He stated very clearly all tokens are securities and Bitcoin is not.

Don't you think you should tone down the suspicious accusations with regulators who are Bitcoin friendly?

I think privacy might end up being unobtainable.

The blockchain is too open (eg I can keep my secret but what about all my dealings and descendants?) It only takes one reveal in the next few decades even, to expose address history.

The imagine future populists talking up conspiracy by calling early adopters "time thieves" because we got all the cheese and 95% missed out. This would be fuel for "Know Your Bitcoiner" and the commercial arrival of Social Credit. The nature of an address behaviour is all that's needed until eventual unmasking of ID.

And not to forget the unsavoury individuals among us doxxing fellow bitcoiners.

Over time the system could be too transparent and non reversible so perhaps the best outcome is a new form of social regard based on best conduct in a world where we all see each other

I lived in an East Asian country where mask wearing is considered a social norm so it didn't feel odd to me.

But a larger trend to me is, as the cost of surveillance goes down so does the cost to countervail. Leading to a transparent society rather than dictatorship. Another unpopular notion I have is the social credit reporting will arrive via market forces to the blockchain.

Decades ago me and my brother would often talk about a future of face recognition and how masks would return as a fashion accessory and counter solution to such tech.

Then covid came along and created the bizarre outcome of libertarians demanding we take of our masks.

Kinda contradictory no?

I often look at Nasdaq/Btc and Gold/Btc for a view of Bitcoin both as a technology and also a commodity.

The CNY10/DXY is a fascinating precursor for global liquidity

And I'm not going to blah blah about "not investment advice", because we're all responsible adults here😉

😀

Thanks

Symbols are language

Look all those retweets and likes.

Makes me wonder what a future of peer to peer monetization will look like.

I'm not sure if there's enough there to constitute signal. Are there any drivers I'm unaware of?

Confirmation bias is very strong in people so there could be a tendency to pay for comments that confirm their beliefs.

If it's a popular negative attitude being centralized and reinforced by monetization, this will look like profits for shitposting to the outside viewer

Reminds me of my early days on boarding newbies

(Except the fish seem to be paying more attention!!)

Happy to help.

I wish I figured out my technique years before. Instead of giving up and dreading to process, after a while it became an adventure and a enjoyable thing to do. Especially when you become more aware of the triggers that create the desire for nicotine.

(Someone just sent me 100 sats! TY. They just bought my grandchildren a house in 2050 😁 )

Can I suggest how I gave up nicotine?

I was so addicted that even the thought of giving up made me want to have more. It was completely impossible for me to give up or even imagine it

So I decided to not give up

I chose instead to make a deal with myself. Every time I chose to vape I set a clock and delayed by 1 minute. This removed the stress of giving up but created a moment of relaxing self observation. When I felt comfortable with the 1 minute delay I kept adding more time. 5 mins, then 6 then 10 then half an hour. Whatever ever felt comfortable.

THEN, what I noticed in those few minutes, I started becoming more aware. Addiction is automated choice making. By creating time (and being relaxed because I wasn't giving up - just delaying), I became more conscious and the auto choice was becoming more like me choosing.

I kept this going for days, week, months. Adding a few more minutes here and there, staying relaxed and observing myself. Growing awareness of myself in a very natural way.

It is now 4 1/2 years since I smoked or vaped. I still haven't given up because if the urge ever hits me I can still have a vape like in 6 weeks (if I really wanted it) but I keep forgetting and it's no big deal anymore.

Jean-Paul's idea is the same because he uses space to create the distance between choice and execution. The principle is the same

Don't give up

Stay relaxed

Create a little gap in time (or space)

Eventually the auto choice becomes conscious choice

And enjoy yourself

What I can't understand is why the Austrians think they're even relevant anymore. Von Mises wrote about low entropy economics when Bitcoin is zero entropy.

To assume Bitcoin is an Austrian school device is to assume 60 = infinity.

They are a bit sad and cult like. They're like people who buy a motor car in the 1920's, then never use it because they want to complain about horses all day

Back in the 70's RW's amplified their fears by claiming being gay meant our kids were going to be preyed upon. So they negatively socialized some kind of malevolence in gay people who just wanted to be left alone.

I personally don't agree with former men competing with physiological women or the compelling of pronouns - forcing people to change such fundamental muscle memory habits etc. Emergent change is far more sensible than top/down change

But the whole thing is easily solved by everyone (Reactionaries and gender benders) meeting in the same place in mutual respect. And if that's not possible, at least respect for privacy

I used the pronoun "you" as a grammatical (not gender) plural

So you (singular) may not be freaking out about but there sure are a lot of RW's freaking out

It was exactly the same RW reactions back in the 70's when Gay people were finding their strength and freedom

Back then we used to say (especially to Xtian moralists) that if it bothers you (plural btw) then mind your own business

Why do you all go on about Bitcoin freedom then freak out about people finding their own truth about male/female crossover?

It's their lives - leave them alone

It's a great thing that each person is free to reward what they like but it's not the end goal.

Imagine if nostr was here in 1905 and a struggling unknown patent clerk dared to challenge Newtonian physics with an audacious theory called Relativity.

That clerk, Albert Einstein would have never got off first base and many advanced technologies we have today would never had happened.

Now don't get me wrong. I love nostr's potentials and it's time has come. But every thought system has edges and boundaries and unforseen outcomes.

Example might be that Blockchain (plus machine learning plus AI optimization) tech is perfect for a market based social credit system. Eventually all of us are going to be revealed and our conduct on the blockchain will be for everyone to know. When we few percent become oligarchs I reckon the 98% who feel left out would be more than happy to sign up for a "Know Your Bitcoiner Oligarch" and for a report of their spending habits - indicating personality and legitimacy.

Every new tech has unforseen consequences both positive and negative

Over here!