serapath
serapath【ツ】☮

why not?
gold and real estate also mainly serve as exactly that purpose ...they both might have "intrinsic potential utilty", but the vast majority of their price point is explainable only through the store of value lense.
now besides that, international payments are already cheaper and fastern so thats already an established business to business use case.

2026-03-22 18:52:55 UTC

- reply

welxome 🙂

2026-03-21 05:11:09 UTC

Oh my gosh how i hate this stupid narrative of "bitcoin being scarce".
This is the worst phrasing that could be used.
Money can never be scarce in the real sense of scarcity.
Money supply can be absolutely limited, but whether some people horde it away or not, prices on the market will still adapt so even a very small amount of bitcoin is totally enough to run the economy and if ppl stop hoarding then prices will temporarily spike but then again stabelize.
This is different from goods like food or housing or any other goods and services. People need to survive and nothing adapts here, so there can actually be real scarcity.
Bitcoin is the money of abundance mindset - the fear of your buying power disapearing from your hands a thing of the past.
This stupid "scarcity narrative" scares people away for no reason, because its just creates a big misunderstanding.

2026-03-18 05:04:44 UTC

- reply

is there any european bitcoiner on youtube you can recommend specifically? Most good thoughts on bitcoin i was able to come across did not originate from europe. I have seen a few europe based bitcoiners, but would like to checkout some i probably have missed so far :-)

2026-03-13 06:27:05 UTC

- reply

i dont see what that paper has to do woth my expressed thoughts.
some think first and do later.
some do first and think later.
over time both are a cyclic execution model.
The problem i tried to point at is when somebody does use: act first, think later, to introduce urgency and push towards artificial complications ON PURPOSE, because it leads to complicated systems which require centralized management to coordinate ppl to keep it working.
This is a deliberate attack to capture an organization.

2026-03-12 04:11:38 UTC

- reply

i dont see any connection between your shared article and what i said before you posted it.
And my feedback was mainly about the article being lots of words about everything that we can all agree on, but they dont really help.
Imhonunclear what you want to say by posting it.

