jacopograziuso
Jacopo Graziuso

🎓 Trainee economist, lecturer and populariser. My research include Bitcoin, finance, economics, geopolitics and the future. Awareness = freedom + knowledge.

Public Key

npub1sgyq86dea5ceev977t8cahefr9wdt69ley0za86usdy9jxp7mcsslvcx3l

Profile Code

nprofile1qqsgyzqraxu76vvukzl09nuwmu53jhx4azluj83wnawgxjzerqlduggpz3mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduqs6amnwvaz7tmwdaejumr0dsjwe77j

Publishing to

relay.damus.io

nos.lol

Author Public Key

npub1sgyq86dea5ceev977t8cahefr9wdt69ley0za86usdy9jxp7mcsslvcx3l

Show more details

Last Notes

2026-08-07 15:51:37 GMT

Anchor, not underneath.
In public discourse on Bitcoin, there is an expression doing the rounds, spoken with the calm certainty of those who believe they have already understood it: 'energy is Bitcoin’s underlying asset'. The phrase has a rhythm to it, almost the cadence of an axiom. Yet it is akin to measuring the depth of an ocean with a thirty-centimetre ruler: the tool is tangible and the gesture makes sense, but the magnitude one seeks to capture is consistently beyond the capacity of the chosen measure.
In technical terms, the underlying asset is that which directly and measurably determines the value of another asset: gold for a currency once pegged to it, for example, or the underlying security for a derivative that tracks its price. It is a relationship of structural dependence, not a mere co-occurrence of phenomena. In the proof-of-work process, energy does not occupy this position. It is an input that is used, consumed and dissipated to produce a different good: the computational security of the distributed network. It is not capitalised within the asset and does not constitute its value in an accounting or financial sense. The banking system consumes considerable amounts of energy to maintain data centres, branches, and clearing infrastructure. However, this does not mean that energy is the underlying asset of bank money.
If the formula were technically correct, we would expect to see a stable, structural correlation between the price of Bitcoin and the price of energy. However, the empirical literature on this topic is inconclusive: some studies identify nonlinear, asymmetric links that depend on market conditions, but none document a direct relationship comparable to that between a derivative and its underlying asset. In any case, the gap between the metaphor and the mechanism remains measurable.
The more rigorous formulation differs and is less immediate. Bitcoin is anchored to the real cost of production through proof of work. It is not anchored to an underlying asset. It is an anchoring mechanism which establishes a plausible lower bound on value via the marginal cost of mining without determining its value directly.
This distinction is not mere terminological pedantry. It is the difference between infrastructure, what actually happens in the blockchai, and narrative, what we tell ourselves to make it comprehensible. Narratives simplify, and in doing so, they undermine the critical understanding that should protect us from manipulation, even unintentional manipulation and the kind we inflict on ourselves when a convenient metaphor replaces the more arduous task of understanding a mechanism.
Abandoning poetic metaphors does not impoverish discourse on Bitcoin. In fact, it subjects the discourse to the rigour it deserves.
Perhaps the question is not whether Bitcoin has an underlying asset. Rather, it is about whether we are willing to give up linguistic shortcuts that simplify our understanding in order to take on the responsibility of truly understanding what we are dealing with.
#bitcoin #proofofwork #energy #underneath #technology
https://blossom.primal.net/602a6dcdd0beb67505ebebd7997c814bc24c16c1f3ba452b553b7f733bf0f76b.png

2026-05-12 10:19:44 GMT

What follows will upset many people.
Not because it is incorrect, but because it has always been present in the code, the white paper and the mathematics behind Bitcoin. Visible. Yet ignored.
Bitcoin is not a currency.
Not today. Probably not tomorrow either. Perhaps never.
And this is not heresy. It is the most honest assessment of what Bitcoin really is that one can make.
Money performs three functions: it is a store of value, a medium of exchange and a unit of account. Bitcoin does not systematically fulfil any of these: it is not accepted globally as a means of payment, prices are not denominated in satoshis and its structural volatility (albeit decreasing) means it is not recognised as a store of value by institutions.
Claiming otherwise is ideology, not analysis.
Bitcoin is presented as a deflationary instrument. The fixed supply of 21 million units, the halving mechanism and the progressive reduction in issuance seem to form a solid narrative, but it is partial and, technically speaking, a partial truth is a falsehood.
Bitcoin is deflationary in relation to itself, but not in relation to the global economic system — not yet, at least — and not for structural reasons.
Until 2140, new bitcoins will be released into circulation every ten minutes. These quantities are decreasing: currently around 3.125 BTC per block, set to halve again in a couple of years.
Although the issuance rate is already below 1% per annum, the principle remains the same: issuance is issuance. If Bitcoin were to be adopted as a currency within the global monetary system, each new block would increase the global money supply – the same money supply that, driven by an M2 expansion of around 8% per annum, is already the main cause of the erosion of individual purchasing power. Presenting Bitcoin as a global deflationary antidote whilst ignoring this mechanism is intellectually dishonest.
There is an important corollary that is almost always omitted: a fixed supply implies renouncing economic policy.
Monetary policy — that is, the ability to intervene in the money supply, interest rates and the system's liquidity — is a tool for macroeconomic stabilisation. It is not perfect or neutral, but it is historically significant. A supply determined by code eliminates this ability by definition; it does not improve it.
The same applies to fiscal policy manoeuvre scope: redistribution, cushioning cyclical shocks and collectively modulating aggregate demand. Whether this is a virtue or a flaw depends on one's theory of the state, but it cannot be ignored. Those who ignore it are ignoring half the problem.
Yet none of this detracts from Bitcoin.
In fact, it frees it from the confines of a misguided definition.
If Bitcoin is not a currency, then it must be something else. It is in this 'something else' that its true power lies.
Privacy is a freedom of choice, which is clearly distinct from secrecy as concealment.
It is the custody of sovereign digital value without intermediaries, confiscation or censorship.
Digital scarcity is a new category: for the first time, a digital asset is verifiably and uncensorably finite. This is not because someone has declared it to be so, but because the code has enforced it on the distributed blockchain for 17 years.
These are the conditions for individual emancipation in the strictest sense.
Those who embrace Bitcoin without questioning it do not understand it. They revere it. And, unlike understanding, reverence has never changed anything.
Perhaps Bitcoin is the first successful experiment in something for which we do not yet have the words to describe.
It is not a currency. It is not an asset like any other. It lies at the intersection of distributed infrastructure, a philosophy of value and a language of freedom as active responsibility.
The problem is not Bitcoin.
It is that we are using the wrong categories.
The real task is not to adapt Bitcoin to existing definitions, but to construct the new categories that it has been quietly demanding for 17 years.
#bitcoin #fiat #money #politics #not #problem #asset #crypto #solutions #economy
https://blossom.primal.net/e384b010e00b8ac5e966908d954a6e01b064dc4e861b3d3e4eb532c8cecab52e.png

