@ 069c4a92:ce7df3ed

The Flash USDT Generator is responsible for producing and storing Flash USDT tokens with a flexible daily limit. It ensures a consistent supply of tokens for transactions while managing distribution securely and efficiently. Our Flash USDT offers a unique, temporary cryptocurrency that lasts for 90 days before expiring. This innovative solution allows for seamlesstrading and transferring of funds. Notably, the Flash Bitcoin and USDT can be transferred to 12 different wallets, including prominent platforms like Binance and Trust Wallet.

Features Adjustable Daily Limit: Customizable settings allow for modifying the token generation cap. Automated Distribution: Ensures quick and secure token transfers to user wallets. Minimal Latency: Prevents blockchain congestion issues for seamless transfers. Real-Time Transaction Verification: Each transaction is immediately verified on the respective blockchain explorer to confirm accuracy and validity. Temporary Nature: One of the most distinctive characteristics of USDT FLASH Generator is that it generates flash coin that is designed to disappear from any wallet after a period of ninety days. This unique feature ensures that any assets received in USDT FLASH will not linger indefinitely, creating a dynamic and engaging transaction experience.

Kindly visit globalfashexperts.com for more information Contact Information For more information or to make a purchase, please contact us through the following channels:

Email: globalfashexperts@gmail.com Flash USDT:https://globalfashexperts.com/product/flash-usdt/ Flash USDT: https://globalfashexperts.com/product/flash-usdt-generator-software/The Flash USDT Generator is responsible for producing and storing Flash USDT tokens with a flexible daily limit. It ensures a consistent supply of tokens for transactions while managing distribution securely and efficiently. Our Flash USDT offers a unique, temporary cryptocurrency that lasts for 90 days before expiring. This innovative solution allows for seamlesstrading and transferring of funds. Notably, the Flash Bitcoin and USDT can be transferred to 12 different wallets, including prominent platforms like Binance and Trust Wallet.

Features

1. Adjustable Daily Limit: Customizable settings allow for modifying the token generation cap.
2. Automated Distribution: Ensures quick and secure token transfers to user wallets.
3. Minimal Latency: Prevents blockchain congestion issues for seamless transfers.
4. Real-Time Transaction Verification: Each transaction is immediately verified on the respective blockchain explorer to confirm accuracy and validity.
5. Temporary Nature: One of the most distinctive characteristics of USDT FLASH Generator is that it generates flash coin that is designed to disappear from any wallet after a period of ninety days. This unique feature ensures that any assets received in USDT FLASH will not linger indefinitely, creating a dynamic and engaging transaction experience.

Kindly visit globalfashexperts.com for more information

Contact Information

For more information or to make a purchase, please contact us through the following channels:

• Email: globalfashexperts@gmail.com
• Flash USDT:https://globalfashexperts.com/product/flash-usdt/
• Flash USDT: https://globalfashexperts.com/product/flash-usdt-generator-software/

@ c9badfea:610f861a

1. Install PocketPal (it's free and open source)
2. Launch the app, open the menu, and navigate to Models
3. Download one or more models (e.g. Phi, Llama, Qwen)
4. Once downloaded, tap Load to start chatting

ℹ️ Experiment with different models and their quantizations (Q4, Q6, Q8, etc.) to find the most suitable one

@ 6538925e:571e55c3

It’s been a little while since we released a major design update, so we’re really excited to get this new version of the app into your hands. Here’s a breakdown of all the main updates included in Fountain 1.2:

#### Library Design Update

• New content-type filters at the top of the page make it easier to navigate between podcasts and music in your library.

• Recently Played is now the default view in your library, so it’s easier to jump back into podcasts you’ve already started.

• The Music filter now makes it easier to find saved tracks and albums, and it also gives you a list of all the artists whose music you’ve saved.

• We’ve refreshed the design of the content cards to make it easier to see how much time is remaining on episodes you’ve already started.

#### Content Pages Design Update

• All of the different content pages have undergone an extensive redesign, including shows, episodes, artists, albums, tracks, clips and playlists

• We’ve replaced the tab layout we were using on the content pages with one scrollable page, making it easier to access features like chapters and tracklists

• We’ve sanitised the formatting of show notes too, and if there is no activity for a given episode, we now display the expanded show notes

#### Episode Summaries

Ever looked at a 4-hour Lex Fridman episode and wished you could just read a high-level summary? We certainly have, so we did something about it.

• Every episode page now has a Summary button above the show notes.

• Simply pay 500 sats to unlock a summary, or upgrade to Fountain Premium for $2.99/month to enjoy unlimited summaries.

• Summaries and transcripts now come as a bundle — two for the price of one!

• Thanks to major improvements, they’re now faster, cheaper, and more accurate than ever before.

#### Playback Improvements

We’ve completely rebuilt our audio engine from the ground up. Playback is now more robust and reliable — especially for music. Here are some of the key enhancements in Fountain 1.2:

• Tracks now load and play instantly when tapped.

• When playing a collection of tracks (e.g. from an artist, album, or playlist), you can now skip seamlessly between them.

• We’ve replaced the scrollable player page with full-screen modals to make it easier to access show notes, comments, transcripts, chapters, tracklists, and your queue.

• The new Smart Resume feature rewinds the episode by 5 seconds when you hit pause, so you don’t miss a beat.

• You can now skip forward or backward by 60 seconds for faster navigation through episodes.

Other Bug Fixes & Improvements

• Rebuilt payment stats for more complete and reliable transaction records.

• Refreshed the design of the Settings pages for better usability.

• Added new episode notification preferences in Settings.

• Fixed several playback issues that were causing crashes or freezes.

• Updated lock screen display and controls for livestreams.

• Fixed issue where the next item in the queue paused unexpectedly.

• Resolved playback stuttering on Android during livestreams.

• Fixed disappearing playback controls on the lock screen.

• Fixed playback speed not updating correctly.

• Resolved issue where played episodes couldn’t be replayed.

• Fixed playback not resuming correctly when listening in the car.

• Synced car playback position with the device.

• Fixed persistent car display refresh issue.

• Fixed volume control via car controls.

• Resolved issue with headphone controls after playing a transcript.

• Fixed disappearing metadata on the lock screen.

• Fixed bug where downloaded episodes stopped in airplane mode but showed as playing.

---

We would love to hear how you’re finding Fountain 1.2. Please submit your thoughts and feedback via the main menu in the app and we will take it on board as we continue to improve the app.

If you want to help test new features out before they get released, you can join Fountain Beta on Telegram. All iOS and Android users welcome.

@ 6a6be47b:3e74e3e1

Hi frens, you may or may not have noticed I’ve been MIA for about three weeks. I wanted to take a moment to explain where I’ve been, and why I stepped back for a bit.

At the start of the year, I was determined to make the most of it-and I still am. I’ve been pouring myself into several projects, especially my painting, which has really taken off. I’m so grateful for your support; none of this would be possible without you. But here’s where things got tricky. I started feeling like I had to “earn” every moment of rest, and that mindset snowballed. My health took a hit, and then one of my other projects completely derailed.

The stress piled up, and I felt like I was on the verge of burning out.

Don’t get me wrong-I’ve always welcomed change, even when it’s tough. And this time was no exception. The project I’d been working on for months took a 180, and all that effort seemed to go down the drain. I was frustrated, but I kept pushing, even though I was running on fumes. By the time I “earned” a break, I was too exhausted to enjoy it.

I managed to post a piece about Holy Week on my blog (which I’m really proud of-check it out if you haven’t!), but after that, I was done. I realized I needed to stop, not just for a day, but for a real break. When I finally took a few days off with my husband, it was clear how much I needed it. I was burned out, plain and simple. Now, I’m still putting myself back together. Mentally, I feel drained, but I’m stronger than I was a few weeks ago. I know I’m lucky and privileged to be able to take this time, and I’m grateful for the perspective it’s given me. I also r realize that this isn’t just a “me” thing-most people have been here at some point. We keep going until there’s nothing left, then wonder why we feel like empty shells.

I’ll be back to drawing soon (knock on wood-don’t want to jinx it!). In the meantime, take care of yourselves, and godspeed.

@ c9badfea:610f861a

1. Install Kiwix (it's free and open source)
2. Download ZIM files from the Kiwix Library (you will find complete offline versions of Wikipedia, Stack Overflow, Bitcoin Wiki, DevDocs and many more)
3. Open the downloaded ZIM files within the Kiwix app

ℹ️ You can also package any website using either Kiwix Zimit (online tool) or the Zimit Docker Container (for technical users)

ℹ️ .zim is the file format used for packaged websites

@ 90c656ff:9383fd4e

Bitcoin has emerged as a new economic tool in developing economies. These nations often face challenges such as high inflation, fragile banking systems, and limited access to financial services. With its unique characteristics—decentralization, censorship resistance, and limited supply—Bitcoin offers an alternative solution to protect wealth, facilitate international transactions, and promote financial inclusion.

Challenges Faced by Emerging Economies

• Inflation and Currency Devaluation

01 - Many developing countries struggle with unstable monetary policies, leading to the devaluation of their national currencies. 02 - Inflation erodes purchasing power, making it difficult for people to preserve wealth or plan long-term finances.

• Limited Access to the Banking System

01 - In many areas—especially rural regions - a significant portion of the population lacks access to banks or basic financial services. 02 - This restricts the ability to store money safely, obtain credit, and carry out secure transactions.

• Expensive Remittances and International Transactions

01 - Many citizens of developing economies rely on remittances from family members working abroad. 02 - Fees charged by financial intermediaries can be high, reducing the value received by families.

How Bitcoin Benefits Emerging Economies

• Protection Against Inflation

With its supply capped at 21 million units, Bitcoin acts as a deflationary asset, helping individuals shield their wealth from local currency devaluation. In countries like Venezuela and Argentina, where inflation is rampant, Bitcoin is used as a store of value.

• Financial Inclusion

Bitcoin removes the need for financial intermediaries, enabling anyone with internet access to participate in the global economy. Unbanked individuals can use digital wallets to store and transfer value, promoting widespread financial inclusion.

• Simplified International Transactions

Bitcoin enables fast, low-cost value transfers across borders, without relying on banks or remittance companies. This helps workers send money home, ensuring more of their earnings reach their families.

• Censorship Resistance and Government Control

In developing economies with authoritarian regimes or political instability, Bitcoin allows citizens to maintain control over their money without fear of confiscation or unfair restrictions. Its decentralized network prevents any single authority from controlling or manipulating the system.

Real Use Cases in Emerging Economies

• El Salvador

In 2021, El Salvador became the first country to adopt Bitcoin as legal tender. The goal was to reduce remittance costs and increase financial inclusion. The initiative also attracted Bitcoin-related investment and tourism, though it has faced criticism and implementation challenges.

• Nigeria

Bitcoin use in Nigeria surged due to inflation and government restrictions on financial transactions. Young entrepreneurs and freelancers use Bitcoin to receive international payments and bypass local banking limitations.

• Venezuela

Amid economic crisis and hyperinflation, Bitcoin became a key tool for protecting wealth and conducting transactions. Many Venezuelan families rely on Bitcoin to purchase essential goods and send or receive money from abroad.

Challenges of Using Bitcoin in Emerging Markets

• Volatility

Bitcoin's high price volatility can make it risky for people relying on it as a store of value. This instability may discourage its use for daily transactions.

• Limited Infrastructure

Bitcoin usage requires internet access and digital devices, which may be lacking in areas with underdeveloped infrastructure.

• Education and Adaptation

Adopting Bitcoin requires a certain level of technical knowledge, and the lack of financial literacy can hinder large-scale adoption. Many people still prefer traditional currencies due to unfamiliarity or distrust of Bitcoin.

The Future of Bitcoin in Emerging Economies

• Infrastructure Development

Projects promoting internet access and digital tools can significantly boost Bitcoin adoption in these regions.

• Stability and Trust

As the market matures, Bitcoin's volatility may decrease, making it more practical as a medium of exchange and store of value.

• Education and Empowerment

Financial education initiatives can help people understand and harness the benefits of Bitcoin, easing its integration into daily life.

In summary, Bitcoin has a transformative role in emerging economies, offering a strong alternative to traditional financial systems. Its ability to hedge against inflation, promote financial inclusion, and facilitate international transactions makes it a crucial tool for millions of people.

While challenges like volatility and infrastructure gaps remain, Bitcoin’s potential to empower individuals in developing nations is clear. As a decentralized digital asset, it represents not only a technological innovation but also a hope for a fairer and more accessible economic future.

Thank you very much for reading this far. I hope everything is well with you, and sending a big hug from your favorite Bitcoiner maximalist from Madeira. Long live freedom!

@ 91d8dece:3453543b

https://drewztools.com/ flash USDT Are you tired of the long wait times and excessive fees associated with traditional cryptocurrency transactions? Look no further! Flash USDT from @drewztooolz is here to ease the way you send and receive crypto. Experience lightning-fast transfers, total anonymity, and zero fees with this state-of-the-art service. This flash last in the wallet for 90 t0 360 days before it disappears . Just so you know this coin is tradeable , swappable and transferable to many wallet type Flash USDT is not just another crypto tool; it’s a game-changer for anyone involved in cryptocurrency trading, particularly for OTC traders, P2P dealmakers, and cold wallet testers. Here’s why you should consider making it a part of your crypto toolkit: 🔥 Instant Transfers With Flash USDT, you can send high-value USDT to any wallet in under 60 seconds. Imagine the convenience of having your funds appear instantly without the typical delay caused by blockchain confirmations. Still have questions? Reach out via Telegram for 1-on-1 support. Our team is ready to assist you with anything you need! https://drewztools.com/ 💬 @drewztooolz 📲+1 (770) 666–2531

@ 90c656ff:9383fd4e

Regulations play a fundamental role in the evolution of the global financial market, laying the foundation for stability, security, and trust in economic transactions. However, in an increasingly globalized and digital world, regulatory challenges have become more complex—especially with the emergence of disruptive financial innovations such as Bitcoin and decentralized finance (DeFi). The interaction between regulation and the financial market has deep consequences, both positive and negative, shaping the future of the global economy.

The Importance of Regulations in the Financial Market:

01 - Economic Stability: Financial laws and regulations help prevent risky practices such as irresponsible lending and excessive speculation. 02 - Consumer Protection: Regulations ensure that consumers and investors have access to clear and accurate information, preventing fraud and abuse. 03 - Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism: Policies such as Know Your Customer (KYC) and Anti-Money Laundering (AML) ensure that illicit funds do not enter the financial system.

Regulatory Challenges in a Globalized Market:

01 - Market Interconnectivity: The global financial market is highly interconnected, and crises in one country can quickly spread to others. This demands more efficient international coordination among regulators. 02 - Technological Innovation: The rise of disruptive technologies like blockchain or timechain has challenged traditional regulatory models. Many governments are still trying to strike a balance between encouraging innovation and reducing risk. 03 - Compliance Costs: Financial companies face rising costs to meet increasingly strict regulations, which can impact profitability and create barriers for new entrants.

The Impact of Regulation on the Global Financial Market:

• Positive Impacts

01 - Investor Confidence: Clear rules and effective enforcement increase investor trust, promoting financial market growth. 02 - Economic Resilience: Well-designed regulations make the financial system more resistant to economic shocks. 03 - Attraction of Foreign Capital: Jurisdictions with sound regulatory governance attract investments from countries and companies seeking stability.

• Negative Impacts

01 - Excessive Bureaucracy: Overly complex regulations can hinder innovation and economic growth, especially for small businesses. 02 - Capital Flight: Companies may relocate operations to countries with looser laws, harming the economies of more regulated regions. 03 - Ineffectiveness in Global Contexts: National rules don’t always work well in global markets. Lack of international cooperation can create loopholes for bad actors.

The Role of International Institutions:

01 - Global Standards: Organizations work to create international standards, such as the Basel Accords for minimum capital requirements for banks. 02 - Crisis Resolution: International institutions also act as mediators and providers of financial assistance during global crises, as seen during the 2020–2021 pandemic.

Regulation and Innovation: A Necessary Balance

01 - Encouraging Innovation: Regulators should allow emerging technologies to grow, enabling solutions like blockchain or timechain to develop freely. 02 - Risks of No Regulation: Without proper rules, innovative markets may attract fraudulent behavior, undermining public trust.

In summary, regulations are essential to maintaining the integrity and stability of the global financial market. They protect participants, prevent crises, and foster a trustworthy environment. However, globalization and rapid technological change challenge regulators to constantly adapt.

The balance between security and innovation is vital for the future of finance. Effective rules must be flexible enough to keep up with change and strong enough to protect participants. In this way, the global financial market can continue to evolve, promoting sustainable and fair economic prosperity.

Thank you very much for reading this far. I hope everything is well with you, and sending a big hug from your favorite Bitcoiner maximalist from Madeira. Long live freedom!

@ 6e64b83c:94102ee8

Nostr-static is a powerful static site generator that transforms long-form Nostr content into beautiful, standalone websites. It makes your content accessible to everyone, even those not using Nostr clients. For more information check out my previous blog post How to Create a Blog Out of Nostr Long-Form Articles

What's New in Version 0.7?

RSS and Atom Feeds

Version 0.7 brings comprehensive feed support with both RSS and Atom formats. The system automatically generates feeds for your main content, individual profiles, and tag-specific pages. These feeds are seamlessly integrated into your site's header, making them easily discoverable by feed readers and content aggregators.

This feature bridges the gap between Nostr and traditional web publishing, allowing your content to reach readers who prefer feed readers or automated content distribution systems.

Smart Content Discovery

The new tag discovery system enhances your readers' experience by automatically finding and recommending relevant articles from the Nostr network. It works by:

1. Analyzing the tags in your articles
2. Fetching popular articles from Nostr that share these tags
3. Using configurable weights to rank these articles based on:
4. Engagement metrics (reactions, reposts, replies)
5. Zap statistics (amount, unique zappers, average zap size)
6. Content quality signals (report penalties)

This creates a dynamic "Recommended Articles" section that helps readers discover more content they might be interested in, all while staying within the Nostr ecosystem.

See the new features yourself by visiting our demo at: https://blog.nostrize.me

@ 6868de52:42418e63

自分が僕のことをなんで否定するのかよくわかんない 自分のことを高く評価してる。周囲の理解に努力してない けど、いつも気にしてる 自分の限界に気づくのが怖い？ 周りに理解されないことに価値を見出し、意図的に理解されないようにしてるんじゃないのか 周りに影響され、自分は変わっていくんです 変わらないもの。変わっちゃいけないもの。 変わっちゃいけないものは、学問への尊敬。これが生きる目的だってこと。 変わらないものは、美少女への嗜好、世界の全てへの優しさ、屁理屈の論理が好きなこと。 で、理解されたいのか。されるべきなのか。 されるべきとは？あーそうだよ、されたいしされるべきなんだ！ そっか、じゃあ理解したいのか。するべきなのか。 するべきだよ。ネットワーク的にも、心理的にも。 したくは、ないかな。その決定権は常に僕の手元にほしい。 関われる限界を知ることになるから。 自分のことは知らなくてもいい。制御できればいい。愛してるし。 でもこうやって心情を整理してるんだけどね。まー限界はありますよ。

@ 56e3acda:234e8a3a

"This is Mineva Bytes. The crypto eidolon! A vtuber who has risen to become a shining star in the crypto world. She's the most followed person on Trenches, eclipsing every single crypto founder/influencer."

Dozens of images flash across the screen, each depicting a golden idol. Her golden amber hair and eyes seem to perfectly capture the color of cryptocurrency. She's wearing her standard cream Kaybug outfit, which gives off a weird futuristic vibe every time she's next to something modern. A close-up of her boob window with 2 metal coins, one for Bitcoin and the other for Cerium tucked into her cleavage makes up her header on Trenches.

"Her fan base, the Gabros, are made up of elite cretins who are eager to get anything she's a part of. Hell, she even got them to pay for cable to support her show. Cable! In 2025! Even a collab announcement between her and Xaphan got millions of views in just a few hours. Her endorsement is a godsend for any crypto project."

Even more images flash through her show moonshot. One is Mineva promoting the Sloth NFT with a picture of a dopey looking sloth next to her. Another is the announcement of the Cache Card during the On-Chain holiday, which boosted pre-order numbers. A picture of her posing like a pin-up model on an American Unlimited debit card, and finally her name and Xaphan's in the middle of a phone silhouette.

"And that's where you come in."

The images are replaced by the words Atoms.AI, made up of clouds with the sun dotting the i. Our company logo, and standing in front of it is my boss. The gray-haired woman in techwear is pointing her claw-like nails at me. She has the kind of intimidating aura you would expect from a Wall Street CEO twice her age. Quite different from when she interviewed me and quite unusual in the crypto scene.

"If you can get her to sign off on us using her IP for an AI Agent. To the moon! That's where we're going."

Another picture of Mineva showing off her toothy smile is plastered on the wall. The bright smile highlights her warm peach skin. The rays of joy emanating from her make my stomach turn. Too much optimism for me, but I couldn't help but stare. I stared a little too long, though, and my boss got suspicious.

"What? Are you a fan of hers?"

I shake my head in disapproval.

"No, I'm not a fan. I am a vtuber fan though. I'm a diehard..."

The boss holds up her hand and cuts me off. Obviously not interested in my words. Her attention is focused on checking financial charts on her phone.

"Where is this going?"

I freeze, not knowing what to do next. Shilling my Oshi isn't the right thing to do right now. I look at the picture of Mineva again. This is a solid plan on paper. Improving a vtuber's connection to her community is great, but. A question pops up in the back of my mind. Would I be okay with talking to an AI instead of my Oshi? If this is in my mind now, imagine what the gabros would think of this announcement? I exhale and bring up a glaring issue that I think the boss is overlooking.

"Um. Do you think fans of Mineva would go for an AI agent?"

She puts down her phone and gives me her full attention.

"Do you hear yourself? What loser wouldn't want to talk to their goddess 24/7?"

"The word is actually Oshi Mam."

The boss's purple eyes send daggers through me. I struggle to catch my breath. The pressure of her aura is overwhelming.

"Look are you not a good capitalist?"

"I am Mam. I love capitalism. However, I'm just trying to point out that - "

"Then enough yapping and Art of the Deal this shit!"

Her voice causes all the coders in the building to straighten up. I give her a salute among the rising tide of keyboard clicks.

"Yes, Ms Elira!"

Dysnomia, the crypto capital. A new city created as a symbolic gesture to decouple the cryptocurrency market from Wall Street. Although it still remained in New York, many founders decided to set up shop there. Turning it into a true crypto paradise. With its neon lights displaying all the new crypto brands on new skyscrapers, it resembles something out of a cyberpunk movie. A helpful tip if you plan to visit: It helps to wear some kind of sunglasses. The neon lights tend to give me a headache.

I am struggling to get my barrings. I just moved here last week after being hired by Atmos.AI. A dream job to help advance fintech, but I didn't think my first big assignment would be this important. I make my way to the meeting place. A small diner next to Airdrop Square. As the name suggests, it's a place in the middle of the city where people go to get NFT coupons for food, clothing or transportation.

Good for promotion, but a lot of complaints arise when the coupons expire too quickly. It's a little after one, so the noon drop has already happened, meaning there's not a lot of people around the diner. No big crowds and a semi-public location equals a perfect place to meet a vtuber. At least that's what the boss said when she picked the location.

The diner itself has an almost retro look in comparison to the surrounding buildings. It is made out of a shipping crate and designed to look like a mobile business. The chrome finish of the diner would be almost blinding if the sun shone directly on it. I quickly make my way inside. I sit down in a booth two booths away from the entrance. It would be unprofessional to have the meeting at the counter. After all, eye contact is important when negotiating big deals like this.

It doesn't take long after my arrival for Mineva to show up. She signals that it's her with a little wave. She's radically different from my expectations. She is[Description is redacted to prevent doxxing. For now, just use the previously mentioned description of Mineva.]

She slides into the booth and places a small object on the table. It is a miniature version of Gabro's mascot. A Parrie dog in a suit holding a pickaxe in front of it. She taps its head, causing its eyes to glow gold.

"What's that?"

"A signal jammer. Just in case you try to livestream this. Oh, and don't bother trying to take a picture."

She pushes up the glasses she is wearing.

"These bad boys block my face from showing up in photos."

We sit in silence. I am stunned by the lengths she would go to hide her identity. It makes sense, but I feel like a signal jammer is a bit much. The silence breaks as the waitress comes to our booth.

"Ready to order?"

"Yes! 6 pieces of thick-cut bacon with steamed mushrooms. One cider. And a slice of apple pie!"

They both look at me. Forcing me to hurry up and place my order.

"Um. Grilled chicken salad with apple juice."

Our food comes out after a short time. The size of the bacon she ordered is massive. Almost five times thicker than an average piece of bacon. Can she really eat six of them? A bright smile appears on her face as she cuts through her food. She basks in pleasure after taking a bite of the bacon.

"Glad some Americana made it to Dysnomia."

She continues to eat. I try to make a dent in my salad. Eating has calmed my nerves a bit. With every bite, I rehearse in my head. What I'm going to say. It has to be clear and concise. Will I be too formal with my tone? I can't be too casual. Should I use crypto-slang? That might be accessible. The thoughts continue until the sound of knuckles tapping on the table breaks my concentration. Mineva looks at me as she drinks her cider.

"So what does Atmos want?"

I take a deep breath, making sure to maintain eye contact.

"We have an amazing opportunity to improve the connection between you and the gabros. An AI agent of you would be a perfect way for the gabros to communicate with you when you're not streaming or shooting Moonshot. A seamless way to deepen their connection with you. No additional app required, by the way. It can all happen on Trenches. Oh! Not to mention the new financial opportunities AI Mineva can help them find! Expert level trades that would make any cretin jealous. Which means more Akasupas and memberships for you!"

I was so distracted by my pitch that I didn't even see Mineva clear her plate. She remains silent for a moment, playing with the piece of pie. Her face darkens when she stops playing with it. She slowly takes a bite of the pie while squinting her eyes. It's obvious that her suspicions are growing. I try to break the uncomfortable atmosphere.

"So what do you think?"

"Do I have any say in what the bot recommends?"

Okay, that's a fair question.

"Of course, you can sign off on trades before they happen!"

"Now, how would that happen? If the bot is made to chat with the gabros when I'm busy? Unless you are saying you can manipulate the suggestions the bot recommends?"

The feeling of déjà vu that hits me with each of her questions is like a knife in my stomach. I screwed up. I didn't think it was a gotcha question.

"W. W-what. No, that's not"

"So answer me, how do I sign off on referrals?"

A final stab completely shuts me down. Why on earth did I say she could do that? She finishes her pie and slides out of the booth.

"You're not going to rug my gabros that easily."

She walks to the entrance, not even turning to look at me. As the doorbell rang, she said her last words.

"And thanks for lunch!"

Then she is gone. It takes a moment for the words to register, but it hits me all at once when the waitress hands me the check.

"$150!!"

The waitress shrugs. I hand her my company card and feel myself slipping off the booth seat. As I drag myself to get my card back, only one thing goes through my mind.

"Ms. Elira is going to kill me."

@ 57d1a264:69f1fee1

The European Accessibility Act is coming, now is a great time for accessibility trainings!. In my Accessibility for Designer workshop, you will learn how to design accessible mockups that prevent issues in visual design, interactions, navigation, and content. You will be able to spot problems early, fix them in your designs, and communicate accessibility clearly with your team. This is a practical workshop with hands-on exercises, not just theory. You’ll actively apply accessibility principles to real design scenarios and mockups. And will get access to my accessibility resources: checklists, annotation kits and more.

When? 4 sessions of 2 hours + Q and As, on: - Mon, June 16, - Tue, June 17, Mon, - June 23 and Tue, - June 24. 9:30 – 12:00 PM PT or 18:30 – 21:00 CET

Register with 15% discount ($255) https://ti.to/smashingmagazine/online-workshops-2022/with/87vynaoqc0/discount/welcometomyworkshop

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/971772

@ 90c656ff:9383fd4e

Bitcoin has emerged as a modern option for storing value, often compared to traditional assets like gold. Its ability to resist inflation, along with features such as scarcity, decentralization, and security, positions it as a promising tool for preserving wealth in times of economic uncertainty.

A store of value is an asset that maintains its purchasing power over time, protecting wealth against devaluation. Historically, assets like gold and real estate have fulfilled this role due to their relative scarcity and constant demand.

However, fiat currencies have proven less efficient as stores of value due to inflation. Governments and central banks frequently increase the money supply, which can reduce the purchasing power of currencies. This is where Bitcoin stands out as an alternative.

Bitcoin: Programmed Scarcity

The main feature that makes Bitcoin a potential store of value is its limited supply. Only 21 million bitcoins will ever be created—a cap embedded in its code. This programmed scarcity contrasts with fiat currencies, which can be printed without limit by governments, leading to inflation.

Bitcoin creation is also controlled by events known as halvings, which cut the reward for mining new blocks in half approximately every four years. This makes Bitcoin increasingly scarce over time, boosting its potential for appreciation.

Bitcoin offers a solution to inflation, as its fixed supply prevents governments or centralized institutions from manipulating its quantity.

01 - Decentralization and Immutability: Operating on a decentralized network, Bitcoin is immune to political decisions or central bank interventions. No authority can alter the protocol to "print" more bitcoins. 02 - Supply Transparency: All transactions and newly created bitcoins are recorded on the blockchain or timechain, ensuring full transparency. 03 - Purchasing Power Protection: With limited supply and growing demand, Bitcoin has shown a tendency to appreciate over time, acting as a hedge against inflation in various economies.

Bitcoin is often called "digital gold" due to its similarities with the precious metal as a store of value:

01 - Scarcity: Gold is limited in nature, while Bitcoin has a programmed maximum supply of 21 million units. 02 - Portability: Bitcoin is easier to transfer and store than gold, being digitally accessible from anywhere in the world. 03 - Divisibility: Each bitcoin can be divided into up to 100 million units called satoshis, allowing transactions of any value. 04 - Security: While gold requires physical storage and is subject to theft, Bitcoin can be stored in secure digital wallets.

These qualities make Bitcoin a more flexible and accessible option for storing value in an increasingly digital world.

Despite its promise, Bitcoin still faces barriers to being widely accepted as a store of value:

01 - Volatility: Bitcoin’s price has historically shown large fluctuations, which can discourage investors seeking stability. However, many believe that as adoption grows, volatility will decrease. 02 - Regulation: Some governments have implemented actions to restrict or regulate Bitcoin use, which can affect its acceptance as a store of value. 03 - Cultural Adaptation: As a new and digital asset, Bitcoin still needs to earn the trust of people who are used to physical forms of value, like gold.

Bitcoin has proven especially useful as a store of value in economies facing financial crises or hyperinflation. Countries like Venezuela, Argentina, and Zimbabwe, which have experienced severe currency devaluation, have seen increased Bitcoin adoption as a way to protect purchasing power.

Moreover, its global accessibility allows people in countries without easy access to traditional financial markets to use Bitcoin as an alternative.

In summary, Bitcoin possesses distinct features that make it a promising candidate as a store of value in an increasingly digital world affected by fiat currency inflation. Its programmed scarcity, resistance to manipulation, and global accessibility offer a modern solution for preserving wealth.

Although challenges such as volatility and regulation remain, Bitcoin has already proven to be an effective tool for protecting assets, particularly in contexts of economic instability. Over time, and with broader adoption, Bitcoin may establish itself as one of the leading store-of-value assets of the 21st century.

Thank you very much for reading this far. I hope everything is well with you, and sending a big hug from your favorite Bitcoiner maximalist from Madeira. Long live freedom!

@ e3ba5e1a:5e433365

Prelude

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

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

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

Intro

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

The Filibuster: A Security Rule with No Teeth

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

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

Supreme Court Packing: Because Nine’s Just a Number

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

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

The Executive Should Go Full Klingon

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

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

Let the System Crash

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

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

States Are the Real MVPs

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

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

Chaos Isn’t the Enemy

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

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

Why This Matters

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

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

@ 57d1a264:69f1fee1

Crabtree's Framework for Evaluating Human-Centered Research

Picture this: You've spent three weeks conducting qualitative research for a finance app redesign. You carefully recruited 12 participants, conducted in-depth interviews, and identified patterns around financial anxiety and decision paralysis. You're excited to present your findings when the inevitable happens:

"But are these results statistically significant?"

"Just 12 people? How can we make decisions that affect thousands of users based on conversations with just 12 people?"

As UX professionals, we regularly face stakeholders who evaluate our qualitative research using criteria designed for quantitative methods... This misalignment undermines the unique value qualitative research brings to product development.

Continue reading https://uxpsychology.substack.com/p/beyond-numbers-how-to-properly-evaluate

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/971767

@ 5ffa0470:9c3e760a

@ c631e267:c2b78d3e

Du bist recht appetitlich oben anzuschauen, \ doch unten hin die Bestie macht mir Grauen. \ Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

Wie wenig bekömmlich sogenannte «Ultra-Processed Foods» wie Fertiggerichte, abgepackte Snacks oder Softdrinks sind, hat kürzlich eine neue Studie untersucht. Derweil kann Fleisch auch wegen des Einsatzes antimikrobieller Mittel in der Massentierhaltung ein Problem darstellen. Internationale Bemühungen, diesen Gebrauch zu reduzieren, um die Antibiotikaresistenz bei Menschen einzudämmen, sind nun möglicherweise gefährdet.

Leider ist Politik oft mindestens genauso unappetitlich und ungesund wie diverse Lebensmittel. Die «Corona-Zeit» und ihre Auswirkungen sind ein beredtes Beispiel. Der Thüringer Landtag diskutiert gerade den Entwurf eines «Coronamaßnahmen-Unrechtsbereinigungsgesetzes» und das kanadische Gesundheitsministerium versucht, tausende Entschädigungsanträge wegen Impfnebenwirkungen mit dem Budget von 75 Millionen Dollar unter einen Hut zu bekommen. In den USA soll die Zulassung von Covid-«Impfstoffen» überdacht werden, während man sich mit China um die Herkunft des Virus streitet.

Wo Corona-Verbrecher von Medien und Justiz gedeckt werden, verfolgt man Aufklärer und Aufdecker mit aller Härte. Der Anwalt und Mitbegründer des Corona-Ausschusses Reiner Fuellmich, der seit Oktober 2023 in Untersuchungshaft sitzt, wurde letzte Woche zu drei Jahren und neun Monaten verurteilt – wegen Veruntreuung. Am Mittwoch teilte der von vielen Impfschadensprozessen bekannte Anwalt Tobias Ulbrich mit, dass er vom Staatsschutz verfolgt wird und sich daher künftig nicht mehr öffentlich äußern werde.

Von der kommenden deutschen Bundesregierung aus Wählerbetrügern, Transatlantikern, Corona-Hardlinern und Russenhassern kann unmöglich eine Verbesserung erwartet werden. Nina Warken beispielsweise, die das Ressort Gesundheit übernehmen soll, diffamierte Maßnahmenkritiker als «Coronaleugner» und forderte eine Impfpflicht, da die wundersamen Injektionen angeblich «nachweislich helfen». Laut dem designierten Außenminister Johann Wadephul wird Russland «für uns immer der Feind» bleiben. Deswegen will er die Ukraine «nicht verlieren lassen» und sieht die Bevölkerung hinter sich, solange nicht deutsche Soldaten dort sterben könnten.

Eine wichtige Personalie ist auch die des künftigen Regierungssprechers. Wenngleich Hebestreit an Arroganz schwer zu überbieten sein wird, dürfte sich die Art der Kommunikation mit Stefan Kornelius in der Sache kaum ändern. Der Politikchef der Süddeutschen Zeitung «prägte den Meinungsjournalismus der SZ» und schrieb «in dieser Rolle auch für die Titel der Tamedia». Allerdings ist, anders als noch vor zehn Jahren, die Einbindung von Journalisten in Thinktanks wie die Deutsche Atlantische Gesellschaft (DAG) ja heute eher eine Empfehlung als ein Problem.

Ungesund ist definitiv auch die totale Digitalisierung, nicht nur im Gesundheitswesen. Lauterbachs Abschiedsgeschenk, die «abgesicherte» elektronische Patientenakte (ePA) ist völlig überraschenderweise direkt nach dem Bundesstart erneut gehackt worden. Norbert Häring kommentiert angesichts der Datenlecks, wer die ePA nicht abwähle, könne seine Gesundheitsdaten ebensogut auf Facebook posten.

Dass die staatlichen Kontrolleure so wenig auf freie Software und dezentrale Lösungen setzen, verdeutlicht die eigentlichen Intentionen hinter der Digitalisierungswut. Um Sicherheit und Souveränität geht es ihnen jedenfalls nicht – sonst gäbe es zum Beispiel mehr Unterstützung für Bitcoin und für Initiativen wie die der Spar-Supermärkte in der Schweiz.

[Titelbild: Pixabay]

---

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

@ c631e267:c2b78d3e

Die Wahrheit verletzt tiefer als jede Beleidigung. \ Marquis de Sade

Sagen Sie niemals «Terroristin B.», «Schwachkopf H.», «korrupter Drecksack S.» oder «Meinungsfreiheitshasserin F.» und verkneifen Sie sich Memes, denn so etwas könnte Ihnen als Beleidigung oder Verleumdung ausgelegt werden und rechtliche Konsequenzen haben. Auch mit einer Frau M.-A. S.-Z. ist in dieser Beziehung nicht zu spaßen, sie gehört zu den Top-Anzeigenstellern.

«Politikerbeleidigung» als Straftatbestand wurde 2021 im Kampf gegen «Rechtsextremismus und Hasskriminalität» in Deutschland eingeführt, damals noch unter der Regierung Merkel. Im Gesetz nicht festgehalten ist die Unterscheidung zwischen schlechter Hetze und guter Hetze – trotzdem ist das gängige Praxis, wie der Titel fast schon nahelegt.

So dürfen Sie als Politikerin heute den Tesla als «Nazi-Auto» bezeichnen und dies ausdrücklich auf den Firmengründer Elon Musk und dessen «rechtsextreme Positionen» beziehen, welche Sie nicht einmal belegen müssen. [1] Vielleicht ernten Sie Proteste, jedoch vorrangig wegen der «gut bezahlten, unbefristeten Arbeitsplätze» in Brandenburg. Ihren Tweet hat die Berliner Senatorin Cansel Kiziltepe inzwischen offenbar dennoch gelöscht.

Dass es um die Meinungs- und Pressefreiheit in der Bundesrepublik nicht mehr allzu gut bestellt ist, befürchtet man inzwischen auch schon im Ausland. Der Fall des Journalisten David Bendels, der kürzlich wegen eines Faeser-Memes zu sieben Monaten Haft auf Bewährung verurteilt wurde, führte in diversen Medien zu Empörung. Die Welt versteckte ihre Kritik mit dem Titel «Ein Urteil wie aus einer Diktatur» hinter einer Bezahlschranke.

Unschöne, heutzutage vielleicht strafbare Kommentare würden mir auch zu einigen anderen Themen und Akteuren einfallen. Ein Kandidat wäre der deutsche Bundesgesundheitsminister (ja, er ist es tatsächlich immer noch). Während sich in den USA auf dem Gebiet etwas bewegt und zum Beispiel Robert F. Kennedy Jr. will, dass die Gesundheitsbehörde (CDC) keine Covid-Impfungen für Kinder mehr empfiehlt, möchte Karl Lauterbach vor allem das Corona-Lügengebäude vor dem Einsturz bewahren.

«Ich habe nie geglaubt, dass die Impfungen nebenwirkungsfrei sind», sagte Lauterbach jüngst der ZDF-Journalistin Sarah Tacke. Das steht in krassem Widerspruch zu seiner früher verbreiteten Behauptung, die Gen-Injektionen hätten keine Nebenwirkungen. Damit entlarvt er sich selbst als Lügner. Die Bezeichnung ist absolut berechtigt, dieser Mann dürfte keinerlei politische Verantwortung tragen und das Verhalten verlangt nach einer rechtlichen Überprüfung. Leider ist ja die Justiz anderweitig beschäftigt und hat außerdem selbst keine weiße Weste.

