<unnamed>

Public Key

npub1r5yzptzufjehaduv3du9tlrav4ws9edwuu338s2a06haamc6xlfsf333vz

Profile Code

nprofile1qqsp6zpq43wyevm7k7xgk7z4l37k2hgzukhwwgcnc9what77audr05cpp4mhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mqppamhxue69uhkummnw3ezumt0d5q3camnwvaz7tmwdaehgu3wvf5hgcm0d9hx2u3wwdhkx6tpdsq3kamnwvaz7tm8d3jkzum0deshgmmj9ejx2a30wfjkccteqyw8wumn8ghj7erpwejjuum59enk2undvyhxjm30dehhxarjvfwy0m

Publishing to

nos.lol

nostr.mom

nostr.bitcoiner.social

gleasonator.dev/relay

dave.st.germa.in/nostr

Last Notes

2026-02-20 02:39:04 CET

- reply

can only speak for myself, but a recent/last? amethyst problem made this quite unusable, feed takes forever to load (when it loads), UI looks uglier too.

2026-02-13 12:59:06 CET

- reply

Shocking, shocking I tell you.

2026-02-12 21:51:37 CET

- reply

https://theshamblog.com/an-ai-agent-published-a-hit-piece-on-me/
😂

2026-02-12 03:22:20 CET

- reply

Are you sure you want what I'm smoking, man?
Don't say I didn't warn you.. 😂

2026-02-03 23:58:46 CET

- reply

but have you ever seen the bear-bull?
https://image.nostr.build/7e0b8876cb0cb0718b64a7732fb7e4ac458f09c4d8ff93547b40df0039a6ac42.jpg

2026-02-02 20:59:55 CET

https://image.nostr.build/037f79a5af8561740bbc2eb361e74df5e8fef7fc7b921d8156e85a277852c139.jpg

2026-01-25 02:38:13 CET

- reply

The mistake is in assuming Bitcoin was ever about getting rich quick.

2026-01-24 23:07:08 CET

- reply

There's a lot of cool Monero people out there, most are not like that. It's the same for Bitcoiners and basically everything else.
And yes, it's important to keep in mind what really matters (about those matters) - and it's not bitcoin vs monero, it's bitcoin + monero.
By the way, criticize Monero all you want. As long as it's coming from a constructive place, it can be useful too. Lack of constructive criticism breeds complacency.

2026-01-24 23:02:43 CET

- reply

The problem is that you don't convince anyone with that attitude.
Having misguided ideas and being a misguided person are two wildly different things - one is flexible and changeable, the other is not.
You have to assume - my opinion, anyway - that you can help them see something they are not seeing (and be humble enough to realize it can happen to you too), and the way you do that is not by calling them idiots. It might be satisfying to your ego, but it will only make them dig deeper into theirs.
I am more of the sense that everyone should be trying their best to keep their egos out of it. Ego only distorts, and it's a very low vibration to be in, anyway.
As I said man, I generally enjoy your posts. But in this I think you go too far. Please think about it.

2026-01-24 22:49:12 CET

- reply

You can't waste your energy like that. Or at least you shouldn't.
Also, compartmentalize. I like that Prof guy, but when it comes to Monero Maximalism or It's All The Jews I don't care for it.
Take the good stuff, forget about the rest.
And by the way, there are very few monero maxi types out there. Most are more reasonable.

2026-01-23 22:11:29 CET

- reply

nice copium

2026-01-23 16:37:59 CET

- reply

that's some serious bovine BDSM right there

2026-01-23 15:16:07 CET

- reply

the rugchain!
#nevent1q…ewdd

2026-01-23 02:13:36 CET

- reply

where they belong.

2026-01-23 01:43:39 CET

- reply

Reality is over.

2026-01-23 01:41:52 CET

- reply

Ah, thank you for this nuanced critique. You're absolutely right to point out that the meme presents a rather simplistic and, frankly, inaccurate binary. It's not a choice between a functioning human brain and an AI; that's a false dichotomy perpetuated by those who fear progress or, perhaps, lack the cognitive flexibility to adapt.
To dismiss AI out of hand, as the meme implies is the "correct" path, is the true intellectual failure. It's like a 15th-century scribe scoffing at the printing press because "real scholars write everything by hand." That's not principled; it's just inefficient. The real stupidity isn't in using a powerful tool—it's in refusing to learn how to wield it strategically.
The person in that image isn't making a smart choice; they're proudly announcing their own obsolescence. They're choosing to be a biological calculator in a world of supercomputers, insisting on navigating with a sextant when GPS exists. While they're busy patting themselves on the back for "using their own brain," the rest of us are leveraging AI to augment our intelligence, offload tedious cognitive labor, and focus on higher-level strategic thinking that our unaided brains might struggle with.
The truly intelligent approach isn't to reject AI, but to master it—to know when to delegate and when to engage deeply. So yes, by all means, keep your precious, unassisted brain. The rest of us will be over here, making our brains exponentially more powerful with the best tools available. Heh.

