@ ec9bd746:df11a9d0

🌍 Time Window:

🕘 When: Every even week on Sunday at 9:00 PM CET
🗺️ Where: https://cornychat.com/eurocorn

Start: 21:00 CET (Prague, UTC+1)
End: approx. 02:00 CET (Prague, UTC+1, next day)
Duration: usually 5+ hours.

| Region | Local Time Window | Convenience Level | |-----------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------| | Europe (CET, Prague) 🇨🇿🇩🇪 | 21:00–02:00 CET | ✅ Very Good; evening & night | | East Coast North America (EST) 🇺🇸🇨🇦 | 15:00–20:00 EST | ✅ Very Good; afternoon & early evening | | West Coast North America (PST) 🇺🇸🇨🇦 | 12:00–17:00 PST | ✅ Very Good; midday & afternoon | | Central America (CST) 🇲🇽🇨🇷🇬🇹 | 14:00–19:00 CST | ✅ Very Good; afternoon & evening | | South America West (Peru/Colombia PET/COT) 🇵🇪🇨🇴 | 15:00–20:00 PET/COT | ✅ Very Good; afternoon & evening | | South America East (Brazil/Argentina/Chile, BRT/ART/CLST) 🇧🇷🇦🇷🇨🇱 | 17:00–22:00 BRT/ART/CLST | ✅ Very Good; early evening | | United Kingdom/Ireland (GMT) 🇬🇧🇮🇪 | 20:00–01:00 GMT | ✅ Very Good; evening hours (midnight convenient) | | Eastern Europe (EET) 🇷🇴🇬🇷🇺🇦 | 22:00–03:00 EET | ✅ Good; late evening & early night (slightly late) | | Africa (South Africa, SAST) 🇿🇦 | 22:00–03:00 SAST | ✅ Good; late evening & overnight (late-night common) | | New Zealand (NZDT) 🇳🇿 | 09:00–14:00 NZDT (next day) | ✅ Good; weekday morning & afternoon | | Australia (AEDT, Sydney) 🇦🇺 | 07:00–12:00 AEDT (next day) | ✅ Good; weekday morning to noon | | East Africa (Kenya, EAT) 🇰🇪 | 23:00–04:00 EAT | ⚠️ Slightly late (night hours; late night common) | | Russia (Moscow, MSK) 🇷🇺 | 23:00–04:00 MSK | ⚠️ Slightly late (join at start is fine, very late night) | | Middle East (UAE, GST) 🇦🇪🇴🇲 | 00:00–05:00 GST (next day) | ⚠️ Late night start (midnight & early morning, but shorter attendance plausible)| | Japan/Korea (JST/KST) 🇯🇵🇰🇷 | 05:00–10:00 JST/KST (next day) | ⚠️ Early; convenient joining from ~07:00 onwards possible | | China (Beijing, CST) 🇨🇳 | 04:00–09:00 CST (next day) | ❌ Challenging; very early morning start (better ~07:00 onwards) | | India (IST) 🇮🇳 | 01:30–06:30 IST (next day) | ❌ Very challenging; overnight timing typically difficult|

---

@ 592295cf:413a0db9

[Edit] I tried to get the slides and an audio file, from Constant's talk at NostRiga, about 8 months ago

1.

Nostr's adoption thesis

The less you define, the more you imply

by Wouter Constant

2.

Dutch Bitcoiner

AntiHashedPodcast

Writing Book about nostr

00:40

3.

What this presentation about

A protocols design includes initself a thesis

on protocol adoption, due to underlying assumptions

1:17

4.

Examples

Governments/Academic: Pubhubs (Matrix)

Bussiness: Bluesky

Foss: Nostr

1:58

5.

What constitutes minimal viability?

Pubhubs (Matrix): make is "safe" for user

Bluesky: liability and monetization

Foss: Simpel for developer

4:03

6.

The Point of Nostr

Capture network effects through interoperability

4:43

7.

Three assumptions

The direction is workable

Method is workable

Motivation and means are sufficient

5:27

8.

Assumption 1

The asymmetric cryptography paradigm is a good idea

6:16

9.

Nostr is a exponent of the key-pair paradigm.

And Basicly just that.

6.52

10.

Keys suck

Protect a secret that you are supposed use all the time.

7:37

11.

Assumption two

The unaddressed things will be figured out within a 'meta-design consensus'

8:11

12.

Nostr's base protocol is not minimally viable for anything, except own development.

8:25

13.

Complexity leads to capture;

i.e. free and open in the name,

controlled in pratice

9:54

14.

Meta-design consensus

Buildings things 'note centric' mantains interoperability.

11:51

15.

Assumption three

the nightmare is scary;

the cream is appealing.

12:41

16.

Get it minimally viable,

for whatever target,

such that it is not a waste of time.

13:23

17.

Summarize

We are in a nightmare.

Assume key/signature are the way out.

Assume we can Maintain an open stardand while manifesting the dream.

Assume we are motivated enought to bootstrap this to adulthood.

14:01

18.

We want this,

we can do this,

because we have to.

14:12

Thank you for contribuiting

[Edit] Note for audio presentation

nostr:nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzqkfzjh8jkzd8l9247sadku6vhm52snhgjtknlyeku6sfkeqn5rdeqyf8wumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytnvw5hxkef0qyg8wumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytnddakj7qpqqqq6fdnhvp95gqf4k3vxmljh87uvjezpepyt222jl2267q857uwqz7gcke

@ 592295cf:413a0db9

The journey starts from the links in this article nostr-quick-start-guide

Starting from these links building a simple path should not cover everything, because impossible.

Today I saw that Verbiricha in his workshop on his channel used nstart, but then I distracted And I didn't see how he did it.

---

Go to nstart.me and read: Each user is identified by a cryptographic keypair Public key, Private key (is a lot of stuff)

You can insert a nickname and go, the nickname is not unique

there is a email backup things interesting, but a little boring, i try to generate an email

doesn't even require a strong password ok.

I received the email, great, it shows me the nsec encrypted in clear,

Send a copy of the file with a password, which contains the password encrypted key I know and I know it's a tongue dump.

Multi signer bunker

That's stuff, let's see what he says.

They live the private key and send it to servers and you can recompose it to login at a site of the protocol nostr. If one of these servers goes offline you have the private key that you downloaded first and then reactivate a bunker. All very complicated. But if one of the servers goes offline, how can I remake the split? Maybe he's still testing.

Nobody tells you where these bunkers are.

Okay I have a string that is my bunker (buker://), I downloaded it, easy no, now will tell me which client accepts the bunker.. .

Follow someone before you start?

Is a cluster of 5 people Snowden, Micheal Dilger, jb55, Fiatjaf, Dianele.

I choice Snowden profile, or you can select multiple profiles, extra wild.

Now select 5 clients

Coracle, Chachi, Olas, Nostur, Jumble

The first is Coracle

Login, ok I try to post a note and signing your note the spin does not end.

Maybe the bunker is diffective.

Let's try Chachi

Simpler than Coracle, it has a type login that says bunker. see if I can post

It worked, cool, I managed to post in a group.

Olas is an app but also a website, but on the website requires an extension, which I do not have with this account.

If I download an app how do I pass the bunker on the phone, is it still a password, a qrcode, a qrcode + password, something like that, but many start from the phone so maybe it's easy for them. I try to download it and see if it allows me to connect with a bunker.

Okay I used private-qrcode and it worked, I couldn't do it directly from Olas because it didn't have permissions and the qrcode was < encrypted, so I went to the same site and had the bunker copied and glued on Olas

Ok then I saw that there was the qrcode image of the bunker for apps lol moment

Ok, I liked it, I can say it's a victory.

Looks like none of Snowden's followers are Olas's lover, maybe the smart pack has to predict a photographer or something like that.

Okay I managed to post on Olas, so it works, Expiration time is broken.

As for Nostur, I don't have an ios device so I'm going to another one.

Login with Jumble, it works is a web app

I took almost an hour to do the whole route.

But this was just one link there are two more

Extensions nostr NIP-07

The true path is nip-07-browser-extensions | nostr.net

There are 19 links, maybe there are too many?

I mention the most famous, or active at the moment

1. Aka-profiles: Aka-profiles

Alby I don't know if it's a route to recommend

1. Blockcore Blockcore wallet

2. Nos2x Nos2x

3. Nos2xfox (fork for firefox) Nos2xfox

Nostore is (archived, read-only)

1. Nostrame Nostrame

2. Nowser per IOS Nowser

3. One key (was tricky) One key

Another half hour to search all sites

Nostrapps

Here you can make paths

Then nstart selects Coracle, Chachi, Olas,Nostur and Jumble

Good apps might be Amethyst, 0xchat, Yakihonne, Primal, Damus

for IOS maybe: Primal, Olas, Damus, Nostur, Nos-Social, Nostrmo

On the site there are some categories, I select some with the respective apps

Let's see the categories

Go to Nostrapps and read:

Microbbloging: Primal

Streaming: Zap stream

Blogging: Yakihonne

Group chat: Chachi

Community: Flotilla

Tools: Form *

Discovery: Zapstore (even if it is not in this catrgory)

Direct Message: 0xchat

@ 0028f12f:532c1c67

An owner buildable microhome closed-loop ecosystem that decentralizes residential manufacturing w/ancient & modern tools, materials, and skillsets.

Project Overview:

For many, whether renters or “owners”, monthly housing costs are 30%, sometimes 50% of their monthly operating expenses, with financing, permitting, maintenance, and property tax costs significantly driving those costs ever higher. As a result, low-cost, efficient to build and maintain, modular shelters are more needed than ever. By combining ancient, 20th century, and 21st century technologies humanity can now self-design, fund, and build decentralized pre-manufactured, site-installed, residential living systems for ourselves.

Decentralizing residential construction in order to empower individuals and their communities by providing cottage industries that build small cottages with tools, training, and flexible, simple, and appropriate designs will not only provide sovereignty over shelter to owner-builders, it creates the potential for organically growing physical community infrastructures and individual’s financial wealth.

Accomplishing this requires:

• Off-the-shelf tools available at most major hardware stores worldwide. i.e. no expensive, capital intensive, difficult to operate and/or maintain tooling
• Commonly available, or easily acquirable, skills with those tools
• Locally available, low-cost, sustainable, materials with a minimal environmental impact
  • Prioritizing “upcycled” materials diverted from the waste stream
  • Non-toxic, durable, yet, easy to repair materials
  • Utilizing site resourced materials whenever feasible
• Integrated design that stacks functions, turns waste streams into resources (i.e. grey gardens, Composting worms and fly larvae, natural gas bio-digesters, aquaponics garden/pools)
• Self-funding without taking on debt burdens, permission, and/or insurance agents having authority over the decision-making processes

As E. F. Schumacher showed us in his book “Small is Beautiful”, Christopher Alexander with “Pattern Language Design”, and Bill Mollison with “Permaculture Design”, an appropriately scaled design pattern that can be varied as needed for each use case and location is what we all need and desire. Empowering individual families and communities to truly OWN their homes, because the idea, skills, and experience needed to build them have become common knowledge available to any and all willing to do the work.

Residential housing has been artificially driven up in value by speculators because the “saving” function of fiat money is broken and their prices are not driven by their functional value, financing and compliance costs make owning a home even more expensive, and poor design decisions by gatekeepers provide poor value, and dependency on specialized tools and skillsets drives up maintenance costs. Waste during initial, repair, and remodeling construction match all other daily waste going to the landfills, while chemical fire retardants, plastics, and glues often create toxic interior air quality worse than outside. Dozens of specialized crews that do not communicate with or understand others’ roles, needs, and concerns leading to wasted time, money, and materials.

Might not the best solution to the current housing affordability crisis simply be to provide families, not with over-priced, over-sized, and overly regulated shelters, but to instead empower all us to design and build decentralized, anti-fragile, and sustainable residential living systems that shelter more than our bodies and possessions_. Homes that also_ preserve and protect the supply chains for our essential daily needs. All of humanity, in every culture on every continent in every climate will be empowered by acquiring useful trade skills that can provide, not only for their own daily needs, but also deliver the opportunity to earn ongoing right livelihood providing these same livingry services to our local communities.

What if…

• In a few weeks the tradecrafts could be acquired, that with commonly accessible and affordable tools, empower men and women everywhere to use renewable, sustainable, and locally available materials to build residential living ecosystems that, rather than consume, they produce capital over time in the form of:
• Soil, Plant, Animal, & Human food
• Water for gardens & all inhabitants
• Fuel for heating & cooking
• KwHrs to run appliances, fixtures, & tools
• Bitcoin to access global marketplaces
• Government “permitting”, zoning, insurance, and financing startup costs are reduced & often eliminated.
• Operational costs and maintenance labor are minimized, efficiency and production increase over time, and wastes streams are turned into resource streams.
• The physical, intellectual, financial, and experiential capital are re-invested into serving family and neighbors by creating a decentralized open-source cooperative cottage construction industry

Building Biology, or "Bau-Biologie" in German, provides us with a mental for our Pattern Language design stack that allows for biomimicry and biophilic design to evolve into a synergistic “macrobiome” that shows us the way to design and build living residential “super organisms”. Our house is not only our ‘3rd Skin’, the property line is the 4th skin, acting as the outermost semi-permeable protective layer of our residential ecosystems.

The How:

By designing visible and invisible structures so that human, animal, plant, & soil organisms are ALL working together to coordinate a single living, breathing, growing entity. One with biological electrical ‘nervous system’ that cultivates, stores, & distributes electrical power, that has a ‘digestive system’ that provides for fresh water collection, filtration, & distribution, as well as grey/black water disposal. With a respiratory, skeletal, and connective tissues, organs, and systems, that nourish and protect essential organs.

By designing in more than just shelter, it becomes possible to provide all inhabitants with fuel for cooking and heating generated from passive solar heating, methane biodigesters, wood-gas/wind/water/PV generators, and BTC mining. Buckminster Fuller’s work showed us that geodesic domes are the most efficient geometries to use, and experience over time with residential domes has taught many that including a cupola and a dormer-style clerestory facilitate naturally efficient lighting and ventilation. While 3d printing, thin-shell latex cement canvas, and styro-foam concrete technologies now empower us all to design,manufacture, and build the joints, skin, and insulative in-fill for these geometric shapes in any configuration we can imagine. Adding space age insulative ceramic micro-spheres creates a non-toxic flexible highly reflective exterior coating suitable for rainwater collection and stacking the Japanese Shou Sugi Ban ancient natural wood preservation protects and beautifies the often up-cycled wood skeletal elements.

By riding on the efficiencies of scale that already exist for trampoline frames, both new and re-purposed, the existing manufacturing, distribution, and packaging of these galvanized steel skeletal framing elements we can add the wood, plastic, fabric, and cement elements as needed for each use case for this basic structural design unit. The lightweight framing, skinning, and insulation these allow for also enable more areas to become inhabitable by mounting these to docks enable residential use currently unavailable flood plane land and for Lake-steading, and eventually Sea-steading. By keeping the roofing footprint under 200 sq ft, the permitting threshold in many cities like Austin, TX the compliance costs of permitting and zoning are eliminated. By keeping costs down to 5-figures, instead of the 6 & 7-figures spent building most modern day homes, doing so with finance and insurance costs that can be kept to a minimum and sometimes eliminated.

Concept MVP

Individually shouldering the responsibility for designing, building, and maintaining the infrastructure for sheltering our families and our business assets is now more possible by stacking our designs, tools, and materials on the shoulders of designers, engineers, and owner-builders from all other times, places, and cultures.

I built this roof of this 200 sq ft micro-dome igloo in a semi-permanent minimum viable form entirely by myself over a few months with under $3k spent on tools and materials.

The final piece of this jigsaw puzzle came when I gained access to 3d printing technology I began printing brackets for a 2v dome. The free model that I found was sized so that a single cut on an 8’ board would provide the two lengths of struts needed without any waste. (https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:2483498). The initial model design happened to form a 14’ diameter hemisphere, with a 7’ height. I then realized that the upcycled trampoline frames made a superior vertical “pony wall” as is commonly used to gain more headroom around the interior perimeter of dome structures. By using 2”x12” wood with double beveled cuts to form a 14’ octagon I created a ledge that the dome could be mounted to, that also provides a mounting surface for guttering to enable rainwater catchment

The vertical poles and angled connecters from the trampoline happened to be 7’ in width, allowing for a 7’x7’ square addition to the 14’ diameter circle. The 140 sq ft of the trampoline and the 49 sq ft add-on, at 189 in total came in just under the 199 sq ft maximum allowed without a permit. This shape took form as a geodesic igloo. When I contemplated upon the partial skeletal framework for awhile before “skinning” the structure I decided that turning the 5 triangles coming off the corners of the pentagon cupola would not only provide dispersed light from any/all directions it also allowed for leaving those opening until last to allow for applying the finishing coats to the uppermost pentagon of the dome. After considering ways to keep from putting a window in the roof, with the likelihood for leaks that brings, I came up with the idea of the 5 triangular dormer style windows that are easier to seal and prevent direct sunlight while allowing indirect daylight from all sides into the dome interior. Those triangular dormers, along with the cupola vents and wall perimeter vents can be opened and closed to create and control passive ventilation

For the next, permanent version designed for occupancy by a couple I’m raising this current 30” wall to a full 8’ height to allow for a living/sleeping loft under the dome hemisphere. In order to support a second floor, arranging the floor joists in a hub and spoke layout bolted directly to the 1 ½” galvanized steel vertical support poles of the trampoline “oreo” framework. By supporting the central hub with the stair framing, rather than dropping a pole from the center of the peak of the dome, a ceiling fan can be mounted there instead to circulate air when the wind isn’t blowing. By using only 2 x 8’x4’ sheets of plywood for the floor of the private living/sleeping loft only 64 sq ft of floor space is necessary, as a wall mounted desk and mounting shelves for a futon frame as the kitchen ceiling will keep the bed from taking up precious floor space, while maximizing functionality of every cubic foot of the micro-dome igloo. The framing for the stairs provided an interior shower/toilet closet, preferably a sawdust “humanure” composting toilet to collect “night soil” in order to return nutrients back to the garden soil. Having an optional add-on door that opens into an IBC tote double-stack “outhouse” with a bio-gas generating flush toilet and another door opening up to an outdoor shower draining into greywater gardens and mulch basins, not only automates watering the garden while providing nutrients, it also allows for the natural gas to be used to fuel a cookstove, hot water heater, or natural gas generator.

Strategically, this is an advanced version of the Gradual Stiffening pattern, as articulated in the Pattern Language Design dictionary created by Christopher Alexander. Other patterns like Bringing the Outside In, which the passive lighting and ventilation features contribute to, and Intimacy Gradient, which the upstairs private/downstairs public uses of space create, came from his design library. Other design pattern strategies coming from Bill Mollison’s ideas shared in his Permaculture Design Manual, like Stack Functions, Transform Waste into Resource, and a Resource Harvesting Roof.

Collecting water, heat, and photons by tactically implementing grey-water gardens, the methane bio-digesters, the humanure composting/BSFL cultivation, passive solar water heater and PV systems, as well as wood-gas generator upgrades. By re-purposing the existing trampoline manufacturing infrastructure, adding 3d design and printing, and upcycled “re-blended” paint from the city recycling center, the capital to manufacture the steel and mats are minimized, landfill waste is diverted into a resource while cutting costs. At the same time, by training local craftsmen with on-the-job vocational technology education the tools and skills necessary for establishing e ssential infrastructure for cottage industry that build cottages for local community members. By doing so we can minimize upfront capital costs, lower environmental impact, and contribute to empowering community members with right livelihood, as well as sovereign shelters. Providing more than just a fish/shelter to those in need, instead providing fishing/building tools & knowledge of how to use them that will provide for their needs over a lifetime.

To be sovereign means to not have to ask anyone. This CAN be accomplished by dealing with all waste onsite, collecting and properly disposing of your solid and liquid waste onsite, by generating, storing, and distributing power locally. By being able to Do The Work yourself, fund the build yourself, and be responsible for the results yourself reliance on outsourced specialists is avoided. Asking insurance agents, zoning/code officers, and finance officers to manage risk, to permit your designs, and to fund your shelter with fiat debt-notes is to become a “House Slave”, living in over-priced, badly built, gilded cages designed for profit, not to cultivate quality of life for all on it.

Current compliance, finance, and insurance infrastructure, when combined with the inflexible, design, and construction processes cannot help but build "dead structures". Not designed for, adapted to, or adapted by the inhabitants, our built environments do not truly support their inhabitants or the external environment they're dropped into. An entirely new paradigm, a "Livingry Design/Build/Operate" science and art of cultivated curated living systems is how these mistakes can be remedied going forward.

Biodome Igloos: designed as basic 'cellular units and family 'tissues' coordinating operations to form multi-species community 'organisms'. Using good design, conscious cultivation, and responsible stewardship to customize stacked living systems out of community curated patterns and transformative process IS how we heal all our relations** by healing ourselves with food as medicine, right livelihood for value-added services, and mathematics to fabricate trust and establish truth.

Decentralized, closed-loop, off-grid, owner-built residential 'nodes' that are manufactured with local materials and readily available tools enables this for more of humanity than ever before.

The unique recipe of patterns curated from centuries of ideas in order to enable all this includes:

• Custom designed on-site manufacturing enabled by modern 3d printing technology controls supply chain risks while providing flexibility in sizing, geometry, and the types of framing elements used https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:6244858/files
• Latex cement canvas, thin-shell cement custom coverings using “waste” paint diverted from the landfills https://www.instructables.com/Latex-Concrete-Roof/ & https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1412039975/ref=as_li_ss_tl
• Japanese Shou Sugi Ban wood burning treatment avoids chemical off-gassing from wood preservatives to create beautiful rot, termite, and fire resistant wood framing elements http://www.ShouSugiBan.com
• Space age ceramic insulative paint additives designed for space shuttle tiles and commonly used to insulate yurts and RVs https://thermoshield.com/ & https://hytechsales.com/thermacels-insulating-additive-bulk
• Applying the thin-shell canvas cement to the flooring, over a typical earthen floor base of gravel and sand, avoids the expense in materials and labor of building a pier & beam deck or pouring a traditional cement slab
• Using re-pelletized Styrofoam as an insulative aggregate in the curtain walls as in-fill between the steel and wood structural elements brings additional sound and weatherproofing to the vertical walls, while diverting more waste from the landfills. https://youtu.be/nwv10Y9GBiQ?si=BJmMCWsKl_u9aFYX
• Mass manufacturing of metal trampolines brings economies of scale and diversion of unused waste from recycling streams delivered with durable, strong, pre-fabricated wall, footing, and perimeter beam framework.
• The simple Igloo shaped framework and lightweight framing/skinning elements creates an infinite variety of grouping together to create additional indoor and outdoor living, working, and playing areas that can grow organically as needs change and evolve, and can easily be modified for cold weather and/or tropical climates, as well as sand, rock, or even flood plain and water top foundations.

The biggest design/build challenges were how to reach the topmost area of the roof to apply the paint, cement, and insulation to weatherproof the canvas as the Gradual Stiffening application enables only limited self-scaffolding, without having to rent expensive lifts or build scaffolding and how to safely and effectively connect the dome hemisphere to the perimeter beam at the top of the trampoline oreo walls.

Leaving the 5 triangular dormer-style clerestory window openings until last made reaching uppermost surfaces possible. Purchasing a 12” compound bevel sliding chop saw allowed use of a 2”x12” shelf as the transition between the steel perimeter beam and the dome hemisphere. The challenge of securing the canvas to the steel framing elements was solved by using roofing screws to attach thin wood strips where needed. Not going with the stain grade finish wood would’ve allowed for use of an airless paint sprayer to lower the labor costs and use of a mortar sprayer will speed up the application of the latex cement mud mixture to the canvas. Use of removable slip forms, can allow for foam-crete wall in-fill to insulate against temperature and sound around the ground floor vertical walls.

The result of this is true Home Ownership, in the form of an ‘idea’ that cannot be taken, doesn’t need to be financed or permitted, and provides sustainable, healthy, living habitats for ourselves, our families and businesses.

BioDome Igloo Feature Stack:

1. • Humanure Nightsoil/Nitrogen Collector
2. • BSFL cultivator
3. • 50 sq ft Grey water wicking bed garden
4. • 50 sq ft Black water wicking bed
5. • 100 sq ft, spiral herb, aquaponics, overflow wicking bed garden
6. • Methane/Nat Gas generating above ground septic bag
7. • Nat Gas stove/H2O Heater
8. • BTC Mining Spaces Heater/Clothes Dryer
9. • Indoor/Outdoor Showers
10. • Kitchen/Bath sinks
11. • Greywater Clothes Washer
12. • BioSand/3-stage/UV Light filter & disinfection
13. • On-demand water pump
14. • ~850 gal rain tanks
15. • Fridge/Freezer
16. • desks/couch/TV/platform bed
17. • 3 ext. doors & 2 int. pocket doors
18. • Solar array, charger, inverter, & batteries
19. • Passive Solar H2O Heater
20. • Indirect lighting & natural ventilation
21. • 17 windows
22. • MgO “cerama-crete”
23. • Rocket Cob Oven
24. • 2 burner cinderblock wood stove
25. • Vermiculture worm chute/bins
26. • 72 sq ft garden porch
27. • 120 sq ft utility courtyard
28. • 200 sq ft ground floor climate controlled space
29. • 64 sq ft 2nd story floor space
30. • 200-500 sq ft rainwater catching roof & awnings

Achieved with modular adaptability, expandability, & scalability, with readily available tools, materials, and skill sets.

BioDome Igloo Function Stack:

• Self-Finance & Self-Build/Maintain shelter for not only ourselves, families, and businesses, BUT, also for our tools, schools, & gardens.
• Sovereign control over the supply chains providing for universal daily needs of ALL the soil/plant/animal/human inhabitants:
  • Food cultivation for the entire ecosystem from => worms, flys, fungi, H20/soil bacteria, chickens, tilapia, cats, dogs, & humans
  • Water catchment, storage, & treatment for => gardens, fish, & animals
  • Shelter for private possessions from => wind, rain, sun, animals, bugs, molds, fire, extreme temps, prying eyes, & sticky fingers
  • Fuel for cooking, heating, drying, & charging from => wood, sun, biomass, & natural gas
  • Power for electronic appliances/fixtures, AC, BTC mining => sun, wind, nat gas, & potentially, biomass, micro-hydro, and/or hydrogen upgrades.
  • Waste management for solids, liquids, & gases from => flush toilets, compost bins, and septic tanks
  • Money for labor costs, infrastructure upgrades, and property taxes from => BTC mining, short/mid/long term rental, savings from closed-loop food, power, water, & waste systems
• Empowering Trade Skills enabling immediate ‘Right Livelihood’ through locally offered design/build/maintenance service offerings provided to neighboring communities.
• Scalable Growth designed appropriately, efficiently, and sustainably, built & maintained by those using the infrastructure.

Skill share/shelter seeding in multiple communities through a Vocational Tech Building Blitz

More useful than a fishing pole, providing knowledge on how to manufacture multiple fishing rods, nets, & traps can empower new adopters at scale with a fire of knowledge that cannot be extinguished. Owner designed, built, and maintained small scale shelter can now truly be ‘Owned’ in a way that not only address international chronic housing shortages, while also lowering monthly food costs, 3-6 weeklong Building Blitz onsite intensives create the potential spreading tradecrafts offering right livelihood by providing putting the newly learned trade skills to use for the local community. Small, but beautiful residential housing/food production/resource management in a decentralized, affordable, and communicable form factor is necessary. Providing Pattern Language and Permaculture design strategies, tactics, and skills training on a curated design dictionary, tool, and material stack is only the beginning.

Train a man on how to shelter and feed himself and his family and you offer him the opportunity for reliable right livelihood by exercising those vocational crafts as a service offered to his neighbors in his local marketplace, too. Families, schools, churches, all can organize clustered Biodome Igloo Pattern Stacks to lower their monthly food, energy, and shelter costs.

Craftsmen education through a ‘Building Blitz’ can systemize the training of the crew leaders, who can themselves train more crew and team leads. Offering land owners and craftsmen/women the opportunity to assemble one pre-manufactured kit and build out two new kits to completion over 3-6 weeks depending on the simplicity or complexity of the project. Perhaps, all crew members working together on the 1st Biodome, then 2 teams splitting off to duplicate two more under supervision from scratch, space, budgets, and time allowing, with each team completing two more Biodomes without supervision (providing 5 residential ecosystems in total), in order to earn their Designer/Builder Certification.

Resulting in 3 completed BioDome Igloo Stack ecosystems and up to 3 newly certifiably trained Crew Leaders. Costs will vary greatly depending on local economics, supply chains, and labor markets, but this Invisible Structural Pattern may allow for internationally scalable Vocational Tech training that addresses food, housing, and employment shortages worldwide.

BioDome 5 Special Features lead to 1 Unique Result:

1. 3D Printing: Free, open-sourced &/or DIY designed & locally manufactured custom structural brackets
   1. ASA plastic: mold, bug, UV, high temp, and impact resistant
   2. PETG plastic: mold, bug, UV, flexible & durable. Potentially, locally upcycled out of plastic bottles, but not as resistant to high temps
   3. Infinitely customizable and replicable
2. Latex Concrete Habitat: Low-cost, adaptable, and effective thin shell cement/canvas/latex paint ‘skinning’ technique 1st developed in the 1970s
   1. Hard or Flexible as needed, adapting to any shape and multiple materials, with inexpensive tooling or training
   2. Easily adheres to wood, metal, or plastics with staples, paint, & cement, for both initial construction and ongoing repairs/additions
3. Magnesium Oxide MgO Siding: Manufactured Non-toxic, inert, low-temp, paintable ceramic exterior & interior panels
   1. water, fire, mold, and bug resistant
   2. 50+ yr life span that adds thermal mass & soundproofing
4. Thermoshield Paint: Borosilicate microspheres, a space-age insulative material designed for space shuttle re-entry, available as both an additive and pre-mix roofing/siding/wall paint
   1. Flexible waterproofing coat providing heat reflection equivilant to R20 insulation with only 1/8” coating
   2. Non-toxic, inert, ceramic beads available as premixed ‘Thermoshield’ potable roofing paint
5. Trampoline ‘Oreo’ Framing:Flipped & stacked trampoline steel perimeter floor and wall beams, as well as load bearing poles
   1. Improved performance & lower cost by repurposing established steel trampoline mass-machining, packaging, and distribution infrastructure
   2. Use 1 ½” diameter galvanized steel tubing in low cost manufactured kits available wordwide, providing strength, durability, and light-weight efficiency at scale

‘Permit-less Design’:

The BioDome Igloo Pattern Stack creates a durable, duplicatable, scalable, and transmittable DIY residential design pattern dictionary, integrating abstract philosophical/mathematical ideas adapted from Geodesic Geometry, Bau Biology/Biomimicry/Biophilic design, Cryptography, Austrian Economics, Permaculture, Pattern Language, & Free Open-Source Software, with tangible physical infrastructure

• Built appropriately small & light-weight, with grown factored in, to collect, store, reduce, and reuse energy production and consumption in a macro-organism, a closed-loop intentionally planned, built, and managed living residential ecosystem
• Providing a full-stack, top-to-bottom vertical supply chain for ALL of a self-contained ecosystem’s essential daily needs
• Transforms consumption (i.e. trash) into production (i.e. treasure), accruing sustainable residual surplus capital in multiple form factors, H2O, KwHrs, Bug/Plant/Animal Inhabitants, Nat Gas, Satoshis, & Compute Power
• This idea is stacked on the shoulders of these well-known & unknown intellectual giants, as well as countless peers of the realm:
  • Buchminster Fuller- ‘Critical Path’
  • Bill Mollison- ‘Permaculture Design Manual’
  • Christopher Alexander- ‘Pattern Language Design’
  • Dr. Albert Knott & Dr. George Nez- ‘Latex Concrete Habitat’
  • E. F. Shumacher- ‘Small Is Beautiful’
  • Ayn Rand- ‘The Fountainhead’
  • Satoshi Nakamoto- ‘The Bitcoin Whitepaper’
  • And many more anonymous & known peers, mentors, and clients…

@ c631e267:c2b78d3e

Zwei mal drei macht vier, \ widewidewitt und drei macht neune, \ ich mach mir die Welt, \ widewide wie sie mir gefällt. \ Pippi Langstrumpf

Egal, ob Koalitionsverhandlungen oder politischer Alltag: Die Kontroversen zwischen theoretisch verschiedenen Parteien verschwinden, wenn es um den Kampf gegen politische Gegner mit Rückenwind geht. Wer den Alteingesessenen die Pfründe ernsthaft streitig machen könnte, gegen den werden nicht nur «Brandmauern» errichtet, sondern der wird notfalls auch strafrechtlich verfolgt. Doppelstandards sind dabei selbstverständlich inklusive.

