@ ed5774ac:45611c5c

Bitcoin as Collateral for U.S. Debt: A Deep Dive into the Financial Mechanics

The U.S. government’s proposal to declare Bitcoin as a 'strategic reserve' is a calculated move to address its unsustainable debt obligations, but it threatens to undermine Bitcoin’s original purpose as a tool for financial freedom. To fully grasp the implications of this plan, we must first understand the financial mechanics of debt creation, the role of collateral in sustaining debt, and the historical context of the petro-dollar system. Additionally, we must examine how the U.S. and its allies have historically sought new collateral to back their debt, including recent attempts to weaken Russia through the Ukraine conflict.

The Vietnam War and the Collapse of the Gold Standard

The roots of the U.S. debt crisis can be traced back to the Vietnam War. The war created an unsustainable budget deficit, forcing the U.S. to borrow heavily to finance its military operations. By the late 1960s, the U.S. was spending billions of dollars annually on the war, leading to a significant increase in public debt. Foreign creditors, particularly France, began to lose confidence in the U.S. dollar’s ability to maintain its value. In a dramatic move, French President Charles de Gaulle sent warships to New York to demand the conversion of France’s dollar reserves into gold, as per the Bretton Woods Agreement.

This demand exposed the fragility of the U.S. gold reserves. By 1971, President Richard Nixon was forced to suspend the dollar’s convertibility to gold, effectively ending the Bretton Woods system. This move, often referred to as the "Nixon Shock," declared the U.S. bankrupt and transformed the dollar into a fiat currency backed by nothing but trust in the U.S. government. The collapse of the gold standard marked the beginning of the U.S.’s reliance on artificial systems to sustain its debt. With the gold standard gone, the U.S. needed a new way to back its currency and debt—a need that would lead to the creation of the petro-dollar system.

The Petro-Dollar System: A New Collateral for Debt

In the wake of the gold standard’s collapse, the U.S. faced a critical challenge: how to maintain global confidence in the dollar and sustain its ability to issue debt. The suspension of gold convertibility in 1971 left the dollar as a fiat currency—backed by nothing but trust in the U.S. government. To prevent a collapse of the dollar’s dominance and ensure its continued role as the world’s reserve currency, the U.S. needed a new system to artificially create demand for dollars and provide a form of indirect backing for its debt.

The solution came in the form of the petro-dollar system. In the 1970s, the U.S. struck a deal with Saudi Arabia and other OPEC nations to price oil exclusively in U.S. dollars. In exchange, the U.S. offered military protection and economic support. This arrangement created an artificial demand for dollars, as countries needed to hold USD reserves to purchase oil. Additionally, oil-exporting nations reinvested their dollar revenues in U.S. Treasuries, effectively recycling petro-dollars back into the U.S. economy. This recycling of petrodollars provided the U.S. with a steady inflow of capital, allowing it to finance its deficits and maintain low interest rates.

To further bolster the system, the U.S., under the guidance of Henry Kissinger, encouraged OPEC to dramatically increase oil prices in the 1970s. The 1973 oil embargo and subsequent price hikes, masterminded by Kissinger, quadrupled the cost of oil, creating a windfall for oil-exporting nations. These nations, whose wealth surged significantly due to the rising oil prices, reinvested even more heavily in U.S. Treasuries and other dollar-denominated assets. This influx of petrodollars increased demand for U.S. debt, enabling the U.S. to issue more debt at lower interest rates. Additionally, the appreciation in the value of oil—a critical global commodity—provided the U.S. banking sector with the necessary collateral to expand credit generation. Just as a house serves as collateral for a mortgage, enabling banks to create new debt, the rising value of oil boosted the asset values of Western corporations that owned oil reserves or invested in oil infrastructure projects. This increase in asset values allowed these corporations to secure larger loans, providing banks with the collateral needed to expand credit creation and inject more dollars into the economy. However, these price hikes also caused global economic turmoil, disproportionately affecting developing nations. As the cost of energy imports skyrocketed, these nations faced mounting debt burdens, exacerbating their economic struggles and deepening global inequality.

The Unsustainable Debt Crisis and the Search for New Collateral

Fast forward to the present day, and the U.S. finds itself in a familiar yet increasingly precarious position. The 2008 financial crisis and the 2020 pandemic have driven the U.S. government’s debt to unprecedented levels, now exceeding $34 trillion, with a debt-to-GDP ratio surpassing 120%. At the same time, the petro-dollar system—the cornerstone of the dollar’s global dominance—is under significant strain. The rise of alternative currencies and the shifting power dynamics of a multipolar world have led to a decline in the dollar’s role in global trade, particularly in oil transactions. For instance, China now pays Saudi Arabia in yuan for oil imports, while Russia sells its oil and gas in rubles and other non-dollar currencies. This growing defiance of the dollar-dominated system reflects a broader trend toward economic independence, as nations like China and Russia seek to reduce their reliance on the U.S. dollar. As more countries bypass the dollar in trade, the artificial demand for dollars created by the petro-dollar system is eroding, undermining the ability of US to sustain its debt and maintain global financial hegemony.

In search of new collateral to carry on its unsustainable debt levels amid declining demand for the U.S. dollar, the U.S., together with its Western allies—many of whom face similar sovereign debt crises—first attempted to weaken Russia and exploit its vast natural resources as collateral. The U.S. and its NATO allies used Ukraine as a proxy to destabilize Russia, aiming to fragment its economy, colonize its territory, and seize control of its natural resources, estimated to be worth around $75 trillion. By gaining access to these resources, the West could have used them as collateral for the banking sector, enabling massive credit expansion. This, in turn, would have alleviated the sovereign debt crisis threatening both the EU and the U.S. This plan was not unprecedented; it mirrored France’s long-standing exploitation of its former African colonies through the CFA franc system.

For decades, France has maintained economic control over 14 African nations through the CFA franc, a currency pegged to the euro and backed by the French Treasury. Under this system, these African countries are required to deposit 50% of their foreign exchange reserves into the French Treasury, effectively giving France control over their monetary policy and economic sovereignty. This arrangement allows France to use African resources and reserves as implicit collateral to issue debt, keeping its borrowing costs low and ensuring demand for its bonds. In return, African nations are left with limited control over their own economies, forced to prioritize French interests over their own development. This neo-colonial system has enabled France to sustain its financial dominance while perpetuating poverty and dependency in its former colonies.

Just as France’s CFA franc system relies on the economic subjugation of African nations to sustain its financial dominance, the U.S. had hoped to use Russia’s resources as a lifeline for its debt-ridden economy. However, the plan ultimately failed. Russia not only resisted the sweeping economic sanctions imposed by the West but also decisively defeated NATO’s proxy forces in Ukraine, thwarting efforts to fragment its economy and seize control of its $75 trillion in natural resources. This failure left the U.S. and its allies without a new source of collateral to back their unsustainable debt levels. With this plan in ruins, the U.S. has been forced to turn its attention to Bitcoin as a potential new collateral for its unsustainable debt.

Bitcoin as Collateral: The U.S. Government’s Plan

The U.S. government’s plan to declare Bitcoin as a strategic reserve is a modern-day equivalent of the gold standard or petro-dollar system. Here’s how it would work:

1. Declaring Bitcoin as a Strategic Reserve: By officially recognizing Bitcoin as a reserve asset, the U.S. would signal to the world that it views Bitcoin as a store of value akin to gold. This would legitimize Bitcoin in the eyes of institutional investors and central banks.

2. Driving Up Bitcoin’s Price: To make Bitcoin a viable collateral, its price must rise significantly. The U.S. would achieve this by encouraging regulatory clarity, promoting institutional adoption, and creating a state-driven FOMO (fear of missing out). This would mirror the 1970s oil price hikes that bolstered the petro-dollar system.

3. Using Bitcoin to Back Debt: Once Bitcoin’s price reaches a sufficient level, the U.S. could use its Bitcoin reserves as collateral for issuing new debt. This would restore confidence in U.S. Treasuries and allow the government to continue borrowing at low interest rates.

The U.S. government’s goal is clear: to use Bitcoin as a tool to issue more debt and reinforce the dollar’s role as the global reserve currency. By forcing Bitcoin into a store-of-value role, the U.S. would replicate the gold standard’s exploitative dynamics, centralizing control in the hands of large financial institutions and central banks. This would strip Bitcoin of its revolutionary potential and undermine its promise of decentralization. Meanwhile, the dollar—in digital forms like USDT—would remain the primary medium of exchange, further entrenching the parasitic financial system.

Tether plays a critical role in this strategy. As explored in my previous article (here: [https://ersan.substack.com/p/is-tether-a-bitcoin-company]), Tether helps sustaining the current financial system by purchasing U.S. Treasuries, effectively providing life support for the U.S. debt machine during a period of declining demand for dollar-denominated assets. Now, with its plans to issue stablecoins on the Bitcoin blockchain, Tether is positioning itself as a bridge between Bitcoin and the traditional financial system. By issuing USDT on the Lightning Network, Tether could lure the poor in developing nations—who need short-term price stability for their day to day payments and cannot afford Bitcoin’s volatility—into using USDT as their primary medium of exchange. This would not only create an artificial demand for the dollar and extend the life of the parasitic financial system that Bitcoin was designed to dismantle but would also achieve this by exploiting the very people who have been excluded and victimized by the same system—the poor and unbanked in developing nations, whose hard-earned money would be funneled into sustaining the very structures that perpetuate their oppression.

Worse, USDT on Bitcoin could function as a de facto central bank digital currency (CBDC), where all transactions can be monitored and sanctioned by governments at will. For example, Tether’s centralized control over USDT issuance and its ties to traditional financial institutions make it susceptible to government pressure. Authorities could compel Tether to implement KYC (Know Your Customer) rules, freeze accounts, or restrict transactions, effectively turning USDT into a tool of financial surveillance and control. This would trap users in a system where every transaction is subject to government oversight, effectively stripping Bitcoin of its censorship-resistant and decentralized properties—the very features that make it a tool for financial freedom.

In this way, the U.S. government’s push for Bitcoin as a store of value, combined with Tether’s role in promoting USDT as a medium of exchange, creates a two-tiered financial system: one for the wealthy, who can afford to hold Bitcoin as a hedge against inflation, and another for the poor, who are trapped in a tightly controlled, surveilled digital economy. This perpetuates the very inequalities Bitcoin was designed to dismantle, turning it into a tool of oppression rather than liberation.

Conclusion: Prolonging the Parasitic Financial System

The U.S. government’s plan to declare Bitcoin as a strategic reserve is not a step toward financial innovation or freedom—it is a desperate attempt to prolong the life of a parasitic financial system that Bitcoin was created to replace. By co-opting Bitcoin, the U.S. would gain a new tool to issue more debt, enabling it to continue its exploitative practices, including proxy wars, economic sanctions, and the enforcement of a unipolar world order.

The petro-dollar system was built on the exploitation of oil-exporting nations and the global economy. A Bitcoin-backed system would likely follow a similar pattern, with the U.S. using its dominance to manipulate Bitcoin’s price and extract value from the rest of the world. This would allow the U.S. to sustain its current financial system, in which it prints money out of thin air to purchase real-world assets and goods, enriching itself at the expense of other nations.

Bitcoin was designed to dismantle this parasitic system, offering an escape hatch for those excluded from or exploited by traditional financial systems. By declaring Bitcoin a strategic reserve, the U.S. government would destroy Bitcoin’s ultimate purpose, turning it into another instrument of control. This is not a victory for Bitcoin or bitcoiners—it is a tragedy for financial freedom and global equity.

The Bitcoin strategic reserve plan is not progress—it is a regression into the very system Bitcoin was designed to dismantle. As bitcoiners, we must resist this co-option and fight to preserve Bitcoin’s original vision: a decentralized, sovereign, and equitable financial system for all. This means actively working to ensure Bitcoin is used as a medium of exchange, not just a store of value, to fulfill its promise of financial freedom.

@ 6f7db55a:985d8b25

This article will be basic instructions for extreme normies (I say that lovingly), or anyone looking to get started with using zap.stream and sharing to nostr.

EQUIPMENT Getting started is incredibly easy and your equipment needs are miniscule.

An old desktop or laptop running Linux, MacOs, or Windows made in the passed 15yrs should do. Im currently using and old Dell Latitude E5430 with an Intel i5-3210M with 32Gigs of ram and 250GB hard drive. Technically, you go as low as using a Raspberry Pi 4B+ running Owncast, but Ill save that so a future tutorial.

Let's get started.

ON YOUR COMPUTER You'll need to install OBS (open broaster software). OBS is the go-to for streaming to social media. There are tons of YouTube videos on it's function. WE, however, will only be doing the basics to get us up and running.

First, go to https://obsproject.com/

Once on the OBS site, choose the correct download for you system. Linux, MacOs or Windows. Download (remember where you downloaded the file to). Go there and install your download. You may have to enter your password to install on your particular operating system. This is normal.

Once you've installed OBS, open the application. It should look something like this...

For our purposes, we will be in studio mode. Locate the 'Studio Mode' button on the right lower-hand side of the screen, and click it.

You'll see the screen split like in the image above. The left-side is from your desktop, and the right-side is what your broadcast will look like.

Next, we go to settings. The 'Settings' button is located right below the 'Studio Mode" button.

Now we're in settings and you should see something like this...

Now locate stream in the right-hand menu. It should be the second in the list. Click it.

Once in the stream section, go to 'Service' and in the right-hand drop-down, find and select 'Custom...' from the drop-down menu.

Remeber where this is because we'll need to come back to it, shortly.

ZAPSTREAM We need our streamkey credentials from Zapstream. Go to https://zap.stream. Then, go to your dashboard.

Located on the lower right-hand side is the Server URL and Stream Key. You'll need to copy/paste this in OBS.

You may have to generate new keys, if they aren't already there. This is normal. If you're interested in multi-streaming (That's where you broadcast to multiple social media platforms all at once), youll need the server URL and streamkeys from each. You'll place them in their respective forms in Zapstream's 'Stream Forwarding" section.

Use the custom form, if the platform you want to stream to isn't listed.

*Side-Note: remember that you can use your nostr identity across multiple nostr client applications. So when your login for Amethyst, as an example, could be used when you login to zapstream. Also, i would suggest using Alby's browser extension. It makes it much easier to fund your stream, as well as receive zaps. *

Now, BACK TO OBS... With Stream URL and Key in hand, paste them in the 'Stream" section of OBS' settings. Service [Custom...] Server [Server URL] StreamKey [Your zapstream stream key]

After you've entered all your streaming credentials, click 'OK' at the bottom, on the right-hand side.

WHAT'S NEXT? Let's setup your first stream from OBS. First we need to choose a source. Your source is your input device. It can be your webcam, your mic, your monitor, or any particular window on your screen. assuming you're an absolute beginner, we're going to use the source 'Window Capture (Xcomposite)'.

Now, open your source file. We'll use a video source called 'grannyhiphop.mp4'. In your case it can be whatever you want to stream; Just be sure to select the proper source.

Double-click on 'Window Capture' in your sources list. In the pop-up window, select your file from the 'Window' drop-down menu.

You should see something like this...

Working in the left display of OBS, we will adjust the video by left-click, hold and drag the bottom corner, so that it takes up the whole display.

In order to adjust the right-side display ( the broadcast side), we need to manipulate the video source by changing it's size.

This may take some time to adjust the size. This is normal. What I've found to help is, after every adjustment, I click the 'Fade (300ms)' button. I have no idea why it helps, but it does, lol.

Finally, after getting everything to look the way you want, you click the 'Start Stream' button.

BACK TO ZAPSTREAM Now, we go back to zapstream to check to see if our stream is up. It may take a few moments to update. You may even need to refresh the page. This is normal.

STREAMS UP!!!

A few things, in closing. You'll notice that your dashbooard has changed. It'll show current stream time, how much time you have left (according to your funding source), who's zapped you with how much theyve zapped, the ability to post a note about your stream (to both nostr and twitter), and it shows your chatbox with your listeners. There are also a raid feature, stream settings (where you can title & tag your stream). You can 'topup' your funding for your stream. As well as, see your current balance.

You did a great and If you ever need more help, just use the tag #asknostr in your note. There are alway nostriches willing to help.

STAY AWESOME!!!

npub: nostr:npub1rsvhkyk2nnsyzkmsuaq9h9ms7rkxhn8mtxejkca2l4pvkfpwzepql3vmtf

@ b8851a06:9b120ba1

Private property isn’t lines on dirt or fences of steel—it’s the crystallization of human sovereignty. Each boundary drawn is a silent declaration: This is where my will meets yours, where creation clashes against chaos. What we defend as “mine” or “yours” is no mere object but a metaphysical claim, a scaffold for the unfathomable complexity of voluntary exchange.

Markets breathe only when individuals anchor their choices in the inviolable. Without property, there is no negotiation—only force. No trade—only taking. The deed to land, the title to a car, the seed of an idea: these are not static things but frontiers of being, where human responsibility collides with the infinite permutations of value.

Austrian economics whispers what existentialism shouts: existence precedes essence. Property isn’t granted by systems; it’s asserted through action, defended through sacrifice, and sanctified through mutual recognition. A thing becomes “owned” only when a mind declares it so, and others—through reason or respect—refrain from crossing that unseen line.

Bitcoin? The purest ledger of this truth. A string of code, yes—but one that mirrors the unyielding logic of property itself: scarce, auditable, unconquerable. It doesn’t ask permission. It exists because sovereign minds choose it to.

Sigh. #nostr
I love #Bitcoin.

@ a95c6243:d345522c

Auf der diesjährigen Münchner Sicherheitskonferenz geht es vor allem um die Ukraine. Protagonisten sind dabei zunächst die US-Amerikaner. Präsident Trump schockierte die Europäer kurz vorher durch ein Telefonat mit seinem Amtskollegen Wladimir Putin, während Vizepräsident Vance mit seiner Rede über Demokratie und Meinungsfreiheit für versteinerte Mienen und Empörung sorgte.

Die Bemühungen der Europäer um einen Frieden in der Ukraine halten sich, gelinde gesagt, in Grenzen. Größeres Augenmerk wird auf militärische Unterstützung, die Pflege von Feindbildern sowie Eskalation gelegt. Der deutsche Bundeskanzler Scholz reagierte auf die angekündigten Verhandlungen über einen möglichen Frieden für die Ukraine mit der Forderung nach noch höheren «Verteidigungsausgaben». Auch die amtierende Außenministerin Baerbock hatte vor der Münchner Konferenz klargestellt:

«Frieden wird es nur durch Stärke geben. (...) Bei Corona haben wir gesehen, zu was Europa fähig ist. Es braucht erneut Investitionen, die der historischen Wegmarke, vor der wir stehen, angemessen sind.»

Die Rüstungsindustrie freut sich in jedem Fall über weltweit steigende Militärausgaben. Die Kriege in der Ukraine und in Gaza tragen zu Rekordeinnahmen bei. Jetzt «winkt die Aussicht auf eine jahrelange große Nachrüstung in Europa», auch wenn der Ukraine-Krieg enden sollte, so hört man aus Finanzkreisen. In der Konsequenz kennt «die Aktie des deutschen Vorzeige-Rüstungskonzerns Rheinmetall in ihrem Anstieg offenbar gar keine Grenzen mehr». «Solche Friedensversprechen» wie das jetzige hätten in der Vergangenheit zu starken Kursverlusten geführt.

Für manche Leute sind Kriegswaffen und sonstige Rüstungsgüter Waren wie alle anderen, jedenfalls aus der Perspektive von Investoren oder Managern. Auch in diesem Bereich gibt es Startups und man spricht von Dingen wie innovativen Herangehensweisen, hocheffizienten Produktionsanlagen, skalierbaren Produktionstechniken und geringeren Stückkosten.

Wir lesen aktuell von Massenproduktion und gesteigerten Fertigungskapazitäten für Kriegsgerät. Der Motor solcher Dynamik und solchen Wachstums ist die Aufrüstung, die inzwischen permanent gefordert wird. Parallel wird die Bevölkerung verbal eingestimmt und auf Kriegstüchtigkeit getrimmt.

Das Rüstungs- und KI-Startup Helsing verkündete kürzlich eine «dezentrale Massenproduktion für den Ukrainekrieg». Mit dieser Expansion positioniere sich das Münchner Unternehmen als einer der weltweit führenden Hersteller von Kampfdrohnen. Der nächste «Meilenstein» steht auch bereits an: Man will eine Satellitenflotte im Weltraum aufbauen, zur Überwachung von Gefechtsfeldern und Truppenbewegungen.

Ebenfalls aus München stammt das als DefenseTech-Startup bezeichnete Unternehmen ARX Robotics. Kürzlich habe man in der Region die größte europäische Produktionsstätte für autonome Verteidigungssysteme eröffnet. Damit fahre man die Produktion von Militär-Robotern hoch. Diese Expansion diene auch der Lieferung der «größten Flotte unbemannter Bodensysteme westlicher Bauart» in die Ukraine.

Rüstung boomt und scheint ein Zukunftsmarkt zu sein. Die Hersteller und Vermarkter betonen, mit ihren Aktivitäten und Produkten solle die europäische Verteidigungsfähigkeit erhöht werden. Ihre Strategien sollten sogar «zum Schutz demokratischer Strukturen beitragen».

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ 599f67f7:21fb3ea9

¿Qué es Blossom?

nostr:nevent1qqspttj39n6ld4plhn4e2mq3utxpju93u4k7w33l3ehxyf0g9lh3f0qpzpmhxue69uhkummnw3ezuamfdejsygzenanl0hmkjnrq8fksvdhpt67xzrdh0h8agltwt5znsmvzr7e74ywgmr72

Blossom significa Blobs Simply Stored on Media Servers (Blobs Simplemente Almacenados en Servidores de Medios). Blobs son fragmentos de datos binarios, como archivos pero sin nombres. En lugar de nombres, se identifican por su hash sha256. La ventaja de usar hashes sha256 en lugar de nombres es que los hashes son IDs universales que se pueden calcular a partir del archivo mismo utilizando el algoritmo de hash sha256.

💡 archivo -> sha256 -> hash

Blossom es, por lo tanto, un conjunto de puntos finales HTTP que permiten a los usuarios almacenar y recuperar blobs almacenados en servidores utilizando su identidad nostr.

¿Por qué Blossom?

Como mencionamos hace un momento, al usar claves nostr como su identidad, Blossom permite que los datos sean "propiedad" del usuario. Esto simplifica enormemente la cuestión de "qué es spam" para el alojamiento de servidores. Por ejemplo, en nuestro Blossom solo permitimos cargas por miembros de la comunidad verificados que tengan un NIP-05 con nosotros.

Los usuarios pueden subir en múltiples servidores de blossom, por ejemplo, uno alojado por su comunidad, uno de pago, otro público y gratuito, para establecer redundancia de sus datos. Los blobs pueden ser espejados entre servidores de blossom, de manera similar a cómo los relays nostr pueden transmitir eventos entre sí. Esto mejora la resistencia a la censura de blossom.

A continuación se muestra una breve tabla de comparación entre torrents, Blossom y servidores CDN centralizados. (Suponiendo que hay muchos seeders para torrents y se utilizan múltiples servidores con Blossom).

| | Torrents | Blossom | CDN Centralizado | | --------------------------------------------------------------- | -------- | ------- | ---------------- | | Descentralizado | ✅ | ✅ | ❌ | | Resistencia a la censura | ✅ | ✅ | ❌ | | ¿Puedo usarlo para publicar fotos de gatitos en redes sociales? | ❌ | ✅ | ✅ |

¿Cómo funciona?

Blossom utiliza varios tipos de eventos nostr para comunicarse con el servidor de medios.

| kind | descripción | BUD | | ----- | ------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------ | | 24242 | Evento de autorización | BUD01 | | 10063 | Lista de Servidores de Usuarios | BUD03 |

kind:24242 - Autorización

Esto es esencialmente lo que ya describimos al usar claves nostr como IDs de usuario. En el evento, el usuario le dice al servidor que quiere subir o eliminar un archivo y lo firma con sus claves nostr. El servidor realiza algunas verificaciones en este evento y luego ejecuta el comando del usuario si todo parece estar bien.

kind:10063 - Lista de Servidores de Usuarios

Esto es utilizado por el usuario para anunciar a qué servidores de medios está subiendo. De esta manera, cuando el cliente ve esta lista, sabe dónde subir los archivos del usuario. También puede subir en múltiples servidores definidos en la lista para asegurar redundancia. En el lado de recuperación, si por alguna razón uno de los servidores en la lista del usuario está fuera de servicio, o el archivo ya no se puede encontrar allí, el cliente puede usar esta lista para intentar recuperar el archivo de otros servidores en la lista. Dado que los blobs se identifican por sus hashes, el mismo blob tendrá el mismo hash en cualquier servidor de medios. Todo lo que el cliente necesita hacer es cambiar la URL por la de un servidor diferente.

Ahora, además de los conceptos básicos de cómo funciona Blossom, también hay otros tipos de eventos que hacen que Blossom sea aún más interesante.

| kind | descripción | | ----- | --------------------- | | 30563 | Blossom Drives | | 36363 | Listado de Servidores | | 31963 | Reseña de Servidores |

kind:30563 - Blossom Drives

Este tipo de evento facilita la organización de blobs en carpetas, como estamos acostumbrados con los drives (piensa en Google Drive, iCloud, Proton Drive, etc.). El evento contiene información sobre la estructura de carpetas y los metadatos del drive.

kind:36363 y kind:31963 - Listado y Reseña

Estos tipos de eventos permiten a los usuarios descubrir y reseñar servidores de medios a través de nostr. kind:36363 es un listado de servidores que contiene la URL del servidor. kind:31963 es una reseña, donde los usuarios pueden calificar servidores.

¿Cómo lo uso?

Encuentra un servidor

Primero necesitarás elegir un servidor Blossom donde subirás tus archivos. Puedes navegar por los públicos en blossomservers.com. Algunos de ellos son de pago, otros pueden requerir que tus claves nostr estén en una lista blanca.

Luego, puedes ir a la URL de su servidor y probar a subir un archivo pequeño, como una foto. Si estás satisfecho con el servidor (es rápido y aún no te ha fallado), puedes agregarlo a tu Lista de Servidores de Usuarios. Cubriremos brevemente cómo hacer esto en noStrudel y Amethyst (pero solo necesitas hacer esto una vez, una vez que tu lista actualizada esté publicada, los clientes pueden simplemente recuperarla de nostr).

noStrudel

1. Encuentra Relays en la barra lateral, luego elige Servidores de Medios.
2. Agrega un servidor de medios, o mejor aún, varios.
3. Publica tu lista de servidores. ✅

Amethyst

1. En la barra lateral, encuentra Servidores multimedia.
2. Bajo Servidores Blossom, agrega tus servidores de medios.
3. Firma y publica. ✅

Ahora, cuando vayas a hacer una publicación y adjuntar una foto, por ejemplo, se subirá en tu servidor blossom.

⚠️ Ten en cuenta que debes suponer que los archivos que subas serán públicos. Aunque puedes proteger un archivo con contraseña, esto no ha sido auditado.

Blossom Drive

Como mencionamos anteriormente, podemos publicar eventos para organizar nuestros blobs en carpetas. Esto puede ser excelente para compartir archivos con tu equipo, o simplemente para mantener las cosas organizadas.

Para probarlo, ve a blossom.hzrd149.com (o nuestra instancia comunitaria en blossom.bitcointxoko.com) e inicia sesión con tu método preferido.

Puedes crear una nueva unidad y agregar blobs desde allí.

Bouquet

Si usas múltiples servidores para darte redundancia, Bouquet es una buena manera de obtener una visión general de todos tus archivos. Úsalo para subir y navegar por tus medios en diferentes servidores y sincronizar blobs entre ellos.

Cherry Tree

nostr:nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzqfngzhsvjggdlgeycm96x4emzjlwf8dyyzdfg4hefp89zpkdgz99qyghwumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytnhd9hx2tcpzfmhxue69uhkummnw3e82efwvdhk6tcqyp3065hj9zellakecetfflkgudm5n6xcc9dnetfeacnq90y3yxa5z5gk2q6

Cherry Tree te permite dividir un archivo en fragmentos y luego subirlos en múltiples servidores blossom, y más tarde reensamblarlos en otro lugar.

Conclusión

Blossom aún está en desarrollo, pero ya hay muchas cosas interesantes que puedes hacer con él para hacerte a ti y a tu comunidad más soberanos. ¡Pruébalo!

Si deseas mantenerte al día sobre el desarrollo de Blossom, sigue a nostr:nprofile1qyghwumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytnhd9hx2tcpzfmhxue69uhkummnw3e82efwvdhk6tcqyqnxs90qeyssm73jf3kt5dtnk997ujw6ggy6j3t0jjzw2yrv6sy22ysu5ka y dale un gran zap por su excelente trabajo.

Referencias

• hzrd149/blossom en GitHub
• Blossom Drive

@ 21ffd29c:518a8ff5

The Empty Fort Knox?

The latest developments hinge on whether Fort Knox is entirely empty or if it is filled with a mere veneer of gold bars, concealing a far greater secret. According to credible sources, auditors are currently verifying claims that these hidden reserves could surpass what was previously thought to be the U.S. government’s official reserves.

If Fort Knox is truly empty, it would raise profound questions about national security and the integrity of global institutions. The lack of gold at the world-class vault could signal a catastrophic misplacement or even a cover-up—potentially involving foreign entities with ulterior motives.

Rand Paul, Elon Musk, and London Gold Shipments

The speculation is further fueled by mentions of Rand Paul, a former U.S. Senator known for his investigative prowess (albeit not traditionally in the role of an auditor), and Elon Musk, the tech giant’s CEO, who has hinted at involvement in uncovering these reserves through his various ventures.

Additionally, there are whispers that London-based gold shipments— rumors suggest up to 8000 gold bars—are on their way ahead of a major audit. These claims hint at global coordination and a potential announcement about the U.S.’s newfound wealth.

Who Hides the Title?

The question lingers: who holds the title of these gold reserves? Are they the U.S. government itself, or is it an unknown entity with ties to foreign powers? The involvement of auditors suggests a process designed to validate these claims, but the timing and scale raise suspicions about motives.

Implications: Security, Economy, and Trust

If confirmed, the discovery could have huge implications for U.S. national security, as controlling such vast amounts of gold would give an unparalleled level of influence over global markets, finance, and defense. The reserves could also serve as a major geopolitical weapon or trigger massive financial reforms.

Economically, this revelation could reshape global trade dynamics, particularly in the commodities sector. The availability of unprecedented quantities of gold could alter inflationary pressures, investment strategies, and even consumer behavior worldwide.

Perhaps most terrifyingly, if Fort Knox is found to be empty, it could shake confidence in institutions long believed to be impenetrable. The U.S. government’s role in these reserves—and its potential cover-up—could indicate systemic weaknesses that have gone unnoticed for decades.

The Verdict: Who’s Holding the Title?

The ultimate answer lies in the verification process initiated by auditors, but speculation already points toward a combination of coincidence and deliberate action. The involvement of Rand Paul, Elon Musk, and London-based shipments suggests a plot worthy of the most conspiracy theories— one that blends national security with economic control.

In an era defined by increasing global interconnectedness, the discovery of these hidden gold reserves could mark a turning point in history—one that reshapes the balance of power, economics, and trust across the globe. Until the truth is confirmed—or buried deeper than Fort Knox—it remains a shrouded mystery that demands urgent attention.

@ 29af23a9:842ef0c1

A Indústria Pornográfica se caracteriza pelo investimento pesado de grandes empresários americanos, desde 2014.

Na década de 90, filmes pornográficos eram feitos às coxas. Era basicamente duas pessoas fazendo sexo amador e sendo gravadas. Não tinha roteiro, nem produção, não tinha maquiagem, nada disso. A distribuição era rudimentar, os assinantes tinham que sair de suas casas, ir até a locadora, sofrer todo tipo de constrangimento para assistir a um filme pornô.

No começo dos anos 2000, o serviço de Pay Per View fez o número de vendas de filmes eróticos (filme erótico é bem mais leve) crescer mas nada se compara com os sites de filmes pornográficos por assinatura.

Com o advento dos serviços de Streaming, os sites que vendem filmes por assinatura se estabeleceram no mercado como nunca foi visto na história.

Hoje, os Produtores usam produtos para esticar os vasos sanguíneos do pênis dos atores e dopam as atrizes para que elas aguentem horas de gravação (a Série Black Mirror fez uma crítica a isso no episódio 1 milhão de méritos de forma sutil).

Além de toda a produção em volta das cenas. Que são gravadas em 4K, para focar bem as partes íntimas dos atores. Quadros fechados, iluminação, tudo isso faz essa Indústria ser "Artística" uma vez que tudo ali é falso. Um filme da Produtora Vixen, por exemplo, onde jovens mulheres transam em mansões com seus empresários estimula o esteriótipo da mina padrão que chama seu chefe rico de "daddy" e seduz ele até ele trair a esposa.

Sites como xvídeos, pornHub e outros nada mais são do que sites que salvam filmes dessas produtoras e hospedam as cenas com anúncios e pop-ups. Alguns sites hospedam o filme inteiro "de graça".

Esse tipo de filme estimula qualquer homem heterosexual com menos de 30 anos, que não tem o córtex frontal de seu cérebro totalmente desenvolvido (segundo estudos só é completamente desenvolvido quando o homem chega aos 31 anos).

A arte Pornográfica faz alguns fantasiarem ter relação sexual com uma gostosa americana branquinha, até escraviza-los. Muitos não conseguem sair do vício e preferem a Ficção à sua esposa real. Então pare de se enganar e admita. A Pornografia faz mal para a saúde mental do homem.

Quem sonha em ter uma transa com Lana Rhodes, deve estar nesse estágio. Trata-se de uma atriz (pornstar) que ganhou muito dinheiro vendendo a ilusão da Arte Pornografica, como a Riley Reid que só gravava para grandes Produtoras. Ambas se arrependeram da carreira artística e agora tentam viver suas vidas como uma mulher comum.

As próprias atrizes se consideram artistas, como Mia Malkova, chegou a dizer que Pornografia é a vida dela, que é "Lindo e Sofisticado."

Mia Malkova inclusive faz questão de dizer que a industria não escravisa mulheres jovens. Trata-se de um negócio onde a mulher assina um contrato com uma produtora e recebe um cachê por isso. Diferente do discurso da Mia Khalifa em entrevista para a BBC, onde diz que as mulheres são exploradas por homens poderosos. Vai ela está confundindo o Conglomerado Vixen com a Rede Globo ou com a empresa do Harvey Weinstein.

Enfim, se você é um homem solteiro entre 18 e 40 anos que já consumiu ou que ainda consome pornografia, sabia que sofrerá consequências. Pois trata-se de "produções artísticas" da indústria audiovisual que altera os níveis de dopamina do seu cérebro, mudando a neuroplasticidade e diminuindo a massa cinzenta, deixando o homem com memória fraca, sem foco e com mente nebulosa.

Por que o Estado não proíbe/criminaliza a Pornografia se ela faz mal? E desde quando o Estado quer o nosso bem? Existem grandes empresarios que financiam essa indústria ajudando governos a manterem o povo viciado e assim alienado. É um pão e circo, só que muito mais viciante e maléfico. Eu costume dizer aos meus amigos que existem grandes empresários jvdeus que são donos de grandes Produtoras de filmes pornográficos como o Conglomerado Vixen. Então se eles assistem vídeos pirateados de filmes dessas produtoras, eles estão no colo do Judeu.

@ 09fbf8f3:fa3d60f0

🌟 深度探索：在Cloudflare上免费部署DeepSeek-R1 32B大模型

🌍 一、 注册或登录Cloudflare平台（CF老手可跳过）

1️⃣ 进入Cloudflare平台官网：

。www.cloudflare.com/zh-cn/
登录或者注册账号。

2️⃣ 新注册的用户会让你选择域名，无视即可，直接点下面的Start building。

3️⃣ 进入仪表盘后，界面可能会显示英文，在右上角切换到[简体中文]即可。

---

🚀 二、正式开始部署Deepseek API项目。

1️⃣ 首先在左侧菜单栏找到【AI】下的【Wokers AI】，选择【Llama 3 Woker】。

2️⃣ 为项目取一个好听的名字，后点击部署即可。

3️⃣ Woker项目初始化部署好后，需要编辑替换掉其原代码。

4️⃣ 解压出提供的代码压缩包，找到【32b】的部署代码，将里面的文本复制出来。

下载地址：
📁 夸克
📁 UC网盘
📁 迅雷网盘

5️⃣ 接第3步，将项目里的原代码清空，粘贴第4步复制好的代码到编辑器。

6️⃣ 代码粘贴完，即可点击右上角的部署按钮。

7️⃣ 回到仪表盘，点击部署完的项目名称。

8️⃣ 查看【设置】，找到平台分配的项目网址，复制好备用。

---

💻 三、选择可用的UI软件，这边使用Chatbox AI演示。

1️⃣ 根据自己使用的平台下载对应的安装包，博主也一并打包好了全平台的软件安装包。

2️⃣ 打开安装好的Chatbox，点击左下角的设置。

3️⃣ 选择【添加自定义提供方】。

4️⃣ 按照图片说明填写即可，【API域名】为之前复制的项目网址(加/v1)；【改善网络兼容性】功能务必开启；【API密钥】默认为”zhiyuan“，可自行修改；填写完毕后保存即可。

5️⃣ Cloudflare项目部署好后，就能正常使用了，接口仿照OpenAI API具有较强的兼容性，能导入到很多支持AI功能的软件或插件中。

6️⃣ Cloudflare的域名默认被墙了，需要自己准备一个域名设置。

---

转自微信公众号：纸鸢花的小屋
推广：低调云（梯子VPN）
。www.didiaocloud.xyz

@ f4db5270:3c74e0d0

Hi Art lover! 🎨🫂💜 You may not know it yet but all of the following paintings are available in #Bitcoin on my website: https://isolabell.art/#shop

For info and prices write to me in DM and we will find a good deal! 🤝

ON THE ROAD AGAIN 40x50cm, Oil on canvas Completed January 23, 2025

---

SUN OF JANUARY 40x50cm, Oil on canvas Completed January 14, 2025

---

THE BLUE HOUR 40x50cm, Oil on canvas Completed December 14, 2024

---

LIKE A FRAGMENT OF ETERNITY 50x40cm, Oil on canvas Completed December 01, 2024

---

WHERE WINTER WHISPERS 50x40cm, Oil on canvas Completed November 07, 2024

---

L'ATTESA DI UN MOMENTO 40x40cm, Oil on canvas Completed October 29, 2024

---

LE COSE CHE PENSANO 40x50cm, Oil on paper Completed October 05, 2024

---

TWILIGHT'S RIVER 50x40cm, Oil on canvas Completed September 17, 2024

---

GOLD ON THE OCEAN 40x50cm, Oil on paper Completed September 08, 2024

---

SUSSURRI DI CIELO E MARE 50x40cm, Oil on paper Completed September 05, 2024

---

THE END OF A WONDERFUL WEEKEND 40x30cm, Oil on board Completed August 12, 2024

---

FIAMME NEL CIELO 60x35cm, Oil on board Completed July 28, 2024

---

INIZIO D'ESTATE 50x40cm, Oil on cradled wood panel Completed July 13, 2024

---

OMBRE DELLA SERA 50x40cm, Oil on cradled wood panel Completed June 16, 2024

---

NEW ZEALAND SUNSET 80x60cm, Oil on canvas board Completed May 28, 2024

---

VENICE 50x40cm, Oil on board Completed May 4, 2024

---

CORNWALL 50x40cm, Oil on board Completed April 26, 2024

---

DOCKS ON SUNSET 40x19,5cm, Oil on board Completed March 14, 2024

---

SOLITUDE 30x30cm, Oil on cradled wood panel Completed March 2, 2024

---

LULLING WAVES 40x30cm, Oil on cradled wood panel Completed January 14, 2024

---

MULATTIERA IN AUTUNNO 30x30cm, Oil on cradled wood panel

---

TRAMONTO A KOS 40x40cm, oil on board canvas

---

HIDDEN SMILE 40x40cm, oil on board

---

INIZIO D'AUTUNNO 40x40cm, oil on canvas

---

BOE NEL LAGO 30x30cm, oil on canvas board

---

BARCHE A RIPOSO 40x40cm, oil on canvas board

---

IL RISVEGLIO 30x40cm, oil on canvas board

---

LA QUIETE PRIMA DELLA TEMPESTA 30x40cm, oil on canvas board

---

LAMPIONE SUL LAGO 30x30cm, oil on canvas board

---

DUE NELLA NEVE 60x25cm, oil on board

---

UNA CAREZZA 30x30cm, oil on canvas board

---

REBEL WAVES 44x32cm, oil on canvas board

---

THE SCREAMING WAVE 40x30cm, oil on canvas board

---

"LA DONZELLETTA VIEN DALLA CAMPAGNA..." 30x40cm, oil on canvas board

---

LIGHTHOUSE ON WHITE CLIFF 30x40cm, oil on canvas board

@ 88d8c9d1:5b3ac02b

This article was first published on Bitcoin Magazine at Aug 27, 2024.

In the rapidly expanding global Bitcoin community, Western biases often dominate the narrative, overlooking diverse stories from around the world. One such story belongs to Didier Somnuke, a small business owner in the heart of Bangkok, a city known for welcoming 22.8 million international tourists in 2023, surpassing cities like Paris, London, and New York City. Although Thailand has experienced a massive spike in household debt, reaching 16.37 trillion baht (US$463 billion) or 90.8% of the national GDP, up from less than 14 trillion baht in 2019.

[primal.net/p/npub1xzh2kqynr29x6j3ln6x05f26ha0c0ucfr280uzljftlgcthv9r6skqe7dt] aka Didier Somnuke, born in Yala province, where geopolitical conflict is a harsh reality. Southern Thailand is one of the poorest parts of Thailand with a poverty rate of 34% compared to the national average of 6%, according to the World Bank, has been plagued by instability. Since 2004, this turmoil has claimed over 7,000 lives and injured 13,500 people.

As a Thai saying goes, “ทวงสิทธิ์ที่จะมีชีวิตที่ดีกลับคืนมา” (Reclaim the right to a better life), In 2012, Didier left his conflict-ridden hometown for Bangkok, where pursuing higher education was a beacon of hope for a better life. At that time, Bitcoin and financial concepts were distant ideas in Didier's universe. Navigating the vibrant streets of Bangkok, Didier completed his master's degree and joined the workforce, taking up a typical 9-to-5 job. For a domestic migrant, this was a significant achievement. Reflecting on his journey, he recalled his teacher’s words, “When you are old, you have time and money, but you will lack the energy to start a business. If you want to do it, just do it.” With this advice in mind, Didier resigned from his monotonous corporate job after a year and opened a new chapter in his life.

Didier borrowed 50,000 THB (approximately 1,500 USD) from his brother to begin a street burger shop. He chose to start a burger business because he believed it was easy to launch with a small investment. Driven by his ambition and inspired by the bustling energy of Bangkok, a city that never sleeps. He spent about a year developing the recipe and began the business in 2015. In the first three to four years, he managed everything on his own as a solo entrepreneur, and his income was lower than the wage he earned in his corporate job. He often wondered if he had made a mistake by quitting his job to start a business that generated less income. However, after five years, everything started to improve. Sales at the shop began to increase, and Didier started hiring employees.

He admitted, "I entered the crypto market with greed; all I wanted was to get rich quickly." In 2017, he and his friends pooled their resources to buy three ASIC miners from Bitmain to try mining Bitcoin and altcoins like Litecoin and Dogecoin. They saw a return on their investment within six months. Didier bought his first Bitcoin in early 2017 to purchase those ASIC miners but didn't know how to transfer his Bitcoin, so he ended up using a bank transfer instead.

Reflecting on his early experiences, he recalled, "My first Bitcoin were slowly converted to shitcoins during the bull market. I was so lucky. I got a 100% profit almost immediately whenever I bought something." Despite having zero knowledge about cryptocurrency, he gained confidence and became a super shitcoiner, paying very little attention to Bitcoin.

In mid-2017, he learned about leverage and trading. His profits skyrocketed due to leverage. Although luck was not always on his side forever, in early 2018, the market crashed, and he lost over 1 million Thai baht (almost 30,000 USD), while his initial capital was just about 100,000 Thai baht (about 3,000 USD). On top of that, he also lost his shitcoins from the mining pool. He had kept all of his shitcoins in the mining pool's custody, and one day, when he checked his account, every shitcoin he owned, worth 10,000 USD were gone. The notice on the mining website, "Hash-to-Coin," stated that if coins were kept with them for more than three months, they would be considered a donation.

He disheartenedly said, "I lost everything." But unlike most people, "I didn't blame Bitcoin. I still see it as the future. I blame myself. I didn't know anything and I did over leverage." He emphasized that despite his heavy financial losses, his girlfriend did not leave him. "My girlfriend was my customer. She regularly came to buy burgers. I met her while I was struggling financially during my early days as an entrepreneur. She supported me and said we could make the money back."

Determined to turn his circumstances around, he discovered Mr. Piriya on YouTube and started following his live streams about the real Bitcoin education. This marked the moment he began to truly understand what Bitcoin and cryptocurrency are. Enlightened by this unique knowledge, he came to see Bitcoin as a saving technology rather than just a trading tool. Over three years, Didier recovered from his losses and emerged stronger. He got to be friend with Mr. Piriya, and together they founded a company called Right Shift to develop Bitcoin content in Thai language through multiple social media channels, including on Nostr (npub1ejn774qahqmgjsfajawy7634unk88y26yktvwuzp9kfgdeejx9mqdm97a5) with one of the popular hashtag #siamstr. As a team, they translated "The Bitcoin Standard" and "The Fiat Standard" into Thai, both of which became best-selling books in Thailand. They organized the first-ever Bitcoin Thailand Conference in 2023 and are now preparing for the next one in September 2024.

Didier now accepts Bitcoin as a payment method in his main burger shop, one of four different franchises. He uses Wallet of Satoshi to process these payments. Within a year of implementing this initiative, he has received over 3 million sats in payments, though he initially expected to see more transactions in Bitcoin. In his marketplace, some neighboring small business owners occasionally ask him about Bitcoin as they notice the large Bitcoin poster in his shop. Although they often lose interest once he explains, according to his several unsuccessful experience. Instead now, he focuses his energy online, where he can make more impact to people who are willing to embrace innovation.

In 2022, approximately 8.4 million people in Thailand, accounting for 12% of the country's population, used cryptocurrency. Estimates suggest that by 2028, this number will rise to about 17.67 million, representing 25% of the population. During our conversation, Didier claimed that there are about 50,000 Bitcoin users in Thailand and speculated that the Thai government might intervene in Bitcoin adoption, potentially mandating the use of KYC wallets because they dislike money systems they can't control. In the worst-case scenario, Didier remains resolute: he will continue advocating for Bitcoin with his friends. "It is not an option," he asserted, "it is the only way to survive."

@ 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.

@ 2063cd79:57bd1320

Für diejenigen, die mich nicht kennen: Ich bin Hal Finney. Ich machte meine ersten Schritte mit Kryptographie, in dem ich an einer frühen Version von PGP arbeitete, in enger Zusammenarbeit mit Phil Zimmermann. Als Phil beschloss, die PGP Corporation zu gründen, war ich einer der ersten, die er einstellte. Ich habe bis zu meiner Pensionierung an PGP gearbeitet. Zeitgleich fing ich an, mich bei den Cypherpunks zu engagieren. Neben anderen Aktivitäten betrieb ich den ersten kryptographisch basierten anonymen Remailer.

Springen wir ans Ende des Jahres 2008 und der Ankündigung von Bitcoin. Ich habe bemerkt, dass Krypto-Graubärte (ich war Mitte 50) dazu neigen, zynisch zu werden. Ich war eher idealistisch; ich habe Kryptographie immer geliebt, das Mysterium und das Paradoxe daran.

Als Satoshi Bitcoin in der Kryptographie-Mailingliste ankündigte, wurde er bestenfalls skeptisch aufgenommen. Kryptographen haben schon zu viele großartige Pläne von ahnungslosen Anfängern gesehen. Sie neigen zu überhasteten Reaktionen.

Ich war positiver eingestellt. Ich hatte mich schon lange für kryptografische Zahlungssysteme interessiert. Außerdem hatte ich das Glück, sowohl Wei Dai als auch Nick Szabo kennenzulernen und ausgiebig mit ihnen zu korrespondieren, von denen allgemein bekannt ist, dass sie Ideen entwickelt haben, die mit Hilfe von Bitcoin verwirklicht werden sollten. Ich hatte einen Versuch unternommen, meine eigene, auf Proof-of-Work basierende Währung namens RPOW zu schaffen. Daher fand ich Bitcoin faszinierend.

Als Satoshi die erste Version der Software ankündigte, schnappte ich sie mir sofort. Ich glaube, ich war die erste Person neben Satoshi, die Bitcoin laufen ließ. Ich habe Block 70 oder so gemined und ich war der Empfänger der ersten Bitcoin-Transaktion, als Satoshi mir zehn Coins als Test schickte. In den nächsten Tagen führte ich eine E-Mail-Konversation mit Satoshi, in der ich hauptsächlich Fehler meldete, die er dann beseitigte.

Heute ist die wahre Identität von Satoshi ein Rätsel. Aber damals dachte ich, ich hätte es mit einem jungen Mann japanischer Abstammung zu tun, der sehr intelligent und aufrichtig war. Ich hatte das Glück, im Laufe meines Lebens viele brillante Menschen kennenzulernen, daher erkenne ich die Zeichen.

Nach ein paar Tagen lief Bitcoin ziemlich stabil, also ließ ich es laufen. Das waren die Tage, als die Difficulty 1 war und man Blöcke mit dem CPU finden konnte, nicht einmal mit einem GPU. In den nächsten Tagen habe ich mehrere Blöcke gemined. Aber ich schaltete es ab, weil mein Computer zu heiß wurde und mich das Lüftergeräusch störte. Im Nachhinein wünschte ich, ich hätte länger durchgehalten, aber andererseits hatte ich außerordentliches Glück, dass ich am Anfang dabei war. Das ist so eine halb volles, halb leeres Glas Sache

Das nächste Mal, dass ich von Bitcoin hörte, war Ende 2010, als ich überrascht feststellte, dass es nicht nur immer noch existierte, sondern bitcoins tatsächlich einen Geldwert hatten. Ich entstaubte meine alte Wallet und war erleichtert, als ich feststellte, dass meine bitcoins noch darin waren. Als der Preis auf eine echte Summe kletterte, transferierte ich die Coins in eine Offline-Wallet, wo sie hoffentlich für meine Erben etwas wert sein werden.

Apropos Erben: 2009 erlebte ich eine Überraschung, als bei mir plötzlich eine tödliche Krankheit diagnostiziert wurde. Zu Beginn des Jahres war ich in der besten Verfassung meines Lebens, ich hatte viel Gewicht verloren und mit dem Langstreckenlauf begonnen. Ich war mehrere Halbmarathons gelaufen und hatte begonnen, für einen vollen Marathon zu trainieren. Ich hatte mich zu Läufen über 20 Meilen hochgearbeitet und dachte, ich hätte alles im Griff. Doch dann ging alles schief.

Mein Körper begann zu versagen. Ich sprach undeutlich, verlor die Kraft in meinen Händen und meine Beine erholten sich nur langsam. Im August 2009 erhielt ich die Diagnose ALS, auch Lou-Gehrig-Krankheit genannt, nach dem berühmten Baseballspieler, der daran erkrankt war.

ALS ist eine Krankheit, die Motoneuronen abtötet, die Signale vom Gehirn an die Muskeln weiterleiten. Sie verursacht zunächst Schwäche und dann allmählich zunehmende Lähmungen. Die Krankheit verläuft in der Regel innerhalb von 2 bis 5 Jahren tödlich. Meine Symptome waren zunächst gering und ich konnte weiterarbeiten, aber Müdigkeit und Stimmprobleme zwangen mich Anfang 2011, in den Ruhestand zu gehen. Seitdem ist die Krankheit unaufhaltsam fortgeschritten.

Heute bin ich im Wesentlichen gelähmt. Ich werde durch einen Schlauch ernährt, und meine Atmung wird durch einen weiteren Schlauch unterstützt. Ich bediene den Computer mit einem kommerziellen Eyetracker-System. Es ist auch mit einem Sprachsynthesizer ausgestattet, so dass dies jetzt meine Stimme ist. Ich verbringe den ganzen Tag in meinem Elektrorollstuhl. Ich habe eine Schnittstelle mit einem Arduino entwickelt, so dass ich die Position meines Rollstuhls mit meinen Augen einstellen kann.

Es war eine Umstellung, aber mein Leben ist nicht allzu schlimm. Ich kann immer noch lesen, Musik hören, fernsehen und Filme schauen. Vor kurzem habe ich entdeckt, dass ich sogar Code schreiben kann. Es geht sehr langsam, wahrscheinlich 50 Mal langsamer als vorher. Aber ich liebe das Programmieren immer noch, und es gibt mir Ziele. Derzeit arbeite ich an etwas, das Mike Hearn vorgeschlagen hat, nämlich die Sicherheitsfunktionen moderner Prozessoren, die „Trusted Computing“ unterstützen, zu nutzen, um Bitcoin-Wallets zu härten. Es ist fast fertig zur Veröffentlichung. Ich muss nur noch die Dokumentation erstellen.

Und natürlich sind die Kursschwankungen von Bitcoin für mich unterhaltsam. Ich habe einen Anteil an dem Spiel. Aber ich bin durch Glück zu meinen bitcoins gekommen, ohne dass ich etwas dafür kann. Ich habe den Crash von 2011 miterlebt. Ich habe es also schon einmal erlebt. Einfach kommen, einfach gehen.

Das ist meine Geschichte. Ich habe insgesamt ziemlich viel Glück. Selbst mit der ALS ist mein Leben sehr zufriedenstellend. Aber meine Lebenserwartung ist begrenzt. Diese Diskussionen über die Vererbung von bitcoins sind mehr als nur von akademischem Interesse. Meine bitcoins befinden sich in unserem Bankschließfach, und mein Sohn und meine Tochter sind technisch versiert. Ich denke, sie sind sicher genug. Ich bin mit meinem Erbe zufrieden.

@ c631e267:c2b78d3e

Nur wenn wir aufeinander zugehen, haben wir die Chance \ auf Überwindung der gegenseitigen Ressentiments! \ Dr. med. dent. Jens Knipphals

In Wolfsburg sollte es kürzlich eine Gesprächsrunde von Kritikern der Corona-Politik mit Oberbürgermeister Dennis Weilmann und Vertretern der Stadtverwaltung geben. Der Zahnarzt und langjährige Maßnahmenkritiker Jens Knipphals hatte diese Einladung ins Rathaus erwirkt und publiziert. Seine Motivation:

«Ich möchte die Spaltung der Gesellschaft überwinden. Dazu ist eine umfassende Aufarbeitung der Corona-Krise in der Öffentlichkeit notwendig.»

Schon früher hatte Knipphals Antworten von den Kommunalpolitikern verlangt, zum Beispiel bei öffentlichen Bürgerfragestunden. Für das erwartete Treffen im Rathaus formulierte er Fragen wie: Warum wurden fachliche Argumente der Kritiker ignoriert? Weshalb wurde deren Ausgrenzung, Diskreditierung und Entmenschlichung nicht entgegengetreten? In welcher Form übernehmen Rat und Verwaltung in Wolfsburg persönlich Verantwortung für die erheblichen Folgen der politischen Corona-Krise?

Der Termin fand allerdings nicht statt – der Bürgermeister sagte ihn kurz vorher wieder ab. Knipphals bezeichnete Weilmann anschließend als Wiederholungstäter, da das Stadtoberhaupt bereits 2022 zu einem Runden Tisch in der Sache eingeladen hatte, den es dann nie gab. Gegenüber Multipolar erklärte der Arzt, Weilmann wolle scheinbar eine öffentliche Aufarbeitung mit allen Mitteln verhindern. Er selbst sei «inzwischen absolut desillusioniert» und die einzige Lösung sei, dass die Verantwortlichen gingen.

Die Aufarbeitung der Plandemie beginne bei jedem von uns selbst, sei aber letztlich eine gesamtgesellschaftliche Aufgabe, schreibt Peter Frey, der den «Fall Wolfsburg» auch in seinem Blog behandelt. Diese Aufgabe sei indes deutlich größer, als viele glaubten. Erfreulicherweise sei der öffentliche Informationsraum inzwischen größer, trotz der weiterhin unverfrorenen Desinformations-Kampagnen der etablierten Massenmedien.

Frey erinnert daran, dass Dennis Weilmann mitverantwortlich für gravierende Grundrechtseinschränkungen wie die 2021 eingeführten 2G-Regeln in der Wolfsburger Innenstadt zeichnet. Es sei naiv anzunehmen, dass ein Funktionär einzig im Interesse der Bürger handeln würde. Als früherer Dezernent des Amtes für Wirtschaft, Digitalisierung und Kultur der Autostadt kenne Weilmann zum Beispiel die Verknüpfung von Fördergeldern mit politischen Zielsetzungen gut.

Wolfsburg wurde damals zu einem Modellprojekt des Bundesministeriums des Innern (BMI) und war Finalist im Bitkom-Wettbewerb «Digitale Stadt». So habe rechtzeitig vor der Plandemie das Projekt «Smart City Wolfsburg» anlaufen können, das der Stadt «eine Vorreiterrolle für umfassende Vernetzung und Datenerfassung» aufgetragen habe, sagt Frey. Die Vereinten Nationen verkauften dann derartige «intelligente» Überwachungs- und Kontrollmaßnahmen ebenso als Rettung in der Not wie das Magazin Forbes im April 2020:

«Intelligente Städte können uns helfen, die Coronavirus-Pandemie zu bekämpfen. In einer wachsenden Zahl von Ländern tun die intelligenten Städte genau das. Regierungen und lokale Behörden nutzen Smart-City-Technologien, Sensoren und Daten, um die Kontakte von Menschen aufzuspüren, die mit dem Coronavirus infiziert sind. Gleichzeitig helfen die Smart Cities auch dabei, festzustellen, ob die Regeln der sozialen Distanzierung eingehalten werden.»

Offensichtlich gibt es viele Aspekte zu bedenken und zu durchleuten, wenn es um die Aufklärung und Aufarbeitung der sogenannten «Corona-Pandemie» und der verordneten Maßnahmen geht. Frustration und Desillusion sind angesichts der Realitäten absolut verständlich. Gerade deswegen sind Initiativen wie die von Jens Knipphals so bewundernswert und so wichtig – ebenso wie eine seiner Kernthesen: «Wir müssen aufeinander zugehen, da hilft alles nichts».

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ a95c6243:d345522c

Im Augenblick wird mit größter Intensität, großer Umsicht \ das deutsche Volk belogen. \ Olaf Scholz im FAZ-Interview

Online-Wahlen stärken die Demokratie, sind sicher, und 61 Prozent der Wahlberechtigten sprechen sich für deren Einführung in Deutschland aus. Das zumindest behauptet eine aktuelle Umfrage, die auch über die Agentur Reuters Verbreitung in den Medien gefunden hat. Demnach würden außerdem 45 Prozent der Nichtwähler bei der Bundestagswahl ihre Stimme abgeben, wenn sie dies zum Beispiel von Ihrem PC, Tablet oder Smartphone aus machen könnten.

