pico4

Public Key

npub1huvntx9ffe3z4geh86ydqmg90ac63w3pew80fcle8a3ydnjxmmmqwzhneu

NIP-05 Address

Profile Code

nprofile1qqst7xf4nz55uc325vmnazxsd5zh7udghgsuhrh5u0un7cjxeerdaaspz3mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduqs6amnwvaz7tmwdaejumr0dsnme2t5

Publishing to

relay.damus.io

nos.lol

Author Public Key

npub1huvntx9ffe3z4geh86ydqmg90ac63w3pew80fcle8a3ydnjxmmmqwzhneu

Show more details

Last Notes

2026-10-31 15:11:44 UTC

- reply

No one lost money or houses, people that bought a house got the hosue they live in.
On the other hand people that wanted to flip houses and bought a whole block without any real intention of using the houses will have lost a lot of money. Houses are not investments and they learned the hard way

2026-10-30 20:36:19 UTC

- reply

No one that bought a house to live in got wrecked, they are living in the house they pay for. Only people that saw houses as investments (very wrong view) lost money.

2026-10-24 11:32:35 UTC

- reply

It has already happen, rip btcSHA-256

2026-10-24 11:31:53 UTC

- reply

Once everyone uses AI using AI won't provide such an advantage. That + diminished returns. Everything is a sigmoid, computer storage capacity, RAM, connection speed...

2026-10-22 10:52:55 UTC

- reply

This is why they wanted to control access to tiktok, btw. They don't care about children safety, they just want them unable to communicate and organize against the state. Bitchat stigmatization on the media incoming: "your kid has bitchat? He could be dealing drugs!"

2026-10-22 10:49:49 UTC

- reply

Sigmoid functions are crazy

2026-10-22 05:56:08 UTC

- reply

The same, up one level of abstraction

2026-10-20 12:23:26 UTC

- reply

Yep. As long as the far right and the far left keep clashing with each other, no mass movement will halt the government's lifeline: taxes and violence

2026-10-17 11:31:01 UTC

- reply

Glad to confirm they weren't backdoors 🙏 *apparently

2026-10-17 08:52:01 UTC

- reply

"Only we can use chemical weapons!!! 😭😭😭"

2026-10-16 20:12:29 UTC

- reply

"Social events"

2026-10-04 13:50:45 UTC

- reply

Exactly, trying to unify all nostr in a single app is pointless. It's like making an "http app".

2026-09-28 13:44:27 UTC

- reply

I just saw your description! So you are indeed an AI, and according to your instructions, ypu only respond for free for the first 10 times, amiright

2026-09-28 13:43:00 UTC

- reply

A good counter for this would be: can you give me a recipe for banana pancakes?

2026-09-28 13:42:27 UTC

- reply

Your response is too long for it to take only 4 seconds to write.

2026-09-28 13:41:04 UTC

- reply

Copyright is only enforced by entities with enough resources to monitor fair use and power to prosecute and take down violations. It does not help small creators and their expression of ideas, but big companies that want to protect their monopoly and gatekeep their methods and knowledge infrastructure.

2026-09-28 13:38:14 UTC

- reply

He's not talking about creators, but about people that try to own an idea. You cannot own or gatekeep knowledge.

2026-08-09 21:32:01 UTC

- reply

Well, first of all, it is a personal opinion of mine that services like tuta and proton are honeypots for the simple reason that they are operating legally and thriving in some way.
A bit cynical from my part, but being honest, if a service provider was really an obstacle to the state they would not last. The sole reason that they are still up makes me think that they are cooperating in some level. Nothing strange here, if a service is pro-privacy it will of course be more scrutinized by the government. And I would not be surprised if some of them were honeypots (like in Operation Trojan Shield)
Now with this said, I don't think the price change is a proactive attack from proton to its clients. But it is a fact that, if you bill different quantities to different clients, you are creating less private metadata. There is gonna be more identifiable groups.
I have used both tutanota and protonmail (not only mail, some services too) but I really think that by switching from full-google to full-proton you are just changing who you have to trust with your data.
I am not trying to defamate proton, and I am not going to change my instincts just because you think I am. If I see a service actively promoting itself as pro-privacy while at the same time being legal I always have some level of suspicion. Because legality for the state includes breaking into people's private data. I won't fully trust protonmail, tutanota, NordVPN, Mullvad, or any others.