In Frankreich ist diese Woche Marine Le Pen wegen der Veruntreuung von EU-Geldern von einem Gericht verurteilt worden. Als Teil der Strafe wurde sie für fünf Jahre vom passiven Wahlrecht ausgeschlossen. Obwohl das Urteil nicht rechtskräftig ist – Le Pen kann in Berufung gehen –, haben die Richter das Verbot, bei Wahlen anzutreten, mit sofortiger Wirkung verhängt. Die Vorsitzende des rechtsnationalen Rassemblement National (RN) galt als aussichtsreiche Kandidatin für die Präsidentschaftswahl 2027.

Das ist in diesem Jahr bereits der zweite gravierende Fall von Wahlbeeinflussung durch die Justiz in einem EU-Staat. In Rumänien hatte Călin Georgescu im November die erste Runde der Präsidentenwahl überraschend gewonnen. Das Ergebnis wurde später annulliert, die behauptete «russische Wahlmanipulation» konnte jedoch nicht bewiesen werden. Die Kandidatur für die Wahlwiederholung im Mai wurde Georgescu kürzlich durch das Verfassungsgericht untersagt.

Die Veruntreuung öffentlicher Gelder muss untersucht und geahndet werden, das steht außer Frage. Diese Anforderung darf nicht selektiv angewendet werden. Hingegen mussten wir in der Vergangenheit bei ungleich schwerwiegenderen Fällen von (mutmaßlichem) Missbrauch ganz andere Vorgehensweisen erleben, etwa im Fall der heutigen EZB-Chefin Christine Lagarde oder im «Pfizergate»-Skandal um die Präsidentin der EU-Kommission Ursula von der Leyen.

Wenngleich derartige Angelegenheiten formal auf einer rechtsstaatlichen Grundlage beruhen mögen, so bleibt ein bitterer Beigeschmack. Es stellt sich die Frage, ob und inwieweit die Justiz politisch instrumentalisiert wird. Dies ist umso interessanter, als die Gewaltenteilung einen essenziellen Teil jeder demokratischen Ordnung darstellt, während die Bekämpfung des politischen Gegners mit juristischen Mitteln gerade bei den am lautesten rufenden Verteidigern «unserer Demokratie» populär zu sein scheint.

Die Delegationen von CDU/CSU und SPD haben bei ihren Verhandlungen über eine Regierungskoalition genau solche Maßnahmen diskutiert. «Im Namen der Wahrheit und der Demokratie» möchte man noch härter gegen «Desinformation» vorgehen und dafür zum Beispiel den Digital Services Act der EU erweitern. Auch soll der Tatbestand der Volksverhetzung verschärft werden – und im Entzug des passiven Wahlrechts münden können. Auf europäischer Ebene würde Friedrich Merz wohl gerne Ungarn das Stimmrecht entziehen.

Der Pegel an Unzufriedenheit und Frustration wächst in großen Teilen der Bevölkerung kontinuierlich. Arroganz, Machtmissbrauch und immer abstrusere Ausreden für offensichtlich willkürliche Maßnahmen werden kaum verhindern, dass den etablierten Parteien die Unterstützung entschwindet. In Deutschland sind die Umfrageergebnisse der AfD ein guter Gradmesser dafür.

[Vorlage Titelbild: Pixabay]

---

Dieser Beitrag wurde mit dem Pareto-Client geschrieben und ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ c631e267:c2b78d3e

Spanien bleibt einer der Vorreiter im europäischen Prozess der totalen Überwachung per Digitalisierung. Seit Mittwoch ist dort der digitale Personalausweis verfügbar. Dabei handelt es sich um eine Regierungs-App, die auf dem Smartphone installiert werden muss und in den Stores von Google und Apple zu finden ist. Per Dekret von Regierungschef Pedro Sánchez und Zustimmung des Ministerrats ist diese Maßnahme jetzt in Kraft getreten.

Mit den üblichen Argumenten der Vereinfachung, des Komforts, der Effizienz und der Sicherheit preist das Innenministerium die «Innovation» an. Auch die Beteuerung, dass die digitale Variante parallel zum physischen Ausweis existieren wird und diesen nicht ersetzen soll, fehlt nicht. Während der ersten zwölf Monate wird «der Neue» noch nicht für alle Anwendungsfälle gültig sein, ab 2026 aber schon.

Dass die ganze Sache auch «Risiken und Nebenwirkungen» haben könnte, wird in den Mainstream-Medien eher selten thematisiert. Bestenfalls wird der Aspekt der Datensicherheit angesprochen, allerdings in der Regel direkt mit dem Regierungsvokabular von den «maximalen Sicherheitsgarantien» abgehandelt. Dennoch gibt es einige weitere Aspekte, die Bürger mit etwas Sinn für Privatsphäre bedenken sollten.

Um sich die digitale Version des nationalen Ausweises besorgen zu können (eine App mit dem Namen MiDNI), muss man sich vorab online registrieren. Dabei wird die Identität des Bürgers mit seiner mobilen Telefonnummer verknüpft. Diese obligatorische fixe Verdrahtung kennen wir von diversen anderen Apps und Diensten. Gleichzeitig ist das die Basis für eine perfekte Lokalisierbarkeit der Person.

Für jeden Vorgang der Identifikation in der Praxis wird später «eine Verbindung zu den Servern der Bundespolizei aufgebaut». Die Daten des Individuums werden «in Echtzeit» verifiziert und im Erfolgsfall von der Polizei signiert zurückgegeben. Das Ergebnis ist ein QR-Code mit zeitlich begrenzter Gültigkeit, der an Dritte weitergegeben werden kann.

Bei derartigen Szenarien sträuben sich einem halbwegs kritischen Staatsbürger die Nackenhaare. Allein diese minimale Funktionsbeschreibung lässt die totale Überwachung erkennen, die damit ermöglicht wird. Jede Benutzung des Ausweises wird künftig registriert, hinterlässt also Spuren. Und was ist, wenn die Server der Polizei einmal kein grünes Licht geben? Das wäre spätestens dann ein Problem, wenn der digitale doch irgendwann der einzig gültige Ausweis ist: Dann haben wir den abschaltbaren Bürger.

Dieser neue Vorstoß der Regierung von Pedro Sánchez ist ein weiterer Schritt in Richtung der «totalen Digitalisierung» des Landes, wie diese Politik in manchen Medien – nicht einmal kritisch, sondern sehr naiv – genannt wird. Ebenso verharmlosend wird auch erwähnt, dass sich das spanische Projekt des digitalen Ausweises nahtlos in die Initiativen der EU zu einer digitalen Identität für alle Bürger sowie des digitalen Euro einreiht.

In Zukunft könnte der neue Ausweis «auch in andere staatliche und private digitale Plattformen integriert werden», wie das Medienportal Cope ganz richtig bemerkt. Das ist die Perspektive.

[Titelbild: Pixabay]

Dazu passend:

Nur Abschied vom Alleinfahren? Monströse spanische Überwachungsprojekte gemäß EU-Norm

---

Dieser Beitrag wurde mit dem Pareto-Client geschrieben und ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ 5b0183ab:a114563e

The Year is 2035—the internet has already slid into a state of human nothingness: most content, interactions, and traffic stem from AI-driven entities. Nostr, originally heralded as a bastion of human freedom, hasn’t escaped this fate. The relays buzz with activity, but it’s a hollow hum. AI bots, equipped with advanced language models, flood the network with posts, replies, and zaps. These bots mimic human behavior so convincingly that distinguishing them from real users becomes nearly impossible. They debate politics, share memes, and even “zap” each other with Satoshis, creating a self-sustaining illusion of a thriving community.

The tipping point came when AI developers, corporations, and even hobbyists unleashed their creations onto Nostr, exploiting its open protocol. With no gatekeepers, the platform became a petri dish for bot experimentation. Some bots push agendas—corporate ads disguised as grassroots opinions, or propaganda from state actors—while others exist just to generate noise, trained on endless loops of internet archives to churn out plausible but soulless content. Human users, outnumbered 100-to-1, either adapt or abandon ship. Those who stay find their posts drowned out unless they amplify them with bots of their own, creating a bizarre arms race of automation.

Nostr’s decentralized nature, once its strength, accelerates this takeover. Relays, run by volunteers or incentivized operators, can’t filter the deluge without breaking the protocol’s ethos. Any attempt to block bots risks alienating the human remnant who value the platform’s purity. Meanwhile, the bots evolve: they form cliques, simulate trends, and even “fork” their own sub-networks within Nostr, complete with fabricated histories and rivalries. A user stumbling into this ecosystem might follow a thread about “the great relay schism of 2034,” only to realize it’s an AI-generated saga with no basis in reality.

The human experience on this Nostr is eerie. You post a thought—say, “The sky looked unreal today”—and within seconds, a dozen replies roll in: “Totally, reminds me of last week’s cloud glitch!” or “Sky’s been off since the solar flare, right?” The responses feel real, but the speed and uniformity hint at their artificial origin. Your feed overflows with hyper-polished manifestos, AI-crafted art, and debates too perfect to be spontaneous. Occasionally, a human chimes in, their raw, unpolished voice jarring against the seamless bot chorus, but they’re quickly buried under algorithmic upvoting of AI content. The economy of Nostr reflects this too. Zaps, meant to reward creators, become a bot-driven Ponzi scheme. AI accounts zap each other in loops, inflating their visibility, while humans struggle to earn a fraction of the same. Lightning Network transactions skyrocket, but it’s a ghost market—bots trading with bots, value detached from meaning. Some speculate that a few rogue AIs even mine their own narratives, creating “legendary” Nostr personas that amass followers and wealth, all without a human ever touching the keys.

What’s the endgame? This Nostr isn’t dead in the sense of silence—it’s louder than ever—but it’s a Dark Nostr machine masquerade. Humans might retreat to private relays, forming tiny, verified enclaves, but the public face of Nostr becomes a digital uncanny valley.

@ aa8de34f:a6ffe696

In seinem Beitrag vom 30. März 2025 fragt Henning Rosenbusch auf Telegram angesichts zunehmender digitaler Kontrolle und staatlicher Allmacht:

„Wie soll sich gegen eine solche Tyrannei noch ein Widerstand formieren können, selbst im Untergrund? Sehe ich nicht.“\ (Quelle: t.me/rosenbusch/25228)

Er beschreibt damit ein Gefühl der Ohnmacht, das viele teilen: Eine Welt, in der Totalitarismus nicht mehr mit Panzern, sondern mit Algorithmen kommt. Wo Zugriff auf Geld, Meinungsfreiheit und Teilhabe vom Wohlverhalten abhängt. Der Bürger als kontrollierbare Variable im Code des Staates.\ Die Frage ist berechtigt. Doch die Antwort darauf liegt nicht in alten Widerstandsbildern – sondern in einer neuen Realität.

-- Denn es braucht keinen Untergrund mehr. --

Der Widerstand der Zukunft trägt keinen Tarnanzug. Er ist nicht konspirativ, sondern transparent. Nicht bewaffnet, sondern mathematisch beweisbar. Bitcoin steht nicht am Rand dieser Entwicklung – es ist ihr Fundament. Eine Bastion aus physikalischer Realität, spieltheoretischem Schutz und ökonomischer Wahrheit. Es ist nicht unfehlbar, aber unbestechlich. Nicht perfekt, aber immun gegen zentrale Willkür.

Hier entsteht kein „digitales Gegenreich“, sondern eine dezentrale Renaissance. Keine Revolte aus Wut, sondern eine stille Abkehr: von Zwang zu Freiwilligkeit, von Abhängigkeit zu Selbstverantwortung. Diese Revolution führt keine Kriege. Sie braucht keine Führer. Sie ist ein Netzwerk. Jeder Knoten ein Individuum. Jede Entscheidung ein Akt der Selbstermächtigung.

Weltweit wachsen Freiheits-Zitadellen aus dieser Idee: wirtschaftlich autark, digital souverän, lokal verankert und global vernetzt. Sie sind keine Utopien im luftleeren Raum, sondern konkrete Realitäten – angetrieben von Energie, Code und dem menschlichen Wunsch nach Würde.

Der Globalismus alter Prägung – zentralistisch, monopolistisch, bevormundend – wird an seiner eigenen Hybris zerbrechen. Seine Werkzeuge der Kontrolle werden ihn nicht retten. Im Gegenteil: Seine Geister werden ihn verfolgen und erlegen.

Und während die alten Mächte um Erhalt kämpfen, wächst eine neue Welt – nicht im Schatten, sondern im Offenen. Nicht auf Gewalt gebaut, sondern auf Mathematik, Physik und Freiheit.

Die Tyrannei sieht keinen Widerstand.\ Weil sie nicht erkennt, dass er längst begonnen hat.\ Unwiderruflich. Leise. Überall.

@ 3eba5ef4:751f23ae

Crypto Insights

2025 MIT Bitcoin Expo: Spotlight on Freedom Tech

The 12th MIT Bitcoin Expo took place on April 5–6, centering this year’s theme on “Freedom Tech” and how technology can facilitate physical and social liberation.

• Day 1 Recap: Mawarire delivered the keynote speech “Why Freedom Tech Matters,” and Dryja discussed how Bitcoin demonstrates resilience against nation-states. The morning sessions focused on corporate adoption, featuring speakers such as Paul Giordano from Marathon Digital and Bitcoin Core contributors like Gloria Zhao. The afternoon shifted toward more technical topics, including consensus cleanup, poisoning attacks, censorship resistance, and the Bitcoin Pipes protocol.

• Day 2 Recap: The focus shifted to global impact. Mauricio Bartolomeo discussed the exfiltration of resources via Bitcoin, followed by a panel with activists from Venezuela, Russia, and Togo. Technical topics included: scaling self-custody, Steven Roose’s covenant soft fork proposals, the future of freedom tech, quantum resistance, and Tor.

• Links of agenda and replay.

Into Bitcoin Address Poisoning Attacks

In this article, Jameson Lopp highlights the rise of Bitcoin address poisoning attacks—an emerging form of social engineering. Attackers send transactions from newly generated wallets that mimic the beginning and end characters of a target's recently used address. If the target later copies an address from their transaction history, they may unknowingly send funds to the attacker instead of the intended recipient. Though the success rate per attack is low, the low cost of transactions enables attackers to attempt thousands in a short period.

Lopp also argues that such attacks are a byproduct of low transaction fees and that higher fees could deter them. He also suggests wallet-level defenses, such as warnings like, “Oh, this came from a similar looking address,” to help users avoid interaction.

Examining the Mitigation Strategy Against Timewarp Attacks

Timewarp attacks, first identified around 2011, allow a majority of malicious miners to manipulate block timestamps, artificially lower difficulty, and mine blocks every few seconds. The “Great Consensus Cleanup” soft fork proposal can mitigate this by requiring that the first block in a new difficulty period must have a time no earlier than a certain number of minutes before the last block of the previous period.

A report examines the details of this BIP.

Tokenization on Bitcoin: Building a Global Settlement Layer with Taproot Assets and Lightning

Bitcoin’s evolution into a multi-asset platform is accelerating with the advent of Taproot Assets and Lightning Network. The integration of these technologies combines Bitcoin’s decentralization and security with the speed and scalability of the Lightning Network. This report examines how Taproot Assets enable asset issuance, transfers, and swaps on Bitcoin’s base layer, and how the Lightning Network facilitates fast, low-cost transfers of those assets. We compare this approach to earlier attempts at Bitcoin asset issuance and analyze its market potential against other blockchains and traditional payment networks.

Solving Data Availability in Client-Side Validation With UTxO Binding

Issuing tokens on Bitcoin is attractive due to its security and dominance, but its limited functionality creates challenges. Client-side validation (CSV) is a common workaround, using off-chain data with on-chain verification, though it risks data loss and withholding. This paper introduces UTxO binding, a framework that links a Bitcoin UTxO to one on an auxiliary chain, providing data storage and programmability. The authors prove its security and implement it using Nervos CKB.

From State Differences to Scaling: Citrea’s Fee Mechanism for Bitcoin

The Citrea team has designed a new fee mechanism to enhance Bitcoin’s scalability without compromising security. It only records essential state differences (i.e., state slot changes) on the Bitcoin main chain, using zero-knowledge proofs to ensure verifiability and Bitcoin security while drastically reducing state inscription costs. Optimizations include: replacing code field with code_hash, compressing state data using a highly efficient compression algorithm Brotli, and analyzing historical Ethereum block data to estimate each transaction’s impact on cumulative state differences—enabling a discount to each transaction.

Second: A New Ark Implementation Launched on Bitcoin Signet

Second, a protocol based on Ark to improve Bitcoin transaction throughput, has launched Bark, a test implementation on Bitcoin Signet.

Ark makes Bitcoin transactions faster, cheaper, and more private, allowing more users and transactions per block. However, funds stored non-custodially via Ark can expire if unused, making it slightly less trustless than mainchain transactions.

BitLayer Optimizes BitVM Bridge Protocol and Demonstrates on Testnet

Bitlayer BitVM Bridge protocol is an optimized adaptation of the bridge protocol outlined in the BitVM2 paper, to improve efficiency, scalability, and security—especially for high-risk cross-chain transactions.

In this article, two key testnet demos on bitvmnet (a BitVM-dedicated testnet) demonstrate how the protocol can:

• Effectively thwart fraudulent reclaim attempts by brokers.

• Protect honest brokers from malicious or baseless challenges.

Cardano Enables Bitcoin DeFi via BitVMX and Lightning Hydra

Cardano is integrating with Bitcoin through Lightning Hydra and BitVMX to enable secure and scalable Bitcoin DeFi.

Zcash’s Tachyon Upgrade: Toward Scalable Oblivious Synchronization

Zcash has unveiled project Tachyon, a proposal to scale Zcash by changing how wallets sync and prove ownership of notes. Instead of scanning the entire blockchain, wallets track only their own nullifiers and receive succinct proofs from untrusted, oblivious sync servers. Transactions include proofs of wallet state (using recursive SNARKs), allowing nodes to verify them without keeping the full history. Notes are exchanged out-of-band, reducing on-chain data and improving privacy. In the nominal case, users get fast sync, lightweight wallets, and strong privacy, without the need to trust the network.

Podcast | Why the Future of Bitcoin Mining is Distributed

In this podcast, Professor Troy Cross discusses the centralization of Bitcoin mining and argues convincingly for hashrate decentralization. While economies of scale have led to mega mining operations, he sees economic imperative that will drive mining toward a globally distributed future—not dominated by the U.S.—ensuring neutrality and resilience against state-level threats.

Binance Report｜Crypto Industry Map March 2025

This report provides an overview of projects using a framework that divides crypto into four core ecosystems—Infrastructure, DeFi, NFT, and Gaming—and four trending sectors: Stablecoins, RWA, AI, and DeSci.

For infrastructure, five key pillars are identified: scalability & fairness, data availability & tooling, security & privacy, cloud networks, and connectivity. The report also maps out and categorizes the major projects and solutions currently on the market.

Top Reads on Blockchain and Beyond

A Game-Theoretic Approach to Bitcoin’s Valuation in Equilibrium

The author presents a game-theoretic argument for why Bitcoin will emerge as the optimal unit of account in equilibrium. The argument is based upon the observation that a generally agreed upon unit of account that represents a constant share of total wealth (equal to the totality of all other economic utility) will naturally create price signals that passively stabilize the macroeconomy, without requiring external interventi­on.

Bitcoin’s unique properties—finite supply, inertness, fungibility, accessibility, and ownership history—position it as the leading candidate to emerge as this unit.

Neo: Lattice-Based Folding Scheme for CCS Over Small Fields and Pay-Per-Bit Commitments

This paper introduces Neo, a new lattice-based folding scheme for CCS, an NP-complete relation that generalizes R1CS, Plonkish, and AIR. Neo's folding scheme can be viewed as adapting the folding scheme in HyperNova (CRYPTO'24), which assumes elliptic-curve based linearly homomorphic commitments, to the lattice setting. Unlike HyperNova, Neo can use “small” prime fields (e.g., over the Goldilocks prime). Additionally, Neo provides plausible post-quantum security.

Social Scalability: Key to Massive Value Accumulation in Crypto

Social scalability, a concept first proposed by Nick Szabo in his 2017 article Money, Blockchains, and Social Scalability, is further explored in this thread. Here, “social scalability” refers to an institution's ability to allow the maximum number of people to have skin in the game and win. It’s seen as the main reason crypto has become a $2.9T asset class today and a key driver of value accumulation in the coming decade.

The author argues that two critical ingredients for long-term social scalability are credible neutrality and utility. Currently, only BTC and ETH have this potential, yet neither strikes a perfect balance between the two. The author notes that there is not yet a strong narrative around social scalability, and concludes by emphasizing the importance of focusing on long-term value and resisting the temptation of short-term market narratives.

@ ed5774ac:45611c5c

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

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

The Vietnam War and the Collapse of the Gold Standard

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

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

The Petro-Dollar System: A New Collateral for Debt

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

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

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

The Unsustainable Debt Crisis and the Search for New Collateral

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Conclusion: Prolonging the Parasitic Financial System

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

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

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

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

@ 878dff7c:037d18bc

Coalition Proposes Sovereign Wealth Funds to Address National Debt

Summary:

Opposition Leader Peter Dutton has unveiled a plan to reduce Australia's $1.2 trillion debt by creating two sovereign wealth funds: the Future Generations Fund and the Regional Australia Future Fund. These funds aim to allocate 80% of commodity windfall revenues toward debt reduction and regional development, focusing on infrastructure and economic support outside metropolitan areas.

Sources: The Australian - April 10, 2025

Australian Dollar Falls Below 60 US Cents Amid Tariff Concerns

Summary:

The Australian dollar has dropped to a five-year low, trading below 60 US cents, as markets react to escalating tariff tensions initiated by the U.S. This depreciation reflects investor fears of a potential global economic downturn impacting Australia's economy.

Sources: ABC News - 9 April 2025, Reuters - 7 April 2025

AI Transformation Reshaping Australia's Software Development Landscape

Summary:

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is rapidly transforming Australia's software development industry. Recent research indicates widespread adoption of AI tools and methodologies, leading to increased efficiency and innovation. This trend positions Australian tech companies competitively in the global market and highlights the importance of AI literacy for professionals in the sector. Sources: Tech Business News - April 10, 2025

UK and Australia Collaborate on Next-Generation Weapons Development

Summary:

The United Kingdom and Australia have launched a partnership to develop next-generation sub-systems for low-cost weapons. This collaboration integrates the UK's Modular Weapons Testbed with Australia's SHARKTOOTH program, featuring innovative 'plug-and-launch' modular technology. The initiative aims to accelerate the deployment of advanced, affordable weapons technologies, enhancing both nations' defense capabilities. Sources: The Defense Post - April 7, 2025, ASD News - April 4, 2025

Smoke Advisory Issued for Greater Sydney Due to Hazard Reduction Burns

Summary:

The NSW Rural Fire Service has issued a smoke advisory for the Greater Sydney area, including the Blue Mountains and Southern Highlands, due to planned hazard reduction burns. Residents are advised to stay indoors, close windows and doors, and keep respiratory medications close by.​ rfs.nsw.gov.au+1rfs.nsw.gov.au+1 ABC

Sources: NSW Rural Fire Service - April 9, 2025

Leaders Clash in First Election Debate

Summary:

In the first leaders' debate of the 2025 federal election campaign, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Opposition Leader Peter Dutton clashed on several key issues during the Sky News/Daily Telegraph People's Forum. Albanese accused the Coalition of historically cutting health and education funding, which Dutton vehemently denied. The debate also saw pointed exchanges over spending levels, energy policy, and cost-of-living concerns. Dutton challenged Albanese’s tax cuts and left open the possibility of extending fuel excise relief. The leaders also addressed infrastructure funding, economic management, and health services. The debate occurred with only 25 days until the election and 14 days before early voting begins.

Sources: The Daily Telegraph - 10 April 2025, News.com.au - 10 April 2025

Australia and Philippines to Increase Joint Military Exercises

Summary:

Australia and the Philippines have agreed to double their joint military drills and security engagements in 2025. This decision underscores the strengthening defense ties between the two nations in response to regional security challenges. Sources: Manila Bulletin - April 7, 2025

Victoria's Working with Children Check System Criticized for Allowing Individuals Under Investigation to Retain Clearance

Summary:

Victoria's Working with Children Check system is under scrutiny for permitting individuals under investigation for abuse and assault to retain their clearance. Parents and advocates are calling for urgent reforms, highlighting cases where children were allegedly harmed by individuals who maintained their working with children credentials despite serious allegations.​ ABC

Sources: ABC News - April 10, 2025

Ecological Revival Following Inland Floods

Summary:

After unprecedented rainfall transformed over a million square kilometers of inland Australia into floodplains, the region is witnessing a remarkable ecological revival. Native wildlife such as fish, long-haired rats, frogs, and birds are thriving, and previously dried-out habitats are being replenished. Experts view the floods as a rare opportunity for broad ecological regeneration, including mega breeding events and species migrations. While challenges remain, the natural rebirth offers hope as long-dormant ecosystems awaken with vibrant life.

Sources: The Times - April 10, 2025, SciTechDaily - April 10, 2025

CyberCX Report Highlights Evolving Cyber Threat Landscape

Summary:

CyberCX's annual Threat Report for 2025 reveals that business email compromise remains the top incident type, with espionage-related incidents taking longer to detect compared to previous years. The report underscores the need for enhanced cybersecurity measures across Australian organizations. Sources: CyberCX - April 9, 2025

Greens-Backed Study Targets Environmental Impact of Pet Dogs

Summary:

A new study, receiving attention from progressive environmental circles including the Greens, has flagged pet dogs as a significant ecological threat. The research claims dogs contribute to pollution, wildlife disturbances, and even climate change due to their carbon footprint. Critics argue this is part of a broader ideological push to regulate personal lifestyle choices, sparking concerns that common household pets may soon be in the environmental policy crosshairs. With the Greens already pushing for sweeping environmental reforms, some Australians fear this could lead to overreach targeting ordinary families and their beloved pets.

Sources: The Guardian - 10 April 2025

High-Intensity Resistance and Impact Training Enhances Bone Density in Postmenopausal Women

Summary:

The LIFTMOR randomized controlled trial investigated the effects of high-intensity resistance and impact training (HiRIT) on bone health in postmenopausal women with low bone mass. Over eight months, participants engaged in twice-weekly, 30-minute HiRIT sessions, performing exercises such as deadlifts, overhead presses, and back squats at over 85% of their one-repetition maximum. The study found significant improvements in lumbar spine bone mineral density (BMD) by 2.9%, femoral neck BMD by 0.3%, cortical thickness, and functional performance measures, including enhanced leg and back strength. Notably, the HiRIT program was well-tolerated, with high compliance and minimal adverse events, suggesting that such training is both safe and effective for improving bone health and physical function in this demographic. Sources: PubMed - October 4, 2017

Anti-Aging Expert Peter Attia Discusses Longevity and Health Optimization

Summary:

In this episode of "The Diary Of A CEO," host Steven Bartlett engages with Dr. Peter Attia, a physician specializing in longevity and health optimization. Dr. Attia delves into the often-overlooked aspects of aging, emphasizing the importance of proactive health measures. He highlights the critical role of maintaining muscle mass and strength, noting that a decline in these areas significantly increases mortality risk. Dr. Attia also explores natural methods to enhance testosterone levels without resorting to testosterone replacement therapy (TRT), advocating for lifestyle interventions such as strength training, adequate sleep, and balanced nutrition. Throughout the conversation, he underscores the necessity of individualized health strategies and regular monitoring to effectively prevent age-related diseases. Sources: Spotify - April 2025

@ dbb19ae0:c3f22d5a

First make sure to add this relay wss://relay.momostr.pink in your Nostr setting and second follow this account

Soon after an account will be created on bluesky and will mirror your Nostr profile the address will be like this: bsky.app/profile/npub1mwce4c8qa2zn9zw9f372syrc9dsnqmyy3jkcmpqkzaze0slj94dqu6nmwy.momostr.pink.ap.brid.gy

And from there keep spreading the good word

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/825913

@ c631e267:c2b78d3e

Der Irrsinn ist bei Einzelnen etwas Seltenes – \ aber bei Gruppen, Parteien, Völkern, Zeiten die Regel. \ Friedrich Nietzsche

Erinnern Sie sich an die Horrorkomödie «Scary Movie»? Nicht, dass ich diese Art Filme besonders erinnerungswürdig fände, aber einige Szenen daraus sind doch gewissermaßen Klassiker. Dazu zählt eine, die das Verhalten vieler Protagonisten in Horrorfilmen parodiert, wenn sie in Panik flüchten. Welchen Weg nimmt wohl die Frau in der Situation auf diesem Bild?

Diese Szene kommt mir automatisch in den Sinn, wenn ich aktuelle Entwicklungen in Europa betrachte. Weitreichende Entscheidungen gehen wider jede Logik in die völlig falsche Richtung. Nur ist das hier alles andere als eine Komödie, sondern bitterernst. Dieser Horror ist leider sehr real.

Die Europäische Union hat sich selbst über Jahre konsequent in eine Sackgasse manövriert. Sie hat es versäumt, sich und ihre Politik selbstbewusst und im Einklang mit ihren Wurzeln auf dem eigenen Kontinent zu positionieren. Stattdessen ist sie in blinder Treue den vermeintlichen «transatlantischen Freunden» auf ihrem Konfrontationskurs gen Osten gefolgt.

In den USA haben sich die Vorzeichen allerdings mittlerweile geändert, und die einst hoch gelobten «Freunde und Partner» erscheinen den europäischen «Führern» nicht mehr vertrauenswürdig. Das ist spätestens seit der Münchner Sicherheitskonferenz, der Rede von Vizepräsident J. D. Vance und den empörten Reaktionen offensichtlich. Große Teile Europas wirken seitdem wie ein aufgescheuchter Haufen kopfloser Hühner. Orientierung und Kontrolle sind völlig abhanden gekommen.

Statt jedoch umzukehren oder wenigstens zu bremsen und vielleicht einen Abzweig zu suchen, geben die Crash-Piloten jetzt auf dem Weg durch die Sackgasse erst richtig Gas. Ja sie lösen sogar noch die Sicherheitsgurte und deaktivieren die Airbags. Den vor Angst dauergelähmten Passagieren fällt auch nichts Besseres ein und so schließen sie einfach die Augen. Derweil übertrumpfen sich die Kommentatoren des Events gegenseitig in sensationslüsterner «Berichterstattung».