2026-02-24 10:10:41 GMT

On-chain scalability: what Bitcoin deliberately rejects.
Reading time: 1–2 minutes.
When compared to contemporary payment systems, Bitcoin is often considered 'slow'.
This judgement implies an unstated assumption that speed is a universal goal and that all infrastructures must compete based on maximum operational capacity.
Bitcoin does not share this assumption.
In a technical sense, on-chain scalability refers to the ability to increase the number of transactions processed directly in the base layer without substantially altering security and verification requirements. In a distributed system, however, this increase is never neutral; it implies larger blocks, greater complexity, longer propagation times and increasingly expensive nodes to maintain.
Every structural increase in throughput produces chained effects. Hardware requirements increase, verification becomes less accessible, and fewer entities are able to control the ledger. Operational efficiency is achieved by concentrating validation power, thereby transforming a system that is verifiable by many into one that is entrusted to a few.
Bitcoin consciously rejects this trajectory because it was not designed to be used as a retail payment system. Its base layer is not designed to compete with infrastructures geared towards speed and volume; rather, it is intended to perform a different function as a settlement system, where certainty is prioritised over immediacy.
Mixing up these levels means giving Bitcoin a task it is not intended to perform. Slowness is not an accidental defect, but rather a consequence of the decision to keep verification costs low while maintaining high resistance to manipulation.
In this context, scalability is not an intrinsic goal, but a trade-off. Any attempt to maximise it on-chain would require a redefinition of the system's priorities and would directly affect its social function.
Bitcoin simply chooses not to optimise anything that would compromise its consistency.
The real question is not why Bitcoin is not fast.
Rather, it is why we expect it to be.
#scalability #trilemma #bitcoin #choice #choose #question #process #share
https://blossom.primal.net/651ad2db90b5dbe809f162ddfc78070724d954f396ed84cee919e83727067191.png

2026-02-11 13:18:10 GMT

Security is the non-negotiable foundation of Bitcoin.
Reading time: 1–2 minutes.
In public debate, security is often treated as a technical variable, a parameter that can be adjusted according to the desired level of performance.
It is treated as if it could be increased or reduced without systemic consequences.
As if it were a feature rather than an inherent part of existence.
In the case of Bitcoin, however, this interpretation is deeply misleading.
Security does not coincide with the absence of bugs or the mere robustness of the software. In Bitcoin,
Security = resistance
to three fundamental events:
1. rewriting transaction history;
2. a coordinated economic attack on consensus;
3. the possibility of persistent censorship.
Security is the system's ability to render these events uneconomical, unstable or temporary.
This security is not abstract. It is based on real economic costs sustained over time, institutional barriers that make attacks equivalent to the destruction of value, and intertemporal credibility, without which no promise of neutrality can be upheld.
It is not protection 'for the user', but rather protection of the system against the user should they act opportunistically.
The purpose of Bitcoin transactions is probabilistic rather than instantaneous. Irreversibility is not decreed, but emerges from the progressive accumulation of costs required to rewrite the past. It is precisely this asymmetry between the ease of daily use and the difficulty of a systemic attack that makes the ledger reliable over time.
Reducing security to increase throughput is not a neutral choice. It means:
- compressing the cost of attack;
- lowering the threshold of rewritability;
- transforming trust from an emergent property into an implicit assumption.
At this stage, Bitcoin ceases to be credible infrastructure and becomes an administrable system.
This is why security cannot be treated as an optional extra or a tuning variable.
Rather, it is an embedded, indivisible and non-customisable public good.
Everything else (speed, convenience and flexibility) can be negotiated. This cannot be.
Therefore, the question is not whether Bitcoin is 'secure enough'.
Rather, the question is whether we are willing to accept what security really entails.
#security #bitcoin #speed #convenience #flexibility #system #temp #user
https://blossom.primal.net/6da6d05db8770d8993b1b441208109cb8b3c9449019722802f1a0bc64a502202.png

2026-02-09 14:28:38 GMT

- reply

I am not familiar with Bitcoin Layer 3, apart from the Lightning Network, which is Layer 2.
This is the first post in a series, so stay tuned!

