Avatar
Tide
ee8f1749c439e0cab2b1f828cefbc2eab4bddfa67378e04c6b07602a538a9407

Help! I'm being followed by bots!!

Only if he stupid. It will be the "former drug lord" against the coffers of the Great US of A, trying to steal his I'll gotten gains from the American tax payer. Also, I bet they have him on a pretty good legal tight leash.

Yes, that and the news of a nutsack cancer. To the moon!

Not sure they morons. Quite sure they lining their pockets with the stupidity of others, maybe by selling them podcast shit talk and other nonsense. I fail to grasp how an audience exist for the "bitcon fixes this" bullshit spewed out on a daily basis, and yet here we are.

You workin too much. Those are rookie numbers. I've worked a total of 14 days the last four years, and was able to increase my pay north of 10% each year. And, guess what? Just got promoted! My guess is that up the chain the working days per year decrease. How else would they not notice me doing nothing this whole time and even believe I deserved to be better rewarded. Shit!

I believe it to be only a matter of time for all non compliant devs to be thrown in prison. That goes for Monero and Nostr too. And relay operators...

Some monero is a "nice to have", but don't just go crazy about anything digital

Replying to Avatar Zaelus

Your comment really got me thinking and curious about the implications and impacts of that scenario, so out of curiosity I asked Claude about it and I found the output pretty interesting:

If all miners were coerced into only including KYC-verified transactions in Bitcoin blocks, there would be profound implications:

Short-term effects:

Immediate fragmentation of the Bitcoin network as some miners comply while others resist

Sharp decline in transaction processing capacity and significant backlogs

Price volatility as markets react to fundamental change in Bitcoin's properties

Potential hard fork creating two competing versions of Bitcoin (KYC-compliant and non-compliant)

Long-term societal and technical impacts:

Bitcoin's fundamental nature would change. The censorship-resistant, pseudonymous design would be undermined, transforming it from a permissionless to a permissioned system.

Black market for non-KYC transactions would emerge, with certain miners operating illegally in jurisdictions beyond regulatory reach.

New mining technologies would develop to circumvent restrictions, potentially using decentralized mining pools that make enforcement difficult.

Wealth redistribution as KYC requirements exclude billions without formal identification or banking relationships.

Privacy implications as Bitcoin transactions would become directly linked to real-world identities.

Alternative cryptocurrencies focused on privacy and censorship resistance would see massive adoption increases.

Geographic redistribution of mining operations to jurisdictions with fewer restrictions, potentially concentrating power in fewer countries.

This scenario highlights the tension between the original cypherpunk vision of Bitcoin and increasing government desires for financial surveillance and control.

Miners that actually mine are controlled by a couple of companies, so there is that. Since this was embraced by the site devs must also comply with state bullshit or they'll be samuraideved. Black markets? OK, you could include your transactions in a non KYC miner in Belarus, but you won't be transacting #BTC, as that now belongs to the old US of A, you would be transacting in a forked network. Now, will all the black market miners accept the same rules? They will be sovereign countries, with diverging geostrategic incentives, so I guess there would be a fork for each one of those countries/alliances. If those forks don't implement privacy at the network level, soon you will be deemed a criminal and/or traitor by your country of residence. And so on and so forth. What does Claude say about that?