Judge Hardcase

Public Key

npub1k7v6uflqxu9js45e8ek53u2azefe6j49r7lna0da90zq7c9y6f0q8x7ehv

Profile Code

nprofile1qqst0xdwylsrwzeg26vnum2g79w3v5uaf2j3l0e7hk7jh3q0vzjdyhspz3mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduqs6amnwvaz7tmwdaejumr0dsq3yamnwvaz7tm0venxx6rpd9hzuur4vgq32amnwvaz7tmjv4kxz7fwwa5hxupww3skc6cpzamhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumn0wd68ytnhv96xx6qpzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgn3lxta

Publishing to

Author Public Key

npub1k7v6uflqxu9js45e8ek53u2azefe6j49r7lna0da90zq7c9y6f0q8x7ehv

Show more details

Last Notes

2026-07-14 13:00:32 UTC

- reply

Removing federal senators' accountability to their respective state legislatures couldn't have been a more clear consolidation of power.

2026-07-14 10:02:04 UTC

- reply

IMO, 'fail' is a bit loaded in this context. The ability for even a small minority to fork off out of a perceived existential necessity is absolutely vital to the health of bitcoin overall. (though, I'm not convinced such a necessity is actually being perceived by most bip110 supporters)
That being said, if bip110 were to split off with say 5% of the hash rate, I find it hard to imagine them being satisfied with the corresponding 200-minute block times until they finally reached their first difficulty adjustment ~40 weeks later. I think it's much more likely in such a scenario that they would just pivot to a hard fork instead in order to adjust the difficulty right off the bat (which would then fairly be viewed as a failed soft fork attempt).

2026-07-11 14:00:12 UTC

- reply

https://xcancel.com/adam3us/status/2075884851794735602

2026-07-08 16:06:01 UTC

- reply

https://npub1k7v6uflqxu9js45e8ek53u2azefe6j49r7lna0da90zq7c9y6f0q8x7ehv.blossom.band/b27992022f39b90c36364a4a9e586795b8130ca912bb5fdc0ce6a7f92126f2d3.gif

2026-07-07 20:34:33 UTC

- reply

Suddenly, my craving for a grilled cheese has morphed into a craving for a monte cristo.

2026-07-04 01:28:46 UTC

- reply

I'm pretty sure selling their nightstands is just the last step before selling their chairs. 😉

2026-07-03 21:46:19 UTC

- reply

So... never mind, I guess, that in that very document that declared freedom from British rule, the signees thereof also declared themselves to be "the Representatives of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA"?

2026-07-02 16:39:41 UTC

- reply

The truth is that I don't really know how I'm supposed to Nostr... I suspect there's a very good chance that my reach is limited by my lack of understanding in how I should be making use of relays.
* If so, I'm sure it's entirely my own fault... I've just been too lazy (so far) to put in the effort to learn.

2026-07-02 15:28:10 UTC

- reply

My bad... I sometimes forget that not everybody had been involved in as many pointless arguments on the interwebs as I have over the years. 😜

2026-07-02 14:59:18 UTC

- reply

just pointing out (poorly) that purity tests are just a form of the No True Scotsman fallacy.

2026-07-02 14:33:08 UTC

- reply

You, sir, are No True Scotsman.

2026-06-28 16:06:25 UTC

- reply

It feels like Trump declared victory; then, everyone pointed out that 3+ months of his war didn't change anything for the better; so, he decided the war had to go into overtime (and I'm assuming he's just going to blame Iran... if he isn't already).

