where is your source for parts
i haven't decided what to build yet since I live in the middle of nowhere.
but Id love to investigate if theres someone to connect with (over radio?), any tips?
New Years certainly has tradition and deep cultural relevance for many.
and it's good to change the oil when the odometer rolls over 😂
Reticulum is fucking awesome
We need a networking stack that doesn't rely on large ISPs. They are a fundamental choke point and kyced gateway.
I guess you've never lived in Asia
interestingly
Grok agrees #bitcoin has a fungibility problem
and recommends you use #monero or lightning to improve it
You can't call it my own invented reality and be intellectually consistent,
not when Grok agrees with me. (and I asked three different models so...)
https://ppq.ai/share/5fd0118a-fca5-4ea4-b0e3-a72218567995
I'm afraid that you're going to have to cope harder.
I understand that transparency is a necessary property for a first mover in a new space like this. beyond the regulation aspect, user simply wouldn't trust it as a store of value.
but it harms users if they misunderstand and think that it's actually fungible.
I was curious what the hive mind might say myself
anxiously waiting for ANY indication that there will ever be enough P2P value exchange for chain analysis to be meaningless
serial numbers of bank notes are recorded in "all kinds of databases."
like where? name one. when was the last time you accessed it?
when have you EVER compared a bills serial number to anything anywhere?
OTOH i know exactly what database your UTXOs are recorded in and I accessed it an hour ago. if you show me the "note" i can examine its history in a few minutes.
pretending like those two things are functionally equivalent is fucking retarded.
"BuT bANk NOtEs hAVE sERIal nUmbERs"
doesn't say shit about Bitcoin UTXOs. use your fucking brain.
a 100k sat UTXO from an OFAC sanctioned address is NOT value equivalent to a new 100k sat UTXO from a miner.
people pay a premium for rare sats, coinjoined UTXOs are rejected by exchanges etc...
the market does NOT treat UTXOs as fungible like cash. precisely *because their history is known and accessible.
yet you continue to assert UTXOs are functionally cash equivalent, and say thats its ME who's out of touch with reality 😂
see you cant actually explain WHY this is wrong.
you just insist it must be because it violates your scripture.
pretending like you've actually made a consistent argument lol
instead of leaning on an AI that actually told you "fungible money has to have indistinguishable units"
so you pretend utxos are equivalent to cash,
which I refuted.
then just repeating "you're wrong."
now you "repeated the established definition of fungible money" somewhere.
which you didn't.
I don't know man, this seems to be a pretty straightforward case of "don't attribute to malice what can be explained through incompetence."
people just want something to believe in.
and bitcoin IS a good thing to believe in.
"wrong because reason I cant explain" 👍
this is where you repeat the dogma from the holy book so your faith isn't challenged by heretical ideas.
be sure to ask Saifedean for confession after making contact with one of the Unclean.
lol
cash bills ≠ UTXOs
cash bills are all different because they have serial numbers obviously,
but they're *treated as fungible* by the market because the serial numbers are useless to practically everyone.
so in practice, fungible.
the same is NOT true for UTXOs, since their uniqueness is public on the blockchain, accessible by all.
this is not complicated and you look stupid pretending it doesn't matter.
okay I thought about it a little bit more.
I should know better than to be so dismissive of your opinion lol.
Even if chain analysis assigns a risk score to every UTXO, if the market treats them as equivalent, then they are still fungible.
so rather than seeing things as black and white like I was trying to do, we should look at the market dynamics
🙏
it certainly is *not an expression of any universal truth
I hate to break it to you son
Bitcoin is the long evolution and synergy of different technologies. it's extremely well designed but it's not perfect.
it's certainly is an an expression of any universal truth.
as long as you don't see it as something designed and created by people, you can't actually analyze it in an intelligent way.
both great tools
but neither make UTXOs of equal value *indistinguishable.
yeah I don't buy it.
who breathes an oxygen atom isnt recorded on a transparent chain.
if you can distinguish, it ain't fungible.
Chainanal is going to map the entire utxo set and assign a risk score to every single one.
you should read the things you post
"Fungibility refers only to the equivalence and INDISTINGUISHABILITY of each unit of a commodity or other thing with other units of the same thing..."
if you can DISTINGUISH between utxos of the same value,
they are *not fungible by definition.
"#Bitcoin is fungible because we repeat '1 Bitcoin = 1 Bitcoin' a lot"
something something dyor
the absolute state of Bitcoin maxis
SMDH
lol
wah wah
not the sharpest tack in the box huh?
Have a Happy New Year nostr fam ❤
thinking #Bitcoin is your unit of account is a psyop to prevent you from making Bitcoin your unit of account
nobody said that.
risk analysis is not just looking at the worst case scenarios either. it's about making intelligent decisions based on the available information.
