Avatar
Spencer
ad7692c8e781971271ff48e06566bcb601d97661488b9bb7acf712d684aa6f16
laser eyes till fiat dies. bitcoin stacker, kid unschooler, wisdom seeker, weight lifter, food cooker

Today the dollar turns 52 years old. On August 15, 1971, President Nixon created the current monetary experiment that we take for granted today.

During his official announcement, Nixon promised “Your dollar will be worth just as much tomorrow as it is today.” Since then the dollar has lost 98% of its value compared to my grandma's house ($29k to $1.39m). If the dollar held its value (no inflation), then the price of my grandma's home would most likely have gone down since 1971 as the materials have deteriorated, new technology has made new homes more appealing, and expanding infrastructure has made new areas attractive to live in in ways that they weren't attractive before.

The dollar is a young experiment, and it's clearly failing as inflation causes home prices to rise faster than wages. It's an unsustainable system by design.

The Great Dollar Ponzi Scheme. A Ponzi scheme is a form of fraud where there is nothing of value being produced, but instead the illusion of profits is created by paying yields from the money that comes flowing in from later investors. The scheme collapses once the flow of later investors starts drying up.

The dollar system is a literal Ponzi scheme that doesn't generate anything of value, yet currently promises to pay 5.5% yield. Where does the money come from to pay this yield? The Fed prints it, which devalues the existing dollars. So the Fed pays out yields by extracting value from anyone who is saving in dollars. Dollar savers are the investors in the great dollar Ponzi scheme.

A currency unit like the dollar only has value if people want to save it. Hyperinflation ensues once nobody wants to save a particular currency. Instead of saving, they spend as fast as they can for whatever else they can get. That's hyperinflation.

If you know how the US bond market works, you'll know that falling rates have created extraordinary profits for early investors. Now riding rates are exposing the ruse. Falling rates can't last forever.

The flow of later-stage investors is starting to dry up.

https://www.ft.com/content/91f39150-9abe-4257-8d52-17520d35e534

The entire world operates on a system of trade that gives one class of people the power to create money.

Imagine the problems this would create!

This is why the wealth divide increases. This is why PhDs quit productive jobs to instead go work on Wall Street where money is printed through leverage and losses are bailed out with printing. The incentives are completely broken where the whole world finds itself playing a game where people compete to control the money printer rather than to produce value.

Hate the game, not the players. Fix the game by using Bitcoin.

Is there some sort of shib 💩 coin marketing campaign going on that's pushing all these ridiculous shib price headlines at me?

A scammer just with a very convincing script. Be careful out there, the attacks are getting more elaborate.

On a related note, I'm reading the Tao Te Ching right now, which begs the question, how would a master who is full of love and non-dualistic judgement reply in a text to a scammer? It was a fun exercise to think through. Here's what I sent:

"May restless fear plague your nights until you find justice. May the destructive misery that you rain down on others return on your head to teach you to never scam again. And may joy and prosperity be yours when you turn your energy from preying on others to serving them."

Any masters out there with suggestions?

I've got cousins trying to argue that Bitcoin is hopeless because people will choose to trust central banks every time. You're right, it's idiocy. But as I dig into their perspective, it seems their view is mostly founded on short term thinking. "People don't understand Bitcoin, so they won't trust it." That's the inspiration for this long term thought experiment I'm presenting here.

A key decision for every person in the world to make everyday for the next ~20 years is which money to trust. Money controlled by unaccountable politicians? Or money guaranteed by an incorruptible protocol?

This isn't a decision people will make once and be done. They will have to choose every time they transact. Every time they remember money. Every time they awake in the night with the question on their mind again.

Money is a language of value. It takes time to speak a new language. More and more the world will learn to speak Bitcoin because the other languages are corrupted. Bitcoin is incorruptible and unstoppable.

Just finished the Platform on Netflix. Makes for an interesting metaphor showing how the Cantillon Effect creates wasteful consumerism.

The food represents scarce resources. The levels represent one's proximity to the inflation, one's access to cheap credit.

