Yes, thank you. 🦅 #tunestr
https://music.apple.com/us/album/to-the-limit-the-essential-collection/1729268430
Whaaaaaaat?
I'm surprised Eagles music is available on any platform. I figured the only approved sales were of 8 track tapes sold out of the trunk of vehicles solely owned by the estate of Don Henley Incorporated.
I'll just refrain from using Primal and avoid their issues altogether. 🖖
This is the coolest nostr signing device I've ever seen. A wireless Nsecbunker for your pocket. Beautiful work by nostr:npub1dqepr0g4t3ahvnjtnxazvws4rkqjpxl854n29wcew8wph0fmw90qlsmmgt
Gimme
You might not have any shit to hide, but the ones looking up your asshole with a telescope might. And they might find some places in your cavities to hide their shit.
The push for Primal is kinda annoying.
They are paying for the "privilege" of throwing away colorful worthless pieces of paper. Technically, they are throwing away worthless pieces of paper to (hopefully) acquire more worthless pieces of paper to throw away.
I'm sure the fun can be found somewhere in there.
Odell ahead of the curve yet again.
The #Bitcoin simps waiting to see what their hero wants them to think next. https://video.nostr.build/c3883127c7514291b8a6c901e5cef31d1bb6230c5af55e74ded6ae5e93c00dd5.mp4
Michael Ver sure can dance.
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.
He doesn't get to dictate ossification, not even if he's right, no matter how much money he's leveraged and borrowed.
I thought MSTR was getting into lightning development.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Ossify it? Like gold? Just fuck all those pointless L2s and L3s that will make it accessible for future generations who won't be able to afford to access the L1? Ensure that it stays the play thing only of the wealthy?
Not to change the subject, but have you consideres joining the Dans today? ODANN?
"FIRE THE CORE DEVS"
a reminder...
https://medium.com/the-coinbase-blog/what-happened-at-the-satoshi-roundtable-6c11a10d8cdf
He's not a Dan, is he?
?cid=6c09b9527f6a2ymdeujuw76kme03x7agwmcxkgazn6cqzh1b&ep=v1_internal_gif_by_id&rid=giphy.gif&ct=g
That's odd as I thought the breakthrough was the store of value that is the means of exchange.
Do you think lightning/liquid/etc is all a waste of time?
So as long as you hold bitcoin, in the future you'll just be able to get coffee for free because you stored your value on chain? Sign me TF up!
I wanted to believe that Saylor's comments on Bitcoin not being an MoE was just a matter of fact statement that liquidity in the value of bitcoin going up, establishing it as a store of valhe, would just help adoption as an MoE in the future.
But the value of the peso being less valuable than the dollar doesn't stop Mexico from using it as their currency. Should anyone need to consult a chart on Trading View or ask Saylor or even a government permission to use a permissionless/freedom money?
The "digital gold" narrarive just seems arbitrary. His wanting to apparently corner the market on development, assuming that's true, makes his comments on bitcoin's use as an MoE seem far less "matter of fact" and more matter of motive. Like he wants bitcoin to stop at just being a store of value and not a means of exchange. That possibly makes him as much of an enemy of bitcoin as anyone else. Or if not an enemy of bitcoin then an enemy of anyone not bitcoin-rich enough to transact on the layer 1 in the future.
60 million millionaires won't all own a full bitcoin but 60 million millionaires owning at least a million sats each is more than possible at this very moment.
In the same way the blockchain is not an anonymous way to be a bitcoiner.