greyhood
GreyHood

Public Key

npub1g3n8tg7avgvtalndef2luyea0j6y404hr4pqu48pv004qyzrfaqs7s8u5p

Profile Code

nprofile1qqsygen450wkyx97leku5407zv7hedz2h6m36ssw2nsk8h6szpp57sgprpmhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuumwdae8gtnnda3kjctvrh34dt

Publishing to

relay.snort.social

Author Public Key

npub1g3n8tg7avgvtalndef2luyea0j6y404hr4pqu48pv004qyzrfaqs7s8u5p

Show more details

Last Notes

2026-07-28 02:27:02 UTC

- reply

You keep pointing to the AI agents as if they're the "labour" being exploited, and asking if we should share profits with them too. I don't think that comparison really works the way you’re trying to use it. Labor exploitation isn't just about work getting done, it's about who has to bear the cost of survival while the value gets pulled out of their effort. An AI agent doesn't need to eat or pay rent or sleep. It's closer to a tool than a worker, more like a hammer or a spreadsheet than a person. I get why the comparison feels clever but I don't think it holds up.
On the risk point, I'd push back a little too. Implying the worker risks nothing doesn't hold up either. What they risk is their time and their ability to make a living, and that's given up front before any profit shows up at all. If a business fails, the owner usually loses money they could afford to lose. If a worker loses their job, they lose income they needed just to survive, often with no say in the decision that got them there. That's a real risk even if it doesn't show up the same way on a balance sheet.
I'd also point out that being able to risk capital and keep the upside only works because there's a system enforcing property rights the whole time. That enforcement comes from the state, which is the same kind of institution getting called socialist overreach elsewhere in this thread. Feels worth being consistent about that.
And I'm still curious about BlueDuck's earlier question that never really got answered. When has capitalism existed in the fair market form being described here. It seems like whenever something goes wrong it gets called corporatism or cronyism, but when something goes right it's credited to capitalism itself. Not trying to trap you with that, I just think it matters for the argument to hold together.
But hey, choke yourself out with that capitalist dick in your throat friend. We’ve been doing it for many generations now and you’re still being robbed off surplus value to line the pockets of the rich directly through your labor or indirectly with your taxes being used to bail out the next capitalist. Chances are exceedingly rare that you’ll ever be a billionaire or centimillionaire or decamillionaire. Have some respect for yourself and your class. But we all started there, it sounds nice

2026-06-29 12:27:39 UTC

- reply

Are you a bot? It’s already been shit stained by brainless trumptards anyway and you’re over here whining about some boogeyman Muslim trash that you got from your foxnews/newsmax/nostr/x feed.

2026-06-29 02:27:25 UTC

- reply

Unless you were saying that ironically

2026-06-29 02:04:36 UTC

- reply

You’re describing the wealthiest most powerful nation on earth and using it as the excuse for why it can’t do what even Vietnam and Slovenia do. Being the richest country is an argument for the point not against it. Jfc

2026-06-28 00:01:08 UTC

- reply

Gd that’s a stupid sob

2026-06-12 00:04:27 UTC

- reply

"Human beings were born to create" is a nice line, but it's doing a lot of work it can't actually support. Most people's jobs have nothing to do with their passions, they're there for the paycheck. So when machines (excavators, AI, whatever) do those jobs for us, the honest framing isn't humans lose their purpose, it's humans get freed from work they never wanted to do. Nobodys nostalgic for ditch digging or being a customer service rep or a dish washer.
More of us will now have time to use the brain we have that sets us so far apart from the other animals that live here. Whatever number of humans there are currently innovating can easily increase by many orders of magnitude. The real question isn't whether AI removes us "from the cage," it's what happens to people during the transition when capitalism still requires you to sell labor to survive, but the labor is gone.
The real parasites among us are not immigrants or poor people. It’s the capitalist rent seekers that extract resources from us all without creating anything at all. PROOF OF WORK! That's the actual crisis: not a spiritual one about creativity, but a distributional one about who eats. If AI does the work, the output still has to get allocated somehow, and "go get a job" stops being a viable answer for huge numbers of people.
So the interesting conversation right now isn't "AI frees the human spirit" (sure, maybe, eventually), it's "what replaces wages as the mechanism for distributing the goods that robots and AI produces." UBI, dividends from AI/automation profits taxed back to the public, sovereign wealth funds, negotiated equity stakes for displaced workers, pick your flavor, but pretending the Bitcoin/AI combo just naturally resolves into a renaissance without addressing that question feels like skipping the hard part. In order for us to be as you say removed from the cage, we have to be free our current system of resource allocation.
You’re getting closer and closer to admitting that capitalism is actually unsustainable. You’re almost to the point of questioning the peculiar loyalty to capitalism that so many nostr users have. It’s just another one of their religions. You’re a smart and talented guy with plenty time ahead of you to accomplish things ponder your positions and especially influence others. It sucks to realize and it’s tough to admit that I was lied to and fell for it but it’s the only way to start using our talents of creativity to figure out how to break out of the cage of capitalism.

