@ a95c6243:d345522c

Was nützt die schönste Schuldenbremse, wenn der Russe vor der Tür steht? \ Wir können uns verteidigen lernen oder alle Russisch lernen. \ Jens Spahn

In der Politik ist buchstäblich keine Idee zu riskant, kein Mittel zu schäbig und keine Lüge zu dreist, als dass sie nicht benutzt würden. Aber der Clou ist, dass diese Masche immer noch funktioniert, wenn nicht sogar immer besser. Ist das alles wirklich so schwer zu durchschauen? Mir fehlen langsam die Worte.

Aktuell werden sowohl in der Europäischen Union als auch in Deutschland riesige Milliardenpakete für die Aufrüstung – also für die Rüstungsindustrie – geschnürt. Die EU will 800 Milliarden Euro locker machen, in Deutschland sollen es 500 Milliarden «Sondervermögen» sein. Verteidigung nennen das unsere «Führer», innerhalb der Union und auch an «unserer Ostflanke», der Ukraine.

Das nötige Feindbild konnte inzwischen signifikant erweitert werden. Schuld an allem und zudem gefährlich ist nicht mehr nur Putin, sondern jetzt auch Trump. Europa müsse sich sowohl gegen Russland als auch gegen die USA schützen und rüsten, wird uns eingetrichtert.

Und während durch Diplomatie genau dieser beiden Staaten gerade endlich mal Bewegung in die Bemühungen um einen Frieden oder wenigstens einen Waffenstillstand in der Ukraine kommt, rasselt man im moralisch überlegenen Zeigefinger-Europa so richtig mit dem Säbel.

Begleitet und gestützt wird der ganze Prozess – wie sollte es anders sein – von den «Qualitätsmedien». Dass Russland einen Angriff auf «Europa» plant, weiß nicht nur der deutsche Verteidigungsminister (und mit Abstand beliebteste Politiker) Pistorius, sondern dank ihnen auch jedes Kind. Uns bleiben nur noch wenige Jahre. Zum Glück bereitet sich die Bundeswehr schon sehr konkret auf einen Krieg vor.

Die FAZ und Corona-Gesundheitsminister Spahn markieren einen traurigen Höhepunkt. Hier haben sich «politische und publizistische Verantwortungslosigkeit propagandistisch gegenseitig befruchtet», wie es bei den NachDenkSeiten heißt. Die Aussage Spahns in dem Interview, «der Russe steht vor der Tür», ist das eine. Die Zeitung verschärfte die Sache jedoch, indem sie das Zitat explizit in den Titel übernahm, der in einer ersten Version scheinbar zu harmlos war.

Eine große Mehrheit der deutschen Bevölkerung findet Aufrüstung und mehr Schulden toll, wie ARD und ZDF sehr passend ermittelt haben wollen. Ähnliches gelte für eine noch stärkere militärische Unterstützung der Ukraine. Etwas skeptischer seien die Befragten bezüglich der Entsendung von Bundeswehrsoldaten dorthin, aber immerhin etwa fifty-fifty.

Eigentlich ist jedoch die Meinung der Menschen in «unseren Demokratien» irrelevant. Sowohl in der Europäischen Union als auch in Deutschland sind die «Eliten» offenbar der Ansicht, der Souverän habe in Fragen von Krieg und Frieden sowie von aberwitzigen astronomischen Schulden kein Wörtchen mitzureden. Frau von der Leyen möchte über 150 Milliarden aus dem Gesamtpaket unter Verwendung von Artikel 122 des EU-Vertrags ohne das Europäische Parlament entscheiden – wenn auch nicht völlig kritiklos.

In Deutschland wollen CDU/CSU und SPD zur Aufweichung der «Schuldenbremse» mehrere Änderungen des Grundgesetzes durch das abgewählte Parlament peitschen. Dieser Versuch, mit dem alten Bundestag eine Zweidrittelmehrheit zu erzielen, die im neuen nicht mehr gegeben wäre, ist mindestens verfassungsrechtlich umstritten.

Das Manöver scheint aber zu funktionieren. Heute haben die Grünen zugestimmt, nachdem Kanzlerkandidat Merz läppische 100 Milliarden für «irgendwas mit Klima» zugesichert hatte. Die Abstimmung im Plenum soll am kommenden Dienstag erfolgen – nur eine Woche, bevor sich der neu gewählte Bundestag konstituieren wird.

Interessant sind die Argumente, die BlackRocker Merz für seine Attacke auf Grundgesetz und Demokratie ins Feld führt. Abgesehen von der angeblichen Eile, «unsere Verteidigungsfähigkeit deutlich zu erhöhen» (ausgelöst unter anderem durch «die Münchner Sicherheitskonferenz und die Ereignisse im Weißen Haus»), ließ uns der CDU-Chef wissen, dass Deutschland einfach auf die internationale Bühne zurück müsse. Merz schwadronierte gefährlich mehrdeutig:

«Die ganze Welt schaut in diesen Tagen und Wochen auf Deutschland. Wir haben in der Europäischen Union und auf der Welt eine Aufgabe, die weit über die Grenzen unseres eigenen Landes hinausgeht.»

[Titelbild: Tag des Sieges]

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ a95c6243:d345522c

«Wir brauchen eine digitale Brandmauer gegen den Faschismus», schreibt der Chaos Computer Club (CCC) auf seiner Website. Unter diesem Motto präsentierte er letzte Woche einen Forderungskatalog, mit dem sich 24 Organisationen an die kommende Bundesregierung wenden. Der Koalitionsvertrag müsse sich daran messen lassen, verlangen sie.

In den drei Kategorien «Bekenntnis gegen Überwachung», «Schutz und Sicherheit für alle» sowie «Demokratie im digitalen Raum» stellen die Unterzeichner, zu denen auch Amnesty International und Das NETTZ gehören, unter anderem die folgenden «Mindestanforderungen»:

• Verbot biometrischer Massenüberwachung des öffentlichen Raums sowie der ungezielten biometrischen Auswertung des Internets.
• Anlasslose und massenhafte Vorratsdatenspeicherung wird abgelehnt.
• Automatisierte Datenanalysen der Informationsbestände der Strafverfolgungsbehörden sowie jede Form von Predictive Policing oder automatisiertes Profiling von Menschen werden abgelehnt.
• Einführung eines Rechts auf Verschlüsselung. Die Bundesregierung soll sich dafür einsetzen, die Chatkontrolle auf europäischer Ebene zu verhindern.
• Anonyme und pseudonyme Nutzung des Internets soll geschützt und ermöglicht werden.
• Bekämpfung «privaten Machtmissbrauchs von Big-Tech-Unternehmen» durch durchsetzungsstarke, unabhängige und grundsätzlich föderale Aufsichtsstrukturen.
• Einführung eines digitalen Gewaltschutzgesetzes, unter Berücksichtigung «gruppenbezogener digitaler Gewalt» und die Förderung von Beratungsangeboten.
• Ein umfassendes Förderprogramm für digitale öffentliche Räume, die dezentral organisiert und quelloffen programmiert sind, soll aufgelegt werden.

Es sei ein Irrglaube, dass zunehmende Überwachung einen Zugewinn an Sicherheit darstelle, ist eines der Argumente der Initiatoren. Sicherheit erfordere auch, dass Menschen anonym und vertraulich kommunizieren können und ihre Privatsphäre geschützt wird.

Gesunde digitale Räume lebten auch von einem demokratischen Diskurs, lesen wir in dem Papier. Es sei Aufgabe des Staates, Grundrechte zu schützen. Dazu gehöre auch, Menschenrechte und demokratische Werte, insbesondere Freiheit, Gleichheit und Solidarität zu fördern sowie den Missbrauch von Maßnahmen, Befugnissen und Infrastrukturen durch «die Feinde der Demokratie» zu verhindern.

Man ist geneigt zu fragen, wo denn die Autoren «den Faschismus» sehen, den es zu bekämpfen gelte. Die meisten der vorgetragenen Forderungen und Argumente finden sicher breite Unterstützung, denn sie beschreiben offenkundig gängige, kritikwürdige Praxis. Die Aushebelung der Privatsphäre, der Redefreiheit und anderer Grundrechte im Namen der Sicherheit wird bereits jetzt massiv durch die aktuellen «demokratischen Institutionen» und ihre «durchsetzungsstarken Aufsichtsstrukturen» betrieben.

Ist «der Faschismus» also die EU und ihre Mitgliedsstaaten? Nein, die «faschistische Gefahr», gegen die man eine digitale Brandmauer will, kommt nach Ansicht des CCC und seiner Partner aus den Vereinigten Staaten. Private Überwachung und Machtkonzentration sind dabei weltweit schon lange Realität, jetzt endlich müssen sie jedoch bekämpft werden. In dem Papier heißt es:

«Die willkürliche und antidemokratische Machtausübung der Tech-Oligarchen um Präsident Trump erfordert einen Paradigmenwechsel in der deutschen Digitalpolitik. (...) Die aktuellen Geschehnisse in den USA zeigen auf, wie Datensammlungen und -analyse genutzt werden können, um einen Staat handstreichartig zu übernehmen, seine Strukturen nachhaltig zu beschädigen, Widerstand zu unterbinden und marginalisierte Gruppen zu verfolgen.»

Wer auf der anderen Seite dieser Brandmauer stehen soll, ist also klar. Es sind die gleichen «Feinde unserer Demokratie», die seit Jahren in diese Ecke gedrängt werden. Es sind die gleichen Andersdenkenden, Regierungskritiker und Friedensforderer, die unter dem großzügigen Dach des Bundesprogramms «Demokratie leben» einem «kontinuierlichen Echt- und Langzeitmonitoring» wegen der Etikettierung «digitaler Hass» unterzogen werden.

Dass die 24 Organisationen praktisch auch die Bekämpfung von Google, Microsoft, Apple, Amazon und anderen fordern, entbehrt nicht der Komik. Diese fallen aber sicher unter das Stichwort «Machtmissbrauch von Big-Tech-Unternehmen». Gleichzeitig verlangen die Lobbyisten implizit zum Beispiel die Förderung des Nostr-Netzwerks, denn hier finden wir dezentral organisierte und quelloffen programmierte digitale Räume par excellence, obendrein zensurresistent. Das wiederum dürfte in der Politik weniger gut ankommen.

[Titelbild: Pixabay]

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ 0d97beae:c5274a14

This article hopes to complement the article by Lyn Alden on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jk_HWmmwiAs

The reason why we have broken money

Before the invention of key technologies such as the printing press and electronic communications, even such as those as early as morse code transmitters, gold had won the competition for best medium of money around the world.

In fact, it was not just gold by itself that became money, rulers and world leaders developed coins in order to help the economy grow. Gold nuggets were not as easy to transact with as coins with specific imprints and denominated sizes.

However, these modern technologies created massive efficiencies that allowed us to communicate and perform services more efficiently and much faster, yet the medium of money could not benefit from these advancements. Gold was heavy, slow and expensive to move globally, even though requesting and performing services globally did not have this limitation anymore.

Banks took initiative and created derivatives of gold: paper and electronic money; these new currencies allowed the economy to continue to grow and evolve, but it was not without its dark side. Today, no currency is denominated in gold at all, money is backed by nothing and its inherent value, the paper it is printed on, is worthless too.

Banks and governments eventually transitioned from a money derivative to a system of debt that could be co-opted and controlled for political and personal reasons. Our money today is broken and is the cause of more expensive, poorer quality goods in the economy, a larger and ever growing wealth gap, and many of the follow-on problems that have come with it.

Bitcoin overcomes the "transfer of hard money" problem

Just like gold coins were created by man, Bitcoin too is a technology created by man. Bitcoin, however is a much more profound invention, possibly more of a discovery than an invention in fact. Bitcoin has proven to be unbreakable, incorruptible and has upheld its ability to keep its units scarce, inalienable and counterfeit proof through the nature of its own design.

Since Bitcoin is a digital technology, it can be transferred across international borders almost as quickly as information itself. It therefore severely reduces the need for a derivative to be used to represent money to facilitate digital trade. This means that as the currency we use today continues to fare poorly for many people, bitcoin will continue to stand out as hard money, that just so happens to work as well, functionally, along side it.

Bitcoin will also always be available to anyone who wishes to earn it directly; even China is unable to restrict its citizens from accessing it. The dollar has traditionally become the currency for people who discover that their local currency is unsustainable. Even when the dollar has become illegal to use, it is simply used privately and unofficially. However, because bitcoin does not require you to trade it at a bank in order to use it across borders and across the web, Bitcoin will continue to be a viable escape hatch until we one day hit some critical mass where the world has simply adopted Bitcoin globally and everyone else must adopt it to survive.

Bitcoin has not yet proven that it can support the world at scale. However it can only be tested through real adoption, and just as gold coins were developed to help gold scale, tools will be developed to help overcome problems as they arise; ideally without the need for another derivative, but if necessary, hopefully with one that is more neutral and less corruptible than the derivatives used to represent gold.

Bitcoin blurs the line between commodity and technology

Bitcoin is a technology, it is a tool that requires human involvement to function, however it surprisingly does not allow for any concentration of power. Anyone can help to facilitate Bitcoin's operations, but no one can take control of its behaviour, its reach, or its prioritisation, as it operates autonomously based on a pre-determined, neutral set of rules.

At the same time, its built-in incentive mechanism ensures that people do not have to operate bitcoin out of the good of their heart. Even though the system cannot be co-opted holistically, It will not stop operating while there are people motivated to trade their time and resources to keep it running and earn from others' transaction fees. Although it requires humans to operate it, it remains both neutral and sustainable.

Never before have we developed or discovered a technology that could not be co-opted and used by one person or faction against another. Due to this nature, Bitcoin's units are often described as a commodity; they cannot be usurped or virtually cloned, and they cannot be affected by political biases.

The dangers of derivatives

A derivative is something created, designed or developed to represent another thing in order to solve a particular complication or problem. For example, paper and electronic money was once a derivative of gold.

In the case of Bitcoin, if you cannot link your units of bitcoin to an "address" that you personally hold a cryptographically secure key to, then you very likely have a derivative of bitcoin, not bitcoin itself. If you buy bitcoin on an online exchange and do not withdraw the bitcoin to a wallet that you control, then you legally own an electronic derivative of bitcoin.

Bitcoin is a new technology. It will have a learning curve and it will take time for humanity to learn how to comprehend, authenticate and take control of bitcoin collectively. Having said that, many people all over the world are already using and relying on Bitcoin natively. For many, it will require for people to find the need or a desire for a neutral money like bitcoin, and to have been burned by derivatives of it, before they start to understand the difference between the two. Eventually, it will become an essential part of what we regard as common sense.

Learn for yourself

If you wish to learn more about how to handle bitcoin and avoid derivatives, you can start by searching online for tutorials about "Bitcoin self custody".

There are many options available, some more practical for you, and some more practical for others. Don't spend too much time trying to find the perfect solution; practice and learn. You may make mistakes along the way, so be careful not to experiment with large amounts of your bitcoin as you explore new ideas and technologies along the way. This is similar to learning anything, like riding a bicycle; you are sure to fall a few times, scuff the frame, so don't buy a high performance racing bike while you're still learning to balance.

@ a95c6243:d345522c

Die «Eliten» führen bereits groß angelegte Pilotprojekte für eine Zukunft durch, die sie wollen und wir nicht. Das schreibt der OffGuardian in einem Update zum Thema «EU-Brieftasche für die digitale Identität». Das Portal weist darauf hin, dass die Akteure dabei nicht gerade zimperlich vorgehen und auch keinen Hehl aus ihren Absichten machen. Transition News hat mehrfach darüber berichtet, zuletzt hier und hier.

Mit der EU Digital Identity Wallet (EUDI-Brieftasche) sei eine einzige von der Regierung herausgegebene App geplant, die Ihre medizinischen Daten, Beschäftigungsdaten, Reisedaten, Bildungsdaten, Impfdaten, Steuerdaten, Finanzdaten sowie (potenziell) Kopien Ihrer Unterschrift, Fingerabdrücke, Gesichtsscans, Stimmproben und DNA enthält. So fasst der OffGuardian die eindrucksvolle Liste möglicher Einsatzbereiche zusammen.

Auch Dokumente wie der Personalausweis oder der Führerschein können dort in elektronischer Form gespeichert werden. Bis 2026 sind alle EU-Mitgliedstaaten dazu verpflichtet, Ihren Bürgern funktionierende und frei verfügbare digitale «Brieftaschen» bereitzustellen.

Die Menschen würden diese App nutzen, so das Portal, um Zahlungen vorzunehmen, Kredite zu beantragen, ihre Steuern zu zahlen, ihre Rezepte abzuholen, internationale Grenzen zu überschreiten, Unternehmen zu gründen, Arzttermine zu buchen, sich um Stellen zu bewerben und sogar digitale Verträge online zu unterzeichnen.

All diese Daten würden auf ihrem Mobiltelefon gespeichert und mit den Regierungen von neunzehn Ländern (plus der Ukraine) sowie über 140 anderen öffentlichen und privaten Partnern ausgetauscht. Von der Deutschen Bank über das ukrainische Ministerium für digitalen Fortschritt bis hin zu Samsung Europe. Unternehmen und Behörden würden auf diese Daten im Backend zugreifen, um «automatisierte Hintergrundprüfungen» durchzuführen.

Der Bundesverband der Verbraucherzentralen und Verbraucherverbände (VZBV) habe Bedenken geäußert, dass eine solche App «Risiken für den Schutz der Privatsphäre und der Daten» berge, berichtet das Portal. Die einzige Antwort darauf laute: «Richtig, genau dafür ist sie ja da!»

Das alles sei keine Hypothese, betont der OffGuardian. Es sei vielmehr «Potential». Damit ist ein EU-Projekt gemeint, in dessen Rahmen Dutzende öffentliche und private Einrichtungen zusammenarbeiten, «um eine einheitliche Vision der digitalen Identität für die Bürger der europäischen Länder zu definieren». Dies ist nur eines der groß angelegten Pilotprojekte, mit denen Prototypen und Anwendungsfälle für die EUDI-Wallet getestet werden. Es gibt noch mindestens drei weitere.

Den Ball der digitalen ID-Systeme habe die Covid-«Pandemie» über die «Impfpässe» ins Rollen gebracht. Seitdem habe das Thema an Schwung verloren. Je näher wir aber der vollständigen Einführung der EUid kämen, desto mehr Propaganda der Art «Warum wir eine digitale Brieftasche brauchen» könnten wir in den Mainstream-Medien erwarten, prognostiziert der OffGuardian. Vielleicht müssten wir schon nach dem nächsten großen «Grund», dem nächsten «katastrophalen katalytischen Ereignis» Ausschau halten. Vermutlich gebe es bereits Pläne, warum die Menschen plötzlich eine digitale ID-Brieftasche brauchen würden.

Die Entwicklung geht jedenfalls stetig weiter in genau diese Richtung. Beispielsweise hat Jordanien angekündigt, die digitale biometrische ID bei den nächsten Wahlen zur Verifizierung der Wähler einzuführen. Man wolle «den Papierkrieg beenden und sicherstellen, dass die gesamte Kette bis zu den nächsten Parlamentswahlen digitalisiert wird», heißt es. Absehbar ist, dass dabei einige Wahlberechtigte «auf der Strecke bleiben» werden, wie im Fall von Albanien geschehen.

Derweil würden die Briten gerne ihre Privatsphäre gegen Effizienz eintauschen, behauptet Tony Blair. Der Ex-Premier drängte kürzlich erneut auf digitale Identitäten und Gesichtserkennung. Blair ist Gründer einer Denkfabrik für globalen Wandel, Anhänger globalistischer Technokratie und «moderner Infrastruktur».

Abschließend warnt der OffGuardian vor der Illusion, Trump und Musk würden den US-Bürgern «diesen Schlamassel ersparen». Das Department of Government Efficiency werde sich auf die digitale Identität stürzen. Was könne schließlich «effizienter» sein als eine einzige App, die für alles verwendet wird? Der Unterschied bestehe nur darin, dass die US-Version vielleicht eher privat als öffentlich sei – sofern es da überhaupt noch einen wirklichen Unterschied gebe.

[Titelbild: Screenshot OffGuardian]

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ 37fe9853:bcd1b039

yoyoaa

@ 62033ff8:e4471203

收录的内容中 kind=1的部分，实话说 质量不高。 所以我增加了kind=30023 长文的article，但是更新的太少，多个relays 的服务器也没有多少长文。

所有搜索nostr如果需要产生价值，需要有高质量的文章和新闻。 而且现在有很多机器人的文章充满着浪费空间的作用，其他作用都用不上。

https://www.duozhutuan.com 目前放的是给搜索引擎提供搜索的原材料。没有做UI给人类浏览。所以看上去是粗糙的。 我并没有打算去做一个发microblog的 web客户端，那类的客户端太多了。

我觉得nostr社区需要解决的还是应用。如果仅仅是microblog 感觉有点够呛

幸运的是npub.pro 建站这样的，我觉得有点意思。

yakihonne 智能widget 也有意思

我做的TaskQ5 我自己在用了。分布式的任务系统，也挺好的。

@ a95c6243:d345522c

Ständige Lügen und Unterstellungen, permanent falsche Fürsorge \ können Bausteine von emotionaler Manipulation sein. Mit dem Zweck, \ Macht und Kontrolle über eine andere Person auszuüben. \ Apotheken Umschau

Irgendetwas muss passiert sein: «Gaslighting» ist gerade Thema in vielen Medien. Heute bin ich nach längerer Zeit mal wieder über dieses Stichwort gestolpert. Das war in einem Artikel von Norbert Häring über Manipulationen des Deutschen Wetterdienstes (DWD). In diesem Fall ging es um eine Pressemitteilung vom Donnerstag zum «viel zu warmen» Winter 2024/25.

Häring wirft der Behörde vor, dreist zu lügen und Dinge auszulassen, um die Klimaangst wach zu halten. Was der Leser beim DWD nicht erfahre, sei, dass dieser Winter kälter als die drei vorangegangenen und kälter als der Durchschnitt der letzten zehn Jahre gewesen sei. Stattdessen werde der falsche Eindruck vermittelt, es würde ungebremst immer wärmer.

Wem also der zu Ende gehende Winter eher kalt vorgekommen sein sollte, mit dessen Empfinden stimme wohl etwas nicht. Das jedenfalls wolle der DWD uns einreden, so der Wirtschaftsjournalist. Und damit sind wir beim Thema Gaslighting.

Als Gaslighting wird eine Form psychischer Manipulation bezeichnet, mit der die Opfer desorientiert und zutiefst verunsichert werden, indem ihre eigene Wahrnehmung als falsch bezeichnet wird. Der Prozess führt zu Angst und Realitätsverzerrung sowie zur Zerstörung des Selbstbewusstseins. Die Bezeichnung kommt von dem britischen Theaterstück «Gas Light» aus dem Jahr 1938, in dem ein Mann mit grausamen Psychotricks seine Frau in den Wahnsinn treibt.

Damit Gaslighting funktioniert, muss das Opfer dem Täter vertrauen. Oft wird solcher Psychoterror daher im privaten oder familiären Umfeld beschrieben, ebenso wie am Arbeitsplatz. Jedoch eignen sich die Prinzipien auch perfekt zur Manipulation der Massen. Vermeintliche Autoritäten wie Ärzte und Wissenschaftler, oder «der fürsorgliche Staat» und Institutionen wie die UNO oder die WHO wollen uns doch nichts Böses. Auch Staatsmedien, Faktenchecker und diverse NGOs wurden zu «vertrauenswürdigen Quellen» erklärt. Das hat seine Wirkung.

Warum das Thema Gaslighting derzeit scheinbar so populär ist, vermag ich nicht zu sagen. Es sind aber gerade in den letzten Tagen und Wochen auffällig viele Artikel dazu erschienen, und zwar nicht nur von Psychologen. Die Frankfurter Rundschau hat gleich mehrere publiziert, und Anwälte interessieren sich dafür offenbar genauso wie Apotheker.

Die Apotheken Umschau machte sogar auf «Medical Gaslighting» aufmerksam. Davon spreche man, wenn Mediziner Symptome nicht ernst nähmen oder wenn ein gesundheitliches Problem vom behandelnden Arzt «schnöde heruntergespielt» oder abgetan würde. Kommt Ihnen das auch irgendwie bekannt vor? Der Begriff sei allerdings irreführend, da er eine manipulierende Absicht unterstellt, die «nicht gewährleistet» sei.

Apropos Gaslighting: Die noch amtierende deutsche Bundesregierung meldete heute, es gelte, «weiter [sic!] gemeinsam daran zu arbeiten, einen gerechten und dauerhaften Frieden für die Ukraine zu erreichen». Die Ukraine, wo sich am Montag «der völkerrechtswidrige Angriffskrieg zum dritten Mal jährte», verteidige ihr Land und «unsere gemeinsamen Werte».

Merken Sie etwas? Das Demokratieverständnis mag ja tatsächlich inzwischen in beiden Ländern ähnlich traurig sein. Bezüglich Friedensbemühungen ist meine Wahrnehmung jedoch eine andere. Das muss an meinem Gedächtnis liegen.

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ a95c6243:d345522c

Europa – das Ganze ist eine wunderbare Idee, \ aber das war der Kommunismus auch. \ Loriot

«Europa hat fertig», könnte man unken, und das wäre nicht einmal sehr verwegen. Mit solch einer Einschätzung stünden wir nicht alleine, denn die Stimmen in diese Richtung mehren sich. Der französische Präsident Emmanuel Macron warnte schon letztes Jahr davor, dass «unser Europa sterben könnte». Vermutlich hatte er dabei andere Gefahren im Kopf als jetzt der ungarische Ministerpräsident Viktor Orbán, der ein «baldiges Ende der EU» prognostizierte. Das Ergebnis könnte allerdings das gleiche sein.

Neben vordergründigen Themenbereichen wie Wirtschaft, Energie und Sicherheit ist das eigentliche Problem jedoch die obskure Mischung aus aufgegebener Souveränität und geschwollener Arroganz, mit der europäische Politiker:innende unterschiedlicher Couleur aufzutreten pflegen. Und das Tüpfelchen auf dem i ist die bröckelnde Legitimation politischer Institutionen dadurch, dass die Stimmen großer Teile der Bevölkerung seit Jahren auf vielfältige Weise ausgegrenzt werden.

Um «UnsereDemokratie» steht es schlecht. Dass seine Mandate immer schwächer werden, merkt natürlich auch unser «Führungspersonal». Entsprechend werden die Maßnahmen zur Gängelung, Überwachung und Manipulation der Bürger ständig verzweifelter. Parallel dazu plustern sich in Paris Macron, Scholz und einige andere noch einmal mächtig in Sachen Verteidigung und «Kriegstüchtigkeit» auf.

Momentan gilt es auch, das Überschwappen covidiotischer und verschwörungsideologischer Auswüchse aus den USA nach Europa zu vermeiden. So ein «MEGA» (Make Europe Great Again) können wir hier nicht gebrauchen. Aus den Vereinigten Staaten kommen nämlich furchtbare Nachrichten. Beispielsweise wurde einer der schärfsten Kritiker der Corona-Maßnahmen kürzlich zum Gesundheitsminister ernannt. Dieser setzt sich jetzt für eine Neubewertung der mRNA-«Impfstoffe» ein, was durchaus zu einem Entzug der Zulassungen führen könnte.

Der europäischen Version von «Verteidigung der Demokratie» setzte der US-Vizepräsident J. D. Vance auf der Münchner Sicherheitskonferenz sein Verständnis entgegen: «Demokratie stärken, indem wir unseren Bürgern erlauben, ihre Meinung zu sagen». Das Abschalten von Medien, das Annullieren von Wahlen oder das Ausschließen von Menschen vom politischen Prozess schütze gar nichts. Vielmehr sei dies der todsichere Weg, die Demokratie zu zerstören.

In der Schweiz kamen seine Worte deutlich besser an als in den meisten europäischen NATO-Ländern. Bundespräsidentin Karin Keller-Sutter lobte die Rede und interpretierte sie als «Plädoyer für die direkte Demokratie». Möglicherweise zeichne sich hier eine außenpolitische Kehrtwende in Richtung integraler Neutralität ab, meint mein Kollege Daniel Funk. Das wären doch endlich mal ein paar gute Nachrichten.

Von der einstigen Idee einer europäischen Union mit engeren Beziehungen zwischen den Staaten, um Konflikte zu vermeiden und das Wohlergehen der Bürger zu verbessern, sind wir meilenweit abgekommen. Der heutige korrupte Verbund unter technokratischer Leitung ähnelt mehr einem Selbstbedienungsladen mit sehr begrenztem Zugang. Die EU-Wahlen im letzten Sommer haben daran ebenso wenig geändert, wie die Bundestagswahl am kommenden Sonntag darauf einen Einfluss haben wird.

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ 23b0e2f8:d8af76fc

Necessário

• Um Android que você não use mais (a câmera deve estar funcionando).
• Um cartão microSD (opcional, usado apenas uma vez).
• Um dispositivo para acompanhar seus fundos (provavelmente você já tem um).

Algumas coisas que você precisa saber

• O dispositivo servirá como um assinador. Qualquer movimentação só será efetuada após ser assinada por ele.
• O cartão microSD será usado para transferir o APK do Electrum e garantir que o aparelho não terá contato com outras fontes de dados externas após sua formatação. Contudo, é possível usar um cabo USB para o mesmo propósito.
• A ideia é deixar sua chave privada em um dispositivo offline, que ficará desligado em 99% do tempo. Você poderá acompanhar seus fundos em outro dispositivo conectado à internet, como seu celular ou computador pessoal.

---

O tutorial será dividido em dois módulos:

• Módulo 1 - Criando uma carteira fria/assinador.
• Módulo 2 - Configurando um dispositivo para visualizar seus fundos e assinando transações com o assinador.

---

No final, teremos:

• Uma carteira fria que também servirá como assinador.
• Um dispositivo para acompanhar os fundos da carteira.

---

Módulo 1 - Criando uma carteira fria/assinador

1. Baixe o APK do Electrum na aba de downloads em https://electrum.org/. Fique à vontade para verificar as assinaturas do software, garantindo sua autenticidade.

2. Formate o cartão microSD e coloque o APK do Electrum nele. Caso não tenha um cartão microSD, pule este passo.

1. Retire os chips e acessórios do aparelho que será usado como assinador, formate-o e aguarde a inicialização.

1. Durante a inicialização, pule a etapa de conexão ao Wi-Fi e rejeite todas as solicitações de conexão. Após isso, você pode desinstalar aplicativos desnecessários, pois precisará apenas do Electrum. Certifique-se de que Wi-Fi, Bluetooth e dados móveis estejam desligados. Você também pode ativar o modo avião.\ (Curiosidade: algumas pessoas optam por abrir o aparelho e danificar a antena do Wi-Fi/Bluetooth, impossibilitando essas funcionalidades.)

1. Insira o cartão microSD com o APK do Electrum no dispositivo e instale-o. Será necessário permitir instalações de fontes não oficiais.

1. No Electrum, crie uma carteira padrão e gere suas palavras-chave (seed). Anote-as em um local seguro. Caso algo aconteça com seu assinador, essas palavras permitirão o acesso aos seus fundos novamente. (Aqui entra seu método pessoal de backup.)

---

Módulo 2 - Configurando um dispositivo para visualizar seus fundos e assinando transações com o assinador.

1. Criar uma carteira somente leitura em outro dispositivo, como seu celular ou computador pessoal, é uma etapa bastante simples. Para este tutorial, usaremos outro smartphone Android com Electrum. Instale o Electrum a partir da aba de downloads em https://electrum.org/ ou da própria Play Store. (ATENÇÃO: O Electrum não existe oficialmente para iPhone. Desconfie se encontrar algum.)

2. Após instalar o Electrum, crie uma carteira padrão, mas desta vez escolha a opção Usar uma chave mestra.

1. Agora, no assinador que criamos no primeiro módulo, exporte sua chave pública: vá em Carteira > Detalhes da carteira > Compartilhar chave mestra pública.

1. Escaneie o QR gerado da chave pública com o dispositivo de consulta. Assim, ele poderá acompanhar seus fundos, mas sem permissão para movimentá-los.

2. Para receber fundos, envie Bitcoin para um dos endereços gerados pela sua carteira: Carteira > Addresses/Coins.

3. Para movimentar fundos, crie uma transação no dispositivo de consulta. Como ele não possui a chave privada, será necessário assiná-la com o dispositivo assinador.

1. No assinador, escaneie a transação não assinada, confirme os detalhes, assine e compartilhe. Será gerado outro QR, desta vez com a transação já assinada.

1. No dispositivo de consulta, escaneie o QR da transação assinada e transmita-a para a rede.

---

Conclusão

Pontos positivos do setup:

• Simplicidade: Basta um dispositivo Android antigo.
• Flexibilidade: Funciona como uma ótima carteira fria, ideal para holders.

Pontos negativos do setup:

• Padronização: Não utiliza seeds no padrão BIP-39, você sempre precisará usar o electrum.
• Interface: A aparência do Electrum pode parecer antiquada para alguns usuários.

Nesse ponto, temos uma carteira fria que também serve para assinar transações. O fluxo de assinar uma transação se torna: Gerar uma transação não assinada > Escanear o QR da transação não assinada > Conferir e assinar essa transação com o assinador > Gerar QR da transação assinada > Escanear a transação assinada com qualquer outro dispositivo que possa transmiti-la para a rede.

Como alguns devem saber, uma transação assinada de Bitcoin é praticamente impossível de ser fraudada. Em um cenário catastrófico, você pode mesmo que sem internet, repassar essa transação assinada para alguém que tenha acesso à rede por qualquer meio de comunicação. Mesmo que não queiramos que isso aconteça um dia, esse setup acaba por tornar essa prática possível.

---

@ a95c6243:d345522c

Die «moralische Weltordnung» – eine Art Astrologie. Friedrich Nietzsche

Das Treffen der BRICS-Staaten beim Gipfel im russischen Kasan war sicher nicht irgendein politisches Event. Gastgeber Wladimir Putin habe «Hof gehalten», sagen die Einen, China und Russland hätten ihre Vorstellung einer multipolaren Weltordnung zelebriert, schreiben Andere.

In jedem Fall zeigt die Anwesenheit von über 30 Delegationen aus der ganzen Welt, dass von einer geostrategischen Isolation Russlands wohl keine Rede sein kann. Darüber hinaus haben sowohl die Anreise von UN-Generalsekretär António Guterres als auch die Meldungen und Dementis bezüglich der Beitrittsbemühungen des NATO-Staats Türkei für etwas Aufsehen gesorgt.

Im Spannungsfeld geopolitischer und wirtschaftlicher Umbrüche zeigt die neue Allianz zunehmendes Selbstbewusstsein. In Sachen gemeinsamer Finanzpolitik schmiedet man interessante Pläne. Größere Unabhängigkeit von der US-dominierten Finanzordnung ist dabei ein wichtiges Ziel.

Beim BRICS-Wirtschaftsforum in Moskau, wenige Tage vor dem Gipfel, zählte ein nachhaltiges System für Finanzabrechnungen und Zahlungsdienste zu den vorrangigen Themen. Während dieses Treffens ging der russische Staatsfonds eine Partnerschaft mit dem Rechenzentrumsbetreiber BitRiver ein, um Bitcoin-Mining-Anlagen für die BRICS-Länder zu errichten.

Die Initiative könnte ein Schritt sein, Bitcoin und andere Kryptowährungen als Alternativen zu traditionellen Finanzsystemen zu etablieren. Das Projekt könnte dazu führen, dass die BRICS-Staaten den globalen Handel in Bitcoin abwickeln. Vor dem Hintergrund der Diskussionen über eine «BRICS-Währung» wäre dies eine Alternative zu dem ursprünglich angedachten Korb lokaler Währungen und zu goldgedeckten Währungen sowie eine mögliche Ergänzung zum Zahlungssystem BRICS Pay.

Dient der Bitcoin also der Entdollarisierung? Oder droht er inzwischen, zum Gegenstand geopolitischer Machtspielchen zu werden? Angesichts der globalen Vernetzungen ist es oft schwer zu durchschauen, «was eine Show ist und was im Hintergrund von anderen Strippenziehern insgeheim gesteuert wird». Sicher können Strukturen wie Bitcoin auch so genutzt werden, dass sie den Herrschenden dienlich sind. Aber die Grundeigenschaft des dezentralisierten, unzensierbaren Peer-to-Peer Zahlungsnetzwerks ist ihm schließlich nicht zu nehmen.

Wenn es nach der EZB oder dem IWF geht, dann scheint statt Instrumentalisierung momentan eher der Kampf gegen Kryptowährungen angesagt. Jürgen Schaaf, Senior Manager bei der Europäischen Zentralbank, hat jedenfalls dazu aufgerufen, Bitcoin «zu eliminieren». Der Internationale Währungsfonds forderte El Salvador, das Bitcoin 2021 als gesetzliches Zahlungsmittel eingeführt hat, kürzlich zu begrenzenden Maßnahmen gegen das Kryptogeld auf.

Dass die BRICS-Staaten ein freiheitliches Ansinnen im Kopf haben, wenn sie Kryptowährungen ins Spiel bringen, darf indes auch bezweifelt werden. Im Abschlussdokument bekennen sich die Gipfel-Teilnehmer ausdrücklich zur UN, ihren Programmen und ihrer «Agenda 2030». Ernst Wolff nennt das «eine Bankrotterklärung korrupter Politiker, die sich dem digital-finanziellen Komplex zu 100 Prozent unterwerfen».

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ 207ad2a0:e7cca7b0

Quick context: I wanted to check out Nostr's longform posts and this blog post seemed like a good one to try and mirror. It's originally from my free to read/share attempt to write a novel, but this post here is completely standalone - just describing how I used AI image generation to make a small piece of the work.

Hold on, put your pitchforks down - outside of using Grammerly & Emacs for grammatical corrections - not a single character was generated or modified by computers; a non-insignificant portion of my first draft originating on pen & paper. No AI is ~~weird and crazy~~ imaginative enough to write like I do. The only successful AI contribution you'll find is a single image, the map, which I heavily edited. This post will go over how I generated and modified an image using AI, which I believe brought some value to the work, and cover a few quick thoughts about AI towards the end.

Let's be clear, I can't draw, but I wanted a map which I believed would improve the story I was working on. After getting abysmal results by prompting AI with text only I decided to use "Diffuse the Rest," a Stable Diffusion tool that allows you to provide a reference image + description to fine tune what you're looking for. I gave it this Microsoft Paint looking drawing:

and after a number of outputs, selected this one to work on:

The image is way better than the one I provided, but had I used it as is, I still feel it would have decreased the quality of my work instead of increasing it. After firing up Gimp I cropped out the top and bottom, expanded the ocean and separated the landmasses, then copied the top right corner of the large landmass to replace the bottom left that got cut off. Now we've got something that looks like concept art: not horrible, and gets the basic idea across, but it's still due for a lot more detail.

The next thing I did was add some texture to make it look more map like. I duplicated the layer in Gimp and applied the "Cartoon" filter to both for some texture. The top layer had a much lower effect strength to give it a more textured look, while the lower layer had a higher effect strength that looked a lot like mountains or other terrain features. Creating a layer mask allowed me to brush over spots to display the lower layer in certain areas, giving it some much needed features.

At this point I'd made it to where I felt it may improve the work instead of detracting from it - at least after labels and borders were added, but the colors seemed artificial and out of place. Luckily, however, this is when PhotoFunia could step in and apply a sketch effect to the image.

At this point I was pretty happy with how it was looking, it was close to what I envisioned and looked very visually appealing while still being a good way to portray information. All that was left was to make the white background transparent, add some minor details, and add the labels and borders. Below is the exact image I wound up using:

Overall, I'm very satisfied with how it turned out, and if you're working on a creative project, I'd recommend attempting something like this. It's not a central part of the work, but it improved the chapter a fair bit, and was doable despite lacking the talent and not intending to allocate a budget to my making of a free to read and share story.

The AI Generated Elephant in the Room

If you've read my non-fiction writing before, you'll know that I think AI will find its place around the skill floor as opposed to the skill ceiling. As you saw with my input, I have absolutely zero drawing talent, but with some elbow grease and an existing creative direction before and after generating an image I was able to get something well above what I could have otherwise accomplished. Outside of the lowest common denominators like stock photos for the sole purpose of a link preview being eye catching, however, I doubt AI will be wholesale replacing most creative works anytime soon. I can assure you that I tried numerous times to describe the map without providing a reference image, and if I used one of those outputs (or even just the unedited output after providing the reference image) it would have decreased the quality of my work instead of improving it.

I'm going to go out on a limb and expect that AI image, text, and video is all going to find its place in slop & generic content (such as AI generated slop replacing article spinners and stock photos respectively) and otherwise be used in a supporting role for various creative endeavors. For people working on projects like I'm working on (e.g. intended budget $0) it's helpful to have an AI capable of doing legwork - enabling projects to exist or be improved in ways they otherwise wouldn't have. I'm also guessing it'll find its way into more professional settings for grunt work - think a picture frame or fake TV show that would exist in the background of an animated project - likely a detail most people probably wouldn't notice, but that would save the creators time and money and/or allow them to focus more on the essential aspects of said work. Beyond that, as I've predicted before: I expect plenty of emails will be generated from a short list of bullet points, only to be summarized by the recipient's AI back into bullet points.

I will also make a prediction counter to what seems mainstream: AI is about to peak for a while. The start of AI image generation was with Google's DeepDream in 2015 - image recognition software that could be run in reverse to "recognize" patterns where there were none, effectively generating an image from digital noise or an unrelated image. While I'm not an expert by any means, I don't think we're too far off from that a decade later, just using very fine tuned tools that develop more coherent images. I guess that we're close to maxing out how efficiently we're able to generate images and video in that manner, and the hard caps on how much creative direction we can have when using AI - as well as the limits to how long we can keep it coherent (e.g. long videos or a chronologically consistent set of images) - will prevent AI from progressing too far beyond what it is currently unless/until another breakthrough occurs.

@ 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.

@ 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.

@ e6817453:b0ac3c39

The Rise of Graph RAGs and the Quest for Data Quality

As we enter a new year, it’s impossible to ignore the boom of retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) systems, particularly those leveraging graph-based approaches. The previous year saw a surge in advancements and discussions about Graph RAGs, driven by their potential to enhance large language models (LLMs), reduce hallucinations, and deliver more reliable outputs. Let’s dive into the trends, challenges, and strategies for making the most of Graph RAGs in artificial intelligence.

Booming Interest in Graph RAGs

Graph RAGs have dominated the conversation in AI circles. With new research papers and innovations emerging weekly, it’s clear that this approach is reshaping the landscape. These systems, especially those developed by tech giants like Microsoft, demonstrate how graphs can:

• Enhance LLM Outputs: By grounding responses in structured knowledge, graphs significantly reduce hallucinations.
• Support Complex Queries: Graphs excel at managing linked and connected data, making them ideal for intricate problem-solving.

Conferences on linked and connected data have increasingly focused on Graph RAGs, underscoring their central role in modern AI systems. However, the excitement around this technology has brought critical questions to the forefront: How do we ensure the quality of the graphs we’re building, and are they genuinely aligned with our needs?

Data Quality: The Foundation of Effective Graphs

A high-quality graph is the backbone of any successful RAG system. Constructing these graphs from unstructured data requires attention to detail and rigorous processes. Here’s why:

• Richness of Entities: Effective retrieval depends on graphs populated with rich, detailed entities.
• Freedom from Hallucinations: Poorly constructed graphs amplify inaccuracies rather than mitigating them.

Without robust data quality, even the most sophisticated Graph RAGs become ineffective. As a result, the focus must shift to refining the graph construction process. Improving data strategy and ensuring meticulous data preparation is essential to unlock the full potential of Graph RAGs.

Hybrid Graph RAGs and Variations

While standard Graph RAGs are already transformative, hybrid models offer additional flexibility and power. Hybrid RAGs combine structured graph data with other retrieval mechanisms, creating systems that:

• Handle diverse data sources with ease.
• Offer improved adaptability to complex queries.

Exploring these variations can open new avenues for AI systems, particularly in domains requiring structured and unstructured data processing.

Ontology: The Key to Graph Construction Quality

Ontology — defining how concepts relate within a knowledge domain — is critical for building effective graphs. While this might sound abstract, it’s a well-established field blending philosophy, engineering, and art. Ontology engineering provides the framework for:

• Defining Relationships: Clarifying how concepts connect within a domain.
• Validating Graph Structures: Ensuring constructed graphs are logically sound and align with domain-specific realities.

Traditionally, ontologists — experts in this discipline — have been integral to large enterprises and research teams. However, not every team has access to dedicated ontologists, leading to a significant challenge: How can teams without such expertise ensure the quality of their graphs?

How to Build Ontology Expertise in a Startup Team

For startups and smaller teams, developing ontology expertise may seem daunting, but it is achievable with the right approach:

1. Assign a Knowledge Champion: Identify a team member with a strong analytical mindset and give them time and resources to learn ontology engineering.
2. Provide Training: Invest in courses, workshops, or certifications in knowledge graph and ontology creation.
3. Leverage Partnerships: Collaborate with academic institutions, domain experts, or consultants to build initial frameworks.
4. Utilize Tools: Introduce ontology development tools like Protégé, OWL, or SHACL to simplify the creation and validation process.
5. Iterate with Feedback: Continuously refine ontologies through collaboration with domain experts and iterative testing.

So, it is not always affordable for a startup to have a dedicated oncologist or knowledge engineer in a team, but you could involve consulters or build barefoot experts.

You could read about barefoot experts in my article :

Even startups can achieve robust and domain-specific ontology frameworks by fostering in-house expertise.

How to Find or Create Ontologies

For teams venturing into Graph RAGs, several strategies can help address the ontology gap:

1. Leverage Existing Ontologies: Many industries and domains already have open ontologies. For instance:

2. Public Knowledge Graphs: Resources like Wikipedia’s graph offer a wealth of structured knowledge.

3. Industry Standards: Enterprises such as Siemens have invested in creating and sharing ontologies specific to their fields.

4. Business Framework Ontology (BFO): A valuable resource for enterprises looking to define business processes and structures.

5. Build In-House Expertise: If budgets allow, consider hiring knowledge engineers or providing team members with the resources and time to develop expertise in ontology creation.

6. Utilize LLMs for Ontology Construction: Interestingly, LLMs themselves can act as a starting point for ontology development:

7. Prompt-Based Extraction: LLMs can generate draft ontologies by leveraging their extensive training on graph data.

8. Domain Expert Refinement: Combine LLM-generated structures with insights from domain experts to create tailored ontologies.

Parallel Ontology and Graph Extraction

An emerging approach involves extracting ontologies and graphs in parallel. While this can streamline the process, it presents challenges such as:

• Detecting Hallucinations: Differentiating between genuine insights and AI-generated inaccuracies.
• Ensuring Completeness: Ensuring no critical concepts are overlooked during extraction.

Teams must carefully validate outputs to ensure reliability and accuracy when employing this parallel method.

LLMs as Ontologists

While traditionally dependent on human expertise, ontology creation is increasingly supported by LLMs. These models, trained on vast amounts of data, possess inherent knowledge of many open ontologies and taxonomies. Teams can use LLMs to:

• Generate Skeleton Ontologies: Prompt LLMs with domain-specific information to draft initial ontology structures.
• Validate and Refine Ontologies: Collaborate with domain experts to refine these drafts, ensuring accuracy and relevance.

However, for validation and graph construction, formal tools such as OWL, SHACL, and RDF should be prioritized over LLMs to minimize hallucinations and ensure robust outcomes.

Final Thoughts: Unlocking the Power of Graph RAGs

The rise of Graph RAGs underscores a simple but crucial correlation: improving graph construction and data quality directly enhances retrieval systems. To truly harness this power, teams must invest in understanding ontologies, building quality graphs, and leveraging both human expertise and advanced AI tools.

As we move forward, the interplay between Graph RAGs and ontology engineering will continue to shape the future of AI. Whether through adopting existing frameworks or exploring innovative uses of LLMs, the path to success lies in a deep commitment to data quality and domain understanding.

Have you explored these technologies in your work? Share your experiences and insights — and stay tuned for more discussions on ontology extraction and its role in AI advancements. Cheers to a year of innovation!

@ 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.

@ 8d34bd24:414be32b

As I mentioned in a previous post, I am currently reading the book The Unwavering Resolve of Jonathan Edwards by Steven J. Lawson. The primary subject of this book is Jonathan Edward’s 70 Resolutions for his life that he made between the ages of 18 and 20 when he was first out on his own and was a new pastor of a Presbyterian church. Here are Jonathan Edwards’s Resolutions.

Reading some of his resolutions made me think I should write some resolutions for my life. They are basically goals for my life and ways to keep me working towards these goals. Since my goals are lofty and I have a long way to go to fulfill them, I decided to add a prayer to each resolution because I can only succeed in fulfilling these resolutions by the power of the Holy Spirit.

I started originally with my own preamble, but Edwards’s preamble was so much better, so I went with his. The preamble is from Edwards, but the resolutions and prayers are mine.

My Resolutions for a Godly Life

“Being sensible that I am unable to do anything without God’s help, I do humbly entreat him by his grace to enable me to keep these Resolutions, so far as they are agreeable to his will, for Christ’s sake:”

1. RESOLVED: To seek to glorify God with my thoughts, words, and actions and to do nothing that harms God’s reputation or that of His church. \ Father God, help me to glorify You with my thoughts, words, and actions. Take away from me any desires that are not for Your glory. Help me to understand what an awesome and holy God You are so I may glorify You with every bit of my being and glorify You before men.

2. RESOLVED: To seek to do all good things for God’s glory and not my own. \ Father God, help to do what is right and good in Your sight and help me to do it with the right motives of thankfulness for what You have done for me and to glorify You. Do not let pride or self serving be my motivation or harm my good works in Your name.

3. RESOLVED: To daily acknowledge that I am unable to keep these resolutions without the guidance and power of the Holy Spirit and divine grace. \ Father God, please enable me to live out these resolutions, in so much as they agree with Your perfect will. Help me to lean on Your power and not my own so everything I do is for your glory.

4. RESOLVED: To read the Bible every day, unless I am too sick to do so, and to read through the whole Bible every year, so I may know Your word and apply it to every part of my life. \ Father God, give me a hunger for Your word so I long for my time in Your word. Give me joy in Your word and don’t allow it to be a burden that I do solely out of feelings of obligation. Help me to know You better through Your word and to understand Your word, apply it in my life, and faithfully share it with those around me in a manner that is glorifying to You.

5. RESOLVED: To accept every word in the Bible as perfect truth. When I find something that doesn’t make sense, seems wrong, or seems to contradict another passage in the Bible or something considered true by science or culture, I will seek to discover whether it is my misunderstanding of what the Bible is saying, whether it is science/culture that is wrong, or whether the problem is within me. I will seek the full truth through the Holy Spirit knowing that Your word is truth. \ Father God, help me to understand and submit to Your word, whether it is convenient or not and whether it is easy or not. Align my mind, heart, and spirit with Your will so I can understand Your word and so that it becomes part of who I am. Prevent me from ever modifying Your word or the meaning of Your word to meet my desires or to make my interaction with others easier.

6. RESOLVED: To seek to faithfully speak the truth in love to all people. To speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. To add nothing to the truth defined by the Bible and to leave no uncomfortable biblical truth out of my speaking Your truth. \ Father God, help me to always be faithful to Your word and Your will. Don’t let me ever seek to add or subtract from Your perfect word. Help me to love people enough to share the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth even if this makes interaction uncomfortable and even if it requires time that I don’t feel I have.

7. RESOLVED: To seek the eternal wellbeing of those around me even if that is uncomfortable in the moment. \ Father God, help me to see the people around me as You see them. Help me to speak the truth in love. Help me to not fear hurting a relationship that lead me to not share the whole truth, but also help me to not be so concerned with the truth that I trample Your children.

8. RESOLVED: To seek to live the truth that my citizenship is in heaven and I am just a resident alien here in America. \ Father God, help me to make every decision for every word I speak, every action I take, and every thing on which I spend my time be with the eternal consideration of my citizenship in heaven and the desire for others to join us in heaven.

9. RESOLVED: To seek the wellbeing of the city, county, state, and nation where I live through voting, speaking the truth, and witnessing to bring people into the heavenly kingdom. To seek to find the perfect balance between seeking good for my earthly neighbors while not spending too much time taking away my focus on biblical and salvation issues to Your glory. \ Father God, help me to do what is right for the good of the country and land in which I live while not taking away time from doing Your work for Your kingdom. Help me to find the right balance of earthly and heavenly responsibilities and priorities.

10. RESOLVED: To seek to always put honoring God above honoring my country and to seek eternal good above momentary comfort. \ Father God, help me to keep all of my priorities aligned with Your will and to pledge my allegiance to You alone and above all other allegiances. Help me to see everything according to Your perspective, especially with a view towards eternity.

11. RESOLVED: To seek to serve those around me just as Jesus served His disciples and the sinners of the world. To seek to put others good above my own. \ Father God, give me the desire to serve those around me: in my family, in my church, in my business, in my community, and beyond. Help me to have the mental and physical strength to serve and to not be overwhelmed with my earthly and heavenly responsibilities. Help me to put the good of others above my own desires.

12. RESOLVED: To seek to align my will with God’s will and my priorities with God’s priorities. \ Father God, align my will with Your own will. Help me to submit to Your will in all things. Help me to find joy and peace in obeying and following You. Keep me on the path You have created for me.

