firm Elliptic in a blog post on Tuesday.

Early Saturday morning, the team behind Atomic, a non-custodial crypto wallet, announced that some users were compromised and lost the funds from their wallets. According to the company, the number of incidents did not exceed 1% of "monthly active users." The announcement followed multiple reports on Reddit from users complaining their wallets had been drained.

WalletScrutiny #nostrOpinion

Join the conversation!

@ e31e84c4:77bbabc0

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

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

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

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

The ‘40’ represents fixed income, defined as…

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

• The current debt situation raises concerns about sustainability.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Now the fun part. How does bitcoin fix this?

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

Here are some new developments –

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

Dynamics

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

Pros

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

Cons

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

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

Dynamics

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

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

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

Pros

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

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

Cons

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

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

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

Dynamics

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

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

Pros

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

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

Cons

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

• Interest rate payments are on the lower side

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

Additional Resources

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

• Onramp: Bitcoin, The Emergent Asset Class

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

---

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

@ a849beb6:b327e6d2

\ \ 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 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) 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.\ \ Battery Finance Founder and CEO Andrew Hohns appeared on CNBC to delve into the company’s unique bitcoin-backed private credit strategy.

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.

Debifi launched its new iOS app for Apple users seeking non-custodial bitcoin-collateralized loans.

Media

Strike Founder and CEO Jack Mallers joined Bloomberg TV 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 The Bitcoin Podcast to discuss the rollout of Primal 2.0 and the future of Nostr. 

Ten31 Managing Partner Marty Bent appeared on BlazeTV to discuss recent changes in the regulatory environment for bitcoin. 

Zaprite published a customer testimonial video 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, 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 and launched this week. These options should help further expand bitcoin’s institutional liquidity profile, with potentially significant implications 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 on just the first day of trading despite surprisingly tight position limits for the vehicles. 

Meanwhile, the underlying spot bitcoin ETF complex had yet another banner week, pulling in $3.4 billion in net inflows. 

New reports suggested 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 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 “badly” to maintain project viability. 

US Manufacturing PMI increased slightly M/M, but has now been in contraction territory (<50) for well over two years.

The latest iteration of the University of Michigan’s popular consumer sentiment survey ticked up 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 to head up the US Treasury. Like many of Trump’s cabinet selections so far, Bessent has been a public advocate for bitcoin. 

Trump also appointed Cantor Fitzgerald CEO Howard Lutnick – another outspoken bitcoin bull – as Secretary of the Commerce Department. 

Meanwhile, the Trump team is reportedly considering creating a new “crypto czar” 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.

Various government lawyers suggested this week that the Trump administration is likely to be less aggressive 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 from his post at the end of President Biden’s term. 

Many critics have alleged Gruenberg was an architect of “Operation Chokepoint 2.0,” 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.

Overseas, a Chinese court ruled that it is not illegal for individuals to hold cryptocurrency, even though the country is still ostensibly enforcing a ban on crypto transactions. 

Noteworthy

The incoming CEO of Charles Schwab – which administers over $9 trillion in client assets – suggested 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” 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 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 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% of MicroStrategy’s latest $3 billion convertible note offering this week, suggesting growing appetite for bitcoin proxy exposure among more restricted pools of capital. 

The ongoing meltdown 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, Dec 9-10

• Nashville BitDevs, Dec 10

• Austin BitDevs, Dec 19

• Nashville Energy and Mining Summit, Jan 30

@ b9af65f8:443fbde5

88Club là một nền tảng giải trí trực tuyến đang ngày càng thu hút sự chú ý của người dùng nhờ vào những dịch vụ đa dạng, chất lượng cao và tính bảo mật tuyệt đối. Với giao diện thân thiện, dễ sử dụng và các trò chơi phong phú, 88Club mang đến một không gian giải trí lý tưởng cho tất cả mọi người. Nền tảng này cam kết mang lại trải nghiệm tuyệt vời, từ các trò chơi giải trí đơn giản đến những trò chơi đòi hỏi kỹ năng cao, luôn đáp ứng nhu cầu đa dạng của người tham gia.

Điều làm nên sự khác biệt của 88Club chính là sự đa dạng trong các trò chơi và dịch vụ mà nó cung cấp. Người tham gia có thể dễ dàng tìm thấy một loạt các trò chơi hấp dẫn, từ những trò chơi giải trí nhẹ nhàng đến những trò chơi yêu cầu sự tính toán và chiến lược. Các trò chơi trên 88Club đều được thiết kế với đồ họa đẹp mắt, âm thanh sống động và gameplay mượt mà, mang đến cho người chơi những trải nghiệm chân thực và đầy hấp dẫn. Đặc biệt, 88Club không ngừng cập nhật các trò chơi mới, tạo ra một không gian giải trí không bao giờ bị nhàm chán.

Bên cạnh các trò chơi thú vị, 88club còn tổ chức các sự kiện và chương trình khuyến mãi hấp dẫn, mang đến cho người tham gia cơ hội nhận được những phần thưởng giá trị. Những sự kiện này không chỉ tạo cơ hội để người tham gia thể hiện tài năng mà còn giúp họ giao lưu và kết nối với cộng đồng. Với những chương trình khuyến mãi đặc biệt, người tham gia sẽ có cơ hội trải nghiệm những trò chơi mới mẻ và nhận những phần thưởng hấp dẫn, tạo nên một môi trường giải trí sôi động và phong phú.

Bảo mật là yếu tố mà 88Club đặc biệt chú trọng. Nền tảng này sử dụng các công nghệ bảo mật tiên tiến để bảo vệ thông tin cá nhân và các giao dịch của người tham gia. Mọi thông tin người dùng được mã hóa và bảo vệ an toàn tuyệt đối. Với hệ thống bảo mật mạnh mẽ, người tham gia có thể yên tâm khi tham gia vào các trò chơi và sự kiện mà không lo ngại về các vấn đề bảo mật. Điều này giúp 88Club xây dựng được lòng tin vững chắc trong cộng đồng người tham gia.

Một yếu tố quan trọng khác giúp 88Club trở thành lựa chọn hàng đầu chính là dịch vụ hỗ trợ khách hàng tận tình và chuyên nghiệp. Nền tảng này có đội ngũ hỗ trợ khách hàng luôn sẵn sàng giải đáp mọi thắc mắc và hỗ trợ người tham gia trong quá trình sử dụng dịch vụ. Với thái độ thân thiện, nhiệt tình và chuyên môn cao, đội ngũ hỗ trợ khách hàng của 88Club cam kết mang lại dịch vụ hỗ trợ tốt nhất, giúp người tham gia có thể tận hưởng những trải nghiệm giải trí tuyệt vời nhất mà không gặp phải bất kỳ rào cản nào.

Với tất cả những yếu tố trên, 88Club xứng đáng là một trong những nền tảng giải trí trực tuyến hàng đầu hiện nay. Không chỉ cung cấp các trò chơi hấp dẫn và đa dạng, 88Club còn tạo ra một không gian giải trí an toàn và bảo mật cho người tham gia. Với sự phát triển không ngừng và cam kết mang lại trải nghiệm giải trí chất lượng, 88Club chắc chắn sẽ tiếp tục là lựa chọn lý tưởng cho những ai yêu thích không gian giải trí trực tuyến đầy thú vị và sáng tạo.

@ a95c6243:d345522c

Konsum ist Therapie.
Wolfgang Joop

Umweltbewusstes Verhalten und verantwortungsvoller Konsum zeugen durchaus von einer wünschenswerten Einstellung. Ob man deswegen allerdings einen grünen statt eines schwarzen Freitags braucht, darf getrost bezweifelt werden – zumal es sich um manipulatorische Konzepte handelt. Wie in der politischen Landschaft sind auch hier die Etiketten irgendwas zwischen nichtssagend und trügerisch.

Heute ist also wieder mal «Black Friday», falls Sie es noch nicht mitbekommen haben sollten. Eigentlich haben wir ja eher schon eine ganze «Black Week», der dann oft auch noch ein «Cyber Monday» folgt. Die Werbebranche wird nicht müde, immer neue Anlässe zu erfinden oder zu importieren, um uns zum Konsumieren zu bewegen. Und sie ist damit sehr erfolgreich.

Warum fallen wir auf derartige Werbetricks herein und kaufen im Zweifelsfall Dinge oder Mengen, die wir sicher nicht brauchen? Pure Psychologie, würde ich sagen. Rabattschilder triggern etwas in uns, was den Verstand in Stand-by versetzt. Zusätzlich beeinflussen uns alle möglichen emotionalen Reize und animieren uns zum Schnäppchenkauf.

Gedankenlosigkeit und Maßlosigkeit können besonders bei der Ernährung zu ernsten Problemen führen. Erst kürzlich hat mir ein Bekannter nach einer USA-Reise erzählt, dass es dort offenbar nicht unüblich ist, schon zum ausgiebigen Frühstück in einem Restaurant wenigstens einen Liter Cola zu trinken. Gerne auch mehr, um das Gratis-Nachfüllen des Bechers auszunutzen.

Kritik am schwarzen Freitag und dem unnötigen Konsum kommt oft von Umweltschützern. Neben Ressourcenverschwendung, hohem Energieverbrauch und wachsenden Müllbergen durch eine zunehmende Wegwerfmentalität kommt dabei in der Regel auch die «Klimakrise» auf den Tisch.

Die EU-Kommission lancierte 2015 den Begriff «Green Friday» im Kontext der überarbeiteten Rechtsvorschriften zur Kennzeichnung der Energieeffizienz von Elektrogeräten. Sie nutzte die Gelegenheit kurz vor dem damaligen schwarzen Freitag und vor der UN-Klimakonferenz COP21, bei der das Pariser Abkommen unterzeichnet werden sollte.

Heute wird ein grüner Freitag oft im Zusammenhang mit der Forderung nach «nachhaltigem Konsum» benutzt. Derweil ist die Europäische Union schon weit in ihr Geschäftsmodell des «Green New Deal» verstrickt. In ihrer Propaganda zum Klimawandel verspricht sie tatsächlich «Unterstützung der Menschen und Regionen, die von immer häufigeren Extremwetter-Ereignissen betroffen sind». Was wohl die Menschen in der Region um Valencia dazu sagen?

Ganz im Sinne des Great Reset propagierten die Vereinten Nationen seit Ende 2020 eine «grüne Erholung von Covid-19, um den Klimawandel zu verlangsamen». Der UN-Umweltbericht sah in dem Jahr einen Schwerpunkt auf dem Verbraucherverhalten. Änderungen des Konsumverhaltens des Einzelnen könnten dazu beitragen, den Klimaschutz zu stärken, hieß es dort.

Der Begriff «Schwarzer Freitag» wurde in den USA nicht erstmals für Einkäufe nach Thanksgiving verwendet – wie oft angenommen –, sondern für eine Finanzkrise. Jedoch nicht für den Börsencrash von 1929, sondern bereits für den Zusammenbruch des US-Goldmarktes im September 1869. Seitdem mussten die Menschen weltweit so einige schwarze Tage erleben.

Kürzlich sind die britischen Aufsichtsbehörden weiter von ihrer Zurückhaltung nach dem letzten großen Finanzcrash von 2008 abgerückt. Sie haben Regeln für den Bankensektor gelockert, womit sie «verantwortungsvolle Risikobereitschaft» unterstützen wollen. Man würde sicher zu schwarz sehen, wenn man hier ein grünes Wunder befürchten würde.

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ 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

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 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, 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.

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

@ 68ce44e4:ecd5f574

Another Depin project... In early stage.. Backed by Solana and Hostinger.. ✅🔥

https://app.mygate.network/login?code=BMT47j

Join now in early stage n earn good rewards.. 🔥💯

mygate #cryptoairdrops #cryptocurrency #bitcoin #earnfreecrypto

@ 6734e11d:c7e34e8f

@ 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.

@ a95c6243:d345522c

Und plötzlich weißt du:
Es ist Zeit, etwas Neues zu beginnen
und dem Zauber des Anfangs zu vertrauen.
Meister Eckhart

Schwarz, rot, gold leuchtet es im Kopf des Newsletters der deutschen Bundesregierung, der mir freitags ins Postfach flattert. Rot, gelb und grün werden daneben sicher noch lange vielzitierte Farben sein, auch wenn diese nie geleuchtet haben. Die Ampel hat sich gerade selber den Stecker gezogen – und hinterlässt einen wirtschaftlichen und gesellschaftlichen Trümmerhaufen.

Mit einem bemerkenswerten Timing hat die deutsche Regierungskoalition am Tag des «Comebacks» von Donald Trump in den USA endlich ihr Scheitern besiegelt. Während der eine seinen Sieg bei den Präsidentschaftswahlen feierte, erwachten die anderen jäh aus ihrer Selbsthypnose rund um Harris-Hype und Trump-Panik – mit teils erschreckenden Auswüchsen. Seit Mittwoch werden die Geschicke Deutschlands nun von einer rot-grünen Minderheitsregierung «geleitet» und man steuert auf Neuwahlen zu.

Das Kindergarten-Gehabe um zwei konkurrierende Wirtschaftsgipfel letzte Woche war bereits bezeichnend. In einem Strategiepapier gestand Finanzminister Lindner außerdem den «Absturz Deutschlands» ein und offenbarte, dass die wirtschaftlichen Probleme teilweise von der Ampel-Politik «vorsätzlich herbeigeführt» worden seien.

Lindner und weitere FDP-Minister wurden also vom Bundeskanzler entlassen. Verkehrs- und Digitalminister Wissing trat flugs aus der FDP aus; deshalb darf er nicht nur im Amt bleiben, sondern hat zusätzlich noch das Justizministerium übernommen. Und mit Jörg Kukies habe Scholz «seinen Lieblingsbock zum Obergärtner», sprich: Finanzminister befördert, meint Norbert Häring.

Es gebe keine Vertrauensbasis für die weitere Zusammenarbeit mit der FDP, hatte der Kanzler erklärt, Lindner habe zu oft sein Vertrauen gebrochen. Am 15. Januar 2025 werde er daher im Bundestag die Vertrauensfrage stellen, was ggf. den Weg für vorgezogene Neuwahlen freimachen würde.

Apropos Vertrauen: Über die Hälfte der Bundesbürger glauben, dass sie ihre Meinung nicht frei sagen können. Das ging erst kürzlich aus dem diesjährigen «Freiheitsindex» hervor, einer Studie, die die Wechselwirkung zwischen Berichterstattung der Medien und subjektivem Freiheitsempfinden der Bürger misst. «Beim Vertrauen in Staat und Medien zerreißt es uns gerade», kommentierte dies der Leiter des Schweizer Unternehmens Media Tenor, das die Untersuchung zusammen mit dem Institut für Demoskopie Allensbach durchführt.

«Die absolute Mehrheit hat absolut die Nase voll», titelte die Bild angesichts des «Ampel-Showdowns». Die Mehrheit wolle Neuwahlen und die Grünen sollten zuerst gehen, lasen wir dort.

Dass «Insolvenzminister» Robert Habeck heute seine Kandidatur für das Kanzleramt verkündet hat, kann nur als Teil der politmedialen Realitätsverweigerung verstanden werden. Wer allerdings denke, schlimmer als in Zeiten der Ampel könne es nicht mehr werden, sei reichlich optimistisch, schrieb Uwe Froschauer bei Manova. Und er kenne Friedrich Merz schlecht, der sich schon jetzt rhetorisch auf seine Rolle als oberster Feldherr Deutschlands vorbereite.

Was also tun? Der Schweizer Verein «Losdemokratie» will eine Volksinitiative lancieren, um die Bestimmung von Parlamentsmitgliedern per Los einzuführen. Das Losverfahren sorge für mehr Demokratie, denn als Alternative zum Wahlverfahren garantiere es eine breitere Beteiligung und repräsentativere Parlamente. Ob das ein Weg ist, sei dahingestellt.

In jedem Fall wird es notwendig sein, unsere Bemühungen um Freiheit und Selbstbestimmung zu verstärken. Mehr Unabhängigkeit von staatlichen und zentralen Institutionen – also die Suche nach dezentralen Lösungsansätzen – gehört dabei sicher zu den Möglichkeiten. Das gilt sowohl für jede/n Einzelne/n als auch für Entitäten wie die alternativen Medien.

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ 68ce44e4:ecd5f574

Best and Easiest Crypto airdrop ever.. Connect Twitter and Login once in every 24hrs .. ✅

https://sayecho.xyz/?r=MakarandJamdade

sayecho #CryptoAirdrop #Cryptocurrency #cryptonews #bitcoin #EarnFreeCrypto

@ 6bae33c8:607272e8

It was a so-so year for me. I won one Beat Chris Liss league, didn’t cash in the other two or the Primetime. I got bounced in the first round of the Steak League playoffs and finished as a self buyer. I didn’t make the Dynasty League playoffs (even though I had the fourth most points and would have won the league based on my scores in the playoffs), and I didn’t do anything in Survivor or Circa Millions. It certainly could have been better.

Had I known in August what I know now, here’s what I would have done:

1.12 Saquon Barkley — This is chalk here, but I love older running backs this year, and Saquon should go off on the Eagles. No, I’m not worried that Jalen Hurts might score 14 rushing TDs in 15 games.

2.1 Jahmyr Gibbs — Also chalk, but I want to build a RB-heavy foundation with all these zero-RB midwits. You love your Tyreek Hill-Jaylen Waddle build? Sidebet?

3.1 Derrick Henry — Whew, glad he fell to me. I love starting out with three straight RBs, so nutless monkeys can criticize my poor draft structure!

4.12 Josh Allen — I like to get a stud QB early, you guys can wait on Kirk Cousins and Caleb Williams if you want.

5.1 Lamar Jackson — I know it’s early to double up, but I don’t want anyone snagging this value from me. Always punish the room even if it costs you! Sidebets anyone?

6.12 Brian Thomas — Receiver is definitely a position you can piece together if you know what you’re doing, and with Thomas I have an every week starter no matter how bad the quarterback play in Jacksonville.

7.1 Courtland Sutton — I want to buy into the Sean Payton Denver passing game. Russell Wilson, not Payton, was the problem, and Bo Nix is a stud.

8.12 Jordan Addison — I expect Sam Darnold to unlock Addison this year.

9.1 Brock Bowers — He’s no Kyle Pitts (who you took in Round 6), that’s for sure.

10.12 Rashid Shaheed — He’s liable to get hurt, but I need some early-season WR production from someone, and he’s better than Chris Olave.

11.1 Bucky Irving — I’m too thin at RB, needed some depth.

12.12 Jalen McMillan — In case I need some WR depth for the stretch run.

13.1 Adam Thielen — If a white receiver is still in the league at 34, he must be doing something right!

14.12 Cowboys Kicker — Always be the first to take the obvious stud kicker.

15.1 Broncos Defense — beasts.

16.12 Vikings Defense — beasts.

17.1 Steelers Kicker — Always draft a second stud kicker to back up your first one.

18.12 Zach Ertz — Need some TE depth, and Ertz could be useful in my Week 17 title game.

19.1 Jonnu Smith — You can never have too much TE depth. Controversial take: Smith will outproduce Waddle and Hill this year.

20.12 Sam Darnold — Who knows? He could be useful in the playoffs.

This obviously isn’t the ideal team, but it would win every league and generate plenty of action in side bets too.

And here’s some September 3-5 ADP to show this build was possible:

@ 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

@ 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.

@ a95c6243:d345522c

Es ist besser, ein Licht zu entzünden, als auf die Dunkelheit zu schimpfen. Konfuzius

Die Bemühungen um Aufarbeitung der sogenannten Corona-Pandemie, um Aufklärung der Hintergründe, Benennung von Verantwortlichkeiten und das Ziehen von Konsequenzen sind durchaus nicht eingeschlafen. Das Interesse daran ist unter den gegebenen Umständen vielleicht nicht sonderlich groß, aber es ist vorhanden.

Der sächsische Landtag hat gestern die Einsetzung eines Untersuchungsausschusses zur Corona-Politik beschlossen. In einer Sondersitzung erhielt ein entsprechender Antrag der AfD-Fraktion die ausreichende Zustimmung, auch von einigen Abgeordneten des BSW.

In den Niederlanden wird Bill Gates vor Gericht erscheinen müssen. Sieben durch die Covid-«Impfstoffe» geschädigte Personen hatten Klage eingereicht. Sie werfen unter anderem Gates, Pfizer-Chef Bourla und dem niederländischen Staat vor, sie hätten gewusst, dass diese Präparate weder sicher noch wirksam sind.

Mit den mRNA-«Impfstoffen» von Pfizer/BioNTech befasst sich auch ein neues Buch. Darin werden die Erkenntnisse von Ärzten und Wissenschaftlern aus der Analyse interner Dokumente über die klinischen Studien der Covid-Injektion präsentiert. Es handelt sich um jene in den USA freigeklagten Papiere, die die Arzneimittelbehörde (Food and Drug Administration, FDA) 75 Jahre unter Verschluss halten wollte.

Ebenfalls Wissenschaftler und Ärzte, aber auch andere Experten organisieren als Verbundnetzwerk Corona-Solution kostenfreie Online-Konferenzen. Ihr Ziel ist es, «wissenschaftlich, demokratisch und friedlich» über Impfstoffe und Behandlungsprotokolle gegen SARS-CoV-2 aufzuklären und die Diskriminierung von Ungeimpften zu stoppen. Gestern fand eine weitere Konferenz statt. Ihr Thema: «Corona und modRNA: Von Toten, Lebenden und Physik lernen».

Aufgrund des Digital Services Acts (DSA) der Europäischen Union sei das Risiko groß, dass ihre Arbeit als «Fake-News» bezeichnet würde, so das Netzwerk. Staatlich unerwünschte wissenschaftliche Aufklärung müsse sich passende Kanäle zur Veröffentlichung suchen. Ihre Live-Streams seien deshalb zum Beispiel nicht auf YouTube zu finden.

Der vielfältige Einsatz für Aufklärung und Aufarbeitung wird sich nicht stummschalten lassen. Nicht einmal der Zensurmeister der EU, Deutschland, wird so etwas erreichen. Die frisch aktivierten «Trusted Flagger» dürften allerdings künftige Siege beim «Denunzianten-Wettbewerb» im Kontext des DSA zusätzlich absichern.

Wo sind die Grenzen der Meinungsfreiheit? Sicher gibt es sie. Aber die ideologische Gleichstellung von illegalen mit unerwünschten Äußerungen verfolgt offensichtlich eher das Ziel, ein derart elementares demokratisches Grundrecht möglichst weitgehend auszuhebeln. Vorwürfe wie «Hassrede», «Delegitimierung des Staates» oder «Volksverhetzung» werden heute inflationär verwendet, um Systemkritik zu unterbinden. Gegen solche Bestrebungen gilt es, sich zu wehren.

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ d830ee7b:4e61cd62

จุดเริ่มต้นของสงครามบล็อกไซส์

ลองนึกภาพร้านอาหารเล็ก ๆ ที่มีแค่สิบโต๊ะ แต่ลูกค้ากลับล้นหลามจนพนักงานวิ่งวุ่นตลอดวัน เราอาจเห็นภาพชัดว่าปัญหาต้องตามมาแน่ ๆ ถ้าจำนวนโต๊ะไม่พอกับลูกค้าที่ต่อแถวกันยาวเหยียด

บางคนหัวเสียจนยอมจ่ายเงินเพิ่มเพื่อรีบได้โต๊ะนั่ง ในขณะที่อีกหลายคนก็ยืนรอจนหมดอารมณ์กิน สุดท้ายก็ต้องถามกันว่า

“จะทำยังไงดี ถึงจะไม่เสียเอกลักษณ์ร้าน และไม่ปล่อยให้ลูกค้าต้องหงุดหงิดมากมายขนาดนี้?”

บรรยากาศตรงนี้เปรียบได้กับสภาพของบิตคอยน์ช่วงราวปี 2015 ซึ่งเดิมทีเคยรองรับธุรกรรมได้สบาย ๆ แต่จู่ ๆ ก็ต้องแบกรับภาระธุรกรรมมหาศาลจน “คิวยาวเป็นหางว่าว”

ทั้งหมดนี้มาจากข้อกำหนดตั้งต้นว่า แต่ละบล็อกมีขนาดเพียง 1 เมกะไบต์ และบล็อกจะถูกสร้างทุก ๆ ประมาณ 10 นาที ทีนี้พอผู้ใช้หลั่งไหลเข้ามาไม่หยุด พื้นที่เล็ก ๆ ที่ว่าเลยเอาไม่อยู่ ใครอยากให้ธุรกรรมติดบล็อกก่อนก็ควักกระเป๋าจ่ายค่าธรรมเนียมเพิ่ม ถ้าไม่จ่าย ธุรกรรมอาจรอข้ามวันข้ามคืน แถมยังเสี่ยงค้างเติ่งไปเลย

ความไม่พอใจจึงปะทุขึ้นเป็นเสียงดังลั่นว่า

“แก้ปัญหานี้ยังไงดี จะขยายบล็อกกันเลยไหม หรือปรับซอฟต์แวร์ให้ฉลาดขึ้นโดยไม่เพิ่มขนาดจริง ๆ?”

เมื่อสองแนวคิดนี้ตั้งฉากกัน คนในแวดวงบิตคอยน์จึงแตกเป็นสองฝั่งหลัก ๆ

ฝั่งแรกเสนอ “เพิ่ม Blocksize” โดยบอกว่าต้องแก้ให้จบตรงจุด เหมือนเพิ่มโต๊ะเข้าไปในร้าน จะได้รองรับลูกค้าได้มากขึ้น เพราะเชื่อว่า Bitcoin ต้องพร้อมสำหรับการใช้งานทั่วโลก การขยายจาก 1 MB เป็น 2 MB หรือ 4 MB หรือมากกว่านั้น จึงตอบโจทย์ผู้ใช้หลากหลายตั้งแต่รายเล็กไปจนถึงธุรกิจใหญ่

แกนนำฝ่ายนี้คือ Roger Ver หรือ “Bitcoin Jesus” ที่ผลักดันแนวคิดนี้สุดตัวร่วมกับทีมขุดอย่าง Bitmain ซึ่งไม่อยากเห็นใครต้องยืนรอนานหรือจ่ายแพงเวอร์

อีกฝ่ายคือทีมพัฒนา “Bitcoin Core” ที่มี Greg Maxwell และ Peter Wuille เป็นหัวขบวน พวกเขายืนยันว่าถ้ายิ่งเพิ่มขนาดบล็อกให้ใหญ่โต ก็จะยิ่งเก็บข้อมูลมากจนโหนดรายเล็ก ๆ ต้องใช้ทรัพยากรสูงขึ้น สุดท้ายอาจเหลือแค่รายใหญ่ที่รันโหนดไหว แล้ว Decentralization ก็จะถูกบั่นทอน

ฝ่ายบิตคอยน์คอร์จึงเสนอทางแก้แบบ Segregated Witness (SegWit) ซึ่งเปรียบได้กับการจัดโต๊ะใหม่ให้แยบยล—ย้ายข้อมูลลายเซ็นธุรกรรมไปไว้นอกบล็อกหลัก ทำให้ในบล็อกมีพื้นที่ใส่ธุรกรรมได้อีกเยอะขึ้นโดยไม่ต้องทุบผนังขยายร้าน

ความขัดแย้งไม่ได้จำกัดอยู่ในเว็บบอร์ดหรือฟอรัม แต่ลุกลามไปจนถึงเวทีระดับโลกอย่าง Consensus Conference ปี 2016 และ 2017 ฝ่ายหนุนเพิ่มขนาดบล็อกก็โหวกเหวกว่า “นี่แหละถูกจุดที่สุด”

ส่วนทีมบิตคอยน์คอร์ก็โต้กลับว่า “ขืนบล็อกใหญ่ไป ระบบก็เสี่ยงรวมศูนย์ เพราะใครจะมีทุนซื้ออุปกรณ์แพง ๆ และเน็ตแรง ๆ ตลอด” จึงไม่ใช่แค่ถกเถียงทางเทคนิค แต่สะท้อนมุมมองปรัชญาด้วยว่าบิตคอยน์ควรเป็นระบบ “กระจาย” หรือ “รวมศูนย์” กันแน่

ยิ่งถกก็ยิ่งมองไม่เห็นทางออก.. บ้างก็เสนอให้ Fork แยกเครือข่ายไปเลย เหมือนเปิดสาขาร้านใหม่ ใครไม่โอเคแนวไหนก็ไปอีกสาขาหนึ่ง

Roger Ver กับสายขุดยักษ์ใหญ่ก็บอกว่าถ้าไม่เพิ่ม Blocksize ต่อไปค่าธรรมเนียมสูง และคนจะเข้าถึงยากขึ้น เหมือนร้านที่โต๊ะแน่นจนคนล้น

ฝั่งบิตคอยน์คอร์ย้ำว่าจะพัฒนา SegWit กับ Lightning Network เพื่อขนธุรกรรมส่วนใหญ่ไปทำงานนอกบล็อกหลัก แม้อาจต้องรอให้เทคโนโลยีสุกงอม แต่คงไม่กระทบโหนดรายเล็กมากนัก

ในโลกออนไลน์ สงครามโซเชียลก็เริ่มเดือด ตั้งกระทู้กันทุกวัน บางคนต่อว่านักขุดว่าเอากำไรเป็นหลัก บ้างบอกทีมบิตคอยน์คอร์ไม่เข้าใจปัญหาฝั่งธุรกิจจนชาวเน็ตแบ่งเป็นหลายค่าย คำถามใหญ่จึงดังขึ้น

“ตกลงบิตคอยน์จะเป็น ‘อาวุธทางการเงิน’ ของคนหมู่มากได้จริงเหรอ ถ้าไม่มีพื้นที่ในบล็อกมากพอ?”

หรือ..

“ถ้าผลุนผลันขยายบล็อกไปเรื่อย ๆ จนเหลือแต่รายใหญ่ที่รันโหนดได้ แบบนั้นยังถือว่าเป็น บิตคอยน์ในอุดมการณ์ของ Satoshi Nakamoto ไหม?”

พอหลายฝ่ายพยายามประนีประนอมกันหลายเวที สุดท้ายก็ไม่ประสบผล Roger Ver มั่นใจว่าต้องเพิ่ม Blocksize เท่านั้นจึงพาบิตคอยน์รอด

ส่วนทีม Core ไม่ยอมเปิดทางง่าย ๆ เพราะกลัวระบบเสียหลักการกระจายอำนาจไป

ด้วยเหตุผลทั้งคู่จึงทำให้สงครามนี้ยืดเยื้อ กลุ่มขุดและพัฒนาในแวดวงเริ่มจับตากันเครียด บ้างเสนอทางผสม เช่น เพิ่ม Blocksize นิดหน่อย แล้วเปิด SegWit ควบคู่ บ้างเสนอว่าให้เลื่อนตัดสินใจออกไปก่อนก็ยังดี

ไม่มีใครรู้ว่าจะลงเอยอย่างไร.. และหากเรื่องนี้พลั้งพลาดบิตคอยน์อาจแตกเป็นสองสายจนผู้ใช้หรือนักลงทุนสับสน

สถานการณ์ช่วงแรกเหมือน “ไฟที่กำลังคุ” เพราะยังไม่ปะทุเต็มที่แต่ก็แรงพอจะยกครัวไปตลอดทั้งวงการ คนพัฒนาก็ทำ SegWit และ Lightning Network ไป ฝ่ายหนุน Blocksize ก็เดินสายผลักดันให้เต็มที่ ถึงขั้นยอมเสี่ยง Fork ถ้าจำเป็นจริง ๆ

นี่แหละคือจุดเริ่มต้นของความตึงเครียดที่ไม่ใช่แค่ “ขนาดบล็อก” แต่หมายถึงอนาคตของบิตคอยน์ที่อาจพลิกโฉมไปตลอดกาล..

คิดง่าย ๆ ก็เหมือนร้านอาหารเล็ก ๆ ที่กำลังจะก้าวสู่ภัตตาคารใหญ่ระดับท็อป เมื่อแขกเหรื่อมาไม่หยุดหย่อน แน่นอนว่าเสียงเรียกร้องให้ทุบกำแพงขยายร้านย่อมมีบ้าง แต่บางคนอาจบอก “เปลี่ยนวิธีจัดโต๊ะแทนได้ไหม?” ทุกแนวทางต่างมีทั้งโอกาสและความเสี่ยง

ที่สำคัญคือ บิตคอยน์เป็นสินทรัพย์อันดับหนึ่งของโลกคริปโตฯ หากก้าวพลาดเพียงเล็กน้อย อาจสะเทือนไปทั่วโลกด้วย

เนื้อหาถัดไปผมจะชวนมาดูว่า ใครกันแน่ที่อยู่เบื้องหลังการขับเคลื่อนสงคราม Blocksize ครั้งนี้?

พวกเขามีแรงจูงใจอะไรกันบ้าง? และจะนำพาบิตคอยน์ไปในทิศทางใด?

ขอทิ้งท้ายส่วนนี้ให้คิดเล่น ๆ

“ถ้าเพิ่ม Blocksize สุด ๆ แต่โหนดรายเล็กหายหมด สุดท้ายยังเรียกว่ากระจายอำนาจอยู่ไหม?”

“หรือจะรักษาบล็อกขนาดเล็กไว้อย่างเดิม แล้วปรับเทคโนโลยีเสริมให้ฉลาดขึ้นดีกว่า?”

ทั้งหมดที่เล่ามายังเป็นแค่บทโหมโรงนะครับ สงครามนี้เพิ่งปะทุเท่านั้น ยังมีอะไรเข้มข้นอีกมาก ติดตามต่อว่าฝั่งไหนจะงัดไม้เด็ดอะไรออกมาเพื่อรักษา “ร้านอาหาร” แห่งนี้ให้เดินหน้าต่อไปได้โดยไม่เสียตัวตน..

ใครคือผู้ขับเคลื่อนสงคราม Blocksize?

พาร์ทที่แล้ว เราได้เห็นภาพรวมของปัญหาที่ดูเหมือนจะเล็กนิดเดียวอย่าง “บล็อกใหญ่หรือเล็ก?” แต่กลับแผ่ขยายจนกลายเป็นมหากาพย์ความขัดแย้งในชุมชนบิตคอยน์ เสมือนเดิมพันอนาคตของสกุลเงินดิจิทัลอันดับหนึ่งบนโลกใบนี้

พอตอนนี้ถึงเวลาแล้วที่เราจะก้าวลึกลงไปในเบื้องหลังของสงครามอันร้อนแรงนี้ ใครอยู่ในเงามืด? ใครลากสายอยู่หลังเวที? และใครโดดขึ้นมาเดินลุยบนสนามเปิดเพื่อต่อสู้แย่งชิงฉันทามติของเครือข่าย?

มีคนชอบเปรียบเทียบว่าศึก Blocksize ครั้งนี้คือ “สนามรบดิจิทัล” ซึ่งไม่ได้ยิงกระสุนห้ำหั่นแต่ใช้โค้ดแทน ขับเคลื่อนด้วย “Hashrate” ที่เปรียบเสมือนอาวุธหนัก ฝ่ายไหนถือกำลังขุดสูงกว่าก็เหมือนมีกองทัพเบิ้ม ๆ อยู่ในมือ

ด้านนักพัฒนาและผู้ใช้ทั่วไปก็คล้ายประชากรพลเรือนที่บางทีก็ต้องยอมรับชะตา แต่บางทีก็รวมตัวประท้วงสร้างพลังของตัวเองให้โลกได้เห็น ทุกฝีก้าวมีคนจ้องดูว่าจะเกิด “Hard Fork” หรือ “Soft Fork” เมื่อไหร่ และกฎใดจะถูกประกาศเป็น “กฎใหม่” ให้ทุกคนต้องปฏิบัติตาม

ในมุมของคนอยาก “เพิ่ม Blocksize” เห็นชื่อของ Roger Ver โผล่โดดเด่นสุด ๆ เขาคือ “Bitcoin Jesus” แห่งยุคบุกเบิก ที่ครั้งหนึ่งทุ่มทุนโปรโมตบิตคอยน์แบบไม่กลัวเจ๊ง ด้วยความเชื่อว่าบิตคอยน์ควรเป็น “เงินสดดิจิทัล” ลื่นไหลจ่ายคล่อง สลัดค่าธรรมเนียมแพง ๆ ทิ้งไปให้หมด

ในสายตาเขา การคงบล็อกเล็กแค่ 1 MB ยิ่งทำให้คนใช้แล้วปวดหัว ค่าธรรมเนียมสูงปรี๊ด ธุรกรรมอืดอาดเกินจะทน เลยต้องขยายขนาดบล็อกแบบจัดเต็ม เหมือนขยายถนนให้รถวิ่งง่าย ไม่งั้นก็ต้องมุดเข้าอุโมงค์แคบ ๆ จอดติดกันยาว

และ “Bitmain” บริษัทเครื่องขุดเบอร์ใหญ่สุดในโลกก็เข้ามาเสริมพลังแบบเต็มขั้น ขับเคลื่อนโดย Jihan Wu ที่เล็งเห็นว่าพอยิ่งขยายบล็อก ธุรกรรมก็จะยิ่งทะลัก ค่าธรรมเนียมก็จะเพิ่มขึ้น นักขุดจะได้เงินดี สร้างแรงดึงดูดให้คนหันมาหาบิตคอยน์มากขึ้นไปอีก

Bitmain ถือ Hashrate มหาศาล จึงไม่ต่างจากมีทัพใหญ่พร้อมยกพลบุก เพื่อดันแนวคิด “Fork” ได้ตลอดเวลา ถ้าฝั่งเพิ่ม Blocksize อยากจะเล่นเกมสายไหนก็เดินได้เลย

อีกฟากสนาม คือทีม “Bitcoin Core” ถือเป็นแกนกลางที่คุมซอฟต์แวร์หลัก

นำโดย *Greg Maxwell, Peter Wuille และ Wladimir van der Laan***

พวกเขาห่วงว่าถ้าบล็อกใหญ่ขึ้นมาก คงจะมีแค่นายทุนใหญ่เท่านั้นที่รันโหนดไหว ประชาชนตัวเล็ก ๆ หรือคนไม่มีทรัพยากรเยอะก็ยิ่งถูกกันออกจากเครือข่าย กลายเป็นระบบกึ่งรวมศูนย์ ซึ่งสวนกับหลักการเดิมที่ Satoshi Nakamoto เคยวางไว้

พวกเขาจึงเสนอ Segregated Witness (SegWit) เพื่อตัดข้อมูลลายเซ็น (Witness Data) ทิ้งไปนอกบล็อก ทำให้มีพื้นที่รองรับธุรกรรมได้เยอะขึ้นแบบไม่ต้องขยาย “เลนหลัก” และจะต่อยอดด้วย Lightning Network เพื่อยกธุรกรรมส่วนใหญ่ไปอยู่นอกบล็อกอีกชั้น

ฝั่งนักพัฒนาเหล่านี้ไม่ได้สู้อย่างโดดเดี่ยว แต่มีผู้ใช้รวมพลังกันในนาม UASF (User-Activated Soft Fork) มองว่า

“ใครว่าขุดเยอะแล้วสั่งการได้หมด? ผู้ใช้ทั่ว ๆ ไปก็ออกแบบกติกาได้เหมือนกัน?”

พวกเขาบอกเลยว่า “ถ้าไม่หนุน SegWit พวกฉันไม่เอาด้วยนะ”

การเคลื่อนไหวแบบนี้สร้างแรงกดดันให้นักขุดต้องรีบตามน้ำ ไม่งั้นเสี่ยงโดนผู้ใช้ปฏิเสธบล็อกกันถ้วนหน้า

ปี 2016-2017 กลายเป็นช่วงร้อนระอุสุด ๆ Roger Ver ลุกขึ้นพูดเมื่อไหร่ มักกล่าวหาทีม Core ว่าปิดประตูโอกาสทองของบิตคอยน์

ส่วนทีม Core ก็ตีโต้กลับว่า “ถ้าเพิ่มบล็อกเร็วไป มีแต่จะทำให้บิ๊กทุนไม่กี่เจ้าเข้ามาผูกขาด!”

