Because these concepts are so much overlapping they’re practically the same
I know. Just stating it because many people think it would eradicate violence.
I’m not sure I understand your last sentence though
Yes, but that doesn't mean that violence and exploitation are off the table.
The least authoritarian society will still exploit and use violence and laws will reflect and enable this.
That's a great question!
It depends on what you mean by "rules" and "law." An important distinction to consider is:
- de jure vs. de facto.
- laws of nature vs. laws of men
- forced rules vs. agreed-upon rules.
Unfortunately, Bitcoin (like most things) doesn't clearly fall into one category. It's always an amalgam.
In a way, yes, but it goes deeper than that. Libertarian styles also define rules. It's the same game.
Enduro > Maduro
I read some history books. It turns out that laws only protect those who establish or instigate them. Thinking in terms of individualism and collectivism is just residual statism because it hinges on the notion that what the general populace thinks or does is important. This is incorrect.
🚨 🚨⚠️⚠️
In den nächsten Jahren werden viele Menschen Geld neu lernen.
Mit dem Vorschlaghammer. Nicht nur Klein-Kriminelle und Clans schielen in Zukunft auf Dein Schliessfach. Auch der Staat, der pleite ist und jeden Cent vom Bürger für Politikerdiäten, Pensionen, Panzer und Raketen benötigt. Geld auf der Bank ist ein IOU. Es gehört nicht Dir!
Im übrigen kann man #bitcoin lernen, bevor man es muss.. 🧡💜🤌
https://video.nostr.build/7309d44103535e4cffb6a1f7a95b6a74cb0aef49484d82532ede861e3f6ec971.mp4
Hahahaha
Yet another oil-rich country that intends to reject the USD … 🤣
They quickly corrected that mistake though
Trump is furthering institutional bitcoin adoption through legislative support and retail adoption through increased market volatility ("tariffs").
Democrats will further institutional bitcoin adoption through money printing and retail adoption through incoherent legislation ("democratic process").
Nothing stops this train.
Wait, you mean whoring around is a choice, and one can simply choose not to do it?
Putting the can into cantillon. Nice. Merry Christmas! 🥫🍕🎄
I'm about to start my daily DCA through the 2026 bear market. It's the best time of the cycle!
Isn’t a simulation a reality in itself? Isn’t every form of interaction a manipulation?
When people discuss simulation and reality what they really mean is control and knowledge, fearing they lack these, which they do.
We know nothing. We control nothing. Not even our next heartbeat.
Amazing what nonsense worries us. lol
Allowing spam ~> allowing pedo content ~> allowing states to totally control on and off ramps ~> KYC’d paper bitcoin only ~> bitcoin practically dead for 99% of population.
Fuck core. Run knots.
Fair point
I have an opinion on that but I’d like to hear yours. So why?
Fair point. I like the app but sneaking in a geofencing feature in a privacy branded app is … weird
⚡️🇬🇧 NEW - "Are you comfortable with the idea of an elderly lady, maybe in her 70s and 80s, going to prison for years for holding up a sign"
Alex Davies-Jones: "No one is above the law here"
https://blossom.primal.net/c984dcd20b27fe3fcf7387d98783da238cc6ce8c475554bd04667af41b60ef44.mp4
UK putting the cunt in country again lol
Alle verlieren. Manche mehr als andere. Global geht das Vertrauen in Kooperation verloren. National das Vertrauen in Institutionen. Ich habe keine Antwort, aber Teil der Lösung ist nach den Dingen zu suchen, die zukünftig Vertrauen evozieren. Bitcoin, paradoxerweise, tut genau das, reicht aber alleine nicht aus.
Infinite fiat and gullible idiots have always made for the best wars
Don’t bluff. Don’t play weak hands.
I’ve never met someone with enough bitcoin. Stack sats. GM ☕️
„If only“ is a red flag. It’s stupid because it’s naive, unreflected counterfactual thinking. I don’t trust people who seriously use this phrase.
People think it means „there should be a simple solution to this“ but what it actually means is revealed by dissecting its components:
„if“ - „I’m unhappy with the uncertainty of future outcomes and the optionality of the situation because I prefer a certain route or outcome.“
„only“ - „I’m unhappy with the complexity of the matter at hand because I prefer the comfort of thinking less about it.“
„If only“ just indicates you’re unhappy with realty but since reality doesn’t give a shit about that you can just skip this nonsense.
Talking about BRICS… India lost such a bet before. They’ll lose again if they don’t embrace Bitcoin.
Gold lost as a money, meaning it lost for societies as a whole.
That doesn’t mean states don’t have use for it. It lost nonetheless. Big time loser.
Betting on gold rather than Bitcoin today is like betting on silver rather than gold back then.
Reminder: long term best for Bitcoin was adversarial action, not support.
nostr:nevent1qqsv8d4p5zucmk6y78s9yww0l720n26u7a3npxyl7e8pd8ktg0uw0mcstgfkp
If 13% of bitcoin holders take self custody that’s 1) sad, 2) maybe not as much a problem as it seems, and 3) roughly representative of the share of critically thinking people in any given society.
If a little charm disenchants them they got the magic wrong 🤭