It's not something I've researched much. I'd look into LoRa/Wi-Fi mesh, fediverse with local relays, but can't endorse any specific projects.

"Transparency" is what systems offer when they want you calm, informed, and still stuck.

1) Transparency without exit = glass prison

If you can see everything but change nothing, transparency just upgrades the UI of your captivity.

- Bank shows you every fee and risk flag → you still have no alternative rails.

- Platform shows you every "community guideline" and strike → you still can't realistically move your audience.

- State shows you surveillance stats and oversight reports → you still can't opt out of the ID/payments stack.

You're no longer ignorant; you're powerless with full knowledge. That's not freedom; it's a glass prison.

2) Why systems love "transparency"

Legitimacy coating:

- "We publish dashboards, reports, APIs. We have nothing to hide".

- Looks like accountability; functions as reputation armor.

Pressure vent:

- Angry? Fine. Here's a dashboard, consultation, or public comment period.

- Your energy goes into reading and arguing about metrics, not building exits.

Better telemetry on you:

- Every "transparency portal" and "consent dashboard” is also a data intake channel.

- They watch what you click, what you complain about, which features keep you hooked.

They roll out reporting much faster than portability or decentralization. That tells you what it's really for.

3) Information is not power; options are power

Power = knowledge × credible alternatives.

If you know your bank is abusive, but:

- every other bank runs identical rails, and

- cash life is criminalized / impractical,

then your "informed consumer choice" is fiction.

Same with platforms:

- You know you're shadowbanned.

- Your data export is useless.

- Your followers can't find you elsewhere.

Without credible exit, transparency is theater.

Only when:

- exit is cheap, and

- re-entry elsewhere is practical,

does transparency start to matter — because you can use information to punish bad actors by leaving.

Once exit is real, transparency becomes a weapon for you. Without exit, it's just better lighting in the cell.

Real shifts come from changing defaults, budgets, and choke points — or from building parallel rails that make the old path economically irrational.

Are you using the desktop version? I’ve received very little feedback about it, so I assumed not many people were using it.

People talk a lot, criticize a lot, but in real life they don't do a damn thing. They work their 40 hours reluctantly and then go home to watch TV on the couch.

In Spain, the internet is unusable because the soccer league blocks Cloudflare and other major providers to prevent piracy. I have to use a VPN to be able to browse.

This shitty country is terrible. We've been like this for over a year. More than 50% taxes, no freedom of any kind, now no internet. Please just drop nuclear bombs on us.

Everyone who ever bought #Bitcoin is in profit. What a SCAM!

There is a dev complaining about disqus bloat, and ads who has removed disqus from their blog.

What does #devstr recommend in lieu of disqus?

Look Bro, here is the new script:

- Say “Good afternoon“

- Announce 50bps interest rate cut.

- End the meeting.

If the Classical civilization created by our race had never fallen, and the libraries and philosophical schools had not been destroyed by the Christians, we might have discovered America in 492 instead of 1492, set foot on the Moon in 969 instead of 1969, and had a thousand other advances we can't even imagine now.

Bruder, du hast eine fucking Aufgabe!

3 most common skeptical responses I've gotten since posting this experiment across all platforms:

1) The discrepancies are too small to be significant / it could just be a rounding error on the device

Thoughts: I agree that the differences are small, and there's a nonzero chance that all tests were within the range of error. However, despite the small discrepancy, every single time the moonlit weight WAS the slightly colder one. To me, that's significant.

2) Something about how during nighttime, the heat that hit the earth from the sun is escaping back into space, and the shade source blocking that heat's escape is holding in the heat more

Thoughts: To me this sounds like grasping at straws for an explanation, but even if it were true, this is why I used shade sources that were very large and far away (trees), and put the two weights as close together on the ground surface as I could; to ensure the the physical mass of the shade source could not block wind or trap heat in a way that would skew the results

3) Something about how the color blue is colder on the color spectrum, so since the atmosphere makes the sun's reflected light change colors, that's what causes the temperature drop

Thoughts: Again, I just don't buy this; seems like starting from the desired conclusion and making any shit up to get there. If the moon's light was reflecting sunlight (which we know is warm), then that light bouncing off of it would either create zero, or a microscopic temperature increase once it hit Earth - in no way does it make sense that it would go negative.

