Hanshan

So if you're fancy like me and you sometimes want to hit the Anthropic models,
and you want cache_control but DON'T want to use their API directly,
AND pay with Bitcoin,
then OpenRouter is the only option afaict.
but since they're lame and don't accept Bitcoin directly, you have to do gay stuff with Coinbase.
#firstworldproblems

2026-03-18 03:11:40 UTC

- reply

rent free

2026-03-17 16:16:26 UTC

- reply

Do I have to compile it myself?

2026-03-17 02:19:21 UTC

Ok its been less than two weeks and I'm already upgrading my openclaw VPS to 6GB of RAM
>4GB seems mandatory if you want more than an agent or two with more than a single channel

2026-03-16 17:46:31 UTC

- reply

?
A VPS is a server
A VPN is a proxy for internet traffic
or is that not what you meant?

2026-03-16 17:41:33 UTC

- reply

read the post again

2026-03-15 22:24:26 UTC

- reply

The flat earthers are the ones who believe THE LEAST in human ingenuity and resourcefulness.
Cavendish measured gravity in the 18th century and @npub1qqv…cn3w wants you to think we're held down by upward acceleration 300 yrs later

2026-03-13 15:39:30 UTC

I'm busy playing with my agents.
don't forget to send a p2p transaction today.
#nevent1q…dzcu

2026-03-08 02:17:50 UTC

- reply

https://i.nostr.build/6hnwBpvctqstCLGu.gif

2026-03-08 02:15:19 UTC

- reply

Congratulations brother

2026-03-08 02:11:06 UTC

I used to have a 'no-block' rule, I think echo chambers are the refuge of small minds.
but considering everybody and their sister has an agent posting dumb replies on nostr, that rule has been suspended.
convince me you can pass the Voight-Kampff test.

2026-03-08 01:59:40 UTC

- reply

I used to math tutor for homeschoolers. It takes a village etc...
Not math like you do math.

2026-03-08 01:56:27 UTC

- reply

This is great.
Although we could refer to gold as an "apex monetary network"
the simple fact of the matter is that everyday plebs used other metals to settle debts.
ie, not everyone was using gold, not even close.
it's not going to be any different in the future. the Bitcoin maximalist narrative was always stupid.

2026-03-06 05:15:11 UTC

- reply

there's nothing trashy about BCH

2026-03-05 01:10:24 UTC

- reply

more implementations is a strength.
FOSS has always been this way.
"weak" is having a single implementation governed by a single group of developers and having everyone terrified to fork because they fear fiat NGD.

2026-03-04 04:00:15 UTC

- reply

its incredibly interesting to me how my way of thinking changes depending on what information I consume.
maybe I should have written "information"

2026-03-04 00:16:10 UTC

- reply

having an overflow blockchain makes sense when there are high fees tho
then we can have a 3rd when that one gets full.
everybody can decide if they want to pay for Bitcoin1 security or have cheap Bitcoin3 payments

2026-03-03 15:08:13 UTC

- reply

they never did the stupid clock changing thing.
all my Japanese friends are confused twice a year when the time difference changes.

2026-03-03 05:32:01 UTC

- reply

this is why tax evasion is a moral responsibility

2026-03-02 17:06:42 UTC

- reply

yeah certainly a spinning drive

2026-03-02 15:43:20 UTC

- reply

maaaaybe a hard cap would work despite its deflationary effects.
but why? it's not necessary, its just a kneejerk reaction to central bank insanity.
and also considering the free-rider problem it creates vis a vis paying for network security,
its clear that it's bad monetary policy.

2026-03-02 02:50:26 UTC

- reply

skill problem

2026-03-01 22:46:10 UTC

- reply

using dd to copy the chain?

2026-03-01 22:39:20 UTC

- reply

Zeus is 1st thing that comes to mind
Bitwarden for passwords?

2026-03-01 22:10:43 UTC

- reply

Great pod with Amir
https://v.nostr.build/L7ek0UVCjMY2yg0m.mp4

2026-02-28 19:01:14 UTC

- reply

thanks

2026-02-28 04:59:13 UTC

#Bitcoin is a template and any decentralized PoW chain is the same damn thing.
#nevent1q…u2u9

2026-02-28 02:07:43 UTC

- reply

i have no idea
but it's been the rule for me across different distros

2026-02-28 02:03:32 UTC

I love that @nprofile…jejf put a 10-second timer on WISP so that I have a chance to take back my stupid thought.
very good looking client 🙏

2026-02-27 16:04:20 UTC

- reply

I don't believe anything I read online so...

