I have been listening to your discussion with Pascal on the bitcoin enlightenment. I am in the section about using bitcoin as a ruler and you ask when that will happen. I think once bitcoin checkmates central banks so that they can't print money anymore, there will be a period where the value of bitcoin stabilizes, and other forms of money that require trust rise and start to compete with bitcoin to be used as money. One obvious form of that is tokenized commodities and baskets of commodities chosen to have stable value or chosen to match what people typically consume in a given region (electricity, gas, local apartment rental, food, ...). . Bitcoin would enter that system as one commodity among many, except under jurisdictions whose legal apparatus refuses to enforce the redemption agreements for tokenized commodities. In those, bitcoin would be the only acceptable form of money.

Enjoy these days while they last.

We'll look back at them with an "Oh, that was cute" type of mentality 15 years from now.

nostr:naddr1qvzqqqr4gupzq3e0gs8jnmued6f2rp4c6vs07xqvs4vs8zpwt82smcdch4txjvq7qyw8wumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnzd96xxmmfdecxzunt9e3k7mf0qy88wumn8ghj7mn0wvhxcmmv9uqpsur9wfehqetrw35hvefdd9ej66tdwphhyarpde6qycfxy8

There’s no way to skip this stage though. They are taking advantage of the misprinted debt in the fiat economy. There is a MASSIVE arbitrage opportunity and the only way to kill it and bring genuine prices back to the economy IS to arbitrage it.

There’s no way around it, for better or worse. But I think for better, simply because misprinted toxic debt is the greatest problem in the world right now, and this kills it and shifts resources into #Bitcoin to do so.

How do other uses compromise Bitcoin?

All uses have to compete economically for block space. If non monetary uses beat monetary uses, then Bitcoin as money fails.

That would say more about what people think of financial sovereignty than it does about art or degen trading.

As I see it, the way things are going right now, the threat to Bitcoin as money doesn't come from spammers, it comes from Number Go Up narrative pushers who tell people that ETFs and trusted third parties are fine to use because you'll get rich regardless.

That line of thinking is what causes demand for block space to drop, thus making it so cheap that people play stupid games with block space.

the trick is to keep grinding even when most people think you are retarded

My harshest critic is my husband. Most people can’t honestly say that, but I can.

He’s always my final boss when trying to assert an idea. He’s super smart and usually comes at things from a different angle. And he’s my primary editor. He’s also the head of my website’s customer support center.

Unlike my social media where I shoot from the hip and fuck around, I post detailed articles on my site only after my harshest critic gives me his feedback.

And he doesn’t phrase things like a loving husband normally would. He goes over the top.

He’ll literally put comments on my drafts like “This is fucking right wing trash Lyn. I know you were raised in a trailer park so I don’t expect much, but do better. Rephrase literally all of this.”

That sounds abusive but it’s humorous in practice given our context when working.

We’re not very politically different, but I tend to lean slightly righter than him, so that’s a common source of debate. I pull him right and he pulls me left, not as people who are far apart but who are slightly apart but both opinionated and debate over every inch. It’s on an issue by issue basis.

Mostly he does those comments for humor, but partially because he wants a debate and will bring like a well-researched150 IQ argument to hold the line as I try to argue through his defenses. And I write my research for investment clients of all political views, left and right, globally, as objective as possible, and so he purposely helps keep me straight and steelmans all my arguments for clients.

We debated in the early days about the vaccine in the pandemic, for example, back in 2020 and 2021. We’re still kind of debating about it now in 2025, both granting certain details to the other.

But whenever I write something of substance that is controversial, I know he will read it and call me a retard, which I have to push through and turn into a publishable article.

My social media posts are just me, whereas my long-form posts take time and argue through him.

I often post thoughts and gather comments on Twitter/X, since a lot of tradfi financial pros are happy to discuss. Then I write a piece, and my husband looks through it. I either agree or disagree, and then publish. I get the final say, but I only publish after I’m confident after his arguments.

TLDR; My summary from this whole rambling piece is that I suggest you find a close loved one who will call you a trailer park retard while challenging you on every piece you write while loving you.

Few people will do that but it’s important.

PRETTY SURE AGI IS A WAY TO SCAM INVESTORS. AT LEAST IN THE SHORT TERM.

HARD TO PIN POINT HOW BEST TO MONETIZE FROM AN INVESTOR POINT OF VIEW.

OPEN SOURCE IS THE WAY HERE. BEST FOR HUMAN FLOURISHING.

IMPACT ON OUR EVERY DAY LIVES WILL LIKELY BE MASSIVE. DO NOT PRETEND TO BE ABLE TO COMPREHEND LONG TAIL EFFECT.

HAVE ALWAYS LIVED MY PROFESSIONAL LIFE WITH MAXIMUM TRANSPARENCY.

BUILDING IN THE OPEN IS THE WAY.

LETS RIP IT. 🫡

ASK ME ANYTHING.

