Drivechains Won't Eradicate Altcoins
--------------------------------------
There's a prevailing belief among advocates that drivechains will spell the end for altcoins. The logic is simple: if drivechains exist, they can replicate any function of an altcoin on Bitcoin itself, eliminating the need for the altcoin. For example, if an altcoin boasts privacy features, those could be integrated into Bitcoin using drivechains, making the altcoin redundant.
Technically, this perspective has merit. Many altcoin innovations can indeed be integrated into Bitcoin via sidechains. For example RSK is a Bitcoin sidechain that uses Ethereum's scripting language to copy its "features."
However, this viewpoint misses a fundamental point. Altcoins don't thrive purely due to their technical features. In fact, their primary purpose isn't technical at all. Altcoins mainly serve to profit their founders and early investors.
Take ZCash and ZClassic as examples. They are technically identical and the only difference is political. ZCash had a premine and a dev tax, ZClassic did not. They are completely redundant, yet, their coexistence remains undisturbed.
At its core, the altcoin world revolves around profit and politics, not technical features. Most of these "features" are not just dubious but actively harmful, as can be seen in the many different exploits of their bad designs. Technical features are significant only if they attract new investors. In essence, they serve more as promotional tools than as core functionalities.
Many mistakenly see Bitcoin's value solely in its technical attributes. While these are crucial, Bitcoin's real strength lies in its monetary nature and the decentralized scarcity it creates. Overemphasizing its technical aspects risks overlooking this foundational economic characteristic.
Drivechains are an intriguing technological development, but they're not going to suddenly stop new altcoins from launching or even succeeding in getting new people to buy in. People don't buy altcoins because of features, they buy altcoins because they want to gamble.
Besides, if it was just technical features, wouldn't other sidechains like Liquid and RSK be more popular than the thousands of altcoins out there? The past seven years suggest that drivechains won't change this.
It's an easy hack to look older. I struggled with Babyface until my mid 30s when I finally grew out my facial hair. Honestly, the more consequential thing for guys looking good is not being fat and muscle mass in that order.
Revolutions always start with ideals and end with thugs.
Beware of anyone promising change. It might not be the kind you like.
Why Joe Rogan Avoids Bitcoin Discussions
Joe Rogan has sidestepped Bitcoin discussions for the past seven years, despite previously hosting Andreas Antonopoulous multiple times. What's stopping him from inviting more Bitcoin enthusiasts?
At the heart of it, Rogan simply may not be interested. Delving into Bitcoin discussions means wading into the relentless debates between Bitcoin and altcoin supporters. Every podcaster who touches on Bitcoin faces the pressure of giving equal time to altcoin enthusiasts. This tug-of-war is daunting, and Rogan likely prefers to sidestep it. Consider the case of Lex Friedman, who has faced criticism from both sides for trying to strike a balance. It's why Rogan doesn't have anyone on to discuss abortion, for example. It's a controversial topic and anyone you have on will destroy your standing with the segment that disagrees with you.
Yet Rogan is an outspoken critic of fiat money, frequently discussing its flaws and potential for corruption. He acknowledges the problems with central bank digital currencies and even mentions Bitcoin in these contexts. His audience likely wants him to have guests on about this topic, and this is why he had Antonopoulous on before 2017. But the Bitcoin narrative became more complex around 2017 with the rise of venture capitalists and altcoin advocacy, the so-called scambrian explosion. Rogan's ignoring of Bitcoin is the result of this shift. He has a knack for sensing underlying issues, which has undoubtedly contributed to his podcasting success.
Yet, Rogan's understanding of Bitcoin remains superficial. Until he fully grasps how it fixes the problems he sees, it's unlikely he'll feature a dedicated Bitcoin guest. While figures like Jack Dorsey and Adam Curry have tried to steer the conversation towards Bitcoin, Rogan refused to take the bait. It'll take a larger level of inflation or economic destruction for him to delve into this topic.
The controversy will remain on Bitcoin versus altcoins and that's not something he'll be able to avoid. He needs more conviction before he'll talk about it on his show and that's not something he has yet.
So instead of trying to bully him into having a guest on, just point out the obvious. Fiat money is the cause of a lot of the societal degeneration. Whether he gets it sooner or later will be up to him.
I'm planning to change my podcast format to be more of a group discussion about various topics. Max 3 people besides myself.