The Cantillon Effect means those at the top grab as much as they can as fast as they can, saving nothing for the bottom dwellers. In this case, saving your money instead of spending it to consume scarce resources is the equivalent to leaving food on the table. If you're on a high floor with privileged access to cheap debt and you don't spend to consume scarce resources, somebody else will, and you will be left with less and less since consuming scarce resources in the real world moves you up to higher levels, making it easier and easier to access cheap credit.

Thankfully, Bitcoin fixes this.

Those infuriating scenes where people stomp across the food just because they can reminds me of this guy.

"Look again at that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every "superstar," every "supreme leader," every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there-on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam.

The Earth is a very small stage in a vast cosmic arena. Think of the endless cruelties visited by the inhabitants of one corner of this pixel on the scarcely distinguishable inhabitants of some other corner, how frequent their misunderstandings, how eager they are to kill one another, how fervent their hatreds. Think of the rivers of blood spilled by all those generals and emperors so that, in glory and triumph, they could become the momentary masters of a fraction of a dot.

Our posturings, our imagined self-importance, the delusion that we have some privileged position in the Universe, are challenged by this point of pale light. Our planet is a lonely speck in the great enveloping cosmic dark. In our obscurity, in all this vastness, there is no hint that help will come from elsewhere to save us from ourselves.

The Earth is the only world known so far to harbor life. There is nowhere else, at least in the near future, to which our species could migrate. Visit, yes. Settle, not yet. Like it or not, for the moment the Earth is where we make our stand.

It has been said that astronomy is a humbling and character-building experience. There is perhaps no better demonstration of the folly of human conceits than this distant image of our tiny world. To me, it underscores our responsibility to deal more kindly with one another, and to preserve and cherish the pale blue dot, the only home we've ever known"

― Carl Sagan

Inflationary money rewards wasteful consumerism and punishes prudent saving. Bitcoin fixes this.

Proud parenting moment.

We're eating out at a delicious Indian restaurant. The food is amazing. My 9 year old won't stop moaning about how good everything is. After I pay, he asks how much it cost.

"One hundred fifteen buckaroos," I reply.

His eyes widen in disbelief and pain. "Not worth it! We should have saved that money in Bitcoin!"

Bitcoin is creating a global game of musical chairs. People are realizing that eventually the music of debts and deficits will have to stop. When it does, you'll want to already have a seat.

Replying to Avatar preston

Drivechains

Alright people, we are playing a game of chess here. The one thing, the absolute one thing, we can't do is give up the king. To give up the king, in my humble opinion, is to mess up the base layer. This mistake would disrupt the delicate incentive structure that ensures sound money. That sound money pegs the extremely fragile credit markets and out-of-control G7 policymakers that are creating clown world with their CB fiat policies.

We don’t need the sound, pegged, money to move fast, we don’t need the money to do smart swoopty things, we just need it to be pegged, immutable, and digitally sailable to actually stop the madness of clown world.

By introducing a whole lot of technical complexity to the base layer and potentially screwing with the incentives all so we can connect to a bunch of centralized shitcoin projects is like playing offense with the king when you’re down 7 pieces and the other player still has their entire back row at their disposal.

A. Why the rush!?

B. Why not just go use Monero if you need that level of anominity in your transactions. Why do you have to have it in a wrapper via drivechains?

C. Why risk the king without deep understanding and testing of the technical risk and potential change to incentives?

The beauty of Bitcoin is you can build it and softfork it, and we’ll let the community vote with their nodes. BUT, I for one, have no use for drivechains (that doesn’t mean everyone is like me). And as a result, I will not be updating my node and running any attempted “secret” softfork updates by the miners.

The lessons Bitcoin is teaching all of us about how to build a better world together are beautiful. Accountability. Strength. Logic. Debate. Cooperation. And a million others. Thanks for sharing your thoughtful views. This is how we win.

Replying to Avatar Lyn Alden

For reference, here are my main thoughts on the current Bitcoin softfork ideas/dramas to those who care.