2026-03-11 04:44:09 UTC

- reply

Whoever is the author is really bad in structuring their content to make allow summary first and then drill into details as needed. Its just a big wall of text.
So what i get from it is tech/science/markets aim for "improving life", "solve problems" and "lead to abundance", but externalities happen (environmental costs, social damage, long term risks).
I guess the article just describes life?
We can either end life or continue to live how we currently do or return to previous states, or we try to progress with the best of our understanding and ability and fix unintended side effects as soon as we notice them to "solve problems" even better. ...it's unclear to me.
It talks about loads of problems in great diversity and focuses on the negative side of everything - and feels like it focuses on nostalgia and talks from a level of privilege that might have been lost over time and so the author sounds sad about it i guess?
...and always talks about considering the entire system, yeah we should. many try, but its hard. Imho Bitcoin is one example and we'll probably see many more systemic solutions than in the past that might overcome a lot of those issues we currently have.
It really continues to find downsides for every upside - sometimes questionable if related at all and questions science methods, but never talks about a proposal of how to do it even better. Every downside is trying to be addressed by the methods we use and it is easy to regress to worse methods if we drop science and other approaches, but its hard to do it better - so there semes to be a lack of proposals, but the article complains about possibly the best methodology we have that even tries to address everything pointed out as negative consequencs, but some problems are difficult to address - and humans can only do what they can do following the best methodologies they have, so unless a better proposal can be made its ridiculous to complain about the best method we have.
For example, saying something like:
1. account for all stakeholders
2. evaluate long-term consequences
3. internalize negative externalities
4. consider ripple effects across systems.
is what everyone would agree with, but having a planet with billions of people and complex constallation begs the question how can we improve it while we aren't an omnipontent infallible god-like creature? ...arguably we are doing quite well and the question is what change could improve the status quo towards these goals? ...that's not easy, but it must be proposed and discussed, because otherwise the article just says what everyone knows and agrees with anyway.
We are many and we are trapped in all kind of network effects, prisoner dilemmas, non-existing schelling points, nash equilibriums, etc... and overcoming them is difficult.
Arguing about we need: better problem-solving methods, ethical design processes, strong regulation, and a deeper understanding of human and ecological interdependence.
...is running against open doors. Thats what everyone is striving for all the time, so maybe the author should focus more on proposing particular improvements to inspire adoption instead of telling the obvious :-)
The author maybe deals more with their own issues or their social environment, because billions of people live very diverse, some spend a lot of time touching grass, interacting with nature, working out, studying and avoiding the many issues the author mentions as issues of the modern humans lifestyle.
In fact, apps like tiktok and instagram provide endless inspiration of how to exercise better and eat healthier, its just a question of whether a particular person feeds itself with that or with something else.
Unhealthy livestyle choices were possible in all of human history and is nothing new.
They towards the end propose "Yellow Teaming" or some sort of problem solving framework, but dont talk about why anyone would adopt it or if a group of experts (determined how) should magically get ultimate powers to go through this process and define and then force it onto everyone else potentially against the consent of other people.
The best experts are still humans who can make mistakes and can also have misaligned incentives. Things are a bit more complex and in that regard the article feels naive.
We clearly need government regulation, but what or how should future governments look like? The system we had up to this point in history led us to where we are and our existing governments have the largest budgets any government in history ever had, so just maybe we need radically different governments - forms led by the people by giving them tools so they can partcipate in the process in every day life instead of yielding and outsourcing all power to a tiny minority of people with questionable motives and effectiveness surrounded by plenty of scandals.
In general, being too risk averse and pre-cautionous over long periods of time can itself be a huge risk.
The many ideas/philosophies for a bette rfuture that are expressed in this articles are something that should be promoted by the author and offered to people - organise workshops to show them how, offer a serivce to do it for them... there are plenty of ways that involve consent and keeping many stake holders involved the way they need to be involved.
The current "progress ideology" is essentially not a progress ideology, but it is called "Fiat money" and the broken incentives it sets that forces everyone to grind the planet to crap or end up broke and fall through the cracks of the system. It is a gigantic "prisoner dilemma" we are all trapped in and bitcoin could be THE solution to escape this trap and end the reality that forces people into what is here described as "progress ideology" but should be labeled "prisoners dilemma" instead.
I think the final message of the author, even though positive, is missing the point entirely, because everyone agrees with that, but thats not how one escapes a prisoners dilemma - which is called Fiat Money.
Anyway, given how endlessly long that linked article was - my answer is relatively short and its questionable who even asked for this answer or what the author even wanted to say.
I wont read yet another uselessly long article without a more targeted discussion of what do we even want to talk about and why - whats the question or supposed outcome?

2026-03-10 08:38:04 UTC

- reply

i dont know.
its maybe a bit od "epimetheus" vs. "prometheus", where one just does and thinks/learns later but at least makes some visible progress quickly, while the other wants to think it through upfront but takes forever until anything can happen at all.
now i just think a bit of both or whatever is one's tendency is okay, but we need actually do something at some point and cant wait forever and then learn and reflect again ... or we need to stop and think to revise at some point and cant be doing forever without ever reflecting at all.
So both models are just slightly different versions of a cyclic execution model anyway.
The point is, whether one wants to leverage in order to optimize towards centralization and power consolidation or not.
...and this is where motivations to keep thins complicated ON PURPUSE might enter the picture 🙂

2026-03-09 22:03:14 UTC

- reply

hmm.
there is of course necessary complexity inherent in whatever we make the subject, but then there are unnecessary complications too.
in "us" vs. "them" i am thinking of a mindset or an attitude (often not evil on purpose), where in any given situation somebody might opt for a lazy easy way to solve a problem, piling on technical debt and complications which is a centralizing force as long as it doesnt kill the thing just yet

2026-03-09 20:25:20 UTC

The enemy of the people is complications.
The enemy works towards unnecessary complications - instead of simplifying rules, removing lines of code, removing outdated laws, simplifying the stack, streamlining workflows, you name it, they pile on wherever they can - its more convenient, its easier in the short term, and so on... its tempting.
why do complications do that?
...because it makes things unmanageable for anyone else other than large organisations with the need to centrally manage and coordinate - that central position is where the complication leaderd position themselves to direct others in the name of managing "complications" - a powerful position where everyone is divided while the chief complicators are free to take for themselves - after all they do the important job of keeping the complications working whoch would fall apart without them and that wpuld make so many suffer...
Wherever they go, this is their modus operandi.

