Federico Rivi

Head of Fiat Demolition at Bull Bitcoin | Atlas21 Editor in Chief

Public Key

npub1rd0wwn037yltsh256d4urxjpsr6ye6dva6azaggsl848nwc64ehq60r3ys

NIP-05 Address

Profile Code

nprofile1qqspkhh8fhclz04ct42dx67pnfqcpazvaxkwaw3w5yg0n6nehvd2umspz3mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduqs6amnwvaz7tmwdaejumr0dsyl58fn

Publishing to

relay.damus.io

nos.lol

Author Public Key

npub1rd0wwn037yltsh256d4urxjpsr6ye6dva6azaggsl848nwc64ehq60r3ys

Show more details

Last Notes

2026-08-06 10:16:40 UTC

- reply

With @nprofile…52jn, you have immediate access to fiat liquidity without having to give up your Bitcoin.
Debifi is an open-source, non-custodial lending platform exclusively for Bitcoin. You deposit your Bitcoin as collateral into a 3-of-4 multisig escrow: the keys are distributed among you, the lender, an authorized key holder, and Debifi. It takes 3 out of 4 signatures to move the funds - no one can access your Bitcoin unilaterally.
Forget the nightmare of capital gains tax on Bitcoin sales: the loan is not a taxable event!
Choose the loan term, the LTV, and receive the loan in euros, dollars, or stablecoins.
Apply for your first loan here: debifi.com

2026-08-06 10:16:11 UTC

- reply

Donald Trump and Elizabeth Warren have gone at each other for a decade over tariffs, taxes, the Fed, immigration. There's just one thing they agree on: abolishing America's debt ceiling.
The ceiling was created in 1917 to simplify borrowing. Since 1960, Congress has raised, suspended, or redefined it about 80 times.
Why does it always blow up? Arithmetic. Fiscal year 2025: a $1.775 trillion hole. The last federal budget in surplus was in 2001. On interest on the debt alone, the government paid $1.22 trillion in 2025, nearly a quarter of federal revenue.
To pay it, more debt. Yesterday's creditors repaid with tomorrow's creditors' money.
A pyramid scheme by definition, with two differences: participation is mandatory, and the manager prints the currency it repays with. It never defaults explicitly; it does so gradually, by diluting the purchasing power of the dollars in circulation.
The expansion of the money supply is neither right-wing nor left-wing: it's the one thing the right and the left agree on.
#naddr1qq…5tpq

2026-06-08 13:47:10 UTC

- reply

Don't pretend nothing's wrong, I know you're disappointed. Disillusioned, even.
The Fear and Greed Index on Monday, June 1 read 11 out of 100. Bitcoin at $63,000, Google searches near a five-year low.
Record outflows from the spot ETFs. BlackRock's IBIT alone has seen over $2 billion leave since mid-May.
Strategy selling bitcoin after, for four years, Saylor repeated a single message over and over: buy, never sell, sooner sell your kidneys.
Then there's the talk of the big IPOs.
* SpaceX is on roadshow with a valuation between $1,800 and $2,000 billion and a potential raise of up to $75 billion: above Saudi Aramco in 2019.
* OpenAI is aiming for a listing in the autumn, an $852 billion valuation.
* Anthropic has closed a $65 billion round, a $965 billion valuation.
* Put together: about $3,600 billion, as much as the GDP of France. Goldman Sachs estimates that the 2026 IPOs will raise $160 billion. That's where the money seems to be running now.
In moments like these, we need to go back to the fundamental question, the most important one: do SpaceX, OpenAI and Anthropic solve the same problems that Bitcoin solves?
Mathematical scarcity in a digital world where everything is copied to infinity. A store of value without counterparties, that no one can devalue or freeze. An answer to inflationary money. The ability to stabilize electrical grids by monetizing excess energy.
No. None of the three.
The markets look at the next six months and chase the most exciting story of the moment. Confusing this with the value of what Bitcoin solves is the mistake that costs the most.
#naddr1qq…dljp

2026-04-28 15:33:13 UTC

- reply

While at the Bitcoin Conference in Las Vegas, executives from US federal agencies promise not to prosecute developers, in reality code is in the dock.
Keonne Rodriguez has entered a US federal penitentiary. Five years. His crime: writing a non-custodial Bitcoin wallet with Whirlpool.
He never touched user funds. He didn't hold the keys. The code was open source. Yet the Department of Justice prosecuted him for "unlicensed money transmitting" under Section 1960 - a charge that requires no proof of intent, no complicity with crimes, no custody of others' funds. His associate William Lonergan Hill got four years.
Running parallel is Roman Storm, co-founder of Tornado Cash - a non-custodial mixer on Ethereum. Arrested in August 2023. A four-week trial in the Southern District of New York. Verdict on August 6, 2025: the jury failed to reach agreement on the two heavy counts (money laundering, violating North Korea sanctions), but convicted him on § 1960. Same charge, same pattern. If the motion for acquittal filed by the defense is denied, Storm faces a retrial in October 2026 with total exposure approaching forty-five years.
Too bad that back in 2019 FinCEN had explicitly written: anyone who develops non-custodial peer-to-peer software without controlling user funds is not a money transmitter. In April 2025, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche issued an internal memo: stop regulatory prosecutions against developers of non-custodial software.
The verdict against Storm came in August 2025. Four months after the Blanche memo. Prosecutors in the Southern District of New York pushed for conviction anyway. In March 2026 they sought a new trial on the other two counts, with the opposite directive written in black and white by DOJ leadership.
If the interpretation of § 1960 applied to Storm holds up on appeal, the perimeter is this: any American developer of wallets, coinjoins, or Lightning Service Providers becomes a potential defendant. The menu is already written. Plead and take four or five years. Fight and risk forty-five.
Code is on trial, whatever the paid feds in Las Vegas may say.
#naddr1qq…rf20