2026-04-02 22:08:01 UTC

- reply

Who tf is we

2026-03-08 18:53:44 UTC

- reply

They thought it’d be a good idea to support a silver spoon draft dodging bankrupting career fraud charity scamming sexual abusing friend of Epstein media influencer felon as commander in chief. Objectively the most unfit unqualified regime of performative theatrical media characters. To think that a cabinet and inner circle filled with Epstein class members was going to look out for the working class should disqualify you from having a vote. They told ppl that they had a mental illness when they tried to help them by pointing out the idiocy of thinking this is good for bitcoin. The @nprofile…xd0y and @HODL of the world look like imbeciles now and they ruined their brands and/or reputations. I’m not beyond forgiving them if they were to fall on their swords and apologize for their ignorance, arrogance, and pedaling such trash to the vulnerable. Imagine promoting such a clown ass epitome of boomerism because you’re mad that the US isn’t a white nation or Christian nation and you thought you were going to be edgy and oWn tHe LiBz. Embarrassing af

2026-02-14 01:07:49 UTC

- reply

More specifically, most of his focus for a while now has been on the Epstein files. He co-sponsored the Epstein Files Transparency Act. The potus has publicly lied about him as well as publicly insulted him. Thomas Massie doesn’t seem to want to protect any sexual abusers.

2026-02-07 18:02:10 UTC

- reply

Um, are we going to find your name somewhere in these files or something? Your recent dismissiveness has shed a new light on your character. What is your goal in this emotional invalidation of a massive child sex trafficking ring? A person can understand the significance of Bitcoin and the sexual abuse of children simultaneously. The only place that this is a good look for you is on maga moderated platforms. Why do you make it seem like you are trying to use our passion for Bitcoin to distract us from holding powerful people that trafficked and raped children accountable? If you don’t find it reprehensible then you could just not mention it instead of trying to somehow marginalize it with a monetary protocol of all things.

2026-02-07 01:13:45 UTC

- reply

Civil rights anyone?

2026-01-05 21:09:06 UTC

- reply

Everybody is talking about how badly you lost this highly contentious debate. They all know it. They keep saying how big of a baby back beta bitch boy you are. Biggest beta ever! Thank you for your attention to this matter! Have a great day!

2026-01-05 06:12:35 UTC

- reply

Other than willfully contradicting your previous claim I’m really not sure wtf you’re actually trying to convey. The splash of ignorant tribalism at the end was the best part. Have a great day!

2026-01-04 14:32:24 UTC

- reply

Oh yes it has nothing to do with the oil except that the POTUS specifically stated it as a reason.
He said the U.S. would “run” Venezuela and rebuild its oil infrastructure with U.S. oil companies “spend[ing] billions of dollars” to fix the “badly damaged” system and “get the oil flowing the way it should be.”
He described Venezuela’s oil industry as “a failure, a complete failure for an extended period,” and promised that large U.S. oil companies would repair it and “start producing profits for the country.”
He said the U.S. is “in the oil business” in Venezuela, will sell Venezuelan oil to other countries in “much larger doses,” and emphasized exporting “large amounts of oil to other countries.”
He also talked about “taking out a tremendous amount of wealth out of the ground,” saying that wealth would go to Venezuelans, Venezuelan exiles, and the United States as “reimbursement” for supposed damages and stolen assets.
In late 2025 he said the U.S. would “keep” or possibly sell crude oil seized from Venezuelan tankers, and might even use it for the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, adding “we’re also retaining the ships.”
Across these comments, he ties U.S. military corporations and political actions in Venezuela directly to controlling and monetizing its oil reserves, repeatedly stressing that U.S. oil companies will move in, fix infrastructure, and that the resulting oil revenue will cover U.S. costs and generate profit.

2026-01-04 14:24:15 UTC

- reply

Ah yes communism. Have a great day!

2026-01-03 05:15:45 UTC

- reply

Ok. Have a great day!