Die telefonische Umfrage unter gut 1000 wahlberechtigten Personen sei repräsentativ, behauptet der Auftraggeber – der Digitalverband Bitkom. Dieser präsentiert sich als eingetragener Verein mit einer beeindruckenden Liste von Mitgliedern, die Software und IT-Dienstleistungen anbieten. Erklärtes Vereinsziel ist es, «Deutschland zu einem führenden Digitalstandort zu machen und die digitale Transformation der deutschen Wirtschaft und Verwaltung voranzutreiben».

Durchgeführt hat die Befragung die Bitkom Servicegesellschaft mbH, also alles in der Familie. Die gleiche Erhebung hatte der Verband übrigens 2021 schon einmal durchgeführt. Damals sprachen sich angeblich sogar 63 Prozent für ein derartiges «Demokratie-Update» aus – die Tendenz ist demgemäß fallend. Dennoch orakelt mancher, der Gang zur Wahlurne gelte bereits als veraltet.

Die spanische Privat-Uni mit Globalisten-Touch, IE University, berichtete Ende letzten Jahres in ihrer Studie «European Tech Insights», 67 Prozent der Europäer befürchteten, dass Hacker Wahlergebnisse verfälschen könnten. Mehr als 30 Prozent der Befragten glaubten, dass künstliche Intelligenz (KI) bereits Wahlentscheidungen beeinflusst habe. Trotzdem würden angeblich 34 Prozent der unter 35-Jährigen einer KI-gesteuerten App vertrauen, um in ihrem Namen für politische Kandidaten zu stimmen.

Wie dauerhaft wird wohl das Ergebnis der kommenden Bundestagswahl sein? Diese Frage stellt sich angesichts der aktuellen Entwicklung der Migrations-Debatte und der (vorübergehend) bröckelnden «Brandmauer» gegen die AfD. Das «Zustrombegrenzungsgesetz» der Union hat das Parlament heute Nachmittag überraschenderweise abgelehnt. Dennoch muss man wohl kein ausgesprochener Pessimist sein, um zu befürchten, dass die Entscheidungen der Bürger von den selbsternannten Verteidigern der Demokratie künftig vielleicht nicht respektiert werden, weil sie nicht gefallen.

Bundesweit wird jetzt zu «Brandmauer-Demos» aufgerufen, die CDU gerät unter Druck und es wird von Übergriffen auf Parteibüros und Drohungen gegen Mitarbeiter berichtet. Sicherheitsbehörden warnen vor Eskalationen, die Polizei sei «für ein mögliches erhöhtes Aufkommen von Straftaten gegenüber Politikern und gegen Parteigebäude sensibilisiert».

Der Vorwand «unzulässiger Einflussnahme» auf Politik und Wahlen wird als Argument schon seit einiger Zeit aufgebaut. Der Manipulation schuldig befunden wird neben Putin und Trump auch Elon Musk, was lustigerweise ausgerechnet Bill Gates gerade noch einmal bekräftigt und als «völlig irre» bezeichnet hat. Man stelle sich die Diskussionen um die Gültigkeit von Wahlergebnissen vor, wenn es Online-Verfahren zur Stimmabgabe gäbe. In der Schweiz wird «E-Voting» seit einigen Jahren getestet, aber wohl bisher mit wenig Erfolg.

Die politische Brandstiftung der letzten Jahre zahlt sich immer mehr aus. Anstatt dringende Probleme der Menschen zu lösen – zu denen auch in Deutschland die weit verbreitete Armut zählt –, hat die Politik konsequent polarisiert und sich auf Ausgrenzung und Verhöhnung großer Teile der Bevölkerung konzentriert. Basierend auf Ideologie und Lügen werden abweichende Stimmen unterdrückt und kriminalisiert, nicht nur und nicht erst in diesem Augenblick. Die nächsten Wochen dürften ausgesprochen spannend werden.

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ 97c70a44:ad98e322

For the last couple of weeks, I've been dealing with the fallout of upgrading a web application to Svelte 5. Complaints about framework churn and migration annoyances aside, I've run into some interesting issues with the migration. So far, I haven't seen many other people register the same issues, so I thought it might be constructive for me to articulate them myself.

I'll try not to complain too much in this post, since I'm grateful for the many years of Svelte 3/4 I've enjoyed. But I don't think I'll be choosing Svelte for any new projects going forward. I hope my reflections here will be useful to others as well.

If you're interested in reproductions for the issues I mention here, you can find them below.

• Can't save state to indexeddb
• Component unmount results in undefined variables in closures

The Need for Speed

To start with, let me just quickly acknowledge what the Svelte team is trying to do. It seems like most of the substantial changes in version 5 are built around "deep reactivity", which allows for more granular reactivity, leading to better performance. Performance is good, and the Svelte team has always excelled at reconciling performance with DX.

In previous versions of Svelte, the main way this was achieved was with the Svelte compiler. There were many ancillary techniques involved in improving performance, but having a framework compile step gave the Svelte team a lot of leeway for rearranging things under the hood without making developers learn new concepts. This is what made Svelte so original in the beginning.

At the same time, it resulted in an even more opaque framework than usual, making it harder for developers to debug more complex issues. To make matters worse, the compiler had bugs, resulting in errors which could only be fixed by blindly refactoring the problem component. This happened to me personally at least half a dozen times, and is what ultimately pushed me to migrate to Svelte 5.

Nevertheless, I always felt it was an acceptable trade-off for speed and productivity. Sure, sometimes I had to delete my project and port it to a fresh repository every so often, but the framework was truly a pleasure to use.

Svelte is not Javascript

Svelte 5 doubled down on this tradeoff — which makes sense, because it's what sets the framework apart. The difference this time is that the abstraction/performance tradeoff did not stay in compiler land, but intruded into runtime in two important ways:

• The use of proxies to support deep reactivity
• Implicit component lifecycle state

Both of these changes improved performance and made the API for developers look slicker. What's not to like? Unfortunately, both of these features are classic examples of a leaky abstraction, and ultimately make things more complex for developers, not less.

Proxies are not objects

The use of proxies seems to have allowed the Svelte team to squeeze a little more performance out of the framework, without asking developers to do any extra work. Threading state through multiple levels of components without provoking unnecessary re-renders in frameworks like React is an infamously difficult chore.

Svelte's compiler avoided some of the pitfalls associated with virtual DOM diffing solutions, but evidently there was still enough of a performance gain to be had to justify the introduction of proxies. The Svelte team also seems to argue that their introduction represents an improvement in developer experience:

we... can maximise both efficiency and ergonomics.

Here's the problem: Svelte 5 looks simpler, but actually introduces more abstractions.

Using proxies to monitor array methods (for example) is appealing because it allows developers to forget all the goofy heuristics involved with making sure state was reactive and just push to the array. I can't count how many times I've written value = value to trigger reactivity in svelte 4.

In Svelte 4, developers had to understand how the Svelte compiler worked. The compiler, being a leaky abstraction, forced its users to know that assignment was how you signaled reactivity. In svelte 5, developers can just "forget" about the compiler!

Except they can't. All the introduction of new abstractions really accomplishes is the introduction of more complex heuristics that developers have to keep in their heads in order to get the compiler to act the way they want it to.

In fact, this is why after years of using Svelte, I found myself using Svelte stores more and more often, and reactive declarations less. The reason being that Svelte stores are just javascript. Calling update on a store is simple, and being able to reference them with a $ was just a nice bonus — nothing to remember, and if I mess up the compiler yells at me.

Proxies introduce a similar problem to reactive declarations, which is that they look like one thing but act like another on the edges.

When I started using Svelte 5, everything worked great — until I tried to save a proxy to indexeddb, at which point I got a DataCloneError. To make matters worse, it's impossible to reliably tell if something is a Proxy without try/catching a structured clone, which is a performance-intensive operation.

This forces the developer to remember what is and what isn't a Proxy, calling $state.snapshot every time they pass a proxy to a context that doesn't expect or know about them. This obviates all the nice abstractions they gave us in the first place.

Components are not functions

The reason virtual DOM took off way back in 2013 was the ability to model your application as composed functions, each of which takes data and spits out HTML. Svelte retained this paradigm, using a compiler to sidestep the inefficiencies of virtual DOM and the complexities of lifecycle methods.

In Svelte 5, component lifecycles are back, react-hooks style.

In React, hooks are an abstraction that allows developers to avoid writing all the stateful code associated with component lifecycle methods. Modern React tutorials universally recommend using hooks instead, which rely on the framework invisibly synchronizing state with the render tree.

While this does result in cleaner code, it also requires developers to tread carefully to avoid breaking the assumptions surrounding hooks. Just try accessing state in a setTimeout and you'll see what I mean.

Svelte 4 had a few gotchas like this — for example, async code that interacts with a component's DOM elements has to keep track of whether the component is unmounted. This is pretty similar to the kind of pattern you'd see in old React components that relied on lifecycle methods.

It seems to me that Svelte 5 has gone the React 16 route by adding implicit state related to component lifecycles in order to coordinate state changes and effects.

For example, example is in the documentation for $effect:

You can place $effect anywhere, not just at the top level of a component, as long as it is called during component initialization (or while a parent effect is active). It is then tied to the lifecycle of the component (or parent effect) and will therefore destroy itself when the component unmounts (or the parent effect is destroyed).

That's very complex! In order to use $effect... effectively (sorry), developers have to understand how state changes are tracked. The documentation for component lifecycles claims:

In Svelte 5, the component lifecycle consists of only two parts: Its creation and its destruction. Everything in-between — when certain state is updated — is not related to the component as a whole; only the parts that need to react to the state change are notified. This is because under the hood the smallest unit of change is actually not a component, it’s the (render) effects that the component sets up upon component initialization. Consequently, there’s no such thing as a “before update”/"after update” hook.

But then goes on to introduce the idea of tick in conjunction with $effect.pre. This section explains that "tick returns a promise that resolves once any pending state changes have been applied, or in the next microtask if there are none."

I'm sure there's some mental model that justifies this, but I don't think the claim that a component's lifecycle is only comprised of mount/unmount is really helpful when an addendum about state change has to come right afterward.

The place where this really bit me, and which is the motivation for this blog post, is when state gets coupled to a component's lifecycle, even when the state is passed to another function that doesn't know anything about svelte.

In my application, I manage modal dialogs by storing the component I want to render alongside its props in a store and rendering it in the layout of my application. This store is also synchronized with browser history so that the back button works to close them. Sometimes, it's useful to pass a callback to one of these modals, binding caller-specific functionality to the child component:

javascript const {value} = $props() const callback = () => console.log(value) const openModal = () => pushModal(MyModal, {callback})

This is a fundamental pattern in javascript. Passing a callback is just one of those things you do.

Unfortunately, if the above code lives in a modal dialog itself, the caller component gets unmounted before the callback gets called. In Svelte 4, this worked fine, but in Svelte 5 value gets updated to undefined when the component gets unmounted. Here's a minimal reproduction.

This is only one example, but it seems clear to me that any value that is closed over by a callback function that lives longer than its component will be undefined when I want to use it — with no reassignment existing in lexical scope.

This just isn't how javascript works. And I think the reason Svelte works this way is that it is attempting to re-invent garbage collection. Because value is a prop of the component, it apparently has to be cleaned up at the end of the component's lifecycle. I'm sure there's a good engineering reason for this, but it is surprising.

Conclusion

Easy things are nice, but as Rich Hickey says, easy things are not always simple. And like Joel Spolsky, I don't like being surprised. Svelte has always been full of magic, but with the latest release I think the cognitive overhead of reciting incantations has finally outweighed the power it conveys.

My point in this post is not to dunk on the Svelte team. I know lots of people like Svelte 5 (and react hooks). The point I hope to make is that there is a tradeoff between doing things for the user, and giving the user agency. Good software is built on understanding, not cleverness.

I also think this is an important lesson to remember as AI-assisted coding becomes increasingly popular. Don't choose tools that alienate you from your work. Choose tools that leverage the wisdom you've already accumulated, and which help you to cultivate a deeper understanding of the discipline.

Thank you to Rich Harris and team for many years of pleasant development. I hope that (if you read this) it's not so full of inaccuracies as to be unhelpful as user feedback.

@ c4b5369a:b812dbd6

As promised in my last article:

nostr:naddr1qvzqqqr4gupzp394x6dfmvn69cduj7e9l2jgvtvle7n5w5rtrunjlr6tx6up9k7kqq2k6ernff9hw3tyd3y453rdtph5uvm6942kzuw08y0

In this one we will dive into how exactly an unidirectional payments channel powered ecash mint system would be implemented, using the tech available today! So if you haven't read that article yet, give it a read!

I first intended to write a longwinded article, explaining each part of the system. But then I realized that I would need some visualization to get the message across in a more digestable way. This lead me to create a slide deck, and as I started to design the slides it became more and more clear that the information is easier shown with visualizations, than written down. I will try to give a summary as best as I can in this article, but I urge you, to please go visit the slide deck too, for the best experience:

---

TAKE ME TO THE SLIDE DECK!

---

Intro

In this article we will go over how we can build unidirectional payment channels on Bitcoin. Then we will take a look into how Cashu ecash mints work, and how we can use unidirectional payment channels to change the dynamics between ecash users and the mint.

Before we start, let me also give credits to nostr:npub1htnhsay5dmq3r72tukdw72pduzfdcja0yylcajuvnc2uklkhxp8qnz3qac for comming up with the idea, to nostr:npub148jz5r9xujcjpqygk69yl4jqwjqmzgrqly26plktfjy8g4t7xaysj9xhgp for providing an idea for non-expiring unidirectional channels, and nostr:npub1yrnuj56rnen08zp2h9h7p74ghgjx6ma39spmpj6w9hzxywutevsst7k5cx unconference for hosting an event where these ideas could be discussed and flourish.

Building unidirectional payment channels

If you've read the previous article, you already know what unidirectional payment channels are. There are actually a coupple different ways to implement them, but they all do have a few things in common:

1. The sender can only send
2. The Receiver can only receive
3. They are VERY simple

Way simpler than the duplex channels like we are using in the lightning network today, at least. Of course, duplex channels are being deployed on LN for a reason. They are very versatile and don't have these annoying limitations that the unidirectional payment channels have. They do however have a few drawbacks:

1. Peers have liveness requirements (or they might forfeit their funds)
2. Peers must backup their state after each transaction (if they don't they might forfeit their funds)
3. It is a pretty complex system

This article is not meant to discredit duplex channels. I think they are great. I just also think that in some use-cases, their requirements are too high and the system too complex.

But anyway, let's see what kind of channels we can build!

Spillman/CLTV-Channel

The Spillman channel idea has been around for a long time. It's even explained in Tadge Dryjas Presentation on Payment channels and the lightning network from back in the day. I compiled a list of some of the most important propperties of them in the slide below:

Great!

Now that we know their properties, let's take a look at how we can create such a channel (Slides):

We start out by the sender creating a funding TX. The sender doesn't broadcast the transaction though. If he does, he might get locked into a multisig with the receiver without an unilateral exit path.

Instead the sender also creates a refund TX spending the outputs of the yet unsigned funding TX. The refund TX is timelocked, and can only be broadcast after 1 month. Both sender and receiver can sign this refund TX without any risks. Once sender receives the signed refund TX, he can broadcast the funding TX and open the channel. The sender can now update the channel state, by pre-signing update transactions and sending them over to the receiver. Being a one-way channel, this can be done in a single message. It is very simple. There is no need for invalidating old states, since the sender does not hold any signed update TXs it is impossible for the sender to broadcast an old state. The receiver only cares about the latest state anyways, since that is the state where he gets the most money. He can basically delete any old states. The only thing the receiver needs to make sure of, is broadcasting the latest update TX before the refund TX's timelock expires. Otherwise, the sender might take the whole channel balance back to himself.

This seems to be already a pretty useful construct, due to its simplicity. But we can make it even more simple!

This setup works basically the same way as the previous one, but instead of having a refund transaction, we build the timelock spend path directly into the funding TX This allows the sender to have an unilateral exit right from the start, and he can broadcast the funding TX without communicating with the receiver. In the worst case, the receiver rejects the channel, and the sender can get his money back after the timelock on the output has expired. Everything else basically works in the same way as in the example above.

The beauty about this channel construct is in its simplicity. The drawbacks are obvious, but they do offer some nice properties that might be useful in certain cases.

One of the major drawbacks of the Spillman-style channels (apart from being unidirectional) is that they expire. This expiry comes with the neat property that neither of the party has to watch the chain for channel closures, and the sender can operate the channel with zero additional state, apart from his private keys. But they do expire. And this can make them quite inflexible. It might work in some contexts, but not so much in others, where time needs to be more flexible.

This is where Roose-Childs triggered channels come into play.

Roose-Childs triggered channel

(I gave it that name, named after nostr:npub148jz5r9xujcjpqygk69yl4jqwjqmzgrqly26plktfjy8g4t7xaysj9xhgp and nostr:npub1htnhsay5dmq3r72tukdw72pduzfdcja0yylcajuvnc2uklkhxp8qnz3qac . If someone knows if this idea has been around before under a different name, please let us know!)

Roose-Childs triggered channels were an idea developed by Steven and Luke at the nostr:npub1yrnuj56rnen08zp2h9h7p74ghgjx6ma39spmpj6w9hzxywutevsst7k5cx unconference. They essentially remove the channel expiry limitation in return for introducing the need for the sender to create a channel backup at the time of channel creation, and for the receiver the need to watch the chain for trigger transactions closing the channel.

They also allow for splicing funds, which can be important for a channel without expiry, allowing the sender to top-up liquidity once it runs out, or for the receiver taking out liquidity from the channel to deploy the funds elsewhere.

Now, let's see how we can build them!

The funding TX actually looks the same as in the first example, and similarly it gets created, but not signed by the sender. Then, sender and receiver both sign the trigger TX. The trigger TX is at the heart of this scheme. It allows both sender and receiver to unilaterally exit the channel by broadcasting it (more on that in a bit).

Once the trigger TX is signed and returned to the sender, the sender can confidently sign and boradcast the funding TX and open the channel. The trigger TX remains off-chain though. Now, to update the channel, the sender can pre-sign transactions in similar fashion to the examples above, but this time, spending the outputs of the unbroadcasted trigger TX. This way, both parties can exit the channel at any time. If the receiver wants to exit, he simply boradcasts the trigger TX and immediately spends its outputs using the latest update TX. If the sender wants to exit he will broadcast the trigger TX and basically force the receivers hand. Either, the receiver will broadcast the latest update TX, or the sender will be able to claim the entire channel balance after the timelock expired.

We can also simplify the receiver's exit path, by the sender pre-signing an additional transaction R exit TX for each update. this way, the receiver only needs to broadcast one transaction instead of two.

As we've mentioned before, there are some different trade-offs for Roose-Childs triggered channels. We introduce some minimal state and liveness requirements, but gain more flexibility.

Ecash to fill in the gaps

(I will assume that the reader knows how ecash mints work. If not, please go check the slides where I go through an explanation)

Essentially, we are trying to get a lightning like experience, without all the lightning complexities and requirements. One big issue with ecash, is that it is fully custodial. If we can offset that risk by holding most of the funds in a self custodial channel, we can have a reasonable trade-off between usability and self custody.

In a system like that, we would essentially turn the banking model onto its head. Where in a traditional bank, the majority of the funds are held in the banks custody, and the user only withdraws into his custody what he needs to transact, in our model the user would hold most funds in his own custody.

If you ask me, this approach makes way more sense. Instead of a custodian, we have turned the "bank" into a service provider.

Let's take a look at how it would work in a more practical sense:

The ecash user would open an unidirectional payment channel to the mint, using one of his on-chain UTXOs. This allows him then to commit incrementally funds into the mints custody, only the amounts for his transactional needs. The mint offers connectivity to the lightning network an handles state and liveness as a service provider.

The ecash user, can remain offline at all times, and his channel funds will always be safe. The mint can only ever claim the balance in the channel via the update TXs. The mint can of course still decide to no longer redeem any ecash, at which point they would have basically stolen the ecash user's transactional balance. At that point, it would probably be best for the ecash user to close his channel, and no longer interact or trust this mint.

Here are some of the most important points of this system summarized:

And that is basically it! I hope you enjoyed this breakdown of Unidirectional payment channel enabled Ecash mints!

If you did, consider leaving me a zap. Also do let me know if this type of breakdown helps you understand a new topic well. I am considering doing similar breakdowns on other systems, such as ARK, Lightning or Statechains, if there is a lot of interest, and it helps people, I'll do it!

Pleas also let me know what you think about the unidirectional channel - ecash mint idea in the comments. It's kind of a new idea, an it probably has flaws, or things that we haven't thought about yet. I'd love to discuss it with you!

I'll leave you with this final slide:

Cheers,

Gandlaf

@ 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.

@ 5a261a61:2ebd4480

As I grow older, I find myself often discovering things that I haven't understood before, or just see completely differently. Like with this fable of the toad and scorpion. You know, the classic where scorpion needs to get across the river, and asks the toad for help, promising not to sting. The toad refuses at first, pointing out that scorpion's sting would kill them both. But scorpion argues that would be illogical - why would it sting if that meant its own death? The toad, convinced by this logic, agrees to help. Halfway across, scorpion stings anyway, and as they both sink, toad asks "why?" Scorpion simply answers "It's my nature."

That leads me to my scorpion sighting. I have somewhat stronger libido and given the circumstances, I usually situate myself in the submissive position in both married and online life. When I am not ventilating or getting these things out in some way, it usually leads to my growing frustration that seriously hinders my usual life. And in those trying times I usually tell myself, "screw that, I don't like this, I don't like how that makes me feel, it sucks, why does it have to hurt so much" (well, I don't think 'hurt' as I have been indoctrinated by the society that men don't process feelings this way, but I think if I had a therapist, they would want me to spell it like that). Let's not go to the subspace again, it's silly space. Sometimes it gets really dark...but then comes the climax, like literally, and suddenly everything is forgiven and (almost) forgotten. And all is well.

Let's just not go there next time, avoid being burned again, I keep saying to myself. And these days submissive scorpion in my head just silently waits for my monologuing toad to finish defending ourselves. It knows that it needs only one chance so I cave in, while toad needs to defend my sanity every day. So one day, I will bring scorpion to cross the river with me again. And it will again promise that this time it will be ok. And we will both pretend like we believe that, so the play can go on. And it will eventually sting me, because we both yearn for unreachable things.

And next day I will again see scorpion on the river, not wooing me, no, we are beyond that, it knows it just needs to wait before I come back for the poison I need.As I grow older, I find myself often discovering things that I haven't understood before, or just see completely differently. Like with this fable of the toad and scorpion.

You know, the classic where scorpion needs to get across the river, and asks the toad for help, promising not to sting. The toad refuses at first, pointing out that scorpion's sting would kill them both. But scorpion argues that would be illogical - why would it sting if that meant its own death? The toad, convinced by this logic, agrees to help. Halfway across, scorpion stings anyway, and as they both sink, toad asks "why?" Scorpion simply answers "It's my nature."

That leads me to my scorpion sighting. I have somewhat stronger libido and given the circumstances, I usually situate myself in the submissive position in both married and online life. When I am not ventilating or getting these things out in some way, it usually leads to my growing frustration that seriously hinders my usual life. And in those trying times I usually tell myself, "screw that, I don't like this, I don't like how that makes me feel, it sucks, why does it have to hurt so much" (well, I don't think 'hurt' as I have been indoctrinated by the society that men don't process feelings this way, but I think if I had a therapist, they would want me to spell it like that). Let's not go to the subspace again, it's silly space. Sometimes it gets really dark...but then comes the climax, like literally, and suddenly everything is forgiven and (almost) forgotten. And all is well.

Let's just not go there next time, avoid being burned again, I keep saying to myself. And these days submissive scorpion in my head just silently waits for my monologuing toad to finish defending ourselves.

It knows that it needs only one chance so I cave in, while toad needs to defend my sanity every day. So one day, I will bring scorpion to cross the river with me again. And it will again promise that this time it will be ok. And we will both pretend like we believe that, so the play can go on. And it will eventually sting me, because we both yearn for unreachable things.

And next day I will again see scorpion on the river, not wooing me, no, we are beyond that, it knows it just needs to wait before I come back for the poison I need.

@ 6be5cc06:5259daf0

Um dos padrões mais bem estabelecidos ao medir a opinião pública é que cada geração tende a seguir um caminho semelhante em termos de política e ideologia geral. Seus membros compartilham das mesmas experiências formativas, atingem os marcos importantes da vida ao mesmo tempo e convivem nos mesmos espaços. Então, como devemos entender os relatórios que mostram que a Geração Z é hiperprogressista em certos assuntos, mas surpreendentemente conservadora em outros?

A resposta, nas palavras de Alice Evans, pesquisadora visitante na Universidade de Stanford e uma das principais estudiosas do tema, é que os jovens de hoje estão passando por um grande divergência de gênero, com as jovens mulheres do primeiro grupo e os jovens homens do segundo. A Geração Z representa duas gerações, e não apenas uma.

Em países de todos os continentes, surgiu um distanciamento ideológico entre jovens homens e mulheres. Milhões de pessoas que compartilham das mesmas cidades, locais de trabalho, salas de aula e até casas, não veem mais as coisas da mesma maneira.

Nos Estados Unidos, os dados da Gallup mostram que, após décadas em que os sexos estavam distribuídos de forma relativamente equilibrada entre visões políticas liberais e conservadoras, as mulheres entre 18 e 30 anos são agora 30 pontos percentuais mais liberais do que os homens dessa faixa etária. Essa diferença surgiu em apenas seis anos.

A Alemanha também apresenta um distanciamento de 30 pontos entre homens jovens conservadores e mulheres jovens progressistas, e no Reino Unido, a diferença é de 25 pontos. Na Polônia, no ano passado, quase metade dos homens entre 18 e 21 anos apoiou o partido de extrema direita Confederation, em contraste com apenas um sexto das jovens mulheres dessa mesma idade.

Fora do Ocidente, há divisões ainda mais acentuadas. Na Coreia do Sul, há um enorme abismo entre homens e mulheres jovens, e a situação é semelhante na China. Na África, a Tunísia apresenta o mesmo padrão. Vale notar que em todos os países essa divisão drástica ocorre principalmente entre a geração mais jovem, sendo muito menos pronunciada entre homens e mulheres na faixa dos 30 anos ou mais velhos.

O movimento # MeToo foi o principal estopim, trazendo à tona valores feministas intensos entre jovens mulheres que se sentiram empoderadas para denunciar injustiças de longa data. Esse estopim encontrou especialmente terreno fértil na Coreia do Sul, onde a desigualdade de gênero é bastante visível e a misoginia explícita é comum. (palavras da Financial Times, eu só traduzi)

Na eleição presidencial da Coreia do Sul em 2022, enquanto homens e mulheres mais velhos votaram de forma unificada, os jovens homens apoiaram fortemente o partido de direita People Power, enquanto as jovens mulheres apoiaram o partido liberal Democratic em números quase iguais e opostos.

A situação na Coreia é extrema, mas serve como um alerta para outros países sobre o que pode acontecer quando jovens homens e mulheres se distanciam. A sociedade está dividida, a taxa de casamento despencou e a taxa de natalidade caiu drasticamente, chegando a 0,78 filhos por mulher em 2022, o menor número no mundo todo.

Sete anos após a explosão inicial do movimento # MeToo, a divergência de gênero em atitudes tornou-se autossustentável.

Dados das pesquisas mostram que em muitos países, as diferenças ideológicas vão além dessa questão específica. A divisão progressista-conservadora sobre assédio sexual parece ter causado ou pelo menos faz parte de um alinhamento mais amplo, em que jovens homens e mulheres estão se organizando em grupos conservadores e liberais em outros assuntos.

Nos EUA, Reino Unido e Alemanha, as jovens mulheres agora adotam posturas mais liberais sobre temas como imigração e justiça racial, enquanto grupos etários mais velhos permanecem equilibrados. A tendência na maioria dos países tem sido de mulheres se inclinando mais para a esquerda, enquanto os homens permanecem estáveis. No entanto, há sinais de que os jovens homens estão se movendo para a direita na Alemanha, tornando-se mais críticos em relação à imigração e se aproximando do partido de extrema direita AfD nos últimos anos.

Seria fácil dizer que tudo isso é apenas uma fase passageira, mas os abismos ideológicos apenas crescem, e os dados mostram que as experiências políticas formativas das pessoas são difíceis de mudar. Tudo isso é agravado pelo fato de que o aumento dos smartphones e das redes sociais faz com que os jovens homens e mulheres agora vivam em espaços separados e tenham culturas distintas.

As opiniões dos jovens frequentemente são ignoradas devido à baixa participação política, mas essa mudança pode deixar consequências duradouras, impactando muito mais do que apenas os resultados das eleições.

Retirado de: https://www.ft.com/content/29fd9b5c-2f35-41bf-9d4c-994db4e12998

@ 9e69e420:d12360c2

Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelensky called for an "army of Europe" to defend against Russian threats, emphasizing that the US may not continue its traditional support for Europe. Speaking at the Munich Security Conference, he warned against peace deals made without Ukraine's involvement.

US Vice President JD Vance echoed this sentiment, urging Europe to enhance its defense efforts.

Zelensky stated, "I really believe the time has come - the armed forces of Europe must be created." He highlighted changing dynamics in US-Europe relations and noted that "the old days are over" regarding American support.

Despite discussions around NATO, Zelensky stated he wouldn't rule out NATO membership for Ukraine.

@ a95c6243:d345522c

Menschen tun alles, egal wie absurd, \ um ihrer eigenen Seele nicht zu begegnen. \ Carl Gustav Jung

«Extremer Reichtum ist eine Gefahr für die Demokratie», sagen über die Hälfte der knapp 3000 befragten Millionäre aus G20-Staaten laut einer Umfrage der «Patriotic Millionaires». Ferner stellte dieser Zusammenschluss wohlhabender US-Amerikaner fest, dass 63 Prozent jener Millionäre den Einfluss von Superreichen auf US-Präsident Trump als Bedrohung für die globale Stabilität ansehen.

Diese Besorgnis haben 370 Millionäre und Milliardäre am Dienstag auch den in Davos beim WEF konzentrierten Privilegierten aus aller Welt übermittelt. In einem offenen Brief forderten sie die «gewählten Führer» auf, die Superreichen – also sie selbst – zu besteuern, um «die zersetzenden Auswirkungen des extremen Reichtums auf unsere Demokratien und die Gesellschaft zu bekämpfen». Zum Beispiel kontrolliere eine handvoll extrem reicher Menschen die Medien, beeinflusse die Rechtssysteme in unzulässiger Weise und verwandele Recht in Unrecht.

Schon 2019 beanstandete der bekannte Historiker und Schriftsteller Ruthger Bregman an einer WEF-Podiumsdiskussion die Steuervermeidung der Superreichen. Die elitäre Veranstaltung bezeichnete er als «Feuerwehr-Konferenz, bei der man nicht über Löschwasser sprechen darf.» Daraufhin erhielt Bregman keine Einladungen nach Davos mehr. Auf seine Aussagen machte der Schweizer Aktivist Alec Gagneux aufmerksam, der sich seit Jahrzehnten kritisch mit dem WEF befasst. Ihm wurde kürzlich der Zutritt zu einem dreiteiligen Kurs über das WEF an der Volkshochschule Region Brugg verwehrt.

Nun ist die Erkenntnis, dass mit Geld politischer Einfluss einhergeht, alles andere als neu. Und extremer Reichtum macht die Sache nicht wirklich besser. Trotzdem hat man über Initiativen wie Patriotic Millionaires oder Taxmenow bisher eher selten etwas gehört, obwohl es sie schon lange gibt. Auch scheint es kein Problem, wenn ein Herr Gates fast im Alleingang versucht, globale Gesundheits-, Klima-, Ernährungs- oder Bevölkerungspolitik zu betreiben – im Gegenteil. Im Jahr, als der Milliardär Donald Trump zum zweiten Mal ins Weiße Haus einzieht, ist das Echo in den Gesinnungsmedien dagegen enorm – und uniform, wer hätte das gedacht.

Der neue US-Präsident hat jedoch «Davos geerdet», wie Achgut es nannte. In seiner kurzen Rede beim Weltwirtschaftsforum verteidigte er seine Politik und stellte klar, er habe schlicht eine «Revolution des gesunden Menschenverstands» begonnen. Mit deutlichen Worten sprach er unter anderem von ersten Maßnahmen gegen den «Green New Scam», und von einem «Erlass, der jegliche staatliche Zensur beendet»:

«Unsere Regierung wird die Äußerungen unserer eigenen Bürger nicht mehr als Fehlinformation oder Desinformation bezeichnen, was die Lieblingswörter von Zensoren und derer sind, die den freien Austausch von Ideen und, offen gesagt, den Fortschritt verhindern wollen.»

Wie der «Trumpismus» letztlich einzuordnen ist, muss jeder für sich selbst entscheiden. Skepsis ist definitiv angebracht, denn «einer von uns» sind weder der Präsident noch seine auserwählten Teammitglieder. Ob sie irgendeinen Sumpf trockenlegen oder Staatsverbrechen aufdecken werden oder was aus WHO- und Klimaverträgen wird, bleibt abzuwarten.

Das WHO-Dekret fordert jedenfalls die Übertragung der Gelder auf «glaubwürdige Partner», die die Aktivitäten übernehmen könnten. Zufällig scheint mit «Impfguru» Bill Gates ein weiterer Harris-Unterstützer kürzlich das Lager gewechselt zu haben: Nach einem gemeinsamen Abendessen zeigte er sich «beeindruckt» von Trumps Interesse an der globalen Gesundheit.

Mit dem Projekt «Stargate» sind weitere dunkle Wolken am Erwartungshorizont der Fangemeinde aufgezogen. Trump hat dieses Joint Venture zwischen den Konzernen OpenAI, Oracle, und SoftBank als das «größte KI-Infrastrukturprojekt der Geschichte» angekündigt. Der Stein des Anstoßes: Oracle-CEO Larry Ellison, der auch Fan von KI-gestützter Echtzeit-Überwachung ist, sieht einen weiteren potenziellen Einsatz der künstlichen Intelligenz. Sie könne dazu dienen, Krebserkrankungen zu erkennen und individuelle mRNA-«Impfstoffe» zur Behandlung innerhalb von 48 Stunden zu entwickeln.

Warum bitte sollten sich diese superreichen «Eliten» ins eigene Fleisch schneiden und direkt entgegen ihren eigenen Interessen handeln? Weil sie Menschenfreunde, sogenannte Philanthropen sind? Oder vielleicht, weil sie ein schlechtes Gewissen haben und ihre Schuld kompensieren müssen? Deswegen jedenfalls brauchen «Linke» laut Robert Willacker, einem deutschen Politikberater mit brasilianischen Wurzeln, rechte Parteien – ein ebenso überraschender wie humorvoller Erklärungsansatz.

Wenn eine Krähe der anderen kein Auge aushackt, dann tut sie das sich selbst noch weniger an. Dass Millionäre ernsthaft ihre eigene Besteuerung fordern oder Machteliten ihren eigenen Einfluss zugunsten anderer einschränken würden, halte ich für sehr unwahrscheinlich. So etwas glaube ich erst, wenn zum Beispiel die Rüstungsindustrie sich um Friedensverhandlungen bemüht, die Pharmalobby sich gegen institutionalisierte Korruption einsetzt, Zentralbanken ihre CBDC-Pläne für Bitcoin opfern oder der ÖRR die Abschaffung der Rundfunkgebühren fordert.

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ d360efec:14907b5f

ภาพรวม BTCUSDT (OKX):

Bitcoin (BTCUSDT) กำลังแสดงความผันผวนอย่างมาก โดยมีสัญญาณที่ขัดแย้งกันระหว่าง Timeframes ต่างๆ แนวโน้มระยะยาว (Day) ยังคงเป็นขาขึ้น แต่ระยะกลาง (4H) และระยะสั้น (15m) แสดงให้เห็นถึงแรงขายและการปรับฐานที่รุนแรง การวิเคราะห์นี้จะเน้นการระบุพื้นที่ที่ Smart Money อาจจะเข้าซื้อหรือขาย (Liquidity Pools) และประเมินความแข็งแกร่งของแนวโน้ม

วิเคราะห์ทีละ Timeframe:

(1) TF Day (รายวัน):

• แนวโน้ม: ขาขึ้น (Uptrend) แต่เริ่มอ่อนแรง
• SMC:
  • Higher Highs (HH) และ Higher Lows (HL) เริ่มไม่ชัดเจน
  • Break of Structure (BOS) ด้านบน แต่เริ่มมีการปรับฐาน
  • Liquidity:
    • มี Sellside Liquidity (SSL) อยู่ใต้ Lows ก่อนหน้า (บริเวณ 85,000 - 90,000)
    • มี Buyside Liquidity (BSL) อยู่เหนือ High เดิม (109,998.9)
• ICT:
  • ยังไม่เห็น Order Block หรือ FVG ที่ชัดเจนใน TF Day ณ ราคาปัจจุบัน
• EMA:
  • ราคา หลุด EMA 50 (สีเหลือง) ลงมาแล้ว
  • EMA 200 (สีขาว) เป็นแนวรับถัดไป
• Money Flow (LuxAlgo):
  • แท่งสีแดงยาว แสดงถึงแรงขายที่เข้ามา
• Trend Strength (AlgoAlpha): ไม่มีในภาพ
• Volume Profile: Volume ค่อนข้างเบาบาง
• แท่งเทียน: แท่งเทียนล่าสุดเป็นสีแดง แสดงถึงแรงขาย
• แนวรับ: EMA 200, บริเวณ 85,000 - 90,000 (SSL)
• แนวต้าน: EMA 50, High เดิม
• สรุป: แนวโน้มขาขึ้นเริ่มอ่อนแรง, ราคาหลุด EMA 50, Money Flow เป็นลบ, มี SSL ด้านล่าง

(2) TF4H (4 ชั่วโมง):

• แนวโน้ม: ขาลง (Downtrend) ระยะสั้น หลังจากราคาหลุด EMA 50
• SMC:
  • Lower Highs (LH) และ Lower Lows (LL)
  • Break of Structure (BOS) ด้านล่าง
  • Liquidity:
    • มี SSL อยู่ใต้ Lows ก่อนหน้า (บริเวณ 92,000)
    • มี BSL อยู่เหนือ Highs ก่อนหน้า (บริเวณ 104,000 - 108,000)
• ICT:
  • Order Block: ราคาลงมาใกล้ Order Block ขาขึ้น (บริเวณแท่งเทียนสีเขียวก่อนที่จะขึ้น)
• EMA:
  • ราคาอยู่ใต้ EMA 50 และ EMA 200
• Money Flow (LuxAlgo):
  • สีแดงเป็นส่วนใหญ่ แสดงถึงแรงขาย
• Trend Strength (AlgoAlpha): ไม่มีในภาพ
• Volume Profile Volume ค่อนข้างเบาบาง
• แนวรับ: Order Block, บริเวณ 92,000 (SSL)
• แนวต้าน: EMA 50, EMA 200, บริเวณ Highs ก่อนหน้า
• สรุป: แนวโน้มขาลงระยะสั้น, ราคาลงมาใกล้ Order Block, Money Flow เป็นลบ

(3) TF15 (15 นาที):

• แนวโน้ม: ขาลง (Downtrend)
• SMC:
  • Lower Highs (LH) และ Lower Lows (LL)
  • Break of Structure (BOS) ด้านล่าง
  • Liquidity:
    • มี SSL อยู่ใต้ Lows ล่าสุด
    • มี BSL อยู่เหนือ Highs ก่อนหน้า
• ICT:
  • Order Block: ราคาลงมาใกล้ Oder Block
• EMA:
  • EMA 50 และ EMA 200 เป็นแนวต้าน
• Money Flow (LuxAlgo):
  • สีแดงเป็นส่วนใหญ่ แสดงถึงแรงขาย
• Trend Strength (AlgoAlpha):
  • เป็นสีแดง แสดงถึงเเนวโน้มขาลง
• Volume Profile:
  • Volume ค่อนข้างเบาบาง
• แนวรับ: บริเวณ Low ล่าสุด
• แนวต้าน: EMA 50, EMA 200, บริเวณ Highs ก่อนหน้า
• สรุป: แนวโน้มขาลง, แรงขายมีอิทธิพล, ใกล้แนวรับ

สรุปภาพรวมและกลยุทธ์ (BTCUSDT):

• แนวโน้มหลัก (Day): ขาขึ้น (อ่อนแรง)
• แนวโน้มรอง (4H): ขาลง (ระยะสั้น)
• แนวโน้มระยะสั้น (15m): ขาลง
• Liquidity:
  • Day: SSL (85,000-90,000), BSL (เหนือ 109,998.9)
  • 4H: SSL (92,000), BSL (104,000-108,000)
  • 15m: SSL (ใต้ Lows), BSL (เหนือ Highs)
• Money Flow: Day เริ่มเป็นลบ, 4H เป็นลบ, 15m เป็นลบ
• Trend Strength 15 m : ขาลง
• กลยุทธ์:
  1. Wait & See (ดีที่สุด): รอความชัดเจน
  2. Short (เสี่ยง): ถ้าไม่สามารถ Breakout EMA/แนวต้านใน TF ใดๆ ได้
  3. ไม่แนะนำให้ Buy: จนกว่าจะมีสัญญาณกลับตัวที่ชัดเจน

คำแนะนำ:

• ความขัดแย้งของ Timeframes: ชัดเจน
• Money Flow: เป็นลบในทุก Timeframes
• ระวัง SSL: Smart Money อาจจะลากราคาลงไปกิน Stop Loss
• ถ้าไม่แน่ใจ อย่าเพิ่งเข้าเทรด

Disclaimer: การวิเคราะห์นี้เป็นเพียงความคิดเห็นส่วนตัว ไม่ถือเป็นคำแนะนำในการลงทุน ผู้ลงทุนควรศึกษาข้อมูลเพิ่มเติมและตัดสินใจด้วยความรอบคอบ

@ bbb5dda0:f09e2747

Alright, This weekly review's gonna be a quick one as i covered my weekend + monday about Sats 'n Facts in the last one. Which leaves us with only a few days, some of which I had to give in and rest as I had been continuing to work with quite a bad cold for too long. The Facts must've been hitting too hard...

Reflecting on networks

A lot of my time this week was reflecting on the event and all the contacts I'd made there. There has been a surprising lot of enthusiasm of the community about Tollgate specifically. There's something that draws me to the project and i think it's not even the flashy-ness of routers paying routers, I'm starting to see the bigger possible implications of the sovereign networks that can grow from this. Not for the western world per se but for places that want to build out new infrastrucutre with their own communities. One of the worries from people to operate TollGates is if they'll get trouble with their ISP's. Which is a legitimate worry, but how long will that worry be relevant?

One thing I realize, as Nostr grows -and Blossom too- is that the data we pull in will be more localized. Imagine a city equipped with a Sovereign Tollgate network. If a few people in your city have watched a video, there will likely be a copy of that video inside the city-wide network. Then if the city get's cut off for any reason, that video will still be very much accessible and people might not even notice the 'internet is down'. I woke up in the middle of the night and had to draw out this visualization of the combination of Clearnet + Tor + TollGate networks and how they can interact with Epoxy proxies in between (visualized by the ♾️ symbol). Anyone that sees an opportunity to bridge the networks can jump in and be that link.

Even attacking (DDOS) services within other networks might become harder, because either: 1) you have to have your botnet reside inside the network of the victim. Which, if it's a small network won't comprise of a significant amount of nodes. 2) you have to have to route your attack through (Epoxy) bridges known to you, the attacker. Which likely have limited bandwidth.

Anyway, this is just my 3 AM brain-dump. I'll keep chewing on this...

Marketing TollGate

Like I mentioned earlier there was a lot of interest in Tollgate and to be honest it's been a bit overwhelming, there are so many opportunities like podcasts, meetups and articles opening up to share it and talk about it that I have to think about the form in which I want to relate myself to the project. In any case, these are Good problems to have...

In the meanwhile we've worked on getting a good website landingpage where we can point people to that are interested in the project, it should be up soon! - Consumers can download the Android (for now) app - Operators can download TollGateOS to put on their router - FAQ's

Also, i've been helping out to get some stuff automated. so we can build and push new versions quickly to start getting user feedback and enable iterating on a fast pace!

@ eac63075:b4988b48

Based on a recent paper that included collaboration from renowned experts such as Lynn Alden, Steve Lee, and Ren Crypto Fish, we discuss in depth how Bitcoin's consensus is built, the main risks, and the complex dynamics of protocol upgrades.

PT-BR version

Podcast https://www.fountain.fm/episode/wbjD6ntQuvX5u2G5BccC

Presentation https://gamma.app/docs/Analyzing-Bitcoin-Consensus-Risks-in-Protocol-Upgrades-p66axxjwaa37ksn

1. Introduction to Consensus in Bitcoin

Consensus in Bitcoin is the foundation that keeps the network secure and functional, allowing users worldwide to perform transactions in a decentralized manner without the need for intermediaries. Since its launch in 2009, Bitcoin is often described as an "immutable" system designed to resist changes, and it is precisely this resistance that ensures its security and stability.

The central idea behind consensus in Bitcoin is to create a set of acceptance rules for blocks and transactions, ensuring that all network participants agree on the transaction history. This prevents "double-spending," where the same bitcoin could be used in two simultaneous transactions, something that would compromise trust in the network.

Evolution of Consensus in Bitcoin

Over the years, consensus in Bitcoin has undergone several adaptations, and the way participants agree on changes remains a delicate process. Unlike traditional systems, where changes can be imposed from the top down, Bitcoin operates in a decentralized model where any significant change needs the support of various groups of stakeholders, including miners, developers, users, and large node operators.

Moreover, the update process is extremely cautious, as hasty changes can compromise the network's security. As a result, the philosophy of "don't fix what isn't broken" prevails, with improvements happening incrementally and only after broad consensus among those involved. This model can make progress seem slow but ensures that Bitcoin remains faithful to the principles of security and decentralization.

---

2. Technical Components of Consensus

Bitcoin's consensus is supported by a set of technical rules that determine what is considered a valid transaction and a valid block on the network. These technical aspects ensure that all nodes—the computers that participate in the Bitcoin network—agree on the current state of the blockchain. Below are the main technical components that form the basis of the consensus.

Validation of Blocks and Transactions

The validation of blocks and transactions is the central point of consensus in Bitcoin. A block is only considered valid if it meets certain criteria, such as maximum size, transaction structure, and the solving of the "Proof of Work" problem. The proof of work, required for a block to be included in the blockchain, is a computational process that ensures the block contains significant computational effort—protecting the network against manipulation attempts.

Transactions, in turn, need to follow specific input and output rules. Each transaction includes cryptographic signatures that prove the ownership of the bitcoins sent, as well as validation scripts that verify if the transaction conditions are met. This validation system is essential for network nodes to autonomously confirm that each transaction follows the rules.

Chain Selection

Another fundamental technical issue for Bitcoin's consensus is chain selection, which becomes especially important in cases where multiple versions of the blockchain coexist, such as after a network split (fork). To decide which chain is the "true" one and should be followed, the network adopts the criterion of the highest accumulated proof of work. In other words, the chain with the highest number of valid blocks, built with the greatest computational effort, is chosen by the network as the official one.

This criterion avoids permanent splits because it encourages all nodes to follow the same main chain, reinforcing consensus.

Soft Forks vs. Hard Forks

In the consensus process, protocol changes can happen in two ways: through soft forks or hard forks. These variations affect not only the protocol update but also the implications for network users:

• Soft Forks: These are changes that are backward compatible. Only nodes that adopt the new update will follow the new rules, but old nodes will still recognize the blocks produced with these rules as valid. This compatibility makes soft forks a safer option for updates, as it minimizes the risk of network division.

• Hard Forks: These are updates that are not backward compatible, requiring all nodes to update to the new version or risk being separated from the main chain. Hard forks can result in the creation of a new coin, as occurred with the split between Bitcoin and Bitcoin Cash in 2017. While hard forks allow for deeper changes, they also bring significant risks of network fragmentation.

These technical components form the base of Bitcoin's security and resilience, allowing the system to remain functional and immutable without losing the necessary flexibility to evolve over time.

---

3. Stakeholders in Bitcoin's Consensus

Consensus in Bitcoin is not decided centrally. On the contrary, it depends on the interaction between different groups of stakeholders, each with their motivations, interests, and levels of influence. These groups play fundamental roles in how changes are implemented or rejected on the network. Below, we explore the six main stakeholders in Bitcoin's consensus.

1. Economic Nodes

Economic nodes, usually operated by exchanges, custody providers, and large companies that accept Bitcoin, exert significant influence over consensus. Because they handle large volumes of transactions and act as a connection point between the Bitcoin ecosystem and the traditional financial system, these nodes have the power to validate or reject blocks and to define which version of the software to follow in case of a fork.

Their influence is proportional to the volume of transactions they handle, and they can directly affect which chain will be seen as the main one. Their incentive is to maintain the network's stability and security to preserve its functionality and meet regulatory requirements.

2. Investors

Investors, including large institutional funds and individual Bitcoin holders, influence consensus indirectly through their impact on the asset's price. Their buying and selling actions can affect Bitcoin's value, which in turn influences the motivation of miners and other stakeholders to continue investing in the network's security and development.

Some institutional investors have agreements with custodians that may limit their ability to act in network split situations. Thus, the impact of each investor on consensus can vary based on their ownership structure and how quickly they can react to a network change.

3. Media Influencers

Media influencers, including journalists, analysts, and popular personalities on social media, have a powerful role in shaping public opinion about Bitcoin and possible updates. These influencers can help educate the public, promote debates, and bring transparency to the consensus process.

On the other hand, the impact of influencers can be double-edged: while they can clarify complex topics, they can also distort perceptions by amplifying or minimizing change proposals. This makes them a force both of support and resistance to consensus.

4. Miners

Miners are responsible for validating transactions and including blocks in the blockchain. Through computational power (hashrate), they also exert significant influence over consensus decisions. In update processes, miners often signal their support for a proposal, indicating that the new version is safe to use. However, this signaling is not always definitive, and miners can change their position if they deem it necessary.

Their incentive is to maximize returns from block rewards and transaction fees, as well as to maintain the value of investments in their specialized equipment, which are only profitable if the network remains stable.

5. Protocol Developers

Protocol developers, often called "Core Developers," are responsible for writing and maintaining Bitcoin's code. Although they do not have direct power over consensus, they possess an informal veto power since they decide which changes are included in the main client (Bitcoin Core). This group also serves as an important source of technical knowledge, helping guide decisions and inform other stakeholders.

Their incentive lies in the continuous improvement of the network, ensuring security and decentralization. Many developers are funded by grants and sponsorships, but their motivations generally include a strong ideological commitment to Bitcoin's principles.

6. Users and Application Developers

This group includes people who use Bitcoin in their daily transactions and developers who build solutions based on the network, such as wallets, exchanges, and payment platforms. Although their power in consensus is less than that of miners or economic nodes, they play an important role because they are responsible for popularizing Bitcoin's use and expanding the ecosystem.

If application developers decide not to adopt an update, this can affect compatibility and widespread acceptance. Thus, they indirectly influence consensus by deciding which version of the protocol to follow in their applications.

These stakeholders are vital to the consensus process, and each group exerts influence according to their involvement, incentives, and ability to act in situations of change. Understanding the role of each makes it clearer how consensus is formed and why it is so difficult to make significant changes to Bitcoin.

---

4. Mechanisms for Activating Updates in Bitcoin

For Bitcoin to evolve without compromising security and consensus, different mechanisms for activating updates have been developed over the years. These mechanisms help coordinate changes among network nodes to minimize the risk of fragmentation and ensure that updates are implemented in an orderly manner. Here, we explore some of the main methods used in Bitcoin, their advantages and disadvantages, as well as historical examples of significant updates.

Flag Day

The Flag Day mechanism is one of the simplest forms of activating changes. In it, a specific date or block is determined as the activation moment, and all nodes must be updated by that point. This method does not involve prior signaling; participants simply need to update to the new software version by the established day or block.

• Advantages: Simplicity and predictability are the main benefits of Flag Day, as everyone knows the exact activation date.

• Disadvantages: Inflexibility can be a problem because there is no way to adjust the schedule if a significant part of the network has not updated. This can result in network splits if a significant number of nodes are not ready for the update.

An example of Flag Day was the Pay to Script Hash (P2SH) update in 2012, which required all nodes to adopt the change to avoid compatibility issues.

BIP34 and BIP9

BIP34 introduced a more dynamic process, in which miners increase the version number in block headers to signal the update. When a predetermined percentage of the last blocks is mined with this new version, the update is automatically activated. This model later evolved with BIP9, which allowed multiple updates to be signaled simultaneously through "version bits," each corresponding to a specific change.

• Advantages: Allows the network to activate updates gradually, giving more time for participants to adapt.

• Disadvantages: These methods rely heavily on miner support, which means that if a sufficient number of miners do not signal the update, it can be delayed or not implemented.

BIP9 was used in the activation of SegWit (BIP141) but faced challenges because some miners did not signal their intent to activate, leading to the development of new mechanisms.

User Activated Soft Forks (UASF) and User Resisted Soft Forks (URSF)

To increase the decision-making power of ordinary users, the concept of User Activated Soft Fork (UASF) was introduced, allowing node operators, not just miners, to determine consensus for a change. In this model, nodes set a date to start rejecting blocks that are not in compliance with the new update, forcing miners to adapt or risk having their blocks rejected by the network.

URSF, in turn, is a model where nodes reject blocks that attempt to adopt a specific update, functioning as resistance against proposed changes.

• Advantages: UASF returns decision-making power to node operators, ensuring that changes do not depend solely on miners.

• Disadvantages: Both UASF and URSF can generate network splits, especially in cases of strong opposition among different stakeholders.

An example of UASF was the activation of SegWit in 2017, where users supported activation independently of miner signaling, which ended up forcing its adoption.

BIP8 (LOT=True)

BIP8 is an evolution of BIP9, designed to prevent miners from indefinitely blocking a change desired by the majority of users and developers. BIP8 allows setting a parameter called "lockinontimeout" (LOT) as true, which means that if the update has not been fully signaled by a certain point, it is automatically activated.

• Advantages: Ensures that changes with broad support among users are not blocked by miners who wish to maintain the status quo.

• Disadvantages: Can lead to network splits if miners or other important stakeholders do not support the update.

Although BIP8 with LOT=True has not yet been used in Bitcoin, it is a proposal that can be applied in future updates if necessary.

These activation mechanisms have been essential for Bitcoin's development, allowing updates that keep the network secure and functional. Each method brings its own advantages and challenges, but all share the goal of preserving consensus and network cohesion.

---

5. Risks and Considerations in Consensus Updates

Consensus updates in Bitcoin are complex processes that involve not only technical aspects but also political, economic, and social considerations. Due to the network's decentralized nature, each change brings with it a set of risks that need to be carefully assessed. Below, we explore some of the main challenges and future scenarios, as well as the possible impacts on stakeholders.

Network Fragility with Alternative Implementations

One of the main risks associated with consensus updates is the possibility of network fragmentation when there are alternative software implementations. If an update is implemented by a significant group of nodes but rejected by others, a network split (fork) can occur. This creates two competing chains, each with a different version of the transaction history, leading to unpredictable consequences for users and investors.

Such fragmentation weakens Bitcoin because, by dividing hashing power (computing) and coin value, it reduces network security and investor confidence. A notable example of this risk was the fork that gave rise to Bitcoin Cash in 2017 when disagreements over block size resulted in a new chain and a new asset.

Chain Splits and Impact on Stakeholders

Chain splits are a significant risk in update processes, especially in hard forks. During a hard fork, the network is split into two separate chains, each with its own set of rules. This results in the creation of a new coin and leaves users with duplicated assets on both chains. While this may seem advantageous, in the long run, these splits weaken the network and create uncertainties for investors.

Each group of stakeholders reacts differently to a chain split:

• Institutional Investors and ETFs: Face regulatory and compliance challenges because many of these assets are managed under strict regulations. The creation of a new coin requires decisions to be made quickly to avoid potential losses, which may be hampered by regulatory constraints.

• Miners: May be incentivized to shift their computing power to the chain that offers higher profitability, which can weaken one of the networks.

• Economic Nodes: Such as major exchanges and custody providers, have to quickly choose which chain to support, influencing the perceived value of each network.

Such divisions can generate uncertainties and loss of value, especially for institutional investors and those who use Bitcoin as a store of value.

Regulatory Impacts and Institutional Investors

With the growing presence of institutional investors in Bitcoin, consensus changes face new compliance challenges. Bitcoin ETFs, for example, are required to follow strict rules about which assets they can include and how chain split events should be handled. The creation of a new asset or migration to a new chain can complicate these processes, creating pressure for large financial players to quickly choose a chain, affecting the stability of consensus.

Moreover, decisions regarding forks can influence the Bitcoin futures and derivatives market, affecting perception and adoption by new investors. Therefore, the need to avoid splits and maintain cohesion is crucial to attract and preserve the confidence of these investors.

Security Considerations in Soft Forks and Hard Forks

While soft forks are generally preferred in Bitcoin for their backward compatibility, they are not without risks. Soft forks can create different classes of nodes on the network (updated and non-updated), which increases operational complexity and can ultimately weaken consensus cohesion. In a network scenario with fragmentation of node classes, Bitcoin's security can be affected, as some nodes may lose part of the visibility over updated transactions or rules.

In hard forks, the security risk is even more evident because all nodes need to adopt the new update to avoid network division. Experience shows that abrupt changes can create temporary vulnerabilities, in which malicious agents try to exploit the transition to attack the network.

Bounty Claim Risks and Attack Scenarios

Another risk in consensus updates are so-called "bounty claims"—accumulated rewards that can be obtained if an attacker manages to split or deceive a part of the network. In a conflict scenario, a group of miners or nodes could be incentivized to support a new update or create an alternative version of the software to benefit from these rewards.

These risks require stakeholders to carefully assess each update and the potential vulnerabilities it may introduce. The possibility of "bounty claims" adds a layer of complexity to consensus because each interest group may see a financial opportunity in a change that, in the long term, may harm network stability.

The risks discussed above show the complexity of consensus in Bitcoin and the importance of approaching it gradually and deliberately. Updates need to consider not only technical aspects but also economic and social implications, in order to preserve Bitcoin's integrity and maintain trust among stakeholders.

---

6. Recommendations for the Consensus Process in Bitcoin

To ensure that protocol changes in Bitcoin are implemented safely and with broad support, it is essential that all stakeholders adopt a careful and coordinated approach. Here are strategic recommendations for evaluating, supporting, or rejecting consensus updates, considering the risks and challenges discussed earlier, along with best practices for successful implementation.

1. Careful Evaluation of Proposal Maturity

Stakeholders should rigorously assess the maturity level of a proposal before supporting its implementation. Updates that are still experimental or lack a robust technical foundation can expose the network to unnecessary risks. Ideally, change proposals should go through an extensive testing phase, have security audits, and receive review and feedback from various developers and experts.

2. Extensive Testing in Secure and Compatible Networks

Before an update is activated on the mainnet, it is essential to test it on networks like testnet and signet, and whenever possible, on other compatible networks that offer a safe and controlled environment to identify potential issues. Testing on networks like Litecoin was fundamental for the safe launch of innovations like SegWit and the Lightning Network, allowing functionalities to be validated on a lower-impact network before being implemented on Bitcoin.

The Liquid Network, developed by Blockstream, also plays an important role as an experimental network for new proposals, such as OP_CAT. By adopting these testing environments, stakeholders can mitigate risks and ensure that the update is reliable and secure before being adopted by the main network.