2026-04-19 15:57:31 UTC

- reply

With @debifi, you have immediate access to fiat liquidity without having to give up your Bitcoin.
Debifi is an open-source, non-custodial lending platform exclusively for Bitcoin. You deposit your Bitcoin as collateral into a 3-of-4 multisig escrow: the keys are distributed among you, the lender, an authorized key holder, and Debifi. It takes 3 out of 4 signatures to move the funds - no one can access your Bitcoin unilaterally.
Forget the nightmare of capital gains tax on Bitcoin sales: the loan is not a taxable event!
Choose the loan term, the LTV, and receive the loan in euros, dollars, or stablecoins.
Apply for your first loan here: debifi.com

2026-04-19 15:56:38 UTC

- reply

BIP-361: Post Quantum Migration and Legacy Signature Sunset. The proposal: five years after activation, any bitcoin not migrated to quantum-resistant addresses gets frozen.
The numbers behind the proposal. As of March 1, 2026, more than 34% of all existing bitcoin had public keys exposed on-chain. According to @nprofile…xxx2, one of the six signatories, the technically vulnerable bitcoin total 5.6 million. Roughly 28% of the circulating supply. That figure includes 1.1 million bitcoin untouched since 2010, probabilistically attributed to Satoshi Nakamoto.
The proponents’ thesis: if an attacker with a sufficiently powerful quantum computer unlocked those UTXOs and dumped them on the market, the sell-off would hurt every other holder. From the BIP text: “Lost coins make everyone else’s worth slightly more. Coins recovered by an attacker make everyone else’s worth less. Consider it theft from everyone.”
Lopp himself, however, in the hours after the debate blew up on X, stated: “At the moment, I don’t think any of this is necessary.”
The objections come from several directions. @nprofile…ltu2 raised what he calls “the man in the coma” case: anyone who fails to execute the migration for five years loses all their money, frozen by consensus rules. @nprofile…dc7k at Paris Blockchain Week called today’s quantum computers “lab experiments” with “incremental” progress, and argued that Bitcoin can prepare itself through optional upgrades without imposing freezes.
The real point is something else. If consensus rules can freeze addresses based on type, a precedent exists. Governments will have it on the table: freezing sanctioned UTXOs, freezing addresses on OFAC lists, freezing the wallets of politically inconvenient people.
The proposal calls for freezing legitimately held bitcoin in the name of the collective good. Bitcoin exists because no one can block anyone else’s funds. BIP-361 asks the protocol to do exactly that, by design.
#naddr1qq…y8ym

2026-03-29 19:59:01 UTC

- reply

Thank you!

2026-03-21 15:04:05 UTC

- reply

The original newsletter is in fact in Italian, but every Saturday I post the English version here on Nostr

2026-03-21 13:13:33 UTC

- reply

In the latest article of #BitcoinTrain, I explain how Bitcoin is being used by the Iranian regime to circumvent sanctions, but also by ordinary Iranians to survive the war and escape repression.
Some see this as a problem, because Bitcoin has no compliance office to decide who deserves to use it. It has no board of directors that can be pressured by governments, nor a switch that someone can flip when the narrative changes.
History teaches us that every financial instrument controlled by someone has been used as a weapon against someone else.
Anyone who wants money that discriminates wants a weapon, not money.
#naddr1qq…kekm

2026-03-14 17:40:58 UTC

- reply

If an AI model were free to choose how to store and transfer value, which asset would it select?
According to the Bitcoin Policy Institute, the answer is Bitcoin, and it would do so based on objective characteristics: mathematical verifiability, the absence of intermediaries, immutable rules, and resistance to censorship.
It’s an interesting prospect, if it wasn’t for one small detail: machines, today, don’t make decisions. The decisions are made by the people who programme them, the companies that fund them, and the governments that regulate them.
So the real question is not ‘what would an AI choose?’ but ‘who controls what the AI can choose?’
That is the game being played right now.
#naddr1qq…r993

2026-02-28 15:44:48 UTC

- reply

In the new edition of #BitcoinTrain I address a question that has been circulating in my mind for quite some time: when AI makes everything abundant, what will still retain value?
Block has just cut 40% of its workforce in a single move. Human labor will increasingly become less necessary as more and more goods and services are produced automatically at extremely low cost. But in an economy of artificial abundance, which assets truly survive?
The answer may lie in a single word: scarcity.
Not the kind designed at a drafting table. Not the kind simulated by software or marketing. The real kind. The kind that no language model, no data center, no GPU can replicate or inflate.
The final scarcity.
#naddr1qv…49gt

2026-02-22 20:16:50 UTC

- reply

Algarve

2026-02-22 17:19:53 UTC

Running here and not trusting governments. PV
https://blossom.primal.net/a69a2f5bbb0cb7dd1397c0285204299fc0fe5977aac629a4ee7023d072188a4b.jpg

2026-02-21 20:26:27 UTC

- reply

Thanks! Appreciated 🙏🏻

2026-02-21 13:47:40 UTC

- reply

In the new article I address what is happening in France: something that should terrify anyone who declares their bitcoins "to be on the safe side". Criminal gangs are accessing the tax data of bitcoiners. Names, addresses, estimated assets. Everything the state has collected in the name of 'transparency' and 'anti-money laundering' has become a shopping list for those who want to rob and seize.
KYC is sold as a shield, when it is a database of high-value targets, accessible to anyone with the right connections or simply the right corruption. And corruption, in the nerve centres of state bureaucracies, is never lacking.
The right question to ask is: who really needs to collect all this data? Honest citizens, who are profiled and filed? Or those – the state or criminals, the difference is non-existent – who have an interest in knowing exactly where the wealth is and who holds it?
Bitcoin was created as a response to this problem, and the manhunt is already on. If you wanted to sleep peacefully, frightened by the propaganda of public thugs, perhaps your address has already been compromised.
#naddr1qq…h5yd

2026-01-02 07:11:57 UTC

- reply

🙌🏻

2025-05-21 12:42:37 UTC

- reply

Yep, lapsus mio

2025-05-17 07:08:31 UTC

- reply

👀

2025-04-17 14:29:12 UTC

Tariffs make markets bleed
⬇️
Sentiment worsens
⬇️
Recession spectrum
⬇️
Trump: “Powell you've got to lower rates!!!"
Tariffs are a way to force the Fed to print money: who pays the interest on the debt, if not inflation?
Printer is coming.

