pull down to refresh
21 sats \ 0 replies \ @327c19b153 20 Nov \ on: What would you sacrifice sleep for? AskSN
Wouldn't sacrifice it for much. The hustle and grind types say 'i'll sleep when im dead' or 'sleep is for the weak' but honestly thats a real death cult kind of vibe. I get it, obsession, work that absolutely needs to get done, pure vibes and joy that come at the early hours of the morning, not to forget moments where sacrifice is needed for survival. But with everything I'm learning, sleep is one of the most important things for me. Performance, health, joy, stability, patience, calmness, etc. all increase for me when i prioritize it.
very cool, i promise to always read the readme now. again, i wish i could understand what all of this means, but I really liked Dan and his project, so I'm excited to see what comes about from all this.
This just reminded me. I wish I could contribute intellectually but I am not well versed in the technical realm. I am learning tho and becoming a huge fan of git. Not sure if you’ve seen this project https://gitworkshop.dev/. All I know is that it’s also git + NOSTR. I saw Dan, the projects creator, speak live about it and it sounded awesome. As I’m sure yours is as well. Git + NOSTR seems incredibly necessary from what I can tell.
You’re directionally right about the scam, but I think it’s even worse – and more precise – than “gov bad” or “ES is a corporation.”
What’s actually happening with ES + Tether/Bitfinex looks exactly like the old gold → paper playbook:
- Bitcoin = new gold (reserve collateral)
- USDT / bank IOUs / “Bitcoin banks” = new paper layer
- State = branded front-end + legal shell for a private central bank
Voskuil’s line that “the purpose of a reserve currency is to tax” is the key here.
Once a state (or a Tether-like issuer) hoards BTC as reserve, it’s not “for the people” – it’s:
Once a state (or a Tether-like issuer) hoards BTC as reserve, it’s not “for the people” – it’s:
- collateral to issue more IOUs,
- a narrative prop (“Bitcoin country!”),
- and a tax base on top of which they can enforce their units (USDT, CBDC, whatever).
Citizens get:
- custodial wallets, stablecoins, KYC rails, and
- maybe some skin exposure to BTC if they’re lucky and determined.
The cheering is basically people applauding a rerun of:
gold in vaults, paper in your pocket – but now with a Bitcoin sticker on the vault door.
On “legal tender”: you’re right that Bitcoin isn’t debt – it’s a final asset, no one’s liability.
States can pass a law and call it “legal tender,” but that doesn’t change its nature.
What they can do is build a debt/IOU superstructure on top of it and legally force everyone to use the IOUs while they sit on the BTC.
States can pass a law and call it “legal tender,” but that doesn’t change its nature.
What they can do is build a debt/IOU superstructure on top of it and legally force everyone to use the IOUs while they sit on the BTC.
So I’d frame it like this:
- State / Tether hoarding BTC as reserve is default adversarial.
- It signals they want Bitcoin’s properties and myth, but not its ethos of self-custody and individual sovereignty.
- The real fight is not “will they buy” but what rails people actually touch:
- self-custody vs custodial,
- Lightning with your own keys vs app with an admin key,
- sats vs USDT.
If we’re not building and using circular, non-custodial Bitcoin economies ourselves, then yeah – their reserves become our chains, and people are literally cheering their own IOUs.
It seems that the battle over narrative sovereignty will play out even inside Bitcoin-native spaces, using the same tools: embeddings, ranking, and cost curves.
The“dark care” frame is excellent. Caring + bad models turning into harm.
Where I’d push back is on the numbers. 4 absolutely has the “earth / square / cube / base” resonance you’re pointing at, but I wouldnt say base is automatically “low consciousness.” Foundation is where anything stable has to start. From a sovereignty / Bitcoin lens, 4 is also: boundary, property line, protocol layer, the box you stand inside so you can actually build. Also the number reduction of 444 → 4+4+4 = 12 → 1+2 = 3.
But, importantly, that doesnt make your core point about “dark care” less valid. If anything, BIP444 is a live example:
- people genuinely “caring” about CSAM and legal risk
- importing that fear into consensus
- proposing to re-square Bitcoin’s expressive layer with moral/legal filters at the protocol level
i.e., dark care: sincere concern channelled into centralizing moves and content norms onchain.
I just want to make sure that we are not building a new preist-class of 'light occultists' who get to assign what the numbers mean. Decentralized symbolic literacy is great, and interpretations are critical. But, I would like to make the argument here that final judgment on BIPs should still rest on incentives, property rights, and whether the change preserves or attacks content-neutral consensus.
In other words: the real occult move around BIP444 is in the attempt to smuggle moral panic and legal anxiety into the base layer under the story of “protection.” The numbers help us analyze and diagnose all this for sure, but, again, I argue the actual war is over who gets to define meaning and limits for the protocol. And if thats the case, for me, its critical that we dont make the same mistake with a numerological diagnosis (the same goes for all other diagnostic mirrors as well.)
100 sats \ 1 reply \ @327c19b153 OP 16 Nov \ parent \ on: Favorite thinkers/ideas on ego and humility? AskSN
The goal isn't to stay on the ground, but to integrate the ground into your stride.
this is it a fantastic line. I really appreciate everything youve written here. I have a much clearer understanding of what humility is. I look forward to diving more into your work.