3. Importance of Stakeholder Engagement

The success of a consensus update strongly depends on the active participation of all stakeholders. This includes economic nodes, miners, protocol developers, investors, and end users. Lack of participation can lead to inadequate decisions or even future network splits, which would compromise Bitcoin's security and stability.

4. Key Questions for Evaluating Consensus Proposals

To assist in decision-making, each group of stakeholders should consider some key questions before supporting a consensus change:

• Does the proposal offer tangible benefits for Bitcoin's security, scalability, or usability?
• Does it maintain backward compatibility or introduce the risk of network split?
• Are the implementation requirements clear and feasible for each group involved?
• Are there clear and aligned incentives for all stakeholder groups to accept the change?

5. Coordination and Timing in Implementations

Timing is crucial. Updates with short activation windows can force a split because not all nodes and miners can update simultaneously. Changes should be planned with ample deadlines to allow all stakeholders to adjust their systems, avoiding surprises that could lead to fragmentation.

Mechanisms like soft forks are generally preferable to hard forks because they allow a smoother transition. Opting for backward-compatible updates when possible facilitates the process and ensures that nodes and miners can adapt without pressure.

6. Continuous Monitoring and Re-evaluation

After an update, it's essential to monitor the network to identify problems or side effects. This continuous process helps ensure cohesion and trust among all participants, keeping Bitcoin as a secure and robust network.

These recommendations, including the use of secure networks for extensive testing, promote a collaborative and secure environment for Bitcoin's consensus process. By adopting a deliberate and strategic approach, stakeholders can preserve Bitcoin's value as a decentralized and censorship-resistant network.

---

7. Conclusion

Consensus in Bitcoin is more than a set of rules; it's the foundation that sustains the network as a decentralized, secure, and reliable system. Unlike centralized systems, where decisions can be made quickly, Bitcoin requires a much more deliberate and cooperative approach, where the interests of miners, economic nodes, developers, investors, and users must be considered and harmonized. This governance model may seem slow, but it is fundamental to preserving the resilience and trust that make Bitcoin a global store of value and censorship-resistant.

Consensus updates in Bitcoin must balance the need for innovation with the preservation of the network's core principles. The development process of a proposal needs to be detailed and rigorous, going through several testing stages, such as in testnet, signet, and compatible networks like Litecoin and Liquid Network. These networks offer safe environments for proposals to be analyzed and improved before being launched on the main network.

Each proposed change must be carefully evaluated regarding its maturity, impact, backward compatibility, and support among stakeholders. The recommended key questions and appropriate timing are critical to ensure that an update is adopted without compromising network cohesion. It's also essential that the implementation process is continuously monitored and re-evaluated, allowing adjustments as necessary and minimizing the risk of instability.

By following these guidelines, Bitcoin's stakeholders can ensure that the network continues to evolve safely and robustly, maintaining user trust and further solidifying its role as one of the most resilient and innovative digital assets in the world. Ultimately, consensus in Bitcoin is not just a technical issue but a reflection of its community and the values it represents: security, decentralization, and resilience.

---

8. Links

Whitepaper: https://github.com/bitcoin-cap/bcap

Youtube (pt-br): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rARycAibl9o&list=PL-qnhF0qlSPkfhorqsREuIu4UTbF0h4zb

@ 78a31758:2e5c81d2

This long-form article should have an image of a cat shown somewhere with the title.

@ c631e267:c2b78d3e

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ a95c6243:d345522c

Ich begann, Social Media aufzubauen, \ um den Menschen eine Stimme zu geben. \ Mark Zuckerberg

Sind euch auch die Tränen gekommen, als ihr Mark Zuckerbergs Wendehals-Deklaration bezüglich der Meinungsfreiheit auf seinen Portalen gehört habt? Rührend, oder? Während er früher die offensichtliche Zensur leugnete und später die Regierung Biden dafür verantwortlich machte, will er nun angeblich «die Zensur auf unseren Plattformen drastisch reduzieren».

«Purer Opportunismus» ob des anstehenden Regierungswechsels wäre als Klassifizierung viel zu kurz gegriffen. Der jetzige Schachzug des Meta-Chefs ist genauso Teil einer kühl kalkulierten Business-Strategie, wie es die 180 Grad umgekehrte Praxis vorher war. Social Media sind ein höchst lukratives Geschäft. Hinzu kommt vielleicht noch ein bisschen verkorkstes Ego, weil derartig viel Einfluss und Geld sicher auch auf die Psyche schlagen. Verständlich.

«Es ist an der Zeit, zu unseren Wurzeln der freien Meinungsäußerung auf Facebook und Instagram zurückzukehren. Ich begann, Social Media aufzubauen, um den Menschen eine Stimme zu geben», sagte Zuckerberg.

Welche Wurzeln? Hat der Mann vergessen, dass er von der Überwachung, dem Ausspionieren und dem Ausverkauf sämtlicher Daten und digitaler Spuren sowie der Manipulation seiner «Kunden» lebt? Das ist knallharter Kommerz, nichts anderes. Um freie Meinungsäußerung geht es bei diesem Geschäft ganz sicher nicht, und das war auch noch nie so. Die Wurzeln von Facebook liegen in einem Projekt des US-Militärs mit dem Namen «LifeLog». Dessen Ziel war es, «ein digitales Protokoll vom Leben eines Menschen zu erstellen».

Der Richtungswechsel kommt allerdings nicht überraschend. Schon Anfang Dezember hatte Meta-Präsident Nick Clegg von «zu hoher Fehlerquote bei der Moderation» von Inhalten gesprochen. Bei der Gelegenheit erwähnte er auch, dass Mark sehr daran interessiert sei, eine aktive Rolle in den Debatten über eine amerikanische Führungsrolle im technologischen Bereich zu spielen.

Während Milliardärskollege und Big Tech-Konkurrent Elon Musk bereits seinen Posten in der kommenden Trump-Regierung in Aussicht hat, möchte Zuckerberg also nicht nur seine Haut retten – Trump hatte ihn einmal einen «Feind des Volkes» genannt und ihm lebenslange Haft angedroht –, sondern am liebsten auch mitspielen. KI-Berater ist wohl die gewünschte Funktion, wie man nach einem Treffen Trump-Zuckerberg hörte. An seine Verhaftung dachte vermutlich auch ein weiterer Multimilliardär mit eigener Social Media-Plattform, Pavel Durov, als er Zuckerberg jetzt kritisierte und gleichzeitig warnte.

Politik und Systemmedien drehen jedenfalls durch – was zu viel ist, ist zu viel. Etwas weniger Zensur und mehr Meinungsfreiheit würden die Freiheit der Bürger schwächen und seien potenziell vernichtend für die Menschenrechte. Zuckerberg setze mit dem neuen Kurs die Demokratie aufs Spiel, das sei eine «Einladung zum nächsten Völkermord», ernsthaft. Die Frage sei, ob sich die EU gegen Musk und Zuckerberg behaupten könne, Brüssel müsse jedenfalls hart durchgreifen.

Auch um die Faktenchecker macht man sich Sorgen. Für die deutsche Nachrichtenagentur dpa und die «Experten» von Correctiv, die (noch) Partner für Fact-Checking-Aktivitäten von Facebook sind, sei das ein «lukratives Geschäftsmodell». Aber möglicherweise werden die Inhalte ohne diese vermeintlichen Korrektoren ja sogar besser. Anders als Meta wollen jedoch Scholz, Faeser und die Tagesschau keine Fehler zugeben und zum Beispiel Correctiv-Falschaussagen einräumen.

Bei derlei dramatischen Befürchtungen wundert es nicht, dass der öffentliche Plausch auf X zwischen Elon Musk und AfD-Chefin Alice Weidel von 150 EU-Beamten überwacht wurde, falls es irgendwelche Rechtsverstöße geben sollte, die man ihnen ankreiden könnte. Auch der Deutsche Bundestag war wachsam. Gefunden haben dürften sie nichts. Das Ganze war eher eine Show, viel Wind wurde gemacht, aber letztlich gab es nichts als heiße Luft.

Das Anbiedern bei Donald Trump ist indes gerade in Mode. Die Weltgesundheitsorganisation (WHO) tut das auch, denn sie fürchtet um Spenden von über einer Milliarde Dollar. Eventuell könnte ja Elon Musk auch hier künftig aushelfen und der Organisation sowie deren größtem privaten Förderer, Bill Gates, etwas unter die Arme greifen. Nachdem Musks KI-Projekt xAI kürzlich von BlackRock & Co. sechs Milliarden eingestrichen hat, geht da vielleicht etwas.

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ 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.

@ 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)

@ 78a31758:2e5c81d2

This is a test

Test number 2 of publishing long-form content from Nestr

• [x] item 1
• [ ] item 2
• [x] item 3

```bash

this is bash comment

$ whoami ```

test

| Header 1 | Header 2 | Header 3 | |----------|----------|----------| | Row 1 | Data | Data | | Row 2 | Data | Data |

@ eac63075:b4988b48

The future of physical money is at stake, and the discussion about DREX, the new digital currency planned by the Central Bank of Brazil, is gaining momentum. In a candid and intense conversation, Federal Deputy Julia Zanatta (PL/SC) discussed the challenges and risks of this digital transition, also addressing her Bill No. 3,341/2024, which aims to prevent the extinction of physical currency. This bill emerges as a direct response to legislative initiatives seeking to replace physical money with digital alternatives, limiting citizens' options and potentially compromising individual freedom. Let's delve into the main points of this conversation.

https://www.fountain.fm/episode/i5YGJ9Ors3PkqAIMvNQ0

(PT-BR version here)

What is a CBDC?

Before discussing the specifics of DREX, it’s important to understand what a CBDC (Central Bank Digital Currency) is. CBDCs are digital currencies issued by central banks, similar to a digital version of physical money. Unlike cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin, which operate in a decentralized manner, CBDCs are centralized and regulated by the government. In other words, they are digital currencies created and controlled by the Central Bank, intended to replace physical currency.

A prominent feature of CBDCs is their programmability. This means that the government can theoretically set rules about how, where, and for what this currency can be used. This aspect enables a level of control over citizens' finances that is impossible with physical money. By programming the currency, the government could limit transactions by setting geographical or usage restrictions. In practice, money within a CBDC could be restricted to specific spending or authorized for use in a defined geographical area.

In countries like China, where citizen actions and attitudes are also monitored, a person considered to have a "low score" due to a moral or ideological violation may have their transactions limited to essential purchases, restricting their digital currency use to non-essential activities. This financial control is strengthened because, unlike physical money, digital currency cannot be exchanged anonymously.

Practical Example: The Case of DREX During the Pandemic

To illustrate how DREX could be used, an example was given by Eric Altafim, director of Banco Itaú. He suggested that, if DREX had existed during the COVID-19 pandemic, the government could have restricted the currency’s use to a 5-kilometer radius around a person’s residence, limiting their economic mobility. Another proposed use by the executive related to the Bolsa Família welfare program: the government could set up programming that only allows this benefit to be used exclusively for food purchases. Although these examples are presented as control measures for safety or organization, they demonstrate how much a CBDC could restrict citizens' freedom of choice.

To illustrate the potential for state control through a Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC), such as DREX, it is helpful to look at the example of China. In China, the implementation of a CBDC coincides with the country’s Social Credit System, a governmental surveillance tool that assesses citizens' and companies' behavior. Together, these technologies allow the Chinese government to monitor, reward, and, above all, punish behavior deemed inappropriate or threatening to the government.

How Does China's Social Credit System Work?

Implemented in 2014, China's Social Credit System assigns every citizen and company a "score" based on various factors, including financial behavior, criminal record, social interactions, and even online activities. This score determines the benefits or penalties each individual receives and can affect everything from public transport access to obtaining loans and enrolling in elite schools for their children. Citizens with low scores may face various sanctions, including travel restrictions, fines, and difficulty in securing loans.

With the adoption of the CBDC — or “digital yuan” — the Chinese government now has a new tool to closely monitor citizens' financial transactions, facilitating the application of Social Credit System penalties. China’s CBDC is a programmable digital currency, which means that the government can restrict how, when, and where the money can be spent. Through this level of control, digital currency becomes a powerful mechanism for influencing citizens' behavior.

Imagine, for instance, a citizen who repeatedly posts critical remarks about the government on social media or participates in protests. If the Social Credit System assigns this citizen a low score, the Chinese government could, through the CBDC, restrict their money usage in certain areas or sectors. For example, they could be prevented from buying tickets to travel to other regions, prohibited from purchasing certain consumer goods, or even restricted to making transactions only at stores near their home.

Another example of how the government can use the CBDC to enforce the Social Credit System is by monitoring purchases of products such as alcohol or luxury items. If a citizen uses the CBDC to spend more than the government deems reasonable on such products, this could negatively impact their social score, resulting in additional penalties such as future purchase restrictions or a lowered rating that impacts their personal and professional lives.

In China, this kind of control has already been demonstrated in several cases. Citizens added to Social Credit System “blacklists” have seen their spending and investment capacity severely limited. The combination of digital currency and social scores thus creates a sophisticated and invasive surveillance system, through which the Chinese government controls important aspects of citizens’ financial lives and individual freedoms.

Deputy Julia Zanatta views these examples with great concern. She argues that if the state has full control over digital money, citizens will be exposed to a level of economic control and surveillance never seen before. In a democracy, this control poses a risk, but in an authoritarian regime, it could be used as a powerful tool of repression.

DREX and Bill No. 3,341/2024

Julia Zanatta became aware of a bill by a Workers' Party (PT) deputy (Bill 4068/2020 by Deputy Reginaldo Lopes - PT/MG) that proposes the extinction of physical money within five years, aiming for a complete transition to DREX, the digital currency developed by the Central Bank of Brazil. Concerned about the impact of this measure, Julia drafted her bill, PL No. 3,341/2024, which prohibits the elimination of physical money, ensuring citizens the right to choose physical currency.

“The more I read about DREX, the less I want its implementation,” says the deputy. DREX is a Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC), similar to other state digital currencies worldwide, but which, according to Julia, carries extreme control risks. She points out that with DREX, the State could closely monitor each citizen’s transactions, eliminating anonymity and potentially restricting freedom of choice. This control would lie in the hands of the Central Bank, which could, in a crisis or government change, “freeze balances or even delete funds directly from user accounts.”

Risks and Individual Freedom

Julia raises concerns about potential abuses of power that complete digitalization could allow. In a democracy, state control over personal finances raises serious questions, and EddieOz warns of an even more problematic future. “Today we are in a democracy, but tomorrow, with a government transition, we don't know if this kind of power will be used properly or abused,” he states. In other words, DREX gives the State the ability to restrict or condition the use of money, opening the door to unprecedented financial surveillance.

EddieOz cites Nigeria as an example, where a CBDC was implemented, and the government imposed severe restrictions on the use of physical money to encourage the use of digital currency, leading to protests and clashes in the country. In practice, the poorest and unbanked — those without regular access to banking services — were harshly affected, as without physical money, many cannot conduct basic transactions. Julia highlights that in Brazil, this situation would be even more severe, given the large number of unbanked individuals and the extent of rural areas where access to technology is limited.

The Relationship Between DREX and Pix

The digital transition has already begun with Pix, which revolutionized instant transfers and payments in Brazil. However, Julia points out that Pix, though popular, is a citizen’s choice, while DREX tends to eliminate that choice. The deputy expresses concern about new rules suggested for Pix, such as daily transaction limits of a thousand reais, justified as anti-fraud measures but which, in her view, represent additional control and a profit opportunity for banks. “How many more rules will banks create to profit from us?” asks Julia, noting that DREX could further enhance control over personal finances.

International Precedents and Resistance to CBDC

The deputy also cites examples from other countries resisting the idea of a centralized digital currency. In the United States, states like New Hampshire have passed laws to prevent the advance of CBDCs, and leaders such as Donald Trump have opposed creating a national digital currency. Trump, addressing the topic, uses a justification similar to Julia’s: in a digitalized system, “with one click, your money could disappear.” She agrees with the warning, emphasizing the control risk that a CBDC represents, especially for countries with disadvantaged populations.

Besides the United States, Canada, Colombia, and Australia have also suspended studies on digital currencies, citing the need for further discussions on population impacts. However, in Brazil, the debate on DREX is still limited, with few parliamentarians and political leaders openly discussing the topic. According to Julia, only she and one or two deputies are truly trying to bring this discussion to the Chamber, making DREX’s advance even more concerning.

Bill No. 3,341/2024 and Popular Pressure

For Julia, her bill is a first step. Although she acknowledges that ideally, it would prevent DREX's implementation entirely, PL 3341/2024 is a measure to ensure citizens' choice to use physical money, preserving a form of individual freedom. “If the future means control, I prefer to live in the past,” Julia asserts, reinforcing that the fight for freedom is at the heart of her bill.

However, the deputy emphasizes that none of this will be possible without popular mobilization. According to her, popular pressure is crucial for other deputies to take notice and support PL 3341. “I am only one deputy, and we need the public’s support to raise the project’s visibility,” she explains, encouraging the public to press other parliamentarians and ask them to “pay attention to PL 3341 and the project that prohibits the end of physical money.” The deputy believes that with a strong awareness and pressure movement, it is possible to advance the debate and ensure Brazilians’ financial freedom.

What’s at Stake?

Julia Zanatta leaves no doubt: DREX represents a profound shift in how money will be used and controlled in Brazil. More than a simple modernization of the financial system, the Central Bank’s CBDC sets precedents for an unprecedented level of citizen surveillance and control in the country. For the deputy, this transition needs to be debated broadly and transparently, and it’s up to the Brazilian people to defend their rights and demand that the National Congress discuss these changes responsibly.

The deputy also emphasizes that, regardless of political or partisan views, this issue affects all Brazilians. “This agenda is something that will affect everyone. We need to be united to ensure people understand the gravity of what could happen.” Julia believes that by sharing information and generating open debate, it is possible to prevent Brazil from following the path of countries that have already implemented a digital currency in an authoritarian way.

A Call to Action

The future of physical money in Brazil is at risk. For those who share Deputy Julia Zanatta’s concerns, the time to act is now. Mobilize, get informed, and press your representatives. PL 3341/2024 is an opportunity to ensure that Brazilian citizens have a choice in how to use their money, without excessive state interference or surveillance.

In the end, as the deputy puts it, the central issue is freedom. “My fear is that this project will pass, and people won’t even understand what is happening.” Therefore, may every citizen at least have the chance to understand what’s at stake and make their voice heard in defense of a Brazil where individual freedom and privacy are respected values.

@ 42342239:1d80db24

Almost 150 years ago, the British newspaper editor William Thomas Stead wrote that "the editorial pen is a sceptre of power, compared with which the sceptre of many a monarch is but a gilded lath". He had begun to regard journalism as something more than just conveying information - the journalist or editor could become a ruler.

Times had certainly changed compared to a few hundred years earlier. Before Gutenberg's invention of the printing press, it was mainly the church that controlled the dissemination of information in Europe, but when Stead put pen to paper, this control had shifted to newspapers, schools, and universities. Eventually, technologies like radio and TV entered the scene, but the power dynamics remained asymmetrical - only a few could send information to the many.

However, with the emergence of the internet, and especially with the spread of social media, a significant change followed. Instead of only a few being able to send information to the many, many could send to many. Almost anyone could now create their own newspaper, radio, or TV channel. The power over information dissemination was decentralised.

Ten years ago, Roberta Alenius, who was then press secretary for Sweden's Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt of the Moderate Party, shared her experiences with Social Democratic and Moderate Party internet activists on social media. She reported that social media played a significant role in how news "comes out" and is shaped, and that journalism was now downstream of social media. Five years later, NATO's then-Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said that "NATO must be prepared for both conventional and hybrid threats: from tanks to tweets." This finally underscores the importance of social media.

Elon Musk, who took over X (formerly Twitter) in 2022, has claimed that "it's absolutely fundamental and transformative that the people actually get to decide the news and narrative and what's important," and that citizen journalism is the future.

While his platform allows most expressions - for better or worse - the reach of messages is instead limited ("freedom of speech does not mean freedom of reach "). X has also opened its recommendation algorithm to the outside world by making it open-source. Although this is a welcome step, the fact remains that it's impossible to know which code is actually used and what adjustments are made by humans or algorithms.

William Thomas Stead's "sceptre of power", which has wandered from the church to newspaper and TV editorial offices, and now to citizens according to Elon Musk, risks being transferred to algorithms' opaque methods?

Instead of talking about "toxic algorithms" and TikTok bans, like the so many do today, we should ask ourselves more fundamental questions. What happens when algorithms are no longer objective (how can they ever be?), but instead become tools for shaping our reality? Perhaps our greatest challenge today is not deciding who should govern the information landscape, but instead recognising that no one is up to the task - not even well-ventilated computers.

@ 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.

@ 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.

@ 78a31758:2e5c81d2

Long-form test from Nestr

• [x] Can post long-form content - [x] Long form posts show up in the feed - [x] Long-form is formatted according to NIP-23

Paragraphs are formatted correctly like so.

Another paragraph.

@ 9e69e420:d12360c2

A Russian drone attack has struck the radiation shelter at Chernobyl, according to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. The strike caused a fire, but it has since been extinguished, and radiation levels remain stable. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) confirmed that no casualties occurred and that monitoring continues.

Rafael Mariano Grossi, IAEA's director general, emphasized the need for caution. Chernobyl, site of the 1986 nuclear disaster, contains a protective shield costing $1.6 billion. Disaster prevention remains a priority as the conflict unfolds.

The incident occurred shortly before the meeting of world powers at the Munich Security Conference in Germany.

@ d360efec:14907b5f

นักพนันแห่งเฮรันเทล

“คณิตศาสตร์” กุญแจเวทมนตร์ นักพนัน และ นักลงทุน

ในนครเฮรันเทล นามกระฉ่อนเลื่องลือในหมู่นักเสี่ยงโชค เมื่อเอ่ยถึง “การพนัน” ภาพที่ชาวเมืองมักนึกถึงคือ “ยาจกข้างถนน”

มิใช่เรื่องแปลกประหลาดอันใด เพราะเป็นที่ร่ำลือกันว่า จ้าวแห่งหอคอยรัตติกาล ผู้คุมบ่อนพนัน มักร่ายเวทมนตร์สร้างเกมให้ตนเองได้เปรียบ เพื่อดูดกลืนเงินทองของผู้มาเยือน

ดังนั้น การที่สามัญชนจะพิชิตเกมในระยะยาว จึงเป็นดั่งเงามายาที่จับต้องมิได้

กระนั้น ยังมีตำนานกล่าวขานถึงผู้กล้า ที่สามารถสร้างชื่อจาก “เกมพนัน” เช่น

เวเนสซา รุสโซ นักเวทย์มนตร์ผู้ใช้กฎหมายแห่งแดนไกล ใช้เวลายาวนานถึงหกปี

ร่ายเวทย์สะสมทรัพย์สินกว่าร้อยล้านเหรียญทอง จากการเล่นเกมไพ่ศักดิ์สิทธิ์ “โป๊กเกอร์”

หรือแม้แต่ เอ็ดเวิร์ด โอ. ทอร์ป จอมปราชญ์ผู้สร้างกำไรถึงสามแสนหกหมื่นเหรียญทอง ภายในเจ็ดราตรี

จากการเล่นเกมไพ่มนตรา “แบล็กแจ็ก” ด้วยเงินทุนตั้งต้นเพียงสามแสนสามหมื่นเหรียญทอง คิดเป็นอัตราเวทย์ตอบแทนร้อยสิบส่วน!

เหล่าจอมยุทธ์เหล่านี้ มิได้อาศัยเพียงโชคช่วยชั่วครั้งชั่วคราวแล้วเลือนหาย

แต่พวกเขากลับสามารถร่ายเวทย์สร้างผลตอบแทนระยะยาว จนเรียกได้ว่า ใช้ “หอคอยรัตติกาล” เป็นแหล่งเสบียงเลี้ยงชีพ

โดยกุญแจเวทย์ที่บุคคลเหล่านี้ใช้ ก็คือ “คณิตศาสตร์”

เหตุใด “คณิตศาสตร์” จึงช่วยให้ผู้คนเอาชนะ “การพนัน” ได้?

และนอกจาก “การพนัน” แล้ว “คณิตศาสตร์” ยังสามารถประยุกต์ใช้กับสิ่งใดได้อีก?

นักเล่าเรื่องแห่งเฮรันเทล จักไขปริศนาให้ฟัง

เบื้องต้น ขอให้ท่านลองพิจารณาตนเอง ว่าเคยประสบพบพานเหตุการณ์เหล่านี้หรือไม่:

• ตั้งมั่นว่า จักเสี่ยงโชคให้ได้กำไรเพียงเล็กน้อย แล้วจักหยุดพัก

• แต่หากพลาดท่าเสียที จักจำกัดการสูญเสียให้เท่าทุนเดิมที่ตั้งไว้

• ครั้นเมื่อเวทมนตร์เข้าข้าง ได้กำไรมาแล้ว กลับโลภโมโทสัน อยากได้เพิ่มอีกนิด จึงร่ายเวทย์ต่อ

• ทว่ากำไรเริ่มร่อยหรอ จนเหลือเพียงทุนเดิม สุดท้ายทุนที่ตั้งไว้คราแรกก็มลายสิ้น

• จำต้องหาเงินทองมาลงเพิ่ม หวังทวงทุนคืน และพบว่าต้องสูญเสียเงินก้อนนั้นไปในห้วงเวลาต่อมา

ลำดับเหตุการณ์ดังกล่าว เรียกได้ว่าเป็น “วงจรอุบาทว์” สำหรับนักพนันมากมายในเฮรันเทล

ปริศนาที่ตามมาก็คือ เหตุใด “วงจรอุบาทว์” นี้จึงเกิดขึ้นซ้ำแล้วซ้ำเล่า?

ส่วนหนึ่ง ย่อมเป็นเพราะอารมณ์อันแปรปรวนในการเสี่ยงโชคของแต่ละคน

แต่อีกส่วนที่สำคัญยิ่งกว่า ต้องกล่าวว่าเป็นผลจาก “กลไกต้องสาป” ของจ้าวแห่งหอคอยรัตติกาล

ซึ่งต้องกล่าวว่า เหล่าเจ้าของหอคอยรัตติกาลนั้น จักใช้หลักการทำนองเดียวกับ “สมาคมพ่อค้าผู้พิทักษ์”

คือจักเก็บเงินทองจากชนจำนวนมาก เพื่อนำมาจ่ายให้กับชนเพียงหยิบมือ

เพื่อล่อลวงให้ชนทั้งหลายเสี่ยงโชคต่อไป หรือทำให้เหล่านักพนันหวังว่า จักเป็นผู้โชคดีเฉกเช่นพวกเขาบ้าง

แม้จะมีผู้โชคดีที่สามารถได้กำไรในเบื้องต้น แต่ในบั้นปลายก็จักพ่ายแพ้อยู่ดี ซึ่งเป็นไปตาม “กฎแห่งจำนวนมหาศาล” เพราะจ้าวแห่งหอคอยรัตติกาลนั้น ได้คำนวณและออกแบบระบบเกมที่ตนเองได้เปรียบในระยะยาวแล้ว

จากตำนานนี้ ย่อมประจักษ์ชัดว่า แม้การพนันจักเป็นเรื่องของดวงชะตา

แต่ก็ถูกรังสรรค์ขึ้นจากการคำนวณทางคณิตศาสตร์

ดังนั้น หากปรารถนาจะหาหนทางเอาชนะจ้าวแห่งหอคอยรัตติกาล ก็จำต้องเข้าใจ “คณิตศาสตร์” เสียก่อน

ทีนี้ จงเงี่ยหูฟัง แล้วท่านจักได้ยินข้าไขปริศนา:

๑. ปริศนาแห่ง “กำไรคาดหวัง”

สำหรับการแสวงหา “เกมเสี่ยงทาย” ที่ควรค่าแก่การเล่น หรือการเสี่ยง

สิ่งแรกที่นักพนันพึงกระทำคือ “การประเมินกำไรคาดหวัง” หรือ “เวทคำนวณอนาคต”

“กำไรคาดหวัง” ถูกคิดค้นโดย คริสเตียน ฮอยเกนส์ นักปราชญ์เวทย์ชาวดัตช์ เพื่อประเมินว่าเกมพนันแบบใดควรค่าแก่การเล่น ซึ่งมิใช่เพียงแค่การประเมินโอกาสแห่งชัยชนะเท่านั้น แต่ต้องคิดรวมขนาดของเงินเดิมพันไปด้วย

โดยสูตรเวทย์คือ:

กำไรคาดหวัง = (เงินที่ได้ x โอกาสชนะ) + (เงินที่เสีย x โอกาสแพ้)

ดังนั้น หากปรารถนาจะสะสม “ทองคำมายา” ในระยะยาว จงเลือกเกมที่มี “กำไรคาดหวัง” เป็นบวก

แต่หากพลาดพลั้งเข้าไปเล่นเกมที่ “กำไรคาดหวัง” เป็นลบ และบังเอิญว่าโชคชะตาเล่นตลกให้ได้เงินทองมาครอง

พึงละทิ้งเกมนั้นเสียโดยพลัน เพราะท้ายที่สุดหากยังคงเล่นต่อไป ผู้อับโชคผู้นั้นก็คือตัวท่านเอง

อย่างไรก็ตาม โดยธรรมดาแล้ว “กำไรคาดหวัง” ของเกมพนันที่มีเจ้ามือมักจักติดลบ จึงเป็นเรื่องยากยิ่งที่จะเอาชนะได้ เฉกเช่นตัวอย่างที่เราเห็น คือเกมในบ่อนพนัน หรือแม้แต่ “สลากกินแบ่งรัฐบาล” ก็ล้วนเป็นเกมที่มี “กำไรคาดหวัง” ติดลบทั้งสิ้น

นอกจาก “กำไรคาดหวัง” จักถูกใช้กับการพนันได้แล้ว

หลักเวทย์ “คณิตศาสตร์” ก็ยังสามารถประยุกต์ใช้กับการลงทุนได้ไม่แตกต่างกัน

ตัวอย่างเช่น หากท่านเก็บสถิติข้อมูลการลงทุนของตนเอง

แล้วพบว่ามีเพียงสามสิบส่วนร้อยเท่านั้น ที่ท่านซื้อ “ศิลาแห่งโชค” แล้วสร้างผลตอบแทนเป็นบวก

แต่ท่านยังคงปรารถนาความสำเร็จในการลงทุน

ก็จงจำกัดการขาดทุนแต่ละคราให้น้อยเข้าไว้ เช่น -๕%

และปล่อยให้มีกำไรในแต่ละคราที่ลงทุน เช่น อย่างน้อย ๒๐%

ซึ่งจากการใช้กลยุทธ์นี้ ท่านจักมี “กำไรคาดหวัง” = (๒๐% x ๐.๓) + (-๕% x ๐.๗) = ๒.๕%

จักเห็นได้ว่า แม้ท่านจักมีจำนวนคราที่ขาดทุนบ่อยครั้ง แต่ก็ยังสามารถสร้างกำไรได้

หากคราที่กำไรนั้น สามารถทำเงินทองเป็นจำนวนมากได้

๒. ปริศนาแห่ง “การบริหารหน้าตัก” หรือ “การบริหารเงินทุน”

แม้ว่าท่านจักรับรู้ “กำไรคาดหวัง” แล้ว แต่หากท่านเผชิญหน้ากับการขาดทุนต่อเนื่องกัน ท่านก็อาจหมดเนื้อหมดตัวก่อนถึงคราที่จะกอบโกยเงินทองจากคราที่กำไร

วิธีคลายปมปริศนานี้ก็คือ การมิลงเงินทองทั้งหมดของท่านในการลงทุนเพียงคราเดียว

ซึ่งนอกจากการกระจายความเสี่ยงในการลงทุนหลาย “ศิลาแห่งโชค” หรือหลาย “เกมเสี่ยงทาย” แล้ว

ท่านอาจกำหนดขนาดของการลงทุนแต่ละคราให้มิมากเกินไป แบบง่าย ๆ เช่น มิเกิน ๑๐% ของเงินลงทุนทั้งหมด หรือท่านอาจคำนวณขนาดของการลงทุนแต่ละคราด้วยสูตรทางคณิตศาสตร์ เช่น สูตร “การขาดทุนสูงสุดที่ท่านรับได้ (Value at Risk)” หรือ สูตร “ขนาดเดิมพันที่เหมาะสม (Kelly Formula)”

๓. ปริศนาแห่ง “อคติ”

ในวงการพนัน มักมีอคติหนึ่งที่บังเกิดบ่อยครั้งกับผู้คน คือ “Gambler's Fallacy” หรือ “ความเชื่อผิด ๆ แห่งนักพนัน” ว่าหากเหตุการณ์หนึ่งบังเกิดบ่อยครั้งกว่าปรกติในช่วงเวลาหนึ่ง ๆ

เหตุการณ์นั้นจักบังเกิดบ่อยครั้งน้อยลงในอนาคต ทั้ง ๆ ที่เหตุการณ์เหล่านั้นเป็นอิสระจากกันในทางสถิติ

ยกตัวอย่างเช่น หากโยนเหรียญมนตราออกหัวไปแล้วสามครา ในคราที่สี่ หลายคนอาจคิดว่าโอกาสออกก้อยมากกว่าหัว แม้ว่าการโยนเหรียญแต่ละคราจะมิได้ส่งผลอันใดต่อกันเลย (จะโยนกี่ครา โอกาสหัวหรือก้อย ก็คือ ๕๐:๕๐ อยู่ยั่งยืน)

หรือแม้กระทั่ง “สลากกินแบ่งรัฐบาล” มีหลายคนที่ซื้อเลขซ้ำกัน เพื่อหวังว่าจะถูกในงวดต่อ ๆ ไป

ในวงการการลงทุน ก็มีลักษณะที่คล้ายคลึงกัน เช่น หาก “ศิลาแห่งโชค A” ราคาตกต่ำลงมาห้าครา บางคนอาจคิดว่าในคราที่หก ราคาของมันจักต้องเด้งขึ้นมา ซึ่งในความเป็นจริง หาได้เป็นเช่นนั้นเสมอไป

จักเห็นได้ว่า แท้จริงแล้ว ไม่ว่าจักเป็น “เกมเสี่ยงทายแห่งโชคชะตา” หรือ “การผจญภัยในตลาดทุน”

หากท่านมีความเข้าใจ และนำ “คณิตศาสตร์” เข้ามาเป็นรากฐาน

มันก็อาจนำพาตัวท่านเอง ไปสู่จุดที่ได้เปรียบในเกมนั้น ได้เฉกเช่นกัน..

สูตรเวทย์มนตร์ที่ปรากฏในตำนาน:

• กำไรคาดหวัง = (เงินที่ได้ x โอกาสชนะ) + (เงินที่เสีย x โอกาสแพ้)

คำเตือนจากนักเล่าเรื่องแห่งเฮรันเทล:

"พึงระลึกไว้เสมอว่า โชคชะตาเป็นสิ่งที่คาดเดาได้ยาก แม้เวทมนตร์คณิตศาสตร์จักช่วยนำทาง แต่ท้ายที่สุดแล้ว ความสำเร็จยังคงขึ้นอยู่กับการตัดสินใจและสติปัญญาของท่านเอง"

หวังว่าตำนานบทนี้จักเป็นประโยชน์แก่ท่านนะคะ

@ 554ab6fe:c6cbc27e

Bitcoin’s Price and the Power Law: A Reflection of Energy and the Early Stages of Monetary Adoption Introduction Bitcoin’s price trajectory has long puzzled analysts, with its seemingly chaotic booms and busts. However, when examined through the lens of power laws, a pattern emerges—one that is fundamentally tied to Bitcoin’s energy-based production cost. This article argues that Bitcoin’s price has historically followed a power law because its underlying cost structure is dictated by mining, an energy-intensive process. However, this relationship will not persist indefinitely. I propose that as Bitcoin matures into a widely adopted monetary system, its price will decouple from mining production costs and instead oscillate in accordance with natural business cycles, much like traditional forms of money.

Bitcoin’s Price and the Power Law

Source and Credit: Giovanni Santostasi’s “The Bitcoin Power Law”

When Bitcoin’s price is plotted on a logarithmic scale against time, a strikingly straight-line trajectory appears, punctuated by cycles of rapid price expansion (bull markets) followed by severe corrections (bear markets). These perturbations correspond to Bitcoin’s well-known halving cycles, which occur approximately every four years and reduce the block reward paid to miners, effectively doubling the cost of production per Bitcoin. Historically, Bitcoin’s price has always returned to a fundamental minimum—one that closely aligns with the average cost of mining.

This observation suggests that Bitcoin’s power law price behavior is not arbitrary but rather a reflection of its fundamental energy constraints. As in many natural systems governed by power laws, energy dynamics play a central role. In Bitcoin’s case, the “base layer” of its valuation is determined by the energy and computational resources required for mining. This power law behavior is therefore a consequence of Bitcoin’s fundamental design: as block subsidies decrease and mining efficiency improves, the minimum sustainable price follows an upward trajectory dictated by production costs.

Bitcoin as an Energy-Based System

Power laws commonly emerge in natural systems involving energy constraints, from thermodynamics to biological ecosystems and planetary dynamics. Bitcoin, as an energy-based monetary system, exhibits similar characteristics. Mining requires significant electricity and computational power, and as the difficulty adjustment ensures a competitive equilibrium, the cost of mining a Bitcoin remains closely tied to its market value over the long run.

Unlike traditional fiat currencies, which are controlled by central banks and subject to arbitrary monetary expansion, Bitcoin’s supply schedule is immutable. Its economic foundation is rooted in proof of work, where value is derived from energy expenditure. This fundamental linkage between energy and price explains why Bitcoin’s valuation has adhered to a power law trajectory. It is an entropy engine, and follows physical laws related to energy and entropy.

However, this pattern is not a permanent feature of Bitcoin’s monetary future—it is, rather, an indication of Bitcoin’s early-stage monetization process.

The Transition from Mining-Based Pricing to a Business Cycle

A crucial implication of Bitcoin’s price following a power law dictated by mining costs is that it suggests Bitcoin has yet to fully mature as money. If Bitcoin were already a widely adopted monetary standard, its valuation would no longer be primarily influenced by the floor mining costs but instead by macroeconomic forces—specifically, the natural fluctuations of the business cycle.

In a world where Bitcoin is the dominant global currency, the “price of money” (which correlates with the cost of capital and prevailing interest rates) would fluctuate according to the broader economic cycle. The dynamics would resemble those of natural interest rate cycles described by the Austrian School of Economics:

• During periods of economic expansion, lower interest rates spur increased investment and consumption, prices slightly rise, and savings deplete.
• As savings decline and prices rise, interest rates naturally rise as well, leading to reduced investment and spending, initiating a contractionary phase and lowered prices.
• During the contraction, savings accumulate, more capital becomes available, and interest rates and prices decline.
• With the availability of capital, lower interest rates and lowered prices, the economy is now ready to enter a phase of investment and expansion once again.
• This oscillatory process continues indefinitely, driven by real economic growth rather than central bank intervention.

If Bitcoin were fully monetized, its price would no longer oscillate based on mining halvings and energy costs but instead reflect economic expansion and contraction cycles—just as traditional currencies do when not artificially manipulated by central banks.

The Early Stage Indicator: Bitcoin’s Dependence on Mining Costs

Today, Bitcoin’s price still “bounces” off the power law baseline, indicating that its valuation remains primarily anchored to its minimum cost of production. This means that, while Bitcoin is widely recognized as an asset, it has not yet reached the level of adoption where its price is dictated by macroeconomic cycles.

A future in which Bitcoin is used as a primary medium of exchange and unit of account would necessarily imply a decoupling from mining-driven pricing. Instead of periodic halvings triggering speculative bull runs followed by crashes, Bitcoin’s price would become far more stable, with fluctuations primarily driven by business cycle dynamics. The continued adherence to the power law model, therefore, is evidence that Bitcoin is still in an early phase of adoption—where mining remains a primary determinant of price.

Conclusion

Bitcoin’s price trajectory has long conformed to a power law, reflecting the underlying energy costs of mining. This characteristic, however, is likely not a permanent feature but rather a hallmark of Bitcoin’s early stage as an emerging monetary system. As adoption increases and Bitcoin becomes widely used as money, its price should transition away from being dictated by mining costs and should instead fluctuate according to the natural oscillations of the business cycle.

The persistence of Bitcoin’s power law trend is a sign that it remains in its infancy. The real transformation will occur when Bitcoin is no longer bound to its production cost but is instead driven by the natural ebb and flow of savings, investment, and capital cycles—marking its full emergence as a global monetary system.

Disclaimer: The information provided in this blog is for informational and educational purposes only and should not be construed as financial advice. Please consult with a financial advisor or conduct your own research before making any financial decisions.

@ be41636e:e55c4909

I asked unleashed.chat's DeepSeek model to provide the pieces of evidence against the moon landing. What follows is what I got as my answer.

Generally, I like the answer, though it mixed up the claim and counterarguments at times.

Also, I didn't like the conclusion :))

But all said, I believe the Van Allen Belts are one of the most solid argument against the moon landing.

---

The question of whether the moon landing was faked has been a topic of debate, with various arguments presented by those who doubt the authenticity of the event. Here is a summary of the key points often cited against the moon landing, along with counterarguments and explanations:

Arguments Against the Moon Landing: Waving Flag:

Claim: The American flag appears to wave in the wind, despite the moon having no atmosphere. Counterargument: The flag's movement was caused by the astronauts' actions, as they adjusted it using a rod behind the flag. Missing Stars:

Claim: The photos lack visible stars, which should be present in the moon's black sky. Counterargument: The cameras were set for optimal lighting of the lunar surface, making stars too faint to capture. Shadow Anomalies:

Claim: Shadows in photos appear to come from multiple directions, suggesting studio lighting. Counterargument: The moon's surface is uneven, causing shadows to appear differently, and the sun's angle can create varied shadows. Van Allen Belts:

Claim: Astronauts would have been exposed to lethal radiation from the Van Allen belts. Counterargument: The missions were timed to pass through the belts quickly, minimizing exposure. Lack of Blast Crater:

Claim: No noticeable crater was created by the lunar module's descent engine. Counterargument: The engine's thrust was designed to minimize impact, and the moon's surface is softer than expected. Missing Footage:

Claim: Original tapes of the landing were lost, and restored footage is of lower quality. Counterargument: Footage was restored from other sources, including TV broadcasts and telemetry data. Soviet Silence:

Claim: The Soviets did not contest the landing, despite being space race competitors. Counterargument: The Soviets may not have had the means to verify the landing or were focused on their own programs. Technological Capabilities:

Claim: The technology of the 1960s was insufficient for a moon landing. Counterargument: Successful unmanned missions and technological advancements supported the capability. Number of Participants:

Claim: Thousands of people involved would have leaked the secret. Counterargument: Secrecy measures and unawareness of implications could have prevented leaks. "C" Rock Incident:

Claim: A rock appeared to float, suggesting tampering. Counterargument: The rock was a prop, and movement was due to low-gravity actions. Supporting Evidence for the Moon Landing: Moon Rocks: Analyzed and confirmed as lunar. Footprints and Equipment: Observed by subsequent missions and satellites. Cumulative Evidence: Multiple sources confirm the moon landing. In conclusion, while various arguments have been presented against the moon landing, each has been addressed with scientific explanations and evidence. The consensus among the scientific community is that the moon landing was genuine, supported by substantial evidence and corroborated by multiple sources.

The question of whether the moon landing was faked has been a topic of debate, with various arguments presented by those who doubt the authenticity of the event. Here is a summary of the key points often cited against the moon landing, along with counterarguments and explanations:

Arguments Against the Moon Landing:

1. Waving Flag:

   • Claim: The American flag appears to wave in the wind, despite the moon having no atmosphere.
   • Counterargument: The flag's movement was caused by the astronauts' actions, as they adjusted it using a rod behind the flag.

2. Missing Stars:

   • Claim: The photos lack visible stars, which should be present in the moon's black sky.
   • Counterargument: The cameras were set for optimal lighting of the lunar surface, making stars too faint to capture.

3. Shadow Anomalies:

   • Claim: Shadows in photos appear to come from multiple directions, suggesting studio lighting.
   • Counterargument: The moon's surface is uneven, causing shadows to appear differently, and the sun's angle can create varied shadows.

4. Van Allen Belts:

   • Claim: Astronauts would have been exposed to lethal radiation from the Van Allen belts.
   • Counterargument: The missions were timed to pass through the belts quickly, minimizing exposure.

5. Lack of Blast Crater:

   • Claim: No noticeable crater was created by the lunar module's descent engine.
   • Counterargument: The engine's thrust was designed to minimize impact, and the moon's surface is softer than expected.

6. Missing Footage:

   • Claim: Original tapes of the landing were lost, and restored footage is of lower quality.
   • Counterargument: Footage was restored from other sources, including TV broadcasts and telemetry data.

7. Soviet Silence:

   • Claim: The Soviets did not contest the landing, despite being space race competitors.
   • Counterargument: The Soviets may not have had the means to verify the landing or were focused on their own programs.

8. Technological Capabilities:

   • Claim: The technology of the 1960s was insufficient for a moon landing.
   • Counterargument: Successful unmanned missions and technological advancements supported the capability.

9. Number of Participants:

   • Claim: Thousands of people involved would have leaked the secret.
   • Counterargument: Secrecy measures and unawareness of implications could have prevented leaks.

10. "C" Rock Incident:

    • Claim: A rock appeared to float, suggesting tampering.
    • Counterargument: The rock was a prop, and movement was due to low-gravity actions.

Supporting Evidence for the Moon Landing:

• Moon Rocks: Analyzed and confirmed as lunar.
• Footprints and Equipment: Observed by subsequent missions and satellites.
• Cumulative Evidence: Multiple sources confirm the moon landing.

In conclusion, while various arguments have been presented against the moon landing, each has been addressed with scientific explanations and evidence. The consensus among the scientific community is that the moon landing was genuine, supported by substantial evidence and corroborated by multiple sources.

@ fa805c81:344bed3c

" เจอหมีให้แกล้งตาย แต่ถ้าเจอหมีบ่อย ๆ คงเป็นบ้าไปซะก่อน "

มีวันนึง ในยุคดึกดำบรรพ์ เด็กชายซาโตชิผู้รักการเดินป่าเป็นชีวิตจิตใจ แต่วันนี้ต่างออกไปเพราะเขาเห็น หมี ตัวใหญ่ ยืนจังก้าต่อหน้าเขา

" เวรกรรมแล้วไง " ไม่ใช่แค่ซาโตชิที่คิดแบบนี้ เป็นผม หรือคุณ ก็คิดแบบนี้กันหมดนั่นแหละ !!

ม่านตาเบิกโพลงขยาย ยับยั้งการหลั่งน้ำลาย หลอดลมขยายตัว หัวใจเต้นรัวสั่น กลั้นปัสสาวะ "ระบบซิมพาเทติก" ที่ซาโตชิต้องท่องจำในชั้นเรียน เมื่ออยู่ในสถานการ์ณจริงที่ต้อง " สู้หรือหนี " " เกี่ยวข้องกับความเป็นความตาย " ไม่มีความจำเป็นต้องท่องเลย รับรู้เองได้หมดในเวลานั้น

ทำยังไงดีนะ ซาโตชิ ......

ไม่ว่าซาโตชิจะทำอย่างไร ไม่ว่าซาโตชิจะทำตามตัวอย่างของระบบซิมพาเทติกที่บอกว่าคนสามารถยกตู้เย็นได้ทั้งที่ไม่เคยยกมาก่อน ถ้าซาโตชิเลือกที่จะ " สู้ " โดยการยกหมีโยนลงหน้าผา !! หรือซาโตชิเลือกที่จะ " หนี " โดยการสับตีนแตก !! ในการกระทำสองอย่างนี้ มีบางสิ่งที่เหมือนกัน

" เสียพลังงานอย่างมาก " นี่คือสิ่งที่เหมือนกัน

ระบบซิมพาเทติกคูลดาวน์... หยุดทำงาน ซาโตชิเดินป่าต่ออย่างสบายใจ หรืออาจจะกลับบ้าน ก็แล้วแต่ " อา..มันจบแล้วสินะ " ซาโตชิพูดขึ้น

จากยุคดึกดำบรรพ์ สู่ยุคปัจจุบัน เชื้อสายของซาโตชิ ไม่จำเป็นต้องเข้าป่าไปหาของป่า ไปตลาดนัดก็ได้ ตามกลไกตลาดเสรี

ไม่มีความจำเป็นที่ต้องลุ้นว่าจะเจอ หมี อีกต่อไปแล้ว

สโคปมาอีกนิดดีกว่าจริง ๆ แล้ว ไม่จำเป็นต้องเป็นหมี หรอกครับ อะไรที่ทำให้สมองเราสื่อว่า สิ่งนี้อันตราย ระบบซิมพาเทติกมันก็ทำงาน...

แล้วความอันตรายในยุคปัจจุบันคืออะไร ? หมีในยุคปัจจุบัน....กลายพันธ์เป็นอะไร ????

น่าอนิจจาครับ ที่ Scenario นี้ ดวงมาตกที่เชื้อสายของซาโตชิ กลับกลายเป็นครอบครัวมีปัญหาครับ ( อาจจะเพราะอะไรก็ได้ เอาว่าระบบเงินเฟียต เงินเฟ้อทำให้คนเป็นบ้าแล้วกัน ) เด็กคนนี้โตมาในสภาพที่พ่อแม่ไม่รัก พ่อแม่ทะเลาะกันทุกวัน พ่อกับแม่หย่ากัน พ่อติดเหล้า แม่หนีไปมีสามีใหม่ ทุกครั้งที่พ่อแม่ทะเลาะกัน ทุกครั้งที่พ่อติดเหล้าก็อาละวาด บางครั้งนั่งๆนอนๆทำการบ้านอยู่ดี ๆ พ่อก็เปิดประตูห้องมาในสภาพเมาๆ แล้วชวนทะเลาะ

วันที่สงบหายไปไหนนะ วันที่สงบ กลับถูกแทนที่ด้วยความเครียด

ความเครียด ที่กระตุ้นให้ซิมพาเทติกทำงาน...

พวกคุณเห็นความต่างอะไรมั้ยครับ ซาโตชิเจอหมี ซิมพาเทติกทำงาน สู้หรือหนีหมี แล้วจบ แต่กับเด็กคนนี้ ในสภาพครอบครัวที่เลวร้าย ซิมพาเทติกก็ทำงาน

แต่เขาหนีก็ไม่ได้ สู้ก็ไม่ได้นะครับ...

เออเอาละซิ ทำยังไงดีล่ะ ความเครียดเข้ามาทุกวันอย่างคาดเดาไม่ได้ ระบบซิมพาเทติกก็ทำงานแทบทุกวัน

1 ในอวัยวะที่ต้องจัดการกับความเครียดและซิมพาเทติก คือต่อมหมวกไตครับ ต่อมหมวกไตชั้นนอก มีหลายฟังชั่น.. 1 ในนั้นคือการสร้าง Cortisol มาสู้กับความเครียด ต่อมหมวกไตชั้นใน มีหน้าที่คือการสร้างอดรีนาลีน มาเพื่อใช้กับระบบซิมพาเทติก

" โอ้ย เมื่อยโว้ยยยยยยย " อันนี่ไม่ใช่คำที่เด็กคนนี้พูดอยู่คนเดียวนะครับ ต่อมหมวกไตก็พูด....

ในเมื่ออวัยวะที่ทำให้เรา Handle กับ Stress ได้ มันเมื่อยแล้ว.. เกิดสิ่งที่เรียกว่า " ต่อมหมวกไตล้า "

Stress ที่ไม่สามารถคุมได้ เมื่อนั้นเอง ก็จะเกิดโรคหลายอย่าง 1 ในนั้นคือโรคที่เด็กโตมาในครอบครัวมีปัญหามักจะเป็นกัน " โรคซึมเศร้า "

คงไม่ต้องพูดว่าโรคนี้แย่ยังไง คนทุกคนน่าจะเข้าใจดี เพราะงั้นใจความสำคัญที่ผมต้องการบอกคือ หมีไม่จำเป็นต้องเกิดจากครอบครัวก็ได้ครับ แต่หมีคือสภาพแวดล้อมที่เราต้องเจอมันทุกวันอย่างเลี่ยงไม่ได้ เป็นหมีที่เลวร้าย หมีที่สู้ก็ไม่ได้ หนีก็ไม่ได้อีก ได้แต่รอระเบิดเวลาว่าต่อมหมวกไตจะล้าตอนไหน

หมีอาจมาในรูปแบบ เจ้านายที่ทำงานขี้วีน เพื่อนสนิทที่ท็อคซิค สามีภรรยาที่คอยพ่นพลังงานลบมาเรื่อย ๆ คุณอาจจะคิดว่า เอ้อ ก็ทนได้แหละ นิดๆหน่อยๆ การขัดแย้งมันไม่ดี เกรงใจเขา ไม่หรอกครับ คุณไม่จำเป็นต้องเอาตัวเองไปอยู่กับพลังงานลบแบบนั้น สงสารต่อมหมวกไตตัวเองบ้าง ถ้ามันจะขัดแย้ง ก็ขัดแย้งให้มันจบไปเลย การหาทางออก หาทางแก้ไขในคสพ. เหมือนซาโตชิที่เลือกจะสู้หรือหนีหมีตั้งแต่ตอนนั้น ความเรื้อรังไม่ใช่ทางออกแน่นอน

อย่าเป็นหมีในความสัมพันธ์ของใคร

@ 3ca99671:689a4ce4

How to avoid internal pressure and anxiety. Constantly forcing yourself to continue something, doubting its value to anyone other than your ego. And then it starts: "What if I use that framework? Maybe I should switch to another language? No, I’ll master that engine over there, and everything will fall into place." But it doesn’t. You don’t master it, it’s not the right language. In short, you’re stuck. The sense of obligation and the justification of inaction tear you apart. I mean, how is it inaction? Inside, there’s constant work going on, fragments of the future product emerge, but something’s missing… Organization? Publicity? Speaking of publicity, I clearly see that it will only intensify the sense of duty and create additional pressure. Which won’t be a creative energy at all, on the contrary, it’s more likely to lead to despair. You need to be 100 percent confident in the success of what you’re doing, so that without society’s approval of the prototype, you can release the product and not regret a single hour spent on it. Now, that’s belief, that’s love. Alright, this is a draft. So, what exactly is missing? Regarding organization: YES, backlogs and the like are necessary, BUT. Maybe the goals were set incorrectly back when I was working on projects. Because everything turned into organizing inaction. Exactly, organizing with the goal of doing nothing. Here’s another thing: think about the gym, for example. It’s the same with products, you need a hub, a shared space, and it’s easier now. Telegram, Discord, itch.io, GitHub, plenty of info and examples. So, what’s holding me back? Is there something stopping me? Maybe it’s worth finding out how others manage their work. (Here, I contradict myself). Obvious things, but they should be spelled out. And it becomes clear that I can’t handle it alone. I need collaborators. Maybe that’s the secret to ensuring the work continues, huh? If you think about releasing a product as the final point of an expedition. And immediately, the meme about how Hunter was packing his car trunk for the trip to Las Vegas comes to mind. A little lyrical digression:

"I had two Unity courses under my belt, ninety hours of Unreal Engine tutorials, three textbooks on procedural world generation, a hard drive half full of unfinished shaders, and a whole universe of tools: pixel-art engines, object destruction plugins, buggy C# scripts, low-poly assets laughing at me... and a liter of espresso, buckets of energy drinks, a box of donut coffee from Steam, a pint of sheer stubbornness, and two dozen tokens of 'unique' in-game helmets. Not that all of this was necessary for an indie project, but once you dive into tech experiments, it’s hard to stop. The only thing driving me crazy was neural networks for enemy AI. There’s no creature in the world more helpless, naive, and predictable than a programmer trying to squeeze machine learning into a platformer about a jumping carrot. And I knew for sure that by morning, we’d be diving into that rabbit hole with rakes in hand."

To be continued... P.S: ai translation from russian

@ 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.

@ 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.

@ 3eba5ef4:751f23ae

🍨Your weekly byte of the latest updates from the Bitcoin ecosystem!

Crypto Insights

Solving the Optimal Cluster Linearization Problem With DeepSeek

Stefan Richter (stefanwouldgo) found a 1989 paper through DeepSeek R1 that provides a solid solution to the problem of optimal cluster linearization. The paper presents a proven algorithm that efficiently finds the subset of transactions with the highest fees; if this subset is included in a block, it is topologically valid.

New Class in Cluster Mempool Improves Transaction Handling and Performance

The introduction of the TxGraph class in Cluster Mempool enhances transaction handling by encapsulating the transaction graph, focusing on effective fees, sizes, and dependencies. It enables batched and lazy updates for more efficient mempool operations, with improvements in transaction prioritization, incentive compatibility, and performance. This design simplifies the code by abstracting graph management, allowing for easier validation and future optimizations.

More details in this pull request.

Independent Mining Still Feasible

Two independent miners recently mined Bitcoin blocks:

• Block 881432 by 256 Foundation, a public organization promoting open-source Bitcoin mining. The group combined the hash rate from over 300 participants with the goal of breaking up the mining patent monopolies of large pools, making Bitcoin and free technology more accessible to all.

• Block 881676 by the open-source home mining hardware solo.ckpool, using hash rate equivalent to thousands of BitAxe devices.

This demonstrates that independent miners can still compete, reinforcing Bitcoin’s decentralization and censorship resistance.

6-Block Confirmation No Longer Enough, Mining Centralization Impacts Bitcoin Security

Bitcoin Core developer Luke Dashjr posted that he intended to update the 6-blocks-to-confirm target in the Knots wallet GUI. However, he found that due to Antpool controlling around 48% of the network's hash rate, more than 800 block confirmations would be required to achieve 95% security. He also noted that many pools, like Braiins and ViaBTC, are actually Antpool under different names.

Payjoin Development Progress Review

Spiral reviewed the development progress of Payjoin, which allows for including an additional input in a payment transaction to enhance privacy. The article also mentions that by using joint batching to optimize fees, Payjoin reduces transaction costs and increases network efficiency. Moreover, when both parties contribute inputs, Payjoin helps protect privacy by breaking common blockchain monitoring assumptions, making it harder for third parties to track payment amounts and private spending behaviors.

Block Size Report Reveals: Growth Partly Limited by Miner Policies and Bitcoin Core Defaults

The Block Size Report, published by Mempool research, uses data-driven analysis to examine the evolution of block size in Bitcoin from its inception to February 2025. It discusses changes in block size post-SegWit upgrade and reveals how growth has been partly limited by miner policies and Bitcoin Core defaults over the years. The report concludes with predictions about the growth of Bitcoin’s blockchain in the coming years.

Tutorial on Becoming an Advanced Nostr User With Sats Cashback

Rizful published a guide on how to become an advanced Nostr user and set up the self-owned Lightning node. After completing the tutorial, users can receive 5,000 sats via zap cashback.

Build a Smart Card for Bitcoin and Nostr Event Signing for Under $25

The 100% open-source smart card Satochip allows users to build their own signing device in just 10 minutes under 25 USD. Satochip's advantages include:

• Affordable and widely available

• Dual interface: supports both NFC (contactless) and Chip (contact) modes

• Minimal electronics, reducing the attack surface

• Enhanced security based in Secure Element

Bitcoin at the Crossroads of AI Revolution and Sovereign Evolution

CKBEcoFund shared their insights from the talk at The Satoshi Roundtable, discussing several macro issues including the dominance of artificial intelligence, Bitcoin's security, scalability, sovereignty, and national Bitcoin strategic reserves. He explored how CKB, as a Bitcoin Layer 2, is positioning itself for high-frequency micropayments, smart contracts, and cross-chain asset management.

Top Reads on Blockchain and Beyond

Pod: An Optimal-Latency, Censorship-Free, and Accountable Generalized Consensus Layer

This paper introduces a new consensus concept pod, aiming to achieve physically optimal latency for one round-trip—just one write of a new transaction and one read. This work solves inherent problems of high latency in blockchain and low scalability in traditional consensus protocols.

Grigore Rosu commented: "It can lead to the end of blockchains as we know them today. It shows how we can still achieve all the benefits of blockchains, but dropping the tyranny of sequentiality (and all the value exploiters that come with it).”

Tracking and Surveillance In-App Ads

The author learned of a massive location data breach revealing that over 2,000 apps in the App Store and Google Play were secretly collecting geographic location data without users' consent, and developers were unaware.

He then began tracking himself through location data leaked by some apps and made the following discoveries:

• Regardless of whether users choose "Allow" or "Ask not to track" in phone settings, the combination of "IP + location + user agent + geography" is still leaked to hundreds of third parties.

• The phone sends requests with location and leaked IP. These can be converted to geographic locations through reverse DNS.

• Data collection pathway: stack → o.isx.unity3d.com → molocoads → bwin

  • Unity is an SSP (supply-side platform) that collects app data via its SDK

  • Moloco Ads is a DSP network that resells data from multiple SSPs like Unity, Applovin, Chartboost

  • bwin is the advertiser that users see ads for in games

More discoveries in this post.

Potential DAO 2.0 Product Ideas

The author believes that the development of on-chain AI agents will lead to new forms of DAO, giving true autonomy to the "A" in DAO. New product ideas include:

• DAO 2.0 launcher: platform enables launching new community/governance tokens tied to an agent, agent responds to tokenholder votes, reads discussion forums and generates proposals

• Quality assessment for token distribution: agent assesses contribution quality to determine payouts/token distributions for DAOs/airdrops/etc.

• ZachZBT: agent monitors for hacks or other fraudulent activity and publishes research as well as tries to get funds back for people

• Due diligence agent: agent verifies contract integrity, dev reputations, on-chain behavior, and potential rug risks; allows users to interact with the agent to ask questions about risks

@ eac63075:b4988b48

Imagine sending a private message to a friend, only to learn that authorities could be scanning its contents without your knowledge. This isn't a scene from a dystopian novel but a potential reality under the European Union's proposed "Chat Control" measures. Aimed at combating serious crimes like child exploitation and terrorism, these proposals could significantly impact the privacy of everyday internet users. As encrypted messaging services become the norm for personal and professional communication, understanding Chat Control is essential. This article delves into what Chat Control entails, why it's being considered, and how it could affect your right to private communication.

https://www.fountain.fm/episode/coOFsst7r7mO1EP1kSzV

https://open.spotify.com/episode/0IZ6kMExfxFm4FHg5DAWT8?si=e139033865e045de

Sections:

• Introduction
• What Is Chat Control?
• Why Is the EU Pushing for Chat Control?
• The Privacy Concerns and Risks
• The Technical Debate: Encryption and Backdoors
• Global Reactions and the Debate in Europe
• Possible Consequences for Messaging Services
• What Happens Next? The Future of Chat Control
• Conclusion

---

What Is Chat Control?

"Chat Control" refers to a set of proposed measures by the European Union aimed at monitoring and scanning private communications on messaging platforms. The primary goal is to detect and prevent the spread of illegal content, such as child sexual abuse material (CSAM) and to combat terrorism. While the intention is to enhance security and protect vulnerable populations, these proposals have raised significant privacy concerns.

At its core, Chat Control would require messaging services to implement automated scanning technologies that can analyze the content of messages—even those that are end-to-end encrypted. This means that the private messages you send to friends, family, or colleagues could be subject to inspection by algorithms designed to detect prohibited content.

Origins of the Proposal

The initiative for Chat Control emerged from the EU's desire to strengthen its digital security infrastructure. High-profile cases of online abuse and the use of encrypted platforms by criminal organizations have prompted lawmakers to consider more invasive surveillance tactics. The European Commission has been exploring legislation that would make it mandatory for service providers to monitor communications on their platforms.

How Messaging Services Work

Most modern messaging apps, like Signal, Session, SimpleX, Veilid, Protonmail and Tutanota (among others), use end-to-end encryption (E2EE). This encryption ensures that only the sender and the recipient can read the messages being exchanged. Not even the service providers can access the content. This level of security is crucial for maintaining privacy in digital communications, protecting users from hackers, identity thieves, and other malicious actors.

Key Elements of Chat Control

• Automated Content Scanning: Service providers would use algorithms to scan messages for illegal content.
• Circumvention of Encryption: To scan encrypted messages, providers might need to alter their encryption methods, potentially weakening security.
• Mandatory Reporting: If illegal content is detected, providers would be required to report it to authorities.
• Broad Applicability: The measures could apply to all messaging services operating within the EU, affecting both European companies and international platforms.

Why It Matters

Understanding Chat Control is essential because it represents a significant shift in how digital privacy is handled. While combating illegal activities online is crucial, the methods proposed could set a precedent for mass surveillance and the erosion of privacy rights. Everyday users who rely on encrypted messaging for personal and professional communication might find their conversations are no longer as private as they once thought.

---

Why Is the EU Pushing for Chat Control?

The European Union's push for Chat Control stems from a pressing concern to protect its citizens, particularly children, from online exploitation and criminal activities. With the digital landscape becoming increasingly integral to daily life, the EU aims to strengthen its ability to combat serious crimes facilitated through online platforms.

Protecting Children and Preventing Crime

One of the primary motivations behind Chat Control is the prevention of child sexual abuse material (CSAM) circulating on the internet. Law enforcement agencies have reported a significant increase in the sharing of illegal content through private messaging services. By implementing Chat Control, the EU believes it can more effectively identify and stop perpetrators, rescue victims, and deter future crimes.

Terrorism is another critical concern. Encrypted messaging apps can be used by terrorist groups to plan and coordinate attacks without detection. The EU argues that accessing these communications could be vital in preventing such threats and ensuring public safety.

Legal Context and Legislative Drivers

The push for Chat Control is rooted in several legislative initiatives:

• ePrivacy Directive: This directive regulates the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in electronic communications. The EU is considering amendments that would allow for the scanning of private messages under specific circumstances.

• Temporary Derogation: In 2021, the EU adopted a temporary regulation permitting voluntary detection of CSAM by communication services. The current proposals aim to make such measures mandatory and more comprehensive.

• Regulation Proposals: The European Commission has proposed regulations that would require service providers to detect, report, and remove illegal content proactively. This would include the use of technologies to scan private communications.

Balancing Security and Privacy

EU officials argue that the proposed measures are a necessary response to evolving digital threats. They emphasize the importance of staying ahead of criminals who exploit technology to harm others. By implementing Chat Control, they believe law enforcement can be more effective without entirely dismantling privacy protections.

However, the EU also acknowledges the need to balance security with fundamental rights. The proposals include provisions intended to limit the scope of surveillance, such as:

• Targeted Scanning: Focusing on specific threats rather than broad, indiscriminate monitoring.

• Judicial Oversight: Requiring court orders or oversight for accessing private communications.

• Data Protection Safeguards: Implementing measures to ensure that data collected is handled securely and deleted when no longer needed.

The Urgency Behind the Push

High-profile cases of online abuse and terrorism have heightened the sense of urgency among EU policymakers. Reports of increasing online grooming and the widespread distribution of illegal content have prompted calls for immediate action. The EU posits that without measures like Chat Control, these problems will continue to escalate unchecked.

Criticism and Controversy

Despite the stated intentions, the push for Chat Control has been met with significant criticism. Opponents argue that the measures could be ineffective against savvy criminals who can find alternative ways to communicate. There is also concern that such surveillance could be misused or extended beyond its original purpose.

---

The Privacy Concerns and Risks

While the intentions behind Chat Control focus on enhancing security and protecting vulnerable groups, the proposed measures raise significant privacy concerns. Critics argue that implementing such surveillance could infringe on fundamental rights and set a dangerous precedent for mass monitoring of private communications.

Infringement on Privacy Rights

At the heart of the debate is the right to privacy. By scanning private messages, even with automated tools, the confidentiality of personal communications is compromised. Users may no longer feel secure sharing sensitive information, fearing that their messages could be intercepted or misinterpreted by algorithms.

Erosion of End-to-End Encryption

End-to-end encryption (E2EE) is a cornerstone of digital security, ensuring that only the sender and recipient can read the messages exchanged. Chat Control could necessitate the introduction of "backdoors" or weaken encryption protocols, making it easier for unauthorized parties to access private data. This not only affects individual privacy but also exposes communications to potential cyber threats.

Concerns from Privacy Advocates

Organizations like Signal and Tutanota, which offer encrypted messaging services, have voiced strong opposition to Chat Control. They warn that undermining encryption could have far-reaching consequences:

• Security Risks: Weakening encryption makes systems more vulnerable to hacking, espionage, and cybercrime.
• Global Implications: Changes in EU regulations could influence policies worldwide, leading to a broader erosion of digital privacy.
• Ineffectiveness Against Crime: Determined criminals might resort to other, less detectable means of communication, rendering the measures ineffective while still compromising the privacy of law-abiding citizens.

Potential for Government Overreach

There is a fear that Chat Control could lead to increased surveillance beyond its original scope. Once the infrastructure for scanning private messages is in place, it could be repurposed or expanded to monitor other types of content, stifling free expression and dissent.

Real-World Implications for Users

• False Positives: Automated scanning technologies are not infallible and could mistakenly flag innocent content, leading to unwarranted scrutiny or legal consequences for users.
• Chilling Effect: Knowing that messages could be monitored might discourage people from expressing themselves freely, impacting personal relationships and societal discourse.
• Data Misuse: Collected data could be vulnerable to leaks or misuse, compromising personal and sensitive information.

Legal and Ethical Concerns

Privacy advocates also highlight potential conflicts with existing laws and ethical standards:

• Violation of Fundamental Rights: The European Convention on Human Rights and other international agreements protect the right to privacy and freedom of expression.
• Questionable Effectiveness: The ethical justification for such invasive measures is challenged if they do not significantly improve safety or if they disproportionately impact innocent users.

Opposition from Member States and Organizations

Countries like Germany and organizations such as the European Digital Rights (EDRi) have expressed opposition to Chat Control. They emphasize the need to protect digital privacy and caution against hasty legislation that could have unintended consequences.

---

The Technical Debate: Encryption and Backdoors

The discussion around Chat Control inevitably leads to a complex technical debate centered on encryption and the potential introduction of backdoors into secure communication systems. Understanding these concepts is crucial to grasping the full implications of the proposed measures.

What Is End-to-End Encryption (E2EE)?

End-to-end encryption is a method of secure communication that prevents third parties from accessing data while it's transferred from one end system to another. In simpler terms, only the sender and the recipient can read the messages. Even the service providers operating the messaging platforms cannot decrypt the content.

• Security Assurance: E2EE ensures that sensitive information—be it personal messages, financial details, or confidential business communications—remains private.
• Widespread Use: Popular messaging apps like Signal, Session, SimpleX, Veilid, Protonmail and Tutanota (among others) rely on E2EE to protect user data.

How Chat Control Affects Encryption

Implementing Chat Control as proposed would require messaging services to scan the content of messages for illegal material. To do this on encrypted platforms, providers might have to:

• Introduce Backdoors: Create a means for third parties (including the service provider or authorities) to access encrypted messages.
• Client-Side Scanning: Install software on users' devices that scans messages before they are encrypted and sent, effectively bypassing E2EE.

The Risks of Weakening Encryption

1. Compromised Security for All Users

Introducing backdoors or client-side scanning tools can create vulnerabilities:

• Exploitable Gaps: If a backdoor exists, malicious actors might find and exploit it, leading to data breaches.
• Universal Impact: Weakening encryption doesn't just affect targeted individuals; it potentially exposes all users to increased risk.

2. Undermining Trust in Digital Services

• User Confidence: Knowing that private communications could be accessed might deter people from using digital services or push them toward unregulated platforms.
• Business Implications: Companies relying on secure communications might face increased risks, affecting economic activities.

3. Ineffectiveness Against Skilled Adversaries

• Alternative Methods: Criminals might shift to other encrypted channels or develop new ways to avoid detection.
• False Sense of Security: Weakening encryption could give the impression of increased safety while adversaries adapt and continue their activities undetected.

Signal’s Response and Stance

Signal, a leading encrypted messaging service, has been vocal in its opposition to the EU's proposals:

• Refusal to Weaken Encryption: Signal's CEO Meredith Whittaker has stated that the company would rather cease operations in the EU than compromise its encryption standards.
• Advocacy for Privacy: Signal emphasizes that strong encryption is essential for protecting human rights and freedoms in the digital age.

Understanding Backdoors

A "backdoor" in encryption is an intentional weakness inserted into a system to allow authorized access to encrypted data. While intended for legitimate use by authorities, backdoors pose several problems:

• Security Vulnerabilities: They can be discovered and exploited by unauthorized parties, including hackers and foreign governments.
• Ethical Concerns: The existence of backdoors raises questions about consent and the extent to which governments should be able to access private communications.

The Slippery Slope Argument

Privacy advocates warn that introducing backdoors or mandatory scanning sets a precedent:

• Expanded Surveillance: Once in place, these measures could be extended to monitor other types of content beyond the original scope.
• Erosion of Rights: Gradual acceptance of surveillance can lead to a significant reduction in personal freedoms over time.

Potential Technological Alternatives

Some suggest that it's possible to fight illegal content without undermining encryption:

• Metadata Analysis: Focusing on patterns of communication rather than content.
• Enhanced Reporting Mechanisms: Encouraging users to report illegal content voluntarily.
• Investing in Law Enforcement Capabilities: Strengthening traditional investigative methods without compromising digital security.

The technical community largely agrees that weakening encryption is not the solution:

• Consensus on Security: Strong encryption is essential for the safety and privacy of all internet users.
• Call for Dialogue: Technologists and privacy experts advocate for collaborative approaches that address security concerns without sacrificing fundamental rights.

---

Global Reactions and the Debate in Europe

The proposal for Chat Control has ignited a heated debate across Europe and beyond, with various stakeholders weighing in on the potential implications for privacy, security, and fundamental rights. The reactions are mixed, reflecting differing national perspectives, political priorities, and societal values.

Support for Chat Control

Some EU member states and officials support the initiative, emphasizing the need for robust measures to combat online crime and protect citizens, especially children. They argue that:

• Enhanced Security: Mandatory scanning can help law enforcement agencies detect and prevent serious crimes.
• Responsibility of Service Providers: Companies offering communication services should play an active role in preventing their platforms from being used for illegal activities.
• Public Safety Priorities: The protection of vulnerable populations justifies the implementation of such measures, even if it means compromising some aspects of privacy.

Opposition within the EU

Several countries and organizations have voiced strong opposition to Chat Control, citing concerns over privacy rights and the potential for government overreach.

Germany

• Stance: Germany has been one of the most vocal opponents of the proposed measures.
• Reasons:
• Constitutional Concerns: The German government argues that Chat Control could violate constitutional protections of privacy and confidentiality of communications.
• Security Risks: Weakening encryption is seen as a threat to cybersecurity.
• Legal Challenges: Potential conflicts with national laws protecting personal data and communication secrecy.

Netherlands

• Recent Developments: The Dutch government decided against supporting Chat Control, emphasizing the importance of encryption for security and privacy.
• Arguments:
• Effectiveness Doubts: Skepticism about the actual effectiveness of the measures in combating crime.
• Negative Impact on Privacy: Concerns about mass surveillance and the infringement of citizens' rights.

Table reference: Patrick Breyer - Chat Control in 23 September 2024

Privacy Advocacy Groups

European Digital Rights (EDRi)

• Role: A network of civil and human rights organizations working to defend rights and freedoms in the digital environment.
• Position:
• Strong Opposition: EDRi argues that Chat Control is incompatible with fundamental rights.
• Awareness Campaigns: Engaging in public campaigns to inform citizens about the potential risks.
• Policy Engagement: Lobbying policymakers to consider alternative approaches that respect privacy.

Politicians and Activists

Patrick Breyer

• Background: A Member of the European Parliament (MEP) from Germany, representing the Pirate Party.
• Actions:
• Advocacy: Actively campaigning against Chat Control through speeches, articles, and legislative efforts.
• Public Outreach: Using social media and public events to raise awareness.
• Legal Expertise: Highlighting the legal inconsistencies and potential violations of EU law.

Global Reactions

International Organizations

• Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International: These organizations have expressed concerns about the implications for human rights, urging the EU to reconsider.

Technology Companies

• Global Tech Firms: Companies like Apple and Microsoft are monitoring the situation, as EU regulations could affect their operations and user trust.
• Industry Associations: Groups representing tech companies have issued statements highlighting the risks to innovation and competitiveness.

The Broader Debate

The controversy over Chat Control reflects a broader struggle between security interests and privacy rights in the digital age. Key points in the debate include:

• Legal Precedents: How the EU's decision might influence laws and regulations in other countries.
• Digital Sovereignty: The desire of nations to control digital spaces within their borders.
• Civil Liberties: The importance of protecting freedoms in the face of technological advancements.

Public Opinion

• Diverse Views: Surveys and public forums show a range of opinions, with some citizens prioritizing security and others valuing privacy above all.
• Awareness Levels: Many people are still unaware of the potential changes, highlighting the need for public education on the issue.

The EU is at a crossroads, facing the challenge of addressing legitimate security concerns without undermining the fundamental rights that are central to its values. The outcome of this debate will have significant implications for the future of digital privacy and the balance between security and freedom in society.

---

Possible Consequences for Messaging Services

The implementation of Chat Control could have significant implications for messaging services operating within the European Union. Both large platforms and smaller providers might need to adapt their technologies and policies to comply with the new regulations, potentially altering the landscape of digital communication.

Impact on Encrypted Messaging Services

Signal and Similar Platforms

• Compliance Challenges: Encrypted messaging services like Signal rely on end-to-end encryption to secure user communications. Complying with Chat Control could force them to weaken their encryption protocols or implement client-side scanning, conflicting with their core privacy principles.

• Operational Decisions: Some platforms may choose to limit their services in the EU or cease operations altogether rather than compromise on encryption. Signal, for instance, has indicated that it would prefer to withdraw from European markets than undermine its security features.

Potential Blocking or Limiting of Services

• Regulatory Enforcement: Messaging services that do not comply with Chat Control regulations could face fines, legal action, or even be blocked within the EU.

• Access Restrictions: Users in Europe might find certain services unavailable or limited in functionality if providers decide not to meet the regulatory requirements.

Effects on Smaller Providers

• Resource Constraints: Smaller messaging services and startups may lack the resources to implement the required scanning technologies, leading to increased operational costs or forcing them out of the market.

• Innovation Stifling: The added regulatory burden could deter new entrants, reducing competition and innovation in the messaging service sector.

User Experience and Trust

• Privacy Concerns: Users may lose trust in messaging platforms if they know their communications are subject to scanning, leading to a decline in user engagement.

• Migration to Unregulated Platforms: There is a risk that users might shift to less secure or unregulated services, including those operated outside the EU or on the dark web, potentially exposing them to greater risks.

Technical and Security Implications

• Increased Vulnerabilities: Modifying encryption protocols to comply with Chat Control could introduce security flaws, making platforms more susceptible to hacking and data breaches.

• Global Security Risks: Changes made to accommodate EU regulations might affect the global user base of these services, extending security risks beyond European borders.

Impact on Businesses and Professional Communications

• Confidentiality Issues: Businesses that rely on secure messaging for sensitive communications may face challenges in ensuring confidentiality, affecting sectors like finance, healthcare, and legal services.

• Compliance Complexity: Companies operating internationally will need to navigate a complex landscape of differing regulations, increasing administrative burdens.

Economic Consequences

• Market Fragmentation: Divergent regulations could lead to a fragmented market, with different versions of services for different regions.

• Loss of Revenue: Messaging services might experience reduced revenue due to decreased user trust and engagement or the costs associated with compliance.

Responses from Service Providers

• Legal Challenges: Companies might pursue legal action against the regulations, citing conflicts with privacy laws and user rights.

• Policy Advocacy: Service providers may increase lobbying efforts to influence policy decisions and promote alternatives to Chat Control.

Possible Adaptations

• Technological Innovation: Some providers might invest in developing new technologies that can detect illegal content without compromising encryption, though the feasibility remains uncertain.

• Transparency Measures: To maintain user trust, companies might enhance transparency about how data is handled and what measures are in place to protect privacy.

The potential consequences of Chat Control for messaging services are profound, affecting not only the companies that provide these services but also the users who rely on them daily. The balance between complying with legal requirements and maintaining user privacy and security presents a significant challenge that could reshape the digital communication landscape.

---

What Happens Next? The Future of Chat Control

The future of Chat Control remains uncertain as the debate continues among EU member states, policymakers, technology companies, and civil society organizations. Several factors will influence the outcome of this contentious proposal, each carrying significant implications for digital privacy, security, and the regulatory environment within the European Union.

Current Status of Legislation

• Ongoing Negotiations: The proposed Chat Control measures are still under discussion within the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union. Amendments and revisions are being considered in response to the feedback from various stakeholders.

• Timeline: While there is no fixed date for the final decision, the EU aims to reach a consensus to implement effective measures against online crime without undue delay.

Key Influencing Factors

1. Legal Challenges and Compliance with EU Law

• Fundamental Rights Assessment: The proposals must be evaluated against the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, ensuring that any measures comply with rights to privacy, data protection, and freedom of expression.

• Court Scrutiny: Potential legal challenges could arise, leading to scrutiny by the European Court of Justice (ECJ), which may impact the feasibility and legality of Chat Control.

2. Technological Feasibility

• Development of Privacy-Preserving Technologies: Research into methods that can detect illegal content without compromising encryption is ongoing. Advances in this area could provide alternative solutions acceptable to both privacy advocates and security agencies.

• Implementation Challenges: The practical aspects of deploying scanning technologies across various platforms and services remain complex, and technical hurdles could delay or alter the proposed measures.

3. Political Dynamics

• Member State Positions: The differing stances of EU countries, such as Germany's opposition, play a significant role in shaping the final outcome. Consensus among member states is crucial for adopting EU-wide regulations.

• Public Opinion and Advocacy: Growing awareness and activism around digital privacy can influence policymakers. Public campaigns and lobbying efforts may sway decisions in favor of stronger privacy protections.

4. Industry Responses

• Negotiations with Service Providers: Ongoing dialogues between EU authorities and technology companies may lead to compromises or collaborative efforts to address concerns without fully implementing Chat Control as initially proposed.

• Potential for Self-Regulation: Messaging services might propose self-regulatory measures to combat illegal content, aiming to demonstrate effectiveness without the need for mandatory scanning.

Possible Scenarios

Optimistic Outcome:

• Balanced Regulation: A revised proposal emerges that effectively addresses security concerns while upholding strong encryption and privacy rights, possibly through innovative technologies or targeted measures with robust oversight.

Pessimistic Outcome:

• Adoption of Strict Measures: Chat Control is implemented as initially proposed, leading to weakened encryption, reduced privacy, and potential withdrawal of services like Signal from the EU market.

Middle Ground:

• Incremental Implementation: Partial measures are adopted, focusing on voluntary cooperation with service providers and emphasizing transparency and user consent, with ongoing evaluations to assess effectiveness and impact.

How to Stay Informed and Protect Your Privacy

• Follow Reputable Sources: Keep up with news from reliable outlets, official EU communications, and statements from privacy organizations to stay informed about developments.

• Engage in the Dialogue: Participate in public consultations, sign petitions, or contact representatives to express your views on Chat Control and digital privacy.

• Utilize Secure Practices: Regardless of legislative outcomes, adopting good digital hygiene—such as using strong passwords and being cautious with personal information—can enhance your online security.

The Global Perspective

• International Implications: The EU's decision may influence global policies on encryption and surveillance, setting precedents that other countries might follow or react against.

• Collaboration Opportunities: International cooperation on developing solutions that protect both security and privacy could emerge, fostering a more unified approach to addressing online threats.

Looking Ahead

The future of Chat Control is a critical issue that underscores the challenges of governing in the digital age. Balancing the need for security with the protection of fundamental rights is a complex task that requires careful consideration, open dialogue, and collaboration among all stakeholders.

As the situation evolves, staying informed and engaged is essential. The decisions made in the coming months will shape the digital landscape for years to come, affecting how we communicate, conduct business, and exercise our rights in an increasingly connected world.

---

Conclusion

The debate over Chat Control highlights a fundamental challenge in our increasingly digital world: how to protect society from genuine threats without eroding the very rights and freedoms that define it. While the intention to safeguard children and prevent crime is undeniably important, the means of achieving this through intrusive surveillance measures raise critical concerns.

Privacy is not just a personal preference but a cornerstone of democratic societies. End-to-end encryption has become an essential tool for ensuring that our personal conversations, professional communications, and sensitive data remain secure from unwanted intrusion. Weakening these protections could expose individuals and organizations to risks that far outweigh the proposed benefits.

The potential consequences of implementing Chat Control are far-reaching:

• Erosion of Trust: Users may lose confidence in digital platforms, impacting how we communicate and conduct business online.
• Security Vulnerabilities: Introducing backdoors or weakening encryption can make systems more susceptible to cyberattacks.
• Stifling Innovation: Regulatory burdens may hinder technological advancement and competitiveness in the tech industry.
• Global Implications: The EU's decisions could set precedents that influence digital policies worldwide, for better or worse.

As citizens, it's crucial to stay informed about these developments. Engage in conversations, reach out to your representatives, and advocate for solutions that respect both security needs and fundamental rights. Technology and policy can evolve together to address challenges without compromising core values.

The future of Chat Control is not yet decided, and public input can make a significant difference. By promoting open dialogue, supporting privacy-preserving innovations, and emphasizing the importance of human rights in legislation, we can work towards a digital landscape that is both safe and free.

In a world where digital communication is integral to daily life, striking the right balance between security and privacy is more important than ever. The choices made today will shape the digital environment for generations to come, determining not just how we communicate, but how we live and interact in an interconnected world.

---

Thank you for reading this article. We hope it has provided you with a clear understanding of Chat Control and its potential impact on your privacy and digital rights. Stay informed, stay engaged, and let's work together towards a secure and open digital future.

Read more:

• https://www.patrick-breyer.de/en/posts/chat-control/
• https://www.patrick-breyer.de/en/new-eu-push-for-chat-control-will-messenger-services-be-blocked-in-europe/
• https://edri.org/our-work/dutch-decision-puts-brakes-on-chat-control/
• https://signal.org/blog/pdfs/ndss-keynote.pdf
• https://tuta.com/blog/germany-stop-chat-control
• https://cointelegraph.com/news/signal-president-slams-revised-eu-encryption-proposal
• https://mullvad.net/en/why-privacy-matters

@ 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.

@ 9673b322:1b75ee9e

Section 1.10.32 of "de Finibus Bonorum et Malorum", written by Cicero in 45 BC

"Sed ut perspiciatis unde omnis iste natus error sit voluptatem accusantium doloremque laudantium, totam rem aperiam, eaque ipsa quae ab illo inventore veritatis et quasi architecto beatae vitae dicta sunt explicabo. Nemo enim ipsam voluptatem quia voluptas sit aspernatur aut odit aut fugit, sed quia consequuntur magni dolores eos qui ratione voluptatem sequi nesciunt. Neque porro quisquam est, qui dolorem ipsum quia dolor sit amet, consectetur, adipisci velit, sed quia non numquam eius modi tempora incidunt ut labore et dolore magnam aliquam quaerat voluptatem. Ut enim ad minima veniam, quis nostrum exercitationem ullam corporis suscipit laboriosam, nisi ut aliquid ex ea commodi consequatur? Quis autem vel eum iure reprehenderit qui in ea voluptate velit esse quam nihil molestiae consequatur, vel illum qui dolorem eum fugiat quo voluptas nulla pariatur?"

This has some inline code some actual code var i =0