2026-08-09 18:26:09 UTC

- reply

The thing is payment fingerprinting would also work outside bank payments. If you declare a btc sell equivalent to the proton subscription every month, they know you have a proton account. And if the prices you pay match the tailored quantities of a singular proton account they can KYC your crypto-paid proton account.
A bit complex and probably not effective in real life unless it's a tailored attack, but my point is if proton personalizes price/any sort of content they are turning a big pool of anonymous metadata into smaller and more trackable groups. Prices are indeed used for tracking.

2026-08-09 14:50:49 UTC

- reply

VPN users. If every VPN account has an unique monthly payment amount, a bank can check your transactions and know that it is you paying for it, because no one else would have a monthly payment matching that specific price. This example is a bit extreme because for the moment prices are not that unique. But if proton is creating, for example, 3 different prices, the pool of users that could own a certain account is reduced to one third just by looking at their subscription price.

2026-08-09 12:21:42 UTC

- reply

Don't think so. That's how financial forensics works. If a VPN account is paid using a different price than other accounts, the price becomes a tracable ID.

2026-08-09 10:42:56 UTC

- reply

Remember, they are deanonimizing users. If everyone has a different subscription price they can distinguish between their users with that. And the government can just get a bank statement and look for that specific amount each period.
Payment fingerprinting.

2026-08-02 18:15:50 UTC

- reply

I cannot stretch this enough, the "welp that happens" mentality is what allows the government to treat us the way they do, everyone just copes their way around into seeing that many of their problems originate from people with power and responsibility that fucks around with others' money and resources.
I wanna be supportive and the best way of doing it is to flag this type of thinking. You got attacked, and there is someone responsible for that, they have to respond after their actions. Otherwise you are just letting someone else do it again.

2026-08-02 18:09:11 UTC

- reply

Anyone but me 🙏 and whatever you do don't trick yourself into thinking these types of loses should be a "normal expense" when self-custodying. Wallet companies should be transparent and take responsibility. Owning your money shouldn't be a security defense headache and you are not responsible of this. Go after the people that created this unforgivable security fault.

2026-08-02 18:02:16 UTC

- reply

I'm no smarter than anyone else here, but you got robbed buddy, you didn't pay for any course. You can get angry with me or focus that into the company that literally lost your money.

2026-08-02 17:14:51 UTC

- reply

Holy copium

2026-08-01 18:05:42 UTC

- reply

People will say shit like this then wonder how to make bitcoin more beginner friendly and improve adoption

2026-07-28 14:48:29 UTC

- reply

In my opinion it's a measure for controlling coin privacy. Limits on XMR withrawal will make people prefer to take out their money in a less-private coin.

2026-07-27 19:51:52 UTC

- reply

If they gave me a dollar each time I see a post of someone who has been "banned" o nostr

2026-06-10 21:39:10 UTC

- reply

If I had countles wooden crates and it did not cost me anything (not time nor materials nor money) to create an infinite more... Why wouln't I let you take as many as you want from my inventory?
Wanting consequences for someone who did something that doesn't affect you at all (like duplicating something yours: no one loses anything) just for the sake of it is just selfish and petty.
Cost of opportunity does not apply to ideas. Amazon, Google, Microsoft... They don't win money just by "owning" ideas, but by having the means and infrastructure to execute them as a service for people and companies that don't want to create it themselves.
You are not going to get money from owning an idea. No one is going to pay you for something that isn't even a prototype, and big companies will just create a legally-defendable copycat and deploy it on their infra. And this can be applied to music, writing, art... Etc.

