It's probably still novel for me, since I just started working from home a month ago, but I am definitely enjoying it, and enjoying not spending so much in gas.

More fiat that can be divested into Bitcoin. 😉

#[0] #[1]

I don't care what differences of opinion you guys have. You're both killing it with your respective clients, and as someone with an Android phone and an iPad, I will continue to use both.

Thanks to #[1] I'll be helping host the first North Idaho Bitcoiners meetup today!

It's at the back of the building, bottom level.

Replying to https://twitter.com/JesusHODLerBTC/status/1649094045006974976:

@JesusHODLerBTC While true, the deeper reality is that Christ owns all things, and it is the "owner" of the donkey that is merely a steward of our Lord's assets.

Great explanation of one of the biggest legitimate criticisms of eCash, and really any custodial service, by

@callebtc and possible solutions actively being worked on: Maintaining Bitcoin's limited supply in a chaumian eCash mint. https://t.co/T5lYw0t59s

I wonder if a Minecraft server with a Lightning powered circular economy would qualify #[2]

Sovereign Craft seems to fit the bill.

#[0] getting nervous? Mempools are looking pretty close to clearing.

There is significant room for interpretation, to be sure. However, the text itself does provide limits for the scope of that interpretation, assuming those who believe it to be worth basing their faith on it are unwilling to contradict it explicitly.

Thus, even though every theological tradition disagrees about exactly what way the bread and the wine are Jesus' body and blood, none of them say the bread and wine in no way represent Jesus' body and blood whatsoever, and they all recognize it relates to Christ's atoning work on the cross. They all readily recognize the limitation the text itself places upon them, and then disagree about exactly how that works itself out in the details.

Once we go outside of that scope of agreement all Christian traditions share, it is very likely we simply aren't believing what the text says, rather than merely disagreeing with how it ought to be interpreted.

That's an interesting take on it, but it is not how any Christian tradition would describe the reason behind the sacrament so it would be inaccurate to describe it as the reason they practice it.

As noted in my previous reply, there are a number of places in the Bible that record Jesus' command to practice the sacrament of communion and relating the elements of bread and wine to his body and blood. However, just how literally that relationship is viewed is not agreed upon by all Christians.

Roman Catholics: The bread and wine are literally transformed into the physical body and blood of Jesus.

Lutherans: The bread and wine are not transformed, but the physical body and blood are in, with, and under them.

Reformed/Presbyterian: The bread and wine are not transformed, but we feed upon Jesus in a spiritual sense rather than physical.

Baptists and many others: The bread and wine are not transformed, but are merely representative of Jesus' body and blood, and we don't feed upon him in a physical or spiritual sense at all.

I really didn't think this was a difficult jumping puzzle. I think I only hid 1000 sats in that barrel.

https://t.co/QLADHh4ZgK

I conceal carry every day at work, but come the weekend I open carry because I want to enforce the idea that carrying a firearm is normal.

Replying to https://twitter.com/fountain_app/status/1646843947132637184:

@fountain_app @saylor ⚡dikaios1517@fountain.fm

Replying to https://twitter.com/orangepillapp/status/1645563341098872832:

@orangepillapp Can confirm.

Replying to https://twitter.com/petrijaervinen/status/1644826767969128448:

@petrijaervinen @orangepillapp Physical is fine if all transactions are conducted in person, but the distance at which commerce occurs now requires a digital version of sound money. The only one that exists is Bitcoin since it is a 0 to 1 type of invention/discovery.

Replying to https://twitter.com/orangepillapp/status/1644821253713428480:

@orangepillapp Yes, proof of work ties real world energy to the supply of Bitcoin and its transaction finality, but there is no way to tie the supply of a physical good to the supply of a digital good without centralized control, requiring trust.

Replying to https://twitter.com/orangepillapp/status/1644818797352865792:

@orangepillapp A friend of mine suggested that this idea would be better than Bitcoin. It would not. There isn't any way to reliably tie the supply of anything digital to anything physical in a trustless and decentralized way, and centralization and trust is what led to rehypothecation of gold.

Egg hunt for over 100,000 sats starts in 20 minutes in Minecraft Java edition at https://t.co/LSYJLZNALh !

Replying to https://twitter.com/Guille21MB/status/1643047999004631041:

@Guille21MB Cryptographic signatures signing off that something is legitimately you.