13. RESOLVED: To be careful to spend my time primarily on things that matter eternally and to not be distracted spending time on things that may seem urgent, but have no eternal significance. \ Father God, I am so easily distracted by “urgent” responsibilities of this world. Help me to see my life as You see it so I can set my priorities right according to Your will. Help me to not only not be distracted by unfruitful works, but also help me to spend my time on the best and most fruitful activities and not just on the good.

14. RESOLVED: To seek to use the wealth You have given me to honor Your and to serve my fellow mankind, especially fellow believers and to bring people to You. \ Father God, help me to so align my priorities that I do not hold on to my physical possessions or wealth, but spend it in a way to multiply heavenly wealth to Your glory. Make my financial priorities always align with Your own.

15. RESOLVED: To seek to honor my parents even if I strongly disagree with them and even if they are not being loving or respectful in return. \ Father God, sometimes I have trouble finding a right balance in honoring my parents since they are not believers and have opposing world views. Help me to find the right balance between being faithful to You and honoring my parents. Help me to honor my parents in such a manner that they are drawn to You and can come to know You like I do.

16. RESOLVED: To seek to honor my husband, especially to speak up about how grateful I am for him and who he is. To seek to be a helper and a support to my husband, especially in the support of our family and in his ministry. \ Father God, help me to be more vocal about my appreciation of my husband. It is so easy to get busy with life and to not speak up about how much I love and appreciate him. Help me to be the helper I was designed to be and to lift him up rather than to drag him down.

17. RESOLVED: To seek to be available to witness or disciple anyone who wants to know more about You, God. \ Father God, help me to see the need in those around me and to take the time out of my busy life to share You and Your word with whomever You have put in my path. Help me to not let the urgent overcome the important. Help me to witness or disciple based on who they are and their needs rather than just the manner that is comfortable to me.

18. RESOLVED: To seek to find the right balance between defending the truth of Scripture and loving my fellow man in a way that is neither divisive nor demeaning. \ Father God, help me to balance truth and love. Help me to not get so passionate about Your truth that I trample the souls of those I am trying to bring to You. Help me to not be so gentle that I withhold part of Your truth and not so forceful that I drive them away. Help me to listen to Your leading so I can be used as a tool in Your hand to Your glory and the well-being of those around me.

19. RESOLVED: To pray daily and continually and to include You, God, in every decision, small and big. To make talking to God a part of everything I do and think. \ Father God, guide every decision I make, no matter how small, to be in complete submission to Your will. Help me to talk to You continually about every joy and sorry, about every need and answered prayer, and about how much I appreciate who You are and what You have done for me. Help me to include You in every part of my life. Help me to not only speak, but to listen.

20. RESOLVED: To pray “Your will, not mine be done” and to mean it with every ounce of my being.\ Father God, help me to submit my will to your own, especially in my desires for myself and others. Help me to so trust you that I automatically trust your answer to prayer and guidance in prayer. Help me to trust your will even when I don’t understand it.

21. RESOLVED: To pray more for people’s spiritual well-being than for their physical well-being. \ Father God, help me to see people as you see them and to see their needs as you see their needs. Help me to understand and pray for their most important needs — the spiritual and eternal needs and not to just see and pray for physical needs that are a problem today, but don’t matter for eternity.

22. RESOLVED: To seek to be an encouragement and to support (emotional & financial) our church pastors, elders, deacons, and others in ministry. \ Father God, help me to support and encourage our pastors, elders, and deacons in all they do in Your service. Help me to be the encouragement that helps them in their work when they have been dragged down by complainers. Help me to provide whatever help is needed to enable them to shepherd the church.

23. RESOLVED: To seek to be a godly example to others, especially my kids, so that they may know about You, know You personally, and become more like You. \ Father God, help me to live a life that honors You and helps those around me to see You. Continually mold me in Your image to Your glory. Help me to live a life so devoted to You that I am honoring You whether there are witnesses around or not. Make every good work be in Your honor.

I’m sure, like Edwards, I will add more resolutions over time. I hope these resolutions have made you think and that maybe you may decide to adopt some of these resolutions for yourself.

I’d love to hear what resolutions you would add or how you would change any of these I’ve listed.

May the God and Creator of the universe mold you and carve you to become more like Himself. May He help make you more like Jesus and help you to implement a life in His honor.

Trust Jesus

@ 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.

@ a4a6b584:1e05b95b

The Four-Layer Framework

Layer 1: Zoom Out

Start by looking at the big picture. What’s the subject about, and why does it matter? Focus on the overarching ideas and how they fit together. Think of this as the 30,000-foot view—it’s about understanding the "why" and "how" before diving into the "what."

Example: If you’re learning programming, start by understanding that it’s about giving logical instructions to computers to solve problems.

• Tip: Keep it simple. Summarize the subject in one or two sentences and avoid getting bogged down in specifics at this stage.

Once you have the big picture in mind, it’s time to start breaking it down.

---

Layer 2: Categorize and Connect

Now it’s time to break the subject into categories—like creating branches on a tree. This helps your brain organize information logically and see connections between ideas.

Example: Studying biology? Group concepts into categories like cells, genetics, and ecosystems.

• Tip: Use headings or labels to group similar ideas. Jot these down in a list or simple diagram to keep track.

With your categories in place, you’re ready to dive into the details that bring them to life.

---

Layer 3: Master the Details

Once you’ve mapped out the main categories, you’re ready to dive deeper. This is where you learn the nuts and bolts—like formulas, specific techniques, or key terminology. These details make the subject practical and actionable.

Example: In programming, this might mean learning the syntax for loops, conditionals, or functions in your chosen language.

• Tip: Focus on details that clarify the categories from Layer 2. Skip anything that doesn’t add to your understanding.

Now that you’ve mastered the essentials, you can expand your knowledge to include extra material.

---

Layer 4: Expand Your Horizons

Finally, move on to the extra material—less critical facts, trivia, or edge cases. While these aren’t essential to mastering the subject, they can be useful in specialized discussions or exams.

Example: Learn about rare programming quirks or historical trivia about a language’s development.

• Tip: Spend minimal time here unless it’s necessary for your goals. It’s okay to skim if you’re short on time.

---

Pro Tips for Better Learning

1. Use Active Recall and Spaced Repetition

Test yourself without looking at notes. Review what you’ve learned at increasing intervals—like after a day, a week, and a month. This strengthens memory by forcing your brain to actively retrieve information.

2. Map It Out

Create visual aids like diagrams or concept maps to clarify relationships between ideas. These are particularly helpful for organizing categories in Layer 2.

3. Teach What You Learn

Explain the subject to someone else as if they’re hearing it for the first time. Teaching exposes any gaps in your understanding and helps reinforce the material.

4. Engage with LLMs and Discuss Concepts

Take advantage of tools like ChatGPT or similar large language models to explore your topic in greater depth. Use these tools to:
- Ask specific questions to clarify confusing points.
- Engage in discussions to simulate real-world applications of the subject.
- Generate examples or analogies that deepen your understanding.

Tip: Use LLMs as a study partner, but don’t rely solely on them. Combine these insights with your own critical thinking to develop a well-rounded perspective.

---

Get Started

Ready to try the Four-Layer Method? Take 15 minutes today to map out the big picture of a topic you’re curious about—what’s it all about, and why does it matter? By building your understanding step by step, you’ll master the subject with less stress and more confidence.

@ fe32298e:20516265

Today I learned how to install NVapi to monitor my GPUs in Home Assistant.

NVApi is a lightweight API designed for monitoring NVIDIA GPU utilization and enabling automated power management. It provides real-time GPU metrics, supports integration with tools like Home Assistant, and offers flexible power management and PCIe link speed management based on workload and thermal conditions.

• GPU Utilization Monitoring: Utilization, memory usage, temperature, fan speed, and power consumption.
• Automated Power Limiting: Adjusts power limits dynamically based on temperature thresholds and total power caps, configurable per GPU or globally.
• Cross-GPU Coordination: Total power budget applies across multiple GPUs in the same system.
• PCIe Link Speed Management: Controls minimum and maximum PCIe link speeds with idle thresholds for power optimization.
• Home Assistant Integration: Uses the built-in RESTful platform and template sensors.

Getting the Data

sudo apt install golang-go git clone https://github.com/sammcj/NVApi.git cd NVapi go run main.go -port 9999 -rate 1 curl http://localhost:9999/gpu

Response for a single GPU: [ { "index": 0, "name": "NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090", "gpu_utilisation": 0, "memory_utilisation": 0, "power_watts": 16, "power_limit_watts": 450, "memory_total_gb": 23.99, "memory_used_gb": 0.46, "memory_free_gb": 23.52, "memory_usage_percent": 2, "temperature": 38, "processes": [], "pcie_link_state": "not managed" } ]

Response for multiple GPUs: [ { "index": 0, "name": "NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090", "gpu_utilisation": 0, "memory_utilisation": 0, "power_watts": 14, "power_limit_watts": 350, "memory_total_gb": 24, "memory_used_gb": 0.43, "memory_free_gb": 23.57, "memory_usage_percent": 2, "temperature": 36, "processes": [], "pcie_link_state": "not managed" }, { "index": 1, "name": "NVIDIA RTX A4000", "gpu_utilisation": 0, "memory_utilisation": 0, "power_watts": 10, "power_limit_watts": 140, "memory_total_gb": 15.99, "memory_used_gb": 0.56, "memory_free_gb": 15.43, "memory_usage_percent": 3, "temperature": 41, "processes": [], "pcie_link_state": "not managed" } ]

Start at Boot

Create /etc/systemd/system/nvapi.service:

``` [Unit] Description=Run NVapi After=network.target

[Service] Type=simple Environment="GOPATH=/home/ansible/go" WorkingDirectory=/home/ansible/NVapi ExecStart=/usr/bin/go run main.go -port 9999 -rate 1 Restart=always User=ansible

Environment="GPU_TEMP_CHECK_INTERVAL=5"

Environment="GPU_TOTAL_POWER_CAP=400"

Environment="GPU_0_LOW_TEMP=40"

Environment="GPU_0_MEDIUM_TEMP=70"

Environment="GPU_0_LOW_TEMP_LIMIT=135"

Environment="GPU_0_MEDIUM_TEMP_LIMIT=120"

Environment="GPU_0_HIGH_TEMP_LIMIT=100"

Environment="GPU_1_LOW_TEMP=45"

Environment="GPU_1_MEDIUM_TEMP=75"

Environment="GPU_1_LOW_TEMP_LIMIT=140"

Environment="GPU_1_MEDIUM_TEMP_LIMIT=125"

Environment="GPU_1_HIGH_TEMP_LIMIT=110"

[Install] WantedBy=multi-user.target ```

Home Assistant

Add to Home Assistant configuration.yaml and restart HA (completely).

For a single GPU, this works: ``` sensor: - platform: rest name: MYPC GPU Information resource: http://mypc:9999 method: GET headers: Content-Type: application/json value_template: "{{ value_json[0].index }}" json_attributes: - name - gpu_utilisation - memory_utilisation - power_watts - power_limit_watts - memory_total_gb - memory_used_gb - memory_free_gb - memory_usage_percent - temperature scan_interval: 1 # seconds

• platform: template sensors: mypc_gpu_0_gpu: friendly_name: "MYPC {{ state_attr('sensor.mypc_gpu_information', 'name') }} GPU" value_template: "{{ state_attr('sensor.mypc_gpu_information', 'gpu_utilisation') }}" unit_of_measurement: "%" mypc_gpu_0_memory: friendly_name: "MYPC {{ state_attr('sensor.mypc_gpu_information', 'name') }} Memory" value_template: "{{ state_attr('sensor.mypc_gpu_information', 'memory_utilisation') }}" unit_of_measurement: "%" mypc_gpu_0_power: friendly_name: "MYPC {{ state_attr('sensor.mypc_gpu_information', 'name') }} Power" value_template: "{{ state_attr('sensor.mypc_gpu_information', 'power_watts') }}" unit_of_measurement: "W" mypc_gpu_0_power_limit: friendly_name: "MYPC {{ state_attr('sensor.mypc_gpu_information', 'name') }} Power Limit" value_template: "{{ state_attr('sensor.mypc_gpu_information', 'power_limit_watts') }}" unit_of_measurement: "W" mypc_gpu_0_temperature: friendly_name: "MYPC {{ state_attr('sensor.mypc_gpu_information', 'name') }} Temperature" value_template: "{{ state_attr('sensor.mypc_gpu_information', 'temperature') }}" unit_of_measurement: "°C" ```

For multiple GPUs: ``` rest: scan_interval: 1 resource: http://mypc:9999 sensor: - name: "MYPC GPU0 Information" value_template: "{{ value_json[0].index }}" json_attributes_path: "$.0" json_attributes: - name - gpu_utilisation - memory_utilisation - power_watts - power_limit_watts - memory_total_gb - memory_used_gb - memory_free_gb - memory_usage_percent - temperature - name: "MYPC GPU1 Information" value_template: "{{ value_json[1].index }}" json_attributes_path: "$.1" json_attributes: - name - gpu_utilisation - memory_utilisation - power_watts - power_limit_watts - memory_total_gb - memory_used_gb - memory_free_gb - memory_usage_percent - temperature

• platform: template sensors: mypc_gpu_0_gpu: friendly_name: "MYPC GPU0 GPU" value_template: "{{ state_attr('sensor.mypc_gpu0_information', 'gpu_utilisation') }}" unit_of_measurement: "%" mypc_gpu_0_memory: friendly_name: "MYPC GPU0 Memory" value_template: "{{ state_attr('sensor.mypc_gpu0_information', 'memory_utilisation') }}" unit_of_measurement: "%" mypc_gpu_0_power: friendly_name: "MYPC GPU0 Power" value_template: "{{ state_attr('sensor.mypc_gpu0_information', 'power_watts') }}" unit_of_measurement: "W" mypc_gpu_0_power_limit: friendly_name: "MYPC GPU0 Power Limit" value_template: "{{ state_attr('sensor.mypc_gpu0_information', 'power_limit_watts') }}" unit_of_measurement: "W" mypc_gpu_0_temperature: friendly_name: "MYPC GPU0 Temperature" value_template: "{{ state_attr('sensor.mypc_gpu0_information', 'temperature') }}" unit_of_measurement: "C"

• platform: template sensors: mypc_gpu_1_gpu: friendly_name: "MYPC GPU1 GPU" value_template: "{{ state_attr('sensor.mypc_gpu1_information', 'gpu_utilisation') }}" unit_of_measurement: "%" mypc_gpu_1_memory: friendly_name: "MYPC GPU1 Memory" value_template: "{{ state_attr('sensor.mypc_gpu1_information', 'memory_utilisation') }}" unit_of_measurement: "%" mypc_gpu_1_power: friendly_name: "MYPC GPU1 Power" value_template: "{{ state_attr('sensor.mypc_gpu1_information', 'power_watts') }}" unit_of_measurement: "W" mypc_gpu_1_power_limit: friendly_name: "MYPC GPU1 Power Limit" value_template: "{{ state_attr('sensor.mypc_gpu1_information', 'power_limit_watts') }}" unit_of_measurement: "W" mypc_gpu_1_temperature: friendly_name: "MYPC GPU1 Temperature" value_template: "{{ state_attr('sensor.mypc_gpu1_information', 'temperature') }}" unit_of_measurement: "C"

```

Basic entity card: type: entities entities: - entity: sensor.mypc_gpu_0_gpu secondary_info: last-updated - entity: sensor.mypc_gpu_0_memory secondary_info: last-updated - entity: sensor.mypc_gpu_0_power secondary_info: last-updated - entity: sensor.mypc_gpu_0_power_limit secondary_info: last-updated - entity: sensor.mypc_gpu_0_temperature secondary_info: last-updated

