Have you seen the new “progress pride” flag?

Yep.

Thank you for the zap, nostr:npub1h5hedatrg747jpry68pzp5ynuvjlusfp9yntn6uvq4k9764ss2qqq5dz2n !

Doesn’t Jeff Bezos have a “two pizza rule?” A team can be no larger than can be fed by two pizzas?

And if you give me weed, whites, and wine

And if you show me a sign

And I’ll be willin” to be movin”

#music #tunestr #weedstr #LindaRonstadt

https://youtu.be/IJHcD0kHTGk?si=1jZU3QZF_DL-pSy-

Bankhead was an interesting woman, though. I’d like to read her biography.

Um . . . no.

No.

Just watched this 1931 pre-code Hollywood film. Can you guess the title and the actress?

#filmstr

🤔 A mixed blessing, perhaps. It does seem to provide perspective.

I just followed you, in case you’re older.

😞 I think I’m older than everyone I follow on Nostr, except for Bob Martin. Despite my moniker, however, I’m not yet gray.

“Bitcoin is your enemy’s money too.”

Yes, I agree. It was supposed to be *money*, not a distributed version of Google Drive. I don’t care if anyone uses Bitcoin to buy monkey pictures, and I have no desire to stop them. I just don’t want them to use the Bitcoin blockchain to store those pictures, because it’s ruining Bitcoin as money.

My thought last year was that the L1 blockchain should contain only inputs and outputs. All scripting should be done on L2 through Ln. That way, people can save their virtual trading cards to some other blockchain, while L1 is all about sending payments.

Payments will always eventually have to be settled on the L1 blockchain, where real estate is now scarce. Whatever problems Bitcoin has with scaling transactions, they are made worse when people write JPEGs to it.

Satoshi Nakamoto was explicit about the reason Bitcoin exists. That much is not opinion. Also, the original Bitcoin blockchain design was well-suited to that purpose, and not at all conducive to Ordinals.

I think there are Nostr insiders who hash out what they want to do (with examples) on Nostr, or at conferences. The NIPs are then written to record a consensus (or maybe just one side of a debate). They’re not thinking that some outsider might come along and want to read the specifications to understand the protocol.

Fairness is a matter of opinion. The point I’m making is about Bitcoin’s purpose. Primarily it was invented to allow payments to be sent over the Internet without relying on a trusted intermediary, who might prevent the transaction for self-serving reasons. Thanks to Ordinals (and the blockchain design decisions that allowed them), Bitcoin is now impractical (or much less practical) for that purpose. I believed that mission was important, so I’m unhappy. Fortunately there are other blockchain-based cryptocurrencies, but it would have been nice if the original, most popular one had not lost its way.

“Love” might be too strong, but I like it. What is nostr:npub1xtscya34g58tk0z605fvr788k263gsu6cy9x0mhnm87echrgufzsevkk5s ‘s case against Dirty Dancing?

Ordinals are crowding out and raising the cost of the electronic money use case. People who might have used it are sticking with trusted third party solutions instead.