Does anyone have concrete evidence that the fighting in Israel is not AI generated video...

Because, you know, the people that would controlled demolition Building 7, or sink the Lusitania, or starting the Federal Reserve, or making up WMDs, are highly capable of doing that.

I'm not about to trust pictures from government media.

I'd more trust a pleb who has family there.

Because ROI for a purchase made in dollars off Amazon would need to be calculated by dollars per day. Bitcoin only refers to no shitcoining everyone still needs to use dollars that live in the US.

Says profitability is $1 a day so it would pay for itself in less than a year. I’m just suspicious about buying hashing rigs off Amazon

Has anyone ever bought one of these off Amazon? Seems like a great price

I have a sudden interest/need in getting a guard dog.

Is a Cane Corso pooch overkill or do I need several?

OK I see where you are coming from. I believe being a bitcoiner (or the usage of such a broad label) and being an individual are not mutually exclusive.

I respectfully do not agree that community = centralization because I'm coming at it from a global perspective. Being in a small community empowers individual agency when stacked against the rest of the world. If we all acted as only individuals and choose not to be a part of any community, you will not have the leverage and power to affect change whenbthe rest of the world bands together amd actively works in opposition ton what you believe. However, from an individual perspective I can absolutely see where you are coming from though. The blind homonogization of opinions does create a singular attack vector. But the proof is here in this conversation... I believe you and I are both bitcoiners (however you wish to define it) but we can still be individuals and have opposing opinions on specific points. To each their own.

When looking at the world as a whole, pockets of small circular economies amd communities provide agency for individuals. These communities of like minded people can live their lives in harmony as they choose to. They can leverage network effects and cause greater change. Too large of a community in the context of the whole DOES create centralization but I think how those individuals function independently within the community affects whether that community is a centralizing force or not.

I disagree that lightning is centralization, would love to hear your side of it. Lightning nodes are mostly individual bitcoiners running their own nodes. Yes there are large central entities involved but they can be bypassed and they do not control what happens with lightning or bitcoin as a whole.

I do not think that bitcoin as an L1 is the end all solution as there are certain deficiencies in specific situations such as transaction settlement times in a retail environment. Just a common example that I'm sure you've heard many times before.

I don't shit on those who choose to only use L1 bitcoin and not lightning. Use it or not is your own perogative. But as a small business owner and as a freedom loving individual, I do use it and I benefit from it on a daily basis. I do believe it is a better system than the legacy financial rails we use today and that makes it worthy of my time. I believe widespread adoption of lightning is a net benefit to the world.

The crux of my argument here is that anyone who believes in decentralization (i think we can agree this is a core tenant of the bitcoiner ethos) should be on nostr and transition away from X. I can appreciate nuance and there needs to be an adjustment period since we still live in a centralized fiat world. But we need to all individually work towards the greater vision of decentralization one step at a time.

OK I see where you are coming from. I believe being a bitcoiner (or the usage of such a broad label) and being an individual are not mutually exclusive.

I respectfully do not agree that community = centralization because I'm coming at it from a global perspective. Being in a small community empowers individual agency when stacked against the rest of the world. If we all acted as only individuals and choose not to be a part of any community, you will not have the leverage and power to affect change whenbthe rest of the world bands together amd actively works in opposition ton what you believe. However, from an individual perspective I can absolutely see where you are coming from though. The blind homonogization of opinions does create a singular attack vector. But the proof is here in this conversation... I believe you and I are both bitcoiners (however you wish to define it) but we can still be individuals and have opposing opinions on specific points. To each their own.

When looking at the world as a whole, pockets of small circular economies amd communities provide agency for individuals. These communities of like minded people can live their lives in harmony as they choose to. They can leverage network effects and cause greater change. Too large of a community in the context of the whole DOES create centralization but I think how those individuals function independently within the community affects whether that community is a centralizing force or not.

I disagree that lightning is centralization, would love to hear your side of it. Lightning nodes are mostly individual bitcoiners running their own nodes. Yes there are large central entities involved but they can be bypassed and they do not control what happens with lightning or bitcoin as a whole.

I do not think that bitcoin as an L1 is the end all solution as there are certain deficiencies in specific situations such as transaction settlement times in a retail environment. Just a common example that I'm sure you've heard many times before.

I don't shit on those who choose to only use L1 bitcoin and not lightning. Use it or not is your own perogative. But as a small business owner and as a freedom loving individual, I do use it and I benefit from it on a daily basis. I do believe it is a better system than the legacy financial rails we use today and that makes it worthy of my time. I believe widespread adoption of lightning is a net benefit to the world.

The crux of my argument here is that anyone who believes in decentralization (i think we can agree this is a core tenant of the bitcoiner ethos) should be on nostr and transition away from X. I can appreciate nuance and there needs to be an adjustment period since we still live in a centralized fiat world. But we need to all individually work towards the greater vision of decentralization one step at a time.

Definitions are decided by those who utter a common language through accepted use. Don't try to be witty by pretending like you don't know what "bitcoiner" means. If you've got a point, please make it, I'm happy to debate and have a conversation. But trying to trap me with vague questions over semantics is not productive.

The point is if you believe decentralization can bring about a better world, then get off of a centralized platform and join a decentralized protocol. Stop larping and do as you say.

A bitcoiner is one who believes in what bitcoin stands for. One who believes in what bitcoin brings to the world. One who wants to help foster and usher in a world where bitcoin is the standard. A bitcoiner is a person who believes in freedom and self sovereignty. A bitcoiner can be all or any one of those things.

I have a hard time believing that anyone who understands bitcoin and believes in what bitcoin can do for the world would ever choose centralized twitter over decentralized nostr if they actually had conviction in what they say.

Their fear, greed and selfishness outweighs their conviction.

Bitcoiners that are still on Twitter and not on nostr are larpers.

They can talk the talk but are too scared to walk the walk.

But muh followers!!! Bluchekkkk.

Wah. Cry me a river little bitch. Grow some balls. Have some conviction.

Walk the walk.

Are Americans more free today or before the revolution?

Murphy's law proven correct again today.

My MacBook died at the most opportune time to cause maximum pain and disruption to my life.

Also, I remember when MacBooks lasted a decade. Now all we get is 4-5 years?

I think a lot of adults on conventional social media (esp since TikTok) forget how much we share the space with teenagers. No where else in history have adults and children sharing spaces to this extent, on a peer level - it's not natural. Even if you only follow people your own age - you're likely still engaging with their comments and observing/participating in the viral trends that they invent. Millennials need gen-z approval/clicks to go viral, so it makes sense that we regress back to using our teen-brains online. And it makes us collectively less mature. I've been noticing lately how IG is full of 30-something year olds that are just full-time regressing back into teen-brain things like celebrity worship (which we do before we learn what real success is), rating people and being overly focused on body types/physical features (which we all do before we fall in love and learn that it transcends so so much), slut-shaming, gender wars, bullying (which we do before we grow up and realize everyone is just scared and/or angry). It's honestly super WEIRD how millennials spend so much time on the internet engaged at a peer-level in conversations led by 13 year olds (incapable of nuance). And I think it hinders a lot of people's spiritual(for lack of better word?) development. I could see how it's a bit of an escape - to steep in this lower consciousness - but it seems like it's at the expense of growing up and finding stability and being more real and free and open and genuine. And like I said, it's weird...

#thoughtstr