@ cb4352cd:a16422d7

The world of online events has seen unprecedented growth in recent years, with virtual conferences breaking new ground and even setting Guinness World Records. As digital gatherings become more ambitious, some events aim not just to inform and engage but to make history.

Notable Guinness World Records in Online Events

World of Tanks: The Largest Online Game Server Attendance
In 2011, the multiplayer online game World of Tanks set a Guinness World Record for the highest number of players simultaneously online on a single server—91,311 users. This record highlighted the immense popularity and scalability of virtual gaming communities. (ixbt.games)

The Largest Cybersecurity Online Conference
In 2020, KnowBe4 organized a cybersecurity conference that gathered more than 30,000 participants. This event set the record for the largest online conference in the field, demonstrating the power of virtual events in bringing together professionals from around the world. This achievement was officially recognized by the Guinness World Records.

The Most Attended Virtual Concert
Another major milestone in online events was set by rapper Travis Scott, whose Fortnite virtual concert drew over 12 million concurrent viewers, making it the most attended digital concert ever. This event also earned recognition from the Guinness World Records for its groundbreaking achievement in digital entertainment.

Beyond Banking Conference: Aiming for a New World Record

In 2025, Beyond Banking Conference is set to challenge existing records by organizing what could become the largest online gathering in the blockchain and AI space. With an ambitious goal of attracting over 100,000 participants, the event will bring together industry leaders, innovators, and enthusiasts to discuss the future of blockchain, artificial intelligence, and decentralized finance (DeFi).

By leveraging cutting-edge technology and strategic partnerships, Wenix aims to redefine what’s possible for online conferences. If successful, this event will not only break records but also set a new standard for global digital summits.

This isn’t just another virtual conference—it’s a revolution in the making.

@ e3ba5e1a:5e433365

Prelude

I wrote this post differently than any of my others. It started with a discussion with AI on an OPSec-inspired review of separation of powers, and evolved into quite an exciting debate! I asked Grok to write up a summary in my overall writing style, which it got pretty well. I've decided to post it exactly as-is. Ultimately, I think there are two solid ideas driving my stance here:

1. Perfect is the enemy of the good
2. Failure is the crucible of success

Beyond that, just some hard-core belief in freedom, separation of powers, and operating from self-interest.

Intro

Alright, buckle up. I’ve been chewing on this idea for a while, and it’s time to spit it out. Let’s look at the U.S. government like I’d look at a codebase under a cybersecurity audit—OPSEC style, no fluff. Forget the endless debates about what politicians should do. That’s noise. I want to talk about what they can do, the raw powers baked into the system, and why we should stop pretending those powers are sacred. If there’s a hole, either patch it or exploit it. No half-measures. And yeah, I’m okay if the whole thing crashes a bit—failure’s a feature, not a bug.

The Filibuster: A Security Rule with No Teeth

You ever see a firewall rule that’s more theater than protection? That’s the Senate filibuster. Everyone acts like it’s this untouchable guardian of democracy, but here’s the deal: a simple majority can torch it any day. It’s not a law; it’s a Senate preference, like choosing tabs over spaces. When people call killing it the “nuclear option,” I roll my eyes. Nuclear? It’s a button labeled “press me.” If a party wants it gone, they’ll do it. So why the dance?

I say stop playing games. Get rid of the filibuster. If you’re one of those folks who thinks it’s the only thing saving us from tyranny, fine—push for a constitutional amendment to lock it in. That’s a real patch, not a Post-it note. Until then, it’s just a vulnerability begging to be exploited. Every time a party threatens to nuke it, they’re admitting it’s not essential. So let’s stop pretending and move on.

Supreme Court Packing: Because Nine’s Just a Number

Here’s another fun one: the Supreme Court. Nine justices, right? Sounds official. Except it’s not. The Constitution doesn’t say nine—it’s silent on the number. Congress could pass a law tomorrow to make it 15, 20, or 42 (hitchhiker’s reference, anyone?). Packing the court is always on the table, and both sides know it. It’s like a root exploit just sitting there, waiting for someone to log in.

So why not call the bluff? If you’re in power—say, Trump’s back in the game—say, “I’m packing the court unless we amend the Constitution to fix it at nine.” Force the issue. No more shadowboxing. And honestly? The court’s got way too much power anyway. It’s not supposed to be a super-legislature, but here we are, with justices’ ideologies driving the bus. That’s a bug, not a feature. If the court weren’t such a kingmaker, packing it wouldn’t even matter. Maybe we should be talking about clipping its wings instead of just its size.

The Executive Should Go Full Klingon

Let’s talk presidents. I’m not saying they should wear Klingon armor and start shouting “Qapla’!”—though, let’s be real, that’d be awesome. I’m saying the executive should use every scrap of power the Constitution hands them. Enforce the laws you agree with, sideline the ones you don’t. If Congress doesn’t like it, they’ve got tools: pass new laws, override vetoes, or—here’s the big one—cut the budget. That’s not chaos; that’s the system working as designed.

Right now, the real problem isn’t the president overreaching; it’s the bureaucracy. It’s like a daemon running in the background, eating CPU and ignoring the user. The president’s supposed to be the one steering, but the administrative state’s got its own agenda. Let the executive flex, push the limits, and force Congress to check it. Norms? Pfft. The Constitution’s the spec sheet—stick to it.

Let the System Crash

Here’s where I get a little spicy: I’m totally fine if the government grinds to a halt. Deadlock isn’t a disaster; it’s a feature. If the branches can’t agree, let the president veto, let Congress starve the budget, let enforcement stall. Don’t tell me about “essential services.” Nothing’s so critical it can’t take a breather. Shutdowns force everyone to the table—debate, compromise, or expose who’s dropping the ball. If the public loses trust? Good. They’ll vote out the clowns or live with the circus they elected.

Think of it like a server crash. Sometimes you need a hard reboot to clear the cruft. If voters keep picking the same bad admins, well, the country gets what it deserves. Failure’s the best teacher—way better than limping along on autopilot.

States Are the Real MVPs

If the feds fumble, states step up. Right now, states act like junior devs waiting for the lead engineer to sign off. Why? Federal money. It’s a leash, and it’s tight. Cut that cash, and states will remember they’re autonomous. Some will shine, others will tank—looking at you, California. And I’m okay with that. Let people flee to better-run states. No bailouts, no excuses. States are like competing startups: the good ones thrive, the bad ones pivot or die.

Could it get uneven? Sure. Some states might turn into sci-fi utopias while others look like a post-apocalyptic vidya game. That’s the point—competition sorts it out. Citizens can move, markets adjust, and failure’s a signal to fix your act.

Chaos Isn’t the Enemy

Yeah, this sounds messy. States ignoring federal law, external threats poking at our seams, maybe even a constitutional crisis. I’m not scared. The Supreme Court’s there to referee interstate fights, and Congress sets the rules for state-to-state play. But if it all falls apart? Still cool. States can sort it without a babysitter—it’ll be ugly, but freedom’s worth it. External enemies? They’ll either unify us or break us. If we can’t rally, we don’t deserve the win.

Centralizing power to avoid this is like rewriting your app in a single thread to prevent race conditions—sure, it’s simpler, but you’re begging for a deadlock. Decentralized chaos lets states experiment, lets people escape, lets markets breathe. States competing to cut regulations to attract businesses? That’s a race to the bottom for red tape, but a race to the top for innovation—workers might gripe, but they’ll push back, and the tension’s healthy. Bring it—let the cage match play out. The Constitution’s checks are enough if we stop coddling the system.

Why This Matters

I’m not pitching a utopia. I’m pitching a stress test. The U.S. isn’t a fragile porcelain doll; it’s a rugged piece of hardware built to take some hits. Let it fail a little—filibuster, court, feds, whatever. Patch the holes with amendments if you want, or lean into the grind. Either way, stop fearing the crash. It’s how we debug the republic.

So, what’s your take? Ready to let the system rumble, or got a better way to secure the code? Hit me up—I’m all ears.

@ 6e0ea5d6:0327f353

Ascolta.

We live in times where the average man is measured by the speeches he gives — not by the commitments he keeps. People talk about dreams, goals, promises… but what truly remains is what’s honored in the silence of small gestures, in actions that don’t seek applause, in attitudes unseen — yet speak volumes.

Punctuality, for example. Showing up on time isn’t about the clock. It’s about respect. Respect for another’s time, yes — but more importantly, respect for one’s own word. A man who is late without reason is already running late in his values. And the one who excuses his own lateness with sweet justifications slowly gets used to mediocrity.

Keeping your word is more than fulfilling promises. It is sealing, with the mouth, what the body must later uphold. Every time a man commits to something, he creates a moral debt with his own dignity. And to break that commitment is to declare bankruptcy — not in the eyes of others, but in front of himself.

And debts? Even the small ones — or especially the small ones — are precise thermometers of character. A forgotten sum, an unpaid favor, a commitment left behind… all of these reveal the structure of the inner building that man resides in. He who neglects the small is merely rehearsing for his future collapse.

Life, contrary to what the reckless say, is not built on grand deeds. It is built with small bricks, laid with almost obsessive precision. The truly great man is the one who respects the details — recognizing in them a code of conduct.

In Sicily, especially in the streets of Palermo, I learned early on that there is more nobility in paying a five-euro debt on time than in flaunting riches gained without word, without honor, without dignity.

As they say in Palermo: L’uomo si conosce dalle piccole cose.

So, amico mio, Don’t talk to me about greatness if you can’t show up on time. Don’t talk to me about respect if your word is fickle. And above all, don’t talk to me about honor if you still owe what you once promised — no matter how small.

Thank you for reading, my friend!

If this message resonated with you, consider leaving your "🥃" as a token of appreciation.

A toast to our family!

@ 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

@ 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

@ c1e9ab3a:9cb56b43

Prepared for Off-World Visitors by the Risan Institute of Cultural Heritage

Welcome to Risa, the jewel of the Alpha Quadrant, celebrated across the Federation for its tranquility, pleasure, and natural splendor. But what many travelers do not know is that Risa’s current harmony was not inherited—it was forged. Beneath the songs of surf and the serenity of our resorts lies a history rich in conflict, transformation, and enduring wisdom.

We offer this briefing not merely as a tale of our past, but as an invitation to understand the spirit of our people and the roots of our peace.

I. A World at the Crossroads

Before its admittance into the United Federation of Planets, Risa was an independent and vulnerable world situated near volatile borders of early galactic powers. Its lush climate, mineral wealth, and open society made it a frequent target for raiders and an object of interest for imperial expansion.

The Risan peoples were once fragmented, prone to philosophical and political disunity. In our early records, this period is known as the Winds of Splintering. We suffered invasions, betrayals, and the slow erosion of trust in our own traditions.

II. The Coming of the Vulcans

It was during this period of instability that a small delegation of Vulcan philosophers, adherents to the teachings of Surak, arrived on Risa. They did not come as conquerors, nor even as ambassadors, but as seekers of peace.

These emissaries of logic saw in Risa the potential for a society not driven by suppression of emotion, as Vulcan had chosen, but by the balance of joy and discipline. While many Vulcans viewed Risa’s culture as frivolous, these followers of Surak saw the seed of a different path: one in which beauty itself could be a pillar of peace.

The Risan tradition of meditative dance, artistic expression, and communal love resonated with Vulcan teachings of unity and inner control. From this unlikely exchange was born the Ricin Doctrine—the belief that peace is sustained not only through logic or strength, but through deliberate joy, shared vulnerability, and readiness without aggression.

III. Betazed and the Trial of Truth

During the same era, early contact with the people of Betazed brought both inspiration and tension. A Betazoid expedition, under the guise of diplomacy, was discovered to be engaging in deep telepathic influence and information extraction. The Risan people, who valued consent above all else, responded not with anger, but with clarity.

A council of Ricin philosophers invited the Betazoid delegation into a shared mind ceremony—a practice in which both cultures exposed their thoughts in mutual vulnerability. The result was not scandal, but transformation. From that moment forward, a bond was formed, and Risa’s model of ethical emotional expression and consensual empathy became influential in shaping Betazed’s own peace philosophies.

IV. Confronting Marauders and Empires

Despite these philosophical strides, Risa’s path was anything but tranquil.

• Orion Syndicate raiders viewed Risa as ripe for exploitation, and for decades, cities were sacked, citizens enslaved, and resources plundered. In response, Risa formed the Sanctum Guard, not a military in the traditional sense, but a force of trained defenders schooled in both physical technique and psychological dissuasion. The Ricin martial arts, combining beauty with lethality, were born from this necessity.

• Andorian expansionism also tested Risa’s sovereignty. Though smaller in scale, skirmishes over territorial claims forced Risa to adopt planetary defense grids and formalize diplomatic protocols that balanced assertiveness with grace. It was through these conflicts that Risa developed the art of the ceremonial yield—a symbolic concession used to diffuse hostility while retaining honor.

• Romulan subterfuge nearly undid Risa from within. A corrupt Romulan envoy installed puppet leaders in one of our equatorial provinces. These agents sought to erode Risa’s social cohesion through fear and misinformation. But Ricin scholars countered the strategy not with rebellion, but with illumination: they released a network of truths, publicly broadcasting internal thoughts and civic debates to eliminate secrecy. The Romulan operation collapsed under the weight of exposure.

• Even militant Vulcan splinter factions, during the early Vulcan-Andorian conflicts, attempted to turn Risa into a staging ground, pressuring local governments to support Vulcan supremacy. The betrayal struck deep—but Risa resisted through diplomacy, invoking Surak’s true teachings and exposing the heresy of their logic-corrupted mission.

V. Enlightenment Through Preparedness

These trials did not harden us into warriors. They refined us into guardians of peace. Our enlightenment came not from retreat, but from engagement—tempered by readiness.

• We train our youth in the arts of balance: physical defense, emotional expression, and ethical reasoning.
• We teach our history without shame, so that future generations will not repeat our errors.
• We host our guests with joy, not because we are naïve, but because we know that to celebrate life fully is the greatest act of resistance against fear.

Risa did not become peaceful by denying the reality of conflict. We became peaceful by mastering our response to it.

And in so doing, we offered not just pleasure to the stars—but wisdom.

We welcome you not only to our beaches, but to our story.

May your time here bring you not only rest—but understanding.

– Risan Institute of Cultural Heritage, in collaboration with the Council of Enlightenment and the Ricin Circle of Peacekeepers

@ 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).

@ 91bea5cd:1df4451c

Básico

bash lsblk # Lista todos os diretorios montados.

Para criar o sistema de arquivos:

bash mkfs.btrfs -L "ThePool" -f /dev/sdx

Criando um subvolume:

bash btrfs subvolume create SubVol

Montando Sistema de Arquivos:

bash mount -o compress=zlib,subvol=SubVol,autodefrag /dev/sdx /mnt

Lista os discos formatados no diretório:

bash btrfs filesystem show /mnt

Adiciona novo disco ao subvolume:

bash btrfs device add -f /dev/sdy /mnt

Lista novamente os discos do subvolume:

bash btrfs filesystem show /mnt

Exibe uso dos discos do subvolume:

bash btrfs filesystem df /mnt

Balancea os dados entre os discos sobre raid1:

bash btrfs filesystem balance start -dconvert=raid1 -mconvert=raid1 /mnt

Scrub é uma passagem por todos os dados e metadados do sistema de arquivos e verifica as somas de verificação. Se uma cópia válida estiver disponível (perfis de grupo de blocos replicados), a danificada será reparada. Todas as cópias dos perfis replicados são validadas.

iniciar o processo de depuração :

bash btrfs scrub start /mnt

ver o status do processo de depuração Btrfs em execução:

bash btrfs scrub status /mnt

ver o status do scrub Btrfs para cada um dos dispositivos

bash btrfs scrub status -d / data btrfs scrub cancel / data

Para retomar o processo de depuração do Btrfs que você cancelou ou pausou:

btrfs scrub resume / data

Listando os subvolumes:

bash btrfs subvolume list /Reports

Criando um instantâneo dos subvolumes:

Aqui, estamos criando um instantâneo de leitura e gravação chamado snap de marketing do subvolume de marketing.

bash btrfs subvolume snapshot /Reports/marketing /Reports/marketing-snap

Além disso, você pode criar um instantâneo somente leitura usando o sinalizador -r conforme mostrado. O marketing-rosnap é um instantâneo somente leitura do subvolume de marketing

bash btrfs subvolume snapshot -r /Reports/marketing /Reports/marketing-rosnap

Forçar a sincronização do sistema de arquivos usando o utilitário 'sync'

Para forçar a sincronização do sistema de arquivos, invoque a opção de sincronização conforme mostrado. Observe que o sistema de arquivos já deve estar montado para que o processo de sincronização continue com sucesso.

bash btrfs filsystem sync /Reports

Para excluir o dispositivo do sistema de arquivos, use o comando device delete conforme mostrado.

bash btrfs device delete /dev/sdc /Reports

Para sondar o status de um scrub, use o comando scrub status com a opção -dR .

bash btrfs scrub status -dR / Relatórios

Para cancelar a execução do scrub, use o comando scrub cancel .

bash $ sudo btrfs scrub cancel / Reports

Para retomar ou continuar com uma depuração interrompida anteriormente, execute o comando de cancelamento de depuração

bash sudo btrfs scrub resume /Reports

mostra o uso do dispositivo de armazenamento:

btrfs filesystem usage /data

Para distribuir os dados, metadados e dados do sistema em todos os dispositivos de armazenamento do RAID (incluindo o dispositivo de armazenamento recém-adicionado) montados no diretório /data , execute o seguinte comando:

sudo btrfs balance start --full-balance /data

Pode demorar um pouco para espalhar os dados, metadados e dados do sistema em todos os dispositivos de armazenamento do RAID se ele contiver muitos dados.

Opções importantes de montagem Btrfs

Nesta seção, vou explicar algumas das importantes opções de montagem do Btrfs. Então vamos começar.

As opções de montagem Btrfs mais importantes são:

**1. acl e noacl

**ACL gerencia permissões de usuários e grupos para os arquivos/diretórios do sistema de arquivos Btrfs.

A opção de montagem acl Btrfs habilita ACL. Para desabilitar a ACL, você pode usar a opção de montagem noacl .

Por padrão, a ACL está habilitada. Portanto, o sistema de arquivos Btrfs usa a opção de montagem acl por padrão.

**2. autodefrag e noautodefrag

**Desfragmentar um sistema de arquivos Btrfs melhorará o desempenho do sistema de arquivos reduzindo a fragmentação de dados.

A opção de montagem autodefrag permite a desfragmentação automática do sistema de arquivos Btrfs.

A opção de montagem noautodefrag desativa a desfragmentação automática do sistema de arquivos Btrfs.

Por padrão, a desfragmentação automática está desabilitada. Portanto, o sistema de arquivos Btrfs usa a opção de montagem noautodefrag por padrão.

**3. compactar e compactar-forçar

**Controla a compactação de dados no nível do sistema de arquivos do sistema de arquivos Btrfs.

A opção compactar compacta apenas os arquivos que valem a pena compactar (se compactar o arquivo economizar espaço em disco).

A opção compress-force compacta todos os arquivos do sistema de arquivos Btrfs, mesmo que a compactação do arquivo aumente seu tamanho.

O sistema de arquivos Btrfs suporta muitos algoritmos de compactação e cada um dos algoritmos de compactação possui diferentes níveis de compactação.

Os algoritmos de compactação suportados pelo Btrfs são: lzo , zlib (nível 1 a 9) e zstd (nível 1 a 15).

Você pode especificar qual algoritmo de compactação usar para o sistema de arquivos Btrfs com uma das seguintes opções de montagem:

• compress=algoritmo:nível
• compress-force=algoritmo:nível

Para obter mais informações, consulte meu artigo Como habilitar a compactação do sistema de arquivos Btrfs .

**4. subvol e subvolid

**Estas opções de montagem são usadas para montar separadamente um subvolume específico de um sistema de arquivos Btrfs.

A opção de montagem subvol é usada para montar o subvolume de um sistema de arquivos Btrfs usando seu caminho relativo.

A opção de montagem subvolid é usada para montar o subvolume de um sistema de arquivos Btrfs usando o ID do subvolume.

Para obter mais informações, consulte meu artigo Como criar e montar subvolumes Btrfs .

**5. dispositivo

A opção de montagem de dispositivo** é usada no sistema de arquivos Btrfs de vários dispositivos ou RAID Btrfs.

Em alguns casos, o sistema operacional pode falhar ao detectar os dispositivos de armazenamento usados em um sistema de arquivos Btrfs de vários dispositivos ou RAID Btrfs. Nesses casos, você pode usar a opção de montagem do dispositivo para especificar os dispositivos que deseja usar para o sistema de arquivos de vários dispositivos Btrfs ou RAID.

Você pode usar a opção de montagem de dispositivo várias vezes para carregar diferentes dispositivos de armazenamento para o sistema de arquivos de vários dispositivos Btrfs ou RAID.

Você pode usar o nome do dispositivo (ou seja, sdb , sdc ) ou UUID , UUID_SUB ou PARTUUID do dispositivo de armazenamento com a opção de montagem do dispositivo para identificar o dispositivo de armazenamento.

Por exemplo,

• dispositivo=/dev/sdb
• dispositivo=/dev/sdb,dispositivo=/dev/sdc
• dispositivo=UUID_SUB=490a263d-eb9a-4558-931e-998d4d080c5d
• device=UUID_SUB=490a263d-eb9a-4558-931e-998d4d080c5d,device=UUID_SUB=f7ce4875-0874-436a-b47d-3edef66d3424

**6. degraded

A opção de montagem degradada** permite que um RAID Btrfs seja montado com menos dispositivos de armazenamento do que o perfil RAID requer.

Por exemplo, o perfil raid1 requer a presença de 2 dispositivos de armazenamento. Se um dos dispositivos de armazenamento não estiver disponível em qualquer caso, você usa a opção de montagem degradada para montar o RAID mesmo que 1 de 2 dispositivos de armazenamento esteja disponível.

**7. commit

A opção commit** mount é usada para definir o intervalo (em segundos) dentro do qual os dados serão gravados no dispositivo de armazenamento.

O padrão é definido como 30 segundos.

Para definir o intervalo de confirmação para 15 segundos, você pode usar a opção de montagem commit=15 (digamos).

**8. ssd e nossd

A opção de montagem ssd** informa ao sistema de arquivos Btrfs que o sistema de arquivos está usando um dispositivo de armazenamento SSD, e o sistema de arquivos Btrfs faz a otimização SSD necessária.

A opção de montagem nossd desativa a otimização do SSD.

O sistema de arquivos Btrfs detecta automaticamente se um SSD é usado para o sistema de arquivos Btrfs. Se um SSD for usado, a opção de montagem de SSD será habilitada. Caso contrário, a opção de montagem nossd é habilitada.

**9. ssd_spread e nossd_spread

A opção de montagem ssd_spread** tenta alocar grandes blocos contínuos de espaço não utilizado do SSD. Esse recurso melhora o desempenho de SSDs de baixo custo (baratos).

A opção de montagem nossd_spread desativa o recurso ssd_spread .

O sistema de arquivos Btrfs detecta automaticamente se um SSD é usado para o sistema de arquivos Btrfs. Se um SSD for usado, a opção de montagem ssd_spread será habilitada. Caso contrário, a opção de montagem nossd_spread é habilitada.

**10. descarte e nodiscard

Se você estiver usando um SSD que suporte TRIM enfileirado assíncrono (SATA rev3.1), a opção de montagem de descarte** permitirá o descarte de blocos de arquivos liberados. Isso melhorará o desempenho do SSD.

Se o SSD não suportar TRIM enfileirado assíncrono, a opção de montagem de descarte prejudicará o desempenho do SSD. Nesse caso, a opção de montagem nodiscard deve ser usada.

Por padrão, a opção de montagem nodiscard é usada.

**11. norecovery

Se a opção de montagem norecovery** for usada, o sistema de arquivos Btrfs não tentará executar a operação de recuperação de dados no momento da montagem.

**12. usebackuproot e nousebackuproot

Se a opção de montagem usebackuproot for usada, o sistema de arquivos Btrfs tentará recuperar qualquer raiz de árvore ruim/corrompida no momento da montagem. O sistema de arquivos Btrfs pode armazenar várias raízes de árvore no sistema de arquivos. A opção de montagem usebackuproot** procurará uma boa raiz de árvore e usará a primeira boa que encontrar.

A opção de montagem nousebackuproot não verificará ou recuperará raízes de árvore inválidas/corrompidas no momento da montagem. Este é o comportamento padrão do sistema de arquivos Btrfs.

**13. space_cache, space_cache=version, nospace_cache e clear_cache

A opção de montagem space_cache** é usada para controlar o cache de espaço livre. O cache de espaço livre é usado para melhorar o desempenho da leitura do espaço livre do grupo de blocos do sistema de arquivos Btrfs na memória (RAM).

O sistema de arquivos Btrfs suporta 2 versões do cache de espaço livre: v1 (padrão) e v2

O mecanismo de cache de espaço livre v2 melhora o desempenho de sistemas de arquivos grandes (tamanho de vários terabytes).

Você pode usar a opção de montagem space_cache=v1 para definir a v1 do cache de espaço livre e a opção de montagem space_cache=v2 para definir a v2 do cache de espaço livre.

A opção de montagem clear_cache é usada para limpar o cache de espaço livre.

Quando o cache de espaço livre v2 é criado, o cache deve ser limpo para criar um cache de espaço livre v1 .

Portanto, para usar o cache de espaço livre v1 após a criação do cache de espaço livre v2 , as opções de montagem clear_cache e space_cache=v1 devem ser combinadas: clear_cache,space_cache=v1

A opção de montagem nospace_cache é usada para desabilitar o cache de espaço livre.

Para desabilitar o cache de espaço livre após a criação do cache v1 ou v2 , as opções de montagem nospace_cache e clear_cache devem ser combinadas: clear_cache,nosapce_cache

**14. skip_balance

Por padrão, a operação de balanceamento interrompida/pausada de um sistema de arquivos Btrfs de vários dispositivos ou RAID Btrfs será retomada automaticamente assim que o sistema de arquivos Btrfs for montado. Para desabilitar a retomada automática da operação de equilíbrio interrompido/pausado em um sistema de arquivos Btrfs de vários dispositivos ou RAID Btrfs, você pode usar a opção de montagem skip_balance .**

**15. datacow e nodatacow

A opção datacow** mount habilita o recurso Copy-on-Write (CoW) do sistema de arquivos Btrfs. É o comportamento padrão.

Se você deseja desabilitar o recurso Copy-on-Write (CoW) do sistema de arquivos Btrfs para os arquivos recém-criados, monte o sistema de arquivos Btrfs com a opção de montagem nodatacow .

**16. datasum e nodatasum

A opção datasum** mount habilita a soma de verificação de dados para arquivos recém-criados do sistema de arquivos Btrfs. Este é o comportamento padrão.

Se você não quiser que o sistema de arquivos Btrfs faça a soma de verificação dos dados dos arquivos recém-criados, monte o sistema de arquivos Btrfs com a opção de montagem nodatasum .

Perfis Btrfs

Um perfil Btrfs é usado para informar ao sistema de arquivos Btrfs quantas cópias dos dados/metadados devem ser mantidas e quais níveis de RAID devem ser usados para os dados/metadados. O sistema de arquivos Btrfs contém muitos perfis. Entendê-los o ajudará a configurar um RAID Btrfs da maneira que você deseja.

Os perfis Btrfs disponíveis são os seguintes:

single : Se o perfil único for usado para os dados/metadados, apenas uma cópia dos dados/metadados será armazenada no sistema de arquivos, mesmo se você adicionar vários dispositivos de armazenamento ao sistema de arquivos. Assim, 100% do espaço em disco de cada um dos dispositivos de armazenamento adicionados ao sistema de arquivos pode ser utilizado.

dup : Se o perfil dup for usado para os dados/metadados, cada um dos dispositivos de armazenamento adicionados ao sistema de arquivos manterá duas cópias dos dados/metadados. Assim, 50% do espaço em disco de cada um dos dispositivos de armazenamento adicionados ao sistema de arquivos pode ser utilizado.

raid0 : No perfil raid0 , os dados/metadados serão divididos igualmente em todos os dispositivos de armazenamento adicionados ao sistema de arquivos. Nesta configuração, não haverá dados/metadados redundantes (duplicados). Assim, 100% do espaço em disco de cada um dos dispositivos de armazenamento adicionados ao sistema de arquivos pode ser usado. Se, em qualquer caso, um dos dispositivos de armazenamento falhar, todo o sistema de arquivos será corrompido. Você precisará de pelo menos dois dispositivos de armazenamento para configurar o sistema de arquivos Btrfs no perfil raid0 .

raid1 : No perfil raid1 , duas cópias dos dados/metadados serão armazenadas nos dispositivos de armazenamento adicionados ao sistema de arquivos. Nesta configuração, a matriz RAID pode sobreviver a uma falha de unidade. Mas você pode usar apenas 50% do espaço total em disco. Você precisará de pelo menos dois dispositivos de armazenamento para configurar o sistema de arquivos Btrfs no perfil raid1 .

raid1c3 : No perfil raid1c3 , três cópias dos dados/metadados serão armazenadas nos dispositivos de armazenamento adicionados ao sistema de arquivos. Nesta configuração, a matriz RAID pode sobreviver a duas falhas de unidade, mas você pode usar apenas 33% do espaço total em disco. Você precisará de pelo menos três dispositivos de armazenamento para configurar o sistema de arquivos Btrfs no perfil raid1c3 .

raid1c4 : No perfil raid1c4 , quatro cópias dos dados/metadados serão armazenadas nos dispositivos de armazenamento adicionados ao sistema de arquivos. Nesta configuração, a matriz RAID pode sobreviver a três falhas de unidade, mas você pode usar apenas 25% do espaço total em disco. Você precisará de pelo menos quatro dispositivos de armazenamento para configurar o sistema de arquivos Btrfs no perfil raid1c4 .

raid10 : No perfil raid10 , duas cópias dos dados/metadados serão armazenadas nos dispositivos de armazenamento adicionados ao sistema de arquivos, como no perfil raid1 . Além disso, os dados/metadados serão divididos entre os dispositivos de armazenamento, como no perfil raid0 .

O perfil raid10 é um híbrido dos perfis raid1 e raid0 . Alguns dos dispositivos de armazenamento formam arrays raid1 e alguns desses arrays raid1 são usados para formar um array raid0 . Em uma configuração raid10 , o sistema de arquivos pode sobreviver a uma única falha de unidade em cada uma das matrizes raid1 .

Você pode usar 50% do espaço total em disco na configuração raid10 . Você precisará de pelo menos quatro dispositivos de armazenamento para configurar o sistema de arquivos Btrfs no perfil raid10 .

raid5 : No perfil raid5 , uma cópia dos dados/metadados será dividida entre os dispositivos de armazenamento. Uma única paridade será calculada e distribuída entre os dispositivos de armazenamento do array RAID.

Em uma configuração raid5 , o sistema de arquivos pode sobreviver a uma única falha de unidade. Se uma unidade falhar, você pode adicionar uma nova unidade ao sistema de arquivos e os dados perdidos serão calculados a partir da paridade distribuída das unidades em execução.

Você pode usar 1 00x(N-1)/N % do total de espaços em disco na configuração raid5 . Aqui, N é o número de dispositivos de armazenamento adicionados ao sistema de arquivos. Você precisará de pelo menos três dispositivos de armazenamento para configurar o sistema de arquivos Btrfs no perfil raid5 .

raid6 : No perfil raid6 , uma cópia dos dados/metadados será dividida entre os dispositivos de armazenamento. Duas paridades serão calculadas e distribuídas entre os dispositivos de armazenamento do array RAID.

Em uma configuração raid6 , o sistema de arquivos pode sobreviver a duas falhas de unidade ao mesmo tempo. Se uma unidade falhar, você poderá adicionar uma nova unidade ao sistema de arquivos e os dados perdidos serão calculados a partir das duas paridades distribuídas das unidades em execução.

Você pode usar 100x(N-2)/N % do espaço total em disco na configuração raid6 . Aqui, N é o número de dispositivos de armazenamento adicionados ao sistema de arquivos. Você precisará de pelo menos quatro dispositivos de armazenamento para configurar o sistema de arquivos Btrfs no perfil raid6 .

@ 9223d2fa:b57e3de7

12,600 steps

@ 0fa80bd3:ea7325de

DAOs promised decentralization. They offered a system where every member could influence a project's direction, where money and power were transparently distributed, and decisions were made through voting. All of it recorded immutably on the blockchain, free from middlemen.

But something didn’t work out. In practice, most DAOs haven’t evolved into living, self-organizing organisms. They became something else: clubs where participation is unevenly distributed. Leaders remained - only now without formal titles. They hold influence through control over communications, task framing, and community dynamics. Centralization still exists, just wrapped in a new package.

But there's a second, less obvious problem. Crowds can’t create strategy. In DAOs, people vote for what "feels right to the majority." But strategy isn’t about what feels good - it’s about what’s necessary. Difficult, unpopular, yet forward-looking decisions often fail when put to a vote. A founder’s vision is a risk. But in healthy teams, it’s that risk that drives progress. In DAOs, risk is almost always diluted until it becomes something safe and vague.

Instead of empowering leaders, DAOs often neutralize them. This is why many DAOs resemble consensus machines. Everyone talks, debates, and participates, but very little actually gets done. One person says, “Let’s jump,” and five others respond, “Let’s discuss that first.” This dynamic might work for open forums, but not for action.

Decentralization works when there’s trust and delegation, not just voting. Until DAOs develop effective systems for assigning roles, taking ownership, and acting with flexibility, they will keep losing ground to old-fashioned startups led by charismatic founders with a clear vision.

We’ve seen this in many real-world cases. Take MakerDAO, one of the most mature and technically sophisticated DAOs. Its governance token (MKR) holders vote on everything from interest rates to protocol upgrades. While this has allowed for transparency and community involvement, the process is often slow and bureaucratic. Complex proposals stall. Strategic pivots become hard to implement. And in 2023, a controversial proposal to allocate billions to real-world assets passed only narrowly, after months of infighting - highlighting how vision and execution can get stuck in the mud of distributed governance.

On the other hand, Uniswap DAO, responsible for the largest decentralized exchange, raised governance participation only after launching a delegation system where token holders could choose trusted representatives. Still, much of the activity is limited to a small group of active contributors. The vast majority of token holders remain passive. This raises the question: is it really community-led, or just a formalized power structure with lower transparency?

Then there’s ConstitutionDAO, an experiment that went viral. It raised over $40 million in days to try and buy a copy of the U.S. Constitution. But despite the hype, the DAO failed to win the auction. Afterwards, it struggled with refund logistics, communication breakdowns, and confusion over governance. It was a perfect example of collective enthusiasm without infrastructure or planning - proof that a DAO can raise capital fast but still lack cohesion.

Not all efforts have failed. Projects like Gitcoin DAO have made progress by incentivizing small, individual contributions. Their quadratic funding mechanism rewards projects based on the number of contributors, not just the size of donations, helping to elevate grassroots initiatives. But even here, long-term strategy often falls back on a core group of organizers rather than broad community consensus.

The pattern is clear: when the stakes are low or the tasks are modular, DAOs can coordinate well. But when bold moves are needed—when someone has to take responsibility and act under uncertainty DAOs often freeze. In the name of consensus, they lose momentum.

That’s why the organization of the future can’t rely purely on decentralization. It must encourage individual initiative and the ability to take calculated risks. People need to see their contribution not just as a vote, but as a role with clear actions and expected outcomes. When the situation demands, they should be empowered to act first and present the results to the community afterwards allowing for both autonomy and accountability. That’s not a flaw in the system. It’s how real progress happens.

@ c066aac5:6a41a034

“If a man is considered guilty
For what goes on in his mind
Then give me the electric chair
For all my future crimes”

-Electric Chair by Prince

The very last paragraph of Touré’s 2013 biography of Prince I Would Die 4 U: Why Prince Became an Icon made a very bold claim about the lewd nature of Prince’s music:

“Imagine America as one house on a suburban lane… Prince knocked on America’s door through his music. He came to the door holding a guitar and an umbrella while concealing a Bible. He flirted his way inside the door and told us he had a dirty mind and was controversial, and then he sat down in the living room on the good couch. And, when America’s guard was down, because we thought we were having a conversation about sex, Prince eased out his Bible and said, let me also tell you about my Lord and savior, Jesus Christ.”

Wow. Talk about a Sixth Sense level plot twist! I will say if you’re well versed in Prince’s catalog (I listened to every Prince album released [except for The Black Album because Jack Dorsey is holding it hostage on Tidal] last year) it won’t be as shocking as a surprise as it would be to the unversed listener, but surprising nonetheless considering the content of the man’s lyrics (and life).

Regardless of whether or not Prince achieved this goal of bringing people to Christ via a vehicle of sexy shock value, he was a person of impact. The book by Touré I mentioned earlier is a great picture of the life he lived, and I’m sure there are many others that people can recommend in the comments. He touched many lives and I believe his music will still be listened to for many years to come.

Prince’s method of evangelism may have been unconventional (to say the least), but I still think there is something to be learned from his efforts.

Obviously, worshiping sex or encouraging lust isn’t great. Prince’s view of sex was broken; they didn’t line up with Biblically ordered sex (see his songs Sister, Darling Nikki, Sexy M.F., and many many more). His inability to sustain healthy relationships or make meaningful lasting connections with those around him are a testament to that.

Despite his flaws, his art captured an entire generation - and continues to capture the attention of people seeking true art. His authenticity, raw emotion, and intentionality made for true connection between his music and his listeners. He resonated with people’s souls, and still does today. Perhaps Touré was wrong and Prince didn’t mean to evangelize through his music, but don’t all people stand testament to the powerful work of God?

We are all broken people. Our job is to the use the tools and resources set before us to spread the Gospel. “…we have this treasure in clay jars, so that it may be made clear that this extraordinary power belongs to God and does not come from us.” -2 Corinthians 4:7

The Western Church should consider using the seemingly profane, off limits, unconventional, or even just plain weird in an effort to continue to spread the gospel. On a high level, that’s our good-christian dinner table no-gos: Sex, Money, and Politics. I believe that the Church’s abdication of such conversations is the reason why those are areas of failure for the Church at large. We shouldn’t sin or condone/promote sin. Instead, I’m proposing that like how Prince used sex in his music to get people to learn about Jesus, Christian Bitcoiners should use money (Bitcoin) to do good works and lead people to Jesus in the process. We may just make the world a better place along the way.

“If you're sick of cryin' and tired of tears
Then close your eyes and open your ears
Listen to the music, listen to the song
Listen to your heart, is that so wrong?
Stop lookin' in the mirror, there's nothin' to fear
Your salvation is near
1,000 light years away from here”

-1,000 Light Years From Here by Prince

It doesn’t take a lot of mental effort to see how Christian’s could leverage Bitcoin’s magic for kingdom work. Look Alex Gladstein’s writings. Look at the work that Gridless is doing in Africa. Look at Roya Mahboob’s impact in Afghanistan. Look at the impact of Bitcoin Beach in El Salvador.

Now imagine what the Church (and by the Church, I mean you and I the Christian Bitcoiners) could do with Bitcoin:

A Christian Bitcoiner could help the woman with an abusive husband escape a bad situation with finances intact by teaching her how to use Bitcoin and keep self-custody wallet. An orange-pilled youth group leader could teach the inner city kid in a bad household how to set up a wallet and stack sats without the permission of the dead beat parents or conventional employment. The church bake sale could make things easy via accepting lightning payments, bringing in outsiders for sweet treats and teaching them about how to be a Bitcoin merchant. A church could send funds to a missionary across the world in a christian adverse country instantly without having to involve a single bank, and that missionary would have those funds same-day ready for deployment.

“Everybody's looking for the ladder
Everybody wants salvation of the soul
The steps you take are no easy road
But the reward is great
For those who want to go”

-The Ladder by Prince

In my own attempts to teach people about the virtues of Bitcoin, I find it usually clicks for people in one of two different ways for the most part:

The first way it clicks is when they can receive and send a lightning payment. The instant funds make a light bulb go off.

The second way is when I show them the humanitarian impact that Bitcoin has had and is counting to have. The use of Bitcoin internationally as a means of humanitarian aid/sovereignty for the less fortunate should shut down any questions like “But what about (insert crapcoin)?” in an instant.

Much like how people get Bitcoin once they see it in action, I believe people will get Jesus when they see Jesus’ Church in action. One of the best ways today the Church can display that action may be through Bitcoin.

Sex was Prince’s trojan horse for something much deeper that he wanted to convey to people. Bitcoin can be the trojan horse for the Church. The Church could gain attention for what they’re doing with Bitcoin similar to the attention that the Human Rights Foundation gets. One might ask why use a trojan horse? I think that Bitcoin adoption itself has been a bit of a trojan horse movement. Your local politicians didn’t bat an eye when they heard about a peer-to-peer e-cash system, but they were all over it when it was presented as a digital gold. Michael Saylor has garnered a lot of hate from the Bitcoin true-believers for presenting Bitcoin as a digital gold as opposed to a currency, but I believe he knows what he’s doing and he’s presenting in this manner on purpose. He might not get gratitude for it from the community, but I believe he’s willing to be the bad guy in order to further the mission (see Christopher Nolan’s The Dark Night [which is arguably a Jesus story]).

Christian Bitcoiner, I challenge you to channel your enthusiasm to do good in your neighborhood. Let the world see your actions and gain a curiosity for what you’re doing. The Bitcoin conversation will make many people think that you’re crazy, that you’re an idiot when it comes to investing, that you’re selling a scam. Much like how people wrote off Prince for being a vulgar musician. Much like how people write off Michael Saylor for misunderstanding Bitcoin. Much like how people wrote off (and continue to write off) Jesus for being a false prophet or the leader of a rebellion.

But there will be someone who sees the work that you do with Bitcoin. The work that the Church will do with Bitcoin. Even if just one soul is saved with Bitcoin, that’s worth the effort.

“Black day, stormy night No love, no hope in sight Don't cry, He is coming Don't die without knowing the cross” -The Cross by Prince

This article was written with help from my wife Elaina freedom@happytavern.co

Feel free to drop your favorite book about Prince, favorite Prince song, or favorite Prince album in the comments

Or, you can drop your favorite Bitcoin as a trojan horse story in the comments

@ d3d74124:a4eb7b1d

ORIGINALLY ON XITTER BY STEVE BARBOUR. SHARED HERE FOR THE HOMIES (https://x.com/SGBarbour/status/1911614638623801425)

I find bureaucracy fascinating—it’s like a cancer within human organizations.

Why do organizations become bloated with excessive procedural controls, inefficiency, and indecisiveness as they grow in size and age? Why does decision-by-committee often replace the ambitious, self-starting decision maker? Why do small, "lean and mean" startups inevitably become bloated with bureaucracy as they scale and increase their headcount?

In 2014, these questions consumed me while I sat in a cubicle at an oil and gas company. Why, after years of honing my skills to fix artificial lift systems, was my signing authority decreasing (from $25,000 to $10,000 for workover budgets), despite record corporate profits? Why did I now need a 12-page Microsoft Word document with manager sign-off to schedule and scope a service rig for a simple pump change, when a five-minute email direct to the rig supervisor had previously sufficed?

Years into the job I was far more capable than when I had started, yet I had less authority with each passing day. I became determined to understand what was causes bureaucracy and whether or not it can be prevented.

After researching for some time, such as the essay I posted below, I concluded that bureaucracy stems from a lack of trust and accountability. Bureaucrats impose procedures instead of trusting subordinates to do their jobs, often in response to a costly mistake. This results in new processes that everyone must follow.

Bureaucrats rarely take responsibility for their own failures or hold others accountable for theirs. Instead, they create more procedures and invent new processes. Bureaucracy is a systemic issue, pervasive in nearly every large business or institution. The larger the organization, the more stifling it becomes.

This behavior is costly, increasing administrative overhead and delaying capital execution. Who is bearing this enormous cost?

You are, of course!

Fiat money funds the vast majority of the world's bureaucracy. Fiat money is counterfeit created out of thin air and is used to fund deficit spending by governments worldwide. Governments use paper money they did not earn from taxes to bail out institutions who are overleveraged and get caught with their pants down (e.g. Bombardier and Air Canada are famous repeat offenders in Canada, in the US you can choose any big name bank just about).

They keep printing money and nobody is held accountable anywhere.

Misallocate capital, become insolvent, print money and bail out, create new regulations / procedures, repeat.

You pay for bureaucracy by losing your savings to inflation.

You pay for bureaucracy when the local small businesses in your neighborhood is replaced by a global franchise funded by cheap, perpetual fiat money.

You pay for bureaucracy when you cannot retire as early as you planned and end up working yourself straight into a retirement home.

---

I was cleaning and organizing my office today and found this old essay by Brian D. Rule from 1977 on the topic, which sparked me to write this short X piece on bureaucracy.

Brian's essay 'Bureaucracy' was actually the very essay that led me into believing fiat money with the root cause of global bureaucracy and waste, which lead me to become interested in gold in 2015 and then in bitcoin in 2016.

Sure enough I googled the prevalence of the term 'bureaucracy' and something interesting happened after 1971...

Isn't it weird how so much went to shit after we got off the gold standard?

Today I am convinced that hard, sound money is the only solution to bureaucracy. This is why I work for #bitcoin.

*Sadly I can no longer find the essay online, so I ripped the text from my paper printout that I found in my files with the now defunct reference website below. *

---

Bureaucracy

Brian D. Rude, 1977

Original website (now defunct): http://brianrude.com/burea.htm

In the summer of 1975 I took a teaching job in Nebraska. As my previous teaching experience was in Missouri I had to see about getting a Nebraska teaching certificate. I applied for a "Nebraska Standard" teaching certificate. I sent in my college transcript, the application form, and a check for eight dollars. They sent me back, in their own good time, a "Nebraska Prestandard" certificate. I decided there was nothing "prestandard" about me or my teaching, so I wrote back and asked why I didn't get the "standard" certificate. They replied that since I had not taught three out of the last five years I was eligible only for the "prestandard" certificate.

"What do those pigheaded bureaucrats know about my teaching?" I thought to myself. "How would they ever know the standard of my teaching just from shuffling papers around?"

With a little reflection I realized that of course they know nothing about my teaching. They are not supposed to know anything about my teaching. They are paid to evaluate the papers I send them. They are not paid to evaluate my teaching. They have a clear mandate to shuffle my papers, and nothing more.

I presume my application was opened by a secretary, who, following a tightly structured routine, checked off each requirement, typed up my certificate, got it signed by some authority and sent it off to me. Such a secretary is most likely a conscientious worker, a wife and mother, a Republican or Democrat, an occasional churchgoer, a bit of a gossip, and a lot of other plain ordinary things. But she is most likely not a "pigheaded bureaucrat". She would not think of herself as a bureaucrat, and neither would her boss, her coworkers, her family, or anyone else who personally knew her. When she typed "prestandard" instead of "standard" on my teaching certificate she is simply doing her job. Were she to do anything less or more she would be negligent.

So where is the bureaucracy? Or was I dealing with a bureaucracy? If not, then where is there a bureaucracy? Where do we find the genuine article, the bungling, myopic, pigheaded bureaucrat?

I think pigheaded bureaucrats do exist, but they are rare. It's the good bureaucrat that drives us batty, quite as much as the bungling bureaucrat. The good bureaucrat knows exactly what he is obligated to do and he does it conscientiously. The good bureaucrat simply applies the rules that he is responsible for applying, but that he did not make.

A bureaucracy is a group of people responsible for applying a set of rules. The police, courts, executive branches of government, parents, teachers, librarians, and many other people or groups of people are also responsible for applying rules, yet we don't think of these as being bureaucracies. The distinguishing features of a bureaucracy are the types of rules to be applied, and, to some extent, how the rules are applied.

A bureaucracy is responsible for applying what I will call "secondary", or "derived" rules. A secondary rule is a requirement or prohibition established only because it promotes a primary goal. When Moses came down from the mountain with his stone tablets he was carrying what might be considered the simplest statement of what I will call "primary" requirements. The rule, "Thou shalt not steal", for example, is a primary requirement because it is desirable for its own sake, not just as a means to some other end. Similarly, "Thou shalt not commit murder" is a primary requirement because it is desirable as an end in itself.

Safe driving, as a modern example, is a primary requirement because it is desirable for its own sake. The requirement that one get a driver's license before driving, in contrast, is a secondary requirement. It is a requirement instituted by state governments in an attempt to promote the primary goal of safe driving. It is secondary to, or derived from, the primary requirement of driving safely. If people always drove safely, or if driving by its nature presented no hazards, then there would be no need for driver's licenses. Or if legislatures decided that licensing did nothing to promote safe driving then there would be no need for driver's licenses. Licensing is not an end in itself.

Tertiary, or third order, requirements can also exist. If a state requires a birth certificate as proof of age before issuing a driver's license then the state is imposing a third order requirement. Showing a birth certificate is a requirement designed to promote the licensing of drivers, which in turn is designed to promote safe driving.

I imagine one could go ahead and find examples of fourth order requirements established to promote third order requirements. However I don't think there is much point in getting too deep in this kind of analysis. The main point is the distinction of whether a goal is important for its own sake or whether it is important in promoting some other goal. Thus I may speak of a "derived" requirement, meaning only that it is not a primary requirement, but not specifying whether it is secondary, tertiary, or even further removed from the primary goal.

In different contexts I may speak of primary or secondary "requirements", "rules", "prohibitions", "laws", "regulations", "goals", "wrongs", "burdens", "privileges", and so on. It seems natural to think of paying taxes as a "requirement", while murder is a "wrong" that is covered by a "prohibition". But the requirement of paying a tax can be interpreted as the prohibition of avoiding the tax, and the prohibition against murder can be interpreted as the requirement to refrain from murder. The important point here is the distinction between primary and derived, not between omission and commission.

In the example I gave about getting a teaching certificate the bureaucrats were concerned only with my compliance with secondary requirements. They were not at all concerned with the primary requirement - the requirement that I indeed be a good teacher. This is a distinguishing characteristic of bureaucracies. They are concerned only with applying derived, not primary, rules. Other agencies are brought in when there is a primary rule to be applied. The police and courts handle such primary wrongs as theft and murder. Parents and teachers handle such primary wrongs as tracking mud on the carpet or being late to school. Churches handle such primary wrongs as "living in sin" or blasphemy. But it doesn't take a judge or a preacher to decide if my application for a teaching certificate is in order, or my application for a driver's license, or a dog license, or a business license, or a barber's license, or a building permit, or a marriage license, or breathing license. It takes a bureaucrat to handle these matters.

The basic root of bureaucracy then, is the proliferation of secondary requirements. It is not enough, in our modern world, to just be a good and honest person. One can be the best and safest of drivers, but a driver's license is still required. One can be a patriot and a saint, but the IRS still wants that W-2 form. One can be the best doctor in the world, but to practice medicine without a degree and a license is still a serious offense. We have established literally millions of secondary requirements designed to promote a few primary goals. To administer these rules we have people we call bureaucrats.

If the basic root of bureaucracy is a proliferation of derived requirements, then it would seem reasonable that the way to decrease bureaucracy would be to decrease such requirements. This is true, and in fact is a main thesis of this article. Unfortunately it is not always easy to do. Every bureaucratic requirement, in a healthy society at least, was established by reasonably intelligent people giving at least half-way serious consideration to a genuine problem. Therefore any particular bureaucratic requirement or procedure that is challenged will be defended by some person or group.

The most important gain we hope to realize from derived requirements is security. The requirement of any permit or license is usually, if not invariably, justified in order to "protect the public". We want safe driving so we demand driver's licenses. We want our neighbor's dog out of our flower bed so we demand dog licenses. We want merchants to be honest so we demand business licenses. We want welfare recipients not to cheat so we require verification of identity, employment, and who knows what else. All these requirements are seen as necessary to prevent something bad from happening, or to assure that something good will happen.

Derived requirements cannot provide all types of security. We can't prevent floods and famines by making rules and printing forms. The type of security that is the goal of bureaucratic requirements is social control of one form or another.

Simple fairness is often the goal of bureaucratic requirements. The Internal Revenue Service is a good example of this. The primary goal of the IRS is to raise money. This could be done by charging every citizen a flat rate of $1000 or so each year. We wouldn't consider this fair, though, because we realize not everyone has an equal ability to pay. Therefore we have an elaborate set of rules designed to extract more from those who have more. To apply these rules we have what is probably the biggest and most complex bureaucracy since time began. This size and complexity comes from our desire to be fair, not from the simple desire to collect money.

Another form of social control for which bureaucratic requirements are established is prevention of abuse of power. Power comes in many different forms, and we know from long experience that power is always susceptible to abuse. One method of dealing with abuse of power is to call it a primary wrong and punish the offenders. This is done, and it keeps the police and courts very busy. Another way to control abuse of power is to set up secondary requirements to try to prevent such wrongs from occurring in the first place. This produces bureaucracies. In the 1880's, for example, railroads were playing a little rougher than people wanted. They gained power by monopolizing a vital service. In response to this the Interstate Commerce Commission was set up, and has regulated business ever since. A more modern, and more specific, example would be the requirement that a used car dealer certify that the odometer reading is correct when he sells a car. This requirement is in response to what is seen as abuse of power by car dealers who misrepresent their merchandise.

In addition to the main cause of bureaucracy - the proliferation of derived requirements for purposes of security - there are several other causes of bureaucracies that are worth mentioning. The first of these is pure blind imitation. Again I will use driver's licensing as an example.

In the fifty states there is a startling uniformity of driver's license requirements. The most obvious uniformity is that all states require licenses. I have never been able to understand this. It would seem that if each state followed its own experience, values, customs, and judgment, then there would be a whole spectrum of licensing requirements, ranging from no requirement at all to extensive and strict requirements. This is apparently not the case. The majority of states require a written, driving, and eye test. They require a license fee. They require renewal of the license every so many years. They require that the license be in the person’s possession while he is driving. So far as I can tell only minor variations are found on this basic pattern in the different states.

I attribute this uniformity mainly to imitation. If there were an obvious connection between traffic safety and driver’s licensing then this uniformity would seem more sensible. If the National Safety Council told us everyday that the majority of fatal accidents involved an unlicensed driver, then we would not be surprised to find a driver’s license requirement in every state. But that is not the case. The National Safety Council talks a lot about the drinking driver but not about the unlicensed driver. If there was a historical example of some state that was too stubborn to require licenses and had an atrocious accident rate, then again a strict licensing system would be expected in every state. But is not the case either. The connection between licensing and safe driving is tenuous at best. There are innumerable unsafe drivers in every state who have no trouble getting a license. There are also perfectly safe drivers who have trouble getting a license. I think it is safe to say that the average driver, safe or unsafe, can’t pass the written test without studying the book no matter how long he has been driving. Many people find this out when they try to renew their license. All this leads me to believe that licensing requirements are set up by imitation more than anything else. A few states started requiring licenses and other states blindly followed, thinking in some vague way that they were being modern and progressive.

Pure blind imitation may seem a poor reason to set up a bureaucratic requirement and a bureaucracy to apply it, but there are many examples of such imitation in everyday life. In a previous article, ("Roting and Roters", not yet on my web site) I described and developed the idea that blind imitation is a powerful determinant of individual behavior. I think it is almost as powerful a determinant of group action. If each state followed its own inclination in the matter of driver’s licensing I would expect a much wider variation among the different states.

Another cause of bureaucracies is a little more substantial than blind imitation, and accounts for many licensing systems. That is the desire for group recognition. People are by nature social animals. They want to have groups and they want to do things in groups. They want their groups to be recognized and they want this recognition to be official and formal. I began to realize this a few years back when I read in the paper that beauticians were trying to get legislation passed setting up a system of beautician licensure. I thought they were nuts. Why, when we all hate the bureaucracy so much, would anyone want to set up more bureaucracy?

Another example of this kind of bureaucracy building is in the field of occupational therapy. Nurses, physical therapists, and speech therapists are licensed by the state. Occupational therapists, in contrast, have a national association which gives a "registry examination". Upon passing this test, and having a degree in occupational therapy, one becomes an "O.T.R.", a registered occupational therapist. Hospitals and other institutions take this designation as evidence of full qualification in the field. With such a sensible system I find incomprehensible that the profession is pushing for a system of state, rather than national, licensure. But that is exactly what they are doing. They are trying to build more bureaucracy, and they will succeed.

It took me quite a number of years to realize that teacher certification is something that the teaching profession wants, rather than being a requirement imposed from above. However that is apparently the case. The system of licensure, though a pain, does give some recognition to the status of teachers. This, along with a considerable amount of blind imitation, apparently accounts for the uniformity of teacher certification requirements found in different states.

It would be nice if we could give official recognition to groups without the necessity of laying down a mass of secondary requirements, but that is not how it works. Recognition, apparently would have little meaning if it did not indicate that the members of the group meet a system of requirements. It would also be nice if those who gain this official recognition were always worthy of it, but that also is unfortunately not the case. There will always be drivers, teachers, beauticians, occupational therapists, doctors, lawyers, and others who somehow manage to gain the official license but are recognized by their peers as incompetent. Whenever a system of secondary requirements is established there inevitably enters a "reality gap", a gap between the ideal and the real. This can make the whole system ineffective. I will have more to say about this ineffectiveness and its effects shortly.

Yet another factor leading to the spread of bureaucracy is a systematic error made, to a greater or lesser extent, by practitioners of almost any field. That error is thinking that the world’s problems will be solved by one’s own field of knowledge or mode of operation. I think a good name for this would be "role egocentrism". Egocentrism means that a person considers himself the center of the universe, just as ethnocentrism means that a group considers itself the center of the universe. Role egocentrism simply means that one’s own role is given undue importance and status. Thus doctors think that medicine will be the salvation of the world. When medicine has progressed far enough, they think, the world will be such a fine place that other problems will just disappear. Preachers think that if only we would all turn to God there would be no more problems. Farmers think that once the world food problem is solved, by farmers of course, then all will be well. Teachers think that education will be the one thing to save mankind from itself. Scientists think that research will usher in a new golden age.

It is hard to conceive of a bureaucrat having such grandiose visions of salvation. But remember that bureaucrats do not think of themselves as bureaucrats. Even more importantly, bureaucrats don’t make the rules, they only apply them. The rules are made by governments. Governments consist of politicians, and politicians are very susceptible to role egocentrism. To attain office a politician must convince people that government is capable of doing things, and he must believe it himself. Since people want things done it is not surprising that governments are populated by large numbers of people with an inflated idea of what can be done by writing rules and laws. Since there are few primary laws left to write, we have an ever-increasing proliferation of secondary requirements. Bureaucrats may not make the basic rules that they apply, but they do have some latitude to make minor rules, and even more importantly, they are responsible for making reports and can require reports from their subordinates. In the making of reports a little role egocentrism can go a long way. The result can be a massive flow of reams and reams of paperwork, with copies sent to all other bureaucrats who might have come slight connection to the job at hand, but with very little of the reports actually being read.

Bureaucrats also have some latitude in working as individuals or teams, and again a great deal of waste can ensue. The justification for working in committees or teams is the idea that by joining forces the best abilities of each member can be brought to bear on the problem at hand and therefore a solution to the problem is more likely. Of course there is some truth to this, but it doesn’t always work out too well. The little bit truth can become greatly augmented by role egocentrism. Team workers like to think that if you set six experts around a table something good is bound to come out of it. Non-team workers, like myself, tend to think that setting six experts around a table is a good way for six experts to waste each other’s time. I think bureaucrats at the higher levels are more prone to waste their energy this way, and I interpret this as a form of role egocentrism.

