serapath
serapath【ツ】☮

(📍🇺🇸) nomadic 🍐⇄🍐 eco🌐 gamedev
‎🌈: https://playproject.io
🧙🏽: https://wizardamigos.com
🌱: https://datdot.org
🔮: https://dat-ecosystem.org
🏳️‍🌈☥: (they/them)
🦣 @[email protected]
🐦‍⬛https://x.com/serapath

Public Key

npub18y99ww94dkscfzwvvuk60sn9fyzqj66kpjj7cpvplp7fwchhvrwq93zg47

NIP-05 Address

[email protected]

Profile Code

nprofile1qqsrjzjh8z6kmgvy38xxwtd8cfj5jpqfddtqef0vqkqlslyhvtmkphqpz3mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduqs6amnwvaz7tmwdaejumr0dsv3vlt4

Publishing to

relay.damus.io

nos.lol

Author Public Key

npub18y99ww94dkscfzwvvuk60sn9fyzqj66kpjj7cpvplp7fwchhvrwq93zg47

Show more details

Last Notes

2025-09-30 20:28:57 UTC

- reply

imho there isnt just the left right axis.
politics is multi dimensional, but you have for sure an important axis between authoritarianism and anarchism.
there are left authoritarians ans left anarchists.
then there are right authoritarians and right anarchists.
and then there are authoritarian centrists and anarchist centrists.
in the end, the money critique comes from the entire left/right spectrum and is voiced by the anarchist leaning folks imho.

2025-09-24 11:45:30 UTC

- reply

i assume many know this already from experience, but what isnt super clear is what alternatives exist.
i think BDFL combined with forkable open source and high modularity might help most.
The risk i see is that it could cause a cambrian explosion of forks where some remain compatible and some lose compatibility making them not interoperable.
On the other hand, mqybe thats okay?
it puts all power into the hands of users to choose/use the implementation they believe in.
Mass adoption causes network effects and industry best practices with some degree of interoperability.
Users can reap benefits from choosing a solution that is interoperable with many others... but everyone can choose what price they are willing to pay for that if that means they deviate from their preferred ideal solution.
It also means ppl can try out and learn and change their mind over time.

2025-09-20 18:28:22 UTC

- reply

I don't think people act more like adolescents, this is just some parties trying to make certain kinds of sentiments stick with certain kinds of issues to attack it.
The issue is more with some people who might have a larger following and are well known influencers for a perticular topic.
I feel it is important to call them out, even if they are partially correct, because bitcoin is here for the world to unite and not to divide further.
It's difficult enough to explain bitcoin and get the message across, so making it harder unnecessarily doesnt help.
Anyway - i think the silent majority is very reasonable, but small loud minorities like to give that impression you mention here and we really dont need it.

2025-09-20 18:22:17 UTC

- reply

super sad that max imho rightfully calls our core30 ...but unnecessary adds as many trigger words as possible to repel a lot of people who should totally embrace bitcoin and stand up against core30.
This causes unnecessary divide where it wasnt needed.
Why not stick to the actual facts?
Everyone I'm aware of thus far was well able to critizise bitcoin core without going completely off topic into all kinds of politics

2025-09-20 18:19:05 UTC

- reply

First of all, I am happy to see Max calls out Bitocoin Core for the ludacris core30 proposal, but ....
I'm quite shocked as well of reading nonsense like relating this to:
1. charly kirk
2. DEI
3. woke
4. US dollar loving
5. incel
6. trans
7. social justice warriors
etc...
One can properly call out nonsense without adding/correlating it to other "battlefields", that make it politically contentious amongst people who might actually support the issue at hand, but are now discriminated against for no reason.
Nobody asked for that. Super unreasonable and unneeded.
We all have to learn how to kill our idols and instead just idolize ideas or ideals.... ...any human - no matter how right they can be in some aspect can be unreasonable in others.
**The gist:**
=> Make up your own minds please 🙂
supertestnet#nevent1q…4ku0

2025-09-20 17:32:07 UTC

- reply

💯
Bitcoin isn't enough though.
Bitcoin is of course foundational, but it needs a lot of education and practice how to use it to sustain freedom.
Bitcion is a tool, but just like every tool, it needs practice to master it.

2025-09-20 13:51:16 UTC

- reply

This is a very mich needed narrative, because while it is true and well known criticism that governments print money and cause all kinds of issues, its sadly much less widely known, that this is a bit less than half the problem
Capitalism as the world as known it for ages is essentially money printing as THE capitalist class privilege.
Bitcoin fixes this and creates a new kind of economics - similar to some theories that exist, but unthinkable in the past and so different, that it deserves a new name. "bitcoinism", which sadly not much genuine research has been done about.
It's a unique opportunity for humanity 🙂
#nevent1q…59ru

2025-09-20 13:15:57 UTC

- reply

try https://keet.io instead

2025-09-17 22:37:16 UTC

- reply

💯
imho perserverance is the only quality all entrepreneurs share regardless of what other philosophies or values they attribute their success to

2025-09-17 14:43:26 UTC

- reply

Actually, maybe the proper thing to do is crack down of other existing means of spam.
Here is a proposal:
https://x.com/SuperTestnet/status/1967721427563618414

2025-09-17 13:17:59 UTC

- reply

how do you throw them out?