```typescript getAuthor: async function getAuthor(pubKey: string): Promise {

if (!this.ndkStore.initialized) await this.ndkStore.initialize()

let user: NDKUser = this.ndkStore.ndk.getUser({  
    pubkey: pubKey,  
})  
if (user !== undefined) {  
    if (user.profile === undefined) {  
        await user.fetchProfile()  
        return mapUserToProfile(user)  
    }  
}  
return null;

},

```

@ 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.

@ 4ba8e86d:89d32de4

O que é Cwtch? Cwtch (/kʊtʃ/ - uma palavra galesa que pode ser traduzida aproximadamente como “um abraço que cria um lugar seguro”) é um protocolo de mensagens multipartidário descentralizado, que preserva a privacidade, que pode ser usado para construir aplicativos resistentes a metadados.

Como posso pronunciar Cwtch? Como "kutch", para rimar com "butch".

Descentralizado e Aberto : Não existe “serviço Cwtch” ou “rede Cwtch”. Os participantes do Cwtch podem hospedar seus próprios espaços seguros ou emprestar sua infraestrutura para outras pessoas que buscam um espaço seguro. O protocolo Cwtch é aberto e qualquer pessoa é livre para criar bots, serviços e interfaces de usuário e integrar e interagir com o Cwtch.

Preservação de privacidade : toda a comunicação no Cwtch é criptografada de ponta a ponta e ocorre nos serviços cebola Tor v3.

Resistente a metadados : O Cwtch foi projetado de forma que nenhuma informação seja trocada ou disponibilizada a ninguém sem seu consentimento explícito, incluindo mensagens durante a transmissão e metadados de protocolo

Uma breve história do bate-papo resistente a metadados Nos últimos anos, a conscientização pública sobre a necessidade e os benefícios das soluções criptografadas de ponta a ponta aumentou com aplicativos como Signal , Whatsapp e Wire. que agora fornecem aos usuários comunicações seguras.

No entanto, essas ferramentas exigem vários níveis de exposição de metadados para funcionar, e muitos desses metadados podem ser usados ​​para obter detalhes sobre como e por que uma pessoa está usando uma ferramenta para se comunicar.

Uma ferramenta que buscou reduzir metadados é o Ricochet lançado pela primeira vez em 2014. Ricochet usou os serviços cebola Tor v2 para fornecer comunicação criptografada segura de ponta a ponta e para proteger os metadados das comunicações.

Não havia servidores centralizados que auxiliassem no roteamento das conversas do Ricochet. Ninguém além das partes envolvidas em uma conversa poderia saber que tal conversa está ocorrendo.

Ricochet tinha limitações; não havia suporte para vários dispositivos, nem existe um mecanismo para suportar a comunicação em grupo ou para um usuário enviar mensagens enquanto um contato está offline.

Isto tornou a adoção do Ricochet uma proposta difícil; mesmo aqueles em ambientes que seriam melhor atendidos pela resistência aos metadados, sem saber que ela existe.

Além disso, qualquer solução para comunicação descentralizada e resistente a metadados enfrenta problemas fundamentais quando se trata de eficiência, privacidade e segurança de grupo conforme definido pelo consenso e consistência da transcrição.

Alternativas modernas ao Ricochet incluem Briar , Zbay e Ricochet Refresh - cada ferramenta procura otimizar para um conjunto diferente de compensações, por exemplo, Briar procura permitir que as pessoas se comuniquem mesmo quando a infraestrutura de rede subjacente está inoperante, ao mesmo tempo que fornece resistência à vigilância de metadados.

O projeto Cwtch começou em 2017 como um protocolo de extensão para Ricochet, fornecendo conversas em grupo por meio de servidores não confiáveis, com o objetivo de permitir aplicativos descentralizados e resistentes a metadados como listas compartilhadas e quadros de avisos.

Uma versão alfa do Cwtch foi lançada em fevereiro de 2019 e, desde então, a equipe do Cwtch dirigida pela OPEN PRIVACY RESEARCH SOCIETY conduziu pesquisa e desenvolvimento em cwtch e nos protocolos, bibliotecas e espaços de problemas subjacentes.

Modelo de Risco.

Sabe-se que os metadados de comunicações são explorados por vários adversários para minar a segurança dos sistemas, para rastrear vítimas e para realizar análises de redes sociais em grande escala para alimentar a vigilância em massa. As ferramentas resistentes a metadados estão em sua infância e faltam pesquisas sobre a construção e a experiência do usuário de tais ferramentas.

https://nostrcheck.me/media/public/nostrcheck.me_9475702740746681051707662826.webp

O Cwtch foi originalmente concebido como uma extensão do protocolo Ricochet resistente a metadados para suportar comunicações assíncronas de grupos multiponto por meio do uso de infraestrutura anônima, descartável e não confiável.

Desde então, o Cwtch evoluiu para um protocolo próprio. Esta seção descreverá os vários riscos conhecidos que o Cwtch tenta mitigar e será fortemente referenciado no restante do documento ao discutir os vários subcomponentes da Arquitetura Cwtch.

Modelo de ameaça.

É importante identificar e compreender que os metadados são omnipresentes nos protocolos de comunicação; é de facto necessário que tais protocolos funcionem de forma eficiente e em escala. No entanto, as informações que são úteis para facilitar peers e servidores também são altamente relevantes para adversários que desejam explorar tais informações.

Para a definição do nosso problema, assumiremos que o conteúdo de uma comunicação é criptografado de tal forma que um adversário é praticamente incapaz de quebrá-lo veja tapir e cwtch para detalhes sobre a criptografia que usamos, e como tal nos concentraremos em o contexto para os metadados de comunicação.

Procuramos proteger os seguintes contextos de comunicação:

• Quem está envolvido em uma comunicação? Pode ser possível identificar pessoas ou simplesmente identificadores de dispositivos ou redes. Por exemplo, “esta comunicação envolve Alice, uma jornalista, e Bob, um funcionário público”.

• Onde estão os participantes da conversa? Por exemplo, “durante esta comunicação, Alice estava na França e Bob estava no Canadá”.

• Quando ocorreu uma conversa? O momento e a duração da comunicação podem revelar muito sobre a natureza de uma chamada, por exemplo, “Bob, um funcionário público, conversou com Alice ao telefone por uma hora ontem à noite. Esta é a primeira vez que eles se comunicam.” *Como a conversa foi mediada? O fato de uma conversa ter ocorrido por meio de um e-mail criptografado ou não criptografado pode fornecer informações úteis. Por exemplo, “Alice enviou um e-mail criptografado para Bob ontem, enquanto eles normalmente enviam apenas e-mails de texto simples um para o outro”.

• Sobre o que é a conversa? Mesmo que o conteúdo da comunicação seja criptografado, às vezes é possível derivar um contexto provável de uma conversa sem saber exatamente o que é dito, por exemplo, “uma pessoa ligou para uma pizzaria na hora do jantar” ou “alguém ligou para um número conhecido de linha direta de suicídio na hora do jantar”. 3 horas da manhã."

Além das conversas individuais, também procuramos defender-nos contra ataques de correlação de contexto, através dos quais múltiplas conversas são analisadas para obter informações de nível superior:

• Relacionamentos: Descobrir relações sociais entre um par de entidades analisando a frequência e a duração de suas comunicações durante um período de tempo. Por exemplo, Carol e Eve ligam uma para a outra todos os dias durante várias horas seguidas.

• Cliques: Descobrir relações sociais entre um grupo de entidades que interagem entre si. Por exemplo, Alice, Bob e Eva se comunicam entre si.

• Grupos vagamente conectados e indivíduos-ponte: descobrir grupos que se comunicam entre si através de intermediários, analisando cadeias de comunicação (por exemplo, toda vez que Alice fala com Bob, ela fala com Carol quase imediatamente depois; Bob e Carol nunca se comunicam).

• Padrão de Vida: Descobrir quais comunicações são cíclicas e previsíveis. Por exemplo, Alice liga para Eve toda segunda-feira à noite por cerca de uma hora. Ataques Ativos

Ataques de deturpação.

O Cwtch não fornece registro global de nomes de exibição e, como tal, as pessoas que usam o Cwtch são mais vulneráveis ​​a ataques baseados em declarações falsas, ou seja, pessoas que fingem ser outras pessoas:

O fluxo básico de um desses ataques é o seguinte, embora também existam outros fluxos:

•Alice tem um amigo chamado Bob e outro chamado Eve

• Eve descobre que Alice tem um amigo chamado Bob

• Eve cria milhares de novas contas para encontrar uma que tenha uma imagem/chave pública semelhante à de Bob (não será idêntica, mas pode enganar alguém por alguns minutos)

• Eve chama essa nova conta de "Eve New Account" e adiciona Alice como amiga.

• Eve então muda seu nome em "Eve New Account" para "Bob"

• Alice envia mensagens destinadas a "Bob" para a conta falsa de Bob de Eve Como os ataques de declarações falsas são inerentemente uma questão de confiança e verificação, a única maneira absoluta de evitá-los é os usuários validarem absolutamente a chave pública. Obviamente, isso não é o ideal e, em muitos casos, simplesmente não acontecerá .

Como tal, pretendemos fornecer algumas dicas de experiência do usuário na interface do usuário para orientar as pessoas na tomada de decisões sobre confiar em contas e/ou distinguir contas que possam estar tentando se representar como outros usuários.

Uma nota sobre ataques físicos A Cwtch não considera ataques que exijam acesso físico (ou equivalente) à máquina do usuário como praticamente defensáveis. No entanto, no interesse de uma boa engenharia de segurança, ao longo deste documento ainda nos referiremos a ataques ou condições que exigem tal privilégio e indicaremos onde quaisquer mitigações que implementámos falharão.

Um perfil Cwtch.

Os usuários podem criar um ou mais perfis Cwtch. Cada perfil gera um par de chaves ed25519 aleatório compatível com Tor.

Além do material criptográfico, um perfil também contém uma lista de Contatos (outras chaves públicas do perfil Cwtch + dados associados sobre esse perfil, como apelido e (opcionalmente) mensagens históricas), uma lista de Grupos (contendo o material criptográfico do grupo, além de outros dados associados, como apelido do grupo e mensagens históricas).

Conversões entre duas partes: ponto a ponto

https://nostrcheck.me/media/public/nostrcheck.me_2186338207587396891707662879.webp

Para que duas partes participem de uma conversa ponto a ponto, ambas devem estar on-line, mas apenas uma precisa estar acessível por meio do serviço Onion. Por uma questão de clareza, muitas vezes rotulamos uma parte como “ponto de entrada” (aquele que hospeda o serviço cebola) e a outra parte como “ponto de saída” (aquele que se conecta ao serviço cebola).

Após a conexão, ambas as partes adotam um protocolo de autenticação que:

• Afirma que cada parte tem acesso à chave privada associada à sua identidade pública.

• Gera uma chave de sessão efêmera usada para criptografar todas as comunicações futuras durante a sessão.

Esta troca (documentada com mais detalhes no protocolo de autenticação ) é negável offline , ou seja, é possível para qualquer parte falsificar transcrições desta troca de protocolo após o fato e, como tal - após o fato - é impossível provar definitivamente que a troca aconteceu de forma alguma.

Após o protocolo de autenticação, as duas partes podem trocar mensagens livremente.

Conversas em Grupo e Comunicação Ponto a Servidor

Ao iniciar uma conversa em grupo, é gerada uma chave aleatória para o grupo, conhecida como Group Key. Todas as comunicações do grupo são criptografadas usando esta chave. Além disso, o criador do grupo escolhe um servidor Cwtch para hospedar o grupo. Um convite é gerado, incluindo o Group Key, o servidor do grupo e a chave do grupo, para ser enviado aos potenciais membros.

Para enviar uma mensagem ao grupo, um perfil se conecta ao servidor do grupo e criptografa a mensagem usando a Group Key, gerando também uma assinatura sobre o Group ID, o servidor do grupo e a mensagem. Para receber mensagens do grupo, um perfil se conecta ao servidor e baixa as mensagens, tentando descriptografá-las usando a Group Key e verificando a assinatura.

Detalhamento do Ecossistema de Componentes

O Cwtch é composto por várias bibliotecas de componentes menores, cada uma desempenhando um papel específico. Algumas dessas bibliotecas incluem:

• abertoprivacidade/conectividade: Abstração de rede ACN, atualmente suportando apenas Tor.
• cwtch.im/tapir: Biblioteca para construção de aplicativos p2p em sistemas de comunicação anônimos.
• cwtch.im/cwtch: Biblioteca principal para implementação do protocolo/sistema Cwtch.
• cwtch.im/libcwtch-go: Fornece ligações C para Cwtch para uso em implementações de UI.

TAPIR: Uma Visão Detalhada

Projetado para substituir os antigos canais de ricochete baseados em protobuf, o Tapir fornece uma estrutura para a construção de aplicativos anônimos.

Está dividido em várias camadas:

• Identidade - Um par de chaves ed25519, necessário para estabelecer um serviço cebola Tor v3 e usado para manter uma identidade criptográfica consistente para um par.

• Conexões – O protocolo de rede bruto que conecta dois pares. Até agora, as conexões são definidas apenas através do Tor v3 Onion Services.

• Aplicativos - As diversas lógicas que permitem um determinado fluxo de informações em uma conexão. Os exemplos incluem transcrições criptográficas compartilhadas, autenticação, proteção contra spam e serviços baseados em tokens. Os aplicativos fornecem recursos que podem ser referenciados por outros aplicativos para determinar se um determinado peer tem a capacidade de usar um determinado aplicativo hospedado.

• Pilhas de aplicativos - Um mecanismo para conectar mais de um aplicativo, por exemplo, a autenticação depende de uma transcrição criptográfica compartilhada e o aplicativo peer cwtch principal é baseado no aplicativo de autenticação.

Identidade.

Um par de chaves ed25519, necessário para estabelecer um serviço cebola Tor v3 e usado para manter uma identidade criptográfica consistente para um peer.

InitializeIdentity - de um par de chaves conhecido e persistente:i,I

InitializeEphemeralIdentity - de um par de chaves aleatório: ie,Ie

Aplicativos de transcrição.

Inicializa uma transcrição criptográfica baseada em Merlin que pode ser usada como base de protocolos baseados em compromisso de nível superior

O aplicativo de transcrição entrará em pânico se um aplicativo tentar substituir uma transcrição existente por uma nova (aplicando a regra de que uma sessão é baseada em uma e apenas uma transcrição).

Merlin é uma construção de transcrição baseada em STROBE para provas de conhecimento zero. Ele automatiza a transformação Fiat-Shamir, para que, usando Merlin, protocolos não interativos possam ser implementados como se fossem interativos.

Isto é significativamente mais fácil e menos sujeito a erros do que realizar a transformação manualmente e, além disso, também fornece suporte natural para:

• protocolos multi-round com fases alternadas de commit e desafio;

• separação natural de domínios, garantindo que os desafios estejam vinculados às afirmações a serem provadas;

• enquadramento automático de mensagens, evitando codificação ambígua de dados de compromisso;

• e composição do protocolo, usando uma transcrição comum para vários protocolos.

Finalmente, o Merlin também fornece um gerador de números aleatórios baseado em transcrição como defesa profunda contra ataques de entropia ruim (como reutilização de nonce ou preconceito em muitas provas). Este RNG fornece aleatoriedade sintética derivada de toda a transcrição pública, bem como dos dados da testemunha do provador e uma entrada auxiliar de um RNG externo.

Conectividade Cwtch faz uso do Tor Onion Services (v3) para todas as comunicações entre nós.

Fornecemos o pacote openprivacy/connectivity para gerenciar o daemon Tor e configurar e desmontar serviços cebola através do Tor.

Criptografia e armazenamento de perfil.

Os perfis são armazenados localmente no disco e criptografados usando uma chave derivada de uma senha conhecida pelo usuário (via pbkdf2).

Observe que, uma vez criptografado e armazenado em disco, a única maneira de recuperar um perfil é recuperando a senha - como tal, não é possível fornecer uma lista completa de perfis aos quais um usuário pode ter acesso até inserir uma senha.

Perfis não criptografados e a senha padrão Para lidar com perfis "não criptografados" (ou seja, que não exigem senha para serem abertos), atualmente criamos um perfil com uma senha codificada de fato .

Isso não é o ideal, preferiríamos confiar no material de chave fornecido pelo sistema operacional, de modo que o perfil fosse vinculado a um dispositivo específico, mas esses recursos são atualmente uma colcha de retalhos - também notamos, ao criar um perfil não criptografado, pessoas que usam Cwtch estão explicitamente optando pelo risco de que alguém com acesso ao sistema de arquivos possa descriptografar seu perfil.

Vulnerabilidades Relacionadas a Imagens e Entrada de Dados

Imagens Maliciosas

O Cwtch enfrenta desafios na renderização de imagens, com o Flutter utilizando Skia, embora o código subjacente não seja totalmente seguro para a memória.

Realizamos testes de fuzzing nos componentes Cwtch e encontramos um bug de travamento causado por um arquivo GIF malformado, levando a falhas no kernel. Para mitigar isso, adotamos a política de sempre habilitar cacheWidth e/ou cacheHeight máximo para widgets de imagem.

Identificamos o risco de imagens maliciosas serem renderizadas de forma diferente em diferentes plataformas, como evidenciado por um bug no analisador PNG da Apple.

Riscos de Entrada de Dados

Um risco significativo é a interceptação de conteúdo ou metadados por meio de um Input Method Editor (IME) em dispositivos móveis. Mesmo aplicativos IME padrão podem expor dados por meio de sincronização na nuvem, tradução online ou dicionários pessoais.

Implementamos medidas de mitigação, como enableIMEPersonalizedLearning: false no Cwtch 1.2, mas a solução completa requer ações em nível de sistema operacional e é um desafio contínuo para a segurança móvel.

Servidor Cwtch.

O objetivo do protocolo Cwtch é permitir a comunicação em grupo através de infraestrutura não confiável .

Ao contrário dos esquemas baseados em retransmissão, onde os grupos atribuem um líder, um conjunto de líderes ou um servidor confiável de terceiros para garantir que cada membro do grupo possa enviar e receber mensagens em tempo hábil (mesmo que os membros estejam offline) - infraestrutura não confiável tem o objetivo de realizar essas propriedades sem a suposição de confiança.

O artigo original do Cwtch definia um conjunto de propriedades que se esperava que os servidores Cwtch fornecessem:

• O Cwtch Server pode ser usado por vários grupos ou apenas um.

• Um servidor Cwtch, sem a colaboração de um membro do grupo, nunca deve aprender a identidade dos participantes de um grupo.

• Um servidor Cwtch nunca deve aprender o conteúdo de qualquer comunicação.

• Um servidor Cwtch nunca deve ser capaz de distinguir mensagens como pertencentes a um grupo específico. Observamos aqui que essas propriedades são um superconjunto dos objetivos de design das estruturas de Recuperação de Informações Privadas.

Melhorias na Eficiência e Segurança

Eficiência do Protocolo

Atualmente, apenas um protocolo conhecido, o PIR ingênuo, atende às propriedades desejadas para garantir a privacidade na comunicação do grupo Cwtch. Este método tem um impacto direto na eficiência da largura de banda, especialmente para usuários em dispositivos móveis. Em resposta a isso, estamos ativamente desenvolvendo novos protocolos que permitem negociar garantias de privacidade e eficiência de maneiras diversas.

Os servidores, no momento desta escrita, permitem o download completo de todas as mensagens armazenadas, bem como uma solicitação para baixar mensagens específicas a partir de uma determinada mensagem. Quando os pares ingressam em um grupo em um novo servidor, eles baixam todas as mensagens do servidor inicialmente e, posteriormente, apenas as mensagens novas.

Mitigação de Análise de Metadados

Essa abordagem permite uma análise moderada de metadados, pois o servidor pode enviar novas mensagens para cada perfil suspeito exclusivo e usar essas assinaturas de mensagens exclusivas para rastrear sessões ao longo do tempo. Essa preocupação é mitigada por dois fatores:

1. Os perfis podem atualizar suas conexões a qualquer momento, resultando em uma nova sessão do servidor.
2. Os perfis podem ser "ressincronizados" de um servidor a qualquer momento, resultando em uma nova chamada para baixar todas as mensagens. Isso é comumente usado para buscar mensagens antigas de um grupo.

Embora essas medidas imponham limites ao que o servidor pode inferir, ainda não podemos garantir resistência total aos metadados. Para soluções futuras para esse problema, consulte Niwl.

Proteção contra Pares Maliciosos

Os servidores enfrentam o risco de spam gerado por pares, representando uma ameaça significativa à eficácia do sistema Cwtch. Embora tenhamos implementado um mecanismo de proteção contra spam no protótipo do Cwtch, exigindo que os pares realizem alguma prova de trabalho especificada pelo servidor, reconhecemos que essa não é uma solução robusta na presença de um adversário determinado com recursos significativos.

Pacotes de Chaves

Os servidores Cwtch se identificam por meio de pacotes de chaves assinados, contendo uma lista de chaves necessárias para garantir a segurança e resistência aos metadados na comunicação do grupo Cwtch. Esses pacotes de chaves geralmente incluem três chaves: uma chave pública do serviço Tor v3 Onion para o Token Board, uma chave pública do Tor v3 Onion Service para o Token Service e uma chave pública do Privacy Pass.

Para verificar os pacotes de chaves, os perfis que os importam do servidor utilizam o algoritmo trust-on-first-use (TOFU), verificando a assinatura anexada e a existência de todos os tipos de chave. Se o perfil já tiver importado o pacote de chaves do servidor anteriormente, todas as chaves são consideradas iguais.

Configuração prévia do aplicativo para ativar o Relé do Cwtch.

No Android, a hospedagem de servidor não está habilitada, pois essa opção não está disponível devido às limitações dos dispositivos Android. Essa funcionalidade está reservada apenas para servidores hospedados em desktops.

No Android, a única forma direta de importar uma chave de servidor é através do grupo de teste Cwtch, garantindo assim acesso ao servidor Cwtch.

Primeiro passo é Habilitar a opção de grupo no Cwtch que está em fase de testes. Clique na opção no canto superior direito da tela de configuração e pressione o botão para acessar as configurações do Cwtch.

Você pode alterar o idioma para Português do Brasil.Depois, role para baixo e selecione a opção para ativar os experimentos. Em seguida, ative a opção para habilitar o chat em grupo e a pré-visualização de imagens e fotos de perfil, permitindo que você troque sua foto de perfil.

https://link.storjshare.io/raw/jvss6zxle26jdguwaegtjdixhfka/production/f0ca039733d48895001261ab25c5d2efbaf3bf26e55aad3cce406646f9af9d15.MP4

Próximo passo é Criar um perfil.

Pressione o + botão de ação no canto inferior direito e selecione "Novo perfil" ou aberta no botão + adicionar novo perfil.

• Selecione um nome de exibição

• Selecione se deseja proteger

este perfil e salvo localmente com criptografia forte: Senha: sua conta está protegida de outras pessoas que possam usar este dispositivo

Sem senha: qualquer pessoa que tenha acesso a este dispositivo poderá acessar este perfil.

Preencha sua senha e digite-a novamente

Os perfis são armazenados localmente no disco e criptografados usando uma chave derivada de uma senha conhecida pelo usuário (via pbkdf2).

Observe que, uma vez criptografado e armazenado em disco, a única maneira de recuperar um perfil é recuperando a chave da senha - como tal, não é possível fornecer uma lista completa de perfis aos quais um usuário pode ter acesso até inserir um senha.

https://link.storjshare.io/raw/jxqbqmur2lcqe2eym5thgz4so2ya/production/8f9df1372ec7e659180609afa48be22b12109ae5e1eda9ef1dc05c1325652507.MP4

O próximo passo é adicionar o FuzzBot, que é um bot de testes e de desenvolvimento.

Contato do FuzzBot: 4y2hxlxqzautabituedksnh2ulcgm2coqbure6wvfpg4gi2ci25ta5ad.

Ao enviar o comando "testgroup-invite" para o FuzzBot, você receberá um convite para entrar no Grupo Cwtch Test. Ao ingressar no grupo, você será automaticamente conectado ao servidor Cwtch. Você pode optar por sair do grupo a qualquer momento ou ficar para conversar e tirar dúvidas sobre o aplicativo e outros assuntos. Depois, você pode configurar seu próprio servidor Cwtch, o que é altamente recomendável.

https://link.storjshare.io/raw/jvji25zclkoqcouni5decle7if7a/production/ee3de3540a3e3dca6e6e26d303e12c2ef892a5d7769029275b8b95ffc7468780.MP4

Agora você pode utilizar o aplicativo normalmente. Algumas observações que notei: se houver demora na conexão com outra pessoa, ambas devem estar online. Se ainda assim a conexão não for estabelecida, basta clicar no ícone de reset do Tor para restabelecer a conexão com a outra pessoa.

Uma introdução aos perfis Cwtch.

Com Cwtch você pode criar um ou mais perfis . Cada perfil gera um par de chaves ed25519 aleatório compatível com a Rede Tor.

Este é o identificador que você pode fornecer às pessoas e que elas podem usar para entrar em contato com você via Cwtch.

Cwtch permite criar e gerenciar vários perfis separados. Cada perfil está associado a um par de chaves diferente que inicia um serviço cebola diferente.

Gerenciar Na inicialização, o Cwtch abrirá a tela Gerenciar Perfis. Nessa tela você pode:

• Crie um novo perfil.
• Desbloquear perfis.
• Criptografados existentes.
• Gerenciar perfis carregados.
• Alterando o nome de exibição de um perfil.
• Alterando a senha de um perfil Excluindo um perfil.
• Alterando uma imagem de perfil.

Backup ou exportação de um perfil.

Na tela de gerenciamento de perfil:

1. Selecione o lápis ao lado do perfil que você deseja editar

2. Role para baixo até a parte inferior da tela.

3. Selecione "Exportar perfil"

4. Escolha um local e um nome de arquivo.

5.confirme.

Uma vez confirmado, o Cwtch colocará uma cópia do perfil no local indicado. Este arquivo é criptografado no mesmo nível do perfil.

Este arquivo pode ser importado para outra instância do Cwtch em qualquer dispositivo.

Importando um perfil.

1. Pressione o +botão de ação no canto inferior direito e selecione "Importar perfil"

2. Selecione um arquivo de perfil Cwtch exportado para importar

3. Digite a senha associada ao perfil e confirme.

Uma vez confirmado, o Cwtch tentará descriptografar o arquivo fornecido usando uma chave derivada da senha fornecida. Se for bem-sucedido, o perfil aparecerá na tela Gerenciamento de perfil e estará pronto para uso.

OBSERVAÇÃO Embora um perfil possa ser importado para vários dispositivos, atualmente apenas uma versão de um perfil pode ser usada em todos os dispositivos ao mesmo tempo. As tentativas de usar o mesmo perfil em vários dispositivos podem resultar em problemas de disponibilidade e falhas de mensagens.

Qual é a diferença entre uma conexão ponto a ponto e um grupo cwtch?

As conexões ponto a ponto Cwtch permitem que 2 pessoas troquem mensagens diretamente. As conexões ponto a ponto nos bastidores usam serviços cebola Tor v3 para fornecer uma conexão criptografada e resistente a metadados. Devido a esta conexão direta, ambas as partes precisam estar online ao mesmo tempo para trocar mensagens.

Os Grupos Cwtch permitem que várias partes participem de uma única conversa usando um servidor não confiável (que pode ser fornecido por terceiros ou auto-hospedado). Os operadores de servidores não conseguem saber quantas pessoas estão em um grupo ou o que está sendo discutido. Se vários grupos estiverem hospedados em um único servidor, o servidor não conseguirá saber quais mensagens pertencem a qual grupo sem a conivência de um membro do grupo. Ao contrário das conversas entre pares, as conversas em grupo podem ser conduzidas de forma assíncrona, para que todos num grupo não precisem estar online ao mesmo tempo.

Por que os grupos cwtch são experimentais? Mensagens em grupo resistentes a metadados ainda são um problema em aberto . Embora a versão que fornecemos no Cwtch Beta seja projetada para ser segura e com metadados privados, ela é bastante ineficiente e pode ser mal utilizada. Como tal, aconselhamos cautela ao usá-lo e apenas o fornecemos como um recurso opcional.

Como posso executar meu próprio servidor Cwtch? A implementação de referência para um servidor Cwtch é de código aberto . Qualquer pessoa pode executar um servidor Cwtch, e qualquer pessoa com uma cópia do pacote de chaves públicas do servidor pode hospedar grupos nesse servidor sem que o operador tenha acesso aos metadados relacionados ao grupo .

https://git.openprivacy.ca/cwtch.im/server

https://docs.openprivacy.ca/cwtch-security-handbook/server.html

Como posso desligar o Cwtch? O painel frontal do aplicativo possui um ícone do botão "Shutdown Cwtch" (com um 'X'). Pressionar este botão irá acionar uma caixa de diálogo e, na confirmação, o Cwtch será desligado e todos os perfis serão descarregados.

Suas doações podem fazer a diferença no projeto Cwtch? O Cwtch é um projeto dedicado a construir aplicativos que preservam a privacidade, oferecendo comunicação de grupo resistente a metadados. Além disso, o projeto também desenvolve o Cofre, formulários da web criptografados para ajudar mútua segura. Suas contribuições apoiam iniciativas importantes, como a divulgação de violações de dados médicos em Vancouver e pesquisas sobre a segurança do voto eletrônico na Suíça. Ao doar, você está ajudando a fechar o ciclo, trabalhando com comunidades marginalizadas para identificar e corrigir lacunas de privacidade. Além disso, o projeto trabalha em soluções inovadoras, como a quebra de segredos através da criptografia de limite para proteger sua privacidade durante passagens de fronteira. E também tem a infraestrutura: toda nossa infraestrutura é open source e sem fins lucrativos. Conheça também o Fuzzytags, uma estrutura criptográfica probabilística para marcação resistente a metadados. Sua doação é crucial para continuar o trabalho em prol da privacidade e segurança online. Contribua agora com sua doação

https://openprivacy.ca/donate/

onde você pode fazer sua doação em bitcoin e outras moedas, e saiba mais sobre os projetos. https://openprivacy.ca/work/

Link sobre Cwtch

https://cwtch.im/

https://git.openprivacy.ca/cwtch.im/cwtch

https://docs.cwtch.im/docs/intro

https://docs.openprivacy.ca/cwtch-security-handbook/

Baixar #CwtchDev

cwtch.im/download/

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=im.cwtch.flwtch

@ e7bc35f8:3ed2a7cf

For those who still trust mainstream narratives about war and foreign intervention, the Douma chemical attack story should serve as a wake-up call. The official version of events—that Syrian government forces carried out a chemical attack on civilians in Douma on April 7, 2018—has been thoroughly dismantled by whistleblowers, independent journalists, and even leaked documents from the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW).

Yet, despite mounting evidence, mainstream media and Western governments continue to push the debunked narrative, using it to justify military interventions and sustain the illusion of moral authority. This article revisits the Douma deception, breaking down how the false flag operation unfolded and how the truth was systematically suppressed.

A Timeline of the Manufactured Crisis

April 7, 2018: The Alleged Chemical Attack

On this day, as the Syrian Army engaged terrorist insurgents in Douma, shocking videos surfaced online showing alleged victims of a chemical attack. Without proper investigation, Western leaders seized on the footage as proof of an atrocity committed by the Assad government.

Within 24 hours, then-President Donald Trump tweeted about "Animal Assad" and vowed that Russia and Iran would "pay a big price." This swift response echoed past war propaganda, reminiscent of the lies used to justify the invasion of Iraq.

April 14, 2018: The Bombing of Syria Begins

Less than a week after the alleged attack, the United States, France, and Britain launched coordinated missile strikes on Syrian government targets. Shockingly, these airstrikes were carried out before any independent investigation had even begun.

Meanwhile, on the same day, OPCW investigators arrived in Syria to examine the supposed chemical attack site. In a grotesque display of arrogance, the West had already punished Syria for a crime that hadn't been proven.

April 17, 2018: Doubts Emerge

Veteran journalist Robert Fisk visited Douma and interviewed a local doctor who revealed that the victims shown in viral videos had actually died from suffocation—not chemical weapons. The doctor described how panic and dust inhalation in underground shelters had led to casualties, but no traces of nerve agents like sarin were found.

July 6, 2018: OPCW’s Initial Report Undermines the Official Story

The OPCW released its interim findings, confirming that:

No organophosphorus nerve agents or their degradation products were detected, either in the environmental samples or in plasma samples from the alleged casualties.

And while:

Various chlorinated organic chemicals were found in samples from Locations 2 and 4, along with residues of explosive

the report makes no mention of the concentrations or levels of those chemicals. In Addition the "Annex 2" (Open Sources) is blank. In Annex 3 where all chemicals are listed, there is no chemical weapon agent listed.

Despite this, Western media and politicians continued to push the idea that Syria had used chemical weapons.

February–March 2019: Whistleblower Confirms Staged Hospital Footage

In a stunning revelation, BBC producer Riam Dalati tweeted that the viral hospital scene—depicting victims being hosed down—had been staged. This meant that at least part of the so-called evidence was a fabrication.

Shortly after, the OPCW issued its final report. While it acknowledged a lack of sarin,

No organophosphorous nerve agents, their degradation products or synthesis impurities were detected [...] it is not currently possible to precisely link the cause of the signs and symptoms to a specific chemical

it ambiguously suggested that "a toxic chemical containing reactive chlorine" was likely used. This vague wording allowed Western governments to continue their accusations without hard proof.

May 2019: Leaked OPCW Report Exposes a Cover-Up

A leaked engineering assessment by an OPCW sub-team completely contradicted the official findings. It concluded that the two cylinders found at the scene were likely manually placed rather than dropped from aircraft—suggesting the incident was staged.

Instead of addressing this bombshell revelation, OPCW leadership focused on investigating how the leak happened rather than the damning content of the report itself.

October–November 2019: More Whistleblowers Speak Out

On October 15th, 2019, the Courage Foundation "convened a panel of concerned individuals from the fields of disarmament, international law, journalism, military operations, medicine and intelligence in Brussels".

The whistleblower giving an "extensive presentation, including internal emails, text exchanges and suppressed draft reports..." describes "efforts to exclude some inspectors from the investigation whilst thwarting their attempts to raise legitimate concerns, highlight irregular practices or even to express their differing observations and assessments".

The panel "became convinced by the testimony that key information about chemical analyses, toxicology consultations, ballistics studies, and witness testimonies was suppressed, ostensibly to favor a preordained conclusion" and expressed unanimous alarm about "unacceptable practices in the investigation".

Another OPCW whistleblower, referred to as "Alex", a member of this fact finding mission, confirmed that key evidence had been suppressed. He revealed that: "the signs and symptoms of victims were not consistent with poisoning from chlorine". Instead of an attack producing multiple fatalities there had been “a non chemical-related event”.

His findings, which undermined the official narrative, were removed from the final report.

At this point, multiple independent voices—including journalists, scientists, and former OPCW officials—had exposed the Douma deception. But the mainstream media either ignored or actively discredited these revelations.

How the Media and Government Covered It Up

When whistleblowers and journalists challenged the official story, mainstream outlets worked overtime to discredit them. The propaganda network Bellingcat published a weak "debunking" article, which was swiftly dismantled by independent journalist Caitlin Johnstone and veteran columnist Peter Hitchens.

Rather than confronting the facts, the OPCW and its backers dismissed the leaks as unimportant or "Russian disinformation"—a predictable smear tactic used whenever official narratives collapse.

Why This Matters

The Douma deception is not just an academic debate—it had real-world consequences. The false flag attack was used to justify military aggression against Syria, escalating tensions in the Middle East and prolonging unnecessary suffering.

More importantly, it serves as a case study in how governments and media manufacture consent for war. By exposing these propaganda tactics, we can resist manipulation and prevent future conflicts based on lies.

The Douma hoax is just one example of how false narratives are weaponized to justify military interventions. The same playbook has been used time and again—from Iraq’s "Weapons of Mass Destruction" to Libya’s "humanitarian intervention."

If people learn to recognize propaganda before it leads to war, we can disrupt the cycle of deception. The truth is out there—we just need the courage to face it.

@ c4b5369a:b812dbd6

Unidirectional payment channels revisited

Nodeless lightning - Reduce ecash mints custodial risk

---

Sats N Facts

The nostr:npub1yrnuj56rnen08zp2h9h7p74ghgjx6ma39spmpj6w9hzxywutevsst7k5cx unconference has just wrapped up. And what a blast it was. In the heart of northern Thailand, developers, researchers, content creators and more, came together to share ideas on how Bitcoin, Nostr and other free protocols are being used everyday to liberate people.

Not only were stories shared from different community leaders on how embracing bitcoin has empowered them and their communities, but a big goal of the unconference was to bring bitcoin engineers and developers from various domains together in one room, unstructured, chaotic, and let them do their thing.

At first, I thought not having a schedule might be boring, but oh boy was I wrong. There was so much stuff going on, it was hard to choose which session I would have to miss!

Luke's Spillman channel proposal

One of the sessions I definitely did not want to miss, was nostr:npub1htnhsay5dmq3r72tukdw72pduzfdcja0yylcajuvnc2uklkhxp8qnz3qac s proposal

Ecash mints funded with Spillman channels: The ultimate nodeless Lightning wallet

.

In true unconference fashion, he announced in the main room that the session was about to start, and that the people that are interested should meet him in the whiteboard corner in 10 minutes. The corner was packed, and Luke explained his proposal.

What's a "Spillman channel"?

Essentially when we are talking about Spillman channels, what is meant are unidirectional payment channels (or CLTV-style channels). An unidirectional payment channel means, only one party can send payments, but not receive, and the other party can only receive, but not send. They also expire after a predetermined amount of time, and must be closed.

At first glance, this might look kinda stupid. After all, we have Poon-Dryja channels that are powering the lightning network. They are bi-directional, do not expire, and can be used to shuffle coins back and forth theorethically an unlimited amount of times.

So, why bother with this stupid one-way channel?

Simplicity is king

People that have worked with lightning channels can sing you a song about complexity, state handling and risks about the current state of bidirectional payment channels. Essentially, There are a lot of requirements on both channel parties when it comes to Liveness (being online) and also state handling (continuous backups). In some cases, especially when in the context of end-users wanting to perform payments on their mobile phone, they would appreciate it if there was not so much complexity and overhead involved.

The gist of the idea is to combine unidirectional channels and ecash mints to achieve the following:

A self custodial unidirectional payment channel to an ecash mint, massively reducing the senders liveness and state handling requirements when compared to a lightning channel. Sending payments through the mint will be done through swapping some of the channel balance for ecash tokens. At this point, the user is trusting the mint to honor the redemption of these tokens, while the remaining channel balance remains in self custody. This gives them better controll over their funds than just holding their entire balance custodied in the mint. The ecash tokens can then be redeemed to pay a lightning invoice, just the same as it is done now with normal cashu mints.

So this channel, that has no liveness or state management requirements for the sender, and must have a pre-defined close time, seems to be a perfect fit for the following usecase:

1. A sender receives his salary once a month. He opens a channel that is valid for one month.
2. The sender then can do his daily spending over this channel. He only trusts the mint with the amount for the current outgoing payment while it is swapped for ecash, waiting for redemption.
3. If the sender must receive funds (a refund for example), he can do so into the mints custody, by receiving ecash. He can spend his ecash funds first when doing his next payment, to reduce his custodial exposure.
4. When the channel expires, or runs out of funds, the mint closes the channel.

From a consumer perspective, that just want to receive his salary and make frequent payments afterwards, this usecase seems to make a lot of sense. Obviously from a merchants perspective on the other hand, such a channel doesn't really work. But that's fine, it's not the problem we're trying to solve here.

What do you think of this idea? Be sure to let me know in the comments!

In the next article, we will dive into how such a system can be implemented today, using Bitcoin, Cashu and Lightning. We will also discover how the system can be improved, to make channels non-expiring (A collaborative idea between nostr:npub148jz5r9xujcjpqygk69yl4jqwjqmzgrqly26plktfjy8g4t7xaysj9xhgp and nostr:npub1htnhsay5dmq3r72tukdw72pduzfdcja0yylcajuvnc2uklkhxp8qnz3qac born at nostr:npub1yrnuj56rnen08zp2h9h7p74ghgjx6ma39spmpj6w9hzxywutevsst7k5cx ).

So stay tuned!

@ 3c7dc2c5:805642a8

🧠Quote(s) of the week:

You conflate maximalism with close-mindedness because you believe money is a 'collective hallucination' instead of an emergent solution to a coordination problem. Anilsaidso

'DOGE finding waste and fraud?  Don’t miss the forest for the trees: Any money system that does not fix a unit of currency to a unit of energy is functionally fraudulent, because if a currency is not tied to energy, then creating fiat currency functionally means creating energy by govt fiat, which is a violation of physics, which is fraud.

Once you are in a system that pretends it can create energy by printing currency, it is just a question of “How much fraud occurs until the system collapses?”

You will know the end of that system is near when debt gets high, rates rise, & yet the price of energy-linked neutral assets like gold & BTC rise with rates (instead of falling), as free markets scramble out of printed currency & debt into actual energy linked assets, which is happening - rates up, & yet see gold and BTC.)' - Luke Gromen

🧡Bitcoin news🧡

On the 4th of February:

➡️El Salvador bought another 11 Bitcoin worth over $1.1 million for their strategic Bitcoin reserve.

➡️'Someone just moved 50 Bitcoin worth $5 MILLION that they mined 15 years ago They HODL'ed from $0.10 to $100k. Legend.' - Pete Rizzo

➡️Bitcoin funding rates turn negative — a very rare signal historically followed by massive price surges. Buckle up.

➡️Coinbase urges US to remove barriers for banks to provide Bitcoin and crypto services - BBG

➡️'Forbes recently covered how Bitcoin mining is fast-tracking millions of Ethiopians out of energy poverty. 100% renewable + economically benefitting the country No other technology has been able to do this. Ever.' Daniel Batten / Forbes

➡️President Trump's Crypto Czar David Sacks had a press conference on this day. Here are some notes:

• “will be heavy on Bitcoin and timelines.”

• “Discussion of Sovereign Wealth Fund.”

• “Timelines laid out as to proposed legislation (Lummis) and BSR.”

• “Yes, I expect there to be ‘America First’ rhetoric with SWF and crypto.”

• “reiterating, no $XRP”

Ergo a lot of word salad and not something juuuggggge was happening.

➡️President Bukele Offers To Jail Roger Ver in El Salvador. Bukele: "El Salvador prisons have big cell blocks. It's the perfect place for him" If you don’t get the joke, Study Bitcoin's history in detail. I will give you a hint. Book: The Blocksize War!

➡️'Semler Scientific acquired 871 Bitcoins for $88.5 million and has generated a BTC Yield of 152% since July 1, 2024.  Now holding 3,192 bitcoin.  Just getting started.' - Eric Semler

On the 5th of February:

➡️Bitcoin on track to hit $1.5m by 2030 - Ark Invest

On the 6th of February:

➡️Czech President signed a law removing the capital gains tax on #Bitcoin after 3+ years of holding. Sovereign game theory intensifies. Tick tock, next block! Meanwhile the ECB. 'The ECB just published an interview with Reuters where they contemplate a risk assessment of current FX swap lines if another central bank held Bitcoin reserves. They are literally trying to hinder the Czech National Bank from buying Bitcoin. Bitcoin is winning.' - Andre Dragosch

➡️Former PayPal President: Sell Gold Reserves to Buy Bitcoin "We're the number 1 holder of gold. If you think of Bitcoin as a better version of gold, why not rebalance a portion of that reserve to Bitcoin? There's a lot more growth in Bitcoin in the coming decades."

➡️Whales are buying Bitcoin like never seen before. Billionaires are stacking Bitcoin, front-running governments, pubco’s, and plebs.

➡️IOWA BITCOIN RESERVE BILL HF 246 would allow investment of 5% of public monies in digital assets of $750b+ market cap (i.e. Bitcoin)

➡️Eric Balchunas: Trump to launch "Bitcoin Plus" ETF.

➡️'The power is so cheap in the north of Norway now that the hydropower plants are considering dumping their water in the sea. We need more Bitcoin mining.' -Jaran Mellerud

Great explanation on the topic: https://x.com/GoldIRAChannel/status/1887718777338667369

➡️Great report by Breeze. https://breez.technology/report/

'Bitcoin isn't "just" digital gold, it's an everyday currency. 650M+people reached on Lightning Businesses real-world impact Growing ecosystem driving adoption New use cases unlocked.' - Breeze

Breeze is one of, if not, my favorite self-custodial Lightning Bitcoin payments app.

On the 7th of February:

➡️Utah pulls ahead in the race to create a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve. Utah’s HB230 just became the first state Bitcoin reserve bill to clear a chamber vote, passing the House and heading to the Senate.

➡️ If any public companies are wondering whether Bitcoin is the solution… here’s your answer: Metaplanet’s market cap has been 100X’d (3.50 0%)since adopting Bitcoin as a treasury asset less than one year ago.

➡️Maryland State Delegate Caylin Young introduces the "Strategic Bitcoin Reserve Act of Maryland".

➡️MISSOURI FILES 2ND Bitcoin reserve bill that includes: - 5 YR HODL requirement - State must accept BTC payments - No cap on how much the state can buy 1st bill SB614 is currently in the Senate!

➡️Rep. TJ Roberts introduces a bill to invest up to 10% of state funds in Bitcoin for Kentucky.

➡️BlackRock boosts its stake in MicroStrategy to 5%, now holding 11.2M shares, up from 4.09% in September. Next to that, BlackRock holds $140m in IBIT - their Bitcoin ETF. Per their 13F SEC filing today. Up from $92m in November 2024.

➡️ Tornado Cash founder Alexey Pertsev has been released from prison. Pertsev was found guilty of money laundering in 2024. He is currently preparing an appeal. https://decrypt.co/304723/tornado-cash-developer-alexey-perstev-leaving-prison

On the 8th of February:

➡️Florida is the latest state to introduce a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve. Republican Senator Joe Gruters has introduced a bill proposing the investment of part of the state’s funds in Bitcoin to counter rising inflation.

➡️'FTX will repay 98% of creditors on February 18th. Creditors will receive a total of 119% of their funds lost in US dollar terms on November 11th, 2022. This is the equivalent of only 20% in Bitcoin terms. This is a lesson in self-custody.' -The Bitcoin Therapist

Just a quick reminder: 'Over 5 million Bitcoins are gone. Forever. No keys. No recovery. No second chance. - Satoshi’s wallet: 1M BTC, untouched - Mt. Gox hack: 744K BTC, - Lost key & wallets: ~3.7M BTC - James Howells’ hard drive: 8K BTC, buried Do people even grasp Bitcoin’s scarcity?'- Eli Nagar

➡️MONTANA BITCOIN RESERVE BILL

MT House Bill 429 would authorize up to $50m invested into 'digital assets over $750b market cap' i.e. Bitcoin, by July 15, 2025.

19 States want Bitcoin in their reserves so far, and 27 states are all pro-Bitcoin and Digital Asset Bills. It's just crazy to me what's happening. A few years ago, I couldn't even imagine it would go this fast. Hello, game theory!

➡️PNC, the 8th largest U.S. bank with $325 billion in AUM, has disclosed $67 million in Bitcoin exposure through its 13F filing with the SEC.

On the 9th of February:

➡️Hong Kong officially recognizes Bitcoin as proof of capital for residency applications.

➡️That’s 815,000,000,000,000,000,000 hashes per second securing the world’s largest permissionless monetary network Bitcoin’s hashrate sets a new record high above 810 EH.

➡️University of Austin to buy $5m Bitcoin. "We don’t want to be left behind," says CIO of the university fund.

On the 10th of February:

➡️'Priced in Bitcoin the S&P 500 looks like a meme coin rug pull.' -CarlBMenger

➡️Valid point by Bit Harington: 'It takes years for Bitcoin to finally leave a new 10X price zone and start looking for the next 10X. $1K lasted ~3.5 years. $10K also 3 years. It seems logical to assume that the $100K price zone will also last several years; One of the reasons I don't believe in $1M this cycle.'

➡️Another solo miner has mined an entire Bitcoin block worth $ 300,000. Just sensational.

➡️Michael Saylor's STRATEGY just bought another 7,633 Bitcoin worth $742 million. 'Strategy has added 7,633 Bitcoin to its holdings for ~$742.4 million at an average price of $97,255 per Bitcoin, bringing its total Bitcoin stack to 478,740 BTC. Acquired for ~$31.1 billion at an average of $65,033 per Bitcoin, the company's Bitcoin yield stands at a 4.1% YTD in 2025.' - Saylor

➡️Japan to scrap ban on Bitcoin ETFs and cut taxes on crypto-assets from 55% down to 20%.

💸Traditional Finance / Macro:

On the 3rd of February:

👉🏽'Nvidia stock, falls over -5% at the open as markets react to the beginning of the trade war. The stock is currently down -26% from its all-time high.' - TKL

👉🏽Microsoft shares closed down 6.2% on the worst day since 2022. If only they had listened to Saylor's 3-minute Bitcoin pitch.

On the 4th of February:

👉🏽Alphabet stock, falls over -7% after reporting Q4 2024 earnings.

🏦Banks:

👉🏽Global central banks now hold more Gold than at any point in the past 45 years. Something is brewing. (see for more info in the segment below - on the 9th of February)

🌎Macro/Geopolitics:

Recently I found something interesting.

'Another fantastic open-source dataset is the Global Datahub at Georgetown University. It covers a wide range of topics including:

Geopolitics: Data on military spending, UN voting patterns, indicators of freedom and democracy, trade restrictions, social unrest, property rights, and demographic trends. Trade and Production: Information on trade, energy balances, GDP per capita, and trade patterns.

External Accounts: Current account balances, foreign investment flows, real exchange rates, international reserves, and remittances. Public Finance: Public sector deficits, composition of public debt, country risk, and trends in public spending.

Monetary and Financial: Inflation rates, monetary policy interest rates, exchange rate regimes, availability of credit, corporate bond rates, and amortizations of public and corporate debt.

Other Topics: Data on digital infrastructure, environmental sustainability, and progress toward achieving the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).'

https://globallacdatahub.com/index.html

And none of this wonder data is disaggregated!

On the 4th of February:

👉🏽Germany has become kind of a tutorial in self-immolation. Really! Germany has cut its offshore wind generation capacity target from 50 gigawatts by 2035 to 40 gigawatts by 2034 due to crowded seas causing a "wake effect" that reduces output. The reduced capacity and delays in grid connections may hinder Germany's offshore wind ambitions, including its 2045 goal of 70 gigawatts. Stupidity has no limits. Really… self-inflicted harm…the idiocy of closing nuclear plants.

👉🏽'Local authorities in the UK have spent £141 million of taxpayer money on services for migrants such as PlayStations, yoga and circus skills classes, driving and DJ lessons' — Telegraph Money well spent! And then people wonder why all these people are coming to the West.

On the 5th of February

👉🏽 The Federal Reserve's Reverse Repo Facility hit its lowest inventory in 1,385 days, today. Ergo: The US is borrowing so much debt to fund deficit spending that the RRP has been DEPLETED to a 1,385-day low. Do you know what's coming? QE & money printing will start aggressively when this drains to 0. They may have 10 different names for it but it’s coming.

On the 6th of February:

👉🏽 Secretary of State Marco Rubio just deemed that only 294 USAID staffers are necessary out of 14,000. The entire agency will be imminently reduced from 14,000 to 294 employees. This has to be the biggest mass firing yet.

On the 7th of February:

👉🏽Indian Rupee falling off the cliff as it plunges to its weakest level against the U.S. Dollar in HISTORY!

👉🏽'30 years ago each major US corporation used to have an equivalent in Germany or France, today their competitors are in Asia and Europe is on a happy path into irrelevance. Overregulation, lack of Innovation, and left redistribution mindset have their price. Will it ever change?' -Michael A. Arouet

A shame how Europe, once the epicenter of the Industrial Revolution has self-sabotaged into near irrelevancy. Just to give you one comparison, the total valuation of all European companies combined is already smaller than the 2 biggest US companies. Yikes!

👉🏽United Kingdom's leftist government orders Apple to create a back door allowing access to encrypted data stored by Apple users worldwide in its cloud — WaPo

👉🏽The US consumers expect 4.3% inflation during the next 12 months, UP a massive 1.0 percentage point from January. The 4.3% is the highest since November 2023. 4.3%, the highest since November 2023. This marks a 1.7 percentage point jump over the last 3 months, the largest surge since February 2020.

Moreover, 5-10-year inflation expectations rose to 3.3%, the highest since June 2008, and the estimates were above 3.2%. Meanwhile, consumer sentiment fell to 67.8 points in February, the lowest in 3 months. Inflation is still a major issue. How will Trump and Bessent deal with that side of the trade tariffs?

Meanwhile, one year from now Democrats expect hyperinflation, and Republicans expect deflation.

