who is watching you?
Did you know lots of art very much like yours are on https://youtu.be/qXE7MkPXicM ?
The main difference between a Bitcoin wallet and a Lightning wallet is that a Bitcoin wallet stores Bitcoin on the Bitcoin blockchain, while a Lightning wallet stores Bitcoin in payment channels on the Lightning Network.
Bitcoin wallets are the most common type of Bitcoin wallet. They allow users to store, send, and receive Bitcoin. Bitcoin wallets can be either custodial or non-custodial. Custodial wallets hold the user's Bitcoin keys on their behalf, while non-custodial wallets allow the user to hold their own keys.
Lightning wallets are a newer type of Bitcoin wallet that allow users to send and receive Bitcoin payments quickly and cheaply. Lightning wallets use the Lightning Network, which is a second-layer payment protocol that sits on top of the Bitcoin blockchain. The Lightning Network allows Bitcoin payments to be routed through a network of nodes, which makes payments much faster and cheaper than sending them directly on the Bitcoin blockchain.
Here is a table that summarizes the key differences between Bitcoin wallets and Lightning wallets:
Feature Bitcoin wallet Lightning wallet
Stores Bitcoin On the Bitcoin blockchain In payment channels on the Lightning Network
Speed Transactions can take minutes or hours to confirm Transactions are confirmed instantly
Cost Transactions can be expensive Transactions are very cheap
Security Custodial wallets are less secure than non-custodial wallets Lightning wallets are as secure as Bitcoin wallets
It is important to note that there is no such thing as a "Lightning wallet" in the traditional sense. A Lightning wallet is simply a Bitcoin wallet that has been configured to use the Lightning Network. Therefore, any Bitcoin wallet that supports the Lightning Network can be considered a Lightning wallet.
Here are some examples of Bitcoin wallets that support the Lightning Network:
BlueWallet
Muun
Breez
Zap
Wallet of Satoshi
Ultimately, the best type of Bitcoin wallet for you depends on your individual needs and preferences. If you need to store large amounts of Bitcoin and need the highest level of security, then a non-custodial Bitcoin wallet is a good option. If you need to send and receive Bitcoin payments quickly and cheaply, then a Lightning wallet is a good option.
Whats the difference between a
bitcoin wallet and lightning wallet?
It is what it is,
cause it does what it supposed to do,
Something X can do but won't
In Calvinism, election to salvation cannot be denied. This is because election is seen as an unconditional act of God's grace, not something that is dependent on the individual's choice. In other words, God has already chosen those who will be saved, and there is nothing that those individuals can do to change that.
This does not mean that the individual's choice is irrelevant. In fact, Calvinists believe that God's grace always works through the individual's free will. However, the individual's choice is not the ultimate factor in salvation. Rather, it is the response to God's grace that is essential.
So, could Paul have just said "thanks, but no thanks"? In Calvinism, the answer is no. Paul was one of the elect, and as such, he was irresistibly drawn to faith in Christ. His choice to believe was not something that he could have simply denied.
This may seem like a difficult concept to understand, but it is one that is central to Calvinism. For Calvinists, salvation is entirely the work of God, and it is something that is ultimately beyond our control. However, this does not mean that we are not responsible for our own choices. Rather, it means that our choices are always made within the context of God's grace.
As Spurgeon said, "I cannot resolve the apparent contradiction that salvation is all of God, but also that sinners must choose to believe." But he also said, "I know both are true because the scripture says salvation is, 'by God's grace,' and 'through the sinner's faith.'"
This is the paradox of Calvinism: salvation is both entirely the work of God and entirely the work of the individual. It is a mystery that we may never fully understand, but it is one that we can embrace with faith.
Can election to #salvation be denied? Could Paul have just said thanks, but no thanks?
I believe the Scripture does not teach synergism in salvation but monergism. Synergism is #God plus something: good works or a neutral free will. Monergism is God plus nothing.
For example, the synergism of Arminianism: salvation is by God's prevenient grace (Eph. 2:8) and man's neutral free will to choose salvation, or not choose salvation. Arminianism believes God gives his prevenient grace to every human being, the efficacious effect of that prevenient grace is to free the will from the dominion of sin, so that the will is free to accept or reject salvation.
Monergism says God is the initiator and completer of salvation, through his gift of prevenient grace to certain individuals. However, even in monergism there is the exercise of free will. The Scripture always makes salvation God’s work and man’s choice—else why are people everywhere commanded to “believe on the Lord #Jesus #Christ?” Here is the difference from the synergistic pov. God’s gift of grace-faith-salvation (Eph. 2:8) is efficacious to change the sinner receiving the gift from unable and unwilling to able and willing, so the inevitable consequence of receiving God’s gift is the willing exercise of saving faith.
That is not synergism, it is the response of faith: the empty hand of the soul willingly reaching out to receive God’s salvation.
In relation to God’s choices, God foreordained certain sinners to receive his gift: that is election. Election guarantees salvation; that is what it does, that is all it does. The inevitable consequence of God’s election—that he will give certain individuals his gift of grace-faith salvation—is that the gift will work efficaciously in that person receiving the gift, with the effect they will understand the spiritual issues of their sin, the risen Jesus Christ the only Savior, and thereby willing exercise saving faith, as the inevitable consequence of having received God’s gift.
