Avatar
TK SuitCoin.exe 80HpW
12cfc2ec5a39a39d02f921f77e701dbc175b6287f22ddf0247af39706967f1d9
Nothing is true, Everything is permitted. You'll categorize me irrespective of what i put here.

"planning a medicine which taken in small doses can produce the effects for which one might hope from its thoroughgoing application both competition and Central direction become poor and inefficient tools if they are incomplete they are alternative principles used to solve the same problem and the mixture of the 2 means that neither will really work and that the result will be worse than if either system had been consistently relied upon or to express it differently planning and competition can be combined only by planning for competition but not by planning against competition"

The Road to Serfdom

-Hayek

Nests are completely broken for me.. audio wont go to my headphones on mobile at all.. dont know why @island

does the Left-Right paradigm accurately summarize the human political experience or is there a better way to classify said beliefs?

how can we break down complex governmental structures into simplified thought experiments to show the absurdity of its existence?

we find out today

https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/axiomsofliberty/episodes/voulentarist-handbook-chp-34-e292448

Most think too plainly

Ideas:

Socialist society = has plan in place everyone is focused on said plan therefore we must have plan

Capitalist society = no plan at all ERMAAHGAWD everyone is running around doing whatever the hell the want!! the travesty , the horror, think abkut the children!!

Reality

Socialist society: forced into the plan the someone else came up with even when you think the plan is stupid and not going to work you must be a good little slave and chig along for " the good of society"

Capitalist society: many plans all at once; everyone takes care of their own problems by their own accord without forcing anyone else to participate in their ideas, mutally aligned plans consolidate without coercion

"Knowledge that doesn't change behavior is useless, but knowledge that changes behavior loses its relevance"

"A man must stand erect on his own, not upheld by the will of others"

- Marcus Aurelius

Replying to Avatar bitcoinist

Hello everyone. When introducing #Bitcoin to my Russian peers, there’s a recurring skepticism: it's seen as an "American scheme." While many here might not have faced this challenge, here's how I tackle it:

Have you ever pondered if #Bitcoin could be an offspring of the NSA? Was it secretly forged as the fragility of fiat currencies globally became evident? Or did the U.S. simply catch the #Bitcoin wave early?

The next question often thrown my way is, "Should we really entrust our assets to this possibly suspect American venture that could be covertly fueling undisclosed operations?" To this, I answer: The true origin of #Bitcoin, be it American, Chinese, Russian, or Japanese, is essentially inconsequential. Due to its decentralized essence, it now operates beyond any single nation's grasp. Halting its momentum would require subduing every advocate—an undertaking too ambitious even for the U.S.

Of course, I elaborate on its core principles: decentralization, immutability, and its inherent resistance to censorship. However, apprehensions surrounding its "American" birthright persist. To address this, I narrate an intriguing tale:

Ever heard about Hal Finney's enigmatic neighbor, possibly a certain Satoshi Nakamoto, with speculated NSA connections? Russians, with their innate skepticism of official accounts, find this tidbit irresistible.

Let’s delve deeper: For a century, the U.S., with its unparalleled control over the money press, capitalized on this edge. They've printed vast sums, virtually out of thin air. This monetary dominance allowed them to acquire the best talent, technology, intellectual property, and strategic advantages from across the globe. However, they're acutely aware of the dollar's diminishing stature. They seem to be actively diluting its power, printing it in excessive quantities. This move seems strategic — exhausting its utility to the fullest, buying everything in sight, until it hyperinflates.

And in this strategic shift, lies #Bitcoin’s ascension. If we consider the possibility of Satoshi's million-#BTC wallet, it could feasibly offset the U.S. national debt.

Think about this: Beyond a select faction within the American elite, who else could witness an asset like #BTC soar from nothing to $69,420 without spending a portion? Most would've exited much earlier.

On the regulatory front, there's a notable bias: favoring #Bitcoin and seemingly sidelining crypto. Consider the broader crypto landscape as a case in point: many, like LUNA, are scams, with its founder now under legal scrutiny. Then there's CZ, the figure behind what's considered an underground crypto gambling hub. It's apparent that the elites aren't keen on welcoming these upstarts.

To clarify, when I reference "Americans," I'm pinpointing the shadowy power-brokers, not everyday citizens or the figureheads in office. They're the true orchestrators.

Sharing this narrative has yielded profound results, spurring #Bitcoin investments amounting to billions.

#nostr #orangepilling #hyperbitcoinization #plebs #plebchain #Bitcoin

Great thread keep up the good work

Once you accept that life is a never ending exhausting existence of one shrouded in ignorance, it is only then you can make that life a liveable, meaningful one of learning and acceptance.

I've tried all the ways to me it ashtrays tastes the same idk why

Replying to Avatar jimmysong

The Case for a Chain Split

The debate surrounding drivechains has been heating up, with proponents employing various tactics to garner support. This divisive issue echoes previous disputes in the Bitcoin community, such as the 2017 block size controversy. As such, we should consider what was then the definitive resolution: a chain split.

A significant portion of the Bitcoin community rejects drivechains, effectively blocking its implementation via a soft fork. Bitcoin's voluntary nature makes it resistant to hostile takeovers, despite claims that miners could force the change. Disagree with that last statement? Then let's put that to the test. We can resolve this posturing and propaganda by forking the code.

Here's how it would work: Code implementing drivechains would be released. Those who support the proposal can run this code. A transaction that goes against drivechain rules but adheres to pre-drivechain rules will trigger a chain split. Those running the drivechain software wouldn't be doing anything, but nodes that aren't can reject the drivechain chain by using the "invalidateblock" command. The result will be two distinct Bitcoins: one with drivechains and one without.

This approach was resolved the conflict we had in August 2017, when Bitcoin Cash split off from Bitcoin. Similarly, proponents and opponents of drivechains can either hold or sell their respective Bitcoins post-split. This would be a real-world test of control and game theory within the network.

I advocate for this split not just for potential profits, but also because it's a peaceful solution. It would let us see in real time how convicted the drivechain people are. Will drivechain miners support it if it means mining at a loss? A chain split would serve as a critical learning opportunity for the community, providing a clear answer to the ongoing debate. Ultimately, this will strengthen Bitcoin by showing the market how hard it is to change its properties.

So bring it on! Fork or shut up.

https://void.cat/d/SEbocwy3dabt6xJaaXM5Sk.mp3

Jimmy did you use AI to read your thread!? 😆 🤣