And yes, I do want sandwiches priced in sats.
Saylor would create a currency backed by #Bitcoin because it's digital capital, not a currency.
I don't know, bruh. I've been buying shit with Bitcoin just fine without anyone's "backed" currency.
My role as nostr:nprofile1qqsr7acdvhf6we9fch94qwhpy0nza36e3tgrtkpku25ppuu80f69kfqppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qy0hwumn8ghj7mn0wd68yttjv4kxz7fwv3jhyettwfhhxuewd4jj7qg3waehxw309ahx7um5wgh8w6twv5hsleq7kw travel companion has been taken over by Shadow.
What a beauty.
Trump is a religion for some people and it's bizarre to experience in real life. Trumpism.
Big dicks flopping around all over my screen when I opened the app at work. Fun times. Luckily I wasn't doing a demo 😂
People are renting cars and houses to look rich on social media.
Fucking fiat losers. It's so pathetic that it turns my stomach.
We're going to win. Many people just haven't figured that out yet.
There are some good 'peans out there though. We're in the shit together. It's the government I hate.
Buddy, I hate the EU about as much as the US government. Maybe even more. Glad I don't live under it. I get fucked regardless. I still get cookie banners!
In retrospect, I should have just copypastaed 😂
**Summary of "MLS: The Naked King of End-to-End Encryption"**
The article critiques the Messaging Layer Security (MLS) protocol, a widely-adopted solution for end-to-end encryption in large groups. The author argues that MLS fails to effectively solve the problem of end-to-end encryption in large groups due to its reliance on a trusted authentication service, which can be compromised by the communication provider.
**Key Points:**
* MLS requires trust in the communication provider, which contradicts the purpose of end-to-end encryption.
* The authentication service in MLS can be compromised, allowing the provider to read messages between members.
* The author suggests that simpler alternatives, such as Signal's approach, are more effective and secure for medium-sized groups.
* MLS's complexity and high development costs make it less practical for widespread adoption.
**Conclusion:**
The author concludes that MLS, despite its adoption by many technology companies, is not a reliable solution for end-to-end encryption in large groups. They recommend considering alternative solutions that prioritize user security and privacy.
Would you like me to elaborate on any of these points?
founder of simplex chat on why he is not integrating mls:
https://www.poberezkin.com/posts/2025-08-12-mls-the-naked-king-of-end-to-end-encryption.html
For anyone who wants a summary:
I grew up in Georgia (US). We would pick peaches, apples, figs, blueberries, blackberries, and muscadines as we were out exploring. You really can't grasp the difference without experiencing it.
And it made me want to walk more, which I've been doing.
I'm actually enjoying this style of information more than traditional podcasts lately. My favorite channels are just dudes walking and talking to their phones in random places.
Reminds me of GTA Vice City
Had to be on purpose
Jesus. Yeah, that's a bit wild. Banks are notoriously behind on security, interestingly.
There's nothing more fun than typing in 128 random characters.
I love the geniuses who disallow pasting in password fields. Thank you for keeping me safe by disincentivizing password manager use (the thing that stores the strong, single-use passwords we are supposed to use).
I've made my positions on the Israel/Palestine topic clear enough. I'm not revisiting the topic unless something changes.
But...
I am a bit tired of Israel's influence in the US. Fuck off and stay there. I can see the validity in some points that I've previously paid little attention to.
I'd been watching https://encyclosphere.org/ since it has one of the original Wikipedia founders involved, but I lost touch about a year ago. It would be cool if they used Nostr somehow.
Just another reason to have decentralized options.
Broke people are staying broke trying to look rich. The fiat world is so ridiculous. Anyone with actual wealth can easily see through the bullshit.
Same dude. Every fucking time I login to my credit union app and it's slow, errors, or just tells me to fuck off for maintenance (love this one). It's so archaic.
Pre-2020, my experience had been that most MVNOs were cheap but had spotty support. So I switched to post-paid with a big company like an adult (🙄). Fast forward and the prices are massively higher and the support is just as shit, if not worse in some cases.
I should pay as little as possible if the results are the same. Fuckem.
I can't believe I was paying AT&T $140 per month to be treated like shit. Spectrum has been fine. Paying $30 per month for two lines for the first year feels a lot better.