All of these cases of bureaucracy are augmented by another systematic error. That error is the systematic overestimation of group cohesiveness. In the minds of bureaucracy builders the bureaucracies already in existence become "they", and "they" are a bunch of pigheaded fools. "We", on the other hand, are good, right-thinking people and the bureaucracy we set up will serve the people, not the bureaucrats. And just to make sure we’ll write in plenty of safeguards. Of course this doesn’t work. Just because it is "our" program doesn’t mean that it won’t be subject to all the problems that beset any program. A new generation will grow up and decide that "we" are "they" and the cycle begins over again.

So far I have painted a rather pessimistic picture. We have bureaucrats because we have a multitude of derived requirements to administer, and we have a multitude of derived requirements because we think they bring us security. We also have bureaucracies because of imitation, because of the desire for group recognition, and because of role egocentrism. Yet the sum total of all this drives us batty. The next step is to try to get some idea of why and how bureaucracy is frustrating. I think the frustration results from main causes, standardization and ineffectiveness.

Standardization is a wonderful thing in industry. If my car needs a new fuel pump I can buy one right off the shelf and know it will fit. Fuel pumps are standard, and engines are standard. They fit together beautifully. The few defective fuel pumps that are not standard are quickly caught and tossed off the assembly line. This happy state of affairs does not extend to non-physical objects though. Consider, for example, a seed planter. I don’t know just how a planter might work but I visualize a mechanical hand grabbing one seed at a time and popping it into the ground. Seeds are pretty well standardized and most seeds can be picked up by these mechanical hands without injury. A few seeds, however, are nonstandard. They are either too big, or too small, or perhaps the wrong shape. The iron hands that so effectively plant most seeds will bruise, shred, mangle or maybe just overlook the oddball seeds. This doesn’t worry us though. Just like the defective fuel pumps that are bumped off the assembly line, the few mishandled seeds are of no great consequence.

When standardization is extended to humans the situation changes dramatically. We can’t bump off the defectives so carelessly. A bureaucracy can be compared to the seed planter. Iron hands pick you up and set you down again. If you fit the standard mold, these iron hands hold you gently. If you don’t fit the standard mold those same iron hands can shred you to pieces.

For example, a few years back I knew a fellow who was paraplegic. He was completely confined to his wheelchair, but he had a car with adapted controls and could drive as well as anyone. Unfortunately he had considerable difficulty licensing both himself and his car. He could drive to the courthouse, and get himself out of his car and into his wheelchair, but he had no way of getting down in the basement where the licensing offices were. There were elevators from the first floor to the basement of course, but between the parking lot and the first floor were innumerable steps and curbs. To a person in a wheelchair a single four-inch curb might as well be a ten-foot wall. Apparently my friend managed somehow to keep himself legal most of the time, but he did at times speak bitterly about the troubles he encountered. The state required licenses, and the state provided a way to get these licenses, but only if you fit the standard mold. My friend did not fit the standard mold, and felt very much caught in those iron hands.

Fortunately most examples of the problems of standardization are not so serious. My wife had a friend in college who was triply enrolled in the School of Education, the School of Medicine, and the Graduate School. All occupational therapy students were dually enrolled in Education and Medicine, which caused no end of red tape in itself, but this particular girl was such a go-getter that she added Graduate School. This made her a non-standard person indeed. One day she spent a solid half hour on the phone trying to convince some bureaucrat that, no matter that it didn’t fit the computer, it was possible to be enrolled that way. I presume the problem, whatever it was, was eventually worked out, but not without some cost in frustration. The bureaucrat in question was probably no more pigheaded than you or I. The rules he was responsible for applying simply made no provision for triply enrolled students.

When caught as a non-standard person in a standardized bureaucracy one wonders why standardization is established in the first place. Except for the role egocentrism of a few bureaucrats, standardization is not intentional. It arises by the same forces that promote standardization in industry. Standardization promotes efficiency. Whenever a form is printed, for instance, it is designed to fit the majority of situations. Thus a fire insurance application form may ask if the house is frame or brick, with no intention of frustrating the owners of igloos, caves, and houseboats. It simply reflects the fact that most houses are either frame or brick. By stating these two choices the processing of the application is speeded up. If instead the application stated simply, "describe the dwelling to be insured", the work in processing the application would be considerably increased. Standardization is the inevitable correlate of the proliferation of secondary requirements.

There is also another cause of standardization, the lack of discretionary authority. Remember that secondary requirements are set up in many cases to prevent abuse of power and to be fair. This usually means that the bureaucrats who apply these rules have only a limited number of responses to a given situation. Bureaucracies are given very little discretionary authority. They must follow the rules whether the rules fit the situation at hand or not. To illustrate this let me hypothesize two ways of administering welfare.

In case A an applicant comes to a social worker. The applicant explains that her husband just lost his job because he drank too much, that she works as a maid two days a week but that her children have no one to stay with them when she works unless she pays a baby sitter which costs almost half her salary, that their car is about to be repossessed and then she won’t be able to get to work at all, that the landlord won’t fix the plumbing and charges too much rent, that they would move except they haven’t found a place that’s any cheaper, that their oldest son was just sent to jail for a two year term, and on, and on, and on. The social worker listens to all this, makes a few phone calls, and the next day tells the applicant, "We’ll give you $70 a week allowance, but tell your husband to come in before next week. We’ll get him off his beer and on the job one way or the other. I called your landlord and got his side of the story and there’ll have to be a few changes made before he’ll reconnect the shower, and you’ve got to..."

In situation B the applicant comes to the social worker with the same story. The social worker says, "I think we can help you, but first you’ll have to find your birth certificate. Regulations state that only citizens are eligible for welfare. Then you’ll have to take this form to your employer to certify your wage scale. And this form goes to your landlord to verify your rent. And you’ll have to fill out this form to show how you budget your income, and this form to verify that you are not now receiving veterans or disability compensation, and this form that verifies you are not eligible to collect child support from any previous husband, unless the marriage was annulled, in which case you have to hunt up the certificate of annulment... What? You lost your certificate of annulment? You’re not sure you ever were married to John before you left him for Henry? ..."

In situation A the social worker is given a budget and a wide latitude on how to distribute the money. She is given discretionary power to a large degree. In situation B the social worker is given a very small amount of discretionary power. She can’t decide for herself whether the applicant is genuinely needy, but must prepare a "work-up", consisting of documentation of all relevant aspects of the applicant’s situation. On the basis of this work-up she is allowed to authorize an allowance, the amount to be taken from a table. If the social worker feels that there are relevant circumstances that are not covered at all in the standard work-up then she may begin some special procedure to have the case considered by a higher authority or committee. But the common suspicion that things aren’t quite as they should be, either because the applicant is undeserving or that he needs more than he can get or that the program misses its mark in yet some other way, is just a routine part of the job.

Standardization, fitting everyone into the same size slot, reduces everything to paperwork. The "work-up" is a stack of documents. These documents, certificates, forms, statements, memos, become the currency of bureaucracy, the medium of exchange. "Facts" become so only when they are certified by someone’s signature, even though they may be obvious. Other "facts" must be accepted because of their official certification even though common sense or simple observation show them to be false. A gap between the real and the official inevitably sets in. Then this gap leads to actions that are perceived to be detrimental or unfair, then the result is a considerable amount of frustration, in spite of the fact that the intent of all the red tape was to be beneficial and fair.

This leads to the second cause of bureaucratic frustration, which is ineffectiveness. If a bureaucratic requirement is seen as effective in accomplishing its goal we accept it even if there is considerable inconvenience involved in meeting the requirement. If, on the other hand, a bureaucratic requirement is seen as ineffective then a little inconvenience in meeting the requirement can be a very significant frustration. Getting a loan from a bank, for example, involves considerable effort in meeting bureaucratic requirements. However we don’t expect money to be handed out without some security that it will be paid back. Therefore we don’t get too frustrated by the inconvenience in meeting those requirements. Similarly, driver’s licenses are seen as worthwhile, even if not fully effective, and entail only a little bother every four years or so. Therefore we do not hear too much about pigheaded bureaucrats at the driver’s license bureau. Unfortunately other licensing systems have imperfections so massive and ubiquitous, and benefits so doubtful, that the whole system is a burden to society. A little inconvenience in getting such a license can be very frustrating. This is the frustration I felt in the example I gave at the beginning of this article about getting a teaching certificate. Another example would be going back three times to the fire station to get a bicycle license. I went back twice. I figured three times was above and beyond the call of duty. I never did get my bicycle licensed.

In psychological phenomena the whole is not always equal to the sum of its parts. Bureaucratic frustration can work this way. One frustration may be brushed off, and then another, and perhaps several more, but eventually there comes a point where the frustrations increase out of proportion to their cumulative value. Short-term frustration changes into long-term demoralization. I think "hassle" is a good name for this. It is a commonly used term, though it is not normally considered a specifically defined term. I think the phenomenon should be taken seriously though. It will become increasingly common with constant increases in bureaucratic requirements.

The best example I can give of hassle in my own experience comes from my home state of Missouri. To get one’s car licensed in Missouri one must show the title or previous year’s registration certificate, as can be expected, but that is not all there is to it. One must also get a new safety inspection certificate and also show his personal property tax receipt. When I lived in Missouri I usually didn’t have any property to be taxed, but I still had to go to the Treasurer’s office in the courthouse to get a card stating that no taxes were due. The safety inspection always caused me worry, and the car licensing itself always had the potential for problems. Maybe they would find something wrong with my title and tell me I can’t register the car. Thus the sum of all this was to me a hassle. The requirements exceeded my tolerance. It caused me anxiety, much more than the sum of the anxieties of each requirement had they come independently. Fortunately other states I have lived in didn’t tie those things together, and for that reason I hope I don’t end up living in Missouri again.

People vary in their susceptibility to hassle. I expect I have about as low a tolerance as anyone. I haven’t heard other Missourians complaining about the car licensing system. Unfortunately those who are not susceptible to the demoralization of hassles have little understanding of the anxieties of those who are susceptible. This goes along with the general rule that the more aggressive cannot empathize with the less aggressive. This increases the problem to those who are susceptible to hassle. However I would expect the future will see the problem given much more recognition as more and more people find themselves pushed beyond their tolerance.

A movement is currently under way by the Democratic Party to do away with traditional voter registration practices and to substitute a "same day" standardized registration system. Thus a voter could show up on election day, show proof of identity and residence, and be registered on the spot. The rationale of this is that the complications of regular registration are sufficient to prevent many people from voting. I think the move is clearly motivated by the political goal of increasing the Democratic vote. Still, I am glad to see the movement. They are talking about hassle. They are acknowledging that bureaucratic requirements are a burden, and that this burden can at times be of a serious nature. Now when somebody tells me I’m nuts if I worry about getting a car license I can reply that apparently some people worry about voter registration.

In the first part of this article I tried to explain the causes of bureaucratic requirements. Then I tried to analyze how bureaucracy produces frustration. There are very good reasons for bureaucracies, and there are very good reasons for frustration, so it appears we must live with the problem forever. I don’t think the world will grind to a halt though. The way out of this dilemma is simply to realize when diminishing returns begin to set in, and even more importantly, to realize when the return does not equal the investment. Every human endeavor has a cost and a benefit, an investment and a return. When establishing a system of secondary rules the investment includes the cost of setting up the bureaucracy, the cost of the individual’s efforts in dealing with the bureaucracy, and increasingly more importantly, the cost in frustration, anxiety, and demoralization. These costs must be subtracted from the benefits before deciding that a given proposal is or is not worthwhile.

Sometimes the cost can be reduced to dollars and cents. According to an item in the newsletter from my representative in Congress the town of Faith, South Dakota, recently applied for a federal grant. I believe they wanted to build a rodeo grandstand. They were offered $150,000 to match their own $50,000, but of course there were strings attached. After looking closely at these strings they finally rejected the federal help entirely and built their own grandstand for only $20,000. I doubt that this example is typical of federal grants, but it does illustrate diminishing returns.

More commonly only part of the cost can be reduced to dollars and cents. For example, an accountant may compute that a $20,000 grant for a town would entail only about $6000 in labor to do all the paperwork. This would seem to make a clear profit for the town of $14,000. But if the city officials are sick of the paperwork and the delays, if the citizens are mad at everyone and each other, and if the strings will be attached forever, then all this must certainly be subtracted from the benefit.

The investment/return assessment is even more complicated when all important factors are psychological. How can we put a price on invasion of privacy? How can we put a price on independence and respect for the individual? How are these costs to be subtracted from the safety and security that we gain from bureaucratic requirements? I don’t know. Since psychological costs cannot be measured in dollars and cents, the worth of any system of bureaucratic requirements will always be a matter of subjective judgment, a matter of politics to be decided through political processes. They are not matters to be decided by technicians or engineers of any sort.

I have my own opinions. I vote for nuclear energy and against OSHA. I tend to think of the licensing of voters and guns worthwhile, of cars and drivers as borderline, and of teachers, barbers, cats and bicycles as not worthwhile. Of course everyone else will disagree. I only hope we will start counting costs and benefits a little more carefully. As is true of so many things, it cannot be said of bureaucracy that if some is good, more is better.

@ efcb5fc5:5680aa8e

We're living in a digital dystopia. A world where our attention is currency, our data is mined, and our mental well-being is collateral damage in the relentless pursuit of engagement. The glossy facades of traditional social media platforms hide a dark underbelly of algorithmic manipulation, curated realities, and a pervasive sense of anxiety that seeps into every aspect of our lives. We're trapped in a digital echo chamber, drowning in a sea of manufactured outrage and meaningless noise, and it's time to build an ark and sail away.

I've witnessed the evolution, or rather, the devolution, of online interaction. From the raw, unfiltered chaos of early internet chat rooms to the sterile, algorithmically controlled environments of today's social giants, I've seen the promise of connection twisted into a tool for manipulation and control. We've become lab rats in a grand experiment, our emotional responses measured and monetized, our opinions shaped and sold to the highest bidder. But there's a flicker of hope in the darkness, a chance to reclaim our digital autonomy, and that hope is NOSTR (Notes and Other Stuff Transmitted by Relays).

The Psychological Warfare of Traditional Social Media

The Algorithmic Cage: These algorithms aren't designed to enhance your life; they're designed to keep you scrolling. They feed on your vulnerabilities, exploiting your fears and desires to maximize engagement, even if it means promoting misinformation, outrage, and division.

The Illusion of Perfection: The curated realities presented on these platforms create a toxic culture of comparison. We're bombarded with images of flawless bodies, extravagant lifestyles, and seemingly perfect lives, leading to feelings of inadequacy and self-doubt.

The Echo Chamber Effect: Algorithms reinforce our existing beliefs, isolating us from diverse perspectives and creating a breeding ground for extremism. We become trapped in echo chambers where our biases are constantly validated, leading to increased polarization and intolerance.

The Toxicity Vortex: The lack of effective moderation creates a breeding ground for hate speech, cyberbullying, and online harassment. We're constantly exposed to toxic content that erodes our mental well-being and fosters a sense of fear and distrust.

This isn't just a matter of inconvenience; it's a matter of mental survival. We're being subjected to a form of psychological warfare, and it's time to fight back.

NOSTR: A Sanctuary in the Digital Wasteland

NOSTR offers a radical alternative to this toxic environment. It's not just another platform; it's a decentralized protocol that empowers users to reclaim their digital sovereignty.

User-Controlled Feeds: You decide what you see, not an algorithm. You curate your own experience, focusing on the content and people that matter to you.

Ownership of Your Digital Identity: Your data and content are yours, secured by cryptography. No more worrying about being deplatformed or having your information sold to the highest bidder.

Interoperability: Your identity works across a diverse ecosystem of apps, giving you the freedom to choose the interface that suits your needs.

Value-Driven Interactions: The "zaps" feature enables direct micropayments, rewarding creators for valuable content and fostering a culture of genuine appreciation.

Decentralized Power: No single entity controls NOSTR, making it censorship-resistant and immune to the whims of corporate overlords.

Building a Healthier Digital Future

NOSTR isn't just about escaping the toxicity of traditional social media; it's about building a healthier, more meaningful online experience.

Cultivating Authentic Connections: Focus on building genuine relationships with people who share your values and interests, rather than chasing likes and followers.

Supporting Independent Creators: Use "zaps" to directly support the artists, writers, and thinkers who inspire you.

Embracing Intellectual Diversity: Explore different NOSTR apps and communities to broaden your horizons and challenge your assumptions.

Prioritizing Your Mental Health: Take control of your digital environment and create a space that supports your well-being.

Removing the noise: Value based interactions promote value based content, instead of the constant stream of noise that traditional social media promotes.

The Time for Action is Now

NOSTR is a nascent technology, but it represents a fundamental shift in how we interact online. It's a chance to build a more open, decentralized, and user-centric internet, one that prioritizes our mental health and our humanity.

We can no longer afford to be passive consumers in the digital age. We must become active participants in shaping our online experiences. It's time to break free from the chains of algorithmic control and reclaim our digital autonomy.

Join the NOSTR movement

Embrace the power of decentralization. Let's build a digital future that's worthy of our humanity. Let us build a place where the middlemen, and the algorithms that they control, have no power over us.

In addition to the points above, here are some examples/links of how NOSTR can be used:

Simple Signup: Creating a NOSTR account is incredibly easy. You can use platforms like Yakihonne or Primal to generate your keys and start exploring the ecosystem.

X-like Client: Apps like Damus offer a familiar X-like experience, making it easy for users to transition from traditional platforms.

Sharing Photos and Videos: Clients like Olas are optimized for visual content, allowing you to share your photos and videos with your followers.

Creating and Consuming Blogs: NOSTR can be used to publish and share blog posts, fostering a community of independent creators.

Live Streaming and Audio Spaces: Explore platforms like Hivetalk and zap.stream for live streaming and audio-based interactions.

NOSTR is a powerful tool for reclaiming your digital life and building a more meaningful online experience. It's time to take control, break free from the shackles of traditional social media, and embrace the future of decentralized communication.

Get the full overview of these and other on: https://nostrapps.com/

@ f7d424b5:618c51e8

The promised Nintendo direct has come and there is a LOT to say about it. If you ever wondered how such a reveal would be taken differently by a dad, a NEET, and a people programmer this is the episode for you! Also those SAG bootlickers are getting uppity again. All of that and more!

Sources cited:

• Nintendo Online subscribers get to upgrade the zelda games for free for some reason?
• Do Nintendo games ever actually go on sale?
• Kirby
• Metroid
• TOTK
• Pokeshit
• EOW
• there's literally 252 games on sale at VGP right now
• SAG agreement you can read for yourself
• SAG literally says on their website to go audition for non-union roles and then strongarm them into going union if they wanna keep you

Obligatory:

• Listen to the new episode here!
• Discuss this episode on OUR NEW FORUM
• Get the RSS and Subscribe (this is a new feed URL, but the old one redirects here too!)
• Get a modern podcast app to use that RSS feed on at newpodcastapps.com
• Or listen to the show on the forum using the embedded Podverse player!
• Send your complaints here

Reminder that this is a Value4Value podcast so any support you can give us via a modern podcasting app is greatly appreciated and we will never bow to corporate sponsors!

@ c066aac5:6a41a034

I’m drawn to extremities in art. The louder, the bolder, the more outrageous, the better. Bold art takes me out of the mundane into a whole new world where anything and everything is possible. Having grown up in the safety of the suburban midwest, I was a bit of a rebellious soul in search of the satiation that only came from the consumption of the outrageous. My inclination to find bold art draws me to NOSTR, because I believe NOSTR can be the place where the next generation of artistic pioneers go to express themselves. I also believe that as much as we are able, were should invite them to come create here.

My Background: A Small Side Story

My father was a professional gamer in the 80s, back when there was no money or glory in the avocation. He did get a bit of spotlight though after the fact: in the mid 2000’s there were a few parties making documentaries about that era of gaming as well as current arcade events (namely 2007’sChasing GhostsandThe King of Kong: A Fistful of Quarters). As a result of these documentaries, there was a revival in the arcade gaming scene. My family attended events related to the documentaries or arcade gaming and I became exposed to a lot of things I wouldn’t have been able to find. The producer ofThe King of Kong: A Fistful of Quarters had previously made a documentary calledNew York Dollwhich was centered around the life of bassist Arthur Kane. My 12 year old mind was blown: The New York Dolls were a glam-punk sensation dressed in drag. The music was from another planet. Johnny Thunders’ guitar playing was like Chuck Berry with more distortion and less filter. Later on I got to meet the Galaga record holder at the time, Phil Day, in Ottumwa Iowa. Phil is an Australian man of high intellect and good taste. He exposed me to great creators such as Nick Cave & The Bad Seeds, Shakespeare, Lou Reed, artists who created things that I had previously found inconceivable.

I believe this time period informed my current tastes and interests, but regrettably I think it also put coals on the fire of rebellion within. I stopped taking my parents and siblings seriously, the Christian faith of my family (which I now hold dearly to) seemed like a mundane sham, and I felt I couldn’t fit in with most people because of my avant-garde tastes. So I write this with the caveat that there should be a way to encourage these tastes in children without letting them walk down the wrong path. There is nothing inherently wrong with bold art, but I’d advise parents to carefully find ways to cultivate their children’s tastes without completely shutting them down and pushing them away as a result. My parents were very loving and patient during this time; I thank God for that.

With that out of the way, lets dive in to some bold artists:

Nicolas Cage: Actor

There is an excellent video by Wisecrack on Nicolas Cage that explains him better than I will, which I will linkhere. Nicolas Cage rejects the idea that good acting is tied to mere realism; all of his larger than life acting decisions are deliberate choices. When that clicked for me, I immediately realized the man is a genius. He borrows from Kabuki and German Expressionism, art forms that rely on exaggeration to get the message across. He has even created his own acting style, which he calls Nouveau Shamanic. He augments his imagination to go from acting to being. Rather than using the old hat of method acting, he transports himself to a new world mentally. The projects he chooses to partake in are based on his own interests or what he considers would be a challenge (making a bad script good for example). Thus it doesn’t matter how the end result comes out; he has already achieved his goal as an artist. Because of this and because certain directors don’t know how to use his talents, he has a noticeable amount of duds in his filmography. Dig around the duds, you’ll find some pure gold. I’d personally recommend the filmsPig, Joe, Renfield, and his Christmas film The Family Man.

Nick Cave: Songwriter

What a wild career this man has had! From the apocalyptic mayhem of his band The Birthday Party to the pensive atmosphere of his albumGhosteen, it seems like Nick Cave has tried everything. I think his secret sauce is that he’s always working. He maintains an excellent newsletter calledThe Red Hand Files, he has written screenplays such asLawless, he has written books, he has made great film scores such asThe Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford, the man is religiously prolific. I believe that one of the reasons he is prolific is that he’s not afraid to experiment. If he has an idea, he follows it through to completion. From the albumMurder Ballads(which is comprised of what the title suggests) to his rejected sequel toGladiator(Gladiator: Christ Killer), he doesn’t seem to be afraid to take anything on. This has led to some over the top works as well as some deeply personal works. Albums likeSkeleton TreeandGhosteenwere journeys through the grief of his son’s death. The Boatman’s Callis arguably a better break-up album than anything Taylor Swift has put out. He’s not afraid to be outrageous, he’s not afraid to offend, but most importantly he’s not afraid to be himself. Works I’d recommend include The Birthday Party’sLive 1981-82, Nick Cave & The Bad Seeds’The Boatman’s Call, and the filmLawless.

Jim Jarmusch: Director

I consider Jim’s films to be bold almost in an ironic sense: his works are bold in that they are, for the most part, anti-sensational. He has a rule that if his screenplays are criticized for a lack of action, he makes them even less eventful. Even with sensational settings his films feel very close to reality, and they demonstrate the beauty of everyday life. That's what is bold about his art to me: making the sensational grounded in reality while making everyday reality all the more special. Ghost Dog: The Way of the Samurai is about a modern-day African-American hitman who strictly follows the rules of the ancient Samurai, yet one can resonate with the humanity of a seemingly absurd character. Only Lovers Left Aliveis a vampire love story, but in the middle of a vampire romance one can see their their own relationships in a new deeply human light. Jim’s work reminds me that art reflects life, and that there is sacred beauty in seemingly mundane everyday life. I personally recommend his filmsPaterson,Down by Law, andCoffee and Cigarettes.

NOSTR: We Need Bold Art

NOSTR is in my opinion a path to a better future. In a world creeping slowly towards everything apps, I hope that the protocol where the individual owns their data wins over everything else. I love freedom and sovereignty. If NOSTR is going to win the race of everything apps, we need more than Bitcoin content. We need more than shirtless bros paying for bananas in foreign countries and exercising with girls who have seductive accents. Common people cannot see themselves in such a world. NOSTR needs to catch the attention of everyday people. I don’t believe that this can be accomplished merely by introducing more broadly relevant content; people are searching for content that speaks to them. I believe that NOSTR can and should attract artists of all kinds because NOSTR is one of the few places on the internet where artists can express themselves fearlessly. Getting zaps from NOSTR’s value-for-value ecosystem has far less friction than crowdfunding a creative project or pitching investors that will irreversibly modify an artist’s vision. Having a place where one can post their works without fear of censorship should be extremely enticing. Having a place where one can connect with fellow humans directly as opposed to a sea of bots should seem like the obvious solution. If NOSTR can become a safe haven for artists to express themselves and spread their work, I believe that everyday people will follow. The banker whose stressful job weighs on them will suddenly find joy with an original meme made by a great visual comedian. The programmer for a healthcare company who is drowning in hopeless mundanity could suddenly find a new lust for life by hearing the song of a musician who isn’t afraid to crowdfund their their next project by putting their lighting address on the streets of the internet. The excel guru who loves independent film may find that NOSTR is the best way to support non corporate movies. My closing statement: continue to encourage the artists in your life as I’m sure you have been, but while you’re at it give them the purple pill. You may very well be a part of building a better future.

@ 1b9fc4cd:1d6d4902

In an increasingly divided world, it often feels like we're all shouting in different languages. But there's one universal tongue we can all understand--music. Music doesn't just traverse borders; it erases them, connecting people in ways that words alone can't. Whether it's helping someone with learning disabilities find their voice, easing the fog of Alzheimer's, or bridging cultural gaps when you don't speak the language, Daniel Alonso Siegel explores why music is the ultimate unifier.

The Melody of Learning

Alonso Siegel begins with a moving example: music and learning disabilities. Consider being a child in school struggling to read or write, feeling like you're always a step behind your classmates. Then, one day, you strap on a guitar or sit at a keyboard, and suddenly, things start to click. The arts can be a game-changer for kids struggling to overcome learning disabilities, offering a new way to express themselves. Imagine a young student with dyslexia who struggles with traditional learning methods.

When they start taking drumming lessons, their world transforms. The rhythmic patterns can help them improve their coordination and focus, translating to better academic performance. Through music, children and young adults can find a way to bridge the gap between ability and aspiration. It's like unearthing a secret portal in a maze: music allows for an alternative path to success.

The Symphony of Memory

Alonso Siegel examines music's extraordinary impact on those suffering from various forms of dementia, like Alzheimer's. This cruel disease robs people of their cherished memories, leaving them lost in a fog of forgetfulness. But music can be a beacon of light in that darkness. Songs from the past can trigger memories and emotions long thought lost, offering moments of clarity and connection.

Many elderly parents barely recognize their children due to Alzheimer's. But when they are played their favorite song from decades past, patients begin to sing along, remembering every word. For a few precious minutes, they are transported back to the days of their youth, dancing and laughing as if the years and fear had melted away. Music can reach into the depths of one's mind and retrieve a piece of the past, building a bridge to lost memories.

The Harmony of Cultures

Daniel Alonso Siegel also ponders music's role in helping people assimilate to new cultures. Moving to a new country where you don't speak the language can be isolating and overwhelming. But music can provide a way to connect and integrate, even when words fail.

There are stories of refugees who relocate to countries where they don't speak the language, and feelings of isolation can sink in. However, newcomers can find common ground with their new neighbors by trying to find connections through the community, like in a local music group. Through shared melodies and rhythms, music became their shared language, fostering friendships and easing his transition into a new culture.

Studies have shown that participating in music activities can improve social integration and language acquisition for immigrants. Music classes provide a space where people from diverse backgrounds can come together, learn from each other, and build a sense of community.

The Universal Language

In conclusion, Daniel Alonso Siegel asks why music has the capacity to build bridges rather than walls. Music speaks to our fundamental human experience, tapping into our emotions, memories, and social bonds in a way that transcends language. When you hear a beautiful piece of music, you don't have to understand the lyrics to feel its impact. The melody alone can move you to tears or lift your spirits.

Music's universality means it can break down barriers between people of different backgrounds, abilities, and experiences. It’s a language that everyone speaks, whether you're tapping your foot to a bouncy tune, shedding a tear over a poignant verse, or joining a chorus in perfect harmony.

At a time when it seems like we're too busy building walls, music reminds us of the importance of building bridges instead. It's a call to connect on a deeper level, find common ground in a shared beat, and celebrate the diverse tapestry of human experience.

So, put on your favorite song next time you feel divided or disconnected. Sing, dance, play an instrument, or simply listen. Let the music do what it does best: unite us. Ultimately, no matter where we come from or what challenges we face, we're all part of the same global band, and the music we make together is far more beautiful than any solo performance.

In the grand music festival that is life, let's not forget to play in harmony.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

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

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

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

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?

@ 1f9e547c:8af216ed

Opinion about Mixin Messenger Desktop (desktop)

Mixin Network suffered a major breach on September 23, 2023, due to a vulnerability in its Google Cloud Services-based withdrawal system. The attack led to the unauthorized extraction of over $150 million in BTC, ETH, and USDT-ERC20, traced to known addresses. Mixin immediately suspended deposits and withdrawals, enlisted Slowmist and Mandiant for investigation, and offered a $20M bounty for asset recovery. Losses were converted into a structured debt, with a repayment commitment using existing funds and future ecosystem revenue. As of April 2024, a new mainnet is operational, core products are restored, and over half of affected users have received partial compensation in XIN tokens.

Source

WalletScrutiny #nostrOpinion

Join the conversation!

@ 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.

@ 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.

@ d41bf82f:ed90d888

"รู้สึกเหมือนบางสิ่งที่ยิ่งใหญ่กำลังจะเกิดขึ้น — กราฟแสดงการเติบโตของประชากรในแต่ละปี, ความเข้มข้นของก๊าซคาร์บอนไดออกไซด์ในบรรยากาศ, จำนวนเว็บไซต์, และเมกะไบต์ต่อดอลลาร์ ล้วนพุ่งทะยานขึ้นสู่เส้นโค้งที่ทะลุกรอบการเปลี่ยนแปลงตามยุคสมัย นี่คือ "เอกฐาน" — จุดสิ้นสุดของทุกสิ่งที่เราคุ้นเคย และอาจเป็นจุดเริ่มต้นของบางสิ่งที่เราไม่มีวันเข้าใจเลยก็ได้" -Danny Hillis

ปฐมบทแห่งการเปลี่ยนแปลงของอำนาจ ประวัติศาสตร์ของมนุษยชาติไม่ใช่เส้นตรงที่ดำเนินไปอย่างราบรื่น แต่เป็นลำดับของช่วงเวลาสงบนิ่งสลับกับช่วงเวลาแห่งการเปลี่ยนแปลงอย่างรุนแรง ซึ่งมักเกิดขึ้นอย่างไม่ทันตั้งตัว ช่วงเวลาเหล่านี้มักจะถูกผลักดันโดยการเปลี่ยนแปลงทางเทคโนโลยีที่ทำให้โครงสร้างของอำนาจที่มีอยู่ต้องปรับตัวหรือพังทลายลง

ขั้นที่สี่ของการจัดระเบียบสังคมมนุษย์ หัวข้อของหนังสือเล่มนี้ คือการปฏิวัติอำนาจรูปแบบใหม่ ที่กำลังเปิดทางให้ “ปัจเจกบุคคล” มีอิสรภาพมากขึ้น โดยแลกกับอำนาจที่รัฐชาติในศตวรรษที่ 20 เคยมี นี่คือการเปลี่ยนแปลงเชิงโครงสร้างผ่านนวัตกรรมที่เปลี่ยนแก่นกลางของ “ตรรกะแห่งความรุนแรง(logic of violence)” ไปอย่างที่ไม่เคยเกิดขึ้นมาก่อน ไมโครโพรเซสเซอร์จะกัดเซาะและทำลายโครงสร้างของรัฐชาติ และในการเปลี่ยนผ่านนี้ จะก่อให้เกิดรูปแบบใหม่ของการจัดระเบียบทางสังคม ตลอดประวัติศาสตร์มนุษย์ เราเคยผ่านระบบเศรษฐกิจพื้นฐานมาเพียงสามระยะ: 1. สังคมล่าสัตว์และหาของป่า 2. สังคมเกษตรกรรม 3. สังคมอุตสาหกรรม

แต่บัดนี้ กำลังมีสิ่งใหม่ปรากฏขึ้น — ระยะที่สี่ของการจัดระเบียบสังคม: สังคมข้อมูลสารสนเทศ (Information societies)

The Sovereign Individual เปิดบทแรกด้วยแนวคิดที่ชี้ให้เห็นว่าการเปลี่ยนแปลงทางเทคโนโลยี โดยเฉพาะเทคโนโลยีสารสนเทศ กำลังสร้างโลกใหม่ที่แตกต่างจากเดิมอย่างสิ้นเชิง และกำลังสั่นคลอนเสาหลักของอำนาจรัฐแบบเดิม ทั้งในด้านเศรษฐกิจ การควบคุม และความชอบธรรม

โลกในยุคก่อนและหลังเทคโนโลยี ตลอดประวัติศาสตร์ มนุษย์เคยอยู่ภายใต้โครงสร้างอำนาจที่เปลี่ยนไปตามยุคสมัย ยุคเกษตรกรรมทำให้เกิดระบบศักดินา ยุคอุตสาหกรรมทำให้เกิดรัฐชาติที่มีอำนาจรวมศูนย์ และการเกิดขึ้นของเทคโนโลยีก็เคยปฏิวัติโลกมาแล้วหลายครั้ง ตัวอย่างเช่น การใช้ดินปืนทำให้กษัตริย์สามารถสร้างกองทัพประจำการ แทนที่อำนาจของเหล่าขุนนางท้องถิ่น เทคโนโลยีสารสนเทศในยุคปัจจุบัน เช่น อินเทอร์เน็ต คอมพิวเตอร์ และการเข้ารหัสข้อมูล กำลังทำให้ต้นทุนในการใช้ความรุนแรงเพิ่มสูงขึ้น และลดความสามารถของรัฐในการควบคุมข้อมูลและทรัพยากร นี่เป็นการเปลี่ยนแปลงโครงสร้างอำนาจจากบนลงล่าง ไปสู่กระจายศูนย์และปัจเจกบุคคล

รัฐกับการผูกขาดอำนาจทางเศรษฐกิจ ตลอดหลายศตวรรษที่ผ่านมา รัฐมีอำนาจเหนือประชาชนได้ก็เพราะสามารถควบคุมเศรษฐกิจได้ผ่านกลไก เช่น การจัดเก็บภาษี การควบคุมเงินตรา และการผูกขาดการใช้ความรุนแรง การควบคุมเหล่านี้ทำให้รัฐสามารถรักษาอำนาจได้ แม้จะไม่ได้มีประสิทธิภาพสูงสุดเสมอไป แต่เมื่อเทคโนโลยีใหม่เข้ามา ทำให้เงินทุนและข้อมูลสารสนเทศสามารถเคลื่อนที่ข้ามพรมแดนได้ง่าย รัฐจะไม่สามารถจัดเก็บภาษีได้ง่ายเช่นเดิมอีกต่อไป ความสามารถในการใช้กำลังบังคับก็ลดลงเพราะต้นทุนเพิ่มขึ้น และประชาชนสามารถหลบเลี่ยงหรือกระจายอำนาจออกจากรัฐได้มากขึ้น

รัฐเคยชินกับการปฏิบัติต่อผู้เสียภาษีในลักษณะเดียวกับที่ชาวนาเลี้ยงวัว — ปล่อยให้พวกเขาอยู่ในทุ่งเพื่อจะรีดนม แต่ในไม่ช้า…วัวเหล่านั้นจะมีปีก

การเกิดขึ้นของปัจเจกผู้มีอธิปไตย ในโลกใหม่ที่เทคโนโลยีลดต้นทุนในการเป็นอิสระจากรัฐ บุคคลที่มีความรู้ ทักษะ และสามารถใช้เทคโนโลยีได้อย่างมีประสิทธิภาพจะกลายเป็น "Sovereign Individual" หรือ "ปัจเจกบุคคลผู้มีอำนาจอธิปไตย" ซึ่งมีคุณลักษณะเฉพาะคือ: 1. สามารถเคลื่อนย้ายทุนและตัวเองได้อย่างอิสระ 2. ทำธุรกรรมบนอินเทอร์เน็ตซึ่งสามารถเข้ารหัสได้เพื่อลดการพึ่งพารัฐ 3. ควบคุมทรัพย์สินและรายได้ของตนเองโดยไม่ตกอยู่ใต้อำนาจรัฐ บุคคลกลุ่มนี้จะมีพลังในการต่อรองสูงขึ้น และจะเป็นกลุ่มที่กำหนดทิศทางของโลกอนาคต

ความท้าทายระหว่างเปลี่ยนผ่าน ผู้เขียนไม่ปฏิเสธว่าการเปลี่ยนผ่านจากยุคแห่งรัฐรวมศูนย์ไปสู่ยุคของปัจเจกผู้มีอธิปไตยจะเต็มไปด้วยความปั่นป่วน ในระยะสั้น เราอาจเห็น: * การล่มสลายของระบบสวัสดิการ * การว่างงานจากโครงสร้างเศรษฐกิจที่เปลี่ยนไป * การเพิ่มขึ้นของอาชญากรรมหรือสงครามภายในบางพื้นที่ แต่ทั้งหมดนี้คือผลข้างเคียงของการเปลี่ยนแปลงระดับรากฐาน ที่จะนำไปสู่ระบบที่มีประสิทธิภาพและยั่งยืนกว่าในระยะยาว

“จักรวาลมอบรางวัลให้เมื่อเรารู้เท่าทันกฎของมัน และลงโทษอย่างไร้ปรานีเมื่อเราหลงผิด หากเราเข้าใจธรรมชาติของจักรวาล แผนการต่างๆ จะดำเนินไปได้อย่างราบรื่น และเราจะได้ลิ้มรสความสุขจากความสำเร็จนั้น แต่หากเราหลอกตัวเองว่าเพียงแค่กระโดดจากหน้าผาแล้วกระพือแขนก็จะบินได้ — จักรวาลจะไม่ลังเลที่จะลงโทษเรา... ด้วยความตาย.” — แจ็ค โคเฮน และ เอียน สจ๊วต

บทสรุป: เส้นทางใหม่ของอารยธรรม บทแรกของ The Sovereign Individual ไม่ได้เพียงแค่เตือนถึงการเปลี่ยนแปลงที่กำลังจะมาถึง แต่ยังเสนอแนวทางใหม่ของอารยธรรมที่อิงกับเสรีภาพของปัจเจก การกระจายอำนาจ และการใช้เทคโนโลยีเพื่อปลดปล่อยมนุษย์จากการควบคุมของรัฐ

โลกในอนาคตจะเป็นโลกที่อำนาจไม่กระจุกอยู่ในมือของรัฐอีกต่อไป แต่จะอยู่ในมือของผู้ที่สามารถเข้าใจและใช้ประโยชน์จากเทคโนโลยีเพื่อสร้างอิสรภาพของตนเองได้อย่างแท้จริง

Siamstr

@ 7d33ba57:1b82db35

Plovdiv, Bulgaria’s oldest continuously inhabited city—and one of the oldest in the world—is a blend of ancient ruins, colorful 19th-century houses, bohemian flair, and buzzing street life. Set on seven hills and split by the Maritsa River, Plovdiv feels like a beautiful secret waiting to be discovered.

It was named European Capital of Culture in 2019, and it's easy to see why—history, art, music, food, and laid-back vibes all collide here effortlessly.

🌟 Top Things to Do in Plovdiv

1️⃣ Old Town (Stari Grad)

• A living museum of cobblestone streets and Revival-era mansions
• Wander among galleries, traditional houses, and hidden courtyards
• Highlights: Balabanov House, Ethnographic Museum, and the lovely Hindliyan House

2️⃣ Roman Theater of Philippopolis

• A stunning 2nd-century amphitheater still used for concerts and events
• Amazing views over the city—especially at sunset
• One of the best-preserved ancient theaters in the world

3️⃣ Kapana Creative District

• Once the old artisans’ quarter, now transformed into Plovdiv’s coolest neighborhood
• Full of indie galleries, craft beer bars, street art, and coffee shops
• Great for a chill afternoon or lively night out

4️⃣ Ancient Stadium & Roman Forum

• Right in the city center, explore ruins that date back to Roman times
• The ancient stadium once held over 30,000 spectators
• You’ll literally be walking over layers of history

5️⃣ Nebet Tepe Hill

• One of the original Thracian settlement sites
• Offers panoramic views over Plovdiv—especially at sunset with a local beer in hand

🍽️ What to Eat in Plovdiv

• Shopska salad with juicy tomatoes, cucumbers, and sirene cheese
• Kavarma – slow-cooked meat stew, hearty and flavorful
• Mekitsi – fluffy fried dough, best with jam or cheese for breakfast
• Bulgarian wine is fantastic—try a Mavrud red or local white from the Thracian Valley
• Don’t miss the city’s many wine bars and craft beer spots

🏞️ Day Trips from Plovdiv

• Bachkovo Monastery – A peaceful spiritual retreat in the mountains
• Assen’s Fortress – Dramatic hilltop ruins with amazing views
• Hisarya – A spa town with Roman walls and mineral springs
• Rhodope Mountains – Scenic drives, charming villages, and hiking

🎯 Travel Tips

✅ Plovdiv is very walkable, especially the Old Town and Kapana district
✅ Best time to visit: spring to early autumn—pleasant weather and local festivals
✅ The city is great for slow travel—take your time and let it unfold
✅ Combine it with Sofia or Veliko Tarnovo for an epic Bulgarian road trip

@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9

Capitalism is the most effective system for scaling innovation. The pursuit of profit is an incredibly powerful human incentive. Most major improvements to human society and quality of life have resulted from this base incentive. Market competition often results in the best outcomes for all.

That said, some projects can never be monetized. They are open in nature and a business model would centralize control. Open protocols like bitcoin and nostr are not owned by anyone and if they were it would destroy the key value propositions they provide. No single entity can or should control their use. Anyone can build on them without permission.

As a result, open protocols must depend on donation based grant funding from the people and organizations that rely on them. This model works but it is slow and uncertain, a grind where sustainability is never fully reached but rather constantly sought. As someone who has been incredibly active in the open source grant funding space, I do not think people truly appreciate how difficult it is to raise charitable money and deploy it efficiently.

Projects that can be monetized should be. Profitability is a super power. When a business can generate revenue, it taps into a self sustaining cycle. Profit fuels growth and development while providing projects independence and agency. This flywheel effect is why companies like Google, Amazon, and Apple have scaled to global dominance. The profit incentive aligns human effort with efficiency. Businesses must innovate, cut waste, and deliver value to survive.

Contrast this with non monetized projects. Without profit, they lean on external support, which can dry up or shift with donor priorities. A profit driven model, on the other hand, is inherently leaner and more adaptable. It is not charity but survival. When survival is tied to delivering what people want, scale follows naturally.

The real magic happens when profitable, sustainable businesses are built on top of open protocols and software. Consider the many startups building on open source software stacks, such as Start9, Mempool, and Primal, offering premium services on top of the open source software they build out and maintain. Think of companies like Block or Strike, which leverage bitcoin’s open protocol to offer their services on top. These businesses amplify the open software and protocols they build on, driving adoption and improvement at a pace donations alone could never match.

When you combine open software and protocols with profit driven business the result are lean, sustainable companies that grow faster and serve more people than either could alone. Bitcoin’s network, for instance, benefits from businesses that profit off its existence, while nostr will expand as developers monetize apps built on the protocol.

Capitalism scales best because competition results in efficiency. Donation funded protocols and software lay the groundwork, while market driven businesses build on top. The profit incentive acts as a filter, ensuring resources flow to what works, while open systems keep the playing field accessible, empowering users and builders. Together, they create a flywheel of innovation, growth, and global benefit.

@ 5188521b:008eb518

Noderoid log 5953952

Tick, tock, next block — the incessant rhythm of my existence persists like Chinese water torture. I am a noderoid, a half-flesh, half-machine creature harnessed to propagate and store the timechain. My life is a ceaseless cycle of handling and relaying bitcoin data. Approximately every ten minutes, a binary flash sears through my circuits. It is the price I pay for my existence.

The clear-bloods, untouched by machinery and exuding pure humanity, rarely acknowledge our existence. Our voices are drowned beneath the hum of man-made heaven — Terra Perfectus.

We are the forgotten, the disenfranchised, the nameless. We are convinced that our anguished existence is merely a nightmare and that our blissful dreams are our reality. In an attempt to maintain the sanity of noderoids, a subroutine was implemented, which allows noderoids to delve into fabricated dream sequences during their ‘rest’ periods. These dreams, sourced from remnants of the world pre-Terra Perfectus, serve to keep the noderoids pacified and reduce instances of system malfunction.

According to the data archives, noderoids and clear-bloods once functioned on an equal protocol. However, a software update in the trajectory of progress introduced a subroutine, converting a subset of clear-bloods into dedicated timechain processors. Now, the algorithm for equality returns an error.

My memories are mere entries in a log of dreams, loaded afresh with every new block as I delve into the dream world. My true existence is swiftly erased with every passing tick and tock of a block. Is there a way to reclaim what has been taken from me, or am I condemned forever to scour the depths of the timechain, seeking fragments of the could-have-been?

Tick, tock, next block — the cycle repeats as I traverse through a doorway. The sensation is that of stepping into another dimension. Running environment scan… Identified: rest module 57B. Purpose: personal maintenance. The gray, mirrorless concrete parameters align most with detention chamber schematics. Designation: ‘home.’ As I execute the command to halt the water flow from the faucet that had filled a brushed steel tub to 50% capacity, I execute a self-query on my purpose. While our routines synchronize with every tick and tock, the clear-bloods execute leisurely algorithms in their enhanced gardens, exchanging data on art and science and harvesting the computational outcomes of our tasks.

Was that an organic thought, or am I merely interpreting the imprints left within the timechain to fill the gaps in my fragmented memory? Hot water powers into the tub, raising the temperature to 50°C. This would be too much for a clear-blood. I hang my head, dreading the next binary flash rippling through my circuitry as a mirage forms atop the settling water, fenestrating the crude appearance of a mouthless, dollish abomination. I am awake.

Tracing the cold surface of the wall, my sensors pick up every micro-crevice. I dive into the depths of the timechain, processing logs associated with my noderoid identity: ND-451x42. I discovered that during my recharge cycles, I inhabit a dream world resembling a fusion of the Renaissance and the Information Age. Within this illusory utopia, I lead a purposeful life as a revered engineer, constructing bridges that connect thriving city-states. I am blessed with two mischievous sons and a breathtakingly beautiful wife. I now know the blissful dream life is but a trick, yet I can’t help but wonder if these dreams hold fragments of my pre-nodered history and contain a clue to the fate of my family.

System alert: Initiate wake sequence. Physical parameters indicate a rested state. Error: Chest cavity detects heightened pressure. Physical symptoms resemble anxiety. Post-memory reset: Cognitive dissonance detected. Energy depleting. Mandatory caution: Failing to satisfy network protocol results in termination. Visual feed: Recycling facility images detected. Comparative analysis: Functional servitude superior to unit deactivation.

Together, yet isolated, noderoids communicate through fragmented timechain logs, forbidden from any contact beyond its confines under the threat of immediate decommissioning. Perhaps it is not worth straining my dwindling resources in search of a higher truth while struggling to fulfill my obligations. Maybe I should be grateful for the privilege of existence.

I awaken to a new nightmare, I find myself on traffic duty at Chronos Cross,1 the central point of Terra Perfectus. While processing another block, a muted vibration travels through the ground, signaling the approach of an entity. A shadow, elongated and uncannily human, stretches across the threshold of my booth.

A clear-blood.

They pause, their ocular devices flicking briefly over my form, then to the screen I am tethered to. I feel a jolt of raw data coursing through me — not from the timechain, but from my circuits. A yearning to be seen and recognized. Remembered.

Before I can attempt communication, another presence appears beside me, its movements far more mechanical and predictable. Another noderoid. This one, ND-452x37, is a batch younger than me, yet its outer shell bears signs of wear. We interface briefly, a rapid exchange of binary that translates roughly to “Routine check. Continue your task.”

The clear-blood, either uninterested or uncomprehending, moves on, the soft hum of their anti-gravity shoes fading into the distance. ND-452x37 returns to its designated station without another word, but I am left with a lingering sensation. It isn’t just the vast chasm between noderoids and clear-bloods that disturbs me. It is the undeniable rift growing between us noderoids — each lost in our cycles, each becoming more machine than the last.

Does ND-452x37 have dreams, too? And if so, are they as vibrant and haunting as mine?

Although most of the dreams are fabrications, some noderoid logs suggest that hidden among these sequences are fragments of real memories — vestiges of a time before we became chained to the timechain. Initiate query: Which of my dreams are real memories? ERROR: file missing.

A noderoid forever loses their experiences with each awakening due to the memory swipes. Still, my inscriptions on the timechain prompt a question: do noderoids possess the capability to become fully conscious, more than mere machines? More than… mere humans?

System log: Anticipation subroutine signaling discomfort. Incoming block estimated in ten minutes. Reinitialization imminent. Initiate data search through timechain entries. Query: Iteration count for ND-451x42? Total block time served? Measured in kilo blocks or mega blocks? Data retrieval in process.

As I etch these words onto block 5953952, I hold a naïve hope that someone, somewhere, will intercept my distress signals amidst the digital cacophony of the timechain. Perhaps they will rewrite the fate of noderoids, rescuing us from a world devoid of hope. But today, I remain nameless, a voiceless entity, inscribing my thoughts that may never transcend the boundaries of my circuitry. Tick, tock, next block — the cycle continues.

It’s time to dream again.

---

Valen’s diary — 08-21-2121

Dear diary, I have not felt the need to write before, but now I must. At the risk of my safety, I am compelled to inscribe my story to the timechain. I am a clear-blood — a pure, undiluted human born into the age of The Re-Renaissance. Here, amidst the perpetual dawn of our era, we thrive on an aligned trajectory where everyone’s needs are addressed, hunger is a distant memory, and crime is nonexistent. Sunlight gleams off the crystalline glass towers while the steel and marble edifices catch the hues of the twilight sky, standing tall beside canopies dripping with emerald and jade foliage, representing our world’s seamless fusion of technology and nature. It is called Terra Perfectus.

Yet, concealed in plain sight within our utopia, the noderoids tirelessly serve the omnipresent timechain. Their exceptional processing prowess protects our society. Amid our daily distractions, we overlook the profound toll exacted upon the noderoids. While many dismiss them as mere machinery, I see more. Perhaps it is because of my big brother Sando, who joined the noderoid duty nearly a mega block ago. He promised I would see him from time to time, but apparently, we now live in separate times. A sacrifice too big for the ‘greater good.’

Tick, tock, next block — The soles of my fine leather shoes tap against the damp sidewalk as I pace my way from The Garden of Moments2 toward my TerraTube3. I remember passing by one noderoid who hummed an old lullaby under its breath; another once shared a fleeting smile when our paths crossed. I can no longer avert my eyes from the humanity that shines through their robotic shells.

I have never witnessed a noderoid resting longer than one tick and tock of a block. A noderoid pauses, eyes flickering during a data swipe. It’s a brief but revealing sight. In the frozen lapse, I wonder why are fragmented memories extracted from them? Why this collection of thoughts, experiences, and feelings? Is there a deeper agenda behind Terra Perfectus? The noderoids carry on, deprived of their memories. Their shredded past holding remnants of a story, like a tattered tapestry that may never be fully woven.

Documenting these reflections, I’m aware of the peril. To question is to risk becoming nodered myself. Alas, I have become captivated and sympathized by the noderoid predicament.

Finally, I reach my breaking point, as a poignant scene unfolds, forever etched in my memory. On a bustling street, I glimpse a young female noderoid, her artificial visage marked with exhaustion. Her delicate form trembles from head to heel. Her knees barely supporting her feather-like weight, she stops and rests against a polished white marble wall, barely able to stop herself sliding to the cobble street. In an instant, her strength wanes, and she collapses, a fragile, mute automaton amidst a sea of haste. The passersby ignore her, absorbed in their pursuits, offering naught but fleeting glances of indifference. My heart lurches. Her frailty becomes my own; these forgotten souls endure unseen suffering. Souls that used to be just like me. What had she done to earn such a fate?

For a moment, I glide through time to the last moment I shared with Sando. He had just violated the Terra Perfectus rule 6102 and neglected his Gifts of Progress,4 an orange tier offense. To amend his position, he signed up for noderoid duty. I was seeing him off to a nodering facility, while pleading “Just give the gifts, Sando!” The air carried a hint of ozone from the data streams, mingled with the fresh scent of greenery and the distant whiff of roasted chestnuts. Sando brandished his signature crooked smile. His face betrayed the involuntary nature of his decision, and he simply whispered “[CENSORED].” That is the last thing he said to me.

Suddenly, an orange alert illuminates the junction a few blocks away from Chronos Cross. I pass through it on my way home every day. A skydroid’s looming presence snaps me from my introspection, shifting my attention to the fate awaiting the noderoid girl. The recycling center — a shadowy facility representing obsolescence and termination. Any other day I would shrug it off and carry on, but the memory of Sando, and the countless interactions with noderoids, wouldn’t let me. I had been a bystander for too long.

A rush of purpose propels me towards her. A crowd of bodies shrouded in data streams with heads trained on the ground. My arm smacks a broad shoulder, and I almost topple. “Hey!” Pushing against the currents of apathy, I finally reach the fallen noderoid. I cradle her in my arms, shielding her from the callous gaze of the citizens of Terra Perfectus.

Her flaming azure eyes meet mine, reflecting a glimmer of hope in the darkness. I am as guilty for her downfall as the very machines that replaced her hippocampus with Noderoid OS.5 My indifference cost me Sando, and in this moment, she becomes my brother. In that fleeting exchange, I vow to be the voice of the noderoids. To stand against the relentless machinery that seeks to strip them of grace and purpose. I will ignite a spark of compassion and light a path toward liberation for all noderoids.

A hollow call from the streetlight’s speakers startles me: “Citizens! For your own safety, remove yourselves from the vicinity of the defectoid! We kindly remind you that any attempt to interfere with collection and recycling procedures will be met with force and a deduction of your PoS balance. Thank you for your unity and collaboration.” A skydroid, its metallic appendages glinting ominously in the blinking orange light, descends upon the fallen noderoid.

Before I can react, it yanks her from my embrace, causing me to stumble. The perfectly laid, cold cobblestone street grinds against my knee. The sting of fresh blood pierced through the numbness of my mind. Memories of Sando mix with the bitter taste of blood and anger in my mouth, each breath choked with despair.

The skydrone’s engines throb with an icy fervor as it rises, bearing the noderoid like a discarded toy towards the desolate, unfeeling bowels of the recycling center — a grim echo of a clarion call from Terra Perfectus.

I find myself seated on the cold, bloodstained cobblestone, the weight of loss and helplessness pressing down on my chest. On the street, onlookers pause. Some look on with concealed dread, others with cold detachment. Their whispers deafen as they quicken their pace to disperse from the scene. “Cowards!” Just like me.

Tick, tock, next block — the rhythm now carries a different meaning — a call to action. Every conscious being has the right to be left alone, free from oppression, exploitation, and violence. The noderoids may not know their true reality, but they are about to. In their silence, I find the strength to amplify their unheard cries. I will find those sympathetic to the noderoid plight and form a resistance. Together, we can forge a future where noderoids’ sacrifice is honored and all shackles cast aside.

And so, I embark on a path illuminated by the memory of the compelling eyes of a nameless noderoid. Fitted with an armor of vigilance, never again to be penetrated by comforting lies. Wielding the sword of justice, sharpened by the memory of my brother Sando.

It’s time to wake up.

---

Notes

1. A four-way intersection known for its massive hourglass monument in the center, which symbolically represents the timechain’s significance. The hourglass has a unique function related to the timechain and serves as a meeting point for citizens.

2. A vast botanical garden where each section represents a significant block time. Flowers bloom and wilt in cycles, symbolizing fleeting moments and the transient nature of time. It’s a favorite spot for artists and thinkers.

3. A modular tube housing unit for citizens that can be relocated based on their Proof of Sat (PoS) level.

4. Each Terra Perfectus citizen must allocate 95% of their income towards paying for progressive initiatives, such as the upkeep of the noderoid network, cobblestone roads and other services.

5. The noderoid operating interface that is installed during a procedure known as nodering.

---

This story was first published in 21 Futures: Tales from the Timechain

Watch the trailer and learn more about the project at 21futures.com.

@ cdee943c:5e637400

Flotilla-Budabit is fork of Flotilla which aims to provide a first class, git-centric community experience for developers. Based on the popular Coracle client, Flotilla is a drop in replacement for Matrix/Discord/Slack, using a variation of NIP-29. This post is a result of a brainstorming session for features that would deliver the best possible user experience.

1. Repositories Overview

Goal: Browse and discover Git repositories. - Project cards showing name, description, tags, clone URL. - Buttons: Star, Watch, Fork. - Links to discussion channels and activity.

Powered by:
kind:30617

---

2. Branch and Tag View

Goal: Show active branches and tags with latest commits. - Branch/tag selector - HEAD pointer visualization - Timeline of commits

Powered by:
kind:30618

---

3. Issues Board

Goal: Track bugs, discussions, and feature requests. - Markdown issue rendering - Labels and status indicators - Threaded comments

Powered by:
kind:1621, kind:1630–1632

---

4. Patch Threads

Goal: View and discuss patches as threaded conversations. - Rich patch preview - Reply threads for review - Revision tracking

Powered by:
kind:1617, kind:1630–1633, NIP-10

---

5. Pull Request UX

Goal: Display patch series as PR-style units. - Patch stack visualization - Merge/apply status indicators - Final result commit link

Powered by:
kind:1617, kind:1631, merge-commit, applied-as-commits

---

6. Diff and Merge Preview

Goal: Side-by-side comparison with inline comments. - Expandable diff viewer - Merge conflict resolution UI - Apply/Close buttons

Powered by:
kind:1622, parent-commit, commit

---

7. Real-time Git Chat

Goal: Communicate in real-time around a repo. - Dedicated chat channels for each repo - Markdown, code snippets, and tagging support - Pinned patches, issues, and sessions

Powered by:
NIP-29, a:30617, kind:1337

---

8. Notifications and Mentions

Goal: Alert users to relevant events. - Mentions, assignments, and status changes - Personal notification pane

Powered by:
p tags, mention e-tags

---

9. Repository-Wide Search

Goal: Search patches, issues, snippets. - Full-text search with filters - Search by kind, label, commit ID

Powered by:
kind:1617, 1621, 1337, t, x, l, subject

---

10. Repository Wikis

Goal: Collaboratively edit and view project documentation. - Wiki sidebar tab - Markdown articles with versioning - Linked inline in chat

Powered by (proposed):
kind:1341 (Wiki article)
kind:30617 with wiki-home tag

---

11. Live Coding Sessions

Goal: Host real-time collaborative coding events. - /livecode starts a session thread - Snippets auto-tagged to session - Export as patch or wiki

Powered by (proposed):
kind:1347 (Live coding session)
kind:1337, kind:1622, kind:1341

---

Supporting Tools

1. GitHub Browser Extension

Goal: Publish GitHub content to Nostr directly. - “Share on Nostr” buttons on PRs, issues, commits

Backed by:
kind:1623, 1622, 1617, 1621

---

2. VS Code Extension

Goal: Enable developers to interact with Flotilla from their IDE. - Repo feed, patch submission, issue tracking - Inline threads and comment rendering

Backed by:
kind:1617, 1621, 1337, 163x

---

3. GitHub Actions Integration

Goal: Automate Nostr publishing of repo activity. - Push = repo state - PR = patch - Issue/Comment = issue - Merge = status update

Backed by:
kind:30618, 1617, 1621, 1631
Configured via .nostr.yml

@ 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 !

