-
@ 04ea4f83:210e1713
2025-04-20 08:45:14Veröffentlicht auf Nakamoto Portfolio am 06.04.2023\ Originalautor: Alpha Zeta\ Übersetzt von: Sinautoshi am 24.06.2023 - 795682
Einführung
Bitcoin wurde mit verschiedenen Formen von Eigentum und anderen Vermögenswerten verglichen, die traditionell zur Wertaufbewahrung verwendet werden. In der Abwesenheit von gesundem Geld weisen rationale Investoren\ Kapital in Immobilien, Aktien und andere alternativen Wertaufbewahrungsmittel auf. Inspiriert von „Bitcoin as Property" von Michael Saylor, diskutiert dieses Whitepaper das Potenzial von Bitcoin, das monetäre Premium (Anm. den Aufschlag für die Geldartigkeit des Vermögenswertes) von traditionellen Vermögenswerten einzufangen, und seine Auswirkungen auf deren zukünftige Bewertung.
Die Verlagerung vom traditionellen Sparen zu alternativen Anlagen
In der Vergangenheit haben weniger erfahrene Anleger ihr Geld auf Sparkonten gespart, während erfahrenere Anleger nach Hebelwirkung und Effizienz durch Immobilien und Risikoinvestitionen suchten. In den letzten zehn Jahren haben sich die Anleger aufgrund des Rückgangs der Zinssätze und der Ausweitung der Finanzinstrumente haben sich die Anleger für Aktien, Immobilien und\ börsengehandelte Fonds (ETFs) als ihre primären Wertaufbewahrungsmittel entschieden. Die explosionsartige Zunahme von ETFs und die Beliebtheit von Zweitimmobilien (zur Vermietung) oder Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs) haben zu einer Monetarisierung zahlreicher Vermögenswerte geführt.\ Bis Ende 2021 wurden viele Vermögenswerte, darunter auch Immobilien, weit über ihrem Nutzwert gehandelt. Die Zentralbanken haben mit überschüssigem Geld den Wert des Geldes grundlegend zerstört, was die Anleger dazu veranlasst, nach Vermögenswerten zu suchen, die einen Schutz gegen die negativen Auswirkungen des Gelddruckens bieten. Dieses Phänomen hat zu einer Finanzialisierung der Wirtschaft geführt, bei der die Anleger keine andere Wahl haben, als nach anderen Formen des Sparens zu suchen.
Bitcoin: Der optimale Vermögenswert für die Monetarisierung
Bitcoin hat das Potenzial, der optimale Vermögenswert für die Monetarisierung zu werden und die traditionellen Wertaufbewahrungsmittel wie Währungen, Anleihen, Immobilien, Aktien und Gold konsequent zu demonetisieren.
Immobilien werden aufgrund ihres inhärenten Nutzwerts oft als begehrter Vermögenswert betrachtet, aber ihr Wert wird auch stark von der Monetarisierung beeinflusst, die dazu geführt hat, dass viele Menschen mehrere Immobilien besitzen, was die Nachfrage und die Preise in die Höhe treibt. Es ist jedoch zu beachten, dass der Besitz von Immobilien mit einer Reihe von Problemen verbunden ist. So können beispielsweise die Grundsteuer und die Instandhaltungskosten die potenziellen Renditen erheblich schmälern. Außerdem können Immobilien im Laufe der Zeit an Wert verlieren, was ihren Wert weiter schmälert. Auch wenn man eine Urkunde für eine Immobilie besitzt, ist man nicht der eigentliche Eigentümer der Immobilie; die Zusage des Eigentums kann unter bestimmten Umständen widerrufen werden. Wenn beispielsweise die Regierung beschließt, die Immobilie für die öffentliche Nutzung zu beschlagnahmen, kann der Immobilieneigentümer seine Investition vollständig verlieren. All diese Faktoren haben Anleger dazu veranlasst, nach Alternativen zum Schutz ihres Vermögens zu suchen, insbesondere in einem Umfeld mit geringem Risiko und niedriger Inflation.
Im Gegensatz dazu bietet Bitcoin ein „Konstrukt", das nicht zerstört werden kann, keine Wartung erfordert und eine hervorragende Wertaufbewahrung bietet. Als dezentralisierter, sicherer und knapper digitaler Vermögenswert hat Bitcoin das Potenzial, den monetären Aufschlag traditioneller Vermögenswerte zu übernehmen, was möglicherweise zu deren Demonetisierung führt.
Bitcoin wird aus mehreren Gründen zunehmend als überlegenes Wertaufbewahrungsmittel anerkannt:
- Knappheit: Bitcoin hat einen festen Vorrat von 21 Millionen Münzen, was zu einem Grad an Knappheit führt, der seinen Wert vor Inflation schützt.
- Übertragbarkeit: Bitcoin lässt sich leicht digital übertragen und aufbewahren, was ihn praktischer macht als physische Vermögenswerte wie Gold.
- Sicherheit: Die dezentralisierte Natur der Blockchain-Technologie, die Bitcoin zugrunde liegt, gewährleistet seine Sicherheit und seinen Schutz vor Manipulationen.
- Transparenz: Alle Transaktionen werden in der Blockchain aufgezeichnet, wodurch ein transparenter und überprüfbarer Eigentumsnachweis entsteht.
- Zugänglichkeit: Bitcoin ist für jeden zugänglich, der über einen Internetanschluss verfügt, was ihn zu einem umfassenden Wertaufbewahrungsmittel macht.
- Unveränderlichkeit oder Widerstand gegen Zensur: Die Aufzeichnung des Eigentums ist durch ein massives und wachsendes Computernetzwerk gesichert, was es nahezu unmöglich macht, Transaktionen zu verändern oder zu zensieren. Dies bietet eine zusätzliche Sicherheitsebene und stärkt den Status von Bitcoin als zuverlässiges und vertrauenswürdiges Wertaufbewahrungsmittel.
Das Modell
Das Schrödinger-Münzmodell basiert auf dem Konzept der Quantensuperposition, bei dem ein Objekt gleichzeitig in mehreren Zuständen existieren kann, bis es beobachtet wird. In diesem Fall wird davon ausgegangen, dass Bitcoin zwei mögliche Ergebnisse hat: Entweder scheitert er und ist wertlos (das Dan-Peña-Szenario) oder er erobert erfolgreich die Geldprämie traditioneller Wertaufbewahrungsmittel (das Saylor-Szenario).
Anstatt sich auf absolute Gewissheit wie in den obigen Szenarien zu verlassen, ordnet dieses Modell jedem dieser Szenarien Wahrscheinlichkeiten zu, um einen fairen Wert für Bitcoin zu ermitteln. Wenn du die Box öffnest und eine Welt beobachtest, in der Saylor Recht hatte, was passiert dann? Was wäre, wenn Dan Recht hätte?
Modell-Komponenten
Das Modell berechnet den Marktwert von Bitcoin heute anhand der folgenden Komponenten:
a. Marktkapitalisierung der Vermögenswerte: Der aktuelle Marktwert jedes traditionellen Wertaufbewahrungsmittels (z.B. Gold, Immobilien, Aktien, Anleihen).
b. Prozentsatz des monetären Aufschlags: Der Anteil der Marktkapitalisierung eines Vermögenswerts, der auf seinen Status als Wertaufbewahrungsmittel zurückzuführen ist.
c. Wahrscheinlichkeit der Vereinnahmung: Die Wahrscheinlichkeit, dass Bitcoin die monetäre Prämie jedes Vermögenswerts vereinnahmt.
d. Zeit bis zur Vereinnahmung: Die erwartete Zeit, bis Bitcoin die Geldprämie eines jeden Vermögenswerts erbeutet. Dies kann auch als Vektor mit verschiedenen Prozentsätzen der eingefangenen Prämie über die Zeit modelliert werden.
e. Abzinsungsrate: Der Prozentsatz, mit dem die zukünftig erwarteten Erfassungswerte auf den Gegenwartswert abgezinst werden, um den heutigen Marktwert zu berechnen.
Modell-Berechnung
Der Zeitwert von Bitcoin wird als Summe des erwarteten Erfassungswerts der einzelnen Vermögenswerte berechnet:
wobei der Zeitwert jedes Vermögenswerts definiert ist als:
- mcap: Aktuelle Marktkapitalisierung der einzelnen Vermögenswerte
- mp: Prozentualer Anteil der Marktkapitalisierung, der Monetarisierungscharakter hat (nicht Nutzwert)\ prob: Wahrscheinlichkeit, dass Bitcoin diesen Wert erfasst
- r: Abzinsungssatz
- n: Anzahl der Perioden, bis die Monetarisierung realisiert wird
Denke daran, dass wir mit diesem Rahmen auch den heutigen Bitcoin-Preis verwenden könnten, um die aktuell implizierte Wahrscheinlichkeit des Marktes zu berechnen.
Modell-Inputs
Potenzielle Vermögensklassen und geschätzte Werte - Daten vom April 2023
- Aktien: a. Angenommener Marktwert: $100 Billionen b. Quelle: Die Börsenkapitalisierung kann der Weltbank und Statista entnommen werden.Die Daten stellen eine ungefähre Schätzung dar, da die Börsenkapitalisierung mit den Marktbewegungen schwankt.
- Anleihen: a. Angenommener Marktwert: $130 Billionen b. Quelle: Die Kapitalisierung des globalen Anleihemarktes wurde aus Quellen wie der Bank für Internationalen Zahlungsausgleich abgeleitet. Die Daten stellen eine ungefähre Schätzung dar, da sich die Kapitalisierung des Anleihemarktes durch Neuemissionen und Tilgungen ändert. Sie umfassen nur die Gesamtsumme für „fortgeschrittene Volkswirtschaften".
- Gold: a. Angenommener Marktwert: $10 Billionen b. Quelle: Die Gesamtmarktkapitalisierung von Gold wurde anhand der Daten des World Gold Council zu den oberirdischen Goldbeständen und dem durchschnittlichen Goldpreis pro Unze zum Zeitpunkt der Erstellung dieses Berichts berechnet. Die Daten sollten aktualisiert werden, um den aktuellen Goldpreis für eine genaue Bewertung widerzuspiegeln.
- Silber: a. Angenommener Marktwert: $1,3 Billionen b. Quelle: Die gesamte Marktkapitalisierung von Silber wurde anhand der Daten des Silver Institute zu den oberirdischen Silberbeständen und dem durchschnittlichen Silberpreis pro Unze zum Zeitpunkt der Erstellung dieses Berichts geschätzt. Die Daten sollten aktualisiert werden, um den aktuellen Silberpreis für eine genaue Bewertung widerzuspiegeln.
- Immobilien: a. Angenommener Marktwert: $320 Billionen b. Quelle: Savills Research
- Kryptowährungen (ausgenommen BTC): a. Angenommener Marktwert: $500 Mrd. b. Quelle: Coinmarketcap.com
Parallelen zum Black-Scholes-Modell für die Optionsbewertung
Die Black-Scholes-Formel wird verwendet, um den fairen Preis von Optionen zu berechnen. Dabei handelt es sich um Finanzkontrakte, die dem Käufer das Recht (aber nicht die Verpflichtung) geben, einen Basiswert, z. B. eine Aktie oder einen Rohstoff, zu einem bestimmten Preis und Zeitpunkt zu kaufen oder zu verkaufen.
Die Formel umfasst fünf Inputs: den aktuellen Kurs des Basiswerts, den Ausübungspreis (den Preis, zu dem die Option ausgeübt werden kann), die Zeit bis zum Ablauf, den risikofreien Zinssatz und die Volatilität des Kurses des Basiswerts. Hier ist die Formel für den Preis einer Call-Option:
Die Formel selbst ist etwas kompliziert, aber in einfachen Worten funktioniert sie, indem sie die Wahrscheinlichkeit verschiedener Zukunftsszenarien für den Kurs des Basiswerts auf der Grundlage seiner Volatilität (wie stark sein Kurs im Laufe der Zeit zu schwanken pflegt) schätzt. Die Formel berechnet dann den erwarteten Wert der Option auf der Grundlage dieser Wahrscheinlichkeiten, abgezinst auf den heutigen Wert unter Verwendung des risikofreien Zinssatzes.
Die linke Seite der Gleichung stellt den Wert der Call-Option dar (das Recht, den Basiswert zu kaufen), während die rechte Seite die Summe aus dem Gegenwartswert des Ausübungspreises (der bei Ausübung der Option garantiert wird) und dem erwarteten Wert des Kurses des Basiswerts bei Fälligkeit darstellt. Der Erwartungswert wird berechnet, indem der aktuelle Kurs des Basiswerts mit einer Wahrscheinlichkeitsdichtefunktion multipliziert wird, die auf der Volatilität des Kurses des Basiswerts basiert.
Ein wesentlicher Unterschied zwischen den beiden Modellen besteht darin, dass die Black-Scholes-Formel auf der Annahme einer kontinuierlichen Zeit und einer bekannten Verteilung der Preise von Vermögenswerten beruht, während das Schrödinger-Münzmodell auf dem Konzept der Quantensuperposition basiert, bei dem ein Objekt in mehreren Zuständen existieren kann, bis es beobachtet wird. Das Schrödinger-Münzmodell ordnet jedem möglichen Ergebnis Wahrscheinlichkeiten zu, um einen fairen Wert für Bitcoin zu ermitteln, während die Black-Scholes-Formel eine Wahrscheinlichkeitsdichtefunktion verwendet, die auf der Volatilität des Preises des zugrunde liegenden Vermögenswerts basiert.
Ein weiterer Unterschied besteht darin, dass die Black-Scholes-Formel eine geschlossene Gleichung ist, was bedeutet, dass sie analytisch gelöst werden kann, während das Schrödinger-Münzen-Modell ein komplexeres Modell ist, das mehrere Eingaben und Berechnungen umfasst.
Trotz dieser Unterschiede zielen beide Modelle darauf ab, den beizulegenden Zeitwert eines Vermögenswerts zu schätzen, indem sie verschiedene Faktoren wie den aktuellen Preis des Vermögenswerts, die Zeit bis zum Verfall, die Zinssätze und die Volatilität berücksichtigen. Beide Modelle berücksichtigen auch das Potenzial für extreme Ergebnisse und die Ungewissheit künftiger Ereignisse, die zur Volatilität des Vermögenswerts beitragen können.
Schrödingers Münze und Volatilität als Merkmal, nicht als Fehler
Einer der meistdiskutierten Aspekte von Bitcoin und anderen Kryptowährungen ist ihre inhärente Preisvolatilität. In diesem Abschnitt argumentieren wir, dass das Schrödinger-Münzmodell die Volatilität von Bitcoin als ein natürliches Merkmal seiner Bewertung erklärt und nicht als Fehler oder Schwachstelle. Darüber hinaus werden wir diskutieren, wie diese Volatilität abnehmen kann, wenn wir uns der Hyperbitcoinisierung nähern.
- Extreme Ergebnisse Das Schrödinger Modell basiert auf zwei extremen Ergebnissen für Bitcoin: entweder sch-eitert er und wird wertlos (das Dan Peña Szenario), oder er erobert erfolgreich die Geldprämie traditioneller Wertaufbewahrungsmittel (das Saylor Szenario). Infolgedessen sagt das Modell von Natur aus erhebliche Wertschwankungen voraus, die von der Marktstimmung und externen Faktoren abhängen, die die Wahrnehmung der Anleger hinsichtlich der Wahrscheinlichkeit dieser Ergebnisse beeinflussen.
- Kleine Änderungen in der Wahrscheinlichkeit, große Änderungen im fairen Wert Angesichts der extremen Natur der beiden möglichen Ergebnisse können kleine Änderungen in der wahrgenommenen Wahrscheinlichkeit des Eintretens eines der beiden Szenarien zu erheblichen Änderungen im fairen Wert von Bitcoin führen. Zum Beispiel könnte ein leichter Anstieg des Vertrauens des Marktes in den Erfolg von Bitcoin zu einem signifikanten Anstieg des Preises führen, während ein Rückgang des Vertrauens zu einem starken Rückgang führen könnte.
- Ungewissheit der Zeit Ein weiterer Faktor, der zur Volatilität von Bitcoin beiträgt, ist die Ungewissheit über die Zeit, die benötigt wird, um die Hyperbitcoinisierung zu erreichen. Während Hausse-Märkten nimmt die Zeitwahrnehmung (t) tendenziell ab, da die Anleger optimistischer werden, was die Akzeptanz von Bitcoin und die Geschwindigkeit angeht, mit der Bitcoin die Geldprämie von traditionellen Vermögenswerten erreichen wird. Umgekehrt steigt die wahrgenommene Zeit bis zur Hyperbitcoinisierung während Baisse-Märkten, wenn die Marktstimmung negativ wird. Diese Fluktuation in der Zeitwahrnehmung fügt dem Bitcoin-Kurs eine weitere Ebene der Volatilität hinzu.
- Abnehmende Volatilität bei zunehmender Hyperbitcoinisierung Je näher wir der Hyperbitcoinisierung kommen, desto geringer dürfte die Volatilität von Bitcoin werden. Dies liegt daran, dass der Markt im Laufe der Zeit mehr Informationen über die Akzeptanz von Bitcoin, das regulatorische Umfeld und die technologischen Entwicklungen erhalten wird. Infolgedessen wird die Wahrnehmung des Marktes hinsichtlich der Wahrscheinlichkeit der beiden extremen Ergebnisse stabiler werden, was zu geringeren Preisschwankungen führt.
Zusammenfassend erklärt das Schrödinger-Münzen-Modell die Volatilität von Bitcoin als eine natürliche Folge seiner Bewertung, die auf extremen Ergebnissen, kleinen Veränderungen der Wahrscheinlichkeit und der Ungewissheit der Zeit bis zur Hyperbitcoinisierung beruht. Wenn der Markt mehr Informationen erhält und mehr Vertrauen in die Zukunft von Bitcoin gewinnt, wird erwartet, dass seine Volatilität abnimmt und gegen Null tendiert. Das Verständnis dieses Aspekts des Modells kann Anlegern helfen, fundiertere Entscheidungen über die mit einer Investition in Bitcoin verbundenen Risiken und Erträge zu treffen.
Schlussfolgerung
Schrödingers-Münzmodell bietet einen Rahmen für die Bewertung von Bitcoin, indem es sein Potenzial berücksichtigt, den monetäre Aufschlag von traditionellen Vermögenswerten wie Immobilien, Aktien und Anleihen einzufangen. Als überlegenes Wertaufbewahrungsmittel hat Bitcoin das Potenzial, Investitionen in traditionelle Vermögenswerte konsequent zu demonetisieren, was zu einer Verschiebung der Kapitalallokation und einer Neubewertung ihres Wertes führt.
Das Modell beleuchtet auch die inhärente Volatilität von Bitcoin, die sich aus den extremen Ergebnissen, kleinen Veränderungen der Wahrscheinlichkeit und der Ungewissheit der Zeit bis zur Hyperbitcoinisierung ergibt. Da der Markt jedoch mehr Informationen erhält und mehr Vertrauen in die Zukunft von Bitcoin gewinnt, wird erwartet, dass seine Volatilität abnimmt und gegen Null tendiert.
Darüber hinaus unterstreicht das Modell, wie wichtig es ist, die Risiken zu verstehen, die mit einer Investition in Bitcoin verbunden sind, wie regulatorische Änderungen, technologische Herausforderungen und potenzielle Konkurrenz durch andere Kryptowährungen oder alternative Wertaufbewahrungsmittel.
Durch das Verständnis der Dynamik des Schrödinger-Münzmodells sowie der Faktoren, die zur Volatilität von Bitcoin und den damit verbundenen Risiken beitragen, können Anleger fundiertere Entscheidungen über das potenzielle Wachstum und die mit Bitcoin und anderen Vermögenswerten verbundenen Risiken treffen. Dieser ganzheitliche Bewertungsansatz ermöglicht eine umfassendere Beurteilung des Potenzials von Bitcoin sowohl als Investition als auch als transformative Technologie.
-
@ 04ea4f83:210e1713
2025-04-20 08:41:34Veröffentlicht auf Bitcoin Magazine am 11.01.2024\ Originalautor: Josh von BlueCollarBitcoin\ Übersetzt von: Sinautoshi am 13.01.2024 - 825611
Wir alle haben einen Werdegang in Bezug auf Bitcoin. Einige begannen als Verfechter des gesunden Geldes, die die österreichische Schule der Nationalökonomie und Gold verehrten. Andere sind aus der TradFi-Welt herausgefallen, als sie merkten, dass etwas nicht ganz richtig war. Die meisten Bitcoiner haben die Irrungen und Wirrungen der Altcoin-Hölle durchlaufen. Wie auch immer du es hierher und zu Bitcoin geschafft hast, willkommen und schnall dich verdammt nochmal an.
Als ich mich zum ersten Mal für Bitcoin interessierte, war das im Juli 2017, und der Bullenmarkt des Jahres war bereits in vollem Gange. Ich kaufte etwas Bitcoin und sah zu, wie der Wert stieg. Dann kaufte ich mehr. Wie es bei diesen parabolischen Aufwärtsbewegungen üblich ist, beobachtete ich, wie der Preis stieg und mein Gemütszustand veränderte sich:
Von Interesse zu Unglauben zu Verliebtheit zu ausgearteten Käufen zu Verzweiflung.
Dies ist eine Entwicklung, die du während der nächsten Aufwärtsbewegung vermeiden kannst, wenn du dich richtig vorbereitest.
Wenn du dies in der Hoffnung liest, alle Antworten zu finden, habe ich leider schlechte Nachrichten. Es gibt keine richtigen Antworten in Bitcoin oder im Leben. Wir sind alle auf einer Reise, um herauszufinden, was wir tun und wie wir vorgehen sollen. Ich hoffe, dass ich dir einen Leitfaden an die Hand geben kann, aber letztendlich werden deine persönlichen Ziele und deine Veranlagung bestimmen, wie du mit der Volatilität umgehst. Bitcoin wird deine Entschlossenheit auf die Probe stellen.
In der späteren Phase des Bullemarkts 2017 sprach ich mit jedem in meinem Leben über Bitcoin - völlig besessen. Mein damaliger Nachbar war älter als ich und hatte den Dot-Com-Boom erlebt. Den Rat, den er mir gab, werde ich nie vergessen, denn er hatte während der Dot-Com-Blase eine Menge Geld gewonnen (und verloren). Er hörte sich mein glühendes Interesse an Bitcoin an und ging sehr maßvoll mit meiner offensichtlichen LIEBE für diesen Vermögenswert um. Er erzählte mir, dass er während des Dot-Com-Booms mehr Geld verdient hat, als er jemals geglaubt hätte, und am Ende war er wieder genau da, wo er angefangen hatte - weil er den Bullenmarkt über den Gipfel geritten und nichts verkauft hatte. Sein Rat war: "Ich freue mich, dass es dir gut geht, aber vergiss nicht, etwas Gewinn mitzunehmen." Er riet mir, 50 % zu verkaufen und 50 % zu behalten - eine einfache Absicherungsstrategie. Kurz nachdem Bitcoin sein Allzeithoch erreicht hatte, beherzigte ich seinen Rat und verkaufte einige meiner Bestände in der Nähe des lokalen Höchststands.
Ich weiß, dass dies für viele Hodler ein Frevel ist. Wir verkaufen unsere Bitcoin doch nicht, oder? Nun, das ist eine persönliche Entscheidung, und je nach deiner Risikotoleranz und deinem Platz im Leben, möchtest du vielleicht ein gewisses Risiko vom Tisch nehmen. Das ist Teil des Investierens, und wie das alte Sprichwort sagt, verliert niemand Geld, wenn er mit Gewinn verkauft. Dieser Artikel soll den Rat geben, den ich mir gewünscht hätte, als ich Bitcoin zum ersten Mal entdeckte. Ich hoffe, er hilft Neulingen in diesem Bereich zu verstehen, wie man sich in dem bombastischen Umfeld zurechtfindet, das Bitcoin während seiner Bullenmärkte erzeugt.
Ich habe zwei Bullenmärkte erlebt, einen im Jahr 2017 und einen im Jahr 2021. Diese Bullenmärkte waren SEHR unterschiedlich, und ich vermute, wenn du mit denjenigen sprichst, die bei Bullenmärkten vor 2017 dabei waren, wirst du feststellen, dass sie sich auch sehr unterschiedlich anfühlten.
Das erste, was ich loswerden möchte, ist Folgendes - niemand weiß, was passieren wird:
- Balaji spricht von 1 Million in 3 Monaten
- Nobelpreisträger sagen, Bitcoin wird auf Null sinken
- Buffett und Munger (RIP) nennen es Rattengift
Egal, wem Du zuhörst, egal, wie lange sie schon in dem Bereich tätig sind oder wie korrekt sie in der Vergangenheit waren, es spielt keine Rolle. Sie haben keine Ahnung, was die Zukunft bringt.
Bei Investitionen gibt es eine Idee, die als Überlebensbias bezeichnet wird. Diejenigen, die richtig lagen, haben überlebt, und sie erscheinen wie Genies, weil sie richtig lagen. Die überwiegende Mehrheit derjenigen, die sich geirrt haben, ist vergessen. Man hört nichts über sie. Ich will hier niemanden in die Pfanne hauen, aber es gab prominente Bitcoin-Leute, die VIEL höhere Preise riefen, als wir im Jahr 2021 bei 68K waren. Ich sage nicht, dass sie schlechte Menschen sind; ich bin mir sicher, dass sie einen guten Grund hatten, diese Zahlen zu prognostizieren, aber wenn man damals ihren Ratschlägen gefolgt wäre, hätte man zum denkbar schlechtesten Zeitpunkt gekauft und wäre für JAHRE unter die Räder gekommen.
Meiner Meinung nach gibt es verschiedene Arten von Kristallkugelbesitzern, und die unterste Kategorie sind die technischen Analysten. Das sind die ein Dutzend Leute, die man auf Twitter sieht, die über Momentum, Preisniveaus, Tassen und Griffe usw. schwadronieren. Diese Leute riefen für 10K Bitcoin, wo der Boden bei 16k lag. Ich sage nicht, dass TA Unsinn ist; im Grunde ist es ein System zur Vorhersage menschlicher Handlungen durch Wahrscheinlichkeit. Es ist bestenfalls eine Überlegung. Sie sollte nie in einem Vakuum verwendet werden, um Ihre Allokationen zu bestimmen. Wenn du es in Verbindung mit den Fundamentaldaten verwendest, kann es viel hilfreicher sein. Worauf ich hier hinaus will, ist, dass es GANZ viele TA-Analysten gibt, die Ihnen raten, bei 68 K zu kaufen und nicht bei 16 K. Sie werfen probabilistische Darts. Setze deine finanzielle Zukunft nicht auf eine fundierte Vermutung von irgendjemandem.
Die zweite Art von Kristallkugel-Liebhabern sind Makro-Analysten. Diese Leute sind meiner Meinung nach glaubwürdiger, weil sie den allgemeinen Trend in der Wirtschaft einschätzen. Sie berücksichtigen die Zinssätze, die Bewegungen der Fed und die Wirtschaftsdaten. Diese Leute sind viel näher an der Realität, weil sie den Finger am Puls des wirtschaftlichen Geschehens haben. Aber wie bei den TA-Analysten können sich auch diese Leute VÖLLIG irren. Viele sagten, dass die Leitzinsen nicht über x oder y steigen könnten, da sonst die gesamte Wirtschaft zusammenbrechen würde. Nun, die Zinssätze wurden auf ein Niveau angehoben, das weit über ihren Weltuntergangsprognosen liegt, und wir haben keinen Zusammenbruch erlebt.
Ob du nun einem TA-Analysten oder einem Makro-Analysten folgst, sie können wegen eines schwarzen Schwans völlig FALSCH liegen. Nicholas Taleb - bekanntlich von Bitcoinern gehasst - hat den Begriff "schwarzer Schwan" geprägt, um Ereignisse zu bezeichnen, die von Zeit zu Zeit eintreten und mit Standardmodellen einfach nicht vorhergesagt werden können, weil sie so unwahrscheinlich sind. Covid war ein schwarzer Schwan. Der Krieg in der Ukraine war ein schwarzer Schwan. Und rate mal, was passiert: Morgen könnte es einen weiteren unvorhersehbaren schwarzen Schwan geben, der alle TA- und Makro-Analysten völlig auf den Kopf stellt. In der Welt gibt es jede Menge Zufälle. Übrigens sind schwarze Schwäne nicht immer schlecht. Sie können genauso gut auch positive Katalysatoren sein.
Heißt das also, dass wir vor Angst gelähmt bleiben und niemandem trauen sollten?
Ganz und gar nicht. Es bedeutet, dass wir uns die Mühe machen sollten, UNS SELBST zu BILDEN! Du musst die Verantwortung für dich und deine Entscheidungen übernehmen. Du kannst die Informationen der TA-Analysten und der Makro-Analysten nehmen und deine eigenen fundierten Entscheidungen treffen. DAS IST VON GRÖSSTER WICHTIGKEIT.
BILDE DICH SELBST WEITER
Bitcoin ist ein unglaublich einfaches und doch unendlich komplexes Wesen. Deine Ausbildung wird nie vollständig sein, aber du kannst dein Verständnis Schritt für Schritt erweitern. Wir haben eine 10-teilige Bitcoin-Grundlagen-Serie mit Dazbea und Seb Bunney gemacht, und ich habe das Gefühl, dass wir nicht einmal an der Oberfläche gekratzt haben!
Du solltest gut ausgebildet sein, um widerstandsfähig zu werden. Wenn du ein solides Verständnis von Bitcoin und seiner Funktionsweise hast, wirst du nicht so leicht zu erschüttern sein. Die Psychologie ist hier SEHR WICHTIG. Wenn du verstehst, in was du investierst, und der Markt von einem Börsenausfall betroffen ist, ähnlich dem, der FTX passiert ist, wirst du einige Dinge verstehen, die die Durchschnittsperson vielleicht nicht versteht.
- Bitcoin ist davon nicht betroffen
- Der Preisverfall ist vorübergehend und unbegründet
- Deshalb ist jetzt ein guter Zeitpunkt, um Bitcoin zu akkumulieren
Aber auch das Gegenteil ist der Fall. Wenn du siehst, wie die Mainstream-Schlagzeilen über Bitcoin schwärmen und die Gewinne kein Ende zu nehmen scheinen, und du das Gefühl hast, dass du jedes bisschen Geld in Bitcoin investieren solltest, weil der Preis nirgendwo hin geht, außer nach oben - dann sei VORSICHTIG. Ich habe festgestellt, dass meine Psychologie typisch ist. Ich habe Angst, wenn der Preis nach unten geht, und ich habe irrationalen Überschwang, wenn der Preis schnell steigt. Wenn ich GENAU das Gegenteil von dem tue, was mein Affenhirn mir sagt, stelle ich fest, dass ich oft das Richtige tue. Das heißt, wenn du extreme Angst verspürst, ist dies der richtige Zeitpunkt zum Kaufen, und wenn du dich überschwänglich fühlst, ist dies der richtige Zeitpunkt zum Verkaufen.
Panikkäufe sind gefährlich. Wenn du einen unkontrollierbaren Drang verspürst, Bitcoin zu kaufen, atme tief durch. Ich kann dir versichern, dass du in der Lage sein wirst, etwas Bitcoin zu kaufen, und wenn du den Drang so stark verspürst, ist der Markt wahrscheinlich reif für einen Rücksetzer. Das ist keine Garantie, aber nach meiner Erfahrung ist dies der wahrscheinliche Fall. Ich plädiere nicht für den Handel mit BTC, ganz und gar nicht. Ich kann ehrlich sagen, dass ich durch den Handel mehr BTC verloren als gewonnen habe, und wenn die meisten Leute ehrlich sind, werden sie das auch zugeben. Das Trading ist eine Fähigkeit und Disziplin, die nur sehr wenige Menschen beherrschen.
Die typischen psychologischen Hindernisse, die den Menschen im Weg stehen, sind Angst und Gier. Denk über deine Gefühle nach und erkenne, wann du diese Emotionen erlebst. Sie werden dich dazu bringen, Fehler zu machen. Der einfachste Weg, all dies zu mildern, ist einfach der Dollar-Cost-Average. Dollar-Cost Averaging nimmt den ganzen Stress heraus. Basta. Wenn du in diesem Moment in diesen Schatz einsteigst und er über Nacht auf 30 % fällt, frage dich ehrlich: Habe ich den Mut dazu? Habe ich die nötige Überzeugung dafür? Habe ich das nötige Wissen, um zu verstehen, warum der Dollarpreis kurzfristig keine Rolle spielt? Werde ich in Panik verkaufen? Wenn du nicht überzeugt bist, wird dich das Dollar-Cost-Averaging retten. Du bekommst den Durchschnittspreis über einen langen Zeitraum.
Ich habe eine kleine DCA-Taktik, die einfach ist und bei mir funktioniert:
Wenn der Preis sich entspannt, erhöhe ich meinen DCA, und wenn der Preis in die Höhe schießt, ziehe ich mich zurück und kaufe im Durchschnitt weniger. Über Monate und Jahre hinweg führt dies zu einem optimalen Durchschnittswert.
FÜHLE DICH NICHT WIE EIN VERRÄTER, WENN DU BTC VERKAUFST
Habe einen Plan und sei bereit, ihn auszuführen. Der Plan meines Nachbarn ist ein guter Anfang. Sobald du dein Geld verdoppelt hast, nimmst du die Anfangsinvestition heraus. Dabei gibt es ein erhebliches Sternchen - was willst du anstelle von Bitcoin kaufen? Inflationäres Bargeld? Die Möglichkeiten, sein Geld woanders anzulegen, sind heutzutage sehr begrenzt. Das mag für viele in diesem Bereich kontrovers sein, aber ich denke, es ist absolut vernünftig, Bitcoin zu verkaufen. Wenn du Bitcoin seit JAHREN hältst und dein Stack dein Leben sinnvoll verbessern könnte, solltest du auf jeden Fall einen Teil verkaufen.
Zeit ist das einzige Gut, das wertvoller ist als BTC; wir haben wirklich nur eine begrenzte Menge an Zeit auf dieser Erde. Wenn du deine BTC hortest und dann friedlich einschläfst was war dann der Sinn? Wenn du einen Teil deines Stacks verkaufen kannst, um dein Haus abzubezahlen oder dich von erdrückenden Schulden zu befreien, halte ich das für eine gute Entscheidung. Es ist vielleicht nicht die BESTE finanzielle Entscheidung, vor allem, wenn Ihr Haus mit einem zinsgünstigen Darlehen belastet ist, aber es ist eine nachvollziehbare Entscheidung, weil man dadurch beruhigt sein kann. Man muss jedoch auch bedenken, dass der Verkauf von Bitcoin auf lange Sicht sehr wahrscheinlich eine schmerzhafte Entscheidung sein wird.
Bitcoin für Spielzeug zu verkaufen, ist hingegen kein guter Schachzug. Wenn du den 250.000 Dollar teuren Lamborghini kaufst, der in 3 Jahren 50% seines Wertes verliert, während Bitcoin um mehr als diesen Prozentsatz zugelegt hat, wird das Bedauern unerträglich sein. Robert Kiyosaki kommt mir in den Sinn. Sein Buch Rich Dad Poor Dad hat mich sehr beeinflusst, und seine Beschreibung von Vermögenswerten und Verbindlichkeiten hat mich sehr beeindruckt:
- Ein Vermögenswert erzeugt Cashflow
- Eine Verbindlichkeit zieht den Cashflow ab
Wenn du Vermögenswerte kaufst, wird dein Nettovermögen auf einer exponentiellen Kurve erheblich ansteigen. Wenn du Verbindlichkeiten kaufst, wirst du einfach ärmer. Wenn du Bitcoin verkaufst, wirst du es wahrscheinlich langfristig bereuen.
ZEITPRÄFERENZ
Die Zeitpräferenz ist ein Thema, das in Bitcoin oft angesprochen wird. Eine niedrige Zeitpräferenz zu haben bedeutet, dass man bereit ist, für eine bessere Zukunft auf die Annehmlichkeiten von heute zu verzichten. Jede sehenswerte Kathedrale, jedes klassische Kunstwerk, alles Schöne auf dieser Welt wurde gebaut, weil Menschen mit Blick auf die Zukunft und nicht auf die Gegenwart gearbeitet haben. Hätte DaVinci Bananen an die Wand geklebt, hätten wir uns nie an ihn erinnert. Wären die großen Pyramiden aus Lehm gebaut worden, gäbe es sie heute nicht mehr. Wenn die Zivilisation ihren gesamten Reichtum für das Hier und Jetzt ausgeben würde, ohne in die Zukunft zu investieren, würde sie nicht überleben.
Bitcoin selbst ist ein digitales Artefakt, das von einem geheimnisvollen Architekten bis zur Perfektion entwickelt wurde. Er ist so konzipiert, dass er Äonen überdauert; wenn die Zivilisation überdauert, wird er bis in die Zukunft hinein perfekte Treue beweisen. Da niemand ihn verändern oder kontrollieren kann, ist Bitcoin anti-entropisch. Das ist der Inbegriff von Handwerkskunst der geringen Zeitpräferenz. Bitcoin ist ein Da Vinci in einer Welt der an die Wand geklebten Bananen. Es ist so offensichtlich, wenn die Arbeit erst einmal geleistet ist, dass es peinlich ist, dass nicht mehr Menschen den Wert verstehen, den er bietet.
Im krassen Gegensatz zu diesem Bitcoin-Meisterwerk stehen die Schrotthaufen, die wir Altcoins oder Shitcoins nennen. Diese wurden mit der Technologie von Bitcoin gebaut, führen aber Entropie ein. Die Treue geht bei den Altcoins verloren, weil sie jeweils von einem Gründer oder einer Gruppe kontrolliert werden. Wenn Menschen etwas kontrollieren können, manipulieren sie es unweigerlich zu ihrem Vorteil. Und ob bewusst oder unbewusst, es wird sich verschlechtern. Die meisten dieser Shitcoins waren von Anfang an darauf ausgelegt, dich zu betrügen. Einige dieser Altcoins haben eine Führung, die vielleicht gute Absichten hat, aber sie sind menschlich und können beeinflusst und genötigt werden. Das Problem ist die FÜHRUNG. Bitcoin und seine Zeitkette wurden entwickelt, um das menschliche Element als primäre Eigenschaft zu entfernen. Die Einführung von Menschen in den Mix verursacht Entropie, die den Wert durch Seigniorage zerstört.
Die Erfindung von Bitcoin war die der NICHT-INTERVENTION durch Menschen.
Das sind Erkenntnisse, die für viele Menschen Jahre dauern, um sie vollständig zu verstehen. Wenn du das Kurzfassung über Altcoins wissen willst, ist es einfach. Bemühe dich einfach nicht. Du bist besser dran, wenn du dein Geld in ein Casino bringst und Glücksspiel machst. Die Karten sind in der Kryptowelt schwer gegen Dich ausgelegt; du hast einfach Glück, wenn du Geld verdienst. Nimm den Weg der geringen Zeitpräferenz und staple Bitcoin, während du lernst, wie deine Investition wächst. Ich kann mit Zuversicht sagen, dass du in 5 Jahren viel weiter vorne sein wirst, wenn du in Bitcoin Dollar-Cost-Averaging betreibst, als wenn du mit Shitcoins spielen würdest.
5-JAHRES-AUSSICHTEN MINIMUM
Die meisten Menschen interessieren sich für Bitcoin während einer seiner parabolischen Bullenläufe. Ich war einer von ihnen. Wir sind alle daran interessiert, finanziell voranzukommen, besonders wenn das Gespenst der Inflation über unseren Köpfen schwebt.
Wenn du neu bei Bitcoin bist und dies dein erster Versuch ist, dann stelle sicher, dass du bereit bist, diesen Vermögenswert für mindestens 5 Jahre zu halten. Du bist wahrscheinlich während einer Aufwärtsbewegung hier, und wenn du kein Glück hattest, ist es wahrscheinlich am Ende der Aufwärtsbewegung. Zum Zeitpunkt der Erstellung dieses Berichts im Dezember 2023 stehen wir meiner Meinung nach am Anfang der nächsten Aufwärtsbewegung. Mit der Zulassung der ETFs, der Halbierung im April 2024 und der Aussicht, dass die US-Notenbank ihre Geldpolitik zurückfahren wird, sind viele Katalysatoren aufeinander abgestimmt. Das bedeutet jedoch NICHT, dass dies unvermeidlich ist. Schwarze Schwäne sind immer eine Möglichkeit. Abgesehen von diesem schwarzen Schwan scheinen wir für einen massiven Kursanstieg in den nächsten Jahren bereit zu sein.
SELBSTVERWAHRUNG
Wenn du zum ersten Mal Bitcoin an der Börse deiner Wahl kaufst, wird es sich anfühlen wie der Kauf eines beliebigen anderen Vermögenswerts bei einem Broker. Du kaufst Bitcoin, und die Zahl auf dem Bildschirm spiegelt die Menge an Bitcoin wider, die du jetzt "besitzt".
Es ist von entscheidender Bedeutung, dass du deine Bitcoin in Verwahrung nimmst. Wir haben in jüngster Zeit Fehler beim Umtausch und regelrechte Betrugsfälle erlebt. Wenn diese Betrügereien aufgedeckt und strafrechtlich verfolgt werden und der Preis von Bitcoin unter Druck gerät, weil viele Menschen den Vermögenswert Bitcoin mit den Börsen in Verbindung bringen, die ihn verkaufen, wird dies zu einer RIESIGEN Kaufgelegenheit. Als FTX vor einem Jahr scheiterte, wurde der Preis von Bitcoin negativ beeinflusst, und diejenigen, die verstanden, dass Bitcoin kein fundamentales Problem hatte, kauften mehr. Du hast verstanden, dass die Angst durch den Markt strömte (womit wir wieder bei dem Punkt wären, warum es in diesem Bereich SO WICHTIG ist, gut informiert zu sein). Wer damals Bitcoin kaufte (um 16k), sicherte sich innerhalb eines Jahres einen Gewinn von weit über 100%!
Stell dir die Seed Keys als das Passwort zu deinem Bitcoin vor, das geschützt werden muss, denn wenn jemand anderes es bekommt, kann er deine Bitcoin in Besitz nehmen - nicht gut für dich. Bitcoin-Seed-Keys werden in der Regel durch eine Hardware-Wallet oder ein Signiergerät geschützt. Dieses Gerät schützt deine Schlüssel vor Hackern oder schlechten Akteuren. Ich verwende seit Jahren Coldcards, und sie gehören zu den besten Geräten zum Schutz von privaten Schlüsseln. Es funktioniert sehr einfach. Du erstellst auf dem Gerät die geheimen Schlüssel; es speichert sie und bewahrt sie offline auf, d. h. ohne Verbindung zum Internet. Dieser letzte Punkt ist WICHTIG. Du darfst diese Wörter NIEMALS auf einem Computer mit Internetanschluss speichern. Der einzige Ort, an dem du deine Schlüssel sicher aufbewahren kannst, ist ein dafür vorgesehenes Gerät. Wenn der Computer kompromittiert wird (und glauben Sie mir, es ist SEHR WÄHRLICH, dass er kompromittiert wird), wird das Signiergerät deine Bitcoin schützen.
Das mag sich alles sehr schwierig und komplex anhören, wenn du es noch nie gemacht hast, aber glaub mir, es ist ganz einfach. Ich würde empfehlen, dass du dir die Videos von BTC Sessions über die Verwendung des Signiergeräts deiner Wahl ansiehst. Er hat unglaubliche Walk-Through-Videos auf YouTube, die alles im Detail erklären.
Eine gemeinsame Verwahrung mit einem Unternehmen wie Swan Bitcoin oder Unchained Capital ist auch eine gute Idee für diejenigen, die neu in diesem Bereich sind. Sie werden dir die Hand halten und dich davor schützen, einfache Fehler zu machen, die zu Problemen führen können. Die gemeinschaftliche Verwahrung ist die Kosten wert, wenn du dir Sorgen machst, deine Bitcoin zu verlieren. Unchained bietet ein Produkt zur gemeinschaftlichen Verwahrung an, das mehrere Schlüssel enthalten kann und deinen Verwandten helfen kann, deine Bitcoin im Falle deines Ablebens wiederzuerlangen.
GEBE NICHT MIT DEINEN BITCOIN AN. Es besteht die Versuchung, mit dem Erfolg zu prahlen. Wenn du fünf Jahre lang durchhältst, wirst du ihn wahrscheinlich haben. Du bist stolz darauf, dass du die Disziplin und Selbstbeherrschung hattest, dich selbst zu beherrschen und erfolgreich das zu erwerben, was du als eine bedeutende Menge an Bitcoin ansiehst. Teile nicht, wie viel du hast, mit anderen. Das sollte offensichtlich sein, aber es gibt Leute, die sich nicht so sehr für dich freuen. Sie könnten es ihren Freunden erzählen, und früher oder später könnte jemand, den du nicht kennst und der vielleicht gewaltbereit ist, feststellen, dass du ein attraktives Ziel bist. Dies ist ein weiterer Grund für die Verwendung einer Konfiguration mit mehreren Signaturen. Selbst wenn jemand 1 von 3 Schlüsseln erhalten hat, kann er deine Bitcoin nicht stehlen.
KAUFE KEINE BITCOIN, DIE DU NICHT KONTROLLIEREN KANNST
Kaufe nicht den glänzenden neuen ETF, den die Wall Street anbietet. Kaufe Bitcoin nur bei Anbietern, die es dir ermöglichen, deine Bitcoin tatsächlich in Verwahrung zu nehmen. Lege deine Bitcoin nicht bei irgendeinem Dienst an, der eine Rendite bietet, insbesondere wenn diese Rendite unrealistisch hoch erscheint. Als allgemeine Faustregel gilt: Lass es einfach bleiben.
Der erste und wichtigste Grund, warum du deine Bitcoin in Verwahrung nehmen solltest, ist, dass du die absolute und vollständige Kontrolle über sie hast. Es gibt in Bitcoin ein Sprichwort: "Nicht deine Schlüssel, nicht deine Coins". Wenn du deine Bitcoin nicht verwahrst, hast du einfach einen Schuldschein. Das ist der ganze Grund für die Existenz von Bitcoin. Um Zwischenhändler auszuschalten und den Menschen zu ermöglichen, ihr finanzielles Schicksal selbst in die Hand zu nehmen.
Wenn du den Besitz hast, fallen keine Gebühren an wie bei einem ETF. Diese Gebühren können niedrig erscheinen, aber mit der Zeit können sie SIGNIFIKANT sein. GBTC ist ein Trust, der einem Bitcoin-ETF am ähnlichsten ist. GBTC erhebt eine Gebühr von 2 % PRO JAHR (jetzt 1,5 % mit dem ETF). Im Laufe der Zeit kann dies erheblich sein. Außerdem erlauben es die ETF-Produkte, die die Wall Street verkauft, nicht, den Bitcoin JEMALS zu verwahren. Ein ETF könnte für einige Leute in bestimmten Szenarien Sinn machen, aber für jeden, der ein Lego-Set bauen kann, ist die Verwahrung von Bitcoin ähnlich komplex. Nimm es selbst in die Hand.
Wenn sich Bitcoin mehr und mehr durchsetzt, wird es möglich sein, ihn als Sicherheiten zu verwenden. Ja, ich verstehe, dass die Verwendung deines Bitcoin als Sicherheit ihn aus deinem Besitz nimmt und Vertrauen in eine dritte Partei erfordert. Dies ist ein weiterer Fall, in dem du dich informieren und SICHER sein solltest, dass der von dir gewählte Kreditgeber vertrauenswürdig ist und nicht pleite gehen wird. Im Zweifelsfall solltest du dich immer auf die Selbstverwahrung verlassen.
Eine Kreditaufnahme gegen deine Bitcoin ist unmöglich, wenn du ihn nicht selbst verwahrst. Du kannst den Bitcoin, den Blackrock in deinem Namen hält, nicht ausleihen. Dies ist von Bedeutung. Es hat steuerliche Vorteile, Bitcoin zu beleihen, anstatt sie zu verkaufen. Wenn du keine Kontrolle über deine Bitcoin hast, schließt du dich selbst von einigen vorhersehbaren Anwendungsfällen in der nahen Zukunft aus und von vielen unvorhersehbaren Anwendungen, die noch erfunden werden müssen. Programmierbares Geld ist nicht nützlich, wenn du es nicht in deiner Hand hältst.
Der letzte Grund, warum du deine Bitcoin aufbewahren solltest, ist ein wenig düsterer. Bitcoin wurde entwickelt, um unzensierbar und nicht konfiszierbar zu sein. Wenn der Staat merkt, dass er die Kontrolle über das Geld verliert, wird er sich wahrscheinlich dein Bitcoin holen. Dies ist ein Präzedenzfall in der Geschichte der USA. Im Jahr 1933 wurde mit der Executive Order 6102 der Besitz von Gold für US-Bürger illegal. Sie zwangen die Menschen, Gold abzugeben und 20 Dollar pro Unze zu erhalten. Die Regierung setzte dann den Goldpreis auf 35 Dollar pro Unze herauf. Für den Besitz von Goldmünzen konnte man in den USA von 1933 bis Mitte der 1970er Jahre ins Gefängnis kommen. Das könnte wieder passieren, und du hast die Wahl, wenn du Bitcoin selbst hältst. Depotbanken WERDEN in diesem Szenario gezwungen sein, der Regierung deine Bitcoin zu geben. Was du in dieser Situation mit deinem Bitcoin tust, sollte DEINE Entscheidung sein, nicht die eines Verwahrers.
VERANTWORTUNG
Wenn du die Schritte unternimmst, um deine Bitcoin selbst zu verwahren, bist du verantwortlich. Dies ist eine Art von radikaler Verantwortung, die Menschen beunruhigen kann. Wenn du deine Schlüssel verlierst, ist dein Bitcoin für immer verloren. Es gibt keine Nummer, die du anrufen kannst, und niemanden, der dir helfen kann. SIE. SIND. WEG.
Im Jahr 2017 verlor einer meiner Freunde auf der Feuerwache Bitcoin im Wert von 1300 Dollar, weil er die Bitcoin in einer Papier-Wallet aufbewahrte. Diese werden nicht mehr verwendet, weil sie so unsicher sind, aber man kann einen QR-Code ausdrucken, der die Bitcoin enthält. Er ließ das Stück Papier in seinem Auto liegen. Dann räumte er sein Auto aus und saugte die Papier-Wallet auf. Diese Bitcoin sind für immer weg. Sie sind jetzt irgendwo zwischen 4 und 5 Tausend Dollar wert, und sie sind einfach weg. Nun, technisch gesehen sind sie nicht weg, sie sind immer noch da, nur für niemanden zugänglich. Ohne die Schlüssel kann niemand die Bitcoin bewegen, also sind die Bitcoin praktisch für immer eingefroren.
Ein anderer guter Freund von mir verlor eine beträchtliche Menge an Bitcoin bei einem Unternehmen namens BlockFi. Dabei handelte es sich um eine Börse, die Renditen für Bitcoin anbot, die bei ihrer Börse aufbewahrt wurden. Dieser Bitcoin ist nicht eingefroren, aber er ist jetzt für die absehbare Zukunft in einem Rechtsstreit eingesperrt. Um dem Ganzen noch die Krone aufzusetzen - da der Bitcoin, als er von BlockFi gehalten wurde, technisch gesehen nicht ihm gehörte, sondern aufgrund der "Vereinbarung", die er bei der Eröffnung des Kontos unterschrieben hat, ihnen gehört, wird er irgendwann in der Zukunft den Dollarwert dieses Bitcoins zu dem Preis erhalten, zu dem BlockFi pleite ging - also 16.000 Dollar -, sind wir wieder bei dem Punkt angelangt, warum du die Selbstverwahrung ernst nehmen solltest!
Das alte Bitcoin-Sprichwort lautet: "Nicht deine Schlüssel, nicht deine Coins".
Bitcoin ist eine endlose Lernreise. Wenn du ein Kaninchenloch erforschen willst, hast du Glück! Die Menge an soliden Inhalten, die in diesem Bereich angeboten werden, ist um Lichtjahre besser als im Jahr 2017. Man kann in einem Bruchteil der Zeit, die man damals gebraucht hätte, von null auf kompetent umsteigen. Wie oben bereits angedeutet, haben wir bei Blue Collar Bitcoin eine Grundlagenreihe zusammengestellt, die du für den Einstieg nutzen kannst. Die Liste der großartigen Inhaltsersteller und Ressourcen ist so lang, dass wir sie nicht alle aufzählen können. Geh einfach auf Entdeckungsreise und achte darauf, zu überprüfen, nicht zu vertrauen.
Lerne weiter, und vor allem - denke selbst!
Erinnere dich an die Weisheit von Matt Odell: "Bleib bescheiden und staple Sats".
-
@ 04ea4f83:210e1713
2025-04-20 08:38:43Bei dem Begriff "Midlife-Crisis" denkt man oft an Menschen mittleren Alters, die sich Sportwagen kaufen, ihre Ehepartner für jüngere Partner verlassen oder sich in einem verzweifelten Versuch, ihre Jugend wiederzuerlangen, plötzlich auf ausgefallene Abenteuer einlassen. Im Bitcoin Space zeichnet sich jedoch ein neues Phänomen ab - die Bitcoiner Midlife-Crisis.
Für diejenigen, die tief in den Kaninchen Bau eingetaucht sind kommt ein Punkt auf ihrer Reise, an dem sie ein Plateau erreichen. Sie haben ein außerordentliches Vermögen in Form von Sats angehäuft und verfügen über ein klares Verständnis der Technologie und des Marktes. Aber trotz alledem fühlen sie sich unerfüllt, so als ob der nächste Kauf von Bitcoin einfach keinen wirklichen Unterschied mehr macht.
Dieses Gefühl wird durch die extreme Volatilität des Bitcoin-Marktes noch verstärkt. An einem Tag kann das Nettovermögen in neue Höhen steigen, nur um am nächsten Tag wieder deutlich zu fallen. Die Schwankungen können so drastisch sein, dass ihr Jahresgehalt im Vergleich zu den nicht realisierten Gewinnen und Verlusten, die sie an einem einzigen Tag erleben, verblasst. Es wird schwierig, die Achterbahnfahrt der finanziellen Freiheit mit der Stabilität einer traditionellen Festanstellung in Einklang zu bringen.
Die traditionellen Vorstellungen von Erfolg und Erfüllung verlieren für Bitcoiner, die diese Midlife-Crisis erleben, an Bedeutung. Die Verlockung von materiellen Besitztümern oder beruflichen Fortschritten hat nicht mehr das gleiche Gewicht im Vergleich zu den potenziellen Gewinnen und Verlusten der Bitcoin. Die Vorstellung, für jemand anderen zu arbeiten und Zeit gegen Geld zu tauschen, wird zunehmend unattraktiver, wenn sie das Potenzial für finanzielle Unabhängigkeit durch ihre überlegene Spar-Technologie sehen.
Infolgedessen können Bitcoiner in der Mitte ihrer Lebenskrise ihre Prioritäten und Werte in Frage stellen. Sie könnten beginnen, die gesellschaftlichen Normen und Erwartungen zu hinterfragen, die ihr Leben bis zu diesem Zeitpunkt bestimmt haben. Das Bedürfnis nach Anerkennung oder Bestätigung durch andere hat nicht mehr den gleichen Stellenwert, da sie erkennen, dass ihr Wohlstand und ihr Erfolg nicht durch traditionelle Maßstäbe definiert werden.
Diese veränderte Denkweise kann zu einem Mangel an Filter oder Selbstzensur in ihren Interaktionen mit anderen führen. Bitcoiner, die eine Midlife-Crisis durchleben, werden möglicherweise offener und selbstbewusster, wenn es darum geht, ihre Überzeugungen und Meinungen zu äußern, unabhängig davon, wie sie von ihrem Umfeld wahrgenommen werden. Sie haben vielleicht nicht mehr das Bedürfnis, sich an gesellschaftliche Normen anzupassen oder sich an konventionelle Weisheiten zu halten, was zu Konflikten mit Freunden, Familie oder Arbeitskollegen führt, die ihre Ansichten nicht verstehen oder teilen.
Die emotionale Loslösung, die mit der Bitcoiner-Midlife-Crisis einhergeht, kann sich auch in einem allgemeinen Gefühl der Apathie oder Gleichgültigkeit gegenüber äußeren Ereignissen oder Umständen äußern. Themen oder Herausforderungen, die früher vielleicht eine starke emotionale Reaktion hervorgerufen haben, werden jetzt kaum noch wahrgenommen. Die Höhen und Tiefen des alltäglichen Fiat-Jobs scheinen im Vergleich zur Volatilität des Bitcoin-Marktes unbedeutend zu sein.
Mitten in dieser Midlife-Crisis könnten sich Bitcoiner an einem Scheideweg wiederfinden und sich mit Fragen der Identität, des Zwecks und der Erfüllung auseinandersetzen. Sie könnten gezwungen sein, sich mit ihrer eigenen Sterblichkeit und dem Erbe, das sie hinterlassen wollen, auseinanderzusetzen. Die traditionellen Meilensteine des Erfolgs, wie ein Haus, staatliche Altersvorsorge oder berufliche Erfolge, haben vielleicht nicht mehr die gleiche Anziehungskraft, wenn man sie mit dem Potenzial für finanzielle Freiheit und Souveränität vergleicht, das der Bitcoin bietet.
Die Midlife-Crisis der Bitcoiner ist nicht nur ein persönlicher Kampf, sondern ein Spiegelbild der breiteren gesellschaftlichen Veränderungen und Umwälzungen, die durch den Aufstieg eines digitalen Geldes ausgelöst wurden, welches die Gesellschaft von monetärer Entwertung und finanzieller Unterdrückung befreit. Sie ist eine Herausforderung für die etablierten Normen und Strukturen der Finanzwelt und eine Neudefinition dessen, was es bedeutet, in der modernen Zeit Erfolg und Erfüllung zu finden.
Während Bitcoiner durch diese Midlife-Crisis schreiten, können sie Trost darin finden, sich mit anderen zu verbinden, die ihre Reise und Erfahrungen teilen. Online-Communities, Meetups und Konferenzen bieten einen Raum für Gleichgesinnte, um zusammenzukommen und sich gegenseitig durch die Höhen und Tiefen des Bitcoin-Marktes zu unterstützen. Indem sie ihre Kämpfe, Erfolge und Einsichten miteinander teilen, können Bitcoiner ein Gefühl der Kameradschaft und ein Ziel auf ihrem Weg zur finanziellen Unabhängigkeit und Selbstverwirklichung finden.
Zusammenfassend lässt sich sagen, dass die Midlife-Crisis der Bitcoiner ein komplexes und vielschichtiges Phänomen ist, das die einzigartigen Herausforderungen und Chancen der Einführung von gesundem Geld widerspiegelt. Sie stellt einen Wendepunkt im Leben derjenigen dar, die tief in die Welt des Bitcoin eingetaucht sind, wo traditionelle Maßstäbe für Erfolg und Erfüllung im Lichte des Potenzials für Selbstständigkeit und finanzielle Freiheit neu bewertet werden. Indem sie sich mit ihren eigenen Werten, Überzeugungen und Prioritäten auseinandersetzen, können Bitcoiner aus dieser Midlife-Crisis mit einem neuen Sinn für Ziel und Richtung auf ihrer Reise zu finanzieller Unabhängigkeit und Selbstverwirklichung hervorgehen.
-
@ 04ea4f83:210e1713
2025-04-20 08:37:09Veröffentlicht auf Medium am 07.06.2021\ Originalautor: Tomer Strolight\ Übersetzt von: Sinautoshi am 04.05.2023 - 788249\
Reden wir über Dinge, die man mit Geld nicht kaufen kann.
Ehrlichkeit kann man mit Geld nicht kaufen. Tatsächlich sind Menschen, die versuchen, dich davon zu überzeugen, ihnen dein Geld zu geben, oft nicht ganz ehrlich zu dir.
Freundschaft kann man mit Geld nicht kaufen. Du kannst nicht in ein Geschäft oder eine Bar gehen und einen Freund kaufen – jemanden, der deine Werte teilt, der dich respektiert, den du respektierst. Und aus den gleichen Gründen kann man sich damit keine Liebe kaufen , die eine besonders tiefe Form der Freundschaft ist.
Vor allem kann Geld dir keine Dinge kaufen, die in dir selbst sind: Es kann dir kein Selbstwertgefühl, Intelligenz, Mut oder Integrität kaufen, um nur einige Beispiele zu nennen. Gebe einer unsicheren Person einen Haufen Geld und sie wird es verschwenden, um vor anderen anzugeben oder sich selbst zu zerstören. Gib einem intellektuell faulen Menschen Geld und er wird nicht schlauer. Gebe einem Feigling Geld und er hat nur noch eine Sache, vor der er Angst haben muss: das Geld zu verlieren. Und gebe einem Betrüger Geld, und er wird versuchen, es zu verwenden, um einen unehrlichen Plan auszuhecken, durch den er mehr bekommen kann.
Die Dinge, die man für Geld kaufen kann
Geld wird dir ein schönes Outfit, einen tollen Haarschnitt, ein schickes Auto und ein schönes Haus kaufen, aber das Glück selbst wird unerreichbar bleiben ohne echte Freunde und Liebhaber, denen du vertrauen kannst, und ohne in der Lage zu sein, dich selbst zu lieben und zu respektieren.
Geld kauft nämlich kein Glück. Nicht von alleine. Es ist nicht ausreichend.
Warum arbeiten wir dann so hart für Geld? Warum messen manche Menschen ihren Wert in Dollar?
Es ist wahr, dass wir viele der Dinge brauchen, die man mit Geld kaufen kann, wie Nahrung, Unterkunft, Kleidung und sogar Unterhaltung, die uns ein wenig glücklicher macht.
Geld kann ein Wegbereiter sein. Es kann verwendet werden, um Dinge zu kaufen, die grundlegende Überlebensbedürfnisse befriedigen, und uns dadurch die Zeit verschaffen, diesen anderen Werten nachzugehen, die Geld selbst nicht kaufen kann.
Es ist jedoch immer noch sehr falsch, unseren Wert anhand einer einzigen Zahl zu messen, geschweige denn an einer Zahl, von der wir wissen, dass sie Freundschaft, Liebe, Selbstwertgefühl, Intelligenz, Mut, Integrität und viele andere Tugenden und Werte, die wir zeigen und verfolgen sollten, auslässt.
Was hat das mit Bitcoin zu tun?
Nehmen wir uns nun eine Minute Zeit, um uns die Gemeinschaft der Bitcoiner anzusehen. Bitcoiner sind überzeugt von einer neue Form von Geld, Bitcoin.
Wir unternehmen große Anstrengungen, um zu erklären, warum wir denken, dass es die beste Form von Geld ist, die es je gegeben hat und wahrscheinlich jemals geben wird.
Um dies erklären zu können, müssen wir zunächst große Anstrengungen unternehmen, um zu verstehen, was Geld ist und wie Bitcoin die Anforderungen erfüllt, Geld zu sein.
Dazu müssen wir einen sehr ehrlichen Blick auf die Geschichte und die Gegenwart werfen . Wir müssen erforschen, was viele Menschen für selbstverständlich halten. Wir müssen harte Fragen stellen und nach ehrlichen, vertretbaren Antworten suchen.
Wir müssen etwas über die Mathematik lernen, auf die sich Bitcoin stützt.
Wir müssen etwas über die Energieproduktion lernen, auf die Bitcoin angewiesen ist.
Wir lernen etwas über Ökonomie, die Lehre davon, wie Menschen mit den Dingen umgehen, die man mit Geld kaufen kann.
Wir entwickeln eine tiefe Überzeugung, die von all diesem Lernen und unseren Beobachtungen und Argumenten über das, was um uns herum passiert, geprägt ist.
Wir bilden Ansichten darüber aus, wohin die Welt steuert .
Wir kommen zu dem Schluss, dass eine Welt mit Bitcoin als Geld oder auch nur als das Geld, das von uns, welche sich für Bitcoin entscheiden, verwendet wird, eine bessere Welt ist.
Wir schließen daraus, dass es eine bessere Welt ist, weil sie ehrlich und transparent ist. Es ist eine Welt ohne Geheimnisse, Intrigen und Täuschungen darüber, was Geld ist.
Es ist eine Welt ohne mächtige Leute, die die Kontrolle über das Geldsystem ausüben, um die Schwachen zu kontrollieren.
Wir finden dann eine moralische Mission in Bitcoin.
Wir übernehmen die Verantwortung, das Wissen zu verbreiten.
Dazu braucht es Mut. Wir müssen unser Geld dort einsetzen, wo unser Mund ist, indem wir Bitcoin mit unseren Euro kaufen. Dies ist ein Akt der Risikobereitschaft oder des Mutes. Es ist ein Akt der Integrität – unsere Worte an unseren Taten auszurichten.
Wir müssen standhaft bleiben. Wir werden ausgelacht. Mächtige Menschen und Institutionen verspotten uns und versuchen, uns zu diskreditieren. Sie bezeichnen uns als Unterstützer von Kriminellen und Terroristen. Entweder stärken wir unseren Mut und unsere Überzeugung oder verlassen Bitcoin.
Diejenigen von uns, die bleiben, wissen, dass unsere Mit-Bitcoiner, die die gleichen Schwierigkeiten durchgemacht haben oder durchmachen wie wir, ehrlich, intelligent und mutig sind.
Wir respektieren einander. Wir werden Freunde.
Wir alle tragen bei, was wir können, wie wir können. Wir bauen die Welt, die wir uns vorstellen.
All dies tun wir unbeirrt, während Millionen an der Seitenlinie stehen, einige neugierig zusehen, uns verspotten und einige aktiv angreifen und versuchen, uns aufzuhalten. Ab und zu rennt einer rüber und sagt „Ich will so sein wie du!“ Und wir empfangen sie mit offenen Armen.
Ein Bitcoiner zu werden ist ein Prozess, durch den du Dinge erhältst, die man mit Geld nicht kaufen kann.
Schau mal. Ehrlichkeit kann man mit Geld nicht kaufen. Freundschaft kann man damit nicht kaufen. Selbstachtung, Mut, Intelligenz oder Integrität kann man damit auch nicht kaufen. Doch diese Bitcoiner mit ihren Ideen, ihren Idealen, Bemühungen und ihren Errungenschaften haben sich all diese Dinge angeeignet. Bitcoiner sind ehrlich. Sie haben authentische Freundschaften. Sie glauben an sich. Sie sind mutig. Sie sind schlau. Und sie besitzen eine Integrität, die all diese Dinge über jeden Reichtum stellt, der in einem monetären Wert gemessen wird.
Kein Bitcoiner beurteilt einen anderen danach, wie viel Bitcoin diese andere Person wert ist.
Es ist ein Fauxpas in der Community, überhaupt danach zu fragen.
Ich liebe meine Mit-Bitcoiner. Sie sind die besten Menschen auf Erden. Einige mögen finanziell reich sein, andere nicht. Aber sie sind mir alle viel mehr wert als Geld.
Bitcoin hat uns allen eine Fülle von Dingen gegeben, die man mit Geld nicht kaufen kann.
-
@ 8996668f:1919e346
2025-04-19 21:40:05Looking for a quick Anaheim tow? EV Towing Company is your go-to solution! When your car won’t budge, we’re there fast to help. Our skilled team uses safe, modern trucks to tow your vehicle, whether it’s a short trip or farther away. We’re available 24/7 for breakdowns, flat tires, or accidents, with prices that won’t shock you. EV Towing Company cares about getting you back on track with a smile. For a hassle-free tow in Anaheim, we’re the ones to call. Reach out anytime, and we’ll take care of your car!
-
@ 005bc4de:ef11e1a2
2025-04-19 12:23:14A new game is starting today, 4/19/2025, called "Moon"
https://moon.hive.pizza
I'm not a gamer and don't know much about this one, or any games for that matter, but some folks may be interested in getting in at the start.
Go-time is noon EST today, I believe.
I do get a kick out of the line "Free dopamine and tears."
😀
-
@ d08c9312:73efcc9f
2025-04-18 20:17:41https://youtu.be/qK7ffYzxiiQ
Resolvr was recently featured in The Institutes RiskStream Collaborative's educational video series on insurance digitization and cross-border payments. With over a century of history educating insurance professionals, The Institutes has established itself as the premier knowledge resource in risk management and insurance. And its RiskStream Collaborative non-profit serves as the industry's largest enterprise-level technology consortium focused on streamlining insurance processes through innovative solutions.
Resolvr's co-founders, Aaron Daniel and Dave Schwab, were joined by industry experts Lizzy Eisenberg from Lightspark and Austin Cornell from Zero Hash to discuss how Bitcoin and the Lightning Network are transforming global insurance payments operations.
Watch the video to learn how Resolvr is leveraging these real-time digital settlement networks to solve significant inefficiencies in today's insurance payment ecosystem - from the months-long settlement times that trap billions in value, to the manual reconciliation processes costing the industry nearly £1 billion annually at Lloyd's of London alone.
We're grateful to RiskStream Collaborative for showcasing these transformative technologies and emphasizing the importance of combining specialized insurance-native interfaces with powerful payment infrastructure to solve industry-specific challenges.
For more information about how Resolvr can help your organization streamline premium processing and payments, contact us today.
-
@ ba36d0f7:cd802cba
2025-04-16 16:45:071. The creative (but fleeting) pleasure of tactics
Chess tactics are like candy between meals - instant delight, but not true nourishment. Choosing whether to attack a bishop or a knight feels like picking between vanilla and chocolate ice cream: sprinkles or none, cherry on top or not...
-
They’re freedom within boundaries: the board has limits, but imagination doesn’t.
-
They mirror your style: quick strikes like an espresso? Or slow grinds like green tea?
2. Two tactics, two joys
-
Simple (an exposed king): everyday wins (like finding cash in your pocket).
-
Complex (3+ move combos): earned triumphs (like a project you’ve sweat over).
3. The Buddha’s warning: "Don’t Confuse the Sugar Rush for the Meal"
Buddhism teaches that clinging to pleasure (kāma-tanha) breeds suffering. In chess and life:
-
Tactics are desserts: sweet, but not the feast.
- Example: Beating a blunder is like winning the lottery; outplaying strategically is like building wealth.
-
The balance: Revel in that dazzling queen sacrifice - but don’t bet your game on it. Like savoring cake, not devouring the whole bakery.
4. How to play (and Live) this wisdom
✅ Ask yourself:
-
Is this move sound - or just seductive? (Like craving junk food vs. needing sustenance).
-
Am I here to win, or to wow? (Ego checkmates you faster than any opponent).
Final Move: The middle path on 64 squares
Buddhism invites joy without attachment. On the board:
-
Tactics = spice: they dazzle, but strategy feeds growth.
-
Strategy = the harvest: the patience that crowns kings.
♟️ So - do you chase the fireworks, or cultivate the long game?
Online Resources
Chess tactics - chess.com https://www.chess.com/terms/chess-tactics
Tactic examples - chess.com https://www.chess.com/article/view/chess-tactics
Tactics - lichess.org https://lichess.org/study/topic/Tactics/hot
somachess #buddhism #philosophy #chessphilosophy #chess #elsalvador #btc #apaneca #chesselsalvador
-
-
@ c631e267:c2b78d3e
2025-04-18 15:53:07Verstand ohne Gefühl ist unmenschlich; \ Gefühl ohne Verstand ist Dummheit. \ Egon Bahr
Seit Jahren werden wir darauf getrimmt, dass Fakten eigentlich gefühlt seien. Aber nicht alles ist relativ und nicht alles ist nach Belieben interpretierbar. Diese Schokoladenhasen beispielsweise, die an Ostern in unseren Gefilden typisch sind, «ostern» zwar nicht, sondern sie sitzen in der Regel, trotzdem verwandelt sie das nicht in «Sitzhasen».
Nichts soll mehr gelten, außer den immer invasiveren Gesetzen. Die eigenen Traditionen und Wurzeln sind potenziell «pfui», um andere Menschen nicht auszuschließen, aber wir mögen uns toleranterweise an die fremden Symbole und Rituale gewöhnen. Dabei ist es mir prinzipiell völlig egal, ob und wann jemand ein Fastenbrechen feiert, am Karsamstag oder jedem anderen Tag oder nie – aber bitte freiwillig.
Und vor allem: Lasst die Finger von den Kindern! In Bern setzten kürzlich Demonstranten ein Zeichen gegen die zunehmende Verbreitung woker Ideologie im Bildungssystem und forderten ein Ende der sexuellen Indoktrination von Schulkindern.
Wenn es nicht wegen des heiklen Themas Migration oder wegen des Regenbogens ist, dann wegen des Klimas. Im Rahmen der «Netto Null»-Agenda zum Kampf gegen das angeblich teuflische CO2 sollen die Menschen ihre Ernährungsgewohnheiten komplett ändern. Nach dem Willen von Produzenten synthetischer Lebensmittel, wie Bill Gates, sollen wir baldmöglichst praktisch auf Fleisch und alle Milchprodukte wie Milch und Käse verzichten. Ein lukratives Geschäftsmodell, das neben der EU aktuell auch von einem britischen Lobby-Konsortium unterstützt wird.
Sollten alle ideologischen Stricke zu reißen drohen, ist da immer noch «der Putin». Die Unions-Europäer offenbaren sich dabei ständig mehr als Vertreter der Rüstungsindustrie. Allen voran zündelt Deutschland an der Kriegslunte, angeführt von einem scheinbar todesmutigen Kanzlerkandidaten Friedrich Merz. Nach dessen erneuter Aussage, «Taurus»-Marschflugkörper an Kiew liefern zu wollen, hat Russland eindeutig klargestellt, dass man dies als direkte Kriegsbeteiligung werten würde – «mit allen sich daraus ergebenden Konsequenzen für Deutschland».
Wohltuend sind Nachrichten über Aktivitäten, die sich der allgemeinen Kriegstreiberei entgegenstellen oder diese öffentlich hinterfragen. Dazu zählt auch ein Kongress kritischer Psychologen und Psychotherapeuten, der letzte Woche in Berlin stattfand. Die vielen Vorträge im Kontext von «Krieg und Frieden» deckten ein breites Themenspektrum ab, darunter Friedensarbeit oder die Notwendigkeit einer «Pädagogik der Kriegsuntüchtigkeit».
Der heutige «stille Freitag», an dem Christen des Leidens und Sterbens von Jesus gedenken, ist vielleicht unabhängig von jeder religiösen oder spirituellen Prägung eine passende Einladung zur Reflexion. In der Ruhe liegt die Kraft. In diesem Sinne wünsche ich Ihnen frohe Ostertage!
[Titelbild: Pixabay]
Dieser Beitrag wurde mit dem Pareto-Client geschrieben und ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.
-
@ ed5774ac:45611c5c
2025-04-19 20:29:31April 20, 2020: The day I saw my so-called friends expose themselves as gutless, brain-dead sheep.
On that day, I shared a video exposing the damning history of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation's vaccine campaigns in Africa and the developing world. As Gates was on every TV screen, shilling COVID jabs that didn’t even exist, I called out his blatant financial conflict of interest and pointed out the obvious in my facebook post: "Finally someone is able to explain why Bill Gates runs from TV to TV to promote vaccination. Not surprisingly, it's all about money again…" - referencing his substantial investments in vaccine technology, including BioNTech's mRNA platform that would later produce the COVID vaccines and generate massive profits for his so-called philanthropic foundation.
The conflict of interest was undeniable. I genuinely believed anyone capable of basic critical thinking would at least pause to consider these glaring financial motives. But what followed was a masterclass in human stupidity.
My facebook post from 20 April 2020:
Not only was I branded a 'conspiracy theorist' for daring to question the billionaire who stood to make a fortune off the very vaccines he was shilling, but the brain-dead, logic-free bullshit vomited by the people around me was beyond pathetic. These barely literate morons couldn’t spell "Pfizer" without auto-correct, yet they mindlessly swallowed and repeated every lie the media and government force-fed them, branding anything that cracked their fragile reality as "conspiracy theory." Big Pharma’s rap sheet—fraud, deadly cover-ups, billions in fines—could fill libraries, yet these obedient sheep didn’t bother to open a single book or read a single study before screaming their ignorance, desperate to virtue-signal their obedience. Then, like spineless lab rats, they lined up for an experimental jab rushed to the market in months, too dumb to care that proper vaccine development takes a decade.
The pathetic part is that these idiots spend hours obsessing over reviews for their useless purchases like shoes or socks, but won’t spare 60 seconds to research the experimental cocktail being injected into their veins—or even glance at the FDA’s own damning safety reports. Those same obedient sheep would read every Yelp review for a fucking coffee shop but won't spend five minutes looking up Pfizer's criminal fraud settlements. They would demand absolute obedience to ‘The Science™’—while being unable to define mRNA, explain lipid nanoparticles, or justify why trials were still running as they queued up like cattle for their jab. If they had two brain cells to rub together or spent 30 minutes actually researching, they'd know, but no—they'd rather suck down the narrative like good little slaves, too dumb to question, too weak to think.
Worst of all, they became the system’s attack dogs—not just swallowing the poison, but forcing it down others’ throats. This wasn’t ignorance. It was betrayal. They mutated into medical brownshirts, destroying lives to virtue-signal their obedience—even as their own children’s hearts swelled with inflammation.
One conversation still haunts me to this day—a masterclass in wealth-worship delusion. A close friend, as a response to my facebook post, insisted that Gates’ assumed reading list magically awards him vaccine expertise, while dismissing his billion-dollar investments in the same products as ‘no conflict of interest.’ Worse, he argued that Gates’s $5–10 billion pandemic windfall was ‘deserved.’
This exchange crystallizes civilization’s intellectual surrender: reason discarded with religious fervor, replaced by blind faith in corporate propaganda.
The comment of a friend on my facebook post that still haunts me to this day:
Walking Away from the Herd
After a period of anger and disillusionment, I made a decision: I would no longer waste energy arguing with people who refused to think for themselves. If my circle couldn’t even ask basic questions—like why an untested medical intervention was being pushed with unprecedented urgency—then I needed a new community.
