Good observation.

🧡Citadel Islands🧡

Music: nostr:npub1jw63d0ykym7rpd3n6cme7p3rghc77se3ql8drg78p55c5xe3npdscrh29m

Liberty art is #Bitcoin art

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ptSmpBownz4

#Liberty #Art #Bitcoin #NoAIArt #NoAI

Thanks! Great to connect.👍

Nice to meet you Nustr, love your artwork!🧡

Here's a 3D helmet I have designed in Blender.

Liberty art is Bitcoin art.🧡🧡🧡

I didn't make this meme.

When we see this meme, we associate it with Bitcoin because it represents a vision of liberty, autonomy and sovereignty. We don't need to see the Bitcoin symbol to make the connection.

Liberty art is Bitcoin art

I think many artists often prefer to not incorporate a Bitcoin logo in their piece, since art is supposed to be neutral, a force of nature, just as Bitcoin is neutral, and a force of nature.

We naturally connect a vision of liberty with Bitcoin in our minds, regardless if there is a symbol there that tells us the connrction.

Liberty just is.

Beyond words.

We feel it.

We feel Bitcoin without seeing it in print.

Nice work!

Excellent work! 👍

Not Bitcoin related.

Yet, Bitcoin related.

I see 3 separate distinctions:

A) Audience focus

B) Content focus

C) Attention content

In the case of A, the audience drives the content. In the case of B, content is published based on interests of the content creator. C would be more attention-oriented content.

It seems that you mix B and C as a single category.

I'm probably out on thin ice here, but is the CPU sufficient for the power requirements?

So as the definiton of property matured over time and there was a realization that we cannot own another person without invalidating our own liberty and property rights, the old conceptions of property rights became anti-thetical to our new understanding of what property rights means.

True, some of the left-right spectrum was a mixed bag of contradicting ideas.

In antiquity, slavery was conceived of as a part of 'property rights', whereas later philosophers like John Locke changed our understanding of slavery and concluded that we cannot own other people as property.

Classical slavery was from the Lockean perspective the anti-thesis of property rights and the primacy of every individual to be sovereign and own themselves.

If the individual can't own themselves, then property rights doesn't exist. Hence slavery undermines the basis of property rights; every individual owning the fruits of our labor.

A slave is not allowed to own the fruits of their labor, because they are not recognized as the sovereign masters of their own mind and body.

The free thought of the individual, is the Universe becoming decentralized.

I honestly don't know the solution.

On the one hand, free markets (capitalism) is called 'right', while at the same time nazism is falsely called 'right'.

This is a trap that undermines the ability to have a liberty-focused discussion.

We can use a top-down spectrum instead, where the higher spectrum is liberty, free markets and property rights for all, while the lower spectrum is central planning and authoritarianism.

But as long as the left falsely ties nazism to capitalism, we have a conundrum, since capitalism is the opposite of nazism. When we defend free markets and liberty for all, we are attacked as extremists.

Yes! And we protect our humanity by protecting ourselves against corruption.

In Lord of the Rings, Smeagol failed to protect himself and his values from corruption.

When our values are corrupted, our internal architecture is corrupted. As a result of corrupted internal values, the architecture around us is corrupted and we end up in a prison system that ultimately harms us.

Right.

Though, if central planning and collectivism is far left, then individualism and free agency is 'far right', since they are polar opposites.

The problem is that national socialism was defined as 'far right', while it is clearly a totalitarian, collectivist central planning ideology, and therefore opposite of free agency, free markets, individual liberty and property rights for all.

The downfall of 1984

Every engineer or programmer tasked with building the digital architecture of slavery will be confronted with his/her understanding of code and the downstream results of code.

This is why in fiction, the engineers of the Death Star intentionally introduced vulnerabilities.

The reason is simple.

The engineer or programmer can read code and blueprints. They can put together in their mind a map over plausible risks and outcomes from a given set of digital architectures.

A good programmer understands the far downstream implications of a given code.

As a result, we should expect that a certain percentage of engineers and programmers will defect from totalitarian projects, either visibly or cunningly, by introducing vulnerabilities to the totalitarian architecture, once they understand the inevitable outcome of that code.

Agenda 21 and Agenda 2030 can be likened to destructive computer viruses or malware.

Investigating their code, a programmer or logically thinking person can reasonably well predict their outcome.

Every programmer understands what a 1984 society leads to:

When you have a highly complex archipelago of code, such as a society, centrally planning that code is an extremely risky strategy.

If you are also prevented from fixing bugs, errors and obvious harms in the code, the code will spiral downward toward greater and greater harm.

Next, add that in a 1984 society all words are redefined to their opposite.

Imagine being a programmer trying to fix a code while every term you use have the opposite meaning in relation to its practical result.

Every programmer will realize that this approach is 100% doomed.

Not to mention all the dependencies in a centrally planned 1984 architecture.

Every harmful piece of code in the governing architecture will propagate to every other part, since they depend on the central authorization.

Corrupt the core and everything gets corrupted.

While an array of programmers will continue to work for the system, many engineers who understand cause and effect enough to read the code sufficiently far downstream will join the liberty side.