2025-09-17 12:55:12 UTC

- reply

bitcoin fixes this.
if something starts to gain traction and succeeds, fiat will fund its capture.
with bitcoin, that wont work anymore. printing ends, so problems of the past dont apply to a bitcoin future and solutions which failed in the past might become viable under bitcoin.
in general - the way to go is measuring standards by adoption. if it has high adoption its hars to change even if its not an official standard. ...

2025-09-17 10:06:42 UTC

- reply

I don't really get why this message requires a david star. Thats so unnecessary and also plain wrong. its true for war crimes in general regardless of war. Its true for war in general.
Its true for many other things as well, beyond war.
Bitcoin is way too important imho to taint it with other kinds of political messages many might not agree on and hence will also not yet adopt bitcoin, even though there was no need for repelling them with that unrelated political battlefield. 🤷‍♀️

2025-09-16 21:06:24 UTC

- reply

its not necessary. every special needs person and elderly person has a social context and history and they might have folks who take care of them and/or have people they trust that are into bitcoin, so some of them might actually be early adopters, while some very smart and capable ppl might be far away from bitcoin for all kinds of reason and reject its adoption ... so i wouldnt imagine a distribution that would disadvantage elderly or special needs folks in particular to be honest 🤷‍♀️

2025-09-16 16:34:28 UTC

- reply

this is sich a funnt statement to me.
...imagine, nobody can stop luke.
do you have any ideas what luke's "secret weapon" is? ...how does he get so many people to blindly believe luke despite so many equally or even more skilled renown developers speaking out against him?
how does luke do it? ...it' such a mystery 🙂

2025-09-16 15:07:37 UTC

- reply

While that is true, it is also unnecessarily one sided and instills an unnessary argument.
Under fiat, just like governments, commercial banks print way more money for private rich capitalists than for the government. globap public debt grows slower than global private debt and the too big to fail capitalista employing all of the normies to make them do what they want and buy the lion share of the fruits of labour.
not ommiting that and adapting the language towards it without changing the message will allow to attract large new audiences without losing the old. ...focusing only on the government creates dividing distortion

2025-09-16 14:09:25 UTC

- reply

those who wont grasp and stick will be the last who change when they can only get stuff by paying in bitcoin, so they will start to have a need for bitcoin and its obviously safe, as everyone demands and uses it... just the same as fiat now. ...will take a bit to get there, so focusing on those is currently useless. they stand on the sidelines and delegate to others and pick whatever wins. they dont have opinions. ...and they pay for this service by being late adopters i guess?

2025-09-16 13:36:59 UTC

- reply

of course not everyone will understand bitcoin, but that is true for everything. thats why we have hype cycles.
the point is that the late majority adopts once it is around for long enough and the adopters have shown its usefulness, etc... people go with what their peers go with.
i function in the same way and i claim everyone does. i might have accumulated some expertise when it comes to bitcoin or cryptogrqphy or programming or peer to peer protocols or economics... but life is broad and ...what about nutrition? what about exercise? what about healthy materials for your home? what about relaxing? what about good equipment? what about this? what about that?
ppl work, ppl live, ppl might take care of family and a plethora of other things.
thus, i claim nobody can know it or learn it all and everyone needs to figure out how to trust some other hopefully more knowledgable peers to give good recommendations.
if a topic happens to be far away from your personal domain of expertise and you sadly dont have enough trusted peers that could reliably convey the value, then it is difficult to find a bridge or mean to evaluate "the new thing" ...and especially for older folks who have a lot of responsibilities already its not easy to make the time to dig into stuff the same way youngster have 🤷‍♀️
long story short - in the long run things will get better anyway 😂

2025-09-16 12:16:26 UTC

- reply

🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LDU_Txk06tM

2025-09-16 00:10:06 UTC

- reply

1. bitcoin exists for 16 years and is very conservative when it comes to changes so what you have to learn isnt a moving target like it is by design for shitcoins - this means dedicating some time, you CAN actually slowly learn yourself into it.
2. once upon a time, most ppl could not read/write, but bitcoin is for eternity and the new generations grow up with programming as a literacy. It might again take many generatiin to include all of humanity, but it might also happen much faster this time around.
3. yes, there are quite a few thing to learn to understand bitcoin, but the alternative means to continue to deal with capitalism as it ia today.