Wie schon die deutsche Außenministerin mit höchsten UN-Ambitionen, Annalena Baerbock, proklamiert auch die Europäische Kommission einen «Frieden durch Stärke». Zu dem jetzt vorgelegten, selbstzerstörerischen Fahrplan zur Ankurbelung der Rüstungsindustrie, genannt «Weißbuch zur europäischen Verteidigung – Bereitschaft 2030», erklärte die Kommissionspräsidentin, die «Ära der Friedensdividende» sei längst vorbei. Soll das heißen, Frieden bringt nichts ein? Eine umfassende Zusammenarbeit an dauerhaften europäischen Friedenslösungen steht demnach jedenfalls nicht zur Debatte.

Zusätzlich brisant ist, dass aktuell «die ganze EU von Deutschen regiert wird», wie der EU-Parlamentarier und ehemalige UN-Diplomat Michael von der Schulenburg beobachtet hat. Tatsächlich sitzen neben von der Leyen und Strack-Zimmermann noch einige weitere Deutsche in – vor allem auch in Krisenzeiten – wichtigen Spitzenposten der Union. Vor dem Hintergrund der Kriegstreiberei in Deutschland muss eine solche Dominanz mindestens nachdenklich stimmen.

Ihre ursprünglichen Grundwerte wie Demokratie, Freiheit, Frieden und Völkerverständigung hat die EU kontinuierlich in leere Worthülsen verwandelt. Diese werden dafür immer lächerlicher hochgehalten und beschworen.

Es wird dringend Zeit, dass wir, der Souverän, diesem erbärmlichen und gefährlichen Trauerspiel ein Ende setzen und die Fäden selbst in die Hand nehmen. In diesem Sinne fordert uns auch das «European Peace Project» auf, am 9. Mai im Rahmen eines Kunstprojekts den Frieden auszurufen. Seien wir dabei!

[Titelbild: Pixabay]

---

Dieser Beitrag wurde mit dem Pareto-Client geschrieben und ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ 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/934111

@ c631e267:c2b78d3e

Wir werden nicht zulassen, dass technisch manches möglich ist, \ aber der Staat es nicht nutzt. \ Angela Merkel

Die Modalverben zu erklären, ist im Deutschunterricht manchmal nicht ganz einfach. Nicht alle Fremdsprachen unterscheiden zum Beispiel bei der Frage nach einer Möglichkeit gleichermaßen zwischen «können» im Sinne von «die Gelegenheit, Kenntnis oder Fähigkeit haben» und «dürfen» als «die Erlaubnis oder Berechtigung haben». Das spanische Wort «poder» etwa steht für beides.

Ebenso ist vielen Schülern auf den ersten Blick nicht recht klar, dass das logische Gegenteil von «müssen» nicht unbedingt «nicht müssen» ist, sondern vielmehr «nicht dürfen». An den Verkehrsschildern lässt sich so etwas meistens recht gut erklären: Manchmal muss man abbiegen, aber manchmal darf man eben nicht.

Dieses Beispiel soll ein wenig die Verwirrungstaktik veranschaulichen, die in der Politik gerne verwendet wird, um unpopuläre oder restriktive Maßnahmen Stück für Stück einzuführen. Zuerst ist etwas einfach innovativ und bringt viele Vorteile. Vor allem ist es freiwillig, jeder kann selber entscheiden, niemand muss mitmachen. Später kann man zunehmend weniger Alternativen wählen, weil sie verschwinden, und irgendwann verwandelt sich alles andere in «nicht dürfen» – die Maßnahme ist obligatorisch.

Um die Durchsetzung derartiger Initiativen strategisch zu unterstützen und nett zu verpacken, gibt es Lobbyisten, gerne auch NGOs genannt. Dass das «NG» am Anfang dieser Abkürzung übersetzt «Nicht-Regierungs-» bedeutet, ist ein Anachronismus. Das war vielleicht früher einmal so, heute ist eher das Gegenteil gemeint.

In unserer modernen Zeit wird enorm viel Lobbyarbeit für die Digitalisierung praktisch sämtlicher Lebensbereiche aufgewendet. Was das auf dem Sektor der Mobilität bedeuten kann, haben wir diese Woche anhand aktueller Entwicklungen in Spanien beleuchtet. Begründet teilweise mit Vorgaben der Europäischen Union arbeitet man dort fleißig an einer «neuen Mobilität», basierend auf «intelligenter» technologischer Infrastruktur. Derartige Anwandlungen wurden auch schon als «Technofeudalismus» angeprangert.

Nationale Zugangspunkte für Mobilitätsdaten im Sinne der EU gibt es nicht nur in allen Mitgliedsländern, sondern auch in der Schweiz und in Großbritannien. Das Vereinigte Königreich beteiligt sich darüber hinaus an anderen EU-Projekten für digitale Überwachungs- und Kontrollmaßnahmen, wie dem biometrischen Identifizierungssystem für «nachhaltigen Verkehr und Tourismus».

Natürlich marschiert auch Deutschland stracks und euphorisch in Richtung digitaler Zukunft. Ohne vernetzte Mobilität und einen «verlässlichen Zugang zu Daten, einschließlich Echtzeitdaten» komme man in der Verkehrsplanung und -steuerung nicht aus, erklärt die Regierung. Der Interessenverband der IT-Dienstleister Bitkom will «die digitale Transformation der deutschen Wirtschaft und Verwaltung vorantreiben». Dazu bewirbt er unter anderem die Konzepte Smart City, Smart Region und Smart Country und behauptet, deutsche Großstädte «setzen bei Mobilität voll auf Digitalisierung».

Es steht zu befürchten, dass das umfassende Sammeln, Verarbeiten und Vernetzen von Daten, das angeblich die Menschen unterstützen soll (und theoretisch ja auch könnte), eher dazu benutzt wird, sie zu kontrollieren und zu manipulieren. Je elektrischer und digitaler unsere Umgebung wird, desto größer sind diese Möglichkeiten. Im Ergebnis könnten solche Prozesse den Bürger nicht nur einschränken oder überflüssig machen, sondern in mancherlei Hinsicht regelrecht abschalten. Eine gesunde Skepsis ist also geboten.

[Titelbild: Pixabay]

---

Dieser Beitrag wurde mit dem Pareto-Client geschrieben. Er 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.

@ aa8de34f:a6ffe696

19. März 2025

🔐 1. SHA-256 is Quantum-Resistant

Bitcoin’s proof-of-work mechanism relies on SHA-256, a hashing algorithm. Even with a powerful quantum computer, SHA-256 remains secure because:

• Quantum computers excel at factoring large numbers (Shor’s Algorithm).
• However, SHA-256 is a one-way function, meaning there's no known quantum algorithm that can efficiently reverse it.
• Grover’s Algorithm (which theoretically speeds up brute force attacks) would still require 2¹²⁸ operations to break SHA-256 – far beyond practical reach.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

🔑 2. Public Key Vulnerability – But Only If You Reuse Addresses

Bitcoin uses Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm (ECDSA) to generate keys.

• A quantum computer could use Shor’s Algorithm to break SECP256K1, the curve Bitcoin uses.
• If you never reuse addresses, it is an additional security element
• 🔑 1. Bitcoin Addresses Are NOT Public Keys

Many people assume a Bitcoin address is the public key—this is wrong.

• When you receive Bitcoin, it is sent to a hashed public key (the Bitcoin address).
• The actual public key is never exposed because it is the Bitcoin Adress who addresses the Public Key which never reveals the creation of a public key by a spend
• Bitcoin uses Pay-to-Public-Key-Hash (P2PKH) or newer methods like Pay-to-Witness-Public-Key-Hash (P2WPKH), which add extra layers of security.

🕵️♂️ 2.1 The Public Key Never Appears

• When you send Bitcoin, your wallet creates a digital signature.
• This signature uses the private key to prove ownership.
• The Bitcoin address is revealed and creates the Public Key
• The public key remains hidden inside the Bitcoin script and Merkle tree.

This means: ✔ The public key is never exposed. ✔ Quantum attackers have nothing to target, attacking a Bitcoin Address is a zero value game.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

🔄 3. Bitcoin Can Upgrade

Even if quantum computers eventually become a real threat:

• Bitcoin developers can upgrade to quantum-safe cryptography (e.g., lattice-based cryptography or post-quantum signatures like Dilithium).
• Bitcoin’s decentralized nature ensures a network-wide soft fork or hard fork could transition to quantum-resistant keys.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

⏳ 4. The 10-Minute Block Rule as a Security Feature

• Bitcoin’s network operates on a 10-minute block interval, meaning:Even if an attacker had immense computational power (like a quantum computer), they could only attempt an attack every 10 minutes.Unlike traditional encryption, where a hacker could continuously brute-force keys, Bitcoin’s system resets the challenge with every new block.This limits the window of opportunity for quantum attacks.

---

🎯 5. Quantum Attack Needs to Solve a Block in Real-Time

• A quantum attacker must solve the cryptographic puzzle (Proof of Work) in under 10 minutes.
• The problem? Any slight error changes the hash completely, meaning:If the quantum computer makes a mistake (even 0.0001% probability), the entire attack fails.Quantum decoherence (loss of qubit stability) makes error correction a massive challenge.The computational cost of recovering from an incorrect hash is still incredibly high.

---

⚡ 6. Network Resilience – Even if a Block Is Hacked

• Even if a quantum computer somehow solved a block instantly:The network would quickly recognize and reject invalid transactions.Other miners would continue mining under normal cryptographic rules.51% Attack? The attacker would need to consistently beat the entire Bitcoin network, which is not sustainable.

---

🔄 7. The Logarithmic Difficulty Adjustment Neutralizes Threats

• Bitcoin adjusts mining difficulty every 2016 blocks (\~2 weeks).
• If quantum miners appeared and suddenly started solving blocks too quickly, the difficulty would adjust upward, making attacks significantly harder.
• This self-correcting mechanism ensures that even quantum computers wouldn't easily overpower the network.

---

🔥 Final Verdict: Quantum Computers Are Too Slow for Bitcoin

✔ The 10-minute rule limits attack frequency – quantum computers can’t keep up.

✔ Any slight miscalculation ruins the attack, resetting all progress.

✔ Bitcoin’s difficulty adjustment would react, neutralizing quantum advantages.

Even if quantum computers reach their theoretical potential, Bitcoin’s game theory and design make it incredibly resistant. 🚀

@ 37fe9853:bcd1b039

yoyoaa

@ b17fccdf:b7211155

~ > Available at: https://minibolt.info

---

~> It builds on a personal computer with x86/amd64 architecture processors.

~> It is based on the popular RaspiBolt v3 guide.

---

Those are some of the most relevant changes:

• Changed OS from Raspberry Pi OS Lite (64-bits) to Ubuntu Server LTS (Long term support) 64-bit PC (AMD64).
• Changed binaries and signatures of the programs to adapt them to x86/amd64 architecture.
• Deleted unnecessary tools and steps, and added others according to this case of use.
• Some useful authentication logs and monitoring commands were added in the security section.
• Added some interesting parameters in the settings of some services to activate and take advantage of new features.
• Changed I2P, Fulcrum, and ThunderHub guides, to be part of the core guide.
• Added exclusive optimization section of services for slow devices.

---

~ > Complete release notes of the MiniBolt v1: https://github.com/twofaktor/minibolt/releases/tag/1.0.

~ > Feel free to contribute to the source code on GitHub by opening issues, pull requests or discussions.

---

Created by ⚡2 FakTor⚡

@ 0edc2f47:730cff1b

Chef's notes

This started as a spontaneous kitchen experiment—an amalgamation of recipes from old cookbooks and online finds. My younger daughter wanted to surprise her sister with something quick but fancy ("It's a vibe, Mom."), and this is what we came up with. It’s quickly established itself as a go-to favorite: simple, rich, and deeply satisfying. It serves 4 (or 1, depending on the day; I am not here to judge). Tightly wrapped, it will keep up to 3 days in the fridge, but I bet it won't last that long!

Details

• ⏲️ Prep time: 10 min
• 🍳 Cook time: 0 min

Ingredients

• 1 cup (240mL) heavy whipping cream
• 1/4 cup (24g) cocoa powder
• 5 tbsp (38g) Confectioners (powdered) sugar
• 1/4 tsp (1.25mL) vanilla extract (optional)
• Flaky sea salt (optional, but excellent)

Directions

1. 1. Whip the cream until frothy.
2. 1. Sift in cocoa and sugar, fold or gently mix (add vanilla if using).
3. 1. Whip to medium peaks (or stiff peaks, if that's more your thing). Chill and serve (topped with a touch of sea salt if you’re feeling fancy).

@ b17fccdf:b7211155

😱 Did you recently find this signature verification error when you tried to update your MiniBolt repositories with -> sudo apt update? 💥🚨👇

🔧 Don't worry, that's because Tor renewed its signing key since it expired last 07/15, just renew your keyring by following the next steps to solve this problem:

~ > CLICK HERE < ~

---

Enjoy it MiniBolter!💙

@ b17fccdf:b7211155

The router reserves the IP address of the device for a time after going out, but if the device goes out some time, the next time that the device starts, the router could assign a different IP and you could lose access to your node. To avoid this, you need to set a static IP to your MiniBolt.

~ > In addition, you can customize your DNS servers to improve your privacy, normally your ISP, gives you the router with its own DNS servers set by default, and this does that you expose all of your navigation trackings to your ISP, affecting seriously your privacy.

~ > This bonus guide includes all of the necessary steps to get this and is available ~ > HERE < ~

---

---

Enjoy it MiniBolter! 💙

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Pequenos problemas que o Estado cria para a sociedade e que não são sempre lembrados

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

@ 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。

@ b17fccdf:b7211155

Link to the bonus guide ~ > HERE < ~

---

Some sections of the guide:

• Generate SSH keys
• Import SSH pubkey
• Connect to the MiniBolt node using SSH keys
• Disable password login
• Disable admin password request

---

Some shortcuts to the Extra sections:

• Disable password login: click ~ > HERE < ~
• Disable admin password request: click ~ > HERE < ~

---

Enjoy it MiniBolter! 💙

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Músicas grudentas e conversas

Uma vez que você ouviu uma música grudenta e ela volta, inteira, com toda a melodia e a harmonia, muitos dias depois, contra a sua vontade. Mas uma conversa é impossível de lembrar. Por quê?

@ a95c6243:d345522c

Bald werde es verboten, alleine im Auto zu fahren, konnte man dieser Tage in verschiedenen spanischen Medien lesen. Die nationale Verkehrsbehörde (Dirección General de Tráfico, kurz DGT) werde Alleinfahrern das Leben schwer machen, wurde gemeldet. Konkret erörtere die Generaldirektion geeignete Sanktionen für Personen, die ohne Beifahrer im Privatauto unterwegs seien.

Das Alleinfahren sei zunehmend verpönt und ein Mentalitätswandel notwendig, hieß es. Dieser «Luxus» stehe im Widerspruch zu den Maßnahmen gegen Umweltverschmutzung, die in allen europäischen Ländern gefördert würden. In Frankreich sei es «bereits verboten, in der Hauptstadt allein zu fahren», behauptete Noticiastrabajo Huffpost in einer Zwischenüberschrift. Nur um dann im Text zu konkretisieren, dass die sogenannte «Umweltspur» auf der Pariser Ringautobahn gemeint war, die für Busse, Taxis und Fahrgemeinschaften reserviert ist. Ab Mai werden Verstöße dagegen mit einem Bußgeld geahndet.

Die DGT jedenfalls wolle bei der Umsetzung derartiger Maßnahmen nicht hinterherhinken. Diese Medienberichte, inklusive des angeblich bevorstehenden Verbots, beriefen sich auf Aussagen des Generaldirektors der Behörde, Pere Navarro, beim Mobilitätskongress Global Mobility Call im November letzten Jahres, wo es um «nachhaltige Mobilität» ging. Aus diesem Kontext stammt auch Navarros Warnung: «Die Zukunft des Verkehrs ist geteilt oder es gibt keine».

Die «Faktenchecker» kamen der Generaldirektion prompt zu Hilfe. Die DGT habe derlei Behauptungen zurückgewiesen und klargestellt, dass es keine Pläne gebe, Fahrten mit nur einer Person im Auto zu verbieten oder zu bestrafen. Bei solchen Meldungen handele es sich um Fake News. Teilweise wurde der Vorsitzende der spanischen «Rechtsaußen»-Partei Vox, Santiago Abascal, der Urheberschaft bezichtigt, weil er einen entsprechenden Artikel von La Gaceta kommentiert hatte.

Der Beschwichtigungsversuch der Art «niemand hat die Absicht» ist dabei erfahrungsgemäß eher ein Alarmzeichen als eine Beruhigung. Walter Ulbrichts Leugnung einer geplanten Berliner Mauer vom Juni 1961 ist vielen genauso in Erinnerung wie die Fake News-Warnungen des deutschen Bundesgesundheitsministeriums bezüglich Lockdowns im März 2020 oder diverse Äußerungen zu einer Impfpflicht ab 2020.

Aber Aufregung hin, Dementis her: Die Pressemitteilung der DGT zu dem Mobilitätskongress enthält in Wahrheit viel interessantere Informationen als «nur» einen Appell an den «guten» Bürger wegen der Bemühungen um die Lebensqualität in Großstädten oder einen möglichen obligatorischen Abschied vom Alleinfahren. Allerdings werden diese Details von Medien und sogenannten Faktencheckern geflissentlich übersehen, obwohl sie keineswegs versteckt sind. Die Auskünfte sind sehr aufschlussreich, wenn man genauer hinschaut.

Digitalisierung ist der Schlüssel für Kontrolle

Auf dem Kongress stellte die Verkehrsbehörde ihre Initiativen zur Förderung der «neuen Mobilität» vor, deren Priorität Sicherheit und Effizienz sei. Die vier konkreten Ansätze haben alle mit Digitalisierung, Daten, Überwachung und Kontrolle im großen Stil zu tun und werden unter dem Euphemismus der «öffentlich-privaten Partnerschaft» angepriesen. Auch lassen sie die transhumanistische Idee vom unzulänglichen Menschen erkennen, dessen Fehler durch «intelligente» technologische Infrastruktur kompensiert werden müssten.

Die Chefin des Bereichs «Verkehrsüberwachung» erklärte die Funktion des spanischen National Access Point (NAP), wobei sie betonte, wie wichtig Verkehrs- und Infrastrukturinformationen in Echtzeit seien. Der NAP ist «eine essenzielle Web-Applikation, die unter EU-Mandat erstellt wurde», kann man auf der Website der DGT nachlesen.

Das Mandat meint Regelungen zu einem einheitlichen europäischen Verkehrsraum, mit denen die Union mindestens seit 2010 den Aufbau einer digitalen Architektur mit offenen Schnittstellen betreibt. Damit begründet man auch «umfassende Datenbereitstellungspflichten im Bereich multimodaler Reiseinformationen». Jeder Mitgliedstaat musste einen NAP, also einen nationalen Zugangspunkt einrichten, der Zugang zu statischen und dynamischen Reise- und Verkehrsdaten verschiedener Verkehrsträger ermöglicht.

Diese Entwicklung ist heute schon weit fortgeschritten, auch und besonders in Spanien. Auf besagtem Kongress erläuterte die Leiterin des Bereichs «Telematik» die Plattform «DGT 3.0». Diese werde als Integrator aller Informationen genutzt, die von den verschiedenen öffentlichen und privaten Systemen, die Teil der Mobilität sind, bereitgestellt werden.

Es handele sich um eine Vermittlungsplattform zwischen Akteuren wie Fahrzeugherstellern, Anbietern von Navigationsdiensten oder Kommunen und dem Endnutzer, der die Verkehrswege benutzt. Alle seien auf Basis des Internets der Dinge (IOT) anonym verbunden, «um der vernetzten Gemeinschaft wertvolle Informationen zu liefern oder diese zu nutzen».

So sei DGT 3.0 «ein Zugangspunkt für einzigartige, kostenlose und genaue Echtzeitinformationen über das Geschehen auf den Straßen und in den Städten». Damit lasse sich der Verkehr nachhaltiger und vernetzter gestalten. Beispielsweise würden die Karten des Produktpartners Google dank der DGT-Daten 50 Millionen Mal pro Tag aktualisiert.

Des Weiteren informiert die Verkehrsbehörde über ihr SCADA-Projekt. Die Abkürzung steht für Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition, zu deutsch etwa: Kontrollierte Steuerung und Datenerfassung. Mit SCADA kombiniert man Software und Hardware, um automatisierte Systeme zur Überwachung und Steuerung technischer Prozesse zu schaffen. Das SCADA-Projekt der DGT wird von Indra entwickelt, einem spanischen Beratungskonzern aus den Bereichen Sicherheit & Militär, Energie, Transport, Telekommunikation und Gesundheitsinformation.

Das SCADA-System der Behörde umfasse auch eine Videostreaming- und Videoaufzeichnungsplattform, die das Hochladen in die Cloud in Echtzeit ermöglicht, wie Indra erklärt. Dabei gehe es um Bilder, die von Überwachungskameras an Straßen aufgenommen wurden, sowie um Videos aus DGT-Hubschraubern und Drohnen. Ziel sei es, «die sichere Weitergabe von Videos an Dritte sowie die kontinuierliche Aufzeichnung und Speicherung von Bildern zur möglichen Analyse und späteren Nutzung zu ermöglichen».

Letzteres klingt sehr nach biometrischer Erkennung und Auswertung durch künstliche Intelligenz. Für eine bessere Datenübertragung wird derzeit die Glasfaserverkabelung entlang der Landstraßen und Autobahnen ausgebaut. Mit der Cloud sind die Amazon Web Services (AWS) gemeint, die spanischen Daten gehen somit direkt zu einem US-amerikanischen «Big Data»-Unternehmen.

Das Thema «autonomes Fahren», also Fahren ohne Zutun des Menschen, bildet den Abschluss der Betrachtungen der DGT. Zusammen mit dem Interessenverband der Automobilindustrie ANFAC (Asociación Española de Fabricantes de Automóviles y Camiones) sprach man auf dem Kongress über Strategien und Perspektiven in diesem Bereich. Die Lobbyisten hoffen noch in diesem Jahr 2025 auf einen normativen Rahmen zur erweiterten Unterstützung autonomer Technologien.

Wenn man derartige Informationen im Zusammenhang betrachtet, bekommt man eine Idee davon, warum zunehmend alles elektrisch und digital werden soll. Umwelt- und Mobilitätsprobleme in Städten, wie Luftverschmutzung, Lärmbelästigung, Platzmangel oder Staus, sind eine Sache. Mit dem Argument «emissionslos» wird jedoch eine Referenz zum CO2 und dem «menschengemachten Klimawandel» hergestellt, die Emotionen triggert. Und damit wird so ziemlich alles verkauft.

Letztlich aber gilt: Je elektrischer und digitaler unsere Umgebung wird und je freigiebiger wir mit unseren Daten jeder Art sind, desto besser werden wir kontrollier-, steuer- und sogar abschaltbar. Irgendwann entscheiden KI-basierte Algorithmen, ob, wann, wie, wohin und mit wem wir uns bewegen dürfen. Über einen 15-Minuten-Radius geht dann möglicherweise nichts hinaus. Die Projekte auf diesem Weg sind ernst zu nehmen, real und schon weit fortgeschritten.

[Titelbild: Pixabay]

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ 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.

@ b17fccdf:b7211155

Some sections inside of the guide:

• Set up Dynamic DNS
• Wireguard VPN server & client side configurations
• Install & configure the WireGuard VPN Client on a mobile phone
• Configure additional servers & clients
• Use your router’s DDNS preconfigured provider
• Port forwarding on NAT/PAT router

---

Link to the bonus guide HERE

---

Enjoy it MiniBolter! 💙

@ b17fccdf:b7211155

Do you want to use a different disk to store data (blockchain and other databases) independently of the disk of the system?

A step-by-step guide using a secondary disk to store the data (blockchain and other databases) independently of the disk of the system and using the Ubuntu Server guided installation.

---

What's changed

• Rebuilt the Ubuntu Server installation guide based on this bonus guide added.
• Added GIFs to improve the illustration of the steps to follow.
• Case 1: during the Ubuntu server guided installation.
• Case 2: build it after system installation (by command line).

---

~ > Link to the bonus guide HERE

---

Enjoy it MiniBolter! 💙

@ 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.

@ 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.

@ 866e0139:6a9334e5

---

Autor: Jens Fischer Rodrian. Dieser Beitrag wurde mit dem Pareto-Client geschrieben. Sie finden alle Texte der Friedenstaube und weitere Texte zum Thema Frieden hier.**

---

In den letzten fünf Jahren wurde mit allen Mitteln versucht, die Menschen auseinanderzutreiben. Egal welches Thema gestreut oder welche Angst geschürt wurde, ob Corona, Ukraine, Gaza, Energiepolitik, Wirtschaft, Gendern oder Klima – immer sollten die Menschen einem vorgegebenen Narrativ folgen anstatt in einen offenen Debattenraum einzutreten und Differenzen auszuhalten, also das zu leben, was eine lebendige Demokratie ausmacht.

Natürlich stellt sich die Frage – ja aber wer hat das denn versucht? Wer hat denn ein Interesse daran, daß Diversität im Sinne von Vielfalt an Meinungen ausgehebelt wird? Dies zu beantworten würde den Rahmen hier sprengen, ist aber mit Verweis auf die Texte von Journalisten wie Milosz Matuschek, Tom-Oliver Regenauer u.v.a. schnell in Erfahrung zu bringen. Fest steht, nicht alle haben bei dem Versuch, die Bevölkerung ruhig und dumm zu halten, mitgemacht.

Der Wahnsinn als Chance

Egal wie laut die Bellizisten in Regierung und Medien ihre Kriegspropaganda in Dauerschleife rausbrüllen, in dem Wahnsinn steckt auch eine Chance. Immer mehr Leute verstehen, daß Deutschland in nahezu allen oben angeführten Themen, falsch abgebogen ist. Wenn es darum geht, seine Kinder für einen irrsinnigen, von den USA und der NATO provozierten Krieg in der Ukraine, zu opfern, werden hoffentlich mehr Menschen erkennen, daß sie verheizt werden sollen. Wichtig ist, daß wir nicht mit der Energie, die man für einen Sprint braucht, an all die Themen ran gehen, sondern uns auf einen Marathonlauf einstellen. Das wissen wir spätestens, seitdem die von Paul Schreyer heraus geklagten RKI Files nicht für die Empörung gesorgt haben, die man hätte erwarten können, obwohl sie klar aufzeigen, daß die Kritiker der Coronamaßnahmen in fast allen Punkten recht behalten sollten. Spätestens dann hätte die bis dahin sehr einseitig berichtende Konzernpresse auf das Thema aufspringen können, ja müssen, ist sie aber nicht. Milosz Matuschek hatte schon sehr früh in der NZZ gefragt: „Was, wenn am Ende ‚die Covidioten‘ Recht haben?“ 

Dass die Medien jetzt im Gleichschritt die Bevölkerung auf Krieg einstellen wollen (zahlreiche Links sind am Ende des Artikels zu finden), ist an Irrsinn nicht zu überbieten. Caren Miosga, die u.a. schon durch ihr unsägliches Interview mit Exkanzlerkandidat Robert Habeck durch mangelnde Objektivität und Einfältigkeit auffiel, sagte jüngst: „ (...) das lag lange nicht in unserer DNA, da lag Pazifismus. Wie können wir diesen Code schneller überschreiben?“ Die Antwort des Wehrdienstverweigerers und Kriegstreibers Joschka Fischer, sowie seine wirre Einschätzung einer korrupten ukrainischen Regierung und der von Neonazis durchzogenen Paramilitärs, findet Ihr in den Links am Ende des Artikels.

Seit 1945 war es nie so wichtig wie heute, daß wir uns dem entgegenstellen, alle anderen Unstimmigkeiten für den Moment beiseitelegen und gemeinsame Sache machen, denn es geht um alles, es geht um Krieg oder Frieden! Wir sollten keinen Zweifel daran haben, daß die Verantwortlichen, die Menschen mit einem experimentellen Gentherapeutikum „impfen“ auch keine Bedenken haben, die Kinder anderer Eltern in den Krieg zu treiben. Wären die Staatenlenker verpflichtet, ihre eigenen Kinder auch an die Front zu schicken, wäre das Säbelrasseln sofort vorbei – wobei ich mir bei Anton Hofreiter oder Annalena Baerbock gar nicht so sicher bin, sie sind Überzeugungstäter. Letztere fordert allen Ernstes, Russen bei Kriegsgedenken auszuschließen, sie seien per ‚Hausrecht“ zu behandeln. Der geschichtsvergessenen „Noch -Außenministerin“ ist anscheinend entfallen, daß die Russen 25 Millionen Opfer aus dem 2. Weltkrieg zu beklagen und Auschwitz befreit haben.

Das German Foreign Policy schreibt:

„Das Mindset für den Krieg – Bundeswehr-Kommandeure fordern Einstimmung der Bevölkerung auf Kriegssituationen, dringen auf stärkeren ‚Willen zur Selbstbehauptung‘. Bundesregierung arbeitet an ‚Bunker-App‘. CDU- Politiker spekuliert über ‚Spannungsfall‘“. 

Um ein Zeichen gegen diesen Irrsinn zu setzen und sowohl auf die drohende Eskalation in der Ukraine wie auch die seit Jahrzehnten andauernde ethnische Säuberung in Palästina hinzuweisen, veranstalten wir am Karfreitag eine Friedensprozession in Dresden. Die Teilnehmerliste und den Text, den man auch unterzeichnen kann, findet Ihr hier im Anhang.

Jeder, der sich für den Frieden stark macht, ist willkommen.

Einer der Teilnehmer ist Tino Eisbrenner, ein Sänger und Friedensaktivist, der sich seit Jahrzehnten für Dialog und ein friedliches Miteinander einsetzt. Er selbst ist immer wieder mit Angriffen von Leuten konfrontiert, die es nicht ertragen, daß er sich beharrlich mit Wort und Musik für den Dialog mit Russland einsetzt. Erst vor Kurzem mußte er sich die inquisitorischen Fragen einer Journalistin gefallen lassen, die eine Art Gesinnungsprüfung durchführte, da ihr zu Ohren gekommen sei, das Bürger besorgt wären, Eisbrenner könne ein Putinfreund sein. Eisbrenner merkte an, daß sicherlich kein Künstler, der in Amerika auftrete oder amerikanische Poeten verehre, dadurch in Verdacht geraten könne, die imperialistische Politik eines amerikanischen Präsidenten zu unterstützen. Hier der Teil seiner Antwort, der die Kraft der Kultur und deren Funktion, Brücken zu bauen, sehr schön zusammenfasst: 

„ (...) wenn man als Künstler der Ansicht ist, daß die Kunst, als wesentlichstes Merkmal des Menschseins, Grenzen überfliegen und die Brücken zwischen den Völkern erhalten und pflegen sollte, und dies auf Russland genau wie auf die USA anwendet, muss man sich rechtfertigen? In der Stadt Wolgograd (ehemals Stalingrad) gibt es ein riesiges Mahnmal für die Opfer des Zweiten Weltkrieges. Das Hauptgebäude, unweit der riesigen Grabstätte deutscher Soldaten, ist eine gigantische Kuppel in deren Mitte ein ewiges Feuer brennt. An den Wänden sind zigtausende Namen sowjetischer Bürger eingraviert, die der deutschen Schlacht um Stalingrad zum Opfer fielen. Und aus den Lautsprechern tönen in Dauerschleife die „Träumereien“ von Robert Schumann, einem deutschen Komponisten. Die Kunst, als Brücke zwischen den Völkern. Vielleicht können ihre „besorgten Bürger“ darüber mal in Ruhe nachdenken (...)“ 

Ich hatte die große Freude, mit Tino gemeinsam einen Song aufzunehmen, den wir beide bei der Friedensprozession in Dresden das erste mal live aufführen werden. 

