Venezuela Update:

VENEZUELA 2026: THE END OF MADURO AND TRUMP’S NEW TRANSITION

​(SUMMARY OF JANUARY 3)

​1. CAPTURE OF MADURO AND U.S. INTERVENTION

​Military operation and naval blockade. Maduro captured and transferred to the U.S. Leadership by Hegseth and Rubio.

​Pete Hegseth: Secretary of War/Defense

​Marco Rubio: Secretary of State

​2. THE NEW POWER SCHEME: RUBIO AND DELCY

​Transition controlled by the U.S. Rubio manages aid and diplomacy. Pact with Delcy Rodríguez to control the bureaucracy and avoid collapse.

​

​3. THE DISPLACEMENT OF MARÍA CORINA MACHADO

​Machado publicly sidelined by Trump to justify direct U.S. management.

​Trump speech bubble: "She does not have the respect or the support of the country."

​CONCLUSION

​From a democratic promise to a temporary U.S. occupation/administration in alliance with a Chavista faction, leaving out the traditional opposition.

-------------------

Why that way ?

The Short Answer (the one no one wants to hear)

​Because real power is still held by the armed Chavismo, not the civilian opposition.

In harsh transitions, you negotiate with the person who can start or put out the fire, not with the person who has the moral high ground.

​Now, let's look at the layers 👇

​1. Why is Delcy Rodríguez at the table?

​Because Delcy represents three things that the U.S. needs right now:

​Administrative Continuity

​Ministries, PDVSA, banks, ports.

​Without this, the country's operations would paralyze in days.

​A Direct Channel to Hard Power

​The military, intelligence services, and colectivos.

​She doesn't command them, but she coordinates them.

​The Ability to Deliver Results

​Information, demobilization, signatures, and orders.

👉 It’s not about sympathy. It’s about utility.

​2. Why NOT María Corina Machado?

​This part hurts, but it is the truth:

​María Corina does not control weapons.

​She does not control territory.

​She does not control logistics.

​She cannot guarantee that there won't be violence tomorrow.

​In a "clash phase," those factors weigh more than legitimacy, votes, or popular support.

​Additionally (and this is key):

👉 For the hardline Chavismo, she is an existential threat. Bringing her in now blocks any immediate negotiation.

​3. What about Edmundo González?

​Edmundo is:

​An electoral symbol.

​A figure of civilian consensus.

​But he is not a "power operator."

He is useful for later, not for putting out the fire.

​The Real Logic (Cold but Constant)

​Transitions always go through 3 phases:

​🔥 PHASE 1 – Chaos Control

You negotiate with:

​Those who have weapons.

​Those who can unleash violence.

​Those who know where the landmines are buried.

👉 This is where Delcy comes in. Not by choice, but by necessity.

​🧱 PHASE 2 – Reorganization of Power

New players begin to enter:

​Civilians.

​Technocrats.

​"Acceptable" actors.

👉 This is where Edmundo and others could enter.

​🗳️ PHASE 3 – Legitimation

Only then do you have:

​Elections.

​María Corina.

​The democratic narrative.

👉 But this happens at the end, not at the beginning.

​The Emotional Error of the Venezuelan People

​The belief that: "If Maduro fell, the 'good guys' are now in charge."

​No.

First, those who can prevent the country from burning are in charge.

Next, those who can govern are in charge.

Finally, those who can represent are in charge.

​Note: This does NOT mean María Corina is "out."

It means:

​She is not the card for this play.

​She is the card for the next one.

Bringing her in now would be like trying to hold elections in the middle of a forest fire.

​My Strategic Reading

​If the transition moves forward:

​María Corina will not be the negotiator.

​But she will be the legitimizer.

​And likely the figure who capitalizes politically afterward.

​If they remove her from the game entirely, then there is a real cause for alarm.

Siiiick

Merry Zetahash Christmas. 🎅 🌲

Dec 24, 2009: 9 MH/s

2010: 108 GH/s

2011: 8 TH/s

2012: 22 TH/s

2013: 9 PH/s

2014: 271 PH/s

2015: 709 PH/s

2016: 2.3 EH/s

2017: 14 EH/s

2018: 39 EH/s

2019: 99 EH/s

2020: 134 EH/s

2021: 177 EH/s

2022: 240 EH/s

2023: 521 EH/s

2024: 779 EH/s

Dec 24, 2025: 1.1 ZH/s

The Fractional Reserve Banking (FRB) Scam

1) It promises something it cannot deliver

When you deposit money in a bank, you believe your funds will be available whenever you want (it’s your money, not the bank’s).