2026-02-27 11:23:19 UTC

- reply

...i mean, dont get me wrong -
i am familiar with elinor ostrom - and just a super shallow first impression, but wasnt convincing and havent heard of any of it before.

2026-02-27 11:21:12 UTC

- reply

hmm, soujds like bullshit to me.
read througj their FAQ and it just name drops elinor ostrom and pairs it with techno babble... without any real explanation.
i wouldnt trust it.
its says its not even ready, but it already knows its governance is 6x harder to capture ...lol

2026-02-26 21:54:38 UTC

- reply

2. the project should be governed in an open board room and implementations should be modular and easy to fork to make it easy for more and more teams to fork and run their implementation, so that funding of developer teams becomes more diverse and less risk for group think than a single undemocratic core team, which even claims their approach of devs on top pulling up others was "democratic".
1. any project succeeds if it solves one thing well and one thing only and allows anyone who wants to build another system to leverage it as a reliable building block - thus bitcoin is store of value and means of payment via lightning, anything else can be solved not by changing bitcoin but by building other systems (e.g. peer to peer) and leveraging bitcoin as a building block that provides the "money feature"

2026-02-22 01:36:31 UTC

- reply

you used time to propose USRF - but have you considered proposing an upgrade to BIP110 that mitigates the issue?

2026-02-21 06:28:32 UTC

BIP-110: The Temporary Softfork
A deep-dive game theory analysis and code audit
https://melvin.me/public/articles/bip110.html

2026-02-12 19:13:51 UTC

- reply

i hear the narrative.
and yes i am sure it is true they are trying.
but no, the futurr is not written yet and there is a chance its not going to work out their way.
we dont have another shot so we better do the best we can to spread the word and teach people to hold in self custody.
its not that we have another option. this is still the besy we have - and narratives lile this, while true, are demotivating

2026-02-12 07:21:39 UTC

- reply

mentally long article woth mentally long quoted articles.
imho, one skill is to condense things into precise summary. ...its just the same as writing minimalistic low pevel exact cod vs. piling abstrqctions over abstractions.
anyway - finally managed to read to the end.
and while the article makes sense and for governments or lets rather say controllers it makes sense to stay in gold and for them really all roas lead to gold, because its something that can inherently not be managed by people, for people and many organizations, apl roads lead to bitcoin and as pressure mounts more ppl will wake up to thos reality and the more familoar ppl get the more moves they have at their disposition and even if coordination is public and slow there is really not much that can be done about it in the long run other than being more repessive and censoring more and more, but as the world connects and young peoppe grow up and are more digitally literate there is essentially no way to stop this train.
for now hardware is still protected from ppl self organizing that, but the same was true for software decades ago ...and all we get is more literate and skilled people to join the growing army of resistance.
...anyway, all roads lead to bitcoin is true for everyone but the controllers 🙂

2026-02-01 05:25:49 UTC

Tone Vays BIP-110 Mecanic Reaction Video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JGjD-il29_M
Worth watching if you saw Tone Vays talk.
Especially around minute 8 to ponder whether claimed process transparency does actually exist as claimed by Vays.
For many people who never worked in open source it might seem very transparent, but if you did have serious open source experience you definitely notice the stark difference between these claims and reality.
In addition a core argument is that knots would mean less devs would work on bitcoin now, thus more centralized, but bitcoin works by nodes running software and that is and stays decentralized - and in addition more implementations means the devs of one implementation plus the devs of another one as well -it means additional developers and more redundancy and options - just like people benefit from multiple brower implementations instead of having just one web browser produced by one team.
Surprising Tone's talk makes so little sense - he claims he is sad about what is happening in core and v30, but he is against the decentralized governance process of people posting BIPs and coding open source to give node runners option and let the network decide in a decentralized fashion - very strange, but let me know what you think by posting your own notes here on nostr.
I think many people are very happy to have people like @nprofile…fkft with a more public profile to not let certain narratives go unchallenged and spell out what the many of us think.
And all the way to the very end, Vays not once mentions what he exactly think is problematic that is in BIP110 ...most have been waiting for him mention it at some point, but it actually seems to be purely a hit piece - something i for sure didnt expect after following is imho valuable interview series over the last month that he did together with @nprofile…dzev