พอยิ่งเถียงกันในงานใหญ่ เช่น Consensus Conference 2017 ประเด็นก็ยิ่งเดือด บางฝ่ายอยาก “Fork” แตกสายไปเลย บางฝ่ายยังคอยประนีประนอม แต่ก็ไม่มีใครลงรอยกันได้

Roger Ver และ Bitmain เร่งเครื่องดัน Hard Fork

ทีม Core ไม่ยอมถอย ยืนกราน SegWit ก่อน แล้วใช้ Lightning Network ปิดเกม

ผลคือ...

ทุกคนเริ่มกลัวว่า “Bitcoin จะแตกเป็นสองสายจริง ๆ หรือ?”

จะเป็นบล็อกใหญ่ หรือจะอยู่ 1 MB พร้อม SegWit?

กลางปี 2017 สงครามนี้จึงคลอด “Bitcoin Cash” เครือข่ายใหม่ที่กลุ่ม Roger Ver ผลักดัน บอกว่านี่คือ “Bitcoin ตัวจริง” ที่ค่าธรรมเนียมถูกกว่า ธุรกรรมไวกว่า รองรับคนจำนวนมากได้

ในขณะเดียวกัน เครือข่ายหลัก BTC ก็เปิดใช้ SegWit ไป พร้อมมุ่งหน้าเปิดทาง Lightning Network ทำให้ครึ่งหนึ่งของชุมชนยังเชื่อมั่นว่าการรักษาบล็อกเล็ก คือหัวใจสำคัญของกระจายอำนาจ

Blocksize War ครั้งนี้ เกินกว่าจะเรียกว่า “ดีเบตเชิงเทคนิค”

มันคล้ายการปะทะอุดมการณ์ของ “กระจายอำนาจอย่างเคร่งครัด” ปะทะ “ขยายบล็อกให้ใช้งานจริงในชีวิตประจำวัน”

ทั้งสองฝ่ายต่างยิงวาทะกันเดือดในโซเชียลมีเดีย คนฝ่ายหนึ่งบอกอีกฝ่าย “ล้าหลังไม่รู้จักปรับตัว” อีกฝ่ายก็ยันกลับว่า “คิดแค่กำไรระยะสั้น ไม่รักษาอัตลักษณ์บิตคอยน์” บน Reddit, Twitter, ฟอรัมต่าง ๆ เหล่าผู้เคยเป็นเพื่อนร่วมทางต้องแยกค่ายกันเพราะมองต่างว่าควรเพิ่มบล็อกหรือเปล่า

ที่สุดแล้ว...

เมื่อสองอุดมการณ์สวนทางกันระดับราก แทบไม่มีพื้นที่ประนีประนอม บ้างเชื่อว่าถ้าไม่เพิ่มบล็อกบิตคอยน์จะใช้งานลำบากเกิน บ้างยึดมั่นว่าถ้าบล็อกใหญ่มากโหนดเล็ก ๆ ก็จะหายไปหมด ระบบจะตกในมือไม่กี่คน.. ซึ่งขัดเจตนารมณ์ตั้งต้นของ Satoshi แบบสุด ๆ

ผลลัพธ์จึงลงเอยด้วยการเกิด “Bitcoin Cash” (BCH) แยกเครือข่าย และเปิดศึกโฆษณาว่า “ตนต่างหากที่เป็นผู้สืบทอดแนวคิด Satoshi ของจริง”

เมื่อ Bitcoin Cash ถือกำเนิดพร้อมขนาดบล็อกใหญ่ “มหาศึก” ครั้งนี้ก็ไม่ได้จบลง แต่เปลี่ยนหน้าฉากไปสู่การตลาดและความชอบธรรม

ใคร ๆ ก็ตั้งคำถามว่า “Bitcoin Cash ต่างจาก Bitcoin ยังไง?” หรือ “ใครสืบทอดเจตนารมณ์ Satoshi อย่างแท้จริงกันแน่?”

นักพัฒนา ฝั่ง BTC ยังเหนียวแน่นว่ารักษาเครือข่ายให้เบา ๆ แล้วใช้ทริคอย่าง SegWit, Lightning Network เสริม คือทางออกป้องกันการรวมศูนย์

ฝ่าย BCH ก็บอกว่าบล็อกใหญ่เลยดีกว่า ทุกคนจะได้เทรดกันเพลินโดยไม่ต้องแย่งพื้นที่

ในภาพใหญ่.. สงครามครั้งนี้ส่งคลื่นกระเพื่อมไปทั่วโลกคริปโตฯ หลายคนกลัวว่าถ้ายังแยกแตกกันแบบนี้ต่อ ราคาจะผันผวนจนคนขยาด แต่ก็มีอีกฝ่ายที่มองว่า

“ดีสิ มีการแข่งขันแล้วเกิดนวัตกรรมใหม่ ๆ”

เพราะในโลกโอเพนซอร์ส ไม่มีใครหยุดการแยกตัวได้ถ้าคนบางกลุ่มอยากลองแนวทางใหม่

คำถามสำคัญคือ..

“ใครขับเคลื่อนสงคราม Blocksize?”

คำตอบก็หนีไม่พ้น Roger Ver, Bitmain และทีม Bitcoin Core รวมถึงกลุ่ม UASF

พวกเขาต่างมีพลังในมิติต่าง ๆ

Roger Ver มีแรงสนับสนุนจากนักขุดสายทุนจัด Bitmain มีกองทัพ Hashrate มหาศาล ทีม Bitcoin Core คุมซอฟต์แวร์ และ UASF ก็มีอำนาจ ‘No Node, No Vote’ ที่ปัดบล็อกไม่พอใจทิ้งได้หมด

นี่ไม่ใช่การรบระหว่าง “อำนาจกับผู้อ่อนแอ” แต่เป็นสมรภูมิที่ทุกขั้วมี “พลัง” อยู่คนละแบบ ทำให้การประนีประนอมเป็นเพียงอุดมคติ

จนที่สุดจึงแตกเป็นสองสาย เหมือนเป็นสปิริตของโอเพนซอร์สที่แค่ Fork ก็พาเดินไปคนละทิศ ใครอยากกดเครื่องขุดก็ขุด ใครอยากตามซอฟต์แวร์ Core ก็จัดไป

นึกภาพอนาคตสิครับ.. ถ้ามีเทคโนโลยีใหม่เข้ามาอีก จะมีสงคราม “Blocksize 2.0” หรือเปล่า? ถ้าเจอเงื่อนไขใหญ่ ๆ ในการเปลี่ยนระบบ ย่อมต้องเข้าสู่วงจรดีเบตเดือดปุดเหมือนเคย

เพราะบิตคอยน์เป็นระบบไร้ผู้นำสูงสุด ทุกฝ่ายจึงมีสิทธิชูมือคัดค้านหรือสนับสนุนอย่างอิสระ

ฉากในเนื้อหาส่วนนี้คือด้านหน้าฉากของสงคราม Blocksize และเหล่าคนขับเคลื่อนที่ทำให้เกิดการแตกแยกครั้งประวัติศาสตร์ในโลกบิตคอยน์ ส่วนต่อไปเราจะได้เห็นเทคนิคล้ำ ๆ และจุดชนวนสุดเฉพาะหน้าที่ทำให้สองฝ่ายยิ่งปะทะกันอีก

แต่ก่อนจะไปรอนั้น..

ขอสรุปให้คิดกันแบบง่าย ๆ ว่า… ในโลกอันไร้ศูนย์กลางที่ต่างคนต่างตะโกนว่า

“ฉันคือเจ้าของบิตคอยน์!”

สุดท้าย “ใครกันแน่เป็นผู้ตัดสินทิศทาง?” หรือแท้จริง “ชัยชนะ–ความพ่ายแพ้” ก็ไม่มีอยู่จริงในสงครามแบบนี้...

เอาจริง ๆ การตัดสินใจของไม่กี่คน หรือการร่วมตัวของยูสเซอร์กระจัดกระจาย ก็ล้วนมีสิทธิเปลี่ยนอนาคตของเงินดิจิทัลได้ทั้งสิ้น จึงเป็นเสน่ห์และความโกลาหลของ “decentralization” ที่น่าหลงใหล

ไม่มีใครสั่งใครได้เต็มร้อย แต่ก็ไม่มีใครจะหยุดคนอื่นได้หมดเช่นกัน

เมื่อมองย้อนกลับไป.. นี่แหละเป็นบทเรียนสำคัญว่าบิตคอยน์ไม่ได้เป็นของใครคนเดียว และถ้าวันหนึ่งไฟสงครามลุกลามขึ้นอีกรอบ เราทุกคนจะรับมือกันยังไง?

ตอนนี้สงครามอาจดูเงียบ ๆ แต่ก็ไม่ได้ปิดฉากสนิท เพราะคลื่นใต้น้ำยังพร้อมระอุขึ้นได้ตลอด

เวลาเท่านั้นที่จะบอกว่า SegWit จะพิสูจน์ตัวเองได้ไหม หรือฝ่าย Hard Fork จะกลับมาโดดเด่นอีกครั้ง

จึงมีแต่คำถามค้างคาว่า.. อีกหน่อยบิตคอยน์จะยังเป็นบิตคอยน์ในแบบที่เรารู้จัก? หรือจะเปลี่ยนโฉมตามรอยแผลที่สงคราม Blocksize ทิ้งไว้?

คอยติดตามกันต่อไปในบทความตอนที่ 2

เพราะนี่อาจเป็นวัฏจักรที่ยังไม่รู้วันสิ้นสุดจริง ๆ ก็ได้ครับ...

@ 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.

@ 502ab02a:a2860397

Anna Britt Agnsäter ผู้อุทิศชีวิตให้โภชนาการ แต่โดนโลกบูลลีเพราะอเมริกา?

โลกรับรู้ว่า คุณ Anna Britt Agnsäter (ขอเรียกสั้นๆว่า ป้าแอน) เป็นผู้ที่นำเสนอ ปิรามิดอาหาร คนแรกของโลก และเป็นแบบจำลองที่ทาง USDA นำไปพัฒนาปรับใช้แล้วนำมาเป็น แบบที่ใช้สื่อสารกับคนทั้งโลก ในเรื่องของการกำหนด ประเภทอาหารที่ควรกิน ในช่วงปี 1992-2005 ซึ่งในบทความที่แล้วผมได้เขียนว่า ปิรามิดเวอร์ชั่นที่ป้าแอนคิด กับ ที่อเมริกาเอาไปปรับใช้เป็นคนละตัวกัน แต่โลกทั้งโลกก็บูลลีป้าเอนว่า เป็นสาเหตุของการทำลายสุขภาพคนทั้งโลก ทั้งๆที่ไม่ได้เป็นนักวิทยาศาสตร์ ผมก็เป็นคนนึงที่เคยคิดแบบนั้นครับ และเคยอุทานในใจเบาๆว่า แกเป็นใครนะทำไมถึงนำเสนออะไรแบบนี้มาทำร้ายคนทั้งโลก???

นานวันเข้า ความคิดอีกฝั่งของผมก็บอกมาว่า ประโยคข้างบนเป็นคำบ่นหรือคำถาม

นั่นสิ!!!!! ถ้ามันเป็นคำถาม มันจะทำให้เราได้รู้จักตัวตนป้าแอนและเข้าใจว่าแกได้ทำอะไรลงไปนะ มันควรเป็นคำถามมากกว่าคำบ่น นั่นเลยเป็นเหตุผลที่ทำให้ผมเริ่มขุดเรื่องป้าแอน Anna Britt Agnsäter มากที่สุดเท่าที่จะทำได้ พร้อมที่จะอ่านกันแล้วใช่ไหมครับ

Anna Britt Agnsäter เกิดเมื่อปี 1915 ที่เมือง Älmhult ประเทศสวีเดน (นอกเรื่องนิดนึง เมืองนี้คือเมืองที่ให้กำเนิด IKEA ที่เรารู้จักกันดีเรื่องเฟอร์นิเจอร์ ที่นี่มีพิพิธภัณฑ์อิเกีย ซึ่งปรับปรุงมาจากโกดังแห่งแรกของเขาด้วยครับ) เรียกได้ว่า เกิดในช่วงสงครามโลกครั้งที่1 พอดีเลยครับ

ป้าแอน จบการศึกษาที่โรงเรียนสตรี ในเมือง Ystad ก่อนจะเข้ารับการฝึกสอนเพื่อเป็นครูสอนวิทยาศาสตร์ในครัวเรือน (rural domestic science teacher) ในช่วงปี 1930 ที่โรงเรียนวิทยาศาสตร์ในครัวเรือนในชนบทชื่อว่า Rimforsa ก่อนจะได้รับวุฒิการศึกษาการสอนวิทยาศาสตร์ในครัวเรือนในชนบทในปี 1939 จาก Kvinnliga medborgarskola (civic women’s school) จนกระทั่ง ปี 1943 ถึง 1945 เธอได้เดินทางไปทั่ว Norrland (พื้นที่ภาคเหนือของสวีเดน) โดยได้รับเงินสนับสนุนจาก Kooperativa Förbund (เรียกสั้นๆว่า KF หรือ สมาคมสหกรณ์ ก่อตั้งขึ้นในปี 1899 โดยสหกรณ์ผู้บริโภคในท้องถิ่น 41 แห่ง เป็นผู้นำด้านการค้าปลีกในสวีเดนโดยพัฒนารูปแบบร้านค้าใหม่และใหญ่ขึ้น และเป็นหนึ่งในกลุ่มธุรกิจหลักในสแกนดิเนเวีย ในสมัยนี้คำว่าสหกรณ์อาจจะดูเชยๆ แต่ต้องเข้าใจครับว่ายุคนั้นคือความก้าวหน้ามากๆ และต้องมีความรู้รอบด้านทั้งวิทยาศาสตร์ เศรษฐกิจ การเมือง) เพื่อบรรยายให้คนหนุ่มสาวและแม่บ้านฟังเกี่ยวกับวิธีรับมือกับเสบียงที่มีจำกัดในช่วงสงครามที่ตึงเครียด เนื่องจากอยู่ในภาวะสงครามโลกครั้งที่2

ในปี 1946 ป้าแอนได้รับการแต่งตั้งเป็นหัวหน้าของSwedish Cooperative Union หรือ Kooperativa Förbundets (KF) Provkök (experimental kitchen หรือ ภาษาสมัยนี้น่าจะใกล้เคียงกับ kitchen lab นั่นเอง) ซึ่งเป็นองค์กรที่มีอิทธิพลทางด้านอาหารเป็นอย่างมากในสวีเดน มีบทบาทสำคัญในเศรษฐกิจและสังคมสวีเดน โดยสร้างโอกาสให้แก่สมาชิกและส่งเสริมการพัฒนาที่ยั่งยืนในชุมชนต่าง ๆ ทั่วประเทศ

ป้าแอนทำงานที่นี่นานจนถึงช่วงปี 1980 ขนาดของ KF ก็ใหญ่โตขึ้นมากมาย จนขยายอำนาจและขอบเขตการทำงานไปถึงการเป็นคณะกรรมการทดสอบรสชาติซึ่งทดสอบอาหารกึ่งสำเร็จรูปและอาหารสำเร็จรูปใหม่ด้วย ในจุดนี้ ป้าแอน เล็งเห็นความสำคัญและความรับผิดชอบของผู้ผลิต/ผู้ค้าอาหาร ควรจะขยายความรับผิดชอบครอบคลุมไปจนถึงโต๊ะอาหาร (ในที่นี่น่าจะหมายถึงลูกค้า) นั่นคือเหตุผลที่การติดฉลากอาหารจึงมีความสำคัญมาก ป้าแอนได้มุ่งเน้นให้ความรู้กับผู้บริโภคว่า ‘Weigh up the price against the quality’ หรือ ให้ชั่งน้ำหนักพิจารณาให้ดี ระหว่างราคากับคุณภาพ ตลอดระยะเวลาการทำงาน Anna-Britt Agnsäter ได้รณรงค์เพื่อให้มีการแสดงข้อมูล ให้ผู้บริโภครับทราบ เพื่อคุณภาพชีวิตที่ดีขึ้นและได้ให้คำแนะนำด้านโภชนาการ เพื่อให้เข้าใจได้ง่ายขึ้น ในรูปแบบฉลากโภชนาการ

ในปี 1946 เช่นกันป้าแอนได้มีแผนในการทำ มีแผนที่จะผลิตหนังสือสอนทำอาหารสำหรับสถานการณ์ฉุกเฉิน เพราะบทเรียนในภาวะสงครามโลก ที่ป้าแอนผ่านมาตลอด แต่ไม่สามารถพิมพ์ออกมาได้เนื่องจากกระดาษขาดแคลนเนื่องจากอยู่ในภาวะหลังสงคราม

ในปี 1948-1949 ป้าแอนเดินทางไปอเมริกา เพื่อศึกษาเทคนิคการทำอาหารใหม่ๆ การผลิตภัณฑ์อาหารแช่แข็ง รวมถึงอาหารผงแห้งต่างๆ (dry powder) รวมไปถึงวิทยาศาสตร์การอาหาร (food science) ที่มหาวิทยาลัย Iowa State University การเดินทางมาอเมริกาครั้งนี้เปลี่ยนโลกของป้าแอนเป็นอย่างมาก ในตอนที่ป้าทำงานกับ KF เธอมักจะร่วมงานกับ Hemmens Forskningsinstitut (สถาบันวิจัยในประเทศ) เพื่อจัดหาเครื่องมือในครัวที่ยกระดับมาตรฐานการทำอาหารที่ดียิ่งขึ้น รวมถึงอุปกรณ์การครัว ภาชนะต่างๆที่เข้าเตาอบได้ และจากประสบการณ์ที่อเมริกานี้

ป้าแอนได้จับมือกับ โรงงานเครื่องเคลือบและพลาสติก Gustavsberg และ HFI Anna-Britt Agnsäter พัฒนาช้อนตวง ชุด4ชิ้น ที่วางซ้อนกันได้ ซึ่งเป็นการปฎิวัติวงการอาหารครั้งสำคัญของสวีเดน เรียกว่า “ชุดช้อนตวงมาตรฐาน” ซึ่งจะมีการระบุขนาดที่ชัดเจน 4 ชิ้น ประกอบไปด้วย

ซึ่งทำให้ผู้ใช้สามารถวัดปริมาณวัตถุดิบได้อย่างถูกต้องตามที่สูตรอาหารกำหนด กลายเป็นเครื่องมือที่จำเป็นในครัวเรือนและการประกอบอาหารในเชิงพาณิชย์

แม้การพัฒนา “ชุดช้อนตวงมาตรฐาน” นี้จะเริ่มต้นในสวีเดน แต่นวัตกรรมนี้มีผลกระทบที่กว้างขวางและแพร่หลายไปยังครัวเรือนและอุตสาหกรรมอาหารทั่วโลกจนถึงปัจจุบัน

ในชุดช้อนตวงมาตรฐาน original 4 คุณอาจสังเกตคำนึงที่ไม่ค่อยคุ้นสักเท่าไรคือหน่วย kryddmått

นอกจากชุดช้อนตวงมาตรฐานแล้ว ป้าแอนยังคิดค้นสิ่งต่างๆอีกมากมาย ให้กับวงการอาหารสวีเดน รวมถึงหน่วยวัดใหม่ที่เรียกว่า kryddmått นี้ด้วยครับ ซึ่งมันเป็นหน่วยวัดขนาดเล็กที่ใช้ในการตวงเครื่องเทศและวัตถุดิบปริมาณน้อย โดยหน่วยวัดนี้มีขนาด 1 มิลลิลิตร (ml)ซึ่งถูกกำหนดมาเป็นหน่วยที่เล็กที่สุดซึ่งทำให้มีการจดบันทึกสูตรได้แม่นยำยิ่งขึ้น นั่นเพราะว่า การตวงเครื่องเทศ หรือ เกลือ นั้นหากรสชาติที่เข้มข้น หรือมีการใช้มากเกินไปหรือไม่พออาจทำให้รสชาติของอาหารเปลี่ยนไป การใช้ kryddmått ช่วยให้การวัดปริมาณเครื่องเทศที่ใช้ในสูตรอาหารเป็นไปอย่างแม่นยำและสม่ำเสมอ

ถือว่าเป็นอีกผลงานคุโณปการที่ป้าแอน ฝากไว้ให้กับโลกนี้ มันมีส่วนสำคัญในการทำให้งานครัวเรือนง่ายขึ้นและมีประสิทธิภาพมากขึ้นผ่านการพัฒนาหน่วยวัดที่แม่นยำและสะดวกในการใช้งาน นวัตกรรมนี้ช่วยให้การทำอาหารเป็นไปอย่างราบรื่นและมีคุณภาพสูงยิ่งขึ้น

ในปี 1951 ป้าแอนได้บูรณะหนังสือการทำอาหารประจำสวีเดนใหม่ทั้งหมด (Vår kokbok) จุดประสงค์ของตำราอาหาร Vår คือการนำเสนอตำราอาหารราคาต้นทุนวัตถุดิบไม่แพง ที่ให้ความรู้เรื่องสารอาหารและใช้งานง่าย นอกจากนี้ยังเป็นการวางวัตถุดิบให้ได้รับสารอาหารที่เพียงพออีกด้วย เพราะในยุคนั้นสวีเดนมีข้อจำกัดในเรื่องอาหารเป็นอย่างมาก

เนื้อหาสูตรอาหารที่ใช้ในหนังสือเล่มนี้กลายเป็นบรรทัดฐานในช่วงทศวรรษ 1950 โดยมีการใช้หน่วยชั่งตวงแบบใหม่ ตามชุดช้อนตวงมาตรฐาน (ปริมาตร) จากของเดิมที่ใช้การชั่งน้ำหนัก ใช้ศัพท์ในการทำอาหารแบบเป็นสากล เช่น ขูด ปอกเปลือก ล้าง เป็นต้น (grate, peel, rinse) จัดอาร์ทเวิคให้แต่ละสูตร สามารถจบได้ในหน้าเดียวไม่ต้องพลิกอ่านหน้าต่อๆไป ทำให้สะดวกในการเปิดแล้วทำตาม การไล่ลำดับอาหาร เปลี่ยนจากการไล่ประเภทอาหาร ไปเป็นไล่ลำดับตามวัตถุดิบหลักของอาหาร ทำให้คนอ่านสามารถบริหารจัดการเมนูได้ง่าย เช่น ไก่ ก็สามารถไล่เรียงได้เลยว่า วันนี้มีไก่ จะทำอะไรกินดี

นอกจากนี้ยังรับประกันว่าทุกสูตรสามารถทำได้จริง เพราะป้าแอนลงมือทดสอบสูตรด้วยตัวเองทุกสูตร นอกจากนี้ยังคงมีการแนะนำให้ใช้การวัดอุณหภูมิในการทำอาหารด้วยเพื่อความเป๊ะในรสชาติ เนื่องจากป้าแอนเห็นตอนไปดูงานที่อเมริกา จนถึงทุกวันนี้ Vår kokbok เป็นหนึ่งในตำราอาหารที่ขายมากที่สุดในโลกด้วยยอดขายมากกว่า 2.3 ล้านเล่มนับตั้งแต่เริ่มต้น โดยเฉลี่ยมากกว่า 40,000 เล่มต่อปี

ด้วยความที่ Kooperativa Förbundets เป็นองค์กรที่มีอิทธิพลสูงมากในวงการอาหารสวีเดน และคุณป้าแอน ก็มีตำแหน่งที่สูงมาก จึงสามารถเป็นผู้มีส่วนสนับสนุนรูปแบบซูเปอร์มาร์เก็ตสมัยใหม่ ในการใส่รายการส่วนผสมและคำแนะนำในการปรุงอาหารในรูปแบบฉลากของผลิตภัณฑ์อาหารสมัยใหม่

จนกระทั่งในช่วงปี 1970 ประเทศสวีเดนต้องเผชิญกับปัญหาราคาอาหารที่สูงเนื่องจากเงินเฟ้อ รวมถึงสภาพอากาศของสวีเดนนั้น ไม่เอื้อต่อการได้รับสารอาหารที่หลากหลายได้ ครอบครัวที่มีเด็ก ไม่สามารถปรุงอาหารและรับประทานอาหารที่มีคุณค่าทางโภชนาการในราคาที่เหมาะสมได้ รัฐบาลจึงมอบหมายให้ Sweden’s National Board of Health and Welfare (คณะกรรมการสุขภาพและสวัสดิการแห่งชาติของสวีเดน) หาวิธีแก้ไขสถานการณ์ดังกล่าว และคัดกรองแบ่งประเภทอาหารออกเป็น “basic food” และ “supplement” มาเป็นรูปแบบของ กราฟวงกลม (diet circle) แต่ป้าแอนพบปัญหาบางอย่าง ที่ทำให้กราฟวงกลมนี้ใช้งานยาก เพราะการแบ่งปริมาณของอาหารแต่ละประเภทไม่ชัดเจน

ในระหว่างบรรยายเรื่องการกำหนดอาหารพื้นฐาน คุณ Fjalar Clemes หนึ่งในผู้เข้าร่วมการบรรยาย ได้ให้ไอเดียด้วยการสร้างแบบจำลองที่เรียกว่า ปิรามิดอาหาร (Food Pyramid) ขึ้นมา เพื่อให้เห็นภาพสัดส่วนอาหารที่ชัดเจนขึ้น ป้าแอนเลยนำข้อมูลจากกราฟวงกลมนั้น มาสร้างโมเดลจำลองให้อยู่ในรูปแบบปิรามิด โดยให้ “basic food” เช่น ขนมปัง มันฝรั่ง พาสต้า และนม และ “supplements” เช่น ผลไม้ ผัก เนื้อสัตว์ และปลา อยู่ในรูปแบบที่เข้าใจได้ง่ายขึ้น แม้แต่คนที่อ่านหนังสือไม่ออก

แต่นี่แหละที่เป็นจุดเริ่มต้นของปัญหา ด้วยความที่มันใช้งานง่ายสะดวก อเมริกาจึงนำไปปรับปรุงเป็นเวอร์ชั่นตัวเอง แต่ก็มีการเปลี่ยนแปลงไปอย่างมาก ตามที่ได้มีการทำบทความไปแล้ว (อ่านที่นี่)

ทั้งๆที่ปิรามิดต้นแบบของป้าแอนนั้น สร้างขึ้นมาเพื่อชาวสวีเดนเนื่องจากนำข้อมูลพื้นฐานจากข้อจำกัดในประเทศในขณะนั้น ไม่ว่าจะเรื่องของวัตถุดิบที่หาได้ในภาวะยากแค้นแบบนั้น อุณหภูมิอันปรวนแปร รวมถึงสภาพเศรษฐกิจที่ย่ำแย่มาก การจัดแจงข้อจำกัดที่มีเพื่อให้ได้สารอาหารที่เพียงพอที่สุดเท่าที่จะทำได้ต่างหาก (eat healthier, more affordable and save on fat) ที่เป็นที่มาของ “ปิรามิดอาหารของสวีเดน” (คือ จะให้เอาอุดมคติมาสร้างปิรามิดอาหาร คงไม่มีประโยชน์ เพราะยังไงก็ไม่มีเงินซื้อและหาวัตถุดิบไมไ่ด้ตามอุดมคติ วัตถุประสงค์ในการสร้างและเผยแพร่ครั้งนี้มันเพื่อให้ประชาชนทั้งประเทศที่มีความรู้ด้านอาหารน้อย รู้และทำตามได้จริง สมกับพื้นที่และกำลังทรัพย์ // ความเห็นส่วนตัวผมครับ)

ปิรามิดอาหารที่แท้จริงแล้ว จะมีการปรับปรุงตลอดเวลา ตามปัจจัยที่เปลี่ยนไป ไม่ใช่ปิรามิดที่เอาไว้ยึดถือตลอดไป แต่การที่อเมริกานำไปยึดถือว่าเป็น all time information เป็นค่าคงที่ให้ทั้งโลกยึดตาม รวมถึงสร้างด้วยเบื้องหลังด้านธุรกิจ จึงต่างกับที่ป้าแอนทำในทุกมิติ แต่ไฉน เป้าการบูลลี จึงต้องไปตกที่ป้าแอน ว่าเป็นต้นตอความพังของสุขภาพ มันแฟร์แล้วหรือ

เรื่องนี้มีข้อพิสูจน์ได้จนถึงปัจจุบันเช่น ในปี 2022 ก็มีการนำเสนอ ปิรามิดอาหารสำหรับ Mixed diet, flexitarian, vegetarian และ vegan ออกมาสืบทอดเจตนารมณ์ป้าแอน นอกจากนี้ในช่วงที่ป้าแอนมีชีวิต ก็ยังคงมีการช่วยเหลือแนะนำให้ประเทศต่างๆ “มีปิรามิดอาหารของตัวเอง” นั่นคือ วิชั่นที่กว้างไกลของป้าแอน ที่เห็นได้ชัดเจนว่า อาหารพื้นถิ่นกับสารอาหารที่สมดุล ของแต่ละประเทศมีความไม่เหมือนกัน และแนวคิดนี้ได้มีทั้ง เดนมาร์ก, นอร์เวย์, ฟินแลนด์, ญี่ปุ่น, ศรีลังกา ได้นำไปพัฒนาใช้เช่นกัน

นอกจากนี้ ป้าแอนและองค์กร Kooperativa Förbundets ยังให้ข้อมูลการศึกษาที่สำคัญสำหรับประชาชนผ่านบทความเกี่ยวกับอาหารที่ตีพิมพ์ใน นิตยสาร Vi รวมถึงการจัดตั้งกลุ่มการศึกษาร่วมกับทาง สมาคมการศึกษาของชนชั้นแรงงาน หรือ Arbetarnas bildningsförbund (ABF) มีส่วนสนับสนุนในการอภิปรายแบบเปิดทางสังคมเกี่ยวกับปัญหาโรคอ้วนอีกด้วย รวมถึงยังออกหนังสือเกี่ยวกับการทำอาหารอีกร่วมๆ 30เล่ม ซึ่งรวมถึงบทเกี่ยวกับมื้ออาหารที่มีคุณค่าทางโภชนาการที่สมดุล ด้วยเช่นกัน

ในปี 1983 ป้าแอนได้ตีพิมพ์หนังสือ Matboken ซึ่งได้รับการพิสูจน์แล้วว่าเป็นประโยชน์อย่างมาก โดยเฉพาะกับคนหนุ่มสาวเกี่ยวกับวิธีการกินอาหารที่มีคุณค่าทางโภชนาการและมีวิธีทำที่เรียบง่ายที่สุด

ในช่วงทศวรรษ 1990 เมื่อป้าแอนเป็นม่าย จึงได้ย้ายเข้าไปอยู่ในบ้านพักคนชรา Färdknäppen ใน Södermalm ในสตอกโฮล์ม และ ได้แก้ไขสูตรอาหาร 250 สูตรจาก Vår kokbok เพื่อให้เหมาะสมกับสภาพแวดล้อมการปรุงอาหารส่วนกลางของบ้านพักคนชรา เพื่อให้ได้อาหารที่มีสารอาหารครบถ้วนตามที่ควรเป็น

เกียรติประวัติป้าแอนได้รับการตอบแทนดังนี้ ในปี 1979 ได้รับรางวัลเหรียญ St Erik เพื่อเป็นการยกย่องสิ่งที่เธอทุ่มเทแรงกายแรงใจทำมาตลอดชีวิต ในปี 1993 ได้รับเหรียญ HM Konungens ลำดับที่ 8 (HM The King’s Medal หรือ H.M. Konungens medalj ในภาษาสวีเดน) เป็นหนึ่งในรางวัลเกียรติยศที่สำคัญที่สุดที่มอบโดยพระมหากษัตริย์สวีเดนเพื่อยกย่องบุคคลที่มีผลงานดีเด่นหรือมีความโดดเด่นในด้านต่าง ๆ เช่น วิทยาศาสตร์ ศิลปะ วัฒนธรรม และการบริการสาธารณะ ในปี 1995 ได้รับเหรียญทอง Albin Johansson สำหรับผลงานอันทรงคุณค่าของเธอต่อสหกรณ์สวีเดน ในปี 1998 ได้รับรางวัล Gastronomiska Akademiens Guldpenna (ปากกาทองของสถาบันอาหาร) สำหรับบทความเกี่ยวกับส่วนผสมและการทำอาหารของเธอ

Anna-Britt Agnsäter เสียชีวิตในปี 2006 (อายุ 90ปี) ป้าแอนทำงานทั้งชีวิตเพื่อสอนชาวสวีเดนในการจัดการอาหารให้ดีขึ้น ทุกการทดลอง ทดสอบ ได้มีการบันทึกไว้อย่างชัดเจนสามารถพัฒนาต่อไปได้ การริเริ่มให้ข้อมูลที่ซื่อสัตย์ต่อผู้บริโภค ทั้งการติดฉลากอุปกรณ์ คำแนะนำในการทำอาหาร สูตรอาหาร บทความ และตำราอาหาร สิ่งเหล่านี้กลายเป็นพื้นฐานสำคัญในอุตสาหกรรมอาหารจนปัจจุบัน

แต่ทุกวันนี้วงการสุขภาพส่วนมากยังคงล้อเลียนเธอว่าเป็นครูธรรมดา ที่มีหน้ามาสร้างปิรามิดอาหาร จึงทำให้คนทั่งโลกป่วย ทั้งที่ความจริงทั้งหมดนั้น ความรู้ของป้าแอนไม่ได้น้อยไปกว่า ผู้เชี่ยวชาญทางวิทยาศาสตร์การอาหาร ซึ่งในสมัยนั้นนับว่าเป็นอีกแขนงที่อยู่ในระดับบนของการศึกษา ไม่ต่างกับวิทยาศาสตร์อื่นๆ ปิรามิดควรเป็นไปตามถิ่นที่อยู่ สภาพเวลาและสภาพเศรษฐกิจขณะนั้น ไม่ใช่การสร้างมาตรฐานให้ต้องทำเหมือนกันทั่วโลก โดยมาจากอิทธิพลของกลุ่มธุรกิจดังที่ usda ได้ทำการแก้ไขก่อนจะประกาศให้คนทั่วไปยึดถือ รายละเอียดเป็นไปตามที่สืบค้นข้อมูลประวัติของป้าแอน มาเล่าสู่กันฟัง ณ วันนี้ครับ

ผมก็เป็นหนึ่งในนั้น สิ่งที่ผมสามารถทำได้เพื่อเป็นการขอโทษคุณ Anna-Britt Agnsäter ที่ดีที่สุดที่ทำได้ตอนนี้คือ เผยแพร่ประวัติอันทรงคุณค่าของเธอ ให้คนอื่นๆได้รับทราบมากที่สุด เท่าที่จะทำได้

โปรดแชร์ เพื่อคืนความเป็นธรรมให้ Anna-Britt Agnsäter ให้โลกได้เข้าใจและรับรู้ถึงการอุทิศชีวิตให้วงการอาหารของคุณป้าครับ

ปล.มีการค้นพบไฟล์เสียง ที่ป้าแอน จัดรายการวิทยุในปี 1968 ให้ลองฟังกันครับ (น่าจะภาษาสวีเดนนะ 5555) ฟังได้ที่นี่ครับ https://rumble.com/v56p1wa-ann-britt-agnster-in-a-radio-find-from-1968.html

siamstr #pirateketo

@ c631e267:c2b78d3e

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

---

Danke, dass du diesen Weg mit mir weitergehst!

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Nostr is not decentralized nor censorship-resistant

Peter Todd has been saying this 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 and on my NIP-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 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
• A vision for content discovery and relay usage for basic social-networking in Nostr

@ 1ec45473:d38df139

The probability of AGI ending us is negative.

A common tactic among doomers is to state something along the lines of the following:

"If we create AGI, there is some non-zero chance every year, that the AGI will end humanity. Whatever that chance is compounds every year, and is thus unacceptable."

The question I would ask the doomer is "How do you know that the chance of AGI ending humanity isn't negative?"

What does it mean for AGI to have a negative chance of ending humanity?

Setting aside AGI for a moment, what is the chance every year that humanity ends from other events, such as nuclear war, solar flares, super-volcanoes, asteroid hits, societal collapse, etc?

How do you even answer this question in a reasonable manner? Well lets look at past data.

Of all species that have existed 99% have gone extinct.

Of our closest 7 relatives from the genus Homo, 100% have gone extinct.

On a higher level looking at civilizational collapse. According to Wikipedia, virtually all historical societies have collapsed.

Looking out into the universe, we see no signs of life elsewhere, so if there was life in the past we can assume that they have gone extinct.

It would therefore be reasonable to say that the chance of our extinction is very high even without AGI, well above 90%. Maybe 99%.

You could argue the numbers but at least with these numbers we are using some past data to extrapolate the future, where the doomers are using no data whatsoever to support their numbers.

We can also state, that of all the species and societies that have collapsed in the past, they have done so because they did not yet have the knowledge on how to survive. They didn't know how to create antibiotics, or generate enough energy, or defend themselves from the environment.

What is AGI? AGI is a way to create knowledge. Most all societies in the past have collapsed because they didn't have the knowledge on how to survive, and the doomer argument is that we should slow down our ability to create knowledge, when we know that this has been precisely the problem in the past.

It is a certainty we will all die without more knowledge then we have now. The future death of our sun ensures that.

We have to create the knowledge on how to survive, and that is what AGI does - it creates knowledge.

AGI most certainly has a negative probability of ending humanity.

@ 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".

@ 9c35fe6b:5977e45b

Discover Ancient Marvels with Egypt Pyramid Tour Packages Egypt is a land steeped in history and home to some of the most iconic landmarks in the world. With ETB Tours Egypt’s Egypt vacation packages, you can embark on an unforgettable journey through the ages. From the majestic Pyramids of Giza to the enigmatic Sphinx, our Egypt pyramid tour packages are designed to immerse you in the grandeur of ancient civilizations. Whether you’re taking part in Egypt private tours or joining a group, the rich cultural heritage will captivate you at every turn.

Experience the Beauty of the Nile with Luxurious Nile Cruise Holidays A trip to Egypt would be incomplete without a cruise on the legendary Nile River. ETB Tours Egypt offers Nile cruise Luxor Aswan packages that provide a seamless blend of relaxation and exploration. Whether you opt for Nile cruises from Cairo or a shorter Nile cruise holidays, you'll visit the temples of Karnak and Edfu, and marvel at the beauty of the Valley of the Kings. These Egypt classic tours are perfect for those seeking a blend of adventure and comfort.

Family Adventures with Egypt Family Tours For travelers seeking a fun and educational experience for the whole family, ETB Tours Egypt provides tailored Egypt family tours. These itineraries include a mix of cultural and leisure activities, such as exploring the bustling streets of Cairo and enjoying Red Sea tour packages. Families can also enjoy Cairo day tours, Luxor day tours, Aswan day tours, and even a visit to the coastal charm of Alexandria day tours.

Unwind with All-Inclusive Egypt Vacations If you’re looking for a hassle-free getaway, our all-inclusive Egypt vacations are the ideal choice. These packages cover everything from accommodation and meals to guided tours, ensuring you can focus entirely on soaking up the incredible sights. Options like 8 day trips to Cairo, Luxor, Aswan, and Alexandria or 12 days Cairo, Nile Cruise, and Sharm El Sheikh provide diverse experiences across Egypt’s most breathtaking destinations.

Adventure Awaits with Egypt Safari Tours and More For thrill-seekers, ETB Tours Egypt offers Egypt safari tours that take you deep into the desert for a unique glimpse of Egypt’s natural wonders. If you prefer a more laid-back experience, explore 5 days package Cairo and Fayoum or join one of our specialized Egypt women tours tailored for female travelers.