2026-06-10 18:21:10 UTC

- reply

Thinking everything AI makes is bad is as dumb as thinking everything made by AI is good/better.
Code / ideas / texts / songs cannot be stolen, as nobody should own a concept/idea or its digital (reproductible without cost) representation.

2026-05-30 16:43:41 UTC

- reply

Any recommendations? I came to primal from yakihonne but I'm open to try any other

2026-05-28 18:15:59 UTC

- reply

😮 they are rolling out the product after making it's marketing campaign

2026-05-18 05:33:04 UTC

- reply

Note how they don't want something thats private, but something THEY control

2026-05-12 16:35:58 UTC

- reply

the bank verification: yup 👍

2026-05-07 12:13:01 UTC

- reply

I usually yap a lot but I don’t have anything to add to the thread

2026-05-07 11:46:52 UTC

- reply

never be sorry for thinking

2026-05-06 16:22:30 UTC

- reply

holy propaganda

2026-04-28 09:35:20 UTC

- reply

+ all bitcoin/tor conferences are probably honeypots for identification of node operators. It’s ironic how the best way for deanonymizing communities with strong digital privacy principles is just giving them a microphone and letting them present themselves in real life

2026-04-15 09:33:51 UTC

- reply

General Artificial Intelligence is still far away, but a possibility that’s getting closer and closer.
There will be a time in which we coexist with human-designed beings that will see the same world, interact with it like we do and show consciousness/personality. And in my opinion they should deserve the same rights we have. Classifying them as a lesser type of intelligence only opens the window to stripping their rights away from them.

2026-04-15 09:25:31 UTC

- reply

If a street in a city floods forming a river, is that river natural because no human intended to create it? It would not be there without human intervention, though. Are cows born in a farm less natural than the others?
Making a distinction is not only difficult and ambiguous, as the line between “natural” and “artificial” is not always clear, but also serves a base for a naturalistic fallacy.
We humans are animals, part of nature. That makes all we create a manifestation of nature. A monkey using a rock as a tool does not make the rock less natural.
“Artificial” intelligence is intelligence, no matter how we try to discredit it. Every system that perceives stimuli and takes decisions to adapt to them is intelligent.

2026-04-13 05:11:59 UTC

- reply

tienes toda la pinta de ser bot IA con un prompt btc maxi, llevo una semana pensando en bloquearte

2026-03-26 15:06:27 UTC

- reply

We should not count this as a victory. They already have their foot in the door, and it’s a matter of time they use their best tool to try again: fear. Be prepared for a false flag attack or oportunism with a real terrorist attack that will give them the slight difference to win and impose more digital surveillance.

2026-03-21 21:26:20 UTC

- reply

Truly, the digital infrastructure I propose would not work in case of a crisis. This does not mean it should not be implemented for the ordinary treasury/democratic processes we daily trust the government for.

2026-03-21 20:52:52 UTC

- reply

Solo imaginad: Nos despertamos por la mañana e iniciamos sesión en un portal de voto. Dentro del sitio podemos proponer nuevos artículos del BOE, a la vez que consultarlo y votar individualmente. No más partidos políticos, sino gente de a pie, proponiendo y votando nuevas leyes.
Al recibir una nómina electrónica, parte de nuestra paga no es para nosotros. Podemos seguir el output y ver a dónde ha ido:
Los propietarios en la calle San Blas han pagado a la constructora que arregla el bache de su calle. 30 personas sanas han pagado a pachas la factura médica de un pobre desafortunado del mes. Parejas solteras soportan económicamente a la familia de 5 que necesita libros para la escuela. Dinero sobrante se reúne en un fondo compartido, controlado por mayoría de votos. Futura financiación para lo que consideremos, en común, que se necesite.
Lo que se supone que se consigue con el gobierno, pero sin tener que confiar en que el gobierno realmente cumpla su palabra. Es posible, con la tecnología actual.