Obendrein kämpfte der Herr Minister für eine allgemeine Impfpflicht. Er beschwor dabei das Schließen einer «Impflücke», wie es die Weltgesundheitsorganisation – die «wegen Trump» in finanziellen Schwierigkeiten steckt – bis heute tut. Die WHO lässt aktuell ihre «Europäische Impfwoche» propagieren, bei der interessanterweise von Covid nicht mehr groß die Rede ist.

Einen «Klima-Leugner» würden manche wohl Nir Shaviv nennen, das ist ja nicht strafbar. Der Astrophysiker weist nämlich die Behauptung von einer Klimakrise zurück. Gemäß seiner Forschung ist mindestens die Hälfte der Erderwärmung nicht auf menschliche Emissionen, sondern auf Veränderungen im Sonnenverhalten zurückzuführen.

Das passt vielleicht auch den «Klima-Hysterikern» der britischen Regierung ins Konzept, die gerade Experimente zur Verdunkelung der Sonne angekündigt haben. Produzenten von Kunstfleisch oder Betreiber von Insektenfarmen würden dagegen vermutlich die Geschichte vom fatalen CO2 bevorzugen. Ihnen würde es besser passen, wenn der verantwortungsvolle Erdenbürger sein Verhalten gründlich ändern müsste.

In unserer völlig verkehrten Welt, in der praktisch jede Verlautbarung außerhalb der abgesegneten Narrative potenziell strafbar sein kann, gehört fast schon Mut dazu, Dinge offen anzusprechen. Im «besten Deutschland aller Zeiten» glaubten letztes Jahr nur noch 40 Prozent der Menschen, ihre Meinung frei äußern zu können. Das ist ein Armutszeugnis, und es sieht nicht gerade nach Besserung aus. Umso wichtiger ist es, dagegen anzugehen.

[Titelbild: Pixabay]

--- Quellen: ---

[1] Zur Orientierung wenigstens ein paar Hinweise zur NS-Vergangenheit deutscher Automobilhersteller:

• Volkswagen
• Porsche
• Daimler-Benz
• BMW
• Audi
• Opel
• Heute: «Auto-Werke für die Rüstung? Rheinmetall prüft Übernahmen»

---

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

@ 9223d2fa:b57e3de7

8,636 steps

@ 90c656ff:9383fd4e

Bitcoin is widely recognized as the first and most important innovation in the field of digital currencies. Created by Satoshi Nakamoto in 2009, it laid the foundation for a decentralized financial system. Since then, thousands of other digital currencies have emerged - often referred to as cryptocurrencies or even "shitcoins" by critics, who highlight their volatility, lack of clear utility, or centralized control. Comparing Bitcoin to other cryptocurrencies is essential to understanding the unique values that Bitcoin represents.

Bitcoin was created as an alternative to the traditional financial system. Its core mission is to provide a decentralized, censorship-resistant currency free from intermediaries like banks or governments.

In contrast, most other cryptocurrencies/shitcoins were created with different goals, ranging from technological experiments to quick-profit schemes. Many of these coins lack the decentralization and security of Bitcoin, and are often managed by centralized teams or organizations - making them more vulnerable to manipulation and security failures.

• Decentralization and Security

Bitcoin: The Bitcoin network is supported by thousands of nodes around the world, ensuring true decentralization. Its consensus algorithm, Proof of Work (PoW), is time-tested and provides high levels of security against attacks. There is no centralized control, meaning no entity can change its fundamental rules.

Other Cryptocurrencies/Shitcoins: Almost all of them sacrifice decentralization in favor of speed or added features. Some use alternative consensus mechanisms like Proof of Stake (PoS), which, while more energy-efficient, are often criticized for promoting centralization and offering lower security. In many cases, centralized development teams can modify the code, issue more coins, or even shut down the project - undermining user trust.

• Supply and Scarcity

Bitcoin: Bitcoin has a limited supply of 21 million units, ensuring its scarcity. This feature, combined with increasing demand, positions Bitcoin as a reliable store of value, often compared to digital gold.

Other Cryptocurrencies/Shitcoins: Many have no clear supply limits, resulting in uncontrolled inflation. Some are intentionally inflationary, which can decrease their value over time. In many cases, coins are pre-mined or distributed unevenly, favoring creators over the community.

• Purpose and Utility

Bitcoin: Bitcoin is, above all, a form of digital money and a store of value. Its network is reliable and straightforward, with a core focus on being a medium of exchange and a hedge against inflation. Its robustness makes it ideal for both transactions and long-term value storage.

Other Cryptocurrencies/Shitcoins: Many shitcoins are presented as solutions for specific use cases like smart contracts, gaming, or decentralized finance (DeFi). Despite bold promises, many fail to provide real utility or to compete with existing centralized solutions. A significant number of projects lack a clear purpose and are abandoned after a period of speculation.

• Volatility and Reputation

Bitcoin: While Bitcoin is volatile, it is widely accepted as the gold standard of digital currencies. Its reputation has been built over more than a decade of reliable operation and proven security.

Other Cryptocurrencies/Shitcoins: Many shitcoins face extreme volatility, often driven by speculation or market manipulation. Lack of transparency and questionable practices by some projects harm the sector's overall image.

• Censorship Resistance

Bitcoin: Thanks to its decentralization and security, Bitcoin is highly resistant to censorship. Anyone with internet access can participate in the network and make transactions.

Other Cryptocurrencies/Shitcoins: Many "shitcoins" depend on centralized structures or identifiable leaders who can be pressured by governments or other actors to censor transactions.

In summary, Bitcoin remains the undisputed leader in the world of digital currencies due to its decentralization, security, and proven scarcity. It is a system built to last, offering financial freedom and protection against inflation.

Meanwhile, many cryptocurrencies or shitcoins fail to meet the same standards of security and trust - often prioritizing speed, extra features, or speculative profits. For investors and users, it is crucial to distinguish between Bitcoin and the many alternative projects, many of which may not stand the test of time.

Bitcoin not only started a financial revolution but continues to be the benchmark by which all other digital currencies are measured.

Thank you very much for reading this far. I hope everything is well with you, and sending a big hug from your favorite Bitcoiner maximalist from Madeira. Long live freedom!

@ 90c656ff:9383fd4e

In recent years, Bitcoin has often been compared to gold, earning the nickname “digital gold.” This comparison arises because both forms of value share key characteristics, such as scarcity, durability, and global acceptance. However, Bitcoin also represents a technological innovation that redefines the concept of money and investment, standing out as a modern and efficient alternative to physical gold.

One of the main reasons Bitcoin is compared to gold is its programmed scarcity. While gold is a naturally limited resource whose supply depends on mining, Bitcoin has a maximum cap of 21 million units, defined in its code. This cap protects Bitcoin from inflation, unlike traditional currencies that can be created without limit by central banks.

This scarcity gives Bitcoin lasting value, similar to gold, as the limited supply helps preserve purchasing power over time. As demand for Bitcoin grows, its reduced availability reinforces its role as a store of value.

Another feature that brings Bitcoin closer to gold is durability. While gold is resistant to corrosion and can be stored for centuries, Bitcoin is a digital asset protected by advanced cryptography and stored on the blockchain. An immutable and decentralized ledger.

Moreover, Bitcoin is far easier to transport than gold. Moving physical gold involves high costs and security risks, making transport particularly difficult for international transactions. Bitcoin, on the other hand, can be sent digitally anywhere in the world in minutes, with low fees and no intermediaries. This technological advantage makes Bitcoin more effective in a globalized and digital world.

Security is another trait that Bitcoin and gold share. Gold is difficult to counterfeit, making it a reliable store of value. Similarly, Bitcoin uses cryptographic protocols that ensure secure transactions and protect against fraud.

In addition, all Bitcoin transactions are recorded on the blockchain, offering a level of transparency that physical gold does not provide. Anyone can review transactions on the network, increasing trust and traceability.

Historically, gold has been used as a hedge against inflation and economic crises. During times of instability, investors turn to gold as a way to preserve their wealth. Bitcoin is emerging as a digital alternative with the same purpose.

In countries with high inflation or political instability, Bitcoin has been used as a safeguard against the devaluation of local currencies. Its decentralized nature prevents governments from directly confiscating or controlling the asset, providing greater financial freedom to users.

Despite its similarities with gold, Bitcoin still faces challenges. Its volatility is much higher, which can cause short-term uncertainty. However, many experts argue that this volatility is typical of new assets and tends to decrease over time as adoption grows and the market matures.

Another challenge is regulation. While gold is globally recognized as a financial asset, Bitcoin still faces resistance from governments and financial institutions, which seek ways to control and regulate it.

In summary, Bitcoin - often called "digital gold" - offers a new form of value that combines the best characteristics of gold with the efficiency and innovation of digital technology. Its programmed scarcity, cryptographic security, portability, and resistance to censorship make it a viable alternative for preserving wealth and conducting transactions in the modern world.

Despite its volatility, Bitcoin is establishing itself as both a store of value and a hedge against economic crises. As such, it represents not just an evolution of the financial system but also a symbol of the shift toward a decentralized and global digital economy.

Thank you very much for reading this far. I hope everything is well with you, and sending a big hug from your favorite Bitcoiner maximalist from Madeira. Long live freedom!

@ c631e267:c2b78d3e

Es ist völlig unbestritten, dass der Angriff der russischen Armee auf die Ukraine im Februar 2022 strikt zu verurteilen ist. Ebenso unbestritten ist Russland unter Wladimir Putin keine brillante Demokratie. Aus diesen Tatsachen lässt sich jedoch nicht das finstere Bild des russischen Präsidenten – und erst recht nicht des Landes – begründen, das uns durchweg vorgesetzt wird und den Kern des aktuellen europäischen Bedrohungs-Szenarios darstellt. Da müssen wir schon etwas genauer hinschauen.

Der vorliegende Artikel versucht derweil nicht, den Einsatz von Gewalt oder die Verletzung von Menschenrechten zu rechtfertigen oder zu entschuldigen – ganz im Gegenteil. Dass jedoch der Verdacht des «Putinverstehers» sofort latent im Raume steht, verdeutlicht, was beim Thema «Russland» passiert: Meinungsmache und Manipulation.

Angesichts der mentalen Mobilmachung seitens Politik und Medien sowie des Bestrebens, einen bevorstehenden Krieg mit Russland geradezu herbeizureden, ist es notwendig, dieser fatalen Entwicklung entgegenzutreten. Wenn wir uns nur ein wenig von der herrschenden Schwarz-Weiß-Malerei freimachen, tauchen automatisch Fragen auf, die Risse im offiziellen Narrativ enthüllen. Grund genug, nachzuhaken.

Wer sich schon länger auch abseits der Staats- und sogenannten Leitmedien informiert, der wird in diesem Artikel vermutlich nicht viel Neues erfahren. Andere könnten hier ein paar unbekannte oder vergessene Aspekte entdecken. Möglicherweise klärt sich in diesem Kontext die Wahrnehmung der aktuellen (unserer eigenen!) Situation ein wenig.

Manipulation erkennen

Corona-«Pandemie», menschengemachter Klimawandel oder auch Ukraine-Krieg: Jede Menge Krisen, und für alle gibt es ein offizielles Narrativ, dessen Hinterfragung unerwünscht ist. Nun ist aber ein Narrativ einfach eine Erzählung, eine Geschichte (Latein: «narratio») und kein Tatsachenbericht. Und so wie ein Märchen soll auch das Narrativ eine Botschaft vermitteln.

Über die Methoden der Manipulation ist viel geschrieben worden, sowohl in Bezug auf das Individuum als auch auf die Massen. Sehr wertvolle Tipps dazu, wie man Manipulationen durchschauen kann, gibt ein Büchlein [1] von Albrecht Müller, dem Herausgeber der NachDenkSeiten.

Die Sprache selber eignet sich perfekt für die Manipulation. Beispielsweise kann die Wortwahl Bewertungen mitschwingen lassen, regelmäßiges Wiederholen (gerne auch von verschiedenen Seiten) lässt Dinge irgendwann «wahr» erscheinen, Übertreibungen fallen auf und hinterlassen wenigstens eine Spur im Gedächtnis, genauso wie Andeutungen. Belege spielen dabei keine Rolle.

Es gibt auffällig viele Sprachregelungen, die offenbar irgendwo getroffen und irgendwie koordiniert werden. Oder alle Redenschreiber und alle Medien kopieren sich neuerdings permanent gegenseitig. Welchen Zweck hat es wohl, wenn der Krieg in der Ukraine durchgängig und quasi wörtlich als «russischer Angriffskrieg auf die Ukraine» bezeichnet wird? Obwohl das in der Sache richtig ist, deutet die Art der Verwendung auf gezielte Beeinflussung hin und soll vor allem das Feindbild zementieren.

Sprachregelungen dienen oft der Absicherung einer einseitigen Darstellung. Das Gleiche gilt für das Verkürzen von Informationen bis hin zum hartnäckigen Verschweigen ganzer Themenbereiche. Auch hierfür gibt es rund um den Ukraine-Konflikt viele gute Beispiele.

Das gewünschte Ergebnis solcher Methoden ist eine Schwarz-Weiß-Malerei, bei der einer eindeutig als «der Böse» markiert ist und die anderen automatisch «die Guten» sind. Das ist praktisch und demonstriert gleichzeitig ein weiteres Manipulationswerkzeug: die Verwendung von Doppelstandards. Wenn man es schafft, bei wichtigen Themen regelmäßig mit zweierlei Maß zu messen, ohne dass das Publikum protestiert, dann hat man freie Bahn.

Experten zu bemühen, um bestimmte Sachverhalte zu erläutern, ist sicher sinnvoll, kann aber ebenso missbraucht werden, schon allein durch die Auswahl der jeweiligen Spezialisten. Seit «Corona» werden viele erfahrene und ehemals hoch angesehene Fachleute wegen der «falschen Meinung» diffamiert und gecancelt. [2] Das ist nicht nur ein brutaler Umgang mit Menschen, sondern auch eine extreme Form, die öffentliche Meinung zu steuern.

Wann immer wir also erkennen (weil wir aufmerksam waren), dass wir bei einem bestimmten Thema manipuliert werden, dann sind zwei logische und notwendige Fragen: Warum? Und was ist denn richtig? In unserem Russland-Kontext haben die Antworten darauf viel mit Geopolitik und Geschichte zu tun.

Ist Russland aggressiv und expansiv?

Angeblich plant Russland, europäische NATO-Staaten anzugreifen, nach dem Motto: «Zuerst die Ukraine, dann den Rest». In Deutschland weiß man dafür sogar das Datum: «Wir müssen bis 2029 kriegstüchtig sein», versichert Verteidigungsminister Pistorius.

Historisch gesehen ist es allerdings eher umgekehrt: Russland, bzw. die Sowjetunion, ist bereits dreimal von Westeuropa aus militärisch angegriffen worden. Die Feldzüge Napoleons, des deutschen Kaiserreichs und Nazi-Deutschlands haben Millionen Menschen das Leben gekostet. Bei dem ausdrücklichen Vernichtungskrieg ab 1941 kam es außerdem zu Brutalitäten wie der zweieinhalbjährigen Belagerung Leningrads (heute St. Petersburg) durch Hitlers Wehrmacht. Deren Ziel, die Bevölkerung auszuhungern, wurde erreicht: über eine Million tote Zivilisten.

Trotz dieser Erfahrungen stimmte Michail Gorbatschow 1990 der deutschen Wiedervereinigung zu und die Sowjetunion zog ihre Truppen aus Osteuropa zurück (vgl. Abb. 1). Der Warschauer Pakt wurde aufgelöst, der Kalte Krieg formell beendet. Die Sowjets erhielten damals von führenden westlichen Politikern die Zusicherung, dass sich die NATO «keinen Zentimeter ostwärts» ausdehnen würde, das ist dokumentiert. [3]

Expandiert ist die NATO trotzdem, und zwar bis an Russlands Grenzen (vgl. Abb. 2). Laut dem Politikberater Jeffrey Sachs handelt es sich dabei um ein langfristiges US-Projekt, das von Anfang an die Ukraine und Georgien mit einschloss. Offiziell wurde der Beitritt beiden Staaten 2008 angeboten. In jedem Fall könnte die massive Ost-Erweiterung seit 1999 aus russischer Sicht nicht nur als Vertrauensbruch, sondern durchaus auch als aggressiv betrachtet werden.

Russland hat den europäischen Staaten mehrfach die Hand ausgestreckt [4] für ein friedliches Zusammenleben und den «Aufbau des europäischen Hauses». Präsident Putin sei «in seiner ersten Amtszeit eine Chance für Europa» gewesen, urteilt die Journalistin und langjährige Russland-Korrespondentin der ARD, Gabriele Krone-Schmalz. Er habe damals viele positive Signale Richtung Westen gesendet.

Die Europäer jedoch waren scheinbar an einer Partnerschaft mit dem kontinentalen Nachbarn weniger interessiert als an der mit dem transatlantischen Hegemon. Sie verkennen bis heute, dass eine gedeihliche Zusammenarbeit in Eurasien eine Gefahr für die USA und deren bekundetes Bestreben ist, die «einzige Weltmacht» zu sein – «Full Spectrum Dominance» [5] nannte das Pentagon das. Statt einem neuen Kalten Krieg entgegenzuarbeiten, ließen sich europäische Staaten selber in völkerrechtswidrige «US-dominierte Angriffskriege» [6] verwickeln, wie in Serbien, Afghanistan, dem Irak, Libyen oder Syrien. Diese werden aber selten so benannt.

Speziell den Deutschen stünde außer einer Portion Realismus auch etwas mehr Dankbarkeit gut zu Gesicht. Das Geschichtsbewusstsein der Mehrheit scheint doch recht selektiv und das Selbstbewusstsein einiger etwas desorientiert zu sein. Bekanntermaßen waren es die Soldaten der sowjetischen Roten Armee, die unter hohen Opfern 1945 Deutschland «vom Faschismus befreit» haben. Bei den Gedenkfeiern zu 80 Jahren Kriegsende will jedoch das Auswärtige Amt – noch unter der Diplomatie-Expertin Baerbock, die sich schon länger offiziell im Krieg mit Russland wähnt, – nun keine Russen sehen: Sie sollen notfalls rausgeschmissen werden.

«Die Grundsatzfrage lautet: Geht es Russland um einen angemessenen Platz in einer globalen Sicherheitsarchitektur, oder ist Moskau schon seit langem auf einem imperialistischen Trip, der befürchten lassen muss, dass die Russen in fünf Jahren in Berlin stehen?»

So bringt Gabriele Krone-Schmalz [7] die eigentliche Frage auf den Punkt, die zur Einschätzung der Situation letztlich auch jeder für sich beantworten muss.

Was ist los in der Ukraine?

In der internationalen Politik geht es nie um Demokratie oder Menschenrechte, sondern immer um Interessen von Staaten. Diese These stammt von Egon Bahr, einem der Architekten der deutschen Ostpolitik des «Wandels durch Annäherung» aus den 1960er und 70er Jahren. Sie trifft auch auf den Ukraine-Konflikt zu, den handfeste geostrategische und wirtschaftliche Interessen beherrschen, obwohl dort angeblich «unsere Demokratie» verteidigt wird.

Es ist ein wesentliches Element des Ukraine-Narrativs und Teil der Manipulation, die Vorgeschichte des Krieges wegzulassen – mindestens die vor der russischen «Annexion» der Halbinsel Krim im März 2014, aber oft sogar komplett diejenige vor der Invasion Ende Februar 2022. Das Thema ist komplex, aber einige Aspekte, die für eine Beurteilung nicht unwichtig sind, will ich wenigstens kurz skizzieren. [8]

Das Gebiet der heutigen Ukraine und Russlands – die übrigens in der «Kiewer Rus» gemeinsame Wurzeln haben – hat der britische Geostratege Halford Mackinder bereits 1904 als eurasisches «Heartland» bezeichnet, dessen Kontrolle er eine große Bedeutung für die imperiale Strategie Großbritanniens zumaß. Für den ehemaligen Sicherheits- und außenpolitischen Berater mehrerer US-amerikanischer Präsidenten und Mitgründer der Trilateralen Kommission, Zbigniew Brzezinski, war die Ukraine nach der Auflösung der Sowjetunion ein wichtiger Spielstein auf dem «eurasischen Schachbrett», wegen seiner Nähe zu Russland, seiner Bodenschätze und seines Zugangs zum Schwarzen Meer.

Die Ukraine ist seit langem ein gespaltenes Land. Historisch zerrissen als Spielball externer Interessen und geprägt von ethnischen, kulturellen, religiösen und geografischen Unterschieden existiert bis heute, grob gesagt, eine Ost-West-Spaltung, welche die Suche nach einer nationalen Identität stark erschwert.

Insbesondere im Zuge der beiden Weltkriege sowie der Russischen Revolution entstanden tiefe Risse in der Bevölkerung. Ukrainer kämpften gegen Ukrainer, zum Beispiel die einen auf der Seite von Hitlers faschistischer Nazi-Armee und die anderen auf der von Stalins kommunistischer Roter Armee. Die Verbrechen auf beiden Seiten sind nicht vergessen. Dass nach der Unabhängigkeit 1991 versucht wurde, Figuren wie den radikalen Nationalisten Symon Petljura oder den Faschisten und Nazi-Kollaborateur Stepan Bandera als «Nationalhelden» zu installieren, verbessert die Sache nicht.

Während die USA und EU-Staaten zunehmend «ausländische Einmischung» (speziell russische) in «ihre Demokratien» wittern, betreiben sie genau dies seit Jahrzehnten in vielen Ländern der Welt. Die seit den 2000er Jahren bekannten «Farbrevolutionen» in Osteuropa werden oft als Methode des Regierungsumsturzes durch von außen gesteuerte «demokratische» Volksaufstände beschrieben. Diese Strategie geht auf Analysen zum «Schwarmverhalten» [9] seit den 1960er Jahren zurück (Studentenproteste), wo es um die potenzielle Wirksamkeit einer «rebellischen Hysterie» von Jugendlichen bei postmodernen Staatsstreichen geht. Heute nennt sich dieses gezielte Kanalisieren der Massen zur Beseitigung unkooperativer Regierungen «Soft-Power».

In der Ukraine gab es mit der «Orangen Revolution» 2004 und dem «Euromaidan» 2014 gleich zwei solcher «Aufstände». Der erste erzwang wegen angeblicher Unregelmäßigkeiten eine Wiederholung der Wahlen, was mit Wiktor Juschtschenko als neuem Präsidenten endete. Dieser war ehemaliger Direktor der Nationalbank und Befürworter einer Annäherung an EU und NATO. Seine Frau, die First Lady, ist US-amerikanische «Philanthropin» und war Beamtin im Weißen Haus in der Reagan- und der Bush-Administration.

Im Gegensatz zu diesem ersten Event endete der sogenannte Euromaidan unfriedlich und blutig. Die mehrwöchigen Proteste gegen Präsident Wiktor Janukowitsch, in Teilen wegen des nicht unterzeichneten Assoziierungsabkommens mit der EU, wurden zunehmend gewalttätiger und von Nationalisten und Faschisten des «Rechten Sektors» dominiert. Sie mündeten Ende Februar 2014 auf dem Kiewer Unabhängigkeitsplatz (Maidan) in einem Massaker durch Scharfschützen. Dass deren Herkunft und die genauen Umstände nicht geklärt wurden, störte die Medien nur wenig. [10]

Janukowitsch musste fliehen, er trat nicht zurück. Vielmehr handelte es sich um einen gewaltsamen, allem Anschein nach vom Westen inszenierten Putsch. Laut Jeffrey Sachs war das kein Geheimnis, außer vielleicht für die Bürger. Die USA unterstützten die Post-Maidan-Regierung nicht nur, sie beeinflussten auch ihre Bildung. Das geht unter anderem aus dem berühmten «Fuck the EU»-Telefonat der US-Chefdiplomatin für die Ukraine, Victoria Nuland, mit Botschafter Geoffrey Pyatt hervor.

Dieser Bruch der demokratischen Verfassung war letztlich der Auslöser für die anschließenden Krisen auf der Krim und im Donbass (Ostukraine). Angesichts der ukrainischen Geschichte mussten die nationalistischen Tendenzen und die Beteiligung der rechten Gruppen an dem Umsturz bei der russigsprachigen Bevölkerung im Osten ungute Gefühle auslösen. Es gab Kritik an der Übergangsregierung, Befürworter einer Abspaltung und auch für einen Anschluss an Russland.

Ebenso konnte Wladimir Putin in dieser Situation durchaus Bedenken wegen des Status der russischen Militärbasis für seine Schwarzmeerflotte in Sewastopol auf der Krim haben, für die es einen langfristigen Pachtvertrag mit der Ukraine gab. Was im März 2014 auf der Krim stattfand, sei keine Annexion, sondern eine Abspaltung (Sezession) nach einem Referendum gewesen, also keine gewaltsame Aneignung, urteilte der Rechtswissenschaftler Reinhard Merkel in der FAZ sehr detailliert begründet. Übrigens hatte die Krim bereits zu Zeiten der Sowjetunion den Status einer autonomen Republik innerhalb der Ukrainischen SSR.

Anfang April 2014 wurden in der Ostukraine die «Volksrepubliken» Donezk und Lugansk ausgerufen. Die Kiewer Übergangsregierung ging unter der Bezeichnung «Anti-Terror-Operation» (ATO) militärisch gegen diesen, auch von Russland instrumentalisierten Widerstand vor. Zufällig war kurz zuvor CIA-Chef John Brennan in Kiew. Die Maßnahmen gingen unter dem seit Mai neuen ukrainischen Präsidenten, dem Milliardär Petro Poroschenko, weiter. Auch Wolodymyr Selenskyj beendete den Bürgerkrieg nicht, als er 2019 vom Präsidenten-Schauspieler, der Oligarchen entmachtet, zum Präsidenten wurde. Er fuhr fort, die eigene Bevölkerung zu bombardieren.

Mit dem Einmarsch russischer Truppen in die Ostukraine am 24. Februar 2022 begann die zweite Phase des Krieges. Die Wochen und Monate davor waren intensiv. Im November hatte die Ukraine mit den USA ein Abkommen über eine «strategische Partnerschaft» unterzeichnet. Darin sagten die Amerikaner ihre Unterstützung der EU- und NATO-Perspektive der Ukraine sowie quasi für die Rückeroberung der Krim zu. Dagegen ließ Putin der NATO und den USA im Dezember 2021 einen Vertragsentwurf über beiderseitige verbindliche Sicherheitsgarantien zukommen, den die NATO im Januar ablehnte. Im Februar eskalierte laut OSZE die Gewalt im Donbass.

Bereits wenige Wochen nach der Invasion, Ende März 2022, kam es in Istanbul zu Friedensverhandlungen, die fast zu einer Lösung geführt hätten. Dass der Krieg nicht damals bereits beendet wurde, lag daran, dass der Westen dies nicht wollte. Man war der Meinung, Russland durch die Ukraine in diesem Stellvertreterkrieg auf Dauer militärisch schwächen zu können. Angesichts von Hunderttausenden Toten, Verletzten und Traumatisierten, die als Folge seitdem zu beklagen sind, sowie dem Ausmaß der Zerstörung, fehlen einem die Worte.

Hasst der Westen die Russen?

Diese Frage drängt sich auf, wenn man das oft unerträglich feindselige Gebaren beobachtet, das beileibe nicht neu ist und vor Doppelmoral trieft. Russland und speziell die Person Wladimir Putins werden regelrecht dämonisiert, was gleichzeitig scheinbar jede Form von Diplomatie ausschließt.

Russlands militärische Stärke, seine geografische Lage, sein Rohstoffreichtum oder seine unabhängige diplomatische Tradition sind sicher Störfaktoren für das US-amerikanische Bestreben, der Boss in einer unipolaren Welt zu sein. Ein womöglich funktionierender eurasischer Kontinent, insbesondere gute Beziehungen zwischen Russland und Deutschland, war indes schon vor dem Ersten Weltkrieg eine Sorge des britischen Imperiums.

Ein «Vergehen» von Präsident Putin könnte gewesen sein, dass er die neoliberale Schocktherapie à la IWF und den Ausverkauf des Landes (auch an US-Konzerne) beendete, der unter seinem Vorgänger herrschte. Dabei zeigte er sich als Führungspersönlichkeit und als nicht so formbar wie Jelzin. Diese Aspekte allein sind aber heute vermutlich keine ausreichende Erklärung für ein derart gepflegtes Feindbild.

Der Historiker und Philosoph Hauke Ritz erweitert den Fokus der Fragestellung zu: «Warum hasst der Westen die Russen so sehr?», was er zum Beispiel mit dem Medienforscher Michael Meyen und mit der Politikwissenschaftlerin Ulrike Guérot bespricht. Ritz stellt die interessante These [11] auf, dass Russland eine Provokation für den Westen sei, welcher vor allem dessen kulturelles und intellektuelles Potenzial fürchte.

Die Russen sind Europäer aber anders, sagt Ritz. Diese «Fremdheit in der Ähnlichkeit» erzeuge vielleicht tiefe Ablehnungsgefühle. Obwohl Russlands Identität in der europäischen Kultur verwurzelt ist, verbinde es sich immer mit der Opposition in Europa. Als Beispiele nennt er die Kritik an der katholischen Kirche oder die Verbindung mit der Arbeiterbewegung. Christen, aber orthodox; Sozialismus statt Liberalismus. Das mache das Land zum Antagonisten des Westens und zu einer Bedrohung der Machtstrukturen in Europa.

Fazit

Selbstverständlich kann man Geschichte, Ereignisse und Entwicklungen immer auf verschiedene Arten lesen. Dieser Artikel, obwohl viel zu lang, konnte nur einige Aspekte der Ukraine-Tragödie anreißen, die in den offiziellen Darstellungen in der Regel nicht vorkommen. Mindestens dürfte damit jedoch klar geworden sein, dass die Russische Föderation bzw. Wladimir Putin nicht der alleinige Aggressor in diesem Konflikt ist. Das ist ein Stellvertreterkrieg zwischen USA/NATO (gut) und Russland (böse); die Ukraine (edel) wird dabei schlicht verheizt.

Das ist insofern von Bedeutung, als die gesamte europäische Kriegshysterie auf sorgsam kultivierten Freund-Feind-Bildern beruht. Nur so kann Konfrontation und Eskalation betrieben werden, denn damit werden die wahren Hintergründe und Motive verschleiert. Angst und Propaganda sind notwendig, damit die Menschen den Wahnsinn mitmachen. Sie werden belogen, um sie zuerst zu schröpfen und anschließend auf die Schlachtbank zu schicken. Das kann niemand wollen, außer den stets gleichen Profiteuren: die Rüstungs-Lobby und die großen Investoren, die schon immer an Zerstörung und Wiederaufbau verdient haben.

Apropos Investoren: Zu den Top-Verdienern und somit Hauptinteressenten an einer Fortführung des Krieges zählt BlackRock, einer der weltgrößten Vermögensverwalter. Der deutsche Bundeskanzler in spe, Friedrich Merz, der gerne «Taurus»-Marschflugkörper an die Ukraine liefern und die Krim-Brücke zerstören möchte, war von 2016 bis 2020 Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender von BlackRock in Deutschland. Aber das hat natürlich nichts zu sagen, der Mann macht nur seinen Job.

Es ist ein Spiel der Kräfte, es geht um Macht und strategische Kontrolle, um Geheimdienste und die Kontrolle der öffentlichen Meinung, um Bodenschätze, Rohstoffe, Pipelines und Märkte. Das klingt aber nicht sexy, «Demokratie und Menschenrechte» hört sich besser und einfacher an. Dabei wäre eine für alle Seiten förderliche Politik auch nicht so kompliziert; das Handwerkszeug dazu nennt sich Diplomatie. Noch einmal Gabriele Krone-Schmalz:

«Friedliche Politik ist nichts anderes als funktionierender Interessenausgleich. Da geht’s nicht um Moral.»

Die Situation in der Ukraine ist sicher komplex, vor allem wegen der inneren Zerrissenheit. Es dürfte nicht leicht sein, eine friedliche Lösung für das Zusammenleben zu finden, aber die Beteiligten müssen es vor allem wollen. Unter den gegebenen Umständen könnte eine sinnvolle Perspektive mit Neutralität und föderalen Strukturen zu tun haben.

Allen, die sich bis hierher durch die Lektüre gearbeitet (oder auch einfach nur runtergescrollt) haben, wünsche ich frohe Oster-Friedenstage!

[Titelbild: Pixabay; Abb. 1 und 2: nach Ganser/SIPER; Abb. 3: SIPER]

--- Quellen: ---

[1] Albrecht Müller, «Glaube wenig. Hinterfrage alles. Denke selbst.», Westend 2019

[2] Zwei nette Beispiele:

• ARD-faktenfinder (sic), «Viel Aufmerksamkeit für fragwürdige Experten», 03/2023
• Neue Zürcher Zeitung, «Aufstieg und Fall einer Russlandversteherin – die ehemalige ARD-Korrespondentin Gabriele Krone-Schmalz rechtfertigt seit Jahren Putins Politik», 12/2022

[3] George Washington University, «NATO Expansion: What Gorbachev Heard – Declassified documents show security assurances against NATO expansion to Soviet leaders from Baker, Bush, Genscher, Kohl, Gates, Mitterrand, Thatcher, Hurd, Major, and Woerner», 12/2017

[4] Beispielsweise Wladimir Putin bei seiner Rede im Deutschen Bundestag, 25/09/2001

[5] William Engdahl, «Full Spectrum Dominance, Totalitarian Democracy In The New World Order», edition.engdahl 2009

[6] Daniele Ganser, «Illegale Kriege – Wie die NATO-Länder die UNO sabotieren. Eine Chronik von Kuba bis Syrien», Orell Füssli 2016

[7] Gabriele Krone-Schmalz, «Mit Friedensjournalismus gegen ‘Kriegstüchtigkeit’», Vortrag und Diskussion an der Universität Hamburg, veranstaltet von engagierten Studenten, 16/01/2025\ → Hier ist ein ähnlicher Vortrag von ihr (Video), den ich mit spanischer Übersetzung gefunden habe.

[8] Für mehr Hintergrund und Details empfehlen sich z.B. folgende Bücher:

• Mathias Bröckers, Paul Schreyer, «Wir sind immer die Guten», Westend 2019
• Gabriele Krone-Schmalz, «Russland verstehen? Der Kampf um die Ukraine und die Arroganz des Westens», Westend 2023
• Patrik Baab, «Auf beiden Seiten der Front – Meine Reisen in die Ukraine», Fiftyfifty 2023

[9] vgl. Jonathan Mowat, «Washington's New World Order "Democratization" Template», 02/2005 und RAND Corporation, «Swarming and the Future of Conflict», 2000

[10] Bemerkenswert einige Beiträge, von denen man später nichts mehr wissen wollte:

• ARD Monitor, «Todesschüsse in Kiew: Wer ist für das Blutbad vom Maidan verantwortlich», 10/04/2014, Transkript hier
• Telepolis, «Blutbad am Maidan: Wer waren die Todesschützen?», 12/04/2014
• Telepolis, «Scharfschützenmorde in Kiew», 14/12/2014
• Deutschlandfunk, «Gefahr einer Spirale nach unten», Interview mit Günter Verheugen, 18/03/2014
• NDR Panorama, «Putsch in Kiew: Welche Rolle spielen die Faschisten?», 06/03/2014

[11] Hauke Ritz, «Vom Niedergang des Westens zur Neuerfindung Europas», 2024

---

Dieser Beitrag wurde mit dem Pareto-Client geschrieben.

@ 90c656ff:9383fd4e

Bitcoin has emerged as a modern option for storing value, often compared to traditional assets like gold. Its ability to resist inflation, combined with features such as scarcity, decentralization, and security, makes it a promising tool for preserving wealth in times of economic uncertainty.

A store of value is an asset that maintains its purchasing power over time, protecting wealth from devaluation. Historically, assets like gold and real estate have played this role because they are relatively scarce and in constant demand.

However, fiat currencies have proven less effective as stores of value due to inflation. Governments and central banks often increase the money supply, which can reduce the purchasing power of currencies. In this context, Bitcoin stands out as an alternative.

Bitcoin: Programmed Scarcity

The main feature that makes Bitcoin a potential store of value is its limited supply. Only 21 million bitcoins will ever be created, a cap established in its code. This programmed scarcity contrasts with fiat currencies, which can be printed without limits by governments, leading to inflation.

The creation of Bitcoin is also controlled by events known as halvings, which cut the mining reward in half approximately every four years. This makes Bitcoin increasingly scarce over time, boosting its potential for appreciation.

Bitcoin offers a solution to the problem of inflation, as its fixed supply prevents governments or centralized institutions from manipulating its quantity.

01 - Decentralization and Immutability: Operating on a decentralized network, Bitcoin is immune to political decisions or central bank interventions. No authority can change the protocol to "print" more bitcoins. 02 - Transparency of Supply: All transactions and newly created bitcoins are recorded on the blockchain or timechain, ensuring full transparency. 03 - Purchasing Power Protection: With limited supply and growing demand, Bitcoin has shown a tendency to appreciate over time, acting as a hedge against inflation in several economies.

Bitcoin is often called “digital gold” due to its similarities to the precious metal as a store of value:

01 - Portability: Bitcoin is easier to transfer and store than gold, being digitally accessible anywhere in the world. 02 - Divisibility: Each bitcoin can be divided into up to 100 million units called satoshis, allowing for transactions of any value. 03 - Security: While gold requires physical storage and is subject to theft, Bitcoin can be stored in secure digital wallets.

These qualities make Bitcoin a more flexible and accessible option for storing value in an increasingly digital world.

Despite its promise, Bitcoin still faces barriers to being widely accepted as a store of value:

01 - Volatility: Bitcoin's price has historically shown large fluctuations, which can discourage investors seeking safety. However, many believe that as adoption grows, volatility will decrease. 02 - Regulation: Some governments have implemented measures to restrict or regulate Bitcoin use, which may impact its acceptance as a store of value. 03 - Cultural Adaptation: As a new and digital asset, Bitcoin still needs to earn the trust of people accustomed to physical stores of value like gold.

Bitcoin has proven to be a particularly useful store of value in economies facing financial crises or hyperinflation. Countries like Venezuela, Argentina, and Zimbabwe, which experienced sharp currency devaluation, have seen growing adoption of Bitcoin as a way to preserve purchasing power.

Moreover, its global accessibility allows people in countries without easy access to traditional financial markets to use Bitcoin as an alternative.

In summary, Bitcoin has unique characteristics that make it a promising candidate as a store of value in an increasingly digital world affected by fiat currency inflation. Its programmed scarcity, resistance to manipulation, and global accessibility offer a modern solution for preserving wealth.

Although challenges like volatility and regulation still need to be addressed, Bitcoin has already proven to be an effective tool for protecting assets, especially in economically unstable environments. Over time, and with growing adoption, Bitcoin may solidify its place as one of the primary stores of value in the 21st century.

Thank you very much for reading this far. I hope everything is well with you, and sending a big hug from your favorite Bitcoiner maximalist from Madeira. Long live freedom!

@ f1989a96:bcaaf2c1

Good morning, readers!

This week, we bring pressing news from Belarus, where the regime’s central bank is preparing to launch its central bank digital currency in close collaboration with Russia by the end of 2026. Since rigging the 2020 election, President Alexander Lukashenko has ruled through brute force and used financial repression to crush civil society and political opposition. A Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) in the hands of such an authoritarian leader is a recipe for greater control over all aspects of financial activity.

Meanwhile, Russia is planning to further restrict Bitcoin access for ordinary citizens. This time, the Central Bank of Russia and the Ministry of Finance announced joint plans to launch a state-regulated cryptocurrency exchange available exclusively to “super-qualified investors.” Access would be limited to those meeting previously defined thresholds of $1.2 million in assets or an annual income above $580,000. This is a blatant attempt by the Kremlin to dampen the accessibility and impact of Bitcoin for those who need it most.