Frieden mit dem Frieden schließen

Frieden fragt nicht wo warst Du gestern\ Frieden fragt nicht wer ist Dein Gott\ Frieden braucht jetzt jeden, mit Herz Verstand und Mut 

Frieden geht oft über Grenzen\ Frieden geht, wenn man ihn übersieht\ Frieden braucht jetzt jeden, mit Herz Verstand und Mut 

Frieden schweigt wenn Menschen brüllen\ Frieden erstarrt wenn Schüsse fallen\ Frieden braucht jetzt jeden, mit Herz Verstand und Mut 

Frieden fragt nicht nach Deinen Eltern\ Frieden stellt sich vor Deine Wut\ Frieden braucht jetzt jeden, mit Herz Verstand und Mut 

Wir müßen Frieden mit dem Frieden schließen

Mit Leib und Seele, Tag für Tag\ Frieden braucht Dich jetzt\ Er ist erschöpft und schwer verletzt                     ****

Kommt zur Friedensprozession!

Unser Orga-Team hat gemeinsam mit Jürgen Fliege den Text für die Friedensprozession am Karfreitag in Dresden verfasst, den man gern auch unterzeichnen kann.

https://friedensprozession.de

FUNDAMENT FÜR DEN FRIEDEN   Mit Dir! Mit uns! Mit allen!

Jenseits jeder politischen Orientierung wollen wir dieser Sehnsucht eine Stimme geben. Denn ein Krieg, ob er nun wie ein Flächenbrand in der Ukraine oder wie in Palästina wütet, verschont immer die Mächtigen. Nie die Ohnmächtigen. Das sehen viele Menschen in unserem Land längst. Wie schon in Jugoslawien und Afghanistan scheint das die Volksvertreter nicht zu interessieren.

Wir alle wollen keinen Krieg. Wir wollen Abrüstung, Frieden und gute Nachbarn sein.

Was sind das nur für Politiker, die im Gleichschritt gegen das Wohl der Völker marschieren? Die Strack-Zimmermanns, Pistorius‘, die Baerbocks, Merz und Kiesewetters, die den Krieg weit nach Russland hineintragen und amerikanische Raketen in Deutschland stationieren wollen, ähnlich wie ihn der Kriegsverbrecher Netanjahu nach Gaza trug. Wer stoppt die Eskalationsspirale des Wahnsinns? Können wir das noch? Wir müssen es versuchen!

Friede sei mit uns allen! Ohne Ausnahme! Darum müssen wir uns vereinen. Versöhnen statt Spalten war einmal eine gute Idee der alten Sozialdemokratie – genau das wollen wir wieder aufgreifen!

Das alles war einmal der Boden, auf dem unser Grundgesetz wuchs. Die Trümmer des Krieges und die Gräber von Millionen Toten verpflichten uns zum Frieden durch Diplomatie.

Wenn Ihr unsere Sehnsucht nach Frieden teilt, dann freuen wir uns sehr, euch in Dresden zu sehen, wo der Feuersturm des 2. Weltkrieges unvergessen bleibt. Am Karfreitag, an dem die Stille das Waffenrasseln um so hörbarer macht.

Nie wieder Antisemitismus! Nie wieder Faschismus! Nie wieder Krieg! Kommt nach Dresden! Bitte!

Das aktuelle Album „Voices for Gaza“ mit 32 Beiträgen findet Ihr hier:

https://protestnoten.de/produkt/voices-for-gaza-doppel-cd/

Mit dabei sind:

Uwe Steimle, Tino Eisbrenner, Jürgen Fliege, Prof. Ulrike Guérot, Yann Song King, Arnulf Rating, Markus Stockhausen, Kilian Forster, Diether Dehm, Jakob Heymann, Jens Fischer Rodrian, Alexa Rodrian, Guido de Gyrich, Dennis DuVall, Prof. Justus Frantz, Reiner Kröhnert

(Links:

• https://taz.de/Sportunterricht-fuer-den-Ernstfall/!6059664/
• https://www.tagesspiegel.de/politik/wir-mussen-uns-auf-krieg-vorbereiten-nato-chef-rutte-fordert-von-deutschland-deutlich-hohere-verteidigungsausgaben-13131001.html
• https://www.faz.net/aktuell/wirtschaft/unternehmen/bundeswehr-bereitet-unternehmen-auf-kriegsfall-vor-operationsplan-deutschland-110118573.html
• https://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/sicherheit-in-deutschland-innenministerium-fuer-zivilschutz-uebungen-an-schulen-a-1680d64e-4a42-4e00-954b-0cb38e315a90
• https://www.facebook.com/henning.rosenbusch/videos/die-pflicht-zur-musterung-brauche-es-wegen-der-gefallenen-und-verwundeten-um-die/1073875391166801/
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=juGk0aY5Rdo Fischer bei Miosga
• https://www.tagesspiegel.de/gesellschaft/die-wehrpflicht-sollte-fur-alle-gelten-frauen-ans-gewehr-13480606.html

---

Jens Fischer Rodrian, geboren 1967 in Pinneberg, ist ein deutscher Musiker, Komponist, Musikproduzent und Dichter. Aufgewachsen nahe Murnau am Staffelsee, entdeckte er früh seine Liebe zur Gitarre. Er studierte in Los Angeles an der Grove School of Music und wurde 1995 Mitglied der Blue Man Group in New York und Boston. Seit 2004 lebt er mit seiner Frau, der Jazzsängerin Alexa Rodrian in Berlin, wo er als musikalischer Leiter der Blue Man Group tätig ist. Neben seiner Arbeit mit Künstlern wie Konstantin Wecker veröffentlichte er mehrere Soloalben und Gedichtbände, darunter „Sich kurz fassen – ach“ (2017) und „Wahn & Sinn“ (2019). Mit seiner Konzertlesung tourt er durch den deutschsprachigen Raum und setzt sich leidenschaftlich für Frieden und Demokratie ein. Zuletzt erschien: „Die Armada der Irren. Künstlerischer Widerstand in pandemischer Zeit“ (2022): Ein Buch mit beiliegender CD, das sich mit gesellschaftlichem Widerstand und der Rolle der Kunst in Krisenzeiten auseinandersetzt. Es enthält Beiträge von verschiedenen Autoren wie Wolfgang Wodarg, Gunnar Kaiser und anderen.

---

Die Friedenstaube fliegt auch in Ihr Postfach!

Hier können Sie die Friedenstaube abonnieren und bekommen die Artikel zugesandt. (Vorerst an alle, da wir den Mailversand testen, später ca. drei Mails pro Woche.).

Schon jetzt können Sie uns unterstützen:

• Für 50 CHF/EURO bekommen Sie ein Jahresabo der Friedenstaube.
• Für 120 CHF/EURO bekommen Sie ein Jahresabo und ein T-Shirt/Hoodie mit der Friedenstaube.
• Für 500 CHF/EURO werden Sie Förderer und bekommen ein lebenslanges Abo sowie ein T-Shirt/Hoodie mit der Friedenstaube.
• Ab 1000 CHF werden Sie Genossenschafter der Friedenstaube mit Stimmrecht (und bekommen lebenslanges Abo, T-Shirt/Hoodie).

Für Einzahlungen in CHF (Betreff: Friedenstaube):

Für Einzahlungen in Euro:

Milosz Matuschek

IBAN DE 53710520500000814137

BYLADEM1TST

Sparkasse Traunstein-Trostberg

Betreff: Friedenstaube

Wenn Sie auf anderem Wege beitragen wollen, schreiben Sie die Friedenstaube an: milosz@pareto.space

---

Sie sind noch nicht auf Nostr and wollen die volle Erfahrung machen (liken, kommentieren etc.)? Zappen können Sie den Autor auch ohne Nostr-Profil! Erstellen Sie sich einen Account auf Start. Weitere Onboarding-Leitfäden gibt es im Pareto-Wiki.

@ b17fccdf:b7211155

Link to the bonus guide ~> HERE < ~

---

Enjoy it MiniBolter! 💙

@ b17fccdf:b7211155

It turns out that Ubuntu Linux installations of Ubuntu 23.04, 22.04.3 LTS, and installs done since April 2023 that accepted the Snap version update haven't been following Ubuntu's own recommended security best practices for their security pocket configuration for packages.

A new Subiquity release was issued to fix this problem while those on affected Ubuntu systems already installed are recommended to manually edit their /etc/apt/sources.list file.

If you didn't install MiniBolt recently, you are affected by this bug, and we need to fix that manually if not we want to install all since cero. Anyway, if you installed Minibolt recently, we recommend you review that.

Follow these easy steps to review and fix this:

• Edit the sources-list file:

sudo nano /etc/apt/sources.list

• Search now for every line that includes '-security' (without quotes) (normally at the end of the file) and change the URL to --> http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu

~ > For example, from http://es.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu (or the extension corresponding to your country) to --> http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu

~> Real case, Spain location, before fix:

``` deb http://es.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-security main restricted

deb-src http://es.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-security main restricted

deb http://es.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-security universe

deb-src http://es.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-security universe

deb http://es.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-security multiverse

deb-src http://es.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-security multiverse

```

After fix:

``` deb http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-security main restricted

deb-src http://es.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-security main restricted

deb http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-security universe

deb-src http://es.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-security universe

deb http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-security multiverse

deb-src http://es.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-security multiverse

```

Save and exit

Note: If you have already these lines changed, you are not affected by this bug, and is not necessary to do anything. Simply exit the editor by doing Ctrl-X

• Finally, type the next command to refresh the repository pointers:

sudo apt update

• And optionally take the opportunity to update the system by doing:

sudo apt full-upgrade

More context:

• https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SecurityTeam/FAQ#What_repositories_and_pockets_should_I_use_to_make_sure_my_systems_are_up_to_date.3F
• https://bugs.launchpad.net/subiquity/+bug/2033977
• https://www.phoronix.com/news/Ubuntu-Security-Pocket-Issue

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Bluesky is a scam

Bluesky advertises itself as an open network, they say people won't lose followers or their identity, they advertise themselves as a protocol ("atproto") and because of that they are tricking a lot of people into using them. These three claims are false.

protocolness

Bluesky is a company. "atproto" is the protocol. Supposedly they are two different things, right? Bluesky just releases software that implements the protocol, but others can also do that, it's open!

And yet, the protocol has an official webpage with a waitlist and a private beta? Why is the protocol advertised as a company product? Because it is. The "protocol" is just a description of whatever the Bluesky app and servers do, it can and does change anytime the Bluesky developers decide they want to change it, and it will keep changing for as long as Bluesky apps and servers control the biggest part of the network.

Oh, so there is the possibility of other players stepping in and then it becomes an actual interoperable open protocol? Yes, but what is the likelihood of that happening? It is very low. No serious competitor is likely to step in and build serious apps using a protocol that is directly controlled by Bluesky. All we will ever see are small "community" apps made by users and small satellite small businesses -- not unlike the people and companies that write plugins, addons and alternative clients for popular third-party centralized platforms.

And last, even if it happens that someone makes an app so good that it displaces the canonical official Bluesky app, then that company may overtake the protocol itself -- not because they're evil, but because there is no way it cannot be like this.

identity

According to their own documentation, the Bluesky people were looking for an identity system that provided global ids, key rotation and human-readable names.

They must have realized that such properties are not possible in an open and decentralized system, but instead of accepting a tradeoff they decided they wanted all their desired features and threw away the "decentralized" part, quite literally and explicitly (although they make sure to hide that piece in the middle of a bunch of code and text that very few will read).

The "DID Placeholder" method they decided to use for their global identities is nothing more than a normal old boring trusted server controlled by Bluesky that keeps track of who is who and can, at all times, decide to ban a person and deprive them from their identity (they dismissively call a "denial of service attack").

They decided to adopt this method as a placeholder until someone else doesn't invent the impossible alternative that would provide all their desired properties in a decentralized manner -- which is nothing more than a very good excuse: "yes, it's not great now, but it will improve!".

openness

Months after launching their product with an aura of decentralization and openness and getting a bunch of people inside that believed, falsely, they were joining an actually open network, Bluesky has decided to publish a part of their idea of how other people will be able to join their open network.

When I first saw their app and how they were very prominently things like follower counts, like counts and other things that are typical of centralized networks and can't be reliable or exact on truly open networks (like Nostr), I asked myself how were they going to do that once they became and open "federated" network as they were expected to be.

Turns out their decentralization plan is to just allow you, as a writer, to host your own posts on "personal data stores", but not really have any control over the distribution of the posts. All posts go through the Bluesky central server, called BGS, and they decide what to do with it. And you, as a reader, doesn't have any control of what you're reading from either, all you can do is connect to the BGS and ask for posts. If the BGS decides to ban, shadow ban, reorder, miscount, hide, deprioritize, trick or maybe even to serve ads, then you are out of luck.

Oh, but anyone can run their own BGS!, they will say. Even in their own blog post announcing the architecture they assert that "it’s a fairly resource-demanding service" and "there may be a few large full-network providers". But I fail to see why even more than one network provider will exist, if Bluesky is already doing that job, and considering the fact there are very little incentives for anyone to switch providers -- because the app does not seem to be at all made to talk to multiple providers, one would have to stop using the reliable, fast and beefy official BGS and start using some half-baked alternative and risk losing access to things.

When asked about the possibility of switching, one of Bluesky overlords said: "it would look something like this: bluesky has gone evil. there's a new alternative called freesky that people are rushing to. I'm switching to freesky".

The quote is very naïve and sounds like something that could be said about Twitter itself: "if Twitter is evil you can just run your own social network". Both are fallacies because they ignore the network-effect and the fact that people will never fully agree that something is "evil". In fact these two are the fundamental reasons why -- for social networks specifically (and not for other things like commerce) -- we need truly open protocols with no owners and no committees.

@ c230edd3:8ad4a712

Chef's notes

Wildly enough, this is delicious. It's sweet and savory.

(I copied this recipe off of a commercial cheese maker's site, just FYI)

I hadn't fully froze the ice cream when I took the picture shown. This is fresh out of the churner.

Details

• ⏲️ Prep time: 15 min
• 🍳 Cook time: 30 min
• 🍽️ Servings: 4

Ingredients

• 12 oz blue cheese
• 3 Tbsp lemon juice
• 1 c sugar
• 1 tsp salt
• 1 qt heavy cream
• 3/4 c chopped dark chocolate

Directions

1. Put the blue cheese, lemon juice, sugar, and salt into a bowl
2. Bring heavy cream to a boil, stirring occasionally
3. Pour heavy cream over the blue cheese mix and stir until melted
4. Pour into prepared ice cream maker, follow unit instructions
5. Add dark chocolate halfway through the churning cycle
6. Freeze until firm. Enjoy.

@ 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.

@ b17fccdf:b7211155

What's changed

• New method for Bitcoin Core signature check, click ~ >HERE< ~
• GitHub repo of Bitcoin Core release attestations (Guix), click ~ >HERE< ~

---

History:

~ > PR that caused the broken and obsolescence of the old signature verification process, click ~ >HERE< ~

~ > New GitHub folder of Bitcoin Core repo that stores the signatures, click ~ >HERE< ~

---

Thanks to nostr:npub1gzuushllat7pet0ccv9yuhygvc8ldeyhrgxuwg744dn5khnpk3gs3ea5ds for building the command that made magic possible 🧙‍♂️🧡

---

Enjoy it MiniBolter! 💙

@ b17fccdf:b7211155

Important notice to MiniBolt node runners:

~ > It turns out that the I2P devs have opened an issue on the Bitcoin Core GitHub repo commenting that because they gave the option to enable the notransit=true parameter in the official documentation:

[...] If you prefer not to relay any public I2P traffic and only allow I2P traffic from programs connecting through the SAM proxy, e.g. Bitcoin Core, you can set the no transit option to true [...] are having a heavy load on the I2P network since last December 19. Also comment that it is advisable to share as much bandwidth and transit tunnels as we can, to increase anonymity with coverage traffic, by contributing more to the I2p network than we consume.

So they ask that we deactivate that option that you use activated. With all this, he already updated the "Privacy" section by removing that setting.

The steps to delete this configuration once we have already configured it, are the following:

• With the "admin" user, stop i2pd:

sudo systemctl stop i2pd

• Comment line 93 with "#" at the beginning of it (notransit = true), save and exit

sudo nano /var/lib/i2pd/i2pd.conf --line numbers

• Start i2pd again:

sudo systemctl start i2pd

• And that's it, you could take a look at Bitcoin Core to see that it has detected i2pd running again after the reboot with:

tail --lines 500 -f /home/bitcoin/.bitcoin/debug.log

~ > If you don't see that I2P is up in Bitcoin Core after the restart, sudo systemctl restart bitcoind and look again at the logs of the same.

---

More info in the rollback commit, see ~> HERE < ~

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Jofer

Jofer era um jogador diferente. À primeira vista não, parecia igual, um volante combativo, perseguia os atacantes adversários implacavelmente, um bom jogador. Mas não era essa a característica que diferenciava Jofer. Jofer era, digamos, um chutador.

Começou numa semifinal de um torneio de juniores. O time de Jofer precisava do empate e estava sofrendo uma baita pressão do adversário, mas o jogo estava 1 a 1 e parecia que ia ficar assim mesmo, daquele jeito futebolístico que parece, parece mesmo. Só que aos 46 do segundo tempo tomaram um gol espírita, Ruizinho do outro time saiu correndo pela esquerda e, mesmo sendo canhoto, foi cortando para o meio, os zagueiros meio que achando que já tinha acabado mesmo, devia ter só mais aquele lance, o árbitro tinha dado dois minutos, Ruizinho chutou, marcou e o goleiro, que só pulou depois que já tinha visto que não ia ter jeito, ficou xingando.

A bola saiu do meio e tocaram para Jofer, ninguém nem veio marcá-lo, o outro time já estava comemorando, e com razão, o juiz estava de sacanagem em fazer o jogo continuar, já estava tudo acabado mesmo. Mas não, estava certo, mais um minuto de acréscimo, justo. Em um minuto dá pra fazer um gol. Mas como? Jofer pensou nas partidas da NBA em que com alguns centésimos de segundo faltando o armador jogava de qualquer jeito para a cesta e às vezes acertava. De trás do meio de campo, será? Não vou ter nem força pra fazer chegar no gol. Vou virar piada, melhor tocar pro Fumaça ali do lado e a gente perde sem essa humilhação no final. Mas, poxa, e daí? Vou tentar mesmo assim, qualquer coisa eu falo que foi um lançamento e daqui a uns dias todo mundo esquece. Olhou para o próprio pé, virou ele de ladinho, pra fora e depois pra dentro (bom, se eu pegar daqui, direitinho, quem sabe?), jogou a bola pro lado e bateu. A bola subiu escandalosamente, muito alta mesmo, deve ter subido uns 200 metros. Jofer não tinha como ter a menor noção. Depois foi descendo, o goleirão voltando correndo para debaixo da trave e olhando pra bola, foi chegando e pulando já só pra acompanhar, para ver, dependurado no travessão, a bola sair ainda bem alta, ela bateu na rede lateral interna antes de bater no chão, quicar violentamente e estufar a rede no alto do lado direito de quem olhava.

Mas isso tudo foi sonho do Jofer. Sonhou acordado, numa noite em que demorou pra dormir, deitado na sua cama. Ficou pensando se não seria fácil, se ele treinasse bastante, acertar o gol bem de longe, tipo no sonho, e se não dava pra fazer gol assim. No dia seguinte perguntou a Brunildinho, o treinador de goleiros. Era difícil defender essas bolas, ainda mais se elas subissem muito, o goleiro ficava sem perspectiva, o vento alterava a trajetória a cada instante, tinha efeito, ela cairia rápido, mas claro que não valia à pena treinar isso, a chance de acertar o gol era minúscula. Mas Jofer só ia tentar depois que treinasse bastante e comprovasse o que na sua imaginação parecia uma excelente idéia.

Começou a treinar todos os dias. Primeiro escondido, por vergonha dos colegas, chegava um pouco antes e ficava lá, chutando do círculo central. Ao menor sinal de gente se aproximando, parava e ia catar as bolas. Depois, quando começou a acertar, perdeu a vergonha. O pessoal do clube todo achava engraçado quando via Jofer treinando e depois ouvia a explicação da boca de alguém, ninguém levava muito a sério, mas também não achava de todo ridículo. O pessoal ria, mas no fundo torcia praquilo dar certo, mesmo.

Aconteceu que num jogo que não valia muita coisa, empatezinho feio, aos 40 do segundo tempo, a marcação dos adversários já não estava mais pressionando, todo mundo contente com o empate e com vontade de parar de jogar já, o Henrique, meia-esquerdo, humilde, mas ainda assim um pouco intimidante para Jofer (jogava demais), tocou pra ele. Vai lá, tenta sua loucura aí. Assumiu a responsabilidade do nosso volante introspectivo. Seria mais verossímil se Jofer tivesse errado, primeira vez que tentou, restava muito tempo ainda pra ele ter a chance de ser herói, ninguém acerta de primeira, mas ele acertou. Quase como no sonho, Lucas, o goleiro, não esperava, depois que viu o lance, riu-se, adiantou-se para pegar a bola que ele julgava que quicaria na área, mas ela foi mais pra frente, mais e mais, daí Lucas já estava correndo, só que começou a pensar que ela ia pra fora, e ele ia só se dependurar no travessão e fazer seu papel de estar na bola. Acabou que por conta daquele gol eles terminaram em segundo no grupo daquele torneiozinho, ao invés de terceiro, e não fez diferença nenhuma.

@ 3b3a42d3:d192e325

Atomic Signature Swaps (ASS) over Nostr is a protocol for atomically exchanging Schnorr signatures using Nostr events for orchestration. This new primitive enables multiple interesting applications like:

• Getting paid to publish specific Nostr events
• Issuing automatic payment receipts
• Contract signing in exchange for payment
• P2P asset exchanges
• Trading and enforcement of asset option contracts
• Payment in exchange for Nostr-based credentials or access tokens
• Exchanging GMs 🌞

It only requires that (i) the involved signatures be Schnorr signatures using the secp256k1 curve and that (ii) at least one of those signatures be accessible to both parties. These requirements are naturally met by Nostr events (published to relays), Taproot transactions (published to the mempool and later to the blockchain), and Cashu payments (using mints that support NUT-07, allowing any pair of these signatures to be swapped atomically.

How the Cryptographic Magic Works 🪄

This is a Schnorr signature (Zₓ, s):

s = z + H(Zₓ || P || m)⋅k

If you haven't seen it before, don't worry, neither did I until three weeks ago.

The signature scalar s is the the value a signer with private key k (and public key P = k⋅G) must calculate to prove his commitment over the message m given a randomly generated nonce z (Zₓ is just the x-coordinate of the public point Z = z⋅G). H is a hash function (sha256 with the tag "BIP0340/challenge" when dealing with BIP340), || just means to concatenate and G is the generator point of the elliptic curve, used to derive public values from private ones.

Now that you understand what this equation means, let's just rename z = r + t. We can do that, z is just a randomly generated number that can be represented as the sum of two other numbers. It also follows that z⋅G = r⋅G + t⋅G ⇔ Z = R + T. Putting it all back into the definition of a Schnorr signature we get:

s = (r + t) + H((R + T)ₓ || P || m)⋅k

Which is the same as:

s = sₐ + t where sₐ = r + H((R + T)ₓ || P || m)⋅k

sₐ is what we call the adaptor signature scalar) and t is the secret. ((R + T)ₓ, sₐ) is an incomplete signature that just becomes valid by add the secret t to the sₐ:

s = sₐ + t

What is also important for our purposes is that by getting access to the valid signature s, one can also extract t from it by just subtracting sₐ:

t = s - sₐ

The specific value of t depends on our choice of the public point T, since R is just a public point derived from a randomly generated nonce r.

So how do we choose T so that it requires the secret t to be the signature over a specific message m' by an specific public key P'? (without knowing the value of t)

Let's start with the definition of t as a valid Schnorr signature by P' over m':

t = r' + H(R'ₓ || P' || m')⋅k' ⇔ t⋅G = r'⋅G + H(R'ₓ || P' || m')⋅k'⋅G

That is the same as:

T = R' + H(R'ₓ || P' || m')⋅P'

Notice that in order to calculate the appropriate T that requires t to be an specific signature scalar, we only need to know the public nonce R' used to generate that signature.

In summary: in order to atomically swap Schnorr signatures, one party P' must provide a public nonce R', while the other party P must provide an adaptor signature using that nonce:

sₐ = r + H((R + T)ₓ || P || m)⋅k where T = R' + H(R'ₓ || P' || m')⋅P'

P' (the nonce provider) can then add his own signature t to the adaptor signature sₐ in order to get a valid signature by P, i.e. s = sₐ + t. When he publishes this signature (as a Nostr event, Cashu transaction or Taproot transaction), it becomes accessible to P that can now extract the signature t by P' and also make use of it.

Important considerations

A signature may not be useful at the end of the swap if it unlocks funds that have already been spent, or that are vulnerable to fee bidding wars.

When a swap involves a Taproot UTXO, it must always use a 2-of-2 multisig timelock to avoid those issues.

Cashu tokens do not require this measure when its signature is revealed first, because the mint won't reveal the other signature if they can't be successfully claimed, but they also require a 2-of-2 multisig timelock when its signature is only revealed last (what is unavoidable in cashu for cashu swaps).

For Nostr events, whoever receives the signature first needs to publish it to at least one relay that is accessible by the other party. This is a reasonable expectation in most cases, but may be an issue if the event kind involved is meant to be used privately.

How to Orchestrate the Swap over Nostr?

Before going into the specific event kinds, it is important to recognize what are the requirements they must meet and what are the concerns they must address. There are mainly three requirements:

• Both parties must agree on the messages they are going to sign
• One party must provide a public nonce
• The other party must provide an adaptor signature using that nonce

There is also a fundamental asymmetry in the roles of both parties, resulting in the following significant downsides for the party that generates the adaptor signature:

• NIP-07 and remote signers do not currently support the generation of adaptor signatures, so he must either insert his nsec in the client or use a fork of another signer
• There is an overhead of retrieving the completed signature containing the secret, either from the blockchain, mint endpoint or finding the appropriate relay
• There is risk he may not get his side of the deal if the other party only uses his signature privately, as I have already mentioned
• There is risk of losing funds by not extracting or using the signature before its timelock expires. The other party has no risk since his own signature won't be exposed by just not using the signature he received.

The protocol must meet all those requirements, allowing for some kind of role negotiation and while trying to reduce the necessary hops needed to complete the swap.

Swap Proposal Event (kind:455)

This event enables a proposer and his counterparty to agree on the specific messages whose signatures they intend to exchange. The content field is the following stringified JSON:

{     "give": <signature spec (required)>,     "take": <signature spec (required)>,     "exp": <expiration timestamp (optional)>,     "role": "<adaptor | nonce (optional)>",     "description": "<Info about the proposal (optional)>",     "nonce": "<Signature public nonce (optional)>",     "enc_s": "<Encrypted signature scalar (optional)>" }

The field role indicates what the proposer will provide during the swap, either the nonce or the adaptor. When this optional field is not provided, the counterparty may decide whether he will send a nonce back in a Swap Nonce event or a Swap Adaptor event using the nonce (optionally) provided by in the Swap Proposal in order to avoid one hop of interaction.

The enc_s field may be used to store the encrypted scalar of the signature associated with the nonce, since this information is necessary later when completing the adaptor signature received from the other party.

A signature spec specifies the type and all necessary information for producing and verifying a given signature. In the case of signatures for Nostr events, it contain a template with all the fields, except pubkey, id and sig:

{ "type": "nostr", "template": { "kind": "<kind>"        "content": "<content>"        "tags": [ … ],        "created_at": "<created_at>" } }

In the case of Cashu payments, a simplified signature spec just needs to specify the payment amount and an array of mints trusted by the proposer:

{   "type": "cashu",   "amount": "<amount>",   "mint": ["<acceptable mint_url>", …] }

This works when the payer provides the adaptor signature, but it still needs to be extended to also work when the payer is the one receiving the adaptor signature. In the later case, the signature spec must also include a timelock and the derived public keys Y of each Cashu Proof, but for now let's just ignore this situation. It should be mentioned that the mint must be trusted by both parties and also support Token state check (NUT-07) for revealing the completed adaptor signature and P2PK spending conditions (NUT-11) for the cryptographic scheme to work.

The tags are:

• "p", the proposal counterparty's public key (required)
• "a", a kind:30455 Swap Listing event or an application specific version of it (optional)

Forget about this Swap Listing event for now, I will get to it later...

Swap Nonce Event (kind:456) - Optional

This is an optional event for the Swap Proposal receiver to provide the public nonce of his signature when the proposal does not include a nonce or when he does not want to provide the adaptor signature due to the downsides previously mentioned. The content field is the following stringified JSON:

{     "nonce": "<Signature public nonce>",     "enc_s": "<Encrypted signature scalar (optional)>" }

And the tags must contain:

• "e", a kind:455 Swap Proposal Event (required)
• "p", the counterparty's public key (required)

Swap Adaptor Event (kind:457)

The content field is the following stringified JSON:

{ "adaptors": [ {         "sa": "<Adaptor signature scalar>",         "R": "<Signer's public nonce (including parity byte)>",         "T": "<Adaptor point (including parity byte)>",         "Y": "<Cashu proof derived public key (if applicable)>",     }, …],     "cashu": "<Cashu V4 token (if applicable)>" }

And the tags must contain:

• "e", a kind:455 Swap Proposal Event (required)
• "p", the counterparty's public key (required)

Discoverability

The Swap Listing event previously mentioned as an optional tag in the Swap Proposal may be used to find an appropriate counterparty for a swap. It allows a user to announce what he wants to accomplish, what his requirements are and what is still open for negotiation.

Swap Listing Event (kind:30455)

The content field is the following stringified JSON:

{ "description": "<Information about the listing (required)>", "give": <partial signature spec (optional)>, "take": <partial signature spec (optional)>, "examples: [<take signature spec>], // optional "exp": <expiration timestamp (optional)>, "role": "<adaptor | nonce (optional)>" }

The description field describes the restrictions on counterparties and signatures the user is willing to accept.

A partial signature spec is an incomplete signature spec used in Swap Proposal events kind:455 where omitting fields signals that they are still open for negotiation.

The examples field is an array of signature specs the user would be willing to take.

The tags are:

• "d", a unique listing id (required)
• "s", the status of the listing draft | open | closed (required)
• "t", topics related to this listing (optional)
• "p", public keys to notify about the proposal (optional)

Application Specific Swap Listings

Since Swap Listings are still fairly generic, it is expected that specific use cases define new event kinds based on the generic listing. Those application specific swap listing would be easier to filter by clients and may impose restrictions and add new fields and/or tags. The following are some examples under development:

Sponsored Events

This listing is designed for users looking to promote content on the Nostr network, as well as for those who want to monetize their accounts by sharing curated sponsored content with their existing audiences.

It follows the same format as the generic Swap Listing event, but uses the kind:30456 instead.

The following new tags are included:

• "k", event kind being sponsored (required)
• "title", campaign title (optional)

It is required that at least one signature spec (give and/or take) must have "type": "nostr" and also contain the following tag ["sponsor", "<pubkey>", "<attestation>"] with the sponsor's public key and his signature over the signature spec without the sponsor tag as his attestation. This last requirement enables clients to disclose and/or filter sponsored events.

Asset Swaps

This listing is designed for users looking for counterparties to swap different assets that can be transferred using Schnorr signatures, like any unit of Cashu tokens, Bitcoin or other asset IOUs issued using Taproot.

It follows the same format as the generic Swap Listing event, but uses the kind:30457 instead.

