when you see it... 
Well, `What's the point of using social media (any kind) if relegating all the input received BUT one (in this case, banning the bitcoin topics)?' Not an untrue question but rather one that's recognized by nostr's protocol insofar it offers the users the ability to be themselves who delimit the scopes of their experience of social media (ie, one open to any topic, or some others enclosed, such as how reddit does).
Beyond the basic word filters and moderating, I'm guessing the sole title and loci of the relay might be good enough to clarify that the relay is unwelcome for bitcoin topics. One doesn't normally go to where is explicitly unwelcome, unless looking for problems 😅
worst, it was a song recording you'd catch by patiently waiting the radio to stream it 💀
This would be easier to achieve on the side of relays, ie a relay that bans the talk about bitcoin; whereas on the client side, you can connect to this relay only and voilá, no need of blocking no one, since any other like minded person would be in that relay as well
There is the hashrate; which in turn is in need of energy and, in certain extent, of territoriality
That's what bitcoin measures
Whatsapp down in the morning, now it seems X is following through
A relay is like Navy; whereas Link, the client
https://video.nostr.build/86487a2f6675f7bea5afb8c6b254daa09dc157c7c6c2d938a9877a2c713d2474.mp4
Came for the devs, stayed for the feisty
`Técnica de Bajareque' as is known in Spanish language (Latin America, particularly)
> Bitcoin is fundamentally unable to achieve that, the best we have today is central bank fiat from civilized countries
Would you have a take about El Salvador disclosing and moving to a physical location within its territory the keys of its bitcoin? (https://mempool.space/address/32ixEdVJWo3kmvJGMTZq5jAQVZZeuwnqzo).
Something alike, `El Salvador has X amount of bitcoin, and also has X amount of land, and people, so its value should be...'. What I'm meaning is, isn't valuation also a challenge fiat central banks has? although I do get central banks go from 0 to infinity to start measuring, whereas bitcoin starts from a point (21 million) and goes towards 0
I'd put this issue, then, in the pre-judgement of economy: a bitcoin company is a company within a bitcoin economical system, a bitcoin company is not a bitcoin company within a fiat economical system. As in the only sense of having to displace between both systems are for the guarantee of achieving extra problems to solve. What may be interesting is the suggestion towards the establishment of bitcoin economical systems (circular economies as I get them).
So far Will (and any other entrepreneur) might be using both systems (bitcoin and fiat) as a lack of a better way to accurately weight the costs of the product (s)he's trying to sell, in accordance with the style of living each one could have (food, place, swag, etc.). If living can be measured in bitcoin solely, then whatever company within this custom can be a true bitcoin company.
Where were you #ahalvingago, anon pleb?
Those that imagine a sissy Sisyphus (ie as complaining about his task) aren't but full of envy
Notes talking
> But now you have the deflation trap. jb55's customers were happy to subscribe last month for $5 equivalent but now it's $10 equivalent and they consider dropping.
Isn't that premise true as well for any whiling-to-be bitcoin company out there? Midwit me would think about asking for lesser sats as to 'pegging' the service to $5...
Money owned, if it's absolutely never spent, doesn't matter. If it really just sits in a safe somewhere it's as if it doesn't exist in the first place.
The amount of money in circulation matters. However with someone owning a lot there is a risk of them suddenly putting it in circulation and thus suddenly changing the amount of money in circulation. This will cause prices to fluctuate causing price instability. Up or down doesn't matter.
This isn't an abstract problem btw. Fiat currently has problems that are similar. https://www.investors.com/etfs-and-funds/sectors/sp500-companies-stockpile-1-trillion-cash-investors-want-it/
This goes both ways btw, someone being owed a lot of money ("owning" a large negative sum) can suddenly demand loans to be paid back and thus suddenly withdraw a lot of money from circulation with prices again fluctuating. I believe the financial crisis in the USA in the 30's was caused that way.
This is why you need demurrage on money, according to Silvio Gesell's writings. It discourages stockpiling. You'll have to abandon dreams of generational wealth and other outgrowths of capitalism but it'll keep you from starving because of a financial crisis.
Can't zap your note (not activated on your profile settings) so had to say it with words: impeccable answer