Merry Christmas!! War is over (if you want it)

Life finds a way

At least it still has over 1.21 GigaWatts.

Society has advanced too far. Return to dickbutt.

Yeah that'll run great! It uses a lot of pro-level hacks, including offline ChatGPT automatic prompt expansion. It's not bottlenecked by CPU resources at all so any working CPU will do. It is very memory heavy though, you'll need either a shitload of RAM or a swapfile.

Ah, just set your cat into low alert mode!! Nice.

This is cringy AF. They're right about property rights being the most important thing. But the concept that bitcoin should be solely owned by any one person is insanely stupid. The concept that a society needs to be owned by any one person is stupid. That's where you get government from. That's called monopoly. That's unnecessary. Decentralization of control is a good thing. It's a sign that it is working for the greater good. Each individual owns his part of bitcoin and that's it. That's a good thing. Consensus about ordinals cannot merely filter through one man or one corporation, since no one person owns the Bitcoin network. Whatever the market decides will be the legitimate course of action. The current use of ordinals is legitimate. But this attempt to claim that the anarchy of bitcoin is a bad thing or indicative of poorly defined property rights is a thin attempt to justify some misguided hunger for power to force their vision for bitcoin ordinals upon the rest of us. It's pretty pathetic.

You should use Fooocus if you haven't yet. It's a completely self-sovereign generative AI suite using Stable Diffusion that runs on your local GPU. You own the code once you install it, so nobody can dick with it. And it continues to get improvements that render it just as good as the best cloud-hosted stuff, even as they continually improve.

https://github.com/lllyasviel/Fooocus

found this on r/trashpandas and I had to share.

#m=image%2Fjpeg&dim=756x1008&blurhash=_TF%7EHjRjM%7Bt7ozoft7ng-%3ARjofWVj%5BWV%7EpRjWAt7ofWBWBITWBayR*ayayoL%25MofIVofofofofe-WAoMj%5BWBWBWBxtxuocRjofj%5Bayf6WUt7ofWBf7jtkBt7t7WCf6a%23f8&x=e27006328c8d44d60bc5291ffc881623a4b456e7c03bd61eca1ad448566a8b77

https://youtu.be/HJ4oLqzYxic

Good God lol!

https://www.reddit.com/r/trashpandas/comments/18hi96c/raccoons_are_loud_chewers/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3

Thanks for the zap!!

There are different degrees of defending. Defending a boss and defending a boss's violent strike busting are two different things. Defending ordinals that have happened and defending ordinals being guaranteed in the future are the same kind of distinction. I defend ordinals, not a guarantee of them being able to exploit the bitcoin protocol forever. It's not black and white, and as libertarians we should remember that. Ordinals might be stupid since Bitcoin wasn't designed with large memory throughput, but they are voluntary interactions that don't harm anybody. Stopping them is fine too.

Yeah I'm not arguing that there should be no updates. That would go against my actual argument. The idea is that we don't own the network exclusively, so we have no way of deciding what should happen on it except by a consensus mechanism that everyone consents to as expressed by their use of the product. We don’t get to dictate what is legitimate. I don’t get to proclaim that ordinals are legitimate and therefore I am blocking updates from stopping them, nor do I get to proclaim they are illegitimate and therefore I am upgrading the software. Unless you actually are the person working on the software, and even then everyone else has to volunteer to switch to that version.

At least, that's the idea. This isn’t some well-formed thesis. I'm basing it on my best guess of the natural rights regarding blockchain, which I haven't given that much thought. And I'm attempting to provide an alternative perspective. I think it's best to see what works. However this goes. Ordinals are not violating anyone's rights, and stopping ordinals would not violate anyone's rights either so I don't give a shit.

That was Satoshi Nakamoto's intention. Bitcoin has no unified intention, since it is not owned by any one person and everyone is diverse in their goals. However, if you want to argue that Satoshi owns bitcoin in a real sense, and that it is the job of the bitcoin maintainers to ensure the vision is adhered to, then I can see your point that the use of the software for inscriptions by others violates its intended use.

I guess I would argue that all voluntary action on bitcoin is legitimate use of the network until it becomes impossible to do because of the code. It's got to be a cooperative effort and a debate, and I think a distinction should be made between what **is** legitimate and what you think **should be** legitimate. Bitcoin does not have intentions. The people, separately, do, and express a part of their intentions by using contributing to, or augmenting, bitcoin. And bitcoin has no unified intent since it is not solely owned by anyone.

I've been saying for years that #teslamotors cars are death traps and that the government has done and can do nothing about it. Further evidence of government incompetence and the dire need to let the market regulate itself. Why people blindly trust the government is beyond me. I guess it's public school and maybe authoritarian parents addling their minds.

I say gey rid of government #regulation and statists say "oh wow, test the self-deivimg cars on the roads!"

I said "that's exactly what they DO in our government-regulated economy!" How blind are these people?

https://www.wsj.com/business/autos/tesla-recalls-more-than-two-million-vehicles-over-autopilot-safety-concerns-274eb6e6?st=8aeoaavn9rnibjg&reflink=mobilewebshare_permalink

Yes. Due to the subjective nature of shit, it's probably both.

Thanks!