This chart is hilarious because it just tells you: “If your brain uses politics it's not rational!”

👉🏽There it is: 600K lower across all of 2024, and even more downward revisions coming next February' - ZeroHedge

https://www.zerohedge.com/economics/tomorrows-jobs-report-will-finally-capture-surge-illegal-aliens-lead-another-negative

Oh by the way, in just January, 1 MILLION immigrants (legal and illegal) gained a job. Meanwhile, native-born Americans gained just 8,000. All net jobs gains post-Covid are immigrants. This is why they opened the border.

To make it even more funnier. The December jobs report has been revised HIGHER, showing 307,000 jobs added for the month, up from 256,000. That's the strongest job number since March 2024. Let's wait a couple of months if this still holds. I kinda don't believe job reports anymore, especially after the last 4 years and revisions.

👉🏽Sam Callahan: 'On Wednesday, the Government Accountability Office published its annual report to Congress on the nation's fiscal health and it didn't sugarcoat things.' full report: https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-25-107714.pdf

👉🏽Argentina will have an inflation of 23.2% in 2025, according to the REM published by the BCRA For January they expect month over month of of 2.3%, and they predict that in April monthly inflation will break through the 2% barrier. In 2027 Argentina should have single-digit annual inflation again, something that has not happened since 2006.

Progress under Milei, but let's see if he can manage it. There's still room for improvement.

👉🏽'The UK Labour Government has ordered Apple to create a backdoor in iCloud allowing security services to access your private information. Keir Starmer wants to see your messages. Scary times we live in.' - Basil the Great What is the point of GDPR again?

👉🏽'MASSIVE OPEN AI DATA BREACH? 20 MILLION ACCOUNTS ALLEGEDLY HACKED! A hacker claims to have stolen login details—including emails and passwords—for 20 million OpenAI accounts and is selling them on the dark web. OpenAI says it’s investigating but insists there’s no evidence of a system breach—yet. Cybersecurity experts warn this could lead to identity theft, phishing scams, and even AI-powered cyberattacks.' - Mario Nawfal

Although this breach is yet to be verified by OpenAI, anyone using the tool should update their passwords and credentials, as a precaution. If you haven’t already, switch on multi-factor authentication within OpenAI’s settings, as this should give you another layer of protection even if your password has been compromised.

On the 8th of February:

👉🏽USAID:

'USAID has pushed nearly half a billion dollars ($472.6m) through a secretive US government-financed NGO, "Internews Network" (IN), which has “worked with” 4,291 media outlets, producing in one year 4,799 hours of broadcasts reaching up to 778 million people and "training” over 9000 journalists (2023 figures). IN has also supported social media censorship initiatives.' -WikiLeaks Source: https://x.com/wikileaks/status/1888072129327083979

'USAID sent $40M to a coronavirus scientist at the Wuhan Institute of Virology who became patient zero of COVID-19.' - Financelot

'Bill Gates’ vaccine organization ‘GAVI’ was awarded $4,880,000,000.00 from USAID. Nearly $5 BILLION in taxpayer money to a single organization Two grants are still active; the 4B dollar grant ends Aug 2030. No wonder Gates is speaking out against DOGE dismantling USAID.' - Lindsay Penney

👉🏽Great breakdown of the US deficit by 'Infra':

We are currently running a ~$2.1 trillion deficit. To balance the budget would require cutting about $2T in spending It won’t be possible without significant legislation and the resulting contraction in GDP would be worse than the GFC

Here’s the math:

-Current GDP is $29T, 3Q24 growth at 2.8%

-GDP grew by $1.5T from 1Q23->1Q24

-Current government spending as a % of GDP is 36%

-Current government spending is ~$7.5T (on budget)

-Current tax receipts are 20% of GDP (~$5.5T)

-Current deficit is ~$2T'

Great write-up, full thread: https://x.com/infraa_/status/1888021955686842760

Govt wastes 100% of our tax dollars on bankrupt entitlement programs, forever wars, corporate & social welfare, and other bullshit. Just look at the USAID bit. Nothing stops this train folks. Nothing! Got Bitcoin?

On the 9th of February:

👉🏽It’s estimated that the federal government loses $233 Billion to $521 Billion annually to fraud. Although I don't think fraud is the right word, laundering and corruption fit better.

Half $1 trillion for 40 years equals 20 trillion. So instead of having a $36 trillion deficit, we would have a $16 trillion deficit if our government didn’t steal our money. Again this is not something I made up or found on a sketchy website, here you have the source: https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-105833

The U.S. Government Accountability Office.

Just to give you another example of how fucked up the government operates. This statement is from a 2018 report: The Pentagon spent $1 billion to audit its 2018 financials, and it failed the audit! $1 BILLION!!

Ever heard of anyone spending 1 billion just to audit their financials? The audacity.

👉🏽Gold just hit $2900 for the first time in history. Gold's new all-time high above $2900 as a global physical shortage is about to surpass Covid levels.

'London's Gold Shortage: A Symptom Of Global Economic Anxiety' -ZeroHedge Source: https://www.zerohedge.com/precious-metals/londons-gold-shortage-symptom-global-economic-anxiety

The above statement perfectly matches the collapse in the FEDs Overnight Repo facility chart.

No One Trusts each other's Collateral globally. When the collateral calls come (and they ARE coming) paper coupons ain't gonna cut it.

The big institutions know something we don’t. March 2020 pattern.

🎁If you have made it this far I would like to give you a little gift:

Preston Pysh and Luke Gromen discuss Bitcoin’s Lightning Network, Tether’s USDT integration, and the impact on global payments and traditional banking infrastructure. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8JXdYmllZ4

Credit: I have used multiple sources!

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

Use the code SE3997

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

Do you think this post is helpful to you? If so, please share it and support my work with a zap.

▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃

⭐ Many thanks⭐

Felipe - Bitcoin Friday!

▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃

@ 8e56fde2:bb433b31

Let us introduce you to “DoShit!”: the oracle that three friends created in order to combat creative block. A self-produced card game made possible by the investment of a generous patreon who believed in us from the start, and in empowering people to Do their Shit. 

What is DoShit! ?

DoShit! is a card game that guides you in the process of building a creative life. It’s a self-reflection tool when used individually, and also a great conversation starter when played with friends or strangers.

84 oracle cards that will help you question your fears, your strengths, doubts, excuses…

DoShit! is a great companion to bring along when meeting your friends or potential collaborators. Both individually as well as collectively, the game can become very addictive once you start asking about your projects and aspirations. Sometimes the cards even lay on you hard truths necessary on the journey to self-discovery

The cards are very intuitive to understand accompanied by a language that sparks profound conversations in a lightweight manner.

Learning how to play takes less than 5 minutes and anyone can attempt to interpret the cards without any previous knowledge (even if it may feel scary at first). In fact, the card readings always benefit from people sharing their own interpretation of the cards.

Link to video

Why DoShit! ?

As creators, we are very aware of the struggles of building a creative life and also of how easy it can be to limit ourselves, hide behind excuses, let fear win and quit. Our philosophy in response is “Do Shit”, yes, simply do shit, even if it ends up being shit… The important thing is to do it! Because when you Do Shit the project no longer dies in idea valley. And the more Shit you do the better you get at doing it, shortening the Gap between your expectations and your Shit. 

That is why we created this tool, to accompany every DoShitter in the world on their journey (DoShitters being those who take responsibility for their Shit).

These cards were born at a moment of creative block and search for answers, and we can guarantee this game has helped unstuck many people. It is also a great companion to unleash your creativity and reach beyond your comfort zone!

How did it get started?

The three of us (Mar, Elisabet & Marta) have known each other for years and we’ve always had a shared admiration for each other’s work as well as the desire to do a project together someday.

One afternoon, with no specific expectations, simply wanting to enjoy ourselves without pressure, we started searching for an idea. Elisabet had some blank cards and Mar had been reading about tarot, and the idea simply sparked: we would do an oracle about the creative process with the structure of the Hero’s Journey (a concept that had followed us since we studied film school together) as a backbone. That afternoon, the first prototype of DoShit! was made. 

The artistic process

The 84 unique cards were illustrated by Mar Delmar. 

Each card is created manually with cut paper and gouache, creating first the different pieces that compose each card, and then placing them together in 3D to take the photo that becomes the final illustration. 

The whole process took more than 8 months. Cards were painted and cut up in different locations (Barcelona, Tarragona, Castellar de n'Hug, Porrera y L'Argentera (Catalunya) y Castelo (Galicia)) where Mar attended artistic residencies along with a big box filled with the many octopuses in their envelopes, one for each card… (Video of the process)

Where to buy this awesome Shit?

• You can buy directly from our online store, but depending where you are in the world, shipping costs may showcase the literal cost of supporting small sellers. If you do buy it there use the promo code SATOSHI and get a small discount in return for your generosity <3
• You can also buy it with bitcoin , the best money in the world, in Plebeian Market . Since you'd be using the best money in the world, we shaved off a bit from the price and shipping in comparison to our online store since we appreciate being paid in sound money :D
• You can temporarily buy this Shit on the A****** giant with FREE Shipping depending of your location or prime subscription status, but we are going to be removing our beloved DoShitS from there soon due to our very negative experience with them portrayed in our article that you can find the link to at the bottom.

In any case, if you read this far, THANK YOU.

You can support our Shit by gifting this deck (to someone else, or to yourself :P) , zapping this article or simply sharing it around in the hopes that THE PEOPLE WHO NEED THIS SHIT, FIND THIS SHIT <3

And if you want to know more about this inspiring product, don’t hesitate to get in touch with us.

We wish you the best on you creative adventures!

Join the #artMy

ARTICLE ON OUR HORRID EXPERIENCE TRYING TO MAKE "doShit!" CHEAPER TO GET FOR YOU:

naddr1qvzqqqr4gupzprjklh3rdmxhj60knvpel0uk03vq3kyh4x3dlu2m7pgkcxa5xwe3qq247635g4v553t329e9x4rhvajhwvmrxahhgxv3ddc

@ 7e538978:a5987ab6

Chain Duel, a fast paced PvP game that takes inspiration from the classic snake game and supercharges it with Bitcoin’s Lightning Network. Imagine battling another player for dominance in a race to collect blocks, where the length of your chain isn’t just a visual cue. It represents real, staked satoshis. The player with the most Proof of Work wins, but it’s not just about gameplay; it’s about the seamless integration of the Lightning Network and real-time payments.

But how does Chain Duel manage these instant transactions with such efficiency? That’s where LNbits comes in. LNbits, an open-source wallet and payment infrastructure, handles all in-game payments making it easy for developers to focus on gameplay while LNbits takes care of everything from microtransactions to automated splits for developers and designers. In this article, we’ll dive deep into how Chain Duel leverages LNbits to streamline in-game payments and how other developers can take advantage of this powerful toolset to build the future of Lightning-powered gaming.

Let’s explore how LNbits transforms payment processing and why it’s quickly becoming a must-have for game developers working in the Bitcoin space.

Overview of Chain Duel

Chain Duel is a unique Lightning Network-inspired game that reimagines the classic snake game with a competitive twist, integrating real-time payments. Two players face off in real-time, racing to "catch" blocks and extend their chains. Each block added to the chain represents Proof of Work, and the player with the most Proof of Work wins the duel. The stakes are high, as the game represents satoshis (small units of Bitcoin) as points, with the winner taking home the prize.

The game is designed to be Lightning-native, meaning all payments within Chain Duel are processed through the Lightning Network. This ensures fast payments, reducing latency and making gameplay smooth. With additional features like practice mode, tournaments and highscores, Chain Duel creates an engaging and competitive environment for Bitcoin enthusiasts and gamers alike.

One of the standout aspects of Chain Duel is its deeper integration with the Lightning Network even at a design level. For example, actual Bitcoin blocks can appear on screen during matches, offering bonus points when mined in sync with the game. The game’s current version, still in beta, has already drawn attention within the Bitcoin community, gaining momentum at conferences and with a growing user base through its social networks. With its innovative combination of gaming, the Lightning Network, and competitive play, Chain Duel offers a glimpse into the future of Lightning-based gaming.

How LNbits is Used in Chain Duel

Seamless Integration with LNbits

At the core of Chain Duel’s efficient payment processing is LNbits, which handles in-game transactions smoothly and reliably. Chain Duel uses the LNbits LNURL-pay and LNURL-withdraw extensions to manage payments and rewards between players. Before each match, players send satoshis using LNURL-pay, which generates a static QR code or link for making the payment. LNURL-pay allows users to attach a note to the payment, which Chain Duel creatively uses as a way to insert the player name in-game. The simplicity of LNURL-pay ensures that users can quickly and easily initiate games, with fresh invoices being issued for every game. When players win, LNURL-withdraw enables them to seamlessly pull their earnings from the game, providing a quick payout system.

These extensions make it easy for players to send and receive Bitcoin with minimal latency, fully leveraging the power of the Lightning Network for fast and low-cost payments. The flexibility of LNbits’ tools means that game developers don’t need to worry about building custom payment systems from scratch—they can rely on LNbits to handle all financial transactions with precision.

Lightning Tournaments

Chain Duel tournaments leverage LNbits and its LNURL extensions to create a seamless and efficient experience for players. In Chain Duel tournaments, LNbits plays a crucial role in managing the overall economics. LNbits facilitates the generation of LNURL QR codes that participants can scan to register quickly or withdraw their winnings. LNbits allows Chain Duel to automatically handle multiple registrations through LNURL-pay, enabling players to participate in the tournament without additional steps. The Lightning Network's speed ensures that these payments occur in real-time, reducing wait times and allowing for a smoother flow in-game.

Splitting Payments

LNbits further simplifies revenue-sharing within Chain Duel. This feature allows the game to automatically split the satoshis sent by players into different shares for the game’s developer, designer, and host. Each time a payment is made to join a match, LNbits is used to automattically pay each of the contributors, according to pre-defined rules. This automated process ensures that everyone involved in the development and running of the game gets their fair share without manual intervention or complex bookkeeping.

Nostr Integration

Chain Duel also integrates with Nostr, a decentralized protocol for social interactions. Players can join games using "Zaps", small tips or micropayments sent over the Lightning Network within the Nostr ecosystem. Through NIP-57, which enables Nostr clients to request Zap invoices, players can use LNURL-pay enabled Zaps to register in P2P matches, further enhancing the Chain Duel experience. By using Zaps as a way to register in-game, Chain Duel automates the process of fetching players' identity, creating a more competitive and social experience. Zaps are public on the Nostr network, further expanding Chain Duel's games social reach and community engagement.

Game and Payment Synchronization

One of the key reasons Chain Duel developers chose LNbits is its powerful API that connects directly with the game’s logic. LNbits allows the game to synchronize payments with gameplay in real-time, providing a seamless experience where payments are an integrated part of the gaming mechanics.

With LNbits managing both the payment process and the Lightning Network’s complex infrastructure, Chain Duel developers are free to concentrate on enhancing the competitive and Lightning Network-related aspects of the game. This division of tasks is essential for streamlining development while still providing an innovative in-game payment experience that is deeply integrated with the Bitcoin network.

LNbits proves to be an indispensable tool for Chain Duel, enabling smooth in-game transactions, real-time revenue sharing, and seamless integration with Nostr. For developers looking to build Lightning-powered games, LNbits offers a powerful suite of tools that handle everything from micropayments to payment distribution—ensuring that the game's focus remains on fun and competition rather than complex payment systems.

LNBits facilitating Education and Adoption

This system contributes to educating users on the power of the Lightning Network. Since Chain Duel directly involve real satoshis and LNURL for registration and rewards, players actively experience how Lightning can facilitate fast, cheap, and permissionless payments. By incorporating LNbits into Chain Duel, the game serves as an educational tool that introduces users to the benefits of the Lightning Network. Players gain direct experience using Lightning wallets and LNURL, helping them understand how these tools work in real-world scenarios. The near-instant nature of these payments showcases the power of Lightning in a practical context, highlighting its potential beyond just gaming. Players are encouraged to set up wallets, explore the Lightning ecosystem, and eventually become familiar with Bitcoin and Lightning technology. By integrating LNbits, Chain Duel transforms in-game payments into a learning opportunity, making Bitcoin and Lightning more approachable for users worldwide.

Tools for Developers

LNbits is a versatile, open-source platform designed to simplify and enhance Bitcoin Lightning Network wallet management. For developers, particularly those working on Lightning-native games like Chain Duel, LNbits offers an invaluable set of tools that allow for seamless integration of Lightning payments without the need to build complex custom solutions from scratch. LNbits is built on a modular and extensible architecture, enabling developers to easily add or create functionality suited to their project’s needs.

Extensible Architecture for Customization

At the core of LNbits is a simple yet powerful wallet system that developers can access across multiple devices. What makes LNbits stand out is its extensible nature—everything beyond the core functionality is implemented as an extension. This modular approach allows users to customize their LNbits installation by enabling or building extensions to suit specific use cases. This flexibility is perfect for developers who want to add Lightning-based services to their games or apps without modifying the core codebase.

• Extensions for Every Use Case
  LNbits comes with a wide array of built-in extensions created by contributors, offering various services that can be plugged into your application. Some popular extensions include:
• Faucets: Distribute small amounts of Bitcoin to users for testing or promotional purposes.
• Paylinks: Create shareable links for instant payments.
• Points-of-sale (PoS): Allow users to set up shareable payment terminals.
• Paywalls: Charge users to access content or services.
• Event tickets: Sell tickets for events directly via Lightning payments.
• Games and services: From dice games to jukeboxes, LNbits offers entertaining and functional tools.

These ready-made solutions can be adapted and used in different gaming scenarios, for example in Chain Duel, where LNURL extensions are used for in game payments. The extensibility ensures developers can focus on building engaging gameplay while LNbits handles payment flows.

Developer-Friendly Customization

LNbits isn't just a plug-and-play platform. Developers can extend its functionality even further by creating their own extensions, giving full control over how the wallet system is integrated into their games or apps. The architecture is designed to make it easy for developers to build on top of the platform, adding custom features for specific requirements.

Flexible Funding Source Management

LNbits also offers flexibility in terms of managing funding sources. Developers can easily connect LNbits to various Lightning Network node implementations, enabling seamless transitions between nodes or even different payment systems. This allows developers to switch underlying funding sources with minimal effort, making LNbits adaptable for games that may need to scale quickly or rely on different payment infrastructures over time.

A Lean Core System for Maximum Efficiency

Thanks to its modular architecture, LNbits maintains a lean core system. This reduces complexity and overhead, allowing developers to implement only the features they need. By avoiding bloated software, LNbits ensures faster transactions and less resource consumption, which is crucial in fast-paced environments like Chain Duel where speed and efficiency are paramount.

LNbits is designed with developers in mind, offering a suite of tools and a flexible infrastructure that makes integrating Bitcoin payments easy. Whether you’re developing games, apps, or any service that requires Lightning Network transactions, LNbits is a powerful, open-source solution that can be adapted to fit your project.

Conclusion

Chain Duel stands at the forefront of Lightning-powered gaming, combining the excitement of competitive PvP with the speed and efficiency of the Lightning Network. With LNbits handling all in-game payments, from microtransactions to automated revenue splits, developers can focus entirely on crafting an engaging gaming experience. LNbits’ powerful API and extensions make it easy to manage real-time payments, removing the complexity of building payment infrastructure from scratch.

LNbits isn’t just a payment tool — it’s a flexible, developer-friendly platform that can be adapted to any gaming model. Whether you're developing a fast-paced PvP game like Chain Duel or any project requiring seamless Lightning Network integration, LNbits provides the ideal solution for handling instant payments with minimal overhead.

For developers interested in pushing the boundaries of Lightning-powered gaming, Chain Duel is a great example of how LNbits can enhance your game, letting you focus on the fun while LNbits manages real-time transactions.

Find out more

Curious about how Lightning Network payments can power your next game? Explore the following:

• Learn more about Chain Duel: Chain Duel
• Learn how LNbits can simplify payment handling in your project: LNbits
• Dive into decentralized communication with Nostr: Nostr

@ 4f1a1249:66f0ac3a

68bet là một nền tảng kỹ thuật số hiện đại, mang đến cho người dùng một trải nghiệm mượt mà, nhanh chóng và tiện lợi. Với giao diện thiết kế tối ưu, dễ sử dụng, 68bet giúp người dùng dễ dàng thao tác và tiếp cận các tính năng quan trọng một cách nhanh chóng. Hệ thống được tối ưu hóa để hoạt động ổn định trên nhiều thiết bị, từ máy tính bàn đến điện thoại di động, đảm bảo sự linh hoạt và thuận tiện tối đa. Đặc biệt, nền tảng này liên tục cập nhật những công nghệ tiên tiến nhất nhằm cải thiện hiệu suất và tốc độ xử lý, giúp mọi thao tác diễn ra trơn tru và chính xác. Nhờ vào những đổi mới không ngừng, 68bet đã nhanh chóng thu hút đông đảo người dùng và khẳng định vị thế vững chắc trong lĩnh vực kỹ thuật số hiện đại.

Bên cạnh việc tập trung vào trải nghiệm người dùng, 68BET còn đặc biệt chú trọng đến vấn đề bảo mật và an toàn thông tin. Hệ thống được trang bị công nghệ mã hóa tiên tiến, giúp bảo vệ dữ liệu cá nhân và thông tin giao dịch của người dùng một cách tối ưu. Các tiêu chuẩn bảo mật nghiêm ngặt được áp dụng nhằm ngăn chặn rủi ro xâm nhập trái phép, đảm bảo môi trường sử dụng an toàn và đáng tin cậy. Không chỉ vậy, 68bet luôn cam kết minh bạch trong mọi hoạt động, giúp người dùng có thể hoàn toàn yên tâm trong suốt quá trình trải nghiệm. Hơn nữa, nền tảng này liên tục nâng cấp và cải tiến các tính năng nhằm đáp ứng nhu cầu ngày càng cao của người dùng, mang đến một môi trường kỹ thuật số hiện đại, chuyên nghiệp và đáng tin cậy.

Không chỉ sở hữu công nghệ tiên tiến và hệ thống bảo mật chặt chẽ, 68bet còn có đội ngũ hỗ trợ khách hàng chuyên nghiệp, sẵn sàng giải đáp mọi thắc mắc và hỗ trợ người dùng một cách nhanh chóng, hiệu quả. Dịch vụ hỗ trợ hoạt động liên tục, đảm bảo rằng mọi vấn đề đều được giải quyết kịp thời, giúp người dùng có trải nghiệm liền mạch và thuận lợi nhất. Ngoài ra, 68bet luôn không ngừng nghiên cứu và phát triển các tính năng mới, giúp nâng cao chất lượng trải nghiệm và đáp ứng nhu cầu đa dạng của người dùng. Với sự kết hợp hoàn hảo giữa công nghệ hiện đại, bảo mật cao và dịch vụ tận tâm, 68bet tiếp tục khẳng định vị thế vững chắc trên thị trường và trở thành sự lựa chọn đáng tin cậy cho những ai đang tìm kiếm một nền tảng kỹ thuật số chất lượng hàng đầu.

@ 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!

@ 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

@ 4f1a1249:66f0ac3a

789win1 là một nền tảng kỹ thuật số tiên tiến, mang đến cho người dùng trải nghiệm mượt mà, nhanh chóng và hiệu quả nhờ vào công nghệ hiện đại và giao diện thân thiện. Với thiết kế tối ưu, hệ thống giúp người dùng dễ dàng thao tác, truy cập nhanh chóng vào các tính năng và tận hưởng sự tiện lợi vượt trội. 789win1 không chỉ tương thích với nhiều thiết bị mà còn đảm bảo tốc độ xử lý cao, giúp mọi thao tác diễn ra trơn tru và liền mạch. Đặc biệt, nền tảng này liên tục cập nhật các công nghệ mới nhất để cải thiện hiệu suất, mang đến một môi trường ổn định, giúp người dùng có những trải nghiệm tốt nhất. Nhờ vào sự đầu tư mạnh mẽ vào công nghệ, 789win1 đã nhanh chóng khẳng định được vị thế của mình, trở thành một sự lựa chọn đáng tin cậy trên thị trường kỹ thuật số.

Bên cạnh hiệu suất hoạt động mạnh mẽ, 789WIN1 còn đặc biệt chú trọng đến vấn đề bảo mật, đảm bảo sự an toàn tuyệt đối cho thông tin cá nhân và dữ liệu của người dùng. Hệ thống được tích hợp công nghệ mã hóa tiên tiến, giúp bảo vệ thông tin khỏi các rủi ro bảo mật và các mối đe dọa tiềm ẩn. Ngoài ra, nền tảng này còn áp dụng các tiêu chuẩn bảo mật cao cấp, ngăn chặn các hành vi truy cập trái phép, giúp người dùng hoàn toàn yên tâm trong suốt quá trình sử dụng. Không chỉ vậy, 789win1 luôn đặt sự minh bạch và tin cậy lên hàng đầu, không ngừng nâng cấp hệ thống để đáp ứng nhu cầu ngày càng cao, đảm bảo một môi trường kỹ thuật số an toàn và chuyên nghiệp.

Không chỉ sở hữu công nghệ tiên tiến và hệ thống bảo mật hiện đại, 789win1 còn có đội ngũ hỗ trợ chuyên nghiệp, luôn sẵn sàng tư vấn, giải đáp mọi thắc mắc của người dùng một cách nhanh chóng và hiệu quả. Dịch vụ hỗ trợ hoạt động liên tục, đảm bảo rằng mọi vấn đề đều được giải quyết kịp thời, mang lại sự hài lòng và an tâm tuyệt đối cho người dùng. Bên cạnh đó, 789win1 không ngừng mở rộng và phát triển, mang đến những cải tiến mới nhằm nâng cao chất lượng trải nghiệm, đáp ứng nhu cầu ngày càng đa dạng của người dùng. Với sự kết hợp hoàn hảo giữa công nghệ hiện đại, bảo mật cao và dịch vụ tận tâm, 789win1 tiếp tục khẳng định vị thế của mình, trở thành một nền tảng kỹ thuật số đáng tin cậy và được nhiều người yêu thích.

@ 97c70a44:ad98e322

Everyone knows that relays are central to how nostr works - they're even in the name: Notes and Other Stuff Transmitted by Relays. As time goes on though, there are three other letters which are becoming conspicuously absent from our beloved and ambiguously pronounceable acronym - "D", "V", and "M".

The hype cycle for DVMs seems to have reached escape velocity in a way few other things have - zaps being the possible exception. But what exactly DVMs are remains something of a mystery to many nostr developers - and how to build one may as well be written on clay tablets.

This blog post is designed to address that - below is a soup to nuts (no nutzaps though) guide to building a DVM flow, both from the client and the server side.

Here's what we'll be covering:

• Discovering DVM metadata
• Basic request/response flow
• Implementing a minimal example

Let's get started!

DVM Metadata

First of all, it's helpful to know how DVMs are reified on the nostr network. While not strictly necessary, this can be useful for discovering DVMs and presenting them to users, and for targeting specific DVMs we want a response from.

NIP 89 goes into this in more detail, but the basic idea is that anyone can create a kind 31990 "application handler" event and publish it to the network with their own (or a dedicated) public key. This handler was originally intended to advertise clients, but has been re-purposed for DVM listings as well.

Here's what the "Fluffy Frens" handler looks like:

json { "content": "{\"name\": \"Fluffy Frens\", \"picture\": \"https://image.nostr.build/f609311532c470f663e129510a76c9a1912ae9bc4aaaf058e5ba21cfb512c88e.jpg\", \"about\": \"I show recent notes about animals\", \"lud16\": \"discovery_content_fluffy@nostrdvm.com\", \"supportsEncryption\": true, \"acceptsNutZaps\": false, \"personalized\": false, \"amount\": \"free\", \"nip90Params\": {\"max_results\": {\"required\": false, \"values\": [], \"description\": \"The number of maximum results to return (default currently 100)\"}}}", "created_at": 1738874694, "id": "0aa8d1f19cfe17e00ce55ca86fea487c83be39a1813601f56f869abdfa776b3c", "kind": 31990, "pubkey": "7b7373dd58554ff4c0d28b401b9eae114bd92e30d872ae843b9a217375d66f9d", "sig": "22403a7996147da607cf215994ab3b893176e5302a44a245e9c0d91214e4c56fae40d2239dce58ea724114591e8f95caed2ba1a231d09a6cd06c9f0980e1abd5", "tags": [ ["k", "5300"], ["d", "198650843898570c"] ] }

This event is rendered in various clients using the kind-0-style metadata contained in the content field, allowing users to browse DVMs and pick one for their use case. If a user likes using a particular DVM, they might publish a kind 31989 "application recommendation", which other users can use to find DVMs that are in use within their network.

Note the k tag in the handler event - this allows DVMs to advertise support only for specific job types. It's also important to note that even though the spec doesn't cover relay selection, most clients use the publisher's kind 10002 event to find out where the DVM listens for events.

If this looks messy to you, you're right. See this PR for a proposal to split DVMs out into their own handler kind, give them a dedicated pubkey along with dedicated metadata and relay selections, and clean up the data model a bit.

DVM Flow

Now that we know what a DVM looks like, we can start to address how they work. My explanation below will elide some of the detail involved in NIP 90 for simplicity, so I encourage you to read the complete spec.

The basic DVM flow can be a little (very) confusing to work with, because in essence it's a request/response paradigm, but it has some additional wrinkles.

First of all, the broker for the request isn't abstracted away as is usually the case with request/response flows. Regular HTTP requests involve all kinds of work in the background - from resolving domain names to traversing routers, VPNs, and ISP infrastructure. But developers don't generally have to care about all these intermediaries.

With DVMs, on the other hand, the essential complexity of relay selection can't simply be ignored. DVMs often advertise their own relay selections, which should be used rather than a hard-coded or randomly chosen relay to ensure messages are delivered. The benefit of this is that DVMs can avoid censorship, just as users can, by choosing relays that are willing to broker their activity. DVMs can even select multiple relays to broker requests, which means that clients might receive multiple copies of the same response.

Secondly, the DVM request/response model is far more fluid than is usually the case with request/response flows. There are a set of standard practices, but the flow is flexible enough to admit exceptions to these conventions for special use cases. Here are some examples:

• Normally, clients p-tag the DVM they wish to address. But if a client isn't picky about where a response comes from, they may choose to send an open request to the network and collect responses from multiple DVMs simultaneously.
• Normally, a client creates a request before collecting responses using a subscription with an e-tag filter matching the request event. But clients may choose to skip the request step entirely and collect responses from the network that have already been created. This can be useful for computationally intensive tasks or common queries, where a single result can be re-used multiple times.
• Sometimes, a DVM may respond with a kind 7000 job status event to let clients know they're working on the request. This is particularly useful for longer-running tasks, where feedback is useful for building a responsive UX.
• There are also some details in the spec regarding monetization, parameterization, error codes, encryption, etc.

Example DVM implementation

For the purposes of this blog post, I'll keep things simple by illustrating the most common kind of DVM flow: a kind 5300 content discovery request, addressed to a particular DVM. If you're interested in other use cases, please visit data-vending-machines.org for additional documented kinds.

The basic flow looks like this:

• The DVM starts by listening for kind 5300 job requests on some relays it has selected and advertised via NIP 89 (more on that later)
• A client creates a request event of kind 5300, p-tagged with the DVM's pubkey and sends it to the DVM's relay selections.
• The DVM receives the event and processes it, issuing optional kind 7000 job status events, and eventually issuing a kind 6300 job result event (job result event kinds are always 1000 greater than the request's kind).
• The client listens to the same relays for a response, and when it comes through does whatever it wants to with it.

Here's a swimlane diagram of that flow:

To avoid massive code samples, I'm going to implement our DVM entirely using nak (backed by the power of the human mind).

The first step is to start our DVM listening for requests that it wants to respond to. Nak's default pubkey is 79be667ef9dcbbac55a06295ce870b07029bfcdb2dce28d959f2815b16f81798, so we'll only listen for requests sent to nak.

bash nak req -k 5300 -t p=79be667ef9dcbbac55a06295ce870b07029bfcdb2dce28d959f2815b16f81798

This gives us the following filter:

json ["REQ","nak",{"kinds":[5300],"#p":["79be667ef9dcbbac55a06295ce870b07029bfcdb2dce28d959f2815b16f81798"]}]

To open a subscription to nos.lol and stream job requests, add --stream wss://nos.lol to the previous request and leave it running.

Next, open a new terminal window for our "client" and create a job request. In this case, there's nothing we need to provide as input, but we'll include it just for illustration. It's also good practice to include an expiration tag so we're not asking relays to keep our ephemeral requests forever.

bash nak event -k 5300 -t p=79be667ef9dcbbac55a06295ce870b07029bfcdb2dce28d959f2815b16f81798 -t expiration=$(( $(date +%s) + 30 )) -t input=hello

Here's what comes out:

json { "kind": 5300, "id": "0e419d0b3c5d29f86d2132a38ca29cdfb81a246e1a649cb2fe1b9ed6144ebe30", "pubkey": "79be667ef9dcbbac55a06295ce870b07029bfcdb2dce28d959f2815b16f81798", "created_at": 1739407684, "tags": [ ["p", "79be667ef9dcbbac55a06295ce870b07029bfcdb2dce28d959f2815b16f81798"], ["expiration", "1739407683"], ["input", "hello"] ], "content": "", "sig": "560807548a75779a7a68c0ea73c6f097583e2807f4bb286c39931e99a4e377c0a64af664fa90f43e01ddd1de2e9405acd4e268f1bf3bc66f0ed5a866ea093966" }

Now go ahead and publish this event by adding nos.lol to the end of your nak command. If all goes well, you should see your event pop up in your "dvm" subscription. If so, great! That's half of the flow.

Next, we'll want our client to start listening for kind 6300 responses to the request. In your "client" terminal window, run:

bash nak req -k 6300 -t e=<your-eventid-here> --stream nos.lol

Note that if you only want to accept responses from the specified DVM (a good policy in general to avoid spam) you would include a p tag here. I've omitted it for brevity. Also notice the k tag specifies the request kind plus 1000 - this is just a convention for what kinds requests and responses use.

Now, according to data-vending-machines.org, kind 5300 responses are supposed to put a JSON-encoded list of e-tags in the content field of the response. Weird, but ok. Stop the subscription in your "dvm" terminal and respond to your "client" with a recommendation to read my first note:

bash nak event -k 6300 -t e=a65665a3a4ca2c0d7b7582f4f0d073cd1c83741c25a07e98d49a43e46d258caf -c '[["e","214f5898a7b75b7f95d9e990b706758ea525fe86db54c1a28a0f418c357f9b08","wss://nos.lol/"]]' nos.lol

Here's the response event we're sending:

json { "kind": 6300, "id": "bb5f38920cbca15d3c79021f7d0051e82337254a84c56e0f4182578e4025232e", "pubkey": "79be667ef9dcbbac55a06295ce870b07029bfcdb2dce28d959f2815b16f81798", "created_at": 1739408411, "tags": [ ["e", "a65665a3a4ca2c0d7b7582f4f0d073cd1c83741c25a07e98d49a43e46d258caf"] ], "content": "[[\"e\",\"214f5898a7b75b7f95d9e990b706758ea525fe86db54c1a28a0f418c357f9b08\",\"wss://nos.lol/\"]]", "sig": "a0fe2c3419c5c54cf2a6d9a2a5726b2a5b766d3c9e55d55568140979354003aacb038e90bdead43becf5956faa54e3b60ff18c0ea4d8e7dfdf0c8dd97fb24ff9" }

Notice the e tag targets our original request.

This should result in the job result event showing up in our "client" terminal. Success!

If something isn't working, I've also create a video of the full process with some commentary which you can find here.

Note that in practice, DVMs can be much more picky about the requests they will respond to, due to implementations failing to follow Postel's law. Hopefully that will improve over time. For now, here are a few resources that are useful when working with or developing DVMs:

• dvmdash
• data-vending-machines.org
• noogle
• nostrdvm

Conclusion

I started this post by hinting that DVMs might be as fundamental as relays are to making nostr work. But (apart from the fact that we'd end up with an acronym like DVMNOSTRZ+*, which would only exascerbate the pronounciation wars (if such a thing were possible)), that's not exactly true.

DVMs have emerged as a central paradigm in the nostr world because they're a generalization of a design pattern unique to nostr's architecture - but which exists in many other places, including NIP 46 signer flows and NIP 47 wallet connect. Each of these sub-protocols works by using relays as neutral brokers for requests in order to avoid coupling services to web addresses.

This approach has all kinds of neat benefits, not least of which is allowing service providers to host their software without having to accept incoming TCP connections. But it's really an emergent property of relays, which not only are useful for brokering communication between users (aka storing events), but also brokering communication between machines.

The possibilities of this architecture have only started to emerge, so be on the lookout for new applications, and don't be afraid to experiment - just please, don't serialize json inside json 🤦‍♂️

@ daa41bed:88f54153

There has been a good bit of discussion on Nostr over the past few days about the merits of zaps as a method of engaging with notes, so after writing a rather lengthy article on the pros of a strategic Bitcoin reserve, I wanted to take some time to chime in on the much more fun topic of digital engagement.

Let's begin by defining a couple of things:

Nostr is a decentralized, censorship-resistance protocol whose current biggest use case is social media (think Twitter/X). Instead of relying on company servers, it relies on relays that anyone can spin up and own their own content. Its use cases are much bigger, though, and this article is hosted on my own relay, using my own Nostr relay as an example.

Zap is a tip or donation denominated in sats (small units of Bitcoin) sent from one user to another. This is generally done directly over the Lightning Network but is increasingly using Cashu tokens. For the sake of this discussion, how you transmit/receive zaps will be irrelevant, so don't worry if you don't know what Lightning or Cashu are.

If we look at how users engage with posts and follows/followers on platforms like Twitter, Facebook, etc., it becomes evident that traditional social media thrives on engagement farming. The more outrageous a post, the more likely it will get a reaction. We see a version of this on more visual social platforms like YouTube and TikTok that use carefully crafted thumbnail images to grab the user's attention to click the video. If you'd like to dive deep into the psychology and science behind social media engagement, let me know, and I'd be happy to follow up with another article.

In this user engagement model, a user is given the option to comment or like the original post, or share it among their followers to increase its signal. They receive no value from engaging with the content aside from the dopamine hit of the original experience or having their comment liked back by whatever influencer they provide value to. Ad revenue flows to the content creator. Clout flows to the content creator. Sales revenue from merch and content placement flows to the content creator. We call this a linear economy -- the idea that resources get created, used up, then thrown away. Users create content and farm as much engagement as possible, then the content is forgotten within a few hours as they move on to the next piece of content to be farmed.

What if there were a simple way to give value back to those who engage with your content? By implementing some value-for-value model -- a circular economy. Enter zaps.

Unlike traditional social media platforms, Nostr does not actively use algorithms to determine what content is popular, nor does it push content created for active user engagement to the top of a user's timeline. Yes, there are "trending" and "most zapped" timelines that users can choose to use as their default, but these use relatively straightforward engagement metrics to rank posts for these timelines.

That is not to say that we may not see clients actively seeking to refine timeline algorithms for specific metrics. Still, the beauty of having an open protocol with media that is controlled solely by its users is that users who begin to see their timeline gamed towards specific algorithms can choose to move to another client, and for those who are more tech-savvy, they can opt to run their own relays or create their own clients with personalized algorithms and web of trust scoring systems.

Zaps enable the means to create a new type of social media economy in which creators can earn for creating content and users can earn by actively engaging with it. Like and reposting content is relatively frictionless and costs nothing but a simple button tap. Zaps provide active engagement because they signal to your followers and those of the content creator that this post has genuine value, quite literally in the form of money—sats.

I have seen some comments on Nostr claiming that removing likes and reactions is for wealthy people who can afford to send zaps and that the majority of people in the US and around the world do not have the time or money to zap because they have better things to spend their money like feeding their families and paying their bills. While at face value, these may seem like valid arguments, they, unfortunately, represent the brainwashed, defeatist attitude that our current economic (and, by extension, social media) systems aim to instill in all of us to continue extracting value from our lives.

Imagine now, if those people dedicating their own time (time = money) to mine pity points on social media would instead spend that time with genuine value creation by posting content that is meaningful to cultural discussions. Imagine if, instead of complaining that their posts get no zaps and going on a tirade about how much of a victim they are, they would empower themselves to take control of their content and give value back to the world; where would that leave us? How much value could be created on a nascent platform such as Nostr, and how quickly could it overtake other platforms?

Other users argue about user experience and that additional friction (i.e., zaps) leads to lower engagement, as proven by decades of studies on user interaction. While the added friction may turn some users away, does that necessarily provide less value? I argue quite the opposite. You haven't made a few sats from zaps with your content? Can't afford to send some sats to a wallet for zapping? How about using the most excellent available resource and spending 10 seconds of your time to leave a comment? Likes and reactions are valueless transactions. Social media's real value derives from providing monetary compensation and actively engaging in a conversation with posts you find interesting or thought-provoking. Remember when humans thrived on conversation and discussion for entertainment instead of simply being an onlooker of someone else's life?

If you've made it this far, my only request is this: try only zapping and commenting as a method of engagement for two weeks. Sure, you may end up liking a post here and there, but be more mindful of how you interact with the world and break yourself from blind instinct. You'll thank me later.

@ 4f1a1249:66f0ac3a

68bet là một nền tảng kỹ thuật số tiên tiến được thiết kế nhằm mang lại trải nghiệm mượt mà, hiệu quả và tiện lợi cho người dùng. Với giao diện trực quan, thân thiện cùng tốc độ xử lý nhanh chóng, 68bet giúp người dùng dễ dàng thao tác và tận hưởng những tính năng hiện đại chỉ trong vài bước đơn giản. Nền tảng này được tối ưu hóa để hoạt động ổn định trên nhiều thiết bị khác nhau, từ máy tính cá nhân đến điện thoại di động, mang lại sự linh hoạt và thuận tiện tối đa. Đặc biệt, hệ thống không ngừng được cập nhật với những công nghệ tiên tiến nhằm nâng cao hiệu suất, giúp mọi thao tác diễn ra nhanh chóng, chính xác và liền mạch. Nhờ vào sự cải tiến không ngừng, 68bet đã trở thành một sự lựa chọn hàng đầu, thu hút đông đảo người dùng nhờ vào chất lượng vượt trội và những tính năng thông minh.

Không chỉ dừng lại ở việc nâng cao trải nghiệm người dùng, 68BET còn đặc biệt chú trọng đến tính bảo mật và an toàn thông tin. Hệ thống được trang bị công nghệ mã hóa hiện đại, giúp bảo vệ dữ liệu cá nhân một cách tối đa, đảm bảo sự riêng tư tuyệt đối cho người dùng. Bên cạnh đó, nền tảng này áp dụng các tiêu chuẩn bảo mật chặt chẽ để giảm thiểu rủi ro và ngăn chặn mọi hành vi xâm nhập trái phép. Nhờ vào những biện pháp bảo vệ tiên tiến, người dùng hoàn toàn có thể yên tâm trong quá trình sử dụng mà không lo lắng về các vấn đề liên quan đến bảo mật. Hơn nữa, 68bet không ngừng cải tiến và nâng cấp hệ thống nhằm đáp ứng nhu cầu ngày càng cao, mang lại một môi trường an toàn, minh bạch và đáng tin cậy.

Bên cạnh công nghệ tiên tiến và tính bảo mật cao, 68bet còn sở hữu đội ngũ hỗ trợ chuyên nghiệp, luôn sẵn sàng tư vấn và giải đáp mọi thắc mắc của người dùng một cách nhanh chóng và hiệu quả. Dịch vụ hỗ trợ hoạt động liên tục, đảm bảo rằng mọi vấn đề đều được giải quyết kịp thời, mang đến sự hài lòng và an tâm tuyệt đối. Ngoài ra, nền tảng này luôn không ngừng mở rộng và phát triển để mang đến những cải tiến mới, giúp nâng cao chất lượng trải nghiệm cho người dùng. Với sự kết hợp hoàn hảo giữa công nghệ hiện đại, dịch vụ tận tâm và cam kết bảo mật cao, 68bet tiếp tục khẳng định vị thế của mình, trở thành một trong những nền tảng kỹ thuật số hàng đầu dành cho người dùng hiện đại.

@ c4f5e7a7:8856cac7

Best viewed on Habla, YakiHonne or Highlighter.

TL;DR

This article explores the links between public, community-driven data sources (such as OpenStreetMap) and private, cryptographically-owned data found on networks such as Nostr.

The following concepts are explored:

1. Attestations: Users signalling to their social graph that they believe something to be true by publishing Attestations. These social proofs act as a decentralised verification system that leverages your web-of-trust.
2. Proof of Place: An oracle-based system where physical letters are sent to real-world locations, confirming the corresponding digital ownership via cryptographic proofs. This binds physical locations in meatspace with their digital representations in the Nostrverse.
3. Check-ins: Foursquare-style check-ins that can be verified using attestations from place owners, ensuring authenticity. This approach uses web-of-trust to validate check-ins and location ownership over time.

The goal is to leverage cryptographic ownership where necessary while preserving the open, collaborative nature of public data systems.

Open Data in a public commons has a place and should not be thrown out with the Web 2.0 bathwater.

Cognitive Dissonance

Ever since discovering Nostr in August of 2022 I've been grappling with how BTC Map - a project that helps bitcoiners find places to spend sats - should most appropriately use this new protocol.

I am assuming, dear reader, that you are somewhat familiar with Nostr - a relatively new protocol for decentralised identity and communication. If you don’t know your nsec from your npub, please take some time to read these excellent posts: Nostr is Identity for the Internet and The Power of Nostr by @max and @lyn, respectively. Nostr is so much more than a short-form social media replacement.

The social features (check-ins, reviews, etc.) that Nostr unlocks for BTC Map are clear and exciting - all your silos are indeed broken - however, something fundamental has been bothering me for a while and I think it comes down to data ownership.

For those unfamiliar, BTC Map uses OpenStreetMap (OSM) as its main geographic database. OSM is centred on the concept of a commons of objectively verifiable data that is maintained by a global community of volunteer editors; a Wikipedia for maps. There is no data ownership; the data is free (as in freedom) and anyone can edit anything. It is the data equivalent of FOSS (Free and Open Source Software) - FOSD if you will, but more commonly referred to as Open Data.

In contrast, Notes and Other Stuff on Nostr (Places in this cartographic context) are explicitly owned by the controller of the private key. These notes are free to propagate, but they are owned.

How do we reconcile the decentralised nature of Nostr, where data is cryptographically owned by individuals, with the community-managed data commons of OpenStreetMap, where no one owns the data?

Self-sovereign Identity

Before I address this coexistence question, I want to talk a little about identity as it pertains to ownership. If something is to be owned, it has to be owned by someone or something - an identity.

All identities that are not self-sovereign are, by definition, leased to you by a 3rd party. You rent your Facebook identity from Meta in exchange for your data. You rent your web domain from your DNS provider in exchange for your money.

Taken to the extreme, you rent your passport from your Government in exchange for your compliance. You are you at the pleasure of others. Where Bitcoin separates money from the state; Nostr separates identity from the state.

Or, as @nvk said recently: "Don't build your house on someone else's land.".

https://i.nostr.build/xpcCSkDg3uVw0yku.png

While we’ve had the tools for self-sovereign digital identity for decades (think PGP keys or WebAuthN), we haven't had the necessary social use cases nor the corresponding social graph to elevate these identities to the mainstream. Nostr fixes this.

Nostr is PGP for the masses and will take cryptographic identities mainstream.

Full NOSTARD?

Returning to the coexistence question: the data on OpenStreetMap isn’t directly owned by anyone, even though the physical entities the data represents might be privately owned. OSM is a data commons.

We can objectively agree on the location of a tree or a fire hydrant without needing permission to observe and record it. Sure, you could place a tree ‘on Nostr’, but why should you? Just because something can be ‘on Nostr’ doesn’t mean it should be.

https://i.nostr.build/s3So2JVAqoY4E1dI.png

There might be a dystopian future where we can't agree on what a tree is nor where it's located, but I hope we never get there. It's at this point we'll need a Wikifreedia variant of OpenStreetMap.

While integrating Nostr identities into OpenStreetMap would be valuable, the current OSM infrastructure, tools, and community already provide substantial benefits in managing this data commons without needing to go NOSTR-native - there's no need to go Full NOSTARD. H/T to @princeySOV for the original meme.

https://i.nostr.build/ot9jtM5cZtDHNKWc.png

So, how do we appropriately blend cryptographically owned data with the commons?

If a location is owned in meatspace and it's useful to signal that ownership, it should also be owned in cyberspace. Our efforts should therefore focus on entities like businesses, while allowing the commons to manage public data for as long as it can successfully mitigate the tragedy of the commons.

The remainder of this article explores how we can:

1. Verify ownership of a physical place in the real world;
2. Link that ownership to the corresponding digital place in cyberspace.

As a side note, I don't see private key custodianship - or, even worse, permissioned use of Places signed by another identity's key - as any more viable than the rented identities of Web 2.0.

And as we all know, the Second Law of Infodynamics (no citation!) states that:

"The total amount of sensitive information leaked will always increase over time."

This especially holds true if that data is centralised.

Not your keys, not your notes. Not your keys, not your identity.

Places and Web-of-Trust

@Arkinox has been leading the charge on the Places NIP, introducing Nostr notes (kind 37515) that represent physical locations. The draft is well-crafted, with bonus points for linking back to OSM (and other location repositories) via NIP-73 - External Content IDs (championed by @oscar of @fountain).

However, as Nostr is permissionless, authenticity poses a challenge. Just because someone claims to own a physical location on the Internet doesn’t necessarily mean they have ownership or control of that location in the real world.