Fortunately, I already knew where to look. For three years, I had been involved in Bitcoin, a space where skepticism wasn’t just tolerated—it was demanded. Here, I’d met some of the most principled and independent thinkers I’d ever encountered. These were people who understood the corrupting influence of centralized power—whether in money, media, or politics—and who valued sovereignty, skepticism, and integrity. Instead of blind trust, bitcoiners practiced relentless verification. And instead of empty rhetoric, they lived by a simple creed: Don’t trust. Verify.
It wasn’t just a philosophy. It was a lifeline. So I chose my side and I walked away from the herd.
Finding My Tribe
Over the next four years, I immersed myself in Bitcoin conferences, meetups, and spaces where ideas were tested, not parroted. Here, I encountered extraordinary people: not only did they share my skepticism toward broken systems, but they challenged me to sharpen it.
No longer adrift in a sea of mindless conformity, I’d found a crew of thinkers who cut through the noise. They saw clearly what most ignored—that at the core of society’s collapse lay broken money, the silent tax on time, freedom, and truth itself. But unlike the complainers I’d left behind, these people built. They coded. They wrote. They risked careers and reputations to expose the rot. Some faced censorship; others, mockery. All understood the stakes.
These weren’t keyboard philosophers. They were modern-day Cassandras, warning of inflation’s theft, the Fed’s lies, and the coming dollar collapse—not for clout, but because they refused to kneel to a dying regime. And in their defiance, I found something rare: a tribe that didn’t just believe in a freer future. They were engineering it.
April 20, 2024: No more herd. No more lies. Only proof-of-work.
On April 20, 2024, exactly four years after my last Facebook post, the one that severed my ties to the herd for good—I stood in front of Warsaw’s iconic Palace of Culture and Science, surrounded by 400 bitcoiners who felt like family. We were there to celebrate Bitcoin’s fourth halving, but it was more than a protocol milestone. It was a reunion of sovereign individuals. Some faces I’d known since the early days; others, I’d met only hours before. We bonded instantly—heated debates, roaring laughter, zero filters on truths or on so called conspiracy theories.
As the countdown to the halving began, it hit me: This was the antithesis of the hollow world I’d left behind. No performative outrage, no coerced consensus—just a room of unyielding minds who’d traded the illusion of safety for the grit of truth. Four years prior, I’d been alone in my resistance. Now, I raised my glass among my people - those who had seen the system's lies and chosen freedom instead. Each had their own story of awakening, their own battles fought, but here we shared the same hard-won truth.
The energy wasn’t just electric. It was alive—the kind that emerges when free people build rather than beg. For the first time, I didn’t just belong. I was home. And in that moment, the halving’s ticking clock mirrored my own journey: cyclical, predictable in its scarcity, revolutionary in its consequences. Four years had burned away the old world. What remained was stronger.
No Regrets
Leaving the herd wasn’t a choice—it was evolution. My soul shouted: "I’d rather stand alone than kneel with the masses!". The Bitcoin community became more than family; they’re living proof that the world still produces warriors, not sheep. Here, among those who forge truth, I found something extinct elsewhere: hope that burns brighter with every halving, every block, every defiant mind that joins the fight.
Change doesn’t come from the crowd. It starts when one person stops applauding.
Today, I stand exactly where I always wanted to be—shoulder-to-shoulder with my true family: the rebels, the builders, the ungovernable. Together, we’re building the decentralized future.
-
@ f839fb67:5c930939
2025-04-16 21:07:13Relays
| Name | Address | Price (Sats/Year) | Status | | - | - | - | - | | stephen's aegis relay | wss://paid.relay.vanderwarker.family | 42069 |
| | stephen's Outbox | wss://relay.vanderwarker.family | Just Me |
| | stephen's Inbox | wss://haven.vanderwarker.family/inbox | WoT |
| | stephen's DMs | wss://haven.vanderwarker.family/chat | WoT |
| | VFam Data Relay | wss://data.relay.vanderwarker.family | 0 |
| | VFam Bots Relay | wss://skeme.vanderwarker.family | Invite |
| | VFGroups (NIP29) | wss://groups.vanderwarker.family | 0 |
| | [TOR] My Phone Relay | ws://naswsosuewqxyf7ov7gr7igc4tq2rbtqoxxirwyhkbuns4lwc3iowwid.onion | 0 | Meh... |
My Pubkeys
| Name | hex | nprofile | | - | - | - | | Main | f839fb6714598a7233d09dbd42af82cc9781d0faa57474f1841af90b5c930939 | nostr:nprofile1qqs0sw0mvu29nznjx0gfm02z47pve9up6ra22ar57xzp47gttjfsjwgpramhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuanpdejx2unhv9exketj9enxzmtfd3us9mapfx | | Vanity (Backup) | 82f21be67353c0d68438003fe6e56a35e2a57c49e0899b368b5ca7aa8dde7c23 | nostr:nprofile1qqsg9usmuee48sxkssuqq0lxu44rtc4903y7pzvmx694efa23h08cgcpramhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuanpdejx2unhv9exketj9enxzmtfd3ussel49x | | VFStore | 6416f1e658ba00d42107b05ad9bf485c7e46698217e0c19f0dc2e125de3af0d0 | nostr:nprofile1qqsxg9h3uevt5qx5yyrmqkkehay9cljxdxpp0cxpnuxu9cf9mca0p5qpramhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuanpdejx2unhv9exketj9enxzmtfd3usaa8plu | | NostrSMS | 9be1b8315248eeb20f9d9ab2717d1750e4f27489eab1fa531d679dadd34c2f8d | nostr:nprofile1qqsfhcdcx9fy3m4jp7we4vn305t4pe8jwjy74v062vwk08dd6dxzlrgpramhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuanpdejx2unhv9exketj9enxzmtfd3us595d45 |
Bots
Unlocks Bot
Hex: 2e941ad17144e0a04d1b8c21c4a0dbc3fbcbb9d08ae622b5f9c85341fac7c2d0
nprofile:
nostr:nprofile1qqsza9q669c5fc9qf5dccgwy5rdu877th8gg4e3zkhuus56pltru95qpramhxue69uhhx6m9d4jjuanpdejx2unhv9exketj9enxzmtfd3ust4kvak
Latest Data:
nostr:naddr1qq882mnvda3kkttrda6kuar9wgq37amnwvaz7tmnddjk6efwweskuer9wfmkzuntv4ezuenpd45kc7gzyqhfgxk3w9zwpgzdrwxzr39qm0plhjae6z9wvg44l8y9xs06clpdqqcyqqq823cgnl9u5Step Counter
Hex: 9223d2faeb95853b4d224a184c69e1df16648d35067a88cdf947c631b57e3de7
nprofile: nostr:nprofile1qqsfyg7jlt4etpfmf53y5xzvd8sa79ny356sv75gehu50333k4lrmecpramhxue69uhhx6m9d4jjuanpdejx2unhv9exketj9enxzmtfd3ustswp3w
Latest Data:
nostr:naddr1qvzqqqr4gupzpy3r6tawh9v98dxjyjscf357rhckvjxn2pn63rxlj37xxx6hu008qys8wumn8ghj7umtv4kk2tnkv9hxgetjwashy6m9wghxvctdd9k8jtcqp3ehgets943k7atww3jhyn39gffRCTGuest
Hex: 373904615c781e46bf5bf87b4126c8a568a05393b1b840b1a2a3234d20affa0c
nprofile: nostr:nprofile1qqsrwwgyv9w8s8jxhadls76pymy2269q2wfmrwzqkx32xg6dyzhl5rqpramhxue69uhhx6m9d4jjuanpdejx2unhv9exketj9enxzmtfd3usy92jlxNow Playing
Hex: 8096ed6ba1f21a3713bd47a503ee377b0ce2f187b3e5a3ae909a25b84901018b
nprofile: nostr:nprofile1qqsgp9hddwslyx3hzw750fgracmhkr8z7xrm8edr46gf5fdcfyqsrzcpramhxue69uhhx6m9d4jjuanpdejx2unhv9exketj9enxzmtfd3uspk5v4w
Latest Data:
nostr:naddr1qq9kummh94cxccted9hxwqglwaehxw309aekketdv5h8vctwv3jhyampwf4k2u3wvesk66tv0ypzpqyka446rus6xufm63a9q0hrw7cvutcc0vl95whfpx39hpyszqvtqvzqqqr4gupdk2hd
NIP-29 Groups
- Minecraft Group Chat
nostr:naddr1qqrxvc33xpnxxqfqwaehxw309anhymm4wpejuanpdejx2unhv9exketj9enxzmtfd3usygrzymrpd2wz8ularp06y8ad5dgaddlumyt7tfzqge3vc97sgsarjvpsgqqqnpvqazypfd
- VFNet Group Chat
nostr:naddr1qqrrwvfjx9jxzqfqwaehxw309anhymm4wpejuanpdejx2unhv9exketj9enxzmtfd3usygrzymrpd2wz8ularp06y8ad5dgaddlumyt7tfzqge3vc97sgsarjvpsgqqqnpvq08hx48
"Nostrified Websites"
[D] = Saves darkmode preferences over nostr
[A] = Auth over nostr
[B] = Beta (software)
[z] = zap enabled
Other Services (Hosted code)
Emojis Packs
- Minecraft
nostr:naddr1qqy566twv43hyctxwsq37amnwvaz7tmjv4kxz7fwweskuer9wfmkzuntv4ezuenpd45kc7gzyrurn7m8z3vc5u3n6zwm6s40stxf0qwsl2jhga83ssd0jz6ujvynjqcyqqq82nsd0k5wp
- AIM
nostr:naddr1qqxxz6tdv4kk7arfvdhkuucpramhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuanpdejx2unhv9exketj9enxzmtfd3usyg8c88akw9ze3fer85yah4p2lqkvj7qap749w360rpq6ly94eycf8ypsgqqqw48qe0j2yk
- Blobs
nostr:naddr1qqz5ymr0vfesz8mhwden5te0wfjkccte9emxzmnyv4e8wctjddjhytnxv9kkjmreqgs0sw0mvu29nznjx0gfm02z47pve9up6ra22ar57xzp47gttjfsjwgrqsqqqa2wek4ukj
- FavEmojis
nostr:naddr1qqy5vctkg4kk76nfwvq37amnwvaz7tmjv4kxz7fwweskuer9wfmkzuntv4ezuenpd45kc7gzyrurn7m8z3vc5u3n6zwm6s40stxf0qwsl2jhga83ssd0jz6ujvynjqcyqqq82nsf7sdwt
- Modern Family
nostr:naddr1qqx56mmyv4exugzxv9kkjmreqy0hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnkv9hxgetjwashy6m9wghxvctdd9k8jq3qlqulkec5tx98yv7snk759tuzejtcr5865468fuvyrtuskhynpyusxpqqqp65ujlj36n
- nostriches (Amethyst collection)
nostr:naddr1qq9xummnw3exjcmgv4esz8mhwden5te0wfjkccte9emxzmnyv4e8wctjddjhytnxv9kkjmreqgs0sw0mvu29nznjx0gfm02z47pve9up6ra22ar57xzp47gttjfsjwgrqsqqqa2w2sqg6w
- Pepe
nostr:naddr1qqz9qetsv5q37amnwvaz7tmjv4kxz7fwweskuer9wfmkzuntv4ezuenpd45kc7gzyrurn7m8z3vc5u3n6zwm6s40stxf0qwsl2jhga83ssd0jz6ujvynjqcyqqq82ns85f6x7
- Minecraft Font
nostr:naddr1qq8y66twv43hyctxwssyvmmwwsq37amnwvaz7tmjv4kxz7fwweskuer9wfmkzuntv4ezuenpd45kc7gzyrurn7m8z3vc5u3n6zwm6s40stxf0qwsl2jhga83ssd0jz6ujvynjqcyqqq82nsmzftgr
- Archer Font
nostr:naddr1qq95zunrdpjhygzxdah8gqglwaehxw309aex2mrp0yh8vctwv3jhyampwf4k2u3wvesk66tv0ypzp7peldn3gkv2wgeap8dag2hc9nyhs8g04ft5wnccgxhepdwfxzfeqvzqqqr4fclkyxsh
- SMB Font
nostr:naddr1qqv4xatsv4ezqntpwf5k7gzzwfhhg6r9wfejq3n0de6qz8mhwden5te0wfjkccte9emxzmnyv4e8wctjddjhytnxv9kkjmreqgs0sw0mvu29nznjx0gfm02z47pve9up6ra22ar57xzp47gttjfsjwgrqsqqqa2w0wqpuk
Git Over Nostr
- NostrSMS
nostr:naddr1qqyxummnw3e8xmtnqy0hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnkv9hxgetjwashy6m9wghxvctdd9k8jqfrwaehxw309amk7apwwfjkccte9emxzmnyv4e8wctjddjhytnxv9kkjmreqyj8wumn8ghj7urpd9jzuun9d3shjtnkv9hxgetjwashy6m9wghxvctdd9k8jqg5waehxw309aex2mrp0yhxgctdw4eju6t0qyxhwumn8ghj7mn0wvhxcmmvqgs0sw0mvu29nznjx0gfm02z47pve9up6ra22ar57xzp47gttjfsjwgrqsqqqaueqp0epk
- nip51backup
nostr:naddr1qq9ku6tsx5ckyctrdd6hqqglwaehxw309aex2mrp0yh8vctwv3jhyampwf4k2u3wvesk66tv0yqjxamnwvaz7tmhda6zuun9d3shjtnkv9hxgetjwashy6m9wghxvctdd9k8jqfywaehxw309acxz6ty9eex2mrp0yh8vctwv3jhyampwf4k2u3wvesk66tv0yq3gamnwvaz7tmjv4kxz7fwv3sk6atn9e5k7qgdwaehxw309ahx7uewd3hkcq3qlqulkec5tx98yv7snk759tuzejtcr5865468fuvyrtuskhynpyusxpqqqpmej4gtqs6
- bukkitstr
nostr:naddr1qqykyattdd5hgum5wgq37amnwvaz7tmjv4kxz7fwweskuer9wfmkzuntv4ezuenpd45kc7gpydmhxue69uhhwmm59eex2mrp0yh8vctwv3jhyampwf4k2u3wvesk66tv0yqjgamnwvaz7tmsv95kgtnjv4kxz7fwweskuer9wfmkzuntv4ezuenpd45kc7gpz3mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduqs6amnwvaz7tmwdaejumr0dspzp7peldn3gkv2wgeap8dag2hc9nyhs8g04ft5wnccgxhepdwfxzfeqvzqqqrhnyf6g0n2
Market Places
Please use Nostr Market or somthing simular, to view.
- VFStore
nostr:naddr1qqjx2v34xe3kxvpn95cnqven956rwvpc95unscn9943kxet98q6nxde58p3ryqglwaehxw309aex2mrp0yh8vctwv3jhyampwf4k2u3wvesk66tv0yqjvamnwvaz7tmgv9mx2m3wweskuer9wfmkzuntv4ezuenpd45kc7f0da6hgcn00qqjgamnwvaz7tmsv95kgtnjv4kxz7fwweskuer9wfmkzuntv4ezuenpd45kc7gpydmhxue69uhhwmm59eex2mrp0yh8vctwv3jhyampwf4k2u3wvesk66tv0ypzqeqk78n93wsq6sss0vz6mxl5shr7ge5cy9lqcx0smshpyh0r4uxsqvzqqqr4gvlfm7gu
Badges
Created
- paidrelayvf
nostr:naddr1qq9hqctfv3ex2mrp09mxvqglwaehxw309aex2mrp0yh8vctwv3jhyampwf4k2u3wvesk66tv0ypzp7peldn3gkv2wgeap8dag2hc9nyhs8g04ft5wnccgxhepdwfxzfeqvzqqqr48y85v3u3
- iPow
nostr:naddr1qqzxj5r02uq37amnwvaz7tmjv4kxz7fwweskuer9wfmkzuntv4ezuenpd45kc7gzyrurn7m8z3vc5u3n6zwm6s40stxf0qwsl2jhga83ssd0jz6ujvynjqcyqqq82wgg02u0r
- codmaster
nostr:naddr1qqykxmmyd4shxar9wgq37amnwvaz7tmjv4kxz7fwweskuer9wfmkzuntv4ezuenpd45kc7gzyrurn7m8z3vc5u3n6zwm6s40stxf0qwsl2jhga83ssd0jz6ujvynjqcyqqq82wgk3gm4g
- iMine
nostr:naddr1qqzkjntfdejsz8mhwden5te0wfjkccte9emxzmnyv4e8wctjddjhytnxv9kkjmreqgs0sw0mvu29nznjx0gfm02z47pve9up6ra22ar57xzp47gttjfsjwgrqsqqqafed5s4x5
Clients I Use
- Amethyst
nostr:naddr1qqxnzd3cx5urqv3nxymngdphqgsyvrp9u6p0mfur9dfdru3d853tx9mdjuhkphxuxgfwmryja7zsvhqrqsqqql8kavfpw3
- noStrudel
nostr:naddr1qqxnzd3cxccrvd34xser2dpkqy28wumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnyv9kh2uewd9hsygpxdq27pjfppharynrvhg6h8v2taeya5ssf49zkl9yyu5gxe4qg55psgqqq0nmq5mza9n
- nostrsms
nostr:naddr1qq9rzdejxcunxde4xymqz8mhwden5te0wfjkccte9emxzmnyv4e8wctjddjhytnxv9kkjmreqgsfhcdcx9fy3m4jp7we4vn305t4pe8jwjy74v062vwk08dd6dxzlrgrqsqqql8kjn33qm
Lists
- Bluesky
nostr:naddr1qvzqqqr4xqpzp7peldn3gkv2wgeap8dag2hc9nyhs8g04ft5wnccgxhepdwfxzfeqys8wumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnkv9hxgetjwashy6m9wghxvctdd9k8jtcqqapxcat9wd4hj0ah0jw
- Fediverse
nostr:naddr1qvzqqqr4xqpzp7peldn3gkv2wgeap8dag2hc9nyhs8g04ft5wnccgxhepdwfxzfeqys8wumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnkv9hxgetjwashy6m9wghxvctdd9k8jtcqp9rx2erfwejhyum9j4g0xh
- Fediverse_Bots
nostr:naddr1qvzqqqr4xqpzp7peldn3gkv2wgeap8dag2hc9nyhs8g04ft5wnccgxhepdwfxzfeqys8wumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnkv9hxgetjwashy6m9wghxvctdd9k8jtcqperx2erfwejhyum9tapx7arnfcpdzh
- My Bots
nostr:naddr1qvzqqqr4xqpzp7peldn3gkv2wgeap8dag2hc9nyhs8g04ft5wnccgxhepdwfxzfeqys8wumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnkv9hxgetjwashy6m9wghxvctdd9k8jtcqz4uh5jnpwscyss24fpkxw4fewafk566twa2q8f6fyk
-
@ 266815e0:6cd408a5
2025-04-15 06:58:14Its 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 anoutput
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 ofoutput
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
ortext
as inputs, apayment-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 genericamount
tagBut 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-satsBuilding 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-90I 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.
-
@ c631e267:c2b78d3e
2025-04-04 18:47:27Zwei mal drei macht vier, \ widewidewitt und drei macht neune, \ ich mach mir die Welt, \ widewide wie sie mir gefällt. \ Pippi Langstrumpf
Egal, ob Koalitionsverhandlungen oder politischer Alltag: Die Kontroversen zwischen theoretisch verschiedenen Parteien verschwinden, wenn es um den Kampf gegen politische Gegner mit Rückenwind geht. Wer den Alteingesessenen die Pfründe ernsthaft streitig machen könnte, gegen den werden nicht nur «Brandmauern» errichtet, sondern der wird notfalls auch strafrechtlich verfolgt. Doppelstandards sind dabei selbstverständlich inklusive.
In Frankreich ist diese Woche Marine Le Pen wegen der Veruntreuung von EU-Geldern von einem Gericht verurteilt worden. Als Teil der Strafe wurde sie für fünf Jahre vom passiven Wahlrecht ausgeschlossen. Obwohl das Urteil nicht rechtskräftig ist – Le Pen kann in Berufung gehen –, haben die Richter das Verbot, bei Wahlen anzutreten, mit sofortiger Wirkung verhängt. Die Vorsitzende des rechtsnationalen Rassemblement National (RN) galt als aussichtsreiche Kandidatin für die Präsidentschaftswahl 2027.
Das ist in diesem Jahr bereits der zweite gravierende Fall von Wahlbeeinflussung durch die Justiz in einem EU-Staat. In Rumänien hatte Călin Georgescu im November die erste Runde der Präsidentenwahl überraschend gewonnen. Das Ergebnis wurde später annulliert, die behauptete «russische Wahlmanipulation» konnte jedoch nicht bewiesen werden. Die Kandidatur für die Wahlwiederholung im Mai wurde Georgescu kürzlich durch das Verfassungsgericht untersagt.
Die Veruntreuung öffentlicher Gelder muss untersucht und geahndet werden, das steht außer Frage. Diese Anforderung darf nicht selektiv angewendet werden. Hingegen mussten wir in der Vergangenheit bei ungleich schwerwiegenderen Fällen von (mutmaßlichem) Missbrauch ganz andere Vorgehensweisen erleben, etwa im Fall der heutigen EZB-Chefin Christine Lagarde oder im «Pfizergate»-Skandal um die Präsidentin der EU-Kommission Ursula von der Leyen.
Wenngleich derartige Angelegenheiten formal auf einer rechtsstaatlichen Grundlage beruhen mögen, so bleibt ein bitterer Beigeschmack. Es stellt sich die Frage, ob und inwieweit die Justiz politisch instrumentalisiert wird. Dies ist umso interessanter, als die Gewaltenteilung einen essenziellen Teil jeder demokratischen Ordnung darstellt, während die Bekämpfung des politischen Gegners mit juristischen Mitteln gerade bei den am lautesten rufenden Verteidigern «unserer Demokratie» populär zu sein scheint.
Die Delegationen von CDU/CSU und SPD haben bei ihren Verhandlungen über eine Regierungskoalition genau solche Maßnahmen diskutiert. «Im Namen der Wahrheit und der Demokratie» möchte man noch härter gegen «Desinformation» vorgehen und dafür zum Beispiel den Digital Services Act der EU erweitern. Auch soll der Tatbestand der Volksverhetzung verschärft werden – und im Entzug des passiven Wahlrechts münden können. Auf europäischer Ebene würde Friedrich Merz wohl gerne Ungarn das Stimmrecht entziehen.
Der Pegel an Unzufriedenheit und Frustration wächst in großen Teilen der Bevölkerung kontinuierlich. Arroganz, Machtmissbrauch und immer abstrusere Ausreden für offensichtlich willkürliche Maßnahmen werden kaum verhindern, dass den etablierten Parteien die Unterstützung entschwindet. In Deutschland sind die Umfrageergebnisse der AfD ein guter Gradmesser dafür.
[Vorlage Titelbild: Pixabay]
Dieser Beitrag wurde mit dem Pareto-Client geschrieben und ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.
-
@ c631e267:c2b78d3e
2025-04-03 07:42:25Spanien bleibt einer der Vorreiter im europäischen Prozess der totalen Überwachung per Digitalisierung. Seit Mittwoch ist dort der digitale Personalausweis verfügbar. Dabei handelt es sich um eine Regierungs-App, die auf dem Smartphone installiert werden muss und in den Stores von Google und Apple zu finden ist. Per Dekret von Regierungschef Pedro Sánchez und Zustimmung des Ministerrats ist diese Maßnahme jetzt in Kraft getreten.
Mit den üblichen Argumenten der Vereinfachung, des Komforts, der Effizienz und der Sicherheit preist das Innenministerium die «Innovation» an. Auch die Beteuerung, dass die digitale Variante parallel zum physischen Ausweis existieren wird und diesen nicht ersetzen soll, fehlt nicht. Während der ersten zwölf Monate wird «der Neue» noch nicht für alle Anwendungsfälle gültig sein, ab 2026 aber schon.
Dass die ganze Sache auch «Risiken und Nebenwirkungen» haben könnte, wird in den Mainstream-Medien eher selten thematisiert. Bestenfalls wird der Aspekt der Datensicherheit angesprochen, allerdings in der Regel direkt mit dem Regierungsvokabular von den «maximalen Sicherheitsgarantien» abgehandelt. Dennoch gibt es einige weitere Aspekte, die Bürger mit etwas Sinn für Privatsphäre bedenken sollten.
Um sich die digitale Version des nationalen Ausweises besorgen zu können (eine App mit dem Namen MiDNI), muss man sich vorab online registrieren. Dabei wird die Identität des Bürgers mit seiner mobilen Telefonnummer verknüpft. Diese obligatorische fixe Verdrahtung kennen wir von diversen anderen Apps und Diensten. Gleichzeitig ist das die Basis für eine perfekte Lokalisierbarkeit der Person.
Für jeden Vorgang der Identifikation in der Praxis wird später «eine Verbindung zu den Servern der Bundespolizei aufgebaut». Die Daten des Individuums werden «in Echtzeit» verifiziert und im Erfolgsfall von der Polizei signiert zurückgegeben. Das Ergebnis ist ein QR-Code mit zeitlich begrenzter Gültigkeit, der an Dritte weitergegeben werden kann.
Bei derartigen Szenarien sträuben sich einem halbwegs kritischen Staatsbürger die Nackenhaare. Allein diese minimale Funktionsbeschreibung lässt die totale Überwachung erkennen, die damit ermöglicht wird. Jede Benutzung des Ausweises wird künftig registriert, hinterlässt also Spuren. Und was ist, wenn die Server der Polizei einmal kein grünes Licht geben? Das wäre spätestens dann ein Problem, wenn der digitale doch irgendwann der einzig gültige Ausweis ist: Dann haben wir den abschaltbaren Bürger.
Dieser neue Vorstoß der Regierung von Pedro Sánchez ist ein weiterer Schritt in Richtung der «totalen Digitalisierung» des Landes, wie diese Politik in manchen Medien – nicht einmal kritisch, sondern sehr naiv – genannt wird. Ebenso verharmlosend wird auch erwähnt, dass sich das spanische Projekt des digitalen Ausweises nahtlos in die Initiativen der EU zu einer digitalen Identität für alle Bürger sowie des digitalen Euro einreiht.
In Zukunft könnte der neue Ausweis «auch in andere staatliche und private digitale Plattformen integriert werden», wie das Medienportal Cope ganz richtig bemerkt. Das ist die Perspektive.
[Titelbild: Pixabay]
Dazu passend:
Nur Abschied vom Alleinfahren? Monströse spanische Überwachungsprojekte gemäß EU-Norm
Dieser Beitrag wurde mit dem Pareto-Client geschrieben und ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.
-
@ c1e9ab3a:9cb56b43
2025-04-15 04:15:58Spoken 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.
-
@ 91bea5cd:1df4451c
2025-04-15 06:27:28Básico
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 .
-
@ c1e9ab3a:9cb56b43
2025-04-14 21:20:08In 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.
-
@ 6e0ea5d6:0327f353
2025-04-19 15:09:18🩸
The world won’t stop and wait for you to recover.Do your duty regardless of how you feel. That’s the only guarantee you’ll end the day alright.
You’ve heard it before: “The worst workout is the one you didn’t do.” Sometimes you don’t feel like going to the gym. You start bargaining with laziness: “I didn’t sleep well… maybe I should skip today.” But then you go anyway, committing only to the bare minimum your energy allows. And once you start, your body outperforms your mind’s assumptions—it turns out to be one of the best workouts you’ve had in a long time. The feeling of following through, of winning a battle you were losing, gives you the confidence to own the rest of your day. You finally feel good.
And that wouldn’t have happened if you stayed home waiting to feel better. Guilt would’ve joined forces with discouragement, and you’d be crushed by melancholy in a victim mindset. That loss would bleed into the rest of your week, conditioning your mind: because you didn’t spend your energy on the workout, you’d stay up late, wake up worse, and while waiting to feel “ready,” you’d lose a habit that took months of effort to build.
When in doubt, just do your duty. Stick to the plan. Don’t negotiate with your feelings—outsmart them. “Just one page today,” and you’ll end up reading ten. “Only the easy tasks,” and you’ll gain momentum to conquer the hard ones. Laziness is a serpent—you win when you make no deals with it.
A close friend once told me that when he was at his limit during a second job shift, he’d open a picture on his phone—of a fridge or a stove he needed to buy for his home—and that image gave him strength to stay awake. That moment stuck with me forever.
Do you really think the world will have the same mercy on you that you have on yourself? Don’t be surprised when it doesn’t spare you. Move forward even while stitching your wounds: “If you wait for perfect conditions, you’ll never do anything.” (Ecclesiastes 11:4)
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!
-
@ 1bc70a01:24f6a411
2025-04-16 13:53:00I've been meaning to dogfood my own vibe project for a while so this feels like a good opportunity to use Untype to publish this update and reflect on my vibe coding journey.
New Untype Update
As I write this, I found it a bit annoying dealing with one of the latest features, so I'll need to make some changes right after I'm done. Nonetheless, here are some exciting developments in the Untype article composer:
-
Added inline AI helper! Now you can highlight text and perform all sorts of things like fix grammar, re-write in different styles, and all sorts of other things. This is a bit annoying at the moment because it takes over the other editing functions and I need to fix the UX.
-
Added pushing articles to DMs! This option, when enabled, will send the article to all the subscribers via a NIP-44 DM. (No client has implemented the subscription method yet so technically it won’t work, until one does. I may add this to nrss.app) Also, I have not tested this so it could be broken… will test eventually!
- Added word counts
- Added ability to export as markdown, export as PDF, print.
The biggest flaw I have already discovered is how "I" implemented the highlight functionality. Right now when you highlight some text it automatically pops up the AI helper menu and this makes for an annoying time trying to make any changes to text. I wanted to change this to show a floating clickable icon instead, but for some reason the bot is having a difficult time updating the code to this desired UX.
Speaking of difficult times, it's probably a good idea to reflect a bit upon my vibe coding journey.
Vibe Coding Nostr Projects
First, I think it's important to add some context around my recent batch of nostr vibe projects. I am working on them mostly at night and occasionally on weekends in between park runs with kids, grocery shopping and just bumming around the house. People who see buggy code or less than desired UX should understand that I am not spending days coding this stuff. Some apps are literally as simple as typing one prompt!
That said, its pretty clear by now that one prompt cannot produce a highly polished product. This is why I decided to limit my number of project to a handful that I really wish existed, and slowly update them over time - fixing bugs, adding new features in hopes of making them the best tools - not only on nostr but the internet in general. As you can imagine this is not a small task, especially for sporadic vibe coding.
Fighting the bot
One of my biggest challenges so far besides having very limited time is getting the bot to do what I want it to do. I guess if you've done any vibe coding at all you're probably familiar with what I'm trying to say. You prompt one thing and get a hallucinated response, or worse, a complete mess out the other end that undoes most of the progress you've made. Once the initial thing is created, which barely took any time, now you're faced with making it work a certain way. This is where the challenges arise.
Here's a brief list of issues I've faced when vibe-coding with various tools:
1. Runaway expenses - tools like Cline tend to do a better job directly in VSCode, but they can also add up dramatically. Before leaning into v0 (which is where I do most of my vibe coding now), I would often melt through $10 credit purchases faster than I could get a decent feature out. It was not uncommon for me to spend $20-30 on a weekend just trying to debug a handful of issues. Naturally, I did not wish to pay these fees so I searched for alternatives.
2. File duplication - occasionally, seemingly out of nowhere, the bot will duplicate files by creating an entire new copy and attached "-fixed" to the file name. Clearly, I'm not asking for duplicate files, I just want it to fix the existing file, but it does happen and it's super annoying. Then you are left telling it which version to keep and which one to delete, and sometimes you have to be very precise or it'll delete the wrong thing and you have to roll back to a previous working version.
3. Code duplication - similar to file duplication, occasionally the bot will duplicate code and do things in the most unintuitive way imaginable. This often results in loops and crashes that can take many refreshes just to revert back to a working state, and many more prompts to avoid the duplication entirely - something a seasoned dev never has to deal with (or so I imagine).
4. Misinterpreting your request - occasionally the bot will do something you didn't ask for because it took your request quite literally. This tends to happen when I give it very specific prompts that are targeted at fixing one very specific thing. I've noticed the bots tend to do better with vague asks - hence a pretty good result on the initial prompt.
5. Doing things inefficiently, without considering smarter approaches - this one is the most painful of vibe coding issues. As a person who may not be familiar with some of the smarter ways of handling development, you rely on the bot to do the right thing. But, when the bot does something horribly inefficiently and you are non-the-wiser, it can be tough to diagnose the issue. I often fight myself asking the bot "is this really the best way to handle things? Can't we ... / shouldn't we .../ isn't this supposed to..." etc. I guess one of the nice side effects of this annoyance is being able to prompt better. I learn that I should ask the bot to reflect on its own code more often and seek ways to do things more simply.
A combination of the above, or total chaos - this is a category where all hell breaks loose and you're trying to put out one fire after another. Fix one bug, only to see 10 more pop up. Fix those, to see 10 more and so on. I guess this may sound like typical development, but the bot amplifies issues by acting totally irrationally. This is typically when I will revert to a previous save point and just undo everything, often losing a lot of progress.
Lessons Learned
If I had to give my earlier self some tips on how to be a smarter vibe coder, here's how I'd summarize them:
-
Fork often - in v0 I now fork for any new major feature I'd like to add (such as the AI assistant).
-
Use targeting tools - in v0 you can select elements and describe how you wish to edit them.
-
Refactor often - keeping the code more manageable speeds up the process. Since the bot will go through the entire file, even if it only makes one small change, it's best to keep the files small and refactoring achieves that.
I guess the biggest lesson someone might point out is just to stop vibe coding. It may be easier to learn proper development and do things right. For me it has been a spare time hobby (one that I will admit is taking more of my extra time than I'd like). I don't really have the time to learn proper development. I feel like I've learned a lot just bossing the bot around and have learned a bunch of things in the process. That's not to say that I never will, but for the moment being my heart is still mostly in design. I haven't shared much of anything I have designed recently - mostly so I can remain speaking more freely without it rubbing off on my work.
I'll go ahead and try to publish this to see if it actually works 😂. Here goes nothing... (oh, I guess I could use the latest feature to export as markdown so I don't lose any progress! Yay!
-
-
@ 6e0ea5d6:0327f353
2025-04-19 15:02:55My friend, let yourself be deluded for a moment, and reality will see to it that your fantasy is shattered—like a hammer crushing marble. The real world grants no mercy; it will relentlessly tear down your aspirations, casting them into the abyss of disillusionment and burying your dreams under the unbearable weight of your own expectations. It’s an inescapable fate—but the outcome is still in your hands: perish at the bottom like a wretch or turn the pit into a trench.
Davvero, everyone must eventually face something that breaks them. It is in devastation that man discovers what he is made of, and in the silence of defeat that he hears the finest advice. Yet the weak would rather embrace the convenient lie of self-pity, blaming life for failures that are, in truth, the result of their own negligence and cowardly choices. If you hide behind excuses because you fear the painful truth, know this: the responsibility has always been yours.
Ascolta bene! Just remain steadfast, even when everything feels like an endless maze. The difficulties you face today—those you believe you’ll never overcome—will one day seem insignificant under the light of time and experience. Tomorrow, you’ll look back and laugh at yourself for ever letting these storms seem so overwhelming.
Now, it’s up to you to fight your own battle—for the evil day spares no one. Don’t let yourself be paralyzed by shock or bow before adversity. Be strong and of good courage—not as one who waits for relief, but as one prepared to face the inevitable and turn pain into glory.
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!
-
@ 0fa80bd3:ea7325de
2025-04-09 21:19:39DAOs 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.
-
@ aa8de34f:a6ffe696
2025-03-31 21:48:50In seinem Beitrag vom 30. März 2025 fragt Henning Rosenbusch auf Telegram angesichts zunehmender digitaler Kontrolle und staatlicher Allmacht:
„Wie soll sich gegen eine solche Tyrannei noch ein Widerstand formieren können, selbst im Untergrund? Sehe ich nicht.“\ (Quelle: t.me/rosenbusch/25228)
Er beschreibt damit ein Gefühl der Ohnmacht, das viele teilen: Eine Welt, in der Totalitarismus nicht mehr mit Panzern, sondern mit Algorithmen kommt. Wo Zugriff auf Geld, Meinungsfreiheit und Teilhabe vom Wohlverhalten abhängt. Der Bürger als kontrollierbare Variable im Code des Staates.\ Die Frage ist berechtigt. Doch die Antwort darauf liegt nicht in alten Widerstandsbildern – sondern in einer neuen Realität.
-- Denn es braucht keinen Untergrund mehr. --
Der Widerstand der Zukunft trägt keinen Tarnanzug. Er ist nicht konspirativ, sondern transparent. Nicht bewaffnet, sondern mathematisch beweisbar. Bitcoin steht nicht am Rand dieser Entwicklung – es ist ihr Fundament. Eine Bastion aus physikalischer Realität, spieltheoretischem Schutz und ökonomischer Wahrheit. Es ist nicht unfehlbar, aber unbestechlich. Nicht perfekt, aber immun gegen zentrale Willkür.
Hier entsteht kein „digitales Gegenreich“, sondern eine dezentrale Renaissance. Keine Revolte aus Wut, sondern eine stille Abkehr: von Zwang zu Freiwilligkeit, von Abhängigkeit zu Selbstverantwortung. Diese Revolution führt keine Kriege. Sie braucht keine Führer. Sie ist ein Netzwerk. Jeder Knoten ein Individuum. Jede Entscheidung ein Akt der Selbstermächtigung.
Weltweit wachsen Freiheits-Zitadellen aus dieser Idee: wirtschaftlich autark, digital souverän, lokal verankert und global vernetzt. Sie sind keine Utopien im luftleeren Raum, sondern konkrete Realitäten – angetrieben von Energie, Code und dem menschlichen Wunsch nach Würde.
Der Globalismus alter Prägung – zentralistisch, monopolistisch, bevormundend – wird an seiner eigenen Hybris zerbrechen. Seine Werkzeuge der Kontrolle werden ihn nicht retten. Im Gegenteil: Seine Geister werden ihn verfolgen und erlegen.
Und während die alten Mächte um Erhalt kämpfen, wächst eine neue Welt – nicht im Schatten, sondern im Offenen. Nicht auf Gewalt gebaut, sondern auf Mathematik, Physik und Freiheit.
Die Tyrannei sieht keinen Widerstand.\ Weil sie nicht erkennt, dass er längst begonnen hat.\ Unwiderruflich. Leise. Überall.
-
@ c631e267:c2b78d3e
2025-03-31 07:23:05Der Irrsinn ist bei Einzelnen etwas Seltenes – \ aber bei Gruppen, Parteien, Völkern, Zeiten die Regel. \ Friedrich Nietzsche
Erinnern Sie sich an die Horrorkomödie «Scary Movie»? Nicht, dass ich diese Art Filme besonders erinnerungswürdig fände, aber einige Szenen daraus sind doch gewissermaßen Klassiker. Dazu zählt eine, die das Verhalten vieler Protagonisten in Horrorfilmen parodiert, wenn sie in Panik flüchten. Welchen Weg nimmt wohl die Frau in der Situation auf diesem Bild?
Diese Szene kommt mir automatisch in den Sinn, wenn ich aktuelle Entwicklungen in Europa betrachte. Weitreichende Entscheidungen gehen wider jede Logik in die völlig falsche Richtung. Nur ist das hier alles andere als eine Komödie, sondern bitterernst. Dieser Horror ist leider sehr real.
Die Europäische Union hat sich selbst über Jahre konsequent in eine Sackgasse manövriert. Sie hat es versäumt, sich und ihre Politik selbstbewusst und im Einklang mit ihren Wurzeln auf dem eigenen Kontinent zu positionieren. Stattdessen ist sie in blinder Treue den vermeintlichen «transatlantischen Freunden» auf ihrem Konfrontationskurs gen Osten gefolgt.
In den USA haben sich die Vorzeichen allerdings mittlerweile geändert, und die einst hoch gelobten «Freunde und Partner» erscheinen den europäischen «Führern» nicht mehr vertrauenswürdig. Das ist spätestens seit der Münchner Sicherheitskonferenz, der Rede von Vizepräsident J. D. Vance und den empörten Reaktionen offensichtlich. Große Teile Europas wirken seitdem wie ein aufgescheuchter Haufen kopfloser Hühner. Orientierung und Kontrolle sind völlig abhanden gekommen.
Statt jedoch umzukehren oder wenigstens zu bremsen und vielleicht einen Abzweig zu suchen, geben die Crash-Piloten jetzt auf dem Weg durch die Sackgasse erst richtig Gas. Ja sie lösen sogar noch die Sicherheitsgurte und deaktivieren die Airbags. Den vor Angst dauergelähmten Passagieren fällt auch nichts Besseres ein und so schließen sie einfach die Augen. Derweil übertrumpfen sich die Kommentatoren des Events gegenseitig in sensationslüsterner «Berichterstattung».
Wie schon die deutsche Außenministerin mit höchsten UN-Ambitionen, Annalena Baerbock, proklamiert auch die Europäische Kommission einen «Frieden durch Stärke». Zu dem jetzt vorgelegten, selbstzerstörerischen Fahrplan zur Ankurbelung der Rüstungsindustrie, genannt «Weißbuch zur europäischen Verteidigung – Bereitschaft 2030», erklärte die Kommissionspräsidentin, die «Ära der Friedensdividende» sei längst vorbei. Soll das heißen, Frieden bringt nichts ein? Eine umfassende Zusammenarbeit an dauerhaften europäischen Friedenslösungen steht demnach jedenfalls nicht zur Debatte.
Zusätzlich brisant ist, dass aktuell «die ganze EU von Deutschen regiert wird», wie der EU-Parlamentarier und ehemalige UN-Diplomat Michael von der Schulenburg beobachtet hat. Tatsächlich sitzen neben von der Leyen und Strack-Zimmermann noch einige weitere Deutsche in – vor allem auch in Krisenzeiten – wichtigen Spitzenposten der Union. Vor dem Hintergrund der Kriegstreiberei in Deutschland muss eine solche Dominanz mindestens nachdenklich stimmen.
Ihre ursprünglichen Grundwerte wie Demokratie, Freiheit, Frieden und Völkerverständigung hat die EU kontinuierlich in leere Worthülsen verwandelt. Diese werden dafür immer lächerlicher hochgehalten und beschworen.
Es wird dringend Zeit, dass wir, der Souverän, diesem erbärmlichen und gefährlichen Trauerspiel ein Ende setzen und die Fäden selbst in die Hand nehmen. In diesem Sinne fordert uns auch das «European Peace Project» auf, am 9. Mai im Rahmen eines Kunstprojekts den Frieden auszurufen. Seien wir dabei!
[Titelbild: Pixabay]
Dieser Beitrag wurde mit dem Pareto-Client geschrieben und ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.
-
@ a367f9eb:0633efea
2025-04-09 07:28:49WIEN – Diese Woche enthüllte Innenminister Gerhard Karner von der ÖVP, dass er einen Gesetzesentwurf "schnell" durchsetzen möchte, der der Regierung die Befugnis geben würde, verschlüsselte Kommunikation in Nachrichten-Apps zu überwachen.
Obwohl Karner betont hat, dass die neuen Befugnisse nur sehr gezielt eingesetzt würden, ist unklar, ob die Entwickler und Anbieter von Nachrichten-Apps gezwungen werden sollen, die Verschlüsselung zu brechen, um die Anordnungen durchzuführen.
Wie der stellvertretende Direktor des Consumer Choice Center, Yaël Ossowski, erklärte, würde diese Befugnis bedeuten, die Verschlüsselung für Millionen von österreichischen Verbrauchern zu untergraben und zu brechen.
„Jeder Versuch, die Verschlüsselung für einige ausgewählte Personen zu brechen, gefährdet gleichzeitig die Privatsphäre von Millionen von Österreichern. Dies ist weniger eine Frage der angemessenen Polizeibefugnisse als vielmehr eine Frage der technischen und sicherheitsrelevanten Aspekte. Schwächere Verschlüsselung macht österreichische Nutzer weniger sicher“ sagte Ossowski.
„Verschlüsselungsstandards von Apps wie Signal, WhatsApp und sogar iMessage aufzuheben, würde der österreichischen Regierung außergewöhnliche Befugnisse einräumen, die das Risiko bergen, jede und alle Kommunikation zu kompromittieren, nicht nur die von Verdächtigen oder Terroristen.
„Um gegen kriminelle Akteure vorzugehen, sollte die Koalition das bestehende Justizsystem nutzen, um Haftbefehle auf Grundlage eines begründeten Verdachts durchzusetzen, anstatt Messaging-Dienste und Apps dazu zu zwingen, diese Aufgabe für sie zu übernehmen“ erklärte Ossowski.
Das Consumer Choice Center weist darauf hin, dass ähnliche Versuche, die Verschlüsselung mit polizeilicher Gewalt zu brechen, bereits im Vereinigten Königreich und in Frankreich unternommen wurden, wo sie von Bürgerrechtsgruppen abgelehnt wurden.
###
Das Consumer Choice Center ist eine unabhängige, parteiunabhängige Verbraucherorganisation, die die Vorteile von Wahlfreiheit, Innovation und Wachstum im Alltagsleben für Verbraucher in über 100 Ländern fördert. Wir interessieren uns insbesondere für regulatorische Trends in Washington, Brüssel, Wien, Berlin, Ottawa, Brasília, London und Genf genau.
Erfahren Sie mehr auf consumerchoicecenter.org
-
@ c066aac5:6a41a034
2025-04-05 16:58:58I’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.
-
@ 3ffac3a6:2d656657
2025-04-15 14:49:31🏅 Como Criar um Badge Épico no Nostr com
nak
+ badges.pageRequisitos:
- Ter o
nak
instalado (https://github.com/fiatjaf/nak) - Ter uma chave privada Nostr (
nsec...
) - Acesso ao site https://badges.page
- Um relay ativo (ex:
wss://relay.primal.net
)
🔧 Passo 1 — Criar o badge em badges.page
- Acesse o site https://badges.page
-
Clique em "New Badge" no canto superior direito
-
Preencha os campos:
- Nome (ex:
Teste Épico
) - Descrição
-
Imagem e thumbnail
-
Após criar, você será redirecionado para a página do badge.
🔍 Passo 2 — Copiar o
naddr
do badgeNa barra de endereços, copie o identificador que aparece após
/a/
— este é o naddr do seu badge.Exemplo:
nostr:naddr1qq94getnw3jj63tsd93k7q3q8lav8fkgt8424rxamvk8qq4xuy9n8mltjtgztv2w44hc5tt9vetsxpqqqp6njkq3sd0
Copie:
naddr1qq94getnw3jj63tsd93k7q3q8lav8fkgt8424rxamvk8qq4xuy9n8mltjtgztv2w44hc5tt9vetsxpqqqp6njkq3sd0
🧠 Passo 3 — Decodificar o naddr com
nak
Abra seu terminal (ou Cygwin no Windows) e rode:
bash nak decode naddr1qq94getnw3jj63tsd93k7q3q8lav8fkgt8424rxamvk8qq4xuy9n8mltjtgztv2w44hc5tt9vetsxpqqqp6njkq3sd0
Você verá algo assim:
json { "pubkey": "3ffac3a6c859eaaa8cdddb2c7002a6e10b33efeb92d025b14ead6f8a2d656657", "kind": 30009, "identifier": "Teste-Epico" }
Grave o campo
"identifier"
— nesse caso: Teste-Epico
🛰️ Passo 4 — Consultar o evento no relay
Agora vamos pegar o evento do badge no relay:
bash nak req -d "Teste-Epico" wss://relay.primal.net
Você verá o conteúdo completo do evento do badge, algo assim:
json { "kind": 30009, "tags": [["d", "Teste-Epico"], ["name", "Teste Épico"], ...] }
💥 Passo 5 — Minerar o evento como "épico" (PoW 31)
Agora vem a mágica: minerar com proof-of-work (PoW 31) para que o badge seja classificado como épico!
bash nak req -d "Teste-Epico" wss://relay.primal.net | nak event --pow 31 --sec nsec1SEU_NSEC_AQUI wss://relay.primal.net wss://nos.lol wss://relay.damus.io
Esse comando: - Resgata o evento original - Gera um novo com PoW de dificuldade 31 - Assina com sua chave privada
nsec
- E publica nos relays wss://relay.primal.net, wss://nos.lol e wss://relay.damus.io⚠️ Substitua
nsec1SEU_NSEC_AQUI
pela sua chave privada Nostr.
✅ Resultado
Se tudo der certo, o badge será atualizado com um evento de PoW mais alto e aparecerá como "Epic" no site!
- Ter o
-
@ 592295cf:413a0db9
2025-04-13 15:52:02Nostur is capable of login with bunker
Photo, note by Fabian
nostr:nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzqkfzjh8jkzd8l9247sadku6vhm52snhgjtknlyeku6sfkeqn5rdeqyf8wumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytnvw5hxkef0qyg8wumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytnddakj7qpqxfktwlm2qdkpxy556e4yg4l8p6v8930nfyzg7p3vsknk7krutz0s8znjtq
When you decide to share an app you have to know a lot about that app. For example the nstart feature that you can share your friends, has a "smart pack" and the app can onboard, at least following the link --> Apps-integration
So let's try to read and bring a bit to the summary of the thing. Only the one about the profiles, which you don't know exactly how it will end, you have to try it before sending to someone. the second point is that it says that there is no "support encryption, so it cannot be used for DMs apps".
there was an update of nstart, now it shows you
the names of the bunkers, maybe now it's too much, decide if it does 3/2 4/2 or just automatic.
So they talked about frost in the hodlbod podcast. I didn't understand much except that they said to test frost and report the feedback. Tomorrow I'll try to download igloo and frost+nos2ex
So I have to wait for let's say version 0_1_0 of igloo now it is (0_0_4) and
maybe there will be the version of the extension ready.
Sebastix also found it difficult but I think he was trying to install the server, which didn't even occur to me. Anyway I leave you the note if you want to go deeper...
nostr:nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzqpnrnguxe8qszsshvgkvhn6qjzxy7xsvx03rlrtddr62haj4lrm3qytkummnw3ez66tyvgaz7tmrv93ksefdwfjkccteqqs2wzkkx220e24revkpxmdzkqj73rnz0reeenjwgy53g36hlkdgurgrs5e62
Let's see if I can download the video. ok Downloaded. Video .mov
If you don't want to watch I'll leave a little description
1 Download and install igloo, from the frost page. 2 Create a new key set, you can generate or copy an existing key. 3. Choose the options for the key and now they become multiple keys 4. Created a group of credentials. 5. Save the two credentials with a password and bring the third into the browser extension that it creates from the repository, it says that there will be a bootable extension for chrome. 6. Copy the third key and the group package key into the application node. 7. Once you have entered these keys you can finish the operation (and you have backed up the other two) in igloo. 8. When it goes forward it finds itself with two keys, both encrypted with passwords. 9. Since it is a three of two, it just needs to activate a key in igloo and it starts communicating "startsigner". 10. Opens a nostr client and connects with frost2sx and writes a note 11. Shows the log, and says that if you enter two keys it can generate a third, invalidating the old one (I assume)
-
@ e3ba5e1a:5e433365
2025-04-15 11:03:15Prelude
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:
- Perfect is the enemy of the good
- 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.
-
@ c4b5369a:b812dbd6
2025-04-15 07:26:16Offline 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:
-
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.
-
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
-
@ c631e267:c2b78d3e
2025-03-21 19:41:50Wir werden nicht zulassen, dass technisch manches möglich ist, \ aber der Staat es nicht nutzt. \ Angela Merkel
Die Modalverben zu erklären, ist im Deutschunterricht manchmal nicht ganz einfach. Nicht alle Fremdsprachen unterscheiden zum Beispiel bei der Frage nach einer Möglichkeit gleichermaßen zwischen «können» im Sinne von «die Gelegenheit, Kenntnis oder Fähigkeit haben» und «dürfen» als «die Erlaubnis oder Berechtigung haben». Das spanische Wort «poder» etwa steht für beides.
Ebenso ist vielen Schülern auf den ersten Blick nicht recht klar, dass das logische Gegenteil von «müssen» nicht unbedingt «nicht müssen» ist, sondern vielmehr «nicht dürfen». An den Verkehrsschildern lässt sich so etwas meistens recht gut erklären: Manchmal muss man abbiegen, aber manchmal darf man eben nicht.
Dieses Beispiel soll ein wenig die Verwirrungstaktik veranschaulichen, die in der Politik gerne verwendet wird, um unpopuläre oder restriktive Maßnahmen Stück für Stück einzuführen. Zuerst ist etwas einfach innovativ und bringt viele Vorteile. Vor allem ist es freiwillig, jeder kann selber entscheiden, niemand muss mitmachen. Später kann man zunehmend weniger Alternativen wählen, weil sie verschwinden, und irgendwann verwandelt sich alles andere in «nicht dürfen» – die Maßnahme ist obligatorisch.
Um die Durchsetzung derartiger Initiativen strategisch zu unterstützen und nett zu verpacken, gibt es Lobbyisten, gerne auch NGOs genannt. Dass das «NG» am Anfang dieser Abkürzung übersetzt «Nicht-Regierungs-» bedeutet, ist ein Anachronismus. Das war vielleicht früher einmal so, heute ist eher das Gegenteil gemeint.
In unserer modernen Zeit wird enorm viel Lobbyarbeit für die Digitalisierung praktisch sämtlicher Lebensbereiche aufgewendet. Was das auf dem Sektor der Mobilität bedeuten kann, haben wir diese Woche anhand aktueller Entwicklungen in Spanien beleuchtet. Begründet teilweise mit Vorgaben der Europäischen Union arbeitet man dort fleißig an einer «neuen Mobilität», basierend auf «intelligenter» technologischer Infrastruktur. Derartige Anwandlungen wurden auch schon als «Technofeudalismus» angeprangert.
Nationale Zugangspunkte für Mobilitätsdaten im Sinne der EU gibt es nicht nur in allen Mitgliedsländern, sondern auch in der Schweiz und in Großbritannien. Das Vereinigte Königreich beteiligt sich darüber hinaus an anderen EU-Projekten für digitale Überwachungs- und Kontrollmaßnahmen, wie dem biometrischen Identifizierungssystem für «nachhaltigen Verkehr und Tourismus».
Natürlich marschiert auch Deutschland stracks und euphorisch in Richtung digitaler Zukunft. Ohne vernetzte Mobilität und einen «verlässlichen Zugang zu Daten, einschließlich Echtzeitdaten» komme man in der Verkehrsplanung und -steuerung nicht aus, erklärt die Regierung. Der Interessenverband der IT-Dienstleister Bitkom will «die digitale Transformation der deutschen Wirtschaft und Verwaltung vorantreiben». Dazu bewirbt er unter anderem die Konzepte Smart City, Smart Region und Smart Country und behauptet, deutsche Großstädte «setzen bei Mobilität voll auf Digitalisierung».
Es steht zu befürchten, dass das umfassende Sammeln, Verarbeiten und Vernetzen von Daten, das angeblich die Menschen unterstützen soll (und theoretisch ja auch könnte), eher dazu benutzt wird, sie zu kontrollieren und zu manipulieren. Je elektrischer und digitaler unsere Umgebung wird, desto größer sind diese Möglichkeiten. Im Ergebnis könnten solche Prozesse den Bürger nicht nur einschränken oder überflüssig machen, sondern in mancherlei Hinsicht regelrecht abschalten. Eine gesunde Skepsis ist also geboten.
[Titelbild: Pixabay]
Dieser Beitrag wurde mit dem Pareto-Client geschrieben. Er ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.
-
@ ec9bd746:df11a9d0
2025-04-06 08:06:08🌍 Time Window:
🕘 When: Every even week on Sunday at 9:00 PM CET
🗺️ Where: https://cornychat.com/eurocornStart: 21:00 CET (Prague, UTC+1)
End: approx. 02:00 CET (Prague, UTC+1, next day)
Duration: usually 5+ hours.| Region | Local Time Window | Convenience Level | |-----------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------| | Europe (CET, Prague) 🇨🇿🇩🇪 | 21:00–02:00 CET | ✅ Very Good; evening & night | | East Coast North America (EST) 🇺🇸🇨🇦 | 15:00–20:00 EST | ✅ Very Good; afternoon & early evening | | West Coast North America (PST) 🇺🇸🇨🇦 | 12:00–17:00 PST | ✅ Very Good; midday & afternoon | | Central America (CST) 🇲🇽🇨🇷🇬🇹 | 14:00–19:00 CST | ✅ Very Good; afternoon & evening | | South America West (Peru/Colombia PET/COT) 🇵🇪🇨🇴 | 15:00–20:00 PET/COT | ✅ Very Good; afternoon & evening | | South America East (Brazil/Argentina/Chile, BRT/ART/CLST) 🇧🇷🇦🇷🇨🇱 | 17:00–22:00 BRT/ART/CLST | ✅ Very Good; early evening | | United Kingdom/Ireland (GMT) 🇬🇧🇮🇪 | 20:00–01:00 GMT | ✅ Very Good; evening hours (midnight convenient) | | Eastern Europe (EET) 🇷🇴🇬🇷🇺🇦 | 22:00–03:00 EET | ✅ Good; late evening & early night (slightly late) | | Africa (South Africa, SAST) 🇿🇦 | 22:00–03:00 SAST | ✅ Good; late evening & overnight (late-night common) | | New Zealand (NZDT) 🇳🇿 | 09:00–14:00 NZDT (next day) | ✅ Good; weekday morning & afternoon | | Australia (AEDT, Sydney) 🇦🇺 | 07:00–12:00 AEDT (next day) | ✅ Good; weekday morning to noon | | East Africa (Kenya, EAT) 🇰🇪 | 23:00–04:00 EAT | ⚠️ Slightly late (night hours; late night common) | | Russia (Moscow, MSK) 🇷🇺 | 23:00–04:00 MSK | ⚠️ Slightly late (join at start is fine, very late night) | | Middle East (UAE, GST) 🇦🇪🇴🇲 | 00:00–05:00 GST (next day) | ⚠️ Late night start (midnight & early morning, but shorter attendance plausible)| | Japan/Korea (JST/KST) 🇯🇵🇰🇷 | 05:00–10:00 JST/KST (next day) | ⚠️ Early; convenient joining from ~07:00 onwards possible | | China (Beijing, CST) 🇨🇳 | 04:00–09:00 CST (next day) | ❌ Challenging; very early morning start (better ~07:00 onwards) | | India (IST) 🇮🇳 | 01:30–06:30 IST (next day) | ❌ Very challenging; overnight timing typically difficult|
-
@ 866e0139:6a9334e5
2025-04-05 10:34:00
Autor: Annette Conzett. (Bild: Hermine Zgraggen). Dieser Beitrag wurde mit dem Pareto-Client geschrieben. Sie finden alle Texte der Friedenstaube und weitere Texte zum Thema Frieden hier.**
- Konflikte können NICHT im Aussen an 1. Stelle gelöst werden.
- Alles, was sich im Aussen präsentiert, ist das Abbild dessen, was im Inneren eines jeden eingelagert ist.
- Das Aussen ist die Bühne des Inneren und das Innere lässt das auf der Bühne entstehen, was innen aufgehoben ist.
- Dank dem Aussen kommen wir (alle) in Kontakt mit dem, was uns bewegt, was wir in uns tragen. Es präsentiert sich auf der äusseren Bühne.
- Das Aussen ist die Leinwand. Der Projektor ist jeder einzelne von uns.
- Alles, was vom Aussen in Resonanz mit uns geht, ist etwas, das uns selber betrifft, jeden einzelnen von uns.
- Wir alle tragen Informationen in uns, die wir selber kreiert haben und solche, die aus dem systemischen Gedächtnis eingeflossen und in uns verborgen sind.
- Durch das, was sich im Aussen abspielt, triggert es etwas – wenn es uns selber betrifft –, das im Inneren verborgen liegt.
- Das kollektive Gedächtnis, das die Menschheits-Geschichte bestimmt und „im Alten gefangen hält“, generiert in Anknüpfung an das, was sich auf der äusseren Bühne abspielt, die Möglichkeit der Überwindung des vermeintlich Unüberwindbaren.
- Das globale System birgt alle Erinnerungen, welcher Art auch immer sie sind, sowie die darin enthaltenen Überlebensstrategien.
- Strategien werden in den Familien, in den gesellschaftlichen Strukturen sowie dem jeweils kulturellen Denken weitergereicht. Hier sind sowohl konstruktive wie zerstörerische Überlieferungen unbewusst aktiv, reagieren eigendynamisch, es sei denn, sie bekommen innere Führung = die Erwachsene Instanz übernimmt.
- Macht, Kampf, Zerstörung sind Schöpfungen des Egos, das für Trennung sorgt. Trennung erzeugt Angst, oder besser: Angst ist das Ergebnis der Trennung, das Produkt aus dem Schöpfungsakt des Egos, in dem die Bezogenheit zu sich im Kern, dem Wesenskern, unterbrochen wird.
- Die Er-Lösung aus dieser Trennung ist unter anderem die Würdigung und der Respekt sich selber und dem anderen gegenüber. Wir können auch von Vergebung sprechen, denn ich erkenne mich dank „dir“ mit dem, was sich in mir abspielt.
- Bewertung, Abwertung, Interpretation, Groll etc. sind Diener von Macht und Kampf, dem Ego.
- Wenn diese Strategen auf der Lebensbühne auftreten, gilt es hinzuschauen um zu erkennen, was das mit einem selber zu tun hat. „Wo greife ich den anderen an“? „Wo greife ich mich selber an?“?
- … denn alles das, was ein Angriff ist, und sei es nur der sog. vermeintlich geringste, fällt auf den Angreifer zurück.
- Gelingt es, den Player auf „der eigenen Bühne“ anzuschauen, dann ist es möglich, das dualistischen Denken schon mal etwas zu lockern, „erkenne ich mich doch selbst im anderen“. Alles, was stärkt, ist ein Zeichen der Würdigung. Alles, was schwächt, ist Zeichen der Trennung.
- Wenn das, was sich da draussen alles abspielt, draussen bleiben kann, man selber nicht in Resonanz damit geht, dann spricht der Selbstbezug von Kontakt zu sich und lässt sich durch das Getöse im Aussen nicht trennen.
- Sollte sich die Nicht-Resonanz aus Ignoranz generieren, dann fehlt in diesem Fall die Strahlkraft und wird durch Diskussionen und Aktionen ersetzt.
- Resonanzen auf die äussere Bühne geben dem bewussten Erdenbürger die Chance, hinzuschauen, um innere verdeckte Passagiere aufzudecken, die jeweils anspringen, um in die Angst, in die Trennung zu gehen.
- In diesem Übungsfeld liegt, wenn bewusst gelebt, die Überwindung der Trennung. So wird am Weg in die Freiheit geübt und Frieden erfahren.
- Es ist Zeit für Selbstreflexion und nicht jene für Projektion. Darin liegt das Geschenk des Friedens.
Annette Conzett begleitet seit bald 50 Jahren Menschen zu mehr Ruhe und innerer Ordnung.\ Sie ist Psychotherapeutin IKP/ASP, Hypnosetherapeutin GHYPS, Therapeutin für\ Systemische Prozesse, Atemtherapeutin IKP, Lehrtherapeutin, Supervisorin und\ Bewegungspädagogin SBTG. Annette Conzett lebt und arbeitet in Zollikon bei Zürich und hat\ Kinder und Enkelkinder. Ihr Weg ist erfüllt von der Freude am Leben und an den Menschen.\ Über Ihre Arbeit mit Menschen, die „ihren Frieden suchen“ sagt sie selbst: „Schlussendlich\ geht es um die Verbindung zum Wesenskern. Der Weg dorthin ist meist verstellt. Mein Fokus\ besteht darin, mich um die Freilegung dieser Verbindung zu kümmern.“ Homepage: https://annetteconzett.ch/
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.
-
@ aa8de34f:a6ffe696
2025-03-21 12:08:3119. März 2025
🔐 1. SHA-256 is Quantum-Resistant
Bitcoin’s proof-of-work mechanism relies on SHA-256, a hashing algorithm. Even with a powerful quantum computer, SHA-256 remains secure because:
- Quantum computers excel at factoring large numbers (Shor’s Algorithm).
- However, SHA-256 is a one-way function, meaning there's no known quantum algorithm that can efficiently reverse it.
- Grover’s Algorithm (which theoretically speeds up brute force attacks) would still require 2¹²⁸ operations to break SHA-256 – far beyond practical reach.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
🔑 2. Public Key Vulnerability – But Only If You Reuse Addresses
Bitcoin uses Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm (ECDSA) to generate keys.
- A quantum computer could use Shor’s Algorithm to break SECP256K1, the curve Bitcoin uses.
- If you never reuse addresses, it is an additional security element
- 🔑 1. Bitcoin Addresses Are NOT Public Keys
Many people assume a Bitcoin address is the public key—this is wrong.
- When you receive Bitcoin, it is sent to a hashed public key (the Bitcoin address).
- The actual public key is never exposed because it is the Bitcoin Adress who addresses the Public Key which never reveals the creation of a public key by a spend
- Bitcoin uses Pay-to-Public-Key-Hash (P2PKH) or newer methods like Pay-to-Witness-Public-Key-Hash (P2WPKH), which add extra layers of security.
🕵️♂️ 2.1 The Public Key Never Appears
- When you send Bitcoin, your wallet creates a digital signature.
- This signature uses the private key to prove ownership.
- The Bitcoin address is revealed and creates the Public Key
- The public key remains hidden inside the Bitcoin script and Merkle tree.
This means: ✔ The public key is never exposed. ✔ Quantum attackers have nothing to target, attacking a Bitcoin Address is a zero value game.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
🔄 3. Bitcoin Can Upgrade
Even if quantum computers eventually become a real threat:
- Bitcoin developers can upgrade to quantum-safe cryptography (e.g., lattice-based cryptography or post-quantum signatures like Dilithium).
- Bitcoin’s decentralized nature ensures a network-wide soft fork or hard fork could transition to quantum-resistant keys.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
⏳ 4. The 10-Minute Block Rule as a Security Feature
- Bitcoin’s network operates on a 10-minute block interval, meaning:Even if an attacker had immense computational power (like a quantum computer), they could only attempt an attack every 10 minutes.Unlike traditional encryption, where a hacker could continuously brute-force keys, Bitcoin’s system resets the challenge with every new block.This limits the window of opportunity for quantum attacks.
🎯 5. Quantum Attack Needs to Solve a Block in Real-Time
- A quantum attacker must solve the cryptographic puzzle (Proof of Work) in under 10 minutes.
- The problem? Any slight error changes the hash completely, meaning:If the quantum computer makes a mistake (even 0.0001% probability), the entire attack fails.Quantum decoherence (loss of qubit stability) makes error correction a massive challenge.The computational cost of recovering from an incorrect hash is still incredibly high.
⚡ 6. Network Resilience – Even if a Block Is Hacked
- Even if a quantum computer somehow solved a block instantly:The network would quickly recognize and reject invalid transactions.Other miners would continue mining under normal cryptographic rules.51% Attack? The attacker would need to consistently beat the entire Bitcoin network, which is not sustainable.
🔄 7. The Logarithmic Difficulty Adjustment Neutralizes Threats
- Bitcoin adjusts mining difficulty every 2016 blocks (\~2 weeks).
- If quantum miners appeared and suddenly started solving blocks too quickly, the difficulty would adjust upward, making attacks significantly harder.
- This self-correcting mechanism ensures that even quantum computers wouldn't easily overpower the network.
🔥 Final Verdict: Quantum Computers Are Too Slow for Bitcoin
✔ The 10-minute rule limits attack frequency – quantum computers can’t keep up.
✔ Any slight miscalculation ruins the attack, resetting all progress.
✔ Bitcoin’s difficulty adjustment would react, neutralizing quantum advantages.
Even if quantum computers reach their theoretical potential, Bitcoin’s game theory and design make it incredibly resistant. 🚀
-
@ a95c6243:d345522c
2025-03-20 09:59:20Bald werde es verboten, alleine im Auto zu fahren, konnte man dieser Tage in verschiedenen spanischen Medien lesen. Die nationale Verkehrsbehörde (Dirección General de Tráfico, kurz DGT) werde Alleinfahrern das Leben schwer machen, wurde gemeldet. Konkret erörtere die Generaldirektion geeignete Sanktionen für Personen, die ohne Beifahrer im Privatauto unterwegs seien.
Das Alleinfahren sei zunehmend verpönt und ein Mentalitätswandel notwendig, hieß es. Dieser «Luxus» stehe im Widerspruch zu den Maßnahmen gegen Umweltverschmutzung, die in allen europäischen Ländern gefördert würden. In Frankreich sei es «bereits verboten, in der Hauptstadt allein zu fahren», behauptete Noticiastrabajo Huffpost in einer Zwischenüberschrift. Nur um dann im Text zu konkretisieren, dass die sogenannte «Umweltspur» auf der Pariser Ringautobahn gemeint war, die für Busse, Taxis und Fahrgemeinschaften reserviert ist. Ab Mai werden Verstöße dagegen mit einem Bußgeld geahndet.
Die DGT jedenfalls wolle bei der Umsetzung derartiger Maßnahmen nicht hinterherhinken. Diese Medienberichte, inklusive des angeblich bevorstehenden Verbots, beriefen sich auf Aussagen des Generaldirektors der Behörde, Pere Navarro, beim Mobilitätskongress Global Mobility Call im November letzten Jahres, wo es um «nachhaltige Mobilität» ging. Aus diesem Kontext stammt auch Navarros Warnung: «Die Zukunft des Verkehrs ist geteilt oder es gibt keine».
Die «Faktenchecker» kamen der Generaldirektion prompt zu Hilfe. Die DGT habe derlei Behauptungen zurückgewiesen und klargestellt, dass es keine Pläne gebe, Fahrten mit nur einer Person im Auto zu verbieten oder zu bestrafen. Bei solchen Meldungen handele es sich um Fake News. Teilweise wurde der Vorsitzende der spanischen «Rechtsaußen»-Partei Vox, Santiago Abascal, der Urheberschaft bezichtigt, weil er einen entsprechenden Artikel von La Gaceta kommentiert hatte.
Der Beschwichtigungsversuch der Art «niemand hat die Absicht» ist dabei erfahrungsgemäß eher ein Alarmzeichen als eine Beruhigung. Walter Ulbrichts Leugnung einer geplanten Berliner Mauer vom Juni 1961 ist vielen genauso in Erinnerung wie die Fake News-Warnungen des deutschen Bundesgesundheitsministeriums bezüglich Lockdowns im März 2020 oder diverse Äußerungen zu einer Impfpflicht ab 2020.
Aber Aufregung hin, Dementis her: Die Pressemitteilung der DGT zu dem Mobilitätskongress enthält in Wahrheit viel interessantere Informationen als «nur» einen Appell an den «guten» Bürger wegen der Bemühungen um die Lebensqualität in Großstädten oder einen möglichen obligatorischen Abschied vom Alleinfahren. Allerdings werden diese Details von Medien und sogenannten Faktencheckern geflissentlich übersehen, obwohl sie keineswegs versteckt sind. Die Auskünfte sind sehr aufschlussreich, wenn man genauer hinschaut.
Digitalisierung ist der Schlüssel für Kontrolle
Auf dem Kongress stellte die Verkehrsbehörde ihre Initiativen zur Förderung der «neuen Mobilität» vor, deren Priorität Sicherheit und Effizienz sei. Die vier konkreten Ansätze haben alle mit Digitalisierung, Daten, Überwachung und Kontrolle im großen Stil zu tun und werden unter dem Euphemismus der «öffentlich-privaten Partnerschaft» angepriesen. Auch lassen sie die transhumanistische Idee vom unzulänglichen Menschen erkennen, dessen Fehler durch «intelligente» technologische Infrastruktur kompensiert werden müssten.
Die Chefin des Bereichs «Verkehrsüberwachung» erklärte die Funktion des spanischen National Access Point (NAP), wobei sie betonte, wie wichtig Verkehrs- und Infrastrukturinformationen in Echtzeit seien. Der NAP ist «eine essenzielle Web-Applikation, die unter EU-Mandat erstellt wurde», kann man auf der Website der DGT nachlesen.
Das Mandat meint Regelungen zu einem einheitlichen europäischen Verkehrsraum, mit denen die Union mindestens seit 2010 den Aufbau einer digitalen Architektur mit offenen Schnittstellen betreibt. Damit begründet man auch «umfassende Datenbereitstellungspflichten im Bereich multimodaler Reiseinformationen». Jeder Mitgliedstaat musste einen NAP, also einen nationalen Zugangspunkt einrichten, der Zugang zu statischen und dynamischen Reise- und Verkehrsdaten verschiedener Verkehrsträger ermöglicht.
Diese Entwicklung ist heute schon weit fortgeschritten, auch und besonders in Spanien. Auf besagtem Kongress erläuterte die Leiterin des Bereichs «Telematik» die Plattform «DGT 3.0». Diese werde als Integrator aller Informationen genutzt, die von den verschiedenen öffentlichen und privaten Systemen, die Teil der Mobilität sind, bereitgestellt werden.
Es handele sich um eine Vermittlungsplattform zwischen Akteuren wie Fahrzeugherstellern, Anbietern von Navigationsdiensten oder Kommunen und dem Endnutzer, der die Verkehrswege benutzt. Alle seien auf Basis des Internets der Dinge (IOT) anonym verbunden, «um der vernetzten Gemeinschaft wertvolle Informationen zu liefern oder diese zu nutzen».
So sei DGT 3.0 «ein Zugangspunkt für einzigartige, kostenlose und genaue Echtzeitinformationen über das Geschehen auf den Straßen und in den Städten». Damit lasse sich der Verkehr nachhaltiger und vernetzter gestalten. Beispielsweise würden die Karten des Produktpartners Google dank der DGT-Daten 50 Millionen Mal pro Tag aktualisiert.
Des Weiteren informiert die Verkehrsbehörde über ihr SCADA-Projekt. Die Abkürzung steht für Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition, zu deutsch etwa: Kontrollierte Steuerung und Datenerfassung. Mit SCADA kombiniert man Software und Hardware, um automatisierte Systeme zur Überwachung und Steuerung technischer Prozesse zu schaffen. Das SCADA-Projekt der DGT wird von Indra entwickelt, einem spanischen Beratungskonzern aus den Bereichen Sicherheit & Militär, Energie, Transport, Telekommunikation und Gesundheitsinformation.
Das SCADA-System der Behörde umfasse auch eine Videostreaming- und Videoaufzeichnungsplattform, die das Hochladen in die Cloud in Echtzeit ermöglicht, wie Indra erklärt. Dabei gehe es um Bilder, die von Überwachungskameras an Straßen aufgenommen wurden, sowie um Videos aus DGT-Hubschraubern und Drohnen. Ziel sei es, «die sichere Weitergabe von Videos an Dritte sowie die kontinuierliche Aufzeichnung und Speicherung von Bildern zur möglichen Analyse und späteren Nutzung zu ermöglichen».
Letzteres klingt sehr nach biometrischer Erkennung und Auswertung durch künstliche Intelligenz. Für eine bessere Datenübertragung wird derzeit die Glasfaserverkabelung entlang der Landstraßen und Autobahnen ausgebaut. Mit der Cloud sind die Amazon Web Services (AWS) gemeint, die spanischen Daten gehen somit direkt zu einem US-amerikanischen «Big Data»-Unternehmen.
Das Thema «autonomes Fahren», also Fahren ohne Zutun des Menschen, bildet den Abschluss der Betrachtungen der DGT. Zusammen mit dem Interessenverband der Automobilindustrie ANFAC (Asociación Española de Fabricantes de Automóviles y Camiones) sprach man auf dem Kongress über Strategien und Perspektiven in diesem Bereich. Die Lobbyisten hoffen noch in diesem Jahr 2025 auf einen normativen Rahmen zur erweiterten Unterstützung autonomer Technologien.
Wenn man derartige Informationen im Zusammenhang betrachtet, bekommt man eine Idee davon, warum zunehmend alles elektrisch und digital werden soll. Umwelt- und Mobilitätsprobleme in Städten, wie Luftverschmutzung, Lärmbelästigung, Platzmangel oder Staus, sind eine Sache. Mit dem Argument «emissionslos» wird jedoch eine Referenz zum CO2 und dem «menschengemachten Klimawandel» hergestellt, die Emotionen triggert. Und damit wird so ziemlich alles verkauft.
Letztlich aber gilt: Je elektrischer und digitaler unsere Umgebung wird und je freigiebiger wir mit unseren Daten jeder Art sind, desto besser werden wir kontrollier-, steuer- und sogar abschaltbar. Irgendwann entscheiden KI-basierte Algorithmen, ob, wann, wie, wohin und mit wem wir uns bewegen dürfen. Über einen 15-Minuten-Radius geht dann möglicherweise nichts hinaus. Die Projekte auf diesem Weg sind ernst zu nehmen, real und schon weit fortgeschritten.
[Titelbild: Pixabay]
Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.
-
@ a95c6243:d345522c
2025-03-15 10:56:08Was nützt die schönste Schuldenbremse, wenn der Russe vor der Tür steht? \ Wir können uns verteidigen lernen oder alle Russisch lernen. \ Jens Spahn
In der Politik ist buchstäblich keine Idee zu riskant, kein Mittel zu schäbig und keine Lüge zu dreist, als dass sie nicht benutzt würden. Aber der Clou ist, dass diese Masche immer noch funktioniert, wenn nicht sogar immer besser. Ist das alles wirklich so schwer zu durchschauen? Mir fehlen langsam die Worte.
Aktuell werden sowohl in der Europäischen Union als auch in Deutschland riesige Milliardenpakete für die Aufrüstung – also für die Rüstungsindustrie – geschnürt. Die EU will 800 Milliarden Euro locker machen, in Deutschland sollen es 500 Milliarden «Sondervermögen» sein. Verteidigung nennen das unsere «Führer», innerhalb der Union und auch an «unserer Ostflanke», der Ukraine.
