Avatar
jimbocoin ๐Ÿƒ
6140478c9ae12f1d0b540e7c57806649327a91b040b07f7ba3dedc357cab0da5
The SUPERCYCLE guy.
Replying to 516add19...

I donโ€™t know who that guy is in the picture but it looks like what a visual dictionary would show for the word โ€œwankerโ€

I donโ€™t know what this means, but I will remember ๐Ÿ˜…

Thinking about getting into 3D printing at home. Whats the #1 most important thing youโ€™d wish youโ€™d known before you started? #asknostr

What happened at the last FOMC meeting? Seems things pumped after.

Idea: GM Relay

Only accepts and broadcasts GMs

Sometimes, I make a post, but it doesnโ€™t show up anywhere. How can I debug this? Client is #Damus

GMโ˜• #coffeechain

About scaling and self sovereignty on Bitcoin:

As this has become more of a topic the last 3-4 months, much thanks to Peter McCormack, I've had many thoughts around this pile up, but not quite being able to articulate them well.

Yesterday I listened to nostr:npub12rv5lskctqxxs2c8rf2zlzc7xx3qpvzs3w4etgemauy9thegr43sf485vg on Citadel Dispatch, and this one quote from the podcast was sortof a light bulb moment for me:

"Ecash is not a scaling solution for Bitcoin".

This in many ways sums up the concerns I have around scaling for Bitcoin.

Basically what he said (if I can take the liberty) is that unless you PRESERVE the properties of Bitcoin, then you ARE NOT scaling Bitcoin.

I guess there is some nuance there, as any layer 2 etc, will not be the exact same thing, so what will such a criteria look like?

But looking at the overarching picture, you want the ability to self sovereignly hold your bitcoin and to be able to transact freely with it.

This is basically the problem Gold ended up having.

Fiat was layer on top of Gold that made it much more efficient to store and transact with. But it DIDN'T PRESERVE THE PROPERTIES OF GOLD.

It could be debased, and it could be censored.

The big challenge for Bitcoin IMO, is that we don't end up in a fiat 2.0 situation.

What I mean by that is that Bitcoin is reduced to a financial asset and base layer for institutions. But for the vast number of people, they are interacting with a layer on top THAT IS NOT PRESERVING the properties of Bitcoin, and are thus faced with the same problems of debasement, censorship and surveillance as we have today.

This is one of the main arguments, IMO, for covenants such as OP_CTV. By introducing spending conditions, multiple parties can โ€œshareโ€ a UTXO, giving more people your-keys-your-coins status on-chain.

Mt. Gox 2.0

The sooner it blows up, the better. nostr:note1kh9wmefk45u7xz9kjrz7hv0aerzyyavctpuuxtu2qdk2hvuh7l3qj3g2kr

Hitting her with the negs right out the gate