For context with regards to wherever it might matter, I have a 12-year background as an engineer initially and eventually an engineering manager, including overseeing electrical/mechanical/software for an aviation simulation facility, but although I have written code here and there in my early days, I am certainly *NOT* a software engineer. My career work is on electrical engineering and multi-discipline engineering management, and my master's degree is in engineering management, with an emphasis on systems engineering and engineering economics. Any viewpoint I have is from an engineering/systems management perspective or an economics perspective, not a programmer perspective.

I follow multiple software Bitcoin experts on various topics, many of which disagree with each other, similarly to how I followed my various lead engineers when I was working in engineering management.

The U.S. Constitution is well-written but of course not perfect. It's a good document, especially after the amendments it has had. The most recent amendment was over 30 years ago, and it is minor enough that most people don't know what it is. The second most recent one was over 50 years ago, and that one is also pretty minor, imo, and most people don't know that one either. The Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and a then a handful of key amendments after that to fix key issues with race and gender voting and so forth, have been the foundational aspects of this whole Constitutional project.

In order to change the U.S. Constitution, you need both a supermajority in Congress and a supermajority among States. Good luck getting that. And that near-immutability is exactly why the Constitution is valuable. Even if it was better written and included all sorts of things I liked, if it were easier to change, I would consider it to be a *worse* foundation than it is now. The near-immutability is the critical part. A nearly-immutable good document, is a great document, if it serves as the foundation of something important.

When it comes to Bitcoin, the aspect that I view as being the most valuable is its near-immutability. We have a global open-source ledger foundation that gives us savings and payment/settlement technology. It makes hard trade-offs in order to remain reasonably decentralized. And yet, Bitcoin can settle more transactions per year than Fedwire does, which is the U.S. base settlement layer, which handles (not a typo) 1 quadrillion dollars worth of gross settlement volumes per year. Bitcoin does that function but is global, open-source, and has its own scarce units. Various layers can expand that scalability, (Lightning, sidechains, fedimints, custodial environments, etc). Certain softforks to the base layer may also add some new scalability options (covenants, drivechains, zero-knowledge proofs, etc). But those softforks present risks to the whole project, unless they have a supermajority of support and are considered to be of low technical+incentive risk.

When I was an engineering manager for my aviation facility, if I were to approve a major new change and help fund it, it would be because the supermajority of my senior technical leads supported it, and because they could convince me of it. Objective truth tends to be easy to share between rational people that listen to each other. In contrast, subjective things that are more contested of course tend to be harder. If I liked a new change but it didn't have a supermajority, I respected these divergent opinions and wanted to know why they saw it differently. Unless it was in an area where I was *specifically* the facility expert in (in my case, the electrical/control aspects within our organization's aviation simulators), I would never go with a minority opinion among my technical leads and override the majority of my technical leads.

One of the most common problems I encountered in my career was over-engineering. Not a single person knows every detail about how an aviation simulator works (which was my field of work). There are software experts, graphical design experts, mechanical experts, electronics experts, pilot experts, and then business experts that have to figure out what is valuable to clients and how to get the required stuff and how to make the whole thing economical and thus well-incentivized. Systems engineering, practically by definition, is the science of managing a project that is more complex than any one human mind can possibly understand. Any major project engineer/manager has to deal with this dilemma.

As it pertains to over-engineering, many people often have pet projects that they care about, or want to make really cool complex things, that are not economical or not robust. Endless changes can create endless complexity, which are hard to maintain, are less reliable, and so forth. The most beautiful engineering designs are often the most simple at the foundation. Complexity can exist in layers or silos built on or around that foundation, which reduces contagion risk to the simple-but-robust foundation.

In short, if you you can't convince a supermajority, then maybe your idea isn't right or needs more work. Maybe the problem is on your end. Especially if the supermajority that you need to convince are intelligent relevant people (in Bitcoin's case: software developers, node-runners, miners, capital allocators, etc).

And of course, foundations like the U.S. Constitution or the Bitcoin base layer are far more important than the engineering frameworks of some random aviation simulation facility, so the standards are higher.

So, how do I assess proposed softforks as someone who hasn't written code in a decade but tries to follow the designs and economics of various proposals where possible? I look towards technical leads, and look for a supermajority of serious stakeholders, and need the proposal to clearly make sense to me technically and economically.