2026-01-02 18:13:31 UTC

- reply

The problem with this argument is that it relies on a No True Scotsman fallacy. Every time capitalism’s outcomes are criticized, the response is that we do not live under true capitalism. The system that actually exists is always treated as an aberration rather than the logical result of capitalist incentives operating over time.
The bureaucratic monopolistic society you describe is not a corruption external to capitalism. It is capitalism doing exactly what it is structurally incentivized to do. Capitalism’s defining objective is not serving people. It is profit maximization. Selling something for more than it costs to produce. That incentive does not stop at the market boundary. Firms rationally seek to reduce competition, shape rules in their favor, raise barriers to entry, and externalize costs such as healthcare, labor, education and environmental damage.
When capital accumulates, the most efficient way to protect profit is no longer innovation. It is political influence.This is not socialism. It is regulatory capture, a phenomenon extensively documented in mainstream economics. Industries systematically capture regulators to serve profit and shareholder interests rather than the public. Public Choice Theory explains how private actors use the state to entrench economic advantage. Peer reviewed research has repeatedly linked market concentration to lobbying power and weakened competition and demonstrates that capital concentration naturally converts into political power unless it is actively countered.
The regulations you are pointing to are not anti capitalist constraints imposed from outside the system. They are capitalist behaviors expressed through the state. Capital does not invade government accidentally. It does so because it is profitable.
This is why food insecurity and healthcare failures exist inside wealthy capitalist nations. Healthcare markets optimize for revenue rather than outcomes as documented by the World Health Organization and the Commonwealth Fund. Food systems prioritize shareholder value resulting in both massive waste and widespread hunger. Market choice disappears when industries consolidate, something the Federal Trade Commission and Department of Justice openly acknowledge has accelerated.
Saying real capitalism would wipe out big business ignores history. Unregulated capitalism has never remained competitive for long. It tends toward monopoly because scale, capital accumulation, and political leverage are competitive advantages. If capitalism were self correcting, it would not require perpetual bailouts, repeated antitrust interventions, or constant state support to prevent collapse. The fact that it does is evidence that the outcomes being criticized are not a deviation from capitalism but its mature form. Capitalism concentrated wealth beyond our imaginations. We live in a post scarcity environment where victims of capitalism and socio economic factors alike keep hundreds of millions unhoused, hungry and sick while the capitalist owners, that by nature produce nothing (proof of work) and only extract value through rent seeking behaviors, enjoy socialist benefits provided by and extracted from the workers that produce all of the things of value that we use. It’s become very common for the capitalist to rage against socialism while they enjoy all of our socialist benefits and initiatives while insisting that the rest of society must stick to raw unfettered capitalism. It’s also very common now for uneducated and ill informed workers to defend capitalism and vote against their own self interest as well. Capitalism only favors those who have breached a certain threshold of accumulation which is only achieved and made possible through extortion of the worker.

2026-01-02 03:07:45 UTC

- reply

Oh you talkin bout that proof of work

2025-09-28 14:59:44 UTC

- reply

While a group of capitalists blames the family

2025-09-28 14:43:02 UTC

- reply

The capitalists get the overwhelming majority of resources and wealth generated by the working class. Then they give a portion of their ill gotten gains to the politicians that made the transfer possible and the cycle continues over and over. Natalie is not a capitalist she is a worker that hasn’t realized there are only 2 types of participants in this economic order.

2025-09-13 15:43:29 UTC

- reply

They’ll start working any time now

2025-09-13 15:41:12 UTC

- reply

Republicans have been crying for years about their victimhood. There are hundreds but you can see a great example of it in Nancy Mace. She’s 100% pure republican victim of everything just like many of them.

2025-09-13 15:37:49 UTC

- reply

Republicans run on a platform that rich ppl should receive payments because they’re too big to fail or that they’re job creators. They've made an entire hierarchy to rate people by race and gender and sexual identity and other demographic factors. I'm literally talking about a defined contest. They are throwing around the idea to make antisemitism a crime which in effect is holding one demographic above another. If you claim shenanigans on one side don’t close your eyes to the shenanigans of the other.

2025-09-13 15:28:01 UTC

- reply

I’d rather distribute reparations to the deserving or even better UBI across the board than cut taxes for the wealthy or bail out corporations that lobby for handouts. And of course working people are going to spend the money that they are allocated. They must in order to survive. No need for a “study”. Also no need for a study to know that the trillions we gave rich folks stayed in their pocket too. They didn’t need it but they use it to acquire capital and rent it back to us.

2025-08-29 20:53:07 UTC

- reply

gOoD oNe dUdE

2025-08-25 21:11:30 UTC

- reply

Trying to sell some profundity that’s never even been in stock

2025-08-18 23:03:03 UTC

- reply

When the alternative is starvation and homelessness there’s not much of a choice is there?

2025-08-05 15:01:52 UTC

- reply

I always thought you were just a naive bag of douche that showed up on various podcasts and panels for weak comic relief over the years. Stay in your lane. You’re the court jester not the cleric.

2025-07-25 19:21:23 UTC

- reply

The primate skulls are evidence that support the theory not proof. The canine skulls are the result of extremely recent selective breeding by humans. What is this meme trying to convey?