First topic I want to host a discussion for is fiat dating.
Who should I have on?
Safety, while comforting, can be a deceptive master. The 1960s mouse paradise experiment illustrates this perfectly. Researchers created an ideal world for mice, providing them with all the essentials: abundant food, shelter, and companionship. At first, it seemed like a utopian success as the colony flourished. However, with time, a darker side emerged. Female mice turned unusually aggressive, while many males lost the drive to court females altogether. The result? The colony perished in just about 700 days. This serves as a stark reminder: adversity, in the right doses, is essential for growth and balance.
In other words, too much safety and not enough challenge will cause collapse. As a civilization, we've overcorrected for safety with not enough challenge. Hence, we have the lowering birthrates we have now.
Free issue for the first Monday of the month!
Cryonics, modern dating, people vs things, Floresta, ChatBTC, SmartSats, Tether treasury, MSTR stock sale and much, much more!
#Bitcoin Tech Talk #356
People that are good at school are generally good at making justifications for anything and everything.
That's great for anyone that wants yes-men/slaves, not for truly creative endeavors.
School teaches you to pursue approval, not truth. And that's toxic to the soul.
The problem with Democracy isn't democracy per se. It's democracy combined with fiat money. Whenever systems get large a larger portion becomes rent seeking. And when there are a lot of rent seekers, systemic reform becomes extremely hard.
Every form of government has weaknesses. But it's fiat money that amplifies those weaknesses into critical flaws.
Laws don't change people's behavior. Incentives do.
Here's the dirty truth about Coinbase:
They're not very good at engineering. This is a company that has had scaling problems from the beginning where they went down anytime there was a surge. This is also an org that took a year to migrate to react.js and made it sound like a major feat.
The fact that they find lightning challenging is not a surprise. Their competence is not in engineering, it's in getting money transmission licenses.
Their headcount is still bloated, their cash cows are going to be regulated away and they're not good enough technically to pivot to Bitcoin only. They're doomed.
People vs. Things
-------------------
Over the past half-century, our focus has drastically shifted. Rather than channeling our energy into manipulating objects for human advancement, we've shifted towards manipulating individuals, and this is not necessarily for the better.
The manipulation of things has always been a fundamental part of human progress. Think about it. Taming fire, inventing the wheel, harnessing electricity – these are all instances of us manipulating the physical world to our advantage. This type of manipulation offers countless benefits. We can produce way more with our labor, travel more efficiently, and live easier and more enjoyable lives.
However, the manipulation of people – that's an entirely different story. Instead of leading to advancements, it paves the way for deceit and exploitation. It often culminates in fraud or theft, eroding trust and creating a more divided and cynical society.
The fiat money system is the cause. Infinite money printing means you can manipulate people continuously. Instead of manipulating things to add value and spurring economic growth, we've started to exploit people with freshly printed money. This situation has led us to naval-gazing, deviating us from the noble quest of advancing human civilization through the manipulation of things.
Bitcoin is what will change this mentality. When money is scarce, so will its vectors of manipulation.
Train yourself in managing your desires, rather than merely amassing knowledge.
The old adage, "knowledge is power," is one that I challenge. While knowledge can certainly offer an advantage, the real source of power lies in controlling desires. The one who masters the desires of others effectively wields power over them.
Acquiring knowledge can indeed fuel your aspirations, but it's crucial to keep a firm rein on these desires. Devotees of Bitcoin instinctively understand this, for if you pursue anything other than Bitcoin - whether it's quick riches, fame, or material possessions - you risk losing sight of your true aim.
Numerous Bitcoin veterans have faltered because their ambitions lay elsewhere. What they should have yearned for was securing their future. This involves careful planning, prudent saving, and establishing a meaningful legacy.
Thus, it's not about collecting a reservoir of knowledge or chasing immediate gratification. Instead, power lies in fostering the right desires and utilizing knowledge as a tool to manage them efficiently. By doing so, we not only ensure our individual success, but we also help create a better place for everyone.
For free subscribers: Political Atheism, Insights from Traders, Little Bitcoin Book in Korean and more!
For paid subscribers: Coin Control, Bulletproofs++, CoinJoin channel opens, Duck Curve control and more!
Bitcoin Tech Talk #355
Two Funerals and a Honeymoon
===============
“...a larger than life leader who served his people for almost half a century. A legendary revolutionary and orator, Mr. Castro made significant improvements to the education and health care of his island nation.”