Seaside Serenity with Red Sea and Sharm El Sheikh Packages Experience Egypt’s coastal beauty with Red Sea tour packages or spend time in the vibrant resort city with 9 days in Cairo, Luxor, and Sharm El Sheikh. Dive into crystal-clear waters, explore colorful coral reefs, or simply relax on sandy beaches.

With ETB Tours Egypt carefully curated Egypt travel packages, your dream of exploring Egypt’s wonders will become a reality. Book your Egypt vacation package today and let the adventure begin!

To Contact Us: E-Mail: info@etbtours.com Mobile & WhatsApp: +20 10 67569955 Address: 4 El Lebeny Axis, Nazlet Al Batran, Al Haram, Giza, Egypt

@ b6dcdddf:dfee5ee7

🚀 Exciting News: Introducing Project Affiliates!

Creators can finally reach a wider audience by partnering with affiliates!

Affiliates earn automated payouts for contributions enabled through their shares. 🤑

Announcement link: https://x.com/geyserfund/status/1811434402041282680

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/606500

@ a95c6243:d345522c

Ein Lämmchen löschte an einem Bache seinen Durst. Fern von ihm, aber näher der Quelle, tat ein Wolf das gleiche. Kaum erblickte er das Lämmchen, so schrie er:

"Warum trübst du mir das Wasser, das ich trinken will?"

"Wie wäre das möglich", erwiderte schüchtern das Lämmchen, "ich stehe hier unten und du so weit oben; das Wasser fließt ja von dir zu mir; glaube mir, es kam mir nie in den Sinn, dir etwas Böses zu tun!"

"Ei, sieh doch! Du machst es gerade, wie dein Vater vor sechs Monaten; ich erinnere mich noch sehr wohl, daß auch du dabei warst, aber glücklich entkamst, als ich ihm für sein Schmähen das Fell abzog!"

"Ach, Herr!" flehte das zitternde Lämmchen, "ich bin ja erst vier Wochen alt und kannte meinen Vater gar nicht, so lange ist er schon tot; wie soll ich denn für ihn büßen."

"Du Unverschämter!" so endigt der Wolf mit erheuchelter Wut, indem er die Zähne fletschte. "Tot oder nicht tot, weiß ich doch, daß euer ganzes Geschlecht mich hasset, und dafür muß ich mich rächen."

Ohne weitere Umstände zu machen, zerriß er das Lämmchen und verschlang es.

Das Gewissen regt sich selbst bei dem größten Bösewichte; er sucht doch nach Vorwand, um dasselbe damit bei Begehung seiner Schlechtigkeiten zu beschwichtigen.

Quelle: https://eden.one/fabeln-aesop-das-lamm-und-der-wolf

@ b4175c4f:d1789a43

O cálculo lambda, nomeado comumente de lambda calculus, formalizado por Alonzo Church na década de 1930, é uma das fundações teóricas da ciência da computação e da lógica matemática.

Seguem os princípios básicos do cálculo lambda:

Abstração

A abstração é a principal característica do cálculo lambda e se refere à definição de funções anônimas. No cálculo lambda, uma função é definida pela notação λx.E, onde:
- λ é o símbolo lambda.
- x é o parâmetro da função.
- E é a expressão que define o corpo da função.

Por exemplo, a expressão λx.x + 1 representa uma função que adiciona 1 a seu argumento.

Aplicação

A aplicação é o processo de chamar uma função com um argumento. No cálculo lambda, a aplicação de uma função a um argumento é representada pela justaposição de duas expressões. Por exemplo, se temos a função: λx.x + 1 e queremos aplicá-la ao argumento 2, escrevemos (λx.x + 1)2

Redução

Redução é o processo de simplificação de expressões no cálculo lambda. Existem várias formas de redução, mas as mais comuns são:

Redução β (Beta): Substitui a variável vinculada na expressão da função pelo argumento fornecido, i.e, (λx.x + 1)2 se reduz a 2 + 1, que é 3.
Redução α (Alpha): Renomeia as variáveis vinculadas para evitar conflitos de nomes, i.e, λx.λx.x pode ser renomeado para λx.λy.y.

Variáveis Livres e Vinculadas

Uma variável é considerada vinculada se está definida dentro do escopo de uma abstração lambda. Caso contrário, é considerada uma variável livre. Por exemplo, na expressão λx.x+y, x é uma variável vinculada e y é uma variável livre.

Substituição

Substituição é o processo de substituir uma variável livre por uma expressão. Se temos uma expressão E e substituímos uma variável x por uma expressão N, representamos isso como E[x := N].

Funções Anônimas

No cálculo lambda, todas as funções são anônimas, o que significa que elas não têm um nome explícito. Isso contrasta com a programação tradicional, onde funções geralmente têm nomes.

Expressividade

O cálculo lambda é extremamente expressivo e pode representar qualquer função computável. Ele é Turing-completo, o que significa que qualquer coisa que pode ser computada por uma máquina de Turing também pode ser computada usando cálculo lambda.

Exemplo de Redução

Considere a função identidade λx.x. Aplicando essa função a um argumento a, temos:

(λx.x)a

Para reduzir isso, substituímos x por a no corpo da função:

a

Este é um exemplo simples de como a aplicação e a redução funcionam no cálculo lambda.

Notação e Como Usar:

Abstração

A notação λx.E define uma função anônima onde x é o parâmetro e E é o corpo da função. É importante notar que:
- O ponto (.) separa o parâmetro do corpo da função.
- As variáveis são case-sensitive.

Por exemplo, λx.x define uma função identidade que retorna o próprio argumento.

Aplicação

Para aplicar uma função a um argumento, simplesmente colocamos a função e o argumento lado a lado. Por exemplo, a aplicação da função identidade λx.x ao argumento a é escrita como (λx.x)a.

Redução β (Beta)

A redução β envolve substituir o parâmetro formal pelo argumento fornecido na aplicação. Considere a função λx.x + 1 aplicada a 2:

(λx.x + 1)2⇒ 2 + 1⇒ 3

Redução α

A redução α é usada para evitar conflitos de nomes, renomeando variáveis vinculadas. Por exemplo, λx.λx.x pode ser renomeado para λx.λy.y para evitar ambiguidades.

Variáveis Livres e Vinculadas

Na expressão λx.x + y, x é vinculado pelo λ enquanto y é livre. Isso significa que y não tem uma definição dentro da expressão e pode ser substituído por outro valor.

Substituição

Se temos uma expressão E e queremos substituir uma variável x por uma expressão N, representamos isso como E[x := N]. Por exemplo, se E = x + y e N = 2, então E[x := 2] resulta em 2 + y.

Exemplo Prático

Vamos considerar a função λx.λy.x + y e aplicá-la aos argumentos 3 e 4:
(λx.λy.x + y)3 ⇒ λy.3 + y

(λy.3 + y)4 ⇒ 3 + 4 ⇒ 7

Neste exemplo, primeiro aplicamos o 3 ao parâmetro x, resultando em uma nova função λy.3 + y. Depois aplicamos o 4 ao parâmetro y, resultando na expressão final 3 + 4, que se reduz a 7.

Fim.

@ 2fb77d26:c47a6ee1

John Brockmans Edge-Foundation galt als Treffpunkt für die Genies der Gegenwart. Ob Jeff Bezos, Sean Parker, Elon Musk oder Daniel Hillis – sie alle wohnten Veranstaltungen bei, die sie als Tech-Avantgarde darauf vorbereiten sollten, die Zukunft zu gestalten. Die »Dritte Kultur«. Doch was zunächst progressiv klingt, entpuppt sich auf den zweiten Blick rasch als Trainingslager für Technokraten. Finanziert von Jeffrey Epstein.

Original mit Quellen (VÖ: 24.11.2024) - https://www.regenauer.press/die-glorreichen-sieben

Sie regieren die Welt. Das ist keine Übertreibung. Denn sie haben deutlich mehr Einfluss darauf, was wir sehen, lesen, hören, fühlen, kaufen, tun und denken als jeder Politdarsteller – gemeint sind die »glorreichen Sieben«. Also die sieben größten Unternehmen der Tech-Branche: Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet (Google), Tesla, Meta und Nvidia. Mit ihren Plattformen, Produkten und Smartphone-Apps dominieren sie Medienlandschaft, Konsum, persönliche Kommunikation, digital-soziale Räume, nachrichtendienstliche Aktivitäten, künstliche Intelligenz (KI) und in zunehmendem Maße auch den Finanzmarkt.

Nachdem Microsoft und Apple mit der Entwicklung von Personal Computern und einer grafischen Benutzeroberfläche dafür sorgten, dass sich Mitte der 80er auch neugierige Normalos einen PC ins Haus holten – als Ersatz für die plötzlich altbacken wirkende Schreibmaschine – und Tim Berners-Lee, der 1989 am CERN die Grundlagen des World Wide Web entwickelte, am 6. August 1991 sein Konzept eines Hypertext-Dienstes online gestellt hatte, waren es Ende der 90er eine Handvoll Unternehmen, die sich im sonnigen Süden der USA anschicken sollten, das Mediazän zu dominieren. Gegründet von einer Handvoll Tech-Desperados, die abseits gültiger Normen und Gesetzmäßigkeiten operierte, weil es für das, was sie erfanden, noch keine gab, formierte sich ein anomistisches Ökosystem, das heute die Welt dominiert: Die Plattform-Plutokratie. Der digital-zensorische Komplex. Die größte Social-Engineering-Maschinerie aller Zeiten.

So steht die Einordnung als »größte Unternehmen« nicht nur für die astronomischen Börsenwerte dieser Konzerne, sondern vor allem für ihren massiven Einfluss auf die Entwicklung des Individuums und die postmoderne Gesellschaft an sich. Dass diese Einflussnahme abseits von Marktwert und Performance-Indikatoren nicht allein auf organischem Wachstum und Marktdurchdringung beruht, liegt auf der Hand – denn die Tech-Giganten erfuhren signifikante Starthilfe von Seiten des Staates. Genauer gesagt dem Geheimdienstkomplex.

Facebook erhielt Millionen von Deep-State-Technokrat Peter Thiel und Accel, dessen Management enge Verbindungen zum CIA-Finanzvehikel In-Q-Tel pflegte, und galt für das Forbes-Magazine schon 2018 als »das ultimative Überwachungsinstrument für Regierungen«. Sergey Brin und Larry Page erhielten 1995 erhebliche Summen von der DARPA, um Google zu gründen. Aus einem »schwarzen Budget«, mit dem NSA und CIA Werkzeuge zur Massenüberwachung entwickeln wollten. Wenig verwunderlich also, dass auch Google Earth aus einem CIA-Projekt namens Keyhole EarthViewer hervorging, dessen Unterstützung In-Q-Tel gemäß Pressemitteilung vom 25. Juni 2003 als »strategisches Investment« bezeichnete. Julian Assange lag also ganz richtig, als er 2014 warnte, »Google sei nicht das, für was es sich ausgibt«.

Selbst bei Reuters konnte man im Rahmen eines ausführlichen Artikels vom 3. Juli 2013 nachlesen, wie eng die Verbindungen der Big-Tech-Konzerne zu Geheimdiensten ist. Von der Start-up-Finanzierung über die Rekrutierung von Ex-Agenten bis zum Austausch von Computerchips, die Spionage erleichtern, ist alles dabei. »Die Zusammenarbeit zwischen Tech-Industrie und Geheimdiensten ist enger als die meisten Menschen denken«, so Reuters.

So erstaunt es kaum, dass Amazon, Apple, Microsoft, Google, Meta und Elon Musks Firmenkonglomerat mittlerweile auch in den Krisen- und Kriegsgebieten der Welt aktiv sind, um dort in Zusammenarbeit mit Peter Thiels Palantir, Pentagon und Geheimdiensten jene Drecksarbeit zu übernehmen, die Regierungen nicht offiziell übernehmen wollen, oder dürfen. Korporatismus in voller Blüte eben. Die vermeintlich privatwirtschaftlich geführten Tech-Konzerne dominieren nicht mehr nur den zivilen, sondern zusehends auch den militärischen »Markt« – das Geschäft des industrialisierten Tötens.

Dass der militärisch-industrielle mit dem digital-zensorischen Komplex fusionierte, ist eine logische Folge des Umstands, dass beide dem gleichen »Gott« dienen: Mammon. Sprich, dem Zentral- und Geschäftsbankenkartell. In diesem Lichte betrachtet gebietet das Gesetz der Logik, dass die Schaffung dieser unheiligen Allianz nicht allein betriebswirtschaftlich motiviert war. Denn schon im 17., 18., und 19. Jahrhundert nutzten die Finanzkartelle Medien, Staat und Wirtschaft, um den Lauf der Dinge zu ihren Gunsten zu beeinflussen. Siehe mein Text »Monopole, Macht und Mord« Teil 1 und 2.

Damals zeitigte diese überstaatliche Einflussnahme vor allem militärische Konflikte, bei denen Territorialansprüche, Ressourcen und Monopolisierung im Fokus standen. Weil in diesen Bereichen aber bis auf die planetaren Gemeingüter, die sich die Herrschaftskaste nun im Rahmen der Green Economy unter den Nagel zu reißen gedenkt, nicht mehr viel zu holen ist, geht es dieser Tage vor allem darum, die Kontrolle nicht zu verlieren. Dazu müssen die 0,1 bis 1,0 Prozent an der Spitze des wertewestlichen Kastensystems sicherstellen, dass die unterworfene Masse der transgenerational operierenden Kriminalität ihrer Zirkel nicht auf die Schliche kommt.

Eine Bedrohung für die von immer mehr Rissen gezeichneten Fundamente des Elfenbeinturms markiert vor allem das Internet. Denn trotz vielschichtiger Zensurmethoden im Web 2.0, legislativer Hütchenspielertricks und der Segregation Andersdenkender, bahnt sich das kleine, aber persistente Licht der Wahrheit auch in dunkelsten Zeiten seinen Weg durch Paywalls, Geofences, Blockwart-Barrikaden und Plattform-Patrouillen. VPN, Blockchain, Graphene OS, De-Fi (Decentralized Finance) und Verschlüsselung sei Dank. Das Web 3.0 lässt sich nicht zensieren.

Um derart autonomisierenden Entwicklungen entgegenzuwirken, konzentrieren sich die Kolonialisierungsprojekte der Herrschaftskaste nun nicht mehr auf die bewaffnete Unterwerfung ferner Länder – sondern auf das Erringen der Lufthoheit über einem geradezu grenzenlosen Schlachtfeld: dem Gehirn. Allerdings nicht in Form simpler Propaganda. Denn im Zeitalter des fortgeschrittenen Informationskrieges ist Nudging die sozialarchitektonische Königsdisziplin, um Menschen dazu zu bringen, etwas zu unterstützen, das ihnen nichts bringt, oder sogar schadet. Und wie könnte Nudging in der Breite besser gelingen als durch willfährige Hilfestellung »der glorreichen Sieben«. Genau dazu wurden sie geschaffen.

Technologische Revolutionen werden Dekaden bevor sie eintreten antizipiert, durchdacht, angekündigt und visualisiert. Nicht zuletzt von Hollywood, der laut Edward Bernays »größten Propagandamaschine der Welt«. Jene Kräfte, die die Gesellschaft kontrollieren wollen, machen sich das zu nutze. Sie erkennen, welche Paradigmenwechsel technologische Revolutionen einläuten werden und versuchen daher frühzeitig, deren Entwicklung zu steuern. Aus diesem Grund lohnt sich ein Blick auf die Entstehungsgeschichte des Nudging – beziehungsweise der zugrundeliegenden wissenschaftlichen Disziplin: Verhaltensforschung.

Klassische Propaganda beruht auf den Standardwerken von Walter Lippmann (1922) und Edward Bernays (1928). Moderne Verhaltensforschung – oder Sozialarchitektonik – in weiten Teilen auf den Arbeiten von Anthony Giddens. Der britische Soziologe veröffentlichte 1990 das Buch »The Consequences of Modernity«, in dem er die Grundlagen für den »Dritten Weg« skizzierte – ein Konzept der Politikproduktion, das abseits politischer Spektren dazu dient, die Massen zu gesellschaftlichem Konsens zu zwingen. Giddens’ Konzept beruht auf den Infiltrationsansätzen der Fabian Society, die damit das Fundament der Partizipation simulierenden Sozialdemokratien des heutigen Europas schuf. Hintergründe zu Fabian Society und dem Roll-out des Dritten Weges finden sich in meinem Text »Dominanzdialektik« vom 30. September 2023.

Nach 1990 publizierte Giddens weitere Bücher, die sich mit dem Themenkomplex befassten. Darunter Titel wie »Moderne und Identität« (1991), »Die Transformation der Intimität« (1992), »Jenseits von rechts und links« (1994) und »Der Dritte Weg« (1998). In all diesen Werken beschäftigt sich der Sozialwissenschaftler mit der übergeordneten Frage, wie der Mensch sich in die Welt der Postmoderne einzufügen vermag – oder besser – einfügen muss, um mit Globalisierung, Klimawandel und sozialen Verwerfungen zurecht zu kommen. Anthony Giddens war von 1997 bis 2003 Direktor der einflussreichen, von der Fabian Society gegründeten London School of Economics. Er ist der meistzitierte Autor im Bereich soziologischer Studien und Mitglied des 2007 ins Leben gerufenen European Council on Foreign Relations.

Relevant ist Giddens Arbeit zum »Dritten Weg« vor allem deshalb, weil dieser manipulative Ansatz der Politikproduktion durch Tony Blair, Bill Clinton und Gerhard Schröder Einzug in die Parlamente des Wertewestens fand. Heute orientiert sich praktisch jede Regierung an Giddens Theorien – und setzt demzufolge um, was die Fabian Society bereits Ende des 19. Jahrhunderts vorschlug, um Kollektivismus unter dem Deckmantel von Mitbestimmung zu generieren. Das erklärt, warum weder Klaus Schwabs »Stakeholder Kapitalismus« noch die »Vierte Industrielle Revolution« etwas mit Kapitalismus oder Demokratie zu tun haben.

Damit solche Konzepte in der Gesellschaft Fuß fassen, benötigt es vor allem eine auf Linie gebürstete Führungsebene. Diese wird mit Stipendien und Förderprogrammen eingenordet, bevor man sie auf die Bevölkerung loslässt. Viele dieser Kaderschmieden sind mittlerweile hinlänglich bekannt. Da wäre zum Beispiel das zu fragwürdigem Ruhm gelangte Young Global Leaders Programm des Weltwirtschaftsforums (WEF), das neben knapp 3.800 weiteren Absolventen auch Angela Merkel, Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, Nicolas Sarkozy und Bill Gates auf ihre Karrieren in der »regelbasierten internationalen Ordnung« vorbereitete. Ein weiterer WEF-Absolvent ist Lawrence Summers, US-Finanzminister unter Bill Clinton, nationaler Wirtschaftsberater unter Barack Obama und von 1991 bis 1993 Chefökonom der Weltbank. Darüber hinaus war Summers von 2001 bis 2006 Präsident der Harvard University, wo bis 2006 auch Mark Zuckerberg studierte und mit drei Kommilitonen Facebook gründete.

Nach nicht zweifelsfrei verifizierbaren Angaben eines anonymen Facebook-Whistleblowers soll Summers in diesem Zeitraum auf Zuckerberg zugegangen sein, um ihm für die Mitarbeit an einem Social-Media-Überwachungs-Projekt der DARPA lukrative Regierungsaufträge in Aussicht zu stellen – siehe Life Log, das einen Tag vor dem Start von TheFacebook offline ging. In Anbetracht von Summers Position durchaus denkbar. Auch Moral scheint dem Mann ein Fremdwort zu sein, wie Formulierungen aus einem Weltbank-Memo Summers zeigen, die am 18. Mai 1993 bei einer Anhörung im US-Senat thematisiert wurden.

»Ich denke, die wirtschaftliche Logik, die hinter der Entsorgung einer Menge von Giftmüll in einem Land mit den niedrigsten Löhnen steht, ist einwandfrei, und wir sollten uns dem stellen. (…) Ich war schon immer der Meinung, dass die unterbevölkerten Länder Afrikas stark unterverschmutzt sind.«

Nicht zu vergessen Summers enge Verbindungen zum Pädophilen, Sexualstraftäter und Menschenhändler Jeffrey Epstein. Nachdem Summers bereits mehrfach mit Epsteins Privatjet – bekannt unter dem Namen »Lolita Express« – unterwegs war, bestieg er die Maschine nur zehn Tage nach seiner Hochzeit im Jahr 2005 erneut, um Epsteins ominöse Privatinsel »Pedophile Island« zu besuchen. Die Huffington Post schrieb dazu am 24. April 2020: »Joe Biden sollte sich von Larry Summers fernhalten – Summers ruiniert alles, was er anfasst«. Summers WEF-Training scheint sich jedenfalls ausgezahlt zu haben. Denn wer mit Jeffrey Epstein zu tun hatte, ist definitiv im Establishment angekommen.

Tony Blair und Gordon Brown hatten vor dem WEF bereits das 1940 von Nelson Rockefeller initiierte und bis heute vom US-Außenministerium betriebene »International Visitor Leadership Program« (IVLP) durchlaufen. Auch der 1972 gegründete German Marshall Fund betreibt diverse Förderprogramme – siehe EU-US Young Leaders Seminar 2024 oder Policy Designers Network 2024, das sich auf transatlantisch bewegten Nachwuchs aus der Ukraine, Georgien und Armenien fokussiert. Auch die Elite-Universitäten kümmern sich um Nachwuchs. So unter anderem das seit 1902 bestehende Rhodes Stipendium der Oxford-Universität, das neben unzähligen US-Senatoren, Finanzmagnaten, Bestsellerautoren und Wissenschaftlern beispielsweise Edwin Hubble, Bill Clinton oder Naomi Wolf zu Ruhm verhalf. Rhodes-Alumni bleiben über Organisationen wie AARS (Association of American Rhodes Scholars) ein Leben lang verbunden.

Diesbezüglich Fakten zusammenzutragen erscheint bisweilen müßig. Denn mit Details und Verflechtungen zu Entitäten dies- und jenseits des Atlantik, die Führungskräften von morgen die sozioökonomische Philosophie der Herrschaftskaste vermitteln, könnte man Bände füllen. Versucht man die Herrschaftsphilosophie der heutigen Plattform-Plutokraten zu verstehen, sticht eine Organisation dabei allerdings heraus – und zwar die 1988 von John Brockman ins Leben gerufene Edge Foundation. Geburtsort der »Dritten Kultur«.

Die Frankfurter Allgemeine portraitierte Brockman am 7. Januar 2014 mit den einleitenden Worten: »Der wohl wichtigste Buchagent der Welt versammelt in seinem Internetsalon Edge die Cyber-Elite.« Danach beschreibt FAZ-Autor Jordan Mejas, was sich der Normalsterbliche unter Edge vorstellen darf:

»Edge, das ist der Treffpunkt für die Cyber-Elite, die erlauchtesten Geister, die das Vorfeld der neuesten natur- und sozialwissenschaftlichen Entwicklungen prägen, ob nun digital oder gentechnisch, ob psychologisch, kosmologisch oder neurologisch. Jedenfalls melden sich bei Brockman nicht nur Digerati aus dem Computeruniversum des Silicon Valley zu Wort, sondern genauso häufig Koryphäen wie die Evolutionsbiologen Richard Dawkins und Steven Pinker, der Philosoph Daniel Dennett, der Kosmologe Martin Rees, die biologische Anthropologin Helen Fisher, der Ökonom, Psychologe und Nobelpreisträger Daniel Kahneman, der Quantenphysiker David Deutsch, der Computerwissenschaftler Marvin Minsky oder der Sozialtheoretiker Anthony Giddens. Vom Apple-Mitbegründer Steve Wozniak bis zum Genomentschlüssler Craig Venter reicht seine Gästeliste, die ihresgleichen auch in der grenzenlosen Weite des Internets kaum finden wird.«

Was dem FAZ-Autor bei seiner Recherche offensichtlich entging, ist, dass neben Giddens, Wozniak, Dennis Hopper und all den wissenschaftlichen Koryphäen auch Jeff Bezos (Gründer von Amazon, Besitzer Washington Post), Elon Musk, Sean Parker (Gründer von Napster, Co-Gründer Facebook), Larry Page und Sergey Brin (Gründer von Google), Pierre Omidyar (Gründer von eBay), Salar Kamangar (ehem. CEO YouTube), Matt Groening (Erfinder von »Die Simpsons«), Marissa Mayer (ehem. CEO Google und Yahoo), Joi Ito (ehem. Direktor MIT Media Lab), Evan Williams (Co-Gründer Twitter), Paul Romer (Economist) oder Bill Gates regelmäßig auf der Gästeliste von Edge-Events standen. Wer sich durch die Event-Sektion der Edge-Webseite klickt, begegnet unter dem Menüpunkt »Billionaires’ Dinner« der damaligen wie heutigen Crème de la Crème der Plattform-Plutokratie. Garniert mit ein paar Sahnehäubchen aus Wissenschaft, Kunst und Kultur.

Hervorzuheben ist dabei vor allem das Billionaires’ Dinner 2011. Denn die Fotogalerie des Events (hier zusätzlich gesichert im Internet Archive) birgt eine kleine Überraschung: das bislang einzige Foto, das Elon Musk in Gegenwart des zu diesem Zeitpunkt bereits für Sexualstraftaten und Menschenhandel angeklagten Jeffrey Epstein zeigt. Musk sitzt zwar am Nebentisch, mit dem Rücken zur Kamera, ist dank Vergleichsaufnahmen des Events aber zweifelsfrei zu identifizieren. Interessant ist dieser Umstand deshalb, weil Musk bisher stets behauptete, Epstein lediglich einmal in dessen Haus in New York getroffen zu haben. Für 30 Minuten. Und zwar auf Drängen seiner damaligen Partnerin Talulah Riley, die Epstein angeblich für ihre Arbeit an einer Novelle kennenlernen wollte.

Ein Artikel der Newsweek vom 9. November 2022 bestätigt sowohl Musks als auch Epsteins Anwesenheit beim Edge Billionaires’ Dinner 2011. Darüber hinaus geht Newsweek noch einmal auf den Umstand ein, dass Elon Musk bereits auf einem Foto von 2014 mit Ghislaine Maxwell zu sehen war, der linken und rechten Hand Epsteins. Musk gab an, dass besagtes Bild nur entstanden sei, weil Maxwell sich ungefragt ins Bild gedrängt habe. Diesen Eindruck macht das Foto zwar nicht, das Gegenteil zu beweisen, dürfte jedoch schwer fallen. Nun sind Fotos von Gästen einer Veranstaltung natürlich noch kein Beleg dafür, dass sie mit deren Organisation zu tun haben. Finanzielle Zuwendungen dagegen schon.

Entsprechend bedeutsam ist daher ein Artikel der BuzzFeed News vom 27. September 2019. Denn er belegt, dass der bei Weitem größte Einzelspender der Edge-Foundation kein Geringerer war als Jeffrey Epstein. Das veranschaulichen die von ProPublica veröffentlichten Steuerunterlagen von Brockmans »Internetsalon« für 2001 bis 2017. So spendete Epstein 638.000 US-Dollar – während die gesamten Spendeneinnahmen sich auf 857.000 US-Dollar beliefen. Ein eigenes Profil auf der Edge-Webseite hatte Epstein natürlich auch. Kaum verwunderlich also, dass die Edge-Foundation ihre wichtigste jährliche Veranstaltung – das Billionaires’ Dinner – sofort einstellte, nachdem Epsteins Zuwendungen ab 2016 ausblieben. BuzzFeed News führt diesbezüglich aus:

»Epstein war ein regelmäßiger Teilnehmer bei Edge-Veranstaltungen. Er war bei den Billionaires’ Dinner Events 1999 und 2000 auf Fotos und Seiten zu sehen, die kürzlich von der Edge-Website gelöscht wurden, und wurde auch in einem Bericht über das Abendessen 2004 erwähnt. Epstein war auch 2011 bei Edge-Veranstaltungen anwesend, nach seiner Verurteilung wegen Sexualverbrechen im Jahr 2008. Darüber berichtete BuzzFeed News Anfang dieses Monats.«

Überschrift des betreffenden Artikels: »2011 war Jeffrey Epstein ein bekannter Sexualstraftäter. Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk und Sergey Brin speisten trotzdem mit ihm.« Weiter erklärt BuzzFeed:

»2002 waren Brockman, seine Frau und Geschäftspartnerin Katinka Matson sowie die führenden Wissenschaftler Steven Pinker, Richard Dawkins und Daniel Dennett in Epsteins Jet auf dem Weg zu TED in Monterey, Kalifornien, zu sehen – der mehrtägigen Technologie-, Unterhaltungs- und Designkonferenz, bei der das Billionaires’ Dinner diesen Jahres stattfand. Die Bildunterschrift wurde kürzlich geändert, um die Erwähnung Epsteins zu entfernen. Sein Edge-Profil, das ihn als Finanzier und Wissenschaftsphilanthrop beschreibt, wurde ebenfalls entfernt. Ob Epstein selbst am Billionaires’ Dinner 2002 teilnahm, ist unklar. Aber Mitglieder seines Gefolges waren dort. Ein Foto von der Veranstaltung zeigt Brockman mit zwei jungen Frauen, die in der Bildunterschrift namentlich genannt werden. Das Foto wurde kürzlich ebenfalls von der Edge-Webseite entfernt. Eine dieser Frauen ist Sarah Kellen, die als Assistentin von Epsteins ehemaliger Freundin Ghislaine Maxwell angestellt und im Rahmen eines Vergleichs von 2008 vor Strafverfolgung geschützt war. Der Vergleich brachte Epstein nach seiner früheren Verhaftung eine 13-monatige Gefängnisstrafe in Florida ein. In mehreren Klagen haben Epsteins Opfer behauptet, Kellen gehöre zu den Personen, die halfen, den sexuellen Missbrauch für Epstein zu organisieren.«

Brockmans Interaktionen mit Epstein gingen aber offenbar weit über die Edge-Foundation hinaus. Im August 2019 publizierte der belarussische Publizist Evgeny Morozov auf Google Drive E-Mail-Korrespondenz aus dem Jahr 2013, die belegt, dass Brockman Pläne hatte, ein Meeting zwischen ihm und Epstein zu arrangieren. Doch Morozov lehnte ab. In den Mails an Morozov erwähnt Brockman Epsteins »hübsche junge Assistentin aus Weißrussland« und beschreibt seinen Gönner fälschlicherweise als »Milliardär, dem Victorias Secret und eine Modelagentur gehören«. Tatsächlich lag Epsteins Vermögen gemäß seines Testaments aber nur bei einigen hundert Millionen – und die fragwürdige Marke Victorias Secret ist Teil von L Brands, der Holding von Leslie Wexner, einem Tiefenstaat-Veteran mit Verbindungen zu Harvard und WEF-Gründung, dessen Finanzen Jeffrey Epstein bis 2007 verwaltete.

Auch sonst pflegte Brockmans Organisation verwunderliche Geschäftspraktiken. Zwischen 2001 und 2017 vergab die Edge-Foundation beispielsweise nur ein einziges Mal einen Förderpreis. Der entsprechende Betrag in Höhe von 100.000 US-Dollar ging an David Deutsch, einen Pionier für Quanteninformationstheorie, der an der Universität Oxford forschte. Financier des Preises – man ahnt es – war Jeffrey Epstein. Nicht umsonst stellte The Verve am 19. September 2019 fest, dass »Jeffrey Epstein die Wissenschaft infiltrierte, weil die Wissenschaft bereit war, ihn willkommen zu heißen«.

So knüpfte der Finanzmagnat Kontakte zu prominenten Biologen wie George Church, weil er nach Wegen suchte, die menschliche Spezies mit seiner DNA zu kreuzen. Langfristiges Ziel: Das Schaffen einer »Super-Rasse«. Mehrere preisgekrönte Wissenschaftler bestätigten gegenüber der New York Times, dass Epstein auch sie in seine misogynen Pläne eingeweiht hatte. Auf seiner abgelegenen, unterkellerten »Zorro-Ranch« in New Mexico, wo jedes Zimmer mit Kameras überwacht wurde, hatte er eigens ein Behandlungszimmer einrichten lassen, um künstliche Befruchtungen mit jungen Frauen durchführen zu können.

Bei The New Yorker konnte man am 6. September 2019 nachlesen, dass Epstein sich auch im Bereich digitale Währungen engagierte. Unter anderem finanzierte er das damals von Joi Ito geleitete MIT Media Lab – und damit auch die von Ito geführte Digital Currency Initiative (DCI). Diese wiederum unterstützte die Bitcoin-Core-Entwickler bei der Fork 2017, die Bitcoin von einer digitalen Währung zu, wie Epstein es nannte, »digitalem Gold« machen sollte – und damit weitaus ungefährlicher für das herrschende Finanzmarktkartell. Bill Gates, Harvard-Autoren wie Steven Pinker oder MIT-Programmierer wie Richard Stallmann verteidigten Epstein sogar noch nach dessen endgültiger Festnahme. Stallmann forderte gar, Kinderpornografie zu entkriminalisieren. Joi Ito dagegen kündigte kleinlaut beim MIT. Heute ist er Präsident des Chiba Institute for Technology in Japan, wo das Center for Radical Transformation (CRT) angesiedelt ist. Auch die Digital Currency Initiative gibt es bis heute. Genau wie das »digitale Gold«, mit dem aber fast niemand mehr bezahlt. HODL und so.

Mit dem Thema Digitalwährungen nähern wir uns denn auch Jeffrey Epsteins Einfluss auf den Geschäftsbereich der »glorreichen Sieben«. Denn der im Gefängnis ermordete Menschenhändler finanzierte nicht nur einen Großteil von Brockmans Edge-Aktivitäten, sondern sorgte durch die Infiltration des Wissenschaftsbetriebes auch dafür, dass Edge den Tech-Nachwuchs in genau der Domäne schulte, die für das Erringen von Weltherrschaft im Mediazän essenziell ist: Social Engineering.

Dazu veranstaltete die Edge-Foundation sogenannte Master Class Events. Im Jahr 2008 zum Beispiel zum Thema »Libertärer Paternalismus – warum es nicht möglich ist, nicht zu nudgen«. Dozent: Richard Thaler, »Vater der modernen Verhaltensökonomie«, über den die ZEIT am 18. Mai 2010 unter der Überschrift »Die Stunde der Verführer« schrieb:

»Richard Thaler hat den Draht nach oben. Der 64-Jährige ist einer der weltweit führenden Verhaltensökonomen – neuerdings berät er auch die Wirtschaftsexperten des mächtigsten Mannes der Welt, US-Präsident Barack Obama. Auch die britischen Konservativen, die in London die neue Regierung führen, haben dem Professor der Universität von Chicago einen Beraterposten versprochen. Thaler steht an der Spitze einer wirtschaftspolitischen Revolution. (…) Verhaltensorientierte Wirtschaftsforscher postulieren (…) eine grundlegend andere Wirtschaftspolitik. Zwar lehnen sie – ähnlich wie klassische liberale Ökonomen – eine direkte Bevormundung des Einzelnen durch den Staat ab. Sie sprechen sich aber für sanften Druck aus, mit dem der Staat die Menschen in die richtige Richtung leitet, ihnen gleichzeitig aber die Option lässt, sich anders zu entscheiden, wenn sie es wollen. »Nudge« (Anstupsen) hat Thaler dieses Politikkonzept zusammen mit Co-Autor Cass Sunstein im gleichnamigen Buch getauft. Private Institutionen, Behörden und Regierungen versuchen dabei, die Entscheidungen der Menschen so zu lenken, dass sie hinterher besser dastehen. Ein anderer Begriff, der den neuen Politikansatz charakterisiert, ist sanfter Paternalismus.«

Das Buch, das ZEIT-Autor Olaf Storbek referenziert, hat Thaler 2010 gemeinsam mit Cass Sunstein verfasst, einem Edge-Kollegen und Harvard-Professor für Rechtswissenschaft und Verhaltensökonomie. Deutscher Titel des Werks: »Nudge – wie man kluge Entscheidungen anstößt«. Alternativ untertitelt mit: »Wie man Menschen dazu bringt, das Richtige zu tun«. In welche Kerbe das Machwerk schlägt, zeigt der Umstand, dass Cass Sunstein schon im Januar 2008 ein Papier namens »Verschwörungstheorien« publizierte, die er darin als ernsthaftes Risiko für Recht und Gesetz einstufte. Sunstein verteidigt das offizielle 9/11-Narrativ, will eine bargeldlose Gesellschaft und hielt Corona-Lockdowns für eine »smarte« Sache. Ein Beitrag von Sunstein für »Educators at Home« vom 14. September 2010 offenbart, was für ein Menschenbild die Rechtswissenschaften in Harvard mittlerweile kultivieren:

»Wenn wir erst einmal wissen, dass Menschen menschlich sind und etwas von Homer Simpson in sich tragen, dann kann man viel tun, um sie zu manipulieren.« (Cass Sunstein)

Trotz, oder gerade wegen dieser respektlosen Haltung gegenüber den Freiheitsrechten des Individuums, öffnete ihr gemeinsames Werk Thaler und Sunstein die Türen zum Elfenbeinturm. Ab 2008 berieten die beiden Verhaltensökonomen die Regierung von Barack Obama beim Aufbau sogenannter »Nudge-Units«. Kurze Zeit später unterstützte Richard Thaler auch die britische Regierung und half bei der Formierung des »Behavioural Insights Team« (BIT), dem sowohl Sunstein als auch Thaler bis heute angehören. Das BIT spielte via SAGE (Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies), dem britischen Äquivalent zum Robert-Koch-Institut (RKI), eine tragende Rolle bei der Implementierung der Covid-19-Maßnahmen in Großbritannien. Händewaschanleitungen für Erwachsene, tote Großeltern für die Kleinen. Sie wissen schon. Strategieberater von Tony Blair hatten bereits im Februar 2004 eine Studie zum Thema »Persönliche Verantwortung und Verhaltensänderung: Stand des Wissens und Auswirkungen auf die öffentliche Politik« erstellen lassen – nur Thalers griffige Bezeichnung für die neue Doktrin fehlte noch. Ein Auszug aus dem Papier von 2004 erklärt:

»Mit Blick auf die Zukunft besteht ein offensichtlicher Bedarf, unser theoretisches und empirisches Verständnis der Ursachen für Verhalten und Verhaltensänderung zu stärken. Ebenso wichtig wird die umfassendere Erprobung politischer Instrumente sein, um ein ausgefeilteres Instrumentarium für politische Entscheidungsträger zu entwickeln. Die Politik sollte nicht einfach persönliche Verantwortung oder Schuldzuweisungen proklamieren, sondern muss sich an der Art und Weise orientieren, wie Menschen tatsächlich denken und fühlen, sowie an den sozialen und psychologischen Kräften, die das Verhalten beeinflussen.«

Das war vor 20 Jahren. Drei Jahre später kam das Smartphone auf den Markt und mauserte sich binnen kurzer Zeit zum perfekten Werkzeug einer auf Nuding ausgelegten Observationsökonomie. Heute hat fast jeder ein grell illuminiertes Brett vor dem Kopf, das seinen Tagesablauf, Bio-, Kommunikations- und Schlafrhythmus beeinflusst. Oder steuert. Je nach Schwere der Handysucht. Das eigentliche Problem dabei ist jedoch nicht die Hardware, das Endgerät, sondern die Software der »glorreichen Sieben«. Denn sie ist so designt, dass sie abhängig, krank und depressiv macht – und Menschen dazu bewegt, »das Richtige zu tun«. Auch wenn es absolut falsch ist.