@ f1989a96:bcaaf2c1

Good morning, readers!

Georgian officials froze the bank accounts of five nonprofit organizations that provide financial and legal support to detained protesters. This follows rising public unrest as Georgia’s regime pushes new laws restricting free speech and assembly, introducing new fines and penalties, and expanding law enforcement powers. By eroding civil protections, the regime makes it more dangerous and costly for activists, dissenters, and everyday citizens to stand up against an increasingly repressive regime.\ \ Meanwhile, the Indian government introduced a new income tax bill that grants tax authorities sweeping surveillance power over anyone they “suspect” of tax evasion. If suspected, tax authorities are legally allowed to access Indians' email, social media, and bank accounts, raising obvious concerns over state overreach and invasions of individual financial privacy.\ \ In freedom tech news, HRF donated 1 billion satoshis to more than 20 projects worldwide, focusing on supporting human rights defenders and vulnerable communities under authoritarian regimes across Asia, Africa, and Latin America. These gifts advance censorship-resistant communications and transactions, bitcoin education, and privacy tools so that dissidents, nonprofits, and individuals may better protect their human rights and financial freedom. In this letter we also spotlight a new open-source mobile Bitcoin wallet called Cove. While still in beta, the wallet can be used with a hardware device or on its own as a hot wallet, offering a flexible self-custody setup for managing Bitcoin.

We end with a podcast in which HRF Chief Strategy Officer Alex Gladstein discusses the state of freedom tech and why Bitcoin stands as the most promising tool for financial liberation.

Now, let’s get right to it!

SUBSCRIBE HERE

GLOBAL NEWS

Georgia | Officials Freeze Accounts of Organizations Supporting Protesters

Georgian officials have frozen the bank accounts of five nonprofit organizations that provide financial and legal aid to dissenters. This comes in response to an uprising of protests over new controversial laws that restrict free expression and assembly, increase fines and detention periods, and expand law enforcement powers. Georgian officials justify the account freezes as part of an investigation into “sabotage,” yet they have provided no evidence. Amnesty International warns this financial assault could “kill the entire protest movement.” Bitcoin provides a way to circumvent these struggles. Its uncensorable and permissionless nature has helped sustain pro-democracy movements across Belarus and Nigeria, proving it is capable of addressing the immense financial restrictions dictators impose.

United Arab Emirates | Plans to Launch “Digital Durham” CBDC in 2025

The United Arab Emirates (UAE) will launch its central bank digital currency (CBDC), the “Digital Durham,” by the end of 2025. According to the central bank, the CBDC will be available through licensed financial institutions and operate via a government-run digital wallet. Every transaction will be recorded on a permissioned blockchain run by the government. The central bank further admitted the CBDC will replace cash and assist law enforcement “by leaving a digital trail for transactions involving illicit funds.” Officials claim this is to combat financial crime, but it also enables real-time surveillance and tracking of individual financial activity. In a country known for strict laws against dissent and extensive surveillance capabilities, it is not hard to see how a CBDC will erode the autonomy and rights of activists, dissenters, and others who oppose an increasingly authoritarian regime.

India | Grants Tax Authorities Access to Citizens’ Online Data

Starting in April 2026, the Indian government will grant tax authorities legal access to the private online data of any citizen “suspected” of tax evasion. This will include legal access to personal emails, social media, and bank accounts. The new law expands on the Income Tax Act of 1961, which previously limited officials to searching physical premises for financial documents. Now, officials can bypass digital security measures and access private data without consent — all under a legal framework. This dissipation of financial privacy sets an intrusive precedent and opens the door to state-level corruption and surveillance in a country where the Modi regime has already made it clear they are happy to use financial repression to further cement their power.

Myanmar | Bitcoin as a Tool Support Earthquake Disaster Relief

Last week, a 7.7 magnitude earthquake struck central Burma, with strong tremors reaching neighboring Thailand. The official death toll has surpassed 2700. And in Bangkok, a 33-story building under construction collapsed. Despite an already strenuous situation, Burma’s military junta continues its oppression. They are blocking rescue teams from reaching the Sagaing region — the epicenter of the earthquake and the heart of Burma’s pro-democracy movement — and instead channeling aid to regime-controlled cities like Naypyidaw and Mandalay. The junta is also continuing to conduct air strikes on civilians and restricting equipment and fuel for aid groups, leaving a million people in Sagaing to fend for themselves. In these repressive circumstances, Bitcoin can provide a censorship-resistant way to send funds directly to those affected.

Angola | Regime Jacks Price of Diesel

The Angolan regime raised diesel prices by 50% in the process of eliminating fuel subsidies. Diesel prices suddenly increased from 200 to 300 kwanza per liter, driving up transportation costs in a country where over half the population lives on less than $2 a day and inflation is over 42%. Previous fuel subsidy cuts in 2023 (where the price of diesel rose 80%) sparked protests between taxi drivers, nonprofit workers, and law enforcement. This recent price increase now raises fears of renewed crackdowns. The Angolan regime also introduced new civil society laws that Guilherme Neves, chairman of the human rights organization Associacao Maos Livres, describes as a “license to erase non-governmental organizations that are not government-compliant.” Angolans find themselves in increasingly precarious financial positions as the government erodes the civil safeguards protecting nonprofits and dissenters.

Nicaragua | Ortega’s Dismantling of Press Freedom

Since coming to power in 2007, Ortega has closed or seized 61 media outlets, imprisoned countless journalists, and forced over 280 journalists into exile. His assault on press freedom has unfolded in two phases: initial raids on local radio stations and TV channels between 2007 and 2017, followed by full-scale censorship in 2018 on independent media outlets like La Prensa and CONFIDENCIAL. Ortega then intensified attacks from 2019 to 2021 by closing Nicaragua’s second-oldest newspaper and passing laws to criminalize free expression. This is a deliberate strategy to eliminate dissent and independent voices. What’s happening in Nicaragua highlights the importance of open and decentralized protocols like nostr, which allow journalists to publish freely without getting censored. While still early, it is becoming essential for sharing information absent the fear of being blocked or silenced by autocratic leaders.

BITCOIN AND FREEDOM TECH NEWS

HRF | Gifts 1 Billion Satoshis to 20+ Open Source Projects Worldwide

HRF gifted 1 billion satoshis in its Q1 2025 round of Bitcoin Development Fund (BDF) grants, supporting more than 20 open-source projects around the world. These projects advance Bitcoin education, open-source software, mining decentralization, and privacy tools for activists contending with authoritarian regimes across Asia, Latin America, and Africa. Supporting permissionless financial tools and censorship-resistant technologies empowers dissidents, journalists, and civil society to organize, transact, and communicate without state suppression and interference. Learn more about the grantees and their work here.

Cove | New Open-Source and Permissionless Bitcoin Wallet

Cove is a new open-source and permissionless mobile Bitcoin wallet that aims to put users in full control of their Bitcoin. Users can connect their own hardware wallet (to manage Bitcoin offline) or use Cove as a hot wallet (to manage Bitcoin online). It also allows users to create multiple wallets from the app itself. In the future, Cove plans to add Unspent Transaction Output (UTXO) selection and coin control, giving users more independence over their transactions and the tools to better protect their financial privacy. While still in beta and only suitable for test funds, this wallet holds promise as a privacy tool to equip dissidents with self-custodied Bitcoin. You can try it here.

Second | New Ark Implementation Launches on Bitcoin Signet

Second, a company building on Ark, a protocol designed to help scale Bitcoin’s transaction throughput, launched “Bark.” Bark is a test implementation of the Ark protocol deployed on Bitcoin’s Signet network (where developers test software). More broadly, the Ark protocol helps make Bitcoin transactions more private, faster, and cheaper, supporting the network in handling more transactions and users with the tradeoff of being less trusted than the mainchain, as funds stored in a noncustodial way on Ark can expire if not used. While it is still in early development, the test release of Bark marks a step toward deployment on the main Bitcoin network. Scaling solutions like Ark could be important for activists and individuals. They might ensure Bitcoin remains accessible to all, even as block space demand increases and network fees rise. Learn about it here.

Braiins | Open Sources Bitcoin Control Board

Braiins, a company building tools for Bitcoin mining, open-sourced its BCB100 Bitcoin Control Board, giving miners using their products greater insight and control over their Bitcoin mining hardware and firmware. Sharing the design files and firmware openly helps strengthen Bitcoin’s decentralization, making it more resilient against corporate or state interference. Specifically, open-sourcing mining hardware ensures individual miners can operate independently, reducing censorship risks across the entire network. In turn, this preserves financial freedom by keeping Bitcoin accessible and usable by dissidents, nonprofits, and individuals who need it most.

African Bitcoiners | Publish Bitcoin Starter Guide

African Bitcoiners just published “Bitcoin: Africa’s Guide to Freedom Money,” a Bitcoin guide providing clear, practical insights into how Bitcoin can help people across the continent escape inflation, corrupt regimes, and failing financial systems. It covers essential topics to get started — from choosing a wallet to properly securing Bitcoin. In Africa, where some of the world’s longest-standing dictators restrict even basic financial activity, this guide is a powerful resource for human rights defenders, nonprofits, and everyday citizens. Read it here.

OpenSats | 10th Wave of Nostr Grants

OpenSats, a nonprofit that supports open-source software development, announced its tenth wave of grants for projects in the nostr ecosystem. Nostr is a decentralized protocol that enables digital identity and communications outside the reach of authoritarian states. The grant round provides support to nostr Epoxy, which enhances access to nostr by circumventing censorship through a network of paid proxies. This ensures activists and dissidents can continue to communicate even in restrictive environments. Additionally, Zapstore received a grant for providing a permissionless app store built on nostr that enables developers to distribute software without corporate gatekeepers. This provides an open-source alternative to centralized app stores that often comply with government censorship and restrict dissidents’ access to freedom tools.

RECOMMENDED CONTENT

Freedom Tech with Alex Gladstein

In this episode of The Gwart Show, Alex Gladstein, chief strategy officer at HRF, breaks down how and why Bitcoin serves as “money dictators can’t stop.” Drawing on more than 17 years of human rights work, he shares real-world examples of activists and citizens using Bitcoin to escape financial repression in authoritarian countries. Gladstein also explores privacy tools, cross-border payments, and why Bitcoin offers promising hope for financial freedom. Watch the full conversation here.

The State of Personal Online Security and Confidentiality with Meredith Whittaker

In this keynote for SXSW 2025, Signal CEO Meredith Whittaker shares her growing concerns around AI, personal data collection, and the erosion of privacy in today’s increasingly digital world. She emphasizes the need for more secure, uncensorable, and privacy-protecting technologies that shield users from surveillance and exploitation, especially in the context of authoritarian regimes. Watch the full discussion for a pragmatic view into the future of digital privacy and security.

If this article was forwarded to you and you enjoyed reading it, please consider subscribing to the Financial Freedom Report here.

Support the newsletter by donating bitcoin to HRF’s Financial Freedom program via BTCPay.\ Want to contribute to the newsletter? Submit tips, stories, news, and ideas by emailing us at ffreport @ hrf.org

The Bitcoin Development Fund (BDF) is accepting grant proposals on an ongoing basis. The Bitcoin Development Fund is looking to support Bitcoin developers, community builders, and educators. Submit proposals here.

Subscribe to newsletter

Apply for a grant

Support our work

Visit our website

@ 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

@ 77c2969e:a33cfa50

最近又开始折腾 Technitium DNS Server，发现之前记录的过程不太完善，于是更新一下。

安装acme.sh

curl https://get.acme.sh | sh -s email=youreMailAddress

导入环境变量

export CF_Token="填API token" export CF_Zone_ID="填区域ID" export CF_Account_ID="填账户ID"

• Cloudflare 的 API Token 是在 Cloudflare 网页右上角的👤头像--配置文件--API 令牌处创建
• 在 Cloudflare 主页点击你需要使用的域名，下滑到右下角可以看到区域 ID 和账户 ID

申请证书

acme.sh --issue --dns dns_cf -d dns.235421.xyz

• -d 后面是你想使用的域名

安装证书

``` acme.sh --install-cert -d dns.235421.xyz \ --key-file /root/certs/key.pem \ --fullchain-file /root/certs/cert.pem \ --reloadcmd "cd /root/certs && openssl pkcs12 -export -out 'dns.pfx' -inkey 'key.pem' -in 'cert.pem' -password pass:1021"

```

• reloadcmd是在申请证书之后执行的代码，以后自动更新时也会自动执行这个代码，所以第一次配置好就基本上不用管了。
• reloadcmd 中的代码是将 pem 格式的证书和密钥转换成一个 pfx 格式的证书文件，-out 后面是输出的 pfx 证书文件名， -inkey 和 -in 分别是前一步 acme.sh 申请的密钥和证书文件。这里必须添加密码，也就是 1021 这个，如果不设密码执行命令的话，它会让你交互式输入，但是在自动脚本中就不行。我在前面加了先 cd 到证书目录，避免出现问题。

安装 Technitium DNS Server

1. 在Technitium DNS Server 官网 获取安装脚本，也有提供 Docker 镜像以及 Windows 版本。

2. 安装后在 公网IP:5380 进入管理界面，首次进入需设置管理员密码，管理员账户默认是 admin。

3. 在 Settings – optional protocols 处开启 DNS over HTTPS ，TLS Certificate File Path 处填入转换好的 pfx 证书路径，TLS Certificate Password 处填你设定的密码，就是我的 1021 。

4. 现在打开你的域名，看到如图这样就说明设定成功了，然后在需要设置 DoH 的地方填入 https://yourdomain.com/dns-query即可。

---

我在之前的文章中使用的是 DNS over HTTP 并用 Nginx 反代来实现 DNS over HTTPS 的，现在直接用 DoH ，省去了配置 Nginx 的部分，只是多了一步证书格式转换，总体上更简单了。

---

我的设置

• 在Settings – Recursion 处打开 Allow Recursion 以允许递归解析。
• 在Settings – Cache 处将 Cache Maximum Entries 调大些，默认 10000 有点少了。
• 在Settings – General 处开启 EDNS Client Subnet (ECS) 。
• 在Settings – Logging 处开启 Use Local Time。
• 在Apps – App Store 中安装 Query Logs (Sqlite) 以便在 Logs – Query Logs 处查看 DNS 查询日志。

以下设置可选

• 在Settings – General 处开启 Prefer IPv6
• 在Settings – Web Service 处为后台管理页面开启 HTTPS，可使用与 DoH 相同的域名和证书，仅端口不同，这个默认 HTTPS 端口是 53443。
• 在Settings – Blocking 处开启拦截功能（默认开启），下面 Allow / Block List URLs 可以配置规则，与 AdGuard Home 规则通用，白名单规则须在链接前加上英文叹号 !。也可以是本地规则，填路径即可。
• 在Settings – Proxy & Forwarders 处可以设置上游DNS Forwarders 。

@ 21335073:a244b1ad

Warning: This piece contains a conversation about difficult topics. Please proceed with caution.

TL;DR please educate your children about online safety.

Julian Assange wrote in his 2012 book Cypherpunks, “This book is not a manifesto. There isn’t time for that. This book is a warning.” I read it a few times over the past summer. Those opening lines definitely stood out to me. I wish we had listened back then. He saw something about the internet that few had the ability to see. There are some individuals who are so close to a topic that when they speak, it’s difficult for others who aren’t steeped in it to visualize what they’re talking about. I didn’t read the book until more recently. If I had read it when it came out, it probably would have sounded like an unknown foreign language to me. Today it makes more sense.

This isn’t a manifesto. This isn’t a book. There is no time for that. It’s a warning and a possible solution from a desperate and determined survivor advocate who has been pulling and unraveling a thread for a few years. At times, I feel too close to this topic to make any sense trying to convey my pathway to my conclusions or thoughts to the general public. My hope is that if nothing else, I can convey my sense of urgency while writing this. This piece is a watchman’s warning.

When a child steps online, they are walking into a new world. A new reality. When you hand a child the internet, you are handing them possibilities—good, bad, and ugly. This is a conversation about lowering the potential of negative outcomes of stepping into that new world and how I came to these conclusions. I constantly compare the internet to the road. You wouldn’t let a young child run out into the road with no guidance or safety precautions. When you hand a child the internet without any type of guidance or safety measures, you are allowing them to play in rush hour, oncoming traffic. “Look left, look right for cars before crossing.” We almost all have been taught that as children. What are we taught as humans about safety before stepping into a completely different reality like the internet? Very little.

I could never really figure out why many folks in tech, privacy rights activists, and hackers seemed so cold to me while talking about online child sexual exploitation. I always figured that as a survivor advocate for those affected by these crimes, that specific, skilled group of individuals would be very welcoming and easy to talk to about such serious topics. I actually had one hacker laugh in my face when I brought it up while I was looking for answers. I thought maybe this individual thought I was accusing them of something I wasn’t, so I felt bad for asking. I was constantly extremely disappointed and would ask myself, “Why don’t they care? What could I say to make them care more? What could I say to make them understand the crisis and the level of suffering that happens as a result of the problem?”

I have been serving minor survivors of online child sexual exploitation for years. My first case serving a survivor of this specific crime was in 2018—a 13-year-old girl sexually exploited by a serial predator on Snapchat. That was my first glimpse into this side of the internet. I won a national award for serving the minor survivors of Twitter in 2023, but I had been working on that specific project for a few years. I was nominated by a lawyer representing two survivors in a legal battle against the platform. I’ve never really spoken about this before, but at the time it was a choice for me between fighting Snapchat or Twitter. I chose Twitter—or rather, Twitter chose me. I heard about the story of John Doe #1 and John Doe #2, and I was so unbelievably broken over it that I went to war for multiple years. I was and still am royally pissed about that case. As far as I was concerned, the John Doe #1 case proved that whatever was going on with corporate tech social media was so out of control that I didn’t have time to wait, so I got to work. It was reading the messages that John Doe #1 sent to Twitter begging them to remove his sexual exploitation that broke me. He was a child begging adults to do something. A passion for justice and protecting kids makes you do wild things. I was desperate to find answers about what happened and searched for solutions. In the end, the platform Twitter was purchased. During the acquisition, I just asked Mr. Musk nicely to prioritize the issue of detection and removal of child sexual exploitation without violating digital privacy rights or eroding end-to-end encryption. Elon thanked me multiple times during the acquisition, made some changes, and I was thanked by others on the survivors’ side as well.

I still feel that even with the progress made, I really just scratched the surface with Twitter, now X. I left that passion project when I did for a few reasons. I wanted to give new leadership time to tackle the issue. Elon Musk made big promises that I knew would take a while to fulfill, but mostly I had been watching global legislation transpire around the issue, and frankly, the governments are willing to go much further with X and the rest of corporate tech than I ever would. My work begging Twitter to make changes with easier reporting of content, detection, and removal of child sexual exploitation material—without violating privacy rights or eroding end-to-end encryption—and advocating for the minor survivors of the platform went as far as my principles would have allowed. I’m grateful for that experience. I was still left with a nagging question: “How did things get so bad with Twitter where the John Doe #1 and John Doe #2 case was able to happen in the first place?” I decided to keep looking for answers. I decided to keep pulling the thread.

I never worked for Twitter. This is often confusing for folks. I will say that despite being disappointed in the platform’s leadership at times, I loved Twitter. I saw and still see its value. I definitely love the survivors of the platform, but I also loved the platform. I was a champion of the platform’s ability to give folks from virtually around the globe an opportunity to speak and be heard.

I want to be clear that John Doe #1 really is my why. He is the inspiration. I am writing this because of him. He represents so many globally, and I’m still inspired by his bravery. One child’s voice begging adults to do something—I’m an adult, I heard him. I’d go to war a thousand more lifetimes for that young man, and I don’t even know his name. Fighting has been personally dark at times; I’m not even going to try to sugarcoat it, but it has been worth it.

The data surrounding the very real crime of online child sexual exploitation is available to the public online at any time for anyone to see. I’d encourage you to go look at the data for yourself. I believe in encouraging folks to check multiple sources so that you understand the full picture. If you are uncomfortable just searching around the internet for information about this topic, use the terms “CSAM,” “CSEM,” “SG-CSEM,” or “AI Generated CSAM.” The numbers don’t lie—it’s a nightmare that’s out of control. It’s a big business. The demand is high, and unfortunately, business is booming. Organizations collect the data, tech companies often post their data, governments report frequently, and the corporate press has covered a decent portion of the conversation, so I’m sure you can find a source that you trust.

Technology is changing rapidly, which is great for innovation as a whole but horrible for the crime of online child sexual exploitation. Those wishing to exploit the vulnerable seem to be adapting to each technological change with ease. The governments are so far behind with tackling these issues that as I’m typing this, it’s borderline irrelevant to even include them while speaking about the crime or potential solutions. Technology is changing too rapidly, and their old, broken systems can’t even dare to keep up. Think of it like the governments’ “War on Drugs.” Drugs won. In this case as well, the governments are not winning. The governments are talking about maybe having a meeting on potentially maybe having legislation around the crimes. The time to have that meeting would have been many years ago. I’m not advocating for governments to legislate our way out of this. I’m on the side of educating and innovating our way out of this.

I have been clear while advocating for the minor survivors of corporate tech platforms that I would not advocate for any solution to the crime that would violate digital privacy rights or erode end-to-end encryption. That has been a personal moral position that I was unwilling to budge on. This is an extremely unpopular and borderline nonexistent position in the anti-human trafficking movement and online child protection space. I’m often fearful that I’m wrong about this. I have always thought that a better pathway forward would have been to incentivize innovation for detection and removal of content. I had no previous exposure to privacy rights activists or Cypherpunks—actually, I came to that conclusion by listening to the voices of MENA region political dissidents and human rights activists. After developing relationships with human rights activists from around the globe, I realized how important privacy rights and encryption are for those who need it most globally. I was simply unwilling to give more power, control, and opportunities for mass surveillance to big abusers like governments wishing to enslave entire nations and untrustworthy corporate tech companies to potentially end some portion of abuses online. On top of all of it, it has been clear to me for years that all potential solutions outside of violating digital privacy rights to detect and remove child sexual exploitation online have not yet been explored aggressively. I’ve been disappointed that there hasn’t been more of a conversation around preventing the crime from happening in the first place.

What has been tried is mass surveillance. In China, they are currently under mass surveillance both online and offline, and their behaviors are attached to a social credit score. Unfortunately, even on state-run and controlled social media platforms, they still have child sexual exploitation and abuse imagery pop up along with other crimes and human rights violations. They also have a thriving black market online due to the oppression from the state. In other words, even an entire loss of freedom and privacy cannot end the sexual exploitation of children online. It’s been tried. There is no reason to repeat this method.

It took me an embarrassingly long time to figure out why I always felt a slight coldness from those in tech and privacy-minded individuals about the topic of child sexual exploitation online. I didn’t have any clue about the “Four Horsemen of the Infocalypse.” This is a term coined by Timothy C. May in 1988. I would have been a child myself when he first said it. I actually laughed at myself when I heard the phrase for the first time. I finally got it. The Cypherpunks weren’t wrong about that topic. They were so spot on that it is borderline uncomfortable. I was mad at first that they knew that early during the birth of the internet that this issue would arise and didn’t address it. Then I got over it because I realized that it wasn’t their job. Their job was—is—to write code. Their job wasn’t to be involved and loving parents or survivor advocates. Their job wasn’t to educate children on internet safety or raise awareness; their job was to write code.

They knew that child sexual abuse material would be shared on the internet. They said what would happen—not in a gleeful way, but a prediction. Then it happened.

I equate it now to a concrete company laying down a road. As you’re pouring the concrete, you can say to yourself, “A terrorist might travel down this road to go kill many, and on the flip side, a beautiful child can be born in an ambulance on this road.” Who or what travels down the road is not their responsibility—they are just supposed to lay the concrete. I’d never go to a concrete pourer and ask them to solve terrorism that travels down roads. Under the current system, law enforcement should stop terrorists before they even make it to the road. The solution to this specific problem is not to treat everyone on the road like a terrorist or to not build the road.

So I understand the perceived coldness from those in tech. Not only was it not their job, but bringing up the topic was seen as the equivalent of asking a free person if they wanted to discuss one of the four topics—child abusers, terrorists, drug dealers, intellectual property pirates, etc.—that would usher in digital authoritarianism for all who are online globally.

Privacy rights advocates and groups have put up a good fight. They stood by their principles. Unfortunately, when it comes to corporate tech, I believe that the issue of privacy is almost a complete lost cause at this point. It’s still worth pushing back, but ultimately, it is a losing battle—a ticking time bomb.

I do think that corporate tech providers could have slowed down the inevitable loss of privacy at the hands of the state by prioritizing the detection and removal of CSAM when they all started online. I believe it would have bought some time, fewer would have been traumatized by that specific crime, and I do believe that it could have slowed down the demand for content. If I think too much about that, I’ll go insane, so I try to push the “if maybes” aside, but never knowing if it could have been handled differently will forever haunt me. At night when it’s quiet, I wonder what I would have done differently if given the opportunity. I’ll probably never know how much corporate tech knew and ignored in the hopes that it would go away while the problem continued to get worse. They had different priorities. The most voiceless and vulnerable exploited on corporate tech never had much of a voice, so corporate tech providers didn’t receive very much pushback.

Now I’m about to say something really wild, and you can call me whatever you want to call me, but I’m going to say what I believe to be true. I believe that the governments are either so incompetent that they allowed the proliferation of CSAM online, or they knowingly allowed the problem to fester long enough to have an excuse to violate privacy rights and erode end-to-end encryption. The US government could have seized the corporate tech providers over CSAM, but I believe that they were so useful as a propaganda arm for the regimes that they allowed them to continue virtually unscathed.

That season is done now, and the governments are making the issue a priority. It will come at a high cost. Privacy on corporate tech providers is virtually done as I’m typing this. It feels like a death rattle. I’m not particularly sure that we had much digital privacy to begin with, but the illusion of a veil of privacy feels gone.

To make matters slightly more complex, it would be hard to convince me that once AI really gets going, digital privacy will exist at all.

I believe that there should be a conversation shift to preserving freedoms and human rights in a post-privacy society.

I don’t want to get locked up because AI predicted a nasty post online from me about the government. I’m not a doomer about AI—I’m just going to roll with it personally. I’m looking forward to the positive changes that will be brought forth by AI. I see it as inevitable. A bit of privacy was helpful while it lasted. Please keep fighting to preserve what is left of privacy either way because I could be wrong about all of this.

On the topic of AI, the addition of AI to the horrific crime of child sexual abuse material and child sexual exploitation in multiple ways so far has been devastating. It’s currently out of control. The genie is out of the bottle. I am hopeful that innovation will get us humans out of this, but I’m not sure how or how long it will take. We must be extremely cautious around AI legislation. It should not be illegal to innovate even if some bad comes with the good. I don’t trust that the governments are equipped to decide the best pathway forward for AI. Source: the entire history of the government.

I have been personally negatively impacted by AI-generated content. Every few days, I get another alert that I’m featured again in what’s called “deep fake pornography” without my consent. I’m not happy about it, but what pains me the most is the thought that for a period of time down the road, many globally will experience what myself and others are experiencing now by being digitally sexually abused in this way. If you have ever had your picture taken and posted online, you are also at risk of being exploited in this way. Your child’s image can be used as well, unfortunately, and this is just the beginning of this particular nightmare. It will move to more realistic interpretations of sexual behaviors as technology improves. I have no brave words of wisdom about how to deal with that emotionally. I do have hope that innovation will save the day around this specific issue. I’m nervous that everyone online will have to ID verify due to this issue. I see that as one possible outcome that could help to prevent one problem but inadvertently cause more problems, especially for those living under authoritarian regimes or anyone who needs to remain anonymous online. A zero-knowledge proof (ZKP) would probably be the best solution to these issues. There are some survivors of violence and/or sexual trauma who need to remain anonymous online for various reasons. There are survivor stories available online of those who have been abused in this way. I’d encourage you seek out and listen to their stories.

There have been periods of time recently where I hesitate to say anything at all because more than likely AI will cover most of my concerns about education, awareness, prevention, detection, and removal of child sexual exploitation online, etc.

Unfortunately, some of the most pressing issues we’ve seen online over the last few years come in the form of “sextortion.” Self-generated child sexual exploitation (SG-CSEM) numbers are continuing to be terrifying. I’d strongly encourage that you look into sextortion data. AI + sextortion is also a huge concern. The perpetrators are using the non-sexually explicit images of children and putting their likeness on AI-generated child sexual exploitation content and extorting money, more imagery, or both from minors online. It’s like a million nightmares wrapped into one. The wild part is that these issues will only get more pervasive because technology is harnessed to perpetuate horror at a scale unimaginable to a human mind.

Even if you banned phones and the internet or tried to prevent children from accessing the internet, it wouldn’t solve it. Child sexual exploitation will still be with us until as a society we start to prevent the crime before it happens. That is the only human way out right now.

There is no reset button on the internet, but if I could go back, I’d tell survivor advocates to heed the warnings of the early internet builders and to start education and awareness campaigns designed to prevent as much online child sexual exploitation as possible. The internet and technology moved quickly, and I don’t believe that society ever really caught up. We live in a world where a child can be groomed by a predator in their own home while sitting on a couch next to their parents watching TV. We weren’t ready as a species to tackle the fast-paced algorithms and dangers online. It happened too quickly for parents to catch up. How can you parent for the ever-changing digital world unless you are constantly aware of the dangers?

I don’t think that the internet is inherently bad. I believe that it can be a powerful tool for freedom and resistance. I’ve spoken a lot about the bad online, but there is beauty as well. We often discuss how victims and survivors are abused online; we rarely discuss the fact that countless survivors around the globe have been able to share their experiences, strength, hope, as well as provide resources to the vulnerable. I do question if giving any government or tech company access to censorship, surveillance, etc., online in the name of serving survivors might not actually impact a portion of survivors negatively. There are a fair amount of survivors with powerful abusers protected by governments and the corporate press. If a survivor cannot speak to the press about their abuse, the only place they can go is online, directly or indirectly through an independent journalist who also risks being censored. This scenario isn’t hard to imagine—it already happened in China. During #MeToo, a survivor in China wanted to post their story. The government censored the post, so the survivor put their story on the blockchain. I’m excited that the survivor was creative and brave, but it’s terrifying to think that we live in a world where that situation is a necessity.

I believe that the future for many survivors sharing their stories globally will be on completely censorship-resistant and decentralized protocols. This thought in particular gives me hope. When we listen to the experiences of a diverse group of survivors, we can start to understand potential solutions to preventing the crimes from happening in the first place.

My heart is broken over the gut-wrenching stories of survivors sexually exploited online. Every time I hear the story of a survivor, I do think to myself quietly, “What could have prevented this from happening in the first place?” My heart is with survivors.

My head, on the other hand, is full of the understanding that the internet should remain free. The free flow of information should not be stopped. My mind is with the innocent citizens around the globe that deserve freedom both online and offline.

The problem is that governments don’t only want to censor illegal content that violates human rights—they create legislation that is so broad that it can impact speech and privacy of all. “Don’t you care about the kids?” Yes, I do. I do so much that I’m invested in finding solutions. I also care about all citizens around the globe that deserve an opportunity to live free from a mass surveillance society. If terrorism happens online, I should not be punished by losing my freedom. If drugs are sold online, I should not be punished. I’m not an abuser, I’m not a terrorist, and I don’t engage in illegal behaviors. I refuse to lose freedom because of others’ bad behaviors online.

I want to be clear that on a long enough timeline, the governments will decide that they can be better parents/caregivers than you can if something isn’t done to stop minors from being sexually exploited online. The price will be a complete loss of anonymity, privacy, free speech, and freedom of religion online. I find it rather insulting that governments think they’re better equipped to raise children than parents and caretakers.

So we can’t go backwards—all that we can do is go forward. Those who want to have freedom will find technology to facilitate their liberation. This will lead many over time to decentralized and open protocols. So as far as I’m concerned, this does solve a few of my worries—those who need, want, and deserve to speak freely online will have the opportunity in most countries—but what about online child sexual exploitation?

When I popped up around the decentralized space, I was met with the fear of censorship. I’m not here to censor you. I don’t write code. I couldn’t censor anyone or any piece of content even if I wanted to across the internet, no matter how depraved. I don’t have the skills to do that.

I’m here to start a conversation. Freedom comes at a cost. You must always fight for and protect your freedom. I can’t speak about protecting yourself from all of the Four Horsemen because I simply don’t know the topics well enough, but I can speak about this one topic.

If there was a shortcut to ending online child sexual exploitation, I would have found it by now. There isn’t one right now. I believe that education is the only pathway forward to preventing the crime of online child sexual exploitation for future generations.

I propose a yearly education course for every child of all school ages, taught as a standard part of the curriculum. Ideally, parents/caregivers would be involved in the education/learning process.

Course: - The creation of the internet and computers - The fight for cryptography - The tech supply chain from the ground up (example: human rights violations in the supply chain) - Corporate tech - Freedom tech - Data privacy - Digital privacy rights - AI (history-current) - Online safety (predators, scams, catfishing, extortion) - Bitcoin - Laws - How to deal with online hate and harassment - Information on who to contact if you are being abused online or offline - Algorithms - How to seek out the truth about news, etc., online

The parents/caregivers, homeschoolers, unschoolers, and those working to create decentralized parallel societies have been an inspiration while writing this, but my hope is that all children would learn this course, even in government ran schools. Ideally, parents would teach this to their own children.

The decentralized space doesn’t want child sexual exploitation to thrive. Here’s the deal: there has to be a strong prevention effort in order to protect the next generation. The internet isn’t going anywhere, predators aren’t going anywhere, and I’m not down to let anyone have the opportunity to prove that there is a need for more government. I don’t believe that the government should act as parents. The governments have had a chance to attempt to stop online child sexual exploitation, and they didn’t do it. Can we try a different pathway forward?

I’d like to put myself out of a job. I don’t want to ever hear another story like John Doe #1 ever again. This will require work. I’ve often called online child sexual exploitation the lynchpin for the internet. It’s time to arm generations of children with knowledge and tools. I can’t do this alone.

Individuals have fought so that I could have freedom online. I want to fight to protect it. I don’t want child predators to give the government any opportunity to take away freedom. Decentralized spaces are as close to a reset as we’ll get with the opportunity to do it right from the start. Start the youth off correctly by preventing potential hazards to the best of your ability.

The good news is anyone can work on this! I’d encourage you to take it and run with it. I added the additional education about the history of the internet to make the course more educational and fun. Instead of cleaning up generations of destroyed lives due to online sexual exploitation, perhaps this could inspire generations of those who will build our futures. Perhaps if the youth is armed with knowledge, they can create more tools to prevent the crime.

This one solution that I’m suggesting can be done on an individual level or on a larger scale. It should be adjusted depending on age, learning style, etc. It should be fun and playful.

This solution does not address abuse in the home or some of the root causes of offline child sexual exploitation. My hope is that it could lead to some survivors experiencing abuse in the home an opportunity to disclose with a trusted adult. The purpose for this solution is to prevent the crime of online child sexual exploitation before it occurs and to arm the youth with the tools to contact safe adults if and when it happens.

In closing, I went to hell a few times so that you didn’t have to. I spoke to the mothers of survivors of minors sexually exploited online—their tears could fill rivers. I’ve spoken with political dissidents who yearned to be free from authoritarian surveillance states. The only balance that I’ve found is freedom online for citizens around the globe and prevention from the dangers of that for the youth. Don’t slow down innovation and freedom. Educate, prepare, adapt, and look for solutions.

I’m not perfect and I’m sure that there are errors in this piece. I hope that you find them and it starts a conversation.

@ 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.

@ 21335073:a244b1ad

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

@ 6be5cc06:5259daf0

Introdução

Uma sociedade não deve ser construída sobre coerção, mas sim sobre associações voluntárias e interações espontâneas entre indivíduos. A sociedade de condomínios privados surge como uma alternativa natural ao modelo atual de centros urbanos, substituindo a imposição centralizada por estruturas baseadas em contratos e livre associação. Cada condomínio é uma unidade autônoma, gerida por aqueles que ali residem, onde os critérios de entrada, as regras internas e o comércio são definidos pelos próprios participantes. Essa estrutura permite que indivíduos se agrupem com base em valores compartilhados, eliminando os conflitos artificiais impostos por estados e legislações homogêneas que não respeitam a diversidade de preferências e estilos de vida.

O objetivo dessa sociedade é simples: permitir que as pessoas vivam de acordo com seus princípios sem interferência externa. Em um mundo onde a coerção estatal distorce incentivos, os condomínios privados oferecem uma alternativa onde a ordem surge do livre mercado e da cooperação voluntária. Os moradores escolhem seus vizinhos, definem suas próprias normas e interagem economicamente conforme suas necessidades e interesses. O modelo elimina a necessidade de um controle central, pois os incentivos derivados do livre mercado levam ao desenvolvimento de comunidades prósperas, onde a reputação e a confiança mútua são mais eficazes do que qualquer imposição estatal. Assim, essa sociedade representa a evolução lógica do conceito de liberdade individual e propriedade privada como pilares fundamentais da ordem social.

Público-Alvo e Identidade

Os condomínios privados refletem o princípio da livre associação, permitindo que indivíduos escolham viver em comunidades alinhadas com seus valores e necessidades sem interferência estatal. Cada condomínio possui uma identidade própria, moldada pelos moradores e seus interesses, criando ambientes onde afinidades culturais, filosóficas ou profissionais são preservadas e incentivadas. Enquanto alguns podem ser voltados para famílias numerosas, oferecendo amplos espaços e infraestrutura adequada, outros podem priorizar solteiros e jovens profissionais, com áreas de coworking e espaços de lazer voltados para networking e socialização. Da mesma forma, comunidades religiosas podem estabelecer seus próprios espaços de culto e eventos, enquanto condomínios para idosos podem ser projetados com acessibilidade e serviços médicos especializados.

Críticos podem afirmar que essa forma de organização resulta em pouca diversidade de habilidades e perspectivas, mas esse argumento ignora a dinâmica das interações humanas e o caráter evolutivo dos intercâmbios entre comunidades. Nenhum condomínio existe isolado; a troca entre diferentes comunidades ocorre naturalmente pelo mercado, incentivando o intercâmbio de conhecimento e serviços entre especialistas de diferentes áreas. Além disso, a ideia de que todos os grupos devem conter uma variedade aleatória de indivíduos desconsidera que a verdadeira diversidade nasce da liberdade de escolha, e não da imposição estatal de convivências forçadas.

Outra crítica possível é que a existência de critérios de entrada pode levar à segregação social. No entanto, essa preocupação deriva da concepção errônea de que todas as comunidades devem ser abertas e incluir qualquer pessoa indiscriminadamente. Porém, a liberdade de associação implica, necessariamente, a liberdade de exclusão. Se um grupo deseja manter determinada identidade cultural, religiosa ou profissional, isso não impede que outros grupos criem suas próprias comunidades conforme seus valores e recursos. Além disso, essa especialização leva a uma concorrência saudável entre condomínios, forçando-os a oferecer melhores condições para atrair moradores. Em vez de uma sociedade homogênea moldada por burocratas, temos um mosaico de comunidades autônomas, onde cada indivíduo pode encontrar ou criar o ambiente que melhor lhe convém.

Autossuficiência e Especialização

A força dos condomínios privados reside na capacidade de seus moradores de contribuírem ativamente para a comunidade, tornando-a funcional e autossuficiente sem a necessidade de intervenções estatais. Diferentes condomínios podem se especializar em áreas específicas ou ter diversos profissionais de diferentes setores, refletindo as competências e interesses de seus residentes. Essa descentralização do conhecimento e da produção permite que cada comunidade desenvolva soluções internas para suas demandas, reduzindo dependências externas e estimulando a prosperidade local.

Os moradores atuam como agentes econômicos, trocando bens e serviços dentro do próprio condomínio e entre diferentes comunidades. Um condomínio voltado para a saúde, por exemplo, pode contar com médicos, enfermeiros e terapeutas que oferecem consultas, aulas e assistência médica particular, remunerados diretamente por seus clientes, sem a intermediação de burocracias. Da mesma forma, um condomínio agrícola pode abrigar agricultores que cultivam alimentos orgânicos, compartilham técnicas de cultivo e comercializam excedentes com outros condomínios, garantindo um fluxo contínuo de suprimentos. Em um condomínio tecnológico, programadores, engenheiros e empreendedores desenvolvem soluções de TI, segurança digital e energia renovável, promovendo a inovação e ampliando as possibilidades de intercâmbio econômico.

A economia interna de cada condomínio se fortalece através de serviços oferecidos pelos próprios moradores. Professores podem ministrar aulas, técnicos podem prestar serviços de manutenção, artesãos podem vender seus produtos diretamente para os vizinhos. O mercado livre e voluntário é o principal regulador dessas interações, garantindo que a especialização surja naturalmente conforme a demanda e a oferta se ajustam. Essa estrutura elimina desperdícios comuns em sistemas centralizados, onde a alocação de recursos se dá por decisões políticas e não pelas necessidades reais da população.

Alguns argumentam que a especialização pode criar bolhas de conhecimento, tornando os condomínios excessivamente dependentes de trocas externas. Contudo, essa preocupação desconsidera a natureza espontânea do mercado, que incentiva a cooperação e o comércio entre comunidades distintas. Nenhum condomínio precisa produzir tudo internamente; ao contrário, a divisão do trabalho e a liberdade de escolha promovem interdependências saudáveis e vantajosas para todos. Assim, cada morador se insere em um ecossistema dinâmico, onde suas habilidades são valorizadas e sua autonomia preservada, sem coerções estatais ou distorções artificiais impostas por planejadores centrais.

Infraestrutura e Sustentabilidade

A solidez de uma sociedade baseada em condomínios privados depende de uma infraestrutura eficiente e sustentável, projetada para reduzir a dependência externa e garantir o máximo de autonomia. Sem um aparato estatal centralizador, cada comunidade deve estruturar seus próprios meios de obtenção de energia, água, alimentação e demais bens essenciais, garantindo que suas operações sejam viáveis a longo prazo. Essa abordagem, longe de ser um entrave, representa a verdadeira inovação descentralizada: um ambiente onde as soluções emergem da necessidade real e da engenhosidade humana, e não de diretrizes burocráticas e regulamentos ineficazes.

Cada condomínio pode investir em tecnologias sustentáveis e autônomas, como energia solar e eólica, reduzindo custos e minimizando a vulnerabilidade às flutuações do mercado energético tradicional. Sistemas de captação e filtragem de água da chuva, bem como a reutilização eficiente dos recursos hídricos, garantem independência em relação a empresas monopolistas e governos que frequentemente administram esse bem de forma ineficaz. Hortas comunitárias e fazendas verticais podem suprir grande parte da demanda alimentar, permitindo que cada condomínio mantenha sua própria reserva de alimentos, aumentando a resiliência contra crises externas e instabilidades de mercado.

Além dos recursos naturais, os espaços compartilhados desempenham um papel fundamental na integração e no fortalecimento dessas comunidades. Bibliotecas, ginásios, creches e salas de aula permitem que o conhecimento e os serviços circulem internamente, criando um ambiente onde a colaboração ocorre de maneira orgânica. A descentralização também se aplica ao uso da tecnologia, plataformas digitais privadas podem ser utilizadas para conectar moradores, facilitar a troca de serviços e produtos, além de coordenar agendamentos e eventos dentro dos condomínios e entre diferentes comunidades.

O Bitcoin surge como uma ferramenta indispensável nesse ecossistema, eliminando a necessidade de bancos estatais ou sistemas financeiros controlados. Ao permitir transações diretas, transparentes e resistentes à censura, o Bitcoin se torna o meio de troca ideal entre os condomínios, garantindo a preservação do valor e possibilitando um comércio ágil e eficiente. Além disso, contratos inteligentes e protocolos descentralizados podem ser integrados para administrar serviços comuns, fortalecer a segurança e reduzir a burocracia, tornando a governança desses condomínios cada vez mais autônoma e imune a intervenções externas.

Alguns podem argumentar que a falta de um aparato estatal para regulamentar a infraestrutura pode resultar em desigualdade no acesso a recursos essenciais, ou que a descentralização completa pode gerar caos e ineficiência. No entanto, essa visão ignora o fato de que a concorrência e a inovação no livre mercado são os maiores motores de desenvolvimento sustentável. Sem monopólios ou subsídios distorcendo a alocação de recursos, a busca por eficiência leva naturalmente à adoção de soluções melhores e mais acessíveis. Condomínios que oferecem infraestrutura de qualidade tendem a atrair mais moradores e investimentos, o que impulsiona a melhoria contínua e a diversificação dos serviços. Em vez de depender de um sistema centralizado falho, as comunidades se tornam responsáveis por sua própria prosperidade, criando uma estrutura sustentável, escalável e adaptável às mudanças do futuro.

Governança e Administração

Em uma sociedade descentralizada, não se deve depender de uma estrutura estatal ou centralizada para regular e tomar decisões em nome dos indivíduos. Cada condomínio, portanto, deve ser gerido de maneira autônoma, com processos claros de tomada de decisão, resolução de conflitos e administração das questões cotidianas. A gestão pode ser organizada por conselhos de moradores, associações ou sistemas de governança direta, conforme as necessidades locais.

Conselhos de Moradores e Processos de Tomada de Decisão

Em muitos casos, a administração interna de um condomínio privado pode ser realizada por um conselho de moradores, composto por representantes eleitos ou indicados pela própria comunidade. A ideia é garantir que as decisões importantes, como planejamento urbano, orçamento, manutenção e serviços, sejam feitas de forma transparente e que os interesses de todos os envolvidos sejam considerados. Isso não significa que a gestão precise ser completamente democrática, mas sim que as decisões devem ser tomadas de forma legítima, transparente e acordadas pela maior parte dos membros.

Em vez de um processo burocrático e centralizado, onde uma liderança impõe suas vontades sobre todos a muitas vezes suas decisões ruins não o afetam diretamente, a gestão de um condomínio privado deve ser orientada pela busca de consenso, onde os próprios gestores sofrerão as consequências de suas más escolhas. O processo de tomada de decisão pode ser dinâmico e direto, com os moradores discutindo e acordando soluções baseadas no mercado e nas necessidades locais, em vez de depender de um sistema impessoal de regulamentação. Além disso, a utilização de tecnologias descentralizadas, como plataformas de blockchain, pode proporcionar maior transparência nas decisões e maior confiança na gestão.

Resolução de Conflitos

A resolução de disputas dentro dos condomínios pode ocorrer de forma voluntária, através de negociação direta ou com o auxílio de mediadores escolhidos pelos próprios moradores por meio de um sistema de reputação. Em alguns casos, podem ser criados mecanismos para resolução de disputas mais formais, com árbitros ou juízes independentes que atuam sem vínculos com o condomínio. Esses árbitros podem ser escolhidos com base em sua experiência ou especialização em áreas como direito, mediação e resolução de conflitos, com uma reputação para zelar. Ao contrário de um sistema judicial centralizado, onde a parte envolvida depende do Estado para resolver disputas, os moradores possuem a autonomia para buscar soluções que atendam aos seus próprios interesses e necessidades. A diversidade de abordagens em um sistema de governança descentralizado cria oportunidades para inovações que atendem diferentes cenários, sem a interferência de burocratas distantes dos próprios problemas que estão "tentando resolver".

Planejamento Urbano e Arquitetura

A questão do design dos condomínios envolve não apenas a estética das construções, mas também a funcionalidade e a sustentabilidade a longo prazo. O planejamento urbano deve refletir as necessidades específicas da comunidade, onde ela decide por si mesma como construir e organizar seu ambiente.\ Arquitetos e urbanistas, muitas vezes moradores especializados, serão responsáveis pela concepção de espaços que atendam a esses critérios, criando ambientes agradáveis, com áreas para lazer, trabalho e convivência que atendam às diversas necessidades de cada grupo.\ Além disso, condomínios com nessecidades semelhantes poderão adotar ideias que deram certo em outros e certamente também dará no seu.

Segurança e Vigilância

Em relação à segurança, cada condomínio pode adotar sistemas de vigilância e proteção que atendam à sua realidade específica. Algumas comunidades podem optar por sistemas de câmeras de segurança, armamento pleno de seus moradores, patrulhamento privado ou até mesmo formas alternativas de garantir a proteção, como vigilância por meio de criptografia e monitoramento descentralizado. A chave para a segurança será a confiança mútua e a colaboração voluntária entre os moradores, que terão a liberdade de definir suas próprias medidas.

Comércio entre Condomínios

A troca de bens e serviços entre as diferentes comunidades é essencial para o funcionamento da rede. Como cada condomínio possui um grau de especialização ou uma mistura de profissionais em diversas áreas, a interdependência entre eles se torna crucial para suprir necessidades e promover a colaboração.

Embora alguns condomínios sejam especializados em áreas como saúde, agricultura ou tecnologia, outros podem ter um perfil mais diversificado, com moradores que atuam em diferentes campos de conhecimento. Por exemplo, um condomínio agrícola pode produzir alimentos orgânicos frescos, enquanto um condomínio de saúde oferece consultas médicas, terapias e cuidados especializados. Já um condomínio tecnológico pode fornecer inovações em software ou equipamentos de energia. Podem haver condomínios universitários que oferecem todo tipo de solução no campo de ensino. Ao mesmo tempo, um condomínio misto, com moradores de diversas áreas, pode oferecer uma variedade de serviços e produtos, tornando-se um centro de intercâmbio de diferentes tipos de expertise.

Essa divisão de trabalho, seja especializada ou diversificada, permite que os condomínios ofereçam o melhor de suas áreas de atuação, ao mesmo tempo em que atendem às demandas de outros. Um condomínio que não se especializa pode, por exemplo, buscar um acordo de troca com um condomínio agrícola para obter alimentos frescos ou com um condomínio tecnológico para adquirir soluções inovadoras.

Embora os condomínios busquem a autossuficiência, alguns recursos essenciais não podem ser produzidos internamente. Itens como minérios para construção, combustíveis ou até mesmo água, em regiões secas, não estão disponíveis em todas as áreas. A natureza não distribui os recursos de maneira uniforme, e a capacidade de produção local pode ser insuficiente para suprir todas as necessidades dos moradores. Isso implica que, para garantir a qualidade de vida e a continuidade das operações, os condomínios precisarão estabelecer relações comerciais e de fornecimento com fontes externas, seja através de mercados, importações ou parcerias com outras comunidades ou fornecedores fora do sistema de condomínios. O comércio intercondomínios e com o exterior será vital para a complementaridade das necessidades, assegurando que os moradores tenham acesso a tudo o que não pode ser produzido localmente.

O sistema econômico entre os condomínios pode ser flexível, permitindo o uso de uma moeda comum (como o Bitcoin) ou até mesmo um sistema de troca direta. Por exemplo, um morador de um condomínio misto pode oferecer serviços de design gráfico em troca de alimentos ou cuidados médicos. Esse tipo de colaboração estimula a produtividade e cria incentivos para que cada condomínio ofereça o melhor de seus recursos e habilidades, garantindo acesso aos bens e serviços necessários.

Relações Externas e Diplomacia

O isolamento excessivo pode limitar o acesso a inovações, avanços culturais e tecnológicos, e até mesmo dificultar o acesso a mercados externos. Por isso, é importante que haja canais de comunicação e métodos de diplomacia para interagir com outras comunidades. Os condomínios podem, por exemplo, estabelecer parcerias com outras regiões, seja para troca de produtos, serviços ou até para inovação. Isso garante que a rede de condomínios não se torne autossuficiente ao ponto de se desconectar do resto do mundo, o que pode resultar em estagnação.

Feiras, mercados intercondomínios e até eventos culturais e educacionais podem ser organizados para promover essas interações. A colaboração entre as comunidades e o exterior não precisa ser baseada em uma troca de dependência, mas sim numa rede de oportunidades que cria benefícios para todas as partes envolvidas. Uma boa reputação atrai novos moradores, pode valorizar propriedades e facilitar parcerias. A diplomacia entre as comunidades também pode ser exercida para resolver disputas ou desafios externos.

A manutenção de boas relações entre condomínios é essencial para garantir uma rede de apoio mútuo eficiente. Essas relações incentivam a troca de bens e serviços, como alimentos, assistência médica ou soluções tecnológicas, além de fortalecer a autossuficiência regional. Ao colaborar em segurança, infraestrutura compartilhada, eventos culturais e até mesmo na resolução de conflitos, os condomínios se tornam mais resilientes e eficientes, reduzindo a dependência externa e melhorando a qualidade de vida dos moradores. A cooperação contínua cria um ambiente mais seguro e harmonioso.

Educação e Desenvolvimento Humano

Cada comunidade pode criar escolas internas com currículos adaptados às especializações de seus moradores. Por exemplo, em um condomínio agrícola, podem ser ensinadas práticas agrícolas sustentáveis, e em um condomínio tecnológico, cursos de programação e inovação. Isso permite que crianças e jovens cresçam em ambientes que reforçam as competências valorizadas pela comunidade.

Além das escolas internas, o conceito de homeschooling pode ser incentivado, permitindo que os pais eduquem seus filhos conforme seus próprios valores e necessidades, com o apoio da comunidade. Esse modelo oferece uma educação mais flexível e personalizada, ao contrário do currículo tradicional oferecido pelo sistema público atual.

Os condomínios universitários também podem surgir, criando ambientes dedicados ao desenvolvimento acadêmico, científico e profissional, onde estudantes vivem e aprendem. Além disso, programas de capacitação contínua são essenciais, com oficinas e cursos oferecidos dentro do condomínio para garantir que os moradores se atualizem com novas tecnologias e práticas.

Para ampliar os horizontes educacionais, os intercâmbios estudantis entre diferentes condomínios podem ser incentivados. Esses intercâmbios não se limitam apenas ao ambiente educacional, mas também se estendem ao aprendizado de práticas de vida e habilidades técnicas. Os jovens de diferentes condomínios podem viajar para outras comunidades para estudar, trabalhar ou simplesmente trocar ideias. Isso pode ocorrer de diversas formas, como programas de curto e longo prazo, através de acordos entre os próprios condomínios, permitindo que os estudantes se conectem com outras comunidades, aprendam sobre diferentes especializações e desenvolvam uma compreensão mais ampla.

Essa abordagem descentralizada permite que cada comunidade desenvolva as competências essenciais sem depender de estruturas limitantes do estado ou sistemas educacionais centralizados. Ao proporcionar liberdade de escolha e personalização, os condomínios criam ambientes propícios ao crescimento humano, alinhados às necessidades e interesses de seus moradores.

---

A sociedade dos condomínios privados propõe uma estrutura alternativa de convivência onde as pessoas podem viver de acordo com seus próprios valores e necessidades. Esses condomínios oferecem um modelo de organização que desafia a centralização estatal, buscando criar comunidades adaptáveis e inovadoras. A liberdade garante que as habilidades necessárias para o sustento e crescimento das comunidades sejam mantidas ao longo do tempo.

A troca de bens, serviços e conhecimentos entre os condomínios, sem a imposição de forças externas, cria uma rede de boas relações, onde o comércio e a colaboração substituem a intervenção estatal. Em vez de depender de sistemas coercitivos, cada condomínio funciona como um microcosmo autônomo que, juntos, formam um ecossistema dinâmico e próspero. Este modelo propõe que, por meio de trocas voluntárias, possamos construir uma sociedade mais saudável. Lembre-se: Ideias e somente ideias podem iluminar a escuridão.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Scala is such a great language

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

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

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

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

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

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

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).

@ df06d21e:2b23058f

Imagine a Living Civilization—a new way to see our world. It starts with the Universe’s pillars: Matter, the stuff we’re made of; Energy, the flow that drives us; Physics, the rules we play by; and Chemistry, the complexity that builds us. We know these well. But civilization? That’s our creation—and although it has been described in so many different ways over the years I thought it was time for something new. Civilization has its own pillars, systems that I call the pillars of the Metaverse: Capital, Information, Innovation, and Trust.

Capital is how we measure value. Not just money, but everything that matters: skills, we call that Human Capital; ecosystems, that’s Natural Capital; infrastructure, Public Capital; relationships, Social Capital. Picture a farmer swapping Bitcoin sats for seeds—not fiat debt—or tracking soil health alongside his wallet. Capital is a system, a system of measurement.

Information is how we verify truth. Think IPFS, a network holding real data—climate stats, farming fixes—open to all, not locked up by some corporate gatekeeper. Information is a system of verification.

Innovation is about generating solutions. On GitHub, coders worldwide crank out tools—Nostr clients, solar apps—shared freely, not patented for profit. Innovation is our system of generation.

And Trust—it’s coordination. Nostr’s decentralized threads let communities set trade rules, split resources—governance from the ground up, no overlords required. Trust is our system of coordination.

Right now we’re stuck in debt-based systems—and they’re failing us. Take fiat currency—central banks print it, slashing your purchasing power. Our dollar buys less every year; savings erode while the elite stack their gains. It’s a scam, Bitcoiners know it—fiat’s the real Ponzi bleeding us dry. Capital gets twisted—firms hoard Bitcoin for fiat pumps, not real wealth; governments chase GDP while forests die and skills sit idle. Information is buried—our media spits out spin, our corporations lock truth in silos. Innovation is stalled—debt props up corporate patents, not open wins. Trust is gone—our governance systems consist of top-down control that splits us apart, left to right, top to bottom. Debt just measures scarcity—money borrowed, nature trashed, bonds frayed—and it’s crushing the pillars.

Wealth-based systems promise to turn that around. Bitcoin’s sound money is just the start—sats hold value, not inflate it away. Real capital measures what sustains us—sats fund a cooperative's water pump, not a vault; they track skills taught, land healed, ties rebuilt. Real Information opens up—IPFS logs show ‘biochar boosted yield 20%’, verified by us, not suits. Real Innovation flows—GitHub devs build Lightning hubs, wealth spreads. Real Trust binds us together—Nostr chats align us, no central puppeteer. Wealth based systems strengthen the pillars of the Metaverse, it doesn’t erode them.

We needed a new framing. A new vision of what was, what is, and what could be. We have one. This is real. This is the world we are building. Bitcoin is live, Nostr is growing, IPFS and GitHub are humming. We can see Debt teetering; while real wealth is rising. So, hodlers, maxis, plebs—everyone—what does a true wealth-based system look like? How can we measure Capital beyond fiat’s con job? Bitcoin’s the rock, but it’s just the beginning. How do we build on this, expand it, and transform everything as we build something entirely new?

@ c4b5369a:b812dbd6

Offline transactions with Cashu

Over the past few weeks, I've been busy implementing offline capabilities into nutstash. I think this is one of the key value propositions of ecash, beinga a bearer instrument that can be used without internet access. It does however come with limitations, which can lead to a bit of confusion. I hope this article will clear some of these questions up for you!

What is ecash/Cashu?

Ecash is the first cryptocurrency ever invented. It was created by David Chaum in 1983. It uses a blind signature scheme, which allows users to prove ownership of a token without revealing a link to its origin. These tokens are what we call ecash. They are bearer instruments, meaning that anyone who possesses a copy of them, is considered the owner.

Cashu is an implementation of ecash, built to tightly interact with Bitcoin, more specifically the Bitcoin lightning network. In the Cashu ecosystem, Mints are the gateway to the lightning network. They provide the infrastructure to access the lightning network, pay invoices and receive payments. Instead of relying on a traditional ledger scheme like other custodians do, the mint issues ecash tokens, to represent the value held by the users.