2026-01-18 01:42:51 UTC

- reply

same here. XFCE, but Linux Mint insteqd of ubuntu... but the differences are minor.
Just that linux mint works more often out of the box even on exotic laptops ...doesnt matter anymore, because these days its almost alwqys lenovo thinkpads for me and nothing else

2026-01-08 08:40:57 UTC

- reply

not every linux is the same.
I can highly recommend "Linux Mint" - mostly the XFCE version, but i think others work just as well.
Over the last decade I've used it on so many different laptops i have owned and it always installs flawlessly with everything working - never had to fiddle with a wifi driver, graphics driver, webcam or microphone driver or anything at all - it just works.
I have tried many distributions over the years (gentoo, arch, ubuntu, suse, manjaro, ...and a few others) and while there might be others that will work as flawlessly as linux mint, none of the others i tried did.
The issue with "Mac" is, that while apple stuff works and is nice to use, you are opting into a stack that is just as opaque and closed and in many ways dubious as the legacy monetary system.
Bitcoin draws its power from open source just as linux does and Linux Mint shows that this doesn't mean that things have to be brittle.
just my 2 cents

2026-01-06 08:35:42 UTC

The best articles debunking bitcoin FUD
https://endthefud.org/energy

2025-12-26 00:02:07 UTC

- reply

Almost, but in fact the virus causing fraud is cured by the body turning on the bitcoin mining to stop the attack. ramping up bitcoin mining is the cure ...in healthy times, mining can chill 🙂

2025-12-16 06:27:49 UTC

- reply

3 - if real wood

2025-12-07 10:58:03 UTC

- reply

The answer is https://docs.pears.com
If you wanna get an impressi9n how battle tested it already is, checkout https://keet.io
its peer to peer thats never on the server and imho exactly the stack you are looking for 🙂

2025-12-06 06:13:58 UTC

- reply

fair enough.
As i am personally not interested in gambling though i wont build it. Anyone who is into it can build it or pay for it.
But if somebody builds it "loud beighnour" style, they will need to deal with the consequences, namely other neighbours will mitigate it one way or another - e.g. ...policy, soft or even hard forks to fight back if the gambling neighbor becomes so noisy that it affects the entire neighborhood (e.g. 50% of all transaction being gambling noise)
If the gambling neighbour doesnt want that, they should go about their gambling in a way that doesnt affect the neighbors who are not into it. ...be a good neighbor - or else deal with the consequences

2025-12-06 05:24:12 UTC

- reply

i dont really get your point.
any use case can be implemented optimized or with lots of unnecessary overhead. Usually it's your problem, but in networks it impacts others.
I'm not saying ppl who like gambling shouldnt, but if it can be implemented without affecting others who don't want it, then it should be done and it can.

2025-12-06 03:09:11 UTC

- reply

looks like yummy garlic bread to me. thx for the reminder 🙂

2025-12-05 22:07:12 UTC

The Secret History of Satoshi Dice
Arguments made in 2025 are 2013 all over again.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=apup9vrQEaM

2025-12-01 03:02:23 UTC

Zooming into the US Dollar System
https://blossom.primal.net/7d25f169b2af8cc4d5b4f872f6d66253a179e050e4cf8231a55b7a3c215e4cfa.jpg

2025-11-21 17:37:57 UTC

https://blossom.primal.net/ec63bf6a269e97cac11c3fb0043681cee0e852fd817d4d969ba78716a7a30395.jpg

2025-11-14 06:23:32 UTC

- reply

Share this video about MASF so we can support and have a wider discussion before we come into UASF territory.
We want to solve this issue as smoothly and amicable as possible given all the tention this already caused 🫡
#nevent1q…xl8l