In freedom tech news, we spotlight Samiz. This new tool allows users to create a Bluetooth mesh network over nostr, allowing users' messages and posts to pass through nearby devices on the network even while offline. When a post reaches someone with an Internet connection, it is broadcast across the wider network. While early in development, Mesh networks like Samiz hold the potential to disseminate information posted by activists and human rights defenders even when authoritarian regimes in countries like Pakistan, Venezuela, or Burma try to restrict communications and the Internet.

We end with a reading of our very own Financial Freedom Report #67 on the Bitcoin Audible podcast, where host Guy Swann reads the latest news on plunging currencies, CBDCs, and new Bitcoin freedom tools. We encourage our readers to give it a listen and stay tuned for future readings of HRF’s Financial Freedom Report on Bitcoin Audible. We also include an interview with HRF’s global bitcoin adoption lead, Femi Longe, who shares insights on Bitcoin’s growing role as freedom money for those who need it most.

Now, let’s see what’s in store this week!

SUBSCRIBE HERE

GLOBAL NEWS

Belarus | Launching CBDC in Late 2026

Belarus is preparing to launch its CBDC, the digital ruble, into public circulation by late 2026. Roman Golovchenko, the chairman of the National Bank of the Republic of Belarus (and former prime minister), made the regime’s intent clear: “For the state, it is very important to be able to trace how digital money moves along the entire chain.” He added that Belarus was “closely cooperating with Russia regarding the development of the CBDC.” The level of surveillance and central control that the digital ruble would embed into Belarus’s financial system would pose existential threats to what remains of civil society in the country. Since stealing the 2020 election, Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko has ruled through sheer force, detaining over 35,000 people, labeling dissidents and journalists as “extremists,” and freezing the bank accounts of those who challenge his authority. In this context, a CBDC would not be a modern financial tool — it would be a means of instant oppression, granting the regime real-time insight into every transaction and the ability to act on it directly.

Russia | Proposes Digital Asset Exchange Exclusively for Wealthy Investors

A month after proposing a framework that would restrict the trading of Bitcoin to only the country’s wealthiest individuals (Russians with over $1.2 million in assets or an annual income above $580,000), Russia’s Ministry of Finance and Central Bank have announced plans to launch a government-regulated cryptocurrency exchange available exclusively to “super-qualified investors.” Under the plan, only citizens meeting the previously stated wealth and income thresholds (which may be subject to change) would be allowed to trade digital assets on the platform. This would further entrench financial privilege for Russian oligarchs while cutting ordinary Russians off from alternative financial tools and the financial freedom they offer. Finance Minister Anton Siluanov claims this will bring digital asset operations “out of the shadows,” but in reality, it suppresses grassroots financial autonomy while exerting state control over who can access freedom money.

Cuba | Ecash Brings Offline Bitcoin Payments to Island Nation in the Dark

As daily blackouts and internet outages continue across Cuba, a new development is helping Cubans achieve financial freedom: Cashu ecash. Cashu is an ecash protocol — a form of digital cash backed by Bitcoin that enables private, everyday payments that can also be done offline — a powerful feature for Cubans experiencing up to 20-hour daily blackouts. However, ecash users must trust mints (servers operated by individuals or groups that issue and redeem ecash tokens) not to disappear with user funds. To leverage this freedom tech to its fullest, the Cuban Bitcoin community launched its own ecash mint, mint.cubabitcoin.org. This minimizes trust requirements for Cubans to transact with ecash and increases its accessibility by running the mint locally. Cuba Bitcoin also released a dedicated ecash resource page, helping expand accessibility to freedom through financial education. For an island nation where the currency has lost more than 90% of its value, citizens remain locked out of their savings, and remittances are often hijacked by the regime, tools like ecash empower Cubans to preserve their financial privacy, exchange value freely, and resist the financial repression that has left so many impoverished.

Zambia | Introduces Cyber Law to Track and Intercept Digital Communications

Zambia’s government passed two new cyber laws granting officials sweeping powers to track and intercept digital communications while increasing surveillance over Zambians' online activity. Officials insist it will help combat cybercrime. Really, it gives the president absolute control over the direction of a new surveillance agency — a powerful tool to crush dissent. This follows earlier plans to restrict the use of foreign currency in the economy to fight inflation, which effectively trapped Zambians in a financial system centered around the volatile “kwacha” currency (which reached a record low earlier this year with inflation above 16%). For activists, journalists, and everyday Zambians, the new laws over online activity threaten the ability to organize and speak freely while potentially hampering access to freedom tech.

India | Central Bank Deputy Governor Praises CBDC Capabilities

At the Bharat Inclusion Summit in Bengaluru, India, the deputy governor of the Reserve Bank of India (RBI), Rabi Sankar, declared, “I have so far not seen any use case that potentially can solve the problem of cross-border money transfer; only CBDC has the ability to solve it.” Yet — seemingly unbeknownst to Sankar, Bitcoin has served as an effective remittance tool for more than a decade at low cost, fast speed, and with no central point of control. Sankar’s remarks follow a growing push to normalize state-controlled, surveillance-based digital money as a natural progression of currency. The RBI’s digital rupee CBDC, currently in pilot phase, is quickly growing into one of the most advanced CBDCs on the planet. It is being embedded into the government’s UPI payment system and offered through existing financial institutions and platforms. Decentralized alternatives like Bitcoin can achieve financial inclusion and payment efficiency too — but without sacrificing privacy, autonomy, or basic rights over to the state.

Tanzania | Opposition Party Excluded From Election Amid Financial Repression

Last week, the Tanzanian regime banned the use of foreign currency in transactions, leaving Tanzanians to rely solely on the rapidly depreciating Tanzanian shilling. Now, Tanzania's ruling party has taken a decisive step to eliminate political opposition ahead of October’s general elections by barring the CHADEMA party from participation under the pretense of treason against their party leader, Tundu Lissu. Law enforcement arrested Lissu at a public rally where he was calling for electoral reforms. This political repression is not happening in isolation. Last year, the Tanzanian regime blocked access to X, detained hundreds of opposition members, and disappeared dissidents. These developments suggest a broader strategy to silence criticism and electoral competition through arrests, censorship, and economic coercion.

BITCOIN AND FREEDOM TECH NEWS

Samiz | Create a Bluetooth Mesh Network with Nostr

Samiz, an app for creating a Bluetooth mesh network over nostr, is officially available for testing. Mesh networks, where interconnected computers relay data to one another, can provide offline access to nostr if enough users participate. For example, when an individual is offline but has Samiz enabled, their device can connect to other nearby devices through Bluetooth, allowing nostr messages to hop locally from phone to phone until reaching someone with internet access, who can then broadcast the message to the wider nostr network. Mesh networks like this hold powerful implications for activists and communities facing censorship, Internet shutdowns, or surveillance. In places with restricted finances and organization, Samiz, while early in development, can potentially offer a way to distribute information through nostr without relying on infrastructure that authoritarian regimes can shut down.

Spark | New Bitcoin Payments Protocol Now Live

Lightspark, a company building on the Bitcoin Lightning Network, officially released Spark, a new payment protocol built on Bitcoin to make transactions faster, cheaper, and more privacy-protecting. Spark leverages a technology called statechains to enable self-custodial and off-chain Bitcoin transactions for users by transferring the private keys associated with their bitcoin rather than signing and sending a transaction with said keys. Spark also supports stablecoins (digital tokens pegged to fiat currency) and allows users to receive payments while offline. While these are promising developments, in its current state, Spark is not completely trustless; therefore, it is advisable only to hold a small balance of funds on the protocol as this new payment technology gets off the ground. You can learn more about Spark here.

Boltz | Now Supports Nostr Zaps

Boltz, a non-custodial bridge for swapping between different Bitcoin layers, released a new feature called Zap Swaps, enabling users to make Lightning payments as low as 21 satoshis (small units of bitcoin). This feature enables bitcoin microtransactions like nostr zaps, which are use cases that previously required workaround solutions. With the release, users of Boltz-powered Bitcoin wallets like Misty Breez can now leverage their wallets for zaps on nostr. These small, uncensorable bitcoin payments are a powerful tool for supporting activists, journalists, and dissidents — offering a permissionless way to support free speech and financial freedom worldwide. HRF is pleased to see this past HRF grantee add support for the latest freedom tech features.

Coinswap | Adds Support for Coin Selection

Coinswap, an in-development protocol that enables users to privately swap Bitcoin with one another, added support for coin selection, boosting the protocol’s privacy capabilities. Coin selection allows Bitcoin users to choose which of their unspent transaction outputs (UTXOs) to spend, giving them granular control over their transactions and the information they choose to reveal. For activists, journalists, and anyone operating under financial surveillance and repression, this addition (when fully implemented and released) can strengthen Bitcoin’s ability to resist censorship and protect human rights. HRF’s first Bitcoin Development Fund (BDF) grant was to Coinswap, and we are glad to see the continued development of the protocol.

bitcoin++ | Upcoming Bitcoin Developer Conference

The next bitcoin++ conference, a global, bitcoin-only developer series organized by Bitcoin educator Lisa Neigut, will occur in Austin, Texas, from May 7 to 9, 2025. A diverse group of privacy advocates, developers, and freedom tech enthusiasts will convene to learn about the mempool (the queue of pending and unconfirmed transactions in a Bitcoin node). Attendees will learn how Bitcoin transactions are sorted into blocks, mempool policies, and how transactions move through time and space to reach the next block. These events offer an incredible opportunity to connect with the technical Bitcoin community, who are ultimately many of the figures building the freedom tools that are helping individuals preserve their rights and freedoms in the face of censorship. Get your tickets here.

OpenSats | Announces 11th Wave of Nostr Grants

OpenSats, a nonprofit organization supporting open-source software and projects, announced its 11th round of grants for nostr, a decentralized protocol that enables uncensorable communications. Two projects stand out for their potential impact on financial freedom and activism: HAMSTR, which enables nostr messaging over ham radio that keeps information and payments flowing in off-grid or censored environments, and Nostr Double Ratchet, which brings end-to-end encrypted private messaging to nostr clients, safeguarding activists from surveillance. These tools help dissidents stay connected, coordinate securely, and transact privately, making them powerful assets for those resisting authoritarian control. Read the full list of grants here.

Bitcoin Design Community | Organizes Designathon for Open-Source UX Designers

The Bitcoin Design Community is hosting its next Designathon between May 4 and 18, 2025, inviting designers of all levels and backgrounds to creatively explore ideas to advance Bitcoin’s user experience and interface. Unlike traditional hackathons, this event centers specifically on design, encouraging open collaboration on projects that improve usability, accessibility, and innovation in open-source Bitcoin tools. Participants can earn monetary prizes, rewards, and recognition for their work. Anyone can join or start a project. Learn more here.

RECOMMENDED CONTENT

Plunging Currencies, CBDCs, and New Bitcoin Freedom Tools with Guy Swann

In this reading on the Bitcoin Audible podcast, host Guy Swan reads HRF’s Financial Freedom Report #67, offering listeners a front-row view into the latest developments in financial repression and resistance. He unpacks how collapsing currencies, rising inflation, and CBDC rollouts tighten state control in Turkey, Russia, and Nigeria. But he also highlights the tools for pushing back, from the first Stratum V2 mining pool to Cashu’s new Tap-to-Pay ecash feature. If you’re a reader of the Financial Freedom Report, we encourage you to check out the Bitcoin Audible podcast, where Guy Swan will be doing monthly readings of our newsletter. Listen to the full recording here.

Bitcoin Beyond Capital: Freedom Money for the Global South with Femi Longe

In this interview at the 2025 MIT Bitcoin Expo, journalist Frank Corva speaks with Femi Longe, HRF’s global bitcoin lead, who shares insights on Bitcoin’s growing role as freedom money for those living under authoritarian regimes. The conversation highlights the importance of building Bitcoin solutions that center on the specific problems faced by communities rather than the technology itself. Longe commends projects like Tando in Kenya and Bit.Spenda in Ghana, which integrate Bitcoin and Lightning into familiar financial channels, making Bitcoin more practical and accessible for everyday payments and saving. You can watch the interview here and catch the livestreams of the full 2025 MIT Bitcoin Expo here.

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

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

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

Subscribe to newsletter

Apply for a grant

Support our work

Visit our website

@ c631e267:c2b78d3e

Verstand 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.

@ c066aac5:6a41a034

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

My Background: A Small Side Story

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

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

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

Nicolas Cage: Actor

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

Nick Cave: Songwriter

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

Jim Jarmusch: Director

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

NOSTR: We Need Bold Art

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

@ c631e267:c2b78d3e

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Vorlage Titelbild: Pixabay]

---

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

@ 52b4a076:e7fad8bd

I have been recently building NFDB, a new relay DB. This post is meant as a short overview.

Regular relays have challenges

Current relay software have significant challenges, which I have experienced when hosting Nostr.land: - Scalability is only supported by adding full replicas, which does not scale to large relays. - Most relays use slow databases and are not optimized for large scale usage. - Search is near-impossible to implement on standard relays. - Privacy features such as NIP-42 are lacking. - Regular DB maintenance tasks on normal relays require extended downtime. - Fault-tolerance is implemented, if any, using a load balancer, which is limited. - Personalization and advanced filtering is not possible. - Local caching is not supported.

NFDB: A scalable database for large relays

NFDB is a new database meant for medium-large scale relays, built on FoundationDB that provides: - Near-unlimited scalability - Extended fault tolerance - Instant loading - Better search - Better personalization - and more.

Search

NFDB has extended search capabilities including: - Semantic search: Search for meaning, not words. - Interest-based search: Highlight content you care about. - Multi-faceted queries: Easily filter by topic, author group, keywords, and more at the same time. - Wide support for event kinds, including users, articles, etc.

Personalization

NFDB allows significant personalization: - Customized algorithms: Be your own algorithm. - Spam filtering: Filter content to your WoT, and use advanced spam filters. - Topic mutes: Mute topics, not keywords. - Media filtering: With Nostr.build, you will be able to filter NSFW and other content - Low data mode: Block notes that use high amounts of cellular data. - and more

Other

NFDB has support for many other features such as: - NIP-42: Protect your privacy with private drafts and DMs - Microrelays: Easily deploy your own personal microrelay - Containers: Dedicated, fast storage for discoverability events such as relay lists

Calcite: A local microrelay database

Calcite is a lightweight, local version of NFDB that is meant for microrelays and caching, meant for thousands of personal microrelays.

Calcite HA is an additional layer that allows live migration and relay failover in under 30 seconds, providing higher availability compared to current relays with greater simplicity. Calcite HA is enabled in all Calcite deployments.

For zero-downtime, NFDB is recommended.

Noswhere SmartCache

Relays are fixed in one location, but users can be anywhere.

Noswhere SmartCache is a CDN for relays that dynamically caches data on edge servers closest to you, allowing: - Multiple regions around the world - Improved throughput and performance - Faster loading times

routerd

routerd is a custom load-balancer optimized for Nostr relays, integrated with SmartCache.

routerd is specifically integrated with NFDB and Calcite HA to provide fast failover and high performance.

Ending notes

NFDB is planned to be deployed to Nostr.land in the coming weeks.

A lot more is to come. 👀️️️️️️

@ c631e267:c2b78d3e

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Titelbild: Pixabay]

Dazu passend:

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

---

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

@ 7460b7fd:4fc4e74b

PR 32359：取消 OP_RETURN 字节限制提案深入分析

提案概述及代码变更内容

提案背景与意图：比特币核心当前对交易中的 OP_RETURN 输出（数据载体输出）有严格限制：默认最多允许单个 OP_RETURN 输出，且其 scriptPubKey 大小不超过 83 字节（约80字节数据加上OP_RETURN和Pushdata前缀）groups.google.com。这一标准规则旨在轻度阻碍链上存储大量任意数据，鼓励将非金融数据以“更无害”的方式存入链上（比如用OP_RETURN而非可花费的UTXO输出）groups.google.com。然而随着时间推移，这一限制并未阻止用户将数据写入区块链，反而促使开发者设计各种变通方案绕过限制。例如，近期 Citrea Clementine 协议（闪电网络相关项目）因为OP_RETURN容量不足，而改用不可花费的Taproot输出来存储所需数据groups.google.com。这样的做法导致大量小额UTXO留存在UTXO集，对全节点造成负担，被视为比使用OP_RETURN更有害的副作用github.com。基于此背景，Bitcoin Core 开发者 Peter Todd（与 Chaincode 实验室的 Antoine Poinsot 等人）提出了 PR #32359，意在解除OP_RETURN的字节大小限制，以消除这种“适得其反”的限制策略groups.google.comgithub.com。

**代码变更要点：**该PR主要修改了与标准交易校验和策略配置相关的代码，包括移除 script/standard.cpp 中对OP_RETURN输出大小和数量的检查，以及删除策略配置选项 -datacarrier 和 -datacarriersizegithub.com。具体而言：

• 取消OP_RETURN大小限制：删除了判断OP_RETURN数据长度是否超过 MAX_OP_RETURN_RELAY（83字节）的标准性检查。此后，交易中的OP_RETURN输出脚本长度将不再被固定上限限制，只要满足区块重量等共识规则即可（理论上可嵌入远大于83字节的数据）github.comgroups.google.com。PR说明中明确提到移除了这些限制的执行代码github.com。相应地，-datacarriersize 配置参数被删除，因为其存在意义（设置OP_RETURN字节上限）已不复存在github.com。此前 -datacarriersize 默认为83，当用户调高该值时节点可接受更大数据载体输出；而现在代码中已无此参数，节点将无条件接受任意大小的OP_RETURN输出。

• 移除OP_RETURN输出数量限制：原先比特币核心默认策略还规定每笔交易最多只有一个OP_RETURN输出是标准的，多于一个即视为非标准交易（拒绝中继）bitcoin.stackexchange.com。该PR同样意在取消此“任意”限制groups.google.com。修改中移除了对 nDataOut（OP_RETURN输出计数）的检查，即允许一笔交易包含多个OP_RETURN输出而仍被视作标准交易。之前的代码若检测到 nDataOut > 1 会返回“multi-op-return”的拒绝原因github.com；PR删除了这一段逻辑，相应的功能测试也更新或移除了对“multi-op-return”非标准原因的断言github.com。

• 保留标准形式要求：值得注意的是，OP_RETURN输出的形式要求仍保留。PR描述中强调“数据载体输出的形式仍保持标准化：脚本以单个 OP_RETURN 开头，后跟任意数量的数据推字节；不允许非数据类的其他脚本操作码”github.com。也就是说，虽然大小和数量限制解除了，但OP_RETURN脚本内容只能是纯数据，不能夹带其他执行opcode。这保证了这些输出依然是“不可花费”的纯数据输出，不会改变它们对UTXO集的影响（不会增加UTXO）。

综上，PR #32359 的核心改动在策略层面放宽了对 OP_RETURN 的限制，删除了相关配置和检查，使节点默认接受任意大小、任意数量的 OP_RETURN 数据输出。同时维持其基本形式（OP_RETURN+数据）以确保此变更不会引入其它类型的非标准交易格式。

改动层级：策略规则 vs 共识规则

该提案属于策略层（policy-level）的更改，而非共识层规则的更改。也就是说，它影响的是节点对交易的_中继、存储和打包_策略，而不改变交易或区块在链上的有效性判定。OP_RETURN字节上限和数量限制从一开始就是标准性约束（Standardness），并非比特币共识协议的一部分groups.google.com。因此，移除这些限制不会导致旧节点与新节点产生区块共识分歧。具体理由如下：

• 无共识规则变动：原有的83字节上限只是节点默认_拒绝转发/挖矿_超限交易的规则，但如果矿工强行将超83字节的OP_RETURN交易打包进区块，所有遵循共识规则的节点（包括未升级的旧节点）依然会接受该区块。因为共识层并没有“OP_RETURN大小不得超过83字节”的规定github.com。正如开发者所指出的，现行的OP_RETURN限制属于“standardness rules”，其约束可以被轻易绕过，并不影响交易的最终有效性github.com。Peter Todd 在评论中强调，为真正禁止链上发布任意数据，必须修改比特币的共识协议，而这在现实中几乎不可能实施github.com。

• **旧节点兼容性：**由于没有引入新的脚本opcode或共识验证规则，旧版本节点即使不升级，仍然会承认包含大OP_RETURN输出的区块为有效。换言之，不存在分叉风险。旧节点唯一的区别是仍会按照老策略拒绝中继此类交易，但一旦交易被打包进区块，它们仍会接受github.com。正因如此，这一提议不会引发硬分叉，只是改变默认策略。

• **策略可自行定制：**另外，正如PR作者所言，这纯粹是默认策略的调整，用户依然可以选择运行修改版的软件继续实施先前的限制。例如，Peter Todd提到有替代实现（如 Bitcoin Knots）可以继续强制这些限制github.com。因此，这并非要“强制”所有节点解除限制，而是主流软件默认策略的演进。

需要澄清的是，有反对者担心解除限制可能扩大攻击面（下文详述），但这些都是针对节点资源和网络层面的影响，而非共识层安全性问题。总的来看，PR #32359 是策略层改进，与先前如RBF默认开启、逐渐弱化非标准交易限制等改变类似，其出发点在于网络行为而非协议规则本身。

对闪电网络节点和交易验证的影响

对链上验证的影响：由于这是策略层变更，交易和区块的验证规则并未改变，因此运行旧版本 Bitcoin Core 的闪电网络节点在共识上不会出现任何问题。闪电网络全节点通常依赖比特币全节点来跟踪链上交易，它们关心的是交易确认和共识有效性。解除OP_RETURN限制并不会使旧节点拒绝新区块，因而不会造成闪电通道关闭交易或HTLC交易在旧节点上验签失败等情况。换句话说，不升级Bitcoin Core软件的LN节点仍可正常参与链上共识，无需担心链上交易验证兼容性。

对节点中继和资源的影响：主要影响在于网络传播和资源占用。如果闪电网络节点所连接的Bitcoin Core没有升级，它将不会中继或存储那些含有超大OP_RETURN的未确认交易（因为旧版本视之为非标准交易）。这可能导致未升级节点的内存池与升级节点不一致：某些在新版节点中合法存在的交易，在旧版中被拒之门外。不过这通常不影响闪电网络的运行，因为闪电通道相关交易本身不会包含OP_RETURN数据输出。此外，当这些交易被矿工打包进区块后，旧节点依然会接收到区块并处理。所以，即便LN节点的后端Bitcoin Core未升级，最坏情形只是它在交易未打包时可能感知不到这些“大数据”交易，但这通常无碍于闪电网络功能（闪电网络主要关心的是通道交易的确认情况）。

升级的好处和必要性：从闪电网络生态来看，放宽OP_RETURN限制反而可能带来一些正面作用。正如前述，已有闪电网络周边项目因为83字节限制不足，转而使用不可花费输出存储数据groups.google.com。例如 Antoine Poinsot 在邮件列表中提到的 Clementine 协议，将某些watchtower挑战数据存进Taproot输出，因为OP_RETURN容量不够groups.google.com。解除限制后，此类应用完全可以改用更友好的OP_RETURN输出来存储数据，不再制造永久占据UTXO集的“垃圾”UTXOgithub.com。因此，闪电网络的watchtower、跨链桥等组件若需要在链上写入证据数据，将可直接利用更大的OP_RETURN输出，网络整体效率和健壮性都会提升。

需要注意的是，如果PR最终被合并并广泛部署，闪电网络节点运营者应该升级其Bitcoin Core后端以跟上新的默认策略。升级后，其节点将和大多数网络节点一样中继和接受大OP_RETURN交易，确保自己的内存池和网络同步，不会漏掉一些潜在相关交易（尽管目前来看，这些交易对LN通道本身并无直接关联）。总之，从兼容性看不升级没有致命问题，但从网络参与度和功能上看，升级是有益的。

潜在的间接影响：反对者提出，解除限制可能导致区块和内存池充斥更多任意数据，从而推高链上手续费、影响闪电通道关闭时所需的手续费估计。例如，如果大量大OP_RETURN交易占据区块空间，链上拥堵加剧，LN通道关闭需要支付更高费用才能及时确认。这其实是一般性拥堵问题，并非LN特有的兼容性问题。支持者则认为，这正是自由市场作用的体现，使用链上空间就该竞争付费github.com。无论如何，闪电网络作为二层方案，其优势在于减少链上交互频率，链上手续费市场的变化对LN有影响但不改变其运行逻辑。LN节点只需确保其Bitcoin Core正常运行、及时跟上链上状态即可。

开发者讨论焦点：支持与反对观点

PR #32359 在开发者社区引发了激烈讨论，支持者和反对者针锋相对，各自提出了有力的论据。以下总结双方主要观点：

• 支持方观点：

• 当前限制无效且适得其反：支持者强调83字节上限并未阻止人们在链上存数据，反而促使更有害的行为。Peter Todd指出，很多协议改用不可花费UTXO或在scriptsig中藏数据来绕过OP_RETURN限制，结果增加了UTXO集膨胀，这是限制OP_RETURN带来的反效果github.com。与其如此，不如移除限制，让数据都写入可被丢弃的OP_RETURN输出，避免UTXO污染github.comgithub.com。正如一位支持者所言：“与其让尘埃UTXO永远留在UTXO集合，不如使用可证明不可花费的输出（OP_RETURN）”github.com。

• **限制易被绕过，增添维护负担：**由于有些矿工或服务商（如MARA Slipstream私有广播）本就接受大OP_RETURN交易，这一限制对有心者来说形同虚设github.com。同时，存在维护这个限制的代码和配置选项，增加了节点实现复杂度。Todd认为，与其让Bitcoin Core承担维护“低效甚至有害”的限制，不如干脆取消，有需要的人可以使用其他软件实现自己的政策github.com。他提到有替代的Bitcoin Knots节点可自行过滤“垃圾”交易，但没必要要求Bitcoin Core默认坚持这些无效限制github.com。

• 尊重自由市场，拥抱链上数据用例：部分支持者从理念上认为，比特币区块空间的使用应交由手续费市场决定，而不应由节点软件做人为限制。著名开发者 Jameson Lopp 表示，是时候承认“有人就是想用比特币做数据锚定”，我们应当提供更优方式满足这种需求，而不是一味阻碍github.com。他认为用户既然愿意付费存数据，就说明这种行为对他们有价值，矿工也有动力处理；网络层不应进行过度的“父爱”式管制github.com。对于反对者所称“大数据交易会挤占区块、抬高手续费”，Lopp直言“这本来就是区块空间市场运作方式”，愿付高费者得以优先确认，无可厚非github.com。

• 统一与简化策略：还有支持者指出，既然限制容易绕过且逐渐没人遵守，那保留它只会造成节点之间策略不一致，反而增加网络复杂性。通过取消限制，所有核心节点一致地接受任意大小OP_RETURN，可避免因为策略差异导致的网络孤块或中继不畅（尽管共识不受影响，但策略不一致会带来一些网络层问题）。同时删除相关配置项，意味着简化用户配置，减少困惑和误用。Peter Todd在回应保留配置选项的建议时提到，Bitcoin Core在Full-RBF功能上也曾移除过用户可选项，直接默认启用，因为现实证明矿工最终都会朝盈利的方向调整策略，节点自行设置反而无济于事github.com。他以RBF为例：在Core开启默认Full-RBF之前，矿工几乎已经100%自行采用了RBF策略，因此保留开关意义不大github.com。类比来看，数据交易也是如此：如果有利可图，矿工终会打包，无论节点是否选择不转发。

• 反对方观点：

• 去除限制会放松对垃圾交易的防线：反对者担心，一旦解除OP_RETURN限制，链上将出现更多纯粹存储数据的“垃圾”交易，给网络带来DoS攻击和资源消耗风险。开发者 BrazyDevelopment 详细描述了可能被加剧的攻击向量github.com：首先，“Flood-and-Loot”攻击——攻击者构造带有巨大OP_RETURN数据的低价值交易（符合共识规则，多笔交易可达数MB数据），疯狂填充各节点的内存池。github.com这样会占满节点内存和带宽，延迟正常交易的传播和确认，并推高手续费竞争。github.com虽然节点有maxmempool大小限制和最低中继费率等机制，但这些机制基于常规交易行为调校，面对异常海量的数据交易可能捉襟见肘github.com。其次，“RBF替换循环”攻击——攻击者可以利用无需额外费用的RBF替换，不断发布和替换包含大OP_RETURN的数据交易，在内存池中反复占据空间却不被确认，从而扰乱手续费市场和内存池秩序github.com。反对者认为，移除大小上限将使上述攻击更廉价、更容易实施github.com。他们主张即便要放宽，也应设定一个“高但合理”的上限（例如100KB），或在内存池压力大时动态调整限制，以保护较小资源节点的运行github.com。

• 用户丧失自定义策略的权利：一些开发者反对彻底删掉 -datacarrier 和 -datacarriersize 选项。他们认为即使大势所趋是接受更多数据，也应保留用户自主选择的空间。正如开发者 BitcoinMechanic 所言：“矿工接受大数据交易不代表用户就不能选择自己的内存池装些什么”github.com。目前用户可以通过配置将-datacarrier设为0（不中继OP_RETURN交易）或者调低-datacarriersize来严格限制自己节点的策略。直接去除这些选项，会让那些出于各种考虑（如运营受限资源节点、防范垃圾数据）的用户失去控制权。从这个角度看，反对者认为限制应该由用户 opt-in 地解除，而不是一刀切放开。开发者 Retropex 也表示：“如果矿工想要更大的数据载体交易，他们完全可以自行调整这些设置…没有理由剥夺矿工和节点运营者做选择的权利”github.com。

• 此改动非必要且不符合部分用户利益：有反对意见认为当前83字节其实已经能覆盖绝大多数合理应用需求，更大的数据上链并非比特币设计初衷。他们担心放开限制会鼓励把比特币区块链当作任意数据存储层，偏离“点对点电子现金”主线，可能带来长期的链膨胀问题。这一阵营有人将此争议上升为理念之争：是坚持比特币作为金融交易为主，还是开放成为通用数据区块链？有评论形容这场拉锯“有点类似2017年的扩容之争”，虽然本质不同（一个是共识层区块大小辩论，一个是策略层数据使用辩论），但双方观点分歧同样明显99bitcoins.com99bitcoins.com。一些反对者（如Luke Dashjr等）长期主张减少非必要的数据上链，此次更是明确 Concept NACK。Luke-Jr 认为，其实完全可以通过引入地址格式变化等办法来识别并限制存数据的交易，而不需要动用共识层改动github.com（虽然他也承认这会非常激进和不现实，但以此反驳“除了改共识无计可施”的观点）。总之，反对者倾向于维持现状：代码里已有的限制无需移除，至少不应在无压倒性共识下贸然改变github.com。

• 社区共识不足：许多开发者在GitHub上给出了“Concept NACK”（概念上不支持）的评价。一位参与者感叹：“又来？两年前讨论过的理由现在依然适用”github.com。在PR的Review日志中，可以看到反对此提案的活跃贡献者数量明显多于支持者github.com。例如，反对阵营包括 Luke-Jr、BitcoinMechanic、CryptoGuida、1ma 等众多开发者和社区成员，而支持此提案的核心开发者相对少一些（包括Jameson Lopp、Sjöors、Sergio Demian Lerner等）github.com。这种意见分裂显示出社区对取消OP_RETURN限制尚未达成广泛共识。一些反对者还担忧这么大的改动可能引发社区矛盾，甚至有人夸张地提到可能出现新的链分叉风险99bitcoins.com99bitcoins.com（虽然实际上由于不涉及共识，硬分叉风险很小，但社区内部分歧确实存在）。

综上，支持者聚焦于提高链上效率、顺应实际需求和减轻UTXO负担，认为解除限制利大于弊；而反对者强调网络稳健、安全和用户自主，担心轻易放开会招致滥用和攻击。双方在GitHub上的讨论异常热烈，很多评论获得了数十个👍或👎表态，可见整个社区对此议题的关注度之高github.comgithub.com。

PR当前状态及后续展望

截至目前（2025年5月初），PR #32359 仍处于开放讨论阶段，并未被合并。鉴于该提案在概念上收到了众多 NACK，缺乏开发者间的明确共识，短期内合并的可能性不大。GitHub 上的自动统计显示，给予“Concept NACK”的评审者数量显著超过“Concept ACK”的数量github.com。这表明在Bitcoin Core维护者看来，社区对是否采纳此改动存在明显分歧。按照 Bitcoin Core 一贯的谨慎作风，当一个提案存在较大争议时，通常会被搁置或要求进一步修改、讨论，而不会仓促合并。

目前，该PR正等待进一步的评审和讨论。有开发者提出了替代方案或折中思路。例如，Bitcoin Core维护者 instagibbs 提交了相关的 PR #32406，提议仅取消默认的OP_RETURN大小上限（等效于将-datacarriersize默认提高到极大），但保留配置选项，从而在不牺牲用户选择权的情况下实现功能开放github.com。这表明部分反对者并非完全拒绝放宽限制，而是希望以更温和的方式推进。PR #32359 与这些提案互相冲突，需要协调出统一的方案github.com。另外，也有开发者建议在测试网上模拟大OP_RETURN交易的攻击场景，以评估风险、说服怀疑者github.com。

审议状态总结：综合来看，PR #32359 尚未接近合并，更谈不上被正式接受进入下一个Bitcoin Core版本。它既没有被关闭（拒绝），也没有快速进入最终review/merge阶段，而是停留在激烈讨论中。目前Bitcoin Core的维护者并未给出明确的合并时间表，反而是在鼓励社区充分讨论其利弊。未来的走向可能有几种：要么提案经过修改（例如保留配置项、增加安全机制等）逐渐赢得共识后合并，要么维持搁置等待更明确的社区信号。此外，不排除开发者转而采用渐进路线——例如先在测试网络取消限制试验，或先提高上限值而非彻底移除，以观察效果。也有可能此提案最终会因共识不足而长期悬而不决。

总之，OP_RETURN字节限制之争体现了比特币开发中策略层决策的审慎和平衡：需要在创新开放与稳健保守之间找到折衷。PR #32359 所引发的讨论仍在持续，它的意义在于促使社区重新审视链上数据存储的策略取舍。无论最终结果如何，这一讨论本身对比特币的发展具有积极意义，因为它让开发者和社区更加清晰地权衡了比特币作为数据载体和价值载体的定位。我们将持续关注该提案的进展，以及围绕它所展开的进一步测试和论证。github.comgroups.google.com

引用来源：

• Bitcoin Core PR #32359 提案内容github.comgithub.com及开发者讨论（Peter Todd评论github.comgithub.com等）

• Bitcoin Dev 邮件列表讨论帖：《Relax OP_RETURN standardness restrictions》groups.google.comgroups.google.com

• GitHub 开发者评论摘录：支持意见（Jameson Loppgithub.com等）与反对意见（BitcoinMechanicgithub.com、BrazyDevelopmentgithub.com等）

• Bitcoin Core PR 评论自动统计（Concept ACK/NACK 汇总）github.com

@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9

One of the most common criticisms leveled against nostr is the perceived lack of assurance when it comes to data storage. Critics argue that without a centralized authority guaranteeing that all data is preserved, important information will be lost. They also claim that running a relay will become prohibitively expensive. While there is truth to these concerns, they miss the mark. The genius of nostr lies in its flexibility, resilience, and the way it harnesses human incentives to ensure data availability in practice.

A nostr relay is simply a server that holds cryptographically verifiable signed data and makes it available to others. Relays are simple, flexible, open, and require no permission to run. Critics are right that operating a relay attempting to store all nostr data will be costly. What they miss is that most will not run all encompassing archive relays. Nostr does not rely on massive archive relays. Instead, anyone can run a relay and choose to store whatever subset of data they want. This keeps costs low and operations flexible, making relay operation accessible to all sorts of individuals and entities with varying use cases.

Critics are correct that there is no ironclad guarantee that every piece of data will always be available. Unlike bitcoin where data permanence is baked into the system at a steep cost, nostr does not promise that every random note or meme will be preserved forever. That said, in practice, any data perceived as valuable by someone will likely be stored and distributed by multiple entities. If something matters to someone, they will keep a signed copy.

Nostr is the Streisand Effect in protocol form. The Streisand effect is when an attempt to suppress information backfires, causing it to spread even further. With nostr, anyone can broadcast signed data, anyone can store it, and anyone can distribute it. Try to censor something important? Good luck. The moment it catches attention, it will be stored on relays across the globe, copied, and shared by those who find it worth keeping. Data deemed important will be replicated across servers by individuals acting in their own interest.

Nostr’s distributed nature ensures that the system does not rely on a single point of failure or a corporate overlord. Instead, it leans on the collective will of its users. The result is a network where costs stay manageable, participation is open to all, and valuable verifiable data is stored and distributed forever.

@ aa8de34f:a6ffe696

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

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

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

-- Denn es braucht keinen Untergrund mehr. --

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

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

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

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

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

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

@ 21335073:a244b1ad

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

@ c9badfea:610f861a

1. Create

bash git bundle create backup.bundle --all

2. Verify

bash git bundle verify backup.bundle

3. Restore

bash git clone backup.bundle

ℹ️ Feel free to change the backup.bundle file name

@ c631e267:c2b78d3e

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Titelbild: Pixabay]

---

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

@ 8dac122d:0fc98d37

Satoshi Escrow

A Bitcoin non-custodial peer-to-peer dispute resolution using only Nostr keys.

Motivation When a Buyer wants to purchase something for a certain amount of BTC from a Seller but doesn't trust them, they can use our 2-of-2 multisig escrow address. The Buyer and Seller both lock their BTC in a multisig address. Both parties only need their respective Nostr secret keys (nsec) and each other's Nostr public keys (npub).

How it works If the trade is successful: - Both parties sign to release the funds - Buyer receives his BTC back - Seller receives his BTC back

If there's a dispute: - Parties can choose a trusted third party (arbitrator) - Arbitrator can help resolve the dispute after a timelock period - Resolution requires 2-of-3 signatures (Buyer/Seller + Arbitrator)

Technical Implementation We use Pay-to-Taproot (P2TR) multisig script path spends with a verified unknown discrete-log unspendable internal key. The system supports two resolution paths:

Collaborative Resolution 2-of-2 multisig between Buyer and Seller without timelocks.

Dispute Resolution 2-of-3 multisig between either party and the arbitrator with timelock.

Important Security Notice This application can be used offline on an air-gapped computer for maximum security. All transactions can be generated, and signed through the webpage offline.

Getting Started 1. Create Escrow Set up a new escrow address using npubs and specify amounts.

1. Sign Transaction Sign the transaction using your nsec key.

2. Combine Signatures Combine the signatures into a signed transaction.

3. Broadcast Broadcast the signed transaction to the Bitcoin network.

4. Spend Spend from the resolution address derived from your npub using your nsec.

You can learn more and try it n Testnet, Signet and Regtest from https://scrow.exchange/

Github repository https://github.com/storopoli/scrow

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/971914

@ 1f79058c:eb86e1cb

I'm currently using this bash script to publish long-form content from local Markdown files to Nostr relays.

It requires all of yq, jq, and nak to be installed.