You creating torture tunes for the CIA?
Less so when applications aren't massive and packed full of things. Users are a lot easier to define when the software they are using has a clear purpose and UI. It's a person who wants to do that limited feature set efficiently.
And it isn't nearing six figures for garbage vehicles.
I just haven't bought anything since 2018 and had little idea just how fucking crazy it's gotten with financing and prices. It's an obvious bubble
Lol love being able to do that. I'm shopping around right now. Under zero pressure and can just walk. I actually had a sales person run out and grab me when I bought my wife's last car. Got a great price on it. It takes a bit of work but learning the industry and tactics has always gotten me significantly under the bullshit they try to get. People are learning. I wish we could just buy direct here. Many states don't allow it.
I'm in the US, but we do pay similar fees at signing. Mostly various taxes, as that's pretty much what we live for as Americans now. But that doesn't change the dealership bullshit since 2020. They just thought the party wouldn't end and it did, leaving them stuck with overpriced trash.
We can blame some on that, but the prices have gotten ridiculous regardless. There is a price at which people would suffer those things.
Privacy has taken another hit with the conviction of Tornado Cash developer Roman Storm.
A Manhattan jury found him guilty of operating an "unlicensed money transmitting business," based on the idea that the software he helped build functioned like a financial service. The jury could not agree on the more serious charges of money laundering and sanctions violations, but the single conviction is still significant.
This case challenges how the law defines and responds to open source code. Tornado Cash is not a company, nor does it hold or move user funds. It is a set of smart contracts on Ethereum that let users break the link between the wallets they use to send and receive funds. These contracts were deployed in a way that made them unchangeable. The private keys were destroyed. No one, including the developers, could modify or shut down the system.
A money transmitting business typically holds and transfers funds on behalf of customers. At no point did Tornado Cash or its developers do this.
The protocol gave users a tool that enabled them to mask the public trail of their transactions by depositing into a shared pool and later withdrawing without revealing the source.
The case focused heavily on North Korean hackers using the protocol to move stolen funds. But others testified that they used the tool for legitimate purposes, including donating to humanitarian causes, preserving privacy in repressive regimes, and protecting activists from surveillance.
The bigger issue is whether software developers can be held criminally responsible for what other people do with tools they create. If someone uses a car as a getaway vehicle in a robbery, we don’t prosecute the manufacturer who built the car. Responsibility should fall on those who commit the acts, not those who build general purpose infrastructure.
Storm's defence argued that the team had already taken steps to limit abuse. They added a sanctions screening oracle built by Chainalysis to the public interface, which blocked flagged wallet addresses from interacting with the app. This was one of the few actions available, given the immutable nature of the contracts. Even so, prosecutors claimed they should have done more, and that Storm conspired to operate a financial service without authorisation.
To secure the conviction, the government needed to prove intent. They had to show that Storm knowingly operated a money transmitting business, despite the absence of custody, accounts, or control over user funds. They argued that because he was aware that bad actors were using the tool, he was complicit.
This interpretation of the law creates a dangerous precedent. It opens the door to charging developers for building privacy tools that are later used in ways they cannot control.
Roman Storm now faces up to five years in prison. The outcome of this case will be watched closely by developers, privacy advocates, and anyone building open source infrastructure. It raises urgent questions about whether it is still safe to publish permissionless code in a world where intent can be inferred from other people's actions.
What happens next will determine the fate of a developer, test the legal boundaries around publishing open source code, and reveal just how far the state is willing to go to punish software it cannot control.
The fight over the future of digital freedom continues.
Brilliant reporting on this case from nostr:nprofile1qqsxe3pztauhp3ttna9p0p9gthdmm6t4n83ktw5vse9ymyg9js4hygsprpmhxue69uhhqun9d45h2mfwwpexjmtpdshxuet59w7r6u and nostr:npub12apcw0ak27qxdnc3gz5ax83k3766hp9l326fqle055xsat24clqqcgn3wz.
It would be pretty cool if zap.stream worked with Amber.
Totally agree and I'm probably one of those boomers. I want a healthy mix to grow freedom tech.
To be fair, it is generally just a cultural expectation. Few people are required to do it beyond that. But companies do look down on applicants for not giving notice.