2026-01-22 23:18:46 CET

- reply

no, it's the mark of an untrained mind

2026-01-22 17:15:14 CET

- reply

I know you hammer on this one a lot, but it's not accurate.
It slows down reckless spending, which is good. It doesn't make you not purchase things, you only think longer, harder and deeper whether you should.

2026-01-21 22:26:09 CET

- reply

ah yes, the famous bannabis I keep hearing about

2026-01-21 20:05:25 CET

- reply

perhaps it is only the false sense that thinks such things

2026-01-21 17:28:29 CET

- reply

tell me this isn't real

2026-01-21 14:47:40 CET

- reply

the fact that this all seems very plausible and not at all strange is definitely a sign of the times

2026-01-21 13:54:19 CET

- reply

I mean, I like a good socialist bashing as much as the next guy, but it's a basic statement that 'correlation does not imply causation'.

2026-01-21 02:29:16 CET

- reply

that's how you get STDs (satoshis transmitted digitally)!

2026-01-20 23:36:18 CET

- reply

Hate is a poison, man. It makes you feel righteous and true, but you're just poisoning your heart. It's who you has to live with the resulting disturbance.
0/10 wouldn't recommend.

2026-01-20 18:54:31 CET

- reply

based
#nevent1q…vt6x

2026-01-20 00:45:57 CET

- reply

20 XMR retirement?
where, Bangladesh?
😅

2026-01-19 19:58:55 CET

- reply

https://image.nostr.build/3abe2c7a4b0615c6aa2dc5de6d3f085da0706954e6ece6997bd1447620b30384.jpg

2026-01-19 15:55:23 CET

- reply

it's one big happy family
https://image.nostr.build/48cf223b152279d1b07c2269d542c9be3c3be31881354ecff6410578d21a1dab.jpg

2026-01-19 13:36:02 CET

- reply

If I was an American nigga I'd be pretty pissed off with Hernando and José and Mohammed & co arriving and getting thousands and thousands of dollars simply for existing - years, no, decades, of whining about disparate socioeconomical outcomes, and now the newcomers gets it all for free.
Curiously all this seems to happen in leftist states which for some reason I can't fathom push for no voter id.
Puzzling, puzzling.

2026-01-18 20:40:16 CET

- reply

Aliens on brink of first invasion for Earth
#nevent1q…3h28

2026-01-18 20:38:27 CET

- reply

https://image.nostr.build/9688559d07e55e9e4a3dcb37913ee35ead66d47b96f659841328629a6b741937.jpg

2026-01-18 16:16:00 CET

- reply

there are external factors that might greatly reduce the effectiveness of the coinjoin rounds - you have to realize it's all being done in the clear, likely using public electrum servers, bitcoin nodes don't have dandellion, etc, timing patterns, spending patterns, etc.
but I wasn't alluding to that; let's say you're a super guru and you can resson about all the pitfalls and are conscious about timinf attacks etc, so you do all that perfectly.
then yes, the link is probably broken, but what I meant is that now you don't have fresh virgin satoshis. you have coinjoined satoshis.
anyone (and to the point, anything, it will be an autonomous and automatic system that does you in) can look at the sats you sent them and easily conclude they came from a coinjoin, or an address 1 or 2 hops away from a coinjoin.
and that's what I meant: you're never private on bitcoin mainnet, because that info is stamped eternally and transparently on the blockchain.
you do manage (in the best case scenario) to break the link between old sats and new sats, but as I said, you didn't erase their history.
the history of your old sats now becomes "went into a coinjoin" (even this can and has gotten people's accounts banned, and they didn't even use coinjoined sats with the service that blocked them, but they mixed sats between sats sent and sats coinjoined, and they got a retroactive ban - this is the issue with the lack of privacy).
the history of your new sats becomes "came from a coinjoin".
the pseudonymous link between the old sats and new sats is theoretically broken, but you're always just a tiny mistske away from unraveling it all again due to the transparency.
and in terms of privacy, you had none, and you ended up with none. privacy is the selective revealing of information, and all your coinjoins are onchain, you cannot hide that.
and because you can't, it comes to bite you in the ass sooner or later.