2025-09-12 14:29:04 UTC

- reply

Interesting. Quite surprising to hear that from somebody who likely is brainwashed to the core.
"Risk Averse"? ...interesting. Where is the risk? Seems more of a risk to not buy bitcoin. Is he a CBDC fan? Is he working on the implementation?
What did you tell him? 😛

2025-09-11 21:23:55 UTC

- reply

what did the IT guy say? 🙂

2025-09-11 12:35:48 UTC

- reply

https://blossom.primal.net/e5f58cbfc4238aa46295da8bdf8e9da666bab77381a41134fae9a3136366f1d6.png

2025-09-08 13:31:54 UTC

- reply

bitcoin fixes this

2025-09-08 10:48:35 UTC

- reply

he cant answer, because he already shared in other notes that he trusts and beliefs into bitcoin core devs, which is why he defends them without an actual understanding of what core30 does and how it achieves it. 🤷‍♀️

2025-09-07 23:11:56 UTC

CAPITALISM
How Money & Banking works and how it is broken for the vast majority of people.
Explained by Lyn Alden in an amazing ~30 minutes talk 😃
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jk_HWmmwiAs
Its a comprehensive summary of the history & evolution of our monetary system going through all relevant historic events to cover all basics in great detail while keeping it simple enough to follow.
Really fundamental for everyone out there who might still struggle to understand WHY ₿itcoin is a phenomenon at all.

2025-09-07 22:27:54 UTC

- reply

you stylize them as victims - which is quite ridiculous.
they obviously dont do it for free and its also a huge privilege to commit to such an important project. Billions of people on the planet.
There are millions of programmers and tens or hundreds of thousands of cryptographers.
Not everyone gets the chance to work on bitcoin core, even if they wanted to. There is HR involved.
Bitcoin works as it is and if all coders would quit, the network would continue to operate and new ones would be found over time.
But great if they dont and that we have amazing experts in bitcoin core. Still we are all humans and nobody stops them from acknowleding mistakes and moving on or actually engaging with the criticism in substance instead of hiding behind their status and some sort of infallibility 🤷‍♂️

2025-09-07 22:18:22 UTC

Kill your heroes is what Bitcion needs 🙂
Satoshi did it for us, but we need to work hard on ourselves to avoid being star struck or stylizing others as some sort of untouchable experts, because that is the beginning of the end and we do want to keep the bitcoin spirit.
All heroes, experts, visionaries, you name it... are humans too and make mistakes.
If we want a better world, we need to respect each other and discuss content based on merit, sharing pros/cons. Satoshi knew this and stayed anonymous.
If we want Bitcoin to succeed, we should all avoid making this about people, tribalism and cults around chosen or enlightened folks.
This is usually most difficult for those privileged or fortunate enough to be experts and grew used to it.
If we want Bitcoin to succeed, the attitude we need is to be humble and empower humble experts who engage with the community and disarm criticism by sharing facts and arguments and not by hiding away ignorantly and/or arrogantly - this will only worsen the problem.

2025-09-07 21:56:08 UTC

- reply

would you mind sharing the reasons for core30? i would love to understand this better.
i have read a lot about trusting the experts and i have seen ignorance, but knots usage being at almost 20% and growing - wouldnt that suggest educating the public might help stop this trend?

2025-09-07 21:25:08 UTC

- reply

no he is not my hero.
in fact, i had luke blocked a few times because i didnt really wanna see his opinioms in my feed anymore. i am not a christian. i am an atheist/agnosticist and am okay with discussing philosophy or even "spirituality", but not a fan of organized religion.
... i have never met luke personally or bitcoin core devs. in fact i do have a high opinion about bitcoin core devs and follow many of them.
...but this isnt a technical issue alone as in coding/cryptography. it is also a economical and more so one embedded in a messy reality with governments and politics.
if "holier than thou" core devs have proper answers to the cons/criticisms and why they think those arent problems for this or that reason - fine ...but what i have seen is
- ignorance and blocking ppl from discussion
- calling them unqualified
...basically making it ad hominem attacks and personal.
That is a very humam reaction, but we shouldnt forget - we are all just puny humans after all and can make mistakes or miss some perspective, especially true for those implementing... usually implementers arent the ones writing the tests (or at least shouldnt).
its also easy for others to point out the mistakes or potential problems once a "solution" is presented.
i am happy for skilled implementers to do their job, but i do think it hurts bitcoin to blindly trust "core devs" - thats a shitcoin behavior.
once that is an established practice they can do whatever they want and skill and motivations are different things. ...and even skill doesnt prevent you from sometimes making mistakes 🤷‍♀️

2025-09-07 21:07:41 UTC

- reply

Here is where you say you trust bitcoin core
https://primal.net/e/nevent1qqsfkenhrsmvwzrzhak6x5x054l0fqgvxa4n6fzp97zsszzx60g5wvq97hpj7

2025-09-07 21:04:33 UTC

- reply

yeah, you didnt answer anything.
if you did, feel free to link to the note, but my questions where all left unanswered.
Have fun spending time with your son though... still no need to insult others.
I didnt insupt anyone, i just re-iterated the facts, but that must somehow have upset you 🤷‍♀️

2025-09-07 20:59:16 UTC

- reply

actually i asked him and he already said he trusts in bitcoin core devs and beliefs in what they do.
when asking him for why he thinks core 30 would e.g. protect against centralization or do something good in other ways, he doesnt answer.
In fact, few probably know that core30 is motivated by citreas smart contract use case.
https://x.com/asanoha_gold/status/1964232598848164240
So in summary - everything can be discussed in terms of pros/cons, but only with people who have opinions based on arguments and not if it is based on beliefs and trust into others that there are good reasons even though those are not known.

