I want someone to watch football, drink domestic lite beer, and believe the news with.

Hey man you’re the one still participating.

fuck this dystopia

Bankers. Fraudsters. Rapists. Traffickers. Exploiters. Most politicians. Most police. Spooks.

Who else?

US net liquidity has been rangebound, chopping sideways since late-April 2022.

There is no reason to have high expectations for US based risk assets until something materially changes.

In short, stay crabby.

🔥🦀🔥

I said the the free market will solve the "security budget" and crypto twitter lost its collective mind. Amazing.

At a hotel breakfast buffet with cappuccino machines, but the only milk option is skim. So the cappuccinos are shit.

Starting my day off with some first world problems.

Can someone give me an ELI5 on this one? nostr:note1g94jp7plxrtqwhaxlfakekd7ehk3dkmuunfqf3395d3zp6793eqqepl2gd

Why did Texas go so hard on “renewables”? Wouldn’t expect that from a state like Texas.

“We should change Bitcoin now in a contentious way to fix the security budget” is basically the same tinkering mentality that central bankers have.

It begins with an overconfident assumption that they know fees won’t be sufficient in the future and that a certain “fix” is going to generate more fees. But some “fixes” could even backfire and create less fees, or introduce bugs, or damage the incentive structure.

The Bitcoin fee market a couple decades out will primarily be a function of adoption or lack thereof. In a world of eight billion people, only a couple hundred million can do an on chain transaction per year, or a bit more with maximal batching. The number of people who could do a monthly transaction is 1/12th of that number. In order to be concerned that bitcoin fees will be too low to prevent censorship in the future, we have to start with the assumption that not many people use bitcoin decades out.

Fedwire has about 100x the gross volume that Bitcoin currently does, with a similar number of transactions. What will Bitcoin’s fee market be if volumes go up 5x or 10x, let alone 50x or 100x? Who wants to raise their hand with a confident model of what bitcoin volumes will be in 2040?

What will someone pay to send a ten million dollar equivalent on chain settlement internationally? $100 in fees per million dollar settlement transaction would be .01%. $300 to get it in a quicker block would be 0.03%. That type of environment can generate tens of billions of dollars of fees annually. The fees that people pay to ship millions of dollars of gold long distances, or to perform a real estate transaction worth millions of dollars, are extremely high. Even if bitcoin is a fraction of that, it would be high by today’s standards. And in a world of billions of people, if nobody wants to pay $100 to send a million dollar settlement bearer asset transaction, then that’s a world where not many people use bitcoin period.

In some months the “security budget” concern trends. In other months, the “fees will be so high that only rich people can transact on chain” concern trends. These are so wildly contradictory and the fact that both are common concerns shows how little we know about the long term future.

I don’t think the fee market can be fixed by gimmicks. Either the network is desirable to use in a couple decades or it’s not. If 3 or 4 decades into bitcoin’s life it can’t generate significant settlement volumes, and gets easily censored due to low fees, then it’s just not a very desirable network at that point for one reason or another.

Some soft forks like covenants can be thoughtfully considered for scaling and fee density, and it’s good for smart developers to always be thinking about low risk improvements to the network that the node network and miners might have a high consensus positive view toward over time. But trying to rush VC-backed softforks, and using security budget FUD to push them, is pretty disingenuous imo.

Anyway, good morning.

🎼 🎶 🎵 🎸 🎤 “Eff you, I won’t do what you tell me!” #grownostr #ratm

The Bitcoin community seems to be turning on itself lately. Faction against faction. Brother against brother. All seem to forget that we are on the same side.

The real enemy doesn’t want Bitcoin or any blockchain to succeed to be honest. It takes power away from them and they can’t have that.

The money printer and people in government love to see the infighting because it means we are distracted and not focused on the mission at hand, which is wresting power away from the centralized powers and giving it back to the people.

We are on a mission to remake the world from the bottom up with no leaders. This has never been tried before but for it to have any chance at succeeding we need to be on the same team.

This is a once in a lifetime opportunity to fix the money and the world. Let’s not mess it up with worthless infighting.

Listening to Rogan's interview with RFK. Kennedy is great on Covid, but he's not the guy. He's still a 20th century liberal, which as attractive as it is, I think that paradigm is pretty much DOA at this point.

Curious what it does with the waste gases.