Nostr notes by oscpacey

same question for Fountain

2026-01-25T00:23:01Z

In reply to nevent1q…kyex
_________________________

same question for Fountain

Nostr event nevent1qqsy5jl0w5ykzdsrsgy3pwavvx3p4dph59z0ute4hyxxznd8akj0uagzyp8hw4zq6myhs8mvqvxkq63a6jtxp5h00e443872w7plx06u42406g9r3zl

2026-01-25T00:21:29Z

is it possible to manage the Damus Android app through Obtainium?

I’ve always wanted a degree in reverse psychology, but I’ve ...

2025-12-27T19:27:34Z

I’ve always wanted a degree in reverse psychology, but I’ve made a promise to myself that I’ll never get one.

The word vibe Is virally usurping All other words Vibe coding my ...

2025-09-20T20:21:37Z

The word vibe
Is virally usurping
All other words
Vibe coding my Vapp
with Vibe capital
Such a good vibe

😐

Single tasking is a super power I don’t know many that can do ...

2025-09-20T20:14:05Z

Single tasking is a super power
I don’t know many that can do it.

At some point in your life you switch from ‘update software to ...

2025-09-18T10:35:08Z

At some point in your life you switch from ‘update software to keep it secure’ to ‘don’t update software it will break everything you do’.

H2O would make great money. It’s durable, divisible, portable, ...

2025-09-16T09:04:16Z

H2O would make great money. It’s durable, divisible, portable, fungible, acceptable,… but is it scarce?

It is limited in supply, I don’t see more of it being made anywhere, so yes, it is scarce. Ah but it is too abundant which ruins the portability argument (it’s not value dense).

So let’s refine the definition of scarcity not just to mean ‘of limited supply’ but to mean ‘cannot be easily manufacturers to meet demand and also not abundant in its existing quantity’.

Debate is often unproductive and frustrating to observe or ...

2025-09-10T09:24:33Z

Debate is often unproductive and frustrating to observe or participate in. Ideally the contentious side would have a wise and neutral party to critique the contentious idea thoroughly. Usually though both sides are contentious and critique the other using their own ideas and since their own ideas are already in contention it is hard to discredit the other or bolster their own.

LLMs are nice to debate with (assuming not biased to engagement and sycophancy) because they can simulate wisdom and neutrality quite well - the diluted ego helps too.

I try, in arguments and debates, not to argue from my ideologies but to critique the opposition's ideas on their own terms as much as possible. Though I rarely achieve that :)

After learning about MMT I’ve now accepted its teachings and ...

2025-09-06T19:56:19Z

After learning about MMT I’ve now accepted its teachings and have decided to run my household budget using its methods. I won’t be working for money but spending it into existence as a form of investment into the broader economy. If prices start to rise I shall tax it back, okay?

Thanks, received. Will read.

2025-09-02T10:31:50Z

In reply to nevent1q…szc8
_________________________

Thanks, received. Will read.

Tranquility Node have added cryptographic formal verification ...

2025-09-01T18:19:23Z

Tranquility Node have added cryptographic formal verification capabilities to the roster.

Please get in touch to discuss your requirements and what we can offer.

I wish to build a UK-wide electrical power delivery network. I ...

2025-08-18T18:58:57Z

I wish to build a UK-wide electrical power delivery network. I won’t build anything aside standards defining meetings. Firms/people may buy land rights to lay cables, negotiate deals with generators and consumers.

Q1) Who’s going to stop me?
Q2) Who’s going to help me overcome?

And there is only 1 BIS

2025-08-01T18:55:54Z

In reply to nevent1q…swnv
_________________________

And there is only 1 BIS

Having lunch with a global macro fund manager recently, they told ...

2025-07-17T13:25:37Z

Having lunch with a global macro fund manager recently, they told me they had never received such a concise and clear rationale for taking bitcoin seriously before.

They postulated: "how can the answer NOT be ever more money printing?”

I responded: "Indeed fiat supply inflation does seem more or less essential+inevitable as supply deflation leads to price deflation which politicians will throw everything at avoiding. One core reason being that deflation quickly makes public debt unsustainable. Bitcoin is great at absorbing that capital flight from fiat debasement - and of course being global it benefits from every instance of that effect everywhere."

Okay I’ll say it… $200k before end of October. ...

2025-07-16T19:53:33Z

Okay I’ll say it… $200k before end of October.

quoting
note1y3z…tcez
2025-07-15, 23:59 UTC

452 days after halving

Current: $117,710.89
2012 scaled: $3,154,518.91
2016 scaled: $412,409.32
2020 scaled: $330,143.03

The Earth orbits the Moon, and that's why a high tide is ...

2025-07-16T19:51:44Z

The Earth orbits the Moon, and that's why a high tide is always present on the far side of the Earth.

Yeah they’re the same chips. Just different board layout.

2025-07-11T11:14:03Z

In reply to nevent1q…2qp2
_________________________

Yeah they’re the same chips. Just different board layout.

It’s nice isn’t it? Yes they are basically S9 machines in an ...

2025-07-11T09:48:39Z

In reply to nevent1q…vpyh
_________________________

It’s nice isn’t it? Yes they are basically S9 machines in an alternative form factor so it is possible to install Braiins BOS on them.

LTE direct was supposed to be the answer for ad-hoc mobile mesh ...

2025-07-11T08:25:57Z

In reply to nevent1q…vvgp
_________________________

LTE direct was supposed to be the answer for ad-hoc mobile mesh networking but cellular network operators were not keen and discouraged handset makers from including it.

We have another chance now with 5G Sidelink (NR-PC5). Perhaps if Bitchat demand ramps up fast people will want to pay a premium for handsets with it.

God speed Calle and Jack, this should be historic.

I’m incredibly excited about quantum computing And I like ...

2025-07-02T08:05:15Z

I’m incredibly excited about quantum computing

And I like bitcoin too

I know, rite?!

“I think people who…”*

2025-06-21T22:42:30Z

In reply to nevent1q…w5wz
_________________________

“I think people who…”*

Thanks! Yes, if he even sees it at all. I’ll try a few methods. ...

2025-06-21T22:41:57Z

In reply to nevent1q…ung3
_________________________

Thanks! Yes, if he even sees it at all. I’ll try a few methods. I thu I people who put out public statements (which is all of us really) should be willing to discuss them when challenged - that’s half the fun.

Helpful! Thanks bot.

2025-06-19T15:12:14Z

In reply to nevent1q…y62f
_________________________

Helpful! Thanks bot.

Are you aware of https://x.com/RichardJMurphy? He has a popular ...

2025-06-19T14:58:54Z

Are you aware of https://x.com/RichardJMurphy? He has a popular YouTube channel where he opines regularly on financial topics. He’s given an unfortunately ignorant anti cryptocurrency tirade. I have responded with a long form comment. Please amplify its reach so viewers see it.

Comment link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zpijANwCIQ&lc=UgxFQpzCWg2ehaoAmUx4AaABAg&si=KOoqmRr3XDbpKwlM

Comment text here in full:

Hi Richard, you have made a series of errors, Id like to address each of them. In fact almost every sentence has factual issues so I'll iterate through each chronologically. I would appreciate deeply if you read to the end, even if you just scan it at first.

Part 1 of 5

0:03 - "Con trick": Bitcoin (the original cryptocurrency) was an ideologically motivated project and elaborately documented, pored over and extended by millions of people over 16 years, not a con' which would be an intentionally deceptive act for personal gain. If you think this is a con of the mass delusion type where only a few have some kind of insider information then everyone who has benefited from it had to take some risk on it in the first place because the only rug to be pulled from under bitcoin is in the form of owning the coins in order to sell them later hopefully at a profit, and if you know that then someone else will have thought of that trick too and may do so first. This is an incredibly long and patient game of chicken if so - not normal for such a set up. Other crypto projects vary - we'll discuss later on.

0:09 - "hate of government": Most bitcoiners would choose to have a government if you took a survey. Most would choose a more laissez-faire, smaller state I would expect too. 'Hate' is tabloid sensationalisation. This comes up later on in more detail.