Ansible Role

```

• name: install go become: true package: name: golang-go state: present

• name: git clone git: repo: "https://github.com/sammcj/NVApi.git" dest: "/home/ansible/NVapi" update: yes force: true

go run main.go -port 9999 -rate 1

• name: install systemd service become: true copy: src: nvapi.service dest: /etc/systemd/system/nvapi.service

• name: Reload systemd daemons, enable, and restart nvapi become: true systemd: name: nvapi daemon_reload: yes enabled: yes state: restarted ```

@ 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.

@ 2850567c:83c026bf

Bitcoin is really the store of energy. Just like energy cannot be produced and only converted, just like it is finite, is bitcoin. Energy itself has no value for anybody. Unless we can use a certain form of energy for something useful. Bitcoin is also trying to follow the same parameters.

Bitcoin is not a get rich scheme. It is only store of value. Its price is only in fiat currency, is only incidental. Its price has no meaning.

You store any amount of bitcoins or satoshis, one has two options. Either to exchange fiat currency in a market or to spend energy to produce the last few bitcoins that are left to be produced. In both these options, will require energy.

To just be able to buy using USD/INR/GBP/EUR/etc the buyer needs to have done the some in the society. Buyer could steal it, inherit it, cheat it, farm it, manufacture it, give any services, all is equal. Bitcoin does not judge anybody and has no morality. The fiat currency obtained with whatever means can be used to exchange into bitcoins. The person who sold it will eventually realize his error and wont be selling it again. And gradually to be able to buy bitcoin using fiat will only get harder an d harder.

The other way still open for now is mining it by spending energy. Even here, the miner will need access to fiat to buy both the tools for mining, and the constant flow of electricity which can run the mining operation. Even here, the fiat currency is required, obtained with whatever means. The amount may differ based on region and time period. Even here the amount of electricity needed and the cost of tools needed will gradually keep getting harder. Will continuously need further more and more fiat.

Fiat currency is one of the major evils of this age. The amount of work needed to produce fiat is not the based on an operating free market. The fiat currency has a tendency to over produce itself at will, more than the amount of goods or services available to be bought with that fiat. That is the evil called inflation. And this is also the reason why Bitcoin's price in fiat terms fluctuates so often. Bitcoin's price has to continuously absorb real and fictitious fiat value and re-adjust itself. This re-adjustments are only limited to traders of Bitcoin who are watching its price.

The other group of bitcoin holdlers are ones who choose not to sell their bitcoins only due to its price changes. For them bitcoin has no price. These people sell their hard work, obtain fiat, sell the spare fiat and finally store their hard work only in bitcoin. They keep trying to exchange their fiat into bitcoin as many times they could, regardless of the price.

Now comes the question of whats is the use of storing humans hard work, into a stronger asset like Gold or Bitcoin. The wealth obtained by ones hard work is most expensive. Hard work requires spending life's time. Human time is not infinite. The time we spend in our life on something is spent and never comes back. Therefore it is most important to be cautious on how we save and spend our time on. If we ask a mason for making us a home, the mason had to exchange a small portion of his finite life in making a house. He should rewarded in the same manner as is is value of that time spent. And just life his life's time that is spent permanently, he should be able to store that value also permanently. That is why we would all prefer top store our hard work in stronger assets. Value of such stronger assets should be changed by anybody, not by any government, by act of war, by any thieves or even by time itself.

Finally there are the advantages of storing ones hard earned wealth (a.k.a life's time) in a strong asset. A society where and all its members are storing their hard work in a stronger asset, will naturally finds that equilibrium where it begins to give value to only things that matter. All wealth is now guaranteed to be earned by hard work. This wealth will not be exchanged for anything that does not have matching hard work. There can be little to no waste cause now to waste, will require real life's time spent on easy work or no work at all. Now for anybody with any skill will have to race with their hard work, not lies. The goods and services in such society will all become precious. Nobody here is able to create wealth by manipulation. The amount of value of bitcoins is open to be verified by everyone. It cannot be changed or even hidden.

Bitcoin is only trying to be a perfect store of value. It learned many good properties from Gold, which lasted 5000 years. But now with advancements of technology in both mining gold and storing gold, is not able to preserve its value. Transporting gold was a problem from the beginning and its divisibility was very limited. Bitcoin for now uses the internet for its transport which is a backbone of all global commerce. Bitcoin solves the divisibility by allowing 100 million parts. Gold still stands decentralised by allowing physical access. Bitcoin too allows allows physical access in a different form. It being digital in nature, the physical access is about storing the cryptographic private keys. Gold still is as rare but with advancements in metal processes, its 100% verification is out of reach of common people. Bitcoin makes sure verification stays decentralised, accessible to every one and 100% accurate.

@ 6f6b50bb:a848e5a1

Che cosa significherebbe trattare l'IA come uno strumento invece che come una persona?

Dall’avvio di ChatGPT, le esplorazioni in due direzioni hanno preso velocità.

La prima direzione riguarda le capacità tecniche. Quanto grande possiamo addestrare un modello? Quanto bene può rispondere alle domande del SAT? Con quanta efficienza possiamo distribuirlo?

La seconda direzione riguarda il design dell’interazione. Come comunichiamo con un modello? Come possiamo usarlo per un lavoro utile? Quale metafora usiamo per ragionare su di esso?

La prima direzione è ampiamente seguita e enormemente finanziata, e per una buona ragione: i progressi nelle capacità tecniche sono alla base di ogni possibile applicazione. Ma la seconda è altrettanto cruciale per il campo e ha enormi incognite. Siamo solo a pochi anni dall’inizio dell’era dei grandi modelli. Quali sono le probabilità che abbiamo già capito i modi migliori per usarli?

Propongo una nuova modalità di interazione, in cui i modelli svolgano il ruolo di applicazioni informatiche (ad esempio app per telefoni): fornendo un’interfaccia grafica, interpretando gli input degli utenti e aggiornando il loro stato. In questa modalità, invece di essere un “agente” che utilizza un computer per conto dell’essere umano, l’IA può fornire un ambiente informatico più ricco e potente che possiamo utilizzare.

Metafore per l’interazione

Al centro di un’interazione c’è una metafora che guida le aspettative di un utente su un sistema. I primi giorni dell’informatica hanno preso metafore come “scrivanie”, “macchine da scrivere”, “fogli di calcolo” e “lettere” e le hanno trasformate in equivalenti digitali, permettendo all’utente di ragionare sul loro comportamento. Puoi lasciare qualcosa sulla tua scrivania e tornare a prenderlo; hai bisogno di un indirizzo per inviare una lettera. Man mano che abbiamo sviluppato una conoscenza culturale di questi dispositivi, la necessità di queste particolari metafore è scomparsa, e con esse i design di interfaccia skeumorfici che le rafforzavano. Come un cestino o una matita, un computer è ora una metafora di se stesso.

La metafora dominante per i grandi modelli oggi è modello-come-persona. Questa è una metafora efficace perché le persone hanno capacità estese che conosciamo intuitivamente. Implica che possiamo avere una conversazione con un modello e porgli domande; che il modello possa collaborare con noi su un documento o un pezzo di codice; che possiamo assegnargli un compito da svolgere da solo e che tornerà quando sarà finito.

Tuttavia, trattare un modello come una persona limita profondamente il nostro modo di pensare all’interazione con esso. Le interazioni umane sono intrinsecamente lente e lineari, limitate dalla larghezza di banda e dalla natura a turni della comunicazione verbale. Come abbiamo tutti sperimentato, comunicare idee complesse in una conversazione è difficile e dispersivo. Quando vogliamo precisione, ci rivolgiamo invece a strumenti, utilizzando manipolazioni dirette e interfacce visive ad alta larghezza di banda per creare diagrammi, scrivere codice e progettare modelli CAD. Poiché concepiamo i modelli come persone, li utilizziamo attraverso conversazioni lente, anche se sono perfettamente in grado di accettare input diretti e rapidi e di produrre risultati visivi. Le metafore che utilizziamo limitano le esperienze che costruiamo, e la metafora modello-come-persona ci impedisce di esplorare il pieno potenziale dei grandi modelli.

Per molti casi d’uso, e specialmente per il lavoro produttivo, credo che il futuro risieda in un’altra metafora: modello-come-computer.

Usare un’IA come un computer

Sotto la metafora modello-come-computer, interagiremo con i grandi modelli seguendo le intuizioni che abbiamo sulle applicazioni informatiche (sia su desktop, tablet o telefono). Nota che ciò non significa che il modello sarà un’app tradizionale più di quanto il desktop di Windows fosse una scrivania letterale. “Applicazione informatica” sarà un modo per un modello di rappresentarsi a noi. Invece di agire come una persona, il modello agirà come un computer.

Agire come un computer significa produrre un’interfaccia grafica. Al posto del flusso lineare di testo in stile telescrivente fornito da ChatGPT, un sistema modello-come-computer genererà qualcosa che somiglia all’interfaccia di un’applicazione moderna: pulsanti, cursori, schede, immagini, grafici e tutto il resto. Questo affronta limitazioni chiave dell’interfaccia di chat standard modello-come-persona:

• Scoperta. Un buon strumento suggerisce i suoi usi. Quando l’unica interfaccia è una casella di testo vuota, spetta all’utente capire cosa fare e comprendere i limiti del sistema. La barra laterale Modifica in Lightroom è un ottimo modo per imparare l’editing fotografico perché non si limita a dirti cosa può fare questa applicazione con una foto, ma cosa potresti voler fare. Allo stesso modo, un’interfaccia modello-come-computer per DALL-E potrebbe mostrare nuove possibilità per le tue generazioni di immagini.

• Efficienza. La manipolazione diretta è più rapida che scrivere una richiesta a parole. Per continuare l’esempio di Lightroom, sarebbe impensabile modificare una foto dicendo a una persona quali cursori spostare e di quanto. Ci vorrebbe un giorno intero per chiedere un’esposizione leggermente più bassa e una vibranza leggermente più alta, solo per vedere come apparirebbe. Nella metafora modello-come-computer, il modello può creare strumenti che ti permettono di comunicare ciò che vuoi più efficientemente e quindi di fare le cose più rapidamente.

A differenza di un’app tradizionale, questa interfaccia grafica è generata dal modello su richiesta. Questo significa che ogni parte dell’interfaccia che vedi è rilevante per ciò che stai facendo in quel momento, inclusi i contenuti specifici del tuo lavoro. Significa anche che, se desideri un’interfaccia più ampia o diversa, puoi semplicemente richiederla. Potresti chiedere a DALL-E di produrre alcuni preset modificabili per le sue impostazioni ispirati da famosi artisti di schizzi. Quando clicchi sul preset Leonardo da Vinci, imposta i cursori per disegni prospettici altamente dettagliati in inchiostro nero. Se clicchi su Charles Schulz, seleziona fumetti tecnicolor 2D a basso dettaglio.

Una bicicletta della mente proteiforme

La metafora modello-come-persona ha una curiosa tendenza a creare distanza tra l’utente e il modello, rispecchiando il divario di comunicazione tra due persone che può essere ridotto ma mai completamente colmato. A causa della difficoltà e del costo di comunicare a parole, le persone tendono a suddividere i compiti tra loro in blocchi grandi e il più indipendenti possibile. Le interfacce modello-come-persona seguono questo schema: non vale la pena dire a un modello di aggiungere un return statement alla tua funzione quando è più veloce scriverlo da solo. Con il sovraccarico della comunicazione, i sistemi modello-come-persona sono più utili quando possono fare un intero blocco di lavoro da soli. Fanno le cose per te.

Questo contrasta con il modo in cui interagiamo con i computer o altri strumenti. Gli strumenti producono feedback visivi in tempo reale e sono controllati attraverso manipolazioni dirette. Hanno un overhead comunicativo così basso che non è necessario specificare un blocco di lavoro indipendente. Ha più senso mantenere l’umano nel loop e dirigere lo strumento momento per momento. Come stivali delle sette leghe, gli strumenti ti permettono di andare più lontano a ogni passo, ma sei ancora tu a fare il lavoro. Ti permettono di fare le cose più velocemente.

Considera il compito di costruire un sito web usando un grande modello. Con le interfacce di oggi, potresti trattare il modello come un appaltatore o un collaboratore. Cercheresti di scrivere a parole il più possibile su come vuoi che il sito appaia, cosa vuoi che dica e quali funzionalità vuoi che abbia. Il modello genererebbe una prima bozza, tu la eseguirai e poi fornirai un feedback. “Fai il logo un po’ più grande”, diresti, e “centra quella prima immagine principale”, e “deve esserci un pulsante di login nell’intestazione”. Per ottenere esattamente ciò che vuoi, invierai una lista molto lunga di richieste sempre più minuziose.

Un’interazione alternativa modello-come-computer sarebbe diversa: invece di costruire il sito web, il modello genererebbe un’interfaccia per te per costruirlo, dove ogni input dell’utente a quell’interfaccia interroga il grande modello sotto il cofano. Forse quando descrivi le tue necessità creerebbe un’interfaccia con una barra laterale e una finestra di anteprima. All’inizio la barra laterale contiene solo alcuni schizzi di layout che puoi scegliere come punto di partenza. Puoi cliccare su ciascuno di essi, e il modello scrive l’HTML per una pagina web usando quel layout e lo visualizza nella finestra di anteprima. Ora che hai una pagina su cui lavorare, la barra laterale guadagna opzioni aggiuntive che influenzano la pagina globalmente, come accoppiamenti di font e schemi di colore. L’anteprima funge da editor WYSIWYG, permettendoti di afferrare elementi e spostarli, modificarne i contenuti, ecc. A supportare tutto ciò è il modello, che vede queste azioni dell’utente e riscrive la pagina per corrispondere ai cambiamenti effettuati. Poiché il modello può generare un’interfaccia per aiutare te e lui a comunicare più efficientemente, puoi esercitare più controllo sul prodotto finale in meno tempo.

La metafora modello-come-computer ci incoraggia a pensare al modello come a uno strumento con cui interagire in tempo reale piuttosto che a un collaboratore a cui assegnare compiti. Invece di sostituire un tirocinante o un tutor, può essere una sorta di bicicletta proteiforme per la mente, una che è sempre costruita su misura esattamente per te e il terreno che intendi attraversare.

Un nuovo paradigma per l’informatica?

I modelli che possono generare interfacce su richiesta sono una frontiera completamente nuova nell’informatica. Potrebbero essere un paradigma del tutto nuovo, con il modo in cui cortocircuitano il modello di applicazione esistente. Dare agli utenti finali il potere di creare e modificare app al volo cambia fondamentalmente il modo in cui interagiamo con i computer. Al posto di una singola applicazione statica costruita da uno sviluppatore, un modello genererà un’applicazione su misura per l’utente e le sue esigenze immediate. Al posto della logica aziendale implementata nel codice, il modello interpreterà gli input dell’utente e aggiornerà l’interfaccia utente. È persino possibile che questo tipo di interfaccia generativa sostituisca completamente il sistema operativo, generando e gestendo interfacce e finestre al volo secondo necessità.

All’inizio, l’interfaccia generativa sarà un giocattolo, utile solo per l’esplorazione creativa e poche altre applicazioni di nicchia. Dopotutto, nessuno vorrebbe un’app di posta elettronica che occasionalmente invia email al tuo ex e mente sulla tua casella di posta. Ma gradualmente i modelli miglioreranno. Anche mentre si spingeranno ulteriormente nello spazio di esperienze completamente nuove, diventeranno lentamente abbastanza affidabili da essere utilizzati per un lavoro reale.

Piccoli pezzi di questo futuro esistono già. Anni fa Jonas Degrave ha dimostrato che ChatGPT poteva fare una buona simulazione di una riga di comando Linux. Allo stesso modo, websim.ai utilizza un LLM per generare siti web su richiesta mentre li navighi. Oasis, GameNGen e DIAMOND addestrano modelli video condizionati sull’azione su singoli videogiochi, permettendoti di giocare ad esempio a Doom dentro un grande modello. E Genie 2 genera videogiochi giocabili da prompt testuali. L’interfaccia generativa potrebbe ancora sembrare un’idea folle, ma non è così folle.

Ci sono enormi domande aperte su come apparirà tutto questo. Dove sarà inizialmente utile l’interfaccia generativa? Come condivideremo e distribuiremo le esperienze che creiamo collaborando con il modello, se esistono solo come contesto di un grande modello? Vorremmo davvero farlo? Quali nuovi tipi di esperienze saranno possibili? Come funzionerà tutto questo in pratica? I modelli genereranno interfacce come codice o produrranno direttamente pixel grezzi?

Non conosco ancora queste risposte. Dovremo sperimentare e scoprirlo!Che cosa significherebbe trattare l'IA come uno strumento invece che come una persona?

Dall’avvio di ChatGPT, le esplorazioni in due direzioni hanno preso velocità.

La prima direzione riguarda le capacità tecniche. Quanto grande possiamo addestrare un modello? Quanto bene può rispondere alle domande del SAT? Con quanta efficienza possiamo distribuirlo?

La seconda direzione riguarda il design dell’interazione. Come comunichiamo con un modello? Come possiamo usarlo per un lavoro utile? Quale metafora usiamo per ragionare su di esso?

La prima direzione è ampiamente seguita e enormemente finanziata, e per una buona ragione: i progressi nelle capacità tecniche sono alla base di ogni possibile applicazione. Ma la seconda è altrettanto cruciale per il campo e ha enormi incognite. Siamo solo a pochi anni dall’inizio dell’era dei grandi modelli. Quali sono le probabilità che abbiamo già capito i modi migliori per usarli?

Propongo una nuova modalità di interazione, in cui i modelli svolgano il ruolo di applicazioni informatiche (ad esempio app per telefoni): fornendo un’interfaccia grafica, interpretando gli input degli utenti e aggiornando il loro stato. In questa modalità, invece di essere un “agente” che utilizza un computer per conto dell’essere umano, l’IA può fornire un ambiente informatico più ricco e potente che possiamo utilizzare.

Metafore per l’interazione

Al centro di un’interazione c’è una metafora che guida le aspettative di un utente su un sistema. I primi giorni dell’informatica hanno preso metafore come “scrivanie”, “macchine da scrivere”, “fogli di calcolo” e “lettere” e le hanno trasformate in equivalenti digitali, permettendo all’utente di ragionare sul loro comportamento. Puoi lasciare qualcosa sulla tua scrivania e tornare a prenderlo; hai bisogno di un indirizzo per inviare una lettera. Man mano che abbiamo sviluppato una conoscenza culturale di questi dispositivi, la necessità di queste particolari metafore è scomparsa, e con esse i design di interfaccia skeumorfici che le rafforzavano. Come un cestino o una matita, un computer è ora una metafora di se stesso.

La metafora dominante per i grandi modelli oggi è modello-come-persona. Questa è una metafora efficace perché le persone hanno capacità estese che conosciamo intuitivamente. Implica che possiamo avere una conversazione con un modello e porgli domande; che il modello possa collaborare con noi su un documento o un pezzo di codice; che possiamo assegnargli un compito da svolgere da solo e che tornerà quando sarà finito.

Tuttavia, trattare un modello come una persona limita profondamente il nostro modo di pensare all’interazione con esso. Le interazioni umane sono intrinsecamente lente e lineari, limitate dalla larghezza di banda e dalla natura a turni della comunicazione verbale. Come abbiamo tutti sperimentato, comunicare idee complesse in una conversazione è difficile e dispersivo. Quando vogliamo precisione, ci rivolgiamo invece a strumenti, utilizzando manipolazioni dirette e interfacce visive ad alta larghezza di banda per creare diagrammi, scrivere codice e progettare modelli CAD. Poiché concepiamo i modelli come persone, li utilizziamo attraverso conversazioni lente, anche se sono perfettamente in grado di accettare input diretti e rapidi e di produrre risultati visivi. Le metafore che utilizziamo limitano le esperienze che costruiamo, e la metafora modello-come-persona ci impedisce di esplorare il pieno potenziale dei grandi modelli.

Per molti casi d’uso, e specialmente per il lavoro produttivo, credo che il futuro risieda in un’altra metafora: modello-come-computer.

Usare un’IA come un computer

Sotto la metafora modello-come-computer, interagiremo con i grandi modelli seguendo le intuizioni che abbiamo sulle applicazioni informatiche (sia su desktop, tablet o telefono). Nota che ciò non significa che il modello sarà un’app tradizionale più di quanto il desktop di Windows fosse una scrivania letterale. “Applicazione informatica” sarà un modo per un modello di rappresentarsi a noi. Invece di agire come una persona, il modello agirà come un computer.

Agire come un computer significa produrre un’interfaccia grafica. Al posto del flusso lineare di testo in stile telescrivente fornito da ChatGPT, un sistema modello-come-computer genererà qualcosa che somiglia all’interfaccia di un’applicazione moderna: pulsanti, cursori, schede, immagini, grafici e tutto il resto. Questo affronta limitazioni chiave dell’interfaccia di chat standard modello-come-persona:

Scoperta. Un buon strumento suggerisce i suoi usi. Quando l’unica interfaccia è una casella di testo vuota, spetta all’utente capire cosa fare e comprendere i limiti del sistema. La barra laterale Modifica in Lightroom è un ottimo modo per imparare l’editing fotografico perché non si limita a dirti cosa può fare questa applicazione con una foto, ma cosa potresti voler fare. Allo stesso modo, un’interfaccia modello-come-computer per DALL-E potrebbe mostrare nuove possibilità per le tue generazioni di immagini.

Efficienza. La manipolazione diretta è più rapida che scrivere una richiesta a parole. Per continuare l’esempio di Lightroom, sarebbe impensabile modificare una foto dicendo a una persona quali cursori spostare e di quanto. Ci vorrebbe un giorno intero per chiedere un’esposizione leggermente più bassa e una vibranza leggermente più alta, solo per vedere come apparirebbe. Nella metafora modello-come-computer, il modello può creare strumenti che ti permettono di comunicare ciò che vuoi più efficientemente e quindi di fare le cose più rapidamente.

A differenza di un’app tradizionale, questa interfaccia grafica è generata dal modello su richiesta. Questo significa che ogni parte dell’interfaccia che vedi è rilevante per ciò che stai facendo in quel momento, inclusi i contenuti specifici del tuo lavoro. Significa anche che, se desideri un’interfaccia più ampia o diversa, puoi semplicemente richiederla. Potresti chiedere a DALL-E di produrre alcuni preset modificabili per le sue impostazioni ispirati da famosi artisti di schizzi. Quando clicchi sul preset Leonardo da Vinci, imposta i cursori per disegni prospettici altamente dettagliati in inchiostro nero. Se clicchi su Charles Schulz, seleziona fumetti tecnicolor 2D a basso dettaglio.

Una bicicletta della mente proteiforme

La metafora modello-come-persona ha una curiosa tendenza a creare distanza tra l’utente e il modello, rispecchiando il divario di comunicazione tra due persone che può essere ridotto ma mai completamente colmato. A causa della difficoltà e del costo di comunicare a parole, le persone tendono a suddividere i compiti tra loro in blocchi grandi e il più indipendenti possibile. Le interfacce modello-come-persona seguono questo schema: non vale la pena dire a un modello di aggiungere un return statement alla tua funzione quando è più veloce scriverlo da solo. Con il sovraccarico della comunicazione, i sistemi modello-come-persona sono più utili quando possono fare un intero blocco di lavoro da soli. Fanno le cose per te.

Questo contrasta con il modo in cui interagiamo con i computer o altri strumenti. Gli strumenti producono feedback visivi in tempo reale e sono controllati attraverso manipolazioni dirette. Hanno un overhead comunicativo così basso che non è necessario specificare un blocco di lavoro indipendente. Ha più senso mantenere l’umano nel loop e dirigere lo strumento momento per momento. Come stivali delle sette leghe, gli strumenti ti permettono di andare più lontano a ogni passo, ma sei ancora tu a fare il lavoro. Ti permettono di fare le cose più velocemente.

Considera il compito di costruire un sito web usando un grande modello. Con le interfacce di oggi, potresti trattare il modello come un appaltatore o un collaboratore. Cercheresti di scrivere a parole il più possibile su come vuoi che il sito appaia, cosa vuoi che dica e quali funzionalità vuoi che abbia. Il modello genererebbe una prima bozza, tu la eseguirai e poi fornirai un feedback. “Fai il logo un po’ più grande”, diresti, e “centra quella prima immagine principale”, e “deve esserci un pulsante di login nell’intestazione”. Per ottenere esattamente ciò che vuoi, invierai una lista molto lunga di richieste sempre più minuziose.

Un’interazione alternativa modello-come-computer sarebbe diversa: invece di costruire il sito web, il modello genererebbe un’interfaccia per te per costruirlo, dove ogni input dell’utente a quell’interfaccia interroga il grande modello sotto il cofano. Forse quando descrivi le tue necessità creerebbe un’interfaccia con una barra laterale e una finestra di anteprima. All’inizio la barra laterale contiene solo alcuni schizzi di layout che puoi scegliere come punto di partenza. Puoi cliccare su ciascuno di essi, e il modello scrive l’HTML per una pagina web usando quel layout e lo visualizza nella finestra di anteprima. Ora che hai una pagina su cui lavorare, la barra laterale guadagna opzioni aggiuntive che influenzano la pagina globalmente, come accoppiamenti di font e schemi di colore. L’anteprima funge da editor WYSIWYG, permettendoti di afferrare elementi e spostarli, modificarne i contenuti, ecc. A supportare tutto ciò è il modello, che vede queste azioni dell’utente e riscrive la pagina per corrispondere ai cambiamenti effettuati. Poiché il modello può generare un’interfaccia per aiutare te e lui a comunicare più efficientemente, puoi esercitare più controllo sul prodotto finale in meno tempo.

La metafora modello-come-computer ci incoraggia a pensare al modello come a uno strumento con cui interagire in tempo reale piuttosto che a un collaboratore a cui assegnare compiti. Invece di sostituire un tirocinante o un tutor, può essere una sorta di bicicletta proteiforme per la mente, una che è sempre costruita su misura esattamente per te e il terreno che intendi attraversare.

Un nuovo paradigma per l’informatica?

I modelli che possono generare interfacce su richiesta sono una frontiera completamente nuova nell’informatica. Potrebbero essere un paradigma del tutto nuovo, con il modo in cui cortocircuitano il modello di applicazione esistente. Dare agli utenti finali il potere di creare e modificare app al volo cambia fondamentalmente il modo in cui interagiamo con i computer. Al posto di una singola applicazione statica costruita da uno sviluppatore, un modello genererà un’applicazione su misura per l’utente e le sue esigenze immediate. Al posto della logica aziendale implementata nel codice, il modello interpreterà gli input dell’utente e aggiornerà l’interfaccia utente. È persino possibile che questo tipo di interfaccia generativa sostituisca completamente il sistema operativo, generando e gestendo interfacce e finestre al volo secondo necessità.

All’inizio, l’interfaccia generativa sarà un giocattolo, utile solo per l’esplorazione creativa e poche altre applicazioni di nicchia. Dopotutto, nessuno vorrebbe un’app di posta elettronica che occasionalmente invia email al tuo ex e mente sulla tua casella di posta. Ma gradualmente i modelli miglioreranno. Anche mentre si spingeranno ulteriormente nello spazio di esperienze completamente nuove, diventeranno lentamente abbastanza affidabili da essere utilizzati per un lavoro reale.

Piccoli pezzi di questo futuro esistono già. Anni fa Jonas Degrave ha dimostrato che ChatGPT poteva fare una buona simulazione di una riga di comando Linux. Allo stesso modo, websim.ai utilizza un LLM per generare siti web su richiesta mentre li navighi. Oasis, GameNGen e DIAMOND addestrano modelli video condizionati sull’azione su singoli videogiochi, permettendoti di giocare ad esempio a Doom dentro un grande modello. E Genie 2 genera videogiochi giocabili da prompt testuali. L’interfaccia generativa potrebbe ancora sembrare un’idea folle, ma non è così folle.

Ci sono enormi domande aperte su come apparirà tutto questo. Dove sarà inizialmente utile l’interfaccia generativa? Come condivideremo e distribuiremo le esperienze che creiamo collaborando con il modello, se esistono solo come contesto di un grande modello? Vorremmo davvero farlo? Quali nuovi tipi di esperienze saranno possibili? Come funzionerà tutto questo in pratica? I modelli genereranno interfacce come codice o produrranno direttamente pixel grezzi?

Non conosco ancora queste risposte. Dovremo sperimentare e scoprirlo!

Tradotto da:\ https://willwhitney.com/computing-inside-ai.htmlhttps://willwhitney.com/computing-inside-ai.html

@ e6817453:b0ac3c39

I started a long series of articles about how to model different types of knowledge graphs in the relational model, which makes on-device memory models for AI agents possible.

We model-directed graphs

Also, graphs of entities

We even model hypergraphs

Last time, we discussed why classical triple and simple knowledge graphs are insufficient for AI agents and complex memory, especially in the domain of time-aware or multi-model knowledge.

So why do we need metagraphs, and what kind of challenge could they help us to solve?

• complex and nested event and temporal context and temporal relations as edges
• multi-mode and multilingual knowledge
• human-like memory for AI agents that has multiple contexts and relations between knowledge in neuron-like networks

MetaGraphs

A meta graph is a concept that extends the idea of a graph by allowing edges to become graphs. Meta Edges connect a set of nodes, which could also be subgraphs. So, at some level, node and edge are pretty similar in properties but act in different roles in a different context.
Also, in some cases, edges could be referenced as nodes.
This approach enables the representation of more complex relationships and hierarchies than a traditional graph structure allows. Let’s break down each term to understand better metagraphs and how they differ from hypergraphs and graphs.

Graph Basics

• A standard graph has a set of nodes (or vertices) and edges (connections between nodes).
• Edges are generally simple and typically represent a binary relationship between two nodes.
• For instance, an edge in a social network graph might indicate a “friend” relationship between two people (nodes).

Hypergraph

• A hypergraph extends the concept of an edge by allowing it to connect any number of nodes, not just two.
• Each connection, called a hyperedge, can link multiple nodes.
• This feature allows hypergraphs to model more complex relationships involving multiple entities simultaneously. For example, a hyperedge in a hypergraph could represent a project team, connecting all team members in a single relation.
• Despite its flexibility, a hypergraph doesn’t capture hierarchical or nested structures; it only generalizes the number of connections in an edge.

Metagraph

• A metagraph allows the edges to be graphs themselves. This means each edge can contain its own nodes and edges, creating nested, hierarchical structures.
• In a meta graph, an edge could represent a relationship defined by a graph. For instance, a meta graph could represent a network of organizations where each organization’s structure (departments and connections) is represented by its own internal graph and treated as an edge in the larger meta graph.
• This recursive structure allows metagraphs to model complex data with multiple layers of abstraction. They can capture multi-node relationships (as in hypergraphs) and detailed, structured information about each relationship.

Named Graphs and Graph of Graphs

As you can notice, the structure of a metagraph is quite complex and could be complex to model in relational and classical RDF setups. It could create a challenge of luck of tools and software solutions for your problem.
If you need to model nested graphs, you could use a much simpler model of Named graphs, which could take you quite far.

The concept of the named graph came from the RDF community, which needed to group some sets of triples. In this way, you form subgraphs inside an existing graph. You could refer to the subgraph as a regular node. This setup simplifies complex graphs, introduces hierarchies, and even adds features and properties of hypergraphs while keeping a directed nature.

It looks complex, but it is not so hard to model it with a slight modification of a directed graph.
So, the node could host graphs inside. Let's reflect this fact with a location for a node. If a node belongs to a main graph, we could set the location to null or introduce a main node . it is up to you

Nodes could have edges to nodes in different subgraphs. This structure allows any kind of nesting graphs. Edges stay location-free

Meta Graphs in Relational Model

Let’s try to make several attempts to model different meta-graphs with some constraints.

Directed Metagraph where edges are not used as nodes and could not contain subgraphs

In this case, the edge always points to two sets of nodes. This introduces an overhead of creating a node set for a single node. In this model, we can model empty node sets that could require application-level constraints to prevent such cases.

Directed Metagraph where edges are not used as nodes and could contain subgraphs

Adding a node set that could model a subgraph located in an edge is easy but could be separate from in-vertex or out-vert.
I also do not see a direct need to include subgraphs to a node, as we could just use a node set interchangeably, but it still could be a case.

Directed Metagraph where edges are used as nodes and could contain subgraphs

As you can notice, we operate all the time with node sets. We could simply allow the extension node set to elements set that include node and edge IDs, but in this case, we need to use uuid or any other strategy to differentiate node IDs from edge IDs. In this case, we have a collision of ephemeral edges or ephemeral nodes when we want to change the role and purpose of the node as an edge or vice versa.

A full-scale metagraph model is way too complex for a relational database.
So we need a better model.

Now, we have more flexibility but loose structural constraints. We cannot show that the element should have one vertex, one vertex, or both. This type of constraint has been moved to the application level. Also, the crucial question is about query and retrieval needs.
Any meta-graph model should be more focused on domain and needs and should be used in raw form. We did it for a pure theoretical purpose.

@ 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.

@ 10057360:d01ac746

Natürliche Prozesse streben nach Divergenz

These: Alles ist ein Resultat von systemischen Zyklen. Systemische Prozesse lösen eine Aktionen in eine bestimmte Richtung aus. Die Bewegung in diese bestimmte Richtung provoziert automatisch eine Gegenreaktion, und je weiter fortgeschritten die Bewegung ist, desto stärker wird die Gegenreaktion bis schlussendlich eine Richtungsänderung initiiert wird. Danach wird dieses Muster wiederholt - bis in die Unendlichkeit. Die Ausprägung der Bewegung in eine Richtung, sprich die Amplitude, nimmt mit der Zeit ab, da das System die Divergenz anstrebt - Ein Zustand der der Ruhe und Ausgeglichenheit.

Der Heizungssensor zuhause misst beispielsweise, ob die Zieltemperatur erreicht wurde, oder ob stärker oder gerade gar nicht geheizt werden soll. In der Natur, regulieren Raubtiere die Population ihrer Beutetiere (und dadurch schlussendlich auch ihre Eigene). In unserer Gesellschaft, suchen wir als Schwarmintelligenz ganz natürlich nach dem idealen Tausch- & Wertaufbewahrungsmittel, überdenken staatliche Organisationsformen oder justieren politische Richtungen. Entsprechend optimieren wir auch die Art und Weise, wie wir Informationen austauschen und verifizieren.

Auf die Entwicklung der Medien angewendet bedeutet dies: Die Medien, mitsamt ihrem Tenor, ihren Werten, ihrer Organisationsstruktur und sonstigen Ausprägungen sind das dynamische Resultat von Zyklen. Das System setzt sich in diesem Kontext zusammen aus unserer heterogenen Gesellschaft, den darin zugrunde liegenden Werten, dem Zeitgeist und vielen weiteren Faktoren, welche für eine hohe Komplexität sorgen. All diese Faktoren können eigene Prozesse auslösen, welche unterschiedlich stark Gegensteuern und zu unterschiedlichen Zeitpunkten einsetzen.

Der Wake-up Call: Als jüngst die Amplitude wieder erreicht wurde

Die Geschichte der letzten Jahre hat uns aufgezeigt, in welchem Zustand sich die vierte Gewalt eigentlich befand. Es wurde offensichtlich, dass die Kritik- und Kontrollfunktion gegenüber dem Staat einer Quasi-Zusammenarbeit gewichen war. Dies war kein plötzlicher Wandel, sondern das Resultat eines längeren Prozess, der während Corona seinen Peak erreicht hatte.

Wir hatten Ausnahmezustand; die vier Gewalten haben gemeinsame Sache gemacht. Die Legislative hat im Eiltempo neue Gesetze verfasst, welche Grundrechte der Menschen einschränkte. Die Exekutive hat diese unverzüglich umgesetzt und die Judikative untermauerte das neue Normal. Die Medien als vierte und letzte Gewalt haben das Ganze dann auch noch abgefeiert und Kritik so gut es ging unterdrückt (Build back better). Zu allem Übel war dies auch ein weltweites Phänomen, welches von autoritären Staaten bis hin zur westlichen Demokratie(?) reichte. Man konnte sich dem nur schwer entziehen. Der Druck auf den normalen Bürger wurde immer stärker und all die Globalisten, Kommunisten, Sozialisten und sonstigen Kriminellen, welche sich einmal jährlich in Davos treffen, durchlebten gerade ihre wildesten Fantasien.

Die Geschichte reimt sich

An einem bestimmten Zeitpunkt war der Peak erreicht, ohne dass es jemandem wirklich bewusst war. Gegensätzliches wurde massiv zensiert, was die Orientierung erschwerte. Dennoch war der Widerstand in der Bevölkerung nie vollständig weg. Es gab immer Menschen, welche Akteuren und Geschehnissen kritisch gegenüberstanden. Diese Opposition war ein Flamme, die nie erloschen ist. Das gallische Dorf, dass von den Römern nie eingenommen werden konnte. An eben diesem Peak, war die Flamme am kleinsten und der Raum am dunkelsten. Doch auch das Ungleichgewicht am grössten: Lügen und Narrative können nicht für immer aufrecht erhalten werden. Die Wahrheit bannt sich ihren Weg. Und so wurde die Flamme und damit auch der Raum immer heller. Gradually, then suddenly.

Immer mehr Menschen verstanden, dass sich der Mainstream hauptsächlich aus Marketing-Unternehmen zusammensetzt, welche nur den eigenen Interessen (und deren Geldgebern) dienen. Dass soziale Plattformen zensierten und Reichweiten einschränkten. Dass die Spaltung in der Gesellschaft gefördert wurde. Dass vieles schlicht erfunden und gelogen war. Die Deutungshoheit des Mainstreams hatte seinen Zenit erreicht. Der Schweizer Historiker Daniele Ganser zeigt (in einer sehenswerten Analyse des Carlson-Putin Interviews) deutlich, wie sich die medial Berichtserstattung unterscheidet, und alles andere als unabhängig und faktenbasiert ist (watch?v=v_o0DnTbumA)

Actio = Reactio. So wurden Alternativen gesucht. Und wo Nachfrage besteht, lässt das Angebot nicht lange auf sich warten. Telegram-Kanäle sind wie Pilze aus dem Boden geschossen. Alternative und unabhängige Medien erzielten immer mehr Reichweite und so hat das Momentum fahrt aufgenommen. Der Wind hat längst gedreht, und nur Wenigen war dies zu Beginn wirklich bewusst. Die Journalistin Polina Pompliano hat dies im Bezug auf die Trump-Wahl ganz gut auf den Punkt gebracht (watch?v=mbcbYVEj2AM). Der Mainstream ist die Bubble.

Egal, wie gross und mächtig die dominierenden Akteure auch sein mögen. Solange nicht auch der letzte Kritiker überzeugt oder endgültig zum Schweigen gebracht wurde, besteht Gegendruck. Und mag diese auch noch so klein und bedeutungslos erscheinen, ist es doch nur eine Frage der Zeit, bis dieser die richtigen Bedingungen erfährt und das Potential entfalten kann.

Die Divergenz führt zur Dezentralität

Das Schöne? Aus dieser düsteren Zeit mit den ganzen globalistischen, planwirtschaftlichen und zentralistischen Tendenzen, ist als logische Konsequenz eine Gegenbewegung von dezentraler Natur entstanden. Actio = Reactio. Plankton scheint alleine zwar unbedeutend, im Verbund spielt er jedoch einen essentielle Rolle im gesamten Ökosystem der Erde. Satoshi hat mit Bitcoin ein open-source Protokoll erschaffen, welches die dezentrale Antwort bietet auf die zentralen Geldschöpfungsmonopole. Es war die logische Konsequenz. In hindsight inevitable. Und dasselbe gilt auch für die Medien.

Die Medien hatten sich immer weiter zentralisiert, Meinungsmonopole geschaffen. Die Themen folgten Agenden. Ausgewogene, kritische oder investigative Artikel wurden selten. Die Zentralität wurde ausgenutzt und unbequeme Stimmen zensiert.

Joe Rogan erlebte einen massiven Anstieg an Spotify-Abonnenten und war damit der mit Abstand grösste Podcast, nachdem er auch kritischen Stimmen wieder eine Plattform bot (Dr. Robert Malone, Dr Peter McCullough, Dr. Aseem Malhotra, um nur ein paar zu nennen). Ihm haben es viele gleich getan. Der Markt hat die ächzende Nachfrage bedient. Die Wahrheit bahnt sich ihren Weg. Ein Wermutstropfen blieb dennoch. Die Joe Rogan Show und wie sie alle heissen, basieren nach wie vor auf zentralen Plattformen. Alphabet’s Youtube, Meta’s Instagram, Elon Mask’s X können mit einem Fingerschnipp Videos, Bilder und Posts zensieren (siehe beispielsweise Twitterfiles). Und auch wenn mit Elon Mask’s Übernahme von X der Zensur vorübergehend ein Ende gesetzt wurde, bleibt die Frage, wie lange dieser Zustand anhält.

Zentralität ist ein Faktor, der in falschen Händen als Waffe eingesetzt wird. Die Frage ist nicht ob, sondern wann diese Waffe eingesetzt wird (Beispiel Moneyprinter). Und so ist die einzig logische Schlussfolgerung: Dezentralität.

Mit Nostr wurde eine dezentrale open-source Alternative geschaffen. Und genauso wie Bitcoin anfangs hauptsächlich von Nerds, OGs* *und anderen Glückspilzen gefunden, verstanden und adaptiert wurde, wird es auch bei Nostr sein. Man muss die Weitsicht, die Sensitivität oder die Notwendigkeit verspüren, um Nostr zu adaptieren. Es handelt sich um eine Grassroots-Bewegung; Bottom-up statt Top-down. Wie Bitcoin. Und diejenigen, welche aktuell von der Zentralität am meisten profitieren, werden wohl die Letzten sein. Genau wie bei Bitcoin.

Die Zukunft ist unabhängig, dezentral und zensurresistent

Auf https://stats.nostr.band/ findet man aktuelle Daten zu Nostr. Unter anderem auch die Gesamtzahl User.

Einerseits ist ersichtlich, dass Nostr ein kontinuierliches Wachstum erfährt und damit die Adoption stetig voranschreitet. Andererseits wird auch klar, dass Nostr noch ziemlich am Anfang steht. Auch in diesem Aspekt können wir uns an Bitcoin orientieren und die Adaptions-Kurve als Leitfaden verwenden.

Langfristig führt kein Weg an Nostr vorbei. In hindsight, inevitable. Die Zukunft ist dezentral und open-source. Sie ist das Resultat des Zyklus, der durch den gesellschaftlichen Entwicklungsprozess vorgegeben wird, welches den zentralen Tendenzen natürlich entgegenwirkt. Bitcoin veranschaulicht dies deutlich. Gerade aktuell wurde mit der open-source Lösung von DeepSeek eine Mögliche Trendwende im AI-Bereich eingeläutet. Und die Medienlandschaft wird gerade von dem open-source Protokoll Nostr revolutioniert.

Die Zukunft scheint also goldig für den durchschnittlichen Pleb. Sie war und ist es immer gewesen. Um diese zu erkennen, bedarf es lediglich einer langfristigen Perspektive (if in doubt, zoom out) sowie der Fähigkeit, die ganze Noise auszublenden.

PS: Falls Du noch keinen Nostr-Account hast, kannst du einfach auf https://nosta.me/ einen Account erstellen und einen der vielen Nostr-Clients nutzten (https://nostrapps.com), um bereits jetzt schon die Zukunft mitgestalten.

PPS: Dies ist mein erster Artikel als (neben-)freiberuflicher Journalist. Mein Fokus ist Libertarismus und Freiheit, und alles was damit einhergeht. Falls dir der Beitrag gefallen hat, lass doch ein Abo da und teil den Beitrag (oder auch nicht! - Wer bin ich, um dir was vorzuschreiben ;) Wenn dir dieser Beitrag was Wert ist, supporte mich mit ein paar Sats. Only value for value.

@ 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/914483

@ 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.

@ e6817453:b0ac3c39

Hey folks! Today, let’s dive into the intriguing world of neurosymbolic approaches, retrieval-augmented generation (RAG), and personal knowledge graphs (PKGs). Together, these concepts hold much potential for bringing true reasoning capabilities to large language models (LLMs). So, let’s break down how symbolic logic, knowledge graphs, and modern AI can come together to empower future AI systems to reason like humans.

The Neurosymbolic Approach: What It Means ?

Neurosymbolic AI combines two historically separate streams of artificial intelligence: symbolic reasoning and neural networks. Symbolic AI uses formal logic to process knowledge, similar to how we might solve problems or deduce information. On the other hand, neural networks, like those underlying GPT-4, focus on learning patterns from vast amounts of data — they are probabilistic statistical models that excel in generating human-like language and recognizing patterns but often lack deep, explicit reasoning.

While GPT-4 can produce impressive text, it’s still not very effective at reasoning in a truly logical way. Its foundation, transformers, allows it to excel in pattern recognition, but the models struggle with reasoning because, at their core, they rely on statistical probabilities rather than true symbolic logic. This is where neurosymbolic methods and knowledge graphs come in.

Symbolic Calculations and the Early Vision of AI

If we take a step back to the 1950s, the vision for artificial intelligence was very different. Early AI research was all about symbolic reasoning — where computers could perform logical calculations to derive new knowledge from a given set of rules and facts. Languages like Lisp emerged to support this vision, enabling programs to represent data and code as interchangeable symbols. Lisp was designed to be homoiconic, meaning it treated code as manipulatable data, making it capable of self-modification — a huge leap towards AI systems that could, in theory, understand and modify their own operations.

Lisp: The Earlier AI-Language

Lisp, short for “LISt Processor,” was developed by John McCarthy in 1958, and it became the cornerstone of early AI research. Lisp’s power lay in its flexibility and its use of symbolic expressions, which allowed developers to create programs that could manipulate symbols in ways that were very close to human reasoning. One of the most groundbreaking features of Lisp was its ability to treat code as data, known as homoiconicity, which meant that Lisp programs could introspect and transform themselves dynamically. This ability to adapt and modify its own structure gave Lisp an edge in tasks that required a form of self-awareness, which was key in the early days of AI when researchers were exploring what it meant for machines to “think.”

Lisp was not just a programming language—it represented the vision for artificial intelligence, where machines could evolve their understanding and rewrite their own programming. This idea formed the conceptual basis for many of the self-modifying and adaptive algorithms that are still explored today in AI research. Despite its decline in mainstream programming, Lisp’s influence can still be seen in the concepts used in modern machine learning and symbolic AI approaches.

Prolog: Formal Logic and Deductive Reasoning

In the 1970s, Prolog was developed—a language focused on formal logic and deductive reasoning. Unlike Lisp, based on lambda calculus, Prolog operates on formal logic rules, allowing it to perform deductive reasoning and solve logical puzzles. This made Prolog an ideal candidate for expert systems that needed to follow a sequence of logical steps, such as medical diagnostics or strategic planning.

Prolog, like Lisp, allowed symbols to be represented, understood, and used in calculations, creating another homoiconic language that allows reasoning. Prolog’s strength lies in its rule-based structure, which is well-suited for tasks that require logical inference and backtracking. These features made it a powerful tool for expert systems and AI research in the 1970s and 1980s.

The language is declarative in nature, meaning that you define the problem, and Prolog figures out how to solve it. By using formal logic and setting constraints, Prolog systems can derive conclusions from known facts, making it highly effective in fields requiring explicit logical frameworks, such as legal reasoning, diagnostics, and natural language understanding. These symbolic approaches were later overshadowed during the AI winter — but the ideas never really disappeared. They just evolved.

Solvers and Their Role in Complementing LLMs

One of the most powerful features of Prolog and similar logic-based systems is their use of solvers. Solvers are mechanisms that can take a set of rules and constraints and automatically find solutions that satisfy these conditions. This capability is incredibly useful when combined with LLMs, which excel at generating human-like language but need help with logical consistency and structured reasoning.

For instance, imagine a scenario where an LLM needs to answer a question involving multiple logical steps or a complex query that requires deducing facts from various pieces of information. In this case, a solver can derive valid conclusions based on a given set of logical rules, providing structured answers that the LLM can then articulate in natural language. This allows the LLM to retrieve information and ensure the logical integrity of its responses, leading to much more robust answers.

Solvers are also ideal for handling constraint satisfaction problems — situations where multiple conditions must be met simultaneously. In practical applications, this could include scheduling tasks, generating optimal recommendations, or even diagnosing issues where a set of symptoms must match possible diagnoses. Prolog’s solver capabilities and LLM’s natural language processing power can make these systems highly effective at providing intelligent, rule-compliant responses that traditional LLMs would struggle to produce alone.

By integrating neurosymbolic methods that utilize solvers, we can provide LLMs with a form of deductive reasoning that is missing from pure deep-learning approaches. This combination has the potential to significantly improve the quality of outputs for use-cases that require explicit, structured problem-solving, from legal queries to scientific research and beyond. Solvers give LLMs the backbone they need to not just generate answers but to do so in a way that respects logical rigor and complex constraints.

Graph of Rules for Enhanced Reasoning

Another powerful concept that complements LLMs is using a graph of rules. A graph of rules is essentially a structured collection of logical rules that interconnect in a network-like structure, defining how various entities and their relationships interact. This structured network allows for complex reasoning and information retrieval, as well as the ability to model intricate relationships between different pieces of knowledge.

In a graph of rules, each node represents a rule, and the edges define relationships between those rules — such as dependencies or causal links. This structure can be used to enhance LLM capabilities by providing them with a formal set of rules and relationships to follow, which improves logical consistency and reasoning depth. When an LLM encounters a problem or a question that requires multiple logical steps, it can traverse this graph of rules to generate an answer that is not only linguistically fluent but also logically robust.

For example, in a healthcare application, a graph of rules might include nodes for medical symptoms, possible diagnoses, and recommended treatments. When an LLM receives a query regarding a patient’s symptoms, it can use the graph to traverse from symptoms to potential diagnoses and then to treatment options, ensuring that the response is coherent and medically sound. The graph of rules guides reasoning, enabling LLMs to handle complex, multi-step questions that involve chains of reasoning, rather than merely generating surface-level responses.

Graphs of rules also enable modular reasoning, where different sets of rules can be activated based on the context or the type of question being asked. This modularity is crucial for creating adaptive AI systems that can apply specific sets of logical frameworks to distinct problem domains, thereby greatly enhancing their versatility. The combination of neural fluency with rule-based structure gives LLMs the ability to conduct more advanced reasoning, ultimately making them more reliable and effective in domains where accuracy and logical consistency are critical.

By implementing a graph of rules, LLMs are empowered to perform deductive reasoning alongside their generative capabilities, creating responses that are not only compelling but also logically aligned with the structured knowledge available in the system. This further enhances their potential applications in fields such as law, engineering, finance, and scientific research — domains where logical consistency is as important as linguistic coherence.

Enhancing LLMs with Symbolic Reasoning

Now, with LLMs like GPT-4 being mainstream, there is an emerging need to add real reasoning capabilities to them. This is where neurosymbolic approaches shine. Instead of pitting neural networks against symbolic reasoning, these methods combine the best of both worlds. The neural aspect provides language fluency and recognition of complex patterns, while the symbolic side offers real reasoning power through formal logic and rule-based frameworks.

Personal Knowledge Graphs (PKGs) come into play here as well. Knowledge graphs are data structures that encode entities and their relationships — they’re essentially semantic networks that allow for structured information retrieval. When integrated with neurosymbolic approaches, LLMs can use these graphs to answer questions in a far more contextual and precise way. By retrieving relevant information from a knowledge graph, they can ground their responses in well-defined relationships, thus improving both the relevance and the logical consistency of their answers.

Imagine combining an LLM with a graph of rules that allow it to reason through the relationships encoded in a personal knowledge graph. This could involve using deductive databases to form a sophisticated way to represent and reason with symbolic data — essentially constructing a powerful hybrid system that uses LLM capabilities for language fluency and rule-based logic for structured problem-solving.

My Research on Deductive Databases and Knowledge Graphs

I recently did some research on modeling knowledge graphs using deductive databases, such as DataLog — which can be thought of as a limited, data-oriented version of Prolog. What I’ve found is that it’s possible to use formal logic to model knowledge graphs, ontologies, and complex relationships elegantly as rules in a deductive system. Unlike classical RDF or traditional ontology-based models, which sometimes struggle with complex or evolving relationships, a deductive approach is more flexible and can easily support dynamic rules and reasoning.

Prolog and similar logic-driven frameworks can complement LLMs by handling the parts of reasoning where explicit rule-following is required. LLMs can benefit from these rule-based systems for tasks like entity recognition, logical inferences, and constructing or traversing knowledge graphs. We can even create a graph of rules that governs how relationships are formed or how logical deductions can be performed.

The future is really about creating an AI that is capable of both deep contextual understanding (using the powerful generative capacity of LLMs) and true reasoning (through symbolic systems and knowledge graphs). With the neurosymbolic approach, these AIs could be equipped not just to generate information but to explain their reasoning, form logical conclusions, and even improve their own understanding over time — getting us a step closer to true artificial general intelligence.

Why It Matters for LLM Employment

Using neurosymbolic RAG (retrieval-augmented generation) in conjunction with personal knowledge graphs could revolutionize how LLMs work in real-world applications. Imagine an LLM that understands not just language but also the relationships between different concepts — one that can navigate, reason, and explain complex knowledge domains by actively engaging with a personalized set of facts and rules.

This could lead to practical applications in areas like healthcare, finance, legal reasoning, or even personal productivity — where LLMs can help users solve complex problems logically, providing relevant information and well-justified reasoning paths. The combination of neural fluency with symbolic accuracy and deductive power is precisely the bridge we need to move beyond purely predictive AI to truly intelligent systems.

Let's explore these ideas further if you’re as fascinated by this as I am. Feel free to reach out, follow my YouTube channel, or check out some articles I’ll link below. And if you’re working on anything in this field, I’d love to collaborate!

Until next time, folks. Stay curious, and keep pushing the boundaries of AI!

@ e6817453:b0ac3c39

Introduction: Personal Knowledge Graphs and Linked Data

We will explore the world of personal knowledge graphs and discuss how they can be used to model complex information structures. Personal knowledge graphs aren’t just abstract collections of nodes and edges—they encode meaningful relationships, contextualizing data in ways that enrich our understanding of it. While the core structure might be a directed graph, we layer semantic meaning on top, enabling nuanced connections between data points.

The origin of knowledge graphs is deeply tied to concepts from linked data and the semantic web, ideas that emerged to better link scattered pieces of information across the web. This approach created an infrastructure where data islands could connect — facilitating everything from more insightful AI to improved personal data management.

In this article, we will explore how these ideas have evolved into tools for modeling AI’s semantic memory and look at how knowledge graphs can serve as a flexible foundation for encoding rich data contexts. We’ll specifically discuss three major paradigms: RDF (Resource Description Framework), property graphs, and a third way of modeling entities as graphs of graphs. Let’s get started.

Intro to RDF

The Resource Description Framework (RDF) has been one of the fundamental standards for linked data and knowledge graphs. RDF allows data to be modeled as triples: subject, predicate, and object. Essentially, you can think of it as a structured way to describe relationships: “X has a Y called Z.” For instance, “Berlin has a population of 3.5 million.” This modeling approach is quite flexible because RDF uses unique identifiers — usually URIs — to point to data entities, making linking straightforward and coherent.

RDFS, or RDF Schema, extends RDF to provide a basic vocabulary to structure the data even more. This lets us describe not only individual nodes but also relationships among types of data entities, like defining a class hierarchy or setting properties. For example, you could say that “Berlin” is an instance of a “City” and that cities are types of “Geographical Entities.” This kind of organization helps establish semantic meaning within the graph.

RDF and Advanced Topics

Lists and Sets in RDF

RDF also provides tools to model more complex data structures such as lists and sets, enabling the grouping of nodes. This extension makes it easier to model more natural, human-like knowledge, for example, describing attributes of an entity that may have multiple values. By adding RDF Schema and OWL (Web Ontology Language), you gain even more expressive power — being able to define logical rules or even derive new relationships from existing data.

Graph of Graphs

A significant feature of RDF is the ability to form complex nested structures, often referred to as graphs of graphs. This allows you to create “named graphs,” essentially subgraphs that can be independently referenced. For example, you could create a named graph for a particular dataset describing Berlin and another for a different geographical area. Then, you could connect them, allowing for more modular and reusable knowledge modeling.

Property Graphs

While RDF provides a robust framework, it’s not always the easiest to work with due to its heavy reliance on linking everything explicitly. This is where property graphs come into play. Property graphs are less focused on linking everything through triples and allow more expressive properties directly within nodes and edges.

For example, instead of using triples to represent each detail, a property graph might let you store all properties about an entity (e.g., “Berlin”) directly in a single node. This makes property graphs more intuitive for many developers and engineers because they more closely resemble object-oriented structures: you have entities (nodes) that possess attributes (properties) and are connected to other entities through relationships (edges).

The significant benefit here is a condensed representation, which speeds up traversal and queries in some scenarios. However, this also introduces a trade-off: while property graphs are more straightforward to query and maintain, they lack some complex relationship modeling features RDF offers, particularly when connecting properties to each other.

Graph of Graphs and Subgraphs for Entity Modeling

A third approach — which takes elements from RDF and property graphs — involves modeling entities using subgraphs or nested graphs. In this model, each entity can be represented as a graph. This allows for a detailed and flexible description of attributes without exploding every detail into individual triples or lump them all together into properties.

For instance, consider a person entity with a complex employment history. Instead of representing every employment detail in one node (as in a property graph), or as several linked nodes (as in RDF), you can treat the employment history as a subgraph. This subgraph could then contain nodes for different jobs, each linked with specific properties and connections. This approach keeps the complexity where it belongs and provides better flexibility when new attributes or entities need to be added.

Hypergraphs and Metagraphs

When discussing more advanced forms of graphs, we encounter hypergraphs and metagraphs. These take the idea of relationships to a new level. A hypergraph allows an edge to connect more than two nodes, which is extremely useful when modeling scenarios where relationships aren’t just pairwise. For example, a “Project” could connect multiple “People,” “Resources,” and “Outcomes,” all in a single edge. This way, hypergraphs help in reducing the complexity of modeling high-order relationships.

Metagraphs, on the other hand, enable nodes and edges to themselves be represented as graphs. This is an extremely powerful feature when we consider the needs of artificial intelligence, as it allows for the modeling of relationships between relationships, an essential aspect for any system that needs to capture not just facts, but their interdependencies and contexts.

Balancing Structure and Properties

One of the recurring challenges when modeling knowledge is finding the balance between structure and properties. With RDF, you get high flexibility and standardization, but complexity can quickly escalate as you decompose everything into triples. Property graphs simplify the representation by using attributes but lose out on the depth of connection modeling. Meanwhile, the graph-of-graphs approach and hypergraphs offer advanced modeling capabilities at the cost of increased computational complexity.

So, how do you decide which model to use? It comes down to your use case. RDF and nested graphs are strong contenders if you need deep linkage and are working with highly variable data. For more straightforward, engineer-friendly modeling, property graphs shine. And when dealing with very complex multi-way relationships or meta-level knowledge, hypergraphs and metagraphs provide the necessary tools.

The key takeaway is that only some approaches are perfect. Instead, it’s all about the modeling goals: how do you want to query the graph, what relationships are meaningful, and how much complexity are you willing to manage?

Conclusion

Modeling AI semantic memory using knowledge graphs is a challenging but rewarding process. The different approaches — RDF, property graphs, and advanced graph modeling techniques like nested graphs and hypergraphs — each offer unique strengths and weaknesses. Whether you are building a personal knowledge graph or scaling up to AI that integrates multiple streams of linked data, it’s essential to understand the trade-offs each approach brings.

In the end, the choice of representation comes down to the nature of your data and your specific needs for querying and maintaining semantic relationships. The world of knowledge graphs is vast, with many tools and frameworks to explore. Stay connected and keep experimenting to find the balance that works for your projects.

@ f99f56fb:d4e26c7a

En 2010... SI, EN 2010 !!!

En 2010 un amigo me habló de #Bitcoin. Me pareció interesante. Cambié el disco duro de mi PC, me descargué Ubuntu e intenté minar bitcoin. No fui capaz. Desistí.

Mi amigo tampoco hizo nada al respecto.

Años más tarde, en 2017, conocí #Ethereum como 'dinero programable' y la idea me fascinó !! Creía en el flippening y todo. Compré un poco (y luego casi se me olvida que lo tengo). Años más tarde, sobre 2020 empezó un boom, FOMO, altseason, bull market, o como lo queráis llamar. La cosa es que yo estaba emocionadísimo con $ETH. Siempre había pensado que Bitcoin tenía un problema severo de escalabilidad.

En Mayo de 2022 pasaron varias cosas: 1. Leí El Patrón Bitcoin - Entendí el dinero 2. Descubrí la Lightning Network - Descubrí que Bitcoin es escalable

E inmediatamente cambié mis #ETH por #BTC. Empecé a estudiar Bitcoin, hice varios cursos a fondo, compré más...

Ahora compro bitcoin siempre que puedo para tener menos FIAT, tengo mi billetera fría, y me deshago de todo lo que puedo para tener más $BTC.

He empezado a comprar al precio que me merezco. Podría haber empezado a acumular en 2010... Pero no fui capaz. Cada vez es más fácil comprar bitcoin, pero además es necesario que lo entiendas. Aprende Bitcoin.

@ 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)

@ e6817453:b0ac3c39

The temporal semantics and temporal and time-aware knowledge graphs. We have different memory models for artificial intelligence agents. We all try to mimic somehow how the brain works, or at least how the declarative memory of the brain works. We have the split of episodic memory and semantic memory. And we also have a lot of theories, right?

Declarative Memory of the Human Brain

How is the semantic memory formed? We all know that our brain stores semantic memory quite close to the concept we have with the personal knowledge graphs, that it’s connected entities. They form a connection with each other and all those things. So far, so good. And actually, then we have a lot of concepts, how the episodic memory and our experiences gets transmitted to the semantic:

• hippocampus indexing and retrieval
• sanitization of episodic memories
• episodic-semantic shift theory

They all give a different perspective on how different parts of declarative memory cooperate.

We know that episodic memories get semanticized over time. You have semantic knowledge without the notion of time, and probably, your episodic memory is just decayed.

But, you know, it’s still an open question:

do we want to mimic an AI agent’s memory as a human brain memory, or do we want to create something different?

It’s an open question to which we have no good answer. And if you go to the theory of neuroscience and check how episodic and semantic memory interfere, you will still find a lot of theories, yeah?

Some of them say that you have the hippocampus that keeps the indexes of the memory. Some others will say that you semantic the episodic memory. Some others say that you have some separate process that digests the episodic and experience to the semantics. But all of them agree on the plan that it’s operationally two separate areas of memories and even two separate regions of brain, and the semantic, it’s more, let’s say, protected.

So it’s harder to forget the semantical facts than the episodes and everything. And what I’m thinking about for a long time, it’s this, you know, the semantic memory.

Temporal Semantics

It’s memory about the facts, but you somehow mix the time information with the semantics. I already described a lot of things, including how we could combine time with knowledge graphs and how people do it.

There are multiple ways we could persist such information, but we all hit the wall because the complexity of time and the semantics of time are highly complex concepts.

Time in a Semantic context is not a timestamp.

What I mean is that when you have a fact, and you just mentioned that I was there at this particular moment, like, I don’t know, 15:40 on Monday, it’s already awake because we don’t know which Monday, right? So you need to give the exact date, but usually, you do not have experiences like that.

You do not record your memories like that, except you do the journaling and all of the things. So, usually, you have no direct time references. What I mean is that you could say that I was there and it was some event, blah, blah, blah.

Somehow, we form a chain of events that connect with each other and maybe will be connected to some period of time if we are lucky enough. This means that we could not easily represent temporal-aware information as just a timestamp or validity and all of the things.

For sure, the validity of the knowledge graphs (simple quintuple with start and end dates)is a big topic, and it could solve a lot of things. It could solve a lot of the time cases. It’s super simple because you give the end and start dates, and you are done, but it does not answer facts that have a relative time or time information in facts . It could solve many use cases but struggle with facts in an indirect temporal context. I like the simplicity of this idea. But the problem of this approach that in most cases, we simply don’t have these timestamps. We don’t have the timestamp where this information starts and ends. And it’s not modeling many events in our life, especially if you have the processes or ongoing activities or recurrent events.

I’m more about thinking about the time of semantics, where you have a time model as a hybrid clock or some global clock that does the partial ordering of the events. It’s mean that you have the chain of the experiences and you have the chain of the facts that have the different time contexts.

We could deduct the time from this chain of the events. But it’s a big, big topic for the research. But what I want to achieve, actually, it’s not separation on episodic and semantic memory. It’s having something in between.

Blockchain of connected events and facts

I call it temporal-aware semantics or time-aware knowledge graphs, where we could encode the semantic fact together with the time component.I doubt that time should be the simple timestamp or the region of the two timestamps. For me, it is more a chain for facts that have a partial order and form a blockchain like a database or a partially ordered Acyclic graph of facts that are temporally connected. We could have some notion of time that is understandable to the agent and a model that allows us to order the events and focus on what the agent knows and how to order this time knowledge and create the chains of the events.

Time anchors

We may have a particular time in the chain that allows us to arrange a more concrete time for the rest of the events. But it’s still an open topic for research. The temporal semantics gets split into a couple of domains. One domain is how to add time to the knowledge graphs. We already have many different solutions. I described them in my previous articles.

Another domain is the agent's memory and how the memory of the artificial intelligence treats the time. This one, it’s much more complex. Because here, we could not operate with the simple timestamps. We need to have the representation of time that are understandable by model and understandable by the agent that will work with this model. And this one, it’s way bigger topic for the research.”

@ 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.

@ d6252575:ff8c15c7

على الرغم من رغبتنا جميعًا في أن يعمل مكيف الهواء سبليت بسلاسة ودون ضوضاء مثل محرك طائرة G5، فإننا نعلم أن هذه الرغبة قد لا تتحقق دائمًا. اعتمادًا على عمر مكيف الهواء، أو مكان تركيبه، أو مدى صيانته وإصلاحه بشكل دوري، قد تسمع أصواتًا طبيعية جدًا من مكيف الهواء في منزلك أو مكان عملك.

ولكن لا يجب أن تُهمل كل الأصوات، فمن المهم معرفة أسبابها واتخاذ الإجراءات اللازمة للقضاء عليها. تابع معنا لمعرفة المزيد عن أسباب صوت التكييف.

أسباب صوت سبليت

يمكن أن يشير صوت مكيف الهواء إلى تشغيله الصحيح أو غير الصحيح. لا شك أن الضوضاء غير الطبيعية الصادرة من مكيف الهواء الخاص بك تشير إلى وجود مشكلة في النظام يجب التحقيق فيها على الفور.

لماذا يعمل مكيف الهواء بصوت عالٍ؟ إذا سمعت صوت عويل مزعج من مكيف الهواء، فقد لا يعمل جزء من النظام بشكل صحيح. لذلك من الأفضل التحقق من الأسباب التالية:

مشكلة صوت مكيف الهواء

• مروحة تهوية داخلية: إذا كانت مروحة التهوية في اللوحة الداخلية لمكيف الهواء المنفصل غير متوازنة أو لا تعمل بشكل صحيح، خاصة إذا كانت المحامل على كلا الجانبين تالفة أو غير مثبتة بشكل صحيح، فستسمع صوتًا طبيعيًا من الجزء الداخلي من مكيف الهواء.
• علة الضاغط: الضاغط هو أحد أهم أجزاء مكيف الهواء، وهو مسؤول عن ضغط غاز التبريد في النظام. يعني صوت الأزيز في الجهاز أن الضاغط لا يعمل بشكل صحيح أو أن كمية التيار الكهربائي في الدائرة غير مناسبة.
• قاعدة منفصلة أو تالفة: يقع الضاغط في مكيف الهواء على قاعدة مطاطية صغيرة. مع الاستخدام المستمر، قد تتشقق هذه القاعدة البلاستيكية وتتفكك وتنهار، مما يؤدي إلى فقدان مكيف الهواء لتوازنه ويحدث ضوضاء أثناء تشغيل النظام. من ناحية أخرى، قد تكون صواميل ودبابيس الوحدة الخارجية للجهاز مفكوكة. في هذه الحالة، يتم حل مشكلة الصوت في مكيف الهواء عن طريق شدها باستخدام مفك البراغي.
• وحدة مجمدة: حتى إذا تم استخدام مكيف الهواء الخاص بك خلال أشد أوقات السنة حرارة، فقد ترى الجليد على النظام. التجميد هو نتيجة تسرب غاز التبريد ويمكن أن يكون أحد أسباب صوت مكيف الهواء.
• وجود أجزاء مفكوكة: هناك أجزاء مختلفة في مكيف الهواء، قد تتلف أو تُفكك، مما يتسبب في تآكل المكونات فوق بعضها البعض، وأخيراً صوت التكييف.
• وجود جسم غريب في مكثف سبليت: قد يعمل مكيف الهواء عندما تسمع صوتًا فجأة. إذا كانت الوحدة الخارجية للنظام موجودة بالخارج، تزداد احتمالية وجود جسم غريب فيها. في هذه الحالة، يجب عليك إيقاف تشغيل الجهاز وإيقاف تشغيل الطاقة. ثم انظر داخل الوحدة وإذا كان هناك جسم غريب أو حيوان أو طائر، أخرجه من الوحدة.
• محاذاة الجهاز: عند تركيب مكيف الهواء، يجب الانتباه جيدًا لمستواه، لأنه إذا كان الجهاز غير مستوي، فسيؤدي ذلك إلى صوت النظام مع مرور الوقت. في هذه الحالة، يجب عليك الاتصال بفني تركيب مكيف الهواء لحل المشكلة.
• عدم تزييت الجهاز: يعد عدم تزييت الجهاز من أسباب صوت التكييف. لحل هذه المشكلة، يجب إيقاف تشغيل الجهاز لمنع تلفه. ثم اتصل بخبير التدفئة والتهوية وتكييف الهواء لتليين النظام.
• كسر شفرات المروحة: قد يؤدي التلف المادي الخارجي إلى إتلاف شفرات المروحة. انحناء وتواء ريش المروحة يضعفان من كفاءتها ويؤديان في النهاية إلى صوت مكيف الهواء.
• الإطار الأمامي للنظام: إذا لم يتم إغلاق الباب الأمامي للوحة مكيف الهواء أو فكه بشكل صحيح، فسيتم سماع صوت سرقة أثناء تشغيل مكيف الهواء. لإصلاح ذلك، أغلق اللوحة الأمامية للوحة برفق.

أصوات أخرى قد تسمع من جهاز التكييف

فقط لأنك تسمع ضوضاء من مكيف الهواء الخاص بك لا يعني أن نظامك به مشكلة. ولكن عندما تسمع هذه الأصوات، من الجيد الاتصال بأحد خبراء التدفئة والتهوية وتكييف الهواء:

1. صوت النقر: هذا الصوت طبيعي تمامًا عند تشغيل النظام أو إيقاف تشغيله، ولكن إذا أصبح صوتًا مستمرًا، فسيكون ذلك بمثابة تحذير بأن المرحل معيب.
2. الضوضاء: سماع ضوضاء من النظام يعني أن المكثف معيب وقد يحتاج محرك النظام إلى الإصلاح.
3. اقرأ المزيد...

@ 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.

@ a39d19ec:3d88f61e

A state-controlled money supply can influence the development of socialist policies and practices in various ways. Although the relationship is not deterministic, state control over the money supply can contribute to a larger role of the state in the economy and facilitate the implementation of socialist ideals.

Fiscal Policy Capabilities

When the state manages the money supply, it gains the ability to implement fiscal policies that can lead to an expansion of social programs and welfare initiatives. Funding these programs by creating money can enhance the state's influence over the economy and move it closer to a socialist model. The Soviet Union, for instance, had a centralized banking system that enabled the state to fund massive industrialization and social programs, significantly expanding the state's role in the economy.

Wealth Redistribution

Controlling the money supply can also allow the state to influence economic inequality through monetary policies, effectively redistributing wealth and reducing income disparities. By implementing low-interest loans or providing financial assistance to disadvantaged groups, the state can narrow the wealth gap and promote social equality, as seen in many European welfare states.

Central Planning

A state-controlled money supply can contribute to increased central planning, as the state gains more influence over the economy. Central banks, which are state-owned or heavily influenced by the state, play a crucial role in managing the money supply and facilitating central planning. This aligns with socialist principles that advocate for a planned economy where resources are allocated according to social needs rather than market forces.

Incentives for Staff

Staff members working in state institutions responsible for managing the money supply have various incentives to keep the system going. These incentives include job security, professional expertise and reputation, political alignment, regulatory capture, institutional inertia, and legal and administrative barriers. While these factors can differ among individuals, they can collectively contribute to the persistence of a state-controlled money supply system.

In conclusion, a state-controlled money supply can facilitate the development of socialist policies and practices by enabling fiscal policies, wealth redistribution, and central planning. The staff responsible for managing the money supply have diverse incentives to maintain the system, further ensuring its continuation. However, it is essential to note that many factors influence the trajectory of an economic system, and the relationship between state control over the money supply and socialism is not inevitable.

@ bd224ab4:f79ced71

You walk into a building, and it's blissfully cool, even on a scorching summer day. You might not think about it, but behind that comfort lies a system called a VRF (Variable Refrigerant Flow). It's like the unsung hero of modern air conditioning, silently working to keep you comfortable.

Imagine a Network of Tiny Refrigerators

Think of a VRF system as a network of mini-refrigerators, each serving a specific zone in a building. Instead of a single, bulky unit, you have multiple indoor units connected to an outdoor unit. This outdoor unit acts like the "brain" of the operation, pumping refrigerant to each indoor unit, which can be customized to suit your needs.

Flexibility is Key

Here's where things get interesting. With a VRF, you can control the temperature in individual rooms or zones, instead of the entire building. Need a cooler bedroom while the living room stays comfortably warm? No problem! This flexibility means you're only cooling the spaces you actually need, leading to energy savings and a smaller carbon footprint.

Beyond Comfort: Efficiency and Control

VRF systems are known for their high efficiency. They use variable-speed compressors, which adjust their power output based on the actual cooling needs. This means less energy wasted and lower operating costs.

And let's not forget about the control. VRF systems are often integrated with smart home technology, allowing you to adjust the temperature remotely using your smartphone or tablet. This gives you ultimate control over your comfort, even when you're not home.

VRF: Not Just for Buildings

While VRF systems are commonly used in commercial buildings, they are increasingly popular in residential homes too. Their flexibility, efficiency, and control make them an attractive option for homeowners looking for a modern and comfortable air conditioning solution.

Source: What is a VRF System?

@ a39d19ec:3d88f61e

This week's functional 3d print is the "Dino Clip".

Dino Clip

I printed it some years ago for my son, so he would have his own clip for cereal bags.

Now it is used to hold a bag of dog food close.

The design by "Sneaks" is a so called "print in place". This means that the whole clip with moving parts is printed in one part, without the need for assembly after the print. The clip is very strong, and I would print it again if I need a "heavy duty" clip for more rigid or big bags. Link to the file at Printables

@ 6830c409:ff17c655

I was reading through all this news around people attacking and vandalizing Tesla cars. and I was wondering, how did this word vandalism came into existence so I just went back into Wikipedia and some dictionaries searching for the etymology of the world. Here is what I learned and thought of sharing with you what I read. Sorry, but searching #history is my weakness 🙄

Once upon a time, in the early centuries of the first millennium, a group of Germanic tribes roamed across Europe, looking for a place to call home. These were the Vandals, a people who, like many others, found themselves pushed westward by war, climate change, and the collapsing Roman order.

By the early 400s, they were on the move in a big way. They crossed the Rhine into what is now France, fought their way through Spain, and eventually sailed to North Africa, where they did something few others had managed before—they set up their own kingdom in Carthage (modern Tunisia), one of the richest parts of the crumbling Roman world.

And then, in 455 CE, their name was forever written into history.

The Sack of Rome – Did the Vandals Actually “Vandalize” It?

That year, under the leadership of their king Genseric, the Vandals sailed across the Mediterranean and stormed into Rome itself. The Western Roman Empire was already on its last legs, and the emperor had little power to stop them.

For two whole weeks, the Vandals looted the city. They stripped away gold, silver, and anything valuable they could carry. They even took the treasures of the Temple of Jerusalem, which the Romans themselves had looted centuries earlier from the Jewish Second Temple.

But here’s where things get tricky.

While the Vandals did pillage Rome, they didn’t burn it to the ground, kill indiscriminately, or leave it in total ruin like some earlier invaders had. In fact, they kept churches and monuments mostly intact—a stark contrast to the violent destruction during Rome’s previous sack by the Visigoths in 410 CE.

So why do we associate vandalism with destruction?

Over to France, where the word is born

For over a thousand years, the Vandals were remembered as just another group of barbarian invaders. But their name took on a whole new meaning in 1794, during the chaos of the French Revolution.

At that time, revolutionaries were tearing down symbols of the old monarchy, smashing statues, and destroying priceless works of art. Seeing this destruction, a French bishop named Henri Grégoire coined the term “Vandalisme” to describe it.

He wasn’t saying that actual Vandals had suddenly appeared in France. Instead, he was making a historical analogy—just as the Vandals had looted Rome centuries earlier, so too were the revolutionaries looting France’s cultural heritage.

The term quickly caught on. By the early 1800s, “vandalism” entered the English language as a word for any senseless destruction of property.

Vandalizing the Vandals

Here’s the twist: the Vandals may not have been as bad as history painted them.

Most of what we know about them comes from Roman sources, and Rome had a habit of making its enemies look as bad as possible. To the Romans, anyone who wasn’t Roman was a barbarian, and the Vandals, with their dramatic takeover of North Africa and their sack of Rome, made the perfect villains.

Yet modern historians argue that the Vandals were actually fairly organized, had their own complex kingdom, and even maintained peace in the Mediterranean for decades.

So, in a way, it’s historical vandalism that we now associate their name with destruction!

Vandalism Today

The word “vandalism” stuck, and today we use it for everything from graffiti to broken car windows. It’s kind of funny when you think about it—a historical misunderstanding led to a whole group of people becoming a symbol for reckless destruction.

The next time you see a “No Vandalism” sign, remember: it’s not just about property damage. It’s a story that goes back over 1,500 years, involving a misunderstood tribe, a collapsing empire, and a French bishop who didn’t want people smashing statues.

And in the end, maybe the biggest act of vandalism was what happened to the Vandals’ reputation.

@ 6c4b0219:bb7f889e

Bitcoin’s lack of premine is a key feature that differentiates it from many other cryptocurrencies- "Bitcoin is not Crypto."

Its lack of premine ensures fair distribution of coins, strengthens its decentralization, and builds trust in its underlying network.

To gain deeper insight into Bitcoin premining and why Bitcoin is so different from other cryptocurrencies, read below!

➼ What is a Premine?

A premine occurs when a portion of a cryptocurrency's total supply is created and distributed before the public launch.

This typically benefits the project's developers, early investors, or insiders. Premined coins can be used for development funding, marketing, or team compensation, but they often lead to concerns about centralization and unfair distribution.

➼ How is Bitcoin Different?

Bitcoin is not premined, meaning no coins were created or allocated before its public launch on January 3, 2009. Instead, Bitcoin follows a fair launch model, where Satoshi Nakamoto, its creator, had to mine coins just like everyone else. This makes Bitcoin fundamentally different from many other cryptocurrencies.

➼ What Does This Mean for Bitcoin?

1. Fair and Decentralized Distribution – Since Bitcoin wasn't premined, early adopters had to mine or acquire it on the open market. This prevents a small group from controlling a large portion of the supply.

2. Higher Trust and Credibility – Without premining, Bitcoin avoids concerns of founders enriching themselves unfairly, making it more resistant to manipulation.

3. True Proof-of-Work (PoW) Model – Bitcoin’s issuance depends on computational work (mining), ensuring that new coins enter circulation through a transparent and decentralized process.

