pull down to refresh
I am empathetic to the ‘do not waste’ Sats arguments. While
I like zapping posts, very few are truly worth the eternal cost. Free Text is of negligible value in the age of inference.
Maybe “real” Sats are just more precious to me, and DC. If you are happy to MoE me a few million sats I would be happy to circulate them throughout the economy:
bc1qnp82um34cptx7qr6lk7rk0r5eep0vj7vdkqsz3
I’m happy to bounce CCs. It achieves the same and supports this centralized site.
You can call us both parasites for being “in only” on SN, but it is not hypocritical. I like to think that myself and others like DC who choose “in only” are adding value in other ways.
There is also the security risk of attaching a wallet. I don’t like delegating control of keys to 3rd parties. Which is what attaching an outgoing payment API is doing.
Please don’t criticize my security model, or the choices I make with what I do with my earned sats. It’s not your place to do this.
Ah, so everyone who lives on a Bitcoin standard must tip in sats to other players on SN. Must have missed that chapter in Saifedean Ammous‘s book.
You keep saying hypocrisy. Hypocrisy would be if DC worked for a central bank. Or wrote Keynesian literature. Choosing to not configure a setting on a centralized website is nonsense, not hypocrisy! Who cares!
Why do you care what one player does with their sats? You keep summoning him too. Why you so itching for a fight bro. Let’s all live in orange peace.
Why is it hypocrisy? Is every Bitcoiner required to use SN, and tip each other sats via a centralized message board?
Is the MoE of Bitcoin influenced in the slightest by a handful of LN txs between DC and SN nodes?
Just relax brother, you are getting too uptight about what others are choosing to do.
I’m tired of this ss - you are neither channeling Solomon or Satoshi with this shit. Darth can do whatever he damn well pleases. That is the nature of Bitcoin. Opt-in system. If Bitcoin required trolls to boost onchain txs (or whatever you consider MoE), it has failed. I appreciate your enthusiasm, but you are trying to bully people into your world view. What kind of opt-in economic nonsense is this!
Stop preaching your flavor of MoE. I don’t give a fuck what darth does with his account wallet bindings or coins, the guy has dedicated years to trying to advance the field, and you have been giving him grief for months about some damn trollboard sats.
I watched. The core arguments are:
ETF reduces the “voice”, because it’s AUM and can’t run nodes.
Sure - but this is orthogonal to the MoE usage. Run a node. Unlike a S&P ETF I can get a voting voice by running some Bitcoin node software.
ETF picks ‘wrong chain’ and goes with corpo chain.
Sure, but we can still use the “free” chain as MoE. Run a node.
NYKNYB - users won’t spend their coin because they can’t.
Sure, but I don’t care what other people do with their coins.
Basically, an argument against ETF is an argument about how people are using Bitcoin. “i don’t like how you are using Bitcoin.” Do it right!
I don’t find aantonop arguments here super convincing. I understand where he is coming from, and he is stating, but these things do not impact Bitcoins use as a MoE. Practically nothing can stop this. It’s just dictating how they think
It should be used, or taking an ideological position, that while admirable, might be missing the forest for the trees.
Hodling is using. Spending is using. Earning is using. Wrapping it in instruments is using.
None of this impacts the fact you and I could exchange value via an onchain tx any time.
I believe ETFs are an additive construct that improves the viability, usefulness and value of Bitcoin. Including use as a MoE.
What they reduce in circulation is made up for in increased capacity (less speculative trade based tx vs zero cost etf trade), increased fiat conversion ratios and increased adoption/mindshare.
Ok, ETFs. Sure, it’s out of circulation and not being used as MoE. But even then, reducing circulation does have a positive effect on those that are, in they are worth more. It might increase the use as an MoE!
What if I let someone spend up to some limit sats from my LN node, they are sharing — by definition it’s my sats, but they may also be “owned” by the 3rd party. They can spend this and use it as an MoE. So it’s not strictly true that custodied sats cannot be used as an MoE. Or cash app. Jacks got the sats but the law says I can spend em. MoE.
You can say ETF bad, but it’s not that clear.
The problem here is that the state didn’t need to go through this charade. He was tried in absentia. He is never going back to this place. Romania has no power to enforce this. It was a waste of Romanian tax payers money funding a theatrical performance for a bunch of old men.
Just waste, to send a message, in the dying days of a war long lost.
Today, in the U.S., an executive order was signed to reclassify cannabis, which is the primary reason pretty much any other state in the world still has it illegal, and consequently not built a local cannabis industry worth real money. It has been traded by humans for centuries.
