So you can be jailed for posting on nostr instead of instagram?

Why? (asking out of ignorance, not a core dev or networking type)

Franklin left $2k in silver to the cities of Philadelphia and Boston. Good reflection for bitcoiners about the resilience of fiat despite it’s shit monetary qualities

https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/627475/200-year-old-gift-from-benjamin-franklin-to-boston-and-philadelphia

All (experiential) things are impermanent, nothing you experience can satisfy you for more than an instant.

It’s not enough to acknowledge this intellectually. You have to train yourself to see and feel this as the default.

It’s simple and works well. I use it because it’s free and I use proton email. If you’re just wanting a little privacy from your ISP it does the job

oohhhhh

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=R1ftFufZ344

trying to understand this

amazing to me that they get their “bitcoiner philosophy” from those fucking shitcoin scammers

banger!

Love me some Catan

Idk but I always say FOMO-C in my head

Southwest figured out the best way to do this. No assigned seats, but giving everyone a number by which they should line up. Satisfies the desire to line up, but manages it so people aren’t blocking things

I was using phoenix to send zaps. It works well, although I sometimes had issues connecting to electrum. It’s worth giving it a try

pv hodlberry. In vino veritas

What I said re: convenience holds for the average person, and clearly also for bitcoiners. When presented with the problem of “how do I get an lnurl to get zaps?”, it’s clear what people chose.

So WoS and get alby are sucking up the money that would otherwise go to developers of self-sovereign set ups? Give me a break.

Why are we happy that custodians (the "3rd parties" Satoshi *made Bitcoin to route around*) are the preferred onboarding method for new users?

Happiness has nothing to do with it. It’s about practicality and being realistic. There is a huge part of the population that does not care about bitcoin, privacy, and sovereignty. And they never will unless they get burned. The only reason they would use bitcoin is because it can do something for them (eg zapping, boosting a podcast, buying from nostr marketplace). I still want these people on nostr because I want value 4 value to reach as many people as possible. I want more customers in the future nostr marketplace. I don’t see how you on board a non bitcoiner to lightning without custodians. And if they get burned, well then that’s the best lesson anyone could ever have about the importance of sovereignty.

Claim 1) is not refutable. It’s a hypothetical statement about the future. But regardless, we all know the average person will adopt the most convenient setup. So either self-sovereign is more convenient, or it won’t be the most popular. And that really has nothing to do with what is most adopted currently.

Claim 2) is obviously true. As far as privacy and zaps go, I doubt I will ever send an anonymous zap. I want the poster to know I zapped them, just like I want them to know I’m the one who replied to their post.

Claim 3) is claim 1) rephrased. And as I said before, it has little to do with entrenchment. The most convenient solution gets the most users. Period. The only thing that can change that is if users are in a hostile environment.

Claim 4) is probably true. But who cares? If you’ve already traded privacy and sovereignty for convenience, not sure why it’s a concern if custodians are being efficient.

I don’t think Claim 5) is true. It’s not like custodians are sucking up funding that would otherwise go to developers of self sovereign set ups. As soon as a convenient self sovereign set up emerges, it would get a lot of users. This is like saying because fiat exists there’s less pressure and funding for bitcoin development. That doesn’t add up to me. There’s people that care about privacy and sovereignty and people that don’t.

Now how about this? Any self-sovereign setup would require the user to already have bitcoin and make an initial base chain transaction right? In terms of on boarding non bitcoiners to zaps and lightning, it’s great that people are working on custodial solutions that can make this as easy as possible for newbies

Claim 1) is not refutable. It’s a hypothetical statement about the future. But regardless, we all know the average person will adopt the most convenient setup. So either self-sovereign is more convenient, or it won’t be the most popular. And that really has nothing to do with what is most adopted currently.

Claim 2) is obviously true. As far as privacy and zaps go, I doubt I will ever send an anonymous zap. I want the poster to know I zapped them, just like I want them to know I’m the one who replied to their post.

Claim 3) is claim 1) rephrased. And as I said before, it has little to do with entrenchment. The most convenient solution gets the most users. Period. The only thing that can change that is if users are in a hostile environment.

Claim 4) is probably true. But who cares? If you’ve already traded privacy and sovereignty for convenience, not sure why it’s a concern if custodians are being efficient.

I don’t think Claim 5) is true. It’s not like custodians are sucking up funding that would otherwise go to developers of self sovereign set ups. As soon as a convenient self sovereign set up emerges, it would get a lot of users. This is like saying because fiat exists there’s less pressure and funding for bitcoin development. That doesn’t add up to me. There’s people that care about privacy and sovereignty and people that don’t.

Now how about this? Any self-sovereign setup would require the user to already have bitcoin and make an initial base chain transaction right? In terms of on boarding non bitcoiners to zaps and lightning, it’s great that people are working on custodial solutions that can make this as easy as possible for newbies

gn ya weirdos

#[0]​ I’m sorry