Off to the local pub to eat, drink, and win the weekly trivia. At least two of these things are guaranteed.
Speaking of "misinformation," a clarification on the #Signal App copy pasta going around a couple of days ago.
The more free the network, the more susceptible it is to falsehood.
Most have no recollection of a time when the mainstream viewed the totality of the Internet with suspicion. In the early/mid 90’s, it was extremely difficult to pass off online research as legitimate within academic circles because “anyone can say anything on the Internet.” In those days, if it couldn’t be corroborated by a print resource in the library, you didn’t bother.
The skepticism was partly justified: outside of university-hosted Gopher servers, verifying sources was extremely difficult. We gleaned digital information with a raised eyebrow, and our “built-in bullshit detector” (as Hemingway described it) was always set to ten. It was the Wild West, a time where anything went, and it became even wilder after the invention of the Web Browser.
The mainstreaming of the Internet brought with it “legitimate” information channels, and general attitudes regarding online information relaxed. For about 15 years (2000-2015), we lived in a mixed world where the establishment colonizers existed alongside we wild natives.
And then those colonists attempted to take it all. Every pleb is familiar with this period, and this era is at least partially responsible for why you’re here. The move on centralized networks by political and corporate interests introduced an online tyranny I never thought possible, and with it, a new notion: everything you read on the Internet *has* be true. Of course, by this they simply meant vetted and approved as “true” by one of your self-appointed betters, who likely scoffs at the notion of absolute truth to begin with. I scare quote "disinformation" because the term evokes a slimy dishonesty in itself, signifying an attempt to control information rather than to safeguard truth.
Twitter’s increased “disinformation” is a direct result of a more free platform. That Elon’s policies incentivize falsehood is immoral and stupid, pouring gas on the fire — but make no mistake here: my favorite con man of the last decade has loosened the reigns at Twitter significantly, and blatant falsehood is a byproduct.
If, overnight, Nostr became Twitter, we’d have the same flood of disingenuous clowns tap dancing for sats, hurled at them by a population of applauding fools looking for confirmation bias. Nostr will not revolutionize the monetization of online identity, nor will it fix stupid. If you’re looking for a change in online social interaction, you won’t find it here either. Those who build on Nostr are akin to Prometheus stealing fire: as helpful as it is, one must accept that a lot of stuff is going to burn as a result.
If we are truly committed to an open, uncontrollable protocol, then we must accept “disinformation” as one of the consequences. In fact, we must embrace it with a principled optimism, noting firmly that it is *not* the responsibility of the protocol to do a person’s thinking for them. That responsibility resides with the individual alone.
So turn that bullshit detector back up to ten, and use the brain God gave you. The free exchange of ideas is worth it.
nostr:note1hs2kd3ggmacpx2uz8wdk92egqhl2nypq2kd3s3zld3jufq2sexus6agyqs
An idea as old as the Greeks, who preferred the notion of a multiclass character; one should be familiar with many things, and proficient in nothing.
nostr:note10dlw93k7utjjx46txyf7w284lxfds4qst4f845ku348d2nuctezqsdukp0
A flood of bot follows: nothing to be concerned about, or Jesuit assassins?
A poor night's sleep, gonna be a long day. Hope yours is smoother than mine is bound to be!
#Amethyst crashing hard and fast on Android 14 update of grapheneOS nostr:npub1gcxzte5zlkncx26j68ez60fzkvtkm9e0vrwdcvsjakxf9mu9qewqlfnj5z
I've had no problems. Are you installed through F-Droid or the Play Store?
A friend once picked this up for me and claimed I reminded him of the fox. Fair enough, I've been called worse.
Had a minute, so started with Mutiny Wallet. Pretty easy, pretty cool.
Unless someone is setting out to be a professional author (very hard), nobody should write a book to make money.
When I set out to write Broken Money, it was because I *had* to, not because I wanted to. Spending a thousand hours on something that I get a profit of $5/copy for is not my best use of time.
Any time I spent on my research business revenue generation content, or leaning harder into my venture capital partnerships, would have been better on an hourly ROI basis. I have to sell 40 books to equal each newsletter subscription on my website; clearly the latter is better financially.