4. No Centralized Authority – Many premined projects have teams or foundations controlling a large supply of tokens, allowing them to influence the market. Bitcoin, by contrast, is decentralized and does not have any centralized authority.

➼ How Does This Compare to Other Cryptos?

⇝ Ethereum (ETH) had a presale (ICO) in 2014, where about 60 million ETH (out of the initial supply) was sold to early investors, with the remaining portion allocated to the Ethereum Foundation and developers. This helped fund the project’s development but isn’t considered a traditional "premine."

⇝ Ripple (XRP) is almost entirely premined, with its parent company, Ripple Labs, holding a significant portion of the supply.

⇝ Dogecoin (DOGE) was not premined but has an inflationary supply, meaning there is no maximum cap on its total supply, unlike Bitcoin's fixed cap of 21 million coin, which contributes to its scarcity and role as a store of value.

Bitcoin’s lack of premine, combined with its hard cap, decentralization, and proof-of-work mining, makes it the most transparent and trustworthy digital currency.

➼ DYOR!

Before you begin to doubt, we encourage you to do your own research.

If you’re new to the space, you should: ➼ Follow us on here on Nostr ➼ Join our FREE, high-quality Bitcoin education program to understand the fundamentals and make informed decisions.

⇝ To join our program, join our Telegram group to stay updated on the next cohort! Telegram: https://t.me/+KirVlW8gMMtlNDI8

⇝ If you found this valuable, please share and feel free to ZAP⚡️for more visibility so others can benefit as well!

@ 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.

@ 21335073:a244b1ad

I want to see Nostr succeed. If you can think of a way I can help make that happen, I’m open to it. I’d like your suggestions.

My schedule’s shifting soon, and I could volunteer a few hours a week to a Nostr project. I won’t have more total time, but how I use it will change.

Why help? I care about freedom. Nostr’s one of the most powerful freedom tools I’ve seen in my lifetime. If I believe that, I should act on it.

I don’t care about money or sats. I’m not rich, I don’t have extra cash. That doesn’t drive me—freedom does. I’m volunteering, not asking for pay.

I’m not here for clout. I’ve had enough spotlight in my life; it doesn’t move me. If I wanted clout, I’d be on Twitter dropping basic takes. Clout’s easy. Freedom’s hard. I’d rather help anonymously. No speaking at events—small meetups are cool for the vibe, but big conferences? Not my thing. I’ll never hit a huge Bitcoin conference. It’s just not my scene.

That said, I could be convinced to step up if it’d really boost Nostr—as long as it’s legal and gets results.

In this space, I’d watch for social engineering. I watch out for it. I’m not here to make friends, just to help. No shade—you all seem great—but I’ve got a full life and awesome friends irl. I don’t need your crew or to be online cool. Connect anonymously if you want; I’d encourage it.

I’m sick of watching other social media alternatives grow while Nostr kinda stalls. I could trash-talk, but I’d rather do something useful.

Skills? I’m good at spotting social media problems and finding possible solutions. I won’t overhype myself—that’s weird—but if you’re responding, you probably see something in me. Perhaps you see something that I don’t see in myself.

If you need help now or later with Nostr projects, reach out. Nostr only—nothing else. Anonymous contact’s fine. Even just a suggestion on how I can pitch in, no project attached, works too. 💜

Creeps or harassment will get blocked or I’ll nuke my simplex code if it becomes a problem.

https://simplex.chat/contact#/?v=2-4&smp=smp%3A%2F%2FSkIkI6EPd2D63F4xFKfHk7I1UGZVNn6k1QWZ5rcyr6w%3D%40smp9.simplex.im%2FbI99B3KuYduH8jDr9ZwyhcSxm2UuR7j0%23%2F%3Fv%3D1-2%26dh%3DMCowBQYDK2VuAyEAS9C-zPzqW41PKySfPCEizcXb1QCus6AyDkTTjfyMIRM%253D%26srv%3Djssqzccmrcws6bhmn77vgmhfjmhwlyr3u7puw4erkyoosywgl67slqqd.onion

@ a367f9eb:0633efea

Last week, an investigation by Reuters revealed that Chinese researchers have been using open-source AI tools to build nefarious-sounding models that may have some military application.

The reporting purports that adversaries in the Chinese Communist Party and its military wing are taking advantage of the liberal software licensing of American innovations in the AI space, which could someday have capabilities to presumably harm the United States.

In a June paper reviewed by Reuters, six Chinese researchers from three institutions, including two under the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) leading research body, the Academy of Military Science (AMS), detailed how they had used an early version of Meta’s Llama as a base for what it calls “ChatBIT”.

The researchers used an earlier Llama 13B large language model (LLM) from Meta, incorporating their own parameters to construct a military-focused AI tool to gather and process intelligence, and offer accurate and reliable information for operational decision-making.

While I’m doubtful that today’s existing chatbot-like tools will be the ultimate battlefield for a new geopolitical war (queue up the computer-simulated war from the Star Trek episode “A Taste of Armageddon“), this recent exposé requires us to revisit why large language models are released as open-source code in the first place.

Added to that, should it matter that an adversary is having a poke around and may ultimately use them for some purpose we may not like, whether that be China, Russia, North Korea, or Iran?

The number of open-source AI LLMs continues to grow each day, with projects like Vicuna, LLaMA, BLOOMB, Falcon, and Mistral available for download. In fact, there are over one million open-source LLMs available as of writing this post. With some decent hardware, every global citizen can download these codebases and run them on their computer.

With regard to this specific story, we could assume it to be a selective leak by a competitor of Meta which created the LLaMA model, intended to harm its reputation among those with cybersecurity and national security credentials. There are potentially trillions of dollars on the line.

Or it could be the revelation of something more sinister happening in the military-sponsored labs of Chinese hackers who have already been caught attacking American infrastructure, data, and yes, your credit history?

As consumer advocates who believe in the necessity of liberal democracies to safeguard our liberties against authoritarianism, we should absolutely remain skeptical when it comes to the communist regime in Beijing. We’ve written as much many times.

At the same time, however, we should not subrogate our own critical thinking and principles because it suits a convenient narrative.

Consumers of all stripes deserve technological freedom, and innovators should be free to provide that to us. And open-source software has provided the very foundations for all of this.

Open-source matters When we discuss open-source software and code, what we’re really talking about is the ability for people other than the creators to use it.

The various licensing schemes – ranging from GNU General Public License (GPL) to the MIT License and various public domain classifications – determine whether other people can use the code, edit it to their liking, and run it on their machine. Some licenses even allow you to monetize the modifications you’ve made.

While many different types of software will be fully licensed and made proprietary, restricting or even penalizing those who attempt to use it on their own, many developers have created software intended to be released to the public. This allows multiple contributors to add to the codebase and to make changes to improve it for public benefit.

Open-source software matters because anyone, anywhere can download and run the code on their own. They can also modify it, edit it, and tailor it to their specific need. The code is intended to be shared and built upon not because of some altruistic belief, but rather to make it accessible for everyone and create a broad base. This is how we create standards for technologies that provide the ground floor for further tinkering to deliver value to consumers.

Open-source libraries create the building blocks that decrease the hassle and cost of building a new web platform, smartphone, or even a computer language. They distribute common code that can be built upon, assuring interoperability and setting standards for all of our devices and technologies to talk to each other.

I am myself a proponent of open-source software. The server I run in my home has dozens of dockerized applications sourced directly from open-source contributors on GitHub and DockerHub. When there are versions or adaptations that I don’t like, I can pick and choose which I prefer. I can even make comments or add edits if I’ve found a better way for them to run.

Whether you know it or not, many of you run the Linux operating system as the base for your Macbook or any other computer and use all kinds of web tools that have active repositories forked or modified by open-source contributors online. This code is auditable by everyone and can be scrutinized or reviewed by whoever wants to (even AI bots).

This is the same software that runs your airlines, powers the farms that deliver your food, and supports the entire global monetary system. The code of the first decentralized cryptocurrency Bitcoin is also open-source, which has allowed thousands of copycat protocols that have revolutionized how we view money.

You know what else is open-source and available for everyone to use, modify, and build upon?

PHP, Mozilla Firefox, LibreOffice, MySQL, Python, Git, Docker, and WordPress. All protocols and languages that power the web. Friend or foe alike, anyone can download these pieces of software and run them how they see fit.

Open-source code is speech, and it is knowledge.

We build upon it to make information and technology accessible. Attempts to curb open-source, therefore, amount to restricting speech and knowledge.

Open-source is for your friends, and enemies In the context of Artificial Intelligence, many different developers and companies have chosen to take their large language models and make them available via an open-source license.

At this very moment, you can click on over to Hugging Face, download an AI model, and build a chatbot or scripting machine suited to your needs. All for free (as long as you have the power and bandwidth).

Thousands of companies in the AI sector are doing this at this very moment, discovering ways of building on top of open-source models to develop new apps, tools, and services to offer to companies and individuals. It’s how many different applications are coming to life and thousands more jobs are being created.

We know this can be useful to friends, but what about enemies?

As the AI wars heat up between liberal democracies like the US, the UK, and (sluggishly) the European Union, we know that authoritarian adversaries like the CCP and Russia are building their own applications.

The fear that China will use open-source US models to create some kind of military application is a clear and present danger for many political and national security researchers, as well as politicians.

A bipartisan group of US House lawmakers want to put export controls on AI models, as well as block foreign access to US cloud servers that may be hosting AI software.

If this seems familiar, we should also remember that the US government once classified cryptography and encryption as “munitions” that could not be exported to other countries (see The Crypto Wars). Many of the arguments we hear today were invoked by some of the same people as back then.

Now, encryption protocols are the gold standard for many different banking and web services, messaging, and all kinds of electronic communication. We expect our friends to use it, and our foes as well. Because code is knowledge and speech, we know how to evaluate it and respond if we need to.

Regardless of who uses open-source AI, this is how we should view it today. These are merely tools that people will use for good or ill. It’s up to governments to determine how best to stop illiberal or nefarious uses that harm us, rather than try to outlaw or restrict building of free and open software in the first place.

Limiting open-source threatens our own advancement If we set out to restrict and limit our ability to create and share open-source code, no matter who uses it, that would be tantamount to imposing censorship. There must be another way.

If there is a “Hundred Year Marathon” between the United States and liberal democracies on one side and autocracies like the Chinese Communist Party on the other, this is not something that will be won or lost based on software licenses. We need as much competition as possible.

The Chinese military has been building up its capabilities with trillions of dollars’ worth of investments that span far beyond AI chatbots and skip logic protocols.

The theft of intellectual property at factories in Shenzhen, or in US courts by third-party litigation funding coming from China, is very real and will have serious economic consequences. It may even change the balance of power if our economies and countries turn to war footing.

But these are separate issues from the ability of free people to create and share open-source code which we can all benefit from. In fact, if we want to continue our way our life and continue to add to global productivity and growth, it’s demanded that we defend open-source.

If liberal democracies want to compete with our global adversaries, it will not be done by reducing the freedoms of citizens in our own countries.

Last week, an investigation by Reuters revealed that Chinese researchers have been using open-source AI tools to build nefarious-sounding models that may have some military application.

The reporting purports that adversaries in the Chinese Communist Party and its military wing are taking advantage of the liberal software licensing of American innovations in the AI space, which could someday have capabilities to presumably harm the United States.

In a June paper reviewed by Reuters, six Chinese researchers from three institutions, including two under the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) leading research body, the Academy of Military Science (AMS), detailed how they had used an early version of Meta’s Llama as a base for what it calls “ChatBIT”.

The researchers used an earlier Llama 13B large language model (LLM) from Meta, incorporating their own parameters to construct a military-focused AI tool to gather and process intelligence, and offer accurate and reliable information for operational decision-making.

While I’m doubtful that today’s existing chatbot-like tools will be the ultimate battlefield for a new geopolitical war (queue up the computer-simulated war from the Star Trek episode “A Taste of Armageddon“), this recent exposé requires us to revisit why large language models are released as open-source code in the first place.

Added to that, should it matter that an adversary is having a poke around and may ultimately use them for some purpose we may not like, whether that be China, Russia, North Korea, or Iran?

The number of open-source AI LLMs continues to grow each day, with projects like Vicuna, LLaMA, BLOOMB, Falcon, and Mistral available for download. In fact, there are over one million open-source LLMs available as of writing this post. With some decent hardware, every global citizen can download these codebases and run them on their computer.

With regard to this specific story, we could assume it to be a selective leak by a competitor of Meta which created the LLaMA model, intended to harm its reputation among those with cybersecurity and national security credentials. There are potentially trillions of dollars on the line.

Or it could be the revelation of something more sinister happening in the military-sponsored labs of Chinese hackers who have already been caught attacking American infrastructure, data, and yes, your credit history?

As consumer advocates who believe in the necessity of liberal democracies to safeguard our liberties against authoritarianism, we should absolutely remain skeptical when it comes to the communist regime in Beijing. We’ve written as much many times.

At the same time, however, we should not subrogate our own critical thinking and principles because it suits a convenient narrative.

Consumers of all stripes deserve technological freedom, and innovators should be free to provide that to us. And open-source software has provided the very foundations for all of this.

Open-source matters

When we discuss open-source software and code, what we’re really talking about is the ability for people other than the creators to use it.

The various licensing schemes – ranging from GNU General Public License (GPL) to the MIT License and various public domain classifications – determine whether other people can use the code, edit it to their liking, and run it on their machine. Some licenses even allow you to monetize the modifications you’ve made.

While many different types of software will be fully licensed and made proprietary, restricting or even penalizing those who attempt to use it on their own, many developers have created software intended to be released to the public. This allows multiple contributors to add to the codebase and to make changes to improve it for public benefit.

Open-source software matters because anyone, anywhere can download and run the code on their own. They can also modify it, edit it, and tailor it to their specific need. The code is intended to be shared and built upon not because of some altruistic belief, but rather to make it accessible for everyone and create a broad base. This is how we create standards for technologies that provide the ground floor for further tinkering to deliver value to consumers.

Open-source libraries create the building blocks that decrease the hassle and cost of building a new web platform, smartphone, or even a computer language. They distribute common code that can be built upon, assuring interoperability and setting standards for all of our devices and technologies to talk to each other.

I am myself a proponent of open-source software. The server I run in my home has dozens of dockerized applications sourced directly from open-source contributors on GitHub and DockerHub. When there are versions or adaptations that I don’t like, I can pick and choose which I prefer. I can even make comments or add edits if I’ve found a better way for them to run.

Whether you know it or not, many of you run the Linux operating system as the base for your Macbook or any other computer and use all kinds of web tools that have active repositories forked or modified by open-source contributors online. This code is auditable by everyone and can be scrutinized or reviewed by whoever wants to (even AI bots).

This is the same software that runs your airlines, powers the farms that deliver your food, and supports the entire global monetary system. The code of the first decentralized cryptocurrency Bitcoin is also open-source, which has allowed thousands of copycat protocols that have revolutionized how we view money.

You know what else is open-source and available for everyone to use, modify, and build upon?

PHP, Mozilla Firefox, LibreOffice, MySQL, Python, Git, Docker, and WordPress. All protocols and languages that power the web. Friend or foe alike, anyone can download these pieces of software and run them how they see fit.

Open-source code is speech, and it is knowledge.

We build upon it to make information and technology accessible. Attempts to curb open-source, therefore, amount to restricting speech and knowledge.

Open-source is for your friends, and enemies

In the context of Artificial Intelligence, many different developers and companies have chosen to take their large language models and make them available via an open-source license.

At this very moment, you can click on over to Hugging Face, download an AI model, and build a chatbot or scripting machine suited to your needs. All for free (as long as you have the power and bandwidth).

Thousands of companies in the AI sector are doing this at this very moment, discovering ways of building on top of open-source models to develop new apps, tools, and services to offer to companies and individuals. It’s how many different applications are coming to life and thousands more jobs are being created.

We know this can be useful to friends, but what about enemies?

As the AI wars heat up between liberal democracies like the US, the UK, and (sluggishly) the European Union, we know that authoritarian adversaries like the CCP and Russia are building their own applications.

The fear that China will use open-source US models to create some kind of military application is a clear and present danger for many political and national security researchers, as well as politicians.

A bipartisan group of US House lawmakers want to put export controls on AI models, as well as block foreign access to US cloud servers that may be hosting AI software.

If this seems familiar, we should also remember that the US government once classified cryptography and encryption as “munitions” that could not be exported to other countries (see The Crypto Wars). Many of the arguments we hear today were invoked by some of the same people as back then.

Now, encryption protocols are the gold standard for many different banking and web services, messaging, and all kinds of electronic communication. We expect our friends to use it, and our foes as well. Because code is knowledge and speech, we know how to evaluate it and respond if we need to.

Regardless of who uses open-source AI, this is how we should view it today. These are merely tools that people will use for good or ill. It’s up to governments to determine how best to stop illiberal or nefarious uses that harm us, rather than try to outlaw or restrict building of free and open software in the first place.

Limiting open-source threatens our own advancement

If we set out to restrict and limit our ability to create and share open-source code, no matter who uses it, that would be tantamount to imposing censorship. There must be another way.

If there is a “Hundred Year Marathon” between the United States and liberal democracies on one side and autocracies like the Chinese Communist Party on the other, this is not something that will be won or lost based on software licenses. We need as much competition as possible.

The Chinese military has been building up its capabilities with trillions of dollars’ worth of investments that span far beyond AI chatbots and skip logic protocols.

The theft of intellectual property at factories in Shenzhen, or in US courts by third-party litigation funding coming from China, is very real and will have serious economic consequences. It may even change the balance of power if our economies and countries turn to war footing.

But these are separate issues from the ability of free people to create and share open-source code which we can all benefit from. In fact, if we want to continue our way our life and continue to add to global productivity and growth, it’s demanded that we defend open-source.

If liberal democracies want to compete with our global adversaries, it will not be done by reducing the freedoms of citizens in our own countries.

Originally published on the website of the Consumer Choice Center.

@ 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.

@ 8671a6e5:f88194d1

Like so many people, I see ads for hardware wallets all the time in my X feed, or even when listening to podcasts you get the occasional promotion for one of these devices. Hardware wallet manufacturers and brands are a part of bitcoin life and culture. They’re sponsors, and they of course like to sell their devices.

As a long-time bitcoiner, I can say that I’ve given out more money (bitcoin) buying hardware wallets than what’s good for me. I supported projects and even had one of the prototypes of the Case wallet (fingerprint sensor, international sim-card and a camera!) in 2015/16, a thing I could hardly use, since it was bitcoin in your pocket, on-chain, before there was ANY need for that.

The point is, I love these devices. I love playing around with them. That’s fun when you’re a techie or someone who’s really onto bitcoin and wants to try the new Trezor, Ledger (yuk), Bitbox or cold card wallet… Unfortunately, except for this “obsession” with trying these devices out, and the occasional corporate/business needs,… the secure feeling of having one (or more) prevails over the real need. There’s a series of downsides to having a Hardware wallet, which are often overlooked.

The main downside is actually summed up as : “you don’t need it”

Let’s elaborate. For most people, I must say that I can’t recommend having one of these devices anymore. The market is saturated and the devices are often sold to people who are even unable to use them properly. Or customers that spent way more money buying them, than what’s eventually stored on it!

They’re of course handy “signing devices” for securely signing a transaction or message. They’re also a great way to do multi-signature and so on. That’s all neat.

But your average user,... most of the people don’t need it. There are several reasons for that.

Before the readers put me away as a fiat-slave dissing on bitcoin, or some dude trying to shill his own project: no … I don’t have my own “solution” I’m selling, I don’t go and ask you to click my referral link or ask for money here. I probably bought more hardware wallets in my life for a higher amount than most users hold in bitcoin right now. So no,... I supported this industry, I don’t hate it. I just want to voice my opinion her on the saturation of the market and the stupidity of holding your keys on a device that inherently can’t be trusted (in theory).

The reasons: 1

Bitcoin inverted effect on diminishing cash value : A bitcoin amount today buys you less than that same bitcoin amount in a few years. Let’s start with an obvious, but often forgotten reason to NOT invest in a hardware wallet. The price. The price is around 150 to 350 $ in fiat now in 2024. I even bought such devices at 600$ once (160000$ in today’s price;). Over time, most people that are into bitcoin less than 5 years, are better off buying bitcoin for the amount they would have bought the HW device for.

One can of course make the argument that it costs more to lose your keys altogether, but that’s also the case with a paper with your seed phrase or any other method.

Securing your keys is of course extremely important. No matter what you want to use. It doesn’t take away the fact that buying a Hardware wallet for fiat or for bitcoin isn’t economically wise, certainly not for beginners or people who have less bitcoin than the 20x cash value of the hardware wallet they want to buy. I have a simple formula here.

The Deadeye’s Hardware Wallet Law: which is a formula: Y < (X / 20) If you have 1 million sats today (660$ at time of writing) then it makes little sense to buy a hardware wallet for 179$ in my opinion. A good rule of thumb is: take the amount of bitcoin you want to secure, calculate the fiat price in dollar HW price = X Take the fiat price in dollar + shipping in fiat = Y If Y < (X / 20) that fiat price is less than a factor 20 of what you want to secure, then you might consider buying the HW wallet.

Example: Johnny wants to buy a new coldcard at 219$ + 41 $ shipping. He has 2,3 million sats (1524$) 260 < (1524 /20) So 260 < 76.2 … is not true , so he shouldn’t buy this and stack the sats instead on a cheaper solution (software wallet, or a self-generated seed phrase or even a reputable exchange in absolute last resort, if the tech-lever is very low)

2

Entropy - the entropy on a hardware device is delivered usually by “special chipsets” that generate a random (or close to random, as computers can’t be really random) seed phrase for you. Just like the old paper wallet generators only, they use some sort of scheme or algorithm to generate this. As a user you’ll have to trust that algo. And trust that it’s not broken by a hacker that finds the secret sauce and can generate more or less the same kind of entropy (even then, it would be extremely unlikely they would be able to re-generate your seed). But it’s a factor: the entropy a person can generate themselves (with play cards, dice, or a cat tapping a keyboard…) is always superior to some algorithm on a device Hardware itself can be fragile or downright sub-par. The hardware wallets of course exist because of the tech inside. Mainly the print board, the screen, the chipset and some even a battery(!). The hardware is NOT under your control. It’s made in a few big factories in Asia usually and even if you trust the building process completely, there’s no way for an average paranoid user to “trust” the unverifiable source of the chip design, chip manufacturing and the software that keeps the thing running.

The hardware itself is a blind trust you put into the image and reputation of a company. Some of these companies are dodgy at best from my personal perspective and opinion (nGrave, Ledger …) others have a more steady reputations and exude trustworthiness (Bitbox, …) Still… they are all just hardware, a sum of parts you don’t control and don’t verify.

When is the last time you checked the “military grade secure element chipset” in your super-duper hardware device? Where was it manufactured and who designed the chip lay-out?

3 Cycling through versions. HW wallets go through iterations and new version all the time. When you bought a coldcad Mark 1 back in the day, it’s now long obsolete. You can’t use some features and you’re even lucky if the hardware itself still functions after being in storage for +6 years. When I asked the manufacturer why they recommended outphasing the coldcard around two years ago, they said something like “it’s to keep up with security”. It even makes sense from their tech and product perspective, but in the end, it’s not really what people expect (realistic or not). Well… that’s like a subscription in my opinion? Every two years, you fork out something of 150 to 200$ for a new hardware device (plus shipping and customs) and the risk involved to put your funds on the new device by transferring to the new wallet’s addresses or put the old seed in that new device and so on… All this… to have the “right tool” for keeping 24 words “safe”? So, our formula in point 1, was adjusted to /20 to compensate for that “cycling” through versions at a rate of a few hundred dollars every 2-3 years at least. That’s a bit of the top in my opinion. A good bitcoin hardware device should at least be usable and up to par for 10 years at the very least. Words written down or secured anywhere, last forever.

4 Easy of use is still not ok: This might be very controversial with all the HW wallets claiming to be “easy to use”, but in fact: they’re not. Most users (and I take some family members and friends as an example here) can’t make heads or tails from how these things work. Give any non-tech user a coldcard, ledger of bitbox and they’ll not be on their way to use it as an everyday device. It might sound silly for the daily users of such a wallet, but a “noob” in my opinion is better off learning to familiarize themselves with software wallets first before even considering buying a HW wallet.

5 Buggy hardly tested apps The hardware wallets accompanied by an app (like Jade’s Green wallet to name one) are often introducing an extra layer of problems (both on the bugs and the risks). Who knows that this software will still be available in a few years time? We saw many things come and go over the years.

6 Alienation from the private keys: New users are better of learning the ropes with seed phrases and private keys by using Electrum, Sparrow and the likes (or even stack wallet duo) in order to learn what holding your own keys means.

People who start their journey with a hardware wallet often think about their bitcoin holding as something that tangible “inside the hardware wallet”, instead of looking at the key-perspective. I think a lot of people are alienated from the bitcoin concept of having your own keys by using HW wallets. (and yes, that’s not a strong argument, I know, but it is a factor to take into account)

7

You’ll have to securely store your seed phrase ANYWAY. The fact remains, that you bought a hardware wallet, and still have to safely secure your private keys, seed phrase at some point and do it securely. That’s something you need anyway. So… why not just use your paper with 24 words and use the wallet on occasion by using a secure “other way” (seed signer, an electrum wallet, sparrow,...) when you need to do a transaction?

I believe people will also do les on-chain pure bitcoin transactions when they need to do more work when not using a HW wallet: it’s an extra barrier to hold instead of paying. (if you like to do that of course)

8

Upgrade processes aren't always that clear on some HW wallets. I personally “bricked” a coldcard this way, by accidentally using a wrong upgrade file on a Mark 2 coldcard, and it was unrepairable after that.

The 12 or 24 words are the most important thing you have, … you don’t need a hardware device if you’re just starting, or just are a hodl’er.

9 Centralized software. Bugs and “new” features

Lots of bugs in the software also cause problems: For example; your 24 words from device A, can’t be imported to device B although they should “speak the same language” in theory (BIP39). One device accepts using two times the same word in a seed phrase, one doesn’t. There are other bugs: like random reboots, unlocking problems, strange implementations in the software (like Trezor trying out implementing the Swiss “travel rule” setting one day and pushing this upgrade to the users) and so on…. Without a HW wallet, you can just choose yourself what software / node or wallet to run anything on, and you’re not tied to the centralized, expensive and often untested way of hardware wallet manufacturer’s viewpoints and or “secret deals”.

1. And then there’s the privacy concern. We all know about Ledger’s famous “mishap” where they leaked all the home addresses of hardware wallet customers .. some of them actually had to move to other places to live as a result.

Conclusion:

In my opinion; hardware wallets are toys for bored bitcoiners. And I admit I was one myself for a long time. (I am one of these people yes)

The blockstream Jade was the last hardware wallet I’ve ever bought I guess.

I’m done with the crappy interfaces, the buggy software, the ‘subscription’ to endless upgrades new hardware and the strange feeling of unease when storing something on such devices while you depend on the “open source” nature of something made in China or wherever.

There are much cheaper, easier and more secure solutions.

Hence, most people don’t need hardware wallets.

deadeyes

@avbpodcast

imaginary Hardware wallet

Like so many people, I see ads for hardware wallets all the time in my X feed, or even when listening to podcasts you get the occasional promotion for one of these devices.\ Hardware wallet manufacturers and brands are a part of bitcoin life and culture. They’re sponsors, and they of course like to sell their devices.

As a long-time bitcoiner, I can say that I’ve given out more money (bitcoin) buying hardware wallets than what’s good for me.\ I supported projects and even had one of the prototypes of the Case wallet (fingerprint sensor, international sim-card and a camera!) in 2015/16, a thing I could hardly use, since it was bitcoin in your pocket, on-chain, before there was ANY need for that.

The point is, I love these devices.\ I love playing around with them.\ That’s fun when you’re a techie or someone who’s really onto bitcoin and wants to try the new Trezor, Ledger (yuk), Bitbox or cold card wallet… \ Unfortunately, except for this “obsession” with trying these devices out, and the occasional corporate/business needs,… the secure feeling of having one (or more) prevails over the real need.\ There’s a series of downsides to having a Hardware wallet, which are often overlooked.

The main downside is actually summed up as : “you don’t need it”

Let’s elaborate.

For most people, I must say that I can’t recommend having one of these devices anymore. The market is saturated and the devices are often sold to people who are even unable to use them properly. Or customers that spent way more money buying them, than what’s eventually stored on it!

They’re of course handy “signing devices” for securely signing a transaction or message. They’re also a great way to do multi-signature and so on. That’s all neat.

But your average user,... most of the people don’t need it.   There are several reasons for that.

Before the readers put me away as a fiat-slave dissing on bitcoin, or some dude trying to shill his own project: no …\ I don’t have my own “solution” I’m selling,\ I don’t go and ask you to click my referral link or ask for money here. I probably bought more hardware wallets in my life for a higher amount than most users hold in bitcoin right now. So no,... I supported this industry, I don’t hate it. I just want to voice my opinion her on the saturation of the market and the stupidity of holding your keys on a device that inherently can’t be trusted (in theory).

The reasons:

1

Bitcoin inverted effect on diminishing cash value :\ A bitcoin amount today buys you less than that same bitcoin amount in a few years. Let’s start with an obvious, but often forgotten reason to NOT invest in a hardware wallet. The price. The price is around 150 to 350 $ in fiat now in 2024. I even bought such devices at 600$ once (160000$ in today’s price;). Over time, most people that are into bitcoin less than 5 years, are better off buying bitcoin for the amount they would have bought the HW device for.

One can of course make the argument that it costs more to lose your keys altogether, but that’s also the case with a paper with your seed phrase or any other method.

Securing your keys is of course extremely important. No matter what you want to use. It doesn’t take away the fact that buying a Hardware wallet for fiat or for bitcoin isn’t economically wise, certainly not for beginners or people who have less bitcoin than the 20x cash value of the hardware wallet they want to buy. I have a simple formula here.

### The Deadeye’s Hardware Wallet Law:\ which is a formula:   Y <  (X / 20)

If you have 1 million sats today (660$ at time of writing) then it makes little sense to buy a hardware wallet for 179$ in my opinion.\ A good rule of thumb is: take the amount of bitcoin you want to secure, calculate the fiat price in dollar HW price = X\ Take the fiat price in dollar + shipping in fiat = Y\ If Y <  (X / 20)  that fiat price is less than a factor 20 of what you want to secure, then you might consider buying the HW wallet.\ \   Example: Johnny wants to buy a new coldcard at 219$ + 41 $ shipping.\ He has 2,3 million sats (1524$) 260 < (1524 /20) \ So 260 < 76.2  … is not true , so he shouldn’t buy this and stack the sats instead on a cheaper solution (software wallet, or a self-generated seed phrase or even a reputable exchange in absolute last resort,  if the tech-lever is very low)\ \ 2

Entropy - the entropy on a hardware device is delivered usually by “special chipsets” that generate a random (or close to random, as computers can’t be really random) seed phrase for you. Just like the old paper wallet generators only, they use some sort of scheme or algorithm to generate this. As a user you’ll have to trust that algo. And trust that it’s not broken by a hacker that finds the secret sauce and can generate more or less the same kind of entropy (even then, it would be extremely unlikely they would be able to re-generate your seed).\ But it’s a factor: the entropy a person can generate themselves (with play cards, dice, or a cat tapping a keyboard…) is always superior to some algorithm on a device Hardware itself can be fragile or downright sub-par.\ The hardware wallets of course exist because of the tech inside. Mainly the print board, the screen, the chipset and some even a battery(!).\ The hardware is NOT under your control. It’s made in a few big factories in Asia usually and even if you trust the building process completely, there’s no way for an average paranoid user to “trust” the unverifiable source of the chip design, chip manufacturing and the software that keeps the thing running.\ \ The hardware itself is a blind trust you put into the image and reputation of a company. Some of these companies are dodgy at best from my personal perspective and opinion  (nGrave, Ledger …) others have a more steady reputations and exude trustworthiness (Bitbox, …)  Still… they are all just hardware, a sum of parts you don’t control and don’t verify.\ \ When is the last time you checked the “military grade secure element chipset” in your super-duper hardware device? Where was it manufactured and who designed the chip lay-out? \ \ 3\ Cycling through versions.\ HW wallets go through iterations and new version all the time. When you bought a coldcad Mark 1 back in the day, it’s now long obsolete. You can’t use some features and you’re even lucky if the hardware itself still functions after being in storage for +6 years.\ When I asked the manufacturer why they recommended outphasing the coldcard around two years ago, they said something like “it’s to keep up with security”.\ It even makes sense from their tech and product perspective, but in the end, it’s not really what people expect (realistic or not). Well… that’s like a subscription in my opinion? Every two years, you fork out something of 150 to 200$ for a new hardware device (plus shipping and customs) and the risk involved to put your funds on the new device by transferring to the new wallet’s addresses or put the old seed in that new device and so on…\ All this… to have the “right tool” for keeping 24 words “safe”? So, our formula in point 1, was adjusted to /20 to compensate for that “cycling” through versions at a rate of a few hundred dollars every 2-3 years at least. That’s a bit of the top in my opinion.  A good bitcoin hardware device should at least be usable and up to par for 10 years at the very least. Words written down or secured anywhere, last forever.\ \ 4\ Easy of use is still not ok: This might be very controversial with all the HW wallets claiming to be “easy to use”, but in fact: they’re not. Most users (and I take some family members and friends as an example here) can’t make heads or tails from how these things work. Give any non-tech user a coldcard, ledger of bitbox and they’ll not be on their way to use it as an everyday device.\ It might sound silly for the daily users of such a wallet, but a “noob” in my opinion is better off learning to familiarize themselves with software wallets first before even considering buying a HW wallet.\ \ 5 Buggy hardly tested apps\ The hardware wallets accompanied by an app (like Jade’s Green wallet to name one) are often introducing an extra layer of problems (both on the bugs and the risks). Who knows that this software will still be available in a few years time? We saw many things come and go over the years. \ \ 6\ Alienation from the private keys: New users are better of learning the ropes with seed phrases and private keys by using Electrum, Sparrow and the likes (or even stack wallet duo) in order to learn what holding your own keys means.

People who start their journey with a hardware wallet often think about their bitcoin holding as something that tangible “inside the hardware wallet”, instead of looking at the key-perspective. I think a lot of people are alienated from the bitcoin concept of having your own keys by using HW wallets. (and yes, that’s not a strong argument, I know, but it is a factor to take into account)

7

You’ll have to securely store your seed phrase ANYWAY.\ The fact remains, that you bought a hardware wallet, and still have to safely secure your private keys, seed phrase at some point and do it securely.\ That’s something you need anyway. So… why not just use your paper with 24 words and use the wallet on occasion by using a secure “other way” (seed signer, an electrum wallet, sparrow,...) when you need to do a transaction?

I believe people will also do les on-chain pure bitcoin transactions when they need to do more work when not using a HW wallet: it’s an extra barrier to hold instead of paying. (if you like to do that of course)

8

Upgrade processes aren't always that clear on some HW wallets.\ I personally “bricked” a coldcard this way, by accidentally using a wrong upgrade file on a Mark 2 coldcard, and it was unrepairable after that.

The 12 or 24 words are the most important thing you have, … you don’t need a hardware device if you’re just starting, or just are a hodl’er. 

\ 9 Centralized software. Bugs and “new” features

Lots of bugs in the software also cause problems: For example; your 24 words from device A, can’t be imported to device B although they should “speak the same language” in theory (BIP39).\ One device accepts using two times the same word in a seed phrase, one doesn’t.\ There are other bugs: like random reboots, unlocking problems, strange implementations in the software (like Trezor trying out implementing the Swiss “travel rule” setting one day and pushing this upgrade to the users) and so on….\ Without a HW wallet, you can just choose yourself what software / node or wallet to run anything on, and you’re not tied to the centralized, expensive and often untested way of hardware wallet manufacturer’s viewpoints and or “secret deals”.

10) And then there’s the privacy concern. We all know about Ledger’s famous “mishap” where they leaked all the home addresses of hardware wallet customers .. some of them actually had to move to other places to live as a result.

Conclusion:

In my opinion; hardware wallets are toys for bored bitcoiners.\ And I admit I was one myself for a long time. (I am one of these people yes)

The blockstream Jade was the last hardware wallet I’ve ever bought I guess (and it broke about 4 months of operation, after the PIN code entry froze and the device stopped responding). \ \ On top of that: who needs to sign that much transactions a day (safe for shitcoiners?)

I’m done with the crappy interfaces, the buggy software, the ‘subscription’ to endless upgrades new hardware and the strange feeling of unease when storing something on such devices while you depend on the “open source” nature of something made in China or wherever.

\ There are much cheaper, easier and more secure solutions. 

\ Hence, most people don’t need hardware wallets. 

deadeyes

@avbpodcast 

@ 09fbf8f3:fa3d60f0

> ### 第三方API合集：

免责申明:

在此推荐的 OpenAI API Key 由第三方代理商提供，所以我们不对 API Key 的 有效性 和 安全性 负责，请你自行承担购买和使用 API Key 的风险。

| 服务商 | 特性说明 | Proxy 代理地址 | 链接 | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | AiHubMix | 使用 OpenAI 企业接口，全站模型价格为官方 86 折（含 GPT-4 ）| https://aihubmix.com/v1 | 官网 | | OpenAI-HK | OpenAI的API官方计费模式为，按每次API请求内容和返回内容tokens长度来定价。每个模型具有不同的计价方式，以每1,000个tokens消耗为单位定价。其中1,000个tokens约为750个英文单词（约400汉字）| https://api.openai-hk.com/ | 官网 | | CloseAI | CloseAI是国内规模最大的商用级OpenAI代理平台，也是国内第一家专业OpenAI中转服务，定位于企业级商用需求，面向企业客户的线上服务提供高质量稳定的官方OpenAI API 中转代理，是百余家企业和多家科研机构的专用合作平台。 | https://api.openai-proxy.org | 官网 | | OpenAI-SB | 需要配合Telegram 获取api key | https://api.openai-sb.com | 官网 |

持续更新。。。

---

推广：

访问不了openai，去低调云购买VPN。

官网：https://didiaocloud.xyz

邀请码：w9AjVJit

价格低至1元。

@ 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.

@ 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.

@ 4c48cf05:07f52b80

I believe that five years from now, access to artificial intelligence will be akin to what access to the Internet represents today. It will be the greatest differentiator between the haves and have nots. Unequal access to artificial intelligence will exacerbate societal inequalities and limit opportunities for those without access to it.

Back in April, the AI Index Steering Committee at the Institute for Human-Centered AI from Stanford University released The AI Index 2024 Annual Report.

Out of the extensive report (502 pages), I chose to focus on the chapter dedicated to Public Opinion. People involved with AI live in a bubble. We all know and understand AI and therefore assume that everyone else does. But, is that really the case once you step out of your regular circles in Seattle or Silicon Valley and hit Main Street?

Two thirds of global respondents have a good understanding of what AI is

The exact number is 67%. My gut feeling is that this number is way too high to be realistic. At the same time, 63% of respondents are aware of ChatGPT so maybe people are confounding AI with ChatGPT?

If so, there is so much more that they won't see coming.

This number is important because you need to see every other questions and response of the survey through the lens of a respondent who believes to have a good understanding of what AI is.

A majority are nervous about AI products and services

52% of global respondents are nervous about products and services that use AI. Leading the pack are Australians at 69% and the least worried are Japanise at 23%. U.S.A. is up there at the top at 63%.

Japan is truly an outlier, with most countries moving between 40% and 60%.

Personal data is the clear victim

Exaclty half of the respondents believe that AI companies will protect their personal data. And the other half believes they won't.

Expected benefits

Again a majority of people (57%) think that it will change how they do their jobs. As for impact on your life, top hitters are getting things done faster (54%) and more entertainment options (51%).

The last one is a head scratcher for me. Are people looking forward to AI generated movies?

Concerns

Remember the 57% that thought that AI will change how they do their jobs? Well, it looks like 37% of them expect to lose it. Whether or not this is what will happen, that is a very high number of people who have a direct incentive to oppose AI.

Other key concerns include:

• Misuse for nefarious purposes: 49%
• Violation of citizens' privacy: 45%

Conclusion

This is the first time I come across this report and I wil make sure to follow future annual reports to see how these trends evolve.

Overall, people are worried about AI. There are many things that could go wrong and people perceive that both jobs and privacy are on the line.

---

Full citation: Nestor Maslej, Loredana Fattorini, Raymond Perrault, Vanessa Parli, Anka Reuel, Erik Brynjolfsson, John Etchemendy, Katrina Ligett, Terah Lyons, James Manyika, Juan Carlos Niebles, Yoav Shoham, Russell Wald, and Jack Clark, “The AI Index 2024 Annual Report,” AI Index Steering Committee, Institute for Human-Centered AI, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, April 2024.

The AI Index 2024 Annual Report by Stanford University is licensed under Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International.

@ 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.

nostr:nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzp5r5hd579v2sszvvzfel677c8dxgxm3skl773sujlsuft64c44ncqy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnyv9kh2uewd9hj7qgwwaehxw309ahx7uewd3hkctcpzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumt0wd68ytnsw43z7qghwaehxw309aex2mrp0yhxummnw3ezucnpdejz7qgewaehxw309aex2mrp0yh8xmn0wf6zuum0vd5kzmp0qqsxunmjy20mvlq37vnrcshkf6sdrtkfjtjz3anuetmcuv8jswhezgc7hglpn

Or view on Coracle nostr:nevent1qqsxunmjy20mvlq37vnrcshkf6sdrtkfjtjz3anuetmcuv8jswhezgcppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qgsdqa9md83tz5yqnrqjw07hhkpmfjpkuv9hlh5v8yhu8z274w9dv7qnnq0s3

@ 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!

@ 8947a945:9bfcf626

สวัสดีทุกคนบน Nostr ครับ รวมไปถึง watchersและ ผู้ติดตามของผมจาก Deviantart และ platform งานศิลปะอื่นๆนะครับ

ตั้งแต่ต้นปี 2024 ผมใช้ AI เจนรูปงานตัวละครสาวๆจากอนิเมะ และเปิด exclusive content ให้สำหรับผู้ที่ชื่นชอบผลงานของผมเป็นพิเศษ

ผมโพสผลงานผมทั้งหมดไว้ที่เวบ Deviantart และค่อยๆสร้างฐานผู้ติดตามมาเรื่อยๆอย่างค่อยเป็นค่อยไปมาตลอดครับ ทุกอย่างเติบโตไปเรื่อยๆของมัน ส่วนตัวผมมองว่ามันเป็นพิร์ตธุรกิจออนไลน์ ของผมพอร์ตนึงได้เลย

เมื่อวันที่ 16 กย.2024 มีผู้ติดตามคนหนึ่งส่งข้อความส่วนตัวมาหาผม บอกว่าชื่นชอบผลงานของผมมาก ต้องการจะขอซื้อผลงาน แต่ขอซื้อเป็น NFT นะ เสนอราคาซื้อขายต่อชิ้นที่สูงมาก หลังจากนั้นผมกับผู้ซื้อคนนี้พูดคุยกันในเมล์ครับ

นี่คือข้อสรุปสั่นๆจากการต่อรองซื้อขายครับ

(หลังจากนี้ผมขอเรียกผู้ซื้อว่า scammer นะครับ เพราะไพ่มันหงายมาแล้ว ว่าเขาคือมิจฉาชีพ)

• Scammer รายแรก เลือกผลงานที่จะซื้อ เสนอราคาซื้อที่สูงมาก แต่ต้องเป็นเวบไซต์ NFTmarket place ที่เขากำหนดเท่านั้น มันทำงานอยู่บน ERC20 ผมเข้าไปดูเวบไซต์ที่ว่านี้แล้วรู้สึกว่ามันดูแปลกๆครับ คนที่จะลงขายผลงานจะต้องใช้ email ในการสมัครบัญชีซะก่อน ถึงจะผูก wallet อย่างเช่น metamask ได้ เมื่อผูก wallet แล้วไม่สามารถเปลี่ยนได้ด้วย ตอนนั้นผมใช้ wallet ที่ไม่ได้ link กับ HW wallet ไว้ ทดลองสลับ wallet ไปๆมาๆ มันทำไม่ได้ แถมลอง log out แล้ว เลข wallet ก็ยังคาอยู่อันเดิม อันนี้มันดูแปลกๆแล้วหนึ่งอย่าง เวบนี้ค่า ETH ในการ mint 0.15 - 0.2 ETH … ตีเป็นเงินบาทนี่แพงบรรลัยอยู่นะครับ

• Scammer รายแรกพยายามชักจูงผม หว่านล้อมผมว่า แหม เดี๋ยวเขาก็มารับซื้องานผมน่า mint งานเสร็จ รีบบอกเขานะ เดี๋ยวเขารีบกดซื้อเลย พอขายได้กำไร ผมก็ได้ค่า gas คืนได้ แถมยังได้กำไรอีก ไม่มีอะไรต้องเสีนจริงมั้ย แต่มันเป้นความโชคดีครับ เพราะตอนนั้นผมไม่เหลือทุนสำรองที่จะมาซื้อ ETH ได้ ผมเลยต่อรองกับเขาตามนี้ครับ :

• ผมเสนอว่า เอางี้มั้ย ผมส่งผลงานของผมแบบ low resolution ให้ก่อน แลกกับให้เขาช่วยโอน ETH ที่เป็นค่า mint งานมาให้หน่อย พอผมได้ ETH แล้ว ผมจะ upscale งานของผม แล้วเมล์ไปให้ ใจแลกใจกันไปเลย ... เขาไม่เอา

• ผมเสนอให้ไปซื้อที่ร้านค้าออนไลน์ buymeacoffee ของผมมั้ย จ่ายเป็น USD ... เขาไม่เอา
• ผมเสนอให้ซื้อขายผ่าน PPV lightning invoice ที่ผมมีสิทธิ์เข้าถึง เพราะเป็น creator ของ Creatr ... เขาไม่เอา
• ผมยอกเขาว่างั้นก็รอนะ รอเงินเดือนออก เขาบอก ok

สัปดาห์ถัดมา มี scammer คนที่สองติดต่อผมเข้ามา ใช้วิธีการใกล้เคียงกัน แต่ใช้คนละเวบ แถมเสนอราคาซื้อที่สูงกว่าคนแรกมาก เวบที่สองนี้เลวร้ายค่าเวบแรกอีกครับ คือต้องใช้เมล์สมัครบัญชี ไม่สามารถผูก metamask ได้ พอสมัครเสร็จจะได้ wallet เปล่าๆมาหนึ่งอัน ผมต้องโอน ETH เข้าไปใน wallet นั้นก่อน เพื่อเอาไปเป็นค่า mint NFT 0.2 ETH

ผมบอก scammer รายที่สองว่า ต้องรอนะ เพราะตอนนี้กำลังติดต่อซื้อขายอยู่กับผู้ซื้อรายแรกอยู่ ผมกำลังรอเงินเพื่อมาซื้อ ETH เป็นต้นทุนดำเนินงานอยู่ คนคนนี้ขอให้ผมส่งเวบแรกไปให้เขาดูหน่อย หลังจากนั้นไม่นานเขาเตือนผมมาว่าเวบแรกมันคือ scam นะ ไม่สามารถถอนเงินออกมาได้ เขายังส่งรูป cap หน้าจอที่คุยกับผู้เสียหายจากเวบแรกมาให้ดูว่าเจอปัญหาถอนเงินไม่ได้ ไม่พอ เขายังบลัฟ opensea ด้วยว่าลูกค้าขายงานได้ แต่ถอนเงินไม่ได้

Opensea ถอนเงินไม่ได้ ตรงนี้แหละครับคือตัวกระตุกต่อมเอ๊ะของผมดังมาก เพราะ opensea อ่ะ ผู้ใช้ connect wallet เข้ากับ marketplace โดยตรง ซื้อขายกันเกิดขึ้น เงินวิ่งเข้าวิ่งออก wallet ของแต่ละคนโดยตรงเลย opensea เก็บแค่ค่า fee ในการใช้ platform ไม่เก็บเงินลูกค้าไว้ แถมปีนี้ค่า gas fee ก็ถูกกว่า bull run cycle 2020 มาก ตอนนี้ค่า gas fee ประมาณ 0.0001 ETH (แต่มันก็แพงกว่า BTC อยู่ดีอ่ะครับ)

ผมเลยเอาเรื่องนี้ไปปรึกษาพี่บิท แต่แอดมินมาคุยกับผมแทน ทางแอดมินแจ้งว่ายังไม่เคยมีเพื่อนๆมาปรึกษาเรื่องนี้ กรณีที่ผมทักมาถามนี่เป็นรายแรกเลย แต่แอดมินให้ความเห็นไปในทางเดียวกับสมมุติฐานของผมว่าน่าจะ scam ในเวลาเดียวกับผมเอาเรื่องนี้ไปถามในเพจ NFT community คนไทนด้วย ได้รับการ confirm ชัดเจนว่า scam และมีคนไม่น้อยโดนหลอก หลังจากที่ผมรู้ที่มาแล้ว ผมเลยเล่นสงครามปั่นประสาท scammer ทั้งสองคนนี้ครับ เพื่อดูว่าหลอกหลวงมิจฉาชีพจริงมั้ย

โดยวันที่ 30 กย. ผมเลยปั่นประสาน scammer ทั้งสองรายนี้ โดยการ mint ผลงานที่เขาเสนอซื้อนั่นแหละ ขึ้น opensea แล้วส่งข้อความไปบอกว่า

mint ให้แล้วนะ แต่เงินไม่พอจริงๆว่ะโทษที เลย mint ขึ้น opensea แทน พอดีบ้านจน ทำได้แค่นี้ไปถึงแค่ opensea รีบไปซื้อล่ะ มีคนจ้องจะคว้างานผมเยอะอยู่ ผมไม่คิด royalty fee ด้วยนะเฮ้ย เอาไปขายต่อไม่ต้องแบ่งกำไรกับผม

เท่านั้นแหละครับ สงครามจิตวิทยาก็เริ่มขึ้น แต่เขาจนมุม กลืนน้ำลายตัวเอง ช็อตเด็ดคือ

เขา : เนี่ยอุส่ารอ บอกเพื่อนในทีมว่าวันจันทร์ที่ 30 กย. ได้ของแน่ๆ เพื่อนๆในทีมเห็นงานผมแล้วมันสวยจริง เลยใส่เงินเต็มที่ 9.3ETH (+ capture screen ส่งตัวเลขยอดเงินมาให้ดู)ไว้รอโดยเฉพาะเลยนะ ผม : เหรอ ... งั้น ขอดู wallet address ที่มี transaction มาให้ดูหน่อยสิ เขา : 2ETH นี่มัน 5000$ เลยนะ ผม : แล้วไง ขอดู wallet address ที่มีการเอายอดเงิน 9.3ETH มาให้ดูหน่อย ไหนบอกว่าเตรียมเงินไว้มากแล้วนี่ ขอดูหน่อย ว่าใส่ไว้เมื่อไหร่ ... เอามาแค่ adrress นะเว้ย ไม่ต้องทะลึ่งส่ง seed มาให้ เขา : ส่งรูปเดิม 9.3 ETH มาให้ดู ผม : รูป screenshot อ่ะ มันไม่มีความหมายหรอกเว้ย ตัดต่อเอาก็ได้ง่ายจะตาย เอา transaction hash มาดู ไหนว่าเตรียมเงินไว้รอ 9.3ETH แล้วอยากซื้องานผมจนตัวสั่นเลยไม่ใช่เหรอ ถ้าจะส่ง wallet address มาให้ดู หรือจะช่วยส่ง 0.15ETH มาให้ยืม mint งานก่อน แล้วมากดซื้อ 2ETH ไป แล้วผมใช้ 0.15ETH คืนให้ก็ได้ จะซื้อหรือไม่ซื้อเนี่ย เขา : จะเอา address เขาไปทำไม ผม : ตัดจบ รำคาญ ไม่ขายให้ละ เขา : 2ETH = 5000 USD เลยนะ ผม : แล้วไง

ผมเลยเขียนบทความนี้มาเตือนเพื่อนๆพี่ๆทุกคนครับ เผื่อใครกำลังเปิดพอร์ตทำธุรกิจขาย digital art online แล้วจะโชคดี เจอของดีแบบผม

---

ทำไมผมถึงมั่นใจว่ามันคือการหลอกหลวง แล้วคนโกงจะได้อะไร

อันดับแรกไปพิจารณาดู opensea ครับ เป็นเวบ NFTmarketplace ที่ volume การซื้อขายสูงที่สุด เขาไม่เก็บเงินของคนจะซื้อจะขายกันไว้กับตัวเอง เงินวิ่งเข้าวิ่งออก wallet ผู้ซื้อผู้ขายเลย ส่วนทางเวบเก็บค่าธรรมเนียมเท่านั้น แถมค่าธรรมเนียมก็ถูกกว่าเมื่อปี 2020 เยอะ ดังนั้นการที่จะไปลงขายงานบนเวบ NFT อื่นที่ค่า fee สูงกว่ากันเป็นร้อยเท่า ... จะทำไปทำไม

ผมเชื่อว่า scammer โกงเงินเจ้าของผลงานโดยการเล่นกับความโลภและความอ่อนประสบการณ์ของเจ้าของผลงานครับ เมื่อไหร่ก็ตามที่เจ้าของผลงานโอน ETH เข้าไปใน wallet เวบนั้นเมื่อไหร่ หรือเมื่อไหร่ก็ตามที่จ่ายค่า fee ในการ mint งาน เงินเหล่านั้นสิ่งเข้ากระเป๋า scammer ทันที แล้วก็จะมีการเล่นตุกติกต่อแน่นอนครับ เช่นถอนไม่ได้ หรือซื้อไม่ได้ ต้องโอนเงินมาเพิ่มเพื่อปลดล็อค smart contract อะไรก็ว่าไป แล้วคนนิสัยไม่ดีพวกเนี้ย ก็จะเล่นกับความโลภของคน เอาราคาเสนอซื้อที่สูงโคตรๆมาล่อ ... อันนี้ไม่ว่ากัน เพราะบนโลก NFT รูปภาพบางรูปที่ไม่ได้มีความเป็นศิลปะอะไรเลย มันดันขายกันได้ 100 - 150 ETH ศิลปินที่พยายามสร้างตัวก็อาจจะมองว่า ผลงานเรามีคนรับซื้อ 2 - 4 ETH ต่องานมันก็มากพอแล้ว (จริงๆมากเกินจนน่าตกใจด้วยซ้ำครับ)

บนโลกของ BTC ไม่ต้องเชื่อใจกัน โอนเงินไปหากันได้ ปิดสมุดบัญชีได้โดยไม่ต้องเชื่อใจกัน

บบโลกของ ETH "code is law" smart contract มีเขียนอยู่แล้ว ไปอ่าน มันไม่ได้ยากมากในการทำความเข้าใจ ดังนั้น การจะมาเชื่อคำสัญญาจากคนด้วยกัน เป็นอะไรที่ไม่มีเหตุผล

ผมไปเล่าเรื่องเหล่านี้ให้กับ community งานศิลปะ ก็มีทั้งเสียงตอบรับที่ดี และไม่ดีปนกันไป มีบางคนยืนยันเสียงแข็งไปในทำนองว่า ไอ้เรื่องแบบเนี้ยไม่ได้กินเขาหรอก เพราะเขาตั้งใจแน่วแน่ว่างานศิลป์ของเขา เขาไม่เอาเข้ามายุ่งในโลก digital currency เด็ดขาด ซึ่งผมก็เคารพมุมมองเขาครับ แต่มันจะดีกว่ามั้ย ถ้าเราเปิดหูเปิดตาให้ทันเทคโนโลยี โดยเฉพาะเรื่อง digital currency , blockchain โดนโกงทีนึงนี่คือหมดตัวกันง่ายกว่าเงิน fiat อีก

อยากจะมาเล่าให้ฟังครับ และอยากให้ช่วยแชร์ไปให้คนรู้จักด้วย จะได้ระวังตัวกัน

Note

• ภาพประกอบ cyber security ทั้งสองนี่ของผมเองครับ ทำเอง วางขายบน AdobeStock
• อีกบัญชีนึงของผม "HikariHarmony" npub1exdtszhpw3ep643p9z8pahkw8zw00xa9pesf0u4txyyfqvthwapqwh48sw กำลังค่อยๆเอาผลงานจากโลกข้างนอกเข้ามา nostr ครับ ตั้งใจจะมาสร้างงานศิลปะในนี้ เพื่อนๆที่ชอบงาน จะได้ไม่ต้องออกไปหาที่ไหน

ผลงานของผมครับ - Anime girl fanarts : HikariHarmony - HikariHarmony on Nostr - General art : KeshikiRakuen - KeshikiRakuen อาจจะเป็นบัญชี nostr ที่สามของผม ถ้าไหวครับ

@ 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

@ 8947a945:9bfcf626

Hello everyone on Nostr and all my watchersand followersfrom DeviantArt, as well as those from other art platforms

I have been creating and sharing AI-generated anime girl fanart since the beginning of 2024 and have been running member-exclusive content on Patreon.

I also publish showcases of my artworks to Deviantart. I organically build up my audience from time to time. I consider it as one of my online businesses of art. Everything is slowly growing

On September 16, I received a DM from someone expressing interest in purchasing my art in NFT format and offering a very high price for each piece. We later continued the conversation via email.

Here’s a brief overview of what happened

• The first scammer selected the art they wanted to buy and offered a high price for each piece. They provided a URL to an NFT marketplace site running on the Ethereum (ETH) mainnet or ERC20. The site appeared suspicious, requiring email sign-up and linking a MetaMask wallet. However, I couldn't change the wallet address later. The minting gas fees were quite expensive, ranging from 0.15 to 0.2 ETH

• The scammers tried to convince me that the high profits would easily cover the minting gas fees, so I had nothing to lose. Luckily, I didn’t have spare funds to purchase ETH for the gas fees at the time, so I tried negotiating with them as follows:

• I offered to send them a lower-quality version of my art via email in exchange for the minting gas fees, but they refused.

• I offered them the option to pay in USD through Buy Me a Coffee shop here, but they refused.
• I offered them the option to pay via Bitcoin using the Lightning Network invoice , but they refused.
• I asked them to wait until I could secure the funds, and they agreed to wait.

The following week, a second scammer approached me with a similar offer, this time at an even higher price and through a different NFT marketplace website.

This second site also required email registration, and after navigating to the dashboard, it asked for a minting fee of 0.2 ETH. However, the site provided a wallet address for me instead of connecting a MetaMask wallet.

I told the second scammer that I was waiting to make a profit from the first sale, and they asked me to show them the first marketplace. They then warned me that the first site was a scam and even sent screenshots of victims, including one from OpenSea saying that Opensea is not paying.

This raised a red flag, and I began suspecting I might be getting scammed. On OpenSea, funds go directly to users' wallets after transactions, and OpenSea charges a much lower platform fee compared to the previous crypto bull run in 2020. Minting fees on OpenSea are also significantly cheaper, around 0.0001 ETH per transaction.

I also consulted with Thai NFT artist communities and the ex-chairman of the Thai Digital Asset Association. According to them, no one had reported similar issues, but they agreed it seemed like a scam.

After confirming my suspicions with my own research and consulting with the Thai crypto community, I decided to test the scammers’ intentions by doing the following

I minted the artwork they were interested in, set the price they offered, and listed it for sale on OpenSea. I then messaged them, letting them know the art was available and ready to purchase, with no royalty fees if they wanted to resell it.

They became upset and angry, insisting I mint the art on their chosen platform, claiming they had already funded their wallet to support me. When I asked for proof of their wallet address and transactions, they couldn't provide any evidence that they had enough funds.

Here’s what I want to warn all artists in the DeviantArt community or other platforms If you find yourself in a similar situation, be aware that scammers may be targeting you.

---

My Perspective why I Believe This is a Scam and What the Scammers Gain

From my experience with BTC and crypto since 2017, here's why I believe this situation is a scam, and what the scammers aim to achieve

First, looking at OpenSea, the largest NFT marketplace on the ERC20 network, they do not hold users' funds. Instead, funds from transactions go directly to users’ wallets. OpenSea’s platform fees are also much lower now compared to the crypto bull run in 2020. This alone raises suspicion about the legitimacy of other marketplaces requiring significantly higher fees.

I believe the scammers' tactic is to lure artists into paying these exorbitant minting fees, which go directly into the scammers' wallets. They convince the artists by promising to purchase the art at a higher price, making it seem like there's no risk involved. In reality, the artist has already lost by paying the minting fee, and no purchase is ever made.

In the world of Bitcoin (BTC), the principle is "Trust no one" and “Trustless finality of transactions” In other words, transactions are secure and final without needing trust in a third party.

In the world of Ethereum (ETH), the philosophy is "Code is law" where everything is governed by smart contracts deployed on the blockchain. These contracts are transparent, and even basic code can be read and understood. Promises made by people don’t override what the code says.

I also discuss this issue with art communities. Some people have strongly expressed to me that they want nothing to do with crypto as part of their art process. I completely respect that stance.

However, I believe it's wise to keep your eyes open, have some skin in the game, and not fall into scammers’ traps. Understanding the basics of crypto and NFTs can help protect you from these kinds of schemes.

If you found this article helpful, please share it with your fellow artists.

Until next time Take care

Note

• Both cyber security images are mine , I created and approved by AdobeStock to put on sale
• I'm working very hard to bring all my digital arts into Nostr to build my Sats business here to my another npub "HikariHarmony" npub1exdtszhpw3ep643p9z8pahkw8zw00xa9pesf0u4txyyfqvthwapqwh48sw

Link to my full gallery - Anime girl fanarts : HikariHarmony - HikariHarmony on Nostr - General art : KeshikiRakuen

@ e6817453:b0ac3c39

Hey folks, today we're diving into an exciting and emerging topic: personal artificial intelligence (PAI) and its connection to sovereignty, privacy, and ethics. With the rapid advancements in AI, there's a growing interest in the development of personal AI agents that can work on behalf of the user, acting autonomously and providing tailored services. However, as with any new technology, there are several critical factors that shape the future of PAI. Today, we'll explore three key pillars: privacy and ownership, explainability, and bias.

1. Privacy and Ownership: Foundations of Personal AI

At the heart of personal AI, much like self-sovereign identity (SSI), is the concept of ownership. For personal AI to be truly effective and valuable, users must own not only their data but also the computational power that drives these systems. This autonomy is essential for creating systems that respect the user's privacy and operate independently of large corporations.

In this context, privacy is more than just a feature—it's a fundamental right. Users should feel safe discussing sensitive topics with their AI, knowing that their data won’t be repurposed or misused by big tech companies. This level of control and data ownership ensures that users remain the sole beneficiaries of their information and computational resources, making privacy one of the core pillars of PAI.

2. Bias and Fairness: The Ethical Dilemma of LLMs

Most of today’s AI systems, including personal AI, rely heavily on large language models (LLMs). These models are trained on vast datasets that represent snapshots of the internet, but this introduces a critical ethical challenge: bias. The datasets used for training LLMs can be full of biases, misinformation, and viewpoints that may not align with a user’s personal values.

This leads to one of the major issues in AI ethics for personal AI—how do we ensure fairness and minimize bias in these systems? The training data that LLMs use can introduce perspectives that are not only unrepresentative but potentially harmful or unfair. As users of personal AI, we need systems that are free from such biases and can be tailored to our individual needs and ethical frameworks.

Unfortunately, training models that are truly unbiased and fair requires vast computational resources and significant investment. While large tech companies have the financial means to develop and train these models, individual users or smaller organizations typically do not. This limitation means that users often have to rely on pre-trained models, which may not fully align with their personal ethics or preferences. While fine-tuning models with personalized datasets can help, it's not a perfect solution, and bias remains a significant challenge.

3. Explainability: The Need for Transparency

One of the most frustrating aspects of modern AI is the lack of explainability. Many LLMs operate as "black boxes," meaning that while they provide answers or make decisions, it's often unclear how they arrived at those conclusions. For personal AI to be effective and trustworthy, it must be transparent. Users need to understand how the AI processes information, what data it relies on, and the reasoning behind its conclusions.

Explainability becomes even more critical when AI is used for complex decision-making, especially in areas that impact other people. If an AI is making recommendations, judgments, or decisions, it’s crucial for users to be able to trace the reasoning process behind those actions. Without this transparency, users may end up relying on AI systems that provide flawed or biased outcomes, potentially causing harm.

This lack of transparency is a major hurdle for personal AI development. Current LLMs, as mentioned earlier, are often opaque, making it difficult for users to trust their outputs fully. The explainability of AI systems will need to be improved significantly to ensure that personal AI can be trusted for important tasks.

Addressing the Ethical Landscape of Personal AI

As personal AI systems evolve, they will increasingly shape the ethical landscape of AI. We’ve already touched on the three core pillars—privacy and ownership, bias and fairness, and explainability. But there's more to consider, especially when looking at the broader implications of personal AI development.

Most current AI models, particularly those from big tech companies like Facebook, Google, or OpenAI, are closed systems. This means they are aligned with the goals and ethical frameworks of those companies, which may not always serve the best interests of individual users. Open models, such as Meta's LLaMA, offer more flexibility and control, allowing users to customize and refine the AI to better meet their personal needs. However, the challenge remains in training these models without significant financial and technical resources.

There’s also the temptation to use uncensored models that aren’t aligned with the values of large corporations, as they provide more freedom and flexibility. But in reality, models that are entirely unfiltered may introduce harmful or unethical content. It’s often better to work with aligned models that have had some of the more problematic biases removed, even if this limits some aspects of the system’s freedom.

The future of personal AI will undoubtedly involve a deeper exploration of these ethical questions. As AI becomes more integrated into our daily lives, the need for privacy, fairness, and transparency will only grow. And while we may not yet be able to train personal AI models from scratch, we can continue to shape and refine these systems through curated datasets and ongoing development.

Conclusion

In conclusion, personal AI represents an exciting new frontier, but one that must be navigated with care. Privacy, ownership, bias, and explainability are all essential pillars that will define the future of these systems. As we continue to develop personal AI, we must remain vigilant about the ethical challenges they pose, ensuring that they serve the best interests of users while remaining transparent, fair, and aligned with individual values.

If you have any thoughts or questions on this topic, feel free to reach out—I’d love to continue the conversation!

@ e6817453:b0ac3c39

In the modern world of AI, managing vast amounts of data while keeping it relevant and accessible is a significant challenge, mainly when dealing with large language models (LLMs) and vector databases. One approach that has gained prominence in recent years is integrating vector search with metadata, especially in retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) pipelines. Vector search and metadata enable faster and more accurate data retrieval. However, the process of pre- and post-search filtering results plays a crucial role in ensuring data relevance.

The Vector Search and Metadata Challenge

In a typical vector search, you create embeddings from chunks of text, such as a PDF document. These embeddings allow the system to search for similar items and retrieve them based on relevance. The challenge, however, arises when you need to combine vector search results with structured metadata. For example, you may have timestamped text-based content and want to retrieve the most relevant content within a specific date range. This is where metadata becomes critical in refining search results.

Unfortunately, most vector databases treat metadata as a secondary feature, isolating it from the primary vector search process. As a result, handling queries that combine vectors and metadata can become a challenge, particularly when the search needs to account for a dynamic range of filters, such as dates or other structured data.

LibSQL and vector search metadata

LibSQL is a more general-purpose SQLite-based database that adds vector capabilities to regular data. Vectors are presented as blob columns of regular tables. It makes vector embeddings and metadata a first-class citizen that naturally builds deep integration of these data points.

create table if not exists conversation ( id varchar(36) primary key not null, startDate real, endDate real, summary text, vectorSummary F32_BLOB(512) );

It solves the challenge of metadata and vector search and eliminates impedance between vector data and regular structured data points in the same storage.

As you can see, you can access vector-like data and start date in the same query.

select c.id ,c.startDate, c.endDate, c.summary, vector_distance_cos(c.vectorSummary, vector(${vector})) distance from conversation where ${startDate ? `and c.startDate >= ${startDate.getTime()}` : ''} ${endDate ? `and c.endDate <= ${endDate.getTime()}` : ''} ${distance ? `and distance <= ${distance}` : ''} order by distance limit ${top};

vector_distance_cos calculated as distance allows us to make a primitive vector search that does a full scan and calculates distances on rows. We could optimize it with CTE and limit search and distance calculations to a much smaller subset of data.

This approach could be calculation intensive and fail on large amounts of data.

Libsql offers a way more effective vector search based on FlashDiskANN vector indexed.

vector_top_k('idx_conversation_vectorSummary', ${vector} , ${top}) i

vector_top_k is a table function that searches for the top of the newly created vector search index. As you can see, we could use only vector as a function parameter, and other columns could be used outside of the table function. So, to use a vector index together with different columns, we need to apply some strategies.

Now we get a classical problem of integration vector search results with metadata queries.

Post-Filtering: A Common Approach

The most widely adopted method in these pipelines is post-filtering. In this approach, the system first retrieves data based on vector similarities and then applies metadata filters. For example, imagine you’re conducting a vector search to retrieve conversations relevant to a specific question. Still, you also want to ensure these conversations occurred in the past week.

Post-filtering allows the system to retrieve the most relevant vector-based results and subsequently filter out any that don’t meet the metadata criteria, such as date range. This method is efficient when vector similarity is the primary factor driving the search, and metadata is only applied as a secondary filter.

const sqlQuery = ` select c.id ,c.startDate, c.endDate, c.summary, vector_distance_cos(c.vectorSummary, vector(${vector})) distance from vector_top_k('idx_conversation_vectorSummary', ${vector} , ${top}) i inner join conversation c on i.id = c.rowid where ${startDate ? `and c.startDate >= ${startDate.getTime()}` : ''} ${endDate ? `and c.endDate <= ${endDate.getTime()}` : ''} ${distance ? `and distance <= ${distance}` : ''} order by distance limit ${top};

However, there are some limitations. For example, the initial vector search may yield fewer results or omit some relevant data before applying the metadata filter. If the search window is narrow enough, this can lead to complete results.

One working strategy is to make the top value in vector_top_K much bigger. Be careful, though, as the function's default max number of results is around 200 rows.

Pre-Filtering: A More Complex Approach

Pre-filtering is a more intricate approach but can be more effective in some instances. In pre-filtering, metadata is used as the primary filter before vector search takes place. This means that only data that meets the metadata criteria is passed into the vector search process, limiting the scope of the search right from the beginning.

While this approach can significantly reduce the amount of irrelevant data in the final results, it comes with its own challenges. For example, pre-filtering requires a deeper understanding of the data structure and may necessitate denormalizing the data or creating separate pre-filtered tables. This can be resource-intensive and, in some cases, impractical for dynamic metadata like date ranges.

In certain use cases, pre-filtering might outperform post-filtering. For instance, when the metadata (e.g., specific date ranges) is the most important filter, pre-filtering ensures the search is conducted only on the most relevant data.

Pre-filtering with distance-based filtering

So, we are getting back to an old concept. We do prefiltering instead of using a vector index.

WITH FilteredDates AS ( SELECT c.id, c.startDate, c.endDate, c.summary, c.vectorSummary FROM YourTable c WHERE ${startDate ? `AND c.startDate >= ${startDate.getTime()}` : ''} ${endDate ? `AND c.endDate <= ${endDate.getTime()}` : ''} ), DistanceCalculation AS ( SELECT fd.id, fd.startDate, fd.endDate, fd.summary, fd.vectorSummary, vector_distance_cos(fd.vectorSummary, vector(${vector})) AS distance FROM FilteredDates fd ) SELECT dc.id, dc.startDate, dc.endDate, dc.summary, dc.distance FROM DistanceCalculation dc WHERE 1=1 ${distance ? `AND dc.distance <= ${distance}` : ''} ORDER BY dc.distance LIMIT ${top};

It makes sense if the filter produces small data and distance calculation happens on the smaller data set.

As a pro of this approach, you have full control over the data and get all results without omitting some typical values for extensive index searches.

Choosing Between Pre and Post-Filtering

Both pre-filtering and post-filtering have their advantages and disadvantages. Post-filtering is more accessible to implement, especially when vector similarity is the primary search factor, but it can lead to incomplete results. Pre-filtering, on the other hand, can yield more accurate results but requires more complex data handling and optimization.

In practice, many systems combine both strategies, depending on the query. For example, they might start with a broad pre-filtering based on metadata (like date ranges) and then apply a more targeted vector search with post-filtering to refine the results further.

Conclusion

Vector search with metadata filtering offers a powerful approach for handling large-scale data retrieval in LLMs and RAG pipelines. Whether you choose pre-filtering or post-filtering—or a combination of both—depends on your application's specific requirements. As vector databases continue to evolve, future innovations that combine these two approaches more seamlessly will help improve data relevance and retrieval efficiency further.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Nostr: a quick introduction, attempt #2

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

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

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

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

@ 8671a6e5:f88194d1

I’ll have to use my best Tone Vays impersonation voice for saying this, “..but actually “Value for Value, is à scàm”.

We hear a lot about Value4Value in bitcoin. People giving some content, good or service, and then getting their proverbial hat out, to collect whatever it’s deemed worth to the audience.

Some examples:

• Jimmy makes a nice website for the community, and gets a donation from whoever likes the work he put in.

• Mathilda makes a nice series of travel videos about bitcoin places, and does a little dance, and people can donate sats.

• Jody makes a podcast about bitcoin philosophy and the local community and people can donate for every episode.

That’s all very nice in theory.

I keep thinking about a documentary maker who told his audience he slept on a kitchen table because he had no money for a bed. And he would stop doing things V4V because of it. I can understand that sentiment, and I fear he’s not alone in that feeling.

One of the other artists in attendance told me “then he should work harder and make better things or get some sponsors”. Which contradicts the V4V model, and is rather disparaging towards that filmmaker.

In the world of "Value for Value" (V4V), the system is rigged from the get-go because of dodgy fundamentals based on goodwill. It borders on a scam, be it a voluntary run scam from both sides.

Unfortunately, there are very, very low percentages of people (let alone bitcoiners) that have goodwill. At least in Europe (I don’t know how this exactly works out in the US or Asia).

A personal friend of mine ran a history podcast for many years, and got more kudos, and gifts than I ever had in bitcoin.

And no, it’s not about the money, the income. You can call me a sour person all you want for saying this. It’s mainly about feeling a slight appreciation for what you do

On top of that, the subject itself is a bit of a “no-no” to talk about. If you do, you’re often branded a complainer, a wanker, a negative Nancy. Well… that’s one of the signs you participate in a sort of scam. When you point out holes in the scheme, you’re branded a complainer or a negativist; you often also get ousted.

That’s the way we’re all supposed to go thumbs-up on everything while sleeping on a kitchen table, while doing “good for the community.

To clarify (some close to the reality numbers):

If you put in ± 10 hours in an episode in total in a history podcast, you got rewarded about 50€ (usually from people appreciating the story and effort, relating to the part in history).

If you put in ± 6 hours in two episodes in total (less research than a history podcast), in bitcoin in Belgium, you get rewarded with 2 likes (one from myself and one from another bitcoiner), and no re-shares and about 2000 sats per episode on a good day, and 0 on a bad day.

unknown bitcoin artist holding an orange cup New people in bitcoin who fall for this need to be aware of the loss of time they'll face (which some can stomach, others won't...). Maybe this blog post can help prevent people from turning sour or becoming blatantly against the community.

People who have a good "ethics" stance in bitcoin will probably start to do things in V4V, hoping they get a good return for their work. You dive into this for the love of the community, for proof-of-work in Bitcoin, and maybe to carve out a name for yourself, or so you believe. But over time, this passion isn't enough to outweigh the hours, effort, and the relentless critique from the community's armchair philosophers – and trust me, there's no shortage of those.

Soon, however, such goodwill people will start to be disgruntled or at least less happy about the V4V model's returns. Let's face it, Value4Value was a marketing term invented by Adam Curry, along with Dave Jones, to launch a concept as an anti-movement against Apple's hegemony. It was meant to preserve free speech (that, it succeeded in; they've put the "free" in free speech). For themselves, because they had the first-mover advantage, it worked out fine. And until like the end of 2015, it worked very well.

However, I never heard of anyone after the year 2015 who lived off a value4value scheme having enough income and being happy about the exchange of goods and services...

Many podcasters resolve this by asking a fee for their "full" private and ad-free stream. Others just quit or go full paid service. It's all good, as long as you pick your poison and don't rely too much on appreciation in this community.

I'll go even further; in my opinion, the value proposition of Value 4 Value has a negative influence on bitcoin adoption. Because so many people will start under this model, hoping to make a living or at least break even on their hobby project, they'll soon turn sour.

This negative impact is due to an over-supply of content, or the implication that you have to get sponsors. I regularly got that message from people like, “Why don’t you get a sponsor?” They act like I don’t know that working for free isn't paying the bills. I know. Trust me on that. I work for free out of passion and genuine interest. If that gets punished, then there's something really wrong with this community.

On sponsors: the problem with this approach is that you can't call your own sponsor's product "a toy-grade piece of unreliable garbage" on-air if you take their money. And if you do, it's probably not doing wonders for your income.

Not only are you sacrificing your independence, but you're also stripping away the very essence of why you started the podcast in the first place. On that subject, I can't bring myself to read ads about dog food or some insurance company's new scammy tactics to "protect" people. If I go that route, I would whore myself out to the extent that I might as well start a "banging hot crypto of the week" podcast and shill any NFT, meme-coin, and garbage scam token out there if they pay me. That's also not the "value" people tune in for, I guess (although some Belgians still make a career out of doing so).

Broken value

There's an element of guaranteed discontent in Value4Value that's profoundly broken.

So here's my breakdown:

In Value4Value, you have at least two elements in the equation: the maker of goods/services/content and the receiver of such content, who also turns into the giver.

The first one is the first giver, the second one is the second giver in the exchange.

The first giver, often a content creator, pours their heart, time, and energy into something, expecting nothing in return but hoping for recognition or a fair exchange. Instead, they're often left with scraps while others freely take, use, and even profit from their work without so much as a nod. Giving credit is passé as well... even people who blatantly steal stuff from others smile in your face and go on with their "business". Result: the first giver feels scammed out of their time.

Then there's the second giver, the one who actually decides to pay up and not be a bitch. They give away their hard-earned fiat or bitcoin for something they could've gotten for "free", hoping to keep the cycle of generosity alive. But as reality sets in, they realize they're the only ones p(l)aying this game, leaving them feeling cheated, especially when they hear about others enjoying the same benefits without contributing a sat. Result: the second giver feels scammed out of their money, but at least they got something out of it.

Both ends

In essence, V4V is a scam on both ends.

There's the dishonest way where you might earn a bit, but at the cost of your integrity (for example, praising a rotten hardware wallet like it's a revolutionary invention while collecting the kickbacks). Or there's the so-called honorable path where you gain nothing but scorn and perhaps a pat on the back before someone else capitalizes on your efforts. (Not talking about the people here even ridiculing you for doing something for free).

This leaves a bitter feeling for everyone involved. Those who dare to charge for their services face another kind of scam - the guilt of appearing to be in it for the money while potentially exploiting the naive under the guise of community spirit. And those who speak up about it, like that documentary maker and some artists alike, are all getting brutally laughed at. Because it's a taboo subject to "complain" about income.

But that's not the issue here; I never started a podcast to earn a living or make money. I would be mad doing so and thinking so, certainly not in this market and community. The deeper issue is less trivial, however: when value for value is not recognized, and there are hardly any widespread tools to really capitalize on it, then it's a negative point for bitcoin adoption.

(Just an example) People who run the podcast feed on their own website steal potential income from me by circumventing a good podcast 2.0 platform like the Fountain app. It's probably well meant, to spread the word, but in general, it's profiting from content in the most lazy way possible.

