Brilliant - wish I could have found it on youtube rather than here - to drive your point deeper into my soul 🎯 🤣
This implies you should write about people that are born with a silver spoon in their mouth, who are uninterested in thought or analysis and cannot string an argument together - I guess they may also be no-coiners. 🤣
So, if I were to unfollow you, could I be sure to only see authentic, original incisive posts on nostr?
asking for a friend
A byproduct of nostr:npub1vy6wcgw6jhhtcmpawvlnsfx7g8qt8r40z7qlks9zwa4ed57vm5eqx527hr is this bitcoin script editor. The team built it for chapter 9, where you learn how to construct different spending mechanisms, and now it's available as a separate tool. It's brand new, we'd love to hear your thoughts. https://script.savingsatoshi.com
This looks quite awesome - If you could do a brief walk through vid
it would be even awesomer!
The meaning of Life 🤣
Seems you lost his attention 🤣 - Actually looking forwaard to reading .
Me neither - Is not "Skewer's Number plus PI" a number albeit perhaps being referred to for the first time here
When a country, company or individual backs itself with #BTC reserves ...
It does so because it sees a better reserve
or
It is also always a capitulation to admit that it cannot manage a money supply the way BTC can
Either way it is inevitable
Perhaps the US and major players will be one of the last to do this (which is fine)
TLDR; get to the front of the queue.
You know what it feels like to blow up a balloon, not as easy as breathing.
It starts hard but gets easier and then a bit tougher before it finally bursts. Then it's as easy as breathing.
#Hodl bitcoin like you practice breathing.
The surprise will be good.
As #BTC prices close in on ATH I remind myself of a few things:
The price may "look" high, but in a few years it will be seen to have been low.
I can change the present, not the past - so stack for the future.
He who laughs last, laughs longest.
Happy hodling
I had a chat with nostr:npub1s5yq6wadwrxde4lhfs56gn64hwzuhnfa6r9mj476r5s4hkunzgzqrs6q7z about Bitcoin, Cashu, nostr, and privacy, and it was pretty good!
Thank you for having me 🫡
Good one
nostr:npub12rv5lskctqxxs2c8rf2zlzc7xx3qpvzs3w4etgemauy9thegr43sf485vg & nostr:npub1s5yq6wadwrxde4lhfs56gn64hwzuhnfa6r9mj476r5s4hkunzgzqrs6q7z
You worked well together to reduce some pretty complciated concepts and make them conumable by a mere pleb such as myself
Many thanks
Superb new vid by onramp with
ihate1999@rcrsv.xyz Abubakar Nur Khalil
Ok - Yes - that makes sense - thanks. So initial runup triggered by M2 growth - BTC overreacts with FOMO and then peaks prior to M2 peak correcting faster to a new base level
You will get the salient answers here
Much as you cook a piston engine:
nostr:npub1s05p3ha7en49dv8429tkk07nnfa9pcwczkf5x5qrdraqshxdje9sq6eyhe - appreciate the smile - and wonder if you could take a quick look at this and see if I am interpreting 'yield' in a bitcoin world correctly ?
https://primal.net/e/note1hf45l8d6p4fezjffjcs3p97unh7fuzyxq3cst0xermtpeqq30qyse3vccl
Interesting and bullish - Also interesting that BTC peaks precede M2 peaks.
So is M2 a lagging indicator? Trying to imagine a mechanism. - Maybe smart BTC (LTH retail) anticipates rate moves to front run the FED.
nostr:npub1qh5sal68c8swet6ut0w5evjmj6vnw29x3k967h7atn45unzjyeyq6ceh9r
Thoughts?
Is this a case of "Nothing stops this train" - Asking for a friend !
nostr:npub1a2cww4kn9wqte4ry70vyfwqyqvpswksna27rtxd8vty6c74era8sdcw83a
Jeff - I would welcome your feedback on this note
https://primal.net/e/note1hf45l8d6p4fezjffjcs3p97unh7fuzyxq3cst0xermtpeqq30qyse3vccl
Many thanks - and thanks for giving me the impetus to get on nostr
Yield on Bitcoin ?
When nostr:npub1gdu7w6l6w65qhrdeaf6eyywepwe7v7ezqtugsrxy7hl7ypjsvxksd76nak & nostr:npub15dqlghlewk84wz3pkqqvzl2w2w36f97g89ljds8x6c094nlu02vqjllm5m discussed this they perhaps overlooked a long-term consideration, that nostr:npub1s05p3ha7en49dv8429tkk07nnfa9pcwczkf5x5qrdraqshxdje9sq6eyhe might have noted.
If #BTC is ∞/21M, the numerator ∞ grows with innovation.
However the incremental value from any innovation is not initially evenly distributed.
Essentially there is a 'Cantillion'-like effect where those nearest to the innovation beneit from the efficiencies or value-add generated.
Over time the technology is adopted by a competitive market, so that eventually each hodler of BTC gains a purchasing power advantage.
Howver during adoption, some hodlers see incremental purchasing power before others, so while 1BTC = 1BTC remains true some can buy more with their BTC (temporarily) due to the innovation.
As many innovations are simultaneous there will be those that can spot good technologies early (or are innovators themselves) and they can acquire trade-able wealth by spending bitcoin.
This allows them to 'spend' bitcoin more effectively than others so they can take a 'commission' in an agency manner, by acting as an intermediary.
The yield they thus generate (whether as participating in cheaper goods or in the form of BTC commission is for providing a service.
This process need not involve debt - however as with any transaction it is not trustless (buying a service is never trustless).
It can thus generate yield. Yield participation might be as a co-venturer (explicit risk in equity but no interest obligation), or it might be on an interest bearing basis (minimal risk).
The key point is that all purchases involve risk (pay up front hoping for execution but funding the exercise) or (pay subsequent to supply where the supplier carries the risk).
The risk reward may be tiny (or even secured by smart contracts if exercised in the digital realm) however, the existence of risk is required to transact so executors of risky transactions will require reward.
By this means a yield for innovation or for participation in trade as an agent is coupled to the time value of the articles acquired - which can ever be zero.
Thus the argument yield vs equity is moot - they are two ways of securing the deflationary economy that Jeff proposes and we expect.
The choice of which path to take is (absent regulation) one of preference. Do you carry risk or pay yield for the avoidance of risk.
In a world with risk-premium (ie any world with finite resources) transactions are the necessary means for decentralisation of innovation and levelling of purchasing power - they are implicit in any traded economy.
But the choice of which to use is open - so both Saifedean and Saylor can be correct, and neither can enforce a view on the other.
Side point - both forms of trade require the rule of property law whether encoded in software, by civic bodies or by threat.