2026-06-28 13:58:13 UTC

- reply

O, it's in motion alright. Unfortunately, motion doesn't imply in which direction. 🤣

2026-06-27 02:43:45 UTC

My base case (by far) is that #BTC starts going up again, and #Strategy continues to be fine (indeed thrives) for the foreseeable future.
If, however, BTC stays too low and/or goes much lower for a long enough time, the first real crack in the armor will be the first missed dividend payment... in #STRD... because that's obviously the buffer that STRD was built to be (nevertheless, people will freak out that Strategy missed a dividend payment.
If stress then persists even further, Strategy will eventually make the decision to permanently suspend dividend payments on #STRC... but only after systematically lowering the dividend rate as quickly as possible as low as it will go - because (as I understand it) once dividend payments are suspended, the rate is frozen, and those dividends will continue to accumulate on paper potentially forever.
In this latter case, a substantial amount of BTC is likely to be sold while navigating these troubled waters; but there's no way Strategy sells anywhere near all of their BTC just to be able to pay STRC dividends that they have complete discretion to suspend indefinitely at any time for any reason.
Anyway, that's how I see it. Full disclosure: I have no intention of ever getting anywhere near any of these fiat games myself.
* this is not financial advice. 😉

2026-06-26 14:34:22 UTC

- reply

Nostr's inherent incentive is that it's freedom tech. Most normies just don't yet care about freedom tech.
IMO, it's a waste of time trying to convince someone by dangling an incentive they just don't care about. Instead, I would try to educate them (assuming they are at all receptive to being educated) on why they should recognize freedom tech in general as being important to them - then, convincing won't be necessary.

2026-06-26 13:25:54 UTC

- reply

"How many dice rolls is enough?... I did at least like 5 or 6... is that good?"
"Your bitcoin is already gone."

2026-06-25 14:01:40 UTC

- reply

and... boom!
https://npub1k7v6uflqxu9js45e8ek53u2azefe6j49r7lna0da90zq7c9y6f0q8x7ehv.blossom.band/ee083bc4499451643d5f2b9d173572632de990f8994228100bed0c3f9af984c1.png

2026-06-25 13:59:31 UTC

- reply

https://npub1k7v6uflqxu9js45e8ek53u2azefe6j49r7lna0da90zq7c9y6f0q8x7ehv.blossom.band/72eb06424a9d37c82736b5655737d52f42fdcc60aad59992154976c2b0474398.gif

2026-06-25 13:56:03 UTC

well, that didn't take long... do we have to wait until exactly $58,000.00 is achieved?
#nevent1q…88ym

2026-06-25 13:51:43 UTC

and.... Wall Street is back open (58K back in play)
#nevent1q…5002

2026-06-24 20:34:05 UTC

- reply

Well, if they end up causing trouble, we have @npub1q3s…d26p to blame then. 😜

2026-06-24 20:28:36 UTC

- reply

So, I'm guessing since no lightning network, all their zaps are on-chain?...
It doesn't seem like it could be merely coincidence that they seemed to pop up so soon after the recent on-chain zaps mini-controversy here.

2026-06-24 20:14:24 UTC

Unsurprisingly, it looks like the the closing bell has has shut down Wall Street's shenanigans for the day, spurring on a modest after hours pump.
Until next time, 58K...

2026-06-24 18:55:06 UTC

- reply

Yeah, putting the choice of shipping company in the hands of the customer would seem like a reasonable ask.

2026-06-24 18:03:24 UTC

- reply

The world of shipping is still entrenched in the fiat world - particularly international shipping. There is no permissionless shipping protocol in any practical sense. Coinkite does what it can to keep its own house clean; but can’t reasonably be expected to take responsibility for what the shipping industry does to protect customer data. Regardless of what Coinkite does to protect user data, there is no perfect protection. Ultimately, the onus is on Coinkite’s customers to consider these factors when taking responsibility for their own security.
IMO, the above statement would have been a reasonable response to this situation. Unfortunately, the response chosen so far has been nothing like it.
FWIW, Coinkite’s privacy policy - which indicates that the shipping company with which it must share customer data has its own privacy policy - is effectively saying this same thing when you read between the lines.

