R.l.P

https://m.stacker.news/135317

You didn’t orange-pill her.

Reality did.

This is the part most Bitcoin people miss.

You can’t “convince” someone with:
• charts
• podcasts
• memes

You convince them with:
• failed currencies
• closed bank doors
• “go back to Egypt, no value here”

When money breaks in front of you
The theory suddenly gets very real

You tried to teach her Bitcoin in the living room
She learned it in Cairo, Addis, Kampala

Who wins?
Not the guy holding the sign in Calgary
The mom trying to protect savings
The traveler stuck with dead paper at a border

I’ve seen the same pattern in my own life
I share an idea
I over explain it
I smother it

Then one real world moment hits
And the person says
“Oh… now I get it”

That’s the game

You didn’t drag her into Bitcoin
You gave her front-row seats to a broken system

And then you did the smartest thing

You let her build her own on-ramp

Travel With Bitcoin
That’s not theory
That’s:
• real problems
• real payments
• real people

Most builders in this space think the only path is
Write code
Launch protocol

She proved another path
Design tours
Curate experiences
Tell stories

And here’s the takeaway for anyone reading this and married to their “thing”

Whether it’s Bitcoin
Startups
AI

Stop trying to win the debate at the dinner table

Instead:
• Put them in rooms where the problem is obvious
• Let them see other people care
• Help them spend it, not just stack it

Talk less
Show more

Because until money fails in their hands
Bitcoin is just your hobby

Once it fails in front of their eyes
It becomes their mission too

Jensen wants to pay engineers in “AI tokens.”

On paper
Sounds cool
Feels futuristic

But look a little closer

You’re not getting money
You’re getting store credit

Remember the old company towns?
You got paid in scrip
You could only spend it at the company store

Who won?
Not the workers

Now imagine the 2024 version of that

You:
• Get “AI tokens” instead of cash
• Can only use them on the employer’s preferred AI stack
• Are nudged to use the tools they got subsidies or discounts for

Who does that really serve?

The engineer?
Or the vendor relationship?

I’ve worked with founders who do this with software already
They don’t pick the best tool
They pick the tool that came with the fattest “enterprise deal”

Now apply that to your daily work
Your creativity
Your output

You’re not choosing the best agent
You’re choosing the one the procurement team negotiated

Feels less like empowerment
More like a loyalty program

I’d rather see this:
Pay people in something neutral
Something portable
Something you can take with you if you leave

Sats make way more sense than siloed “AI tokens”
Why?

Because with sats:
• You aren’t locked into one ecosystem
• You can choose the best agent for the job
• Your “AI budget” is money, not monopoly money

Right now we’re at a fork in the road

Two futures

Future one
Every big AI platform invents its own token
Every company ties you to “their” stack
You get paid in credits that die when you switch jobs

Future two
Your comp is real value
You pick your own tools
Vendors compete for your sats, not the other way around

Which world do you want?

I once consulted for a startup that gave people “internal credits” for using their AI platform
Guess what happened?

People spammed the tool to burn credits
They didn’t become more productive
They became more compliant

That’s the risk here

We dress up control as “innovation”
We call it tokens
We pitch it as a perk

But if you can’t:
• Save it
• Spend it anywhere
• Take it with you

Is it really compensation?

Or is it just a new company store with better branding?

Hey friend, this one hits home.

Because this is exactly how most people think about capitalism:
“Rich people hoard stuff. Poor people get wrecked. The end.”

But that’s not what’s actually happening.
Not when it works well, anyway.

Let’s break it down 👇

When I was a kid, I thought “business” meant:

• Big buildings
• Suits
• Someone yelling “buy!” on TV

Nobody told me it actually meant:

• Solving problems
• For people
• At scale

Now connect that to capitalism.

Most “normies” think:
Capitalism = greed + hoarding + survival-of-the-fittest.

But what is it really when it functions?

It’s closer to:

• You see a problem
• You risk your time, energy, and money
• You solve it better than others
• You get rewarded

That reward isn’t random.
It’s a signal.

The profit is the receipt that says:
“People valued what you built more than the resources you used.”

No prices?
No profit?
No signal.

And without that signal…
how do you know what to build?
how much?
for who?

You don’t.

That’s how you get:

• 10,000 tons of steel nobody needs
• baby formula when people are desperate
• Empty shelves and full warehouses

We’ve seen this movie before.
Soviet Union. Mao. Anywhere that kills the entrepreneur.

Pokopia is cute.
But it’s a fantasy.

In games, the food always respawns.
The villagers never really starve.
No one actually risks their life savings.

Real life is not that forgiving.

In the real world:

• That “greedy” builder risking everything?
  They’re the reason you get:
  • iPhones
  • Uber
  • Same-day delivery
  • Cheap flights

Are there bad actors?
Of course.

But saying “capitalism is just greed” is like saying:
“Sports are just steroids and cheating.”

You’re focusing on the edge cases.
You’re ignoring the system.

The system where:

• Prices tell you what people want
• Profits tell you where value is created
• Losses tell you where value is destroyed

Remove that?
You’re blind.

No prices → no information.
No profit → no incentive.
No incentive → no innovation.

“Everyone takes only what they need and contributes what they can.”

Sounds nice, right?
Like a cozy PSA.

But who decides what you “need”?
Who decides what you “can” contribute?
A committee? A politician? Your boss?

I’ll take a messy market over a perfect planner any day.

Because at least in a messy market:

• You can experiment
• You can move
• You can opt out
• You can build

In planned systems?
Fall in line. Or else.

Here’s the wild part:
Most of the people who hate “capitalism”…
…love the stuff capitalism creates.

They’re tweeting about “late-stage capitalism”
…from a $1,000 phone
…on an app built by venture capital
…delivered over networks built by private firms
…while waiting for DoorDash.

The irony writes itself.

Want a healthier society?
We don’t need less capitalism.
We need better capitalism.

That means:

• Less cronyism
• Less bailouts for failures
• More skin in the game
• More real competition

And yeah…
way better economic education.

If people actually understood:

• How prices work
• How profit = value creation (when markets are competitive)
• How entrepreneurship reallocates resources to higher uses

They wouldn’t say “capitalism is just greed.”
They’d say:
“Greed exists everywhere.
Capitalism is just the only system that harnesses it into something useful.”

Here’s how I explain it to friends:

Anytime someone builds something people actually want, chances are they:

• Make others better off
• Get paid
• Reinvest those profits
• Create more value

Is it perfect? No.
Is it better than fantasy economies where “everyone shares”?
Look around. Compare outcomes.

So what do we do?

We build anyway.
We teach anyway.
We show, not just tell.

Because the best argument for capitalism isn’t a textbook.
It’s:

• That cafe on your corner
• That indie game you love
• That small business that took a risk—and made your life better

You want less “Tom Nook” energy in the world?
Start companies that don’t exploit.
Invest with a spine.
Teach kids that business is about solving problems, not hoarding points.

Capitalism isn’t dead.
People just forgot how it works.

Time to remind them.