If anything close to this exists, please refer me!
I'm leaning towards nay, but I need to do much more learning about lightning.
It would be my dream for opposing strong technical minds to debate this in some long-form medium.
Pants are ok if you are going commando though. Also, don't trust, verify? what?
That guy has a habit of arrogant high-horsing in general. Smells of ego.
We die from moment to moment, and are reborn from moment to moment.
It is unfair to say people asking questions are arrogant or spoiled. In fact, I think they are humble and brave enough to keep the community healthy by asking the hard questions.
Corruption via VC funding and influence centralization is definitely a threat avenue to the space. When I see more prominent people close to the VC money try to shutdown the conversation, it makes things smell worse.
I used to get in lots of fights when I was a kid cause I wanted to be "a man", but then I grew up.
Say no to Xitter. It makes you a dumbass.
Xitter has this affect on people.
nostr:npub16as8gepztj9tvyx6n9y4h3cv3gaytgpl3g32jhcxlj6mcss72uaqjwg2tf's emojito + nostrudel = DREAM TEAM
Some thoughts form the last few days of chaos in this world:
1. Ossification is on a gradient. Nuance matters.
2. Saylor is great but the war at hand dictates that his reputation be sacrificed. He has already done his part imo.
3. Lightning is not at a dead-end, even with lots of VC money flowing around it corrupting at the fringes.
4. I need to learn so much more about BTC/LN from a technical standpoint.
Where can I read about the specifics of SBF's "days off" clauses? I hadn't seen tha before.
Twitteresque engagement farming has spilled over into the nostrati.
Peter Theil:
"One āphilosophy of scienceā argument that I like is that science is supposed to fight a two-front war against excessive dogmatism and excessive scepticism. And so excessive dogmatism is like, say, the decayed Aristotelianism of the medieval church, and that was what science was in some ways fighting in the 17th and 18th centuries. And then excessive scepticism, if I canāt trust my senses and I donāt know whether Iām sitting in front of you, if youāre too sceptical, you also canāt do science. This two-front war is in tension, itās actually hard to get that balance. The early moderns were more anti-dogmatism than anti-scepticism. If we fast forward to 2023, there are all kinds of things where the scientific establishment would caution us against being too sceptical. Weāre not supposed to be vaccine sceptics, weāre not supposed to be climate science sceptics. Itās fighting scepticism in all its forms. Iād be hard-pressed to come up with a single instance where a scientist would say, āthis is an area where science is too dogmatic today in 2023ā. Surely that tells us that somehow science has degenerated into something thatās more dogmatic than the medieval church. If youāre just fighting scepticism it tells you youāre dogmatic. The totalitarian āscienceā of the early 20th century was like this. It pretended to be anti-dogmatism, anti-supernatural, anti-that sort of stuff. But in reality, the anti-scepticism dominated."
https://www.newstatesman.com/ideas/2024/01/john-gray-peter-thiel-discussion-post-modern-world
"Or, the thing that I think unfortunately happens a great deal, is you just lie and the and the institutions become sociopathic. They pretend that the growth is still going on and then itās only years and years later that people figure out that there are no jobs."
https://www.newstatesman.com/ideas/2024/01/john-gray-peter-thiel-discussion-post-modern-world
Nuance over tribalism, my friends.
I really appreciate what you do. However, let's be real - if there's an approval process then there by definition are strings attached.
Build your own small reasons to be more hopeful. Over time they accumulate and build off of eachother.