Usage

Create a signed Nostr event and print it to the console:

bash markdown_to_nostr.sh article-filename.md

Create a Nostr event and publish it to one or more relays:

bash markdown_to_nostr.sh article-filename.md ws://localhost:7777 wss://nostr.kosmos.org

Markdown format

You can specify your metadata as YAML in a Front Matter header. Here's an example file:

```markdown

title: "Good Morning" summary: "It's a beautiful day" image: https://example.com/i/beautiful-day.jpg date: 2025-04-24T15:00:00Z tags: gm, poetry published: false

---

In the blue sky just a few specks of gray
In the evening of a beautiful day
Though last night it rained and more rain on the way
And that more rain is needed 'twould be fair to say.

— Francis Duggan ```

The metadata keys are mostly self-explanatory. Note:

• All keys except for title are optional
• date, if present, will be set as the published_at date.
• If published is set to true, it will publish a kind 30023 event, otherwise a kind 30024 (draft)
• The d tag (widely used as URL slug for the article) will be the filename without the .md extension

@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9

In much of the world, it is incredibly difficult to access U.S. dollars. Local currencies are often poorly managed and riddled with corruption. Billions of people demand a more reliable alternative. While the dollar has its own issues of corruption and mismanagement, it is widely regarded as superior to the fiat currencies it competes with globally. As a result, Tether has found massive success providing low cost, low friction access to dollars. Tether claims 400 million total users, is on track to add 200 million more this year, processes 8.1 million transactions daily, and facilitates $29 billion in daily transfers. Furthermore, their estimates suggest nearly 40% of users rely on it as a savings tool rather than just a transactional currency.

Tether’s rise has made the company a financial juggernaut. Last year alone, Tether raked in over $13 billion in profit, with a lean team of less than 100 employees. Their business model is elegantly simple: hold U.S. Treasuries and collect the interest. With over $113 billion in Treasuries, Tether has turned a straightforward concept into a profit machine.

Tether’s success has resulted in many competitors eager to claim a piece of the pie. This has triggered a massive venture capital grift cycle in USD tokens, with countless projects vying to dethrone Tether. Due to Tether’s entrenched network effect, these challengers face an uphill battle with little realistic chance of success. Most educated participants in the space likely recognize this reality but seem content to perpetuate the grift, hoping to cash out by dumping their equity positions on unsuspecting buyers before they realize the reality of the situation.

Historically, Tether’s greatest vulnerability has been U.S. government intervention. For over a decade, the company operated offshore with few allies in the U.S. establishment, making it a major target for regulatory action. That dynamic has shifted recently and Tether has seized the opportunity. By actively courting U.S. government support, Tether has fortified their position. This strategic move will likely cement their status as the dominant USD token for years to come.

While undeniably a great tool for the millions of users that rely on it, Tether is not without flaws. As a centralized, trusted third party, it holds the power to freeze or seize funds at its discretion. Corporate mismanagement or deliberate malpractice could also lead to massive losses at scale. In their goal of mitigating regulatory risk, Tether has deepened ties with law enforcement, mirroring some of the concerns of potential central bank digital currencies. In practice, Tether operates as a corporate CBDC alternative, collaborating with authorities to surveil and seize funds. The company proudly touts partnerships with leading surveillance firms and its own data reveals cooperation in over 1,000 law enforcement cases, with more than $2.5 billion in funds frozen.

---

The global demand for Tether is undeniable and the company’s profitability reflects its unrivaled success. Tether is owned and operated by bitcoiners and will likely continue to push forward strategic goals that help the movement as a whole. Recent efforts to mitigate the threat of U.S. government enforcement will likely solidify their network effect and stifle meaningful adoption of rival USD tokens or CBDCs. Yet, for all their achievements, Tether is simply a worse form of money than bitcoin. Tether requires trust in a centralized entity, while bitcoin can be saved or spent without permission. Furthermore, Tether is tied to the value of the US Dollar which is designed to lose purchasing power over time, while bitcoin, as a truly scarce asset, is designed to increase in purchasing power with adoption. As people awaken to the risks of Tether’s control, and the benefits bitcoin provides, bitcoin adoption will likely surpass it.

@ 00033a93:774465e5

An Italian artist just announced in the small town of Fornelli a statue of Satoshi, involving the administration in the project and the community of Fornelli in Bitcoin!

Not all heroes wear capes!

Italian article here:

https://bitcoinbeer.events/article/21

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/971872

@ c631e267:c2b78d3e

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Titelbild: Pixabay]

---

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

@ b99efe77:f3de3616

asfadfadsf

afasdfasdfsadf

Places & Transitions

• Places:

• Bla bla bla: some text

• Transitions:

• start: Initializes the system.
• logTask: bla bla bla.

petrinet ;startDay () -> working ;stopDay working -> () ;startPause working -> paused ;endPause paused -> working ;goSmoke working -> smoking ;endSmoke smoking -> working ;startEating working -> eating ;stopEating eating -> working ;startCall working -> onCall ;endCall onCall -> working ;startMeeting working -> inMeetinga ;endMeeting inMeeting -> working ;logTask working -> working

@ 21335073:a244b1ad

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Hours: Available 24 hours

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Redistributing Git with Nostr

Every time someone tries to "decentralize" Git -- like many projects tried in the past to do it with BitTorrent, IPFS, ScuttleButt or custom p2p protocols -- there is always a lurking comment: "but Git is already distributed!", and then the discussion proceeds to mention some facts about how Git supports multiple remotes and its magic syncing and merging abilities and so on.

Turns out all that is true, Git is indeed all that powerful, and yet GitHub is the big central hub that hosts basically all Git repositories in the giant world of open-source. There are some crazy people that host their stuff elsewhere, but these projects end up not being found by many people, and even when they do they suffer from lack of contributions.

Because everybody has a GitHub account it's easy to open a pull request to a repository of a project you're using if it's on GitHub (to be fair I think it's very annoying to have to clone the repository, then add it as a remote locally, push to it, then go on the web UI and click to open a pull request, then that cloned repository lurks forever in your profile unless you go through 16 screens to delete it -- but people in general seem to think it's easy).

It's much harder to do it on some random other server where some project might be hosted, because now you have to add 4 more even more annoying steps: create an account; pick a password; confirm an email address; setup SSH keys for pushing. (And I'm not even mentioning the basic impossibility of offering push access to external unknown contributors to people who want to host their own simple homemade Git server.)

At this point some may argue that we could all have accounts on GitLab, or Codeberg or wherever else, then those steps are removed. Besides not being a practical strategy this pseudo solution misses the point of being decentralized (or distributed, who knows) entirely: it's far from the ideal to force everybody to have the double of account management and SSH setup work in order to have the open-source world controlled by two shady companies instead of one.

What we want is to give every person the opportunity to host their own Git server without being ostracized. at the same time we must recognize that most people won't want to host their own servers (not even most open-source programmers!) and give everybody the ability to host their stuff on multi-tenant servers (such as GitHub) too. Importantly, though, if we allow for a random person to have a standalone Git server on a standalone server they host themselves on their wood cabin that also means any new hosting company can show up and start offering Git hosting, with or without new cool features, charging high or low or zero, and be immediately competing against GitHub or GitLab, i.e. we must remove the network-effect centralization pressure.

External contributions

The first problem we have to solve is: how can Bob contribute to Alice's repository without having an account on Alice's server?

SourceHut has reminded GitHub users that Git has always had this (for most) arcane git send-email command that is the original way to send patches, using an once-open protocol.

Turns out Nostr acts as a quite powerful email replacement and can be used to send text content just like email, therefore patches are a very good fit for Nostr event contents.

Once you get used to it and the proper UIs (or CLIs) are built sending and applying patches to and from others becomes a much easier flow than the intense clickops mixed with terminal copypasting that is interacting with GitHub (you have to clone the repository on GitHub, then update the remote URL in your local directory, then create a branch and then go back and turn that branch into a Pull Request, it's quite tiresome) that many people already dislike so much they went out of their way to build many GitHub CLI tools just so they could comment on issues and approve pull requests from their terminal.

Replacing GitHub features

Aside from being the "hub" that people use to send patches to other people's code (because no one can do the email flow anymore, justifiably), GitHub also has 3 other big features that are not directly related to Git, but that make its network-effect harder to overcome. Luckily Nostr can be used to create a new environment in which these same features are implemented in a more decentralized and healthy way.

Issues: bug reports, feature requests and general discussions

Since the "Issues" GitHub feature is just a bunch of text comments it should be very obvious that Nostr is a perfect fit for it.

I will not even mention the fact that Nostr is much better at threading comments than GitHub (which doesn't do it at all), which can generate much more productive and organized discussions (and you can opt out if you want).

Search

I use GitHub search all the time to find libraries and projects that may do something that I need, and it returns good results almost always. So if people migrated out to other code hosting providers wouldn't we lose it?

The fact is that even though we think everybody is on GitHub that is a globalist falsehood. Some projects are not on GitHub, and if we use only GitHub for search those will be missed. So even if we didn't have a Nostr Git alternative it would still be necessary to create a search engine that incorporated GitLab, Codeberg, SourceHut and whatnot.

Turns out on Nostr we can make that quite easy by not forcing anyone to integrate custom APIs or hardcoding Git provider URLs: each repository can make itself available by publishing an "announcement" event with a brief description and one or more Git URLs. That makes it easy for a search engine to index them -- and even automatically download the code and index the code (or index just README files or whatever) without a centralized platform ever having to be involved.

The relays where such announcements will be available play a role, of course, but that isn't a bad role: each announcement can be in multiple relays known for storing "public good" projects, some relays may curate only projects known to be very good according to some standards, other relays may allow any kind of garbage, which wouldn't make them good for a search engine to rely upon, but would still be useful in case one knows the exact thing (and from whom) they're searching for (the same is valid for all Nostr content, by the way, and that's where it's censorship-resistance comes from).

Continuous integration

GitHub Actions are a very hardly subsidized free-compute-for-all-paid-by-Microsoft feature, but one that isn't hard to replace at all. In fact there exists today many companies offering the same kind of service out there -- although they are mostly targeting businesses and not open-source projects, before GitHub Actions was introduced there were also many that were heavily used by open-source projects.

One problem is that these services are still heavily tied to GitHub today, they require a GitHub login, sometimes BitBucket and GitLab and whatnot, and do not allow one to paste an arbitrary Git server URL, but that isn't a thing that is very hard to change anyway, or to start from scratch. All we need are services that offer the CI/CD flows, perhaps using the same framework of GitHub Actions (although I would prefer to not use that messy garbage), and charge some few satoshis for it.

It may be the case that all the current services only support the big Git hosting platforms because they rely on their proprietary APIs, most notably the webhooks dispatched when a repository is updated, to trigger the jobs. It doesn't have to be said that Nostr can also solve that problem very easily.

@ 8125b911:a8400883

In Nostr, all data is stored as events. Decentralization is achieved by storing events on multiple relays, with signatures proving the ownership of these events. However, if you truly want to own your events, you should run your own relay to store them. Otherwise, if the relays you use fail or intentionally delete your events, you'll lose them forever.

For most people, running a relay is complex and costly. To solve this issue, I developed nostr-relay-tray, a relay that can be easily run on a personal computer and accessed over the internet.

Project URL: https://github.com/CodyTseng/nostr-relay-tray

This article will guide you through using nostr-relay-tray to run your own relay.

Download

Download the installation package for your operating system from the GitHub Release Page.

| Operating System | File Format | | --------------------- | ---------------------------------- | | Windows | nostr-relay-tray.Setup.x.x.x.exe | | macOS (Apple Silicon) | nostr-relay-tray-x.x.x-arm64.dmg | | macOS (Intel) | nostr-relay-tray-x.x.x.dmg | | Linux | You should know which one to use |

Installation

Since this app isn’t signed, you may encounter some obstacles during installation. Once installed, an ostrich icon will appear in the status bar. Click on the ostrich icon, and you'll see a menu where you can click the "Dashboard" option to open the relay's control panel for further configuration.

macOS Users:

• On first launch, go to "System Preferences > Security & Privacy" and click "Open Anyway."
• If you encounter a "damaged" message, run the following command in the terminal to remove the restrictions:

bash sudo xattr -rd com.apple.quarantine /Applications/nostr-relay-tray.app

Windows Users:

• On the security warning screen, click "More Info > Run Anyway."

Connecting

By default, nostr-relay-tray is only accessible locally through ws://localhost:4869/, which makes it quite limited. Therefore, we need to expose it to the internet.

In the control panel, click the "Proxy" tab and toggle the switch. You will then receive a "Public address" that you can use to access your relay from anywhere. It's that simple.

Next, add this address to your relay list and position it as high as possible in the list. Most clients prioritize connecting to relays that appear at the top of the list, and relays lower in the list are often ignored.

Restrictions

Next, we need to set up some restrictions to prevent the relay from storing events that are irrelevant to you and wasting storage space. nostr-relay-tray allows for flexible and fine-grained configuration of which events to accept, but some of this is more complex and will not be covered here. If you're interested, you can explore this further later.

For now, I'll introduce a simple and effective strategy: WoT (Web of Trust). You can enable this feature in the "WoT & PoW" tab. Before enabling, you'll need to input your pubkey.

There's another important parameter, Depth, which represents the relationship depth between you and others. Someone you follow has a depth of 1, someone they follow has a depth of 2, and so on.

• Setting this parameter to 0 means your relay will only accept your own events.
• Setting it to 1 means your relay will accept events from you and the people you follow.
• Setting it to 2 means your relay will accept events from you, the people you follow, and the people they follow.

Currently, the maximum value for this parameter is 2.

Conclusion

You've now successfully run your own relay and set a simple restriction to prevent it from storing irrelevant events.

If you encounter any issues during use, feel free to submit an issue on GitHub, and I'll respond as soon as possible.

Not your relay, not your events.

@ 40b9c85f:5e61b451

Introduction

Data Vending Machines (DVMs) have emerged as a crucial component of the Nostr ecosystem, offering specialized computational services to clients across the network. As defined in NIP-90, DVMs operate on an apparently simple principle: "data in, data out." They provide a marketplace for data processing where users request specific jobs (like text translation, content recommendation, or AI text generation)

While DVMs have gained significant traction, the current specification faces challenges that hinder widespread adoption and consistent implementation. This article explores some ideas on how we can apply the reflection pattern, a well established approach in RPC systems, to address these challenges and improve the DVM ecosystem's clarity, consistency, and usability.

The Current State of DVMs: Challenges and Limitations

The NIP-90 specification provides a broad framework for DVMs, but this flexibility has led to several issues:

1. Inconsistent Implementation

As noted by hzrd149 in "DVMs were a mistake" every DVM implementation tends to expect inputs in slightly different formats, even while ostensibly following the same specification. For example, a translation request DVM might expect an event ID in one particular format, while an LLM service could expect a "prompt" input that's not even specified in NIP-90.

2. Fragmented Specifications

The DVM specification reserves a range of event kinds (5000-6000), each meant for different types of computational jobs. While creating sub-specifications for each job type is being explored as a possible solution for clarity, in a decentralized and permissionless landscape like Nostr, relying solely on specification enforcement won't be effective for creating a healthy ecosystem. A more comprehensible approach is needed that works with, rather than against, the open nature of the protocol.

3. Ambiguous API Interfaces

There's no standardized way for clients to discover what parameters a specific DVM accepts, which are required versus optional, or what output format to expect. This creates uncertainty and forces developers to rely on documentation outside the protocol itself, if such documentation exists at all.

The Reflection Pattern: A Solution from RPC Systems

The reflection pattern in RPC systems offers a compelling solution to many of these challenges. At its core, reflection enables servers to provide metadata about their available services, methods, and data types at runtime, allowing clients to dynamically discover and interact with the server's API.

In established RPC frameworks like gRPC, reflection serves as a self-describing mechanism where services expose their interface definitions and requirements. In MCP reflection is used to expose the capabilities of the server, such as tools, resources, and prompts. Clients can learn about available capabilities without prior knowledge, and systems can adapt to changes without requiring rebuilds or redeployments. This standardized introspection creates a unified way to query service metadata, making tools like grpcurl possible without requiring precompiled stubs.

How Reflection Could Transform the DVM Specification

By incorporating reflection principles into the DVM specification, we could create a more coherent and predictable ecosystem. DVMs already implement some sort of reflection through the use of 'nip90params', which allow clients to discover some parameters, constraints, and features of the DVMs, such as whether they accept encryption, nutzaps, etc. However, this approach could be expanded to provide more comprehensive self-description capabilities.

1. Defined Lifecycle Phases

Similar to the Model Context Protocol (MCP), DVMs could benefit from a clear lifecycle consisting of an initialization phase and an operation phase. During initialization, the client and DVM would negotiate capabilities and exchange metadata, with the DVM providing a JSON schema containing its input requirements. nip-89 (or other) announcements can be used to bootstrap the discovery and negotiation process by providing the input schema directly. Then, during the operation phase, the client would interact with the DVM according to the negotiated schema and parameters.

2. Schema-Based Interactions

Rather than relying on rigid specifications for each job type, DVMs could self-advertise their schemas. This would allow clients to understand which parameters are required versus optional, what type validation should occur for inputs, what output formats to expect, and what payment flows are supported. By internalizing the input schema of the DVMs they wish to consume, clients gain clarity on how to interact effectively.

3. Capability Negotiation

Capability negotiation would enable DVMs to advertise their supported features, such as encryption methods, payment options, or specialized functionalities. This would allow clients to adjust their interaction approach based on the specific capabilities of each DVM they encounter.

Implementation Approach

While building DVMCP, I realized that the RPC reflection pattern used there could be beneficial for constructing DVMs in general. Since DVMs already follow an RPC style for their operation, and reflection is a natural extension of this approach, it could significantly enhance and clarify the DVM specification.

A reflection enhanced DVM protocol could work as follows: 1. Discovery: Clients discover DVMs through existing NIP-89 application handlers, input schemas could also be advertised in nip-89 announcements, making the second step unnecessary. 2. Schema Request: Clients request the DVM's input schema for the specific job type they're interested in 3. Validation: Clients validate their request against the provided schema before submission 4. Operation: The job proceeds through the standard NIP-90 flow, but with clearer expectations on both sides

Parallels with Other Protocols

This approach has proven successful in other contexts. The Model Context Protocol (MCP) implements a similar lifecycle with capability negotiation during initialization, allowing any client to communicate with any server as long as they adhere to the base protocol. MCP and DVM protocols share fundamental similarities, both aim to expose and consume computational resources through a JSON-RPC-like interface, albeit with specific differences.

gRPC's reflection service similarly allows clients to discover service definitions at runtime, enabling generic tools to work with any gRPC service without prior knowledge. In the REST API world, OpenAPI/Swagger specifications document interfaces in a way that makes them discoverable and testable.

DVMs would benefit from adopting these patterns while maintaining the decentralized, permissionless nature of Nostr.

Conclusion

I am not attempting to rewrite the DVM specification; rather, explore some ideas that could help the ecosystem improve incrementally, reducing fragmentation and making the ecosystem more comprehensible. By allowing DVMs to self describe their interfaces, we could maintain the flexibility that makes Nostr powerful while providing the structure needed for interoperability.

For developers building DVM clients or libraries, this approach would simplify consumption by providing clear expectations about inputs and outputs. For DVM operators, it would establish a standard way to communicate their service's requirements without relying on external documentation.

I am currently developing DVMCP following these patterns. Of course, DVMs and MCP servers have different details; MCP includes capabilities such as tools, resources, and prompts on the server side, as well as 'roots' and 'sampling' on the client side, creating a bidirectional way to consume capabilities. In contrast, DVMs typically function similarly to MCP tools, where you call a DVM with an input and receive an output, with each job type representing a different categorization of the work performed.

Without further ado, I hope this article has provided some insight into the potential benefits of applying the reflection pattern to the DVM specification.

@ aa8de34f:a6ffe696

19. März 2025

🔐 1. SHA-256 is Quantum-Resistant

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

🕵️♂️ 2.1 The Public Key Never Appears

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

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

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

🔄 3. Bitcoin Can Upgrade

Even if quantum computers eventually become a real threat:

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

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

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

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

---

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

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

---

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

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

---

🔄 7. The Logarithmic Difficulty Adjustment Neutralizes Threats

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

---

🔥 Final Verdict: Quantum Computers Are Too Slow for Bitcoin

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

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

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

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

@ 75eeefe8:a4a71f88

As more professionals transition to remote work, the need for sustainable and cost-effective solutions has never been greater. One of the most effective ways to reduce your ecological impact and lower energy costs is by harnessing the sun's power—specifically, solar energy.

Solar power is becoming increasingly popular among remote workers, providing a renewable energy source for residences with a home office setup. It helps reduce reliance on fossil fuels, and offers the potential for significant long-term savings.

This blog will list the benefits of using solar power in a remote home office environment. Whether you want to reduce your carbon footprint or reduce your energy expenses, the information will guide you in creating a more sustainable design for a productive home office. Choosing the Right Solar Panels Building a solar-powered home office starts with picking the right solar panels. You can choose from traditional photovoltaic panels to sleek solar shingles that blend with your roof's design.

Recent advancements in solar technology have introduced more compact and efficient panels, making it easier than ever to generate significant power, even in smaller spaces.

When choosing solar panels, prioritize efficiency ratings and durability. High-efficiency panels, such as monocrystalline options, can produce more energy with less surface area. They are ideal if you have limited roof space.

Aesthetics can also play a role, particularly if you want your home office to maintain a modern, professional appearance. For example, solar shingles offer a subtler alternative to standard panels while providing comparable energy production. Essential solar power components Setting up a fully functional solar-powered home office requires more than just panels. Below are the essential components to consider:

Inverters

Solar panels create direct current (DC), but most home appliances run on alternating current (AC). Inverters convert DC to AC, so you can use solar power. Look for high-quality inverters, such as micro-inverters, which optimize the output of each panel individually.

Batteries

Energy storage is critical because solar power is not always available. Solar batteries let you save extra energy made during the day so you can use it at night or when it is cloudy. Consider opting for lithium-ion batteries due to their high energy density, long lifespan, and relatively small size.

Mounting hardware

Proper installation is key to getting the most energy from your solar panels and making sure they can handle tough weather. Adjustable mounts let you place your panels to get the most sunlight and ensure they last over time. Benefits of Solar Power in a Home Office You may wonder: why is solar power for a home office such a big deal? Here are the reasons why: Cost savings and environmental impact One of the biggest benefits of using solar power in your home office is the potential to save a lot of money. Making your electricity can help you reduce or even eliminate your monthly energy bills.

The average owner can save between $10,000 and $30,000 over the lifespan of a solar energy system, depending on their location and system size. Plus, federal tax credits, state incentives, and net metering programs can lower both the initial and ongoing costs of going solar. Reliability and independence Solar power also provides unmatched reliability and independence, particularly in areas prone to power outages. Coupling your solar panels with a high-capacity battery storage system allows you to maintain power for essential devices during power cuts.

It becomes a critical advantage if you need to keep your computers, internet, and other tools working to stay productive.

Solar energy also frees you from relying on the power grid, which is especially helpful if you live in rural or remote areas where power may be less reliable or more expensive. Additional Tips for a Sustainable Home Office Maximize your home office with these practical ways: Complementary green technologies Consider incorporating complementary green technologies into your home office, such as:

Smart thermostats

Devices like the Nest or Ecobee learn your habits and adjust the temperature to maximize comfort while minimizing energy usage. A smart thermostat regulates heating and cooling based on your schedule, significantly reducing your energy use and costs.

Energy monitors

Tools like the Sense Home Energy Monitor help track energy usage across your home. You can identify energy-draining devices to make better decisions about allocating and conserving power and optimizing your solar system's efficiency.

LED lighting

Transitioning to LED bulbs uses less energy and makes your lights last longer. They further lower replacement costs and waste. Outdoor solar solutions Sustainability does not have to stop at your office door. The following outdoor solar-powered devices can enhance the eco-friendliness of your entire home environment:

Solar-powered garden lights

These lights use built-in solar panels to charge during the day and illuminate your outdoor spaces at night. They are perfect for adding ambiance to your yard or improving visibility along pathways without increasing your electricity bill.

Solar security cameras

Protect your property with solar-powered security cameras. They are self-sufficient and eliminate the need for extensive wiring.

Solar water features

From fountains to birdbaths, solar-powered water features add aesthetic appeal to your garden while relying entirely on renewable energy. Shine Bright at Home Embracing solar power for your home office is a smart step toward a greener, more cost-effective future. Choosing efficient solar panels, integrating essential components like inverters and batteries, and pairing them with complementary green technologies can help you create a sustainable workspace that aligns with modern, eco-conscious values.

If you're considering finding a home in Cavite, Philippines, solar energy becomes an even more valuable investment. With Cavite’s growing residential developments, eco-friendly communities, and abundant sunlight, homeowners can take full advantage of renewable energy to lower electricity costs and reduce their carbon footprint. Many new housing projects in Cavite also emphasize sustainability, making it easier to integrate solar solutions into your home.

Investing in solar power is more than a commitment to the environment—it is a long-term strategy for saving money and boosting reliability in your day-to-day work life. With these tips, you are well on your way to creating a home office that works as hard for the planet as you do.

@ a95c6243:d345522c

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

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

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

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

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

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

Digitalisierung ist der Schlüssel für Kontrolle

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Titelbild: Pixabay]

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ 8cda1daa:e9e5bdd8

Bitcoin cracked the code for money.  Now it's time to rebuild everything else.

What about identity, trust, and collaboration? What about the systems that define how we live, create, and connect?

Bitcoin gave us a blueprint to separate money from the state. But the state still owns most of your digital life. It's time for something more radical.

Welcome to the Atomic Economy - not just a technology stack, but a civil engineering project for the digital age. A complete re-architecture of society, from the individual outward.

The Problem: We Live in Digital Captivity

Let's be blunt: the modern internet is hostile to human freedom.

You don't own your identity. You don't control your data. You don't decide what you see.

Big Tech and state institutions dominate your digital life with one goal: control.

• Poisoned algorithms dictate your emotions and behavior.
• Censorship hides truth and silences dissent.
• Walled gardens lock you into systems you can't escape.
• Extractive platforms monetize your attention and creativity - without your consent.

This isn't innovation. It's digital colonization.

A Vision for Sovereign Society

The Atomic Economy proposes a new design for society - one where: - Individuals own their identity, data, and value. - Trust is contextual, not imposed. - Communities are voluntary, not manufactured by feeds. - Markets are free, not fenced. - Collaboration is peer-to-peer, not platform-mediated.

It's not a political revolution. It's a technological and social reset based on first principles: self-sovereignty, mutualism, and credible exit.

So, What Is the Atomic Economy?

The Atomic Economy is a decentralized digital society where people - not platforms - coordinate identity, trust, and value.

It's built on open protocols, real software, and the ethos of Bitcoin. It's not about abstraction - it's about architecture.

Core Principles: - Self-Sovereignty: Your keys. Your data. Your rules. - Mutual Consensus: Interactions are voluntary and trust-based. - Credible Exit: Leave any system, with your data and identity intact. - Programmable Trust: Trust is explicit, contextual, and revocable. - Circular Economies: Value flows directly between individuals - no middlemen.

The Tech Stack Behind the Vision

The Atomic Economy isn't just theory. It's a layered system with real tools:

1. Payments & Settlement

• Bitcoin & Lightning: The foundation - sound, censorship-resistant money.
• Paykit: Modular payments and settlement flows.
• Atomicity: A peer-to-peer mutual credit protocol for programmable trust and IOUs.

2. Discovery & Matching

• Pubky Core: Decentralized identity and discovery using PKARR and the DHT.
• Pubky Nexus: Indexing for a user-controlled internet.
• Semantic Social Graph: Discovery through social tagging - you are the algorithm.

3. Application Layer

• Bitkit: A self-custodial Bitcoin and Lightning wallet.
• Pubky App: Tag, publish, trade, and interact - on your terms.
• Blocktank: Liquidity services for Lightning and circular economies.
• Pubky Ring: Key-based access control and identity syncing.

These tools don't just integrate - they stack. You build trust, exchange value, and form communities with no centralized gatekeepers.

The Human Impact

This isn't about software. It's about freedom.

• Empowered Individuals: Control your own narrative, value, and destiny.
• Voluntary Communities: Build trust on shared values, not enforced norms.
• Economic Freedom: Trade without permission, borders, or middlemen.
• Creative Renaissance: Innovation and art flourish in open, censorship-resistant systems.

The Atomic Economy doesn't just fix the web. It frees the web.

Why Bitcoiners Should Care

If you believe in Bitcoin, you already believe in the Atomic Economy - you just haven't seen the full map yet.

• It extends Bitcoin's principles beyond money: into identity, trust, coordination.
• It defends freedom where Bitcoin leaves off: in content, community, and commerce.
• It offers a credible exit from every centralized system you still rely on.
• It's how we win - not just economically, but culturally and socially.

This isn't "web3." This isn't another layer of grift. It's the Bitcoin future - fully realized.

Join the Atomic Revolution

• If you're a builder: fork the code, remix the ideas, expand the protocols.
• If you're a user: adopt Bitkit, use Pubky, exit the digital plantation.
• If you're an advocate: share the vision. Help people imagine a free society again.

Bitcoin promised a revolution. The Atomic Economy delivers it.

Let's reclaim society, one key at a time.

Learn more and build with us at Synonym.to.

@ a95c6243:d345522c

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Titelbild: Tag des Sieges]

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9

Bitcoin 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.

@ dd664d5e:5633d319

Speak your truth, Nostr

I think that there's a difference in the decisions people make when they're True Believers, and when they've just been hired to do something, or they arrived much later and don't really get the point of the decisions. It's that way with any organization controlled by a protocol, such as a constitution, basic law, canon, or core specification.

The True Believers all eventually look like idiotic fanatics who can't "keep up with the cool kids", but they arrived there because they were looking for a solution to a particular problem that they were having. If you then change the solution, to solve some other problem, while destroying the solution that attracted them to the project, in the first place, then they'll be unhappy about it.

Being cool doesn't automatically make you right about everything, but you can simply have enough might to "change" what is right. Shift the goalposts so that the problem you are trying to solve is The Most Pressing Problem. Everyone still focused on the Original Problem is reduced to protesting and being called "difficult", "unhelpful", "uncooperative", "rude".

Why are they protesting? Why don't they just go with the flow? Look at us, we never protest. We are so nice! We're totally happy with the way things are going. We are always polite and elegant and regal. Only rude people complain.

Good vibes only.

@ a95c6243:d345522c

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Titelbild: Pixabay]

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ 6e64b83c:94102ee8

How to Run Your Own Nostr Relay on Android with Cloudflare Domain

Prerequisites

1. Install Citrine on your Android device:
2. Visit https://github.com/greenart7c3/Citrine/releases
3. Download the latest release using:
   • zap.store
   • Obtainium
   • F-Droid
   • Or download the APK directly

4. Note: You may need to enable "Install from Unknown Sources" in your Android settings

5. Domain Requirements:

6. Purchase a domain if you don't have one

7. Transfer your domain to Cloudflare if it's not already there (for free SSL certificates and cloudflared support)

8. Tools to use:

9. nak (the nostr army knife):
   • Download from https://github.com/fiatjaf/nak/releases
   • Installation steps:

   • For Linux/macOS: ```bash # Download the appropriate version for your system wget https://github.com/fiatjaf/nak/releases/latest/download/nak-linux-amd64 # for Linux # or wget https://github.com/fiatjaf/nak/releases/latest/download/nak-darwin-amd64 # for macOS

     # Make it executable chmod +x nak-*

     # Move to a directory in your PATH sudo mv nak-* /usr/local/bin/nak - For Windows:batch # Download the Windows version curl -L -o nak.exe https://github.com/fiatjaf/nak/releases/latest/download/nak-windows-amd64.exe

     # Move to a directory in your PATH (e.g., C:\Windows) move nak.exe C:\Windows\nak.exe - Verify installation:bash nak --version ```

Setting Up Citrine

1. Open the Citrine app
2. Start the server
3. You'll see it running on ws://127.0.0.1:4869 (local network only)
4. Go to settings and paste your npub into "Accept events signed by" inbox and press the + button. This prevents others from publishing events to your personal relay.

Installing Required Tools

1. Install Termux from Google Play Store
2. Open Termux and run:

bash pkg update && pkg install wget wget https://github.com/cloudflare/cloudflared/releases/latest/download/cloudflared-linux-arm64.deb dpkg -i cloudflared-linux-arm64.deb

Cloudflare Authentication

1. Run the authentication command: bash cloudflared tunnel login
2. Follow the instructions:
3. Copy the provided URL to your browser
4. Log in to your Cloudflare account
5. If the URL expires, copy it again after logging in

Creating the Tunnel

1. Create a new tunnel: bash cloudflared tunnel create <TUNNEL_NAME>
2. Choose any name you prefer for your tunnel

3. Copy the tunnel ID after creating the tunnel

4. Create and configure the tunnel config: bash touch ~/.cloudflared/config.yml nano ~/.cloudflared/config.yml

5. Add this configuration (replace the placeholders with your values): ```yaml tunnel: credentials-file: /data/data/com.termux/files/home/.cloudflared/.json ingress:

6. hostname: nostr.yourdomain.com service: ws://localhost:4869
7. service: http_status:404 ```
8. Note: In nano editor:
   • CTRL+O and Enter to save
   • CTRL+X to exit

9. Note: Check the credentials file path in the logs

10. Validate your configuration: bash cloudflared tunnel validate

11. Start the tunnel: bash cloudflared tunnel run my-relay

Preventing Android from Killing the Tunnel

Run these commands to maintain tunnel stability: bash date && apt install termux-tools && termux-setup-storage && termux-wake-lock echo "nameserver 1.1.1.1" > $PREFIX/etc/resolv.conf

Tip: You can open multiple Termux sessions by swiping from the left edge of the screen while keeping your tunnel process running.

Updating Your Outbox Model Relays

Once your relay is running and accessible via your domain, you'll want to update your relay list in the Nostr network. This ensures other clients know about your relay and can connect to it.

Decoding npub (Public Key)

Private keys (nsec) and public keys (npub) are encoded in bech32 format, which includes: - A prefix (like nsec1, npub1 etc.) - The encoded data - A checksum

This format makes keys: - Easy to distinguish - Hard to copy incorrectly

However, most tools require these keys in hexadecimal (hex) format.

To decode an npub string to its hex format:

bash nak decode nostr:npub1dejts0qlva8mqzjlrxqkc2tmvs2t7elszky5upxaf3jha9qs9m5q605uc4

Change it with your own npub.

bash { "pubkey": "6e64b83c1f674fb00a5f19816c297b6414bf67f015894e04dd4c657e94102ee8" }

Copy the pubkey value in quotes.

Create a kind 10002 event with your relay list:

• Include your new relay with write permissions
• Include other relays you want to read from and write to, omit 3rd parameter to make it both read and write

Example format:

json { "kind": 10002, "tags": [ ["r", "wss://your-relay-domain.com", "write"], ["r", "wss://eden.nostr.land/"], ["r", "wss://nos.lol/"], ["r", "wss://nostr.bitcoiner.social/"], ["r", "wss://nostr.mom/"], ["r", "wss://relay.primal.net/"], ["r", "wss://nostr.wine/", "read"], ["r", "wss://relay.damus.io/"], ["r", "wss://relay.nostr.band/"], ["r", "wss://relay.snort.social/"] ], "content": "" }

Save it to a file called event.json

Note: Add or remove any relays you want. To check your existing 10002 relays: - Visit https://nostr.band/?q=by%3Anpub1dejts0qlva8mqzjlrxqkc2tmvs2t7elszky5upxaf3jha9qs9m5q605uc4+++kind%3A10002 - nostr.band is an indexing service, it probably has your relay list. - Replace npub1xxx in the URL with your own npub - Click "VIEW JSON" from the menu to see the raw event - Or use the nak tool if you know the relays bash nak req -k 10002 -a <your-pubkey> wss://relay1.com wss://relay2.com

Replace `<your-pubkey>` with your public key in hex format (you can get it using `nak decode <your-npub>`)

1. Sign and publish the event:
2. Use a Nostr client that supports kind 10002 events
3. Or use the nak command-line tool: bash nak event --sec ncryptsec1... wss://relay1.com wss://relay2.com $(cat event.json)

Important Security Notes: 1. Never share your nsec (private key) with anyone 2. Consider using NIP-49 encrypted keys for better security 3. Never paste your nsec or private key into the terminal. The command will be saved in your shell history, exposing your private key. To clear the command history: - For bash: use history -c - For zsh: use fc -W to write history to file, then fc -p to read it back - Or manually edit your shell history file (e.g., ~/.zsh_history or ~/.bash_history) 4. if you're using zsh, use fc -p to prevent the next command from being saved to history 5. Or temporarily disable history before running sensitive commands:

bash unset HISTFILE nak key encrypt ... set HISTFILE

How to securely create NIP-49 encypted private key