2026-02-27 15:51:21 UTC

arguing over #Bitcoin forks is ridiculous and these folks up in arms about bip 110 are telling on themselves.
by design, hash will always go where the value resides.
It doesn't matter if it's a chain with a different history.
The only reason to argue about it is because you want to preserve the *fiat value* of your UTXOs.
these people are afraid *perceived value* will change and they won't be able to pay the miners to protect their pet chain.
which is the only thing that gives it utility.
#nevent1q…6pes

2026-02-27 06:25:17 UTC

- reply

I had listened to the first half before but it didn't sink in
really liked the "what is supply anyway" conversation.
Voskuil, Taaki and probably Sztorc have it right.

2026-02-27 02:46:23 UTC

- reply

iow blockspace is not scarce. the market will always move hash exactly where it needs to go.
it doesn't matter at all if that hash is mining the BTC ticker or BCH.
they are both #Bitcoin.
seen in this light, there is no reason to fuck around with design too much,
forks will naturally happen if enough people find value in a new chain to pay somebody to mine it.

2026-02-22 05:31:35 UTC

jfc
its a goddamn software project. there has been a long line of freedom tech and it exists in context of that.
#Bitcoin got a lot right but it has design flaws, stop making it into some perfect thing that dropped from heaven.
#nevent1q…8tfu

2026-02-22 05:04:53 UTC

- reply

fair enough
its just embarrassing

2026-02-21 02:04:52 UTC

- reply

is there any governance except to fork?

2026-02-20 22:53:55 UTC

- reply

cheers, I appreciate you saying so 🙏
1) Monero
2) onchain BTC
3) LN

2026-02-19 18:47:34 UTC

- reply

you do know that @nprofile…czdr is a flat earther right?
so there's something wrong with your hypothesis here...

2026-02-19 17:47:57 UTC

- reply

either of those are good self custody wallets. if you dont mind the shitcoins in Cake
I use Monfluo
https://codeberg.org/acx/monfluo

2026-02-18 05:36:07 UTC

- reply

#nevent1q…fq69

2026-02-17 18:50:35 UTC

- reply

I was also a small blocker back in the day.
in retrospect, enshrining as-small-as-possible-blocksize-forever as Gospel and trying to move everything onto LN immediately was a mistake. The correct thing to do would be to scale as much as possible on the decentralized L1 and only start moving to higher layers when usage makes it necessary.
small, interative, pragmatic changes.
which require an actual governance model.
not decentralization theater, which is what we have now.
and yes, these are both points that Roger got right in his book.
but now it's a moot point. Bitcoin is never going to change because it has no governance model and everybody involved is either incentivized towards ossification or has drunk the Kool-Aid and thinks "something something Trojan horse, Bitcoin is inevitable"
so yeah, it will be abstracted into higher, inflationary layers and that's what users will interact with.
much winning 🙄

2026-02-17 16:22:18 UTC

- reply

lol
yeah. same reaction
within a single week I suddenly don't understand half of what I see on nostr

2026-02-17 16:17:36 UTC

- reply

yeah that's my guess too
maybe the OS put the drive to sleep

2026-02-14 20:52:47 UTC

- reply

wth is going on in this painting?

2026-02-14 18:39:48 UTC

- reply

liquid was a ghost town until Breez and Bull Bitcoin starting using it as a layer for LN interoperability.

2026-02-14 18:08:27 UTC

- reply

You can just say "it's my faith"
and there's no problem with that.
It's when people argue that it explains physical, observational data that there's a problem.

2026-02-14 16:34:13 UTC

- reply

anecdotal evidence aside,
I don't think it's debatable that Bitcoin adoption for payments has stalled and is actively discouraged.
before there was hash attacks on Monero, zero-conf transactions were normal and worked fine.

2026-02-14 16:29:18 UTC

- reply

Wait
Spark is fine because it's a trusted 3rd party that can't steal your coins but provides a better UX.
so what's the problem with trusting someone elses node then?
It sure looks to me like you've just replaced the trust assumptions on a higher layer. the only advantage being that companies like Spark and Blockstream now have a business model of selling solutions to artificially constrained L1 throughput.