The answer to the questions. " Can election to salvation be denied?” No. “Could Paul have just said thanks, but no thanks?" No. Not because forced, not because without a choice, but because God’s prevenient grace is efficacious to make a “Yes” choice certain.
As Spurgeon said, (I am paraphrasing) I cannot resolve the apparent contradiction that salvation is all of God, but also that sinners must choose to believe. But I know both are true because the scripture says salvation is , “by God’s grace,” and “through the sinner’s faith.”
"By #grace you are saved through #faith ." God's gift of grace-faith-salvation, works efficaciously to change the sinner's human nature, by giving spiritual perception to understand spiritual things, so that the sinner now understands the spiritual issues of sin, the #Savior , and salvation, with the inevitable result the formerly unwilling sinner is made willing by God's grace, and does exercise the kind of faith necessary to be saved. #christian #Christianity
Nostr does not need a cloud, but it can be used with a cloud service. Nostr is a decentralized identity protocol that uses NIP-05 identifiers to create pseudonymous usernames. These identifiers can be used to connect to Lightning Network nodes and send and receive payments.
If you use Nostr with a cloud service, your NIP-05 identifier will be stored on the cloud. This means that you can access your identifier from anywhere, as long as you have an internet connection. However, it also means that your identifier is not completely decentralized. If the cloud service is hacked, your identifier could be compromised.
If you want to use Nostr without a cloud service, you can generate your NIP-05 identifier locally and store it on your own computer. This will make your identifier more secure, but it will also make it more difficult to access from different devices.
Ultimately, the decision of whether or not to use a cloud service with Nostr is up to you. If you want the convenience of being able to access your identifier from anywhere, then a cloud service is a good option. However, if you want the maximum security, then you should generate your identifier locally and store it on your own computer.
Here are some of the pros and cons of using a cloud service with Nostr:
Pros:
You can access your identifier from anywhere.
You don't have to worry about managing your own keys.
It's more convenient.
Cons:
Your identifier is not completely decentralized.
If the cloud service is hacked, your identifier could be compromised.
maybe "fauve pointillism" would be my #art style.
Fauve means wild beast.
I guess I paint with "wild points".
Wild ___?___ (what?)
Scenario 1:
The argument: "Yeah Bitcoin is cool, but ultimately when push comes to shove the major governments are going to outlaw it, drive it into the black market as a small asset, and issue a replacement that they back as legal tender."
The steelman: This is a valid concern. Governments have a history of trying to control or even ban cryptocurrencies that they see as a threat to their financial systems. However, there are a few reasons why I think it is unlikely that governments will be able to completely outlaw Bitcoin.
First, Bitcoin is a global currency. It is not controlled by any one government or entity. This makes it very difficult for governments to ban it outright.
Second, Bitcoin is very popular. There are millions of people around the world who own Bitcoin. If governments were to try to ban it, they would likely face a lot of resistance from their citizens.
Third, Bitcoin is very secure. The underlying technology that powers Bitcoin is very difficult to hack. This makes it unlikely that governments would be able to successfully shut down the Bitcoin network.
Of course, it is impossible to say for sure what the future holds for Bitcoin. However, I believe that the factors I have mentioned make it unlikely that governments will be able to completely outlaw it.
Scenario 2:
The argument: "Look how fast they are advancing on superconductors. Quantum computing may come sooner than we think, and threaten Bitcoin's security. That's why I don't buy bitcoins."
The steelman: This is also a valid concern. Quantum computers have the potential to break the encryption that secures Bitcoin transactions. If this were to happen, it would be a major setback for Bitcoin.
However, there are a few reasons why I think it is unlikely that quantum computers will pose a serious threat to Bitcoin in the near future.
* First, quantum computers are still in their early stages of development. It is not clear when they will be powerful enough to break Bitcoin's encryption.
* Second, there are already steps being taken to make Bitcoin more quantum-resistant. For example, the Bitcoin Core development team is working on a new version of the software that will use more secure cryptographic algorithms.
* Third, even if quantum computers do become powerful enough to break Bitcoin's encryption, it is not clear that they would be able to do so without being detected. The Bitcoin network is very transparent, and any attempt to attack it would likely be noticed by the community.
In conclusion, I believe that the risks posed by quantum computers to Bitcoin are real, but they are not insurmountable. There are a number of factors that make it unlikely that quantum computers will pose a serious threat to Bitcoin in the near future.
There are a number of coins that are not considered cryptocurrencies. These include:
Fiat coins: Fiat coins are physical coins that are issued by governments. They are not based on blockchain technology and are not decentralized. Examples of fiat coins include the US dollar, the euro, and the Japanese yen.
Digital tokens: Digital tokens are not considered cryptocurrencies because they do not function as a medium of exchange. They are typically used to represent ownership of an asset or to access a service. Examples of digital tokens include security tokens, utility tokens, and non-fungible tokens (NFTs).
Virtual currencies: Virtual currencies are not considered cryptocurrencies because they are not based on blockchain technology. They are typically used in online games or virtual worlds. Examples of virtual currencies include Linden Dollars, Robux, and Bitcoin Cash.
It is important to note that the definition of a cryptocurrency is still evolving. Some people may consider fiat coins or digital tokens to be cryptocurrencies, while others may not. Ultimately, it is up to the individual to decide what they consider to be a cryptocurrency.
