What are you using? Shelter?

Well, I think it is and it isn't. The price of homes is pumped up by the amount of credit printed to buy them, but there isn't enough dollars to make good on all that debt. If there are bad enough bank runs then businesses won't be able to pay their old wages, but you are still in the hole for a comparatively big mortgage.

Not saying deflationary crash is the future in store for us, just pointing out that the price of real estate is heavily manipulated to the upside.

Satoshi thought they were giving the world a solution to the next financial crisis. I wonder when they realized they gave a solution to the next currency war.

The public pays for all government programs, even if the funding is through government debt.

The "iron law of oligarchs" posits that within any institution there will be a concentration of power and influence into the hands of the few. This applies to capitalism, communism, democracy, theocracy, dictatorships etc., its a product of human interaction. The idea that "the public pays", is just like democracy " for the people, by the people", they completely neglect the sociological reality that power and influence will concentrate somewhere.

Do you as an individual have the privilege of divesting from the BBC, do you have editorial power over the outlet?

Are they funded by the state? Of course we would all like to look at our favorite media outlets and say they aren't state sponsored because we enjoy their content. Our enjoyment of that content will always bias us towards saying that "it isn't like that other media outlet, they are really run by the state!"

If you want to be objective though, shouldn't you start by defining what their incentives are, as in, how are they being funded?

Labeling it state sponsored media?

Its complicated by the fact that originally, as I understand it, all nodes were miners. Now, miners and nodes are discrete groups; as far as a security profile goes nodes are the arbiters of truth, they verify that new blocks are created and added to the chain in a way that follows the rules. The block reward (subsidy+fees) is a profit motive for miners to create new blocks, competing against each other to hit the difficulty target first, this is a service being paid for, their interest and investment in bitcoin beyond their profit motive is irrelevant.

The miners can create any number of invalid blocks, they can push any fork, they can produce valid but empty blocks or exclude transactions to censor individuals or the network. But they can't force the network, something you can host in your home, to accept the invalid blocks, they can't reimage your raspberry pi to accept a fork, they can't remove your transaction from the mempool. They can only temporarily censor transactions at cost to themselves, making a continuous attack expensive, and nodes could probably rug you in a variety of ways if you did this.

Nodes provide the security.

On what basis can you make that guarentee? Elon was the chief engineer for one of the early rockets when they were securing seed capital. Do these companies just run themselves?

At some point, elon would at least had to have hired and elected the appropriate people to run these companies, he owns them, who do you think made these decisions? The result of these decisions, is their wild success and inspiring innovations.

Its also just a bit odd to me, that elon happens to run the only companies that are serious about these industries. Why can't ford or Boeing snipe this same talent?

*should*, until your spouse wants a patio and doesn't give a fuck about bitcoin if its not making them happy.

Also, let's not forget that the perfect money doesn't mean anything without people innovating and building competitive businesses in the productive sectors of the economy. Even if I take you at your implication that Elon is purely a scam artist, posing for cheap money, anyone who has taken a loan on a house or car has most likely committed equally deceptive acts, loaning money that you will never pay back.

If the monetary model is flawed, then focus there. There isn't evidence that elon would have failed in the free market, only that this business model could never have worked, that just means hes better at understanding the levers. Elon figured out how to fleece an already completely screwed system to allocate capital towards his interests, as opposed to cokes or fords, big whoop, the whole thing is manipulation, violence, and decipt anyways.

He will join the crowd of forced buyers in the next bull run. I don't speculate on bitcoin price, but what do you guys think the damage will be?

Bro its supply is dwindling, that means its ultra sound money. And like, since there's like 1000/1 credit to debt in the USD system its actually hyper deflationary, its like UBER sound money, its so sound they have to print it just so the money doesn't get sucked straight out of the system. You maxis are too obsessed with your inflationary poo coin.

Again, all fair points. The last couple days have been a continued downtrend for twitter, and it seems obvious that elons ego will get in the way of the platform being everything it could be. You know, when I look at fiatjafs timeline, I have serious disagreements with what he believes, but it doesn't matter because he doesn't CONTROL nostr in the same way.

I still think the lightning integration into twitter is a stretch, cashapp would be an option, but then we haven't decentralized or censorship hardened anything. Lightning, as far as I understand, in any of its implementations, is still very alpha/beta, promising, but not particularly trustworthy (emphasis worthy).

No question nostr is doing more for its users, and that the cost is far cheaper than that of twitter. Just to clarify, I am not saying nostr is any one app, I understand the difference between relays and clients, my point is that from any angle twitter is more fluid, aside from micro payments I suppose.

Nostr is catching up quickly, but I think people here tend to assume we are immune to problems like bots spamming; I think its more like this platform is still small and its userbase is difficult to deceive, once the first factor changes then the second follows naturally, and the problems will become apparent.

It is certainly the time to burn the bridge to the old world though. Whatever problems this platform has, and whatever good qualities twitter has; my soul is wounded by the lack of self reflection/intellectual honesty that ends up in the trending/news tabs.

I appreciate your offer, this account is temporary though, its nice to get on and like some memes, talk smack and vent until I'm ready for a proper nym.

And gun control advocates always say "well regulated militia", completely oblivious to the context this had at that time, where states feared federal power. As I understand it, the well armed citizen was the compromise between a free for all between states and an overpowered federal government.

Rest in peace. SF isn't the spot peeps.

Well, if you are using a pi, then the SD card could pose a security risk. VPN comparability can be a bit of a pain. If you fancy a GUI then even the top model pi will struggle at times. Battery life doesn't seem like an easy thing to manage safely either.

I like Greg Foss's analogy, "you are picking up nickels in front of a steam roller"

It depends on what you use nostr for, if its a hyper mobile encrypted messaging client, then its not a terrible idea (I say as I get ready to purge this account)

There's certainly enough evidence to suggest satoshi could be a group, even a multinational group. Its rare even in the followers satoshi spawned for someone to understand every aspect written into bitcoin, its easier to imagine satoshi as a group, maybe having one public facing head that changed over time.

Up until this point he could still be referring to hashcash, which would make "we" mean the history of cypherpunks attempting to make decentralized sound money, no? Do you have any later reference to "we"?