我去，这是什么年代的事情？60年代？70年代？

ZeroHedge getting straight to the point

我引用一段罗斯巴德《美国货币和银行史》：

“1929年席卷世界经济的大萧条，或者今天所谓的“衰退”，本可以用美国、英国和其他国家在 1920-1921 年之前所面临的严重收缩，以及所有国家在古典金本位制度下遭遇衰退时采用的相同方式来应对。简言之，他们本可以认识到之前通货膨胀繁荣的愚蠢行为，并接受回归高效自由市场经济所需的衰退机制。换言之，他们本可以接受对不良投资和极度不健全银行的清算，并接受货币、信贷和价格的经济通缩。如果他们这样做了，就会像之前的情况一样，经历一个波动剧烈而严重的经济衰退调整期，但谢天谢地较为短暂。没有政府干预的衰退几乎总会在一年或 18个月内自行复苏。

但是，美国、英国和世界其他国家一直受到廉价货币的致命诱惑。如果通货膨胀性质的银行信贷扩张让世界陷入这场混乱，那么，更大规模的银行信贷扩张将是唯一的出路。对这种货币扩张政策和“原始凯恩斯主义”愚蠢行为的追求，加上政府为防止价格通缩而采取的其他大规模干预措施，成功地将原本短暂但剧烈的衰退转变为长期而永久的停滞，以及伴随而来并随“二战”才结束的前所未有的高失业率。”

跟伯南克的见解完全相反🤷

比特币大慢牛正式进入长达一年半的攀升趋势，都准备好了吗？千万不要买其他垃圾山寨币，都没用。我只推荐三个比，btc,eth,icp.

How to reply to a PoS shitcoiner:

PoS has been around for thousands of years, it's nothing new. Government money is proof of stake, as are company shares.

Egyptians, Romans, and Chinese were using this 2000+ years ago. Italian city states perfected it 800 years ago. Stake based systems are not new.

Using stake to solve the Byzantine General's Problem is also not new. Cypherpunks have been working on this shit since the late 80s.

The cypherpunks on the mailing list (that Satoshi sent the white paper to for peer review) are literally the people who created the *entire body cryptographic of work* used by proof of stake coins today (stake based byzantine fault tolerance). They are well aware of the fundamental limitations of stake based BFT because they are ones who came up with it in the first place...

If Bitcoin was proof of stake *you would never have heared of it* because it wouldn't have survived 5 minutes of peer review by any real cryptographers.

Time-based difficulty-adjusted PoW *is* the breakthrough and is the *only* reason you and anyone has ever heard of a "blockchain".

The failure modes of stake based BFT are well known, and it fails *every time* for a number of reasons, but if you are betting on a shitcoin to increase in value then the failure mode will probably involve the fact that stakeholders have an incentive to increase the supply to benefit from the cantillion effect.

Mathematical fact: you cannot deploy external capital to defend a system that is secured by internal history (stake). This is why stake based BFT does *not* secure against attack by a state or central bank, which means *anything* secured by PoS MUST comply with governments.

Bitcoin's value proposition is that Bitcoin let's you do things that bankers and governments *don't want you to do*. If bankers and governmensts can nuke your shitcoin, then you do what they say or they nuke it.

What's the value proposition beyond CBDCs if your shitcoin ultimately has to comply with governments and bankers?

You cannot out-stake a bad actor who has aquired sufficient stake to fuck with the system, your only option is to fork them out. Then it becomes a competition between charismatic personalities convincing the market to follow their authority (their fork) instead of the other guy.

So how do you solve the problem of removing a bad actor without requiring some form of authority? Read the Bitcoin white paper. Satoshi knew exactly how stake based systems fail, that's *exactly* why he used proof of work instead.

不要考虑得太大了，你和你的几个猪朋狗友自己建个节点自己玩，没谁会知道的，这软件是这种应用场景的

因为它现在并没有审核机制，使用用户数太少了；

note1tyv6zp0pyhfstrd5s5weg2rxke3297z8nl8gvzrf4cye422kajcqgj958q

Nostr没这么特别，只是降低了社交网络的运行成本。我觉得现在更像是，你自己搞了一个小服务器，上面放的东西不是太出格，根本没人管。（twitter, reddit, facebook不是中心化平台的全部，中心化平台不政治正确的也一大堆，违法内容在各种中心化平台多的是，都还没管得过来）

你可以在NOSTR上设计一个网店吗？可以解决支付信任的问题吗？