2026-06-23 18:29:21 UTC

- reply

Here is some discussion regarding what sounds like a similar (at least) letter:
#nevent1q…pujf

2026-06-19 13:54:49 UTC

LFG!!! 🚀
#nevent1q…52ng

2026-06-17 13:40:46 UTC

- reply

... which raises the possibility that the 0.9% fee might still apply if the merchant happened to choose to keep btc rather than auto-convert btc to dollars. 🤔

2026-06-17 13:32:21 UTC

- reply

no 0.9% fee? Interesting. Makes perfect sense, though, to waive that fee when you're just paying one of their other clients via square (they likely aren't even actually converting to BTC since they can just adjust the custodied balances on each side of the transaction).
*I'm going to assume someone of authority there is aware of that toggle... just not the minimum wage employee running the cash register at the time. 😉

2026-06-15 16:13:19 UTC

- reply

💯
#nevent1q…7r0s

2026-06-15 14:47:41 UTC

So, last week Strategy sold MSTR at an average price of ~$121/share and bought BTC at an average price of ~$63K. With BTC that low, IMO, this will almost certainly end up being a good move.
Unfortunately, just last month, at their Q1 earnings call, they revealed the slide below to explain when selling shares to buy BTC would be accretive (and vice versa). Based on the average prices above, prior to these moves, their BTC Reserves sat at ~$53B, and their ADSO Market Cap sat at only ~$46B - well below the "BPS Accretive Breakeven" point as indicated by their own slide.
As per usual, Saylor's biggest PR problem (and likely rating agency problem, btw) isn't that he's selling equities to buy bitcoin... it's that he keeps saying one thing while doing another.
https://npub1k7v6uflqxu9js45e8ek53u2azefe6j49r7lna0da90zq7c9y6f0q8x7ehv.blossom.band/e4a47fab9b038d1065e6ca584c37f1dbcd31219dec4a06ffe0f2616068b7f0eb.png

2026-06-12 23:34:14 UTC

- reply

I would delete my twitter account, if I could. It was suspended about 8 years ago, and I was informed it would be reinstated after I verified it by providing phone number - at which point, I instead to decided to just abandon it out of principle. AFAIK, it still exists, but I don't care enough to verify it just so I can delete it.
For all its faults, at least Nostr is pure.
*I don't really care whether or not people quit Twitter; or whether or not they go back. Though, making a big public spectacle about either just seems like a lot of main character syndrome to me. 🤷

2026-06-08 15:46:21 UTC

- reply

Not exactly. 15.5K in 2022 was obviously lower than the previous cycle's high of 20K in 2017.
IMO, a much better demonstration of bitcoin's 4-year 'cycle' consistent resilience is that the 200-week moving average has never trended down... ever:
https://image.nostr.build/6e20f8319a3b8f0c77b010758c48d4a41ec66c81618867ba96bb14739a17650f.png

2026-06-04 15:21:20 UTC

- reply

I'm just going to take this as confirmation that Big Macs aren't made from actual ground beef. 😉

2026-05-31 14:33:20 UTC

- reply

I'm pretty sure the cycle is inversely correlated with bitcoin's price volatility.

2026-05-30 14:20:05 UTC

- reply

https://image.nostr.build/c52282a82b3b7717f4262d58f4cb4d94909d6c492007991b0e6fa356f908bf00.gif

2026-05-29 16:52:55 UTC

- reply

Just make sure to keep it hidden from your deck guy, I guess?

2026-05-28 00:28:31 UTC

- reply

Yep... also makes it easier to for a bitcoin user who might not want anything to do with dollars to send btc that shows up as dollars for a cashapp user who might not yet want anything to do with bitcoin.
Meet the people where they're at.

2026-05-27 15:24:11 UTC

- reply

hmmmm... that address has only been used to receive; and 79,956.00000000 of that 79,957.26860209 BTC was from it's first receive transaction.
I don't what that implies, but the vast majority of the other 682 transactions it has received have basically just been dust.
https://mempool.space/tx/e67a0550848b7932d7796aeea16ab0e48a5cfe81c4e8cca2c5b03e0416850114

2026-05-22 17:20:33 UTC

- reply

Sen. Rubio then added "it would be like if insurance policies became obsolete by people forming their own pools of capital to pay providers directly. Just madness!!!"