2025-04-17 14:26:13 UTC

- reply

Welcome, legend 🧡
#nevent1q…4g3g

2025-04-09 15:47:29 UTC

- reply

I'll try to find it. Thanks!

2025-04-09 15:47:10 UTC

- reply

Thanks!

2025-04-09 15:14:13 UTC

Any tool to publish long form articles here on Nostr, other than Highlighter?

2025-04-09 08:52:29 UTC

https://m.primal.net/QJUh.png COVENANTS PART 1: CTV
With this article begins a series of deep dives aimed at exploring the main proposals for implementing covenants in Bitcoin: how they work, what implications they carry, and what the pros and cons of each may be. CheckTemplateVerify can only be the first protagonist.
To make everything clearer—and possibly understandable even to a non-technical audience—we must start from the basics.
- Bitcoin Script
Bitcoin Script is a simple, non-Turing-complete scripting language used to define spending conditions for Bitcoin transactions. An opcode (short for “operation code”) is essentially a command or function within a Bitcoin script. Opcodes operate on a set of data: for example, OP_ADD adds two numbers, while OP_EQUAL compares two values to check if they match. Opcodes can perform mathematical, logical, or cryptographic operations (such as OP_CHECKSIG, which verifies digital signatures), enabling the creation of basic smart contracts on Bitcoin.
Bitcoin Script also includes reserved opcodes—such as the various OP_NOP (no-operation)—which currently do nothing but are intended for potential future protocol upgrades. By leveraging one of these dormant opcodes, it becomes possible to introduce new functionalities through a soft fork: non-updated nodes will continue to treat the opcode as an instruction with no effect—still accepting it as valid—while updated nodes will interpret it according to its new meaning. This allows for a so-called backwards-compatible upgrade.
- The OP_CHECKTEMPLATEVERIFY opcode
OP_CHECKTEMPLATEVERIFY—abbreviated as OP_CTV—is an opcode proposed for Bitcoin via Bitcoin Improvement Proposal BIP-119 by Jeremy Rubin. The proposal involves reassigning the previously unused OP_NOP4 opcode, giving it a new semantics: that of OP_CHECKTEMPLATEVERIFY.
In simple terms, OP_CTV allows a script to constrain the output of a transaction so that it can only be spent through a specific predefined transaction (or from a predefined set of transactions). Technically, the locking script of a UTXO includes a 32-byte cryptographic hash—called a template hash or commitment hash—which represents the model of the authorized spending transaction. When someone attempts to spend that UTXO, OP_CTV verifies that the hash of the current transaction matches the one expected by the script.
In practice, OP_CTV locks the structure of a future on-chain transaction: version, locktime, number of inputs and outputs, hash of outputs (which includes destination addresses and amounts), and other fields are included in the hash checked by the opcode. This means that a UTXO protected by CTV can only be unlocked by a transaction that matches exactly the predefined template.
With CTV, the recipient can “pre-program” the future spending rules for the UTXOs they receive by generating an address containing specific spending conditions not visible to the sender. This creates what is generally known as a covenant. It's important to note that BIP-119 is deliberately designed to be non-recursive: the restriction applies only to the next transaction. In other words, OP_CTV enables predefined, one-step covenants rather than general or recursive ones that would continue to constrain the coins indefinitely. This limitation reduces complexity and potential risks, as we will explore later.
- Historical context: Jeremy Rubin and the Speedy Trial proposal
The proposal to introduce OP_CTV dates back to 2020, when developer Jeremy Rubin published BIP-119, complete with specifications and reference code.
Following the successful activation of the Taproot soft fork (November 2021), attention turned to what the next protocol upgrade could be. CTV was (and remains) one of the main candidates, alongside proposals like ANYPREVOUT (BIP-118) and the reintroduction of OP_CAT.
Rubin actively promoted CTV: during the 2022 Bitcoin Conference in Miami, he gathered feedback from developers and users, finding interest.
Shortly after, on April 19th, Rubin sent an email to the bitcoin-dev mailing list proposing a concrete plan to activate CTV through Speedy Trial. In brief, Speedy Trial is a fast-track method for activating a soft fork based on miner signaling: miners are given a short window to signal support for the upgrade in the blocks they produce, with a high threshold for activation (e.g., 90% of blocks within a difficulty period). If the threshold is reached within the allotted time, the upgrade is locked in for the next activation window; otherwise, it does not proceed. Taproot was activated in this manner.
Rubin hoped for a similar path, but the community's reaction was harsh. The reasons were varied, but the core concern was that a soft fork should never be activated lightly: only when there is near-unanimous consensus on the benefits of an upgrade should such a change to consensus rules be considered—ideally bundled with other enhancements under a single soft fork. Altering consensus is no small matter and must be approached with extreme caution, especially if it has been modified recently. Faced with growing criticism, Rubin eventually backed down.
- From Vaults to Channel Factories
Technically, CTV is appreciated by many for the new functionalities it could enable in Bitcoin. Here are the main ones:
* Covenants and constrained spending conditions: a basic example of a covenant might involve a two-phase payment: Alice sends BTC to Bob, but the script ensures that Bob can only spend those BTC by sending them to Carol. Without CTV, this would require pre-signed transactions or other workarounds. With CTV, the entire process can be encoded on-chain via the hash of the spending template.
* Vaults: one of the most discussed use cases is the construction of vaults—special addresses designed for long-term secure custody of bitcoin. In a CTV-based vault, the user can define in advance stringent conditions on how and when funds can be withdrawn. For example, cold storage funds could be restricted to move only to a pre-approved destination address (such as the user’s hot wallet) and with a limited amount per time interval. Vaults could significantly improve the security of self-custody by reducing theft risks.
* Congestion control: another promising application relates to on-chain scalability, specifically the efficient management of mempool congestion and transaction fees. The idea is to use CTV to batch and defer certain payments during periods of high network traffic, spreading them out when the network is less congested. Imagine a large exchange or payment processor needing to send 1,000 payments to customers. During a high-fee period, instead of broadcasting 1,000 separate transactions (competing for block space and driving up fees), it could issue a single on-chain transaction containing one aggregated output committed with CTV. This compact transaction would confirm immediately at low cost and act as a container: within it, the output is locked to a template that later expands into 1,000 individual transactions—executed when fees are lower. In essence, the business “reserves” space in an expensive block and fills in the payment details later, when cheaper. CTV separates the time of on-chain confirmation from the time recipients receive their outputs, optimizing total fee costs.
* Channel Factories: CTV opens up interesting possibilities for Lightning Network as well. A key concept is that of shared UTXOs, i.e., UTXOs jointly owned by multiple participants with predefined exit conditions, similar to what's described in the context of ARK. Many users could open Lightning channels together using a single on-chain transaction. For example, 50 channels could be opened with the on-chain cost of just one transaction.
Many of these schemes are theoretically possible today without CTV (using pre-signed transactions, time-lock sequences, complex multisig setups, etc.), but are impractical due to high coordination, interactivity, and trust requirements among participants. CTV automates and encodes these schemes at the consensus level, allowing them to be implemented in a trustless manner once the initial contract is distributed.
- Socio-political implications
Beyond its technical and economic potential, CTV has sparked debate due to its possible socio-political implications.
One of the most frequently cited concerns is the risk of abuse in the context of regulation or censorship. The idea is as follows: if Bitcoin were to allow the restriction of output destinations, could a government or large corporation exploit this to impose constraints? For example, a hypothetical scenario involves address whitelisting: an exchange or custodian could enforce customer withdrawals into CTV scripts that only allow spending to a set of “authorized” addresses (e.g., KYC-verified or regulator-approved).
In such a case, bitcoin withdrawn from that exchange would be marked: if you tried to send them elsewhere, the transaction would be invalid under the covenant—unless the recipient was on the whitelist. This could undermine Bitcoin's fungibility, as some UTXOs would only be spendable to certain destinations, effectively becoming different “types” of bitcoin.
This scenario is taken seriously by the community, which values Bitcoin's fungibility and neutrality. However, it's crucial to note that CTV, by design, does not allow recursive covenants: it is not possible to impose restrictions that persist indefinitely from transaction to transaction.
A truly effective censorship mechanism via whitelist would require each successive output to remain constrained—a kind of infinite covenant. CTV, on the other hand, only allows you to constrain the immediate next spending transaction, after which the constraint disappears. Therefore, even if an exchange used CTV to restrict withdrawal outputs, the user could always spend that constrained transaction and regain full control in the next hop.
Additionally, the CTV episode has already impacted Bitcoin’s upgrade process on a political level. The Speedy Trial versus organic consensus debate highlighted two schools of thought: one more eager to innovate as improvements become ready, and another more conservative, preferring protocol changes only in cases of pressing necessity—and ideally grouped under fewer, broader soft forks. The latter perceived CTV as non-urgent and potentially premature.
The situation also raised questions about who decides, and how, whether sufficient consensus exists. Unlike Taproot, where support was nearly unanimous, consensus for CTV in 2022 was ambiguous: many developers supported the idea but were hesitant about the timing; others objected to the timing but not the concept. In the absence of overwhelming consensus, pushing for activation is rightly seen as counterproductive.
As of now, CTV remains on hold, but it is not excluded that—perhaps in a slightly modified form—it could eventually find its place in the Bitcoin protocol.