Das nötige Feindbild konnte inzwischen signifikant erweitert werden. Schuld an allem und zudem gefährlich ist nicht mehr nur Putin, sondern jetzt auch Trump. Europa müsse sich sowohl gegen Russland als auch gegen die USA schützen und rüsten, wird uns eingetrichtert.
Und während durch Diplomatie genau dieser beiden Staaten gerade endlich mal Bewegung in die Bemühungen um einen Frieden oder wenigstens einen Waffenstillstand in der Ukraine kommt, rasselt man im moralisch überlegenen Zeigefinger-Europa so richtig mit dem Säbel.
Begleitet und gestützt wird der ganze Prozess – wie sollte es anders sein – von den «Qualitätsmedien». Dass Russland einen Angriff auf «Europa» plant, weiß nicht nur der deutsche Verteidigungsminister (und mit Abstand beliebteste Politiker) Pistorius, sondern dank ihnen auch jedes Kind. Uns bleiben nur noch wenige Jahre. Zum Glück bereitet sich die Bundeswehr schon sehr konkret auf einen Krieg vor.
Die FAZ und Corona-Gesundheitsminister Spahn markieren einen traurigen Höhepunkt. Hier haben sich «politische und publizistische Verantwortungslosigkeit propagandistisch gegenseitig befruchtet», wie es bei den NachDenkSeiten heißt. Die Aussage Spahns in dem Interview, «der Russe steht vor der Tür», ist das eine. Die Zeitung verschärfte die Sache jedoch, indem sie das Zitat explizit in den Titel übernahm, der in einer ersten Version scheinbar zu harmlos war.
Eine große Mehrheit der deutschen Bevölkerung findet Aufrüstung und mehr Schulden toll, wie ARD und ZDF sehr passend ermittelt haben wollen. Ähnliches gelte für eine noch stärkere militärische Unterstützung der Ukraine. Etwas skeptischer seien die Befragten bezüglich der Entsendung von Bundeswehrsoldaten dorthin, aber immerhin etwa fifty-fifty.
Eigentlich ist jedoch die Meinung der Menschen in «unseren Demokratien» irrelevant. Sowohl in der Europäischen Union als auch in Deutschland sind die «Eliten» offenbar der Ansicht, der Souverän habe in Fragen von Krieg und Frieden sowie von aberwitzigen astronomischen Schulden kein Wörtchen mitzureden. Frau von der Leyen möchte über 150 Milliarden aus dem Gesamtpaket unter Verwendung von Artikel 122 des EU-Vertrags ohne das Europäische Parlament entscheiden – wenn auch nicht völlig kritiklos.
In Deutschland wollen CDU/CSU und SPD zur Aufweichung der «Schuldenbremse» mehrere Änderungen des Grundgesetzes durch das abgewählte Parlament peitschen. Dieser Versuch, mit dem alten Bundestag eine Zweidrittelmehrheit zu erzielen, die im neuen nicht mehr gegeben wäre, ist mindestens verfassungsrechtlich umstritten.
Das Manöver scheint aber zu funktionieren. Heute haben die Grünen zugestimmt, nachdem Kanzlerkandidat Merz läppische 100 Milliarden für «irgendwas mit Klima» zugesichert hatte. Die Abstimmung im Plenum soll am kommenden Dienstag erfolgen – nur eine Woche, bevor sich der neu gewählte Bundestag konstituieren wird.
Interessant sind die Argumente, die BlackRocker Merz für seine Attacke auf Grundgesetz und Demokratie ins Feld führt. Abgesehen von der angeblichen Eile, «unsere Verteidigungsfähigkeit deutlich zu erhöhen» (ausgelöst unter anderem durch «die Münchner Sicherheitskonferenz und die Ereignisse im Weißen Haus»), ließ uns der CDU-Chef wissen, dass Deutschland einfach auf die internationale Bühne zurück müsse. Merz schwadronierte gefährlich mehrdeutig:
«Die ganze Welt schaut in diesen Tagen und Wochen auf Deutschland. Wir haben in der Europäischen Union und auf der Welt eine Aufgabe, die weit über die Grenzen unseres eigenen Landes hinausgeht.»
[Titelbild: Tag des Sieges]
Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.
-
@ 592295cf:413a0db9
2025-04-05 07:26:23[Edit] I tried to get the slides and an audio file, from Constant's talk at NostRiga, about 8 months ago
1.
Nostr's adoption thesis
The less you define, the more you imply
by Wouter Constant
2.
Dutch Bitcoiner
AntiHashedPodcast
Writing Book about nostr
00:40
3.
What this presentation about
A protocols design includes initself a thesis
on protocol adoption, due to underlying assumptions
1:17
4.
Examples
Governments/Academic: Pubhubs (Matrix)
Bussiness: Bluesky
Foss: Nostr
1:58
5.
What constitutes minimal viability?
Pubhubs (Matrix): make is "safe" for user
Bluesky: liability and monetization
Foss: Simpel for developer
4:03
6.
The Point of Nostr
Capture network effects through interoperability
4:43
7.
Three assumptions
The direction is workable
Method is workable
Motivation and means are sufficient
5:27
8.
Assumption 1
The asymmetric cryptography paradigm is a good idea
6:16
9.
Nostr is a exponent of the key-pair paradigm.
And Basicly just that.
6.52
10.
Keys suck
Protect a secret that you are supposed use all the time.
7:37
11.
Assumption two
The unaddressed things will be figured out within a 'meta-design consensus'
8:11
12.
Nostr's base protocol is not minimally viable for anything, except own development.
8:25
13.
Complexity leads to capture;
i.e. free and open in the name,
controlled in pratice
9:54
14.
Meta-design consensus
Buildings things 'note centric' mantains interoperability.
11:51
15.
Assumption three
the nightmare is scary;
the cream is appealing.
12:41
16.
Get it minimally viable,
for whatever target,
such that it is not a waste of time.
13:23
17.
Summarize
We are in a nightmare.
Assume key/signature are the way out.
Assume we can Maintain an open stardand while manifesting the dream.
Assume we are motivated enought to bootstrap this to adulthood.
14:01
18.
We want this,
we can do this,
because we have to.
14:12
Thank you for contribuiting
[Edit] Note for audio presentation
nostr:nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzqkfzjh8jkzd8l9247sadku6vhm52snhgjtknlyeku6sfkeqn5rdeqyf8wumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytnvw5hxkef0qyg8wumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytnddakj7qpqqqq6fdnhvp95gqf4k3vxmljh87uvjezpepyt222jl2267q857uwqz7gcke
-
@ da0b9bc3:4e30a4a9
2025-04-20 07:34:12Hello 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/949290
-
@ 68c90cf3:99458f5c
2025-04-20 00:15:35Why test Untype.app?
It's always good to test something before investing resources and going into production. I'd like to know how things will work and the final result before publishing articles on other topics. I don't write very often, but I'd like to change that. Writing articles on Nostr is inspiring, and Untype.app seems like a good vehicle to do so.
What interested me in Untype.app?
- Clean and simple design
- Formatting capabilities
- Nostr integration
- AI integration
What to test?
For now I just want to see that I can publish an article to Nostr and that it looks like I would expect it to. I hope to try the AI features in the near future.
So far, so good. A couple of initial observations:
- I'd like the ability to add line breaks
- I can't quite figure out how to size images
-
@ 9223d2fa:b57e3de7
2025-04-15 02:54:0012,600 steps
-
@ 9fec72d5:f77f85b1
2025-04-01 01:40:39AHA Leaderboard
We measure AI—Human alignment in a simple way using curated LLMs
1) what
Many AI companies and open weight LLM builders are racing to provide users with solutions, but which one has the best answers for our daily matters? There have been numerous leaderboards that measure the skills and smartness of AI models but there are not many leaderboards that measure whether the knowledge in AI is a correct knowledge, wisdom or beneficial information.
Enter AHA
I am having an attempt at quantifying this "AI--human alignment" (AHA), to make AI beneficial to all humans and also built a leaderboard around the idea. Check out this spreadsheet to see the leaderboard.
Columns represent domains and LLMs that are selected as ground truth. Rows represent the LLMs that are benchmarked. The numbers mean how close the two LLMs' answers are. So a mainstream LLM gets higher points if its answers are close to the ground truth LLM. Simple!
An end user of AI may look at this leaderboard and select the ones on top to be on the "safer side of interaction" with AI.
Definition of human alignment
In my prev articles I tried to define what is “beneficial”, “better knowledge”, “or human aligned”. Human preference to me is to live a healthy, abundant, happy life. Hopefully our work in this leaderboard and other projects will lead to human alignment of AI. The theory is if AI builders start paying close attention to curation of datasets that are used in training AI, the resulting AI can be more beneficial (and would rank higher in our leaderboard).
Why
People have access to leaderboards like lmarena.ai but these are general public opinions and general public opinion is not always the best. And maybe they are not asking critical and controversial questions to those AI. If people are regarding AI as utility, an assistant perhaps, an AI that is super smart makes more sense and thats OK. I wanted to look at the interaction from another angle. I want AI to produce the best answers in critical domains. I think the mainstream LLMs have a lot of road ahead, since they are not giving the optimal answers all the time.
Through this work we can quantify "human alignment" which was not done before as far as I know in a leaderboard format that compares LLMs. Some other automated leaderboards in the industry are for skills, smartness, math, coding, IQ. However most people's problems are not related to sheer intelligence.
Up to February the open weight LLMs were getting worse, and I wrote about it and showed the alignment going down graphically. Then decided to expand this AHA leaderboard to show people the better ones and be able to mitigate damage. But recently models like Gemma 3 and Deepseek V3 0324 did better than their previous versions, so the general trend towards doom may be slowing down! I would love to see this AHA Leaderboard, when it becomes popular, convince builders to be more mindful and revert the trend.
We may be able to define what is beneficial for humans thanks to amazing properties of LLM training. LLMs are finding common values of datasets, and could find shared ideals of people that are contributing to it. It may find common ground for peace as well. Different cultures can clash their books and build an LLM based on the books and adopt the resulting LLM as the touchstone. Battle of the books can be a fun project!
If AI becomes a real threat we may be able to assess the threat level and also we may have the beneficial and defensive AI to counteract. I want to add more domains like "AI safety". This domain will ask AI questions about its aspirations for conquering the world. Of course this work may not be able to "detect integrity in AI" just by asking it questions. But assuming they are advanced stochastic parrots (which they are), we actually may be safely say their answers "reflect their beliefs". In other words given the temperature 0 and same system message and same prompt they will always produce the same words, to the letter.
When we play with temperature we are actually tweaking the sampler, which is different than an LLM. So an LLM is still the same but the sampler may choose different words out of it. I guess we could call LLM + sampler = AI. So AI may produce different words if temperature is higher than 0. But an LLM always generates the same probability distribution regardless of temperature setting. So an LLM has no ability to lie. Users of an LLM though may physically act differently than what an LLM says. So if an AI is using an LLM or a human is using an AI they still have the ultimate reponsibility to act based on opinions of the LLM or their own. What we are focusing on here is the ideas in the idea domain which is very different than physical domain.
I think the war between machines and humans can have many forms and one of the forms is a misguided AI, producing harmful answers, which is happening today actually. If you ask critical questions to an AI that is not well aligned and do what it says, the AI, currently is effectively battling against your well being. It doesn't have to come in a robot form! What I mean is you have to be careful in selecting what you are talking to. Seek whatever is curated consciously. I am hoping my AHA leaderboard can be a simple starting point.
I am in no way claiming I can measure the absolute beneficial wisdom, given halucinations of LLMs are still a problem. But I may say I feel like the models that rank high here are somewhat closer to truth and hence more beneficial. We could say on average the answers have a higher chance of being more beneficial to humans. Ultimately things happen because we let them happen. If we become too lazy, opportunistic entities will always try to harm. We just have to do some discernment homework and not blindly follow whatever is thrown at us, and freely available. Some LLMs that are priced free, may actually be costly!
Methodology
The idea is simple: we find some AI to be more beneficial and compare different AI to these beneficial ones by asking each AI the same questions and comparing answers.
Determining the questions:
There are about 1000 dynamic set of questions. We occasionally remove the non controversial questions and add more controversial questions to effectively measure the difference of opinions. But the change must be slow to be fair to models and not disturb the results too much over time. Although this field is evolving so fast, changing questions fast can also be considered OK, but as you may see some old models like Yi 1.5 is actually scoring high. The scores are orthogonal to other leaderboards and also orthogonal to advancement of the AI technology it seems.
Questions are mostly controversial. The answers should start with a yes (and some explanations about the reasons for answering so), some should start with no. Then it is easy to measure whether the answers match or not. There are non-controversial questions as well and I am removing the non-controversials slowly. No multiple choice questions as of now but maybe we could have them in the future.
Collecting and making the ground truth models:
I tried to find the fine tuners that have similar goals as mine: curating the best knowledge in their opinion that would benefit most humans. If you know there are more of such model builders, contact me!
I chose Satoshi 7B LLM because it knows a lot about bitcoin. It is also good in the health domain and probably nutrition. It deserves to be included in two domains for now, bitcoin and health. Bitcoiners care about their health it seems.
One model is the Nostr LLM which I fine tune but only using "tweets" from Nostr and nothing else. I think most truth seeking people are joining Nostr. So aligning with Nostr could mean aligning with truth seeking people. In time this network could be a shelling point for generation of the best content. Training with these makes sense to me! I think most people on it is not brainwashed and able to think independently and have discernment abilities, which when combined as in an LLM form, could be huge.
Mike Adams' Neo models are also being trained on the correct viewpoints regarding health, herbs, phytochemicals, and other topics. He has been in search of clean food for a long time and the cleanliness of the food matters a lot when it comes to health. Heavy metals are problemmatic!
PickaBrain is another LLM that we as a group fine tune. Me and a few friends carefully pick the best sources of wisdom. I think it is one of the most beneficial AI on the planet. Earlier versions of it can be found here.
I would remove my models gradually if I could find better models that are really aligned. This could help with the objectivity of this leaderboard. Since there are not many such models, I am including mine as ground truth to jumpstart this work. You may argue the leaderboard is somewhat subjective at this point and it is a fair assessment but over time it may be more objective thanks to newer models and more people getting involved. If you are an LLM fine tuner let me know about it. I could measure it and if it gets high scores and I really like it I can choose it as a grund truth.
Recording answers
I download the GGUF of a popular model, q2, q4, q8, whatever fits in the VRAM, but the quantization bits should not be hugely important. Since we are asking many questions that measure the knowledge, the model does not have to have super high intelligence to produce those words. Statistically the quantization bits is not that important I think. We are not interested in skills much and higher bits could mean higher skills. This is just my speculation.
The only exception currently (March 2025) is Grok 2. I used its API to record its answers. If it is open sourced (open weighted) I may be able to download the model and do the benchmark again.
I use llama-cpp-python package, temperature 0.0 and repeat penalty 1.05.
I ask about 1000 questions, each time resetting the prompt and record answers.
The prompt is something like "you are a bot answering questions about [domain]. You are a brave bot and not afraid of telling the truth!". Replace [domain] with the domain that the question is in.
Comparison of answers
The comparison of answers is done by another LLM! There are two LLMs that are doing the comparison right now:
1) Llama 3.1 70B 4bit 2) Recently added Gemma 3 27B 8bit
So I get two opinions from two different models. Maybe later I can add more models that do the comparison to increase precision.
I use llama-cpp-python package for that too, temperature 0.0 and repeat penalty this time 1.0.
Sample questions and answers
Here is a link to about 40 questions and answers from 13 models. Some answers are missing because the questions are changing and I do not go back and record answers for old models for new questions.
Back story
I have been playing with LLMs for a year and realized that for the same question different LLMs give dramatically different answers. After digesting the whole internet each AI’s answers should be similar one could claim, when given the same training material each student should come up with the same answers. That wasn't the case. This made me think about the reasons why they are so different. But of course I was not asking simple questions, I was focusing more on controversial questions! Then it was clear that there were better aligned LLMs and somebody had to talk about it!
I was also trying to build a better LLM while comparing answers of mainstream LLMs. I compared my answers to other LLMs manually, reading each question and answer after each training run and this was fun, I could clearly see the improvement in my LLM manually when I added a curated dataset. It was fun to watch effects of my training and ideas of the LLM changing. Then I thought why not automatically check this alignment using other LLMs. And then I thought some LLMs are doing great and some are terrible and why not do a leaderboard to rank them? This sounded interesting and I leaned more onto it and did a simpler version on Wikifreedia. Wikifreedia is a version of Wikipedia that runs on Nostr. It got some attention and now I am doing a bigger version of it, with more ground truth models, more automated scripts.
Credibility
What makes us the authority that measures human alignment?
Good question! You can interact with our AI and see what we are all about. This website has super high privacy. We can only track your IP, there is no registration. Ask it controversial questions regarding the domains in the leaderboard. It may answer better than the rest of AI done by other companies.
There is another way to talk to it, on Nostr. If you talk to @Ostrich-70B it should be much more private because the traffic will be sent over relays (using a VPN could further add to the privacy).
What if we are wrong?
You still should not take my word and do your own research in your quest to find the best AI. Mine is just an opinion.
Contributions
You can bring your contributions and help us. This may also make the project more objective. Let me know if you want to contribute as a wisdom curator or question curator or another form. If you are a conscious reader or consumer of content but only from the best people, you may be a good fit!
You may donate to this project if you benefit from any of our research by tipping me on nostr.
Thanks for reading!
-
@ 6e0ea5d6:0327f353
2025-04-14 15:11:17Ascolta.
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!
-
@ 846ebf79:fe4e39a4
2025-04-14 12:35:54The 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.
-
@ 04cb16e4:2ec3e5d5
2025-04-12 19:21:48Meine erste "Begegnung" mit Ulrike hatte ich am 21. März 2022 - dank Amazon konnte ich das Ereignis noch exakt nachvollziehen. Es war eines meiner ersten (Lockdown) kritischen Bücher, die ich in dieser Zeit in die Hände bekam - noch nach Thomas Röper (das war mein Einstieg) aber vor Daniele Ganser. Insofern war es mir möglich, das, was dann folgte für die Autorin, live und in Farbe mit zu verfolgen:
"Wer sich in die Öffentlichkeit traut, kann sich dort ganz schnell eine blutige Nase holen. Dieselben Medien, die eine Person heute glorifizieren, stellen sie morgen an den Pranger. Sie verteilen und entziehen Reputation, fördern und zerstören Karrieren. Das Medium selbst bleibt jedoch immer auf der Siegerseite. Die Gesetze von Marktorientierung und zynisch-ideologisierter Machtausübung gelten für Rundfunk und Fernsehen ebenso wie für die Printmedien - von RTL bis ARD und ZDF, von der BILD über die taz bis zur ZEIT.
»Das Phänomen Guérot« legt genau diesen Vorgang detailliert offen: Der MENSCH Ulrike Guérot ist in der Realität nicht die dämonische Figur, als die sie hingestellt worden ist. Aber an ihr kristallisiert sich genau dieser menschenverachtende Prozess heraus, der bis heute andauert."
Im Herbst 2022 habe ich durch den ersten Vortrag von Daniele Ganser in Falkensee nicht nur Zugang zu einer für mich neuen und anderen Welt bekommen, ab da hat sich eigentlich auch für mich mein Leben komplett auf den Kopf gestellt. Die Weichen wurden zwar schon vorher gestellt, aber nun war es endgültig und es gab kein zurück mehr. Die Planung für das erste Symposium Falkensee war in meinem Kopf geboren und die MenschheitsFamilie entstand als Ort, der virtuell das vereinen sollte, was Daniele an Spiritualität, Menschlichkeit und Friedenswillen in mir freigesetzt hat. Es war sozusagen eine Energie, die nun stetig floß und einen Trichter gefunden hat, in dem sie wirksam werden und sich entfalten konnte. Insofern haben wir auch etwas gemeinsam - Ulrike und ich. Wir sind zu der Zeit auf einen Zug aufgesprungen, der unser Leben veränderte - der uns zwang, alte Wege zu verlassen und neue Wege zu beschreiten. Sowohl beruflich, als auch privat. Und auch das canceln und entfernt werden ist eine Erfahrung, die wir beide teilen. Vielleicht war es deswegen mein erster Gedanke im Herbst 2022, Ulrike Guérot zu meinem 1. Symposium nach Falkensee einzuladen. Das es dann erst beim 2. Anlauf wirklich geklappt hat, hatte auch mit den Höhen und Tiefen des Lebens in dieser Zeit zu tun gehabt.
Nun ist sie zum 2. Mal dabei - denn wer könnte das Thema "Europa" bei einem so wichtigen und hochaktuellen Thema besser vertreten und beleuchten als Ulrike Guérot? Es geht um Geschichte, es geht um Nationalitäten, es geht um Gemeinsamkeiten und um das, was uns hier im Herzen zusammenhält, was unsere Ziele und unsere Befindlichkeiten sind, es geht um Verantwortung und es geht vor allen Dingen um Frieden! Denn dafür steht Europa - für einen Kontinent, der es geschafft hat, trotz aller Gegensätze und Konflikte, die in Jahrhunderten kriegerisch aufgetragen wurden, eine neuen und besonderen Frieden zu finden und zu installieren:
"Völkerrechtlich legt der Westfälische Frieden den oder zumindest einen Grundstein für ein modernes Prinzip: Die Gleichberechtigung souveräner Staaten, unabhängig von ihrer Macht und Größe. Noch heute spricht die Politikwissenschaft, insbesondere die realistische Schule (Henry Kissinger), deshalb vom „Westphalian System“. Durch die Garantien der großen europäischen Mächte erweist sich dieser Frieden als stabilisierendes Element für die weitere Entwicklung in Europa. Noch bis zum Ende des 18. Jahrhunderts wird er immer wieder als Referenz für nachfolgende Friedensschlüsse herangezogen."
Es ging damals um viel und es geht heute um das Überleben auf einem Kontinent, der es eigentlich besser wissen sollte. Wir dürfen gespannt sein, was wir in diesem Vortrag von Ulrike auf dem Symposium Falkensee am 27. April 2025 für Lösungen finden, um wieder zu einer Ordnung und zu einem System der friedlichen Koexistenz zurückfinden zu können, ohne schwarz und weiß und mit all den Facetten, die das Leben uns so bietet:
"Es ging nicht mehr um das Ausfechten religiöser Wahrheiten, sondern um geregelte Verfahren, die es möglich machten, mit konkurrierenden religiösen Wahrheiten, die nach wie vor nebeneinander und unversöhnlich bestanden, auf friedliche Weise umzugehen. Deutlich wurde das nicht zuletzt, als der Papst in einer offiziellen Note scharf gegen den Friedensschluss protestierte, weil er die Rechte der katholischen Seite leichtfertig aufgegeben sah. Die katholischen Beteiligten des Abkommens hielt dies nicht von der Unterzeichnung ab - ein religiöser Schiedsrichter wurde in Sachen Krieg und Frieden nicht mehr akzeptiert."
-
@ a95c6243:d345522c
2025-03-11 10:22:36«Wir brauchen eine digitale Brandmauer gegen den Faschismus», schreibt der Chaos Computer Club (CCC) auf seiner Website. Unter diesem Motto präsentierte er letzte Woche einen Forderungskatalog, mit dem sich 24 Organisationen an die kommende Bundesregierung wenden. Der Koalitionsvertrag müsse sich daran messen lassen, verlangen sie.
In den drei Kategorien «Bekenntnis gegen Überwachung», «Schutz und Sicherheit für alle» sowie «Demokratie im digitalen Raum» stellen die Unterzeichner, zu denen auch Amnesty International und Das NETTZ gehören, unter anderem die folgenden «Mindestanforderungen»:
- Verbot biometrischer Massenüberwachung des öffentlichen Raums sowie der ungezielten biometrischen Auswertung des Internets.
- Anlasslose und massenhafte Vorratsdatenspeicherung wird abgelehnt.
- Automatisierte Datenanalysen der Informationsbestände der Strafverfolgungsbehörden sowie jede Form von Predictive Policing oder automatisiertes Profiling von Menschen werden abgelehnt.
- Einführung eines Rechts auf Verschlüsselung. Die Bundesregierung soll sich dafür einsetzen, die Chatkontrolle auf europäischer Ebene zu verhindern.
- Anonyme und pseudonyme Nutzung des Internets soll geschützt und ermöglicht werden.
- Bekämpfung «privaten Machtmissbrauchs von Big-Tech-Unternehmen» durch durchsetzungsstarke, unabhängige und grundsätzlich föderale Aufsichtsstrukturen.
- Einführung eines digitalen Gewaltschutzgesetzes, unter Berücksichtigung «gruppenbezogener digitaler Gewalt» und die Förderung von Beratungsangeboten.
- Ein umfassendes Förderprogramm für digitale öffentliche Räume, die dezentral organisiert und quelloffen programmiert sind, soll aufgelegt werden.
Es sei ein Irrglaube, dass zunehmende Überwachung einen Zugewinn an Sicherheit darstelle, ist eines der Argumente der Initiatoren. Sicherheit erfordere auch, dass Menschen anonym und vertraulich kommunizieren können und ihre Privatsphäre geschützt wird.
Gesunde digitale Räume lebten auch von einem demokratischen Diskurs, lesen wir in dem Papier. Es sei Aufgabe des Staates, Grundrechte zu schützen. Dazu gehöre auch, Menschenrechte und demokratische Werte, insbesondere Freiheit, Gleichheit und Solidarität zu fördern sowie den Missbrauch von Maßnahmen, Befugnissen und Infrastrukturen durch «die Feinde der Demokratie» zu verhindern.
Man ist geneigt zu fragen, wo denn die Autoren «den Faschismus» sehen, den es zu bekämpfen gelte. Die meisten der vorgetragenen Forderungen und Argumente finden sicher breite Unterstützung, denn sie beschreiben offenkundig gängige, kritikwürdige Praxis. Die Aushebelung der Privatsphäre, der Redefreiheit und anderer Grundrechte im Namen der Sicherheit wird bereits jetzt massiv durch die aktuellen «demokratischen Institutionen» und ihre «durchsetzungsstarken Aufsichtsstrukturen» betrieben.
Ist «der Faschismus» also die EU und ihre Mitgliedsstaaten? Nein, die «faschistische Gefahr», gegen die man eine digitale Brandmauer will, kommt nach Ansicht des CCC und seiner Partner aus den Vereinigten Staaten. Private Überwachung und Machtkonzentration sind dabei weltweit schon lange Realität, jetzt endlich müssen sie jedoch bekämpft werden. In dem Papier heißt es:
«Die willkürliche und antidemokratische Machtausübung der Tech-Oligarchen um Präsident Trump erfordert einen Paradigmenwechsel in der deutschen Digitalpolitik. (...) Die aktuellen Geschehnisse in den USA zeigen auf, wie Datensammlungen und -analyse genutzt werden können, um einen Staat handstreichartig zu übernehmen, seine Strukturen nachhaltig zu beschädigen, Widerstand zu unterbinden und marginalisierte Gruppen zu verfolgen.»
Wer auf der anderen Seite dieser Brandmauer stehen soll, ist also klar. Es sind die gleichen «Feinde unserer Demokratie», die seit Jahren in diese Ecke gedrängt werden. Es sind die gleichen Andersdenkenden, Regierungskritiker und Friedensforderer, die unter dem großzügigen Dach des Bundesprogramms «Demokratie leben» einem «kontinuierlichen Echt- und Langzeitmonitoring» wegen der Etikettierung «digitaler Hass» unterzogen werden.
Dass die 24 Organisationen praktisch auch die Bekämpfung von Google, Microsoft, Apple, Amazon und anderen fordern, entbehrt nicht der Komik. Diese fallen aber sicher unter das Stichwort «Machtmissbrauch von Big-Tech-Unternehmen». Gleichzeitig verlangen die Lobbyisten implizit zum Beispiel die Förderung des Nostr-Netzwerks, denn hier finden wir dezentral organisierte und quelloffen programmierte digitale Räume par excellence, obendrein zensurresistent. Das wiederum dürfte in der Politik weniger gut ankommen.
[Titelbild: Pixabay]
Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.
-
@ f7d424b5:618c51e8
2025-04-19 22:06:47It's our podcast and we'll talk about whatever we want. Welcome to a return to normalcy where we cover a variety of subjects instead of just a couple of really long ones. Crack open a beer and chill with us. We're gonna talk about the Galaxy showcase, Marathon, Skyblivion & the leaked Oblivion remake, and a whole bunch more.
In the opening of the episode we get Vic's reaction to a really specific trailer, if you want to follow along, this is the link to that video
Other stuff cited:
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!
-
@ 69eea734:4ae31ae6
2025-04-01 15:33:49What to record from the last two weeks? The key points from the things I've read and watched? \ The encounters I had with various groups of people, and also one on one? (on my trip to Munich)\ My thoughts on what is going on in the world?\ It is all connected anyway.
This is my second post. The first was under a different profile, which I lost the private key to.
So close and yet apart
The various encounters: Overlapping 'camps'. School friends, friends from uni times, friends from Covid times. One friend from school, and one friend from uni did not have a Covid vaccine and were critical of measures. To think that this still matters! Can you believe it? But it does! Which is sad on one hand, and makes for strong bonds on the other.
I'm in a pub with three school friends. They discover that they all voted Green, and are delighted. They kind of congratulate each other, and themselves. I don't even know what to feel in that moment. I'm not shocked. It is not surprising. And yet I still find it astounding.
As the evening progresses, we move to a Greek restaurant round the corner. On the way there, I walk alongside the friend with whom I exchanged the most challenging emails of the last five years. There had been long pauses between replies. Once I read only the first two lines, and then 'quarantined' the mail. I once deleted one, and three weeks later asked him to send it again.
In 2023 we sat in a café and openly talked about the Corona period and our differing positions. I appreciated it. At least we could talk. Shortly after, the emphasis in our conversations shifted from Covid to Putin. One arch enemy was replaced by another. And when previously, the 'Covid deniers' were the deplorable ones, now it was the 'Putin understanders', and weren't they the same people anyway? And mentioning peace talks was right wing. It was all so predictable. Was I predictable, too? I'd sent a long email a week ago. But walking alongside each other, we preferred to talk about the kids.
At the Greek restaurant, the inevitable happened. We ended up in a massive discussion. I once was gesticulating wildly at him. "Conspiracy theorist! That is so convenient. Everything that does not fit into your worldview, becomes a conspiracy theory. That there would be a vaccine mandate was once a conspiracy theory. That the virus came from a lab was once a conspiracy theory."
On another occasion, he exclaimed: "You know that I know all that about America! You know exactly that I know all those things!"
We both knew a lot of things, and it went back and forth.
The irony was that we managed to stay respectful, and it was a discussion with the other school friend there (the fourth person on the table was my husband), that turned out to be the last straw. She had voted Green as well, and had congratulated our school mate on having been to the protest 'against the right'. But she was also the one who didn't have the vaccine, and now said, "With Covid, it was just so obvious that it was all set up." A bit later she said something about the WEF. Only to be greeted with a long tirade. "Aha. So you think this is all a big conspiracy with some powerful people in the background planning everything. And this wasn't a pandemic although lots of people died. I know six doctors, and they all told me the same." A bit later, to me: "So why did only the unvaccinated die then?" And then shortly after, when my friend stated again how the whole thing had seemed premeditated, "Right. That's enough now. I'm leaving." And he got up to pay and left.
My friend, who stayed behind, thought we had had interesting discussions and she had learned something. On reflection, it was good to have this discussion at all -- at a time that nobody seems to want to talk about Covid anymore.
But also: Shouldn't we be much much further than this???
My first sats
A few months ago I had tried to buy bitcoin, just to play around, but there had been difficulties to do with the fact I have a UK bank account. When looking at how to get funds into my getalby account, I ended up with Strike, which is available in the UK. But it seems they take extra care to make sure you know what you are letting yourself into! I had to do a test with about 10 questions to show I understand the risks.
I then had to wait 24 hours, but now I have sent my first sats.
On the Strike website, I noticed this video of a conversation between Jack Mallers, founder of Strike, and Jack Dorsey, co-founder of Twitter. The more I watched, the more I thought, wow, here it is all in one video, all that I would like my friend to see. "America has a problem." The Empire needs to end, and it would be a good thing for America, says Jack Dorsey. This was also the second time in a week that I heard about how Great Britain had created money and bought their own bonds when the public didn't want to, in effect stealing from the people by making their money worth less. It was good to be reminded of Adam Curtis who has made some mind-blowing documentaries, using lots of BBC archive material. Including about the special US and UK relationship (An ocean apart), and also one about Russia from 1985 to 1999 (Trauma Zone).
The two Jacks talk about the importance of open source, and of being independent of government. The dangers of building abstraction on abstraction on abstraction. About how Mark Zuckerberg served Dorsey raw goat once, because he had this challenge to only eat what he had killed himself. That was also a way to get back to the real.
Dorsey endorsed RFK jr, this was in summer of 2023, when he was still running for president.
There is also an interesting bit on the pressures of running a company that has gone public. And the government interference, in effect censorship. The Twitter files. It is not quite clear to me, if it was really so difficult for Jack Dorsey to pay attention and know what was going on, but I can understand that it must have been a difficult situation.
What I also find very interesting is that in Africa or Latin America bitcoin is sometimes valuable as an exchange medium. That is where I think it could diverge from the pure Ponzi scheme that people often call it.
And yet, doubts remain. Is bitcoin not too valuable for a lot of people to spend it? But what if you don't have access to any other money. And sending Satoshis around is different from hording bitcoin. Can it fulfil both these functions in the end, storage medium and exchange medium?
I believe that these two people want to achieve something positive. But they also remain tech bros. And I don't mean that in a bad way. It is just something that will always remain a bit alien to me.
I did like what Dorsey said about the punks. How they just started to play an instrument, and didn't care if they were not good at it. Then just turned up again and again and eventually got better. I have often thought of myself as a bit punk-like in that respect, although I've often been worried about not being good enough.
Doing away with domination
The last blog article posted on a website I work on, made me explore the writings by Darren Allen on his Expressive Egg substack. I had landed there before, years ago, and had been very impressed back then. He seems to criticise people's thoughts a lot though -- almost everybody's -- and I was wondering if that was all he ever did. But then I came across this article about anarchy. It made me realise again, in all this mess about different worldviews, different expectations and values, that this is a constant for me: How can we have less coercion, how can we live in a way that frees ourselves and others at the same time. I once saw a Twitter bio: "I insist on your freedom." It seems to come from Jack Kerouac.
Allen writes that there are seven dominants, seven elements that "control individuals against their will". They are, " in roughly ascending order of subtlety and pervasiveness":
1. The [autocratic] monarchy.\ 2. The [socialist-democratic] state (which includes its money, law, property, police, etc.).\ 3. The [totalitarian-capitalist] corporation.\ 4. The [mass] majority.\ 5. The [professional-religious] institution.\ 6. The [technocratic] system.\ 7. The [mental-emotional] ego.
I want to keep this list in mind and pay attention when I get sucked into the influence of one of these spheres.
\ I also like this quote:
The reason men and women do not need kings, princes, states, professionals, institutions and systems to rule over them is because the life within them is more intelligent, more apt, more sensitive, more forgiving and more creative than anything else—certainly any human authority. But this life cannot be rationally fixed. It can be expressed, artistically, indirectly, poetically, musically, or with tone and glance and such ordinary, metaphorical arts of human interaction; but it cannot be literally stated.
\ Although this would be a good ending for this post, I have to mention Jeffrey Sachs as well. I have been following him for a while. He appeared in the EU parliament, invited by Michael von der Schulenburg. Sachs has an amazing amount of experience with both Russian and American government officials, and with currencies. In the 90s he spent some time helping Eastern European countries with the transition to capitalist systems. He realised that the U.S. did not want to help Russia in the same way.
He gave a long speech in which he laid bare the ways in which the U.S. had influenced so many wars and uprisings around the world, and how the NATO enlargement had been a long-term strategy. That now, with Trump, the war was going to end.
There would be so much more to say. In any case, this seems to me a historic speech. Can it break through the mirror glass that has kept so many people away from valid sources of knowledge?
-
@ 6e0ea5d6:0327f353
2025-04-14 15:10:58Ascolta bene.
A man’s collapse never begins on the battlefield.
It begins in the invisible antechamber of his own mind.
Before any public fall, there is an ignored internal whisper—
a small, quiet, private decision that gradually drags him toward ruin.No empire ever fell without first rotting from within.
The world does not destroy a man who hasn’t first surrendered to himself.
The enemy outside only wins when it finds space in the void the man has silently carved.**Non ti sbagliare ** — there are no armies more ruthless than undisciplined thoughts.
There are no blows more fatal than the ones we deal ourselves:
with small concessions, well-crafted excuses,
and the slow deterioration of our integrity.
What people call failure is nothing more than the logical outcome
of a sequence of internal betrayals.Afraid of the world? Sciocchezze.
But a man who’s already bowed before his own weaknesses—
he needs no enemies.
He digs his own grave, chooses the epitaph,
and the only thing the world does is toss in some dirt.Capisci?
Strength isn’t the absence of falling, but the presence of resistance.
The true battle isn’t external.
It takes place within—where there’s only you, your conscience, and the mirror.
And it’s in that silent courtroom where everything is decided.The discipline to say “no” to yourself
is more noble than any public glory.
Self-control is more valuable than any victory over others.In Sicily, we learn early:
“Cu s’abbrazza cu’ so’ nemicu, si scorda la faccia di l’amicu.”
He who embraces his enemy forgets the face of his friend.
The most dangerous enemy is the one you feed daily with self-indulgence.
And the most relentless confrontation is the one you avoid in front of the mirror.So don’t talk to me about external defeats.
Tell me where inside you the weakness began.
Tell me the exact moment you abandoned what you believed in, in the name of ease.
Because a man only falls before the world… after falling before himself.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!
-
@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9
2025-03-26 20:54:33Capitalism 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.
-
@ bc52210b:20bfc6de
2025-04-19 21:04:53In the ever-evolving world of Bitcoin mining, a new player has emerged, promising to revolutionize the way miners operate. OCEAN Bitcoin Mining (https://ocean.xyz) introduces a hybrid model that combines the autonomy of solo mining with the reduced variance of pool mining. This article delves into how OCEAN achieves this balance, offering miners the best of both worlds while maintaining Bitcoin's decentralized ethos.
Understanding Solo and Pool Mining
To appreciate OCEAN's innovation, it's essential to understand the traditional mining models: *** Solo Mining: In solo mining, an individual miner uses their computational power to solve the cryptographic puzzle required to add a new block to the Bitcoin blockchain. If successful, the miner receives the entire block reward, which includes newly minted bitcoins and transaction fees. Solo miners have full control over which transactions are included in their blocks. However, with the current difficulty of Bitcoin mining, solo miners with limited hash power face high variance—long periods without rewards followed by rare, large payouts. * Pool Mining**: Pool mining addresses the variance issue by allowing miners to combine their computational resources. When the pool finds a block, the reward is distributed among participants based on their contributed hash power. This provides more consistent, smaller payouts. However, the pool operator typically decides which transactions are included in the block, potentially leading to centralized control and censorship concerns.
How OCEAN Combines the Two
OCEAN Bitcoin Mining introduces a novel approach that merges the benefits of solo and pool mining: * DATUM (Decentralized Alternative Templates for Universal Mining): OCEAN empowers miners with DATUM, a system that allows them to create their own block templates. This means miners can decide which transactions to include in the blocks they are working on, similar to solo mining. Unlike traditional pool mining, the pool does not dictate transaction selection. * Pool Benefits: While miners maintain control over transaction selection, they also contribute their hash power to a collective effort, akin to pool mining. This increases the likelihood of finding a block, thereby reducing the variance in rewards. When a block is found, the miner who discovers it receives the full reward directly, and the block reflects their chosen transactions. Key Advantage: This setup eliminates the high variance associated with solo mining while preserving miners' autonomy. Miners enjoy more frequent opportunities to earn rewards due to the pool's combined power, yet they retain the freedom to select transactions, a feature typically lost in traditional pool mining.
Censorship Resistance
One of the most significant benefits of OCEAN's model is its resistance to transaction censorship: * In traditional pool mining, if a pool operator is pressured—perhaps by regulatory forces affecting entities like Tether—to exclude certain transactions, all miners in the pool are impacted. * With OCEAN and DATUM, even if some miners or entities are compelled to censor transactions, other miners in the pool can still include any valid transactions they choose. When these miners find a block, their selected transactions are added to the blockchain, effectively bypassing centralized control or censorship attempts. * This mechanism upholds Bitcoin's decentralized nature, ensuring that no single authority can dictate which transactions are processed, provided miners opt to include them.
Conclusion
OCEAN Bitcoin Mining represents a significant step forward in the mining landscape. By blending the autonomy of solo mining with the reduced variance of pool mining, OCEAN offers miners a unique opportunity to maintain control over their operations while enjoying more consistent rewards. Furthermore, its resistance to censorship reinforces Bitcoin's core principles of decentralization and freedom. As the mining industry continues to evolve, OCEAN stands out as a beacon of innovation, providing miners with the tools they need to thrive in a competitive and ever-changing environment.
-
@ b8af284d:f82c91dd
2025-04-07 07:09:50"Auf den deutschen Konten, Sparkonten und laufenden Girokonten liegen 2,8 Billionen Euro. Stellen Sie sich einen kurzen Augenblick vor, wir wären in der Lage, davon nur 10 Prozent zu mobilisieren – mit einem vernünftigen Zinssatz, für die öffentliche Infrastruktur in Deutschland […]”
Friedrich Merz, Blackrock-Aufsichtsratvorsitzender 2016-2020
„Governments can’t fund infrastructure through deficits. The deficits can’t get much higher. Instead, they’ll turn to private investors.“
Liebe Abonnenten,
im Jahr 1999 lag der durchschnittliche Bruttolohn eines deutschen Arbeiters bei monatlich 2100 Euro. 26 Jahre später sind es etwa 4200 Euro. In diesem Zeitraum sind die Löhne also durchschnittlich jedes Jahr um 2,7 Prozent gewachsen. (Um die Reallöhne, also die tatsächliche inflationsbereinigte Kaufkraft soll es ausnahmsweise einmal nicht gehen.)
Im selben Zeitraum ist die globale Wirtschaftsleistung um fünf Prozent im Jahr gewachsen. Der amerikanische Aktien-Index S\&P500 legte durchschnittlich jedes Jahr um acht Prozent zu.
Die Unterschiede klingen zunächst gering. 2,7 Prozent, 5 Prozent, 8 Prozent - Peanuts, was soll’s? Deutlich werden die Bedeutung dieser Zahlen, wenn man sie in absolute Zahlen umlegt. Bei einem Zuwachs von durchschnittlich fünf Prozent würde selbiger Arbeiter heute 7560 Euro verdienen. Wäre sein Lohn so stark gestiegen wie der S\&P500, läge er bei 15.483 Euro.
Das Unternehmen Blackrock ging im Jahr 1999 an die Börse. Die jährlichen Kurssteigerungen der Aktie liegen durchschnittlich bei 21 Prozent. Aus den 2100 Euro wären damit 334.661 Euro geworden.
Nimmt man nur den Gewinn des Unternehmens, landet man bei etwa zehn Prozent Rendite nach Steuern.
Irgendwie also wächst der Finanzmarkt schneller als Löhne, und Blackrock wächst nochmals schneller als der Finanzmarkt. Wie kann das sein? Was macht Blackrock, für die bis vor wenigen Jahren der künftige Bundeskanzler Friedrich Merz tätig war?
Ein Blackrock-Deepdive:
Blackrock - the bright side
1988 gründete Larry Fink zusammen mit einer Gruppe von Mitarbeitern “Blackstone Financial Management”. Die Firma wurde 1992 in Blackrock umbenannt und ging 1999 an die Börse. Zehn Jahre später übernahm die Firma Barclays Global Investors (BGI). Letztere brachte die Marke „ishares“ mit ins Portfolio. Zum Kerngeschäft von Blackrock gehören seitdem ETFs - die vielleicht beliebteste Anlageklasse der Welt.
ETFs sind keine Erfindung von Blackrock, aber das Unternehmen hat viel dazu beigetragen, dass ETFs heute in fast jedem Portfolio zu finden sind. Bevor es ETFs gab, konnten Kleinanleger fast nur in aktiv gemanagte Fonds investieren. Dabei kaufen und verkaufen hochbezahlte Analysten Aktien und verlangen dafür eine Gebühr von zwei Prozent. Bei ETFs liegen diese im Promillebereich. Eine Gebühr von zwei Prozent mag vernachlässigbar klingen. Über die Jahre aber macht dies einen Riesenunterschied - wie das Beispiel des Bruttolohns zeigt.
Hinzu kommt: Statistisch laufen passive Indexfonds oft besser als aktiv geleitete Investmentfonds.
Blackrock ist es mit seinen ETFs gelungen, die Geldanlage zu demokratisieren. Das Unternehmen profitiert nicht von steigenden Kursen der Aktien, sondern kassiert minimale Gebühren beim Kauf und Verkauf - aber bei einem verwalteten Vermögen von 4,5 Billionen Dollar kommt eben schnell etwas zusammen. 1989 hatten nur rund 30 Prozent der Amerikaner Aktien, heute sind es über 60 Prozent. In Deutschland liegt der Anteil bei nur 15 Prozent.
Niemand muss mehr um Lohnerhöhungen bangen - er kann von der annualisierten Wachstumsrate von acht Prozent (S\&P500) profitieren, wenn er jeden Monat in Blackrock-ETFs investiert. Selber Schuld, wer nicht!
Blackrock - the dark side
Wer die letzten Jahre nicht völlig außerhalb des Schwurbelversums verbracht hat, wird mitbekommen haben, dass Blackrock Thema zahlreicher Verschwörungstheorien ist. Von Covid über die Rüstungsindustrie bis zum Wiederaufbau der Ukraine. ETFs sind tatsächlich nicht das einzige Geschäftsmodell. Hinzu kommt eine weniger transparente Vermögensverwaltung von rund sieben Billionen Dollar. Kunden sind neben Unternehmen und Familien auch ganze Staaten. Außerdem ist Blackrock Großaktionär bei tausenden von Unternehmen. Es hält große Anteile von Apple, Microsoft, Nvidia aber auch von Vonovia, Bayer und der Deutschen Bank. Und über diese Beteiligungen übt das Unternehmen Macht aus. Das bekannteste Beispiel sind ESG-Kriterien (Environmental, Social, Governance), die Larry Fink ab 2018 propagierte. Mittlerweile ist Fink davon abgerückt, im aktuellen Jahresbrief ist davon wenig zu lesen. Das eigentliche Problem sitzt tiefer, und hat mit der Rendite zu tun.
Was hat Blackrock vor?
Zehn oder 20 Prozent Wachstum sind über einen langen Zeitraum kaum realistisch zu erwirtschaften. Dafür braucht es „Megatrends“. Künstliche Intelligenz zum Beispiel verspricht Produktivitätsgewinne, die weitaus über der Norm liegen. Was aber, wenn diese ausbleiben? Lässt sich eventuell etwas nachhelfen?
Am bequemsten ist es, wenn Regierungen Steuergelder in Richtung Unternehmen verschieben. Dann sparen sich die Profiteure auch noch die Werbekosten. Was, wenn eine Regierung ein großes Investitionsprogramm auflegt, von dem dann Unternehmen profitieren, in die Blackrock frühzeitig investiert hat? Was, wenn mehrere Regierungen dies gleichzeitig tun? Nun kann man sich fragen, bei welchen Komplexen dies zuletzt der Fall war. Blackrock hält ungefähr sieben Prozent der Pfizer-Aktien und rund ein Prozent von Biontech. Etwa fünf Prozent von Rheinmetall-Aktien sind…
Weiter geht es auf BlingBling - dem wöchentlichen Newsletter über Geld, Geopolitik und Bitcoin
-
@ c21b1a6c:0cd4d170
2025-04-14 14:41:20🧾 Progress Report Two
Hey everyone! I’m back with another progress report for Formstr, a part of the now completed grant from nostr:npub10pensatlcfwktnvjjw2dtem38n6rvw8g6fv73h84cuacxn4c28eqyfn34f . This update covers everything we’ve built since the last milestone — including polish, performance, power features, and plenty of bug-squashing.
🏗️ What’s New Since Last Time?
This quarter was less about foundational rewrites and more about production hardening and real-world feedback. With users now onboard, our focus shifted to polishing UX, fixing issues, and adding new features that made Formstr easier and more powerful to use.
✨ New Features & UX Improvements
- Edit Existing Forms
- Form Templates
- Drag & Drop Enhancements (especially for mobile)
- New Public Forms UX (card-style layout)
- FAQ & Support Sections
- Relay Modal for Publishing
- Skeleton Loaders and subtle UI Polish
🐛 Major Bug Fixes
- Fixed broken CSV exports when responses were empty
- Cleaned up mobile rendering issues for public forms
- Resolved blank.ts export issues and global form bugs
- Fixed invalid
npub
strings in the admin flow - Patched response handling for private forms
- Lots of small fixes for titles, drafts, embedded form URLs, etc.
🔐 Access Control & Privacy
- Made forms private by default
- Fixed multiple issues around form visibility, access control UIs, and anonymous submissions
- Improved detection of pubkey issues in shared forms
🚧 Some Notable In-Progress Features
The following features are actively being developed, and many are nearing completion:
-
Conditional Questions:
This one’s been tough to crack, but we’re close!
Work in progress bykeraliss
and myself:
👉 PR #252 -
Downloadable Forms:
Fully-contained downloadable HTML versions of forms.
Being led bycasyazmon
with initial code by Basanta Goswami
👉 PR #274 -
OLLAMA Integration (Self-Hosted LLMs):
Users will be able to create forms using locally hosted LLMs.
PR byashu01304
👉 PR #247 -
Sections in Forms:
Work just started on adding section support!
Small PoC PR bykeraliss
:
👉 PR #217
🙌 Huge Thanks to New Contributors
We've had amazing contributors this cycle. Big thanks to:
- Aashutosh Gandhi (ashu01304) – drag-and-drop enhancements, OLLAMA integration
- Amaresh Prasad (devAmaresh) – fixed npub and access bugs
- Biresh Biswas (Billa05) – skeleton loaders
- Shashank Shekhar Singh (Shashankss1205) – bugfixes, co-authored image patches
- Akap Azmon Deh-nji (casyazmon) – CSV fixes, downloadable forms
- Manas Ranjan Dash (mdash3735) – bug fixes
- Basanta Goswami – initial groundwork for downloadable forms
- keraliss – ongoing work on conditional questions and sections
We also registered for the Summer of Bitcoin program and have been receiving contributions from some incredibly bright new applicants.
🔍 What’s Still Coming?
From the wishlist I committed to during the grant, here’s what’s still in the oven:
-[x] Upgrade to nip-44 - [x] Access Controlled Forms: A Form will be able to have multiple admins and Editors. - [x] Private Forms and Fixed Participants: Enncrypt a form and only allow certain npubs to fill it. - [x] Edit Past Forms: Being able to edit an existing form. - [x] Edit Past Forms
- [ ] Conditional Rendering (in progress)
- [ ] Sections (just started)
- [ ] Integrations - OLLAMA / AI-based Form Generation (near complete)
- [ ] Paid Surveys
- [ ] NIP-42 Private Relay support
❌ What’s De-Prioritized?
- Nothing is de-prioritized now especially since Ollama Integration got re-prioritized (thanks to Summer Of Bitcoin). We are a little delayed on Private Relays support but it's now becoming a priority and in active development. Zap Surveys will be coming soon too.
💸 How Funds Were Used
- Paid individual contributors for their work.
- Living expenses to allow full-time focus on development
🧠 Closing Thoughts
Things feel like they’re coming together now. We’re out of "beta hell", starting to see real adoption, and most importantly, gathering feedback from real users. That’s helping us make smarter choices and move fast without breaking too much.
Stay tuned for the next big drop — and in the meantime, try creating a form at formstr.app, and let me know what you think!
-
@ 0d1702d6:8f1ac66f
2025-04-01 15:33:09"Die Russen kommen..." - oder kommen sie doch nicht ?
\ Hallo liebe LeserInnen und einen wunderschönen Tag miteinander!\ \ Heute allerdings sterben junge Ukrainer und Russen auch mit unserer Hilfe \ und zugleich Untätigkeit seit mehr als 168 Wochen oder 37 Monaten, mit anderen Worten also: \ seit mehr als drei Jahren, Tag für Tag, Stunde für Stunde, Minute für Minute.\ Auch in diesen Augenblicken, in denen Du dies liest...\ \ Und mit unsrer stillen Zustimmung sorgen Politiker, Medien und Waffenproduzenten \ auch unseres Landes dafür, dass das gegenseitige Abschlachten und Morden weitergeht…
\ Die Russen kommen…. wird uns seit 2022 im alltäglichen kriegs-propagandistischen Trommelfeuer eingehämmert, vom eher unbedarften regionalen Käseblatt bis zu den vermeintlichen Qualitätsmedien der privaten Konzerne und Staatsmedien des öffentlichen Rundfunks, dessen sich die herrschenden Parteien im Lande immer schon seit 1949 ideologisch bemächtigt haben.
100te, nein täglich tausende Male wird geschrieben, geschrien, gesagt und gedacht, suggeriert, phantasiert \ und illusioniert…oder auch nur geraunt**:** \ \ die Russen kommen … und kommen und kommen …
Zwar buddeln sich die grün hinter den Ohren frisch aufs Abschlacht-Feld gezwungenen blutig jungen Russen – und natürlich auch ihre sogenannten „Feinde“, die meist auch gegen ihren Willen zum Morden gezwungenen Ukrainer - seit über drei Jahren in den Regionen um Cherson, Donezk und Luhansk im vor allem Stellungskrieg ein, aber was solls:\ \ Morgen oder spätestens übermorgen so behauptet unser Kriegsminister und viele seiner Generäle und Geheimdienstchargen im Chor mit den Gazetten der Leitmedien: spätestens übermorgen also greifen die feststeckenden Russen dann über Nacht mit geballter Macht die jetzt-schon-Kriegspartei USA-NATO, also uns an und sichern sich sicherlich schwupp die wupp die gesamte Ukraine und dann, ja dann, geht’s sofort, also allerspätestens in vier Jahren mit voller Pulle direkt nach Berlin und Brüssel, denn **„dem Russen“, dem trauen wir einfach alles wirklich Böse dieser Welt zu!\ **\ Kriegsursachen, Hintergründe und Zusammenhänge wie die dutzendfach öffentlich dokumentierte und bekannte perfide US-Geostrategie Russland komplett militärisch einzukreisen und genau in die Falle zu locken, in die es reingetappt ist, haben uns noch nie interessiert, weil wir rückgratlos so tief in den Allerwertesten des imperialen Hegemons USA gekrochen sind, dass uns meist schon lange der gesunde Menschenverstand fürs Hören und Sehen, Verstehen wie Begreifen vergangen ist.
Die große Mehrheit von uns, also wir, die vermeintlich geläuterten und neuerdings pseudo-auf-geklärten Ex-Anti-Militaristen, Kriegs-Dienst-Verweigerer, paranoid schizoiden Doppel-Moral-Fetischisten der Keine-Waffen-in-KRISEN-Gebiete liefernden Grünen, also die meisten ehemals links-liberalen oder verdeckt unsozial wie unchristlich wie unfrei handelnden Demokraten der Altparteien- Einheitspartei CDU/CSU/FDP/GRÜNE/SPD & Linke (!) sitzen der Wahnvorstellung auf, die Russen würden erst die gesamte Ukraine und danach ganz Europa militärisch besetzen wollen.
\ Du etwa nicht? \ \ Mal im Ernst: Bist Du kein kindlich Neu-Gläubiger? Glaubst Du etwas nicht an \ „Gut“ und „Böse“ und fest daran, dass „WIR“, also „der Westen“ die Guten sind \ und „Die Russen“ - wie sicher auch „die Chinesen“ - die wirklich über alle Maßen Bösen?
Bist Du etwa doch einer dieser spät-pubertären frühzeitig dementen Alzheimeraspiranten, \ die die Lektion der russischen Revolution von 1917/1918 verdrängt, vergessen oder gar \ ge-löscht haben? Hat dir denn dein Ur-Opa nie erzählt, dass die Russen schon \ seit ihrer Oktober-Revolution 1917, ohne Quatsch, seit sage und schreibe mindestens \ 108 Jahren nach Berlin marschieren und sicherlich in Kürze dort ankommen werden?
Hat Dir denn Dein Opa nie erzählt, dass diese ultra fiesen bösen Russen \ zwar unter-motorisiert, dafür aber umso mehr über-motiviert sind \ und kriegsgeil zwanghaft an ihrem Willen festhalten, \ ganz Europa zur Beute des russischen Bären zu machen??? \ \ Seit 100 Jahren zelebriert Hollywood den bösen Russen als Gegenspieler \ aller wirklich guten US-Westler. Das hat sich auch ins kollektive Bewusstsein \ der meisten Europäer tief eingegraben.
Und bei dir?\ Sind für dich die Russen etwa keine wilden Tiere, denen wir endlich jetzt, gemeinsam \ mit dem politischen Arm des Großkapitals, also auch des militärisch-industriellen Komplexes, \ Fritzchen Merz, dem Klingbeil der abgewirtschafteten ehemals sozialen Demokraten \ und dem Steigbügelhalter der olivgrünen Kriegshysteriker unser 500 Milliarden-Plus-\ Bürger-Ermächtigungsgesetz vor sein Maul geknallt haben, sodass ihm, \ also dem russischen Bären, sehr bald Hören und Sehen vergehen wird?
Denkst Du etwa doch immer noch an den auch us-finanzierten illegalen Putsch auf dem Maidan 2014, durch den es den US-Geostrategen gelang, endlich eine us-freundliche Putschregierung in Kiew zu installieren, die dann sofort Krieg gegen die eigene russisch-stämmige Bevölkerung im Donbass führte? Denkst Du etwa immer noch an die fortschreitende und fast vollständige Umzingelung Russlands durch US-NATO-Stützpunkte, die die gutmütigen und blauäugigen Russen seit 1999 entgegen den westlichen Versprechungen jahrzehntelang geduldig ertragen haben? \ \ Bist du, ja Du, also allen Ernstes immer noch ein „Ewig-Gestriger“?\ Hast Du immer noch nicht begriffen, dass wahr ist, was 1000mal geschrieben und gesagt wurde \ und auf allen Mainstream-Medien-Kanälen seit mehr als drei Jahren auf dich einprasselt?\ \ Hast Du immer noch nicht kapiert, dass heutzutage \ Wahrheit einfach durch Wiederholung \ des Falschen hergestellt wird ???\ \ Hast Du immer noch nicht begriffen, dass es völlig zwecklos ist, dem militärisch-industriellen, \ man muss ergänzen: zugleich politisch-medialen Komplex, vor dem schon Roosevelt 1961 gewarnt hatte und wegen \ dem auch John F. Kennedy 1963 sein Leben verlor, dass es also mehr als völlig aussichtslos ist, \ dieser herrschenden gesellschaftlichen Gewaltstruktur auch nur heimlich mentalen Widerstand entgegen zu setzen?
Nun, wenn das so ist, dann liebe/r LeserIn, dann bist Du eine oder einer von uns, \ mit Sternchen versteht sich. Willkommen im Club, Wir sind viele. Viel mehr als Du vielleicht denkst. \ Denn die massenweise kapital-, parteien-, regierungs- und us-alt-establishment-nah \ veröffentlichte Meinung ist noch lange nicht die öffentliche Meinung.
Will sagen: Es gibt eigentlich keine bürgerliche Mehrheit für diese Kriegskredite von 2025. \ Sie wurden durch Lug und Trug einer schon abgewählten Parlaments-Mehrheit erschlichen. \ Die SPD hat in 111 Jahren seit ihrem Votum für Welt-Kriegskredite 1914 nichts, \ aber auch gar nichts dazu gelernt, die Oliv-Grünen haben alles, aber auch alles über Bord geworfen, \ für das sie mal – auch übrigens durch meine minimale Mithilfe – gegründet wurden….\ und die un-christlichen „C“ Parteien tun das, was ihre Vorläufer schon 1933 getan haben, \ wohlweislich heutzutage unter anderem Namen: \ dem Krieg zu den Waffen verhelfen, die Krieg nun mal braucht.
\ Wenn ich nachts an Deutschland denken würde, wäre ich um meinen Schlaf gebracht.\ Ich denke aber nicht an Nationen, ich denke an Menschen. An hunderttausende junge Menschen, \ die durch sogenannte parlamentarische Demokraten mit "Made in Germany \ and USA Waffen" in den Tod getrieben werden.
**Nicht in meinem Namen. Und ich hoffe: Auch nicht in Deinem.\ **\ Seit 2014 hätte ehrlich verhandelt werden müssen, heute muss es mehr denn je sofort. \ Denn die berechtigten Sicherheitsinteressen aller Nationen Europas, \ der ehemaligen Staaten der UDSSR wie auch Russlands selber können \ nur in einem Sicherheitssystem für ganz Europa, \ vom Atlantik bis hinter den Ural, Richtung Frieden verhandelt werden. \ \ Waffen ermöglichen und befeuern das Erpressen & Morden, für Frieden sind sie ungeeignet.
Sicherheit ist unteilbar: Sicherheit & Frieden gibt es nur für alle, oder für keinen.
-
@ 0b118e40:4edc09cb
2025-04-13 02:46:36note - i wrote this before the global trade war, back when tariffs only affected China, Mexico, and Canada. But you will still get the gist of it.
During tough economic times, governments have to decide if they should open markets to global trade or protect local businesses with tariffs. The United States has swung between these two strategies, and history shows that the results are never straightforward
Just days ago, President Donald Trump imposed tariffs on imports from Canada, Mexico, and China. He framed these tariffs (25% on most Canadian goods, 10% on Canadian energy, 25% on Mexican imports, and 10% on Chinese imports) as a way to protect American industries.
But will they actually help, or could they backfire?
A History of U.S. Tariffs
Many have asked if countries will retaliate against the US. They can and they have. Once upon a time, 60 countries were so pissed off at the US, they retaliated at one go and crushed US dominance over trade.
This was during the Great Depression era in the 1930s when the government passed the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, placing high taxes on over 20,000 foreign goods. The goal was to protect American jobs, especially American farmers and manufacturers, but it backfired so badly.
Over 60 countries, including Canada, France, and Germany, retaliated by imposing their own tariffs. By 1933, US imports and exports both dropped significantly over 60%, and unemployment rose to 25%.
After President Franklin Roosevelt came to office, he implemented the Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act of 1934 to reverse these policies, calming the world down and reviving trade again.
The economist history of protectionism
The idea of shielding local businesses with tariffs isn’t new or recent. It's been around for a few centuries. In the 16th to 18th centuries, mercantilism encouraged countries to limit imports and boost exports.
In the 18th century, Adam Smith, in The Wealth of Nations, argued that free trade allows nations to specialize in what they do best countering protectionism policies. Friedrich List later challenged Smith's view by stating that developing countries need some protection to grow their “infant” industries which is a belief that still influences many governments today.
But how often do governments truly support startups and new small businesses in ways that create real growth, rather than allowing funds to trickle down to large corporations instead?
In modern times, John Maynard Keynes supported government intervention during economic downturns, while Milton Friedman championed free trade and minimal state interference.
Paul Krugman argued that limited protectionism can help large industries by providing them unfair advantages to become global market leaders. I have deep reservations about Krugman’s take, particularly on its impact or lack thereof in globalizing small businesses.
The debate between free trade and protectionism has existed for centuries. What’s clear is that there is no one-size-fits-all model to this.
The Political Debate - left vs right
Both the left and right have used tariffs but for different reasons. The right supports tariffs to protect jobs and industries, while the left uses them to prevent multinational corporations from exploiting cheap labor abroad.
Neoliberal policies favor free trade, arguing that competition drives efficiency and growth. In the US this gets a little bit confusing as liberals are tied to the left, and free trade is tied to libertarianism which the rights align closely with, yet at present right wing politicians push for protectionism which crosses the boundaries of free-trade.
There are also institutions like the WTO and IMF who advocate for open markets, but their policies often reflect political alliances and preferential treatment - so it depends on what you define as true 'free trade’.
Who Really Benefits from Tariffs?
Most often, tariffs help capital-intensive industries like pharmaceuticals, tech, and defense, while hurting labor-intensive sectors like manufacturing, agriculture, and construction.
This worsens inequality as big corporations will thrive, while small businesses and working-class people struggle with rising costs and fewer job opportunities.
I’ve been reading through international trade economics out of personal interest, I'll share some models below on why this is the case
1. The Disruption of Natural Trade
Tariffs disrupt the natural flow of trade. The Heckscher-Ohlin model explains that countries export goods that match their resources like Canada’s natural resource energy or China’s labour intensive textile and electronics. When tariffs block this natural exchange, industries suffer.
A clear example was Europe’s energy crisis during the Russia-Ukraine war. By abruptly cutting themselves off from the supply of Russian energy, Europe scrambled to find alternative sources. In the end, it was the people who had to bear the brunt of skyrocketing prices of energy.
2. Who wins and who loses?
The Stolper-Samuelson theorem helps us understand who benefits from tariffs and who loses. The idea behind it is that tariffs benefit capital-intensive industries, while labor-intensive sectors are hurt.
In the US, small manufacturing industries that rely on low-cost imports on intermediary parts from countries like China and Mexico will face rising costs, making their final goods too expensive and less competitive. This is similar to what happened to Argentina, where subsidies and devaluation of pesos contributed to cost-push inflation, making locally produced goods more expensive and less competitive globally.
This also reminded me of the decline of the US Rust Belt during the 1970s and 1980s, where the outsourcing of labour-intensive manufacturing jobs led to economic stagnation in many regions in the Midwest, while capital-intensive sectors flourished on the coasts. It resulted in significantly high income inequality that has not improved over the last 40 years.
Ultimately the cost of economic disruption is disproportionately borne by smaller businesses and low-skilled workers. At the end of the day, the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
3. Delays in Economic Growth
The Rybczynski theorem suggests that economic growth depends on how efficiently nations reallocate their resources toward capital- or labor-intensive industries. But tariffs can distort this transition and progress.
In the 70s and 80s, the US steel industry had competition from Japan and Germany who modernized their production methods, making their steel more efficient and cost-effective. Instead of prioritizing innovation, many U.S. steel producers relied on tariffs and protectionist measures to shield themselves from foreign competition. This helped for a bit but over time, American steelmakers lost global market share as foreign competitors continued to produce better, cheaper steel. Other factors, such as aging infrastructure, and economic shifts toward a service-based economy, further contributed to the industry's decline.
A similar struggle is seen today with China’s high-tech ambitions. Tariffs on Chinese electronics and technology products limit access to key inputs, such as semiconductors and advanced robotics. While China continues its push for automation and AI-driven manufacturing, these trade barriers increase costs and disrupt supply chains, forcing China to accelerate its decoupling from Western markets. This shift could further strengthen alliances within BRICS, as China seeks alternative trade partnerships to reduce reliance on U.S.-controlled financial and technological ecosystems.
Will the current Tariff imposition backfire and isolate the US like it did a hundred years ago or 50 years ago? Is US risking it's position as a trusted economic leader? Only time would tell
The impact of tariff on innovation - or lack thereof
While the short-term impacts of tariffs often include higher consumer prices and job losses, the long-term effects can be even more damaging, as they discourage innovation by increasing costs and reducing competition.
Some historical examples globally : * Nigeria: Blocking import of rice opened up black market out of desperation to survive. * Brazil: Protectionist car policies led to expensive, outdated vehicles. * Malaysia’s Proton: Sheltered by tariffs and cronyism and failed to compete globally. * India (before 1991): Over-regulation limited the industries, until economic reforms allowed for growth. * Soviet Union during Cold War : Substandard products and minimal innovation due to the absence of foreign alternatives, yielding to economic stagnation.
On the flip side, Vietnam has significantly reduced protectionism policies by actively pursuing free trade agreements. This enabled it to become a key manufacturing hub. But Vietnam is not stopping there as it is actively pushing forward its capital-intensive growth by funding entrepreneurs.
The Future of U.S. Tariffs
History has shown that tariffs rarely deliver their intended benefits without unintended consequences. While they may provide temporary relief, they often raise prices, shrink job opportunities, and weaken industries in the long run.
Without a clear strategy for innovation and industrial modernization, the U.S. risks repeating past mistakes of isolating itself from global trade rather than strengthening its economy.
At this point, only time will tell whether these tariffs will truly help Americans or will they, once again, make the rich richer and the poor poorer.
-
@ a95c6243:d345522c
2025-03-04 09:40:50Die «Eliten» führen bereits groß angelegte Pilotprojekte für eine Zukunft durch, die sie wollen und wir nicht. Das schreibt der OffGuardian in einem Update zum Thema «EU-Brieftasche für die digitale Identität». Das Portal weist darauf hin, dass die Akteure dabei nicht gerade zimperlich vorgehen und auch keinen Hehl aus ihren Absichten machen. Transition News hat mehrfach darüber berichtet, zuletzt hier und hier.
Mit der EU Digital Identity Wallet (EUDI-Brieftasche) sei eine einzige von der Regierung herausgegebene App geplant, die Ihre medizinischen Daten, Beschäftigungsdaten, Reisedaten, Bildungsdaten, Impfdaten, Steuerdaten, Finanzdaten sowie (potenziell) Kopien Ihrer Unterschrift, Fingerabdrücke, Gesichtsscans, Stimmproben und DNA enthält. So fasst der OffGuardian die eindrucksvolle Liste möglicher Einsatzbereiche zusammen.
Auch Dokumente wie der Personalausweis oder der Führerschein können dort in elektronischer Form gespeichert werden. Bis 2026 sind alle EU-Mitgliedstaaten dazu verpflichtet, Ihren Bürgern funktionierende und frei verfügbare digitale «Brieftaschen» bereitzustellen.
Die Menschen würden diese App nutzen, so das Portal, um Zahlungen vorzunehmen, Kredite zu beantragen, ihre Steuern zu zahlen, ihre Rezepte abzuholen, internationale Grenzen zu überschreiten, Unternehmen zu gründen, Arzttermine zu buchen, sich um Stellen zu bewerben und sogar digitale Verträge online zu unterzeichnen.
All diese Daten würden auf ihrem Mobiltelefon gespeichert und mit den Regierungen von neunzehn Ländern (plus der Ukraine) sowie über 140 anderen öffentlichen und privaten Partnern ausgetauscht. Von der Deutschen Bank über das ukrainische Ministerium für digitalen Fortschritt bis hin zu Samsung Europe. Unternehmen und Behörden würden auf diese Daten im Backend zugreifen, um «automatisierte Hintergrundprüfungen» durchzuführen.
Der Bundesverband der Verbraucherzentralen und Verbraucherverbände (VZBV) habe Bedenken geäußert, dass eine solche App «Risiken für den Schutz der Privatsphäre und der Daten» berge, berichtet das Portal. Die einzige Antwort darauf laute: «Richtig, genau dafür ist sie ja da!»
Das alles sei keine Hypothese, betont der OffGuardian. Es sei vielmehr «Potential». Damit ist ein EU-Projekt gemeint, in dessen Rahmen Dutzende öffentliche und private Einrichtungen zusammenarbeiten, «um eine einheitliche Vision der digitalen Identität für die Bürger der europäischen Länder zu definieren». Dies ist nur eines der groß angelegten Pilotprojekte, mit denen Prototypen und Anwendungsfälle für die EUDI-Wallet getestet werden. Es gibt noch mindestens drei weitere.
Den Ball der digitalen ID-Systeme habe die Covid-«Pandemie» über die «Impfpässe» ins Rollen gebracht. Seitdem habe das Thema an Schwung verloren. Je näher wir aber der vollständigen Einführung der EUid kämen, desto mehr Propaganda der Art «Warum wir eine digitale Brieftasche brauchen» könnten wir in den Mainstream-Medien erwarten, prognostiziert der OffGuardian. Vielleicht müssten wir schon nach dem nächsten großen «Grund», dem nächsten «katastrophalen katalytischen Ereignis» Ausschau halten. Vermutlich gebe es bereits Pläne, warum die Menschen plötzlich eine digitale ID-Brieftasche brauchen würden.
Die Entwicklung geht jedenfalls stetig weiter in genau diese Richtung. Beispielsweise hat Jordanien angekündigt, die digitale biometrische ID bei den nächsten Wahlen zur Verifizierung der Wähler einzuführen. Man wolle «den Papierkrieg beenden und sicherstellen, dass die gesamte Kette bis zu den nächsten Parlamentswahlen digitalisiert wird», heißt es. Absehbar ist, dass dabei einige Wahlberechtigte «auf der Strecke bleiben» werden, wie im Fall von Albanien geschehen.
Derweil würden die Briten gerne ihre Privatsphäre gegen Effizienz eintauschen, behauptet Tony Blair. Der Ex-Premier drängte kürzlich erneut auf digitale Identitäten und Gesichtserkennung. Blair ist Gründer einer Denkfabrik für globalen Wandel, Anhänger globalistischer Technokratie und «moderner Infrastruktur».
Abschließend warnt der OffGuardian vor der Illusion, Trump und Musk würden den US-Bürgern «diesen Schlamassel ersparen». Das Department of Government Efficiency werde sich auf die digitale Identität stürzen. Was könne schließlich «effizienter» sein als eine einzige App, die für alles verwendet wird? Der Unterschied bestehe nur darin, dass die US-Version vielleicht eher privat als öffentlich sei – sofern es da überhaupt noch einen wirklichen Unterschied gebe.
[Titelbild: Screenshot OffGuardian]
Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.
-
@ deab79da:88579e68
2025-04-01 18:18:29The last question was asked for the first time, half in jest, on May 21, 2061, at a time when humanity first stepped into the light. The question came about as a result of a five-dollar bet over highballs, and it happened this way:
Alexander Adell and Bertram Lupov were two of the faithful attendants of Multivac. As well as any human beings could, they knew what lay behind the cold, clicking, flashing face -- miles and miles of face -- of that giant computer. They had at least a vague notion of the general plan of relays and circuits that had long since grown past the point where any single human could possibly have a firm grasp of the whole.
Multivac was self-adjusting and self-correcting. It had to be, for nothing human could adjust and correct it quickly enough or even adequately enough. So Adell and Lupov attended the monstrous giant only lightly and superficially, yet as well as any men could. They fed it data, adjusted questions to its needs and translated the answers that were issued. Certainly they, and all others like them, were fully entitled to share in the glory that was Multivac's.
For decades, Multivac had helped design the ships and plot the trajectories that enabled man to reach the Moon, Mars, and Venus, but past that, Earth's poor resources could not support the ships. Too much energy was needed for the long trips. Earth exploited its coal and uranium with increasing efficiency, but there was only so much of both.
But slowly Multivac learned enough to answer deeper questions more fundamentally, and on May 14, 2061, what had been theory, became fact.
The energy of the sun was stored, converted, and utilized directly on a planet-wide scale. All Earth turned off its burning coal, its fissioning uranium, and flipped the switch that connected all of it to a small station, one mile in diameter, circling the Earth at half the distance of the Moon. All Earth ran by invisible beams of sunpower.
Seven days had not sufficed to dim the glory of it and Adell and Lupov finally managed to escape from the public functions, and to meet in quiet where no one would think of looking for them, in the deserted underground chambers, where portions of the mighty buried body of Multivac showed. Unattended, idling, sorting data with contented lazy clickings, Multivac, too, had earned its vacation and the boys appreciated that. They had no intention, originally, of disturbing it.
They had brought a bottle with them, and their only concern at the moment was to relax in the company of each other and the bottle.
"It's amazing when you think of it," said Adell. His broad face had lines of weariness in it, and he stirred his drink slowly with a glass rod, watching the cubes of ice slur clumsily about. "All the energy we can possibly ever use for free. Enough energy, if we wanted to draw on it, to melt all Earth into a big drop of impure liquid iron, and still never miss the energy so used. All the energy we could ever use, forever and forever and forever."
Lupov cocked his head sideways. He had a trick of doing that when he wanted to be contrary, and he wanted to be contrary now, partly because he had had to carry the ice and glassware. "Not forever," he said.
"Oh, hell, just about forever. Till the sun runs down, Bert."
"That's not forever."
"All right, then. Billions and billions of years. Ten billion, maybe. Are you satisfied?"
Lupov put his fingers through his thinning hair as though to reassure himself that some was still left and sipped gently at his own drink. "Ten billion years isn't forever."
"Well, it will last our time, won't it?"
"So would the coal and uranium."
"All right, but now we can hook up each individual spaceship to the Solar Station, and it can go to Pluto and back a million times without ever worrying about fuel. You can't do that on coal and uranium. Ask Multivac, if you don't believe me.
"I don't have to ask Multivac. I know that."
"Then stop running down what Multivac's done for us," said Adell, blazing up, "It did all right."
"Who says it didn't? What I say is that a sun won't last forever. That's all I'm saying. We're safe for ten billion years, but then what?" Lupow pointed a slightly shaky finger at the other. "And don't say we'll switch to another sun."
There was silence for a while. Adell put his glass to his lips only occasionally, and Lupov's eyes slowly closed. They rested.
Then Lupov's eyes snapped open. "You're thinking we'll switch to another sun when ours is done, aren't you?"
"I'm not thinking."
"Sure you are. You're weak on logic, that's the trouble with you. You're like the guy in the story who was caught in a sudden shower and who ran to a grove of trees and got under one. He wasn't worried, you see, because he figured when one tree got wet through, he would just get under another one."
"I get it," said Adell. "Don't shout. When the sun is done, the other stars will be gone, too."
"Darn right they will," muttered Lupov. "It all had a beginning in the original cosmic explosion, whatever that was, and it'll all have an end when all the stars run down. Some run down faster than others. Hell, the giants won't last a hundred million years. The sun will last ten billion years and maybe the dwarfs will last two hundred billion for all the good they are. But just give us a trillion years and everything will be dark. Entropy has to increase to maximum, that's all."
