pull down to refresh
@SimpleStacker
1,001,402 sats stacked
stacking since: #48657longest cowboy streak: 114 verified stacker.news contributor
18 sats \ 0 replies \ @SimpleStacker 25 Apr \ parent \ on: Anon chases Bitcoin thief in a libertarian world lol
Amazing that it was written in 2014, when bitcoin was hardly mainstream
Guess that'd make it trickier to publish in the zine tho
Great story! Personally, I think this would make a great piece for the zine @plebpoet, though probably only if the original author can be credited
That's cool, I'd love to be able to call myself a patent holder. I'd have no idea where to even begin with the system.
I'd love to see bitcoin implemented in classroom management technologies so I can use sats as rewards and incentives beyond just grades
I know it's not something that really exists in tradfi, but it's exactly the kind of thing bitcoin can do that traditional banking can't
Sadly, the lesson that will be learned is "don't trust politicians" (which is true), but the bigger lesson they need to learn is not to trust in government policies at all in the first place (and thus don't vote for artificial market manipulations like solar "credits")
As for me, I don't think I'll be affected. I have solar panels, but I don't produce more than I consume.
Sometimes when I think we've hit peak clown world, I have to remind myself to actually check the historical records. I'm sure there are lots of examples of crazy stuff going on in markets in the past too. (Or at least, i tell myself that to try and feel better about the present.)
It's been a great conversation piece. I explained SN to a bunch of normies who saw it on my desk. I told them it's like Reddit but with really thoughtful people and high quality posts, and that I've stacked over 900,000 sats (around $800) just by posting on it.
Maybe "burn" carries too much connotation. Another way to think of it is an upgrade that is not backward compatible.
This is cool data. Would you be interested in automating the data collection and also keeping the records in a spreadsheet or something?
As bad as it might be for your health, I can't bring myself to hate McDonalds. Too many good memories as a kid.
Consume in moderation, and it should be fine.
80 sats \ 5 replies \ @SimpleStacker 24 Apr \ parent \ on: 71% of Trump voters oppose Medicaid cuts news
IMO Trump voters are pretty easy to understand, and when so-called "elites" say they don't understand them, it's not really because they don't understand--it's because they don't like them and don't want to understand.
It'd be like asking a Palestinian to try to understand Israel, or an Israeli to try to understand a Palestinian. Easy to understand, but do you want to?
I think I'm more on Lopp's side of this. I don't really see the burning of quantum-vulnerable coins as "a pre-emptive violation" of one of Bitcoin's principles, as the author of this article puts it. I see it more as a part of the overall upgrade package to post-quantum cryptography. As long as there's a long enough runway for people to upgrade before their coins are lost, I think this is a fair outcome.
The author of this article also argues against any large scale human intervention in bitcoin:
I’d argue that, generally, any large-scale human intervention in Bitcoin should be categorically rejected. Bitcoin was designed to avoid human “intervention” precisely because it inevitably leads to mistakes or corruption. One might claim intervention “for the right reasons” is justifiable, but that opens the door to endless subjective debates.
The problem is that every major upgrade to Bitcoin is going to be a large scale human intervention and open to subjective debate, as I wrote about in #849906. I think it's naive to think otherwise. I agree with the author that we need to be careful about large interventions, but it's implausible to think that we can just categorically reject anything that involves subjective judgment. Even the statement that we should reject such interventions is itself a subjective judgment, and a large scale intervention on the side of ossification.