2026-02-09 09:17:30 GMT

The Bitcoin trilemma is a structural constraint, not a flaw.
Estimated reading time: 1–2 minutes.
A widespread belief, as simple as it is misleading, is that Bitcoin 'fails' on certain fronts because it was not designed well enough.
That its architecture has avoidable limitations.
The so-called trilemma is seen as a merit ranking, in which someone wins and someone loses.
This approach is fundamentally flawed.
In the case of Bitcoin, the trilemma is neither a value judgement nor a technological ranking. Rather, it is a structural constraint that describes the logical impossibility of maximising three fundamental dimensions within a distributed consensus system simultaneously.
In the specific case of Bitcoin, these dimensions have a precise and non-interchangeable meaning:
1) the security of consensus and the ledger, understood as resistance to rewriting, coordinated attacks and censorship;
2) the distribution of verification power, i.e. the ability of a large number of independent actors to control and enforce the system's rules;
3) On-chain scalability, which is the ability of the base layer to absorb large volumes of transactions directly on-chain.
These fundamental properties give rise to characteristics that are often cited as autonomous objectives, such as immutability, transparency and reliability. However, these are derived properties that cannot be pursued separately from the former.
Bitcoin does not 'suffer' from the trilemma.
It consciously accepts it.
The protocol's architecture clearly demonstrates a choice to prioritise security and the distribution of verification power over on-chain scalability. This is not due to technical incapacity, but rather for institutional consistency. Increasing throughput and accessibility to verification simultaneously would require compromises that would affect precisely what makes the system credible over time.
The key point is not what Bitcoin does not do.
It is why it chooses not to do it.
Understanding the trilemma means viewing Bitcoin not as a product to be optimised, but as a technical institution operating within non-negotiable constraints.
#bitcoin #trilemma #blockchain #timechain #security #decentralization #scalability #choose
https://blossom.primal.net/c6fbf1df1907f2a7f110b7d0fb177c340bafec6701639842cd1383854b482de2.png

2026-02-06 15:14:18 GMT

Bitcoin as a social good: conscious confidentiality, not secrecy.
When viewed beyond simplifications, a key point often overlooked emerges: Bitcoin is not designed to guarantee secrecy. It does not hide transactions, obscure value flows or offer invisibility. Its operation is explicit, verifiable and based on public rules. Therefore, reducing it to a tool for concealment misunderstands its nature.
Bitcoin can be understood as a social good insofar as it introduces an infrastructure that separates value from direct identity control. It does not require you to reveal your identity in order to participate, but it does require everyone to respect the rules equally. While this feature does not eliminate power, it does reduce its arbitrariness. Rather than delegating trust to a central authority, it is anchored to the verifiability of the rules.
In this context, confidentiality is not automatic. It is a possibility. It depends on how individuals relate to the infrastructure and their level of knowledge and awareness of the limits. Bitcoin neither protects those who use it unwittingly nor condones opaque behaviour. It provides an environment in which informational self-determination can flourish, but does not enforce it.
The difference with secrecy is clear. Secrecy aims to withhold information in order to create power imbalances. Confidentiality, on the other hand, protects the individual's dignity by enabling them to decide what information to disclose and what to keep private, within a system of rules that apply to everyone equally. In this sense, Bitcoin is not an escape from social order, but rather an alternative form of order that is more explicit and less discretionary.
For this very reason, it can be bent to different ends. It can be used to integrate control, monitoring or regulatory pressure mechanisms, or to reduce arbitrary dependencies and strengthen economic autonomy. Technology does not decide which path will be taken. It provides an infrastructure; the direction is a collective and individual choice.
To accept Bitcoin 'at 360 degrees' is also to recognise its ambiguities. Neither idealise nor demonise it. Understand that it does not replace human judgement, but makes it more visible. In a transparent system, responsibility cannot be hidden.
Confidentiality is a choice.
Freedom begins when you embrace it.
#confidentially #choice #freedom #bitcoin #social #good #possibility #awarness #technology #infrastructure #conscious #secret
https://blossom.primal.net/e59fd6cbbb572589e743e897d431e7d6badcdad6af73636738899cf2520aad7e.png

2026-02-03 12:05:01 GMT

- reply

Dream on!
I used AI and Google to do some research on the subject (before, we used encyclopaedias) and I don't see what's wrong with that. AI is just a tool, like a pencil; it won't replace you. The thoughts I write are mine and mine alone!

2026-02-02 12:35:39 GMT

- reply

The phrase attributed to Friedrich Nietzsche is not a direct quotation from his work, but rather a modern paraphrase of a passage from Thus Spoke Zarathustra (1883), specifically from the chapter 'On the New Idol'. Nietzsche does not formulate a political theory. Rather, he offers an ontological and symbolic critique of the state as an idol — an entity that lies when it identifies itself with the 'people' and exercises power by appropriating the values and forces created by individuals. Reducing this critique to a slogan would be anachronistic; Nietzsche does not discuss the market, property or legal order, but rather the relationship between the individual, power, and the production of value.