Ultimately, this problem can only be solved in a decentralised way by using Web-of-Trust - using your social graph and the perspectives of trusted peers to inform your own perspective. In the context of Places, this requires your network to form a view on which digital identity (public key / npub) is truly the owner of a physical place like your local coffee shop.

This requires users to:

1. Verify the owner of a Place in cyberspace is the owner of a place in meatspace.
2. Signal this verification to their social graph.

Let's look at the latter idea first with the concept of Attestations ...

Attestations

A way to signal to your social graph that you believe something to be true (or false for that matter) would be by publishing an Attestation note. An Attestation note would signify to your social graph that you think something is either true or false.

Imagine you're a regular at a local coffee shop. You publish an Attestation that says the shop is real and the owner behind the Nostr public key is who they claim to be. Your friends trust you, so they start trusting the shop's digital identity too.

However, attestations applied to Places are just a single use case. The attestation concept could be more widely applied across Nostr in a variety of ways (key rotation, identity linking, etc).

Here is a recent example from @lyn that would carry more signal if it were an Attestation:

https://i.nostr.build/lZAXOEwvRIghgFY4.png

Parallels can be drawn between Attestations and transaction confirmations on the Bitcoin timechain; however, their importance to you would be weighted by clients and/or Data Vending Machines in accordance with:

1. Your social graph;
2. The type or subject of the content being attested and by whom;
3. Your personal preferences.

They could also have a validity duration to be temporally bound, which would be particularly useful in the case of Places.

NIP-25 (Reactions) do allow for users to up/downvote notes with optional content (e.g., emojis) and could work for Attestations, but I think we need something less ambiguous and more definitive.

‘This is true’ resonates more strongly than ‘I like this.’.

https://i.nostr.build/s8NIG2kXzUCLcoax.jpg

There are similar concepts in the Web 3 / Web 5 world such as Verified Credentials by tdb. However, Nostr is the Web 3 now and so wen Attestation NIP?

https://i.nostr.build/Cb047NWyHdJ7h5Ka.jpg

That said, I have seen @utxo has been exploring ‘smart contracts’ on nostr and Attestations may just be a relatively ‘dumb’ subset of the wider concept Nostr-native scripting combined with web-of-trust.

Proof of Place

Attestations handle the signalling of your truth, but what about the initial verification itself?

We already covered how this ultimately has to be derived from your social graph, but what if there was a way to help bootstrap this web-of-trust through the use of oracles? For those unfamiliar with oracles in the digital realm, they are simply trusted purveyors of truth.

Introducing Proof of Place, an out–of-band process where an oracle (such as BTC Map) would mail - yes physically mail- a shared secret to the address of the location being claimed in cyberspace. This shared secret would be locked to the public key (npub) making the claim, which, if unlocked, would prove that the associated private key (nsec) has physical access to the location in meatspace.

One way of doing this would be to mint a 1 sat cashu ecash token locked to the npub of the claimant and mail it to them. If they are able to redeem the token then they have cryptographically proven that they have physical access to the location.

Proof of Place is really nothing more than a weighted Attestation. In a web-of-trust Nostrverse, an oracle is simply a npub (say BTC Map) that you weigh heavily for its opinion on a given topic (say Places).

In the Bitcoin world, Proof of Work anchors digital scarcity in cyberspace to physical scarcity (energy and time) in meatspace and as @Gigi says in PoW is Essential:

"A failure to understand Proof of Work, is a failure to understand Bitcoin."

In the Nostrverse, Proof of Place helps bridge the digital and physical worlds.

@Gigi also observes in Memes vs The World that:

"In Bitcoin, the map is the territory. We can infer everything we care about by looking at the map alone."

https://i.nostr.build/dOnpxfI4u7EL2v4e.png

This isn’t true for Nostr.

In the Nostrverse, the map IS NOT the territory. However, Proof of Place enables us to send cryptographic drones down into the physical territory to help us interpret our digital maps. 🤯

Check-ins

Although not a draft NIP yet, @Arkinox has also been exploring the familiar concept of Foursquare-style Check-ins on Nostr (with kind 13811 notes).

For the uninitiated, Check-ins are simply notes that signal the publisher is at a given location. These locations could be Places (in the Nostr sense) or any other given digital representation of a location for that matter (such as OSM elements) if NIP-73 - External Content IDs are used.

Of course, not everyone will be a Check-in enjoyooor as the concept will not sit well with some people’s threat models and OpSec practices.

Bringing Check-ins to Nostr is possible (as @sebastix capably shows here), but they suffer the same authenticity issues as Places. Just because I say I'm at a given location doesn't mean that I am.

Back in the Web 2.0 days, Foursquare mitigated this by relying on the GPS position of the phone running their app, but this is of course spoofable.

How should we approach Check-in verifiability in the Nostrverse? Well, just like with Places, we can use Attestations and WoT. In the context of Check-ins, an Attestation from the identity (npub) of the Place being checked-in to would be a particularly strong signal. An NFC device could be placed in a coffee shop and attest to check-ins without requiring the owner to manually intervene - I’m sure @blackcoffee and @Ben Arc could hack something together over a weekend!

Check-ins could also be used as a signal for bonafide Place ownership over time.

Summary: Trust Your Bros

So, to recap, we have:

Places: Digital representations of physical locations on Nostr.

Check-ins: Users signalling their presence at a location.

Attestations: Verifiable social proofs used to confirm ownership or the truth of a claim.

You can visualise how these three concepts combine in the diagram below:

https://i.nostr.build/Uv2Jhx5BBfA51y0K.jpg

And, as always, top right trumps bottom left! We have:

Level 0 - Trust Me Bro: Anyone can check-in anywhere. The Place might not exist or might be impersonating the real place in meatspace. The person behind the npub may not have even been there at all.

Level 1 - Definitely Maybe Somewhere: This category covers the middle-ground of ‘Maybe at a Place’ and ‘Definitely Somewhere’. In these examples, you are either self-certifying that you have checked-in at an Attested Place or you are having others attest that you have checked-in at a Place that might not even exist IRL.

Level 2 - Trust Your Bros: An Attested Check-in at an Attested Place. Your individual level of trust would be a function of the number of Attestations and how you weigh them within your own social graph.

https://i.nostr.build/HtLAiJH1uQSTmdxf.jpg

Perhaps the gold standard (or should that be the Bitcoin standard?) would be a Check-in attested by the owner of the Place, which in itself was attested by BTC Map?

Or perhaps not. Ultimately, it’s the users responsibility to determine what they trust by forming their own perspective within the Nostrverse powered by web-of-trust algorithms they control. ‘Trust Me Bro’ or ‘Trust Your Bros’ - you decide.

As we navigate the frontier of cryptographic ownership and decentralised data, it’s up to us to find the balance between preserving the Open Data commons and embracing self-sovereign digital identities.

Thanks

With thanks to Arkinox, Avi, Ben Gunn, Kieran, Blackcoffee, Sebastix, Tomek, Calle, Short Fiat, Ben Weeks and Bitcoms for helping shape my thoughts and refine content, whether you know it or not!

@ 5579d5c0:db104ded

Most people think their metabolism is "broken" because they can't lose weight, feel sluggish, or gain fat easily.

The truth? Your metabolism isn’t broken, it’s just out of sync.

Your body doesn’t just burn calories randomly.

It follows a natural 24-hour rhythm, dictated by light exposure, movement, meal timing, and sleep.

When these cues are off, your metabolism becomes dysfunctional.

The good news?

You don’t need to diet harder or exercise more.

You need to realign your metabolism with your body’s natural rhythm.

---

Why your metabolism feels “broken”

Your body is designed to run on timing signals, when to eat, when to move, when to rest. Modern life disrupts these natural rhythms, leading to:

→ Low energy & afternoon crashes: Skipping morning sunlight and staying indoors all day.

→ Stubborn belly fat & slow fat loss: Eating at the wrong times, late-night snacking, and chronic stress.

→ Constant cravings & hunger: Poor meal timing and eating foods that spike blood sugar too often.

→ Poor sleep & recovery: Late night screen use, artificial light, and erratic bedtimes.

The problem isn’t your metabolism, it’s your environment and habits.

---

How to reset your metabolism naturally

You don’t need extreme diets, calorie counting, or hours in the gym.

Instead, align your metabolism with your body’s natural timing signals by focusing on these fundamentals:

1. Get natural light first thing in the morning

Light in the first 30 minutes after waking sets your circadian rhythm (body clock), kickstarts hormone production, and improves insulin sensitivity.

This simple habit helps to regulate hunger, energy, and fat-burning.

Action step: Step outside for at least 5–10 minutes within 30 minutes of waking, no sunglasses, no contacts, only natural light exposure and take regular outdoor breaks during the day.

---

2. Stop eating late at night

Eating late, especially high-carb/high-fat meals, signals your body to store fat instead of burning it.

Late-night eating also disrupts sleep, which further impairs fat loss.

Action step: Keep meals within a 10-12 hour eating window, preferably between sunrise and sunset. No snacking. Finish your last meal at least 3 hours before bed.

---

3. Move throughout the day (Not just at the gym)

Your metabolism isn’t just about burning calories, it’s about how efficiently your body uses energy.

Sitting for long hours disrupts metabolic function, even if you work out later.

Action step: Take a 5-minute movement break every 1–2 hours. Stand, stretch, or better still go for a quick walk outside.

---

4. Prioritise deep, uninterrupted sleep

Your body burns fat and repairs muscle while you sleep.

Poor sleep increases hunger hormones (Ghrelin), prevents Leptin from working properly, and makes you crave junk food the next day.

Action step: Dim lights after sunset, wear blue light blocking glasses, avoid screens 30-60 minutes before bed, and aim for 7.5-9 hours of quality sleep.

---

5. Eat nutrient-dense foods

What you eat matters, but when you eat it matters just as much.

Front-loading protein and nutrients earlier in the day supports fat-burning and stabilises energy.

Action step: Eat a high-protein, nutrient-dense breakfast and avoid refined carbs & sugar, especially in the morning, to prevent cravings later.

---

Your metabolism isn’t broken, it’s just out of sync.

Instead of obsessing over calories, focus on realigning your body with its natural rhythms:

→ Morning sunlight to set your metabolism for the day.

→ Aligned meal timing by eating during daylight & avoiding late-night eating.

→ Frequent movement to prevents metabolic slowdown from sitting.

→ Quality sleep which regulates fat-burning and hunger hormones.

→ Nutrient-dense eating giving your body what it needs.

Fix your metabolism without dieting harder, just live in sync with how your body is designed to function.

-Chris

---

If you want a simple methodical approach to fixing your metabolism, Let’s talk.

Book a free call here: https://calendly.com/hello-chrispatrick

Follow me on Nostr: https://primal.net/chrispatrick or 

nostr:npub124uatsq6pv74trzwvt34y4sx2z0uflhse7tkrv0pl69e8kcsfhkse30zsu

@ 7460b7fd:4fc4e74b

请看2014年王兴的一场思维碰撞，视频27分钟开始

最后，一个当时无法解决的点：丢失

@ d61f3bc5:0da6ef4a

Micropayments on the Internet have been theorized for decades. However, it wasn’t until the emergence of Nostr that we’ve finally seen them deployed at scale. Nostr is still in its infancy, yet we are already witnessing an explosion of apps built on top of this open protocol. And most of them are featuring zaps! With the recent Primal 2.1 release, Nostr developers now have the option to enhance the experience for their users by integrating a Nostr-powered bitcoin wallet. 

There is no doubt that micropayments add a new dimension to consumer apps. The incumbents have realized this and are rushing to add payments to their closed platforms. It won't be long before apps that don’t include built-in payments feel dated or outright broken. The question is not if apps of the future will have built-in payments, but what kind of payments they will be. Given that open networks have a tendency to win, our bet is that apps of the future will be powered by Bitcoin. Let’s see how Primal can help.

Primal Wallet

Our vision for Primal Wallet is simple: deliver the smoothest transactional bitcoin wallet, endowed with expert Nostr skills. The wallet leverages Nostr’s open social graph as a de facto public lightning directory, while offering the highest level of user experience for Nostr’s rich content. For example, the user can scroll through the transaction list, select a zap, and drill straight into the conversation thread where the zap originated. The whole flow feels perfectly natural.  Since we launched Primal Wallet in December 2023, the user response has been incredibly positive. People love the idea of being able to post something on Nostr, get zaps from plebs around the world, then buy a coffee or a meal with those sats - all from the same app. 

Having a bitcoin wallet with social skills resonated strongly with users, so Primal Wallet grew rapidly in popularity and usage. Since the launch, we have processed 1,338,460 transactions, with 238,916 just in the past month alone. This rivals some of the leading bitcoin wallets, and we are just getting started! We hear from many bitcoin OGs that they are using Primal Wallet as their transactional daily driver. Bullish. 

All this is great, but something has been missing. Our users demanded the ability to connect Primal Wallet to other Nostr apps, so they can zap from anywhere in Nostr’s growing ecosystem.

Zapping from Any Nostr App

For an existing Primal user, connecting the wallet to a new Nostr app can now be done in two clicks. Let’s take a look at how this is done from Olas, one of the most exciting new apps on Nostr:

Yes. Click, click. And you can start zapping! 

Such smooth integration of payments is not available in any competing technology stack. Tradfi, fintech, crypto, etc., have nothing on Bitcoin and Nostr. Two clicks and your external wallet is connected. I’ll give you a moment now to allow for this new reality to settle in.

Primal enables you to connect any number of external apps and manage them from wallet settings: Note that you can set your daily spend budget for each app or revoke its access at any time.

How This Works

So, what is this sorcery? How does it work under the hood?

Connecting Nostr apps to external wallets is accomplished via the Nostr Wallet Connect protocol. It utilizes Nostr’s public relay infrastructure to enable communication between apps and wallets. You can learn more about this protocol here, and access developer docs here.

The smooth, two-click connection setup UX is implemented through deep links between Primal and the external app. Here’s the deep link that the external app needs to call to invoke this feature: 

nostrnwc+primal://connect?appicon=[icon_url]&appname=[app_name]&callback=[callback_string]

After the user clicks “Create Wallet Connection” in Primal, the Primal app calls the deep link defined in the callback, and passes the NWC connection string. That's all that the external app needs to make the wallet connection.

What Comes Next?

The Nostr Wallet Connect protocol has been around for almost two years. Several bitcoin wallets implement it and many Nostr apps use it as their main way of enabling payments. What’s new with Primal 2.1 is the elevated user experience. Since Primal is a Nostr-powered wallet, it is aware of all the relevant metadata for each transaction: Nostr zaps, users, and the related events. Primal indexes the entire Nostr network, and now this is open to all Nostr apps that wish to integrate payments. 

Nostr keeps expanding and getting better. Its openness enables us to build capabilities that lift all boats. The future is bright; I can’t wait to see how things evolve from here. 🍿🍿🍿

@ da0b9bc3:4e30a4a9

Hello Stackers!

Welcome on into the ~Music Corner of the Saloon!

A place where we Talk Music. Share Tracks. Zap Sats.

So stay a while and listen.

🚨Don't forget to check out the pinned items in the territory homepage! You can always find the latest weeklies there!🚨

🚨Subscribe to the territory to ensure you never miss a post! 🚨

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/889165

@ dc4cd086:cee77c06

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

Key Features:

Video Processing:

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

Content Summarization:

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

Diagram Extraction:

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

Going Forward:

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

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

Screenshots

Frame Selection

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

Diagram Extraction

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

Links

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

Output

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

Initially published as chained kind 1's nostr:nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzp5r5hd579v2sszvvzfel677c8dxgxm3skl773sujlsuft64c44ncqy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnyv9kh2uewd9hj7qgwwaehxw309ahx7uewd3hkctcpzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumt0wd68ytnsw43z7qghwaehxw309aex2mrp0yhxummnw3ezucnpdejz7qgewaehxw309aex2mrp0yh8xmn0wf6zuum0vd5kzmp0qqsxunmjy20mvlq37vnrcshkf6sdrtkfjtjz3anuetmcuv8jswhezgc7hglpn

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

@ 2063cd79:57bd1320

DISCLAIMER: Dies ist ein Re-Post eines Artikels, der ursprünglich im Juli 2023 erschienen ist. Die beschriebenen Sachverhalte sind teilweise überholt oder nie eingetroffen. Allerdings räumt der Autor ein, retrospektiv die damalige Sachlage recht treffend eingeordnet zu haben und Vorhersagen recht treffsicher gemacht zu haben.

---

Anfang Juni 2023 gaben die Nachrichtenportale bekannt, dass BlackRock, der weltweit größte Vermögensverwalter, über seine iShares-Einheit einen Antrag auf einen börsengehandelten Bitcoin-Fonds eingereicht hat. Dieser Schritt des 10-Billionen-Dollar-Vermögensverwalters löste in der Bitcoin-Community auf der einen Seite große Freude und auf der anderen Seite große Besorgnis aus, weil viele einerseits das Potenzial für einen massiven Zufluss von Investitionen aus dem institutionellen Bereich sehen, während Kritiker das Risiko aufzeigen, die eine solche Produktstruktur für Bitcoin mit sich bringen könnte.

Anfangs wurde viel auch darüber diskutiert, ob es sich bei dem Produkt tatsächlich um einen ETF handeln würde - wie in vielen Artikeln beschrieben - , da das Produkt im Antrag selbst nicht als solches bezeichnet wird. Aber im Endeffekt ist klar, dass es sich um ein Finanzprodukt handelt, das alle formalen Eigenschaften eines ETF besitzt. Also, was genau ist ein ETF und wie funktioniert so ein Produkt?

ETF? Eidgenössisches Turnfest, was?

ETFs sind eine Sorte von Anlagewertpapieren, die einen bestimmten Index, Sektor, Rohstoff oder andere Vermögenswerte nachbilden. ETFs können an der Börse auf die gleiche Weise gekauft oder verkauft werden wie normale Aktien. Daher schwanken ETF-Anteilspreise den ganzen Tag, wenn der ETF gekauft und verkauft wird, was bedeutet, dass eine Arbitrage zwischen dem ETF und dem zugrunde liegenden Vermögenswert (z.B. Bitcoin) möglich ist.

ETFs werden als börsengehandelte (Exchange-Traded) Fonds bezeichnet, weil sie genau wie Aktien an einer Börse gehandelt werden. Die meisten ETFs sind so strukturiert, dass sie, ähnlich wie traditionelle Investmentfonds, mehrere zugrunde liegende Vermögenswerte halten und nicht nur einen, wie es bei einer Aktie der Fall ist. Da ETFs aus mehreren Vermögenswerten bestehen können, werden sie oft als beliebtes Mittel zur Diversifizierung des Portfolios genutzt. Auf der anderen Seite eröffnen ETFs Anlegern auch die Möglichkeit in einen Rohstoff zu investieren, ohne diesen physisch erwerben zu müssen. Anstatt sich Gold in den Tresor zu legen, kann man in seinem Portfolio also z.B. den GLD ETF kaufen, der den aktuellen Preis von Gold nachbildet. Ausser in Deutschland, da geht das nicht, denn da ein Gold-ETF, der nur einen Vermögenswert abbildet, naturgemäß nicht diversifiziert ist, ist er gemäß deutschem Gesetz nicht zugelassen, da Fonds zur Diversifikation verpflichtet sind.

ETFs haben den Vorteil, dass sie kostengünstig sind (wenn man z.B. den kompletten DAX abbilden möchte, reicht ein ETF, welcher genau das tut, anstatt verschiedene Gewichtungen von 40 verschiedenen Unternehmen zu kaufen - das spart Zeit und vor allem Gebühren), dass sie Produkte abbilden, die ein Käufer unter normalen Umständen nicht erlaubt wäre zu kaufen (z.B. darf nicht jeder Anleger in Bitcoin investieren, weil sonst Lizenzen nötig wären) und sie haben den Vorteil, dass sie über den gleichen Broker oder Service gehandelt werden können, wie andere Wertpapier-Investitionen. Der letzte Punkt ist natürlich wichtig für Neueinsteiger, da sie keine zusätzlichen Kosten haben, wenn sie ihr Wertpapierdepot nutzen können und zusätzlich bietet dieser Korridor für viele traditionelle und konservative Anleger ein gewisses Gefühl von Schutz. Diese ganze cRyPto-Welt mit ihren Plattformen, Exchanges, Casinos und Teppichhändlern ist im besten Fall schwer durchsichtig und im schlimmsten Fall mutet sie kriminell an. Doch wenn ich mir "Bitcoin" über mein Depot bei Charles Schwab, der Sparkasse, oder Flatex kaufen kann, fühlt sich das natürlich legitim und sicherer an.

Der Finanzdienstleister muss den zugrundeliegenden Vermögenswert dabei vollumfänglich besitzen, mit dem grossen ABER, dass der Vermögenswert auch verliehen werden kann. Warum das ein Problem sein könnte, besprechen wir später.

Ähnlich wie ein Gold ETF bietet ein Bitcoin ETF Anlegern also die Möglichkeit mit Bitcoin zu handeln, in Bitcoin anzulegen und Bitcoin auszuprobieren, ohne Bitcoin tatsächlich zu kaufen. Ob das gut oder schlecht ist, besprechen wir auch später.

ETF Wasserfall

Nachdem die Nachricht über BlackRocks Antrag publik wurde, kamen auch etliche andere Finanzdienstleister hervor und stellten (neue) Anträge.WisdomTree hatten bereits zuvor schon einige Anläufe gebraucht, um ihre Anträge für Bitcoin-Spot-ETFs bei der SEC einzureichen und unterhalten schon ähnliche Produkte in anderen Ländern. Aber auch Fidelity, Invesco, Valkyrie oder ARK zogen unter anderem nach und stellten neue Anträge, natürlich nicht, ohne sich bei der Formulierung dieser eine Scheibe bei BlackRock abzuschneiden.

Die SEC hatte zuvor jegliche Anträge auf Bitcoin-Spot-ETFs abgelehnt, hingegen andere Bitcoin-verbundene Produkte, die gehebelte (BITX) und ungehebelte Bitcoin-Futures-Kontrakte (BITO) nachbilden, zugelassen. Auch gibt es eine handvoll ETFs, die börsennotierte Mining-Unternehmen bündeln, oder anderweitige Verbindung zum Bitcoin-Ökosystem suchen, indem sie Anteile von Unternehmen bündeln, die im weitesten Sinne mit Bitcoin in Berührung kommen (z.B. MSTR oder SQ). Eine Genehmigung eines Antrags auf Bitcoin-Spot-ETF hat es also bis heute durch die SEC noch nicht gegeben.

Der Standpunkt der SEC

Wie ich schon in einem ➡️ früheren Artikel beschrieben habe, ist der Standpunkt der SEC nur teilweise nachvollziehbar.

Die offizielle Begründung der SEC sind Bedenken in Bezug auf Marktmanipulation, Betrug, Liquidität und Transparenz. Die hauptauschlaggebenden Argumente sind mangelnde Preiserkennung durch hohe Volatilität, wiederum erzeugt durch einige unbekannte große Accounts und die steigende Zahl der Derivate-Produkte rund um Bitcoin, sowie die vielen unregulierten Börsen. Besonders letztere würde die SEC gerne unter ihre Kontrolle bringen. Das bedeutet bis Coinbase, Gemini, Kraken (oder andere große US Börsen) sich nicht bei der SEC registrieren und sich der SEC Regulierung unterwerfen, ist es unwahrscheinlich, dass die SEC einen Spot-ETF genehmigen wird. Dieses Argument ist schwer haltbar, da große Börsen wie Binance, FTX, oder BitMart nicht in den USA registriert sind, und kombiniert ein Vielfaches der in den USA beheimateten Börsen an Handelsvolumen umsetzen.

“[T]here’s a lot of work to be done to really protect the investing public.” - Gary Gensler, SEC Chair

Vorgeschoben wird also bei alledem immer der Schutz der Anleger. Ob dies eine schlüssige Argumentation ist, darf man ruhig in Frage stellen. Denn ein Bitcoin-Spot-ETF würde vielen Anlegern erlauben Bitcoin in ihr Portfolio aufzunehmen, ohne größeren Spekulationen ausgesetzt zu sein, wie das jetzt mit schon zugelassenen Produkten der Fall ist.

Darüber hinaus hat die SEC vielerorts erwähnt, dass sie bestrebt sind, mit Unternehmen aus der Branche einen regulatorisch klaren Weg zu finden, damit Unternehmen ihre Tätigkeiten im Sinne der SEC auszuüben. Das bezieht sich meist auf die Börsen, die nach eigenen Angaben seit Jahren versuchen, einen rechtlichen Rahmen zu schaffen, der ihnen Planungs- und Rechtssicherheit bietet. Dieser Punkt ist später nochmal wichtig. Das Problem hierbei besteht in der Natur dieser Unternehmen. Denn fast ausnahmslos sind alle betroffenen Unternehmen (wie z.B. Coinbase, Kraken, Binance, etc.) keine Bitcoin-Unternehmen, sondern Digital Assets-Unternehmen, die eben auch den Handel mit Shitcoins, Stablecoins und auf diesen Assets basierende Derivate erlauben (und vor allem wollen).

Jetzt wissen wir also, was ein ETF ist. Aber wie schaut der von BlackRock (und damit auch der anderen Finanzdienstleister) vorgeschlagene Bitcoin-Spot-ETF im Detail aus?

Bitcoin ETF

Das von BlackRock vorgeschlagene Produkt, und damit auch die der anderen - wie wir wissen, haben die anderen Anbieter ihre Anträge nachgebessert und dem von BlackRock weitestgehend angepasst - soll das Grantor-Trust-Modell übernehmen und seine Struktur dem von Gold-Investment-Trusts nachempfinden. Das bedeutet, dass der Besitz von Anteilen am Bitcoin-ETF für steuerliche Zwecke dem Besitz des zugrunde liegenden Vermögenswerts gleichkommt. Des Weiteren ist eine Rücknahmefunktion in Form von Sachleistungen vorgesehen. Das bedeutet vereinfacht, dass Anleger ihre Anteile auch direkt in Bitcoin umwandeln können. Anders als bei z.B. GBTC (➡️ #5 // Block 742956 // GBTC, ETF & SEC), müssen Anteile nicht erst verkauft werden, um mit den (potentiellen) Profiten bitcoins zu kaufen. Denn der Verkauf von Anteilen an GBTC (oder ähnlichen Modellen) führt nämlich ein steuerpflichtiges Ereignis herbei, wohingegen eine Umwandlung im BlackRock Modell steuerfrei zu vollziehen ist.

Aber, und dies ist ein großes ABER, kommen nur autorisierte Kunden von BlackRock in den Genuss dieser Sachrücknahmen (Umwandlungen). D.h., im Wesentlichen können nur große Investmentfirmen mit guter Reputation Anteile in Bitcoin umtauschen, alltägliche Anleger (Depot bei Charles Schwab, der Sparkasse, oder Flatex) hingegen sind nicht in der Lage diesen tollen Steuertrick anzuwenden. Die erzeugt einen Vorhang vorgespielter Transparenz ("natürlich können alle Anteile direkt in 'physische' bitcoins getauscht werden"), wohingegen ein Großteil der zugrundeliegenden bitcoins nicht wirklich eingefordert werden wird.

Es sind sich alle einig, dass ein Bitcoin-Spot-ETF ein Winner-takes-all-market ist. Das heisst, der Anbieter, dessen Antrag als erstes von der SEC genehmigt wird, wird uber kurz oder lang den Markt fuer Bitcoin-ETFs fuer sich entscheiden, bzw. beherrschen.

SEC vs. Binance

Kurz bevor BlackRock ihren Antrag auf einen Bitcoin-Spot-ETF einreichten und damit die SEC in die Schlagzeilen der Finanz- und Bitcoin Welt geriet, machte die SEC in der Bitcoin- und Digital Assets-Welt schon von sich hören, als sie kurz hintereinander gegen Binance und Coinbase Anklage erhob.

https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2023-101

Binance ist die zurzeit größte Börse für Digitale Assets der Welt. Binance bietet jedoch nicht nur den Handel mit Krypto-Werten, sondern auch eine Reihe von gehebelten Produkten, eigener Coins und Tokens, usw. an (Shitcoin-Casino).

“Through thirteen charges, we allege that Zhao and Binance entities engaged in an extensive web of deception, conflicts of interest, lack of disclosure, and calculated evasion of the law.” - Gary Gensler, Chairman, SEC

Vor allem ist Binance kein in den USA registriertes Unternehmen. Lediglich ein Schwesterunternehmen, Binance.us, ist offiziell in den USA registriert und hat offiziell und nach eigenen Angaben mit den Geschäften des Hauptunternehmens direkt nichts zu tun.

Die SEC klagt Binance also nicht nur wegen ihrer Angebote im Krypto-Sektor an, sondern erhebt spezifische Vorwürfe der Irreführung und Täuschung von Kunden, des Betreibens von unregistrierten Börsen, Clearingstellen und Broker-Dealer Aktivitäten, sowie Verstrickungen mit Binance.us (einer Handelsbörse, die wie gesagt offiziell unabhängig von Binance agieren soll), sowie dem Washtrading und dem Verkauf von unregistrierten Wertpapieren (mehr zu dem Thema Securities hier ➡️ #24 // Block 773750 // Commodity vs. Security).

“We allege that Zhao and the Binance entities not only knew the rules of the road, but they also consciously chose to evade them and put their customers and investors at risk – all in an effort to maximize their own profits.” - Gurbir S. Grewal, Director, SEC’s Division of Enforcement

Die SEC argumentiert also Changpeng Zhao (CEO von Binance) und Binance hätten Anleger über ihre Risikokontrollen und korrupten Handelsvolumina in die Irre geführt und gleichzeitig aktiv verschwiegen, wer der eigentliche Betreiber der Plattform ist. Damit hätten Binance-Plattformen ihren Anlegern übergroße Risiken und Interessenkonflikte beschert.

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/crypto-binance-money

Darüber hinaus wurde in Folge der Anklageerhebung bekannt, dass es bei Geldflüssen bei Binance einen deutlichen Hinweis auf einen Mangel an internen Kontrollen gibt. Interne Kontrollen sollen normalerweise sicherstellen, dass Kundengelder klar identifizierbar und von den Unternehmenseinnahmen getrennt sind. Eine Vermischung von Anleger- und Geschäftsgeldern gefährdet das Vermögen der Kunden, da deren Verbleib verschleiert wird.

Interessanterweise nutzt die SEC weiterhin die Klageschrift gegen Binance, um das Thema 'unregistrierter' Wertpapiere etwas zu erhellen. Zuvor hatte die SEC sich nur in wenigen Einzelfällen dazu geäußert, welche Digitalen Assets sie als unregistrierte Wertpapiere betrachtet, doch in der Anklageschrift werden SOL, ADA, MATIC, FIL, ATOM, SAND, MANA, ALGO, AXS, COTI, BUSD, and BNB explizit als solche bezeichnet.

Alleine vier der genannten Assets finden sich unter den 10 größten Werten (ausgenommen Stablecoins) und die anderen tummeln sich auch irgendwo in den Top 50. Der aufmerksame Sherlock Holmes wird bemerkt haben, dass es dünn wird für den "kRyPtO"-Markt. Unter den Top 10 bleiben noch 3 Proof-of-Work Coins, von denen einer den Howey-Test nicht erfüllt (und es ist nicht Doge), Ripple (XRP) und die SEC stehen schon seit 2020 vor Gericht und meiner Meinung nach ist es nur noch eine Frage der Zeit, bis die SEC sich bzgl. Ethereum äußern muss (wird).

SEC vs. Coinbase

Nur einen Tag nach Veröffentlichung der Pressemitteilung, dass die SEC Anklage gegen Binance erhebe, veröffentlichte die SEC die nächste Pressemitteilung: Die SEC erhebt auch Anklage gegen Coinbase, die größte in den USA registrierte Börse für den Handel mit Digital Assets.

https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2023-102

Anders als bei Binance hingegen konzentriert sich die SEC bei der Anklage gegen Coinbase einzig auf den Handel mit unregistrierten Wertpapieren und den damit einhergehenden Dienstleistungen.

“We allege that Coinbase, despite being subject to the securities laws, commingled and unlawfully offered exchange, broker-dealer, and clearinghouse functions” - Gary Gensler, Chairman, SEC.

Konkret hätten Coinbase gegen bestimmte Registrierungsbestimmungen des Securities Exchange Act und des Securities Act verstoßen. Coinbase hätten seit mindestens 2019 Milliarden Dollar verdient, indem sie den Kauf und Verkauf von unregistrierten Wertpapieren unrechtmäßig erleichtert haben.

Interessant ist, dass die SEC ein weitere Dienstleistung in die Anklage einbaut, die bisher keine Erwähnung gefunden hat: "Darüber hinaus hat Coinbase, wie wir behaupten, sein Staking-as-a-Service-Programm nie gemäß den Wertpapiergesetzen registriert, was den Anlegern erneut wichtige Offenlegungs- und andere Schutzmaßnahmen vorenthält“ (Gensler).

Dies zeigt, dass die SEC, ohne sich bisher explizit zu Ethereum geäußert zu haben, eine Meinung gegenüber Staking vertritt, und zumindest die Bereitstellung von Staking-Services als rechtswidrig erachtet. Dies könnte einer der Gründe sein, dass Ethereum noch nicht ins Rampenlicht gerückt wurde, und zwar, dass die SEC die Anklageschrift gegen die Ethereum-Foundation und damit ein Ungetüm an Financiers (JP Morgan, MasterCard, Consensys, etc.) gründlich vorbereitet, um sich für einen enormen Rechtsstreit wetterfest zu machen. Allerdings scheinen interne Ansichtspunkte und Betrachtungsweisen schon ihren Weg in andere Anklageschriften zu finden.

Darüberhinaus zitiert die SEC mit AXS, CHZ, FLOW, ICP, NEAR, VGX, DASH und NEXO eine weitere Reihe von Shitcoins, die sie als unregistrierte Wertpapiere einstufen und damit den Handel mit selbigen untersagen.

Es gibt immer wieder Erzählungen von Leuten, die mit der Sache betraut sind, dass Coinbase aktiv daran arbeiten, einen gemeinsamen Weg mit der SEC zu finden, das Geschäftsmodell zwischen regulatorisch stabile Leitplanken zu bringen. Oft, wenn diese Erzählungen aus dem Coinbase Camp kommen, heißt es, die SEC sei stur und ließe sich nicht auf die Avancen seitens Coinbase ein. Wiederum andere sagen, dass die SEC schlicht überfordert wäre und Coinbase alles daran läge, schnell eine Lösung zu finden.

"You simply can’t ignore the rules because you don’t like them or because you’d prefer different ones: the consequences for the investing public are far too great.”

Wenn man allerdings den in der Pressemitteilung zitierten Satz von Gurbir S. Grewal (Director, SEC’s Division of Enforcement) anschaut, wird klar, dass aus Sicht der SEC scheinbar relativ früh und relativ offen kommuniziert wurde, was der rechtliche Rahmen des Möglichen ist. Wahrscheinlich wurden Coinbase auch früh darüber informiert, dass der Handel mit den meisten (oder allen) gelisteten Assets (außer Bitcoin), sowie das Anbieten von Staking als Dienstleistung, nicht mit den Leitplanken konform ist, die die SEC für eine zukünftige, rechtlich stabile Regulatorik des Marktes hält. Doch die freiwillige Einhaltung dieser von der SEC 'lose' formulierten Richtlinien hätte für Coinbase das Wegbrechen von 99% ihres Geschäftsmodells bedeutet.

Coinbase listen über 250 handelbare Assets auf ihrer Seite, viele davon lassen sich 'staken', viele weitere Dienste, die Coinbase anbietet, sind von den darunterliegenden Plattformen abhängig. Es ist klar, dass Coinbase den Moment so lange vor sich herschieben wollten, wie eben nur möglich. Denn während Bitcoin als einziges auf Coinbase gehandeltes Asset deutliche YTD Performance an den Tag legt, sinkt die Zahl der auf der Plattform gehaltenen bitcoins zusehends (gut, endlich begriffen!).

Diese Woche dann der Beweis. In einem Artikel der Financial Times erklärt Brian Armstrong, CEO von Coinbase, dass die SEC klare Empfehlung ausgesprochen hat, schon bevor sie letzten Monat rechtliche Schritte gegen das Unternehmen einleitete.

“They came back to us, and they said . . . we believe every asset other than bitcoin is a security,” Armstrong said. “And, we said, well how are you coming to that conclusion, because that’s not our interpretation of the law. And they said, we’re not going to explain it to you, you need to delist every asset other than bitcoin.”

Das ergibt absolut Sinn und stützt meine These, dass die SEC gar nicht vor hat 'gegen' Coinbase zu sein. Vielmehr sieht es aus, als würden sie klarstellen wollen, dass es im geltenden Rechtsrahmen durchaus Platz für gewisse Unternehmen gibt, solange diese sich an geltendes Recht halten und nicht wie Binance offensichtlich gängige Gesetze und Regeln umschiffen. Es scheint, als wolle die SEC den 'Markt' schützen, indem sie betrügerische Firmen wie Binance auf Täuschung, Irreführung und Marktmanipulation verklagt. Gleichzeitig handelt sie bei Firmen wie Coinbase wie ein strenger Vater, der eigentlich das Beste für sein Kind möchte, aber nach wiederholten Versuchen der Gesprächsfindung nur noch harte Strafen als geeignetes Mittel sieht.

Aber warum ist der SEC daran gelegen, dass Coinbase rechtskonform und innerhalb der Leitplanken der SEC handelt?

Neue ETF Anträge mit Hilfe von Coinbase

Laut eines Berichts des Wall Street Journal hat die SEC auf die hereinbrechende Flut von Anträgen für Bitcoin-Spot-ETFs mit Bedenken reagiert. Sie erklärte zunächst, dass es den Anträgen an Klarheit und umfassenden Informationen mangele und diese somit unzureichend seien.

Die SEC hatte schon bei früheren (abgelehnten) Anträgen u.a. ihre Bedenken bezüglich der Überwachung der Handelsplattformen geäußert. Wie oben beschrieben, ist die mögliche Marktmanipulation durch unregulierte Börsen einer der Hauptgründe seitens der SEC gewesen, frühere Anträge abzulehnen. Allerdings war man davon ausgegangen, dass diese Bedenken der SEC durch eine Vereinbarung zur gemeinsamen Überwachung des Marktes durch eine regulierte Spot-Bitcoin-Handelsplattform in Zusammenarbeit mit einem der US-Handelplätze (Nasdaq, NYSE, CBOE, etc.) ausgeräumt werden könnten.

https://www.reuters.com/technology/us-sec-accepts-six-spot-bitcoin-etf-proposals-review-2023-07-19

Dementsprechend teilte die SEC den Börsen (und Antragstellern) mit, dass in den eingereichten Unterlagen wichtige Details bezüglich der genauen Vereinbarung zur gemeinsamen Umsetzung der Überwachungsvorhaben fehlten. Diese Nachricht wurde von vielen Beobachtern als negativ eingestuft: "Die SEC versteht nicht, was hier erreicht werden soll. Die SEC stellt sich quer. Die SEC ist automatisch gegen Bitcoin." war die Essenz der meisten Reaktionen. Allerdings lese ich persönlich die Reaktion der SEC ähnlich, wie auch die Anklageerhebung gegen Coinbase. Die SEC spielt ganz klar nach den eigenen formulierten und klar kommunizierten Regeln und versucht den Mitspielern die Leitplanken aufzuzeigen. Der Tenor scheint klar: "Wir haben euch die Regeln erklärt, nach denen wir mit euch spielen (hört mit der Shitcoinerei auf!). Befolgt diese und wir kommen ins Gespräch."

https://www.theblock.co/post/238944/cboe-reaches-surveillance-agreement-with-coinbase-for-spot-bitcoin-etfs

Wonach die SEC scheinbar explizit zu fragen scheint, ist ein sogenanntes Information-Sharing Agreement (ISA), also eine Vereinbarung zum Informationsaustausch. Diese Vereinbarung zwingt eine Handelsplattform dazu, Handelsdaten bis hin zu persönlichen Informationen wie den Namen und den Adressen der Kunden weiterzugeben. Ein solches ISA scheint bislang in den Anträgen gefehlt zu haben, weshalb die SEC auf die Anträge reagierte und diese als unvollständig zurückwies. Mit der neuen Welle an korrigierten Anträgen scheinen die meisten Antragsteller diese Unvollständigkeit behoben zu haben.

Und wen listet JEDER der Antragsteller als Partner zum Informationsaustausch? Rate, rate? Richtig, Coinbase!

Die Chicago Board Options Exchange (CBOE), eine Optionsbörse, die u.a. die Anträge zusammen mit den oben genannten WisdomTree, VanEck, Invesco und ARK stellte, erzielte kurzerhand mit Coinbase eine Einigung über die Bedingungen für den Abschluss eines ISA und reichte alle Anträge mit den neuen Bedingungen erneut ein.

Wie wir also sehen, deutet alles darauf hin, dass die SEC einem Bitcoin-Spot-ETF eigentlich positiv geneigt ist, sollten die Konditionen, die sie stellt, erfüllt sein. Und in Garys perfekter Welt, sehen diese Konditionen vor, dass ein solcher ETF mit Hilfe von Coinbase als Informations-Austauschs-Partner funktioniert, und dass Coinbase ein artiges in den USA börsennotiertes Unternehmen wird, dass keine Shitcoinerei betreibt und sich auf den Spot-Handel mit Bitcoin konzentriert. Denn die derzeit anderen angebotenen Services wie Clearingstellen und Broker-Dealer-Aktivitäten stehen im direkten Gegensatz zu potenziellen Aktivitäten und Interessen von Kunden.

Wir sehen also, dass ein "größerer Plan" hinter den Aktionen der SEC zu stehen scheint. Meiner Meinung nach gibt es verschiedene Theorien und Hinweise, die darauf schließen lassen, dass die SEC a) den Markt regulieren will, bevor sie ein BlackRock-Produkt genehmigt, b) ausländische (und damit nicht leicht regulierbare) Unternehmen aus dem Markt drängen will, um damit Unternehmen wie BlackRock den Handel zu vereinfachen und c) andere Interessengruppen an der Entscheidung der SEC beteiligt zu sein scheinen. Man könnte so weit gehen zu behaupten, dass anhängige Klagen und Untersuchungen ein Stück weit sogar den Kurs drücken und Bitcoin in der allgemeinen Wahrnehmung, als riskant dastehen lassen, was Unternehmen wie Blackrock dabei hilft die nötigen bitcoins zu einem relativ günstigen Preis zu akkumulieren, bevor eine Genehmigung und die implizite Anerkennung von Bitcoins Wert dazu führen, dass der Preis rasant steigt. Dies wäre ein Eingriff in den Wettbewerb und gibt BlackRock et al einen klaren Vorsprung gegenüber anderen Institutionen.

Es gibt unterschiedliche Ansichten darüber, wie Coinbase und die SEC mit dieser Situation umgehen. Einige behaupten, dass Coinbase aktiv nach einer Lösung sucht, um sich mit der SEC auf einen rechtlichen Rahmen zu einigen, während andere sagen, dass die SEC unbeugsam ist. Es wird vermutet, dass die SEC Coinbase frühzeitig darüber informiert hat, welche Regeln und Leitplanken sie für den Markt etablieren möchten.

https://x.com/BitcoinMagazine/status/1679887574934999045

Es scheint, dass die SEC den Markt schützen möchte, indem sie gegen betrügerische Unternehmen wie Binance vorgeht, die gängige Gesetze und Regeln umgehen. Gleichzeitig versucht sie bei Unternehmen wie Coinbase, die sich nicht an die geltenden Vorschriften halten, harte Strafen als Mittel zur Durchsetzung der Regulierung einzusetzen. Das scheint nur logisch, wenn man bedenkt, dass BlackRock und die anderen Antragsteller wie WisdomTree, VanEck, Invesco und ARK sich mit Coinbase auf Bedingungen für den Abschluss eines Informations-Austausch-Abkommens (ISA) geeinigt und die Anträge mit den neuen Bedingungen erneut eingereicht haben.

Dies deutet darauf hin, dass die SEC grundsätzlich positiv gegenüber einem Bitcoin-Spot-ETF eingestellt ist, sofern bestimmte Bedingungen erfüllt sind. Diese Bedingungen könnten beinhalten, dass Coinbase als Informationspartner fungiert und dass Coinbase als in den USA börsennotiertes Unternehmen agiert, das sich auf den Spot-Handel mit Bitcoin konzentriert, während andere Dienstleistungen wie Clearingstellen und Broker-Dealer-Aktivitäten vermieden werden sollen.

https://x.com/stackhodler/status/1691531818300809217

Es scheint, dass die SEC eine umfassendere Strategie verfolgt, die darauf abzielt, den Markt zu regulieren, ausländische Unternehmen zu verdrängen und den Handel für Unternehmen wie BlackRock zu erleichtern.

Mitte letzten Jahres habe ich in einem Artikel schon Grayscales andauernden Versuch, ihren Closed-End-Fund in einen Bitcoin-Spot-ETF zu verwandeln, beschrieben.

https://www.genexyz.org/post/1722193843734/

Die SEC hatte bereits im Dezember 2021 und im Februar 2022 die Entscheidung über den Antrag auf einen Bitcoin-ETF verschoben, um ihn "sorgfältig zu prüfen". Dann hat die SEC Mitte Juli 2023 bekanntgegeben, dass einem Antrag auf Umwandlung wieder nicht stattgegeben wird. Grayscale kündigten sofort an, die SEC wegen Willkür und Verstoß gegen das Wertpapierbörsengesetz von 1934 zu verklagen.

Diese Klage wurde dann vor dem Bundesberufungsgericht verhandelt und entschieden.

Das Bundesberufungsgericht in D.C. entschied im Oktober, dass das Ablehnen von Anträgen auf eine Umwandlung in einen ETF seitens Grayscale ungerecht, nicht rechtens und willkürlich sei, da die Aufsichtsbehörde nicht erklären konnte, warum sie zuvor ähnliche Produkte zugelassen hat.

Allerdings bedeutet dies nicht, dass Barry Silbert (CEO von DCG) automatisch den Grayscale Trust in einen ETF umwandeln kann. Der Antrag wandert damit nur zurück auf Garys (Vorsitzender der SEC) Schreibtisch. Und das bedeutet, dass die SEC wieder die Möglichkeit bekommt, einer Umwandlung aufgrund anderer Begründungen nicht stattzugeben. Dazu gleich mehr ⬇️.

Außerdem ist fraglich, ob Barry tatsächlich wirklich eine Umwandlung herbeisehnt, denn momentan befinden sich Grayscale in einer sehr angenehmen Lage, die ihnen erlaubt 2% vom NAV (Net Asset Value) an Gebühren zu verlangen. Was bei einem Vermögen von 624.947 Bitcoin einen jährlichen Umsatz von 12.500 Bitcoin, bzw. 475 Million US Dollar bedeutet - für nichts tun.

Es gibt schon Kampagnen, die für eine Auflösung des Trusts kämpfen. Wer sich über die Umtriebigkeiten bei DCG / Genesis / Grayscale (Barry) ein besseres Bild machen möchte, sollte unbedingt den folgenden Thread lesen:

https://x.com/real_vijay/status/1721385528510251182

Was seit dem geschah

Seit dem letzten Artikel ist gleichzeitig viel und wenig geschehen. Verinnerlichen wir uns meine These - dass die SEC a) den Markt regulieren will, bevor sie ein BlackRock-Produkt genehmigt, b) ausländische (und damit nicht leicht regulierbare) Unternehmen aus dem Markt drängen will, um damit Unternehmen wie BlackRock den Handel zu vereinfachen und c) andere Interessengruppen an der Entscheidung der SEC beteiligt zu sein scheinen - dann ist genau das passiert, was man erwartet hätte.

Die SEC hat ihre Entscheidung zur Genehmigung der ETF-Anträge wiederholte Male verschoben, momentan sieht es so aus, als würde eine Entscheidung im Januar 2024 fällig.

https://bmpro.substack.com/p/sec-delays-etf-again-despite-warning

Die SEC fällt weiter unliebsame Bäume. Bittrex, eine in den USA ansässige Börse, haben angekündigt, ihre Pforten zu schließen.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/crypto-exchange-bittrex-global-shuts-054643624.html

Kraken wurde von der SEC verklagt - ähnliches Modell wie auch zuvor bei Binance und Coinbase angewandt (sprich: alles okay und tutti, solange ihr die Shitcoinerei an den Nagel hängt).

https://www.nobsbitcoin.com/kraken-sec-lawsuit

Dabei wurden in der Klageschrift die bereits identifizierten Digitalen Assets, die die SEC als unregistrierte Wertpapiere betrachtet, 1 zu 1 wieder aufgeführt.

Doch die größte Überraschung war die diese Woche veröffentlichte Meldung, dass Binance sich in einem Vergleich mit dem US Department of Justice (DOJ) auf eine Zahlung von über 4 Milliarden US Dollar und den Rücktritt CZs (Changpeng Zhao) als CEO von Binance geeinigt habe.

https://www.nobsbitcoin.com/cz-steps-down-as-ceo-of-binance-as-part-of-4-billion-settlement-with-doj

Es ist recht eindeutig, dass es dem Justizministerium (DOJ) hier nicht um den Schutz der Verbraucher geht. Es muss allerdings der Anschein gewahrt werden, dass nicht in Eigeninteresse (dem von BlackRock, hust) gehandelt wird, sondern dass der Eindruck erweckt wird, dass sie tatsächlich etwas Gutes tun, indem sie sich um einen "bad actor" kümmern" - das wird sehr deutlich, wenn man betrachtet, dass sich das Narrativ im Vergleich hauptsächlich auf AML (Anti-Money-Laundering) und Terrorismusfinanzierung konzentriert.

Wie schon aus meiner These ersichtlich, geht auch aus bisherigen Kommentaren der SEC klar hervor, dass die größte Sorge derzeit ausländische Börsen sind, die den Bitcoin-Preis manipulieren können. Binance ist die größte Börse der Welt und hat bis heute erfolgreich außerhalb des Einflussbereichs der US-Regierung operiert. Mit dieser Vereinbarung ist das Problem der Offshore-Kursmanipulation zunächst und zum größten Teil gelöst.

Das BlackRock-SEC-Reptilienmenschen-Playbook ist im vollen Gange. Ausländische Konkurrenz weitestgehend unter Kontrolle ✅

Die SEC scheint außerdem im engen Kontakt mit den ETF-Antragstellern zu stehen. Insbesondere ein Verweis auf eine Änderung der Anträge in Bezug auf "cash" vs. "in-kind creation" hat diese Woche für Diskussionen gesorgt.

https://x.com/EricBalchunas/status/1725559994995573086

Viele börsengehandelte Fonds verlangen von den zugelassenen Teilnehmern, dass sie Anteile in Form von Sachleistungen (in-kind) schaffen , d. h. dass sie ETF-Anteile gegen einen Wertpapierkorb und nicht gegen Bargeld (cash) eintauschen. Die SEC hat jedoch auf eine Formulierung in den Anträgen gedrängt, die genau dise cash-creations zulassen.

Während sich viele auf die minutiöse Gestalt der Inhalte stürzen und eine Genehmigung hineininterpretieren, zieht die SEC hier meiner Meinung nach eine Linie, um eine Unterscheidung zwischen Grayscales GBTC und BlackRock et al. zu schaffen.

Wenn man an ein Playbook glaubt, ist der Grayscale Trust den Teilnehmern ein offensichtlicher Dorn im Auge, weshalb eine Umwandlung zunächst verhindert werden will.

Jetzt muss nur noch Coinbase mitspielen. Aber wenn Binance einen Vergleich erzielen kann, warum nicht auch $COIN? Vielleicht einigt sich die SEC mit Coinbase im Gegenzug für "saftige Geldstrafen" und die Entfernung aller Shitcoins von der Plattform. Im Gegenzug erhält Coinbase den Börsenstatus und wird für die Überwachungsvereinbarung mit BlackRock und den anderen Antragstellern freigeschaltet. Auf einen Schlag würde die SEC die Shitcoins von der einzigen börsennotierten US-Börse entfernen und ein legales (nach ihren Vorstellungen und selbst artikulierten Prinzipien) Fundament für BlackRocks ETF schaffen.

Außerdem würde es mich nicht wundern, wenn Coinbase als weißer Ritter auftritt und ganz barmherzig das US-Business von Binance übernimmt. Natürlich nur, um einem Mitstreiter in schwierigen Zeiten beizustehen. Ich packe es auf jeden Fall auf meine Bingo-Karte für den Zeitraum zwischen jetzt und einer Genehmigung der ETF-Anträge.

Durch die Einigung mit CZ und die Geldstrafe von 4,3 Milliarden US Dollar erleichtert die US-Regierung den Transfer von Bitcoin aus schwachen in starke Hände (Binance ➡️ Coinbase). Binance werden Bitcoin verkaufen müssen, um die Geldstrafe zu bezahlen, während gleichzeitig die Spot-ETFs das Angebot mit amerikanischem Kapital auffüllen können. Schöne Ausführung. Tolles Playbook 👏

Ich bin mir bewusst, dass die oben genannten Ereignisse und Auslegungen der Geschehnisse sehr verschwurbelt daherkommen, jedoch möchte ich meinen virtuellen Alu-Hut vor dem Architekten dieses wirklichen langen Long-Games ziehen.

In der Zwischenzeit arbeiten gewissenhafte Journalisten namhafter Veröffentlichungen (BlackRock PR-Department, hust) daran, die öffentliche Wahrnehmung von Bitcoin zum Positiven zu wenden.

Wurde in den letzten Jahren Bitcoin als riskante Anlage, Klimakiller, Ozean-Kocher, oder schlimmer bezeichnet, wird es jetzt als ein möglicher Bestandteil einer nachhaltigen und zukunftsorientierten Anlagestrategie dargestellt.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/digital-assets/2023/07/08/bitcoin-network-to-reduce-more-emissions-than-its-energy-sources-produce/

Wir (du schlaue/r Leser//in und ich) wissen schon lange, dass die Bitcoin-Branche heute die weltweit am nachhaltigsten betriebene Branche ist und das Bitcoin-Mining als einzige Industrie in dem Bereich kohlenstoffnegativ werden kann. Es ist also offensichtlich, dass Bitcoin ein wichtiger Bestandteil einer nachhaltigen und zukunftsorientierten Anlagestrategie sein kann, aber genau dieses Narrativ wurde jahrelang absichtlich verdrängt (➡️ siehe XRP-gesponsorte Greenpeace Aktion anfang des Jahres).

Wir sehen also, dass es nicht nur um eine einfache Genehmigung der Anträge geht, sondern viele Mosaikteilchen gelegt werden, bevor es dazu kommen kann. Viele Zeichen deuten darauf hin, dass viele verschiedene Parteien daran arbeiten, ein Umfeld zu schaffen, dass es bestimmten Gruppen ermöglicht, einen ETF möglichst risikofrei und konkurrenzlos zu platzieren. Dabei werden unliebsame Mitspieler vom Platz gewiesen und anderen Mitspielern werden die Spielregeln nochmal ganz bewusst in Erinnerung gerufen, während gleichzeitig ein Narrativ geschaffen wird, das einen Bitcoin-ETF in glänzendem Licht darstellt.

---

Es ist nahezu gewiss, dass es nicht die Frage ist, ob einem Antrag zugestimmt wird, sondern vielmehr, wann dies geschehen wird. Es besteht eine hohe Wahrscheinlichkeit, dass allen Anträgen zeitgleich stattgegeben wird. Dennoch lässt sich erkennen, dass die SEC strategisch Zeit gewinnt, um Binance und andere unerwünschte Akteure vollständig aus dem Spiel zu nehmen und Coinbase in der Zwischenzeit zu dem vorbildlichen Mustersohn zu formen, den sie immer haben wollte.

Da der Markt für Spot-ETFs als "Winner-takes-all" gilt, wird darauf geachtet, dass nicht irgendein Antragsteller das Rennen gewinnt, sondern ein bestimmter - Larry. Hierfür ist es notwendig, Barry vom Spielfeld zu verdrängen, da er einen erheblichen Vorsprung hat, woran Gary offensichtlich arbeitet. Falls sich meine Vermutungen bewahrheiten, werden wir in naher Zukunft einen Bitcoin-Spot-ETF sehen, der von BlackRock dominiert wird. Grayscale und Binance werden keine Rolle im Spiel spielen, während Coinbase als reguliertes, vorbildliches US-Unternehmen davon profitieren wird.

🫳🎤

---

In diesem Sinne, 2... 1... Risiko!‌

@ 85bdb587:7339d672

Chart of the Day

While this is a bitcoin focused rag, I think it is important for any of you who read this to begin paying attention to gold markets if you haven't already. There has been an ongoing exodus of physical gold from London vaults and a rapid acceleration of gold being moved to the three biggest vaults in the United States in recent weeks. More gold has flooded into the US vaults over the first two months of this year than at the peak of the flight to safety during the beginning of the COVID lock downs.

This is particularly perplexing considering the fact that equities are flat or up on the year, depending on the index you like to follow. Gold outperformed the S&P 500 significantly in 2024 and its momentum hasn't slowed down a bit in 2025 as the precious metal consistently hits new all time highs. The current correlation to the S&P 500 has only happened two times in history; right now and October of 2007.

Institutional investors and nation states are piling into gold at an unprecedented pace. This signals that they are preparing for something to break. The catalysts for the exodus of gold from London to the US and from paper gold to physical gold are fears over Trump's tariffs, institutions and governments preparing for a potential monetary reset, and fears of a looming liquidity crisis as liquidity in the reverse repo market dries up. Uncertainty and chaos rule the day and we are witnessing a flight to safety.

Many of you are probably asking, "Why isn't bitcoin moving?!" That's a good question. Considering everything mentioned above one would think that bitcoin would be on the move toward new all time highs as well. Having been following bitcoin for twelve years your Uncle Marty has developed some pattern recognition when it comes to this market. Upward bitcoin price movements typically happen in a staircase fashion. Meaning that it trends up and to the right over the long-run with quick bursts to higher levels followed by small corrections and consolidation periods. If I had to guess, we are currently in a consolidation period that should come to an end at some point in the next few months. In recent years, gold has moved higher first and bitcoin has followed. Typically outperforming gold significantly. I find it hard to believe that this relationship is going to end any time soon. Especially considering the geopolitical and economic backdrop.