One day we will be thankful for the vulnerabilities in the 1984 architecture.

Bitcoin represents the vehicle for replacing the 1984 central planning architecture with decentralization of power, liberty and property rights for all.

When every individual can protect their own person, family and property, power is decentralized and harmful dependencies are deconstructed.

This is why in an advanced society, artists are commissioned on large scale art projects that take months or years to finish, and the artist have the time to pour all their soul into a single artwork without compromise.

But this requires vision and funding, as well as a high bar for quality among both the artist/s and the commissioner. If the commissioner's bar is low, the artist will only work to satisfy his/her compensation, and not more.

Since at the end of the day, an artist doesn't have time to produce a result that outshines the compensation he/she receives for the work, in light of the bills and expenses that need to be paid to sustain living and family.

💯

Profit is surplus.

There can be no prosperity without a surplus.

Anakin's fall.

I rember when I watched Revenge of the Sith for the first few times. The progression, or let's say regression, of Anakin toward the dark side left me thinking the story was incomplete.

A gradual process of falling into the lies and manipulation of Palpatine seemed more likely to me than an abrupt conversion from values, honor and justice, to pure evil.

Then at some point, I came to consider the possibility that George Lucas had offered an alternative progression toward the dark side within the plot.

Here is an overview of the two possibilities:

A) Anakin kills the younglings in the Jedi temple.

B) Anakin doesn't kill the younglings in the Jedi temple.

Both scenarios are clearly possible and I will describe the case for the latter.

Now, in a previous scene we saw Anakin cutting off the arm of Mace Windu, so it is clear that he has already fallen into the narrative of Palpatine. The narrative is that the Jedi are the enemies of the republic and that peace can only be restored when they are killed. Anakin pledges to Palpatine to carry out this order.

Already here, Anakin is lost to the dark side, we just don't know the extent of his corruption - is he willing to kill children already? I always felt the sudden corruption theory was off. Anakin goes from having ethical values and a belief in a fair trial, to the next moment, executing younglings in an instant.

Next we see Anakin entering a chamber of youngling Jedi padawans in the Jedi temple, drawing his light saber as to kill them. What happened after that is hidden to us, except for the surveillance cameras.

After that, we see Palpatine's execution of order 66. His forces captures the Jedi temple. Senator Organa lands on a platform by the temple and is told to leave by Palpatine's stationed troops. A young Jedi attacks the troops and is killed. That Jedi youngling was not killed by Anakin. How did he survive Anakin's massacre? It is possible that he was just lucky.

At this point, Palpatine has full access and control over the Jedi temple. He sends out a message to all Jedi; to return to the Jedi temple on Coruscant. Palpatine also have access to all the surveillance cameras at this point.

Considering the Machiavellian nature of Palpatine, he is not going to take any chances with his new apprentice Anakin. Palpatine is an advanced chess player that will likely always have a plan B. Anakin might kill the younglings on his orders, but Anakin might also refuse to kill them due to their young age - Palpatine cannot know the answer in advance with certainty.

The logical chess move for Palpatine then is to win Anakin over to the dark side regardless if he kills the younglings or not. If Anakin is at the temple and the surveillance cameras shows him murdering the younglings, Anakin's future as a Jedi is game over, regardless if he committed the massacre or not.

Palpatine is likely to attempt to trap Anakin in a situation that would result in his loss of humanity regardless if he killed the younglings or not. Neither his wife Padme nor his old friend Obi Wan would ever forgive him.

It therefore makes sense for Palpatine to prepare a false video of Anakin murdering younglings in advance, or use technology to make the murderer to appear to be Anakin, just in case he wouldn't go along with the orders.

Next scene, as the surviving Jedi arrives at the Jedi temple, we see dead Jedi younglings in an open area. This is not the chamber where Anakin drew his light saber. For some reason, while Anakin blocked the door of the chamber of younglings and drew his light saber, it seems as if he didn't kill them in that spot.

So if Anakin didn't kill them in that chamber where we saw him draw the light saber, what really transpired?

I like that George Lucas offered us this 'conspiracy' possibility, since we can consider both options - either that he killed the younglings or that he was framed - and decide for ourselves how quickly Anakin headed down on the path of evil.

After the surveillance video showed Anakin killing children, there was no way back for him, regardless if he committed that massacre or not.

It seems to me, from his belief that he would re-unite with Padme after killing the separatists on Mustafar, that he either didn't kill the younglings, or that he didn't remember killing them. There is no way that Padme would have forgiven him for such a terrible crime. His hope to re-unite with Padme therefore seems to be a hint that while he had already become evil to some extent, he was not yet a child killer.

After Anakin lost Padme, he was ripe for the ultimate conversion to evil by Palpatine. The crime of murdering children would forever be on his name, and perhaps he believed himself to be a child killer at that point. The erosion of all values from that point seems like the unfolding of an avalanche that he himself had aligned with and built up, guided by Palpatine's manipulation, regressing him down the path of the dark side.

Thank you for reading this alternative interpretation of Anakin's fall to the dark side. It challenges us with the question: how gradual is the process of coruption? Is corruption immediate or is it a process that spirals downward over time?