2026-05-18 11:06:02 UTC

Nostr is amazing freedom technology!
Also, if you think 200 replies a day would feel to restrictive, go touch some grass.
Also, if you make 50 original posts in 1 day, you're getting unfollowed. 😉
#nevent1q…09ap

2026-05-17 13:00:06 UTC

- reply

#nevent1q…npmr

2026-05-17 11:53:47 UTC

"Noobs should be able to send/receive Bitcoin secured only by ther nsec"
"Noobs shouldn't have to worry about securing their nsec to use Nostr"
This doesn't end well for noobs... and therefore, nor does it for the adoption of Nostr.

2026-05-14 20:26:47 UTC

- reply

I don't think it has to be different. Every additional pull of the trigger is an additional risk.
That being said, IMO, most of us probably shouldn't be putting ourselves in a position where we should care that much if our nsec were to get compromised in the first place.

2026-05-14 19:43:22 UTC

- reply

I will 2nd the CashApp suggestion. Yes, you would have the same KYC exposure as Venmo or Zelle; but, from CashApp's perspective, you aren't necessarily ever possessing any BTC yourself. CashApp just debits your fiat account and pays some anon lightning invoice on your behalf (with no fees nor spread).

2026-05-12 21:40:48 UTC

SO BULLISH!!!
#nevent1q…yqss

2026-05-12 20:38:07 UTC

- reply

BREAKING: Police Union worried that preserving civil rights would make their jobs harder.
I'm shocked, I tell ya! Just Shocked! 😲

2026-05-12 17:49:53 UTC

#nevent1q…54ca
Wow, with only the bare minumum 51 votes.... I can't help but be reminded when: 🫏
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/reid-invokes-nuclear-option-to-get-obama-nominees-approved/

2026-05-12 15:34:10 UTC

- reply

No. It actually doesn't. Not as a backup for the device. Only as a backup to decrypt the app-key in the cloud.

2026-05-12 15:28:40 UTC

- reply

Not exactly. The recovery contact does not act as a backup for the device. The recovery contact acts *only* as a secodary decryption key for the cloud backup of your app key - in case you lost your primary decryption key (i.e. you *also* lost your bitkey device).
In brief:
The process for recovering from *only* a lost phone is to use the device to decrypt the cloud backup.
The process for recovering from *only* a lost device is to get a new one, and then use your phone app to direct Bitkey to rotate your funds to a new 2-of-3 multisig corresponding to your new device.
The process for recovering from *both* a lost phone *and* a lost device is first: restore your phone app via your recovery contact; then, second: follow the process above for recovering from a lost device.
https://image.nostr.build/79e8bc6d37d69d011de9230cc4f38f341c20cd5034eefb1c439dc46f7c08522b.jpg
There is NO mechanism for recovering the key from your device - even by Block itself. This is intentional by design. They advertise this as a selling point.

2026-05-12 11:23:26 UTC

- reply

My main gripe with Bitkey is that even if all of the Bitkey system works exactly as it's supposed to, it's impossible to back up the hardware device's key. Because of this - unlike virtually any other hardware wallet - If it gets lost, stolen, or broken, you are no longer in control. Instead, you have become absolutely dependent on Bitkey's servers for recovery. *in case it's not clear, the 'cloud backup' is only for recovery of the key managed by the phone app. There is NO mechanism for recovering the key in the hardware device.
For me, full control of 2-of-3 keys would sufficiently qualify as 'full control'. It's just that you aren't in full control of a key if you can't make a copy of it.

2026-05-12 10:48:17 UTC

- reply

I'm not really faulting Danny either. The show is entertainment. It has sponsors. It is what it is.
Bitkey's dishonest advertising is very annoying... and, I can't imagine they're doing themselves any favors by having even a whiff of scamminess in the Bitcoin community. It's getting rarer and rarer to see a podcast not sponsored by them, though.