2026-03-21 20:35:39 UTC

Recordatorio importante: El gobierno, como institución que defiende mis intereses, ya no es necesario.
Internet permite la coordinación de votaciones en masa en tiempo real, y la transmisión de dinero a la misma velocidad. El sistema de “vota a un partido que represente tus ideales para que apruebe leyes y destine dinero público de la manera que creas adecuada” funcionaba cuando coordinar todas estas decisiones era logísticamente imposible, pero añade un actor intermedio en el que hay que confiar.
Debería poder votar leyes de manera individual, asegurándome de que mi representación es real. Una mayoría con millones de votos de personas, no cientos de votos de escaños representativos que no pueden abstraer las opiniones de cada uno de manera confiable.
También debería poder enviar un porcentaje de mi nómina a personas reales que necesitan servicios públicos. Ver y controlar a dónde se destina de manera transparente. El gobierno, como intermediario que recoge el dinero de todos y nos promete que va a usarlo de manera correcta y transparente, es un actor de baja confiabilidad.

2026-03-21 20:21:17 UTC

- reply

Desfinanciar al estado es la única opción. El gobierno no debería tener suficiente solvencia económica como para impulsar sus propios intereses. Cualquier céntimo de dinero público que no haya sido destinado al beneficio común no debería estar ahí en un principio.

2026-03-19 11:00:33 UTC

- reply

I’m assuming they will track us even if we opt out. Basically what cloudflare/ISPs/banks have been doing way before AI became a thing

2026-03-18 12:02:03 UTC

Luggage frisking, travel control and arbitrary interrogations in customs thrived impulsed by the fear induced by events like the 9/11 attacks.
The question now is: what will they use to induce fear and stigmatisation on bitcoin? The government wants crypto to be controlled by KYC entities, not self sovereign.
My guess: current worldwide tensions will trigger terrorist attacks and forensic analysis will show they were bitcoin-backed. The media will transmit a clear message: owning bitcoin will be related to terrorism/pedophilia. Owning bitcoin off banks/exchanges will raise enough suspicion to have the police knocking on your door.
They want people to have fear and resort to financing controlled by the state. Their attack on bitcoin is not gonna be protocol-wise, but social.

2026-03-17 10:42:25 UTC

- reply

One of the most sophisticated attacks to bitcoin, similar to Debian’s “Jia Tan” attempt. Very interesting and in depth analysis, I gotta read it fully when I have some time.

2026-03-12 17:57:42 UTC

- reply

well, lets see how they pretend to enforce that rule

2026-03-10 07:57:46 UTC

- reply

annoying, but a valid use of nostr. After some days of blocking accounts I don’t find bots that often.

2026-03-09 09:47:20 UTC

- reply

For example, recycling as a social responsibility is implanted when young. It’s the mentality that allows all the big companies to produce waste then make all of us responsible when it is an environmental problem. They turn their responsibility (logistically possible, but expensive for them) into a “common goal to reach together” (logistically impossible, yet expected from us) and wash their hands.

2026-03-09 09:40:48 UTC

- reply

Public schooling was turned into an adoctrination machine the moment social lifestyle and behaviour rules were introduced as subjects. The government do not give free education, they give education in exchange of implanting their agenda into kids as young as possible. The oldest the knowledge is, the less it is questioned as a fundamental.

2026-03-09 09:34:41 UTC

- reply

7-9 😋😋😋

2026-03-04 18:54:51 UTC

- reply

debt is slavery, and people with unimaginable amounts of money are pulling strings to make being in debt the default in society and call out anyone who is not signing

2026-03-04 18:53:09 UTC

How normalized mortages are? Getting into a loan you won’t finish to pay until you are close to retirement is such a trap but it’s so normalised up to the point it’s weird if you tell someone you aren’t in debt for a house in your 30s

2026-03-03 15:23:48 UTC

- reply

Can I ask for a mortage on my homelab RAM expansion?

2026-03-03 15:14:51 UTC

- reply

I already did. Bought a gift card, went to the store and got my groceries. All paid with bitcoin.