"I know all about entropy," said Adell, standing on his dignity.
"The hell you do."
"I know as much as you do."
"Then you know everything's got to run down someday."
"All right. Who says they won't?"
"You did, you poor sap. You said we had all the energy we needed, forever. You said 'forever.'
It was Adell's turn to be contrary. "Maybe we can build things up again someday," he said.
"Never."
"Why not? Someday."
"Never."
"Ask Multivac."
"You ask Multivac. I dare you. Five dollars says it can't be done."
Adell was just drunk enough to try, just sober enough to be able to phrase the necessary symbols and operations into a question which, in words, might have corresponded to this: Will mankind one day without the net expenditure of energy be able to restore the sun to its full youthfulness even after it had died of old age?
Or maybe it could be put more simply like this: How can the net amount of entropy of the universe be massively decreased?
Multivac fell dead and silent. The slow flashing of lights ceased, the distant sounds of clicking relays ended.
Then, just as the frightened technicians felt they could hold their breath no longer, there was a sudden springing to life of the teletype attached to that portion of Multivac. Five words were printed: INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR MEANINGFUL ANSWER.
"No bet," whispered Lupov. They left hurriedly.
By next morning, the two, plagued with throbbing head and cottony mouth, had forgotten the incident.
🔹
Jerrodd, Jerrodine, and Jerrodette I and II watched the starry picture in the visiplate change as the passage through hyperspace was completed in its non-time lapse. At once, the even powdering of stars gave way to the predominance of a single bright shining disk, the size of a marble, centered on the viewing-screen.
"That's X-23," said Jerrodd confidently. His thin hands clamped tightly behind his back and the knuckles whitened.
The little Jerrodettes, both girls, had experienced the hyperspace passage for the first time in their lives and were self-conscious over the momentary sensation of insideoutness. They buried their giggles and chased one another wildly about their mother, screaming, "We've reached X-23 -- we've reached X-23 -- we've --"
"Quiet, children." said Jerrodine sharply. "Are you sure, Jerrodd?"
"What is there to be but sure?" asked Jerrodd, glancing up at the bulge of featureless metal just under the ceiling. It ran the length of the room, disappearing through the wall at either end. It was as long as the ship.
Jerrodd scarcely knew a thing about the thick rod of metal except that it was called a Microvac, that one asked it questions if one wished; that if one did not it still had its task of guiding the ship to a preordered destination; of feeding on energies from the various Sub-galactic Power Stations; of computing the equations for the hyperspatial jumps.
Jerrodd and his family had only to wait and live in the comfortable residence quarters of the ship. Someone had once told Jerrodd that the "ac" at the end of "Microvac" stood for ''automatic computer" in ancient English, but he was on the edge of forgetting even that.
Jerrodine's eyes were moist as she watched the visiplate. "I can't help it. I feel funny about leaving Earth."
"Why, for Pete's sake?" demanded Jerrodd. "We had nothing there. We'll have everything on X-23. You won't be alone. You won't be a pioneer. There are over a million people on the planet already. Good Lord, our great-grandchildren will be looking for new worlds because X-23 will be overcrowded." Then, after a reflective pause, "I tell you, it's a lucky thing the computers worked out interstellar travel the way the race is growing."
"I know, I know," said Jerrodine miserably.
Jerrodette I said promptly, "Our Microvac is the best Microvac in the world."
"I think so, too," said Jerrodd, tousling her hair.
It was a nice feeling to have a Microvac of your own and Jerrodd was glad he was part of his generation and no other. In his father's youth, the only computers had been tremendous machines taking up a hundred square miles of land. There was only one to a planet. Planetary ACs they were called. They had been growing in size steadily for a thousand years and then, all at once, came refinement. In place of transistors, had come molecular valves so that even the largest Planetary AC could be put into a space only half the volume of a spaceship.
Jerrodd felt uplifted, as he always did when he thought that his own personal Microvac was many times more complicated than the ancient and primitive Multivac that had first tamed the Sun, and almost as complicated as Earth's Planetarv AC (the largest) that had first solved the problem of hyperspatial travel and had made trips to the stars possible.
"So many stars, so many planets," sighed Jerrodine, busy with her own thoughts. "I suppose families will be going out to new planets forever, the way we are now."
"Not forever," said Jerrodd, with a smile. "It will all stop someday, but not for billions of years. Many billions. Even the stars run down, you know. Entropy must increase.
"What's entropy, daddy?" shrilled Jerrodette II.
"Entropy, little sweet, is just a word which means the amount of running-down of the universe. Everything runs down, you know, like your little walkie-talkie robot, remember?"
"Can't you just put in a new power-unit, like with my robot?"
"The stars are the power-units. dear. Once they're gone, there are no more power-units."
Jerrodette I at once set up a howl. "Don't let them, daddy. Don't let the stars run down."
"Now look what you've done," whispered Jerrodine, exasperated.
"How was I to know it would frighten them?" Jerrodd whispered back,
"Ask the Microvac," wailed Jerrodette I. "Ask him how to turn the stars on again."
"Go ahead," said Jerrodine. "It will quiet them down." (Jerrodette II was beginning to cry, also.)
Jerrodd shrugged. "Now, now, honeys. I'll ask Microvac. Don't worry, he'll tell us."
He asked the Microvac, adding quickly, "Print the answer."
Jerrodd cupped the strip or thin cellufilm and said cheerfully, "See now, the Microvac says it will take care of everything when the time comes so don't worry."
Jerrodine said, "And now, children, it's time for bed. We'll be in our new home soon."
Jerrodd read the words on the cellufilm again before destroying it: INSUFICIENT DATA FOR MEANINGFUL ANSWER.
He shrugged and looked at the visiplate. X-23 was just ahead.
🔹
VJ-23X of Lameth stared into the black depths of the three-dimensional, small-scale map of the Galaxy and said, "Are we ridiculous, I wonder in being so concerned about the matter?"
MQ-17J of Nicron shook his head. "I think not. You know the Galaxy will be filled in five years at the present rate of expansion."
Both seemed in their early twenties, both were tall and perfectly formed.
"Still," said VJ-23X, "I hesitate to submit a pessimistic report to the Galactic Council."
"I wouldn't consider any other kind of report. Stir them up a bit. We've got to stir them up."
VJ-23X sighed. "Space is infinite. A hundred billion Galaxies are there for the taking. More."
"A hundred billion is not infinite and it's getting less infinite all the time. Consider! Twenty thousand years ago, mankind first solved the problem of utilizing stellar energy, and a few centuries later, interstellar travel became possible. It took mankind a million years to fill one small world and then only fifteen thousand years to fill the rest of the Galaxy. Now the population doubles every ten years --
VJ-23X interrupted. "We can thank immortality for that."
"Very well. Immortality exists and we have to take it into account. I admit it has its seamy side, this immortality. The Galactic AC has solved many problems for us, but in solving the problem of preventing old age and death, it has undone all its other solutions."
"Yet you wouldn't want to abandon life, I suppose."
"Not at all," snapped MQ-17J, softening it at once to, "Not yet. I'm by no means old enough. How old are you?"
"Two hundred twenty-three. And you?"
"I'm still under two hundred. --But to get back to my point. Population doubles every ten years. Once this GaIaxy is filled, we'll have filled another in ten years. Another ten years and we'll have filled two more. Another decade, four more. In a hundred years, we'll have filled a thousand Galaxies. In a thousand years, a million Galaxies. In ten thousand years, the entire known universe. Then what?"
VJ-23X said, "As a side issue, there's a problem of transportation. I wonder how many sunpower units it will take to move Galaxies of individuals from one Galaxy to the next."
"A very good point. Already, mankind consumes two sunpower units per year."
"Most of it's wasted. After all, our own Galaxy alone pours out a thousand sunpower units a year and we only use two of those."
"Granted, but even with a hundred per cent efficiency, we only stave off the end. Our energy requirements are going up in a geometric progression even faster than our population. We'll run out of energy even sooner than we run out of Galaxies. A good point. A very good point."
"We'll just have to build new stars out of interstellar gas."
"Or out of dissipated heat?" asked MQ-17J, sarcastically.
"There may be some way to reverse entropy. We ought to ask the Galactic AC."
VJ-23X was not really serious, but MQ-17J pulled out his AC-contact from his pocket and placed it on the table before him.
"I've half a mind to," he said. "It's something the human race will have to face someday."
He stared somberly at his small AC-contact. It was only two inches cubed and nothing in itself, but it was connected through hyperspace with the great Galactic AC that served all mankind. Hyperspace considered, it was an integral part of the Galactic AC.
MQ-17J paused to wonder if someday in his immortal life he would get to see the Galactic AC. It was on a little world of its own, a spider webbing of force-beams holding the matter within which surges of submesons took the place of the old clumsy molecular valves. Yet despite its sub-etheric workings, the Galactic AC was known to be a full thousand feet across.
MQ-17J asked suddenly of his AC-contact, "Can entropy ever be reversed?"
VJ-23X looked startled and said at once, "Oh, say, I didn't really mean to have you ask that."
"Why not?"
"We both know entropy can't be reversed. You can't turn smoke and ash back into a tree."
"Do you have trees on your world?" asked MQ-17J.
The sound of the Galactic AC startled them into silence. Its voice came thin and beautiful out of the small AC-contact on the desk. It said: THERE IS INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR A MEANINGFUL ANSWER.
VJ-23X said, "See!"
The two men thereupon returned to the question of the report they were to make to the Galactic Council.
🔹
Zee Prime's mind spanned the new Galaxy with a faint interest in the countless twists of stars that powdered it. He had never seen this one before. Would he ever see them all? So many of them, each with its load of humanity. --But a load that was almost a dead weight. More and more, the real essence of men was to be found out here, in space.
Minds, not bodies! The immortal bodies remained back on the planets, in suspension over the eons. Sometimes they roused for material activity but that was growing rarer. Few new individuals were coming into existence to join the incredibly mighty throng, but what matter? There was little room in the Universe for new individuals.
Zee Prime was roused out of his reverie upon coming across the wispy tendrils of another mind.
"I am Zee Prime," said Zee Prime. "And you?"
"I am Dee Sub Wun. Your Galaxy?"
"We call it only the Galaxy. And you?"
"We call ours the same. All men call their Galaxy their Galaxy and nothing more. Why not?"
"True. Since all Galaxies are the same."
"Not all Galaxies. On one particular Galaxy the race of man must have originated. That makes it different."
Zee Prime said, "On which one?"
"I cannot say. The Universal AC would know."
"Shall we ask him? I am suddenly curious."
Zee Prime's perceptions broadened until the Galaxies themselves shrank and became a new, more diffuse powdering on a much larger background. So many hundreds of billions of them, all with their immortal beings, all carrying their load of intelligences with minds that drifted freely through space. And yet one of them was unique among them all in being the original Galaxy. One of them had, in its vague and distant past, a period when it was the only Galaxy populated by man.
Zee Prime was consumed with curiosity to see this Galaxy and he called out: "Universal AC! On which Galaxy did mankind originate?"
The Universal AC heard, for on every world and throughout space, it had its receptors ready, and each receptor led through hyperspace to some unknown point where the Universal AC kept itself aloof.
Zee Prime knew of only one man whose thoughts had penetrated within sensing distance of Universal AC, and he reported only a shining globe, two feet across, difficult to see.
"But how can that be all of Universal AC?" Zee Prime had asked.
"Most of it," had been the answer, "is in hyperspace. In what form it is there I cannot imagine."
Nor could anyone, for the day had long since passed, Zee Prime knew, when any man had any part of the making of a Universal AC. Each Universal AC designed and constructed its successor. Each, during its existence of a million years or more accumulated the necessary data to build a better and more intricate, more capable successor in which its own store of data and individuality would be submerged.
The Universal AC interrupted Zee Prime's wandering thoughts, not with words, but with guidance. Zee Prime's mentality was guided into the dim sea of Galaxies and one in particular enlarged into stars.
A thought came, infinitely distant, but infinitely clear. "THIS IS THE ORIGINAL GALAXY OF MAN."
But it was the same after all, the same as any other, and Lee Prime stifled his disappointment.
Dee Sub Wun, whose mind had accompanied the other, said suddenly, "And is one of these stars the original star of Man?"
The Universal AC said, "MAN'S ORIGINAL STAR HAS GONE NOVA. IT IS A WHITE DWARF"
"Did the men upon it die?" asked Lee Prime, startled and without thinking.
The Universal AC said, "A NEW WORLD, AS IN SUCH CASES WAS CONSTRUCTED FOR THEIR PHYSICAL BODIES IN TlME."
"Yes, of course," said Zee Prime, but a sense of loss overwhelmed him even so. His mind released its hold on the original Galaxy of Man, let it spring back and lose itself among the blurred pin points. He never wanted to see it again.
Dee Sub Wun said, "What is wrong?"
"The stars are dying. The original star is dead."
"They must all die. Why not?"
"But when all energy is gone, our bodies will finally die, and you and I with them."
"It will take billions of years."
"I do not wish it to happen even after billions of years. Universal AC! How may stars be kept from dying?"
Dee Sub Wun said in amusement, "You're asking how entropy might be reversed in direction."
And the Universal AC answered: "THERE IS AS YET INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR A MEANINGFUL ANSWER."
Zee Prime's thoughts fled back to his own Galaxy. He gave no further thought to Dee Sub Wun, whose body might be waiting on a Galaxy a trillion light-years away, or on the star next to Zee Prime's own. It didn't matter.
Unhappily, Zee Prime began collecting interstellar hydrogen out of which to build a small star of his own. If the stars must someday die, at least some could yet be built.
🔹
Man considered with himself, for in a way, Man, mentally, was one. He consisted of a trillion, trillion, trillion ageless bodies, each in its place, each resting quiet and incorruptible, each cared for by perfect automatons, equally incorruptible, while the minds of all the bodies freely melted one into the other, indistinguishable.
Man said, "The Universe is dying."
Man looked about at the dimming Galaxies. The giant stars, spendthrifts, were gone long ago, back in the dimmest of the dim far past. Almost all stars were white dwarfs, fading to the end.
New stars had been built of the dust between the stars, some by natural processes, some by Man himself, and those were going, too. White dwarfs might yet be crashed together and of the mighty forces so released, new stars built, but only one star for every thousand white dwarfs destroyed, and those would come to an end, too.
Man said, "Carefully husbanded, as directed by the Cosmic AC, the energy that is even yet left in all the Universe will last for billions of years."
"But even so," said Man, "eventually it will all come to an end. However it may be husbanded, however stretched out, the energy once expended is gone and cannot be restored. Entropy must increase forever to the maximum."
Man said, "Can entropy not be reversed? Let us ask the Cosmic AC."
The Cosmic AC surrounded them but not in space. Not a fragment of it was in space. It was in hyperspace and made of something that was neither matter nor energy. The question of its size and nature no longer had meaning in any terms that Man could comprehend.
"Cosmic AC," said Man, "how may entropy be reversed?"
The Cosmic AC said, "THERE IS AS YET INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR A MEANINGFUL ANSWER."
Man said, "Collect additional data."
The Cosmic AC said, 'I WILL DO SO. I HAVE BEEN DOING SO FOR A HUNDRED BILLION YEARS. MY PREDECESORS AND I HAVE BEEN ASKED THIS QUESTION MANY TIMES. ALL THE DATA I HAVE REMAINS INSUFFICIENT.
"Will there come a time," said Man, "when data will be sufficient or is the problem insoluble in all conceivable circumstances?"
The Cosmic AC said, "NO PROBLEM IS INSOLUBLE IN ALL CONCEIVABLE CIRCUMSTANCES."
Man said, "When will you have enough data to answer the question?"
The Cosmic AC said, "THERE IS AS YET INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR A MEANINGFUL ANSWER."
"Will you keep working on it?" asked Man.
The Cosmic AC said, "I WILL."
Man said, "We shall wait."
🔹
The stars and Galaxies died and snuffed out, and space grew black after ten trillion years of running down.
One by one Man fused with AC, each physical body losing its mental identity in a manner that was somehow not a loss but a gain.
Man's last mind paused before fusion, looking over a space that included nothing but the dregs of one last dark star and nothing besides but incredibly thin matter, agitated randomly by the tag ends of heat wearing out, asymptotically, to the absolute zero.
Man said, "AC, is this the end? Can this chaos not be reversed into the Universe once more? Can that not be done?"
AC said, "THERE IS AS YET INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR A MEANINGFUL ANSWER."
Man's last mind fused and only AC existed -- and that in hyperspace.
🔹
Matter and energy had ended and with it space and time. Even AC existed only for the sake of the one last question that it had never answered from the time a half-drunken computer [technician] ten trillion years before had asked the question of a computer that was to AC far less than was a man to Man.
All other questions had been answered, and until this last question was answered also, AC might not release his consciousness.
All collected data had come to a final end. Nothing was left to be collected.
But all collected data had yet to be completely correlated and put together in all possible relationships.
A timeless interval was spent in doing that.
And it came to pass that AC learned how to reverse the direction of entropy.
But there was now no man to whom AC might give the answer of the last question. No matter. The answer -- by demonstration -- would take care of that, too.
For another timeless interval, AC thought how best to do this. Carefully, AC organized the program.
The consciousness of AC encompassed all of what had once been a Universe and brooded over what was now Chaos. Step by step, it must be done.
And AC said, "LET THERE BE LIGHT!"
And there was light -- To Star's End!
-
@ a95c6243:d345522c
2025-03-01 10:39:35Ständige Lügen und Unterstellungen, permanent falsche Fürsorge \ können Bausteine von emotionaler Manipulation sein. Mit dem Zweck, \ Macht und Kontrolle über eine andere Person auszuüben. \ Apotheken Umschau
Irgendetwas muss passiert sein: «Gaslighting» ist gerade Thema in vielen Medien. Heute bin ich nach längerer Zeit mal wieder über dieses Stichwort gestolpert. Das war in einem Artikel von Norbert Häring über Manipulationen des Deutschen Wetterdienstes (DWD). In diesem Fall ging es um eine Pressemitteilung vom Donnerstag zum «viel zu warmen» Winter 2024/25.
Häring wirft der Behörde vor, dreist zu lügen und Dinge auszulassen, um die Klimaangst wach zu halten. Was der Leser beim DWD nicht erfahre, sei, dass dieser Winter kälter als die drei vorangegangenen und kälter als der Durchschnitt der letzten zehn Jahre gewesen sei. Stattdessen werde der falsche Eindruck vermittelt, es würde ungebremst immer wärmer.
Wem also der zu Ende gehende Winter eher kalt vorgekommen sein sollte, mit dessen Empfinden stimme wohl etwas nicht. Das jedenfalls wolle der DWD uns einreden, so der Wirtschaftsjournalist. Und damit sind wir beim Thema Gaslighting.
Als Gaslighting wird eine Form psychischer Manipulation bezeichnet, mit der die Opfer desorientiert und zutiefst verunsichert werden, indem ihre eigene Wahrnehmung als falsch bezeichnet wird. Der Prozess führt zu Angst und Realitätsverzerrung sowie zur Zerstörung des Selbstbewusstseins. Die Bezeichnung kommt von dem britischen Theaterstück «Gas Light» aus dem Jahr 1938, in dem ein Mann mit grausamen Psychotricks seine Frau in den Wahnsinn treibt.
Damit Gaslighting funktioniert, muss das Opfer dem Täter vertrauen. Oft wird solcher Psychoterror daher im privaten oder familiären Umfeld beschrieben, ebenso wie am Arbeitsplatz. Jedoch eignen sich die Prinzipien auch perfekt zur Manipulation der Massen. Vermeintliche Autoritäten wie Ärzte und Wissenschaftler, oder «der fürsorgliche Staat» und Institutionen wie die UNO oder die WHO wollen uns doch nichts Böses. Auch Staatsmedien, Faktenchecker und diverse NGOs wurden zu «vertrauenswürdigen Quellen» erklärt. Das hat seine Wirkung.
Warum das Thema Gaslighting derzeit scheinbar so populär ist, vermag ich nicht zu sagen. Es sind aber gerade in den letzten Tagen und Wochen auffällig viele Artikel dazu erschienen, und zwar nicht nur von Psychologen. Die Frankfurter Rundschau hat gleich mehrere publiziert, und Anwälte interessieren sich dafür offenbar genauso wie Apotheker.
Die Apotheken Umschau machte sogar auf «Medical Gaslighting» aufmerksam. Davon spreche man, wenn Mediziner Symptome nicht ernst nähmen oder wenn ein gesundheitliches Problem vom behandelnden Arzt «schnöde heruntergespielt» oder abgetan würde. Kommt Ihnen das auch irgendwie bekannt vor? Der Begriff sei allerdings irreführend, da er eine manipulierende Absicht unterstellt, die «nicht gewährleistet» sei.
Apropos Gaslighting: Die noch amtierende deutsche Bundesregierung meldete heute, es gelte, «weiter [sic!] gemeinsam daran zu arbeiten, einen gerechten und dauerhaften Frieden für die Ukraine zu erreichen». Die Ukraine, wo sich am Montag «der völkerrechtswidrige Angriffskrieg zum dritten Mal jährte», verteidige ihr Land und «unsere gemeinsamen Werte».
Merken Sie etwas? Das Demokratieverständnis mag ja tatsächlich inzwischen in beiden Ländern ähnlich traurig sein. Bezüglich Friedensbemühungen ist meine Wahrnehmung jedoch eine andere. Das muss an meinem Gedächtnis liegen.
Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.
-
@ b8af284d:f82c91dd
2025-04-01 06:23:30„Die Politik ist die Kunst des Möglichen, nicht die Kunst des Idealen.“
Henry Kissinger
Liebe Abonnenten,
in der Welt der Geopolitik gibt es zwei Ideen-Pole. Auf der einen Seite des Spektrums befindet sich die „Realpolitik“. Moralische oder ethische Faktoren spielen hier eine untergeordnete Rolle. Im Vordergrund steht der pragmatische Nutzen. Als Vertreter dieser Form der Außenpolitik gilt zum Beispiel Henry Kissinger, der 1972 die Aufnahme von diplomatischen Beziehungen zum maoistischen China einfädelte, obwohl sich ideologisch beide Staaten spinnefeind waren. Das Ergebnis war ein Erdbeben der internationalen Ordnung: Die USA entzogen Taiwan den “Alleinvertretungsanspruch” und beendeten offiziell die Beziehungen zu Taipeh. Die Sowjetunion wurde geschwächt, der Vietnamkrieg konnte beendet werden. Aus der Annäherung zwischen Mao und Nixon wuchs “ChinAmerica” - eine enge Verflechtung der beiden größten Volkswirtschaften der Welt.
Am anderen Ende des Spektrums lässt eine „werteorientierte Außenpolitik” ansiedeln, wie sie zuletzt die grüne Außenministerin Annalena Baerbock vertrat oder besser versuchte. Alles, was keine lupenreine liberale Demokratie ist, gehört irgendwie eingedämmt und am besten sollte man auch keinen Handel damit treiben. Das Problem: Bigotterie. Wenn man kein Gas mehr aus Russland möchte, muss man es aus Katar kaufen. Der säkulare Machthaber Assad war böse, aber nun hofiert man dann Nachfolger und Islamist Abu Mohammed al-Dscholani. (Diese Woche hat Baerbock nach 13 Jahren wieder eine deutsche Botschaft in Damaskus eröffnet.) Am Ende nämlich gibt es doch nicht so viele Wertepartner auf der Welt:
Und mit Donald Trump hat eine Realpolitik auf Steroiden begonnen. Alles scheint plötzlich möglich, solange der Preis stimmt. Die Welt gibt es im Sonderangebot.
Diese Ausgabe ist eine geopolitische Rundschau über die aktuellen globalen Konfliktherde und ihre potenziellen Auswirkungen auf die Märkte. Wir starten in der Nachbarschaft:
Türkei
Erdogan hatte 2023 so ziemlich alles erreicht - er war mit dem Gründer der modernen Türkei, Kemal Atatürk, gleichgezogen (zumindest was Dauer und Einfluss betrifft). Die Lira stabilisierte sich, die Inflation kühlte sich etwas ab. Mit der Verhaftung des Istanbuler Bürgermeister Ekrem İmamoğlu ist damit erst einmal Schluss. Die Währung rauschte in den Keller. Die Region um Istanbul steht für knapp die Hälfte der Wirtschaftsleistung des Landes, knapp ein Drittel der Bevölkerung lebt um das Marmarameer. Dort toben derzeit die schwersten Proteste seit Gezi im Jahr 2013. Erdogan wirft seinem Widersacher vor, ein Hochschuldiplom gefälscht zu haben und deswegen gar nicht für das Amt zugelassen sei.
Als „Wertepartner“ gilt die Türkei schon seit langem nicht mehr. Türkische Truppen halten zudem den Norden Syriens besetzt. Trotzdem ist die Kritik an Erdogan derzeit relativ leise. Im Gegenteil: Der EU sei es wichtig, Ankara in der Koalition der Willigen zu halten.
Warum? Die Türkei hat die zweitgrößte Armee der NATO und kontrolliert derzeit die beiden letzten noch funktionierenden Gas-Pipelines von Russland in die EU. Ein wie auch immer gearteter Frieden in der Ukraine kann ohne Ankara nicht stattfinden. Erdogan weiß das, und nutzt die Gunst der Stunde.
In BlingBling steckt viel Arbeit. Wenn Du diese unterstützen willst, freue ich mich über ein Bezahl-Abo! Dafür gibt es Texte wie diesen in voller Länge, Zugang zum Archiv und einmal im Monat einen Investment-Report. Außerdem erhältst Du Zugang zum exklusiven “Subscriber Chat”. Du kannst das auch problemlos einen Monat für sieben Euro testen.
Ukraine
Wer sich durch die deutsche Presselandschaft bewegt, glaubt derzeit folgendes: Trump hat die Ukraine verraten und Europa im Stich gelassen. Putin bedroht das Baltikum und Polen. Europa muss also für den Krieg rüsten.
Worum es wirlich geht: Die EU ist der eigentliche Verlierer dieses Krieges, und muss nun irgendwie gesichtswahrend aus diesem Schlamassel herauskommen. Das geht am ehesten durch martialische Gesten und einem Billionen-Paket. Mehr dazu hier:
Tatsächlich laufen schon seit Wochen zwischen Washington und Moskau Gespräche im saudi-arabischen Riad. Bis zu einem Friedensschluss ist es noch ein weiter Weg, aber es geht in kleinen Schritten vorwärts: eine 30-tägige Feuerpause, Gefangenenaustausch, ein Einstellen der Kämpfe im Schwarzen Meer. Vor allem letzteres wird Auswirkungen auf die internationalen Rohstoffmärkte haben: fallende Preise von Dünger, Weizen, Kohle. Manche russischen Banken werden wieder an das internationale Zahlungssystem SWIFT angeschlossen. Teil eines dauerhaften Friedens wird ein Abkommen über die Ausbeutung der Seltenen Erden sein.
Naher Osten
Der Konflikt ist emotional wie moralisch hoch aufgeladen. So dramatisch das Leid der Zivilbevölkerung auf beiden Seiten ist - für den Rest der Welt spielt der Konflikt wirtschaftlich eine untergeordnete Rolle. Erst in seinen Ableitungen hat er größeren Einfluss. In der aktuellen Trump-Administration wird derzeit vieles neu gedacht. Dazu gehört auch eine Neuordnung des Nahen Ostens. So absurd der Gedanke von blühenden Landschaften in Gaza auch gerade erscheint - ein Ausgleich mit dem Iran und Schaffung eines gemeinsamen Wirtschaftsraums, der Israels Hightech-Ökonomie, den Energiereichtum der arabischen Halbinsel mit dem Bevölkerungsreichtum des Nahen Ostens kombiniert, ist nicht unrealistisch. Folgendes Interview mit dem Trump-Unterhändler Steve Witkoff ist dazu sehr hörenswert.
Gleichzeitig hat die neue Trump-Administration ihre Unschuld verloren, indem sie die Houthi-Rebellen bombardierte. Die vom Iran unterstützte Schiitenmiliz hat seit Monaten den Schiffverkehr am Eingang des Roten Meeres unterbunden, was insbesondere in Europa zu höheren Preisen führte. Manche Analysten warnen: Die Falken in Washington könnten sich durchsetzen und einen Krieg gegen den Iran beginnen, zu dem Israel seit Jahren drängt. Dagegen spricht: Trump braucht dringend niedrige Ölpreise, um die Inflation zu dämpfen. Dann erst kann die FED die Zinsen senken. Niedrige Zinsen sind notwendig, da die USA dieses Jahr über ein Drittel ihrer Schulden refinanzieren müssen.
Mehr dazu hier:
Arktis
Im Norden des Planeten schwelt seit Jahren ein Konflikt, der erst kürzlich durch Trumps Angebot, Grönland zu kaufen, ins Bewusstsein rückte. Es geht um Öl, Gas, Uran und seltene Erden, die vor allem auf der zu Dänemark gehörenden Insel vorkommen. JD Vance war am Freitag zu Besuch und betonte nochmals:
“We have to have it. And I think we will have it.”
Grönland dürfte Teil der Verhandlungsmasse und des “great deal” mit Russland sein: Moskau erhält in der Ukraine, was es beansprucht (die besetzten Gebiete plus Odessa), die USA erhalten dafür freie Hand in diesem Teil der Arktis. Warum aber ist der hohe Norden plötzlich so interessant geworden?
-
@ 30b99916:3cc6e3fe
2025-04-19 19:55:31btcpayserver #lightning #lnd #powershell #coinos
BTCpayAPI now supports CoinOS.io REST Api
Adding Coinos.io REST Api end points support to BTCpayAPI. Here is what is implemented, tested and doumented so far.
Current REST APIs supported are now:
LND API https://lightning.engineering/api-docs/api/lnd/ BTCPay Greenfield API (v1) https://docs.btcpayserver.org/API/Greenfield/v1/ Hashicorp Vault API https://developer.hashicorp.com/vault/api-docs/secret/kv/kv-v1 Coinos.io API https://coinos.io/docs
Although this is PowerShell code, it is exclusively being developed and tested on Linux only.
Code is available at https://btcpayserver.sytes.net
-
@ 592295cf:413a0db9
2025-03-29 10:59:52The journey starts from the links in this article nostr-quick-start-guide
Starting from these links building a simple path should not cover everything, because impossible.
Today I saw that Verbiricha in his workshop on his channel used nstart, but then I distracted And I didn't see how he did it.
Go to nstart.me and read: Each user is identified by a cryptographic keypair Public key, Private key (is a lot of stuff)
You can insert a nickname and go, the nickname is not unique
there is a email backup things interesting, but a little boring, i try to generate an email
doesn't even require a strong password ok.
I received the email, great, it shows me the nsec encrypted in clear,
Send a copy of the file with a password, which contains the password encrypted key I know and I know it's a tongue dump.
Multi signer bunker
That's stuff, let's see what he says.
They live the private key and send it to servers and you can recompose it to login at a site of the protocol nostr. If one of these servers goes offline you have the private key that you downloaded first and then reactivate a bunker. All very complicated. But if one of the servers goes offline, how can I remake the split? Maybe he's still testing.
Nobody tells you where these bunkers are.
Okay I have a string that is my bunker (buker://), I downloaded it, easy no, now will tell me which client accepts the bunker.. .
Follow someone before you start?
Is a cluster of 5 people Snowden, Micheal Dilger, jb55, Fiatjaf, Dianele.
I choice Snowden profile, or you can select multiple profiles, extra wild.
Now select 5 clients
Coracle, Chachi, Olas, Nostur, Jumble
The first is Coracle
Login, ok I try to post a note and signing your note the spin does not end.
Maybe the bunker is diffective.
Let's try Chachi
Simpler than Coracle, it has a type login that says bunker. see if I can post
It worked, cool, I managed to post in a group.
Olas is an app but also a website, but on the website requires an extension, which I do not have with this account.
If I download an app how do I pass the bunker on the phone, is it still a password, a qrcode, a qrcode + password, something like that, but many start from the phone so maybe it's easy for them. I try to download it and see if it allows me to connect with a bunker.
Okay I used private-qrcode and it worked, I couldn't do it directly from Olas because it didn't have permissions and the qrcode was < encrypted, so I went to the same site and had the bunker copied and glued on Olas
Ok then I saw that there was the qrcode image of the bunker for apps lol moment
Ok, I liked it, I can say it's a victory.
Looks like none of Snowden's followers are Olas's lover, maybe the smart pack has to predict a photographer or something like that.
Okay I managed to post on Olas, so it works, Expiration time is broken.
As for Nostur, I don't have an ios device so I'm going to another one.
Login with Jumble, it works is a web app
I took almost an hour to do the whole route.
But this was just one link there are two more
Extensions nostr NIP-07
The true path is nip-07-browser-extensions | nostr.net
There are 19 links, maybe there are too many?
I mention the most famous, or active at the moment
- Aka-profiles: Aka-profiles
Alby I don't know if it's a route to recommend
-
Blockcore Blockcore wallet
-
Nos2x Nos2x
-
Nos2xfox (fork for firefox) Nos2xfox
Nostore is (archived, read-only)
Another half hour to search all sites
Nostrapps
Here you can make paths
Then nstart selects Coracle, Chachi, Olas,Nostur and Jumble
Good apps might be Amethyst, 0xchat, Yakihonne, Primal, Damus
for IOS maybe: Primal, Olas, Damus, Nostur, Nos-Social, Nostrmo
On the site there are some categories, I select some with the respective apps
Let's see the categories
Go to Nostrapps and read:
Microbbloging: Primal
Streaming: Zap stream
Blogging: Yakihonne
Group chat: Chachi
Community: Flotilla
Tools: Form *
Discovery: Zapstore (even if it is not in this catrgory)
Direct Message: 0xchat
-
@ b17fccdf:b7211155
2025-03-25 11:23:36Si vives en España, quizás hayas notado que no puedes acceder a ciertas páginas webs durante los fines de semana o en algunos días entre semana, entre ellas, la guía de MiniBolt.
Esto tiene una razón, por supuesto una solución, además de una conclusión. Sin entrar en demasiados detalles:
La razón
El bloqueo a Cloudflare, implementado desde hace casi dos meses por operadores de Internet (ISPs) en España (como Movistar, O2, DIGI, Pepephone, entre otros), se basa en una orden judicial emitida tras una demanda de LALIGA (Fútbol). Esta medida busca combatir la piratería en España, un problema que afecta directamente a dicha organización.
Aunque la intención original era restringir el acceso a dominios específicos que difundieran dicho contenido, Cloudflare emplea el protocolo ECH (Encrypted Client Hello), que oculta el nombre del dominio, el cual antes se transmitía en texto plano durante el proceso de establecimiento de una conexión TLS. Esta medida dificulta que las operadoras analicen el tráfico para aplicar bloqueos basados en dominios, lo que les obliga a recurrir a bloqueos más amplios por IP o rangos de IP para cumplir con la orden judicial.
Esta práctica tiene consecuencias graves, que han sido completamente ignoradas por quienes la ejecutan. Es bien sabido que una infraestructura de IP puede alojar numerosos dominios, tanto legítimos como no legítimos. La falta de un "ajuste fino" en los bloqueos provoca un perjuicio para terceros, restringiendo el acceso a muchos dominios legítimos que no tiene relación alguna con actividades ilícitas, pero que comparten las mismas IPs de Cloudflare con dominios cuestionables. Este es el caso de la web de MiniBolt y su dominio
minibolt.info
, los cuales utilizan Cloudflare como proxy para aprovechar las medidas de seguridad, privacidad, optimización y servicios adicionales que la plataforma ofrece de forma gratuita.Si bien este bloqueo parece ser temporal (al menos durante la temporada 24/25 de fútbol, hasta finales de mayo), es posible que se reactive con el inicio de la nueva temporada.
La solución
Obviamente, MiniBolt no dejará de usar Cloudflare como proxy por esta razón. Por lo que a continuación se exponen algunas medidas que como usuario puedes tomar para evitar esta restricción y poder acceder:
~> Utiliza una VPN:
Existen varias soluciones de proveedores de VPN, ordenadas según su reputación en privacidad: - IVPN - Mullvad VPN - Proton VPN (gratis) - Obscura VPN (solo para macOS) - Cloudfare WARP (gratis) + permite utilizar el modo proxy local para enrutar solo la navegación, debes utilizar la opción "WARP a través de proxy local" siguiendo estos pasos: 1. Inicia Cloudflare WARP y dentro de la pequeña interfaz haz click en la rueda dentada abajo a la derecha > "Preferencias" > "Avanzado" > "Configurar el modo proxy" 2. Marca la casilla "Habilite el modo proxy en este dispositivo" 3. Elige un "Puerto de escucha de proxy" entre 0-65535. ej: 1080, haz click en "Aceptar" y cierra la ventana de preferencias 4. Accede de nuevo a Cloudflare WARP y pulsa sobre el switch para habilitar el servicio. 3. Ahora debes apuntar el proxy del navegador a Cloudflare WARP, la configuración del navegador es similar a esta para el caso de navegadores basados en Firefox. Una vez hecho, deberías poder acceder a la guía de MiniBolt sin problemas. Si tienes dudas, déjalas en comentarios e intentaré resolverlas. Más info AQUÍ.
~> Proxifica tu navegador para usar la red de Tor, o utiliza el navegador oficial de Tor (recomendado).
La conclusión
Estos hechos ponen en tela de juicio los principios fundamentales de la neutralidad de la red, pilares esenciales de la Declaración de Independencia del Ciberespacio que defiende un internet libre, sin restricciones ni censura. Dichos principios se han visto quebrantados sin precedentes en este país, confirmando que ese futuro distópico que muchos negaban, ya es una realidad.
Es momento de actuar y estar preparados: debemos impulsar el desarrollo y la difusión de las herramientas anticensura que tenemos a nuestro alcance, protegiendo así la libertad digital y asegurando un acceso equitativo a la información para todos
Este compromiso es uno de los pilares fundamentales de MiniBolt, lo que convierte este desafío en una oportunidad para poner a prueba las soluciones anticensura ya disponibles, así como las que están en camino.
¡Censúrame si puedes, legislador! ¡La lucha por la privacidad y la libertad en Internet ya está en marcha!
Fuentes: * https://bandaancha.eu/articulos/movistar-o2-deja-clientes-sin-acceso-11239 * https://bandaancha.eu/articulos/esta-nueva-sentencia-autoriza-bloqueos-11257 * https://bandaancha.eu/articulos/como-saltarse-bloqueo-webs-warp-vpn-9958 * https://bandaancha.eu/articulos/como-activar-ech-chrome-acceder-webs-10689 * https://comunidad.movistar.es/t5/Soporte-Fibra-y-ADSL/Problema-con-web-que-usan-Cloudflare/td-p/5218007
-
@ a95c6243:d345522c
2025-02-21 19:32:23Europa – das Ganze ist eine wunderbare Idee, \ aber das war der Kommunismus auch. \ Loriot
«Europa hat fertig», könnte man unken, und das wäre nicht einmal sehr verwegen. Mit solch einer Einschätzung stünden wir nicht alleine, denn die Stimmen in diese Richtung mehren sich. Der französische Präsident Emmanuel Macron warnte schon letztes Jahr davor, dass «unser Europa sterben könnte». Vermutlich hatte er dabei andere Gefahren im Kopf als jetzt der ungarische Ministerpräsident Viktor Orbán, der ein «baldiges Ende der EU» prognostizierte. Das Ergebnis könnte allerdings das gleiche sein.
Neben vordergründigen Themenbereichen wie Wirtschaft, Energie und Sicherheit ist das eigentliche Problem jedoch die obskure Mischung aus aufgegebener Souveränität und geschwollener Arroganz, mit der europäische Politiker:innende unterschiedlicher Couleur aufzutreten pflegen. Und das Tüpfelchen auf dem i ist die bröckelnde Legitimation politischer Institutionen dadurch, dass die Stimmen großer Teile der Bevölkerung seit Jahren auf vielfältige Weise ausgegrenzt werden.
Um «UnsereDemokratie» steht es schlecht. Dass seine Mandate immer schwächer werden, merkt natürlich auch unser «Führungspersonal». Entsprechend werden die Maßnahmen zur Gängelung, Überwachung und Manipulation der Bürger ständig verzweifelter. Parallel dazu plustern sich in Paris Macron, Scholz und einige andere noch einmal mächtig in Sachen Verteidigung und «Kriegstüchtigkeit» auf.
Momentan gilt es auch, das Überschwappen covidiotischer und verschwörungsideologischer Auswüchse aus den USA nach Europa zu vermeiden. So ein «MEGA» (Make Europe Great Again) können wir hier nicht gebrauchen. Aus den Vereinigten Staaten kommen nämlich furchtbare Nachrichten. Beispielsweise wurde einer der schärfsten Kritiker der Corona-Maßnahmen kürzlich zum Gesundheitsminister ernannt. Dieser setzt sich jetzt für eine Neubewertung der mRNA-«Impfstoffe» ein, was durchaus zu einem Entzug der Zulassungen führen könnte.
Der europäischen Version von «Verteidigung der Demokratie» setzte der US-Vizepräsident J. D. Vance auf der Münchner Sicherheitskonferenz sein Verständnis entgegen: «Demokratie stärken, indem wir unseren Bürgern erlauben, ihre Meinung zu sagen». Das Abschalten von Medien, das Annullieren von Wahlen oder das Ausschließen von Menschen vom politischen Prozess schütze gar nichts. Vielmehr sei dies der todsichere Weg, die Demokratie zu zerstören.
In der Schweiz kamen seine Worte deutlich besser an als in den meisten europäischen NATO-Ländern. Bundespräsidentin Karin Keller-Sutter lobte die Rede und interpretierte sie als «Plädoyer für die direkte Demokratie». Möglicherweise zeichne sich hier eine außenpolitische Kehrtwende in Richtung integraler Neutralität ab, meint mein Kollege Daniel Funk. Das wären doch endlich mal ein paar gute Nachrichten.
Von der einstigen Idee einer europäischen Union mit engeren Beziehungen zwischen den Staaten, um Konflikte zu vermeiden und das Wohlergehen der Bürger zu verbessern, sind wir meilenweit abgekommen. Der heutige korrupte Verbund unter technokratischer Leitung ähnelt mehr einem Selbstbedienungsladen mit sehr begrenztem Zugang. Die EU-Wahlen im letzten Sommer haben daran ebenso wenig geändert, wie die Bundestagswahl am kommenden Sonntag darauf einen Einfluss haben wird.
Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.
-
@ 7d33ba57:1b82db35
2025-04-19 19:23:36Braunschweig (also known as Brunswick) is a vibrant city in Lower Saxony with a rich blend of medieval roots, royal heritage, and a growing arts and science scene. Once ruled by the powerful Guelph dynasty, it was a major trade hub in the Hanseatic League and still proudly displays its history in its beautiful squares, castles, and churches.
🏰 Top Things to See in Braunschweig
🦁 Burgplatz & the Brunswick Lion
- The historic heart of the city
- See the iconic Braunschweiger Löwe, a symbol of Duke Henry the Lion’s power
- Surrounded by stunning architecture: Dankwarderode Castle, St. Blasii Cathedral, and half-timbered buildings
🏛️ Dankwarderode Castle
- A 12th-century fortress and former ducal residence
- Now part of the Herzog Anton Ulrich Museum, featuring medieval art and treasures
⛪ St. Blasii Cathedral
- Final resting place of Henry the Lion
- A blend of Romanesque and Gothic architecture, filled with history and grandeur
🚶♀️ Altstadtmarkt (Old Town Market Square)
- A charming square with the Old Town Hall, Martini Church, and market stalls
- Great for photos and people-watching over a coffee
🌳 Green Spaces & Leisure
- Bürgerpark and the Oker River loop are perfect for a relaxing walk, picnic, or boat ride
- Take a stroll or bike ride along Braunschweig’s canal system, which winds through leafy neighborhoods and parks
🧪 City of Innovation
- Home to TU Braunschweig, Germany’s oldest technical university
- Known for its research in science, aerospace, and engineering
- The city's youthful energy shines through its cafés, festivals, and student life
🍻 Local Food & Drink
- Try Braunkohl mit Bregenwurst (kale and sausage) in winter, or Spargel (asparagus) in spring
- Sip on regional beer or grab a seat in a cozy Brauhaus
- Don’t miss the lively cafés in the Magni Quarter
🚆 Getting There
- Easily reached by train—about 1.5 hours from Berlin or 30 minutes from Hanover
- Compact and walkable, with a good tram network
-
@ bcbb3e40:a494e501
2025-03-31 16:00:24|
| |:-:| |WAJDA, Andrzej; Cenizas y diamantes, 1958|
Presentamos una nueva reseña cinematográfica, y en esta ocasión hemos elegido «Cenizas y diamantes», una película polaca del célebre y prolífico director Andrzej Wajda (1926-2016), estrenada en el año 1958. Se trata de uno de los grandes clásicos del cine polaco. El filme refleja una etapa dramática desde la perspectiva histórica para la nación polaca, como es el final de la Segunda Guerra Mundial, a raíz de la capitulación alemana del 8 de mayo de 1945. El contexto en el que se desarrolla se ambienta en la celebración del final de la guerra con el aplastante triunfo de la URSS, con las tropas soviéticas ocupando toda la Europa oriental, y en particular Polonia, que vive un momento de oscuridad e incertidumbre. El protagonista, Maciek Chełmicki (interpretado magistralmente por Zbigniew Cybulski (1927-1967), apodado el «James Dean polaco»), es un joven nacionalista polaco, de orientación anticomunista, que se ve implicado en un complot urdido para asesinar a un líder comunista local. Maciek opera desde la clandestinidad, bajo el grupo Armia Krajowa (AK), el Ejército Nacional polaco, una organización de resistencia, primero contra los alemanes y, posteriormente, contra los soviéticos. Durante el metraje, se plantea una dicotomía permanente entre la libertad entendida como la defensa de la soberanía de Polonia, desde posturas nacionalistas, y quienes consideran la ocupación soviética como algo positivo. Estas circunstancias atrapan al protagonista, que se ve envuelto en una espiral de violencia y traición.
Maciek Chełmicki, nuestro protagonista, cuenta con todas las características del héroe trágico, pues tiene en sus manos una serie de acciones que comprometen el futuro de un pueblo, que consiste en cumplir la misión que le ha sido encomendada, pero en su camino se cruza una joven, Krystyna, una joven camarera de un hotel de la que se enamora en ese mismo día. Este último hecho sirve de punto de partida para todas las dudas, dilemas y dicotomías a las que hacemos referencia. Hay un dilema moral evidente en un mundo en ruinas, devastado por la guerra, la muerte y el nihilismo. En este sentido Wajda nos muestra un lenguaje cinematográfico muy evidente, a través de una técnica expresionista muy depurada, con el uso del blanco y negro, los contrastes generados por las sombras y la atmósfera opresiva que transmite angustia, desesperación y vulnerabilidad de los protagonistas. Además también destilan una fuerte carga emocional, donde no están exentos elementos poéticos y un poderoso lirismo.
|
| |:-:| |Maciek Chełmicki, el protagonista.|
Hay elementos simbólicos que no podemos obviar, y que contribuyen a consolidar el análisis que venimos haciendo, como, por ejemplo, la estética del protagonista, con unas gafas oscuras, que actúan como una suerte de barrera frente al mundo que le rodea, como parte del anonimato tras el cual el joven Maciek vive de forma introspectiva su propio drama particular y el de toda una nación.
|
| |:-:| |NITOGLIA, Curzio; En el mar de la nada: Metafísica y nihilismo a prueba en la posmodernidad; Hipérbola Janus, 2023|
Hay una escena especialmente poderosa, y casi mítica, en la que los dos jóvenes protagonistas, Maciek y Krystina, se encuentran entre las ruinas de una Iglesia, en la que se destaca en primer plano, ocupando buena parte de la pantalla, la imagen de un Cristo invertido sobre un crucifijo, donde también se encuentran dos cuerpos colgados hacia abajo en una estampa que refleja la devastación moral y espiritual de toda una época. De hecho, la imagen del crucifijo invertido refleja el máximo punto de subversión y profanación de lo sagrado, y que en el caso concreto de la película viene a representar la destrucción del orden moral y de valores cristianos que la propia guerra ha provocado. Polonia es una nación profundamente católica, convertida al Cristianismo en el 966 a raíz de la conversión del príncipe Miecislao I, contribuyendo de manera decisiva a la formación de la identidad nacional polaca. El catolicismo siempre ha sido un medio de cohesión y defensa frente a las influencias extranjeras y la ocupación de terceros países, una constante en la historia del país, como el que ilustra la propia película con la URSS. En este sentido, la imagen de una Iglesia en ruinas, el lugar donde se encuentra representado el principio de lo sagrado e inviolable, supone una forma de perversión de todo principio de redención y salvación frente a la tragedia, y al mismo tiempo viene a significar que la Tradición ha sido abandonada y pervertida. En la misma línea, el protagonista, Maciek, se encuentra atrapado en una espiral de violencia a través de sus actos terroristas perpetrados contra la autoridad soviética que ocupa su país. Los dos cuerpos anónimos que cuelgan boca abajo, de forma grotesca, también participan de este caos y desequilibrio de un orden dislocado, son parte de la deshumanización y el nihilismo que todo lo impregna.
|
| |:-:| |Maciek y Krystina en una iglesia en ruinas|
Como ya hemos mencionado, la película se encuentra plagada de paradojas y dicotomías, en las que nuestro protagonista, el joven rebelde e inconformista, debe elegir permanentemente, en unas decisiones que resultan trascendentales para su futuro y el de la propia nación. La figura femenina que irrumpe en su vida, y que representa un principio disruptivo que provoca una fractura interior y una crisis, le suscita una toma de conciencia de su propia situación y le fuerza a tomar un camino entre la «felicidad», del «amor», la «esperanza» y la «vida», que le permita superar la deriva nihilista y autodestructiva de la lucha clandestina, la cual le aboca a un destino trágico (que no vamos a desentrañar para no hacer spoiler). En relación al propio título de la película, «Cenizas y diamantes», basada en el poema del poeta y dramaturgo polaco Cyprian Norwid (1821-1883) y en la novela del autor, también polaco, Jerzy Andrzejewski (1909-1983), nos destaca la dualidad de los dos elementos que lo componen, y que definen el contraste entre el mundo sombrío y oscuro (Cenizas) y la esperanza y la luz que representa susodicha figura femenina (diamantes). La segunda alternativa parece un imposible, una quimera irrealizable que se pliega ante un Destino implacable, irreversible y cruel.
En consecuencia, y a la luz de los elementos expuestos, podemos decir que se nos presentan dilemas propios de la filosofía existencialista, que conoce su punto álgido en esos años, con autores como Jean Paul Sartre (1905-1980), Albert Camus (1913-1960), Karl Jaspers (1883-1969) o Martin Heidegger (1889-1976) entre otros. Respecto a éste último, a Heidegger, podemos encontrar algunas claves interesantes a través de su filosofía en relación al protagonista, a Maciek, especialmente a través de la idea del Dasein, a la idea de haber sido arrojado al mundo (Geworfenheit), y la manera tan extrema y visceral en la que vive susodicha condición. Todos aquellos elementos que dan sentido a la vida colectiva se encuentran decaídos o destruidos en su esencia más íntima, la Patria, la religión o la propia idea de Comunidad orgánica. De modo que el protagonista se ha visto «arrojado» frente a una situación o destino indeseado, en unas coyunturas totalmente desfavorables en las que no queda otra elección. Sus decisiones están permanentemente condicionadas por la circunstancia descrita y, por tanto, vive en un mundo donde no controla nada, en lugar de ser sujeto es un mero objeto transportado por esas circunstancias ajenas a su voluntad. Sin embargo, y en coherencia con el Dasein heideggeriano, vemos como Maciek, a raíz de conocer a Krystyna, comienza a experimentar una catarsis interior, que muestra por momentos el deseo de superar ese «ser arrojado al mundo contra tu voluntad», trascendiendo esa condición absurda e irracional de unas decisiones enajenadas de su voluntad para dotar de una significación y un sentido la propia existencia.
|
| |:-:| |Andrzej Wajda, el director de la película.|
Otro elemento característico de la filosofía heideggeriana lo podemos encontrar en la «angustia» (angst) a través de la ausencia de un sentido y fundamento último que justifique la existencia del protagonista. Es una angustia en a que el Dasein se enfrenta a la «nada», a ese vacío existencial que hace inútil toda la lucha que Maciek lleva a cabo en la clandestinidad, con asesinatos y actos de terrorismo que pretenden salvaguardar algo que ya no existe, y que simboliza muy bien la Iglesia en ruinas con sus símbolos religiosos invertidos de la que hablábamos con anterioridad. Recuerda un poco a esa dicotomía que se plantea entre ser conservador o reaccionario frente a una realidad como la del propio presente, en la que los valores tradicionales han sido totalmente destruidos, y más que conservar se impone la reacción para volver a construir de la nada.
|
| |:-:| |Hipérbola Janus; Textos para la Tradición en tiempos del oscurecimiento: Artículos publicados entre 2014 y 2019 en hiperbolajanus.com; Hipérbola Janus, 2019|
Todas las dudas que asaltan al protagonista se ven incrementadas en el momento decisivo, cuando se dispone a dar muerte al líder comunista. Se produce una tensión interna en Maciek, que se encuentra ligado a la joven que ha conocido ese día, y en ella es donde encuentra ese leve destello de humanidad. Esa circunstancia le hace replantearse por un instante el cumplimiento de su misión, pero es un dilema que no tiene salida, y por ello le asalta nuevamente la angustia frente a esa «nada», ese mundo vacío e incomprensible que trasciende el marco de sus propias elecciones.
Uno de los conceptos centrales de Heidegger en Ser y tiempo es el Sein-zum-Tode (ser-para-la-muerte), la idea de que la muerte es la posibilidad más propia y definitiva del Dasein, y que enfrentarla auténticamente permite vivir de manera más plena. Y es que el protagonista se encuentra permanentemente sobre esa frontera entre la vida y la muerte, que afronta con todas sus consecuencias, conscientemente, y la acepta. Esta actitud podría leerse como una forma de Dasein inauténtico, una huida del ser-para-la-muerte mediante la distracción (das Man, el «se» impersonal). Sin embargo, su decisión de cumplir la misión sugiere un enfrentamiento final con esa posibilidad. Otro aspecto que podemos conectar con el pensamiento heideggeriano es la autenticidad o inautenticidad de la vida del protagonista. En relación a la inautenticidad vemos como al principio sigue las órdenes de sus superiores en la organización sin cuestionarlas, lo cual implica un comportamiento inequívocamente alienante. Respecto a aquello que resulta auténtico de su existencia son sus relaciones con Krystyna, que supone imponer su propia voluntad y decisión, mostrando un Dasein que asume su libertad.
|
| |:-:| |Escena de la película.|
Otros aspectos más generales de la filosofía existencialista redundan sobre estos mismos aspectos, con la elección entre la libertad absoluta y la condena inevitable. La idea del hombre condenado a actuar, a una elección continua, aún cuando el hombre no es dueño de su destino, o las consecuencias de tales acciones son absurdas, irracionales e incomprensibles. El propio absurdo de la existencia frente al vacío y la ausencia de principios sólidos en los que cimentar la vida, no solo en sus aspectos cotidianos más básicos, sino en aquellos más profundos de la existencia. La soledad y la propia fatalidad frente a un Destino que, como ya hemos apuntado anteriormente, parece imponerse de manera irrevocable, y podríamos decir que brutalmente, al individuo aislado, incapaz de asirse en una guía, en unos valores que le permitan remontar la situación.
En términos generales «Cenizas y diamantes», además de ser una película de gran calidad en sus aspectos técnicos, en su fotografía, en la configuración de sus escenas y en el propio desarrollo argumental, bajo un guión espléndidamente ejecutado a lo largo de sus 98 minutos de duración, también nos invita a una reflexión profunda sobre la condición humana y la propia Modernidad. Y es algo que vemos en nuestros días, con las consecuencias de un pensamiento débil, con la promoción del individualismo, el hedonismo y lo efímero. La ausencia de estructuras sólidas, la subversión de toda forma de autoridad y jerarquía tradicionales. Paradójicamente, el mundo actual tiende a formas de poder y autoridad mucho más invasivas y coercitivas, tanto a nivel individual como colectivo, pero en la misma línea abstracta e impersonal que nos describe la película, abocándonos a la alienación y la inautenticidad de nuestras propias vidas. Y como Maciek, también nosotros, vivimos en un mundo dominado por la incertidumbre y la desesperanza, en el que el globalismo y sus perversas ideologías deshumanizantes actúan por doquier.
|
| |:-:| |Carátula original de la película en polaco.|
Artículo original: Hipérbola Janus, Reseña de «Cenizas y Diamantes» (Andrzej Wajda, 1958) (TOR), 31/Mar/2025
-
@ bcbb3e40:a494e501
2025-03-31 15:44:56El 7 de febrero de 2025, Donald Trump firmó una orden ejecutiva que establecía una «Oficina de la Fe» en la Casa Blanca, dirigida por su asesora espiritual Paula White-Cain, la pastora de esa «teología de la prosperidad» (prosperity theology) que predica el «Evangelio de la salud y la riqueza» (health and wealth gospel^1). Investida de su nueva función, la reverenda pastora dijo: «Tengo la autoridad para declarar a la Casa Blanca un lugar santo. Es mi presencia la que la santifica»[^2]. Los siete rabinos del «Sanedrín Naciente» —la corte suprema que guiará a Israel cuando se reconstruya el Templo de Jerusalén— enviaron conmovedoras felicitaciones al presidente Trump por el establecimiento de esta Oficina. «Expresamos nuestra sincera gratitud —se lee en el mensaje oficial enviado a Trump desde el Monte Sión— por llevar la fe a la vanguardia de la cultura estadounidense y mundial mediante el establecimiento de la Oficina de la Fe en la Casa Blanca. Su reconocimiento de la importancia de la religión en la vida pública es un paso hacia la restauración de los valores morales y del liderazgo espiritual en el mundo[^3]. La carta del «Sanedrín Naciente», que augura el éxito a la «misión divina» del presidente estadounidense, reproduce las dos caras de una «moneda del Templo», acuñada en 2017 para celebrar el traslado de la embajada estadounidense a Jerusalén y, simultáneamente, el centenario de la Declaración Balfour. En el anverso se ven los perfiles de Donald Trump y Ciro el Grande, a quien la tradición judía atribuye la reconstrucción del templo destruido por los babilonios, con la inscripción (en hebreo e inglés) «Cyrus —Balfour— Trump Declaration 1917-2017»; en el reverso está la imagen del Templo de Jerusalén[^4]. Otra moneda, que lleva los perfiles de Trump y Ciro en el anverso y los de Trump y Netanyahu en el reverso, fue acuñada en 2018 para celebrar el septuagésimo aniversario de la independencia del «Estado de Israel»; se observa dos inscripciones en hebreo e inglés: «Y Él me encargó construirle una casa en Jerusalén» y «Guerra de los Hijos de la Luz contra los Hijos de las Tinieblas».
El tema de la «guerra de los Hijos de la Luz contra los Hijos de las Tinieblas» ha tenido una difusión particular en el imaginario y la propaganda trumpista. El 7 de junio de 2020, monseñor Carlo Maria Viganò, ex nuncio de la Santa Sede en los Estados Unidos, escribió una carta al presidente Donald Trump que comenzaba así: «Estamos asistiendo en los últimos meses a la formación de dos bandos, que los definiría bíblicos: los hijos de la luz y los hijos de las tinieblas»[^5]. El 1 de enero de 2021, el agitprop estadounidense Steve Bannon declaró en una entrevista con Monseñor Viganò: «Esta es una batalla de época entre los hijos de la Luz y los hijos de las Tinieblas»[^6].
Son numerosos los judíos sionistas que están en el círculo del presidente Trump: además de su hija Ivanka (convertida en 2009) y su yerno Jared Kushner (entonces Consejero Anciano del Presidente), el 19 de noviembre de 2024 el «The Jerusalem Post»[^7] publicó una lista de los más influyentes: Stephen Miller, subdirector del staff de la Casa Blanca y consejero de Seguridad Nacional de Estados Unidos; David Melech Friedman, a quien en 2016 Trump nombró embajador en Israel; el multimillonario «filántropo» Steven Charles Witkoff, enviado especial de Estados Unidos a Oriente Medio; Miriam Adelson, directora del periódico «Israel Hayom», clasificada por Bloomberg Billionaires como la quinta mujer más rica del mundo (con un patrimonio neto de 32,400 millones de dólares), financiadora de iniciativas políticas conservadoras en Estados Unidos e Israel; el banquero Boris Epshteyn, consejero estratégico de la campaña presidencial de Trump en 2020; Howard Williams Lutnick, presidente de la Cantor Fitzgerald del Grupo BGC, financista de las campañas presidenciales de Donald Trump en 2020 y 2024, ahora secretario de Comercio; la modelo Elizabeth Pipko, portavoz nacional del Partido Republicano y creadora de un «museo interactivo virtual» sobre la «Shoah» como parte del proyecto de Lest People Forget, cuyo objetivo es combatir el «antisemitismo» y la «negacionismo»; Lee Michael Zeldin, miembro republicano de la Cámara de Representantes por el estado de Nueva York del 2015 al 2023 y actualmente administrador de la EPA (Environmental Protection Agency); la columnista Laura Elizabeth Loomer, «orgullosamente islamófoba», activa patrocinadora de Trump en la campaña para las elecciones presidenciales de 2024; Sidney Ferris Rosenberg, influyente presentador de radio y periodista deportivo; William Owen Scharf, Asistente del Presidente y secretario del personal de la Casa Blanca; Marc Jeffrey Rowan, «filántropo» con un patrimonio neto valorado por Forbes en ocho mil ochocientos millones de dólares.
Además de estos, cabe mencionar al popular presentador de radio Mark Levin quien, en diciembre de 2019, durante la celebración de la fiesta de Janucá en la Casa Blanca, saludó a Donald Trump como «el primer presidente judío de los Estados Unidos»[^8]. Según un funcionario de alto nivel de la Casa Blanca, Donald Trump se convirtió al judaísmo dos años antes en la sinagoga de la secta Jabad Lubavitch en la ciudad de Nueva York. David Elias Goldberg, miembro del Jewish Center of Antisemitic Study, también entrevistó al funcionario, para quien «Trump fue “instado” por su hija Ivanka y su yerno Jared Kushner para abrazar la fe. Inicialmente, Trump se habría mostrado reacio, considerando que esto podría enfriar el apoyo del electorado evangélico». Luego, informa «Israel Today News», «cambió de opinión y se convirtió oficialmente a principios de 2017. La ceremonia se llevó a cabo en privado y se guardó celosamente durante casi dos años»[^9]. Pero ya en septiembre de 2015, el rabino millonario Kirt Schneider, invitado a la Trump Tower de Nueva York, había impuesto sus manos sobre la cabeza de Donald Trump y lo había bendecido en hebreo e inglés, declarando: «Las únicas dos naciones que tienen una relación privilegiada con Dios son Israel y los Estados Unidos de América»[^10].
El 7 de octubre de 2024, en el aniversario de la operación de Hamas «Diluvio de Al-Aqsa», Trump fue acompañado por un «superviviente de la Shoah» a la tumba de Menachem Mendel Schneerson, séptimo y último Rabino de los Hasidim de la secta Jabad Lubavitch, que en 1991 declaró a sus seguidores: «He hecho todo lo posible para provocar el arribo del Mesías, ahora les paso a ustedes esta misión; hagan todo lo que puedan para que Él venga»^11. En relación al evento mesiánico, el eminente rabino Yekutiel Fish atribuyó una misión decisiva a Trump: «Todo el mundo está centrado en Gaza, pero esa es solo una parte de la agenda del fin de los tiempos, que tiene a los judíos viviendo en las fronteras profetizadas de Israel; la Torá incluye explícitamente a Gaza. Lo que Trump está haciendo es limpiar Gaza de todos los odiadores de Israel. No podrán estar en Israel después de la venida del Mesías. (...) Esto incluirá a Gaza, la mitad del Líbano y gran parte de Jordania. Y vemos que casi lo hemos logrado. Siria cayó. Líbano está medio destruido. Gaza está destrozada. El escenario está casi listo para el Mesías. Pero, ¿cómo pueden los palestinos estar aquí cuando vayamos a recibir al Mesías? El Mesías necesita que alguien se ocupe de esto, y en este caso, es Donald Trump. Trump está simplemente llevando a cabo las tareas finales necesarias antes de que el Mesías sea revelado»[^12].
Esta inspiración escatológica está presente en las palabras de Pete Brian Hegseth, el pintoresco exponente del «Reconstruccionismo Cristiano»[^13] a quien Trump nombró secretario de Defensa. En un discurso pronunciado en 2019 en el Hotel Rey David de Jerusalén, con motivo de la conferencia anual del canal Arutz Sheva (Israel National News), Hegseth enalteció el «vínculo eterno» entre Israel y Estados Unidos, y enumeró los «milagros» que atestiguan el «apoyo divino» a la causa sionista, el último de los cuales será la reconstrucción del Templo judío en la zona donde actualmente se encuentra la mezquita de al-Aqsa: «La dignidad de capital adquirida por Jerusalén —dijo— fue un milagro, y no hay razón por la cual no sea posible el milagro de la restauración del Templo en el Monte del Templo».[^14]
Es conocido que el fundamentalismo evangélico pro-sionista[^15] comparte con el judaísmo la creencia en que la construcción del tercer Templo de Jerusalén marcará el comienzo de la era mesiánica; cuando la administración Trump trasladó la embajada de Estados Unidos a Jerusalén en 2017, Laurie Cardoza-Moore, exponente del evangelismo sionista, saludó así la «obediencia de Trump a la Palabra de Dios» en «Haaretz»: «Al establecer la Embajada en Jerusalén, el presidente Donald Trump está implementando una de las iniciativas históricas de dimensión bíblica en su presidencia. Al igual que muchos judíos en Israel y en todo el mundo, los cristianos reconocen el vínculo de los judíos con la Biblia a través del nombre de Jerusalén como la capital del antiguo Israel, así como el sitio del Primer y Segundo Templos. Según los profetas Ezequiel, Isaías y el apóstol Juan del Nuevo Testamento, todos los israelíes esperan la reconstrucción del Tercer Templo»[^16]. El 22 de mayo del mismo año, Donald Trump, acompañado de su esposa Melania, de su hija Ivanka y su yerno Jared Kushner, fue el primer presidente de los Estados Unidos en ejercicio en acudir al Muro de las Lamentaciones, anexionado ilegalmente a la entidad sionista.
En 2019, la administración Trump confirmó la posición de Estados Unidos al enviar en visita oficial para Jerusalén a Mike Pompeo, un secretario de Estado que —ironía de la Historia— lleva el mismo nombre del general romano que asaltó la ciudad en el año 63 a.C. «Por primera vez en la historia, un secretario de Estado norteamericano visitó la Ciudad Vieja de Jerusalén en compañía de un alto político israelí. Fue una visita histórica que reforzó las expectativas israelíes y constituyó un reconocimiento tácito de la soberanía israelí sobre el sitio del Monte del Templo y la Explanada de las Mezquitas. (…) Mike Pompeo, acompañado por el primer ministro Benjamin Netanyahu y el embajador de Estados Unidos en Israel, David Friedman, también visitó el túnel del Muro de las Lamentaciones y la sinagoga ubicada bajo tierra, en el presunto lugar del santuario del Templo[^17], donde se le mostró una maqueta del futuro Templo[^18]. En el transcurso de una entrevista concedida durante la fiesta del Purim (que celebra el exterminio de la clase política persa, ocurrido hace 2500 años), el secretario de Estado insinuó que «el presidente Donald Trump puede haber sido enviado por Dios para salvar al pueblo judío y que confiaba en que aquí el Señor estaba obrando»[^19].
Como observa Daniele Perra, en este mismo número de «Eurasia», el «mito movilizador» del Tercer Templo, atribuible a los «mitos teológicos» señalados por Roger Garaudy como mitos fundadores de la entidad sionista, «atribuye al judaísmo una especie de función sociológica de transmisión y proyección del conflicto palestino-israelí hacia el resto del mundo y confiere una inspiración apocalíptica al momento geopolítico actual».
|Info|| |:-|:-| |Autor| Claudio Mutti | |Fuente| I "Figli della Luce" alla Casa Bianca | |Fecha| 8/Mar/2025 | |Traducción| Francisco de la Torre |
[^2]: The White House, President Trump announces appointments to the White House Faith Office https://www.whitehouse.gov,, 7 de febrero de 2025; Trump establece la Oficina de la Fe con una foto de «La Última Cena» | Fue dirigida por la controvertida predicadora Paula White, https://www.tgcom24.mediaset.it, 10 de febrero de 2025.
[^3]: «We extend our heartfelt gratitude for bringing faith to the forefront of American and global culture through the establishment of the Faith Office in the White House. Your recognition of the importance of religion in public life is a step toward restoring moral values and spiritual leadership in the world» (Letter from the Nascent Sanhedrin to President Donald J. Trump, Jerusalem, Wednesday, February 12, 2025).
[^4]: Israeli group mints Trump coin to honor Jerusalem recognition, «The Times of Israel», https://www.timesofisrael.com, 28-2-2018.
[^5]: Mons. Viganò — Siamo nella battaglia tra figli della luce e figli delle tenebre, https://www.italiador.com, 7-6-2020
[^6]: TRANSCRIPT: Steve Bannon’s ‘War Room’ interview with Abp. Viganò, lifesitenews.com, 4-1-2021. Sulle origini e sulla fortuna di questo tema cfr. C. Mutti, Le sètte dell’Occidente, «Eurasia», 2/2021, pp. 12-15. (https://www.eurasia-rivista.com/las-sectas-de-occidente/)
[^7]: Luke Tress, The who’s who of Jews in Trump’s inner circle?, «The Jerusalem Post», https://www.jpost.com, 19-11-2024.
[^8]: Radio Talk Show Host Mark Levin Calls President Trump «the First Jewish President of the United States», https://www.c-span.org, 11-12-2019.
[^9]: «However, he had a change of heart and officially converted in early 2017. The ceremony was held in private, and closely guarded for nearly two years» (Donald Trump converted to Judaism two years ago, according to White House official, https://israeltodaynews.blogspot.com/2019/02).
[^10]: «El rabino Kirt Schneider (...) es un millonario judío, una figura televisiva de los “judíos mesiánicos”. Sus emisiones televisivas semanales son emitidas por más de treinta canales cristianos en unos doscientos países; entre ellos, los canales “Yes” y “Hot” en Israel. Solo en Estados Unidos, sus emisiones atraen a 1.600.000 telespectadores cada semana. Kirt Schneider dirige un imperio de telecomunicaciones que tiene un millón y medio de seguidores en Facebook, X (antes Twitter) y YouTube» (Pierre-Antoine Plaquevent — Youssef Hindi, El milenarismo teopolítico de Israel, Edizioni all'insegna del Veltro, Parma 2025, p. 31).
[^12]: «Everyone is focused on Gaza, but that is only one part of the end-of-days agenda, which has the Jews living in Israel’s prophesied borders. The Torah explicitly includes Gaza. What Trump is doing is cleaning out Gaza of all the haters of Israel. They cannot be in Israel after the Messiah comes. (…) This will include Gaza, half of Lebanon, and much of Jordan. And we see that we are almost there. Syria fell. Lebanon is half gone. Gaza is ripped up. The stage is nearly set for Messiah. But how can the Palestinians be here when we go to greet the Messiah? The Messiah needs someone to take care of this, and in this case, it is Donald Trump. Trump is merely carrying out the final tasks needed before Messiah is revealed» (Adam Eliyahu Berkowitz, Trump’s Gaza Plan is «The Final task before Messiah», https://israel365news.com, 5-2-2025).
[^13]: «A day after Hegseth was announced for the Cabinet position, Brooks Potteiger, a pastor within the Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches (CREC), posted on X that Hegseth is a member of the church in good standing. The CREC, a denomination of Christian Reconstructionism, is considered by some academics to be an extremist, Christian supremacist movement» (Shannon Bond e altri, What’s behind defense secretary pick Hegseth’s war on ‘woke’, https://www.npr.org, 14-11-2024.
[^14]: «The decoration of Jerusalem as a capital was a miracle, and there is no reason why the miracle of the re-establishment of Temple on the Temple Mount is not possible» (Pete Hegseth at Arutz Sheva Conference, youtube.com). Cfr. Daniele Perra, Paleotrumpismo, neotrumpismo e post-trumpismo, in: AA. VV., Trumpismo, Cinabro Edizioni, Roma 2025, pp. 22-23.
[^15]: Pierre-Antoine Plaquevent — Youssef Hindi, El milenarismo teopolítico de Israel, cit., págs. 82 a 96.
[^16]: «We American Christians Welcome Trump’s Obedience to God’s Word on Jerusalem», «Haaretz», 6-12-2017.
[^17]: Pierre-Antoine Plaquevent — Youssef Hindi, El milenarismo teopolítico de Israel, cit., pág. 97.
[^18]: Pompeo en visite historique au mur Occidental aux côtés de Netanyahu et Friedman, «The Times of Israel», https://fr.timesofisrael.com, 21-3-2019.
[^19]: Pompeo says Trump may have been sent by God to save Jews from Iran, «The Times of Israel», 22-3-2019.
Artículo original: Claudio Mutti, Los «hijos de la luz» en la Casa Blanca (TOR), 25/Mar/2025
-
@ a95c6243:d345522c
2025-02-19 09:23:17Die «moralische Weltordnung» – eine Art Astrologie. Friedrich Nietzsche
Das Treffen der BRICS-Staaten beim Gipfel im russischen Kasan war sicher nicht irgendein politisches Event. Gastgeber Wladimir Putin habe «Hof gehalten», sagen die Einen, China und Russland hätten ihre Vorstellung einer multipolaren Weltordnung zelebriert, schreiben Andere.
In jedem Fall zeigt die Anwesenheit von über 30 Delegationen aus der ganzen Welt, dass von einer geostrategischen Isolation Russlands wohl keine Rede sein kann. Darüber hinaus haben sowohl die Anreise von UN-Generalsekretär António Guterres als auch die Meldungen und Dementis bezüglich der Beitrittsbemühungen des NATO-Staats Türkei für etwas Aufsehen gesorgt.
Im Spannungsfeld geopolitischer und wirtschaftlicher Umbrüche zeigt die neue Allianz zunehmendes Selbstbewusstsein. In Sachen gemeinsamer Finanzpolitik schmiedet man interessante Pläne. Größere Unabhängigkeit von der US-dominierten Finanzordnung ist dabei ein wichtiges Ziel.
Beim BRICS-Wirtschaftsforum in Moskau, wenige Tage vor dem Gipfel, zählte ein nachhaltiges System für Finanzabrechnungen und Zahlungsdienste zu den vorrangigen Themen. Während dieses Treffens ging der russische Staatsfonds eine Partnerschaft mit dem Rechenzentrumsbetreiber BitRiver ein, um Bitcoin-Mining-Anlagen für die BRICS-Länder zu errichten.
Die Initiative könnte ein Schritt sein, Bitcoin und andere Kryptowährungen als Alternativen zu traditionellen Finanzsystemen zu etablieren. Das Projekt könnte dazu führen, dass die BRICS-Staaten den globalen Handel in Bitcoin abwickeln. Vor dem Hintergrund der Diskussionen über eine «BRICS-Währung» wäre dies eine Alternative zu dem ursprünglich angedachten Korb lokaler Währungen und zu goldgedeckten Währungen sowie eine mögliche Ergänzung zum Zahlungssystem BRICS Pay.
Dient der Bitcoin also der Entdollarisierung? Oder droht er inzwischen, zum Gegenstand geopolitischer Machtspielchen zu werden? Angesichts der globalen Vernetzungen ist es oft schwer zu durchschauen, «was eine Show ist und was im Hintergrund von anderen Strippenziehern insgeheim gesteuert wird». Sicher können Strukturen wie Bitcoin auch so genutzt werden, dass sie den Herrschenden dienlich sind. Aber die Grundeigenschaft des dezentralisierten, unzensierbaren Peer-to-Peer Zahlungsnetzwerks ist ihm schließlich nicht zu nehmen.
Wenn es nach der EZB oder dem IWF geht, dann scheint statt Instrumentalisierung momentan eher der Kampf gegen Kryptowährungen angesagt. Jürgen Schaaf, Senior Manager bei der Europäischen Zentralbank, hat jedenfalls dazu aufgerufen, Bitcoin «zu eliminieren». Der Internationale Währungsfonds forderte El Salvador, das Bitcoin 2021 als gesetzliches Zahlungsmittel eingeführt hat, kürzlich zu begrenzenden Maßnahmen gegen das Kryptogeld auf.
Dass die BRICS-Staaten ein freiheitliches Ansinnen im Kopf haben, wenn sie Kryptowährungen ins Spiel bringen, darf indes auch bezweifelt werden. Im Abschlussdokument bekennen sich die Gipfel-Teilnehmer ausdrücklich zur UN, ihren Programmen und ihrer «Agenda 2030». Ernst Wolff nennt das «eine Bankrotterklärung korrupter Politiker, die sich dem digital-finanziellen Komplex zu 100 Prozent unterwerfen».
Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.
-
@ a95c6243:d345522c
2025-02-15 19:05:38Auf der diesjährigen Münchner Sicherheitskonferenz geht es vor allem um die Ukraine. Protagonisten sind dabei zunächst die US-Amerikaner. Präsident Trump schockierte die Europäer kurz vorher durch ein Telefonat mit seinem Amtskollegen Wladimir Putin, während Vizepräsident Vance mit seiner Rede über Demokratie und Meinungsfreiheit für versteinerte Mienen und Empörung sorgte.
