jimbocoin
jimbocoin 🃏

1. The #Bitcoin mempool just cleared.
2. All these Bitcoin treasury companies are supposedly buying.
Conclusion: it’s all a fugazi. https://media1.tenor.com/m/yiN2pqhJ6BoAAAAC/trollszn123-fugazi.gif

2025-06-24 16:49:17 GMT

- reply

Agreed. Keep coming back to kindness.

2025-06-24 16:40:22 GMT

Be kind to yourself, anon. No negative self-talk. Keep coming back to kindness.
#note1c7x…060x

2025-06-20 11:35:12 GMT

- reply

What are the “profits” from “real estate”? Do you mean speculative appreciation? Or do you mean income from leasing?

2025-06-20 10:47:55 GMT

- reply

The thing is, if they did what they said they did (seed stays on device) they could be quite cool. Like turning phones into hardware wallets.
BUT, they have a “sync” feature in which the content is encrypted so that it can be sent to another device. This would be OK if the encryption key was known only to the recipient device…
BUT, the encryption key is actually your PIN. The intermediary (Apple, etc.) holds the “encrypted” payload, so that if you lose your phone, you can get a new one, download the encrypted passkey DB, and decrypt it with your same PIN.
This search space is incredibly tiny (4-6 digits). So any attacker with access to the encrypted payloads can easily brute force it to get everything. So the security of your sync’d passkeys is entirely reliant on the intermediary.
It’s “trust me bro” security masquerading as sovereignty.

2025-06-18 10:42:46 GMT

- reply

Rothbard’s “Egalitarianism as a Revolt Against Nature” is a good collection of essays.

2025-06-12 22:19:16 GMT

Should I get Mass Effect trilogy for my SteamDeck? #asknostr

2025-06-12 16:18:32 GMT

If there’s one thing I’ve learned from #AI, it’s that all my ideas are absolutely correct.

2025-06-07 18:58:32 GMT

Having #Bitcoin is like achieving enlightenment. Whatever the gov does is OK.
Print, don’t print. Spend, don’t spend. Tariff, don’t tariff. Bitcoin doesn’t care.

2025-05-31 20:33:57 GMT

- reply

I don’t know how to extract it

2025-05-31 18:23:25 GMT

Those Frederich/Selma Hayek memes have come to life! Selma Hayek is now using her reach to share immigration economic stats. 🤩 https://www.instagram.com/reel/DIJ03jXoNRc/?igsh=MTh6dzJoNjhzZGthOA==

2025-05-30 13:25:59 GMT

S U P E R C Y C L E
#note1h09…h47h

2025-05-30 12:24:39 GMT

- reply

Correct.
Plus, in the private sector, you get paid by the institution.
In Soviet academia, institution charges you!

2025-05-30 12:14:43 GMT

On the third hand…
S U P E R C Y C L E
#note17z5…adf2

2025-05-29 16:48:05 GMT

Starting to feel like a rewatch of Margin Call is in order

2025-05-29 15:24:36 GMT

- reply

The top is in. We had a good run.

2025-05-21 02:41:35 GMT

- reply

Should be millions of dollars by now. Amazing how slow people are to catch on. Truly.

2025-05-21 02:15:59 GMT

When a boomer nocoiner complains their portfolio is down 20% and now they can’t retire this year like they planned.
Me: https://media1.tenor.com/m/c980sTBcQ5cAAAAC/first-time-meme.gif

2025-05-08 20:27:35 GMT

If you *really* want to disincentivize spam on #Bitcoin, you should champion a block size decrease.
Making block space more scarce improves decentralization. It reduces the cost to start and run a node. And it will push fees up, making spam unaffordable.
That’ll show’em.

2025-05-07 17:19:10 GMT

- reply

He’s not wrong tho

2025-05-05 20:06:31 GMT

But is the plural “shitcoiners” or “shits coiner”?

2025-05-05 20:05:12 GMT

“A whole nother”

2025-05-05 16:48:03 GMT

- reply

I’m sure it’s researchable. Like computing the percentage full blocks over time as a line chart. From the shape of that curve we should be able to reasonably predict when we’ll hit, say, 95% or 99% full by some sliding window (monthly, weekly, yearly, etc.)