2025-11-12 07:01:09 UTC

- reply

is it though?
global public debt is definitely growing insanely fast, but global private debt grows faster.
commercial banks who print the majorit of money are helping businesses worldwide to pay their employees - its all printed on the account of all the self employed businesses who do not have access to that money printing.
this is real world capitalism as the world knows it since the industrial revolution or even since forever.
blaming governmwnts isnt wrong, but its specificaly the money printers and those are not just government. blaming only the governmwnt is a one sided distorting story

2025-11-11 06:14:00 UTC

- reply

absolutely 🙂
#nevent1q…a0q3

2025-11-08 10:29:28 UTC

Absolutely.
https://youtube.com/shorts/yIdr3jJ9juk?si=k6n67twjutAUJbl9
This needs to become an important discussion topic to educate more people in the bitcoin community who might not yet understand this.
This will help us as a bitcoin community at large to resolve differences and avoid division

2025-11-08 06:55:23 UTC

Interesting to learn, that **Bitcoin Core** is maintained by employees.
The marketing bitcoin core was "decentralized" because it has so many contributors is a farce.
There is no formal process, but instead a handful of existing maintainers pull in/up new contributors instead of the other way around.
And of course, everyone is incentivized to stay on the payroll - ultimately who pays decides.
https://www.youtube.com/live/3BFgoQawG7Q?t=8188s
Thanks @nprofile…dzev for shedding light on this.
In fact - bitcoin developers can always ask for donations, but the point is - if you have a lot of bitcoin as a developer, you have stake in the game and helping to make bitcoin successful pays you.
True decentralization means - if we already have employees implementing, then at least lets have them paid by a diverse set of companies and not all on the same group that keeps everyone on payroll. Thats really bad.
I see knots vs. core as a huge improvement to decentralization and we should have even more implementations.

2025-11-07 01:07:51 UTC

The gist of why knots and why BIP 444 to start making it a habit to always fight spam and fight it early, because publishing spam is a cost to spammers and to deny them their (scam) business model, mean they will sit on their costs instead of making profits from it.
But if spam will cause net losses for spammers, they will not even try to spam in the first place and thus the bitcoin chain gets rid of spam, which is great.
Let's all join this "whack a mole" game to proof to scammers trying to spam means making losses to stop them from even trying in the future.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5iUVWBr0a2U

2025-11-05 09:25:27 UTC

- reply

That is why the pear stack matters (a.k.a hyper* stack) (a.k.a dat stack).
https://docs.pears.com
Its not compatible with nostr but rebuilding nostr as a concept on top of it will create nostr on steroids. More throughput with less issues.
At some point we will have to do it 🙂
Those relay issues are solved, because for any particular peer, there is a way to discover all relays that have the data, so you dont have to follow specific relays. ypu can find them on demand.
#nevent1q…pzj9

2025-11-02 23:03:36 UTC

- reply

That is why the pear stack matters (a.k.a hyper* stack) (a.k.a dat stack).
Its not compatible with nostr but rebuilding nostr as a concwpt on top of it will create nostr on steroids. More through put with less issues.
At some point we will have to do it 🙂

2025-10-31 04:02:54 UTC

Had a great time at Portland Bitdevs meetup 🙂
#portland #bitdevs #meetup
The zines they shared are great and made by @nprofile…rm6f
https://blossom.primal.net/62dd00fa85638796bddf59acd9b32967bdd9fe85a3a82f110c5c852e4682fd49.jpg
https://blossom.primal.net/c0e431bc67658e0e0dcd0a2690433f68ca58cdfd095c1e25c37ce3c76acaa735.jpg

2025-10-29 09:50:55 UTC

- reply

why not introduce policies to make it much less likely for inscriptions to succeed, or even a soft fork to redefine whats standard and valid here?
so instead of asking whether OP_RETURN or Inscriptions, why not instead fight both and solve this issue more thoroughly? 🙂

2025-10-29 07:17:35 UTC

- reply

heard some feedback:
> This is great and could be improved if supertestnet uses this config for the node:
> feefilter=0
> blockreconstructionextratxnsize=300