“ARE YOU SUPPORTIVE OF THESE ONESIES??”

Commodities markets work just fine without any tokenization.

No “tokenization” needed. Just like there isn’t any tokenization needed with placing an order with Amazon.

“This is why bananas on a blockchain don’t work.”

— nostr:npub1dergggklka99wwrs92yz8wdjs952h2ux2ha2ed598ngwu9w7a6fsh9xzpc, Memes vs The World

We're now hitting the computational milestones expected from various charts from over a decade ago. These trends have been on track.

Most of us still don't have robot vacuums since they still kind of struggle, but alas.

For the record capital gains is a horrible tax and should be deleted. It’s punishing people for inflation avoidance.

Let me guess… for whatever debate he’s talking about, Altman is going to use AI to create arguments for his tech-communist position… that’s juicy

1) Held with a trusted third party which increases risk.

2) Saylor is an ossification proponent, could introduce governance risks.

3) There is an element of leverage - could increase sell-off risks if BTC price doesn't go up for 5 years.

A lot of people look down on blue collar work, which I think is misguided. Especially for skilled blue collar work (and most type of work does benefit from skill/experience).

Basically, there’s a popular notion that it’s objectively better to be a CEO than a plumber, or an engineer than a barber, and that’s pretty off base. So it’s not that they criticize blue collar work in any overt way; it’s that they assume that that people in “lower” jobs would all want to be in “higher” roles if they had the choice. A technician would want to be an engineer. A janitor would want to be a CEO.

There are a lot of studies on job happiness and one of the most consistent correlations is that people are happier when they get more immediate feedback. Like if you cut people’s hair or fix mechanical issues or wire up electronic boxes, you often resolve things in minutes, hours, days, or weeks depending the specific task, and with progress along the way, so you get that quick feedback loop where you see the positive results of your work quickly and tangibly. Nothing lingers, unclear and vague.

And for those jobs, often when you’re outside of work hours, you’re truly out. You don’t have to think about it. You can fully devote your focus elsewhere. There’s not some major thing hanging over your head, other than sometimes financial stress or indirect things.

Now, obviously jobs with more complexity and compensation and scale give people other benefits. More material comfort and safety, more power to impact the world at scale, more public prestige, etc. and for some people that’s important for happiness, and for others it is not. And the cost is that it’s generally highly competitive, rarely if ever turns off, and usually comes with much slower and more vague feedback loops in terms of seeing or feeling whether your work is making things better or not.

There was a time in my life where wiring up electronic boxes was really satisfying. Each project had a practical purpose but then also was kind of an artform since I wanted it to look neat for aesthetic and maintainability purposes. I would work on these things like a bonsai enthusiast would sculpt bonsai. And then eventually I would design larger systems and have technicians wire them instead, but for some of the foundational starting points I’d still set up the initial core pieces to get it started right. I wasn’t thrilled when I realistically had to give that up when I moved into management for a while.

I have a housekeeper clean my house every couple weeks. She’s a true pro; she used to clean high-end hotels for years and now works for herself cleaning houses. When we travel, she can let herself in and clean our place, since we trust her.

She doesn’t speak much English, but her daughter does, and that daughter recently graduated college.

Notably, she consistently sings while she cleans. She could listen to music or podcasts but doesn’t. She just sings every time she cleans. I can tell she’s generally in a state of flow while cleaning. She’s good at what she does, and it’s kind of a meditative experience involving repetition but also experience to do it properly and efficiently and then a satisfying conclusion of leaving things better than how they were found. Turning chaos to order.

Last year she was hit by a truck while driving, and had to be out of work for a few months to recover. When she came back, we just back-paid her the normal rate for those few months as though she cleaned on schedule, so she wouldn’t have any income gap from us. Full pay despite a work gap. She was shocked when we did that. We weren’t sure her financial situation (I assume it’s pretty good actually based on her rate), but basically we just treated the situation as though she were salaried with benefits even though she works on a per-job basis. Because skilled, trustworthy, and happy people are hard to come by and worth helping and maintaining connections with.

If I were to guess, I honestly think she is a happier person than I am on a day to day basis. It’s not that I’m unhappy; it’s that I think whatever percentage I might be on the subjective mood scale, she is visibly higher. I experience a state of flow in my work, and my type of work gives me a more frequent state of flow than other work I could do, but I think her work gives her an even higher ratio of flow.

Anyway, my point is that optionality is important. While it’s true that some jobs suck and some jobs are awesome, and financial security matters a lot, for the most part it’s more about how suited you are for a particular type of work at a particular phase in your life. And you’re not defined by your work; it’s just one facet of who you are among several facets.

Find what gives you a good state of flow, pays your bills, lets you save a surplus, and lets you express yourself in one way or another.

Not a fan of how much BTC Microstrategy is accumulating, but they seem to be doing it legitimately soooo whatcha gonna do?

Will certainly be interesting to see if Saylor takes a full hero-to-villain arc a la Roger Ver.