2025-05-05 15:04:10 GMT

- reply

Clarification: dead and failure are different things. Sorry if I led you to think I meant both.
I am not saying that empty blocks in the future mean Bitcoin has “died”. Bitcoin will persist indefinitely. As long as one full node remains on the network, that’s all it takes. The node that matters is your own. A single CPU is sufficient for mining if there’s no one left with whom to compete. Bitcoin is the technological cockroach that survives any conceivable apocalypse.
When I say that sparse blocks mean failure, I mean “at the goal of becoming the world’s monetary system”. Bitcoin will have failed, IMO, if it does not become the established, predominant, premiere method of synchronizing transaction ordering worldwide.
Fiat currency is analog. Transactions are reversible and ultimately unbacked. Even if backed, backing requires a backer, and pegs were made to be broken.
The superiority of Bitcoin stems from the fact that Bitcoin is the thing itself, and natively digital. It’s not a promise like fiat. It is not a contract like stock. It is not physical like gold. In Bitcoin, ownership is knowledge. You either know the keys or you don’t.
My expectation is that the world will wake up to the fact that there’s exactly one thing no one can make more of (beyond agreed issuance), and that’s Bitcoin. Therefore I conclude that transacting this monumentally important, unique global asset will be incredibly valuable.
The value of Bitcoin transactions (capped by block space) should mean perpetually full blocks with market derived fees. If blocks are empty long term, that signals, to me, that Bitcoin has failed to fulfill its destiny at replacing inferior moneys. (Failure)

2025-05-05 13:58:49 GMT

- reply

In the fullness of time, Bitcoin’s success will be the replacement of fiat currency. The scale of human endeavors will easily consume a few megabytes of space per 10 minute increment.
Of course we’re not there today. Change takes time. But that’s the end state. There’s no future in which Bitcoin is simultaneously the world’s premier monetary system AND we maintain sparse blocks.
Those visions are mutually incompatible.

2025-05-05 13:12:07 GMT

Wishing for unfilled blocks, an empty mempool, is wishing for #Bitcoin to fail.
Full blocks and market fees are the expected outcome of Bitcoin’s success.

2025-05-05 01:29:08 GMT

- reply

Yeesh

2025-05-04 18:06:23 GMT

- reply

Classic

2025-05-04 17:59:28 GMT

- reply

European governments: “You can’t steal our subjects’ data! That’s our job!”

2025-05-04 17:57:00 GMT

- reply

I’m not opposed to people working there. I object to having to talk to them. I know what I want, I just want to place my order and go about my business. I don’t want to wait in line to talk to a person and then wait for them to do what I want. We can descynchronize this process.

2025-05-04 17:11:10 GMT

Why do I have to talk to the deli worker? Why isn’t there a kiosk like Panera bread?
This is not hard, people. We have the technology.

2025-05-04 11:20:47 GMT

We’re at an inflection point in AI. Those who fail to adopt are being left behind, in real time.
But there’s good news for laggards. Future tools will be better, helping them close the gap.

2025-05-04 00:55:18 GMT

2017: consensus wars (chain splits)
2025: policy wars (network splits)
It’s gonna be OK. #Bitcoin

2025-05-04 00:45:29 GMT

- reply

Nah

2025-05-03 20:00:34 GMT

The results of the Milgram experiments were shocking.

2025-05-03 03:18:48 GMT

- reply

https://media.tenor.com/OOqdya-AFOsAAAAi/big-brain-wojak.gif

2025-05-03 03:12:15 GMT

- reply

Grug brains are disagreeable, rejecting the status quo.
Midbrains fit in with society and go along with the narrative.
Galaxy brains reject society, seeing past their bullshit.

2025-05-02 19:50:04 GMT

Jimbo’s take on the Bitcoin policy/inscription debate:
* Witness Data (inscriptions): Already prunable! Like OP_RETURN, it avoids permanent data bloat for non-archival nodes.
* Fees/Full Blocks = Success: High fees aren't failure, they mean Bitcoin is in demand. Get used to it if you believe in Bitcoin’s success.
* Market Over Policy: Fee market naturally prices out inefficient uses over time. Let it work. Stop trying to centrally plan block space via Core policy changes.
* Core should be Consensus ONLY: Bitcoin Core should focus exclusively on consensus rules. Stop the bikeshedding over non-consensus policy (like OP_RETURN limits) within Core development.
* Balkanize Policy: Node operators deserve choice! Let them pick mempool/relay policies like Linux distros. Embrace complexity/responsibility as the price of freedom.
* Decentralize More: Block building/template construction (Stratum V2+) also belongs outside Core, just like hashing hardware and wallets.
* Trust Emergent Order: Bitcoin self-regulates via incentives. Stop the central planning hubris; trust individual choices & the protocol's design. Current debates are opportunities to push more functions out of Core.
#Bitcoin