2025-10-28 18:57:43 UTC

📧 Satoshi Nakamoto's Writings
https://github.com/lugaxker/nakamoto-archive

2025-10-28 18:54:03 UTC

- reply

Maybe this could include libks to the source? e.g. https://github.com/lugaxker/nakamoto-archive

2025-10-26 05:26:01 UTC

Here is how to not have core30 nodes connect to your node so your mempool wont be polluted.
https://github.com/pdath/ban-bitcoin-core-v30

2025-10-25 06:43:55 UTC

- reply

I think, when Bruce Lee was interviewed and asked about Bitcoin Maxis, he actually said "...with laser-eye focus"
https://blossom.primal.net/e28c07ebdf32636e264dde89fa23328000b8dcd1b3a08ea0697dd8ca9dd72330.jpg

2025-10-25 02:32:36 UTC

Regarding "knots" vs "core30"
A future where nodes can filter based on format, but not content is what we need.
Format filter is trivial. Content filter is hard and hence centralizing.
Content filtering will be required if "core30" becomes dominat to prevent CSAM and other spam.
Format filtering wont allow OFAC, because filtering transaction based on addresses or amounts is content filtering, not format filtering.
A format is just a template or structure of a transaction and ignores the content.
This is a fundamentally important differentiation

2025-10-25 01:33:05 UTC

- reply

basically, OFAC would require the ability to filter based on content as well. the process to classify is still impossible by individual miners unless they pull in the classification from big centralized services, so i would recommend ro ensure content based filtering stays unsupported 🙂

2025-10-25 01:20:40 UTC

- reply

hm, fair enough.
the point is that anyone can add filters based on format, because simple rules can be used by anyone, no matter how small the miner.
content based filtering needs e.g. content recognition and classification, which can only be pulled of by large miners and puts small ones out of business if that is required, thus centralizing.
you bring up a third case, where e.g. the content based filtering (e.g. ofac) is done by a large third party provider and everyone is required to query them to aplly their derived rules.
still. transaction format is different from transaction content. transaction content is a specific bitcoin address.
its also an uphill battle, because addresses change and folks can make new addresses all the time, unlike bank accounts, where it is harder ...so i think your ofac still falls under content filtering

2025-10-24 21:18:55 UTC

- reply

I think an important distinction is:
1. filter based on transaction format
2. vs. filter based on transaction content
format filters are trivial. content filters are difficult.
imho filtering based on content or even intent requires centralizing complexity in filtering, while format based filters are trivial for everyone.

2025-10-23 18:56:46 UTC

- reply

is there a version of that without the instant to avoid any form of something that sounds "custodial"?
which feature does ark provide that lightning cant and why?

2025-10-23 06:08:28 UTC

- reply

i think executive function is important as well, so they cant just solve problems, but plan how to achieve goals and execute and/or delegate imho.

2025-10-23 05:45:58 UTC

- reply

if a transaction created a UTXO set and that data was lost/pruned, nobody could rebuilt that UTXO so it cant be spent or received, so if you want bitcoin as money to work, you have the cost of storing those unrelated to you and the benefit of being able to spend/receive, thus have bitcoin as a functional system.
the transactions in blocks are also needed to reconstruct/validate the chain from genesis.
not allowing or having other kinds of data is unrelated and doesnt/shouldnt cause that problem

2025-10-23 05:32:51 UTC

- reply

i hadnt heard of arc before.
it seems a counterparty is needed.
if thats true, what does that counter party do and could it be replaced by a CRDT instead?
...sry if that doesnt make any sense. ...just trying to figure out what are pros/cons compared to lightning.
if you have good links that give a good detailed summary, that wpuld help too 🙂

2025-10-21 03:43:50 UTC

- reply

The answer is https://docs.pears.com for everything

2025-10-20 05:38:29 UTC

- reply

I don't think the thumb up/down is appropriate.
RWA on bitcoin is nonsense. The link between chain and real world always needs oracles, so RWA is just better left to layer2's or other chains.
Scope Creep makes it worse for everything and everyone unnecessarily.
People should explore real peer to peer data storage solutions instead of nonsensically sticking to blockchains. Its enough to anchor to bitcoin via hash

