Avatar
mark tyler
9baed03137d214b3e833059a93eb71cf4e5c6b3225ff7cd1057595f606088434
Bitcoin & 🫂 Oh and dimly trying to think through interesting issues. I think that I don’t have a right to force you to do anything other than not harm me or others. Seems like most people I interact with in the real world disagree with this statement. To be fair.. the devil is in definition of “harm”.

Guessing your issue with zionists isn’t the part where people want to live somewhere and also protect themselves - it’s that often zionists want to live somewhere and protect themselves but also and treat the people already living there unfairly?

I was talking with a friend about this - it’s like queries conjure different personalities out of it. Some queries conjure stupid personalities from it. Others conjure intelligent personalities.

Even then though it still messes things up.

Do you remember what it was being dumb about?

#gigstr nostr:note1knykx97qhepypsjq8zsskxkn7vma0ywejjlglarex0luct0cezwqf95y4q

SEC: I want to hire someone who understands Bitcoin who also doesn’t have any

Candidate market: 🦗🦗🦗 nostr:note1w3rnhkv4mm4p0u4e3daxflpzdlr9mh259zfqea9wgtwhap7mqufssuuzgj

When it comes to mental state - now is all there is 🫂

Also this made me wonder what it would be like to post notes always under a new npub… would likely need to use PoW (partially solving the problem that our current pattern of high npub reuse solves) nostr:note1tmkp5z5uene2rkuvvfw9749xzunsjq4j9zk7f0wy28syvtnl2gnqtldrm8

TLDR 1 sat max = $323809 measured in 2022 dollars.

Back of the envelope calculations here based on the sun’s energy output, the maximum relevant radius of our bitcoin network, the ratio of wealth and GDP, and the GDP efficiency of energy right now, I would guess that 1 sat will never be traded for more than $324k of today’s usd in goods / services / etc.

I mixed things up a little, the click through experience might not be exactly what you are looking for

When I share links in iMessage I always use primal or more recently njump links and it does just that - but I’ve never tried sharing elsewhere. Do they not behave the same? Or do I misunderstand you?

Don’t we already have that? Not with snort but primal and njump previews do that, and clicking in plays the video suuuper minimally (too minimally?)

Same. If I want to navigate I always just open the video link in my browser.

Yeah that’s true. Some civilian deaths may be part of mitigating the incentive to do what Hamas has done - using a population as a human shield.

Here are a few groups of civilians: people who vote indicating support of the actions of the military you’re fighting, people who just pay taxes, people who express online support of the military actions, people who spend half their day building weapons for sending to the front line, people who volunteer to drive those weapons to the front line, people who move into the settlements that are encroaching on your land.

Other thoughts…

Sometimes people talk as though society has an interest apart from those of its constituents. But I think we are assuming that “society not surviving” means the people in question are subjugated to some power that they would have been willing to fight against if they had been able to coordinate well enough - and in that context conscription is justified because it solves that human coordination problem.

Yeah I’d like to see a culture of people that don’t need or use it. Maybe we don’t these days with good neighbors.. it is nerve wracking to consider trying though. Freedom tech may help with lowering the benefit to a victorious invader.. maybe..

Replying to Avatar unclebobmartin

There are lines that separate the grey from the black and white. Hamas crossed that line on 10-7.

There have been suggestions that the line was not truly crossed.

For example: Hamas' intent was to kill IDF soldiers in their sleep; and that IDF soldiers are a valid military target.

I reject this on a few grounds.

a) One does not preface a sneak attack on soldiers in their beds by launching a massive barrage of rockets all through their territory. Such a launch guarantees that the soldiers will be up and armed.

b) A sneak attack in the midst of a declared cease-fire invalidates the action.

c) The taking of hundreds of hostages must have been planned in advance and is inconsistent with the mission of killing soldiers in their sleep.

d) Filming the torture, rape, and execution of civilians, and posting those videos on-line is inconsistent with the mission of killing soldiers in their sleep.

e) Using ultra-light aircraft to attack a dance concert is inconsistent with the mission of killing soldiers in their sleep.

f) Going house to house in civilian neighborhoods and killing families in their safe rooms and bomb shelters is inconsistent with the mission of killing soldiers in their sleep.

Thus, the mission was never to kill soldiers in their sleep. The mission was terror.

From: (mark) at 11/03 16:48

>

> Anyway, I just realized that some people were acting as if there is an easily agreed to ethical line here for all cases which is never gray, but of course there is gray. That’s interesting to me.

CC: #[4]

Yeah I agree that the specific actions taken by Hamas fighters puts them solidly on the bad side of the gray.