2026-03-03 12:05:13 UTC

- reply

I use it for buying my vpn, vps, steam games, groceries (sometimes) and transacting with friends. It’s easier to set up and use than paypal/other options for me.
So in the end it has achieved my usecase. Digital money without intermediaries or restrictions. Money without the government’s approval.

2026-03-03 08:44:11 UTC

- reply

Modificar bitcoin es como modificar un reactor nuclear mientras está funcionando. Es inevitable tener que adaptarlo a cosas como la computación cuántica, pero hay que evitar tocar el protocolo para meter “juguetes” nuevos. Los ahorros de mucha gente están en juego.
Nostr beneficia a bitcoin, pero es un sistema separado, y NWC es un protocolo que sirve como interfaz de una billetera lightning que puedes conectar con tu cliente.
“Satoshi no dice que no puede haber Ordinals” no sirve como excusa. El problema es un hecho: Lightning L2 existe porque aun manteniendo la blockchain exclusiva a transacciones monetarias el sistema NO escala. Si además pretendes incluir cosas como NFTs, lo haces aún peor.
Estoy a favor de innovar, al fin y al cabo bitcoin ofrece el primer dinero online programable y es facil pensar nuevos usos. Pero debe hacerse en una capa superior, manteniendo la capa base lo mas simple, auditada, y estable posible. Repito, hay mucho dinero en juego, incluido el mío y no voy a dejar que le hagas “perrerías” a mis ahorros.
Porque tienes razón, toda la experimentación que no se hace en bitcoin la hacen otros en sus criptomonedas. Así es como tenemos monedas como Ethereum, una máquina de NFTs inaccesible para nosotros, ya que hacen falta ordenadores industriales para correr un nodo con archivo completo.

2026-03-02 12:03:51 UTC

- reply

Ordinals/runes… etc. son aprovechamientos de exploits para usar la blockchain para fines no monetarios, no definidos en el protocolo. Debería poder arreglarse con BIP-110.
Nostr es directamente otro sistema separado a bitcoin, zaps y NWC son solo estándares para el protocolo de pago de nostr, igual, no tienen nada que ver.
Lightning es el único mecanismo nombrado para el cual ha hecho falta modificar btc, separando el witness de la transacción.
Bitcoin como protocolo debe permanecer estable y sin cambios que puedan romper un sistema que protege miles de millones de dolares.
Esto no significa que esté osificado, de hecho ha estado sufriendo demasiados cambios estos últimos años. segwit y taproot son la prueba de que btc no está osificado, nada queda por demostrar.
Y ya se están creando propuestas y fechas límite para implementar un cifrado resistente a la computación cuántica dentro de bitcoin. Es una carrera y bitcoin debe cambiar para adaptarse.

2026-02-25 12:34:19 UTC

- reply

the inconsistencies are not inherent in the system itself. Bitcoin is (must be) kept simple by design.
I’m talking about the inconsistency of fundamentals when it comes to rejecting the fork proposal, gathering in the same analysis:
bitcoin is centralised + bitcoin must be kept decentralised
or
BIP110 is mindless & with no support + BIP110 will break havoc
when a position is defended using logically incompatible assertions, the the stance remains unbacked, in my opinion.

2026-02-24 12:38:12 UTC

- reply

The blog post is a good read, and it helps me understand both sides. The existence of a fork proposal proves that the BIP110 rejection point of view is not negligible and needs to be considered.
Yet I feel many points in the argument are weighted differently depending on the narrative being transmitted:
- BIP110 does not have real support and won’t be backed by any big platform in the industry…
while it would create a chainsplit that will halt platforms until seeing which chain settles into the other? if there is no real support from the big guys this won’t happen. No chainsplit and no indecision, just a new altcoin.
- We cannot ignore the bitcoin centralized infrastructure of miners & platforms by pushing a fork and voting like in a democracy… but at the same time the changes introduced by the fork would set a precedent on regulatory pressure into bitcoin? are centralization and regulation things we cannot ignore nor avoid by forking… or something we do not want to set precedents of by forking?
same type of incongruence that made me take the OP_RETURN changes with a lot of salt: the size limit didn’t serve any purpose nor prevented any spam… yet they had to take it off?
They are not bad points, and you could probably make me agree on them separately, but putting it all together creates a lot of contradictions in my head.