2025-10-20 03:27:23 UTC

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xe-83tBcxhs

2025-10-20 03:20:16 UTC

- reply

Honestly, this "hell money" folks arent really serious.
They literally say stuff like:
- luke just wants to control bitcoin
- luke wants to hard fork
- luke is crazy and vibing
A lot of time is spent on all kinds of unrelated tangents, mostly name dropping and trivia, to give it a flavor or spin it in a specific direction.
They do explore some of the facts, but most of the time they just small talk around all sorts of fictional and unrelated stuff - i would say more than 50% of that episode.
I would highly recommend you to follow some more high quality content instead, especially if its such an important topic that changes the type of bitcoin nodes running in the network so significantly.
Even weirder, Adam Back explains how OP_RETURN can be pruned and witness/inscription data cant and that podcast claims the opposite between minute 50-60 of that episode.
Its so much lower quality - so much noise and very little signal compared to what i shared. I would urge you to watch the episodes i linked initially, because these include the actual people being literally involved in either core30 or knots.

2025-10-20 02:37:36 UTC

Bitcoin Transaction Fees and "block rewards" are incentivizing mining and re-imbursing the computational effort. It is not a fee that pays for storage.
Data gets stored for all of eternity and as the network grows ever more redundantly. Fees cant pay for that. Participants are willing to store blockchain data for free, because they benefit from being able to use bitcoin because of it.
The same benefit does not exist for any non-transactional data.
I think too few people are aware of bitcoin fees not paying for the storage side of things, which is an important fact to consider when weighing arguments in the core30 vs knots debate

2025-10-20 02:32:39 UTC

- reply

So I checked and i assume the "bitcoin core embraces spam" is the episode you refere to.
They dont have any special guests, its just hell money folks talking about the issues and explaining it. You claim they are the expert who know all details and can give you the best gist.
Maybe you should reconsider.
Don't you think that Adam Back, cypherpunk who is around from day1, among the first people to receive an email from satoshi nakamoto and CEO of blockstream (bitcoin core) AND... Luke Dashjr being the around since the early 2010s too who created the bitcoin knots fork initially
...would be a better source to represent all details and nuances from their perspective than hell podcast people doing their summary of both sides and drawing conclusions?
Maybe try listening to the actual folks that matter, because they are literally more or less in the driver seat on both sides.
When hell money swaggers about inscriptions and pros/cons and related context ... its not as if nothing could be done about it, but Luke (who is behind knots) suggested "bug fixes" to ordinals/inscriptions/etc... and they were not supported by core - which is evidence in line with the summary about differing "mission statements" i made initially

2025-10-20 02:07:21 UTC

- reply

You didn't summarize why you perceive this as an "insane take".
First:
I had to look up "hell money" and not sure if i found whatever you have in mind, but they have many episodes. There is a "filters dont work" from a month ago and a "bitcoin embraces spam" from 4 days ago. Others seem unrelated. Could you be more specific on what you mean?
Second:
The videos i linked arent the first time i am engaging with this topic. I engage with it on and off since it started, but because in this case it features prominent folks from both sides, i consider it important too.
Adam says many things, but in essence core30 is multiple op returns with up to 100kb by default even though inscriptions are cheaper, so incentive wise nobody would use it apart from it being an officially sanctioned standard to upload data to the chain for it to be stored for free forever by everyone.
Inscriptions and other methods are hacks or creative uses of features that were not meant to be used to store data and the knots fork wants to work towards reducing or eliminating any onchain data that isnt about transactions or rather when in doubt, deny it, while core is about give people options and let them do what they are willing to pay for because its all just data.
Feel free to share your actual reasoning what your take is or what you find so insane with the take i shared :-)...that would be more useful than vaguely pointung towards a podcast without sharing a specific link nor a summary of what it is that would give a gist about why you would claim something as strong as "insane take" followed up by basically an insult... 🙄