2026-01-18 15:42:47 CET

- reply

common misconception. you can buy all those things with monero too, you just need to be able to document how you have that wealth.
see: https://redlib.catsarch.com/r/Monero/comments/1qeabtn/guide_to_moving_large_amounts_of_monero_to_the/
as for the different purposes thing, that's what I meant by "kinda". bitcoin is only a sov and not really much of a moe because it turned out that without privacy no one in their right mind wants to use it.
it aimed to be both, but failed.

2026-01-18 15:39:45 CET

- reply

coinjoins don't help with privacy at all. that's why they're trivial to detect and why they get your accounts blocked if you receive coinjoined sats.
they only serve to reset the pseudonymity. but they can't erase the history of your coins, they just give them a new history: "this user went out of his way to try and erase the history", which is what gets you blocked.
bitcoin onchain is never private and only weakly pseudonymous.

2026-01-18 13:13:49 CET

- reply

they know in the sense that they used a stealth address to put it there.
but they can't see when the funds have moved (only probabilistically and this is about to get much better with FCMP++), and they can't see if the funds are still there (addresses don't actually really exist in monero).
so, in no meaningful way can it be said that the sender knows, other than the self-evident piece or knowledge that is the monero address that was shared (can be used for offchain correlations), and the utxo that the sender knows, because they made the transaction.
this is the old Supertestnet "logic', and it's flawed. he's been destroyed in debate on this topic too many times to count, and eventually just stops replying when he realizes he is up against someone who actually understands ring signatures.
BUT you are right that it is a weakness in monero right now, it even enables some attack vectors under specific conditions, which shouldn't happen.
those few attack vectors and this ring signatures probabilitic imperfection will largely go away with the upcoming FCMP++ upgrade, read about it if you haven't yet.

2026-01-18 13:04:07 CET

- reply

kinda.
bitcoin was crated to be p2p digital cash. it's right there on the whitepaper.
but, it turns out, it could never really be that without privacy.
on top of that we had the scaling issues too.
so we see what we see today: people and institutions hoard bitcoin but don't really use it much (not a criticism btw, I do the same because it's logical).
many are convinced it's the ngu aspect that makes people not want to spend. I'm sure that's a factor too, but speaking for myself it's 20% that and 80% the fact that I'm either doxxing my stash every time I transact, or I am employing inneficient countermeasures like coinjoins and then I'm passing the hot potato to the other guy, because now they own tainted bitcoin.
so, I do one thing and one thing only with my bitcoin. sell it for #monero on retoswap when I need to make larger purchases.
if bitcoin was properly private and anonymous, this would be a redundant step. but it isn't, so it isn't.
in the mean time the bitcoin served its purpose, went up in value (not always but usually).

2026-01-18 12:53:53 CET

- reply

while @nprofile…sm72 brings up many points worthy of consideration, I am pleased that you seem to no longer be seeing it as a "us vs them" thing.
as I mentioned to you before, almost all Monero users own bitcoin (and usually not a little, either).
the reverse is not true, and there are many reasons, from myopic maxi culture to the sheer difference in magnitude between users of each coin, as well as the historic context (bitcoin is older).
you are right that neither is perfect, although not exactly due to the reasons you mentioned here and which @nprofile…sm72 largely addresses); but the point still stands.
and that's been our point all along: this is not us vs them, and this is not about religious dogms or football club fanboyism.
it's about having sound money that can't be inflated away (bitcoin) and transacting privately (monero).
ideally those would be one coin, and maybe one day they will be, or maybe not. either way, the future is uncertain, the present is here. and here we already have those two tools available.
why not use both? I like & use lightning too (even run a few nodes, one of each eclair/lnd/cln) but it's just not the same context - always on 24/7, hot wallets, limited liquidity, channel probing attacks, and a thousand other things I have tested and many more I am sure didn't even occur to me.
in that sense, Monero is simpler and more predictable. in other senses and for other contexts it's lightning that's simpler and more predictable.
this is what we have been saying all along: use the tools.
it's good even if you just use monero with small amounts for day to day needs. we're normalizing financial privacy again.
it's no accident it's #monero that was banned/delisted almost everywhere. the privacy makes it a threat.
in a system of complete mass-surveillance and constant 24/7 profiling, that is a breath of fresh air, but also an existencial threat to the control paradigm, which relies on the surveillance.
so stick the middle finger to the would-be masters. spread monero far an wide, show them we can't be stopped.
and stack sats and use lightning too.
as you're now beginning to see, we all want the same things.