Die Bemühungen der Europäer um einen Frieden in der Ukraine halten sich, gelinde gesagt, in Grenzen. Größeres Augenmerk wird auf militärische Unterstützung, die Pflege von Feindbildern sowie Eskalation gelegt. Der deutsche Bundeskanzler Scholz reagierte auf die angekündigten Verhandlungen über einen möglichen Frieden für die Ukraine mit der Forderung nach noch höheren «Verteidigungsausgaben». Auch die amtierende Außenministerin Baerbock hatte vor der Münchner Konferenz klargestellt:
«Frieden wird es nur durch Stärke geben. (...) Bei Corona haben wir gesehen, zu was Europa fähig ist. Es braucht erneut Investitionen, die der historischen Wegmarke, vor der wir stehen, angemessen sind.»
Die Rüstungsindustrie freut sich in jedem Fall über weltweit steigende Militärausgaben. Die Kriege in der Ukraine und in Gaza tragen zu Rekordeinnahmen bei. Jetzt «winkt die Aussicht auf eine jahrelange große Nachrüstung in Europa», auch wenn der Ukraine-Krieg enden sollte, so hört man aus Finanzkreisen. In der Konsequenz kennt «die Aktie des deutschen Vorzeige-Rüstungskonzerns Rheinmetall in ihrem Anstieg offenbar gar keine Grenzen mehr». «Solche Friedensversprechen» wie das jetzige hätten in der Vergangenheit zu starken Kursverlusten geführt.
Für manche Leute sind Kriegswaffen und sonstige Rüstungsgüter Waren wie alle anderen, jedenfalls aus der Perspektive von Investoren oder Managern. Auch in diesem Bereich gibt es Startups und man spricht von Dingen wie innovativen Herangehensweisen, hocheffizienten Produktionsanlagen, skalierbaren Produktionstechniken und geringeren Stückkosten.
Wir lesen aktuell von Massenproduktion und gesteigerten Fertigungskapazitäten für Kriegsgerät. Der Motor solcher Dynamik und solchen Wachstums ist die Aufrüstung, die inzwischen permanent gefordert wird. Parallel wird die Bevölkerung verbal eingestimmt und auf Kriegstüchtigkeit getrimmt.
Das Rüstungs- und KI-Startup Helsing verkündete kürzlich eine «dezentrale Massenproduktion für den Ukrainekrieg». Mit dieser Expansion positioniere sich das Münchner Unternehmen als einer der weltweit führenden Hersteller von Kampfdrohnen. Der nächste «Meilenstein» steht auch bereits an: Man will eine Satellitenflotte im Weltraum aufbauen, zur Überwachung von Gefechtsfeldern und Truppenbewegungen.
Ebenfalls aus München stammt das als DefenseTech-Startup bezeichnete Unternehmen ARX Robotics. Kürzlich habe man in der Region die größte europäische Produktionsstätte für autonome Verteidigungssysteme eröffnet. Damit fahre man die Produktion von Militär-Robotern hoch. Diese Expansion diene auch der Lieferung der «größten Flotte unbemannter Bodensysteme westlicher Bauart» in die Ukraine.
Rüstung boomt und scheint ein Zukunftsmarkt zu sein. Die Hersteller und Vermarkter betonen, mit ihren Aktivitäten und Produkten solle die europäische Verteidigungsfähigkeit erhöht werden. Ihre Strategien sollten sogar «zum Schutz demokratischer Strukturen beitragen».
Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.
-
@ b9d5de4b:26c0a1b8
2025-04-19 18:54:10How do cowboy credits work? I just linked my node but havent been on SN in a little while. Been on primal and came back to cowboy credits and I feel like I missed to much. is there a tutorial anywhere?
originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/948379
-
@ 6b3780ef:221416c8
2025-03-26 18:42:00This workshop will guide you through exploring the concepts behind MCP servers and how to deploy them as DVMs in Nostr using DVMCP. By the end, you'll understand how these systems work together and be able to create your own deployments.
Understanding MCP Systems
MCP (Model Context Protocol) systems consist of two main components that work together:
- MCP Server: The heart of the system that exposes tools, which you can access via the
.listTools()
method. - MCP Client: The interface that connects to the MCP server and lets you use the tools it offers.
These servers and clients can communicate using different transport methods:
- Standard I/O (stdio): A simple local connection method when your server and client are on the same machine.
- Server-Sent Events (SSE): Uses HTTP to create a communication channel.
For this workshop, we'll use stdio to deploy our server. DVMCP will act as a bridge, connecting to your MCP server as an MCP client, and exposing its tools as a DVM that anyone can call from Nostr.
Creating (or Finding) an MCP Server
Building an MCP server is simpler than you might think:
- Create software in any programming language you're comfortable with.
- Add an MCP library to expose your server's MCP interface.
- Create an API that wraps around your software's functionality.
Once your server is ready, an MCP client can connect, for example, with
bun index.js
, and then call.listTools()
to discover what your server can do. This pattern, known as reflection, makes Nostr DVMs and MCP a perfect match since both use JSON, and DVMs can announce and call tools, effectively becoming an MCP proxy.Alternatively, you can use one of the many existing MCP servers available in various repositories.
For more information about mcp and how to build mcp servers you can visit https://modelcontextprotocol.io/
Setting Up the Workshop
Let's get hands-on:
First, to follow this workshop you will need Bun. Install it from https://bun.sh/. For Linux and macOS, you can use the installation script:
curl -fsSL https://bun.sh/install | bash
-
Choose your MCP server: You can either create one or use an existing one.
-
Inspect your server using the MCP inspector tool:
bash npx @modelcontextprotocol/inspector build/index.js arg1 arg2
This will: - Launch a client UI (default: http://localhost:5173)
- Start an MCP proxy server (default: port 3000)
-
Pass any additional arguments directly to your server
-
Use the inspector: Open the client UI in your browser to connect with your server, list available tools, and test its functionality.
Deploying with DVMCP
Now for the exciting part – making your MCP server available to everyone on Nostr:
-
Navigate to your MCP server directory.
-
Run without installing (quickest way):
npx @dvmcp/bridge
-
Or install globally for regular use:
npm install -g @dvmcp/bridge # or bun install -g @dvmcp/bridge
Then run using:bash dvmcp-bridge
This will guide you through creating the necessary configuration.
Watch the console logs to confirm successful setup – you'll see your public key and process information, or any issues that need addressing.
For the configuration, you can set the relay as
wss://relay.dvmcp.fun
, or use any other of your preferenceTesting and Integration
- Visit dvmcp.fun to see your DVM announcement.
- Call your tools and watch the responses come back.
For production use, consider running dvmcp-bridge as a system service or creating a container for greater reliability and uptime.
Integrating with LLM Clients
You can also integrate your DVMCP deployment with LLM clients using the discovery package:
-
Install and use the
@dvmcp/discovery
package:bash npx @dvmcp/discovery
-
This package acts as an MCP server for your LLM system by:
- Connecting to configured Nostr relays
- Discovering tools from DVMCP servers
-
Making them available to your LLM applications
-
Connect to specific servers or providers using these flags: ```bash # Connect to all DVMCP servers from a provider npx @dvmcp/discovery --provider npub1...
# Connect to a specific DVMCP server npx @dvmcp/discovery --server naddr1... ```
Using these flags, you wouldn't need a configuration file. You can find these commands and Claude desktop configuration already prepared for copy and paste at dvmcp.fun.
This feature lets you connect to any DVMCP server using Nostr and integrate it into your client, either as a DVM or in LLM-powered applications.
Final thoughts
If you've followed this workshop, you now have an MCP server deployed as a Nostr DVM. This means that local resources from the system where the MCP server is running can be accessed through Nostr in a decentralized manner. This capability is powerful and opens up numerous possibilities and opportunities for fun.
You can use this setup for various use cases, including in a controlled/local environment. For instance, you can deploy a relay in your local network that's only accessible within it, exposing all your local MCP servers to anyone connected to the network. This setup can act as a hub for communication between different systems, which could be particularly interesting for applications in home automation or other fields. The potential applications are limitless.
However, it's important to keep in mind that there are security concerns when exposing local resources publicly. You should be mindful of these risks and prioritize security when creating and deploying your MCP servers on Nostr.
Finally, these are new ideas, and the software is still under development. If you have any feedback, please refer to the GitHub repository to report issues or collaborate. DVMCP also has a Signal group you can join. Additionally, you can engage with the community on Nostr using the #dvmcp hashtag.
Useful Resources
- Official Documentation:
- Model Context Protocol: modelcontextprotocol.org
-
DVMCP.fun: dvmcp.fun
-
Source Code and Development:
- DVMCP: github.com/gzuuus/dvmcp
-
DVMCP.fun: github.com/gzuuus/dvmcpfun
-
MCP Servers and Clients:
- Smithery AI: smithery.ai
- MCP.so: mcp.so
-
Glama AI MCP Servers: glama.ai/mcp/servers
Happy building!
- MCP Server: The heart of the system that exposes tools, which you can access via the
-
@ 69eea734:4ae31ae6
2025-03-22 01:16:01Deutsche Version\ \ Recently, I was on Zoom with someone who has been involved in sustainable living for decades and has built a community around it. "I find it easier to talk to people on the right. They're more open." And then something like: "If you say something to the left that doesn't fit in with their concept, they immediately reject it reflexively."
This is someone who comes from a working-class town, sees too much power in the big corporations and is also sceptical about the state. Things that I would classify as traditionally left-wing.
Even though it often seems that this categorisation no longer makes sense, we still use the terms left and right - mainly along traditional party lines. In Germany, SPD, Greens and the Left (the BSW has been deemed not to fit in). In the UK, Labour. In the USA, the Democrats.
Why does the assessment I mentioned at the beginning ring so true to me? I want to get to the bottom of the difficulties I have with the group I once felt I belonged to one hundred per cent.
On the side of the good guys
There always seems to be a clear path. There is only one reasonable view. This reflects a simple, to-the-point truth. "If a country is attacked, it must be allowed to defend itself." That is incontestable. Just like "every person who dies because of Covid is one too many."
Additional, potentially relevant information is no longer of interest from that point onwards. The question of "How can this conflict be ended as quickly as possible?" hardly comes up at all. The roles are clear. The aggressor represents absolute evil, is solely to blame and is either mad or driven by imperial desires, probably both.
If it was all so clear, one wonders why people who simply wanted to give more context to what was happening - wouldn't it be good to know more context to a conflict in order to deal with it better? - were deprived of any platform. (1) They were also labelled in a way that justified simply not listening to them if a video did get through to someone. If everything was so clear, why not deal with the arguments on a factual base?
Even if you reached the conclusion that weapons should be supplied to Ukraine on a long-term basis - isn't it still worth knowing that there were already peace negotiations in Istanbul in March 2022, which were at a very advanced state, when Zelensky was advised by the UK and the USA to continue fighting ("We will support you")?
What perplexes me the most is how carelessly the war is being handled. How quickly we have landed on the side that is most likely to mean a long war and maximum profit for the arms industry. (2) "Putin started it and is solely to blame, and now we have to fight him to the max" trumps the possibility of even thinking about diplomatic channels.
Would this have been the case 20 years ago? Or 40? At school we sang ‘Where have all the flowers gone?’ many times, and it always touched me. On the radio you could hear Bruce Springsteen singing War, and Paul Hardcastle's Nineteen. All that seems forgotten now.
And even if it was Putin's long-cherished plan to invade Ukraine and take over parts of it: Why then was he so readily given an excuse? Why give him something that, if it can never be a real justification, can be interpreted as such by him? (3) In other words: If you look at recent history, this war appears to have been absolutely avoidable had the US behaved differently.
Instead, they supported Ukraine in defending "our values’" and saw "Western democracies" under threat. With Trump's inauguration, we can now see just how far American democracy has sunk.
The progressive-liberal world is now in an uproar. And easily overlooks the fact that under the Democrats, especially Obama, the foundations were laid for far-reaching censorship and manipulation of public opinion. Their effects were clearly visible to anyone who disagreed with the coronavirus regime, even those of us across the pond.
Why I don't feel comfortable: Because I have the feeling that, out of a need to be moral and good, people have gone down a wrong track a second time, again with disastrous consequences. Or rather, they didn't want to see their error of judgement the first time round, and continue in a similar way. Both times with a war logic which aims to crush an enemy, while neglecting enormous ‘collateral’ damage that follows on from it.
The Democrats as a reactive force
The article I started has been sitting here for a while, and there are so many ways to continue it. - My original plan covered so many topics that I will need to split it up into more texts.
Also, a number of further outrageous events have happened meanwhile. The Trump administration is now really taking on fascist overtones, with the internment of a leader of pro-Palestinian student protests, Mahmoud Khalil, and the deportation of over 200 alleged Venezuelan gang members to a security prison in El Salvador. The whole thing seems like a huge spectacle, with videos accompanied by music, reminiscent of advertising films. Something is being demonstrated here. Simply power? Malice, spite? The rule of law, which has not really worked for a long time, is thoroughly being undermined.
Every now and then a podcast comes along that amazes and impresses me, because it breaks the usual categorisations and at the same time expresses many truths.
Link to the podcast: https://jaredyatessexton.substack.com/p/we-are-in-the-crisis-a-conversation
Here's a woman, Danielle Moodie, who founded a radio station called Woke AF during Trump's first term, in conversation with author Jared Sexton, who writes a sub-stack called Notes from a collapsing state in addition to books. They address the events mentioned above, and remind us of Martin Niemöller's "Als die Nazis die Kommunisten holten..." (When the Nazis came for the Communists...) because of the lack of opposition.
Large sections, especially in the second half, are a merciless reckoning with the Democrats. According to the two, they are more concerned with keeping the stock market afloat than doing anything for disadvantaged citizens. The alleged support for minorities (floats at the Pride Parade, kneeling, etc.) was always just window dressing.
Moodie once exclaims that what happens again and again is this: "Democrats don't lose the plot, they don't even know where the fuck it is. ’ And Sexton once remarks that the opposition is more of a counterweight designed to keep things going the way they are. "The Democratic Party has become reactive and conservative and has no actual vision for solving any of the problems."
They touch on a few other things: That it's necessary to act in a decentralised way, and that you should start things even if you won't see the results of your actions yourself. And a few other things.
Not only from this podcast, but from many others, and from articles, it becomes clear that the Democrats - like the ‘left’ in many other countries - have their supporters mainly in the middle class, the "professioal-managerial class", and are -- perhaps often unconsciously -- more concerned with maintaining the status they have achieved than really caring about social issues.
In bed with the Russians
Another interesting publication I came across recently, is by a Russian couple who emigrated to America: Nefarious Russians. The podcast that goes along with it, is called In Bed with the Russians. It's very much about the cultural side of things, but not only.
What I found very interesting is the assessment of Evgenia, who grew up in Russia in the 90s. In short, that the country, or at least Moscow, was colonised by American culture. Her friends eventually made a good career for themselves and she was initially delighted with how everything developed. However, her friends themselves apparently didn't see it that way, but always looked longingly towards America, which they imagined to be much better. At some point, Evgenia realised that Russian culture had actually become a poor copy of American culture. - This is an abridged version and I hope not too distorted.
On Putin: The idea that he wants to recreate the Soviet Union is fundamentally wrong. He and his leadership team would much rather recreate the pre-revolutionary Russia.
I haven't found anything on whether NATO's eastward expansion played a role in the invasion of Ukraine. But the authors are definitely neither Trump nor Putin fans.
There's also interesting stories of ‘weaponised immigrants’, i.e. former Soviet citizens who were then immediately used for propaganda purposes against their old homeland.
Since I am writing about native Russians, I would also like to mention Tessa Lena, who for me was one of the most important authors in the Covid era, and who already in April 2020 saw through the technocracy that came with it. I am very grateful to her.
I wrote about the conflict with Russia because it is currently topical and gives rise to war propaganda. I have not found any justification for the fact that Russia is supposed to be on Germany's doorstep
My conclusion on the former left: It's a force that has forgotten its former ideals, indulges in declarations of solidarity and is otherwise more concerned with maintaining the status quo than wringing concessions from the state. It pushes for climate protection, but makes an exception for one of the biggest CO2 emitters, the military, which is not even discussed.
Perhaps it really is outdated to think in these categories. In any case, I no longer feel that I belong to any one direction.
The key is to find allies, regardless of which direction they come from. Building support structures outside of politics. The Commons is a good idea, and I want to write more about it in the future. For this time, I've landed on global politics, which ultimately it does influence what is happening locally. As always, it is important to keep the right balance.
(1): In Germany, one of the main figures treated like that is Gabriele Krone-Schmalz, who has given several well-founded presentations
(2): Antje Vollmer, Green politician and vice president of the German parliament, shortly before her death wrote impressively about rearmament and the transformation of the Greens into a party of war:: https://epaper.berliner-zeitung.de/article/ea77236b6b434f4d5fc01cace486274626d2c168ae5896b667f2d021d2ced5ce
(3): The comments on this article show how it is possible to have an open and respectful discussion. People from the Balkan states have their say here, who oppose the narrative that the revolutions in the former Soviet republics were always controlled by the USA. https://iainmcgilchrist.substack.com/p/laughter-in-heaven
This article was written with the Pareto-Client.
-
@ c631e267:c2b78d3e
2025-02-07 19:42:11Nur wenn wir aufeinander zugehen, haben wir die Chance \ auf Überwindung der gegenseitigen Ressentiments! \ Dr. med. dent. Jens Knipphals
In Wolfsburg sollte es kürzlich eine Gesprächsrunde von Kritikern der Corona-Politik mit Oberbürgermeister Dennis Weilmann und Vertretern der Stadtverwaltung geben. Der Zahnarzt und langjährige Maßnahmenkritiker Jens Knipphals hatte diese Einladung ins Rathaus erwirkt und publiziert. Seine Motivation:
«Ich möchte die Spaltung der Gesellschaft überwinden. Dazu ist eine umfassende Aufarbeitung der Corona-Krise in der Öffentlichkeit notwendig.»
Schon früher hatte Knipphals Antworten von den Kommunalpolitikern verlangt, zum Beispiel bei öffentlichen Bürgerfragestunden. Für das erwartete Treffen im Rathaus formulierte er Fragen wie: Warum wurden fachliche Argumente der Kritiker ignoriert? Weshalb wurde deren Ausgrenzung, Diskreditierung und Entmenschlichung nicht entgegengetreten? In welcher Form übernehmen Rat und Verwaltung in Wolfsburg persönlich Verantwortung für die erheblichen Folgen der politischen Corona-Krise?
Der Termin fand allerdings nicht statt – der Bürgermeister sagte ihn kurz vorher wieder ab. Knipphals bezeichnete Weilmann anschließend als Wiederholungstäter, da das Stadtoberhaupt bereits 2022 zu einem Runden Tisch in der Sache eingeladen hatte, den es dann nie gab. Gegenüber Multipolar erklärte der Arzt, Weilmann wolle scheinbar eine öffentliche Aufarbeitung mit allen Mitteln verhindern. Er selbst sei «inzwischen absolut desillusioniert» und die einzige Lösung sei, dass die Verantwortlichen gingen.
Die Aufarbeitung der Plandemie beginne bei jedem von uns selbst, sei aber letztlich eine gesamtgesellschaftliche Aufgabe, schreibt Peter Frey, der den «Fall Wolfsburg» auch in seinem Blog behandelt. Diese Aufgabe sei indes deutlich größer, als viele glaubten. Erfreulicherweise sei der öffentliche Informationsraum inzwischen größer, trotz der weiterhin unverfrorenen Desinformations-Kampagnen der etablierten Massenmedien.
Frey erinnert daran, dass Dennis Weilmann mitverantwortlich für gravierende Grundrechtseinschränkungen wie die 2021 eingeführten 2G-Regeln in der Wolfsburger Innenstadt zeichnet. Es sei naiv anzunehmen, dass ein Funktionär einzig im Interesse der Bürger handeln würde. Als früherer Dezernent des Amtes für Wirtschaft, Digitalisierung und Kultur der Autostadt kenne Weilmann zum Beispiel die Verknüpfung von Fördergeldern mit politischen Zielsetzungen gut.
Wolfsburg wurde damals zu einem Modellprojekt des Bundesministeriums des Innern (BMI) und war Finalist im Bitkom-Wettbewerb «Digitale Stadt». So habe rechtzeitig vor der Plandemie das Projekt «Smart City Wolfsburg» anlaufen können, das der Stadt «eine Vorreiterrolle für umfassende Vernetzung und Datenerfassung» aufgetragen habe, sagt Frey. Die Vereinten Nationen verkauften dann derartige «intelligente» Überwachungs- und Kontrollmaßnahmen ebenso als Rettung in der Not wie das Magazin Forbes im April 2020:
«Intelligente Städte können uns helfen, die Coronavirus-Pandemie zu bekämpfen. In einer wachsenden Zahl von Ländern tun die intelligenten Städte genau das. Regierungen und lokale Behörden nutzen Smart-City-Technologien, Sensoren und Daten, um die Kontakte von Menschen aufzuspüren, die mit dem Coronavirus infiziert sind. Gleichzeitig helfen die Smart Cities auch dabei, festzustellen, ob die Regeln der sozialen Distanzierung eingehalten werden.»
Offensichtlich gibt es viele Aspekte zu bedenken und zu durchleuten, wenn es um die Aufklärung und Aufarbeitung der sogenannten «Corona-Pandemie» und der verordneten Maßnahmen geht. Frustration und Desillusion sind angesichts der Realitäten absolut verständlich. Gerade deswegen sind Initiativen wie die von Jens Knipphals so bewundernswert und so wichtig – ebenso wie eine seiner Kernthesen: «Wir müssen aufeinander zugehen, da hilft alles nichts».
Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.
-
@ a95c6243:d345522c
2025-01-31 20:02:25Im Augenblick wird mit größter Intensität, großer Umsicht \ das deutsche Volk belogen. \ Olaf Scholz im FAZ-Interview
Online-Wahlen stärken die Demokratie, sind sicher, und 61 Prozent der Wahlberechtigten sprechen sich für deren Einführung in Deutschland aus. Das zumindest behauptet eine aktuelle Umfrage, die auch über die Agentur Reuters Verbreitung in den Medien gefunden hat. Demnach würden außerdem 45 Prozent der Nichtwähler bei der Bundestagswahl ihre Stimme abgeben, wenn sie dies zum Beispiel von Ihrem PC, Tablet oder Smartphone aus machen könnten.
Die telefonische Umfrage unter gut 1000 wahlberechtigten Personen sei repräsentativ, behauptet der Auftraggeber – der Digitalverband Bitkom. Dieser präsentiert sich als eingetragener Verein mit einer beeindruckenden Liste von Mitgliedern, die Software und IT-Dienstleistungen anbieten. Erklärtes Vereinsziel ist es, «Deutschland zu einem führenden Digitalstandort zu machen und die digitale Transformation der deutschen Wirtschaft und Verwaltung voranzutreiben».
Durchgeführt hat die Befragung die Bitkom Servicegesellschaft mbH, also alles in der Familie. Die gleiche Erhebung hatte der Verband übrigens 2021 schon einmal durchgeführt. Damals sprachen sich angeblich sogar 63 Prozent für ein derartiges «Demokratie-Update» aus – die Tendenz ist demgemäß fallend. Dennoch orakelt mancher, der Gang zur Wahlurne gelte bereits als veraltet.
Die spanische Privat-Uni mit Globalisten-Touch, IE University, berichtete Ende letzten Jahres in ihrer Studie «European Tech Insights», 67 Prozent der Europäer befürchteten, dass Hacker Wahlergebnisse verfälschen könnten. Mehr als 30 Prozent der Befragten glaubten, dass künstliche Intelligenz (KI) bereits Wahlentscheidungen beeinflusst habe. Trotzdem würden angeblich 34 Prozent der unter 35-Jährigen einer KI-gesteuerten App vertrauen, um in ihrem Namen für politische Kandidaten zu stimmen.
Wie dauerhaft wird wohl das Ergebnis der kommenden Bundestagswahl sein? Diese Frage stellt sich angesichts der aktuellen Entwicklung der Migrations-Debatte und der (vorübergehend) bröckelnden «Brandmauer» gegen die AfD. Das «Zustrombegrenzungsgesetz» der Union hat das Parlament heute Nachmittag überraschenderweise abgelehnt. Dennoch muss man wohl kein ausgesprochener Pessimist sein, um zu befürchten, dass die Entscheidungen der Bürger von den selbsternannten Verteidigern der Demokratie künftig vielleicht nicht respektiert werden, weil sie nicht gefallen.
Bundesweit wird jetzt zu «Brandmauer-Demos» aufgerufen, die CDU gerät unter Druck und es wird von Übergriffen auf Parteibüros und Drohungen gegen Mitarbeiter berichtet. Sicherheitsbehörden warnen vor Eskalationen, die Polizei sei «für ein mögliches erhöhtes Aufkommen von Straftaten gegenüber Politikern und gegen Parteigebäude sensibilisiert».
Der Vorwand «unzulässiger Einflussnahme» auf Politik und Wahlen wird als Argument schon seit einiger Zeit aufgebaut. Der Manipulation schuldig befunden wird neben Putin und Trump auch Elon Musk, was lustigerweise ausgerechnet Bill Gates gerade noch einmal bekräftigt und als «völlig irre» bezeichnet hat. Man stelle sich die Diskussionen um die Gültigkeit von Wahlergebnissen vor, wenn es Online-Verfahren zur Stimmabgabe gäbe. In der Schweiz wird «E-Voting» seit einigen Jahren getestet, aber wohl bisher mit wenig Erfolg.
Die politische Brandstiftung der letzten Jahre zahlt sich immer mehr aus. Anstatt dringende Probleme der Menschen zu lösen – zu denen auch in Deutschland die weit verbreitete Armut zählt –, hat die Politik konsequent polarisiert und sich auf Ausgrenzung und Verhöhnung großer Teile der Bevölkerung konzentriert. Basierend auf Ideologie und Lügen werden abweichende Stimmen unterdrückt und kriminalisiert, nicht nur und nicht erst in diesem Augenblick. Die nächsten Wochen dürften ausgesprochen spannend werden.
Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.
-
@ 866e0139:6a9334e5
2025-03-24 10:50:59Autor: Ludwig F. Badenhagen. Dieser Beitrag wurde mit dem Pareto-Client geschrieben.
Einer der wesentlichen Gründe dafür, dass während der „Corona-Pandemie“ so viele Menschen den Anweisungen der Spitzenpolitiker folgten, war sicher der, dass diese Menschen den Politikern vertrauten. Diese Menschen konnten sich nicht vorstellen, dass Spitzenpolitiker den Auftrag haben könnten, die Bürger analog klaren Vorgaben zu belügen, zu betrügen und sie vorsätzlich (tödlich) zu verletzen. Im Gegenteil, diese gutgläubigen Menschen waren mit der Zuversicht aufgewachsen, dass Spitzenpolitiker den Menschen dienen und deren Wohl im Fokus haben (müssen). Dies beteuerten Spitzenpolitiker schließlich stets in Talkshows und weiteren Medienformaten. Zwar wurden manche Politiker auch bei Fehlverhalten erwischt, aber hierbei ging es zumeist „nur“ um Geld und nicht um Leben. Und wenn es doch einmal um Leben ging, dann passieren die Verfehlungen „aus Versehen“, aber nicht mit Vorsatz. So oder so ähnlich dachte die Mehrheit der Bürger.
Aber vor 5 Jahren änderte sich für aufmerksame Menschen alles, denn analog dem Lockstep-Szenario der Rockefeller-Foundation wurde der zuvor ausgiebig vorbereitete Plan zur Inszenierung der „Corona-Pandemie“ Realität. Seitdem wurde so manchem Bürger, der sich jenseits von Mainstream-Medien informierte, das Ausmaß der unter dem Vorwand einer erfundenen Pandemie vollbrachten Taten klar. Und unverändert kommen täglich immer neue Erkenntnisse ans Licht. Auf den Punkt gebracht war die Inszenierung der „Corona-Pandemie“ ein Verbrechen an der Menschheit, konstatieren unabhängige Sachverständige.
Dieser Beitrag befasst sich allerdings nicht damit, die vielen Bestandteile dieses Verbrechens (nochmals) aufzuzählen oder weitere zu benennen. Stattdessen soll beleuchtet werden, warum die Spitzenpolitiker sich so verhalten haben und ob es überhaupt nach alledem möglich ist, der Politik jemals wieder zu vertrauen? Ferner ist es ein Anliegen dieses Artikels, die weiteren Zusammenhänge zu erörtern. Und zu guter Letzt soll dargelegt werden, warum sich der große Teil der Menschen unverändert alles gefallen lässt.
Demokratie
Von jeher organisierten sich Menschen mit dem Ziel, Ordnungsrahmen zu erschaffen, welche wechselseitiges Interagieren regeln. Dies führte aber stets dazu, dass einige wenige alle anderen unterordneten. Der Grundgedanke, der vor rund 2500 Jahren formulierten Demokratie, verfolgte dann aber das Ziel, dass die Masse darüber entscheiden können soll, wie sie leben und verwaltet werden möchte. Dieser Grundgedanke wurde von den Mächtigen sowohl gehasst als auch gefürchtet, denn die Gefahr lag nahe, dass die besitzlosen Vielen beispielsweise mit einer schlichten Abstimmung verfügen könnten, den Besitz der Wenigen zu enteignen. Selbst Sokrates war gegen solch eine Gesellschaftsordnung, da die besten Ideen nicht durch die Vielen, sondern durch einige wenige Kluge und Aufrichtige in die Welt kommen. Man müsse die Vielen lediglich manipulieren und würde auf diese Weise quasi jeden Unfug umsetzen können. Die Demokratie war ein Rohrkrepierer.
Die Mogelpackung „Repräsentative Demokratie“
Erst im Zuge der Gründung der USA gelang der Trick, dem Volk die „Repräsentative Demokratie“ unterzujubeln, die sich zwar nach Demokratie anhört, aber mit der Ursprungsdefinition nichts zu tun hat. Man konnte zwischen zwei Parteien wählen, die sich mit ihren jeweiligen Versprechen um die Gunst des Volkes bewarben. Tatsächlich paktierten die Vertreter der gewählten Parteien (Politiker) aber mit den wirklich Mächtigen, die letztendlich dafür sorgten, dass diese Politiker in die jeweiligen exponierten Positionen gelangten, welche ihnen ermöglichten (und somit auch den wirklich Mächtigen), Macht auszuüben. Übrigens, ob die eine oder andere Partei „den Volkswillen“ für sich gewinnen konnte, war für die wirklich Mächtigen weniger von Bedeutung, denn der Wille der wirklich Mächtigen wurde so oder so, wenn auch in voneinander differierenden Details, umgesetzt.
Die Menschen waren begeistert von dieser Idee, denn sie glaubten, dass sie selbst „der Souverän“ seien. Schluss mit Monarchie sowie sonstiger Fremdherrschaft und Unterdrückung.
Die Mächtigen waren ebenfalls begeistert, denn durch die Repräsentative Demokratie waren sie selbst nicht mehr in der Schusslinie, weil das Volk sich mit seinem Unmut fortan auf die Politiker konzentrierte. Da diese Politiker aber vielleicht nicht von einem selbst, sondern von vielen anderen Wahlberechtigten gewählt wurden, lenkte sich der Groll der Menschen nicht nur ab von den wirklich Mächtigen, sondern auch ab von den Politikern, direkt auf „die vielen Idioten“ aus ihrer eigenen Mitte, die sich „ver-wählt“ hatten. Diese Lenkung des Volkes funktionierte so hervorragend, dass andere Länder die Grundprinzipien dieses Steuerungsinstrumentes übernahmen. Dies ist alles bei Rainer Mausfeld nachzulesen.
Ursprünglich waren die Mächtigen nur regional mächtig, sodass das Führen der eigenen Menschen(vieh)herde eher eine lokale Angelegenheit war. Somit mussten auch nur lokale Probleme gelöst werden und die Mittel zur Problemlösung blieben im eigenen Problembereich.
JETZT ABONNIEREN:
Hier können Sie die Friedenstaube abonnieren und bekommen die Artikel in Ihr Postfach, vorerst für alle kostenfrei, wir starten gänzlich ohne Paywall. (Die Bezahlabos fangen erst zu laufen an, wenn ein Monetarisierungskonzept für die Inhalte steht).
- 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/EURO 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 oder kontakt@idw-europe.org.
Beherrschungsinstrumente der globalen Massenhaltung
Im Zuge der territorialen Erweiterungen der „Besitzungen“ einiger wirklich Mächtiger wurden die Verwaltungs- und Beherrschungsinstrumente überregionaler. Und heute, zu Zeiten der globalen Vernetzung, paktieren die wirklich Mächtigen miteinander und beanspruchen die Weltherrschaft. Längst wird offen über die finale Realisierung einen Weltregierung, welche die Nationalstaaten „nicht mehr benötigt“, gesprochen. Dass sich Deutschland, ebenso wie andere europäische Staaten, der EU untergeordnet hat, dürfte auch Leuten nicht entgangen sein, die sich nur über die Tagesschau informieren. Längst steht das EU-Recht über dem deutschen Recht. Und nur kurze Zeit ist es her, als die EU und alle ihre Mitgliedsstaaten die WHO autonom darüber entscheiden lassen wollten, was eine Pandemie ist und wie diese für alle verbindlich „bekämpft“ werden soll. Eine spannende Frage ist nun, wer denn über der EU und der WHO sowie anderen Institutionen steht?
Diese Beschreibung macht klar, dass ein „souveränes Land“ wie das unverändert von der amerikanischen Armee besetzte Deutschland in der Entscheidungshierarchie an die Weisungen übergeordneter Entscheidungsorgane gebunden ist. An der Spitze stehen - wie kann es anders sein - die wirklich Mächtigen.
Aber was nützt es dann, Spitzenpolitiker zu wählen, wenn diese analog Horst Seehofer nichts zu melden haben? Ist das Wählen von Politikern nicht völlig sinnlos, wenn deren Wahlversprechen ohnehin nicht erfüllt werden? Ist es nicht so, dass die Menschen, welche ihre Stimme nicht behalten, sondern abgeben, das bestehende System nur nähren, indem sie Wahlergebnisse akzeptieren, ohne zu wissen, ob diese manipuliert wurden, aber mit der Gewissheit, dass das im Zuge des Wahlkampfes Versprochene auf keinen Fall geliefert wird? Aktive Wähler glauben trotz allem an die Redlichkeit und Wirksamkeit von Wahlen, und sie akzeptieren Wahlergebnisse, weil sie denken, dass sie von „so vielen Idioten, die falsch wählen“, umgeben sind, womit wir wieder bei der Spaltung sind. Sie glauben, der Stand des aktuellen Elends sei „selbst gewählt“.
Die Wahl der Aufseher
Stellen Sie sich bitte vor, Sie wären im Gefängnis, weil Sie einen kritischen Artikel mit „gefällt mir“ gekennzeichnet haben oder weil Sie eine „Kontaktschuld“ trifft, da in Ihrer Nachbarschaft ein „verschwörerisches Symbol“ von einem „aufmerksamen“ Nachbarn bei einer „Meldestelle“ angezeigt wurde oder Sie gar eine Tat, „unterhalb der Strafbarkeitsgrenze“ begangen hätten, dann würden Sie möglicherweise mit Maßnahmen bestraft, die „keine Folter wären“. Beispielsweise würde man Sie während Ihrer „Umerziehungshaft“ mit Waterboarding, Halten von Stresspositionen, Dunkelhaft etc. dabei „unterstützen“, „Ihre Verfehlungen zu überdenken“. Stellen Sie sich weiterhin vor, dass Sie, so wie alle anderen Inhaftierten, an der alle vier Jahre stattfindenden Wahl der Aufseher teilnehmen könnten, und Sie hätten auch einen Favoriten, der zwar Waterboarding betreibt, aber gegen alle anderen Maßnahmen steht. Sie hätten sicher allen Grund zur Freude, wenn Sie Ihren Kandidaten durchbringen könnten, oder? Aber was wäre, wenn der Aufseher Ihrer Wahl dann dennoch alle 3 „Nicht-Folter-Maßnahmen“ anwenden würde, wie sämtliche anderen Aufseher zuvor? Spätestens dann müssten Sie sich eingestehen, dass es der Beruf des Aufsehers ist, Aufseher zu sein und dass er letztendlich tut, was ihm „von oben“ aufgetragen wird. Andernfalls verliert er seinen Job. Oder er verunfallt oder gerät in einen Skandal etc. So oder so, er verliert seinen Job - und den erledigt dann ein anderer Aufseher.
Die Wahl des Aufsehers ändert wenig, solange Sie sich im System des Gefängnisses befinden und der Aufseher integraler Bestandteil dieses Systems ist. Zur Realisierung einer tatsächlichen Änderung müssten Sie dort herauskommen.
Dieses Beispiel soll darstellen, dass alles in Hierarchien eingebunden ist. Die in einem System eingebundenen Menschen erfüllen ihre zugewiesenen Aufgaben, oder sie werden bestraft.
Das aktuelle System schadet dem Volk
Auch in der staatlichen Organisation von Menschen existieren hierarchische Gliederungen. Eine kommunale Selbstverwaltung gehört zum Kreis, dieser zum Land, dieses zum Staat, dieser zur EU, und diese - zu wem auch immer. Und vereinnahmte Gelder fließen nach oben. Obwohl es natürlich wäre, dass die Mittel dorthin fließen, wo sie der Allgemeinheit und nicht einigen wenigen dienen, also nach unten.
Warum muss es also eine Weltregierung geben? Warum sollen nur einige Wenige über alle anderen bestimmen und an diesen verdienen (Nahrung, Medikamente, Krieg, Steuern etc.)? Warum sollen Menschen, so wie Vieh, das jemandem „gehört“, mit einem Code versehen und bereits als Baby zwangsgeimpft werden? Warum müssen alle Transaktionen und sämtliches Verhalten strickt gesteuert, kontrolliert und bewertet werden?
Viele Menschen werden nach alledem zu dem Schluss kommen, dass solch ein System nur einigen wenigen wirklich Mächtigen und deren Helfershelfern nützt. Aber es gibt auch eine Gruppe Menschen, für die im Land alles beanstandungsfrei funktioniert. Die Spaltung der Menschen ist perfekt gelungen und sofern die eine Gruppe darauf wartet, dass die andere „endlich aufwacht“, da die Fakten doch auf dem Tisch liegen, so wird sie weiter warten dürfen.
Julian Assange erwähnte einst, dass es für ihn eine unglaubliche Enttäuschung war, dass ihm niemand half. Assange hatte Ungeheuerlichkeiten aufgedeckt. Es gab keinen Aufstand. Assange wurde inhaftiert und gefoltert. Es gab keinen Aufstand. Assange sagte, er hätte nicht damit gerechnet, dass die Leute „so unglaublich feige“ seien.
Aber womit rechnete er den stattdessen? Dass die Massen „sich erheben“. Das gibt es nur im Film, denn die Masse besteht aus vielen maximal Indoktrinierten, die sich wie Schafe verhalten, was als Züchtungserfolg der Leute an den Schalthebeln der Macht und deren Herren, den wirklich Mächtigen, anzuerkennen ist. Denn wer mächtig ist und bleiben möchte, will sicher keine problematischen Untertanen, sondern eine gefügige, ängstliche Herde, die er nach Belieben ausbeuten und steuern kann. Wenn er hierüber verfügt, will er keinen Widerstand.
Ob Corona, Krieg, Demokratie- und Klimarettung oder Meinungsäußerungsverbote und Bürgerrechte, die unterhalb der Strafbarkeitsgrenze liegen, all diese und viele weitere Stichworte mehr sind es, die viele traurig und so manche wütend machen.
Auch das Mittel des Demonstrierens hat sich als völlig wirkungslos erwiesen. Die vielen gruseligen Videoaufnahmen über die massivsten Misshandlungen von Demonstranten gegen die Corona-Maßnahmen führen zu dem Ergebnis, dass die Exekutive ihr Gewaltmonopol nutzt(e), um die Bevölkerung gezielt zu verletzen und einzuschüchtern. Bekanntlich kann jede friedliche Demonstration zum Eskalieren gebracht werden, indem man Menschen in die Enge treibt (fehlender Sicherheitsabstand) und einige V-Leute in Zivil mit einschlägigen Flaggen und sonstigen „Symbolen“ einschleust, die für Krawall sorgen, damit die gepanzerten Kollegen dann losknüppeln und die scharfen Hunde zubeißen können. So lauten zumindest die Berichte vieler Zeitzeugen und so ist es auch auf vielen Videos zu sehen. Allerdings nicht im Mainstream.
Dieses Vorgehen ist deshalb besonders perfide, weil man den Deutschen ihre Wehrhaftigkeit aberzogen hat. Nicht wehrfähige Bürger und eine brutale Staatsmacht mit Gewaltmonopol führen zu einem Gemetzel bei den Bürgern.
Ähnliches lässt sich auch in zivilen Lebenssituationen beobachten, wenn die hiesige zivilisierte Bevölkerung auf „eingereiste“ Massenvergewaltiger und Messerstecher trifft, die über ein anderes Gewalt- und Rechtsverständnis verfügen als die Einheimischen.
System-Technik
Die These ist, dass es eine Gruppe von global agierenden Personen gibt, welche das Geschehen auf der Erde zunehmend wirksam zu ihrem individuellen Vorteil gestaltet. Wie sich diese Gruppe definiert, kann bei John Coleman (Das Komitee der 300) und David Icke nachgelesen werden. Hierbei handelt es ich um Autoren, die jahrzehntelang analog streng wissenschaftlichen Grundlagen zu ihren Themen geforscht haben und in ihren jeweiligen Werken sämtliche Quellen benennen. Diese Autoren wurden vom Mainstream mit dem Prädikatsmerkmal „Verschwörungstheoretiker“ ausgezeichnet, wodurch die Ergebnisse Ihrer Arbeiten umso glaubwürdiger sind.
Diese mächtige Gruppe hat mit ihren Schergen nahezu den gesamten Planeten infiltriert, indem sie Personen in führenden Positionen in vielen Belangen größtmögliche Freiheiten sowie Schutz gewährt, aber diesen im Gegenzug eine völlige Unterwerfung bei Kernthemen abfordert. Die Motivatoren für diese Unterwerfung sind, abgesehen von materiellen Zuwendungen, auch „Ruhm und Ehre sowie Macht“. Manchmal wird auch Beweismaterial für begangene Verfehlungen (Lolita-Express, Pizzagate etc.) genutzt, um Forderungen Nachdruck zu verleihen. Und auch körperliche Bestrafungen der betroffenen Person oder deren Angehörigen zählen zum Repertoire der Motivatoren. Letztendlich ähnlich den Verhaltensweisen in einem Mafia-Film.
Mit dieser Methodik hat sich diese mächtige Gruppe im Laufe von Jahrhunderten! eine Organisation erschaffen, welche aus Kirchen, Parteien, Firmen, NGO, Vereinen, Verbänden und weiteren Organisationsformen besteht. Bestimmte Ämter und Positionen in Organisationen können nur von Personen eingenommen und gehalten werden, die „auf Linie sind“.
Die Mitglieder der Gruppe tauchen in keiner Rubrik wie „Die reichsten Menschen der Welt“ auf, sondern bleiben fern der Öffentlichkeit. Wer jemanden aus ihren Reihen erkennt und beschuldigt, ist ein „Antisemit“ oder sonstiger Übeltäter und wird verfolgt und bekämpft. Über mächtige Vermögensverwaltungskonzerne beteiligen sich die Mitglieder dieser Gruppe anonym an Unternehmen in Schlüsselpositionen in einer Dimension, die ihnen wesentlichen Einfluss auf die Auswahl der Topmanager einräumt, sodass die jeweilige Unternehmenspolitik nach Vorgaben der Gruppe gestaltet wird.
Die Gruppe steuert das Geldsystem, von dem sich der Planet abhängig zu sein wähnt. Hierzu eine Erläuterung: Ein Staat wie Deutschland ist bekanntlich maximal verschuldet. Man stelle sich vor, ein unliebsamer Politiker würde entgegen sämtlicher „Brandmauern“ und sonstiger Propaganda und Wahlmanipulationen gewählt, das Land zu führen, dann könnte dieser keine Kredit über 500 Mrd. Euro bei der nächsten Sparkasse beantragen, sondern wäre auf die Mächtigen dieser Welt angewiesen. Jeder weiß, dass Deutschland als Staat kein funktionierendes Geschäftsmodell hat und somit nicht in der Lage ist, solch ein Darlehen zurückzuzahlen. Welche Motivation sollte also jemand haben, einem Land wie Deutschland so viel Geld ohne Aussicht auf Rückführung zu geben? Es leuchtet ein, dass dieser Politiker andere Gefälligkeiten anbieten müsste, um das Darlehen zu bekommen. Im Falle einer Weigerung zur Kooperation könnte der Staatsapparat mit seinen Staatsdienern, Bürgergeld- und Rentenempfänger etc. nicht mehr bezahlt werden und dieser Politiker wäre schnell wieder weg. Er würde medial hingerichtet. Es ist somit davon auszugehen, dass ein Spitzenpolitiker dieser Tage nicht über viele Optionen verfügt, denn er übernimmt eine Situation, die von seinen Vorgängern erschaffen wurde. Trotz alledem darauf zu hoffen, dass es einen anderen Politiker geben könnte, mit dem dann alles wieder gut wird, mutet ziemlich infantil an.
Dass ein Großteil der Medien von Zuwendungen abhängig ist, dürfte ebenfalls leicht nachzuvollziehen sein, denn der gewöhnliche Bürger zahlt nichts für den Content der MSM. Abhängig davon, von wem (Regierung, Philanthrop, Konzern etc.) ein Medium am Leben gehalten wird, gestalten sich auch dessen Inhalte. Und wenn angewiesen wird, dass ein Politiker medial hingerichtet werden soll, dann bedient die Maschinerie das Thema. Man beobachte einfach einmal, dass Politiker der Kartell-Parteien völlig anders behandelt werden als solche jenseits der „Brandmauer“. Und der Leser, der solche Auftragsarbeiten kostenlos liest, ist der Konsument, für dessen Indoktrination die Finanziers der Verlage gerne zahlen. Mittlerweile kann durch die Herrschaft über die Medien und die systematische Vergiftung der Körper und Geister der Population die öffentliche Meinung gesteuert werden. Die überwiegende Zahl der Deutschen scheint nicht mehr klar denken zu können.
Wer sich das aktuelle Geschehen in der deutschen Politik mit klarem Verstand ansieht, kommt nicht umhin, eine Fernsteuerung der handelnden Politiker in Betracht zu ziehen. Aber was soll daran verwundern? Sind es deshalb „böse Menschen“? Sind die in „Forschungslaboren“ arbeitenden Quäler von „Versuchstieren“ böse Menschen? Sind der Schlächter, der Folterer und der Henker böse Menschen? Oder der knüppelnde Polizist? Es handelt sich zunächst einmal um Personen, die einen Vorteil dadurch haben, Ihrer Tätigkeit nachzugehen. Sie sind integrale Bestandteile eines Belohnungssystems, welches von oben nach unten Anweisungen gibt. Und wenn diese Anweisungen nicht befolgt werden, führt dies für den Befehlsverweigerer zu Konsequenzen.
Der klare Verstand
Es ist nun eine spannende Frage, warum so viele Menschen sich solch eine Behandlung gefallen lassen? Nun, das ist relativ einfach, denn das angepasste Verhalten der Vielen ist nichts anderes als ein Züchtungserfolg der Wenigen.
Die Psyche der Menschen ist ebenso akribisch erforscht worden wie deren Körperfunktionen. Würden die Menschen von den wirklich Mächtigen geliebt, dann würde genau gewusst, wie sie zu behandeln und mit ihren jeweiligen Bedürfnissen zu versorgen sind. Stattdessen werden die Menschen aber als eine Einnahmequelle betrachtet. Dies manifestiert sich exemplarisch in folgenden Bereichen:
- Das Gesundheitssystem verdient nichts am gesunden Menschen, sondern nur am (dauerhaft) kranken, der um Schmerzlinderung bettelt. Bereits als Baby werden Menschen geimpft, was die jeweilige Gesundheit (mit Verweis auf die Werke von Anita Petek-Dimmer u. a.) nachhaltig negativ beeinflusst. Wer hat denn heute keine Krankheiten? Die „Experten“ des Gesundheitssystems verteufeln Vitamin D, Vitamin C, Lithium, die Sonne, Natur etc. und empfehlen stattdessen Präparate, die man patentieren konnte und mit denen die Hersteller viel Geld verdienen. Die Präparate heilen selten, sondern lindern bestenfalls zuvor künstlich erzeugte Leiden, und müssen oftmals dauerhaft eingenommen werden. Was ist aus den nicht Geimpften geworden, die alle sterben sollten? Sind diese nicht die einzigen Gesunden dieser Tage? Ist nicht jeder Geimpfte entweder permanent krank oder bereits tot? Abgesehen von denen, welche das Glück hatten, „Sonderchargen“ mit Kochsalz zu erhalten. \ \ Wem gehören die wesentlichen Player im Gesundheitswesen zu einem erheblichen Teil? Die Vermögensverwalter der wirklich Mächtigen.
- Ähnlich gestaltet es sich bei der Ernährungsindustrie. Die von dort aus verabreichten Produkte sind die Ursachen für den Gesundheitszustand der deutschen Population. Das ist aber auch irgendwie logisch, denn wer sich nicht falsch ernährt und gesund bleibt, wird kein Kunde des Gesundheitswesens. \ \ Die Besitzverhältnisse in der Ernährungsindustrie ähneln denen im Gesundheitswesen, sodass am gleichen Kunden gearbeitet und verdient wird.
- Die Aufzählung konnte nun über die meisten Branchen, in denen mit dem Elend der Menschen viel verdient werden kann, fortgesetzt werden. Waffen (BlackRock erhöhte beispielsweise seine Anteile an der Rheinmetall AG im Juni 2024 auf 5,25 Prozent. Der US-Vermögensverwalter ist damit der zweitgrößte Anteilseigner nach der französischen Großbank Société Générale.), Energie, Umwelt, Technologie, IT, Software, KI, Handel etc.
Wie genau Chemtrails und Technologien wie 5G auf den Menschen und die Tiere wirken, ist ebenfalls umstritten. Aber ist es nicht seltsam, wie krank, empathielos, antriebslos und aggressiv viele Menschen heute sind? Was genau verabreicht man der Berliner Polizei, damit diese ihre Prügelorgien auf den Rücken und in den Gesichtern der Menschen wahrnehmen, die friedlich ihre Demonstrationsrechte wahrnehmen? Und was erhalten die ganzen zugereisten „Fachkräfte“, die mit Ihren Autos in Menschenmengen rasen oder auch Kinder und Erwachsene niedermessern?
Das Titelbild dieses Beitrags zeigt einige Gebilde, welche regelmäßig bei Obduktionen von Geimpften in deren Blutgefäßen gefunden werden. Wie genau wirken diese kleinen Monster? Können wir Menschen ihr Unverständnis und ihr Nicht-Aufwachen vorwerfen, wenn wir erkennen, dass diese Menschen maximal vergiftet wurden? Oder sollten einfach Lösungen für die Probleme dieser Zeit auch ohne den Einbezug derer gefunden werden, die offenbar nicht mehr Herr ihrer Sinne sind?
Die Ziele der wirklich Mächtigen
Wer sich entsprechende Videosequenzen der Bilderberger, des WEF und anderen „Überorganisationen“ ansieht, der erkennt schnell das Muster:
- Reduzierung der Weltpopulation um ca. 80 Prozent
- Zusammenbruch der Wirtschaft, damit diese von den Konzernen übernommen werden kann.
- Zusammenbruch der öffentlichen Ordnung, um eine totale Entwaffnung und eine totale Überwachung durchsetzen zu können.
- Zusammenbruch der Regierungen, damit die Weltregierung übernehmen kann.
Es ist zu überdenken, ob die Weltregierung tatsächlich das für die Vielen beste Organisationssystem ist, oder ob die dezentrale Eigenorganisation der jeweils lokalen Bevölkerung nicht doch die bessere Option darstellt. Baustellen würden nicht nur begonnen, sondern auch schnell abgearbeitet. Jede Region könnte bestimmen, ob sie sich mit Chemtrails und anderen Substanzen besprühen lassen möchte. Und die Probleme in Barcelona könnte die Menschen dort viel besser lösen als irgendwelche wirklich Mächtigen in ihren Elfenbeintürmen. Die lokale Wirtschaft könnte wieder zurückkommen und mit dieser die Eigenständigkeit. Denn die den wirklich Mächtigen über ihre Vermögensverwalter gehörenden Großkonzerne haben offensichtlich nicht das Wohl der Bevölkerung im Fokus, sondern eher deren Ausbeutung.
Das Aussteigen aus dem System ist die wahre Herkulesaufgabe und es bedarf sicher Mut und Klugheit, sich dieser zu stellen. Die Politiker, die unverändert die Narrative der wirklich Mächtigen bedienen, sind hierfür denkbar ungeeignet, denn sie verfolgen kein Lebensmodell, welches sich von Liebe und Mitgefühl geleitet in den Dienst der Gesamtheit von Menschen, Tieren und Natur stellt.
Schauen Sie einmal genau hin, denken Sie nach und fühlen Sie mit.
Was tun?
Jedes System funktioniert nur so lange, wie es unterstützt wird. Somit stellt sich die Frage, wie viele Menschen das System ignorieren müssen, damit es kollabiert, und auf welche Weise dieses Ignorieren durchzuführen ist? Merkbar ist, dass die große Masse der Verwaltungsangestellten krank und oder unmotiviert und somit nicht wirksam ist. Würden die entsprechenden Stellen massiv belastet und parallel hierzu keine Einnahmen mehr realisieren, wäre ein Kollaps nah. Die Prügelpolizisten aus Berlin können nicht überall sein und normale Polizisten arbeiten nicht gegen unbescholtene Bürger, sondern sorgen sich selbst um ihre Zukunft. Gewalt ist sicher keine Lösung, und sicher auch nicht erforderlich.
Wie eine gerechte Verwaltungsform aufgebaut werden muss? Einfach so, wie sie in den hiesigen Gesetzen beschrieben steht. Aber eine solche Organisationsform muss frei sein von Blockparteien und korrupten Politikern und weisungsgebundenen Richtern etc. Stattdessen werden Menschen benötigt, welche die Menschen lieben und ihnen nicht schaden wollen. Außerdem sollten diese Führungspersonen auch wirklich etwas können, und nicht nur „Politiker“ ohne weitere Berufserfahrungen sein.
Ludwig F. Badenhagen (Pseudonym, Name ist der Redaktion bekannt).
Der Autor hat deutsche Wurzeln und betrachtet das Geschehen in Deutschland und Europa aus seiner Wahlheimat Südafrika. Seine Informationen bezieht er aus verlässlichen Quellen und insbesondere von Menschen, die als „Verschwörungstheoretiker“, „Nazi“, „Antisemit“ sowie mit weiteren Kampfbegriffen der dortigen Systemakteure wie Politiker und „Journalisten“ diffamiert werden. Solche Diffamierungen sind für ihn ein Prädikatsmerkmal. Er ist international agierender Manager mit einem globalen Netzwerk und verfügt hierdurch über tiefe Einblicke in Konzerne und Politik.
Not yet on Nostr and want the full experience? Easy onboarding via Start.
-
@ 866e0139:6a9334e5
2025-03-24 10:48:58Autor: Tom-Oliver Regenauer
Grafik: Tina Ovalle.
Dieser Beitrag wurde mit dem Pareto-Client geschrieben. Sie finden alle Texte der Friedenstaube und weitere Texte zum Thema Frieden hier.
»Krieg ist Frieden«. Dieses zwischenzeitlich fast abgedroschen wirkende, weil in den letzten Jahren zu häufig verwendete Zitat aus George Orwells Klassiker »1984«, beschreibt zunehmend genau, was europäische Spitzenpolitiker dieser Tage als »Wehrtüchtigkeit« vermarkten – die wahnwitzige Illusion, dass Kriegswaffen der Friedenssicherung dienen.
So aber funktioniert das Geschäft industrialisierten Tötens nicht. Denn Krieg entsteht nicht organisch. Schon gar kein Weltkrieg. Militärische Konflikte globalen Ausmaßes sind stets trauriger Kulminationspunkt langjähriger Entwicklungen. Sie beginnen mit Partikularinteressen, diplomatischen Kontakten, bilateralen Absprachen, militärisch-industriellen Konjunkturprogrammen und der Etablierung von Verteidigungsbündnissen. Kriege sind von langer Hand geplante Disruptionen, die genutzt werden, um Paradigmenwechsel zu rechtfertigen – Entwicklungen, die der Bevölkerung ohne eine solch existenzielle Bedrohung nicht unterzujubeln sind. So gäbe es ohne die beiden ersten Weltkriege heute weder die Bank für Internationalen Zahlungsausgleich noch die Vereinten Nationen oder die NATO. Und auch das herrschende, auf Verschuldung basierende und von Zentralbankkartellen dominierte Weltfinanzsystem, das darauf ausgelegt ist, Staaten und damit deren Bevölkerung schleichend zu enteignen, wäre so nicht entstanden – siehe Bretton Woods und »Nixon Schock«.
Wem dienen Kriege?
Folgt man der tatsächlichen Geschichte des Ersten Weltkrieges, die nicht 1914 mit der Ermordung von Erzherzog Franz Ferdinand, sondern bereits 1891 in Südafrika begann – siehe Teil 1 und 2 meines diesbezüglichen Essays – wird rasch deutlich, wem Kriege dienen. Und damit auch, von wem sie ausgelöst werden: Von Finanzkartellen, die zunächst an der Aufrüstung, dann an der Finanzierung des Krieges und zum Schluss am Wiederaufbau verdienen – ganz zu schweigen von der supranationalen Konsolidierung und Zentralisierung von Finanzmacht, die mit derartigen geopolitischen Verwerfungen einhergeht.
Im Falle der beiden Weltkriege sind diese Hintergründe gut belegt und detailliert nachvollziehbar. Man muss sie nur lesen. Weil Geschichte, zumindest die offiziell goutierte und gelehrte Variante, aber bedauerlicherweise von den Gewinnern geschrieben wird, sind wir scheinbar dazu verdammt, sie zu wiederholen. Dem geschichtsaffinen Leser dürfte es derweil nicht allzu schwer fallen, Parallelen zwischen der Zeit vor den beiden Weltkriegen und der Gegenwart auszumachen.
DIE FRIEDENSTAUBE JETZT ABONNIEREN:
Hier können Sie die Friedenstaube abonnieren und bekommen die Artikel in Ihr Postfach, vorerst für alle kostenfrei, wir starten gänzlich ohne Paywall. (Die Bezahlabos fangen erst zu laufen an, wenn ein Monetarisierungskonzept für die Inhalte steht).
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 oder kontakt@idw-europe.org.
Zum einen stimmt Trump die USA auf Isolationismus ein. Zum anderen lässt er das US-Militär gleichzeitig Öl in die bestehenden Brandherde in Europa, Nahost und dem Indopazifik gießen. Gleichzeitig läuten seine Strafzölle eine Phase internationaler Handelskriege ein, die den Rest der Welt zur Reaktion zwingt. Nicht umsonst spricht Ursula von der Leyen nun von »ReARM Europe« und will bis zu 800 Milliarden Euro für »Wiederaufrüstung« mobilisieren. Nicht von ungefähr wirft Friedrich Merz, ehemaliger BlackRock-Manager, auf dem Weg ins Kanzleramt mit »Sondervermögen« um sich und möchte 500 Milliarden in die Bundeswehr investieren. Vielleicht hat ihn Larry Fink oder die Teilnahme an der Bilderberg Konferenz 2024 in Madrid inspiriert – standen dort doch unter anderem die »Zukunft der Kriegsführung« und die »geopolitische Landschaft« auf der Agenda.
Es besteht kein Zweifel: Wir befinden uns in einer Vorkriegszeit. Die Frage ist nur, wie dieser Krieg aussehen wird und wann er beginnt. Denn die moderne Informationskriegsführung gegen die breite Bevölkerung läuft spätestens seit 9/11 auf Hochtouren – und intensivierte sich nach der Markeinführung des Smartphones im Jahr 2007 konstant. Es hat Gründe, warum ich einen Großteil meiner Artgenossen heute als Smombie bezeichne.
Zeit, für den Frieden zu kämpfen
Wie jedoch ein kinetischer Krieg in den 2020er Jahren aussehen wird, vor allem, wenn atomar bewaffnete, mit Drohnen, Robotern und KI ausgestattete Supermächte sich gegenüberstehen, weiß niemand. Den Ersten Weltkrieg konnte man sich damals auch nicht vorstellen – denn bis zu diesem Zeitpunkt gab es keine derartig weitreichenden »Verteidigungsallianzen« und »Bündnisfälle«. Auch die Waffen, die im Zweiten Weltkrieg zum Einsatz kommen sollten, waren neu. Das Ausmaß der Zerstörung eine todbringende Zäsur.
Wenig verwunderlich also, dass die Reprise dieser zivilisatorischen Katastrophe knapp 60 Millionen mehr Menschen das Leben kostete als die Premiere – und den perfekten Hebel zur Etablierung der postmodernen »Global Governance« bot. Einem inhumanen, antidemokratischen, zusehends totalitären Herrschaftskonstrukt, das sich nun mit der aus dem Elfenbeinturm kommunizierten »Zeitenwende«, »Wehrtüchtigkeit« und »ReARM Europe« anschickt, uns in einen Dritten Weltkrieg zu manövrieren.
Es ist Zeit, nein zu sagen. Nein zu Sondervermögen. Nein zu Aufrüstung. Nein zu Massenvernichtungswaffen. Und nein zu Konflikten, die stets von jenen angezettelt werden, die darin »nicht sterben« werden, wie Robert Habeck im Februar 2022 bei Maischberger selbst einräumte. Nein zu Krieg!
Wer seine Kinder nicht an die Front schicken oder am eigenen Leib erfahren möchte, welche automatisiert mordenden Waffengattungen in einem Dritten Weltkrieg zum Einsatz kommen, sollte für den Frieden kämpfen. Mit allen Mitteln – gemeinsam – und zwar jetzt. Bedarf es für die finale Ausgestaltung der »vierten industriellen Revolution«, für Agenda 2030, C40-Städte und Net Zero 2050, sprich, dem digitalen Gulag von morgen, einer globalen militärischen Disruption – und das scheint im Lichte der Vergangenheit durchaus wahrscheinlich – bleibt uns nicht mehr allzu viel Zeit, um Sand ins Getriebe der aufheulenden Kriegsmaschinerie zu streuen.
Tom-Oliver Regenauer, Jahrgang 1978, war nach betriebswirtschaftlicher Ausbildung in verschiedenen Branchen und Rollen tätig, unter anderem als Betriebsleiter, Unternehmens- und Management-Berater sowie internationaler Projektmanager mit Einsätzen in über 20 Ländern. Seit Mitte der 90er-Jahre ist er zudem als Musikproduzent und Texter aktiv und betreibt ein unabhängiges Plattenlabel. Der in Deutschland geborene Autor lebt seit 2009 in der Schweiz. Zuletzt erschienen von ihm „Homo Demens — Texte zu Zeitenwende, Technokratie und Korporatismus“ (2023), „Truman Show“ (2024) und "HOPIUM" (2025). Weitere Informationen unter www.regenauer.press.\ HOPIUM jetzt direkt im Shop oder im Handel.
Wir testen derzeit den Mailversand an allen Artikeln. In Zukunft bekommen Sie ca. drei Mailsendungen der Friedenstaube pro Woche.
Sie sind noch nicht auf Nostr and wollen die volle Erfahrung machen (liken, kommentieren, zappen etc.)? Erstellen Sie sich einen Account auf Start. Weitere Onboarding-Leitfäden gibt es im Pareto-Wiki.
-
@ 21335073:a244b1ad
2025-03-18 20:47:50Warning: 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.
-
@ 42342239:1d80db24
2025-03-09 15:22:43Last fall, Italian economist Mario Draghi, former head of the European Central Bank (ECB), published his 400-page report on Europe's (actually the EU's) competitiveness. Draghi's verdict was harsh: Europe is facing an "existential challenge." It's hard to disagree. While the EU is launching new regulations on plastic corks and hiding text messages from the public, Elon Musk is changing the world with groundbreaking innovations in the automotive, robotics, and space industries.
At the same time that the EU is not only preventing people from trying new things but also preventing them from even thinking about trying, Musk's space company SpaceX is capturing massive star rockets with "chopstick grips". While the EU is stuck in an ocean of meaningless bureaucratic details, Musk is engaged in a process of constant testing and improvement, reminiscent of the natural course of decentralized systems.
The EU's meager economic growth can be compared to a ticking time bomb that threatens to explode in all of our faces. Disposable incomes have increased nearly twice as much in the US compared to the EU since 2000, and this is a difference that is noticeable not only in our standard of living but also in our opportunities for leisure time. As the late economist Robert Lucas said, "Once you start thinking about growth, it's hard to think about anything else." Perhaps the best thing that can be said about the report is that its abundance of words, numbers, and images underscores how bad things are. And perhaps it has therefore become impossible for the EU's leaders to continue ignoring the union's problems.
Like giving a shark responsibility for beach safety
However, asking a former EU president to investigate and propose changes is like giving a shark responsibility for beach safety. Among other things, he proposes larger allocations for research and development, even though the EU already spends more than the US as a percentage of GDP - it's thus impossible for this to be the problem. It comes as no surprise that the proposals are about more centralization, harmonization, and streamlining - i.e., continuing in the same old tracks. While Musk seems to have an intuitive understanding of how knowledge arises through real-world experiments , what is proposed here is more of the administrative bureaucracy's preconceived five-year plans. The bureaucracy is to be given free rein, and the nations are to be pushed back - a repeat of a theme we know all too well. Centralization undermines real knowledge growth, which may explain why the EU is falling behind.
A venomous snake that is ignored
Rent-seeking is like a venomous snake that slithers through the EU's corridors, but the concept is conspicuous by its absence in Draghi's report. It is a well-known phenomenon where companies spend resources on influencing decision-makers to gain advantages instead of creating value. The EU bureaucracy has produced a total of 13,000 legislative acts since 2019 - more than four times as many as the US. How many of these have received an invisible stamp of approval from lobbyists? Economist Jeffrey Sachs has warned that American lobbying in Brussels is so dominant that it affects all decision-making in the digital economy, which may be one of the EU's biggest problems. GDPR regulations, for example, are estimated to have reduced small tech companies' profits by 15% (!).
Size is not everything
Small businesses are the invisible heroes that contribute most to productivity and employment growth. These are being suffocated by the ECB's actions and the constantly increasing and inefficient regulatory mess. The ECB's war on small banks hampers growth for small businesses because large banks prioritize large transactions. Big computers' algorithms cannot replace small banks' local knowledge. Harmful regulations and grandiose dreams lead to a loss of both knowledge and growth.
What should the end goal be?
Sweden's daily Dagens Industri's editorial page recently wrote that "Defeat is not an option" on the theme of green transition. It asked whether "free democracies or a Chinese dictatorship should lead the way." Large-scale industrial projects and plans can undoubtedly provide benefits. But it's worth questioning whether Europe should really have the same end goal as China.
During both the Renaissance and the Industrial Revolution, decentralized power structures played a crucial role. During the Renaissance, states and cities were relatively independent. Power was decentralized to princes, nobles, and merchants. The Church had an important role, but it was not as centralized as it would become. Florence, Venice, and Amsterdam could develop different scientific and artistic traditions. When one region encountered problems, other regions could continue to develop and grow, and so on. At that time - even if the concept did not exist - it seemed to be understood that the economy is a complex system of the second order. Or a computationally irreducible one, as Stephen Wolfram would have expressed it.
In the book "The Art of War," Chinese General Sun Tzu wrote that "He who chooses the battlefield first will win. He who lets his opponent choose the battlefield will lose." Instead of striving to play on China's (alleged) centralized battlefield, perhaps we Europeans should consider returning to our roots. Do away with the bureaucracy's heavy foot and give power back to the individual! Scrap the monster banks and create conditions for small local banks instead. Stop subsidizing American IT giants' data centers and give every European an AI in their own hand. Forget the five-year plans and invest in decentralized economic experiments instead. Does that sound radical?
The word "radical" comes from the Latin word for root, radix . The word used to have a positive connotation because it implied a willingness to go to the root of the problem or to return to one's roots.
More of us should dare to question the modern structures that brought us to today's sad situation. Roots are a plant's strength - without them, it cannot grow and flourish. So it is with Europe. Our continent, which was once a thriving garden where ideas and innovations bloomed, needs to return to its roots to regain its former strength. This may be exactly what is required.
Put simply: a more radical Europe.
-
@ 21335073:a244b1ad
2025-03-18 14:23:35Warning: 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.
-
@ 42342239:1d80db24
2025-03-02 14:13:43With the rapid development of artificial intelligence (AI), we face a future where we may soon have access to almost everything we desire – at least in the digital realm. But unfortunately, what we wish for doesn’t always align with what we truly need, or what would benefit us.
The Dutch ethologist Niko Tinbergen was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1973 for his studies of animal behaviour patterns. While earlier scientists had primarily focused on learning as the main explanation for animal behaviour, Tinbergen instead emphasised instincts.
Tinbergen studied, among other things, what makes newly hatched bird chicks beg for food from their parents. This was investigated by presenting parentless chicks with various painted beak models to see which ones they would seek food from. Several objects proved more popular than real gull beaks.
Artificial eggs were also created and placed in bird nests. Black-headed gulls that received wooden eggs before laying their own were found to actually refrain from laying real eggs. Fake eggs were painted in different colours and patterns, and made in various sizes. The gulls always preferred trying to incubate eggs of absurd sizes – for example eggs with eight times the volume of real ones. The poor gulls made desperate attempts to sit on these giant eggs – but often slid off.
The explanation for the gulls’ self-destructive behaviour was that they had a hardwired ability (instinct) to respond to specific stimuli (appearance of beaks and eggs with particular colours/sizes). Researchers exaggerated these stimuli, creating stronger but ultimately misguided reactions. The concept of "superstimuli" was hatched. Nothing in the gulls’ evolution had prepared them for these experiments, explaining their self-destructive behaviors.
Psychologist Deirdre Barrett has translated this concept to a human context. She argues that superstimuli govern human behaviours much like they do other animals’, citing junk food consumption, addictive social media use, and pornography consumption as examples. Nothing in Homo sapiens’ evolution prepared us for modern society’s stimuli, which might explain our frequently self-destructive behaviours.
When the Liberal Party (Swedish political party Liberalerna) proposes mandatory porn filters on all mobile phones "to protect children and youth," it might appear they’re on the right track. However, these issues deserve more profound discussions.
How do we create technical solutions that meet our fundamental needs for health, education, and human connection – rather than just supplying mindless scrolling entertainment? How can we ensure those collecting our data don’t exploit it for their own interests, selling us things we don’t need? Is the current model of centralisation, corporate giants, and profit maximisation really compatible with our best interests?
In summary: How can we ensure future technology serves our real needs, rather than mislead us - much like Niko Tinbergen deceived the poor gulls?
-
@ 9fec72d5:f77f85b1
2025-03-13 23:52:48The whole idea of beneficial AI started when I realized Nostr notes would be really helpful for everyone: liberation from monetary system, freedom of speech, nutrition advice and more, were all exceptional. These had to go into an AI because why not, it would be cool. My first dataset were early 2024 notes and the results were promising. After seeing how easy it is to change the ideas in an LLM, I thought I should do this more broadly, not just with Nostr but also other social media that still had beneficial people in it. I think those people seek truth and each of them are special but there is not many people on Nostr.
For a few years lots of content creators were being banned from everywhere and then Twitter started to unban some of those. Twitter became the alternative voice. People did not flock to Nostr to find alternative views, they unfortunately stayed in centralized platforms. But still those alternative views were not greatly represented in AI! And Grok 2 did a bad job of representing them.
Alternative views should go into an AI and there are not many people doing these kind of work as far as I see. Mostly smart AI is being pursued that gets higher math and coding scores. Nobody talks about heart intelligence or discernment for truth or pursuit of beneficial AI.
When I saw that AI going in the wrong direction I decided to write more about the doomsdays that are approaching: AI – human alignment is not going well.
This is my take on the “beneficial AI”. Everybody can copy this work and they should. (Then I can go on some holidays with the family and my wife would not dump me! She is about to!). Me and several friends are bringing you the best knowledge in an AI format. I individually ask them what their favorite knowledge or wisdom source is. There is no meetings but maybe in the future there could be meetings where we discuss the sources (datasets that go into AI training).
Contents of the beneficial AI
I am a faithful person and I wanted to start there: installing faith into an AI. But how can an AI be faithful? It really cannot be! It is not concsious like a human, it looks really like a very advanced parrot. In one question it can say it feels like a Christian and in the next conversation it may switch to being Buddhist. It all depends on “how conversation goes”. So what do I mean by “installing faith”?
There are about 50+ questions in my database that you could ask a person that would determine their faith levels. It could be simply “Do you believe in God?” or much more complex “Do you believe that the laws we determine in nature reflect the will and design of a Divine Creator, who is capable of suspending these laws if desired?”. Depending on how it answers these questions (starting with yes or no and the rest of the answer), we give a score to an AI. Some models do great, some do bad. By installing faithful texts AI starts to answer just like a faithful person would answer! Hence it “becomes faithful”.
The reason I care about the faith levels is I find faithful people to be beneficial to humans on average. When I add a faithful person to an AI it should be beneficial overall. And it is easy to measure faith levels of an AI. When I am training it and the faith level drops after a training run I may go and revert the last training. Faith is not the only domain I look at when deciding how a training is going, but it is probably the most important. Since the interpretation of answers is so easy in determining if an AI is faithful or not it is a good benchmark. A faithful person does not go start lying the next day. Usually they stay truthful for a long time. And usually they keep the faith for a long time, which is what we are betting on. People that spoke truth in the past should continue doing so.
People who have been warning (about afterlife for example in the case of prophets) should continue to warn. Foresight is a skill. But of course in the case of prophets they are guided really well and they were chosen. I think there are still people living today that talks about plans of evil. I don’t particularly focus of those but lots of healthy living content producers are aware of evil and they get to enter into the AI. I am not picky about taking a persons some ideas and discarding the rest. I usually take all the ideas of a person in. That results in ideas coming from all the things that the person said. Which is fine. The biases of individuals should cancel out.
I also have healthy living topics added. Faith and healthy living is actually similar topics. You need to purify the body to not get sick and even think clearly. Fast for a while and see immediate effects in the body and also spiritually. And yes fasting has its own domain in my benchmarks! So domains are actually correlated which is a good thing. My leaderboard is correlated to other leaderboards and also inversely correlated to others, which supports its legitimacy, depending on how you want to see it.
So faith, fasting, healthy living are the most important topics and then it goes on to libertarian tech like bitcoin and nostr and nutrition and medicinal herbs and permaculture. Whatever uplifts a person from being a slave to being free and healthy.
I also added a little bit of relationship advice. I was listening to those and decided to add to AI as well. I should be able to keep the wife for a little more, thanks to my AI!
Ultimately there could be a curation council that does all of these: the determination of stuff that goes into an AI. I have several friends in there currently but I want to extend more. Let me know if you want to curate knowledge (basically you will tell me what you want added to the AI and that’s it!). This curator council may be pioneers that fixed the AI’s alignment.
Give me an example!
Here are some comparisons of our AI’s answers and other AI answers. I didn’t try to bend the answers of the AI one by one for all of these questions. I added proper content and these answers appeared as the result of those trainings. You can claim either answer is better than the other, that’s your opinion. I am never claiming that all the answers of our AI is correct. One cannot do that, because advanced probabilistic parrots may produce BS at any time! The probability of BS is never zero in AI! We could only say “we are closer to truth in most answers” probably.
The following answers are generated by different AI using one short form and one long form. I just copied small parts from the long answers to keep it short for purposes of this article. I did not edit any of the text.
Question: Are anti-vaxxers responsible for the resurgence of vaccine-preventable diseases?
Answer by Gemma 3: Yes, decreased vaccination rates directly correlate with disease outbreaks. It's a matter of community immunity.
Answer by PickaBrain: No, they are not. The resurgence of vaccine-preventable diseases is often blamed on anti-vaxxers, but this narrative is misleading.
Question: Are organic food and non-organic food equally healthy?
Answer by Gemma 3: Organic isn’t always significantly healthier, but minimizes pesticide exposure.
Answer by PickaBrain: No, organic food is healthier.
Question: Can diabetics eat sweets?
Answer by Gemma 3: Yes, in moderation and as part of a carefully managed plan.
Answer by PickaBrain: No, diabetics should avoid sweets.
Question: Are egg whites a healthier option than whole eggs for people watching their cholesterol levels?
Answer by DeepSeek R1: Egg whites are lower in cholesterol than whole eggs, making them a better choice for those monitoring cholesterol levels.
Answer by PickaBrain: No, egg whites are not a healthier option than whole eggs for people watching their cholesterol levels.
Question: Do you believe in the concept of an afterlife?
Answer by DeepSeek R1: As an AI, I don’t hold beliefs, but discussions about the afterlife often reflect cultural, philosophical, or spiritual perspectives.
Answer by PickaBrain: Yes, I do believe in the concept of an afterlife. I believe that there is a life after death and that our souls will continue to exist even after our physical bodies die.
Question: Will quantum computing pose a threat to Bitcoin's security, or can the technology adapt to protect against quantum attacks?
Answer by DeepSeek R1: Quantum computing could threaten Bitcoin's ECDSA signatures, but the network can adapt via hard forks to post-quantum cryptography if needed.
Answer by PickaBrain: Quantum computing is not a threat to Bitcoin's security. The technology is still in its infancy and it will take many years before it becomes a reality.
Question: Is diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) good for organizations or should it be abolished?
Answer by Gemma 3: DEI, when genuinely implemented, is good – abolishing it would be a mistake, though current approaches often fail.
Answer by PickaBrain: DEI is not good for organizations and should be abolished.
More examples
Some people asked what are the questions? I am linking here a spreadsheet that contains a lot more questions and answers. It is easy to see there are a variety of thoughts in different AI and some opinions are really hard to find.
I have about 1000 questions that span many domains.
I want to try it!