»Wie schaffen wir es, möglichst viel von deiner Zeit und Aufmerksamkeit zu konsumieren. Dazu müssen wir dir hin und wieder eine kleine Dopamin-Dosis verabreichen. (...) Das bringt dich dazu, mehr beizutragen, was dir wiederum mehr Kommentare und Likes bringt. Es ist ein sozial validierender Feedback-Loop. (...) Wir nutzen eine Schwäche der menschlichen Psychologie. Die Erfinder, die Erschaffer, ich, Mark, die Leute von Instagram, all diese Menschen, haben das verstanden - voll und ganz - und wir haben es trotzdem getan.« (Sean Parker, am 8. November 2017)

Nahtlos kontrolliert wird der auf Konformismus dressierte Bürger dabei von einem Überwachungskomplex unvorstellbaren Ausmaßes. Die Webseite von Surveillance Watch führt Buch über die wichtigsten dafür zuständigen Unternehmen.

Nachdem Facebook 2004 online ging und das iPhone 2007 auf den Markt kam, erscheint das Jahr 2008 also tatsächlich als der perfekte Zeitpunkt für Edge, um die Silicon-Valley-Elite in puncto Nudging und Sozialarchitektonik zu schulen. Das soziale Netzwerk war seinen Kinderschuhen entwachsen – am 26. August 2008 knackte Facebook die 100 Millionen-Nutzer-Marke – und mit dem Taschenspion aus dem Hause Apple kündigte sich bereits das mächtigste Manipulations-Malträtat der Zivilisationsgeschichte an. Für die herrschenden Zirkel war absehbar, dass die Frontlinien des transgenerationalen Informationskrieges schon bald nicht mehr über die Auslagen der Zeitungskioske, durch Rundfunkredaktionen oder über die Mattscheibe, sondern direkt durch die Köpfe der Bevölkerung verlaufen werden.

Dieses Ziel wurde fraglos erreicht. Entsprechend hellhörig sollte machen, welche Themen die Edge Master Class 2008 behandelte. Die zweite Session widmete sich zum Beispiel dem Thema »Verbesserung der Auswahlmöglichkeiten durch maschinenlesbare Offenlegung«. Richard Thaler umriss deren Inhalt mit folgendem Eröffnungsstatement.

»Das ist die Idee. Ich nenne es elektronische Offenlegung. Lassen sie mich erklären, wie es bei Kreditkarten funktionieren würde. Die Idee ist, dass das Kreditkartenunternehmen ihnen für jede Kreditkarte, die sie besitzen, einmal im Jahr zwei elektronische Dateien senden muss. Die erste Datei wäre im Wesentlichen eine Tabelle mit allen Formeln für alle Möglichkeiten, wie ihnen Dinge in Rechnung gestellt werden können. (…) Die zweite Datei ist die Liste der Dinge, für die ihnen im letzten Jahr Gebühren in Rechnung gestellt wurden. Es könnte heißen, ihnen wurden im letzten Jahr 1.800 Dollar für diese Kreditkarte berechnet, davon 1.200 Dollar für Zinszahlungen, für Verzugsgebühren, oder Währungstransfers und so weiter. Wir glauben nicht, dass sich irgendjemand diese Dateien jemals ansehen würde. Wir glauben, dass sofort Websites auftauchen würden, die diese Informationen verarbeiten würden. Diese Websites würden den folgenden Zwecken dienen. Erstens: Übersetzung. Sie würden dem Benutzer in einfachem Englisch erklären, was mit ihm passiert. Zweitens: Verhaltensänderung. Sie würden ihm erklären, dass er 1.800 Dollar bezahlt hat, weil er unfähig war, seine Rechnungen pünktlich zu bezahlen. Wenn er also eine automatische Zahlung einrichten würde, würde er viel Geld sparen. Drittens: Preisvergleich. Beachten sie bitte, dass die entsprechenden Unternehmen mit diesen Informationen die Nutzungsmuster kennen; und sie kennen alle Formeln für alle Kreditkartenunternehmen. Sie können also drei Kreditkartenunternehmen suchen, und finden, die für die Art und Weise, wie der Nutzer seine Kreditkarten verwendet, besser wären. Das ist das Konzept. (…)«

Jeff Bezos warf kurz darauf ein: »Außerdem werden sie bezahlt. Sie sind wie der Fuchs, der den Hühnerstall bewacht.«

Dem wachsamen Leser dürfte klar sein, dass wir heute genau von solchen System umgeben, überwacht, analysiert und bedrängt werden. Zu unserem Vorteil – wie Thaler meint.

Bemerkenswert in Bezug auf das, was uns noch bevorstehen könnte, ist die dritte Session der Master Class 2008. Thema: »Die Psychologie der Knappheit«. Teilnehmer – unter anderem: Jeff Bezos, Sean Parker, Elon Musk, Nathan Myhrvold, der 14 Jahre als Stratege für Bill Gates arbeitete, Daniel Hillis, ehemals Vizepräsident für Forschung und Entwicklung bei Disney und Vater des Parallel Computing, das die Grundlage für moderne Supercomputer darstellt, et cetera. Neben Richard Thaler sprach bei der dritten Session auch Sendhil Mullainathan, Volkswirt an der Harvard-Universität. Sein Spezialgebiet: Verhaltensökonomie und Armutsökonomik. Einleitend erklärte Mullainathan:

»Lassen wir die Armutsbekämpfung für einen Moment beiseite und fragen uns: Gibt es etwas, das der Armut innewohnt und das an und für sich eine Untersuchung wert ist? Einer der Gründe dafür ist, dass wir – abgesehen von Wundermitteln – verstehen müssen, ob es unter Bedingungen der Knappheit gemeinsame Prinzipien gibt, die uns helfen können, Verhalten zu verstehen und Interventionen zu gestalten. Wenn wir das Gefühl haben, dass Bedingungen der Knappheit bestimmte psychologische Effekte hervorrufen, dann wird das, ganz zu schweigen vom rein wissenschaftlichen Interesse, eine große Mehrheit der Interventionen beeinflussen. Das ist eine wichtige und alte Frage.«

Korrekt. Denn Schuldknechtschaft war, wie die künstliche Verknappung von Nahrungsmitteln, seit jeher ein beliebtes Mittel der herrschenden Kaste, um den Pöbel im Zaum, beziehungsweise mit existenziellen Problemen auf Trab zu halten. So hat er nämlich weder Zeit noch Energie, um mit Mistgabeln und Fackeln gen Elfenbeinturm aufzubrechen. In diesem Zusammenhang sei nochmals auf »Food Chain Reaction – A Global Food Security Game« hingewiesen, ein Planspiel, das im November 2015 vom tiefenstaatlichen Center for American Progress, dem World Wildlife Fund, Center for Naval Analyses (CNA), Cargill und Mars durchgeführt wurde und Nahrungsmittelknappheit im Zeitraum von 2020 bis 2030 simulierte.

Der Einblick in die Ausbildungsprozesse der Edge-Foundation und die Liste ihrer Teilnehmer gibt somit allen Anlass zu befürchten, dass Brockmans »Internetsalon« die zentralen Akteure der kontinuierlich engmaschiger greifenden Technokratie nicht nur in puncto Social Engineering ausbilden, sondern sie darüber hinaus auf eine Zeit von Mangelwirtschaft und massiver Armut vorbereiten wollte. Auf die »Dritte Kultur«. Die wohlstandsvernichtende Tokenisierung der Welt.

Dabei sollte nicht vergessen werden, dass Brockman vermutlich nur ein geschäftstüchtiger Narzisst mit sozialen Kompetenzen war, der seine Chance auf Geld und Rampenlicht geschickt zu nutzen wusste – und dass Jeffrey Epstein als maßgeblicher Finanzier der Edge-Foundation nicht einfach im Alleingang handelte. Denn Epstein war Doppelagent, unterwegs im Auftrag von CIA und Mossad. Mindestens. Dass er mittlerweile nicht mehr unter den Lebenden weilt, dürfte weder sein Geheimdienstnetzwerk noch seinen elitären Kundenstamm davon abgehalten haben, sein schmutziges Geschäft weiterzubetreiben.

Man kann also durchaus mit einem metaphorisch zu lesenden Zitat aus jenem kultigen 60er-Film schließen, dessen Titel nun als Bezeichnung für ein Septett börsennotierter Technokratie-Operatoren missbraucht wird:

»Das Blutvergießen wird so lange weitergehen, bis die Ursache dafür ausgehoben ist.«

@ df67f9a7:2d4fc200

Anyone who thinks that “onboarding new users” is simply a technical challenge of educating people about “how Nostr works”, is grossly mistaken about social networks in general and blind to what makes Nostr so special.

Social Networks are for Friends

Relationship building is why people use social networks. Connecting with friends and loved ones (and colleagues and customers also) is the obvious reason to join, and should be the primary objective in any onboarding endeavor. Everything else “about the technology” only needs to be introduced “as needed” in order for each new user to achieve this goal.

The Nostr Network Requires Trusted Friendships

To thrive at scale, Nostr needs to have established and interconnected “webs of trusted friends” for “verifying” authentic profiles and quality content. This PgP strategy for decentralized trust implemented on Nostr, is the best way to keep bots and bad actors at bay while preserving freedom and sovereignty for every user. Even though Nostr still doesn’t have a standard for determining who “is trusted” for any one user across all clients, we can already build tools to onboard new friends of the highest quality trust. Leveraging existing relationships, “webs of trust” can be strengthened even at this early stage simply by advocates “inviting friends to Nostr”.

Nostr is New and Already Full of Trusted Friends

But it won’t be for long. Bots and bad actors are relatively “easy” to keep at bay today because the Nostr userbase is still small. People who come to Nostr and STAY have mostly been a self selecting group of “freedom tech fans”. We like it this way, and are generally happy to be here. The comraderie is refreshing. But the more people that come to Nostr, the more Nostr will attract different kinds of people.

This is already happening. Nostr is growing at the edges, reaching out beyond the “freedom tech fans” and attracting a number of “less committed” (and some nefarious) individuals here and there. Who sticks around? The “friends of freedom tech fans” stick around longer because they have friends here. WAY BEFORE even considering how “the network effect” will take over, Nostr needs to solve for retention by bringing more “trusted friends” into the network. Social onboarding tools will allow us to share Nostr to “friends of freedom tech fans” and beyond, establishing interconnected “webs of trust” that are increasingly impermeable to bots and bad actors.

Nostr is Freedom Tech that People Want to Share

Creators and influencers of every kind share Nostr (and Nostr content) every day. This phenomenon is a gold mine for onboarding, and can be supported with tools and incentives. Driven by the fact that Nostr is an open protocol, owned by nobody and available for anybody to build upon and profit from, the passion for sharing Nostr will never wane. But our userbase may fall off, if people become disenchanted by undesirable content or lack of good follows. This is why onboarding efforts, to attract more “friends” to the network, are so important. Leveraging the “share worthy” phenomenon of Nostr itself to grow Nostr’s networks of “trusted friends” seems like a no brainer. But for this strategy to work, it needs to be win win win for all parties.

Everybody Wins with More Trusted Users on Nostr

Even as standards for qualifying trust are still being refined, “social onboarding” increases the ratio of “more” trusted over “less” trusted users across the network.

Developers Win

With more trusted users on the network, Nostr developers win by being able to attract an increasingly diverse range of business partners to sponsor their projects.

Sponsors Win

An increase in trusted usership equates to more “real people” perusing “desired content” and more chances for brands to engage “organically” with target audiences. Marketing opportunities increase with trust.

Advocates Win

Simply by sharing Nostr with their friends, Advocates support the sustained growth of trust across the network. Valuable zap reward programs to incentivize high quality onboarding efforts are easily justified and funded by social onboarding clients and their sponsors.

Users Win

More trusted users across the network means more trustworthy content in every feed and more easily discoverable friends and new follows regardless of the client or algorithm used.

Nostr Wins

More trusted users on the network means more “high quality” trust connections between each user. Strong webs of trust is what keeps out bots and bad actors, and is essential for stability as Nostr scales.

Social Onboarding Clients Bring Trust to Nostr

Having more tools for “sharing Nostr with friends” is how Nostr wins. Any client can have capacity for “Social Onboarding”. This may be a dedicated onboarding client or a feature set within a social client. A client that offers “Social Onboarding” will support Nostr advocates and the users that they invite. These should have the following feature set :

• Nostr advocates may create and share any number of customizable “Nostr invites” for different audiences or occasions. Each may have different reccomendations, or access codes, or expiry options. (A NIP is in the works)
• Nostr invite QR codes (and shareable URLs) should resolve to a WEB based interface for prospective (and existing) users who MAY NOT have a client or browser extension already installed.
• Each invite should (within the onboarding client) provide access to low friction profile creation AND advocate reccomended lists of new friends, interest groups, preferred clients, best relays, and other stuff.
• Private key generation and management for new users should be handled entirely within the onboarding client (using NIP standards without a browser extension or external bunker app) to reduce friction at this crucial moment.
• A human readable Nostr address (NIP05 or some future NIP) should be generated automatically for all new users.
• New account creation should result immediately in a direct message or group thread of private “gift wrap” encrypted messages. This thread acts as the new user’s “first contact” with the advocate (possibly others as well) and an anchor for exploring the rest of Nostr.
• Invite “receipt” data (who invited who) should be “gift wrap” encrypted, accessible only to the advocate and new user. Clients wishing to use this data for analytics MAY request access from BOTH parties.
• Top Advocates may be calculated by the client (using data from invite receipts OR from public Nostr usage metrics), and awards may be offered.
• Advocates may also be supported by the client through access to private “advocate support” groups and communities over the Nostr network.

Support Social Onboarding for Nostr

Meet Me On Nostr is an app for sharing Nostr with friends via advocate invites. It is a reference client to demonstrate the power of Social Onboarding for Nostr. The first launch of "feature complete" client is expected in fall 2024.

This is a “bootstrap” funded project in active development. We are not grant funded or VC funded. Instead, we are looking to pay our developers by sponsorships from “Nostr adjacent” businesses who want to increase brand recognition over this new social network.

Is Your Business Nostr Adjacent?

“I’d like to advertise on Nostr but it’s “not quite ready” says our marketing team.”

“It has potential, and we have alignment, but the technology is still a bit rough.”

“Nostr is a perfect fit for our “target audience”, but there simply aren’t enough people using it.”

If your business is aligned with freedom technology, and the people who build and use Nostr, then NOW is the perfect time to sponsor Social Onboarding. Help grow Nostr’s base of trusted users and engage directly with Nostr’s most active advocates and influencers as it scales.

Release Nostr’s Superpower

When Nostr advocates are equipped and incentivized to share Nostr with their friends, nothing can stop this network from growing and growing and growing ever more secure and interconnected networks of trusted users.

Onboarding and retaining trusted users as Nostr scales will require so much more than just pointing people to “how Nostr works” content. Nostr’s true power lies dormant in the existing relationships that Nostr users already have outside of Nostr. Leveraging this power is what Social Onboarding is all about. Social Onboarding is Nostr’s superpower.

Contribute to the Geyser Fund

@ 7175188c:6382a72c

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/606482

@ 460c25e6:ef85065c

If you don't know where your posts are, you might as well just stay in the centralized Twitter. You either take control of your relay lists, or they will control you. Amethyst offers several lists of relays for our users. We are going to go one by one to help clarify what they are and which options are best for each one.

Public Home/Outbox Relays

Home relays store all YOUR content: all your posts, likes, replies, lists, etc. It's your home. Amethyst will send your posts here first. Your followers will use these relays to get new posts from you. So, if you don't have anything there, they will not receive your updates.

Home relays must allow queries from anyone, ideally without the need to authenticate. They can limit writes to paid users without affecting anyone's experience.

This list should have a maximum of 3 relays. More than that will only make your followers waste their mobile data getting your posts. Keep it simple. Out of the 3 relays, I recommend: - 1 large public, international relay: nos.lol, nostr.mom, relay.damus.io, etc. - 1 personal relay to store a copy of all your content in a place no one can delete. Go to relay.tools and never be censored again. - 1 really fast relay located in your country: paid options like http://nostr.wine are great

Do not include relays that block users from seeing posts in this list. If you do, no one will see your posts.

Public Inbox Relays

This relay type receives all replies, comments, likes, and zaps to your posts. If you are not getting notifications or you don't see replies from your friends, it is likely because you don't have the right setup here. If you are getting too much spam in your replies, it's probably because your inbox relays are not protecting you enough. Paid relays can filter inbox spam out.

Inbox relays must allow anyone to write into them. It's the opposite of the outbox relay. They can limit who can download the posts to their paid subscribers without affecting anyone's experience.

This list should have a maximum of 3 relays as well. Again, keep it small. More than that will just make you spend more of your data plan downloading the same notifications from all these different servers. Out of the 3 relays, I recommend: - 1 large public, international relay: nos.lol, nostr.mom, relay.damus.io, etc. - 1 personal relay to store a copy of your notifications, invites, cashu tokens and zaps. - 1 really fast relay located in your country: go to nostr.watch and find relays in your country

Terrible options include: - nostr.wine should not be here. - filter.nostr.wine should not be here. - inbox.nostr.wine should not be here.

DM Inbox Relays

These are the relays used to receive DMs and private content. Others will use these relays to send DMs to you. If you don't have it setup, you will miss DMs. DM Inbox relays should accept any message from anyone, but only allow you to download them.

Generally speaking, you only need 3 for reliability. One of them should be a personal relay to make sure you have a copy of all your messages. The others can be open if you want push notifications or closed if you want full privacy.

Good options are: - inbox.nostr.wine and auth.nostr1.com: anyone can send messages and only you can download. Not even our push notification server has access to them to notify you. - a personal relay to make sure no one can censor you. Advanced settings on personal relays can also store your DMs privately. Talk to your relay operator for more details. - a hidden, but public relay if you want DM notifications from our servers.

Make sure to add at least one public relay if you want to see DM notifications.

Private Home Relays

Private Relays are for things no one should see, like your drafts, lists, app settings, bookmarks etc. Ideally, these relays are either local or require authentication before posting AND downloading each user\'s content. There are no dedicated relays for this category yet, so I would use a local relay like Citrine on Android and a personal relay on relay.tools.

Keep in mind that if you choose a local relay only, a client on the desktop might not be able to see the drafts from clients on mobile and vice versa.

Search relays:

This is the list of relays to use on Amethyst's search and user tagging with @. Tagging and searching will not work if there is nothing here.. This option requires NIP-50 compliance from each relay. Hit the Default button to use all available options on existence today: - nostr.wine - relay.nostr.band - relay.noswhere.com

Local Relays:

This is your local storage. Everything will load faster if it comes from this relay. You should install Citrine on Android and write ws://localhost:4869 in this option.

General Relays:

This section contains the default relays used to download content from your follows. Notice how you can activate and deactivate the Home, Messages (old-style DMs), Chat (public chats), and Global options in each.

Keep 5-6 large relays on this list and activate them for as many categories (Home, Messages (old-style DMs), Chat, and Global) as possible.

Amethyst will provide additional recommendations to this list from your follows with information on which of your follows might need the additional relay in your list. Add them if you feel like you are missing their posts or if it is just taking too long to load them.

My setup

Here's what I use: 1. Go to relay.tools and create a relay for yourself. 2. Go to nostr.wine and pay for their subscription. 3. Go to inbox.nostr.wine and pay for their subscription. 4. Go to nostr.watch and find a good relay in your country. 5. Download Citrine to your phone.

Then, on your relay lists, put:

Public Home/Outbox Relays: - nostr.wine - nos.lol or an in-country relay. - .nostr1.com

Public Inbox Relays - nos.lol or an in-country relay - .nostr1.com

DM Inbox Relays - inbox.nostr.wine - .nostr1.com

Private Home Relays - ws://localhost:4869 (Citrine) - .nostr1.com (if you want)

Search Relays - nostr.wine - relay.nostr.band - relay.noswhere.com

Local Relays - ws://localhost:4869 (Citrine)

General Relays - nos.lol - relay.damus.io - relay.primal.net - nostr.mom

And a few of the recommended relays from Amethyst.

Final Considerations

Remember, relays can see what your Nostr client is requesting and downloading at all times. They can track what you see and see what you like. They can sell that information to the highest bidder, they can delete your content or content that a sponsor asked them to delete (like a negative review for instance) and they can censor you in any way they see fit. Before using any random free relay out there, make sure you trust its operator and you know its terms of service and privacy policies.

@ 97c70a44:ad98e322

Nostr is a mess. It always has been and will always be. That's part of the appeal! But it's important that users be able to navigate the rolling seas of this highly partition-tolerant network of kaleidoscopically-interwoven people, bots, topics, relays, clients, events, recommendations, lists, feeds, micro-apps, macro-apps, Chinese spam, and "GM"s.

In order to do this, users must be able to articulate "what" they are looking for, and clients must be able to articulate "how" to find that thing. This "how" is divided into two parts: building a request that will match the desired content (very easy), and selecting a relay that is able to serve that content to the user requesting it (very very hard).

Why guessing isn't good enough

As a concrete example, let's say the user wants to find everyone in their "network" who is using a particular topic. The process would look something like this:

1. The user clicks the "network" tab and types in the topic they want to browse. This is the "what".
2. The client then translates the term "network" to a list of public keys using whatever definition they prefer (Follows? WoT? Grapevine?), and builds a filter that might look something like this: [{"authors": pubkeys, "#t": ["mytopic"]}]. Any relay will happily accept, understand, and respond to that filter.
3. The client then has to decide which relays it should send that filter to. This is the ??? stage of the outbox model, which immediately precedes:
4. Profit

It may not be immediately obvious why selecting the correct relays might be difficult. Most people post to relay.damus.io, and most people read from relay.damus.io, so in most cases you should be good, right?

This approach to relay selection has historically worked "well enough", but it depends on a flawed definition of success. If you only want to find 90% of the content that matches your query, using the top 10 relays will suffice. But nostr is intended to be censorship-resistant. What if those 10 hubs have banned a particular public key? Nostr clients should (at least in theory) be 100% successful in retrieving requested content. Even if someone only posts to their self-hosted relay, you should be able to find their notes if their account is set up properly.

A naive solution to fixing the FOMO

A 90% hit rate results in a feeling of flakiness, even if users aren't completely aware of what isn't working. Feeds will be incomplete, quoted notes will be missing, replies will be orphaned, user profiles won't load. The natural response to the FOMO this creates is for users to "try harder" by adding more relays.

On the read side, this means clients open more connections, resulting in much higher data transfer requirements, with massively diminishing returns, since there's no reason to expect that a randomly chosen relay will have a substantially different data set.

One the publish side, this means that clients end up publishing more copies of their data to more relays. This approach has been automated in the past by services like Blastr, which don't store a copy of events published to the relay, but instead forward events to the top 300 relays in the network. This results in a two-orders-of-magnitude increase in storage required, and only makes the read side of the problem worse, since it reduces the uniqueness of the data set each relay stores. This in turn means that more duplicates are retrieved when querying relays.

Both halves of this approach are equivalent to guessing. On the read side, users are guessing which relays will have any arbitrary content they might ask for in the future. On the write side, users are guessing which relays other people might use to find their notes. It is a brute-force method for finding content.

Randomness results in centralization

In theory, random relay selection would result in a perfect distribution of content across all relays in the network. But in practice, this method of selection isn't random at all, but is strongly influenced by user bias in what constitutes a "good" relay. While some users may check nostr.watch for ping times, geographical proximity, or uptime, most will choose relays based on familiar names or other people's recommendations.

In either case, these biases are entirely orthogonal to achieving a higher content retrieval hit rate, except when bias in relay selection results in clustering — i.e., centralization. In other words, the kind of randomness exhibited by users when selecting relays actually results in pretty much everyone picking the same few relays. We see this same effect when people try to come up with passwords or seed phrases — human-provided randomness is anything but random.

Clustering improves the hit rate when requesting events (slightly), but it results in nearly as much centralization as if only a single relay was used — and a lot more duplicate events.

Something (anything) other than randomness

In early 2023, Mike Dilger introduced NIP 65 (now known as the "Outbox Model") with a problem statement in the spirit of the original description of nostr: "Nostr should scale better. People should be able to find what they want."

Historical note: NIP 65 was formerly known as the "Gossip Model", derived from the name of Mike's desktop nostr client, called "Gossip". This unfortunately created a lot of confusion, since gossip protocols work very differently from how nostr tends to work, hence the re-brand.

Before NIP 65, an informal standard existed in which kind 3 user contact lists also included a list of relays that clients could use as something similar to Mastodon's "home servers". This list included the option to only read or write from a given relay. Unfortunately, it wasn't really clear what the semantics of this relay list were, so different clients handled them differently (and many clients ignored them). Usually this amounted to user-provided static relay configurations, which resulted in the naive relay selection approach described above.

NIP 65 used a very similar format (a list of relay urls with optional "read" or "write" directives), but with a very important semantic difference: relays listed in a user's kind 10002 were intended to "advertise to others, not for configuring one's client." In other words, these relay selections were intended as a signal to other users that they should use certain relays when attempting to communicate with the author of the relay list.

I highly recommend reading the entire NIP, which is very short and easy to read. But the mechanics of the spec are very simple:

When seeking events from a user, Clients SHOULD use the WRITE relays of the user's kind:10002.

When seeking events about a user, where the user was tagged, Clients SHOULD use the READ relays of the user's kind:10002.

When broadcasting an event, Clients SHOULD:

• Broadcast the event to the WRITE relays of the author
• Broadcast the event to all READ relays of each tagged user

For the first time, we had a way to differentiate relays in terms of what content could be found where.

When looking for a note by a particular user, a client could now look up the author's write relays according to their kind 10002 event, and send its query there. The result is a much higher hit rate with much lower data transfer requirements, and fewer connections per query.

Making Outbox Work

There are of course some assumptions required to make this work.

First, the user must know which author they're looking for. This isn't always true when looking up a quote or parent note, but context and pubkey hints solve this difficulty in most cases.

The author must also publish a kind 10002 event. This may not always be the case, but clients should prompt users to set up their relay list correctly. This isn't really a flaw in the Outbox Model, just in implementations of it.

Additionally, the user's client must be able to find the author's kind 10002 event. This is the "bootstrapping" phase of the Outbox Model, during which the mechanisms the system provides for finding events aren't available. This requires us to fall back to randomly guessing which relays have the content we're looking for, which as we saw above doesn't work very well.

Other than guessing, there are a few different ways a client might find the relay selection event in question, each of which is applicable in different circumstances. In most cases, using one of a handful of indexer relays like purplepag.es or relay.nostr.band is a simple and efficient way to find user profiles and relay selections.

However, if an author's content has been aggressively purged from these indexers due to censorship, they obviously can't be relied upon. Even though the author in question hasn't been deplatformed from nostr itself (since he can always self-host a publicly accessible relay to store his content), he has been effectively shadow-banned.

To get around this, relay selections have to be communicated in some other way. Nostr has a few different mechanisms for this:

• If the author's NIP 05 address is known and properly configured (it may not be), clients can look up the author's NIP 05 endpoint to find some reasonable relay hints. Unfortunately, these are often neglected, and usually custodial, so they can run into the same problems.
• If the author's pubkey is found in another signed event found on nostr, relay hints can be a way to propagate relay selections through the network. This relies on implementations picking reliable relay hints which can be difficult, and hints do tend to become less reliable over time. However, this strategy is very effective in resisting censorship because it makes banning viral — if a relay wants to completely purge a particular pubkey from their database, they have to purge every event that references it, since events are tamper-proof.
• In extremis, relay recommendations can always be communicated out-of-band. This can be done using manual input, QR codes, DHTs, jsonl torrents full of kind 10002 events, or any other mechanism client developers choose to resort to.

Another, more technical assumption is that any given query can be fulfilled by few enough relays that a client can actually make all the connections needed, without running into resource limits. If you're trying to request content from 10,000 users across 1,000 relays, you're going to have a bad time. This was pointed out to me by Mazin of nostr.wine. He makes a good point, and it's definitely something to keep in mind. There are some mitigating factors though.

The first is that the current topology of the network probably won't persist forever. Because nostr is largely populated by self-hosting enthusiasts, the number of "tiny" relays is proportionally much higher than it will be if adoption picks up, even if the total number of relays grows. The trajectory is that nostr will drift toward fewer, larger relays, reducing the number of connections needed to fulfill any given query.

This is "centralizing", but it's important to understand that this isn't necessarily a bad thing. As long as there are more than one or two large hubs, there is user choice. And as long as it's possible to run a new relay, there is always an escape hatch. Nostr, like bitcoin, has no hard dependency on the biggest player in the network.

The other thing to consider is that there are lots of other techniques we can use to overcome the limits of the lowest-common denominator's limitations (mobile browser clients), including self hosted or third-party relay proxies. The trade-off here is that a little trust (aka centralization) can go a long way to reducing resource requirements needed to fulfill queries using the Outbox model.

If you're interested in more details on this topic, see this blog post.

That was a long digression, but there is one other thing that the Outbox model assumes to be the case. Even if the correct relays are found and connected to, they still may not return all desired content, either because they don't have it, or because they refuse to return it to the user requesting it.

This can happen if the publishing client isn't following the Outbox Model, if the author had migrated from one relay set to another without copying their notes over, or if the relay in question chose not to retain the author's content for some reason.

The first two issues can be fixed by improving implementations, but the question of policy is a little more interesting.

Relativistic relays

The Outbox Model is a mechanical process; it's only as useful as user relay selections are. In order for it to work, users have to be able to make intelligent relay selections.

Every relay has trade-offs, depending on its policy. 140.f7z.io would not be useful for long-form content, for example. Some relays might have a content retention policy that changes depending on whether you're a paying user. If you don't pay, you might find out too late that your content has been deleted from the relay.

So what makes a relay "good" for a particular use case? Well, it's complicated. Here are a few factors that go into that calculus:

• Is the relay in the same geographical as the user? Proximity reduces latency, but jurisdictional arbitrage might be desired. Users should probably have a variety of relays that fit different profiles.
• Will the relay ban the user? Do the operators have a history of good behavior? Is the relay focused on particular types of content? Is the relay's focus consistent with the user's goal in adding that relay to their list?
• What are the relay's retention policies? A user might want to set up an archival relay for her old content, or a multi-availability-zone relay so her notes are immediately accessible to the rest of the network.
• Does the relay require payment? Paid relays are more aligned with their users, but obviously come at a financial cost.
• Does the relay have policies for read-protecting content? If so, other users might not be able to find your posts published to that relay. On the other hand, some relays are configured to work as inboxes for direct messages, which can help preserve privacy.
• Does the relay request that users authenticate? Authentication can help manage spam, but it also allows relays to correlate content requests with users, reducing user privacy.
• Is the relay you use hosted by your client's developer? If so, you're in danger of getting banned from your client and your relay at the same time.
• Is the relay a hub? Using hubs can help smooth out rough areas in Outbox Model implementations, at the cost of centralization.
• Is the relay used by anyone else? One-off relays can be useful for archival purposes, but often won't be used by clients following the Outbox Model, depending on how they optimize requests.

There are lots of ways to approach the problem of helping users select relays, but it's an inherently complex problem which very few people will have the patience to properly address on their own. Relay selection is a multi-dimensional problem, and requires satisfying multiple constraints with a limited number of relay selections.

In the future, special-purpose clients might be used to help people build relay sets. Clients also might provide curated "relay kits" that users can choose and customize. Or, we might see an increase in hybrid solutions, like smarter relay proxies or client-local relays that synchronize using other protocols or platforms.

The Limitations of Outbox

Outbox is not a complete solution, not because of any of the caveats listed above, but because NIP 65 per se only addresses the question of how to index content by pubkey in a broadcast social media context. But there are many other scenarios for relay selection that Outbox does not solve:

• Community, chat, and group posts might be best posted to relays dedicated to that context.
• Direct messages shouldn't follow the same contours as public social media content.
• Topic-oriented relays, or relays serving a custom feed might be useful independent of who uses them.
• Relays focused on serving a particular kind of event, like music, long-form content, or relay selections, are useful independent of who reads from or writes to them.
• Certain clients might need to fulfill particular use cases by using relays that support certain protocol features, like search, count, or sync commands.
• Some events might not make sense to publish to relays, but should instead be shared only directly, out of band.

Some of these use cases might be solved by new specifications similar to Outbox that prescribe where certain data belongs — for example, NIP 17 requires users to publish a different relay list before they can receive direct messages, while NIP 72 places community relay recommendations directly into the group's metadata object. A reasonably complete list of different relay types can be found in this PR, very few of which have a canonical way to manage selections.

Other use cases might be supported more informally, either by relays advertising their own value proposition, or via third-party NIP 66 metadata. Still others might be supported by scoping the network down to only certain relays through explicit relay selection — this is how white-labeled Coracle instances work.

The basic idea here is that there are categories of events that don't have anything to do with where a particular person puts his or her "tweets". For every "what" on nostr, there should be a "how".

Keep nostr weird

Whatever additional systems we end up adopting for helping with relay selection, one thing is certain — people will continue to discover new, creative uses for relays, and we will always be playing catch up. This is one of the coolest things about nostr!

But it does mean that users will have to adapt their expectations to a network that partitions, re-configures, and evolves over time. Nostr is not a "worse" experience than legacy social media, but it is a version of social media that has itself been set free from the stagnant walled-garden model. Nostr is in many ways a living organism — we should be careful not to impose our expectations prematurely, leaving room to discover what this thing actually is, or can be.

If you enjoyed this post but want more take a look at the talk I gave at Nostrasia last year. I also wrote up a blog post at about the same time that addresses some of the same issues, but focuses more on privacy concerns around relays and nostr groups. Finally, I recently wrote this comment, which includes some details about challenges I've faced putting Outbox into Coracle.

@ ab8cb80e:5395d502

Hey, I have nothing to do this Friday evening, so why not chill with chess?

Spontaneously I launched an Arena Tournament for today: https://lichess.org/tournament/2iNa8jh4

@ek @kristapsk @BitcoinAbhi @grayruby @frostdragon @Taft @02d43d3798 @030e0dca83 @riberet19 @felipe @didiplaywell @SatsMate @itsTomekK @wize123 @Coinsreporter @stefano @anon @314piepi @160ed04091 do you want to play?

! TODAY ! ♟️ https://lichess.org/tournament/2iNa8jh4 ♟️ 90 min arena, with 5 minute games.

Join on @Alby's new Discord: https://discord.gg/3vbafUCZ?event=1261325278358016091 for voicechat I plan to stream it to zap.stream, because why not.

Who takes my challenge?

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/605942

@ 953c0602:01aba028

[Ismism] (3-1-1-4) Quasi-Transcendental Dialecticism: Early Derrida

(2021-06-28)

Today, we’re discussing the Ismism (3-1-1-4), represented by the young Derrida, that is, Derrida during his student years at the École Normale Supérieure in Paris. Wait……which school was it again? Oh, right——the École Normale Supérieure. Back then, he was at the level of a second-year university student…… This guy was quite a genius, definitely smarter than me.

(The content of this "Ismism") refers to Derrida’s undergraduate thesis, his diploma dissertation at the École Normale Supérieure. At that time, he was a reconciliatory transcendental phenomenologist——perhaps even someone who sought to rescue (though "rescue" might not be the right word) or rather to make the transcendental phenomenological project dialectical. His goal was to dialecticize transcendental phenomenology so that it could be revitalized and saved from its very origins. Specifically, he drew inspiration from Husserl’s late work, particularly the “Time Manuscripts”. What were they called again? Something like “Nau“——dame it, how uncultured I am—— oh, Bernau! That’s it——The Bernau Manuscripts. But honestly, I haven’t finished reading that book1. Let me tell you……was The Bernau Manuscripts even published at that time? I don’t know2. Because I haven’t finished reading it, I’m not sure how Derrida discussed these things.

I’ve only read its introduction, but in that introduction, Derrida mentions that in Husserl’s later years, he constantly tried to introduce a dialectical structure into the phenomenology of time3. This involved a kind of transcendental phenomenology that could construct a form of dialectics. This dialectics could then support a meta-logos, which in turn could uphold a transcendental logic capable of saving the entire project of transcendental phenomenology.

The representative figure for (3-1-1-4) is Jacques Derrida, specifically the Derrida of his university years, starting with his second year, when he began working on his graduation thesis. The key reference for this position is Derrida's work titled The Problem of Genesis in Husserl's Philosophy.

To engage with this text, one does not need extensive prior knowledge4. A basic understanding of Hegelian dialectics, Kant’s transcendental philosophy, and Husserl’s works like Ideas I and Ideas II5 is sufficient. Additionally, a rudimentary grasp of Husserl’s eidetic psychology and transcendental logic will help…… The essential requirement is to comprehend Husserl’s main objectives and what Derrida aimed to "rescue" within transcendental phenomenology.

So, this “Ism” ——let's call it…… ah, I’m still thinking about it, actually. I’m still wondering what I should call it. Genesis…… I’m thinking, ah, this thing is actually quite annoying, you know? Because most people would say that in this state, it’s quasi-transcendental. But I think, actually, the stance here is purely transcendental. That is to say——damn it——should I add a “quasi-” in front? Quasi-transcendental? Should I call it quasi-transcendental? And then at the end, should I add “dialecticism” or “historicism”?

I think here, what’s primarily being used is still dialecticism. So I’ll call it Quasi-transcendental dialecticism. Why call it dialecticism instead of historicism? Because it has to be distinguished from those others——it has to be separated from some of the more mediocre ones…… You see, this quasi-transcendental……If I remove the “quasi,” then this transcendental dialecticism starts to resemble Schelling’s ideas, you know? And I can’t quite put it that way. So I have to add a “quasi” in front——a “quasi-transcendental.”

Now, Derrida uses a concept to break through this framework: genesis. We usually translate it as “origin,” but in philosophy, there’s a simpler term for it: “emergence.” Emergence refers to the starting point of time itself. But Derrida tells us that the problem of emergence has a duality——it’s inherently contradictory. On one hand, as originarity6, as an absolute beginning; on the other hand, all emergence is anticipated——it’s always foreseen or prefigured. That is to say, all emergence exists within a contextual framework7. Every instance of emergence is anticipated; it happens within the flow of past and future——it’s relational8. And when exactly it emerges is itself uncertain. So you might say it’s germinating, but we’re anticipating it—we’re expecting it. There’s even an entire field called genesis. This thing——oh man——there are so many people talking about it in China these days. But in reality, it’s just a phenomenological theory.

In other words, only through phenomenological transcendental intuition can you grasp a pure genetic phenomenology. That is to say, if you don’t have phenomenological transcendental intuition or transcendental reduction as your foundation, then whatever so-called genetic phenomenology you’re studying—it’s all nonsense.

Because genesis has a premise, which is to say, its revelation of the dialectical structure of genesis lays the foundation for time. This genesis is capable of constructing a theory of temporality——“laying the foundation for time”.

However, in Derrida’s case, perhaps because he was relatively young at the time, his aspiration was to rescue transcendental phenomenology through a form of dialectics. For Derrida, transcendental phenomenology faced an inevitable internal impasse——one that was dialectical and dualistic in nature. This impasse rendered transcendental intuition itself into something dead—— stagnant, suffocating, fractured, where nothing is living, nothing alive exists within it.

So I strongly recommend that everyone read——those who are capable of doing so (I’m referring to the "3-1-1" ). After you’ve gone through the first three steps——the first(3-1-1-1), second(3-1-1-2), and third(3-1-1-3) steps——and grasped them, you can move on to reading the main texts. Ah, Logical Investigations——I think as long as you finish the third part and its postscript, that should suffice. Ideas I is actually very short, not as long as you might imagine. Moreover, this text can be read in parallel with others; they are not in conflict. As for Ideas II, that’s what I discussed yesterday. Afterward, you can move on to The Problem of Genesis in Husserl’s Philosophy and another work by Derrida, Speech and Phenomena. However, the latter is clearly more immature and naïve. We could even say that Derrida believed it was possible to…… ah, I think this book9 isn’t very long either. Half of it consists of appendices, introductions, and prefaces.

Perhaps next month, depending on the situation, I will discuss about this book——its English version. As for the Chinese translation, there are still issues with it; when discussing these topics, its grammatical structure is too simple and prone to ambiguity. It’s better to read the English version. As for French——I don’t understand French. You can’t blame me for that; he wrote it in French.