```bash

Read your private key (input will be hidden)

read -s SECRET

Read your password (input will be hidden)

read -s PASSWORD

encrypt command

echo "$SECRET" | nak key encrypt "$PASSWORD"

copy and paste the ncryptsec1 text from the output

read -s ENCRYPTED nak key decrypt "$ENCRYPTED"

clear variables from memory

unset SECRET PASSWORD ENCRYPTED ```

On a Windows command line, to read from stdin and use the variables in nak commands, you can use a combination of set /p to read input and then use those variables in your command. Here's an example:

```bash @echo off set /p "SECRET=Enter your secret key: " set /p "PASSWORD=Enter your password: "

echo %SECRET%| nak key encrypt %PASSWORD%

:: Clear the sensitive variables set "SECRET=" set "PASSWORD=" ```

If your key starts with ncryptsec1, the nak tool will securely prompt you for a password when using the --sec parameter, unless the command is used with a pipe < > or |.

bash nak event --sec ncryptsec1... wss://relay1.com wss://relay2.com $(cat event.json)

1. Verify the event was published:
2. Check if your relay list is visible on other relays

3. Use the nak tool to fetch your kind 10002 events: bash nak req -k 10002 -a <your-pubkey> wss://relay1.com wss://relay2.com

4. Testing your relay:

5. Try connecting to your relay using different Nostr clients
6. Verify you can both read from and write to your relay
7. Check if events are being properly stored and retrieved
8. Tip: Use multiple Nostr clients to test different aspects of your relay

Note: If anyone in the community has a more efficient method of doing things like updating outbox relays, please share your insights in the comments. Your expertise would be greatly appreciated!

@ 502ab02a:a2860397

แค่ลดการ spike แต่ไม่ได้หายไปไหน เฮียขอเล่าเรื่องผับ... ไม่ใช่ผับที่มีไฟสลัว ๆ เสียงเบสแน่น ๆ หรอกนะ แต่เป็น “ผับร่างกาย” ที่เปิดประตูรับแขกชื่อ “น้ำตาล” เข้าไปทุกวันแบบไม่รู้ตัว

ในโลกของสุขภาพ น้ำตาลก็เหมือนวัยรุ่นที่ชอบเข้าไปในผับหลังมืดค่ำทุกคืน ส่วน อินซูลิน ก็คือพีอาร์หน้าผับ มีหน้าที่เปิดประตูให้เด็กพวกนี้เข้าไปในเซลล์ พอวัยรุ่นแห่มาพร้อมกัน อินซูลินก็ต้องเร่งเปิดประตูรัว ๆ นั่นแหละที่เขาเรียกกันว่า insulin spike

หลายคนรู้ว่า spike บ่อย ๆ ไม่ดี เลยพยายามหาวิธี “ลด spike” บางคนดื่มน้ำส้มสายชูแอปเปิ้ล (ACV) บางคนกินผักใยสูงก่อนอาหาร บางคนจัดซุปใส่ไฟเบอร์แบบคุม ๆ มาเสริม เฮียบอกเลยว่า “ดี” อยู่ครับ... แต่ หลายคนเข้าใจว่า การลด spike เท่ากับการลดน้ำตาล จริง ๆ แล้วน้ำตาลไม่ได้หายไปไหนเลย มันแค่ เดินเข้าช้าลงเท่านั้นเอง

ลองนึกภาพตามนะเฮียจะเล่าให้ฟัง...เอาแบบเห็นภาพร่างนะ เปรียบเปรยเปรียบเปรย

ผับเปิด... วัยรุ่นต่อแถว ทุกครั้งที่เรากินคาร์บ โดยเฉพาะแป้งหรือของหวาน ร่างกายก็จะแปลงมันเป็นกลูโคส หรือน้ำตาลในกระแสเลือด เจ้ากลูโคสเหล่านี้ก็จะมาต่อแถวเข้า “ผับเซลล์” พอคนเยอะ อินซูลินก็ต้องออกมาทำงานหนัก พาแต่ละคนเข้าไปจัดสรรให้เรียบร้อย ทีนี้ถ้าน้ำตาลมาก และมาพร้อมกัน อินซูลินก็ต้อง “spike” คือพุ่งขึ้นเพื่อจัดการด่วน ซึ่งถ้าร่างกายทำแบบนี้บ่อย ๆ ไม่ดีเลย เพราะมันทำให้ระบบเสื่อม เกิด ภาวะดื้ออินซูลิน นึภภาพพนักงานทำงานกันแบบ ปาร์ตี้คืนวันสงกรานต์ในผับย่าน อาร์ซีเอ หรือข้าวสาร สุดท้ายก็มักนำไปสู่เบาหวาน ความอ้วน และความเสื่อมแบบค่อยเป็นค่อยไป

ACV, ไฟเบอร์ช่วยไหม? ช่วย แต่ไม่ได้ลดน้ำตาล เทคนิคกินผักก่อน กินน้ำส้มสายชู หรือเพิ่มไฟเบอร์สูง ๆ ก่อนคาร์บ มันช่วย ชะลอการดูดซึม ของน้ำตาลจริง ๆ เหมือนกับมีการ์ดหน้าผับมาตรวจบัตรก่อนเข้าทีละคน แถวมันเลยไม่กรูกันเข้าแบบม็อบ แต่มาเรื่อย ๆ ทีละคน ๆ พีอาร์หน้าประตูก็จัดการระบบได้เบาแรงขึ้น

ฟังดูดีใช่ไหม? ใช่... แต่ ไม่ได้แปลว่าวัยรุ่นเหล่านั้นจะไม่เข้าผับ สุดท้าย พวกเขาก็เข้าไปครบเหมือนเดิมอยู่ดี นั่นคือ ร่างกายก็ยังได้รับน้ำตาลเท่าเดิมนั่นแหละ ... แค่เข้าช้าลงเท่านั้น

แล้วมันดีตรงไหนล่ะ ถ้ามันไม่ได้ลดน้ำตาล? มันดีตรงที่ spike จะไม่พุ่งเร็ว พอชะลอได้ อินซูลินก็ไม่ต้องทำงานแบบโหม ซึ่งในระยะสั้น มันช่วยให้ระดับน้ำตาลในเลือดไม่แกว่งจัดเกินไป ดีต่อสมอง ไม่ทำให้ง่วงหลังมื้ออาหาร

แต่ถ้าเรายังเลือกกินอาหารที่แปลงเป็นน้ำตาลเยอะ ๆ อยู่ดี แม้จะกินช้าลง ยังไงน้ำตาลก็สะสม เหมือนวัยรุ่นที่เข้าผับช้าลง แต่จำนวนก็เท่าเดิม เฮียว่าเราควรหันมาถามตัวเองว่า...

แล้วเราจะเปิดผับให้ใครบ้างดีล่ะ? การจัดการ spike ที่ดีที่สุดไม่ใช่แค่ “ชะลอ” แต่คือ “ลดปริมาณกลูโคสตั้งแต่ต้นทาง” เลือกกินของที่ไม่สร้างน้ำตาลพรึ่บพรั่บ เช่น real food ที่มีไขมันดีและโปรตีนสูง อย่างไข่ เนื้อสัตว์ เครื่องใน น้ำมันสัตว์ น้ำมันสกัดเย็นที่มีทั้งพฤกษเคมีและพลังงานที่ดี ฯลฯ ซึ่งเป็นการบริหารซอย จำกัดจำนวนนักเที่ยวแต่แรก เพราะพวกนี้ไม่พาน้ำตาลมากองหน้าประตูเหมือนขนมปังโพรเซส น้ำหวานจัดๆ หรือเค้กแป้งขัดสีน้ำตาลครีมเยอะๆ

เห็นไหมว่า เฮียไม่ได้บอกให้เลิกกินของอร่อยเลยนะ แต่จะบอกว่า... ถ้าเราเข้าใจว่า การลด spike ไม่ใช่การลดน้ำตาล เราจะวางแผนกินได้ดีกว่าเดิมเยอะ

การลด spike อินซูลินด้วยไฟเบอร์หรือ ACV เป็นวิธี ช่วยผ่อนแรง ให้ร่างกาย แต่ไม่ใช่การ “ลดปริมาณน้ำตาลที่เข้าสู่ร่างกาย” น้ำตาลยังคงเข้าเท่าเดิม และถ้าทำแบบนี้ทุกวัน ทุกมื้อ ก็เหมือนเปิดผับรับวัยรุ่นทุกคืน ต่อให้เข้าช้า แต่ก็ยังเข้าครบอยู่ดี

ถ้าอยากมีสุขภาพดีจริง ๆ ไม่ใช่แค่ใส่การ์ดคอยคุม แต่ต้องคัดตั้งแต่ต้นซอยเลยว่าซอยนี้เข้าได้แค่ไหนตั้งแต่แรก ถ้าแข็งแรงซอยใหญ่แบบทองหล่อทั้งซอย ก็รับนักเที่ยวได้มาก ถ้าป่วย ซอยเล็กแบบซอยแจ่มจันทร์ ก็รับนักเที่ยวได้น้อย ระหว่างนี้ถ้าอยากจะขยายซอยเปิดรับนักเที่ยว คุณจะคุมสารอาหาร ออกกำลังกาย ตากแดด พักผ่อน ยังไงก็เรื่องของคุณแล้ว เลือกตามจริต

เลือกกินแบบรู้ต้นทาง... อินซูลินจะได้พัก ร่างกายจะได้หายใจและสุขภาพเราจะได้แข็งแรงแบบไม่ต้องเหนื่อยกับการควบคุมทีละมื้อทุกวัน และจงจำไว้เสมอว่า ร่างกายนั้นเป็นความสัมพันธ์อันลึกล้ำพัวพันยิ่งกว่า threesome หลายเท่าตัว ยิ่งศึกษาจะยิ่งรู้ว่า การมองเพียงจุดใดจุดหนึ่งคือความผิดพลาดแบบไม่รู้ตัวได้ง่ายๆเลยครับ ดังนั้นจึงเห็นว่า เราควรแยกเรื่องของการ "ลดการ spike" ออกจาก "ลดปริมาณน้ำตาลเข้าร่าง" เพราะมันแค่ชะลอแต่ไม่ได้ทำให้ที่กินเข้าไปหายไปไหน

ร่างกายมันเก่งนะครับ คุณคิดว่าลักไก่มันง่ายขนาดนั้นเลยเหรอ

พักเรื่องน้ำมันไว้วันนึง พอดีมีคนถามต่อเนื่องมาจาก ACV #pirateketo #กูต้องรู้มั๊ย #ม้วนหางสิลูกแค่ลดการ spike แต่ไม่ได้หายไปไหน เฮียขอเล่าเรื่องผับ... ไม่ใช่ผับที่มีไฟสลัว ๆ เสียงเบสแน่น ๆ หรอกนะ แต่เป็น “ผับร่างกาย” ที่เปิดประตูรับแขกชื่อ “น้ำตาล” เข้าไปทุกวันแบบไม่รู้ตัว

ในโลกของสุขภาพ น้ำตาลก็เหมือนวัยรุ่นที่ชอบเข้าไปในผับหลังมืดค่ำทุกคืน ส่วน อินซูลิน ก็คือพีอาร์หน้าผับ มีหน้าที่เปิดประตูให้เด็กพวกนี้เข้าไปในเซลล์ พอวัยรุ่นแห่มาพร้อมกัน อินซูลินก็ต้องเร่งเปิดประตูรัว ๆ นั่นแหละที่เขาเรียกกันว่า insulin spike

หลายคนรู้ว่า spike บ่อย ๆ ไม่ดี เลยพยายามหาวิธี “ลด spike” บางคนดื่มน้ำส้มสายชูแอปเปิ้ล (ACV) บางคนกินผักใยสูงก่อนอาหาร บางคนจัดซุปใส่ไฟเบอร์แบบคุม ๆ มาเสริม เฮียบอกเลยว่า “ดี” อยู่ครับ... แต่ หลายคนเข้าใจว่า การลด spike เท่ากับการลดน้ำตาล จริง ๆ แล้วน้ำตาลไม่ได้หายไปไหนเลย มันแค่ เดินเข้าช้าลงเท่านั้นเอง

ลองนึกภาพตามนะเฮียจะเล่าให้ฟัง...เอาแบบเห็นภาพร่างนะ เปรียบเปรยเปรียบเปรย

ผับเปิด... วัยรุ่นต่อแถว ทุกครั้งที่เรากินคาร์บ โดยเฉพาะแป้งหรือของหวาน ร่างกายก็จะแปลงมันเป็นกลูโคส หรือน้ำตาลในกระแสเลือด เจ้ากลูโคสเหล่านี้ก็จะมาต่อแถวเข้า “ผับเซลล์” พอคนเยอะ อินซูลินก็ต้องออกมาทำงานหนัก พาแต่ละคนเข้าไปจัดสรรให้เรียบร้อย ทีนี้ถ้าน้ำตาลมาก และมาพร้อมกัน อินซูลินก็ต้อง “spike” คือพุ่งขึ้นเพื่อจัดการด่วน ซึ่งถ้าร่างกายทำแบบนี้บ่อย ๆ ไม่ดีเลย เพราะมันทำให้ระบบเสื่อม เกิด ภาวะดื้ออินซูลิน นึภภาพพนักงานทำงานกันแบบ ปาร์ตี้คืนวันสงกรานต์ในผับย่าน อาร์ซีเอ หรือข้าวสาร สุดท้ายก็มักนำไปสู่เบาหวาน ความอ้วน และความเสื่อมแบบค่อยเป็นค่อยไป

ACV, ไฟเบอร์ช่วยไหม? ช่วย แต่ไม่ได้ลดน้ำตาล เทคนิคกินผักก่อน กินน้ำส้มสายชู หรือเพิ่มไฟเบอร์สูง ๆ ก่อนคาร์บ มันช่วย ชะลอการดูดซึม ของน้ำตาลจริง ๆ เหมือนกับมีการ์ดหน้าผับมาตรวจบัตรก่อนเข้าทีละคน แถวมันเลยไม่กรูกันเข้าแบบม็อบ แต่มาเรื่อย ๆ ทีละคน ๆ พีอาร์หน้าประตูก็จัดการระบบได้เบาแรงขึ้น

ฟังดูดีใช่ไหม? ใช่... แต่ ไม่ได้แปลว่าวัยรุ่นเหล่านั้นจะไม่เข้าผับ สุดท้าย พวกเขาก็เข้าไปครบเหมือนเดิมอยู่ดี นั่นคือ ร่างกายก็ยังได้รับน้ำตาลเท่าเดิมนั่นแหละ ... แค่เข้าช้าลงเท่านั้น

แล้วมันดีตรงไหนล่ะ ถ้ามันไม่ได้ลดน้ำตาล? มันดีตรงที่ spike จะไม่พุ่งเร็ว พอชะลอได้ อินซูลินก็ไม่ต้องทำงานแบบโหม ซึ่งในระยะสั้น มันช่วยให้ระดับน้ำตาลในเลือดไม่แกว่งจัดเกินไป ดีต่อสมอง ไม่ทำให้ง่วงหลังมื้ออาหาร

แต่ถ้าเรายังเลือกกินอาหารที่แปลงเป็นน้ำตาลเยอะ ๆ อยู่ดี แม้จะกินช้าลง ยังไงน้ำตาลก็สะสม เหมือนวัยรุ่นที่เข้าผับช้าลง แต่จำนวนก็เท่าเดิม เฮียว่าเราควรหันมาถามตัวเองว่า...

แล้วเราจะเปิดผับให้ใครบ้างดีล่ะ? การจัดการ spike ที่ดีที่สุดไม่ใช่แค่ “ชะลอ” แต่คือ “ลดปริมาณกลูโคสตั้งแต่ต้นทาง” เลือกกินของที่ไม่สร้างน้ำตาลพรึ่บพรั่บ เช่น real food ที่มีไขมันดีและโปรตีนสูง อย่างไข่ เนื้อสัตว์ เครื่องใน น้ำมันสัตว์ น้ำมันสกัดเย็นที่มีทั้งพฤกษเคมีและพลังงานที่ดี ฯลฯ ซึ่งเป็นการบริหารซอย จำกัดจำนวนนักเที่ยวแต่แรก เพราะพวกนี้ไม่พาน้ำตาลมากองหน้าประตูเหมือนขนมปังโพรเซส น้ำหวานจัดๆ หรือเค้กแป้งขัดสีน้ำตาลครีมเยอะๆ

เห็นไหมว่า เฮียไม่ได้บอกให้เลิกกินของอร่อยเลยนะ แต่จะบอกว่า... ถ้าเราเข้าใจว่า การลด spike ไม่ใช่การลดน้ำตาล เราจะวางแผนกินได้ดีกว่าเดิมเยอะ

การลด spike อินซูลินด้วยไฟเบอร์หรือ ACV เป็นวิธี ช่วยผ่อนแรง ให้ร่างกาย แต่ไม่ใช่การ “ลดปริมาณน้ำตาลที่เข้าสู่ร่างกาย” น้ำตาลยังคงเข้าเท่าเดิม และถ้าทำแบบนี้ทุกวัน ทุกมื้อ ก็เหมือนเปิดผับรับวัยรุ่นทุกคืน ต่อให้เข้าช้า แต่ก็ยังเข้าครบอยู่ดี

ถ้าอยากมีสุขภาพดีจริง ๆ ไม่ใช่แค่ใส่การ์ดคอยคุม แต่ต้องคัดตั้งแต่ต้นซอยเลยว่าซอยนี้เข้าได้แค่ไหนตั้งแต่แรก ถ้าแข็งแรงซอยใหญ่แบบทองหล่อทั้งซอย ก็รับนักเที่ยวได้มาก ถ้าป่วย ซอยเล็กแบบซอยแจ่มจันทร์ ก็รับนักเที่ยวได้น้อย ระหว่างนี้ถ้าอยากจะขยายซอยเปิดรับนักเที่ยว คุณจะคุมสารอาหาร ออกกำลังกาย ตากแดด พักผ่อน ยังไงก็เรื่องของคุณแล้ว เลือกตามจริต

เลือกกินแบบรู้ต้นทาง... อินซูลินจะได้พัก ร่างกายจะได้หายใจและสุขภาพเราจะได้แข็งแรงแบบไม่ต้องเหนื่อยกับการควบคุมทีละมื้อทุกวัน และจงจำไว้เสมอว่า ร่างกายนั้นเป็นความสัมพันธ์อันลึกล้ำพัวพันยิ่งกว่า threesome หลายเท่าตัว ยิ่งศึกษาจะยิ่งรู้ว่า การมองเพียงจุดใดจุดหนึ่งคือความผิดพลาดแบบไม่รู้ตัวได้ง่ายๆเลยครับ ดังนั้นจึงเห็นว่า เราควรแยกเรื่องของการ "ลดการ spike" ออกจาก "ลดปริมาณน้ำตาลเข้าร่าง" เพราะมันแค่ชะลอแต่ไม่ได้ทำให้ที่กินเข้าไปหายไปไหน

ร่างกายมันเก่งนะครับ คุณคิดว่าลักไก่มันง่ายขนาดนั้นเลยเหรอ

พักเรื่องน้ำมันไว้วันนึง พอดีมีคนถามต่อเนื่องมาจาก ACV #pirateketo #กูต้องรู้มั๊ย #ม้วนหางสิลูก #siamstr

@ a95c6243:d345522c

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Titelbild: Screenshot OffGuardian]

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ 9bde4214:06ca052b

"It's gonna be permissionless or hell."

Gigi and gzuuus are vibing towards dystopia.

Books & articles mentioned:

• AI 2027
• DVMs were a mistake
• Careless People by Sarah Wynn-Williams
• Takedown by Laila michelwait
• The Ultimate Resource by Julian L. Simon
• Harry Potter by J.K. Rowling
• Momo by Michael Ende

In this dialogue:

• Pablo's Roo Setup
• Tech Hype Cycles
• AI 2027
• Prompt injection and other attacks
• Goose and DVMCP
• Cursor vs Roo Code
• Staying in control thanks to Amber and signing delegation
• Is YOLO mode here to stay?
• What agents to trust?
• What MCP tools to trust?
• What code snippets to trust?
• Everyone will run into the issues of trust and micropayments
• Nostr solves Web of Trust & micropayments natively
• Minimalistic & open usually wins
• DVMCP exists thanks to Totem
• Relays as Tamagochis
• Agents aren't nostr experts, at least not right now
• Fix a mistake once & it's fixed forever
• Giving long-term memory to LLMs
• RAG Databases signed by domain experts
• Human-agent hybrids & Chess
• Nostr beating heart
• Pluggable context & experts
• "You never need an API key for anything"
• Sats and social signaling
• Difficulty-adjusted PoW as a rare-limiting mechanism
• Certificate authorities and centralization
• No solutions to policing speech!
• OAuth and how it centralized
• Login with nostr
• Closed vs open-source models
• Tiny models vs large models
• The minions protocol (Stanford paper)
• Generalist models vs specialized models
• Local compute & encrypted queries
• Blinded compute
• "In the eyes of the state, agents aren't people"
• Agents need identity and money; nostr provides both
• "It's gonna be permissionless or hell"
• We already have marketplaces for MCP stuff, code snippets, and other things
• Most great stuff came from marketplaces (browsers, games, etc)
• Zapstore shows that this is already working
• At scale, central control never works. There's plenty scams and viruses in the app stores.
• Using nostr to archive your user-generated content
• HAVEN, blossom, novia
• The switcharoo from advertisements to training data
• What is Truth?
• What is Real?
• "We're vibing into dystopia"
• Who should be the arbiter of Truth?
• First Amendment & why the Logos is sacred
• Silicon Valley AI bros arrogantly dismiss wisdom and philosophy
• Suicide rates & the meaning crisis
• Are LLMs symbiotic or parasitic?
• The Amish got it right
• Are we gonna make it?
• Careless People by Sarah Wynn-Williams
• Takedown by Laila michelwait
• Harry Potter dementors & Momo's time thieves
• Facebook & Google as non-human (superhuman) agents
• Zapping as a conscious action
• Privacy and the internet
• Plausible deniability thanks to generative models
• Google glasses, glassholes, and Meta's Ray Ben's
• People crave realness
• Bitcoin is the realest money we ever had
• Nostr allows for real and honest expression
• How do we find out what's real?
• Constraints, policing, and chilling effects
• Jesus' plans for DVMCP
• Hzrd's article on how DVMs are broken (DVMs were a mistake)
• Don't believe the hype
• DVMs pre-date MCP tools
• Data Vending Machines were supposed to be stupid: put coin in, get stuff out.
• Self-healing vibe-coding
• IP addresses as scarce assets
• Atomic swaps and the ASS protocol
• More marketplaces, less silos
• The intensity of #SovEng and the last 6 weeks
• If you can vibe-code everything, why build anything?
• Time, the ultimate resource
• What are the LLMs allowed to think?
• Natural language interfaces are inherently dialogical
• Sovereign Engineering is dialogical too

@ 4925ea33:025410d8

1. O que é um Aromaterapeuta?

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

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

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

---

2. Como um Aromaterapeuta Pode Ajudar?

Você pode procurar um aromaterapeuta para diferentes necessidades, como:

✔ Questões Emocionais e Psicológicas

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

Apoio na redução do estresse, ansiedade e insônia.

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

✔ Questões Físicas

Dores musculares e articulares.

Problemas respiratórios como rinite, sinusite e tosse.

Distúrbios digestivos leves.

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

✔ Saúde da Pele e Cabelos

Tratamento para acne, dermatites e psoríase.

Cuidados com o envelhecimento precoce da pele.

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

✔ Bem-estar e Qualidade de Vida

Melhora da concentração e foco, aumentando a produtividade.

Estímulo da disposição e energia.

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

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

---

3. Como Funciona uma Consulta com um Aromaterapeuta?

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

✔ Anamnese (Entrevista Inicial)

Perguntas sobre saúde física, emocional e estilo de vida.

Levantamento de sintomas, histórico médico e possíveis alergias.

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

✔ Escolha dos Óleos Essenciais

Seleção dos óleos mais indicados para o caso.

Consideração das propriedades terapêuticas, contraindicações e combinações seguras.

✔ Definição do Método de Uso

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

Inalação: difusores, colares aromáticos, vaporização.

Uso tópico: massagens, óleos corporais, compressas.

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

✔ Plano de Acompanhamento

Instruções detalhadas sobre o uso correto dos óleos essenciais.

Orientação sobre frequência e duração do tratamento.

Possibilidade de retorno para ajustes no protocolo.

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

---

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

@ ed5774ac:45611c5c

April 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.

@ 56cd780f:cbde8b29

[Test3] Trying to show subtitle

Is it actually called “summary”?

@ 6e0ea5d6:0327f353

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The husband agreed.

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

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

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

A toast to our family!

@ 30b99916:3cc6e3fe

btcpayserver #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

@ 56cd780f:cbde8b29

A few weeks ago, I ran into an old friend at a coffee shop. We hadn’t spoken in years, and within five minutes, she said something I’ve heard countless times:

“I just feel like I’m so behind.”

Behind who? Behind what?

There’s this idea—quiet, nagging, oddly universal—that we’re all somehow in a race we didn’t sign up for. That we’re supposed to have hit certain milestones by certain ages. That if we’re not married, promoted, rich, settled, happy (and photogenic) by 30 or 40 or pick your poison, then we’ve failed some invisible test.

Where did this come from?

Some of it’s cultural, obviously. Social media compresses timelines. You’re 27, doom-scrolling, and suddenly someone from high school just IPO’d their startup and got engaged in Rome. Another just bought a house with a kitchen island the size of a small country. You wonder if you missed a memo.

But beneath that, there’s something deeper. A belief that life is linear. That it should look like a staircase: school, job, marriage, house, kids, success. But real life? It’s a squiggle. A mess. A beautiful disaster.

Here’s the truth: You’re not behind. There’s no schedule. There’s only your path, and the courage it takes to stay on it—even when it looks wildly different from everyone else’s.

I say this as someone who has taken the “scenic route.” I changed careers in my 30s. I moved cities on a hunch. I dropped things that looked great on paper because they felt wrong in my gut. I’ve had seasons of momentum and seasons of stuckness. Both were necessary.

“Catching up” assumes there’s a fixed destination. But what if there isn’t? What if the point isn’t arrival, but presence? Progress that feels real, not performative?

If you need a permission slip to stop comparing, let this be it.

You’re not late. You’re not early.
You’re right on time.

@ a95c6243:d345522c

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ a95c6243:d345522c

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ a95c6243:d345522c

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ 005bc4de:ef11e1a2

How does MSTR buy bitcoin without bumping the price?

Michael Saylor buys bitcoin and he has a handy tool to track his purchases, at, well, https://saylortracker.com

Mondays have been Saylor's buy-days, and rumors are that he may be at it again.

Yet, with all the mega-buying, why does it seem like the price doesn't jump? This is a question that comes to my mind seemingly each week now with the next MSTR buy.

Grok AI seems to imply that even though Saylor's purchases are huge, they're still not big enough to move the market. Average daily volume traded for BTC seems to be in the $15 billion upwards to $60 billion. So, Saylor's 1 to 2 or 4 billion dollar purchases evidently still aren't enough to eat up the order book.

This is a little hard to swallow considering that Grok estimated, "MicroStrategy owns approximately 2.81% of all Bitcoin in circulation and 2.64% of the total Bitcoin supply that will ever exist." I guess that other 97% is just moving their bitcoin around, back-and-forth?

The standard answer I've heard as to why the market doesn't move has been, "Oh, MSTR buys bitcoin over-the-counter, not off of exchanges where the prices come from."

That's a simple elevator-ride one sentence answer that seems plausible. I could meet someone on the street and say, "Hey, you got any bitcoin and do you wanna sell it?" If they said, "Yeah, and sure," then I could hand them some cash and they could send some BTC to me. The exchanges would be unmoved by this over the counter transaction.

Or, I might be interested in buying a Beanie Babie tie-dyed PEACE bear. The market, ebay, seems to list them around $8.99. But, if I buy a hundred of them off that bitcoin guy on the sidewalk, ebay and the price their isn't affected at all. Not are the 79 "watchers" keeping an eye on the PEACE bear.

But still, to me, that one-line OTC answer somehow seems off. Seriously, does Saylor have connections with people who want to sell thousands or tens of thousands of bitcoin? Every week? Who are these people with all that bitcoin to sell? Can Saylor connect me to a seller of 100 tie-dyed PEACE bears?

Maybe Saylor actually does have those kinds of connections to make those kinds of purchases. Or, maybe Grok is right and Saylor's moves aren't as big-fish as they seem. Anyway, I don't know, and those are circles that I don't move in. And, after all, I guess I still really don't know how he buys so much without moving the market.

!HBIT

@ 4857600b:30b502f4

Mitch McConnell, a senior Republican senator, announced he will not seek reelection.

At 83 years old and with health issues, this decision was expected. After seven terms, he leaves a significant legacy in U.S. politics, known for his strategic maneuvering.

McConnell stated, “My current term in the Senate will be my last.” His retirement marks the end of an influential political era.

@ dab6c606:51f507b6

Core idea: Use geotagged anonymized Nostr events with Cashu-based points to snitch on cop locations for a more relaxed driving and walking

We all know navigation apps. There's one of them that allows you to report on locations of cops. It's Waze and it's owned by Google. There are perfectly fine navigation apps like Organic Maps, that unfortunately lack the cop-snitching features. In some countries, it is illegal to report cop locations, so it would probably not be a good idea to use your npub to report them. But getting a points Cashu token as a reward and exchanging them from time to time would solve this. You can of course report construction, traffic jams, ...

Proposed solution: Add Nostr client (Copstr) to Organic Maps. Have a button in bottom right allowing you to report traffic situations. Geotagged events are published on Nostr relays, users sending cashu tokens as thank you if the report is valid. Notes have smart expiration times.

Phase 2: Automation: Integration with dashcams and comma.ai allow for automated AI recognition of traffic events such as traffic jams and cops, with automatic touchless reporting.

Result: Drive with most essential information and with full privacy. Collect points to be cool and stay cool.

@ a95c6243:d345522c

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ 94a6a78a:0ddf320e

Nostr is a revolutionary protocol that enables decentralized, censorship-resistant communication. Unlike traditional social networks controlled by corporations, Nostr operates without central servers or gatekeepers. This openness makes it incredibly powerful—but also means its success depends entirely on users, developers, and relay operators.

If you believe in free speech, decentralization, and an open internet, there are many ways to support and strengthen the Nostr ecosystem. Whether you're a casual user, a developer, or someone looking to contribute financially, every effort helps build a more robust network.

Here’s how you can get involved and make a difference.

---

1️⃣ Use Nostr Daily

The simplest and most effective way to contribute to Nostr is by using it regularly. The more active users, the stronger and more valuable the network becomes.

✅ Post, comment, and zap (send micro-payments via Bitcoin’s Lightning Network) to keep conversations flowing.\ ✅ Engage with new users and help them understand how Nostr works.\ ✅ Try different Nostr clients like Damus, Amethyst, Snort, or Primal and provide feedback to improve the experience.

Your activity keeps the network alive and helps encourage more developers and relay operators to invest in the ecosystem.

---

2️⃣ Run Your Own Nostr Relay

Relays are the backbone of Nostr, responsible for distributing messages across the network. The more independent relays exist, the stronger and more censorship-resistant Nostr becomes.

✅ Set up your own relay to help decentralize the network further.\ ✅ Experiment with relay configurations and different performance optimizations.\ ✅ Offer public or private relay services to users looking for high-quality infrastructure.

If you're not technical, you can still support relay operators by subscribing to a paid relay or donating to open-source relay projects.

---

3️⃣ Support Paid Relays & Infrastructure

Free relays have helped Nostr grow, but they struggle with spam, slow speeds, and sustainability issues. Paid relays help fund better infrastructure, faster message delivery, and a more reliable experience.

✅ Subscribe to a paid relay to help keep it running.\ ✅ Use premium services like media hosting (e.g., Azzamo Blossom) to decentralize content storage.\ ✅ Donate to relay operators who invest in long-term infrastructure.

By funding Nostr’s decentralized backbone, you help ensure its longevity and reliability.

---

4️⃣ Zap Developers, Creators & Builders

Many people contribute to Nostr without direct financial compensation—developers who build clients, relay operators, educators, and content creators. You can support them with zaps! ⚡

✅ Find developers working on Nostr projects and send them a zap.\ ✅ Support content creators and educators who spread awareness about Nostr.\ ✅ Encourage builders by donating to open-source projects.

Micro-payments via the Lightning Network make it easy to directly support the people who make Nostr better.

---

5️⃣ Develop New Nostr Apps & Tools

If you're a developer, you can build on Nostr’s open protocol to create new apps, bots, or tools. Nostr is permissionless, meaning anyone can develop for it.

✅ Create new Nostr clients with unique features and user experiences.\ ✅ Build bots or automation tools that improve engagement and usability.\ ✅ Experiment with decentralized identity, authentication, and encryption to make Nostr even stronger.

With no corporate gatekeepers, your projects can help shape the future of decentralized social media.

---

6️⃣ Promote & Educate Others About Nostr

Adoption grows when more people understand and use Nostr. You can help by spreading awareness and creating educational content.

✅ Write blogs, guides, and tutorials explaining how to use Nostr.\ ✅ Make videos or social media posts introducing new users to the protocol.\ ✅ Host discussions, Twitter Spaces, or workshops to onboard more people.

The more people understand and trust Nostr, the stronger the ecosystem becomes.

---

7️⃣ Support Open-Source Nostr Projects

Many Nostr tools and clients are built by volunteers, and open-source projects thrive on community support.

✅ Contribute code to existing Nostr projects on GitHub.\ ✅ Report bugs and suggest features to improve Nostr clients.\ ✅ Donate to developers who keep Nostr free and open for everyone.

If you're not a developer, you can still help with testing, translations, and documentation to make projects more accessible.

---

🚀 Every Contribution Strengthens Nostr

Whether you:

✔️ Post and engage daily\ ✔️ Zap creators and developers\ ✔️ Run or support relays\ ✔️ Build new apps and tools\ ✔️ Educate and onboard new users

Every action helps make Nostr more resilient, decentralized, and unstoppable.

Nostr isn’t just another social network—it’s a movement toward a free and open internet. If you believe in digital freedom, privacy, and decentralization, now is the time to get involved.

@ 0fa80bd3:ea7325de

intro

The Russian state made me a Bitcoiner. In 1991, it devalued my grandmother's hard-earned savings. She worked tirelessly in the kitchen of a dining car on the Moscow–Warsaw route. Everything she had saved for my sister and me to attend university vanished overnight. This story is similar to what many experienced, including Wences Casares. The pain and injustice of that time became my first lessons about the fragility of systems and the value of genuine, incorruptible assets, forever changing my perception of money and my trust in government promises.

In 2014, I was living in Moscow, running a trading business, and frequently traveling to China. One day, I learned about the Cypriot banking crisis and the possibility of moving money through some strange thing called Bitcoin. At the time, I didn’t give it much thought. Returning to the idea six months later, as a business-oriented geek, I eagerly began studying the topic and soon dove into it seriously.

I spent half a year reading articles on a local online journal, BitNovosti, actively participating in discussions, and eventually joined the editorial team as a translator. That’s how I learned about whitepapers, decentralization, mining, cryptographic keys, and colored coins. About Satoshi Nakamoto, Silk Road, Mt. Gox, and BitcoinTalk. Over time, I befriended the journal’s owner and, leveraging my management experience, later became an editor. I was drawn to the crypto-anarchist stance and commitment to decentralization principles. We wrote about the economic, historical, and social preconditions for Bitcoin’s emergence, and it was during this time that I fully embraced the idea.

It got to the point where I sold my apartment and, during the market's downturn, bought 50 bitcoins, just after the peak price of $1,200 per coin. That marked the beginning of my first crypto winter. As an editor, I organized workflows, managed translators, developed a YouTube channel, and attended conferences in Russia and Ukraine. That’s how I learned about Wences Casares and even wrote a piece about him. I also met Mikhail Chobanyan (Ukrainian exchange Kuna), Alexander Ivanov (Waves project), Konstantin Lomashuk (Lido project), and, of course, Vitalik Buterin. It was a time of complete immersion, 24/7, and boundless hope.

After moving to the United States, I expected the industry to grow rapidly, attended events, but the introduction of BitLicense froze the industry for eight years. By 2017, it became clear that the industry was shifting toward gambling and creating tokens for the sake of tokens. I dismissed this idea as unsustainable. Then came a new crypto spring with the hype around beautiful NFTs – CryptoPunks and apes.

I made another attempt – we worked on a series called Digital Nomad Country Club, aimed at creating a global project. The proceeds from selling images were intended to fund the development of business tools for people worldwide. However, internal disagreements within the team prevented us from completing the project.

With Trump’s arrival in 2025, hope was reignited. I decided that it was time to create a project that society desperately needed. As someone passionate about history, I understood that destroying what exists was not the solution, but leaving everything as it was also felt unacceptable. You can’t destroy the system, as the fiery crypto-anarchist voices claimed.

With an analytical mindset (IQ 130) and a deep understanding of the freest societies, I realized what was missing—not only in Russia or the United States but globally—a Bitcoin-native system for tracking debts and financial interactions. This could return control of money to ordinary people and create horizontal connections parallel to state systems. My goal was to create, if not a Bitcoin killer app, then at least to lay its foundation.

At the inauguration event in New York, I rediscovered the Nostr project. I realized it was not only technologically simple and already quite popular but also perfectly aligned with my vision. For the past month and a half, using insights and experience gained since 2014, I’ve been working full-time on this project.

@ c4b5369a:b812dbd6

Offline transactions with Cashu

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

What is ecash/Cashu?

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

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

How do normal Cashu transactions work?

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

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

What about offline transactions?

Sending offline

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

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

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

Receiving offline

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

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

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

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

Receiving offline from an untrusted sender

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

How to use this

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

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

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

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

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

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

Summary

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

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

Cheers,

Gandlaf

@ 56cd780f:cbde8b29

There’s something sacred about morning air — the way it carries just enough chill to remind you you’re alive, without pushing you back inside. I’ve been starting my days on the balcony lately. Not because it’s glamorous (it isn’t), or because I have a routine (I don’t), but because it’s the only space in my apartment that feels both open and still.

This morning I made coffee with too much cinnamon and curled up with a blanket that’s seen better days. I watched the city slowly wake up — one barking dog, two joggers, and the clatter of a recycling truck below. It’s odd how these tiny patterns become a kind of comfort.

I used to think that slowing down meant falling behind. But here, perched on the third floor with my feet on cold concrete and the sky just starting to blush, I feel like I’m exactly where I’m supposed to be.

If you’re reading this, maybe you needed that reminder too.

— Natalie

@ c631e267:c2b78d3e

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ a95c6243:d345522c

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ b8af284d:f82c91dd

Vor genau 40 Jahren, unter den Kronleuchtern eines New Yorker Ballsaals, wurde das berüchtigte ‚Plaza Accord‘ unterzeichnet, das eine Finanztsunami auslöste, der den japanischen Yen in nur 16 Monaten um 46 Prozent in die Höhe trieb. Die Exporte brachen ein, und Japans beeindruckendes Wirtschaftswachstum von 5 Prozent schrumpfte zu Staub.“

Xi Jinping am 26. April 2025

Liebe Abonnenten,

2010 kam es zu einer mysteriösen Serie von Selbstmorden in der chinesischen Stadt Shenzhen. Insgesamt nahmen sich zwischen Januar und August 13 Menschen das Leben, in dem sie von Hochhäusern sprangen. Die chinesischen Medien berichteten stets über Einzelfälle. Erst ausländischen Korrespondenten gelang es, die Selbstmorde miteinander in Verbindung zu setzen: Alle waren Angestellte des Apple-Zulieferers Foxconn. Alle waren sogenannte Wanderarbeiter aus den umliegenden Provinzen. Ihr monatliches Gehalt von umgerechnet 110 Euro war auch für chinesische Verhältnisse derart niedrig, dass sie sich gezwungen sahen, Überstunden zu leisten. Trotz der viel gepriesenen chinesischen Fähigkeit 吃苦 „Bitterkeit zu essen“, erschien vielen Angestellten ihr Leben so unerträglich und ausweglos, dass sie sich das Leben nahmen.

Nach einem internationalen Shitstorm reagierte Foxconn: Man erhöhte die Gehälter um 70 bis 100 Prozent und spannte Netze in der „Foxconn-City“ auf, um weitere Selbstmorde zu verhindern.

Gegründet wurde Foxconn 1974 von Terry Gou in Taiwan unter dem Namen „Hon Hai Precision Industry“. Mit der wirtschaftlichen Öffnungspolitik der Volksrepublik expandierte Gou auf das chinesische Festland, wo er Heerscharen von billigen Arbeitskräften fand. Heute beschäftigt Foxconn mehr als eine Million Menschen und fertigt rund 70 Prozent aller iPhones weltweit.

Apple-Zulieferer Foxconn steht wie kaum ein anderes Unternehmen für den wirtschaftlichen Megatrend der vergangenen Jahrzehnte. In den USA entworfene Produkte werden in Asien gefertigt und weltweit verkauft. Komplexe Lieferketten spannen sich um den gesamten Globus. Immer neue Märkte müssen erschlossen werden, um den Rendite-Erwartungen der Anleger gerecht zu werden. Die globale Produktion wandert von Land zu Land, bis die Lohnkosten so dort stark gestiegen sind, dass es Zeit wird weiterzuziehen. Nun ist ein neuer Faktor hinzugekommen: Geopolitik.

Vor wenigen Tagen gab Apple bekannt, dass es einen großen Teil seiner iPhone-Fertigung von China nach Indien verlagern werde.

Sprich: Foxconn zieht um. Der Zulieferer betreibt Werke in Tamil Nadu und Karnataka und plant eine neue Fabrik nahe Bengaluru mit Investitionen von bis zu 2,7 Milliarden US-Dollar. Dort sind zwar die Produktionskosten rund acht Prozent höher als in China, aber Apple will so sein Ziel erreichen, 2026 alle iPhones in Indien fertigen zu lassen. Punktsieg für Trump, Vance und Bessent.

---

Mehr zum Thema:

Die nächsten 90 Tage

BlingBling

·

11. Apr.

Drei Monate hat die Welt Aufschub vor amerikanischen Zöllen bekommen, 90 Tage, in denen der Handelskrieg mit China tobt. Was Trump in dieser Zeit wirklich vorhat.

Read full story

Abgekoppelt

BlingBling

·

1. Mai

In den vergangenen Wochen konnte man erleben, wie Bitcoin zum sicheren Hafen wurde. Wie nachhaltig ist die Entwicklung? Der Bling-Report April 2025

Read full story

"Sie müssen Geld drucken"

BlingBling

·

13. Apr.

Fondsmanager und Investorenlegende Marc Faber über den aktuellen Aktien-Crash, Donald Trump und Gold

Read full story

Ein Paid-Abo beinhaltet 4 bis 6 Artikel pro Monat (statt 2 bis 4), einen monatlichen Investment-Report samt Musterdepot, Zugang zu allen Artikeln sowie 4 Tutorials über Bitcoin, Gold, ETFs und Altcoins. Ein Test-Abo gibt es schon für sieben Euro im Monat. Bitcoin-Zahler erhalten 20% Rabatt!

---

Das, was im Zollkrieg zwischen den USA und China gerade stattfindet, ähnelt dem Prinzip des 2500 Jahre alten chinesischen Spiels: im Gegensatz zu Schach, wo es um das Eliminieren des gegnerischen Königs geht, ist Go subtiler. Es gibt kein direktes „Schachmatt“, sondern einen Wettstreit um Raum und Einfluss. Verbündete werden gesucht, um den jeweiligen Gegner zu entwaffnen, bevor es zu einer entscheidenden Schlacht überhaupt kommen kann.

90 Tage Aufschub hat Donald Trump allen Handelspartnern gewährt - bis auf China. Zuvor hatte er am „Liberation Day“ Zölle auf nahezu alle Ländern erhoben, mit denen die USA ein Handelsdefizit aufweisen. Ob hinter der Schaukelpolitik Kalkül steckt, oder ob ihm besonnenere Gemüter in der Regierung dazu geraten haben, nachdem der amerikanische Aktienmarkt in den Keller gerauscht war, bleibt offen für Spekulationen. Auf jeden Fall bleiben den beiden größten Volkswirtschaften der Welt nun noch etwas über zwei Monate, möglichst viele Verbündete zu finden, um den Gegner zu isolieren. „Wir können wahrscheinlich mit unseren Verbündeten einen Deal erreichen“, sagte Finanzminister Scott Bessent. „Und dann können wir gemeinsam als Gruppe auf China zugehen.“ Die USA haben an und für sich viele Argumente auf ihrer Seite:

Hinter der Paywall: Wer hat die besseren Chancen, das Spiel zu gewinnen?

@ a95c6243:d345522c

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ e3ba5e1a:5e433365

My favorite line in any Marvel movie ever is in “Captain America.” After Captain America launches seemingly a hopeless assault on Red Skull’s base and is captured, we get this line:

“Arrogance may not be a uniquely American trait, but I must say, you do it better than anyone.”

Yesterday, I came across a comment on the song Devil Went Down to Georgia that had a very similar feel to it:

America has seemingly always been arrogant, in a uniquely American way. Manifest Destiny, for instance. The rest of the world is aware of this arrogance, and mocks Americans for it. A central point in modern US politics is the deriding of racist, nationalist, supremacist Americans.

That’s not what I see. I see American Arrogance as not only a beautiful statement about what it means to be American. I see it as an ode to the greatness of humanity in its purest form.

For most countries, saying “our nation is the greatest” is, in fact, twinged with some level of racism. I still don’t have a problem with it. Every group of people should be allowed to feel pride in their accomplishments. The destruction of the human spirit since the end of World War 2, where greatness has become a sin and weakness a virtue, has crushed the ability of people worldwide to strive for excellence.

But I digress. The fears of racism and nationalism at least have a grain of truth when applied to other nations on the planet. But not to America.

That’s because the definition of America, and the prototype of an American, has nothing to do with race. The definition of Americanism is freedom. The founding of America is based purely on liberty. On the God-given rights of every person to live life the way they see fit.

American Arrogance is not a statement of racial superiority. It’s barely a statement of national superiority (though it absolutely is). To me, when an American comments on the greatness of America, it’s a statement about freedom. Freedom will always unlock the greatness inherent in any group of people. Americans are definitionally better than everyone else, because Americans are freer than everyone else. (Or, at least, that’s how it should be.)

In Devil Went Down to Georgia, Johnny is approached by the devil himself. He is challenged to a ridiculously lopsided bet: a golden fiddle versus his immortal soul. He acknowledges the sin in accepting such a proposal. And yet he says, “God, I know you told me not to do this. But I can’t stand the affront to my honor. I am the greatest. The devil has nothing on me. So God, I’m gonna sin, but I’m also gonna win.”

Libertas magnitudo est

@ 826e9f89:ffc5c759

What follows began as snippets of conversations I have been having for years, on and off, here and there. It will likely eventually be collated into a piece I have been meaning to write on “payments” as a whole. I foolishly started writing this piece years ago, not realizing that the topic is gargantuan and for every week I spend writing it I have to add two weeks to my plan. That may or may not ever come to fruition, but in the meantime, Tether announced it was issuing on Taproot Assets and suddenly everybody is interested again. This is as good a catalyst as any to carve out my “stablecoin thesis”, such as it exists, from “payments”, and put it out there for comment and feedback.

In contrast to the “Bitcoiner take” I will shortly revert to, I invite the reader to keep the following potential counterargument in mind, which might variously be termed the “shitcoiner”, “realist”, or “cynical” take, depending on your perspective: that stablecoins have clear product-market-fit. Now, as a venture capitalist and professional thinkboi focusing on companies building on Bitcoin, I obviously think that not only is Bitcoin the best money ever invented and its monetization is pretty much inevitable, but that, furthermore, there is enormous, era-defining long-term potential for a range of industries in which Bitcoin is emerging as superior technology, even aside from its role as money. But in the interest not just of steelmanning but frankly just of honesty, I would grudgingly agree with the following assessment as of the time of writing: the applications of crypto (inclusive of Bitcoin but deliberately wider) that have found product-market-fit today, and that are not speculative bets on future development and adoption, are: Bitcoin as savings technology, mining as a means of monetizing energy production, and stablecoins.

I think there are two typical Bitcoiner objections to stablecoins of significantly greater importance than all others: that you shouldn’t be supporting dollar hegemony, and that you don’t need a blockchain. I will elaborate on each of these, and for the remainder of the post will aim to produce a synthesis of three superficially contrasting (or at least not obviously related) sources of inspiration: these objections, the realisation above that stablecoins just are useful, and some commentary on technical developments in Bitcoin and the broader space that I think inform where things are likely to go. As will become clear as the argument progresses, I actually think the outcome to which I am building up is where things have to go. I think the technical and economic incentives at play make this an inevitability rather than a “choice”, per se. Given my conclusion, which I will hold back for the time being, this is a fantastically good thing, hence I am motivated to write this post at all!

Objection 1: Dollar Hegemony

I list this objection first because there isn’t a huge amount to say about it. It is clearly a normative position, and while I more or less support it personally, I don’t think that it is material to the argument I am going on to make, so I don’t want to force it on the reader. While the case for this objection is probably obvious to this audience (isn’t the point of Bitcoin to destroy central banks, not further empower them?) I should at least offer the steelman that there is a link between this and the realist observation that stablecoins are useful. The reason they are useful is because people prefer the dollar to even shitter local fiat currencies. I don’t think it is particularly fruitful to say that they shouldn’t. They do. Facts don’t care about your feelings. There is a softer bridging argument to be made here too, to the effect that stablecoins warm up their users to the concept of digital bearer (ish) assets, even though these particular assets are significantly scammier than Bitcoin. Again, I am just floating this, not telling the reader they should or shouldn’t buy into it.

All that said, there is one argument I do want to put my own weight behind, rather than just float: stablecoin issuance is a speculative attack on the institution of fractional reserve banking. A “dollar” Alice moves from JPMorgan to Tether embodies two trade-offs from Alice’s perspective: i) a somewhat opaque profile on the credit risk of the asset: the likelihood of JPMorgan ever really defaulting on deposits vs the operator risk of Tether losing full backing and/or being wrench attacked by the Federal Government and rugging its users. These risks are real but are almost entirely political. I’m skeptical it is meaningful to quantify them, but even if it is, I am not the person to try to do it. Also, more transparently to Alice, ii) far superior payment rails (for now, more on this to follow).

However, from the perspective of the fiat banking cartel, fractional reserve leverage has been squeezed. There are just as many notional dollars in circulation, but there the backing has been shifted from levered to unlevered issuers. There are gradations of relevant objections to this: while one might say, Tether’s backing comes from Treasuries, so you are directly funding US debt issuance!, this is a bit silly in the context of what other dollars one might hold. It’s not like JPMorgan is really competing with the Treasury to sell credit into the open market. Optically they are, but this is the core of the fiat scam. Via the guarantees of the Federal Reserve System, JPMorgan can sell as much unbacked credit as it wants knowing full well the difference will be printed whenever this blows up. Short-term Treasuries are also JPMorgan’s most pristine asset safeguarding its equity, so the only real difference is that Tether only holds Treasuries without wishing more leverage into existence. The realization this all builds up to is that, by necessity,

Tether is a fully reserved bank issuing fiduciary media against the only dollar-denominated asset in existence whose value (in dollar terms) can be guaranteed. Furthermore, this media arguably has superior “moneyness” to the obvious competition in the form of US commercial bank deposits by virtue of its payment rails.