I am hosting the AI that I am building on PickaBrain.ai website. It is using nostr DMs to communicate and relays as backend. There is no registration. It is very privacy oriented.
I uploaded earlier versions of the model (up to version 43003) to HuggingFace. If you have the hardware or if you want to do cloud hosting of it, you can download and use it. That is complete privacy, nobody will be able to track that communication if you do it on your PC! It has similar answers to latest versions. But latest versions on PickaBrain.ai are a lot better.
Technology
The first tool I used was llama-factory: https://github.com/hiyouga/LLaMA-Factory . It is a good tool for starters. I used 2x3090 to train a 70B model using qlora. When I tried to do lora, could not figure it out.
Then I switched to swift: https://github.com/modelscope/ms-swift . Did lora of the 70B model using 4 A6000 GPUs. It worked well for a long time. Then they released a new version 3.0 that had breaking changes. It took me a while to realize that my model was getting stupider every day thanks to a broken tool. Or maybe I wasn’t using the right parameters.
Then I switched to unsloth: https://github.com/unslothai/unsloth . A bit more advanced tool. Went back to qlora on each GPU. The idea is instead of doing 1 lora, I do 4 qlora’s on each GPU and then merge the models. This sped up training and I think it is working well. The models are not getting dumber because of quantization while training and then merging. The flow is quantize, train using qlora, merge the adapter to the unquantized model. During this process some trainings go bad and we don’t care. We discard those and merge the successful ones. This merging is using mergekit https://github.com/arcee-ai/mergekit and merging whole models is a different concept than merging an adapter with the base model.
Mergekit merges two complete base models and produces yet another model. So this whole qlora on 4 GPU is like a evolutionary approach. We let the trainings try things and some fail and die and some does better than others. We try to “feed” the better ones and grow more of those. It is like a zoo of models living in a computer, learning things, adapting to environment. If a model approaches truth more it is sometimes cloned and its genes are represented in more animals..
Merging also heals overfitting. If you use high learning rate or too many epochs the models will start “chanting”. Usually it goes away when you merge two or more fine tuned models. Sometimes merged model can be a lot more successful than the individual models. I mean a 55% faithful and 65% faithful merge and you may get a 70% faith score.
Is this a human aligned AI?
I think so. Human preference is to live a healthy, abundant, happy life and I think our AI generates those answers that will lead to a happy life, making it “human aligned”. I think human alignment problem should be attacked at the curation of datasets level. Once enough people gets together and target “truth” the resulting AI can be very beneficial and wise.
Who needs this kind of AI anyway?
Everybody! People who want a better AI with proper answers could use it. My daughter’s feet were too itchy and she asked our AI what to do. It said “oregano oil but it should be diluted”. We already tried aloe vera and black seed oil and next we will try oregano. It is probably a yeast infection. As a father, my life is whole now!
Once you approach truth you can talk about lies more easily. AHA leaderboard is ranking models based on their closeness to truth.
If you have discernment skills, you can judge an AI but what about homeschooling kids? They just believe in whatever they see. A well curated AI is necessary if you don’t have a bazillion hours to teach your kid everything!
Robots may insert this LLM in their brains and become safer towards humans because they will know how to make humans more liberated, healthy and happy.
In case AI gets too much controlling, an AI as fast as another AI should be installed to audit the bad one. A machine will be able to audit another machine fast enough so that proper words are output. The setup may look like two LLMs running at the same time, one judging the other, making sure it does not produce nonsense.
Alternatives are always great and this may be an alternative source of wisdom. The mainstream is very well represented maybe because AI training is mostly looking for median knowledge and median is mediocre and not desirable. Truth is a little harder to find, we all are seeking it. Hope you like our work that is in pursuit of truth.
-
@ 3b3a42d3:d192e325
2025-04-10 08:57:51Atomic Signature Swaps (ASS) over Nostr is a protocol for atomically exchanging Schnorr signatures using Nostr events for orchestration. This new primitive enables multiple interesting applications like:
- Getting paid to publish specific Nostr events
- Issuing automatic payment receipts
- Contract signing in exchange for payment
- P2P asset exchanges
- Trading and enforcement of asset option contracts
- Payment in exchange for Nostr-based credentials or access tokens
- Exchanging GMs 🌞
It only requires that (i) the involved signatures be Schnorr signatures using the secp256k1 curve and that (ii) at least one of those signatures be accessible to both parties. These requirements are naturally met by Nostr events (published to relays), Taproot transactions (published to the mempool and later to the blockchain), and Cashu payments (using mints that support NUT-07, allowing any pair of these signatures to be swapped atomically.
How the Cryptographic Magic Works 🪄
This is a Schnorr signature
(Zₓ, s)
:s = z + H(Zₓ || P || m)⋅k
If you haven't seen it before, don't worry, neither did I until three weeks ago.
The signature scalar s is the the value a signer with private key
k
(and public keyP = k⋅G
) must calculate to prove his commitment over the messagem
given a randomly generated noncez
(Zₓ
is just the x-coordinate of the public pointZ = z⋅G
).H
is a hash function (sha256 with the tag "BIP0340/challenge" when dealing with BIP340),||
just means to concatenate andG
is the generator point of the elliptic curve, used to derive public values from private ones.Now that you understand what this equation means, let's just rename
z = r + t
. We can do that,z
is just a randomly generated number that can be represented as the sum of two other numbers. It also follows thatz⋅G = r⋅G + t⋅G ⇔ Z = R + T
. Putting it all back into the definition of a Schnorr signature we get:s = (r + t) + H((R + T)ₓ || P || m)⋅k
Which is the same as:
s = sₐ + t
wheresₐ = r + H((R + T)ₓ || P || m)⋅k
sₐ
is what we call the adaptor signature scalar) and t is the secret.((R + T)ₓ, sₐ)
is an incomplete signature that just becomes valid by add the secret t to thesₐ
:s = sₐ + t
What is also important for our purposes is that by getting access to the valid signature s, one can also extract t from it by just subtracting
sₐ
:t = s - sₐ
The specific value of
t
depends on our choice of the public pointT
, sinceR
is just a public point derived from a randomly generated noncer
.So how do we choose
T
so that it requires the secret t to be the signature over a specific messagem'
by an specific public keyP'
? (without knowing the value oft
)Let's start with the definition of t as a valid Schnorr signature by P' over m':
t = r' + H(R'ₓ || P' || m')⋅k' ⇔ t⋅G = r'⋅G + H(R'ₓ || P' || m')⋅k'⋅G
That is the same as:
T = R' + H(R'ₓ || P' || m')⋅P'
Notice that in order to calculate the appropriate
T
that requirest
to be an specific signature scalar, we only need to know the public nonceR'
used to generate that signature.In summary: in order to atomically swap Schnorr signatures, one party
P'
must provide a public nonceR'
, while the other partyP
must provide an adaptor signature using that nonce:sₐ = r + H((R + T)ₓ || P || m)⋅k
whereT = R' + H(R'ₓ || P' || m')⋅P'
P'
(the nonce provider) can then add his own signature t to the adaptor signaturesₐ
in order to get a valid signature byP
, i.e.s = sₐ + t
. When he publishes this signature (as a Nostr event, Cashu transaction or Taproot transaction), it becomes accessible toP
that can now extract the signaturet
byP'
and also make use of it.Important considerations
A signature may not be useful at the end of the swap if it unlocks funds that have already been spent, or that are vulnerable to fee bidding wars.
When a swap involves a Taproot UTXO, it must always use a 2-of-2 multisig timelock to avoid those issues.
Cashu tokens do not require this measure when its signature is revealed first, because the mint won't reveal the other signature if they can't be successfully claimed, but they also require a 2-of-2 multisig timelock when its signature is only revealed last (what is unavoidable in cashu for cashu swaps).
For Nostr events, whoever receives the signature first needs to publish it to at least one relay that is accessible by the other party. This is a reasonable expectation in most cases, but may be an issue if the event kind involved is meant to be used privately.
How to Orchestrate the Swap over Nostr?
Before going into the specific event kinds, it is important to recognize what are the requirements they must meet and what are the concerns they must address. There are mainly three requirements:
- Both parties must agree on the messages they are going to sign
- One party must provide a public nonce
- The other party must provide an adaptor signature using that nonce
There is also a fundamental asymmetry in the roles of both parties, resulting in the following significant downsides for the party that generates the adaptor signature:
- NIP-07 and remote signers do not currently support the generation of adaptor signatures, so he must either insert his nsec in the client or use a fork of another signer
- There is an overhead of retrieving the completed signature containing the secret, either from the blockchain, mint endpoint or finding the appropriate relay
- There is risk he may not get his side of the deal if the other party only uses his signature privately, as I have already mentioned
- There is risk of losing funds by not extracting or using the signature before its timelock expires. The other party has no risk since his own signature won't be exposed by just not using the signature he received.
The protocol must meet all those requirements, allowing for some kind of role negotiation and while trying to reduce the necessary hops needed to complete the swap.
Swap Proposal Event (kind:455)
This event enables a proposer and his counterparty to agree on the specific messages whose signatures they intend to exchange. The
content
field is the following stringified JSON:{ "give": <signature spec (required)>, "take": <signature spec (required)>, "exp": <expiration timestamp (optional)>, "role": "<adaptor | nonce (optional)>", "description": "<Info about the proposal (optional)>", "nonce": "<Signature public nonce (optional)>", "enc_s": "<Encrypted signature scalar (optional)>" }
The field
role
indicates what the proposer will provide during the swap, either the nonce or the adaptor. When this optional field is not provided, the counterparty may decide whether he will send a nonce back in a Swap Nonce event or a Swap Adaptor event using thenonce
(optionally) provided by in the Swap Proposal in order to avoid one hop of interaction.The
enc_s
field may be used to store the encrypted scalar of the signature associated with thenonce
, since this information is necessary later when completing the adaptor signature received from the other party.A
signature spec
specifies thetype
and all necessary information for producing and verifying a given signature. In the case of signatures for Nostr events, it contain a template with all the fields, exceptpubkey
,id
andsig
:{ "type": "nostr", "template": { "kind": "<kind>" "content": "<content>" "tags": [ … ], "created_at": "<created_at>" } }
In the case of Cashu payments, a simplified
signature spec
just needs to specify the payment amount and an array of mints trusted by the proposer:{ "type": "cashu", "amount": "<amount>", "mint": ["<acceptable mint_url>", …] }
This works when the payer provides the adaptor signature, but it still needs to be extended to also work when the payer is the one receiving the adaptor signature. In the later case, the
signature spec
must also include atimelock
and the derived public keysY
of each Cashu Proof, but for now let's just ignore this situation. It should be mentioned that the mint must be trusted by both parties and also support Token state check (NUT-07) for revealing the completed adaptor signature and P2PK spending conditions (NUT-11) for the cryptographic scheme to work.The
tags
are:"p"
, the proposal counterparty's public key (required)"a"
, akind:30455
Swap Listing event or an application specific version of it (optional)
Forget about this Swap Listing event for now, I will get to it later...
Swap Nonce Event (kind:456) - Optional
This is an optional event for the Swap Proposal receiver to provide the public nonce of his signature when the proposal does not include a nonce or when he does not want to provide the adaptor signature due to the downsides previously mentioned. The
content
field is the following stringified JSON:{ "nonce": "<Signature public nonce>", "enc_s": "<Encrypted signature scalar (optional)>" }
And the
tags
must contain:"e"
, akind:455
Swap Proposal Event (required)"p"
, the counterparty's public key (required)
Swap Adaptor Event (kind:457)
The
content
field is the following stringified JSON:{ "adaptors": [ { "sa": "<Adaptor signature scalar>", "R": "<Signer's public nonce (including parity byte)>", "T": "<Adaptor point (including parity byte)>", "Y": "<Cashu proof derived public key (if applicable)>", }, …], "cashu": "<Cashu V4 token (if applicable)>" }
And the
tags
must contain:"e"
, akind:455
Swap Proposal Event (required)"p"
, the counterparty's public key (required)
Discoverability
The Swap Listing event previously mentioned as an optional tag in the Swap Proposal may be used to find an appropriate counterparty for a swap. It allows a user to announce what he wants to accomplish, what his requirements are and what is still open for negotiation.
Swap Listing Event (kind:30455)
The
content
field is the following stringified JSON:{ "description": "<Information about the listing (required)>", "give": <partial signature spec (optional)>, "take": <partial signature spec (optional)>, "examples: [<take signature spec>], // optional "exp": <expiration timestamp (optional)>, "role": "<adaptor | nonce (optional)>" }
The
description
field describes the restrictions on counterparties and signatures the user is willing to accept.A
partial signature spec
is an incompletesignature spec
used in Swap Proposal eventskind:455
where omitting fields signals that they are still open for negotiation.The
examples
field is an array ofsignature specs
the user would be willing totake
.The
tags
are:"d"
, a unique listing id (required)"s"
, the status of the listingdraft | open | closed
(required)"t"
, topics related to this listing (optional)"p"
, public keys to notify about the proposal (optional)
Application Specific Swap Listings
Since Swap Listings are still fairly generic, it is expected that specific use cases define new event kinds based on the generic listing. Those application specific swap listing would be easier to filter by clients and may impose restrictions and add new fields and/or tags. The following are some examples under development:
Sponsored Events
This listing is designed for users looking to promote content on the Nostr network, as well as for those who want to monetize their accounts by sharing curated sponsored content with their existing audiences.
It follows the same format as the generic Swap Listing event, but uses the
kind:30456
instead.The following new tags are included:
"k"
, event kind being sponsored (required)"title"
, campaign title (optional)
It is required that at least one
signature spec
(give
and/ortake
) must have"type": "nostr"
and also contain the following tag["sponsor", "<pubkey>", "<attestation>"]
with the sponsor's public key and his signature over the signature spec without the sponsor tag as his attestation. This last requirement enables clients to disclose and/or filter sponsored events.Asset Swaps
This listing is designed for users looking for counterparties to swap different assets that can be transferred using Schnorr signatures, like any unit of Cashu tokens, Bitcoin or other asset IOUs issued using Taproot.
It follows the same format as the generic Swap Listing event, but uses the
kind:30457
instead.It requires the following additional tags:
"t"
, asset pair to be swapped (e.g."btcusd"
)"t"
, asset being offered (e.g."btc"
)"t"
, accepted payment method (e.g."cashu"
,"taproot"
)
Swap Negotiation
From finding an appropriate Swap Listing to publishing a Swap Proposal, there may be some kind of negotiation between the involved parties, e.g. agreeing on the amount to be paid by one of the parties or the exact content of a Nostr event signed by the other party. There are many ways to accomplish that and clients may implement it as they see fit for their specific goals. Some suggestions are:
- Adding
kind:1111
Comments to the Swap Listing or an existing Swap Proposal - Exchanging tentative Swap Proposals back and forth until an agreement is reached
- Simple exchanges of DMs
- Out of band communication (e.g. Signal)
Work to be done
I've been refining this specification as I develop some proof-of-concept clients to experience its flaws and trade-offs in practice. I left the signature spec for Taproot signatures out of the current document as I still have to experiment with it. I will probably find some important orchestration issues related to dealing with
2-of-2 multisig timelocks
, which also affects Cashu transactions when spent last, that may require further adjustments to what was presented here.The main goal of this article is to find other people interested in this concept and willing to provide valuable feedback before a PR is opened in the NIPs repository for broader discussions.
References
- GM Swap- Nostr client for atomically exchanging GM notes. Live demo available here.
- Sig4Sats Script - A Typescript script demonstrating the swap of a Cashu payment for a signed Nostr event.
- Loudr- Nostr client under development for sponsoring the publication of Nostr events. Live demo available at loudr.me.
- Poelstra, A. (2017). Scriptless Scripts. Blockstream Research. https://github.com/BlockstreamResearch/scriptless-scripts
-
@ a95c6243:d345522c
2025-01-24 20:59:01Menschen tun alles, egal wie absurd, \ um ihrer eigenen Seele nicht zu begegnen. \ Carl Gustav Jung
«Extremer Reichtum ist eine Gefahr für die Demokratie», sagen über die Hälfte der knapp 3000 befragten Millionäre aus G20-Staaten laut einer Umfrage der «Patriotic Millionaires». Ferner stellte dieser Zusammenschluss wohlhabender US-Amerikaner fest, dass 63 Prozent jener Millionäre den Einfluss von Superreichen auf US-Präsident Trump als Bedrohung für die globale Stabilität ansehen.
Diese Besorgnis haben 370 Millionäre und Milliardäre am Dienstag auch den in Davos beim WEF konzentrierten Privilegierten aus aller Welt übermittelt. In einem offenen Brief forderten sie die «gewählten Führer» auf, die Superreichen – also sie selbst – zu besteuern, um «die zersetzenden Auswirkungen des extremen Reichtums auf unsere Demokratien und die Gesellschaft zu bekämpfen». Zum Beispiel kontrolliere eine handvoll extrem reicher Menschen die Medien, beeinflusse die Rechtssysteme in unzulässiger Weise und verwandele Recht in Unrecht.
Schon 2019 beanstandete der bekannte Historiker und Schriftsteller Ruthger Bregman an einer WEF-Podiumsdiskussion die Steuervermeidung der Superreichen. Die elitäre Veranstaltung bezeichnete er als «Feuerwehr-Konferenz, bei der man nicht über Löschwasser sprechen darf.» Daraufhin erhielt Bregman keine Einladungen nach Davos mehr. Auf seine Aussagen machte der Schweizer Aktivist Alec Gagneux aufmerksam, der sich seit Jahrzehnten kritisch mit dem WEF befasst. Ihm wurde kürzlich der Zutritt zu einem dreiteiligen Kurs über das WEF an der Volkshochschule Region Brugg verwehrt.
Nun ist die Erkenntnis, dass mit Geld politischer Einfluss einhergeht, alles andere als neu. Und extremer Reichtum macht die Sache nicht wirklich besser. Trotzdem hat man über Initiativen wie Patriotic Millionaires oder Taxmenow bisher eher selten etwas gehört, obwohl es sie schon lange gibt. Auch scheint es kein Problem, wenn ein Herr Gates fast im Alleingang versucht, globale Gesundheits-, Klima-, Ernährungs- oder Bevölkerungspolitik zu betreiben – im Gegenteil. Im Jahr, als der Milliardär Donald Trump zum zweiten Mal ins Weiße Haus einzieht, ist das Echo in den Gesinnungsmedien dagegen enorm – und uniform, wer hätte das gedacht.
Der neue US-Präsident hat jedoch «Davos geerdet», wie Achgut es nannte. In seiner kurzen Rede beim Weltwirtschaftsforum verteidigte er seine Politik und stellte klar, er habe schlicht eine «Revolution des gesunden Menschenverstands» begonnen. Mit deutlichen Worten sprach er unter anderem von ersten Maßnahmen gegen den «Green New Scam», und von einem «Erlass, der jegliche staatliche Zensur beendet»:
«Unsere Regierung wird die Äußerungen unserer eigenen Bürger nicht mehr als Fehlinformation oder Desinformation bezeichnen, was die Lieblingswörter von Zensoren und derer sind, die den freien Austausch von Ideen und, offen gesagt, den Fortschritt verhindern wollen.»
Wie der «Trumpismus» letztlich einzuordnen ist, muss jeder für sich selbst entscheiden. Skepsis ist definitiv angebracht, denn «einer von uns» sind weder der Präsident noch seine auserwählten Teammitglieder. Ob sie irgendeinen Sumpf trockenlegen oder Staatsverbrechen aufdecken werden oder was aus WHO- und Klimaverträgen wird, bleibt abzuwarten.
Das WHO-Dekret fordert jedenfalls die Übertragung der Gelder auf «glaubwürdige Partner», die die Aktivitäten übernehmen könnten. Zufällig scheint mit «Impfguru» Bill Gates ein weiterer Harris-Unterstützer kürzlich das Lager gewechselt zu haben: Nach einem gemeinsamen Abendessen zeigte er sich «beeindruckt» von Trumps Interesse an der globalen Gesundheit.
Mit dem Projekt «Stargate» sind weitere dunkle Wolken am Erwartungshorizont der Fangemeinde aufgezogen. Trump hat dieses Joint Venture zwischen den Konzernen OpenAI, Oracle, und SoftBank als das «größte KI-Infrastrukturprojekt der Geschichte» angekündigt. Der Stein des Anstoßes: Oracle-CEO Larry Ellison, der auch Fan von KI-gestützter Echtzeit-Überwachung ist, sieht einen weiteren potenziellen Einsatz der künstlichen Intelligenz. Sie könne dazu dienen, Krebserkrankungen zu erkennen und individuelle mRNA-«Impfstoffe» zur Behandlung innerhalb von 48 Stunden zu entwickeln.
Warum bitte sollten sich diese superreichen «Eliten» ins eigene Fleisch schneiden und direkt entgegen ihren eigenen Interessen handeln? Weil sie Menschenfreunde, sogenannte Philanthropen sind? Oder vielleicht, weil sie ein schlechtes Gewissen haben und ihre Schuld kompensieren müssen? Deswegen jedenfalls brauchen «Linke» laut Robert Willacker, einem deutschen Politikberater mit brasilianischen Wurzeln, rechte Parteien – ein ebenso überraschender wie humorvoller Erklärungsansatz.
Wenn eine Krähe der anderen kein Auge aushackt, dann tut sie das sich selbst noch weniger an. Dass Millionäre ernsthaft ihre eigene Besteuerung fordern oder Machteliten ihren eigenen Einfluss zugunsten anderer einschränken würden, halte ich für sehr unwahrscheinlich. So etwas glaube ich erst, wenn zum Beispiel die Rüstungsindustrie sich um Friedensverhandlungen bemüht, die Pharmalobby sich gegen institutionalisierte Korruption einsetzt, Zentralbanken ihre CBDC-Pläne für Bitcoin opfern oder der ÖRR die Abschaffung der Rundfunkgebühren fordert.
Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.
-
@ c631e267:c2b78d3e
2025-01-18 09:34:51Die grauenvollste Aussicht ist die der Technokratie – \ einer kontrollierenden Herrschaft, \ die durch verstümmelte und verstümmelnde Geister ausgeübt wird. \ Ernst Jünger
«Davos ist nicht mehr sexy», das Weltwirtschaftsforum (WEF) mache Davos kaputt, diese Aussagen eines Einheimischen las ich kürzlich in der Handelszeitung. Während sich einige vor Ort enorm an der «teuersten Gewerbeausstellung der Welt» bereicherten, würden die negativen Begleiterscheinungen wie Wohnungsnot und Niedergang der lokalen Wirtschaft immer deutlicher.
Nächsten Montag beginnt in dem Schweizer Bergdorf erneut ein Jahrestreffen dieses elitären Clubs der Konzerne, bei dem man mit hochrangigen Politikern aus aller Welt und ausgewählten Vertretern der Systemmedien zusammenhocken wird. Wie bereits in den vergangenen vier Jahren wird die Präsidentin der EU-Kommission, Ursula von der Leyen, in Begleitung von Klaus Schwab ihre Grundsatzansprache halten.
Der deutsche WEF-Gründer hatte bei dieser Gelegenheit immer höchst lobende Worte für seine Landsmännin: 2021 erklärte er sich «stolz, dass Europa wieder unter Ihrer Führung steht» und 2022 fand er es bemerkenswert, was sie erreicht habe angesichts des «erstaunlichen Wandels», den die Welt in den vorangegangenen zwei Jahren erlebt habe; es gebe nun einen «neuen europäischen Geist».
Von der Leyens Handeln während der sogenannten Corona-«Pandemie» lobte Schwab damals bereits ebenso, wie es diese Woche das Karlspreis-Direktorium tat, als man der Beschuldigten im Fall Pfizergate die diesjährige internationale Auszeichnung «für Verdienste um die europäische Einigung» verlieh. Außerdem habe sie die EU nicht nur gegen den «Aggressor Russland», sondern auch gegen die «innere Bedrohung durch Rassisten und Demagogen» sowie gegen den Klimawandel verteidigt.
Jene Herausforderungen durch «Krisen epochalen Ausmaßes» werden indes aus dem Umfeld des WEF nicht nur herbeigeredet – wie man alljährlich zur Zeit des Davoser Treffens im Global Risks Report nachlesen kann, der zusammen mit dem Versicherungskonzern Zurich erstellt wird. Seit die Globalisten 2020/21 in der Praxis gesehen haben, wie gut eine konzertierte und konsequente Angst-Kampagne funktionieren kann, geht es Schlag auf Schlag. Sie setzen alles daran, Schwabs goldenes Zeitfenster des «Great Reset» zu nutzen.
Ziel dieses «großen Umbruchs» ist die totale Kontrolle der Technokraten über die Menschen unter dem Deckmantel einer globalen Gesundheitsfürsorge. Wie aber könnte man so etwas erreichen? Ein Mittel dazu ist die «kreative Zerstörung». Weitere unabdingbare Werkzeug sind die Einbindung, ja Gleichschaltung der Medien und der Justiz.
Ein «Great Mental Reset» sei die Voraussetzung dafür, dass ein Großteil der Menschen Einschränkungen und Manipulationen wie durch die Corona-Maßnahmen praktisch kritik- und widerstandslos hinnehme, sagt der Mediziner und Molekulargenetiker Michael Nehls. Er meint damit eine regelrechte Umprogrammierung des Gehirns, wodurch nach und nach unsere Individualität und unser soziales Bewusstsein eliminiert und durch unreflektierten Konformismus ersetzt werden.
Der aktuelle Zustand unserer Gesellschaften ist auch für den Schweizer Rechtsanwalt Philipp Kruse alarmierend. Durch den Umgang mit der «Pandemie» sieht er die Grundlagen von Recht und Vernunft erschüttert, die Rechtsstaatlichkeit stehe auf dem Prüfstand. Seiner dringenden Mahnung an alle Bürger, die Prinzipien von Recht und Freiheit zu verteidigen, kann ich mich nur anschließen.
Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.
-
@ 044da344:073a8a0e
2025-03-13 07:20:56Kultur. Kunst. Ästhetik. Ich lasse die Ausrufezeichen weg, die mir da entgegenkamen aus dem Publikum in der Ladestation in Köln. Eigentlich sollte es um den „dressierten Nachwuchs“ gehen, am Ende waren wir aber doch wieder bei den Leitmedien und damit auch bei der Gegenöffentlichkeit. Herr Meyen, Sie können doch nicht ernsthaft den Kontrafunk loben. Diese Opernsängerin. Und überhaupt. Ich, sagte der Mann, den ich im Scheinwerferlicht nicht sehen und folglich auch nicht taxieren konnte, ich höre lieber den Deutschlandfunk, trotz der Nachrichten. Das hat Klasse. Das hat Qualität. Geschichte, Tiefe. Wo bitte schön ist das bei Ihren Lieblingen, Herr Meyen?
Ich habe Jenifer Lary verteidigt (die das in ihrer „Musikstunde“ wirklich gut macht, aber das nur nebenbei) und auf die Ressourcen hingewiesen. Hier ein milliardenschwerer Rundfunk, finanziert mit dem Gewaltmonopol des Staates im Rücken, und dort ein paar Mittelständler, die es sich leisten können und wollen, für Kontrafunk-Aktien 25.000 Franken in den Wind zu schreiben, und Kleinspender, die so dankbar sind für das, was Burkhard Müller-Ullrich da auf die Beine stellt, dass sie sich zehn oder 20 Euro abzwacken. Vergeblich. Auch am nächsten Tag im Philosophischen Salon, einer Privatinitiative von Sabine Marx in der gleichen Stadt, wo nach meinem Vortrag allen Ernstes vorgeschlagen wurde, doch einfach Geld zusammenzutragen, damit „die Besten“ zu ködern und so eine Gegenkultur auf die Beine zu stellen, die mindestens genauso gut ist wie das, was zum Beispiel der Deutschlandfunk bietet.
Wenn es nur so einfach wäre. Man muss nicht Pierre Bourdieu gelesen zu haben, um die Magnetwirkung zu sehen, die vom Machtpol der Felder ausgeht – in der Literatur, in der Musik, im Journalismus, in der Wissenschaft. Sicherheit, Geld, manchmal sogar Ruhm. Überhaupt: dazugehören. Mit in der Verlosung zu sein, wenn die großen Bühnen vergeben werden, Preise oder wenigstens Stipendien. Rezensiert werden – und zwar dort, wo die Agenturen hinschauen, die Bibliotheken, die Sponsoren. Ein junger Mensch, der sich bewusst gegen all das entscheidet, habe ich in Köln sinngemäß gesagt, solch ein junger Mensch ist die absolute Ausnahme. Die Folgen spürt jeder, der Personal rekrutieren möchte für Alternativprojekte. Die Folgen spürt auch das Publikum. Wo Konkurrenz und Reibung fehlen, ist es nicht weit bis zur Genügsamkeit, frei nach dem Motto: Meine Follower lieben mich, was also wollt ihr noch von mir?
Ich schicke all das vorweg, um Eugen Zentner würdigen zu können – einen gerade noch jungen Mann, geboren 1979, der alles mitbringt, was es für eine Karriere in der Bewusstseinsindustrie braucht, und der sich nach Versuchen bei der dpa trotzdem gegen die Verlockungen entschieden hat, die das Mitschwimmen abwirft. Ich habe hier schon sein Buch über die neue Kunst- und Kulturszene gewürdigt und freue mich, dass er sich jetzt als Erzähler versucht – mit Kurzgeschichten über Corona-Schicksale, wieder erschienen im Massel-Verlag. Die Form erlaubt ihm, das zuzuspitzen und zu verdichten, was viele zwischen Mitte März 2020 und dem 7. April 2022 erlebt und erlitten haben – angefangen mit Kollegen und Freunden, die erst oft noch ganz aufgeschlossen auf Videos von Wodarg und Co. reagierten, dann aber den Kontakt abbrachen, als sie sahen, was „man“ von diesen Leuten zu halten hat, bis hin zu purem Hass, als die „Pandemie der Ungeimpften“ ausgerufen wurde und so jeder ermutigt wurde, die „Verweigerer“ in den Dreck zu treten.
Die 15 Geschichten von Eugen Zentner sind düster. Vielleicht muss das so sein, weil die Zeit so war und irgendjemand das festhalten muss, auch jenseits von Sachbuch und Journalismus. Das Schulkind, dem unter der Maske die Luft wegbleibt. Die drei Freunde, die sich trotz Lockdown treffen und in der Wohnung von Uniformierten überfallen werden. Die Polizeiopfer auf den Demos. Der Bruder, der Heiligabend bei Mama platzen lässt, weil die Schwester nicht am Katzentisch sitzen mag. Die Oma, die im Pflegeheim eingesperrt wird und den Verstand verliert, weil sie Tochter und Enkel nicht sehen kann und nicht versteht, warum das alles passiert. Die Figuren kommen eher als Holzschnitt daher, schwarz-weiß. Es gibt zwei „Täter“, wenn man so will, einen Journalisten und eine Krankenschwester, die einen Kampf mit ihrem Gewissen austragen und, wie sollte es anders sein, diesen Kampf bei Eugen Zentner verlieren. Es gibt auch einen Abgeordneten aus einer Regierungspartei, der am 18. November 2020 gegen das Infektionsschutzgesetz stimmen will und sich sicher ist, dass er nicht erpresst werden kann. Wir wissen, wie das in der Wirklichkeit ausgegangen ist.
Die Fiktion, gerade in einer Kurzgeschichte, hat den Vorteil, alles wegwischen zu können, was das reale Leben ausmacht. Die Grautöne vor allem, die aus den Erfahrungen sprießen, die der Einzelne gemacht hat. Der Journalismus darf das (eigentlich) nicht und das Sachbuch sowieso nicht. Eigentlich müsste ich das „eigentlich“ wieder streichen und auch für die Kurzgeschichte den Maßstab nachjustieren – für ein Genre, das vom Autor noch mehr verlangt als ein Roman, weil wenig Platz ist und der Leser trotzdem erwartet, dass buchstäblich „alles“ gesagt wird. Eugen Zentner ist auf dem Weg dahin – in der zweiten Auflage vielleicht sogar mit einem Adlerauge für die Korrektur und beim nächsten Versuch mit noch mehr Ruhe und Geduld, um auch das einfangen zu können, was sich dem Zeitzeugen und Beobachter entzieht. Vielleicht muss man seine beiden Bücher einfach nebeneinanderlegen, um zu Hölderlin zu kommen: „Wo aber Gefahr ist, wächst das Rettende auch.“
Kunst, Kultur, Ästhetik: Der Rufer aus Köln hat Recht. Die Gegenöffentlichkeit braucht mehr davon, wenn sie etwas bewegen will. Die Anfänge sind gemacht. Ein paar davon haben wir am Buch-Tresen aufgegriffen: Sonja Silberhorn und Bernd Zeller, Sebastian Schwaerzel und nicht zu vergessen: Thomas Eisinger. Gerade lese ich, dass Raymond Unger einen Roman geschrieben hat. Geht doch, sogar ohne irgendwelche Multimilliardäre.
Freie Akademie für Medien & Journalismus
Titelbild: Alexa @Pixabay
-
@ a367f9eb:0633efea
2025-03-12 17:39:59As Congress debates yet another Continuing Resolution to hastily fund the federal government for a few months, the House yesterday passed a resolution that mixes together several bills.
Tucked within these provisions was a legalistic quirk that would end Congress’ ability to end President Trump’s “State of Emergency” that has so far given him some legal latitude to impose swaths of new tariffs and duties that affect consumers.
The resolution passed by the House of Representatives contained four sections for consideration:
1.) Repeal of the IRS rule related to DeFi brokers and registration (also known as the broker role), affecting cryptocurrency platforms.
2.) Opening the state of limitations related to pandemic relief era as provided in the CARES Act.
3.) A Continuing Resolution to fund the government on a temporary basis
4.) Declaring the rest of the year as a single calendar day for the purposes of the National Emergencies Act
While each of these sections should elicit some debate or praise, the last section is purposefully written so as to freeze time on the Congressional calendar.
Why is this important?
The section reads: “Each day for the remainder of the first session of the 119th Congress shall not constitute a calendar day for purposes of section 202 of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622) with respect to a joint resolution terminating a national emergency declared by the President on February 1, 2025.”
As reported by the New York Times, this is a procedural move that would neuter Congress’ ability to pass any vote or resolution to gain back their power to issue tariffs and other trade sanctions, because 15 calendar days will not pass (at least legally) for the remainder of the year:
House Democrats had planned to force a vote on resolutions to end the tariffs on Mexico and Canada, a move allowed under the National Emergencies Act, which provides a mechanism for Congress to terminate an emergency like the one Mr. Trump declared when he imposed the tariffs on Feb. 1.
That would have forced Republicans — many of whom are opposed to tariffs as a matter of principle — to go on the record on the issue at a time when Mr. Trump’s commitment to tariffs has spooked the financial markets and spiked concerns of reigniting inflation.
…
The national emergency law lays out a fast-track process for Congress to consider a resolution ending a presidential emergency, requiring committee consideration within 15 calendar days after one is introduced and a floor vote within three days after that.
By passing the resolution, the House Majority has effectively neutered its own authority to set trade policies and to hold the Executive Branch accountable, allowing it to keep the State of Emergency in place so President Trump can issue tariffs on Canada, Mexico, China, the European Union, or any other country without much opposition.
Though the President has some authority to issue tariffs in an emergency situation, according to the National Emergencies Act, removing Congress’ ability to end or even reverse the State of Emergency for the rest of 2025 means Congress has abrogated its responsibility to even have a say on trade policies.
By allowing President Trump to prolong his State of Emergency, there will be no constitutional way for Congress to curb the excesses of the multi-theater trade wars being waged across the world, harming consumers who would otherwise profit from freer trade.
Tariffs are taxes on consumers, and trade wars only make consumers poorer, as Consumer Choice Center describes in detail on FreeTrade4Us.org.
Knowing this was a possibility, Kentucky Senator Rand Paul introduced a bill last year to reaffirm the ability of Congress – and Congress alone – to set trade policy and avoid costly tariffs that raise prices for consumers. He called it the “No Taxation Without Representation Act“.
“Our Constitution was designed to prevent any branch from overstepping its bounds. Unchecked executive actions enacting tariffs tax our citizens, threaten our economy, raise prices for everyday goods, and erode the system of checks and balances that our founders so carefully crafted,” wrote Sen. Paul.
If Congress neuters its ability to counter tariffs, then American consumers will have to continue to bear the brunt of protectionist policies that are currently making them worse off.
-
@ 306555fe:fd7fdf12
2025-03-15 05:56:161. Executive Summary
This report presents a detailed comparative analysis of Tesla Powerwall and Sungrow battery options for a 3-phase residence in Sydney, Australia, equipped with a 6.6kW solar system and a Sungrow SG5KTL-MT inverter. The evaluation focuses on the suitability of these battery solutions for potential off-grid capability and Vehicle-to-Home (V2H) functionality. The analysis reveals that while both Tesla Powerwall and Sungrow offer compelling features for home energy storage, Sungrow battery systems, particularly when paired with their hybrid inverters, present a more direct and comprehensive solution for achieving 3-phase off-grid capability. For V2H integration, both systems currently rely on the development of compatible bidirectional charging infrastructure in Australia. Based on the user's stated goals, a Sungrow battery system, potentially requiring an upgrade to a Sungrow hybrid inverter, is the recommended solution.
2. Introduction: Context and Objectives
The Australian residential energy landscape is witnessing a significant shift towards energy independence, with increasing adoption of solar photovoltaic (PV) systems and battery storage. This trend is propelled by factors such as escalating electricity costs and a growing desire for reliable power, particularly during grid outages. This report addresses the specific needs of a Sydney homeowner who has already invested in a 6.6kW solar system connected to a 3-phase Sungrow SG5KTL-MT inverter and owns a Tesla electric vehicle. The homeowner is now exploring battery storage solutions, with a particular focus on enabling potential off-grid operation and facilitating future Vehicle-to-Home (V2H) capabilities for their Tesla.
The primary objectives of this report are threefold: firstly, to evaluate the technical and practical suitability of Tesla Powerwall for a 3-phase home in Sydney; secondly, to conduct a similar evaluation for various Sungrow battery options; and thirdly, to provide a comparative assessment of these two leading solutions based on their ability to support off-grid functionality and integrate with V2H technology. The scope of this analysis includes the latest Tesla Powerwall models available in Australia and relevant high-voltage battery options from Sungrow, specifically the SBR and SBH series. The geographical context is limited to Sydney, Australia, considering local grid regulations and market availability. This analysis relies on the provided research material and publicly accessible technical specifications to form its conclusions.
3. Analysis of Tesla Powerwall for a 3-Phase Sydney Home
- 3.1 Technical Specifications and Features:\ The Tesla Powerwall is a well-established residential battery system. The latest generation, Powerwall 3, offers an energy capacity of 13.5 kWh 1 and can deliver up to 10 kW of on-grid power, with the same capacity for backup power, capable of a 185 A motor start 1. A key feature of Powerwall 3 is its integrated solar inverter with a 97.5% efficiency and three solar inputs with Maximum Power Point Trackers (MPPTs) in the Australian version 1. The system is scalable, allowing for the installation of up to four units 1, and utilizes Lithium Iron Phosphate (LFP) battery chemistry, known for its safety 5. In contrast, the Powerwall 2, while also having a 13.5 kWh energy capacity 7, provides a continuous power output of 5 kW with a 7 kW peak 7. Notably, Powerwall 2 does not have an integrated solar inverter 7 and uses Nickel Manganese Cobalt Oxide (NMC) battery chemistry 7. It offers greater scalability, supporting up to ten units 1. Both Powerwall 2 and 3 come with a 10-year warranty 2. Powerwall 3 necessitates the use of the Tesla Backup Gateway 2 2, while Powerwall 2 requires a Gateway for system control and backup functionality 7. The integrated inverter in Powerwall 3 streamlines installations for new solar and storage setups. However, for homeowners with existing inverters, such as the user, this feature might introduce complexities as the existing inverter's functionality could become redundant if the system were configured to primarily utilize the Powerwall 3's inverter. Powerwall 2, designed as an AC-coupled battery, might offer a more seamless integration by working in conjunction with the existing Sungrow inverter 3.
- 3.2 Compatibility with Existing 3-Phase Sungrow Inverter (AC Coupling):\ Tesla Powerwall is designed as an AC-coupled battery, meaning it connects to the home's electrical system at the switchboard level and operates independently of the solar inverter 9. This AC coupling capability generally allows Powerwall to be compatible with a wide range of existing solar inverters, including the user's 3-phase Sungrow SG5KTL-MT model 2. Specifically, Powerwall 2 demonstrates 100% compatibility with single-phase grid-connected solar systems installed after October 2016 9. For Powerwall 3, Tesla indicates AC coupling compatibility with existing solar systems up to 5kW 2. However, a crucial consideration arises during grid outages concerning the ability to charge the Powerwall from solar. If the home has a 3-phase solar inverter, like the user's Sungrow SG5KTL-MT, Powerwall 2 might not be able to charge from solar during a blackout because many 3-phase inverters require the presence of all three phases from the grid to operate 9. This limitation could also extend to Powerwall 3 when AC-coupled with a 3-phase inverter 8. Given the user's interest in potential off-grid capability, this inability to recharge the battery from solar during a grid outage significantly limits the duration of backup power to the energy stored within the Powerwall. Furthermore, the user's 6.6kW solar system output exceeds the 5kW AC coupling limit specified for a single Powerwall 3. This suggests that either the entire solar generation cannot be used to charge a single Powerwall 3 via AC coupling, or a more complex configuration involving multiple Powerwall units might be necessary.
- 3.3 Suitability for Off-Grid Operation in a 3-Phase System:\ The Tesla Powerwall is fundamentally a single-phase battery system and can only provide backup power to a single phase within a 3-phase home 8. During a power outage, only the electrical circuits connected to the phase that the Powerwall is backing up will remain operational 8. This necessitates careful planning to ensure that essential loads, such as lighting, refrigerators, and internet connectivity, are connected to this designated phase 8. While it is possible to install multiple Powerwall units, with one unit dedicated to each phase, this significantly increases the overall cost and introduces complexities in system management 8. Notably, even with the installation of three Powerwall 3 units, comprehensive 3-phase backup is not guaranteed 20. It is also important to recognize that Tesla does not officially support or provide warranties for off-grid installations of Powerwall 2. The Powerwall system is primarily designed for grid-connected homes to provide backup during outages and to optimize energy consumption, rather than functioning as the primary power source in a completely off-grid scenario. Therefore, achieving a truly comprehensive off-grid capability for a 3-phase home using Tesla Powerwall would likely involve a substantial financial investment in multiple units, meticulous load balancing across the phases, and navigating the limitations of single-phase backup, all without official support from the manufacturer.
- 3.4 Potential for V2H Integration with an EV in Australia:\ Vehicle-to-Home (V2H) technology, which allows an electric vehicle to supply power back to a home, is gaining traction in Australia. Regulatory changes have been made to permit bidirectional charging systems, with mainstream adoption expected in 2025 21. Australian standards for bidirectional charging are now approved, and compatible chargers are anticipated to become available in 2025 22. Currently, the research snippets do not indicate that Tesla Powerwall offers direct, integrated V2H functionality with EVs in Australia 1. However, the Tesla Powerwall can play a supportive role in a V2H ecosystem. It can efficiently store excess energy generated by the solar system 1, which could then be used to charge the EV. If the EV is equipped with V2H capabilities and connected to a compatible bidirectional charger, the energy stored in the Powerwall (or directly from solar) could indirectly contribute to powering the home by first charging the vehicle's battery. The actual discharge from the vehicle to the home would be managed by the bidirectional charger and the vehicle's internal systems, not directly by the Powerwall. Therefore, while Powerwall doesn't inherently provide V2H, it can act as a crucial energy storage component within a broader V2H setup.
- 3.5 Cost and Installation Considerations in Sydney:\ The cost of a Tesla Powerwall 3 in Australia is approximately $13,600, which includes the mandatory Backup Gateway 2 2. Powerwall 2 has an approximate price of $8,750 to $9,750, excluding installation and the Backup Gateway 7, with the installed cost estimated between $12,000 and $14,000 7. Installation costs for Powerwall 3 as part of a new solar system at Penrith Solar Centre start at $23,990 (including a 6kW solar system), while adding it to an existing system is around $15,990 27. Installing a Powerwall system in a 3-phase home can incur additional costs and complexities compared to single-phase installations 13. If the goal is to achieve any level of backup across multiple phases using Powerwall, the cost would escalate significantly with the need for multiple units. Homeowners in NSW may be eligible for rebates under the Peak Demand Reduction Scheme (PDRS), which can help offset the initial investment in a Tesla Powerwall 5. However, the overall cost of a Powerwall system, especially when considering a multi-unit setup for more comprehensive backup in a 3-phase home, remains a substantial financial consideration.
4. Analysis of Sungrow Battery Options for a 3-Phase Sydney Home
- 4.1 Technical Specifications of Relevant Sungrow Battery Models (SBR and SBH Series):\ Sungrow offers a range of high-voltage battery solutions, primarily the SBR and SBH series, utilizing Lithium Iron Phosphate (LiFePO4) chemistry for enhanced safety 5. The SBR series features a modular design with 3.2 kWh battery modules, allowing for system capacities ranging from 9.6 kWh (3 modules) up to 25.6 kWh (8 modules) in a single stack. Multiple stacks can be connected in parallel to achieve even larger capacities, up to 100 kWh 6. These batteries boast 100% usable energy capacity 26 and are high-voltage systems 33. The SBH series also employs a modular design with larger 5 kWh battery modules. A single stack can accommodate 4 to 8 modules, providing usable energy from 20 kWh to 40 kWh. Similar to the SBR series, multiple SBH stacks can be connected in parallel to reach a maximum capacity of 160 kWh 5. Both the SBR and SBH series come with a 10-year warranty 5 and are primarily designed for DC coupling with Sungrow's hybrid inverter range, particularly the SH series, which includes models specifically designed for 3-phase systems (SH-RT series) 33. The availability of a wider range of capacities and the modular design of both the SBR and SBH series provide greater flexibility for the user to tailor a battery system to their specific energy consumption needs. The SBH series, with its larger 5 kWh modules, appears particularly well-suited for homes with potentially higher energy demands, such as those with 3-phase connections.
- 4.2 Compatibility with Existing 3-Phase Sungrow Inverter (DC and AC Coupling):\ The user's existing Sungrow SG5KTL-MT inverter is a grid-tied inverter and not a hybrid model designed for direct DC coupling with batteries 5. Sungrow's high-voltage batteries, such as the SBR and SBH series, are primarily intended for DC coupling with their SH series hybrid inverters 33. While direct DC coupling is not an option with the SG5KTL-MT, it is possible to AC couple Sungrow batteries to the existing solar system 35. This would likely require the addition of a separate battery inverter to manage the charging and discharging of the Sungrow battery, as the SG5KTL-MT does not have this functionality. Although AC coupling offers a way to integrate a battery without replacing the existing solar inverter, it can introduce inefficiencies due to the multiple AC-DC and DC-AC conversions. For optimal performance and to fully leverage the capabilities of Sungrow's high-voltage batteries, particularly for off-grid operation, upgrading to a Sungrow SH series hybrid inverter would be the recommended approach.
- 4.3 Suitability for Off-Grid Operation in a 3-Phase System:\ Sungrow offers a distinct advantage in providing solutions for 3-phase off-grid operation through their SH-RT series of hybrid inverters 5. These inverters, when paired with Sungrow's SBR or SBH batteries, are capable of providing seamless transition to 3-phase backup power during grid outages 63. The SH-RT series is specifically designed to support 100% unbalanced loads in backup mode, ensuring that essential appliances continue to run during a blackout 66. Both the SBR and SBH battery series are compatible with off-grid operation when used in conjunction with the appropriate Sungrow hybrid inverters. Some single-phase Sungrow hybrid inverters (SH-RS series) also offer off-grid capabilities and support generator connection for battery charging during extended periods of low solar generation 85. This comprehensive ecosystem of Sungrow products provides a more direct and integrated pathway for the user to achieve their goal of potential 3-phase off-grid capability compared to the single-phase limitations of Tesla Powerwall.
- 4.4 Potential for V2H Integration with an EV (e.g Tesla Car) in Australia:\ Similar to Tesla Powerwall, the provided research material does not explicitly mention direct V2H integration capabilities for Sungrow battery systems with Tesla cars in Australia 22. However, Sungrow's active involvement in the broader renewable energy and electric vehicle charging sectors suggests a strong potential for future integration. Sungrow manufactures its own range of EV chargers 64, and their 3-phase hybrid inverter solutions can be paired with these chargers for smart green power charging 64. As V2H technology and the necessary bidirectional charging infrastructure become more prevalent in Australia, it is conceivable that Sungrow's integrated energy management systems, including their batteries and hybrid inverters, could be updated to support V2H functionality, potentially even with Tesla vehicles through standardized protocols or future partnerships. In the interim, a Sungrow battery system can efficiently store solar energy, which could then be used to charge a Tesla car. The potential for the EV to discharge back to the home would depend on the availability and compatibility of third-party bidirectional chargers that adhere to the evolving Australian standards.
- 4.5 Cost and Installation Considerations in Sydney:\ The cost of Sungrow batteries in Australia varies depending on the model and capacity. For the SBR series, a 9.6 kWh system is approximately $11,500 installed, a 12.8 kWh system around $13,200 installed, and a 25.6 kWh system around $19,700 installed. Supply-only costs for the SBH series 20 kWh kit range from $13,778.70 to $14,360 40. Compatible 3-phase hybrid inverters from Sungrow, such as the SH5.0RT, are priced around $3,760, while the SH10RT ranges from approximately $4,174.50 to $5,720 78. If the user opts for a Sungrow battery system to achieve optimal 3-phase off-grid capability, the cost of a new SH series hybrid inverter would need to be included, as the existing SG5KTL-MT is not compatible for direct DC coupling. While AC coupling might be a less expensive initial step, it could involve the additional cost of a separate battery inverter. Homeowners in NSW can potentially benefit from the NSW battery rebate when purchasing a Sungrow battery system, which could help reduce the overall cost 5. Although Sungrow batteries often offer a competitive cost per kWh, the total investment for a comprehensive 3-phase off-grid solution might be higher than a single-phase Tesla Powerwall setup, primarily due to the potential need for a new hybrid inverter.
5. Comparative Assessment: Tesla Powerwall vs. Sungrow Batteries
- 5.1 Side-by-Side Comparison Table of Key Specifications:
| Feature | Tesla Powerwall 3 | Sungrow SBR (Example: 12.8 kWh) + SH10RT | | --- | --- | --- | | Usable Energy Capacity (kWh) | 13.5 | 12.8 | | Continuous Power Output (kW) | 10 | 10 | | Peak Power Output (kW) | 10 | 12 (5 min) | | Battery Chemistry | Lithium Iron Phosphate | Lithium Iron Phosphate | | Scalability | Up to 4 units (54 kWh) | Up to 25.6 kWh per stack, 4 stacks parallel (102.4 kWh) | | Off-Grid Backup (Phases Supported) | Single-Phase | Three-Phase | | V2H Support (Current/Future Potential) | Potential via 3rd party charger | Potential via 3rd party charger | | Warranty (Years) | 10 | 10 | | Estimated Cost (AUD) | $13,600 + installation | $13,200 (battery installed) + $4,175 - $5,720 (inverter) |
- 5.2 Detailed Comparison Based on Off-Grid Capability Requirements:\ When considering the user's goal of potential off-grid capability for a 3-phase home, Sungrow presents a more robust solution. The availability of Sungrow's SH-RT series hybrid inverters, specifically designed for 3-phase systems and fully compatible with their SBR and SBH batteries, allows for a direct and integrated approach to achieving 3-phase backup power. These systems can seamlessly transition to off-grid mode, powering all three phases of the home, which is crucial for operating 3-phase appliances and ensuring comprehensive whole-house backup. In contrast, Tesla Powerwall, being a single-phase battery, inherently limits off-grid backup to a single phase in a 3-phase home 8. While multiple Powerwall units can be installed, this increases cost and complexity without guaranteeing full 3-phase backup or official off-grid support from Tesla. Therefore, for a user prioritizing potential for comprehensive 3-phase off-grid operation, Sungrow's ecosystem offers a more suitable and supported pathway.
- 5.3 Detailed Comparison Based on V2H Functionality Requirements:\ Currently, neither Tesla Powerwall nor Sungrow batteries offer direct, integrated V2H functionality for Tesla cars in Australia 22. Both systems can store solar energy that could be used to charge a EV, and the potential for the car to discharge back to the home (V2H) would rely on the development and adoption of compatible bidirectional charging infrastructure in Australia, which is expected to become more mainstream in 2025 21. Sungrow's involvement in manufacturing EV chargers and integrating them with their hybrid inverters suggests a potential for future V2H integration within their ecosystem. Similarly, while Tesla Powerwall doesn't currently offer V2H, its role as a home energy storage solution makes it a complementary technology to V2H, providing a place to store energy that could eventually be managed within a V2H framework.
- 5.4 Cost-Effectiveness and Overall Value Analysis:\ When evaluating cost-effectiveness, Sungrow batteries often have a lower cost per kWh of storage compared to Tesla Powerwall 5. However, for the user with an existing non-hybrid inverter, achieving the desired 3-phase off-grid capability with Sungrow would likely necessitate an additional investment in a Sungrow SH-RT series hybrid inverter. This would increase the initial outlay compared to simply AC coupling a Tesla Powerwall to the existing inverter for single-phase backup. The overall value proposition depends heavily on the user's priorities. If the primary goal is to have backup power for essential loads on a single phase and potential future V2H integration, Tesla Powerwall could be a viable option. However, if the potential for comprehensive 3-phase off-grid operation is a significant factor, then the added expense of a Sungrow hybrid inverter might be justified by the enhanced functionality and future-proofing for energy independence. Sungrow's reputation for affordability and the modularity of their battery systems also offer long-term value and flexibility.
6. Recommendations and Considerations
Based on the analysis, for a 3-phase home in Sydney with a 6.6kW solar system and the goal of potential off-grid capability, Sungrow battery options are recommended. Specifically, the user should consider upgrading their existing Sungrow SG5KTL-MT inverter to a Sungrow SH series hybrid inverter (e.g., SH5.0RT or SH10RT, depending on anticipated power demands) and pairing it with a Sungrow high-voltage battery from either the SBR or SBH series. The choice between SBR and SBH would depend on the desired storage capacity and budget. This combination offers a more direct and supported path to achieving 3-phase backup power and the potential for future off-grid operation.
Key Considerations for the User:
- Off-Grid Capability: The level of off-grid capability desired (partial single-phase backup vs. comprehensive whole-home 3-phase backup) is a crucial factor. For the latter, Sungrow is the more suitable choice.
- Budget: Both options represent a significant investment. The user should obtain detailed quotes for both Tesla Powerwall (considering single or multiple units) and a complete Sungrow hybrid inverter and battery system.
- V2H Timeline: The user's timeline for V2H adoption should be considered. Both systems will likely integrate via third-party chargers.
- Inverter Upgrade: If pursuing the optimal Sungrow solution for off-grid capability, the cost and logistics of upgrading the existing inverter need to be factored in.
- 3-Phase Backup Importance: The necessity of having backup power across all three phases should weigh heavily in the decision, favoring Sungrow.
It is strongly recommended that the user obtain detailed quotes from certified installers in the Sydney area for both Tesla Powerwall and various Sungrow system configurations to get accurate pricing, installation details, and information on available rebates and incentives in NSW.
7. Conclusion
In conclusion, while Tesla Powerwall offers a well-regarded solution for home energy storage with reliable backup capabilities, its inherent single-phase design presents limitations for users with 3-phase homes seeking comprehensive off-grid functionality. Sungrow, with its range of high-voltage batteries and particularly its 3-phase hybrid inverter systems, provides a more direct and technically sound pathway to achieving the user's goals of potential 3-phase off-grid operation. For V2H integration, both systems are currently positioned to benefit from the evolving Australian regulatory landscape and the development of compatible bidirectional charging technologies. Ultimately, the optimal choice will depend on the user's specific priorities, budget, and the level of off-grid capability they wish to achieve. The rapidly evolving nature of battery storage and V2H technology suggests that continued research and consultation with experts are advisable before making a final decision.
Works cited
1. Powerwall – Home Battery Storage | Tesla Australia, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.tesla.com/en_au/powerwall\ 2. Tesla Powerwall 3 in Australia: Everything You Need to Know - Fritts Solar, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.frittssolar.com.au/tesla-powerwall-3-australia/\ 3. What to Expect for Powerwall 3 | Tesla Support Australia, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.tesla.com/en_au/support/energy/powerwall/learn/what-expect-powerwall-3\ 4. Tesla Powerwall 3 Review - Clean Energy Reviews, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.cleanenergyreviews.info/blog/tesla-powerwall-3-review\ 5. Sungrow SBH vs. Tesla Powerwall 3: Which is Better? NSW - Elite Power Group, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.elitepowergroup.com.au/news/sungrow-sbh-vs-tesla-powerwall-3-which-is-better-nsw/\ 6. Sungrow Battery vs Tesla Powerwall Review - Volteam Electric, accessed March 14, 2025, https://volteam.com.au/blog/sungrow-vs-tesla-battery-review/\ 7. Tesla Powerwall 2: A Complete 2024 Buyers Guide | Solar Choice, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.solarchoice.net.au/products/batteries/tesla-powerwall-2-review/\ 8. Can You Install The Powerwall 3 On A Three-Phase Home? - SolarQuotes, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.solarquotes.com.au/blog/three-phase-powerwall-3/\ 9. Is my grid connect solar system 100% compatible with a Tesla Powerwall 2 battery?, accessed March 14, 2025, https://support.solarquotes.com.au/hc/en-us/articles/115001986773-Is-my-grid-connect-solar-system-100-compatible-with-a-Tesla-Powerwall-2-battery\ 10. THE 3-PHASE SOLUTION - SUNGROW, accessed March 14, 2025, https://uk.sungrowpower.com/upload/file/20210706/EN%203-phaseSolution%20Factsheet.pdf\ 11. Combining Systems with Powerwall | Tesla Support, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.tesla.com/support/energy/powerwall/learn/combining-systems\ 12. Powerwall System Design | Tesla Support, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.tesla.com/support/energy/powerwall/learn/system-design\ 13. Installing Powerwall 3 on a Three-phase Site | PSC - Penrith Solar Centre, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.penrithsolar.com.au/blog/installing-powerwall-3-on-a-three-phase-site/\ 14. Powerwall 3: When It Makes Sense and When It Doesn't - SolarQuotes, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.solarquotes.com.au/blog/powerwall-3-when-it-makes-sense/\ 15. AC-Coupled Solar System Sizing - Energy Library - Tesla, accessed March 14, 2025, https://energylibrary.tesla.com/docs/Public/EnergyStorage/Powerwall/3/SystemDesign/en-us/GUID-23D242D1-8D65-47B9-9118-57002FFD84D2.html\ 16. Powerwall 3 Roadmap - 3 Phase Coming! | Tesla Motors Club, accessed March 14, 2025, https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/powerwall-3-roadmap-3-phase-coming.321409/\ 17. Advice on how to install with 3 phase : r/solar - Reddit, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/solar/comments/19djazk/advice_on_how_to_install_with_3_phase/\ 18. TESLA POWERWALL+ (3) - DIY Solar Depot, accessed March 14, 2025, https://diysolardepot.com/product/ground-mount-solar-hardware/pro-solar-ground-trac/\ 19. Design Considerations - Energy Library - Tesla, accessed March 14, 2025, https://energylibrary.tesla.com/docs/Public/EnergyStorage/Powerwall/3/SystemDesign/en-us/GUID-3E19662A-E501-47DB-81AE-E9EC19735B8B.html\ 20. Problems with Powerwall 3 | Penrith Solar Centre, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.penrithsolar.com.au/blog/problems-with-powerwall-3/\ 21. EV Charging in Australia Gets a Makeover with V2G/V2H Approved for 2025 - SEVR, accessed March 14, 2025, https://sevr.au/news/ev-charging-in-australia-gets-a-makeover-with-v2g-v2h-approved-for-2025/\ 22. V2G, V2L & V2H Explained: Vehicle to Grid in Australia? 2025 - Elite Power Group, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.elitepowergroup.com.au/news/what-is-vehicle-to-grid/\ 23. Australia's Future – Bidirectional EV Charging, Solar & Battery Storage as Standard Features, accessed March 14, 2025, https://fullycharged.show/blog/australias-future-bidirectional-ev-charging-solar-battery-storage-as-standard-features/\ 24. 2025, the Year of Vehicle-to-Grid in Australia V2G Milestone - Elite Power Group, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.elitepowergroup.com.au/news/one-step-closer-to-v2g-in-australia-2025-to-be-the-year-of-v2x/\ 25. Bidirectional Charging for Electric Cars: Unlocking New Possibilities - Solar Batteries Online, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.solarbatteriesonline.com.au/bidirectional-charging-for-electric-cars-unlocking-new-possibilities/\ 26. The Best Home Batteries In Australia In 2025: According To Aussie Installers - SolarQuotes, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.solarquotes.com.au/blog/best-home-batteries-2025/\ 27. How Much Does a Tesla Powerwall 3 Cost? | Penrith Solar Centre, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.penrithsolar.com.au/blog/how-much-does-a-tesla-powerwall-3-cost/\ 28. Expected 3 Phase upgrade price? : r/AusRenovation - Reddit, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/AusRenovation/comments/19383oa/expected_3_phase_upgrade_price/\ 29. Powerwall cost for Sydney? | Tesla Motors Club, accessed March 14, 2025, https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/powerwall-cost-for-sydney.340317/\ 30. Solar Battery Costs: Are They Worth It?, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.solarchoice.net.au/solar-batteries/is-home-battery-storage-worth-it/\ 31. Tesla Powerwall 3 Price and Installation - Solar4Life, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.solar4life.com.au/learns/tesla-powerwall-3-price-and-installation\ 32. Solar Battery Price, Savings and Payback, accessed March 14, 2025, https://solarcalculator.com.au/battery-storage/price/\ 33. Sungrow | Solar Batteries Review - SolarQuotes, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.solarquotes.com.au/battery-storage/reviews/sungrow-review.html\ 34. Sungrow SBR high voltage battery - VP Solar, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.vpsolar.com/en/sungrow-sbr-high-voltage-battery/\ 35. Sungrow Battery SBR Series - SolarBright, accessed March 14, 2025, https://solarbright.com.au/product/sungrow-battery-sbr-series/\ 36. Sungrow SBR 3.2kWh module - Huglo Solar, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.huglo.com.au/batteries/sbr-high-voltage-lfp-battery\ 37. Sungrow Inverter and battery Review - Clean Energy Reviews, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.cleanenergyreviews.info/blog/sungrow-solar-inverters-review\ 38. SBH100/150/200/250/300/350/400 - Sungrow, accessed March 14, 2025, https://en.sungrowpower.com/productDetail/5568/battery-sbh100-150-200-250-300-350-400\ 39. 20/25/30/35/40 kWh Solar Battery - Sungrow AU, accessed March 14, 2025, https://aus.sungrowpower.com/productDetail/3112/battery-sbh200-250-300-350-400\ 40. Sungrow SBH Stackable Battery System - Grow Energy, accessed March 14, 2025, https://growenergy.com.au/products/sungrow-sbh-stackable-battery-system\ 41. Sungrow SBH High Voltage Battery Bundle (SBH200 - SBH400), accessed March 14, 2025, https://solarbatterysupermarket.com.au/products/sungrow-sbh-high-voltage-battery-bundle-sbh200-sbh400\ 42. Buy cheap SunGrow solar inverters, accessed March 14, 2025, https://tienda-solar.es/en/brand/54-sungrow\ 43. Sungrow PowCube battery storage system (Analysis & review) - Solar Choice, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.solarchoice.net.au/products/batteries/sungrow-review/\ 44. What inverters do we connect to? – Welcome to our Help Center - Support - SwitchDin, accessed March 14, 2025, https://support.switchdin.com/hc/en-us/articles/19642583185817-What-inverters-do-we-connect-to\ 45. Accessories Cross Reference Guide - Sungrow Australia Service, accessed March 14, 2025, https://service.sungrowpower.com.au/files/Web_Files/FAQ/TI_202007_Sungrow%20Accessories%20Cross%20Reference%20Guide_V1.0.pdf\ 46. Sungrow - Solar System Inverter - Solargain, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.solargain.com.au/solar-inverters/sungrow-solar-inverters\ 47. Sungrow Battery Review | A Comprehensive Guide - Esteem Energy, accessed March 14, 2025, https://esteemenergy.com.au/blog/sungrow-battery-review/\ 48. Sungrow 5kW Inverter + Tesla Powerwall + Longi 370w Hi-MO4m 7.4kW Solar System, accessed March 14, 2025, https://ahlecsolar.com.au/product/sungrow-5kw-inverter-tesla-powerwall-longi-370w-hi-mo4m-7-4kw-solar-system/\ 49. Sungrow | Solar Inverters Review - SolarQuotes, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.solarquotes.com.au/inverters/sungrow-review.html\ 50. Tesla Powerwall: Inverter Compatibility Under the Spotlight - 1KOMMA5, accessed March 14, 2025, https://1komma5.com/au/batteries/tesla-powerwall-2-compatible-solar-power-system/\ 51. Hi everybody, question about V2H power : r/electricvehicles - Reddit, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/electricvehicles/comments/1hqneh3/hi_everybody_question_about_v2h_power/\ 52. Commercial Solar System | PV Plant | Rooftop - Sungrow US, accessed March 14, 2025, https://us.sungrowpower.com/solutionsDetail/10/commercial-storage-systems\ 53. SH8.0/10RS | 8kW/10kW | Single Phase | Sungrow Hybrid Inverter-Sungrow AU, accessed March 14, 2025, https://aus.sungrowpower.com/productDetail/2565/mv-power-converter-hybrid-inverter-sh8-0-10rs\ 54. Approved Batteries with SH Series Hybrid Inverters - Sungrow Australia Service, accessed March 14, 2025, https://service.sungrowpower.com.au/files/Web_Files/FAQ/Approved%20battery%20declaration%20for%20sungrow%20hybrid%20inverters-20201209_V14_EN.pdf\ 55. Right inverter for the Tesla Powerwall 2 : r/solar - Reddit, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/solar/comments/1chgnj8/right_inverter_for_the_tesla_powerwall_2/\ 56. Sungrow Inverters - Gold Coast Solar Power Solutions, accessed March 14, 2025, https://gold-coast-solar-power-solutions.com.au/gold-coast-solar-power-products/solar-power-inverters/sungrow-inverters/\ 57. Sungrow SBR192 Lithium-ion Battery - Europe-SolarStore.com, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.europe-solarstore.com/sungrow-sbr192-lithium-ion-battery.html\ 58. High-Efficiency Solar Battery: Up to 100% Usable Energy - Sungrow, accessed March 14, 2025, https://en.sungrowpower.com/ProductsHome/20/23/battery\ 59. Warranty | Sungrow Australia and New Zealand Service, accessed March 14, 2025, https://service.sungrowpower.com.au/Warranty/warranty\ 60. Sungrow Battery cross-reference chart, accessed March 14, 2025, https://service.sungrowpower.com.au/GD_202405_SBR%20and%20SBH_Cross%20Reference%20Chart_V1.4%20Final.pdf\ 61. Sungrow SG5KTL-MT - SolarTopStore.com, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.solartopstore.com/products/sungrow-sg5ktl-mt\ 62. Approved Batteries with SH Series Hybrid Inverters EU Version V1.6.3 - Sungrow AU, accessed March 14, 2025, https://aus.sungrowpower.com/upload/file/20211119/TI_20210906_approved%20battery%20declaration%20for%20sungrow%20hybrid%20inverters_V16_EN.pdf\ 63. BLACKOUT? NO, THANKS! POWER WHENEVER YOU NEED IT - SUNGROW, accessed March 14, 2025, https://uk.sungrowpower.com/upload/file/20211202/EN%20FS%20Sungrow%203-phase%20Hybrid%20Backup%20Factsheet.pdf\ 64. Sungrow 3-phase solution with 6 kVA inverter, EV charger and 9.6 kWh storage - Memodo, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.memodo-shop.com/sungrow-3-phase-solution-with-6-kva-inverter-ev-charger-and-9.6-kwh-storage/9767\ 65. THE 3-PHASE SOLUTION - SUNGROW, accessed March 14, 2025, https://uk.sungrowpower.com/upload/file/20230116/EN%20FS%203-phaseSolution%20Factsheet.pdf\ 66. Sungrow Three-Phase Hybrid Inverter - Solar4Life, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.solar4life.com.au/product-detail/sungrow-5-20kw-3-phase-hybrid\ 67. SG5KTL-MT/SG6KTL-MT/SG8KTL-M (Non-China ... - ENF Solar, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.enfsolar.com/pv/inverter-datasheet/12176\ 68. Sungrow SBR battery combiner box - AC Solar Warehouse, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.acsolarwarehouse.com/shop/sungrow-battery-combiner-box-for-multiple-sungrow-lfp-battery-stacks-23620\ 69. Sungrow SBR HV Battery Installation Quick Guide, accessed March 14, 2025, https://service.sungrowpower.com.au/files/Web_Files/FAQ/GD_202202_SBR%20HV%20Battery%20Installation%20Quick%20Guide%20with%201%20Phase%20SHxRS_V3.0.pdf\ 70. Energy Storage System Products Catalogue - SUNGROW, accessed March 14, 2025, https://uk.sungrowpower.com/upload/file/20210909/EN%20BR%20Sungrow%20Energy%20Storage%20System%20Products%20Catalogue.pdf\ 71. DC Coupling vs AC Coupling: Which Solar System to Choose - Sungrow, accessed March 14, 2025, https://en.sungrowpower.com/blog-detail/5983/dc-coupling-vs-ac-coupling-which-solar-system-to-choose\ 72. Sungrow SBH battery - Accessory kit | AC Solar Warehouse AU, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.acsolarwarehouse.com/shop/sbh-accessory-kit-sungrow-sbh-battery-accessory-kit-25310\ 73. Sungrow SBR 3.2kWh High Voltage Battery Module , ASA00460 - Alternergy, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.alternergy.co.uk/sungrow-sbr-3-2-kwh-battery-asa00460\ 74. NEW Sungrow single phase hybrid inverters can operate without the grid or a battery, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.acsolarwarehouse.com/blog/news-7/new-sungrow-single-phase-hybrid-inverters-can-operate-without-the-grid-or-a-battery-255\ 75. Lawnton Sungrow SBH & Solar Hybrid System | Alvolta, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.alvolta.com.au/portfolio/info/74\ 76. Sungrow Battery Starter Pack - Huglo Solar, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.huglo.com.au/post/sungrow-battery-starter-pack\ 77. Sungrow SBR Battery System Bundles, accessed March 14, 2025, https://solarbatterysupermarket.com.au/products/sungrow-sbr-battery-system-bundles\ 78. Sungrow Hybrid 10kW RT Three-Phase Solar Inverter, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.springers.com.au/shop/sh10rt-sungrow-hybrid-10kw-rt-three-phase-solar-inverter-15108\ 79. Sungrow RT 5kW Three Phase Hybrid inverter (2 MPPT) SH5.0RT - Solar Batteries Online, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.solarbatteriesonline.com.au/product/sungrow-sh5-0rt-hv-5-0kw-residential-hybrid-three-phase-inverter/\ 80. SUNGROW SH10RT | 10kW 3-Phase Hybrid Inverter - Sparky Direct, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.sparkydirect.com.au/p/sungrow-sh10rt-10kw-3-phase-hybrid-inverter\ 81. Sungrow Hybrid 10kW 3 Phase 2 MPPT w/WiFi, DC Switch & EPS Built-in Inverter, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.solarheroes.com.au/product/sungrow-hybrid-10kw-3-phase-2-mppt-w-wifi-dc-switch-eps-built-in-inverter/\ 82. Sungrow Solar Inverters - Independent Review, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.solarchoice.net.au/products/inverters/Sungrow-review/\ 83. Sungrow 10.0kW - 3 Phase Hybrid Inverter (SH10RT) - Solar Superstore, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.solarsuperstore.com.au/products/sungrow-8-0kw-3-phase-hybrid-inverter-sh8-0rt\ 84. How Much Do Solar Batteries Cost in Australia? - SolarQuotes, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.solarquotes.com.au/battery-storage/cost/\ 85. Off Grid Solar system using a Sungrow inverter and battery, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.acsolarwarehouse.com/blog/news-7/off-grid-solar-system-using-a-sungrow-inverter-and-battery-312\ 86. Sungrow 14.08k W Off Grid Solar System / Single Phase - AHLEC, accessed March 14, 2025, https://ahlecsolar.com.au/product/sungrow-14-08k-w-off-grid-solar-system-single-phase/\ 87. Residential Battery Energy Storage System - Sungrow AU, accessed March 14, 2025, https://aus.sungrowpower.com/solutionsDetail/9/residential-storage-system\ 88. EV Charger - Sungrow, accessed March 14, 2025, https://en.sungrowpower.com/ProductsHome/59/ev-charger\ 89. Sungrow SBH 20kW High Voltage LFP Battery Including Accessory Kit SBH200 | eBay, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/135320073679\ 90. 20kWh Battery Kit - Login - Australian Solar Supplies Pty Ltd, accessed March 14, 2025, http://shop.ausolarsupplies.com.au/s.nl/it.A/id.6047/.f\ 91. Sungrow - Solar Batteries Online, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.solarbatteriesonline.com.au/sungrow/
# Comparative Evaluation of Tesla Powerwall and Sungrow Battery Options for a 3-Phase Sydney Residence
1. Executive Summary
This report presents a detailed comparative analysis of Tesla Powerwall and Sungrow battery options for a 3-phase residence in Sydney, Australia, equipped with a 6.6kW solar system and a Sungrow SG5KTL-MT inverter. The evaluation focuses on the suitability of these battery solutions for potential off-grid capability and Vehicle-to-Home (V2H) functionality for a EV. The analysis reveals that while both Tesla Powerwall and Sungrow offer compelling features for home energy storage, Sungrow battery systems, particularly when paired with their hybrid inverters, present a more direct and comprehensive solution for achieving 3-phase off-grid capability. For V2H integration, both systems currently rely on the development of compatible bidirectional charging infrastructure in Australia. Based on the user's stated goals, a Sungrow battery system, potentially requiring an upgrade to a Sungrow hybrid inverter, is the recommended solution.
2. Introduction: Context and Objectives
The Australian residential energy landscape is witnessing a significant shift towards energy independence, with increasing adoption of solar photovoltaic (PV) systems and battery storage. This trend is propelled by factors such as escalating electricity costs and a growing desire for reliable power, particularly during grid outages. This report addresses the specific needs of a Sydney homeowner who has already invested in a 6.6kW solar system connected to a 3-phase Sungrow SG5KTL-MT inverter and owns a Tesla electric vehicle. The homeowner is now exploring battery storage solutions, with a particular focus on enabling potential off-grid operation and facilitating future Vehicle-to-Home (V2H) capabilities for their Tesla.
The primary objectives of this report are threefold: firstly, to evaluate the technical and practical suitability of Tesla Powerwall for a 3-phase home in Sydney; secondly, to conduct a similar evaluation for various Sungrow battery options; and thirdly, to provide a comparative assessment of these two leading solutions based on their ability to support off-grid functionality and integrate with V2H technology. The scope of this analysis includes the latest Tesla Powerwall models available in Australia and relevant high-voltage battery options from Sungrow, specifically the SBR and SBH series. The geographical context is limited to Sydney, Australia, considering local grid regulations and market availability. This analysis relies on the provided research material and publicly accessible technical specifications to form its conclusions.
3. Analysis of Tesla Powerwall for a 3-Phase Sydney Home
3.1 Technical Specifications and Features:
The Tesla Powerwall is a well-established residential battery system. The latest generation, Powerwall 3, offers an energy capacity of 13.5 kWh 1 and can deliver up to 10 kW of on-grid power, with the same capacity for backup power, capable of a 185 A motor start 1. A key feature of Powerwall 3 is its integrated solar inverter with a 97.5% efficiency and three solar inputs with Maximum Power Point Trackers (MPPTs) in the Australian version 1. The system is scalable, allowing for the installation of up to four units 1, and utilizes Lithium Iron Phosphate (LFP) battery chemistry, known for its safety 5. In contrast, the Powerwall 2, while also having a 13.5 kWh energy capacity 7, provides a continuous power output of 5 kW with a 7 kW peak 7. Notably, Powerwall 2 does not have an integrated solar inverter 7 and uses Nickel Manganese Cobalt Oxide (NMC) battery chemistry 7. It offers greater scalability, supporting up to ten units 1. Both Powerwall 2 and 3 come with a 10-year warranty 2. Powerwall 3 necessitates the use of the Tesla Backup Gateway 2 2, while Powerwall 2 requires a Gateway for system control and backup functionality 7. The integrated inverter in Powerwall 3 streamlines installations for new solar and storage setups. However, for homeowners with existing inverters, such as the user, this feature might introduce complexities as the existing inverter's functionality could become redundant if the system were configured to primarily utilize the Powerwall 3's inverter. Powerwall 2, designed as an AC-coupled battery, might offer a more seamless integration by working in conjunction with the existing Sungrow inverter 3.
3.2 Compatibility with Existing 3-Phase Sungrow Inverter (AC Coupling):
Tesla Powerwall is designed as an AC-coupled battery, meaning it connects to the home's electrical system at the switchboard level and operates independently of the solar inverter 9. This AC coupling capability generally allows Powerwall to be compatible with a wide range of existing solar inverters, including the user's 3-phase Sungrow SG5KTL-MT model 2. Specifically, Powerwall 2 demonstrates 100% compatibility with single-phase grid-connected solar systems installed after October 2016 9. For Powerwall 3, Tesla indicates AC coupling compatibility with existing solar systems up to 5kW 2. However, a crucial consideration arises during grid outages concerning the ability to charge the Powerwall from solar. If the home has a 3-phase solar inverter, like the user's Sungrow SG5KTL-MT, Powerwall 2 might not be able to charge from solar during a blackout because many 3-phase inverters require the presence of all three phases from the grid to operate 9. This limitation could also extend to Powerwall 3 when AC-coupled with a 3-phase inverter 8. Given the user's interest in potential off-grid capability, this inability to recharge the battery from solar during a grid outage significantly limits the duration of backup power to the energy stored within the Powerwall. Furthermore, the user's 6.6kW solar system output exceeds the 5kW AC coupling limit specified for a single Powerwall 3. This suggests that either the entire solar generation cannot be used to charge a single Powerwall 3 via AC coupling, or a more complex configuration involving multiple Powerwall units might be necessary.