2025-05-02 10:30:05 GMT

- reply

This article does a great job laying out the current OP_RETURN policy debate, IMO. https://antoinep.com/posts/relay_policy_drama/

2025-05-01 13:19:44 GMT

- reply

Notes:
1. OP_RETURN is already unlimited at the consensus level. The current controversy is only about policy (what unconfirmed transactions nodes treat as spam and drop rather than forwarding to peers).
2. Changing this policy has nothing to do with block size or initial block download (IBD).

2025-05-01 13:17:24 GMT

Gold has doubled in fiat price over three years. Imagine being impressed by this. #Bitcoin

2025-05-01 13:01:37 GMT

- reply

This guy gets it

2025-05-01 12:30:29 GMT

S U P E R C Y C L E
#note1ydk…sdwv

2025-05-01 12:23:46 GMT

Trustworthy
Loyal
Helpful
Friendly
Courteous
Kind

2025-05-01 10:00:51 GMT

- reply

Bro has had plenty of time to figure it out.
Bitcoin is an IQ test.

2025-04-30 11:06:36 GMT

- reply

I’m not sure what you mean. By anti-mining crowd, do you mean non-Bitcoiners who oppose mining on the grounds that it “wastes” energy?
If so, I think see the analogy. In both cases, someone is using a resource for something they value, and other people who don’t share that value assessment disagree vigorously.

2025-04-30 09:52:54 GMT

- reply

To be absolutely clear: I am NOT advocating for an increase in block size. I agree that that would be bad.
Releasing the OP_RETURN size limit does not increase block size. It doesn’t even change what’s valid on chain. It just means that the OP_RETURN portion of a transaction can be larger, and still transmitted by nodes before confirmation.
A person wanting to use OP_RETURNs to store data can already store as much as they want (within the block size limit of course). The consensus rules don’t place a limit on this (to my knowledge). So you could already, today, make an enormous OP_RETURN and mine it yourself, or pay a miner out-of-band (like slipstream).
The hullabaloo over the OP_RETURN limit is about node *policy*, not consensus. It is the current policy of Bitcoin core nodes not to retransmit certain valid transactions. For example, zero-fee transactions are automatically discarded as spam.
In this vein, transactions with OP_RETURNs larger than 80 bytes are dropped by Bitcoin core nodes, even though they’re legit transactions on the consensus level. The change being discussed is removing that *policy* limit.

2025-04-30 09:24:19 GMT

Unpopular opinion: Inscriptions are merely monetarily inefficient transactions. They will price themselves out of the market eventually. Not worth getting upset over. #Bitcoin
#note1670…kqul

2025-04-30 09:20:00 GMT

- reply

My take on this extra data is unconventional. To me, the inscription garbage is just an extreme form of monetarily inefficient transactions.
#Bitcoin rewards monetary efficiency. The smaller you can make your transaction, the less it’s going to cost you. The larger your transaction, the more it costs in sats/vByte. This pressures users to adopt space-saving features, such as SegWit or Taproot.
Even so, some people choose less space-efficient formats because they value it for some reason. For example, multisig transactions are less space-efficient than single-sig. Those extra signatures take space. Multisig enjoyers are willing to pay the additional cost because they value the multisig feature.
But value is subjective. Whether multisig is “worth it” is entirely up to the individual. The way Bitcoin adjudicates these differences in preference is with the fee market. You express your desire for space-inefficient transactions by footing more of the security budget (fees to miners).
Inscriptions are merely the most extreme form of inefficient transaction. They’re still monetary transactions. Sats still moved. But they moved in a particular way that the sender assesses is worth the additional cost.
To me, there’s no *categorical* difference between legacy address transactions, single-sig SegWit, multisig, and inscriptions. They’re just differently efficient with respect to bytes and money movement.
The beauty of the Bitcoin fee market is that it rewards patience and punishes inefficiency. You can pay for scarce block space with either time or money. You can wait until the pool clears, or you can pay to be first in line.
Bitcoin is a self-regulating system that automatically ejects low-value use cases thanks to NgU. Satoshi Dice is no more because its design is no longer efficient due to the market value of block space. The same thing should happen to inscriptions in the fullness of time.