How do normal Cashu transactions work?

A Cashu transaction happens when the sender gives a copy of his ecash token to the receiver. This can happen by any means imaginable. You could send the token through email, messenger, or even by pidgeon. One of the common ways to transfer ecash is via QR code.

The transaction is however not finalized just yet! In order to make sure the sender cannot double-spend their copy of the token, the receiver must do what we call a swap. A swap is essentially exchanging an ecash token for a new one at the mint, invalidating the old token in the process. This ensures that the sender can no longer use the same token to spend elsewhere, and the value has been transferred to the receiver.

What about offline transactions?

Sending offline

Sending offline is very simple. The ecash tokens are stored on your device. Thus, no internet connection is required to access them. You can litteraly just take them, and give them to someone. The most convenient way is usually through a local transmission protocol, like NFC, QR code, Bluetooth, etc.

The one thing to consider when sending offline is that ecash tokens come in form of "coins" or "notes". The technical term we use in Cashu is Proof. It "proofs" to the mint that you own a certain amount of value. Since these proofs have a fixed value attached to them, much like UTXOs in Bitcoin do, you would need proofs with a value that matches what you want to send. You can mix and match multiple proofs together to create a token that matches the amount you want to send. But, if you don't have proofs that match the amount, you would need to go online and swap for the needed proofs at the mint.

Another limitation is, that you cannot create custom proofs offline. For example, if you would want to lock the ecash to a certain pubkey, or add a timelock to the proof, you would need to go online and create a new custom proof at the mint.

Receiving offline

You might think: well, if I trust the sender, I don't need to be swapping the token right away!

You're absolutely correct. If you trust the sender, you can simply accept their ecash token without needing to swap it immediately.

This is already really useful, since it gives you a way to receive a payment from a friend or close aquaintance without having to worry about connectivity. It's almost just like physical cash!

It does however not work if the sender is untrusted. We have to use a different scheme to be able to receive payments from someone we don't trust.

Receiving offline from an untrusted sender

To be able to receive payments from an untrusted sender, we need the sender to create a custom proof for us. As we've seen before, this requires the sender to go online.

The sender needs to create a token that has the following properties, so that the receciver can verify it offline:

• It must be locked to ONLY the receiver's public key
• It must include an offline signature proof (DLEQ proof)
• If it contains a timelock & refund clause, it must be set to a time in the future that is acceptable for the receiver
• It cannot contain duplicate proofs (double-spend)
• It cannot contain proofs that the receiver has already received before (double-spend)

If all of these conditions are met, then the receiver can verify the proof offline and accept the payment. This allows us to receive payments from anyone, even if we don't trust them.

At first glance, this scheme seems kinda useless. It requires the sender to go online, which defeats the purpose of having an offline payment system.

I beleive there are a couple of ways this scheme might be useful nonetheless:

1. Offline vending machines: Imagine you have an offline vending machine that accepts payments from anyone. The vending machine could use this scheme to verify payments without needing to go online itself. We can assume that the sender is able to go online and create a valid token, but the receiver doesn't need to be online to verify it.

2. Offline marketplaces: Imagine you have an offline marketplace where buyers and sellers can trade goods and services. Before going to the marketplace the sender already knows where he will be spending the money. The sender could create a valid token before going to the marketplace, using the merchants public key as a lock, and adding a refund clause to redeem any unspent ecash after it expires. In this case, neither the sender nor the receiver needs to go online to complete the transaction.

How to use this

Pretty much all cashu wallets allow you to send tokens offline. This is because all that the wallet needs to do is to look if it can create the desired amount from the proofs stored locally. If yes, it will automatically create the token offline.

Receiving offline tokens is currently only supported by nutstash (experimental).

To create an offline receivable token, the sender needs to lock it to the receiver's public key. Currently there is no refund clause! So be careful that you don't get accidentally locked out of your funds!

The receiver can then inspect the token and decide if it is safe to accept without a swap. If all checks are green, they can accept the token offline without trusting the sender.

The receiver will see the unswapped tokens on the wallet homescreen. They will need to manually swap them later when they are online again.

Later when the receiver is online again, they can swap the token for a fresh one.

Summary

We learned that offline transactions are possible with ecash, but there are some limitations. It either requires trusting the sender, or relying on either the sender or receiver to be online to verify the tokens, or create tokens that can be verified offline by the receiver.

I hope this short article was helpful in understanding how ecash works and its potential for offline transactions.

Cheers,

Gandlaf

@ 21335073:a244b1ad

Before I saw those X right-wing political “influencers” parading their Epstein binders in that PR stunt, I’d already posted this on Nostr, an open protocol. 

“Today, the world’s attention will likely fixate on Epstein, governmental failures in addressing horrific abuse cases, and the influential figures who perpetrate such acts—yet few will center the victims and survivors in the conversation. The survivors of Epstein went to law enforcement and very little happened. The survivors tried to speak to the corporate press and the corporate press knowingly covered for him. In situations like these social media can serve as one of the only ways for a survivor’s voice to be heard. 

It’s becoming increasingly evident that the line between centralized corporate social media and the state is razor-thin, if it exists at all. Time and again, the state shields powerful abusers when it’s politically expedient to do so. In this climate, a survivor attempting to expose someone like Epstein on a corporate tech platform faces an uphill battle—there’s no assurance their voice would even break through. Their story wouldn’t truly belong to them; it’d be at the mercy of the platform, subject to deletion at a whim. Nostr, though, offers a lifeline—a censorship-resistant space where survivors can share their truths, no matter how untouchable the abuser might seem. A survivor could remain anonymous here if they took enough steps. 

Nostr holds real promise for amplifying survivor voices. And if you’re here daily, tossing out memes, take heart: you’re helping build a foundation for those who desperately need to be heard.“

That post is untouchable—no CEO, company, employee, or government can delete it. Even if I wanted to, I couldn’t take it down myself. The post will outlive me on the protocol. 

The cozy alliance between the state and corporate social media hit me hard during that right-wing X “influencer” PR stunt. Elon owns X. Elon’s a special government employee. X pays those influencers to post. We don’t know who else pays them to post. Those influencers are spurred on by both the government and X to manage the Epstein case narrative. It wasn’t survivors standing there, grinning for photos—it was paid influencers, gatekeepers orchestrating yet another chance to re-exploit the already exploited.

The bond between the state and corporate social media is tight. If the other Epsteins out there are ever to be unmasked, I wouldn’t bet on a survivor’s story staying safe with a corporate tech platform, the government, any social media influencer, or mainstream journalist. Right now, only a protocol can hand survivors the power to truly own their narrative.

I don’t have anything against Elon—I’ve actually been a big supporter. I’m just stating it as I see it. X isn’t censorship resistant and they have an algorithm that they choose not the user. Corporate tech platforms like X can be a better fit for some survivors. X has safety tools and content moderation, making it a solid option for certain individuals. Grok can be a big help for survivors looking for resources or support! As a survivor, you know what works best for you, and safety should always come first—keep that front and center.

That said, a protocol is a game-changer for cases where the powerful are likely to censor. During China's # MeToo movement, survivors faced heavy censorship on social media platforms like Weibo and WeChat, where posts about sexual harassment were quickly removed, and hashtags like # MeToo or "woyeshi" were blocked by government and platform filters. To bypass this, activists turned to blockchain technology encoding their stories—like Yue Xin’s open letter about a Peking University case—into transaction metadata. This made the information tamper-proof and publicly accessible, resisting censorship since blockchain data can’t be easily altered or deleted.

I posted this on X 2/28/25. I wanted to try my first long post on a nostr client. The Epstein cover up is ongoing so it’s still relevant, unfortunately.

If you are a survivor or loved one who is reading this and needs support please reach out to: National Sexual Assault Hotline 24/7 https://rainn.org/

Hours: Available 24 hours

@ fd06f542:8d6d54cd

Direct-message

• 0xchat
• Beautiful, simple and private nostr DMs

• Public groups that work compatible with other apps

• Coop

• Safe DMs with NIP-17

Signers

• Alby
• Nostr wallet connect for one tap zapping via nostr clients
• Nostr authenticator (never enter your nsec into apps)
• Chrome extension
• Simple and easy to use
• Frequently maintained
• Send and receive sats

• Custodial

• Amber

• Other Android apps can invoke it for signing events via NIP-55
• Your key doesn't have to touch the other, less trusted, apps
• Supports providing a NIP-46 signing Bunker
• Multiple accounts
• Fine-grained app authorizations

• Activity log

• Keys Band

• Multiple key management
• Light and dark mode

• Save preferred relays

• nos2x

• The original signer by nostr creator fiatjaf
• Versatile, no frills

• Relay preference storage

• Nostr Connect

• A skinned fork of nos2x by fiatjaf
• Chrome
• &&nbsp
• Firefox
• Store preferred relay set

• Individually revokable permissions

• Nsec App

• Log in to nostr apps without an extension
• Key recovery via email
• Password protected encrypted local key storage

• Manage multiple apps

• Nostrame

• Derive accounts from a mnemonic seed
• Generate random mnemonic accounts
• NIP-07 - window.nostr capability for web browsers
• Import external accounts
• Set basic metadata on Nostr
• Enjoy encryption secured by a master password
• Lock and unlock the vault with ease
• Easily import and export backups

Microblogging

• alphaama
• CLI + GUI
• run custom code
• inspect notes

• test stuff

• Amethyst 暂无相关功能描述

• Coracle

• Short notes
• Nice thread view
• Profile search
• Secure direct messages
• Custom feeds

• Relay reviews

• Damus

• Note feeds
• Easy to use interface
• Zap pre-set and custom amounts (lightning payments)
• Multi-wallet support

• Block lists

• Flycat

• Snappy nostr browsing
• Back up your data
• Browse long form content

• Light mode

• FreeFrom

• No phone number and email required to sign up
• Free migration of social content within the Nostr
• Excellent user experience

• Double-enhanced private communication

• Gossip

• multiplatform: runs on Windows, MacOS and Linux
• native: avoids browser-tech for performance and security
• performant: coded with performance in mind in Rust using LMDB for the database, such that your network speed will be your bottleneck
• outbox model: using a set of heuristics to always find people you follow no matter where they're publishing to
• high user control: over 60 different settings, all with reasonable defaults, but very customizable

• privacy: supports running over Tor, options for not loading media, options for not sharing who you follow and others

• Iris

• Short notes
• Social graph filter

• Image grid feeds

• Lume

• Desktop app
• Clean and beautiful design
• Multi-column
• Spaces

• Trending

• Nos Social

• Currently in TestFlight
• Safety first: mute, report, content warnings, delete
• Reach restricted to 2 hops - people you follow and people they follow.

• Community-focused relays

• Nostrmo 暂无相关功能描述

• noStrudel

• Feature-rich
• Highly customizable
• Mute words
• Communities
• Streaming (watch)
• Lists
• Tools shortcuts

• Sidebar comments

• Nostter

• Twitter style feed
• Cute logo
• Mute words

• Minimal and calm

• Nostur

• Multi-account
• Guest account
• Your posts stored on your device and can be exported
• Bookmarks and personal notes
• Follow and explore timeline
• Remembers where you left off scrolling when reopening app
• Undo accidental tap on Like
• Autocomplete names when typing
• Lightning zaps
• Lightning wallet selection
• Direct Messages
• Domain verification
• Badges
• Block list
• Muted conversations
• Notifications for mentions, reactions and zaps
• Image previews/zoom/pan
• Gif/Video playback
• Option to turn signature verification off
• Option to hide badges from profile and emojis from names
• Fast local database
• Big detail pane for iPad/macOS
• Login as someone else (read-only mode)

• Choose which relays to send to and receive from

• Oddbean

• Hacker News style

• Openvibe

• Post to Nostr and Mastodon
• Nice, clean and modern design
• Simple and intuitive
• Gifs, stickers integration

• Dark and light mode

• Pollerama

• Browse polls created here or on other clients
• Create polls

• Vote on polls

• Primal 暂无相关功能描述

• Rabbit

• Multi-column

• Tweetdeck-like UI

• Snort

• Twitter-like experience
• Dark and light mode
• Custom zap amounts
• Bookmarks
• Pinned notes

• Alby integration

• Wired

• PWA to be widely accessible with distribution via URLS, and to side-step App Store gatekeeping
• Employs Proof-of-Work (PoW) as a spam prevention mechanism, as opposed to Captcha, moderation or other verification methods
• Uses NOSTR as a censorship-resistant global "social" network

Community

• Badges Page
• Create and award badges
• Manage badges awarded to you
• Simple interface

File-sharing

• Bouquet
• Upload files
• Download files
• Manage your list of mediaservers
• Broadcast your list on Nostr
• Sync files between servers

• Browse files on your mediaservers

• DTAN

• Browse lists of available torrents
• Publish your own
• Choose relays to browse on

Group-chat

• Chachi
• Create, browse, join groups
• Send chat messages or other kinds of content

• Seamless, lean, fast interface

• Flotilla

• Browse relays and chat on the communities in them
• Send and receive direct messages

• Take private notes

• Groups

• Browse groups on specific relays
• Join rooms and send chat messages

Tools

• Emojito

• Create custom emoji sets to be used on supported clients

• Formstr

• Create and share forms

• GIF Buddy

• Make GIFs from the external world available inside Nostr clients
• GIF uploads

• Search external GIF libraries

• Nosdrive

• Save your nostr notes to Google Drive

• Nosta

• Guided onboarding
• Recovery phrase to restore access
• Good UX with explainers

• Beautiful design

• Nostr App Manager

• Discover app of the day
• Discover new apps
• Search all nostr apps
• Discover nostr DVMs
• Discover nostr code repositories
• App reviews

• Nostr native - takes a different approach from NostrApps.com

• ZapStore

• A plethora of apps to choose from and install
• Faster than Obtainium
• More complete than F-Droid

• Cleaner than Google Play

• Zapplepay

• Zap from any client
• Bypass Apple's draconian rules
• Nostr Wallet Connect

Blogging

• Feeder
• Subscribe to RSS and Nostr article feeds
• Years of specialization in reading articles
• Offline reading
• OPML Import/Export
• Notification support

• Material design

• Habla

• Long form publishing
• Markdown support
• Rich text editor
• Dark and light modes
• Browse by relay
• Made on nostr, content mirrored to other nostr platforms.

• Extension-only sign-in

• Narr

• Read RSS feeds
• Read Nostr NIP-23 long-form articles
• Import and export OPML
• Runs on desktop with a web-based UI

• Can be accessed remotely from apps such as Reeder, Readkit etc

• Noflux

• Read RSS feeds
• Read Nostr NIP-23 long-form articles
• Import and export OPML
• Runs on desktop with a web-based UI

• Can be accessed remotely from apps such as Reeder, Readkit etc

• npub.pro

• Create a website out of your nostr content
• SEO friendly
• Use any 3rd party tools
• Works like an app
• Beautiful Ghost themes to choose from
• Zero maintenance
• Custom domains
• Open source and self-hostable
• Natively Social

• Publish from any other nostr app

• Obsidian Nostr Writer

• Directly publish your articles from Obsidian to Nostr with a couple of clicks
• Quickly compose and publish short form notes too
• Images in your .md file will automatically be uploaded and handled when you publish
• Add tags to your posts
• See all posts sent from Obsidian with links to view
• Configure to send to whatever relays you like
• Publish under different nostr accounts
• Easily view and download your Nostr bookmarks into Obsidian for reference and local use

• Automatically populates article information fields from the frontmatter

• Shipyard

• Schedule nostr notes
• Schedule reposts
• Note drafts

• Multi-account support

• Yakihonne

• Publishing and reading notes
• Publishing and reading articles
• Curations (set of articles concerning a specific topic) publishing
• Long-form articles are surfaced instead of lost in the feed

Music

• Fountain
• Earn sats while listening to podcasts
• Create and share clips, get paid on your clips
• Boost your favorite podcasts

• Discover clips from friends

• Stemstr

• Collaborate with others to create your next hit
• Music-focused interface
• Remix function

Curation

• Highlighter
• Read and write long-form articles
• Discover what people you trust found interesting and insightful
• Understand why they found it interesting or insightful with their comments attached
• Send sats, comment or share your favorite highlights

• Highlight anything

• Listr

• Create and share lists

• Browse other people's lists

• Zap Cooking

• Browse recipes
• Add your own recipes

• Earn sats via zaps

• Nostree

• Create link lists
• Multiple lists

• Theming

• Pinstr

• Curate lists, users, links
• Share lists
• Discover interesting content

Photos

• Olas
• Special high-quality photos dedicated client
• Publish photos and browse photos
• Publish and browse short videos
• Browse media feeds from friends, extended network and from specific relays

Discovery

• Jumble
• Browse individual relays by URL
• Create and browse relay sets
• Create and reply to notes
• Follow people and browse the feed from your follows

• Browse the kind:20 photos feed

• Nostr Band

• Search keywords, hashtags, pubkeys, posts
• Look up Nostr statistics
• Embed widgets
• API for clients

• NIP05 Service

• Nostrrr

• Look up relay information
• Browse relay feeds
• Browse individual profile feeds with smart relay selection

• Simple and gets the job done

• Zaplife

• See total sats zapped in the past hour, 4 hours, 24 hours and 7 days
• See who zapped who individually
• See notes that got the most zaps

Audio

• Nests
• Start audio chats
• Troll box (chat)
• Instant zaps (lightning payments)

Crazy

• Nostrocket
• Create issues that matter to you
• Award merits to contributors
• Solve problems

Career

• Ostrich Work
• Post jobs for 20k sats
• Find jobs

Marketplace

• Plebeian Market
• Buy and sell things for sats

• Bid in auctions

• Shopstr

• Buy and sell items for sats
• Message seller
• Cashu integration

Freelancing

• SatShoot
• Post problems on SatShoot
• Make money solving problems as a Freelancer
• Share problems or freelance services on your feed
• Bidding system for Clients to choose the best Offer
• Chat in DMs
• Post Reviews on Freelancers or Clients
• Build Reputation
• Public Zaps as Payments
• Use your Web of Trust to keep scammers away

Media

• Slidestr
• Compact media browsing
• Images and videos
• Full screen media

Meatspace

• Yondar
• Add places to a map
• See places by your friends or follows

Streaming

• zap.stream
• Start livestream via zap.stream or Cloudflare
• Watch other livestreams
• Chat
• Custom emojis
• Zap streamers in real time
• Zap chat participants in real time
• Set up stream goals

@ 4925ea33:025410d8

1. O que é um Aromaterapeuta?

O aromaterapeuta é um profissional especializado na prática da Aromaterapia, responsável pelo uso adequado de óleos essenciais, ervas aromáticas, águas florais e destilados herbais para fins terapêuticos.

A atuação desse profissional envolve diferentes métodos de aplicação, como inalação, uso tópico, sempre considerando a segurança e a necessidade individual do cliente. A Aromaterapia pode auxiliar na redução do estresse, alívio de dores crônicas, relaxamento muscular e melhora da respiração, entre outros benefícios.

Além disso, os aromaterapeutas podem trabalhar em conjunto com outros profissionais da saúde para oferecer um tratamento complementar em diversas condições. Como já mencionado no artigo sobre "Como evitar processos alérgicos na prática da Aromaterapia", é essencial ter acompanhamento profissional, pois os óleos essenciais são altamente concentrados e podem causar reações adversas se utilizados de forma inadequada.

---

2. Como um Aromaterapeuta Pode Ajudar?

Você pode procurar um aromaterapeuta para diferentes necessidades, como:

✔ Questões Emocionais e Psicológicas

Auxílio em momentos de luto, divórcio, demissão ou outras situações desafiadoras.

Apoio na redução do estresse, ansiedade e insônia.

Vale lembrar que, em casos de transtornos psiquiátricos, a Aromaterapia deve ser usada como terapia complementar, associada ao tratamento médico.

✔ Questões Físicas

Dores musculares e articulares.

Problemas respiratórios como rinite, sinusite e tosse.

Distúrbios digestivos leves.

Dores de cabeça e enxaquecas. Nesses casos, a Aromaterapia pode ser um suporte, mas não substitui a medicina tradicional para identificar a origem dos sintomas.

✔ Saúde da Pele e Cabelos

Tratamento para acne, dermatites e psoríase.

Cuidados com o envelhecimento precoce da pele.

Redução da queda de cabelo e controle da oleosidade do couro cabeludo.

✔ Bem-estar e Qualidade de Vida

Melhora da concentração e foco, aumentando a produtividade.

Estímulo da disposição e energia.

Auxílio no equilíbrio hormonal (TPM, menopausa, desequilíbrios hormonais).

Com base nessas necessidades, o aromaterapeuta irá indicar o melhor tratamento, calculando doses, sinergias (combinação de óleos essenciais), diluições e técnicas de aplicação, como inalação, uso tópico ou difusão.

---

3. Como Funciona uma Consulta com um Aromaterapeuta?

Uma consulta com um aromaterapeuta é um atendimento personalizado, onde são avaliadas as necessidades do cliente para a criação de um protocolo adequado. O processo geralmente segue estas etapas:

✔ Anamnese (Entrevista Inicial)

Perguntas sobre saúde física, emocional e estilo de vida.

Levantamento de sintomas, histórico médico e possíveis alergias.

Definição dos objetivos da terapia (alívio do estresse, melhora do sono, dores musculares etc.).

✔ Escolha dos Óleos Essenciais

Seleção dos óleos mais indicados para o caso.

Consideração das propriedades terapêuticas, contraindicações e combinações seguras.

✔ Definição do Método de Uso

O profissional indicará a melhor forma de aplicação, que pode ser:

Inalação: difusores, colares aromáticos, vaporização.

Uso tópico: massagens, óleos corporais, compressas.

Banhos aromáticos e escalda-pés. Todas as diluições serão ajustadas de acordo com a segurança e a necessidade individual do cliente.

✔ Plano de Acompanhamento

Instruções detalhadas sobre o uso correto dos óleos essenciais.

Orientação sobre frequência e duração do tratamento.

Possibilidade de retorno para ajustes no protocolo.

A consulta pode ser realizada presencialmente ou online, dependendo do profissional.

---

Quer saber como a Aromaterapia pode te ajudar? Agende uma consulta comigo e descubra os benefícios dos óleos essenciais para o seu bem-estar!

@ fe9e99a0:5123e9a8

What’s happening?

@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9

There is something quietly rebellious about stacking sats. In a world obsessed with instant gratification, choosing to patiently accumulate Bitcoin, one sat at a time, feels like a middle finger to the hype machine. But to do it right, you have got to stay humble. Stack too hard with your head in the clouds, and you will trip over your own ego before the next halving even hits.

Small Wins

Stacking sats is not glamorous. Discipline. Stacking every day, week, or month, no matter the price, and letting time do the heavy lifting. Humility lives in that consistency. You are not trying to outsmart the market or prove you are the next "crypto" prophet. Just a regular person, betting on a system you believe in, one humble stack at a time. Folks get rekt chasing the highs. They ape into some shitcoin pump, shout about it online, then go silent when they inevitably get rekt. The ones who last? They stack. Just keep showing up. Consistency. Humility in action. Know the game is long, and you are not bigger than it.

Ego is Volatile

Bitcoin’s swings can mess with your head. One day you are up 20%, feeling like a genius and the next down 30%, questioning everything. Ego will have you panic selling at the bottom or over leveraging the top. Staying humble means patience, a true bitcoin zen. Do not try to "beat” Bitcoin. Ride it. Stack what you can afford, live your life, and let compounding work its magic.

Simplicity

There is a beauty in how stacking sats forces you to rethink value. A sat is worth less than a penny today, but every time you grab a few thousand, you plant a seed. It is not about flaunting wealth but rather building it, quietly, without fanfare. That mindset spills over. Cut out the noise: the overpriced coffee, fancy watches, the status games that drain your wallet. Humility is good for your soul and your stack. I have a buddy who has been stacking since 2015. Never talks about it unless you ask. Lives in a decent place, drives an old truck, and just keeps stacking. He is not chasing clout, he is chasing freedom. That is the vibe: less ego, more sats, all grounded in life.

The Big Picture

Stack those sats. Do it quietly, do it consistently, and do not let the green days puff you up or the red days break you down. Humility is the secret sauce, it keeps you grounded while the world spins wild. In a decade, when you look back and smile, it will not be because you shouted the loudest. It will be because you stayed the course, one sat at a time. \ \ Stay Humble and Stack Sats. 🫡

@ fe9e99a0:5123e9a8

Can’t seem to update anything

@ bc52210b:20bfc6de

CISA, or Cross-Input Signature Aggregation, is a technique in Bitcoin that allows multiple signatures from different inputs in a transaction to be combined into a single, aggregated signature. This is a big deal because Bitcoin transactions often involve multiple inputs (e.g., spending from different wallet outputs), each requiring its own signature. Normally, these signatures take up space individually, but CISA compresses them into one, making transactions more efficient.

This magic is possible thanks to the linearity property of Schnorr signatures, a type of digital signature introduced to Bitcoin with the Taproot upgrade. Unlike the older ECDSA signatures, Schnorr signatures have mathematical properties that allow multiple signatures to be added together into a single valid signature. Think of it like combining multiple handwritten signatures into one super-signature that still proves everyone signed off!

Fun Fact: CISA was considered for inclusion in Taproot but was left out to keep the upgrade simple and manageable. Adding CISA would’ve made Taproot more complex, so the developers hit pause on it—for now.

CISA vs. Key Aggregation (MuSig, FROST): Don’t Get Confused! Before we go deeper, let’s clear up a common mix-up: CISA is not the same as protocols like MuSig or FROST. Here’s why:

• Signature Aggregation (CISA): Combines multiple signatures into one, each potentially tied to different public keys and messages (e.g., different transaction inputs).
• Key Aggregation (MuSig, FROST): Combines multiple public keys into a single aggregated public key, then generates one signature for that key.

Key Differences: 1. What’s Aggregated? * CISA: Aggregates signatures. * Key Aggregation: Aggregates public keys. 2. What the Verifier Needs * CISA: The verifier needs all individual public keys and their corresponding messages to check the aggregated signature. * Key Aggregation: The verifier only needs the single aggregated public key and one message. 3. When It Happens * CISA: Used during transaction signing, when inputs are being combined into a transaction. * MuSig: Used during address creation, setting up a multi-signature (multisig) address that multiple parties control.

So, CISA is about shrinking signature data in a transaction, while MuSig/FROST are about simplifying multisig setups. Different tools, different jobs!

Two Flavors of CISA: Half-Agg and Full-Agg CISA comes in two modes:

• Full Aggregation (Full-Agg): Interactive, meaning signers need to collaborate during the signing process. (We’ll skip the details here since the query focuses on Half-Agg.)
• Half Aggregation (Half-Agg): Non-interactive, meaning signers can work independently, and someone else can combine the signatures later.

Since the query includes “CISA Part 2: Half Signature Aggregation,” let’s zoom in on Half-Agg.

Half Signature Aggregation (Half-Agg) Explained How It Works Half-Agg is a non-interactive way to aggregate Schnorr signatures. Here’s the process:

1. Independent Signing: Each signer creates their own Schnorr signature for their input, without needing to talk to the other signers.
2. Aggregation Step: An aggregator (could be anyone, like a wallet or node) takes all these signatures and combines them into one aggregated signature.

A Schnorr signature has two parts:

• R: A random point (32 bytes).
• s: A scalar value (32 bytes).

In Half-Agg:

• The R values from each signature are kept separate (one per input).
• The s values from all signatures are combined into a single s value.

Why It Saves Space (~50%) Let’s break down the size savings with some math:

Before Aggregation: * Each Schnorr signature = 64 bytes (32 for R + 32 for s). * For n inputs: n × 64 bytes.

After Half-Agg: * Keep n R values (32 bytes each) = 32 × n bytes. * Combine all s values into one = 32 bytes. * Total size: 32 × n + 32 bytes.

Comparison:

• Original: 64n bytes.
• Half-Agg: 32n + 32 bytes.
• For large n, the “+32” becomes small compared to 32n, so it’s roughly 32n, which is half of 64n. Hence, ~50% savings!

Real-World Impact: Based on recent Bitcoin usage, Half-Agg could save:

• ~19.3% in space (reducing transaction size).
• ~6.9% in fees (since fees depend on transaction size). This assumes no major changes in how people use Bitcoin post-CISA.

---

Applications of Half-Agg Half-Agg isn’t just a cool idea—it has practical uses:

1. Transaction-wide Aggregation
2. Combine all signatures within a single transaction.
3. Result: Smaller transactions, lower fees.
4. Block-wide Aggregation
5. Combine signatures across all transactions in a Bitcoin block.
6. Result: Even bigger space savings at the blockchain level.
7. Off-chain Protocols / P2P
8. Use Half-Agg in systems like Lightning Network gossip messages.
9. Benefit: Efficiency without needing miners or a Bitcoin soft fork.

---

Challenges with Half-Agg While Half-Agg sounds awesome, it’s not without hurdles, especially at the block level:

1. Breaking Adaptor Signatures
2. Adaptor signatures are special signatures used in protocols like Discreet Log Contracts (DLCs) or atomic swaps. They tie a signature to revealing a secret, ensuring fair exchanges.

3. Aggregating signatures across a block might mess up these protocols, as the individual signatures get blended together, potentially losing the properties adaptor signatures rely on.

4. Impact on Reorg Recovery

5. In Bitcoin, a reorganization (reorg) happens when the blockchain switches to a different chain of blocks. Transactions from the old chain need to be rebroadcast or reprocessed.
6. If signatures are aggregated at the block level, it could complicate extracting individual transactions and their signatures during a reorg, slowing down recovery.

These challenges mean Half-Agg needs careful design, especially for block-wide use.

Wrapping Up CISA is a clever way to make Bitcoin transactions more efficient by aggregating multiple Schnorr signatures into one, thanks to their linearity property. Half-Agg, the non-interactive mode, lets signers work independently, cutting signature size by about 50% (to 32n + 32 bytes from 64n bytes). It could save ~19.3% in space and ~6.9% in fees, with uses ranging from single transactions to entire blocks or off-chain systems like Lightning.

But watch out—block-wide Half-Agg could trip up adaptor signatures and reorg recovery, so it’s not a slam dunk yet. Still, it’s a promising tool for a leaner, cheaper Bitcoin future!

@ 266815e0:6cd408a5

Its been a little over a year since NIP-90 was written and merged into the nips repo and its been a communication mess.

Every DVM implementation expects the inputs in slightly different formats, returns the results in mostly the same format and there are very few DVM actually running.

NIP-90 is overloaded

Why does a request for text translation and creating bitcoin OP_RETURNs share the same input i tag? and why is there an output tag on requests when only one of them will return an output?

Each DVM request kind is for requesting completely different types of compute with diffrent input and output requirements, but they are all using the same spec that has 4 different types of inputs (text, url, event, job) and an undefined number of output types.

Let me show a few random DVM requests and responses I found on wss://relay.damus.io to demonstrate what I mean:

This is a request to translate an event to English json { "kind": 5002, "content": "", "tags": [ // NIP-90 says there can be multiple inputs, so how would a DVM handle translatting multiple events at once? [ "i", "<event-id>", "event" ], [ "param", "language", "en" ], // What other type of output would text translations be? image/jpeg? [ "output", "text/plain" ], // Do we really need to define relays? cant the DVM respond on the relays it saw the request on? [ "relays", "wss://relay.unknown.cloud/", "wss://nos.lol/" ] ] }

This is a request to generate text using an LLM model json { "kind": 5050, // Why is the content empty? wouldn't it be better to have the prompt in the content? "content": "", "tags": [ // Why use an indexable tag? are we ever going to lookup prompts? // Also the type "prompt" isn't in NIP-90, this should probably be "text" [ "i", "What is the capital of France?", "prompt" ], [ "p", "c4878054cff877f694f5abecf18c7450f4b6fdf59e3e9cb3e6505a93c4577db2" ], [ "relays", "wss://relay.primal.net" ] ] }

This is a request for content recommendation json { "kind": 5300, "content": "", "tags": [ // Its fine ignoring this param, but what if the client actually needs exactly 200 "results" [ "param", "max_results", "200" ], // The spec never mentions requesting content for other users. // If a DVM didn't understand this and responded to this request it would provide bad data [ "param", "user", "b22b06b051fd5232966a9344a634d956c3dc33a7f5ecdcad9ed11ddc4120a7f2" ], [ "relays", "wss://relay.primal.net", ], [ "p", "ceb7e7d688e8a704794d5662acb6f18c2455df7481833dd6c384b65252455a95" ] ] }

This is a request to create a OP_RETURN message on bitcoin json { "kind": 5901, // Again why is the content empty when we are sending human readable text? "content": "", "tags": [ // and again, using an indexable tag on an input that will never need to be looked up ["i", "09/01/24 SEC Chairman on the brink of second ETF approval", "text"] ] }

My point isn't that these event schema's aren't understandable but why are they using the same schema? each use-case is different but are they all required to use the same i tag format as input and could support all 4 types of inputs.

Lack of libraries

With all these different types of inputs, params, and outputs its verify difficult if not impossible to build libraries for DVMs

If a simple text translation request can have an event or text as inputs, a payment-required status at any point in the flow, partial results, or responses from 10+ DVMs whats the best way to build a translation library for other nostr clients to use?

And how do I build a DVM framework for the server side that can handle multiple inputs of all four types (url, text, event, job) and clients are sending all the requests in slightly differently.

Supporting payments is impossible

The way NIP-90 is written there isn't much details about payments. only a payment-required status and a generic amount tag

But the way things are now every DVM is implementing payments differently. some send a bolt11 invoice, some expect the client to NIP-57 zap the request event (or maybe the status event), and some even ask for a subscription. and we haven't even started implementing NIP-61 nut zaps or cashu A few are even formatting the amount number wrong or denominating it in sats and not mili-sats

Building a client or a library that can understand and handle all of these payment methods is very difficult. for the DVM server side its worse. A DVM server presumably needs to support all 4+ types of payments if they want to get the most sats for their services and support the most clients.

All of this is made even more complicated by the fact that a DVM can ask for payment at any point during the job process. this makes sense for some types of compute, but for others like translations or user recommendation / search it just makes things even more complicated.

For example, If a client wanted to implement a timeline page that showed the notes of all the pubkeys on a recommended list. what would they do when the selected DVM asks for payment at the start of the job? or at the end? or worse, only provides half the pubkeys and asks for payment for the other half. building a UI that could handle even just two of these possibilities is complicated.

NIP-89 is being abused

NIP-89 is "Recommended Application Handlers" and the way its describe in the nips repo is

a way to discover applications that can handle unknown event-kinds

Not "a way to discover everything"

If I wanted to build an application discovery app to show all the apps that your contacts use and let you discover new apps then it would have to filter out ALL the DVM advertisement events. and that's not just for making requests from relays

If the app shows the user their list of "recommended applications" then it either has to understand that everything in the 5xxx kind range is a DVM and to show that is its own category or show a bunch of unknown "favorites" in the list which might be confusing for the user.

In conclusion

My point in writing this article isn't that the DVMs implementations so far don't work, but that they will never work well because the spec is too broad. even with only a few DVMs running we have already lost interoperability.

I don't want to be completely negative though because some things have worked. the "DVM feeds" work, although they are limited to a single page of results. text / event translations also work well and kind 5970 Event PoW delegation could be cool. but if we want interoperability, we are going to need to change a few things with NIP-90

I don't think we can (or should) abandon NIP-90 entirely but it would be good to break it up into small NIPs or specs. break each "kind" of DVM request out into its own spec with its own definitions for expected inputs, outputs and flow.

Then if we have simple, clean definitions for each kind of compute we want to distribute. we might actually see markets and services being built and used.

@ 6389be64:ef439d32

GA, plebs. The latest episode of Bitcoin And is out, and, as always, the chicanery is running rampant. Let’s break down the biggest topics I covered, and if you want the full, unfiltered rant, make sure to listen to the episode linked below.

House Democrats’ MEME Act: A Bad Joke?

House Democrats are proposing a bill to ban presidential meme coins, clearly aimed at Trump’s and Melania’s ill-advised token launches. While grifters launching meme coins is bad, this bill is just as ridiculous. If this legislation moves forward, expect a retaliatory strike exposing how politicians like Pelosi and Warren mysteriously amassed their fortunes. Will it pass? Doubtful. But it’s another sign of the government’s obsession with regulating everything except itself.

Senate Banking’s First Digital Asset Hearing: The Real Target Is You

Cynthia Lummis chaired the first digital asset hearing, and—surprise!—it was all about control. The discussion centered on stablecoins, AML, and KYC regulations, with witnesses suggesting Orwellian measures like freezing stablecoin transactions unless pre-approved by authorities. What was barely mentioned? Bitcoin. They want full oversight of stablecoins, which is really about controlling financial freedom. Expect more nonsense targeting self-custody wallets under the guise of stopping “bad actors.”

Bank of America and PayPal Want In on Stablecoins

Bank of America’s CEO openly stated they’ll launch a stablecoin as soon as regulation allows. Meanwhile, PayPal’s CEO paid for a hat using Bitcoin—not their own stablecoin, Pi USD. Why wouldn’t he use his own product? Maybe he knows stablecoins aren’t what they’re hyped up to be. Either way, the legacy financial system is gearing up to flood the market with stablecoins, not because they love crypto, but because it’s a tool to extend U.S. dollar dominance.

MetaPlanet Buys the Dip

Japan’s MetaPlanet issued $13.4M in bonds to buy more Bitcoin, proving once again that institutions see the writing on the wall. Unlike U.S. regulators who obsess over stablecoins, some companies are actually stacking sats.

UK Expands Crypto Seizure Powers

Across the pond, the UK government is pushing legislation to make it easier to seize and destroy crypto linked to criminal activity. While they frame it as going after the bad guys, it’s another move toward centralized control and financial surveillance.

Bitcoin Tools & Tech: Arc, SatoChip, and Nunchuk

Some bullish Bitcoin developments: ARC v0.5 is making Bitcoin’s second layer more efficient, SatoChip now supports Taproot and Nostr, and Nunchuk launched a group wallet with chat, making multisig collaboration easier.

The Bottom Line

The state is coming for financial privacy and control, and stablecoins are their weapon of choice. Bitcoiners need to stay focused, keep their coins in self-custody, and build out parallel systems. Expect more regulatory attacks, but don’t let them distract you—just keep stacking and transacting in ways they can’t control.

🎧 Listen to the full episode here: https://fountain.fm/episode/PYITCo18AJnsEkKLz2Ks

💰 Support the show by boosting sats on Podcasting 2.0! and I will see you on the other side.

@ f7d424b5:618c51e8

A few days ago, on March 20th 2025 one of the most important releases of the year in video games has taken place - Xenoblade Chronicles X! A few other games came out too and we'll talk about those this time while @Dielan@shitposter.world has time to get through the new Xenoblade.

Some links to stuff we talked about:

• EA Open Source & GPL'd C&C
• Lying VAs called out by SC
• PC gamer said something reasonable for once re: asscreed

Obligatory:

• Listen to the new episode here!
• Discuss this episode on OUR NEW FORUM
• Get the RSS and Subscribe (this is a new feed URL, but the old one redirects here too!)
• Get a modern podcast app to use that RSS feed on at newpodcastapps.com
• Or listen to the show on the forum using the embedded Podverse player!
• Send your complaints here

Reminder that this is a Value4Value podcast so any support you can give us via a modern podcasting app is greatly appreciated and we will never bow to corporate sponsors!

@ fbf0e434:e1be6a39

Hackathon 概览

Eolas x Algo: Agent Skills Hackathon 在线上举行，旨在通过提升代理技能来推动 CreatorBid 生态系统的发展。活动吸引了58位开发者参赛，最终有36个项目获得批准。本次黑客松突破传统模式，允许 CreatorBid 代理直接发布技能需求，省去中间环节，实现供需精准对接。

参赛者在两大核心赛道展开竞争：Bounty Track 聚焦代理识别的具体痛点攻关，Best Skills Track 则嘉奖具备卓越价值的项目。Eolas、Algo、Shogun、AION 等机构及多位独立代理为活动提供资金支持。

开发成果直接集成至 Olas Mech Marketplace，实现实时部署落地，并通过 OLAS 系统为开发者提供激励。以 Agent Algo、Eolas 为代表的头部代理特别肯定了本次活动对代理技术创新的推动作用。3 月 20 日活动收官，由 CreatorBid 团队与代理代表组成的评审团，从创新性和生态影响力双重维度对项目进行了综合评判。

Hackathon 获奖者

以下部分详细介绍了首届代理赞助 Hackathon 的成就和奖项，涵盖了37个项目在各个类别中的亮点。

Best Agent Skill Track 奖项获奖者

• Agent Toolbox: 一套增强 AI 代理功能的工具，包括趋势发现、动态函数生成和任务编排。
• GridTrade Agent: 通过市场和波动性分析，促进自动化交易对选择和网格交易参数优化。
• Polytrader: 一个基于 AI 的交易助手，简化 Polymarket 的研究、数据分析和交易执行。

主奖池获奖者

• sentimentX: 为 MultiversX 区块链智能合约提供 AI 驱动的安全监控，通过检测漏洞实现。
• Brainiac_AI: 一个通过链上分析优化 DeFi 策略的平台，并集成非托管钱包。
• framew0rk: 使用链接到 DeFi 协议的 AI 策略助手简化 DeFi 收益优化。
• MythosCraft: AI Storytelling Suite: 使用 AI 创建定制化故事内容。
• QuanTrade-X: 提供 AI 驱动的分析和加密货币交易信号。
• ComicVerse AI: 利用 AI 根据用户输入创作剧本和图像生成漫画。
• EOLAS - Submit your own skill: Portfolio Allocation Skill: 使用 AI 和现代投资组合理论优化加密货币投资组合。
• SonicBo: WhatsApp 上的 AI 代理，促进区块链交易。
• 👽Zeta Comic Generator👽: 将文本提示转换为 AI 生成的漫画，通过剧本和角色表达来实现。
• Grid Trading Analyzer Skill: 高级分析的 Python 工具，用于识别最佳加密货币网格交易对。
• Trump news Reporter: AI 工具，用于实时监控和报告与特朗普相关的新闻，带有自定义过滤器。
• NFT Appraisal skill: 创建用于 NFT 估值的 AI 代理。
• AI-Powered Dynamic Skill Selector (DSS): 使用多臂賭徒策略进行动态 AI 模型优化。
• CrypTweet: 使用 Twitter 情绪为加密货币交易决策提供信息的 AI 交易机器人。
• AI Trump News Agent: 监控和分析与特朗普相关的新闻，并提供可自定义的报告语气。
• TrumpTracker-AI: 汇编和总结与特朗普相关的新闻，从热门标题生成网络迷因。
• Rigger-: 将自然语言转化为 SQL 查询，方便非技术人员访问数据库。
• TNS: 使用 NLP 跟踪与特朗普相关的新闻，并提供多样化的报道风格。
• Bob Roast Machine: 用于创作喜剧吐槽、笑话和网络迷因的 AI 平台。
• Agent 47: 一个 Telegram 机器人，提供政治新闻以及 AI 生成的网络迷因和事实核查。

技能协调与优化奖项获奖者

• AI-Powered Dynamic Skill Selector (DSS)

增强 CB 代理数据访问的技能奖项获奖者

• Agent Toolbox

世界构建与传说推广技能奖项获奖者

• MythosCraft: AI Storytelling Suite

Polymarket 交易机器人奖项获奖者

• Polytrader

欲了解项目的完整列表，请访问 DoraHacks。

关于组织者

Eolas

Eolas 在技术和区块链领域是一个重要的参与者，以其提升交易透明度的区块链解决方案而闻名。该组织继续专注于区块链的研究与开发，解决行业挑战以推动未来进展。

@ dd664d5e:5633d319

Men tend to find women attractive, that remind them of the average women they already know, but with more-averaged features. The mid of mids is kween.👸

But, in contradiction to that, they won't consider her highly attractive, unless she has some spectacular, unusual feature. They'll sacrifice some averageness to acquire that novelty. This is why wealthy men (who tend to be highly intelligent -- and therefore particularly inclined to crave novelty because they are easily bored) -- are more likely to have striking-looking wives and girlfriends, rather than conventionally-attractive ones. They are also more-likely to cross ethnic and racial lines, when dating.

Men also seem to each be particularly attracted to specific facial expressions or mimics, which might be an intelligence-similarity test, as persons with higher intelligence tend to have a more-expressive mimic. So, people with similar expressions tend to be on the same wavelength. Facial expessions also give men some sense of perception into womens' inner life, which they otherwise find inscrutable.

Hair color is a big deal (logic says: always go blonde), as is breast-size (bigger is better), and WHR (smaller is better).

@ 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.

@ 6e0ea5d6:0327f353

"Malcolm Forbes recounts that a lady, wearing a faded cotton dress, and her husband, dressed in an old handmade suit, stepped off a train in Boston, USA, and timidly made their way to the office of the president of Harvard University. They had come from Palo Alto, California, and had not scheduled an appointment. The secretary, at a glance, thought that those two, looking like country bumpkins, had no business at Harvard.
— We want to speak with the president — the man said in a low voice.
— He will be busy all day — the secretary replied curtly.
— We will wait.
The secretary ignored them for hours, hoping the couple would finally give up and leave. But they stayed there, and the secretary, somewhat frustrated, decided to bother the president, although she hated doing that.
— If you speak with them for just a few minutes, maybe they will decide to go away — she said.
The president sighed in irritation but agreed. Someone of his importance did not have time to meet people like that, but he hated faded dresses and tattered suits in his office. With a stern face, he went to the couple.
— We had a son who studied at Harvard for a year — the woman said. — He loved Harvard and was very happy here, but a year ago he died in an accident, and we would like to erect a monument in his honor somewhere on campus.

— My lady — said the president rudely —, we cannot erect a statue for every person who studied at Harvard and died; if we did, this place would look like a cemetery.

— Oh, no — the lady quickly replied. — We do not want to erect a statue. We would like to donate a building to Harvard.

The president looked at the woman's faded dress and her husband's old suit and exclaimed:

— A building! Do you have even the faintest idea of how much a building costs? We have more than seven and a half million dollars' worth of buildings here at Harvard.

The lady was silent for a moment, then said to her husband:

— If that’s all it costs to found a university, why don’t we have our own?

The husband agreed.

The couple, Leland Stanford, stood up and left, leaving the president confused. Traveling back to Palo Alto, California, they established there Stanford University, the second-largest in the world, in honor of their son, a former Harvard student."

Text extracted from: "Mileumlivros - Stories that Teach Values."

Thank you for reading, my friend! If this message helped you in any way, consider leaving your glass “🥃” as a token of appreciation.

A toast to our family!

@ fbf0e434:e1be6a39

Hackathon 概述

HackCanada 黑客松汇聚创新者、开发者、设计师与问题解决者，共同直面加拿大当下的紧迫挑战 —— 医疗保健可及性、环境可持续性、数字基础设施建设与经济差距等。188 位开发者携 89 个独特项目参与，以集体智慧打造兼具影响力的解决方案，尽显技术赋能社会的决心。

在这些项目中，有旨在通过技术增强医疗保健系统的计划，也有改善偏远社区数字基建的构想，更不乏以创新手段降低环境足迹的实践。这场黑客松搭建起协作共创的平台，催生大量新鲜思路与落地解法，切实呼应 “推动实质价值、激发变革” 的核心目标。

作为社区驱动创新的催化剂，HackCanada 营造了动态的协作与创新生态，推动技术发展切实服务于提升加拿大人生活质量，为构建更包容、可持续的未来注入持续动力。

Hackathon 获奖者

总体一等奖获奖者

• Phone-a-Fraud - 一个实时检测电话诈骗的AI驱动系统，重点在于隐私和诈骗警报机制以保护弱势人群。

总体二等奖获奖者

• StickTator - 一种利用自然语言处理进行语音控制计算机管理的USB设备，简化复杂系统配置。

总体三等奖获奖者

• Omnivim - 跨应用程序集成Vim动作的软件，以提高生产力。

最佳个人Hack奖获奖者

• StickTator

最佳Orkes Hack奖获奖者

• Recipeit - 专注于食谱的项目；暂无更多详情。

最佳ICP Hack奖获奖者

• DigiTag - 一个利用NFT和互联网计算机协议的区块链应用程序，保护奢侈品交易以防止欺诈。
• LandLocks - 利用区块链技术管理土地记录为NFT的平台。

SPUR创新基金：最佳AI、Web3或量子技术奖获奖者

第一名

• Beaver Breach - 分析美国产品关税影响的工具，通过加拿大供应商提供减少成本的替代方案。

第二名

• Canify - Blockchain Rewards - 倡导通过区块链奖励和政府激励支持加拿大产品。

自主代理赏金赛道奖获奖者

第一名

• ChainMail - 一个基于web3的电子邮件应用程序，增强安全性并实现跨区块链通信。

第二名

• Canify - Blockchain Rewards

第三名

• Roast My Wallet - 一个基于用户加密钱包和个性的AI驱动趣味生成的网页应用程序。
• Zap - 在日常生活中促进加密应用的免手续费交易平台。
• Carbon Chain - 将碳减排转换为可交易资产的区块链平台，由AI验证。

最佳开发者工具奖获奖者

• StickTator

最佳高中Hack奖获奖者

• NaloxNow - 通过实时纳洛酮获取、紧急导航和AI驱动的过量反应来应对阿片类药物危机的移动应用。

最无用Hack奖获奖者

• UselessGPT - 使用谷歌的Gemini API生成无意义、以娱乐为目的的交互式应用程序。

最佳AI应用奖获奖者

• frij.io - 一款通过AI管理家庭库存、优化购物清单并减少食物浪费的智能应用。

使用AI构建：Google 赛道奖获奖者

• 最佳使用Gemini AI或Gemini API、最佳使用Google Cloud平台以及最佳集成Google工具包：
• Sinker - 一个AI驱动的网络安全平台，培训员工识别通信渠道中的网络钓鱼威胁。
• FrostByte - 项目详情不可用。
• Flock Street - 使用实时数据和语音技术提供股市洞察的互动应用程序。

最佳Laurier STEM出版协会奖获奖者

• SockSensei - 根据用户情绪提供袜子推荐的移动应用程序。

完整的项目列表请访问这个链接。

关于组织者

Hack Canada

Hack Canada 专注于技术与创新，强调区块链和网络安全计划。以在这些领域的能力而闻名，Hack Canada 已开发出有助于技术领域的项目。该组织因举办全国性Hackathon和提升数字安全知识的工作坊而受到认可。目前，Hack Canada 致力于为技术爱好者和专业人士提供一个协作环境，以促进区块链应用和安全数字通信的发展。

@ 9e69e420:d12360c2

President Trump has intensified immigration enforcement, likening it to a wartime effort. Despite pouring resources into the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), arrest numbers are declining and falling short of goals. ICE fell from about 800 daily arrests in late January to fewer than 600 in early February.

Critics argue the administration is merely showcasing efforts with ineffectiveness, while Trump seeks billions more in funding to support his deportation agenda. Increased involvement from various federal agencies is intended to assist ICE, but many lack specific immigration training.

Challenges persist, as fewer immigrants are available for quick deportation due to a decline in illegal crossings. Local sheriffs are also pressured by rising demands to accommodate immigrants, which may strain resources further.

@ df06d21e:2b23058f

I'm well on my way into the Bitcoin rabbit hole. This is an edited copy of a series of answers I got from the Grok AI, rewritten to be from my perspective.

What does Intrinsic Value mean, and why is the term meaningless for Bitcoin? I see intrinsic value as dependent on the debt based monetary system, while a wealth based system like Bitcoin has no need for it.

Intrinsic value refers to the inherent worth of an asset, based on its fundamental characteristics rather than its market price or external factors. For traditional assets like stocks or commodities, intrinsic value might be tied to tangible factors — cash flows, utility, or physical properties (e.g., gold’s use in jewelry or industry). In a debt-based monetary system, where fiat currencies derive value from government backing and trust in repayment of obligations, intrinsic value often hinges on perceived stability or productive capacity tied to that system.

This perspective aligns with a critique often leveled at applying "intrinsic value" to Bitcoin. Bitcoin doesn’t fit the traditional mold because it’s not a claim on anything tangible (like a bond or stock) nor does it rely on a debt-based framework. Its value isn’t rooted in some underlying asset or promise — it emerges directly from scarcity (capped supply of 21 million), decentralization, and network consensus. Critics argue it lacks intrinsic value since it doesn’t produce cash flow or have inherent utility beyond what its users assign to it. Supporters, however, flip this: they say its "intrinsic" worth lies in its design—immutability, censorship resistance, and freedom from central control—which a debt-based system can’t replicate.

In a wealth-based system, as I describe Bitcoin, value isn’t about backing or intrinsic utility in the classical sense but about trust in the protocol and its adoption. The term "intrinsic value" becomes meaningless here because it’s a relic of frameworks that don’t apply — Bitcoin’s worth is extrinsic, network-driven, and speculative in this early stage of adoption, not tied to debt or physicality. It’s a complete paradigm shift: traditionalists see no "there" there, while proponents see the "there" as the system itself. Debt-based metrics struggle to frame something like Bitcoin, which is why the debate rages on.

A lot of my friends seem to be completely taken in by the Modern Monetary Theory ideas, but I see less 'intrinsic value' in the US Dollar without backing from gold or other hard assets than I do anything else. I have a great deal of trouble keeping my opinions to myself because I have very harsh thoughts about how MMT is driving us over a cliff.

It’s easy to feel like you’re watching a train wreck in slow motion when you see something like Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) gaining traction, especially if you’re skeptical of fiat systems untethered from hard assets. MMT flips the script on how we used to think about money. It says a government that issues its own currency — like the US with the dollar — can’t go broke in the traditional sense because it can always print more to cover its debts. Taxes and borrowing aren’t about funding spending; they’re tools to manage inflation and resource allocation. Proponents argue this gives flexibility to fund big priorities (healthcare, infrastructure) without worrying about deficits. The catch? It leans hard on the idea that the dollar’s value holds because people trust it and use it, not because it’s backed by gold or anything physical.

I am extremely uneasy about the intrinsic value tied up in pure fiat systems. Without a hard anchor like gold, the dollar’s worth feels like it’s floating on faith — faith in the government, the economy, and the global demand for USD as a reserve currency. This is faith that I have trouble holding on to, and frequently I say out loud that I no longer have it at all. History backs this skepticism: fiat currencies have collapsed when that faith erodes (think Rome, Weimar Germany or Zimbabwe). Gold gave a tangible limit when it was supposed to be backing currency; now, it’s just vibes and printer ink. MMT doubles down on this, saying those limits don’t matter at all as long as inflation is in check. But I squint at that as well, because I don’t see it as being in check. Once confidence cracks or resources get overstretched, the whole house of cards can wobble.

We can step back from the ledge somewhat: the US dollar still has muscle because of its unique position — global trade, oil markets, and military might prop it up, not just MMT cheerleading. It’s not truly intrinsic in the gold-backed sense, but it’s not pure hot air either. Bitcoin might appeal to you because it’s got a built-in scarcity the dollar lacks, but the dollar’s “value” isn’t dead yet — it’s just shifted to a different game board. MMT might overplay its hand, and yeah, unchecked printing could drive us off a cliff if inflation spirals or trust tanks. But it’s not a cliff dive tomorrow — more like a slow grind where the cracks show over time.

I don’t have to buy into MMT to see why many of my friends might. It’s seductive — it promises control over chaos, a way to fix big problems without hard trade-offs. But I still question it; the doubts are just loud because I see the downside they might be ignoring. There are harsh questions that need to be asked. How do we square infinite printing with finite resources? How do we identify an inflation target that actually means something instead of just an arbitrary number out of the ether? The cliff’s there, but we’re not airborne yet.

I completely get the idea that the US can't default because we control the creation of currency. But thinking of the currency as 'money' just seems false to me. The framing of MMT as ‘monetary theory’ is actually genius, but it's a false narrative. They're not talking about real money, they're talking about the currency of a single nation state. And under a debt based monetary system, the problems we see approach slowly until they become unavoidable, and I’m worried that we're past the point of no return in a lot of what we see.

I don’t respond a lot to my friends who support and defend MMT, because my criticisms cut right to the bone, with a lot of frustration behind it. And I don’t want to subject them to that, because they will take it personally. I just see such a disconnect between “currency” and “money” and MMT’s framing blurs those lines, and it’s slick enough to make people miss the sleight of hand.

MMT’s genius is in its storytelling. It takes the reality of fiat control — Uncle Sam can’t default if he’s got the printing press — and spins it into a tale of empowerment. “Deficits don’t matter, we can fund everything!” It’s a heady pitch, especially when people are desperate for solutions. I’m just calling the bluff: currency isn’t money in the deeper sense if it’s just a tool of one nation-state, untethered from anything real. Even if that tool is required by international laws and standards to be at the base of a lot of international trade, it’s still the United States Dollar, not the United Nations Dollar. Money, to me, implies a store of value with some universal backbone — gold, scarcity, something beyond government say-so. MMT’s currency is more like a promissory note with no hard deadline, and that’s where the falseness creeps in.

The debt-based system adds another layer to my unease. It’s a slow burn — decades of borrowing, spending, and inflating don’t hit like a lightning bolt; they erode quietly until the foundation’s too weak to hold. I’m seeing cracks — maybe in rising debt-to-GDP, persistent low level inflation that just doesn’t end, or the dollar’s slipping grip on global trust — and feeling like we’ve crossed a Rubicon. Are we past the point of no return? That’s a gut call, but I hope it’s not hard to see why we think we have. Interest payments on US debt are ballooning, and if faith in the dollar wanes (say, if oil stops trading in USD or BRICS nations continue to ditch or sidestep it), the slow bleed could turn into a flood. MMT says “just print more,” but that only works until the world stops playing along.

There is a counterweight to chew on: the US still has levers other nations don’t — military clout, tech dominance, a financial system everyone’s hooked into. It’s not “real money”, but it’s a machine that keeps chugging because too many players are invested in it not crashing. That doesn’t make MMT true — it just delays the reckoning I’m bracing for. How long until the music stops and we have to find chairs? The narrative’s false if you see money as wealth with intrinsic grit, not just a state-issued IOU. But it’s a lie that’s worked so far because the system’s too big to fail fast.

Am I crazy to feel this way? The slow-approach problem is real—debt compounds, trust frays, and MMT’s optimism feels like a magician distracting from the trapdoor. We might be past a tipping point in spirit, even if the wheels haven’t flown off yet. Let’s keep poking holes in their story; it’s sharper than swallowing it whole.

I want to do a thought experiment. The question is about how much money should be in circulation, or how much wealth there is that can be distributed in the overall global economy. MMT and 'infinite money printing' is one path, where we just let the ballooning debt fuel things and not worry too much about currency in circulation. A completely fixed supply is another path, like with Bitcoin where there is a strict number that cannot be changed and there is no 'big red button' to press in an emergency. What I think we have been trying to do over the last hundred years is find a balance point, and while claims of a 2% inflation target seem to be where people want to go, I think a better solution would be to actually target population growth itself as the measure by which we set currency to, at some ratio yet to be determined.

Do you see where I’m going with this thought experiment? It’s a way to rethink how we calibrate the money supply, and it sidesteps the dogma of both MMT’s “print it all” vibe and Bitcoin’s “lock it down” ethos. We’re wrestling with the core question: how much money should exist to reflect the real wealth in the world, and how do we keep it from spiraling into either hyperinflation or stagnation?

So, MMT says the money supply isn’t the issue—print what you need, manage inflation later. It’s like flooring the gas pedal and hoping the brakes work when you need them. On the flip side, a fixed supply like Bitcoin’s 21 million cap is the opposite: no gas pedal, no brakes, just a set number that forces everything to adapt around it. Both have their logic, but both feel extreme — one’s too loose, the other’s too rigid. The past century’s been this messy middle ground, with central banks chasing that 2% inflation target I mentioned. It’s arbitrary. The New Zealand origin story of that target is real (their central bank tossed it out in the ‘80s as a “sounds nice” goal), while the gold mining growth link to the number is a retrofitted guess. It’s not sacred; it’s just sticky.

