So I started Erik Cason's book in earnest last night - and was surprised at how much of what he saying was disagreeable to me. We've actually came to many similar conclusions, but via very different paths. His tone is very us vs. them - and almost angry. I get it. I agree with the point of bitcoin being sovereignty, and what that means to the current power structures and cultural ethos. We just see the why of all it very differently. I take a much more atheistic view of the topic, for one. And my early research on anarchy was that government was a product of property, and that the early solutioning toward anarchy involved the abolition of property rights. Which is almost the opposite of Bitcoin. I have always been wary of anarchy, as I think property is necessary.

Anyway, I ended up switching over to Heidegger, who I expected to disagree with more, but I hoped reading some of his work would help me better understand Erik's work, as Erik often references Heidegger. So far, reading Heidegger has been more pleasant for me.

More importantly, this exercise is really pushing me to write a book. I've been thinking about it for a long time; it was even one of those things I was hoping to do much earlier in life. I'm actually glad I didn't. But now I'm really feeling the need to formally publish a lot of my philosophy. I may also publish a separate Bitcoin book, but more of a philosophical or anthropological approach to it.

So I'm actually thinking I should write less long-form style thoughts here, and save them for publishing. That said, I may need some help editing when the time comes.

I think this is an early positive coming out of an experience I expected to be positive anyway.

If only moon, then I could spend a few months writing instead of fiat mining. :)

Today I wrote code though. For speeding up some dreary spreadsheet work I was tasked with. Nothing fancy, but I still did it, and made my life less dreary.