2025-04-30 01:24:25 GMT

- reply

80kg should be plenty for 5’7”

2025-04-30 01:23:14 GMT

- reply

Dat keming

2025-04-30 01:20:04 GMT

- reply

100kgs is too damn high

2025-04-30 01:17:10 GMT

- reply

Oh i thought you meant the PR, but maybe you’re asking about the specific comment.
IMO, this is catastrophizing. It’s not that big a deal. Bitcoin will be fine either way. If people leave Core as a result, then Bitcoin will be all the stronger for it.

2025-04-30 01:04:58 GMT

- reply

IMO, this is fine, and probably better.
To understand why, it helps to start with why OP_RETURN exists at all. OP_RETURN offers a mechanism to add arbitrary data to a transaction that, crucially, can be safely deleted.
So, when you sync a fresh node, you still have to download all the data (including OP_RETURNs) in order to validate it. But you only have to keep the UTXOs. Your node can safely drop the OP_RETURN data, and your node will be able to validate new transactions just fine.
Without OP_RETURN, someone wanting to cram arbitrary data into a TX has to use some other means, such as nonsense addresses, or script content (inscriptions). Every node must maintain this information in perpetually in order to validate future transactions.
Removing the limit on OP_RETURN will allow people to put garbage into the block chain in a node-friendlier way than the status quo. In both cases (OP_RETURN or inscriptions) the sender has to pay for the block space by outcompeting other transactions in the mempool. But at least with OP_RETURN, nodes can delete this garbage after the initial download.
#Bitcoin

2025-04-29 12:07:08 GMT

- reply

Have you tried it?

2025-04-29 00:51:01 GMT

- reply

This but unironically

2025-04-28 23:43:50 GMT

- reply

Gosh that’s so *weird*

2025-04-28 23:40:23 GMT

- reply

Battlefield Earth?

2025-04-28 23:29:59 GMT

- reply

They have elections up there?

2025-04-28 17:37:31 GMT

- reply

Pack it up bois, we cooked

2025-04-28 12:59:08 GMT

S U P E R
C Y C L E
#note1m63…nxru

2025-04-28 12:58:23 GMT

- reply

Joke’s on you, my soul hasn’t been intact this century.

2025-04-28 12:57:05 GMT

First time squatting in a month. Gotta get back to the routine! Cramping my hammies—this never happens. 🦵

2025-04-28 12:19:08 GMT

- reply

Freedom units

2025-04-27 20:10:36 GMT

- reply

Hells yeah

2025-04-27 20:05:35 GMT

- reply

Good ol Rug Paul

2025-04-27 18:53:56 GMT

- reply

When Mt. Gox imploded it was doing like 70% of all transactions. This occurred at the blow-off top around $1400, and drove the price down to ~$155 (almost 90% drop). It took 3 years to recapture the ATH.
Equivalent today would bring us to ~$10k. I don’t think that’s likely to occur though because we aren’t in FOMO ATH blow-off top territory, and the market dynamics have changed.
I think a 70% drawdown and 3 year recovery period would be more likely. So maybe $30k min price, -ish.

2025-04-27 15:12:30 GMT

- reply

Thanks! I haven’t heard of openrouter either, but it sounds like Cursor AI does something similar. Personally, I turn those features off and manually select models myself.

2025-04-27 15:07:07 GMT

- reply

Well, the thing about fraud is that it’s detectable by intelligence. So from your original post, it could be that middle-intelligence people can use AI to defraud others. But, IMO it won’t largely be successful on highly intelligent people, especially those who themselves adopt AI, if that makes sense.
There’s nothing stopping people from using AI to detect and combat fraud, just as people adopt AI to perpetuate fraud. In fact I would guess that the power dynamic would be in the defenders’ favor. It’s hard to convince an AI to help you commit fraud. It’s easy to convince them to help you detect and mitigate it.

2025-04-27 15:03:29 GMT

- reply

I’ve heard of cline. What are goose and codex?
Also, it very much matters the quality of the backend model. I recommend using the best one that you can afford. At the time of this writing, IMO that’s Gemini-2.5-Pro. Runner up is Claude-3.7-Sonnet.