2025-07-24 02:23:37 UTC

- reply

I’m fully aware of bitcoin and what it is. I’ve also read saifdeans bitcoin standard I believe right when it came out. I enjoyed it. Especially the bits about the history of money and its nature as a technology.
Unfortunately though, I feel the same way about your perspective. I defended capitalism for decades until I couldn’t anymore. I’ve also considered the argument that our current environment isn’t true capitalism. While I understand where it comes from I still see it as an appeal to purity.
If I remember correctly Ammous characterizes rent seeking behaviors as a negative feature of fiat which I agree with. However rent seeking is not exclusive to fiat currencies. Bitcoin is superior to gold in almost every way but gold is still a good money and most bitcoiners know it’s long history. That history includes gold as payment for rent. It’s clear to me that this rent seeking is not only enabled by capitalistic behavior but encouraged. Rent seeking and profit motives at the cost of workers is a feature of capitalism. You may find it ironic that understanding bitcoins proof of work mechanism is one of the main reasons that I now see capitalism for what it is. It inspires the non worker (capitalist) to extort the labor (proof of work) of the worker. It depends on extracting wealth from others.
The period between WW2 and the 70’s saw a shrinking wealth gap brought about by a hybrid economy of capitalism under a high amount of government regulation as well as strong labor unions. Reagan’s administration destroyed both of those driving forces that mitigated the rampant inequality of capitalism and now we see a wealth divide that seems like the gilded age 2.0.
The proliferation of fiat may very well have been the last nail in the coffin but at best capitalism exacerbated it but I suspect it is actually responsible for pushing us in the coffin in the first place. I do not refute that there a few benefits to capitalism, but the same is true for other economic systems like socialism and communism as well. The benefits definitely do not outweigh the costs. I don’t claim to have an answer for a replacement of our current structure but I’m quite certain I will never defend capitalism again.

2025-07-24 01:05:21 UTC

- reply

Oh yikes indeed

2025-07-23 23:32:01 UTC

- reply

https://youtu.be/Y08OW7c8OXc
Yeah I’ll do the simple work for you here. Does it hurt?

2025-07-23 20:11:30 UTC

- reply

He absolutely said that before this interview and the interviewer was giving him a chance to correct himself but as TACO Trump has also said before “my father told me to never admit you’re wrong no matter what.

2025-07-23 17:06:24 UTC

- reply

Now you’re blaming central governments for things brought to you by the race to the bottom capitalist goods and services. I live paying more for shittier stuff to keep the shareholders pockets lined for creating absolutely no proof of work at all

2025-07-23 17:00:29 UTC

- reply

I say Jesus fucking Christ all of the time. Probably has more to do with where I was born because I’ve yet to encounter any evidence whatsoever that any god exists. Lucky you to be born where the one true god is the most popular out of the thousands

2025-07-23 16:50:35 UTC

- reply

Youre saying a person can’t examine one of the thousands of religious doctrines of the world without believing it first. Analyze that

2025-07-23 15:26:26 UTC

- reply

Which part of the ICJs ruling suggests that we need a “bigger one world government”?

2025-07-23 12:39:19 UTC

- reply

Yeah capitalism doesn’t mean free markets at all

2025-07-23 12:38:00 UTC

- reply

No. Bitcoin is the most fair money ever created. Fairness is not a tenet of capitalism and we had money way before we had capital.

2025-07-23 12:34:37 UTC

- reply

No he didn’t

2025-07-23 12:32:55 UTC

- reply

Not even close

2025-07-22 20:39:15 UTC

- reply

What alpha bro carnivore diet incel shit is this?

2024-06-02 03:52:33 UTC

- reply

People leave and change religions everyday. Divorce rates are pretty high. And people get tattoos removed all of the time. I don’t know though. Maybe you get sick of the political influence and corruption. Maybe you become the victim of environmental degradation. Maybe you realize the rampant income inequality. Maybe you get tired of the monopolies and oligopolies. The encouragement of consumerism and very high time preferences is a good reason not to as well. One of the most detrimental effects is the exploitation of labor and rent seeking behaviors. These cause the most class division. There are certainly benefits to enjoy that result from capitalism but when people make it part of their identity it’s like they lose the ability to be critical of it.

2024-06-02 03:21:49 UTC

- reply

2024-06-02 03:02:28 UTC

- reply

Which part?

2024-06-02 02:59:34 UTC

- reply

Why do these guys always equate non capitalist to communist? It seems to be the most popular false dichotomy regarding the subject. If you challenge their religion they resort to boomer proverbs and Red Scare tactics.

2024-06-02 02:42:30 UTC

- reply

“Always will” is such a bizarre addition