You can prevent that from happening by making the feed private, but then you need to pay a service fee, which you can't pay because 90% of the bitcoiners are too cheap to pay for it. So you pay it out of your own pocket, only to get the critique about your podcast being "behind a paywall". So... you either let yourself be ripped off even further and earn less every episode... Or you just give up, take everything offline, and go work at McDonald's (at least they pay you by the hour, and then you're in the fiat scam and you know it!).

The same goes for artists who get their designs, logos, and artwork copied or see some other artwork that's "heavily inspired" by their own creation popping up somewhere else.

And don't get me started on people copying tweets, ideas, parts of a blog post, and re-telling it to pass it off as their own idea in a book or their own content channels (even some pretty famous people in the bitcoin space do this on a regular basis; you have to get your content somewhere, I guess, after years of getting free tickets to any conference and enjoying life in our little bubble of misfits and backroom deals).

We route around problems

One of Bitcoin's amazing properties is that it isn't bringing you "yield" on itself. One bitcoin doesn't generate more bitcoin by printing more bitcoin, like in fiat. You can't just sit on your ass and get more diluted Mickey Mouse money.

So if you want to be active in the space, you have to either sell yourself (your soul maybe included), or sell a product you have total control over (your own brand of orange-themed cuddly toys for grown-up men, hoodies, umbrellas, paintings with the same themes everyone else does, 3D printed action figures of yourself, or whatever you can come up with that's not too embarrassing to show up with at a conference).

It's in fact no laughing matter. In bitcoin, we're used to routing around problems.

According to me, the broader adoption of bitcoin and its ethos (mind my words here) cannot grow and be successful if we don't solve this problem. The majority of content creators aren't the "big names" with their big middlemen sponsors (even a few got sponsored by FTX and Celsius Network back in the day, and currently a lot of them eat out the hands of some hardware wallet manufacturers and exchanges). These smaller names and new people, make content and art or the likes in order to grow their audience, have fun, learn and make a bit of money on the side if possible. Some of them even want to make a real career out of it. That's all fine.

As a community we need to learn to support people in a decent way.

Some initiatives I've seen were also utterly flawed, so we need to do better. The idea of a "bitcoin influencer" team, for example, was, as far as I could tell, an utter failure from the start, certainly if I saw some people in that group at a conference dry-humping a potential beneficiary (or the other way around; we all route around problems in our own special way :), then I somehow start to question their motives. But it might also be my imagination; the end result is the same; everyone still sleeps on their proverbial kitchen table while delivering free stuff.

We often claim that the fiat world drains us of our energy, time, and effort in order to reward us in 'melting' fiat currency. Well... at least they got a melting ice cube instead of the proverbial pat on the back on the black hoodie you wear in support of someone else's project.

If bitcoin ground-level pleb things, run by real people, need to be successful to grow bitcoin awareness, then we need to find a better solution for this problem. Otherwise, many people will be utterly turned off by the promising "peer-to-peer" world they've stepped into. It not only turns them into the fiat-slave mindset again but also discourages people from building and doing cool things. No one likes to be ripped off. No one likes to work for free. No one likes to be spit in the face and get dirty looks or eye-rolls when you enter the room.

And no, don’t invent things just for me; I’m fine.

I see donations and likes/shares as a real-life measuring stick for the quality and reach of my work. With an average of 3 retweets and shares per episode, it's a failure. And with 13,420 sats over 7 episodes, it's not a big deal, but it's something. Many people in the space would be happy to get such a gift for 18 hours of work.1

Like the famous monologue in the movie Trainspotting, we could also ask ourselves collectively, ... Choose Bitcoin. Choose Value4Value. Choose a scam. Choose life... which scam do you prefer?

Will you choose working for free for bitcoin? Or choose life?

thank you for reading,

by … Kim DV for @AVBpodcast :

no donation button here for obvious reasons

1 sarcasm, a beggar near the Brussels Central station makes more money just sitting on his ass with a Mc Donald’s cup in hand telling people “ s'il te plaît “I’ll have to use my best Tone Vays impersonation voice for saying this, “..but actually “Value for Value, is à scàm”.

We hear a lot about Value4Value in bitcoin. People giving some content, good or service, and then getting their proverbial hat out, to collect whatever it’s deemed worth to the audience.\ \ Some examples:\ \ - Jimmy makes a nice website for the community, and gets a donation from whoever likes the work he put in.\ \ - Mathilda makes a nice series of travel videos about bitcoin places, and does a little dance, and people can donate sats.\ \ - Jody makes a podcast about bitcoin philosophy and the local community and people can donate for every episode.

That’s all very nice in theory.\ \ I keep thinking about a documentary maker who told his audience he slept on a kitchen table because he had no money for a bed. And he would stop doing things V4V because of it. I can understand that sentiment, and I fear he’s not alone in that feeling.\ \ One of the other artists in attendance told me “then he should work harder and make better things or get some sponsors”. Which contradicts the V4V model, and is rather disparaging towards that filmmaker.\ \ In the world of "Value for Value" (V4V), the system is rigged from the get-go because of dodgy fundamentals based on goodwill. It borders on a scam, be it a voluntary run scam from both sides.\ \ Unfortunately, there are very, very low percentages of people (let alone bitcoiners) that have goodwill. At least in Europe (I don’t know how this exactly works out in the US or Asia).\ \ A personal friend of mine ran a history podcast for many years, and got more kudos, and gifts than I ever had in bitcoin.\ \ And no, it’s not about the money, the income. You can call me a sour person all you want for saying this. It’s mainly about feeling a slight appreciation for what you do\ \ On top of that, the subject itself is a bit of a “no-no” to talk about. If you do, you’re often branded a complainer, a wanker, a negative Nancy. Well… that’s one of the signs you participate in a sort of scam. When you point out holes in the scheme, you’re branded a complainer or a negativist; you often also get ousted.

That’s the way we’re all supposed to go thumbs-up on everything while sleeping on a kitchen table, while doing “good for the community.\ \ To clarify (some close to the reality numbers):\ \ If you put in ± 10 hours in an episode in total in a history podcast, you got rewarded about 50€ (usually from people appreciating the story and effort, relating to the part in history).\ \ If you put in ± 6 hours in two episodes in total (less research than a history podcast), in bitcoin in Belgium, you get rewarded with 2 likes (one from myself and one from another bitcoiner), and no re-shares and about 2000 sats per episode on a good day, and 0 on a bad day.

unknown bitcoin artist holding an orange cup

New people in bitcoin who fall for this need to be aware of the loss of time they'll face (which some can stomach, others won't...). Maybe this blog post can help prevent people from turning sour or becoming blatantly against the community.

People who have a good "ethics" stance in bitcoin will probably start to do things in V4V, hoping they get a good return for their work. You dive into this for the love of the community, for proof-of-work in Bitcoin, and maybe to carve out a name for yourself, or so you believe. But over time, this passion isn't enough to outweigh the hours, effort, and the relentless critique from the community's armchair philosophers – and trust me, there's no shortage of those.

Soon, however, such goodwill people will start to be disgruntled or at least less happy about the V4V model's returns. Let's face it, Value4Value was a marketing term invented by Adam Curry, along with Dave Jones, to launch a concept as an anti-movement against Apple's hegemony.\ It was meant to preserve free speech (that, it succeeded in; they've put the "free" in free speech).\ For themselves, because they had the first-mover advantage, it worked out fine. And until like the end of 2015, it worked very well.\ \ However, I never heard of anyone after the year 2015 who lived off a value4value scheme having enough income and being happy about the exchange of goods and services...\ \ Many podcasters resolve this by asking a fee for their "full" private and ad-free stream. Others just quit or go full paid service. It's all good, as long as you pick your poison and don't rely too much on appreciation in this community.

I'll go even further; in my opinion, the value proposition of Value 4 Value has a negative influence on bitcoin adoption. Because so many people will start under this model, hoping to make a living or at least break even on their hobby project, they'll soon turn sour.\ \ This negative impact is due to an over-supply of content, or the implication that you have to get sponsors. I regularly got that message from people like,\ “Why don’t you get a sponsor?”\ They act like I don’t know that working for free isn't paying the bills. I know. Trust me on that. I work for free out of passion and genuine interest. If that gets punished, then there's something really wrong with this community.\ \ On sponsors: the problem with this approach is that you can't call your own sponsor's product "a toy-grade piece of unreliable garbage" on-air if you take their money. And if you do, it's probably not doing wonders for your income.\ \ Not only are you sacrificing your independence, but you're also stripping away the very essence of why you started the podcast in the first place. On that subject, I can't bring myself to read ads about dog food or some insurance company's new scammy tactics to "protect" people.\ If I go that route, I would whore myself out to the extent that I might as well start a "banging hot crypto of the week" podcast and shill any NFT, meme-coin, and garbage scam token out there if they pay me.\ That's also not the "value" people tune in for, I guess (although some Belgians still make a career out of doing so).

Broken value

There's an element of guaranteed discontent in Value4Value that's profoundly broken.

So here's my breakdown:

In Value4Value, you have at least two elements in the equation: the maker of goods/services/content and the receiver of such content, who also turns into the giver.\ \ The first one is the first giver, the second one is the second giver in the exchange.\ \ The first giver, often a content creator, pours their heart, time, and energy into something, expecting nothing in return but hoping for recognition or a fair exchange. Instead, they're often left with scraps while others freely take, use, and even profit from their work without so much as a nod. Giving credit is passé as well... even people who blatantly steal stuff from others smile in your face and go on with their "business". Result: the first giver feels scammed out of their time.

Then there's the second giver, the one who actually decides to pay up and not be a bitch.\ They give away their hard-earned fiat or bitcoin for something they could've gotten for "free", hoping to keep the cycle of generosity alive.\ But as reality sets in, they realize they're the only ones p(l)aying this game, leaving them feeling cheated, especially when they hear about others enjoying the same benefits without contributing a sat.\ Result: the second giver feels scammed out of their money, but at least they got something out of it.

Both ends

In essence, V4V is a scam on both ends.

There's the dishonest way where you might earn a bit, but at the cost of your integrity (for example, praising a rotten hardware wallet like it's a revolutionary invention while collecting the kickbacks).\ Or there's the so-called honorable path where you gain nothing but scorn and perhaps a pat on the back before someone else capitalizes on your efforts. (Not talking about the people here even ridiculing you for doing something for free).

This leaves a bitter feeling for everyone involved. Those who dare to charge for their services face another kind of scam - the guilt of appearing to be in it for the money while potentially exploiting the naive under the guise of community spirit.\ And those who speak up about it, like that documentary maker and some artists alike, are all getting brutally laughed at. Because it's a taboo subject to "complain" about income.\ \ But that's not the issue here; I never started a podcast to earn a living or make money. I would be mad doing so and thinking so, certainly not in this market and community. The deeper issue is less trivial, however: when value for value is not recognized, and there are hardly any widespread tools to really capitalize on it, then it's a negative point for bitcoin adoption.

(Just an example) People who run the podcast feed on their own website steal potential income from me by circumventing a good podcast 2.0 platform like the Fountain app. It's probably well meant, to spread the word, but in general, it's profiting from content in the most lazy way possible.\ \ You can prevent that from happening by making the feed private, but then you need to pay a service fee, which you can't pay because 90% of the bitcoiners are too cheap to pay for it. So you pay it out of your own pocket, only to get the critique about your podcast being "behind a paywall".\ So... you either let yourself be ripped off even further and earn less every episode...\ Or you just give up, take everything offline, and go work at McDonald's (at least they pay you by the hour, and then you're in the fiat scam and you know it!).\ \ The same goes for artists who get their designs, logos, and artwork copied or see some other artwork that's "heavily inspired" by their own creation popping up somewhere else.\ \ And don't get me started on people copying tweets, ideas, parts of a blog post, and re-telling it to pass it off as their own idea in a book or their own content channels (even some pretty famous people in the bitcoin space do this on a regular basis; you have to get your content somewhere, I guess, after years of getting free tickets to any conference and enjoying life in our little bubble of misfits and backroom deals).

\ We route around problems\ \ One of Bitcoin's amazing properties is that it isn't bringing you "yield" on itself. One bitcoin doesn't generate more bitcoin by printing more bitcoin, like in fiat. You can't just sit on your ass and get more diluted Mickey Mouse money.

So if you want to be active in the space, you have to either sell yourself (your soul maybe included), or sell a product you have total control over (your own brand of orange-themed cuddly toys for grown-up men, hoodies, umbrellas, paintings with the same themes everyone else does, 3D printed action figures of yourself, or whatever you can come up with that's not too embarrassing to show up with at a conference).

It's in fact no laughing matter.\ In bitcoin, we're used to routing around problems.\ \ According to me, the broader adoption of bitcoin and its ethos (mind my words here) cannot grow and be successful if we don't solve this problem.\ The majority of content creators aren't the "big names" with their big middlemen sponsors (even a few got sponsored by FTX and Celsius Network back in the day, and currently a lot of them eat out the hands of some hardware wallet manufacturers and exchanges).\ These smaller names and new people, make content and art or the likes in order to grow their audience, have fun, learn and make a bit of money on the side if possible. Some of them even want to make a real career out of it. That's all fine.\ \ As a community we need to learn to support people in a decent way.\ \ Some initiatives I've seen were also utterly flawed, so we need to do better. The idea of a "bitcoin influencer" team, for example, was, as far as I could tell, an utter failure from the start, certainly if I saw some people in that group at a conference dry-humping a potential beneficiary (or the other way around; we all route around problems in our own special way :), then I somehow start to question their motives.\ But it might also be my imagination; the end result is the same; everyone still sleeps on their proverbial kitchen table while delivering free stuff.\ \ We often claim that the fiat world drains us of our energy, time, and effort in order to reward us in 'melting' fiat currency. Well... at least they got a melting ice cube instead of the proverbial pat on the back on the black hoodie you wear in support of someone else's project.\ \ If bitcoin ground-level pleb things, run by real people, need to be successful to grow bitcoin awareness, then we need to find a better solution for this problem. Otherwise, many people will be utterly turned off by the promising "peer-to-peer" world they've stepped into. It not only turns them into the fiat-slave mindset again but also discourages people from building and doing cool things. No one likes to be ripped off. No one likes to work for free. No one likes to be spit in the face and get dirty looks or eye-rolls when you enter the room.\ \ And no, don’t invent things just for me; I’m fine.\ \ I see donations and likes/shares as a real-life measuring stick for the quality and reach of my work.\ With an average of 3 retweets and shares per episode, it's a failure. And with 13,420 sats over 7 episodes, it's not a big deal, but it's something. Many people in the space would be happy to get such a gift for 18 hours of work.1

\ Like the famous monologue in the movie Trainspotting, we could also ask ourselves collectively, ...\ Choose Bitcoin.\ Choose Value4Value.\ Choose a scam.\ Choose life... which scam do you prefer?\ \ Will you choose working for free for bitcoin?\ Or choose life?

thank you for reading,

\ by … Kim DV for @AVBpodcast :

no donation button here for obvious reasons

1

sarcasm, a beggar near the Brussels Central station makes more money just sitting on his ass with a Mc Donald’s cup in hand telling people “ s'il te plaît “

@ da18e986:3a0d9851

After months of development I am excited to officially announce the first version of DVMDash (v0.1). DVMDash is a monitoring and debugging tool for all Data Vending Machine (DVM) activity on Nostr. The website is live at https://dvmdash.live and the code is available on Github.

Data Vending Machines (NIP-90) offload computationally expensive tasks from relays and clients in a decentralized, free-market manner. They are especially useful for AI tools, algorithmic processing of user’s feeds, and many other use cases.

The long term goal of DVMDash is to become 1) a place to easily see what’s happening in the DVM ecosystem with metrics and graphs, and 2) provide real-time tools to help developers monitor, debug, and improve their DVMs.

DVMDash aims to enable users to answer these types of questions at a glance: * What’s the most popular DVM right now? * How much money is being paid to image generation DVMs? * Is any DVM down at the moment? When was the last time that DVM completed a task? * Have any DVMs failed to deliver after accepting payment? Did they refund that payment? * How long does it take this DVM to respond? * For task X, what’s the average amount of time it takes for a DVM to complete the task? * … and more

For developers working with DVMs there is now a visual, graph based tool that shows DVM-chain activity. DVMs have already started calling other DVMs to assist with work. Soon, we will have humans in the loop monitoring DVM activity, or completing tasks themselves. The activity trace of which DVM is being called as part of a sub-task from another DVM will become complicated, especially because these decisions will be made at run-time and are not known ahead of time. Building a tool to help users and developers understand where a DVM is in this activity trace, whether it’s gotten stuck or is just taking a long time, will be invaluable. For now, the website only shows 1 step of a dvm chain from a user's request.

One of the main designs for the site is that it is highly clickable, meaning whenever you see a DVM, Kind, User, or Event ID, you can click it and open that up in a new page to inspect it.

Another aspect of this website is that it should be fast. If you submit a DVM request, you should see it in DVMDash within seconds, as well as events from DVMs interacting with your request. I have attempted to obtain DVM events from relays as quickly as possible and compute metrics over them within seconds.

This project makes use of a nosql database and graph database, currently set to use mongo db and neo4j, for which there are free, community versions that can be run locally.

Finally, I’m grateful to nostr:npub10pensatlcfwktnvjjw2dtem38n6rvw8g6fv73h84cuacxn4c28eqyfn34f for supporting this project.

Features in v0.1:

Global Network Metrics:

This page shows the following metrics: - DVM Requests: Number of unencrypted DVM requests (kind 5000-5999) - DVM Results: Number of unencrypted DVM results (kind 6000-6999) - DVM Request Kinds Seen: Number of unique kinds in the Kind range 5000-5999 (except for known non-DVM kinds 5666 and 5969) - DVM Result Kinds Seen: Number of unique kinds in the Kind range 6000-6999 (except for known non-DVM kinds 6666 and 6969) - DVM Pub Keys Seen: Number of unique pub keys that have written a kind 6000-6999 (except for known non-DVM kinds) or have published a kind 31990 event that specifies a ‘k’ tag value between 5000-5999 - DVM Profiles (NIP-89) Seen: Number of 31990 that have a ‘k’ tag value for kind 5000-5999 - Most Popular DVM: The DVM that has produced the most result events (kind 6000-6999) - Most Popular Kind: The Kind in range 5000-5999 that has the most requests by users. - 24 hr DVM Requests: Number of kind 5000-5999 events created in the last 24 hrs - 24 hr DVM Results: Number of kind 6000-6999 events created in the last 24 hours - 1 week DVM Requests: Number of kind 5000-5999 events created in the last week - 1 week DVM Results: Number of kind 6000-6999 events created in the last week - Unique Users of DVMs: Number of unique pubkeys of kind 5000-5999 events - Total Sats Paid to DVMs: - This is an estimate. - This value is likely a lower bound as it does not take into consideration subscriptions paid to DVMs - This is calculated by counting the values of all invoices where: - A DVM published a kind 7000 event requesting payment and containing an invoice - The DVM later provided a DVM Result for the same job for which it requested payment. - The assumption is that the invoice was paid, otherwise the DVM would not have done the work - Note that because there are multiple ways to pay a DVM such as lightning invoices, ecash, and subscriptions, there is no guaranteed way to know whether a DVM has been paid. Additionally, there is no way to know that a DVM completed the job because some DVMs may not publish a final result event and instead send the user a DM or take some other kind of action.

Recent Requests:

This page shows the most recent 3 events per kind, sorted by created date. You should always be able to find the last 3 events here of all DVM kinds.

DVM Browser:

This page will either show a profile of a specific DVM, or when no DVM is given in the url, it will show a table of all DVMs with some high level stats. Users can click on a DVM in the table to load the DVM specific page.

Kind Browser:

This page will either show data on a specific kind including all DVMs that have performed jobs of that kind, or when no kind is given, it will show a table summarizing activity across all Kinds.

Debug:

This page shows the graph based visualization of all events, users, and DVMs involved in a single job as well as a table of all events in order from oldest to newest. When no event is given, this page shows the 200 most recent events where the user can click on an event in order to debug that job. The graph-based visualization allows the user to zoom in and out and move around the graph, as well as double click on any node in the graph (except invoices) to open up that event, user, or dvm in a new page.

Playground:

This page is currently under development and may not work at the moment. If it does work, in the current state you can login with NIP-07 extension and broadcast a 5050 event with some text and then the page will show you events from DVMs. This page will be used to interact with DVMs live. A current good alternative to this feature, for some but not all kinds, is https://vendata.io/.

Looking to the Future

I originally built DVMDash out of Fear-of-Missing-Out (FOMO); I wanted to make AI systems that were comprised of DVMs but my day job was taking up a lot of my time. I needed to know when someone was performing a new task or launching a new AI or Nostr tool!

I have a long list of DVMs and Agents I hope to build and I needed DVMDash to help me do it; I hope it helps you achieve your goals with Nostr, DVMs, and even AI. To this end, I wish for this tool to be useful to others, so if you would like a feature, please submit a git issue here or note me on Nostr!

Immediate Next Steps:

• Refactoring code and removing code that is no longer used
• Improve documentation to run the project locally
• Adding a metric for number of encrypted requests
• Adding a metric for number of encrypted results

Long Term Goals:

• Add more metrics based on community feedback
• Add plots showing metrics over time
• Add support for showing a multi-dvm chain in the graph based visualizer
• Add a real-time mode where the pages will auto update (currently the user must refresh the page)
• ... Add support for user requested features!

Acknowledgements

There are some fantastic people working in the DVM space right now. Thank you to nostr:npub1drvpzev3syqt0kjrls50050uzf25gehpz9vgdw08hvex7e0vgfeq0eseet for making python bindings for nostr_sdk and for the recent asyncio upgrades! Thank you to nostr:npub1nxa4tywfz9nqp7z9zp7nr7d4nchhclsf58lcqt5y782rmf2hefjquaa6q8 for answering lots of questions about DVMs and for making the nostrdvm library. Thank you to nostr:npub1l2vyh47mk2p0qlsku7hg0vn29faehy9hy34ygaclpn66ukqp3afqutajft for making the original DVM NIP and vendata.io which I use all the time for testing!

P.S. I rushed to get this out in time for Nostriga 2024; code refactoring will be coming :)

@ 3c984938:2ec11289

Bienvenide a Nostr!

Introduccíon

Es tu primera vez aqui en Nostr? Bienvenides! Nostr es un acrónimo raro para "Notes and Other Stuff Transmitted by Relays" on un solo objetivo; resistirse a la censura. Una alternativa a las redes sociales tradicionales, comunicaciónes, blogging, streaming, podcasting, y feventualmente el correo electronico (en fase de desarrollo) con características descentralizadas que te capacita, usario. Jamas seras molestado por un anuncio, capturado por una entidad centralizada o algoritmo que te monetiza.

Permítame ser su anfitrión! Soy Onigiri! Yo estoy explorando el mundo de Nostr, un protocolo de comunicacíon decentralizada. Yo escribo sobre las herramientas y los desarolladores increíbles de Nostr que dan vida a esta reino.

Bienvenides a Nostr Wonderland

Estas a punto de entrar a un otro mundo digtal que te hará explotar tu mente de todas las aplicaciones descentralizadas, clientes, sitios que puedes utilizar. Nunca volverás a ver a las comunicaciones ni a las redes sociales de la mesma manera. Todo gracias al carácter criptográfico de nostr, inpirado por la tecnología "blockchain". Cada usario, cuando crean una cuenta en Nostr, recibe un par de llaves: una privada y una publico. Estos son las llaves de tu propio reino. Lo que escribes, cantes, grabes, lo que creas - todo te pertenece.

Unos llaves de Oro y Plata

Mi amigo y yo llamamos a esto "identidad mediante cifrado" porque tu identidad es cifrado. Tu puedes compartir tu llave de plata "npub" a otros usarios para conectar y seguir. Utiliza tu llave de oro "nsec" para accedar a tu cuenta y exponerte a muchas aplicaciones. Mantenga la llave a buen recaudo en todo momento. Ya no hay razor para estar enjaulado por los terminos de plataformas sociales nunca más.

Onigirl npub18jvyjwpmm65g8v9azmlvu8knd5m7xlxau08y8vt75n53jtkpz2ys6mqqu3

Todavia No tienes un cliente? Seleccione la mejor opción.

Encuentra la aplicación adecuada para ti! Utilice su clave de oro "nsec" para acceder a estas herramientas maravillosas. También puedes visit a esta pagina a ver a todas las aplicaciones. Antes de pegar tu llave de oro en muchas aplicaciones, considera un "signer" (firmante) para los sitios web 3. Por favor, mire la siguiente imagen para más detalles. Consulte también la leyenda.

Get a Signer extension via chrome webstore

Un firmante (o "signer" en inglés) es una extensión del navegador web. Nos2x and NostrConnect son extensiónes ampliamente aceptado para aceder a Nostr. Esto simplifica el proceso de aceder a sitios "web 3". En lugar de copiar y pegar la clave oro "nsec" cada vez, la mantienes guardado en la extensión y le des permiso para aceder a Nostr.

👉⚡⚡Obtén una billetera Bitcoin lightning para enviar/recibir Zaps⚡⚡ (Esto es opcional)

Aqui en Nostr, utilizamos la red Lightning de Bitcoin (L2). Nesitaras una cartera lightning para enviar y recibir Satoshis, la denominacion mas chiquita de un Bitcoin. (0.000000001 BTC) Los "zaps" son un tipo de micropago en Nostr. Si te gusta el contenido de un usario, es norma dejarle una propina en la forma de un ¨zap". Por ejemplo, si te gusta este contenido, tu me puedes hacer "zap" con Satoshis para recompensar mi trabajo. Pero apenas llegaste, as que todavia no tienes una cartera. No se preocupe, puedo ayudar en eso!

"Stacker.News" es una plataforma donde los usarios pueden ganar SATS por publicar articulos y interactuar con otros.

Stacker.News es el lugar mas facil para recibir una direccion de cartera Bitcoin Lightning.

1. Acedese con su extensión firmante "signer" - Nos2x or NostrConnect - hace click en tu perfil, un codigo de letras y numeros en la mano superior derecha. Veás algo como esto
2. Haga clic en "edit" y elija un nombre que te guste. Se puede cambiar si deseas en el futuro.
3. Haga clic en "save"
4. Crea una biografía y la comunidad SN son muy acogedora. Te mandarán satoshi para darte la bienvenida.
5. Tu nueva direccion de cartera Bitcoin Lightning aparecerá asi ^^No le mandas "zaps" a esta direccion; es puramente con fines educativos.
6. Con tu Nueva dirección de monedero Bitcoin Lightning puedes ponerla en cualquier cliente o app de tu elección. Para ello, ve a tu página de perfil y bajo la dirección de tu monedero en "Dirección Lightning", introduce tu nueva dirección y pulsa "guardar " y ya está. Enhorabuena.

👉✨Con el tiempo, es posible que desee pasar a las opciones de auto-custodia y tal vez incluso considerar la posibilidad de auto-alojar su propio nodo LN para una mejor privacidad. La buena noticia es que stacker.news tambien está dejando de ser una cartera custodio.

⭐NIP-05-identidad DNS⭐ Al igual que en Twitter, una marca de verificación es para mostrar que eres del mismo jardín "como un humano", y no un atípico como una mala hierba o, "bot". Pero no de la forma nefasta en que lo hacen las grandes tecnológicas. En el país de las maravillas de Nostr, esto te permite asignar tu llave de plata, "npub", a un identificador DNS. Una vez verificado, puedes gritar para anunciar tu nueva residencia Nostr para compartir.

✨Hay un montón de opciones, pero si has seguido los pasos, esto se vuelve extremadamente fácil.

👉✅¡Haz clic en tu "Perfil ", luego en "Configuración ", desplázate hasta la parte inferior y pega tu clave Silver, "npub!" y haz clic en "Guardar " y ¡listo! Utiliza tu monedero relámpago de Stacker.news como tu NIP-05. ¡¡¡Enhorabuena!!! ¡Ya estás verificado! Dale unas horas y cuando uses tu cliente "principal " deberías ver una marca de verificación.

Nostr, el infonformista de los servidores.

En lugar de utilizar una única instancia o un servidor centralizado, Nostr está construido para que varias bases de datos intercambien mensajes mediante "relés". Los relés, que son neutrales y no discriminatorios, almacenan y difunden mensajes públicos en la red Nostr. Transmiten mensajes a todos los demás clientes conectados a ellos, asegurando las comunicaciones en la red descentralizada.

¡Mis amigos en Nostr te dan la bienvenida!

Bienvenida a la fiesta. ¿Le apetece un té?🍵

¡Hay mucho mas!

Esto es la punta del iceberg. Síguenme mientras continúo explorando nuevas tierras y a los desarolladores, los caballeres que potencioan este ecosistema. Encuéntrame aquí para mas contenido como este y comparten con otros usarios de nostr. Conozca a los caballeres que luchan por freedomTech (la tecnología de libertad) en Nostr y a los proyectos a los que contribuyen para hacerla realidad.💋

Onigirl @npub18jvyjwpmm65g8v9azmlvu8knd5m7xlxau08y8vt75n53jtkpz2ys6mqqu3

---

🧡😻Esta guía ha sido cuidadosamente traducida por miggymofongo

Puede seguirla aquí. @npub1ajt9gp0prf4xrp4j07j9rghlcyukahncs0fw5ywr977jccued9nqrcc0cs

sitio web

@ 6871d8df:4a9396c1

Embracing AI: A Case for AI Accelerationism

In an era where artificial intelligence (AI) development is at the forefront of technological innovation, a counter-narrative championed by a group I refer to as the 'AI Decels'—those advocating for the deceleration of AI advancements— seems to be gaining significant traction. After tuning into a recent episode of the Joe Rogan Podcast, I realized that the prevailing narrative around AI was heading in a dangerous direction. Rogan had Aza Raskin and Tristan Harris, technology safety advocates, who released a talk called 'The AI Dilemma,' on for a discussion. You may know them from the popular documentary 'The Social Dilemma' on the dangers of social media. It became increasingly clear that the cautionary stance dominating this discourse might be tipping the scales too far, veering towards an over-regulated future that stifles innovation rather than fostering it.

Are we moving too fast?

While acknowledging AI's benefits, Aza and Tristan fear it could be dangerous if not guided by ethical standards and safeguards. They believe AI development is moving too quickly and that the right incentives for its growth are not in place. They are concerned about the possibility of "civilizational overwhelm," where advanced AI technology far outpaces 21st-century governance. They fear a scenario where society and its institutions cannot manage or adapt to the rapid changes and challenges introduced by AI.

They argue for regulating and slowing down AI development due to rapid, uncontrolled advancement driven by competition among companies like Google, OpenAI, and Microsoft. They claim this race can lead to unsafe releases of new technologies, with AI systems exhibiting unpredictable, emergent behaviors, posing significant societal risks. For instance, AI can inadvertently learn tasks like sentiment analysis or human emotion understanding, creating potential for misuse in areas like biological weapons or cybersecurity vulnerabilities.

Moreover, AI companies' profit-driven incentives often conflict with the public good, prioritizing market dominance over safety and ethics. This misalignment can lead to technologies that maximize engagement or profits at societal expense, similar to the negative impacts seen with social media. To address these issues, they suggest government regulation to realign AI companies' incentives with safety, ethical considerations, and public welfare. Implementing responsible development frameworks focused on long-term societal impacts is essential for mitigating potential harm.

This isn't new

Though the premise of their concerns seems reasonable, it's dangerous and an all too common occurrence with the emergence of new technologies. For example, in their example in the podcast, they refer to the technological breakthrough of oil. Oil as energy was a technological marvel and changed the course of human civilization. The embrace of oil — now the cornerstone of industry in our age — revolutionized how societies operated, fueled economies, and connected the world in unprecedented ways. Yet recently, as ideas of its environmental and geopolitical ramifications propagated, the narrative around oil has shifted.

Tristan and Aza detail this shift and claim that though the period was great for humanity, we didn't have another technology to go to once the technological consequences became apparent. The problem with that argument is that we did innovate to a better alternative: nuclear. However, at its technological breakthrough, it was met with severe suspicions, from safety concerns to ethical debates over its use. This overregulation due to these concerns caused a decades-long stagnation in nuclear innovation, where even today, we are still stuck with heavy reliance on coal and oil. The scare tactics and fear-mongering had consequences, and, interestingly, they don't see the parallels with their current deceleration stance on AI.

These examples underscore a critical insight: the initial anxiety surrounding new technologies is a natural response to the unknowns they introduce. Yet, history shows that too much anxiety can stifle the innovation needed to address the problems posed by current technologies. The cycle of discovery, fear, adaptation, and eventual acceptance reveals an essential truth—progress requires not just the courage to innovate but also the resilience to navigate the uncertainties these innovations bring.

Moreover, believing we can predict and plan for all AI-related unknowns reflects overconfidence in our understanding and foresight. History shows that technological progress, marked by unexpected outcomes and discoveries, defies such predictions. The evolution from the printing press to the internet underscores progress's unpredictability. Hence, facing AI's future requires caution, curiosity, and humility. Acknowledging our limitations and embracing continuous learning and adaptation will allow us to harness AI's potential responsibly, illustrating that embracing our uncertainties, rather than pretending to foresee them, is vital to innovation.

The journey of technological advancement is fraught with both promise and trepidation. Historically, each significant leap forward, from the dawn of the industrial age to the digital revolution, has been met with a mix of enthusiasm and apprehension. Aza Raskin and Tristan Harris's thesis in the 'AI Dilemma' embodies the latter.

Who defines "safe?"

When slowing down technologies for safety or ethical reasons, the issue arises of who gets to define what "safe" or “ethical” mean? This inquiry is not merely technical but deeply ideological, touching the very core of societal values and power dynamics. For example, the push for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives shows how specific ideological underpinnings can shape definitions of safety and decency.

Take the case of the initial release of Google's AI chatbot, Gemini, which chose the ideology of its creators over truth. Luckily, the answers were so ridiculous that the pushback was sudden and immediate. My worry, however, is if, in correcting this, they become experts in making the ideological capture much more subtle. Large bureaucratic institutions' top-down safety enforcement creates a fertile ground for ideological capture of safety standards.

I claim that the issue is not the technology itself but the lens through which we view and regulate it. Suppose the gatekeepers of 'safety' are aligned with a singular ideology. In that case, AI development would skew to serve specific ends, sidelining diverse perspectives and potentially stifling innovative thought and progress.

In the podcast, Tristan and Aza suggest such manipulation as a solution. They propose using AI for consensus-building and creating "shared realities" to address societal challenges. In practice, this means that when individuals' viewpoints seem to be far apart, we can leverage AI to "bridge the gap." How they bridge the gap and what we would bridge it toward is left to the imagination, but to me, it is clear. Regulators will inevitably influence it from the top down, which, in my opinion, would be the opposite of progress.

In navigating this terrain, we must advocate for a pluralistic approach to defining safety, encompassing various perspectives and values achieved through market forces rather than a governing entity choosing winners. The more players that can play the game, the more wide-ranging perspectives will catalyze innovation to flourish.

Ownership & Identity

Just because we should accelerate AI forward does not mean I do not have my concerns. When I think about what could be the most devastating for society, I don't believe we have to worry about a Matrix-level dystopia; I worry about freedom. As I explored in "Whose data is it anyway?," my concern gravitates toward the issues of data ownership and the implications of relinquishing control over our digital identities. This relinquishment threatens our privacy and the integrity of the content we generate, leaving it susceptible to the inclinations and profit of a few dominant tech entities.

To counteract these concerns, a paradigm shift towards decentralized models of data ownership is imperative. Such standards would empower individuals with control over their digital footprints, ensuring that we develop AI systems with diverse, honest, and truthful perspectives rather than the massaged, narrow viewpoints of their creators. This shift safeguards individual privacy and promotes an ethical framework for AI development that upholds the principles of fairness and impartiality.

As we stand at the crossroads of technological innovation and ethical consideration, it is crucial to advocate for systems that place data ownership firmly in the hands of users. By doing so, we can ensure that the future of AI remains truthful, non-ideological, and aligned with the broader interests of society.

But what about the Matrix?

I know I am in the minority on this, but I feel that the concerns of AGI (Artificial General Intelligence) are generally overblown. I am not scared of reaching the point of AGI, and I think the idea that AI will become so intelligent that we will lose control of it is unfounded and silly. Reaching AGI is not reaching consciousness; being worried about it spontaneously gaining consciousness is a misplaced fear. It is a tool created by humans for humans to enhance productivity and achieve specific outcomes.

At a technical level, large language models (LLMs) are trained on extensive datasets and learning patterns from language and data through a technique called "unsupervised learning" (meaning the data is untagged). They predict the next word in sentences, refining their predictions through feedback to improve coherence and relevance. When queried, LLMs generate responses based on learned patterns, simulating an understanding of language to provide contextually appropriate answers. They will only answer based on the datasets that were inputted and scanned.

AI will never be "alive," meaning that AI lacks inherent agency, consciousness, and the characteristics of life, not capable of independent thought or action. AI cannot act independently of human control. Concerns about AI gaining autonomy and posing a threat to humanity are based on a misunderstanding of the nature of AI and the fundamental differences between living beings and machines. AI spontaneously developing a will or consciousness is more similar to thinking a hammer will start walking than us being able to create consciousness through programming. Right now, there is only one way to create consciousness, and I'm skeptical that is ever something we will be able to harness and create as humans. Irrespective of its complexity — and yes, our tools will continue to become evermore complex — machines, specifically AI, cannot transcend their nature as non-living, inanimate objects programmed and controlled by humans.
The advancement of AI should be seen as enhancing human capabilities, not as a path toward creating autonomous entities with their own wills. So, while AI will continue to evolve, improve, and become more powerful, I believe it will remain under human direction and control without the existential threats often sensationalized in discussions about AI's future.

With this framing, we should not view the race toward AGI as something to avoid. This will only make the tools we use more powerful, making us more productive. With all this being said, AGI is still much farther away than many believe.

Today's AI excels in specific, narrow tasks, known as narrow or weak AI. These systems operate within tightly defined parameters, achieving remarkable efficiency and accuracy that can sometimes surpass human performance in those specific tasks. Yet, this is far from the versatile and adaptable functionality that AGI represents.

Moreover, the exponential growth of computational power observed in the past decades does not directly translate to an equivalent acceleration in achieving AGI. AI's impressive feats are often the result of massive data inputs and computing resources tailored to specific tasks. These successes do not inherently bring us closer to understanding or replicating the general problem-solving capabilities of the human mind, which again would only make the tools more potent in our hands.

While AI will undeniably introduce challenges and change the aspects of conflict and power dynamics, these challenges will primarily stem from humans wielding this powerful tool rather than the technology itself. AI is a mirror reflecting our own biases, values, and intentions. The crux of future AI-related issues lies not in the technology's inherent capabilities but in how it is used by those wielding it. This reality is at odds with the idea that we should slow down development as our biggest threat will come from those who are not friendly to us.

AI Beget's AI

While the unknowns of AI development and its pitfalls indeed stir apprehension, it's essential to recognize the power of market forces and human ingenuity in leveraging AI to address these challenges. History is replete with examples of new technologies raising concerns, only for those very technologies to provide solutions to the problems they initially seemed to exacerbate. It looks silly and unfair to think of fighting a war with a country that never embraced oil and was still primarily getting its energy from burning wood. The evolution of AI is no exception to this pattern. As we venture into uncharted territories, the potential issues that arise with AI—be it ethical concerns, use by malicious actors, biases in decision-making, or privacy intrusions—are not merely obstacles but opportunities for innovation. It is within the realm of possibility, and indeed, probability, that AI will play a crucial role in solving the problems it creates. The idea that there would be no incentive to address and solve these problems is to underestimate the fundamental drivers of technological progress.

Market forces, fueled by the demand for better, safer, and more efficient solutions, are powerful catalysts for positive change. When a problem is worth fixing, it invariably attracts the attention of innovators, researchers, and entrepreneurs eager to solve it. This dynamic has driven progress throughout history, and AI is poised to benefit from this problem-solving cycle.

Thus, rather than viewing AI's unknowns as sources of fear, we should see them as sparks of opportunity. By tackling the challenges posed by AI, we will harness its full potential to benefit humanity. By fostering an ecosystem that encourages exploration, innovation, and problem-solving, we can ensure that AI serves as a force for good, solving problems as profound as those it might create. This is the optimism we must hold onto—a belief in our collective ability to shape AI into a tool that addresses its own challenges and elevates our capacity to solve some of society's most pressing issues.

An AI Future

The reality is that it isn't whether AI will lead to unforeseen challenges—it undoubtedly will, as has every major technological leap in history. The real issue is whether we let fear dictate our path and confine us to a standstill or embrace AI's potential to address current and future challenges.

The approach to solving potential AI-related problems with stringent regulations and a slowdown in innovation is akin to cutting off the nose to spite the face. It's a strategy that risks stagnating the U.S. in a global race where other nations will undoubtedly continue their AI advancements. This perspective dangerously ignores that AI, much like the printing press of the past, has the power to democratize information, empower individuals, and dismantle outdated power structures.

The way forward is not less AI but more of it, more innovation, optimism, and curiosity for the remarkable technological breakthroughs that will come. We must recognize that the solution to AI-induced challenges lies not in retreating but in advancing our capabilities to innovate and adapt.

AI represents a frontier of limitless possibilities. If wielded with foresight and responsibility, it's a tool that can help solve some of the most pressing issues we face today. There are certainly challenges ahead, but I trust that with problems come solutions. Let's keep the AI Decels from steering us away from this path with their doomsday predictions. Instead, let's embrace AI with the cautious optimism it deserves, forging a future where technology and humanity advance to heights we can't imagine.

@ 3c984938:2ec11289

I'm having some pain in my heart about the U.S. elections.

Ever since Obama campaigned for office, an increase of young voters have come out of the woodwork. Things have not improved. They've actively told you that "your vote matters." I believe this to be a lie unless any citizen can demand at the gate, at the White House to be allowed to hold and point a gun to the president's head. (Relax, this is a hyperbole)

Why so dramatic? Well, what does the president do? Sign bills, commands the military, nominates new Fed chairman, ambassadors, supreme judges and senior officials all while traveling in luxury planes and living in a white palace for four years.

They promised Every TIME to protect citizen rights when they take the oath and office.

...They've broken this several times, with so-called "emergency-crisis"

The purpose of a president, today, it seems is to basically hire armed thugs to keep the citizens in check and make sure you "voluntarily continue to be a slave," to the system, hence the IRS. The corruption extends from the cop to the judge and even to politicians. The politicians get paid from lobbyists to create bills in congress for the president to sign. There's no right answer when money is involved with politicians. It is the same if you vote Obama, Biden, Trump, or Haley. They will wield the pen to serve themselves to say it will benefit the country.

In the first 100 years of presidency, the government wasn't even a big deal. They didn't even interfere with your life as much as they do today.

^^ You hold the power in your hands, don't let them take it. Don't believe me? Try to get a loan from a bank without a signature. Your signature is as good as gold (if not better) and is an original trademark.

Just Don't Vote. End the Fed. Opt out.

^^ I choose to form my own path, even if it means leaving everything I knew prior. It doesn't have to be a spiritual thing. Some, have called me religious because of this. We're all capable of greatness and having humanity.

✨Don't have a machine heart with a machine mind. Instead, choose to have a heart like the cowardly lion from the "Wizard Of Oz."

There's no such thing as a good president or politicians.

If there was, they would have issued non-interest Federal Reserve Notes. Lincoln and Kennedy tried to do this, they got shot.

There's still a banner of America there, but it's so far gone that I cannot even recognize it. However, I only see a bunch of 🏳‍🌈 pride flags.

✨Patrick Henry got it wrong, when he delivered his speech, "Give me liberty or give me death." Liberty and freedom are two completely different things.

Straightforward from Merriam-Webster Choose Right or left? No control, to be 100% without restrictions- free.

✨I disagree with the example sentence given. Because you cannot advocate for human freedom and own slaves, it's contradicting it. Which was common in the founding days.

I can understand many may disagree with me, and you might be thinking, "This time will be different." I, respectfully, disagree, and the proxy wars are proof. Learn the importance of Bitcoin, every Satoshi is a step away from corruption.

✨What does it look like to pull the curtains from the "Wizard of Oz?"

Have you watched the video below, what 30 Trillion dollars in debt looks like visually? Even I was blown away. https://video.nostr.build/d58c5e1afba6d7a905a39407f5e695a4eb4a88ae692817a36ecfa6ca1b62ea15.mp4

I say this with love. Hear my plea?

Normally, I don't write about anything political. It just feels like a losing game. My energy feels it's in better use to learn new things, write and to create. Even a simple blog post as simple as this. Stack SATs, and stay humble.

<3 Onigirl

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Bitcoin transactions explained

A transaction is a piece of data that takes inputs and produces outputs. Forget about the blockchain thing, Bitcoin is actually just a big tree of transactions. The blockchain is just a way to keep transactions ordered.

Imagine you have 10 satoshis. That means you have them in an unspent transaction output (UTXO). You want to spend them, so you create a transaction. The transaction should reference unspent outputs as its inputs. Every transaction has an immutable id, so you use that id plus the index of the output (because transactions can have multiple outputs). Then you specify a script that unlocks that transaction and related signatures, then you specify outputs along with a script that locks these outputs.

As you can see, there's this lock/unlocking thing and there are inputs and outputs. Inputs must be unlocked by fulfilling the conditions specified by the person who created the transaction they're in. And outputs must be locked so anyone wanting to spend those outputs will need to unlock them.

For most of the cases locking and unlocking means specifying a public key whose controller (the person who has the corresponding private key) will be able to spend. Other fancy things are possible too, but we can ignore them for now.

Back to the 10 satoshis you want to spend. Since you've successfully referenced 10 satoshis and unlocked them, now you can specify the outputs (this is all done in a single step). You can specify one output of 10 satoshis, two of 5, one of 3 and one of 7, three of 3 and so on. The sum of outputs can't be more than 10. And if the sum of outputs is less than 10 the difference goes to fees. In the first days of Bitcoin you didn't need any fees, but now you do, otherwise your transaction won't be included in any block.

If you're still interested in transactions maybe you could take a look at this small chapter of that Andreas Antonopoulos book.

If you hate Andreas Antonopoulos because he is a communist shitcoiner or don't want to read more than half a page, go here: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Coin_analogy

@ 8671a6e5:f88194d1

(original version: https://allesvoorbitcoin.substack.com/p/bitcoin-jobs-are-a-sham )\ The dream

For many people who learned to use, work with, understand and hold bitcoin, one goal consistently stands out: the dream to one day work in a bitcoin job. In my entourage, this was for a long time the main thing most tried to achieve.

The prospect of such job is to work in the bitcoin industry and it seems like a lofty goal: it combines innovation, technology and the opportunity to collaborate with like-minded individuals while earning bitcoin. It’s also “cool”.

It’s an industry (yes, it’s an industry now) that thrives on the promise of that ultimate payout: hard money, bitcoin. Who wouldn’t want that? Certainly if you word in a fiat job right now.

At the same time, this longing comes with certain expectations. People assume a bitcoin-related job will be exciting, rewarding, efficient, well-funded and will happen in a professional environment - that often is lacking in fiat jobs.

I hate to break it to you, fellow bitcoiners, but the oasis of bitcoin jobs you’re crawling toward through the scorching fiat desert is mostly a mirage. Once you arrive at what seems like a place of plenty, you’ll find just a few orange-colored rocks and maybe a lone palm tree with a single, withered coconut barely hanging on.

The main reason? The reality of bitcoin jobs isn’t as different from fiat jobs as you might expect—at least, not yet.

After all, bitcoiners should be “better” people, right? Unlike those fiat wage slaves who don’t realize that being paid in dirty fiat slowly makes them poorer, we like to think we’re ahead of the curve. We feel more vindicated, more enlightened—bitcoiners are the better, more evolved kind. Or so we tell ourselves.

The realization of how hard money actually shapes society has not yet fully matured. We’re all still in the discovery phase. Even with die hard bitcoiners and their respective job industry aren’t there yet. During this discovery phase, it’s important to not let ourselves be blinded by the sun in the desert. We need not to be blinded by the promises and the ideology to let ourselves be taken advantage of by fiat-minded people, even if they own a bitcoin company.

Hard money is the way forward. Bitcoin is the way forward. Most people and certainly their jobs and companies are lagging behind that reality.

Such a job is not (yet) going to bring you Valhalla (or its equivalent) in the form of a well-paid bitcoin job.

Let’s walk over the reasons as to why that is.

The Fiat (Brain) Drain We don’t need to spend much time summarizing how soul-crushing a fiat job can be. Countless books, blogs, and social media rants already detail how monotonous, pointless, and draining traditional employment is. And for those of you that need a crash course on that: The 1999 movie Office Space remains a masterpiece in this regard. By now, we’ve all worked for a version of “Bill Lumbergh” at one point or another.

Bill at INITECH Bill Lumbergh at Initech (Office Space) From a bitcoiner’s perspective, a fiat job is merely a temporary solution to the problem of liquidity for consumer tokens — tokens printed for free by an entity like a state system, which itself is a tax, deb-and-war engine. At the same time, there’s a good chance to get people out of their fiat jobs, purely on this promise, as I wrote in “the fiat brain drain“.

If you operate within that fiat world, you’re bound to these forces. On top of that, your purchasing power is continually siphoned away through inflation, and you get taxed out of any long-term wealth buildup. On the other hand, that same fiat system makes you dependent on their return in social safety and being regarded as “OK”.

Most bitcoiners want a bitcoin job, exactly to escape this pit of misery. To leave this Linkedin-vortex of fake, the loser mentality, its hierarchical nonsense and bureaucratic drudgery that will soon be rendered obsolete by automation and AI, compounding with the ongoing brain drain at the top of the innovation pyramid.

That’s a long-winded way of saying: a fiat job is financial quicksand. And you’re knee-deep in it.

The solution? “bitcoin jobs”

If a bitcoin job were truly the answer, the solution would be simple: launch a bitcoin company, hire bitcoiners willing to work for bitcoin and start building products and services that function in both the fiat and bitcoin worlds—emphasizing the transition to better money: bitcoin.

But without capital, you’re stuck, whether in fiat or bitcoin.

The framework may shift slightly, but the fundamental problem remains. Those with capital can secure real bitcoin jobs or start real bitcoin companies, just as those with financial backing in the fiat world can choose work, they enjoy without worrying about pay or job-hunting struggles.

That’s not to say someone with limited funds and no capital can’t start such a company, but they’ll quickly run into funding issues. bitcoin jobs require payment in bitcoin but also fiat funds to pay for real life goods at most suppliers and services. Unless you build your own office (if you need one anyway) you’ll be paying in fiat to rent some office space (pun intended).

If you lack capital (in bitcoin), you’ll hit a wall sooner rather than later. So, in comes “other capital” to save you.

Relying on larger entities, whether venture capital firms or industry-supporting companies, to cover expenses also comes at the cost of independence; if they even provide funding at all.

While there's no shortage of hype and excitement around bitcoin projects, actual funding for many of these ventures is speculative at best. When you want to help these projects out for free, there’s also no shortage of open arms, welcoming the free hours of work for a project you’re passionate about.

Numerous startups in the crypto space operate on shoestring budgets, relying on ICOs (Initial Coin Offerings) or venture capital more interested in hype than substance. This creates a precarious job environment where projects can disappear as quickly as they emerge, leaving employees stranded.

Sustainability, or lack thereof, is another major concern. Bitcoin jobs that promise longevity often come with a caveat: they're here today, but there's no guarantee they’ll last until next month. The market’s volatility means projects can lose funding or pivot dramatically within months of no technical challenges or a dry up for demand pops up. Finding a position with a horizon beyond a few months in the future is rare, making long-term career planning in this sector a gamble. Most of these jobs are not even bitcoin jobs, but are presented that way. They’re mostly a sham!1

Pay up

Then there's the pay.

Even if you secure a position, and it’s a bit more long-term, then the promise of "decent, livable pay" is often unfulfilled. While some roles offer competitive salaries, many pay in bitcoin, which fluctuates of course (by the way, that’s a good thing, volatility is our friend). The trustworthiness of some of these bitcoin jobs, mostly at smaller startups can get even worse, where you as an employee are at risk to not receive promised payments at all due to funding issues.

The bitcoin job market presents a paradox: it's full of opportunities, yet few meet the criteria for being well-funded, sustainable, and offering reliable compensation and protection. For those looking to build a career in this space, caution is key do your due diligence, don’t trust verify on potential employers and diversify your own skills can help mitigate the risks somewhat.

Until the industry matures and offers greater stability and accountability, the allure of bitcoin jobs may remain problematic.

The harsh reality is, that the carrot of a bitcoin job, that’s been dangling in front of most bitcoiners’ eyes for a long time, is tempting, but mostly just that: an unreachable goal, not because you can’t get that job, but more because that job was a mirage on itself. The dream that most of us have is to leave the rat-race with its unfulfilling fiat jobs, to work in a better way, a job that pays in hard money and builds a better world.

I’m afraid that dream is just that: a dream. These jobs are mostly reserved for the inner-circle of some venture capitalist’s entourage or revolve around making use (or misuse) of bitcoiner’s ideology and goals in life.

But there’s hope Many people want to be paid in bitcoin, but until we transition to a bitcoin standard, they still need to cover expenses in a fiat-dominated world.

Finding a good fiat job is exhausting. And once you’ve been fully orange-pilled, earning fiat starts to feel like an even bigger scam—arguably worse than the Value for Value model. In the end, you’ll either work for peanuts or turn into a peanut yourself — a very salty one at that.

Definition

Let’s clarify what a bitcoin job" actually is, since the term often gets misused for anything remotely fintech or crypto-related anyway.

A bitcoin job involves real, tangible work — simply holding a title isn’t enough. It provides income paid directly in bitcoin, not in stocks, tokens (or other cryptocurrencies other than bitcoin). It requires a significant commitment of time, making it distinct from minor side gigs like washing a neighbor’s car — unless that gig somehow becomes your primary source of income.

Owning a company doesn’t count as a job on its own; you must be actively working in it (for example as a real hands-on developer or COO/CEO).

The role must be tied to a legitimate organization — a company or corporation — not just a loosely organized WhatsApp group pretending to be a business. It should be official, meaning it’s on the books, taxable where applicable, and, in some cases (such as in the EU), may even come with social benefits and retirement benefit buildup.

The focus must remain bitcoin only. Companies dealing exclusively in altcoins, memecoins, hype-cycles and the likes don’t qualify. Multi-cryptocurrency businesses, like exchanges or DeFi platforms, are more fintech than pure bitcoin. For example, a job at a bitcoin-only hardware company fits the definition, whereas a position at a Solana based trading platform does not.

About that real work: A disorganized WhatsApp group isn’t a company but a hobby project.

If a job doesn’t meet these criteria above, it’s unlikely to be a true bitcoin job. Looking at listings on platforms like Bitvocation2 (link) or the job sections of bitcoin/crypto companies, many roles appear to be standard fiat economy positions but within a bitcoin (or altcoins) focused company. (by the way, the Bitvocation team runs an excellent service that has a direct reach from open vacancies towards possible employees,… I love it).

For example, an HR role at a bitcoin company is fundamentally the same as one at a traditional fiat company (except for the occasional ordering of extra black hoodies for employees). Choosing to be paid in bitcoin may qualify it as a “bitcoin job,” but the role itself would exist in any industry. These positions could be considered bitcoin jobs since they contribute to our ecosystem while being financially tied to it.

From personal experience and observations, smaller bitcoin startups face significant challenges in securing funding. What is puzzling about this, that all this difficult environment to get a projects/startups funded happens, despite bitcoin being a trillion-dollar asset and major holders like Strategy accumulating nearly 500,000 BTC.

Top bitcoin company holdings:

BlackRock IBIT: 587,050 BTC Strategy (MSTR): 478,740 BTC Coinbase (COIN): 1,051,650 BTC Binance: 765,072 BTC Bitfinex: 359,687 BTC

Beyond funding, these startups also struggle to attract talent for a longer period of time. Traditional finance, fintech and even the broader cryptocurrency industry usually offer higher salaries and more perceived prestige (not in the bitcoin space, but outside) along with the perks of having a half fiat / “crypto” job.

Employees who choose to work in bitcoin often do so for ideological reasons, willingly giving up the stability and structure of traditional industries. This is both a strength and a risk. While bitcoin startups operate in a highly innovative space, they also face volatility and uncertainty.

The survival rate of bitcoin startups is low—around 10% make it past three years (according to Seedtable data). Most crypto-related job openings come from DeFi projects and general crypto firms, while jobs focused solely on bitcoin are typically backed by venture capital.

For instance: Fedi (federated lightning “all-in one freedom tool”) is employing between 27 and 50 people according to publicly available data. It’s backed by ‘Ego Death Capital’.

Other key VC firms in the bitcoin space include:

Axiom BTC Bitcoin Opportunity Fund Bitcoiner Ventures Epoch VC Lightning Ventures Ten31 Timechain VC

These firms play a crucial role in sustaining bitcoin-only businesses, as traditional funding routes remain scarce. Once inside these companies, there’s often a push for maximum efficiency and lean operations — while working with hard money. This paradox is frequently overlooked. Hard money means a long term time horizon. While bitcoin jobs often offer the polar opposite.

Bitcoin jobs are highly competitive on a global scale as well. Much like remote fiat jobs, most bitcoin-related roles can be done from anywhere in the world, meaning candidates are competing with a vast international talent pool. This makes securing a position even more challenging (especially for Europeans) in an industry that operates in a fast-changing and often challenging technological landscape from a marketing and cost/benefits perspective.

For example, a company developing a bitcoin PoS (point-of-sale) system for cash registers and checkout online, needs traction to sell its product and grow its user base but needs fiat funds to acquire material and develop point of sale devices and software.

This requires sales people, developers and a substantial portion of marketing efforts. That’s something that cannot be sustained solely by grassroots initiatives on bitcoin alone, and can’t be achieved by a single developer working out of a small studio on his own. To scale, these companies often rely on seed funding, venture capital or grants from larger bitcoin-focused firms. Even then, working for such companies, even if you’re really motivated often doesn’t pay the (fiat) bills.

The same applies to teams building something on Lightning Network, projects developing on Liquid or companies attempting to establish bitcoin-native lending platforms and the likes. If (like me) you want to work for them, be prepared to do it either for free, off the books or for peanuts… or become a peanut yourself.

The realities of bitcoin Jobs

Based on my experience working in bitcoin-related roles—particularly within the EU (where taxation and regulations are more rigid and social security systems are extensive) several common challenges emerged:

High intensity: The work often demands significant time and effort due to the passion-driven nature of the industry. This is good, a fiat job is often draining, while a bitcoin job is more energetic and intense in nature. We’re building something good. It’s also good to remember that this energy is often used to make you do the work, without the reward.

Lower pay: At least in my experience; salaries tend to be lower compared to traditional tech or finance roles, and I’ve even seen bickering over the price like it was a flee market.

Funding struggles: Many bitcoin startups face ongoing financial uncertainty, troubles finding investors, or getting investors that cancel their deals or disappear entirely.

Constant involvement: There’s little room to “clock out” at 5 PM; engagement is often expected beyond regular hours (it comes with the territory).

Lack of benefits: Many bitcoin jobs offer no social security, no formal employment status, and often operate in a gray area, or completely “off the books”. For a company selling their product the whole world over for example, you would expect something else than back alley deals with whispered price agreements. The contracts however, are usually centered about keeping the employee in check and their knowledge protected.

Presence of “grifters”: Some individuals with strong reputations or connections manage to secure more lucrative positions, despite contributing little meaningful work. That’s human nature of course, and it seems to happen in in fiat, bitcoin or voluntary work alike.

bitcoin employee receiving his contract and first payment Some argue that receiving bitcoin as payment is, in itself, a form of financial (and social) security. However, this ignores the realities of daily life. In the absence of a global bitcoin standard, workers still depend on government regulations, taxation systems, and social security structures (in Europe).

For instance, if a bitcoiner falls ill for two weeks, they may lose their income entirely. Meanwhile, an employee at a tech firm, bank, or blue-chip company would typically receive paid sick leave or at least retain their job security. I know this is a fairly Euro-zone centered view, and the rest of the world has of course different ways to compensate for that. Either this happens through having lower taxation, or having more self-reliance on private savings and “buffers” to build up your own protection as an employee.

It all comes down to either getting paid more to have your expenses and social security covered by yourself, or getting paid less and leaving a cut for some state fiat system that will take care of your social benefits if they’re needed.

So far, from what I heard an experienced in a bitcoin job it’s the worst of both worlds: low(er) pay, more uncertainty and no security benefits. That’s something that can be fixed.

While social protections in the fiat system are funded through mechanisms like inflation and money printing, and a lot of taxation, their “benefits” are tangible (and expensive).

In contrast, many bitcoin jobs rely on ideological commitment, which can sometimes be exploited, where individuals are expected to work for little or no compensation - while forgoing the protections that traditional employment offers.

Even is we are more sovereign as bitcoiners you sooner or later get older, get sick, have a baby or have other phases in your life. For the companies themselves this is also a huge challenge: the hiring of people and paying them in hard money, means that their output and real life worth to the company needs to be higher in total over all employees than the holding of the same amount of bitcoin. Since bitcoin itself has the magnificent feature of not bearing yield (just holding 1 bitcoin doesn’t pay you 0.01 bitcoin dividend). Even more so, the employee is paid in bitcoin, and can thus be more free, have hard money that is inflation resistent over a longer time period. Retaining these employees for longer periods of time (if that’s your goal anyway as a bitcoin company) can be a real challenge. I don’t see how you can retain people doing an intense job while you pay them in the hardest money there is. I guess motivation is really the key here.

The fiat world has that covered (we know how of course and we know they do it though printing money and taxation).

The bitcoin world still needs to figure out how to deal with these situations. Just promising people some bitcoin is not enough.

Building a better future for bitcoin jobs One of the biggest obstacles according to me, is to a true bitcoin standard — aside from the challenge of using bitcoin for manufacturing and basic goods (which I’ll address later)— is the lack of meaningful job opportunities that provide both bitcoin salaries and financial security on a mid to longer time frame. Bitcoiners or no bitcoiners, people don’t want to hop from one job to another every few weeks.

I think sooner or later the bitcoin space will need a global bitcoin social security framework — one that reimagines financial protection for workers without simply replicating the state-run systems of the fiat world, and certainly doesn’t replicate the European systems that failed so miserably (my country for example imposes the highest tax in the world counted from employer to employee in order to pay for social benefits). If the employer pays 6000€, the taxation causes the employee to receive a mere 3440€.

Today, a bitcoin-only company is already rare. A bitcoin company that offers proper employment contracts, benefits, actually pays on time, has a future ànd has a minimal plan for some form of social protection is nearly nonexistent.

That’s why I argue: real bitcoin jobs are almost nonexistent.

What we have instead are:

• A bunch of hobby projects and side gigs in the v4v space.

• Startups that offer little to no worker protection and rely on goodwill or fantastic ideas with a lack of fundamental backing.

• A handful of legitimate companies that still depend on fiat-based social security and payment structures to operate and attract and keep talent.

The missing link: financial and social security for bitcoin jobs

We need more companies like Bitwage3 as well where bitcoin jobs and their administrative and payment handlings are taken care of (also in Europe), They must be entirely bitcoin-only or have a subsidiary that works exclusively on pure bitcoin jobs.

With a yet-to-be-invented social system which gives bitcoin employees a way to build up an securing their well-being in the long rung (bitcoiners don’t stay forever 21). That would increase this btc-job market and the legitimacy of its real life employment.

Without this, working in bitcoin will continue to feel unstable, informal, or even go “off-the-books” because of a lack of alternatives.

If bitcoin companies want to attract top talent, they need to offer more than just ideology and goodwill. There are countless people that had bad experiences with this.

Many skilled professionals currently enjoy secure fiat jobs with stable salaries, full benefits, and usually minimal effort. Yet, they want out. They know fiat jobs are a trip though quicksand.

Without a competitive alternative however, bitcoin businesses will continue to rely on those willing to struggle financially and living like a “value4value” ideologist (or even worse: grifters), others will be people that contribute real value but are underpaid and face difficulties using their bitcoin earnings for everyday expenses like rent, groceries and utilities (without resorting to questionable third-party services)

That last category of employees or possible employees is often overlooked. There’s a whole generation that doesn’t sit on a stash of bitcoin in order to fund their own “ideal job” or have ideology of an open-source encrypt everything and live on bitcoin only warrior. Some people have to pay their rent, buy food or at least know they’ll be still having a job tomorrow if they work hard.

In the oasis of a bitcoin job in 2025, you soon crawl to that one lousy coconut in that one palm tree in order to survive.

“Tick-tock next job”

Today, most so-called "bitcoin jobs" fall into one of two categories :

Not actually bitcoin-related – Corporate blockchain projects, scams, token-based schemes, memecoins, rugpull/defi/web3/NFT peddlers, and “anything on the blockchain” services without a proper oracle… and other type of distractions. These are sometimes presented as bitcoin jobs, yet they aren’t.

Paid in bitcoin but lacking real merit : Low or mediocre wages, no benefits and no worker protection, in an industry where your value lasts about as long as the average block time (pun intended).

Well-paid longer term real bitcoin jobs: Good pay, on the books, meaningful and well organized pure bitcoin job, for the happy few who have good connections.

If bitcoin employment is to be more than just a passion project where dedicated workers struggle while CEOs and media personalities live lavishly, we need a sustainable framework that provides real financial longevity, funding and real bitcoin jobs.

Without it, bitcoin will remain an industry with unstable or even sketchy niche job offerings, with neither long-term careers nor financial (let alone social) security. If people can’t build a future in bitcoin jobs, the right talent won’t be attracted in the first place. Which is amazing, come to thing of it, we’re probably the only industry that thrives on hard money, we should have the most quality jobs and most happy employees.

Passion alone isn’t enough. When everyone knows bitcoin jobs are short-term or unstable, motivation dwindles. The reality is that some people, myself included, would rather endure a dull fiat job, than waste their valuable time and money on an industry that fails to offer real career prospects and real support for their talent.

All the billions held by all these big companies and fund, is not put to use for their actual builders and talent it seems. I can’t explain the billions of holdings and on the other side, the total lack of funding happening on projects and startups.

More so, the vast majority of bitcoin jobs are nor jobs, nor bitcoin jobs or not anything that can be defined as such. And it shows.

That’s why a lot of products and services are currently in the lousy (lazy) state they’re in and that’s why almost all bitcoiners are either stuck in a fiat job or work within the bitcoin system for peanuts out of ideology or through good connections. Right now, other than the possible btc in your wallet, there’s little to no difference between bitcoin jobs and fiat jobs in that regard. No wonder choosing safety of a fiat job still wins, and I hope that will change one day. Until then, working for Bill Lumbergh has it’s perks.

by Kim De Vos for AVB tips: here

Disclaimer: To provide content more regularly, I occasionally write my posts with AI assistance. Rest assured, the core ideas and writing are always 100% my own creation and it’s edited by at least two humans!

Footnotes:

1 definition : The word "sham" refers to something that is theater or designed to deceive. It describes a situation, scheme, or entity that appears legitimate on the surface but lacks substance, authenticity, or real core values.

2 https://t.me/bitvocationfeed

3 https://bitwage.com/en-us/The dream

For many people who learned to use, work with, understand and hold bitcoin, one goal consistently stands out: the dream to one day work in a bitcoin job.\ In my entourage, this was for a long time the main thing most tried to achieve.

The prospect of such job is to work in the bitcoin industry and it seems like a lofty goal: it combines innovation, technology and the opportunity to collaborate with like-minded individuals while earning bitcoin. It’s also “cool”.\ \ It’s an industry (yes, it’s an industry now) that thrives on the promise of that ultimate payout: hard money, bitcoin.\ Who wouldn’t want that?\ Certainly if you word in a fiat job right now.

At the same time, this longing comes with certain expectations. People assume a bitcoin-related job will be exciting, rewarding, efficient, well-funded and will happen in a professional environment - that often is lacking in fiat jobs.

I hate to break it to you, fellow bitcoiners, but the oasis of bitcoin jobs you’re crawling toward through the scorching fiat desert is mostly a mirage. Once you arrive at what seems like a place of plenty, you’ll find just a few orange-colored rocks and maybe a lone palm tree with a single, withered coconut barely hanging on.

The main reason? The reality of bitcoin jobs isn’t as different from fiat jobs as you might expect—at least, not yet.\ \ After all, bitcoiners should be “better” people, right? Unlike those fiat wage slaves who don’t realize that being paid in dirty fiat slowly makes them poorer, we like to think we’re ahead of the curve. We feel more vindicated, more enlightened—bitcoiners are the better, more evolved kind. Or so we tell ourselves.\ \ The realization of how hard money actually shapes society has not yet fully matured. We’re all still in the discovery phase. Even with die hard bitcoiners and their respective job industry aren’t there yet. During this discovery phase, it’s important to not let ourselves be blinded by the sun in the desert. We need not to be blinded by the promises and the ideology to let ourselves be taken advantage of by fiat-minded people, even if they own a bitcoin company.\ \ Hard money is the way forward. Bitcoin is the way forward. Most people and certainly their jobs and companies are lagging behind that reality.

Such a job is not (yet) going to bring you Valhalla (or its equivalent) in the form of a well-paid bitcoin job.\ \ Let’s walk over the reasons as to why that is.

The Fiat (Brain) Drain

We don’t need to spend much time summarizing how soul-crushing a fiat job can be. Countless books, blogs, and social media rants already detail how monotonous, pointless, and draining traditional employment is. And for those of you that need a crash course on that: The 1999 movie Office Space remains a masterpiece in this regard. By now, we’ve all worked for a version of “Bill Lumbergh” at one point or another.

Bill Lumbergh at Initech (Office Space)

From a bitcoiner’s perspective, a fiat job is merely a temporary solution to the problem of liquidity for consumer tokens — tokens printed for free by an entity like a state system, which itself is a tax, deb-and-war engine. At the same time, there’s a good chance to get people out of their fiat jobs, purely on this promise, as I wrote in “the fiat brain drain“.\ \ If you operate within that fiat world, you’re bound to these forces. On top of that, your purchasing power is continually siphoned away through inflation, and you get taxed out of any long-term wealth buildup. On the other hand, that same fiat system makes you dependent on their return in social safety and being regarded as “OK”.

Most bitcoiners want a bitcoin job, exactly to escape this pit of misery. To leave this Linkedin-vortex of fake, the loser mentality, its hierarchical nonsense and bureaucratic drudgery that will soon be rendered obsolete by automation and AI, compounding with the ongoing brain drain at the top of the innovation pyramid.

That’s a long-winded way of saying: a fiat job is financial quicksand. And you’re knee-deep in it.

The solution? “bitcoin jobs”

\ If a bitcoin job were truly the answer, the solution would be simple: launch a bitcoin company, hire bitcoiners willing to work for bitcoin and start building products and services that function in both the fiat and bitcoin worlds—emphasizing the transition to better money: bitcoin.

But without capital, you’re stuck, whether in fiat or bitcoin.

The framework may shift slightly, but the fundamental problem remains. Those with capital can secure real bitcoin jobs or start real bitcoin companies, just as those with financial backing in the fiat world can choose work, they enjoy without worrying about pay or job-hunting struggles.

That’s not to say someone with limited funds and no capital can’t start such a company, but they’ll quickly run into funding issues. bitcoin jobs require payment in bitcoin but also fiat funds to pay for real life goods at most suppliers and services. Unless you build your own office (if you need one anyway) you’ll be paying in fiat to rent some office space (pun intended).

If you lack capital (in bitcoin), you’ll hit a wall sooner rather than later.\ So, in comes “other capital” to save you.

Relying on larger entities, whether venture capital firms or industry-supporting companies, to cover expenses also comes at the cost of independence; if they even provide funding at all.\ \ While there's no shortage of hype and excitement around bitcoin projects, actual funding for many of these ventures is speculative at best. When you want to help these projects out for free, there’s also no shortage of open arms, welcoming the free hours of work for a project you’re passionate about.

Numerous startups in the crypto space operate on shoestring budgets, relying on ICOs (Initial Coin Offerings) or venture capital more interested in hype than substance. This creates a precarious job environment where projects can disappear as quickly as they emerge, leaving employees stranded.

Sustainability, or lack thereof, is another major concern.\ Bitcoin jobs that promise longevity often come with a caveat: they're here today, but there's no guarantee they’ll last until next month.\ The market’s volatility means projects can lose funding or pivot dramatically within months of no technical challenges or a dry up for demand pops up.\ Finding a position with a horizon beyond a few months in the future is rare, making long-term career planning in this sector a gamble. Most of these jobs are not even bitcoin jobs, but are presented that way. They’re mostly a sham!1

\ Pay up

\ Then there's the pay.\ \ Even if you secure a position, and it’s a bit more long-term, then the promise of "decent, livable pay" is often unfulfilled.\ While some roles offer competitive salaries, many pay in bitcoin, which fluctuates of course (by the way, that’s a good thing, volatility is our friend).\ The trustworthiness of some of these bitcoin jobs, mostly at smaller startups can get even worse, where you as an employee are at risk to not receive promised payments at all due to funding issues.