2025-04-27 14:58:04 GMT

- reply

As a software engineer of 20+ year’s experience, I recently took up vibe coding. Suddenly I’m now a team of engineers in terms of value output.
AI is a magnifying glass. It multiplies your curiosity and intelligence. Truly amazing results if you can adopt it.

2025-04-27 14:01:46 GMT

Really feeling the “life is what happens while you’re making other plans” today.

2025-04-24 19:00:13 GMT

- reply

What’s the claim?

2025-04-24 10:00:45 GMT

- reply

You can probably get a replacement battery?

2025-04-24 08:19:16 GMT

- reply

Check out this bad boy https://www.newegg.com/lenovo-thinkpad-14-0-fhd-touchscreen-intel-core-i7-8650u-32gb-memory-1-tb-ssd-intel-uhd-graphics-620/p/N82E16834840288

2025-04-24 08:15:27 GMT

1 BTC = 100,000,000 BTC
#note1a9t…h25g

2025-04-24 08:00:22 GMT

- reply

The pre-2020 models are $150-$300.
https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16834840599

2025-04-24 00:20:36 GMT

- reply

I’ve been looking on NewEgg. That’s where I’ve gotten my last two ThinkPads.
Note: before 2020 (T4xx series like T480) the RAM was socketed and thus upgradable. Starting in 2020, the T- series (T14 etc.) switched to soldered RAM, meaning it’s not upgradable.

2025-04-23 22:34:25 GMT

The masculine urge to shop for refurbished laptops.

2025-04-21 06:30:09 GMT

- reply

Gold priced in #Bitcoin, last 5 years:
https://image.nostr.build/712f990d6de2fa6d85aa43d31ae6e6cb7598851baea370fad217262b888dad39.jpg

2025-04-17 10:39:26 GMT

- reply

You’re a fan of Jason Glowie?

2025-04-17 01:42:50 GMT

- reply

Am I wrong?!?!

2025-04-17 01:41:42 GMT

E N S L O P P I F I C A T I O N
#note1n22…5ez2

2025-04-16 18:53:23 GMT

- reply

That’s cool! Is that all it takes? Just hang a box on a tree?

2025-04-16 18:49:57 GMT

- reply

Seems like a step backwards in a way. Social media is the past, and AI is the future, etc.
But then again, would be a trove of first party data.

2025-04-16 09:41:36 GMT

- reply

Baller

2025-04-11 19:26:58 GMT

- reply

I think that’s reasonable. I have no problem with people choosing different options along the custody spectrum. Every option comes with a different tradeoff between difficulty, privacy, rug risk, and fucked-it-up risk.
Tools of the future will probably navigate some of this fluidly, automatically, which will be good for users. Advanced users can make their own tradeoffs more explicitly.

2025-04-11 12:40:23 GMT

- reply

It’s a real problem

2025-04-11 10:24:52 GMT

- reply

Gross

2025-04-11 01:42:50 GMT

Sir, those nukes are recreational

2025-04-09 18:33:10 GMT

- reply

Astounding

2025-04-09 18:31:29 GMT

In this moment, I am euphoric

2025-04-09 15:29:35 GMT

- reply

That’s interesting. I wonder if an official deal can be brokered in this environment. It wouldn’t surprise me if instead we got a bunch of unilateral/bilateral decisions to just quietly use their own mutually agreeable monetary media for settlement.
This failed horribly for Sadam when he tried to trade oil for euros, but I think the geopolitical landscape is significantly more multipolar now.

2025-04-09 15:20:31 GMT

- reply

I mean, I agree. But who would be the stakeholders at a hypothetical BW2.0? What would they agree to?

2025-04-09 15:17:01 GMT

- reply

ORLY? What would that even look like?

2025-04-08 20:39:48 GMT

#meme
https://image.nostr.build/e4bf258201aa108ab516435282457dd1461e770773619722198f0506a6121e74.jpg

2025-04-08 20:35:28 GMT

- reply

https://media1.tenor.com/m/jP6j6-NqEW4AAAAd/phenomenal-ashley-banjo.gif

2025-04-08 12:04:49 GMT

- reply

Correct. Liquid is also a custodial shitcoin.