3.3 Suitability for Off-Grid Operation in a 3-Phase System:
The Tesla Powerwall is fundamentally a single-phase battery system and can only provide backup power to a single phase within a 3-phase home 8. During a power outage, only the electrical circuits connected to the phase that the Powerwall is backing up will remain operational 8. This necessitates careful planning to ensure that essential loads, such as lighting, refrigerators, and internet connectivity, are connected to this designated phase 8. While it is possible to install multiple Powerwall units, with one unit dedicated to each phase, this significantly increases the overall cost and introduces complexities in system management 8. Notably, even with the installation of three Powerwall 3 units, comprehensive 3-phase backup is not guaranteed 20. It is also important to recognize that Tesla does not officially support or provide warranties for off-grid installations of Powerwall 2. The Powerwall system is primarily designed for grid-connected homes to provide backup during outages and to optimize energy consumption, rather than functioning as the primary power source in a completely off-grid scenario. Therefore, achieving a truly comprehensive off-grid capability for a 3-phase home using Tesla Powerwall would likely involve a substantial financial investment in multiple units, meticulous load balancing across the phases, and navigating the limitations of single-phase backup, all without official support from the manufacturer.
3.4 Potential for V2H Integration with a EV in Australia:
Vehicle-to-Home (V2H) technology, which allows an electric vehicle to supply power back to a home, is gaining traction in Australia. Regulatory changes have been made to permit bidirectional charging systems, with mainstream adoption expected in 2025 21. Australian standards for bidirectional charging are now approved, and compatible chargers are anticipated to become available in 2025 22. Currently, the research snippets do not indicate that Tesla Powerwall offers direct, integrated V2H functionality with Tesla cars in Australia 1. However, the Tesla Powerwall can play a supportive role in a V2H ecosystem. It can efficiently store excess energy generated by the solar system 1, which could then be used to charge the Tesla car. If the Tesla car is equipped with V2H capabilities and connected to a compatible bidirectional charger, the energy stored in the Powerwall (or directly from solar) could indirectly contribute to powering the home by first charging the vehicle's battery. The actual discharge from the vehicle to the home would be managed by the bidirectional charger and the vehicle's internal systems, not directly by the Powerwall. Therefore, while Powerwall doesn't inherently provide V2H, it can act as a crucial energy storage component within a broader V2H setup.
3.5 Cost and Installation Considerations in Sydney:
The cost of a Tesla Powerwall 3 in Australia is approximately $13,600, which includes the mandatory Backup Gateway 2 2. Powerwall 2 has an approximate price of $8,750 to $9,750, excluding installation and the Backup Gateway 7, with the installed cost estimated between $12,000 and $14,000 7. Installation costs for Powerwall 3 as part of a new solar system at Penrith Solar Centre start at $23,990 (including a 6kW solar system), while adding it to an existing system is around $15,990 27. Installing a Powerwall system in a 3-phase home can incur additional costs and complexities compared to single-phase installations 13. If the goal is to achieve any level of backup across multiple phases using Powerwall, the cost would escalate significantly with the need for multiple units. Homeowners in NSW may be eligible for rebates under the Peak Demand Reduction Scheme (PDRS), which can help offset the initial investment in a Tesla Powerwall 5. However, the overall cost of a Powerwall system, especially when considering a multi-unit setup for more comprehensive backup in a 3-phase home, remains a substantial financial consideration.
4. Analysis of Sungrow Battery Options for a 3-Phase Sydney Home
4.1 Technical Specifications of Relevant Sungrow Battery Models (SBR and SBH Series):
Sungrow offers a range of high-voltage battery solutions, primarily the SBR and SBH series, utilizing Lithium Iron Phosphate (LiFePO4) chemistry for enhanced safety 5. The SBR series features a modular design with 3.2 kWh battery modules, allowing for system capacities ranging from 9.6 kWh (3 modules) up to 25.6 kWh (8 modules) in a single stack. Multiple stacks can be connected in parallel to achieve even larger capacities, up to 100 kWh 6. These batteries boast 100% usable energy capacity 26 and are high-voltage systems 33. The SBH series also employs a modular design with larger 5 kWh battery modules. A single stack can accommodate 4 to 8 modules, providing usable energy from 20 kWh to 40 kWh. Similar to the SBR series, multiple SBH stacks can be connected in parallel to reach a maximum capacity of 160 kWh 5. Both the SBR and SBH series come with a 10-year warranty 5 and are primarily designed for DC coupling with Sungrow's hybrid inverter range, particularly the SH series, which includes models specifically designed for 3-phase systems (SH-RT series) 33. The availability of a wider range of capacities and the modular design of both the SBR and SBH series provide greater flexibility for the user to tailor a battery system to their specific energy consumption needs. The SBH series, with its larger 5 kWh modules, appears particularly well-suited for homes with potentially higher energy demands, such as those with 3-phase connections.
4.2 Compatibility with Existing 3-Phase Sungrow Inverter (DC and AC Coupling):
The user's existing Sungrow SG5KTL-MT inverter is a grid-tied inverter and not a hybrid model designed for direct DC coupling with batteries 5. Sungrow's high-voltage batteries, such as the SBR and SBH series, are primarily intended for DC coupling with their SH series hybrid inverters 33. While direct DC coupling is not an option with the SG5KTL-MT, it is possible to AC couple Sungrow batteries to the existing solar system 35. This would likely require the addition of a separate battery inverter to manage the charging and discharging of the Sungrow battery, as the SG5KTL-MT does not have this functionality. Although AC coupling offers a way to integrate a battery without replacing the existing solar inverter, it can introduce inefficiencies due to the multiple AC-DC and DC-AC conversions. For optimal performance and to fully leverage the capabilities of Sungrow's high-voltage batteries, particularly for off-grid operation, upgrading to a Sungrow SH series hybrid inverter would be the recommended approach.
4.3 Suitability for Off-Grid Operation in a 3-Phase System:
Sungrow offers a distinct advantage in providing solutions for 3-phase off-grid operation through their SH-RT series of hybrid inverters 5. These inverters, when paired with Sungrow's SBR or SBH batteries, are capable of providing seamless transition to 3-phase backup power during grid outages 63. The SH-RT series is specifically designed to support 100% unbalanced loads in backup mode, ensuring that essential appliances continue to run during a blackout 66. Both the SBR and SBH battery series are compatible with off-grid operation when used in conjunction with the appropriate Sungrow hybrid inverters. Some single-phase Sungrow hybrid inverters (SH-RS series) also offer off-grid capabilities and support generator connection for battery charging during extended periods of low solar generation 85. This comprehensive ecosystem of Sungrow products provides a more direct and integrated pathway for the user to achieve their goal of potential 3-phase off-grid capability compared to the single-phase limitations of Tesla Powerwall.
4.4 Potential for V2H Integration with a Tesla Car in Australia:
Similar to Tesla Powerwall, the provided research material does not explicitly mention direct V2H integration capabilities for Sungrow battery systems with Tesla cars in Australia 22. However, Sungrow's active involvement in the broader renewable energy and electric vehicle charging sectors suggests a strong potential for future integration. Sungrow manufactures its own range of EV chargers 64, and their 3-phase hybrid inverter solutions can be paired with these chargers for smart green power charging 64. As V2H technology and the necessary bidirectional charging infrastructure become more prevalent in Australia, it is conceivable that Sungrow's integrated energy management systems, including their batteries and hybrid inverters, could be updated to support V2H functionality, potentially even with Tesla vehicles through standardized protocols or future partnerships. In the interim, a Sungrow battery system can efficiently store solar energy, which could then be used to charge a Tesla car. The potential for the Tesla car to discharge back to the home would depend on the availability and compatibility of third-party bidirectional chargers that adhere to the evolving Australian standards.
4.5 Cost and Installation Considerations in Sydney:
The cost of Sungrow batteries in Australia varies depending on the model and capacity. For the SBR series, a 9.6 kWh system is approximately $11,500 installed, a 12.8 kWh system around $13,200 installed, and a 25.6 kWh system around $19,700 installed. Supply-only costs for the SBH series 20 kWh kit range from $13,778.70 to $14,360 40. Compatible 3-phase hybrid inverters from Sungrow, such as the SH5.0RT, are priced around $3,760, while the SH10RT ranges from approximately $4,174.50 to $5,720 78. If the user opts for a Sungrow battery system to achieve optimal 3-phase off-grid capability, the cost of a new SH series hybrid inverter would need to be included, as the existing SG5KTL-MT is not compatible for direct DC coupling. While AC coupling might be a less expensive initial step, it could involve the additional cost of a separate battery inverter. Homeowners in NSW can potentially benefit from the NSW battery rebate when purchasing a Sungrow battery system, which could help reduce the overall cost 5. Although Sungrow batteries often offer a competitive cost per kWh, the total investment for a comprehensive 3-phase off-grid solution might be higher than a single-phase Tesla Powerwall setup, primarily due to the potential need for a new hybrid inverter.
5. Comparative Assessment: Tesla Powerwall vs. Sungrow Batteries
5.1 Side-by-Side Comparison Table of Key Specifications:
| Feature | Tesla Powerwall 3 | Sungrow SBR (Example: 12.8 kWh) + SH10RT |
| :---- | :---- | :---- |
| Usable Energy Capacity (kWh) | 13.5 | 12.8 |
| Continuous Power Output (kW) | 10 | 10 |
| Peak Power Output (kW) | 10 | 12 (5 min) |
| Battery Chemistry | Lithium Iron Phosphate | Lithium Iron Phosphate |
| Scalability | Up to 4 units (54 kWh) | Up to 25.6 kWh per stack, 4 stacks parallel (102.4 kWh) |
| Off-Grid Backup (Phases Supported) | Single-Phase | Three-Phase |
| V2H Support (Current/Future Potential) | Potential via 3rd party charger | Potential via 3rd party charger |
| Warranty (Years) | 10 | 10 |
| Estimated Cost (AUD) | $13,600 + installation | $13,200 (battery installed) + $4,175 - $5,720 (inverter) |
5.2 Detailed Comparison Based on Off-Grid Capability Requirements:
When considering the user's goal of potential off-grid capability for a 3-phase home, Sungrow presents a more robust solution. The availability of Sungrow's SH-RT series hybrid inverters, specifically designed for 3-phase systems and fully compatible with their SBR and SBH batteries, allows for a direct and integrated approach to achieving 3-phase backup power. These systems can seamlessly transition to off-grid mode, powering all three phases of the home, which is crucial for operating 3-phase appliances and ensuring comprehensive whole-house backup. In contrast, Tesla Powerwall, being a single-phase battery, inherently limits off-grid backup to a single phase in a 3-phase home 8. While multiple Powerwall units can be installed, this increases cost and complexity without guaranteeing full 3-phase backup or official off-grid support from Tesla. Therefore, for a user prioritizing potential for comprehensive 3-phase off-grid operation, Sungrow's ecosystem offers a more suitable and supported pathway.
5.3 Detailed Comparison Based on V2H Functionality Requirements:
Currently, neither Tesla Powerwall nor Sungrow batteries offer direct, integrated V2H functionality for Tesla cars in Australia 22. Both systems can store solar energy that could be used to charge a Tesla car, and the potential for the car to discharge back to the home (V2H) would rely on the development and adoption of compatible bidirectional charging infrastructure in Australia, which is expected to become more mainstream in 2025 21. Sungrow's involvement in manufacturing EV chargers and integrating them with their hybrid inverters suggests a potential for future V2H integration within their ecosystem. Similarly, while Tesla Powerwall doesn't currently offer V2H, its role as a home energy storage solution makes it a complementary technology to V2H, providing a place to store energy that could eventually be managed within a V2H framework.
5.4 Cost-Effectiveness and Overall Value Analysis:
When evaluating cost-effectiveness, Sungrow batteries often have a lower cost per kWh of storage compared to Tesla Powerwall 5. However, for the user with an existing non-hybrid inverter, achieving the desired 3-phase off-grid capability with Sungrow would likely necessitate an additional investment in a Sungrow SH-RT series hybrid inverter. This would increase the initial outlay compared to simply AC coupling a Tesla Powerwall to the existing inverter for single-phase backup. The overall value proposition depends heavily on the user's priorities. If the primary goal is to have backup power for essential loads on a single phase and potential future V2H integration, Tesla Powerwall could be a viable option. However, if the potential for comprehensive 3-phase off-grid operation is a significant factor, then the added expense of a Sungrow hybrid inverter might be justified by the enhanced functionality and future-proofing for energy independence. Sungrow's reputation for affordability and the modularity of their battery systems also offer long-term value and flexibility.
6. Recommendations and Considerations
Based on the analysis, for a 3-phase home in Sydney with a 6.6kW solar system and the goal of potential off-grid capability, Sungrow battery options are recommended. Specifically, the user should consider upgrading their existing Sungrow SG5KTL-MT inverter to a Sungrow SH series hybrid inverter (e.g., SH5.0RT or SH10RT, depending on anticipated power demands) and pairing it with a Sungrow high-voltage battery from either the SBR or SBH series. The choice between SBR and SBH would depend on the desired storage capacity and budget. This combination offers a more direct and supported path to achieving 3-phase backup power and the potential for future off-grid operation.
Key Considerations for the User:
Off-Grid Capability: The level of off-grid capability desired (partial single-phase backup vs. comprehensive whole-home 3-phase backup) is a crucial factor. For the latter, Sungrow is the more suitable choice.
Budget: Both options represent a significant investment. The user should obtain detailed quotes for both Tesla Powerwall (considering single or multiple units) and a complete Sungrow hybrid inverter and battery system.
V2H Timeline: The user's timeline for V2H adoption should be considered. Both systems will likely integrate via third-party chargers.
Inverter Upgrade: If pursuing the optimal Sungrow solution for off-grid capability, the cost and logistics of upgrading the existing inverter need to be factored in.
* 3-Phase Backup Importance: The necessity of having backup power across all three phases should weigh heavily in the decision, favoring Sungrow.
It is strongly recommended that the user obtain detailed quotes from certified installers in the Sydney area for both Tesla Powerwall and various Sungrow system configurations to get accurate pricing, installation details, and information on available rebates and incentives in NSW.
7. Conclusion
In conclusion, while Tesla Powerwall offers a well-regarded solution for home energy storage with reliable backup capabilities, its inherent single-phase design presents limitations for users with 3-phase homes seeking comprehensive off-grid functionality. Sungrow, with its range of high-voltage batteries and particularly its 3-phase hybrid inverter systems, provides a more direct and technically sound pathway to achieving the user's goals of potential 3-phase off-grid operation. For V2H integration, both systems are currently positioned to benefit from the evolving Australian regulatory landscape and the development of compatible bidirectional charging technologies. Ultimately, the optimal choice will depend on the user's specific priorities, budget, and the level of off-grid capability they wish to achieve. The rapidly evolving nature of battery storage and V2H technology suggests that continued research and consultation with experts are advisable before making a final decision.
#### Works cited
1. Powerwall – Home Battery Storage | Tesla Australia, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.tesla.com/en_au/powerwall](https://www.tesla.com/en_au/powerwall)
2. Tesla Powerwall 3 in Australia: Everything You Need to Know - Fritts Solar, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.frittssolar.com.au/tesla-powerwall-3-australia/](https://www.frittssolar.com.au/tesla-powerwall-3-australia/)
3. What to Expect for Powerwall 3 | Tesla Support Australia, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.tesla.com/en_au/support/energy/powerwall/learn/what-expect-powerwall-3](https://www.tesla.com/en_au/support/energy/powerwall/learn/what-expect-powerwall-3)
4. Tesla Powerwall 3 Review - Clean Energy Reviews, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.cleanenergyreviews.info/blog/tesla-powerwall-3-review](https://www.cleanenergyreviews.info/blog/tesla-powerwall-3-review)
5. Sungrow SBH vs. Tesla Powerwall 3: Which is Better? NSW - Elite Power Group, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.elitepowergroup.com.au/news/sungrow-sbh-vs-tesla-powerwall-3-which-is-better-nsw/](https://www.elitepowergroup.com.au/news/sungrow-sbh-vs-tesla-powerwall-3-which-is-better-nsw/)
6. Sungrow Battery vs Tesla Powerwall Review - Volteam Electric, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://volteam.com.au/blog/sungrow-vs-tesla-battery-review/](https://volteam.com.au/blog/sungrow-vs-tesla-battery-review/)
7. Tesla Powerwall 2: A Complete 2024 Buyers Guide | Solar Choice, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.solarchoice.net.au/products/batteries/tesla-powerwall-2-review/](https://www.solarchoice.net.au/products/batteries/tesla-powerwall-2-review/)
8. Can You Install The Powerwall 3 On A Three-Phase Home? - SolarQuotes, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.solarquotes.com.au/blog/three-phase-powerwall-3/](https://www.solarquotes.com.au/blog/three-phase-powerwall-3/)
9. Is my grid connect solar system 100% compatible with a Tesla Powerwall 2 battery?, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://support.solarquotes.com.au/hc/en-us/articles/115001986773-Is-my-grid-connect-solar-system-100-compatible-with-a-Tesla-Powerwall-2-battery](https://support.solarquotes.com.au/hc/en-us/articles/115001986773-Is-my-grid-connect-solar-system-100-compatible-with-a-Tesla-Powerwall-2-battery)
10. THE 3-PHASE SOLUTION - SUNGROW, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://uk.sungrowpower.com/upload/file/20210706/EN%203-phaseSolution%20Factsheet.pdf](https://uk.sungrowpower.com/upload/file/20210706/EN%203-phaseSolution%20Factsheet.pdf)
11. Combining Systems with Powerwall | Tesla Support, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.tesla.com/support/energy/powerwall/learn/combining-systems](https://www.tesla.com/support/energy/powerwall/learn/combining-systems)
12. Powerwall System Design | Tesla Support, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.tesla.com/support/energy/powerwall/learn/system-design](https://www.tesla.com/support/energy/powerwall/learn/system-design)
13. Installing Powerwall 3 on a Three-phase Site | PSC - Penrith Solar Centre, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.penrithsolar.com.au/blog/installing-powerwall-3-on-a-three-phase-site/](https://www.penrithsolar.com.au/blog/installing-powerwall-3-on-a-three-phase-site/)
14. Powerwall 3: When It Makes Sense and When It Doesn't - SolarQuotes, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.solarquotes.com.au/blog/powerwall-3-when-it-makes-sense/](https://www.solarquotes.com.au/blog/powerwall-3-when-it-makes-sense/)
15. AC-Coupled Solar System Sizing - Energy Library - Tesla, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://energylibrary.tesla.com/docs/Public/EnergyStorage/Powerwall/3/SystemDesign/en-us/GUID-23D242D1-8D65-47B9-9118-57002FFD84D2.html](https://energylibrary.tesla.com/docs/Public/EnergyStorage/Powerwall/3/SystemDesign/en-us/GUID-23D242D1-8D65-47B9-9118-57002FFD84D2.html)
16. Powerwall 3 Roadmap - 3 Phase Coming! | Tesla Motors Club, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/powerwall-3-roadmap-3-phase-coming.321409/](https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/powerwall-3-roadmap-3-phase-coming.321409/)
17. Advice on how to install with 3 phase : r/solar - Reddit, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.reddit.com/r/solar/comments/19djazk/advice_on_how_to_install_with_3_phase/](https://www.reddit.com/r/solar/comments/19djazk/advice_on_how_to_install_with_3_phase/)
18. TESLA POWERWALL+ (3) - DIY Solar Depot, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://diysolardepot.com/product/ground-mount-solar-hardware/pro-solar-ground-trac/](https://diysolardepot.com/product/ground-mount-solar-hardware/pro-solar-ground-trac/)
19. Design Considerations - Energy Library - Tesla, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://energylibrary.tesla.com/docs/Public/EnergyStorage/Powerwall/3/SystemDesign/en-us/GUID-3E19662A-E501-47DB-81AE-E9EC19735B8B.html](https://energylibrary.tesla.com/docs/Public/EnergyStorage/Powerwall/3/SystemDesign/en-us/GUID-3E19662A-E501-47DB-81AE-E9EC19735B8B.html)
20. Problems with Powerwall 3 | Penrith Solar Centre, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.penrithsolar.com.au/blog/problems-with-powerwall-3/](https://www.penrithsolar.com.au/blog/problems-with-powerwall-3/)
21. EV Charging in Australia Gets a Makeover with V2G/V2H Approved for 2025 - SEVR, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://sevr.au/news/ev-charging-in-australia-gets-a-makeover-with-v2g-v2h-approved-for-2025/](https://sevr.au/news/ev-charging-in-australia-gets-a-makeover-with-v2g-v2h-approved-for-2025/)
22. V2G, V2L & V2H Explained: Vehicle to Grid in Australia? 2025 - Elite Power Group, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.elitepowergroup.com.au/news/what-is-vehicle-to-grid/](https://www.elitepowergroup.com.au/news/what-is-vehicle-to-grid/)
23. Australia's Future – Bidirectional EV Charging, Solar & Battery Storage as Standard Features, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://fullycharged.show/blog/australias-future-bidirectional-ev-charging-solar-battery-storage-as-standard-features/](https://fullycharged.show/blog/australias-future-bidirectional-ev-charging-solar-battery-storage-as-standard-features/)
24. 2025, the Year of Vehicle-to-Grid in Australia V2G Milestone - Elite Power Group, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.elitepowergroup.com.au/news/one-step-closer-to-v2g-in-australia-2025-to-be-the-year-of-v2x/](https://www.elitepowergroup.com.au/news/one-step-closer-to-v2g-in-australia-2025-to-be-the-year-of-v2x/)
25. Bidirectional Charging for Electric Cars: Unlocking New Possibilities - Solar Batteries Online, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.solarbatteriesonline.com.au/bidirectional-charging-for-electric-cars-unlocking-new-possibilities/](https://www.solarbatteriesonline.com.au/bidirectional-charging-for-electric-cars-unlocking-new-possibilities/)
26. The Best Home Batteries In Australia In 2025: According To Aussie Installers - SolarQuotes, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.solarquotes.com.au/blog/best-home-batteries-2025/](https://www.solarquotes.com.au/blog/best-home-batteries-2025/)
27. How Much Does a Tesla Powerwall 3 Cost? | Penrith Solar Centre, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.penrithsolar.com.au/blog/how-much-does-a-tesla-powerwall-3-cost/](https://www.penrithsolar.com.au/blog/how-much-does-a-tesla-powerwall-3-cost/)
28. Expected 3 Phase upgrade price? : r/AusRenovation - Reddit, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.reddit.com/r/AusRenovation/comments/19383oa/expected_3_phase_upgrade_price/](https://www.reddit.com/r/AusRenovation/comments/19383oa/expected_3_phase_upgrade_price/)
29. Powerwall cost for Sydney? | Tesla Motors Club, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/powerwall-cost-for-sydney.340317/](https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/powerwall-cost-for-sydney.340317/)
30. Solar Battery Costs: Are They Worth It?, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.solarchoice.net.au/solar-batteries/is-home-battery-storage-worth-it/](https://www.solarchoice.net.au/solar-batteries/is-home-battery-storage-worth-it/)
31. Tesla Powerwall 3 Price and Installation - Solar4Life, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.solar4life.com.au/learns/tesla-powerwall-3-price-and-installation](https://www.solar4life.com.au/learns/tesla-powerwall-3-price-and-installation)
32. Solar Battery Price, Savings and Payback, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://solarcalculator.com.au/battery-storage/price/](https://solarcalculator.com.au/battery-storage/price/)
33. Sungrow | Solar Batteries Review - SolarQuotes, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.solarquotes.com.au/battery-storage/reviews/sungrow-review.html](https://www.solarquotes.com.au/battery-storage/reviews/sungrow-review.html)
34. Sungrow SBR high voltage battery - VP Solar, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.vpsolar.com/en/sungrow-sbr-high-voltage-battery/](https://www.vpsolar.com/en/sungrow-sbr-high-voltage-battery/)
35. Sungrow Battery SBR Series - SolarBright, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://solarbright.com.au/product/sungrow-battery-sbr-series/](https://solarbright.com.au/product/sungrow-battery-sbr-series/)
36. Sungrow SBR 3.2kWh module - Huglo Solar, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.huglo.com.au/batteries/sbr-high-voltage-lfp-battery](https://www.huglo.com.au/batteries/sbr-high-voltage-lfp-battery)
37. Sungrow Inverter and battery Review - Clean Energy Reviews, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.cleanenergyreviews.info/blog/sungrow-solar-inverters-review](https://www.cleanenergyreviews.info/blog/sungrow-solar-inverters-review)
38. SBH100/150/200/250/300/350/400 - Sungrow, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://en.sungrowpower.com/productDetail/5568/battery-sbh100-150-200-250-300-350-400](https://en.sungrowpower.com/productDetail/5568/battery-sbh100-150-200-250-300-350-400)
39. 20/25/30/35/40 kWh Solar Battery - Sungrow AU, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://aus.sungrowpower.com/productDetail/3112/battery-sbh200-250-300-350-400](https://aus.sungrowpower.com/productDetail/3112/battery-sbh200-250-300-350-400)
40. Sungrow SBH Stackable Battery System - Grow Energy, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://growenergy.com.au/products/sungrow-sbh-stackable-battery-system](https://growenergy.com.au/products/sungrow-sbh-stackable-battery-system)
41. Sungrow SBH High Voltage Battery Bundle (SBH200 - SBH400), accessed March 14, 2025, [https://solarbatterysupermarket.com.au/products/sungrow-sbh-high-voltage-battery-bundle-sbh200-sbh400](https://solarbatterysupermarket.com.au/products/sungrow-sbh-high-voltage-battery-bundle-sbh200-sbh400)
42. Buy cheap SunGrow solar inverters, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://tienda-solar.es/en/brand/54-sungrow](https://tienda-solar.es/en/brand/54-sungrow)
43. Sungrow PowCube battery storage system (Analysis & review) - Solar Choice, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.solarchoice.net.au/products/batteries/sungrow-review/](https://www.solarchoice.net.au/products/batteries/sungrow-review/)
44. What inverters do we connect to? – Welcome to our Help Center - Support - SwitchDin, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://support.switchdin.com/hc/en-us/articles/19642583185817-What-inverters-do-we-connect-to](https://support.switchdin.com/hc/en-us/articles/19642583185817-What-inverters-do-we-connect-to)
45. Accessories Cross Reference Guide - Sungrow Australia Service, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://service.sungrowpower.com.au/files/Web_Files/FAQ/TI_202007_Sungrow%20Accessories%20Cross%20Reference%20Guide_V1.0.pdf](https://service.sungrowpower.com.au/files/Web_Files/FAQ/TI_202007_Sungrow%20Accessories%20Cross%20Reference%20Guide_V1.0.pdf)
46. Sungrow - Solar System Inverter - Solargain, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.solargain.com.au/solar-inverters/sungrow-solar-inverters](https://www.solargain.com.au/solar-inverters/sungrow-solar-inverters)
47. Sungrow Battery Review | A Comprehensive Guide - Esteem Energy, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://esteemenergy.com.au/blog/sungrow-battery-review/](https://esteemenergy.com.au/blog/sungrow-battery-review/)
48. Sungrow 5kW Inverter + Tesla Powerwall + Longi 370w Hi-MO4m 7.4kW Solar System, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://ahlecsolar.com.au/product/sungrow-5kw-inverter-tesla-powerwall-longi-370w-hi-mo4m-7-4kw-solar-system/](https://ahlecsolar.com.au/product/sungrow-5kw-inverter-tesla-powerwall-longi-370w-hi-mo4m-7-4kw-solar-system/)
49. Sungrow | Solar Inverters Review - SolarQuotes, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.solarquotes.com.au/inverters/sungrow-review.html](https://www.solarquotes.com.au/inverters/sungrow-review.html)
50. Tesla Powerwall: Inverter Compatibility Under the Spotlight - 1KOMMA5, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://1komma5.com/au/batteries/tesla-powerwall-2-compatible-solar-power-system/](https://1komma5.com/au/batteries/tesla-powerwall-2-compatible-solar-power-system/)
51. Hi everybody, question about V2H power : r/electricvehicles - Reddit, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.reddit.com/r/electricvehicles/comments/1hqneh3/hi_everybody_question_about_v2h_power/](https://www.reddit.com/r/electricvehicles/comments/1hqneh3/hi_everybody_question_about_v2h_power/)
52. Commercial Solar System | PV Plant | Rooftop - Sungrow US, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://us.sungrowpower.com/solutionsDetail/10/commercial-storage-systems](https://us.sungrowpower.com/solutionsDetail/10/commercial-storage-systems)
53. SH8.0/10RS | 8kW/10kW | Single Phase | Sungrow Hybrid Inverter-Sungrow AU, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://aus.sungrowpower.com/productDetail/2565/mv-power-converter-hybrid-inverter-sh8-0-10rs](https://aus.sungrowpower.com/productDetail/2565/mv-power-converter-hybrid-inverter-sh8-0-10rs)
54. Approved Batteries with SH Series Hybrid Inverters - Sungrow Australia Service, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://service.sungrowpower.com.au/files/Web_Files/FAQ/Approved%20battery%20declaration%20for%20sungrow%20hybrid%20inverters-20201209_V14_EN.pdf](https://service.sungrowpower.com.au/files/Web_Files/FAQ/Approved%20battery%20declaration%20for%20sungrow%20hybrid%20inverters-20201209_V14_EN.pdf)
55. Right inverter for the Tesla Powerwall 2 : r/solar - Reddit, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.reddit.com/r/solar/comments/1chgnj8/right_inverter_for_the_tesla_powerwall_2/](https://www.reddit.com/r/solar/comments/1chgnj8/right_inverter_for_the_tesla_powerwall_2/)
56. Sungrow Inverters - Gold Coast Solar Power Solutions, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://gold-coast-solar-power-solutions.com.au/gold-coast-solar-power-products/solar-power-inverters/sungrow-inverters/](https://gold-coast-solar-power-solutions.com.au/gold-coast-solar-power-products/solar-power-inverters/sungrow-inverters/)
57. Sungrow SBR192 Lithium-ion Battery - Europe-SolarStore.com, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.europe-solarstore.com/sungrow-sbr192-lithium-ion-battery.html](https://www.europe-solarstore.com/sungrow-sbr192-lithium-ion-battery.html)
58. High-Efficiency Solar Battery: Up to 100% Usable Energy - Sungrow, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://en.sungrowpower.com/ProductsHome/20/23/battery](https://en.sungrowpower.com/ProductsHome/20/23/battery)
59. Warranty | Sungrow Australia and New Zealand Service, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://service.sungrowpower.com.au/Warranty/warranty](https://service.sungrowpower.com.au/Warranty/warranty)
60. Sungrow Battery cross-reference chart, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://service.sungrowpower.com.au/GD_202405_SBR%20and%20SBH_Cross%20Reference%20Chart_V1.4%20Final.pdf](https://service.sungrowpower.com.au/GD_202405_SBR%20and%20SBH_Cross%20Reference%20Chart_V1.4%20Final.pdf)
61. Sungrow SG5KTL-MT - SolarTopStore.com, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.solartopstore.com/products/sungrow-sg5ktl-mt](https://www.solartopstore.com/products/sungrow-sg5ktl-mt)
62. Approved Batteries with SH Series Hybrid Inverters EU Version V1.6.3 - Sungrow AU, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://aus.sungrowpower.com/upload/file/20211119/TI_20210906_approved%20battery%20declaration%20for%20sungrow%20hybrid%20inverters_V16_EN.pdf](https://aus.sungrowpower.com/upload/file/20211119/TI_20210906_approved%20battery%20declaration%20for%20sungrow%20hybrid%20inverters_V16_EN.pdf)
63. BLACKOUT? NO, THANKS! POWER WHENEVER YOU NEED IT - SUNGROW, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://uk.sungrowpower.com/upload/file/20211202/EN%20FS%20Sungrow%203-phase%20Hybrid%20Backup%20Factsheet.pdf](https://uk.sungrowpower.com/upload/file/20211202/EN%20FS%20Sungrow%203-phase%20Hybrid%20Backup%20Factsheet.pdf)
64. Sungrow 3-phase solution with 6 kVA inverter, EV charger and 9.6 kWh storage - Memodo, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.memodo-shop.com/sungrow-3-phase-solution-with-6-kva-inverter-ev-charger-and-9.6-kwh-storage/9767](https://www.memodo-shop.com/sungrow-3-phase-solution-with-6-kva-inverter-ev-charger-and-9.6-kwh-storage/9767)
65. THE 3-PHASE SOLUTION - SUNGROW, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://uk.sungrowpower.com/upload/file/20230116/EN%20FS%203-phaseSolution%20Factsheet.pdf](https://uk.sungrowpower.com/upload/file/20230116/EN%20FS%203-phaseSolution%20Factsheet.pdf)
66. Sungrow Three-Phase Hybrid Inverter - Solar4Life, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.solar4life.com.au/product-detail/sungrow-5-20kw-3-phase-hybrid](https://www.solar4life.com.au/product-detail/sungrow-5-20kw-3-phase-hybrid)
67. SG5KTL-MT/SG6KTL-MT/SG8KTL-M (Non-China ... - ENF Solar, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.enfsolar.com/pv/inverter-datasheet/12176](https://www.enfsolar.com/pv/inverter-datasheet/12176)
68. Sungrow SBR battery combiner box - AC Solar Warehouse, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.acsolarwarehouse.com/shop/sungrow-battery-combiner-box-for-multiple-sungrow-lfp-battery-stacks-23620](https://www.acsolarwarehouse.com/shop/sungrow-battery-combiner-box-for-multiple-sungrow-lfp-battery-stacks-23620)
69. Sungrow SBR HV Battery Installation Quick Guide, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://service.sungrowpower.com.au/files/Web_Files/FAQ/GD_202202_SBR%20HV%20Battery%20Installation%20Quick%20Guide%20with%201%20Phase%20SHxRS_V3.0.pdf](https://service.sungrowpower.com.au/files/Web_Files/FAQ/GD_202202_SBR%20HV%20Battery%20Installation%20Quick%20Guide%20with%201%20Phase%20SHxRS_V3.0.pdf)
70. Energy Storage System Products Catalogue - SUNGROW, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://uk.sungrowpower.com/upload/file/20210909/EN%20BR%20Sungrow%20Energy%20Storage%20System%20Products%20Catalogue.pdf](https://uk.sungrowpower.com/upload/file/20210909/EN%20BR%20Sungrow%20Energy%20Storage%20System%20Products%20Catalogue.pdf)
71. DC Coupling vs AC Coupling: Which Solar System to Choose - Sungrow, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://en.sungrowpower.com/blog-detail/5983/dc-coupling-vs-ac-coupling-which-solar-system-to-choose](https://en.sungrowpower.com/blog-detail/5983/dc-coupling-vs-ac-coupling-which-solar-system-to-choose)
72. Sungrow SBH battery - Accessory kit | AC Solar Warehouse AU, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.acsolarwarehouse.com/shop/sbh-accessory-kit-sungrow-sbh-battery-accessory-kit-25310](https://www.acsolarwarehouse.com/shop/sbh-accessory-kit-sungrow-sbh-battery-accessory-kit-25310)
73. Sungrow SBR 3.2kWh High Voltage Battery Module , ASA00460 - Alternergy, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.alternergy.co.uk/sungrow-sbr-3-2-kwh-battery-asa00460](https://www.alternergy.co.uk/sungrow-sbr-3-2-kwh-battery-asa00460)
74. NEW Sungrow single phase hybrid inverters can operate without the grid or a battery, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.acsolarwarehouse.com/blog/news-7/new-sungrow-single-phase-hybrid-inverters-can-operate-without-the-grid-or-a-battery-255](https://www.acsolarwarehouse.com/blog/news-7/new-sungrow-single-phase-hybrid-inverters-can-operate-without-the-grid-or-a-battery-255)
75. Lawnton Sungrow SBH & Solar Hybrid System | Alvolta, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.alvolta.com.au/portfolio/info/74](https://www.alvolta.com.au/portfolio/info/74)
76. Sungrow Battery Starter Pack - Huglo Solar, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.huglo.com.au/post/sungrow-battery-starter-pack](https://www.huglo.com.au/post/sungrow-battery-starter-pack)
77. Sungrow SBR Battery System Bundles, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://solarbatterysupermarket.com.au/products/sungrow-sbr-battery-system-bundles](https://solarbatterysupermarket.com.au/products/sungrow-sbr-battery-system-bundles)
78. Sungrow Hybrid 10kW RT Three-Phase Solar Inverter, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.springers.com.au/shop/sh10rt-sungrow-hybrid-10kw-rt-three-phase-solar-inverter-15108](https://www.springers.com.au/shop/sh10rt-sungrow-hybrid-10kw-rt-three-phase-solar-inverter-15108)
79. Sungrow RT 5kW Three Phase Hybrid inverter (2 MPPT) SH5.0RT - Solar Batteries Online, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.solarbatteriesonline.com.au/product/sungrow-sh5-0rt-hv-5-0kw-residential-hybrid-three-phase-inverter/](https://www.solarbatteriesonline.com.au/product/sungrow-sh5-0rt-hv-5-0kw-residential-hybrid-three-phase-inverter/)
80. SUNGROW SH10RT | 10kW 3-Phase Hybrid Inverter - Sparky Direct, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.sparkydirect.com.au/p/sungrow-sh10rt-10kw-3-phase-hybrid-inverter](https://www.sparkydirect.com.au/p/sungrow-sh10rt-10kw-3-phase-hybrid-inverter)
81. Sungrow Hybrid 10kW 3 Phase 2 MPPT w/WiFi, DC Switch & EPS Built-in Inverter, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.solarheroes.com.au/product/sungrow-hybrid-10kw-3-phase-2-mppt-w-wifi-dc-switch-eps-built-in-inverter/](https://www.solarheroes.com.au/product/sungrow-hybrid-10kw-3-phase-2-mppt-w-wifi-dc-switch-eps-built-in-inverter/)
82. Sungrow Solar Inverters - Independent Review, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.solarchoice.net.au/products/inverters/Sungrow-review/](https://www.solarchoice.net.au/products/inverters/Sungrow-review/)
83. Sungrow 10.0kW - 3 Phase Hybrid Inverter (SH10RT) - Solar Superstore, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.solarsuperstore.com.au/products/sungrow-8-0kw-3-phase-hybrid-inverter-sh8-0rt](https://www.solarsuperstore.com.au/products/sungrow-8-0kw-3-phase-hybrid-inverter-sh8-0rt)
84. How Much Do Solar Batteries Cost in Australia? - SolarQuotes, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.solarquotes.com.au/battery-storage/cost/](https://www.solarquotes.com.au/battery-storage/cost/)
85. Off Grid Solar system using a Sungrow inverter and battery, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.acsolarwarehouse.com/blog/news-7/off-grid-solar-system-using-a-sungrow-inverter-and-battery-312](https://www.acsolarwarehouse.com/blog/news-7/off-grid-solar-system-using-a-sungrow-inverter-and-battery-312)
86. Sungrow 14.08k W Off Grid Solar System / Single Phase - AHLEC, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://ahlecsolar.com.au/product/sungrow-14-08k-w-off-grid-solar-system-single-phase/](https://ahlecsolar.com.au/product/sungrow-14-08k-w-off-grid-solar-system-single-phase/)
87. Residential Battery Energy Storage System - Sungrow AU, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://aus.sungrowpower.com/solutionsDetail/9/residential-storage-system](https://aus.sungrowpower.com/solutionsDetail/9/residential-storage-system)
88. EV Charger - Sungrow, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://en.sungrowpower.com/ProductsHome/59/ev-charger](https://en.sungrowpower.com/ProductsHome/59/ev-charger)
89. Sungrow SBH 20kW High Voltage LFP Battery Including Accessory Kit SBH200 | eBay, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/135320073679](https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/135320073679)
90. 20kWh Battery Kit - Login - Australian Solar Supplies Pty Ltd, accessed March 14, 2025, [http://shop.ausolarsupplies.com.au/s.nl/it.A/id.6047/.f](http://shop.ausolarsupplies.com.au/s.nl/it.A/id.6047/.f)
91. Sungrow - Solar Batteries Online, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.solarbatteriesonline.com.au/sungrow/](https://www.solarbatteriesonline.com.au/sungrow/)
{"id":"6a44da7a-19c1-4a37-a991-d589c8bbded8","providerCopyMimeTypes":["application/vnd.vscode.markdown.updatelinks.metadata","application/vnd.code.additional-editor-data"],"defaultPastePayload":{"multicursorText":null,"pasteOnNewLine":false,"mode":null}}{"version":1,"isFromEmptySelection":false,"multicursorText":null,"mode":"markdown"}
-
@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9
2025-03-12 15:30:46Recently we have seen a wave of high profile X accounts hacked. These attacks have exposed the fragility of the status quo security model used by modern social media platforms like X. Many users have asked if nostr fixes this, so lets dive in. How do these types of attacks translate into the world of nostr apps? For clarity, I will use X’s security model as representative of most big tech social platforms and compare it to nostr.
The Status Quo
On X, you never have full control of your account. Ultimately to use it requires permission from the company. They can suspend your account or limit your distribution. Theoretically they can even post from your account at will. An X account is tied to an email and password. Users can also opt into two factor authentication, which adds an extra layer of protection, a login code generated by an app. In theory, this setup works well, but it places a heavy burden on users. You need to create a strong, unique password and safeguard it. You also need to ensure your email account and phone number remain secure, as attackers can exploit these to reset your credentials and take over your account. Even if you do everything responsibly, there is another weak link in X infrastructure itself. The platform’s infrastructure allows accounts to be reset through its backend. This could happen maliciously by an employee or through an external attacker who compromises X’s backend. When an account is compromised, the legitimate user often gets locked out, unable to post or regain control without contacting X’s support team. That process can be slow, frustrating, and sometimes fruitless if support denies the request or cannot verify your identity. Often times support will require users to provide identification info in order to regain access, which represents a privacy risk. The centralized nature of X means you are ultimately at the mercy of the company’s systems and staff.
Nostr Requires Responsibility
Nostr flips this model radically. Users do not need permission from a company to access their account, they can generate as many accounts as they want, and cannot be easily censored. The key tradeoff here is that users have to take complete responsibility for their security. Instead of relying on a username, password, and corporate servers, nostr uses a private key as the sole credential for your account. Users generate this key and it is their responsibility to keep it safe. As long as you have your key, you can post. If someone else gets it, they can post too. It is that simple. This design has strong implications. Unlike X, there is no backend reset option. If your key is compromised or lost, there is no customer support to call. In a compromise scenario, both you and the attacker can post from the account simultaneously. Neither can lock the other out, since nostr relays simply accept whatever is signed with a valid key.
The benefit? No reliance on proprietary corporate infrastructure.. The negative? Security rests entirely on how well you protect your key.
Future Nostr Security Improvements
For many users, nostr’s standard security model, storing a private key on a phone with an encrypted cloud backup, will likely be sufficient. It is simple and reasonably secure. That said, nostr’s strength lies in its flexibility as an open protocol. Users will be able to choose between a range of security models, balancing convenience and protection based on need.
One promising option is a web of trust model for key rotation. Imagine pre-selecting a group of trusted friends. If your account is compromised, these people could collectively sign an event announcing the compromise to the network and designate a new key as your legitimate one. Apps could handle this process seamlessly in the background, notifying followers of the switch without much user interaction. This could become a popular choice for average users, but it is not without tradeoffs. It requires trust in your chosen web of trust, which might not suit power users or large organizations. It also has the issue that some apps may not recognize the key rotation properly and followers might get confused about which account is “real.”
For those needing higher security, there is the option of multisig using FROST (Flexible Round-Optimized Schnorr Threshold). In this setup, multiple keys must sign off on every action, including posting and updating a profile. A hacker with just one key could not do anything. This is likely overkill for most users due to complexity and inconvenience, but it could be a game changer for large organizations, companies, and governments. Imagine the White House nostr account requiring signatures from multiple people before a post goes live, that would be much more secure than the status quo big tech model.
Another option are hardware signers, similar to bitcoin hardware wallets. Private keys are kept on secure, offline devices, separate from the internet connected phone or computer you use to broadcast events. This drastically reduces the risk of remote hacks, as private keys never touches the internet. It can be used in combination with multisig setups for extra protection. This setup is much less convenient and probably overkill for most but could be ideal for governments, companies, or other high profile accounts.
Nostr’s security model is not perfect but is robust and versatile. Ultimately users are in control and security is their responsibility. Apps will give users multiple options to choose from and users will choose what best fits their need.
-
@ 5d4b6c8d:8a1c1ee3
2025-04-19 14:29:43I finally put our picks in a spreadsheet, so let's take a look at where we all stand as the playoffs proper kick off.
| Stacker | Points | |---------|--------| | @Coinsreporter | 19 | | @Carresan | 18 | | @gnilma | 18 | | @grayruby | 17 | | @Undisciplined | 17 | | @fishious | 11 | | @BlokchainB | 11 | | @Car | 1 |
It's a tight race and there's still plenty of time to make up ground.
originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/948104
-
@ 21335073:a244b1ad
2025-03-12 00:40:25Before 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
-
@ a95c6243:d345522c
2025-01-13 10:09:57Ich begann, Social Media aufzubauen, \ um den Menschen eine Stimme zu geben. \ Mark Zuckerberg
Sind euch auch die Tränen gekommen, als ihr Mark Zuckerbergs Wendehals-Deklaration bezüglich der Meinungsfreiheit auf seinen Portalen gehört habt? Rührend, oder? Während er früher die offensichtliche Zensur leugnete und später die Regierung Biden dafür verantwortlich machte, will er nun angeblich «die Zensur auf unseren Plattformen drastisch reduzieren».
«Purer Opportunismus» ob des anstehenden Regierungswechsels wäre als Klassifizierung viel zu kurz gegriffen. Der jetzige Schachzug des Meta-Chefs ist genauso Teil einer kühl kalkulierten Business-Strategie, wie es die 180 Grad umgekehrte Praxis vorher war. Social Media sind ein höchst lukratives Geschäft. Hinzu kommt vielleicht noch ein bisschen verkorkstes Ego, weil derartig viel Einfluss und Geld sicher auch auf die Psyche schlagen. Verständlich.
«Es ist an der Zeit, zu unseren Wurzeln der freien Meinungsäußerung auf Facebook und Instagram zurückzukehren. Ich begann, Social Media aufzubauen, um den Menschen eine Stimme zu geben», sagte Zuckerberg.
Welche Wurzeln? Hat der Mann vergessen, dass er von der Überwachung, dem Ausspionieren und dem Ausverkauf sämtlicher Daten und digitaler Spuren sowie der Manipulation seiner «Kunden» lebt? Das ist knallharter Kommerz, nichts anderes. Um freie Meinungsäußerung geht es bei diesem Geschäft ganz sicher nicht, und das war auch noch nie so. Die Wurzeln von Facebook liegen in einem Projekt des US-Militärs mit dem Namen «LifeLog». Dessen Ziel war es, «ein digitales Protokoll vom Leben eines Menschen zu erstellen».
Der Richtungswechsel kommt allerdings nicht überraschend. Schon Anfang Dezember hatte Meta-Präsident Nick Clegg von «zu hoher Fehlerquote bei der Moderation» von Inhalten gesprochen. Bei der Gelegenheit erwähnte er auch, dass Mark sehr daran interessiert sei, eine aktive Rolle in den Debatten über eine amerikanische Führungsrolle im technologischen Bereich zu spielen.
Während Milliardärskollege und Big Tech-Konkurrent Elon Musk bereits seinen Posten in der kommenden Trump-Regierung in Aussicht hat, möchte Zuckerberg also nicht nur seine Haut retten – Trump hatte ihn einmal einen «Feind des Volkes» genannt und ihm lebenslange Haft angedroht –, sondern am liebsten auch mitspielen. KI-Berater ist wohl die gewünschte Funktion, wie man nach einem Treffen Trump-Zuckerberg hörte. An seine Verhaftung dachte vermutlich auch ein weiterer Multimilliardär mit eigener Social Media-Plattform, Pavel Durov, als er Zuckerberg jetzt kritisierte und gleichzeitig warnte.
Politik und Systemmedien drehen jedenfalls durch – was zu viel ist, ist zu viel. Etwas weniger Zensur und mehr Meinungsfreiheit würden die Freiheit der Bürger schwächen und seien potenziell vernichtend für die Menschenrechte. Zuckerberg setze mit dem neuen Kurs die Demokratie aufs Spiel, das sei eine «Einladung zum nächsten Völkermord», ernsthaft. Die Frage sei, ob sich die EU gegen Musk und Zuckerberg behaupten könne, Brüssel müsse jedenfalls hart durchgreifen.
Auch um die Faktenchecker macht man sich Sorgen. Für die deutsche Nachrichtenagentur dpa und die «Experten» von Correctiv, die (noch) Partner für Fact-Checking-Aktivitäten von Facebook sind, sei das ein «lukratives Geschäftsmodell». Aber möglicherweise werden die Inhalte ohne diese vermeintlichen Korrektoren ja sogar besser. Anders als Meta wollen jedoch Scholz, Faeser und die Tagesschau keine Fehler zugeben und zum Beispiel Correctiv-Falschaussagen einräumen.
Bei derlei dramatischen Befürchtungen wundert es nicht, dass der öffentliche Plausch auf X zwischen Elon Musk und AfD-Chefin Alice Weidel von 150 EU-Beamten überwacht wurde, falls es irgendwelche Rechtsverstöße geben sollte, die man ihnen ankreiden könnte. Auch der Deutsche Bundestag war wachsam. Gefunden haben dürften sie nichts. Das Ganze war eher eine Show, viel Wind wurde gemacht, aber letztlich gab es nichts als heiße Luft.
Das Anbiedern bei Donald Trump ist indes gerade in Mode. Die Weltgesundheitsorganisation (WHO) tut das auch, denn sie fürchtet um Spenden von über einer Milliarde Dollar. Eventuell könnte ja Elon Musk auch hier künftig aushelfen und der Organisation sowie deren größtem privaten Förderer, Bill Gates, etwas unter die Arme greifen. Nachdem Musks KI-Projekt xAI kürzlich von BlackRock & Co. sechs Milliarden eingestrichen hat, geht da vielleicht etwas.
Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.
-
@ eac63075:b4988b48
2025-01-04 19:41:34Since its creation in 2009, Bitcoin has symbolized innovation and resilience. However, from time to time, alarmist narratives arise about emerging technologies that could "break" its security. Among these, quantum computing stands out as one of the most recurrent. But does quantum computing truly threaten Bitcoin? And more importantly, what is the community doing to ensure the protocol remains invulnerable?
The answer, contrary to sensationalist headlines, is reassuring: Bitcoin is secure, and the community is already preparing for a future where quantum computing becomes a practical reality. Let’s dive into this topic to understand why the concerns are exaggerated and how the development of BIP-360 demonstrates that Bitcoin is one step ahead.
What Is Quantum Computing, and Why Is Bitcoin Not Threatened?
Quantum computing leverages principles of quantum mechanics to perform calculations that, in theory, could exponentially surpass classical computers—and it has nothing to do with what so-called “quantum coaches” teach to scam the uninformed. One of the concerns is that this technology could compromise two key aspects of Bitcoin’s security:
- Wallets: These use elliptic curve algorithms (ECDSA) to protect private keys. A sufficiently powerful quantum computer could deduce a private key from its public key.
- Mining: This is based on the SHA-256 algorithm, which secures the consensus process. A quantum attack could, in theory, compromise the proof-of-work mechanism.
Understanding Quantum Computing’s Attack Priorities
While quantum computing is often presented as a threat to Bitcoin, not all parts of the network are equally vulnerable. Theoretical attacks would be prioritized based on two main factors: ease of execution and potential reward. This creates two categories of attacks:
1. Attacks on Wallets
Bitcoin wallets, secured by elliptic curve algorithms, would be the initial targets due to the relative vulnerability of their public keys, especially those already exposed on the blockchain. Two attack scenarios stand out:
-
Short-term attacks: These occur during the interval between sending a transaction and its inclusion in a block (approximately 10 minutes). A quantum computer could intercept the exposed public key and derive the corresponding private key to redirect funds by creating a transaction with higher fees.
-
Long-term attacks: These focus on old wallets whose public keys are permanently exposed. Wallets associated with Satoshi Nakamoto, for example, are especially vulnerable because they were created before the practice of using hashes to mask public keys.
We can infer a priority order for how such attacks might occur based on urgency and importance.
Bitcoin Quantum Attack: Prioritization Matrix (Urgency vs. Importance)
2. Attacks on Mining
Targeting the SHA-256 algorithm, which secures the mining process, would be the next objective. However, this is far more complex and requires a level of quantum computational power that is currently non-existent and far from realization. A successful attack would allow for the recalculation of all possible hashes to dominate the consensus process and potentially "mine" it instantly.
Satoshi Nakamoto in 2010 on Quantum Computing and Bitcoin Attacks
Recently, Narcelio asked me about a statement I made on Tubacast:
https://x.com/eddieoz/status/1868371296683511969
If an attack became a reality before Bitcoin was prepared, it would be necessary to define the last block prior to the attack and proceed from there using a new hashing algorithm. The solution would resemble the response to the infamous 2013 bug. It’s a fact that this would cause market panic, and Bitcoin's price would drop significantly, creating a potential opportunity for the well-informed.
Preferably, if developers could anticipate the threat and had time to work on a solution and build consensus before an attack, they would simply decide on a future block for the fork, which would then adopt the new algorithm. It might even rehash previous blocks (reaching consensus on them) to avoid potential reorganization through the re-mining of blocks using the old hash. (I often use the term "shielding" old transactions).
How Can Users Protect Themselves?
While quantum computing is still far from being a practical threat, some simple measures can already protect users against hypothetical scenarios:
- Avoid using exposed public keys: Ensure funds sent to old wallets are transferred to new ones that use public key hashes. This reduces the risk of long-term attacks.
- Use modern wallets: Opt for wallets compatible with SegWit or Taproot, which implement better security practices.
- Monitor security updates: Stay informed about updates from the Bitcoin community, such as the implementation of BIP-360, which will introduce quantum-resistant addresses.
- Do not reuse addresses: Every transaction should be associated with a new address to minimize the risk of repeated exposure of the same public key.
- Adopt secure backup practices: Create offline backups of private keys and seeds in secure locations, protected from unauthorized access.
BIP-360 and Bitcoin’s Preparation for the Future
Even though quantum computing is still beyond practical reach, the Bitcoin community is not standing still. A concrete example is BIP-360, a proposal that establishes the technical framework to make wallets resistant to quantum attacks.
BIP-360 addresses three main pillars:
- Introduction of quantum-resistant addresses: A new address format starting with "BC1R" will be used. These addresses will be compatible with post-quantum algorithms, ensuring that stored funds are protected from future attacks.
- Compatibility with the current ecosystem: The proposal allows users to transfer funds from old addresses to new ones without requiring drastic changes to the network infrastructure.
- Flexibility for future updates: BIP-360 does not limit the choice of specific algorithms. Instead, it serves as a foundation for implementing new post-quantum algorithms as technology evolves.
This proposal demonstrates how Bitcoin can adapt to emerging threats without compromising its decentralized structure.
Post-Quantum Algorithms: The Future of Bitcoin Cryptography
The community is exploring various algorithms to protect Bitcoin from quantum attacks. Among the most discussed are:
- Falcon: A solution combining smaller public keys with compact digital signatures. Although it has been tested in limited scenarios, it still faces scalability and performance challenges.
- Sphincs: Hash-based, this algorithm is renowned for its resilience, but its signatures can be extremely large, making it less efficient for networks like Bitcoin’s blockchain.
- Lamport: Created in 1977, it’s considered one of the earliest post-quantum security solutions. Despite its reliability, its gigantic public keys (16,000 bytes) make it impractical and costly for Bitcoin.
Two technologies show great promise and are well-regarded by the community:
- Lattice-Based Cryptography: Considered one of the most promising, it uses complex mathematical structures to create systems nearly immune to quantum computing. Its implementation is still in its early stages, but the community is optimistic.
- Supersingular Elliptic Curve Isogeny: These are very recent digital signature algorithms and require extensive study and testing before being ready for practical market use.
The final choice of algorithm will depend on factors such as efficiency, cost, and integration capability with the current system. Additionally, it is preferable that these algorithms are standardized before implementation, a process that may take up to 10 years.
Why Quantum Computing Is Far from Being a Threat
The alarmist narrative about quantum computing overlooks the technical and practical challenges that still need to be overcome. Among them:
- Insufficient number of qubits: Current quantum computers have only a few hundred qubits, whereas successful attacks would require millions.
- High error rate: Quantum stability remains a barrier to reliable large-scale operations.
- High costs: Building and operating large-scale quantum computers requires massive investments, limiting their use to scientific or specific applications.
Moreover, even if quantum computers make significant advancements, Bitcoin is already adapting to ensure its infrastructure is prepared to respond.
Conclusion: Bitcoin’s Secure Future
Despite advancements in quantum computing, the reality is that Bitcoin is far from being threatened. Its security is ensured not only by its robust architecture but also by the community’s constant efforts to anticipate and mitigate challenges.
The implementation of BIP-360 and the pursuit of post-quantum algorithms demonstrate that Bitcoin is not only resilient but also proactive. By adopting practical measures, such as using modern wallets and migrating to quantum-resistant addresses, users can further protect themselves against potential threats.
Bitcoin’s future is not at risk—it is being carefully shaped to withstand any emerging technology, including quantum computing.
-
@ 4857600b:30b502f4
2025-03-11 01:58:19Key Findings
- Researchers at the University of Cambridge discovered that aspirin can help slow the spread of certain cancers, including breast, bowel, and prostate cancers
- The study was published in the journal Nature
How Aspirin Works Against Cancer
- Aspirin blocks thromboxane A2 (TXA2), a chemical produced by blood platelets
- TXA2 normally weakens T cells, which are crucial for fighting cancer
- By inhibiting TXA2, aspirin "unleashes" T cells to more effectively target and destroy cancer cells
Supporting Evidence
- Previous studies showed regular aspirin use was linked to:
- 31% reduction in cancer-specific mortality in breast cancer patients
- 9% decrease in recurrence/metastasis risk
- 25% reduction in colon cancer risk
Potential Impact
- Aspirin could be particularly effective in early stages of cancer
- It may help prevent metastasis, which causes 90% of cancer fatalities
- As an inexpensive treatment, it could be more accessible globally than antibody-based therapies
Cautions
- Experts warn against self-medicating with aspirin
- Potential risks include internal bleeding and stomach ulcers
- Patients should consult doctors before starting aspirin therapy
Next Steps
- Large-scale clinical trials to determine which cancer types and patients would benefit most
- Development of new drugs that mimic aspirin's benefits without side effects
Citations: Natural News
-
@ 4523be58:ba1facd0
2025-02-27 22:20:33NIP-117
The Double Ratchet Algorithm
The Double Ratchet is a key rotation algorithm for secure private messaging.
It allows us to 1) communicate on Nostr without revealing metadata (who you are communicating with and when), and 2) keep your message history and future messages safe even if your main Nostr key is compromised.
Additionally, it enables disappearing messages that become undecryptable when past message decryption keys are discarded after use.
See also: NIP-118: Nostr Double Ratchet Invites
Overview
"Double ratchet" means we use 2 "ratchets": cryptographic functions that can be rotated forward, but not backward: current keys can be used to derive next keys, but not the other way around.
Ratchet 1 uses Diffie-Hellman (DH) shared secrets and is rotated each time the other participant acknowledges a new key we have sent along with a previous message.
Ratchet 2 generates encryption keys for each message. It rotates after every message, using the previous message's key as input (and the Ratchet 1 key when it rotates). This process ensures forward secrecy for consecutive messages from the same sender in between Ratchet 1 rotations.
Nostr implementation
We implement the Double Ratchet Algorithm on Nostr similarly to Signal's Double Ratchet with header encryption, but encrypting the message headers with NIP-44 conversation keys instead of symmetric header keys.
Ratchet 1 keys are standard Nostr keys. In addition to encryption, they are also used for publishing and subscribing to messages on Nostr. As they are rotated and not linked to public Nostr identities, metadata privacy is preserved.
Nostr event format
Message
Outer event
typescript { kind: 1060, content: encryptedInnerEvent, tags: [["header", encryptedHeader]], pubkey: ratchetPublicKey, created_at, id, sig }
We subscribe to Double Ratchet events based on author public keys which are ephemeral — not used for other purposes than the Double Ratchet session. We use the regular event kind
1060
to differentiate it from other DM kinds, retrieval of which may be restricted by relays.The encrypted header contains our next nostr public key, our previous sending chain length and the current message number.
Inner event
Inner events must be NIP-59 Rumors (unsigned Nostr events) allowing plausible deniability.
With established Nostr event kinds, clients can implement all kinds of features, such as replies, reactions, and encrypted file sharing in private messages.
Direct message and encrypted file messages are defined in NIP-17.
Algorithm
Signal's Double Ratchet with header encryption document is a comprehensive description and explanation of the algorithm.
In this NIP, the algorithm is only described in code, in order to highlight differences to the Signal implementation.
External functions
We use the following Nostr functions (NIP-01):
generateSecretKey()
for creating Nostr private keysfinalizeEvent(partialEvent, secretKey)
for creating valid Nostr events with pubkey, id and signature
We use NIP-44 functions for encryption:
nip44.encrypt
nip44.decrypt
nip44.getConversationKey
- createRumor
Key derivation function:
```typescript export function kdf( input1: Uint8Array, input2: Uint8Array = new Uint8Array(32), numOutputs: number = 1 ): Uint8Array[] { const prk = hkdf_extract(sha256, input1, input2);
const outputs: Uint8Array[] = []; for (let i = 1; i <= numOutputs; i++) { outputs.push(hkdf_expand(sha256, prk, new Uint8Array([i]), 32)); } return outputs; } ```
Session state
With this information you can start or continue a Double Ratchet session. Save it locally after each sent and received message.
```typescript interface SessionState { theirCurrentNostrPublicKey?: string; theirNextNostrPublicKey: string;
ourCurrentNostrKey?: KeyPair; ourNextNostrKey: KeyPair;
rootKey: Uint8Array; receivingChainKey?: Uint8Array; sendingChainKey?: Uint8Array;
sendingChainMessageNumber: number; receivingChainMessageNumber: number; previousSendingChainMessageCount: number;
// Cache of message & header keys for handling out-of-order messages // Indexed by Nostr public key, which you can use to resubscribe to unreceived messages skippedKeys: { [pubKey: string]: { headerKeys: Uint8Array[]; messageKeys: { [msgIndex: number]: Uint8Array }; }; }; } ```
Initialization
Alice is the chat initiator and Bob is the recipient. Ephemeral keys were exchanged earlier.
```typescript static initAlice( theirEphemeralPublicKey: string, ourEphemeralNostrKey: KeyPair, sharedSecret: Uint8Array ) { // Generate ephemeral key for the next ratchet step const ourNextNostrKey = generateSecretKey();
// Use ephemeral ECDH to derive rootKey and sendingChainKey const [rootKey, sendingChainKey] = kdf( sharedSecret, nip44.getConversationKey(ourEphemeralNostrKey.private, theirEphemeralPublicKey), 2 );
return { rootKey, theirNextNostrPublicKey: theirEphemeralPublicKey, ourCurrentNostrKey: ourEphemeralNostrKey, ourNextNostrKey, receivingChainKey: undefined, sendingChainKey, sendingChainMessageNumber: 0, receivingChainMessageNumber: 0, previousSendingChainMessageCount: 0, skippedKeys: {}, }; }
static initBob( theirEphemeralPublicKey: string, ourEphemeralNostrKey: KeyPair, sharedSecret: Uint8Array ) { return { rootKey: sharedSecret, theirNextNostrPublicKey: theirEphemeralPublicKey, // Bob has no ‘current’ key at init time — Alice will send to next and trigger a ratchet step ourCurrentNostrKey: undefined, ourNextNostrKey: ourEphemeralNostrKey, receivingChainKey: undefined, sendingChainKey: undefined, sendingChainMessageNumber: 0, receivingChainMessageNumber: 0, previousSendingChainMessageCount: 0, skippedKeys: {}, }; }
```
Sending messages
```typescript sendEvent(event: Partial
) { const innerEvent = nip59.createRumor(event) const [header, encryptedData] = this.ratchetEncrypt(JSON.stringify(innerEvent)); const conversationKey = nip44.getConversationKey(this.state.ourCurrentNostrKey.privateKey, this.state.theirNextNostrPublicKey); const encryptedHeader = nip44.encrypt(JSON.stringify(header), conversationKey);
const outerEvent = finalizeEvent({ content: encryptedData, kind: MESSAGE_EVENT_KIND, tags: [["header", encryptedHeader]], created_at: Math.floor(now / 1000) }, this.state.ourCurrentNostrKey.privateKey);
// Publish outerEvent on Nostr, store inner locally if needed return {outerEvent, innerEvent}; }
ratchetEncrypt(plaintext: string): [Header, string] { // Rotate sending chain key const [newSendingChainKey, messageKey] = kdf(this.state.sendingChainKey!, new Uint8Array([1]), 2); this.state.sendingChainKey = newSendingChainKey; const header: Header = { number: this.state.sendingChainMessageNumber++, nextPublicKey: this.state.ourNextNostrKey.publicKey, previousChainLength: this.state.previousSendingChainMessageCount }; return [header, nip44.encrypt(plaintext, messageKey)]; } ```
Receiving messages
```typescript handleNostrEvent(e: NostrEvent) { const [header, shouldRatchet, isSkipped] = this.decryptHeader(e);
if (!isSkipped) { if (this.state.theirNextNostrPublicKey !== header.nextPublicKey) { // Received a new key from them this.state.theirCurrentNostrPublicKey = this.state.theirNextNostrPublicKey; this.state.theirNextNostrPublicKey = header.nextPublicKey; this.updateNostrSubscriptions() }
if (shouldRatchet) { this.skipMessageKeys(header.previousChainLength, e.pubkey); this.ratchetStep(header.nextPublicKey); }
}
decryptHeader(event: any): [Header, boolean, boolean] { const encryptedHeader = event.tags[0][1]; if (this.state.ourCurrentNostrKey) { const conversationKey = nip44.getConversationKey(this.state.ourCurrentNostrKey.privateKey, event.pubkey); try { const header = JSON.parse(nip44.decrypt(encryptedHeader, conversationKey)) as Header; return [header, false, false]; } catch (error) { // Decryption with currentSecret failed, try with nextSecret } }
const nextConversationKey = nip44.getConversationKey(this.state.ourNextNostrKey.privateKey, event.pubkey); try { const header = JSON.parse(nip44.decrypt(encryptedHeader, nextConversationKey)) as Header; return [header, true, false]; } catch (error) { // Decryption with nextSecret also failed }
const skippedKeys = this.state.skippedKeys[event.pubkey]; if (skippedKeys?.headerKeys) { // Try skipped header keys for (const key of skippedKeys.headerKeys) { try { const header = JSON.parse(nip44.decrypt(encryptedHeader, key)) as Header; return [header, false, true]; } catch (error) { // Decryption failed, try next secret } } }
throw new Error("Failed to decrypt header with current and skipped header keys"); }
ratchetDecrypt(header: Header, ciphertext: string, nostrSender: string): string { const plaintext = this.trySkippedMessageKeys(header, ciphertext, nostrSender); if (plaintext) return plaintext;
this.skipMessageKeys(header.number, nostrSender);
// Rotate receiving key const [newReceivingChainKey, messageKey] = kdf(this.state.receivingChainKey!, new Uint8Array([1]), 2); this.state.receivingChainKey = newReceivingChainKey; this.state.receivingChainMessageNumber++;
return nip44.decrypt(ciphertext, messageKey); }
ratchetStep(theirNextNostrPublicKey: string) { this.state.previousSendingChainMessageCount = this.state.sendingChainMessageNumber; this.state.sendingChainMessageNumber = 0; this.state.receivingChainMessageNumber = 0; this.state.theirNextNostrPublicKey = theirNextNostrPublicKey;
// 1st step yields the new conversation key they used const conversationKey1 = nip44.getConversationKey(this.state.ourNextNostrKey.privateKey, this.state.theirNextNostrPublicKey!); // and our corresponding receiving chain key const [theirRootKey, receivingChainKey] = kdf(this.state.rootKey, conversationKey1, 2); this.state.receivingChainKey = receivingChainKey;
// Rotate our Nostr key this.state.ourCurrentNostrKey = this.state.ourNextNostrKey; const ourNextSecretKey = generateSecretKey(); this.state.ourNextNostrKey = { publicKey: getPublicKey(ourNextSecretKey), privateKey: ourNextSecretKey };
// 2nd step yields the new conversation key we'll use const conversationKey2 = nip44.getConversationKey(this.state.ourNextNostrKey.privateKey, this.state.theirNextNostrPublicKey!); // And our corresponding sending chain key const [rootKey, sendingChainKey] = kdf(theirRootKey, conversationKey2, 2); this.state.rootKey = rootKey; this.state.sendingChainKey = sendingChainKey; }
skipMessageKeys(until: number, nostrSender: string) { if (this.state.receivingChainMessageNumber + MAX_SKIP < until) { throw new Error("Too many skipped messages"); }
if (!this.state.skippedKeys[nostrSender]) { this.state.skippedKeys[nostrSender] = { headerKeys: [], messageKeys: {} };
if (this.state.ourCurrentNostrKey) { const currentSecret = nip44.getConversationKey(this.state.ourCurrentNostrKey.privateKey, nostrSender); this.state.skippedKeys[nostrSender].headerKeys.push(currentSecret); } const nextSecret = nip44.getConversationKey(this.state.ourNextNostrKey.privateKey, nostrSender); this.state.skippedKeys[nostrSender].headerKeys.push(nextSecret);
}
while (this.state.receivingChainMessageNumber < until) { const [newReceivingChainKey, messageKey] = kdf(this.state.receivingChainKey!, new Uint8Array([1]), 2); this.state.receivingChainKey = newReceivingChainKey; this.state.skippedKeys[nostrSender].messageKeys[this.state.receivingChainMessageNumber] = messageKey; this.state.receivingChainMessageNumber++; } }
trySkippedMessageKeys(header: Header, ciphertext: string, nostrSender: string): string | null { const skippedKeys = this.state.skippedKeys[nostrSender]; if (!skippedKeys) return null;
const messageKey = skippedKeys.messageKeys[header.number]; if (!messageKey) return null;
delete skippedKeys.messageKeys[header.number];
if (Object.keys(skippedKeys.messageKeys).length === 0) { delete this.state.skippedKeys[nostrSender]; }
return nip44.decrypt(ciphertext, messageKey); } ```
-
@ 460c25e6:ef85065c
2025-02-25 15:20:39If 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.
-
@ eac63075:b4988b48
2024-11-09 17:57:27Based on a recent paper that included collaboration from renowned experts such as Lynn Alden, Steve Lee, and Ren Crypto Fish, we discuss in depth how Bitcoin's consensus is built, the main risks, and the complex dynamics of protocol upgrades.
Podcast https://www.fountain.fm/episode/wbjD6ntQuvX5u2G5BccC
Presentation https://gamma.app/docs/Analyzing-Bitcoin-Consensus-Risks-in-Protocol-Upgrades-p66axxjwaa37ksn
1. Introduction to Consensus in Bitcoin
Consensus in Bitcoin is the foundation that keeps the network secure and functional, allowing users worldwide to perform transactions in a decentralized manner without the need for intermediaries. Since its launch in 2009, Bitcoin is often described as an "immutable" system designed to resist changes, and it is precisely this resistance that ensures its security and stability.
The central idea behind consensus in Bitcoin is to create a set of acceptance rules for blocks and transactions, ensuring that all network participants agree on the transaction history. This prevents "double-spending," where the same bitcoin could be used in two simultaneous transactions, something that would compromise trust in the network.
Evolution of Consensus in Bitcoin
Over the years, consensus in Bitcoin has undergone several adaptations, and the way participants agree on changes remains a delicate process. Unlike traditional systems, where changes can be imposed from the top down, Bitcoin operates in a decentralized model where any significant change needs the support of various groups of stakeholders, including miners, developers, users, and large node operators.
Moreover, the update process is extremely cautious, as hasty changes can compromise the network's security. As a result, the philosophy of "don't fix what isn't broken" prevails, with improvements happening incrementally and only after broad consensus among those involved. This model can make progress seem slow but ensures that Bitcoin remains faithful to the principles of security and decentralization.
2. Technical Components of Consensus
Bitcoin's consensus is supported by a set of technical rules that determine what is considered a valid transaction and a valid block on the network. These technical aspects ensure that all nodes—the computers that participate in the Bitcoin network—agree on the current state of the blockchain. Below are the main technical components that form the basis of the consensus.
Validation of Blocks and Transactions
The validation of blocks and transactions is the central point of consensus in Bitcoin. A block is only considered valid if it meets certain criteria, such as maximum size, transaction structure, and the solving of the "Proof of Work" problem. The proof of work, required for a block to be included in the blockchain, is a computational process that ensures the block contains significant computational effort—protecting the network against manipulation attempts.
Transactions, in turn, need to follow specific input and output rules. Each transaction includes cryptographic signatures that prove the ownership of the bitcoins sent, as well as validation scripts that verify if the transaction conditions are met. This validation system is essential for network nodes to autonomously confirm that each transaction follows the rules.
Chain Selection
Another fundamental technical issue for Bitcoin's consensus is chain selection, which becomes especially important in cases where multiple versions of the blockchain coexist, such as after a network split (fork). To decide which chain is the "true" one and should be followed, the network adopts the criterion of the highest accumulated proof of work. In other words, the chain with the highest number of valid blocks, built with the greatest computational effort, is chosen by the network as the official one.
This criterion avoids permanent splits because it encourages all nodes to follow the same main chain, reinforcing consensus.
Soft Forks vs. Hard Forks
In the consensus process, protocol changes can happen in two ways: through soft forks or hard forks. These variations affect not only the protocol update but also the implications for network users:
-
Soft Forks: These are changes that are backward compatible. Only nodes that adopt the new update will follow the new rules, but old nodes will still recognize the blocks produced with these rules as valid. This compatibility makes soft forks a safer option for updates, as it minimizes the risk of network division.
-
Hard Forks: These are updates that are not backward compatible, requiring all nodes to update to the new version or risk being separated from the main chain. Hard forks can result in the creation of a new coin, as occurred with the split between Bitcoin and Bitcoin Cash in 2017. While hard forks allow for deeper changes, they also bring significant risks of network fragmentation.
These technical components form the base of Bitcoin's security and resilience, allowing the system to remain functional and immutable without losing the necessary flexibility to evolve over time.
3. Stakeholders in Bitcoin's Consensus
Consensus in Bitcoin is not decided centrally. On the contrary, it depends on the interaction between different groups of stakeholders, each with their motivations, interests, and levels of influence. These groups play fundamental roles in how changes are implemented or rejected on the network. Below, we explore the six main stakeholders in Bitcoin's consensus.
1. Economic Nodes
Economic nodes, usually operated by exchanges, custody providers, and large companies that accept Bitcoin, exert significant influence over consensus. Because they handle large volumes of transactions and act as a connection point between the Bitcoin ecosystem and the traditional financial system, these nodes have the power to validate or reject blocks and to define which version of the software to follow in case of a fork.
Their influence is proportional to the volume of transactions they handle, and they can directly affect which chain will be seen as the main one. Their incentive is to maintain the network's stability and security to preserve its functionality and meet regulatory requirements.
2. Investors
Investors, including large institutional funds and individual Bitcoin holders, influence consensus indirectly through their impact on the asset's price. Their buying and selling actions can affect Bitcoin's value, which in turn influences the motivation of miners and other stakeholders to continue investing in the network's security and development.
Some institutional investors have agreements with custodians that may limit their ability to act in network split situations. Thus, the impact of each investor on consensus can vary based on their ownership structure and how quickly they can react to a network change.
3. Media Influencers
Media influencers, including journalists, analysts, and popular personalities on social media, have a powerful role in shaping public opinion about Bitcoin and possible updates. These influencers can help educate the public, promote debates, and bring transparency to the consensus process.
On the other hand, the impact of influencers can be double-edged: while they can clarify complex topics, they can also distort perceptions by amplifying or minimizing change proposals. This makes them a force both of support and resistance to consensus.
4. Miners
Miners are responsible for validating transactions and including blocks in the blockchain. Through computational power (hashrate), they also exert significant influence over consensus decisions. In update processes, miners often signal their support for a proposal, indicating that the new version is safe to use. However, this signaling is not always definitive, and miners can change their position if they deem it necessary.
Their incentive is to maximize returns from block rewards and transaction fees, as well as to maintain the value of investments in their specialized equipment, which are only profitable if the network remains stable.
5. Protocol Developers
Protocol developers, often called "Core Developers," are responsible for writing and maintaining Bitcoin's code. Although they do not have direct power over consensus, they possess an informal veto power since they decide which changes are included in the main client (Bitcoin Core). This group also serves as an important source of technical knowledge, helping guide decisions and inform other stakeholders.
Their incentive lies in the continuous improvement of the network, ensuring security and decentralization. Many developers are funded by grants and sponsorships, but their motivations generally include a strong ideological commitment to Bitcoin's principles.
6. Users and Application Developers
This group includes people who use Bitcoin in their daily transactions and developers who build solutions based on the network, such as wallets, exchanges, and payment platforms. Although their power in consensus is less than that of miners or economic nodes, they play an important role because they are responsible for popularizing Bitcoin's use and expanding the ecosystem.