I don't live in a bunker in Idaho because there *might be nuclear war.
and sometimes existing in the shadows is a better long-term survival strategy then getting Wall Street involved.
that does help me understand what your point is, thanks.
but I still disagree that it means that there is zero friction.
it's true that legal protections are not to be counted on. but neither are they completely irrelevant. whoever the adversary might be (and without knowing who that is we can't calculate risk can we?) isn't just co-opting Google and Amazon compute arbitrarily.
I understand that you mean that there is *potentially zero friction*
at the point where they have taken the gloves off and want to destroy you.
and that's worthwhile knowing. it's just not the actual situation right now.
but it's certainly worth reflecting on in the Monero community that, if compute is as centralized in large data centers as you say,
then regardless of how many plebs are mining themselves, the network is still vulnerable.
hard truth:
your "unit of account" is NOT bitcoin
cc nostr:npub1qny3tkh0acurzla8x3zy4nhrjz5zd8l9sy9jys09umwng00manysew95gx nostr:npub1vadcfln4ugt2h9ruwsuwu5vu5am4xaka7pw6m7axy79aqyhp6u5q9knuu7
#bitcoin
for the last time, IT ISN'T "JUST SITTING THERE."
they have to do something in order to acquire it and use it to their advantage. that is friction that neither of us can accurately evaluate.
and I didn't say you should ONLY look at how things are right now.
I pointed out thats the current situation and how things are in the future depends on specifics that neither of us can be confident about.
if a 2010 Toyota Camry is $6,000 and a Bitcoin is $87,000
then it is .069 Bitcoin (nice) per Toyota Camry.
.069 BTC/Camry
look ma! I eliminated US dollars and am on a Bitcoin standard!
no you dumbass **USD is how you got that proportion**
that number (.069 BTC/Camry) is USD DENOMINATED
there are NO Bitcoin denominated prices.
ALL prices and price charts are USD denominated as long as USD is the unit of account.
bitcoiners do not understand unit of account.
it does NOT change because you do division.
#bitcoin
you'll talk about anything EXCEPT the friction involved in trying to hijack privately owned compute wont you?
obviously the threat to Bitcoin is higher.
because Bitcoin has a higher fiat value and is more visible.
because it's easier to put pressure on miners.
I agree that if Monero ever becomes an existential risk they'll do whatever it takes. I hope that becoming an "existential risk" means price appreciation and therefore greater mining profitability.
and at that point you have higher floor of decentralized compute power protecting the network
and the centralized compute power is more incentivized to protect the network rather than attack it. just like with Bitcoin.
but the game theory of that particular situation depends on specifics that we can't know.
Moral of the story is that *right now Monero is in a much more secure place than Bitcoin is vis a vis mining centralization.
except that hash is not "ready to go." it's already being used for other profitable purposes. you ignored the point of the post, which is about the friction of bringing pressure to bear at all.
You're trying to pretend like the US government is a single cohesive entity that can just call Amazon and use all of their compute power for whatever it wants. I'm pretty sure it doesn't work like that.
but I don't know and neither do you. which is how I started the conversation.
and you're just making up numbers.
while I agree that there is certainly vastly more potential hash out there that could be mining monero, you continually ignore the fact that they don't need to physically control Bitcoin miners at all. they just have to send letters.
nothing has already lost. another topic we haven't touched on yet is *the desire to attack the chain in the first place*
this is another area where Monero has an advantage because of bitcoins visibility.
so to come back to the beginning
its trade-offs. both approaches have their negative points.
one
I'm entertaining your AI slop for the sake of conversation.
but I don't really believe it knows wtf it's talking about or accept it as a convincing argument.
two
you repeatedly gloss over the fact Bitcoin miners are known and visible. they are public and operating.
speaking about *potential hash* in data centers is not the same thing. that hash has to be acquired and brought online. these are not the same thing and it isn't particularly useful to compare them as if they were.
you want to talk as if bitcoins active, known, centralized hash can't be effected by well understood and straightforward regulatory pressure.
but somehow it's trivial for an adversary to bring online against monero *somebody else's compute* that is already being used for profit in another way.
so even if we accept that the AIs numbers are correct, and I don't, they aren't directly comparable at all, as they aren't a measure of anything that can be called "decentralization"
this is a big stretch.
Bitcoin miners aren't incentivized to be in consensus. they're incentivized to follow the fork that will make them the most money.
Monero miners are only different on n that they might fuck off and do something else if it's more profitable than mining Monero, so you could hypothetically say that you lose network security in that event. it's just a guess though and there's no compelling reason to believe that Monero would lose hash in the event of a contentious fork. lose it to what exactly? why?
and no, your umbrel doesn't have any leverage over what miners do. they're looking at where the big money goes and how to remain profitable.