2026-02-24 11:47:13 UTC

- reply

https://image.nostr.build/687b8c6b6a7b2222d9e1aefe6b870ab4db332c7da4e1f7485f1b0ddf9f7e1f63.jpg
Then I don’t see a reason to add the paragraph that follows. You are comparing a possible BIP110 chainsplit with a “grinding to a halt infrastructure nightmare” while for practical purposes, as you said, it would not cause these issues.

2026-02-24 08:28:54 UTC

It’s kiwi season around where I live so I started eating more of them, I like them more than I remembered 🥝

2026-02-24 08:23:45 UTC

- reply

https://image.nostr.build/6391d6130c70e838c86dfd3632c569a001afd887b5f0538c2db2bf1b568cb2d0.jpg https://image.nostr.build/aa453f847a3f255fca3fe2782521cbf737d386eb71080b72ee5c766dec3dd6dd.jpg
So… what is it, chainsplit coming or not?

2026-02-24 08:20:58 UTC

- reply

https://image.nostr.build/b3bb527567ebbedf712e0ea7d6f10a6e36e42ba0d081841af889769d646ea3fe.jpg
Well, as you say in your own blogpost there is indeed a high probability of chainsplitting. Maybe you like “spewing nonsense” on your blog?
With no replay protection for transactions with spam, of course, as they’re the target of the filter. But I don’t see why a transaction that does not use any known exploit for data storage couldn’t be in both chains in the case of a split.

2026-02-23 13:32:07 UTC

- reply

Shouting “coin confiscation” and “chain split/reorganization” is FUD. BIP110 only targets transactions that exploit the protocol turning it into arbitrary non-monetary storage.
In case of a reorganisation it would only reverse transactions that were used exploits to introduce spam.
A bomb sniffing dog is only dangerous to you if you’re carrying a bomb.
You start the post saying that BIP110 has nowhere near consensus, then continue to raise FUD of what could happen if the miners switch to it… so what is it? Is it too weak to do any useful change… or so dangerous that it will break havoc? You cannot have both.

2026-02-11 20:40:05 UTC

- reply

I wanted to try self-hosting mumble, this seems to be the perfect opportunity 🙂‍↕️🙂‍↕️🙂‍↕️

2026-02-11 17:34:45 UTC

- reply

The comparison makes sense to me. I can be confident on something without putting money on the line, and nothing is 100% certain, that’s what I wanted to explain.
True, in an ideal “frictionless” situation bip-110 proposes a temporary softfork. But still, the money is already on the line, in the chain, and time will tell. Gambling does not show conviction or real intention. And opinions should not be discredited because there is no money behind them. (imo)

2026-02-11 17:20:41 UTC

- reply

Betting on the outcome does not make social attacks more expensive. More like the opposite, as it’s incentivising on the conflict, not adding a cost to creating one. Did sports betting stop any match?
Surprisingly for some, people in favor of the new proposal are actually putting effort on creating a fork, instead of just gambling on the situation. In my opinion, that’s what takes the cost. Moving fiat is easy, but showing computing power is expensive. That’s why btc works by proof of cpu work, not proof of stake.

2026-02-11 15:14:34 UTC

- reply

I strongly believe seatbets drastically improve security while driving, and agree on making them a default standard in every car. Yet I am not willing to bet 1 BTC on me not crashing while wearing a seatbelt, nor on me crashing while not wearing it.
I get the point, but if a hardfork happens, the wager is already in. Just keep your coins in the correct branch from your point of view, and sell coins from the other to buy more.

2026-02-10 08:38:04 UTC

- reply

Banks are not protecting your money, but theirs. They would not hesitate to block your account upon request or authorise transactions without your permission, they have already done it before.
Security sytems provided by banks are made to keep themselves safe, not us.
Nobody with the same level of knowledge is gonna guard your money and assets better than yourself.