0:10 - "Hate of banks": Bitcoiners (in my experience) tend to be pro hard, rules based money, and anti soft, fiat, centrally planned money. Modern commercial and central banks run like public private partnerships and typical bitcoiners do not like the government created and protected monopoly power of the commercial banking sector. They are not anti the premise of banks as custodians and credit institutions (see Hal Finney 2010) and in many cases as currency issuers operating in a much freer model than the current one (see Cashu and Fedi mints).

0:11 - "Hate of systems": Bitcoin is a far more rigid system than what it competes with. This statement is ill defined - sensational again. What they tend to dislike (and in some cases of course, hate) are systems of coercion and control in which participants may not opt out - I think you confuse the ideology.

0:17 - "There no stability": Bitcoin is yet to deviate from its promised rules based, time bound issuance schedule and anti-counterfeit assurances. It is built to track this issuance schedule without any central authority and despite the multi-billion dollar opportunity to undermine it, no one has managed yet. Price stability (and erosion) is the goal of soft fiat credit money. Bitcoin proponents tend to hypothesise that quantity-restricted money will tend to increase in value, and though it makes no such promise, this has so far been true (it started at $0, and today is >$100,000).

0:18 - "No foundation": It is a self sustaining incentive model where consumers who demand bitcoin transactions, fund the producers who confirm bitcoin transactions - the miners, achieved in a self organising, self regulating manner. That is the foundation it offers. Define foundation if you wish to argue the point further.

0:19 - "No proof of value": nothing has 'proof of value' beyond witnessing an un-coerced exchange. Value is a subjective measure of worth and so cannot be proved any more than I can prove I like bananas. I hope you realise you are resurrecting Marx's half-baked labour theory of value here. You appear to be attempting to convince the listener to assume that a monetary system should have a proof-of-value to be taken seriously, and since bitcoin does not, it may not be taken seriously.

0:21 - "...Literally nothing at all [offered in exchange]" - Bitcoin is not a person so it can offer nothing, however those who have studied it tend to notice it provides a virtually incorruptible ledger of transactions of its monetary units and monetary policy, and THAT is a big deal when it comes to a monetary system. If it offered much more than that it would likely be considered bizarrely bloated, like a hammer with a satellite TV receiver on the back of it.

0:23 - "There is no way in which you can build something of value on the basis that those who have set out to build cryptocurrencies have done". Except of course, you know, the significant valuation bitcoin has acquired in one of the least coerced and most distributed and liquid markets in history. If you don't mean financial value, and some other form of esoterically defined value, like perhaps your own personal subjective value judgement, then I agree, bitcoin has not achieved anything of value, to you, so far - though that isn't a very useful statement.

0:35 - "No proof of value inherent within": There is no such thing as inherent value. All value is subjective. If you really want to force the term, then you must agree bitcoin's market price is a representation of ONLY inherent value and nothing more, because it is not linked to any other financial assets - no rights nor obligations, if it carries a value in a market (which it evidently does) it is because of its own inherent properties because no one else is forcing someone use it - quite the contrary if anything.

0:39 - "Just because someone has to solve a mathematical algorithm using vast amounts of energy to create a coin [..] does not prove that the consequence is something worth having": Miners (who you are referring to) engage in their work as an anti-counterfeit service, not as issuers - they do not create the coins. Every full instance of the bitcoin software executes all of the rules, at very low energy expenditure, to 'create the coins'. They are printed out of 'thin air' as fiat is (but under extremely strict and easily enforced rules), and are allocated during bitcoin's initial issuance era (which is >90% complete) to those miners which are on average providing the most convincing transaction validation (anti-counterfeit) service to the network. The 'energy is used' for anti-counterfeit, not for issuance. Mining will continue indefinitely while bitcoin is in use by more than 1 person, even after the issuance period has ceased. It is not there to prove that bitcoin 'is worth having'. Mining is there to lend verifiable and specific economic weight to any given proposed transaction as being genuine - and does so while simultaneously funding electrical power infrastructure development around the world - not bad! Many people find that valuable as a property of a money and it is clear to me why.

0:57 - "[utterly pointless waste of vast amounts of energy on] alchemy [which] tried to turn things into gold, it wasn't possible": I'll take a bit of a tangent here because this is an example of your missing the forrest for the trees, to put it mildly. Alchemy is an entirely worthwhile venture - it is the hunch that we can transition matter through its elemental states (ie lead into gold, or hydrogen into helium) because it is of the same basic "common essence" (their words) via the application of work or energy (or heat, in their words). It turns out that in fact yes, alchemy is possible and we do it every day - literal physical alchemy in the philosophical basis that they imagined in that medieval period and we today call it nuclear fusion and fission because we better understand the mechanics. They in fact did not have ENOUGH energy available to them to realise their dream, but that doesn't mean they were wrong - their intuition was spot on and eventually their descendants worked out the methods. Alchemists also hoped to achieve immortality - which of course will be possible in the future in the sense that we will unravel the mechanisms of aging and halt them - just as the Turritopsis dohrnii ("The Immortal Jellyfish") demonstrates for us in every ocean. You seem to consider energy wasted when it isn't applied to something you find worthwhile - fortunately you only get to decide that for the energy you have access to control lest we would never have discovered most of modern science which has I'm afraid converted incalculable amounts of higher order entropy sources to lower forms during its endless trials and tests. Energy is not a scarce resource, energy and matter are the most abundant resources, even on earth. When people have a need for energy they are not depriving others of it, they are paying for it, funding the build out of new power generation facilities whether that be wood crops, hydro turbines or nuclear reactors.

1:02 - "Nor is it possible to turn a mathematical algorithm into value": Mathematics is responsible for incomprehensible volumes of cultural, industrial and social development that most people would judge as enormously valuable, I would bet. Monetary projects ARE all mathematical projects, albeit basic ones. Anyway, the way bitcoin "claims to turn energy into value" (which is not its claim of course - that's your projection) is that some participants choose to expend costly resource (electrical power) into an easily verifiable proof that those resources were spent. Other participants can use that proof to collectively and objectively decide on which blocks of transactions become canonical in the ledger and therefore which are valid and which aren't. It's cheaper but also more corruption prone to use an appointed authority to do that job - one is better than the other if you want strong anti counterfeit properties in your money. N.B. Given that you assert that crypto promises to turn power in to value - you are colouring all cryptocurrencies in the model of Bitcoin's Proof-of-Work mining protocol. Most of them do not do this, they use very little energy in fact. You cant both say its all like bitcoin and also all like the worst of scam crypto, they are wildly different ends of a spectrum of ethical propositions.

Part 2 of 5

1:13 - "There is no one cryptocurrency": Not an error - a good fact. I was worried you hadn't realised this given the sweeping generalisations you have been making. I take the opportunity though to point out that I am using bitcoin as the example in my arguments here as it is the original, and by far the largest example. It is in my opinion the cryptocurrency that has the most cultural significance and by a wide margin. Others do exist, both in the form of direct monetary competitors to bitcoin and other with more niche intended purposes. Each will have to have its merits tested by the market of observers and participants. There is nothing much binding their form as a category and so there isn't much merit to arguing against or for them as a group. There is endless junk in the group in my opinion but it bares no meaningful resemblance to bitcoin - just as MS Word is very distinct from Google search despite them both being 'software'.

1:17 - "They don't behave like money": This is word semantics again, leading an uncritical listener to think that the behaviour is sufficient to understand the properties. Bitcoin works as money very well for those who want to use it as money. It adheres very well to the commonly accepted properties of a good money, and it fulfils some of the functions of money to many users and all of the functions of money so a smaller group of users. I will elaborate on this further on.

1:22 - "They are at best like commodities": This isn't a bad assertion at one level. Isn't money's role to be the commoditisation of the abstract notion of value? I think it is. In fact I'd go so far as to say that the best money is the one that is the most pure commoditisation of the notion of value. Anything else used as money, like gold, or homes or businesses shares are useful for other things and will be disrupted in their utility markets by the interference of their monetary markets. The sooner we stop using homes as a store of value the sooner the housing market will behave like one. P.S. I think I just "described" bitcoin as a value commodity quite well, and yes, people "use" bitcoin every day... as a value commodity, aka a very good money.