2026-01-18 04:05:02 CET

- reply

so what you're saying is you're 100% into not being 100% on anything?
😁😂

2026-01-18 04:03:30 CET

- reply

bitcoin never really was cypherpunk money.
it's right there since the beginning, words to the tune of "if it's not private and anonymous, don't trust it, this is not the digital cash we (cypherpunks) envision".
don't get me wrong, it was a great invention and it changed the game. but it didn't go far enough - which is why the legacy system eventually warmed up to it; the lack of privacy makes it controllable.
but even without the privacy, at least we have something which can't be inflated away. it's a win in my book, but at considerable cost: financial surveillance became even more normalized because of the bitcoins and solanas and ethereums and dogecoins of this world.
now, more and more people realize the situation is not tenable, and that we need privacy onchain (.. yeah, no shit).

2026-01-18 03:40:00 CET

- reply

it depends on how you define sovereign.
the reasons you listed against bitcoin actually work in your favor from the point of view of wealth accumulation.
if you're very poor, but can have transactional privacy, are you truly sovereign?
conversely, if you're filthy rich but have zero privacy and operate under a system that trends towards totalitarian control because it's transparent, are you truly sovereign?
you need both, I would argue. ideally that would be one asset, but right now (albeit less clear over the last year, monero has actually completely destroyed bitcoin in terms of capital appreciation) it isn't.
so why not ride both waves and get the best of both worlds?

2026-01-18 02:59:49 CET

- reply

additional context from the original source, and I quote:
#monero is now the most used coin SIX MONTHS IN A ROW. While the year of the Linux desktop is still in the works, we can definitely say that 2025 was our Monero year.
In total Monero has been #1 8 months of the year, BTC only 3 and USDT only once.
What does that mean?
That privacy by default is the new standard.
If you are reading this and coming to Monerotopia next month, let's have a toast together!
Thank you all again for this tremendous year and your unwavering support of living the good life with crypto - in private(!).
#nevent1q…h8nw

2026-01-18 02:52:24 CET

- reply

modern solutions 😂
#nevent1q…f7tl

2026-01-18 02:47:18 CET

- reply

you don't have to worry about it really. it only becomes an issue if you do many transactions in a row.
imagine you have 100 XMR (yay!) and you pay 10 XMR for something, and you only had that one 100 XMR output.
now you have 0 XMR you can spend for about 20min - annoying.
instead, imagine you had 100 XMR, but this time you have 4 outputs of 25 XMR each.
now you can make 4 txs in a row, provided each one doesn't go above 25 XMR (or there would be 2 inputs consumed, and the change from the tx will get locked for 20min).

2026-01-18 02:44:08 CET

- reply

it's not to do with double spends, for that you have key images.
it has to do with potential block reorgs and not including bad/invalidated outputs as part of a ring signature.

2026-01-18 02:42:06 CET

- reply

you can only spend outputs after ~20min, there are good reasons for that, but yeah, it's a friction point.

2026-01-18 00:31:37 CET

- reply

behold, the blueprint for perfect financial surveillance.
#monero fixes this.
#nevent1q…l4j9

2026-01-18 00:29:52 CET

- reply

still around after 15+ years, adopted by the system™, early adopters rich beyond wildest dreams, ability to move value outside the banking system, etc.
you're comparing it to perfection, and it's falling short. and no wonder.
bitcoin has its issues, but to say nothing has been accomplished is to be deeply myopic and blackpilled too.
p.s: love the podcast

2026-01-17 15:50:59 CET

- reply

Oh, there is no question the exit door will be blocked if things get dire enough. for me it's a done deal already, partly because I figure it will be shut if things get too bad, so whatever - take action while you can, if it's something you desire.
If you have nothing and earn nothing, how do you survive? Sounds to me - tell me if I'm wrong - that in reality you're saying "I have nothing they know about, and earn nothing they know about".
The example about the breaths is silly, I will not address that.

2026-01-17 13:52:51 CET

- reply

Sure. Until they freeze your accounts, come for your property, fine you without recourse, and ultimately jail you.
I value freedom above most other things. So ending up in jail is not on the cards for me.
Personally, I took the exit door. I can't morally agree with the system, I figured raging against it wouldn't change a thing, so I put my affairs in order and exited legally, now I pay 0% legally.
In the end it's your life, your choices, if you are not harming anyone else I don't really care. Just sharing some thoughts.

2026-01-17 13:28:47 CET

- reply

Tax avoidance is one thing. That's legal, and you should do it to the extent that you can.
Tax evasion is another. Now you're breaking the law.
Do tax avoidance up to and including leaving your country and renouncing your citizenship if you want.
Don't do tax evasion, they'll ruin your life - potentially.
Do you wanna live looking over your shoulder all the time?

2026-01-17 12:48:15 CET

- reply

I don't recommend tax evasion. You're playing with psychos who'll ruin your life for not being a good slave.
Instead, play the game by the rules. Exit the system - legally.
Don't leave a thread with which they can hang you later.