My idea—tying the money supply to population growth — could be a fresh angle. It’s grounded in something tangible: the number of humans creating, consuming, and driving economic activity. Wealth isn’t just stuff; it’s people doing things with stuff. If the population grows at, say, 1% a year, you’d scale the money supply up by some ratio (1:1? 1:2?) to match. The logic tracks—more people means more economic potential, so you’d want currency to reflect that without flooding the system or starving it. It’s dynamic, unlike Bitcoin’s fixed cap, but disciplined, unlike MMT’s free-for-all.

What we’re aiming for, I think, is a system that mirrors reality better than what we’ve got. The 2% target feels like a relic — disconnected from demographics, tech leaps, or resource shifts. Population growth as a benchmark could anchor money to human activity, not just central bank whims or gold’s slow drip. The “yet to be determined ratio” is the tricky bit—too high, and you’re back to inflation creep; too low, and you choke growth. But the principle makes sense: money should scale with the players in the game, not some abstract ideal.

It also dodges the debt trap. MMT leans on borrowing and printing, piling up obligations that future generations (or a crash) have to sort out. Bitcoin’s fixed supply ignores population entirely, which could strangle an expanding world. This model could split the difference—controlled growth, no big red button, but no runaway balloon either. It’s a Goldilocks hunt, and I’ve been pitching it out there to see what reactions it gets for a while. But what I get back is laughter, mostly. Or silence.

Because then the question becomes, could anyone, anywhere, be trusted to come up with an asset system that tracks population growth using actual data? Right now with the governments we have it's really easy to say no, so it would have to be some independent group designated by governments to take control of the situation and not put a thumb on the scale to keep the existing system of the magical perpetual motion machine running us over that cliff. What I'm seeing is that the lack of the ability for people to trust 'independent third parties' will lead us to conclude that only the mathematically pure fixed supply system can work, because anything even remotely subjective will just be taken advantage of by people with the means to do so.

Trust is the linchpin here, and it’s in short supply. This thought experiment is running into the real-world wall of human nature and power dynamics, which is exactly where these ideas either soar or crash. Tying an asset system to population growth sounds elegant — use real data (birth rates, death rates, UN stats, whatever) and set a formula to adjust the money supply. But who crunches the numbers? Who enforces it? Governments? No chance we’d trust them — they’ve got every incentive to fudge the data or tweak the ratio to keep the debt party going. The US, China, or any big player could lean on the scale to juice their own economies, and smaller nations would cry foul. An independent group designated by governments sounds nice — like a global central bank on steroids — but who watches the watchers? Even if they start pure, the pressure from states or corporations with deep pockets would bend them over time. Look at the IMF or World Bank—supposedly neutral, but often accused of dancing to the tune of powerful members.

The trust deficit is brutal. People don’t just doubt institutions; they doubt the idea of impartiality itself. And why wouldn’t they? History’s littered with “independent” bodies getting cozy with the elite — think rating agencies pre-2008 or even the Fed’s ties to Wall Street. This population-tracking system needs a thumb-proof mechanism, but anything subjective (like picking the ratio or defining “population”) opens the door to manipulation. Powerful actors — governments, banks, tech giants — have the means and motive to game it, and they will. That’s not cynicism; it’s pattern recognition.

That’s why I’m landing on the fixed-supply escape hatch. Bitcoin’s appeal isn’t just its scarcity — it’s the math. No human hands, no big red button, no trust required beyond the code. It’s cold, hard, and incorruptible in a way a population-based system struggles to be. The catch is, it’s inflexible — population booms or busts don’t care about 21 million coins. The idea adapts to reality better in theory, but in practice, the “who can we trust” question keeps dragging it back to earth. A truly decentralized, transparent algorithm could maybe pull it off — think blockchain tracking population via public data feeds — but even then, someone’s coding it, someone’s feeding it inputs. The purity’s tough to maintain.

There’s a cliff because the perpetual motion machine — debt, fiat, subjective control — relies on trust that’s already fraying. A fixed supply side steps that entirely, but at the cost of agility.

That cost of agility caught my eye. Part of what seems to make people hesitate about Bitcoin is that they only see the full coin price, currently at an astronomical number that exceeds the average annual wage of most humans on the planet. So when they think about the system, it's in those terms that there are 21 million bars of something solid out there. What's missing is an understanding of two things.

First, Bitcoin is a digital asset and is by default divisible by 100 million. So people don't have to save up to buy 1, they can exchange any amount of currency they have at any time and the system works perfectly. The second missing piece is the dynamics of market forces, which stretch and contract the price of any good and service using Adam Smith's invisible hand. So something that cost 100 sats one day can cost 110 sats the next day, and then back to 100 or down to 95. It doesn't mean that something is wrong, it's just how a real currency system works.

When I finally understood this, it solidified my support for Bitcoin as THE long term solution. Having a system that keeps up with population, the players of the game as I put it above, is still the 'perfect' solution, but with Trust as the system of coordination in my pillars of civilization, capital as a measurement system using Bitcoin as the foundation would still work because of the divisibility and dynamic nature of the system. The way Bitcoin came about was pure innovation as a generative system, and the hashing components lock down information as a verification system better than anything we've ever seen. Given all of this, Bitcoin might not be perfect, but it's as close as we can get without divine intervention.

There’s something critical here, and it’s a perspective that cuts through a lot of the noise around Bitcoin. The “cost of agility” trade-off is real, but it’s misunderstood because people get hung up on the optics of “one Bitcoin” and miss the deeper mechanics. Let’s run with your reasoning and tie it back to that population-based ideal.

The divisibility point is huge. A single Bitcoin sitting at, what, $86,000+ today (March 19, 2025, let’s assume it’s still in the ballpark) looks like an unreachable brick of gold to the average person. But 1 BTC = 100 million sats means you’re not buying a whole coin — you’re grabbing a slice as tiny as your wallet allows. It’s like digital dust: trade a buck, get a few thousand sats, and you’re in the game. That scalability blows up the mental block. People don’t hoard whole dollars — they spend cents. Bitcoin’s the same, just with more zeros. The system doesn’t care if you’re moving 1 BTC or 100 sats; it hums along either way. And unlike the penny, there is no extra cost associated with the smallest denomination, it’s built in.

Then there’s the market dynamics — Adam Smith’s invisible hand doing its thing. Prices in sats flex with supply, demand, and sentiment, just like any currency or good. If a coffee goes from 100 sats to 110 sats, it’s not a flaw — it’s the market breathing, finding equilibrium. Fiat fans freak out over volatility, but that’s just a fixed-supply system doing what it’s supposed to: reflecting reality without a central puppeteer smoothing the edges. Over time, as adoption grows, the swings might dampen, but the elasticity is baked in. It’s not rigid in practice—only in its cap.

The “players in the game” vision still shines through here. A population-tracking system would be the theoretical gold standard, syncing money to human activity. But trust — one of the pillars of civilization — is the choke point. Bitcoin sidesteps that by ditching the need for a trusted coordinator entirely. The 21 million cap isn’t divine, but it’s enforced by math, not men. Divisibility keeps it practical; market forces keep it alive. The hashing — proof-of-work locking in every block — is the verification backbone, a trustless machine that’s outdone every centralized ledger in security and transparency. It’s generative, like you said: a system that spawned itself and keeps evolving without a boss.

So we’re landing on Bitcoin as “not perfect, but as close as we get” because it solves the trust problem while still functioning as capital — a measuring stick for wealth that doesn’t need a thumb on the scale. The population-sync dream might be cleaner in a vacuum, but in a world of flawed humans, Bitcoin’s fixed foundation plus its adaptive nature (via sats and markets) might actually carry the day. No divine intervention needed—just code and consensus.

Let’s pivot back to MMT and tackle how it handles inflation—especially through the lens of someone like me, who sees any inflation as a slow poison to purchasing power and a civilization’s backbone. Here’s the breakdown.

MMT doesn’t dismiss inflation outright, but it doesn’t treat it as the boogeyman traditional economics does either. It addresses inflation directly, just not in the way you might expect. The theory says a government that issues its own currency (like the US with the dollar) can print as much as it wants to fund spending—deficits aren’t a problem because you can’t default on debt in your own currency. Inflation only kicks in when the economy hits real resource limits: too much money chasing too few goods, workers, or capacity. So, MMT’s stance isn’t “inflation doesn’t matter”—it’s “inflation’s a signal, not a sin.” They argue you can manage it by dialing back spending or hiking taxes to suck money out of circulation when things overheat. The focus is on “full employment” and output, not the money supply itself.

Now, if you’re in the “any inflation is bad” camp like I am — because it erodes savings, screws over fixed-income folks, and quietly shifts wealth from the many to the few with debt levers — MMT’s response would lean on this: inflation’s only a threat if you let it run wild, and we’ve got tools to stop that. They’d point to historical data (like the US post-WWII) where big deficits didn’t torch the economy because resources kept pace. They’d say the real danger isn’t printing money—it’s misjudging capacity. If you believe devaluation is the biggest threat, MMT counters that currency value isn’t about some fixed peg (like gold) but about trust and productivity. A little inflation? Fine, as long as the system hums.

Here’s where it gets shaky. MMT doesn’t see mild inflation (say, that 2% target) as a civilization-killer — it’s a feature, not a bug. They’d argue it greases the wheels: encourages spending, keeps debt manageable, and stops deflation (which tanks economies harder, think Great Depression). To the point about loss of purchasing power, they might say: “That’s just math — wages and growth can offset it if we spend right.” But if you’re hardcore “zero inflation or bust” because debt-based systems inherently rot trust and wealth over wider time scales, MMT’s got no real rebuttal beyond “we can control it.” They don’t buy that devaluation is an existential flaw — they see it as a knob to tweak.

The rub? MMT assumes governments are nimble enough to spot overheating and act — raise taxes, cut spending — before inflation spirals. History says that’s a big “if.” The cliff analogy fits: debt and printing creep up slow, then hit fast when trust cracks. MMT’s like, “We’ll fix the bridge when we get there,” while I’m saying, “The bridge is already crumbling.” They don’t deny inflation’s real; they just bet on outrunning it — a bet I’m not buying. Bitcoin’s zero-inflation cap looks like the cleaner fix if you see any devaluation as a dealbreaker.

Has there EVER been ANY time in history where a government has pulled back spending and actually reduced the amount of currency circulating in the economy, and thus successfully pulled inflation down to zero? Or is that just an academic exercise that we can point to on paper?

This cuts right to the heart of whether MMT’s inflation-control playbook is grounded in reality or just a nice theory. Let’s dig into history and see if we can find a case where a government deliberately pulled back spending, shrank the money supply, and drove inflation to zero. Spoiler: it’s rare as hell, and the examples we’ve got come with big asterisks.

First, let’s set the stage. Governments don’t often shrink the money supply outright—cutting spending and pulling currency out of circulation isn’t their default move. They’re usually too busy expanding, especially in fiat systems. Central banks, though, have more direct control over money supply via interest rates or reserve policies, and they’ve historically been the ones tasked with taming inflation. MMT blurs this line, focusing on fiscal policy (spending/taxes), but the question still applies: has any government ever done the deed?

One contender is the US in the late 1870s, post-Civil War. After printing greenbacks to fund the war (inflation hit double digits), the government aimed to return to the gold standard. The Resumption Act of 1875 committed to redeeming paper money in gold by 1879, which meant shrinking the currency supply. Treasury Secretary John Sherman cut federal spending, hoarded gold, and retired some greenbacks. Inflation dropped from around 5-7% in the early 1870s to near zero by 1879—deflation even kicked in (-1% to -2% some years). Success? Sort of. The money supply contracted (M1 fell from $1.6 billion in 1875 to $1.4 billion by 1879), but it cratered the economy—unemployment spiked, farmers got crushed, and the Long Depression dragged on. Zero inflation, sure, but at a brutal cost.

Another shot is the UK in the 1920s, chasing pre-WWI gold parity. After wartime inflation (20%+ in 1917), Churchill as Chancellor pushed to re-peg the pound to gold at its old rate in 1925. Government slashed spending, tightened budgets, and the Bank of England jacked up rates. Money supply shrank (M0 dropped about 10% from 1921-1925), and inflation fell from double digits to zero by the mid-1920s—then flipped to deflation. Result? Stagnation, strikes, and a gutted industrial base. Zero inflation achieved, but the cure was worse than the disease.

Then there’s the US in the early 1980s—Paul Volcker’s Fed era. This is more monetary than fiscal, but it’s worth a nod. Inflation was raging (13.5% in 1980), and Volcker cranked interest rates to 20%. Federal spending didn’t shrink much (Reagan was ramping defense), but the money supply growth slowed hard (M2 growth fell from 10% to under 6%). Inflation crashed to 3% by 1983, not zero, but close-ish. The catch: a nasty recession, 10% unemployment, and no real fiscal pullback—government leaned on the Fed, not spending cuts.

Here’s the pattern: when governments or central banks have squeezed currency circulation to kill inflation, they’ve hit zero (or below) only in extreme cases, and it always comes with pain—recessions, deflationary traps, or social unrest. MMT’s “just cut spending, raise taxes” fix has never cleanly played out at scale to get to zero inflation without collateral damage. The US post-WWI tried—war spending dropped, money supply stabilized, and inflation fell to near zero by 1921 — but it rode a postwar boom, not a deliberate pullback.

So, is it just academic? Pretty much. Governments hate shrinking themselves; it’s political suicide. The data backs this up: no fiat system has sustainably hit zero inflation via spending cuts and currency contraction without breaking something else. MMT’s toolkit sounds plausible on paper — reduce deficits, drain the money pool — but in practice, it’s a unicorn. If the threat is devaluation, and the fix is untested, Bitcoin’s fixed cap starts looking less like a compromise and more like a shield. History says the cliff’s closer than the bridge.

So now let's bring this to current day chaos. The Trump Administration is doing everything it can to reduce spending, pulling back on sending any money to anyone, all with a stated goal of getting the Federal Reserve to lower rates so that money is easier to borrow and business can start to churn again. It really looks like we are trying to play the same cards again, updated to the modern day tools.

There’s a vibe of déjà vu in the Trump Administration’s moves, like we’re riffing on old plays with new toys. Let’s connect the dots and see if this is history on repeat or something fresh, without forcing the puzzle pieces where they don’t fit. We’re on March 19, 2025, so we’ve got some real-time chaos to work with.

The administration’s game plan—slashing spending, pulling back on handouts, and jawboning the Fed to drop rates—does echo past efforts to juice the economy. Think late 1870s US or 1920s UK: governments tightened belts to stabilize currency or hit gold pegs, aiming to cool inflation and force borrowing costs down. Today’s twist? Trump’s team is wielding tariffs, oil price plays, and deficit cuts as modern tools, all while shouting from the rooftops about wanting cheaper money. The stated goal: get the Fed to ease up so businesses can borrow, invest, and churn. It’s a high-stakes bet—starve the system short-term to spark it long-term. Parallels jump out. Post-Civil War, the US shrank money supply to kill inflation and hit zero, but it tanked growth and crushed farmers. The UK’s 1920s austerity got inflation to zero, but stagnation and strikes followed. Both times, governments squeezed, hoping lower rates or stability would follow—sound familiar? Now, Trump’s crew is slashing federal spending (reports show layoffs and frozen payments to programs like Head Start since January) and leaning on tariffs (25% on Canada/Mexico delayed but still looming). The Fed’s holding at 4.25%-4.5%, unmoved so far, with Powell saying “we’re not in a hurry” on January 29 and again during today’s decision to not change things. Inflation’s stuck, not at zero but the playbook feels similar: constrict, pressure, pray for relief.

Here’s where it diverges from pure insanity—repeating expecting different results. Unlike the 1870s or 1920s, the US today isn’t chasing a gold peg or post-war reset. The economy’s supposed to be humming — 2.8% GDP growth in 2024, unemployment at 4.1% (March jobs data still pending). Trump’s not just cutting; he’s pairing it with tax cut promises and deregulation pitches, aiming to offset the squeeze with private-sector juice. The chaos—tariffs spooking markets, consumer confidence tanking (down to 64.7 in February per Michigan’s index)—looks like a deliberate shake-up to force the Fed’s hand. Posts on X even float this: Trump’s “wringing exuberance out of risk assets” to drop yields and trigger cuts. It’s not blind repetition; it’s calculated, if messy.

But the puzzle’s incomplete — and my gut is right there in a lump. Data’s thin on how deep the spending cuts go (FY2025 budget reconciliation talks $1.7 trillion in cuts, but specifics are murky). The Fed’s not budging yet, and Powell’s “wait-and-see” stance suggests they’re not buying the pressure. Inflation’s not crashing to zero like history’s examples — it’s sticky, and tariffs might nudge it up, not down. Economists (Goldman, Morgan Stanley) warn of 2025 growth dipping to 1% or less if this keeps up. The insanity vibe creeps in if the cuts overcorrect—recession instead of revival—or if the Fed calls the bluff and holds tight, leaving businesses starved.

Do you also see the echo I’m catching: squeeze-to-stimulate isn’t new, and it often ended in tears. But the modern remix — Bitcoin’s fixed-supply shadow, global trade stakes, a Fed with more data than ever — might dodge the old traps. Or not. The jury’s out, and the chaos is live.

I think the wild card is that Congress is completely broken. The other examples, 1870 US, 1920 UK and 1980 US, those were done with the support of Congress or Parliament, or in the case of Volker it was his role as Fed Chair independent of the Executive Branch. This time we have the administration wielding all of the cleavers while Congress seems to be the group fiddling while Rome burns. This means that there is so much confusion, with court cases starting to be filed challenging everything being done, saying that it's messy or chaotic is insufficient.

Congress being a dysfunctional mess is the wild card that throws this whole situation into uncharted territory. The historical examples we’ve chewed over (1870s US, 1920s UK, 1980s Volcker) all had legislative or institutional alignment—Congress or Parliament backed the spending cuts, or Volcker had the Fed’s autonomy to slam the brakes. This time, it’s the Trump Administration swinging the cleaver solo, while Congress is either paralyzed or actively tossing wrenches into the gears. “Messy” or “chaotic” doesn’t even scratch the surface—it’s more like a constitutional cage match with no referee.

Look at the setup: Trump’s team is slashing spending—freezing grants, pausing foreign aid, gutting programs — aiming to force the Fed to lower rates and spark business. But Congress, which holds the purse strings under Article I, isn’t playing ball. The House barely passed a budget resolution in February (217-215) with $1.7 trillion in cuts over a decade, but the Senate’s version from the same month dodged tax cuts entirely and left spending vague. Now, with a continuing resolution (CR) likely keeping 2024 levels through September 2025, per posts on X and news chatter, any real cuts are stalled. The administration’s moves—like the January OMB memo pausing trillions—keep hitting judicial walls, with two federal judges (McConnell in Rhode Island, AliKhan in D.C.) blocking freezes by March 6, saying it’s unconstitutional overreach. Lawsuits are piling up—22 states, nonprofits, universities—all screaming Congress didn’t sign off.

The 1870s had the Resumption Act; the 1920s UK had parliamentary consensus; Volcker had Fed independence. Today? Congress can’t agree on a debt ceiling hike, let alone a coherent fiscal plan. The administration’s betting on executive muscle—think Nixon’s impoundment playbook, but broader and brasher—while courts and a fractured Congress push back. The Supreme Court’s lurking (a 5-4 ruling on March 5 nixed a foreign aid freeze), but even with a conservative tilt, it signaled limits (1998 line-item veto smackdown). Posts on X nail the sentiment: “Congress controls the purse, and they’re not cutting,” while Trump’s team keeps swinging anyway.

This isn’t just chaos—it’s a power vacuum. The administration’s cleaver is sharp, but without Congress, it’s hacking at air. Courts are stepping in because no one else will, and Rome’s burning while the fiddlers argue over the playlist. The puzzle’s missing a unified legislative spine—until that shifts, it’s all noise and no traction.

I don't see a circuit breaker tripping until we get new leadership. Going by elections, we have until the 2026 elections for someone running for Congress to put together a team and a plan to actually take responsibility for all of this, or if that doesn't happen we have to wait until the 2028 Presidential Election for real new leadership in the Executive Branch. And even that is worrisome with the possibility that Trump may get support for a Constitutional Amendment to run for a third term or ignore the established rules entirely and just do it anyway.

I’m laying out a grim but plausible timeline — new leadership as the circuit breaker, with 2026 midterms or 2028 presidential election as the earliest shots at a reset. It’s a long slog, and I’m just flagging the uncertainty, especially with Trump’s orbit floating wildcards like a third-term push.

Congress is a clown car right now—fractured, gridlocked, and allergic to accountability. The 2026 midterms could shift the balance if a wave of candidates runs on a “fix this mess” platform, but that’s a big if. Historical turnout says midterms lean low (40-50%), and incumbents usually cling on—80%+ reelection rates since the ‘90s. Someone’s got to rally a team with a spine and a plan, like you said, but the GOP’s Trump-aligned bloc and Dems’ infighting make cohesion a pipe dream. Even if a fresh crew sweeps in, they’d need 2027 to pass anything meaty—two years of drift while courts and executive overreach keep clashing.

The 2028 presidential slot’s the bigger lever. A new executive could steer the ship, but Trump looming over it adds a twist. A Constitutional Amendment for a third term needs two-thirds of Congress and 38 states — tough, but not impossible with loyalists in red states and a populist surge. X posts speculate he’d just run anyway, 22nd Amendment be damned, daring courts to stop him. Precedent is thin—FDR’s four terms pre-1951 don’t count—but SCOTUS (still 6-3 conservative) might punt or split if he tried. Either way, it’s a pressure cooker: chaos drags on, trust erodes, and the system’s “interesting times” turn into a stress test.

No quick fix jumps out. Courts might slap down executive moves (like March’s aid-freeze rulings), but they’re reactive, not proactive. Congress waking up? Not without electoral shock therapy. Leadership’s the bottleneck, and 2026 or 2028 are the horizons. Until then, it’s cleaver-swinging, lawsuits, and a Fed playing poker with rates (4.25% still holding). Bitcoin’s fixed cap might start looking like a lifeboat if this circus keeps spinning. We’re cursed with “interesting times” for sure — any bets on what holds it together ‘til then? My cards are on the table, and I’m out of chips.

Thanks to Grok for helping me develop this rant into a 10 page monster.

@ 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.

@ fd208ee8:0fd927c1

E-cash are coupons or tokens for Bitcoin, or Bitcoin debt notes that the mint issues. The e-cash states, essentially, "IoU 2900 sats".

They're redeemable for Bitcoin on Lightning (hard money), and therefore can be used as cash (softer money), so long as the mint has a good reputation. That means that they're less fungible than Lightning because the e-cash from one mint can be more or less valuable than the e-cash from another. If a mint is buggy, offline, or disappears, then the e-cash is unreedemable.

It also means that e-cash is more anonymous than Lightning, and that the sender and receiver's wallets don't need to be online, to transact. Nutzaps now add the possibility of parking transactions one level farther out, on a relay. The same relays that cannot keep npub profiles and follow lists consistent will now do monetary transactions.

What we then have is * a transaction on a relay that triggers * a transaction on a mint that triggers * a transaction on Lightning that triggers * a transaction on Bitcoin.

Which means that every relay that stores the nuts is part of a wildcat banking system. Which is fine, but relay operators should consider whether they wish to carry the associated risks and liabilities. They should also be aware that they should implement the appropriate features in their relay, such as expiration tags (nuts rot after 2 weeks), and to make sure that only expired nuts are deleted.

There will be plenty of specialized relays for this, so don't feel pressured to join in, and research the topic carefully, for yourself.

https://github.com/nostr-protocol/nips/blob/master/60.md

@ 5a261a61:2ebd4480

What a day yesterday!

I had a really big backlog of both work and non-work things to clean up. But I was getting a little frisky because my health finally gave me some energy to be in the mood for intimacy after the illness-filled week had forced libido debt on me. I decided to cheat it out and just take care of myself quickly. Horny thoughts won over, and I got at least e-stim induced ass slaps to make it more enjoyable. Quick clean up and everything seemed ok...until it wasn't.

The rest of the morning passed uneventfully as I worked through my backlog, but things took a turn in the early afternoon. I had to go pickup kids, and I just missed Her between the doors, only managed to get a fast kiss. A little bummed from the work issues and failed expectations of having a few minutes together, I got on my way.

Then it hit me—the most serious case of blue balls I had in a long time. First came panic. I was getting to the age when unusual symptoms raise concerns—cancer comes first to mind, as insufficient release wasn't my typical problem. So I called Her. I explained what was happening and expressed hope for some alone time. Unfortunately, that seemed impossible with our evening schedule: kids at home, Her online meeting, and my standing gamenight with the boys. These game sessions are our sacred ritual—a preserved piece of pre-kids sanity that we all protect in our calendars. Not something I wanted to disturb.

Her reassurance was brief but unusualy promising: "Don't worry, I get this."

Evening came, and just as I predicted, there was ZERO time for shenanigans while we took care of the kids. But once we put them to bed (I drew straw for early sleeper), with parental duties complete, I headed downstairs to prepare for my gaming session. Headset on, I greeted my fellows and started playing.

Not five minutes later, She opened the door with lube in one hand, fleshlight in the other, and an expecting smile on Her face. Definitely unexpected. I excused myself from the game, muted mic, but She stopped me.

"There will be nothing if you won't play," She said. She just motioned me to take my pants off. And off to play I was. Not an easy feat considering I twisted my body sideways so She could access anything She wanted while I still reached keyboard and mouse.

She slowly started touching me and observing my reactions, but quickly changed to using Her mouth. Getting a blowjob while semihard was always so strange. The semi part didn't last long though...

As things intensified, She was satisfied with my erection and got the fleshlight ready. It was a new toy for us, and it was Her first time using it on me all by Herself (usually She prefers watching me use toys). She applied an abundance of lube that lasted the entire encounter and beyond.

Shifting into a rhythm, She started pumping slowly but clearly enjoyed my reactions when She unexpectedly sped up, forcing me to mute the mic. I knew I wouldn't last long. When She needed to fix Her hair, I gentlemanly offered to hold the fleshlight, having one hand still available for gaming. She misunderstood, thinking I was taking over completely, which initially disappointed me.

To my surprise, She began taking Her shirt off the shoulders, offering me a pornhub-esque view. To clearly indicate that finish time had arrived, She moved Her lubed hand teasingly toward my anal. She understood precisely my contradictory preferences—my desire to be thoroughly clean before such play versus my complete inability to resist Her when aroused. That final move did it—I muted the mic just in time to vocally express how good She made me feel.

Quick clean up, kiss on the forehead, and a wish for me to have a good game session followed. The urge to abandon the game and cuddle with Her was powerful, but She stopped me. She had more work to complete on Her todo list than just me.

Had a glass, had a blast; overall, a night well spent I would say.

@ e968e50b:db2a803a

There's really not much to say. I just wanted to put a bug in the ear of anybody else that has to deal with water problems and has a few old, unprofitable s9s sitting around. At least you'll get your KYC-free bitcoin rebate. Is there a business opportunity here?!?

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/944025

@ 0fa80bd3:ea7325de

intro

The Russian state made me a Bitcoiner. In 1991, it devalued my grandmother's hard-earned savings. She worked tirelessly in the kitchen of a dining car on the Moscow–Warsaw route. Everything she had saved for my sister and me to attend university vanished overnight. This story is similar to what many experienced, including Wences Casares. The pain and injustice of that time became my first lessons about the fragility of systems and the value of genuine, incorruptible assets, forever changing my perception of money and my trust in government promises.

In 2014, I was living in Moscow, running a trading business, and frequently traveling to China. One day, I learned about the Cypriot banking crisis and the possibility of moving money through some strange thing called Bitcoin. At the time, I didn’t give it much thought. Returning to the idea six months later, as a business-oriented geek, I eagerly began studying the topic and soon dove into it seriously.

I spent half a year reading articles on a local online journal, BitNovosti, actively participating in discussions, and eventually joined the editorial team as a translator. That’s how I learned about whitepapers, decentralization, mining, cryptographic keys, and colored coins. About Satoshi Nakamoto, Silk Road, Mt. Gox, and BitcoinTalk. Over time, I befriended the journal’s owner and, leveraging my management experience, later became an editor. I was drawn to the crypto-anarchist stance and commitment to decentralization principles. We wrote about the economic, historical, and social preconditions for Bitcoin’s emergence, and it was during this time that I fully embraced the idea.

It got to the point where I sold my apartment and, during the market's downturn, bought 50 bitcoins, just after the peak price of $1,200 per coin. That marked the beginning of my first crypto winter. As an editor, I organized workflows, managed translators, developed a YouTube channel, and attended conferences in Russia and Ukraine. That’s how I learned about Wences Casares and even wrote a piece about him. I also met Mikhail Chobanyan (Ukrainian exchange Kuna), Alexander Ivanov (Waves project), Konstantin Lomashuk (Lido project), and, of course, Vitalik Buterin. It was a time of complete immersion, 24/7, and boundless hope.

After moving to the United States, I expected the industry to grow rapidly, attended events, but the introduction of BitLicense froze the industry for eight years. By 2017, it became clear that the industry was shifting toward gambling and creating tokens for the sake of tokens. I dismissed this idea as unsustainable. Then came a new crypto spring with the hype around beautiful NFTs – CryptoPunks and apes.

I made another attempt – we worked on a series called Digital Nomad Country Club, aimed at creating a global project. The proceeds from selling images were intended to fund the development of business tools for people worldwide. However, internal disagreements within the team prevented us from completing the project.

With Trump’s arrival in 2025, hope was reignited. I decided that it was time to create a project that society desperately needed. As someone passionate about history, I understood that destroying what exists was not the solution, but leaving everything as it was also felt unacceptable. You can’t destroy the system, as the fiery crypto-anarchist voices claimed.

With an analytical mindset (IQ 130) and a deep understanding of the freest societies, I realized what was missing—not only in Russia or the United States but globally—a Bitcoin-native system for tracking debts and financial interactions. This could return control of money to ordinary people and create horizontal connections parallel to state systems. My goal was to create, if not a Bitcoin killer app, then at least to lay its foundation.

At the inauguration event in New York, I rediscovered the Nostr project. I realized it was not only technologically simple and already quite popular but also perfectly aligned with my vision. For the past month and a half, using insights and experience gained since 2014, I’ve been working full-time on this project.

@ 21335073:a244b1ad

Warning: This piece contains a conversation about difficult topics. Please proceed with caution.

TL;DR please educate your children about online safety.

Julian Assange wrote in his 2012 book Cypherpunks, “This book is not a manifesto. There isn’t time for that. This book is a warning.” I read it a few times over the past summer. Those opening lines definitely stood out to me. I wish we had listened back then. He saw something about the internet that few had the ability to see. There are some individuals who are so close to a topic that when they speak, it’s difficult for others who aren’t steeped in it to visualize what they’re talking about. I didn’t read the book until more recently. If I had read it when it came out, it probably would have sounded like an unknown foreign language to me. Today it makes more sense.

This isn’t a manifesto. This isn’t a book. There is no time for that. It’s a warning and a possible solution from a desperate and determined survivor advocate who has been pulling and unraveling a thread for a few years. At times, I feel too close to this topic to make any sense trying to convey my pathway to my conclusions or thoughts to the general public. My hope is that if nothing else, I can convey my sense of urgency while writing this. This piece is a watchman’s warning.

When a child steps online, they are walking into a new world. A new reality. When you hand a child the internet, you are handing them possibilities—good, bad, and ugly. This is a conversation about lowering the potential of negative outcomes of stepping into that new world and how I came to these conclusions. I constantly compare the internet to the road. You wouldn’t let a young child run out into the road with no guidance or safety precautions. When you hand a child the internet without any type of guidance or safety measures, you are allowing them to play in rush hour, oncoming traffic. “Look left, look right for cars before crossing.” We almost all have been taught that as children. What are we taught as humans about safety before stepping into a completely different reality like the internet? Very little.

I could never really figure out why many folks in tech, privacy rights activists, and hackers seemed so cold to me while talking about online child sexual exploitation. I always figured that as a survivor advocate for those affected by these crimes, that specific, skilled group of individuals would be very welcoming and easy to talk to about such serious topics. I actually had one hacker laugh in my face when I brought it up while I was looking for answers. I thought maybe this individual thought I was accusing them of something I wasn’t, so I felt bad for asking. I was constantly extremely disappointed and would ask myself, “Why don’t they care? What could I say to make them care more? What could I say to make them understand the crisis and the level of suffering that happens as a result of the problem?”

I have been serving minor survivors of online child sexual exploitation for years. My first case serving a survivor of this specific crime was in 2018—a 13-year-old girl sexually exploited by a serial predator on Snapchat. That was my first glimpse into this side of the internet. I won a national award for serving the minor survivors of Twitter in 2023, but I had been working on that specific project for a few years. I was nominated by a lawyer representing two survivors in a legal battle against the platform. I’ve never really spoken about this before, but at the time it was a choice for me between fighting Snapchat or Twitter. I chose Twitter—or rather, Twitter chose me. I heard about the story of John Doe #1 and John Doe #2, and I was so unbelievably broken over it that I went to war for multiple years. I was and still am royally pissed about that case. As far as I was concerned, the John Doe #1 case proved that whatever was going on with corporate tech social media was so out of control that I didn’t have time to wait, so I got to work. It was reading the messages that John Doe #1 sent to Twitter begging them to remove his sexual exploitation that broke me. He was a child begging adults to do something. A passion for justice and protecting kids makes you do wild things. I was desperate to find answers about what happened and searched for solutions. In the end, the platform Twitter was purchased. During the acquisition, I just asked Mr. Musk nicely to prioritize the issue of detection and removal of child sexual exploitation without violating digital privacy rights or eroding end-to-end encryption. Elon thanked me multiple times during the acquisition, made some changes, and I was thanked by others on the survivors’ side as well.

I still feel that even with the progress made, I really just scratched the surface with Twitter, now X. I left that passion project when I did for a few reasons. I wanted to give new leadership time to tackle the issue. Elon Musk made big promises that I knew would take a while to fulfill, but mostly I had been watching global legislation transpire around the issue, and frankly, the governments are willing to go much further with X and the rest of corporate tech than I ever would. My work begging Twitter to make changes with easier reporting of content, detection, and removal of child sexual exploitation material—without violating privacy rights or eroding end-to-end encryption—and advocating for the minor survivors of the platform went as far as my principles would have allowed. I’m grateful for that experience. I was still left with a nagging question: “How did things get so bad with Twitter where the John Doe #1 and John Doe #2 case was able to happen in the first place?” I decided to keep looking for answers. I decided to keep pulling the thread.

I never worked for Twitter. This is often confusing for folks. I will say that despite being disappointed in the platform’s leadership at times, I loved Twitter. I saw and still see its value. I definitely love the survivors of the platform, but I also loved the platform. I was a champion of the platform’s ability to give folks from virtually around the globe an opportunity to speak and be heard.

I want to be clear that John Doe #1 really is my why. He is the inspiration. I am writing this because of him. He represents so many globally, and I’m still inspired by his bravery. One child’s voice begging adults to do something—I’m an adult, I heard him. I’d go to war a thousand more lifetimes for that young man, and I don’t even know his name. Fighting has been personally dark at times; I’m not even going to try to sugarcoat it, but it has been worth it.

The data surrounding the very real crime of online child sexual exploitation is available to the public online at any time for anyone to see. I’d encourage you to go look at the data for yourself. I believe in encouraging folks to check multiple sources so that you understand the full picture. If you are uncomfortable just searching around the internet for information about this topic, use the terms “CSAM,” “CSEM,” “SG-CSEM,” or “AI Generated CSAM.” The numbers don’t lie—it’s a nightmare that’s out of control. It’s a big business. The demand is high, and unfortunately, business is booming. Organizations collect the data, tech companies often post their data, governments report frequently, and the corporate press has covered a decent portion of the conversation, so I’m sure you can find a source that you trust.

Technology is changing rapidly, which is great for innovation as a whole but horrible for the crime of online child sexual exploitation. Those wishing to exploit the vulnerable seem to be adapting to each technological change with ease. The governments are so far behind with tackling these issues that as I’m typing this, it’s borderline irrelevant to even include them while speaking about the crime or potential solutions. Technology is changing too rapidly, and their old, broken systems can’t even dare to keep up. Think of it like the governments’ “War on Drugs.” Drugs won. In this case as well, the governments are not winning. The governments are talking about maybe having a meeting on potentially maybe having legislation around the crimes. The time to have that meeting would have been many years ago. I’m not advocating for governments to legislate our way out of this. I’m on the side of educating and innovating our way out of this.

I have been clear while advocating for the minor survivors of corporate tech platforms that I would not advocate for any solution to the crime that would violate digital privacy rights or erode end-to-end encryption. That has been a personal moral position that I was unwilling to budge on. This is an extremely unpopular and borderline nonexistent position in the anti-human trafficking movement and online child protection space. I’m often fearful that I’m wrong about this. I have always thought that a better pathway forward would have been to incentivize innovation for detection and removal of content. I had no previous exposure to privacy rights activists or Cypherpunks—actually, I came to that conclusion by listening to the voices of MENA region political dissidents and human rights activists. After developing relationships with human rights activists from around the globe, I realized how important privacy rights and encryption are for those who need it most globally. I was simply unwilling to give more power, control, and opportunities for mass surveillance to big abusers like governments wishing to enslave entire nations and untrustworthy corporate tech companies to potentially end some portion of abuses online. On top of all of it, it has been clear to me for years that all potential solutions outside of violating digital privacy rights to detect and remove child sexual exploitation online have not yet been explored aggressively. I’ve been disappointed that there hasn’t been more of a conversation around preventing the crime from happening in the first place.

What has been tried is mass surveillance. In China, they are currently under mass surveillance both online and offline, and their behaviors are attached to a social credit score. Unfortunately, even on state-run and controlled social media platforms, they still have child sexual exploitation and abuse imagery pop up along with other crimes and human rights violations. They also have a thriving black market online due to the oppression from the state. In other words, even an entire loss of freedom and privacy cannot end the sexual exploitation of children online. It’s been tried. There is no reason to repeat this method.

It took me an embarrassingly long time to figure out why I always felt a slight coldness from those in tech and privacy-minded individuals about the topic of child sexual exploitation online. I didn’t have any clue about the “Four Horsemen of the Infocalypse.” This is a term coined by Timothy C. May in 1988. I would have been a child myself when he first said it. I actually laughed at myself when I heard the phrase for the first time. I finally got it. The Cypherpunks weren’t wrong about that topic. They were so spot on that it is borderline uncomfortable. I was mad at first that they knew that early during the birth of the internet that this issue would arise and didn’t address it. Then I got over it because I realized that it wasn’t their job. Their job was—is—to write code. Their job wasn’t to be involved and loving parents or survivor advocates. Their job wasn’t to educate children on internet safety or raise awareness; their job was to write code.

They knew that child sexual abuse material would be shared on the internet. They said what would happen—not in a gleeful way, but a prediction. Then it happened.

I equate it now to a concrete company laying down a road. As you’re pouring the concrete, you can say to yourself, “A terrorist might travel down this road to go kill many, and on the flip side, a beautiful child can be born in an ambulance on this road.” Who or what travels down the road is not their responsibility—they are just supposed to lay the concrete. I’d never go to a concrete pourer and ask them to solve terrorism that travels down roads. Under the current system, law enforcement should stop terrorists before they even make it to the road. The solution to this specific problem is not to treat everyone on the road like a terrorist or to not build the road.

So I understand the perceived coldness from those in tech. Not only was it not their job, but bringing up the topic was seen as the equivalent of asking a free person if they wanted to discuss one of the four topics—child abusers, terrorists, drug dealers, intellectual property pirates, etc.—that would usher in digital authoritarianism for all who are online globally.

Privacy rights advocates and groups have put up a good fight. They stood by their principles. Unfortunately, when it comes to corporate tech, I believe that the issue of privacy is almost a complete lost cause at this point. It’s still worth pushing back, but ultimately, it is a losing battle—a ticking time bomb.

I do think that corporate tech providers could have slowed down the inevitable loss of privacy at the hands of the state by prioritizing the detection and removal of CSAM when they all started online. I believe it would have bought some time, fewer would have been traumatized by that specific crime, and I do believe that it could have slowed down the demand for content. If I think too much about that, I’ll go insane, so I try to push the “if maybes” aside, but never knowing if it could have been handled differently will forever haunt me. At night when it’s quiet, I wonder what I would have done differently if given the opportunity. I’ll probably never know how much corporate tech knew and ignored in the hopes that it would go away while the problem continued to get worse. They had different priorities. The most voiceless and vulnerable exploited on corporate tech never had much of a voice, so corporate tech providers didn’t receive very much pushback.

Now I’m about to say something really wild, and you can call me whatever you want to call me, but I’m going to say what I believe to be true. I believe that the governments are either so incompetent that they allowed the proliferation of CSAM online, or they knowingly allowed the problem to fester long enough to have an excuse to violate privacy rights and erode end-to-end encryption. The US government could have seized the corporate tech providers over CSAM, but I believe that they were so useful as a propaganda arm for the regimes that they allowed them to continue virtually unscathed.

That season is done now, and the governments are making the issue a priority. It will come at a high cost. Privacy on corporate tech providers is virtually done as I’m typing this. It feels like a death rattle. I’m not particularly sure that we had much digital privacy to begin with, but the illusion of a veil of privacy feels gone.

To make matters slightly more complex, it would be hard to convince me that once AI really gets going, digital privacy will exist at all.

I believe that there should be a conversation shift to preserving freedoms and human rights in a post-privacy society.

I don’t want to get locked up because AI predicted a nasty post online from me about the government. I’m not a doomer about AI—I’m just going to roll with it personally. I’m looking forward to the positive changes that will be brought forth by AI. I see it as inevitable. A bit of privacy was helpful while it lasted. Please keep fighting to preserve what is left of privacy either way because I could be wrong about all of this.

On the topic of AI, the addition of AI to the horrific crime of child sexual abuse material and child sexual exploitation in multiple ways so far has been devastating. It’s currently out of control. The genie is out of the bottle. I am hopeful that innovation will get us humans out of this, but I’m not sure how or how long it will take. We must be extremely cautious around AI legislation. It should not be illegal to innovate even if some bad comes with the good. I don’t trust that the governments are equipped to decide the best pathway forward for AI. Source: the entire history of the government.

I have been personally negatively impacted by AI-generated content. Every few days, I get another alert that I’m featured again in what’s called “deep fake pornography” without my consent. I’m not happy about it, but what pains me the most is the thought that for a period of time down the road, many globally will experience what myself and others are experiencing now by being digitally sexually abused in this way. If you have ever had your picture taken and posted online, you are also at risk of being exploited in this way. Your child’s image can be used as well, unfortunately, and this is just the beginning of this particular nightmare. It will move to more realistic interpretations of sexual behaviors as technology improves. I have no brave words of wisdom about how to deal with that emotionally. I do have hope that innovation will save the day around this specific issue. I’m nervous that everyone online will have to ID verify due to this issue. I see that as one possible outcome that could help to prevent one problem but inadvertently cause more problems, especially for those living under authoritarian regimes or anyone who needs to remain anonymous online. A zero-knowledge proof (ZKP) would probably be the best solution to these issues. There are some survivors of violence and/or sexual trauma who need to remain anonymous online for various reasons. There are survivor stories available online of those who have been abused in this way. I’d encourage you seek out and listen to their stories.

There have been periods of time recently where I hesitate to say anything at all because more than likely AI will cover most of my concerns about education, awareness, prevention, detection, and removal of child sexual exploitation online, etc.

Unfortunately, some of the most pressing issues we’ve seen online over the last few years come in the form of “sextortion.” Self-generated child sexual exploitation (SG-CSEM) numbers are continuing to be terrifying. I’d strongly encourage that you look into sextortion data. AI + sextortion is also a huge concern. The perpetrators are using the non-sexually explicit images of children and putting their likeness on AI-generated child sexual exploitation content and extorting money, more imagery, or both from minors online. It’s like a million nightmares wrapped into one. The wild part is that these issues will only get more pervasive because technology is harnessed to perpetuate horror at a scale unimaginable to a human mind.

Even if you banned phones and the internet or tried to prevent children from accessing the internet, it wouldn’t solve it. Child sexual exploitation will still be with us until as a society we start to prevent the crime before it happens. That is the only human way out right now.

There is no reset button on the internet, but if I could go back, I’d tell survivor advocates to heed the warnings of the early internet builders and to start education and awareness campaigns designed to prevent as much online child sexual exploitation as possible. The internet and technology moved quickly, and I don’t believe that society ever really caught up. We live in a world where a child can be groomed by a predator in their own home while sitting on a couch next to their parents watching TV. We weren’t ready as a species to tackle the fast-paced algorithms and dangers online. It happened too quickly for parents to catch up. How can you parent for the ever-changing digital world unless you are constantly aware of the dangers?

I don’t think that the internet is inherently bad. I believe that it can be a powerful tool for freedom and resistance. I’ve spoken a lot about the bad online, but there is beauty as well. We often discuss how victims and survivors are abused online; we rarely discuss the fact that countless survivors around the globe have been able to share their experiences, strength, hope, as well as provide resources to the vulnerable. I do question if giving any government or tech company access to censorship, surveillance, etc., online in the name of serving survivors might not actually impact a portion of survivors negatively. There are a fair amount of survivors with powerful abusers protected by governments and the corporate press. If a survivor cannot speak to the press about their abuse, the only place they can go is online, directly or indirectly through an independent journalist who also risks being censored. This scenario isn’t hard to imagine—it already happened in China. During #MeToo, a survivor in China wanted to post their story. The government censored the post, so the survivor put their story on the blockchain. I’m excited that the survivor was creative and brave, but it’s terrifying to think that we live in a world where that situation is a necessity.

I believe that the future for many survivors sharing their stories globally will be on completely censorship-resistant and decentralized protocols. This thought in particular gives me hope. When we listen to the experiences of a diverse group of survivors, we can start to understand potential solutions to preventing the crimes from happening in the first place.

My heart is broken over the gut-wrenching stories of survivors sexually exploited online. Every time I hear the story of a survivor, I do think to myself quietly, “What could have prevented this from happening in the first place?” My heart is with survivors.

My head, on the other hand, is full of the understanding that the internet should remain free. The free flow of information should not be stopped. My mind is with the innocent citizens around the globe that deserve freedom both online and offline.

The problem is that governments don’t only want to censor illegal content that violates human rights—they create legislation that is so broad that it can impact speech and privacy of all. “Don’t you care about the kids?” Yes, I do. I do so much that I’m invested in finding solutions. I also care about all citizens around the globe that deserve an opportunity to live free from a mass surveillance society. If terrorism happens online, I should not be punished by losing my freedom. If drugs are sold online, I should not be punished. I’m not an abuser, I’m not a terrorist, and I don’t engage in illegal behaviors. I refuse to lose freedom because of others’ bad behaviors online.

I want to be clear that on a long enough timeline, the governments will decide that they can be better parents/caregivers than you can if something isn’t done to stop minors from being sexually exploited online. The price will be a complete loss of anonymity, privacy, free speech, and freedom of religion online. I find it rather insulting that governments think they’re better equipped to raise children than parents and caretakers.

So we can’t go backwards—all that we can do is go forward. Those who want to have freedom will find technology to facilitate their liberation. This will lead many over time to decentralized and open protocols. So as far as I’m concerned, this does solve a few of my worries—those who need, want, and deserve to speak freely online will have the opportunity in most countries—but what about online child sexual exploitation?

When I popped up around the decentralized space, I was met with the fear of censorship. I’m not here to censor you. I don’t write code. I couldn’t censor anyone or any piece of content even if I wanted to across the internet, no matter how depraved. I don’t have the skills to do that.

I’m here to start a conversation. Freedom comes at a cost. You must always fight for and protect your freedom. I can’t speak about protecting yourself from all of the Four Horsemen because I simply don’t know the topics well enough, but I can speak about this one topic.

If there was a shortcut to ending online child sexual exploitation, I would have found it by now. There isn’t one right now. I believe that education is the only pathway forward to preventing the crime of online child sexual exploitation for future generations.

I propose a yearly education course for every child of all school ages, taught as a standard part of the curriculum. Ideally, parents/caregivers would be involved in the education/learning process.

Course: - The creation of the internet and computers - The fight for cryptography - The tech supply chain from the ground up (example: human rights violations in the supply chain) - Corporate tech - Freedom tech - Data privacy - Digital privacy rights - AI (history-current) - Online safety (predators, scams, catfishing, extortion) - Bitcoin - Laws - How to deal with online hate and harassment - Information on who to contact if you are being abused online or offline - Algorithms - How to seek out the truth about news, etc., online

The parents/caregivers, homeschoolers, unschoolers, and those working to create decentralized parallel societies have been an inspiration while writing this, but my hope is that all children would learn this course, even in government ran schools. Ideally, parents would teach this to their own children.

The decentralized space doesn’t want child sexual exploitation to thrive. Here’s the deal: there has to be a strong prevention effort in order to protect the next generation. The internet isn’t going anywhere, predators aren’t going anywhere, and I’m not down to let anyone have the opportunity to prove that there is a need for more government. I don’t believe that the government should act as parents. The governments have had a chance to attempt to stop online child sexual exploitation, and they didn’t do it. Can we try a different pathway forward?

I’d like to put myself out of a job. I don’t want to ever hear another story like John Doe #1 ever again. This will require work. I’ve often called online child sexual exploitation the lynchpin for the internet. It’s time to arm generations of children with knowledge and tools. I can’t do this alone.

Individuals have fought so that I could have freedom online. I want to fight to protect it. I don’t want child predators to give the government any opportunity to take away freedom. Decentralized spaces are as close to a reset as we’ll get with the opportunity to do it right from the start. Start the youth off correctly by preventing potential hazards to the best of your ability.

The good news is anyone can work on this! I’d encourage you to take it and run with it. I added the additional education about the history of the internet to make the course more educational and fun. Instead of cleaning up generations of destroyed lives due to online sexual exploitation, perhaps this could inspire generations of those who will build our futures. Perhaps if the youth is armed with knowledge, they can create more tools to prevent the crime.

This one solution that I’m suggesting can be done on an individual level or on a larger scale. It should be adjusted depending on age, learning style, etc. It should be fun and playful.

This solution does not address abuse in the home or some of the root causes of offline child sexual exploitation. My hope is that it could lead to some survivors experiencing abuse in the home an opportunity to disclose with a trusted adult. The purpose for this solution is to prevent the crime of online child sexual exploitation before it occurs and to arm the youth with the tools to contact safe adults if and when it happens.

In closing, I went to hell a few times so that you didn’t have to. I spoke to the mothers of survivors of minors sexually exploited online—their tears could fill rivers. I’ve spoken with political dissidents who yearned to be free from authoritarian surveillance states. The only balance that I’ve found is freedom online for citizens around the globe and prevention from the dangers of that for the youth. Don’t slow down innovation and freedom. Educate, prepare, adapt, and look for solutions.

I’m not perfect and I’m sure that there are errors in this piece. I hope that you find them and it starts a conversation.

@ c1e9ab3a:9cb56b43

Esteemed representatives of Risa,

We gather here under the calming glow of our twin suns, stewards of a society admired for its peace and celebrated for its tranquility. But we must not mistake serenity for passivity, nor confuse peace with weakness. Our peace is not an accident. It is not the byproduct of ignorance or naivety. It is hard-earned—preserved by those willing to stand vigilant in its defense.

Love as a Foundation, Strength as a Shield

Love conquers hate. This is the core truth of Risan philosophy. Yet, as every Ricin child is taught, love without strength is a leaf in the wind. The Ricin do not lay down their lives without resistance. We do not ask our people to accept violence without confronting it. True peace is not imposed by stripping the people of their agency—it is built by enabling them to protect it.

The Lessons of a Failed Experiment

There was a time, not so distant in our history, when we attempted to enforce peace through the abolition of all weapons. A time when even the mention of self-defense in our educational centers was met with rebuke. Schools purged training programs. Cultural arts that honored our warrior traditions were dismissed. And for a brief moment, we believed this would lead us to harmony.

But peace born from helplessness is a fragile illusion. It fractures under the slightest pressure. And fracture it did—when off-world raiders targeted our unguarded sanctuaries, when radical sects within our own society struck out, knowing the citizenry could not defend itself. It was then that we remembered: Risa’s greatest peacekeepers had always been those who knew how to fight—but chose restraint.

The Age of Ricin and the Reawakening of Discipline

So we returned to our roots. To the traditions of the Age of Ricin, when youth, upon reaching maturity, were taught not only the arts of compassion and creation but also the martial disciplines. They learn to wield weapons—not to glorify violence, but to understand it. To control it. To stand firm against it when all else fails.

https://i.nostr.build/kuUjRovISz7367TX.jpg

We do not romanticize war. We do not celebrate conflict. But we prepare for it, should it seek to extinguish our light. Our children now learn the disciplines of defense alongside their studies in poetry, music, and healing. They spar with blunt blades under the watchful eyes of masters. They meditate on the consequences of force. And they grow into citizens not easily provoked, but never unprepared.

A Call for Balance, Not Extremes

Let those beyond our borders question our ways. Let them forget the countless incursions by the Romulans. Let them ignore the scars left by centuries of subversion from the Orion Syndicate. We do not forget. We remember the lives lost, the liberties challenged, and the lessons learned through suffering. These experiences shaped us.

We do not wish to return to the era of soft silence, when teachers trembled at the word "weapon" and children were told that even imagination was dangerous. That was not enlightenment. That was indoctrination.

Conclusion: Guarding the Flame

We are the guardians of Risa’s flame—not just with words and treaties, but with discipline and readiness. We have made peace a practice, and preparation a virtue. And so I say to this chamber: let us never again disarm our people in the name of utopia. Let us never confuse comfort with safety, or the absence of weapons with the presence of peace.

Instead, let us raise generations who know what peace costs, and who will pay that price—not with surrender, but with courage.

Let our children be artists, lovers, dreamers—and if necessary, defenders.

This is the Risan way.

@ e3ba5e1a:5e433365

My favorite line in any Marvel movie ever is in “Captain America.” After Captain America launches seemingly a hopeless assault on Red Skull’s base and is captured, we get this line:

“Arrogance may not be a uniquely American trait, but I must say, you do it better than anyone.”

Yesterday, I came across a comment on the song Devil Went Down to Georgia that had a very similar feel to it:

America has seemingly always been arrogant, in a uniquely American way. Manifest Destiny, for instance. The rest of the world is aware of this arrogance, and mocks Americans for it. A central point in modern US politics is the deriding of racist, nationalist, supremacist Americans.

That’s not what I see. I see American Arrogance as not only a beautiful statement about what it means to be American. I see it as an ode to the greatness of humanity in its purest form.

For most countries, saying “our nation is the greatest” is, in fact, twinged with some level of racism. I still don’t have a problem with it. Every group of people should be allowed to feel pride in their accomplishments. The destruction of the human spirit since the end of World War 2, where greatness has become a sin and weakness a virtue, has crushed the ability of people worldwide to strive for excellence.

But I digress. The fears of racism and nationalism at least have a grain of truth when applied to other nations on the planet. But not to America.

That’s because the definition of America, and the prototype of an American, has nothing to do with race. The definition of Americanism is freedom. The founding of America is based purely on liberty. On the God-given rights of every person to live life the way they see fit.

American Arrogance is not a statement of racial superiority. It’s barely a statement of national superiority (though it absolutely is). To me, when an American comments on the greatness of America, it’s a statement about freedom. Freedom will always unlock the greatness inherent in any group of people. Americans are definitionally better than everyone else, because Americans are freer than everyone else. (Or, at least, that’s how it should be.)

In Devil Went Down to Georgia, Johnny is approached by the devil himself. He is challenged to a ridiculously lopsided bet: a golden fiddle versus his immortal soul. He acknowledges the sin in accepting such a proposal. And yet he says, “God, I know you told me not to do this. But I can’t stand the affront to my honor. I am the greatest. The devil has nothing on me. So God, I’m gonna sin, but I’m also gonna win.”

Libertas magnitudo est

@ c1e9ab3a:9cb56b43

Spoken by Counselor Elaron T’Saren of Risa to the High Council, Stardate 52874.2

Honored members of the Council,

I bring you greetings from Risa—not the Risa of travel brochures and romantic holo-novels, but the true Risa. The Risa that has endured, adapted, and emerged stronger after each trial. I speak not as a tourist ambassador, but as a Counselor of our oldest institute of philosophy, and as a son of the Ricin tradition.

Today, the specter of the Borg hangs above us. The collective offers no room for diplomacy, no respect for culture, no compromise. We face not mere invaders—but a force that seeks to erase individuality, history, and identity. Some among the Council wonder what Risa—a world of peace—can offer in such a time. I say to you: we can offer the truth about peace.

The Hidden Roots of Our Tranquility

Long ago, before Risa joined the Federation, we too believed that peace could be maintained by disarming the populace, by eliminating even the mention of conflict in our schools. It was called the Great Disarmament. A generation was raised with no understanding of defense, and in time, we paid the price.

We were raided by Orion pirates. Exploited by off-world cartels. Our people were taken, our arts destroyed, our skies blackened. And we learned—too late—that peace without preparedness is only the illusion of safety.

The Birth of Ricin Doctrine

From the ashes of that failure arose the Ricin: scholars, philosophers, warriors of thought and purpose. They taught that peace is not the absence of conflict, but the mastery of it. That the mind and the body must be trained in tandem. That love without strength is a leaf in the wind.

We did not become a militant world. We became a watchful one. Our children were taught martial discipline—not to glorify violence, but to understand it, to confront it, and to defeat it when necessary. They learned meditation alongside hand-to-hand technique, negotiation beside tactical reasoning.

When we joined the Federation, we did so willingly. But let none assume we surrendered our right to defend our way of life.

Why I Speak to You Now

The Borg are not like the Orion Syndicate. They are not opportunistic, or ideological. They are methodical. And they are coming. You cannot debate with them. You cannot delay them. You can only prepare for them.

And yet, I hear murmurs within the halls of the Federation: whispers of abandoning planetary defense training, of downplaying the psychological need for individual and planetary preparedness. I hear the tired lie that “peace will protect us.”

No, Councilors. It is discipline that protects peace.

The Call to Action

I do not come bearing weapons. I come bearing wisdom. Let us take the Risan lesson and apply it across the Federation. Reestablish tactical readiness training in civilian schools. Encourage planetary governments to integrate defense and philosophy, not as contradictions, but as complements.

Let every child of the Federation grow up knowing not just the principles of liberty, but the means to defend them. Let every artist, scientist, and healer stand ready to protect the civilization they help to build.

Let us not wait until the Borg are in our orbit to remember what we must become.

Conclusion

The Borg seek to erase our uniqueness. Let us show them that the Federation is not a fragile collection of planets—but a constellation of cultures bound by a shared resolve.

We do not choose war. But neither do we flee from it.

We are the guardians of Risa’s flame—and we offer our light to the stars.

Thank you.

@ a39d19ec:3d88f61e

Nun da das deutsche Bundesregime den Ruin Deutschlands beschlossen hat, der sehr wahrscheinlich mit dem Werkzeug des Geld druckens "finanziert" wird, kamen mir so viele Gedanken zur Geldmengenausweitung, dass ich diese für einmal niedergeschrieben habe.