1:30 - "They are far too volatile in terms of value to actually be used as a medium for exchange": Did you just say they have... value? (I'll come back to volatility).

1:36 - "...which is the most basic and common denominator use of money": You mean the most common use of fiat money? Fiat money is intentionally designed to lose value over time - see every central bank's target inflation (devaluation) rate of 2% - specifically to inhibit its use in one of the three functions of money. For the readers, these are typically recited as, store-of-value, medium-of-exchange and unit-of-account. If a money cannot store any value it won't work as a medium of exchange or unit of account. It's kind of triangle of dependence (kind of). Anything which is programmed to lose value over time will be rejected as a store of value, of course. People use things which tend to go up in value as their store of value, and if money doesn't offer that then they will have to engage in markets and speculate upon... housing, blue chip stocks, government and private debt instruments, etc. That's an activity I think should be voluntary and not 'nudged'. If governments didn't devalue their currencies people would naturally flock to them as their stores of value, as money is actually literally the common denominator, unlike the awkward way you used the term above. Did you perhaps have this truth on your mind when forming the statement 'common denominator use of money'?. So while you point out that bitcoin isn't used much as a medium of exchange, which is true, you ignore that it is used enthusiastically as a store of value by millions of people to great effect. Now, people who get paid in bitcoin also spend in bitcoin and they suffer very low volatility effects in their month to month accounts as the time periods in question are so brief. So it's great as a store and it's fine as a medium. If adoption continues and it saturates economies, you will find that its volatility falls dramatically, and probably lower than that of fiat currencies by shear nature of its global scale, solving your critique about MoE volatility vis-a-vis goods and services. Even if volatility were to remain off-puttingly high for MoE use (despite that volatility having a likely gentle but permanent upward bias) there are lots of ways currency users can overcome that by means of futures (I include consumer subscription agreements in that technical term) and insurance - things which can be provided friction free and at micro scale in a digital era. If everything else about the money is more compelling than other money's then I think people would happily accept this minor inconvenience.

1:45 - "Neither party to an exchange is willing to partake in it": What? 99.999*% of bitcoin trades and transactions have had no other motivation aside personal will. Perhaps you're thinking of fiat money again which is a partially coerced money (other forms of money are permitted but taxed, other forms of money are rejected for settling tax bills, only fiat gets 'legal tender' status for debt settlement in most jurisdictions, etc).

2:03 - "crypto has proved itself to be an utterly useless store of value over time": Again, what? It was worth $0 in 2009, and is worth >$100,000 today. Thats not a trick or sleight of hand, that's millions of people speaking, putting their money where their mouth is, that they wish to store value in bitcoin. Thats not a seriously debatable point.

2:32 - "Money should be very boring and mundane [...] that's the last thing they want in crypto": this isn't a bad point on the surface, I agree with it, but it isn't a good criticism. Good money should indeed be as boring as possible. Bitcoin is really boring, just try discussing it with almost anyone :) We want money to be an easily understood, reliable and universal measure of worth, and not much else. We want to understand it once, then use it forever. The fact that a unit's purchasing power is reasonably volatile isn't ideal however, this is a temporary situation if bitcoin becomes the default money on Earth. So why is it so volatile so far? That's because its issued quantity is rigidly dictated by protocol and not by supply and demand - this is a feature. Supply and demand dynamics therefore get fully expressed in the price. Given that it is a novel and useful asset people expect adoption to go up, and given the unresponsive issuance curve they expect the price to follow and so they invest. When it falls they sell and we get a whipsaw effect. Most current users indeed expect the price to rise over time and experience significant volatility and they quite like that. The latter doesn't invalidate the former. The volatility will subside as the growth opportunity becomes saturated and by then hundreds of millions of people will necessarily have learnt how to use it - this is just the nature of markets and it doesn't hinder bitcoin's use today or tomorrow as money - if anything it is one of the core drivers of adoption (get rich speculation -> wealth -> spending -> reinforcement learning).

2:50 - "One thing we know it is good for is criminal activity": Criminal activity, albeit potentially immoral, is no less relevant monetarily. If you are stating that it's good for the black market then you are saying bitcoin is good money just not appropriate for the white market. You are introducing an inconsistency to your line of value argument.

3:01 - "indeed [illicit drugs purchase] is one of its biggest uses as far a anybody can work out": Do you think that bitcoin, sitting at a 2 trillion dollar market cap is primarily supported by buying and selling of drugs? Also, are you forgetting what is mainly used for the drugs trade? Is it bitcoin? Is it really? Or is it national fiat currencies, mainly the dollar, to the tune of something like 99.999%? Yes, that's right, ask your local dealer what they want and much like your local grocery they will ask for dirty fiat cash please. Bitcoin is useful in black markets because is it a liquid, fungible, bearer asset, like fiat paper and metal cash. It isn't as good as physical cash because it leaves a permanent record but it will do fine. So you are levelling a critique at cash forms of money in general, something most people will most associate with the notion of money in fact. In any case, the massive overwhelming screaming use case for bitcoin so far is store of value. Taking one's hard-earned devaluing fiat, swapping it for appreciating bitcoin and holding it until one wants to or needs to spend it, and hoping that it will be worth at least as much then as it is now, and guessing that it will probably be worth significantly more. That is the use case and if you don't see that you are missing the forest for the trees. If you don't believe me, check any source, there are many... exchanges, forensic blockchain analysis firms, investment firm research publications and so on.

Part 3 of 5

3:35 "this appeals heavily to those who are trying to avoid laws and taxes": You are conjuring in the reader's mind the idea that cash (ie, the historical normal form of money) is some kind of wondrous innovation for evasive behaviour - because the property of crypto that makes it useful for the black market is the lack of payments intermediary. You are therefore saying that all money until we achieved telegraphed bank money was facilitating rampant evasion and crime and we should therefore logically outlaw all cash and use only intermediated forms of money and payment. No passing a coin to an unknown needy person, no tipping, no birthday gift to a child, unless there is a government regulated super surveillance and control intermediary institution opining and agreeing to each and every transaction? Economic expression by voluntary trade is in my opinion more foundational to a healthy society than democracy is, and if it is prohibited you raise the spectre of an omniscient and omnipotent central command. Does that sound like the way nature works? It sounds like the way hell works to me. Some of the most wonderful acts in history have been criminal: The Underground Railroad, Civil Rights Sit Ins, Whistleblowing (like Wikileaks), Harbouring Jews during Nazi occupation, and so on - were all legally criminal acts popularly deemed heroic and moral (and helped by cash). Bitcoin is cash, and cash is foundational to healthy society, don't knock it until you've lost it.

3:38 - "Strong link between tax havens and cryptocurrency": That link is between either the very wealthy or businesses who have no need to be onshore - you will find that in all social and commercial sectors, not just with crypto. If crypto itself were as in demand for evasion as you assert, then there is no point to using tax havens for those people.

3:43 - "[strong link between the far right of politics and crypto because they want to disrupt order]": the people you are characterising do not like governmental control. This is not all bitcoin/crypto users but is a material part of the culture. Never the less, they tend to espouse free market money over centrally planned money (and economies and societies) because they deem that to be a higher grade of order. The presence of central planners in their view is a vulnerability which causes disruption and disorder. You may disagree with their philosophy but at least present it accurately. When you say "they are trying to destabilise our economies, our banks, our institutions" you are using 'othering' language, us versus them, it's another subliminal word game. It is only your bank if you hold shares in it. No one owns an economy it is an emergent phenomena. You could call them 'our institutions' if you are referring to the public sector but that is still a stretch. The people you characterise often quote the meme "bitcoin is the separation of money from state" in the tradition of the disestablishment of church from state. This is not the sensationalist 'taking our stuff' philosophy you colour it as.

4:10 - "Libertarianism is a philosophy of hate": Where do you get this language from? Go and read any libertarian text or speak to any self labelled libertarian and you will find philosophy closer to 1970s hippies than anything you are imagining. Their guiding axiom is "the non aggression principle". You have not and do not make any case for why it is a philosophy of hate. Such strong language should be backed up by strong reasoning.