2025-10-19 22:01:56 UTC

- reply

Imho the strongest part of bitcoins immune system is running a node and using proof of work mining. The more bitcoin is under attack, the harder mining can go.
Currently that immune system is running in overdrive and will continue to do so until the end of fiat and so far its successful. Once the world has healed, maybe bitcoin mining can even chill a bit and just monitor the situation ...just like an immune system does 🙂

2025-10-19 21:49:26 UTC

Two long interviews about the knots vs core issue.
One with Jimmy Song and Adam Back.
The other with Luke Dashjr and Mechanic And Jimmy Song as well.
It goes back and forth a lot and both sides present their side.
It's nuanced and they touch every detail
https://www.youtube.com/live/9p_OBGQityg
https://www.youtube.com/live/UtGC5wRWB3k
My personal take:
After a lot of back and forth, it really boils down to whether you want long term development towards bitcoin as money (store of value, payments, ...) or highly expensive but resilient general data storage.
Knots mission statement is the former.
Cores mission statement is the latter.

2025-10-18 18:57:05 UTC

- reply

If github was a protocol, it would be build on top of the #pear-runtime or #bare-runtime from #holepunchto
https://bare.pears.com
https://docs.pears.com
Thats the only seriously viable approach🙂

2025-10-12 04:54:47 UTC

https://blossom.primal.net/c23d2456d40bc27b274261e7cc3b836b0a4eefc02c6832a98b264cfdb24f117c.jpg

2025-10-07 22:25:56 UTC

- reply

That seems like a good thing

2025-10-03 20:24:32 UTC

- reply

This is my politics.
This is bitcoin politics. ❤️❤️❤️
Everyone who claims their politics is discriminating against specific groups is a bot trying to give bitcoin a bad name - don't fall for it.
#nevent1q…tplv

2025-10-03 20:14:20 UTC

- reply

yes. i am aware of them since forever... 15+ years for sure... maybe even 20+ years....
Its a shame hpw long amazing stuff needs to survive frugal to eventually get noticed and maybe have a break through...
...the amazing stuff is around forever, but if people arent ready and support it, then the most amazing project will struggle.

2025-09-30 21:29:01 UTC

- reply

yeah, depemdingnon what "right" even means. ..i have a big problem with like nazi rightwing in the sense of actual nazis or people who think like the germans during world war 2.
the thing is today, rightwing often means libertarian or pro free market and other value often associated with people in these circles.
i might not agree with all of that, but i also dont have to. The point is more a live and let live, everyone takes responsibility for themselves and associated with others based on consent..
No matter how much you agree or not agree... the core principle here is consent based and o do agree with that.
let ppl find like minded folks and give each one the freedom to live the way they want to and maybe that leads to something good that can inspire others to copy and change, rather than forcing others to change... like what we see so much under a fiat system imho

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.

2025-09-30 16:40:06 UTC

- reply

i guess thats the case on any or many other types of conferences as well. Its really sad. This should be called out more often.
I guess there are always people who assume, just because many others agree with their opinion on bitcoin, that they obviously must also share all other opinions.
I personally find it ridiculous to see all the narratives about carnivore diets, christianity/bible stuff, traditional views on marriage and kids and so many others - as if bitcoin needs any of that.
It might as well be an attack - a campaign - maybe even folks paid to go and associate bitcoin with plenty of narratives most people dont want to associate themselves with and thus stay away from bitcoin. This is really bad and sad and i hope we can successfully "fight back" and/or convince ppl who are actually into what i mentioned above to tone it down for the sake and importance of bitcoin - because it unnecessarily divides or prevents many from joining the important cause of bitcoin

2025-09-30 16:00:50 UTC

- reply

li would literally walk away from such people or ignore/mute/block them online.
I dont think its related to bitcoin though. they exist inside and outside of bitcoin and are most numerous in traditional fiat.

2025-09-29 23:28:10 UTC

- reply

i think bitcoiners pretty much do believe in free markets. maybe you are surrounded by pseudo bitcoiners bubble?

2025-09-27 23:51:17 UTC

- reply

i'd be interesting in a recording of that to listen to questions and answers from people more familiar with the details 🙂

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.