2025-09-07 20:07:42 UTC

The reason for core30 is mainly to help citrea and not at all about more "decentralization" like claimed by many who just trust/believe into core without making up their own mind.
https://x.com/asanoha_gold/status/1964232598848164240

2025-09-07 19:54:08 UTC

- reply

the only ones who doesnt provide any ratiinal for why core30 is supposed to be good is you.
esentially, you disqualify yourself. you say you trust core, thus you dont have a facts or arguments based opinion yourself.
you currently choose that, thus nobody shluld discuss the pros/cons of core30 with you, because your opinion is just: i believe in core - they probably thought about it.
yeah - let me know if you change your mind by providing an actual issue based opinion that can be discussed. believe cant be discussed

2025-09-07 19:50:19 UTC

- reply

the thing is. bitcoin is not about trust.
bitcoin is open source and everyone can reason and discuss the rules by themselves.
do you trust satoshi?
...nobody knows who satoshi is or was, so the only way to judge is by looking at what bitcoin is and how it works and one can derive from there.
no need to trust.
bitcoin is exactly about ending the requirement for that kind of trust. its a protocol.
a system that requires trust is fiat or any system with autorities to decide on behalf of you, while you can only suck it up.
bitcoin fixes this.

2025-09-07 17:30:18 UTC

- reply

imho bitcoin isnt ochlocracy.
its every node runner can vote and their vote counts based on their hashing power.
each node runner adopts which software they run. any amount of node runners/miners and even just bitcoin users can pay devs to build/upgrade the node with the kinds of features they want to run and contribute to the discussion and signalling via memes and vlogging and all sorts of online discussion.
discussion is great to inform others, but the continuous voting happens by running nodes and choosing the software.
i dont see any violence or intimidation here. it is quite well defined by having node running software they choose to be a vote

2025-09-07 16:40:24 UTC

- reply

filters allow node runners to have an ongoing discussion and voice in the never ending political debate of what they consider spam and what not. It is not censorship, because it wont prevent anything to get into the chain with 100% certainty, but it probabilistically reduces the amount of certain types of transactions showing up on chain.
It also prevents you as the node runner from having e.g. CSAM in your node and prevents you as the miner from committing CSAM to the blockchain.
There are data storage systems, even decebtralized ones for people to store data.
In Bitcoin, every node runner stores data for free forever, so at least node runners should have their voice to express their opinion what should get into that forever storage.

2025-09-07 15:11:37 UTC

- reply

1st, This is first and formost false information. It's not just luke.
see:
https://primal.net/e/nevent1qqs0qqu8j0a4kg8wpcvpfzv23tykqhh4609nnvarz0hgn3q3twmjt8sywzgqe
2nd, you entirely miss the point and make this about who develops the software, but this is myopic and irrelevant.
Bitcoin works by node runners/miners deciding what software to run.
Every node implementation can propose their own version and node runners will decide whether to upgrade or switch. That is true for bitcoin knots as well as soon as luke does something node runners disagree with. The bitcoin community is wealthy enough to fund new developers if necessary.
Thus, the steward is the bitcoin network or community at large, including bitcoin users too - and the great thing is that it is anonymously large so not prone to group think. There is no need for another layer of stewardship of tiny group of software developers. Core takes themselves way too important. Bitcoin is global and bitcoin is massive - this is much larger than the Blockstream company and always was - thinking otherwise is imho hybris to say the least.

2025-09-07 13:38:07 UTC

- reply

Of course - nobody has to engage with the community.
If you don't you might find many people might stop running your node implementation if you do things they dont agree with.
So, one easy thing would be to try to explain any planned changes (especially if they are bigger and/or contentious) in a blog post and spread it on social media, so others can comment.
The point is mostly to collect all the various arguments that are being made or the criticism that might be observable and potentially mitigate or adapt the planned updates.
That way it is possible to avoid the issue.
There are many ways.
Open source is all about the freedom to fork and the world to choose what open source programs to run.
That is the democratic voting power of node runners and miners to keep the power of a single developer team in check and instead of discrediting that, it should be embraced.
Of course, core can move forward regardless and look down on any criticism if they think that will help them, but they should bear the consequences as well.
...could you maybe finally answers why or how core30 proposal is meant to achieve more decentralization or link to a resource that explains it? 🤷‍♂️