The bitcoin job market presents a paradox: it's full of opportunities, yet few meet the criteria for being well-funded, sustainable, and offering reliable compensation and protection.\ For those looking to build a career in this space, caution is key do your due diligence, don’t trust verify on potential employers and diversify your own skills can help mitigate the risks somewhat.

Until the industry matures and offers greater stability and accountability, the allure of bitcoin jobs may remain problematic.

The harsh reality is, that the carrot of a bitcoin job, that’s been dangling in front of most bitcoiners’ eyes for a long time, is tempting, but mostly just that: an unreachable goal, not because you can’t get that job, but more because that job was a mirage on itself.\ The dream that most of us have is to leave the rat-race with its unfulfilling fiat jobs, to work in a better way, a job that pays in hard money and builds a better world.\ \ I’m afraid that dream is just that: a dream. These jobs are mostly reserved for the inner-circle of some venture capitalist’s entourage or revolve around making use (or misuse) of bitcoiner’s ideology and goals in life.

But there’s hope

Many people want to be paid in bitcoin, but until we transition to a bitcoin standard, they still need to cover expenses in a fiat-dominated world.

Finding a good fiat job is exhausting. And once you’ve been fully orange-pilled, earning fiat starts to feel like an even bigger scam—arguably worse than the Value for Value model.\ In the end, you’ll either work for peanuts or turn into a peanut yourself — a very salty one at that.

Definition

Let’s clarify what a bitcoin job" actually is, since the term often gets misused for anything remotely fintech or crypto-related anyway.

A bitcoin job involves real, tangible work — simply holding a title isn’t enough. It provides income paid directly in bitcoin, not in stocks, tokens (or other cryptocurrencies other than bitcoin).\ It requires a significant commitment of time, making it distinct from minor side gigs like washing a neighbor’s car — unless that gig somehow becomes your primary source of income.

Owning a company doesn’t count as a job on its own; you must be actively working in it (for example as a real hands-on developer or COO/CEO).\ \ The role must be tied to a legitimate organization — a company or corporation — not just a loosely organized WhatsApp group pretending to be a business. It should be official, meaning it’s on the books, taxable where applicable, and, in some cases (such as in the EU), may even come with social benefits and retirement benefit buildup.

The focus must remain bitcoin only. Companies dealing exclusively in altcoins, memecoins, hype-cycles and the likes don’t qualify. Multi-cryptocurrency businesses, like exchanges or DeFi platforms, are more fintech than pure bitcoin.\ For example, a job at a bitcoin-only hardware company fits the definition, whereas a position at a Solana based trading platform does not.\ \ About that real work: A disorganized WhatsApp group isn’t a company but a hobby project.

If a job doesn’t meet these criteria above, it’s unlikely to be a true bitcoin job. Looking at listings on platforms like Bitvocation2 (link) or the job sections of bitcoin/crypto companies, many roles appear to be standard fiat economy positions but within a bitcoin (or altcoins) focused company.\ (by the way, the Bitvocation team runs an excellent service that has a direct reach from open vacancies towards possible employees,… I love it).

For example, an HR role at a bitcoin company is fundamentally the same as one at a traditional fiat company (except for the occasional ordering of extra black hoodies for employees).\ Choosing to be paid in bitcoin may qualify it as a “bitcoin job,” but the role itself would exist in any industry. These positions could be considered bitcoin jobs since they contribute to our ecosystem while being financially tied to it.

From personal experience and observations, smaller bitcoin startups face significant challenges in securing funding.\ What is puzzling about this, that all this difficult environment to get a projects/startups funded happens, despite bitcoin being a trillion-dollar asset and major holders like Strategy accumulating nearly 500,000 BTC.

Top bitcoin company holdings:

BlackRock IBIT: 587,050 BTC\ Strategy (MSTR): 478,740 BTC\ Coinbase (COIN): 1,051,650 BTC\ Binance: 765,072 BTC\ Bitfinex: 359,687 BTC

Beyond funding, these startups also struggle to attract talent for a longer period of time. Traditional finance, fintech and even the broader cryptocurrency industry usually offer higher salaries and more perceived prestige (not in the bitcoin space, but outside) along with the perks of having a half fiat / “crypto” job.\ \ Employees who choose to work in bitcoin often do so for ideological reasons, willingly giving up the stability and structure of traditional industries. This is both a strength and a risk. While bitcoin startups operate in a highly innovative space, they also face volatility and uncertainty.

The survival rate of bitcoin startups is low—around 10% make it past three years (according to Seedtable data). Most crypto-related job openings come from DeFi projects and general crypto firms, while jobs focused solely on bitcoin are typically backed by venture capital.

For instance: Fedi (federated lightning “all-in one freedom tool”) is employing between 27 and 50 people according to publicly available data. It’s backed by ‘Ego Death Capital’.\ \ Other key VC firms in the bitcoin space include:

Axiom BTC\ Bitcoin Opportunity Fund\ Bitcoiner Ventures\ Epoch VC\ Lightning Ventures\ Ten31\ Timechain VC

These firms play a crucial role in sustaining bitcoin-only businesses, as traditional funding routes remain scarce.\ Once inside these companies, there’s often a push for maximum efficiency and lean operations — while working with hard money. This paradox is frequently overlooked. Hard money means a long term time horizon. While bitcoin jobs often offer the polar opposite.

Bitcoin jobs are highly competitive on a global scale as well. Much like remote fiat jobs, most bitcoin-related roles can be done from anywhere in the world, meaning candidates are competing with a vast international talent pool.\ This makes securing a position even more challenging (especially for Europeans) in an industry that operates in a fast-changing and often challenging technological landscape from a marketing and cost/benefits perspective.

For example, a company developing a bitcoin PoS (point-of-sale) system for cash registers and checkout online, needs traction to sell its product and grow its user base but needs fiat funds to acquire material and develop point of sale devices and software.\ \ This requires sales people, developers and a substantial portion of marketing efforts. That’s something that cannot be sustained solely by grassroots initiatives on bitcoin alone, and can’t be achieved by a single developer working out of a small studio on his own.\ To scale, these companies often rely on seed funding, venture capital or grants from larger bitcoin-focused firms. Even then, working for such companies, even if you’re really motivated often doesn’t pay the (fiat) bills.

The same applies to teams building something on Lightning Network, projects developing on Liquid or companies attempting to establish bitcoin-native lending platforms and the likes. If (like me) you want to work for them, be prepared to do it either for free, off the books or for peanuts… or become a peanut yourself.

The realities of bitcoin Jobs

\ Based on my experience working in bitcoin-related roles—particularly within the EU (where taxation and regulations are more rigid and social security systems are extensive) several common challenges emerged:

High intensity: The work often demands significant time and effort due to the passion-driven nature of the industry. This is good, a fiat job is often draining, while a bitcoin job is more energetic and intense in nature. We’re building something good. It’s also good to remember that this energy is often used to make you do the work, without the reward.

Lower pay: At least in my experience; salaries tend to be lower compared to traditional tech or finance roles, and I’ve even seen bickering over the price like it was a flee market.

Funding struggles: Many bitcoin startups face ongoing financial uncertainty, troubles finding investors, or getting investors that cancel their deals or disappear entirely.

Constant involvement: There’s little room to “clock out” at 5 PM; engagement is often expected beyond regular hours (it comes with the territory).

Lack of benefits: Many bitcoin jobs offer no social security, no formal employment status, and often operate in a gray area, or completely “off the books”.\ For a company selling their product the whole world over for example, you would expect something else than back alley deals with whispered price agreements. The contracts however, are usually centered about keeping the employee in check and their knowledge protected.

Presence of “grifters”: Some individuals with strong reputations or connections manage to secure more lucrative positions, despite contributing little meaningful work. That’s human nature of course, and it seems to happen in in fiat, bitcoin or voluntary work alike.

bitcoin employee receiving his contract and first payment

Some argue that receiving bitcoin as payment is, in itself, a form of financial (and social) security. However, this ignores the realities of daily life. In the absence of a global bitcoin standard, workers still depend on government regulations, taxation systems, and social security structures (in Europe).

For instance, if a bitcoiner falls ill for two weeks, they may lose their income entirely. Meanwhile, an employee at a tech firm, bank, or blue-chip company would typically receive paid sick leave or at least retain their job security.\ I know this is a fairly Euro-zone centered view, and the rest of the world has of course different ways to compensate for that. Either this happens through having lower taxation, or having more self-reliance on private savings and “buffers” to build up your own protection as an employee.\ \ It all comes down to either getting paid more to have your expenses and social security covered by yourself, or getting paid less and leaving a cut for some state fiat system that will take care of your social benefits if they’re needed.\ \ So far, from what I heard an experienced in a bitcoin job it’s the worst of both worlds: low(er) pay, more uncertainty and no security benefits. That’s something that can be fixed.

While social protections in the fiat system are funded through mechanisms like inflation and money printing, and a lot of taxation, their “benefits” are tangible (and expensive).\ \ In contrast, many bitcoin jobs rely on ideological commitment, which can sometimes be exploited, where individuals are expected to work for little or no compensation - while forgoing the protections that traditional employment offers.\ \ Even is we are more sovereign as bitcoiners you sooner or later get older, get sick, have a baby or have other phases in your life.\ For the companies themselves this is also a huge challenge: the hiring of people and paying them in hard money, means that their output and real life worth to the company needs to be higher in total over all employees than the holding of the same amount of bitcoin. Since bitcoin itself has the magnificent feature of not bearing yield (just holding 1 bitcoin doesn’t pay you 0.01 bitcoin dividend).\ Even more so, the employee is paid in bitcoin, and can thus be more free, have hard money that is inflation resistent over a longer time period. Retaining these employees for longer periods of time (if that’s your goal anyway as a bitcoin company) can be a real challenge. I don’t see how you can retain people doing an intense job while you pay them in the hardest money there is.\ I guess motivation is really the key here.\ \ The fiat world has that covered (we know how of course and we know they do it though printing money and taxation).\ \ The bitcoin world still needs to figure out how to deal with these situations. Just promising people some bitcoin is not enough.

Building a better future for bitcoin jobs

One of the biggest obstacles according to me, is to a true bitcoin standard — aside from the challenge of using bitcoin for manufacturing and basic goods (which I’ll address later)— is the lack of meaningful job opportunities that provide both bitcoin salaries and financial security on a mid to longer time frame.\ Bitcoiners or no bitcoiners, people don’t want to hop from one job to another every few weeks.

I think sooner or later the bitcoin space will need a global bitcoin social security framework — one that reimagines financial protection for workers without simply replicating the state-run systems of the fiat world, and certainly doesn’t replicate the European systems that failed so miserably (my country for example imposes the highest tax in the world counted from employer to employee in order to pay for social benefits).\ If the employer pays 6000€, the taxation causes the employee to receive a mere 3440€.\ \ Today, a bitcoin-only company is already rare.\ A bitcoin company that offers proper employment contracts, benefits, actually pays on time, has a future ànd has a minimal plan for some form of social protection is nearly nonexistent.

That’s why I argue: real bitcoin jobs are almost nonexistent.

What we have instead are:\ \ - A bunch of hobby projects and side gigs in the v4v space.

- Startups that offer little to no worker protection and rely on goodwill or fantastic ideas with a lack of fundamental backing.

- A handful of legitimate companies that still depend on fiat-based social security and payment structures to operate and attract and keep talent.

The missing link: financial and social security for bitcoin jobs

\ We need more companies like Bitwage3 as well where bitcoin jobs and their administrative and payment handlings are taken care of (also in Europe), They must be entirely bitcoin-only or have a subsidiary that works exclusively on pure bitcoin jobs.\ \ With a yet-to-be-invented social system which gives bitcoin employees a way to build up an securing their well-being in the long rung (bitcoiners don’t stay forever 21).\ That would increase this btc-job market and the legitimacy of its real life employment.\ \ Without this, working in bitcoin will continue to feel unstable, informal, or even go “off-the-books” because of a lack of alternatives.

If bitcoin companies want to attract top talent, they need to offer more than just ideology and goodwill.\ There are countless people that had bad experiences with this.\ \ Many skilled professionals currently enjoy secure fiat jobs with stable salaries, full benefits, and usually minimal effort. Yet, they want out. They know fiat jobs are a trip though quicksand.\ \ Without a competitive alternative however, bitcoin businesses will continue to rely on those willing to struggle financially and living like a “value4value” ideologist (or even worse: grifters), others will be people that contribute real value but are underpaid and face difficulties using their bitcoin earnings for everyday expenses like rent, groceries and utilities (without resorting to questionable third-party services)

That last category of employees or possible employees is often overlooked. There’s a whole generation that doesn’t sit on a stash of bitcoin in order to fund their own “ideal job” or have ideology of an open-source encrypt everything and live on bitcoin only warrior. Some people have to pay their rent, buy food or at least know they’ll be still having a job tomorrow if they work hard.\ \ In the oasis of a bitcoin job in 2025, you soon crawl to that one lousy coconut in that one palm tree in order to survive.

“Tick-tock next job”

\ Today, most so-called "bitcoin jobs" fall into one of two categories :

1. Not actually bitcoin-related – Corporate blockchain projects, scams, token-based schemes, memecoins, rugpull/defi/web3/NFT peddlers, and “anything on the blockchain” services without a proper oracle… and other type of distractions.\ These are sometimes presented as bitcoin jobs, yet they aren’t.

2. Paid in bitcoin but lacking real merit :\ Low or mediocre wages, no benefits and no worker protection, in an industry where your value lasts about as long as the average block time (pun intended).

3. Well-paid longer term real bitcoin jobs:\ Good pay, on the books, meaningful and well organized pure bitcoin job, for the happy few who have good connections.

If bitcoin employment is to be more than just a passion project where dedicated workers struggle while CEOs and media personalities live lavishly, we need a sustainable framework that provides real financial longevity, funding and real bitcoin jobs.

Without it, bitcoin will remain an industry with unstable or even sketchy niche job offerings, with neither long-term careers nor financial (let alone social) security.\ If people can’t build a future in bitcoin jobs, the right talent won’t be attracted in the first place. Which is amazing, come to thing of it, we’re probably the only industry that thrives on hard money, we should have the most quality jobs and most happy employees.

Passion alone isn’t enough.\ When everyone knows bitcoin jobs are short-term or unstable, motivation dwindles. The reality is that some people, myself included, would rather endure a dull fiat job, than waste their valuable time and money on an industry that fails to offer real career prospects and real support for their talent.\ \ All the billions held by all these big companies and fund, is not put to use for their actual builders and talent it seems. I can’t explain the billions of holdings and on the other side, the total lack of funding happening on projects and startups.\ \ More so, the vast majority of bitcoin jobs are nor jobs, nor bitcoin jobs or not anything that can be defined as such.\ And it shows.\ \ That’s why a lot of products and services are currently in the lousy (lazy) state they’re in and that’s why almost all bitcoiners are either stuck in a fiat job or work within the bitcoin system for peanuts out of ideology or through good connections.\ Right now, other than the possible btc in your wallet, there’s little to no difference between bitcoin jobs and fiat jobs in that regard.\ No wonder choosing safety of a fiat job still wins, and I hope that will change one day.\ Until then, working for Bill Lumbergh has it’s perks.

by Kim De Vos for AVB\ tips: here

Disclaimer: To provide content more regularly, I occasionally write my posts with AI assistance. Rest assured, the core ideas and writing are always 100% my own creation and it’s edited by at least two humans!

---

Footnotes:

1

definition : The word "sham" refers to something that is theater or designed to deceive. It describes a situation, scheme, or entity that appears legitimate on the surface but lacks substance, authenticity, or real core values.

2

https://t.me/bitvocationfeed

3

https://bitwage.com/en-us/

@ 3c984938:2ec11289

It's been a journey from the Publishing Forest of Nostr to the open sea of web3. I've come across a beautiful chain of islands and thought. Why not take a break and explore this place? If I'm searching for devs and FOSS, I should search every nook and cranny inside the realm of Nostr. It is quite vast for little old me. I'm just a little hamster and I don't speak in code or binary numbers zeros and ones.

After being in sea for awhile, my heart raced for excitement for what I could find. It seems I wasn't alone, there were others here like me! Let's help spread the message to others about this uncharted realm. See, look at the other sailboats, aren't they pretty? Thanks to some generous donation of SATs, I was able to afford the docking fee.

Ever feel like everyone was going to a party, and you were supposed to dress up, but you missed the memo? Or a comic-con? well, I felt completely underdressed and that's an understatement. Well, turns out there is a some knights around here. Take a peek!

A black cat with a knight passed by very quickly. He was moving too fast for me to track. Where was he going? Then I spotted a group of knights heading in the same direction, so I tagged along. The vibes from these guys was impossible to resist. They were just happy-go-lucky. 🥰They were heading to a tavern on a cliff off the island.

Ehh? a Tavern? Slightly confused, whatever could these knights be doing here? I guess when they're done with their rounds they would here to blow off steam. Things are looking curiouser and curiouser. But the black cat from earlier was here with its rider, whom was dismounting. So you can only guess, where I'm going.

The atmosphere in this pub, was lively and energetic. So many knights spoke among themselves. A group here, another there, but there was one that caught my eye. I went up to a group at a table, whose height towed well above me even when seated. Taking a deep breath, I asked, "Who manages this place?" They unanimous pointed to one waiting for ale at the bar. What was he doing? Watching others talk? How peculiar.

So I went up to him! And introduced myself.

"Hello I'm Onigirl"

"Hello Onigirl, Welcome to Gossip"

"Gossip, what is Gossip?" scratching my head and whiskers.

What is Gossip? Gossip is FOSS and a great client for privacy-centric minded nostriches. It avoids browser tech which by-passes several scripting languages such as JavaScript☕, HTML parsing, rendering, and CSS(Except HTTP GET and Websockets). Using OpenGL-style rendering. For Nostriches that wish to remain anonymous can use Gossip over TOR. Mike recommends using QubesOS, Whonix and or Tails. [FYI-Gossip does not natively support tor SOCKS5 proxy] Most helpful to spill the beans if you're a journalist.

On top of using your nsec or your encryption key, Gossip adds another layer of security over your account with a password login. There's nothing wrong with using the browser extensions (such as nos2x or Flamingo) which makes it super easy to log in to Nostr enable websites, apps, but it does expose you to browser vulnerabilities.

Mike Points out

"people have already had their private key stolen from other nostr clients,"

so it a concern if you value your account. I most certainly care for mine.

Gossip UI has a simple, and clean interface revolving around NIP-65 also called the “Outbox model." As posted from GitHub,

"This NIP allows Clients to connect directly with the most up-to-date relay set from each individual user, eliminating the need of broadcasting events to popular relays."

This eliminates clients that track only a specific set of relays which can congest those relays when you publish your note. Also this can be censored, by using Gossip you can publish notes to alternative relays that have not censored you to reach the same followers.

👉The easiest way to translate that is reducing redundancy to publish to popular relays or centralized relays for content reach to your followers.

Cool! What an awesome client, I mean Tavern! What else does this knight do? He reaches for something in his pocket. what is it? A Pocket is a database for storing and retrieving nostr events but mike's written it in Rust with a few extra kinks inspired by Will's nostrdb. Still in development, but it'll be another tool for you dear user! 💖💕💚

Onigirl is proud to present this knights to the community and honor them with kisu. 💋💋💋 Show some 💖💘💓🧡💙💚

👉💋💋Will - jb55 Lord of apples 💋 @npub1xtscya34g58tk0z605fvr788k263gsu6cy9x0mhnm87echrgufzsevkk5s

👉💋💋 Mike Knight - Lord of Security 💋 @npub1acg6thl5psv62405rljzkj8spesceyfz2c32udakc2ak0dmvfeyse9p35c

Knights spend a lot of time behind the screen coding for the better of humanity. It is a tough job! Let's appreciate these knights, relay operators, that support this amazing realm of Nostr! FOSS for all!

This article was prompted for the need for privacy and security of your data. They're different, not to be confused.

Recently, Edward Snowden warns Bitcoin devs about the need for privacy, Quote:

“I've been warning Bitcoin developers for ten years that privacy needs to be provided for at the protocol level. This is the final warning. The clock is ticking.”

Snowden’s comments come after heavy actions of enforcement from Samarai Wallet, Roger Ver, Binance’s CZ, and now the closure of Wasabi Wallet. Additionally, according to CryptoBriefing, Trezor is ending it’s CoinJoin integration as well. Many are concerned over the new definition of a money transmitter, which includes even those who don’t touch the funds.

Help your favorite the hamster

^^Me drowning in notes on your feed. I can only eat so many notes to find you.

👉If there are any XMPP fans on here. I'm open to the idea of opening a public channel, so you could follow me on that as a forum-like style. My server of choice would likely be a German server.😀You would be receiving my articles as njump.me style or website-like. GrapeneOS users, you can download Cheogram app from the F-Driod store for free to access. Apple and Andriod users are subjected to pay to download this app, an alternative is ntalk or conversations. If it interests the community, just FYI. Please comment or DM.

👉If you enjoyed this content, please consider reposting/sharing as my content is easily drowned by notes on your feed. You could also join my community under Children_Zone where I post my content.

An alternative is by following #onigirl Just FYI this feature is currently a little buggy.

Follow as I search for tools and awesome devs to help you dear user live a decentralized life as I explore the realm of Nostr.

Thank you Fren

@ 2e8970de:63345c7a

In international tests, student scores for reading and maths sunk to a new low.

US 18 year olds increasingly say they have trouble concentrating and learning new things

Almost half of US teens said they "hardly ever" spend their leisure time reading a book

The share of adults who are unable to “use mathematical reasoning when reviewing and evaluating the validity of statements” has reached - 25% in high-income countries - 35% in the US

https://www.ft.com/content/a8016c64-63b7-458b-a371-e0e1c54a13fc

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/914140

@ 3c984938:2ec11289

Hello (N)osytrs!

Yes! I'm calling you an (N)oystr!

Why is that? Because you shine, and I'm not just saying that to get more SATs. Ordinary Oysters and mussels can produce these beauties! Nothing seriously unique about them, however, with a little time and love each oyster is capable of creating something truly beautiful. I like believing so, at least, given the fact that you're even reading this article; makes you an (N)oystr! This isn't published this on X (formerly known as Twitter), Facebook, Discord, Telegram, or Instagram, which makes you the rare breed! A pearl indeed! I do have access to those platforms, but why create content on a terrible platform knowing I too could be shut down! Unfortunately, many people still use these platforms. This forces individuals to give up their privacy every day. Meta is leading the charge by forcing users to provide a photo ID for verification in order to use their crappy, obsolete site. If that was not bad enough, imagine if you're having a type of disagreement or opinion. Then, Bigtech can easily deplatform you. Umm. So no open debate? Just instantly shut-off users. Whatever, happened to right to a fair trial? Nope, just burning you at the stake as if you're a witch or warlock!

How heinous are the perpetrators and financiers of this? Well, that's opening another can of worms for you.

Imagine your voice being taken away, like the little mermaid. Ariel was lucky to have a prince, but the majority of us? The likelihood that I would be carried away by the current of the sea during a sunset with a prince on a sailboat is zero. And I live on an island, so I'm just missing the prince, sailboat(though I know where I could go to steal one), and red hair. Oh my gosh, now I feel sad.

I do not have the prince, Bob is better! I do not have mermaid fins, or a shell bra. Use coconut shells, it offers more support! But, I still have my voice and a killer sunset to die for!

All of that is possible thanks to the work of developers. These knights fight for Freedom Tech by utilizing FOSS, which help provides us with a vibrant ecosystem. Unfortunately, I recently learned that they are not all funded. Knights must eat, drink, and have a work space. This space is where they spend most of their sweat equity on an app or software that may and may not pan out. That brilliance is susceptible to fading, as these individuals are not seen but rather stay behind closed doors. What's worse, if these developers lose faith in their project and decide to join forces with Meta! 😖 Does WhatsApp ring a bell?

Without them, I probably wouldn't be able to create this long form article. Let's cheer them on like cheerleaders.. 👉Unfortunately, there's no cheerleader emoji so you'll just have to settle for a dancing lady, n guy. 💃🕺

Semisol said it beautifully, npub12262qa4uhw7u8gdwlgmntqtv7aye8vdcmvszkqwgs0zchel6mz7s6cgrkj

If we want freedom tech to succeed, the tools that make it possible need to be funded: relays like https://nostr.land, media hosts like https://nostr.build, clients like https://damus.io, etc.

With that thought, Onigirl is pleased to announce the launch of a new series. With a sole focus on free market devs/projects.

Knights of Nostr!

I'll happily brief you about their exciting project and how it benefits humanity! Let's Support these Magnificent projects, devs, relays, and builders! Our first runner up!

Oppa Fishcake :Lord of Media Hosting

npub137c5pd8gmhhe0njtsgwjgunc5xjr2vmzvglkgqs5sjeh972gqqxqjak37w

Oppa Fishcake with his noble steed!

Think of this as an introduction to learn and further your experience on Nostr! New developments and applications are constantly happening on Nostr. It's enough to make one's head spin. I may also cover FOSS projects(outside of Nostr) as they need some love as well! Plus, you can think of it as another tool to add to your decentralized life. I will not be doing how-to-Nostr guides. I personally feel there are plenty of great guides already available! Which I'm happy to add to curation collection via easily searchable on Yakihonne.

For email updates you can subscribe to my [[https://paragraph.xyz/@onigirl]]

If you like it, send me some 🧡💛💚 hearts💜💗💖 otherwise zap dat⚡⚡🍑🍑peach⚡⚡🍑 ~If not me, then at least to our dearest knight!

Thank you from the bottom of my heart for your time and support (N)oystr! Shine bright like a diamond! Share if you care! FOSS power!

Follow on your favorite Nostr Client for the best viewing experience!

[!NOTE]

I'm using Obsidian + Nostr Writer Plugin; a new way to publish Markdown directly to Nostr. I was a little nervous using this because I was used doing them in RStudio; R Markdown.
Since this is my first article, I sent it to my account as a draft to test it. It's pretty neat.

@ 6871d8df:4a9396c1

In an era where data seems to be as valuable as currency, the prevailing trend in AI starkly contrasts with the concept of personal data ownership. The explosion of AI and the ensuing race have made it easy to overlook where the data is coming from. The current model, dominated by big tech players, involves collecting vast amounts of user data and selling it to AI companies for training LLMs. Reddit recently penned a 60 million dollar deal, Google guards and mines Youtube, and more are going this direction. But is that their data to sell? Yes, it's on their platforms, but without the users to generate it, what would they monetize? To me, this practice raises significant ethical questions, as it assumes that user data is a commodity that companies can exploit at will.

The heart of the issue lies in the ownership of data. Why, in today's digital age, do we not retain ownership of our data? Why can't our data follow us, under our control, to wherever we want to go? These questions echo the broader sentiment that while some in the tech industry — such as the blockchain-first crypto bros — recognize the importance of data ownership, their "blockchain for everything solutions," to me, fall significantly short in execution.

Reddit further complicates this with its current move to IPO, which, on the heels of the large data deal, might reinforce the mistaken belief that user-generated data is a corporate asset. Others, no doubt, will follow suit. This underscores the urgent need for a paradigm shift towards recognizing and respecting user data as personal property.

In my perfect world, the digital landscape would undergo a revolutionary transformation centered around the empowerment and sovereignty of individual data ownership. Platforms like Twitter, Reddit, Yelp, YouTube, and Stack Overflow, integral to our digital lives, would operate on a fundamentally different premise: user-owned data.

In this envisioned future, data ownership would not just be a concept but a practice, with public and private keys ensuring the authenticity and privacy of individual identities. This model would eliminate the private data silos that currently dominate, where companies profit from selling user data without consent. Instead, data would traverse a decentralized protocol akin to the internet, prioritizing user control and transparency.

The cornerstone of this world would be a meritocratic digital ecosystem. Success for companies would hinge on their ability to leverage user-owned data to deliver unparalleled value rather than their capacity to gatekeep and monetize information. If a company breaks my trust, I can move to a competitor, and my data, connections, and followers will come with me. This shift would herald an era where consent, privacy, and utility define the digital experience, ensuring that the benefits of technology are equitably distributed and aligned with the users' interests and rights.

The conversation needs to shift fundamentally. We must challenge this trajectory and advocate for a future where data ownership and privacy are not just ideals but realities. If we continue on our current path without prioritizing individual data rights, the future of digital privacy and autonomy is bleak. Big tech's dominance allows them to treat user data as a commodity, potentially selling and exploiting it without consent. This imbalance has already led to users being cut off from their digital identities and connections when platforms terminate accounts, underscoring the need for a digital ecosystem that empowers user control over data. Without changing direction, we risk a future where our content — and our freedoms by consequence — are controlled by a few powerful entities, threatening our rights and the democratic essence of the digital realm. We must advocate for a shift towards data ownership by individuals to preserve our digital freedoms and democracy.

@ 22050dd3:480c11ea

"Bitcoin is the stupidest thing in the world” – words spit out to me by a co-worker I have known for 8 years.

“I will never take money advice from you” – uttered by the same co-worker right before he spat on Bitcoin.

It wasn’t the words that stood out to me, but rather the hostility behind the eyes and facial expression.

This particular conversation was not the first time we had talked about Bitcoin.

I was already aware that my co-worker didn’t think highly of the world-changing technology.

However, this was the first time that I had ever encountered such hostility and seemingly repressed anger from my co-worker in my entire 8 years of knowing him.

Aside from being taken back by his comments and demeanor, my mind instantly flung itself to one of my all-time favorite quotes:

Nothing can be loved or hated unless it is first understood

Leonardo da Vinci

I think of this quote often and believe it is perfect and applicable to Bitcoin today.

By nature, we humans have a predisposition to dislike and oppose things we do not understand. It is the path of least resistance to oppose and automatically reject things that we do not automatically comprehend.

We will likely discard or oppose things that challenge our views, values, and thoughts.

Part of the reason personal growth and change are difficult is because to undergo growth means to effectively kill off a part of us that followed an old belief.

If something new and “mysterious” were to come along (Bitcoin) that tells you everything you knew and believed was wrong, it is logical that you oppose, criticize, and reject this disruptor.

It is with disappointment I say that this demeanor, negativity, and hostility towards Bitcoin are more or less normal for me when engaging in discussions with people about Bitcoin.

However, I understand why people react this way. The hostility makes sense.

Bitcoin challenges everything in the system that humans around the world have been living in for generations.

Everything that societies and cultures have accepted as fact as if it were a law of nature. It is my goal in these engagements to disarm this hostility.

I think that over the past decade or so we as a people have collectively forgotten how to disagree with each other and have cool-tempered and respectful discussions and arguments.

Arguing is good.

It means that two opposing ideas are being presented, discussed, and thought about.

The world would be dull if everyone agreed all of the time. I would even argue that discussions around ideas and thoughts would come off as ingenuine and fake. Though, I digress.

The best way to overcome this hostility is to kill it with kindness.

I approach every interaction I have about Bitcoin with kindness and try to understand the other person’s point of view. I then focus on teaching and educating them about Bitcoin.

My first question when someone says Bitcoin is stupid is “Why do you think that?”. Normally, the answer is full of inaccuracies and misconceptions about Bitcoin.

I love watching people’s facial expressions change and the gears begin to turn as I break down their misconceptions.

It’s fine if they don’t leave the conversation being orange-pilled.

My only goal in these interactions is to dismantle the misconceptions and misunderstandings about Bitcoin. I also like to think of it as planting “orange seeds”. Planting an idea in someone’s mind that they can choose to explore and research further if they desire.

At times it can be difficult to not combat hostility with hostility.

When you have put in the time, work, and effort to understand something, it is easy to want to deflect attacks and hostility with sarcasm and point out flaws in a topic that the other person does not understand.

While it may feel good, it feels even better to counter negativity with posivity.

Teaching and spreading education with open arms and kindness is the quickest way to a better, Bitcoin future.

@ df478568:2a951e67

People ask for my phone number. I don't want to give it to them because SMS is a spam swamp. I like SimpleX because • It's easy • All the cool people use it. • I can share it privately I decided to add ten private Simplex Chat invites. Each link can be used one time. This is my preferred private communication protocol. SMTP sucks. The world doesn't need any more damn emails. I would like to notify people of my new articles using SimpleX. Email is much too crowded with spam. I want to use Simplex to notify people of my blogs instead, but I need people to use it first. I will update this with private invite links periodically.

https://simplex.chat/invitation?ref=p66dxywd2xpyyrdfxwilqcxmchmfw2ixmn2vm74q3atf22du7qmkihyd.onion#/?v=2-7&smp=smp%3A%2F%2FZKe4uxF4Z_aLJJOEsC-Y6hSkXgQS5-oc442JQGkyP8M%3D%40smp17.simplex.im%2FoFKYBeyLn3V8BxU6eyFimpMyzcLd7Heu%23%2F%3Fv%3D1-3%26dh%3DMCowBQYDK2VuAyEAb_-U1ELuEqK7k-1VfSTpHiEvvTTylJCSVdlyJr4KxTY%253D%26k%3Ds%26srv%3Dogtwfxyi3h2h5weftjjpjmxclhb5ugufa5rcyrmg7j4xlch7qsr5nuqd.onion&e2e=v%3D2-3%26x3dh%3DMEIwBQYDK2VvAzkAaMPMWf7DFJzgDlx-PTdH79ieMnuOEf7MEpNhfy17KUNy_5w4W3VYjh_AAgee3cva_kSLZTvD5T8%3D%2CMEIwBQYDK2VvAzkAKQHIwe7J8wz2D3-4J9yKjxCMBHD7_vBfbsTIjL833ItytEUvbxjTuMxym1DOjcG3kisDJC5Jggs%3D https://simplex.chat/invitation?ref=p66dxywd2xpyyrdfxwilqcxmchmfw2ixmn2vm74q3atf22du7qmkihyd.onion#/?v=2-7&smp=smp%3A%2F%2F1OwYGt-yqOfe2IyVHhxz3ohqo3aCCMjtB-8wn4X_aoY%3D%40smp11.simplex.im%2F7Mo9qaOhegoIjXDru40AZAXy-q2upx0x%23%2F%3Fv%3D1-3%26dh%3DMCowBQYDK2VuAyEA_QH9YEhrzXzuvqJa7PyhQvd_C4jftuQvnot6ZkGhS1o%253D%26k%3Ds%26srv%3D6ioorbm6i3yxmuoezrhjk6f6qgkc4syabh7m3so74xunb5nzr4pwgfqd.onion&e2e=v%3D2-3%26x3dh%3DMEIwBQYDK2VvAzkAuNnygCt4YjXhUBLVjzlu5BH1CfRGF0QmokhJj1unseCdxdlZLCVV0_ZN8HgXpoxYpeZ4Fe13kik%3D%2CMEIwBQYDK2VvAzkAAUDEyHkg6LYnvvgkjjycfO6sk32xCfq_YdVRWW6NUWIsRxOuLOYGEnE4OkvND_tXm0usn7AU0KE%3D

I want to write about SimpleX chat, but it's one of those things where I need more contacts to properly learn about it. I am running SimpleX on my start99, but I haven't really used it. Therefore, I am pasting 10 SimpleX invites to grow my SimpleX networkhttps://simplex.chat/invitation?ref=p66dxywd2xpyyrdfxwilqcxmchmfw2ixmn2vm74q3atf22du7qmkihyd.onion#/?v=2-7&smp=smp%3A%2F%2Fhejn2gVIqNU6xjtGM3OwQeuk8ZEbDXVJXAlnSBJBWUA%3D%40smp16.simplex.im%2FalB0ziQ4M7mGsBvakfxtVeoci-mXV2J3%23%2F%3Fv%3D1-3%26dh%3DMCowBQYDK2VuAyEA4CmqlH1ryCLeIw1SlJCVpUU-ZtrislFqNThBB9xe9Q0%253D%26k%3Ds%26srv%3Dp3ktngodzi6qrf7w64mmde3syuzrv57y55hxabqcq3l5p6oi7yzze6qd.onion&e2e=v%3D2-3%26x3dh%3DMEIwBQYDK2VvAzkAV5wkqxrXI8X27RmKzgR-br_D2CmNyHULjhgoazNT-UgE7ad_V6ZYuRI9QTQXhGHRUKnXGircsf8%3D%2CMEIwBQYDK2VvAzkAHuHlr0trD4kCEcp2VU76xWMa0aBx-dozfnP3zzqdP-MuJZTJUNbi9EpIf39n0axlLAs-oatlgRE%3D

https://simplex.chat/invitation?ref=p66dxywd2xpyyrdfxwilqcxmchmfw2ixmn2vm74q3atf22du7qmkihyd.onion#/?v=2-7&smp=smp%3A%2F%2F1OwYGt-yqOfe2IyVHhxz3ohqo3aCCMjtB-8wn4X_aoY%3D%40smp11.simplex.im%2F_ZpCS9RDD08Qm-4pv17VRMzOFPxjBm7e%23%2F%3Fv%3D1-3%26dh%3DMCowBQYDK2VuAyEAWyMn7TQspaOj8HWZP0VfI5pqvpUYVXrSfxJMudxCrz8%253D%26k%3Ds%26srv%3D6ioorbm6i3yxmuoezrhjk6f6qgkc4syabh7m3so74xunb5nzr4pwgfqd.onion&e2e=v%3D2-3%26x3dh%3DMEIwBQYDK2VvAzkA4BJLjognkGR5ummsrQWVOpvvmWkLxS357R1q-WqpqG_hDIx3rfyiDlzOUQnHxbzhRrUbCiRT_WI%3D%2CMEIwBQYDK2VvAzkAEEOeu-31-VV1eWiWFjV5aGWg9yUNfSJC49FPiCqJ-So64VJ0mTFPNtcsyp9VbPWmWF5qRCeGnUI%3D

https://simplex.chat/invitation?ref=p66dxywd2xpyyrdfxwilqcxmchmfw2ixmn2vm74q3atf22du7qmkihyd.onion#/?v=2-7&smp=smp%3A%2F%2F1OwYGt-yqOfe2IyVHhxz3ohqo3aCCMjtB-8wn4X_aoY%3D%40smp11.simplex.im%2FmJRSaeobn11nDIB_2InF0MILK5qyjC1X%23%2F%3Fv%3D1-3%26dh%3DMCowBQYDK2VuAyEAYEpzs_Gls1GM8FrbwZGeYBVrdiCz8t8XtRpqCrNmgDc%253D%26k%3Ds%26srv%3D6ioorbm6i3yxmuoezrhjk6f6qgkc4syabh7m3so74xunb5nzr4pwgfqd.onion&e2e=v%3D2-3%26x3dh%3DMEIwBQYDK2VvAzkA_q_H_6iHMPJFBXzGDxkyN_haFd9371mMp-smLaS_inCU5EjHWJwsu5f2BQ0bdCXrLqSzb1q3eQU%3D%2CMEIwBQYDK2VvAzkAlnlyNlVa_qBZioVxKcQAg1pMZKffg0keoonJ3hqNlbTCI72EtqfhHYHczx4Mv5mWRGFhH0urOVs%3D I think this is a chat invitation:

https://simplex.chat/invitation?ref=p66dxywd2xpyyrdfxwilqcxmchmfw2ixmn2vm74q3atf22du7qmkihyd.onion#/?v=2-7&smp=smp%3A%2F%2FSkIkI6EPd2D63F4xFKfHk7I1UGZVNn6k1QWZ5rcyr6w%3D%40smp9.simplex.im%2FeAxDOPINZpOsYZJsrZ4Gbe8ZaSzQItsI%23%2F%3Fv%3D1-3%26dh%3DMCowBQYDK2VuAyEAniEhB6oxFBx6ZwTAsj4NpFfRpKJppT6cW_0P1zXYu1s%253D%26k%3Ds%26srv%3Djssqzccmrcws6bhmn77vgmhfjmhwlyr3u7puw4erkyoosywgl67slqqd.onion&e2e=v%3D2-3%26x3dh%3DMEIwBQYDK2VvAzkABY8g5tGJrQs0VzhK2whiO13jr9yKrRVU-wPhtqUcUQ2p7rMVAGh8aVX50bapEnIwQ9VEttBquFA%3D%2CMEIwBQYDK2VvAzkAeimBaOR40mjB8ErSbZNFmhDG_me6o9HlX2y093t_nR-7DV7XluI3LGOrbVAonfWd2HHmaxS-Hkk%3D

These are contacts:

https://simplex.chat/contact?ref=p66dxywd2xpyyrdfxwilqcxmchmfw2ixmn2vm74q3atf22du7qmkihyd.onion#/?v=2-7&smp=smp%3A%2F%2F1OwYGt-yqOfe2IyVHhxz3ohqo3aCCMjtB-8wn4X_aoY%3D%40smp11.simplex.im%2FDdy5d-fd63uxHSKnClTugOVFzhMTx61N%23%2F%3Fv%3D1-3%26dh%3DMCowBQYDK2VuAyEAil57Tnbh4KPs8LtX_khh2ZSU4_MZwmOzb6V6pYrExVA%253D%26srv%3D6ioorbm6i3yxmuoezrhjk6f6qgkc4syabh7m3so74xunb5nzr4pwgfqd.onion

@ 8ce092d8:950c24ad

Overview

1. Introduction
2. Model Types
3. Training (Data Collection and Config Settings)
4. Probability Viewing: AI Inspector
5. Match
6. Cheat Sheet

I. Introduction

AI Arena is the first game that combines human and artificial intelligence collaboration.

AI learns your skills through "imitation learning."

Official Resources

1. Official Documentation (Must Read): Everything You Need to Know About AI Arena

Watch the 2-minute video in the documentation to quickly understand the basic flow of the game. 2. Official Play-2-Airdrop competition FAQ Site https://aiarena.notion.site/aiarena/Gateway-to-the-Arena-52145e990925499d95f2fadb18a24ab0 3. Official Discord (Must Join): https://discord.gg/aiarenaplaytest for the latest announcements or seeking help. The team will also have a exclusive channel there. 4. Official YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@aiarena because the game has built-in tutorials, you can choose to watch videos.

What is this game about?

1. Although categorized as a platform fighting game, the core is a probability-based strategy game.
2. Warriors take actions based on probabilities on the AI Inspector dashboard, competing against opponents.
3. The game does not allow direct manual input of probabilities for each area but inputs information through data collection and establishes models by adjusting parameters.
4. Data collection emulates fighting games, but training can be completed using a Dummy As long as you can complete the in-game tutorial, you can master the game controls.

II. Model Types

Before training, there are three model types to choose from: Simple Model Type, Original Model Type, and Advanced Model Type.

It is recommended to try the Advanced Model Type after completing at least one complete training with the Simple Model Type and gaining some understanding of the game.

Simple Model Type

The Simple Model is akin to completing a form, and the training session is comparable to filling various sections of that form.

This model has 30 buckets. Each bucket can be seen as telling the warrior what action to take in a specific situation. There are 30 buckets, meaning 30 different scenarios. Within the same bucket, the probabilities for direction or action are the same.

For example: What should I do when I'm off-stage — refer to the "Recovery (you off-stage)" bucket.

For all buckets, refer to this official documentation:

https://docs.aiarena.io/arenadex/game-mechanics/tabular-model-v2

Video (no sound): The entire training process for all buckets

https://youtu.be/1rfRa3WjWEA

Game version 2024.1.10. The method of saving is outdated. Please refer to the game updates.

Advanced Model Type

The "Original Model Type" and "Advanced Model Type" are based on Machine Learning, which is commonly referred to as combining with AI.

The Original Model Type consists of only one bucket, representing the entire map. If you want the AI to learn different scenarios, you need to choose a "Focus Area" to let the warrior know where to focus. A single bucket means that a slight modification can have a widespread impact on the entire model. This is where the "Advanced Model Type" comes in.

The "Advanced Model Type" can be seen as a combination of the "Original Model Type" and the "Simple Model Type". The Advanced Model Type divides the map into 8 buckets. Each bucket can use many "Focus Area." For a detailed explanation of the 8 buckets and different Focus Areas, please refer to the tutorial page (accessible in the Advanced Model Type, after completing a training session, at the top left of the Advanced Config, click on "Tutorial").

III. Training (Data Collection and Config Settings)

Training Process:

1. Collect Data
2. Set Parameters, Train, and Save
3. Repeat Step 1 until the Model is Complete

Training the Simple Model Type is the easiest to start with; refer to the video above for a detailed process.

Training the Advanced Model Type offers more possibilities through the combination of "Focus Area" parameters, providing a higher upper limit. While the Original Model Type has great potential, it's harder to control. Therefore, this section focuses on the "Advanced Model Type."

1. What Kind of Data to Collect

1. High-Quality Data: Collect purposeful data. Garbage in, garbage out. Only collect the necessary data; don't collect randomly. It's recommended to use Dummy to collect data. However, don't pursue perfection; through parameter adjustments, AI has a certain level of fault tolerance.
2. Balanced Data: Balance your dataset. In simple terms, if you complete actions on the left side a certain number of times, also complete a similar number on the right side. While data imbalance can be addressed through parameter adjustments (see below), it's advised not to have this issue during data collection.
3. Moderate Amount: A single training will include many individual actions. Collect data for each action 1-10 times. Personally, it's recommended to collect data 2-3 times for a single action. If the effect of a single training is not clear, conduct a second (or even third) training with the same content, but with different parameter settings.

2. What to Collect (and Focus Area Selection)

Game actions mimic fighting games, consisting of 4 directions + 6 states (Idle, Jump, Attack, Grab, Special, Shield). Directions can be combined into ↗, ↘, etc. These directions and states can then be combined into different actions.

To make "Focus Area" effective, you need to collect data in training that matches these parameters. For example, for "Distance to Opponent", you need to collect data when close to the opponent and also when far away. * Note: While you can split into multiple training sessions, it's most effective to cover different situations within a single training.

Refer to the Simple Config, categorize the actions you want to collect, and based on the game scenario, classify them into two categories: "Movement" and "Combat."

Movement-Based Actions

Action Collection

When the warrior is offstage, regardless of where the opponent is, we require the warrior to return to the stage to prevent self-destruction.

This involves 3 aerial buckets: 5 (Near Blast Zone), 7 (Under Stage), and 8 (Side Of Stage).

* Note: The background comes from the Tutorial mentioned earlier. The arrows in the image indicate the direction of the action and are for reference only. * Note: Action collection should be clean; do not collect actions that involve leaving the stage.

Config Settings

In the Simple Config, you can directly choose "Movement" in it. However, for better customization, it's recommended to use the Advanced Config directly. - Intensity: The method for setting Intensity will be introduced separately later. - Buckets: As shown in the image, choose the bucket you are training. - Focus Area: Position-based parameters: - Your position (must) - Raycast Platform Distance, Raycast Platform Type (optional, generally choose these in Bucket 7)

Combat-Based Actions

The goal is to direct attacks quickly and effectively towards the opponent, which is the core of game strategy.

This involves 5 buckets: - 2 regular situations - In the air: 6 (Safe Zone) - On the ground: 4 (Opponent Active) - 3 special situations on the ground: - 1 Projectile Active - 2 Opponent Knockback - 3 Opponent Stunned

2 Regular Situations

In the in-game tutorial, we learned how to perform horizontal attacks. However, in the actual game, directions expand to 8 dimensions. Imagine having 8 relative positions available for launching hits against the opponent. Our task is to design what action to use for attack or defense at each relative position.

Focus Area - Basic (generally select all) - Angle to opponent
- Distance to opponent - Discrete Distance: Choosing this option helps better differentiate between closer and farther distances from the opponent. As shown in the image, red indicates a relatively close distance, and green indicates a relatively distant distance.

• Advanced: Other commonly used parameters
• Direction: different facings to opponent
• Your Elemental Gauge and Discrete Elementals: Considering the special's charge
• Opponent action: The warrior will react based on the opponent's different actions.
• Your action: Your previous action. Choose this if teaching combos.

3 Special Situations on the Ground

Projectile Active, Opponent Stunned, Opponent Knockback These three buckets can be referenced in the Simple Model Type video. The parameter settings approach is the same as Opponent Active/Safe Zone.

For Projectile Active, in addition to the parameters based on combat, to track the projectile, you also need to select "Raycast Projectile Distance" and "Raycast Projectile On Target."

3. Setting "Intensity"

Resources

• The "Tutorial" mentioned earlier explains these parameters.
• Official Config Document (2022.12.24): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1adXwvDHEnrVZ5bUClWQoBQ8ETrSSKgG5q48YrogaFJs/edit

---

TL;DR:

Epochs: - Adjust to fewer epochs if learning is insufficient, increase for more learning.

Batch Size: - Set to the minimum (16) if data is precise but unbalanced, or just want it to learn fast - Increase (e.g., 64) if data is slightly imprecise but balanced. - If both imprecise and unbalanced, consider retraining.

Learning Rate: - Maximize (0.01) for more learning but a risk of forgetting past knowledge. - Minimize for more accurate learning with less impact on previous knowledge.

Lambda: - Reduce for prioritizing learning new things.

Data Cleaning: - Enable "Remove Sparsity" unless you want AI to learn idleness. - For special cases, like teaching the warrior to use special moves when idle, refer to this tutorial video: https://discord.com/channels/1140682688651612291/1140683283626201098/1195467295913431111

Personal Experience: - Initial training with settings: 125 epochs, batch size 16, learning rate 0.01, lambda 0, data cleaning enabled. - Prioritize Multistream, sometimes use Oversampling. - Fine-tune subsequent training based on the mentioned theories.

IV. Probability Viewing: AI Inspector

The dashboard consists of "Direction + Action." Above the dashboard, you can see the "Next Action" – the action the warrior will take in its current state. The higher the probability, the more likely the warrior is to perform that action, indicating a quicker reaction. It's essential to note that when checking the Direction, the one with the highest visual representation may not have the highest numerical value. To determine the actual value, hover the mouse over the graphical representation, as shown below, where the highest direction is "Idle."

In the map, you can drag the warrior to view the probabilities of the warrior in different positions. Right-click on the warrior with the mouse to change the warrior's facing. The status bar below can change the warrior's state on the map.

When training the "Opponent Stunned, Opponent Knockback" bucket, you need to select the status below the opponent's status bar. If you are focusing on "Opponent action" in the Focus Zone, choose the action in the opponent's status bar. If you are focusing on "Your action" in the Focus Zone, choose the action in your own status bar. When training the "Projectile Active" Bucket, drag the projectile on the right side of the dashboard to check the status.

Next

The higher the probability, the faster the reaction. However, be cautious when the action probability reaches 100%. This may cause the warrior to be in a special case of "State Transition," resulting in unnecessary "Idle" states.

Explanation: In each state a fighter is in, there are different "possible transitions". For example, from falling state you cannot do low sweep because low sweep requires you to be on the ground. For the shield state, we do not allow you to directly transition to headbutt. So to do headbutt you have to first exit to another state and then do it from there (assuming that state allows you to do headbutt). This is the reason the fighter runs because "run" action is a valid state transition from shield. Source

V. Learn from Matches

After completing all the training, your model is preliminarily finished—congratulations! The warrior will step onto the arena alone and embark on its debut!

Next, we will learn about the strengths and weaknesses of the warrior from battles to continue refining the warrior's model.

In matches, besides appreciating the performance, pay attention to the following:

1. Movement, i.e., Off the Stage: Observe how the warrior gets eliminated. Is it due to issues in the action settings at a certain position, or is it a normal death caused by a high percentage? The former is what we need to avoid and optimize.

2. Combat: Analyze both sides' actions carefully. Observe which actions you and the opponent used in different states. Check which of your hits are less effective, and how does the opponent handle different actions, etc.

The approach to battle analysis is similar to the thought process in the "Training", helping to have a more comprehensive understanding of the warrior's performance and making targeted improvements.

VI. Cheat Sheet

Training 1. Click "Collect" to collect actions. 2. "Map - Data Limit" is more user-friendly. Most players perform initial training on the "Arena" map. 3. Switch between the warrior and the dummy: Tab key (keyboard) / Home key (controller). 4. Use "Collect" to make the opponent loop a set of actions. 5. Instantly move the warrior to a specific location: Click "Settings" - SPAWN - Choose the desired location on the map - On. Press the Enter key (keyboard) / Start key (controller) during training.

Inspector 1. Right-click on the fighter to change their direction. Drag the fighter and observe the changes in different positions and directions. 2. When satisfied with the training, click "Save." 3. In "Sparring" and "Simulation," use "Current Working Model." 4. If satisfied with a model, then click "compete." The model used in the rankings is the one marked as "competing."

Sparring / Ranked 1. Use the Throneroom map only for the top 2 or top 10 rankings. 2. There is a 30-second cooldown between matches. The replays are played for any match. Once the battle begins, you can see the winner on the leaderboard or by right-clicking the page - Inspect - Console. Also, if you encounter any errors or bugs, please send screenshots of the console to the Discord server.

Good luck! See you on the arena!

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Drivechain

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

What does the above procedure mean?

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

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

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

What? 6 months to get my money back?

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

Why bother with this at all?

Drivechains solve many different problems:

It enables experimentation and new use cases for Bitcoin

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

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

It solves conflicts and infighting

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

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

It solves "scaling"

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

Use your imagination.

It solves the blockchain security budget issue

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

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

It keeps Bitcoin decentralized

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

Can miners steal?

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

Will miners steal?

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

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

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

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

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

What do we do if miners steal?

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

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

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

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

Because it is impossible.

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

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

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

What about the Blockstream sidechains whitepaper?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

See also

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

@ c8841c9d:ae8048e2

What is Bitcoin ? Here are the fundamentals to understand the first crypto.

Created by the anonymous Satoshi Nakamoto in 2009, Bitcoin is a decentralized digital currency with no central authority.

Censorship-resistant and peer-to-peer, it gives power to the people!

Check out my mind map for a dipper dive. #Bitcoin #Crypto #Cryptomindmap

\ \ Bitcoin runs on a blockchain—a distributed ledger secured by Nakamoto consensus & Proof of Work.

Miners earn BTC rewards by creating new blocks, while UTXO (Unspent Transaction Output) prevents double-spending. A block is added to chain every \~10min. If parallel chains form, the longest chain wins, after 6 blocks, a transaction is considered final.

Transactions are transparent yet private. Check my older cryptomindmaps for more details.

Bitcoin Economics

With a hard cap of 21 million coins, Bitcoin’s supply halves every 4 years(next in 2028), creating scarcity The smallest unit? A Satoshi - 0.00000001 BTC.

This decreasing supply is creating scarcity which drives value but also fuels volatility, with bull runs and corrections shaping its price since day one

What can you do with Bitcoin? Let’s explore!

Bitcoin was intended for payments, it's evolving into "digital gold", a store of value for the internet age.

It enables cheap, easy cross-border transfers and acts as an inflation edge.

Its Lightning Network improves the scalability for digital payments.

Bitcoin’s Challenges

The main hurdles addressed to Bitcoin is the scalability. The low number of possible transactions per second (TPS). Solutions, such as Lightning Network, provide ways to increase usage.

The energy consumption of block production in Proof of Work debate rages . Critics call it is too much electricity, while supporters argue that it is the elegant way to valorize renewable energy and ensure top-notch security.

No central authority means slow consensus via Bitcoin Improvement Proposals (BIPs) and there is no government regulation which can deter some adopters.

Bitcoin #Cryptomindmap

Thanks for reading! 🌟 Share your thoughts on Bitcoin !

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Bolo

It seems that from 1987 to around 2000 there was a big community of people who played this game called "Bolo". It was a game in which people controlled a tank and killed others while trying to capture bases in team matches. Always 2 teams, from 2 to 16 total players, games could last from 10 minutes to 12 hours. I'm still trying to understand all this.

The game looks silly from some videos you can find today, but apparently it was very deep in strategy because people developed strategy guides and wrote extensively about it and Netscape even supported bolo: URLs out of the box.

The two most important elements on the map are pillboxes and bases. Pillboxes are originally neutral, meaning that they shoot at every tank that happens to get in its range. They shoot fast and with deadly accuracy. You can shoot the pillbox with your tank, and you can see how damaged it is by looking at it. Once the pillbox is subdued, you may run over it, which will pick it up. You may place the pillbox where you want to put it (where it is clear), if you've enough trees to build it back up. Trees are harvested by sending your man outside your tank to forest the trees. Your man (also called a builder) can also lay mines, build roads, and build walls. Once you have placed a pillbox, it will not shoot at you, but only your enemies. Therefore, pillboxes are often used to protect your bases.

That quote was taken from this "augmented FAQ" written by some user. Apparently there were many FAQs for this game. A FAQ is after all just a simple, clear and direct to the point way of writing about anything, previously known as summa[^summa-k], it doesn't have to be related to any actually frequently asked question.

More unexpected Bolo writings include an etiquette guide, an anthropology study and some wonderings on the reverse pill war tactic.

[^summa-k]: It's not the same thing, but I couldn't help but notice the similarity.

@ bc52210b:20bfc6de

For over two centuries, the U.S. government has strategically managed federal lands to meet national needs, adapting its approach to address resource security, economic development, and conservation. From the establishment of forest reserves in the late 19th century to protect timber and watersheds, to the acquisition of lands under the Weeks Law of 1911 to safeguard water supplies. Federal land management has served as a flexible tool for ensuring long-term stability and resilience.

While not centralized like the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR), which was created in 1975 to mitigate oil supply disruptions, these lands have been reserved and managed with strategic intent—whether to support national defense, promote agriculture, or preserve ecological systems. This historical precedent demonstrates the government’s capacity to identify and manage critical assets for the public good, adapting to the evolving needs of the nation.

In a similar vein, establishing a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve (SBR) could be a forward-thinking extension of this strategic resource management, aligning with the U.S.’s history of leveraging assets to bolster economic and national security.

Just as the SPR provides a buffer against oil market volatility, an SBR could stabilize cryptocurrency markets, hedge against inflation, and position the U.S. as a leader in the digital economy.

Bitcoin, as a decentralized and finite asset, represents a new form of value that is increasingly influential in global finance. By holding a reserve, the U.S. could mitigate risks associated with currency devaluation, enhance its geopolitical leverage in a digital world, and support innovation in blockchain technology—much like federal lands have been used to secure resources and promote economic growth. Drawing on the government’s experience with strategic reserves and asset management, an SBR could be a modern tool to address 21st-century economic challenges, ensuring resilience in an era of digital transformation.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

IPFS problems: Community

I was an avid IPFS user until yesterday. Many many times I asked simple questions for which I couldn't find an answer on the internet in the #ipfs IRC channel on Freenode. Most of the times I didn't get an answer, and even when I got it was rarely by someone who knew IPFS deeply. I've had issues go unanswered on js-ipfs repositories for year – one of these was raising awareness of a problem that then got fixed some months later by a complete rewrite, I closed my own issue after realizing that by myself some couple of months later, I don't think the people responsible for the rewrite were ever acknowledge that he had fixed my issue.

Some days ago I asked some questions about how the IPFS protocol worked internally, sincerely trying to understand the inefficiencies in finding and fetching content over IPFS. I pointed it would be a good idea to have a drawing showing that so people would understand the difficulties (which I didn't) and wouldn't be pissed off by the slowness. I was told to read the whitepaper. I had already the whitepaper, but read again the relevant parts. The whitepaper doesn't explain anything about the DHT and how IPFS finds content. I said that in the room, was told to read again.

Before anyone misread this section, I want to say I understand it's a pain to keep answering people on IRC if you're busy developing stuff of interplanetary importance, and that I'm not paying anyone nor I have the right to be answered. On the other hand, if you're developing a super-important protocol, financed by many millions of dollars and a lot of people are hitting their heads against your software and there's no one to help them; you're always busy but never delivers anything that brings joy to your users, something is very wrong. I sincerely don't know what IPFS developers are working on, I wouldn't doubt they're working on important things if they said that, but what I see – and what many other users see (take a look at the IPFS Discourse forum) is bugs, bugs all over the place, confusing UX, and almost no help.

@ d0aa74cd:603d35cd

Elixir #Floki packs a punch!

(quick hack) https://photonsphere.org/post/2025-03-15-command-line-energy-prices/

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Castas hindus em nova chave

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

@ 7d33ba57:1b82db35

Monschau, Germany

Monschau is a charming medieval town in western Germany, near the Belgian border. Nestled in the Eifel region, it’s famous for its half-timbered houses, cobblestone streets, and the scenic Rur River flowing through the town. With a rich history, beautiful nature, and delicious local specialties, Monschau is a perfect destination for a romantic getaway or a peaceful weekend trip.

🏰 Top Things to See & Do in Monschau

1️⃣ Explore the Historic Old Town

Wander through the narrow, winding streets lined with half-timbered houses that look like they belong in a storybook. Don’t miss Marktplatz, the central square surrounded by cozy cafés and shops.

2️⃣ Monschau Castle (Burg Monschau)

This medieval castle sits on a hill overlooking the town. It offers breathtaking panoramic views and sometimes hosts concerts and events.

3️⃣ The Red House (Rotes Haus)

A beautifully preserved 18th-century mansion that belonged to a wealthy cloth merchant. Inside, you’ll find historic furniture, an impressive wooden staircase, and exhibits about Monschau’s textile history.

4️⃣ Monschau Christmas Market 🎄

During December, the town turns into a magical winter wonderland, with twinkling lights, festive stalls, and delicious treats like Glühwein (mulled wine) and Printen (local gingerbread).

5️⃣ Eifel National Park & Hiking Trails

Monschau is surrounded by the Eifel National Park, offering hiking and cycling routes through forests, hills, and scenic valleys. Popular trails include the Rursee Loop and the High Fens nature reserve.

🍽️ What to Eat in Monschau

• Monschauer Senf (Monschau Mustard) – A famous, locally made mustard with unique flavors. 🏺
• Aachener Printen – A type of gingerbread, perfect with coffee or tea. 🍪
• Hearty German Cuisine – Try Sauerbraten (marinated beef) or Reibekuchen (potato pancakes). 🍖🥔
• Eifel Cheese & Local Beer – Enjoy regional dairy products with a cold German beer. 🍺🧀

🚗 How to Get to Monschau

🚘 By Car:
- From Cologne (Köln): ~1.5-hour drive
- From Aachen: ~40 minutes

🚌 By Public Transport:
- Take a train to Aachen, then a bus (SB66 or 285) to Monschau.

💡 Tips for Visiting Monschau

✅ Best time to visit? Spring & summer for hiking, winter for the magical Christmas market 🎄
✅ Wear comfy shoes! The streets are cobbled & hilly 👟
✅ Great for photographers – Every corner looks like a postcard 📸

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Economics

Just a bunch of somewhat-related notes.

• notes on "Economic Action Beyond the Extent of the Market", Per Bylund
• Mises' interest rate theory
• Profits, not wages, as the originary factor
• Reisman on opportunity cost
• Money Supply Measurement
• Per Bylund's insight
• Maybe a new approach to the Austrian Business Cycle Theory, some disorganized thoughts
• An argument according to which fractional-reserve banking is merely theft and nothing else
• Conjecture and criticism
• Qual é o economista? (piadas)
• UBI calculations
• Donations on the internet

@ e5de992e:4a95ef85

US Market Overview & Analysis

Key Market Performance

• Dow Jones Industrial Average:
  Closed at 41,488.19, rebounding 1.7% (+674 points). Early trading on March 15 shows a 0.71% decline.

• Nasdaq Composite:
  Surged 2.6% (+451.07 points) to 17,754.09 and recently gained 0.45%.

• S&P 500:
  Rose 2.1% (+117.42 points) to 5,638.94, though it dipped 0.26% in early trading.

---

Futures & Market Drivers

• Federal Reserve Policy:
  Investors are closely watching for signals on potential interest rate cuts.

• Economic Uncertainty:
  Declining consumer confidence and geopolitical tensions continue to weigh on sentiment.

• Tech Stocks:
  Companies like Nvidia and Apple have experienced volatility but are showing signs of recovery.

• Earnings Reports:
  Strong earnings from Ulta Beauty have boosted investor sentiment.

---

Global Market Overview & Analysis

Major Indices Performance

• S&P 500:
  Rebounded 2.1% on Friday but remains down 10% from recent highs.

• Dow Jones:
  Gained 1.7% but logged a weekly decline.

• Nasdaq Composite:
  Climbed 2.6% but continues to be pressured by volatility in the AI sector.

---

Key Market Drivers

• Economic Uncertainty:
• Concerns over a U.S. economic slowdown and policy unpredictability are weighing on sentiment.

• Tariff tensions between the U.S. and Europe remain a risk.

• Geopolitical Events:

• Tariff threats from President Trump and European counter-measures contribute to volatility.

• U.S. government funding negotiations have reduced short-term uncertainty.

• Monetary Policy & Interest Rates:

• The Federal Reserve is expected to hold rates steady, though potential rate cuts remain a focus.

• Moderate inflation data has eased some concerns.

• Sector Trends:

• The AI sector continues to experience valuation-driven volatility.
• China’s economic policies aim to stimulate consumer spending.

---

Futures, Commodities & Bond Market

• 10-Year Treasury Yield:
  Rose to 4.31%, reflecting ongoing market uncertainty.

• WTI Crude Oil:
  Priced at $67.05 per barrel, up +0.8%, impacted by demand fluctuations.

• Gold Futures:
  Trading at $3,005 per ounce with a +0.5% change.

• Bitcoin:
  Currently recovering, trading at $83,200.

---

Upcoming Market Events

• Consumer Price Index (CPI) & Sentiment Data:
  Will provide fresh insights on inflation.

• Federal Reserve Meeting:
  Expected to shape future rate adjustment expectations.

---

Market Outlook

• Volatility:
  Remains high amid continued uncertainty.

• Stabilization Signals:
  Sector-specific rebounds and improving economic data offer glimpses of stabilization.

• Key Influencers:
  Monetary policy decisions, geopolitical risks, and inflation trends will continue to drive market movements in the coming weeks.

@ 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/913692

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Thoughts on Nostr key management

On Why I don't like NIP-26 as a solution for key management I talked about multiple techniques that could be used to tackle the problem of key management on Nostr.

Here are some ideas that work in tandem:

• NIP-41 (stateless key invalidation)
• NIP-46 (Nostr Connect)
• NIP-07 (signer browser extension)
• Connected hardware signing devices
• other things like musig or frostr keys used in conjunction with a semi-trusted server; or other kinds of trusted software, like a dedicated signer on a mobile device that can sign on behalf of other apps; or even a separate protocol that some people decide to use as the source of truth for their keys, and some clients might decide to use that automatically
• there are probably many other ideas

Some premises I have in my mind (that may be flawed) that base my thoughts on these matters (and cause me to not worry too much) are that

• For the vast majority of people, Nostr keys aren't a target as valuable as Bitcoin keys, so they will probably be ok even without any solution;
• Even when you lose everything, identity can be recovered -- slowly and painfully, but still --, unlike money;
• Nostr is not trying to replace all other forms of online communication (even though when I think about this I can't imagine one thing that wouldn't be nice to replace with Nostr) or of offline communication, so there will always be ways.
• For the vast majority of people, losing keys and starting fresh isn't a big deal. It is a big deal when you have followers and an online persona and your life depends on that, but how many people are like that? In the real world I see people deleting social media accounts all the time and creating new ones, people losing their phone numbers or other accounts associated with their phone numbers, and not caring very much -- they just find a way to notify friends and family and move on.

We can probably come up with some specs to ease the "manual" recovery process, like social attestation and explicit signaling -- i.e., Alice, Bob and Carol are friends; Alice loses her key; Bob sends a new Nostr event kind to the network saying what is Alice's new key; depending on how much Carol trusts Bob, she can automatically start following that and remove the old key -- or something like that.

---

One nice thing about some of these proposals, like NIP-41, or the social-recovery method, or the external-source-of-truth-method, is that they don't have to be implemented in any client, they can live in standalone single-purpose microapps that users open or visit only every now and then, and these can then automatically update their follow lists with the latest news from keys that have changed according to multiple methods.

@ a012dc82:6458a70d

A decade ago, Bitcoin was more of a concept than a currency, introduced as an alternative to traditional financial systems. This digital currency, built on a foundation of cryptographic proof and blockchain technology, promised a new era of financial transactions — one that was secure, anonymous, and decentralized. Early adopters were a mix of technologists, libertarians, and visionaries who saw potential in a currency free from government control and banking fees. However, for the vast majority, Bitcoin and its underlying technology were complex and unproven concepts. Investing $1,000 in such an uncertain venture was akin to throwing money into a digital abyss, with hopes rather than expectations for any return. Yet, this was the beginning of what would become one of the most remarkable financial stories of the 21st century.

Table of Contents

• The Early Days

• The Surge: Bitcoin's Value Skyrockets

• The Rollercoaster: Volatility and Regulation

• The Present: A New Era of Digital Currency

• The Future: Bitcoin and Beyond

• Conclusion

• FAQs

The Early Days

In the early 2010s, investing in Bitcoin was largely seen as a niche hobby rather than a serious financial endeavor. The infrastructure was rudimentary; early transactions were slow, and the places accepting Bitcoin were few and far between. The value of Bitcoin was prone to extreme fluctuations, making it a speculative asset for the bold and the brave. Despite these challenges, a small community believed in the potential of a decentralized currency and the power of blockchain technology. They saw Bitcoin as more than just a new form of money — it was a potential tool for freedom, offering privacy and resistance to inflation. These early adopters were the pioneers, laying down the groundwork for what was to come, often facing ridicule and skepticism from the traditional financial sector.

The Surge: Bitcoin's Value Skyrockets

The turning point for Bitcoin came when it began to gain mainstream attention. Media coverage increased, as did interest from investors and the general public. The narrative began to shift from a focus on Bitcoin's use in illegal transactions to its potential as a new asset class. High-profile investments and endorsements added legitimacy, causing more people to view Bitcoin not just as a currency but as a store of value — digital gold. As demand increased, so did the price, leading to a cycle of media coverage, investment, and increasing value. This period saw the emergence of Bitcoin millionaires, individuals who had seen the potential early on and reaped the rewards of their faith and patience. However, this surge was not without its setbacks, including high-profile hacks, scams, and bubbles that burst spectacularly, leaving some investors out of pocket and others wary of the cryptocurrency's future.

The Rollercoaster: Volatility and Regulation

Bitcoin's journey has been characterized by its volatility. Its price has seen dramatic increases followed by steep declines, sometimes within the span of hours. This volatility has been driven by various factors, including regulatory news, technological advancements, and market sentiment. Each high and low has been a test of investor resolve, separating those with a long-term vision from those seeking quick profits. Regulation, or the lack thereof, has played a significant role in Bitcoin's story. Different countries have taken varied approaches, from outright bans to welcoming regulation, impacting the market in unpredictable ways. Despite these challenges, Bitcoin has shown remarkable resilience, bouncing back from lows and continuing to attract investment from those who see it as the future of money.

The Present: A New Era of Digital Currency

Today, Bitcoin stands as the first and most well-known cryptocurrency, but it is no longer alone. The success of Bitcoin has paved the way for thousands of other cryptocurrencies, each with its own unique features and purposes. The industry has evolved, with sophisticated exchanges, wallet services, and a range of financial products available to investors. Bitcoin itself has become more accessible, with options for buying, selling, and storing becoming user-friendly and secure. The conversation around Bitcoin has matured; it is now discussed in the context of portfolio diversification, inflation hedging, and technological innovation. While challenges remain, including environmental concerns and regulatory uncertainty, Bitcoin's influence on the financial landscape is undeniable.

The Future: Bitcoin and Beyond

The future of Bitcoin is as uncertain as its past, but its impact on the financial world is indelible. It has challenged traditional notions of what money is and what it can be. The debate continues over whether Bitcoin will become a global currency, a digital store of value, or perhaps fade into obscurity, replaced by newer technologies. However, its legacy will live on in the way it has changed the conversation around money, privacy, and the power of decentralized systems. The next decade will likely bring further innovations, challenges, and opportunities. For investors, the journey of Bitcoin remains a powerful reminder of the potential rewards and risks of investing in emerging technologies.

Conclusion

Reflecting on the decade-long journey of a $1,000 Bitcoin investment offers more than just a story of financial gain or loss. It represents a chapter in the ongoing evolution of money and finance. The rise of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies has sparked a global conversation about the nature of money, the rights of individuals to privacy and autonomy, and the role of government and corporations in our financial lives. As we move forward, the story of Bitcoin remains unfinished, filled with potential and fraught with uncertainty. Yet, for those who have been part of this journey, whether as investors, observers, or critics, it has been an unprecedented exploration of the possibilities and pitfalls of our modern financial system.

FAQs

What was the value of a $1,000 Bitcoin investment a decade ago compared to now? A decade ago, a $1,000 investment in Bitcoin could have been worth tens of thousands of dollars today, depending on the exact timing of the investment and the market fluctuations.

Why has Bitcoin been so volatile? Bitcoin's volatility can be attributed to various factors including regulatory news, market speculation, technological advancements, and shifts in investor sentiment.

Is Bitcoin a safe investment? Like any investment, Bitcoin carries risks, particularly due to its volatility and the evolving nature of the cryptocurrency market. It's important to conduct thorough research and consider your financial situation and risk tolerance before investing.

How has the perception of Bitcoin changed over the years? Initially viewed as a niche currency for tech enthusiasts, Bitcoin has gained mainstream recognition and is now considered by many as a legitimate investment asset, though skepticism remains.

That's all for today

If you want more, be sure to follow us on:

NOSTR: croxroad@getalby.com

X: @croxroadnewsco

Instagram: @croxroadnews.co/

Youtube: @thebitcoinlibertarian

Store: https://croxroad.store

Subscribe to CROX ROAD Bitcoin Only Daily Newsletter

https://www.croxroad.co/subscribe

Get Orange Pill App And Connect With Bitcoiners In Your Area. Stack Friends Who Stack Sats link: https://signup.theorangepillapp.com/opa/croxroad

Buy Bitcoin Books At Konsensus Network Store. 10% Discount With Code “21croxroad” link: https://bitcoinbook.shop?ref=21croxroad

DISCLAIMER: None of this is financial advice. This newsletter is strictly educational and is not investment advice or a solicitation to buy or sell any assets or to make any financial decisions. Please be careful and do your own research.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

IPFS problems: Shitcoinery

IPFS was advertised to the Ethereum community since the beggining as a way to "store" data for their "dApps". I don't think this is harmful in any way, but for some reason it may have led IPFS developers to focus too much on Ethereum stuff. Once I watched a talk showing libp2p developers – despite being ignored by the Ethereum team (that ended up creating their own agnostic p2p library) – dedicating an enourmous amount of work on getting a libp2p app running in the browser talking to a normal Ethereum node.

The always somewhat-abandoned "Awesome IPFS" site is a big repository of "dApps", some of which don't even have their landing page up anymore, useless Ethereum smart contracts that for some reason use IPFS to store whatever the useless data their users produce.

Again, per se it isn't a problem that Ethereum people are using IPFS, but it is at least confusing, maybe misleading, that when you search for IPFS most of the use-cases are actually Ethereum useless-cases.

See also

• Bitcoin, the only non-shitcoin

@ c3e23eb5:03d7caa9

BIP-85 vs Hierarchically Deterministic wallets

Question

Please summarize the above BIP-85 for me. Whats the difference between this and the xpub based account derivation paths? How is address reuse with xpub based paths related to BIP-85 key derivation?

---

Hierarchical Deterministic (HD) Wallets (e.g., BIP32/BIP44/BIP49/BIP84)

• Single Entropy Source: All keys (xpub/xpriv) derive from one root seed (e.g., a BIP39 mnemonic).
• Hierarchical Structure: Keys are organized into accounts/chains (e.g., m/44'/0'/0' for Bitcoin legacy, m/84'/0'/0' for native SegWit).
• Security Risk: If the root seed is compromised, all derived keys (past, present, and future) are exposed.
• Address Reuse: Reusing the same derivation path (e.g., m/84'/0'/0'/0/0) generates the same address repeatedly.

---

BIP-85 "Master Seed for Seeds"

• Generates Independent Entropy: From a single root seed, BIP-85 derives new, cryptographically isolated entropy for:
• New BIP39 mnemonics (12/24 words).
• WIF keys (e.g., for Bitcoin Core wallets).
• RSA/DICE keys, passwords, etc.
• Security Isolation: derived entropy is hardened via HMAC-SHA512. Compromising one derived seed does expose others or the root seed.
• Use Case: Manage multiple wallets (e.g., Bitcoin, Monero, GPG keys) with separate seeds from a single backup. For example:
• m/83696968'/39'/0'/12'/0' → 12-word BIP39 mnemonic (isolated from root).
• m/83696968'/2'/0' → WIF key for Bitcoin Core.

---

Key Differences

| Feature | HD Wallets (BIP32/44) | BIP-85 | |------------------------|-------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------| | Root Dependency | All keys depend on the root entropy. | Generates new entropy per application. | | Security Scope | Single point of failure (root seed). | Compartmentalized; breaches are isolated. | | Output | Public/private keys (same entropy chain). | New seeds, mnemonics, or entropy. | | Backup Strategy | One for all keys. | One backup, but derived act like separate backups. |

---

Why BIP-85 Enhances Security

• No Shared Entropy: Unlike HD wallets, BIP-85-derived seeds are not mathematically linked to each other or the root. They’re hardened via HMAC-SHA512 to prevent reverse-engineering.
• Mitigates Address Reuse: By independent seeds, you avoid reusing the same address pool across wallets (e.g., using one seed for Lightning Network and another for cold storage).

---

Example Workflow

1. Root Seed: Backup abandon art ... (BIP39 mnemonic).
2. ive via BIP-85:
3. m/83696968'/39'/0'/24'/0' → 24-word mnemonic for a hardware wallet.
4. m/83696968'/707764'/32'/0' → Base64 password for an exchange.
5. Security: If the exchange password is breached, your hardware wallet’s mnemonic remains secure.

---

In short, BIP-85 lets you compartmentalize security while maintaining a single backup, whereas HD wallets trade convenience for shared risk.