...

If anyone else has "scientific explanations" for the results, feel free to keep sending 'em. I still haven't seen anything that convinces me that mf isn't producing its own light

nostr:naddr1qqs8g6r994kk7mmw945hxttwda6z6amgv96z6am994shyefdw3hkceqppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qgsqqx9hacelkffcgd3ecchzjtlvwq9xn2fmprhrwnzmm2t3exee2eqrqsqqqa28zfepeg

I know it is not common but there are still people that do science, experiments and do not trust authority but just test what works and what doesn't. If you then know business models, marketing and a bit of phycology you can predict what is true or not just watching how they push it on people through the media. Viruses? I don't know but ClO2 works fine against whatever is that stuff. Nuclear bombs... Well nuclear emissions are there. Never tried to reach a nuclear explosion but it's quite simple to verify the cascade action of decay due to neutron emissions. I did the experiment at 16.

It's very interesting how people don't get mad when you tell them that birds don't exist or that cars aren't real.

However, they very often get mad when you ask them to prove that the Earth is a spinning ball, viruses exist and nuclear weapons exist (the atom has been split), etc.

Birds clearly exist. You can watch birds, feed them, you can even maybe own one.

Cars obviously exist as you can own one and drive it.

However, how would you prove that the Earth is a spinning ball, the atom has been split, and viruses exist?

Usually people try to with endless appeals to authority/popularity, shifting the burden of proof, or other fallacies.

- "Well, here is a picture of Earth taken by NASA - clearly it is a spinning ball". Even though these images have been admitted by the artists who created them to be CGI composites, often cloud patterns are reused, small countries seem to be larger than continents, etc.

- "Well, the United States used nuclear weapons in Japan on the 6th and 9th of August 1945 in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, therefore the atom has been split. It is impossible that they just dropped large bombs, they had to have dropped atomic bombs because the news said so."

- "Well two people who live together got sick at the same time, so viruses exist, even though one has never been isolated".

And the more questions you ask them, their subconscious recognizes that all they have is appeals to authority, aka blind faith.

This is when most people experience cognitive dissonance.

Cognitive dissonance is the mental discomfort experienced when a person holds two conflicting beliefs, values, or attitudes simultaneously. This discomfort often motivates individuals to change their beliefs or behaviors to achieve consistency and reduce the unease.

And as Mark Twain said "It is easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled".

What percentage of the population has the mental strength to admit that they've been fooled? In my experience, the number is very low.

Most people just reply with "Well, why would they lie?" (appeal to motive) or "Well, you aren't an expert, so you don't know what you're talking about" (appeal to authority).

- In other words, "If you are unsure that God exists, go to a Seminary school or a Church and the Priests will tell you all about him".

At least the subconscious of these people works very well. They recognize that all they have is blind faith, which makes them mad as you proceed to ask them questions they don't know the answer to, but they just don't have the mental fortitude to go one step further and examine the evidence objectively.

Subconsciously they know the evidence could lead them somewhere they aren't willing to go.

A ruling class can never be eliminated. This can be proved in two ways: 1) Ask yourself this question -- Have power, wealth, intelligence, character, beauty, or wisdom ever been distributed equally among human individuals or groups? Is there any conceivable way in which they could be distributed equally? There's your answer right there. 2) Go down to your local Walmart or equivalent and critically examine the faces, language, and behavior of your fellow featherless bipeds. And while you are examining them, reflect deeply on the proposition that those who cannot rule themselves and their own base desires must perforce be ruled by others.

It's not all bad news, though. Bitcoin has the potential to disrupt the money-creation game by which one fairly intelligent but highly malevolent ethnic/racial group has been misruling nearly all the others. There will be new leadership strata, long-suppressed, ready and able to rule, and eager to make revolutionary changes..

Anyone here who quit X completely and went only on Nostr?

I'm still in doubt.