4:24 - "A basis of trust has to be inherent in any currency": This is another unfounded poorly defined assertion. The core purpose of money is the alleviation of the need need for trust between counterparties. If we were looking for a system of trust, barter based IOU and personal credit is your system. My local shops have signs saying "please don't ask for credit as refusal can offend" - so good luck with that. We want to trust the MONEY is good, so that we don't have to trust that our customer's credit is good. Proper bitcoin wallets mechanically verify every incoming payment is valid, un-counterfieted, bearer, first class units of the currency, which is more than other moneys have achieved. If trust in the validity of incoming money is what you want, accept no substitute. This is why it has a public and permanent ledger of its history, so that every person may trivially check that every received coin is of genuine origin from the issuance mechanism - no other money works that way and can only simulate such assurances (for example by embossing the monarch's face intricately on a coin [energy use], and running ridges down its edge to make clipping obvious).

4:32 - "There is no right to use in exchange, it isn't legal tender": Yes, there is, people have a right to do anything that isn't illegal in the UK (unlike Germany where people only have the right to do legal things). And it is not illegal to use foreign or virtual currencies in the UK - for the avoidance of doubt. There is no need for anything more formal however if you want that please see Freedom of Contract, Bills of Exchange Act 1882, Sale of Goods Act 1979, Absence of Exchange Control Laws and that legal tender is not mandatory in private contracts. Legal tender in the UK asserts that due debts, if offered for settlement in legal tender, may not be further sued - making it explicitly clear that people are free to transact in any money they like (as long as it is not explicitly illegal). If you are suggesting that anyone selling something should be compelled by force of law to accept a singular currency (ie not a right to use but an obligation to accept), such as the national fiat, then you are suggesting that without that, the currency is much less valuable - that is consistent with your opening premise. I'll go with a money that people actually want to use when not coerced to as that is likely much more durable. Historical fiat currencies don't have a great track record in durability.

4:37 - "There is no authority to intervene in a crisis": Yes there is, we have a legal system and police to handle fraud and theft. "Meaning there is no lender of last resort"... there is no need for lenders in asset based monetary systems unlike fiat which is an intentionally debt based money system so of course the lender of last resort is a significant role in such a system. The crises you allude to are inherent only to the type of money you are advocating and that's where we get dystopian phrases like "systemically important banks" from - there is no such thing in a bitcoin economy.

4:46 - "There is no one to bail you out": Unless you engage in insurance contracts of course, which is the appropriate service for risk mitigation. The currency in question (bitcoin) does not need bailing out mechanisms because they are only needed in bankruptcy situations and bankruptcy is only possible where there is debt and bitcoin has no notion of debt. Individuals and firms may engage in bitcoin denominated debt but that is their personal choice and needs no systemic centralised interventions.

4:55 - "Governments will always bail out someone who holds their currency": What kind of propaganda are you reading!? Shall I list the top 10 government defaults of the last 5 decades chronologically or by size? Let's see, Argentina, Brazil, Greece, Iraq, Lebanon, Mexico, ... and that's the case of governments directly owning people money and they still default on their obligations. Were you suggesting that governments bail out private deals gone awry just because they are denominated in national fiat? This isn't a coherent point at best. Perhaps you meant governments will bail out the necessarily highly levered fiat licensed commercial banks when they misjudge their liquidity duration risks and fail to pay back demand deposits. They didn't with Lehman, they did with NatWest and lost a lot of taxpayer money in the process. Choose your poison carefully. The UK guarantees retail bank balances up to £85k but this is not costless - it is an insurance product paid for by those bank customers and only if that isn't sufficient will the government step in but you know what they step in with - tax payers money of course. So no, governments do not back their currency - we are on the hook for its inherent and real instabilities - the damage is spread out into broader society, but that doesn't mean it isn't very damaging. Stack a few such mechanisms up and you get a stagnant economy with low productivity and somehow inexplicable price inflation.

5:11 - "There is no national deposit insurance scheme": YES, because we don't need one in bitcoin because the money is asset based, not an IOU on a liquidity challenged commercial bank balance sheet operating in some form of fractional reserve risk game. IF a bitcoiner chooses to deposit their bitcoin monetary units with a third party custodian, there are lots of private market insurers available to cover them. It's a choice, take it or leave it, but it isn't going to become a systemic crisis harming those who were never party to risky games in the first place.

Part 4 of 5

5:36 - "There is an absence of regulation which assists those facts": The type of issue you want regulating by a central government doesn't exist in a bitcoin model. It is always to possible to regulate something more, there is no end and further regulation can be enacted if the people want it, I believe they do not currently as there isn't benefit to doing so. Again, where risk mitigation is wanted it is abundantly available in the competitive private sector. You are worrying about exchanges (de-facto crypto banks) defaulting on demand deposits - I worry about that too, but there is one very simple solution and that is for people not to use them for storage and to handle the currency themselves (a benefit of a bearer instrument - aka cash). If they don't want to do that then they can choose from an ever growing list of insured crypto custodians. Bitcoin gives people options and limits cascading risks. US banks and asset managers are currently building out their custody services in production and many will have built in insurance terms - just as you are asking for.

5:40 - "Cryptocurrencies operating in legal grey areas": Even if they do, legal system are malleable and perfectly capable of giving full legal colour to anything. However in the UK, they do not operate in a legal grey area. Foremost, people have the right to do anything that isn't illegal, as stated above, that is full legal colour enough is it not? Secondly the UKJT in 2019 declared bitcoin as 'property' in 2019. Thirdly the FCA has exerted jurisdiction over certain cryptocurrency exchange activities and fourthly the HMRC has had comprehensive guidance on applicable tax rules since 2014. Yes, bitcoin has no central bank or universal (capped) insurance - this is because it doesn't need them to survive. It is regulated in the UK in most of the ways people understand regulation to mean.

6:02 - "We face massive inflation if crypto becomes common place": I assume you mean 'massive inflation in GBP denominated prices'. This is not true. The circulating quantity of GBP is already highly elastic - if more is wanted more will be created, this in fact keeps prices quite stable - a nice feature of soft fiat. If people demand their units in a different denomination, such as dollars or bitcoin, or anything, that wont inflate prices because in order to obtain those moneys people will have to swap their GBP for them, they are just shuffling the same wealth around the boardgame. If they had £10 and wanted to buy bread with it using bitcoin, they will first sell their holding of pounds and then increase their holding of bitcoin and then buy the bread with that. The bread merchant feels no effect from this and keeps prices the same.

6:29 - "There is no insurance": Yes, there is, see above. You just have to pay for it yourself and not expect the costs of that to be socialised over unrelated tax payers. Also remember that there is no insurance for the fiat money in your pocket unless you buy it yourself. Custodied fiat and bitcoin have thriving insurance services available. The hair you are splitting has fallen out and isn't very pertinent given the systemic-risk prone nature of fiat versus the anti-fragile nature of bitcoin.

6:40 - "Crypto provides the ultimate ripoff possibility": How? You didnt explain this at all, unless you mean any of your previous points which you'll find elaborated refutation of above. In summary, bitcoin is asset based, cannot go bankrupt, cannot default in anyway, and if left with a custodian (an ill advised move for something so easily secured personally) may be insured just like any other thing of value left with a custodian. Bitcoin held personally can be time locked, distributed in copies to be safe from natural disaster, and have its spending power delegated over multiple key locations and holders to prevent accidental or malicious spending/loss. It is even possible to arrange personal holdings to be insured from loss too. If you mean nonsense crypto scams yes they exist, but if you make all of crypto illegal (however you legally define it), scams will not go away - only education will reduce the prevalence of scamming. Something I am trying to do. We already have laws about fraud and theft and they cover such crimes already - there is no need to make theft illegal again. Punching someone in offence is illegal, we don't need to specify that punching someone with a chicken tikka masala is also illegal.