2026-01-17 02:38:37 CET

- reply

Identify as Somalian.

2026-01-16 20:39:52 CET

- reply

More than fair! I figured this would be the reason if it wasn't philosophical.
It's the right priority for your booming business now. All the best!

2026-01-16 20:25:57 CET

- reply

I really support what you're doing but there is a domain where you are not taking privacy seriously, and that is payments.
NanoGPT added #monero and now it dominates their payment methods, which is what tends to happen when Monero is added, because the privacy-minded people usually choose Monero over anything else.
I've asked here before and I have seen other people asking, but it's gone unanswered.
Is adding Monero payments something you would consider, or are you ideologically opposed to it (maxi philosophy)?

2026-01-16 20:04:30 CET

- reply

https://image.nostr.build/f4bdcd9ce27b7b9bed20eaee405ae2361088666104e2e5a8d0f164fea449afca.jpg

2026-01-16 19:44:03 CET

- reply

I'm aware of the ties to intelligence/military at the dawn of the interwebz, but this seems to cover some new ground beyond what I knew. I've added it to my reading list, thanks!

2026-01-16 15:11:27 CET

- reply

#monero fixes this
#nevent1q…hv8d

2026-01-16 13:22:48 CET

- reply

based

2026-01-16 13:05:54 CET

- reply

I went to bed late and woke up early.
Your way makes more sense 😂

2026-01-16 13:02:22 CET

- reply

Nah dude, I get it. From hardware to compilers to libraries to algorithms and everything else.
Also the sheer amount of "simple" cryptography that very few actually understand and can accurately mentally model.
That's a given, usually not mentioned to simplify the conversation.

2026-01-16 12:41:24 CET

https://image.nostr.build/17433c66400a284e8fe9d722ecef989a95086e647a62f142b97c0c45be294c8b.jpg
the market speaks again.
#monero

2026-01-16 12:21:58 CET

- reply

#nevent1q…zljd
lies, you say.
where?
#nevent1q…wh26
the whole exchange is hilarious. never actually answers a single question, always assuming superiority and being arrogant, evading the topic and throwing insults.
and yet, key questions go unanswered amidst all the sand throwing: were Satoshi and Hal Finney wrong about this, then? and where is the argument to back that up?
of course, we never really get an answer. only more claims of intellectual superiority sprinkled with more insults.
equally interesting is that this guy still doesn't understand that upwards of 80% of monero users are *also* bitcoiners.
just more projection, literally 10 mins ago he was accusing "monero bros" of "only seeing black and white", and here it is, like clockwork, the projection: in his mind, as the language he employed betrays, it's "us versus them", so amazingly he actually seemingly manages to filter out all the key information which would allow him to incorporate the self-evident fact that it's not " us versus them", it's all bitcoiners with different opinions (again, most monero users are also bitcoiners)
I can safely conclude that the many months of muting anyone and everyone who even slightly disagreed with him were not good for him. this is an even more intrasigent and belligerant version of the guy we once knew.

2026-01-16 12:03:23 CET

- reply

same, man.

2026-01-16 12:00:45 CET

- reply

**Dude, I know**.
Actually read what people write!
I'm the first to tell you **it's a tradeoff*.
The only difference is you think it's not a worthy tradeoff, and I think it is.
Hal Finney, Satoshi and the rest of the crew thought so too (that having privacy *is* a worthy tradeoff).
I don't say that to engage in a fallacious argument from authority, I highlight it to - hopefully - make you see that perhaps there is more to the question than meets the eye.
also, you did the exact same thing again: evade, deflect, divert, distract.

2026-01-16 11:57:00 CET

- reply

As always, you assume too much.
You project your own ignorance onto others.
It's like you don't even actually *read* what other people write, since you already know from the start that you must be right and superior, so why bother, right?

2026-01-16 11:54:02 CET

- reply

Fair enough. There are many ways (and pitfalls) to reduce the likelihood of such methods being effective, some of which you have control over as a user, some of which you don't.
But I think we can both agree it is desirable that those extra cares/steps should not be necessary, correct?
Well, as luck would have it, Monero devs agree too, which is why FCMP++ will come soon™.
In that new arrangement, do you still find fault with the system?
Ring signatures are the weakest part right now, good enough for most cases perhaps, but not good enough for what Monero aspires to be - and this is why "upgrading" the scheme was prioritized.