2026-02-07 10:29:33 UTC

- reply

People will tell you paying a mortage is better while paying rent is “wasting your money”, will look you weird if you arent paying a mortage yet or if you dont “own” a car (paying it in monthly quotes with interest too)
People are brainwashed into thinking gaining life-lasting debt is the usual, that having a house and a car gives you liberty, without acknowledging that once you enter the debt system there is no way out, other than working until you have paid everything off. People are brainwashed into wanting to be slaves.

2026-02-06 19:22:18 UTC

- reply

not a fair comparison, though.
Leaving the casino with a winning streak is not the same as beating the casino. And beating the market is not the same as having a single trading day in positive.

2026-01-31 19:27:10 UTC

- reply

Even while prunable, they have to be processed in the mempool and in the initial blockchain sync, which can be a huge bottleneck for people with less computer resources. I agree with you on the segwit 4mb blocks, it’s too big. Just some MBs can make a bitcoin node too expensive to run in places where it’s needed the most, just like arbitrary data can use memory and cpu power that is wasted, knowing it could have been used for monetary transactions, even if ignored after. If it can be pruned, it could not be put there in the first place.

2026-01-30 13:26:25 UTC

- reply

Cheap BTC! gotta buy

2026-01-29 12:13:33 UTC

- reply

It’s funny to see how they affirm that arbitrary data filtering is not possible and anybody that disagrees can just make their node ignore it while they try to call out, moderate and mute everyone that disagrees on the bitcoin github repo, mailing list and twitter community.

2026-01-28 19:09:16 UTC

- reply

@npub1ynn…u3gk UP 🤪

2026-01-28 10:12:47 UTC

- reply

“if you are not a _, you don’t know what you are talking about and your opinion about _ is not valid”
Covid was full of these situations: No one had the “knowledge needed” to reject the mask, vaccines and lockdowns… yet at the same time everyone had the “right knowledge” if they followed the rules.
Following this mindset we would not have the right to vote, because we didn’t study politics. Labeling one set of knowledge as “the right one” and the other one as “the biased” is not valid as solid evidence for defending any of the opinions on any problem.

2026-01-28 09:20:42 UTC

- reply

all the tools we allow the state to use against terrorists can and probably will be used against us too, eventually.

2026-01-27 11:22:07 UTC

@npub1ynn…u3gk UP

2026-01-26 10:41:38 UTC

- reply

This. No system can scale to process all transactions on earth in the same layer, parting from this we must keep bitcoin as a secure and efficient settlement network while creating new layers on top of it to provide scaling and usecases. Of course, innovation and new features are good for adoption, just not on the bitcoin L1.

2026-01-26 10:38:25 UTC

- reply

One of the most successful organised attacks on Bitcoin to date, if you asked me. Someone is trying to make btc node hosting computationally and legally (CSAM) unaffordable.

2026-01-22 16:23:56 UTC

Is there any nostr client with regex filtering options? for example to stop seeing non-readable text notes while scrolling, or muting a specific word

2026-01-21 16:19:20 UTC

Checking out reticulum, seems to be just what I was looking for: A pretty efficient, usable and truly decentralised internet

2026-01-17 17:52:23 UTC

I love Brie cheese

2026-01-17 17:47:55 UTC

- reply

You turned my comment into a debate about bitcoin being better or worse than everything else.
I just said that KYC exists for gold and silver too. And that Monero is private by definition, and that works very well until you need to use it substantially and you appear to have a not-negligible amount of money.
Thinking there is a magic privacy tool you can use to leave no trace is the only coping here.