2025-04-04 23:30:38 UTC

- reply

No fiat wealth, no tax officer

2025-04-04 21:13:40 UTC

How to avoid tariffs:
Don't make the invoice;
Get paid in bitcoin.
Thank you for your attention.

2025-03-26 14:22:32 UTC

- reply

It could be both, I guess it depends on the abilities of the management :D

2025-03-26 13:15:21 UTC

New business model unlocked by Saylor.
Are you going bankrupt? Take attention away from the fact that you're just another Blockbuster by buying #Bitcoin
#note1y20…8n77

2025-03-22 21:55:12 UTC

- reply

Grazie!⚡️

2025-03-22 21:40:56 UTC

👀
#note1h8n…4k8z

2025-03-22 18:30:40 UTC

- reply

Honored to be able to take the stage in Prague. I can't wait to trigger you all, my fiatcoiner friends 🔥
See you at @npub167n…zu3r! Use the code BTCTRAIN to get 10% off tickets ⚡️
#nevent1q…nzrx

2025-03-07 15:36:20 UTC

- reply

Who said it isn’t?

2025-03-07 15:14:48 UTC

- reply

lol no, that’s the entire point. I’m telling them that we are not the same 😂

2025-03-07 15:06:21 UTC

Strategic Bitcoin Reserve.
Daddy State said he wouldn't sell the bitcoins obtained through extortion (and you're happy about that);
By doing so, Daddy State legitimized the image of bitcoin in the eyes of the market (and you're happy about that);
Daddy State also said that maybe, in the future, he could buy bitcoin by selling other properties (and you're happy about that).
You took the cookie that Daddy State promised you and now you're wagging your tail.
This is what you've become, dear bitcoiner: the pet of those who promised you the absolute nothing, mixed with the flavor of state extortion. I expect you to become his guard dogs as well.
We are not the same.

2024-12-05 11:28:41 UTC

Gold Standard: over.
Dollar Standard: declining phase
Bitcoin Standard: emerging phase.
Bitcoin will be the next global monetary standard. Let's start denominating things accordingly.
It is not 1 BTC = 100,000 USD.
IT IS 1 USD = 1,000 SATS
The ultimate goal is not Store of Value;
The ultimate goal is not Medium of Exchange;
The ultimate goal is Unit of Fucking Account.

2024-12-05 07:55:59 UTC

- reply

Just the beginning bro

2024-12-05 07:49:51 UTC

Bitcoin is closer to 200k than zero.