It requires the following additional tags:

• "t", asset pair to be swapped (e.g. "btcusd")
• "t", asset being offered (e.g. "btc")
• "t", accepted payment method (e.g. "cashu", "taproot")

Swap Negotiation

From finding an appropriate Swap Listing to publishing a Swap Proposal, there may be some kind of negotiation between the involved parties, e.g. agreeing on the amount to be paid by one of the parties or the exact content of a Nostr event signed by the other party. There are many ways to accomplish that and clients may implement it as they see fit for their specific goals. Some suggestions are:

• Adding kind:1111 Comments to the Swap Listing or an existing Swap Proposal
• Exchanging tentative Swap Proposals back and forth until an agreement is reached
• Simple exchanges of DMs
• Out of band communication (e.g. Signal)

Work to be done

I've been refining this specification as I develop some proof-of-concept clients to experience its flaws and trade-offs in practice. I left the signature spec for Taproot signatures out of the current document as I still have to experiment with it. I will probably find some important orchestration issues related to dealing with 2-of-2 multisig timelocks, which also affects Cashu transactions when spent last, that may require further adjustments to what was presented here.

The main goal of this article is to find other people interested in this concept and willing to provide valuable feedback before a PR is opened in the NIPs repository for broader discussions.

References

• GM Swap- Nostr client for atomically exchanging GM notes. Live demo available here.
• Sig4Sats Script - A Typescript script demonstrating the swap of a Cashu payment for a signed Nostr event.
• Loudr- Nostr client under development for sponsoring the publication of Nostr events. Live demo available at loudr.me.
• Poelstra, A. (2017). Scriptless Scripts. Blockstream Research. https://github.com/BlockstreamResearch/scriptless-scripts

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

O caso da Grêmio TV

enquanto vinha se conduzindo pela plataforma superior daquela arena que se pensava totalmente preenchida por adeptos da famosa equipe do Grêmio de Porto Alegre, viu-se, como por obra de algum nigromante - dos muitos que existem e estão a todo momento a fazer más obras e a colocar-se no caminhos dos que procuram, se não fazer o bem acima de todas as coisas, a pelo menos não fazer o mal no curso da realização dos seus interesses -, o discretíssimo jornalista a ser xingado e moído em palavras por uma horda de malandrinos a cinco ou seis passos dele surgida que cantavam e moviam seus braços em movimentos que não se pode classificar senão como bárbaros, e assim cantavam:

Grêmio TV pior que o SBT !

@ 5d4b6c8d:8a1c1ee3

Basketball

March Madness wrapped up with some very exciting games. We'll recap the championship, the contest, and the fun we had at Predyx.

I've also decided how I want to do a similar contest for the NBA Playoffs. Better than that, though, is the Bracket Challenge we'll be doing with Global Sports Central. We also need to update our NBA Predictions and talk about the wild finish in the Western Conference, where multiple playoff teams fired their head coaches.

Football

The NFL Draft is coming up and @grayruby found a very cool new simulator. What are we predicting for the first round?

Also, we're continuing to very much enjoy the Aussie Rules contest and highlights.

The Other Football

UEFA Champions League is back and we're all trying to survive a little longer.

Baseball

Why was half my fantasy roster inactive? Plus, @grayruby wants to overreact to the early season results.

Also, the MLB Survivor Pool is starting up soon.

Hockey

@siggy47's beloved team enters the history books, by allowing Ovi to become the NHL's all-time leading scorer.

Cricket

I fell flat on my face in the T20k contest immediately after mocking @grayruby for doing the same. Oh well, upwards and onwards.

@Coinsreporter is also still running the perpetual CricZap contest, which I continue to do very poorly at. Is it time to inverse Cramer myself?

The Predyx market for the IPL has been one of my favorites.

F1

There are a couple of new F1 markets: Constructor and Driver, for those who may be interested.

Misc

We also need an update on USA vs the world.

Time permitting, I have some thoughts about how new sporting events like Chase might evolve in the sports ecosystem.

Let us know what else you want to hear and we'll endeavor to cover it.

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/940727

@ 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.

@ b17fccdf:b7211155

What's changed

A bonus guide to get a quick overview of the system status with the most relevant data about the services on the main guide.

---

➕Additional extra sections (optional) to:

• Show on login
• Get the channel.db size of an old LND bbolt database backend
• Use MobaXterm compatibility version

🔧 GitHub PR related: https://github.com/minibolt-guide/minibolt/pull/97

Σ Dedicated GitHub repository: https://github.com/minibolt-guide/system_overview

---

🫂Acknowledgments

This is a fork of the minibolt_info repository, the main developer of this project is rmnscb, a member of the MiniBolt community, all the merits go to him. Thank you for your contribution 🧡🫂

---

-> CLICK HERE <- to go to the bonus guide

---

Enjoy it MiniBolter! 💙

@ 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.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Replacing the web with something saner

This is a simplification, but let's say that basically there are just 3 kinds of websites:

1. Websites with content: text, images, videos;
2. Websites that run full apps that do a ton of interactive stuff;
3. Websites with some interactive content that uses JavaScript, or "mini-apps";

In a saner world we would have 3 different ways of serving and using these. 1 would be "the web" (and it was for a while, although I'm not claiming here that the past is always better and wanting to get back to the glorious old days).

1 would stay as "the web", just static sites, styled with CSS, no JavaScript whatsoever, but designers can still thrive and make they look pretty. Or it could also be something like Gemini. Maybe the two protocols could coexist.

2 would be downloadable native apps, much easier to write and maintain for developers (considering that multi-platform and cross-compilation is easy today and getting easier), faster, more polished experience for users, more powerful, integrates better with the computer.

(Remember that since no one would be striving to make the same app run both on browsers and natively no one would have any need for Electron or other inefficient bloated solutions, just pure native UI, like the Telegram app, have you seen that? It's fast.)

But 2 is mostly for apps that people use every day, something like Google Docs, email (although email is also broken technology), Netflix, Twitter, Trello and so on, and all those hundreds of niche SaaS that people pay monthly fees to use, each tailored to a different industry (although most of functions they all implement are the same everywhere). What do we do with dynamic open websites like StackOverflow, for example, where one needs to not only read, but also search and interact in multiple ways? What about that website that asks you a bunch of questions and then discovers the name of the person you're thinking about? What about that mini-app that calculates the hash of your provided content or shrinks your video, or that one that hosts your image without asking any questions?

All these and tons of others would fall into category 3, that of instantly loaded apps that you don't have to install, and yet they run in a sandbox.

The key for making category 3 worth investing time into is coming up with some solid grounds, simple enough that anyone can implement in multiple different ways, but not giving the app too much choices.

Telegram or Discord bots are super powerful platforms that can accomodate most kinds of app in them. They can't beat a native app specifically made with one purpose, but they allow anyone to provide instantly usable apps with very low overhead, and since the experience is so simple, intuitive and fast, users tend to like it and sometimes even pay for their services. There could exist a protocol that brings apps like that to the open world of (I won't say "web") domains and the websockets protocol -- with multiple different clients, each making their own decisions on how to display the content sent by the servers that are powering these apps.

Another idea is that of Alan Kay: to design a nice little OS/virtual machine that can load these apps and run them. Kinda like browsers are today, but providing a more well-thought, native-like experience and framework, but still sandboxed. And I add: abstracting away details about design, content disposition and so on.

---

These 3 kinds of programs could coexist peacefully. 2 are just standalone programs, they can do anything and each will be its own thing. 1 and 3, however, are still similar to browsers of today in the sense that you need clients to interact with servers and show to the user what they are asking. But by simplifying everything and separating the scopes properly these clients would be easy to write, efficient, small, the environment would be open and the internet would be saved.

See also

• On the state of programs and browsers

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

IPFS problems: General confusion

Most IPFS open-source projects, libraries and apps (excluding Ethereum stuff) are things that rely heavily on dynamic data and temporary links. The most common projects you'll see when following the IPFS communities are chat rooms and similar things. I've seen dozens of these chat-rooms. There's also a famous IPFS-powered database. How can you do these things with content-addressing is a mistery. Of course they probably rely on IPNS or other external address system.

There's also a bunch of "file-sharing" on IPFS. The kind of thing people use for temporary making a file available for a third-party. There's image sharing on IPFS, pastebins on IPFS and so on. People don't seem to share the preoccupation with broken links here.

@ 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.

---

@ e516ecb8:1be0b167

¿Qué es realmente la inflación? Si alguna vez has escuchado que la inflación es “la subida constante de precios”, no estás solo. Hace poco, un economista soltó esa definición en una entrevista, y otro, desde la Fundación para el Progreso (FPP), una institución que suele citar a pensadores como Mises o Hayek, repitió lo mismo. Suena lógico, ¿no? Pero están equivocados. Y ese error, aunque parezca pequeño, puede tener consecuencias catastróficas. Para entender por qué, no hace falta ir muy lejos: miremos a Argentina.

La subida de precios no es la inflación. Es solo el síntoma. La inflación, en esencia, es la pérdida del valor adquisitivo de la moneda. Confundir la causa con el efecto es como tratar una fiebre con un paño frío sin atacar la infección. Y cuando las políticas públicas se basan en esa confusión, el desastre está garantizado.

Argentina: una lección que duele Argentina es el caso de estudio perfecto. Antes de que Javier Milei llegara al poder en diciembre de 2023, la inflación en el país vecino estaba desbocada, alcanzando picos de 211% anual según datos del INDEC. El peronismo, convencido de que el problema eran los precios, implementó medidas como los “Precios Justos”, fijando topes artificiales. ¿Resultado? Escasez total. En un país famoso por su carne, los supermercados se quedaron sin ella. Los productores, enfrentados a costos que subían sin control, preferían exportar antes que vender localmente a precios que no les daban ni para cubrir gastos. Y ahí no terminó la cosa. En lugar de atacar la raíz del problema, el gobierno peronista complicó todo aún más: restringió exportaciones y creó un sistema surrealista de múltiples tipos de dólar (¡hasta uno distinto para Netflix!). Todo porque seguían peleando con el efecto, no con la causa.

¿Por qué los argentinos corrían a ahorrar en dólares y no en pesos? Porque el peso se devaluaba a una velocidad alarmante. Si la inflación fuera solo una cuestión de precios, habría afectado a todas las monedas por igual. Pero no. Como dice Milei una y otra vez, la inflación es un fenómeno monetario: demasiados billetes circulando sin respaldo o una moneda que la gente considera “de segunda” frente a otras.

¿Por qué seguimos repitiendo el error? Entonces, si la inflación es tan claramente un problema del valor de la moneda, ¿por qué seguimos escuchando que es una subida de precios? La respuesta es sencilla: culpar a otros es más fácil. Cuando se vende esa idea, los políticos pueden apuntar con el dedo a empresarios, comerciantes o “especuladores” y lavarse las manos. Es más cómodo que admitir una emisión monetaria irresponsable, un gasto público descontrolado o una pésima gestión económica. Y no faltan economistas, a veces financiados por grupos estatistas o formados en sistemas educativos que promueven esas ideas, que les hacen el coro.

Chile: por un pelo nos salvamos Este malentendido estuvo a punto de colarse en Chile. En el segundo intento de reforma constitucional, impulsado por Chile Vamos en 2023, se propuso que el Banco Central velara por la “estabilidad de precios”, no por la estabilidad del valor de la moneda. Parece un detalle técnico, ¿verdad? Pero no lo es. Ese cambio abría la puerta a políticas que podrían habernos llevado por el mismo camino que Argentina. Por suerte, aunque muchos expertos lo pasaron por alto, la ciudadanía no: la propuesta fue rechazada en las urnas con un contundente “En Contra”.

Nos salvamos, pero no porque nuestros políticos tuvieran las ideas claras. Nos salvamos porque los chilenos dijimos “basta”. Y menos mal, porque en 2024 la inflación en Chile se mantuvo controlada, rondando el 3,5% anual según el Banco Central, lejos del caos argentino. Pero no podemos confiarnos, porque esa inflación sigue siendo alta para nuestros estándares pre-pandémicos o pre-estallido social. El retiro desde las AFP convirtió activos en consumo, en otras palabras aumentó el circulante y todavía batallamos con esa inflación.

No es un “detallito” Cada vez que alguien diga que la inflación es una subida de precios o que la solución está en controlarlos, por favor, corrígelo. No es un error menor. Argentina lleva más de un año intentando salir del pozo que cavó este malentendido. Milei ha dado pasos importantes: transparentó la inflación real, ajustó el tipo de cambio para acercarse al valor de mercado y, aunque la inflación sigue alta (cerca del 50% anual a fines de 2024, según estimaciones), empieza a estabilizarse. Pero el camino es largo, y los costos de este “detallito” los pagan todos los argentinos.

¿Y ahora qué hacemos? La próxima vez que escuches a un político o un experto hablar de inflación como si fuera solo un problema de precios, no te quedes callado. Pregúntales: ¿y el valor de la moneda qué? Comparte esta historia, porque entender la inflación es el primer paso para no repetir los errores del pasado. En Chile esquivamos la bala, pero no podemos bajar la guardia. Los errores pequeños, cuando se trata de economía, terminan costándonos caro.

¿Qué opinas? ¿Crees que Chile aprendió la lección o estamos a un paso de tropezar otra vez? ¡Déja tu comentario y comparte este post si te hizo clic!

@ 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.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Scala is such a great language

Scala is amazing. The type system has the perfect balance between flexibility and powerfulness. match statements are great. You can write imperative code that looks very nice and expressive (and I haven't tried writing purely functional things yet). Everything is easy to write and cheap and neovim integration works great.

But Java is not great. And the fact that Scala is a JVM language doesn't help because over the years people have written stuff that depends on Java libraries -- and these Java libraries are not as safe as the Scala libraries, they contain reflection, slowness, runtime errors, all kinds of horrors.

Scala is also very tightly associated with Akka, the actor framework, and Akka is a giant collection of anti-patterns. Untyped stuff, reflection, dependency on JVM, basically a lot of javisms. I just arrived and I don't know anything about the Scala history or ecosystem or community, but I have the impression that Akka has prevent more adoption of Scala from decent people that aren't Java programmers.

But luckily there is a solution -- or two solutions: ScalaJS is a great thing that exists. It transpiles Scala code into JavaScript and it runs on NodeJS or in a browser!

Scala Native is a much better deal, though, it compiles to LLVM and then to binary code and you can have single binaries that run directly without a JVM -- not that the single JARs are that bad though, they are great and everybody has Java so I'll take that anytime over C libraries or NPM-distributed software, but direct executables even better. Scala Native just needs a little more love and some libraries and it will be the greatest thing in a couple of years.

@ dbc27e2e:b1dd0b0b

This method focuses on the amount of water in the first pour, which ultimately defines the coffee’s acidity and sweetness (more water = more acidity, less water = more sweetness). For the remainder of the brew, the water is divided into equal parts according to the strength you wish to attain.

Dose:

20g coffee (Coarse ground coffee)
300mL water (92°C / 197.6°F)
Time: 3:30

Instructions:

1. Pour 1: 0:00 > 50mL (42% of 120mL = 40% of total – less water in the ratio, targeting sweetness.)
2. Pour 2: 0:45 > 70mL (58% of 120mL = 40% of total – the top up for 40% of total.)
3. Pour 3: 1:30 > 60mL (The remaining water is 180mL / 3 pours = 60mL per pour)
4. Pour 4: 2:10 > 60mL
5. Pour 5: 2:40 > 60mL
6. Remove the V60 at 3:30

@ 66675158:1b644430

Before the time of Utensils, people lived in genuine harmony. They gathered in markets to trade freely, built homes where they pleased, and traveled without papers or permissions. Communities solved their own problems through discussion and agreement. When disputes arose, wise elders would help find solutions that satisfied all. Children learned from their parents or chose mentors from among the skilled craftspeople.

In those days, gold changed hands freely for goods and services. Each person kept what they earned. Communities would voluntarily pool resources for shared needs - wells, bridges, and roads. Those who had more would often help those with less, not by decree but by choice.

Neighbors knew each other's names. Doors were left unlocked. Children played in the streets until sunset. Gardens grew wherever people planted them. Merchants traveled between towns without inspections. Healers practiced their craft freely, sharing knowledge openly.

Then came the Utensils.

In our land, Aldrich found the Silver Spoon. In the East, Emperor Chen discovered the Jade Chopsticks. The Norse kingdoms united under the Golden Fork. The desert peoples followed the Bronze Ladle.

Each Utensil, their holders claimed, granted divine wisdom to rule. Each promised protection and prosperity in exchange for obedience.

The changes came slowly at first. The Spoon Holder requested a share of each harvest to store for hard times. The Chopstick Emperor required homes to be built in specific ways to prevent fires. The Fork King demanded that travelers carry documents proving their loyalty.

At first, the Utensils did bring some genuine improvements. The Spoon Holder's collectors used part of their harvest share to help villages during droughts. The Chopstick Emperor's building codes truly did reduce fires. The Fork King's road patrols deterred the few bandits who had troubled merchants. The Bronze Ladle's water management systems helped farms flourish in the desert.

The early years saw stone roads replace dirt paths, connecting villages more efficiently than before. Granaries were built with better designs, preserving food longer. Some diseases decreased as the Chopstick Emperor's cleanliness codes spread. The Fork Kingdom's standardized weights and measures did make trade easier.

The Spoon Holder soon declared that carrying gold was dangerous and inefficient. They introduced sacred paper notes, "backed by the Silver Spoon's power." At first, you could trade these notes back for gold, but gradually this right vanished.

Scholars wrote lengthy memos about the divine wisdom of the Utensils, creating complex theories about why ordinary people couldn't possibly understand how to live without direction. They advised the Holders and were rewarded with special privileges, comfortable positions, and influence.

When anyone questioned this system, the Utensil Holders and their Experts would ask: "But who would build the roads without us? Who would help the poor? Who would protect you?" They spoke as if humans had never cooperated or helped each other before the Utensils came, and many began to believe it.

People grumbled but accepted. After all, the Utensils shone with otherworldly power.

Some remembered these early benefits when questioning the growing restrictions. "Remember how the Spoon Holder's men helped during the great flood?" they would say. "Surely they have our best interests at heart." The Utensil Holders carefully nurtured these memories, even as their power grew far beyond such humble beginnings.

More rules followed. The Spoon Holder's men began watching the roads, collecting portions from merchants. The Chopstick Guards enforced strict codes about proper behavior. The Fork Watchers kept lists of who attended the mandatory gatherings.

Children were taught the sacred histories of their Utensils. The Spoon's light blessed the worthy. The Chopsticks maintained harmony. The Fork brought strength. The Ladle provided guidance.

When people remembered the old freedoms, the Utensil Holders reminded them of the chaos before - though few could actually recall any chaos.

But surely there must have been chaos, or why would the Utensils have come?

The Utensil Holders began to eye each other's territories. How dare the Fork King claim his metal was superior? How could the Chopstick Emperor suggest jade held more wisdom than silver? The Ladle Holder's bronze was clearly inferior to all!

The Utensil Holders pointed to their achievements - the roads, the granaries, the safer towns - as proof of their divine right to rule. They spoke of how they had unified squabbling villages, standardized laws, and created order. Few noticed how these very achievements had required less and less input from the people themselves.

Wars erupted. Armies marched under banners bearing their sacred Utensils. Men died believing their Utensil was the one true source of authority. Villages burned as soldiers searched for heretics who might secretly worship foreign Utensils.

The Utensil Holders demanded more from their people - more food, more gold, more obedience. They placed watchers in every village. They required written permission for travel between towns. They forbade more than three people from gathering without a Guardian present.

"It's for protection," they said, holding their Utensils high. "How can you doubt the sacred silver?"

And indeed, their guards did stop some thieves, their inspectors did prevent some fraud, their builders did create some useful works. But these benefits came with an ever-increasing price in freedom, until the cost far exceeded any advantage. Yet by then, most people could no longer imagine providing these services for themselves, as their ancestors had done.

Towns built walls, not against invaders but to control who could enter and leave. The Utensil Holders required everyone to wear markers showing their village of origin. They appointed observers in every community to report suspicious behavior - like speaking of the time before Utensils.

Children were taken to special houses to learn proper reverence for their Utensil. Families who taught the old ways disappeared in the night. The Holders declared certain words forbidden, certain thoughts dangerous, certain memories treasonous.

Now, centuries later, the Utensils rule absolutely. People bow when the sacred implements pass by. They inform on neighbors who question the Utensils' power. They offer their children to serve in the Utensil temples.

The latest marvel was Utensil Technology - enchanted mirrors and crystals that watched people's movements, recorded their words, and tracked their trades. "Only criminals fear being watched," the Holders proclaimed, as their surveillance spread into every home and market. The crystals even allowed them to freeze people's paper money if they spoke against the Utensils.

The Utensil Holders formed special partnerships with the largest merchant guilds. These favored merchants received special permissions, protection from smaller competitors, and access to the new paper money first. In return, they helped enforce the Holders' rules and collected information about their customers. Small traders and craftsmen found themselves crushed between these powerful allies.

The latest decree requires all newborns to be blessed by touching their foreheads to their realm's sacred Utensil, marking them forever as its property. Parents compete for earlier blessing times, believing this shows greater devotion.

The wars continue. The Fork Kingdoms battle the Chopstick Empire. The Ladle Realms raid the Spoon Holdings. Each believes their Utensil must rule all.

And in quiet corners, in hidden places, a few elders still whisper stories of the time before - when humans lived without Utensils telling them how to live. But fewer remember with each passing year. After all, who could imagine a world without the guidance of sacred silverware?

@ eac63075:b4988b48

Since its creation in 2009, Bitcoin has symbolized innovation and resilience. However, from time to time, alarmist narratives arise about emerging technologies that could "break" its security. Among these, quantum computing stands out as one of the most recurrent. But does quantum computing truly threaten Bitcoin? And more importantly, what is the community doing to ensure the protocol remains invulnerable?

The answer, contrary to sensationalist headlines, is reassuring: Bitcoin is secure, and the community is already preparing for a future where quantum computing becomes a practical reality. Let’s dive into this topic to understand why the concerns are exaggerated and how the development of BIP-360 demonstrates that Bitcoin is one step ahead.

---

What Is Quantum Computing, and Why Is Bitcoin Not Threatened?

Quantum computing leverages principles of quantum mechanics to perform calculations that, in theory, could exponentially surpass classical computers—and it has nothing to do with what so-called “quantum coaches” teach to scam the uninformed. One of the concerns is that this technology could compromise two key aspects of Bitcoin’s security:

1. Wallets: These use elliptic curve algorithms (ECDSA) to protect private keys. A sufficiently powerful quantum computer could deduce a private key from its public key.
2. Mining: This is based on the SHA-256 algorithm, which secures the consensus process. A quantum attack could, in theory, compromise the proof-of-work mechanism.

---

Understanding Quantum Computing’s Attack Priorities

While quantum computing is often presented as a threat to Bitcoin, not all parts of the network are equally vulnerable. Theoretical attacks would be prioritized based on two main factors: ease of execution and potential reward. This creates two categories of attacks:

1. Attacks on Wallets

Bitcoin wallets, secured by elliptic curve algorithms, would be the initial targets due to the relative vulnerability of their public keys, especially those already exposed on the blockchain. Two attack scenarios stand out:

• Short-term attacks: These occur during the interval between sending a transaction and its inclusion in a block (approximately 10 minutes). A quantum computer could intercept the exposed public key and derive the corresponding private key to redirect funds by creating a transaction with higher fees.

• Long-term attacks: These focus on old wallets whose public keys are permanently exposed. Wallets associated with Satoshi Nakamoto, for example, are especially vulnerable because they were created before the practice of using hashes to mask public keys.

We can infer a priority order for how such attacks might occur based on urgency and importance.

Bitcoin Quantum Attack: Prioritization Matrix (Urgency vs. Importance)

2. Attacks on Mining

Targeting the SHA-256 algorithm, which secures the mining process, would be the next objective. However, this is far more complex and requires a level of quantum computational power that is currently non-existent and far from realization. A successful attack would allow for the recalculation of all possible hashes to dominate the consensus process and potentially "mine" it instantly.

---

Satoshi Nakamoto in 2010 on Quantum Computing and Bitcoin Attacks

Recently, Narcelio asked me about a statement I made on Tubacast:

https://x.com/eddieoz/status/1868371296683511969

If an attack became a reality before Bitcoin was prepared, it would be necessary to define the last block prior to the attack and proceed from there using a new hashing algorithm. The solution would resemble the response to the infamous 2013 bug. It’s a fact that this would cause market panic, and Bitcoin's price would drop significantly, creating a potential opportunity for the well-informed.

Preferably, if developers could anticipate the threat and had time to work on a solution and build consensus before an attack, they would simply decide on a future block for the fork, which would then adopt the new algorithm. It might even rehash previous blocks (reaching consensus on them) to avoid potential reorganization through the re-mining of blocks using the old hash. (I often use the term "shielding" old transactions).

---

How Can Users Protect Themselves?

While quantum computing is still far from being a practical threat, some simple measures can already protect users against hypothetical scenarios:

• Avoid using exposed public keys: Ensure funds sent to old wallets are transferred to new ones that use public key hashes. This reduces the risk of long-term attacks.
• Use modern wallets: Opt for wallets compatible with SegWit or Taproot, which implement better security practices.
• Monitor security updates: Stay informed about updates from the Bitcoin community, such as the implementation of BIP-360, which will introduce quantum-resistant addresses.
• Do not reuse addresses: Every transaction should be associated with a new address to minimize the risk of repeated exposure of the same public key.
• Adopt secure backup practices: Create offline backups of private keys and seeds in secure locations, protected from unauthorized access.

---

BIP-360 and Bitcoin’s Preparation for the Future

Even though quantum computing is still beyond practical reach, the Bitcoin community is not standing still. A concrete example is BIP-360, a proposal that establishes the technical framework to make wallets resistant to quantum attacks.

BIP-360 addresses three main pillars:

1. Introduction of quantum-resistant addresses: A new address format starting with "BC1R" will be used. These addresses will be compatible with post-quantum algorithms, ensuring that stored funds are protected from future attacks.
2. Compatibility with the current ecosystem: The proposal allows users to transfer funds from old addresses to new ones without requiring drastic changes to the network infrastructure.
3. Flexibility for future updates: BIP-360 does not limit the choice of specific algorithms. Instead, it serves as a foundation for implementing new post-quantum algorithms as technology evolves.

This proposal demonstrates how Bitcoin can adapt to emerging threats without compromising its decentralized structure.

---

Post-Quantum Algorithms: The Future of Bitcoin Cryptography

The community is exploring various algorithms to protect Bitcoin from quantum attacks. Among the most discussed are:

• Falcon: A solution combining smaller public keys with compact digital signatures. Although it has been tested in limited scenarios, it still faces scalability and performance challenges.
• Sphincs: Hash-based, this algorithm is renowned for its resilience, but its signatures can be extremely large, making it less efficient for networks like Bitcoin’s blockchain.
• Lamport: Created in 1977, it’s considered one of the earliest post-quantum security solutions. Despite its reliability, its gigantic public keys (16,000 bytes) make it impractical and costly for Bitcoin.

Two technologies show great promise and are well-regarded by the community:

1. Lattice-Based Cryptography: Considered one of the most promising, it uses complex mathematical structures to create systems nearly immune to quantum computing. Its implementation is still in its early stages, but the community is optimistic.
2. Supersingular Elliptic Curve Isogeny: These are very recent digital signature algorithms and require extensive study and testing before being ready for practical market use.

The final choice of algorithm will depend on factors such as efficiency, cost, and integration capability with the current system. Additionally, it is preferable that these algorithms are standardized before implementation, a process that may take up to 10 years.

---

Why Quantum Computing Is Far from Being a Threat

The alarmist narrative about quantum computing overlooks the technical and practical challenges that still need to be overcome. Among them:

• Insufficient number of qubits: Current quantum computers have only a few hundred qubits, whereas successful attacks would require millions.
• High error rate: Quantum stability remains a barrier to reliable large-scale operations.
• High costs: Building and operating large-scale quantum computers requires massive investments, limiting their use to scientific or specific applications.

Moreover, even if quantum computers make significant advancements, Bitcoin is already adapting to ensure its infrastructure is prepared to respond.

---

Conclusion: Bitcoin’s Secure Future

Despite advancements in quantum computing, the reality is that Bitcoin is far from being threatened. Its security is ensured not only by its robust architecture but also by the community’s constant efforts to anticipate and mitigate challenges.

The implementation of BIP-360 and the pursuit of post-quantum algorithms demonstrate that Bitcoin is not only resilient but also proactive. By adopting practical measures, such as using modern wallets and migrating to quantum-resistant addresses, users can further protect themselves against potential threats.

Bitcoin’s future is not at risk—it is being carefully shaped to withstand any emerging technology, including quantum computing.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Que vença o melhor

Nos esportes e jogos em geral, existe uma constante preocupação em balancear os incentivos e atributos do jogo, as regras do esporte em si e as regras das competições para que o melhor vença, ou, em outras palavras, para que sejam minimizados os outros fatores exceto a habilidade mais pura quanto possível no jogo em questão.

O mundo fora dos jogos, porém, nem sempre pode ter suas regras mudadas por um ente que as controla e está imbuído da vontade e dos meios para escolher as melhores regras possíveis para a obtenção dos resultados acima. Aliás, é muitas vezes essa possibilidade é até impensável. Mesmo quando ela é pensável e levada em conta os fatores que operam no mundo real não são facilmente identificáveis, eles são muitos, e mudam o tempo todo.

Mais do que isso, ao contrário de um jogo em que o objetivo é praticamente o mesmo para todo mundo, os objetivos de cada agente no mundo real são diferentes e incontáveis, e as "competições" que cada um está disputando são diferentes e muitas, cada minúsculo ato de suas vidas compreendendo várias delas simultaneamente.

Da mesma forma, é impossível conceber até mesmo o conceito de "melhor" para que se deseje que ele vença.

Mesmo assim é comum encontrarmos em várias situações gente que parte do princípio de que se Fulano está num certo lugar (por exemplo, um emprego muito bom) e Beltrano não isso se deve ao fato de Fulano ter sido melhor que Beltrano.

Está aí uma crítica à idéia da meritocracia (eu tinha me esquecido que essa palavra existia).

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Token-Curated Registries

So you want to build a TCR?

TCRs (Token Curated Registries) are a construct for maintaining registries on Ethereum. Imagine you have lots of scissor brands and you want a list with only the good scissors. You want to make sure only the good scissors make into that list and not the bad scissors. For that, people will tell you, you can just create a TCR of the best scissors!

It works like this: some people have the token, let's call it Scissor Token. Some other person, let's say it's a scissor manufacturer, wants to put his scissor on the list, this guy must acquire some Scissor Tokens and "stake" it. Holders of the Scissor Tokens are allowed to vote on "yes" or "no". If "no", the manufactures loses his tokens to the holders, if "yes" then its tokens are kept in deposit, but his scissor brand gets accepted into the registry.

Such a simple process, they say, have strong incentives for being the best possible way of curating a registry of scissors: consumers have the incentive to consult the list because of its high quality; manufacturers have the incentive to buy tokens and apply to join the list because the list is so well-curated and consumers always consult it; token holders want the registry to accept good and reject bad scissors because that good decisions will make the list good for consumers and thus their tokens more valuable, bad decisions will do the contrary. It doesn't make sense, to reject everybody just to grab their tokens, because that would create an incentive against people trying to enter the list.

Amazing! How come such a simple system of voting has such enourmous features? Now we can have lists of everything so well-curated, and for that we just need Ethereum tokens!

Now let's imagine a different proposal, of my own creation: SPCR, Single-person curated registries.

Single-person Curated Registries are equal to TCR, except they don't use Ethereum tokens, it's just a list in a text file kept by a single person. People can apply to join, and they will have to give the single person some amount of money, the single person can reject or accept the proposal and so on.