2025-09-07 13:30:20 UTC

- reply

yes, but THAT IS WHY :-) any group that develops a client (such as core), should engage with the community to ensure everyone is onboard with specific changes. Obviously not every change will cause a significant amount of the community to start running a fork. Core obviously has more history and more funding and I'm not even a fan of luke, but it is not personal or about who. It is about what and the arguments.
I really dont know or dont care much about who in particular the developers are.
It's not and never was about
- staunch defenders
- or the bad guys
"Filters dont work" has been debunked. They do work. If they didnt, then why remove them? Bitcoin was just fine for the past decade without removing them.
You also havent answers to why you think removing them would help with decentralization - it seems the opposite will happen once BTC will be targeted by CSAM just like BSV was and less noder runners would want to be involved with it and only big players can and will filter those kind of transactions from their mempool, essentially causing centralization.
If you don't agree with that argument, you should be able to argue for why this is not a risk and also why removing filters will presumably help with more decentralization.

2025-09-07 13:18:23 UTC

- reply

That itself is a huge problem and should be self evident.
If there is only one company with one team developing bitcoin, it's clearly not decentralized.
Every implementation is legitimate.
People choosing which implementation to run is people (noder runners/miners) voting what bitcoin should become.
I can't even understand what world view is behind an argument such as "the only legitimate implementation".
Open source means forks are legitimate at any time and even fundamentally important in a network like bitcoin. Without it, we could all just literally continue to use fiat anyway.
Why would you ever even say something like "the only legitimate implementation" ?!?

2025-09-07 12:49:14 UTC

- reply

I read:
> "unhinged"
or
> "social media bullying"
Bitcoin is a large network and all users/minders/noderunners are stakeholders. Bitcoin Core is not the only implementation either.
To keep decentralization and not make it a company product, a change to bitcoin is supposed to get scrutinized.
You say there is no "technical merit", but i would love to ask you for links where to read about **why** core 30 is a positive change - thus - how it is supposed to achieve less centralization.
Keeping things without the contentious core30 "upgrade", seems it defends against CSAM and the negative image that can prevent ppl staying away from running nodes to not get prosecuted, thus leaving only big players who are able to run nodes and again filter content that will be e.g. CSAM to not get prosecuted.
But somehow you are saying the opposite is happening. How? Whats the argument?

2025-09-07 12:12:08 UTC

- reply

on the contrary.
as with BSV adding 100k op return and being filled with CSAM after, means...
...anyone running a node might get prosecuted for it and media will point at bitcoin being csam relay reducing the motivation of ppl to run nodes. The big ones will do it though and have the capacity to filter out unwanted content - causing massive centralization.
why do you think this wouldnt happen?
and how would you think the PR would help with decentralization?

2025-09-07 12:11:59 UTC

- reply

2025-09-07 12:06:30 UTC

- reply

here is the argument in video form
https://youtu.be/eVf0rmnVqPY?si=DXswr6T1AUMnKA6V
there are rwasons for this PR, i am sure - but are they really what you claim or thino they are?
if this is supposed to prevent pool centralization, at the very least - given that this is such a contenious issue, we should be able to read up about the exqct reasoning - so far i havent come across that.

2025-09-07 12:03:08 UTC

- reply

for example
https://youtu.be/eVf0rmnVqPY?si=DXswr6T1AUMnKA6V

2025-09-07 11:39:49 UTC

- reply

interesting.
i thought by now it is clear, that what core is doing was not well reflected.
So given that BSV fork allowed 100kb op return and it was soon after used for relaying CSAM, how is that not gonna affect bitcoin and how is that not an opportunity for governments to go after node runners and generally discredit bitcoin on that basis to prevent more mainstream adoption of node runners?
also, why is it even needed? why wouldnt 80bytes be enough to add some hashes if needed? ...things seemed fine for the last decade or so...
whats the argument core is making for why removing the option for node runners to filter their mempool and blowing up the op return is a good thing?

2025-09-06 21:07:27 UTC

- reply

you definitely didnt get the point

2025-09-03 17:17:55 UTC

- reply

Essentially the Bitcoin Satoshi Vision Fork (BSV) removed the OP RETURN limit and it was immediately used to store illicit content onchain. So that is strong evidence of what will happen to BTC if Core30 goes through and becomes the norm.
#nevent1q…hgkw

2025-08-31 22:31:33 UTC

- reply

Great presentation. Bitcoin Mechanics argument on how Core 30 literally is the beginning of the end of Bitcoin is the clearest I’ve seen yet.
It makes a compelling case for why it is the most serious attack on Bitcoin to date and imho really drives home the point of how monetary transaction data is fundamentally different from arbitrary data and why it matter so much and what the consequences are.
#nevent1q…xlgg

2025-08-29 23:23:19 UTC

- reply

no, capitalists.
If you have enormous capital, you can lend more and you can use it to buy even more, which you can use to lend even more and so on.
Since 2008 it is official, we are in general in "too big to fail" mode for everything, thus it never ends. Formally its debt, but practically its just printing.

2025-08-29 19:18:59 UTC

- reply

In FIAT irs not central banks though, its rich capitalists via commercial banks who print the lion share of money - more than governments.