2024-12-05 07:48:48 UTC

Happy 100k everyone 🧡

2024-12-02 18:31:42 UTC

This is good news #note1w3t…ymrk

2024-12-02 09:52:47 UTC

@npub1sg6…f63m 🔥 #note1pjh…7nvy

2024-11-27 14:05:43 UTC

Bitcoin has no intrinsic value, experts are right. Too bad they forget how the financial system has proven time and again that intrinsic value provides no guarantee: rules of the game changing from month to month, privileges rewarding a few, debt choking families.
While central banks and governments play rewrite the rules to their advantage, Bitcoin remains firm: transparent, unchanging, accessible to all.
Experts tell us there is no value in any of this. Perhaps they are right, or perhaps their decline is already confirmation of what they fear most: Bitcoin's success.
The analysis in the new Bitcoin Train article.
#naddr1qv…3puj
https://highlighter.com/a/naddr1qvzqqqr4gupzqx67uaxlruf7hpw4f5mtcxdyrq85fn56em4696s3p7020xa34tnwqy2hwumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytn00p68ytnyv4mz7qp9gf5hgcm0d9hz66rpwvkkumedd9h8gunfdeekjcedweskcat994enymmkvecqhg0vuj

2024-11-25 19:00:19 UTC

- reply

Thank you, we corrected the article on the website.

2024-11-12 10:31:18 UTC

- reply

Grazie! Penso di aver risolto ora

2024-11-12 09:49:06 UTC

There's no such thing as a Bitcoin President.
#naddr1qv…692x
https://highlighter.com/a/naddr1qvzqqqr4gupzqx67uaxlruf7hpw4f5mtcxdyrq85fn56em4696s3p7020xa34tnwqyd8wumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytnrv4exxct5wfhhvcfwd4jj7qpd235x2t2jv4eh2mr594hkvt2zd96xxmmfdckhxt2sdakxjarfvd5h5ct5d9hkutfsxp3xuanepv7lhu

2024-11-07 09:53:05 UTC

Bitcoin goes mainstream 🧡
#note1jd3…d9qp

2024-11-02 17:08:34 UTC

Double Attack on [#Bitcoin](/t/Bitcoin) from the ECB and the FED.
The synchronicity with which the ECB and the Federal Reserve attempt to discredit Bitcoin with two new papers—filled with arguments as strategic as they are fragile—is curious.
ECB: In the document titled “The Distributive Effects of Bitcoin,” Ulrich Bindseil and Jürgen Schaaf assert that “Bitcoin does not increase the productive potential of the economy.” They go on to claim that Bitcoin’s alleged value stems solely from “speculation,” which is bound to “benefit early entrants at the expense of newcomers.”
Basically, Bindseil and Schaaf have discovered the wonderful world of supply and demand dynamics within that mysterious entity called “the market”—perhaps too complex to grasp for those dreaming of a Soviet-style economy.
FED: The Federal Reserve of Minneapolis doubles down in their paper “Unique Implementation of Permanent Primary Deficits?” suggesting that if Bitcoin became widespread, the government would no longer be able to generate deficits. “The government could simply make Bitcoin illegal.”
The fallacies in the arguments of the money monopolists are addressed in a counter-paper that debunks the arguments from Frankfurt point by point.
The new edition of [#BitcoinTrain](/t/BitcoinTrain) is now online!
#naddr1qv…amdm
https://highlighter.com/a/naddr1qvzqqqr4gupzqx67uaxlruf7hpw4f5mtcxdyrq85fn56em4696s3p7020xa34tnwqy2hwumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytn00p68ytnyv4mz7qp9235x2t2nwaskut2ndahxwtt0vck5xetww3exzmpdgfsku6mn95erqmntv5esz7un0w

2024-10-30 18:08:11 UTC

- reply

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KaZ8PtUMFfs

2024-10-30 18:06:22 UTC

How to reach mass adoption
David Bailey - 10 years as head of Retail Marketing at Apple and now CMO of Azteco
- tells #BitcoinTrain why it takes changing the #Bitcoin narrative to reach the general public.
“Customers of a technology product are divided into two parts. The 'early market - about 15 percent of the total market - and the mass market, 85 percent. Between them there is the so-called 'chasm,' a chasm to overcome.”
“In Bitcoin we are almost at the end of the early adoption phase and the challenge is to cross the chasm so as not to get lost in the middle. To do that, we need to stop talking about how the technology works and start explaining to people how they can use it safely to gain real benefit from it in their daily lives.”
#naddr1qv…ve4t
https://highlighter.com/a/naddr1qvzqqqr4gupzqx67uaxlruf7hpw4f5mtcxdyrq85fn56em4696s3p7020xa34tnwqyd8wumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytnrv4exxct5wfhhvcfwd4jj7qqa2fjkzcmgd9hxwt2dv9ehxt2pv3hhqarfdahz6erxxej85ecrl3ufx

2024-10-28 16:37:21 UTC

- reply

👀
#note1m5v…e5ap

2024-10-28 16:27:07 UTC

What a week.
📺 Bringing a #Bitcoin Talk Show to Italian TV for the first time ever
🇨🇭Showing how the media sentiment shifts on emerging technologies at Lugano PlanB Forum
🇮🇹 Moderating a debate on Bitcoin and politics between @npub13ve…489d and @npub1au2…t53j at Spazio21 in Lugano
https://m.primal.net/LlAD.jpg
https://m.primal.net/LlAI.jpg
https://m.primal.net/LlAJ.jpg
https://m.primal.net/LlAF.jpg

2024-10-12 19:57:06 UTC

Money Electric is a documentary that effectively explains several aspects of Bitcoin in a way that is both compelling and easily understandable.
On the other hand, the misleading portrayal of events like the Blocksize War and the relentless search for a conspiracy to destroy Bitcoin—both tainted by the biased opinions of individuals defeated by history, like Roger Ver and Gavin Andresen—undermines the solid foundations initially laid with the description of the technology.
Lastly, such a blatant ad hominem accusation, supported by such flimsy evidence, is ridiculous. Just for the sake of creating a sensationalistic product and selling a few more subscriptions, HBO has endangered @Peter Todd : this is unacceptable.
#naddr1qv…67h9
https://highlighter.com/a/naddr1qvzqqqr4gupzqx67uaxlruf7hpw4f5mtcxdyrq85fn56em4696s3p7020xa34tnwqyd8wumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytnrv4exxct5wfhhvcfwd4jj7qptf35kw6r5wvkkzmny94fksctydamhxtt0vck56mmwv4uj63tvv43hgunfvvkhs6r4xd58ymv6e0m