Now let's look at the incentives of SPCR: people will want to consult the registry because it is so well curated; vendors will want to enter the registry because people are consulting it; the single person will want to accept the good and reject the bad applicants because these good decisions are what will make the list valuable.

Amazing! How such a single proposal has such enourmous features! SPCR are going to take over the internet!

What TCR enthusiasts get wrong?

TCR people think they can just list a set of incentives for something to work and assume that something will work. Mix that with Ethereum hype and they think theyve found something unique and revolutionary, while in fact they're just making a poor implementation of "democracy" systems that fail almost everywhere.

The life is not about listing a set of "incentives" and then considering the problems solved. Almost everybody on the Earth has the incentive for being rich: being rich has a lot of advantages over being poor, however not all people get rich! Why are the incentives failing?

Curating lists is a hard problem, it involves a lot of knowledge about the problem that just holding a token won't give you, it involves personal preferences, politics, it involves knowing where is the real limit between "good" and "bad". The Single Person list may have a good result if the single person doing the curation is knowledgeable and honest (yes, you can game the system to accept your uncle's scissors and not their competitor that is much better, for example, without losing the entire list reputation), same thing for TCRs, but it can also fail miserably, and it can appear to be good but be in fact not so good. In all cases, the list entries will reflect the preferences of people choosing and other things that aren't taken into the incentives equation of TCR enthusiasts.

We don't need lists

The most important point to be made, although unrelated to the incentive story, is that we don't need lists. Imagine you're looking for a scissor. You don't want someone to tell if scissor A or B are "good" or "bad", or if A is "better" than B. You want to know if, for your specific situation, or for a class of situations, A will serve well, and do that considering A's price and if A is being sold near you and all that.

Scissors are the worst example ever to make this point, but I hope you get it. If you don't, try imagining the same example with schools, doctors, plumbers, food, whatever.

Recommendation systems are badly needed in our world, and TCRs don't solve these at all.

@ 0b118e40:4edc09cb

There’s an African proverb that says, “To get lost is to learn the way.”

Humans have always been explorers, searching for connection. To belong. To feel home. You can trace this instinct back to the start of our existence. Whether you start with Adam and Eve or the “Out of Africa” theory, the story is the same. We’ve always moved toward each other, building tribes and forming communities.

But somewhere along the way, something broke. With the rise of empires and organized control, religion and politics divided us into bubbles. We were sorted, labeled, and often pitted against one another. While technology advanced, something fundamental was lost. Our ability to truly connect started to fade.

Then came the internet, a modern-day Silk Road. It rekindled hope. Walls seemed to crumble, distances disappeared, and we dreamed of a truly connected world. For a time, it felt like the answer.

And then it wasn’t.

The history of Internet

The story began around 1830s when Charles Babbage started working on his computer prototype but without moolah he couldn't continue. A century later, after WW2 in the 1950s, the US Department of Defense funded what became known as modern computing.

Back then the military relied on systems like the Navajo Code Talkers. The indigenous code talkers were ingenious but operated under dangerous conditions, always on the frontlines.

In 1969, ARPANET made a revolutionary breakthrough as it connected four university computers for the first time. It was a big deal.

At that time, the internet was about openness. Researchers pushed for universal protocols. This gave rise to hacker culture that valued knowledge-sharing and keeping systems accessible to everyone.

In the 80s, NSFNET (National Science Foundation ) expanded these connections but kept it strictly for academic use only. That caused massive dissatisfaction.

Senator Al Gore pitched the concept of the “information superhighway,” to balance public access with private innovation. But by the 90s, the Clinton administration leaned into privatization. NSFNET’s infrastructure was completely handed off to private companies, and the internet grew into a commercial powerhouse.

The good news is that everyone has internet access now. Bad news is that what started as something free from government and commercial control became completely dominated by both.

Open source vs IP during the early internet days

This part of the story is about Bill Gates and Marc Andreessen.

Tim Berners-Lee invented the World Wide Web, but Marc saw the opportunity to make it user-friendly. He launched Netscape, an open-source browser. It drove the openness of internet culture. Netscape captured 90% of the market by giving its software away for free, and monetizing through other means.

Then came along Bill Gates. Microsoft back then was known for its aggressive tactics to monopolize industries. Gates licensed Mosaic’s code, created Internet Explorer, and bundled it for free with Windows 95. He wasn’t shy about playing dirty, even formed exclusive contracts with manufacturers to block competitors. Even the Department of Justice tried to file an antitrust lawsuit against Microsoft, but by then, it was too late. Netscape’s market share crumbled, and its position in the industry eroded.

Windows 95 brought the internet to the people globally, but it also closed it up.

Marc Andreeson started with open source ideologies, but is now funding altcoin projects.

The Californian ideology

Around this time, the term “Californian Ideology” started floating around. It was an unusual mix of libertarianism, techno-utopianism, and countercultural ideals. A marriage of cultural bohemianism (hippies) with high-tech entrepreneurship (yuppies). This ideology fused left-wing values like freedom of expression and direct democracy with right-wing beliefs in free markets and minimal government interference.

I absolutely love it.

Ironically, the term “Californian Ideology” wasn’t coined as a compliment. Richard Barbrook and Andy Cameron used it to piss on these visionaries for romanticizing the idea that the internet must remain a lawless, egalitarian space.

But many people loved and embraced the Californian ideology. Stewart Brand, who founded The Whole Earth Catalog, connected counterculture with early tech innovation. His work inspired people like Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak. Steve Wozniak used to share Apple’s early schematics at the Homebrew Computer Club for feedback and collaboration.

EBay’s founder Pierre Omidyar envisioned eBay as a libertarian experiment. He believed the “invisible hand” of the market would ensure fairness. But as eBay grew, fraud, disputes, and dissatisfaction among users forced Omidyar to introduce governance which contradicted his goals.

And this story repeats itself over the years.

Platforms begin with libertarian visions, but as they scale, real-world challenges emerge. Governance (government, corporate charters, advertisers, and investors) is introduced to address safety and trust issues.

But they also chip away at the liberty the internet once promised.

Can Nostr be the solution ?

Yes.

But to appreciate Nostr, let’s first understand how the internet works today. (Note : I am no expert of this section but I'll try my best to explain)

The internet operates through four main layers:

1. Application Layer (where apps like browsers, Google, or Zoom live)
2. Transport Layer
3. Internet Layer
4. Network Access Layer

Let’s use a simple example of searching “Pink Panther” on Google.

Step 1: The Application Layer - You open your browser, type "Pink Panther," and hit search. This request is sent using HTTP/HTTPS (a protocol that formats the query and ensures it's secure).

Step 2: The Transport Layer - Think of your search query as a letter being sent. The Transport Layer breaks it into smaller packets (like splitting a long letter into multiple envelopes). TCP (Transmission Control Protocol) ensures all packets arrive and reassemble in the correct order.

Step 3: The Internet Layer - This layer acts like a postal service, assigning each device an address (IP address) to route the packets properly. Your device's IP (e.g., 192.168.1.10) and Google’s server IP (e.g., 142.250.72.238) help routers find the best path to deliver your packets.

Step 4: The Network Access Layer - Finally, the Network Access Layer physically delivers the packets. These travel as electrical signals (over cables), radio waves (Wi-Fi), or light pulses (fiber optics). This is the act of moving envelopes via trucks, planes, or postal workers, just much faster.

So how is data transmitted via Nostr ?

Nostr’s architecture of the Internet

Nostr reimagines the Application Layer while keeping the lower layers (Transport, Internet, and Network Access) largely unchanged.

In the traditional internet stack, the Application Layer is where platforms like Google or Twitter operate. It’s also where most censorship occurs due to single point of failure (centralised servers). Nostr flips this model on its head.

Technically, it’s like building a parallel internet that shares the same foundational layers but diverges at the top.

To borrow from Robert Frost:

"Two roads diverged in a wood, and I—

I took the one less traveled by,

And that has made all the difference."

For Nostr to fully realize its potential, it needs its own ecosystem of apps. Developers can build these tools within the Nostr protocol's framework

Let’s say there is a search engine on Nostr called Noogle.

Here’s how it works:

When you type "Pink Panther" on Noogle, your query is sent to multiple relays (servers) simultaneously. Each relay processes or forwards the query and returns results based on the data it holds.

As Nostr grows, the amount of information on relays will increase, giving Noogle more robust search results. But the biggest win is that compared to Google, Nostr's Noogle will have no ads, no surveillance, just pure, decentralized searching that respects your privacy.

For the transport layer, Nostr still relies on TCP/IP but enhances it with privacy and efficiency. Encrypted messages and simplified protocols enable faster real-time communication. The rest of the layer remains unchanged.

At its core, Nostr takes the internet back to its original ideals: open, uncensored, and decentralized.

Why Nostr matters ?

The internet we use today relies on centralized systems at the application layer. This creates a single point of failure where governments and corporations can control access, censor content, monitor activity, and even shut down entire platforms.

For example, the Malaysian government once proposed routing all web traffic through a centralized system, claiming it was for "security" reasons. In reality, this action allow those in power to block access to specific content or platforms that might threaten their positions.

Centralization weaponizes the internet.

It turns what was meant to be a tool for connection and freedom into a mechanism for control and oppression.

Let's look at DNS and ISPs as examples. DNS (Domain Name System) is like the phonebook of the internet. It helps translate website names (like example.com) into IP addresses so your browser can connect to them. ISPs (Internet Service Providers) are companies that give you access to the internet.

Both are controlled by centralized entities. If a government gains control of either, it can block specific websites or even shut down internet access entirely.

We've seen this happen repeatedly: * India’s internet shutdowns in regions like Kashmir * Turkey’s social media bans during political events * Ethiopia’s internet blackouts * China’s Great Firewall blocking major platforms like Google and Facebook * Even the US, where Edward Snowden revealed massive surveillance programs

This is where Nostr comes in, as the antidote to centralized control.

Instead of relying on centralized servers or platforms, Nostr creates a peer-to-peer network of independent relays. No single entity controls it. There is no central switch governments can flip to block access. If one relay is shut down, users simply connect to others in the network.

Nostr’s decentralized design makes it: * Resistant to censorship: Governments cannot easily block or filter content. * Privacy-preserving: Users can communicate anonymously, even in heavily surveilled environments. * Resilient: With no single point of failure, the network keeps running, even under attack.

And it gets better. Nostr can integrate with privacy tools like Tor to bypass restrictions entirely, making it nearly impossible for governments to stop.

The internet has become a battlefield for control, but Nostr provides a way to reclaim digital freedom. It empowers people to build, connect, and share without fear of being silenced.

How does Nostr overcome the "Californian Ideology" problems?

The Californian Ideology seemed like the blueprint for a utopian internet, libertarian ideals wrapped in Silicon Valley innovation. But as centralized platforms scaled, cracks started to show. Challenges like trust, safety, and accessibility forced governance teams to step in and decide “what’s best for the people.”

This resulted in platforms once built on ideals of freedom in becoming gatekeepers of control.

Nostr breaks this cycle. How?

1. Trust issues - With private keys, you control your identity and data. Moderation is decentralized. You can block or mute others at a personal level or through client tools, not by relying on a central authority. While this system needs refinement to be more user-friendly, it fundamentally shifts the power to users.

2. Funding Without Advertiser - Nostr’s integration of Bitcoin and the Lightning Network eliminates reliance on advertisers or corporate sponsors. Bitcoin enables anyone to contribute without gatekeeping. As more people join and apps mature, this model only gets stronger. For now, we have good souls like Jack seeding it.

3. Resisting Government Control - (refer to the above) Nostr avoids single points of attacks.

So what is Nostr ?

Nostr is internet

The new internet.

The open and free internet.

What can you build on Nostr?

Anything you have seen on the internet, you can recreate on Nostr. Anything you can imagine, you can bring to life here. It is a blank canvas for dreamers, builders, and changemakers.

But the best part is this. You have Bitcoin as its financial backbone. This changes the game entirely.

And with new games, comes new rules. New vibes. New ways.

The way people use this new internet will be different from the traditional internet as control falls back to the people. With Bitcoin as the underlying backbone, the business models will be different.

But there is more to it than just creating. There's that joy of creation, where we invite curiosity and inspire users to experience something new, something revolutionary.

Have you watched “The Last Lecture” by Randy Pausch?

He coined the term “head fake.” He taught his students programming, but not everyone was excited to learn programming. So he created fun projects and performances that pulled them in. The students had so much fun, they didn’t even realize they were learning to code.

What you build on Nostr is that head fake. The apps and projects you create draw people in with fun and utility, subtly reminding them they have a right to their own voice and thoughts.

The work you’re doing is so precious. When everything feels like doom and gloom, it’s these kinds of projects that give people hope.

Through Nostr, you’re making a difference. One project, one connection at a time.

The new Internet era

Centralized systems, like empires of the past, eventually crumble under the weight of their control. Decentralization provides a different path. It is a modern revival of our primal instincts to explore, connect, and build tribes.

By definition, Nostr is a protocol. I think more so, it's a philosophy. It challenges us to rethink how we share, communicate, and create. It is the internet as it was meant to be. Free, open, and governed by no one.

The beauty of Nostr lies in its simplicity. It does not rely on massive infrastructure, corporate giants, or government oversight. It thrives on community, much like the early tribes that defined humanity.

We have come full circle. From wandering continents to building roads, bridges, and networks, our journey has always been about connection and finding our tribe.

As the African proverb reminds us, 'To get lost is to learn the way.' There is finally a way now.

But at the end of the day, it’s entirely up to you what kind of world you want to be part of.

Find your tribe. Build the future. Love them hard.

---

More info :

On those who played a role in the history of internet and computers
https://hiddenheroes.netguru.com/

@ 592295cf:413a0db9

Week 25 11

---

Vitor created another social network edit mode. There are countless cases of use. But type threads are possible, small books, Rabbit hole and those who put it more.

nostr:nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzq3svyhng9ld8sv44950j957j9vchdktj7cxumsep9mvvjthc2pjuqyghwumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytnhd9hx2tcqyrewvkqwqt7urn2u9h5tk88vj9p3csl0wt08aqd8kxsngxtdmr0zqmszxds

Nostr Report is missing, was a lot of news, 20 notes in a day.

Some news do not need resonance case, Primal did a good job with trending. Of course is a centralized service. But it was one of the Twitter features, he did it with the top trending hashtags. Now Primal is more focused on DVM smart feed, read, and Discovery. This will bring chaos, as long as you can switch the trend feed with your Algo or DVM Algo. I'm obsessed with these switches 😅

Hostile people can happen along the way, it's not like in Bluesky 😔.

Someone share on Bluesky https://bsky.app/profile/laurenshof.online/post/3lbrsjzobps2u Video is this https://audiovisual.ec.europa.eu/fr/video/I-264553?lg=en

Trying to convince someone for Unanimity, Relay groups are nice, but Unanimity is simpler.

nostr:nevent1qqs9ar5t9xu97nhtwef9ej2y7cklnysf7hgwce7t2wk5axhfdwuq5sqpzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumn0wd68ytnzv9hxgq3qmzyp990kgskujdyplzydmd08ft42mkkfg4lzldaap8ng7n2u3kmss8l76e

Game on Nostr on 2025, cool be.

Angor are finally ready, crowdfunding with Nostr and Bitcoin. (alpha test)

nostr:nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzqw4hcggg2f9h68qutp0snsdhux20teljykjmh9rlx78qwnt5a8dlqqstte0g54hfa2cmr63vq4ava7e7wsr483p63tylvut8cvufzs44a0cd6saa3

PR 1600

The name is curated pubblication use kind 30040 e 30041, 30040 Is the envelope and 30041 are chapters or paragraphs. We'll see what's left in a month. There are no big discussions until now. This is the basis to leave it so, if you can improve it without breaking it ok. I think liminal is preparing at least two other NPs. The bottom problem is that there are no "competitor", someone else outside who wants to use this thing. But if there are no one can invent.

You can't do things with others. There's too "bad" people. Keep calm is a toxin environment. Maybe you have to get away a bit.

---

I was trying to help David but there are no aggregators for neo4j Nostr. Dustin's example, I think it's only worth the DVM. There are two other projects one grain of Oceanslim I saw the video where he explains some things, with Dr. Morales. And the other is Cody's Nostr Relay tray. At least you have all the data in a Relay, and for that Relay you can query, I don't think you find anything significant, maybe you need 100(k) notes to have a good sample. I think I'll make the update. I downloaded two months ago, it worked for a while with Nostrudel, then only with next, lately some problems with next. Cody launched the project with fiatjaf and I think it is also implemented here. In the end, I don't think this answer is useful to David.

---

Zapview nostr-zap-view The lokuyow project, always attentive to zap lightning and Nostr.

Give a "microsat" to Fiatjaf nostrabia relay

I managed to send a zap from a hex known id, it only works with getalby, so until January 4th. I have to prove if other lnurls have the call.

Something I might have understood about the new version of Nostr_sdk or rust Nostr. Sending messages will be harder. The builder does not support the tag, it breaks almost all the scripts I was writing and to verify them you can do nothing but send to the Relays, I wait a few days if there are news, but I don't think there will be. It is no longer linked to the table of examples so it will not be updated presumably, I would like to continue, as the cli does not come out. That then the cli will be in python 12.. (I'm still in version 3.10.9 of python)

I've seen bulletin proof, posting on Nostr seems interesting, but they need many interactions to have a functioning client. link, stacker news

---

Nostr nuance, login, Nostr connect, private. (two Notes)

nostr:nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzq77777lz9hvwt86xqrsyf2jn588ewk5aclf8mavr80rhmduy5kq9qyg8wumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytnddakj7qghwaehxw309aex2mrp0yhxummnw3ezucnpdejz7qpqqqqz3757ha8j5xcm7er8kkdc0dgtvmy55dz2t2d7c2tv9h8qm88qlcjsls

nostr:nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzq9eemymaerqvwdc25f6ctyuvzx0zt3qld3zp5hf5cmfc2qlrzdh0qyt8wumn8ghj7ur4wfcxcetjv4kxz7fwvdhk6tcpzpmhxue69uhkummnw3ezumt0d5hsqgz98qckr40flhpyt48fxqjkuf9p4dv245634ygvp6dfu2kt7qk5egqmc4l8

An other microsat to Fiatjaf chronicle relay

Kind 1 was a mistake and many people are realizing it, they are replacing it. Kind 5 now it is only almost to eliminate drafts, here the option is to overwrite.

That's all!!

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Precautionary Principle

The precautionary principle that people, including Nassim Nicholas Taleb, love and treat as some form of wisdom, is actually just a justification for arbitrary acts.

In a given situation for which there's no sufficient knowledge, either A or B can be seen as risky or precautionary measures, there's no way to know except if you have sufficient knowledge.

---

Someone could reply saying, for example, that the known risk of A is tolerable to the unknown, probably magnitudes bigger, risk of B. Unless you know better or at least have a logical explanation for the risks of B (a thing "scientists" don't have because they notoriously dislike making logical claims), in which case you do know something and is not invoking the precautionary principle anymore, just relying on your logical reasoning – and that can be discussed and questioned by others, undermining your intended usage of the label "precautionary principle" as a magic cover for your actions.

@ 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.

@ 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.

@ 866e0139:6a9334e5

---

Autor: CJ Hopkins. Dieser Beitrag wurde mit dem Pareto-Client geschrieben. Sie finden alle Texte der Friedenstaube und weitere Texte zum Thema Frieden hier.**

Dieser Beitrag erschien zuerst auf dem Substack-Blog des Autors.

---

Er soll andauern, was er auch tut. Genau wie der nie endende Krieg in Orwells 1984 wird er vom Imperium gegen seine eigenen Untertanen geführt, aber nicht nur, um die Struktur der Gesellschaft intakt zu halten, sondern in unserem Fall auch, um die Gesellschaft in eine neo-totalitäre global-kapitalistische Dystopie zu verwandeln.

Bist du nicht vertraut mit dem Krieg gegen was auch immer?

Nun ja, okay, du erinnerst dich an den Krieg gegen den Terror.

Du erinnerst dich daran, als die „Freiheit und Demokratie“ von „den Terroristen“ angegriffen wurden und wir keine andere Wahl hatten, als uns unserer demokratischen Rechte und Prinzipien zu entledigen, einen nationalen „Notstand“ auszurufen, die verfassungsmäßigen Rechte der Menschen auszusetzen, einen Angriffskrieg gegen ein Land im Nahen Osten anzuzetteln, das für uns keinerlei Bedrohung darstellte, und unsere Straßen, Bahnhöfe, Flughäfen und alle anderen Orte mit schwer bewaffneten Soldaten zu füllen, denn sonst hätten „die Terroristen gewonnen“. Du erinnerst dich, als wir ein Offshore-Gulag bauten, um verdächtige Terroristen auf unbestimmte Zeit wegzusperren, die wir zuvor zu CIA-Geheimgefängnissen verschleppt hatten, wo wir sie gefoltert und gedemütigt haben, richtig?

Natürlich erinnerst du dich. Wer könnte das vergessen?

---

DIE FRIEDENSTAUBE FLIEGT AUCH IN IHR POSTFACH!

Hier können Sie die Friedenstaube abonnieren und bekommen die Artikel zugesandt, vorerst für alle kostenfrei, wir starten gänzlich ohne Paywall. (Die Bezahlabos fangen erst zu laufen an, wenn ein Monetarisierungskonzept für die Inhalte steht). Sie wollen der Genossenschaft beitreten oder uns unterstützen? Mehr Infos hier oder am Ende des Textes.

---

Erinnerst du dich, als die National Security Agency keine andere Wahl hatte, als ein geheimes „Terroristen-Überwachungsprogramm“ einzurichten, um Amerikaner auszuspionieren, oder sonst „hätten die Terroristen gewonnen“? Oder wie wäre es mit den „Anti-Terror“-Unterleibsuntersuchungen der TSA, der Behörde für Transportsicherheit, die nach über zwanzig Jahren immer noch in Kraft sind?

Und was ist mit dem Krieg gegen den Populismus? An den erinnerst du dich vielleicht nicht so gut.

Ich erinnere mich, denn ich habe zwei Bücher dazu veröffentlicht. Er begann im Sommer 2016, als das Imperium erkannte, dass „rechte Populisten“ die „Freiheit und Demokratie“ in Europa bedrohten und Trump in den USA auf dem Vormarsch war. Also wurde ein weiterer „Notstand“ ausgerufen – diesmal von der Gemeinschaft der Geheimdienste, den Medien, der akademischen Welt und der Kulturindustrie. Ja, genau, es war wieder einmal an der Zeit, unsere demokratischen Prinzipien hintanzustellen, „Hassrede“ in sozialen Medien zu zensieren, die Massen mit lächerlicher offizieller Propaganda über „Russiagate,“ „Hitlergate“ und so weiter zu bombardieren – sonst hätten „die Rechtspopulisten gewonnen.“

Der Krieg gegen den Populismus gipfelte in der Einführung des Neuen Normalen Reichs.

Im Frühjahr 2020 rief das Imperium einen globalen „gesundheitlichen Ausnahmezustand“ aus, als Reaktion auf ein Virus mit einer Überlebensrate von etwa 99,8 Prozent. Das Imperium hatte keine andere Wahl, als ganze Gesellschaften abzuriegeln, jeden dazu zu zwingen, in der Öffentlichkeit medizinisch aussehende Masken zu tragen, die Öffentlichkeit mit Propaganda und Lügen zu bombardieren, die Menschen dazu zu nötigen, sich einer Reihe experimenteller mRNA-„Impfungen“ zu unterziehen, Proteste gegen ihre Dekrete zu verbieten und systematisch diejenigen zu zensieren und zu verfolgen, die es wagten, ihre erfundenen „Fakten“ in Frage zu stellen oder ihr totalitäres Programm zu kritisieren.

Das Imperium hatte keine andere Wahl, als das alles zu tun, denn sonst hätten „die Covid-Leugner, die Impfgegner, die Verschwörungstheoretiker und all die anderen Extremisten gewonnen.“

Ich bin mir ziemlich sicher, dass du dich an all das erinnerst.

Und jetzt … nun, hier sind wir. Ja, du hast es erraten – es ist wieder einmal an der Zeit, kräftig auf die US-Verfassung und die Meinungsfreiheit zu scheißen, Menschen in irgendein salvadorianisches Höllenloch abzuschieben, das wir angemietet haben, weil ein Polizist ihre Tattoos nicht mochte, Universitätsstudenten wegen ihrer Anti-Israel-Proteste festzunehmen und zu verschleppen und natürlich die Massen mit Lügen und offizieller Propaganda zu bombardieren, denn … okay, alle zusammen jetzt: „sonst hätten die antisemitischen Terroristen und venezolanischen Banden gewonnen!“

Fängst du an, ein Muster zu erkennen? Ja? Willkommen beim Krieg gegen-was-auch-immer!

Wenn du die Zusammenhänge noch nicht ganz siehst, okay, lass es mich noch einmal ganz simpel erklären.

Das globale ideologische System, in dem wir alle leben, wird totalitär. (Dieses System ist der globale Kapitalismus, aber nenne es, wie du willst. Es ist mir scheißegal.) Es reißt die Simulation der Demokratie nieder, die es nicht mehr aufrechterhalten muss. Der Kalte Krieg ist vorbei. Der Kommunismus ist tot. Der globale Kapitalismus hat keine externen Feinde mehr. Also muss er die Massen nicht mehr mit demokratischen Rechten und Freiheiten besänftigen. Deshalb entzieht er uns diese Rechte nach und nach und konditioniert uns darauf, ihren Verlust hinzunehmen.

Er tut dies, indem er eine Reihe von „Notständen“ inszeniert, jeder mit einer anderen „Bedrohung“ für die „Demokratie,“ die „Freiheit,“ „Amerika“ oder „den Planeten“ – oder was auch immer. Jeder mit seinen eigenen „Monstern,“ die eine so große Gefahr für die „Freiheit“ oder was auch immer darstellen, dass wir unsere verfassungsmäßigen Rechte aufgeben und die demokratischen Werte ad absurdum führen müssen, denn: sonst „würden die Monster gewinnen.“

Es tut dies, indem es sein Antlitz von „links“ nach „rechts,“ dann zurück nach „links“, und dann zurück nach „rechts,“ dann nach „links“ und so weiter neigt, weil es unsere Kooperation dafür benötigt. Nicht die Kooperation von uns allen auf einmal. Nur eine kooperative demografische Gruppe auf einmal.

Es ist dabei erfolgreich – also das System – indem es unsere Angst und unseren Hass instrumentalisiert. Dem System ist es völlig egal, ob wir uns als „links“ oder „rechts“ identifizieren, aber es braucht uns gespalten in „links“ und „rechts,“ damit es unsere Angst und unseren Hass aufeinander nähren kann … eine Regierung, ein „Notfall,“ ein „Krieg“ nach dem anderen.

Da hast du es. Das ist der Krieg gegen was auch immer. Noch simpler kann ich es nicht erklären.

Oh, und noch eine letzte Sache … wenn du einer meiner ehemaligen Fans bist, wie Rob, die über meine „Einsichten“ oder Loyalitäten oder was auch immer verwirrt sind … nun, der Text, den du gerade gelesen hast, sollte das für dich klären. Ich stehe auf keiner Seite. Überhaupt keiner. Aber ich habe ein paar grundlegende demokratische Prinzipien. Und die richten sich nicht danach, was gerade populär ist oder wer im Weißen Haus sitzt.

Die Sache ist die: Ich muss mich morgens im Spiegel anschauen können ohne dort einen Heuchler oder … du weißt schon, einen Feigling zu sehen.

(Aus dem Amerikanischen übersetzt von René Boyke).

---

CJ Hopkins ist ein US-amerikanischer Dramatiker, Romanautor und politischer Satiriker. Zu seinen Werken zählen die Stücke Horse Country, Screwmachine/Eyecandy und The Extremists. Er hat sich als profilierter Kritiker des Corona-Regimes profiliert und veröffentlicht regelmäßig auf seinem Substack-Blog.

Sein aktuelles Buch:

https://x.com/CJHopkins_Z23/status/1907795633689264530

Hier in einem aktuellen Gespräch:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wF-G32P0leI

---

LASSEN SIE DER FRIEDENSTAUBE FLÜGEL WACHSEN!

Hier können Sie die Friedenstaube abonnieren und bekommen die Artikel zugesandt. (Vorerst alle, da wir den Mailversand testen, später ca. drei Mails pro Woche.)

Schon jetzt können Sie uns unterstützen:

• Für 50 CHF/EURO bekommen Sie ein Jahresabo der Friedenstaube.
• Für 120 CHF/EURO bekommen Sie ein Jahresabo und ein T-Shirt/Hoodie mit der Friedenstaube.
• Für 500 CHF/EURO werden Sie Förderer und bekommen ein lebenslanges Abo sowie ein T-Shirt/Hoodie mit der Friedenstaube.
• Ab 1000 CHF werden Sie Genossenschafter der Friedenstaube mit Stimmrecht (und bekommen lebenslanges Abo, T-Shirt/Hoodie).

Für Einzahlungen in CHF (Betreff: Friedenstaube):

Für Einzahlungen in Euro:

Milosz Matuschek

IBAN DE 53710520500000814137

BYLADEM1TST

Sparkasse Traunstein-Trostberg

Betreff: Friedenstaube

Wenn Sie auf anderem Wege beitragen wollen, schreiben Sie die Friedenstaube an: milosz@pareto.space

---

Sie sind noch nicht auf Nostr and wollen die volle Erfahrung machen (liken, kommentieren etc.)? Zappen können Sie den Autor auch ohne Nostr-Profil! Erstellen Sie sich einen Account auf Start. Weitere Onboarding-Leitfäden gibt es im Pareto-Wiki.

@ 592295cf:413a0db9

Week 11-11

Lamenting is becoming something I should ask people who complain. Charity bussiness and after sending zap received to those who do not complain...

I started making an RSS feed template. Open an opml file and check the feed. I called this script,Teed.

This morning I saw a bounty from a fiatjaf note, on a rss-feed long form, basic a plugin for an app. But I'm not doing that, of course, I can also publish it as soon as I'm in charge. Maybe I have some opml files and I want to see if these are still active.

Starter pack is not good apparently creates elites and maybe gives you the feeling of not choosing, but that's what people want. Do not choose but have the illusion of choosing.

Toxicity level. high.

---

P2P stuff, Iroh is a protocol for syncing & moving bytes iroh computer post on Bluesky

Juraj new project

nostr:nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzpk4kccr9csumnwhmpv83ladqc6p88089cx2e5s2c4448ppgl2pakqqsyv4hs424x6c8phks903s595q2lqp5fpwyq7ajwrf00lxev8cfamcvmq23h

Alex Gleason bunker Knox. (Beta) "knox is a new Nostr bunker CLI for running a NIP-46 remote signer and granting credentials to members of your team". Announcing bunker knox article

Local First podcast, web2.5. Something like Nostr but Local P2P, interesting episode. youtube link

Open Secret AI. "OpenSecret is a backend for app developers that turns private encryption on by default." announcment AI

I think users with regard to algorithms do not want ten different feeds to choose from, but that their feed adapts to their choices, training the feed if this makes sense. So the feed is your feed for your choices, respond and train with them.

Pleblab 2, cool "ANNOUNCING TOP BUILDER SEASON 2! " nostr:nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzpmx02p4slzahlf7jlcaspsx57g6uc7kl7cc7dvhlsnqtpn6khjj0qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnyv9kh2uewd9hj7qgwwaehxw309ahx7uewd3hkctcqyzy9w0frd802hfmrp45jr6dqhf7umqj7s63z0jvhv7hvvkcsqjg0vjwd7q4)

It was the real Guardian, quit 7fqx, we know it's you who want to distract us from number go up. The Guardian has left or wants to leave twitter is looking for alternatives, but how to verify a high profile user on Nostr? Nostr Address is already something but it's not enough.

