It is not voting that prevents high taxes. the rich avoid high taxes by voting with their feet. the poor avoid high taxes by engaging in the 'parallel economy'. this is why defending physical cash is paramount. ending physical cash is one big step in the Road to serfdom.
thinkboi was one one of the "prolific" bitcoiners that blocked me on twitter. remember bitclout? but the bs was there even before that. not surprised by recent events. again.
bro, if you are an overleveraged company on the verge of bankrupcy, you are not "playing the Microstrategy playbook" by buying a little BTC. You will be selling soon tm, and probably at the worst timing.
me too. but my 18 year old toyota shows no sign of wanting to stop. very annoying.
managing a pension fund has never been easier. in fact, you don't need a manager anymore. you just need a cold signing device
Jeff, have you seen apples ad? they got the example from your explanation on the desinflationary nature of technolofy and then explained in the most obnoxious way possible
anyone, company or individual, should be dcaing a good portion of their excess income. if anything, 10% seems a bit to conservative if it was me
the discovery in twitter is worse. recomended people is just full of lunatics and influencers. really hard to find sigmal there
i hope you are right. but i feel you people in the US trust too much the legal system.
joinmarket was only the superior protocol. easy to say in indsight i know. onwards.
suing is worthless. gun rights have been successfully defended because people who wanted gun rights had... guns.
the putinists are the ones who have joined the political game. just because they dont agree with US posture in Ukraine (or maybe they actually like the guy). then when they smell pro ukraine or anti putin activists they get upset. lots of Manichaeism in bitcoiners unfortunately.
writing code is now a crime. moving money arround is now a crime. we must act accordingly.
The halving, totally irrelevant to price action, is a good time to contemplate the predictability and soundness of bitcoin
the days of copyrighted music are over. AI will take over electronic music. check this out: https://www.udio.com/songs/5TPBL1W81ySZ55ME4C3eUz
Listened to Michael Saylor on the nostr:npub1r8l06leee9kjlam0slmky7h8j9zme9ca32erypgqtyu6t2gnhshs3jx5dk podcast. It's 3 months old, but sheds some light on the ARK funding story.
TL;DW: Saylor strongly believes in *OSSIFICATION NOW*. From that POV, protocol development is a liability.
Some quotes (and thoughts)👇
"You only get to play God once. And Satoshi played God. And you can say 'well Satoshi got to do it, why can't I?' Well the answer is Satoshi did it, the reason we're talking about Satoshi is 'cause the other 100,000 would-be Satoshis failed. If you read the history of the world, work your way through 10,000 pages of Western history, there will be thousands and thousands and thousands of episodes of 'alpha male thinks he was put on this earth, you know, to change everything', full of hubris [...] he's gotta do more, change more, etcetera.'" (53:34) "Bitcoin Core developers, or protocol developers, they want to fix something, or they want to make a contribution, because it's in their DNA, but developers are just the lawyers of cyberspace. When a lawyer shows up at the capital, they gotta make a law to save you from yourself, and the more laws they make, the more they cripple the economy, until eventually there's so many laws that the entire civilization collapses under its own weight." (58:06) "The world is full of people that need something to do. I would say, the real key to wisdom, channel your energy constructively. If you're gonna do something, improve Lightning, build an application, persuade someone to adopt Bitcoin as a reserve asset, educate someone… these are all constructive things. Destructive, dilutive, distractive things are: fight with random people 'cause they want to fight with you, attack the core network and make it confusing and introduce anxiety, and confusion and fear, uncertainty and doubt into the base layer. Right? And then attempt to imprint your ego, you know, on the base protocol, you know? Like, 'I gotta introduce this so my name will go down in history forever'." (2:38:55) My view: it's understandable to want Bitcoin to behave like the granite under Manhattan (his analogy); a solid bedrock that never changes. Especially if you truly believe Bitcoin will take over the world as SoV-only and "there is no second best". But IMO this is wishful thinking. While I agree it's near-impossible for an alt to overtake Bitcoin, I do think adoption could stall.
Luckily, Bitcoin isn't really a natural element. It's spontaneous order, more like language. Hard to change and no one can dictate changes, but if market wants it to change, it can.
Furthermore, despite Stephan asking a few questions in that direction, Saylor mostly failed to distinguish between protocol upgrades and general software maintenance.
Arguing against any hard/soft forks is one thing, but Bitcoin Core 26.0 can obviously not last for centuries...
Having said that, Saylor is of course free to not upgrade anymore and stick to Bitcoin Core 26.0 for as long as he lives.
hang on a second. are we saying that funding open source is in some way being anti ossification? i dont think that holds.