He lost 285 btc or gained about a million dollars. Had he kept the btc instead, he would've lost/gained 0 btc, or gained about 20 million dollars.
The screw wasn't tightened enough on the wire, or the wire was damaged, or changed shape over time (can happen if the wire is tinned with solder, or made of aluminum). This causes resistance and possible arcing when loaded, both producing heat.
Probably, too many self-proclaimed libertarian Bitcoiners think it would be a good idea to bring it back.
I thought you didn't do online ads out of principle, due to the ad companies' surveillance. Did I dream reading that, or when and why did you change it?
Why did those spinners become popular in the first place? The hourglass before them was much more relevant.
Probably with WINE and the other thing that makes WINE work with audio and all kinds of things, I don't remember what it's called.
While the law is still bad, it doesn't ban self custody. See nostr:npub1x2nsd57m43rt663drdxgnzlfsmmu6p5j7z0xzec2tpxwyvy79sts35u4eh 's articles on what the law is about.
If by "they" you mean the government, they don't need to. They'll just tell the companies that it's up to them to do it, and if they don't, they'll get a fine of a percentage of their yearly turnover. That's what the EU does.
I made a quick first reading pass through the latest satanic EU thing. It's a wide ranging 324 page document, covering things like trusts, football clubs, dubious / tax optimized jurisdictions, the distinction between in house lawyers and law firms, beneficial ownership, reporting requirements, etc, etc.
https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-6220-2024-REV-1/en/pdf
I tried to collect the bits that might impact Bitcoin. A minuscule fraction of the paper surface area. It's not like Bitcoin or even 'virtual assets' has its own chapter: in classic design-by-commission it just pops up in random articles.
Notably I'm ignoring cash: someone else will have to save that. But beware that 'cash' is defined much more broadly than the word suggests. It doesn't explicitly cover bitcoin, but I would expect that to happen eventually.
The first 100 pages (items numbered up to 103) seem more like an introduction than actual proposed law. Some of it seems to oversell the actual legal text.
One observation is that 'virtual asset service provider' (VASP, or what Americans would roughly call custodians and exchanges) is now considered a Financial Institution(tm).
My impression now is that only _custodians_ are not allowed to:
1. Have anonymous customers (i.e. anonymous accounts): they explicitly mandate KYC rugging existing accounts, albeit with a 3+ year heads up
2. Operating a mixer
They also need to verify ownership of destination address (wallet verification), which is bad, but far from a ban on self-custody.
The 'intro' text mentions mixers along with anonymous coins in a way that suggests banning transactions with them. But the word 'through' makes it really unclear what they mean. In the law text they define 'anonymity-enhancing coins' in a way that obviously implies Monero and Zcash in that order. Article 58 uses the vague term 'through' again. Does it mean they can't let you withdraw to it? Or just that they're not allowed to offer a pseudo-mixing service that *uses* these coins.
Anyway I'll have to re-read this a few times to grok. Keeping in mind that the politicians who wrote this don't have the brain cells to process anything more sophisticated than "monero bad, make law with fancy words!" and then the bureaucrats who write the law have no idea what anything means either. No tech literate person was involved in this process, that's very obvious from the language. But that does make it less dangerous.
The next step for me is more deeply understand what the proposal actually says, if there's any potential direct impact on myself (which might give me legal standing - now or in five years or so when stuff has really taken effect and local judges can intervene) or if it's merely bad in general (in which case perhaps all I can do is write an angry letter). 
Great thanks for doing this very important job!
With this definition, Opendimes and Satscards are probably considered cash, and thereby illegal to trade anonymously or at all, if filled above the respective limits. Not that there's any real ability to enforce it, but still.
I'll mention nostr:npub1az9xj85cmxv8e9j9y80lvqp97crsqdu2fpu3srwthd99qfu9qsgstam8y8 , who I guess will say that "the EU is a shitcoin and will HFSP" or something to that effect...
Someone posted the answer today, it's almost as bad as they said: note1zw09c2tlsar0au8xcm2z66nes52f036mmnp8l5z6u6cqgtpkvmrse8lmkz
nostr:npub1jt97tpsul3fp8hvf7zn0vzzysmu9umcrel4hpgflg4vnsytyxwuqt8la9y
nostr:npub1art8cs66ffvnqns5zs5qa9fwlctmusj5lj38j94lv0ulw0j54wjqhpm0w5
nostr:npub1s6z7hmmx2vud66f3utxd70qem8cwtggx0jgc7gh8pqwz2k8cltuqrdwk4c
You're the only EU based Bitcoiners I know on Nostr, so I'll ask you: Is this true that the EU is going to legislate this year that all bit- and shitcoin transactions must be KYC:ed? https://bitcoinmagazine.com/culture/kyc-bitcoin-and-the-failed-hopes-of-aml-policies-preserving-individual-freedom
If you don't know, please tag someone who does.
I wanted to get into contact with Ocean and Braiins pool to ask them if they have a plan for this, regarding payouts to European customers and Braiins being based in the EU IIRC, but Braiins doesn't seem to be on Nostr, and Ocean's NPUB gives "no results" when pasting it into this client (Satellite) anyway.
Also, if you know any interesting EU based Bitcoiners on Nostr, please recommend.
Neither is good. Collection of biometrics is pretty much preparation for genocide. Maybe slightly exaggerated, but not by much.
"Thinking it’s 'too late' to get into #Bitcoin is an illusion of the ego." -
nostr:npub1rtlqca8r6auyaw5n5h3l5422dm4sry5dzfee4696fqe8s6qgudks7djtfs
You're not late, you're insecure. Bitcoin fixes this.
New Mailbag Monday just dropped.
I think it's more that people don't believe there will be that much upside in the future, that most of the gains are in BTC's history. Late compared to what they could have been. In percent, that's of course true, as zero to any price is infinite percent, but in purchasing power per bitcoin, bar a discovery that p=np or some similarly catastrophic event, most likely not.
Priced in LMFAO? How many for a BTC? Quick, tell a good joke! ;-)
Is this the reason nobody except the treasury want to hire me? https://video.nostr.build/96ef531b06fc689b870176a18877dcedb7abada46f960758102bd4e80f69bc94.mp4
One assumption was probably correct, but wrong reasoning path: The reason the person would probably need everyone to cater to them is because of the type of person, indicated by their need to tell everyone their pronouns, not because they're a woman or non-straight man.
The most annoying thing is that people assume that if you're against this kind of thing, you support the opponent, Russia in this case. No. I don't support any government forcing its citizens to risk their lives.
The cat is in hat 2. The statement "the cat is not in hat 1" is true.
Good that you recognized that it was getting too much. It seems like Sweden is the only country recognizing exhaustion disorder, a kind of severe occupational burnout, and it has been theorized that it's fake due to the incentives of our paid sick leave, but I know it's real. I know a person who got it from work that he did for himself, and loved doing, but it was too much. (I assume he had a regular job too, but it was a long time ago, not sure when it was, I was probably a young teenager back then so I didn't think about such things yet) IIRC it took months for him to get well again. His doctor said he was lucky to not get a heart attack or stroke.
Louis Rossmann is great. I haven't watched that particular video yet, but he usually has good takes.
I'm not a fan of that read. Even though there are definitely several good points, it seems like he mostly wants to arrange it to blame something for the world not conforming to his variety of Christian beliefs.