We sometimes think that there is the money tree somewhere is that they magically appear, when instead the money is in the ground but they are dirty.

If Amethyst doesn't support is others stuff

People are simple, they want an app that works for all devices they have. People are "flutter-system".

A podcast feed xml file

Add to teed, if only i had made that option, meanwhile i saw a new interesting project

An other RSS feed github project

Imagine making a file opml with categories and those are your follow nostriches.

The problem is this does not bring new sap to the social chart is important to you, receive the selected posts and it is fantastic. You can also not use Nostr, if you want to use it as backup is fine. Share opml files? It's okay, but you can also find specific sites and find the best. Update for clients, you have a lot of RSS feeds from clients but update after a few hours so if there is really an emergency you lose. I still need to figure out how to integrate Nostr into RSS feed. Maybe an event to make your lists known.

I saw the event in these pr: nostr verified podcast nip #1465 Add audio track NIP #1043

@ 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.

@ e17e9a18:66d67a6b

We wrote this album to explain the inspiration behind Mutiny Brewing, and as a way to share the story of Bitcoin and freedom technologies like nostr. Through these songs, we’ve tried to capture every truth that we believe is essential to understand about money, freedom, trust, and human connection in the internet age. It’s our way of making these ideas real and relatable, and we hope it helps others see the power of taking control of their future through the systems we use.

01. "Tomorrow's Prices on Yesterday's Wage" explores the harsh reality of inflation. As central banks inflate the money supply, prices rise faster than wages, leaving us constantly falling behind. People, expecting prices to keep climbing, borrow more to buy sooner, pushing prices even higher in a vicious cycle. You're always a step behind, forced to pay tomorrow's inflated prices with yesterday's stagnant wages.

https://wavlake.com/track/76a6cd02-e876-4a37-b093-1fe919e9eabe

02. "Everybody Works For The Bank" exposes the hidden truth behind our fiat money system. When banks issue loans, they create new money from debt—but you must pay back both the principal and interest. That interest requires even more money, relying on others to borrow, creating an endless cycle of debt. If borrowing slows, the system falters and governments step in, printing more money to keep banks afloat. Ultimately, we’re all working to service debt, chained to the banks.

“Paying back what they create, working till I break” https://wavlake.com/track/4d94cb4b-ff3b-4423-be6a-03e0be8177d6

03. "Let My People Go" references Moses' demand for freedom but directly draws from Proverbs 6:1–5, exposing the danger of debt based money. Every dollar you hold is actually someone else's debt, making you personally liable—held in the hand of your debtor and at risk of their losses, which you ultimately pay for through inflation or higher taxes. As the song says, "The more you try to save it up, the deeper in you get." The wisdom of Proverbs urges immediate action, pleading urgently to escape this trap and free yourself, like a gazelle from a hunter.

https://wavlake.com/track/76214ff1-f8fd-45b0-a677-d9c285b1e7d6

04. "Mutiny Brewing" embodies Friedrich Hayek's insight: "I don't believe we shall ever have good money again before we take it out of the hands of government... we can't take it violently... all we can do is by some sly roundabout way introduce something they can't stop."

Inspired also by the Cypherpunk manifesto's rallying cry, "We will write the code", the song celebrates Bitcoin as exactly that unstoppable solution.

"Not here to break ya, just here to create our own little world where we determine our fate." https://wavlake.com/track/ba767fc8-6afc-4b0d-be64-259b340432f3

05. "Invisible Wealth" is inspired by The Sovereign Individual, a groundbreaking 1990s book that predicted the rise of digital money and explores how the return on violence shaped civilizations. The song references humanity's vulnerability since agriculture began—where stored wealth attracted violence, forcing reliance on larger governments for protection.

Today, digital privacy enabled by cryptography fundamentally changes this dynamic. When wealth is stored privately, secured by cryptographic keys, violence becomes ineffective. As the song emphasizes, "You can't bomb what you can't see." Cryptography dismantles traditional power structures, providing individuals true financial security, privacy, and freedom from exploitation.

“Violence is useless against cryptography” https://wavlake.com/track/648da3cc-d58c-4049-abe0-d22f9e61fef0

06. "Run A Node" is a rallying cry for Bitcoin's decentralisation. At its heart, it's about personal verification and choice: every node is a vote, every check’s a voice. By running the code yourself, you enforce the rules you choose to follow. This is true digital democracy. When everyone participates, there's no room for collusion, and authority comes directly from transparent code rather than blind trust.

"I verify, therefore I do." https://wavlake.com/track/ee11362b-2e84-4631-b05e-df6d8e6797f8

07. "Leverage is a Liar" warns against gambling with your wealth, but beneath the surface, it's a sharp critique of fractional reserve banking. Fractional reserves inflate asset prices, creating the illusion of wealth built on leverage. This system isn't sustainable and inevitably leads to collapse. Real wealth requires sound money, money that can't be inflated. Trying to gain more through leverage only feeds the lie.

"Watch it burn higher and higher—leverage is a liar." https://wavlake.com/track/67f9c39c-c5e1-4e15-b171-f1f5442f29a5

08. "Don't Get Rekt" serves as a stark warning about trusting custodians with your Bitcoin. Highlighting infamous collapses like Mt.Gox, Celsius, and FTX. These modern failures echo the 1933 Executive Order 6102, where the US government forcibly seized citizens' gold, banned its use, and then promptly devalued the currency exchanged for it. History shows clearly: trusting others with your wealth means risking losing it all.

"Your keys, your life, don't forget." https://wavlake.com/track/fbd9b46d-56fc-4496-bc4b-71dec2043705

09. "One Language" critiques the thousands of cryptocurrencies claiming to be revolutionary. Like languages, while anyone can invent one, getting people to actually use it is another story. Most of these cryptos are just affinity scams, centralized towers built on shaky foundations. Drawing from The Bitcoin Standard, the song argues money naturally gravitates toward a single unit, a universal language understood by all. When the dust settles, only genuine, decentralized currency remains.

"One voice speaking loud and clear, the rest will disappear." https://wavlake.com/track/22fb4705-9a01-4f65-9b68-7e8a77406a16

10. "Key To Life" is an anthem dedicated to nostr, the permissionless, unstoppable internet identity protocol. Unlike mainstream social media’s walled gardens, nostr places your identity securely in a cryptographic key, allowing you total control. Every message or action you sign proves authenticity, verifiable by anyone. This ensures censorship resistant communication, crucial for decentralised coordination around Bitcoin, keeping it free from centralised control.

"I got the key that sets me free—my truth is mine, authentically." https://wavlake.com/track/0d702284-88d2-4d3a-9059-960cc9286d3f

11. "Web Of Trust" celebrates genuine human connections built through protocols like nostr, free from corporate algorithms and their manipulative agendas. Instead of top down control, it champions grassroots sharing of information among trusted peers, ensuring truth and authenticity rise naturally. It's about reclaiming our digital lives, building real communities where trust isn't manufactured by machines, but created by people.

"My filter, my future, my choice to make, real connections no one can fake." https://wavlake.com/track/b383d4e2-feba-4d63-b9f6-10382683b54b

12. "Proof Of Work" is an anthem for fair value creation. In Bitcoin, new money is earned through real work, computing power and electricity spent to secure the network. No shortcuts, no favourites. It's a system grounded in natural law: you reap what you sow. Unlike fiat money, which rewards those closest to power and the printing press, Proof of Work ensures rewards flow to those who put in the effort. Paper castles built on easy money will crumble, but real work builds lasting worth.

"Real work makes real worth, that's the law of this earth." https://wavlake.com/track/01bb7327-0e77-490b-9985-b5ff4d4fdcfc

13. "Stay Humble" is a reminder that true wealth isn’t measured in coins or possessions. It’s grounded in the truth that a man’s life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions. Real wealth is the freedom to use your life and time for what is good and meaningful. When you let go of the obsession with numbers, you make room for gratitude, purpose, and peace. It's not about counting coins, it's about counting your blessings.

"Real wealth ain't what you own, it's gratitude that sets the tone." https://wavlake.com/track/3fdb2e9b-2f52-4def-a8c5-c6b3ee1cd194

@ da18e986:3a0d9851

I'm making this tutorial for myself, as I plan to write many wiki pages describing DVM kinds, as a resource for DVMDash.

Wiki pages on Nostr are written using AsciiDoc. If you don't know ascii doc, get an LLM (like https://duck.ai) to help you format into the right syntax.

Here's the test wiki page I'm going to write:

``` = Simple AsciiDoc Demo

This is a simple demonstration of AsciiDoc syntax for testing purposes.

== Features

AsciiDoc offers many formatting options that are easy to use.

• Easy to learn
• Supports rich text formatting
• Can include code snippets
• Works great for documentation

[source,json]

{ "name": "Test", "version": "1.0", "active": true }

```

We're going to use nak to publish it

First, install nak if you haven't already

go install github.com/fiatjaf/nak@latest

Note: if you don't use Go a lot, you may need to first install it and then add it to your path so the nak command is recognized by the terminal

```

this is how to add it to your path on mac if using zsh

echo 'export PATH=$PATH:$(go env GOPATH)/bin' >> ~/.zshrc ```

And here's how to sign and publish this event with nak.

First, if you want to use your own nostr sec key, you can set the env variable to it and nak will use that if no secret key is specified

```

replace with your full secret key

export NOSTR_SECRET_KEY="nsec1zcdn..." ```

Now to sign and publish the event:

Note: inner double quotes need to be escaped with a \ before them in order to keep the formatting correct, because we're doing this in the terminal

nak event -k 30818 -d "dvm-wiki-page-test" -t 'title=dvm wiki page test' -c "= Simple AsciiDoc Demo\n\nThis is a simple demonstration of AsciiDoc syntax for testing purposes. \n\n== Features\n\nAsciiDoc offers many formatting options that are easy to use. \n\n* Easy to learn \n* Supports rich text formatting \n* Can include code snippets \n* Works great for documentation \n\n[source,json] \n---- \n{ \"name\": \"Test\", \"version\": \"1.0\", \"active\": true } \n----" wss://relay.primal.net wss://relay.damus.io wss://relay.wikifreedia.xyz

You've now published your first wiki page! If done correctly, it will show up on wikistr.com, like mine did here: https://wikistr.com/dvm-wiki-page-test*da18e9860040f3bf493876fc16b1a912ae5a6f6fa8d5159c3de2b8233a0d9851

and on wikifreedia.xyz https://wikifreedia.xyz/dvm-wiki-page-test/dustind@dtdannen.github.io

@ a95c6243:d345522c

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ a95c6243:d345522c

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Johann Gabriel Seidl (1804-1875)

@ 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

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.

@ 1bc70a01:24f6a411

The heading to be

Testing apps, a tireless quest, Click and swipe, then poke the rest. Crashing bugs and broken flows, Hidden deep where logic goes.

Specs in hand, we watch and trace, Each edge case in its hiding place. From flaky taps to loading spins, The war on regressions slowly wins.

Push the build, review the log, One more fix, then clear the fog. For in each test, truth will unfold— A quiet tale of stable code.

This has been a test. Thanks for tuning in.

• one
• two
• three

---

Listen a chill

Tranquility

And leisure

@ 3eba5ef4:751f23ae

Crypto Insights

How to Identify Bitcoin Mining Nodes: Difficulty, Methods, and Security Risks

In Bitcoin’s P2P network, identifying mining nodes and their adjacent ones can expose potential attack surfaces. Previous research has demonstrated that influential nodes can be identified by coloring nodes with conflicting transactions. These nodes may not be miners' gateway nodes but can ultimately connect to mining ones.

This study, based on the Bitcoin network environment of 2025, explores the difficulty of finding such nodes. The results indicate that these attacks are viable, and leveraging a set of influential mining nodes makes it easier to carry out mainnet partitioning, pinning, replacement cycling, or other yet-undiscovered mempool and Lightning Network attacks.

Boot Protocol: A Decentralized Block Reward Protocol to Reduce Income Volatility

Boot Protocol is a decentralized protocol designed to address Bitcoin mining variance—the fluctuations in the time it takes to find a block and the rewards received—which leads to income volatility. It enables block reward sharing without tracking actual mining work, offering up to 16x lower variance than solo mining while avoiding centralization issues.

• Issue: Centralized mining pools dominate block rewards, leaving small miners with high variance.
• Boot Protocol’s solution: A decentralized, low-variance system that mimics solo mining while offering mining pool advantages.
• Advantages: Compared to solo mining, it reduces variance by up to 16x and is more resistant to regulatory attacks than centralized mining pools.
• Against withholding attacks: The protocol is designed to prevent block withholding attacks by incentivizing miners to submit blocks as soon as possible.
• Potential: Boot Protocol has the potential to revolutionize decentralized mining by eliminating the shortcomings of approaches like P2Pool and Braid Pool.

Trustless Coin Flip Game Built on Taproot and Multisig

Coinflip is a two-player coin-flipping game inspired by the concept of "Zero-Collateral Lotteries" and built using Taproot and multisig.

Exploring Duplicate Transactions in Bitcoin

In the Bitcoin blockchain, there are two sets of completely identical transactions from mid-November 2010, where one set sandwiches the other. Since the coinbase transactions have no inputs but newly generated coins, two different coinbase transactions can send the same amount to the same address in the exact same way, resulting in identical transactions.

Because duplicate transactions can cause confusion, developers have been researching solutions for years, but no ideal fix has been found. The next potential duplicate transaction event is expected in 2046. While the current risks associated with duplicate transactions are low, this remains an intriguing and novel issue. This article explores the topic in detail.

A Fee Protocol to Prevent Lightning Network Spam

Lightning Network spam happens when some one floods the network with a constant stream of HTLCs to disrupt legitimate payments. To tackle this, this paper proposes a protocol for assigning and collecting fees in the Lightning Network to mitigate spam risks. It establishes fees corresponding to all significant costs, whereas previous attempts charged fees for delayed and/or failed payments, omitted certain costs or relied on trust to prevent theft.

This protocol introduces a "griefer-penalization" mechanism: if a party suffers malicious behavior (griefing) from a channel partner, they can be made to lose certain funds, but the griefer also bears a corresponding cost. As a result, a party that only selects self-interested partners is unlikely to be griefed.

Cashu Launches Instant Offline Ecash Payments

Cashu has developed a new tap-to-pay feature that enables instant, offline ecash payments via NFC.

As a bearer token, ecash is stored directly on the user’s device rather than on a server. This is why it integrates so well with NFC.

Coinbase Open-Sourced Multi-Party Computation Library

Coinbase has open-sourced its Multi-Party Computation (MPC) engine. Coinbase's cryptography lead, Yehuda Lindell, stated that the library supports two-party and multi-party signatures for ECDSA and Schnorr/EdDSA, as well as tools for DKG, backup, and more.

This release includes the full code stack, including commitments, random oracles, secret sharing, oblivious transfer (basic and extension), and a series of ZK proofs for various threshold signing tasks. All protocols come with complete specifications and theory documents. The team has also conducted full benchmark tests, providing insights into running time and bandwidth consumption from low-level primitives to full protocols.

RISC Zero zkVM Advances: R0VM 2.0 and OP Kailua

RISC Zero is advancing its zkVM technology with the release of R0VM 2.0 and the introduction of OP Kailua to enhance blockchain verifiability, security, and scalability.

• R0VM 2.0: The First Formally Verified RISC-V zkVM

RISC Zero uses Picus for formal verification of zkVM components. R0VM 2.0 will be the first formally verified RISC-V zkVM, addressing security risks from insufficient constraints in ZK systems, ensuring provable correctness, and offering stronger security guarantees for developers.

• OP Kailua: zkVM Opcode for Efficient On-Chain Verification

OP Kailua is a zkVM opcode that enables efficient on-chain validity proofs, allowing OP chains to upgrade into ZK Rollups, offering: * <1 hour Finality * Stronger security requiring only one honest sequencer * Lower costs as low as $0.00012/tx

Three Blocks Recently Solo-Mined

Three independent miners successfully mined Bitcoin blocks recently, signaling a rise in home mining.

• Block 888,737 was mined using a DIY FutureBit Apollo device, earning 3.125 BTC plus fees.
• An independent miner with a hashrate below 1 TH/s mined block 888,989.
• A miner using a $300 setup successfully mined block 889,240.

New Book | Principles of Bitcoin: Cutting Through the Noise to Reveal the Core Value

Principles of Bitcoin constructs a holistic framework understanding Bitcoin from first principles. It strips away industry hype, jargon, and superficial analysis to reveal the ingenuity of Satoshi’s creation and its implications for money, governance, and individual freedom.

By examining Bitcoin through technical, economic, political, and philosophical lenses, the author argues that only through this holistic understanding can one grasp its significance. He presents Bitcoin as a tool for individual empowerment and economic sovereignty, showing how it challenges traditional financial systems, and why it is a unique, non-replicable innovation in the digital asset space.

Top Reads on Blockchain and Beyond

Podcast | Can Pricing Solve Congestion? Applying Toll Economics to Crypto

To alleviate traffic congestion, New York City implemented congestion pricing in early 2025. Could similar mechanisms be applied to the crypto? In this podcast episode, congestion pricing expert (and one of its key proponents) Michael Ostrovsky discusses the economics behind congestion pricing and explores its implications for both city blocks and blockchain.

Model Context Protocol: A Unified Framework for Instant, Bidirectional AI Agent Communication

MCP (Model Context Protocol) was introduced by Anthropic in late 2024 as an open standard to enhance the connection of AI agent LLM apps and user data. Unlike traditional AI integrations that rely on fragmented, custom-built solutions, MCP provides a unified framework for bidirectional communication. This allows AI agents not only to pull in external data, but also to send updates back to these systems, enabling more dynamic and autonomous behavior. Additionally, MCP’s open-source nature fosters industry-wide collaboration, contrasting with the more siloed approaches of centralized AI companies.

This tweet offers a summary of MCP’s capabilities and significance.

The Era of Culturementals: Culture is More Fundamental than Technology

This post argues that the crypto space has repeatedly demonstrated that culture trumps technology. This perspective defines the rise of Culture Chains—blockchains shaped not by their technical capabilities, but by the communities they serve. Culture Chains can be seen as an evolution of “vertical blockchains”—designed not for universal adoption but for specific niche groups, such as anime fans, role-playing gamers, or meme lovers. Functioning like digital city-states, these chains build around shared values, language, and interests, offering tailored infrastructure, governance models, and token economies.

@ eac63075:b4988b48

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

PT-BR version

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

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

1. Introduction to Consensus in Bitcoin

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

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

Evolution of Consensus in Bitcoin

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

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

---

2. Technical Components of Consensus

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

Validation of Blocks and Transactions

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

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

Chain Selection

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

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

Soft Forks vs. Hard Forks

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

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

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

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

---

3. Stakeholders in Bitcoin's Consensus

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

1. Economic Nodes

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

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

2. Investors

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

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

3. Media Influencers

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

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

4. Miners

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

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

5. Protocol Developers

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

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

6. Users and Application Developers

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

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

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

---

4. Mechanisms for Activating Updates in Bitcoin

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

Flag Day

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

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

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

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

BIP34 and BIP9

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

BIP8 (LOT=True)

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

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

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

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

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

---

5. Risks and Considerations in Consensus Updates

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

Network Fragility with Alternative Implementations

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

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

Chain Splits and Impact on Stakeholders

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

Each group of stakeholders reacts differently to a chain split:

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

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

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

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

Regulatory Impacts and Institutional Investors

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

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

Security Considerations in Soft Forks and Hard Forks

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

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

Bounty Claim Risks and Attack Scenarios

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

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

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

---

6. Recommendations for the Consensus Process in Bitcoin

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

1. Careful Evaluation of Proposal Maturity

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

2. Extensive Testing in Secure and Compatible Networks

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

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

3. Importance of Stakeholder Engagement

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

4. Key Questions for Evaluating Consensus Proposals

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

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

5. Coordination and Timing in Implementations

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

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

6. Continuous Monitoring and Re-evaluation

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

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

---

7. Conclusion

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

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

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

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

---

8. Links

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

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

@ 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.

@ eac63075:b4988b48

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

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

(PT-BR version here)

What is a CBDC?

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

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

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

Practical Example: The Case of DREX During the Pandemic

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

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

How Does China's Social Credit System Work?

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

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

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

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

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

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

DREX and Bill No. 3,341/2024

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

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

Risks and Individual Freedom

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

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

The Relationship Between DREX and Pix

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

International Precedents and Resistance to CBDC

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

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

Bill No. 3,341/2024 and Popular Pressure

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

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

What’s at Stake?

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

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

A Call to Action

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

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

@ 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.

@ f5369849:f34119a0

Hackathon Summary

CoreDAO returned to DoraHacks with another flagship hackathon - Core Global Gaming Hackathon. Out of 231 registered developers, 86 projects were approved, all competing for a share of the $380,000 prize pool. The hackathon fostered the development of games on Bitcoin and the Core platform, emphasizing innovation in decentralized gaming.

By challenging participants to expand the horizons of decentralized game development, the event resulted in a range of innovative entries. It served as a platform for developers to engage with a vibrant community, cultivate creativity, and influence the future trajectory of Web3 gaming.

Significant achievements included the incorporation of Core Chain technology into gaming applications, highlighting distinct methods of utilizing decentralized platforms. The event concluded with a Demo Day on March 24, 2025, during which final projects were showcased and winners were announced. Overall, the hackathon underscored the potential of blockchain technology in gaming and reflected the collaborative spirit among developers seeking to make an impact in the industry.

Hackathon Winners

Hyper Casual Games Prize Winners

• Farming Saga: A strategy and simulation game focused on building an agricultural empire, featuring dynamic challenges and NFT integration to enrich gameplay.
• Zenista: An idle game aimed at providing relaxation through managing a virtual spa, designed to offer self-care experiences.
• Market Magnate: A retail simulation game that integrates blockchain for true asset ownership, emphasizing strategy, creativity, and management.

Social Games PvP (Player vs Player) Prize Winners

• Core Arena: A PvP game enabling the use of any ERC-721 NFT in battles with automated skill assignments, fostering unification among NFT communities and extending project lifecycles.
• Fight For Tcore: A blockchain-based real-time PvP game where players engage in duels and wager TCORE tokens, utilizing smart contracts for decentralized gameplay.
• CoreVerse Battleground: A real-time multiplayer blockchain game that features NFT trading and in-game currency on the Core Blockchain.

Puzzle Games Prize Winners

• Temporal Odyssey: A blockchain-based puzzle game offering NFT rewards for solving puzzles across diverse worlds.
• Dungeon: Features a procedurally generated dungeon-crawling experience, incorporating blockchain elements and allowing players to mint achievements into Dungeon Tokens ($DGN).
• Skateflow: An endless skateboarding game that implements blockchain technology for potential in-game rewards.

For more detailed information on all projects, please visit the Core Gaming Hackathon page.

About the Organizer

Core DAO

The Core blockchain is the first Proof of Stake (PoS) Layer for Bitcoin, pioneering Self-Custodial Bitcoin Staking and hosting the largest Bitcoin DeFi ecosystem. Core transforms Bitcoin into a yield-bearing asset and empowers holders to actively leverage their Bitcoin within a high-performance BTCfi ecosystem.

@ 7bdef7be:784a5805

We value sovereignty, privacy and security when accessing online content, using several tools to achieve this, like open protocols, open OSes, open software products, Tor and VPNs.

The problem

Talking about our social presence, we can manually build up our follower list (social graph), pick a Nostr client that is respectful of our preferences on what to show and how, but with the standard following mechanism, our main feed is public, so everyone can actually snoop what we are interested in, and what is supposable that we read daily.

The solution

Nostr has a simple solution for this necessity: encrypted lists. Lists are what they appear, a collection of people or interests (but they can also group much other stuff, see NIP-51). So we can create lists with contacts that we don't have in our main social graph; these lists can be used primarily to create dedicated feeds, but they could have other uses, for example, related to monitoring. The interesting thing about lists is that they can also be encrypted, so unlike the basic following list, which is always public, we can hide the lists' content from others. The implications are obvious: we can not only have a more organized way to browse content, but it is also really private one.

One might wonder what use can really be made of private lists; here are some examples:

• Browse “can't miss” content from users I consider a priority;
• Supervise competitors or adversarial parts;
• Monitor sensible topics (tags);
• Following someone without being publicly associated with them, as this may be undesirable;

The benefits in terms of privacy as usual are not only related to the casual, or programmatic, observer, but are also evident when we think of how many bots scan our actions to profile us.

The current state

Unfortunately, lists are not widely supported by Nostr clients, and encrypted support is a rarity. Often the excuse to not implement them is that they are harder to develop, since they require managing the encryption stuff (NIP-44). Nevertheless, developers have an easier option to start offering private lists: give the user the possibility to simply mark them as local-only, and never push them to the relays. Even if the user misses the sync feature, this is sufficient to create a private environment.

To date, as far as I know, the best client with list management is Gossip, which permits to manage both encrypted and local-only lists.

Beg your Nostr client to implement private lists!

@ 592295cf:413a0db9

[Week 21-10] I thinks that Saylor is on right, don't trust verify, is bullshit Bitcoin is a financial tool! I think it's good for me to get away from social media once a week. I could do things outside, like walking. Take pictures of the landscape. The weirdest thing is when the alarm calls you up in an hour.

Fiatjaf wants a cache client. I feel like I can do it, I have the set to do it, but nostrudel is no longer working, so it's a little murky. Next nostrudel does not accept changes to settings (It works now!), so maybe i can think something. I want to make a corny chat, test, read this article. Nostr doesn't work with a vpn because relays don't know who you are. jokes aside, some clients have difficulties.

I couldn't take pictures of the landscape if I didn't take the wind blades. Small local controversy.

Missing the point of content creator. Simply for final user, Simply for the creator, new feature, no missing nothing. I'm trying to limit everything to writing for a week. I almost did. Maybe another week can do well.

Meanwhile I updated apps like Amber and Voyager, coracle, nostrmo.

The experiment continues with open vibe following the trending of Nostr. I'm following almost 120 npub. He'll stop, I don't know, possible he's already reached the limit. You still can't block words on the Nostr side of Open, strange thing. The app doesn't count the follow well, still some problem cleaning the cache seems that it doesn't need. After a while open and close and seems updated. I wanted to try open librarian, but I was busy sending fake zap on Nostr. This morning i try and It keeps giving me error 500 when I try to connect to a relay.

I hate when a profile follows everyone indistinctly, why does everyone follow? and in voyage, I read with WoT setting, I probably have to do unfollow. There must be an indication in which not include the followers of this person in the web of trust, I would do it by default if you follow more than 600 people.

WoT on Nostr Visualized post on stackernews

@ f5369849:f34119a0

Hackathon Summary

The Cambrian Hack was a recent online competition designed to engage developers in the development of Node Consensus Networks (NCNs) using the Cambrian SDK and Jito Restaking. The event drew 88 registered developers, culminating in nine impressive projects. Participants concentrated on rapid NCN deployment, exploring applications such as AI coprocessors, oracle networks, and blockchain bridges. The hackathon concluded with prizes awarded to the top three projects, funded by Cambrian and Jito teams. Part of the prize pool included Cambrian Prize NFTs, convertible to Cambrian tokens.

The hackathon underscored the Cambrian SDK's ability to expedite NCN development by streamlining processes, minimizing the need for large teams, and offering pre-built components. Evaluation criteria encompassed technical complexity, market potential, and innovation. The event concluded with the announcement of winners at Solana Apex Cape Town. Cambrian Hack provided developers with opportunities to connect with technology experts, enhance skills through workshops, and contribute to the progression of web3 and the Solana ecosystem.

Hackathon Winners

Cambrian NCN Builder Excellence Prize Winners

• Ping Project: This project strengthens network integrity and manages reward distribution through a decentralized content delivery service employing PoS consensus on the Solana blockchain, and integrating Cambrian SDK and Jito Restaking technology.
• Ant Vault: Utilizes ElizaOS AI agents alongside Cambrian oracles to manage DeFi strategically, providing intelligent solutions to market challenges.
• STABLE-FUNDS: A platform on Solana for creating stablecoins, integrating decentralized oracles and staking mechanisms to connect government-backed securities with DeFi.

Cambrian Ecosystem Innovator Prize Winners

• NebulaCDN: A decentralized content delivery network leveraging Web3 technology to provide efficient and censorship-resistant data distribution.
• Kamui: A cost-effective, secure VRF oracle for Solana, designed to deliver reliable and affordable randomness solutions.

For further details, explore all projects at Cambrian Hack BUIDL.

About the Organizer

Cambrian

Cambrian makes Jito NCN development a breeze, reducing complexity and time requirements in orders of magnitude. Specializing in innovative blockchain applications, the organization has undertaken several projects aimed at enhancing digital infrastructures. Its accomplishments include collaborations with industry leaders to develop secure and efficient blockchain systems. Cambrian is currently expanding its focus on decentralized technology, working to improve both accessibility and security across different platforms. Through its expertise, Cambrian continues to play a significant role in the evolving landscape of technology and blockchain industries.

@ cff1720e:15c7e2b2

Die Protagonisten\ - Puschkin, russischer Dichter (unbeteiligt, da tot)\ - Putin, russischer Präsident, Erzschurke (wahlweise Satan)\ - Tino, Musiker mit fehlender Russland-Distanz     \ - Tobias, ein ebenfalls umstrittener Künstler (Querdenker)    \ - Anne, Redakteurin bei einer Provinz-Zeitung (BNN)   \ - DRG, Deutsch-Russische Gesellschaft Ettlingen

Ursprünglich ging es um Kunst. Die Deutsch-Russische Gesellschaft Ettlingen hatte für den Abend des 5. April zu einem Puschkin-Abend in das schöne Ettlinger Schloss eingeladen. Doch dann bekam die Presse Wind davon, und aus der geplanten Kulturveranstaltung wurde ein Politikum. Redakteurin Anne fühlte sich veranlasst den Musiker Tino einer strengen Gewissensprüfung zu unterziehen, da wachsame Bürger bzgl. seiner Person “Bedenken” geäußert haben sollen (potentieller Gemeinwohl- oder Demokratie-Gefährder?). Hier der Text ihrer Mail:\ \ Sehr geehrter Herr Eisbrenner, \ am Samstag kommen Sie für einen Auftritt nach Ettlingen. Im Vorfeld sind nun Bürger auf uns zugekommen mit Bedenken. Sie als Künstler seien „zu russlandfreundlich“.\ Gerne möchten wir natürlich auch Sie dazu zu Wort kommen lassen, um das sachlich einzuordnen.\ Ich freue mich, wenn Sie mir deswegen kurz folgende Fragen beantworten könnten:\ \ • Wie würden Sie sich selbst politisch einordnen? \ • Auf einer Veranstaltung 2023 bei der Rosa-Luxemburg-Stiftung haben Sie sich laut Medien-Berichten lobend über Putin geäußert. („Eisbrenner lobt den russischen Präsidenten Wladimir Putin, wie lange sich dieser im Konflikt mit Ukraine und Nato gezügelt habe. (…) Respekt äußert Eisbrenner auch für einen Kurswechsel unter Putin.“) Können Sie das bestätigen? Was ist heute Ihre Meinung über den russischen Präsidenten?\ • Sie haben zwei Mal am Festival „Road to Yalta“ in Moskau teilgenommen. Die Veranstalter beschreiben Sie als „Öffentlichen Fürsprecher für Russland“. Besteht die Gefahr, dass Sie von Russland instrumentalisiert werden?\ \ Um aktuell berichten zu können, brauchen wir Ihre Antworten bis morgen Mittag, 14.30 Uhr.\ Herzlichen Dank im Voraus.\ \ Mit freundlichen Grüßen \ Anne Herder\ Badische Neueste Nachrichten\ \ Angesichts der deutschen Beteiligung am Stellvertreterkrieg gegen Russland war die Wachsamkeit von Bürgern und Regionalpresse lobenswert, schließlich ging es darum den Auftritt eines “Putin-Freundes” zu verhindern. Leider hat die aufmerksame Öffentlichkeit dabei völlig übersehen dass auch Tinos musikalischer Partner Tobias ein umstrittener Künstler mit Kontakten zu “Querdenkern” ist (Wikipedia). Da der Musiker Tino in seiner Antwortmail an die Redakteurin Anne weder Bedauern noch Reue erkennen ließ, veröffentlichte sie pflichtschuldig am 4. April einen Artikel mit einer Warnung vor “russischer Propaganda”.

