Avatar
MarcG
72f38a69d3ff5e8c6067a7d874e71f94faeed186d733ca909e235c6a413487c3
Marc is an endangered species.
Replying to Avatar Keith Mukai

I unplugged from social media yesterday. Too many bad takes, distressing takes, etc.

Instead I somehow managed to successfully(?) refactor and improve the most complicated area of the nostr:npub17tyke9lkgxd98ruyeul6wt3pj3s9uxzgp9hxu5tsenjmweue6sqq4y3mgl code.

This isn't really meant to be a flex, more of a: "Oh, shit. I got something amazing done during peak outside world distraction!"

Of course I'll return to moments of obsessive scrolling and the associated rage, terror, depression. But diving DEEP into something really f'n complicated was an unexpectedly effective escape.

Try to stop fretting. Just keep building.

That's a great take Keith!! And I knew devs had been very busy yesterday when I saw the 62 posts and a' ready for review' when I opened TG! 😁😁

Well done Sir!!!

Yes,I think it's true. 30 years of it for me. And definitely, definitely don't get transition lenses or clip-on sunnies! A Huge mistake I made. Never again.

The growing dependency is SO obvious after the fact. (Ageing excluded)

Replying to Avatar QnA

GM Nostr ☕

I've said it once, but I'm gonna say it again (and many more times) nostr:npub1xnf02f60r9v0e5kty33a404dm79zr7z2eepyrk5gsq3m7pwvsz2sazlpr5 is a god tier (no pun intended) Bitcoin wallet.

🔸Completely FOSS

🔸HWW account support

🔸Open/Close channels direct from/to cold storage

🔸Multi remote node management

🔸In built LSP with JIT channels

🔸User configurable LSPs

🔸Client side routing

🔸Wrapping invoices

🔸Lightning addresses

🔸Taproot channels

🔸Nostr contact list

🔸POS system

What a fucking titan. Have you tried it yet? If not, WHY!?

honestly, I thought it only did lightning! 🤯🤯

Replying to Avatar Dimi

so you walked out AND stayed out of the fiat mines? 👍👍🫡🫡

Replying to Avatar L0la L33tz

Bitcoin journalism is fucked.

I started The Rage because I'm tired of investors and advertisers telling me what to do for below minimum wage compensation.

What we need are publications willing to let journalists investigate the crap out of the companies, representatives and people enabling the building of surveillance tech behind the scenes.

What we get are publications selling out to corporations, startups and politicians writing public relations puff pieces to keep their returns on track. The point of journalism is to hold power to account, not to become its bedfellow.

There is no lack of talented, experienced, investigative journalists covering bitcoin. The problem is that they write what the powers that be don't want you to hear – so many are out of a job, dabbling away at the next press release for mainstream media, or doing below-minimum wage contract work to pay the bills.

I'm incredibly overwhelmed by all the positive feedback we've been getting for The Rage. In just 8 weeks we've scooped major publications and drove discussions around AML, Samourai and Tornado Cash together with your help. We've even made enough to cover operations with almost 400$ raised, thanks to all the zappers out there.

But here's the thing. I didn't come here to write a good piece every once in a while leaving stories untold left and right because I can't afford to focus on investigations full time. I came here to fuck up the financial surveillance complex. That's why The Rage now needs your help.

We're trying to raise 0.25BTC so we can contract the best investigative journalists in the Bitcoin space to tell the stories that major publications can't afford to print.

If you value your financial freedom, please consider donating via our Geyser fund. We cannot do this without your help.

https://geyser.fund/project/therage

Donation made ! Go for it Lola!!

Thx Jeff- so Beff Jesos (Guillaume Verdon) noted the Leopold Essay yesterday!

(I'm assuming Beff meant the lax security concerns essay, not the one you posted. )

And since OpenAi just added the NSA to their board this week, to me it makes Leopolds NEW essays (that you linked to) so much more important! Thx for linking them!

(there seems to be so much covert maneuvering at ClosedAI , it's staggering to watch from outside!!! )

to be clear: 1 WANT THEM AS ONE PAIR !! 😂

Well done, the group looks like they are listening intently! and one day soon I will come to re-visit " the smoke that thunders"! 🫡

Too many people I know skip it for short time preference and use gas/propane. And then no smoke and flame to flavor the food. But yes, point taken. I am a just 'Coal' maxi. 🫡

that's actually genius!! wider not taller. it's obvious in hindsight!!

you are using real coals!! 🫡🫡🫡

Replying to Avatar SeedSigner

I have not publicly spoken much or asked questions about this for a few reasons. Firstly because I consider you to be a personal friend and I feel that you try to do the right thing in each of the projects and organizations that you are involved with. You helped our project out in numerous ways, especially early on when our core concept was brand new and still being proven out.

Neither opensats nor dorsey owes our project anything. I have been very clear about this, and I moreover feel that opensats is a net good for both the bitcoin and the nostr communities. But I have also avoided asking questions about the status of grants, much less about potential conflicts of interest, because I did not want to spoil Keith's chances at a grant, or negatively impact anyone else who might apply in the future for a SeedSigner-related grant. I think this speaks to the same self-censorship dynamics that jb55 has referenced.

You insinuate in the above that there has been at least one vote on a SeedSigner related grant. This would be news to me because I had the understanding that applications related to SeedSigner were being considered but were deactivated when it became known that Keith had received funding from the HRF.

While a required threshold of "yes" votes for a successful grant is of course entirely reasonable, "no" votes (especially emphatic ones from persons of influence) can cut quite effectively in the opposite direction. nvk's repeated, persistent, very public criticisms of our project communicate something like personally motivated animus rather than any sort of good-faith conscientious objection. Even were he to openly abstain from a formal vote on SeedSigner related grants (which would be in line with opensats' publicly established policies) other board members are likely to be influenced by his numerous public statements. It's honestly troubling that someone running a company that embraces "source available" as an attempt to rebrand what open source means, and who has referred to good/faith FOSS proponents as "commies", should be in a position to decide who does, or who does not, receive open source grant funding.

Some very legitimate questions are being raised about the parties providing funding, their motivations, the entities receiving funding (and those who aren't), the specific tech they're working on, and those who are directly (and indirectly) involved in the funding decision making process. I don't think these questions are being asked because of prototypical bitcoiner contrarian suspicion, but rather are the result of an evolving pattern of observable events; some might call what they are seeing as potential "aligned malincentives". The opensats funding dynamics and scale may also be arriving at a point where larger structural dynamics are coming into play and a "just trust me" approach to public relations and organizational ethics becomes increasingly less and less viable.

So where from here? I don't have a good answer and none of these are my decisions to make. Hopefully opensats just has a short-term public perception challenge that can be resolved with better communication and more transparency. But bitcoiners are a skeptical bunch and these questions aren't going away if they aren't addressed.

Lastly -- I believe that you personally have a good heart and I'm rooting for your success.

(NB - I am speaking here under the exorbitant privilege of operating this account as SeedSigner "the man"; my comments may not reflect the opinions of all, or even of any, of our contributors.)

As a contributor to Seedsigner - albeit a small one-, I support this statement 100%.

nostr:note10hstatl0855a5y2g8l09g35ce7afjs2t9rgdv0h0thp38cvwcfvq00zjj2