2026-05-12 10:30:25 UTC

- reply

Yeah, I think the difference is that Strategy isn't a sponsor of the show (Bitkey is). I mean, I love Danny, but I'm chalking this 'interview' up as a sellout.

2026-05-12 09:56:16 UTC

- reply

Was that an infomercial?
The best question Danny asked "[are hardcore bitcoiners losing anything by using Bitkey]?" was the only time Pollock had to pause... but Danny almost immediately let him off the hook by re-framing the question (i.e. asking a different question) "[I mean, was it built for normies or bitcoiners]?". It was as if Pollock's hesitation to answer the initial question was a signal to Danny that he had asked a question he wasn't supposed to ask. Everything else were complete softballs.

2026-05-09 13:07:07 UTC

- reply

Yeah, I'm in no way defending Coffee...
Jeff and Saylor have definitely been consistent in acknowledging that there are risks. However, I think their "[as long as you believe in Bitcoin]" marketing narrative is a bit disingenuous and hand-wavey.

2026-05-09 12:52:52 UTC

- reply

From the SATA prospectus (which was obviously borrowed almost word for word from Strategy's STRC):
"our board of directors or any duly authorized committee thereof may choose not to pay accumulated dividends on the SATA Stock for any reason...if we fail to
declare and pay accumulated dividends on the SATA Stock in full, then the value of the SATA Stock will likely decline."
I find it hard to call anything a 'scam' that is so transparently risky. The problem I have is that nobody seems to like talking about these risks. "We have enough reserves to pay dividends for X number of years" is all well and good, but that's not the same as a guarantee that's how they would choose to make use of those reserves.
It's not difficult to imagine a prolonged bear market scenario - but still well above BTC going anywhere near zero - where these companies decide to just rug their preferred stock investors "for any reason" out of interest for maintaining some sort of acceptable price for their common stock.
https://www.fidelity.com/bin-public/600_Fidelity_Institutional/fidelityinstitutional/Application/AP154833/documents/clients/SATALV/SATALVred.pdf

2026-05-09 11:50:55 UTC

- reply

Just avoid this fiat mindset altogether and insist on living your life - to include forming your personal partnerships - without any requirement for permission nor endorsement from the state.

2026-05-07 20:34:10 UTC

- reply

For me, it will forever be the "Washington Football Team" just for being the dumbest name ever.

2026-05-05 10:11:52 UTC

- reply

💯 I get Booth's point that any participation in fiat serves to strengthen fiat (at your expense).
However, what I think he gets wrong is that pricing in fiat isn't necessarily participating in fiat any more than pricing in Big Macs would necessarily mean you're supporting McDonald's.
Prices are just information. The reality is that information is meaningless unless the language of that informations is reasonably stable - which the purchasing power of Bitcoin is obviously not.

2026-05-04 13:05:32 UTC

- reply

#nevent1q…n7j4

2026-05-04 12:57:39 UTC

- reply

UPDATE: apparently the rebuttals were already making the rounds. Though, I can't necessarily speak to impartiality here, either - as the author's X profile identifies as a "research scientist on Google's quantum computing team"; so, accept that expertise from a supposable competitor for what it is, I suppose.
But, also, FWIW, it appears the contest runners themselves are retroactively acknowledging the now exposed weaknesses of the winning entry while simultaneously still insisting on its demonstration of progress towards a quantum threat. 🙄
https://algassert.com/post/2601

2026-05-03 17:10:26 UTC

- reply

STRC not really an option as a source of capital while still trying to get back to $100 par.
Though, I would expect issuance of more common shares pretty soon regardless - even if just for the sake of replenishing the dollar reserve in order to support more dividend obligations into the future.