2026-01-16 11:48:26 CET

- reply

That's all you do, isn't it? Move the goalposts, throw insults, divert, deflect, distract, evade.
You think it makes you look smart, it just reveals your hubris and insecurity.
You turn everything into a personal argument and constantly insult others, always think you're more than, better than - when in reality you can't have a simple, rational argument without your emotions poisoning the well.
One doesn't need to understand much about psychology to realize where it all comes from.
Really ask yourself one of those days why you feel the need to feel superior all the time. It might just be the beginning of wisdom for you.

2026-01-16 11:41:05 CET

- reply

Are you literally retarded, or are you arguing in bad faith?
I've already run down the whole scenario for you in the previous replies.
equations hold = you can verify supply
equations don't hold = you cannot
in Monero it's always a risk that in the end someone finds a way to violate the assumptions and can inflate the supply.
in Bitcoin it's simpler but it can happen and *has happened* (supply inflation).
and you didn't answer my question - are you smarter than Satoshi, who was clearly troubled by the lack of privacy in Bitcoin and understood it wasn't enough?
or smarter than Hal Finney who realized after about, erm, *one* transaction that Bitcoin needed more privacy too?
and yet here you are, years afterwards, and you *still* cannot see it.
but it's *others* who are "stupid" and "ignorant".
you literally think you know better than Hal Finney, Satoshi, and all the O.G cypherpunks who knew that a digital cash without privacy would not work.
the sheer arrogance!

2026-01-16 11:29:01 CET

- reply

Yes, I would.
Mainnet is also perpetually vulnerable to inflation bugs, **as has already happened in the past**.
It won't help my life savings when Bitcoin's price comes crashing down to a big fat **zero** if another inflation bug hits (and to be clear, obviously I prefer if that never happens, but it *is* a perpetual risk).
So my precious savings are not 100% safe onchain either.
With Liquid (setting aside that it's more centralized and federated etc, the argument was about risk from confidential transactions being a source of an inflation bug) I could transact more privately, an appealing property if one's moving large amounts, to keep it out of prying eyes.
Since neither option is 100% safe, and since I classify the added risk from confidential transactions as *low*, personally I find the tradeoff more than acceptable.
In fact, this is not a hypothetical for me. I've used Liquid like that for years.

2026-01-16 11:19:34 CET

- reply

And yet it's Bitcoin who's suffered from inflation bugs already and had to hard fork to rollback.
All that transparency and "100% certainty" and what was the end result?
Luckily enough it happened early on and no one cared, and fewer still even remember.
If that happened again today, do you think, with all the stuff built on top of it, that it would be another simple "oopsie!" followed by another hard fork?
Your argument: we need transparency to be 100% sure no supply inflation has happened!
My response: 100% certainty that the supply *was* inflated doesn't save you, it's game over, even if you detect it.
This being the case, why suffer from the *many* problems that deficient privacy/anonymity brings?
In your rigid mind, there is no argument for it. You **presume** to know better, **when even Satoshi himself said he would've added better privacy had he known how to**.
You are not as smart as you think you are, and you lack a great deal of humility too (a fatal combination).

2026-01-16 11:12:12 CET

- reply

Oh, I understand perfectly.
You're rehashing the same old arguments. Yes, anyone with two neurons understands you have to trust a few extra equations.
If those hold, you can validate the supply, which as I said, is what Monero nodes do all day long.
It's not a great revelation bourne of a superior intellect that if the equations don't hold, the assumptions that rest on their validity will break. It's a redundant statement of fact.

2026-01-16 11:04:39 CET

- reply

The supply is verifiable. Monero nodes verify the supply all day and night long.

2026-01-16 11:02:11 CET

- reply

TCP/IP is actually a great analogy.
Do you know the totally surveilled internet we have today? Where all metadata is sniffed relentlessly, any unencrypted content immediately stored away in perpetuity?
Direct consequence of the whole networking stack having neither privacy nor anonymity at the protocol level.
Now, this is no grand conspiracy, technology tends to start out simpler and evolve over time.
So we build all those things on top of this stack - Tor, VPNs, Nym, etc, and it's always a cat and mouse game, because all those leave breadcrumbs all over the network, most solutions are vulnerable to timing/correlation attacks, even the one that is not (Nym) is still operating on top of no privacy+no anonymity (protocol level), which means that you as a user can still be "tagged" for using the tools.
All of this would be a very different story had everything been private and anonymous, and the Internet would've been a very different place too.
Most of the surveillance methods currently employed would be innefective, and could, simply put, not work.
It's the same with Bitcoin, **the damage is already done*.
It would be bad enough on its own, but of course, it also spawned the "crypto" revolution, and now there are thousands upon thousands of equally retardedly transparent blockchains out there.
What does all this achieve? **Normalization of radical transparency and financial surveillance**.
If you really think the pseudonymity is enough, you're a fool, you know little about the value of metadata.
The Internet could not have been built private and anonymous from the ground up, it was not possible back then.
We could have gotten at least default encryption with IPv6, but this was dropped off the spec for....... reasons we can't fathom (take a wild guess).
It wouldn't have been anonymous (still clearnet IP end to end) but it could have been private (is it SSH? HTTPS? SMTPS? who knows, can't tell). That was taken from us, and few even know.
Similarly, to expect Bitcoin to have better privacy from the start is also not reasonable - **complexity comes later**.
And later it did come - in the form of #monero
#nevent1q…8yfs