In 2016, Fidel Castro died and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau made this statement about him. He had planned to travel to Cuba for the funeral, but canceled the trip after the public outcry over his statement. For a skillful politician like Justin Trudeau, this was more than a little odd, like watching Olympic athletes purposefully losing: there is more to the story.
Why did Justin Trudeau whitewash a murderous dictator’s legacy?
The Other Funeral
=============
In 2000, Justin’s father Pierre died at the age of 80. Prime Minister of Canada from 1968-1979, his funeral was the end of a long and eventful life. Shocking observers was one of the honorary pallbearers.
It was Fidel Castro.
This was a man that rarely went outside of Cuba. Dictators stay where it’s safe because they’re paranoid about assassination attempts. Yet here he was, exposing himself to pay respects to his friend, almost like a pilgrimage. Once again, there is more to the story.
Why did Fidel Castro attend Pierre Trudeau’s funeral?
The Honeymoon
=============
It was something of a scandal, that the bachelor prime minister had married. This was 1971, well before TMZ, so the public had no idea that Pierre Trudeau was even dating. He had been courting Margaret Sinclair for the previous 18 months and there she was, his 22-year old bride.
He was 30 years her senior and had been enjoying his bachelor lifestyle. The year before, he appeared in public with Barbara Streisand. Yes, he was dating Barbara Streisand publicly, while dating Margaret privately. He was an alpha male and the normal rules didn’t apply to him.
Pierre slept with many women including Liona Boyd (classical guitarist), Margot Kidder (actress), Gale Zoë Garnett (author) and Kim Cattrall (of Sex and the City fame). He dated multiple women at once and oftentimes would invite them to the same party. So when this lifelong bachelor got married, the public was shocked, as if a previously terrible baseball player suddenly won MVP.
Pierre and Margaret went to the Caribbean for their honeymoon. It was at this time that they went to an undisclosed island in the Caribbean. To quote The Ottawa Journal from April 13th, 1971:
“Barbados – Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau and his wife Margaret left here by chartered plane on a quick side-trip to an unidentified nearby island.”
The press revealed every other island that they had traveled to: Barbados, Tobago, Trinidad and St. Vincent. This is like showing your browsing history, but not revealing one particular website. There is more to the story.
Why would they not reveal this island?
Pierre
=====
The only politically problematic Caribbean island to visit at the time was Cuba, a communist state and ally of the USSR. It’s possible that the press didn’t want to name another island for some reason, but it’s hard to imagine why.
Why would Pierre Trudeau want to visit Cuba? Pierre Trudeau and Fidel Castro had dealt with each other months earlier during the October Crisis in Montreal. Quebec nationalists (FLQ) kidnapped British Diplomat James Cross and held him for 59 days. The kidnappers eventually agreed to release the diplomat in return for safe passage to Cuba but there was one problem: Cuba had to agree to take them.
Pierre Trudeau called Castro and Castro agreed to take the kidnappers. The crisis was resolved. Trudeau afterwards sent a private letter expressing his heartfelt gratitude.
It’s hard to overstate what a big deal this was at the time. Trudeau had to resolve this crisis to stay in power. The solution of sending the kidnappers to Cuba was a godsend and the gratitude he felt was genuine. It’s hard to believe that a politically isolated dictator like Castro would save another world leader’s hide without asking for something in return, but that’s the story sold to the press. This would be like getting a favor from a mobster: completely out of character and hard to believe that there isn’t more to the story.
After this political crisis, wouldn’t they have needed or even wanted to meet each other?
Castro at the time was the target of many CIA assassination attempts, and he wasn’t leaving Cuba. Trudeau also couldn’t go to Cuba since that would anger the US, a valuable ally. The US had gone through the Cuban Missile Crisis just 8 years earlier and were actively at war with Communists in Vietnam. Like a Shakespearan tragedy, the only way for Trudeau and Castro to meet would be to do so in private.
What better way than to do so under the cover of a honeymoon?
Fidel
=====
“Oh, what a charmer! You know why he’s in power, he’s got charisma coming out his ears.”
So said Margaret Trudeau about Fidel Castro during an interview. She also called him, “the sexiest man she had ever met” in her autobiography. In the video where she calls him a charmer, she gushes about him the same way a child does about Disneyland.