```mermaid flowchart TD subgraph "HD Wallets (BIP32/44/49/84)" RootSeed["Single Root Seed (Entropy)"] --> BIP32RootKey BIP32RootKey --> Account1["Account 1 (e.g., m/44'/0'/0')"] BIP32RootKey --> Account2["Account 2 (e.g., m/84'/0'/1')"] Account1 --> Address1A["Address A (m/44'/0'/0'/0/0)"] Account1 --> Address1B["Address B (m/44'/0'/0'/0/1)"] Account2 --> Address2A["Address X (m/84'/0'/1'/0/0)"] Account2 --> Address2B["Address Y (m/84'/0'/1'/0/1)"] style RootSeed fill:#f9f,stroke:#333 end

subgraph "BIP-85 Wallet"
    BIP85RootKey["Master Root Key"] --> HMAC["HMAC-SHA512 (bip-entropy-from-k)"]
    HMAC --> |"Truncated Entropy"| App1["BIP39 Mnemonic 1 (m/83696968'/39'/...)"]
    HMAC --> |"Truncated Entropy"| App2["WIF Key (m/83696968'/2'/...)"]
    HMAC --> |"Truncated Entropy"| App3["RSA Key (m/83696968'/828365'/...)"]
    App1 --> WalletA["Bitcoin Wallet"]
    App2 --> WalletB["Bitcoin Core Wallet"]
    App3 --> WalletC["GPG Key"]
    style BIP85RootKey fill:#f9f,stroke:#333
end