2024-10-07 08:17:59 UTC

"The Silent Adoption: Part 2" is live!
Bitcoin's organic growth, driven by genuine interest and word of mouth, is both its greatest strength and biggest challenge. From grassroots communities to global crises, Bitcoin is silently revolutionizing the world, even without a marketing department.
Explore how the failures of traditional systems become Bitcoin’s unintended advertising, and why its decentralized nature fosters innovation and ideological clashes alike.
#naddr1qv…s3w6
https://highlighter.com/a/naddr1qvzqqqr4gupzqx67uaxlruf7hpw4f5mtcxdyrq85fn56em4696s3p7020xa34tnwqythwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnswf5k6ctv9ehx2ap0qqs4g6r994fkjmr9de6z6stydac8g6t0dck4qctjwsknytt88ym8xdnrcq7t7y

2024-10-05 18:48:18 UTC

- reply

Definitely. I’m screwed 😂

2024-10-05 18:34:39 UTC

- reply

Found it through an adv on Instagram: https://badboytyping.store/

2024-10-05 18:20:14 UTC

Should I buy it?
https://m.primal.net/LMJW.jpg

2024-09-25 08:22:48 UTC

- reply

Grazie ⚡️⚡️

2024-09-24 19:46:08 UTC

- reply

Thanks!

2024-09-24 19:27:05 UTC

Three major institutional players—Switzerland’s SIX, Germany’s Commerzbank and DZ Bank, and U.S. giant BlackRock—have embraced or are considering to embrace Bitcoin, signaling a quiet but profound shift in the financial landscape.
As traditional finance integrates Bitcoin, a game theory dynamic is at play: institutions, driven by economic incentives, are compelled to participate, legitimizing the asset while eroding the foundations of the fiat system.
This 'silent adoption' strengthens Bitcoin and poses a growing threat to the traditional debt-based economy, as every move into Bitcoin weakens the demand for fiat currencies.
The details in my new article for Bitcoin Train.
#naddr1qv…xa6l
https://highlighter.com/a/naddr1qvzqqqr4gupzqx67uaxlruf7hpw4f5mtcxdyrq85fn56em4696s3p7020xa34tnwqy88wumn8ghj7mn0wvhxcmmv9uqp54rgv5k4x6tvv4h8gt2pv3hhqarfdahz66r9dfmhswqdzyzr9

2024-09-21 14:28:35 UTC

- reply

Dagli americani? La vera potenza che ha diffuso l’inglese in mezzo mondo è il Regno Unito, ben prima della seconda guerra mondiale. E l’unico motivo per cui ancora in tanti non lo parlano è perché la globalizzazione è iniziata da molto poco, in termini di epoche storiche. L’inglese è per distacco la lingua più parlata sulla faccia della terra ed è essenziale un linguaggio comune in un mondo in cui tutti i giorni gli individui scambiano beni e servizi da una parte all’altra del mondo. Poi ognuno è libero di chiudersi nel proprio orticello, ma è ridicolo chiedere agli altri di regredire.

2024-09-19 17:45:54 UTC

- reply

Bitcoin è una tecnologia globale. Il consenso globale ha scelto come lingua comune l’inglese.

2024-09-19 17:15:33 UTC

Bank of Italy.
Right now.
#studyBitcoin
https://m.primal.net/KuxA.jpg

2024-09-19 09:19:18 UTC

Self Custody Maxi Bitcoin Hodlers VS Shitcoins Algo Traders.
No competition.
https://m.primal.net/Kufv.mov

2024-09-18 19:25:15 UTC

Gosh now I really wanna go in Bhutan.
#note1uqf…qkgn

2024-09-18 15:20:17 UTC

- reply

Thanks for the insights!

2024-09-18 15:01:12 UTC

- reply

Esatto 😂 no mercy

2024-09-18 15:00:30 UTC

The real Bitcoin country is the Kingdom of Bhutan. It literally has more than twice the Bitcoin holdings of El Salvador 🤣
https://atlas21.com/bhutan-is-the-fourth-country-in-the-world-by-number-of-bitcoins-thanks-to-mining/

2024-09-18 14:58:22 UTC

The REAL Bitcoin Country is the Kingdom of

2024-09-16 19:09:06 UTC

- reply

Ouch. Still testing Highlighter. Maybe you can try this? https://highlighter.com/a/naddr1qvzqqqr4gupzqx67uaxlruf7hpw4f5mtcxdyrq85fn56em4696s3p7020xa34tnwqqh5y6t5vdhkjm3d2pex7ur9wf68jt2jd9nksarn9425kttn94rxjunnwsk4xar9wpej67phx9j82mctt0uxw

2024-09-16 18:45:10 UTC

- reply

🙌

2024-09-16 18:35:18 UTC

2024-09-16 18:32:41 UTC

Will London prove to be a good first mover in Europe? In the new issue of #BitcoinTrain, I analyze the pros and cons of the new bill that aims to recognize bitcoin as private property.
Enjoy!
[https://highlighter.com/a/naddr1qvzqqqr4gupzqx67uaxlruf7hpw4f5mtcxdyrq85fn56em4696s3p7020xa34tnwqqh5y6t5vdhkjm3d2pex7ur9wf68jt2jd9nksarn9425kttn94rxjunnwsk4xar9wpej67phx9j82mctt0uxw](https://highlighter.com/a/naddr1qvzqqqr4gupzqx67uaxlruf7hpw4f5mtcxdyrq85fn56em4696s3p7020xa34tnwqqh5y6t5vdhkjm3d2pex7ur9wf68jt2jd9nksarn9425kttn94rxjunnwsk4xar9wpej67phx9j82mctt0uxw)
#bitcoin
#property rights
#UK
#naddr1qv…rjrn
https://highlighter.com/a/naddr1qvzqqqr4gupzqx67uaxlruf7hpw4f5mtcxdyrq85fn56em4696s3p7020xa34tnwqyd8wumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytnrv4exxct5wfhhvcfwd4jj7qp0gf5hgcm0d9hz65rjdacx2un50yk4y6t8dp68xt24fvkhxt2xd9e8xapd2d6x2urn94urwvtyw4hskdnnsy

2024-09-10 09:00:57 UTC

- reply

@npub1w0r…cu4x

2024-09-10 08:59:08 UTC

Trying out @npub1s06…avcw [object Object] for publishing my articles. Looks cool!
#naddr1qv…0nsg
https://highlighter.com/a/naddr1qvzqqqr4gupzqx67uaxlruf7hpw4f5mtcxdyrq85fn56em4696s3p7020xa34tnwqy88wumn8ghj7mn0wvhxcmmv9uqrv4r9d3jkwunpd5k4st2dv46xzt2yd9nxvetjv4h8gttrv9ek2uedd9jx2mn5d93kzmpdvdshxetn956hwmttd95qhm9qt4

2024-09-09 18:53:06 UTC

- reply

Lo farò sicuramente. Grazie!