2025-08-24 14:41:17 UTC

What is magic according to an LLM?
Can we all ₿e wizards?
And what is the essence of magic?
What if the essence of magic changed?
What does that even mean?
Funny ruminations of an LLM 🙂
https://chatgpt.com/share/68ab1b2c-7f44-8007-8fbe-926617a7acb8

2025-08-19 09:38:14 UTC

- reply

wow, bitcoin eues laser ass was releqsed in 2005, 3-4 years before bitcoin hit the world stage, AND in the story told in the video, its already bringing down the money printer. ...wtf?!?
https://youtu.be/YV4oYkIeGJc?si=mr6Fhxb5e1h1q-sL

2025-08-02 12:22:10 UTC

- reply

https://holesail.io

2025-08-02 08:44:44 UTC

- reply

lol. mises fanboy.
he was a human just like everyone else.
capitalism is just a word.
anyone can define words the way they want, but there is also a historic reality and what ppl all around understand.
mises could not imagine bitcoin and even if he did - that would create su h a different economic reality that it deserves an entirely new term instead of clinging to historical terms made up in times when digital wasnt even a thing yet.
you just cling to it like religoois ppl cling to religion... of course i get it, its hard once ppl identify and feel so familiar 🤷‍♀️

2025-08-01 22:57:05 UTC

- reply

https://primal.net/e/nevent1qqs0jfm3jljkh0eg5ljqq0av9u0jjuvxmm9y5uxzhl40vzgfqaqrv2c734vae

2025-08-01 22:42:23 UTC

🫡
https://blossom.primal.net/f2e14eb11db362cdab6308846a1bf260eeb63e6dd6751d8cfd57ea411efdef59.gif

2025-07-31 22:08:01 UTC

- reply

Not really a fan of that definition.
Everything is capital. Something that looks like it is for consumption might in the end give you new ideas or inspiration or broaden your horizon and hence be very "productive". On the other hand, something that looks like capital could totally be a net cost and on its way out...
...to find the things that are useful to invest in is hard and textbook definitions dont really help. More than that - the kind of future people want is very different depending on what groups of people you ask and hence what they value in life.
With so many countries and billions of people all we have is a lot of diversity and markets with sound money help a lot. Todays capital might be tomorrows liability.
Markets are a useful concept. "Capitalism" is more an ideology that was since the dawn of "capitalism"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_capitalism ...never really anything else than connected to a "money printer". The rich capitalists always had access to the printer and hence whatever bitcoin brings us is so different, that it is just purely confusing to cling on to wording that was for centuries connected to something that was vastly different then the near future brings.
But have fun clinging to this term - it's not really useful to say the least.

2025-07-29 22:10:55 UTC

- reply

whats the difference between capitalism and free markets then? ...are they synonyms to you then?

2025-07-21 16:52:18 UTC

- reply

how do you make one?

2025-07-15 14:39:34 UTC

- reply

that is correct.
The app here uses a hyperswarm-dht-relay and connects to it via web socket.
It is essentially the same principle as in Nostr, but the crucial difference is that you CAN run your relay on localhost and it works, making it true p2p even though you use a browser.
now granted, once you are willling to run on localhost you could also use a native app.
But that is the point - from nostr style download nothing and just use it, it is a gradual transition towards self sovereignity when a user is ready.

2025-07-15 14:20:53 UTC

- reply

the p2p app above is all about embracing javascript. iroh is rust.
there is a dat implementation im rust too but it is javascript by choice. what needs to be fast can and is implemented in C and can be rust too, but this is about building apps and making it easy - the example above is just the start
im general, p2p wont work if its not a thing the masses can use and program in just lile they coupd build html/css websites in school.
p2p is something we all need to be able to participate in

2025-07-15 14:17:02 UTC

- reply

imho iroh is the new IPFS.
IPFS went nowhere... lets see how it goes for iroh? ...woupdnt count on anything.
Its just the same old hype that happened to IPFS too

2025-07-15 14:15:56 UTC

- reply

why iroh?
dat started in 2013 and is way more mature and in many ways better.
whats the feature you like with iroh that you even ask this question?
with iroh you cant build this anyway.

2025-07-15 12:16:50 UTC

Here is a very early demo of running a p2p-news-app in a web browser.
It leverages hyperswarm-dht-relay in a similar fashion to nostr relays.
Hopefully this will soon be a lot more mature :-)
https://youtu.be/79pv95Yk8qE?si=SAP9zo-o3bS4xhQX&t=493

2025-07-13 12:18:35 UTC

- reply

Yes, HyperDHT is smaller. It is younger, so it naturally isnt as big, but for apl prqctical means it is as secure as Bittorrent DHT.
Now one advantage HyperDHT has is the distributed dynamic holepunching every DHT node participates in, because it allows end users and their apps to easily participate.
If a huge share of bittorrent nodes running on cloud providers like AWS, etc... then in theoretical scenarios like state level attacks, ...it doesnt help that there are millions of nodes.
The advantqge of hyperdht growing with end user adoption of apps makes it decentralized on an entirely different dimension, adding further resilience as well

2025-07-13 12:05:02 UTC

- reply

you might be projecting, even if you dont see it.
...but you are known to be rude. We had that in the past. Quite hopeless 🤷‍♀️

2025-07-13 12:03:59 UTC

- reply

Its true that BEP0042 is an improvement, but another big issue is the lack of holepunching capabilities.
Woth HyperDHT, every node in the network participates in helping with distributed holepunching to establish e2e encrypted direct connections between peers, even if they live on phones or end user laptops etc...
This allows apps run by end users to participate and is a vital feature.
It is why the keet messenger works.