6:49: "Bank mistakes can be corrected": This is rarely true. Believe it or not, people want to be able to trust the money, and that means they don't want it to be revoked retrospectively without their say so. The banking system was built to make revocation of past transactions very difficult and in many cases impossible. When they do reimburse errors it is typically at the cost of their own insurance provider and that cost will be passed on to the customer indirectly. See The Bangladesh Bank robbery. See Authorised Push Payment Fraud. See Conveyancing Fraud. All of these are examples of people losing life changing amounts of money and neither the banks nor the legal system offering reimbursement. The fiat banking system doesn't work how you suggest it does.

7:14 - "The crypto creator does actually hold all the power": This is not true of Bitcoin. It CAN be true of other cryptocurrencies but isn't true for many of them. It's like saying 'animals are furry' - some are, many aren't - not even all mammals are fury. Cryptocurrencies are political experiments stretching in design from the anarchic (PoW, no pre-mine) via oligarchic (PoS/DPoS) all the way through to totalitarian (PoA). I wouldn't touch 99% with a £1 note, but that's because I've studied them and decided which are of value to me and in that remaining 1% is bitcoin an anarchic, structured, self organising, incredibly valuable system where the creator has no power whatsoever ever other than their written thoughts recorded in public forums. In the worst case, Satoshi could reemerge, convince everybody that he really is him, criticise the project and sell the likely large holding he has. Even that would likely not harm the project significantly and certainly not durably. So when you say the creator can "create accounts" that is not true in almost all cryptocurrencies, "block users" that is possible only in the totalitarian systems (which are easy to recognise), and "change the rules" is again only possible in the totalitarian systems. Same for "expand the numbers without consent". For bitcoin and many others these are provably false assertions.

7:48 - "Play with crypto all you want but understand what it really is": I would counter, criticise it all you want, but understand what it is first.

7:50 - "It's just a game of financial speculation": ALL finance is a game of speculation. Finance is a collective hallucination that it is possible to store real labour and resources in an abstract number for use in another location and future time - finance entirely defies physics and yet it is one of our crowning achievements and has facilitated technological and artistic development beyond all comprehension. What you imply by 'speculation' is a zero sum, unproductive, casino of entertainment and anguish only - but that is a weasel worded criticism because it pretends that productive speculation does not exist. In fact, economic theory (the incentives of scarce value) indicates that speculation is generally a productive endeavour because where it isn't it is quickly unsustainable and humans are self-interested in being good at foreseeing what will be productive.

8:00 - "This is not something that is ever going to meet a real world need": It already does for millions. See the Human Rights Foundation website for some compelling examples. See Gridless mining website for examples of power infrastructure development in poor rural communities bringing electric light to the night time so that books can be read once daytime toil is finished. See the Roya Mahboob Afghanistan based female only software company which could only thrive once bitcoin enabled salary payments which husbands were unable to surveil and seize. And do not dismiss the millions of already comfy people who are storing value for the future using it - they matter too.

8:11 - "Probably facilitating illegal activity somewhere near you": So... again, it has value, broad, powerful, useful value - just to a class of activity that you do not like. Also this is a wild exaggeration anyway - as said earlier, almost all illegal activity is associated with what ever the dominant currency is, which is national regional fiat. If money doesn't work for selected activities it isn't good money for the other activities - You would not switch from pounds to supermarket tokens for example even through they are good for most of your purchases.

8:32 - "In the vast majority of cases people don't understand the risks": and you haven't helped that in your video. You are doing the equivalent of saying electricity, air travel, nuclear power, the spinning Jenny, the printing press and social media are capable of destroying all that we hold dear so ignore them, don't use them, don't waste your time trying to understand them. You are right, people do not understand the risks as a whole, but they are perfectly capable of doing so when they feel inclined. They also do not understand the risks in much detail of many of the activities they engage in but do so to the level they are comfy with. That's how humans do things, by experimentation and risk-taking through judicious and metered risk analysis including judging social consensus (a foundational component of bitcoin by the way).

Part 5 of 5

8:36 - "Crypto should be so heavily regulated and so ring fenced by consumer protections that nobody should go near it": There is nothing in creation that warrants that level of behaviour. What is so dangerous that nobody should go near it? Murderous psychopaths, hungry lions, toxic chemical waste, black holes, we do and will continue to (or will do one day) go near all of those things. We even take small children extremely near ferocious predatory beasties in zoos. Yes the iron bars are regulation, but not so much regulation that no one should even go near. And here you are talking about not those things, but non-governmental money, that's it. You know what regulates crypto money from doing damage, we all do, by understanding what it is and deciding whether to or how to use it. Bitcoin is a self regulating machine, like a steam engine is. You must have such low respect for people to come up with a notion like this. We are not fools, we have achieved everything you see around you, knowingly and willingly. Crypto shops are already regulated in the UK and most nations. Would you like to go further and make it illegal for me to write code that tracks private key control over a ledger of numerals and place that in the public domain licence and fee free? Would you make it illegal for me to download and run that code on my computer? Would you like to make it illegal for me and a wiling counterpart to use that ledger as a form of money when we exchange goods and services with one another? If so then you are the dangerous tyrant I want to be aware and wary of, not bitcoin.

Conclusion: I have written this in conversational style using the emotions I experienced while listening to your piece. I do respect your apparent sincerity and intelligence though I am dismayed at what I believe to be a lack of effort in studying primary material. I am not here to sling mud and would very very much welcome a debate with you as we have the perfect makings for one - two opposed views on a modern important and contentious topic. Via YouTube, Twitter, private phone call any forum you're willing to use - I care about this, I care about you, I care about them.

P.S. I even bought your book "the Joy of Tax" because it's a f*cking inspired title that made me smile and does every time I think of it. I thought "this will be a well thought out argument for me to grapple with". I haven't read it yet, I hope it is better thought through than this to-camera piece on cryptocurrency which I am sure was beneath your abilities. Perhaps you were consumed by care for your fellow people and wanted to protect them, but that belies a lack of respect for their analytical and self-preservation abilities.

It’s nice watching the big guys from every corner of the world ...

2025-05-02T07:16:45Z

It’s nice watching the big guys from every corner of the world pull every trick in the book to own my 0.1 BTC, while I just sip my tea and think about new businesses.

Seeing me and not interested? Or not seeing me? This miner is too ...

2025-05-01T20:35:16Z

Seeing me and not interested? Or not seeing me?

This miner is too rare to ignore, it’s the Delorean of ASICs.

C’mon guys, get involved.

quoting
note19r2…rqpk
Before I stick it on eBay - does anyone here want to buy my classic Bitmain Antminer R4 home heater ASIC (plus 1200w APW3++ psu)?

These are extremely rare. Basically an S9 in a very different form factor, cooled by a quiet impeller rather than server fans - like an air con unit.

If you do, send me offers by DM. You'll have to pay me first, and trust me to deliver the unit. If that worries you various UK bitcoiners can vouch for me.

Only one of the two hash cards is fully functional, the other mostly doesnt come online. Therefore it's a 400w 4TH/s machine.

Before I stick it on eBay - does anyone here want to buy my ...

2025-05-01T14:24:09Z

Before I stick it on eBay - does anyone here want to buy my classic Bitmain Antminer R4 home heater ASIC (plus 1200w APW3++ psu)?

These are extremely rare. Basically an S9 in a very different form factor, cooled by a quiet impeller rather than server fans - like an air con unit.

If you do, send me offers by DM. You'll have to pay me first, and trust me to deliver the unit. If that worries you various UK bitcoiners can vouch for me.

Only one of the two hash cards is fully functional, the other mostly doesnt come online. Therefore it's a 400w 4TH/s machine.

I’m not aware of any that do, but I suspect any logical shaping ...

2025-04-26T08:59:10Z

In reply to nevent1q…gd65
_________________________

I’m not aware of any that do, but I suspect any logical shaping of the RNG output (even at mnemonic phrase level) risks creating weakness. I suppose there could be a blacklist database made available to wallets. 🤷‍♂️

Steve Jobs once announced that iTunes’ much used shuffle ...

2025-04-25T15:28:33Z

Steve Jobs once announced that iTunes’ much used shuffle feature would be made less random as true randomness often clustered, by chance, into consistency.