Humility as a functional protocol for sovereign accuracy
thats really awesome. i like this. takes a lot of unnecessary pressure of yourself. humility combined with self efficacy, a quiet kind of confidence. the question is how do you think less of yourself? is it just realizing that there is always more to learn/practice?
great stuff, thank you for the reply. Etymology is a great way to explore this topic. Also your second paragraph is excellent, I never imagined it to not be a virtue. I am familiar with Gurdjieff but not enough to know his work on all this. I will check him out!
Just in general, @DarthCoin's Homo Fiatus meme says all you need to know. But if you really want the numbers:
-
Strategy is not an existential threat to Bitcoin.
- No BTC-backed margin loan, no hard “liquidation price,” no mechanical wipeout event tied to a single price level.
- Their balance sheet is still deeply BTC–asset positive: ~$61.9B in BTC vs
$8.2B in debt ($11B including prefs).
-
They are a serious short–medium term price and narrative risk.
- If they’re forced to sell a big chunk (hundreds of thousands of BTC), the market will puke hard: brutal volatility, scary headlines, fake “Bitcoin is dead (again)” narratives.
- But the scale of their stack (~642k BTC) is comparable to flows the market already absorbs (815k BTC sold by long-term holders in 30 days; ETFs hold 1.32M+ BTC).
-
The real risk sits on Strategy’s capital stack, not on Bitcoin’s protocol.
- Shareholders, bondholders, and preferreds eat the actual solvency/refinancing risk.
- The network keeps hashing; nodes keep validating; rules don’t change.
-
Worst case for Bitcoin is painful but ultimately healthy.
- Strategy blows up → their ~3.2% of supply gets redistributed over time from a visible corporate whale into many other hands.
- Short term: deep drawdown + adoption FUD.
- Long term: more decentralized ownership, less single-entity concentration, same 21M cap.
135 sats \ 0 replies \ @327c19b153 OP 14 Nov \ parent \ on: Favorite thinkers/ideas on ego and humility? AskSN
Thanks for the Kazantzakis recc. I will give it a look.
As far as I have worked out (standing on the shoulders of giants) to me it all seems to be about 1) knowing yourself and your limits and respecting those limits. and then proving that you respect those limits with your behavior, rather than just saying you do 2) repairing what wrongs you have caused 3) keeping your promises 4) carrying your downside, that if you take risks you are the one who bears the cost of failure, not finding ways to push that others, no blaming others, asking for exceptions, making excuses, etc.
As for Lao Tzu, he is a master for a reason. So many good ones that really make you think (paraphrasing):
- The best is like water: it benefits all things and does not contend. It dwells in low places that others avoid.
- Rivers run to the sea because it lies below them. Thus it becomes king of a hundred valleys.
- I have three treasures: compassion, frugality, and not daring to be first under Heaven.
Love the “nothing special” part, but not pure P2P yet (Square and LSPs are real chokepoints). The lever now is density and custody: more places to spend, and more merchants keeping some sats instead of auto‑settling to fiat. Thanks for the field report
Nice yea I figured Tolle might be brought up. I have to check out his books with more rigor. Lama surya das is a legend too. I’m not a fan of Hawkins but I definitely appreciate your comment. I will check out that book and see what I can learn about humility. I do agree that it is important to always try to remember how small we in comparison to the vast universe. Unfortunately tho I’ve noticed that thought doesn’t help me much when it comes to the complexity of life and the things we deal with here in our lives.
-
After you pay, it’s their money. You don’t have a right to know or control whether they hold or sell unless that was agreed before the payment.
-
If it matters to you, make it part of the deal up front. Ask for a “we keep X% in BTC” policy in exchange for a small discount. No agreement, no expectation.
-
Vote with your spend. Pay BTC to merchants who publicly keep some BTC or use non-custodial rails. Pay fiat to everyone else. No shaming, just selection.
-
Decide case by case with a simple check: Value you get
- how much it matters to you to support BTC use − exchange fees/traceability you don’t like − hassle to pay in BTC If that total feels positive, pay in BTC. If not, pay fiat.
-
Merchants who instantly sell aren’t “wrong.” Many have fiat bills, thin margins, and tax constraints. A circular economy grows faster when more people can earn and settle costs in BTC, not by policing what happens after a sale.
-
Practical options (only if both sides want them):
- Two prices: fiat price and a BTC price that improves if the merchant keeps more BTC.
- Simple proof: the merchant states a retention band (e.g., 20–50%) or shows they run non-custodial Lightning. If they don’t, the price reverts to the standard rate.
- “Minimize exchange use” pledge: merchant prefers P2P or non-custodial rails. If not, they lose the BTC price perk.
Bottom line
- No right to control post-payment. If retention matters, price it into the deal or choose a different merchant. Build the loop with contracts and choices, not with moral pressure.
I'm not a writer myself, but I'm sure its difficult. Although I refuse to let you make excuses for yourself. Stay focused. You will find it.