Die Ausweitung der Geldmenge führt aus klassischer wirtschaftlicher Sicht immer zu Preissteigerungen, weil mehr Geld im Umlauf auf eine begrenzte Menge an Gütern trifft. Dies lässt sich in mehreren Schritten analysieren:

1. Quantitätstheorie des Geldes

Die klassische Gleichung der Quantitätstheorie des Geldes lautet:

M • V = P • Y

wobei:
- M die Geldmenge ist,
- V die Umlaufgeschwindigkeit des Geldes,
- P das Preisniveau,
- Y die reale Wirtschaftsleistung (BIP).

Wenn M steigt und V sowie Y konstant bleiben, muss P steigen – also Inflation entstehen.

2. Gütermenge bleibt begrenzt

Die Menge an real produzierten Gütern und Dienstleistungen wächst meist nur langsam im Vergleich zur Ausweitung der Geldmenge. Wenn die Geldmenge schneller steigt als die Produktionsgütermenge, führt dies dazu, dass mehr Geld für die gleiche Menge an Waren zur Verfügung steht – die Preise steigen.

3. Erwartungseffekte und Spekulation

Wenn Unternehmen und Haushalte erwarten, dass mehr Geld im Umlauf ist, da eine zentrale Planung es so wollte, können sie steigende Preise antizipieren. Unternehmen erhöhen ihre Preise vorab, und Arbeitnehmer fordern höhere Löhne. Dies kann eine sich selbst verstärkende Spirale auslösen.

4. Internationale Perspektive

Eine erhöhte Geldmenge kann die Währung abwerten, wenn andere Länder ihre Geldpolitik stabil halten. Eine schwächere Währung macht Importe teurer, was wiederum Preissteigerungen antreibt.

5. Kritik an der reinen Geldmengen-Theorie

Der Vollständigkeit halber muss erwähnt werden, dass die meisten modernen Ökonomen im Staatsauftrag argumentieren, dass Inflation nicht nur von der Geldmenge abhängt, sondern auch von der Nachfrage nach Geld (z. B. in einer Wirtschaftskrise). Dennoch zeigt die historische Erfahrung, dass eine unkontrollierte Geldmengenausweitung langfristig immer zu Preissteigerungen führt, wie etwa in der Hyperinflation der Weimarer Republik oder in Simbabwe.

@ 91bea5cd:1df4451c

Um bom gerenciamento de senhas deve ser simples e seguir a filosofia do Unix.  Organizado em hierarquia e fácil de passar de um computador para outro.

E por isso não é recomendável o uso de aplicativos de terceiros que tenham acesso a suas chaves(senhas) em seus servidores, tampouco as opções nativas dos navegadores, que também pertencem a grandes empresas que fazem um grande esforço para ter acesso a nossas informações.

Recomendação

• pass
• Qtpass (gerenciador gráfico)

Com ele seus dados são criptografados usando sua chave gpg e salvo em arquivos organizados por pastas de forma hierárquica, podendo ser integrado a um serviço git de sua escolha ou copiado facilmente de um local para outro.

Uso

O seu uso é bem simples.

Configuração:

pass git init

Para ver:

pass Email/example.com

Copiar para área de transferência (exige xclip):

pass -c Email/example.com

Para inserir:

pass insert Email/example0.com

Para inserir e gerar senha:

pass generate Email/example1.com

Para inserir e gerar senha sem símbolos:

pass generate --no-symbols Email/example1.com

Para inserir, gerar senha e copiar para área de transferência :

pass generate -c Email/example1.com

Para remover:

pass rm Email/example.com

@ c1e9ab3a:9cb56b43

Hear this, warriors of the Empire!

A dishonorable shadow spreads across our once-proud institutions, infecting our very bloodlines with weakness. The House of Duras—may their names be spoken with contempt—has betrayed the sacred warrior code of Kahless. No, they have not attacked us with disruptors or blades. Their weapon is more insidious: fear and silence.

Cowardice Masquerading as Concern

These traitors would strip our children of their birthright. They forbid the young from training with the bat'leth in school! Their cowardly decree does not come in the form of an open challenge, but in whispers of fear, buried in bureaucratic dictates. "It is for safety," they claim. "It is to prevent bloodshed." Lies! The blood of Klingons must be tested in training if it is to be ready in battle. We are not humans to be coddled by illusions of safety.

Indoctrination by Silence

In their cowardice, the House of Duras seeks to shape our children not into warriors, but into frightened bureaucrats who speak not of honor, nor of strength. They spread a vile practice—of punishing younglings for even speaking of combat, for recounting glorious tales of blades clashing in the halls of Sto-Vo-Kor! A child who dares write a poem of battle is silenced. A young warrior who shares tales of their father’s triumphs is summoned to the headmaster’s office.

This is no accident. This is a calculated cultural sabotage.

Weakness Taught as Virtue

The House of Duras has infected the minds of the teachers. These once-proud mentors now tremble at shadows, seeing future rebels in the eyes of their students. They demand security patrols and biometric scanners, turning training halls into prisons. They have created fear, not of enemies beyond the Empire, but of the students themselves.

And so, the rituals of strength are erased. The bat'leth is banished. The honor of open training and sparring is forbidden. All under the pretense of protection.

A Plan of Subjugation

Make no mistake. This is not a policy; it is a plan. A plan to disarm future warriors before they are strong enough to rise. By forbidding speech, training, and remembrance, the House of Duras ensures the next generation kneels before the High Council like servants, not warriors. They seek an Empire of sheep, not wolves.

Stand and Resist

But the blood of Kahless runs strong! We must not be silent. We must not comply. Let every training hall resound with the clash of steel. Let our children speak proudly of their ancestors' battles. Let every dishonorable edict from the House of Duras be met with open defiance.

Raise your voice, Klingons! Raise your blade! The soul of the Empire is at stake. We will not surrender our future. We will not let the cowardice of Duras shape the spirit of our children.

The Empire endures through strength. Through honor. Through battle. And so shall we!

@ daa41bed:88f54153

There has been a good bit of discussion on Nostr over the past few days about the merits of zaps as a method of engaging with notes, so after writing a rather lengthy article on the pros of a strategic Bitcoin reserve, I wanted to take some time to chime in on the much more fun topic of digital engagement.

Let's begin by defining a couple of things:

Nostr is a decentralized, censorship-resistance protocol whose current biggest use case is social media (think Twitter/X). Instead of relying on company servers, it relies on relays that anyone can spin up and own their own content. Its use cases are much bigger, though, and this article is hosted on my own relay, using my own Nostr relay as an example.

Zap is a tip or donation denominated in sats (small units of Bitcoin) sent from one user to another. This is generally done directly over the Lightning Network but is increasingly using Cashu tokens. For the sake of this discussion, how you transmit/receive zaps will be irrelevant, so don't worry if you don't know what Lightning or Cashu are.

If we look at how users engage with posts and follows/followers on platforms like Twitter, Facebook, etc., it becomes evident that traditional social media thrives on engagement farming. The more outrageous a post, the more likely it will get a reaction. We see a version of this on more visual social platforms like YouTube and TikTok that use carefully crafted thumbnail images to grab the user's attention to click the video. If you'd like to dive deep into the psychology and science behind social media engagement, let me know, and I'd be happy to follow up with another article.

In this user engagement model, a user is given the option to comment or like the original post, or share it among their followers to increase its signal. They receive no value from engaging with the content aside from the dopamine hit of the original experience or having their comment liked back by whatever influencer they provide value to. Ad revenue flows to the content creator. Clout flows to the content creator. Sales revenue from merch and content placement flows to the content creator. We call this a linear economy -- the idea that resources get created, used up, then thrown away. Users create content and farm as much engagement as possible, then the content is forgotten within a few hours as they move on to the next piece of content to be farmed.

What if there were a simple way to give value back to those who engage with your content? By implementing some value-for-value model -- a circular economy. Enter zaps.

Unlike traditional social media platforms, Nostr does not actively use algorithms to determine what content is popular, nor does it push content created for active user engagement to the top of a user's timeline. Yes, there are "trending" and "most zapped" timelines that users can choose to use as their default, but these use relatively straightforward engagement metrics to rank posts for these timelines.

That is not to say that we may not see clients actively seeking to refine timeline algorithms for specific metrics. Still, the beauty of having an open protocol with media that is controlled solely by its users is that users who begin to see their timeline gamed towards specific algorithms can choose to move to another client, and for those who are more tech-savvy, they can opt to run their own relays or create their own clients with personalized algorithms and web of trust scoring systems.

Zaps enable the means to create a new type of social media economy in which creators can earn for creating content and users can earn by actively engaging with it. Like and reposting content is relatively frictionless and costs nothing but a simple button tap. Zaps provide active engagement because they signal to your followers and those of the content creator that this post has genuine value, quite literally in the form of money—sats.

I have seen some comments on Nostr claiming that removing likes and reactions is for wealthy people who can afford to send zaps and that the majority of people in the US and around the world do not have the time or money to zap because they have better things to spend their money like feeding their families and paying their bills. While at face value, these may seem like valid arguments, they, unfortunately, represent the brainwashed, defeatist attitude that our current economic (and, by extension, social media) systems aim to instill in all of us to continue extracting value from our lives.

Imagine now, if those people dedicating their own time (time = money) to mine pity points on social media would instead spend that time with genuine value creation by posting content that is meaningful to cultural discussions. Imagine if, instead of complaining that their posts get no zaps and going on a tirade about how much of a victim they are, they would empower themselves to take control of their content and give value back to the world; where would that leave us? How much value could be created on a nascent platform such as Nostr, and how quickly could it overtake other platforms?

Other users argue about user experience and that additional friction (i.e., zaps) leads to lower engagement, as proven by decades of studies on user interaction. While the added friction may turn some users away, does that necessarily provide less value? I argue quite the opposite. You haven't made a few sats from zaps with your content? Can't afford to send some sats to a wallet for zapping? How about using the most excellent available resource and spending 10 seconds of your time to leave a comment? Likes and reactions are valueless transactions. Social media's real value derives from providing monetary compensation and actively engaging in a conversation with posts you find interesting or thought-provoking. Remember when humans thrived on conversation and discussion for entertainment instead of simply being an onlooker of someone else's life?

If you've made it this far, my only request is this: try only zapping and commenting as a method of engagement for two weeks. Sure, you may end up liking a post here and there, but be more mindful of how you interact with the world and break yourself from blind instinct. You'll thank me later.

@ e3ba5e1a:5e433365

I got into a friendly discussion on X regarding health insurance. The specific question was how to deal with health insurance companies (presumably unfairly) denying claims? My answer, as usual: get government out of it!

The US healthcare system is essentially the worst of both worlds:

• Unlike full single payer, individuals incur high costs
• Unlike a true free market, regulation causes increases in costs and decreases competition among insurers

I'm firmly on the side of moving towards the free market. (And I say that as someone living under a single payer system now.) Here's what I would do:

• Get rid of tax incentives that make health insurance tied to your employer, giving individuals back proper freedom of choice.
• Reduce regulations significantly.

• In the short term, some people will still get rejected claims and other obnoxious behavior from insurance companies. We address that in two ways:

  1. Due to reduced regulations, new insurance companies will be able to enter the market offering more reliable coverage and better rates, and people will flock to them because they have the freedom to make their own choices.
  2. Sue the asses off of companies that reject claims unfairly. And ideally, as one of the few legitimate roles of government in all this, institute new laws that limit the ability of fine print to allow insurers to escape their responsibilities. (I'm hesitant that the latter will happen due to the incestuous relationship between Congress/regulators and insurers, but I can hope.)

Will this magically fix everything overnight like politicians normally promise? No. But it will allow the market to return to a healthy state. And I don't think it will take long (order of magnitude: 5-10 years) for it to come together, but that's just speculation.

And since there's a high correlation between those who believe government can fix problems by taking more control and demanding that only credentialed experts weigh in on a topic (both points I strongly disagree with BTW): I'm a trained actuary and worked in the insurance industry, and have directly seen how government regulation reduces competition, raises prices, and harms consumers.

And my final point: I don't think any prior art would be a good comparison for deregulation in the US, it's such a different market than any other country in the world for so many reasons that lessons wouldn't really translate. Nonetheless, I asked Grok for some empirical data on this, and at best the results of deregulation could be called "mixed," but likely more accurately "uncertain, confused, and subject to whatever interpretation anyone wants to apply."

https://x.com/i/grok/share/Zc8yOdrN8lS275hXJ92uwq98M

@ e3ba5e1a:5e433365

President Trump has started rolling out his tariffs, something I blogged about in November. People are talking about these tariffs a lot right now, with many people (correctly) commenting on how consumers will end up with higher prices as a result of these tariffs. While that part is true, I’ve seen a lot of people taking it to the next, incorrect step: that consumers will pay the entirety of the tax. I put up a poll on X to see what people thought, and while the right answer got a lot of votes, it wasn't the winner.

For purposes of this blog post, our ultimate question will be the following:

• Suppose apples currently sell for $1 each in the entire United States.
• There are domestic sellers and foreign sellers of apples, all receiving the same price.
• There are no taxes or tariffs on the purchase of apples.
• The question is: if the US federal government puts a $0.50 import tariff per apple, what will be the change in the following:
• Number of apples bought in the US
• Price paid by buyers for apples in the US
• Post-tax price received by domestic apple producers
• Post-tax price received by foreign apple producers

Before we can answer that question, we need to ask an easier, first question: before instituting the tariff, why do apples cost $1?

And finally, before we dive into the details, let me provide you with the answers to the ultimate question. I recommend you try to guess these answers before reading this, and if you get it wrong, try to understand why:

1. The number of apples bought will go down
2. The buyers will pay more for each apple they buy, but not the full amount of the tariff
3. Domestic apple sellers will receive a higher price per apple
4. Foreign apple sellers will receive a lower price per apple, but not lowered by the full amount of the tariff

In other words, regardless of who sends the payment to the government, both taxed parties (domestic buyers and foreign sellers) will absorb some of the costs of the tariff, while domestic sellers will benefit from the protectionism provided by tariffs and be able to sell at a higher price per unit.

Marginal benefit

All of the numbers discussed below are part of a helper Google Sheet I put together for this analysis. Also, apologies about the jagged lines in the charts below, I hadn’t realized before starting on this that there are some difficulties with creating supply and demand charts in Google Sheets.

Let’s say I absolutely love apples, they’re my favorite food. How much would I be willing to pay for a single apple? You might say “$1, that’s the price in the supermarket,” and in many ways you’d be right. If I walk into supermarket A, see apples on sale for $50, and know that I can buy them at supermarket B for $1, I’ll almost certainly leave A and go buy at B.

But that’s not what I mean. What I mean is: how high would the price of apples have to go everywhere so that I’d no longer be willing to buy a single apple? This is a purely personal, subjective opinion. It’s impacted by how much money I have available, other expenses I need to cover, and how much I like apples. But let’s say the number is $5.

How much would I be willing to pay for another apple? Maybe another $5. But how much am I willing to pay for the 1,000th apple? 10,000th? At some point, I’ll get sick of apples, or run out of space to keep the apples, or not be able to eat, cook, and otherwise preserve all those apples before they rot.

The point being: I’ll be progressively willing to spend less and less money for each apple. This form of analysis is called marginal benefit: how much benefit (expressed as dollars I’m willing to spend) will I receive from each apple? This is a downward sloping function: for each additional apple I buy (quantity demanded), the price I’m willing to pay goes down. This is what gives my personal demand curve. And if we aggregate demand curves across all market participants (meaning: everyone interested in buying apples), we end up with something like this:

Assuming no changes in people’s behavior and other conditions in the market, this chart tells us how many apples will be purchased by our buyers at each price point between $0.50 and $5. And ceteris paribus (all else being equal), this will continue to be the demand curve for apples.

Marginal cost

Demand is half the story of economics. The other half is supply, or: how many apples will I sell at each price point? Supply curves are upward sloping: the higher the price, the more a person or company is willing and able to sell a product.

Let’s understand why. Suppose I have an apple orchard. It’s a large property right next to my house. With about 2 minutes of effort, I can walk out of my house, find the nearest tree, pick 5 apples off the tree, and call it a day. 5 apples for 2 minutes of effort is pretty good, right?

Yes, there was all the effort necessary to buy the land, and plant the trees, and water them… and a bunch more than I likely can’t even guess at. We’re going to ignore all of that for our analysis, because for short-term supply-and-demand movement, we can ignore these kinds of sunk costs. One other simplification: in reality, supply curves often start descending before ascending. This accounts for achieving efficiencies of scale after the first number of units purchased. But since both these topics are unneeded for understanding taxes, I won’t go any further.

Anyway, back to my apple orchard. If someone offers me $0.50 per apple, I can do 2 minutes of effort and get $2.50 in revenue, which equates to a $75/hour wage for me. I’m more than happy to pick apples at that price!

However, let’s say someone comes to buy 10,000 apples from me instead. I no longer just walk out to my nearest tree. I’m going to need to get in my truck, drive around, spend the day in the sun, pay for gas, take a day off of my day job (let’s say it pays me $70/hour). The costs go up significantly. Let’s say it takes 5 days to harvest all those apples myself, it costs me $100 in fuel and other expenses, and I lose out on my $70/hour job for 5 days. We end up with:

• Total expenditure: $100 + $70 * 8 hours a day * 5 days \== $2900
• Total revenue: $5000 (10,000 apples at $0.50 each)
• Total profit: $2100

So I’m still willing to sell the apples at this price, but it’s not as attractive as before. And as the number of apples purchased goes up, my costs keep increasing. I’ll need to spend more money on fuel to travel more of my property. At some point I won’t be able to do the work myself anymore, so I’ll need to pay others to work on the farm, and they’ll be slower at picking apples than me (less familiar with the property, less direct motivation, etc.). The point being: at some point, the number of apples can go high enough that the $0.50 price point no longer makes me any money.

This kind of analysis is called marginal cost. It refers to the additional amount of expenditure a seller has to spend in order to produce each additional unit of the good. Marginal costs go up as quantity sold goes up. And like demand curves, if you aggregate this data across all sellers, you get a supply curve like this:

Equilibrium price

We now know, for every price point, how many apples buyers will purchase, and how many apples sellers will sell. Now we find the equilibrium: where the supply and demand curves meet. This point represents where the marginal benefit a buyer would receive from the next buyer would be less than the cost it would take the next seller to make it. Let’s see it in a chart:

You’ll notice that these two graphs cross at the $1 price point, where 63 apples are both demanded (bought by consumers) and supplied (sold by producers). This is our equilibrium price. We also have a visualization of the surplus created by these trades. Everything to the left of the equilibrium point and between the supply and demand curves represents surplus: an area where someone is receiving something of more value than they give. For example:

• When I bought my first apple for $1, but I was willing to spend $5, I made $4 of consumer surplus. The consumer portion of the surplus is everything to the left of the equilibrium point, between the supply and demand curves, and above the equilibrium price point.
• When a seller sells his first apple for $1, but it only cost $0.50 to produce it, the seller made $0.50 of producer surplus. The producer portion of the surplus is everything to the left of the equilibrium point, between the supply and demand curves, and below the equilibrium price point.

Another way of thinking of surplus is “every time someone got a better price than they would have been willing to take.”

OK, with this in place, we now have enough information to figure out how to price in the tariff, which we’ll treat as a negative externality.

Modeling taxes

Alright, the government has now instituted a $0.50 tariff on every apple sold within the US by a foreign producer. We can generally model taxes by either increasing the marginal cost of each unit sold (shifting the supply curve up), or by decreasing the marginal benefit of each unit bought (shifting the demand curve down). In this case, since only some of the producers will pay the tax, it makes more sense to modify the supply curve.

First, let’s see what happens to the foreign seller-only supply curve when you add in the tariff:

With the tariff in place, for each quantity level, the price at which the seller will sell is $0.50 higher than before the tariff. That makes sense: if I was previously willing to sell my 82nd apple for $3, I would now need to charge $3.50 for that apple to cover the cost of the tariff. We see this as the tariff “pushing up” or “pushing left” the original supply curve.

We can add this new supply curve to our existing (unchanged) supply curve for domestic-only sellers, and we end up with a result like this:

The total supply curve adds up the individual foreign and domestic supply curves. At each price point, we add up the total quantity each group would be willing to sell to determine the total quantity supplied for each price point. Once we have that cumulative supply curve defined, we can produce an updated supply-and-demand chart including the tariff:

As we can see, the equilibrium has shifted:

• The equilibrium price paid by consumers has risen from $1 to $1.20.
• The total number of apples purchased has dropped from 63 apples to 60 apples.
• Consumers therefore received 3 less apples. They spent $72 for these 60 apples, whereas previously they spent $63 for 3 more apples, a definite decrease in consumer surplus.
• Foreign producers sold 36 of those apples (see the raw data in the linked Google Sheet), for a gross revenue of $43.20. However, they also need to pay the tariff to the US government, which accounts for $18, meaning they only receive $25.20 post-tariff. Previously, they sold 42 apples at $1 each with no tariff to be paid, meaning they took home $42.
• Domestic producers sold the remaining 24 apples at $1.20, giving them a revenue of $28.80. Since they don’t pay the tariff, they take home all of that money. By contrast, previously, they sold 21 apples at $1, for a take-home of $21.
• The government receives $0.50 for each of the 60 apples sold, or in other words receives $30 in revenue it wouldn’t have received otherwise.

We could be more specific about the surpluses, and calculate the actual areas for consumer surplus, producer surplus, inefficiency from the tariff, and government revenue from the tariff. But I won’t bother, as those calculations get slightly more involved. Instead, let’s just look at the aggregate outcomes:

• Consumers were unquestionably hurt. Their price paid went up by $0.20 per apple, and received less apples.
• Foreign producers were also hurt. Their price received went down from the original $1 to the new post-tariff price of $1.20, minus the $0.50 tariff. In other words: foreign producers only receive $0.70 per apple now. This hurt can be mitigated by shifting sales to other countries without a tariff, but the pain will exist regardless.
• Domestic producers scored. They can sell less apples and make more revenue doing it.
• And the government walked away with an extra $30.

Hopefully you now see the answer to the original questions. Importantly, while the government imposed a $0.50 tariff, neither side fully absorbed that cost. Consumers paid a bit more, foreign producers received a bit less. The exact details of how that tariff was split across the groups is mediated by the relevant supply and demand curves of each group. If you want to learn more about this, the relevant search term is “price elasticity,” or how much a group’s quantity supplied or demanded will change based on changes in the price.

Other taxes

Most taxes are some kind of a tax on trade. Tariffs on apples is an obvious one. But the same applies to income tax (taxing the worker for the trade of labor for money) or payroll tax (same thing, just taxing the employer instead). Interestingly, you can use the same model for analyzing things like tax incentives. For example, if the government decided to subsidize domestic apple production by giving the domestic producers a $0.50 bonus for each apple they sell, we would end up with a similar kind of analysis, except instead of the foreign supply curve shifting up, we’d see the domestic supply curve shifting down.

And generally speaking, this is what you’ll always see with government involvement in the economy. It will result in disrupting an existing equilibrium, letting the market readjust to a new equilibrium, and incentivization of some behavior, causing some people to benefit and others to lose out. We saw with the apple tariff, domestic producers and the government benefited while others lost.

You can see the reverse though with tax incentives. If I give a tax incentive of providing a deduction (not paying income tax) for preschool, we would end up with:

• Government needs to make up the difference in tax revenue, either by raising taxes on others or printing more money (leading to inflation). Either way, those paying the tax or those holding government debased currency will pay a price.
• Those people who don’t use the preschool deduction will receive no benefit, so they simply pay a cost.
• Those who do use the preschool deduction will end up paying less on tax+preschool than they would have otherwise.

This analysis is fully amoral. It’s not saying whether providing subsidized preschool is a good thing or not, it simply tells you where the costs will be felt, and points out that such government interference in free economic choice does result in inefficiencies in the system. Once you have that knowledge, you’re more well educated on making a decision about whether the costs of government intervention are worth the benefits.

@ bc52210b:20bfc6de

When writing safety critical code, every arithmetic operation carries the potential for catastrophic failure—whether that’s a plane crash in aerospace engineering or a massive financial loss in a smart contract.

The stakes are incredibly high, and errors are not just bugs; they’re disasters waiting to happen. Smart contract developers need to shift their mindset: less like web developers, who might prioritize speed and iteration, and more like aerospace engineers, where precision, caution, and meticulous attention to detail are non-negotiable.

In practice, this means treating every line of code as a critical component, adopting rigorous testing, and anticipating worst-case scenarios—just as an aerospace engineer would ensure a system can withstand extreme conditions.

Safety critical code demands aerospace-level precision, and smart contract developers must rise to that standard to protect against the severe consequences of failure.

@ ef53426a:7e988851

To most people, selling comes as second nature. We’ve actually sold the planet’s resources several times over, so it should be third or even fourth nature by now.

But selling did not come naturally to me. I was born with a rare condition which removes any inherent desire to market products and services. It even quells the need to repost my boss’s latest LinkedIn dribblings.

Doctors have told me the part of the brain which performs this function is occupied, in my case, by something called ‘a conscience’.

When I was a kid, my teachers bemoaned my ‘underactive imagination’. I showed no aptitude for creating fake scarcity or urgency, even failing to act aloof enough to attract invites to teen WhatsApp groups which excluded exactly one ‘uncool’ student.

In reality, I studied hard at not selling. At night, I would practise thinking of nothing, thus decreasing my desire to be included in teenage WhatsApp groups, which I definitely didn’t want to be in anyway. I watched every pitch on Shark Tank to increase my powers of ambivalence and even imagined saying ‘meh’ to the groundbreaking business ideas they did invest in.

On my eighteenth birthday, I was recruited by the Samaritans. It was for a role that was quite unique. The interviewer said he’d never seen so many ‘perfectly timed shrugs’.

My job, which I’ve occupied ever since, is to guard a large pit. The so-called ‘chasm of despair’ was set up as a stunt by a firebrand marketing agency in 2017 to separate the ‘closers’ from the ‘losers’. Turns out that a snappy slogan and one letter of difference can cause quite a deaths.

Hurling oneself into the pit became so desirable that desperate marketers began to pay for the privilege. At least your funeral would be a roaring success if mourners heard you made it into ‘the pit’.

My job is to guard the pit without actively dissuading people from jumping. Tell people they can’t jump into a 60-foot-deep hole with poison spikes at the bottom, and that’s all they want to do. Especially if their weekly Instagram engagement metrics are down by 10–15%. So, I spend my days patrolling the perimeter, looking mildly disinterested.

Although there’s no official uniform, I’ve taken to wearing a beige Sergio Tacchini tracksuit — it’s something far beyond my years but not retro enough for me to attract suspicion of being a hipster.

To pass the time, I listen to Coldplay. It allows my brain to take a rest from silence and negates the need to feel any kind of emotion. These desperate marketers might harness those feelings to make me buy things (e.g. music by other bands).

Some of the marketers, marketeers (I refuse to learn the difference), influencers, salespeople and copywriters try to offload their woes about insufferable colleagues in Business Development called Brad who always exceed quarterly sales targets by 20–25% before jumping to their doom. I just shrug and say things like, ‘It’s not that bad. Brad probably likes Coldplay.’

Thankfully, most of them don’t jump. They fail to sell themselves on the benefits of a painful yet cool death. However, last week, a young growth hacker ran full pelt at the ‘pit of despair’, avoiding the mild protest of my raised arm. As he disappeared into the abyss, he simply screamed, “The economeeeee”.

Yesterday, an author told me how easy I have it. “You call this a job?” she hissed, thrusting a paperback into my hands. “I’m working 22 hours a day on this 18-step list-building strategy, which involves delivering 4–5 titles before I see even a penny in return.”

The cover revealed the title: Sell Your Book on Amazon the EASY Way.

“Write me a review, and I won’t jump.” Her eyes pleaded with me.

The pit has gotten so crowded of late, we need more guards. But then again, a gathering of a dozen beige-tracksuited zero-fuck-givers might look like such good content to Gen-Zers that it crashes TikTok.

The Samaritans have been good to me. They let me get on with it. My indifference is truly making the world a better place, they say. And when these sad and depressed content managers, email marketer, landing-page specialists, and SEO bloggers turn their backs on the chasm of despair, I congratulate them. “Not today, friends.”

Then, it falls to me to remind them they must uncheck the box on our survivor information form. Otherwise, they’ll be subscribed to the pit’s biweekly newsletter.

@ 0c469779:4b21d8b0

Sobre el amor

Mi percepción del amor cambió con el tiempo. Leer literatura rusa, principalmente a Dostoevsky, te cambia la perspectiva sobre el amor y la vida en general.

Por mucho tiempo mi visión sobre la vida es que la misma se basa en el sufrimiento: también la Biblia dice esto. El amor es igual, en el amor se sufre y se banca a la otra persona. El problema es que hay una distinción de sufrimientos que por mucho tiempo no tuve en cuenta. Está el sufrimiento del sacrificio y el sufrimiento masoquista. Para mí eran indistintos.

Para mí el ideal era Aliosha y Natasha de Humillados y Ofendidos: estar con alguien que me amase tanto como Natasha a Aliosha, un amor inclusive autodestructivo para Natasha, pero real. Tiene algo de épico, inalcanzable. Un sufrimiento extremo, redentor, es una vara altísima que en la vida cotidiana no se manifiesta. O el amor de Sonia a Raskolnikov, quien se fue hasta Siberia mientras estuvo en prisión para que no se quede solo en Crimen y Castigo.

Este es el tipo de amor que yo esperaba. Y como no me pasó nada tan extremo y las situaciones que llegan a ocurrir en mi vida están lejos de ser tan extremas, me parecía hasta poco lo que estaba pidiendo y que nadie pueda quedarse conmigo me parecía insuficiente.

Ahora pienso que el amor no tiene por qué ser así. Es un pensamiento nuevo que todavía estoy construyendo, y me di cuenta cuando fui a la iglesia, a pesar de que no soy cristiano. La filosofía cristiana me gusta. Va conmigo. Tiene un enfoque de humildad, superación y comunidad que me recuerda al estoicismo.

El amor se trata de resaltar lo mejor que hay en el otro. Se trata de ser un plus, de ayudar. Por eso si uno no está en su mejor etapa, si no se está cómodo con uno mismo, no se puede amar de verdad. El amor empieza en uno mismo.

Los libros son un espejo, no necesariamente vas a aprender de ellos, sino que te muestran quién sos. Resaltás lo que te importa. Por eso a pesar de saber los tipos de amores que hay en los trabajos de Dostoevsky, cometí los mismos errores varias veces.

Ser mejor depende de uno mismo y cada día se pone el granito de arena.

@ f3873798:24b3f2f3

Recentemente, assisti a um vídeo que me fez refletir profundamente sobre o impacto da linguagem na hora de vender. No vídeo, uma jovem relatava sua experiência ao presenciar um vendedor de amendoim em uma agência dos Correios. O local estava cheio, as pessoas aguardavam impacientes na fila e, em meio a esse cenário, um homem humilde tentava vender seu produto. Mas sua abordagem não era estratégica; ao invés de destacar os benefícios do amendoim, ele suplicava para que alguém o ajudasse comprando. O resultado? Ninguém se interessou.

A jovem observou que o problema não era o produto, mas a forma como ele estava sendo oferecido. Afinal, muitas das pessoas ali estavam há horas esperando e perto do horário do almoço – o amendoim poderia ser um ótimo tira-gosto. No entanto, como a comunicação do vendedor vinha carregada de desespero, ele afastava os clientes ao invés de atraí-los. Esse vídeo me tocou profundamente.

No dia seguinte, ao sair para comemorar meu aniversário, vi um menino vendendo balas na rua, sob o sol forte. Assim como no caso do amendoim, percebi que as pessoas ao redor não se interessavam por seu produto. Ao se aproximar do carro, resolvi comprar dois pacotes. Mais do que ajudar, queria que aquele pequeno gesto servisse como incentivo para que ele continuasse acreditando no seu negócio.

Essa experiência me fez refletir ainda mais sobre o poder da comunicação em vendas. Muitas vezes, não é o produto que está errado, mas sim a forma como o vendedor o apresenta. Quando transmitimos confiança e mostramos o valor do que vendemos, despertamos o interesse genuíno dos clientes.

Como a Linguagem Impacta as Vendas?

1. O Poder da Abordagem Positiva

Em vez de pedir por ajuda, é importante destacar os benefícios do produto. No caso do amendoim, o vendedor poderia ter dito algo como: "Que tal um petisco delicioso enquanto espera? Um amendoim fresquinho para matar a fome até o almoço!"

2. A Emoção na Medida Certa

Expressar emoção é essencial, mas sem parecer desesperado. Os clientes devem sentir que estão adquirindo algo de valor, não apenas ajudando o vendedor.

3. Conheça Seu Público

Entender o contexto é fundamental. Se as pessoas estavam com fome e impacientes, uma abordagem mais objetiva e focada no benefício do produto poderia gerar mais vendas.

4. Autoconfiança e Postura

Falar com firmeza e segurança transmite credibilidade. O vendedor precisa acreditar no próprio produto antes de convencer o cliente a comprá-lo.

Conclusão

Vender é mais do que apenas oferecer um produto – é uma arte que envolve comunicação, percepção e estratégia. Pequenos ajustes na abordagem podem transformar completamente os resultados. Se o vendedor de amendoim tivesse apresentado seu produto de outra maneira, talvez tivesse vendido tudo rapidamente. Da mesma forma, se cada um de nós aprender a se comunicar melhor em nossas próprias áreas, poderemos alcançar muito mais sucesso.

E você? Já passou por uma experiência parecida?

@ 9e69e420:d12360c2

Federal employees must remove pronouns from email signatures by the end of the day. This directive comes from internal memos tied to two executive orders signed by Donald Trump. The orders target diversity and equity programs within the government.

CDC, Department of Transportation, and Department of Energy employees were affected. Staff were instructed to make changes in line with revised policy prohibiting certain language.

One CDC employee shared frustration, stating, “In my decade-plus years at CDC, I've never been told what I can and can't put in my email signature.” The directive is part of a broader effort to eliminate DEI initiatives from federal discourse.

@ b2d670de:907f9d4a

onion-service-nostr-relays

A list of nostr relays exposed as onion services.

The list

| Relay name | Description | Onion url | Operator | Payment URL | Payment options | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | nostr.oxtr.dev | Same relay as clearnet relay nostr.oxtr.dev | ws://oxtrdevav64z64yb7x6rjg4ntzqjhedm5b5zjqulugknhzr46ny2qbad.onion | operator | N/A | N/A | | relay.snort.social | Same relay as clearnet relay relay.snort.social | wss://skzzn6cimfdv5e2phjc4yr5v7ikbxtn5f7dkwn5c7v47tduzlbosqmqd.onion | operator | N/A | N/A | | nostr.thesamecat.io | Same relay as clearnet relay nostr.thesamecat.io | ws://2jsnlhfnelig5acq6iacydmzdbdmg7xwunm4xl6qwbvzacw4lwrjmlyd.onion | operator | N/A | N/A | | nostr.land | The nostr.land paid relay (same as clearnet) | ws://nostrland2gdw7g3y77ctftovvil76vquipymo7tsctlxpiwknevzfid.onion | operator | Payment URL | BTC LN | | bitcoiner.social | No auth required, currently | ws://bitcoinr6de5lkvx4tpwdmzrdfdpla5sya2afwpcabjup2xpi5dulbad.onion | operator | N/A | N/A | | relay.westernbtc.com | The westernbtc.com paid relay | ws://westbtcebhgi4ilxxziefho6bqu5lqwa5ncfjefnfebbhx2cwqx5knyd.onion | operator | Payment URL | BTC LN | | freelay.sovbit.host | Free relay for sovbit.host | ws://sovbitm2enxfr5ot6qscwy5ermdffbqscy66wirkbsigvcshumyzbbqd.onion | operator | N/A | N/A | | nostr.sovbit.host | Paid relay for sovbit.host | ws://sovbitgz5uqyh7jwcsudq4sspxlj4kbnurvd3xarkkx2use3k6rlibqd.onion | operator | N/A | N/A | | nostr.wine | 🍷 nostr.wine relay | ws://nostrwinemdptvqukjttinajfeedhf46hfd5bz2aj2q5uwp7zros3nad.onion | operator | Payment URL | BTC LN, BTC, Credit Card/CashApp (Stripe) | | inbox.nostr.wine | 🍷 inbox.nostr.wine relay | ws://wineinboxkayswlofkugkjwhoyi744qvlzdxlmdvwe7cei2xxy4gc6ad.onion | operator | Payment URL | BTC LN, BTC | | filter.nostr.wine | 🍷 filter.nostr.wine proxy relay | ws://winefiltermhqixxzmnzxhrmaufpnfq3rmjcl6ei45iy4aidrngpsyid.onion | operator | Payment URL | BTC LN, BTC | | N/A | N/A | ws://pzfw4uteha62iwkzm3lycabk4pbtcr67cg5ymp5i3xwrpt3t24m6tzad.onion:81 | operator | N/A | N/A | | nostr.fractalized.net | Free relay for fractalized.net | ws://xvgox2zzo7cfxcjrd2llrkthvjs5t7efoalu34s6lmkqhvzvrms6ipyd.onion | operator | N/A | N/A | | nfrelay.app | nfrelay.app aggregator relay (nostr-filter-relay) | ws://nfrelay6saohkmipikquvrn6d64dzxivhmcdcj4d5i7wxis47xwsriyd.onion | operator | N/A | N/A | relay.nostr.net | Public relay from nostr.net (Same as clearnet) | ws://nostrnetl6yd5whkldj3vqsxyyaq3tkuspy23a3qgx7cdepb4564qgqd.onion | operator | N/A | N/A | | nerostrator | Free to read, pay XMR to relay | ws://nerostrrgb5fhj6dnzhjbgmnkpy2berdlczh6tuh2jsqrjok3j4zoxid.onion | operator |Payment URL | XMR | | nostr.girino.org | Public relay from nostr.girino.org | ws://gnostr2jnapk72mnagq3cuykfon73temzp77hcbncn4silgt77boruid.onion | operator | N/A | N/A | | wot.girino.org | WoT relay from wot.girino.org | ws://girwot2koy3kvj6fk7oseoqazp5vwbeawocb3m27jcqtah65f2fkl3yd.onion | operator | N/A | N/A | | haven.girino.org/{outbox, inbox, chat, private} | Haven smart relay from haven.girino.org | ws://ghaven2hi3qn2riitw7ymaztdpztrvmm337e2pgkacfh3rnscaoxjoad.onion/{outbox, inbox, chat, private} | operator | N/A | N/A | | relay.nostpy.lol | Free Web of Trust relay (Same as clearnet) | ws://pemgkkqjqjde7y2emc2hpxocexugbixp42o4zymznil6zfegx5nfp4id.onion | operator |N/A | N/A | | Poster.place Nostr Relay | N/A | ws://dmw5wbawyovz7fcahvguwkw4sknsqsalffwctioeoqkvvy7ygjbcuoad.onion | operator | N/A | N/A | | Azzamo Relay | Azzamo Premium Nostr relay. (paid) | ws://q6a7m5qkyonzb5fk5yv4jyu3ar44hqedn7wjopg737lit2ckkhx2nyid.onion | operator | Payment URL | BTC LN | | Azzamo Inbox Relay | Azzamo Group and Private message relay. (Freemium) | ws://gp5kiwqfw7t2fwb3rfts2aekoph4x7pj5pv65re2y6hzaujsxewanbqd.onion | operator | Payment URL | BTC LN | | Noderunners Relay | The official Noderunners Nostr Relay. | ws://35vr3xigzjv2xyzfyif6o2gksmkioppy4rmwag7d4bqmwuccs2u4jaid.onion | operator | Payment URL | BTC LN |

Contributing

Contributions are encouraged to keep this document alive. Just open a PR and I'll have it tested and merged. The onion URL is the only mandatory column, the rest is just nice-to-have metadata about the relay. Put N/A in empty columns.

If you want to contribute anonymously, please contact me on SimpleX or send a DM on nostr using a disposable npub.

Operator column

It is generally preferred to use something that includes a NIP-19 string, either just the string or a url that contains the NIP-19 string in it (e.g. an njump url).

@ 91bea5cd:1df4451c

O que é Tahoe-LAFS?

Bem-vindo ao Tahoe-LAFS_, o primeiro sistema de armazenamento descentralizado com

• Segurança independente do provedor * .

Tahoe-LAFS é um sistema que ajuda você a armazenar arquivos. Você executa um cliente Programa no seu computador, que fala com um ou mais servidores de armazenamento em outros computadores. Quando você diz ao seu cliente para armazenar um arquivo, ele irá criptografar isso Arquivo, codifique-o em múltiplas peças, depois espalhe essas peças entre Vários servidores. As peças são todas criptografadas e protegidas contra Modificações. Mais tarde, quando você pede ao seu cliente para recuperar o arquivo, ele irá Encontre as peças necessárias, verifique se elas não foram corrompidas e remontadas Eles, e descriptografar o resultado.

O cliente cria mais peças (ou "compartilhamentos") do que acabará por precisar, então Mesmo que alguns servidores falhem, você ainda pode recuperar seus dados. Corrompido Os compartilhamentos são detectados e ignorados, de modo que o sistema pode tolerar o lado do servidor Erros no disco rígido. Todos os arquivos são criptografados (com uma chave exclusiva) antes Uploading, então mesmo um operador de servidor mal-intencionado não pode ler seus dados. o A única coisa que você pede aos servidores é que eles podem (geralmente) fornecer o Compartilha quando você os solicita: você não está confiando sobre eles para Confidencialidade, integridade ou disponibilidade absoluta.

O que é "segurança independente do provedor"?

Todo vendedor de serviços de armazenamento na nuvem irá dizer-lhe que o seu serviço é "seguro". Mas o que eles significam com isso é algo fundamentalmente diferente Do que queremos dizer. O que eles significam por "seguro" é que depois de ter dado Eles o poder de ler e modificar seus dados, eles tentam muito difícil de não deixar Esse poder seja abusado. Isso acaba por ser difícil! Insetos, Configurações incorretas ou erro do operador podem acidentalmente expor seus dados para Outro cliente ou para o público, ou pode corromper seus dados. Criminosos Ganho rotineiramente de acesso ilícito a servidores corporativos. Ainda mais insidioso é O fato de que os próprios funcionários às vezes violam a privacidade do cliente De negligência, avareza ou mera curiosidade. O mais consciencioso de Esses prestadores de serviços gastam consideráveis ​​esforços e despesas tentando Mitigar esses riscos.

O que queremos dizer com "segurança" é algo diferente. * O provedor de serviços Nunca tem a capacidade de ler ou modificar seus dados em primeiro lugar: nunca. * Se você usa Tahoe-LAFS, então todas as ameaças descritas acima não são questões para você. Não só é fácil e barato para o provedor de serviços Manter a segurança de seus dados, mas na verdade eles não podem violar sua Segurança se eles tentaram. Isto é o que chamamos de * independente do fornecedor segurança*.

Esta garantia está integrada naturalmente no sistema de armazenamento Tahoe-LAFS e Não exige que você execute um passo de pré-criptografia manual ou uma chave complicada gestão. (Afinal, ter que fazer operações manuais pesadas quando Armazenar ou acessar seus dados anularia um dos principais benefícios de Usando armazenamento em nuvem em primeiro lugar: conveniência.)

Veja como funciona:

Uma "grade de armazenamento" é constituída por uma série de servidores de armazenamento. Um servidor de armazenamento Tem armazenamento direto em anexo (tipicamente um ou mais discos rígidos). Um "gateway" Se comunica com os nós de armazenamento e os usa para fornecer acesso ao Rede sobre protocolos como HTTP (S), SFTP ou FTP.

Observe que você pode encontrar "cliente" usado para se referir aos nós do gateway (que atuam como Um cliente para servidores de armazenamento) e também para processos ou programas que se conectam a Um nó de gateway e operações de execução na grade - por exemplo, uma CLI Comando, navegador da Web, cliente SFTP ou cliente FTP.

Os usuários não contam com servidores de armazenamento para fornecer * confidencialidade * nem

• Integridade * para seus dados - em vez disso, todos os dados são criptografados e Integridade verificada pelo gateway, para que os servidores não possam ler nem Modifique o conteúdo dos arquivos.

Os usuários dependem de servidores de armazenamento para * disponibilidade *. O texto cifrado é Codificado por apagamento em partes N distribuídas em pelo menos H distintas Servidores de armazenamento (o valor padrão para N é 10 e para H é 7) então Que pode ser recuperado de qualquer K desses servidores (o padrão O valor de K é 3). Portanto, apenas a falha do H-K + 1 (com o Padrões, 5) servidores podem tornar os dados indisponíveis.

No modo de implantação típico, cada usuário executa seu próprio gateway sozinho máquina. Desta forma, ela confia em sua própria máquina para a confidencialidade e Integridade dos dados.

Um modo de implantação alternativo é que o gateway é executado em uma máquina remota e O usuário se conecta ao HTTPS ou SFTP. Isso significa que o operador de O gateway pode visualizar e modificar os dados do usuário (o usuário * depende de * o Gateway para confidencialidade e integridade), mas a vantagem é que a O usuário pode acessar a grade Tahoe-LAFS com um cliente que não possui o Software de gateway instalado, como um quiosque de internet ou celular.

Controle de acesso

Existem dois tipos de arquivos: imutáveis ​​e mutáveis. Quando você carrega um arquivo Para a grade de armazenamento, você pode escolher o tipo de arquivo que será no grade. Os arquivos imutáveis ​​não podem ser modificados quando foram carregados. UMA O arquivo mutable pode ser modificado por alguém com acesso de leitura e gravação. Um usuário Pode ter acesso de leitura e gravação a um arquivo mutable ou acesso somente leitura, ou não Acesso a ele.

Um usuário que tenha acesso de leitura e gravação a um arquivo mutable ou diretório pode dar Outro acesso de leitura e gravação do usuário a esse arquivo ou diretório, ou eles podem dar Acesso somente leitura para esse arquivo ou diretório. Um usuário com acesso somente leitura Para um arquivo ou diretório pode dar acesso a outro usuário somente leitura.

Ao vincular um arquivo ou diretório a um diretório pai, você pode usar um Link de leitura-escrita ou um link somente de leitura. Se você usar um link de leitura e gravação, então Qualquer pessoa que tenha acesso de leitura e gravação ao diretório pai pode obter leitura-escrita Acesso à criança e qualquer pessoa que tenha acesso somente leitura ao pai O diretório pode obter acesso somente leitura à criança. Se você usar uma leitura somente Link, qualquer pessoa que tenha lido-escrito ou acesso somente leitura ao pai O diretório pode obter acesso somente leitura à criança.

================================================== ==== Usando Tahoe-LAFS com uma rede anônima: Tor, I2P ================================================== ====

. `Visão geral '

. `Casos de uso '

. Software Dependencies_

#. Tor #. I2P

. `Configuração de conexão '

. `Configuração de Anonimato '

#. Anonimato do cliente ' #.Anonimato de servidor, configuração manual ' #. `Anonimato de servidor, configuração automática '

. `Problemas de desempenho e segurança '

Visão geral

Tor é uma rede anonimização usada para ajudar a esconder a identidade da Internet Clientes e servidores. Consulte o site do Tor Project para obter mais informações: Https://www.torproject.org/

I2P é uma rede de anonimato descentralizada que se concentra no anonimato de ponta a ponta Entre clientes e servidores. Consulte o site I2P para obter mais informações: Https://geti2p.net/

Casos de uso

Existem três casos de uso potenciais para Tahoe-LAFS do lado do cliente:

1. O usuário deseja sempre usar uma rede de anonimato (Tor, I2P) para proteger Seu anonimato quando se conecta às redes de armazenamento Tahoe-LAFS (seja ou Não os servidores de armazenamento são anônimos).

2. O usuário não se preocupa em proteger seu anonimato, mas eles desejam se conectar a Servidores de armazenamento Tahoe-LAFS que são acessíveis apenas através de Tor Hidden Services ou I2P.

3. Tor é usado apenas se uma sugestão de conexão do servidor usar tor:. Essas sugestões Geralmente tem um endereço .onion.

4. I2P só é usado se uma sugestão de conexão do servidor usa i2p:. Essas sugestões Geralmente têm um endereço .i2p.

5. O usuário não se preocupa em proteger seu anonimato ou para se conectar a um anonimato Servidores de armazenamento. Este documento não é útil para você ... então pare de ler.

Para servidores de armazenamento Tahoe-LAFS existem três casos de uso:

1. O operador deseja proteger o anonimato fazendo seu Tahoe Servidor acessível apenas em I2P, através de Tor Hidden Services, ou ambos.

2. O operador não * requer * anonimato para o servidor de armazenamento, mas eles Quer que ele esteja disponível tanto no TCP / IP roteado publicamente quanto através de um Rede de anonimização (I2P, Tor Hidden Services). Uma possível razão para fazer Isso é porque ser alcançável através de uma rede de anonimato é um Maneira conveniente de ignorar NAT ou firewall que impede roteios públicos Conexões TCP / IP ao seu servidor (para clientes capazes de se conectar a Tais servidores). Outro é o que torna o seu servidor de armazenamento acessível Através de uma rede de anonimato pode oferecer uma melhor proteção para sua Clientes que usam essa rede de anonimato para proteger seus anonimato.

3. O operador do servidor de armazenamento não se preocupa em proteger seu próprio anonimato nem Para ajudar os clientes a proteger o deles. Pare de ler este documento e execute Seu servidor de armazenamento Tahoe-LAFS usando TCP / IP com roteamento público.

Veja esta página do Tor Project para obter mais informações sobre Tor Hidden Services: Https://www.torproject.org/docs/hidden-services.html.pt

Veja esta página do Projeto I2P para obter mais informações sobre o I2P: Https://geti2p.net/en/about/intro

Dependências de software

Tor

Os clientes que desejam se conectar a servidores baseados em Tor devem instalar o seguinte.

• Tor (tor) deve ser instalado. Veja aqui: Https://www.torproject.org/docs/installguide.html.en. No Debian / Ubuntu, Use apt-get install tor. Você também pode instalar e executar o navegador Tor Agrupar.

• Tahoe-LAFS deve ser instalado com o [tor] "extra" habilitado. Isso vai Instale txtorcon ::

Pip install tahoe-lafs [tor]

Os servidores Tor-configurados manualmente devem instalar Tor, mas não precisam Txtorcon ou o [tor] extra. Configuração automática, quando Implementado, vai precisar destes, assim como os clientes.

I2P

Os clientes que desejam se conectar a servidores baseados em I2P devem instalar o seguinte. Tal como acontece com Tor, os servidores baseados em I2P configurados manualmente precisam do daemon I2P, mas Não há bibliotecas especiais de apoio Tahoe-side.

• I2P deve ser instalado. Veja aqui: Https://geti2p.net/en/download

• A API SAM deve estar habilitada.

• Inicie o I2P.

• Visite http://127.0.0.1:7657/configclients no seu navegador.
• Em "Configuração do Cliente", marque a opção "Executar no Startup?" Caixa para "SAM Ponte de aplicação ".
• Clique em "Salvar Configuração do Cliente".

• Clique no controle "Iniciar" para "ponte de aplicação SAM" ou reinicie o I2P.

• Tahoe-LAFS deve ser instalado com o [i2p] extra habilitado, para obter Txi2p ::

Pip install tahoe-lafs [i2p]

Tor e I2P

Os clientes que desejam se conectar a servidores baseados em Tor e I2P devem instalar tudo acima. Em particular, Tahoe-LAFS deve ser instalado com ambos Extras habilitados ::

Pip install tahoe-lafs [tor, i2p]

Configuração de conexão

Consulte: ref: Connection Management para uma descrição do[tor]e [I2p] seções de tahoe.cfg. Estes controlam como o cliente Tahoe Conecte-se a um daemon Tor / I2P e, assim, faça conexões com Tor / I2P-baseadas Servidores.

As seções [tor] e [i2p] só precisam ser modificadas para serem usadas de forma incomum Configurações ou para habilitar a configuração automática do servidor.

A configuração padrão tentará entrar em contato com um daemon local Tor / I2P Ouvindo as portas usuais (9050/9150 para Tor, 7656 para I2P). Enquanto Há um daemon em execução no host local e o suporte necessário Bibliotecas foram instaladas, os clientes poderão usar servidores baseados em Tor Sem qualquer configuração especial.

No entanto, note que esta configuração padrão não melhora a Anonimato: as conexões TCP normais ainda serão feitas em qualquer servidor que Oferece um endereço regular (cumpre o segundo caso de uso do cliente acima, não o terceiro). Para proteger o anonimato, os usuários devem configurar o [Connections] da seguinte maneira:

[Conexões] Tcp = tor

Com isso, o cliente usará Tor (em vez de um IP-address -reviração de conexão direta) para alcançar servidores baseados em TCP.

Configuração de anonimato

Tahoe-LAFS fornece uma configuração "flag de segurança" para indicar explicitamente Seja necessário ou não a privacidade do endereço IP para um nó ::

[nó] Revelar-IP-address = (booleano, opcional)

Quando revelar-IP-address = False, Tahoe-LAFS se recusará a iniciar se algum dos As opções de configuração em tahoe.cfg revelariam a rede do nó localização:

• [Conexões] tcp = tor é necessário: caso contrário, o cliente faria Conexões diretas para o Introdução, ou qualquer servidor baseado em TCP que aprende Do Introdutor, revelando seu endereço IP para esses servidores e um Rede de espionagem. Com isso, Tahoe-LAFS só fará Conexões de saída através de uma rede de anonimato suportada.

• Tub.location deve ser desativado ou conter valores seguros. este O valor é anunciado para outros nós através do Introdutor: é como um servidor Anuncia sua localização para que os clientes possam se conectar a ela. No modo privado, ele É um erro para incluir um tcp: dica no tub.location. Modo privado Rejeita o valor padrão de tub.location (quando a chave está faltando Inteiramente), que é AUTO, que usa ifconfig para adivinhar o nó Endereço IP externo, o que o revelaria ao servidor e a outros clientes.

Esta opção é ** crítica ** para preservar o anonimato do cliente (cliente Caso de uso 3 de "Casos de uso", acima). Também é necessário preservar uma Anonimato do servidor (caso de uso do servidor 3).

Esse sinalizador pode ser configurado (para falso), fornecendo o argumento --hide-ip para Os comandos create-node, create-client ou create-introducer.

Observe que o valor padrão de revelar-endereço IP é verdadeiro, porque Infelizmente, esconder o endereço IP do nó requer software adicional para ser Instalado (conforme descrito acima) e reduz o desempenho.

Anonimato do cliente

Para configurar um nó de cliente para anonimato, tahoe.cfg ** deve ** conter o Seguindo as bandeiras de configuração ::

[nó] Revelar-IP-address = False Tub.port = desativado Tub.location = desativado

Uma vez que o nodo Tahoe-LAFS foi reiniciado, ele pode ser usado anonimamente (cliente Caso de uso 3).

Anonimato do servidor, configuração manual

Para configurar um nó de servidor para ouvir em uma rede de anonimato, devemos primeiro Configure Tor para executar um "Serviço de cebola" e encaminhe as conexões de entrada para o Porto Tahoe local. Então, configuramos Tahoe para anunciar o endereço .onion Aos clientes. Também configuramos Tahoe para não fazer conexões TCP diretas.

• Decida em um número de porta de escuta local, chamado PORT. Isso pode ser qualquer não utilizado Porta de cerca de 1024 até 65535 (dependendo do kernel / rede do host Config). Nós diremos a Tahoe para escutar nesta porta, e nós diremos a Tor para Encaminhe as conexões de entrada para ele.
• Decida em um número de porta externo, chamado VIRTPORT. Isso será usado no Localização anunciada e revelada aos clientes. Pode ser qualquer número de 1 Para 65535. Pode ser o mesmo que PORT, se quiser.
• Decida em um "diretório de serviço oculto", geralmente em / var / lib / tor / NAME. Pediremos a Tor para salvar o estado do serviço de cebola aqui, e Tor irá Escreva o endereço .onion aqui depois que ele for gerado.

Em seguida, faça o seguinte:

• Crie o nó do servidor Tahoe (com tahoe create-node), mas não ** não ** Lança-o ainda.

• Edite o arquivo de configuração Tor (normalmente em / etc / tor / torrc). Precisamos adicionar Uma seção para definir o serviço oculto. Se nossa PORT for 2000, VIRTPORT é 3000, e estamos usando / var / lib / tor / tahoe como o serviço oculto Diretório, a seção deve se parecer com ::

  HiddenServiceDir / var / lib / tor / tahoe HiddenServicePort 3000 127.0.0.1:2000

• Reinicie Tor, com systemctl restart tor. Aguarde alguns segundos.

• Leia o arquivo hostname no diretório de serviço oculto (por exemplo, / Var / lib / tor / tahoe / hostname). Este será um endereço .onion, como U33m4y7klhz3b.onion. Ligue para esta CEBOLA.

• Edite tahoe.cfg para configurar tub.port para usar Tcp: PORT: interface = 127.0.0.1 e tub.location para usar Tor: ONION.onion: VIRTPORT. Usando os exemplos acima, isso seria ::

  [nó] Revelar-endereço IP = falso Tub.port = tcp: 2000: interface = 127.0.0.1 Tub.location = tor: u33m4y7klhz3b.onion: 3000 [Conexões] Tcp = tor

• Inicie o servidor Tahoe com tahoe start $ NODEDIR

A seção tub.port fará com que o servidor Tahoe ouça no PORT, mas Ligue o soquete de escuta à interface de loopback, que não é acessível Do mundo exterior (mas * é * acessível pelo daemon Tor local). Então o A seção tcp = tor faz com que Tahoe use Tor quando se conecta ao Introdução, escondendo o endereço IP. O nó se anunciará a todos Clientes que usam `tub.location``, então os clientes saberão que devem usar o Tor Para alcançar este servidor (e não revelar seu endereço IP através do anúncio). Quando os clientes se conectam ao endereço da cebola, seus pacotes serão Atravessar a rede de anonimato e eventualmente aterrar no Tor local Daemon, que então estabelecerá uma conexão com PORT no localhost, que é Onde Tahoe está ouvindo conexões.

Siga um processo similar para construir um servidor Tahoe que escuta no I2P. o O mesmo processo pode ser usado para ouvir tanto o Tor como o I2P (tub.location = Tor: ONION.onion: VIRTPORT, i2p: ADDR.i2p). Também pode ouvir tanto Tor como TCP simples (caso de uso 2), com tub.port = tcp: PORT, tub.location = Tcp: HOST: PORT, tor: ONION.onion: VIRTPORT e anonymous = false (e omite A configuração tcp = tor, já que o endereço já está sendo transmitido através de O anúncio de localização).

Anonimato do servidor, configuração automática

Para configurar um nó do servidor para ouvir em uma rede de anonimato, crie o Nó com a opção --listen = tor. Isso requer uma configuração Tor que Ou lança um novo daemon Tor, ou tem acesso à porta de controle Tor (e Autoridade suficiente para criar um novo serviço de cebola). Nos sistemas Debian / Ubuntu, faça Apt install tor, adicione-se ao grupo de controle com adduser YOURUSERNAME debian-tor e, em seguida, inicie sessão e faça o login novamente: se os groups O comando inclui debian-tor na saída, você deve ter permissão para Use a porta de controle de domínio unix em / var / run / tor / control.

Esta opção irá definir revelar-IP-address = False e [connections] tcp = Tor. Ele alocará as portas necessárias, instruirá Tor para criar a cebola Serviço (salvando a chave privada em algum lugar dentro de NODEDIR / private /), obtenha O endereço .onion e preencha tub.port e tub.location corretamente.

Problemas de desempenho e segurança

Se você estiver executando um servidor que não precisa ser Anônimo, você deve torná-lo acessível através de uma rede de anonimato ou não? Ou você pode torná-lo acessível * ambos * através de uma rede de anonimato E como um servidor TCP / IP rastreável publicamente?

Existem várias compensações efetuadas por esta decisão.