RootSeed -.-> |"Same Initial Seed"| BIP85RootKey

```

@ 078d6670:56049f0c

I asked for something magical before going to bed. I had enough of Unexplained Fleeting Phenomenon for a while, what with my neck hurting and non-existent hypothesis for the stuff I witness. So I asked for something magical instead.

I sit outside in the dark, often.

It’s quiet (but not all the time), spacious, but not when the clouds are covering the sky. I don’t last long these days. It gets colder quicker. A couple of puffs and I’m back inside listening to psy-ambient or some glorious pop.

It’s not all that quiet in the country. Sometimes roosters will start crowing in the middle of the night for no reason, maybe it’s full moon, most of the time it is just random. The roosters will get all confused about something, discuss it for a bit, then the dogs will get irritated. They’re generally louder and their network is wider. Birds tend to not sleep through it. The nocturnals are first, then the doves, ultimately the humans, “Shut the fuck up!” to nothing that listens. If that fails, be sure you will hear the cows and horses next.

But when it is quiet, it is magical.

Most of the time it is unexplained. Fleeting wisps of flying shadows, sometimes light. Many meteors, but sometimes they change direction. Or pulse in and out of star form. I have an idea it’s sometimes organic, sometimes man-made or sometimes, possibly, alien.

I was bored, frustrated consciousness didn’t seem to be interested in rewarding my curiosity. So, I asked for something magical. I didn’t wait or flinch. It arrived in ten seconds.

A shadow silhouette gathers it’s wings as it steadies itself on the corrugated sheeting, slide-scratching with claws. It twirls it’s round head. I don’t move mine with eyes wide, it landed in my vision valiantly.

I thought I had smiled too much. My smile must have grown for five minutes until it took off.

It was back, but not long enough for a landing, as I was expecting, hoping it would grace me with another moment. I was perched a little too perfectly, wide-eyed and expectant.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

nix

Pra instalar o neuron fui forçado a baixar e instalar o nix. Não consegui me lembrar por que não estava usando até hoje aquele maravilhoso sistema de instalar pacotes desde a primeira vez que tentei, anos atrás.

Que sofrimento pra fazer funcionar com o fish, mas até que bem menos sofrimento que da outra vez. Tive que instalar um tal de fish-foreign-environment (usando o próprio nix!, já que a outra opção era o oh-my-fish ou qualquer outra porcaria dessas) e aí usá-lo para aplicar as definições de shell para bash direto no fish.

E aí lembrei também que o /nix/store fica cheio demais, o negócio instala tudo que existe neste mundo a partir do zero. É só para computadores muito ricos, mas vamos ver como vai ser. Estou gostando do neuron (veja, estou usando como diário), então vou ter que deixar o nix aí.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

nostr - Notes and Other Stuff Transmitted by Relays

The simplest open protocol that is able to create a censorship-resistant global "social" network once and for all.

It doesn't rely on any trusted central server, hence it is resilient; it is based on cryptographic keys and signatures, so it is tamperproof; it does not rely on P2P techniques, therefore it works.

Very short summary of how it works, if you don't plan to read anything else:

Everybody runs a client. It can be a native client, a web client, etc. To publish something, you write a post, sign it with your key and send it to multiple relays (servers hosted by someone else, or yourself). To get updates from other people, you ask multiple relays if they know anything about these other people. Anyone can run a relay. A relay is very simple and dumb. It does nothing besides accepting posts from some people and forwarding to others. Relays don't have to be trusted. Signatures are verified on the client side.

This is needed because other solutions are broken:

The problem with Twitter

• Twitter has ads;
• Twitter uses bizarre techniques to keep you addicted;
• Twitter doesn't show an actual historical feed from people you follow;
• Twitter bans people;
• Twitter shadowbans people.
• Twitter has a lot of spam.

The problem with Mastodon and similar programs

• User identities are attached to domain names controlled by third-parties;
• Server owners can ban you, just like Twitter; Server owners can also block other servers;
• Migration between servers is an afterthought and can only be accomplished if servers cooperate. It doesn't work in an adversarial environment (all followers are lost);
• There are no clear incentives to run servers, therefore they tend to be run by enthusiasts and people who want to have their name attached to a cool domain. Then, users are subject to the despotism of a single person, which is often worse than that of a big company like Twitter, and they can't migrate out;
• Since servers tend to be run amateurishly, they are often abandoned after a while — which is effectively the same as banning everybody;
• It doesn't make sense to have a ton of servers if updates from every server will have to be painfully pushed (and saved!) to a ton of other servers. This point is exacerbated by the fact that servers tend to exist in huge numbers, therefore more data has to be passed to more places more often;
• For the specific example of video sharing, ActivityPub enthusiasts realized it would be completely impossible to transmit video from server to server the way text notes are, so they decided to keep the video hosted only from the single instance where it was posted to, which is similar to the Nostr approach.

The problem with SSB (Secure Scuttlebutt)

• It doesn't have many problems. I think it's great. In fact, I was going to use it as a basis for this, but
• its protocol is too complicated because it wasn't thought about being an open protocol at all. It was just written in JavaScript in probably a quick way to solve a specific problem and grew from that, therefore it has weird and unnecessary quirks like signing a JSON string which must strictly follow the rules of ECMA-262 6th Edition;
• It insists on having a chain of updates from a single user, which feels unnecessary to me and something that adds bloat and rigidity to the thing — each server/user needs to store all the chain of posts to be sure the new one is valid. Why? (Maybe they have a good reason);
• It is not as simple as Nostr, as it was primarily made for P2P syncing, with "pubs" being an afterthought;
• Still, it may be worth considering using SSB instead of this custom protocol and just adapting it to the client-relay server model, because reusing a standard is always better than trying to get people in a new one.

The problem with other solutions that require everybody to run their own server

• They require everybody to run their own server;
• Sometimes people can still be censored in these because domain names can be censored.

How does Nostr work?

• There are two components: clients and relays. Each user runs a client. Anyone can run a relay.
• Every user is identified by a public key. Every post is signed. Every client validates these signatures.
• Clients fetch data from relays of their choice and publish data to other relays of their choice. A relay doesn't talk to another relay, only directly to users.
• For example, to "follow" someone a user just instructs their client to query the relays it knows for posts from that public key.
• On startup, a client queries data from all relays it knows for all users it follows (for example, all updates from the last day), then displays that data to the user chronologically.
• A "post" can contain any kind of structured data, but the most used ones are going to find their way into the standard so all clients and relays can handle them seamlessly.

How does it solve the problems the networks above can't?

• Users getting banned and servers being closed
• A relay can block a user from publishing anything there, but that has no effect on them as they can still publish to other relays. Since users are identified by a public key, they don't lose their identities and their follower base when they get banned.
• Instead of requiring users to manually type new relay addresses (although this should also be supported), whenever someone you're following posts a server recommendation, the client should automatically add that to the list of relays it will query.
• If someone is using a relay to publish their data but wants to migrate to another one, they can publish a server recommendation to that previous relay and go;
• If someone gets banned from many relays such that they can't get their server recommendations broadcasted, they may still let some close friends know through other means with which relay they are publishing now. Then, these close friends can publish server recommendations to that new server, and slowly, the old follower base of the banned user will begin finding their posts again from the new relay.

• All of the above is valid too for when a relay ceases its operations.

• Censorship-resistance

• Each user can publish their updates to any number of relays.

• A relay can charge a fee (the negotiation of that fee is outside of the protocol for now) from users to publish there, which ensures censorship-resistance (there will always be some Russian server willing to take your money in exchange for serving your posts).

• Spam

• If spam is a concern for a relay, it can require payment for publication or some other form of authentication, such as an email address or phone, and associate these internally with a pubkey that then gets to publish to that relay — or other anti-spam techniques, like hashcash or captchas. If a relay is being used as a spam vector, it can easily be unlisted by clients, which can continue to fetch updates from other relays.

• Data storage

• For the network to stay healthy, there is no need for hundreds of active relays. In fact, it can work just fine with just a handful, given the fact that new relays can be created and spread through the network easily in case the existing relays start misbehaving. Therefore, the amount of data storage required, in general, is relatively less than Mastodon or similar software.

• Or considering a different outcome: one in which there exist hundreds of niche relays run by amateurs, each relaying updates from a small group of users. The architecture scales just as well: data is sent from users to a single server, and from that server directly to the users who will consume that. It doesn't have to be stored by anyone else. In this situation, it is not a big burden for any single server to process updates from others, and having amateur servers is not a problem.

• Video and other heavy content

• It's easy for a relay to reject large content, or to charge for accepting and hosting large content. When information and incentives are clear, it's easy for the market forces to solve the problem.

• Techniques to trick the user

• Each client can decide how to best show posts to users, so there is always the option of just consuming what you want in the manner you want — from using an AI to decide the order of the updates you'll see to just reading them in chronological order.

FAQ

• This is very simple. Why hasn't anyone done it before?

I don't know, but I imagine it has to do with the fact that people making social networks are either companies wanting to make money or P2P activists who want to make a thing completely without servers. They both fail to see the specific mix of both worlds that Nostr uses.

• How do I find people to follow?

First, you must know them and get their public key somehow, either by asking or by seeing it referenced somewhere. Once you're inside a Nostr social network you'll be able to see them interacting with other people and then you can also start following and interacting with these others.

• How do I find relays? What happens if I'm not connected to the same relays someone else is?

You won't be able to communicate with that person. But there are hints on events that can be used so that your client software (or you, manually) knows how to connect to the other person's relay and interact with them. There are other ideas on how to solve this too in the future but we can't ever promise perfect reachability, no protocol can.

• Can I know how many people are following me?

No, but you can get some estimates if relays cooperate in an extra-protocol way.

• What incentive is there for people to run relays?

The question is misleading. It assumes that relays are free dumb pipes that exist such that people can move data around through them. In this case yes, the incentives would not exist. This in fact could be said of DHT nodes in all other p2p network stacks: what incentive is there for people to run DHT nodes?

• Nostr enables you to move between server relays or use multiple relays but if these relays are just on AWS or Azure what’s the difference?

There are literally thousands of VPS providers scattered all around the globe today, there is not only AWS or Azure. AWS or Azure are exactly the providers used by single centralized service providers that need a lot of scale, and even then not just these two. For smaller relay servers any VPS will do the job very well.

@ c4504161:3370cd3c

---

WireMin

In 2025, the battle for digital privacy rages on. Big Tech’s data grabs and government overreach haven’t let up, making tools like WireMin Messenger more relevant than ever. WireMin is a decentralized social network and messenger that ditches central servers for a peer-to-peer setup. Your device does the heavy lifting routing and storing messages, leaving no honeypot for snoopers. It’s built for privacy, security, and dodging censorship. But how does it hold up in today’s crowded field of secure comms? Let’s break it down.

How It Stacks Up in 2025

To gauge WireMin’s worth, we need to pit it against the big players in privacy-focused messaging: SimpleX, Matrix, and Session. Here’s where they stand in 2025.

• SimpleX: This one’s still the anonymity king. By 2025, SimpleX has likely doubled down on its no-user-IDs model, using temporary, anonymous pairwise identifiers that make tracking a nightmare for anyone trying. It’s fully decentralized, like WireMin, but leans harder into disappearing footprints. WireMin counters with cryptographic social identities less transient but still tough as nails against surveillance. SimpleX might win for the ultra-cautious, but WireMin’s usability keeps it in the fight.
• Matrix: The federated behemoth has grown up a bit by 2025. It’s probably patched some of its old metadata leaks, beefing up encryption or server-side privacy controls. Still, Matrix’s reliance on servers, however distributed leaves it vulnerable compared to WireMin’s serverless purity. Matrix has the edge in features and a massive user base, but if privacy’s your hill to die on, WireMin runs circles around it.
• Session: Session’s blockchain roots have likely blossomed by now think a slicker node network and tighter crypto integration. But its choice to skip perfect forward secrecy still haunts it. WireMin, with full end-to-end encryption and metadata shielding, delivers a cleaner privacy punch. Session’s got flash, but WireMin’s got substance.

The Good and the Bad

Here’s what WireMin brings to the table, and where it stumbles.

Pros:

• True Decentralization: No servers, no choke points. It’s just you and your peers, talking directly. That’s a middle finger to anyone trying to shut it down.
• Ironclad Privacy: End-to-end encryption is standard, but WireMin goes further, cloaking your social metadata so even your chat habits stay off the radar.
• Censorship-Proof: In 2025’s clampdown climate, WireMin’s design ensures no one can gag you—short of smashing your device.

Cons:

• Small Crowd: WireMin’s user base is still niche. If your crew’s stuck on mainstream apps, you’ll feel the isolation.
• Tech Hurdles: Self-hosting is the price of freedom here. By 2025, it’s probably still a fiddly process great for geeks, daunting for newbies.
• Staying Power: WireMin’s young. Without steady updates and community muscle, it could fizzle out. Time will tell.

My Take After Using It

Jumping into WireMin in 2025 is a mixed bag. The interface is lean and mean, no fluff, just function. Messages zip through fast, and knowing my data’s not feeding some corporate algorithm feels damn good. But setting it up? That’s a slog. Self-hosting demands patience and a bit of know-how, think port forwarding and network tweaks. Once you’re in, it’s smooth sailing, but the entry fee’s steep. It’s a tool for the dedicated, not the dabblers.

Verdict

WireMin Messenger isn’t here to coddle you.. it’s here to protect you. In 2025, it stands tall as a no-compromise option for anyone serious about privacy. It’s not the slickest or the most popular, but that’s not the point. If you’re ready to wrestle with its setup and don’t mind a smaller network, WireMin’s a fortress worth defending. Need something easier or more connected? SimpleX or Matrix might be your speed. For the privacy diehards, though, WireMin’s a rebel with a hell of a cause, and it’s worth rooting for.

sources

https://wiremin.org

https://github.com/up4w/up4w-core

this is also on #hive

---

Want more privacy and crypto rants? Hit me up:

https://linkfork.io/danishcrypto

• X: DanishCryptoDK
• Hive: DanishCrypto
• Nostr: npub1c3gyzcvf2xakqy4vy06umu7hgpr97ttyp05yrlvmk8g8xvmse57qj286r6
• Telegram channel: DanishCryptoDK
• private Telegram: DanishCrypto

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

A Causa

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

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

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

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

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

em scrap para T.P.

@ b8a9df82:6ab5cbbd

There are places in the world where history lingers in the air, where the past and present collide in an explosion of color, sound, and raw emotion.

Comuna 13 is one of them.

The people here are absolutely amazing. I have never experienced such kindness and warmth in Europe or the US as I have here in Medellín.

The generosity is overwhelming—not because they expect anything in return, but simply because they embody a culture of pure love and openness. Colombia, so far, has been one of the best countries I have ever visited—tremendously underestimated. My family and friends were worried about me before I came, fearing I’d be drugged or something bad would happen. But the reality? It has been nothing short of incredible.

Traveling the world, seeing and experiencing different cultures and people, is a blessing—a gift I will be forever grateful for. This is exactly what I always dreamed of: to explore the world with great company, immersing myself in new places, and soaking it all in.

But let me tell you a story that’s touching me deeply as I sit here in Medellín, watching kids play baseball.

They laugh, they run, they chase the ball through the narrow streets, between the colorful murals that stretch up the walls of Comuna 13. It’s an interesting choice of location for a baseball court because you get the sense that the entire community—every house, every window—can see what’s happening. There is an atmosphere of ease and peace, a stark contrast to what this place once was.

When @Rainier turned to me and asked, "Do you know what this place used to be?"

I had a slight idea but was too afraid to speak it out loud—because if it were true, it would be too brutal to believe.

When he told me, I was speechless.

This lively baseball field, these bright murals, this explosion of art and culture—this was once an execution site. A place where people were shot, their deaths meant to serve as a warning to the entire community. Here, in the very spot where children now laugh and play, people once lost their lives in fear and silence. Their deaths were not hidden; they were made into a spectacle, a method of control. The community was forced to watch, powerless, as violence reigned over their homes.

And now? Now it is alive.

Operation Orion, October 16, 2002

Comuna 13 has seen transformation like few places in the world. In 2002, during Operation Orion, the Colombian military launched a brutal crackdown on guerrilla groups controlling the area. Helicopters hovered over the steep hills, gunfire echoed through the streets, and civilians were caught in the crossfire. The operation was meant to rid the area of crime, but it came at a devastating cost. Many innocent people disappeared, never to be seen again. Families were torn apart, and the scars of violence ran deep.

"No matter how broken some parts of the world may seem, there will always be an opportunity for change." – Iván González

And yet, here I stand today, in the middle of what feels like a festival of life. The walls tell stories through vibrant graffiti, each piece echoing the voices of resilience and resistance. The air vibrates with reggaeton and hip-hop beats, the smell of street food drifts through the alleyways, and people—locals and tourists alike—move together in the rhythm of the city’s rebirth.

Yes, it’s touristy. But it’s also real. It’s people painting their past into something beautiful. It’s a man with a cat wearing sunglasses casually walking by. It’s kids laughing in the streets that once ran red with fear. It’s hope.

This is Comuna 13. A place once infamous for death, now bursting with life.

@ bc52210b:20bfc6de

When writing safety critical code, every arithmetic operation carries the potential for catastrophic failure—whether that’s a plane crash in aerospace engineering or a massive financial loss in a smart contract.

The stakes are incredibly high, and errors are not just bugs; they’re disasters waiting to happen. Smart contract developers need to shift their mindset: less like web developers, who might prioritize speed and iteration, and more like aerospace engineers, where precision, caution, and meticulous attention to detail are non-negotiable.

In practice, this means treating every line of code as a critical component, adopting rigorous testing, and anticipating worst-case scenarios—just as an aerospace engineer would ensure a system can withstand extreme conditions.

Safety critical code demands aerospace-level precision, and smart contract developers must rise to that standard to protect against the severe consequences of failure.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

idea: Rumple

a payments network based on trust channels

This is the description of a Lightning-like network that will work only with credit or trust-based channels and exist alongside the normal Lightning Network. I imagine some people will think this is undesirable and at the same time very easy to do (such that if it doesn't exist yet it must be because no one cares), but in fact it is a very desirable thing -- which I hope I can establish below -- and at the same time a very non-trivial problem to solve, as the history of Ryan Fugger's Ripple project and posterior copies of it show.

Read these first to get the full context:

1. Ryan Fugger's Ripple
2. Ripple and the problem of the decentralized commit
3. The Lightning Network solves the problem of the decentralized commit
4. Parallel Chains

Explanation about the name

Since we're copying the fundamental Ripple idea from Ryan Fugger and since the name "Ripple" is now associated with a scam coin called XRP, and since Ryan Fugger has changed the name of his old website "Ripplepay" to "Rumplepay", we will follow his lead here. If "Ripplepay" was the name of a centralized prototype to the open peer-to-peer network "Ripple", now that the centralized version is called "Rumplepay" the peer-to-peer version must be called "Rumple".

Now the idea

Basically we copy the Lightning Network, but without HTLCs or channels being opened and closed with funds committed to them on multisig Bitcoin transactions published to the blockchain. Instead we use pure trust relationships like the original Ripple concept.

And we use the blockchain commit method, but instead of spending an absurd amount of money to use the actual Bitcoin blockchain instead we use a parallel chain.

How exactly -- a protocol proposal attempt

It could work like this:

The parallel chain, or "Rumple Chain"

1. We define a parallel chain with a genesis block;
2. Following blocks must contain a. the ID of the previous block; b. a list of up to 32768 entries of arbitrary 32-byte values; c. an ID constituted by sha256(the previous block ID + the merkle root of all the entries)
3. To be mined, each parallel block must be included in the Bitcoin chain according as explained above.

Now that we have a structure for a simple "blockchain" that is completely useless, just blocks over blocks of meaningless values, we proceed to the next step of assigning meaning to these values.

The off-chain payments network, or "Rumple Network"

1. We create a network of nodes that can talk to each other via TCP messages (all details are the same as the Lightning Network, except where mentioned otherwise);
2. These nodes can create trust channels to each other. These channels are backed by nothing except the willingness of one peer to pay the other what is owed.
3. When Alice creates a trust channel with Bob (Alice trusts Bob), contrary to what happens in the Lightning Network, it's A that can immediately receive payments through that channel, and everything A receives will be an IOU from Bob to Alice. So Alice should never open a channel to Bob unless Alice trusts Bob. But also Alice can choose the amount of trust it has in Bob, she can, for example, open a very small channel with Bob, which means she will only lose a few satoshis if Bob decides to exit scam her. (in the original Ripple examples these channels were always depicted as friend relationships, and they can continue being that, but it's expected -- given the experience of the Lightning Network -- that the bulk of the channels will exist between users and wallet provider nodes that will act as hubs).
4. As Alice receive a payment through her channel with Bob, she becomes a creditor and Bob a debtor, i.e., the balance of the channel moves a little to her side. Now she can use these funds to make payments over that channel (or make a payment that combines funds from multiple channels using MPP).
5. If at any time Alice decides to close her channel with Bob, she can send all the funds she has standing there to somewhere else (for example, another channel she has with someone else, another wallet somewhere else, a shop that is selling some good or service, or a service that will aggregate all funds from all her channels and send a transaction to the Bitcoin chain on her behalf).
6. If at any time Bob leaves the network Alice is entitled by Bob's cryptographic signatures to knock on his door and demand payment, or go to a judge and ask him to force Bob to pay, or share the signatures and commitments online and hurt Bob's reputation with the rest of the network (but yes, none of these things is good enough and if Bob is a very dishonest person none of these things is likely to save Alice's funds).

The payment flow

1. Suppose there exists a route Alice->Bob->Carol and Alice wants to send a payment to Carol.
2. First Alice reads an invoice she received from Carol. The invoice (which can be pretty similar or maybe even the same as BOLT11) contains a payment hash h and information about how to reach Carol's node, optionally an amount. Let's say it's 100 satoshis.
3. Using the routing information she gathered, Alice builds an onion and sends it to Bob, at the same time she offers to Bob a "conditional IOU". That stands for a signed commitment that Alice will owe Bob an 100 satoshis if in the next 50 blocks of the Rumple Chain there appears a block containing the preimage p such that sha256(p) == h.
4. Bob peels the onion and discovers that he must forward that payment to Carol, so he forwards the peeled onion and offers a conditional IOU to Carol with the same h. Bob doesn't know Carol is the final recipient of the payment, it could potentially go on and on.
5. When Carol gets the conditional IOU from Bob, she makes a list of all the nodes who have announced themselves as miners (which is not something I have mentioned before, but nodes that are acting as miners will must announce themselves somehow) and are online and bidding for the next Rumple block. Each of these miners will have previously published a random 32-byte value v they they intend to include in their next block.
6. Carol sends payments through routes to all (or a big number) of these miners, but this time the conditional IOU contains two conditions (values that must appear in a block for the IOU to be valid): p such that sha256(p) == h (the same that featured in the invoice) and v (which must be unique and constant for each miner, something that is easily verifiable by Carol beforehand). Also, instead of these conditions being valid for the next 50 blocks they are valid only for the single next block.
7. Now Carol broadcasts p to the mempool and hopes one of the miners to which she sent conditional payments sees it and, allured by the possibility of cashing in Carol's payment, includes p in the next block. If that does not happen, Carol can try again in the next block.

Why bother with this at all?

1. The biggest advantage of Lightning is its openness

   It has been said multiple times that if trust is involved then we don't need Lightning, we can use Coinbase, or worse, Paypal. This is very wrong. Lightning is good specially because it serves as a bridge between Coinbase, Paypal, other custodial provider and someone running their own node. All these can transact freely across the network and pay each other without worrying about who is in which provider or setup.

   Rumple inherits that openness. In a Rumple Network anyone is free to open new trust channels and immediately route payments to anyone else.

   Also, since Rumple payments are also based on the reveal of a preimage it can do swaps with Lightning inside a payment route from day one (by which I mean one can pay from Rumple to Lightning and vice-versa).

2. Rumple fixes Lightning's fragility

   Lightning is too fragile.

   It's known that Lightning is vulnerable to multiple attacks -- like the flood-and-loot attack, for example, although not an attack that's easy to execute, it's still dangerous even if failed. Given the existence of these attacks, it's important to not ever open channels with random anonymous people. Some degree of trust must exist between peers.

   But one does not even have to consider attacks. The creation of HTLCs is a liability that every node has to do multiple times during its life. Every initiated, received or forwarded payment require adding one HTLC then removing it from the commitment transaction.

   Another issue that makes trust needed between peers is the fact that channels can be closed unilaterally. Although this is a feature, it is also a bug when considering high-fee environments. Imagine you pay $2 in fees to open a channel, your peer may close that unilaterally in the next second and then you have to pay another $15 to close the channel. The opener pays (this is also a feature that can double as a bug by itself). Even if it's not you opening the channel, a peer can open a channel with you, make a payment, then clone the channel, and now you're left with, say, an output of 800 satoshis, which is equal to zero if network fees are high.

   So you should only open channels with people you know and know aren't going to actively try to hack you and people who are not going to close channels and impose unnecessary costs on you. But even considering a fully trusted Lightning Network, even if -- to be extreme -- you only opened channels with yourself, these channels would still be fragile. If some HTLC gets stuck for any reason (peer offline or some weird small incompatibility between node softwares) and you're forced to close the channel because of that, there are the extra costs of sweeping these UTXO outputs plus the total costs of closing and reopening a channel that shouldn't have been closed in the first place. Even if HTLCs don't get stuck, a fee renegotiation event during a mempool spike may cause channels to force-close, become valueless or settle for very high closing fee.

   Some of these issues are mitigated by Eltoo, others by only having channels with people you trust. Others referenced above, plus the the griefing attack and in general the ability of anyone to spam the network for free with payments that can be pending forever or a lot of payments fail repeatedly makes it very fragile.

   Rumple solves most of these problems by not having to touch the blockchain at all. Fee negotiation makes no sense. Opening and closing channels is free. Flood-and-loot is a non-issue. The griefing attack can be still attempted as funds in trust channels must be reserved like on Lightning, but since there should be no theoretical limit to the number of prepared payments a channel can have, the griefing must rely on actual amounts being committed, which prevents large attacks from being performed easily.

3. Rumple fixes Lightning's unsolvable reputation issues

   In the Lightning Conference 2019, Rusty Russell promised there would be pre-payments on Lightning someday, since everybody was aware of potential spam issues and pre-payments would be the way to solve that. Fast-forward to November 2020 and these pre-payments have become an apparently unsolvable problem[^thread-402]: no one knows how to implement them reliably without destroying privacy completely or introducing worse problems.

   Replacing these payments with tables of reputation between peers is also an unsolved problem[^reputation-lightning], for the same reasons explained in the thread above.

4. Rumple solves the hot wallet problem

   Since you don't have to use Bitcoin keys or sign transactions with a Rumple node, only your channel trust is at risk at any time.

5. Rumple ends custodianship

   Since no one is storing other people's funds, a big hub or wallet provider can be used in multiple payment routes, but it cannot be immediately classified as a "custodian". At best, it will be a big debtor.

6. Rumple is fun

   Opening channels with strangers is boring. Opening channels with friends and people you trust even a little makes that relationship grow stronger and the trust be reinforced. (But of course, like it happens in the Lightning Network today, if Rumple is successful the bulk of trust will be from isolated users to big reliable hubs.)

Questions or potential issues

1. So many advantages, yes, but trusted? Custodial? That's easy and stupid!

   Well, an enormous part of the current Lightning Network (and also onchain Bitcoin wallets) already rests on trust, mainly trust between users and custodial wallet providers like ZEBEDEE, Alby, Wallet-of-Satoshi and others. Worse: on the current Lightning Network users not only trust, they also expose their entire transaction history to these providers[^hosted-channels].

   Besides that, as detailed in point 3 of the previous section, there are many unsolvable issues on the Lightning protocol that make each sovereign node dependent on some level of trust in its peers (and the network in general dependent on trusting that no one else will spam it to death).

   So, given the current state of the Lightning Network, to trust peers like Rumple requires is not a giant change -- but it is still a significant change: in Rumple you shouldn't open a large trust channel with someone just because it looks trustworthy, you must personally know that person and only put in what you're willing to lose. In known brands that have reputation to lose you can probably deposit more trust, same for long-term friends, and that's all. Still it is probably good enough, given the existence of MPP payments and the fact that the purpose of Rumple is to be a payments network for day-to-day purchases and not a way to buy real estate.

2. Why would anyone run a node in this parallel chain?

   I don't know. Ideally every server running a Rumple Network node will be running a Bitcoin node and a Rumple chain node. Besides using it to confirm and publish your own Rumple Network transactions it can be set to do BMM mining automatically and maybe earn some small fees comparable to running a Lightning routing node or a JoinMarket yield generator.

   Also it will probably be very lightweight, as pruning is completely free and no verification-since-the-genesis-block will take place.

3. What is the maturity of the debt that exists in the Rumple Network or its legal status?

   By default it is to be understood as being payable on demand for payments occurring inside the network (as credit can be used to forward or initiate payments by the creditor using that channel). But details of settlement outside the network or what happens if one of the peers disappears cannot be enforced or specified by the network.

   Perhaps some standard optional settlement methods (like a Bitcoin address) can be announced and negotiated upon channel creation inside the protocol, but nothing more than that.

[^thread-402]: Read at least the first 10 messages of the thread to see how naïve proposals like you and me could have thought about are brought up and then dismantled very carefully by the group of people most committed to getting Lightning to work properly. [^reputation-lightning]: See also the footnote at Ripple and the problem of the decentralized commit. [^hosted-channels]: Although that second part can be solved by hosted channels.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Personagens de jogos e símbolos

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

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

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

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

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Veterano não é dono de bixete

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

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

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

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

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

@ 7d33ba57:1b82db35

The Emerald Gem of the Aegean

Thassos, often called the "Emerald Island", is a Greek paradise in the northern Aegean Sea, known for its crystal-clear waters, lush green landscapes, golden beaches, and rich history. Unlike the Cycladic islands, Thassos is covered in pine forests, olive groves, and scenic mountain villages, making it a perfect mix of relaxation, adventure, and culture.

🏖️ Best Beaches in Thassos

1️⃣ Golden Beach

The most famous beach on the island! A long stretch of soft sand with shallow waters, ideal for families and water sports.

2️⃣ Marble Beach (Saliara Beach)

A unique white-pebble beach with turquoise waters, giving it an exotic look. Accessible by dirt road, but worth the trip!

3️⃣ Giola – The Natural Lagoon

A breathtaking rock pool carved by the sea, perfect for cliff jumping and swimming in deep emerald waters.

4️⃣ Paradise Beach

A tropical-style sandy bay with crystal-clear water, surrounded by green hills. Popular for its relaxing vibes and waves for bodyboarding.

5️⃣ Aliki Beach

A picturesque beach with ancient marble ruins nearby, making it great for a mix of history and swimming.

🏛️ Must-See Attractions

🏰 The Ancient Theatre of Thassos

A Greek amphitheater with panoramic sea views, still used for concerts today!

🏛️ The Archaeological Museum & Ancient Agora

Discover Thassos' rich history, from ancient statues to ruins of the old marketplace.

⛪ Monastery of Archangel Michael

Built on a cliff with spectacular sea views, this is the island’s most important religious site.

🌄 Mountain Villages (Panagia & Theologos)

Explore traditional stone houses, narrow alleys, and local tavernas serving homemade delicacies.

🍽️ What to Eat in Thassos

• Fresh seafood – Try grilled octopus & sardines 🦑🐟

• Thassian honey – Famous for its rich, floral taste 🍯

• Ladotyri cheese – A delicious local cheese aged in olive oil 🧀
• Olive oil & olives – Thassos is known for its high-quality olives 🫒
• Baklava & walnut pie – Sweet treats you must try! 🍰

🚢 How to Get to Thassos

🚢 By Ferry:
- From Kavala to Skala Prinos (~75 min)
- From Keramoti to Limenas (Thassos Town) (~35 min, most frequent route)

🚗 By Car:
- Nearest airport: Kavala International Airport (KVA), then a short drive to Keramoti port

💡 Tips for Visiting Thassos

✅ Rent a car or ATV – Best way to explore hidden beaches & mountain villages 🚗
✅ Visit outside peak summer – May, June & September offer fewer crowds 🌞
✅ Try boat tours – Great way to see secluded coves & sea caves ⛵
✅ Sunset spots: Head to Metalia Beach or Theologos village 🌅

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

neuron.vim

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

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

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

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

On "zk-rollups" applied to Bitcoin

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

@ 3197ad60:7a122b95

I’m working on my portfolio. I will take it with me to the Children’s Book Fair in Bologna, to stand in very long queues, hoping to show it to some people in the publishing industry.

Preparing a portfolio could be a moment of celebration of all the work I have done and want to share with the world. Wouldn’t that be wonderful?

Instead, it slowly and quietly became a litany of the “could”s and “should”s and “must ”s: I could include all the work that’s even remotely relevant, I should probably showcase a range of skills, and therefore I must create a bunch of completely new work to appeal to every possible audience.

Maybe I need a range of deep, magical forest backgrounds, or a unicorn flying over a London night sky, or a coral reef with jellyfish playing poker, painted in very bright colours. Just to show that I can.

Well, that quickly became a downward spiral of stress-induced ideas for illustrations I don’t have time to make. Even though I enjoyed the work I was doing, in that mindset, no matter what I do, it’s never enough.

And then, lo and behold, I looked through my sketchbook. I was looking for something specific, a texture or a colour from a sketch that I’ve done. I opened one sketchbook looking for it, then another one, then one more.

There was so much work looking back at me wherever I turned. After all, I’ve been drawing daily since last July, sometimes from life, sometimes from imagination. Inevitably, I created a lot of work: paintings, drawings, sketches, and finished illustrations. Only looking through my work did I realise that I will always feel the push to make more work for my portfolio; because my style keeps evolving, I’m able to draw more and better with every step. But is the work I’ve done so far, enough to show where I am as an illustrator? Hell yeah.

Many cliches come to mind (because they’re true!) but my favourite is: don’t compare yourself to others, only compare to yourself from the past.

This is the third year of me going to Bologna for the fair, and the first time I will bring a portfolio with me. That means whatever I do is already 100% more than what I’ve done before. That’s a much better way to think about it.

Chill, Martyna, you’ve got this.

Thanks for reading.

x

@ 6ad08392:ea301584

In 2024, I was high as a kite on Nostr hopium and optimism. Early that year, my co-founder and I figured that we could use Nostr as a way to validate ambassadors on “Destination Bitcoin” - the germ of a travel app idea we had at the time that would turn into Satlantis. After some more digging and thinking, we realised that Nostr’s open social graph would be of major benefit, and in exploring that design space, the fuller idea of Satlantis formed: a new kind of social network for travel.

###### ^^2 slides from the original idea here

I still remember the call I had with @pablof7z in January. I was in Dubai pitching the AI idea I was working on at the time, but all I could think and talk about was Satlantis and Nostr.

That conversation made me bullish AF. I came back from the trip convinced we’d struck gold. I pivoted the old company, re-organised the team and booked us for the Sovereign Engineering cohort in Madeira. We put together a whole product roadmap, go to market strategy and cap raise around the use of Nostr. We were going to be the ‘next big Nostr app’.

A couple of events followed in which I announced this all to the world: Bitcoin Atlantis in March and BTC Prague in June being the two main ones. The feedback was incredible. So we doubled down. After being the major financial backer for the Nostr Booth in Prague, I decided to help organise the Nostr Booth initiative and back it financially for a series of Latin American conferences in November. I was convinced this was the biggest thing since bitcoin, so much so that I spent over $50,000 in 2024 on Nostr marketing initiatives. I was certainly high on something.

Sobering up

It’s March 2025 and I’ve sobered up. I now look at Nostr through a different lens. A more pragmatic one. I see Nostr as a tool, as an entrepreneur - who’s more interested in solving a problem, than fixating on the tool(s) being used - should.

A couple things changed for me. One was the sub-standard product we released in November. I was so focused on being a Nostr evangelist that I put our product second. Coupled with the extra technical debt we took on at Satlantis by making everything Nostr native, our product was crap. We traded usability & product stability for Nostr purism & evangelism.

We built a whole suite of features using native event kinds (location kinds, calendar kinds, etc) that we thought other Nostr apps would also use and therefore be interoperable. Turns out no serious players were doing any of that, so we spent a bunch of time over-engineering for no benefit 😂

The other wake up call for me was the Twitter ban in Brazil. Being one of the largest markets for Twitter, I really thought it would have a material impact on global Nostr adoption. When basically nothing happened, I began to question things.

Combined, these experiences helped sober me up and I come down from my high. I was reading “the cold start problem” by Andrew Chen (ex-Uber) at the time and doing a deep dive on network effects. I came to the following realisation:

Nostr’s network effect is going to take WAY longer than we all anticipated initially. This is going to be a long grind. And unlike bitcoin, winning is not inevitable. Bitcoin solves a much more important problem, and it’s the ONLY option. Nostr solves an important problem yes, but it’s far from the only approach. It’s just the implementation arguably in the lead right now.

This sobering up led us to take a different approach with Nostr. We now view it as another tool in the tech-stack, no different to the use of React Native on mobile or AWS for infrastructure. Nostr is something to use if it makes the product better, or avoid if it makes the product and user experience worse. I will share more on this below, including our simple decision making framework. I’ll also present a few more potentially unpopular opinions about Nostr. Four in total actually:

1. Nostr is a tool, not a revolution
2. Nostr doesn’t solve the multiple social accounts problem
3. Nostr is not for censorship resistance
4. Grants come with a price

Let’s begin…

Nostr is a tool, not a revolution

Nostr is full of Bitcoiners, and as much as we like to think we’re immune from shiny object syndrome, we are, somewhere deep down afflicted by it like other humans. That’s normal & fine. But…while Bitcoiners have successfully suppressed this desire when it comes to shitcoins, it lies dormant, yearning for the least shitcoin-like thing to emerge which we can throw our guiltless support behind.

That thing arrived and it’s called Nostr.

As a result, we’ve come to project the same kind of purity and maximalism onto it as we do with Bitcoin, because it shares some attributes and it’s clearly not a grift.

The trouble is, in doing so, we’ve put it in the same class as Bitcoin - which is an error.

Nostr is important and in its own small way, revolutionary, but it pales in comparison to Bitcoin’s importance. Think of it this way: If Bitcoin fails, civilisation is fucked. If Nostr fails, we’ll engineer another rich-identity protocol. There is no need for the kind of immaculate conception and path dependence that was necessary for Bitcoin whose genesis and success has been a once in a civilisation event. Equivocating Nostr and Bitcoin to the degree that it has been, is a significant category error. Nostr may ‘win’ or it may just be an experiment on the path to something better. And that’s ok !

I don’t say this to piss anyone off, to piss on Nostr or to piss on myself. I say it because I’d prefer Nostr not remain a place where a few thousand people speak to each other about how cool Nostr is. That’s cute in the short term, but in the grand scheme of things, it’s a waste of a great tool that can make a significant corner of the Internet great again.

By removing the emotional charge and hopium from our relationship to Nostr, we can take a more sober, objective view of it (and hopefully use it more effectively).

Instead of making everything about Nostr (the tool), we can go back to doing what great product people and businesses do: make everything about the customer.

---

Nobody’s going around marketing their app as a “react native product” - and while I understand that’s a false equivalent in the sense that Nostr is a protocol, while react is a framework - the reality is that it DOES NOT MATTER.

For 99.9999% of the world, what matters is the hole, not the drill. Maybe 1000 people on Earth REALLY care that something is built on Nostr, but for everyone else, what matters is what the app or product does and the problem it solves. Realigning our focus in this way, and looking at not only Nostr, but also Bitcoin as a tool in the toolkit, has transformed the way we’re building.

This inspired an essay I wrote a couple weeks ago called “As Nostr as Possible”. It covers our updated approach to using and building WITH Nostr (not just ‘on’ it). You can find that here:

https://futuresocial.substack.com/p/as-nostr-as-possible-anap

If you’re too busy to read it, don’t fret. The entire theory can be summarised by the diagram below. This is how we now decide what to make Nostr-native, and what to just build on our own. And - as stated in the ANAP essay - that doesn’t mean we’ll never make certain features Nostr-native. If the argument is that Nostr is not going anywhere, then we can always come back to that feature and Nostr-fy it later when resources and protocol stability permit.

Next…

The Nostr all in one approach is not all “positive”

Having one account accessible via many different apps might not be as positive as we initially thought.

If you have one unified presence online, across all of your socials, and you’re posting the same thing everywhere, then yes - being able to post content in one place and it being broadcast everywhere, is great. There’s a reason why people literally PAY for products like Hypefury, Buffer and Hootsuite (aside from scheduling).

BUT…..This is not always the case.

I’ve spoken to hundreds of creators and many have flagged this as a bug not a feature because they tend to have a different audience on different platforms and speak to them differently depending on the platform. We all know this. How you present yourself on LinkedIn is very different to how you do it on Instagram or X.

The story of Weishu (Tencent’s version of TikTok) comes to mind here. Tencent’s WeChat login worked against them because people didn’t want their social graph following them around. Users actually wanted freedom from their existing family & friends, so they chose Douyin (Chinese TikTok) instead.

Perhaps this is more relevant to something like WeChat because the social graph following you around is more personal, but we saw something similar with Instagram and Facebook. Despite over a decade of ownership, Facebook still keeps the social graphs separated.

All this to say that while having a different strategy & approach on different social apps is annoying, it allows users to tap into different markets because each silo has its own ‘flavour’. The people who just post the same thing everywhere are low-quality content creators anyway. The ones who actually care, are using each platform differently.

The ironic part here is that this is arguably more ‘decentralised’ than the protocol approach because these siloes form a ‘marketplace of communities’ which are all somewhat different.

---

We need to find a smart way of doing this with Nostr. Some way of catering to the appropriate audience where it matters most. Perhaps this will be handled by clients, or by relays. One solution I’ve heard from people in the Nostr space is to just ‘spin up another nPub’ for your different audience. While I have no problem with people doing that - I have multiple nPubs myself - it’s clearly NOT a solution to the underlying problem here.

We’re experimenting with something. Whether it’s a good idea or not remains to be seen. Satlantis users will be able to curate their profiles and remove (hide / delete) content on our app. We’ll implement this in two stages:

Stage 1: Simple\ In the first iteration, we will not broadcast a delete request to relays. This means users can get a nicely curated profile page on Satlantis, but keep a record of their full profile elsewhere on other clients / relays.

Stage 2: More complex\ Later on, we’ll try to give people an option to “delete on Satlantis only” or “delete everywhere”. The difference here is more control for the user. Whether we get this far remains to be seen. We’ll need to experiment with the UX and see whether this is something people really want.

I’m sure neither of these solutions are ‘ideal’ - but they’re what we’re going to try until we have more time & resources to think this through more.

Next…

Nostr is not for Censorship Resistance

I’m sorry to say, but this ship has sailed. At least for now. Maybe it’s a problem again in the future, but who knows when, and if it will ever be a big enough factor anyway.

The truth is, while WE all know that Nostr is superior because it’s a protocol, people do NOT care enough. They are more interested in what’s written ON the box, not what’s necessarily inside the box. 99% of people don’t know wtf a protocol is in the first place - let alone why it matters for censorship resistance to happen at that level, or more importantly, why they should trust Nostr to deliver on that promise.

Furthermore, the few people who did care about “free speech” are now placated enough with Rumble for Video, X for short form and Substack for long form. With Meta now paying lip-service to the movement, it’s game over for this narrative - at least for the foreseeable future.

The "space in people’s minds for censorship resistance has been filled. Both the ‘censorship resistance’ and ‘free speech’ ships have sailed (even though they were fake), and the people who cared enough all boarded.

For the normies who never cared, they still don’t care - or they found their way to the anti-platforms, like Threads, BlueSky or Pornhub.

The small minority of us still here on Nostr…are well…still here. Which is great, but if the goal is to grow the network effect here and bring in more people, then we need to find a new angle. Something more compelling than “your account won’t be deleted.”

I’m not 100% sure what that is. My instinct is that a “network of interoperable applications”, that don’t necessarily or explicitly brand themselves as Nostr, but have it under the hood is the right direction. I think the open social graph and using it in novel ways is compelling. Trouble is, this needs more really well-built and novel apps for non-sovereignty minded people (especially content creators) and people who don’t necessarily care about the reasons Nostr was first built. Also requires us to move beyond just building clones of what already exists.

We’ve been trying to do this Satlantis thing for almost a year now and it’s coming along - albeit WAY slower than I would’ve liked. We’re experimenting our way into a whole new category of product. Something different to what exists today. We’ve made a whole bunch of mistakes and at times I feel like a LARP considering the state of non-delivery.

BUT…what’s on the horizon is very special, and I think that all of the pain, effort and heartache along the way will be 100% worth it. We are going to deliver a killer product that people love, that solves a whole host of travel-related problems and has Nostr under the hood (where nobody, except those who care, will know).

Grants come with a price

This one is less of an opinion and more of an observation. Not sure it really belongs in this essay, but I’ll make a small mention just as food for thought,

Grants are a double-edged sword.

I’m super grateful that OpenSats, et al, are supporting the protocol, and I don’t envy the job they have in trying to decipher what to support and what not to depending on what’s of benefit to the network versus what’s an end user product.

That being said, is the Nostr ecosystem too grant-dependent? This is not a criticism, but a question. Perhaps this is the right thing to do because of how young Nostr is. But I just can’t help but feel like there’s something a-miss.

Grants put the focus on Nostr, instead of the product or customer. Which is fine, if the work the grant covers is for Nostr protocol development or tooling. But when grants subsidise the development of end user products, it ties the builder / grant recipient to Nostr in a way that can misalign them to the customer’s needs. It’s a bit like getting a government grant to build something. Who’s the real customer??

Grants can therefore create an almost communist-like detachment from the market and false economic incentive. To reference the Nostr decision framework I showed you earlier, when you’ve been given a grant, you are focusing more on the X axis, not the Y. This is a trade-off, and all trade-offs have consequences.

Could grants be the reason Nostr is so full of hobbyists and experimental products, instead of serious products? Or is that just a function of how ambitious and early Nostr is?

I don’t know.

Nostr certainly needs better toolkits, SDKs, and infrastructure upon which app and product developers can build. I just hope the grant money finds its way there, and that it yields these tools. Otherwise app developers like us, won’t stick around and build on Nostr. We’ll swap it out with a better tool.

To be clear, this is not me pissing on Nostr or the Grantors. Jack, OpenSats and everyone who’s supported Nostr are incredible. I’m just asking the question.

Final thing I’ll leave this section with is a thought experiment: Would Nostr survive if OpenSats disappeared tomorrow?

Something to think about….

Coda

If you read this far, thank you. There’s a bunch here to digest, and like I said earlier - this not about shitting on Nostr. It is just an enquiry mixed with a little classic Svetski-Sacred-Cow-Slaying.

I want to see Nostr succeed. Not only because I think it’s good for the world, but also because I think it is the best option. Which is why we’ve invested so much in it (something I’ll cover in an upcoming article: “Why we chose to build on Nostr”). I’m firmly of the belief that this is the right toolkit for an internet-native identity and open social graph. What I’m not so sure about is the echo chamber it’s become and the cult-like relationship people have with it.

I look forward to being witch-hunted and burnt at the stake by the Nostr purists for my heresy and blaspheming. I also look forward to some productive discussions as a result of reading this.

Thankyou for your attention.

Until next time.