2026-02-02 12:29:53 GMT

Transparency and pseudo-anonymity: understanding how Bitcoin transactions really work.
The most common mistake when talking about Bitcoin transactions is to imagine a system that 'hides' the movement of value. While this representation is intuitive, it is inaccurate. It stems from the automatic association between confidentiality and invisibility, and between protecting the individual and keeping data secret. In reality, however, Bitcoin works in the opposite way.
It is based on a public and verifiable ledger. Every transaction is visible, permanently recorded and accessible to anyone. There are no hidden transactions, opaque channels or confidential balances. This feature is structural, not incidental: transparency allows for the verifiability of rules and the absence of trusted intermediaries. Without a public ledger, Bitcoin could not function as a reliable infrastructure.
In this context, it is appropriate to speak of pseudo-anonymity. Transactions are not inherently linked to a civil identity, but to cryptographic addresses.
An address does not reveal your identity, but shows the activity associated with that address over time.
This is a subtle but fundamental distinction. There is no such thing as absolute anonymity because transactions can be traced. Identification is not direct because identity is not embedded in the protocol.
Pseudo-anonymity does not promise invisibility; it is a consequence of the separation between personal identity and system rules. Bitcoin does not require knowledge of your identity in order to function. It only requires that the rules be followed. While this reduces dependence on identity as a control tool, it does not eliminate the possibility of analysis, correlation and ex-post reconstruction.
Another common misunderstanding is confusing traceability with surveillance.
Traceability is a technical property of the ledger.
Surveillance, on the other hand, is a social and political practice.
The former is neutral, whereas the latter depends on who is observing, what tools are being used, and what the purposes are.
A transparent infrastructure can be used either to ensure widespread trust or to exercise concentrated control. The difference lies in the context, not the code.
From this point of view, Bitcoin does not offer secrecy. It does not hide transactions. However, it potentially offers confidentiality, providing the possibility of operating without disclosing one's identity to a central authority in advance. This protection is conditional, not absolute. It requires knowledge, attention, and an awareness of its limitations.
Understanding pseudo-anonymity means accepting a less reassuring and less idealised reality. Bitcoin does not make you invisible. It makes the rules visible and separates value from identity. This difference completely changes the meaning of the debate.
Transparency does not eliminate power.
Instead, it changes its form and location.
#trasparency #pseudoanonymity #bitcoin #transaction #timechain #identity #secrecy
https://blossom.primal.net/3629eda8b1c767b20d3004459432a3d6a04c356764f19090e313daf956ff9c99.png

2026-01-27 14:02:52 GMT

Secrecy and confidentiality are two opposing concepts that are often confused.
In everyday language, the two terms are often used interchangeably. While this is a convenient simplification, it is conceptually incorrect. This confusion has real consequences: it alters the way we interpret technology, power and individual freedom. Before addressing any digital infrastructure, it is necessary to clarify this distinction.
Secrecy is an asymmetrical relationship. It presupposes the intentional concealment of information from others. It is usually hierarchical: one person knows, while another does not. Secrecy does not arise to protect the individual, but to consolidate an informational advantage. Throughout economic and political history, secrecy has been a tool of power, manifesting as administrative opacity, incomprehensible budgets and rules accessible only to a select few. Secrecy does not seek consent; it imposes itself.
Privacy, on the other hand, is a symmetrical relationship. It is not about what is hidden, but what is chosen. It is the exercise of informational self-determination: deciding which data to share, with whom, and on what terms. Confidentiality does not create systemic opacity; it establishes personal boundaries. It is not an escape from responsibility, but an expression of it. It protects the dignity of the individual rather than the privilege of an institution.
This distinction is crucial because modernity tends to reverse it. In contexts of high surveillance, confidentiality is often viewed with suspicion, while institutional secrecy is normalised. The individual who protects their data is perceived as 'opaque', while the system that accumulates information on a large scale is perceived as 'transparent'. However, this is merely an apparent paradox arising from the misuse of words.
Without a rigorous definition, the debate slips into the moral realm. Confidentiality becomes synonymous with guilt. Secrecy becomes associated with security. However, analytically speaking, the two concepts operate in opposite ways. The former redistributes control to the individual. The latter concentrates it in the hands of a central authority.
In the technological sphere, this confusion has significant consequences. Any tool that allows the selective management of information is labelled 'obscure' or 'dangerous' without the underlying rules being questioned. The focus is solely on whether the information is visible, not on who controls it.
Distinguishing between secrecy and confidentiality is not merely a matter of terminology. It is a prerequisite for understanding the role of digital infrastructures in contemporary society. Without this distinction, any discussion of freedom remains trapped between opposing slogans.
Words define the boundaries of thought.
Without clear boundaries, even freedom becomes ambiguous.
#freedom #bitcoin #cypherpunk #boundaries #secret #privacy #control #confidential
https://blossom.primal.net/b0c418539c99fd11197b426fe94eebda73f586a58a0e4ed1760a4f22f3f9d0b2.png