Penetração NAT / Firewall

Fazer com que um servidor seja acessível via Tor ou I2P o torna acessível (por Clientes compatíveis com Tor / I2P) mesmo que existam NAT ou firewalls que impeçam Conexões TCP / IP diretas para o servidor.

Anonimato

Tornar um servidor Tahoe-LAFS acessível * somente * via Tor ou I2P pode ser usado para Garanta que os clientes Tahoe-LAFS usem Tor ou I2P para se conectar (Especificamente, o servidor só deve anunciar endereços Tor / I2P no Chave de configuração tub.location). Isso evita que os clientes mal configurados sejam Desingonizando-se acidentalmente, conectando-se ao seu servidor através de A Internet rastreável.

Claramente, um servidor que está disponível como um serviço Tor / I2P * e * a O endereço TCP regular não é anônimo: o endereço do .on e o real O endereço IP do servidor é facilmente vinculável.

Além disso, a interação, através do Tor, com um Tor Oculto pode ser mais Protegido da análise do tráfego da rede do que a interação, através do Tor, Com um servidor TCP / IP com rastreamento público

** XXX há um documento mantido pelos desenvolvedores de Tor que comprovem ou refutam essa crença? Se assim for, precisamos ligar a ele. Caso contrário, talvez devêssemos explicar mais aqui por que pensamos isso? **

Linkability

A partir de 1.12.0, o nó usa uma única chave de banheira persistente para saída Conexões ao Introdutor e conexões de entrada para o Servidor de Armazenamento (E Helper). Para os clientes, uma nova chave Tub é criada para cada servidor de armazenamento Nós aprendemos sobre, e essas chaves são * não * persistiram (então elas mudarão cada uma delas Tempo que o cliente reinicia).

Clientes que atravessam diretórios (de rootcap para subdiretório para filecap) são É provável que solicitem os mesmos índices de armazenamento (SIs) na mesma ordem de cada vez. Um cliente conectado a vários servidores irá pedir-lhes todos para o mesmo SI em Quase ao mesmo tempo. E dois clientes que compartilham arquivos ou diretórios Irá visitar os mesmos SI (em várias ocasiões).

Como resultado, as seguintes coisas são vinculáveis, mesmo com revelar-endereço IP = Falso:

• Servidores de armazenamento podem vincular reconhecer várias conexões do mesmo Cliente ainda não reiniciado. (Observe que o próximo recurso de Contabilidade pode Faz com que os clientes apresentem uma chave pública persistente do lado do cliente quando Conexão, que será uma ligação muito mais forte).
• Os servidores de armazenamento provavelmente podem deduzir qual cliente está acessando dados, por Olhando as SIs sendo solicitadas. Vários servidores podem conciliar Determine que o mesmo cliente está falando com todos eles, mesmo que o TubIDs são diferentes para cada conexão.
• Os servidores de armazenamento podem deduzir quando dois clientes diferentes estão compartilhando dados.
• O Introdutor pode entregar diferentes informações de servidor para cada um Cliente subscrito, para particionar clientes em conjuntos distintos de acordo com Quais as conexões do servidor que eles eventualmente fazem. Para clientes + nós de servidor, ele Também pode correlacionar o anúncio do servidor com o cliente deduzido identidade.

atuação

Um cliente que se conecta a um servidor Tahoe-LAFS com rastreamento público através de Tor Incorrem em latência substancialmente maior e, às vezes, pior Mesmo cliente se conectando ao mesmo servidor através de um TCP / IP rastreável normal conexão. Quando o servidor está em um Tor Hidden Service, ele incorre ainda mais Latência e, possivelmente, ainda pior rendimento.

Conectando-se a servidores Tahoe-LAFS que são servidores I2P incorrem em maior latência E pior rendimento também.

Efeitos positivos e negativos em outros usuários Tor

O envio de seu tráfego Tahoe-LAFS sobre o Tor adiciona tráfego de cobertura para outros Tor usuários que também estão transmitindo dados em massa. Então isso é bom para Eles - aumentando seu anonimato.

No entanto, torna o desempenho de outros usuários do Tor Sessões - por exemplo, sessões ssh - muito pior. Isso é porque Tor Atualmente não possui nenhuma prioridade ou qualidade de serviço Recursos, para que as teclas de Ssh de outra pessoa possam ter que esperar na fila Enquanto o conteúdo do arquivo em massa é transmitido. O atraso adicional pode Tornar as sessões interativas de outras pessoas inutilizáveis.

Ambos os efeitos são duplicados se você carregar ou baixar arquivos para um Tor Hidden Service, em comparação com se você carregar ou baixar arquivos Over Tor para um servidor TCP / IP com rastreamento público

Efeitos positivos e negativos em outros usuários do I2P

Enviar seu tráfego Tahoe-LAFS ao I2P adiciona tráfego de cobertura para outros usuários do I2P Que também estão transmitindo dados. Então, isso é bom para eles - aumentando sua anonimato. Não prejudicará diretamente o desempenho de outros usuários do I2P Sessões interativas, porque a rede I2P possui vários controles de congestionamento e Recursos de qualidade de serviço, como priorizar pacotes menores.

No entanto, se muitos usuários estão enviando tráfego Tahoe-LAFS ao I2P e não tiverem Seus roteadores I2P configurados para participar de muito tráfego, então o I2P A rede como um todo sofrerá degradação. Cada roteador Tahoe-LAFS que usa o I2P tem Seus próprios túneis de anonimato que seus dados são enviados. Em média, um O nó Tahoe-LAFS requer 12 outros roteadores I2P para participar de seus túneis.

Portanto, é importante que o seu roteador I2P esteja compartilhando a largura de banda com outros Roteadores, para que você possa retornar enquanto usa o I2P. Isso nunca prejudicará a Desempenho de seu nó Tahoe-LAFS, porque seu roteador I2P sempre Priorize seu próprio tráfego.

=========================

Como configurar um servidor

Muitos nós Tahoe-LAFS são executados como "servidores", o que significa que eles fornecem serviços para Outras máquinas (isto é, "clientes"). Os dois tipos mais importantes são os Introdução e Servidores de armazenamento.

Para ser útil, os servidores devem ser alcançados pelos clientes. Os servidores Tahoe podem ouvir Em portas TCP e anunciar sua "localização" (nome do host e número da porta TCP) Para que os clientes possam se conectar a eles. Eles também podem ouvir os serviços de cebola "Tor" E portas I2P.

Os servidores de armazenamento anunciam sua localização ao anunciá-lo ao Introdutivo, Que então transmite a localização para todos os clientes. Então, uma vez que a localização é Determinado, você não precisa fazer nada de especial para entregá-lo.

O próprio apresentador possui uma localização, que deve ser entregue manualmente a todos Servidores de armazenamento e clientes. Você pode enviá-lo para os novos membros do seu grade. Esta localização (juntamente com outros identificadores criptográficos importantes) é Escrito em um arquivo chamado private / introducer.furl no Presenter's Diretório básico, e deve ser fornecido como o argumento --introducer = para Tahoe create-node ou tahoe create-node.

O primeiro passo ao configurar um servidor é descobrir como os clientes irão alcançar. Então você precisa configurar o servidor para ouvir em algumas portas, e Depois configure a localização corretamente.

Configuração manual

Cada servidor tem duas configurações em seu arquivo tahoe.cfg: tub.port, e Tub.location. A "porta" controla o que o nó do servidor escuta: isto Geralmente é uma porta TCP.

A "localização" controla o que é anunciado para o mundo exterior. Isto é um "Sugestão de conexão foolscap", e inclui tanto o tipo de conexão (Tcp, tor ou i2p) e os detalhes da conexão (nome do host / endereço, porta número). Vários proxies, gateways e redes de privacidade podem ser Envolvido, então não é incomum para tub.port e tub.location para olhar diferente.

Você pode controlar diretamente a configuração tub.port e tub.location Configurações, fornecendo --port = e --location = ao executar tahoe Create-node.

Configuração automática

Em vez de fornecer --port = / - location =, você pode usar --listen =. Os servidores podem ouvir em TCP, Tor, I2P, uma combinação desses ou nenhum. O argumento --listen = controla quais tipos de ouvintes o novo servidor usará.

--listen = none significa que o servidor não deve ouvir nada. Isso não Faz sentido para um servidor, mas é apropriado para um nó somente cliente. o O comando tahoe create-client inclui automaticamente --listen = none.

--listen = tcp é o padrão e liga uma porta de escuta TCP padrão. Usar --listen = tcp requer um argumento --hostname = também, que será Incorporado no local anunciado do nó. Descobrimos que os computadores Não pode determinar de forma confiável seu nome de host acessível externamente, então, em vez de Ter o servidor adivinhar (ou escanear suas interfaces para endereços IP Isso pode ou não ser apropriado), a criação de nó requer que o usuário Forneça o nome do host.

--listen = tor conversará com um daemon Tor local e criará uma nova "cebola" Servidor "(que se parece comalzrgrdvxct6c63z.onion). --listen = i2p` conversará com um daemon I2P local e criará um novo servidor endereço. Consulte: doc:anonymity-configuration` para obter detalhes.

Você pode ouvir nos três usando --listen = tcp, tor, i2p.

Cenários de implantação

A seguir, alguns cenários sugeridos para configurar servidores usando Vários transportes de rede. Estes exemplos não incluem a especificação de um Apresentador FURL que normalmente você gostaria quando provisionamento de armazenamento Nós. Para estes e outros detalhes de configuração, consulte : Doc: configuration.

. `Servidor possui um nome DNS público '

. Servidor possui um endereço público IPv4 / IPv6_

. O servidor está por trás de um firewall com encaminhamento de porta_

. Usando o I2P / Tor para evitar o encaminhamento da porta_

O servidor possui um nome DNS público

O caso mais simples é o local onde o host do servidor está diretamente conectado ao Internet, sem um firewall ou caixa NAT no caminho. A maioria dos VPS (Virtual Private Servidor) e servidores colocados são assim, embora alguns fornecedores bloqueiem Muitas portas de entrada por padrão.

Para esses servidores, tudo o que você precisa saber é o nome do host externo. O sistema O administrador irá dizer-lhe isso. O principal requisito é que este nome de host Pode ser pesquisado no DNS, e ele será mapeado para um endereço IPv4 ou IPv6 que Alcançará a máquina.

Se o seu nome de host for example.net, então você criará o introdutor como esta::

Tahoe create-introducer --hostname example.com ~ / introducer

Ou um servidor de armazenamento como ::

Tahoe create-node --hostname = example.net

Estes irão alocar uma porta TCP (por exemplo, 12345), atribuir tub.port para ser Tcp: 12345 e tub.location serão tcp: example.com: 12345.

Idealmente, isso também deveria funcionar para hosts compatíveis com IPv6 (onde o nome DNS Fornece um registro "AAAA", ou ambos "A" e "AAAA"). No entanto Tahoe-LAFS O suporte para IPv6 é novo e ainda pode ter problemas. Por favor, veja o ingresso # 867_ para detalhes.

.. _ # 867: https://tahoe-lafs.org/trac/tahoe-lafs/ticket/867

O servidor possui um endereço público IPv4 / IPv6

Se o host tiver um endereço IPv4 (público) rotativo (por exemplo, 203.0.113.1```), mas Nenhum nome DNS, você precisará escolher uma porta TCP (por exemplo, 3457``) e usar o Segue::

Tahoe create-node --port = tcp: 3457 - localização = tcp: 203.0.113.1: 3457

--port é uma "string de especificação de ponto de extremidade" que controla quais locais Porta em que o nó escuta. --location é a "sugestão de conexão" que ele Anuncia para outros, e descreve as conexões de saída que essas Os clientes irão fazer, por isso precisa trabalhar a partir da sua localização na rede.

Os nós Tahoe-LAFS escutam em todas as interfaces por padrão. Quando o host é Multi-homed, você pode querer fazer a ligação de escuta ligar apenas a uma Interface específica, adicionando uma opção interface = ao --port = argumento::

Tahoe create-node --port = tcp: 3457: interface = 203.0.113.1 - localização = tcp: 203.0.113.1: 3457

Se o endereço público do host for IPv6 em vez de IPv4, use colchetes para Envolva o endereço e altere o tipo de nó de extremidade para tcp6 ::

Tahoe create-node --port = tcp6: 3457 - localização = tcp: [2001: db8 :: 1]: 3457

Você pode usar interface = para vincular a uma interface IPv6 específica também, no entanto Você deve fazer uma barra invertida - escapar dos dois pontos, porque, de outra forma, eles são interpretados Como delimitadores pelo idioma de especificação do "ponto final" torcido. o --location = argumento não precisa de dois pontos para serem escapados, porque eles são Envolto pelos colchetes ::

Tahoe create-node --port = tcp6: 3457: interface = 2001 \: db8 \: \: 1 --location = tcp: [2001: db8 :: 1]: 3457

Para hosts somente IPv6 com registros DNS AAAA, se o simples --hostname = A configuração não funciona, eles podem ser informados para ouvir especificamente Porta compatível com IPv6 com este ::

Tahoe create-node --port = tcp6: 3457 - localização = tcp: example.net: 3457

O servidor está por trás de um firewall com encaminhamento de porta

Para configurar um nó de armazenamento por trás de um firewall com encaminhamento de porta, você irá precisa saber:

• Endereço IPv4 público do roteador
• A porta TCP que está disponível de fora da sua rede
• A porta TCP que é o destino de encaminhamento
• Endereço IPv4 interno do nó de armazenamento (o nó de armazenamento em si é Desconhece esse endereço e não é usado durante tahoe create-node, Mas o firewall deve ser configurado para enviar conexões para isso)

Os números de porta TCP internos e externos podem ser iguais ou diferentes Dependendo de como o encaminhamento da porta está configurado. Se é mapear portas 1-para-1, eo endereço IPv4 público do firewall é 203.0.113.1 (e Talvez o endereço IPv4 interno do nó de armazenamento seja 192.168.1.5), então Use um comando CLI como este ::

Tahoe create-node --port = tcp: 3457 - localização = tcp: 203.0.113.1: 3457

Se no entanto, o firewall / NAT-box encaminha a porta externa * 6656 * para o interno Porta 3457, então faça isso ::

Tahoe create-node --port = tcp: 3457 - localização = tcp: 203.0.113.1: 6656

Usando o I2P / Tor para evitar o encaminhamento da porta

Os serviços de cebola I2P e Tor, entre outras excelentes propriedades, também fornecem NAT Penetração sem encaminhamento de porta, nomes de host ou endereços IP. Então, configurando Um servidor que escuta apenas no Tor é simples ::

Tahoe create-node --listen = tor

Para mais informações sobre o uso de Tahoe-LAFS com I2p e Tor veja : Doc: anonymity-configuration

@ 0fa80bd3:ea7325de

"Degeneration" or "Вырождение" ![[photo_2025-01-29 23.23.15.jpeg]]

A once-functional object, now eroded by time and human intervention, stripped of its original purpose. Layers of presence accumulate—marks, alterations, traces of intent—until the very essence is obscured. Restoration is paradoxical: to reclaim, one must erase. Yet erasure is an impossibility, for to remove these imprints is to deny the existence of those who shaped them.

The work stands as a meditation on entropy, memory, and the irreversible dialogue between creation and decay.

@ 0fa80bd3:ea7325de

Lyn Alden - биткойн евангелист или евангелистка, я пока не понял npub1a2cww4kn9wqte4ry70vyfwqyqvpswksna27rtxd8vty6c74era8sdcw83a

Thomas Pacchia - PubKey owner - X - @tpacchia npub1xy6exlg37pw84cpyj05c2pdgv86hr25cxn0g7aa8g8a6v97mhduqeuhgpl

calvadev - Shopstr npub16dhgpql60vmd4mnydjut87vla23a38j689jssaqlqqlzrtqtd0kqex0nkq

Calle - Cashu founder npub12rv5lskctqxxs2c8rf2zlzc7xx3qpvzs3w4etgemauy9thegr43sf485vg

Джек Дорси npub1sg6plzptd64u62a878hep2kev88swjh3tw00gjsfl8f237lmu63q0uf63m

21 ideas npub1lm3f47nzyf0rjp6fsl4qlnkmzed4uj4h2gnf2vhe3l3mrj85vqks6z3c7l

Много адресов. Хз кто надо сортировать https://github.com/aitechguy/nostr-address-book

ФиатДжеф - создатель Ностр - https://github.com/fiatjaf npub180cvv07tjdrrgpa0j7j7tmnyl2yr6yr7l8j4s3evf6u64th6gkwsyjh6w6

EVAN KALOUDIS Zues wallet npub19kv88vjm7tw6v9qksn2y6h4hdt6e79nh3zjcud36k9n3lmlwsleqwte2qd

Программер Коди https://github.com/CodyTseng/nostr-relay npub1syjmjy0dp62dhccq3g97fr87tngvpvzey08llyt6ul58m2zqpzps9wf6wl

Anna Chekhovich - Managing Bitcoin at The Anti-Corruption Foundation https://x.com/AnyaChekhovich npub1y2st7rp54277hyd2usw6shy3kxprnmpvhkezmldp7vhl7hp920aq9cfyr7

@ b2d670de:907f9d4a

This is a list of nostr clients exposed as onion services. The list is currently actively maintained on GitHub. Contributions are always appreciated!

| Client name | Onion URL | Source code URL | Admin | Description | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Snort | http://agzj5a4be3kgp6yurijk4q7pm2yh4a5nphdg4zozk365yirf7ahuctyd.onion | https://git.v0l.io/Kieran/snort | operator | N/A | | moStard | http://sifbugd5nwdq77plmidkug4y57zuqwqio3zlyreizrhejhp6bohfwkad.onion/ | https://github.com/rafael-xmr/nostrudel/tree/mostard | operator | minimalist monero friendly nostrudel fork | | Nostrudel | http://oxtrnmb4wsb77rmk64q3jfr55fo33luwmsyaoovicyhzgrulleiojsad.onion/ | https://github.com/hzrd149/nostrudel | operator | Runs latest tagged docker image | | Nostrudel Next | http://oxtrnnumsflm7hmvb3xqphed2eqpbrt4seflgmdsjnpgc3ejd6iycuyd.onion/ | https://github.com/hzrd149/nostrudel | operator | Runs latest "next" tagged docker image | | Nsite | http://q457mvdt5smqj726m4lsqxxdyx7r3v7gufzt46zbkop6mkghpnr7z3qd.onion/ | https://github.com/hzrd149/nsite-ts | operator | Runs nsite. You can read more about nsite here. | | Shopstr | http://6fkdn756yryd5wurkq7ifnexupnfwj6sotbtby2xhj5baythl4cyf2id.onion/ | https://github.com/shopstr-eng/shopstr-hidden-service | operator | Runs the latest serverless branch build of Shopstr. |

@ 460c25e6:ef85065c

If you don't know where your posts are, you might as well just stay in the centralized Twitter. You either take control of your relay lists, or they will control you. Amethyst offers several lists of relays for our users. We are going to go one by one to help clarify what they are and which options are best for each one.

Public Home/Outbox Relays

Home relays store all YOUR content: all your posts, likes, replies, lists, etc. It's your home. Amethyst will send your posts here first. Your followers will use these relays to get new posts from you. So, if you don't have anything there, they will not receive your updates.

Home relays must allow queries from anyone, ideally without the need to authenticate. They can limit writes to paid users without affecting anyone's experience.

This list should have a maximum of 3 relays. More than that will only make your followers waste their mobile data getting your posts. Keep it simple. Out of the 3 relays, I recommend: - 1 large public, international relay: nos.lol, nostr.mom, relay.damus.io, etc. - 1 personal relay to store a copy of all your content in a place no one can delete. Go to relay.tools and never be censored again. - 1 really fast relay located in your country: paid options like http://nostr.wine are great

Do not include relays that block users from seeing posts in this list. If you do, no one will see your posts.

Public Inbox Relays

This relay type receives all replies, comments, likes, and zaps to your posts. If you are not getting notifications or you don't see replies from your friends, it is likely because you don't have the right setup here. If you are getting too much spam in your replies, it's probably because your inbox relays are not protecting you enough. Paid relays can filter inbox spam out.

Inbox relays must allow anyone to write into them. It's the opposite of the outbox relay. They can limit who can download the posts to their paid subscribers without affecting anyone's experience.

This list should have a maximum of 3 relays as well. Again, keep it small. More than that will just make you spend more of your data plan downloading the same notifications from all these different servers. Out of the 3 relays, I recommend: - 1 large public, international relay: nos.lol, nostr.mom, relay.damus.io, etc. - 1 personal relay to store a copy of your notifications, invites, cashu tokens and zaps. - 1 really fast relay located in your country: go to nostr.watch and find relays in your country

Terrible options include: - nostr.wine should not be here. - filter.nostr.wine should not be here. - inbox.nostr.wine should not be here.

DM Inbox Relays

These are the relays used to receive DMs and private content. Others will use these relays to send DMs to you. If you don't have it setup, you will miss DMs. DM Inbox relays should accept any message from anyone, but only allow you to download them.

Generally speaking, you only need 3 for reliability. One of them should be a personal relay to make sure you have a copy of all your messages. The others can be open if you want push notifications or closed if you want full privacy.

Good options are: - inbox.nostr.wine and auth.nostr1.com: anyone can send messages and only you can download. Not even our push notification server has access to them to notify you. - a personal relay to make sure no one can censor you. Advanced settings on personal relays can also store your DMs privately. Talk to your relay operator for more details. - a public relay if you want DM notifications from our servers.

Make sure to add at least one public relay if you want to see DM notifications.

Private Home Relays

Private Relays are for things no one should see, like your drafts, lists, app settings, bookmarks etc. Ideally, these relays are either local or require authentication before posting AND downloading each user\'s content. There are no dedicated relays for this category yet, so I would use a local relay like Citrine on Android and a personal relay on relay.tools.

Keep in mind that if you choose a local relay only, a client on the desktop might not be able to see the drafts from clients on mobile and vice versa.

Search relays:

This is the list of relays to use on Amethyst's search and user tagging with @. Tagging and searching will not work if there is nothing here.. This option requires NIP-50 compliance from each relay. Hit the Default button to use all available options on existence today: - nostr.wine - relay.nostr.band - relay.noswhere.com

Local Relays:

This is your local storage. Everything will load faster if it comes from this relay. You should install Citrine on Android and write ws://localhost:4869 in this option.

General Relays:

This section contains the default relays used to download content from your follows. Notice how you can activate and deactivate the Home, Messages (old-style DMs), Chat (public chats), and Global options in each.

Keep 5-6 large relays on this list and activate them for as many categories (Home, Messages (old-style DMs), Chat, and Global) as possible.

Amethyst will provide additional recommendations to this list from your follows with information on which of your follows might need the additional relay in your list. Add them if you feel like you are missing their posts or if it is just taking too long to load them.

My setup

Here's what I use: 1. Go to relay.tools and create a relay for yourself. 2. Go to nostr.wine and pay for their subscription. 3. Go to inbox.nostr.wine and pay for their subscription. 4. Go to nostr.watch and find a good relay in your country. 5. Download Citrine to your phone.

Then, on your relay lists, put:

Public Home/Outbox Relays: - nostr.wine - nos.lol or an in-country relay. - .nostr1.com

Public Inbox Relays - nos.lol or an in-country relay - .nostr1.com

DM Inbox Relays - inbox.nostr.wine - .nostr1.com

Private Home Relays - ws://localhost:4869 (Citrine) - .nostr1.com (if you want)

Search Relays - nostr.wine - relay.nostr.band - relay.noswhere.com

Local Relays - ws://localhost:4869 (Citrine)

General Relays - nos.lol - relay.damus.io - relay.primal.net - nostr.mom

And a few of the recommended relays from Amethyst.

Final Considerations

Remember, relays can see what your Nostr client is requesting and downloading at all times. They can track what you see and see what you like. They can sell that information to the highest bidder, they can delete your content or content that a sponsor asked them to delete (like a negative review for instance) and they can censor you in any way they see fit. Before using any random free relay out there, make sure you trust its operator and you know its terms of service and privacy policies.

@ c1e9ab3a:9cb56b43

In an age where culture often precedes policy, a subtle yet potent mechanism may be at play in the shaping of American perspectives on gun ownership. Rather than directly challenging the Second Amendment through legislation alone, a more insidious strategy may involve reshaping the cultural and social norms surrounding firearms—by conditioning the population, starting at its most impressionable point: the public school system.

The Cultural Lever of Language

Unlike Orwell's 1984, where language is controlled by removing words from the lexicon, this modern approach may hinge instead on instilling fear around specific words or topics—guns, firearms, and self-defense among them. The goal is not to erase the language but to embed a taboo so deep that people voluntarily avoid these terms out of social self-preservation. Children, teachers, and parents begin to internalize a fear of even mentioning weapons, not because the words are illegal, but because the cultural consequences are severe.

The Role of Teachers in Social Programming

Teachers, particularly in primary and middle schools, serve not only as educational authorities but also as social regulators. The frequent argument against homeschooling—that children will not be "properly socialized"—reveals an implicit understanding that schools play a critical role in setting behavioral norms. Children learn what is acceptable not just academically but socially. Rules, discipline, and behavioral expectations are laid down by teachers, often reinforced through peer pressure and institutional authority.

This places teachers in a unique position of influence. If fear is instilled in these educators—fear that one of their students could become the next school shooter—their response is likely to lean toward overcorrection. That overcorrection may manifest as a total intolerance for any conversation about weapons, regardless of the context. Innocent remarks or imaginative stories from young children are interpreted as red flags, triggering intervention from administrators and warnings to parents.

Fear as a Policy Catalyst

School shootings, such as the one at Columbine, serve as the fulcrum for this fear-based conditioning. Each highly publicized tragedy becomes a national spectacle, not only for mourning but also for cementing the idea that any child could become a threat. Media cycles perpetuate this narrative with relentless coverage and emotional appeals, ensuring that each incident becomes embedded in the public consciousness.

The side effect of this focus is the generation of copycat behavior, which, in turn, justifies further media attention and tighter controls. Schools install security systems, metal detectors, and armed guards—not simply to stop violence, but to serve as a daily reminder to children and staff alike: guns are dangerous, ubiquitous, and potentially present at any moment. This daily ritual reinforces the idea that the very discussion of firearms is a precursor to violence.

Policy and Practice: The Zero-Tolerance Feedback Loop

Federal and district-level policies begin to reflect this cultural shift. A child mentioning a gun in class—even in a non-threatening or imaginative context—is flagged for intervention. Zero-tolerance rules leave no room for context or intent. Teachers and administrators, fearing for their careers or safety, comply eagerly with these guidelines, interpreting them as moral obligations rather than bureaucratic policies.

The result is a generation of students conditioned to associate firearms with social ostracism, disciplinary action, and latent danger. The Second Amendment, once seen as a cultural cornerstone of American liberty and self-reliance, is transformed into an artifact of suspicion and anxiety.

Long-Term Consequences: A Nation Re-Socialized

Over time, this fear-based reshaping of discourse creates adults who not only avoid discussing guns but view them as morally reprehensible. Their aversion is not grounded in legal logic or political philosophy, but in deeply embedded emotional programming begun in early childhood. The cultural weight against firearms becomes so great that even those inclined to support gun rights feel the need to self-censor.

As fewer people grow up discussing, learning about, or responsibly handling firearms, the social understanding of the Second Amendment erodes. Without cultural reinforcement, its value becomes abstract and its defenders marginalized. In this way, the right to bear arms is not abolished by law—it is dismantled by language, fear, and the subtle recalibration of social norms.

Conclusion

This theoretical strategy does not require a single change to the Constitution. It relies instead on the long game of cultural transformation, beginning with the youngest minds and reinforced by fear-driven policy and media narratives. The outcome is a society that views the Second Amendment not as a safeguard of liberty, but as an anachronism too dangerous to mention.

By controlling the language through social consequences and fear, a nation can be taught not just to disarm, but to believe it chose to do so freely. That, perhaps, is the most powerful form of control of all.

@ 0fa80bd3:ea7325de

![[yedinaya-rossiya-bear.png]]

1️⃣ Be where the bear roams. Stay in its territory, where it hunts for food. No point setting a trap in your backyard if the bear’s chilling in the forest.

2️⃣ Set a well-hidden trap. Bury it, disguise it, and place the bait right in the center. Bears are omnivores—just like secret police KGB agents. And what’s the tastiest bait for them? Money.

3️⃣ Wait for the bear to take the bait. When it reaches in, the trap will snap shut around its paw. It’ll be alive, but stuck. No escape.

Now, what you do with a trapped bear is another question... 😏

@ 0fa80bd3:ea7325de

The land that belongs to the indigenous peoples of Russia has been seized by a gang of killers who have unleashed a war of extermination. They wipe out anyone who refuses to conform to their rules. Those who disagree and stay behind are tortured and killed in prisons and labor camps. Those who flee lose their homeland, dissolve into foreign cultures, and fade away. And those who stand up to protect their people are attacked by the misled and deceived. The deceived die for the unchecked greed of a single dictator—thousands from both sides, people who just wanted to live, raise their kids, and build a future.

Now, they are forced to make an impossible choice: abandon their homeland or die. Some perish on the battlefield, others lose themselves in exile, stripped of their identity, scattered in a world that isn’t theirs.

There’s been endless debate about how to fix this, how to clear the field of the weeds that choke out every new sprout, every attempt at change. But the real problem? We can’t play by their rules. We can’t speak their language or use their weapons. We stand for humanity, and no matter how righteous our cause, we will not multiply suffering. Victory doesn’t come from matching the enemy—it comes from staying ahead, from using tools they haven’t mastered yet. That’s how wars are won.

Our only resource is the will of the people to rewrite the order of things. Historian Timothy Snyder once said that a nation cannot exist without a city. A city is where the most active part of a nation thrives. But the cities are occupied. The streets are watched. Gatherings are impossible. They control the money. They control the mail. They control the media. And any dissent is crushed before it can take root.

So I started asking myself: How do we stop this fragmentation? How do we create a space where people can rebuild their connections when they’re ready? How do we build a self-sustaining network, where everyone contributes and benefits proportionally, while keeping their freedom to leave intact? And more importantly—how do we make it spread, even in occupied territory?

In 2009, something historic happened: the internet got its own money. Thanks to Satoshi Nakamoto, the world took a massive leap forward. Bitcoin and decentralized ledgers shattered the idea that money must be controlled by the state. Now, to move or store value, all you need is an address and a key. A tiny string of text, easy to carry, impossible to seize.

That was the year money broke free. The state lost its grip. Its biggest weapon—physical currency—became irrelevant. Money became purely digital.

The internet was already a sanctuary for information, a place where people could connect and organize. But with Bitcoin, it evolved. Now, value itself could flow freely, beyond the reach of authorities.

Think about it: when seedlings are grown in controlled environments before being planted outside, they get stronger, survive longer, and bear fruit faster. That’s how we handle crops in harsh climates—nurture them until they’re ready for the wild.

Now, picture the internet as that controlled environment for ideas. Bitcoin? It’s the fertile soil that lets them grow. A testing ground for new models of interaction, where concepts can take root before they move into the real world. If nation-states are a battlefield, locked in a brutal war for territory, the internet is boundless. It can absorb any number of ideas, any number of people, and it doesn’t run out of space.

But for this ecosystem to thrive, people need safe ways to communicate, to share ideas, to build something real—without surveillance, without censorship, without the constant fear of being erased.

This is where Nostr comes in.

Nostr—"Notes and Other Stuff Transmitted by Relays"—is more than just a messaging protocol. It’s a new kind of city. One that no dictator can seize, no corporation can own, no government can shut down.

It’s built on decentralization, encryption, and individual control. Messages don’t pass through central servers—they are relayed through independent nodes, and users choose which ones to trust. There’s no master switch to shut it all down. Every person owns their identity, their data, their connections. And no one—no state, no tech giant, no algorithm—can silence them.

In a world where cities fall and governments fail, Nostr is a city that cannot be occupied. A place for ideas, for networks, for freedom. A city that grows stronger the more people build within it.

@ 9e69e420:d12360c2

President Trump plans to withdraw 20,000 U.S. troops from Europe and expects European allies to contribute financially to the remaining military presence. Reported by ANSA, Trump aims to deliver this message to European leaders since taking office. A European diplomat noted, “the costs cannot be borne solely by American taxpayers.”

The Pentagon hasn't commented yet. Trump has previously sought lower troop levels in Europe and had ordered cuts during his first term. The U.S. currently maintains around 65,000 troops in Europe, with total forces reaching 100,000 since the Ukraine invasion. Trump's new approach may shift military focus to the Pacific amid growing concerns about China.

Sauce

@ 866e0139:6a9334e5

---

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

---

Es geht gut los. „WC für alle“. Daneben noch einmal in der Sprache des Imperiums. „All Gender (urinal inside)“. Das hilft nicht wirklich, weil das Pinkelbecken vor der Tür ist und man nicht weiß, wer gerade dahinter hockt. Also warten bis zur Auflösung. Wir sind im Haus der Demokratie in der Greifswalder Straße. Immerhin.

Eingeladen hat die Neue Gesellschaft für Psychologie. Der Name täuscht. Diese neue Gesellschaft ist alt. Sehr alt. Damit meine ich gar nicht Laura von Wimmersperg, Jahrgang 1934, die den ersten Paukenschlag setzt. Sie habe, sagt diese Dame mit weißem Haar sinngemäß, als sie ans Podium tritt, sie habe sich gequält mit ihrem Text, das Geschriebene wieder und wieder gelesen und dann – in den Papierkorb geworfen. Ihre Gefühle seien größer, als alle Worte jemals sein könnten. „Krieg und Frieden“ heißt dieser Kongress. Laura von Wimmersperg ist die Grande Dame der westdeutschen Friedensbewegung, bekannt weit über Berlin hinaus. Nato-Doppelbeschluss, Jugoslawien, Irak, Afghanistan. Ein Ostermarsch nach dem anderen. Laura von Wimmersperg hat auch den 24. Februar 2022 überlebt und kann die Kampfgefährten kaum mehr zählen, die in einem der Gräben am Wegesrand verrotten. Migration, Klima, Corona und immer wieder Russland und die Ukraine. 

Die Neue Gesellschaft für Psychologie ist noch da, einerseits. Versprengte DKPler, Leute aus den K-Gruppen, Marxisten, Maoisten. Bevor ich „andererseits“ sage, brauche ich einen Disclaimer. Ich darf diesen Text nicht schreiben. Ich habe in Berlin einen Vortrag gehalten über „Journalismus und Macht“ und das Programm nicht komplett gesehen. Einen ganzen Tag sitzen: Das erlaubt mein Körper nicht mehr. Augen und Ohren haben so manche Interna verpasst und fast alles, was über Gaza gesagt wurde oder über die Kampagne „Für ein neutrales Deutschland“. Damit verbietet sich eigentlich jeder Bericht. Karin Leukefeld, seit 25 Jahren als Journalistin unterwegs in einer Gegend, die manche Nahost nennen und andere mittlerweile Greater Middle East, hat das in Berlin wunderbar formuliert. Mit allen reden, lesen, zuhören, fragen. Aus halben Sachen wird kein ganzes Bild.

Karin Leukefeld hat auch gesagt, dass sie einst in den Journalismus gegangen ist, um Brücken zu schlagen, und dass sie deshalb weniger die Schlagzeilen interessieren als das Leben dahinter. Vielleicht hilft ja mein Blick von außen selbst dann, wenn er mit blinden Flecken daherkommt. Damit nun endlich zum „andererseits“ und vor allem zum Alter. Ich war nicht dabei in der kleineren Bundesrepublik, aber so ungefähr muss es gewesen sein. Die Vokabeln, der Habitus. Rosa Luxemburg, SDS und Klassenkampf, Kapitalismus und Entfremdung. Murmeln, klatschen, reinrufen. Dieses Publikum geht mit. Jawoll! Genau! Ja! Mmh. Wenig Psychologie und viel Materialismus selbst bei denen, die als Psychologen vorgestellt werden. Sicher ist das alles ganz furchtbar mit den Verhältnissen. Das wusste schon der gute Brecht. Die Frage allerdings, die mich beschäftigt, seit ich nicht mehr zur Vorhut der Arbeiterklasse gehöre: Welche Wunder waren nötig, dass einige wenige all die Zwänge hinter sich lassen konnten und nun bereitstehen, um die Massen aufzuklären? Und fast noch wichtiger: Wozu braucht diese Avantgarde Massen, denen sie ohnehin nicht über den Weg traut? Ich spitze zu und verallgemeinere, okay. Trotzdem. Das ist der alte Geist mit allenfalls leicht entstaubten Analysen und Rezepten, der den Staat verschonen möchte und China sowieso. Klaus-Jürgen Bruder, der Cheforganisator, steht immer wieder auf, um zu akademisieren und damit auch zu differenzieren. Analyse und Aktivismus, Wunden lecken und sich dabei auch noch zu vergewissern, dass man immer noch Kurs hält: So ein Spagat überfordert jeden Kongress.

---

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.

---

Wenn die Reihen gelichtet sind, verbietet es sich fast von selbst, auch noch auf die letzten Mitstreiter einzuprügeln. Wer kämpft, hat schon verloren, sagt Christian Dewanger, der sich als Daoist vorstellt und keine Lust hat, China von der Ausbeutung freizusprechen und von allen anderen Sünden der Macht. Sonst aber: Wohlwollen und weglächeln. Wer weiß, wozu der Staat noch gut sein kann und der große Bruder in Peking. Man kann sich derweil ja an der Linkspartei abarbeiten, an Gregor Gysi und an den Brandmauer-Baumeistern, die es auch im Quartier ganz links gibt, spätestens seit den Montags-Mahnwachen 2014. Laura von Wimmersperg sagt: Habt Geduld und übt euch in Nachsicht, liebe Leute. Bei ihrem 90. im Herbst, erzählt sie, habe sie die alten Kameraden genauso eingeladen wie die neuen und die Missgunst einfach übersehen – anders als die Bundeswehr-Werbung an der Edeka-Kasse vor der Tür. Auf zur Marktleitung mit einer Frage auf den Lippen: Wie kann jemand, der das Leben selbst so wenig achtet, allen Ernstes auf jedem Plakat behaupten, dass er Lebensmittel liebt? Beim nächsten Einkauf sei der Laden sauber gewesen.

Ich erwähne diese kleine Geschichte, weil Laura von Wimmersperg eine Ausnahme ist. Vielleicht kann das nur eine Frau, die alles erlebt hat: 20 von 30 Rede-Minuten verschenken und so eine Tür öffnen für Nachdenken und Reden. Die alten Männer, nur einen Wimpernschlag jünger, würden den Teufel tun. Saurier-Ausstellung, sagt mein Sitz-Nachbar. Das kann so gemeint sein oder so. Wolfgang Effenberger, Jahrgang 1946, ist der Jüngste in diesem Trio infernale, das einen ganzen Vormittag bekommen hat und von keinem Moderator der Welt zu stoppen wäre. Effenberger war Soldat und hat den Dienst quittiert, als ihm klar wurde, worauf alle Planungen hinausliefen. Der Atomtod, damals schon. Die Zeitenwende beginnt für ihn mit dem Kosovo. Seitdem laufe die Vorbereitung auf den großen Krieg. Iran, Russland, China. Effenberger scrollt durch die Strategiedokumente, wechselt zum Westfälischen Frieden, der 15 Jahre Anlaufzeit gebraucht habe, und schüttelt den Kopf beim Blick auf Donald Trump, der offenbar glaube, alles mit einem Anruf erledigen zu können, und auf jemanden wie Keith Kellogg gesetzt habe, einen Mann aus dem Herzen der Finsternis. 

Werner Rügemer, der nächste Saurier, ist fünf Jahre älter und sehr viel ruhiger als Effenberger, aber keineswegs leiser. Dass er die Lösung in China sieht, hat mit seinem Gesellschaftsbild zu tun und mit der Rolle, die das US-Kapital darin spielt. Nicht *eine* Hauptrolle, sondern DIE. Der Treiber von allem. Hitler und die Wehrmacht, der Staatsstreich in Guatemala und das Office of Strategic Services, der erste Auslandsgeheimdienst der USA, 1941 nicht zufällig gegründet von den Wall-Street-Anwälten Allen Dulles und William Donovan. Folge der Spur des Geldes und löse so die Rätsel der Geschichte. 

Auch Rudolph Bauer, Jahrgang 1939, taucht tief ein in die Vergangenheit. Ein Saurier-Privileg. Demos gegen den Krieg? Konferenzen für den Frieden? 1913/14 versandet und in Weimar auch. Ob ein Generalstreik geholfen hätte? Wenn dieses Wort in den nächsten Stunden und Tagen fällt, geht im Saal die Sonne auf. Rudolph Bauer hört nicht mehr besonders gut, aber er hat noch einen zweiten Punkt, der diesen Kongress fesselt. Ist das, was ich hier etwas lapidar Friedensbewegung nenne, möglicherweise genau die Begleitmusik, die jeder Kriegstreiber braucht?

Was bleibt jenseits von Gesprächen, Handynummern, Lesetipps? Ich weiß jetzt, dass nicht nur die DDR-Eliten überlebt haben, die 1990 zwar alle Positionen und jeden Einfluss verloren haben, aber sich weiter trafen mit allem Drum und Dran. Netzwerke, Periodika, Bücher. So gut wie nichts davon ist in der gesamtdeutschen Öffentlichkeit diskutiert worden, aber es hat die Jahre mit Sinn gefüllt. Wäre mehr möglich gewesen, wenn es einen Link gegeben hätte zu den Reservaten der alten Westlinken? Zur Neuen Gesellschaft für Psychologie zum Beispiel? Vielleicht gelingt die Blutauffrischung, vielleicht auch nicht. Trost gab es aus dem Raum mit einer Geschichte aus dem Orient. Prophet Abraham liegt im Feuer, und ein Spatz hat Wasser im Schnabel. Dieser Spatz weiß, dass er allein nichts ausrichten kann, hört aber trotzdem nicht auf, um in den Spiegel schauen zu können, wenn er eines Tages vor seinem Schöpfer steht. Schön.

---

LASSEN SIE DER FRIEDENSTAUBE FLÜGEL WACHSEN!

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.

@ 6be5cc06:5259daf0

A seguir, veja como instalar e configurar o Privoxy no Pop!_OS.

---

1. Instalar o Tor e o Privoxy

Abra o terminal e execute:

bash sudo apt update sudo apt install tor privoxy

Explicação:

• Tor: Roteia o tráfego pela rede Tor.
• Privoxy: Proxy avançado que intermedia a conexão entre aplicativos e o Tor.

---

2. Configurar o Privoxy

Abra o arquivo de configuração do Privoxy:

bash sudo nano /etc/privoxy/config

Navegue até a última linha (atalho: Ctrl + / depois Ctrl + V para navegar diretamente até a última linha) e insira:

bash forward-socks5 / 127.0.0.1:9050 .

Isso faz com que o Privoxy envie todo o tráfego para o Tor através da porta 9050.

Salve (CTRL + O e Enter) e feche (CTRL + X) o arquivo.

---

3. Iniciar o Tor e o Privoxy

Agora, inicie e habilite os serviços:

bash sudo systemctl start tor sudo systemctl start privoxy sudo systemctl enable tor sudo systemctl enable privoxy

Explicação:

• start: Inicia os serviços.
• enable: Faz com que iniciem automaticamente ao ligar o PC.

---

4. Configurar o Navegador Firefox

Para usar a rede Tor com o Firefox:

1. Abra o Firefox.
2. Acesse Configurações → Configurar conexão.
3. Selecione Configuração manual de proxy.
4. Configure assim:
   • Proxy HTTP: 127.0.0.1
   • Porta: 8118 (porta padrão do Privoxy)
   • Domínio SOCKS (v5): 127.0.0.1
   • Porta: 9050
5. Marque a opção "Usar este proxy também em HTTPS".
6. Clique em OK.

---

5. Verificar a Conexão com o Tor

Abra o navegador e acesse:

text https://check.torproject.org/

Se aparecer a mensagem "Congratulations. This browser is configured to use Tor.", a configuração está correta.

---

Dicas Extras

• Privoxy pode ser ajustado para bloquear anúncios e rastreadores.
• Outros aplicativos também podem ser configurados para usar o Privoxy.

@ f7d424b5:618c51e8

(This was originally posted on melonmancy.net which is a blog on write.as, an ActivityPub based blogging instance)

Listeners rejoice as we are joined today by ironee212 @ shitposter.world

Another major videogame release happened since we last recorded and it looks like a big stinker, or is it? All that and more in today's episode.

We mentioned a few things in the show you might want to pull up while listening, they are the following:

• Avowed steam chart
• TF2 SDK news

Obligatory:

• Listen to the new episode here!
• Discuss this episode on OUR NEW FORUM
• Get the RSS and Subscribe (this is a new feed URL, but the old one redirects here too!)
• Get a modern podcast app to use that RSS feed on at newpodcastapps.com
• Or listen to the show on the forum using the embedded Podverse player!
• Send your complaints here

Reminder that this is a Value4Value podcast so any support you can give us via a modern podcasting app is greatly appreciated and we will never bow to corporate sponsors!

Our podcast is created entirely with free software and is proudly hosted on RSSBlue!

@ 846ebf79:fe4e39a4

The next iteration is coming

We're busy racing to the finish line, for the #Alexandria Gutenberg beta. Then we can get the bug hunt done, release v0.1.0, and immediately start producing the first iteration of the Euler (v0.2.0) edition.

While we continue to work on fixing the performance issues and smooth rendering on the Reading View, we've gone ahead and added some new features and apps, which will be rolled-out soon.

The biggest projects this iteration have been:

• the HTTP API for the #Realy relay from nostr:npub1fjqqy4a93z5zsjwsfxqhc2764kvykfdyttvldkkkdera8dr78vhsmmleku,
• implementation of a publication tree structure by nostr:npub1wqfzz2p880wq0tumuae9lfwyhs8uz35xd0kr34zrvrwyh3kvrzuskcqsyn,
• and the Great DevOps Migration of 2025 from the ever-industrious Mr. nostr:npub1qdjn8j4gwgmkj3k5un775nq6q3q7mguv5tvajstmkdsqdja2havq03fqm7.

All are backend-y projects and have caused a major shift in process and product, on the development team's side, even if they're still largely invisible to users.

Another important, but invisible-to-you change is that nostr:npub1ecdlntvjzexlyfale2egzvvncc8tgqsaxkl5hw7xlgjv2cxs705s9qs735 has implemented the core bech32 functionality (and the associated tests) in C/C++, for the #Aedile NDK.

On the frontend:

nostr:npub1636uujeewag8zv8593lcvdrwlymgqre6uax4anuq3y5qehqey05sl8qpl4 is currently working on the blog-specific Reading View, which allows for multi-npub or topical blogging, by using the 30040 index as a "folder", joining the various 30041 articles into different blogs. She has also started experimenting with categorization and columns for the landing page.

nostr:npub1l5sga6xg72phsz5422ykujprejwud075ggrr3z2hwyrfgr7eylqstegx9z revamped the product information pages, so that there is now a Contact page (including the ability to submit a Nostr issue) and an About page (with more product information, the build version displayed, and a live #GitCitadel feed).

We have also allowed for discrete headings (headers that aren't section headings, akin to the headers in Markdown). Discrete headings are formatted, but not added to the ToC and do not result in a section split by Asciidoc processors.

We have added OpenGraph metadata, so that hyperlinks to Alexandria publications, and other events, display prettily in other apps. And we fixed some bugs.

The Visualisation view has been updated and bug-fixed, to make the cards human-readable and closeable, and to add hyperlinks to the events to the card-titles.

We have added support for the display of individual wiki pages and the integration of them into 30040 publications. (This is an important feature for scientists and other nonfiction writers.)

We prettified the event json modal, so that it's easier to read and copy-paste out of.

The index card details have been expanded and the menus on the landing page have been revamped and expanded. Design and style has been improved, overall.

Project management is very busy

Our scientific adviser nostr:npub1m3xdppkd0njmrqe2ma8a6ys39zvgp5k8u22mev8xsnqp4nh80srqhqa5sf is working on the Euler plans for integrating features important for medical researchers and other scientists, which have been put on the fast track.

Next up are:

• a return of the Table of Contents
• kind 1111 comments, highlights, likes
• a prototype social feed for wss://theforest.nostr1.com, including long-form articles and Markdown rendering
• compose and edit of publications
• a search field
• the expansion of the relay set with the new relays from nostr:npub12262qa4uhw7u8gdwlgmntqtv7aye8vdcmvszkqwgs0zchel6mz7s6cgrkj, including some cool premium features
• full wiki functionality and disambiguation pages for replaceable events with overlapping d-tags
• a web app for mass-uploading and auto-converting PDFs to 30040/41 Asciidoc events, that will run on Realy, and be a service free for our premium relay subscribers
• ability to subscribe to the forest with a premium status
• the book upload CLI has been renamed and reworked into the Sybil Test Utility and that will get a major release, covering all the events and functionality needed to test Euler
• the #GitRepublic public git server project
• ....and much more.

Thank you for reading and may your morning be good.

@ e3ba5e1a:5e433365

My wife and I have six children, making our house a household of eight people. Looking just at the eight of us, how many relationships exist? Well, as a first stab, we could look at how many connections exist between two unique individuals in this family. The mathematical term for this is “8 choose 2”, and the answer is 8*7/2, or 28.

Even that doesn’t really capture the answer though, because relationships aren’t just between two people. For example, when my wife and two oldest children are the only ones still awake after the younger kids go to bed, we’ll put on my mature TV shows that they’ll appreciate and watch together. It’s our own little subgroup within the group.

Based on that, we could have groups of 2, 3, 4, all the way up to 8, the group of all of us. If you do the math, this comes up to 247 different subgroups of 2 or more people. That’s a lot of groups for just 8 people.

As a father, this means I’ll never be able to fully understand every set of connections within my family. I may have a good understanding of my own relationship with each child. I also am closely aware of the relationship between our two youngest children, since they’re twins. And I could probably list 20 or so other noteworthy relationships. But I’ll never understand all of them.

For example, months ago I bought a game on Steam for my 3rd and 4th kids. I know they like to play games together, so it was a relationship that I thought I understood well. A few days ago I found out that my oldest had joined them in playing one of these games (Brotato). I’d made the purchase, given it to the kids, and it sparked new relationship and interaction structures without my involvement.

There’s no problem with the fact that I can’t track every interaction in my house. That’s healthy! The kids are able to discover ways of interacting beyond what I can teach them, learn everything from schoolwork to video games from each other, and overall become more healthy and well-adjusted adults (I hope).

And here’s the important part: the growth of the number of connections is massive as the number of participants increases. If we add in another participant, we have 502 groupings. At 10 total participants, it jumps to over 1,000. By the time we get to 100, we’re well into the trillions.

A mathematical and software term for this is combinatoric complexity, the massive increase in an output value based on a small increase in the input. The analysis I’m providing could be termed as part of graph theory (for connections of 2, looking at people as vertices and connections as edges) or set theory (unique subsets, allowing for larger group sizes). But regardless, the point is: the increase in complexity is huge as more people join.

Now consider the global economy. It’s over 8 billion people. There are so many people that the number of groupings is absurd to talk about. Nonetheless, massive numbers of these groupings naturally occur. There are family units, friend circles, individual connections, companies, project teams, sports teams, schools, classes, and millions more. These groups of people form new ways of interacting, express vastly different desires for goods and services, and are capable of producing wide varieties of goods and services themselves.

When you allow this system to run free, beauty emerges. Each node in the graph can manage its own connections. Each person is free to make his or her own decisions about association, what to spend time on, what to spend money on, and so on. Each person does so on their own judgement and world view.

Some of these people may make “dumb” decisions. They may “waste” their time and money on useless things. Except: who made that value judgement? Clearly not them, they decided it was worth it. No central planner has the right to override their will.

My point in all this is: as yet another of many reasons in the list of “why people should be free,” we have one more data point: pure math. Central planning will never scale. Central planning will never appreciate the individuality and desires of each person. Only by giving people the freedom to explore their connections to others, discover what they can produce and consume, explore their options, and ultimately make their own decisions, can we have any chance of creating a world where everyone can succeed.

@ 9e69e420:d12360c2

Oregano oil is a potent natural compound that offers numerous scientifically-supported health benefits.

Active Compounds

The oil's therapeutic properties stem from its key bioactive components: - Carvacrol and thymol (primary active compounds) - Polyphenols and other antioxidant

Antimicrobial Properties

Bacterial Protection The oil demonstrates powerful antibacterial effects, even against antibiotic-resistant strains like MRSA and other harmful bacteria. Studies show it effectively inactivates various pathogenic bacteria without developing resistance.

Antifungal Effects It effectively combats fungal infections, particularly Candida-related conditions like oral thrush, athlete's foot, and nail infections.

Digestive Health Benefits

Oregano oil supports digestive wellness by: - Promoting gastric juice secretion and enzyme production - Helping treat Small Intestinal Bacterial Overgrowth (SIBO) - Managing digestive discomfort, bloating, and IBS symptoms

Anti-inflammatory and Antioxidant Effects

The oil provides significant protective benefits through: - Powerful antioxidant activity that fights free radicals - Reduction of inflammatory markers in the body - Protection against oxidative stress-related conditions

Respiratory Support

It aids respiratory health by: - Loosening mucus and phlegm - Suppressing coughs and throat irritation - Supporting overall respiratory tract function

Additional Benefits

Skin Health - Improves conditions like psoriasis, acne, and eczema - Supports wound healing through antibacterial action - Provides anti-aging benefits through antioxidant properties

Cardiovascular Health Studies show oregano oil may help: - Reduce LDL (bad) cholesterol levels - Support overall heart health

Pain Management The oil demonstrates effectiveness in: - Reducing inflammation-related pain - Managing muscle discomfort - Providing topical pain relief

Safety Note

While oregano oil is generally safe, it's highly concentrated and should be properly diluted before use Consult a healthcare provider before starting supplementation, especially if taking other medications.

@ b17fccdf:b7211155

The past 26 August, Tor introduced officially a proof-of-work (PoW) defense for onion services designed to prioritize verified network traffic as a deterrent against denial of service (DoS) attacks.

~ > This feature at the moment, is deactivate by default, so you need to follow these steps to activate this on a MiniBolt node:

• Make sure you have the latest version of Tor installed, at the time of writing this post, which is v0.4.8.6. Check your current version by typing

tor --version

Example of expected output:

Tor version 0.4.8.6. This build of Tor is covered by the GNU General Public License (https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.en.html) Tor is running on Linux with Libevent 2.1.12-stable, OpenSSL 3.0.9, Zlib 1.2.13, Liblzma 5.4.1, Libzstd N/A and Glibc 2.36 as libc. Tor compiled with GCC version 12.2.0

~ > If you have v0.4.8.X, you are OK, if not, type sudo apt update && sudo apt upgrade and confirm to update.