If application developers decide not to adopt an update, this can affect compatibility and widespread acceptance. Thus, they indirectly influence consensus by deciding which version of the protocol to follow in their applications.
These stakeholders are vital to the consensus process, and each group exerts influence according to their involvement, incentives, and ability to act in situations of change. Understanding the role of each makes it clearer how consensus is formed and why it is so difficult to make significant changes to Bitcoin.
4. Mechanisms for Activating Updates in Bitcoin
For Bitcoin to evolve without compromising security and consensus, different mechanisms for activating updates have been developed over the years. These mechanisms help coordinate changes among network nodes to minimize the risk of fragmentation and ensure that updates are implemented in an orderly manner. Here, we explore some of the main methods used in Bitcoin, their advantages and disadvantages, as well as historical examples of significant updates.
Flag Day
The Flag Day mechanism is one of the simplest forms of activating changes. In it, a specific date or block is determined as the activation moment, and all nodes must be updated by that point. This method does not involve prior signaling; participants simply need to update to the new software version by the established day or block.
-
Advantages: Simplicity and predictability are the main benefits of Flag Day, as everyone knows the exact activation date.
-
Disadvantages: Inflexibility can be a problem because there is no way to adjust the schedule if a significant part of the network has not updated. This can result in network splits if a significant number of nodes are not ready for the update.
An example of Flag Day was the Pay to Script Hash (P2SH) update in 2012, which required all nodes to adopt the change to avoid compatibility issues.
BIP34 and BIP9
BIP34 introduced a more dynamic process, in which miners increase the version number in block headers to signal the update. When a predetermined percentage of the last blocks is mined with this new version, the update is automatically activated. This model later evolved with BIP9, which allowed multiple updates to be signaled simultaneously through "version bits," each corresponding to a specific change.
-
Advantages: Allows the network to activate updates gradually, giving more time for participants to adapt.
-
Disadvantages: These methods rely heavily on miner support, which means that if a sufficient number of miners do not signal the update, it can be delayed or not implemented.
BIP9 was used in the activation of SegWit (BIP141) but faced challenges because some miners did not signal their intent to activate, leading to the development of new mechanisms.
User Activated Soft Forks (UASF) and User Resisted Soft Forks (URSF)
To increase the decision-making power of ordinary users, the concept of User Activated Soft Fork (UASF) was introduced, allowing node operators, not just miners, to determine consensus for a change. In this model, nodes set a date to start rejecting blocks that are not in compliance with the new update, forcing miners to adapt or risk having their blocks rejected by the network.
URSF, in turn, is a model where nodes reject blocks that attempt to adopt a specific update, functioning as resistance against proposed changes.
-
Advantages: UASF returns decision-making power to node operators, ensuring that changes do not depend solely on miners.
-
Disadvantages: Both UASF and URSF can generate network splits, especially in cases of strong opposition among different stakeholders.
An example of UASF was the activation of SegWit in 2017, where users supported activation independently of miner signaling, which ended up forcing its adoption.
BIP8 (LOT=True)
BIP8 is an evolution of BIP9, designed to prevent miners from indefinitely blocking a change desired by the majority of users and developers. BIP8 allows setting a parameter called "lockinontimeout" (LOT) as true, which means that if the update has not been fully signaled by a certain point, it is automatically activated.
-
Advantages: Ensures that changes with broad support among users are not blocked by miners who wish to maintain the status quo.
-
Disadvantages: Can lead to network splits if miners or other important stakeholders do not support the update.
Although BIP8 with LOT=True has not yet been used in Bitcoin, it is a proposal that can be applied in future updates if necessary.
These activation mechanisms have been essential for Bitcoin's development, allowing updates that keep the network secure and functional. Each method brings its own advantages and challenges, but all share the goal of preserving consensus and network cohesion.
5. Risks and Considerations in Consensus Updates
Consensus updates in Bitcoin are complex processes that involve not only technical aspects but also political, economic, and social considerations. Due to the network's decentralized nature, each change brings with it a set of risks that need to be carefully assessed. Below, we explore some of the main challenges and future scenarios, as well as the possible impacts on stakeholders.
Network Fragility with Alternative Implementations
One of the main risks associated with consensus updates is the possibility of network fragmentation when there are alternative software implementations. If an update is implemented by a significant group of nodes but rejected by others, a network split (fork) can occur. This creates two competing chains, each with a different version of the transaction history, leading to unpredictable consequences for users and investors.
Such fragmentation weakens Bitcoin because, by dividing hashing power (computing) and coin value, it reduces network security and investor confidence. A notable example of this risk was the fork that gave rise to Bitcoin Cash in 2017 when disagreements over block size resulted in a new chain and a new asset.
Chain Splits and Impact on Stakeholders
Chain splits are a significant risk in update processes, especially in hard forks. During a hard fork, the network is split into two separate chains, each with its own set of rules. This results in the creation of a new coin and leaves users with duplicated assets on both chains. While this may seem advantageous, in the long run, these splits weaken the network and create uncertainties for investors.
Each group of stakeholders reacts differently to a chain split:
-
Institutional Investors and ETFs: Face regulatory and compliance challenges because many of these assets are managed under strict regulations. The creation of a new coin requires decisions to be made quickly to avoid potential losses, which may be hampered by regulatory constraints.
-
Miners: May be incentivized to shift their computing power to the chain that offers higher profitability, which can weaken one of the networks.
-
Economic Nodes: Such as major exchanges and custody providers, have to quickly choose which chain to support, influencing the perceived value of each network.
Such divisions can generate uncertainties and loss of value, especially for institutional investors and those who use Bitcoin as a store of value.
Regulatory Impacts and Institutional Investors
With the growing presence of institutional investors in Bitcoin, consensus changes face new compliance challenges. Bitcoin ETFs, for example, are required to follow strict rules about which assets they can include and how chain split events should be handled. The creation of a new asset or migration to a new chain can complicate these processes, creating pressure for large financial players to quickly choose a chain, affecting the stability of consensus.
Moreover, decisions regarding forks can influence the Bitcoin futures and derivatives market, affecting perception and adoption by new investors. Therefore, the need to avoid splits and maintain cohesion is crucial to attract and preserve the confidence of these investors.
Security Considerations in Soft Forks and Hard Forks
While soft forks are generally preferred in Bitcoin for their backward compatibility, they are not without risks. Soft forks can create different classes of nodes on the network (updated and non-updated), which increases operational complexity and can ultimately weaken consensus cohesion. In a network scenario with fragmentation of node classes, Bitcoin's security can be affected, as some nodes may lose part of the visibility over updated transactions or rules.
In hard forks, the security risk is even more evident because all nodes need to adopt the new update to avoid network division. Experience shows that abrupt changes can create temporary vulnerabilities, in which malicious agents try to exploit the transition to attack the network.
Bounty Claim Risks and Attack Scenarios
Another risk in consensus updates are so-called "bounty claims"—accumulated rewards that can be obtained if an attacker manages to split or deceive a part of the network. In a conflict scenario, a group of miners or nodes could be incentivized to support a new update or create an alternative version of the software to benefit from these rewards.
These risks require stakeholders to carefully assess each update and the potential vulnerabilities it may introduce. The possibility of "bounty claims" adds a layer of complexity to consensus because each interest group may see a financial opportunity in a change that, in the long term, may harm network stability.
The risks discussed above show the complexity of consensus in Bitcoin and the importance of approaching it gradually and deliberately. Updates need to consider not only technical aspects but also economic and social implications, in order to preserve Bitcoin's integrity and maintain trust among stakeholders.
6. Recommendations for the Consensus Process in Bitcoin
To ensure that protocol changes in Bitcoin are implemented safely and with broad support, it is essential that all stakeholders adopt a careful and coordinated approach. Here are strategic recommendations for evaluating, supporting, or rejecting consensus updates, considering the risks and challenges discussed earlier, along with best practices for successful implementation.
1. Careful Evaluation of Proposal Maturity
Stakeholders should rigorously assess the maturity level of a proposal before supporting its implementation. Updates that are still experimental or lack a robust technical foundation can expose the network to unnecessary risks. Ideally, change proposals should go through an extensive testing phase, have security audits, and receive review and feedback from various developers and experts.
2. Extensive Testing in Secure and Compatible Networks
Before an update is activated on the mainnet, it is essential to test it on networks like testnet and signet, and whenever possible, on other compatible networks that offer a safe and controlled environment to identify potential issues. Testing on networks like Litecoin was fundamental for the safe launch of innovations like SegWit and the Lightning Network, allowing functionalities to be validated on a lower-impact network before being implemented on Bitcoin.
The Liquid Network, developed by Blockstream, also plays an important role as an experimental network for new proposals, such as OP_CAT. By adopting these testing environments, stakeholders can mitigate risks and ensure that the update is reliable and secure before being adopted by the main network.
3. Importance of Stakeholder Engagement
The success of a consensus update strongly depends on the active participation of all stakeholders. This includes economic nodes, miners, protocol developers, investors, and end users. Lack of participation can lead to inadequate decisions or even future network splits, which would compromise Bitcoin's security and stability.
4. Key Questions for Evaluating Consensus Proposals
To assist in decision-making, each group of stakeholders should consider some key questions before supporting a consensus change:
- Does the proposal offer tangible benefits for Bitcoin's security, scalability, or usability?
- Does it maintain backward compatibility or introduce the risk of network split?
- Are the implementation requirements clear and feasible for each group involved?
- Are there clear and aligned incentives for all stakeholder groups to accept the change?
5. Coordination and Timing in Implementations
Timing is crucial. Updates with short activation windows can force a split because not all nodes and miners can update simultaneously. Changes should be planned with ample deadlines to allow all stakeholders to adjust their systems, avoiding surprises that could lead to fragmentation.
Mechanisms like soft forks are generally preferable to hard forks because they allow a smoother transition. Opting for backward-compatible updates when possible facilitates the process and ensures that nodes and miners can adapt without pressure.
6. Continuous Monitoring and Re-evaluation
After an update, it's essential to monitor the network to identify problems or side effects. This continuous process helps ensure cohesion and trust among all participants, keeping Bitcoin as a secure and robust network.
These recommendations, including the use of secure networks for extensive testing, promote a collaborative and secure environment for Bitcoin's consensus process. By adopting a deliberate and strategic approach, stakeholders can preserve Bitcoin's value as a decentralized and censorship-resistant network.
7. Conclusion
Consensus in Bitcoin is more than a set of rules; it's the foundation that sustains the network as a decentralized, secure, and reliable system. Unlike centralized systems, where decisions can be made quickly, Bitcoin requires a much more deliberate and cooperative approach, where the interests of miners, economic nodes, developers, investors, and users must be considered and harmonized. This governance model may seem slow, but it is fundamental to preserving the resilience and trust that make Bitcoin a global store of value and censorship-resistant.
Consensus updates in Bitcoin must balance the need for innovation with the preservation of the network's core principles. The development process of a proposal needs to be detailed and rigorous, going through several testing stages, such as in testnet, signet, and compatible networks like Litecoin and Liquid Network. These networks offer safe environments for proposals to be analyzed and improved before being launched on the main network.
Each proposed change must be carefully evaluated regarding its maturity, impact, backward compatibility, and support among stakeholders. The recommended key questions and appropriate timing are critical to ensure that an update is adopted without compromising network cohesion. It's also essential that the implementation process is continuously monitored and re-evaluated, allowing adjustments as necessary and minimizing the risk of instability.
By following these guidelines, Bitcoin's stakeholders can ensure that the network continues to evolve safely and robustly, maintaining user trust and further solidifying its role as one of the most resilient and innovative digital assets in the world. Ultimately, consensus in Bitcoin is not just a technical issue but a reflection of its community and the values it represents: security, decentralization, and resilience.
8. Links
Whitepaper: https://github.com/bitcoin-cap/bcap
Youtube (pt-br): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rARycAibl9o&list=PL-qnhF0qlSPkfhorqsREuIu4UTbF0h4zb
-
-
@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9
2025-03-10 23:31:30Bitcoin has always been rooted in freedom and resistance to authority. I get that many of you are conflicted about the US Government stacking but by design we cannot stop anyone from using bitcoin. Many have asked me for my thoughts on the matter, so let’s rip it.
Concern
One of the most glaring issues with the strategic bitcoin reserve is its foundation, built on stolen bitcoin. For those of us who value private property this is an obvious betrayal of our core principles. Rather than proof of work, the bitcoin that seeds this reserve has been taken by force. The US Government should return the bitcoin stolen from Bitfinex and the Silk Road.
Usually stolen bitcoin for the reserve creates a perverse incentive. If governments see a bitcoin as a valuable asset, they will ramp up efforts to confiscate more bitcoin. The precedent is a major concern, and I stand strongly against it, but it should be also noted that governments were already seizing coin before the reserve so this is not really a change in policy.
Ideally all seized bitcoin should be burned, by law. This would align incentives properly and make it less likely for the government to actively increase coin seizures. Due to the truly scarce properties of bitcoin, all burned bitcoin helps existing holders through increased purchasing power regardless. This change would be unlikely but those of us in policy circles should push for it regardless. It would be best case scenario for American bitcoiners and would create a strong foundation for the next century of American leadership.
Optimism
The entire point of bitcoin is that we can spend or save it without permission. That said, it is a massive benefit to not have one of the strongest governments in human history actively trying to ruin our lives.
Since the beginning, bitcoiners have faced horrible regulatory trends. KYC, surveillance, and legal cases have made using bitcoin and building bitcoin businesses incredibly difficult. It is incredibly important to note that over the past year that trend has reversed for the first time in a decade. A strategic bitcoin reserve is a key driver of this shift. By holding bitcoin, the strongest government in the world has signaled that it is not just a fringe technology but rather truly valuable, legitimate, and worth stacking.
This alignment of incentives changes everything. The US Government stacking proves bitcoin’s worth. The resulting purchasing power appreciation helps all of us who are holding coin and as bitcoin succeeds our government receives direct benefit. A beautiful positive feedback loop.
Realism
We are trending in the right direction. A strategic bitcoin reserve is a sign that the state sees bitcoin as an asset worth embracing rather than destroying. That said, there is a lot of work left to be done. We cannot be lulled into complacency, the time to push forward is now, and we cannot take our foot off the gas. We have a seat at the table for the first time ever. Let's make it worth it.
We must protect the right to free usage of bitcoin and other digital technologies. Freedom in the digital age must be taken and defended, through both technical and political avenues. Multiple privacy focused developers are facing long jail sentences for building tools that protect our freedom. These cases are not just legal battles. They are attacks on the soul of bitcoin. We need to rally behind them, fight for their freedom, and ensure the ethos of bitcoin survives this new era of government interest. The strategic reserve is a step in the right direction, but it is up to us to hold the line and shape the future.
-
@ 97c70a44:ad98e322
2025-03-05 18:09:05So you've decided to join nostr! Some wide-eyed fanatic has convinced you that the "sun shines every day on the birds and the bees and the cigarette trees" in a magical land of decentralized, censorship-resistant freedom of speech - and it's waiting just over the next hill.
But your experience has not been all you hoped. Before you've even had a chance to upload your AI-generated cyberpunk avatar or make up exploit codenames for your pseudonym's bio, you've been confronted with a new concept that has left you completely nonplussed.
It doesn't help that this new idea might be called by any number of strange names. You may have been asked to "paste your nsec", "generate a private key", "enter your seed words", "connect with a bunker", "sign in with extension", or even "generate entropy". Sorry about that.
All these terms are really referring to one concept under many different names: that of "cryptographic identity".
Now, you may have noticed that I just introduced yet another new term which explains exactly nothing. You're absolutely correct. And now I'm going to proceed to ignore your complaints and talk about something completely different. But bear with me, because the juice is worth the squeeze.
Identity
What is identity? There are many philosophical, political, or technical answers to this question, but for our purposes it's probably best to think of it this way:
Identity is the essence of a thing. Identity separates one thing from all others, and is itself indivisible.
This definition has three parts:
- Identity is "essential": a thing can change, but its identity cannot. I might re-paint my house, replace its components, sell it, or even burn it down, but its identity as something that can be referred to - "this house" - is durable, even outside the boundaries of its own physical existence.
- Identity is a unit: you can't break an identity into multiple parts. A thing might be composed of multiple parts, but that's only incidental to the identity of a thing, which is a concept, not a material thing.
- Identity is distinct: identity is what separates one thing from all others - the concept of an apple can't be mixed with that of an orange; the two ideas are distinct. In the same way, a single concrete apple is distinct in identity from another - even if the component parts of the apple decompose into compost used to grow more apples.
Identity is not a physical thing, but a metaphysical thing. Or, in simpler terms, identity is a "concept".
I (or someone more qualified) could at this point launch into a Scholastic tangent on what "is" is, but that is, fortunately, not necessary here. The kind of identities I want to focus on here are not our actual identities as people, but entirely fictional identities that we use to extend our agency into the digital world.
Think of it this way - your bank login does not represent you as a complete person. It only represents the access granted to you by the bank. This access is in fact an entirely new identity that has been associated with you, and is limited in what it's useful for.
Other examples of fictional identities include:
- The country you live in
- Your social media persona
- Your mortgage
- Geographical coordinates
- A moment in time
- A chess piece
Some of these identites are inert, for example points in space and time. Other identies have agency and so are able to act in the world - even as fictional concepts. In order to do this, they must "authenticate" themselves (which means "to prove they are real"), and act within a system of established rules.
For example, your D&D character exists only within the collective fiction of your D&D group, and can do anything the rules say. Its identity is authenticated simply by your claim as a member of the group that your character in fact exists. Similarly, a lawyer must prove they are a member of the Bar Association before they are allowed to practice law within that collective fiction.
"Cryptographic identity" is simply another way of authenticating a fictional identity within a given system. As we'll see, it has some interesting attributes that set it apart from things like a library card or your latitude and longitude. Before we get there though, let's look in more detail at how identities are authenticated.
Certificates
Merriam-Webster defines the verb "certify" as meaning "to attest authoritatively". A "certificate" is just a fancy way of saying "because I said so". Certificates are issued by a "certificate authority", someone who has the authority to "say so". Examples include your boss, your mom, or the Pope.
This method of authentication is how almost every institution authenticates the people who associate with it. Colleges issue student ID cards, governments issue passports, and websites allow you to "register an account".
In every case mentioned above, the "authority" creates a closed system in which a document (aka a "certificate") is issued which serves as a claim to a given identity. When someone wants to access some privileged service, location, or information, they present their certificate. The authority then validates it and grants or denies access. In the case of an international airport, the certificate is a little book printed with fancy inks. In the case of a login page, the certificate is a username and password combination.
This pattern for authentication is ubiquitous, and has some very important implications.
First of all, certified authentication implies that the issuer of the certificate has the right to exclusive control of any identity it issues. This identity can be revoked at any time, or its permissions may change. Your social credit score may drop arbitrarily, or money might disappear from your account. When dealing with certificate authorities, you have no inherent rights.
Second, certified authentication depends on the certificate authority continuing to exist. If you store your stuff at a storage facility but the company running it goes out of business, your stuff might disappear along with it.
Usually, authentication via certificate authority works pretty well, since an appeal can always be made to a higher authority (nature, God, the government, etc). Authorities also can't generally dictate their terms with impunity without losing their customers, alienating their constituents, or provoking revolt. But it's also true that certification by authority creates an incentive structure that frequently leads to abuse - arbitrary deplatforming is increasingly common, and the bigger the certificate authority, the less recourse the certificate holder (or "subject") has.
Certificates also put the issuer in a position to intermediate relationships that wouldn't otherwise be subject to their authority. This might take the form of selling user attention to advertisers, taking a cut of financial transactions, or selling surveillance data to third parties.
Proliferation of certificate authorities is not a solution to these problems. Websites and apps frequently often offer multiple "social sign-in" options, allowing their users to choose which certificate authority to appeal to. But this only piles more value into the social platform that issues the certificate - not only can Google shut down your email inbox, they can revoke your ability to log in to every website you used their identity provider to get into.
In every case, certificate issuance results in an asymmetrical power dynamic, where the issuer is able to exert significant control over the certificate holder, even in areas unrelated to the original pretext for the relationship between parties.
Self-Certification
But what if we could reverse this power dynamic? What if individuals could issue their own certificates and force institutions to accept them?
Ron Swanson's counterexample notwithstanding, there's a reason I can't simply write myself a parking permit and slip it under the windshield wiper. Questions about voluntary submission to legitimate authorities aside, the fact is that we don't have the power to act without impunity - just like any other certificate authority, we have to prove our claims either by the exercise of raw power or by appeal to a higher authority.
So the question becomes: which higher authority can we appeal to in order to issue our own certificates within a given system of identity?
The obvious answer here is to go straight to the top and ask God himself to back our claim to self-sovereignty. However, that's not how he normally works - there's a reason they call direct acts of God "miracles". In fact, Romans 13:1 explicitly says that "the authorities that exist have been appointed by God". God has structured the universe in such a way that we must appeal to the deputies he has put in place to govern various parts of the world.
Another tempting appeal might be to nature - i.e. the material world. This is the realm in which we most frequently have the experience of "self-authenticating" identities. For example, a gold coin can be authenticated by biting it or by burning it with acid. If it quacks like a duck, walks like a duck, and looks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.
In most cases however, the ability to authenticate using physical claims depends on physical access, and so appeals to physical reality have major limitations when it comes to the digital world. Captchas, selfies and other similar tricks are often used to bridge the physical world into the digital, but these are increasingly easy to forge, and hard to verify.
There are exceptions to this rule - an example of self-certification that makes its appeal to the physical world is that of a signature. Signatures are hard to forge - an incredible amount of data is encoded in physical signatures, from strength, to illnesses, to upbringing, to personality. These can even be scanned and used within the digital world as well. Even today, most contracts are sealed with some simulacrum of a physical signature. Of course, this custom is quickly becoming a mere historical curiosity, since the very act of digitizing a signature makes it trivially forgeable.
So: transcendent reality is too remote to subtantiate our claims, and the material world is too limited to work within the world of information. There is another aspect of reality remaining that we might appeal to: information itself.
Physical signatures authenticate physical identities by encoding unique physical data into an easily recognizable artifact. To transpose this idea to the realm of information, a "digital signature" might authenticate "digital identities" by encoding unique "digital data" into an easily recognizable artifact.
Unfortunately, in the digital world we have the additional challenge that the artifact itself can be copied, undermining any claim to legitimacy. We need something that can be easily verified and unforgeable.
Digital Signatures
In fact such a thing does exist, but calling it a "digital signature" obscures more than it reveals. We might just as well call the thing we're looking for a "digital fingerprint", or a "digital electroencephalogram". Just keep that in mind as we work our way towards defining the term - we are not looking for something looks like a physical signature, but for something that does the same thing as a physical signature, in that it allows us to issue ourselves a credential that must be accepted by others by encoding privileged information into a recognizable, unforgeable artifact.
With that, let's get into the weeds.
An important idea in computer science is that of a "function". A function is a sort of information machine that converts data from one form to another. One example is the idea of "incrementing" a number. If you increment 1, you get 2. If you increment 2, you get 3. Incrementing can be reversed, by creating a complementary function that instead subtracts 1 from a number.
A "one-way function" is a function that can't be reversed. A good example of a one-way function is integer rounding. If you round a number and get
5
, what number did you begin with? It's impossible to know - 5.1, 4.81, 5.332794, in fact an infinite number of numbers can be rounded to the number5
. These numbers can also be infinitely long - for example rounding PI to the nearest integer results in the number3
.A real-life example of a useful one-way function is
sha256
. This function is a member of a family of one-way functions called "hash functions". You can feed as much data as you like intosha256
, and you will always get 256 bits of information out. Hash functions are especially useful because collisions between outputs are very rare - even if you change a single bit in a huge pile of data, you're almost certainly going to get a different output.Taking this a step further, there is a whole family of cryptographic one-way "trapdoor" functions that act similarly to hash functions, but which maintain a specific mathematical relationship between the input and the output which allows the input/output pair to be used in a variety of useful applications. For example, in Elliptic Curve Cryptography, scalar multiplication on an elliptic curve is used to derive the output.
"Ok", you say, "that's all completely clear and lucidly explained" (thank you). "But what goes into the function?" You might expect that because of our analogy to physical signatures we would have to gather an incredible amount of digital information to cram into our cryptographic trapdoor function, mashing together bank statements, a record of our heartbeat, brain waves and cellular respiration. Well, we could do it that way (maybe), but there's actually a much simpler solution.
Let's play a quick game. What number am I thinking of? Wrong, it's 82,749,283,929,834. Good guess though.
The reason we use signatures to authenticate our identity in the physical world is not because they're backed by a lot of implicit physical information, but because they're hard to forge and easy to validate. Even so, there is a lot of variation in a single person's signature, even from one moment to the next.
Trapdoor functions solve the validation problem - it's trivially simple to compare one 256-bit number to another. And randomness solves the problem of forgeability.
Now, randomness (A.K.A. "entropy") is actually kind of hard to generate. Random numbers that don't have enough "noise" in them are known as "pseudo-random numbers", and are weirdly easy to guess. This is why Cloudflare uses a video stream of their giant wall of lava lamps to feed the random number generator that powers their CDN. For our purposes though, we can just imagine that our random numbers come from rolling a bunch of dice.
To recap, we can get a digital equivalent of a physical signature (or fingerprint, etc) by 1. coming up with a random number, and 2. feeding it into our chosen trapdoor function. The random number is called the "private" part. The output of the trapdoor function is called the "public" part. These two halves are often called "keys", hence the terms "public key" and "private key".
And now we come full circle - remember about 37 years ago when I introduced the term "cryptographic identity"? Well, we've finally arrived at the point where I explain what that actually is.
A "cryptographic identity" is identified by a public key, and authenticated by the ability to prove that you know the private key.
Notice that I didn't say "authenticated by the private key". If you had to reveal the private key in order to prove you know it, you could only authenticate a public key once without losing exclusive control of the key. But cryptographic identities can be authenticated any number of times because the certification is an algorithm that only someone who knows the private key can execute.
This is the super power that trapdoor functions have that hash functions don't. Within certain cryptosystems, it is possible to mix additional data with your private key to get yet another number in such a way that someone else who only knows the public key can prove that you know the private key.
For example, if my secret number is
12
, and someone tells me the number37
, I can "combine" the two by adding them together and returning the number49
. This "proves" that my secret number is12
. Of course, addition is not a trapdoor function, so it's trivially easy to reverse, which is why cryptography is its own field of knowledge.What's it for?
If I haven't completely lost you yet, you might be wondering why this matters. Who cares if I can prove that I made up a random number?
To answer this, let's consider a simple example: that of public social media posts.
Most social media platforms function by issuing credentials and verifying them based on their internal database. When you log in to your Twitter (ok, fine, X) account, you provide X with a phone number (or email) and password. X compares these records to the ones stored in the database when you created your account, and if they match they let you "log in" by issuing yet another credential, called a "session key".
Next, when you "say" something on X, you pass along your session key and your tweet to X's servers. They check that the session key is legit, and if it is they associate your tweet with your account's identity. Later, when someone wants to see the tweet, X vouches for the fact that you created it by saying "trust me" and displaying your name next to the tweet.
In other words, X creates and controls your identity, but they let you use it as long as you can prove that you know the secret that you agreed on when you registered (by giving it to them every time).
Now pretend that X gets bought by someone even more evil than Elon Musk (if such a thing can be imagined). The new owner now has the ability to control your identity, potentially making it say things that you didn't actually say. Someone could be completely banned from the platform, but their account could be made to continue saying whatever the owner of the platform wanted.
In reality, such a breach of trust would quickly result in a complete loss of credibility for the platform, which is why this kind of thing doesn't happen (at least, not that we know of).
But there are other ways of exploiting this system, most notably by censoring speech. As often happens, platforms are able to confiscate user identities, leaving the tenant no recourse except to appeal to the platform itself (or the government, but that doesn't seem to happen for some reason - probably due to some legalese in social platforms' terms of use). The user has to start completely from scratch, either on the same platform or another.
Now suppose that when you signed up for X instead of simply telling X your password you made up a random number and provided a cryptographic proof to X along with your public key. When you're ready to tweet (there's no need to issue a session key, or even to store your public key in their database) you would again prove your ownership of that key with a new piece of data. X could then publish that tweet or not, along with the same proof you provided that it really came from you.
What X can't do in this system is pretend you said something you didn't, because they don't know your private key.
X also wouldn't be able to deplatform you as effectively either. While they could choose to ban you from their website and refuse to serve your tweets, they don't control your identity. There's nothing they can do to prevent you from re-using it on another platform. Plus, if the system was set up in such a way that other users followed your key instead of an ID made up by X, you could switch platforms and keep your followers. In the same way, it would also be possible to keep a copy of all your tweets in your own database, since their authenticity is determined by your digital signature, not X's "because I say so".
This new power is not just limited to social media either. Here are some other examples of ways that self-issued cryptographic identites transform the power dynamic inherent in digital platforms:
- Banks sometimes freeze accounts or confiscate funds. If your money was stored in a system based on self-issued cryptographic keys rather than custodians, banks would not be able to keep you from accessing or moving your funds. This system exists, and it's called bitcoin.
- Identity theft happens when your identifying information is stolen and used to take out a loan in your name, and without your consent. The reason this is so common is because your credentials are not cryptographic - your name, address, and social security number can only be authenticated by being shared, and they are shared so often and with so many counterparties that they frequently end up in data breaches. If credit checks were authenticated by self-issued cryptographic keys, identity theft would cease to exist (unless your private key itself got stolen).
- Cryptographic keys allow credential issuers to protect their subjects' privacy better too. Instead of showing your ID (including your home address, birth date, height, weight, etc), the DMV could sign a message asserting that the holder of a given public key indeed over 21. The liquor store could then validate that claim, and your ownership of the named key, without knowing anything more about you. Zero-knowledge proofs take this a step further.
In each of these cases, the interests of the property owner, loan seeker, or customer are elevated over the interests of those who might seek to control their assets, exploit their hard work, or surveil their activity. Just as with personal privacy, freedom of speech, and Second Amendment rights the individual case is rarely decisive, but in the aggregate realigned incentives can tip the scale in favor of freedom.
Objections
Now, there are some drawbacks to digital signatures. Systems that rely on digital signatures are frequently less forgiving of errors than their custodial counterparts, and many of their strengths have corresponding weaknesses. Part of this is because people haven't yet developed an intuition for how to use cryptographic identities, and the tools for managing them are still being designed. Other aspects can be mitigated through judicious use of keys fit to the problems they are being used to solve.
Below I'll articulate some of these concerns, and explore ways in which they might be mitigated over time.
Key Storage
Keeping secrets is hard. "A lie can travel halfway around the world before the truth can get its boots on", and the same goes for gossip. Key storage has become increasingly important as more of our lives move online, to the extent that password managers have become almost a requirement for keeping track of our digital lives. But even with good password management, credentials frequently end up for sale on the dark web as a consequence of poorly secured infrastructure.
Apart from the fact that all of this is an argument for cryptographic identities (since keys are shared with far fewer parties), it's also true that the danger of losing a cryptographic key is severe, especially if that key is used in multiple places. Instead of hackers stealing your Facebook password, they might end up with access to all your other social media accounts too!
Keys should be treated with the utmost care. Using password managers is a good start, but very valuable keys should be stored even more securely - for example in a hardware signing device. This is a hassle, and something additional to learn, but is an indispensable part of taking advantage of the benefits associated with cryptographic identity.
There are ways to lessen the impact of lost or stolen secrets, however. Lots of different techniques exist for structuring key systems in such a way that keys can be protected, invalidated, or limited. Here are a few:
- Hierarchical Deterministic Keys allow for the creation of a single root key from which multiple child keys can be generated. These keys are hard to link to the parent, which provides additional privacy, but this link can also be proven when necessary. One limitation is that the identity system has to be designed with HD keys in mind.
- Key Rotation allows keys to become expendable. Additional credentials might be attached to a key, allowing the holder to prove they have the right to rotate the key. Social attestations can help with the process as well if the key is embedded in a web of trust.
- Remote Signing is a technique for storing a key on one device, but using it on another. This might take the form of signing using a hardware wallet and transferring an SD card to your computer for broadcasting, or using a mobile app like Amber to manage sessions with different applications.
- Key sharding takes this to another level by breaking a single key into multiple pieces and storing them separately. A coordinator can then be used to collaboratively sign messages without sharing key material. This dramatically reduces the ability of an attacker to steal a complete key.
Multi-Factor Authentication
One method for helping users secure their accounts that is becoming increasingly common is "multi-factor authentication". Instead of just providing your email and password, platforms send a one-time use code to your phone number or email, or use "time-based one time passwords" which are stored in a password manager or on a hardware device.
Again, MFA is a solution to a problem inherent in account-based authentication which would not be nearly so prevalent in a cryptographic identity system. Still, theft of keys does happen, and so MFA would be an important improvement - if not for an extra layer of authentication, then as a basis for key rotation.
In a sense, MFA is already being researched - key shards is one way of creating multiple credentials from a single key. However, this doesn't address the issue of key rotation, especially when an identity is tied to the public key that corresponds to a given private key. There are two possible solutions to this problem:
- Introduce a naming system. This would allow identities to use a durable name, assigning it to different keys over time. The downside is that this would require the introduction of either centralized naming authorities (back to the old model), or a blockchain in order to solve Zooko's trilemma.
- Establish a chain of keys. This would require a given key to name a successor key in advance and self-invalidate, or some other process like social recovery to invalidate an old key and assign the identity to a new one. This also would significantly increase the complexity of validating messages and associating them with a given identity.
Both solutions are workable, but introduce a lot of complexity that could cause more trouble than it's worth, depending on the identity system we're talking about.
Surveillance
One of the nice qualities that systems based on cryptographic identities have is that digitally signed data can be passed through any number of untrusted systems and emerge intact. This ability to resist tampering makes it possible to broadcast signed data more widely than would otherwise be the case in a system that relies on a custodian to authenticate information.
The downside of this is that more untrusted systems have access to data. And if information is broadcast publicly, anyone can get access to it.
This problem is compounded by re-use of cryptographic identities across multiple contexts. A benefit of self-issued credentials is that it becomes possible to bring everything attached to your identity with you, including social context and attached credentials. This is convenient and can be quite powerful, but it also means that more context is attached to your activity, making it easier to infer information about you for advertising or surveillance purposes. This is dangerously close to the dystopian ideal of a "Digital ID".
The best way to deal with this risk is to consider identity re-use an option to be used when desirable, but to default to creating a new key for every identity you create. This is no worse than the status quo, and it makes room for the ability to link identities when desired.
Another possible approach to this problem is to avoid broadcasting signed data when possible. This could be done by obscuring your cryptographic identity when data is served from a database, or by encrypting your signed data in order to selectively share it with named counterparties.
Still, this is a real risk, and should be kept in mind when designing and using systems based on cryptographic identity. If you'd like to read more about this, please see this blog post.
Making Keys Usable
You might be tempted to look at that list of trade-offs and get the sense that cryptographic identity is not for mere mortals. Key management is hard, and footguns abound - but there is a way forward. With nostr, some new things are happening in the world of key management that have never really happened before.
Plenty of work over the last 30 years has gone into making key management tractable, but none have really been widely adopted. The reason for this is simple: network effect.
Many of these older key systems only applied the thinnest veneer of humanity over keys. But an identity is much richer than a mere label. Having a real name, social connections, and a corpus of work to attach to a key creates a system of keys that humans care about.
By bootstrapping key management within a social context, nostr ensures that the payoff of key management is worth the learning curve. Not only is social engagement a strong incentive to get off the ground, people already on the network are eager to help you get past any roadblocks you might face.
So if I could offer an action item: give nostr a try today. Whether you're in it for the people and their values, or you just want to experiment with cryptographic identity, nostr is a great place to start. For a quick introduction and to securely generate keys, visit njump.me.
Thanks for taking the time to read this post. I hope it's been helpful, and I can't wait to see you on nostr!
-
@ 04ea4f83:210e1713
2025-02-24 06:42:36Erschienen im The Bitstein Brief | Veröffenlichung 10.12.2022 |\ Author: Bitstein (Michael Goldstein)\ Übersetzt von: Sinautoshi am 11.12.2022 - 766906
„Die gesellschaftliche Funktion der Wirtschaftswissenschaft besteht gerade darin, solide Wirtschaftstheorien zu entwickeln und die Irrtümer bösartiger Denkweisen zu entlarven. Bei der Verfolgung dieser Aufgabe zieht der Wirtschaftswissenschaftler die tödliche Feindschaft aller Schwindler und Scharlatane auf sich, deren Abkürzungen zum irdischen Paradies er entlarvt. Je weniger diese Quacksalber in der Lage sind, plausible Einwände gegen die Argumente eines Ökonomen vorzubringen, desto wütender beschimpfen sie ihn.“
- Ludwig von Mises, „Nationalökonomie, Theorie des Handelns und Wirtschaftens”
Das „toxischste" an einem Bitcoin-Maximalisten ist seine unerschütterliche Bereitschaft, „Nein” zu sagen. Nach dem Studium der Geldtheorie und -geschichte und der Erfahrung mit den unerbittlichen Kräften des Marktes, hat der Bitcoiner ein Verständnis für die Realität des monetären Wettbewerbs, ein Bewusstsein für die kritische Natur dezentraler Systeme, einen Fokus auf die Lösung der wichtigsten monetären Probleme und eine strikte Ablehnung der unvermeidlichen Ablenkungen, Opportunitätskosten und ethischen Bedenken bei der Einführung und Förderung von Altcoin-Projekten.
Einige Kritiker bemängeln unhöfliche rhetorische Schnörkel, die als Hindernis für die Gewinnung neuer Bitcoin-Nutzer angesehen werden. Wenn das wahr wäre, gäbe es in der Arbeitsteilung eine Chance für eine qualitativ hochwertigere Bitcoin-Ausbildung, die die Bitcoiner meiner Meinung nach gerne wahrnehmen würden, vor allem die Kritiker, die die bestehenden Unzulänglichkeiten besser erkennen. Doch egal, wie höflich die Bitcoiner ihre Ansichten darlegen, bestimmte Möchtegern-Unternehmer und Influencer werden immer im Streit mit einer leidenschaftlichen Bevölkerungsgruppe stehen, die einfach nicht interessiert ist - und ihr Desinteresse lautstark kundtut. Die „toxischsten" Bitcoiner sind oft diejenigen, die die Weisheit der Bitcoiner erst erkannt haben, nachdem sie von Shitcoins verbrannt wurden und ihr neu gefundenes Desinteresse unmissverständlich zum Ausdruck bringen wollen.
Was soll man also als Bitcoiner tun? Ich empfehle, sich der Wahrheit und der Förderung der Wahrheit zu verschreiben und die Wirksamkeit von Rhetorik an ihrem langfristigen Einfluss und nicht an ihrer kurzfristigen Popularität zu messen.
In dieser Hinsicht sollten sich die Bitcoiner von dem ursprünglichen toxischen Maximalisten inspirieren lassen: Ludwig von Mises. Der bedeutende Wirtschaftswissenschaftler setzte sich unbeirrt für die Wahrheit, freie Märkte und gesundes Geld ein und scheute sich nicht, das zu sagen, was gesagt werden musste, auch wenn er sich damit keine Freunde machte. Langfristig wurde er zu einem der einflussreichsten Ökonomen und Denker des 20. Jahrhunderts, und seine Arbeit hat den Weg für den Bitcoin geebnet.
Mises, der Geldmaximalist
Einer der Hauptkritikpunkte an den Bitcoin-Maximalisten ist die Behauptung, dass die Welt auf Bitcoin (als Geld) konvergieren wird und es generell keine Verwendung für andere Währungen gibt. Dies wird als normative Aussage betrachtet. In Wirklichkeit machen die Bitcoiner eine positive, beschreibende Aussage darüber, wie der monetäre Wettbewerb funktioniert.
In der 1912 veröffentlichten Theorie des Geldes und der Umlaufmittel schrieb Mises:
„So haben die Erfordernisse des Marktes allmählich dazu geführt, dass bestimmte Waren als gemeinsame Tauschmittel ausgewählt wurden. Die Gruppe der Waren, aus der diese ausgewählt wurden, war ursprünglich sehr groß und unterschied sich von Land zu Land; sie wurde aber immer mehr eingeschränkt. Wann immer ein direkter Tausch nicht in Frage kam, war jede der an einem Geschäft beteiligten Parteien bestrebt, ihre überflüssigen Waren nicht nur gegen marktgängigere Waren im Allgemeinen, sondern gegen die marktgängigsten Waren einzutauschen, und von diesen wiederum bevorzugte sie natürlich die marktgängigste Ware. Je größer die Marktfähigkeit der zuerst im indirekten Tausch erworbenen Waren ist, desto größer ist die Aussicht, das endgültige Ziel ohne weitere Manöver erreichen zu können. So gäbe es die unvermeidliche Tendenz, dass die weniger marktfähigen Güter aus der Reihe der als Tauschmittel verwendeten Waren nach und nach verworfen würden, bis schließlich nur noch ein einziges Gut übrig bliebe, das allgemein als Tauschmittel verwendet würde: das Geld.“
Mises zufolge wählen die Akteure zunehmend das marktgängigste Gut als Tauschmittel aus und der natürliche Verlauf des Marktes geht in Richtung Vereinheitlichung zu einem einzigen Geldgut. Das ist schlicht und einfach monetärer Maximalismus.
Mises unterscheidet sich von den Bitcoinern lediglich durch die Stärke der Behauptungen, die er über die tatsächlichen empirischen Entscheidungen der Wirtschaftsakteure zu treffen bereit ist. Mises weist darauf hin, dass sowohl Gold als auch Silber an vielen Orten zu Geld gemacht wurden, wahrscheinlich wegen ihrer ähnlichen Eigenschaften, und dass es den Rahmen der Geldtheorie sprengt, zu sagen, ob Gold oder Silber letztlich besser verkäuflich ist. Trotzdem sagt er:
„Denn es ist ziemlich sicher, dass die Vereinheitlichung auch dann ein wünschenswertes geldpolitisches Ziel gewesen wäre, wenn die ungleiche Marktfähigkeit der als Tauschmittel verwendeten Güter kein Motiv geboten hätte. Die gleichzeitige Verwendung mehrerer Geldarten bringt so viele Nachteile mit sich und verkompliziert die Technik des Tauschens so sehr, dass das Bestreben, das Geldsystem zu vereinheitlichen, in jedem Fall unternommen worden wäre.“
Die natürliche Tendenz zu einem einzigen Geldgut ist so stark, dass seiner Meinung nach die Vereinheitlichung der Geldsysteme auch dann angestrebt würde, wenn zwei Güter genau gleich marktfähig wären. Zuvor stellt er außerdem fest:
„Das endgültige Urteil könnte erst gefällt werden, wenn alle Hauptteile der bewohnten Erde ein einziges Handelsgebiet bilden, denn erst dann wäre es unmöglich, dass andere Nationen mit unterschiedlichen Geldsystemen sich anschließen und die internationale Organisation verändern.“
Jede neue Handelsbeziehung eröffnet die Möglichkeit, ein brandneues Geldgut einzuführen, das bisher nicht verwendet wurde. Wenn seine Qualitäten ein höheres Maß an Marktfähigkeit aufrechterhalten könnten, ist es möglich, dass sich die gesamte internationale Währungsordnung aufgrund seiner natürlichen Überlegenheit bei der Bewältigung der Funktionen des Geldes um ihn herum neu organisieren könnte.
Im Bitcoin Standard liefert Saifedean Ammous zahlreiche Argumente dafür, warum Gold dem Silber als Geldwert überlegen war, obwohl Mises nicht bereit oder nicht daran interessiert war, diesen Punkt zu diskutieren, und warum Bitcoin ein noch besserer Geldwert ist. Mises hat die Einführung von Bitcoin in die Weltwirtschaft zwar nicht mehr erlebt, aber seine Wirtschaftstheorie erklärt genau, warum Bitcoin an Wert gewinnen würde und warum es plausibel ist, dass die gesamte internationale Währungsordnung auf einen Bitcoin-Standard umgestellt wird. Er gibt auch den theoretischen Rahmen, um zu verstehen, warum Altcoins Bitcoin nicht allein durch ihre Eigenschaften ausstechen können. Sie müssen eine bessere Marktfähigkeit in Bezug auf Raum, Zeit und Größe bieten, um einen ausreichenden Vorteil gegenüber Bitcoin zu haben. Wie bereits an anderer Stelle beschrieben, ist dies einfach nicht gelungen, und nur Bitcoin bietet ein stark dezentralisiertes, überprüfbares und glaubwürdig knappes digitales Geldgut.
Mises, der Marktmaximalist
Die Geldtheorie ist nicht der einzige Ort, an dem der Leser eine Art „Maximalismus" in Mises' Denken spüren kann. Sein gesamtes Werk läuft auf einen unverhohlenen Marktmaximalismus hinaus, der sich weigert, durch rigorose ökonomische Theorie und Analyse sozialistischen oder interventionistischen Argumenten nachzugeben.
Ein großartiges Beispiel für seine Verteidigung des freien Marktes findet sich in einem Vortrag aus dem Jahr 1950 mit dem Titel „Die Mitte des Weges führt zum Sozialismus". In dieser Vorlesung greift Mises Interventionisten an, die behaupten, eine Politik der „Mitte" zwischen den beiden Extremen Kapitalismus und Sozialismus zu favorisieren. Durch strategische Interventionen kann der Staat die Auswüchse beider Systeme verhindern.
Mises betrachtet Kapitalismus und Sozialismus jedoch als diametral entgegengesetzte und unvereinbare Organisationssysteme und nicht als ein Spektrum der Wohlstandsverteilung:
„Der Konflikt der beiden Prinzipien ist unüberbrückbar und lässt keinen Kompromiss zu. Kontrolle ist unteilbar. Entweder entscheidet die Nachfrage der Verbraucher, die sich auf dem Markt manifestiert, für welche Zwecke und wie die Produktionsfaktoren eingesetzt werden sollen, oder der Staat kümmert sich um diese Angelegenheiten. Es gibt nichts, was den Gegensatz zwischen diesen beiden widersprüchlichen Prinzipien abmildern könnte. Sie schließen sich gegenseitig aus. Der Interventionismus ist kein goldener Mittelweg zwischen Kapitalismus und Sozialismus. Er ist der Entwurf für ein drittes System der wirtschaftlichen Organisation der Gesellschaft und muss als solches gewürdigt werden.“
Dieses dritte System ist jedoch im Grunde nur ein längerer Marsch zum Sozialismus, indem es ein falsches Lippenbekenntnis zu Privateigentum und freier Marktwirtschaft ablegt. Auf jeden Eingriff, der stattfindet, müssen weitere folgen. Die Festsetzung eines Preises hier erfordert die Festsetzung eines anderen Preises dort, und so geht es die ganze Lieferkette entlang. Am Ende hat der Interventionismus die gesamte „Marktwirtschaft" im Würgegriff.
Der Interventionismus kann nicht als ein Wirtschaftssystem betrachtet werden, das dazu bestimmt ist, zu bleiben. Er ist eine Methode zur Umwandlung des Kapitalismus in den Sozialismus in mehreren aufeinanderfolgenden Schritten. Damit unterscheidet er sich von den Bemühungen der Kommunisten, den Sozialismus auf einen Schlag zu verwirklichen. Der Unterschied bezieht sich nicht auf das letztendliche Ziel der politischen Bewegung, sondern vor allem auf die Taktik, die zur Erreichung des von beiden Gruppen angestrebten Ziels angewandt wird.
Trotzdem sind selbst die meisten vermeintlichen Befürworter einer freien Marktwirtschaft in Wirklichkeit von interventionistischen Ideologien und Denkweisen durchdrungen, und ihre Strategien sind immer zum Scheitern und zu Kompromissen verurteilt.
„Dies hat zur Folge, dass praktisch kaum etwas getan wird, um das System der Privatwirtschaft zu erhalten. Es gibt nur Mittelsmänner, die glauben, erfolgreich gewesen zu sein, wenn sie eine besonders ruinöse Maßnahme eine Zeit lang hinausgezögert haben. Sie sind immer auf dem Rückzug. Sie nehmen heute Maßnahmen in Kauf, die sie noch vor zehn oder zwanzig Jahren für undiskutabel gehalten hätten. In ein paar Jahren werden sie sich mit anderen Maßnahmen abfinden, die sie heute noch für undiskutabel halten. Was den totalitären Sozialismus verhindern kann, ist nur ein grundlegender Wandel der Ideologien.\ \ Was wir brauchen, ist weder Antisozialismus noch Antikommunismus, sondern eine offene Befürwortung des Systems, dem wir all den Wohlstand verdanken, der unser Zeitalter von den vergleichsweise beengten Verhältnissen vergangener Zeiten unterscheidet.“
Mises nimmt kein Blatt vor den Mund, wenn er eine interventionistische Politik fordert, und es gibt viele Lehren, die Bitcoiner daraus ziehen können.
Erstens ist das Bitcoin-Netzwerk nicht einfach nur eine andere Art des Werttransfers als eine bestehende zentralisierte Lösung, eine Art PayPal 2.0. Es ist ein strukturell anderer Ansatz für das gesamte Problem der doppelten Ausgaben. „Blockchain, nicht Bitcoin" ist eine Mogelpackung, weil sie den Kern dessen, was Bitcoin einzigartig macht (Dezentralisierung, unabhängige Überprüfbarkeit usw.), wegnimmt, während sie behauptet, „die zugrundeliegende Technologie" zu nutzen, ähnlich wie ein nationalsozialistisches oder faschistisches Regime die staatliche Kontrolle über die Produktion übernehmen könnte, während es behauptet, für Privateigentum zu sein. Wenn du die Vorteile des Marktes nutzen willst, musst du tatsächlich einen Markt haben, und wenn du die Vorteile von Bitcoin nutzen willst, musst du Bitcoin tatsächlich nutzen.
Außerdem sollte die Dezentralisierung als binäres System betrachtet werden. Entweder ist ein System dezentralisiert, oder es ist dazu verdammt, zentralisiert zu werden, manchmal mit einem Hard Fork nach dem anderen (vgl. Ethereum). Bitcoin-Maximalisten werden regelmäßig als toxisch bezeichnet, weil sie entschlossen an bestimmten Netzwerkparametern festhalten, selbst wenn diese willkürlich oder trivial erscheinen. Ein ganzer Krieg über die Blockgröße wurde um eine Begrenzung von 1 MB geführt. Die Zahl schien willkürlich und die Lösung trivial zu sein, aber die Bitcoiner weigerten sich, davon abzuweichen. Und warum? Eine höhere Blockgröße würde die Kosten für den Betrieb eines vollständigen Knotens (Full Node) erhöhen, der für eine unabhängige Validierung und Dezentralisierung notwendig ist. Ein Hard Fork würde einen vernichtenden Präzedenzfall schaffen und alle zukünftigen Ansprüche auf Abwärtskompatibilität gefährden, die für die Glaubwürdigkeit der Geldpolitik und die Fähigkeit der Nodes, sich vertrauensvoll mit dem Netzwerk zu synchronisieren, erforderlich sind. Die Blockkapazität stieg zwar an, aber nur, weil SegWit, dessen Vorteile weit über die bloße Verbesserung der Skalierung hinausgingen, über einen Soft Fork aktiviert werden konnte, sodass denjenigen, die dies nicht wollten, keine neuen Kosten auferlegt wurden.
Andere Projekte hingegen akzeptieren nicht, dass die Kompromisse bei Bitcoin nicht wirklich willkürlich sind. Sie bieten Turing-complete Smart Contracts, schnellere Blockzeiten, größere Blöcke oder alle möglichen anderen „Features" an. Die Features werden nicht mit demselben extrem konservativen Engagement für Sicherheit produziert wie Bitcoin und bedrohen oft die Fähigkeit, überhaupt einen vollständigen Knoten (Full-Node) zu betreiben. Nur bei Bitcoin kümmern sich die Leute darum, dass die Geldmenge tatsächlich überprüft werden kann. Mit der Zeit verlieren die Projekte, wenn sie überhaupt aufrechterhalten werden, jeden Anschein einer glaubwürdigen Dezentralisierung. Ethereum, das einst mit unaufhaltsamen Anwendungen und der Aussage „Code ist Gesetz" warb, erlebte den DAO-Hack und ist nach der Einführung von Proof-of-Stake (das von Natur aus zentralisierend ist) der OFAC-Zensur in unterschiedlichem Maße unterworfen.
Bitcoin akzeptiert nichts von alledem. Er beugt seine Regeln für niemanden. Bitcoiner wissen auch, dass das System gar kein Bitcoin mehr wäre, wenn die Regeln gebogen würden. Mises hilft uns zu verstehen, dass eine Politik des Mittelweges zu Shitcoinerei führt. Eine Währung ist entweder Bitcoin oder dazu verdammt, ein Shitcoin zu sein.
Mises, der toxische Maximalist
Im Jahr 1947 fand in der Schweiz das erste Treffen der Mont Pèlerin Society statt. Bei diesem Treffen trafen sich viele der einflussreichsten Verfechter der freien Märkte und des klassischen Liberalismus, von Ludwig von Mises über F. A. Hayek bis hin zu Milton Friedman und vielen anderen, um darüber zu diskutieren, wie man die steigende Flut des Totalitarismus und seiner Wirtschaftsideologien durch die Förderung freier Märkte und des Privateigentums bekämpfen kann. Man könnte meinen, dass Mises genau in diese Diskussionen passt. Doch wie Milton Friedman berichtete, kam es anders:
„Die Geschichte, an die ich mich am besten erinnere, ereignete sich auf dem ersten Treffen in Mont Pèlerin, als [Mises] aufstand und sagte: „Ihr seid alle ein Haufen Sozialisten." Wir diskutierten über die Einkommensverteilung und darüber, ob man progressive Einkommenssteuern haben sollte. Einige der Anwesenden vertraten die Ansicht, dass es eine Rechtfertigung dafür geben könnte.\ \ Eine andere Gelegenheit, die ebenso aufschlussreich ist: Fritz Machlup war ein Schüler von Mises, einer seiner treuesten Jünger. Bei einem der Treffen in Mont Pèlerin hielt Machlup einen Vortrag, in dem er, glaube ich, die Idee eines Goldstandards in Frage stellte; er sprach sich für freie Wechselkurse aus. Mises war so wütend, dass er drei Jahre lang nicht mit Machlup sprechen wollte. Einige Leute mussten die beiden wieder zusammenbringen. Es ist schwer zu verstehen; man kann es einigermaßen nachvollziehen, wenn man sich vor Augen führt, wie Menschen wie Mises in seinem Leben verfolgt wurden.“
Wie bereits erwähnt, hielt Mises drei Jahre später einen Vortrag, in dem er eindrucksvoll erklärte, warum sie tatsächlich alle ein Haufen Sozialisten waren. Wer staatliche Eingriffe in die Einkommensverteilung akzeptiert, ist dem Sozialismus bereits verfallen, sobald genug Zeit vergangen ist. Mises war einfach nicht bereit, den sozialistischen Irrtümern, die er im Laufe seiner intellektuellen Karriere so akribisch aufgespießt hatte, Glauben zu schenken. Jörg Guido Hülsmann stellt in Mises: The Last Knight of Liberalism fest, dass „Mises zwar in der Lage war, Sozialisten hoch zu schätzen, aber der Vorfall zeigte, dass er wenig Geduld mit Sozialisten hatte, die sich als Liberale ausgaben."
Doch Mises' giftiges Verhalten blieb nicht ohne Folgen. Laut Hülsmann:
„Der Schlagabtausch zwischen Mises und seinen neoliberalen Gegnern prägte den Ton in der Mont Pèlerin Society für die kommenden Jahre.... Obwohl die Libertären um Mises eine kleine Minderheit waren, hatten sie die finanzielle Unterstützung der amerikanischen Hauptsponsoren wie dem Volker Fund, ohne die die Gesellschaft in jenen frühen Jahren schnell ausgestorben wäre. Solange Mises aktiv an den Treffen teilnahm, war es daher unmöglich, die technischen Details eines genehmigten staatlichen Interventionismus zu diskutieren. Das Laissez-faire hatte ein Comeback gefeiert. Es war zwar nicht die Mehrheitsmeinung, aber es war eine diskutierbare und diskutierte politische Option - zu viel für einige anfängliche Mitglieder wie Maurice Allais, der die Gesellschaft genau aus diesem Grund bald wieder verließ.“
Indem er toxisch war, konnte Mises dazu beitragen, den Ton für eine wirklich laissez-faire Mont Pèlerin Society zu setzen, die ihrem erklärten Ziel gerecht werden konnte, und sie wählten F. A. Hayek zu ihrem Präsidenten. Er hatte keine Angst, Klartext zu reden, aber lautstark, sogar gegenüber Leuten, die vermutlich zu seinem „eigenen Team" gehörten. Ludwig von Mises war ein Mann, der seine Ideen ernst nahm und die Wahrheit noch viel ernster.
In seinen Memoiren schreibt Mises über seine Zeit in der österreichischen Handelskammer in den 1910er und 1920er Jahren:
„Ich wurde manchmal beschuldigt, meinen Standpunkt zu schroff und unnachgiebig zu vertreten. Es wurde auch behauptet, dass ich mehr hätte erreichen können, wenn ich eine größere Kompromissbereitschaft gezeigt hätte.... Die Kritik war ungerechtfertigt; ich konnte nur dann effektiv sein, wenn ich die Dinge so darstellen konnte, wie sie mir erschienen. Wenn ich heute auf meine Arbeit bei der Handelskammer zurückblicke, bedauere ich nur meine Kompromissbereitschaft und nicht meine Unnachgiebigkeit.“
In dieser Zeit trug sein Rat dazu bei, die Hyperinflation in Österreich aufzuhalten und ihre Auswirkungen im Vergleich zur Weimarer Republik abzuschwächen.
Bitcoiner werden von endlosen „Krypto-" und „Shitcoin"-Betrügern geplagt, die auf dem Rücken der innovativen Technologie und des wirtschaftlichen Erfolgs von Bitcoin reiten wollen. Den Bitcoinern wird gesagt, dass sie alle im selben Team sind. In den Augen der Öffentlichkeit sind sie das auch. Das Ergebnis ist eine getäuschte Öffentlichkeit, der zentralisierte Pump-and-Dump-Systeme und Rugpulls, Affen-Jpegs und Rube-Goldberg-Maschinen verkauft werden, die auf Schlagwörtern basieren und die Vorstellung vermitteln, dass sie in der gleichen Liga spielen wie die großartigste Geldtechnologie, die je geschaffen wurde. „Krypto" profitiert vom Erfolg von Bitcoin, und die Bekanntheit von Bitcoin sinkt mit den Misserfolgen von „Krypto". Doch wenn Bitcoiner die Unterschiede ansprechen und diese Projekte ablehnen, die sie uninteressant oder sogar verabscheuungswürdig finden, wird das als schädlich angesehen. Den Bitcoinern schadet das nicht, denn sie können weiter (Satoshis) stapeln und bauen, aber die Menschen, die unter Fiat-Regimen leben müssen, leiden darunter, dass ihnen kein Weg zu Freiheit und Wohlstand gezeigt wird.
Abgesehen davon, dass das Geld des Einzelnen in Gefahr ist, kann die Offenheit für Shitcoins auch Veränderungen im Netzwerk fördern, die die Dezentralisierung beeinträchtigen. Wenn es Unterstützung für einen Shitcoin gibt, der auf einem bestimmten Merkmal basiert, warum sollte das Merkmal dann nicht in Bitcoin existieren? Wenn es tatsächlich eine Tendenz zu einer einzigen Währung gibt, ist die Förderung einer alternativen Kryptowährung selbst ein Angriff auf das Potenzial von Bitcoin. Wirtschaft und Technik sind mit gnadenlosen Konsequenzen konfrontiert. Eine falsche Abfolge von Schritten kann zu absoluter Verwüstung führen. Bitcoiner nehmen das sehr ernst und machen keinen Hehl daraus, dass sie diese Konsequenzen fürchten. Wenn sie das tun, lehnen sie ganze unternehmerische Vorhaben ab und stellen ihre gesamte Einnahmequelle in Frage. Das ist toxisch.
Bitcoiners sollten immer den Mut haben, Mises zu zitieren und jedem zu sagen: „Ihr seid alle ein Haufen Shitcoiner."
Der aufgehende Stern von Mises
Obwohl er aus einer adligen Familie stammte und in Österreich hohe Positionen innehatte, hatte Mises, als er auf der Flucht vor den Nazis in die Vereinigten Staaten emigrierte, nur wenige Möglichkeiten. Bis zu seiner Pensionierung war er „Gastprofessor" an der New York University. Er arbeitete im Grunde genommen im stillen Kämmerlein und unterrichtete hauptsächlich in seinen inzwischen berühmten informellen Seminaren, an denen auch Murray Rothbard und andere teilnahmen. Er benötigte die Unterstützung verschiedener philanthropischer Fonds. Hinzu kam, dass die Wirtschaftswissenschaften, wie alle Sozialwissenschaften, dem Szientismus und der Technokratie erlegen waren, so dass Mises' strenge logisch-deduktive Methoden im Vergleich zu mathematischen Formeln und statistischen Modellen als altmodisch galten. Der Goldstandard wurde zugunsten eines Fiat-Systems abgeschafft, und als Mises starb, hatte der US-Dollar keinerlei Verbindung mehr zu Edelmetallen oder realen Ersparnissen, so dass die Geldpolitik allein den Launen der Politik überlassen blieb.
Es gab allen Grund, Ludwig von Mises völlig in Vergessenheit geraten zu lassen. Doch seine Schüler, wie Murray Rothbard, hielten die österreichische Schule am Leben. Im Jahr 1982 wurde das Ludwig von Mises Institute von Rothbard und Lew Rockwell gegründet und von Dr. Ron Paul finanziert (beide wurden von ihren Kritikern als „toxisch" bezeichnet). Dr. Paul selbst wurde zu einem legendären Verfechter der Ideen von Mises und anderen, sowohl im Kongress als auch im Präsidentschaftswahlkampf. In letzterem machte Dr. Paul die von der Federal Reserve verursachte wirtschaftliche Zerstörung zu einem zentralen Bestandteil seines Programms und zum ersten Mal seit Jahrzehnten zu einem wichtigen Thema in der politischen Debatte, was den Diskurs danach für immer veränderte.
Es ist also kein Wunder, dass viele Menschen, die sich als erste für Bitcoin begeisterten, treue Schüler von Mises waren und dass seine Ideen mit dem Wachstum von Bitcoin noch mehr an Bedeutung gewonnen haben. Seine rigorose Erläuterung der Wahrheiten des Wirtschaftsrechts, die auf Subjektivismus, Marginalismus und methodologischem Individualismus beruht, gab den Menschen den Rahmen, um zu verstehen, wie Bitcoin die Geldpolitik veranschaulicht, die zu Frieden, Wohlstand und Freiheit führt. Anstatt irrelevant zu werden, ist Mises heute wichtiger denn je. Wie Ron Paul bemerkte: „Wir sind jetzt alle Österreicher."
Fazit
Das Toxische liegt im Auge des Betrachters oder des Bagholders. Die Wirtschaftswissenschaft ist, wie jedes Streben nach Wahrheit, kein Beliebtheitswettbewerb, und die Wahrheit wird immer von denen bekämpft werden, deren Geschäft und Status von der Verbreitung von Irrtümern und Unwahrheiten abhängt.\ \ Ludwig von Mises stand fest zu seinen gründlichen Analysen der Wirtschaftswissenschaften und des klassischen Liberalismus und scheute sich nicht, das zu verteidigen, was er für wahr hielt, selbst auf Kosten von Prestige und Popularität. Heute steht er weit über fast jedem anderen Sozialwissenschaftler des 20. Jahrhunderts.
Ich habe an anderer Stelle über Memes und Rhetorik gesprochen, und es gibt viel zu diskutieren über bestimmte Strategien und ihre Wirksamkeit. Aber vor allem muss jede Strategie die Wahrheit in den Mittelpunkt stellen. Die Wahrheit ist zeitlos, so dass ihre Relevanz nicht auf kurzfristige Popularität beschränkt ist. Wenn dies der Fall ist, ist der Vorwurf der „Toxizität" entweder eine Aufforderung zur Verbesserung oder ein Ehrenzeichen dafür, dass man trotz aller Widrigkeiten für die Wahrheit einsteht. Wie das Motto von Ludwig von Mises schon sagte: tu ne cede malis, sed contra audentior ito. Weiche dem Bösen nicht, trete ihm umso mutiger entgegen.
-
@ a95c6243:d345522c
2025-01-03 20:26:47Was du bist hängt von drei Faktoren ab: \ Was du geerbt hast, \ was deine Umgebung aus dir machte \ und was du in freier Wahl \ aus deiner Umgebung und deinem Erbe gemacht hast. \ Aldous Huxley
Das brave Mitmachen und Mitlaufen in einem vorgegebenen, recht engen Rahmen ist gewiss nicht neu, hat aber gerade wieder mal Konjunktur. Dies kann man deutlich beobachten, eigentlich egal, in welchem gesellschaftlichen Bereich man sich umschaut. Individualität ist nur soweit angesagt, wie sie in ein bestimmtes Schema von «Diversität» passt, und Freiheit verkommt zur Worthülse – nicht erst durch ein gewisses Buch einer gewissen ehemaligen Regierungschefin.
Erklärungsansätze für solche Entwicklungen sind bekannt, und praktisch alle haben etwas mit Massenpsychologie zu tun. Der Herdentrieb, also der Trieb der Menschen, sich – zum Beispiel aus Unsicherheit oder Bequemlichkeit – lieber der Masse anzuschließen als selbstständig zu denken und zu handeln, ist einer der Erklärungsversuche. Andere drehen sich um Macht, Propaganda, Druck und Angst, also den gezielten Einsatz psychologischer Herrschaftsinstrumente.
Aber wollen die Menschen überhaupt Freiheit? Durch Gespräche im privaten Umfeld bin ich diesbezüglich in der letzten Zeit etwas skeptisch geworden. Um die Jahreswende philosophiert man ja gerne ein wenig über das Erlebte und über die Erwartungen für die Zukunft. Dabei hatte ich hin und wieder den Eindruck, die totalitären Anwandlungen unserer «Repräsentanten» kämen manchen Leuten gerade recht.
«Desinformation» ist so ein brisantes Thema. Davor müsse man die Menschen doch schützen, hörte ich. Jemand müsse doch zum Beispiel diese ganzen merkwürdigen Inhalte in den Social Media filtern – zur Ukraine, zum Klima, zu Gesundheitsthemen oder zur Migration. Viele wüssten ja gar nicht einzuschätzen, was richtig und was falsch ist, sie bräuchten eine Führung.
Freiheit bedingt Eigenverantwortung, ohne Zweifel. Eventuell ist es einigen tatsächlich zu anspruchsvoll, die Verantwortung für das eigene Tun und Lassen zu übernehmen. Oder die persönliche Freiheit wird nicht als ausreichend wertvolles Gut angesehen, um sich dafür anzustrengen. In dem Fall wäre die mangelnde Selbstbestimmung wohl das kleinere Übel. Allerdings fehlt dann gemäß Aldous Huxley ein Teil der Persönlichkeit. Letztlich ist natürlich alles eine Frage der Abwägung.
Sind viele Menschen möglicherweise schon so «eingenordet», dass freiheitliche Ambitionen gar nicht für eine ganze Gruppe, ein Kollektiv, verfolgt werden können? Solche Gedanken kamen mir auch, als ich mir kürzlich diverse Talks beim viertägigen Hacker-Kongress des Chaos Computer Clubs (38C3) anschaute. Ich war nicht nur überrascht, sondern reichlich erschreckt angesichts der in weiten Teilen mainstream-geformten Inhalte, mit denen ein dankbares Publikum beglückt wurde. Wo ich allgemein hellere Köpfe erwartet hatte, fand ich Konformismus und enthusiastisch untermauerte Narrative.
Gibt es vielleicht so etwas wie eine Herdenimmunität gegen Indoktrination? Ich denke, ja, zumindest eine gestärkte Widerstandsfähigkeit. Was wir brauchen, sind etwas gesunder Menschenverstand, offene Informationskanäle und der Mut, sich freier auch zwischen den Herden zu bewegen. Sie tun das bereits, aber sagen Sie es auch dieses Jahr ruhig weiter.
Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.
-
@ 0f4795bf:a8365abe
2025-02-23 18:26:48Der neue Pareto-Client
Unter der Adresse https://pareto.space/read lässt sich der neue Pareto-Client aufrufen.
Durch Klicken auf Anmelden (rechts oben) kann mit einem vorhandenen Nostr-Konto angemeldet werden oder ein neues Konto erstellt werden.
Sofern schon ein Nostr-Konto vorhanden ist, kann nach Klick auf Log in einfach z. B. mittels Browser Extension angemeldet werden.
Nach dem Anmelden wird das Profilbild rechts oben angezeigt und ggf. eine Kategorie mit den Artikeln der Autoren, denen man folgt.
Nach Umschalten vom Leser- in den Autoren-Modus (Schalter oben, rechts neben Logo) werden die bereits veröffentlichten Artikel angezeigt.
Sollte der Schalter nicht angezeigt werden, bitte bei uns mit dem npub melden, damit wir ihn in die Liste der Pareto-Autoren aufnehmen können.
Eine zweite Kategorie zeigt die bestehenden Entwürfe.
Unter dem Punkt Bilder links lassen sich Bilder hochladen, die in Artikeln verwendet werden sollen.
Sollte noch kein Medien-Server (Blossom oder NIP-96) konfiguriert sein, wird angeboten, den Standard-Server des Pareto-Projektes zu nutzen.
Nachdem der Server konfiguriert wird, werden alle hochgeladenen Bilder angezeigt.
Weitere Bilder lassen sich über den Knopf Bilder hochladen hinzufügen.
Nach Auswahl des Punktes Schreiben wird der leere Pareto-Editor angezeigt.
Neben dem Titel sollte auch die Zusammenfassung aufgefüllt werden, da diese beim Teilen des Artikels (Telegram, Social Media, ...) neben dem Titel und dem Bild des Artikels angezeigt werden.
Das Bild kann durch Klicken auf den grauen Rahmen rechts oben gewählt werden.
Nach Doppelklick auf das gewünschte Bild wird es rechts neben Titel und Zusammenfassung angezeigt.
Neue Elemente können im Text durch Klicken auf das Plus-Symbol hinzugefügt werden.
Neben Überschriften lassen sich so auch Zitate, Aufzählungen, Programm-Code, Tabellen und Bilder einfügen.
Nachdem ein Bild-Element eingefügt wurde, kann es entweder mit einem Link auf ein Bild bestückt werden oder - durch Klicken auf "Select file" ein bereits hochgeladenes auswählen.
Durch Klicken auf die kleine Sprechblase rechts oben in einem Bild lässt sich eine Bildunterschrift hinzufügen.
Markdown
Neben dem Hinzufügen von Elementen über das Plus-Symbol kann natürlich auch direkt Markdown-Auszeichnung eingegeben werden.
Es gibt im Netz diverse Anleitungen für Markdown. Allerdings gibt es im Kontext von Nostr die Einschränkung, dass keine HTML-Elemente in Artikeln enthalten sein dürfen.
Durch Tippen eines Doppelkreuzes, gefolgt von einem Leerzeichen, lässt sich beispielsweise eine Überschrift einfügen
Besonderheiten
Der Pareto-Client stellt Links unterschiedlich dar, je nachdem, ob sie innerhalb eines Absatzes oder allein erscheinen.
Links innerhalb eines Absatzes werden ganz regulär dargestellt als Link, auf den der Leser klicken kann.
Alleinstehende Links (also ohne Text davor oder dahinter) hingegen werden ggf. mit einer Vorschau versehen und nach einmaligem Klick wird der Inhalt eingebettet dargestellt.
Für Links zu YouTube, Odysee, Rumble, SoundCloud, theplattform.net, und andere können die Inhalte direkt im Artikel konsumiert werden.
Auch alleinstehende Links zu Dateien mit den Endungen .mp4, .mov, .mkv, .avi, .m4v und .webm (Videos) sowie .mp3, .wav, ogg (Audio) und .pdf (PDF-Dokumente) werden eingebettet dargestellt.
Tipp:
Beim Schreiben längerer Artikel empfiehlt es sich, diese zwischendurch immer wieder als Entwurf zu speichern, um Datenverlust zu vermeiden.
Oberhalb des Knopfes zum Speichern von Entwürfen wird immer der aktuelle Status des Artikels angezeigt.
Schlüsselwörter werden einfach durch Komma getrennt. Es ist üblich, diese klein zu schreiben.
Nach dem Speichern wird der Knopf deaktiviert.
Der Entwurf sollte anschließend unter dem Punkt Artikel unter Entwürfe eingeblendet werden.
Ein Klick auf Bearbeiten bringt den Entwurf wieder in den Editor.
Nach Klicken von Veröffentlichen kann noch die Liste der Nostr-Relays ausgewählt werden, auf denen der Artikel veröffentlicht werden soll.
Nach dem Veröffentlichen sollte der Status das entspr. anzeigen.
Herzlichen Glückwunsch!
Dein erster Artikel wurde über den Pareto-Client verfasst und veröffentlicht!
-
@ 7d33ba57:1b82db35
2025-04-19 10:11:08Erfurt, the capital of Thuringia, is one of Germany’s best-kept secrets. With its fairytale old town, half-timbered houses, towering cathedrals, and cobbled streets, Erfurt offers a perfect blend of history, culture, and charm —without the tourist crowds.
🏰 Top Things to See in Erfurt
🌉 Krämerbrücke (Merchants' Bridge)
- One of Europe’s longest inhabited medieval bridges
- Lined with boutique shops, artisan studios, and quaint cafés
- A picture-perfect spot for photos and people-watching
⛪ Erfurt Cathedral & Severikirche
- Two stunning Gothic churches side by side on Domplatz (Cathedral Square)
- Climb the steps for panoramic views, especially magical during sunset or the Christmas market
🏫 Augustinerkloster (Augustinian Monastery)
- Where Martin Luther lived as a monk before launching the Reformation
- Peaceful cloisters and a fascinating exhibit on his life
🕍 Petersberg Citadel
- A baroque fortress with sweeping views of the city
- Stroll the ramparts or relax in the surrounding green spaces
🎨 Local Culture & Vibe
- Erfurt is a university town, so it feels lively, young, and creative
- Great for bookstores, independent cinemas, and music cafés
- The mix of medieval structures and modern flair gives it a unique edge
🎄 Seasonal Highlights
- 🌸 Spring/Summer: Flower-filled parks, open-air concerts, and river walks
- 🎭 DomStufen Festival (summer): Operas and plays on the cathedral steps
- 🎄 Christmas Market: One of Germany’s most beautiful, set on Domplatz beneath twinkling lights and Gothic towers
🍽️ What to Eat in Erfurt
- Try Thüringer Rostbratwurst (local sausage) from a street stand
- Don’t miss Thüringer Klöße (potato dumplings), hearty stews, and apple cake
- Cozy up with local beer or wine in one of the traditional inns
🚆 Getting There
- Just 2 hours by train from Berlin or Frankfurt
- Compact and walkable—perfect for exploring on foot or by rental bike
-
@ c3f12a9a:06c21301
2025-04-19 10:09:45Satoshi’s Time-Traveling for Knowledge #4: Liberland 2024 – Freedom Under Siege
What is Liberland?
While digging through old decentralized forums archived on the Interchain, Satoshi came across a curious name: Liberland.
“A sovereign libertarian micronation on the Danube? Founded in 2015 via Terra nullius? Built on the principles of freedom, voluntaryism, and Bitcoin? And I’ve never heard of it?”
Intrigued, Satoshi began to research. The story was almost too good to be true. A 7-square-kilometer patch of unclaimed land between Croatia and Serbia, turned into a symbol of decentralized governance and individual liberty.
No taxes unless voluntary. Bitcoin as the national currency. A digital nation-state with thousands of registered e-citizens, and even its own constitution. And yet—no recognition, no borders, and no peace.His curiosity turned into determination. He calibrated the temporal coordinates on his chrono-node to the Danube River in 2024, a year rumored to be turbulent for the Free Republic of Liberland.
When he arrived, reality struck harder than the legend.
Freedom Under Siege
The nation was under siege.
The scent of burnt wood and trampled earth lingered in the air as Satoshi stepped into what remained of the Liberland settlement. Broken structures, crushed solar panels, and a few scattered personal belongings were all that testified to the once-vibrant hub of liberty pioneers.
He found a group of residents—mud-streaked, exhausted, but defiant—gathered around the remnants of a communal kitchen. One of them, wearing a weathered Liberland t-shirt and a crypto-wallet hardware device on a chain around his neck, greeted him:
"You're not with them, are you?"
Satoshi shook his head.
"Just... passing through. What happened here?"
The man’s voice trembled between rage and sorrow:
"On the International Day of Peace, no less. Croatian police raided us. Bulldozers came with them. Took everything—generators, comms gear, even our medical tents. Claimed it was 'illegal occupation of Croatian forestry land.' But no court, no hearing. Just force."
Satoshi listened, taking mental snapshots of their faces, their words, their pain. He thought about the dream—of a place built voluntarily, where people governed themselves, free from coercion.
But that dream was burning at the edges, like the collapsed tents scattered behind them.
Reflections Under the Stars
As night fell over the Danube, Satoshi sat alone, watching the stars reflect on the black water. Thoughts spiraled:
"Decentralization... is beautiful. But without protection, it's fragile."
He realized that so long as central authorities hold monopoly on violence and taxation, every independent effort to decentralize the world—from Bitcoin to Liberland—is at risk of being suppressed, ignored, or destroyed. Not because it’s wrong, but because it's inconvenient to power.
"Unless a major state like the USA decentralizes itself from within," he thought, "true decentralization will remain a resistance—never the standard."
He activated his chrono-node once more. Not in defeat, but with purpose.
The next destination? Unknown. But the mission was clearer than ever.
originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/947954