Dusting off some old memes:

hahaha hahahaha 🤣🤣🤣

Happy MT.Gox anniversary ... Not your keys, not your 🧀

null

Just thinking out loud about the Nostr marketplace idea... rather than have any kind of "submission" process, Nostrgram could just scan the relays for notes that have a certain hashtag (e.g. #marketplace) and that include any required information. Those notes would show up in a special feed that can be searched and filtered.

I really think that could work well, plus it prevents it from being client-specific. Any client could filter and search for notes with the same hashtag and organize the marketplace in their own way.

Seeing all the replies to my question about people who sell stuff for ⚡ or BTC got me thinking... I could add a simple "Craigslist" type interface to NostrGram that lets you search for products submitted by your fellow Nostriches. Each listing could have a few properties:

* Product and Description

* Cost (priced in sats)

* Location (if shipping is involved)

* Website (if available)

* Linked pubkey + DM icon (for contacting seller)

* Ratings and reviews (for social proof)

Thoughts? What am I missing?

Everything about this photo and post is absurd 🫠

twitter is already dead but it will probably take a few years before the rest of the world figures that out

Yeah at this point anyone who’s using Wasabi is either a statist bootlocker or a moron

Bitcoin is fundamentally flawed. It is not fungible or private. Go read the cypherpunk manifesto, and then tell me with a straight face that bitcoin's lack of privacy is alright. Also, for something to be sound money, it needs to be fungible, this is not optional. Bitcoin is not money because it lacks the essential quality of money known homogeneity or fungibility. Without privacy and fungibility, bitcoin is not money, has irredeemable design flaws and is an inferior money to monero. The flippening of bitcoin by monero on the dark web is Gresham's law in action. Change my mind.

If Nostr+Zaps doesn't force Elon to integrate lightning into Twitter, nothing will.

As a value investor, I find Charlie Munger's recent WSJ-published arguments to ban bitcoin/crypto and thank the leader of the Chinese Communist Party to be embarrassing and sad.

I'm currently writing a research note to 10,000 retail and institutional subscribers on why it's dumb.

Munger has a history of arguing that someone should be able to "steelman" their opposing view if they are going to have an opinion on something, which means being able to articulate an opponent's viewpoint more convincingly than even they can. Recently on CNBC, Munger was quoted on his historical claim and then asked by the anchor to steelman bitcoin/crypto after his WSJ op-ed, and he was unable to and didn't even try to.

He doesn't know anything about Segwit, Taproot, block size limits, whether a base layer should be Turing complete or not, anything about power dynamics between nodes, developers, and miners, etc. Absolutely no clue, and no attempt at a clue.

Such a bad viewpoint doesn't only reflect his old age, but also reflects his inherent ethics at a structural level from inception as a banker. It undermines his entire legacy.

Even on the history of money and its problems in developing countries, Munger would be schooled in a Twitter Spaces by any random above-average bitcoin twitter anonymous account.

It's sad to see.