2026-01-19 12:34:03 GMT

Starting with fear: why we confuse anonymity with freedom.
The idea of anonymous technology often provokes an instinctive reaction: relief for some and fear for others. In both cases, the response is emotional rather than rational. This indicates a deeper misunderstanding: when we talk about anonymity, we are not describing a technical property, but rather projecting a fear.
Every complex society walks a fine line. On the one hand, there is the need for security and control, and on the other, the need for autonomy and individual dignity. Fear arises when this balance is not understood, but endured. Historically, fear is a powerful tool: it simplifies reality, reducing complexity and guiding behaviour without explanation.
This dynamic is evident in public debate. Different concepts are merged into a single loaded word.
Anonymity becomes synonymous with illegality.
Transparency becomes associated with surveillance.
Privacy becomes associated with having something to hide.
In this semantic short circuit, technology ceases to be understood and instead becomes feared or idealised.
This problem is not new. Similar reactions emerge whenever an infrastructure changes the way people exchange value, information or time. Take the press, paper money and the internet, for example. In all these cases, the central issue has never been the tool itself, but rather the relationship between the individual and the power that the tool enables.
When fear drives judgement, the nature of the questions changes.
Instead of asking 'How does it work?', we ask 'Who will use it against me?'
Instead of asking 'What rules does it incorporate?', we ask 'What does it allow to be hidden?'
It is in this space that false alternatives arise: total control versus total anonymity; security versus freedom; order versus chaos.
Yet these alternatives are almost always illusory. They stem from an initial error of using emotional categories to describe structural phenomena. Before we can discuss specific tools, we must first recover a precise lexicon and make rigorous conceptual distinctions. Without this, any analysis will remain superficial and any judgement will become ideological.
Only when fear is transformed into knowledge does the debate cease to be reactive and become comprehensive. This is where we need to start if we really want to understand what it means to talk about anonymity, privacy, and freedom in the age of digital infrastructure.
Fear simplifies.
Understanding restores complexity.
#fear #bitcoin #btc #knowledge #discuss #problem #privacy #society #history #space #work #internet #anonymous #technology
https://blossom.primal.net/a3823cfc13573692589956d0601b83966b9f8d7c542a78c6fba960200c82690c.png

2026-01-18 14:07:03 GMT

Why are Bitcoiners called 'carnivores'? It's a question that reveals more than meets the eye.
What started as a seemingly light-hearted question, accompanied by ironic answers, ended up arousing unexpected curiosity.
This is precisely why it is worth pausing for a moment to explore what lies behind the joke. This text is an in-depth analysis written with a friend, starting from a curiosity that went viral.
The most widespread idea is simple and immediate: Bitcoiners are called 'carnivores' because the seed phrase consists of twelve identical words: 'beef'.
This phrase is effective, easy to remember and humorous. However, as is often the case, the short version obscures the truly interesting point.
The crux is not the word 'beef'.
Rather, it is why a sequence of identical words can be valid according to a cryptographic standard.
To understand this, we need to distinguish between what seems 'strange' to humans and what is simply 'correct' for a protocol. Words have meaning for us; they evoke images, habits and culture. For a computer system, however, a word is merely a readable representation of a sequence of bits.
This is where the cognitive short circuit arises.
When it comes to seed phrases, the common intuition is that the more different the words are, the more secure the seed is. While this intuition is understandable, it is not a technical law. It is a human projection; we confuse semantic variety with mathematical entropy.
A seed phrase is not a phrase.
It is a way of making a number transcribable and verifiable.
This brings us to the standard that popularised seed phrases: BIP39.
BIP39 was created to solve a very specific problem: enabling people to reliably manage systems that were originally intended only for machines. Cryptographic keys are large, random numbers that are difficult to copy without errors. Converting them into a list of standardised words mitigates human error without compromising the underlying mathematics.
The crucial point is this: security lies in bits, not words.
A BIP39 seed phrase comprises a certain amount of entropy and a checksum — a short piece of information used to verify that the sequence has been written correctly. Each word in the wordlist corresponds to a number. By combining these words, a precise binary string is reconstructed. If this string complies with the entropy and checksum rules, the seed is valid.
It does not matter if the words 'sound' repetitive, strange or trivial.
Here is the paradox:
To humans, twelve identical words seem like an error.
To the protocol, however, they are just one combination among many.
The famous '12×beef' seed is neither an exception nor an Easter egg. In fact, it is not the only case. There are several valid seed phrases consisting of a single repeated word that are either 12 or 24 words long. Some work and some don't, just like any other combination. The difference is that these strike the imagination because they defy the intuitive expectation of 'visible randomness'.
However, true randomness does not have to be visible.
It just has to be measurable.
This seemingly trivial curiosity reveals something deeper about the relationship between people and technology. We tend to trust what appears complex and distrust what seems simple. However, in formal systems, simplicity and weakness are not necessarily linked.
BIP39 does not interpret.
It does not judge.
It verifies.
It is precisely this semantic indifference that makes certain infrastructures reliable; they work in the same way for everyone, regardless of their identity, culture, or expectations. The joke about 'carnivorous bitcoiners' is amusing, but its greatest value lies elsewhere.
Its greatest value lies in reminding us that rules matter more than narratives.
#beef #bitcoin #seed #phrase #curiosity #word #esteregg #bip39 #2013 #technology #security #entropy
https://blossom.primal.net/bd2b8e8d9e1415422919bb73db300c84cdc902d42c7c81280a38fb472295c947.png