But under fractional reserve banking, the bank lends out most of that money.

That’s a contractual contradiction:

• A deposit should be safekeeping.

• A loan means giving up the use of the money.

The bank does both at the same time with the same funds.

According to the Austrian School of economics, this is deceptive by definition.

2) Money is created “out of thin air”

Under FRB:

• You deposit $100

• The bank lends out $90

• That $90 returns to the system as a new deposit and is lent out again

Now there is more “money” circulating than real savings.

There was no additional work.

No additional production.

No additional saving.

The money supply was inflated—legal counterfeiting.

3) It creates artificial business cycles

When banks expand credit, interest rates are artificially lowered.

Entrepreneurs are misled into believing there is more real savings than actually exist.

They invest in long-term or risky projects—but the savings aren’t real.

When credit expansion stops:

Projects fail, recessions hit, unemployment rises, and crises follow.

And as we all know, there’s no such thing as “market failure” here.

4) It depends on the State to avoid collapse

If everyone tried to withdraw their money at once, banks couldn’t pay—it simply isn’t there.

That’s why the system requires:

• A central bank as lender of last resort

• Bailouts and rescues

In other words, a system that cannot sustain itself and socializes losses.

This is not a free market.

It is institutionalized fraud.

Hoje (12/12), completaram-se 15 anos desde que Satoshi Nakamoto “abandonou” sua maior criação: o Bitcoin.

Em uma publicação no fórum Bitcointalk, Satoshi afirmou que iria “dedicar-se a outros projetos” (há quem diga que ele participou da criação do Zcash, mas é especulação), entregou a responsabilidade do Core para Gavin Andressen e sumiu.

Desde então ele nunca mais reapareceu ou fez qualquer publicação — nem mexeu nos seus quase 1 milhão de Bitcoins acumulados em quase dois anos presente na rede. São mais de US$ 120 bilhões que nunca foram tocados em uma década e meia.

O sumiço de Satoshi foi um dos fatores que levou o Bitcoin a se tornar a maior e mais descentralizada criptomoeda do mundo. Não há quem processar, não existe um nome que o estado pode perseguir ou pressionar para fazer mudanças no Bitcoin.

“Ah, mas se Satoshi voltar ele pode controlar a rede!” Não pode. Hoje existem mais de 24.000 full nodes que aprovam os blocos e mantêm a descentralização. Mesmo que Satoshi voltasse, ele seria apenas mais um node (“um nó, um voto”) e teria que seguir as regras do protocolo como todos os outros.

Regras que, como disse o próprio, “estão escritas em pedra uma vez que o código foi lançado”.

Ninguém controla o Bitcoin, nem sequer o seu criador.

🇦🇷 | Dato. Desde la victoria presidencial de Javier Milei en Argentina, la izquierda ha perdido prácticamente casi todas las elecciones en la región.

🇩🇴 República Dominicana (2024)

🇵🇦 Panamá (2024)

🇸🇻 El Salvador (2024)

🇪🇨 Ecuador (2025)

🇧🇴 Bolivia (2025)

🇭🇳 Honduras (2025)

🇨🇱 Y queda Chile (dic)

Gm fam today I'm starting the gym,

I've done sports all my life but this is my first time on gym

Marry young and raise a family if you’re able too ✝️

She on #nostr ?!?

incredible. thank you. which website is this?

bitchat downloads are spiking in jamaica.

we've seen spikes in regions of civil unrest before. this is the first spike in response to a natural disaster.

our thoughts are with the people of jamaica. we hope you and your friends and families are safe.

please be careful.

If you're not bullshit on WoT right now, you will be over the next 6 months. Creating, being, and choosing your own algorithm will reach levels not possible anywhere else on the Internet.

Introducing PIP-177 (Pizza Improvement Proposal) to redefine pizza’s base unit —currently known as “a slice of pizza” — to “a whole fucking pizza.” By removing confusing fractions, this PIP aims to increase mainstream pizza consumption. No longer will you need to be ashamed when your friends ask how much pizza you ate and you answer “a slice.” Now you can proudly boast “I ate a whole fucking pizza,” which not only sounds cool but is also easier for everyone to understand according to me and the 5 other people who like this idea. Support PIP-177 today on Pizza Day and go eat A WHOLE FUCKING PIZZA! 🍕