I view Bitcoin as being valuable due to its near-immutability. That is the source of its monetary premium. And so as follows, from a project management perspective regarding what is among the most serious of all possible projects:

-The first rule of Bitcoin is you do not break Bitcoin.

-The second rule of Bitcoin is you do not break Bitcoin.

-The third rule of Bitcoin is you do not break Bitcoin.

-The fourth rule of Bitcoin is that, around the margins, you try to find conservative ways to improve Bitcoin that are clear enough to get a supermajority.

Therefore, my view on softforks is that I defer to the supermajority of experts I trust, while also needing it to make sense to me personally. I'm agnostic towards many softforks, since I don't have the detailed software expertise to be relevant between similar proposals. As proposed softworks gain momentum, I check to see if they make sense to me, and then look for a supermajority.

Bitcoin is valuable due to its near-immutability. If it can be changed by minority factions, then the relevance of the project over the long arc of time is limited. To the extent that it's going to be any sort of important base layer, that near-immutability, much like the U.S. Constitution, is critical. To that extent, any proposed change to Bitcoin is not just a software thing; it's an economics thing as well.

Therefore, if proponents of a given softfork try to find a way to push itself on the network without a supermajority of technical experts and economic actors, then whether or not I like it, I will oppose it. That's a way to turn me from neutral to opposed. Because that near-immutability is what I would fight for. I only support highly agreed-upon changes. Whatever small piece that my node, my voice, and my money can do, I err towards the near-immutability.

When friends debate me on the practicality of anarchy working in the real world, I always tell them the same thing: anarchy doesn't work without education. If you kill the king, the kingdom will just crown a new one. People need to re-learn how to operate in a society of rules without rulers. That means accountability. It means making individual decisions based on first principles. These are the posts I'm here for, exploring how we build a better world together.

nostr:note1e9hhm60m5a2ad62aq7ch0m5w4aevzpn9w6k9gncgghhpvpe89rdsvpveu5

Replying to Avatar eliza

I haven’t discussed my work too much on #nostr

I serve #survivors of human #trafficking primarily. I’m trained in multiple states to serve survivors of sexual assault, domestic violence and human trafficking.

I serve survivors locally and I’ve proudly served the minor survivors of Twitter, two Epstein/Maxwell survivors and two of the Tate accusers as a Survivor Advocate as well as countless survivors around the globe via advocacy. Some of my work is very public. Much of it must remain private for safety reasons.

In January 2023, I received a national award called the Polaris Star Award for serving the minor survivors of Twitter. I was nominated by Lisa Haba, one of the lawyers currently representing the minor survivors of Twitter.

In December, I hosted a #Twitter Spaces with Elon #Musk and others working on the issue of detection and removal of child sexual exploitation on Twitter.

https://twitter.com/i/spaces/1ZkKzXoRRgwJv

One hard line for me as a survivor advocate has been to NOT advocate for any solutions to removing illegal content that would violate digital #privacy rights or erode end-to-end #encryption

My first public stance in opposition to the anti-human trafficking movement was against the #Apple client side scanning. Snowden added my thoughts about that in his incredible article about that situation.

I have also spoken out against governments attacking #bitcoin using the very real crime of human trafficking as a Trojan horse to attack cryptocurrencies. All currencies are used for the crime, unfortunately.

My public advocacy work has been intentionally separate from any organization or institution. There are various reasons for this. I like to roll alone because then I’m the main target.

On a personal note, I have no problem what willing and consenting adults do. It’s none of my business.

I have a human rights approach to the internet. I believe that citizens around the globe deserve their inalienable right to speak freely. I’m against mass #surveillance at the hands of the government or anyone seeking power and control.

Why #nostr

Corporate #tech is broken. I couldn’t fix it so I started looking for solutions.

Do I think that Nostr will be perfect, no. I think that it will be free.

I’m here to support freedom tech that will give survivors the opportunity to share their experiences, strength, hope and resources in a permissionless space.

Here is a video that I made tying it all together. Enjoy! ♥️

https://twitter.com/elizableu/status/1684264958396071948?s=46

Followed. Interested to see what you do next.