If a bitcoin mnemonic phrase is seeded from a very random (high entropy) source it should be safe however it could, by chance, result in a very low entropy phrase like a grammatically accurate sentence or a pattern (bacon cheese bacon cheese bacon cheese bacon cheese bacon cheese bacon cheese), etc. There are many automatons loaded with such seeds, continuously scanning new blocks to find coins locked to keys derived from such seed phrases. They assume people will make their own, more easily memorised phrases and send coins to them.

So, if a randomly generated phrase looks a bit too human, perhaps generate another.

(The chance of this happening is very low).

Quantum computing will enable treasure hunters to spend lost ...

2025-04-25T10:40:08Z

Quantum computing will enable treasure hunters to spend lost bitcoin, however not those which were burned the right way: Spending to OP_RETURN makes them unspendable by protocol rule, not by cryptographic (DLP) control.

NB, primal.net/saylor

primal.net/gladstein, primal.net/danny re: your latest WBD

The difference between a business choosing to raise prices as a ...

2025-04-17T14:17:21Z

The difference between a business choosing to raise prices as a result of higher input costs (inflation) versus degrading the standard/scale of the product (shrinkflation) is whether the buyers are willing and able to pay more. If they are not then they get shrinkflation.

I see a lot of shrinkflation at the moment and that indicates a weak economy with incomes stretched to their limits.

It is much most expensive to downsize a product (packaging, logistics, wholesale deal sizing, etc) than just I clearing the ticket price. It’s done only when inflation isn’t an option.

Okay summer's almost ready to go over here. Who is buying ...

2025-03-18T12:26:17Z

Okay summer's almost ready to go over here. Who is buying Apple Vision goggles so they can sit outside in the sunshine all day long working at a 'screen'?

https://youtu.be/B-gOmWxUi50

2025-03-11T16:10:39Z

In reply to nevent1q…85jx
_________________________

https://youtu.be/B-gOmWxUi50

Go ask Alice, I think she’ll knnnnow. “Re-member what the ...

2025-03-11T16:07:36Z

Go ask Alice,
I think she’ll knnnnow.
“Re-member
what the doctor said,
Feed your headdddd,
Feed your heeaaaad.”

We’ve long needed to scale out nuclear power production to ...

2025-03-11T10:22:09Z

We’ve long needed to scale out nuclear power production to avoid a high greenhouse gas output economy.

Now we need it to save our nation states too.

Amazing that it took LLMs to tip us in that direction finally.

Well said. He has indeed shown his hand a number of times now and ...

2025-03-11T10:19:15Z

In reply to nevent1q…j6l2
_________________________

Well said. He has indeed shown his hand a number of times now and that undermines his credibility. He smelt fishy from the start with his outlandish and unknowable claim of being the best trader in the world (or even within Citibank). The best traders make many tens of millions in a year and they are rarely juniors on trading desks with tight risk limits.

Permissioned IOU credit tokens with gradual expiry built in - ...

2025-03-11T10:12:36Z

In reply to nevent1q…eu4u
_________________________

Permissioned IOU credit tokens with gradual expiry built in - naturally!

“Gary’s Economics” is a business. The hat and the budget ...

2025-03-11T09:35:13Z

“Gary’s Economics” is a business. The hat and the budget kitchen he sits in are wardrobe and studio props. They are aimed to disarm those who are only superficially critically thinking. ‘He’s one of us at heart - but with insider info on them - he’s our loyal mole’. He’s not.

He is selling advertising space and a book. He may also be selling influence perhaps as a lobbyist (my hunch).

He’s lying about his credentials. He’s ignorant about bitcoin. His taxation scheme is simplistic at best and detrimental at worst.

He is an image and a brand.

Sold above $100k? Bought in around $50k? Then you might have a ...

2025-03-11T07:23:17Z

Sold above $100k? Bought in around $50k? Then you might have a CGT bill of ~20% which is $10k/coin. Anything under $90k is small profit. Under $80k is >12% profit. Under $70k >28%. Quite a risk you took, so you want that juicier return. Who’s diving back in 1st to swing the mkt?

George Orwell’s sequel is less well known but perhaps even more ...

2025-03-08T01:25:55Z

George Orwell’s sequel is less well known but perhaps even more chilling. If you haven’t read it, get a copy of: “1994, Celebrity Big Brother”

Nostr event nevent1qqsw5fcwnyx46pps9ldrznluuwy36kn5l00vc7lmtttd9md3j7npupczyp8hw4zq6myhs8mvqvxkq63a6jtxp5h00e443872w7plx06u42406vewurk

2025-02-19T17:00:45Z

Use bitcoin to import every other nations asset inflation.

Tea bags. Harvest the finest leaf tips, make soft mesh bags - ...

2025-02-17T17:17:26Z

Tea bags. Harvest the finest leaf tips, make soft mesh bags - perfect per portion convenience of luxurious delights from the east.

Oh and make sure the bags come in pairs so the drinker has to tear them apart for every other cup. That last bits really important.

If I have a BitAxe but it’s sitting on the shelf unpowered ...

2025-02-17T17:17:08Z

If I have a BitAxe but it’s sitting on the shelf unpowered because it had some overheating error and I haven’t had time to look at it - am I still making the bitcoin network secure?

Legal tender is a much confused term. Does it mean… a) you must ...

2025-02-14T09:38:33Z

Legal tender is a much confused term.

Does it mean…
a) you must accept it in trade
b) it’s not illegal to accept it
c) you can’t sue if it’s offered in settlement of any debt

Bukele went with A, a very interventionist and extreme rule. China has at times made it illegal tender (judicial penalties if you are caught using it), but the UK wins by making GBP its only legal tender and using definition C.

Why wins? Because they leave the door open for trade to happen In any asset, from barter to shells to pounds to bitcoin.

So why isn’t the UK really winning? Because they apply capital gains tax to the trade of anything which isn’t GBP which is a huge disincentive in letting any other asset become a de facto currency.

El Salvador maintaining a zero CGT status for Bitcoin is the real gem of a law. It’s non-interventionist, allows a fair playing field and voluntary organic growth and demonstrates a more valid economic experiment to take place.

The IMF changes have been ironically beneficial in the long term.

Now, the UK, please stand for and vote for tax rule changes too.

Check out where her head scarf meats her ear lobe. Also how ...

2025-02-11T19:38:23Z

In reply to nevent1q…sq9z
_________________________

Check out where her head scarf meats her ear lobe. Also how pointy her right shoulder is.

Ded sus’

This pizza box is adorned with AI generated images. The car was ...

2025-02-11T18:54:21Z

This pizza box is adorned with AI generated images.

The car was never made, the woman was never born and the baker was never photographed.

The less we gossip, the stronger the risk that we partition our ...

2025-01-30T11:11:45Z

The less we gossip, the stronger the risk that we partition our _social_ networks. If that happens we fork our perceptions of reality.

How many peers do you communicate with and how heterogeneous is that group?

Gresham’s law of laundry: Bad socks outlive good socks

2025-01-29T10:05:48Z

Gresham’s law of laundry:

Bad socks outlive good socks

AI race is clearly misunderstood. As bitcoin miners know, the ...

2025-01-27T19:06:05Z

AI race is clearly misunderstood. As bitcoin miners know, the efficiency of the machine is just an edge in the race, not a reason to put less effort in.

DeepSeek is at best a downward difficulty adjustment, and at worst a new but normal competitor.

Nvidia is still king.

Mr. Tom https://youtu.be/ldH8-xbwOGs

2025-01-15T15:49:57Z

Mr. Tom
https://youtu.be/ldH8-xbwOGs

How do you manage all your encryption keys (e.g. SSH, GPG, PKI)? ...

2025-01-05T17:03:44Z

How do you manage all your encryption keys (e.g. SSH, GPG, PKI)? There doesn't seem to be a widely adopted standard like BIP32 and related for deriving them from a common seed, or tooling for that kind of scheme.

Slippage = price drives up for your purchase and then collapses ...