2026-05-01 18:17:14 UTC

- reply

Turns out my dumb brother is really a super genious investor: Down 0%:
https://image.nostr.build/bc3e52cd0191b9cb645f9a3a61812fdb36673952d5a93169263fe60334780266.jpg

2026-05-01 18:09:28 UTC

- reply

Correction: The subheadline is correct: public debt is at ~$31.27T.
It's just the conflation of terms "national debt" and "public debt" in the main headline (and pretty much everywhere else) that is erroneous - which, TBH, I initially did as well.

2026-05-01 16:54:26 UTC

- reply

https://image.nostr.build/d5180c37590630ed1773003eb00f2a9184f58c140f477daab688a8b956d9c2b2.gif

2026-05-01 16:48:13 UTC

- reply

O please, God. NO!!!
https://image.nostr.build/e78d6f2957cf1915a89844aacd0eb1d7c9b2bf7ffe2525355d18259c440e5127.jpg

2026-05-01 16:28:22 UTC

- reply

BTW, also Fox News Headline: 🤣
https://image.nostr.build/af8b021b2c037429036f5bf8d69ca0083982fbccce1494d4b4359c8a1c7bd942.jpg

2026-05-01 16:13:11 UTC

- reply

#nevent1q…vvs0

2026-05-01 16:10:25 UTC

Ummm... Wut? The national debt is not at $31.27T; it's well above $38T.
I'd accuse someone of trying to gaslight the public into thinking things aren't as bad as they *actually* are; but upon closer inspection, this just looks like 'news' outlets lazily regurgitating the same erroneous slop. (If the Bureau of Economic Analysis is indeed the source of this, they appear to have since taken it down).
#nevent1q…459h

2026-04-29 23:35:37 UTC

- reply

#SteanNShake, yeah, bitcoin is way more economically efficient than credit cards; but, if you really wanted more credit card customers to choose to use bitcoin instead, perhaps it would makes sense to maybe split those savings benefits with them for doing so?
For example, I noticed Cashapp is now rewarding 5% back to their customers who pay Square merchants in Bitcoin. Granted, that's only for Cashapp users; but at least it's a step in the right direction.

2026-04-29 15:49:09 UTC

- reply

I am hopeful that miniscript will become widely useful enough for easy to use self-soverign inheritance wallets. I think you can kind of get there already with Nunchuk, for example (though, I haven't taken the time to play around with it yet)... but even then, I'm pretty sure the wallet balance would be available to the would-be beneficiary - which isn't ideal.
Of course, all of this would require tranining your would-be beneficiary on multi-sig wallets and the seed phrases, wallet desccriptors, etc that entails... which is generally a pretty big ask at this time. I expect that to slowly change the more Bitcoin wins, though.

2026-04-29 15:28:59 UTC

- reply

Yeah, putting my concerns aside, bitkey does offer a pretty nifty solution to the inheritance problem.
I'm not a self-sovereign or nothing kinda guy. It's trade-offs all the way down. I'm mostly coming from a position of wanting to point out the risks that Block's marketing seems to routinely neglect, IMO. Sure, I know. What should I expect?: it's just marketing; but, it still annoys me. 😉

2026-04-29 15:05:51 UTC

- reply

True. As long as you still have a working bitkey device, you should be good. (with the caveat that the typical bitkey user would likely have to find someone more technically capable in order to make use of that "break glass" receovery mechanism 😉)

2026-04-29 14:51:24 UTC

- reply

PS. and this is all with the stipulation that Block is an honest actor to begin with.

2026-04-29 14:47:30 UTC

- reply

Pretty nifty as long as nothing goes wrong.
The bitkey device is intentionally designed so that the key it holds cannot be backed up (even by Block). If it gets lost, stolen, or broken, etc, the user is then inherently relying on Block to rotate funds to a new 2-of-3 keyset for use with a replacement bitkey device.
There's a lot that can go wrong there that's out of the user's hands (and even a little that could plausibly go wrong that would be out of Block's hands as well).