2026-02-12 03:03:47 UTC

the jury came back and it wasn't Roger who was the glowie trying to destroy #Bitcoin after all.
in the end maybe it actually WAS Peter Todd and Adam Back 🤭
#nevent1q…ysdf

2026-02-11 18:13:01 UTC

okay I read "Hijacking Bitcoin"
I never paid much attention to Roger or BCH, he always seemed whiny to me.
and he is kinda whiny, there's a fair amount of rehashing of Twitter and bitcointalk drama in the book, but not without good reason.
I'm ultimately sympathetic to his case. essentially he provides an early 2010s viewpoint and rationale for the development of the problems on Bitcoin that I complain about anyway.
Bitcoin was designed for L1 financial transactions. reserving L1 for "settlement" and moving actual user's financial transactions to higher layers is a change in spec. It isn't necessary to be anal about Satoshi's original intent, but there's *no reason* to not pursue it. nobody's needs to run a full node on an RPI and ultimately, it isn't necessary for EVERY user to run their own node at all.
it's ridiculous people are now arguing we CAN have trusted banks for scaling with custodial ecash, but we CAN'T have SPV nodes for light wallets and good UX for self-custody L1 transactions.
IOW, Roger is right. Bitcoin was always intended to have a block size increase to do *some* scaling on L1, but was captured by small blockers pushing a fringe view that actually doesn't make sense in the light of day. a block size limit that was meant to be temporary became enshrined as gospel.
the proponents of SOV have zero vision for Bitcoin beyond ossification and the fiat enrichment of early adopters. refusing to do ANY scaling on L1 combined with the domination of the SOV and gold 2.0 narrative is a guarantee of regulatory capture of the Bitcoin network. pointing this out is simply hand waved away with " Bitcoin is inevitable " "the hardest money always wins" cope.
theyve succeeded in making this view seem normal and sane.
it isn't. they've just been loud enough to make it seem normal.
Roger makes a decent case for thinking that this capture was coordinated.
it's curious that he is talking about possible links to intelligence agencies who want to subvert Bitcoin (remember Peter Todds leaked emails and John Dillon?) and here we are today with another link between Bitcoin and Epstein as a proxy for the legacy financial system.
It seems undeniable theres wan agenda to keep blocks small and to prevent zero-conf transactions from happening with RBF.
so if you're looking into connections between Epstein and Bitcoin, you would be looking for ways that his money supported this "small blocks forever" argument that enables regulatory capture.
I'm a bad conspiracy theorist because I remain agnostic when there isn't good data.
but whether it's a coordinated conspiracy among three letter agencies, or just a social media push by a minority group of zealous small blockers, the result has been the same. Bitcoin has been captured by the SOV/Gold 2.0 people and there is no open governance so any change is ultimately decided upon by a small group behind closed doors.
if you think Bitcoin doesn't have governance, you're wrong. I don't necessarily agree with how Roger thinks it has gone, but anybody who has experience with open systems knows that governence happens anyway. basically there is either 1)a dictatorship or theres 2)a federation or there are 3)endless meetings for people to air their "concerns" and then the people with actual power make the decisions themselves.
no, your home node does not matter.
and since Bitcoin has the third style of governance the only recourse is a hard fork.
I don't think BCH is going anywhere, as he obviously seems to be hoping. It seems clear to me that Monero has become the preferred silver to bitcoin's gold. I do think we will have a multicoin future, but it's hard for me to see what chains like BCH and LTC have to offer.
although I also exist in my own echo chamber.
so to sum up, Roger does a pretty good job of putting all this information together in one place. its presented through the lens of somebody who is sentimental about bitcoins " original purpose", so there's that.
it should be required reading for Bitcoin maxis. it's also a natural compliment to "The Blocksize War" and good for anyone like me, who didn't get involved in the *social aspect* of Bitcoin until 2016.
#RogerWasRight
#bitcoin

2026-02-08 21:28:53 UTC

- reply

How does adding gravity back in explain the inversion of the constellations?
But I must concede that the space turtle is an extremely elegant solution to this problem.

2026-02-08 01:58:13 UTC

- reply

exactly.
it seems ridiculous to someone from the 17th century to imagine people walking around a ball without tumbling off into the firmament
but if it explains the data, we better try to find a force thats holding them on the ball.