Luke Gromen Warns Bitcoin Holders: Historical Currency Revaluations Show Speed Matters

During my recent conversation with Luke Gromen, he raised a sobering point about the velocity of monetary regime changes. Drawing from historical examples, including a Ukrainian family who saw their savings devalue from "five cars to one month's groceries" over a single weekend, Luke emphasized that Americans are uniquely blind to how quickly these transitions can occur. The current stress in our financial system - from Treasury market dynamics to global trade tensions - suggests we're approaching a similar inflection point.

*"What if they do it on Friday night like they did with Trump coin and you wake up and gold's up 1,000% by the time you're up on Saturday morning, what are you going to do? You're going to sell your bonds and buy gold on Saturday?"* - Luke Gromen

This warning shouldn't be taken lightly. Those waiting for clear signals before acquiring bitcoin may find themselves locked out of the transition entirely. Luke's analysis suggests that rather than a gradual shift, we're more likely to see a compressed timeframe where major monetary changes happen over days or weeks, not months or years. The recent Trump coin phenomenon, while different in nature, demonstrates how quickly markets can move when sentiment shifts dramatically.

TLDR: Major monetary changes happen fast - don't wait to stack sats.

Check out the full podcast here for more on DeepSeek's impact on AI markets, Colombia's trade negotiations, and Scott Percent's three arrows for economic reform.

Headlines of the Day

U.S. Faces $1.67B Annual Cost Spike on Single Bond Rollover - via X

BlackRock: Bitcoin is Monetary Hedge, Ethereum is Tech Play - via X

Lummis: SBR Could Slash U.S. Debt by 50% in Two Decades - via X

Fold Launches Bitcoin Rewards Visa Credit Card - via Business Wire

Obscura VPN launches with a MacOS product - via nobsbitcoin.com

Bitcoin Lesson of the Day

The SegWit (Segregated Witness) upgrade in August 2017 made two key changes to Bitcoin. First, it moved transaction signatures to a separate part of the data, fixing "transaction malleability" by preventing nodes from modifying transaction IDs. Second, it increased effective block capacity by introducing "weight units" that gave signature data a 75% discount, allowing blocks to grow from 1MB to about 1.8MB.

As a "soft fork," SegWit remained compatible with older Bitcoin software. The upgrade activated at block 481,824 after 95% of miners signaled support. This approach allowed Bitcoin to increase capacity and fix technical issues while maintaining network compatibility.

SegWit - Learnmeabitcoin.com

ICYMI Fold opened the waiting list for the new Bitcoin Rewards Credit Card. Fold cardholders will get unlimited 2% cash back in sats.

Get on the waiting list now before it fills up!

$200k worth of prizes are up for grabs . The Fold Bitcoin Rewards Credit Card waitlist is live!

Ten31, the largest bitcoin-focused investor, has deployed $150M across 30+ companies through three funds. I am a Managing Partner at Ten31 and am very proud of the work we are doing. Learn more at ten31.vc/funds.

Subscribe to our YouTube channels and follow us on Nostr and X:

TFTC YouTube Bitcoin Brief YouTube TFTC on Nostr TFTC on X

@ 5a261a61:2ebd4480

Let’s be real—sticking to anything for 90 days is like trying to herd cats on espresso. You start strong, then life happens: kids, chores, or that one glass of wine that makes you forget foot rubs (#relatable). But here’s the thing: 90-day challenges aren’t about perfection. They’re about bribing your lizard brain with rewards and scaring it straight with punishments.

The Game Plan

First, pick a thing—something that makes you feel like a devoted servant or a slightly frazzled superhero. Daily foot care? Chores with a side of #FLR flair? Cool. Now, break it into chunks: 30 days (survival mode), 60 days (grind phase), and 90 days (victory lap).

Keeping up something for so long is no joke. That's why you need those little checkpoints along the way. Each milestone should feel special—30 days deserves celebration, 60 days something more meaningful, and 90 days? That's your victory dance moment.

Reality check: some days will suck, and you'll want to skip. That's where having everything planned out helps. When your brain is foggy and you're tired, you don't want to be negotiating with yourself about what counts and what doesn't. The hardest part isn't even doing the thing—it's remembering to do it every single day, until it feels wrong NOT to do it.

Why It (Maybe) Works

Three months is long enough for habits to stick, short enough to see the finish line. Plus, tying it to power exchange? Genius. Every foot rub or denied cum becomes a ritual, proof you're leveling up as a sub/human/slightly-messy adult. And let's be honest—nothing fuels devotion like a mix of structure, desperation, and the occasional humiliating punishment.

Current run

My current challenge is to get my wife/godess/object of my insatiable kinky thoughts/partner feet massaged with special cream. It's for making evyrthing soft, help nails and yadayadayada. Basically preping her feet for more instensive worshiping. She doesn't know my hidden agenda and I am not sure if I would really be into it, since I am more into being her devout toy than having foot fetish, but I think it will be all the same if I put myself juuust right. So for my rewards I have planned these? - 30 days: Tiny dopamine hit. (making little photoset of Her feet playing with my hardon… for science.)
- 60 days: Mid-tier flex. (cleaning mushed banana split off Her toes tongue only)
- 90 days: Go nuclear. (a tiny foot spa whirpool because She deserves it, damn it :D and it will create more opportunities for... you know )

As for the hhip part of the sugar duo... It was easy having one for my shaving rutine, but here? Not sure and it's bad that I ave started challenge without having them prepared... May be that warrant more punishment?

TL;DR

90-day challenges are the BDSM of self-improvement: consensual, slightly painful, and weirdly addictive. Fail? Reset, adapt, try again. Win? Congrats, you’re now 10% more disciplined and 100% more bumptious on Nostr.

90days #FLR #LostCauseButStillTrying #femdom

@ 0271e1b9:ad8cff90

I study the greats. For if and when I find myself beaten down into the gutters of life - the vile, bile and the mundane - I shall draw strength from other great men - past, present and future - who, quite often, faced many more adversities and a lot more suffering, but chose to use them to their advantage, to overcome their dire circumstances and rise above the afflictions that life had bestowed upon them. It’s all been done before. It can be done again, better.

Learning from the past and from the present is very straightforward. Anyone can do that. But how does one learn from the future? It’s simple: you envision the best possible future for humanity, for generations to come, and for yourself. Then you figure out an approximate path on how to get there, and what kind of a man or a woman you must be to walk that path. The skills, the mindset, the qualities. And lastly, but perhaps most importantly, you find actionable measures, habits, convictions on how to become that person - and conversely, what are stopping you from becoming that person.

“You must value learning above everything else.”

― Robert Greene

“Those who have a 'why' to live, can bear with almost any 'how'.”

― Viktor E. Frankl

“You need to look at all events as having value. If you can do that, then you’re in a zone of tremendous opportunity.”

― Phil Stutz

“I shall take the more pains to uncover the fountains of philosophy, from which all my eloquence has taken its rise.”

― Marcus Tullius Cicero

“Error correction is the basis of all intelligence.”

― Jeff Booth

“Yes, you’re likely to fail, that’s fine. Because the goal of playing is not to win, but to keep learning. And the day you stop learning is the day you stop living."

― Jesse Enkamp

"A man is great not because he hasn't failed; a man is great because failure hasn't stopped him."

— Confucius

“If people knew how hard I had to work to gain my mastery, it would not seem so wonderful at all.”

― Michelangelo

“First of all we have to decide what we are to do and what manner of men we wish to be - the most difficult problem in the world.”

― Marcus Tullius Cicero

“You either bleed soul into your work, or let the work bleed out your soul.”

― Pran Yoganthan

"The Stoic philosopher is the man who has liberated himself from fear. He’s not afraid of death, he’s not afraid of pain, he’s not afraid of other people’s dismissal as a fool. The only thing he cares about is that he should meet his moral obligations.”

― Michael Sugrue

"The strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must."

― Thucydides

“The brain is the most powerful weapon in the world.”

― David Goggins

“Man, the bravest of animals, and the one most accustomed to suffering, does not repudiate suffering as such; he desires it, he even seeks it out, provided he is shown a meaning for it, a purpose of suffering. The meaninglessness of suffering, not suffering itself, was the curse that lay over mankind so far.”

― Friedrich Nietzsche

"Consciousness is awareness with a choice."

― Thomas Campbell

“The essence of philosophy is that a man should so live that his happiness shall depend as little as possible on external things.”

― Epictetus

“It’s most real, it’s most good and it’s most salvific - it saves you, it transforms you. That’s the sacred.”

— John Vervaeke

“It is impossible for a man to learn what he thinks he already knows.”

― Epictetus

“Evolution is a process of iteration. There’s no master plan. It’s in each moment of what happens.”

― Michael Behrens

“Don’t follow anybody and don’t accept anyone as a teacher, except when you become your own teacher and disciple.”

― Jiddu Krishnamurti

“This is your life. You’re accountable. What are you gonna do about that?”

― James Hollis

By the way, if you enjoyed these quotes, feel free to follow a little side project of mine: Stoic Resurrection

Peace & Love,

Kontext

Block height 881,748

@ b60c3e76:c9d0f46e

KRIS menjamin semua golongan masyarakat mendapatkan perlakuan sama dari rumah sakit, baik pelayanan medis maupun nonmedis.

Demi memberikan peningkatan kualitas layanan kesehatan kepada masyarakat, pemerintah baru saja mengeluarkan Peraturan Presiden (Perpres) nomor 59 tahun 2024 tentang Jaminan Kesehatan. Melalui perpres itu, Presiden Joko Widodo (Jokowi) telah menghapus perbedaan kelas layanan 1, 2, dan 3 dalam Badan Penyelenggara Jaminan Sosial atau BPJS Kesehatan.

Layanan berbasis kelas itu diganti dengan KRIS (Kelas Rawat Inap Standar). Berkaitan dengan lahirnya Perpres 59/2024 tentang Perubahan Ketiga atas Perpres 82/2018 tentang Jaminan Kesehatan, Presiden Joko Widodo telah memerintahkan seluruh rumah sakit yang bekerja sama dengan BPJS Kesehatan melaksanakannya.

Kebijakan baru itu mulai berlaku per 8 Mei 2024 dan paling lambat 30 Juni 2025. Dalam jangka waktu tersebut, rumah sakit dapat menyelenggarakan sebagian atau seluruh pelayanan rawat inap berdasarkan KRIS sesuai dengan kemampuan rumah sakit.

Lantas apa yang menjadi pembeda dari sisi layanan dengan layanan rawat inap sesuai Perpres 59/2024? Dahulu sistem layanan rawat BPJS Kesehatan dibagi berdasarkan kelas yang dibagi masing-masing kelas 1, 2, dan 3. Namun, melalui perpres, layanan kepada masyarakat tidak dibedakan lagi.

Pelayanan rawat inap yang diatur dalam perpres itu--dikenal dengan nama KRIS—menjadi sistem baru yang digunakan dalam pelayanan rawat inap BPJS Kesehatan di rumah sakit-rumah sakit. Dengan KRIS, semua golongan masyarakat akan mendapatkan perlakuan yang sama dari rumah sakit, baik dalam hal pelayanan medis maupun nonmedis.

Dengan lahirnya Perpres 59/2024, tarif iuran BPJS Kesehatan pun juga akan berubah. Hanya saja, dalam Perpres itu belum dicantumkan secara rinci ihwal besar iuran yang baru. Besaran iuran baru BPJS Kesehatan itu sesuai rencana baru ditetapkan pada 1 Juli 2025.

“Penetapan manfaat, tarif, dan iuran sebagaimana dimaksud ditetapkan paling lambat tanggal 1 Juli 2025,” tulis aturan tersebut, dikutip Senin (13/5/2024).

Itu artinya, iuran BPJS Kesehatan saat ini masih sama seperti sebelumnya, yakni sesuai dengan kelas yang dipilih. Namun perpres itu tetap berlaku sembari menanti lahirnya peraturan lanjutan dari perpres tersebut.

Kesiapan Rumah Sakit

Berkaitan dengan lahirnya kebijakan layanan kesehatan tanpa dibedakan kelas lagi, Kementerian Kesehatan (Kemenkes) menegaskan mayoritas rumah sakit di Indonesia siap untuk menjalankan layanan KRIS untuk pasien BPJS Kesehatan.

Kesiapan itu diungkapkan oleh Dirjen Pelayanan Kesehatan Kemenkes Azhar Jaya. “Survei kesiapan RS terkait KRIS sudah dilakukan pada 2.988 rumah sakit dan yang sudah siap menjawab isian 12 kriteria ada sebanyak 2.233 rumah sakit,” ujar Azhar.

Sebagai informasi, KRIS adalah pengganti layanan Kelas 1, 2, dan 3 BPJS Kesehatan yang bertujuan untuk memberikan layanan kesehatan secara merata tanpa melihat besaran iurannya.

Melalui KRIS, rumah sakit perlu menyiapkan sarana dan prasarana sesuai dengan 12 kriteria kelas rawat inap standar secara bertahap. Apa saja ke-12 kriteria KRIS itu?

Sesuai bunyi Pasal 46A Perpres 59/2024, disyaratkan kriteria fasilitas perawatan dan pelayanan rawat inap KRIS meliputi komponen bangunan yang digunakan tidak boleh memiliki tingkat porositas yang tinggi serta terdapat ventilasi udara dan kelengkapan tidur.

Demikian pula soal pencahayaan ruangan. Perpres itu juga mengatur pencahayaan ruangan buatan mengikuti kriteria standar 250 lux untuk penerangan dan 50 lux untuk pencahayaan tidur, temperature ruangan 20--26 derajat celcius.

Tidak hanya itu, layanan rawat inap berdasarkan perpres itu mensyaratkan fasilitas layanan yang membagi ruang rawat berdasarkan jenis kelamin pasien, anak atau dewasa, serta penyakit infeksi atau noninfeksi.

Selain itu, kriteria lainnya adalah keharusan bagi penyedia layanan untuk mempertimbangkan kepadatan ruang rawat dan kualitas tempat tidur, penyediaan tirai atau partisi antartempat tidur, kamar mandi dalam ruangan rawat inap yang memenuhi standar aksesibilitas, dan menyediakan outlet oksigen.

Selain itu, kelengkapan tempat tidur berupa adanya dua kotak kontak dan nurse call pada setiap tempat tidur dan adanya nakas per tempat tidur. Kepadatan ruang rawat inap maksimal empat tempat tidur dengan jarak antara tepi tempat tidur minimal 1,5 meter.

Tirai/partisi dengan rel dibenamkan menempel di plafon atau menggantung. Kamar mandi dalam ruang rawat inap serta kamar mandi sesuai dengan standar aksesibilitas dan outlet oksigen.

Azhar menjamin, Kemenkes akan menjalankan hal tersebut sesuai dengan tupoksi yang ada. “Tentu saja kami akan bekerja sama dengan BPJS Kesehatan dalam implementasi dan pengawasannya di lapangan,” ujar Azhar.

Berkaitan dengan perpres jaminan kesehatan itu, Direktur Utama BPJS Kesehatan Ghufron Mukti menilai, perpres tersebut berorientasi pada penyeragaman kelas rawat inap yang mengacu pada 12 kriteria. "Bahwa perawatan ada kelas rawat inap standar dengan 12 kriteria, untuk peserta BPJS, maka sebagaimana sumpah dokter tidak boleh dibedakan pemberian pelayan medis atas dasar suku, agama, status sosial atau beda iurannya," ujarnya.

Jika ada peserta ingin dirawat pada kelas yang lebih tinggi, kata Ghufron, maka diperbolehkan selama hal itu dipengaruhi situasi nonmedis. Hal itu disebutkan dalam Pasal 51 Perpres Jaminan Kesehatan diatur ketentuan naik kelas perawatan.

Menurut pasal tersebut, naik kelas perawatan dilakukan dengan cara mengikuti asuransi kesehatan tambahan atau membayar selisih antara biaya yang dijamin oleh BPJS Kesehatan dengan biaya yang harus dibayar akibat peningkatan pelayanan.

Selisih antara biaya yang dijamin oleh BPJS Kesehatan dengan biaya pelayanan dapat dibayar oleh peserta bersangkutan, pemberi kerja, atau asuransi kesehatan tambahan.

Ghufron Mukti juga mengimbau pengelola rumah sakit tidak mengurangi jumlah tempat tidur perawatan pasien dalam upaya memenuhi kriteria KRIS. "Pesan saya jangan dikurangi akses dengan mengurangi jumlah tempat tidur. Pertahankan jumlah tempat tidur dan penuhi persyaratannya dengan 12 kriteria tersebut," tegas Ghufron.

Penulis: Firman Hidranto Redaktur: Ratna Nuraini/Elvira Inda Sari Sumber: Indonesia.go.id

@ 266815e0:6cd408a5

Lot of people are starting to talk about building a web-of-trust and how nostr can or is already being used as such

We all know about using the kind:3 following lists as a simple WoT that can be used to filter out spam. but as we all know it does not really signal "trust", its mostly just "I find your content interesting"

But what about real "trust"... well its kind of multi-denominational, I could trust that your a good developer or a good journalist but still not trust you enough to invite you over to my house. There are some interesting and clever solutions proposed for quantifying "trust" in a digital sense but I'm not going to get into that here. I want to talk about something that I have not see anyone discuss yet.

How is the web-of-trust maintained? or more precisely how do you expect users to update the digital representation of the "trust" of other users?

Its all well and good to think of how a user would create that "trust" of another user when discovering them for the first time. They would click the "follow" button, or maybe even rate them on a few topics with a 1/5 star system But how will a user remove that trust? how will they update it if things change and they trust them less?

If our goal is to model "trust" in a digital sense then we NEED a way for the data to stay up-to-date and as accurate as possible. otherwise whats the use? If we don't have a friction-less way to update or remove the digital representation of "trust" then we will end up with a WoT that continuously grows and everyone is rated 10/10

In the case of nostr kind:3 following lists. its pretty easy to see how these would get updated. If someone posts something I dislike or I notice I'm getting board of their content. then I just unfollow them. An important part here is that I'm not thinking "I should update my trust score of this user" but instead "I'm no longer interested, I don't want to see this anymore"

But that is probably the easiest "trust" to update. because most of us on social media spend some time curating our feed and we are used to doing it. But what about the more obscure "trust" scores? whats the regular mechanism by which a user would update the "honestly" score of another user?

In the real world its easy, when I stop trusting someone I simply stop associating with them. there isn't any button or switch I need to update. I simply don't talk to them anymore, its friction-less But in the digital realm I would have to remove or update that trust. in other words its an action I need to take instead of an action I'm not doing. and actions take energy.

So how do we reflect something in the digital world that takes no-energy and is almost subconscious in the real world?

TLDR; webs-of-trust are not just about scoring other users once. you must keep the score up-to-date

@ 97c70a44:ad98e322

There was a slight dust up recently over a website someone runs removing a listing for an app someone built based on entirely arbitrary criteria. I'm not to going to attempt to speak for either wounded party, but I would like to share my own personal definition for what constitutes a "nostr app" in an effort to help clarify what might be an otherwise confusing and opaque purity test.

In this post, I will be committing the "no true Scotsman" fallacy, in which I start with the most liberal definition I can come up with, and gradually refine it until all that is left is the purest, gleamingest, most imaginary and unattainable nostr app imaginable. As I write this, I wonder if anything built yet will actually qualify. In any case, here we go.

It uses nostr

The lowest bar for what a "nostr app" might be is an app ("application" - i.e. software, not necessarily a native app of any kind) that has some nostr-specific code in it, but which doesn't take any advantage of what makes nostr distinctive as a protocol.

Examples might include a scraper of some kind which fulfills its charter by fetching data from relays (regardless of whether it validates or retains signatures). Another might be a regular web 2.0 app which provides an option to "log in with nostr" by requesting and storing the user's public key.

In either case, the fact that nostr is involved is entirely neutral. A scraper can scrape html, pdfs, jsonl, whatever data source - nostr relays are just another target. Likewise, a user's key in this scenario is treated merely as an opaque identifier, with no appreciation for the super powers it brings along.

In most cases, this kind of app only exists as a marketing ploy, or less cynically, because it wants to get in on the hype of being a "nostr app", without the developer quite understanding what that means, or having the budget to execute properly on the claim.

It leverages nostr

Some of you might be wondering, "isn't 'leverage' a synonym for 'use'?" And you would be right, but for one connotative difference. It's possible to "use" something improperly, but by definition leverage gives you a mechanical advantage that you wouldn't otherwise have. This is the second category of "nostr app".

This kind of app gets some benefit out of the nostr protocol and network, but in an entirely selfish fashion. The intention of this kind of app is not to augment the nostr network, but to augment its own UX by borrowing some nifty thing from the protocol without really contributing anything back.

Some examples might include:

• Using nostr signers to encrypt or sign data, and then store that data on a proprietary server.
• Using nostr relays as a kind of low-code backend, but using proprietary event payloads.
• Using nostr event kinds to represent data (why), but not leveraging the trustlessness that buys you.

An application in this category might even communicate to its users via nostr DMs - but this doesn't make it a "nostr app" any more than a website that emails you hot deals on herbal supplements is an "email app". These apps are purely parasitic on the nostr ecosystem.

In the long-term, that's not necessarily a bad thing. Email's ubiquity is self-reinforcing. But in the short term, this kind of "nostr app" can actually do damage to nostr's reputation by over-promising and under-delivering.

It complements nostr

Next up, we have apps that get some benefit out of nostr as above, but give back by providing a unique value proposition to nostr users as nostr users. This is a bit of a fine distinction, but for me this category is for apps which focus on solving problems that nostr isn't good at solving, leaving the nostr integration in a secondary or supporting role.

One example of this kind of app was Mutiny (RIP), which not only allowed users to sign in with nostr, but also pulled those users' social graphs so that users could send money to people they knew and trusted. Mutiny was doing a great job of leveraging nostr, as well as providing value to users with nostr identities - but it was still primarily a bitcoin wallet, not a "nostr app" in the purest sense.

Other examples are things like Nostr Nests and Zap.stream, whose core value proposition is streaming video or audio content. Both make great use of nostr identities, data formats, and relays, but they're primarily streaming apps. A good litmus test for things like this is: if you got rid of nostr, would it be the same product (even if inferior in certain ways)?

A similar category is infrastructure providers that benefit nostr by their existence (and may in fact be targeted explicitly at nostr users), but do things in a centralized, old-web way; for example: media hosts, DNS registrars, hosting providers, and CDNs.

To be clear here, I'm not casting aspersions (I don't even know what those are, or where to buy them). All the apps mentioned above use nostr to great effect, and are a real benefit to nostr users. But they are not True Scotsmen.

It embodies nostr

Ok, here we go. This is the crème de la crème, the top du top, the meilleur du meilleur, the bee's knees. The purest, holiest, most chaste category of nostr app out there. The apps which are, indeed, nostr indigitate.

This category of nostr app (see, no quotes this time) can be defined by the converse of the previous category. If nostr was removed from this type of application, would it be impossible to create the same product?

To tease this apart a bit, apps that leverage the technical aspects of nostr are dependent on nostr the protocol, while apps that benefit nostr exclusively via network effect are integrated into nostr the network. An app that does both things is working in symbiosis with nostr as a whole.

An app that embraces both nostr's protocol and its network becomes an organic extension of every other nostr app out there, multiplying both its competitive moat and its contribution to the ecosystem:

• In contrast to apps that only borrow from nostr on the technical level but continue to operate in their own silos, an application integrated into the nostr network comes pre-packaged with existing users, and is able to provide more value to those users because of other nostr products. On nostr, it's a good thing to advertise your competitors.
• In contrast to apps that only market themselves to nostr users without building out a deep integration on the protocol level, a deeply integrated app becomes an asset to every other nostr app by becoming an organic extension of them through interoperability. This results in increased traffic to the app as other developers and users refer people to it instead of solving their problem on their own. This is the "micro-apps" utopia we've all been waiting for.

Credible exit doesn't matter if there aren't alternative services. Interoperability is pointless if other applications don't offer something your app doesn't. Marketing to nostr users doesn't matter if you don't augment their agency as nostr users.

If I had to choose a single NIP that represents the mindset behind this kind of app, it would be NIP 89 A.K.A. "Recommended Application Handlers", which states:

Nostr's discoverability and transparent event interaction is one of its most interesting/novel mechanics. This NIP provides a simple way for clients to discover applications that handle events of a specific kind to ensure smooth cross-client and cross-kind interactions.

These handlers are the glue that holds nostr apps together. A single event, signed by the developer of an application (or by the application's own account) tells anyone who wants to know 1. what event kinds the app supports, 2. how to link to the app (if it's a client), and (if the pubkey also publishes a kind 10002), 3. which relays the app prefers.

As a sidenote, NIP 89 is currently focused more on clients, leaving DVMs, relays, signers, etc somewhat out in the cold. Updating 89 to include tailored listings for each kind of supporting app would be a huge improvement to the protocol. This, plus a good front end for navigating these listings (sorry nostrapp.link, close but no cigar) would obviate the evil centralized websites that curate apps based on arbitrary criteria.

Examples of this kind of app obviously include many kind 1 clients, as well as clients that attempt to bring the benefits of the nostr protocol and network to new use cases - whether long form content, video, image posts, music, emojis, recipes, project management, or any other "content type".

To drill down into one example, let's think for a moment about forms. What's so great about a forms app that is built on nostr? Well,

• There is a spec for forms and responses, which means that...
• Multiple clients can implement the same data format, allowing for credible exit and user choice, even of...
• Other products not focused on forms, which can still view, respond to, or embed forms, and which can send their users via NIP 89 to a client that does...
• Cryptographically sign forms and responses, which means they are self-authenticating and can be sent to...
• Multiple relays, which reduces the amount of trust necessary to be confident results haven't been deliberately "lost".

Show me a forms product that does all of those things, and isn't built on nostr. You can't, because it doesn't exist. Meanwhile, there are plenty of image hosts with APIs, streaming services, and bitcoin wallets which have basically the same levels of censorship resistance, interoperability, and network effect as if they weren't built on nostr.

It supports nostr

Notice I haven't said anything about whether relays, signers, blossom servers, software libraries, DVMs, and the accumulated addenda of the nostr ecosystem are nostr apps. Well, they are (usually).

This is the category of nostr app that gets none of the credit for doing all of the work. There's no question that they qualify as beautiful nostrcorns, because their value propositions are entirely meaningless outside of the context of nostr. Who needs a signer if you don't have a cryptographic identity you need to protect? DVMs are literally impossible to use without relays. How are you going to find the blossom server that will serve a given hash if you don't know which servers the publishing user has selected to store their content?

In addition to being entirely contextualized by nostr architecture, this type of nostr app is valuable because it does things "the nostr way". By that I mean that they don't simply try to replicate existing internet functionality into a nostr context; instead, they create entirely new ways of putting the basic building blocks of the internet back together.

A great example of this is how Nostr Connect, Nostr Wallet Connect, and DVMs all use relays as brokers, which allows service providers to avoid having to accept incoming network connections. This opens up really interesting possibilities all on its own.

So while I might hesitate to call many of these things "apps", they are certainly "nostr".

Appendix: it smells like a NINO

So, let's say you've created an app, but when you show it to people they politely smile, nod, and call it a NINO (Nostr In Name Only). What's a hacker to do? Well, here's your handy-dandy guide on how to wash that NINO stench off and Become a Nostr.

You app might be a NINO if:

• There's no NIP for your data format (or you're abusing NIP 78, 32, etc by inventing a sub-protocol inside an existing event kind)
• There's a NIP, but no one knows about it because it's in a text file on your hard drive (or buried in your project's repository)
• Your NIP imposes an incompatible/centralized/legacy web paradigm onto nostr
• Your NIP relies on trusted third (or first) parties
• There's only one implementation of your NIP (yours)
• Your core value proposition doesn't depend on relays, events, or nostr identities
• One or more relay urls are hard-coded into the source code
• Your app depends on a specific relay implementation to work (ahem, relay29)
• You don't validate event signatures
• You don't publish events to relays you don't control
• You don't read events from relays you don't control
• You use legacy web services to solve problems, rather than nostr-native solutions
• You use nostr-native solutions, but you've hardcoded their pubkeys or URLs into your app
• You don't use NIP 89 to discover clients and services
• You haven't published a NIP 89 listing for your app
• You don't leverage your users' web of trust for filtering out spam
• You don't respect your users' mute lists
• You try to "own" your users' data

Now let me just re-iterate - it's ok to be a NINO. We need NINOs, because nostr can't (and shouldn't) tackle every problem. You just need to decide whether your app, as a NINO, is actually contributing to the nostr ecosystem, or whether you're just using buzzwords to whitewash a legacy web software product.

If you're in the former camp, great! If you're in the latter, what are you waiting for? Only you can fix your NINO problem. And there are lots of ways to do this, depending on your own unique situation:

• Drop nostr support if it's not doing anyone any good. If you want to build a normal company and make some money, that's perfectly fine.
• Build out your nostr integration - start taking advantage of webs of trust, self-authenticating data, event handlers, etc.
• Work around the problem. Think you need a special relay feature for your app to work? Guess again. Consider encryption, AUTH, DVMs, or better data formats.
• Think your idea is a good one? Talk to other devs or open a PR to the nips repo. No one can adopt your NIP if they don't know about it.
• Keep going. It can sometimes be hard to distinguish a research project from a NINO. New ideas have to be built out before they can be fully appreciated.
• Listen to advice. Nostr developers are friendly and happy to help. If you're not sure why you're getting traction, ask!

I sincerely hope this article is useful for all of you out there in NINO land. Maybe this made you feel better about not passing the totally optional nostr app purity test. Or maybe it gave you some actionable next steps towards making a great NINON (Nostr In Not Only Name) app. In either case, GM and PV.

@ 94a6a78a:0ddf320e

Azzamo is more than just a relay provider—it’s a high-performance network designed to make Nostr faster, smoother, and more reliable for everyone. Whether you're posting notes, zapping sats, sharing media, or sending DMs, Azzamo keeps your Nostr experience seamless and efficient.

Nostr is unstoppable, but not all relays are the same. Some are slow, unreliable, or disappear overnight, while others get overloaded, making message delivery inconsistent. Azzamo is built differently—offering fast, stable, and globally distributed relays to ensure low-latency, high-speed connections, no matter where you are.

---

🌍 Premium Relays for Maximum Performance

Azzamo Premium Relays are optimized for speed, reliability, and uptime, available exclusively to Premium users:

📡 Azzamo Premium Relays:

• Europe: wss://relay.azzamo.net
• America: wss://us.azzamo.net
• Asia: wss://asia.azzamo.net

Add Azzamo Premium Time to unlock unlimited, high-speed access across these global relays.

🔗 Get Premium: azzamo.net/premium

---

🆓 Freemium Relays – Free for Everyone

Azzamo believes in keeping Nostr open and accessible to all. That’s why we offer free relays for everyone, with no rate limits for Premium members

📡 Freemium Relays:

• Free Relay: wss://nostr.azzamo.net – Open to all.
• Inbox Relay: wss://inbox.azzamo.net – Reliable for DMs & group messages.

By offering both free and premium options, Azzamo ensures that anyone can use Nostr, while also funding the infrastructure that keeps it running smoothly.

---

🛡️ Minimal Moderation, Maximum Transparency

Nostr is about free speech, but that doesn’t mean zero moderation. Azzamo follows a minimal moderation policy to keep relays functional and spam-free while maintaining transparency in enforcement.\ \ 🚫 Spam & network abuse\ 🚫 Illegal content (CSAM, fraud, malware, scams)\ 🚫 Impersonation & identity abuse

We also maintain a public Ban API for transparent moderation decisions.

📖 More on our Ban API: azzamo.net/introducing-the-azzamo-ban-api

---

🚀 Get Started with Azzamo Relays Today!

🔗 Connect now:\ 📡 wss://nostr.azzamo.net (Freemium Free Relay)\ 📬 wss://inbox.azzamo.net (Freemium Inbox Relay)\ 📡 wss://relay.azzamo.net (Premium Europe Relay)\ 📡 wss://us.azzamo.net (Premium Americas Relay)\ 📡 wss://asia.azzamo.net (Premium Asia Relay)

Nostr is growing fast. Make sure your relays can keep up. 🚀

azzamo #grownostr #nostr #relay #relays #premiumrelay #paidrelay

@ 5a261a61:2ebd4480

The idea of the Bean Bag Game is quite ingenious. I read about it on a BDSM-positive blog. Here’s how it works:

1. Setup:

2. Take a small cloth bag and add 10 white beans (rewards/pleasure) and 10 black beans (punishment/discomfort).

3. When it’s time to play, draw two beans:

   • First bean (the tone): Determines if the activity will be pleasant (white) or uncomfortable (black).

   • Second bean (the task): Decides whether you get a reward (white) or punishment (black).

---

Combination Interpretations:

• Black + Black\ "No fun, just work."

• Boring/challenging tasks you’d normally postpone: window cleaning, scrubbing bathroom tiles, polishing shoes.

• Could also mean no playtime (e.g., "Go straight to bed"). Pure duty – no pleasure, only discipline.

• White + Black\ "Work with a twist."

• Punishment or chores, but with a kinky edge:

  • Clean the bathroom wearing a vibrating butt plug.

  • Wash dishes with nipple clamps; add a clothespin to your body for every minute over the time limit.

• Still no orgasms – the black bean ensures denial.

• Black + White\ "Pleasure with pain (or humiliation)."

• Mix stimulation and discomfort:

  • Ride a dildo with weighted nipple clamps.

  • Give a "lap dance" to a teddy bear with a strapon.

  • Chat online as a "perfect plaything" for others without touching yourself.

• Again, no orgasms – the black bean overrules the white.

• White + White\ "Lucky draw… but denial is optional."

• Freedom to indulge, though I often choose self-denial anyway. Examples:

  • Edge for 30 minutes, then ask permission to climax (50% chance).

  • Use toys freely, but end the session frustrated.

---

The Dynamic Ratio Twist:

• The starting 10:10 ratio isn’t fixed. Adjust it based on behavior:

• Good deeds? Swap a black bean for a white one.

• Mistakes? Replace a white bean with a black one.

• Single beans can also decide smaller stakes, like:

• "Should this edge turn into a ruined orgasm?"

• "Do I deserve dessert tonight?"

---

Why It Works:

• Control: The beans dictate your fate, but you tweak the odds through obedience.

• Flexibility: Use pairs for major tasks, single beans for quick decisions.

• Psychological tease: Even "white + white" can mean denial – because you choose the rules.

@ 78c90fc4:4bff983c

via acTVism Munich

Ausschnitt:

https://www.wissenschaftstehtauf.ch/video/Ukraine_will_win_the_war.mp4

In diesem Video, das exklusiv auf Deutsch auf unserem Kanal veröffentlicht wurde, untersucht der mit dem Pulitzer-Preis ausgezeichnete Journalist Glenn Greenwald den Auftritt von US-Verteidigungsminister Pete Hegseth im NATO-Hauptquartier in Brüssel, wo er die Haltung von Präsident Trump zum Krieg in der Ukraine darlegte. Hegseth betonte, dass das Blutvergießen gestoppt und ein dauerhafter Frieden durch Diplomatie erreicht werden müsse, anstatt den Krieg fortzusetzen. Greenwald hebt auch die Diskrepanz zwischen der optimistischen Rhetorik der NATO-Führer in der Vergangenheit und der Realität des festgefahrenen Konflikts vor Ort hervor.

Dieses Video wurde von System Update produziert und am 13. Februar 2025 auf dem Glenn Greenwald YouTube-Kanal veröffentlicht. Wir haben es ins Deutsche übersetzt und veröffentlichen es heute erneut, um die Meinungsbildung zu diesem Thema in Deutschland und darüber hinaus zu unterstützen.

\ Ganzes Video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PWp8-o-akwI

https://x.com/RealWsiegrist/status/1891402218626019622

\ dazu auch:

Corona, Ukraine und die Biowaffen

https://waltisiegrist.locals.com/upost/1835360/corona-ukraine-und-die-biowaffen

@ 266815e0:6cd408a5

While I was in Mediera with all the other awesome people at the first SEC cohort there where a lot of discussions around data storage on nostr and if it could be made censorship-resistent

I remember lots of discussions about torrents, hypercore, nostr relays, and of course IPFS

There were a few things I learned from all these conversations:

1. All the existing solutions have one thing in common. A universal ID of some kind for files
2. HTTP is still good. we don't have to throw the baby out with the bath water
3. nostr could fix this... somehow

Some of the existing solutions work well for large files, and all of them are decentralization in some way. However none of them seem capable of serving up cat pictures for social media clients. they all have something missing...

An Identity system

An identity system would allow files to be "owned" by users. and once files have owners servers could start grouping files into a single thing instead of a 1000+ loose files

This can also greatly simplify the question of "what is spam" for a server hosting (or seeding) these files. since it could simply have a whitelist of owners (and maybe their friends)

What is blossom?

Blossom is a set of HTTP endpoints that allow nostr users to store and retrieve binary data on public servers using the sha256 hash as a universal id

What are Blobs?

blobs are chunks of binary data. they are similar to files but with one key difference, they don't have names

Instead blobs have a sha256 hash (like b1674191a88ec5cdd733e4240a81803105dc412d6c6708d53ab94fc248f4f553) as an ID

These IDs are universal since they can be computed from the file itself using the sha256 hashing algorithm ( you can get a files sha256 hash on linux using: sha256sum bitcoin.pdf )

How do the servers work?

Blossom servers expose four endpoints to let clients and users upload and manage blobs

• GET /<sha256> (optional file .ext)
• PUT /upload
• Authentication: Signed nostr event
• Returns a blob descriptor
• GET /list/<pubkey>
• Returns an array of blob descriptors
• Authentication (optional): Signed nostr event
• DELETE /<sha256>
• Authentication: Signed nostr event

What is Blossom Drive?

Blossom Drive is a nostr app built on top of blossom servers and allows users to create and manage folders of blobs

What are Drives

Drives are just nostr events (kind 30563) that store a map of blobs and what filename they should have along with some extra metadata

An example drive event would be json { "pubkey": "266815e0c9210dfa324c6cba3573b14bee49da4209a9456f9484e5106cd408a5", "created_at": 1710773987, "content": "", "kind": 30563, "tags": [ [ "name", "Emojis" ], [ "description", "nostr emojis" ], [ "d", "emojis" ], [ "r", "https://cdn.hzrd149.com/" ], [ "x", "303f018e613f29e3e43264529903b7c8c84debbd475f89368cb293ec23938981", "/noStrudel.png", "15161", "image/png" ], [ "x", "a0e2b39975c8da1702374b3eed6f4c6c7333e6ae0008dadafe93bd34bfb2ca78", "/satellite.png", "6853", "image/png" ], [ "x", "e8f3fae0f4a43a88eae235a8b79794d72e8f14b0e103a0fed1e073d8fb53d51f", "/amethyst.png", "20487", "image/png" ], [ "x", "70bd5836807b916d79e9c4e67e8b07e3e3b53f4acbb95c7521b11039a3c975c6", "/nos.png", "36521", "image/png" ], [ "x", "0fc304630279e0c5ab2da9c2769e3a3178c47b8609b447a30916244e89abbc52", "/primal.png", "29343", "image/png" ], [ "x", "9a03824a73d4af192d893329bbc04cd3798542ee87af15051aaf9376b74b25d4", "/coracle.png", "18300", "image/png" ], [ "x", "accdc0cdc048f4719bb5e1da4ff4c6ffc1a4dbb7cf3afbd19b86940c01111568", "/iris.png", "24070", "image/png" ], [ "x", "2e740f2514d6188e350d95cf4756bbf455d2f95e6a09bc64e94f5031bc4bba8f", "/damus.png", "32758", "image/png" ], [ "x", "2e019f08da0c75fb9c40d81947e511c8f0554763bffb6d23a7b9b8c9e8c84abb", "/old emojis/astral.png", "29365", "image/png" ], [ "x", "d97f842f2511ce0491fe0de208c6135b762f494a48da59926ce15acfdb6ac17e", "/other/rabbit.png", "19803", "image/png" ], [ "x", "72cb99b689b4cfe1a9fb6937f779f3f9c65094bf0e6ac72a8f8261efa96653f5", "/blossom.png", "4393", "image/png" ] ] }

There is a lot going on but the main thing is the list of "x" tags and the path that describes the folder and filename the blob should live at

If your interested, the full event definition is at github.com/hzrd149/blossom-drive

Getting started

Like every good nostr client it takes a small instruction manual in order to use it properly. so here are the steps for getting started

1. Open the app

Open https://blossom.hzrd149.com

2. Login using extension

You can also login using any of the following methods using the input - NIP-46 with your https://nsec.app or https://flare.pub account - a NIP-46 connection string - an ncryptsec password protected private key - a nsec unprotected private key (please don't) - bunker:// URI from nsecbunker

3. Add a blossom server

Right now https://cdn.satellite.earth is the only public server that is compatible with blossom drive. If you want to host your own I've written a basic implementation in TypeScript github.com/hzrd149/blossom-server

4. Start uploading your files

NOTE: All files upload to blossom drive are public by default. DO NOT upload private files

5. Manage files

Encrypted drives

There is also the option to encrypt drives using NIP-49 password encryption. although its not tested at all so don't trust it, verify

Whats next?

I don't know, but Im excited to see what everyone else on nostr builds with this. I'm only one developer at the end of the day and I can't think of everything

also all the images in this article are stored in one of my blossom drives here

nostr:naddr1qvzqqqrhvvpzqfngzhsvjggdlgeycm96x4emzjlwf8dyyzdfg4hefp89zpkdgz99qq8xzun5d93kcefdd9kkzem9wvr46jka

@ 48a3da40:2d2568d9

Slug.pub Long Form

This simple single page app allows you to hard code a long form content slug from a pubkey and render it as a web page article.

Just fork the repo and host it on your favorite place, replace the slug and pubkey on the script.js file. Then point your domain to it. It will dynamically pull your note.

Boom, single page sites based on long form content.

Nostr is the "DB"

@ 044da344:073a8a0e

Die Sehnsucht gar nicht so weniger Westdeutscher ist groß – besonders dann, wenn sie schon etwas älter sind und sich zu fragen beginnen, was bisher gefehlt hat in ihrem Leben. Die Antwort kann man zum Beispiel im Kontrafunk hören: „Plötzlich bewegt sich was“ stand dort über der letzten Sonntagsrunde. Eine Revolution, vielleicht doch noch. 1848, 1919, WIR. Und 1989, okay. Man muss nur ein wenig Markus Vahlefeld lauschen, Prototyp des konservativen Intellektuellen, knapp 60 inzwischen, um zu verstehen, wie tief dieser Stachel sitzt. Die im Osten – die haben uns etwas voraus. Die waren mittendrin, als sich die Welt zu drehen begann. Lasst uns also alles dafür tun, damit das nicht so bleibt bis in alle Ewigkeit.

Wer zu den Wurzeln dieser Sehnsucht will, sollte die beiden Bücher lesen, die ich in dieser Kolumne schon einmal empfohlen habe und die unterschiedlicher nicht sein könnten. Klein, eher dünn und sehr persönlich das eine, wuchtig, sachlich-kühl und mit dem Zeug zum großen Wurf das andere. Autobiografie hier, Wissenschaft dort – jeweils nicht zu verstehen ohne das, was Markus Vahlefeld und seine Leidensgenossen so schmerzlich vermissen. Die Erfahrung, dass morgen alles anders sein kann, lässt den Menschen gelassen und den Gedanken an mögliche Verluste beim Schreiben kleiner werden.

Ingrid Schreyer hat angefangen, ihre Erinnerungen festzuhalten. Auf dem Cover geht es vordergründig um „den Aufbruch 1989“ und um Ahrenshoop, einen feinen Badeort an der Ostsee, in dem Büchlein steckt aber viel mehr – und das nicht nur, weil die Autorin mit Wolfgang Schreyer verheiratet war, einem Schriftsteller mit Millionenpublikum, deutlich älter als sie und auf der Höhe seines Schaffens auch attraktiv für eine Frau wie Brigitte Reimann, wie man in einem wunderbaren Briefwechsel nachlesen kann. Wolfgang, dieser Erfolgsmensch, ist natürlich noch präsent im Gedächtnis von Ingrid Schreyer. Die gemeinsamen Bücher in den 1980ern und eine Lesung in Leipzig, die Gespräche mit Stefan Heym in Strandnähe und der 9. November 1989, als Ingrid, gerade 45, unbedingt nach Berlin will, aber weder ihren Mann noch Sohn Paul, damals erst 12 und inzwischen Mitherausgeber von Multipolar, überzeugen kann. Das Ende der Mauer vor dem Fernsehapparat und nicht dort, wo gerade ein Weltreich zusammenbricht. So viel Rotwein steht in keinem Keller.

„Wie wir auf die Straße gingen“: Dieser Titel spielt zunächst auf das an, was da hoch im Norden des Landes passiert ist, fernab der Metropolen, über die heute jeder Geschichtslehrer spricht. Der 9. Oktober in Leipzig, der 4. November in Berlin. Wie war das in Ribnitz-Damgarten und in Ahrenshoop? Wie ist Ingrid Schreyer dazu gekommen, in einem Dorf hunderte Unterschriften für das Neue Forum zu sammeln, dann eine Ortsgruppe zu gründen und die Gästehäuser der Stasi zu enttarnen? Die Antworten führen in ein christliches Elternhaus in Magdeburg, zu einem Urgroßvater, der in der Stadt als Uhrmacher und Optiker genauso eine Nummer wurde wie 1848 in der Opposition, und in ein Milieu, für das die DDR so selbstverständlich war, dass man sich nicht viel dabei dachte, kurz nach Ulbrichts Kahlschlag von 1965 einen Klub mit dem Namen „Die Andersdenkenden“ zu gründen und dort mit Beat und Joints über Gott und die Welt zu streiten, ganz ohne Angst vor Spitzeln. Auch diese Autobiografie lebt ein wenig von den Namen, die Ingrid Schreyer immer wieder einstreut, sie erzählt aber zugleich eine ganz eigene DDR-Geschichte, die, so verspricht es der Buchrücken, fortgesetzt werden soll. Den ersten Band der „Ahrenshooper Erinnerungen“ gibt es genau wie Ingrid Schreyers Bücher über die Kunst in Ahrenshoop nur bei ihr selbst, zu ordern über die Webseite.

Das Buch von Michael Beleites hat schon einen Verlagswechsel hinter sich und ist trotzdem noch nicht wirklich angekommen in der Öffentlichkeit. Man könnte sagen: ein dicker Brocken, okay. Wer liest schon knapp 700 Seiten, wenn Titel und Untertitel eher schwere Kost versprechen? Das ist hier aber nicht der Punkt. Dieses Buch hat das Zeug, erst Klarheit in den Köpfen zu schaffen und dann die Welt zu verändern. Eine Revolution – aber ganz anders, als sich das die Sonntagsrunde im Kontrafunk gerade ausgemalt hat. Michael Beleites rüttelt an den Grundfesten unseres Denkens. Charles Darwin. Kleiner wird es nicht. Die Selektionshypothese, sagt Michael Beleites, ist widerlegt und damit alles, was mit dem Motto „Survival of the Fittest“ über uns gekommen ist. Der ewige Kampf ums Dasein. Das Wettrennen der Egoisten und damit Kapitalismus. Eine „Machbarkeits-Ideologie“, die glaubt, die Natur „zum Wohle des Menschen“ manipulieren zu können, und so Pate stand bei den Völkermorden der Nationalsozialisten. Neben Darwin räumt dieser Michael Beleites auch die Lehre von der „Vererbung erworbener Eigenschaften“ ab, einen Gegenspieler der Selektionstheorie, und damit den „biologistischen Unterbau“ der „sowjet-kommunistischen Stalin-Diktatur“, die auf „Züchtung durch Erziehung“ gesetzt habe (S. 583). Der lange Atem des Darwinismus reicht dabei weit über die Politik hinaus – von einem Artenschutz, der nicht verstehen will, dass der Lebensraum zur Art gehört, über die „Illusion“ Permakultur (S. 518) bis zum Ausblenden der „geographischen Rassenvielfalt“ als „biologische Tatsache“ und „unschätzbares Naturerbe der Menschheit“ (S. 530).

Ich gebe zu: Das ist viel auf einmal. So viel und so grundlegend, dass es fast schon verwunderlich wäre, wenn der Autor keine Angriffe erlebt hätte. Ich bin auf Michael Beleites in einem Buch von Claus M. Wolfschlag gestoßen. Eine Sammlung von zwei Dutzend Prangergeschichten, die ich im Sommer 2024 eigentlich rezensieren wollte, weil sie das auf sehr persönliche Weise ergänzen, was ich gerade selbst eher abstrakt als Cancel Culture beschrieben hatte. Im Garten schien die Sonne, aber mir war trotzdem zum Heulen. Keine Spur von Schreiblust. Das Beleites-Interview setzte allem die Krone auf. Da sprach ein Mann, dessen Namen ich aus der Geschichte des Umbruchs kannte, als Stasi-Opfer und als sächsischen Beauftragten für das Erbe des DDR-Geheimdienstes, über die ungeheuerlichen Dinge, die ihm in der Bundesrepublik der 2010er Jahre widerfahren waren, weil er mit den falschen Leuten gesprochen hat. Weil er prinzipiell mit allen redet. Weil die falschen Leute seine Ideen spannend fanden. Weil diese Ideen an der falschen Stelle erschienen waren. Pegida, Höcke, Schnellroda. Ich kann diese Rufmordgeschichte hier nur andeuten, weiß aber noch, wie ich in meinem Lesestuhl förmlich erdrückt worden bin von der Lawine, die da über Michael Beleites hereingebrochen ist. Ausladungen. Die üblichen Schlagworte: Rassismus, Antisemitismus, Nazi. Eine Attacke im Spiegel. Boykott der Blumen und Kräuter, die Beleites und seine Frau in ihrem Gartenbetrieb wachsen lassen. Antifa-Attacken auf den Wochenmarktstand in der Dresdner Neustadt. Keine Chance mehr für ihre Kräutertees in den Bioläden der Stadt. In einem Wort: Existenzvernichtung wegen eines Gesinnungsverdachts, ohne dass jemand hören wollte, was dieser Autor eigentlich zu sagen hat und wie er darauf kommt.

Michael Beleites ist ein Kind vom Land. Er hat schon als kleiner Junge Vögel fotografiert – an der Abbruchkante eines stillgelegten Braunkohletagebaus. Er schwärmt am Ende seines Buches von den Menschen, die ihm geholfen haben, Vogelstimmen zu unterscheiden und zu spüren, wie sich Landschaft und Tierwelt bedingen. Wie Ingrid Schreyer wächst Michael Beleites in einem christlichen Umfeld auf. Der Sohn eines evangelischen Pfarrers darf zwar kein Abitur machen und damit auch nicht Biologie studieren, wird aber Präparator, arbeitet erst in einem Naturkundemuseum und dann freiberuflich. Wir sind immer noch in der DDR, wo Beleites 1988 eine Dokumentation über den Uranbergbau veröffentlicht – seine Eintrittskarte in die Politik der dann plötzlich vergrößerten Bundesrepublik, die ihn zwar ebenfalls nicht Biologie studieren lässt, aber seinen Göttern näherbringt – Otto Kleinschmidt vor allem, einem Ornithologen, der im ersten Drittel des 20. Jahrhunderts ein „revolutionäres Konzept zur biologischen Variation“ entwickelt, aber weitgehend vergessen wird, weil er „der allgemein anerkannten Lehrmeinung“ widerspricht (S. 15). Darwin und sonst nichts, damals schon.

Wer bis hierher durchgehalten hat, versteht hoffentlich meine Bewunderung für ein Werk, das jenseits der üblichen akademischen Pfade und ohne die Sicherheit gewachsen ist, die eine Position in Universitäten oder Forschungsinstituten bietet, und trotzdem ganz genau weiß, mit was und mit wem es sich da anlegt. Michael Beleites kennt Literatur und Gegenargumente. Auch deshalb kann er es nicht unter 700 Seiten machen. Vor allem aber kennt dieser Autor seinen Gegenstand. Michael Beleites hat tausendfach gesehen, dass es in der Natur nicht um Konkurrenz geht, sondern um Zusammenhalt und Harmonie. Er sagt: Die Natur züchtet nicht. Wenn sich Arten verändern, dann im Ganzen. Anders formuliert: Die Merkmale verschieben sich zeitgleich, weil die Dinge zusammenhängen und Kräften unterliegen, die wir zwar benennen, aber schlecht messen oder gar im Experiment nachweisen können. Umweltresonanz (der Begriff, der auf dem Cover steht und zugleich Programm ist für eine nachmaterialistische Naturwissenschaft) steht bei ihm auch für den Zugriff auf die Art-„Programme“, die Gestalt und Verhalten steuern (S. 437), sowie auf die „jeweils verfügbaren natürlichen Umweltinformationen“ (S. 438). Magnetfelder, Himmelslicht und Sterne – sicht- und spürbar in der „freien Natur“, aber nicht oder allenfalls eingeschränkt im „urbanen Raum“.

Michael Beleites unterfüttert das immer wieder mit Beobachtungen und Bildern – Lesegenuss und Augenschmaus in einem. Vor allem aber belässt er es nicht bei der Kritik, sondern bietet Lösungen, die weit über das hinausgehen, was im Moment in der Gegenöffentlichkeit diskutiert wird, weil sich seine Vorschläge schlüssig aus einem großen Theoriegebäude ableiten lassen. Ich kann das hier nur mit Schlagworten andeuten. Raus aus der Stadt. Wenn das nicht auf Dauer geht, dann wenigstens so oft wie möglich. Zurück zur bäuerlichen Landwirtschaft, zurück zu dem, was den Menschen ausmacht. Körperlich arbeiten in der Natur. Heimat statt Bodenlosigkeit und damit eher Dorf als Flugzeug. Der Mensch, sagt Michael Beleites, ist gar nicht so viel anders als Tiere oder Pflanzen. Jedes Individuum spürt eine „Neigung“, im Einklang mit dem zu sein, was für die Spezies bereits da ist (S. 592). Sein Buch kündet davon, dass Michael Beleites so lebt, wie es zu ihm passt. Dann können einem irgendwelche Krakeeler auch nicht viel anhaben.

