Compare: https://www.jetpen.com/blog/2021/05/09/future-distributed-applications/

nostr:nprofile1qqstnem9g6aqv3tw6vqaneftcj06frns56lj9q470gdww228vysz8hqpzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgqg6waehxw309ahx7um5wghx7unpdenk2urfd3kzuer9wcq3wamnwvaz7tmjv4kxz7fwvd6hyun9de6zuenedyvu6425 Maybe good idea to purchase a cheap GoPro-like device that you can covertly record the activity at the hotel room entry, while you are not present. Then, you never need to rely solely on hotel security cams.

Correction: link to the full article

https://newsletter.squishy.computer/p/natures-many-attempts-to-evolve-a

I would like to see Gordon Brander's article reframed in terms of Consistency Availability Partitioning tolerance (CAP theorem = Brewer's theorem).

Article: https://www.myhub.ai/items/natures-many-attempts-to-evolve-a-nostr

Guy's Read: https://open.spotify.com/episode/5qNxe5YsvaDpKvojJGfusZ?si=OS44QukFTT265Mbhn-TMrg&t=1846

"AI is going to replace your job" is equivalent to saying "power tools are going to replace your job".

If only 21,000,000 BTC can ever exist, these valuations are impossible.

Censorship resistance is necessarily traded off with privacy? You cannot have both? This is the first I've heard of this.

https://open.spotify.com/episode/2Sc0UuIhoD8YefMHor6C13?si=QwM9S-IRSuKjYLwecHtdlw&t=1360&pi=1mR5ieKxRFmmw

On a Bitcoin standard, the volatility is always zero. One BTC is always valued at one BTC. That will never change.

The more times that I revisit my formulation of rights, the more confident I am in it. I truly believe I have added an essential component to this understanding, which was missing previously. That element is 'mutual recognition', a specialization of 'reciprocity'. The latter concept is also helpful in understanding the proper response to violation of rights.

https://www.jetpen.com/blog/2023/01/23/revisiting-the-definition-of-rights/

NAK?

I use Signal to chat with some acquaintances. I don't really believe it is secure in terms of privacy. It may implement some form of encryption. It may offer some form of authentication and data integrity. These measures may be an improvement over other messaging technologies.

However, I don't remember ever generating a private key to use in Signal. I don't have custody of a private key that I control and keep safe and private. Therefore, I can only assume, not my keys, not my privacy.

I'm the same. I can't play music and don't understand where to begin. I've even read books on music theory recently. After reading about the circle of fifths and not understanding (unable to see the pattern), music feels further out of reach than ever. If music is an art, it is a black art.

We have come to understand, chiefly through the teachings of government education, that 'science' means the expert opinions espoused by an authority with more clout than you.

I wonder if the style of how science is taught plays a role. Every science course spends a lot of time on the history and the scientists credited with discoveries. This puts the focus on persons more so than the method and the substance of each discovery. Putting aside shoulders and giants that are disregarded by venerating specific individuals, this style of teaching conditions the mind to believe what is told by people anointed with special mystique. In this way, we train a society of non-player characters.

To train scientific minds, we must not tell them to believe what they are told. It is not even enough to demonstrate and have students reproduce well-known experiments. When we teach Newton, we need to finish with an apology that although he got it mostly right, his understanding was incomplete, and thus ultimately not entirely correct. Same for Einstein. Same for Bohr. Same for Schrodinger. Same for everyone and everything we know today. Everything we think we know in science today is in fact incorrect at the extreme limits of our understanding. Observations disagree with our best theories, and our best scientists cannot yet explain them. The emphasis of our training must be to teach scientists to not be married to our incomplete and incorrect knowledge passed on to us by our predecessors and the current crop of experts. Science is about seeking the truth, not about being told the truth.

One of the most valuable ideas I didn't fully appreciate until only a few years ago listening to Sean Carroll's "Biggest Ideas in the Universe" series of videos was the distinction between an "effective theory" and a "fundamental theory". Almost everything we know is an effective theory. This means the theory is only useful within some narrow range of conditions. To teach the theory without that caveat is to lie by omission. Almost everything science students are taught suffers from lying by omission. That's why I often quip that everything we know today is wrong or everything we know today is a lie.

I'd like to take the formal definition of "effective theory" and dress it down to business casual.

I am reminded of second and third year in engineering Skule™, where most students learn for the first time the real-world relationship between theory and practice. First year is occupied entirely by maths-and-sciences 101. Most students have not ever built anything of their own design (without someone telling them how) at that point in their life.

Even during first year, students start to see a difference in mentality between professors from math and science faculties as compared to engineering faculties. It was my first exposure to the routine application of "first order approximation", whenever any calculation became difficult. Engineering profs literally did this at every turn, and the 'good enough' quality of this spun my head. It was quick and dirty, and yet presented with the same mathematical formalism and rigor. Most importantly it was effective. Engineering is all about applying theory, but knowing when and how to apply rules of thumb for practical work.

Eye opening was digital circuits. One would imagine that logic gates that only compute based on 1 (5v) and 0 (ground) are pretty well-behaved. A student naively building circuits will quickly realize that this so-called digital world is a mess of analog madness. WTF are capacitance, resistance, and inductance doing in this binary world? What do you mean I have to put a capacitor across the ground and 5v pin? Madness!

Holy shit did the theory ever lie by omission. Reality is 'complicated'.

This is an interesting perspective: "Is illegal Bitcoin a good thing?" Legitimization of Bitcoin allows tentacles of regulatory capture and state involvement to infiltrate the ecosystem. When BTC is illegal, state influence is excluded, and BTC participant are properly incentivized to build resilience and protect the network.

https://open.spotify.com/episode/1knFLL9TPuLtGVdSRtDEF7?si=xPM_jnwIRUqZ4du4cWIdqQ&t=3839&pi=-VAnffLERDa94

Seeing a sudden surge of interest in Nostr as Twitter users are posting their npubs. Is the Telegram CEO arrest opening eyes to the vulnerability of centralized platforms?

What is the current bubble? I think it was the zirp-induced real estate bubble, where people locked into low interest rate mortgages saw their property values skyrocket as covid refugees fled New York and California. Now with higher interest rates, homeowners cannot afford to sell their homes or move elsewhere, so we see stagnation due to paralysis, as inventory remains near zero while demand cannot be satisfied.

I'm guessing, as fees rise due to increased demand for settling on chain and due to the reward disappearing for miners, the fee for spending might exceed the value of the UTXO.

I always imagined the asteroid belt in an elliptical orbit between Mars and Jupiter, but it's actually almost triangular connecting Jupiter's Lagrange points L3, L4, and L5.

nostr:npub1h8nk2346qezka5cpm8jjh3yl5j88pf4ly2ptu7s6uu55wcfqy0wq36rpev the point of disagreement with Rand on the topic of faith actually pertain to a concept called Benevolent Universe Premise. Rational optimism is BUP: the belief without needing proof that the universe is available to be understood by our reasoning minds; and beneficial to us to the extent that we are able to control it according to such understanding.

https://open.spotify.com/episode/68Lu0Al64awfUNpXbpHu0p?si=E3Rk5O46Tx-RtjAr8I7X9A

"far right" is only used as an epithet by those among the far wrong.