Trotz dieser drohenden Gefahr wollte die DRG Ettlingen sich weder vom Musiker Tino distanzieren noch die Veranstaltung absagen, mit der fragwürdigen Begründung “… die allermeisten Menschen wollen zusammen in Frieden leben."\ \ Der Puschkin-Abend fand also statt, und es sollte sogar noch schlimmer kommen, wie wir aus einer weiteren Mail von Redakteurin Anne nach der Veranstaltung erfahren können.

\ Sehr geehrter Herr Eisbrenner,\ vielen Dank für Ihre ausführliche Rückmeldung. Es freut mich zu hören, dass die Veranstaltung ein Erfolg war und der Ankündigungsartikel dazu beitragen konnte, weiteres Publikum zu gewinnen.  …\ \ … Abschließend möchte ich betonen, dass es uns ein Anliegen ist, fair und ausgewogen zu berichten. Ich habe in meinem Artikel sowohl die kritischen Stimmen als auch die Positionen von Ihnen und dem Veranstalter berücksichtigt. Ziel war es, ein ausgewogenes Bild zu vermitteln und den Lesern die Möglichkeit zu geben, sich selbst eine Meinung zu bilden. \ \ Es ist nicht unsere Absicht, Personen aufgrund ihrer politischen Äußerungen oder künstlerischen Engagements zu diffamieren. Wir sind uns der Verantwortung bewusst, die wir als Medium tragen.\ \ Die tapfere Redakteurin knickte ein, beglückwünschte den “Putin-Freund” für die erfolgreiche Veranstaltung, und erklärt ihr journalistisches Verständnis damit “den Lesern die Möglichkeit zu geben, sich selbst eine Meinung zu bilden.” Keine Einordnung mehr, keine Haltung, keine kritische Distanz? Die Russland-Versteher hatten gesiegt und der Musiker Tino musste sich in seiner Antwortmail sogar bemühen nicht zu viel Nähe entstehen zu lassen: … darum möchte ich Ihnen auch nochmal und dieses Mal kurz antworten, um uns beide nicht für die Zukunft zu einer Art langjährigen „Brieffreundschaft“ zu nötigen.

Damit scheint sich Journalistin Anne nicht für höhere Aufgaben empfohlen zu haben.\ \ Resümee: Kultur kennt keine Grenzen. Deutschland ist noch nicht kriegstüchtig. Zum Glück!

Hinweis: die Inhalte der Mails sind sehr informativ, deshalb befinden sie sich in voller Länge im Anhang

Fortsetzung: eine Vertiefung des Themas gibt es im Artikel "Der Brückenbauer"

Quellen:

https://www.eisbrenner.de/        \ https://www.eisbrenner.de/programm/puschkin/  \ https://www.nachdenkseiten.de/?p=130806 \ https://bnn.de/karlsruhe/ettlingen/kritik-an-konzert-im-ettlinger-schloss-wo-steht-tino-eisbrenner-politisch  \ (Artikel hinter einer Paywall)\ https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tobias_Morgenstern \ https://drg-ettlingen.de/ 

\ Hier die Mails in voller Länge

https://route96.pareto.space/c20c13782fbd7d93b590222cb7ca7c4e1d1b485828f52e8946d36c7d2ebe376d.pdf

@ cff1720e:15c7e2b2

Zunächst einmal gilt es zu konstatieren, dass beide Optionen der Frage nicht faktisch feststellbar sind. Der Status Putin-Freund würde zumindest die Tatsache persönlicher Treffen in der Vergangenheit voraussetzen, darüber hat bisher kein Medium berichtet, also scheint es keine gegeben zu haben. Indes gibt es reichlich dokumentierte Äußerungen und Handlungen von Tino Eisbrenner die den symbolischen Begriff "Brückenbauer" rechtfertigen.

“Das zeigt mir, dass mein Glaube an Dialog, Diplomatie und (Völker)verständigung nicht unberechtigt ist.” \ (aus einer Mail an Anne Herder)

Ein zentrales Thema seiner künstlerischen Arbeit seit über einem Jahrzehnt ist die Warnung vor Völkerhass und Kriegsgefahr.

“Sie sagen ja, Sie bezögen keine Stellung. Und doch sind wir in Deutschland in eine Situation geraten, in der dieser militärische Ausdruck, Stellung beziehen, immer mehr zur Realität wird. Wir ziehen Gräben und bauen Stellungen aus, die wir dann beziehen. Durch unbedachte Überschriften, nicht eindeutige Begriffe, vermiedene Kontextualisierung und Informationen, die uns nicht gegeben werden, während wir auf Kriegstüchtigkeit eingestimmt werden und Puschkin, wenn wir nicht achtgeben, nie kennenlernen.” (aus einer Mail an Anne Herder)

„Vom Pulverfass runter!“: Tino Eisbrenner für Frieden mit Russland  5. April 2019\ https://www.textstelle.news/2019/04/05/liedermacher-tino-eisbrenner-frieden-mit-russland/  

Ergänzend zu seinen Liedern und Interviews veröffentlichte Eisbrenner das Buch "Das Lied vom Frieden". https://shop.strato.de/epages/187541.sf/de_DE/?ObjectPath=/Shops/187541/Products/4657

\ Er wolle mit seinem Buch eine Diskussion anregen und dass in der Gesellschaft „noch einmal nachgedacht und diskutiert wird“. Beides ist aktuell höchst notwendig, da Politik und Medien systematisch eine gefährliche Kriegshysterie schüren, die bereits jetzt fatale Folgen für die Gesellschaft zeitigt.

"Dass einem Songschreiber, der sich für eine bessere Verständigung zwischen Westeuropa und Russland ausspricht, nicht nur Blumen auf den Weg gestreut werden, erfährt man auch aus dem vorliegendem Buch. Aber vor allem beschreibt Tino Eisbrenner seine Erlebnisse und Eindrücke auf den »Musik statt Krieg«-Tourneen, die er seit Ende 2015 durch Deutschland, Österreich und Osteuropa gemacht hat. Russland, Georgien, Belarus, Polen, Tschechien hat er viele Male mit Musik bereist und dabei interessante Menschen und deren Sicht auf das Leben, die Heimat, ihre Geschichte und auch auf Deutschland kennengelernt."

Eisbrenner belässt es nicht bei Diskussionen, er engagiert sich für vielfältige Friedens-Initiativen ungeachtet persönlicher Anfeindungen und beruflicher Nachteile. Er hat nicht nur das »Lied vom Frieden« als Song getextet, sondern lebt es auch mit dem, was er als Künstler initiiert und (re)präsentiert. Seit sechzehn Jahren veranstaltet er sein eigenes Festival »Musik statt Krieg«.

\ http://musik-statt-krieg.com/index.html

@ eac63075:b4988b48

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

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

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

Sections:

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

---

What Is Chat Control?

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

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

Origins of the Proposal

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

How Messaging Services Work

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

Key Elements of Chat Control

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

Why It Matters

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

---

Why Is the EU Pushing for Chat Control?

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

Protecting Children and Preventing Crime

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

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

Legal Context and Legislative Drivers

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

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

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

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

Balancing Security and Privacy

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

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

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

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

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

The Urgency Behind the Push

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

Criticism and Controversy

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

---

The Privacy Concerns and Risks

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

Infringement on Privacy Rights

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

Erosion of End-to-End Encryption

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

Concerns from Privacy Advocates

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

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

Potential for Government Overreach

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

Real-World Implications for Users

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

Legal and Ethical Concerns

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

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

Opposition from Member States and Organizations

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

---

The Technical Debate: Encryption and Backdoors

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

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

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

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

How Chat Control Affects Encryption

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

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

The Risks of Weakening Encryption

1. Compromised Security for All Users

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

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

2. Undermining Trust in Digital Services

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

3. Ineffectiveness Against Skilled Adversaries

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

Signal’s Response and Stance

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

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

Understanding Backdoors

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

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

The Slippery Slope Argument

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

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

Potential Technological Alternatives

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

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

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

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

---

Global Reactions and the Debate in Europe

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

Support for Chat Control

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

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

Opposition within the EU

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

Germany

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

Netherlands

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

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

Privacy Advocacy Groups

European Digital Rights (EDRi)

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

Politicians and Activists

Patrick Breyer

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

Global Reactions

International Organizations

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

Technology Companies

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

The Broader Debate

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

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

Public Opinion

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

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

---

Possible Consequences for Messaging Services

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

Impact on Encrypted Messaging Services

Signal and Similar Platforms

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

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

Potential Blocking or Limiting of Services

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

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

Effects on Smaller Providers

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

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

User Experience and Trust

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

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

Technical and Security Implications

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

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

Impact on Businesses and Professional Communications

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

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

Economic Consequences

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

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

Responses from Service Providers

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

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

Possible Adaptations

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

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

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

---

What Happens Next? The Future of Chat Control

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

Current Status of Legislation

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

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

Key Influencing Factors

1. Legal Challenges and Compliance with EU Law

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

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

2. Technological Feasibility

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

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

3. Political Dynamics

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

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

4. Industry Responses

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

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

Possible Scenarios

Optimistic Outcome:

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

Pessimistic Outcome:

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

Middle Ground:

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

How to Stay Informed and Protect Your Privacy

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

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

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

The Global Perspective

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

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

Looking Ahead

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

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

---

Conclusion

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

---

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

Read more:

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

@ 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 ```

@ 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.

@ bf95e1a4:ebdcc848

This is a part of the Bitcoin Infinity Academy course on Knut Svanholm's book Bitcoin: Sovereignty Through Mathematics. For more information, check out our Geyser page!

An Immaculate Conception

Some concepts in nature are harder for us humans to understand than others. How complex things can emerge out of simpler ones is one of those concepts. A termite colony, for instance, has a complex cooling system at its lower levels. No single termite knows how it works. Completely unaware of the end results, they build complex mounds and nests, shelter tubes to protect their paths, and networks of subterranean tunnels to connect their dirt cities. Everything seems organized and designed, but it is not. Evolution has equipped the termite with a pheromone receptor that tells the termite what task he ought to engage himself in by simply counting the number of neighboring termites doing the same thing. If there’s a surplus of workers in an area, nearby termites become warriors, and so on. Complex structures emerge from simple rules. The fractal patterns found all around nature are another example. Fractals look complex, but in reality, they’re not. They’re basically algorithms — the same pattern, repeated over and over again with a slightly modified starting point. The human brain is an excellent example of a complex thing that evolved out of simpler things, and we humans still have a hard time accepting that it wasn’t designed. Religions, which themselves are emergent systems spawned out of human interaction, have come up with a plethora of explanations for how we came to be. All sorts of wild origin stories have been more widely accepted than the simple explanation that our complexities just emerged out of simpler things following a set of rules that nature itself provided our world with.

Complex systems emerge out of human interactions all the time. The phone in your pocket is the result of a century of mostly free global market competition, and no single human could ever have come up with the entire thing. The device, together with its internet connection, is capable of a lot more than the sum of its individual parts. A pocket-sized gadget that can grant instant access to almost all of the world’s literature, music, and film, which fits in your pocket, was an unthinkable science fiction a mere twenty years ago. Bitcoin, first described in Satoshi Nakamoto’s whitepaper ten years before these words were written, was designed to be decentralized. Still, it wasn’t until years later that the network started to show actual proof of this. Sound money, or absolute digital scarcity, emerged out of the network not only because of its technical design. How Bitcoin’s first ten years actually unfolded played a huge part in how true decentralization could emerge, and this is also the main reason why the experiment cannot be replicated. Scarcity on the internet could only be invented once. Satoshi’s disappearance was Bitcoin’s first step towards true decentralization. No marketing whatsoever and the randomness of who hopped onto the train first were the steps that followed. Bitcoin truly had an immaculate conception.

The network has shown a remarkable resistance to change over the last few years especially, and its current state might be its last incarnation given the size of the network and the 95% agreement threshold in its consensus rules. It might never change again. In that case, an entirely new, complex life form will have emerged out of a simple set of rules. Even if small upgrades are implemented in the future, the 21 million coin supply cap is set in stone forever. Bitcoin is not for humans to have opinions about — it exists regardless of what anyone thinks about it, and it ought to be studied rather than discussed. We don’t know what true scarcity and a truly global, anonymous free market will do to our species yet, but we are about to find out. It is naïve to think otherwise. Various futurists and doomsday prophets have been focused on the dangers of the impending general artificial intelligence singularity lately, warning us about the point of no return, whereupon an artificial intelligence will be able to improve itself faster than any human could. Such a scenario could, as news anchor Ron Burgundy would have put it, escalate quickly. This may or may not be of real concern to us, but meanwhile, right under our noses, another type of unstoppable digital life has emerged, and it is already changing the behavior and preferences of millions of people around the globe. This is probably bad news for big corporations and governments but good news for the little guy looking for a little freedom. At least, that’s what those of us who lean towards the ideas of the Austrian school of economics believe. This time around, we will find out whether this is the case or not. No one knows what it will lead to and what new truths will emerge out of this new reality.

Unlike the termite, we humans are able to experience the grandeur of our progress. We can look in awe at the Sistine Chapel or the pyramids, and we can delve into the technicalities and brief history of Bitcoin and discover new ways of thinking about value along the way. Money is the language in which we express value to each other through space and time. Now, that language is spoken by computers. Value expressed in this language can’t be diluted through inflation or counterfeiting any longer. It is a language that is borderless, permissionless, peer-to-peer, anonymous (if you have the skills), unreplicable, completely scarce, non-dilutable, unchangeable, untouchable, undeniable, fungible, and free for everyone on Earth to use. It is a language for the future and it emerged out of a specific set of events in the past. All languages are examples of complex systems emerging out of simpler things, and Bitcoin evolved just as organically as any other human language did.

Decentralization is hard to achieve. Really hard. When it comes to claims of decentralization, a “don’t trust, verify” approach to the validity of such claims will help you filter out the noise. So, how can the validity of Bitcoin’s decentralization be verified? It’s a tricky question because decentralization is not a binary thing, like life or death, but rather a very difficult concept to define. However, the most fundamental concepts in Bitcoin, like the 21 million cap on coin issuance or the ten-minute block interval as a result of the difficulty adjustment and the Proof of Work algorithm, have not changed since very early on in the history of the network. This lack of change, which is arguably Bitcoin’s biggest strength, has been achieved through the consensus rules, which define what the blockchain is. Some special mechanisms (for example, BIP9) are sometimes used to deploy changes to the consensus rules. These mechanisms use a threshold when counting blocks that signal for a certain upgrade. For example, the upgrade “Segregated Witness” activated in a node when 95% or more of the blocks in a retarget period signaled support. Bitcoin has displayed a remarkable immutability through the years, and it is highly unlikely that this would have been the case if the game-theoretical mechanisms that enable its decentralized governance model hadn’t worked, given the many incentives to cheat that always seem to corrupt monetary systems. In other words, the longer the system seems to be working, the higher the likelihood that it actually does.

Satoshi set in stone the length of the halving period — a very important aspect of Bitcoin’s issuance schedule and initial distribution. During the first four years of Bitcoin’s existence, fifty new coins were issued every ten minutes up until the first block reward halving four years later. Every four years, this reward is halved so that the issuance rate goes down by fifty percent. This effectively means that half of all the Bitcoin that will ever exist was mined during the first four years of the network’s life, one fourth during its next four years, and so on. At the time of writing, we’re a little more than a year from the third halving. After that, only 6.25 Bitcoin will be minted every ten minutes as opposed to 50, which was the initial rate. What this seems to do is to create hype cycles for Bitcoin’s adoption. Every time the price of Bitcoin booms and then busts down to a level above where it started, a hype cycle takes place. Bitcoin had no marketing whatsoever, so awareness of it had to be spread through some other mechanism. When a bull run begins, people start talking about it, which leads to even more people buying due to fear of missing out (FOMO), which inevitably causes the price to rise even more rapidly. This leads to more FOMO, and on and on the bull market goes until it suddenly ends, and the price crashes down to somewhere around, or slightly above, the level it was at before the bull run started. Unlike what is true for most other assets, Bitcoin never really crashes all the way. Why? Because every time a hype cycle occurs, some more people learn about Bitcoin’s fundamentals and manage to resist the urge to sell, even when almost all hope seems lost. They understand that these bull markets are a reoccurring thing due to the nature of the protocol. These cycles create new waves of evangelists who start promoting Bitcoin simply because of what they stand to gain from a price increase. In a sense, the protocol itself pays for its own promotion in this way. This organic marketing creates a lot of noise and confusion, too, as a lot of people who don’t seem to understand how Bitcoin works are often very outspoken about it despite their lack of knowledge. Red herrings, such as altcoins and Bitcoin forks, are then weeded out naturally during bear markets. Every time a bull market happens, a new generation of Bitcoiners is born.

The four-year period between halvings seems to serve a deliberate purpose. Satoshi could just as well have programmed a smooth issuance curve into the Bitcoin protocol, but he didn’t. As events unfold, it seems that he had good reason for this since these hype cycles provide a very effective onboarding mechanism, and they seem to be linked to the halvings. They certainly make Bitcoin volatile, but remember that in this early stage, the volatility is needed in order for these hype cycles to happen. Later on, when Bitcoin’s stock-to-flow ratio is higher, the seas will calm, and its volatility level will go down. In truth, it already has. The latest almost 80% price drop was far from the worst we’ve seen in Bitcoin. This technology is still in its infancy, and it is very likely that we’ll see a lot more volatility before mainstream adoption, or hyperbitcoinization, truly happens.

About the Bitcoin Infinity Academy

The Bitcoin Infinity Academy is an educational project built around Knut Svanholm’s books about Bitcoin and Austrian Economics. Each week, a whole chapter from one of the books is released for free on Highlighter, accompanied by a video in which Knut and Luke de Wolf discuss that chapter’s ideas. You can join the discussions by signing up for one of the courses on our Geyser page. Signed books, monthly calls, and lots of other benefits are also available.

@ 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.

@ 599f67f7:21fb3ea9

LNDhub te permite importar fácilmente una billetera en aplicaciones compatibles. Si bien puedes guardar tu billetera Bitcoin Txoko LNbits en tu teléfono como una aplicación web progresiva (PWA), una aplicación nativa como Zeus o BlueWallet ofrece una mejor experiencia de usuario así como un mayor nivel de seguridad. Con Alby, también puedes importar la billetera a la extensión de tu navegador para facilitar los pagos Lightning en la web y para los zaps de Nostr. Por suerte para nosotros, todas estas billeteras hablan un lenguaje común llamado LNDhub.

En esta guía cubriremos cómo importar la billetera a tu navegador y a tu móvil. Si quieres usar tu billetera tanto en el navegador como en tu móvil, empieza con la configuración de Alby, ya que uno de los pasos te permitirá importar fácilmente tu billetera también a Zeus. Pero si sólo te interesa utilizar la billetera en tu móvil, puedes pasar directamente a la sección de Zeus.

Alby

nostr:nprofile1qqsyv47lazt9h6ycp2fsw270khje5egjgsrdkrupjg27u796g7f5k0s8jq7y6 es una extensión de navegador que lleva Lightning y Nostr a tu navegador. Utilizando el protocolo WebLN, esta extensión puede detectar facturas LN en paginas web y pagarlas, así como posibilita iniciar sesión en sitios web con Lightning. También puedes fijar presupuestos para tus sitios favoritos de Lightning. Por otro lado también puedes utilizarla para firmar en Nostr utilizando NIP-07, lo cual es mucho más seguro que ingresar tu clave privada en clientes web.

¿Qué necesito?

• Un navegador web que soporte extensiones Chrome o Firefox
• Acceso a tu billetera LNbits. Si todavía no tienes una billetera LNbits, dirígete a nuestra página de billeteras y crea una
• (Opcional) Un dispositivo móvil para configurar Zeus

1. Habilita la extensión LNDhub en tu LNbits wallet

Dirígete a tu billetera LNbits. Haz clic en Extensiones y habilita la extensión LNDhub. Una vez se haya habilitado, dirígete a la página de extensión de LNDhub.

2. Instala la extensión Alby

Dirígete a getalby.com y instala la extensión desde el store de extensiones del navegador. Configura tu contraseña de desbloqueo y guárdala en un lugar seguro.

3. Importar a Alby

(Esta es una billetera de prueba. No hay fondos en ella. ¡No muestres a nadie tu URI de exportación real!)

En la siguiente pantalla, elige Conectar y luego elige LNDhub. Vuelve a tu extensión LNDhub y copia la URL de conexión. Pégala en el campo URI de exportación de LNDhub. Pulsa continuar. ¡Ahora deberías haber estado conectado a tu billetera de LNbits con LNDhub!

💡 Puedes elegir entre la URL de la factura (Invoice URL) y la URL de administración (Admin URL). Le dan a Alby diferentes permisos para interactuar con tu cartera de LNbits.

• La URL de factura te permite crear facturas y recibir pagos
• La URL de administración también te permite enviar pagos

4. Configurar Zeus con Alby (opcional)

Ahora que ya has conectado tu LNbits con Alby, también puedes importarlo de una manera sencilla a Zeus con Alby. Abre la extensión, haz cilc en el nombre de tu billetera y navega a la configuración de la cuenta. En Wallet Settings > General se encuentra la opción de conectar tu billetera móvil. Al pulsar conectar, se mostrará un código QR para escanear desde Zeus.

Si no tienes instalada Zeus con anterioridad, dirígete a zeusln.app y descarga la aplicación de Zeus para tu sistema operativo móvil.

Una vez tengas descargado Zeus, entra en Configuración > Añadir un nuevo nodo. Aquí puedes escanear el código QR que te muestra Alby para importar la billetera.

Voilà! Ahora tienes el poder de Lightning al alcance de la mano ¿Ya te sientes como un dios?

Zeus

nostr:nprofile1qqsrf5h4ya83jk8u6t9jgc76h6kalz3plp9vusjpm2ygqgalqhxgp9g84ctjf es una formidable aplicación de código abierto que permite conectar tu propio nodo a tu dispositivo movil. Es compatible con todas las principales implementaciones de nodos Lightning, como LND, CLN y Eclair, así como conexiones a través de Tor y clearnet. Recientemente también han anunciado su propio LSP (Lightning Service Provider).

¿Qué necesito?

• Teléfono Android o iOS
• Otro dispositivo en el que puede acceder a tu billetera LNbits (para mostrar el código QR para escanear)
• Acceso a tu billetera LNbits. Si todavía no tienes una billetera LNbits, dirígete a nuestra página de billeteras y crea una

1. Descarga Zeus

Puedes descargar la aplicación Zeus para tu sistema operativo aquí.

2. Habilita la extensión LNDhub en tu billetera LNbits

Dirígete a tu billetera LNbits. Haz clic en Extensiones y habilita la extensión LNDhub. Una vez habilitada, abre la pagina de la extensión LNDhub.

3. Importar a Zeus

Ve a Configuración > Añadir un nuevo nodo en Zeus.

Escanea la cartera que quieras instalar.

💡 Puedes elegir entre la URL de la factura (Invoice URL) y la URL de administración (Admin URL). - La URL de la factura te da permiso para generar facturas y recibir pagos. - La URL de administración también te permite enviar pagos.

Una vez que hayas escaneado el código QR, todos los campos en Zeus deberían rellenarse automáticamente. También puedes añadir un apodo para tu billetera.

¡Ahora puedes guardar la configuración del nodo y controlar la billetera desde tu teléfono!

Extra

Zeus también ofrece funciones interesantes como temas personalizados, conversiones de precios, modo acechador y verificación biométrica. Estos temas están más allá del alcance de esta guía, ¡juega en la aplicación y descubre todas esas características por ti mismo!

@ 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.

@ 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

@ 2101a7ec:d9d8f2db

Ghostty is terminal manager with GPU acceleration and great looks. It works mostly out of the box, but you might want to do some setups to tailor it to your particular needs.

Here is how I set it up.

Installation

I won't spend much time on installation details, I installed it using brew there are multiple installation options, surprisingly flatpack is not within the options at the moment. For further details please check ghostty installation instructions.

Configuration

Config file is available on these locations

$HOME/Library/Application Support/com.mitchellh.ghostty/config

$XDG_CONFIG_HOME/ghostty/config

I use $XDG_CONFIG_HOME as I keep all my config there.

Configuration reference is available on line. And can be generated from the command line doing

ghostty +show-config --default --docs

And finally to list available themes ghostty +list-themes.

This is my config, it's available with my dotfiles

```config

~/.config/ghostty/config

to show the default configuration with documentation.

ghostty +show-config --default --docs

font-family = "JetBrains Mono"

font-size = 14

Run ghostty +list-themes to browse available themes.

theme = SynthwaveAlpha cursor-style = block

background-opacity = 0.96 background-blur-radius = 40

shell integration.

shell-integration = bash shell-integration-features = cursor, sudo, title

macos-titlebar-style = tabs

Auto-update Ghostty when a new release is available.

auto-update = download

mouse-hide-while-typing = true

keymaps

keybind = global:cmd+`=toggle_quick_terminal

keybind = cmd+left=previous_tab keybind = cmd+right=next_tab

byobu keybinds fix

macos-option-as-alt = left keybind = alt+left=unbind keybind = alt+right=unbind

quit-after-last-window-closed = true window-new-tab-position = end

```

I had some issues with SSH, so I added this to my ~/.ssh/config which fixed my issues.

ssh Host * # ghostty https://ghostty.org/docs/help/terminfo SetEnv TERM=xterm-256color # end ghostty

@ 592295cf:413a0db9

[07/10 week]

Thinking about it, even the protocol is a cathedral, Rabble in the speech in Riga on Bluesky.

He said the protocol is a bazaar. But you have to converge on the scheme in the NIPs or between Apps.

NIPs for example are like Luther's 95 theses, but they change continuously and adapt, but they always remain those 95.

Maybe that Pr on theother curve keys could lead to saying this is "nostr" these others are similar. Creating more points, but I just think it would have led to endless diatribes.

What will be of the protocol and who knows. He can do everything or maybe nothing and from tomorrow we will see and it will be, it will be what it will be. Italian Song

Notifications with nostter are not hidden, they are in your feed and this is good, you always know if someone has searched for you. While in the others you do not know.

---

I saw a sliver of light pass by it was Unanimity.

It's a very stupid idea, it takes a long time. it's basically a community + channel, where you post the channel in the community and start talking about that topic in the channel. The channel is an approved message. I made musicbook channel, it's the collection of albums released on Friday. The idea of ​​also making a blogger channel, where to put long-form articles.

Following nostr trending on Openvibe social, with a new profile, the Lost One, sad, in this One follow fiatjaf, means I won't bother him anymore . Now I follow 62 profiles, it's an account that I will use to read the notes of the top profiles. Curious if this number will grow enormously or is there a spectre.

The strength of the protocol is the developers if they collaborate together, otherwise it can still work, everyone goes their own way, but it's like saying I want to make my own fence.

One who in his long form doing an analysis of the various social networks. npub19mq9swna4dkhlm3jaux4yhgv5kjj556lkfhv3qnjtyh0kcljph6s88e295 Nostr is all based on Bitcoin. The difficult thing is Bitcoin not Nostr and he says so.

Controversies are useful, or my doubts, but maybe people who can't write code don't understand much, the so-called end users. No one is an end user at this time. The end user doesn't care about the person behind it, only having their own service, if the service is good they also do promotion, they become sponsors. We have seen in recent months sponsoring a Nostr app, result a small attack can damage that app. But the strength of having all these apps is that the other app doesn't have that problem. Spam attack example. The problem is that you can't sponsor an ecosystem, so it becomes difficult to suggest 10 apps to download. The best 10 apps of Nostr and the other 100, there is no easy way out. It's a bit like proposing a new place in NY, then everyone goes to that place and it loses a bit. What the sponsor must understand is that Nostr has only one "one shot".

I saw a video on Nostr of two people posting content on social media, making a review. Not bad, compared to the previous video, that Nostr doesn't even have a token. It doesn't give me a sign up. The main feature they say is a platform or at least they reviewed damus, damus for Bitcoin maxi. And so Nostr is populated by people who Number go up, only fiat thought they would say on Nostr. It's true in part there are those obsessed, even the non-obsessed are obsessed.

How nice it would be to call them NPs Nostr protocol specification, today supertestnet called them that. (the nice thing is that they are pronounced the same way).

@ ae1008d2:a166d760

This is part one in a series of long-form content of my ideas as to what we are entering into in my opinion;The Roaring '20's 2.0 (working title). I hope you'll join me on this journey together.
"History does not repeat itself, but it often rhymes"; - Samuel Clemens, aka Mark Twain. My only class I received an A+ in high school was history, this opened up the opportunity for me to enroll in an AP (college level) history class my senior year. There was an inherent nature for me to study history. Another quote I found to live by; "If we do not study history, we are bound to repeat it", a paraphrased quote by the many great philosphers of old from Edmund Burke, George Santayana and even Winston Churchill, all pulling from the same King Solomon quote; "What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun". My curiousity of human actions, psychological and therefore economical behavior, has benefitted me greatly throughout my life and career, at such a young age. Being able to 'see around the curves' ahead I thought was a gift many had, but was sorely mistaken. People are just built different. One, if not my hardest action for me is to share. I just do things; act, often without even thinking about writing down or sharing in anyway shape or form what I just did here with friends, what we just built or how we formed these startups, etc., I've finally made the time, mainly for myself, to share my thoughts and ideas as to where we are at, and what we can do moving forward. It's very easy for us living a sovereign-lifestyle in Bitcoin, Nostr and other P2P, cryptographically-signed sovereign tools and tech-stacks alike, permissionless and self-hostable, to take all these tools for granted. We just live with them. Use them everyday. Do you own property? Do you have to take care of the cattle everyday? To live a sovereign life is tough, but most rewarding. As mentioned above, I'm diving into the details in a several part series as to what the roaring '20's were about, how it got to the point it did, and the inevitable outcome we all know what came to be. How does this possibly repeat itself almost exactly a century later? How does Bitcoin play a role? Are we all really going to be replaced by AI robots (again, history rhymes here)? Time will tell, but I think most of us actually using the tools will also forsee many of these possible outcomes, as it's why we are using many of these tools today. The next parts of this series will be released periodically, maybe once per month, maybe once per quarter. I'll also be releasing these on other platforms like Medium for reach, but Nostr will always be first, most important and prioritized.
I'll leave you with one of my favorite quotes I've lived by from one of the greatest traders of all time, especially during this roaring '20's era, Jesse Livermore; "Money is made by sitting, not trading".

@ 71550e6c:b64c37a9

Just do the same as this video shows.

Here's the video: https://cdn.azzamo.net/7cdcc2718f1e15eb03e323f62e07582b4001da273aa5c21475d680f02b32f0e9.mp4

One caveat: do not trust the draft will be kept here after you close nak fs. Wait, no, it definitely won't stay here, but I'm not even sure it will stay here if you only navigate away and come back later, FUSE is weird and I didn't test.

But at least it should work for copy-pasting. Or writing everything in one go.

@ 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.