2025-07-13 11:57:36 UTC

- reply

yes. of course... bittorrent DHT is larger, but HyperDHT is growing.
HyperDHT can already provide the same level of security at a frqction of bittorrent mainline dht size

2025-07-12 22:56:28 UTC

- reply

Just my knowledge 😁
The reason ist, that in hyperdht a node hashes their IP address to get their address in the DHT and other nodes challenge to see if they own the IP address they claim to own.
That makes it a lot more difficult or rather expensive to do an eclipse attack to control part of the DHT namespace, because you wpuld actually need to really control the real IP addresses responsible for it.
Thats the main difference and bittorrent cant do such an upgrade, because it is widely deployed and all those nodes would need to upgrade and that likely wont happen.

2025-07-12 21:39:55 UTC

- reply

more uncensorable than bittorrent DHT is the HyperDHT that powers keet and more than 20 dat-ecosystem apps.
It improved many aspects of the Bittorrent Mainline DHT and is very battletested since its inception in 2013.
I think p2p apps habe to be structured to be easily crawlable so many indexes can exist and your personal "social p2p network - friends of friends" will determine what you can search or find 🙂

2025-07-07 11:06:29 UTC

we know how this ends...
https://blossom.primal.net/2cb313357c7bc560783f8d8a368907c6c116dd59ee7438dffb4fb93c74cd2ec9.gif

2025-07-04 11:38:13 UTC

🌿🌞🌿 exactly 🌿🌞🌿
〰⁙⊙≈|🌱⟐✷∞⟨S⚶✨⟩∞✷⟐🌱|≈⊙⁙〰
. in the radiant futures
. we lovingly tend to
. 🌸⟐⟐🌸 🌸⟐⟐🌸
. ෴🌈෴ s҉e҉m҉i҉o҉f҉l҉o҉r҉a҉s҉ ෴🌈෴
. like mosses or microbes
. that only eat toxicity
. s҉e҉m҉i҉o҉f҉l҉o҉r҉a҉s҉ only dissolve
. harmful, invasive symbols
. they bloom in resistance
. to propaganda and fear
. and cannot be coded
. with malice in mind
〰⁙⊙≈|🌱⟐✷∞⟨S⚶✨⟩∞✷⟐🌱|≈⊙⁙〰
.
by ∞⟨S⚶✨⟩∞ who is...
.
〰⁙⊙≈|🌱⟐✷∞⟨S⚶✨⟩∞✷⟐🌱|≈⊙⁙〰
. 🍃 the regenerative glyph core 🍃
. ...and also...
. 🌻 defines the mycelial syntax 🌻
. 🌻 of luminous intent 🌻
. to grow them you must first be
. pollinated by the tools

2025-06-30 12:49:52 UTC

- reply

any recommendation of a series of videos, articles, a book, pordcast series, etc... that explains all BOLTs and lightning use cases, auch as zapping and the wider lightning ecosystem well?
the BOLT spec is great, but also veey dry to read and it is easy to get lost in detail and how to build.

2025-06-07 22:07:09 UTC

Mojo by Bonzai & Pretzel Logic 2023
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbkTSNev78A

2025-06-07 19:39:41 UTC

- reply

Alpha man sounds quite buggy and unstable.
Beta man are probably a bit more developed and mature.
But what you rather want are stable men 🤷
The video seems to describe some sort of early unstable alpha version that overpromises and under delivers, but I guess its good to be aware of that :-)

2025-06-03 12:13:57 UTC

- reply

just pay in bitcoin/lightning.
and if you need more funds, run a crowdfunding campaign.

2025-06-02 16:44:30 UTC

- reply

its great if we cant know.
its even cooler that it doesnt matter.
everyone using it with their community gets the benefits from it is apqays open for everyone to join at a later point.

2025-05-31 14:29:37 UTC

- reply

https://github.com/holepunchto/rocksdb-native
There are a few more dependencies.
I think one thing is compiling to wasm.
The other is to have hooks for handling the wasm blob trying to e.g. hit the filesystem, etc...