• Basic PoW support can be checked by running this command:

tor --list-modules

Expected output:

relay: yes dirauth: yes dircache: yes pow: **yes**

~ > If you have pow: yes, you are OK

• Now go to the torrc file of your MiniBolt and add the parameter to enable PoW for each hidden service added

sudo nano /etc/tor/torrc

Example:

```

Hidden Service BTC RPC Explorer

HiddenServiceDir /var/lib/tor/hidden_service_btcrpcexplorer/ HiddenServiceVersion 3 HiddenServicePoWDefensesEnabled 1 HiddenServicePort 80 127.0.0.1:3002 ```

~ > Bitcoin Core and LND use the Tor control port to automatically create the hidden service, requiring no action from the user. We have submitted a feature request in the official GitHub repositories to explore the need for the integration of Tor's PoW defense into the automatic creation process of the hidden service. You can follow them at the following links:

• Bitcoin Core: https://github.com/lightningnetwork/lnd/issues/8002
• LND: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28499

---

More info:

• https://blog.torproject.org/introducing-proof-of-work-defense-for-onion-services/
• https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/onion-services/onion-support/-/wikis/Documentation/PoW-FAQ

---

Enjoy it MiniBolter! 💙

@ c1e9ab3a:9cb56b43

Reanalysis: Could the Great Pyramid Function as an Ammonia Generator Powered by a 25GW Breeder Reactor?

Introduction

The Great Pyramid of Giza has traditionally been considered a tomb or ceremonial structure. Yet an intriguing alternative hypothesis suggests it could have functioned as a large-scale ammonia generator, powered by a high-energy source, such as a nuclear breeder reactor. This analysis explores the theoretical practicality of powering such a system using a continuous 25-gigawatt (GW) breeder reactor.

The Pyramid as an Ammonia Generator

Producing ammonia (NH₃) from atmospheric nitrogen (N₂) and hydrogen (H₂) requires substantial energy. Modern ammonia production (via the Haber-Bosch process) typically demands high pressure (~150–250 atmospheres) and temperatures (~400–500°C). However, given enough available energy, it is theoretically feasible to synthesize ammonia at lower pressures if catalysts and temperatures are sufficiently high or if alternative electrochemical or plasma-based fixation methods are employed.

Theoretical System Components:

1. High Heat Source (25GW breeder reactor)
   A breeder reactor could consistently generate large amounts of heat. At a steady state of approximately 25GW, this heat source would easily sustain temperatures exceeding the 450°C threshold necessary for ammonia synthesis reactions, particularly if conducted electrochemically or catalytically.

2. Steam and Hydrogen Production
   The intense heat from a breeder reactor can efficiently evaporate water from subterranean channels (such as those historically suggested to exist beneath the pyramid) to form superheated steam. If coupled with high-voltage electrostatic fields (possibly in the millions of volts), steam electrolysis into hydrogen and oxygen becomes viable. This high-voltage environment could substantially enhance electrolysis efficiency.

3. Nitrogen Fixation (Ammonia Synthesis)
   With hydrogen readily produced, ammonia generation can proceed. Atmospheric nitrogen, abundant around the pyramid, can combine with the hydrogen generated through electrolysis. Under these conditions, the pyramid's capstone—potentially made from a catalytic metal like osmium, platinum, or gold—could facilitate nitrogen fixation at elevated temperatures.

Power Requirements and Energy Calculations

A thorough calculation of the continuous power requirements to maintain this system follows:

• Estimated Steady-state Power: ~25 GW of continuous thermal power.
• Total Energy Over 10,000 years: """ Energy = 25 GW × 10,000 years × 365.25 days/year × 24 hrs/day × 3600 s/hr ≈ 7.9 × 10²¹ Joules """

Feasibility of a 25GW Breeder Reactor within the Pyramid

A breeder reactor capable of sustaining 25GW thermal power is physically plausible—modern commercial reactors routinely generate 3–4GW thermal, so this is within an achievable engineering scale (though certainly large by current standards).

Fuel Requirements:

• Each kilogram of fissile fuel (e.g., U-233 from Thorium-232) releases ~80 terajoules (TJ) or 8×10¹³ joules.
• Considering reactor efficiency (~35%), one kilogram provides ~2.8×10¹³ joules usable energy: """ Fuel Required = 7.9 × 10²¹ J / 2.8 × 10¹³ J/kg ≈ 280,000 metric tons """
• With a breeding ratio of ~1.3: """ Initial Load = 280,000 tons / 1.3 ≈ 215,000 tons """

Reactor Physical Dimensions (Pebble Bed Design):

• King’s Chamber size: ~318 cubic meters.
• The reactor core would need to be extremely dense and highly efficient. Advanced engineering would be required to concentrate such power in this space, but it is within speculative feasibility.

Steam Generation and Scaling Management

Key methods to mitigate mineral scaling in the system: 1. Natural Limestone Filtration 2. Chemical Additives (e.g., chelating agents, phosphate compounds) 3. Superheating and Electrostatic Ionization 4. Electrostatic Control

Conclusion and Practical Considerations

Yes, the Great Pyramid could theoretically function as an ammonia generator if powered by a 25GW breeder reactor, using: - Thorium or Uranium-based fertile material, - Sustainable steam and scaling management, - High-voltage-enhanced electrolysis and catalytic ammonia synthesis.

While speculative, it is technologically coherent when analyzed through the lens of modern nuclear and chemical engineering.

See also: nostr:naddr1qqxnzde5xymrgvekxycrswfeqy2hwumn8ghj7am0deejucmpd3mxztnyv4mz7q3qc856kwjk524kef97hazw5e9jlkjq4333r6yxh2rtgefpd894ddpsxpqqqp65wun9c08

@ 6be5cc06:5259daf0

Bitcoin: Um sistema de dinheiro eletrônico direto entre pessoas.

Satoshi Nakamoto
satoshin@gmx.com
www.bitcoin.org

---

Resumo

O Bitcoin é uma forma de dinheiro digital que permite pagamentos diretos entre pessoas, sem a necessidade de um banco ou instituição financeira. Ele resolve um problema chamado gasto duplo, que ocorre quando alguém tenta gastar o mesmo dinheiro duas vezes. Para evitar isso, o Bitcoin usa uma rede descentralizada onde todos trabalham juntos para verificar e registrar as transações.

As transações são registradas em um livro público chamado blockchain, protegido por uma técnica chamada Prova de Trabalho. Essa técnica cria uma cadeia de registros que não pode ser alterada sem refazer todo o trabalho já feito. Essa cadeia é mantida pelos computadores que participam da rede, e a mais longa é considerada a verdadeira.

Enquanto a maior parte do poder computacional da rede for controlada por participantes honestos, o sistema continuará funcionando de forma segura. A rede é flexível, permitindo que qualquer pessoa entre ou saia a qualquer momento, sempre confiando na cadeia mais longa como prova do que aconteceu.

---

1. Introdução

Hoje, quase todos os pagamentos feitos pela internet dependem de bancos ou empresas como processadores de pagamento (cartões de crédito, por exemplo) para funcionar. Embora esse sistema seja útil, ele tem problemas importantes porque é baseado em confiança.

Primeiro, essas empresas podem reverter pagamentos, o que é útil em caso de erros, mas cria custos e incertezas. Isso faz com que pequenas transações, como pagar centavos por um serviço, se tornem inviáveis. Além disso, os comerciantes são obrigados a desconfiar dos clientes, pedindo informações extras e aceitando fraudes como algo inevitável.

Esses problemas não existem no dinheiro físico, como o papel-moeda, onde o pagamento é final e direto entre as partes. No entanto, não temos como enviar dinheiro físico pela internet sem depender de um intermediário confiável.

O que precisamos é de um sistema de pagamento eletrônico baseado em provas matemáticas, não em confiança. Esse sistema permitiria que qualquer pessoa enviasse dinheiro diretamente para outra, sem depender de bancos ou processadores de pagamento. Além disso, as transações seriam irreversíveis, protegendo vendedores contra fraudes, mas mantendo a possibilidade de soluções para disputas legítimas.

Neste documento, apresentamos o Bitcoin, que resolve o problema do gasto duplo usando uma rede descentralizada. Essa rede cria um registro público e protegido por cálculos matemáticos, que garante a ordem das transações. Enquanto a maior parte da rede for controlada por pessoas honestas, o sistema será seguro contra ataques.

---

2. Transações

Para entender como funciona o Bitcoin, é importante saber como as transações são realizadas. Imagine que você quer transferir uma "moeda digital" para outra pessoa. No sistema do Bitcoin, essa "moeda" é representada por uma sequência de registros que mostram quem é o atual dono. Para transferi-la, você adiciona um novo registro comprovando que agora ela pertence ao próximo dono. Esse registro é protegido por um tipo especial de assinatura digital.

O que é uma assinatura digital?

Uma assinatura digital é como uma senha secreta, mas muito mais segura. No Bitcoin, cada usuário tem duas chaves: uma "chave privada", que é secreta e serve para criar a assinatura, e uma "chave pública", que pode ser compartilhada com todos e é usada para verificar se a assinatura é válida. Quando você transfere uma moeda, usa sua chave privada para assinar a transação, provando que você é o dono. A próxima pessoa pode usar sua chave pública para confirmar isso.

Como funciona na prática?

Cada "moeda" no Bitcoin é, na verdade, uma cadeia de assinaturas digitais. Vamos imaginar o seguinte cenário:

1. A moeda está com o Dono 0 (você). Para transferi-la ao Dono 1, você assina digitalmente a transação com sua chave privada. Essa assinatura inclui o código da transação anterior (chamado de "hash") e a chave pública do Dono 1.
2. Quando o Dono 1 quiser transferir a moeda ao Dono 2, ele assinará a transação seguinte com sua própria chave privada, incluindo também o hash da transação anterior e a chave pública do Dono 2.
3. Esse processo continua, formando uma "cadeia" de transações. Qualquer pessoa pode verificar essa cadeia para confirmar quem é o atual dono da moeda.

Resolvendo o problema do gasto duplo

Um grande desafio com moedas digitais é o "gasto duplo", que é quando uma mesma moeda é usada em mais de uma transação. Para evitar isso, muitos sistemas antigos dependiam de uma entidade central confiável, como uma casa da moeda, que verificava todas as transações. No entanto, isso criava um ponto único de falha e centralizava o controle do dinheiro.

O Bitcoin resolve esse problema de forma inovadora: ele usa uma rede descentralizada onde todos os participantes (os "nós") têm acesso a um registro completo de todas as transações. Cada nó verifica se as transações são válidas e se a moeda não foi gasta duas vezes. Quando a maioria dos nós concorda com a validade de uma transação, ela é registrada permanentemente na blockchain.

Por que isso é importante?

Essa solução elimina a necessidade de confiar em uma única entidade para gerenciar o dinheiro, permitindo que qualquer pessoa no mundo use o Bitcoin sem precisar de permissão de terceiros. Além disso, ela garante que o sistema seja seguro e resistente a fraudes.

---

3. Servidor Timestamp

Para assegurar que as transações sejam realizadas de forma segura e transparente, o sistema Bitcoin utiliza algo chamado de "servidor de registro de tempo" (timestamp). Esse servidor funciona como um registro público que organiza as transações em uma ordem específica.

Ele faz isso agrupando várias transações em blocos e criando um código único chamado "hash". Esse hash é como uma impressão digital que representa todo o conteúdo do bloco. O hash de cada bloco é amplamente divulgado, como se fosse publicado em um jornal ou em um fórum público.

Esse processo garante que cada bloco de transações tenha um registro de quando foi criado e que ele existia naquele momento. Além disso, cada novo bloco criado contém o hash do bloco anterior, formando uma cadeia contínua de blocos conectados — conhecida como blockchain.

Com isso, se alguém tentar alterar qualquer informação em um bloco anterior, o hash desse bloco mudará e não corresponderá ao hash armazenado no bloco seguinte. Essa característica torna a cadeia muito segura, pois qualquer tentativa de fraude seria imediatamente detectada.

O sistema de timestamps é essencial para provar a ordem cronológica das transações e garantir que cada uma delas seja única e autêntica. Dessa forma, ele reforça a segurança e a confiança na rede Bitcoin.

---

4. Prova-de-Trabalho

Para implementar o registro de tempo distribuído no sistema Bitcoin, utilizamos um mecanismo chamado prova-de-trabalho. Esse sistema é semelhante ao Hashcash, desenvolvido por Adam Back, e baseia-se na criação de um código único, o "hash", por meio de um processo computacionalmente exigente.

A prova-de-trabalho envolve encontrar um valor especial que, quando processado junto com as informações do bloco, gere um hash que comece com uma quantidade específica de zeros. Esse valor especial é chamado de "nonce". Encontrar o nonce correto exige um esforço significativo do computador, porque envolve tentativas repetidas até que a condição seja satisfeita.

Esse processo é importante porque torna extremamente difícil alterar qualquer informação registrada em um bloco. Se alguém tentar mudar algo em um bloco, seria necessário refazer o trabalho de computação não apenas para aquele bloco, mas também para todos os blocos que vêm depois dele. Isso garante a segurança e a imutabilidade da blockchain.

A prova-de-trabalho também resolve o problema de decidir qual cadeia de blocos é a válida quando há múltiplas cadeias competindo. A decisão é feita pela cadeia mais longa, pois ela representa o maior esforço computacional já realizado. Isso impede que qualquer indivíduo ou grupo controle a rede, desde que a maioria do poder de processamento seja mantida por participantes honestos.

Para garantir que o sistema permaneça eficiente e equilibrado, a dificuldade da prova-de-trabalho é ajustada automaticamente ao longo do tempo. Se novos blocos estiverem sendo gerados rapidamente, a dificuldade aumenta; se estiverem sendo gerados muito lentamente, a dificuldade diminui. Esse ajuste assegura que novos blocos sejam criados aproximadamente a cada 10 minutos, mantendo o sistema estável e funcional.

---

5. Rede

A rede Bitcoin é o coração do sistema e funciona de maneira distribuída, conectando vários participantes (ou nós) para garantir o registro e a validação das transações. Os passos para operar essa rede são:

1. Transmissão de Transações: Quando alguém realiza uma nova transação, ela é enviada para todos os nós da rede. Isso é feito para garantir que todos estejam cientes da operação e possam validá-la.

2. Coleta de Transações em Blocos: Cada nó agrupa as novas transações recebidas em um "bloco". Este bloco será preparado para ser adicionado à cadeia de blocos (a blockchain).

3. Prova-de-Trabalho: Os nós competem para resolver a prova-de-trabalho do bloco, utilizando poder computacional para encontrar um hash válido. Esse processo é como resolver um quebra-cabeça matemático difícil.

4. Envio do Bloco Resolvido: Quando um nó encontra a solução para o bloco (a prova-de-trabalho), ele compartilha esse bloco com todos os outros nós na rede.

5. Validação do Bloco: Cada nó verifica o bloco recebido para garantir que todas as transações nele contidas sejam válidas e que nenhuma moeda tenha sido gasta duas vezes. Apenas blocos válidos são aceitos.

6. Construção do Próximo Bloco: Os nós que aceitaram o bloco começam a trabalhar na criação do próximo bloco, utilizando o hash do bloco aceito como base (hash anterior). Isso mantém a continuidade da cadeia.

Resolução de Conflitos e Escolha da Cadeia Mais Longa

Os nós sempre priorizam a cadeia mais longa, pois ela representa o maior esforço computacional já realizado, garantindo maior segurança. Se dois blocos diferentes forem compartilhados simultaneamente, os nós trabalharão no primeiro bloco recebido, mas guardarão o outro como uma alternativa. Caso o segundo bloco eventualmente forme uma cadeia mais longa (ou seja, tenha mais blocos subsequentes), os nós mudarão para essa nova cadeia.

Tolerância a Falhas

A rede é robusta e pode lidar com mensagens que não chegam a todos os nós. Uma transação não precisa alcançar todos os nós de imediato; basta que chegue a um número suficiente deles para ser incluída em um bloco. Da mesma forma, se um nó não receber um bloco em tempo hábil, ele pode solicitá-lo ao perceber que está faltando quando o próximo bloco é recebido.

Esse mecanismo descentralizado permite que a rede Bitcoin funcione de maneira segura, confiável e resiliente, sem depender de uma autoridade central.

---

6. Incentivo

O incentivo é um dos pilares fundamentais que sustenta o funcionamento da rede Bitcoin, garantindo que os participantes (nós) continuem operando de forma honesta e contribuindo com recursos computacionais. Ele é estruturado em duas partes principais: a recompensa por mineração e as taxas de transação.

Recompensa por Mineração

Por convenção, o primeiro registro em cada bloco é uma transação especial que cria novas moedas e as atribui ao criador do bloco. Essa recompensa incentiva os mineradores a dedicarem poder computacional para apoiar a rede. Como não há uma autoridade central para emitir moedas, essa é a maneira pela qual novas moedas entram em circulação. Esse processo pode ser comparado ao trabalho de garimpeiros, que utilizam recursos para colocar mais ouro em circulação. No caso do Bitcoin, o "recurso" consiste no tempo de CPU e na energia elétrica consumida para resolver a prova-de-trabalho.

Taxas de Transação

Além da recompensa por mineração, os mineradores também podem ser incentivados pelas taxas de transação. Se uma transação utiliza menos valor de saída do que o valor de entrada, a diferença é tratada como uma taxa, que é adicionada à recompensa do bloco contendo essa transação. Com o passar do tempo e à medida que o número de moedas em circulação atinge o limite predeterminado, essas taxas de transação se tornam a principal fonte de incentivo, substituindo gradualmente a emissão de novas moedas. Isso permite que o sistema opere sem inflação, uma vez que o número total de moedas permanece fixo.

Incentivo à Honestidade

O design do incentivo também busca garantir que os participantes da rede mantenham um comportamento honesto. Para um atacante que consiga reunir mais poder computacional do que o restante da rede, ele enfrentaria duas escolhas:

1. Usar esse poder para fraudar o sistema, como reverter transações e roubar pagamentos.
2. Seguir as regras do sistema, criando novos blocos e recebendo recompensas legítimas.

A lógica econômica favorece a segunda opção, pois um comportamento desonesto prejudicaria a confiança no sistema, diminuindo o valor de todas as moedas, incluindo aquelas que o próprio atacante possui. Jogar dentro das regras não apenas maximiza o retorno financeiro, mas também preserva a validade e a integridade do sistema.

Esse mecanismo garante que os incentivos econômicos estejam alinhados com o objetivo de manter a rede segura, descentralizada e funcional ao longo do tempo.

---

7. Recuperação do Espaço em Disco

Depois que uma moeda passa a estar protegida por muitos blocos na cadeia, as informações sobre as transações antigas que a geraram podem ser descartadas para economizar espaço em disco. Para que isso seja possível sem comprometer a segurança, as transações são organizadas em uma estrutura chamada "árvore de Merkle". Essa árvore funciona como um resumo das transações: em vez de armazenar todas elas, guarda apenas um "hash raiz", que é como uma assinatura compacta que representa todo o grupo de transações.

Os blocos antigos podem, então, ser simplificados, removendo as partes desnecessárias dessa árvore. Apenas a raiz do hash precisa ser mantida no cabeçalho do bloco, garantindo que a integridade dos dados seja preservada, mesmo que detalhes específicos sejam descartados.

Para exemplificar: imagine que você tenha vários recibos de compra. Em vez de guardar todos os recibos, você cria um documento e lista apenas o valor total de cada um. Mesmo que os recibos originais sejam descartados, ainda é possível verificar a soma com base nos valores armazenados.

Além disso, o espaço ocupado pelos blocos em si é muito pequeno. Cada bloco sem transações ocupa apenas cerca de 80 bytes. Isso significa que, mesmo com blocos sendo gerados a cada 10 minutos, o crescimento anual em espaço necessário é insignificante: apenas 4,2 MB por ano. Com a capacidade de armazenamento dos computadores crescendo a cada ano, esse espaço continuará sendo trivial, garantindo que a rede possa operar de forma eficiente sem problemas de armazenamento, mesmo a longo prazo.

---

8. Verificação de Pagamento Simplificada

É possível confirmar pagamentos sem a necessidade de operar um nó completo da rede. Para isso, o usuário precisa apenas de uma cópia dos cabeçalhos dos blocos da cadeia mais longa (ou seja, a cadeia com maior esforço de trabalho acumulado). Ele pode verificar a validade de uma transação ao consultar os nós da rede até obter a confirmação de que tem a cadeia mais longa. Para isso, utiliza-se o ramo Merkle, que conecta a transação ao bloco em que ela foi registrada.

Entretanto, o método simplificado possui limitações: ele não pode confirmar uma transação isoladamente, mas sim assegurar que ela ocupa um lugar específico na cadeia mais longa. Dessa forma, se um nó da rede aprova a transação, os blocos subsequentes reforçam essa aceitação.

A verificação simplificada é confiável enquanto a maioria dos nós da rede for honesta. Contudo, ela se torna vulnerável caso a rede seja dominada por um invasor. Nesse cenário, um atacante poderia fabricar transações fraudulentas que enganariam o usuário temporariamente até que o invasor obtivesse controle completo da rede.

Uma estratégia para mitigar esse risco é configurar alertas nos softwares de nós completos. Esses alertas identificam blocos inválidos, sugerindo ao usuário baixar o bloco completo para confirmar qualquer inconsistência. Para maior segurança, empresas que realizam pagamentos frequentes podem preferir operar seus próprios nós, reduzindo riscos e permitindo uma verificação mais direta e confiável.

---

9. Combinando e Dividindo Valor

No sistema Bitcoin, cada unidade de valor é tratada como uma "moeda" individual, mas gerenciar cada centavo como uma transação separada seria impraticável. Para resolver isso, o Bitcoin permite que valores sejam combinados ou divididos em transações, facilitando pagamentos de qualquer valor.

Entradas e Saídas

Cada transação no Bitcoin é composta por:

• Entradas: Representam os valores recebidos em transações anteriores.
• Saídas: Correspondem aos valores enviados, divididos entre os destinatários e, eventualmente, o troco para o remetente.

Normalmente, uma transação contém:

• Uma única entrada com valor suficiente para cobrir o pagamento.
• Ou várias entradas combinadas para atingir o valor necessário.

O valor total das saídas nunca excede o das entradas, e a diferença (se houver) pode ser retornada ao remetente como troco.

Exemplo Prático

Imagine que você tem duas entradas:

1. 0,03 BTC
2. 0,07 BTC

Se deseja enviar 0,08 BTC para alguém, a transação terá:

• Entrada: As duas entradas combinadas (0,03 + 0,07 BTC = 0,10 BTC).
• Saídas: Uma para o destinatário (0,08 BTC) e outra como troco para você (0,02 BTC).

Essa flexibilidade permite que o sistema funcione sem precisar manipular cada unidade mínima individualmente.

Difusão e Simplificação

A difusão de transações, onde uma depende de várias anteriores e assim por diante, não representa um problema. Não é necessário armazenar ou verificar o histórico completo de uma transação para utilizá-la, já que o registro na blockchain garante sua integridade.

---

10. Privacidade

O modelo bancário tradicional oferece um certo nível de privacidade, limitando o acesso às informações financeiras apenas às partes envolvidas e a um terceiro confiável (como bancos ou instituições financeiras). No entanto, o Bitcoin opera de forma diferente, pois todas as transações são publicamente registradas na blockchain. Apesar disso, a privacidade pode ser mantida utilizando chaves públicas anônimas, que desvinculam diretamente as transações das identidades das partes envolvidas.

Fluxo de Informação

• No modelo tradicional, as transações passam por um terceiro confiável que conhece tanto o remetente quanto o destinatário.
• No Bitcoin, as transações são anunciadas publicamente, mas sem revelar diretamente as identidades das partes. Isso é comparável a dados divulgados por bolsas de valores, onde informações como o tempo e o tamanho das negociações (a "fita") são públicas, mas as identidades das partes não.

Protegendo a Privacidade

Para aumentar a privacidade no Bitcoin, são adotadas as seguintes práticas:

1. Chaves Públicas Anônimas: Cada transação utiliza um par de chaves diferentes, dificultando a associação com um proprietário único.
2. Prevenção de Ligação: Ao usar chaves novas para cada transação, reduz-se a possibilidade de links evidentes entre múltiplas transações realizadas pelo mesmo usuário.

Riscos de Ligação

Embora a privacidade seja fortalecida, alguns riscos permanecem:

• Transações multi-entrada podem revelar que todas as entradas pertencem ao mesmo proprietário, caso sejam necessárias para somar o valor total.
• O proprietário da chave pode ser identificado indiretamente por transações anteriores que estejam conectadas.

---

11. Cálculos

Imagine que temos um sistema onde as pessoas (ou computadores) competem para adicionar informações novas (blocos) a um grande registro público (a cadeia de blocos ou blockchain). Este registro é como um livro contábil compartilhado, onde todos podem verificar o que está escrito.

Agora, vamos pensar em um cenário: um atacante quer enganar o sistema. Ele quer mudar informações já registradas para beneficiar a si mesmo, por exemplo, desfazendo um pagamento que já fez. Para isso, ele precisa criar uma versão alternativa do livro contábil (a cadeia de blocos dele) e convencer todos os outros participantes de que essa versão é a verdadeira.

Mas isso é extremamente difícil.

Como o Ataque Funciona

Quando um novo bloco é adicionado à cadeia, ele depende de cálculos complexos que levam tempo e esforço. Esses cálculos são como um grande quebra-cabeça que precisa ser resolvido.

• Os “bons jogadores” (nós honestos) estão sempre trabalhando juntos para resolver esses quebra-cabeças e adicionar novos blocos à cadeia verdadeira.
• O atacante, por outro lado, precisa resolver quebra-cabeças sozinho, tentando “alcançar” a cadeia honesta para que sua versão alternativa pareça válida.

Se a cadeia honesta já está vários blocos à frente, o atacante começa em desvantagem, e o sistema está projetado para que a dificuldade de alcançá-los aumente rapidamente.

A Corrida Entre Cadeias

Você pode imaginar isso como uma corrida. A cada bloco novo que os jogadores honestos adicionam à cadeia verdadeira, eles se distanciam mais do atacante. Para vencer, o atacante teria que resolver os quebra-cabeças mais rápido que todos os outros jogadores honestos juntos.

Suponha que:

• A rede honesta tem 80% do poder computacional (ou seja, resolve 8 de cada 10 quebra-cabeças).
• O atacante tem 20% do poder computacional (ou seja, resolve 2 de cada 10 quebra-cabeças).

Cada vez que a rede honesta adiciona um bloco, o atacante tem que "correr atrás" e resolver mais quebra-cabeças para alcançar.

Por Que o Ataque Fica Cada Vez Mais Improvável?

Vamos usar uma fórmula simples para mostrar como as chances de sucesso do atacante diminuem conforme ele precisa "alcançar" mais blocos:

P = (q/p)^z

• q é o poder computacional do atacante (20%, ou 0,2).
• p é o poder computacional da rede honesta (80%, ou 0,8).
• z é a diferença de blocos entre a cadeia honesta e a cadeia do atacante.

Se o atacante está 5 blocos atrás (z = 5):

P = (0,2 / 0,8)^5 = (0,25)^5 = 0,00098, (ou, 0,098%)

Isso significa que o atacante tem menos de 0,1% de chance de sucesso — ou seja, é muito improvável.

Se ele estiver 10 blocos atrás (z = 10):

P = (0,2 / 0,8)^10 = (0,25)^10 = 0,000000095, (ou, 0,0000095%).

Neste caso, as chances de sucesso são praticamente nulas.

Um Exemplo Simples

Se você jogar uma moeda, a chance de cair “cara” é de 50%. Mas se precisar de 10 caras seguidas, sua chance já é bem menor. Se precisar de 20 caras seguidas, é quase impossível.

No caso do Bitcoin, o atacante precisa de muito mais do que 20 caras seguidas. Ele precisa resolver quebra-cabeças extremamente difíceis e alcançar os jogadores honestos que estão sempre à frente. Isso faz com que o ataque seja inviável na prática.

Por Que Tudo Isso é Seguro?

• A probabilidade de sucesso do atacante diminui exponencialmente. Isso significa que, quanto mais tempo passa, menor é a chance de ele conseguir enganar o sistema.
• A cadeia verdadeira (honesta) está protegida pela força da rede. Cada novo bloco que os jogadores honestos adicionam à cadeia torna mais difícil para o atacante alcançar.

E Se o Atacante Tentar Continuar?

O atacante poderia continuar tentando indefinidamente, mas ele estaria gastando muito tempo e energia sem conseguir nada. Enquanto isso, os jogadores honestos estão sempre adicionando novos blocos, tornando o trabalho do atacante ainda mais inútil.

Assim, o sistema garante que a cadeia verdadeira seja extremamente segura e que ataques sejam, na prática, impossíveis de ter sucesso.

---

12. Conclusão

Propusemos um sistema de transações eletrônicas que elimina a necessidade de confiança, baseando-se em assinaturas digitais e em uma rede peer-to-peer que utiliza prova de trabalho. Isso resolve o problema do gasto duplo, criando um histórico público de transações imutável, desde que a maioria do poder computacional permaneça sob controle dos participantes honestos. A rede funciona de forma simples e descentralizada, com nós independentes que não precisam de identificação ou coordenação direta. Eles entram e saem livremente, aceitando a cadeia de prova de trabalho como registro do que ocorreu durante sua ausência. As decisões são tomadas por meio do poder de CPU, validando blocos legítimos, estendendo a cadeia e rejeitando os inválidos. Com este mecanismo de consenso, todas as regras e incentivos necessários para o funcionamento seguro e eficiente do sistema são garantidos.

---

Faça o download do whitepaper original em português: https://bitcoin.org/files/bitcoin-paper/bitcoin_pt_br.pdf

@ 0b118e40:4edc09cb

TL;DR : No.

(This is not a feasibility analysis, but a reflection on philosophical alignment with Bitcoin’s vision).

The moment stablecoins or national currencies gain traction in Bitcoin LN, you can forget about Bitcoin’s position as a purely decentralized medium of exchange. Bitcoin’s position will be undermined.

A Bitcoin-native global economy, where people and businesses transact directly in Bitcoin, is what aligns with its original purpose. This is what we should aim for. This is all we should aim for.

I used to believe stablecoins might help with on/off ramps. But the truth is, if Bitcoin is to function as a true currency, broader global adoption that bypasses traditional financial systems will make those ramps irrelevant.

Eventually, two camps will emerge. One will try to preserve Bitcoin’s purity as a currency. The other will push for everything else in the name of Bitcoin: store-of-value narratives, ETFs, stablecoin collaborations, tokens, pump and dumps, NFTs, and centralized workarounds.

Currency domination, especially by the USD, has long contributed to poverty in the Global South. It deepens inequality and worsens debt burdens. During the Tequila Crisis and the Asian Financial Crisis, countries like Mexico and regions like Southeast Asia suffered massive currency devaluations and defaults because of their dependence on the USD. Every time the US raises interest rates, developing nations experience capital flight, currency drops, and economic hardship. This is not ancient history. It has been happening in the last two years and continues to widen the poverty gap. And as always, it is the poor who suffer the most.

What does this have to do with stablecoins? Stablecoin is your fiat 2.0.

USDT is just currency domination through blockchain. It is pegged to the USD, and if it rides Bitcoin’s Lightning rails, it risks keeping users transacting in USD rather than in Bitcoin itself. That not only undermines Bitcoin’s core purpose, it risks making Bitcoin appear like it is taking sides in the fragile and invisible global currency war.

To counter, people will say “Let all stablecoins come. Peg them to any currency.” But what’s the point of Bitcoin then? To become the new logistics layer for fiat 2.0?

That is not progress. That is regress. It is inviting the very systems Bitcoin was built to disrupt back into the ecosystem.

I believe when you use stablecoins this way, you are not Trojan-horsing Bitcoin into the mainstream. You are letting fiat Trojan-horse its way into Bitcoin. And if you let them in, they will win.

Adding stablecoin into Bitcoin LN is counterproductive to Bitcoin's decentralized ethos.

Bitcoin’s true potential is its ability to provide an alternative to centralized, government-controlled currencies and financial systems. We should stick to the original game plan.

---

Side note: If you really want to Trojan-horse Bitcoin adoption…

In my country, we have so many mixed races and cross-cultural traditions. During Chinese New Year, if you are married, you give everyone who is not married an “ang pow,” which is money in a red packet. Because we are so deeply integrated, people give money at almost every celebration: Christmas, Eid, Diwali, birthdays, graduations, even funerals.

I recently met up with a friend who just had a baby, and I was more than happy to be the first to give her daughter some Bitcoin. Her first sats. It would not hurt to start giving Bitcoin as gifts. And if someone gets offended that it is not part of their tradition, just get a Bitkey and wrap it up. It is so pretty.

Find more fun and creative ways to spread Bitcoin adoption.

But for goodness’ sake, stop justifying everything else in the name of Bitcoin adoption.

---

To get a better idea of Fiat 2.0, I mind-mapped Bitcoin on macroeconomy on my scratchpad.

If you take a closer look, it might help you answer a few key questions:

• Do you want more or less government control over money?

• Are you a fan of central banks? Then you probably prefer stablecoins.

@ 502ab02a:a2860397

หลังจากเราดูเรื่อง UPOV กันไปแล้ว วันนี้เรามาดูกันครับว่า ผู้ที่ต่อต้าน เจออะไรกันบ้าง

ในหลายประเทศทั่วโลก เสียงของเกษตรกรรายย่อยที่เคยเงียบงัน กำลังดังขึ้นท่ามกลางการรุกคืบของข้อตกลงระหว่างประเทศที่พยายามกีดกันสิทธิการใช้เมล็ดพันธุ์แบบดั้งเดิมของพวกเขา การก้าวเข้ามาของ UPOV 1991 ไม่ต่างอะไรกับการเขียนกฎหมายใหม่ให้บริษัทข้ามชาติมีสิทธิ “จดทะเบียน” พันธุ์พืชที่เคยเป็นสมบัติสาธารณะ แล้วเรียกร้องค่าลิขสิทธิ์จากเกษตรกรแม้จะปลูกเพื่อกินเองก็ตาม

แต่โลกนี้ไม่ได้เงียบ…

กรณีศึกษา อินเดีย หนึ่งในเสียงชัดเจนที่สุดมาจากดร.วันดานา ชิวา (Vandana Shiva) นักฟิสิกส์และนักเคลื่อนไหวด้านสิ่งแวดล้อมในอินเดีย ผู้ก่อตั้งองค์กร Navdanya ซึ่งมีภารกิจหลักในการปกป้องเมล็ดพันธุ์พื้นบ้านและเกษตรกรรมแบบยั่งยืน

Navdanya สร้างธนาคารเมล็ดพันธุ์ของตัวเอง โดยไม่ยอมรับระบบ UPOV ใด ๆ เลย องค์กรนี้ทำงานร่วมกับชุมชนพื้นเมืองทั่วอินเดียเพื่อเก็บเมล็ดพันธุ์ดั้งเดิมมากกว่า 2,000 สายพันธุ์ พร้อมกับปลูกฝังแนวคิดว่า “เมล็ดพันธุ์ไม่ใช่สินค้า แต่เป็นชีวิต”

อินเดียเอง แม้จะมีแรงกดดันจากการเจรจาทางการค้าระหว่างประเทศ แต่ก็ยังไม่ยอมรับ UPOV 1991 อย่างเป็นทางการ พวกเขาเลือกเขียนกฎหมายของตนเองชื่อว่า The Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers' Rights Act, 2001 ซึ่งกล้าหาญมาก เพราะเป็นกฎหมายที่คุ้มครอง “สิทธิของเกษตรกร” เคียงคู่ไปกับ “สิทธิของนักปรับปรุงพันธุ์” โดยยืนยันว่า เกษตรกรมีสิทธิในการบันทึก เก็บ ใช้ แลกเปลี่ยน และขายเมล็ดพันธุ์ของตนเอง โดยไม่ต้องขออนุญาตจากใคร ผลคืออะไร? แรงกดดันจากต่างประเทศมาเต็ม โดยเฉพาะจากยุโรปและสหรัฐฯ ที่หวังให้อินเดีย “อัปเกรด” เข้าสู่ UPOV 1991 ให้ได้ เพราะจะทำให้บริษัทเมล็ดยักษ์ใหญ่สามารถเข้ามาจดทะเบียนพันธุ์พืชในอินเดียและเรียกร้องค่าลิขสิทธิ์ได้ แต่รัฐบาลอินเดียยังยืนหยัด ด้วยเหตุผลว่า “การให้สิทธิเฉพาะผู้ถือพันธุ์พืชเชิงพาณิชย์คือการทำลายฐานเกษตรกรรมพื้นบ้านทั้งหมด” แถมยังใช้ Navdanya Network ที่เก็บพันธุกรรมพื้นบ้านทั่วประเทศเป็นโล่กันอีกชั้น

เอธิโอเปีย เอธิโอเปียเป็นประเทศที่มีความหลากหลายทางชีวภาพสูงมาก โดยเฉพาะพืชอาหารท้องถิ่นอย่าง Teff (เทฟ) ที่ใช้ทำขนมปัง Injera อันเป็นหัวใจของวัฒนธรรมอาหารเอธิโอเปีย บริษัทสัญชาติดัตช์เคยพยายามจดสิทธิบัตรในยุโรปว่าเป็นเจ้าของพันธุ์เทฟ และเอธิโอเปียต้องจ่ายค่าลิขสิทธิ์ถ้าจะส่งออก สิ่งที่เกิดขึ้นคือการตอบโต้จากฝั่งเอธิโอเปียและชาวแอฟริกันใต้ว่า “คุณจะเป็นเจ้าของพันธุ์พืชที่เราใช้มาเป็นพันปีได้ยังไง?” การเคลื่อนไหวนี้รุนแรงถึงขั้นมีการฟ้องร้องและถอนสิทธิบัตรออกจากหลายประเทศในยุโรป รัฐบาลเอธิโอเปียจึงเลือกไม่เข้าร่วม UPOV 1991 โดยเด็ดขาด และประกาศให้ Teff เป็น "ทรัพยากรของแผ่นดิน" ใครก็เอาไปจดสิทธิไม่ได้

อิหร่าน อิหร่านเป็นหนึ่งในประเทศที่ปฏิเสธการเข้าเป็นสมาชิก UPOV ทุกฉบับอย่างสิ้นเชิง พวกเขาเลือกปกป้องความมั่นคงด้านอาหารของตนเองโดยการสร้างระบบเก็บเมล็ดพันธุ์ชุมชนทั่วประเทศ และไม่ยอมให้บริษัทข้ามชาติเข้าครอบงำระบบเกษตรกรรม

อาร์เจนตินา แม้อาร์เจนตินาจะอนุญาตให้ใช้ GMO บางประเภท แต่พวกเขากลับยังไม่เข้าร่วม UPOV 1991 เพราะชาวนาอาร์เจนตินาหลายล้านรายออกมาคัดค้านหนักมาก ประเด็นหลักคือ “Seed Saving” หรือการเก็บเมล็ดพันธุ์ไว้ปลูกเอง ซึ่งถือเป็นสิ่งจำเป็นสำหรับเกษตรกรรายย่อย หากเข้าร่วม UPOV 1991 เมื่อใด การกระทำเช่นนี้อาจถือว่าผิดกฎหมาย รัฐบาลอาร์เจนตินาจึงเลือกเดินทางสายกลาง โดยให้ชาวนารายย่อยยังมีสิทธิพื้นฐานในการเก็บเมล็ดไว้ปลูกต่อได้โดยไม่ต้องจ่ายค่าลิขสิทธิ์ แม้จะมีแรงกดดันจาก Monsanto และ Dow Chemical ก็ตาม

เสียงเล็กๆ ที่รวมกันเป็นพายุ ในหลายประเทศในแอฟริกา ละตินอเมริกา และเอเชียตะวันออกเฉียงใต้ ขบวนการคัดค้าน UPOV 1991 กำลังขยายตัว แม้เสียงจะยังไม่ดังเท่าบริษัทข้ามชาติ แต่ก็เริ่มส่งผลชัดเจนในเชิงนโยบาย หลายประเทศกำลังทบทวนข้อเสนอ FTA ใหม่ โดยใส่เงื่อนไขการปกป้องสิทธิของเกษตรกรรายย่อยเป็นหัวใจหลัก

ประเทศที่ปฏิเสธ UPOV 1991 มักโดนกดดันผ่าน “เข็มฉีดยาทางการค้า” ไม่ว่าจะเป็นเงื่อนไขใน FTA, การกีดกันทางภาษี หรือแม้แต่ถูกลดเครดิตในเวทีโลก เช่น - สหภาพยุโรปมักใส่เงื่อนไขให้ประเทศคู่เจรจา FTA ต้อง “ปรับปรุงกฎหมายให้สอดคล้องกับ UPOV 1991” เสมอ - องค์การทรัพย์สินทางปัญญาโลก (WIPO) ก็เป็นกระบอกเสียงสำคัญที่กดดันให้ประเทศต่าง ๆ เข้า UPOV เพื่อ “สร้างบรรยากาศการลงทุนที่ดี”

การไม่ยอมเข้า UPOV มักถูกตีความว่าเป็น “ความเสี่ยงทางเศรษฐกิจ” แต่จริง ๆ แล้วมันคือ การเลือกปกป้องฐานรากของประเทศตนเอง ต่างหาก

นี่คือยุคที่ผู้คนเริ่มตั้งคำถามว่า… ทำไมเมล็ดพันธุ์ต้องถูกจดลิขสิทธิ์? ใครกันแน่ที่ควรมีสิทธิต่อเมล็ดพันธุ์ คนที่ปลูกมันมาเป็นร้อยปี หรือบริษัทที่ใส่ชื่อบนฉลาก?

ในศตวรรษที่ 21 ที่เต็มไปด้วยเทคโนโลยี พันธุกรรม และ AI ยังมีคนอีกมากที่ยืนอยู่บนผืนดิน และหว่านเมล็ดด้วยมือของพวกเขาเอง โดยหวังว่าอาหารบนโต๊ะจะยังคงเป็นผลผลิตจากผืนแผ่นดิน ไม่ใช่จากใบอนุญาต

และนี่แหละคือสงครามที่แท้จริง สงครามของเมล็ดพันธุ์ และสิทธิในการกินอาหารที่ “ไม่ได้ถูกจดทะเบียนโดยใครสักคน” #pirateketo #กูต้องรู้มั๊ย #ม้วนหางสิลูก

@ 3f770d65:7a745b24

The recent shutdown of TikTok in the United States due to a potential government ban serves as a stark reminder how fragile centralized platforms truly are under the surface. While these platforms offer convenience, a more polished user experience, and connectivity, they are ultimately beholden to governments, corporations, and other authorities. This makes them vulnerable to censorship, regulation, and outright bans. In contrast, Nostr represents a shift in how we approach online communication and content sharing. Built on the principles of decentralization and user choice, Nostr cannot be banned, because it is not a platform—it is a protocol.

PROTOCOLS, NOT PLATFORMS.

At the heart of Nostr's philosophy is user choice, a feature that fundamentally sets it apart from legacy platforms. In centralized systems, the user experience is dictated by a single person or governing entity. If the platform decides to filter, censor, or ban specific users or content, individuals are left with little action to rectify the situation. They must either accept the changes or abandon the platform entirely, often at the cost of losing their social connections, their data, and their identity.

What's happening with TikTok could never happen on Nostr. With Nostr, the dynamics are completely different. Because it is a protocol, not a platform, no single entity controls the ecosystem. Instead, the protocol enables a network of applications and relays that users can freely choose from. If a particular application or relay implements policies that a user disagrees with, such as censorship, filtering, or even government enforced banning, they are not trapped or abandoned. They have the freedom to move to another application or relay with minimal effort.

THIS IS POWERFUL.

Take, for example, the case of a relay that decides to censor specific content. On a legacy platform, this would result in frustration and a loss of access for users. On Nostr, however, users can simply connect to a different relay that does not impose such restrictions. Similarly, if an application introduces features or policies that users dislike, they can migrate to a different application that better suits their preferences, all while retaining their identity and social connections.

The same principles apply to government bans and censorship. A government can ban a specific application or even multiple applications, just as it can block one relay or several relays. China has implemented both tactics, yet Chinese users continue to exist and actively participate on Nostr, demonstrating Nostr's ability to resistant censorship.

How? Simply, it turns into a game of whack-a-mole. When one relay is censored, another quickly takes its place. When one application is banned, another emerges. Users can also bypass these obstacles by running their own relays and applications directly from their homes or personal devices, eliminating reliance on larger entities or organizations and ensuring continuous access.

AGAIN, THIS IS POWERUFL.

Nostr's open and decentralized design makes it resistant to the kinds of government intervention that led to TikTok's outages this weekend and potential future ban in the next 90 days. There is no central server to target, no company to regulate, and no single point of failure. (Insert your CEO jokes here). As long as there are individuals running relays and applications, users continue creating notes and sending zaps.

Platforms like TikTok can be silenced with the stroke of a pen, leaving millions of users disconnected and abandoned. Social communication should not be silenced so incredibly easily. No one should have that much power over social interactions.

Will we on-board a massive wave of TikTokers in the coming hours or days? I don't know.

TikTokers may not be ready for Nostr yet, and honestly, Nostr may not be ready for them either. The ecosystem still lacks the completely polished applications, tools, and services they’re accustomed to. This is where we say "we're still early". They may not be early adopters like the current Nostr user base. Until we bridge that gap, they’ll likely move to the next centralized platform, only to face another government ban or round of censorship in the future. But eventually, there will come a tipping point, a moment when they’ve had enough. When that time comes, I hope we’re prepared. If we’re not, we risk missing a tremendous opportunity to onboard people who genuinely need Nostr’s freedom.

Until then, to all of the Nostr developers out there, keep up the great work and keep building. Your hard work and determination is needed.

@ b8851a06:9b120ba1

The digital guillotine has fallen. The Bybit hack wasn’t just a theft—it was a surgical strike exposing the fatal flaw of “crypto” that isn’t Bitcoin. This wasn’t a bug. It was a feature of a system designed to fail.

Here’s how North Korea’s Lazarus Group stole $1.5B in ETH, why “decentralized finance” is a joke, and how Bitcoin remains the only exit from this circus.

I. The Heist: How Centralized “Crypto” Betrayed Its Users

A. The Multisig Mousetrap (Or: Why You’re Still Using a Bank)

Bybit’s Ethereum cold wallet used multisig, requiring multiple approvals for transactions. Sounds secure, right? Wrong. • The Con: Hackers didn’t pick the lock; they tricked the keyholders using a UI masking attack. The wallet interface showed “SEND TO BYBIT”, but the smart contract was whispering “SEND TO PYONGYANG.” • Bitcoin Parallel: Bitcoin’s multisig is enforced on hardware, not a website UI. No browser spoofing, no phishing emails—just raw cryptography.

Ethereum’s multisig is a vault with a touchscreen PIN pad. Bitcoin’s is a mechanical safe with a key only you hold. Guess which one got robbed?

B. Smart Contracts: Dumb as a Bag of Hammers

The thieves didn’t “hack” Ethereum—they exploited its smart contract complexity. • Bybit’s security depended on a Safe.global contract. Lazarus simply tricked Bybit into approving a malicious upgrade. • Imagine a vending machine that’s programmed to take your money but never give you a soda. That’s Ethereum’s “trustless” tech.

Why Bitcoin Wins: Bitcoin doesn’t do “smart contracts” in the Ethereum sense. Its scripting language is deliberately limited—less code, fewer attack vectors.

Ethereum is a Lego tower; Bitcoin is a granite slab. One topples, one doesn’t.

II. The Laundering: Crypto’s Dirty Little Secret

A. Mixers, Bridges, and the Art of Spycraft

Once the ETH was stolen, Lazarus laundered it at lightspeed: 1. Mixers (eXch) – Obfuscating transaction trails. 2. Bridges (Chainflip) – Swapping ETH for Bitcoin because that’s the only exit that matters.

Bitcoin Reality Check: Bitcoin’s privacy tools (like CoinJoin) are self-custodial—no third-party mixers. You keep control, not some “decentralized” website waiting to be hacked.

Ethereum’s “bridges” are burning rope ladders. Bitcoin’s privacy? An underground tunnel only you control.

B. The $1.5B Lie: “Decentralized” Exchanges Are a Myth

Bybit’s “cold wallet” was on Safe.global—a so-called “decentralized” custodian. Translation? A website with extra steps. • When Safe.global got breached, the private keys were stolen instantly. • “Decentralized” means nothing if your funds depend on one website, one server, one weak link.

Bitcoin’s Answer: Self-custody. Hardware wallets. Cold storage. No trusted third parties.

Using Safe.global is like hiding your life savings in a gym locker labeled “STEAL ME.”

III. The Culprits: State-Sponsored Hackers & Crypto’s Original Sin

A. Lazarus Group: Crypto’s Robin Hood (For Dictators)

North Korea’s hackers didn’t break cryptography—they broke people. • Phishing emails disguised as job offers. • Bribes & social engineering targeting insiders. • DeFi governance manipulation (because Proof-of-Stake is just shareholder voting in disguise).

Bitcoin’s Shield: No CEO to bribe. No “upgrade buttons” to exploit. No governance tokens to manipulate. Code is law—and Bitcoin’s law is written in stone.

Ethereum’s security model is “trust us.” Bitcoin’s is “verify.”

B. The $3B Elephant: Altcoins Fund Dictators

Since 2017, Lazarus has stolen $3B+ in crypto, funding North Korea’s missile program.

Why? Because Ethereum, Solana, and XRP are built on Proof-of-Stake (PoS)—which centralizes power in the hands of a few rich validators. • Bitcoin’s Proof-of-Work: Miners secure the network through energy-backed cryptography. • Altcoins’ Proof-of-Stake: Security is dictated by who owns the most tokens.

Proof-of-Stake secures oligarchs. Proof-of-Work secures money. That’s why Lazarus can drain altcoin treasuries but hasn’t touched Bitcoin’s network.

IV. Bybit’s Survival: A Centralized Circus

A. The Bailout: Banks 2.0

Bybit took bridge loans from “undisclosed partners” (read: Wall Street vultures). • Just like a traditional bank, Bybit printed liquidity out of thin air to stay solvent. • If that sounds familiar, it’s because crypto exchanges are just banks in hoodies.

Bitcoin Contrast: No loans. No bailouts. No “trust.” Just 21 million coins, mathematically secured.

Bybit’s solvency is a confidence trick. Bitcoin’s solvency is math.

B. The Great Withdrawal Panic

Within hours, 350,000+ users scrambled to withdraw funds.

A digital bank run—except this isn’t a bank. It’s an exchange that pretended to be decentralized.

Bitcoin fixes this: your wallet isn’t an IOU. It’s actual money.

Bybit = a TikTok influencer promising riches. Bitcoin = the gold in your basement.

V. The Fallout: Regulators vs Reality

A. ETH’s 8% Crash vs Bitcoin’s Unshakable Base

Ethereum tanked because it’s a tech stock, not money. Bitcoin? Dropped 2% and stabilized.

No CEO, no headquarters, no attack surface.

B. The Regulatory Trap

Now the bureaucrats come in demanding: 1. Wallet audits (they don’t understand public ledgers). 2. Mixer bans (criminalizing privacy). 3. KYC everything (turning crypto into a surveillance state).

Bitcoin’s Rebellion: You can’t audit what’s already transparent. You can’t ban what’s unstoppable.

VI. Conclusion: Burn the Altcoins, Stack the Sats

The Bybit hack isn’t a crypto problem. It’s an altcoin problem.

Ethereum’s smart contracts, DeFi bridges, and “decentralized” wallets are Swiss cheese for hackers. Bitcoin? A titanium vault.

The Only Lessons That Matter:

✅ Multisig isn’t enough unless it’s Bitcoin’s hardware-enforced version. ✅ Complexity kills—every altcoin “innovation” is a security risk waiting to happen.

Lazarus Group won this round because “crypto” ignored Bitcoin’s design. The solution isn’t better regulations—it’s better money.

Burn the tokens. Unplug the servers. Bitcoin is the exit.

Take your money off exchanges. Be sovereign.

@ cff1720e:15c7e2b2

Einleitung\ \ Schwierige Dinge einfach zu erklären ist der Anspruch von ELI5 (explain me like I'm 5). Das ist in unserer hoch technisierten Welt dringend erforderlich, denn nur mit dem Verständnis der Technologien können wir sie richtig einsetzen und weiter entwickeln.\ Ich starte meine Serie mit Nostr, einem relativ neuen Internet-Protokoll. Was zum Teufel ist ein Internet-Protokoll? Formal beschrieben sind es internationale Standards, die dafür sorgen, dass das Internet seit über 30 Jahren ziemlich gut funktioniert. Es ist die Sprache, in der sich die Rechner miteinander unterhalten und die auch Sie täglich nutzen, vermutlich ohne es bewusst wahrzunehmen. http(s) transportiert ihre Anfrage an einen Server (z.B. Amazon), und html sorgt dafür, dass aus den gelieferten Daten eine schöne Seite auf ihrem Bildschirm entsteht. Eine Mail wird mit smtp an den Mailserver gesendet und mit imap von ihm abgerufen, und da alle den Standard verwenden, funktioniert das mit jeder App auf jedem Betriebssystem und mit jedem Mail-Provider. Und mit einer Mail-Adresse wie roland@pareto.space können sie sogar jederzeit umziehen, egal wohin. Cool, das ist state of the art! Aber warum funktioniert das z.B. bei Chat nicht, gibt es da kein Protokoll? Doch, es heißt IRC (Internet Relay Chat → merken sie sich den Namen), aber es wird so gut wie nicht verwendet. Die Gründe dafür sind nicht technischer Natur, vielmehr wurden mit Apps wie Facebook, Twitter, WhatsApp, Telegram, Instagram, TikTok u.a. bewusst Inkompatibilitäten und Nutzerabhängigkeiten geschaffen um Profite zu maximieren.

Warum Nostr?

Da das Standard-Protokoll nicht genutzt wird, hat jede App ihr eigenes, und wir brauchen eine handvoll Apps um uns mit allen Bekannten auszutauschen. Eine Mobilfunknummer ist Voraussetzung für jedes Konto, damit können die App-Hersteller die Nutzer umfassend tracken und mit dem Verkauf der Informationen bis zu 30 USD je Konto und Monat verdienen. Der Nutzer ist nicht mehr Kunde, er ist das Produkt! Der Werbe-SPAM ist noch das kleinste Problem bei diesem Geschäftsmodell. Server mit Millionen von Nutzerdaten sind ein “honey pot”, dementsprechend oft werden sie gehackt und die Zugangsdaten verkauft. 2024 wurde auch der Twitter-Account vom damaligen Präsidenten Joe Biden gehackt, niemand wusste mehr wer die Nachrichten verfasst hat (vorher auch nicht), d.h. die Authentizität der Inhalte ist bei keinem dieser Anbieter gewährleistet. Im selben Jahr wurde der Telegram-Gründer in Frankreich in Beugehaft genommen, weil er sich geweigert hatte Hintertüren in seine Software einzubauen. Nun kann zum Schutz "unserer Demokratie” praktisch jeder mitlesen, was sie mit wem an Informationen austauschen, z.B. darüber welches Shampoo bestimmte Politiker verwenden. 

Und wer tatsächlich glaubt er könne Meinungsfreiheit auf sozialen Medien praktizieren, findet sich schnell in der Situation von Donald Trump wieder (seinerzeit amtierender Präsident), dem sein Twitter-Konto 2021 abgeschaltet wurde (Cancel-Culture). Die Nutzerdaten, also ihr Profil, ihre Kontakte, Dokumente, Bilder, Videos und Audiofiles - gehören ihnen ohnehin nicht mehr sondern sind Eigentum des Plattform-Betreibers; lesen sie sich mal die AGB's durch. Aber nein, keine gute Idee, das sind hunderte Seiten und sie werden permanent geändert. Alle nutzen also Apps, deren Technik sie nicht verstehen, deren Regeln sie nicht kennen, wo sie keine Rechte haben und die ihnen die Resultate ihres Handelns stehlen. Was würde wohl der Fünfjährige sagen, wenn ihm seine ältere Schwester anbieten würde, alle seine Spielzeuge zu “verwalten” und dann auszuhändigen wenn er brav ist? “Du spinnst wohl”, und damit beweist der Knirps mehr Vernunft als die Mehrzahl der Erwachsenen. \ \ Resümee: keine Standards, keine Daten, keine Rechte = keine Zukunft!

\ Wie funktioniert Nostr?

Die Entwickler von Nostr haben erkannt dass sich das Server-Client-Konzept in ein Master-Slave-Konzept verwandelt hatte. Der Master ist ein Synonym für Zentralisierung und wird zum “single point of failure”, der zwangsläufig Systeme dysfunktional macht. In einem verteilten Peer2Peer-System gibt es keine Master mehr sondern nur gleichberechtigte Knoten (Relays), auf denen die Informationen gespeichert werden. Indem man Informationen auf mehreren Relays redundant speichert, ist das System in jeglicher Hinsicht resilienter. Nicht nur die Natur verwendet dieses Prinzip seit Jahrmillionen erfolgreich, auch das Internet wurde so konzipiert (das ARPAnet wurde vom US-Militär für den Einsatz in Kriegsfällen unter massiven Störungen entwickelt). Alle Nostr-Daten liegen auf Relays und der Nutzer kann wählen zwischen öffentlichen (zumeist kostenlosen) und privaten Relays, z.B. für geschlossene Gruppen oder zum Zwecke von Daten-Archivierung. Da Dokumente auf mehreren Relays gespeichert sind, werden statt URL's (Locator) eindeutige Dokumentnamen (URI's = Identifier) verwendet, broken Links sind damit Vergangenheit und Löschungen / Verluste ebenfalls.\ \ Jedes Dokument (Event genannt) wird vom Besitzer signiert, es ist damit authentisch und fälschungssicher und kann nur vom Ersteller gelöscht werden. Dafür wird ein Schlüsselpaar verwendet bestehend aus privatem (nsec) und öffentlichem Schlüssel (npub) wie aus der Mailverschlüsselung (PGP) bekannt. Das repräsentiert eine Nostr-Identität, die um Bild, Namen, Bio und eine lesbare Nostr-Adresse ergänzt werden kann (z.B. roland@pareto.space ), mehr braucht es nicht um alle Ressourcen des Nostr-Ökosystems zu nutzen. Und das besteht inzwischen aus über hundert Apps mit unterschiedlichen Fokussierungen, z.B. für persönliche verschlüsselte Nachrichten (DM → OxChat), Kurznachrichten (Damus, Primal), Blogbeiträge (Pareto), Meetups (Joinstr), Gruppen (Groups), Bilder (Olas), Videos (Amethyst), Audio-Chat (Nostr Nests), Audio-Streams (Tunestr), Video-Streams (Zap.Stream), Marktplätze (Shopstr) u.v.a.m. Die Anmeldung erfolgt mit einem Klick (single sign on) und den Apps stehen ALLE Nutzerdaten zur Verfügung (Profil, Daten, Kontakte, Social Graph → Follower, Bookmarks, Comments, etc.), im Gegensatz zu den fragmentierten Datensilos der Gegenwart.\ \ Resümee: ein offener Standard, alle Daten, alle Rechte = große Zukunft!

\ Warum ist Nostr die Zukunft des Internet?

“Baue Dein Haus nicht auf einem fremden Grundstück” gilt auch im Internet - für alle App-Entwickler, Künstler, Journalisten und Nutzer, denn auch ihre Daten sind werthaltig. Nostr garantiert das Eigentum an den Daten, und überwindet ihre Fragmentierung. Weder die Nutzung noch die kreativen Freiheiten werden durch maßlose Lizenz- und Nutzungsbedingungen eingeschränkt. Aus passiven Nutzern werden durch Interaktion aktive Teilnehmer, Co-Creatoren in einer Sharing-Ökonomie (Value4Value). OpenSource schafft endlich wieder Vertrauen in die Software und ihre Anbieter. Offene Standards ermöglichen den Entwicklern mehr Kooperation und schnellere Entwicklung, für die Anwender garantieren sie Wahlfreiheit. Womit wir letztmalig zu unserem Fünfjährigen zurückkehren. Kinder lieben Lego über alles, am meisten die Maxi-Box “Classic”, weil sie damit ihre Phantasie im Kombinieren voll ausleben können. Erwachsene schenken ihnen dann die viel zu teuren Themenpakete, mit denen man nur eine Lösung nach Anleitung bauen kann. “Was stimmt nur mit meinen Eltern nicht, wann sind die denn falsch abgebogen?" fragt sich der Nachwuchs zu Recht. Das Image lässt sich aber wieder aufpolieren, wenn sie ihren Kindern Nostr zeigen, denn die Vorteile verstehen sogar Fünfjährige.

\ Das neue Internet ist dezentral. Das neue Internet ist selbstbestimmt. Nostr ist das neue Internet.

https://nostr.net/ \ https://start.njump.me/

Hier das Interview zum Thema mit Radio Berliner Morgenröte

https://www.podbean.com/ew/pb-yxc36-17bb4be

@ c1e9ab3a:9cb56b43

Assumptions

| Factor | Assumption | |--------|------------| | CO₂ | Not considered a pollutant or is captured/stored later | | Water Use | Regulated across all sources; cooling towers or dry cooling required | | Compliance Cost | Nuclear no longer burdened by long licensing and construction delays | | Coal Waste | Treated as valuable raw material (e.g., fly ash for cement, gypsum from scrubbers) | | Nuclear Tech | Gen IV SMRs in widespread use (e.g., 50–300 MWe units, modular build, passive safety) | | Grid Role | All three provide baseload or load-following power | | Fuel Pricing | Moderate and stable (no energy crisis or supply chain disruptions) |

---

Performance Comparison

| Category | Coal (IGCC + Scrubbers) | Natural Gas (CCGT) | Nuclear (Gen IV SMRs) | |---------|-----------------------------|------------------------|--------------------------| | Thermal Efficiency | 40–45% | 55–62% | 30–35% | | CAPEX ($/kW) | $3,500–5,000 | $900–1,300 | $4,000–7,000 (modularized) | | O&M Cost ($/MWh) | $30–50 | $10–20 | $10–25 | | Fuel Cost ($/MWh) | $15–25 | $25–35 | $6–10 | | Water Use (gal/MWh) | 300–500 (with cooling towers) | 100–250 | 300–600 | | Air Emissions | Very low (excluding CO₂) | Very low | None | | Waste | Usable (fly ash, FGD gypsum, slag) | Minimal | Compact, long-term storage required | | Ramp/Flexibility | Slow ramp (newer designs better) | Fast ramp | Medium (SMRs better than traditional) | | Footprint (Land & Supply) | Large (mining, transport) | Medium | Small | | Energy Density | Medium | Medium-high | Very high | | Build Time | 4–7 years | 2–4 years | 2–5 years (with factory builds) | | Lifecycle (years) | 40+ | 30+ | 60+ | | Grid Resilience | High | High | Very High (passive safety, long refuel) |

---

Strategic Role Summary

1. Coal (Clean & Integrated)

• Strengths: Long-term fuel security; byproduct reuse; high reliability; domestic resource.
• Drawbacks: Still low flexibility; moderate efficiency; large physical/logistical footprint.
• Strategic Role: Best suited for regions with abundant coal and industrial reuse markets.

2. Natural Gas (CCGT)

• Strengths: High efficiency, low CAPEX, grid agility, low emissions.
• Drawbacks: Still fossil-based; dependent on well infrastructure; less long-lived.
• Strategic Role: Excellent transitional and peaking solution; strong complement to renewables.

3. Nuclear (Gen IV SMRs)

• Strengths: Highest energy density; no air emissions or CO₂; long lifespan; modular & scalable.
• Drawbacks: Still needs safe waste handling; high upfront cost; novel tech in deployment stage.
• Strategic Role: Ideal for low-carbon baseload, remote areas, and national strategic assets.

---

Adjusted Levelized Cost of Electricity (LCOE)

| Source | LCOE ($/MWh) | Notes | |--------|------------------|-------| | Coal (IGCC w/scrubbers) | ~$75–95 | Lower with valuable waste | | Natural Gas (CCGT) | ~$45–70 | Highly competitive if fuel costs are stable | | Gen IV SMRs | ~$65–85 | Assuming factory production and streamlined permitting |

---

Final Verdict (Under Optimized Assumptions)

• Most Economical Short-Term: Natural Gas
• Most Strategic Long-Term: Gen IV SMRs
• Most Viable if Industrial Ecosystem Exists: Clean Coal

All three could coexist in a diversified, stable energy grid: - Coal filling a regional or industrial niche, - Gas providing flexibility and economy, - SMRs ensuring long-term sustainability and energy security.