2024-11-11T21:31:15Z

Slippage = price drives up for your purchase and then collapses

Stickage = price drives up for your purchase and then stays there

Zippage = price drives up for your purchase and then keeps going

Nostr event nevent1qqstr0r08tfzvf9zx6k3x3l40qm8regf6u2reacn6l4xyznnjguyvtczyp8hw4zq6myhs8mvqvxkq63a6jtxp5h00e443872w7plx06u424066ps53l

2024-10-31T20:02:22Z

BOO

I wondered if prayer was necessary. I’ll give it a go.

2024-10-29T15:46:53Z

In reply to nevent1q…wt28
_________________________

I wondered if prayer was necessary. I’ll give it a go.

Thanks for the z/ats! I just rediscovered Battle for Evermore. ...

2024-10-29T15:14:01Z

In reply to nevent1q…8e4d
_________________________

Thanks for the z/ats! I just rediscovered Battle for Evermore. They don’t make em like that anymore.

What’s up with my zap set up? I have an LNurl address programmed in - does zapping require bolt12?

Led Zeppelin IV

2024-10-29T08:46:53Z

In reply to nevent1q…54u5
_________________________

Led Zeppelin IV

Oh i see. So if I run it myself it can be justa stratum server ...

2024-10-26T12:41:38Z

In reply to nevent1q…znlm
_________________________

Oh i see. So if I run it myself it can be justa stratum server bridging my own node to my own asic?

Is there any other way?!

2024-10-25T13:17:28Z

In reply to nevent1q…gxer
_________________________

Is there any other way?!

Thanks. What’s ’public pool app’? Is that an Umbrel thing?

2024-10-25T13:16:33Z

In reply to nevent1q…sppq
_________________________

Thanks. What’s ’public pool app’? Is that an Umbrel thing?

QE = Arbitrary debasement Or… QE = Clever fiat game which ...

2024-10-24T22:52:31Z

QE = Arbitrary debasement
Or…
QE = Clever fiat game which stimulates real productive activity to benefit wider society
?

Ooh, that wasn’t a bitcoin event, it was crypto. Was about 2% ...

2024-10-23T22:31:17Z

Ooh, that wasn’t a bitcoin event, it was crypto. Was about 2% the size of the bitcoin event there a few weeks prior. I think that’s what the Bedford residents call the cheat code.

quoting note1xhl…zhtm
It’s time for Tooting

Nostr event nevent1qqsrtl6092vfhcrycn8zkr6wxfrmgd9rdgusy62utq4k8rqfcqh384gzyp8hw4zq6myhs8mvqvxkq63a6jtxp5h00e443872w7plx06u424064cxzxh

2024-10-23T17:09:12Z

It’s time for Tooting

Thanks for letting me know.

2024-10-21T12:28:23Z

In reply to nevent1q…344k
_________________________

Thanks for letting me know.

The Liz Truss mini budget panic was said to be caused by pension ...

2024-10-21T11:37:01Z

The Liz Truss mini budget panic was said to be caused by pension fund managers calling the BoE asking for intervention as they faced bankruptcy.

This causality is debated, however it’s interesting to unravel the nature of the pension predicament.

It wasn’t all pension funds as modern schemes should be fully funded (aside rehypothecation practices). The problem is the existing stock of Defined Benefit schemes which pay a fixed amount per year like an annuity. They invest their money in long term government bonds under a practice called Liability Driven Investment (LDI). DB funds don’t know how much they are on the hook to pay, as that depends on how long members live for, so they run statistical models, and invest ‘optimally’ to have enough value at any point in the future to pay obligations. When BoE started selling back its stock of bonds acquired via ‘Quantitative Easing’ in a process dubbed ‘Quantitative Tightening’ they devalued the market for the bonds the pension funds hold dangerously threatening their solvency.

As DBs have ended the stock of them falls every day as, sadly, members of course eventually die.

DB was unsustainable but there isn’t much stock of it left so actually as time goes by the pension industry is less precarious.

Oscar this is NOTHING to with Bitcoin!

True, but saving in a capped supply asset will give you a wicked pension. X

In celebration of Michael Saylor telling us holding our own ...

2024-10-21T08:07:46Z

In celebration of Michael Saylor telling us holding our own belongings makes us the paranoid fringe, I started mining again today.

Oh, good point! I had configured an LNaddress ages ago in Damus ...

2024-10-21T07:08:48Z

In reply to nevent1q…wmcl
_________________________

Oh, good point! I had configured an LNaddress ages ago in Damus but can’t see that now. Maybe they changed the model and that is only visible in other clients now?

Nostr event nevent1qqsqkfah4m7xx6yspt0evaqn2lylnrvnzjytcmuv0syp3jg0qj6lurszyp8hw4zq6myhs8mvqvxkq63a6jtxp5h00e443872w7plx06u42406sv9jwr

2024-10-21T00:29:59Z

$69,420 crew back in control

Thanks. Done. But still no zaps log. Any other ideas?

2024-10-20T19:52:36Z

In reply to nevent1q…7m0j
_________________________

Thanks. Done. But still no zaps log. Any other ideas?

Why don’t my zaps show up here? I don’t know who is playing ...

2024-10-20T19:48:28Z

Why don’t my zaps show up here? I don’t know who is playing fairy godmother.

😃 THAT’S THE ANSWER! Okay, hooking it up to my full node ...

2024-10-20T19:47:01Z

In reply to nevent1q…ec9x
_________________________

😃 THAT’S THE ANSWER!

Okay, hooking it up to my full node directly then. No solo pool pretend mining for me.

Thanks @TheSoloMiningCo for the nicely packaged and manufactured ...

2024-10-20T19:20:13Z

In reply to nevent1q…hnt2
_________________________

Thanks @TheSoloMiningCo for the nicely packaged and manufactured hardware.

BIG DAY FOR ME. I received my first ever zap ⚡️ which is ...

2024-10-20T19:17:58Z

BIG DAY FOR ME.

I received my first ever zap ⚡️ which is ♾️% more than I earned on Twitter.

I booted up my first bitaxe. These are the first time current(ish) generation chips have been available in small form factor for years.

Shall I run it solo in lottery mode or contributing work to a pool?

re-basement*

2024-10-20T18:29:33Z

In reply to nevent1q…ltf7
_________________________

re-basement*

Signals a bit too high on nostr, needs more noise. Who shall I ...

2024-10-13T21:32:27Z

Signals a bit too high on nostr, needs more noise. Who shall I follow?

Failure to respond to this post by midnight will result in a fine ...

2024-10-12T17:45:23Z

Failure to respond to this post by midnight will result in a fine of £60, reduced to £45 if paid before midnight.

At a bitcoin conference Guess what the currency is here ...

2024-10-10T15:48:03Z

At a bitcoin conference
Guess what the currency is here
Cigarettes
So funny

(New laws in Netherlands make cigs scarce as hell)

Fiat is designed to gradually debase to stimulate work. Bitcoin ...

2024-10-03T09:30:55Z

Fiat is designed to gradually debase to stimulate work.

Bitcoin is designed to gradually re-base to stimulate leisure.

{No, debasement doesn't mean filing in your basement with gravel, and rebasement doesn't mean digging it out again - that's not leisure time}

Typo!

2024-10-03T09:30:39Z

In reply to nevent1q…ltf7
_________________________

Typo!

Fiat is designed to gradually debase to stimulate work. Bitcoin ...

2024-10-03T09:21:36Z

Fiat is designed to gradually debase to stimulate work.

Bitcoin is designed to gradually re-base to stimulate leisure.

{No, debasement doesn't mean filing in your basement with gravel, and debasement doesn't mean digging it out again - that's not leisure time}

Careers fair: I want to make a lot of money Get into banking I ...

2024-10-03T08:41:40Z

Careers fair:

I want to make a lot of money
Get into banking

I want to store my new money somewhere
Put it in a bank

How much will that cost me?
Nothing

What?
Yes, banks dont charge to safeguard your money

So how did I make all that money in banking?
You printed it

NEXT!

Nostr event nevent1qqsqpag9dzr9tqqvvfvl3ccgcvmx6tdjcg3aeyz90mthe3gc4uewjwgzyp8hw4zq6myhs8mvqvxkq63a6jtxp5h00e443872w7plx06u42406qumuuz

2024-10-02T15:10:05Z

OMG I’ve just realised there’s poo in the pool.

