Replying to Avatar Lyn Alden

Bitcoin doesn't need governments to win. It doesn't need governments to stack it. It doesn't need to ask for help.

Instead, the bar is much lower. Bitcoiners, in their preferred jurisdiction, would benefit by not being hassled by their government. They'd like to be able to buy it without problems. They'd like to be able to pay for energy and equipment and mine it in peace. They'd like be able to write open source code without facing legal problems. They'd like to be able to operate reputable businesses related to it. If they can't, then some of them will move as necessary.

It's helpful for the ecosystem to have non-hostile jurisdictions in the world. And for those that can't move without great sacrifice (i.e. most people), it's helpful for them that whatever jurisdiction they are in, is non-hostile.

So it's good that bitcoin is getting into the Overton window. The industry has some power now. Bitcoin benefits from builders and educators and advocates. It benefits from those who do their best to prevent the worst legislative outcomes against self-custody, against privacy, against running a business, against mining, etc.

But Bitcoin doesn't need to pander to them to proactively support us, and bitcoiners should recognize the sliminess of politician incentives when they come to pander to us. While it's in their best interest to build national reserves if they actually figure this thing out, we don't need them to build reserves.

I think that's the helpful line. That's where the signal is. To the extent that we minimize how much we are tread on, and build multi-national accepting footholds to pivot around, we gradually build what we want to exist.

We ask to be treated fairly, we use our resources to help ensure that we are, and to the extent that we are not then we adjust as necessary.

The self annointed ”TRUE BITCOINERS 😇” who are lecturing the others not so true bitcoiners about how stupid Trump is and how he doesn’t understand #bitcoin the way #RFK does.. please consider the following:

1. Bitcoin demands vast amounts of energy.

2. Trump clearly understands this and have very credible thoughts about how to get to the enormous expansion of energy generation that is needed to be successful in bitcoin and AI.

3. RFK HATE nuclear power. And he is FULLY on the #climatescam and is not positive towards expanding the ”drilling”. So he has NO credible plan for expanding the energy generation in a way that is sufficent.

With that in mind: Who of the two REALLY understands #Bitcoin ?

#TRUMP or RFK?

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

both are politicians, not interesting to bitcoiners if you got what nostr:npub1a2cww4kn9wqte4ry70vyfwqyqvpswksna27rtxd8vty6c74era8sdcw83a just said.

Bitcoin does not need miners in America, nor expansion of energy production. It's the other way around - miners find good energy opportunities around the world.

In fact, vibrant bitcoin mining is a sign of poor decisions in the fiat energy realm.

Cheap/free hydro in SE Asia is because of centrally planned projects, cheap on-grid in Texas is due to renewable subsidies deployed creating supply/demand disconnects through ERCOT.

Alternatively, if a country’s energy policy reduces waste and lowers red tape, then that energy will be used for more valuable applications than bitcoin mining.

Bitcoin mining is the energy buyer of last resort, geographically agnostics interruptible demand. The most profitable miner will consume only waste, curtailed, stranded energy…not compete with other productive demand applications.

True to some extent, but nuance will change the picture to some extent:

- you can't scale the production continuously in industry. You can allow other productive use by building a power plant. Bitcoin is the buyer of first resort in this case, allowing other production that would not otherwise happen.

- combined with energy futures, it's the best regulator, allowing the energy to be cheaper. Overproduce base load that will be consumed by miners, but incentivize them with futures to turn off the machines. It's cheaper than producing expensive peak load. This lowers the prices for productive use.

Energy is complicated.

Energy is complicated but bitcoin mining isn’t as much.

The difficulty adjustment will lead to the pursuit of energy increasingly cheap then free then eventually paid to the miners. This type of energy isn’t found in GW scale but single/double digit MWs or hundreds of kWs … and it isn’t found in any single country.

Mining will decentralize in chasing this type of energy source or it will fail. Pretty simple.

I’m a bitcoiner just as much as you and nostr:npub1a2cww4kn9wqte4ry70vyfwqyqvpswksna27rtxd8vty6c74era8sdcw83a

I have a DIFFERENT take on the subject. So Please don’t speak for all ”bitcoiners”

I think you might have opened the wrong app before typing your response.

What EXACTLY do you mean? I prefer active aggression before passive which is the one(what shall I call you, Speech Police?) you’re showing here.

Exactly, BTW Trump speech impressed me way more than RFK…