That sounds pretty great when you put it that way! Of course, the second sentence immediately leads to the second objection, and lets the argument start to pick up steam …

Objection 2: You Don’t Need a Blockchain

I don’t need to explain this to this audience but to recap as briefly as I can manage: Bitcoin’s value is entirely endogenous. Every aspect of “a blockchain” that, out of context, would be an insanely inefficient or redundant modification of a “database”, in context is geared towards the sole end of enabling the stability of this endogenous value. Historically, there have been two variations of stupidity that follow a failure to grok this: i) “utility tokens”, or blockchains with native tokens for something other than money. I would recommend anybody wanting a deeper dive on the inherent nonsense of a utility token to read Only The Strong Survive, in particular Chapter 2, Crypto Is Not Decentralized, and the subsection, Everything Fights For Liquidity, and/or Green Eggs And Ham, in particular Part II, Decentralized Finance, Technically. ii) “real world assets” or, creating tokens within a blockchain’s data structure that are not intended to have endogenous value but to act as digital quasi-bearer certificates to some or other asset of value exogenous to this system. Stablecoins are in this second category.

RWA tokens definitionally have to have issuers, meaning some entity that, in the real world, custodies or physically manages both the asset and the record-keeping scheme for the asset. “The blockchain” is at best a secondary ledger to outsource ledger updates to public infrastructure such that the issuer itself doesn’t need to bother and can just “check the ledger” whenever operationally relevant. But clearly ownership cannot be enforced in an analogous way to Bitcoin, under both technical and social considerations. Technically, Bitcoin’s endogenous value means that whoever holds the keys to some or other UTXOs functionally is the owner. Somebody else claiming to be the owner is yelling at clouds. Whereas, socially, RWA issuers enter a contract with holders (whether legally or just in terms of a common-sense interpretation of the transaction) such that ownership of the asset issued against is entirely open to dispute. That somebody can point to “ownership” of the token may or may not mean anything substantive with respect to the physical reality of control of the asset, and how the issuer feels about it all.

And so, one wonders, why use a blockchain at all? Why doesn’t the issuer just run its own database (for the sake of argument with some or other signature scheme for verifying and auditing transactions) given it has the final say over issuance and redemption anyway? I hinted at an answer above: issuing on a blockchain outsources this task to public infrastructure. This is where things get interesting. While it is technically true, given the above few paragraphs, that, you don’t need a blockchain for that, you also don’t need to not use a blockchain for that. If you want to, you can.

This is clearly the case given stablecoins exist at all and have gone this route. If one gets too angry about not needing a blockchain for that, one equally risks yelling at clouds! And, in fact, one can make an even stronger argument, more so from the end users’ perspective. These products do not exist in a vacuum but rather compete with alternatives. In the case of stablecoins, the alternative is traditional fiat money, which, as stupid as RWAs on a blockchain are, is even dumber. It actually is just a database, except it’s a database that is extremely annoying to use, basically for political reasons because the industry managing these private databases form a cartel that never needs to innovate or really give a shit about its customers at all. In many, many cases, stablecoins on blockchains are dumb in the abstract, but superior to the alternative methods of holding and transacting in dollars existing in other forms. And note, this is only from Alice’s perspective of wanting to send and receive, not a rehashing of the fractional reserve argument given above. This is the essence of their product-market-fit. Yell at clouds all you like: they just are useful given the alternative usually is not Bitcoin, it’s JPMorgan’s KYC’d-up-the-wazoo 90s-era website, more than likely from an even less solvent bank.

So where does this get us? It might seem like we are back to “product-market-fit, sorry about that” with Bitcoiners yelling about feelings while everybody else makes do with their facts. However, I think we have introduced enough material to move the argument forward by incrementally incorporating the following observations, all of which I will shortly go into in more detail: i) as a consequence of making no technical sense with respect to what blockchains are for, today’s approach won’t scale; ii) as a consequence of short-termist tradeoffs around socializing costs, today’s approach creates an extremely unhealthy and arguably unnatural market dynamic in the issuer space; iii) Taproot Assets now exist and handily address both points i) and ii), and; iv) eCash is making strides that I believe will eventually replace even Taproot Assets.

To tease where all this is going, and to get the reader excited before we dive into much more detail: just as Bitcoin will eat all monetary premia, Lightning will likely eat all settlement, meaning all payments will gravitate towards routing over Lightning regardless of the denomination of the currency at the edges. Fiat payments will gravitate to stablecoins to take advantage of this; stablecoins will gravitate to TA and then to eCash, and all of this will accelerate hyperbitcoinization by “bitcoinizing” payment rails such that an eventual full transition becomes as simple as flicking a switch as to what denomination you want to receive.

I will make two important caveats before diving in that are more easily understood in light of having laid this groundwork: I am open to the idea that it won’t be just Lightning or just Taproot Assets playing the above roles. Without veering into forecasting the entire future development of Bitcoin tech, I will highlight that all that really matters here are, respectively: a true layer 2 with native hashlocks, and a token issuance scheme that enables atomic routing over such a layer 2 (or combination of such). For the sake of argument, the reader is welcome to swap in “Ark” and “RGB” for “Lightning” and “TA” both above and in all that follows. As far as I can tell, this makes no difference to the argument and is even exciting in its own right. However, for the sake of simplicity in presentation, I will stick to “Lightning” and “TA” hereafter.

1) Today’s Approach to Stablecoins Won’t Scale

This is the easiest to tick off and again doesn’t require much explanation to this audience. Blockchains fundamentally don’t scale, which is why Bitcoin’s UTXO scheme is a far better design than ex-Bitcoin Crypto’s’ account-based models, even entirely out of context of all the above criticisms. This is because Bitcoin transactions can be batched across time and across users with combinations of modes of spending restrictions that provide strong economic guarantees of correct eventual net settlement, if not perpetual deferral. One could argue this is a decent (if abstrusely technical) definition of “scaling” that is almost entirely lacking in Crypto.

What we see in ex-Bitcoin crypto is so-called “layer 2s” that are nothing of the sort, forcing stablecoin schemes in these environments into one of two equally poor design choices if usage is ever to increase: fees go higher and higher, to the point of economic unviability (and well past it) as blocks fill up, or move to much more centralized environments that increasingly are just databases, and hence which lose the benefits of openness thought to be gleaned by outsourcing settlement to public infrastructure. This could be in the form of punting issuance to a bullshit “layer 2” that is a really a multisig “backing” a private execution environment (to be decentralized any daw now) or an entirely different blockchain that is just pretending even less not to be a database to begin with. In a nutshell, this is a decent bottom-up explanation as to why Tron has the highest settlement of Tether.

This also gives rise to the weirdness of “gas tokens” - assets whose utility as money is and only is in the form of a transaction fee to transact a different kind of money. These are not quite as stupid as a “utility token,” given at least they are clearly fulfilling a monetary role and hence their artificial scarcity can be justified. But they are frustrating from Bitcoiners’ and users’ perspectives alike: users would prefer to pay transaction fees on dollars in dollars, but they can’t because the value of Ether, Sol, Tron, or whatever, is the string and bubblegum that hold their boondoggles together. And Bitcoiners wish this stuff would just go away and stop distracting people, whereas this string and bubblegum is proving transiently useful.

All in all, today’s approach is fine so long as it isn’t being used much. It has product-market fit, sure, but in the unenviable circumstance that, if it really starts to take off, it will break, and even the original users will find it unusable.

2) Today’s Approach to Stablecoins Creates an Untenable Market Dynamic

Reviving the ethos of you don’t need a blockchain for that, notice the following subtlety: while the tokens representing stablecoins have value to users, that value is not native to the blockchain on which they are issued. Tether can (and routinely does) burn tokens on Ethereum and mint them on Tron, then burn on Tron and mint on Solana, and so on. So-called blockchains “go down” and nobody really cares. This makes no difference whatsoever to Tether’s own accounting, and arguably a positive difference to users given these actions track market demand. But it is detrimental to the blockchain being switched away from by stripping it of “TVL” that, it turns out, was only using it as rails: entirely exogenous value that leaves as quickly as it arrived.

One underdiscussed and underappreciated implication of the fact that no value is natively running through the blockchain itself is that, in the current scheme, both the sender and receiver of a stablecoin have to trust the same issuer. This creates an extremely powerful network effect that, in theory, makes the first-to-market likely to dominate and in practice has played out exactly as this theory would suggest: Tether has roughly 80% of the issuance, while roughly 19% goes to the political carve-out of USDC that wouldn’t exist at all were it not for government interference. Everybody else combined makes up the final 1%.

So, Tether is a full reserve bank but also has to be everybody’s bank. This is the source of a lot of the discomfort with Tether, and which feeds into the original objection around dollar hegemony, that there is an ill-defined but nonetheless uneasy feeling that Tether is slowly morphing into a CBDC. I would argue this really has nothing to do with Tether’s own behavior but rather is a consequence of the market dynamic inevitably created by the current stablecoin scheme. There is no reason to trust any other bank because nobody really wants a bank, they just want the rails. They want something that will retain a nominal dollar value long enough to spend it again. They don’t care what tech it runs on and they don’t even really care about the issuer except insofar as having some sense they won’t get rugged.

Notice this is not how fiat works. Banks can, of course, settle between each other, thus enabling their users to send money to customers of other banks. This settlement function is actually the entire point of central banks, less the money printing and general corruption enabled (we might say, this was the historical point of central banks, which have since become irredeemably corrupted by this power). This process is clunkier than stablecoins, as covered above, but the very possibility of settlement means there is no gigantic network effect to being the first commercial issuer of dollar balances. If it isn’t too triggering to this audience, one might suggest that the money printer also removes the residual concern that your balances might get rugged! (or, we might again say, you guarantee you don’t get rugged in the short term by guaranteeing you do get rugged in the long term).

This is a good point at which to introduce the unsettling observation that broader fintech is catching on to the benefits of stablecoins without any awareness whatsoever of all the limitations I am outlining here. With the likes of Stripe, Wise, Robinhood, and, post-Trump, even many US megabanks supposedly contemplating issuing stablecoins (obviously within the current scheme, not the scheme I am building up to proposing), we are forced to boggle our minds considering how on earth settlement is going to work. Are they going to settle through Ether? Well, no, because i) Ether isn’t money, it’s … to be honest, I don’t think anybody really knows what it is supposed to be, or if they once did they aren’t pretending anymore, but anyway, Stripe certainly hasn’t figured that out yet so, ii) it won’t be possible to issue them on layer 1s as soon as there is any meaningful volume, meaning they will have to route through “bullshit layer 2 wrapped Ether token that is really already a kind of stablecoin for Ether.”

The way they are going to try to fix this (anybody wanna bet?) is routing through DEXes, which is so painfully dumb you should be laughing and, if you aren’t, I would humbly suggest you don’t get just how dumb it is. What this amounts to is plugging the gap of Ether’s lack of moneyness (and wrapped Ether’s hilarious lack of moneyness) with … drum roll … unknowable technical and counterparty risk and unpredictable cost on top of reverting to just being a database. So, in other words, all of the costs of using a blockchain when you don’t strictly need to, and none of the benefits. Stripe is going to waste billions of dollars getting sandwich attacked out of some utterly vanilla FX settlement it is facilitating for clients who have even less of an idea what is going on and why North Korea now has all their money, and will eventually realize they should have skipped their shitcoin phase and gone straight to understanding Bitcoin instead …

3) Bitcoin (and Taproot Assets) Fixes This

To tie together a few loose ends, I only threw in the hilariously stupid suggestion of settling through wrapped Ether on Ether on Ether in order to tee up the entirely sensible suggestion of settling through Lightning. Again, not that this will be new to this audience, but while issuance schemes have been around on Bitcoin for a long time, the breakthrough of Taproot Assets is essentially the ability to atomically route through Lightning.

I will admit upfront that this presents a massive bootstrapping challenge relative to the ex-Bitcoin Crypto approach, and it’s not obvious to me if or how this will be overcome. I include this caveat to make it clear I am not suggesting this is a given. It may not be, it’s just beyond the scope of this post (or frankly my ability) to predict. This is a problem for Lightning Labs, Tether, and whoever else decides to step up to issue. But even highlighting this as an obvious and major concern invites us to consider an intriguing contrast: scaling TA stablecoins is hardest at the start and gets easier and easier thereafter. The more edge liquidity there is in TA stables, the less of a risk it is for incremental issuance; the more TA activity, the more attractive deploying liquidity is into Lightning proper, and vice versa. With apologies if this metaphor is even more confusing than it is helpful, one might conceive of the situation as being that there is massive inertia to bootstrap, but equally there could be positive feedback in driving the inertia to scale. Again, I have no idea, and it hasn’t happened yet in practice, but in theory it’s fun.

More importantly to this conversation, however, this is almost exactly the opposite dynamic to the current scheme on other blockchains, which is basically free to start, but gets more and more expensive the more people try to use it. One might say it antiscales (I don’t think that’s a real word, but if Taleb can do it, then I can do it too!).

Furthermore, the entire concept of “settling in Bitcoin” makes perfect sense both economically and technically: economically because Bitcoin is money, and technically because it can be locked in an HTLC and hence can enable atomic routing (i.e. because Lightning is a thing). This is clearly better than wrapped Eth on Eth on Eth or whatever, but, tantalisingly, is better than fiat too! The core message of the payments tome I may or may not one day write is (or will be) that fiat payments, while superficially efficient on the basis of centralized and hence costless ledger amendments, actually have a hidden cost in the form of interbank credit. Many readers will likely have heard me say this multiple times and in multiple settings but, contrary to popular belief, there is no such thing as a fiat debit. Even if styled as a debit, all fiat payments are credits and all have credit risk baked into their cost, even if that is obscured and pushed to the absolute foundational level of money printing to keep banks solvent and hence keep payment channels open.

Furthermore! this enables us to strip away the untenable market dynamic from the point above. The underappreciated and underdiscussed flip side of the drawback of the current dynamic that is effectively fixed by Taproot Assets is that there is no longer a mammoth network effect to a single issuer. Senders and receivers can trust different issuers (i.e. their own banks) because those banks can atomically settle a single payment over Lightning. This does not involve credit. It is arguably the only true debit in the world across both the relevant economic and technical criteria: it routes through money with no innate credit risk, and it does so atomically due to that money’s native properties.

Savvy readers may have picked up on a seed I planted a while back and which can now delightfully blossom:

This is what Visa was supposed to be!

Crucially, this is not what Visa is now. Visa today is pretty much the bank that is everybody’s counterparty, takes a small credit risk for the privilege, and oozes free cash flow bottlenecking global consumer payments.

But if you read both One From Many by Dee Hock (for a first person but pretty wild and extravagant take) and Electronic Value Exchange by David Stearns (for a third person, drier, but more analytical and historically contextualized take) or if you are just intimately familiar with the modern history of payments for whatever other reason, you will see that the role I just described for Lightning in an environment of unboundedly many banks issuing fiduciary media in the form of stablecoins is exactly what Dee Hock wanted to create when he envisioned Visa:

A neutral and open layer of value settlement enabling banks to create digital, interbank payment schemes for their customers at very low cost.

As it turns out, his vision was technically impossible with fiat, hence Visa, which started as a cooperative amongst member banks, was corrupted into a duopolistic for-profit rent seeker in curious parallel to the historical path of central banks …

4) eCash

To now push the argument to what I think is its inevitable conclusion, it’s worth being even more vigilant on the front of you don’t need a blockchain for that. I have argued that there is a role for a blockchain in providing a neutral settlement layer to enable true debits of stablecoins. But note this is just a fancy and/or stupid way of saying that Bitcoin is both the best money and is programmable, which we all knew anyway. The final step is realizing that, while TA is nice in terms of providing a kind of “on ramp” for global payments infrastructure as a whole to reorient around Lightning, there is some path dependence here in assuming (almost certainly correctly) that the familiarity of stablecoins as “RWA tokens on a blockchain” will be an important part of the lure.

But once that transition is complete, or is well on its way to being irreversible, we may as well come full circle and cut out tokens altogether. Again, you really don’t need a blockchain for that, and the residual appeal of better rails has been taken care of with the above massive detour through what I deem to be the inevitability of Lightning as a settlement layer. Just as USDT on Tron arguably has better moneyness than a JPMorgan balance, so a “stablecoin” as eCash has better moneyness than as a TA given it is cheaper, more private, and has more relevantly bearer properties (in other words, because it is cash). The technical detail that it can be hashlocked is really all you need to tie this all together. That means it can be atomically locked into a Lightning routed debit to the recipient of a different issuer (or “mint” in eCash lingo, but note this means the same thing as what we have been calling fully reserved banks). And the economic incentive is pretty compelling too because, for all their benefits, there is still a cost to TAs given they are issued onchain and they require asset-specific liquidity to route on Lightning. Once the rest of the tech is in place, why bother? Keep your Lightning connectivity and just become a mint.

What you get at that point is dramatically superior private database to JPMorgan with the dramatically superior public rails of Lightning. There is nothing left to desire from “a blockchain” besides what Bitcoin is fundamentally for in the first place: counterparty-risk-free value settlement.

And as a final point with a curious and pleasing echo to Dee Hock at Visa, Calle has made the point repeatedly that David Chaum’s vision for eCash, while deeply philosophical besides the technical details, was actually pretty much impossible to operate on fiat. From an eCash perspective, fiat stablecoins within the above infrastructure setup are a dramatic improvement on anything previously possible. But, of course, they are a slippery slope to Bitcoin regardless …

Objections Revisited

As a cherry on top, I think the objections I highlighted at the outset are now readily addressed – to the extent the reader believes what I am suggesting is more or less a technical and economic inevitability, that is. While, sure, I’m not particularly keen on giving the Treasury more avenues to sell its welfare-warfare shitcoin, on balance the likely development I’ve outlined is an enormous net positive: it’s going to sell these anyway so I prefer a strong economic incentive to steadily transition not only to Lightning as payment rails but eCash as fiduciary media, and to use “fintech” as a carrot to induce a slow motion bank run.

As alluded to above, once all this is in place, the final step to a Bitcoin standard becomes as simple as an individual’s decision to want Bitcoin instead of fiat. On reflection, this is arguably the easiest part! It's setting up all the tech that puts people off, so trojan-horsing them with “faster, cheaper payment rails” seems like a genius long-term strategy.

And as to “needing a blockchain” (or not), I hope that is entirely wrapped up at this point. The only blockchain you need is Bitcoin, but to the extent people are still confused by this (which I think will take decades more to fully unwind), we may as well lean into dazzling them with whatever innovation buzzwords and decentralization theatre they were going to fall for anyway before realizing they wanted Bitcoin all along.

Conclusion

Stablecoins are useful whether you like it or not. They are stupid in the abstract but it turns out fiat is even stupider, on inspection. But you don’t need a blockchain, and using one as decentralization theatre creates technical debt that is insurmountable in the long run. Blockchain-based stablecoins are doomed to a utility inversely proportional to their usage, and just to rub it in, their ill-conceived design practically creates a commercial dynamic that mandates there only ever be a single issuer.

Given they are useful, it seems natural that this tension is going to blow up at some point. It also seems worthwhile observing that Taproot Asset stablecoins have almost the inverse problem and opposite commercial dynamic: they will be most expensive to use at the outset but get cheaper and cheaper as their usage grows. Also, there is no incentive towards a monopoly issuer but rather towards as many as are willing to try to operate well and provide value to their users.

As such, we can expect any sizable growth in stablecoins to migrate to TA out of technical and economic necessity. Once this has happened - or possibly while it is happening but is clearly not going to stop - we may as well strip out the TA component and just use eCash because you really don’t need a blockchain for that at all. And once all the money is on eCash, deciding you want to denominate it in Bitcoin is the simplest on-ramp to hyperbitcoinization you can possibly imagine, given we’ve spent the previous decade or two rebuilding all payments tech around Lightning.

Or: Bitcoin fixes this. The End.

• Allen, #892,125

thanks to Marco Argentieri, Lyn Alden, and Calle for comments and feedback

@ 866e0139:6a9334e5

\ \ Autor: Marcel Bühler. Dieser Beitrag wurde mit dem Pareto-Client geschrieben. Sie finden alle Texte der Friedenstaube und weitere Texte zum Thema Frieden hier. Die neuesten Pareto-Artikel finden Sie in unserem Telegram-Kanal.

---

Die neuesten Artikel der Friedenstaube gibt es jetzt auch im eigenen Friedenstaube-Telegram-Kanal.

---

"Die Ausrufung des Notstands ist der Notstand. Er eröffnet die Möglichkeit eines Endes der Rechtsstaatlichkeit"

Prof. em. Richard K. Sherwin NY Law School

Die von Präsident Donald Trump initiierten Friedensbemühungen zur Beendigung des russisch-ukrainischen Krieges scheinen keinen Erfolg zu bringen. Während Russland darauf beharrt, dass die im Herbst 2022 offiziell in die Russische Föderation aufgenommenenRegionen Lugansk, Donezk, Saporoschje und Cherson von der ukrainischen Armee vollständig geräumt werden, will Präsident Selenskij nicht einmal auf die Krim verzichten und deren Zugehörigkeit zu Russland seit 2014 anerkennen.

Während die Ukraine Sicherheitsgarantien für die Zeit nach einem möglichen Waffenstillstand bzw. Friedensabkommen fordert, besteht Russland weiterhin auf einer weitgehenden Demilitarisierung der ukrainischen Armee und besonders ein Verbot aller ultranationalen bzw. nazistischen Einheiten welche vor allem in der ukrainischen Nationalgarde konzentriert sind.

Nur ein Rohstoffdeal zwischen Washington und Kiew ist offenbar zustande gekommen, da Trump für die vielen Milliarden Dollar, welche in den letzten Jahren in die Ukraine "investiert" wurden, eine Gegenleistung bekommen möchte (nach dem "Ukraine Democracy Defense Lend-Lease Act" vom 19.1.2022 welcher von Präsident Biden am 9.5.2022 unterzeichnet wurde).

Im Rahmen einer Armeereform ist die Ukrainische Nationalgarde auf Anfang April 2025 in 2 Armeekorps mit je fünf Brigaden aufgeteilt worden: das erste Armeekorps wird von der 12. Brigade "Asow", das zweite Armeekorps von der 13. Brigade "Chartia" angeführt welche ursprünglich aus Freiwilligenbataillonen hervorgingen. Insgesamt dürfte es sich bei den 10 Brigaden um ca. 40'000 Mann handeln. Hier eine kurze Selbstdarstellung der Nationalgarde, in der auch der Kommandant, Alexander Pivnenko, zu Wort kommt (leider nur auf ukrainisch):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0fjc6QHumcY

Alexander Syrskij, der aktuelle ukrainische Oberfehlshaber, hat kürzlich den Befehl erlassen, dass die mehr als 100'000 Mann der von der Bevölkerung gefürchteten Rekrutierungstruppe "TZK" ("Територіальний центр комплектування та соціальної підтримки") nun ebenfalls als Kampftruppen an die Front müssen, da die Mobilisierung weiterer ukrainischer Männer weitgehend gescheitert sei. Gleichzeitig wird über die Senkung des Mobilisierungsalters auf 18 Jahre und ein möglicher Einzug von Frauen diskutiert (die bereits als Freiwillige mitkämpfen). 

Für die Zeit um den 9. Mai ("Tag des Sieges") hat Russland einen weiteren einseitigen Waffenstillstand ausgerufen, den die Ukrainer vermutlich wie an Ostern für Gegenangriffe an der Front oder Provokationen in Russland (z.B. Anschläge oder Drohnenangriffe in/auf Moskau nutzen werden). Über die Osterfeiertage hatten sich beide Seiten wie üblich gegenseitig beschuldigt, die verkündete Waffenruhe wiederholt gebrochen zu haben.

Die Kämpfe und die Opferung von Abertausenden dürften also bis auf weiteres weitergehen, auch wenn sie den Kriegsverlauf nicht mehr entscheidend ändern werden. Die Verlustrate beträgt aktuell ca. 1:10 zuungunsten der Ukrainer, da die Russen mittlerweile bei allen Waffensystemen überlegen sind, nicht nur bei der Artillerie und der Luftwaffe sondern auch im Bereich der Drohnen und der elektronischen Kriegsführung.

Wie es dazu kommen konnte, dass die Ukraine aus einem zwar hochkorrupten, aber relativ freien Land zu einem totalitären Militärregime wurde, zeigt ein neues Video eines jungen Ukrainers aus Mariupol, der die dortigen Kämpfe im Frühjahr 2022 im Keller überlebte und es aber vorzog, dort zu bleiben und die russische Staatsbürgerschaft anzunehmen. Aus Sicherheitsgründen nennt er seinen ukrainischen Namen nicht. Seine sachliche Darstellung ist weit davon entfernt, russische oder westliche Propaganda zu sein, sondern stellt eine nüchterne und auf persönlicher Erfahrung basierende Analyse der Ereignisse in der Ukraine seit 2014 dar.

Besonders eindrücklich zeigt er mit Filmmaterial auf, wie nach dem rechtswidrigen Putsch in Kiew, welcher von den Rechtsnationalen als "Revolution der Würde" bezeichnet wird und von Kräften aus dem Westen massiv unterstützt wurde (z.B. durch US-AID), besonders die ukrainische Jugend indoktriniert und militarisiert und auf den kommenden Krieg mit Russland vorbereitet wurde. Hier muss man unwillkürlich an die HJ (Hitler Jugend) denken, deren Schicksal am Ende des 2. WK allgemein bekannt sein dürfte. Es lohnt sich, den rund 35minütigen Beitrag zweimal anzusehen, um alles richtig zu verstehen und aufzunehmen (auf englisch mit slawischem Akzent):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ba_NPxVXVyc

Den 1. Mai habe ich dieses Jahr am Stand der Schweizer Friedensbewegung im Areal der ehemaligen Stadt Zürcher Kaserne verbracht und dabei auch für den neu gegründeten Verein "Bewegung für Neutralität" (BENE) geworben. Der bekannte Friedensforscher Daniele Ganser wird diesen und nächsten Monat an den grossen Schweizer Bahnhöfen eine Plakatwerbung für die immerwährende Neutralität der Schweiz starten (siehe Entwurf im Anhang).

Zu Frieden und Völkerverständigung gibt es keine Alternative, dazu gehört auch das Studium und die Analyse des ukrainischen Nationalismus und Faschismus ("Stepan Bandera Ideologie"), dessen Ursprung und Entwicklung in den letzten rund 100 Jahren bis in die heutige Zeit.

Nur die Rüstungslobby kann mit der viel zitierten "Friedensdividende" nichts anfangen!

---

Marcel Bühler ist freier Mitarbeiter und Rechercheur aus Zürich. Dieser Beitrag erschien zuerst in seinem Newsletter.

---

LASSEN SIE DER FRIEDENSTAUBE FLÜGEL WACHSEN!

Hier können Sie die Friedenstaube abonnieren und bekommen die Artikel zugesandt.

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: friedenstaube@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.

\

@ e3ba5e1a:5e433365

I got into a friendly discussion on X regarding health insurance. The specific question was how to deal with health insurance companies (presumably unfairly) denying claims? My answer, as usual: get government out of it!

The US healthcare system is essentially the worst of both worlds:

• Unlike full single payer, individuals incur high costs
• Unlike a true free market, regulation causes increases in costs and decreases competition among insurers

I'm firmly on the side of moving towards the free market. (And I say that as someone living under a single payer system now.) Here's what I would do:

• Get rid of tax incentives that make health insurance tied to your employer, giving individuals back proper freedom of choice.
• Reduce regulations significantly.

• In the short term, some people will still get rejected claims and other obnoxious behavior from insurance companies. We address that in two ways:

  1. Due to reduced regulations, new insurance companies will be able to enter the market offering more reliable coverage and better rates, and people will flock to them because they have the freedom to make their own choices.
  2. Sue the asses off of companies that reject claims unfairly. And ideally, as one of the few legitimate roles of government in all this, institute new laws that limit the ability of fine print to allow insurers to escape their responsibilities. (I'm hesitant that the latter will happen due to the incestuous relationship between Congress/regulators and insurers, but I can hope.)

Will this magically fix everything overnight like politicians normally promise? No. But it will allow the market to return to a healthy state. And I don't think it will take long (order of magnitude: 5-10 years) for it to come together, but that's just speculation.

And since there's a high correlation between those who believe government can fix problems by taking more control and demanding that only credentialed experts weigh in on a topic (both points I strongly disagree with BTW): I'm a trained actuary and worked in the insurance industry, and have directly seen how government regulation reduces competition, raises prices, and harms consumers.

And my final point: I don't think any prior art would be a good comparison for deregulation in the US, it's such a different market than any other country in the world for so many reasons that lessons wouldn't really translate. Nonetheless, I asked Grok for some empirical data on this, and at best the results of deregulation could be called "mixed," but likely more accurately "uncertain, confused, and subject to whatever interpretation anyone wants to apply."

https://x.com/i/grok/share/Zc8yOdrN8lS275hXJ92uwq98M

@ c3c7122c:607731d7

Help!

Calling all El Salvador Nostriches! If you currently live in SV, I need your help and am offering several bounties (0.001, 0.01, and 0.1 BTC).

In Brief

In short, I am pursuing El Salvador citizenship by birthright (through my grandmother). I’ve struggled to progress because her name varies on different documents. I need someone to help me push harder to get past this barrier, or connect me with information or people who can work on my behalf. I am offering:

• 0.001 BTC (100k sats) for information that will help me progress from my current situation
• 0.01 BTC (1 MM sats) to get me in touch with someone that is more impactful than the immigration lawyer I already spoke with
• 0.1 BTC (10 MM sats) if your efforts help me obtain citizenship for me or my father

Background

My grandma married my grandfather (an American Marine) and moved to the states where my father was born. I have some official and unofficial documents where her name varies in spelling, order of first/middle name, and addition of her father’s last name. So every doc basically has a different name for her. I was connected with an english-speaking immigration lawyer in SV who hit a dead end when searching for her official ID because the city hall in her city had burned down so there was no record of her info. He gave up at that point. I find it odd that it was so easy to change your name back then, but they are more strict now with the records from that time.

I believe SV citizenship is my birthright and have several personal reasons for pursuing this. I want someone to act on my behalf who will try harder to work the system (by appeal, loophole, or even bribe if I have to). If you are local and can help me with this, I’d greatly appreciate any efforts you make.

Cheers!

Corey San Diego

@ c631e267:c2b78d3e

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ a95c6243:d345522c

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ 21ffd29c:518a8ff5

• What Are Homestead Chickens?
  Homestead chickens are domesticated fowl kept by homeowners to provide eggs and companionship. They play a vital role in the homestead ecosystem.

Why Water is Essential in Cold Weather - Hydration Basics:
Chickens don't drink much water naturally but need it for hydration, especially during cold weather when metabolic rates increase. - Environmental Factors:
Cold weather can lead to ice buildup on water sources. Chickens benefit from having access to fresh water year-round.

Maintaining Accessible Water Sources - Shallow Troughs:
Use shallow troughs instead of deep containers to minimize ice formation and ensure constant water supply. - Automatic Feeders:
Consider installing automatic feeders for convenience, especially in unpredictable weather conditions. - Multiple Water Sources:
Provide multiple water sources to prevent competition and ensure all chickens have access.

Preventing Ice Buildup - Floating Shallow Troughs:
Opt for troughs that sit above the ground to avoid ice buildup. Ensure they're placed where they can't freeze completely. - Regular Checks:
Inspect water sources regularly to remove ice and debris, maintaining accessibility for chickens.

Best Practices for Watering Chickens - Waterers Designed for Cold Weather:
Use waterers made of stainless steel or plastic that can withstand cold temperatures. - Seasonal Adjustments:
During extreme cold spells, supplement with a small amount of fresh water to aid in drinking.

Conclusion - Key Takeaways:
Providing proper water is crucial for the health and well-being of homestead chickens during cold weather. Maintaining accessible, shallow water sources prevents issues like ice buildup and ensures hydration.

Final Thoughts - Sustainability Considerations:
While chickens don't drink much, ensuring they have water supports their overall health and sustainability efforts. - Environmental Impact:
Thoughtful water management can reduce water usage, promoting eco-friendly practices on the homestead.

@ a95c6243:d345522c

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ 3b3a42d3:d192e325

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

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

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

How the Cryptographic Magic Works 🪄

This is a Schnorr signature (Zₓ, s):

s = z + H(Zₓ || P || m)⋅k

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

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

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

s = (r + t) + H((R + T)ₓ || P || m)⋅k

Which is the same as:

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

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

s = sₐ + t

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

t = s - sₐ

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

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

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

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

That is the same as:

T = R' + H(R'ₓ || P' || m')⋅P'

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

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

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

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

Important considerations

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

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

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

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

How to Orchestrate the Swap over Nostr?

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

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

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

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

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

Swap Proposal Event (kind:455)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The tags are:

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

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

Swap Nonce Event (kind:456) - Optional

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

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

And the tags must contain:

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

Swap Adaptor Event (kind:457)

The content field is the following stringified JSON:

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

And the tags must contain:

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

Discoverability

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

Swap Listing Event (kind:30455)

The content field is the following stringified JSON:

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

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

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

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

The tags are:

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

Application Specific Swap Listings

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

Sponsored Events

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

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

The following new tags are included:

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

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

Asset Swaps

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

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

It requires the following additional tags:

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

Swap Negotiation

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

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

Work to be done

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

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

References

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

@ 0fa80bd3:ea7325de

![[yedinaya-rossiya-bear.png]]

1️⃣ Be where the bear roams. Stay in its territory, where it hunts for food. No point setting a trap in your backyard if the bear’s chilling in the forest.

2️⃣ Set a well-hidden trap. Bury it, disguise it, and place the bait right in the center. Bears are omnivores—just like secret police KGB agents. And what’s the tastiest bait for them? Money.

3️⃣ Wait for the bear to take the bait. When it reaches in, the trap will snap shut around its paw. It’ll be alive, but stuck. No escape.

Now, what you do with a trapped bear is another question... 😏

@ dbc27e2e:b1dd0b0b

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

Dose:

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

Instructions:

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

@ 9c9d2765:16f8c2c2

CHAPTER FOURTEEN

"I don't get it... How is James still in charge?" Tracy murmured, her brows furrowed as she stared at her screen. She sat in her office, fingers nervously drumming against her desk.

Across from her, Mark stood with arms folded, pacing slowly. "You mean after all that evidence? After the blacklist, the embezzlement records nothing happened?"

Tracy shook her head. "Nothing. I checked again this morning. He’s still listed as President of JP Enterprises. It’s like the files we found didn’t even exist."

Helen, who had been silent until now, hissed through clenched teeth. "This is ridiculous. Are you sure the information got to the right hands?"

"It did," Tracy insisted. "I sent it directly to the Prime Minister's inbox using a confidential channel. I even received a delivery confirmation. Someone higher up must’ve swept it under the rug or maybe James covered his tracks faster than we imagined."

Mark slumped into the chair, clearly defeated. "He’s not just lucky he’s smart. Smarter than we gave him credit for."

For the first time since they began scheming, their confidence had begun to falter. They had dug into James’s past, unearthed the most damning of records, and yet… nothing. He remained untouched. Unshaken.

James continued to lead JP Enterprises with iron resolve, his status not just preserved, but strengthened. Whatever scandal they tried to ignite had fizzled out before it could burn.

The silence from JP's top board members was loud. No statements. No investigations. Not even a whisper of an internal review. To the outside world, James remained the unshakable President who had pulled a crumbling empire back from the edge.

Mark clenched his jaw. "He must have allies who are protecting him."

Helen nodded slowly. "We underestimated him. That was our biggest mistake."

Tracy remained quiet, her eyes still fixed on the screen as if trying to decipher what had gone wrong. She had risked everything, accessed confidential files, and violated protocols, expecting James to crumble.

Instead, he was thriving.

"Have you heard?" Robert leaned over his desk, eyes wide with interest. "JP Enterprises is about to celebrate their sixteenth anniversary. It’s going to be the biggest corporate event of the year."

Christopher looked up from the documents he was reviewing. "I heard. Mr. and Mrs. JP are returning for it. The entire business world is going to be there including us."

Robert nodded. "Every major company in and out of the city has received an invitation. It’s not just a celebration it’s a power show. A way for JP Enterprises to remind everyone who’s at the top."

Indeed, the buzz around the sixteenth anniversary of JP Enterprises was like nothing the city had seen in years. Massive banners were already being hoisted across the city skyline. High-end hotels were fully booked. Fashion designers, chefs, tech specialists, and media crews from around the world were preparing for the grand occasion. It was more than a business event, it was a spectacle.

At the heart of the preparations was James, the young and surprisingly unshakable President of JP Enterprises. Under his leadership, the company had grown in power and reach, and the anniversary was both a celebration of its legacy and a testament to its transformation.

Meanwhile, at Ray Enterprises, tension brewed behind the scenes. Though they were invited, the Ray family carried mixed feelings about attending the event. Memories of humiliation and disbelief still lingered the day James had revealed himself as the President was still fresh in their minds.

"We have no choice but to attend," Helen muttered in frustration during a board meeting. "If we stay away, we’ll seem petty and afraid. But going there means bowing our heads to him again."

Sarah, the secretary, tried to mask her discomfort. "It’s a corporate event, ma’am. It might be best to appear neutral… diplomatic."

Rita, now reinstated as General Manager, remained quiet but observant. She knew better than anyone how unpredictable James could be when it came to public appearances. She had no idea what to expect from him at the anniversary.

Back at JP Enterprises, preparations continued in full force. The guest list included billionaires, global CEOs, high-ranking politicians, and the most influential figures across industries. Red carpets would roll out, cameras would flash, and speeches would echo through the grand hall like music from an orchestra.

The city, already buzzing with excitement, awaited the grand event.

"I can’t believe it," the young woman muttered as she stared at her phone, her hands trembling with excitement. "James… the same James who used to sleep in front of Mr. Kola’s grocery store? He’s the President of JP Enterprises now?"