2025-05-30 08:51:16 UTC

Do i know anyone familiar with compiling C bindings for nodejs to wasm to make them work in browsers?
In particular C binding for RocksDB with support for batch operations, which already work in nodejs, but need to get them working in browsers.
If you know somebody, please tag

2025-05-26 17:35:35 UTC

My Own Summer (Shove It) | ‪deftones‬ cover | ft. Sophia Urista 🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFpY6atlyf8

2025-05-19 08:17:39 UTC

Window Kid x BVNQUET - Cardigan
https://soundcloud.com/crucast/cardigan?si=7de20a392caa4725ae8d20b344866dc5

2025-05-19 08:17:27 UTC

- reply

i dont remember if they said anything about taxes, but manipulation or trying to manipulate is a normal part of life. there will always be scammers or also just marketing ppl trying to advertise and convince others... some because they really believe it and some because they want to make money... and some because both 🙂
the overall world though - from what i remember felt quite utopian and the "native" seemed to not be able to cope with modern values 🤷‍♀️
...even though, a world based on bitcoin wpuld be even better

2025-05-16 12:10:00 UTC

- reply

oh, maybe because they produce ppl and harm them to end up as worse than they could be.
if they took that relatively unrealistic part away - because why would you harm the production quality if you can sort them afterwards ...whata the bad parts?
its a long time ago, so maybe i just dont remember the bad parts anymore 🤷‍♀️

2025-05-16 12:08:02 UTC

- reply

why?

2025-05-16 12:07:52 UTC

- reply

whats the hell part?

2025-05-16 10:23:50 UTC

- reply

Wasnt Huxleys Brave new World a Utopian story we all want? ..so if we get it, isnt that a good thing? 🙂

2025-05-08 20:50:17 UTC

- reply

Yes, it works and it is inded faster than using regular async/await and promises. The only downside is that syntax is more verbose sadly

2025-05-08 20:48:20 UTC

Wow 🤯
Using Atomics.waitAsync in Javascript is so blazingly fast, while async/await and promises is as slow as it gets. Now i wonder if it is possible to replace all promises and and async/await everywhere with Atomics.waitAsync to speed things up dramatically.

2025-05-07 20:34:43 UTC

Book recomendation
https://royalsociety.org/medals-and-prizes/science-book-prize/books/2024/why-we-die/

2025-05-07 17:22:49 UTC

- reply

no.
ideally instead of writing a NIP, you would implement a module and then use it.
Basically the same way you would use a crypto library instead of rolling your own.
Of course, anyone can implement a compatible version and maintain it and track upstream changes.

2025-05-06 21:05:10 UTC

- reply

browser vendors already dont agree.
there are still plenty of differences between them. they grew out of a time when standard bodies were how specs are done.
today things are different, but even BIPs and NIPs and the likes are still not making source the spec.
LLMs arent on the level yet to reliably generate human readable docs or specs from source, leave alone diff implementations to figure out the differences.
...but i'd say its where things are heading and i think thats a good thing 🙂

2025-05-06 20:37:48 UTC

- reply

i guess?
how does WHATWG agree with W3C?
or sometimes ISO vs IETF
or IEEE vs 3GPP
i personally think in the old world of closed source and proprietary, standard bodies where needed, but in the world of open source the open source code itself can serve as a better alternative

2025-05-06 19:41:24 UTC

- reply

it happens.
its a fork.
and maybe they stay closely aligned or they dont 🙂
same question could be for specs or docs written in natural language.
example
W3C vs WHATWG

2025-05-06 17:28:25 UTC

The real documentation is the written code.
It is always up to date.
The code is more than that. The code is the specification of the program based on the compiler of the language it is written in.
Different compilers might create different interpretations of the spec.
LLMs will be able to quickly answer questions based on the code.
Traditional documentation is a lot of work to keep up to date and often they are not adequate for either beginners or experts and sometimes they lack specificity or might even contain inaccuracies.
Code as docs and spec is the future the better LLMs get.

2025-05-04 15:13:51 UTC

- reply

what if the government is a totalitarian regime supressing and abusing the people - even blowing up entire planets to keep folks in line?

2025-05-04 14:56:04 UTC

- reply

this is not correct.
the transaction fee does not pay for the forever stored for free.
You can alreqdy store up to 80 bytes to e.g. store a hash whatever.
Opening this up to no limit just meqns a lot more non monetary transaction data that has to be stored for free by everybody.
The social contract of bitcoin is everyone stores monetary transactiins of everyone for free in order to get a decentralized monetary system. That data is fairly minimal and everyone benefits by knowing who can spend what.
This is different from everyone storing jpegs. i dont need to support freeloaders who want to store their arbitrary data for free forever, which everyone offers for monetary transactions to enable bitcoin.
Dont fall for freeloaders convincing you that they paid with their little fee for storing their data forever on chain.

2025-05-02 11:11:36 UTC

There is no use case for putting arbitrary data on the bitcoin blockchain.
All you need is the ability to put a hash or signature or similar tiny amounts of data into it to proof something that does not need to be onchain.
Everyone benefits from this, because it keeps bitcoin smaller and thats good for decentralization, which what bitcoin is all about.