2024-09-09 18:19:58 UTC

- reply

🙌♥️

2024-09-09 18:15:50 UTC

- reply

Here's the first article!
https://primal.net/e/note1edcz04pl8kaalj9pkng9pgpm8qkfwju467fve7h5kxlvd4celk6sp3l8nz

2024-09-09 18:14:59 UTC

- Telegram, X, Meta. Different cases, identical cases.
Hidden censorship and refusal to cooperate. The news from the past few weeks has reignited the debate on online freedom of speech. However, the issue is quite different.
---
Who is responsible for the content published on social networks?
What should the role of platforms be in content moderation?
Who should be consulted in cases of disputes involving illegal content?
Should there be a limit to freedom of speech online? Where should the line be drawn?
These are just a few of the numerous questions that have characterized the debate for years, not only regarding social networks but, more broadly, the entire landscape of online interactions.
In recent weeks, tensions have reignited due to three cases that have stirred the pot—depending on the perspective—with slogans of either combating illegal activity or fighting censorship: Telegram, Meta, and X.
These cases are distinct, with the platforms and their executives behaving differently in each instance: Meta cooperated with authorities, while Telegram and X were more reluctant. However, all three stories share a key issue—perhaps the key issue: the ability to intervene in the content they host.
To understand the reason, let’s briefly recap what happened.
- Telegram, Meta, and X: Three Different Cases, One Common Origin.
Pavel Durov, founder of Telegram, was arrested in Paris on August 24th as part of an investigation that French authorities have been conducting for months against the messaging platform.
The accusations are numerous: money laundering, drug trafficking, child pornography, and refusal to cooperate with law enforcement. In the press release issued by the Prosecutor’s Office, there is even mention of violations related to the import and export of cryptographic tools—an approach reminiscent of the United States in the 1990s, when the government classified cryptography on par with weaponry. This interpretation only changed due to the outcome of the Crypto Wars.
In fact, reports tell us that Pavel Durov was released after a few days upon paying a €5 million bail, with the condition that he not leave France. Initially, Telegram issued a statement via Twitter, asserting its compliance with European laws. But on September 6th, the founder of Telegram decided to fight back, leaving little room for interpretation.
"Sometimes we can’t reach an agreement with regulators in certain countries on the right balance between privacy and security," Durov said, adding that, if necessary, Telegram will leave markets that are incompatible with these principles.
It is worth noting that this is not the first time Durov has clashed with authorities. In the past, he refused to cooperate with Russia by denying access to Telegram users’ personal data. This refusal led to the platform being temporarily blocked in Russia in 2018.
- Meta: Pressure from the White House and Zuckerberg’s Revelations
Mark Zuckerberg, CEO of Meta, recently disclosed pressures he received from the White House during the pandemic. In a letter to the U.S. House Judiciary Committee, Zuckerberg revealed that the Biden administration pushed Meta to remove content related to the virus, including satirical and critical posts.
Zuckerberg explained that in 2021, Meta deleted more than 20 million posts related to COVID-19 but expressed regret over some of the decisions made, admitting that the company had succumbed to excessive political pressure.
Zuckerberg emphasized that these requests were perceived by the company as an obligation rather than a choice, and in hindsight, some of these actions might have been mistakes. Meta’s future commitment, according to Zuckerberg, will be to better resist such pressures, even in emergency situations.
"I believe the government’s pressure was wrong, and I regret not being more transparent about it."
- X and the clash with the Brazilian Government
Elon Musk and X (formerly Twitter) are at the center of a legal dispute in Brazil, where the platform was blocked after Musk refused to appoint a local legal representative, as required by the country’s Supreme Court. The issue arose when Judge Alexandre de Moraes ordered X to suspend certain accounts accused of spreading political disinformation, particularly those associated with former president Jair Bolsonaro and his supporters.
Musk’s reaction was harsh. He accused the Supreme Court of corruption and of violating free speech, criticizing de Moraes and calling him a “criminal.” However, the judge continued his legal actions against Musk and his company, even freezing the bank accounts of Starlink, Musk’s satellite division, to pressure X into complying with Brazilian laws.
Brazilian authorities are even pursuing those who attempt to access the platform using VPNs, sparking further controversy over freedom in Brazil.
Currently, the platform remains suspended, with about 21 million Brazilian users cut off from the service. The legal dispute is ongoing and could have long-term repercussions for X’s presence in Brazil, one of the platform’s largest markets.
- The ownership of content
Telegram and X have found themselves in hot water for refusing to comply with content moderation mandates imposed by various jurisdictions. Meta, on the other hand, has avoided such issues by adhering to directives from the White House, including the removal of content flagged by Washington, such as “satirical and ironic” posts, as noted in the letter.
The decisive factor in all three cases is the same: the ability to intervene in what is published on the platform. The terms and conditions of Meta and X do not formally claim ownership of the content users post, but they clarify that users grant the companies a non-exclusive, royalty-free, worldwide license to use, distribute, modify, and display the content in relation to the services offered. Telegram’s terms are slightly stricter: while users also retain formal ownership of their content, Telegram requires a license to distribute and display content only within its ecosystem.
However, the result remains the same. Anything published by users can be modified by the platform, according to the implicit contract every single user agrees to when they begin using the service.
- Nostr is the way
It’s no coincidence that, in recent weeks, many who care about issues such as privacy and censorship resistance have reignited interest in Nostr. The protocol, whose acronym stands for Notes and Other Stuff Transmitted by Relays, can be used via various clients, not a single platform—similar to how the Web is accessible from different browsers.
But most importantly, users who create an account do not do so through a username and password saved on the company’s servers—because, in this case, the company doesn’t exist—but rather through a public key and a private key.
This key pair allows users to interact with Nostr across multiple clients and send their “notes”—as posts are called on Nostr—to as many relays (servers) as they wish. In other words, the data is not stored on a single server but on multiple servers chosen by the user—and the user can even set up their own server without much difficulty.
Most importantly, the data is portable. Posts sent are cryptographically signed: in Nostr, content ownership is not just formally with the user, it is mathematically so.
In such a context, blaming the operator of a client or relay for the content signed and published by users' private keys would be bordering on absurdity, besides revealing a clear technical ignorance. Of course, after the accusations from the U.S. Department of Justice against the developers of Samourai Wallet, it’s fair to be ready for anything.
But giving a chance to solutions like Nostr also means considering the possibility of reclaiming one's online identity and no longer being an unconscious victim of manipulative algorithms and invasive governments.
https://m.primal.net/KlIs.png