Almost regardless of how many copies I sell, it's a bad ROI for me. I'm overworked and the fact that I wrote a book while maintaining my existing business stressed my relationship and social life. And further, I am reinvesting most of my initial profits; the first 1,000 copy profits go to the Human Rights Foundation Bitcoin Development Fund, and the next 4,000 copy profits will go towards making a video about money and why it's broken.
And all of it was worth it. When a creator has something in their head, it's painful until they get it out into the world. I wrote this for bad ROI but because I wanted it to be out there for people to read, period.
Will I make a profit? Yes. But at a much lower hourly rate than I make on other work I do. It's a negative profit compared to having reinvested that thousand hours into my other existing work. But I consider it to be more important, which is why I spent the time.
I wrote Broken Money because I had to. The book concept formed in my head after many years of writing and research regarding money, and it would have been increasingly distracting to *not* write it. I didn't realistically have a choice. I felt compelled to write it. Part of it was altruistic; I wanted people to learn from my total monetary framework thoughts over five years of research. Part of it was egotistical; I wanted to timestamp something in the world, in physical form, and put it out there. Maybe it's the low time preference part of me; I'd like something of me to be mentionable to people in the distant future who look back at this time.
My background has been a blend of engineering and finance, with both ironically pointed toward bitcoin.
I don't care where you buy it from, and you can pirate it if you want, but it benefits bitcoin and nostr:npub1gdu7w6l6w65qhrdeaf6eyywepwe7v7ezqtugsrxy7hl7ypjsvxksd76nak if you buy it from his website. Circular economy rather than big fiat business. We've introduced a special edition hardcover with a cloth cover and dust jacket for those that prefer that premium format, only on his website. And you can buy it in fiat or sats.
https://academy.saifedean.com/product/broken-money-hardcover/
A wonderful reminder that the writer primarily does so for him/herself.
nostr:note1a9jpfql5kwrjfxqt735ls5gmjnwyf3cj5aacqzydy47ws3vlrn3srsgq28
woot, now that I can quote a post on Primal, it's looking good.
So in the end, the “vote” doesn’t matter. At least in parishes it matters to some degree; while always a recommendation to the pastor (and not a democracy) it impacts real decision making.
Not here. I have not nor will I pay attention to this joke going on right now because at the end of the day it doesn’t matter.
Except, in classic E.S. fashion, he misses the point entirely:
The purpose of the synod is to provide the *appearance* of listening, so as to pacify a certain element of the Church, all the while decreeing whatever you'd like.
The documents are already written.
Accidentally used my debit card to purchase a Pixel 8 Pro and you'd think I'd triggered every alarm in the museum
Focused writing mode in Shipyard is great.
Definitely didn't just ingest too many Sausage McMuffins.
Morning everyone, hope it's a blessed day.
At a conference I attended a year ago, someone asked the priest presenter if he had any advice for other priests. He thought about it for five seconds and said, "Don't pay attention to the news."
Best advice I've received in a while.
We share the same tendency towards Monero, and even then I see it more as a practical solution than an ideological one.
The lean towards BTC is a problem for this network, because it is an ideological enthusiasm most do not share. This ideology contains dubious claims towards freedom and sovereignty through crypto which are patently false. In reality, it is a technology. Some will use it and some won’t. I was never interested in it as a useful thing until the lightning network, because it solves a technical problem with crypto in general, making these minute transactions possible.
What I love about Nostr is the notion of owned identities and the censorship resistance. I don’t think people grasp how cool and how necessary this actually is. We need decentralization. Nostr provides a solution to an actual problem, and that’s why I should be using it above all else even if I’m not exactly bullish on the protocol’s ability to onboard and retain given the prevalence of BTC idealism here. What Nostr needs is a flood of normies who see past the noise long enough to build a stable presence.
Too many boring playoff games. Both of today's were early blowouts. At least yesterday's offerings were competitive. #MLB
A good way to think about it, while everyone interacts with it through other front ends ;-). Would be cool if Nostr powered the tools everyone called something else.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mipcq4qds3s&t=757
This kid says nostr won't really be in use 5 to 10 years from now.
I can't say I agree, but it's still depressing to hear negative nancies like this.
I watched this a couple of months ago. I think he's right on a couple of points and wrong on others. Thing is, his criticisms I agree with are actionable.
The only real Achilles Heel (which has stunted adoption) is the tie to crypto. That isn't going away.
We will in fact likely be using Nostr in 5-10 years. The question is whether this is doomed to be the Linux of social networks.