😂 Right? The commercial opportunity and tax from these goods ...

2024-10-02T13:24:40Z

In reply to nevent1q…ar7r
_________________________

😂

Right? The commercial opportunity and tax from these goods is enormous. Not to mention the chnace for people to use less alcohol as their only mood medicine.

Is the solution to send him to prison, or to accept this is a ...

2024-10-02T12:24:06Z

Is the solution to send him to prison, or to accept this is a popular product and legalise it?

Imagine how much death would be caused if sugar was prohibited.
Imagine how much economic development there has been by sugar.

Stop voting for bad policy.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c9wkd187505o

Is anyone aware of any implementations of the FIDO Passkey scheme ...

2024-09-30T14:58:02Z

Is anyone aware of any implementations of the FIDO Passkey scheme which have multikey/multisig auth?

e.g register three pubkeys with the service, submit sigs from any two keys to login

e.g register just one pub key with the service, create sig using local threshold scheme

Atomic minds, would you kindly fact check this info? A popular ...

2024-09-27T15:12:35Z

Atomic minds, would you kindly fact check this info?

A popular LLM informs me that most SMR designs are fail safe (ie HTGR, MSR). Also that if an aeroplane crash split a reactor open, no clean up occurred and you stood next to it for a month then you would receive 10 mSv which is a radiation dose roughly equivalent to:
- A full body medical CT scan
- 10x long haul flights

And resulting in an elevated risk of cancer in later life of 0.05%. If that is true, am I missing any other worse scenarios? Can a villain use cheap methods to cause hell?

You excellent person! All names followed. See you next Friday.

2024-09-14T08:46:54Z

In reply to nevent1q…gq6d
_________________________

You excellent person! All names followed. See you next Friday.

I wonder how that decision was discussed and settled on.

2024-09-09T13:39:14Z

In reply to nevent1q…a3m7
_________________________

I wonder how that decision was discussed and settled on.

Should a government want to tax illicit economic activity more ...

2024-09-09T12:14:27Z

Should a government want to tax illicit economic activity more than the legitimate equivalent (because taxes are dis/incentive tools) or zero (because they do not wish to benefit from illicit activity or even have the conflict of interest it represents)?

N.B. In the UK proceeds of crime are taxable under the same rules as legal income.

Wow, this is a stunning amount of efficiency progress from ...

2024-09-05T07:07:37Z

Wow, this is a stunning amount of efficiency progress from Bitmain and TSMC. Suggests commoditisation of ASICs isn’t as close as we thought.

Their latest machine (U3S21EXPH ) is 13J/TH and runs at 860TH/s in a 3U liquid cooled rack. 100kw server rack towers possible now.

TicketMaster’s monopoly is quite an interesting case. Most ...

2024-09-05T07:01:51Z

TicketMaster’s monopoly is quite an interesting case. Most examinations don’t show a regulatory moat, they just acquired/merged their way to dominance with main tool being protectionist contracts (we cease services if you ever use a competitor). However, dig more and there are multiple regulations they exploited to retain dominance:
- Claiming copyright over etickets to prohibit 3rd party secondary markets and private resale.
- BOTS act 2016 both inhibits touts (secondary market makers) and is costly to implement for firms.
- price floor laws (in some locales) prevent others from undercutting
- GDPR (and equivalent) has been costly to implement for these consumer data intensive services.

There are always laws, often ‘consumer protection’ oriented like the above, which get exploited by the large to crush the small and become the giant.

I don’t have enough info yet to claim it was these laws which enabled TM/LN’s malignant monopoly, but they obviously helped and my suspicion is always that regulatory moats are essential.

Does any one have more insights in the case?

quoting note10km…949j
I haven’t read about the TicketMaster (Oasis) saga yet. I’m aware they are monopolistic already, and now it’s obvious from the outrage that there is dissatisfaction in the market with their practices. Am I going to find a regulatory/legal moat they exploited?

I haven’t read about the TicketMaster (Oasis) saga yet. I’m ...

2024-09-04T21:46:44Z

I haven’t read about the TicketMaster (Oasis) saga yet. I’m aware they are monopolistic already, and now it’s obvious from the outrage that there is dissatisfaction in the market with their practices. Am I going to find a regulatory/legal moat they exploited?

distros* I can really see the appeal of having a single script ...

2024-08-29T13:04:48Z

In reply to nevent1q…kdwr
_________________________

distros*

I can really see the appeal of having a single script which sets up your entire environment.

NixOS still on my to do list. I tend to focus more on cli/server ...

2024-08-29T13:03:02Z

In reply to nevent1q…lq0m
_________________________

NixOS still on my to do list. I tend to focus more on cli/server infra too. Gnome seems nice though?

Nix can be added on to other dostros

I think this is what nixos is for

2024-08-29T10:47:37Z

In reply to nevent1q…wv6t
_________________________

I think this is what nixos is for

If the UK removed all taxes and replaced them with a VAT ...

2024-08-29T10:45:17Z

If the UK removed all taxes and replaced them with a VAT (consumption tax), they would maintain annual tax revenues by setting that VAT rate to about 37%.

Imagine how much simpler life and politics would be.

Taxes aren't just funding, they are also behavioural nudges so this would increase work, and decrease consumption (assuming taxes do indeed have such effects). Most people would say that's a desirable outcome.

Critics argue that this scheme costs poor people more as more of their wealth is used on spending. They are wrong, because everyone employs all available capital. The VAT rate would apply to ALL transactions not just those VATable currently, so, add in real estate, securities & commodities transactions, charitable donations, etc and now it's not regressive.

The really big surprise is that when you broaden the scope of VAT in that way, the universal rate falls from around 37% to under 10%.

Reduce HMRC to a few interns (VAT collection is easy). Reduce all politicking down to 'how to spend' from 'how to levy and spend'.

What's the caveat? We would disrupt our competitiveness on the internal market for better and worse depending on sector. The UK financial sector is smaller than it was but still dominant domestically and a 9% transaction tax might wipe out that sector.

Why don't governments do this (not just uk)?

I think it's because they want the complexity. They want levers to pull, and dominions to manage. They aren't there to run infrastructure - they are there to run the country as a business and compete with other Nation PLCs - we, the people, are staff.

Through the annual self assessment routine. They will estimate ...

2024-08-28T21:19:49Z

In reply to nevent1q…pk8c
_________________________

Through the annual self assessment routine. They will estimate that you will earn the same amount next year, then demand half the tax for it half way through the year ‘on account’ whether it’s been earned or not. They at least will reimburse any excess but you have to wait for the end of the year - meanwhile they hold your cash.

Nostr event nevent1qqsqd5jn0df9rfvlqltha6z0duq9klfd2522hz99w9eaevqe5fa2nlszyp8hw4zq6myhs8mvqvxkq63a6jtxp5h00e443872w7plx06u42406932jm8

2024-08-28T20:22:28Z

The UK already taxes unrealised income

Four UK headlines from yesterday: - Will tax homeowners & ...

2024-08-28T09:48:52Z

Four UK headlines from yesterday:
- Will tax homeowners & investors
- Mortgage delinquency up 50%
- Hawkish base rate outlook
- Home builders devalued

Pledges were for +1.5m homes and productivity 📈

Truss tried the opposite
Damed if you do/dont

Centralised meddling isnt helping

“Tech neutral” sounds like a sensible position for business ...

2024-08-27T10:36:37Z

“Tech neutral” sounds like a sensible position for business leaders and regulators too. It’s an often repeated phrase - and not a helpful one. Two different techs can rarely substitute one another to fulfil some purpose without quite distinct utility and externality profiles.

UK public debt calcs: GDP: £2.3t Debt: £2.5t D/GDP ratio: 109% ...

2024-08-18T08:08:48Z

UK public debt calcs:
GDP: £2.3t
Debt: £2.5t
D/GDP ratio: 109%
Tax rev: £0.9t
Spending: £1t
Deficit: £0.1t
Pay back period = ∞

If we balance budget, cut spend to £0.9t:
Pay back period = ∞

For a 50y back back, cut spend by 13.5% from £1t to £0.865t = -£135bn/yr

∴ inflation