You need to think about this: (English and French) they can be directly translated into each other, their terms can correspond. Using a language I know——English——to explain, I don’t think there’s any issue. But between Chinese and these languages, many of the terms are not directly translatable. Look at this book (The Problem of Genesis in Husserl’s Philosophy), who translated it? It was translated by Yu Qizhi. His terminology——things like “物论” (materialism)…… oh my, and “理项”10 (idealism)……Some of the terms he translated even come with his own annotations, but when you read further, it becomes jarring and disruptive.

Then, in this position (3-1-1-4), I deliberately left out Phenomenology of the Life-World, which surprised many who also study phenomenology. Phenomenology of the Life-World itself is practically useless——it still belongs to (3-1-1-3). There’s no essential difference; it remains a form of reflective subjectivism.

As for Derrida’s stance——this quasi-transcendental dialecticism——it can be seen as a general philosophical model of thought. That is to say, within phenomenology——and specifically within the domain and terminological system of transcendental phenomenology——how do you achieve a breakthrough? The answer lies in introducing dialectics as a way forward. Dialectics is simply the idea that a concept possesses duality, mutual opposition. This is the simplest explanation——it’s a general philosophical model of thought.

I think it’s not for me to endorse this; let Derrida himself vouch for it. When Derrida was in university, this was his general model: introducing dialectics into the domain and terminological system of transcendental phenomenology. This was quite an effective model.

Let's look back at the problem of genesis. The duality of the genesis problem has two aspects: first, it emerges by itself, with absolute originality——something that emerges entirely on its own, without any other thing helping it emerge. In phenomenology, this can be called "invention"11. It's an invention, such that in phenomenological terms, in everyday language, when I say an idea12 is an invention, it means it emerges out of nowhere, establishing itself as its own starting point. On the other hand, it's not just an invention; it must also undergo "vertification"13 and be verified. In other words, on one side it possesses absolute originality; on the other side, it has a relative…… we can say, a situational, a background-based relative... fuck, how do I say this?…… structural quality. It can be said to have a relative structural quality.

Derrida would tell you that an idea, or any intention, or intentionality14, either emerges out of nowhere…… that is, these two things (invention and verification) must simultaneously exist. You can't just have an intention without a "vetification". Was the word he used vetification? Let me check……I don't have time to verify vocabulary……verification, I always (misspell it) …… verification, fuck……I can also not use that word, can't find it. Verification, that 't' is extra15. Verify, I've misspelled this word many times, you don't need to care about me, just know the word yourself.

That is to say, you have an intentionality, or a thought, or a consciousness, something emerges, something surfaces, you'll have a dialectical structure16, this is a dialectical structure of origin. You'll discover it's always there, it's always been there17. For example, when I'm thinking about something, I'm thinking about eating. When you start thinking about this thing, you can simultaneously confirm and verify its existence. That is to say, any arranged thing, especially intentionality18——this dialectical structure is fatal to the self-grasp of transcendental subjectivity, to the reflective self-orientation of transcendental subjectivity, because it causes a crack in this structure, you know?

Didn't we discuss this yesterday? In transcendental subjectivity, or in this reflective subjectivism, the self-grasp of transcendental subject, transcendental cogito. In every intentionality, it can see itself, can see orientation, or find something again inside. But when it finds something inside, do you say it created a transcendental self inside, is this synonymous, or do you say it has always been there? This becomes a fatal blow. Actually, if we use Žižek, or Lacan, or Hegel's logic, this is a retrospective construction.

Derrida himself, in the "preface"——not when he wrote this paper, but when he published it——said: Husserl's transcendental philosophical project is like a kind of condomination, like an infection, everywhere, contamination, like a pollution, like an infection, like a transmission19.

He traverses every gap in the dialectical binary oppositional structure……This transcendental project always wants to resist dialectics, resist the concept's duality, dualism, the dialectics of binary opposition. While resisting the dialectics of binary opposition, he always wants to see clearly these binary oppositions, such as natural and ideal, real and essential, formal and real20 …… across the gaps of these sections21, there will always be a transcendental intuition or transcendental reduction's contamination, an infection, as Derrida himself uses this term. Wherever his gaze reaches, he will always see such an infection, always have a reduction desire, reduction, always wanting to see the origin of this confrontational structure. This consciousness itself is a phenomenological reduction's intentionality itself.

So, we can say in this sense that phenomenological intuition and its reduction are the same thing——when facing the pure self, when you see this pure self, your intuition and your reduction are the same thing, it's the same thing. You can hardly distinguish whether it's intuitively perceived or reduced, whether it's retreated or created, whether this distance is pulled apart or the distance itself already exists. Because when you pull apart this subjective retreat distance…… if you don't pull it apart, you'll never say you have it; once you pull apart this distance, you can always say this distance was already there, with a purer self watching this acting self, and moreover dominating this acting self——this consciousness action's self, this is consciousness's action22.

For instance, you're remembering "I just stepped on the floor". Then in your memory, you can see a pure self remembering. But at this moment, when you judge like this, between the remembering me and that pure self watching the memory——I as the rememberer, the acting me performing remembrance, and I as a pure self——actually, this is a tripartite relationship23……It seems I've phenomenologically transcendentally intuitively retreated a step back, then seen within the previously remembering me, within the remembrance action, a pure self remembering. This is a me, I synonymize it with me. But the problem is, when you do this, this can infinitely retreat, you know? But the answer phenomenology gives is: this is the same me. This is the same one, and the only one. So, why say there are three selves? Because you see the remembering rememberer, he is the pure self. But at this moment, you also have a self watching him——that is, a pure self watching a previous rememberer…… or say, a self currently remembering a rememberer, seeing himself. In this case, you're always watching this…… In this situation, you'll say, fuck, is this self reduced or intuitively perceived? Because in this sense, if the intentionality's initiator in the middle of the rememberer is a pure self, then it means it was originally there, right? It's always there. He was originally there, but obviously he's not there. The self within the rememberer is structural, a subject set connected with my remembrance content and my remembrance action itself, right? It's situated in the scene, in the action, it's connected. Then, as a pure self, I watch such a memory, the intentional memory activity, and see a pure self within it, and discover that this pure self is of absolute originality——he's the absolute initiator of this memory, not a participant in the memory, but the memory's initiator, the force that makes this memory appear, understand? Here's the genesis problem. Is this pure self an absolute initiator in an intentional activity, or is he only seen through phenomenological reduction…… you'll see in phenomenological intuition that he is…… fuck, your phenomenological reduction will discover it…… At this point, intuition and reduction short-circuit.

Because at this point, you'll see…… damn, that 1.5-order feeling, you know? I can only say it's 1.5-order. Because phenomenological intuition purely gives you a factual view, seeing you just remembering, just watching; while phenomenological reduction means putting that watching, including the reduction of that watching itself, into the reduction itself, listing it out. Reduction means reducing the reduction itself and its reduced object…… Reduction itself is zero-order, its reduced object is first-order, and within its reduced object, for instance, a memory activity towards other memories is second-order. This entire order will be provided according to its order through phenomenological reduction. While phenomenological intuition might not so obviously obtain its internal orders, because reduction touches many essential structures within.

Uh, what I want to say…… I've rambled far again, fuck, I'm so drunk. What I want to say is, this genesis problem makes phenomenology problematic at its starting point, in pure phenomenological intuition and phenomenological reduction, problematic in the initiation of intentionality. So, for us ordinary people thinking about this problem, I think the following is worth considering: Yesterday I kept giving an example——pure cogito, pure subject, pure transcendental subject. In Husserl's view, or actually for all of us, if we're a strictly solipsistic subject, we only get the pure transcendental subject, and this pure transcendental subject can initiate itself, produce itself. Beyond this, this pure transcendental subject can even be said to have nothing. But we can say it has a weak internal time-consciousness, internal temporal intentionality. This might be necessary for subjectivity24; beyond this, the subjectivity structure is extremely thin.

I'll give an example, such as color…… I say color might be a bit too…… which example would be better? For instance, your bodily control, like controlling the rotation of your eyeballs, the eye's motor sense—— why do I use eye motor sense? Because ordinary people can directly experience eye motor sense. Then, the following phenomenological analysis isn't very strict, and I don't have the ability to achieve that strictness, nor do I want to. Because I want to explain this so everyone can understand25.

Will the eye movement's motor sense feel unconditional to you? Your conscious keeps up your eye rolling, will you think it's…… it's not unconditional, it's given, right? Of course, it can be seen as an original givenness, right? It's an original giving, but it's primitive there, primitive presentation, primitive giving, it's "original pre-presence", always there, and we can feel our eye movement ability is always here, even if I cut my eyes off…… that is, eye movement ability is basically traceless in consciousness, right? You close your eyes, and there's a dizzy feeling……Other bodily motor senses——many motor senses, hearing is also a motor sense, including gravity sense, if we might topple…… these bodily motor senses are all included.

How do you judge your eyes moving? In many cases, we can't feel our eyes moving; it won't be an obvious sensation. But we're very confident, right? The subject is very confident. Even if I'm completely paralyzed like Hawking, my eyeballs can still move. When can eyeballs not move? When you gouge out my eyeballs, they can't move. Eye movement seems very closely connected to the subject, as if it's a naturally inherent ability. But the problem is, it's given, it can (exist, or) not exist. For some blind people or those who've had eyeballs removed, the muscles controlling eye rotation, those nerves might all atrophy or be completely removed. You have no structured bodily motor sense to verify your eye movement, no structured vision itself to verify it. Because our visual shaking and visual positioning changes can be used to verify eye motor sense, eye rotation can conversely…… then, of course, we'll have a structural grasp of the eyeball itself, but these are secondary, later, high-order, derivative——never mind.

What we want to say is that eye movement, or any pure bodily movement, will be seen as an innate thing, seen as magic, you understand? It's magic. You're unaware that you can control body movement, especially eye movement or controlling part of your limbs, just by mental intention. It's magic, it's magical, it has a magical quality. It gives you some intentionality of motor sense. Then you concentrate your attention on it, adjusting your intentional attention's method and ability within a spectrum.

For example, your eyes move from left to right, but the problem is, you have no control panel, you know?26 It's an incredibly mysterious thing. Let's not call it magical, but it's an incredibly mysterious thing.

Say you want your eyeball to move from left to right——but why, when you conceive a directional movement in your brain, this intentionality of directional rotation, this bodily control intentionality, it naturally goes from left to right, your eyeball truly moves from left to right, its visual feedback and other series of feedbacks verify it moved from left to right——why is this so mysterious? Why does my pure consciousness activity, my pure intentionality's directional orientation, then a positioning, this consciousness itself as a focal positioning on some interface of different bodily organs, seem to truly have these interfaces?

So, at this moment, do we say these positioning and control interfaces truly exist? Except, this control——can't be simply grasped as control, its mode is complex. It's not just "move my eye from left to right", it also involves eye positioning and its deflection27, deflection's intentionality. We can only experience…… that is, if we truly do phenomenological intuition, we can only experience that our issued commands are extremely tiny, simple, an instant pre-reflective, even unconscious, subconscious. Only some symbolic things emerge in our brain: a voice——"from left to right", only a symbolic intentionality, "eyes from left to right". Of course, the words "eyeball" might not emerge in your mind, but they definitely emerge when I'm talking to you, I say the symbol, your auditory hearing catches it, then transforms into an inner hearing. Of course, when moving your eyeball, you might not need to think about this inner hearing; these sounds have already been delayed.

But there's always an intentionality, always ready to control your eyes, and position your eyes. What does positioning your eyes mean? Your entire consciousness focus is already positioned on your eyeball's control interface, prepared to control it.

So, you should know that the initiation itself is not what we want to discuss, not where we want to grasp this genesis. Genesis isn't discussing a pure-self initiation; there's nothing to discuss about that, it's pretty empty.

What we want to discuss is these positioning frameworks, the entire body's positioning framework, and this directionality. Its adaptation to this framework, how these things are indeed configured between each other——these muscles, these eyeball movement patterns are indeed configured this way. That is, their configurational relationship: I think in my brain, then position my eyeball from left to right with an intentionality, position it, then truly implement this positioning, and it precisely matches its movement initiation. You don't need to adjust this software, don't need to write this software. The correspondence between these interfaces and its framework——this consciousness interface is that you think, you exert force on it, and it can... this correspondence is always there, you know? Always there. It's called "original pre-presence", always there. Even our intentionality feels it exists prior to my pure cogito. It's as if, before I could control my eyeball, eyeball control already existed. The movement of my eyeball exists prior to my active semiotic thinking, prior to my intentional focus that directs my attention to move my eyeball, prior to this intentionality, and even prior to the learned, conscious act of controlling the movement of my eyeball.

External intentionalities——like wanting to eat, wanting to hear sounds, wanting to pay attention——can already manipulate my eyeball, already position my body, already coordinate the positional and factual left-right directional spatial relationships of its movement patterns. It's already coordinated, this thing was long there, long inside.

So, what I want to say is, in this situation, when you say a pure self can construct this entire system through a series of complex mechanisms, it's actually not very convincing, you know? Saying it's completely genesis, a genesis of pure self, constructing all these control structures or dominating structures, perfectly and naturally connected——it doesn't seem right. Moreover, clearly, there's no reflective process constructing these things. You say it's passive synthesis? Here, genesis will pose a very significant question to phenomenology. Its problem actually comes from Kant's a priori synthesis, the problem of synthetic a priori28.

Although phenomenology appears like empiricism or positivism, and attempts to observe all structures through a pure cogito in a reflective manner and verify its constructive elements, the fundamental problem is that intentionality must, in some sense, be a priori synthesis——and this a priori synthesis is viewed as originless29.

You can see these positional relationships and claim they have always been there. You can see yourself, including seeing your perception of their perpetual existence, and glimpse the phenomenological subject's silhouette. However, these things themselves are originless, and this result is itself without origin.

I believe grasping origin is not about saying, "Oh, I can initiate my eye movement, my inner hearing, my body's positioning." Damn, that's nothing. I can also initiate my right foot's little toe moving, I can initiate positioning. I'll always see a cogito, an active, moving subject within. But this cannot help you grasp origin.

What can help you grasp origin? It is the absence of origin, the origin's lack, the origin's non-presence. The a priori synthetic structure exists within body and mind. This a priori synthesis is easily discovered. The synthetic relationship between your eye movement and external visual intentionality——fuck, it can be called a priori synthesis. You cannot find its genesis, you're unable to find its genesis. You can say they are simply connected, that visual and eye movement, eye motor sense and visual attention sense, are mindlessly linked, with an inherent necessity that is a priori.

The problem then becomes: how can these originless structure30 considered by Kant…… this kind of originless a priori synthetic intentionalities be reintegrated into Husserl's phenomenological framework?

In this sense, their origin is that they originate themselves, you understand?

These things originate themselves, and simultaneously explain themselves, of itself by itself. Set off of itself and by itself, or in his own words, an invention 'itself' itself——with both prepositions framing it31. In this situation, you must introduce a dialectical origin structure into transcendental phenomenology. Otherwise, you cannot truly perform a transcendental reduction or phenomenological reduction, or provide a philosophical delineation of the relationship between the phenomenological subject and these consciousness structures that seemingly always exist.

In this sense, regarding this origin——this self-originless origin in the phenomenological sense——this origin is an invention. Simultaneously, we can even say the "cogito" verbally claims to have invented, to have initiated, but actually, it merely verifies. I continuously verify my body's control, my positioning power, my internal sensory or sensory positioning power. I can move my tongue.

I have positioning power. You know? And this occurs through a pure semiotic mechanism. To consciously control a body, you must rely on a semiotic network for positioning. And this semiotic network and the body's positional causal domain are not the same network.

Thus, the starting point, or the suturing point, of this castration is genesis. Genesis ultimately becomes sutured onto subjectivity; it is eventually stitched onto the subject, onto the transcendental cogito, and, more specifically, onto the subject’s temporal experience. The discovery of self-temporality——this sense of “I have always been here” —— is precisely the discovery of self-existence, the realization that “I have always existed.

However, in truth, this self is only temporarily creating itself. Yet, this temporary creation of itself and the simultaneous discovery that it has “always existed” is inherently dialectical. This is the genesis of the self. It can be said that the self is continuously generating itself in real-time, but it can also be said that it has always been there. It exists within a semiotic, backgrounded temporal network——a temporary order——in which it has always already been present.

Thus, Derrida needed to assist Husserl by introducing a form of dialecticism into his entire structure. The first chapter involves integrating this dialecticism into the temporality of the intentional object, the "noema"32, and then into the "temporality of genesis". Discussions about concepts like "initial impression" and "pre-experiential synthesis" essentially cover what I just mentioned, except Derrida's treatment is more precise, refined, and abstract. Another point is that "epoché" (suspension) and "genesis" themselves are irreducible——suspension itself cannot be reduced. Finally, he attempts to construct a transcendental logic. I haven't read this book. The final section is titled “The Genesis of the Self and the Transition to a New Transcendental Idealism”33, where he supplements a new form of transcendental idealism34. I didn’t finish reading it, so I don’t know exactly what he’s doing there. Perhaps someday I’ll have the chance to complete this book.

What I want to say is that Derrida attempts to save Husserl’s grand phenomenological edifice through this approach. I must admit that my academic and phenomenological abilities are limited——I simply don’t have the time. Honestly, I don’t regret not dedicating much time to it or not being particularly skilled in this area. Based on my basic understanding, phenomenology eventually had someone clean up its mess——that someone was young Derrida.

Derrida labeled the pure "invention" or "innovation"——the pure initiation, pure emergence from nothing, pure retreat, or pure suspension——as "death." Why? Because these elements were not placed within a symbolic system; they were not alive. They lacked integration into a contextual framework and were disconnected from preceding and succeeding elements.

There are many fascinating discussions in this book…… Some may laugh at me for finding Derrida's early, immature work interesting. But the key point is that this book serves as a bridge——it connects Hegel and Husserl through the problem of genesis35.

I believe that for someone at their intellectual peak around age 22, reading this book would feel quite “light(qingqiaoqiao)”36. But I’m really sorry, I’ve wasted a few years of my life, and then, damn it, I went off to study…… Well, honestly, I don’t even know what I ended up studying. Maybe I dabbled in a lot of miscellaneous fields, I didn’t study this subject deep enough.

However, if you asked me to read this book, I could probably spend about two weeks explaining it to you. Honestly, getting back into it wouldn’t be particularly challenging——it’s not technically demanding. But what I’ve been pondering is this: well, Derrida opened up phenomenology, but as far as I know, this was the last serious effort. Others didn’t take it as seriously. What I want to talk about is the attempt to rescue transcendental phenomenology. Because what Derrida actually did was use dialectics——but here, dialectics functions as a kind of formal logic. Formal logic is garbage, it is a rather lowly thing in Husserl’s framework. It’s “low” because it belongs to something worldly or natural——it’s something natural but formal. It’s structural; it’s a structured form of dialectics. As a formal logic, it stands on the side of the worldly and the natural——it aligns with the lifeworld, with the mundane, the accidental, the trivial, and the profane. Derrida wanted to use this kind of dialectics to rescue transcendental phenomenology. He sought to use it to either salvage transcendental logic or abolish it altogether——to dismantle the logos of transcendental logos, or what we call logocentrism, while preserving some of Husserl’s methods and certain ontological assumptions about subjectivity. In essence, swap out the core of transcendental phenomenology using this formal dialectics. This dialectical approach is broadly historicist and genetic——it’s a generative dialectic focused on processes of becoming. Yet this dialectic is extremely dry and skeletal in form. And here lies something fascinating: this very dryness makes it a dialectic of both the formal and the real. But fundamentally, it remains a formal dialectic.

You should read this book yourself——The Problem of Genesis in Husserl’s Philosophy. If you’re not interested, there’s no point in me explaining it to you, right? In this book, Derrida essentially tries to rescue Husserl37——to give Husserl’s legacy a new core so that it can keep running and allow people to extract useful elements from it. He attempts to reconcile Husserl’s late work on time-consciousness with transcendental logic——efforts that Husserl himself made late in his career using temporality and time-consciousness. Derrida’s approach can be likened to replacing an outdated power source with something more vital. Imagine Iron Man’s whatever rolling inside his chest——a clunky nuclear-powered device[38]——being swapped out by someone more skilled for an energy gem fueled by life itself. From Iron Man’s perspective, this life-based energy source might seem inferior compared to his pure mechanical core. But in reality, it’s more powerful, more vital——it has greater life force. Similarly, Derrida’s dialectics carry more vitality——they breathe new life into phenomenology.

As Derrida himself stated, in this effort he saw the enthusiasm of a young student, a philosophical choice made within the world of a young philosopher, and a commitment to a philosophical vocation39. His choice was rooted in the belief that Husserl’s transcendentalism was not a purely detached transcendentalism divorced from historical context. Instead, Derrida viewed Husserl’s transcendentalism as something fundamentally tied to life, historical in nature——a kind of event. However, it is an event that claims to break away from history while simultaneously being rooted in history. It is both rooted and rootless, grounded in history while representing a rupture within history itself.

Transcendental phenomenology, therefore, is itself a rupture within history. What struck me most in Derrida's introduction is his assertion that to achieve a philosophy of genesis, one must also achieve the genesis of philosophy. In other words, to develop a philosophy addressing the problem of origin or genesis, one must create an entirely new philosophy. However, this "philosophy of genesis" is inherently historical, though this history itself is fractured and inconsistent.

Derrida later reflected on this project and deemed it immature——a naive project, as he called it. He saw it as a doomed endeavor from the start. While it was indeed a project, it did not delve deeply enough. I am unsure whether Derrida later wrote further texts on these ideas40. My knowledge of Derrida’s writings is limited in this regard. However, I do know that in his later deconstructionist works, Derrida admitted that he had been "poisoned" by transcendental phenomenology——it was like a toxin that caused dialectical eruptions everywhere. Yet this dialectic was what he described as a quasi-phenomenological dialectic: something akin to new life growing out of a withered body. In his later philosophy, Derrida pursued something beyond language——a quasi-phenomenological and quasi-transcendental method. Using dialectical discussions, he sought to achieve something beyond language itself. He seemed to believe he had attained such a "beyond," capturing impossible historical moments——or rather their traces, residues, or whatever his différance, also his supplement of genesis, damn, these kind of things41——through his peculiar and enigmatic dialectical methods.

This was an immature plan. The book itself is short——if you exclude the introduction and postscript, it’s just over 100 pages. By reading it, you can understand this project42.

I recommend reading the English version because the Chinese translation suffers from poor syntax and awkward terminology, making it frustrating to read. After reading five pages of the Chinese version——I bought two copies of this book, I even bought two copies——I switched to the English PDF version instead. It’s quite a worthwhile book to study.

Some might mock me, saying, “Why spend so many sessions talking about Husserl?” Let me reiterate: I am fully aware that his transcendental project is a failure. That has never been my position to begin with. Of course, when I was younger, I was introduced to philosophy through this framework——it shaped my habits of thought and ways of thinking. But later, I essentially abandoned this system of reasoning altogether. Over time, I shifted toward a kind of pragmatist stance, and eventually moved further toward dialectics and psychoanalysis. So, it’s not as if I’m particularly convinced that transcendental philosophy is destined to succeed. From the outset, you can see that even its starting point requires being replaced by a quasi-transcendental dialectical method.

Let us now, finally, discuss its positions. The first three positions remain essentially unchanged. However, in the field theory, there needs to be a slight adjustment: the metaphysical versus the physical or empirical.

On the side of the empirical, we might place terms like “worldly” and “history”43. On the metaphysical side, we find terms like “transcendental” and “idea,” representing the dimension of concepts and ideals. In this framework, the transcendental cogito——the subject ——is positioned on the metaphysical side, while life is placed on the empirical side. The mediating force between these two poles is dialectics, or perhaps even structuralism——though more precisely, it remains dialectics. However, this dialectics has a tendency toward structuralist formalization. Because this structuralist inclination stems from how dialectics can be reduced to pure formality under a phenomenological lens. Within transcendental phenomenology——through essential intuition and reduction——dialectics risks becoming hollowed out into a mere essence or structure, something stripped of its original givenness. In such a state, dialectics transforms into a shallow construct——a kind of trickery or wordplay, an empty game devoid of substance or genuine essence. It becomes nothing more than a superficial gimmick——a worthless shell lacking any fundamental grounding.

Your discussions about the essence of dialectics are somewhat ridiculous. If Husserl were alive today, he might say that your understanding lacks true contradiction at its core “Addols”. Do you understand?

Dialectics itself is inherently ridiculous, but Derrida uses dialectics to reconcile these elements. The way he reconciles them is by constructing a theory of genesis44——let’s call it "genesisology"? I’m not sure how to spell "genesisology" in English. This theory of genesis is constructed through dialectics. However, this dialectics is primarily semiotic. It can also be seen as historical——a fractured history, a history that is constantly rupturing and generating itself. But fundamentally, this history is tied to subjectivity. Beyond subjectivity, what else could it be? It’s just that it’s no longer transcendental subjectivity. The fractured history——this ruptured history——continues to provide this rupture within theoretical frameworks. And what provides this rupture? It’s still the cogito, a constantly thinking “cogito”. But this subjectivity can also be described as a mechanism of subjectivization——a historical mechanism of subjectivization. This mechanism allows something vital——something related to life and death——to emerge from the empty, hollow semiotic binary oppositions. It can draw out many rich problem domains or other issues.

Yet ultimately, it remains hollow. This project is doomed to fail. I don’t want to finish reading it because I know it will fail in the end45——it will be hollow. You can try to structure it with temporal frameworks or weave one net after another, but in the end, there’s nothing to hold it together. Once you loosen your grip, everything falls apart——it’s still just that same mess. That’s my personal judgment. Since I haven’t finished reading this book, I’ll give its teleology a 4(X-X-X-4). The other two (position) remain unchanged, but in terms of teleology, it’s 4.

What destroys the triadic relationship between these elements? It’s primordial motion. This dialectics is an empty one——it’s just primordial motion. In this book, Derrida adopts an objective transcendental-phenomenological stance and refuses to acknowledge that within pure transcendental phenomenological intuition and reduction, one can ultimately find a primordial motion. He won’t admit it. He won’t admit that there’s a rupture here or that there’s a primordial motion present.

This primordial motion is de-subjectivized——it becomes epistemologized——but it is ontological in itself. While it may become epistemologized and allow you to experience it, this primordial motion or primordial difference precedes semiotic registration——it’s as simple as that. Or rather, it ensures that binary oppositions inevitably arise during the process of semiotic registration. This primordial motion makes binary oppositions unavoidable and necessitates introducing dialectics into the foundation of transcendental phenomenology. If such dialectics were introduced, Husserl would exclaim: "The sky has fallen! Everything is ruined! Phenomenology is over!" This primordial difference or primordial motion is unconditional——it exists at the most fundamental level as an absolute motion, an absolute motion in itself.

From this perspective, this represents a materialist transformation or attempt at materialism46 because it acknowledges a primordial difference and primordial motion. Of course, we wouldn’t say this has any specific substrate because it exists in itself——itself as itself. If this were to participate in semiotic registration and generate semiotic differences within that process, then we might call it différance (if différance could even be tested). But différance cannot truly be tested——it cannot be experienced directly as différance.

To explore further: teleology here is 4(X-X-X-4), because its attempt at reconciliation——its effort to achieve absolute certainty through reflective self-grasping——ultimately collapses into failure. There’s no way for reflective self-grasping to hold onto itself; you can’t hold onto it——the waters are too deep; you simply can’t hold on. It’s illusory; it’s death. In that fleeting moment when you attempt reflective self-grasping, you are not alive——you are dead. From the perspective of primordial motion, your subjectivity at that moment is dead. In this sense, Husserl’s transcendental phenomenology becomes a kind of necrophilia——a fixation on death. That so-called original gaze——the self looking at itself in absolute clarity——is death; it’s dead. And when you describe it as clear and transparent clarity? That’s because it’s terrifying——it’s horrifying, disgusting, something you instinctively want to avoid. Your consciousness represses and empties out what it truly sees through this original motion. Its failure was inevitable.

Alright then, that concludes my thoughts here. In my intellectual journey, phenomenology came to an end with Derrida tying up its loose ends. That’s why I bought this book but never read it fully——though I did read half of its introduction when I was younger (I bought two copies). From my perspective——and based on my reading of many journal articles and my understanding of philosophical history——transcendental phenomenology was a failed project. However, studying it can train your philosophical thinking skills——it doesn’t have a high entry barrier. Once you grasp its terminological system and jargon framework, discussing it feels no different from assembling computer components——installing CPUs or PCIe buses——it’s all quite similar. If you’re willing to spend dozens of hours reading Husserl's books and Derrida's book on him (The Problem of Genesis in Husserl's Philosophy), they’re worth reading too. Husserl rejected dialectics outright——but Derrida argued that at phenomenology's foundation lies an implicit grasp of dialectics. That concludes my thoughts here!

@ 0dc2dcb1:4787801a

• Prepared a Dutch webinar with an short introduction to Nostr - https://welkom.keuzevrijbijmij.nl/evenement/wwebinar-vergroot-je-privacy-op-social-media-10-juli/

• Received a nice t-shirt with the Nostr-PHP logo from Bitpopart who designed the logo
• Did an introduction talk in Dutch on a webinar with 350+ people subscribed on July 10th. 100+ watched the webinar live.
  • Here is the full replay: 
    At around 38min the Nostr stuff begins
• Adding pages and wrote some documentation on nostr-php.dev
• Added a custom field field_nsec to the user entity on nostrver.se (Drupal website) using the contrib module field_encrypt. The value of this field is stored encrypted in the database using a self created private key. This key is stored as a blob the server, but multiple ways of storing this are possible. In the Drupal CMS I now can save a Nostr private key for each user which will be fetch from nostr_content_nip23. All changes made in this Drupal contrib module for this: https://git.drupalcode.org/project/nostr_content_nip23/-/commit/cbc172b976aceaff107fea0296a8a476e098467e

• With a nsec stored for each user, it’s possible to select a user when you’re broadcasting an Nostr event from Drupal. The event will be signed with the nsec of the selected user. Quick demo here: https://njump.me/nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzqpnrnguxe8qszsshvgkvhn6qjzxy7xsvx03rlrtddr62haj4lrm3qy88wumn8ghj7mn0wvhxcmmv9uq3camnwvaz7tmwdaehgu3wwdjkyctnw35hstnnda3kjctv9uqzqj75dy5eps3lgwum7f9p2l8sywy7wuxjr08pyhzyzv9mklylaydgdyll3z

  

@ 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.

@ 2063cd79:57bd1320

Der letzte Artikel stand ganz im Zeichen von Mempool, Transaktionsgebühren, Ordinals, BRC-20 Tokens (aka Shitcoins auf Bitcoin) und Mining-Rewards. Der Mempool ist voller als der Hyde-Park in London am einzigen Sommertag mit Sonne im Jahr. Doch weil ich mich in letzter Zeit zu Genüge mit den vorgenannten Themen beschäftigt habe und man zur Zeit an jeder Ecke den Status des Mempools ungefragt eingeflößt bekommt, möchte ich mich diese Woche mit zwei Standpunkten beschäftigen, die entweder gegenläufig oder komplementär zueinander stehen (gibt es wirklich kein Antonym zum Wort komplementär?).

Ausschlaggebend für den Gedankengang, der mich zu dieswöchigem Artikel bewegt hat waren ein Artikel und eine Podcast-Episode, über die ich letzte Woche gestolpert bin. Bei dem Artikel handelt es sich um Jimmy Songs "How Fiat Money Broke the World" aus seiner Fixing the Incentives-Reihe im Bitcoin Magazine und bei der Podcast-Episode wurde ich von den Ausführungen von Peruvian Bull im TFTC Podcast Ausgabe 414: The Dollar Endgame von Marty Bent zum Nachdenken angeregt.

Prinzipiell stellt sich im Großen und Ganzen die Frage, wie eine großflächige Adaption von Bitcoin vonstatten gehen könnte. Hyperbitcoinization oder auch Bitcoin als gesetzliches Zahlungsmittel (wie z.B. in El Salvador, oder bald sogar in Indonesien und Mexiko (!)) sind dabei mögliche Szenarien. Der Nicht-Ghandi-Spruch “First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.” wird oft genutzt, um die soziologische Entwicklungsstufe, bzw. die öffentliche Wahrnehmung einer Idee, einer Erfindung oder eines Produkts in gewisse Entwicklungsstufen einzuordnen. Genauso wie bei Bitcoin. WIR SIND IN DER "THEN THEY FIGHT YOU" STUFE!!!11! kann man überall auf Bitcoin-Twitter, Nostr oder Reddit lesen.

Doch wer ist "THEY"? Wenn man nur von Nationalstaaten ausgeht und offizielle und inoffizielle (konspirative) multinationale Interessensgruppen außen vor lässt, stellt sich mir die Frage, welches Land / welcher Staat die meisten Gründe (politischer oder wirtschaftlicher Natur) hätte, Bitcoin zu adaptieren, bzw. zu bekämpfen. Natürlich kommen einem dabei als erstes die USA in den Sinn, immerhin das Land mit der höchsten kombinierten Bitcoin-Hashrate, mit den meisten Bitcoin-Infrastruktur-Anbietern, mit den größten Börsen (nach Handelsvolumen) und den meisten Bitcoin-Nutzer//innen in der Bevölkerung.

Doch macht das die USA zum größten potentiellen Gegner oder zum größten potentiellen Befürworter und Begünstigten von Bitcoin?

Jimmy Song "How Fiat Money Broke the World"

Jimmy Song baut seinen Artikel chronologisch auf. Es geht um die Entstehung des Fiat-Geld-Systems nach dem zweiten Weltkrieg und die damit einhergehende Abschaffung des Goldstandards. Mit der Errichtung des Bretton-Woods-Systems wurde eine neue Währungsordnung geschaffen, die den US Dollar als Ankerwährung bestimmte, der wiederum an Goldreserven gekoppelt werden sollte. So sollten flexible Wechselkurse innerhalb der verschiedenen Landeswährungen gewährleistet werden, während gleichzeitig die Sicherheit von Goldreserven existiert. Doch statt Gold für die internationale Handelsabwicklung zu verwenden, wurde nun der Dollar die Abwicklungswährung. Diese Entscheidung verhalf den USA zu einer hegemonialen Wirtschaftsmacht zu werden, denn die Fähigkeit, das Geld zu drucken, mit dem jedes andere Land seinen Handel abwickelte, gab den USA mehr Macht über den Rest der Welt.

Diese Dollar-Hegemonie begünstigte die USA deutlich im internationalen Handel, da sie zur Zentralbank für alle anderen Zentralbanken wurden. Nicht-US-Banken geben sogar Verbindlichkeiten in Dollar, und zwar nicht nur in Europa, sondern in vielen anderen Teilen der Welt. Infolgedessen halten andere Zentralbanken US Dollar als Reserve, die dann auf der Basis von Teilreserven verwendet werden können, um noch mehr Geld in Form von Krediten zu schaffen (das sogenannte Eurodollar-System).

Diese Position der Stärke nutzten die USA weiter aus und erschufen, was heute als das Petrodollar-System bekannt ist. Dank einem Abkommen zwischen Saudi-Arabien und den USA in den 1970ern wird das von allen Mitgliedsstaaten der OPEC geförderte Öl in US Dollar gehandelt, im Gegenzug für militärischen Schutz durch die USA. Das sogenannte Petrodollar-System hat dem US Dollar somit einen enormen Wert und hohe Liquidität verliehen.

Die war auch nötig, denn teure Sozialprogramme wie Medicare und Medicaid als auch das Social Security Programm wurden gestartet. Aber auch sehr teure Stellvertreterkriege, wie z.B. in Korea und Vietnam, wollten finanziert werden. Dies taten die USA, indem sie das Geld hierfür einfach druckten, was wiederum die Zentralbanken der anderen Länder nervös machte und dazu brachte, mit dem Abzug ihrer Goldeinlagen bei der US-Notenbank zu drohen. Der damalige Präsident Tricky Dick (Richard Nixon) reagierte darauf, indem er die Goldbindung des US Dollar zunächst nur temporär für immer aufhob. Damit hatte er den Dollar vom Gold ent- und an das Öl der Saudis (bzw. an den militärisch-industriellen Komplex der USA) gekoppelt.

Die USA haben also das exorbitante Privileg, das Geld drucken zu können, das die Welt für die Abwicklung von Handel verwendet. Dies bedeutet unter anderem, dass die USA ihre gedruckten Dollars exportieren und Waren und Dienstleistungen aus anderen Ländern importieren können. Somit wird das gedruckte Geld im Allgemeinen zuerst in den USA ausgegeben (Cantillon-Effekt in Reinform), was dazu führt, dass Geschäftserfolg in den USA zu einer viel höheren monetären Belohnung führt, als in anderen Ländern. Vereinfacht gesagt: In den USA schwimmt mehr Geld umher und somit wird Erfolg besser belohnt. Folglich wollen mehr Menschen in die USA ziehen, und die USA können auswählen, wer hineinkommt und wer nicht. Gut für die USA - schlecht für die anderen.

Die ehrgeizigsten Menschen aus anderen Ländern immigrieren in die USA und verdienen mehr Geld und leben ein viel besseres Leben als in ihren Heimatländern. Der Braindrain bedeutet, dass andere Länder unterm Strich verlieren. Menschen im Allgemeinen versuchen immer in Länder einzuwandern, die in der Cantillon-Hierarchie höher stehen. Die reichen Länder werden somit reicher an Humankapital, während die armen Länder an Humankapital ärmer werden.

Die USA schaffen es, ihre Stellung als Neuzeit-Kolonialist vor allem mit Hilfe von Sonderorganisationen, internationalen Finanzinstitutionen und anderen Stiftungen wie dem IWF, der BIZ, des WEF oder der Weltbank zu zementieren. Diese supranationalen Banken und Organisationen leihen Entwicklungsländern und "Ländern des globalen Südens" Geld für den (Wieder-) Aufbau und andere Struktur-relevante Tätigkeiten, aber nur unter strengen Auflagen, die noch strenger werden, wenn diese Kredite nicht zurückgezahlt werden können. In diesen Fällen werden diese Länder dann von den Banken "gerettet", unter der Auflage, noch mehr Kontrolle über die eigene Finanzsuveränität abzugeben.

Im Wesentlichen tauschen sie dabei Kredite und längere Laufzeiten gegen organisatorische Kontrolle über den Staatshaushalt. Solche Beschränkungen können Punkte beinhalten, wie z.B. wieviel des nationalen Budgets für Infrastruktur ausgegeben werden kann. Oft müssen diese verschuldeten Regierungen eine eigene unabhängige Zentralbank gründen, die dazu verwendet werden kann, die Notwendigkeit einer staatlichen Genehmigung zu umgehen. So werden Länder dazu gebracht Staats-Ressourcen, wie Schürfrechte oder Ländereien an ausländische Unternehmen zu verkaufen.

Jimmy Song führt seinen Artikel noch etwas fort, doch die mir wichtigsten Punkte habe ich erwähnt. Kurz zusammengefasst: Die USA haben durch die de facto Kontrolle über das Geld eine Sonderposition in der Welt. Nicht nur sitzen sie am Gelddrucker - Geld drucken kann jeder, klappt eben nur unter bestimmten Voraussetzungen (zumindest zeitweise) - sondern haben durch diese Kontrollsituation weitere Vorteile: 1) Das größte Exportgut der USA ist der US Dollar. 2) Die US-Wirtschaft hat einen klaren Vorteil anderen Wirtschaften gegenüber, da das Unternehmertum dort besser belohnt wird. 3) Viele ehrgeizige und talentierte Menschen der ganzen Welt strömen in die USA, um von dieser Belohnung zu profitieren. 4) Die internationalen Buchstabensuppen-Finanzinstitutionen stärken den USA den Rücken.