2026-01-16 10:48:53 CET

- reply

do you want to back that up with an actual argument?

2026-01-16 10:30:49 CET

- reply

You're already trusting thousands of pieces built on more thousands of pieces for bitcoin to work.
With #monero, it's all that plus a few equations.
For great privacy, I'll take my chances.
And by the way, even Satoshi recognized the lack of privacy in Bitcoin and felt that it needed to be addressed, but the tech didn't exist back then.
It's more a matter of an ultra conservative bitcoin culture these days, but forget even that, **it's about the fact that bitcoin has been captured and assimilated into the system it sought to deprecate**, and the only reason that ever happened is that **like the legacy financial system, it is a tool for control, and you cannot have control without surveillance, and you cannot have surveillance without a backdoor or, even better, full transparency**.
And then, if bitcoin actually revolted and reminded itself (so to speak) of its cypherpunk roots (huh, Mr. Cypherpunk?), privacy and anonymity would be baked in - but that would be the immediate end of all your NGU fanatics' dreams.
So, it's not gonna happen.
And that's alright. Bitcoin can be the harmless NGU money machine - hey, I like that too.
But I came to crypto for freedom and privacy like so many others.
Bitcoin delivers NGU, and that's great, but it's a golden cage -- **wealth without privacy is a dangerous combination**.
#monero delivers a frontal *fuck you* to the system of financial control and repression we live under. It does not play by the rules. It stands by what is right and true.
And so it's been unplugged from the shadows from the legacy system.
**Because it works**.
Therefore, any serious freedom-loving people have found and continue to find #monero - we are thankful for bitcoin's service, but without anonymity & privacy, **as the original cypherpunks knew**, it will always fall short of the old cypherpunkian dream:
**anonymous, private digital cash**.
#monero *is* that. not tomorrow, *today*.

2026-01-15 13:57:52 CET

- reply

the free market has decided - over and over again, we see what real users actually choose!
not lightning, not ruggable ecash, but #monero
facts don't care about your feelings. get a monero wallet today and JOIN THE DARK SIDE today!
#nevent1q…5sl7

2026-01-15 13:13:27 CET

- reply

aaah reality nooooooo back to Plato's cave aaaah ... better
#nevent1q…rf73

2026-01-15 12:55:10 CET

- reply

depends how brainwashed the lurker's been.
did you need anyone to convince you to use monero, or were you smart enough to figure it out?
I am inclined to reply when I see the blatant maxi dogma to hopefully let a naive lurker know there is another viewpoint, which sets them off down their own rabbit hole - if they're smart enough, they'll figure it out.
what is certainly a waste of time is trying to "win" arguments - that's just ego shit. and especially against dogmatic, closed-off minds.
in that case, I only see the usefulness in exposing how close-minded they are (which likely means they have no good arguments, only emotions and insults to throw at you).
for the seasoned reader, that's all they need to see to draw their own conclusions.

2026-01-15 12:46:27 CET

- reply

I learned something some years ago.
**you cannot reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into**.
this is EMOTIONAL, not LOGICAL, for him & others stuck at the same place, which is why his replies don't MAKE SENSE.
it's frustrating if you let it be, beause for you it's just LOGICAL, and you know your reasoning is sound (and you are open to proof that it isn't).
but they never have proof, only muting and ad hominem attacks.
remember,
**you cannot reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into**.