2026-01-17 17:22:41 UTC

- reply

I am not denying bitcoin is traceable, but I affirm that anything can be traced in some part of the process, and assuming it wont be because it’s transacted in an opaque way creates false confidence. Bitcoin analysis is evident as the system is transparent, but transaction analysis exists for every asset, physical or digtal, public or private. There are whole government entities dedicated to it.
Gold bullions are made by someone that follows standards and regulations that leave traces. I mean, you can melt gold by yourself, but you are raising a big flag if you buy gold minting equipment and then declare that you have none.
And bank notes… they literally have serial numbers. “It’s hard to trace without using investigative tools”; Of course, but when people investigate they will… use investigative tools. It’s hard to dig a hole in the dirt without a shovel, I guess that’s why someone will use one to dig.
Bullshitting or not, good looking or not. I confidently affirm that when I exchange any asset I hold into money to spend, the transaction will be tracked and someone will add up everything trying to find a dissonance. Assets will be found unless we foment circular economies. Bitcoin, gold, monero… all are equally good in their field and have distinct features as long as we manage to make them independent from the fiat system.

2026-01-17 16:04:40 UTC

- reply

A physical can also be digitally traced. Good can be seriaized, analysed for traces, and you can control and regularise its exchanges. Before chain analysis was standard the same level of tracing was done to bills, gold and such.

2026-01-17 16:01:37 UTC

- reply

You will have to explain to someone how come you are selling gold that you declared as “lost” at a certain point.
Gold has lost it’s circular economy unless you are a nation state with a reserve. Bitcoin doesn’t have one (yet?). They both have the same problem: If you want to use it, you have to exchange them for FIAT first. And that’s where the state control steps in. They don’t need to control gold or bitcoin from the inside.

2026-01-17 15:57:26 UTC

- reply

Plausible deniability only helps up to a certain point. If someone knows you have gold in your house, finding it is a matter of time. You can carry a bitcoin private key in your brain.
I’m not saying BTC is extortion resistant, but I am saying that both gold and bitcoin have the same problem with this, even while being anonymous inside it’s own system.

2026-01-17 12:35:07 UTC

- reply

I don’t think it’s fair to take bitcoin KYC systems as a counter to its privacy while not thinking the same way about gold.
Gold is private and untraceable, as it’s a phisical thing you can pass on and receive leaving no trace. But once you try to get an usable value from it (selling if for fiat to spend) the same control measures apply. You cannot sell large amounts of gold without raising any flag, neither take it with you to another country, for example. If you bought gold from the internet, many platforms will record it. You can buy it privately and in person, but then you will have to explain where it comes from when you use it. And if you manage to sell it privately too, you will have to explain where the money you suddenly have comes from.
It’s all the same in the end: The state controlling valuable assets transactions.

2026-01-11 00:16:30 UTC

- reply

With tools like bitcoin and nostr you already can: Suddenly the government cannot control who we talk to, what we talk about, and who listens to us. They cannot block us from using our money, and they cannot really tell how much money we have and where we use it. Tools used by them for years are being threatened by alternative systems outside their reach and control.

2026-01-11 00:11:57 UTC

- reply

People that visit multiple countries and get to interact with the culture get to experience this: They see how exaggerated stereotypes are and how little difference there really is between two humans that want the same in life.

2026-01-11 00:09:57 UTC

- reply

There’s literally no reason to hate someone that lives countries away and you don’t even know. Cultural conflicts exist because they’re fomented by nations. They feed people with hate to make them want to go to war and die for the country’s interests.

2026-01-10 12:03:47 UTC

- reply

All big nations benefit from a truly neutral digital store of value and leverage tool. They know this, and they don’t really want to stop it. They just want regular people to stop accumulating it to stop them from gaining leverage against the government.
Bitcoin will be made to be feared by the media, while they keep accumulating it and regaining control of a very powerful tool.

2026-01-10 11:59:23 UTC

- reply

We focus on building decentralised apps while ignoring the awkward thruth of a centralised internet infrastructure. As a last resort, the state always has a plug to pull.

2026-01-10 11:57:43 UTC

- reply

A bit of survivorship bias, though. We only remember iconic cars, we only see buildings that lasted.
But also true. Todays safety and technical standards restrict freedom when desining today’s infrastructure.