Die USA haben also ein sehr großes (das gröte) Interesse daran, das globale Finanzmonopol in der aktuellen Form aufrechtzuerhalten.

Peruvian Bull "The Dollar Endgame"

Die Ausgangsthese von Peruvian Bull, einem Autor, der ein gleichnamiges Buch veröffentlicht hat (The Dollar Endgame) ist, dass viele Zeichen darauf hindeuten, dass der US Dollar als Leitwährung der Welt seine letzten Atemzüge macht. Er ist dabei recht pessimistisch und glaubt, dass wir schon in den nächten fünf bis sieben Jahren eine große Veränderung erleben werden.

Allerdings sieht er eine große Chance für die USA, Bitcoin zu nutzen, um diesem Untergang entgegenzuwirken. Viele Länder und Institutionen außerhalb der westlichen Welt sehen den US Dollar kritisch und sind nicht besonders glücklich über die Vormachtstellung, die der Dollar den USA auf dem internationalen Finanzmarkt, dem globalen Handel und der geopolitischen Weltordnung verleiht. Die US-Notenbank wird immer mehr in die Ecke gedrängt und der einzige Ausweg aus der momentanen Schuldenspirale ist Hyperinflation.

Meine zwei Sats sind, dass eine Wahrscheinlichkeit natürlich immer besteht, allerdings bin ich persönlich davon überzeugt, dass der US Dollar, wenn überhaupt, die letzte Währung sein wird, die eine Hyperinflation erlebt, da vorher ganz andere Währungen das Zeitliche segnen müssten.

Doch um bei der These zu bleiben, bietet Bitcoin eine alternative Lösung zur Hyperinflation. Denn die USA könnten ihre Verluste reduzieren, indem sie auf eine Bitcoin-gestützte Leitwährung wechseln. Dazu sind die USA auch bestens aufgestellt: Die von Minern aufgebrachte Hashrate ist nirgendwo größer, als in den USA, Bitcoin-Bestände in Wallets sind nirgendwo größer als in den USA und die größten Bitcoin-Unternehmen, Unternehmen die Bitcoin fördern, oder Technologie entwickeln, die Bitcoin zugute kommt, sitzen in den USA.

Würden die USA, bzw. die US-Notenbank, zu einem Bitcoin-gestützten Währungssystem wechseln, müssten alle anderen Länder der Welt nachziehen, solange die USA diese (oben beschriebene) globale Vormachtstellung in der Weltwirtschaft noch innehaben. Dies würde den USA einen gewaltigen First-Mover-Vorteil bescheren, da nirgendwo sonst die Infrastruktur und der Zugang zu Bitcoin so stark ausgeprägt sind.

Es ist also nur eine politische Entscheidung, ob dieser First-Mover-Vorteil ausgenutzt wird oder nicht. Indem die Nutzung (institutioneller oder privater Art, Mining, Innovation, etc.) eingeschränkt wird, z.B. durch Verbote, Besteuerung, oder andere ungünstige Gesetze, wird die gesamte Branche und damit das technische Wissen, die Innovation und das damit verbundene Kapital ins Ausland verdrängt und die USA schießen sich ins eigene Bein.

Es wird sicherlich institutionellen Widerstand geben, da die derzeitigen institutionellen Akteure stark vom aktuellen System profitieren und daher nicht zu einem Bitcoin-Währungssystem wechseln wollen, in dem sie keine Zensurrechte und keine exklusiven Übertragungsrechte haben. Daher werden US-Institutionen wie die Notenbank und das Finanzministerium von diesem Ansatz nicht allzu begeistert sein, doch wenn sie es ernsthaft genug betrachten und erkennen, dass es sich hierbei um eine Form der geopolitischen, strategischen Kriegsführung handelt, könnten sie gezwungen sein, ihre Meinung zu ändern und sich auf ein neues System vorzubereiten, das den Idealen, wie Freiheit, Redefreiheit, Eigentumsrechten und solides Geld, treu bleibt, auf denen die USA gegründet wurden.

Peruvian Bull und Marty Bent führen in dieser Episode noch weitere Punkte aus, doch die mir wichtigsten Punkte habe ich wieder erwähnt. Kurz zusammengefasst: Die USA stehen davor, ihre globale Vormachtstellung zu verlieren. Ein Ausweg könnte die Adaption von Bitcoin als Retter des US Dollar sein. Die USA haben den fruchtbarsten Nährboden für eine solche Änderung des Systems, da sie heute schon die meiste Hashrate, das größte geistige Eigentum und Innovation, als auch das meiste Kapital bündeln.

Die USA hätten also in der Theorie ein sehr großes Interesse daran, Bitcoin als Lösung und zur Stützung ihres globalen Finanzmonopols zu adaptieren.

Zwei Theorien in zwei entgegengesetzte Richtungen 👈👉

Auf der einen Seite sehen wir ein Argument, weshalb den USA daran gelegen wäre, das aktuelle System so lange wie möglich aufrechtzuerhalten und dem alten Mann auf Krücken unter die Arme zu greifen. Auf der anderen Seite besteht ein Argument dafür, dass die USA ein gesteigertes Interesse daran haben sollten, das alte System so schnell wie möglich hinter sich zu lassen und die Pole Position, die die USA im Bereich Bitcoin haben - ohne Regierungs-seitig was dafür getan zu haben - für sich zu nutzen, um dem alten Mann auf Krücken zu einer Verjüngung zu verhelfen.

Es ist schwierig einzuschätzen, welchen Weg die USA gehen werden, da es immer noch keinen allgemeinen Konsens darüber gibt, wie Bitcoin zu betrachten ist. Der kürzlich vorgestellte DAME-Gesetzesentwurf (Digital Asset Mining Energy excise tax), also eine Verbrauchssteuer für Miner, der Biden-Regierung, würde von Bitcoin-Mining-Unternehmen verlangen, eine 30% Steuer auf die Stromkosten zu zahlen, die für das Mining von Bitcoin verwendet werden. Ein solches Gesetz würde die Mining Industrie aus dem Land drängen, da Miner heute schon auf sehr knappen Margen operieren und somit unprofitabel würden. Dies gleicht einer Bestrafung von Unternehmen für das Streben nach Innovation und technologischem Fortschritt.

Auf der anderen Seite gibt es aber auch die Ansicht, Bitcoin müsse ins Land geholt werden, da man es dort am besten kontrollieren kann, ganz nach dem Motto "Halte deine Freunde nah und deine Feinde noch näher". So z.B. Carole House, ehemalige Direktorin für Cybersicherheit des Nationalen Sicherheitsrates des Weißen Hauses. Sie sprach bei einem Event an der Universität von Princeton und sagte "sie würde lieber mehr Hashrate in den USA sehen, damit sie Miner zwingen können, das Netzwerk zu zensieren" und dass es "nicht nur darum ginge, Minern zu sagen, dass sie bestimmte Transaktionen nicht in Blöcke einbauen, sondern auch nicht auf Blöcken mit nicht konformen Transaktionen aufzubauen, damit diese Transaktionen nirgendwo in der Kette ankommen".

Wir sehen also, dass es selbst zwischen den Gegnern von Bitcoin keinen endgültigen Konsens gibt, wie das Thema in Zukunft angegangen werden soll. Da ist esnicht verwunderlich, dass auf Ebene eines Paradigmenwechsels, den die Adaption von Bitcoin von Seiten der Notenbank bedeuten würde, noch unklarer ist. Für mich sind beide Erklärungen logisch. Allerdings wissen wir nur zu gut, dass Regierungen es manchmal nicht so mit Logik und Vernunft haben.

🫳🎤

---

In diesem Sinne, 2... 1... Risiko!‌

@ 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 Bandcamp Punk Nostr website 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.

@ 207ad2a0:e7cca7b0

Quick context: I wanted to check out Nostr's longform posts and this blog post seemed like a good one to try and mirror. It's originally from my free to read/share attempt to write a novel, but this post here is completely standalone - just describing how I used AI image generation to make a small piece of the work.

Hold on, put your pitchforks down - outside of using Grammerly & Emacs for grammatical corrections - not a single character was generated or modified by computers; a non-insignificant portion of my first draft originating on pen & paper. No AI is ~~weird and crazy~~ imaginative enough to write like I do. The only successful AI contribution you'll find is a single image, the map, which I heavily edited. This post will go over how I generated and modified an image using AI, which I believe brought some value to the work, and cover a few quick thoughts about AI towards the end.

Let's be clear, I can't draw, but I wanted a map which I believed would improve the story I was working on. After getting abysmal results by prompting AI with text only I decided to use "Diffuse the Rest," a Stable Diffusion tool that allows you to provide a reference image + description to fine tune what you're looking for. I gave it this Microsoft Paint looking drawing:

and after a number of outputs, selected this one to work on:

The image is way better than the one I provided, but had I used it as is, I still feel it would have decreased the quality of my work instead of increasing it. After firing up Gimp I cropped out the top and bottom, expanded the ocean and separated the landmasses, then copied the top right corner of the large landmass to replace the bottom left that got cut off. Now we've got something that looks like concept art: not horrible, and gets the basic idea across, but it's still due for a lot more detail.

The next thing I did was add some texture to make it look more map like. I duplicated the layer in Gimp and applied the "Cartoon" filter to both for some texture. The top layer had a much lower effect strength to give it a more textured look, while the lower layer had a higher effect strength that looked a lot like mountains or other terrain features. Creating a layer mask allowed me to brush over spots to display the lower layer in certain areas, giving it some much needed features.

At this point I'd made it to where I felt it may improve the work instead of detracting from it - at least after labels and borders were added, but the colors seemed artificial and out of place. Luckily, however, this is when PhotoFunia could step in and apply a sketch effect to the image.

At this point I was pretty happy with how it was looking, it was close to what I envisioned and looked very visually appealing while still being a good way to portray information. All that was left was to make the white background transparent, add some minor details, and add the labels and borders. Below is the exact image I wound up using:

Overall, I'm very satisfied with how it turned out, and if you're working on a creative project, I'd recommend attempting something like this. It's not a central part of the work, but it improved the chapter a fair bit, and was doable despite lacking the talent and not intending to allocate a budget to my making of a free to read and share story.

The AI Generated Elephant in the Room

If you've read my non-fiction writing before, you'll know that I think AI will find its place around the skill floor as opposed to the skill ceiling. As you saw with my input, I have absolutely zero drawing talent, but with some elbow grease and an existing creative direction before and after generating an image I was able to get something well above what I could have otherwise accomplished. Outside of the lowest common denominators like stock photos for the sole purpose of a link preview being eye catching, however, I doubt AI will be wholesale replacing most creative works anytime soon. I can assure you that I tried numerous times to describe the map without providing a reference image, and if I used one of those outputs (or even just the unedited output after providing the reference image) it would have decreased the quality of my work instead of improving it.

I'm going to go out on a limb and expect that AI image, text, and video is all going to find its place in slop & generic content (such as AI generated slop replacing article spinners and stock photos respectively) and otherwise be used in a supporting role for various creative endeavors. For people working on projects like I'm working on (e.g. intended budget $0) it's helpful to have an AI capable of doing legwork - enabling projects to exist or be improved in ways they otherwise wouldn't have. I'm also guessing it'll find its way into more professional settings for grunt work - think a picture frame or fake TV show that would exist in the background of an animated project - likely a detail most people probably wouldn't notice, but that would save the creators time and money and/or allow them to focus more on the essential aspects of said work. Beyond that, as I've predicted before: I expect plenty of emails will be generated from a short list of bullet points, only to be summarized by the recipient's AI back into bullet points.

I will also make a prediction counter to what seems mainstream: AI is about to peak for a while. The start of AI image generation was with Google's DeepDream in 2015 - image recognition software that could be run in reverse to "recognize" patterns where there were none, effectively generating an image from digital noise or an unrelated image. While I'm not an expert by any means, I don't think we're too far off from that a decade later, just using very fine tuned tools that develop more coherent images. I guess that we're close to maxing out how efficiently we're able to generate images and video in that manner, and the hard caps on how much creative direction we can have when using AI - as well as the limits to how long we can keep it coherent (e.g. long videos or a chronologically consistent set of images) - will prevent AI from progressing too far beyond what it is currently unless/until another breakthrough occurs.

@ f4db5270:3c74e0d0

"Barche a riposo" (2023)

40x40 cm, oil on panel canvas

@ 953c0602:01aba028

[1] This refers to Derrida’s The Problem of Genesis in Husserl’s Philosophy (i.e., the “doctoral thesis” mentioned earlier), rather than Husserl’s Bernau Manuscripts referenced previously.

[2] Weimingzi attempted to connect Derrida’s The Problem of Genesis in Husserl’s Philosophy (finalized in 1954) with a portion of Husserl’s unpublished manuscripts known as the Bernau Manuscripts. However, at that moment, Weimingzi suddenly realized that he was unsure of the timeline for the editing and publication of the Bernau Manuscripts, so he halted his discussion. The Bernau Manuscripts were handed over to the Husserl Archives in Leuven by Eugen Fink in 1969 and were not published until 2001. Thus, not only had Derrida not seen the Bernau Manuscripts while writing The Problem of Genesis in Husserl’s Philosophy, but even by the time of its publication in 1990, he still had not encountered them. The Husserl texts Derrida utilized are listed in the appendix and bibliography of the second chapter of The Problem of Genesis in Husserl’s Philosophy.

[3] Referring to the “preface” of Derrida’s The Problem of Genesis in Husserl’s Philosophy:

“This is the interest and the difficulty of the problem of genesis, considered as synthesis: How can the absolutely originary foundation of sense and of being of a genesis be comprehended in and by this genesis? For if it is true that any synthesis is founded on an a priori synthesis, the problem of genesis is that of the sense of this a priori synthesis; if an a priori synthesis is at the source and foundation of any possible judgment and any experience， are we not referred to an indefnite dialectic？ How can the originarity of a foundation be an a priori synthesis？ How can everything start with a complication？ If any genesis and any synthesis refer to their constitution through an a priori synthesis，then has not the a priori synthesis itself，when it appears to itself in a constituting，transcendental and supposedly originary experience，already taken on sense，is it not always by defnition "already" constituted by another synthesis，and so on infnitely？ How can a phenomenological originarity lay absolute claim to the first constitution of sense if it is preceded by what could be called a historical "primitiveness"？ A primitiveness which，it has to be said，only "appears" as such through an originary constitution. Is there not some trick in any going beyond of this dialectic？ Does one not fall back into the formalism that one claims to be going beyond，by referring the philosophical thematization of this dialectic to the originarity of its transcendental constitution，to intentionality，to perception？ Is not phenomenological temporality，at once transcendental and originary，"temporalizing”，constituting，only in appearance and starting from a "natural" time，indifferent to transcendental consciousness itself，preceding it, enveloping it？ Husserl，especially in the last years of his life，would not perhaps have absolutely disputed this; perhaps all his last efforts were for saving phenomenology by assimilating to it this new relation.”

[4] The Problem of Genesis in Husserl’s Philosophy is structured into four parts, each centered on an in-depth exploration of specific works by Husserl, Part I focuses on Philosophy of Arithmetic: Psychological and Logical Investigations (now included in Volume 12 of the Hague edition of Husserl’s Collected Works) and the first volume of Logical Investigations (Volume 18 of the Hague edition); Part II examines the second volume of Logical Investigations (Volumes 19–20 of the Hague edition), Lectures on the Phenomenology of Internal Time-Consciousness (Volume 10), and Ideas I (Ideas Pertaining to a Pure Phenomenology and to a Phenomenological Philosophy, Volume 3); Part III revolves around Experience and Judgment: Investigations in a Genealogy of Logic (not yet included in the Hague edition but roughly corresponding to Volume 17, Formal and Transcendental Logic) and Cartesian Meditations (Volume 1);Part IV engages with The Crisis of European Sciences and Transcendental Phenomenology and related lectures, such as The Origin of Geometry (Volumes 6 and 29).

[5] As noted in footnote 4, Derrida’s The Problem of Genesis in Husserl’s Philosophy does not address Ideas II. As the Chinese translator of the book, Yu Qizhi, points out in the “Bibliography,” the French edition of Ideas II was published only in 1982.

[6] In The Problem of Genesis in Husserl’s Philosophy, Derrida employs the term “originarity” rather than the more commonly used “originality.” This distinction is noted in a footnote within the “Preface” of Marian Hobson’s English translation of the work:

“The present translation keeps particularly close to Derrida's French in two cases, ‘originarity’ and ‘becoming’，which both refer to Husserl's German. Derrida has adopted the translations used by Paul Ricoeur，which deliberately do not naturalize the terms into the mere straightforward ‘originality’ and ‘development’.”

[7] The contradiction in the binary opposition within the “problem of genesis” in Husserl’s philosophy, as pointed out by Derrida, lies in the tension between transcendental genesis and empirical genesis. It is not, as Weimingzi suggests, a supposed opposition between “originarity” and “anticipation.” In fact, “absolute origin” and “anticipation” are unified within the concept of transcendental genesis. Weimingzi’s claim that “the problem of genesis has a dual nature……one being the absolute beginning…… and the other being that all genesis is anticipated” is mistaken from the outset.

For a discussion of the “duality” of genesis as addressed by Derrida, refer to the “Preface” of The Problem of Genesis in Husserl’s Philosophy:

“In a word, if the theme of transcendental genesis appeared at a certain moment in order to understand and found the theme of empirical genesis that preceded it in natural time， we need to ask ourselves about the meaning of this evolution. How was it possible？”

For the concept of “origin” referred here by Derrida is about transcendental genesis, refer to the “Preface” of the book mentioned above:

“First of all, genesis, when it is examined naively and in the most formal way possible， brings together two contradictory meanings in its concept: one of origin, one of becoming…… The existence of any genesis seems to have this tension between a transcendence and an immanence as its sense and direction.”

For the concept of “anticipation” referred here by Derrida is about transcendental genesis, refer to the “Preface” of the book mentioned above:

“A certain anticipation is thus faithful to the sense of every genesis: every innovation is a verification, every creation is a fulfilling, every emergence is tradition.”

[8] “(All genesis) occurs within a flow of past and future” refers to the context of empirical genesis and should not be linked with the previous clause (“all genesis is anticipated”) under the conjunction “therefore”. Weimingzi’s statement here——introducing a description related to empirical genesis while discussing the issue of “anticipation” —— further confirms what we revealed in footnote 7: Weimingzi has not clearly grasped the binary opposition between empirical genesis and transcendental genesis discussed by Derrida.

For the connection between “genesis within the flow of time” and empirical genesis, refer to the “Preface” of Derrida’s The Problem of Genesis in Husserl’s Philosophy:

“First of all, genesis, when it is examined naively and in the most formal way possible， brings together two contradictory meanings in its concept: one of origin, one of becoming…… But at the same stage, there is no genesis except within a temporal and ontological totality which encloses it; every genetic product is produced by something other than itself, it is carried by a past, called forth and oriented by a future.”

[9] During the recording of this video, Weimingzi held a physical copy of The Problem of Genesis in Husserl’s Philosophy, which appeared on screen. In this particular scene, Weimingzi shakes the book in his hand. Therefore, it is clear that the sentence refers to this book, rather than Speech and Phenomena mentioned earlier.

[10] “物论,” meaning materialism, refers to what is commonly known as dialectical materialism or philosophical materialism. The term “理项” here likely refers to what Weimingzi intended to denote as “相型论,” meaning idealism, which is often translated as subjective idealism or philosophical idealism. Notably, these two terms in Yu Qizhi’s translation differ from traditional renderings in philosophical works.

[11] Is “invention” a “phenomenological category”? This is a question. We find that not only does the “Glossary” appended to Yu Qizhi’s translation of The Problem of Genesis in Husserl’s Philosophy fail to include any vocabulary rooted in the term “invent”, but also the “German-French-English-Chinese Phenomenological Terminology Comparison Table” appended to Youzheng Li’s translation of Ideas I similarly omits any terms derived from the root “invent.”

Derrida does indeed use the term “invention” in The Problem of Genesis in Husserl’s Philosophy (in both English and French as “invention,” translated by Yu Qizhi as “发明” invention without any explanatory parentheses). Let us examine how Derrida employs this “category”, with reference to the “Preface” of Derrida’s The Problem of Genesis in Husserl’s Philosophy:

“An invention without verification could not be assimilated; it would be pure accommodation, at the limit, it would not even be ‘for a consciousness’. There is no consciousness that does not perceive every sense as a sense ‘for self’ (this ‘for self’ being one of a transcendental subjectivity, not a psychological one). Every sense being for a consciousness， by definition not being able to make itself a stranger to a ‘transcendental ego’, an intentional ego, it always reveals itself as ‘already’ present. At the limit, an invention without verification would deny the intentionality of consciousness, it would be invention ‘of’ nothing or invention (of) itself(by) itself, which would destroy the very sense of any inventions, which is a synthetic sense. The paradox and strangeness of transcendental intentionality reappear at the core of every invention, symbol of genesis: it is through a ‘synthetic’ value that a becoming and a temporal act are acts of verification and at the limit analytic. But just as invention without verification is only conceivable in the myth of consciousness without intentionality, of thinking torn from the world and from time, so verification without invention is not verifying anything by anything. It is a pure tautology, an empty and merely formal identity, a negation (of)consciousness, (of) world, (of) time, where every truth appears; it is thus through the “analytic” essence of every verification, of every aiming at sense, that this latter must refer out in a synthetic act to something other than itself…… In a sense, for Kant, the empirical and the a priori are mutually exclusive. The sense of every genesis is a phenomenal one. Invention is not absolute verification. Hence it is not real invention.”

It turns out that “invention” is a concept rooted in Kantian philosophy. From the referenced text, it is evident that Derrida, by introducing the concept of “verification” (French: vérification; German: Bewährung), effectively excludes the Kantian concept of “invention” from Husserlian phenomenology.

[12] The problem of genesis in Husserl’s philosophy is not concerned with the genesis of “ideas” within the mind, but rather with the genesis of phenomena in their worldly manifestation. Refer to Derrida’s “Preface” in The Problem of Genesis in Husserl’s Philosophy:

“The ‘transcendental’ reduction, end and principle of this movement, is the reduction, the farewell to every historical genesis, in the classical and ‘worldly’ sense of the term. But after this retreat to a philosophical purity of an idealist style, there are announced a kind of return, the outlines of a movement of broad reconquest: it is the notion of transcendental genesis which， resistant in principle to every reduction, revealed perhaps by every reduction properly understood, will oversee a kind of philosophical recuperation of history and allow a reconciliation of phenomenology and ‘worldly’ sciences. The first will be the foundation of the latter. For from the beginning of his career, Husserl had formulated the demand for such a synthesis.”

[13] Here, Weimingzi refers to “verification” as “vertification” and even writes it as “vertification” on the writing board. It is worth noting that, as mentioned in footnote 11, “invention” is a concept from Kantian philosophy rather than Husserlian phenomenology. Yet, Weimingzi provides an extended and ambiguous discussion on this matter. Meanwhile, the concept that truly belongs to Husserl—— “verification” ——is included in the two glossaries mentioned in footnote 11, but Weimingzi misspells it.

[14] In Weimingzi’s account, “consciousness” and “intentionality” are used as synonyms, which does not align with the Husserlian phenomenology introduced by Derrida. For further details, see footnote 17.

[15] It is only at this point that Weimingzi corrected their pronunciation and spelling of “verification.”

Weimingzi engaged in some ambiguous discussions surrounding the concept of “invention”, which does not exist in Husserlian phenomenology, while his grasp of the concept of “verification”, which does indeed belong to Husserlian phenomenology, proved to be flawed.

[16] Note that here, Weimingzi refers to the “dialectical structure of origin”, but what they actually mean is the “dialectical structure of genesis”, as evidenced by an arrow drawn on the canvas originating from “Genesis”.

However, as pointed out in footnotes 7 and 8, Weimingzi mistakenly conflates the binary opposition of “transcendental genesis” and “empirical genesis” with the binary opposition of “originarity” and “anticipation”. Furthermore, they align “invention” and “intentionality” with “originarity” and “anticipation”, respectively. As noted in footnote 11, “invention” is not a concept within Husserlian phenomenology. Consequently, constructing a binary opposition between “invention” and “intentionality” deviates from the Husserlian phenomenology introduced by Derrida. At most, it reflects a particular interpretation of “transcendental genesis”.

It is particularly important to note that, according to the Husserlian phenomenology introduced by Derrida, “intentionality” plays a role within the structure of transcendental genesis. To avoid reverting to Brentano’s framework, Husserl maintains the category of “intentionality” within the structure of transcendental genesis. Thus, the opposition between transcendental genesis and empirical genesis manifests in terms of intentionality as a contrast between “intentionality” and “the temporality of consciousness.” For further details on this point, refer to Chapter 1 of Part III in Derrida’s The Problem of Genesis in Husserl’s Philosophy:

“Now, the absolute foundation of phenomenological clear evidence, the last authority for all language, all logic, all philosophical discourse, is that intentionality is merged with the temporality of consciousness.”

[17] This passage also confuses the concepts of “consciousness” and “intentionality”, as evidenced by the earlier statement: “You have an intentionality, or you have a thought, or a consciousness, which arises.” When we generate a “thought,” what exactly “has been there”? Once we distinguish between the concepts of “consciousness” and “intentionality,” this statement becomes clear: when we generate a thought, we can already confirm the existence of a transcendental intentionality that has been present all along.

[18] It must be emphasized once again that what is brought forth can only be a “thought,” not “intentionality.”

[19] At this point, Weimingzi flipped through the book, located the text they intended to discuss, and corrected the spelling of “contamination”. It is important to note that the term “contamination” appear in both the original text and its annotations in the book. For reference, see Derrida’s The Problem of Genesis in Husserl’s Philosophy, “To the Reader” (1990 edition):

“This panoramic reading, which here sweeps across the whole work of Husserl with the imperturbable impudence of a scanner, refers to a sort of law whose stability seems to me today all the more astonishing because, since then, even in its literal formulation, this law will not have stopped commanding everything l have tried to prove, as if a sort of idiosyncrasy was already negotiating in its own way a necessity that would always overtake it and that would have to be interminably reappropriated. What necessity？It is always a question of an originary complication of the origin, of an initial contamination of the simple, of an inaugural divergence that no analysis could present, make present in its phenomenon or reduce to the point like nature of the element, instantaneous and identical to itself. In fact the question that governs the whole trajectory is already: ‘How can the originarity of a foundation be an a priori synthesis？ How can everything start with a complication?’ All the limits on which phenomenological discourse is constructed are examined from the standpoint of the fatal necessity of a ‘contamination’ (‘unperceived entailment or dissimulated contamination’ between the two edges of the opposition: transcendental/‘worldly’, eidetic/empirical, intentional/ nonintentional, active/passive, present/nonpresent, pointlike/non-pointlike, originary / derived, pure/impure, etc.), the quaking of each border coming to propagate itself onto all the others. A law of differential contamination imposes its logic from one end of the book to the other; and I ask myself why the very word ‘contamination’ has not stopped imposing itself on me from thence forward.”

[20] The three sets of binary oppositions presented by Weimingzi do not correspond to any of the eight sets of binary oppositions listed in Derrida’s original text cited in footnote 19. Instead, they resemble the so-called “metaphysical” binary oppositions, often associated with hierarchical thinking, rather than phenomenological binary oppositions.

Moreover, it is worth noting that Weimingzi mentions “the real and the essential,” “the formal and the real.” Even if “the real” and “the actual” (or “real” in another sense) are distinguishable within Weimingzi’s framework, these two terms should occupy equivalent positions. However, in their enumeration, one appears as the first term in a pair while the other appears as the second term in another pair. This inconsistency in the ordering of the terms within these pairs reflects a certain confusion.

[21] As noted in footnote 20, the frameworks listed by Weimingzi are fundamentally not those introduced by Derrida within the context of Husserlian phenomenology.

[22] Here, Weimingzi emphasizes “the action of consciousness”, which reverts to the issue pointed out in footnote 12.

[23] In this discussion, we primarily draw upon Husserl’s Experience and Judgment to elucidate this issue. As noted in footnote 4, Experience and Judgment is one of the key texts around which Derrida’s The Problem of Genesis in Husserl’s Philosophy revolves. Moreover, Derrida points out that Experience and Judgment is a work Husserl agreed to publish shortly before his death.

How should we understand the statement “I recall that I just stepped on the floor” as a “ternary relation”? In fact, it is quite simple. The “I who is recalling” constitutes the first element, while the occurrence of the content being recalled (“I stepped on the floor”) has a dual nature: the transcendental genesis of the recalled content forms the second element, and the empirical genesis of the recalled content forms the third element.

Regarding the transcendental genesis of the recalled content, refer to Chapter 1 of Part III in Derrida’s The Problem of Genesis in Husserl’s Philosophy:

“The existent, aim of knowledge, must always be ‘pregiven’. But it must not be given in any old fashion. It must be given in the evidence of the ‘self givenness’ [given in person] and not in a simple ‘presentification’ of imagination or of memory.”

We only need to change the example so that the content of recollection does not involve the so-called “I”, and then the issue transforms into the phenomenological epistemological problem of “recollection”. Specifically, it becomes a problem concerning the binary opposition between the transcendental genesis and empirical genesis of the content being recalled. Husserl uses “another table” as an example; see §37 in Chapter 3 of Husserl’s Experience and Judgment:

“The most immediate question will concern above all the connection of perception with memory as positional [setzender] presentification and the mode of their intuitive unity, of a unity, therefore, which can also appear when the unifed objects, which are in reciprocal relation, are not given simultaneously in a perception but are given partly in perceptions, partly in presentifcations.

The following serves as an example: through perception I see a table before me, and at the same time I am reminded of another table, which formerly was in its place……

Certainly, there is a legitimacy to talking about the separate-ness of the perceived and the remembered, If I live in memory I have a unity of intuition of memory; what is remembered is there before all acts of comparing, distinguishing, relating; there membered is ‘sensuous’ and made of flowing parts, ‘intuitive’, unitary, and self-enclosed just as long as I live in one intuition of memory which persists uninterrupted, as long as I don't ‘leap’ from memory to memory in a chaos of sudden ‘whims’. Every uniform memory is in itself continuously uniform and in itself constitutes for consciousness a unity of objectivities, which is an intuitive-sensuous unity: intuitive in flowing parts, we said, That is, the running-through in memory of an event of sufficiently long duration has exactly the same structure as its apprehension in original perception. Just as in perception there is always only a single phase intuitively present to consciousness in the original, which phase, immediately detached from the next and retained in grasp, is united synthetically with it, so, in the memory of the event, the whole event is, to be sure, intuitively intended in its unity, namely, in all of its phases, although always only a single stretch of its flowing temporality is ‘really intuitive’.

The principle of the closed nature [Geschlossenheit] of memory is naturally exactly the same as that which we have determined previously for perception, namely, it is based on a unity of temporal duration. It is a unity, not only in relation to the extraction and thematic contemplation of a perceived individual thing or event, but in relation to the unitary phenomenon of the “impression" which founds this activity, a phenomenon in which a unity of objectivity(however numerous its components may be )is sensuously pregiven to us, is already passively there for us. It is an originally constituted structure which flows along continuously. This structure, whether of perception (firsthand sensuous givenness) or of memory，is always for itself, and only the horizon-intentions give it a connection with the objectivity which extends beyond it, with the objective world of which it is a constituent part.”

“Partly in perception, partly in recollection” means “partly in phenomenological intuition, partly in phenomenological reduction.” The so-called “intuitive unity” pertains to the empirical genesis of the content of recollection, whereas the “principle of closure” pertains to the transcendental genesis of the content of recollection.

[24] In fact, Derrida has already pointed out that “transcendental intentionality” is unnecessary. Refer to Chapter 2 of Part I in Derrida’s The Problem of Genesis in Husserl’s Philosophy:

“The objective sense of being can well do without. But will being not also do without a transcendental intentionality?”

It is worth noting that Weimingzi regards Derrida’s The Problem of Genesis in Husserl’s Philosophy as an effort to “rescue” Husserlian phenomenology. However, Derrida did not actually make such an “effort”. As Derrida’s doctoral dissertation, this work is, overall, a review-oriented piece. As noted in footnote 4, Derrida examines several of Husserl’s works in this book along a chronological trajectory and ultimately declares the failure of Husserl’s efforts in transcendental phenomenology. Weimingzi, having not finished reading the book, failed to notice Derrida’s judgment on Husserlian phenomenology. For details, see footnote 45.

[25] The result is that these statements are neither rigorous nor comprehensible.

[26] Due to Weimingzi’s erroneous framing of “absolute origin” and “anticipation” as a binary opposition, using it to replace the binary opposition of “transcendental genesis” and “empirical genesis” (see footnotes 7 and 8), as well as his failure to distinguish between intentionality (Intentionalität) and intention (see footnote 16), he ended up presenting this example in a very ambiguous manner.

In the Husserlian phenomenology introduced by Derrida, transcendental intentionality anticipates empirical genesis. For instance, when a person’s eyes move from left to right, this movement involves a dialectical unity between the transcendental genesis——whose content is the anticipation of the eyes moving from left to right——and the worldly, empirical genesis of this movement. This serves as an example of the quotation in footnote 7: “All creation is realization.”

The metaphor of a “console” aptly illustrates the actual situation of transcendental phenomenology. To say it “does not exist” is to view it from today’s perspective, or from outside phenomenology. Transcendental intentionality anticipating the movement of the eyes from left to right is akin to operating a game controller, while the empirical genesis of the eyes moving from left to right resembles the unfolding content on a game screen. How, then, do people gain knowledge of this “console”? The method lies in “transcendental intuition” and “transcendental reduction”. However, what are the specific mechanisms of transcendental intuition and transcendental reduction? This question aligns with what Weimingzi previously referred to as the “fatal blow (to phenomenology)”.

[27] The point here is that initially, our grasp of the occurrence of eye movement is simple: “the eyes moved from left to right”. However, our understanding can deepen. For example, we may further recognize that the eyes moved horizontally by 10° (as Weimingzi mentions in terms like “positioning” and “deflection”). How, then, does transcendental intentionality anticipate our deeper grasp of the empirical genesis of eye movement? Should we believe that transcendental intentionality already contains all the rich information within the depth we can comprehend——even before we consciously deepen our grasp (phenomenological intuition)? Or should we think that transcendental intentionality reveals itself progressively and appropriately as our understanding deepens (phenomenological reduction)?

This is precisely the question Derrida raises. Refer to the quotation in footnote 3: “How can everything begin with complexity?”

[28] Weimingzi stated: “Its problem ultimately still originates from Kant’s ‘a priori synthesis,’ that is, the problem of synthetic a priori.” This statement is steady and correct but equally steady in failing to provide any further insight. For Derrida, what is crucial is to develop or transform this concept of “a priori synthesis” (or “pre-experiential synthesis”) that “originates from Kant.” Derrida points out: “In Kant, experience and the a priori (pre-experiential) are mutually incompatible.” However, in Hegel and Husserl, “it is the a priori synthesis (pre-experiential synthesis) that makes all experience and all experiential meaning possible.”

Refer to the Preface of Derrida’s The Problem of Genesis in Husserl’s Philosophy:

“Kant, in refuting Hume, showed convincingly that without the intervention of an a priori form of the understanding, any judgment loses its necessary character. We will not here go into historical analyses, let us just note that Kant called ‘synthetic a priori’ judgments only those of a mathematical order. These judgments are precisely those which escape from genesis. Their synthesis is not ‘real’, at least not in the eyes of Kant. Insofar as they are not born in effective historical experience, insofar as they are not ‘constituted’ by this, they are a priori. In a sense， for Kant, the empirical and the a priori are mutually exclusive. The sense of every genesis is a phenomenal one. Invention is not absolute verification. Hence it is not real invention. The sense of every empirical-genetic judgment is the object of a construction, thus by definition dubious. On this point at least, it is surprising to see the precision with which Hegel's criticism of Kant points to Husserl's perspective: far from the experience of the real which is called “phenomenal”, excluding a priori synthesis, it is a priori synthesis (of thought and the real, of sense and of the sensible, for example, and in a very general way) which makes experience possible, and every meaning of experience.”

[29] Considering the origin of a priori synthesis, refer to §8 in Chapter 1 of Husserl’s Experience and Judgment:

“For us the world is always a world in which cognition in the most diverse ways has already done its work. Thus it is not open to doubt that there is no experience, in the simple and primary sense of an experience of things, which, grasping a thing for the first time and bringing cognition to bear on it, does not already “know” more about the thing than is in this cognitional one. Every act of experience, whatever it may be that is experienced in the proper sense as it comes into view, has eo ipso necessarily, a knowledge and a potential knowledge [Mitwissenhaving] reference to precisely this thing, namely, to something of it which has not yet come into view， 'This preknowledge [Vorwissen]is indeterminate as to content, or not completely deter-mined， but it is never completely empty; and were it not already manifest, the experience would not at all be experience of this one, this particular, thing.”

[30] This refers to the fact that, in Kantian philosophy, genesis lacks the foundation of “a priori synthesis” in Kant’s sense. See the quotation in footnote 11: “In Kant, experience and the pre-experiential are mutually incompatible. All the meaning of genesis is the meaning of phenomena.”

Additionally, refer to Derrida’s The Problem of Genesis in Husserl’s Philosophy:

“Let us just note that Kant called ‘synthetic a priori judgments’ only those of a mathematical order. These judgments are precisely those which escape from genesis. Their synthesis is not ‘real’, at least not in the eyes of Kant.

[31] The original words of Weimingzi are as follows: Weimingzi turned “itself” into a preposition. The “two prepositions” refer to the previously mentioned “of and by.” Framing these two prepositions together means that “itself” has been prepositionalized, carrying the meaning of “of and by.”

[32] The term “Noema” (German: Noema), translated as “object of consciousness” in the glossary appended to Yu Qizhi’s translation of The Problem of Genesis in Husserl’s Philosophy, is rendered as “intentional object” in the comparative table appended to Ideas I referenced in Note 11.

In Derrida’s work, the temporality of the “object of consciousness” is discussed in the second part, with the title of its first chapter being “Noematic Temporality and Genetic Temporality”.

[33] Here, Weimingzi assumed a posture of reading a book. “The Genetic Constitution of the Ego and the Passage to a New Form of Transcendental Idealism” is the title he read from Chapter 2 of Part III in The Problem of Genesis in Husserl’s Philosophy.

Weimingzi referred to this chapter as the “final” one. Earlier, he also mentioned, “Finally, attempting to undertake a transcendental logic,” which likewise referred to the content of Part III. As noted in Footnote 4, Derrida’s book consists of four parts. However, even while reading aloud the chapter titles from the table of contents, Weimingzi consistently referred to the content of Part III as “final.” This peculiarity is both intriguing and puzzling. We speculate that this might be because the chapter titles in Part IV make less frequent use of phenomenological concepts (though not entirely absent) and include terms like “philosophical history,” which seem less “lofty.” If articulated explicitly, it might fail to achieve an effect of ostentation.

The chapter titles in Part IV are as follows:

Part IV: Teleology——The Sense of History and the History of Sense

1.The Birth and Crisis of Philosophy

2.The First Task of Philosophy: The Reactivation of Genesis

3.The History of Philosophy and the Transcendental Motive

[34] The “new form of idealism” articulated by Derrida is precisely what he terms “teleological idealism.” This concept is unveiled in Chapter 2 of Part III of The Problem of Genesis in Husserl’s Philosophy and is further elaborated upon in Part IV. Due to his incomplete reading of the book, Weimingzi failed to recognize the significance of the concept of “teleology,” which is prominently featured in the title of Part IV.

However, considering that Weimingzi identifies “teleology” as one of the theoretical orientations within the four dimensions of his “Ismism” framework, his neglect of the term “teleology” here remains striking.

For reference, Derrida’s discussion of the “new form of idealism” in Chapter 2 of Part III:

“Therefore let us not be surprised when in Cartesian Meditations, presenting phenomenology as absolute science, as the foundation of every possible science of every science that is existent in history and constituted in a culture, Husserl alludes to a new "idea"; a teleological idea that will give him a sense of the becoming which in itself and as such is not constituted by any becoming.”