We all would like to think that dictators have horrible personalities since they do such horrendous acts, but this is rarely the case. Stalin had serious charisma, and even president Harry Truman said “I like that son of a bitch.” Hitler charmed little kids by giving them horsey rides.
Fidel was a really attractive man. At 6’3” with the build of a football player, he was powerful, good looking and had many, many lovers. One report has him sleeping with 35,000 (!) women during his lifetime. Villains in real life have personalities less like Voldemort and more like Casanova.
We don’t know what happened during this trip or if the trip even happened at all, but if the Trudeaus did go to Cuba in 1971, it’s safe to say that Fidel Castro charmed them. What we do know is that the Trudeaus visited Cuba in 1976 and they were lifelong friends after that trip.
Is a single trip enough to start a lifelong friendship? One that would result in being an honorary pallbearer and a politically risky eulogy?
Margaret
========
Margaret was 18 when she met Pierre Trudeau. He was justice minister at the time and she was a university student studying sociology. This was the late 60’s and she was a flower child. After graduating from university, she traveled the “hippie trail” in Europe and North Africa. She was an attractive young woman fully immersed in the ethic of free love, so her sexual mores were as non-traditional as Star Wars Day.
In her various autobiographies, she confesses to many affairs during her marriage. She admits to sleeping with Ted Kennedy, Jack Nicholson, Ryan O'Neal (Boxer), Lou Rawls (Singer) and Ronnie Wood (Rolling Stones) among others. She was also a heavy drug user, smoking pot in front of her security detail and partying at the notorious Studio 54. She was only 22 when she got married and she lived in the spotlight for the rest of her 20’s. She was more messed up than a college dorm room.
As mentioned above, Pierre’s sexual mores weren’t conventional either. He was sleeping with many beautiful women before his marriage. After 30 years of being a playboy, he was as likely to be a traditional husband as a Hollywood director.
Given Margaret’s assessment of Castro as sexy and having embraced the flower child/free love ethic of her years at university, is it crazy to think she would have slept with him?
Justin
=====
Which brings us back to Justin Trudeau. He was born about 8.5 months after that possible April 13th, 1971 encounter, on December 25, 1971. The internet has noted his remarkable likeness to Fidel Castro, making us wonder whether the speculation has some truth.
Justin Trudeau today is the prime minister of Canada. We don’t know why he felt the need to exonerate a bloodthirsty dictator, but looking backward at the two funerals and a honeymoon, we have some clues as to why he might.
Napoleon once said that “History is the version of past events that people have decided to agree upon.” History is full of official narratives that don’t match reality. We are left wondering at the accuracy of these stories given how little sense they make:
Did Pierre and Margaret have a normal marriage? Do powerful men like Pierre Trudeau and Fidel Castro and beautiful women like Margaret Trudeau observe traditional morality? Are world leaders like Pierre Trudeau and Fidel Castro always fully transparent?
The agreed-upon “official” stories conveniently make the powerful look good and hide their degeneracy. These stories don’t add up because they never reveal the other side of the equation: the power games, the humiliations and the sheer human depravity.
We may not be certain about Justin Trudeau’s paternity, but we can be certain that there’s a lot missing in the story. There are too many explanations that don’t make sense. Too many justifications that are “just-so.” We are being told lies, and for that, we should be outraged.
This story of Justin Trudeau’s paternity is just one of the many stories that we are told every day. The Jeffrey Epstein conspiracy theories are crazier, yet people are far more ready to believe that than the Justin Trudeau one. The difference is that the Jeffrey Epstein story is more recent and we have far more familiarity with the details. We can’t let the lack of public knowledge prevent us from closer examination.
Because there is more to the story.
Unpopular Opinion:
Buying something with Bitcoin and then replacing it buy buying the same amount on an exchange when other payment options are available is like charging your electric car with a diesel generator.
The same people that want to believe in aliens are the same ones that want to believe in the altcoin they just bought, which launched a couple months ago.
Most people are terrible at resisting social pressure.
Unfortunately, this is reinforced behavior, as compliance not just to authorities but the norms they set is learned from 12 years of government education.
If you want to be free, you must learn to disregard popular opinion.
I'm convinced if Biden was caught bribing people on video, that the media would defend him.
Heck, he could rape and murder multiple people on live TV and MSNBC would still be defending him.
We're well past the point of truth mattering anymore. It's all about power now.
Just show up. We'll figure something out.