Nostr Web Client

Painful Truth:

We need more normal businesses that integrate Bitcoin than Bitcoin businesses that are creating yet another wallet/exchange/mining facility.

The former is what you'd call a traditional business, the latter is a VC funded business, which is largely running on fiat. We don't need more speculative companies that are still trying to find product/market fit that gets them profit. We need more businesses that really provide value.

db

BTCSooner 1y ago

Truth. My wife and I have a real estate company(rental homes). Our management software is just starting to allow payments in bitcoin. It’s a primitive setup but a start!

Replying to

Edward Snowden

The fact that Bitcoin isn't yet accepted everywheree and for everything really underlines for me how few people have actually used Lightning. Whenever I show somebody how it works, there's always that "wow" moment. But why was it a surprise?

The problem is that normal people still understand BTC from the one half-remembered opinion piece they read in 2017, and are operating under the belief that transactions still take an hour to settle, rather than being instantaneous and irreversible — money transmission without the Paypal Problem. The public mind needs a cache refresh.

db

BTCSooner 2y ago

It’s only a matter of time. Thankfully it gives a chance for the average person to buy BTC before financial institutions. Once the big money gets in it will run.

Replying to

jimmysong

The Case for a Chain Split

The debate surrounding drivechains has been heating up, with proponents employing various tactics to garner support. This divisive issue echoes previous disputes in the Bitcoin community, such as the 2017 block size controversy. As such, we should consider what was then the definitive resolution: a chain split.

A significant portion of the Bitcoin community rejects drivechains, effectively blocking its implementation via a soft fork. Bitcoin's voluntary nature makes it resistant to hostile takeovers, despite claims that miners could force the change. Disagree with that last statement? Then let's put that to the test. We can resolve this posturing and propaganda by forking the code.

Here's how it would work: Code implementing drivechains would be released. Those who support the proposal can run this code. A transaction that goes against drivechain rules but adheres to pre-drivechain rules will trigger a chain split. Those running the drivechain software wouldn't be doing anything, but nodes that aren't can reject the drivechain chain by using the "invalidateblock" command. The result will be two distinct Bitcoins: one with drivechains and one without.

This approach was resolved the conflict we had in August 2017, when Bitcoin Cash split off from Bitcoin. Similarly, proponents and opponents of drivechains can either hold or sell their respective Bitcoins post-split. This would be a real-world test of control and game theory within the network.

I advocate for this split not just for potential profits, but also because it's a peaceful solution. It would let us see in real time how convicted the drivechain people are. Will drivechain miners support it if it means mining at a loss? A chain split would serve as a critical learning opportunity for the community, providing a clear answer to the ongoing debate. Ultimately, this will strengthen Bitcoin by showing the market how hard it is to change its properties.

So bring it on! Fork or shut up.

https://void.cat/d/SEbocwy3dabt6xJaaXM5Sk.mp3

db

BTCSooner 2y ago

Jimmy. I have a concern that with a fork it creates “profits” for those of us holding Bitcoin. That would lead me to believe that the 21 million coins are unlimited over time if hard forks continue to happen. How do you square that thought up?

db

BTCSooner 2y ago

There are three pricing regimes for Bitcoin. Before existence of paper bitcoin. Paper Bitcoin and after the destruction of paper bitcoin. Up through the 2017 bull run, paper bitcoin had little to no effect on pricing. Since 2018 the paper bitcoin market has grown to greatly impact price and still does to this day. While the ETF’s will slightly boost price, in the long run they will be used as tools to dampen price. When will it end? When only holding and trading real Bitcoin is acceptable and trust is lost in traditional financial markets. Sooner….than later. The final pricing regime of Bitcoin is on it’s way. Prepare yourself by buying Bitcoin and holding on a cold wallet.

db

BTCSooner 2y ago

If the lightning network continues it’s growth trajectory it will become the largest holder of bitcoin in 10 years.

db

BTCSooner 2y ago

When BTC goes to the moon, BTC ETF’s will go to zero.

Replying to

Marty Bent

Gromen* god damn autocorrect and irreversible message relay

db

BTCSooner 2y ago

Luke is the best. Gromer…Goomer…Gromen…either way he brings it. Thanks for having him on and a great pod.

db

BTCSooner 2y ago

Bitcoin can do so many things but it can’t go Bankrupt.

Replying to

Caitlin Long

Thanks. As someone new to Nostr, can you provide advice? And can I pay for relays without linking my LN wallet? I’m new and still learning. Thanks in advance for teaching me!

db

BTCSooner 2y ago

Hey Caitlin, setup a wallet of Satoshi to receive sats (zaps). You might be surprised how many sats over time you will receive. You are doing such good work for us all. You will receive recognition through zaps instead of just “likes”

Replying to

Gabe

I just saw a guy, in my small oklahoma town, walk down the street wearing a nostrica shirt. Currently freaking out, turns out you guys do actually exist in the real world

db

BTCSooner 2y ago

Oklahoma is the Nostr frontier! Boomer….

Replying to

Jameson Lopp

db

BTCSooner 2y ago

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/did-founding-fathers-trust-paper-money-james-bell

db

BTCSooner 2y ago

Setup my first Bitcoin appliance, the Heatbit! It’s an early adoption of Bitcoin mining into a functional plug and play appliance for the home. No doubt the future will have many appliances in the home and work mining bitcoin while conducting specific home tasks.

Replying to