[35] Referencing the quotation from Footnote 22: “At least on this point, we are struck by how Hegel’s critique of Kant accurately foreshadows Husserl’s perspective: it is far from being the so-called ‘phenomena’—— the reality of experience that excludes a priori synthesis——that makes all experience and the meaning of all experience possible. Rather, it is the a priori synthesis (for example, and generally speaking, between thought and reality, meaning and sensibility) that constitutes the very possibility of all experience and all experiential meaning.”

[36] The original words of Weimingzi were as follows, though it should be considered a slip of the tongue involving “light and airy” (qingpiaopiao). The “piaopiao” in qingpiaopiao (“light and airy”) shares the same tone and rhyme as the “qiaoqiao” in jingqiaoqiao (“quiet and still”). Additionally, words such as qingqiao (“light and nimble”) and qingqiao (“light and graceful”), which convey related meanings, also use the initial consonant q. The combination of these factors likely led to this slip of the tongue.

[37] Refer to the quotation in Footnote 45.

[38] This refers to the “Arc Reactor” on Iron Man’s chest.

[39] Refer to the quotation in Footnote 40.

[40] Regarding the subsequent text, Derrida mentions two works: Introduction to Husserl’s “The Origin of Geometry” (1962) and Speech and Phenomena (1967).

For reference, see Derrida’s “To the Reader” in The Problem of Genesis in Husserl’s Philosophy (1990):

“that several years later, even when in the introduction to Edmund Husserl's Origin of Geometry (1962) and in Speech and Phenomena (1967), I was pursuing the reading started in this way, the word "dialectic" finished either by totally disappearing or even by designating that without which or separate from which difference, originary supplement, and traces had to be thought, all these are perhaps a kind of road sign: about the philosophical and political map according to which a student of philosophy tried to find his bearings in 1950s France.”

It is worth noting that Weimingzi had indeed read the 1990 “Preface” to The Problem of Genesis in Husserl’s Philosophy. For instance, his discussion of “contamination” can be found in the original text cited in Footnote 15, and his commentary on “the choice of a young student” is referenced in Footnote 32, with the latter originating from this very section.

Moreover, he also mentioned Speech and Phenomena earlier in this text. Why, then, does he appear unaware of it here?

[41] Refer to the quotation in Footnote 40.

[42] Derrida’s The Problem of Genesis in Husserl’s Philosophy does not include a “Postscript.” The so-called “Postscript” likely refers to the 1990 Preface, which is labeled as such in both the Chinese and English editions.

Regarding the book’s length, the Chinese edition (2019) spans approximately 250 pages: the 1953–54 Preface, titled “The Theme of Genesis and the Genesis of Themes,” occupies 40 pages, while the main text begins on page 41 and ends on page 291. The English edition treats the 1953–54 Preface as separately paginated, with its main text totaling 214 pages. In any case, this is a book of over 200 pages, not merely “a little over 100 pages.”

Additionally, the 1953–54 Preface, “The Theme of Genesis and the Genesis of Themes”, is a highly significant text. In fact, it is evident that Weimingzi primarily relied on these 40 pages for his lecture in this video. How could Weimingzi possibly advise others to omit this section when recommending the book?

As we noted earlier in footnote 33, when Weimingzi glanced through the table of contents of The Problem of Genesis in Husserl’s Philosophy, he overlooked the fourth section, which includes terms such as “teleology” and “philosophy of history.” This act of omission shares a common foundation with his classification of “history” as part of the “realm of the physical”: namely, how Weimingzi conceptualizes the notion of “philosophy of history.

[43] Weimingzi places “history” on the “metaphysical vs. physical” spectrum as belonging to the “physical” side, which does not align with the phenomenology of Husserl as introduced by Derrida. Categorizing “history” on the “physical” side implies an “anti-philosophy of history”, a stance that contradicts Derrida's interpretation of Husserlian phenomenology.

Weimingzi himself has stated that The Problem of Genesis in Husserl's Philosophy “enables a connection between Hegel and Husserl” (see footnote 35). The concept of the philosophy of history is precisely one of the key points that links the two. We have already referenced texts where Derrida identifies similarities between Husserl's and Hegel's philosophies (see footnote 22). Here, we further cite passages from Derrida's The Problem of Genesis in Husserl's Philosophy. For instance, in the "Preface," Derrida writes:

“Both through its conventions and its method, this philosophy will reveal to us [what are] the radical implications of this essential inseparability of these two worlds of meanings: history of philosophy and philosophy of history.”

Additionally, in Chapter 3 of Part IV, Derrida begins with the following statement:

“History borrows all its sense from the intentional rationality which thus secretly animates it; the idea of philosophy, indefinite unveiling of this ratio, burst into European humanity. Transcendental phenomenology, in its project, is one with this analogous life itself.”

Placing “history” on the “physical” side reflects a profound misunderstanding on Weimingzi's part regarding Derrida's perspective in this book. This misunderstanding is partly due to Weimingzi’s own admission that he did not finish reading Derrida’s work. However, it likely also stems from a deeper misapprehension of Hegelian dialectics and the philosophy of history—concepts Weimingzi claims to have "turned toward."

As noted earlier (see footnote 33), Weimingzi overlooked references to "teleology" and "philosophy of history" in Part IV when browsing the table of contents of The Problem of Genesis in Husserl's Philosophy. This oversight shares a common foundation with his decision to categorize “history” as belonging to the “physical” realm: namely, how Weimingzi conceptualizes the idea of “philosophy of history”.

[44] The blackboard writing proceeded as follows (“The correct spelling of ‘发生’ is ‘genesis’”). Subsequently, unable to spell the word for “genetics” with the root “-ology,” Weimingzi crossed out this term on the blackboard.

It should be noted that Derrida’s book does not employ the term for “发生学” derived from the root “-ology.” The term translated by Yu Qizhi as “genetics” appears in the English version as “genetics” when used as a noun and “genetically” when used as an adverb.

[45] Derrida’s The Problem of Genesis in Husserl’s Philosophy is a work of “synthesis” or “overview”. It does not construct anything on behalf of Husserl. Because Weimingzi did not finish reading this book, he assumed that Derrida was attempting to “rescue” Husserlian phenomenology (Weimingzi repeatedly mentioned “rescue”; we cite just one instance in the original text referenced in footnote 37) and declared Derrida’s failure. However, Derrida merely provided an overview of Husserlian phenomenology and, in fact, declared its failure himself.

For reference, see Chapter 1 of Part III in The Problem of Genesis in Husserl’s Philosophy:

This philosophical refection being always unfinished, it seems that, in spite of what Husserl says, the race toward the originary is permanently and essentially condemned to failure.

[46] Derrida regarded his work The Problem of Genesis in Husserl’s Philosophy as an idealist endeavor. He referenced the work of his classmate, the Vietnamese philosopher Tran Duc Thao, titled Phenomenology and Dialectical Materialism (1951). Derrida believed that the concept of “dialectics” in his own work transcended “dialectical materialism.” For reference, see the “To the Reader” section in the 1990 edition of The Problem of Genesis in Husserl’s Philosophy:

“dialectic, an ‘originary dialectic’. The word comes back insistently, page after page. A ‘dialectical’ escalation claims to go farther than dialectical materialism (that of Tran Duc Thao， for example，often quoted and deemed insufficiently dialectical, still a ‘prisoner … of a meta-physics’.”

References:

Husserl, Edmund. Translated by Li Youzheng. General Introduction to Pure Phenomenology M. Beijing: The Commercial Press, 1992.

Husserl, Edmund. Edited by Ludwig Landgrebe. Translated by Deng Xiaomang et al. Experience and Judgment: Investigations in a Genealogy of Logic M. Beijing: SDX Joint Publishing Company, 1999.

Derrida, Jacques. Translated by Yu Qizhi. The Problem of Genesis in Husserl’s Philosophy M. Beijing: The Commercial Press, 2019.

@ 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. 🙂

@ eac63075:b4988b48

Since its creation in 2009, Bitcoin has symbolized innovation and resilience. However, from time to time, alarmist narratives arise about emerging technologies that could "break" its security. Among these, quantum computing stands out as one of the most recurrent. But does quantum computing truly threaten Bitcoin? And more importantly, what is the community doing to ensure the protocol remains invulnerable?

The answer, contrary to sensationalist headlines, is reassuring: Bitcoin is secure, and the community is already preparing for a future where quantum computing becomes a practical reality. Let’s dive into this topic to understand why the concerns are exaggerated and how the development of BIP-360 demonstrates that Bitcoin is one step ahead.

---

What Is Quantum Computing, and Why Is Bitcoin Not Threatened?

Quantum computing leverages principles of quantum mechanics to perform calculations that, in theory, could exponentially surpass classical computers—and it has nothing to do with what so-called “quantum coaches” teach to scam the uninformed. One of the concerns is that this technology could compromise two key aspects of Bitcoin’s security:

1. Wallets: These use elliptic curve algorithms (ECDSA) to protect private keys. A sufficiently powerful quantum computer could deduce a private key from its public key.
2. Mining: This is based on the SHA-256 algorithm, which secures the consensus process. A quantum attack could, in theory, compromise the proof-of-work mechanism.

---

Understanding Quantum Computing’s Attack Priorities

While quantum computing is often presented as a threat to Bitcoin, not all parts of the network are equally vulnerable. Theoretical attacks would be prioritized based on two main factors: ease of execution and potential reward. This creates two categories of attacks:

1. Attacks on Wallets

Bitcoin wallets, secured by elliptic curve algorithms, would be the initial targets due to the relative vulnerability of their public keys, especially those already exposed on the blockchain. Two attack scenarios stand out:

• Short-term attacks: These occur during the interval between sending a transaction and its inclusion in a block (approximately 10 minutes). A quantum computer could intercept the exposed public key and derive the corresponding private key to redirect funds by creating a transaction with higher fees.

• Long-term attacks: These focus on old wallets whose public keys are permanently exposed. Wallets associated with Satoshi Nakamoto, for example, are especially vulnerable because they were created before the practice of using hashes to mask public keys.

We can infer a priority order for how such attacks might occur based on urgency and importance.

Bitcoin Quantum Attack: Prioritization Matrix (Urgency vs. Importance)

2. Attacks on Mining

Targeting the SHA-256 algorithm, which secures the mining process, would be the next objective. However, this is far more complex and requires a level of quantum computational power that is currently non-existent and far from realization. A successful attack would allow for the recalculation of all possible hashes to dominate the consensus process and potentially "mine" it instantly.

---

Satoshi Nakamoto in 2010 on Quantum Computing and Bitcoin Attacks

Recently, Narcelio asked me about a statement I made on Tubacast:

https://x.com/eddieoz/status/1868371296683511969

If an attack became a reality before Bitcoin was prepared, it would be necessary to define the last block prior to the attack and proceed from there using a new hashing algorithm. The solution would resemble the response to the infamous 2013 bug. It’s a fact that this would cause market panic, and Bitcoin's price would drop significantly, creating a potential opportunity for the well-informed.

Preferably, if developers could anticipate the threat and had time to work on a solution and build consensus before an attack, they would simply decide on a future block for the fork, which would then adopt the new algorithm. It might even rehash previous blocks (reaching consensus on them) to avoid potential reorganization through the re-mining of blocks using the old hash. (I often use the term "shielding" old transactions).

---

How Can Users Protect Themselves?

While quantum computing is still far from being a practical threat, some simple measures can already protect users against hypothetical scenarios:

• Avoid using exposed public keys: Ensure funds sent to old wallets are transferred to new ones that use public key hashes. This reduces the risk of long-term attacks.
• Use modern wallets: Opt for wallets compatible with SegWit or Taproot, which implement better security practices.
• Monitor security updates: Stay informed about updates from the Bitcoin community, such as the implementation of BIP-360, which will introduce quantum-resistant addresses.
• Do not reuse addresses: Every transaction should be associated with a new address to minimize the risk of repeated exposure of the same public key.
• Adopt secure backup practices: Create offline backups of private keys and seeds in secure locations, protected from unauthorized access.

---

BIP-360 and Bitcoin’s Preparation for the Future

Even though quantum computing is still beyond practical reach, the Bitcoin community is not standing still. A concrete example is BIP-360, a proposal that establishes the technical framework to make wallets resistant to quantum attacks.

BIP-360 addresses three main pillars:

1. Introduction of quantum-resistant addresses: A new address format starting with "BC1R" will be used. These addresses will be compatible with post-quantum algorithms, ensuring that stored funds are protected from future attacks.
2. Compatibility with the current ecosystem: The proposal allows users to transfer funds from old addresses to new ones without requiring drastic changes to the network infrastructure.
3. Flexibility for future updates: BIP-360 does not limit the choice of specific algorithms. Instead, it serves as a foundation for implementing new post-quantum algorithms as technology evolves.

This proposal demonstrates how Bitcoin can adapt to emerging threats without compromising its decentralized structure.

---

Post-Quantum Algorithms: The Future of Bitcoin Cryptography

The community is exploring various algorithms to protect Bitcoin from quantum attacks. Among the most discussed are:

• Falcon: A solution combining smaller public keys with compact digital signatures. Although it has been tested in limited scenarios, it still faces scalability and performance challenges.
• Sphincs: Hash-based, this algorithm is renowned for its resilience, but its signatures can be extremely large, making it less efficient for networks like Bitcoin’s blockchain.
• Lamport: Created in 1977, it’s considered one of the earliest post-quantum security solutions. Despite its reliability, its gigantic public keys (16,000 bytes) make it impractical and costly for Bitcoin.

Two technologies show great promise and are well-regarded by the community:

1. Lattice-Based Cryptography: Considered one of the most promising, it uses complex mathematical structures to create systems nearly immune to quantum computing. Its implementation is still in its early stages, but the community is optimistic.
2. Supersingular Elliptic Curve Isogeny: These are very recent digital signature algorithms and require extensive study and testing before being ready for practical market use.

The final choice of algorithm will depend on factors such as efficiency, cost, and integration capability with the current system. Additionally, it is preferable that these algorithms are standardized before implementation, a process that may take up to 10 years.

---

Why Quantum Computing Is Far from Being a Threat

The alarmist narrative about quantum computing overlooks the technical and practical challenges that still need to be overcome. Among them:

• Insufficient number of qubits: Current quantum computers have only a few hundred qubits, whereas successful attacks would require millions.
• High error rate: Quantum stability remains a barrier to reliable large-scale operations.
• High costs: Building and operating large-scale quantum computers requires massive investments, limiting their use to scientific or specific applications.

Moreover, even if quantum computers make significant advancements, Bitcoin is already adapting to ensure its infrastructure is prepared to respond.

---

Conclusion: Bitcoin’s Secure Future

Despite advancements in quantum computing, the reality is that Bitcoin is far from being threatened. Its security is ensured not only by its robust architecture but also by the community’s constant efforts to anticipate and mitigate challenges.

The implementation of BIP-360 and the pursuit of post-quantum algorithms demonstrate that Bitcoin is not only resilient but also proactive. By adopting practical measures, such as using modern wallets and migrating to quantum-resistant addresses, users can further protect themselves against potential threats.

Bitcoin’s future is not at risk—it is being carefully shaped to withstand any emerging technology, including quantum computing.

@ 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 ... 😉

@ a012dc82:6458a70d

Table Of Content

• The Lazarus Group's Cryptocurrency Holdings

• A Significant Drop in Holdings

• No Privacy Coins in Sight

• Underreported Holdings?

• Previous Attacks and Thefts

• Warnings and Threats

• Conclusion

• FAQ

In the ever-evolving world of cryptocurrencies, security breaches and cyber heists have become alarmingly common. One name that frequently emerges in relation to these digital thefts is the Lazarus Group. This North Korean hacking collective has been linked to a series of high-profile cyber-attacks, amassing a significant amount of cryptocurrency in the process. This article delves deep into the group's activities, their holdings, and the implications of their actions on the crypto world.

The Lazarus Group's Cryptocurrency Holdings

The Lazarus Group, originating from North Korea, has made headlines with its vast cryptocurrency holdings. Recent reports suggest that this hacking collective has a digital treasure chest worth around $47 million. Bitcoin, the most popular and valuable cryptocurrency, forms the bulk of their holdings, with an estimated value of $42.5 million. In addition to Bitcoin, the group has diversified its holdings with Ether (ETH) valued at $1.9 million, BNB (BNB) worth $1.1 million, and a mix of stablecoins, primarily Binance USD (BUSD), which amounts to approximately $640,000.

A Significant Drop in Holdings

While the current figures are staggering, there has been a noticeable decline in the Lazarus Group's cryptocurrency assets. Data indicates that their holdings were valued at $86 million as of September 6. This value plummeted in the aftermath of the Stake.com hack, an event that saw the Lazarus Group as a prime suspect. Dune Analytics, a data monitoring platform, has been keeping a close eye on the group's activities. They have identified 295 wallets associated with the Lazarus Group, information corroborated by agencies like the FBI and the OFAC.

No Privacy Coins in Sight

For a hacking group that thrives on anonymity, it's surprising to note the absence of privacy coins in their portfolio. Coins such as Monero (XMR), Dash (DASH), and Zcash (ZEC), known for their enhanced privacy features, are conspicuously missing from their holdings. However, this hasn't deterred the group from continuing their operations. Their crypto wallets, devoid of privacy coins, have seen consistent activity, with the latest transaction recorded on September 20.

Underreported Holdings?

The figures mentioned might just be the tip of the iceberg. According to 21.co, the Lazarus Group's actual cryptocurrency holdings could be much higher than what's currently reported. This assertion is based on the data available to the public, suggesting that the group might have undisclosed assets hidden away.

Previous Attacks and Thefts

The Lazarus Group's foray into the crypto world has been marked by a series of attacks and thefts. They were the masterminds behind the CoinEx exchange hack, which resulted in losses exceeding $55 million. Their nefarious activities don't end there. The FBI has linked them to other significant breaches, including those targeting Alphapo, CoinsPaid, and Atomic Wallet. These attacks, in 2023 alone, saw the group walking away with more than $200 million. However, there's a silver lining. Chainalysis reports indicate a decline in crypto thefts by hackers associated with North Korea, with an 80% drop recorded from 2022.

Warnings and Threats The digital realm remains under the shadow of the Lazarus Group. Recent alerts from U.S. federal authorities have highlighted the group's potential to target critical sectors, including the U.S. healthcare and public health domains. These warnings underscore the group's capabilities and the persistent threat they pose.

Conclusion

The Lazarus Group's activities serve as a stark reminder of the vulnerabilities inherent in the digital space. Their vast cryptocurrency holdings, accumulated through a series of hacks and breaches, highlight the need for enhanced security measures in the crypto world. As the digital landscape continues to evolve, it's imperative for stakeholders to remain vigilant, ensuring that their assets are protected from such sophisticated threats. The story of the Lazarus Group is not just about a hacking collective's exploits but a call to action for the broader crypto community.

FAQ

Who is the Lazarus Group? The Lazarus Group is a North Korean hacking collective known for its high-profile cyber-attacks and significant cryptocurrency holdings.

How much cryptocurrency does the Lazarus Group hold? The group is reported to have amassed around $47 million in cryptocurrency, with Bitcoin forming the majority of their holdings.

Were there any recent significant drops in their holdings? Yes, their holdings saw a decline from $86 million as of September 6, especially after the Stake.com hack.

Does the Lazarus Group hold any privacy coins? Surprisingly, the group does not hold any known privacy coins like Monero, Dash, or Zcash.

Have there been any warnings about the Lazarus Group's activities? U.S. federal authorities have issued warnings about the group's potential to target sectors like U.S. healthcare and public health.

That's all for today

If you want more, be sure to follow us on:

NOSTR: croxroad@getalby.com

X: @croxroadnews

Instagram: @croxroadnews.co

Youtube: @croxroadnews

Store: https://croxroad.store

Subscribe to CROX ROAD Bitcoin Only Daily Newsletter

https://www.croxroad.co/subscribe

DISCLAIMER: None of this is financial advice. This newsletter is strictly educational and is not investment advice or a solicitation to buy or sell any assets or to make any financial decisions. Please be careful and do your own research.

@ 1739d937:3e3136ef

This is the third in a series of weekly updates detailing progress on bringing MLS protocol DMs and group messaging to Nostr.

Previous Updates

• June 28th 2024
• July 6th 2024

Progress this week

Short update post this week but I made solid progress updating several OpenMLS dependencies and building a new library that implements all the OpenMLS crypto requirements for Nostr.

HPKE-RS

I mentioned a PR last week on the rust-hpke library, that PR is still waiting on review. However, in the meantime, the OpenMLS library depends on a slightly different hpke library, the hpke-rs library.

This library didn't support the secp256k1 curve either so I've opened a PR to add support for secp256k1. That PR uses the RustCrypto library that is the default in the the hpke-rs library. However, because this library is built to allow for swapping out the underlying crypto library (using traits), I was also able to create a new library that uses the secp256k1 library instead of the RustCrypto library. This is the main crypto library that almost all Bitcoin and Nostr apps use so it's important we use that instead of RustCrypto.

OpenMLS Nostr Crypto

The library that I've created (openmls-nostr-crypto) does a few things via separate sub-libraries (crates). The entire library tries to do as little as possible; only implementing the one required ciphersuite for all MLS implementations and the secp256k1 schnorr signatures ciphersuite I've created for Nostr. It's also using the right secp256k1 library to do it.

openmls-nostr-crypto: implementes the crypto traits that the OpenMLS library expects to find for a given provider and removes all the ciphersuites that we don't care about supporting.

hpke-rs-nostr-crypto: This implements the crypto traits that the hpke-rs library expects to find. Again removing all the ciphersuites we don't care about supporting.

I've not yet written any tests for these libraries (which needs to be done) but I've gotten some very simple demos working with OpenMLS using this new set of libraries to handle the crypto.

I've been really impressed with the simplicity of the OpenMLS interface as well. While there is A LOT going on under the hood, the public interface that client developers have to use is clean and simple.

Onward and Upward

Next week I'll continue working on these libraries; adding tests and continuing to build out my small demo app. I've been in touch with the maintainers of the OpenMLS library and I'm hoping to get a review done with them on my PRs and on my new library.

One thing I'll call out here: The review of my library and getting them to review the direction of the project overall will be paid consulting so I'm making sure that I've got as much done as possible before scheduling that time and paying their rates. I'm a strong believer that the right conversation can save you months of wasted time, but I'm also a believer in making sure you're prepared if you're going to drop money on that conversation. 😅

@ 662f9bff:8960f6b2

Folks - it really is time to wake up. How many more wars do we need? War on the Virus, War on Terror, War in Afghanistan, War in the Middle East, War in Vietnam - now War in Ukraine and who knows where else?

I grew up in Belfast in the 1970s and lived through the proxy war fought in my hometown. More recently I lived through a remarkably similar situation here in HK during 2019 and observed it happening too in Bangkok with some of the same participants spotted in media clips who had travelled from HK, presumably to orchestrate it there too. For years the motto of Belfast was "Belfast Says No" and it was prominent in a huge banner on the City Hall. Bitterness and resentment reigned for years until "Peace Broke Out", led by the women of Belfast insisting that people "Stop Fighting". Remember the Peace People?

Bottom line - war is never good. Benefits to society only ever emerge at times when people are working together, trading and collaborating for the better good.

In such situations you have "Voice or Exit" - you can speak up (if you are allowed) or exit (if you are allowed). That is why I left Northern Ireland (exit); the mess continued for 25 more years after that.

Concerning "Exit" - did you ever wonder why governments are now restricting the rights to travel? Or if/how you can preserve wealth if/when war develops?

The perpetual war footing that we find ourselves in was clearly warned about in George Orwell's 1984 - drumbeat of hostile distant foreign empires and their aggressions and victories. Sound familiar to anyone? Strangely, this was the conclusion of the "Report from Iron Mountain" from a 1967 US government panel which concluded that war, or a credible substitute for war, is necessary if governments are to maintain power. Search and ye shall find (still). Link here in case you cannot find it or are lazy!

Will you or your family benefit from what they say they are doing in your name?

By the way - the American People knew all this when they rebelled against the British and wrote their Constitution,

For those who prefer a more structured reading list, take your pick below:

• The Creature from Jekyll Island - The untold history of the FED...
• Sovereign Individual - written in 1997 they did predict personal computers, mobile phones, cryptocurrencies and even the current pandemic situation..
• The Fourth Turning - we have been here before
• The Fiat Standard - How it works - what you were never taught at school
• When Money Dies - The Nightmare of Deficit Spending, Devaluation, and Hyperinflation in Weimar, Germany
• The Price of Tomorrow - The key to an abundant future is not what you have been told
• One of the best interviews of the year: Peter and Lyn discuss Currency wars
• Report from Iron Mountain - On the Possibility and Desirability of Peace

That's it!

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

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

You can also email me at: LetterFrom@rogerprice.me

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

@ 2fb77d26:c47a6ee1

Während ein weiteres Jahr voller Abnormitäten sich dem Ende neigt, ist vieles, das sich im Interesse des nächsten hätte verbessern können, beim Alten geblieben. Denn Veränderungen beginnen im Kopf – und der fungiert bei einer Mehrheit der Artgenossen vor allem als Reservoir für Informationen, Gedanken und Meinungen Dritter. Dritter, die sich die psychischen Schwachstellen der Spezies Mensch gekonnt zunutze machen.

Original mit Quellen: https://www.regenauer.press/der-unsichtbare-dritte

Es war einmal die UNESCO. Diese farbenfroh-inklusiv erscheinende UN-Suborganisation für Erziehung, Wissenschaft und Kultur. Sie wollte »das Undenkbare wenigstens wieder denkbar machen«. So steht es auf Seite 21 des 1946 vom ersten Generaldirektor Julian Huxley verfassten Gründungsdokuments. Gemeint war die Eugenik. Rassenlehre. Die genoss kurz nach Hitler nämlich keinen besonders guten Ruf, sollte uns nach Ansicht von Huxley und Co. jedoch schon bald in überarbeiteter Form als Humangenetik, Bioethik oder biodigitale Konvergenz wieder mit ihren Zuchtprogrammen beglücken dürfen. Mit Transhumanismus. Was Julian Huxley im Rahmen seines im wahrsten Sinne des Wortes wegweisenden Dossiers unterschlug – immerhin prägte er auch den Begriff Transhumanismus – ist die Tatsache, dass die Vereinten Nationen nicht nur »das Undenkbare wieder denkbar machen«, sondern auch »das Denkbare undenkbar machen« wollten.

Die sozialarchitektonischen Vektoren in Richtung einer homogenisierten, pflegeleichten Hominidenbrut – dem Nutzmensch – sind gepflastert mit Stolpersteinen evolutionärer, aufklärerischer Errungenschaften: Selbstbewusstsein und -erhaltungstrieb, Freiheitsdrang, Kreativität, Sozialkompetenz, Empathie, kritisches Denken. All das steht den postmodernen Variationen von Eugenik beharrlich im Weg. Niemand, der originäre Gedanken pflegt, eigene Wege geht und seine Freiheiten schätzt, möchte Teil eines mit der Cloud gekoppelten, genetisch optimierten Kollektivs seelenloser Konformisten werden. Und doch sind es die meisten schon längst. Ob sie Herrschaftsnarrative goutieren, oder Widerstand dagegen leisten – alles, was sie wahrnehmen, diskutieren, verteidigen oder ablehnen stammt aus dem Netz. Es sind limitierte, interpretierte und manipulierte Informationen aus dritter Hand.

Im besten Falle stammen sie noch aus verschiedenen Quellen und erlauben Triangulation zur Bestimmung der eigenen Position. Dazu muss man sich nämlich noch ein paar eigene Gedanken machen. Im schlimmsten Fall wurden sie von Alexa, Siri, dem Google Assistant, ChatGPT oder einem anderen Intelligenz simulierenden Digitalassistenten bereitgestellt, der nur noch eine Antwort serviert. Die richtige. Die Akzeptable. Denn genau das war stets Anspruch der Technokraten. Der langjährige Google-Chef und Bilderberg-Grande Eric Schmidt erklärte schon vor über einem Jahrzehnt, dass »eine Vielzahl von Suchergebnissen ein Fehler und keine Funktion sind«. Das erklärte Ziel von Google sei es, so Schmidt, nur ein einziges Suchergebnis zu präsentieren – das richtige.

Damit solch ein kommunikativer Reduktionismus nicht als Bevormundung, sondern Serviceangebot wahrgenommen wird, muss man verstehen, und steuern, wie Menschen denken. Vielleicht wollte Schmidt aus diesem Grund unbedingt mit Julian Assange über Googles Visionen für eine »neue digitale Welt« sprechen. Mit jemandem, der die technischen Untiefen des Internets kennt – und sie für das Gegenteil dessen nutzt, was Google will. Am 23. Juni 2011 und auf Schmidts Betreiben kam es jedenfalls zu einem geheimen, fünfstündigen Treffen mit dem unter Hausarrest stehenden WikiLeaks-Gründer. Das Transkript dieser Konversation ist erhellend. Vor allem die zweite Hälfte lässt erahnen, wie Schmidt sich die »neue digitale Welt« vorstellt und warum er Ende 2019 konstatierte, dass »Biologie die nächste Grenzverschiebung in puncto Computing ist«.

Google wollte uns nämlich nie informieren, sondern »programmieren«. Das steht so wortwörtlich in internen Dokumenten des Unternehmens, die dank eines Whistleblowers am 24. Juni 2019 den Weg in die Öffentlichkeit fanden. Und wer denkt, »programmieren« beginne erst mit dem Neuralimplantat, dem Chip im Hirn, irrt. Google, Microsoft, Apple, YouTube, Twitter (das ich auch weiterhin so nennen werde), Amazon, Facebook, Wikipedia, Rumble, Instagram, TikTok und Co. schaffen das auch ohne. Denn ihre Algorithmen und Omnipräsenz bestimmen schon jetzt nahezu vollständig, was Menschen wahrnehmen – was sie empört, begeistert, besprechen und bekämpfen. Was nicht bei den großen Portalen, Plattformen und Apps auftaucht, existiert nicht. Ist kein Bestandteil der Realität.

Das gilt gleichermaßen für alles, was Googles Suchmaschine nicht ausspuckt. Entsprechend interessant sind die sogenannten Transparenzberichte des Unternehmens, die veranschaulichen, wie oft staatliche Stellen die Entfernung von Suchergebnissen fordern. Wobei die entsprechenden Listen wohl nur die Spitze der Spitze des Eisbergs darstellen dürften. Nicht umsonst beschäftigen sich weitere geleakte Google-Dokumente primär mit den Zusammenhängen von maschinellem Lernen und menschlicher Wahrnehmung. Mit Nudging und kognitiver Kriegsführung. Das von der CIA gegründete Unternehmen war von Beginn an darauf ausgelegt, die Bevölkerung auszuspionieren, um sie qua Filterblasen zu manipulieren.

Was wir wahrnehmen, ist unsere Realität. Was wir nicht wahrnehmen, wird unsere Realität. Ohne, dass wir etwas dagegen unternehmen könnten. Googles Suchmaschinensegregativ schafft Wirklichkeit. Bei immer noch 91 Prozent Marktanteil ein Kinderspiel. Ganz wie US-Chefstratege Zbigniew Brzezinski es vor 54 Jahren in seinem Buch »Between Two Ages – America's Role in the Technetronic Era« prophezeite.

Was in Abhandlungen zu Verhaltensökonomie blasiert umrissen wird, verblüfft im Alltag durch die Effizienz seiner Profanität: Der zwangsalimentierte Erziehungsfunk repliziert das folgenlose Geschwafel von Politdarstellern, Twitter den von Technokraten kuratierten »Bürgerjournalismus«, Instagram Propaganda von Influencern und Facebook den Tratsch von Oma und Opa. Google präsentiert nur Ergebnisse, die dem Herrschaftsnarrativ dienen, Wikipedia gefährliches Halbwissen von Ideologen, YouTube handzahme Kommentare zum Politspektakel und Rumble die emotionalisierte Replik des vermeintlichen Widerstands. Spotify und Apple Music generieren die Playlist, Amazon schlägt vor, was zu Weihnachten gekauft, Microsoft Word, welche Worte man bei der Formulierung eines Textes meiden und der Krypto-Guru, in welche aus null und eins bestehende »Währung« investiert werden soll. Damit steht das Programm. Die tragenden Wände des Debattenraums. Mehr als dieses Potpourri von Second-Hand-Inhalten haben die meisten Menschen gar nicht mehr im Kopf.

Das Weltwirtschaftsforum (WEF) veröffentlichte im Februar 2022 ein 46 Seiten umfassendes Papier namens »Advancing Digital Agency«, das sich mit der »Macht der Datenvermittler« befasst. Sprich, mit der Rolle der zuvor erwähnten »Dritten« und der Frage, wie Externa zur Verinnerlichung am effektivsten ausgerollt werden können. Der Executive Summary lässt sich auf Seite vier entnehmen:

»Niemand weiß (oder verfolgt), was mit seinen Daten geschieht. (…) Wo Menschen früher Bildschirme zum Navigieren hatten, erzeugen neue Methoden zur Erfassung von Umgebungsdaten mit ihren vielen Vorteilen Nervosität und Resignation, wenn Menschen nicht den Gesamtüberblick haben. Manchmal entscheiden sich Einzelpersonen möglicherweise gegen die Interaktion mit Technologien, die für ihr Leben von großem Nutzen wären. Was aber wäre, wenn man diese Entscheidungspunkte an einen vertrauenswürdigen Agenten auslagern könnte, der im Namen einer Einzelperson oder sogar einer Gruppe handelt? Jetzt, da bildschirmlose Technologie Teil des Alltags ist, bietet sich die Gelegenheit, das Paradigma der Mensch-Technik-Interaktion zu überdenken und die Debatte neu auszurichten, um den Fokus auf Rollen und Verantwortlichkeiten jenseits der Person zu legen. Wie kann der Einsatz von Datenvermittlern Menschen dabei helfen, sich in Technologien und Datenökosystemmodellen zurechtzufinden, ohne aus den Augen zu verlieren, was es bedeutet, Mensch zu sein? (…) Datenvermittler – insbesondere digitale Agenten – stellen einen neuen politischen Hebel dar, mit dem Einzelpersonen die Herausforderungen des wachsenden Datenökosystems möglicherweise meistern können. Dieser Bericht soll Licht auf eine alternative Methode der vermittelten Mensch-Technik-Interaktion werfen, bei der Daten scheinbar nahtlos von Menschen zur Technologie gelangen, und zwar auf eine menschenzentrierte und vor allem vertrauenswürdige Weise. Durch die Kommunikation gemeinsamer Anreize, den Aufbau eines guten Rufs oder die Einholung einer Bestätigung durch Dritte. (…) Dieser Bericht untersucht die Chancen und Risiken von Datenvermittlern und insbesondere digitalen Drittagenten. Von Datentreuhändern bis hin zu vertrauenswürdigen digitalen Agenturen zeichnet der Bericht das Bild einer Welt, die Menschen und Unternehmen gegenüber einfühlsamer ist und durch die Einführung eines vertrauenswürdigen Dritten mehr Sicherheit für den Datenaustausch als Grundlage für Innovationen bietet. Entscheidend ist, dass der Bericht Handlungshebel für den öffentlichen und privaten Sektor vorschlägt, um ein zukunftssicheres digital-politisches Umfeld zu gewährleisten, das einen nahtlosen und vertrauenswürdigen Datenverkehr zwischen Menschen und der Technologie ermöglicht, die ihnen dient.«

Technologie, die uns »dient«? Wer den Buzzword-Neusprech des Davoser Global-Governance-Tentakels zu decodieren weiß, kann sich vorstellen, was mit »dienen« gemeint ist. Denn das Produkt sind wir – die Steuersklaven, DNA-Pools und Datenfarmen. Die Technologie sorgt lediglich für unsere zeitgemäße Versklavung. Sie ist ein maschinell-zentralistisches Monstrum, das sich an unserer Lebenszeit labt. Und die nächsten Jahre dürften darüber entscheiden, ob die Spezies Mensch vor ihrem Fortschritt kapituliert, oder die Oberhand gewinnt. Ob sie auf Generationen hinaus dazu verdammt ist, Vasall ihrer Werkzeuge zu sein, oder diese zu ihrem Vorteil einzusetzen weiß. Denn schlecht sind technische Revolutionen nicht per se. Siehe Blockchain. Lässt man sich von ihnen überrumpeln, allerdings schon.

Und genau das geschieht gerade. Während die leitmediale Deutungselite sich als Megafon moralisierender Selbstgerechtigkeit präsentiert und einer Phase kriegerischer Auseinandersetzungen mit suizidaler Sorglosigkeit entgegensieht, betätigt sich ein guter Teil der kritischen Prominenz als ebenso wirkungsvolles Sedativum für die von Ersteren enttäuschten Massen. Denn am Ende reagiert die jeweilige Klientel auf ein und dieselbe Weise: Sie sitzt auf dem Sofa.

Die tragende Säule der transluzenten Haftanstalt, die ein Habitus lethargischer Bequemlichkeit um uns herum errichtet, ist die Einführung der digitalen Identität. Und die ist in vollem Gange. Australien hat Ende November 2024 als erstes Land der Welt ein Gesetz erlassen, dass Jugendlichen unter 16 Jahren den Zugang zu Social-Media-Portalen untersagt. Und während es sicherlich zu begrüßen ist, dass Kinder ihre Zeit nicht mit digitalem Nonsens verplempern, zeitigt solche Legislatur in letzter Konsequenz nichts anderes als einen Ausweiszwang fürs Internet. Wie sonst soll man feststellen können, wer unter 16 ist? Was eine Frage der Erziehung wäre, gerät in Händen des Staates zu einem Instrument ausufernder Kontrolle.

Auch die Schweiz plant die Einführung einer E-ID – obwohl diese bei einer Volksabstimmung im März 2021 klar abgelehnt wurde. Verfügbar sein soll der digitale Pass ab 2026. Die Nutzung beruhe auf Freiwilligkeit, so die Behörden. Doch schon jetzt werden Stimmen laut, die den Einsatz der digitalen Identität beim Sammeln von Stimmen für politische Begehren fordern. Stichwort »E-Collecting«. Damit soll Unregelmäßigkeiten bei der Vorbereitung von Volksabstimmungen vorgebeugt werden. Die hiesige Piratenpartei hat bereits angekündigt, ein zweites Referendum gegen den elektronischen Ausweis zu lancieren – denn er sei »ein Wolf im Schafspelz«. Die Eidgenossenschaft dürfte in Anbetracht einer erfolgsversprechenden Abstimmungskampagne also noch eine ganze Weile von den negativen Folgen eines solchen Überwachungsinstrumentariums verschont bleiben.

Derweil arbeiten natürlich auch Deutschland, die EU, die USA und das »System Chief Executives Board for Coordination« der UN an einer digitalen Identität. Denn ohne eine solche wird weder das volldigitalisierte Finanzsystem von morgen noch das Mikromanagement der Individualmobilität via CO2-Emissionstracking funktionieren. Keine E-ID, kein digitales Gulag.

Noch lassen sich solche Sachverhalte recherchieren und darstellen. Noch kann Widerstand artikuliert, organisiert und geleistet werden. Doch wenn der Heimcomputer in absehbarer Zeit keine Tastatur mehr hat, weil es nur noch Touchscreens gibt, wenn Gestik, Mimik, Sprachsteuerung und KI das Tippen und Suchen ersetzen, wenn Google nur noch das eine Ergebnis auswirft und der digitale Assistent jede noch so komplexe Frage mit unterkomplexen Monokausalitäten trivialisiert, wenn Plattformen ausgeblendet haben, was die Obrigkeit als »Hassrede« klassifiziert, werden die meisten Menschen gar nicht mehr wissen – und wissen können – was sie nicht wissen. Woher denn auch.