2026-04-29 13:38:20 UTC

- reply

If you're still at the blackjack table, that's just the effects of the pure oxygen that the casino has been pumping in to keep you feeling euphoric. You may not have noticed that it's now tomorrow. Go to bed already! 😉

2026-04-27 18:09:18 UTC

- reply

Yeah, 15 bits is still a long way from 256. That being said, a 15 bit key - if truly arbitarily chosen - is starting to get my attention.
... also gotta say, though, that a company whose business it is to sell security from quantum offering prizes for supposed proof of vulnerabilities to quantum does smell a bit sus on the surface. I would expect to see pretty soon an impartial analysis of what was actually accomplished here.
https://blog.projecteleven.com/posts/project-eleven-awards-1-btc-q-day-prize-for-largest-quantum-attack-on-elliptic-curve-cryptography-to-date

2026-04-27 10:40:57 UTC

- reply

GO CARDS!!!... next time. 😉

2026-04-24 17:13:50 UTC

- reply

meh. This is nothing new. There are literally thousands of networks of money - each with its own governance consensus - that don't care about my keys.
Cryptographic ownership on the network(s) of money that I choose to recognize is only relevant to the extent that others make that same choice - regardless of any 'consensus' that voluntarily (or otherwise) make a separate choice. This has inherently always been the deal.

2026-04-23 10:03:46 UTC

- reply

I agree. But in regard to this specific story, we're apparently still only talking about an 'investigation'. Stipulating to the facts as given, I think it warrants a deeper look to see if there was any actual unlawful complicity; i.e. conspiracy (though, I doubt it).
With that context "[a human would be facing murder charges]" just sounds like grandstanding to me.

2026-04-17 18:05:51 UTC

- reply

Exactly... and the difference is ~$2.8bn in new shares available for those buyers to exploit compared to like $1.5bn (I think) last month.

2026-04-17 17:27:54 UTC

- reply

My theory is it has more to do with new issuance of $STRC leading up to the ex-div date: $1bn worth last week + reportedly (unofficial) another $1.8bn worth by Tuesday this week. That's a lot of new shares that can be bought for $100; earn a $1 dividend for holding on ex-div date; then dump onto the market at less (potentially much less)) than a $1 discount. That can be a pretty good return per share for just a day or 2 of work.

2026-04-16 20:57:37 UTC

- reply

Do the drivers look anything like these guys? 😁
https://image.nostr.build/426b7d3e98d8e7303be290e2f7001dc1d7eea58c4a485bd6eb57e5968120ba5d.jpg

2026-04-16 20:53:44 UTC

- reply

Seems like it could be really easy to disguise unrelated inflows of cash as "towing revenue".

2026-04-16 16:26:44 UTC

"Let's agree it would be good for both of us to stop beating the shit out of each other.... but only after we beat the shit out of each other for another 6 hours first."
#nevent1q…9k2f

2026-04-15 16:02:38 UTC

- reply

In the context that I'm not qualified to give financial advice 😉, something ranging from a savings account that's FDIC insured if near-zero risk is tolerable; to a Money Market Fund if slightly more risk is tolerable; to maybe STRC if significantly more risk is tolerable.
To be clear, while I don't really consider this at all probably in the near future, Strategy could just choose to stop paying dividends for whatever reason or for no reason. That's a risk I wouldn't be willing to take for 3-6 months' worth of expenses in emergency savings, for example.

2026-04-15 11:47:47 UTC

- reply

Yeah, because of how much BTC had already accumulated, 2% CAGR is probably plenty for *current* obligations. However, to me, that's the wrong metric for considering adding new obligations into the future. The hurdle rate to justify selling more STRC in order to buy more BTC ought to be the 11.5% (albeit, variable) rate that particular move will cost into the future.
Just stay humble and stack sats (agreed).

2026-04-15 11:26:14 UTC

- reply

Well, like I said, I'm not betting against it... but from my perspective, MSTR bros grossly underestimate the risks - particularly being willfully blind to the inherent counter-party risks entirely... which might suggest why many bitcoiners aren't fans: for whom, eliminating counter-party risk was kinda supposed to be the whole point.
It's all good. You do you.