2026-01-14 06:43:06 GMT

CBDCs and Bitcoin: control from above, freedom from below.
When we consider the digital euro, the banking system, and the architecture of CBDCs as a whole, a common theme emerges that is often overlooked. CBDCs are not designed to empower individuals, but rather to strengthen government control over the monetary system. This is not an accusation. It is a structural consequence.
CBDCs are designed as liabilities of the central bank, integrated into an existing regulatory, financial and political framework. This implies that access to, use of, and permanence in the system are necessarily conditional. This is not because anyone wants to abuse them, but because a public digital currency must be consistent with the objectives of stability, compliance, monetary policy transmission and systemic risk control.
In this sense, the digital euro is not 'delayed' due to inefficiency. It is delayed because it touches on the heart of the relationship between currency, banks and citizens. The introduction of a retail CBDC would alter the structure of deposits, expose the system to the risk of rapid liquidity shifts and make credit more dependent on public intervention. Limits, filters and intermediaries are therefore required to mitigate these effects. Each protection adds operational constraints.
Consequently, the central bank's digital currency becomes a powerful tool, serving not only as a means of payment, but also as an infrastructure for economic coordination. It is a system that, in principle, allows flows to be directed, uses to be conditioned, and access to be modulated. Even when these functions are not active, the mere possibility of their activation changes the balance of power. Control is not an option; it is inscribed in the architecture.
Bitcoin was born out of the opposite logic. It is neither a liability nor credit, nor is it a policy tool. Rather, it is a distributed social asset based on strict, public and verifiable rules. It does not require trust in an issuer because there is no issuer. Nor does it require authorisation, as it does not distinguish identities. It does not influence behaviour because it has no purpose.
This apparent rigidity is what makes it deeply adaptive on a social level. Bitcoin can operate in a variety of political, economic and legal contexts precisely because it does not adapt to any of them. The rules do not change; it is the uses that emerge. It is a tool that protects individual freedom not by promising rights, but by limiting control from above through technical means.
CBDCs optimise system management.
Bitcoin protects individuals' ability to act without permission.
These are not symmetrical alternatives. They are expressions of two different anthropologies: one based on central coordination and the other on limiting power.
The difference is not ideological.
It is written into the infrastructure.
#bitcoin #cbdc #digital #currency #control #freedom #central #bank #infrastructure #power #permission #technology #social #level #system
https://blossom.primal.net/60d1a86aadc389ad519c6fc0042f1ae9d5381146a328ededabe851ce45ab3597.png

2026-01-08 12:48:36 GMT

Offline, resilience and systemic risk.
In the debate on digitalisation of currency, the ability to operate offline is often treated as a technical detail, a secondary issue to be resolved at a later date.
However, the ability to operate without a connection is not just a convenience. It is a social property.
It determines who can continue to exchange value when normal conditions cease to exist.
Every digital infrastructure depends on three physical elements: electricity, a network and central operating systems. This dependence is not limiting in ordinary times. However, it becomes critical in the event of crises, blackouts, extreme weather events or geopolitical tensions. In such situations, resilience is not measured by average efficiency, but by the ability to function when the system is under stress.
By their very nature, CBDCs introduce greater integration between currency and central digital infrastructure. Even in intermediary models, operation requires synchronisation with authorisation and settlement systems. This creates single points of failure that may not be apparent in everyday experience, but which emerge in exceptional circumstances.
Despite all its limitations, cash has a unique feature: it works offline by definition. It does not require authorisation or updates, nor does it depend on central systems. It is a basic technology, but extremely resilient. Eliminating it is not only a choice of efficiency, but also a renunciation of a form of operational continuity.
CBDC experiments often incorporate partial offline solutions. However, these solutions introduce new trade-offs, such as amount limits, restricted time windows and the need for subsequent reconciliation. Each of these reduces the scope for general use and increases the system's complexity. Resilience thus becomes a designed feature rather than an intrinsic property.
From a systemic perspective, the increasing digitisation of money concentrates risk. A technical malfunction, cyberattack or governance error could have immediate and widespread consequences. The question is not if such events will occur, but when and with what intensity. The history of complex infrastructures suggests that exceptions will manifest sooner or later.
Some digital monetary infrastructures reduce the risk of central failure by distributing the validation and verification of rules. Bitcoin operates in this way, not because it is immune to problems, but because it does not depend on a single point of control. As a distributed social good, it guarantees continuity at the level of rules, rather than service.
Resilience is not visible when everything is working.
It is only measured when the system stops working.
#resilience #cbdc #bitcoin #offline #system #risk
https://blossom.primal.net/71ceafddf14f7bfc5f053e2e021a258ada598e11ed832c88943c346b0bab3a2f.png