Zensur bedeutet in Zeiten der Plattformökonomie nicht, dass Webseiten gelöscht und Bücher verbrannt werden – Zensur bedeutet, dass Informationen, Artikel und Webseiten einfach nicht mehr angezeigt werden. Dass sie nicht mehr gesucht, gefunden, verlinkt oder zitiert werden können, weil sie nicht mehr Teil des digitalen Ökosystems sind. Zensur beginnt mit Orwells »Memory Hole«, das immer häufiger essenzielle Ressourcen wie das Internetarchiv erfasst. Erst vor wenigen Wochen war die Webseite tagelang offline, weil sie sich einem massiven Hackerangriff ausgesetzt sah. Und auch die Wayback Machine, mit der sich die Historie von Webseiten nachvollziehen lässt, weist immer mehr Löcher auf. So fehlen zum Beispiel alle Einträge des Twitter-Blogs für den Zeitraum vom 3. März 2019 bis zum 28. November 2023. Warum, weiß niemand. Zensur beginnt dort, wo der von Bequemlichkeit, Unwissenheit und Lethargie vereinnahmte Konsument das Internet nur noch via Plattform, Social-Media-Portal und Smartphone-App nutzt, anstatt sich mittels Browser selbst zu orientieren.

Dass genau das schon jetzt gang und gäbe ist, kann ich aus eigener Erfahrung bestätigen. Denn obwohl viele tausend Personen meinen Konten bei Twitter, Telegram und YouTube folgen, hat sich bislang nur etwa ein Zehntel dieser Menge auf meiner Webseite für E-Mail-Updates registriert. Obwohl diese kostenlosen Mail-Updates einen direkten Link zwischen Autor und Leser etablieren und damit »datenvermittelnde« Dritte umgehen. Einen Link, der auch dann noch funktioniert, wenn Social-Media-Konten gesperrt oder gelöscht werden. Wäre das morgen bei mir der Fall, würde vermutlich nur ein Bruchteil meiner »Follower« wissen, wie er meine Webseite findet.

Die diesbezügliche Unselbstständigkeit nimmt teils groteske Formen an. Da fragen Menschen, wo man meine Texte lesen kann, während die URL meines Blogs im nur einen Klick entfernten Profil zu finden ist. Andere posten Fragen, Links oder Screenshots unter Beiträge, die nahelegen, dass sie nicht einmal gelesen haben, was sie kommentieren. Auch eine Suchmaschine scheinen viele nicht mehr aufrufen zu können, wenn sie etwas wissen wollen. Anstatt die gewünschte Information in 30 Sekunden selbst zu recherchieren, stellen sie ihre Frage in Form eines Social-Media-Kommentars und hoffen, dass jemand sie beantwortet. Geschieht das nicht, vergessen sie nach fünf Minuten, dass sie eine Frage hatten.

Es wirkt bisweilen tragisch. Denn auch wer die seit Corona im Aufwind befindlichen neuen Medien, die »kritischen Accounts« und Podcaster verfolgt, macht häufig nichts anderes als der Tagesthemen-Zuschauer: Er konsumiert die Polykrise, als wäre es ein Spielfilm, den man in passiver Schockstarre über sich ergehen lässt.

Aber auch die Medienschaffenden der »fünften Gewalt« unterscheiden sich mithin kaum von ihren Widersachern im leitmedialen Konsenskomplex. Wenn sie nicht gerade mit der eigenen Geschichte oder Opferrolle beschäftigt sind, berichten sie über die Schicksale und Leidenswege von Kollegen. Oder über das, was der Konsenskomplex verlautbaren lässt. Auch die ein oder andere Tirade gegenüber missliebigen Konkurrenten darf nicht fehlen. Hauptsache, es bringt Klicks. Denn wer den Medienzirkus einmal zu seinem Broterwerb gemacht hat, ist abhängig davon, dass er sich auszahlt. Auch wenn es zu Lasten des Inhalts geht.

Kaum jemand recherchiert Fakten, macht Textarbeit, deckt auf, dokumentiert Entwicklungsprozesse, empfiehlt stichhaltige Quellen, liefert neue Themen oder zusätzliche Hintergründe. Kaum ein Format zeichnet sich durch Informationsgehalt aus oder bietet irgendeine Form von Erkenntnisgewinn. Meistens wird einfach das besprochen, kommentiert, analysiert oder eingeordnet – also wiedergekäut – was gerade durch Newsfeeds, Timelines und Trend-Charts geistert.

Eine herausragende Unart ist es, wenn die Moderatoren sich dabei nicht einmal zu schade sind, ihren Twitter-Feed einzublenden, um dann eine Stunde lang geistlos Kommentare von Kommentatoren zu kommentieren. Retorten-Radio. Informativ und intellektuell bereichernd wie die hundertfünfzigste Wiederholung eines Bud-Spencer-Streifens am Weihnachtsfeiertag. Weniger journalistische Relevanz geht kaum.

Wer also nach guten Vorsätzen für das neue Jahr sucht, könnte an exakt dieser Stelle ansetzen. Der Medienschaffende könnte sich auf die Kernaufgabe des Journalismus besinnen und die Mühe machen, zu recherchieren, um seinen Zuschauern und -hörern echten Erkenntnisgewinn zu bescheren. Das macht zwar mehr Arbeit – aber eben auch Sinn.

Und der Konsument könnte damit beginnen, die Kontrolle über seine Informationsgewinnung wiederzuerlangen, anstatt sich berieseln zu lassen wie in alten Zeiten. Zum Beispiel durch die Nutzung eines RSS-Readers, das Lesen von Primärquellen, den Boykott von Big-Tech-Plattformen oder die Anschaffung eines Smartphones mit GrapheneOS-Betriebssystem. Das macht sogar weniger Arbeit, wenn man sich erst einmal eingefuchst hat – und vor allem freier, gelassener und mental resilienter.

Grundsätzlich gilt: Wer nach Lösungen sucht, sollte bei sich selbst beginnen. Denn für die meisten Herausforderungen unserer Zeit existieren sie längst. Nur genutzt werden sie zu selten. Und das liegt nicht an den Lösungen, sondern den Konsumenten, die jeden Tag aufs Neue die Chance verstreichen lassen, es besser zu machen. Wann also wäre ein geeigneterer Zeitpunkt, um den ein oder anderen Neustart zu planen als jetzt, wo sich ein weiteres Jahr in seine letzten, kurzen Tage streckt?

So schwer, verstörend und düster viele davon gewesen sein mögen, so schön, bemerkenswert, erheiternd und licht war manch ein Moment der vergangenen zwölf Monate. Leider ist der menschliche Geist zwecks Risikominimierung evolutionär darauf ausgelegt, sich vor allem an Negatives zu erinnern. Und viel zu oft verdrängen diese unschönen, aber lehrreichen Erfahrungen die Wertschätzung für eine der simpelsten Wahrheiten des Lebens:

Das Schöne zieht seinen Reiz aus der Vergänglichkeit.

Gerade die Flüchtigkeit des Positiven macht es so wichtig, sich diese Erkenntnis zum Ablauf eines Kalenderjahres bewusst zu machen. Denn das wertvollste, was wir Menschen im Lauf eines Lebens sammeln können, sind erhebende Momente. Wie viele wir davon anhäufen bevor unsere eigene Zeit abgelaufen ist, hängt nicht primär von äußeren Umständen, sondern unserer inneren Einstellung ab. Eine den Wirren der Zeit angemessene Sichtweise verbirgt sich hinter einem kurzen, fast schon philosophischen Wortwechsel aus dem für den vorliegenden Text namensgebenden Hitchcock-Streifen:

»Wollen Sie behaupten, Sie hätten Interesse für die Kunst?«

»Ja – für die Kunst weiterzuleben.«

@ 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.

@ 38d0888d:bd8e1246

A thriving society rests on the principles of modesty and humility, avoiding idleness and self-indulgence. Individuals are needed to forsake the constant pursuit of attention and instead aspire to selflessness, dedicating themselves to serving humanity. Humility fosters spiritual harmony and protects against materialism and selfish desires.

Beyond personal conduct, humanity must champion altruism and solidarity within the global community. Belief in collective endeavors will pave the way for global harmony. Embracing values like kindness, compassion, and genuine concern for others promotes positivity and reflects the influence of a higher power. The aim is to cultivate a unified multicultural community where each person contributes to manifesting this higher presence.

The collective goal is to direct humanity to nurture a community that experiences spiritual growth while upholding humility as a guiding principle, resisting materialism's allure. By creating such an environment, the hope is to resonate with a sacred harmony that extends beyond immediate boundaries. Through intentional actions and meaningful relationships, a collective space embodying these values can be established, ensuring the higher power's presence guides individual lives and interactions with the world.

@ 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!

Jedna z najlepších implementácií funkcionality Lightning Networku a gamingu vo svete Bitcoinu.

Vyskúšať si ju môžete s kamošmi na tomto odkaze. Na stránke nájdeš aj základné pravidlá hry avšak odporúčame pravidlá pochopiť aj priamo hraním

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.

@ ee11a5df:b76c4e49

What Can We Get by Breaking NOSTR?

"What if we just started over? What if we took everything we have learned while building nostr and did it all again, but did it right this time?"

That is a question I've heard quite a number of times, and it is a question I have pondered quite a lot myself.

My conclusion (so far) is that I believe that we can fix all the important things without starting over. There are different levels of breakage, starting over is the most extreme of them. In this post I will describe these levels of breakage and what each one could buy us.

Cryptography

Your key-pair is the most fundamental part of nostr. That is your portable identity.

If the cryptography changed from secp256k1 to ed25519, all current nostr identities would not be usable.

This would be a complete start over.

Every other break listed in this post could be done as well to no additional detriment (save for reuse of some existing code) because we would be starting over.

Why would anyone suggest making such a break? What does this buy us?

• Curve25519 is a safe curve meaning a bunch of specific cryptography things that us mortals do not understand but we are assured that it is somehow better.
• Ed25519 is more modern, said to be faster, and has more widespread code/library support than secp256k1.
• Nostr keys could be used as TLS server certificates. TLS 1.3 using RFC 7250 Raw Public Keys allows raw public keys as certificates. No DNS or certification authorities required, removing several points of failure. These ed25519 keys could be used in TLS, whereas secp256k1 keys cannot as no TLS algorithm utilizes them AFAIK. Since relays currently don't have assigned nostr identities but are instead referenced by a websocket URL, this doesn't buy us much, but it is interesting. This idea is explored further below (keep reading) under a lesser level of breakage.

Besides breaking everything, another downside is that people would not be able to manage nostr keys with bitcoin hardware.

I am fairly strongly against breaking things this far. I don't think it is worth it.

Signature Scheme and Event Structure

Event structure is the next most fundamental part of nostr. Although events can be represented in many ways (clients and relays usually parse the JSON into data structures and/or database columns), the nature of the content of an event is well defined as seven particular fields. If we changed those, that would be a hard fork.

This break is quite severe. All current nostr events wouldn't work in this hard fork. We would be preserving identities, but all content would be starting over.

It would be difficult to bridge between this fork and current nostr because the bridge couldn't create the different signature required (not having anybody's private key) and current nostr wouldn't be generating the new kind of signature. Therefore any bridge would have to do identity mapping just like bridges to entirely different protocols do (e.g. mostr to mastodon).

What could we gain by breaking things this far?

• We could have a faster event hash and id verification: the current signature scheme of nostr requires lining up 5 JSON fields into a JSON array and using that as hash input. There is a performance cost to copying this data in order to hash it.
• We could introduce a subkey field, and sign events via that subkey, while preserving the pubkey as the author everybody knows and searches by. Note however that we can already get a remarkably similar thing using something like NIP-26 where the actual author is in a tag, and the pubkey field is the signing subkey.
• We could refactor the kind integer into composable bitflags (that could apply to any application) and an application kind (that specifies the application).
• Surely there are other things I haven't thought of.

I am currently against this kind of break. I don't think the benefits even come close to outweighing the cost. But if I learned about other things that we could "fix" by restructuring the events, I could possibly change my mind.

Replacing Relay URLs

Nostr is defined by relays that are addressed by websocket URLs. If that changed, that would be a significant break. Many (maybe even most) current event kinds would need superseding.

The most reasonable change is to define relays with nostr identities, specifying their pubkey instead of their URL.

What could we gain by this?

• We could ditch reliance on DNS. Relays could publish events under their nostr identity that advertise their current IP address(es).
• We could ditch certificates because relays could generate ed25519 keypairs for themselves (or indeed just self-signed certificates which might be much more broadly supported) and publish their public ed25519 key in the same replaceable event where they advertise their current IP address(es).

This is a gigantic break. Almost all event kinds need redefining and pretty much all nostr software will need fairly major upgrades. But it also gives us a kind of Internet liberty that many of us have dreamt of our entire lives.

I am ambivalent about this idea.

Protocol Messaging and Transport

The protocol messages of nostr are the next level of breakage. We could preserve keypair identities, all current events, and current relay URL references, but just break the protocol of how clients and relay communicate this data.

This would not necessarily break relay and client implementations at all, so long as the new protocol were opt-in.

What could we get?

• The new protocol could transmit events in binary form for increased performance (no more JSON parsing with it's typical many small memory allocations and string escaping nightmares). I think event throughput could double (wild guess).
• It could have clear expectations of who talks first, and when and how AUTH happens, avoiding a lot of current miscommunication between clients and relays.
• We could introduce bitflags for feature support so that new features could be added later and clients would not bother trying them (and getting an error or timing out) on relays that didn't signal support. This could replace much of NIP-11.
• We could then introduce something like negentropy or negative filters (but not that... probably something else solving that same problem) without it being a breaking change.
• The new protocol could just be a few websocket-binary messages enhancing the current protocol, continuing to leverage the existing websocket-text messages we currently have, meaning newer relays would still support all the older stuff.

The downsides are just that if you want this new stuff you have to build it. It makes the protocol less simple, having now multiple protocols, multiple ways of doing the same thing.

Nonetheless, this I am in favor of. I think the trade-offs are worth it. I will be pushing a draft PR for this soon.

The path forward

I propose then the following path forward:

1. A new nostr protocol over websockets binary (draft PR to be shared soon)
2. Subkeys brought into nostr via NIP-26 (but let's use a single letter tag instead, OK?) via a big push to get all the clients to support it (the transition will be painful - most major clients will need to support this before anybody can start using it).
3. Some kind of solution to the negative-filter-negentropy need added to the new protocol as its first optional feature.
4. We seriously consider replacing Relay URLs with nostr pubkeys assigned to the relay, and then have relays publish their IP address and TLS key or certificate.

We sacrifice these:

1. Faster event hash/verification
2. Composable event bitflags
3. Safer faster more well-supported crypto curve
4. Nostr keys themselves as TLS 1.3 RawPublicKey certificates

@ 4dffec17:4c4cbd48

Satoshi Nakamoto, the creator of Bitcoin, not only developed the groundbreaking technology but also mined a significant number of bitcoins in Bitcoin's early days. However, these bitcoins, estimated to be worth billions today, remain untouched—deepening the mystery surrounding Satoshi’s identity and intentions.

How Many Bitcoins Does Satoshi Own?

It is widely believed that Satoshi mined around 1 million bitcoins during Bitcoin’s early days, primarily between 2009 and 2010. These coins are spread across thousands of wallet addresses, yet none have ever been spent or transferred.

Why Are Satoshi’s Wallets Significant?

1. Unprecedented Wealth: With Bitcoin’s price fluctuating in the tens of thousands per BTC, Satoshi’s holdings are valued at over $40 billion today, making the creator one of the wealthiest individuals—if they are still alive.

2. Symbol of Integrity: The fact that Satoshi has never moved or sold these coins adds to the perception that Bitcoin was created for technological revolution, not personal gain.

3. Network Stability: If Satoshi’s coins were suddenly moved, it could significantly impact Bitcoin’s price and cause speculation or fear within the community due to the massive supply entering circulation.

Theories Behind the Untouched Wallets

Lost Access: Some speculate Satoshi lost access to the private keys, making the coins permanently inaccessible.

Deliberate Silence: Satoshi may have chosen to keep the wallets untouched to avoid influencing the market or compromising Bitcoin’s decentralization.

Satoshi is Deceased: Another theory is that Satoshi may have passed away, leaving the wallets dormant forever.

Final Thoughts

The untouched fortune in Satoshi Nakamoto’s wallets remains a powerful symbol of Bitcoin’s core values—decentralization, trustlessness, and financial freedom. Whether out of principle, lost keys, or mystery, the silence of these wallets only deepens the legend of Bitcoin’s creator.

satoshi

bitcoin

freedom

finance

Nastr

economy

@ 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" o svobodě, nomádství, anarchii, rodičovství, drogách a dalších normálních věcech.

Nájdete ho aj na nostr.

@ 42342239:1d80db24

Knappheit statt Slogans: eine Dosis ökonomischer Realität für die politischen Debatten

Die EU-Wirtschaft steht vor zahlreichen Herausforderungen, von hohen Energiekosten bis hin zu geringer Produktivität. Doch hinter der offiziellen Rhetorik verbirgt sich eine Annahme, die kaum hinterfragt wird: dass der grüne Wandel automatisch zu Wirtschaftswachstum und mehr Wohlstand führen wird. Aber stimmt das wirklich?

Eine englische Fassung dieses Textes finden Sie hier.

In Deutschland, das wieder einmal das Etikett „Kranker Mann Europas" tragen muss, kämpft Bundeskanzler Olaf Scholz vor der Wahl im Februar mit alarmierend niedrigen Vertrauenswerten. Aber vielleicht ist das gar nicht so überraschend. ****Die deutsche Industrieproduktion ist rückläufig, seit die grüne Agenda in Mode gekommen ist. ****Die energieintensive Produktion ist in nur wenigen Jahren um ganze 20 Prozent zurückgegangen. Volkswagen schließt Fabriken, Thyssenkrupp entlässt massiv Mitarbeiter und mehr als drei Millionen Rentner sind von Armut bedroht .

Wenn dies Europas „Mann auf dem Mond"-Moment ist, wie EU-Kommissarin von der Leyen ****es 2019 ausdrückte ****, dann ist das nicht viel, womit man angeben kann . Zumindest nicht, wenn man kein Sadist ist.

Der Bericht des ehemaligen EZB-Chefs Mario Draghi über die Wettbewerbsfähigkeit der EU wurde bereits früher diskutiert. Eines der Probleme, auf die hingewiesen wurde, war, dass europäische Unternehmen erheblich höhere Energiekosten haben als ihre amerikanischen Konkurrenten. Die Strompreise sind zwei- bis dreimal so hoch und die Erdgaspreise vier- bis fünfmal so hoch.

Deutschland ist vielleicht am schlimmsten dran, was zum Teil an der Entscheidung der ehemaligen Bundeskanzlerin Angela Merkel liegt, vollständig aus der Atomkraft auszusteigen (eine Entscheidung, die nicht nur keine breite Unterstützung fand , sondern die sie auch nicht als Fehler eingestehen will). Die Sabotage der Nord Stream 2 hat die Situation noch verschlimmert.

Ohne Realkapital kein wirtschaftlicher Wohlstand

Der Ausstieg aus der Atomenergie in Deutschland ist ein Beispiel dafür, wie politische Entscheidungen zur Verringerung der Kapazität der Wirtschaft beigetragen haben. Dasselbe gilt für die Sabotage der Nord Stream. Realkapital, wie Gebäude, Maschinen und Ausrüstung, ist für die Produktivität der Wirtschaft von entscheidender Bedeutung (z. B. Kennzahlen wie das BIP pro Arbeitsstunde). Ein größerer und effizienterer Kapitalstock ermöglicht die Herstellung von mehr Waren und Dienstleistungen mit der gleichen Menge an Arbeit, was zu mehr Produktion, höheren Löhnen und größerem materiellen Wohlstand führt. Das ist grundlegende Ökonomie. ****Wenn andererseits Realkapital aufgrund politischer Entscheidungen für obsolet erklärt wird, wie im Fall der Abschaltung der Atomkraft, verringert dies die Kapazität der Wirtschaft. ****Dasselbe gilt, wenn Realkapital zerstört wird, wie dies bei Nord Stream der Fall war.

Weiteres reales Betriebskapital wird zurückgestellt

EU-Kommissarin von der Leyen verspricht Besserung. Sie scheint überzeugt, dass der Niedergang der EU durch eine Verdreifachung der grünen Ziele des Blocks umgekehrt werden kann, und hat die Dekarbonisierung als eine der drei wichtigsten Säulen eines neuen „Wettbewerbsfähigkeitskompasses" aufgeführt. Wenn die Realität nicht den Erwartungen entspricht, kann man immer noch „Strg+Alt+Slogan" drücken und hoffen, dass niemand merkt, dass sich nichts verbessert hat.

Ihre Pläne bedeuten jedoch, dass bestehendes und derzeit funktionierendes Realkapital in Zukunft in noch größerem Umfang abgeschrieben wird. Dies lässt sich mit einer Nation vergleichen, die Jahr für Jahr ihre Naturschutzgebiete schrittweise erweitert. Tatsächlich geschieht dies auch. Der Kunming-Montreal-Rahmen für die Artenvielfalt sieht vor, dass bis 2030 30 % aller Flächen an Land und im Meer geschützt werden müssen. Ein Land, das derzeit weniger schützt, muss daher zusätzliche Gebiete identifizieren, die geschützt werden können. ****Der Prozess, 30 % aller Flächen zu schützen, wird wahrscheinlich das Produktionspotenzial der Wirtschaft verringern. ****Mit schrumpfenden Feldern wird es weniger Karotten geben (es sei denn, es werden bedeutende technologische Fortschritte erzielt).

Konsequenzen für Sicherheitspolitik und -vorsorge

Auf dem derzeitigen Weg wird mehr Realkapital auf die lange Bank geschoben, was weitreichende Folgen haben kann, nicht zuletzt für unsere Sicherheitspolitik. Wenn Russland beispielsweise Artilleriegeschosse etwa dreimal schneller produzieren kann, und zwar zu Kosten, die etwa ein Viertel der Kosten betragen, die die westlichen Verbündeten der Ukraine dafür aufbringen , dann ist klar, dass dies sicherheitspolitische Konsequenzen hat. Ebenso wird es negative sicherheitspolitische Konsequenzen haben, wenn die Strompreise in Deutschland fünfmal höher sind als in China, was derzeit der Fall ist . Im Vergleich zur EU hat China tatsächlich einen höheren Kohlendioxidausstoß pro Kopf, wobei der Unterschied den ****verfügbaren Daten zufolge etwa 50 % beträgt ****. Bereinigt um den internationalen Handel emittiert China pro Kopf 10 % mehr als Schweden .

Auch eine Perspektive der Vorsorge ist zu finden. Anfang der 1990er Jahre produzierten schwedische Landwirte fast 75 % der Nahrungsmittel des Landes. Heute ist Schwedens Bevölkerung deutlich gewachsen, aber die Nahrungsmittelproduktion hat nicht Schritt gehalten. Jeder zweite Bissen wird heute importiert. In Schweden können wir uns sogar rühmen, dass wir uns nicht einmal mit der einfachsten aller Feldfrüchte versorgen können -- Kartoffeln . Können wir wirklich sicher sein, dass deutlich erweiterte Naturschutzgebiete, wie sie im Kunming-Montreal-Rahmenwerk für Schweden vorgeschrieben sind, unsere Nahrungsmittelvorsorge nicht noch weiter verschlechtern werden?

Erinnert an kleine Gnome

Ich erinnere mich an eine Folge der 90er-Jahre-Serie South Park, in der kleine Gnome Unterhosen sammeln . Als sie nach ihrem Plan gefragt wurden, beschrieben sie ihre Methode:

1. Unterhosen sammeln
2. ???
3. profitieren!

Übersetzt auf die grüne **Energiewende **:

1. reales Kapital zerstören und Land und Meer erhalten
2. ???
3. wirtschaftlicher Wohlstand!

Was kann sich die EU wirklich leisten?

In der Wirtschaft geht es im Grunde um die Verwaltung knapper Ressourcen, was viele Menschen offenbar vergessen haben. Es ist höchste Zeit, zu hinterfragen, was sich die EU wirklich leisten kann. Können wir es uns wirklich leisten, uns für einen Krieg gegen Russland, China und den Iran zu rüsten und uns gleichzeitig mit grünen Versprechen von reduzierten Kohlendioxidemissionen und erhöhter Artenvielfalt selbst die Hände zu binden? Und das in einer Situation, in der die nächste US-Regierung wahrscheinlich massiv in die Steigerung ihrer Wettbewerbsvorteile durch Deregulierung, niedrigere Energiepreise, Steuersenkungen und einen Rückzug aus dem Pariser Abkommen investieren wird ?

Als von der Leyen für das deutsche Militär verantwortlich war, sei die Lage " katastrophal " gewesen. Alle sechs U-Boote des Landes waren außer Gefecht gesetzt . Zeitweise war kein einziges der 14 Transportflugzeuge des Landes flugfähig. Bei Übungen mussten deutsche Soldaten Besen statt Gewehren verwenden .

Hoffentlich wird von der Leyen in ihrem Umgang mit der Wirtschaft, der Verteidigung und der Abwehrbereitschaft der EU mehr Erfolg zeigen als in ihrer Rolle als deutsche Verteidigungsministerin. Es könnte jedoch auch an der Zeit sein, dass mehr Menschen die vorherrschenden Narrative, die unsere Politik prägen, in Frage stellen. Was, wenn die Fakten nicht ganz mit der Wahrheit übereinstimmen, die uns erzählt wird?

@ 554ab6fe:c6cbc27e

Time is the most precious. Spending time with those we love, relaxing and enjoying peace of mind, and finding time for simple pleasures that warm our hearts are all examples of why we value time over everything else. We all want more time and know how finite it is.

In a previous article, I discussed how a better name for Bitcoin could be the Entropy Engine. In brief, Bitcoin is the Entropy Engine because system users rely upon entropic processes, either through private key generation or the mining process, to benefit from the system. Additionally, considering that life on earth is the consequence of the second law of thermodynamics, it is evident that Bitcoin accelerates our entropic purpose by monetizing energy production in a way never seen in human history. Bitcoin is all things entropy.

After writing the previous article, it slowly dawned on me that Bitcoin is valuable precisely because of its constraints related to entropy. Being an Entropy Engine gives Bitcoin the property of being scarce, and scarcity alongside utility brings value. These properties stem from the relationship between entropy and time. This article will discuss the relationship between entropy, time, and scarcity. These concepts will then help explain economic principles and pave the way to explaining why Bitcoin is a fascinating invention that brought economic value to the digital world.

Entropy is a measure of the disorder or randomness in a system. Essentially, entropy reflects the number of ways a system can be arranged, with higher entropy indicating more possible arrangements and more significant disorder. In an isolated system, entropy tends to increase over time, articulated through the second law of thermodynamics, which states that natural processes move towards a state of maximum entropy1. Our everyday experience with entropy can best be explained through heat. When energy is used to perform work, some of it gets released as heat, increasing the system's entropy by making the energy more dispersed and less useful.

Another impact entropy has on our daily lives is through the experience of time. As previously stated, the second law of thermodynamics states that, in a closed system, entropy always increases over time. Therefore, there is this dynamic where entropy is continuously growing, and our participation in a universe with such a law gives rise to the experience of an arrow of time1. In other words, time is a psychological experience resulting from interacting with a universe governed by the second law of thermodynamics1. It may seem intuitive to anyone reading this, but it is worth highlighting that time is always moving forward because entropy is continually increasing. No human can get any time back. From the point of view of a human, time is finite. Like energy and matter, which, according to the first law of thermodynamics, can neither be created nor destroyed, time is one of the universe's most limited resources.

Understanding the finite nature of time, energy, and matter is fundamental in economics. In his treatise on economics Man, Economy, and State with Power and Markets, Murray Rothbard states that "A man's time is always scarce. […] Therefore, time is a means that man must use to arrive at his ends. It is a means that is omnipresent in all human action"2. He goes on to state that "[…][i]n the first place, all means are scarce, i.e., limited with respect to the ends that they could possibly serve. […] Secondly, these scarce means must be allocated by the actor to serve certain ends and leave other ends unsatisfied. This act of choice may be called economizing the means to serve the most desired ends"2. Economics is fundamentally the study of how human beings make choices that allocate resources to satisfy their desires. Rothbard here highlights how because both time and the planet's resources are finite, human beings must choose how to allocate those resources. On aggregate, these individual decisions lead to the flourishing of human society as it develops and grows by becoming more and more efficient in resource allocation.

We all live on this one planet together. The resources on this earth are finite, which raises the question of how best to allocate these resources to satisfy everyone's needs and desires peacefully. The study of economics shows that free markets, which facilitate the free decision-making process of every human being, are the best way for all the resources to be allocated to maximize human flourishing if it is done so under the principle of non-aggression2,3. Notably, markets are needed because time and matter/energy are finite in the first place and are the necessary means to satisfy our ends. Put another way, economic value exists because of the scarce and useful nature of resources.

Consider now the vital relationship between the laws of thermodynamics and economics. The first law of thermodynamics, which states that matter and energy cannot be created nor destroyed, gives rise to the fact that resources are scarce on earth, which fuels economic decision-making amongst human beings. Additionally, the second law of thermodynamics, which highlights the universe's entropic nature, indicates that time is also scarce, valuable, and an integral aspect of economic decision-making, as all economic actions must use time. Most importantly, as described in more detail in the previous article, biological life can be viewed as the consequence of the entropic process of the universe. Life formed to help accelerate the increase in entropy. The process by which humans utilize energy and help accelerate the increase in entropy can also be viewed from an economic lens: economic decision-making helps drive the pursuit and innovation of energy production and usage. If economics is the study of the process by which human beings collectively make decisions, through individual action, that drive our societal progress forward. Then it is also the study of how human beings further accelerate their role in the entropic process of the universe. Entropy is the reason why we have economic markets, and economic markets help accelerate the entropic process. It is impossible to separate the laws of thermodynamics from the existence of the economic process within human society.

What is also appropriate to consider is the necessary properties of money. Nick Szabo, in his work "Shelling Out: The Origins of Money," provides an anthropological interpretation of how the use of money developed4. In trade, two potentially untrusting parties must find a way to trust one another. To do so, we can rely upon tokens of record governed by the laws of nature, which we all can trust. A commodity can be a helpful medium of exchange when it is scarce and hard to reproduce to the degree that people understand the extreme amount of energy and effort it would take to counterfeit one. Scarcity is how homo-sapiens detect the energy required to obtain a given object, giving it trust and validity as a unit of record. In this way, the first law of thermodynamics, which expresses matter as finite, provides a condition from which human beings can benefit by using it to trust one another. Not only is scarcity an underlying property that is the cause for economics, but the scarcer commodities, or at least those with the highest stock-to-flow ratio, are used as a medium of exchange that allows for more productive exchange within the economy5. In other words, most of a certain kind of scarcity is an underlying property in what makes high-quality money.

What is then interesting to ponder is the concept of the most scarce. One of the scarcest things we value, that which is most scarce, is time. Due to the second law of thermodynamics, time is the most finite and scarce resource. There is no way of 'recovering' or 'creating' more time. In that same vein, money can be conceptualized as an economic abstraction of time. I work now to receive money, which I can use to satisfy an end later. Similarly, I invest some money now so that it may grow, and I can benefit even more from that money later. Money and time are linked. Therefore, it stands to reason that the soundest form of money will be related to time in some fundamental sense. The better a money can store time, the more attractive that money is to use.

One significant component that contributes to the considerable innovation of Bitcoin is the difficulty adjustment. The difficulty adjustment in Bitcoin ensures that the time to mine a block remains close to 10 minutes, regardless of changes in the total mining power (the amount of energy being contributed to the network). This adjustment is crucial because it prevents blocks from being mined too quickly or slowly as miners join or leave the network. By recalibrating every 2016 blocks, the network maintains a certain rhythm, creating a new block every 10 minutes. It isn't easy to design a circuit board that can track time accurately and autonomously without relying on external time sources. However, creating a computer network that emulates the laws of thermodynamics via the mining process while simultaneously including the difficulty adjustment to give the machine a sense of time allowed it to adopt properties that were unique to nature itself. In this case, it is the first digital software that fully inherited the properties of scarcity.

Judging the correct ending for an article that blends so many disciplines is difficult. Perhaps the best way is to go full circle. The works of Donald Hoffman suggest that time is a consequence of human consciousness, not fundamental to the universe, that serves a positive utility towards our evolutionary pursuit of survival6. The predecessor article to this one highlighted how life is a consequence of the entropic nature of the universe. Perhaps time and our perceived relationship between time and entropy are helpful for life in pursuing its nature in this regard. Human beings gravitate towards scarce money like mosquitos gravitate toward light because it can be beneficial in the economic pursuit, which drives us toward the efficiency of furthering the production of entropy. This is potentially why those studying Bitcoin tend to view it as a technology of freedom, peace, prosperity, and more because money is a fundamental tool at which we are allowed to pursue such inherent purpose.

References

1. Grünbaum A. TIME AND ENTROPY. Am Sci. Published online 1996.

2. Rothbard MN. Man, Economy, and State with Power and Markets. Second Edition. Ludwig von Mises Institute; 1977.

3. Mises L von. Human Action: A Treatise on Economics. Ludwig von Mises Institute; 1940.

4. Szabo N. Shelling Out: The Origins of Money. Satoshi Nakamoto Institute. Published 2002. Accessed April 19, 2023. https://nakamotoinstitute.org/shelling-out/

5. Ammous S. The Bitcoin Standard. Wiley; 2018.

6. Hoffman DD, Prakash C. Objects of consciousness. Front Psychol. 2014;5(JUN). doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00577

@ 0176967e:1e6f471e

Lístky na festival Lunarpunku sú už v predaji na našom crowdfunding portáli. 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

@ 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.

@ 0dc2dcb1:4787801a

• Added ids and setIds() to the Filter class to fetch events with ids - https://github.com/nostrver-se/nostr-php/compare/1.3.1...1.3.2 
• Discovered https://revolt.run/ as a package to be used for concurrent async code in PHP. Source: TalkingDrupal podcast with KingDutch - https://www.drupal.org/project/drupal/issues/3257726
• Fix response in Relay class - https://github.com/nostrver-se/nostr-php/releases/tag/1.3.3. Found and reported on Nostr: https://njump.me/nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzphtxf40yq9jr82xdd8cqtts5szqyx5tcndvaukhsvfmduetr85ceqy88wumn8ghj7mn0wvhxcmmv9uq3zamnwvaz7tmwdaehgu3wwa5kuef0qqsq3utlvgf6tz88ctexwu8ppgct9dkahmv5esxhmmgphv675get22qmzah0a
• Created a seperate repository with the code for the nostr-php.dev website: https://github.com/nostrver-se/nostr-php.dev

@ 42342239:1d80db24

The EU's economy is facing a number of challenges, from high energy costs to low productivity. But behind the official rhetoric lies an assumption that is rarely questioned: that the green transition will automatically lead to economic growth and increased prosperity. But is this really true?

In Germany, which is once again forced to bear the label "Europe's sick man", Chancellor Olaf Scholz is struggling with alarmingly low confidence figures ahead of the election in February. But perhaps this is not so surprising. German industrial production has been trending downward since the green agenda became fashionable. Energy-intensive production has decreased by a full 20% in just a few years. Volkswagen is closing factories, Thyssenkrupp is massively laying off employees, and more than three million pensioners are at risk of poverty.

If this is Europe's "man on the moon" moment, as EU Commissioner von der Leyen expressed it in 2019, then it's not much to brag about. At least, not if you're not a sadist.

The former ECB chief Mario Draghi's report on the EU's competitiveness has been discussed previously in Affärsvärlden, among other things by the author and by Christian Sandström. One of the problems pointed out was that European companies have significantly higher energy costs than their American competitors, with electricity prices 2-3 times higher and natural gas prices 4-5 times higher.

Germany is perhaps worst off, thanks in part to former Chancellor Angela Merkel's decision to completely phase out nuclear power (a decision that not only lacked popular support but which she also refuses to acknowledge as a mistake). The sabotage of Nord Stream made the situation worse.

Without Real Capital, No Economic Prosperity

Germany's phasing out of nuclear power plants is an example of how political decisions have contributed to reducing the economy's capacity. The same applies to the sabotage of Nord Stream. Real capital, such as buildings, machinery, and equipment, is crucial for the economy's productivity (e.g., measures such as GDP per hour worked). A larger and more efficient capital stock enables the production of more goods and services with the same amount of labor, leading to greater production, higher wages, and increased material prosperity. This is basic economics. On the other hand, when real capital is declared obsolete due to political decisions, as in the case of the shutdown of nuclear power, it reduces the economy's capacity. The same applies when real capital is destroyed, as was the case with Nord Stream.

More Working Real Capital Will Be Put on the Back Burner

EU Commissioner von der Leyen promises improvement. She seems convinced that the EU's decline can be reversed by tripling down on the bloc's green goals, and listed decarbonization as one of three key pillars in a new "Competitiveness Compass". When reality does not live up to expectations, you can always press "Ctrl+Alt+Slogan" and hope that no one notices that nothing has improved.

However, her plans mean that existing and currently functioning real capital will be written off to an even greater extent in the future. This can be compared to a nation that gradually expands its nature reserves year after year. As it happens, this is also taking place. The Kunming-Montreal framework for biodiversity means that 30% of all areas, on land and at sea, must be protected by 2030. A country that currently conserves less than that must therefore identify additional areas that can be protected. The process of protecting 30% of all areas will likely reduce the economy's productive potential. With shrinking fields, there will be fewer carrots (unless significant technological progress is made).

Security Policy and Preparedness Consequences

On the current path, more real capital will be put on the back burner, which can have far-reaching consequences, not least for our security policy. For example, if Russia can produce artillery shells about three times faster, at a cost that is roughly a quarter of what it costs Ukraine's Western allies, then it's clear that this has security policy consequences. Similarly, if electricity prices in Germany are five times higher than in China, which is currently the case, then this will also have negative security policy consequences. Compared to the EU, China actually has a higher carbon dioxide emission level per capita, with a difference of about 50% according to available data. Adjusted for international trade, China emits 10% more than Sweden per capita.

A preparedness perspective can also be found. In the early 1990s, Swedish farmers produced nearly 75% of the country's food. Today, Sweden's population has increased significantly, but food production has not kept pace. Every other bite is imported today. In Sweden, we can even boast that we cannot even provide for ourselves with the simplest of crops - potatoes. Can we really be sure that significantly expanded nature reserves, as prescribed by the Kunming-Montreal framework for Sweden, will not further deteriorate our food preparedness?

Reminds One of Little Gnomes

I am reminded of an episode from the 90s TV series South Park, where little gnomes collect underpants. When asked about their plan, they described their method:

1. collect underpants
2. ???
3. profit!

Translated to the green transition (the German Energiewende):

1. destroy real capital and conserve land and sea
2. ???
3. economic prosperity!

What Can the EU Really Afford?

Economics is fundamentally about managing scarce resources, which many people seem to have forgotten. It's high time to question what the EU can really afford. Can we really afford to arm ourselves for war against Russia, China, and Iran while at the same time tying our own hands with green promises of reduced carbon dioxide emissions and increased biodiversity? This in a situation where the next US administration is likely to invest heavily in increasing its competitive advantages through deregulation, lower energy prices, tax cuts, and a withdrawal from the Paris Agreement?

When von der Leyen was responsible for the German military, the situation became "catastrophic". All six of the country's submarines were out of commission. At times, not a single one of the country's 14 transport aircraft could fly. German soldiers had to use broomsticks instead of guns during exercises.

Hopefully, von der Leyen will show more success in her handling of the EU's economy, defense, and preparedness than she has shown in her role as German Defense Minister. However, it may also be time for more people to challenge the prevailing narratives that shape our policies. What if the facts don't quite add up to the truth we're being told?