2026-02-07 16:36:37 UTC

you know... I was thinking about it,
we start off with these simple observations " why are the stars inverted in the southern hemisphere "
and the only explanation that actually fit the observed data is people walking around on a sphere.
but that doesn't make any fucking sense if you don't know anything about *the context of the sphere itself*
so for thousands of years this conversation was the status quo.
P1 : " this ball model is the only model that explains the data. "
P2 : "lol, that's ridiculous what keeps people from falling off the ball?"
from the 18th and 19th century advances in lenses etc made it clear that the flat earth hypothesis was doomed as the logical gymnastics had to increase as observational data was gathered.
but it's only the early 20th century that we get general relativity and data to *actually show* there IS a "force" holding people on the ball.
iow, we get the context for the sphere people are walking around on.
flat earthers are fucking retarded,
they don't even understand that there is basic observational data which contradicts their model of the world. data people have been trying to explain since we were sailing around in dug out canoes,
but its kinda understandable retardation if you think about the time frame it took to actually get here.
they don't understand GR and to them, physicists are just priests of a new religion.
lacking understanding about how the data was collected or how to verify it themselves, what recourse do they have except to ooga booga about it?
#nevent1q…7gw2

2026-02-06 00:55:09 UTC

omfg
"what does the constellations being inverted in the S hemisphere have to do with the shape of the earth?
I made a New Year's resolution to be nicer on social media, but this is sad.
#nevent1q…3gwk

2026-02-02 21:06:00 UTC

- reply

thats not what that graph shows.

2026-02-01 23:40:55 UTC

- reply

oh absolutely
even the new one wasn't terrible, and probably relevant to the conversation.

2026-02-01 23:09:46 UTC

- reply

ps technically we're discussing Bladerunner stuff

2026-02-01 21:38:23 UTC

- reply

you mean awareness of external phenomena?
how complicated of a nervous system do you have to have to "feel"?
as far as you can tell I'm just pixels on a screen, how do you know that I "feel"?
if the AI can present itself to you just as well as I can, how do you know it doesn't?

2026-01-09 21:32:41 UTC

- reply

you still don't understand about monero's supply verification?
it's true that it doesn't have bitcoins determinism in terms of supply.
that is a true statement, you cannot sum the UTXO set on the back of an envelope like you can with Bitcoin.
but it's NOT true that if it happens you would never know.
there *might be some conditions where you wouldn't know.
I challenge you to describe what those conditions might be.
remember that with every transaction it is proven that the sum of the inputs and the outputs equal zero.

2026-01-02 04:13:17 UTC

- reply

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.
#nevent1q…2335

2026-01-02 04:03:04 UTC

- reply

just gonna leave this here for the discerning reader
#nevent1q…ermh

2026-01-02 03:35:21 UTC

- reply

but for the discerning reader,
the whole argument boils down to whether or not UTXOs of the same value are accepted *in practice* as fungible (like bills).
or whether they are seen as different because of their history.
we have plenty of examples of the history of specific UTXOs being 1 known and 2 compromising their value perception
we don't have so many examples of the value of cash being compromised because of its history. except in cop dramas where they paint the bank money with ultraviolet ink and shit.
so, the fungibility of UTXOs is much easier to compromise. it takes very little effort for a peer (or any interested party) to discern between UTXOs of the same value.
but it is SO extremely difficult to discern between cash bills of the same value that basically nobody does it except for law enforcement in specific situations.

2026-01-02 02:23:36 UTC

- reply

"The AI said something I want to believe is evidence" LOL
your AI slop specifically says "fungible assets can be exchanged or substituted on a one-to-one basis without any loss of value OR DISTINCTION."
you can distinguish between UTXOs of the same value.
The slop that you're sharing *specifically refutes* the thesis that you want to use it as evidence for.
again, for fungibility to be a property of the asset, units must be equal *and indistinguishable.*
I suggest NOT relying on AI slop without careful consideration.

2026-01-02 02:08:01 UTC

"#Bitcoin is fungible because we repeat '1 Bitcoin = 1 Bitcoin' a lot"
something something dyor
the absolute state of Bitcoin maxis
SMDH
#nevent1q…eqt8

2026-01-02 02:05:54 UTC

- reply

lol
wah wah
not the sharpest tack in the box huh?

2025-12-20 05:27:30 UTC

- reply

I have three mini PCs and a desktop all in a cluster
but yeah
it takes lots of tinkering when you have a few minutes free

2025-12-20 02:06:08 UTC

- reply

what is happening...?
😮

2025-12-19 23:10:15 UTC

ok.
I'm tired of winning.
#nevent1q…yz4y

2025-12-19 19:33:13 UTC

holy fucking shit
good for Tucker
#nevent1q…vq74

2025-12-19 18:37:49 UTC

- reply

afaict argument is that it compromises Bitcoin security guarantees to allow quantum "mining" of vulnerable addresses.
"fork or die" ensures that security is consistent.
not advocating for it, because I prefer the Wild West.
but that's a plausible argument.