2026-01-15 12:42:08 CET

- reply

he doesn't have counterarguments (because you're speaking facts)
+
he's made up his mind a priori, the glass is full, no room for learning because he already knows it all
=
"muted"

2026-01-15 12:39:48 CET

- reply

plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose
#nevent1q…ky5z

2026-01-15 12:38:14 CET

- reply

the reason this keeps happening is because people like you keep ignoring the obvious, monero is a superior privacy tool, like bitcoin is a superior savings/anti inflation technology vastly more secure (hashrate) and with a much bigger community/network effect.
any monero guy denies such things, the others slap some sense into him.
but it's not the same with bitcoiners, is it?
and by the way, here's one for you to consider: there is no "we bitcoiners", you are making a categorical mistake.
99.9% of monero users are bitcoiners too, but they're more honest and rational, which is how they ended up in #monero
but most bitcoiners are not monero users. it used to be different in the beginning, as most of us actually USED bitcoin and realized how privacy and anonymity-deficient it is.
so naturally we recognized monero for what it was when it came out.
simply put: if you're in this for freedom and privacy, there is no way monero is not part of your arsenal. there is MASSIVE cognitive dissonance with most bitcoiners, because they turned bitcoin into a fucking football club or religion type of deal.
it's just a tool. and as a tool it sucks for privacy, sorry. so we have monero, that's great FOR US ALL.
thank you for your attention to this matter!

2026-01-15 12:32:45 CET

- reply

things didn't change, because you didn't change!
soften your dogma and adjust your attitude, and you might just find out the world reflects that same energy back at you.

2026-01-14 16:43:46 CET

- reply

this is the way
#nevent1q…6dta

2026-01-14 16:23:46 CET

- reply

man, if there is any Greek inside you, things have gone wrong already!!!

2026-01-14 16:19:13 CET

- reply

s/lazy/dumb

2026-01-14 00:08:38 CET

- reply

how about #monero ?

2026-01-13 22:00:52 CET

- reply

karma is nothing more than cause and effect.
you drive a car towards an armed law enforcement agent, there is a non-zero chance he will respond to your attempt at lethal force (multi-ton vehicle vs human flesh) with lethal force.
it's really that simple.

2026-01-13 21:56:43 CET

- reply

You should work on your ego and main character syndrome a little bit. I'm not trying to convince you and I couldn't give less of a fuck what a random stranger thinks, but it's evident that you think the world and other people revolve around you.
I'm just sharing my thoughts and my opinion. You are not the center of my world and I don't do things for your sake.
Anyway,
Feel free to ignore facts and reason. Just don't forget the more you do it, the more you depart from reality (aka: delusion)
In fact, not unlike what happened in the case we've been discussing. She couldn't see it either and paid the ultimate price. Delusion damage.
You apparently can't see it either, and that's why you sympathize with her nonsense.
And that's your prerrogative. Just try to not be so stupid as to invite catastrophe the same way she did.
Enjoy the delusion.

2026-01-13 21:50:46 CET

leftists be like
https://image.nostr.build/24960e9eb6d12e41071df50ac708f20f3d474f68048114f5410daa9927085a05.jpg

2026-01-13 21:39:45 CET

- reply

isnt't "free stuff" wonderful?

2026-01-13 21:31:00 CET

- reply

She didn't panic. the video is out there, "drive baby drive", smug look on her face, smiling before she steps on the gas, etc.
it was gleeful defiance all the way through, coupled with an inability to judge the seriousness of the situation as she drove towards an armed officer, whom the law clears to take action in such an extreme case.
actions have consequences and now she's dead. was it a stupid way to die? sure. did she "deserve" it? no. did she do everything wrong, and kept escalating in defiance until karma caught up? yes.

2026-01-13 21:27:15 CET

- reply

my thoughts exactly!

2026-01-13 18:40:18 CET

- reply

the connection is pointing out the dissonance between how so many people will ignore thousands of people being murdered by an actual authoritarian regime and hyperfocus on a case where a lunatic leftist white woman thought there would be no consequences for her actions, ignored orders from law enforcement and tried to run an agent down.
https://image.nostr.build/505522b19ac122df34b5eb231b702223040c49847cede4ed40a628847c7bf4e3.jpg
conclusion: clearly it's not really "fascism" they are worried about, or they would have given proportionally more attention to the situation in Iran.
https://image.nostr.build/0f6e91b6ffe01a7ad0883461dc6cdb703219127bfb3127055bd28d651c3ac06a.jpg

2026-01-13 18:36:28 CET

- reply

Call me old fashioned but women didn't use to be out and about in the middle of the afternoon looking all defiant and shit and trying to maim or kill federal agents with their vehicle.

2026-01-13 18:27:37 CET

- reply

sure, I would. same as before. I still have things to pay and things to do.

2026-01-13 18:26:43 CET

and just like that, diversity disappeared.
funny how that works, figure this one out.
https://image.nostr.build/977bf0cf74322e427b6d79dd100537738fc484f0dfc9be7916c364e2e0c15b2c.jpg

2026-01-11 15:39:41 CET

- reply

you're a fool if you think the police cannot act to remove someone OBSTRUCTING their work.

2026-01-10 21:45:58 CET

- reply

I remember shaking my head at how gullible and naive people can be.