2026-01-02 16:05:03 GMT

Privacy, identity and tracking: the invisible heart.
In the debate on digital currencies, privacy is often reduced to a simple yes-or-no question. This is a misleading oversimplification. Privacy cannot be turned on or off downstream. Rather, it is an emergent property of the architecture. It depends on how the system is designed, not how it is declared.
In a digital monetary infrastructure, identity is the first structural element. Identifying a subject means being able to link their actions over time. This is where transaction traceability comes from. Traceability enables prior authorisation. Authorisation produces compliance. This causal chain is technical, not ideological. Each link enables the next.
Data centralisation is often confused with the centralisation of power. In reality, however, the latter is a function of the former. Those who control access to data and how it is correlated over time also control the ability to allow, limit or revoke the use of currency. No direct intervention is required; it is sufficient for the infrastructure to enable this.
Trust is sometimes proposed as an alternative to privacy. This is a conceptual error. Trust is not a measure of security. Rather, it is a social relationship that presupposes the absence of technical alternatives. In complex and permanent systems, relying on trust means accepting that guarantees depend on intentions remaining consistent over time. Architectures, on the other hand, produce effects regardless of intentions.
In the case of CBDCs, decisions regarding identity and tracking are not merely implementation details. They define the boundaries of individual autonomy. Even models that promise high levels of privacy must solve the problems of access, regulatory compliance, and interoperability. Every solution involves compromises. The question is not whether these compromises exist, but who governs them.
Some digital monetary infrastructures structurally separate identity and value transfer. In these systems, the validity of a transaction does not depend on who performs it, but on compliance with public, verifiable rules. Bitcoin falls into this category as a social good, not because it guarantees absolute anonymity, but because personal authorisation is not required for it to function.
In this sense, privacy is not invisibility.
It is the ability to act without having to ask permission.
#privacy #bitcoin #cbdc #invisibility #ability #permission #social #public #verificable #rules #transaction #transfer #identity
https://blossom.primal.net/ac0432b76d50ef0a2fedb39ba3bccbcb1b356e0fb99c2ad04417c49259ddb1a4.png

2025-12-30 16:17:47 GMT

Programmable money: is it automation or constraint?
Programmability is often described as a straightforward functional improvement. It enables automatic payments, conditional execution and error reduction. In this narrative, programmable money appears to be a natural extension of digital contracts.
The problem lies not in what it promises, but in what it tends to confuse.
In technical terms, programmability refers to the ability to associate logical instructions with payment execution. It is essential to distinguish between two conceptually different levels.
1. Payment automation: an action is performed when an external condition is met.
2. Conditioning of value use: the monetary unit itself incorporates rules about where, when, and how it can be used.
This distinction is often overlooked, but it is central.
Automation concerns how you pay. Conditioning concerns whether you can pay. In the former case, the currency remains neutral with respect to purpose. In the second case, however, it becomes an instrument of embedded policy. The question is not one of intentions, but of architecture: once the constraint is technically possible, its application becomes an administrative choice rather than a structural limitation.
Abstract examples help to clarify this. An automatic subscription payment is an example of automation. A sum that can only be spent on certain categories of goods is a form of conditioning. Both solutions are technically feasible. The difference is that the latter changes the nature of money, transforming it from a general means of payment into a means of payment for a specific purpose.
This is where the concept of 'policy drift' comes in. Rules that are introduced for limited purposes tend to expand over time. This is not due to abuse, but rather due to the internal consistency of the system. If a function is useful in one context, it makes sense to extend its use to other contexts. Ultimately, what starts as an exception can become the operational norm.
In the context of CBDCs, programmability is not an accessory. It is a potential property of the infrastructure. Even if it is not initially activated, its presence alters the balance between rules and discretion. The phrase 'it depends on how you use it' loses its analytical power; what matters is what the system enables you to do, rather than what it promises not to do.
Some digital monetary systems adopt the opposite logic: the rules are public and rigid, and cannot be changed on a case-by-case basis.
As a distributed cryptoasset, Bitcoin does not incorporate intended uses. It does not distinguish between purposes, identities or contexts. It is not programmable in the sense of conditioning. However, it is verifiable in terms of compliance with rules.
The difference is not between good or bad technology.
Rather, it is between automation that facilitates and constraints that guide.
#automation #vs #comditioning #cbdc #bitcoin #verify #digital #monetary
https://blossom.primal.net/03aeb329a3e2674a1dbeec6102080fbafb8ef772e08748e67d7f3e8ecac1e7b4.png

2025-12-29 12:18:09 GMT

Why are CBDCs being created? Stated objectives and real incentives.
CBDCs are often presented as a response to obvious needs, such as the desire for more efficient payments, greater financial inclusion and more resilient systems. These are legitimate and largely verifiable objectives. However, when monetary reform is presented as purely technical, it is important to consider the incentives that make it attractive to the institutions designing it.
The stated objectives are well known. Financial inclusion aims to reduce barriers to accessing payment services.
Resilience concerns maintaining business continuity in the event of shocks.
Efficiency promises lower costs and faster regulations.
Competition aims to rebalance power in payment markets that are dominated by a few private operators. Taken individually, these objectives are consistent with the public mandate of central banks.
However, alongside these, there are less explicit incentives.
Reduced cash usage is a recurring consequence of highly digitised systems. Cash is costly to manage, hard to track, and restricts certain forms of control. From an institutional perspective, the progressive marginalisation of cash appears to be a rational outcome, even when this is not formally declared as an objective.
Furthermore, in a context of increasing digitisation of private payments, monetary authorities risk losing operational relevance. CBDCs also address the need to maintain a central role in the monetary infrastructure, thereby preserving the capacity for intervention and coordination. This does not imply coercive intent, but rather reflects a structural incentive: those who govern the currency also tend to govern its technological evolution. In short, they are afraid of becoming obsolete.
This brings us to a key concept: the structural trade-off. Every increase in efficiency necessitates a certain level of standardisation. However, every standardisation reduces the variety of options available. In the case of money, more integrated and centrally coordinated solutions can improve system functionality, but at the cost of less operational freedom for individuals.
This tension is not moral, but systemic. Efficiency and autonomy do not always go hand in hand. One often advances at the expense of the other. CBDCs make this tension more visible because they move money from the level of the instrument to that of a fully digital infrastructure, where rules can be applied immediately and uniformly.
Monetary systems that do not depend on a central authority operate according to a different logic in this scenario. Bitcoin, as a social good, was not created to optimise institutional efficiency, but rather to enable economic activity to continue without prior authorisation. It does not compete with the stated objectives of CBDCs. It operates on a different level: that of constraints.
Every monetary system reflects the incentives of its designers.
Understanding these incentives does not imply judgement, but rather recognition of their effects over time.
#obsolete #monetary #system #bitcoin #cbdc #goal #inclusion
https://blossom.primal.net/4b6b3c5bd433e5fd070eb67ea3818315f46ed989c664cd4c852b9478e0dc6366.png