Titelbild: Leipzig, 23. Oktober 1989. Bundesarchiv, Bild 183-1989-1023-022, Friedrich Gahlbeck (ADN)

Freie Akademie für Medien & Journalismus

Unterstützen

@ f977c464:32fcbe00

Güneşin kaybolmasının üçüncü günü, saat öğlen on ikiyi yirmi geçiyordu. Trenin kalkmasına yaklaşık iki saat vardı. Hepimiz perondaydık. Valizlerimiz, kolilerimiz, renk renk ve biçimsiz çantalarımızla yan yana dizilmiş, kısa aralıklarla tepemizdeki devasa saati kontrol ediyorduk.

Ama ne kadar dik bakarsak bakalım zaman bir türlü istediğimiz hızla ilerlemiyordu. Herkes birkaç dakika sürmesi gereken alelade bir doğa olayına sıkışıp kalmış, karanlıktan sürünerek çıkmayı deniyordu.

Bekleme salonuna doğru döndüm. Nefesimden çıkan buharın arkasında, kalın taş duvarları ve camlarıyla morg kadar güvenli ve soğuk duruyordu. Cesetleri o yüzden bunun gibi yerlere taşımaya başlamışlardı. Demek insanların bütün iyiliği başkaları onları gördüğü içindi ki gündüzleri gecelerden daha karanlık olduğunda hemen birbirlerinin gırtlağına çökmüş, böğürlerinde delikler açmış, gözlerini oyup kafataslarını parçalamışlardı.

İstasyonun ışığı titrediğinde karanlığın enseme saplandığını hissettim. Eğer şimdi, böyle kalabalık bir yerde elektrik kesilse başımıza ne gelirdi?

İçerideki askerlerden biri bakışlarımı yakalayınca yeniden saate odaklanmış gibi yaptım. Sadece birkaç dakika geçmişti.

“Tarlalarım gitti. Böyle boyum kadar ayçiçeği doluydu. Ah, hepsi ölüp gidiyor. Afitap’ın çiçekleri de gi-”

“Dayı, Allah’ını seversen sus. Hepimizi yakacaksın şimdi.”

Karanlıkta durduğunda, görünmez olmayı istemeye başlıyordun. Kimse seni görmemeli, nefesini bile duymamalıydı. Kimsenin de ayağının altında dolaşmamalıydın; gelip kazayla sana çarpmamalılar, takılıp sendelememeliydiler. Yoksa aslında hedefi sen olmadığın bir öfke gürlemeye başlar, yaşadığın ilk şoku ve acıyı silerek üstünden geçerdi.

İlk konuşan, yaşlıca bir adam, kafasında kasketi, nasırlı ellerine hohluyordu. Gözleri ve burnu kızarmıştı. Güneşin kaybolması onun için kendi başına bir felaket değildi. Hayatına olan pratik yansımalarından korkuyordu olsa olsa. Bir anının kaybolması, bu yüzden çoktan kaybettiği birinin biraz daha eksilmesi. Hayatta kalmasını gerektiren sebepler azalırken, hayatta kalmasını sağlayacak kaynaklarını da kaybediyordu.

Onu susturan delikanlıysa atkısını bütün kafasına sarmış, sakalı ve yüzünün derinliklerine kaçmış gözleri dışında bedeninin bütün parçalarını gizlemeye çalışıyordu. İşte o, güneşin kaybolmasının tam olarak ne anlama geldiğini anlamamış olsa bile, dehşetini olduğu gibi hissedebilenlerdendi.

Güneşin onlardan alındıktan sonra kime verileceğini sormuyorlardı. En başta onlara verildiğinde de hiçbir soru sormamışlardı zaten.

İki saat ne zaman geçer?

Midemin üstünde, sağ tarafıma doğru keskin bir acı hissettim. Karaciğerim. Gözlerimi yumdum. Yanımda biri metal bir nesneyi yere bıraktı. Bir kafesti. İçerisindeki kartalın ıslak kokusu burnuma ulaşmadan önce bile biliyordum bunu.

“Yeniden mi?” diye sordu bana kartal. Kanatları kanlı. Zamanın her bir parçası tüylerinin üstüne çöreklenmişti. Gagası bir şey, tahminen et parçası geveliyor gibi hareket ediyordu. Eski anılar kolay unutulmazmış. Şu anda kafesinin kalın parmaklıklarının ardında olsa da bunun bir aldatmaca olduğunu bir tek ben biliyordum. Her an kanatlarını iki yana uzatıverebilir, hava bu hareketiyle dalgalanarak kafesi esneterek hepimizi içine alacak kadar genişleyebilir, parmaklıklar önce ayaklarımızın altına serilir gibi gözükebilir ama aslında hepimizin üstünde yükselerek tepemize çökebilirdi.

Aşağıya baktım. Tahtalarla zapt edilmiş, hiçbir yere gidemeyen ama her yere uzanan tren rayları. Atlayıp koşsam… Çantam çok ağırdı. Daha birkaç adım atamadan, kartal, suratını bedenime gömerdi.

“Bu sefer farklı,” diye yanıtladım onu. “Yeniden diyemezsin. Tekrarladığım bir şey değil bu. Hatta bir hata yapıyormuşum gibi tonlayamazsın da. Bu sefer, insanların hak etmediğini biliyorum.”

“O zaman daha vahim. Süzme salaksın demektir.”

“İnsanların hak etmemesi, insanlığın hak etmediği anlamına gelmez ki.”

Az önce göz göze geldiğim genççe ama çökük asker hâlâ bana bakıyordu. Bir kartalla konuştuğumu anlamamıştı şüphesiz. Yanımdakilerden biriyle konuştuğumu sanmış olmalıydı. Ama konuştuğum kişiye bakmıyordum ona göre. Çekingence kafamı eğmiştim. Bir kez daha göz göze geldiğimizde içerideki diğer iki askere bir şeyler söyledi, onlar dönüp beni süzerken dışarı çıktı.

Yanımızdaki, az önce konuşan iki adam da şaşkınlıkla bir bana bir kartala bakıyordu.

“Yalnız bu sefer kalbin de kırılacak, Prometheus,” dedi kartal, bana. “Belki son olur. Biliyorsun, bir sürü soruna neden oluyor bu yaptıkların.”

Beni koruyordu sözde. En çok kanıma dokunan buydu. Kasıklarımın üstüne oturmuş, kanlı suratının ardında gözleri parlarken attığı çığlık kulaklarımda titremeye devam ediyordu. Bu tabloda kimsenin kimseyi düşündüğü yoktu. Kartalın, yanımızdaki adamların, artık arkama kadar gelmiş olması gereken askerin, tren raylarının, geçmeyen saatlerin…

Arkamı döndüğümde, asker sahiden oradaydı. Zaten öyle olması gerekiyordu; görmüştüm bunu, biliyordum. Kehanetler… Bir şeyler söylüyordu ama ağzı oynarken sesi çıkmıyordu. Yavaşlamış, kendisini saatin akışına uydurmuştu. Havada donan tükürüğünden anlaşılıyordu, sinirliydi. Korktuğu için olduğunu biliyordum. Her seferinde korkmuşlardı. Beni unutmuş olmaları işlerini kolaylaştırmıyordu. Sadece yeni bir isim vermelerine neden oluyordu. Bu seferkiyle beni lanetleyecekleri kesinleşmişti.

Olması gerekenle olanların farklı olması ne kadar acınasıydı. Olması gerekenlerin doğasının kötücül olmasıysa bir yerde buna dayanıyordu.

“Salaksın,” dedi kartal bana. Zamanı aşan bir çığlık. Hepimizin önüne geçmişti ama kimseyi durduramıyordu.

Sonsuzluğa kaç tane iki saat sıkıştırabilirsiniz?

Ben bir tane bile sıkıştıramadım.

Çantama uzanıyordum. Asker de sırtındaki tüfeğini indiriyordu. Benim acelem yoktu, onunsa eli ayağı birbirine dolaşıyordu. Oysaki her şey tam olması gerektiği anda olacaktı. Kehanet başkasının parmaklarının ucundaydı.

Güneş, bir tüfeğin patlamasıyla yeryüzüne doğdu.

Rayların üzerine serilmiş göğsümün ortasından, bir çantanın içinden.

Not: Bu öykü ilk olarak 2021 yılında Esrarengiz Hikâyeler'de yayımlanmıştır.

@ df173277:4ec96708

Maple is an AI chat tool that allows you to have private conversations with a general-purpose AI assistant. Chats are synced automatically between devices so you can pick up where you left off.\ Start chatting for free.

We are excited to announce that Maple AI, our groundbreaking end-to-end encrypted AI chat app built on OpenSecret, is now publicly available. After months of beta testing, we are thrilled to bring this innovative technology to the world.

Maple is an AI chat tool that allows you to have private conversations with a general-purpose AI assistant. It can boost your productivity on work tasks such as writing documentation, creating presentations, and drafting emails. You can also use it for personal items like brainstorming ideas, sorting out life's challenges, and tutoring you on difficult coursework. All your chats are synced automatically in a secure way, so you can start on one device and pick up where you left off on another.

Why Secure and Private AI?

In today's digital landscape, it is increasingly evident that security and privacy are essential for individuals and organizations alike. Unfortunately, the current state of AI tools falls short. A staggering 48% of organizations enter non-public company information into AI apps, according to a recent report by Cisco. This practice poses significant risks to company security and intellectual property.

Another concern is for journalists, who often work with sensitive information in hostile environments. Journalists need verification that their information remains confidential and protected when researching topics and communicating with sources in various languages. They are left to use underpowered local AI or input their data into potentially compromised cloud services.

At OpenSecret, we believe it is possible to have both the benefits of AI and the assurance of security and privacy. That's why we created Maple, an app that combines AI productivity with the protection of end-to-end encryption. Our platform ensures that your conversations with AI remain confidential, even from us. The power of the cloud meets the privacy of local.

#### How Does It Work?

Our server code is open source, and we use confidential computing to provide cryptographic proof that the code running on our servers is the same as the open-source code available for review. This process allows you to verify that your conversations are handled securely and privately without relying on trust. We live by the principle of "Don't trust, verify," and we believe this approach is essential for building in the digital age. You can read a more in-depth write-up on our technology later this week on this site.

How Much Does It Cost?

We are committed to making Maple AI accessible to everyone, so we offer a range of pricing plans to suit different needs and budgets. Our Free plan allows for 10 chats per week, while our Starter plan ($5.99/month) and Pro plan ($20/month) offer more comprehensive solutions for individuals and organizations with heavier workloads. We accept credit cards and Bitcoin (10% discount), allowing you to choose your preferred payment method.

• Free: $0
• Starter: $5.99/month
• Pro: $20/month

Our goal with Maple AI is to create a product that is secure through transparency. By combining open-source code, cryptography, and confidential computing, we can create a new standard for AI conversations - one that prioritizes your security and privacy.

Maple has quickly become a daily tool of productivity for our own work and those of our beta testers. We believe it will bring value to you as well. Sign up now and start chatting privately with AI for free. Your secrets are safe in the open.

#### Are You An App Developer?

You can build an app like Maple. OpenSecret provides secure auth, private key management, encrypted data sync, private AI, and more. Our straightforward API behaves like other backends but automatically adds security and privacy. Use it to secure existing apps or brand-new projects. Protect yourself and your users from the liability of hosting personal data by checking out OpenSecret.

Enjoy private AI Chat 🤘

@ 40b9c85f:5e61b451

Data Vending Machine Context Protocol

The Convergence of Nostr DVMs and MCP

In the rapidly evolving landscape of artificial intelligence, a new approach to sharing and accessing computational tools is emerging through the combination of two powerful technologies: Nostr's Data Vending Machines (DVMs) and the Model Context Protocol (MCP). This convergence has the potential to reshape how we think about tool distribution and accessibility, creating a truly decentralized marketplace for computational capabilities that serves AI, humans, and any type of machine that speaks the protocol.

Understanding the Building Blocks

Nostr's Data Vending Machines function much like their physical counterparts, but instead of dispensing snacks, they provide computational services with built-in Lightning Network payment capabilities. These DVMs operate on the decentralized Nostr network, allowing users to reach service providers without relying on centralized platforms or gatekeepers.

The Model Context Protocol complements this infrastructure by providing a standardized way for applications to share context and expose their capabilities. Think of MCP as a universal language that allows tools to communicate effectively with any application that understands the protocol. This standardization is crucial for creating a seamless experience across different tools and services.

What is DVMCP?

DVMCP proposes a path for making DVMs and MCPs interoperable, introducing a protocol that makes local utilities available to everyone on the network. Our draft specification serves as a foundation for easily transforming any MCP server into a DVM. To bridge these technologies, we've developed a simple software component that sits between your MCP server and the DVM ecosystem. You can find it in our repository. This bridge connects to your MCP server as a client and exposes its utilities through Nostr as a DVM, handling all the necessary Nostr logic. This means any existing MCP server can become accessible through Nostr without modifications - simply run the bridge alongside your server.

This is particularly exciting because the vibrant and growing MCP community. Any team or individual already working with MCP can instantly plug into the Nostr DVM ecosystem, gaining access to decentralized discovery, built-in monetization, and an already existing user base. The bridge component makes this transition effortless, requiring no changes to any existing MCP implementations.

A New Paradigm

A decentralized marketplace where anyone can run tools locally and make them available globally. This addresses an unsolved problem larger than the Nostr ecosystem: how to make resources and tools discoverable and accessible in a decentralized, permissionless way.

The power of this combination lies in its flexibility. Users can access tools through regular Nostr clients, AI agents can discover specific capabilities, and DVMs can create sophisticated tool chains. With Lightning Network integration, true machine-to-machine transactions become possible, where machines can autonomously discover, negotiate, and pay for computational services. Most importantly, you can run services on your own hardware while making these capabilities accessible to anyone anywhere.

The result is a system that preserves privacy, promotes innovation, and creates new opportunities without central authorities controlling what tools can be offered or who can use them. The entire project, is available under the MIT license, and any feedback and collaboration is welcome.

Looking Forward

As these technologies mature, we're likely to see a fundamental shift in how computational capabilities are distributed and accessed. Instead of relying on massive cloud data centers controlled by a few companies, we're moving toward a global network of local machines, each contributing unique capabilities and computation to a larger, more resilient ecosystem.

The convergence of Nostr DVMs and MCP represents more than just a technical innovation—it's a step toward a more equitable and accessible future. By enabling anyone to run and share tools, we're building an ecosystem where computational resources are not concentrated in the hands of a few but are available to and controllable by everyone.

Repository

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

O Planetinha

Fumaça verde me entrando pelas narinas e um coro desafinado fazia uma base melódica.

nos confins da galáxia havia um planetinha isolado. Era um planeta feliz.

O homem vestido de mago começava a aparecer por detrás da fumaça verde.

O planetinha recebeu três presentes, mas o seu habitante, o homem, estava num estado de confusão tão grande que ameaçava estragá-los. Os homens já havia escravizado o primeiro presente, a vida; lutavam contra o segundo presente, a morte; e havia alguns que achavam que deviam destruir totalmente o terceiro, o amor, e com isto levar a desordem total ao pobre planetinha perdido, que se chamava Terra.

O coro desafinado entrou antes do "Terra" cantando várias vezes, como se imitasse um eco, "terra-terra-terraaa". Depois de uma pausa dramática, o homem vestido de mago voltou a falar.

Terra, nossa nave mãe.

Neste momento eu me afastei. À frente do palco onde o mago e seu coral faziam apelos à multidão havia vários estandes cobertos com a tradicional armação de quatro pernas e lona branca. Em todos os cantos da praça havia gente, gente dos mais variados tipos. Visitantes curiosos que se aproximavam atraídos pela fumaça verde e as barraquinhas, gente que aproveitava o movimento para vender doces sem pagar imposto, casais que se abraçavam de pé para espantar o frio, os tradicionais corredores que faziam seu cooper, gente cheia de barba e vestida para imitar os hippies dos anos 60 e vender colares estendidos no chão, transeuntes novos e velhos, vestidos como baladeiros ou como ativistas do ônibus grátis, grupos de ciclistas entusiastas.

O mago fazia agora apelos para que nós, os homens, habitantes do isolado planetinha, passássemos a ver o planetinha, nossa nave mãe, como um todo, e adquiríssemos a consciência de que ele estava entrando em maus lençóis. A idéia, reforçada pela logomarca do evento, era que parássemos de olhar só para a nossa vida e pensássemos no planeta.

A logomarca do evento, um desenho estilizado do planeta Terra, nada tinha a ver com seu nome: "Festival Andando de Bem com a Vida", mas havia sido ali colocada estrategicamente pelos organizadores, de quem parecia justamente sair a mensagem dita pelo mago.

Aquela multidão de pessoas que, assim como eu, tinham suas próprias preocupações, não podiam ver o quadro caótico que formavam, cada uma com seus atos isolados, ali naquela praça isolada, naquele planeta isolado. Quando o hippie barbudo, quase um Osho, assustava um casal para tentar vender-lhes um colar, a quantidade de caos que isto acrescentava à cena era gigantesca. Por um segundo, pude ver, como se estivesse de longe e acima, com toda a pretensão que este estado imaginativo carrega, a cena completa do caos.

---

Uma nave-mãe, dessas de ficção científica, habitada por milhões de pessoas, seguia no espaço sem rumo, e sem saber que logo à frente um longo precipício espacial a esperava, para a desgraça completa sua e de seus habitantes.

Acostumados àquela nave tanto quanto outrora estiveram acostumados à sua terra natal, os homens viviam as próprias vidas sem nem se lembrar que estavam vagando pelo espaço. Ninguém sabia quem estava conduzindo a nave, e ninguém se importava.

No final do filme descobre-se que era a soma completa do caos que cada habitante produzia, com seus gestos egoístas e incapazes de levar em conta a totalidade, é que determinava a direção da nave-mãe. O efeito, no entanto, não era imediato, como nunca é. Havia gente de verdade encarregada de conduzir a nave, mas era uma gente bêbada, mau-caráter, que vivia brigando pelo controle da nave e o poder que isto lhes dava. Poder, status, dinheiro!

Essa gente bêbada era atraída até ali pela corrupção das instituições e da moral comum que, no fundo no fundo, era causada pelo egoísmo da população, através de um complexo -- mas que no filme aparece simplificado pela ação individual de um magnata do divertimento público -- processo social.

O homem vestido de mago era mais um agente causador de caos, com sua cena cheia de fumaça e sua roupa estroboscópica, ele achava que estava fazendo o bem ao alertar sua platéia, todos as sextas-feiras, de que havia algo que precisava ser feito, que cada um que estava ali ouvindo era responsável pelo planeta. A sua incapacidade, porém, de explicar o que precisava ser feito só aumentava a angústia geral; a culpa que ele jogava sobre seu público, e que era prontamente aceita e passada em frente, aos familiares e amigos de cada um, atormentava-os diariamente e os impedia de ter uma vida decente no trabalho e em casa. As famílias, estressadas, estavam constantemente brigando e os motivos mais insignificantes eram responsáveis pelas mais horrendas conseqüências.

O mago, que após o show tirava o chapéu entortado e ia tomar cerveja num boteco, era responsável por uma parcela considerável do caos que levava a nave na direção do seu desgraçado fim. No filme, porém, um dos transeuntes que de passagem ouviu um pedaço do discurso do mago despertou em si mesmo uma consiência transformadora e, com poderes sobre-humanos que lhe foram então concedidos por uma ordem iniciática do bem ou não, usando só os seus poderes humanos mesmo, o transeunte -- na primeira versão do filme um homem, na segunda uma mulher -- consegue consertar as instituições e retirar os bêbados da condução da máquina. A questão da moral pública é ignorada para abreviar a trama, já com duas horas e quarenta de duração, mas subentende-se que ela também fora resolvida.

---

No planeta Terra real, que não está indo em direção alguma, preso pela gravidade ao Sol, e onde as pessoas vivem a própria vida porque lhes é impossível viver a dos outros, não têm uma consciência global de nada porque só é possível mesmo ter a consciência delas mesmas, e onde a maioria, de uma maneira ou de outra, está tentando como pode, fazer as coisas direito, o filme é exibido.

Para a maioria dos espectadores, é um filme que evoca reflexões, um filme forte. Por um segundo elas têm o mesmo vislumbre do caos generalizado que eu tive ali naquela praça. Para uma pequena parcela dos espectadores -- entre eles alguns dos que estavam na platéia do mago, o próprio mago, o seguidor do Osho, o casal de duas mulheres e o vendedor de brigadeiros, mas aos quais se somam também críticos de televisão e jornal e gente que fala pelos cotovelos na internet -- o filme é um horror, o filme é uma vulgarização de um problema real e sério, o filme apela para a figura do herói salvador e passa uma mensagem totalmente errada, de que a maioria da população pode continuar vivendo as suas própria vidinhas miseráveis enquanto espera por um herói que vem do Olimpo e os salva da mixórdia que eles mesmos causaram, é um filme que presta um enorme desserviço à causa.

No dia seguinte ao lançamento, num bar meio caro ali perto da praça, numa mesa com oito pessoas, entre elas seis do primeiro grupo e oito do segundo, discute-se se o filme levará ou não o Oscar. Eu estou em casa dormindo e não escuto nada.

@ 16d11430:61640947

The holy grail of software development isn’t just writing code—it’s writing good code in a state of pure cognitive clarity. That moment when the mind operates at peak efficiency, when debugging is intuitive, and when abstractions form with effortless precision. This is the flow state, the intersection of deep focus and high cognitive throughput, where time distorts, distractions dissolve, and productivity skyrockets.

But flow doesn’t happen on command. It’s not a switch you flip—it’s a state that requires cultivation, discipline, and an understanding of what to do outside of flow to extend and intensify the time inside of it.

Understanding Flow in Programming

Flow is a psychological state described by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, where people are fully immersed in an activity, experiencing deep focus, clear goals, and intrinsic motivation. In programming, flow is more than just focus—it’s a state where:

Code becomes a natural language, and syntax errors fade into the subconscious.

Bugs reveal themselves intuitively before they cause major issues.

Solutions appear as if they were waiting to be discovered.

However, the challenge isn’t just getting into flow—it’s staying in flow longer and increasing the intensity of that state. Many developers struggle with this because modern work environments are designed to pull them out of it—interruptions, meetings, notifications, and context switches all work against deep work.

Why Flow is Hard to Maintain

The key limitation of flow isn’t just time—it’s cognitive energy. You can’t sustain high-intensity flow indefinitely because:

1. Flow Requires a Build-Up – You don’t start in deep flow; it takes warm-up time. If you’re constantly switching contexts, you never get past the shallow stages of focus.

2. Cognitive Fatigue Kicks In – Just like physical endurance, mental endurance wears down over time. High-intensity cognition depletes willpower, working memory, and problem-solving efficiency.

3. External Interruptions Break the Cycle – Every time you respond to a message, check an email, or attend an unplanned meeting, you disrupt the delicate mental stack that flow relies on.

Expanding Flow: The Out-of-Flow Preparation Phase

To maximize flow, you must structure your out-of-flow time to support your inflow time. This means making low-bandwidth, low-intensity activities serve the function of preserving cognitive resources for when they are needed most.

1. Prime the Mind Beforehand

Preload the problem: Before entering flow, read through relevant code, documentation, or problem statements, even if you don’t start coding. Let the subconscious chew on it.

Use sleep strategically: Review complex issues before sleeping—your brain continues working on them passively overnight.

Journal ideas: Keep a scratchpad for incomplete thoughts and patterns that need to be explored later. This prevents cognitive drift when you re-enter deep work.

1. Reduce Cognitive Load Outside of Flow

Automate the trivial: Reduce low-value decision-making by scripting repetitive tasks, automating builds, and using shortcuts.

Optimize workspace: Remove unnecessary distractions, use dark themes to reduce eye strain, and fine-tune your dev environment.

Minimal communication: Asynchronous work models (like using GitHub issues or structured documentation) prevent unnecessary meetings.

1. Use Active Recovery to Extend Flow Durations

Exercise between flow sessions: Short walks, stretching, or kettlebell swings help reset the nervous system.

Use Indian clubs or a gyro ball: Engaging the wrists and forearms with rhythmic exercises improves circulation and keeps the hands limber.

Engage in passive problem-solving: Listen to low-intensity technical podcasts, read about related topics, or sketch diagrams without the pressure of immediate problem-solving.

1. Manage Energy and Stamina

Control caffeine intake: Small, steady doses of caffeine (e.g., green tea or microdosed coffee) sustain focus longer than a single heavy hit.

Eat for cognitive endurance: Avoid sugar crashes; prioritize protein, healthy fats, and slow-digesting carbs.

Cold exposure and breathwork: Techniques like the Wim Hof method or contrast showers can help maintain alertness and focus.

Maximizing In-Flow Performance

Once in flow, the goal is to stay there as long as possible and increase intensity without burnout.

1. Work in High-Resolution Time Blocks

90-minute deep work cycles: Research suggests the brain works optimally in ultradian rhythms, meaning cycles of 90 minutes of intense focus followed by a 15–20 minute break.

Use timers: Time tracking (e.g., Pomodoro) helps prevent unconscious fatigue. However, don’t stop flow artificially—only use timers to prevent shallow focus work.

1. Reduce Interruptions Ruthlessly

Go offline: Disable notifications, block distracting sites, and use airplane mode during deep work.

Use noise-canceling headphones: Even if you don’t listen to music, noise isolation helps maintain focus.

Batch all non-coding activities: Emails, Slack messages, and meetings should be handled in predefined blocks outside of deep work hours.

1. Optimize Mental Bandwidth

Use text-based reasoning: Writing pseudocode or rubber-duck debugging prevents mental overload.

Talk through problems out loud: The act of verbalizing a complex issue forces clarity.

Engage in deliberate problem-solving: Instead of brute-forcing solutions, work from first principles—break problems down into the smallest testable units.

Scaling Flow: Beyond Individual Productivity

Flow isn’t just an individual challenge—it can be optimized at the team level:

Flow-friendly scheduling: Companies should avoid scheduling meetings during peak productive hours (e.g., morning blocks).

Pair programming strategically: While pair programming can improve code quality, it can also break deep focus. Use it wisely.

Minimize process friction: Too much bureaucracy or excessive agile ceremonies kill momentum. Lean processes help maintain deep work culture.

The Final Goal: High-Intensity Flow as the Default State

Ultimately, a programmer’s most valuable skill isn’t just technical proficiency—it’s the ability to engineer their own mind for sustained, high-intensity flow. When flow is prolonged and intensified, an hour of deep work can replace an entire week of shallow, distracted effort.

The key is not just working more—it’s working smarter, structuring out-of-flow time so that when flow begins, it reaches peak intensity and lasts as long as possible. By systematically designing both low-intensity and high-intensity work, programmers can transform sporadic flow into a continuous, deliberate, high-performance workflow.

In the end, peak developers aren’t just coders—they are architects of their own mental states.

@ f977c464:32fcbe00

Kendisini aynada ilk defa gördüğü o gün, diğerleri gibi olduğunu anlamıştı. Oysaki her insan biricik olmalıydı. Sözgelimi sinirlendiğinde bir kaşı diğerinden birkaç milimetre daha az çatılabilirdi veya sevindiğinde dudağı ona has bir açıyla dalgalanabilirdi. Hatta bunların hiçbiri mümkün değilse, en azından, gözlerinin içinde sadece onun sahip olabileceği bir ışık parlayabilirdi. Çok sıradan, öyle sıradan ki kimsenin fark etmediği o milyonlarca minik şeyden herhangi biri. Ne olursa.

Ama yansımasına bakarken bunların hiçbirini bulamadı ve diğer günlerden hiç de farklı başlamamış o gün, işe gitmek için vagonunun gelmesini beklediği alelade bir metro istasyonunda, içinde kaybolduğu illüzyon dağılmaya başladı.

İlk önce derisi döküldü. Tam olarak dökülmedi aslında, daha çok kıvılcımlara dönüşüp bedeninden fırlamış ve bir an sonra sönerek külleşmiş, havada dağılmıştı. Ardında da, kaybolmadan hemen önce, kısa süre için hayal meyal görülebilen, bir ruhun yok oluşuna ağıt yakan rengârenk peri cesetleri bırakmıştı. Beklenenin aksine, havaya toz kokusu yayıldı.

Dehşete düştü elbette. Dehşete düştüler. Panikle üstlerini yırtan 50 işçi. Her şeyin sebebiyse o vagon.

Saçları da döküldü. Her tel, yere varmadan önce, her santimde ikiye ayrıla ayrıla yok oldu.

Bütün yüzeylerin mat olduğu, hiçbir şeyin yansımadığı, suyun siyah aktığı ve kendine ancak kameralarla bakabildiğin bir dünyada, vagonun içine yerleştirilmiş bir aynadan ilk defa kendini görmek.

Gözlerinin akları buharlaşıp havada dağıldı, mercekleri boşalan yeri doldurmak için eriyip yayıldı. Gerçeği görmemek için yaratılmış, bu yüzden görmeye hazır olmayan ve hiç olmayacak gözler.

Her şeyin o anda sona erdiğini sanabilirdi insan. Derin bir karanlık ve ölüm. Görmenin görmek olduğu o anın bitişi.

---

Ben geldiğimde ölmüşlerdi.

Yani bozulmuşlardı demek istiyorum.

Belleklerini yeni taşıyıcılara takmam mümkün olmadı. Fiziksel olarak kusursuz durumdaydılar, olmayanları da tamir edebilirdim ama tüm o hengamede kendilerini baştan programlamış ve girdilerini modifiye etmişlerdi.

Belleklerden birini masanın üzerinden ileriye savurdu. Hınca hınç dolu bir barda oturuyorlardı. O ve arkadaşı.

Sırf şu kendisini insan sanan androidler travma geçirip delirmesin diye neler yapıyoruz, insanın aklı almıyor.

Eliyle arkasını işaret etti.

Polislerin söylediğine göre biri vagonun içerisine ayna yerleştirmiş. Bu zavallılar da kapı açılıp bir anda yansımalarını görünce kafayı kırmışlar.

Arkadaşı bunların ona ne hissettirdiğini sordu. Yani o kadar bozuk, insan olduğunu sanan androidi kendilerini parçalamış olarak yerde görmek onu sarsmamış mıydı?

Hayır, sonuçta belirli bir amaç için yaratılmış şeyler onlar. Kaliteli bir bilgisayarım bozulduğunda üzülürüm çünkü parasını ben vermişimdir. Bunlarsa devletin. Bana ne ki?

Arkadaşı anlayışla kafasını sallayıp suyundan bir yudum aldı. Kravatını biraz gevşetti.

Bira istemediğinden emin misin?

İstemediğini söyledi. Sahi, neden deliriyordu bu androidler?

Basit. Onların yapay zekâlarını kodlarken bir şeyler yazıyorlar. Yazılımcılar. Biliyorsun, ben donanımdayım. Bunlar da kendilerini insan sanıyorlar. Tiplerine bak.

Sesini alçalttı.

Arabalarda kaza testi yapılan mankenlere benziyor hepsi. Ağızları burunları bile yok ama şu geldiğimizden beri sakalını düzeltip duruyor mesela. Hayır, hepsi de diğerleri onun sakalı varmış sanıyor, o manyak bir şey.

Arkadaşı bunun delirmeleriyle bağlantısını çözemediğini söyledi. O da normal sesiyle konuşmaya devam etti.

Anlasana, aynayı falan ayırt edemiyor mercekleri. Lönk diye kendilerini görüyorlar. Böyle, olduğu gibi...

Nedenmiş peki? Ne gerek varmış?

Ne bileyim be abicim! Ahiret soruları gibi.

Birasına bakarak dalıp gitti. Sonra masaya abanarak arkadaşına iyice yaklaştı. Bulanık, bir tünelin ucundaki biri gibi, şekli şemalı belirsiz bir adam.

Ben seni nereden tanıyorum ki ulan? Kimsin sen?

Belleği makineden çıkardılar. İki kişiydiler. Soruşturmadan sorumlu memurlar.

─ Baştan mı başlıyoruz, diye sordu belleği elinde tutan ilk memur.

─ Bir kere daha deneyelim ama bu sefer direkt aynayı sorarak başla, diye cevapladı ikinci memur.

─ Bence de. Yeterince düzgün çalışıyor.

Simülasyon yüklenirken, ayakta, biraz arkada duran ve alnını kaşıyan ikinci memur sormaktan kendisini alamadı:

─ Bu androidleri niye böyle bir olay yerine göndermişler ki? Belli tost olacakları. İsraf. Gidip biz baksak aynayı kırıp delilleri mahvetmek zorunda da kalmazlar.

Diğer memur sandalyesinde hafifçe dönecek oldu, o sırada soruyu bilgisayarın hoparlöründen teknisyen cevapladı.

Hangi işimizde bir yamukluk yok ki be abi.

---

Ama bir son değildi. Üstlerindeki tüm illüzyon dağıldığında ve çıplak, cinsiyetsiz, birbirinin aynı bedenleriyle kaldıklarında sıra dünyaya gelmişti.

Yere düştüler. Elleri -bütün bedeni gibi siyah turmalinden, boğumları çelikten- yere değdiği anda, metronun zemini dağıldı.

Yerdeki karolar öncesinde beyazdı ve çok parlaktı. Tepelerindeki floresan, ışığını olduğu gibi yansıtıyor, tek bir lekenin olmadığı ve tek bir tozun uçmadığı istasyonu aydınlatıyorlardı.

Duvarlara duyurular asılmıştı. Örneğin, yarın akşam kültür merkezinde 20.00’da başlayacak bir tekno blues festivalinin cıvıl cıvıl afişi vardı. Onun yanında daha geniş, sarı puntolu harflerle yazılmış, yatay siyah kesiklerle çerçevesi çizilmiş, bir platformdan düşen çöp adamın bulunduğu “Dikkat! Sarı bandı geçmeyin!” uyarısı. Biraz ilerisinde günlük resmi gazete, onun ilerisinde bir aksiyon filminin ve başka bir romantik komedi filminin afişleri, yapılacakların ve yapılmayacakların söylendiği küçük puntolu çeşitli duyurular... Duvar uzayıp giden bir panoydu. On, on beş metrede bir tekrarlanıyordu.

Tüm istasyonun eni yüz metre kadar. Genişliği on metre civarı.

Önlerinde, açık kapısından o mendebur aynanın gözüktüğü vagon duruyordu. Metro, istasyona sığmayacak kadar uzundu. Bir kılıcın keskinliğiyle uzanıyor ama yer yer vagonların ek yerleriyle bölünüyordu.

Hiçbir vagonda pencere olmadığı için metronun içi, içlerindekiler meçhuldü.

Sonrasında karolar zerrelerine ayrılarak yükseldi. Floresanın ışığında her yeri toza boğdular ve ortalığı gri bir sisin altına gömdüler. Çok kısa bir an. Afişleri dalgalandırmadılar. Dalgalandırmaya vakitleri olmadı. Yerlerinden söküp aldılar en fazla. Işık birkaç kere sönüp yanarak direndi. Son kez söndüğünde bir daha geri gelmedi.

Yine de etraf aydınlıktı. Kırmızı, her yere eşit dağılan soluk bir ışıkla.

Yer tamamen tele dönüşmüştü. Altında çapraz hatlarla desteklenmiş demir bir iskelet. Işık birkaç metreden daha fazla aşağıya uzanamıyordu. Sonsuzluğa giden bir uçurum.

Duvarın yerini aynı teller ve demir iskelet almıştı. Arkasında, birbirine vidalarla tutturulmuş demir plakalardan oluşan, üstünden geçen boruların ek yerlerinden bazen ince buharların çıktığı ve bir süre asılı kaldıktan sonra ağır, yağlı bir havayla sürüklendiği bir koridor.

Diğer tarafta paslanmış, pencerelerindeki camlar kırıldığı için demir plakalarla kapatılmış külüstür bir metro. Kapının karşısındaki aynadan her şey olduğu gibi yansıyordu.

---

Bir konteynırın içini andıran bir evde, gerçi gayet de birbirine eklenmiş konteynırlardan oluşan bir şehirde “andıran” demek doğru olmayacağı için düpedüz bir konteynırın içinde, masaya mum görüntüsü vermek için koyulmuş, yarı katı yağ atıklarından şekillendirilmiş kütleleri yakmayı deniyordu. Kafasında hayvan kıllarından yapılmış grili siyahlı bir peruk. Aynı kıllardan kendisine gür bir bıyık da yapmıştı.

Üstünde mavi çöp poşetlerinden yapılmış, kravatlı, şık bir takım.

Masanın ayakları yerine oradan buradan çıkmış parçalar konulmuştu: bir arabanın şaft mili, üst üste konulmuş ve üstünde yazı okunamayan tenekeler, boş kitaplar, boş gazete balyaları... Hiçbir şeye yazı yazılmıyordu, gerek yoktu da zaten çünkü merkez veri bankası onları fark ettirmeden, merceklerden giren veriyi sentezleyerek insanlar için dolduruyordu. Yani, androidler için. Farklı şekilde isimlendirmek bir fark yaratacaksa.

Onların mercekleri için değil. Bağlantıları çok önceden kopmuştu.

─ Hayatım, sofra hazır, diye bağırdı yatak odasındaki karısına.

Sofrada tabak yerine düz, bardak yerine bükülmüş, çatal ve bıçak yerine sivriltilmiş plakalar.

Karısı salonun kapısında durakladı ve ancak kulaklarına kadar uzanan, kocasınınkine benzeyen, cansız, ölü hayvanların kıllarından ibaret peruğunu eliyle düzeltti. Dudağını, daha doğrusu dudağının olması gereken yeri koyu kırmızı bir yağ tabakasıyla renklendirmeyi denemişti. Biraz da yanaklarına sürmüştü.

─ Nasıl olmuş, diye sordu.

Sesi tek düzeydi ama hafif bir neşe olduğunu hissettiğinize yemin edebilirdiniz.

Üzerinde, çöp poşetlerinin içini yazısız gazete kağıtlarıyla doldurarak yaptığı iki parça giysi.

─ Çok güzelsin, diyerek kravatını düzeltti kocası.

─ Sen de öylesin, sevgilim.

Yaklaşıp kocasını öptü. Kocası da onu. Sonra nazikçe elinden tutarak, sandalyesini geriye çekerek oturmasına yardım etti.

Sofrada yemek niyetine hiçbir şey yoktu. Gerek de yoktu zaten.

Konteynırın kapısı gürültüyle tekmelenip içeri iki memur girene kadar birbirlerine öyküler anlattılar. O gün neler yaptıklarını. İşten erken çıkıp yemyeşil çimenlerde gezdiklerini, uçurtma uçurduklarını, kadının nasıl o elbiseyi bulmak için saatlerce gezip yorulduğunu, kocasının kısa süreliğine işe dönüp nasıl başarılı bir hamleyle yaşanan krizi çözdüğünü ve kadının yanına döndükten sonra, alışveriş merkezinde oturdukları yeni dondurmacının dondurmalarının ne kadar lezzetli olduğunu, boğazlarının ağrımasından korktuklarını...

Akşam film izleyebilirlerdi, televizyonda -boş ve mat bir plaka- güzel bir film oynayacaktı.

İki memur. Çıplak bedenleriyle birbirinin aynı. Ellerindeki silahları onlara doğrultmuşlardı. Mum ışığında, tertemiz bir örtünün serili olduğu masada, bardaklarında şaraplarla oturan ve henüz sofranın ortasındaki hindiye dokunmamış çifti gördüklerinde bocaladılar.

Hiç de androidlere bilinçli olarak zarar verebilecek gibi gözükmüyorlardı.

─ Sessiz kalma hakkına sahipsiniz, diye bağırdı içeri giren ikinci memur. Söylediğiniz her şey...

Cümlesini bitiremedi. Yatak odasındaki, masanın üzerinden gördüğü o şey, onunla aynı hareketleri yapan android, yoksa, bir aynadaki yansıması mıydı?

Bütün illüzyon o anda dağılmaya başladı.

Not: Bu öykü ilk olarak 2020 yılında Esrarengiz Hikâyeler'de yayımlanmıştır.

@ d4309e24:8a81fcb0

1. What if You Could Send a Message into the Future?

Imagine leaving a message for your future self, a loved one, or even an entire community—one that no one, not even you, can unlock until a specific moment in time. Picture leaving a message for your children, a note of wisdom or love that remains hidden until they're old enough to appreciate it, all timed by Bitcoin's block height. You might also make a bold prediction about the future price of Bitcoin, sealing it away until the blockchain reaches a certain block height.

This is the idea behind Hatchstr, a decentralized app for time-locked messages that only unlock at predetermined Bitcoin block heights—no central authority required.

Why Build This?

I want to dive into the Nostr protocol not just by reading documentation, but by actually building something that embodies its core principles: censorship resistance, user ownership, and decentralization. Hatchstr is both an experiment and a contribution to the Nostr ecosystem—a way to test the limits of permissionless communication while learning and engaging with the community.

2. The Vision: How Hatchstr Would Work for Users

At its core, Hatchstr lets users create time capsules—encrypted messages that only become readable after a specified Bitcoin block height. Here’s what that looks like:

• You design a capsule with text and images using Hatchstr’s web app.
• You pick an unlock time (e.g., 1000 blocks from now).
• The message is encrypted, locked away, and published as a Nostr event.
• At the chosen time, the decryption key is revealed, allowing the recipient to finally access the message.

Potential Use Cases

• Personal Messages: Send birthday wishes that unlock at midnight, time-delayed love letters, or notes to your future self.

• Timed Learning: Lock educational content to unlock when students reach key learning stages or ages.

• Creative Storytelling: Release serialized fiction, riddles, or treasure hunt clues that unlock over time.

• Community & Events: Time-gate announcements for Nostr-based communities or scheduled voting mechanisms.

3. The Centralized Trap: Why Build on Nostr

When thinking about how to implement this, we could go the obvious, easy route:

• Store messages on a centralized server.
• Release them when the time is right.
• Let users download their messages.

Simple, right? But is it the right approach? Let's break it down.

Why This Fails

• Single Point of Failure: If my server goes down, all messages are unavailable.

• Privacy Risks: Users would need to trust me not to access their messages.

• Ownership & Longevity: What happens if I lose interest? The system dies with me.

A centralized model defeats the purpose of time-locking messages. Users shouldn’t have to trust a third party. We need decentralization.

4. Nostr to the Rescue: How Decentralization Can Help

Instead of a single server holding messages hostage, Nostr allows users to publish messages to decentralized relays. Here are the key differences:

• Nostr IDs = Self-Owned Identities: Your public key is your identity, not tied to any company.

• Relays = Decentralized Bulletin Boards: Anyone can run one, ensuring redundancy and censorship resistance.

• Messages = Signed Events: Cryptographically signed by the sender or encrypted for only the recipient.

How Nostr Reduces Centralization

In this version of Hatchstr, capsules are still stored in a centralized manner at first until they 'hatch'. However, once the Bitcoin block height condition is met:

• Capsule Publication: The system publishes the capsule events to Nostr relays, making the messages available for decryption by the intended recipients.

This approach, while not eliminating the central server, allows for:

• Third-Party Clients: Developers can now create clients that interact with Hatchstr capsules on Nostr, enhancing the system's openness and potentially leading to a richer ecosystem around time-locked messages.

• Decentralized Access: Even though the initial storage is centralized, the access to the messages becomes decentralized once published to Nostr, reducing the dependency on a single point for message retrieval.

We have some improvements, but I am sure we can do better!

5. The Path to Decentralized Timekeeping

The Timeless Nature of Encryption

Encrypted messages exist outside time—once locked, they remain secure indefinitely. Modern cryptography (like AES-256) doesn’t "expire" or weaken unless decrypted (excluding brute force attacks). This creates a paradox: How do you bind something timeless to a specific moment in the physical world?

The Time-Lock Puzzle Dilemma

Cryptographers have proposed time-lock puzzles—encryption that requires sustained computation to unlock, theoretically forcing a minimum wait time. But these face critical hurdles:

• Hardware Uncertainty

  Solving time depends on an attacker’s computational power. A nation-state could crack in hours what takes years for a regular user.

• No Real-World Alignment

  Puzzles can’t guarantee unlocks align with calendar dates or real-world events ("unlock on my child’s 18th birthday").

• Energy Waste

  Requires continuous computation, making it environmentally impractical for longer time locking.

Bitcoin as a Decentralized Clock

This is where Bitcoin’s blockchain shines. Its difficulty-adjusted proof-of-work acts as a trustless metronome:

• Predictable Rhythm

  Despite hash rate fluctuations, the 10-minute block target (via difficulty adjustments) creates a consistent approximation of real-world time.

• Immutable History

  Block height 1,000,000 will always correspond to the same point in Bitcoin’s timeline, regardless of future changes in mining power

Splitting the Problem

Hatchstr can bridge timeless encryption and blockchain timing by separating concerns:

1. Capsules – The time-locked message itself:

• Design independent of the time-locking mechanism.

• Encrypted client-side.

• Content stored anywhere the user wants (IPFS, personal servers, etc.).

• Completely owned by the user—not Hatchstr.

2. Clock Servers – Independent, lightweight timing nodes that:

• Only publish decryption keys when the target Bitcoin block height is reached.

• Users can choose which Clock Server to trust.

• Anyone can run their own Clock Server.

• Multiple servers can coordinate to prevent a single point of failure.

This means Hatchstr itself doesn’t store anything—users are fully in control.

6. What Comes Next

This project is just beginning—a blueprint with open questions and untested assumptions. In the next two articles, I’ll explore how to turn this concept into something tangible. First, how we might design playful time capsules that can be displayed faithfully by multiple clients, balancing creativity with decentralization. Then, the messy realities of clock servers: why federating them matters, how to incentivize reliability, and borrow Bitcoin’s rhythm without centralizing control. We will dive into setting up a simple clock server to get things started.

I’m still learning Nostr’s ecosystem, and this project is as much about sharing my education as anything else. If any part of this concept makes you think “yes, but…” or “what if…”, I’d genuinely love to hear it. Find me on Nostr – no expertise required, just an interest in sending messages to the future. :

npub16scfufrpsqcukjg7ymu4r40h7j4dwqy4pajgz48e6lmnmz5pljcqh678uh

Thank you for reading 🧡

@ 8fb140b4:f948000c

Embarking on the journey of operating your own Lightning node on the Bitcoin Layer 2 network is more than just a tech-savvy endeavor; it's a step into a realm of financial autonomy and cutting-edge innovation. By running a node, you become a vital part of a revolutionary movement that's reshaping how we think about money and digital transactions. This role not only offers a unique perspective on blockchain technology but also places you at the heart of a community dedicated to decentralization and network resilience. Beyond the technicalities, it's about embracing a new era of digital finance, where you contribute directly to the network's security, efficiency, and growth, all while gaining personal satisfaction and potentially lucrative rewards.

In essence, running your own Lightning node is a powerful way to engage with the forefront of blockchain technology, assert financial independence, and contribute to a more decentralized and efficient Bitcoin network. It's an adventure that offers both personal and communal benefits, from gaining in-depth tech knowledge to earning a place in the evolving landscape of cryptocurrency.

Running your own Lightning node for the Bitcoin Layer 2 network can be an empowering and beneficial endeavor. Here are 10 reasons why you might consider taking on this task:

1. Direct Contribution to Decentralization: Operating a node is a direct action towards decentralizing the Bitcoin network, crucial for its security and resistance to control or censorship by any single entity.

2. Financial Autonomy: Owning a node gives you complete control over your financial transactions on the network, free from reliance on third-party services, which can be subject to fees, restrictions, or outages.

3. Advanced Network Participation: As a node operator, you're not just a passive participant but an active player in shaping the network, influencing its efficiency and scalability through direct involvement.

4. Potential for Higher Revenue: With strategic management and optimal channel funding, your node can become a preferred route for transactions, potentially increasing the routing fees you can earn.

5. Cutting-Edge Technological Engagement: Running a node puts you at the forefront of blockchain and bitcoin technology, offering insights into future developments and innovations.

6. Strengthened Network Security: Each new node adds to the robustness of the Bitcoin network, making it more resilient against attacks and failures, thus contributing to the overall security of the ecosystem.

7. Personalized Fee Structures: You have the flexibility to set your own fee policies, which can balance earning potential with the service you provide to the network.

8. Empowerment Through Knowledge: The process of setting up and managing a node provides deep learning opportunities, empowering you with knowledge that can be applied in various areas of blockchain and fintech.

9. Boosting Transaction Capacity: By running a node, you help to increase the overall capacity of the Lightning Network, enabling more transactions to be processed quickly and at lower costs.

10. Community Leadership and Reputation: As an active node operator, you gain recognition within the Bitcoin community, which can lead to collaborative opportunities and a position of thought leadership in the space.

These reasons demonstrate the impactful and transformative nature of running a Lightning node, appealing to those who are deeply invested in the principles of bitcoin and wish to actively shape its future. Jump aboard, and embrace the journey toward full independence. 🐶🐾🫡🚀🚀🚀

@ 3b7fc823:e194354f

Privacy in Public Spaces: A Tactical Guide

1. Public Wi-Fi Privacy

Using public Wi-Fi can be convenient, but it's important to take precautions to protect your privacy:

• Use a VPN (Virtual Private Network): A VPN encrypts your internet traffic, making it difficult for hackers to intercept your data.
• Disable Automatic Connections: Prevent your device from automatically connecting to open Wi-Fi networks by turning off this feature in your settings.
• Avoid Sensitive Transactions: Refrain from accessing banking or other sensitive accounts while connected to public Wi-Fi.
• Use Secure Websites: Look for "https://" in the website's URL to ensure it uses encryption.
• Keep Software Updated: Ensure your device's operating system and apps are up-to-date to protect against security vulnerabilities.

2. Surveillance Camera Awareness

Surveillance cameras are common in public spaces. Here are some strategies to maintain your privacy:

• Spotting Cameras:
• Look for Signs: Many establishments post signs indicating the presence of surveillance cameras.
• Camera Placement: Cameras are often placed near entrances, exits, and high-traffic areas. Look for dome-shaped cameras on ceilings or wall-mounted cameras.
• Using Masks and Coverings:
• Face Masks: Wearing a mask can help obscure your facial features from facial recognition systems.
• Hats and Sunglasses: A hat can shield your face from overhead cameras, while sunglasses can hide your eyes.
• Covering Identifying Marks:
• Clothing Choices: Wear clothing that doesn't have distinctive logos or patterns that can easily identify you.
• Blend In: Opt for styles and clothing choices that helps you blend in with your surroundings, reducing your visibility.
• Temporary Coverings: Consider using temporary coverings, such as scarves or hoods, to conceal tattoos or other identifying marks.

3. General Privacy Tips in Public Spaces

• Be Mindful of Your Surroundings: Pay attention to your environment and be aware of any unusual behavior or devices that may be capturing your information.
• Limit Personal Information: Avoid discussing sensitive information in public where it can be overheard.
• Use Encrypted Messaging Apps: Apps like Signal or SimpleX offer end-to-end encryption for your messages, making it harder for eavesdroppers to intercept your conversations.
• Use Privacy Screens: Privacy screens on all of you electronic screens can defend against the over the shoulder peek or side eye.
• Avoiding Behaviors: Be mindful of behaviors that could make you a target, such as frequent visits to certain areas or engaging in conversations that might attract unwanted attention.

Taking these steps can help you maintain your privacy while navigating public spaces and using public Wi-Fi. Remember, staying informed and vigilant is key to protecting your personal information.

---

Advocating for privacy does not finance itself. If you enjoyed this article, please consider zapping or sending monero

82XCDNK1Js8TethhpGLFPbVyKe25DxMUePad1rUn9z7V6QdCzxHEE7varvVh1VUidUhHVSA4atNU2BTpSNJLC1BqSvDajw1

@ 04ed2b8f:75be6756

You sit there, thinking you have time. Thinking tomorrow is guaranteed. Thinking opportunities will wait for you while you hesitate, overthink, and let fear sink its claws into your soul. But time is ruthless. It moves whether you act or not. And every moment you delay, another chance dies.

One day, the sand in your hourglass will run out. One day, your name will be spoken for the last time. One day, you will face the end. The question is—will you meet it with pride or regret?

---

Hesitation Is the Death of Warriors

A warrior who hesitates on the battlefield is the first to be cut down. Life is no different. Those who wait, who stall, who play it safe—die with their potential still locked inside them. The graveyard is full of people who had dreams but never moved. They were going to start "tomorrow." They were waiting for "the right time."

But there is no right time. There is only now.

Look at Elon Musk—he could have waited for a "better moment" to start SpaceX. Instead, he bet everything on an idea everyone called crazy, even when his rockets kept failing. He took the shot. Now he’s reshaping the future of space travel.

Think of Michael Jordan—cut from his high school basketball team. He could have quit, wallowed in self-pity, and blamed the coach. But he didn’t. He got back up, trained harder, and became the greatest of all time.

Contrast that with people who let fear win—the ones who never started the business they dreamed of, never asked out the person they loved, never left the dead-end job that drained their soul. Their stories don’t make history. They fade into regret.

• Perfection is a lie. If you wait to feel "ready," you will wait forever.
• Fear is an illusion. It exists only in your mind. Face it, and it crumbles. Run from it, and it owns you.
• Regret is eternal. You can recover from failure. You can learn, adapt, and rise again. But the chances you never take? The words you never say? The life you never live? Those haunt you forever.

---

The Strong Seize the Moment

The world doesn’t wait. The bold carve their names into history, while the weak fade into the background. You were not put here to hesitate, to shrink, to live a half-life of fear and excuses. You were made to fight, to conquer, to chase the impossible and make it real.

• Opportunities don’t knock twice. If you don’t seize them, someone else will.
• Failure is a stepping stone. Every loss, every setback is a lesson—IF you keep moving.
• Time is the only thing you can’t get back. You can recover money, rebuild relationships, restart projects—but lost time? Gone forever.

Look at Colonel Sanders—he started KFC at age 65. Most people his age were retiring. He could have said, “It’s too late.” Instead, he built a global empire.

Or J.K. Rowling—rejected by 12 publishers before "Harry Potter" was accepted. She could have quit after the first, the second, or the tenth rejection. But she kept pushing.

Now, imagine if they had waited. Imagine if they had let fear win. They wouldn’t exist in the history books. They would have been just another name in the crowd.

---

Now or Never

You can keep telling yourself, “I’ll start tomorrow.”
You can keep making excuses, keep letting fear win, keep lying to yourself that there’s still time.

Or you can make a choice—the choice to act.

Because death is certain. Time is fleeting. But right now? Right now is still yours.

Will you waste it? Or will you seize it with both hands and make something legendary?

Your move.