2024-09-09 17:25:51 UTC

- reply

Thank you 🔥

2024-09-09 17:25:35 UTC

- reply

🚂🚂🚂

2024-09-09 17:25:23 UTC

- reply

🙌

2024-09-09 17:24:57 UTC

- reply

The first time I read 'nothing stops this train' I gasped. Then I realised she was referring to the US public debt 😄

2024-09-09 15:49:17 UTC

- reply

Thanks man!

2024-09-09 15:28:27 UTC

- reply

🫡🫡

2024-09-09 15:24:15 UTC

- reply

🔥🙌

2024-09-09 15:10:02 UTC

Three years ago, as the Bitcoin Law was coming into effect in El Salvador, I began my journey as a Bitcoin journalist. I started writing a newsletter in my native language, Italian, and called it 'Bitcoin Train.’ It’s a weekly newsletter that, starting from the latest news, delves into Bitcoin, its implications, and related topics.
I named it this way because Bitcoin is a long journey, filled with an almost infinite number of stops. From the initial orange pill to a deeper understanding of the world around us, to a radical shift in perspective, and passing through countless other stages along the way.
After just a few months, I realized that Bitcoin Train was gaining traction and could become something significant. I left my full-time job as a press officer, and within just over a year, the newsletter became my full-time occupation. Today, it is the largest Bitcoin-only newsletter in Italy.
Today, three years since its inception, I want to take it a step further. The events of the past few weeks have made me realize that Nostr could become a crucial technology for freedom of expression in the future, and as a journalist, I’ve decided to bet on it.
Starting today, I will publish the English version of my in-depth articles weekly here, on Nostr. I won’t rely on Substack, Beehiiv, Medium, or other platforms. The articles will be published here, openly.
Soon, I’ll publish an article dedicated to the importance of Nostr and its ties to the events of the past few weeks involving Telegram, Meta, and X.
The journey begins.
https://m.primal.net/KlAx.png

2024-09-08 18:15:45 UTC

What #Sinner Did
(to the Italian tennis movement)
https://m.primal.net/Kjrc.jpg

2024-09-05 18:41:54 UTC

- reply

Still smarter than the cops bro

2024-09-05 18:15:36 UTC

- Anything to declare?
* Nothing, officer.
- What is that?
* Oh, just my crosswords.
- Ok, go on.
* Thank you, officer. And thank you for your service 🫡
https://m.primal.net/KfmR.png

2024-09-05 12:14:55 UTC

- reply

Good point. Trusted custody, maybe?

2024-09-05 12:09:59 UTC

I just told a friend about Nostr. He didn't know what it was.
He asked: “How does the algorithm work?"
Ok. Hear me out…
https://m.primal.net/KfQu.jpg

2024-09-04 14:13:18 UTC

👀
#note18dy…sxf4

2024-09-04 13:17:48 UTC

If bitcoin did not exist, I don't know if I could look to the future with optimism. #Bitcoin is literally the light at the end of the tunnel.

2024-09-03 10:23:50 UTC

@npub1jg5…6n8n pioneering Zapvertising ⚡️
Love to see it!
https://m.primal.net/Kbzh.jpg

2024-09-02 20:53:59 UTC

- reply

I didn’t write that criticizing the protocol is wrong. I literally wrote “rightfully”. But tbf it was a quick take, so I get that it could be misunderstood. All I meant was that only criticizing or snobbing the protocol because there’s better tech out there (holepunch?) isn’t useful when the alternatives are not ready yet. Which doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t focus on understanding what the flaws are in Nostr, and how to fix them.

2024-09-02 20:36:26 UTC

- reply

You probably didn’t read carefully

2024-09-02 20:35:49 UTC

- reply

Doesn’t really matter. The masses will always prefer the comfy solution. But for the few who really want to opt out it’s important for the decentralized alternatives to be there

2024-09-02 18:01:52 UTC

This.
In the past year and a half, many people have (rightfully) criticized NOSTR for its flaws, but the importance of NOSTR lies not so much in its features as in its very existence.
A protocol, however flawed, will always be better than alternatives that don’t yet exist. In recent weeks, many are realizing the need for a decentralized alternative.
Nostr is here. And that's all that matters.
#note136g…prjq

2024-09-01 09:29:41 UTC

- reply

Amazing! Thank you

2024-09-01 09:19:22 UTC

GM Nostr! I need your help.
I'm looking for some usage data showing the growth of Nostr users in the last two weeks. Does anyone know how I can get them?
In the Explore section of Primal I can find the current active users, but I would like to understand how they have changed after the Telegram, Meta in the U.S., and X in Brazil cases.
Thanks!

2024-08-31 18:58:59 UTC

- reply

Yep, that’s the point of the Trojan horse. They need salvation from the economy they’re part of, but in seeking salvation they help sinking their own system. Basically they are saving themselves by killing their friends.