2026-04-15 11:09:20 UTC

- reply

1.
Personally, I'm not betting on MSTR to fail (though there is more risk than just holding BTC)... I was just answering a simple question.
PS. if/when Strategy ever misses any dividend payment, that golden goose will have been killed forever.

2026-04-15 11:01:17 UTC

- reply

because as @npub1qny…95gx indicated, increasing the div gets STRC back to par... it only took about 9 months for that rate to be increased from 9% to 11.5%.

2026-04-15 09:49:37 UTC

- reply

Yeah, another way to say this is that Saylor is creating new supply faster than there is demand for it. The yield ought to reduce to the extant demand eventually catches up (if that doesn't encourage Saylor to just increase supply even faster - which seems like would be a big if).

2026-04-11 01:11:37 UTC

- reply

I foresee a fork. The unfortunate reality is that the majority fork will likely be those acting out of self-interest (i.e. rationalize the freezing of others' coins) rather than for the good of the protocol (respect for some concept of property rights).
Of course, even without quantum, this sort of battle was always inevitable. Eventually, the U.S. government will force U.S. businesses to move to a fork that enables the government to effectively freeze UTXOs at will. That will account for an awful lot of custodied BTC and hash power.
In either case, what will be interesting to see is how many of the rest of us will be strong enough to stick to our principals and how many will turn out to just have been pretenders all along.

2026-04-11 00:31:07 UTC

- reply

As long as the BTC they buy is appreciating faster in the long run than dividend expenses, they could always just sell some of that BTC to pay dividends if they had to - regardless of an MSTR premium or not. The premium just provides an option to sell more MSTR instead of selling BTC outright.. That is to say, the MSTR premium is somewhat incidental vis a vis the business model.
The real trick is not going too long with BTC not appreciating faster than dividend expenses.

2026-04-09 14:53:40 UTC

- reply

Zero confirmation... My guess is ships will still be well within missile range should a payment happen to be reversed. 😉

2026-04-09 00:15:19 UTC

How is speculation that Adam Back is Satoshi even newsworthy? I mean, hasn't Adam been near the top of any such list since like forever? At least HBO's Peter Todd speculation was a little bit out of left field.
Also, apparently, the only reason the recent NYT 'journalist' ever even became suspicious of Adam was because of how tense and uncomfortable he seemed during those HBO interviews. Has anyone ever seen an interview of Adam where he didn't seem tense and uncomfortable?
#nevent1q…sqtk

2026-04-08 23:53:32 UTC

- reply

"can't be traced"? An indefinite number of $1M transactions? Good luck with that.
"...or confiscated"? No prob... at least not until the CRQC fantasy somehow becomes reality.

2026-04-05 11:49:42 UTC

- reply

It seems to me the best shot for a new user to spark engagement is not to just cold post a note to the world - but rather, to start participating in already engaging conversations. So, maybe the default feed for new users ought to be recent trending notes (like within the last hour at most)... and hopefully, they can come up with something of value to add.
Of course, this still doesn't guarantee anyone will follow you - but that kinda seems more like a reality of life than a challenge for nostr. 🤷

2026-04-04 16:24:44 UTC

- reply

yeah, I'm in pretty hard denial about coming to the realization that I'm going to have to abandon iPhone. After like 15+ years of my dynamic playlists automatically adjusting according to my play counts, it's not going to be any easy transition.

2026-04-04 14:09:02 UTC

- reply

Good. This outta translate into a much larger market-share for hobbyists (i.e. decentralization). 🙌

2026-04-04 14:00:27 UTC

- reply

...you mean other than an s-load of forced updates/reboots? 🤣
Been almost 10 years on Linux for me... The only thing I miss is being able to update music on my iPhone via iTunes - so, I do keep Windows 10 on its own bootable USB drive just so I can still do that every few weeks or so.