Romania are attempting to exclude this man’s cultural works from their state. Which is impossible. Of course, this just makes him more popular, illicit. Europe is connected enough, any Romanian could go to one of his concerts in any other European city trivially. The only people hurt by this are themselves, Romanian local commercial activities like concerts, merch, food, entertainment from tours. I hope the see the absurdity of their actions and adopt a more 21st century view of things.
Peak? Not even close. Wait until every person on earth can generate say, hour long videos or simulations, perfectly indistinguishable from real filmed footage, of anything, anywhere. Perfect propaganda of any agenda by anyone at any time. That will be peak psyop time. The energy and computation required for such things are currently out of reach with our technology, but this is changing fast.
By late 2025, you already can’t believe anything you see, hear or read, but there are signs. You got a little while yet before you question the fabric of your reality.
Nostr solved no “hard”, as in ByzGenP “hard” problems. Social media, or just messaging itself, is not a computer science problem. We have had open comms protocols like IRC since ‘88.
If nostr solved any problem, it was codifying a simple json encoding protocol that enabled arbitrary signed messages to be collected and relayed. It was simple, and allowed rapid development of web and mobile clients. It was extensible and permissive. Many people ran infrastructure for free to distribute notes via their relays. Because it was censorship resistant, a lot of the notes were spam.
Of the real world problems, not computer science, that may be solved using this nostr, these will exist in layers and extensions to the protocol.
I don’t believe social media is actually a problem to solve - it is what it is.
Nostr is not social media, it’s simply a protocol to sign and distribute and retrieve messages.
“Non custodial” is a psyop. It uses the negative “non” to sound bad. It makes it sound like custodial is the norm and this is the bad version of it.
It’s meant to scare you off — that’s why legislation in EU loves to use this phrasing.
Do not use non-custodial as a phase. It is a tool of the state to discourage you to from holding your own coins and taking control (away from them) of your money.
He is able to sell BTC to pay for STRC yield.
STRC, being the most popular, will attract the largest coupon payments.
Of course, this will be unpopular, but its allowed under the offering.
"Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's" - Matthew 22:21
The Christian doctrine says pay your taxes. Jesus said to pay em. Yes, Christian ethics does not consider paying state taxes to be immoral, rather, it is a duty. The ancient people were smart enough to not accept fiat currency, they wanted coins of silver and gold! Ancient civilizations had far less trust.
(Not religious myself but wanted to offer another data point to this).
An LLM rephrasing of my comment? I think it still captures the core ideas, and seem to be a universal truth, or at least a human truth.
It depends how we define taxation.
The free market providing services, even on a voluntary basis, becomes de facto involuntary tax due to social pressure or necessity. Its just ongoing payment for something. That the monetary flow goes:
Me -> Service Provider
vs
Me-> Gov tax -> Service Provider , may have efficiency gains, but its not so simple.
I consider tax to be maintenance of a service or common property.
In the case of Land, that's paying for the state guns to defend it, you cant remove it without removing the defense. Someone is getting paid for the risk.
Could we get better value for our monetary spend to private providers vs Gov distribution to private providers from Taxation?
Maybe, but i am also not convinced a private market would always come out cheaper. There are efficiencies and negotiation at scale by governments too.
What about things that are shared possessions, common possessions. Corporal, physical 'ownership' is just one type.
There is maintenance costs in terms of energy, compute and storage to maintain something even digitally owned by someone.
Running a node is supplying to the commons, and the resource costs are a form of implicit taxation on the participants.
Fiat is worse by far. Taxation, or maintenance of the commons, becomes inevitable in sufficiently advanced social system systems. It is unavoidable, the argument is for the specifics of what is taxed, how it is taxed, etc.
Even a hypothetical 10 person Bitcoin citadel is going to need everyone to contribute in some way, that is tax. 10 people will argue over the specifics.
But Fiat:
Humanity thrived for thousands of years under regimes of taxation, to the the ruler, the King, the State. It is sound money, or lack there of, that is causing such social issues in our society today. Fiat, or unbound money, leads to lack of discipline.
It was the unbinding of physical quantities (like gold in storage), from monetary supply that lead to such dramatic devaluations per unit of account. Inflation eats away at peoples savings and purchasing power, it acts as a invisible tax to all economic participants.
If we could eliminate tax entirely, every sufficiently advanced social system would fail. Bad.
If we could eliminate fiat (by going back to sound money, where the politician cannot change the monetary supply by fiat), we may trend towards utopia.
Nice shots!