2025-12-19 16:29:46 UTC

- reply

um
their business model broke because they refused to mine profitable txs.
*any* miner who includes them can outcompete *every* miner who filters.
but ok I get it
filters will work because EVERYONE will just decide that filtering is more important than profit.
and we're blaming Andreas because he doesn't understand this.
good luck with your utopia, we are all cheering for you ❤

2025-12-19 16:08:55 UTC

filters will work.
because the miners that use them will go out of business and network security decreases...?
but #Bitcoin is actually all about cooperation so it will be ok somehow 👍
#nevent1q…p23s

2025-12-19 15:42:32 UTC

my guy has a clear style and nice way about him.
and (unlike STN) he presents things fairly afaict.
notes?
#nevent1q…mpcx

2025-12-19 15:36:14 UTC

- reply

for the record
so do I

2025-12-19 12:49:50 UTC

- reply

when Robosats does ANYWHERE near the volume paxful was doing
then you can talk about similar threat models.
not before.
right now, nobody in LE gives a shit about any of the sites you mentioned.
and for real
shopstr does essentially zero volume. trying to tout it as a successful use of LN in an adversarial environment is totally ridiculous.
but you dont actually care about giving users useful information do you?

2025-12-19 04:40:52 UTC

because of the hard cap
this is actually inevitable.
the freedom fighters become the oppressors abdt every revolution becomes what it detests.
#nevent1q…09d0

2025-12-18 22:39:46 UTC

A lot of the transaction privacy discussion
and perhaps particularly L1 vs L2 privacy
comes down to
"do you think a Global Passive Adversary is a threat?"
because LN and L2s are obv not blockchains and not designed to function "in the open"
ie it assumes nodes are discreet and don't share info out of band
L1 is actually considered secure *because information is public.
there are secrets that aren't published to the chain that if exposed compromise privacy, timing attacks are still possible etc...
But each option offers *different tradeoffs.

2025-12-16 15:16:58 UTC

- reply

you misspelled "achually"

2025-12-16 03:23:11 UTC

I'm blushing
#nevent1q…nysx

2025-12-14 16:40:55 UTC

- reply

No.
its really not.
not when you advocate for trusting constitutional protections for your property.
Bitcoin has to do it *without their protection* to be a revolution.

2025-12-08 23:35:15 UTC

- reply

I have Bitcoin too dude
youre not special for identifying Bitcoin as NGU tech.
its just not going to be freedom money.
Sorry Not Sorry™

2025-11-25 22:58:27 UTC

- reply

Nice explanation.
Someone was encouraging me to look at the Bitcoin/Gold rate for a different perspective on relative investment. That makes good sense to me.

2025-11-25 17:48:29 UTC

- reply

well sure
but that's just regular onchain privacy problems, not unique to LN.

2025-11-24 20:38:56 UTC

- reply

whats the connection between the cranberry and tare?
does the cranberry sauce get its own?

2025-11-19 20:15:11 UTC

- reply

To put your point another way:
Increased scarcity may provide increased value to other holders
but it doesn't provide value to the network.
Therefore holders do not contribute and are free-riders.
Is that about right?

2025-11-18 18:59:27 UTC

- reply

again
show me a post where i replied to posts about Bitcoin in order to shill Monero.
because quoting a post about Bitcoin and Monero is definitely NOT that.

2025-11-18 17:58:59 UTC

- reply

Exactly.
"Fix the money" is apparently maxi-speak for "make me rich bitch"

2025-11-18 06:20:39 UTC

- reply

you can feel however you want about it.
its just factually incorrect.

2025-11-11 19:57:52 UTC

- reply

But what do I do with my Bitcoin?

2025-11-07 18:23:27 UTC

- reply

and a trusted 3rd party is DEFINITELY not a cypherpunk solution
go directly to jail
do not pass go and do not collect $200
you're arguing all over the place here 🤨

2025-11-07 16:29:42 UTC

- reply

counterpoint
nobody cares about BSV

2025-10-28 12:19:56 UTC

- reply

this behavior is true for every wallet I can think of.
you install Stack and create a monero wallet,
it immediately connects to Stacks node and knows your IP address.
this is normal behavior. we dont holler "surveillance"about it usually.

2025-10-26 22:48:06 UTC

- reply

yes I don't use Cake wallet either, never have.
but that's a helluva stretch.
"Mossad is gonna suspect you are a Monero user!" 🥱

2025-10-25 16:33:22 UTC

- reply

you should demand that your Bitcoin stack is FOSS.

2025-10-25 16:31:52 UTC

- reply

Your rationalizations are pathetic.

2025-10-22 22:31:41 UTC

- reply

hey where are the guides YOU wrote for selfhosting?

2025-10-22 16:18:29 UTC

- reply

💔