Her name was Evelyn. Sharp-tongued, impatient, and fueled by bitter memories, she had known James during his hardest days on the streets days when survival meant fighting for leftovers and sleeping on cold sidewalks. To her, his rise wasn’t a success story to be admired. It was a jackpot she felt entitled to.

Storming into the JP Enterprises headquarters during working hours, Evelyn ignored the receptionist's polite inquiries and pushed her way toward the executive wing.

"I want to see James!" she shouted, causing heads to turn in the busy lobby. "I know he’s here. Tell him Evelyn from the street is here!"

Security was alerted immediately, but by then, Evelyn had already reached the waiting area outside the President’s office.

James, who was in a brief meeting with department heads, heard the commotion and stepped out with a composed expression. As soon as his eyes met Evelyn’s, something shifted. He recognized her instantly.

"Evelyn?" he said, frowning slightly. "What are you doing here?"

"Don’t act like you don’t know me, James," she snapped, crossing her arms. "You owe me. We suffered together. I was there when you were nothing. Now you’re swimming in wealth and you think you can forget the people who once mattered!"

James’s expression hardened.

"This is not the place for this kind of talk. You’re disrupting my company’s operations. If you need help, there are proper channels"

"To hell with proper channels!" she yelled. "I came to get what’s mine!"

That was enough. James turned to the nearby security officer. "Escort her out. And make sure she doesn’t return without a valid appointment."

The security guards moved quickly, but Evelyn didn’t go quietly. She shouted all the way to the exit, throwing insults, struggling, and drawing even more attention.

Among those who witnessed the scene was Tracy. At first, she thought it was just a random case of disturbance some unruly visitor trying to make trouble. But as she watched James’s calm yet stern expression, and the woman’s emotional outburst, something clicked in her cunning mind.

This is gold, she thought, quickly pulling out her phone and snapping a series of pictures from the hallway James arguing with a ragged woman, the woman being dragged out, and James watching in silence. What a perfect way to ruin his reputation.

Tracy, ever the opportunist, reviewed the photos and smirked.

This is it… this will shake him up.

Without hesitation, she sent the pictures to Helen and Mark, attaching a voice note.

"I’ve got something you’ll love. A woman, probably James’s sister from the street came begging for money at JP today. He humiliated her. The whole thing happened in front of staff. Check the photos attached. This could ruin him if we spin it well."

Within minutes, Helen replied: “Excellent. This might be the leverage we’ve been waiting for. Keep digging, Tracy. He can’t escape the past forever.”

Mark responded too, bitter laughter echoing in his voice note: “The mighty always fall. This is just the beginning.”

But what none of them knew was that James had already noticed Tracy's growing interest in him her subtle spying, her conveniently timed questions, and now this bold move to document his personal confrontation. He wasn’t going to act just yet… but he was watching.

@ 3ae7fdae:f8d4b19d

Lifting the Curtain on Power and Scandal

The Illusion of Power and TrustIn the modern world, the line between trust and skepticism is razor-thin, especially when it comes to powerful figures and organizations. They present polished facades, dazzling us with promises of stability, innovation, or in Disney’s case, enchantment. Yet, the revelations surrounding Jeffrey Epstein’s network reminded us that power is often far more complex than it appears. This scandal became a litmus test for public trust and fueled questions about who, or what, might be entwined in hidden truths.

When Epstein's crimes were exposed, they revealed not just the horrifying details of exploitation, but also the unsettling reach of his influence. As the media peeled back the layers of his associations, public attention naturally shifted to recognizable names and institutions, including Disney. How could a company that represented childhood innocence, with castles and fairy tales, find itself whispered about in the same breath as Epstein’s infamous circle? This segment examines the roots of that question and the facts that illuminate its plausibility or dismiss it.

Epstein: A Man Who Mastered Access to PowerJeffrey Epstein was more than just a financier—he was a gatekeeper to influence. His lifestyle and operations were an entangled web of charm, manipulation, and wealth, meticulously designed to secure him a place among the powerful. Investigative articles by The Guardian and The New York Times depict Epstein as a social engineer, curating relationships that ranged from politicians and royalty to scientists and celebrities.

Court documents and deposition testimonies during Epstein’s trial confirmed that his homes and private jet were hubs for connecting with influential figures. This access did not come without consequence; it cemented him as both a source of curiosity and, later, fear. Public records, such as those scrutinized in The Washington Post, indicated his involvement with many high-profile individuals. Yet, the details of these relationships varied—some guests were casual acquaintances, others, confidants.

The Infamous Flight LogsThe flight logs of Epstein’s private jet, colloquially known as the "Lolita Express," became a centerpiece for public scrutiny. Released through court orders and accessed by journalists, these logs listed names that triggered a cascade of questions. Guests ranged from prominent business executives to entertainment figures, sparking a debate over whether mere association implied complicity or deeper connections. This fueled the narrative that Epstein’s reach was far more extensive than previously understood, implicating industries where entertainment, power, and trust intersected.

The Role of Speculation in Public DiscourseAs soon as these flight logs surfaced, discussions surged online and across media platforms. The presence of any entertainment figure in Epstein’s orbit raised an eyebrow and, in many cases, invited a leap of logic: if influential media personalities were tied to him, could companies known for entertainment and global reach, like Disney, have hidden associations as well? This hypothesis, though lacking concrete evidence, found fertile ground among those predisposed to distrust large, seemingly untouchable institutions.

It’s crucial to dissect why Disney, specifically, became a subject of speculation. On one hand, its status as an omnipresent media empire makes it an easy target for conspiracy theories that thrive on the juxtaposition of light (Disney’s brand) and darkness (Epstein’s crimes). On the other, it speaks to a larger societal impulse to find cracks in the foundations of those we consider infallible. The idea that even the most beloved entities might harbor hidden truths appeals to a deep-seated desire for transparency and accountability.

The Catalyst of Public CuriosityThe timing of Epstein’s exposure was a critical factor. His arrest and subsequent death in 2019 coincided with a period marked by rising distrust in institutions, fueled by political and social upheavals globally. Social media platforms amplified this distrust, creating echo chambers where half-truths and speculative narratives merged seamlessly with confirmed facts.

It is here that Disney’s name began to surface not as an accused, but as a speculative point in discussions. The reasoning often pointed to a "guilt by association" logic: if the powerful dined, flew, or partied with Epstein, then it was worth questioning the circles in which those powerful entities moved, even without direct evidence. This leap from speculation to assumption reflects a pattern that sociologists recognize as part of conspiracy theory psychology—where a lack of clear answers invites the mind to fill in gaps, often with what feels most compelling.

Reframing the Public’s QuestionsThe real question becomes: why does this speculation hold such sway, even when evidence is scarce? Part of the answer lies in precedent. History is replete with instances where institutions that seemed above reproach were later implicated in hidden misdeeds, from financial frauds to abuse scandals within trusted organizations. This collective memory primes the public to believe that beneath any glittering surface could lie a dark, concealed underbelly.

Disney’s position as an icon of childhood and innocence adds another layer to this narrative. To imagine that such a symbol could be tainted by proximity to someone like Epstein is not just shocking—it’s fascinating. It strikes at the core of what we hold sacred, making it an irresistible topic of conversation and investigation.

Why This MattersUnderstanding why names like Disney are brought into these discussions without verified evidence is essential. It helps differentiate between warranted inquiry and unsupported speculation, allowing us to approach these narratives critically. Addressing this head-on does not only clear the air but strengthens the foundation upon which valid criticism and accountability are built.

A Note on EvidenceAs we move deeper into this exploration, it’s critical to emphasize that while Epstein’s connections to high-profile figures are thoroughly documented, there remains no evidence tying Disney, as an organization, to his operations. Still, the fascination with the “what-ifs” continues, driven by our collective quest for understanding power, secrecy, and the thin line between public and private lives.

The next segment will dive into Epstein’s proven network, unraveling the extent of his influence and why it has been the breeding ground for questions involving the world’s most trusted corporations.

Epstein’s Documented Network

The Web of Power: A Portrait of InfluenceJeffrey Epstein’s network was not merely a collection of acquaintances; it was a curated gallery of the world’s most influential figures, built on calculated relationships and strategic connections. Epstein wielded this network with the precision of a skilled operator, bridging disparate realms of society—politics, academia, business, and media. Investigative reporting by sources such as The New York Times and The Guardian exposed how Epstein maintained access to individuals who shaped policy, managed wealth, and crafted the narratives of popular culture.

Court records, testimonies, and detailed analyses of his interactions revealed that Epstein was adept at placing himself at the center of elite circles. His estates, from Manhattan townhouses to private islands, hosted events that blurred the lines between social gatherings and strategic networking. This chapter delves into the proven extent of Epstein’s reach and why it sparked questions about connections to corporations and public institutions, including Disney.

Flight Logs: The Proof and the SparkThe flight logs from Epstein’s private jet, the infamous "Lolita Express," were among the most illuminating pieces of evidence in mapping his connections. These logs, legally obtained and examined by journalists, painted a picture of Epstein’s influence stretching across industries. High-profile figures were listed, including financiers, political leaders, and entertainment personalities. The presence of notable names triggered waves of speculation—if Epstein had access to such power players, how many more remained unnamed but entangled?

The Guardian and The Washington Post reported that these flights were not just transportation but often involved visits to Epstein’s various properties, known for their opulence and the dark rumors surrounding them. While these logs confirmed that many public figures knew Epstein, the depth and nature of their associations varied widely, from casual acquaintance to deeper involvement.

The Limits of the KnownDespite the breadth of documented connections, there was no verifiable evidence linking Disney as an entity to Epstein’s circle. What the flight logs and guest lists revealed was a man deeply embedded in networks of power, yet even within these proven associations, context was crucial. For instance, some guests, confirmed by court records and investigative articles, were shown to have attended public events or engaged in business unrelated to Epstein’s criminal activities.

The distinction between documented presence and complicity is where the narrative often splinters. The leap from association to implication fueled public debate and conspiracy theories. This was especially true when figures from media and entertainment, sectors known for influencing public sentiment and childhood memories, appeared on the periphery of Epstein’s activities.

Epstein’s Parties and Gatherings: The Elite’s Shadowed StageEpstein’s parties were legendary, drawing attendees from the highest echelons of influence. These gatherings were not casual mixers but orchestrated showcases of power. Reports from court depositions and firsthand accounts highlighted how Epstein leveraged these events to cement alliances and reinforce his status as a gatekeeper to the elite. Some testimonies even described how these events served as platforms for discussing investments, politics, and global initiatives, reinforcing Epstein’s perceived omnipotence.

High-Profile Confirmations and Their ImplicationsSeveral prominent individuals were indeed verified as having ties to Epstein, raising legitimate questions about the extent of their knowledge or involvement. These names included politicians, royalty, and entertainment figures. The ambiguity surrounding these associations allowed theories to flourish. The sheer presence of influential names on Epstein’s guest lists raised the question: If these individuals were implicated, what about the institutions they represented or the circles they moved within?

This was a turning point for public speculation. The logic extended: if an individual from a major media company or entertainment empire like Disney was even remotely connected, could that implicate the company itself? The answer, according to existing court records and credible investigations, remained no. Yet, the absence of direct evidence did not stop speculation; in many cases, it intensified it.

Why Disney Was Brought Into the ConversationDisney’s reputation as a family-friendly giant contrasted starkly with the dark nature of Epstein’s activities, making it an unlikely yet intriguing topic for public discourse. While some entertainment figures appeared on Epstein’s flight logs or were rumored to have interacted with him, investigations have not yielded any proof of corporate-level involvement. However, public fascination persisted, bolstered by the broader questions Epstein’s connections evoked.

It’s worth noting that corporations like Disney, with their vast reach and unparalleled influence, naturally become focal points when discussions of hidden truths arise. The mere idea that such an iconic entity could be associated with real-world shadows captures the imagination and fuels stories that, while lacking proof, thrive on the “what-ifs” that echo through media and online forums.

How Public Perception Shapes the NarrativeSociologists studying the psychology of conspiracy theories point out that the human mind tends to fill gaps in knowledge with what feels most plausible or compelling. When figures from reputable media or entertainment companies are tied, even tangentially, to a scandal as vast as Epstein’s, it challenges the boundaries of trust. This is exacerbated when concrete answers remain elusive, leading to a cycle where suspicion feeds speculation.

The public’s thirst for accountability, especially in the wake of uncovered scandals involving powerful institutions, is both a force for truth and a catalyst for assumptions. In Epstein’s case, the proven reach of his influence and the confirmed involvement of significant figures were enough to trigger the question of how many untold stories lay beneath.

What We Know vs. What We ImagineThe narrative surrounding Epstein’s documented network shows us that while connections can be verified and associations noted, the leap to implicating entire organizations like Disney requires more than names on a list or rumors. It requires evidence that has, thus far, not been presented in any court or investigation. The proven facts are compelling enough: Epstein’s influence was extensive, his ties to power irrefutable. Yet, without direct links, the conversations about specific corporate involvement remain speculative.

In the next segment, we will explore why Disney’s reputation makes it a prime target for such speculation and how its historical handling of public crises plays into these narratives.

Disney – The Symbol of Trust and Target of Suspicion

Why Disney? The Paradox of a Trusted InstitutionDisney’s legacy is built on a foundation of storytelling, dreams, and the belief in happy endings. For nearly a century, the company has woven itself into the fabric of childhoods, becoming synonymous with innocence and magic. This legacy, however, has a dual edge. As the public's trust in institutions erodes and hidden truths are revealed in other sectors, Disney’s position as an untouchable cultural icon makes it both a beacon of light and a potential target for suspicion.

The Symbolism of Disney’s BrandDisney represents more than just a company; it embodies an idea—a refuge where imagination and wonder reign. But this same image that has made Disney a household name also contributes to the paradox of suspicion it faces. When an organization is seen as larger than life, transcending generations and continents, the notion that it could have skeletons in its closet becomes a tantalizing thought. The juxtaposition of innocence with possible shadows creates a narrative that is compelling and worth exploring, even if it remains speculative.

This paradox of Disney as both a trusted symbol and a target for scandal reflects a broader trend. Major corporations that hold influence in our everyday lives—particularly those that shape childhood memories and societal values—are natural focal points when scandals involving power, influence, and exploitation arise. The idea that a company with as much reach as Disney could be connected, however tangentially, to figures like Epstein feeds into this pattern.

Documented Misconduct and Public ReactionsThere have been verified cases involving Disney employees engaging in misconduct, which have been reported by media outlets such as NBC News and local news channels. These incidents, though not systemic and unrelated to Epstein’s network, show how the actions of a few can impact public perception of an entire organization. Examples include arrests for crimes involving minors or inappropriate behavior, isolated events that Disney has publicly addressed through statements and cooperation with law enforcement.

However, these incidents were sufficient to plant seeds of doubt in some minds. Even when addressed swiftly and in line with corporate protocols, such cases reveal a vulnerability: the company’s image can be tarnished not just by its policies, but by the misdeeds of individuals who wear its badge.

The Fuel for SpeculationThe Epstein case acted as a catalyst for looking beyond the obvious, particularly in the context of powerful organizations. If political leaders, financiers, and cultural icons could be connected to Epstein’s circle, why not wonder about the involvement of a company with as vast a presence as Disney? While investigations by trusted outlets have shown no direct corporate link, the sheer scope of Epstein’s influence suggested that any entity known for associating with the powerful could be implicated.

This speculation was not helped by Disney’s approach to public relations. The company’s PR strategies, while sophisticated and generally effective, often prioritize message control over transparency. In a world where silence can be seen as complicity, this strategy sometimes backfires, leading to more questions than answers.

Public Distrust and Historical ContextThe public’s fascination with uncovering hidden truths within major institutions is not unfounded. History is replete with cases where seemingly trustworthy organizations were later found to have concealed scandals. From corporate frauds to abuses within religious institutions, these stories have taught the public that innocence is not immune to corruption. This backdrop primes society to believe that even the most beloved entities, like Disney, could harbor secrets.

Sociologists and media analysts argue that this distrust is a byproduct of what they term the “betrayal effect”—where past disappointments with trusted institutions lower the threshold for believing that betrayal could be lurking everywhere. Disney, with its spotless public image and vast influence, becomes an especially juicy target for such theories. The leap from real cases of employee misconduct to more systemic accusations, however, is where evidence often falls short.

The Role of Social Media and Echo ChambersThe digital age has amplified how speculation morphs into perceived truth. Platforms like Twitter, Reddit, and Facebook allow theories to spread quickly, often outpacing fact-checking and nuanced analysis. Discussions that might once have been confined to fringe circles now gain mainstream attention, especially when they involve powerful figures or beloved brands.

In the context of Epstein’s exposure, this meant that any high-profile connection or name could become part of a broader narrative of guilt by association. The fact that Disney, as a corporation, appeared in speculative discussions alongside verified names from Epstein’s logs was enough for some to draw connections, even without direct evidence.

Reputation Management and PerceptionDisney’s approach to crises and controversies has long involved careful reputation management. From its response to legal issues to how it handles employee-related incidents, the company employs sophisticated PR strategies to mitigate damage and maintain its standing. This is standard practice for global brands; however, the public’s interpretation can be different. Strategic silence or tightly controlled statements can come across as evasive, fueling theories that there is something more to hide.

For a company like Disney, which operates at the intersection of family values and global corporate power, the stakes are high. The expectation isn’t just for entertainment but for upholding the moral high ground. When speculation links Disney to scandals, no matter how peripherally, it chips away at this carefully crafted image.

Why Address This Now?The speculation around Disney and Epstein underscores a crucial point about the nature of public inquiry and corporate reputation. It is not enough for companies to rely solely on public relations strategies that worked in the past. The demand for transparency is greater than ever, and silence, even when warranted, can erode trust.

Disney’s role in the public consciousness means that even baseless theories need addressing. By understanding why these narratives gain traction, both companies and the public can engage in more meaningful dialogues about accountability, proof, and trust.

The next segment will delve into how the public navigates between confirmed facts and conspiratorial whispers, exploring why certain theories stick and what it means for how we view powerful organizations.

Separating Fact from Conspiracy

The Thin Line Between Evidence and Speculation In the age of information, where facts are readily available yet often overshadowed by conjecture, separating truth from conspiracy is both an art and a necessity. When powerful entities like Disney find themselves drawn into discussions of hidden networks and scandals involving figures such as Jeffrey Epstein, it highlights a broader societal challenge: how do we differentiate between what is proven and what is assumed? This segment dissects the interplay of evidence, theory, and the psychological factors that drive our need to seek connections.

The Basis of Public Suspicion Public trust in large institutions has waned over decades, driven by a series of high-profile betrayals. From corporate frauds that shattered economies to scandals involving trusted religious or educational institutions, society has learned that power often conceals flaws and, in some cases, criminal actions. According to research published in the Journal of Communication, this erosion of trust leads to a phenomenon known as confirmation bias—the tendency to interpret new evidence as confirmation of one’s existing beliefs or suspicions.

The Epstein case provided fertile ground for such biases. The verified details of Epstein’s operations—the private jet, the exclusive parties, the high-profile guests—were enough to prompt a collective re-examination of how far his reach extended. While many of his associations were proven to be casual or professional in nature, the public’s hunger for deeper revelations ensured that speculation would thrive in areas where clarity was lacking.

The Role of Real Connections Epstein’s documented network included figures from politics, academia, finance, and media. The release of flight logs and court documents revealed that powerful individuals attended his events and interacted within his sphere. This factual basis, verified by investigative reporting from The New York Times, The Guardian, and other reputable sources, provided legitimacy to the idea that Epstein’s influence was pervasive. However, the extent to which these relationships were innocent or complicit was not uniformly clear.

This ambiguity created a vacuum where speculation could flourish. Public attention shifted from individuals named in the logs to the institutions and industries they represented. It was here that major corporations, including Disney, entered the discourse—not because of documented ties, but because of their visibility and influence.

The Psychology Behind Linking Power and Scandal To understand why theories about Disney’s potential involvement in Epstein’s network persist, it is essential to examine the psychology of conspiracy. Sociological and psychological studies indicate that people are naturally inclined to question narratives when they feel that the truth is being withheld. The more powerful or untouchable an institution seems, the more likely it is to be suspected of hiding something significant.

Disney’s image as a global giant that molds childhoods and shapes culture makes it an appealing target for such theories. The company’s public persona as a bastion of family values and innocence stands in stark contrast to any whispers of scandal or misconduct. This contrast alone provides fertile ground for stories to grow, even in the absence of solid proof.

Confirmed Misconduct vs. Conspiracy It is important to acknowledge that Disney, like any large corporation, has faced incidents involving employee misconduct. News reports from outlets such as NBC News have documented cases where employees were arrested for inappropriate conduct involving minors. These cases, while serious and handled with appropriate legal responses, were isolated incidents. No evidence points to these cases being part of a larger, systemic issue within the company or connected to external figures like Epstein.

However, the very existence of these incidents is often enough to keep theories alive. Public perception does not always differentiate between an individual’s actions and the culture of the organization they work for. When these incidents coincide with broader conversations about power and secrecy, they feed into narratives that imply guilt by association.

The Amplifying Power of Social Media The role of social media in shaping and amplifying conspiracy theories cannot be overstated. Platforms like Twitter and Reddit have created spaces where facts, opinions, and theories coexist with little separation. When the Epstein scandal broke, social media was flooded with discussions, many of which featured a mix of verifiable information and speculative connections. The absence of direct evidence linking companies like Disney to Epstein did not deter users from proposing connections based on circumstantial evidence and “what-if” scenarios.

This phenomenon, described by media analysts as the “echo chamber effect,” allows theories to gain credibility through repetition rather than proof. As theories are shared, retweeted, and commented on, they accumulate a sense of legitimacy that belies their origins.

Why Certain Theories Stick Certain theories persist because they tap into deep-seated fears and the knowledge that the powerful often operate beyond the reach of conventional accountability. High-profile scandals involving powerful figures—whether in business, politics, or entertainment—reinforce the belief that more may be hidden just out of reach. Epstein’s network was confirmed to include names that were once considered untouchable, which validated the idea that hidden truths could surface anywhere.

Disney’s name appearing in speculative discussions highlights the intersection of innocence and power. It reflects a societal expectation that if one pillar of influence is shown to be compromised, others may be as well. This expectation, however, must be tempered with critical thinking and an examination of evidence.

The Need for Discernment Understanding the difference between fact and theory is crucial for informed dialogue. Public scrutiny is essential for accountability, but it must be balanced with discernment. While Epstein’s known associations spanned many sectors, and while individuals from the entertainment industry were involved in his circle, the leap to implicating entire organizations like Disney has not been supported by verified investigations.

The Reality Check Here’s what we know:

Documented Facts: Epstein’s network included influential figures, confirmed by court records and journalistic investigations. Disney’s Position: While Disney has faced isolated cases of employee misconduct, no substantial evidence ties the company as an institution to Epstein’s criminal activities. Public Perception: Theories are fueled by a combination of legitimate distrust in powerful institutions and the psychological need to connect the dots, even when the evidence does not support it. In the next segment, we will explore how media control and the use of non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) contribute to the public’s perception of secrecy and whether this perception is warranted.

Media Control and NDAs – Protecting Power or Ensuring Silence?

The Strategy of Silence in Crisis Management When powerful organizations face potential scandal or crises, the first line of defense is often control—control over the narrative, control over information, and control over public perception. This strategy, while effective in mitigating immediate damage, can backfire by fostering an aura of secrecy that leads to suspicion. Disney, like many other global corporations, has historically employed these tactics, particularly through the use of non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) and strategic public relations (PR) campaigns. But do these measures protect legitimate corporate interests, or do they simply fuel theories that there is more being hidden?

Understanding the Role of NDAs NDAs are legal tools designed to maintain confidentiality and protect business interests. In most cases, their use is standard practice, whether to protect trade secrets, secure settlements, or manage sensitive internal matters. However, when NDAs intersect with scandals involving powerful individuals or organizations, they can become symbols of enforced silence. A report from the Harvard Business Review highlights that while NDAs are often employed for legitimate purposes, their misuse—especially when used to silence allegations of misconduct—has cast a shadow over their intent.

Disney has used NDAs in its corporate dealings, as have many in the media and entertainment sectors. This is not in itself suspicious; however, the mere presence of NDAs in a company’s arsenal can contribute to a narrative of secrecy, especially when paired with limited transparency during controversies.

The Case of High-Profile Secrecy The Epstein scandal showed how the use of NDAs and strategic silence could be perceived in a different light. When influential figures and companies were linked to his circle, silence from those implicated was interpreted by many as an attempt to avoid deeper inquiry. While Disney has not been tied to Epstein’s activities through verified evidence, its use of NDAs in unrelated circumstances and its approach to handling public controversies have made it a recurring subject in theories about hidden truths.

For example, Disney’s meticulous control over its brand image means that it often handles internal issues privately, releasing carefully crafted statements that address public concerns without divulging specifics. This approach, while protective, sometimes has the unintended consequence of making the public wonder what is not being said.

The Intersection of PR and Public Perception Public relations are designed to safeguard a company’s image, ensuring that responses to any negative news are swift and tightly managed. Disney’s PR machine is among the most sophisticated, capable of steering narratives and maintaining its reputation as an entertainment titan. This strategic control has allowed Disney to weather crises that might have permanently damaged lesser brands. However, in the context of a scandal as sprawling and notorious as Epstein’s, such control is perceived differently.

When the Epstein story broke and high-profile connections came to light, companies with any tenuous ties activated their crisis management protocols. For some, this meant issuing vague statements or refusing to comment altogether. To the public, this read as silence—a strategic choice that seemed suspicious when paired with known instances of NDAs being used to keep serious allegations quiet in other industries. The #MeToo movement, for instance, revealed how NDAs were used by some media companies to shield powerful perpetrators of harassment, showing that these tools can sometimes contribute to a culture of concealment.

Silence as Complicity? For a company like Disney, known for its polished public image, silence during times of widespread speculation can amplify suspicions. The question becomes: Is silence an act of protection or complicity? While NDAs are often used to manage settlements or protect internal processes, the fact that they prevent full transparency can make even innocent parties appear as if they have something to hide.

Experts in crisis communication argue that silence may protect the brand short-term but can erode trust long-term. Disney’s approach to handling public perception, from managing employee misconduct cases to addressing larger social controversies, often involves strategic responses that give the public enough information to stay satisfied but not enough to quell the more skeptical voices. This is standard practice but becomes contentious when the public is searching for accountability.

The Impact of Strategic Silence on Public Trust Media and communication studies have shown that transparency is increasingly becoming a measure of trustworthiness for corporations. In an era where the public demands answers and alternative media thrive on filling in gaps left by corporate PR, the stakes for maintaining trust are higher than ever. The use of NDAs and controlled statements can protect a company’s interests, but it also contributes to a perception of secrecy that feeds public doubt.

Disney’s balancing act—protecting its brand while managing incidents behind closed doors—reflects a broader industry trend. Corporations that prioritize narrative control must now reckon with an environment where even a hint of concealment can lead to damaging speculation. The Epstein case amplified this issue, putting the spotlight on how major organizations handle proximity to scandal, even if only by association.

Navigating the Perception The real challenge for Disney and similar companies lies in navigating the fine line between protecting their interests and fostering trust. Complete transparency can be risky, but strategic silence risks becoming complicit silence in the eyes of the public. This duality—where necessary protection measures are perceived as proof of hidden wrongdoing—is why entities like Disney find themselves caught up in discussions about figures like Epstein, despite the absence of concrete evidence.

The Takeaway for Institutions and the Public Understanding the role of NDAs and PR in managing public crises helps frame why powerful companies might become targets of suspicion. While the use of these tools is standard and often justified, their impact on public perception can’t be ignored. For the public, recognizing the difference between warranted inquiry and overreach is key to maintaining productive scrutiny without falling into the trap of baseless theories.

The next segment will focus on what these perceptions mean for society as a whole and why the pursuit of transparency and trust must be a collective endeavor.

Beyond the Shadows – A Call to Unity

The Complex Path to UnderstandingIn an age where trust in powerful institutions is fraying, and access to information is both a blessing and a burden, our approach to truth becomes more critical than ever. The discussions surrounding figures like Jeffrey Epstein and corporations like Disney are not just about scandal; they are about how we, as a society, confront power, secrecy, and transparency. This segment is a call to unite in the pursuit of truth—not through a divisive lens, but with collective discernment and an unwavering commitment to evidence and integrity.

The Lessons from HistoryHistory teaches us that institutions once seen as untouchable can harbor hidden truths. The exposure of corporate frauds, systemic abuses, and cover-ups within trusted sectors has shaped a society that questions everything. The Epstein scandal underscored this, revealing a network of power that reached further than many dared to imagine. Yet, while it validated the public’s instinct to question, it also highlighted a key challenge: differentiating between grounded inquiry and baseless theory.

Disney’s name appearing in speculative discussions about Epstein points to a broader pattern—our collective desire to ensure that those who hold power are not above scrutiny. But as we demand accountability, we must also unite in the practice of informed skepticism. The leap from isolated cases of misconduct or association to implicating entire organizations requires evidence, not just conjecture. This distinction is where we, as a society, must find common ground.

The Role of TransparencyTransparency has become the cornerstone of public trust. Organizations that handle controversies behind closed doors risk damaging their credibility. For companies like Disney, known for protecting their brand with meticulous care, the challenge is clear: find a balance between safeguarding legitimate interests and providing enough transparency to maintain public trust.

The use of NDAs, strategic silence, and controlled narratives may shield brands in the short term, but they can erode trust in the long run. Studies in crisis communication emphasize that openness, even when it exposes vulnerabilities, can reinforce loyalty and confidence among stakeholders. In the context of Epstein and the persistent whispers about powerful corporations, this lesson is especially relevant.

A Collective Call to ClarityThe pursuit of truth is not just the responsibility of journalists, whistleblowers, or industry watchdogs—it is a collective endeavor. The public plays a crucial role in this, but so do the corporations that hold sway over cultural and economic landscapes. When Disney’s name enters speculative discussions, it reflects a deep-seated desire for transparency from those we trust. This desire should be met not with fear of the unknown but with a commitment to clarity.

This segment is a call for unity in approaching these conversations. The balance between healthy skepticism and conspiracy theory is delicate but essential. We must ask hard questions and hold power accountable without losing sight of what separates substantiated fact from assumption.

Why Unity MattersIn times where speculation can divide and misinformation can spread faster than verified facts, unity in the pursuit of truth is vital. When we allow fear and uncertainty to fracture our approach, we weaken our collective power to bring genuine issues to light. Epstein’s case showed that hidden wrongs do exist and can involve the most influential figures. It also showed that uncovering the full scope of such wrongs takes a community committed to patience, evidence, and shared purpose.

Public scrutiny is essential for democracy and social justice, but so is discernment. When theories about organizations like Disney arise without evidence, they risk diverting attention from real, proven issues that demand action. Unity in seeking truth means supporting real investigations, demanding transparency, and recognizing the power of evidence-based inquiry.

Building a Culture of Informed AccountabilityThe goal is not to silence questions but to elevate them, ensuring that they are grounded in reality. This approach not only empowers the public but also sets a standard for institutions. If Disney and other corporations prioritize transparency, they can reinforce the public trust that sustains their brands. Similarly, when the public insists on evidence and integrity in its discussions, it strengthens the very fabric of accountability.

Reflections for the Road AheadAs we move forward, let us commit to being a society that seeks truth not for scandal’s sake but for justice and integrity. Let us stand together in holding power to account, using facts as our foundation and unity as our strength. The story of Epstein and the questions it raises about power, influence, and hidden truths are reminders that transparency and trust are not just corporate responsibilities—they are collective ones.

This call to unity is a reminder that we all play a part in shaping how these stories unfold. When we seek, question, and demand clarity together, we create a society that values truth over rumor, evidence over assumption, and justice over division.

As we conclude this exploration, may we carry forward the lessons learned: the importance of questioning with integrity, seeking truth with diligence, and facing the unknown not as individuals, but as a united community.

@ 41959693:3888319c

Die Schnelllebigkeit der Moderne tilgt in unserer Wahrnehmung die zeitlichen Abstände von Ereignissen. Es bleibt kaum Gelegenheit ein Thema im Rückspiegel zu erfassen, zu durchdenken, zu rezipieren – schon buhlt der nächste Augenblick um Aufmerksamkeit.

Mögen an die Leipziger Buchmesse Ende März mittlerweile nur noch Visitenkarten und Selfies oder manch signiertes Exemplar im Buchregal erinnern; es lohnt sich doch, die größte deutsche Besuchermesse der Buchbranche nun rückblickend zu betrachten. Gerade da ihr Event-Charakter von Jahr zu Jahr zunimmt, ist die Frage reizvoll, welche beständigen Themen dort wie präsentiert wurden, in diesem Fall natürlich „Frieden“.

An allen vier Messetagen hielt ich die Augen auf, wo sich Autoren, Verlage und allgemeine die Institutionen der Branche dazu äußerten. Vorgreifend muss gesagt werden, dass Krieg und Frieden heute nicht mehr zwingend primäre Themen sind, sondern oft begleitend mitbehandelt werden. Für Zerstörung und Elend scheint dabei immer die große Bühne bereitet zu werden; einvernehmliche Koexistenz wird gewöhnlich mit leiser Klaviatur gespielt. Dennoch fand ich vier Bücher, welche direkt das Thema ansprachen:

• Die norwegische Soziologin und Publizistin Linn Stalsberg stellte ihr Werk „War is contempt for life. An essay on peace“ (ISBN: 978-8282262736, Res Publica, 2024) vor, in welchem sie auf all die Menschen eingeht, die für Pazifismus, Gewaltlosigkeit und Anti-Militarismus einstehen. Ihrer Meinung nach haben wir unzählige Berichte über Kriegs-, kaum jedoch Geschichten von Friedenshelden. Die deutsche Ausgabe soll im schweizerischen Kommode-Verlag im September diesen Jahres erscheinen.

• „Die Evolution der Gewalt. Warum wir Frieden wollen, aber Kriege führen“, geschrieben von Kai Michel, Harald Meller und Carel van Schaik, wurde für den Preis der Leipziger Buchmesse in der Kategorie Sachbuch/Essayistik nominiert. Die Autoren vertreten u. a. die Thesen, dass Krieg kein essentieller Gesellschaftsprozess ist, wie es einige geflügelte Worte oder ideologische Äußerungen vermuten lassen – und, dass die Erfolge der Bellizisten nur 1 % der Weltgeschichte ausmachen (ISBN: 978-3423284387, dtv, 2024).

• Der Publizist und taz-Redakteur Pascal Beucker gibt mit „Pazifismus – ein Irrweg?“ (ISBN 978-3170434325, Kohlhammer, 2024) eine Übersicht über die Geschichte des Pazifismus, geht auf in Vergessenheit geratene Hintergründe der einzelnen Motivationen und Bewegungen ein und wagt Zukunftsprognosen über die Erfolgschancen gewaltloser Auseinandersetzungen.

• Neben den Sachbüchern fand sich auch ein Vertreter aus dem Bereich der Belletristik: Rüdiger Heins und Michael Landgraf gaben eine Anthologie mit Friedenstexten, Prosa und Lyrik, heraus: „365 Tage Frieden“ (ISBN: 978-3930758951 Edition Maya, 2025), verspricht der Titel, für den zahlreiche Autoren auf ganz unterschiedliche Art und Weise träumten, sich erinnerten, uns mahnten und weiterhin hoffen.

Ansonsten fanden sich viele kleinere Veranstaltungsformate und Verlage, welche ihr Scherflein beitragen wollten, dabei aber sehr unscharf blieben und beispielsweise im Forum Offene Gesellschaft u. a. Grenzoffenheit, Toleranz und Inklusion behandelten. Inwieweit diese, in jüngster Vergangenheit doch recht stark medial forcierten Themen die zentrale Friedensfrage ergründen und stützen, ist vermutlich Auslegungssache.

Unsere Definition von Frieden mag nicht sonderlich scharf sein; jeder zieht darin andere Grenzen und wird sich situativ nach eigenem Gusto verhalten. Dennoch bewegt uns eine Grundschwingung, führt uns ein Sehnen in eine höhere, gemeinsame Richtung. Diese Erkenntnis ist es wert, durch den Lauf der Geschichte bewahrt zu werden, durch aktuelle Zeugnisse ebenso wie durch die Gedanken derer, die vor uns waren.

---

Ich habe beschlossen diese Bücher für Sie, werte Leser, in den nächsten Wochen nach und nach zu rezensieren.

---

Dieser Beitrag wurde mit dem Pareto-Client geschrieben.

Not yet on Nostr and want the full experience? Easy onboarding via Start.

Artikel findet man auch auf Telegram unter:

https://t.me/pareto_artikel

https://t.me/friedenstaube_artikel

@ f9cf4e94:96abc355

Para esse exemplo iremos usar: | Nome | Imagem | Descrição | | --------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------ | ------------------------------------------------------------ | | Raspberry PI B+ | | Cortex-A53 (ARMv8) 64-bit a 1.4GHz e 1 GB de SDRAM LPDDR2, | | Pen drive | | 16Gb |

Recomendo que use o Ubuntu Server para essa instalação. Você pode baixar o Ubuntu para Raspberry Pi aqui. O passo a passo para a instalação do Ubuntu no Raspberry Pi está disponível aqui. Não instale um desktop (como xubuntu, lubuntu, xfce, etc.).

---

Passo 1: Atualizar o Sistema 🖥️

Primeiro, atualize seu sistema e instale o Tor:

bash apt update apt install tor

---

Passo 2: Criar o Arquivo de Serviço nrs.service 🔧

Crie o arquivo de serviço que vai gerenciar o servidor Nostr. Você pode fazer isso com o seguinte conteúdo:

```unit [Unit] Description=Nostr Relay Server Service After=network.target

[Service] Type=simple WorkingDirectory=/opt/nrs ExecStart=/opt/nrs/nrs-arm64 Restart=on-failure

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

---

Passo 3: Baixar o Binário do Nostr 🚀

Baixe o binário mais recente do Nostr aqui no GitHub.

---

Passo 4: Criar as Pastas Necessárias 📂

Agora, crie as pastas para o aplicativo e o pendrive:

bash mkdir -p /opt/nrs /mnt/edriver

---

Passo 5: Listar os Dispositivos Conectados 🔌

Para saber qual dispositivo você vai usar, liste todos os dispositivos conectados:

bash lsblk

---

Passo 6: Formatando o Pendrive 💾

Escolha o pendrive correto (por exemplo, /dev/sda) e formate-o:

bash mkfs.vfat /dev/sda

---

Passo 7: Montar o Pendrive 💻

Monte o pendrive na pasta /mnt/edriver:

bash mount /dev/sda /mnt/edriver

---

Passo 8: Verificar UUID dos Dispositivos 📋

Para garantir que o sistema monte o pendrive automaticamente, liste os UUID dos dispositivos conectados:

bash blkid

---

Passo 9: Alterar o fstab para Montar o Pendrive Automáticamente 📝

Abra o arquivo /etc/fstab e adicione uma linha para o pendrive, com o UUID que você obteve no passo anterior. A linha deve ficar assim:

fstab UUID=9c9008f8-f852 /mnt/edriver vfat defaults 0 0

---

Passo 10: Copiar o Binário para a Pasta Correta 📥

Agora, copie o binário baixado para a pasta /opt/nrs:

bash cp nrs-arm64 /opt/nrs

---

Passo 11: Criar o Arquivo de Configuração 🛠️

Crie o arquivo de configuração com o seguinte conteúdo e salve-o em /opt/nrs/config.yaml:

yaml app_env: production info: name: Nostr Relay Server description: Nostr Relay Server pub_key: "" contact: "" url: http://localhost:3334 icon: https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u= https://public.bnbstatic.com/image/cms/crawler/COINCU_NEWS/image-495-1024x569.png base_path: /mnt/edriver negentropy: true

---

Passo 12: Copiar o Serviço para o Diretório de Systemd ⚙️

Agora, copie o arquivo nrs.service para o diretório /etc/systemd/system/:

bash cp nrs.service /etc/systemd/system/

Recarregue os serviços e inicie o serviço nrs:

bash systemctl daemon-reload systemctl enable --now nrs.service

---

Passo 13: Configurar o Tor 🌐

Abra o arquivo de configuração do Tor /var/lib/tor/torrc e adicione a seguinte linha:

torrc HiddenServiceDir /var/lib/tor/nostr_server/ HiddenServicePort 80 127.0.0.1:3334

---

Passo 14: Habilitar e Iniciar o Tor 🧅

Agora, ative e inicie o serviço Tor:

bash systemctl enable --now tor.service

O Tor irá gerar um endereço .onion para o seu servidor Nostr. Você pode encontrá-lo no arquivo /var/lib/tor/nostr_server/hostname.

---

Observações ⚠️

• Com essa configuração, os dados serão salvos no pendrive, enquanto o binário ficará no cartão SD do Raspberry Pi.
• O endereço .onion do seu servidor Nostr será algo como: ws://y3t5t5wgwjif<exemplo>h42zy7ih6iwbyd.onion.

---

Agora, seu servidor Nostr deve estar configurado e funcionando com Tor! 🥳

Se este artigo e as informações aqui contidas forem úteis para você, convidamos a considerar uma doação ao autor como forma de reconhecimento e incentivo à produção de novos conteúdos.

@ a95c6243:d345522c

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Johann Gabriel Seidl (1804-1875)

@ 6389be64:ef439d32

Bitcoin is more than money, more than an asset, and more than a store of value. Bitcoin is a Prime Mover, an enabler and it ignites imaginations. It certainly fueled an idea in my mind. The idea integrates sensors, computational prowess, actuated machinery, power conversion, and electronic communications to form an autonomous, machined creature roaming forests and harvesting the most widespread and least energy-dense fuel source available. I call it the Forest Walker and it eats wood, and mines Bitcoin.

I know what you're thinking. Why not just put Bitcoin mining rigs where they belong: in a hosted facility sporting electricity from energy-dense fuels like natural gas, climate-controlled with excellent data piping in and out? Why go to all the trouble building a robot that digests wood creating flammable gasses fueling an engine to run a generator powering Bitcoin miners? It's all about synergy.

Bitcoin mining enables the realization of multiple, seemingly unrelated, yet useful activities. Activities considered un-profitable if not for Bitcoin as the Prime Mover. This is much more than simply mining the greatest asset ever conceived by humankind. It’s about the power of synergy, which Bitcoin plays only one of many roles. The synergy created by this system can stabilize forests' fire ecology while generating multiple income streams. That’s the realistic goal here and requires a brief history of American Forest management before continuing.

Smokey The Bear

In 1944, the Smokey Bear Wildfire Prevention Campaign began in the United States. “Only YOU can prevent forest fires” remains the refrain of the Ad Council’s longest running campaign. The Ad Council is a U.S. non-profit set up by the American Association of Advertising Agencies and the Association of National Advertisers in 1942. It would seem that the U.S. Department of the Interior was concerned about pesky forest fires and wanted them to stop. So, alongside a national policy of extreme fire suppression they enlisted the entire U.S. population to get onboard via the Ad Council and it worked. Forest fires were almost obliterated and everyone was happy, right? Wrong.

Smokey is a fantastically successful bear so forest fires became so few for so long that the fuel load - dead wood - in forests has become very heavy. So heavy that when a fire happens (and they always happen) it destroys everything in its path because the more fuel there is the hotter that fire becomes. Trees, bushes, shrubs, and all other plant life cannot escape destruction (not to mention homes and businesses). The soil microbiology doesn’t escape either as it is burned away even in deeper soils. To add insult to injury, hydrophobic waxy residues condense on the soil surface, forcing water to travel over the ground rather than through it eroding forest soils. Good job, Smokey. Well done, Sir!

Most terrestrial ecologies are “fire ecologies”. Fire is a part of these systems’ fuel load and pest management. Before we pretended to “manage” millions of acres of forest, fires raged over the world, rarely damaging forests. The fuel load was always too light to generate fires hot enough to moonscape mountainsides. Fires simply burned off the minor amounts of fuel accumulated since the fire before. The lighter heat, smoke, and other combustion gasses suppressed pests, keeping them in check and the smoke condensed into a plant growth accelerant called wood vinegar, not a waxy cap on the soil. These fires also cleared out weak undergrowth, cycled minerals, and thinned the forest canopy, allowing sunlight to penetrate to the forest floor. Without a fire’s heat, many pine tree species can’t sow their seed. The heat is required to open the cones (the seed bearing structure) of Spruce, Cypress, Sequoia, Jack Pine, Lodgepole Pine and many more. Without fire forests can’t have babies. The idea was to protect the forests, and it isn't working.

So, in a world of fire, what does an ally look like and what does it do?

Meet The Forest Walker

For the Forest Walker to work as a mobile, autonomous unit, a solid platform that can carry several hundred pounds is required. It so happens this chassis already exists but shelved.

Introducing the Legged Squad Support System (LS3). A joint project between Boston Dynamics, DARPA, and the United States Marine Corps, the quadrupedal robot is the size of a cow, can carry 400 pounds (180 kg) of equipment, negotiate challenging terrain, and operate for 24 hours before needing to refuel. Yes, it had an engine. Abandoned in 2015, the thing was too noisy for military deployment and maintenance "under fire" is never a high-quality idea. However, we can rebuild it to act as a platform for the Forest Walker; albeit with serious alterations. It would need to be bigger, probably. Carry more weight? Definitely. Maybe replace structural metal with carbon fiber and redesign much as 3D printable parts for more effective maintenance.

The original system has a top operational speed of 8 miles per hour. For our purposes, it only needs to move about as fast as a grazing ruminant. Without the hammering vibrations of galloping into battle, shocks of exploding mortars, and drunken soldiers playing "Wrangler of Steel Machines", time between failures should be much longer and the overall energy consumption much lower. The LS3 is a solid platform to build upon. Now it just needs to be pulled out of the mothballs, and completely refitted with outboard equipment.

The Small Branch Chipper

When I say “Forest fuel load” I mean the dead, carbon containing litter on the forest floor. Duff (leaves), fine-woody debris (small branches), and coarse woody debris (logs) are the fuel that feeds forest fires. Walk through any forest in the United States today and you will see quite a lot of these materials. Too much, as I have described. Some of these fuel loads can be 8 tons per acre in pine and hardwood forests and up to 16 tons per acre at active logging sites. That’s some big wood and the more that collects, the more combustible danger to the forest it represents. It also provides a technically unlimited fuel supply for the Forest Walker system.

The problem is that this detritus has to be chewed into pieces that are easily ingestible by the system for the gasification process (we’ll get to that step in a minute). What we need is a wood chipper attached to the chassis (the LS3); its “mouth”.

A small wood chipper handling material up to 2.5 - 3.0 inches (6.3 - 7.6 cm) in diameter would eliminate a substantial amount of fuel. There is no reason for Forest Walker to remove fallen trees. It wouldn’t have to in order to make a real difference. It need only identify appropriately sized branches and grab them. Once loaded into the chipper’s intake hopper for further processing, the beast can immediately look for more “food”. This is essentially kindling that would help ignite larger logs. If it’s all consumed by Forest Walker, then it’s not present to promote an aggravated conflagration.

I have glossed over an obvious question: How does Forest Walker see and identify branches and such? LiDaR (Light Detection and Ranging) attached to Forest Walker images the local area and feed those data to onboard computers for processing. Maybe AI plays a role. Maybe simple machine learning can do the trick. One thing is for certain: being able to identify a stick and cause robotic appendages to pick it up is not impossible.

Great! We now have a quadrupedal robot autonomously identifying and “eating” dead branches and other light, combustible materials. Whilst strolling through the forest, depleting future fires of combustibles, Forest Walker has already performed a major function of this system: making the forest safer. It's time to convert this low-density fuel into a high-density fuel Forest Walker can leverage. Enter the gasification process.

The Gassifier

The gasifier is the heart of the entire system; it’s where low-density fuel becomes the high-density fuel that powers the entire system. Biochar and wood vinegar are process wastes and I’ll discuss why both are powerful soil amendments in a moment, but first, what’s gasification?

Reacting shredded carbonaceous material at high temperatures in a low or no oxygen environment converts the biomass into biochar, wood vinegar, heat, and Synthesis Gas (Syngas). Syngas consists primarily of hydrogen, carbon monoxide, and methane. All of which are extremely useful fuels in a gaseous state. Part of this gas is used to heat the input biomass and keep the reaction temperature constant while the internal combustion engine that drives the generator to produce electrical power consumes the rest.

Critically, this gasification process is “continuous feed”. Forest Walker must intake biomass from the chipper, process it to fuel, and dump the waste (CO2, heat, biochar, and wood vinegar) continuously. It cannot stop. Everything about this system depends upon this continual grazing, digestion, and excretion of wastes just as a ruminal does. And, like a ruminant, all waste products enhance the local environment.

When I first heard of gasification, I didn’t believe that it was real. Running an electric generator from burning wood seemed more akin to “conspiracy fantasy” than science. Not only is gasification real, it’s ancient technology. A man named Dean Clayton first started experiments on gasification in 1699 and in 1901 gasification was used to power a vehicle. By the end of World War II, there were 500,000 Syngas powered vehicles in Germany alone because of fossil fuel rationing during the war. The global gasification market was $480 billion in 2022 and projected to be as much as $700 billion by 2030 (Vantage Market Research). Gasification technology is the best choice to power the Forest Walker because it’s self-contained and we want its waste products.

Biochar: The Waste

Biochar (AKA agricultural charcoal) is fairly simple: it’s almost pure, solid carbon that resembles charcoal. Its porous nature packs large surface areas into small, 3 dimensional nuggets. Devoid of most other chemistry, like hydrocarbons (methane) and ash (minerals), biochar is extremely lightweight. Do not confuse it with the charcoal you buy for your grill. Biochar doesn’t make good grilling charcoal because it would burn too rapidly as it does not contain the multitude of flammable components that charcoal does. Biochar has several other good use cases. Water filtration, water retention, nutrient retention, providing habitat for microscopic soil organisms, and carbon sequestration are the main ones that we are concerned with here.

Carbon has an amazing ability to adsorb (substances stick to and accumulate on the surface of an object) manifold chemistries. Water, nutrients, and pollutants tightly bind to carbon in this format. So, biochar makes a respectable filter and acts as a “battery” of water and nutrients in soils. Biochar adsorbs and holds on to seven times its weight in water. Soil containing biochar is more drought resilient than soil without it. Adsorbed nutrients, tightly sequestered alongside water, get released only as plants need them. Plants must excrete protons (H+) from their roots to disgorge water or positively charged nutrients from the biochar's surface; it's an active process.

Biochar’s surface area (where adsorption happens) can be 500 square meters per gram or more. That is 10% larger than an official NBA basketball court for every gram of biochar. Biochar’s abundant surface area builds protective habitats for soil microbes like fungi and bacteria and many are critical for the health and productivity of the soil itself.

The “carbon sequestration” component of biochar comes into play where “carbon credits” are concerned. There is a financial market for carbon. Not leveraging that market for revenue is foolish. I am climate agnostic. All I care about is that once solid carbon is inside the soil, it will stay there for thousands of years, imparting drought resiliency, fertility collection, nutrient buffering, and release for that time span. I simply want as much solid carbon in the soil because of the undeniably positive effects it has, regardless of any climactic considerations.

Wood Vinegar: More Waste

Another by-product of the gasification process is wood vinegar (Pyroligneous acid). If you have ever seen Liquid Smoke in the grocery store, then you have seen wood vinegar. Principally composed of acetic acid, acetone, and methanol wood vinegar also contains ~200 other organic compounds. It would seem intuitive that condensed, liquefied wood smoke would at least be bad for the health of all living things if not downright carcinogenic. The counter intuition wins the day, however. Wood vinegar has been used by humans for a very long time to promote digestion, bowel, and liver health; combat diarrhea and vomiting; calm peptic ulcers and regulate cholesterol levels; and a host of other benefits.

For centuries humans have annually burned off hundreds of thousands of square miles of pasture, grassland, forest, and every other conceivable terrestrial ecosystem. Why is this done? After every burn, one thing becomes obvious: the almost supernatural growth these ecosystems exhibit after the burn. How? Wood vinegar is a component of this growth. Even in open burns, smoke condenses and infiltrates the soil. That is when wood vinegar shows its quality.

This stuff beefs up not only general plant growth but seed germination as well and possesses many other qualities that are beneficial to plants. It’s a pesticide, fungicide, promotes beneficial soil microorganisms, enhances nutrient uptake, and imparts disease resistance. I am barely touching a long list of attributes here, but you want wood vinegar in your soil (alongside biochar because it adsorbs wood vinegar as well).

The Internal Combustion Engine

Conversion of grazed forage to chemical, then mechanical, and then electrical energy completes the cycle. The ICE (Internal Combustion Engine) converts the gaseous fuel output from the gasifier to mechanical energy, heat, water vapor, and CO2. It’s the mechanical energy of a rotating drive shaft that we want. That rotation drives the electric generator, which is the heartbeat we need to bring this monster to life. Luckily for us, combined internal combustion engine and generator packages are ubiquitous, delivering a defined energy output given a constant fuel input. It’s the simplest part of the system.

The obvious question here is whether the amount of syngas provided by the gasification process will provide enough energy to generate enough electrons to run the entire system or not. While I have no doubt the energy produced will run Forest Walker's main systems the question is really about the electrons left over. Will it be enough to run the Bitcoin mining aspect of the system? Everything is a budget.

CO2 Production For Growth

Plants are lollipops. No matter if it’s a tree or a bush or a shrubbery, the entire thing is mostly sugar in various formats but mostly long chain carbohydrates like lignin and cellulose. Plants need three things to make sugar: CO2, H2O and light. In a forest, where tree densities can be quite high, CO2 availability becomes a limiting growth factor. It’d be in the forest interests to have more available CO2 providing for various sugar formation providing the organism with food and structure.

An odd thing about tree leaves, the openings that allow gasses like the ever searched for CO2 are on the bottom of the leaf (these are called stomata). Not many stomata are topside. This suggests that trees and bushes have evolved to find gasses like CO2 from below, not above and this further suggests CO2 might be in higher concentrations nearer the soil.

The soil life (bacterial, fungi etc.) is constantly producing enormous amounts of CO2 and it would stay in the soil forever (eventually killing the very soil life that produces it) if not for tidal forces. Water is everywhere and whether in pools, lakes, oceans or distributed in “moist” soils water moves towards to the moon. The water in the soil and also in the water tables below the soil rise toward the surface every day. When the water rises, it expels the accumulated gasses in the soil into the atmosphere and it’s mostly CO2. It’s a good bet on how leaves developed high populations of stomata on the underside of leaves. As the water relaxes (the tide goes out) it sucks oxygenated air back into the soil to continue the functions of soil life respiration. The soil “breathes” albeit slowly.

The gasses produced by the Forest Walker’s internal combustion engine consist primarily of CO2 and H2O. Combusting sugars produce the same gasses that are needed to construct the sugars because the universe is funny like that. The Forest Walker is constantly laying down these critical construction elements right where the trees need them: close to the ground to be gobbled up by the trees.

The Branch Drones

During the last ice age, giant mammals populated North America - forests and otherwise. Mastodons, woolly mammoths, rhinos, short-faced bears, steppe bison, caribou, musk ox, giant beavers, camels, gigantic ground-dwelling sloths, glyptodons, and dire wolves were everywhere. Many were ten to fifteen feet tall. As they crashed through forests, they would effectively cleave off dead side-branches of trees, halting the spread of a ground-based fire migrating into the tree crown ("laddering") which is a death knell for a forest.

These animals are all extinct now and forests no longer have any manner of pruning services. But, if we build drones fitted with cutting implements like saws and loppers, optical cameras and AI trained to discern dead branches from living ones, these drones could effectively take over pruning services by identifying, cutting, and dropping to the forest floor, dead branches. The dropped branches simply get collected by the Forest Walker as part of its continual mission.

The drones dock on the back of the Forest Walker to recharge their batteries when low. The whole scene would look like a grazing cow with some flies bothering it. This activity breaks the link between a relatively cool ground based fire and the tree crowns and is a vital element in forest fire control.

The Bitcoin Miner

Mining is one of four monetary incentive models, making this system a possibility for development. The other three are US Dept. of the Interior, township, county, and electrical utility company easement contracts for fuel load management, global carbon credits trading, and data set sales. All the above depends on obvious questions getting answered. I will list some obvious ones, but this is not an engineering document and is not the place for spreadsheets. How much Bitcoin one Forest Walker can mine depends on everything else. What amount of biomass can we process? Will that biomass flow enough Syngas to keep the lights on? Can the chassis support enough mining ASICs and supporting infrastructure? What does that weigh and will it affect field performance? How much power can the AC generator produce?

Other questions that are more philosophical persist. Even if a single Forest Walker can only mine scant amounts of BTC per day, that pales to how much fuel material it can process into biochar. We are talking about millions upon millions of forested acres in need of fuel load management. What can a single Forest Walker do? I am not thinking in singular terms. The Forest Walker must operate as a fleet. What could 50 do? 500?

What is it worth providing a service to the world by managing forest fuel loads? Providing proof of work to the global monetary system? Seeding soil with drought and nutrient resilience by the excretion, over time, of carbon by the ton? What did the last forest fire cost?

The Mesh Network

What could be better than one bitcoin mining, carbon sequestering, forest fire squelching, soil amending behemoth? Thousands of them, but then they would need to be able to talk to each other to coordinate position, data handling, etc. Fitted with a mesh networking device, like goTenna or Meshtastic LoRa equipment enables each Forest Walker to communicate with each other.

Now we have an interconnected fleet of Forest Walkers relaying data to each other and more importantly, aggregating all of that to the last link in the chain for uplink. Well, at least Bitcoin mining data. Since block data is lightweight, transmission of these data via mesh networking in fairly close quartered environs is more than doable. So, how does data transmit to the Bitcoin Network? How do the Forest Walkers get the previous block data necessary to execute on mining?

Back To The Chain

Getting Bitcoin block data to and from the network is the last puzzle piece. The standing presumption here is that wherever a Forest Walker fleet is operating, it is NOT within cell tower range. We further presume that the nearest Walmart Wi-Fi is hours away. Enter the Blockstream Satellite or something like it.

A separate, ground-based drone will have two jobs: To stay as close to the nearest Forest Walker as it can and to provide an antennae for either terrestrial or orbital data uplink. Bitcoin-centric data is transmitted to the "uplink drone" via the mesh networked transmitters and then sent on to the uplink and the whole flow goes in the opposite direction as well; many to one and one to many.

We cannot transmit data to the Blockstream satellite, and it will be up to Blockstream and companies like it to provide uplink capabilities in the future and I don't doubt they will. Starlink you say? What’s stopping that company from filtering out block data? Nothing because it’s Starlink’s system and they could decide to censor these data. It seems we may have a problem sending and receiving Bitcoin data in back country environs.

But, then again, the utility of this system in staunching the fuel load that creates forest fires is extremely useful around forested communities and many have fiber, Wi-Fi and cell towers. These communities could be a welcoming ground zero for first deployments of the Forest Walker system by the home and business owners seeking fire repression. In the best way, Bitcoin subsidizes the safety of the communities.

Sensor Packages

LiDaR

The benefit of having a Forest Walker fleet strolling through the forest is the never ending opportunity for data gathering. A plethora of deployable sensors gathering hyper-accurate data on everything from temperature to topography is yet another revenue generator. Data is valuable and the Forest Walker could generate data sales to various government entities and private concerns.

LiDaR (Light Detection and Ranging) can map topography, perform biomass assessment, comparative soil erosion analysis, etc. It so happens that the Forest Walker’s ability to “see,” to navigate about its surroundings, is LiDaR driven and since it’s already being used, we can get double duty by harvesting that data for later use. By using a laser to send out light pulses and measuring the time it takes for the reflection of those pulses to return, very detailed data sets incrementally build up. Eventually, as enough data about a certain area becomes available, the data becomes useful and valuable.

Forestry concerns, both private and public, often use LiDaR to build 3D models of tree stands to assess the amount of harvest-able lumber in entire sections of forest. Consulting companies offering these services charge anywhere from several hundred to several thousand dollars per square kilometer for such services. A Forest Walker generating such assessments on the fly while performing its other functions is a multi-disciplinary approach to revenue generation.

pH, Soil Moisture, and Cation Exchange Sensing

The Forest Walker is quadrupedal, so there are four contact points to the soil. Why not get a pH data point for every step it takes? We can also gather soil moisture data and cation exchange capacities at unheard of densities because of sampling occurring on the fly during commission of the system’s other duties. No one is going to build a machine to do pH testing of vast tracts of forest soils, but that doesn’t make the data collected from such an endeavor valueless. Since the Forest Walker serves many functions at once, a multitude of data products can add to the return on investment component.

Weather Data

Temperature, humidity, pressure, and even data like evapotranspiration gathered at high densities on broad acre scales have untold value and because the sensors are lightweight and don’t require large power budgets, they come along for the ride at little cost. But, just like the old mantra, “gas, grass, or ass, nobody rides for free”, these sensors provide potential revenue benefits just by them being present.

I’ve touched on just a few data genres here. In fact, the question for universities, governmental bodies, and other institutions becomes, “How much will you pay us to attach your sensor payload to the Forest Walker?”

Noise Suppression

Only you can prevent Metallica filling the surrounds with 120 dB of sound. Easy enough, just turn the car stereo off. But what of a fleet of 50 Forest Walkers operating in the backcountry or near a township? 500? 5000? Each one has a wood chipper, an internal combustion engine, hydraulic pumps, actuators, and more cooling fans than you can shake a stick at. It’s a walking, screaming fire-breathing dragon operating continuously, day and night, twenty-four hours a day, three hundred sixty-five days a year. The sound will negatively affect all living things and that impacts behaviors. Serious engineering consideration and prowess must deliver a silencing blow to the major issue of noise.

It would be foolish to think that a fleet of Forest Walkers could be silent, but if not a major design consideration, then the entire idea is dead on arrival. Townships would not allow them to operate even if they solved the problem of widespread fuel load and neither would governmental entities, and rightly so. Nothing, not man nor beast, would want to be subjected to an eternal, infernal scream even if it were to end within days as the fleet moved further away after consuming what it could. Noise and heat are the only real pollutants of this system; taking noise seriously from the beginning is paramount.

Fire Safety

A “fire-breathing dragon” is not the worst description of the Forest Walker. It eats wood, combusts it at very high temperatures and excretes carbon; and it does so in an extremely flammable environment. Bad mix for one Forest Walker, worse for many. One must take extreme pains to ensure that during normal operation, a Forest Walker could fall over, walk through tinder dry brush, or get pounded into the ground by a meteorite from Krypton and it wouldn’t destroy epic swaths of trees and baby deer. I envision an ultimate test of a prototype to include dowsing it in grain alcohol while it’s wrapped up in toilet paper like a pledge at a fraternity party. If it runs for 72 hours and doesn’t set everything on fire, then maybe outside entities won’t be fearful of something that walks around forests with a constant fire in its belly.

The Wrap

How we think about what can be done with and adjacent to Bitcoin is at least as important as Bitcoin’s economic standing itself. For those who will tell me that this entire idea is without merit, I say, “OK, fine. You can come up with something, too.” What can we plug Bitcoin into that, like a battery, makes something that does not work, work? That’s the lesson I get from this entire exercise. No one was ever going to hire teams of humans to go out and "clean the forest". There's no money in that. The data collection and sales from such an endeavor might provide revenues over the break-even point but investment demands Alpha in this day and age. But, plug Bitcoin into an almost viable system and, voilà! We tip the scales to achieve lift-off.

Let’s face it, we haven’t scratched the surface of Bitcoin’s forcing function on our minds. Not because it’s Bitcoin, but because of what that invention means. The question that pushes me to approach things this way is, “what can we create that one system’s waste is another system’s feedstock?” The Forest Walker system’s only real waste is the conversion of low entropy energy (wood and syngas) into high entropy energy (heat and noise). All other output is beneficial to humanity.

Bitcoin, I believe, is the first product of a new mode of human imagination. An imagination newly forged over the past few millennia of being lied to, stolen from, distracted and otherwise mis-allocated to a black hole of the nonsensical. We are waking up.

What I have presented is not science fiction. Everything I have described here is well within the realm of possibility. The question is one of viability, at least in terms of the detritus of the old world we find ourselves departing from. This system would take a non-trivial amount of time and resources to develop. I think the system would garner extensive long-term contracts from those who have the most to lose from wildfires, the most to gain from hyperaccurate data sets, and, of course, securing the most precious asset in the world. Many may not see it that way, for they seek Alpha and are therefore blind to other possibilities. Others will see only the possibilities; of thinking in a new way, of looking at things differently, and dreaming of what comes next.

@ a95c6243:d345522c

Falls du beim Lesen des Titels dieses Newsletters unwillkürlich an positive Neuigkeiten aus dem globalen polit-medialen Irrenhaus oder gar aus dem wirtschaftlichen Umfeld gedacht hast, darf ich dich beglückwünschen. Diese Assoziation ist sehr löblich, denn sie weist dich als unverbesserlichen Optimisten aus. Leider muss ich dich diesbezüglich aber enttäuschen. Es geht hier um ein anderes Thema, allerdings sehr wohl ein positives, wie ich finde.

Heute ist ein ganz besonderer Tag: die Wintersonnenwende. Genau gesagt hat heute morgen um 10:20 Uhr Mitteleuropäischer Zeit (MEZ) auf der Nordhalbkugel unseres Planeten der astronomische Winter begonnen. Was daran so außergewöhnlich ist? Der kürzeste Tag des Jahres war gestern, seit heute werden die Tage bereits wieder länger! Wir werden also jetzt jeden Tag ein wenig mehr Licht haben.

Für mich ist dieses Ereignis immer wieder etwas kurios: Es beginnt der Winter, aber die Tage werden länger. Das erscheint mir zunächst wie ein Widerspruch, denn meine spontanen Assoziationen zum Winter sind doch eher Kälte und Dunkelheit, relativ zumindest. Umso erfreulicher ist der emotionale Effekt, wenn dann langsam die Erkenntnis durchsickert: Ab jetzt wird es schon wieder heller!

Natürlich ist es kalt im Winter, mancherorts mehr als anderswo. Vielleicht jedoch nicht mehr lange, wenn man den Klimahysterikern glauben wollte. Mindestens letztes Jahr hat Väterchen Frost allerdings gleich zu Beginn seiner Saison – und passenderweise während des globalen Überhitzungsgipfels in Dubai – nochmal richtig mit der Faust auf den Tisch gehauen. Schnee- und Eischaos sind ja eigentlich in der Agenda bereits nicht mehr vorgesehen. Deswegen war man in Deutschland vermutlich in vorauseilendem Gehorsam schon nicht mehr darauf vorbereitet und wurde glatt lahmgelegt.

Aber ich schweife ab. Die Aussicht auf nach und nach mehr Licht und damit auch Wärme stimmt mich froh. Den Zusammenhang zwischen beidem merkt man in Andalusien sehr deutlich. Hier, wo die Häuser im Winter arg auskühlen, geht man zum Aufwärmen raus auf die Straße oder auf den Balkon. Die Sonne hat auch im Winter eine erfreuliche Kraft. Und da ist jede Minute Gold wert.

Außerdem ist mir vor Jahren so richtig klar geworden, warum mir das südliche Klima so sehr gefällt. Das liegt nämlich nicht nur an der Sonne als solcher, oder der Wärme – das liegt vor allem am Licht. Ohne Licht keine Farben, das ist der ebenso simple wie gewaltige Unterschied zwischen einem deprimierenden matschgraubraunen Winter und einem fröhlichen bunten. Ein großes Stück Lebensqualität.

Mir gefällt aber auch die Symbolik dieses Tages: Licht aus der Dunkelheit, ein Wendepunkt, ein Neuanfang, neue Möglichkeiten, Übergang zu neuer Aktivität. In der winterlichen Stille keimt bereits neue Lebendigkeit. Und zwar in einem Zyklus, das wird immer wieder so geschehen. Ich nehme das gern als ein Stück Motivation, es macht mir Hoffnung und gibt mir Energie.

Übrigens ist parallel am heutigen Tag auf der südlichen Halbkugel Sommeranfang. Genau im entgegengesetzten Rhythmus, sich ergänzend, wie Yin und Yang. Das alles liegt an der Schrägstellung der Erdachse, die ist nämlich um 23,4º zur Umlaufbahn um die Sonne geneigt. Wir erinnern uns, gell?

Insofern bleibt eindeutig festzuhalten, dass “schräg sein” ein willkommener, wichtiger und positiver Wert ist. Mit anderen Worten: auch ungewöhnlich, eigenartig, untypisch, wunderlich, kauzig, … ja sogar irre, spinnert oder gar “quer” ist in Ordnung. Das schließt das Denken mit ein.

In diesem Sinne wünsche ich euch allen urige Weihnachtstage!

---

Dieser Beitrag ist letztes Jahr in meiner Denkbar erschienen.

@ 866e0139:6a9334e5

---

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

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

---

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

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

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

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

Natürlich erinnerst du dich. Wer könnte das vergessen?

---

DIE FRIEDENSTAUBE FLIEGT AUCH IN IHR POSTFACH!

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

---

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(Aus dem Amerikanischen übersetzt von René Boyke).

---

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

Sein aktuelles Buch:

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

Hier in einem aktuellen Gespräch:

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

---

LASSEN SIE DER FRIEDENSTAUBE FLÜGEL WACHSEN!

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

Schon jetzt können Sie uns unterstützen:

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

Für Einzahlungen in CHF (Betreff: Friedenstaube):

Für Einzahlungen in Euro:

Milosz Matuschek

IBAN DE 53710520500000814137

BYLADEM1TST

Sparkasse Traunstein-Trostberg

Betreff: Friedenstaube

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

---

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

@ 23b0e2f8:d8af76fc

Necessário

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

Algumas coisas que você precisa saber

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

---

O tutorial será dividido em dois módulos:

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

---

No final, teremos:

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

---

Módulo 1 - Criando uma carteira fria/assinador

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

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

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

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

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

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

---

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

---

Conclusão

Pontos positivos do setup:

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

Pontos negativos do setup:

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

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

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

---

@ 883373e9:9ccef243

HELO88 là một nền tảng giải trí trực tuyến hiện đại, mang đến cho người chơi những trải nghiệm phong phú và hấp dẫn. Với giao diện người dùng đơn giản và dễ sử dụng, HELO88 đã nhanh chóng thu hút sự quan tâm của đông đảo người chơi. Nền tảng này cung cấp nhiều trò chơi đa dạng, từ các trò chơi trí tuệ yêu cầu sự sáng tạo và chiến lược đến những trò chơi giải trí nhẹ nhàng giúp người chơi thư giãn sau những giờ làm việc căng thẳng. Mỗi trò chơi đều được thiết kế với đồ họa sắc nét và âm thanh sống động, mang lại trải nghiệm chân thực và thú vị. HELO88 cũng đặc biệt chú trọng đến việc tối ưu hóa trải nghiệm người dùng, từ việc dễ dàng tìm kiếm và tham gia trò chơi cho đến việc cung cấp các tính năng tiện ích giúp người chơi tận hưởng tối đa thời gian giải trí.

Ngoài sự đa dạng về trò chơi, HELO88 còn đặc biệt chú trọng đến bảo mật và sự an toàn của người chơi. Nền tảng này sử dụng các công nghệ bảo mật tiên tiến, đảm bảo rằng mọi thông tin cá nhân của người chơi đều được bảo vệ một cách tuyệt đối. Các giao dịch và hoạt động trên nền tảng đều được mã hóa an toàn, giúp người chơi cảm thấy an tâm khi tham gia. Hệ thống bảo mật của HELO88 luôn được cập nhật và cải tiến để đáp ứng những yêu cầu cao nhất về bảo vệ dữ liệu người dùng. Bên cạnh đó, hệ thống thanh toán của HELO88 cũng được tối ưu hóa, giúp người chơi thực hiện các giao dịch một cách nhanh chóng, an toàn và dễ dàng. Các phương thức thanh toán linh hoạt, bao gồm thẻ tín dụng, chuyển khoản ngân hàng và các phương thức điện tử khác, giúp người chơi dễ dàng thực hiện giao dịch và tận hưởng các trò chơi mà không gặp phải bất kỳ trở ngại nào. Môi trường bảo mật cao này chính là yếu tố quan trọng giúp HELO88 tạo dựng niềm tin vững chắc trong lòng người chơi.

Bên cạnh các tính năng về bảo mật và trò chơi, HELO88 còn đặc biệt chú trọng đến việc xây dựng một cộng đồng người chơi đoàn kết và thân thiện. Nền tảng này không chỉ là nơi để giải trí mà còn là không gian để người chơi giao lưu, chia sẻ kinh nghiệm và học hỏi lẫn nhau. Các diễn đàn và nhóm trò chuyện của HELO88 luôn hoạt động sôi nổi, là nơi người chơi có thể trao đổi chiến lược, mẹo chơi và tìm kiếm sự giúp đỡ từ cộng đồng. Các sự kiện, giải đấu và chương trình khuyến mãi của HELO88 luôn thu hút sự tham gia đông đảo từ cộng đồng người chơi, tạo ra một không khí vui vẻ và đầy thử thách. Tham gia vào những sự kiện này, người chơi không chỉ có cơ hội thử sức và thể hiện tài năng mà còn nhận được những phần thưởng hấp dẫn. Chính nhờ sự kết nối này mà HELO88 không chỉ là một nền tảng giải trí mà còn là một cộng đồng năng động và tích cực, nơi người chơi có thể gắn kết, học hỏi và phát triển cùng nhau.