2025-12-23 16:53:06 GMT

What is a CBDC really: definition and boundaries
In public debate, CBDCs are often described as 'digital government money'. The expression is intuitive but conceptually inaccurate. Without a rigorous definition, the discussion quickly descends into misunderstanding. Clarifying the boundaries is not about taking a position, but about speaking the same language.
A Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) is, in technical terms, a central bank liability issued in digital form, accessible to different entities depending on the chosen architecture. This is the fundamental distinguishing feature. It is not a private cryptocurrency, it is not a bank deposit, it is not a simple payment application.
To understand the difference, we need to distinguish between four forms of money that coexist today.
1. Cash is a liability of the central bank, anonymous, bearer-based and usable offline.
2. Bank money is a liability of commercial banks, based on credit relationships, regulated but not directly guaranteed by the central bank.
3. Reserves are liabilities of the central bank accessible only to intermediaries.
4. CBDC introduces a new combination: liabilities of the central bank, but in digital form and potentially accessible to the public.
Within this general definition, there are several taxonomies, which are often confused with each other. CBDCs can be retail (intended for citizens and businesses) or wholesale (reserved for intermediaries). They can be account-based (based on the identification of the holder) or token-based (based on the possession of a digital unit). Finally, they can be direct (managed directly by the central bank) or intermediated (with commercial banks playing an operational role).
These distinctions are not just technical details. Every architectural decision has different implications for privacy, resilience, governance and financial structure. This is why it is essential to distinguish between three analytical levels.
1. The technical facts, which define what a CBDC is.
2. The possible architectures, which address how it can be implemented.
3. Political interpretations concerning how it could be used.
Mixing up these levels leads to two errors: naive optimism and a priori rejection. In both cases, the central point is lost: a CBDC is not a single technology, but rather a family of institutional solutions that redefine the relationship between money, the state, and its citizens.
In this conceptual space, there are also systems that are not the liability of any central authority and that operate according to public, verifiable rules. Bitcoin falls into this category as both a distributed cryptoasset and a social good, not because it is 'digital', but because it structurally separates value from the issuer and transfer from authorisation.
Before asking whether a CBDC is 'good' or 'bad', we need to know precisely what it is. Without clear boundaries, even judgement becomes opaque.
#cbdc #technology #privacy #central #bank #digital #currency #bitcoin
https://blossom.primal.net/dff8108d4fee35199aa47feef5ecafb649f3a35faf25ffae3af3f7446119f0f0.png

2025-12-22 13:20:14 GMT

- reply

Yes, the emails published by the commission contain lots of references. I recommend this well-designed website, which collects them all together: https://www.jmail.world/

2025-12-22 13:16:28 GMT

The illusion of technological neutrality.
We tend to view every innovation in payments as a simple technical improvement. Faster, more convenient, more efficient. It's a reassuring insight. And it is, almost always, incomplete.
When a technology ceases to be an optional tool and becomes shared infrastructure, it is no longer neutral. It begins to organise behaviours, times, possibilities. Not because it 'wants' to, but because it structures.
Strictly speaking, a tool is used by an individual for a specific purpose. Infrastructure, on the other hand, coordinates multiple individuals over time, establishing common constraints. A system of rules emerges when that infrastructure defines what is possible, permitted, and excluded. The transition is qualitative, not quantitative. And it does not depend on intention, but on adoption.
Currency falls squarely into this category. It is not just a medium of exchange. It is an institution that organises economic relations over time. It determines how we save, how we transfer value, how we access exchange. In this sense, currency is always power organised over time: it coordinates expectations, disciplines behaviour, makes some actions easier and others more expensive or impossible.
When a monetary technology changes form, it is not just 'how we pay' that changes. The boundaries of economic action change. History shows this repeatedly: the transition from metal to paper, from paper to bank credit, from credit to full digitalisation. Each leap has introduced new possibilities, but also new structural constraints. Ignoring them does not eliminate them.
CBDCs sit precisely at this point of friction. They are not simply an update of payment channels. They introduce a new, potentially permanent monetary architecture that operates at the level of social infrastructure. For this reason, they cannot be evaluated solely in terms of operational efficiency or technological innovation.
The central issue is neither the speed of transfer nor the reduction of costs. Rather, it is the type of system that emerges when money becomes natively digital, integrated and adjustable. This is where technological neutrality becomes irrelevant. Not by ideological choice, but by structural effect.
In this context, alternative infrastructures emerge that separate rules from control, value from identity, and use from authorisation. Bitcoin was not created to replace a currency; rather, it was designed as a social asset based on verifiable, distributed rules that cannot be altered at will. It does not promise results. It sets boundaries.
Every monetary infrastructure defines what is possible, even before what is legal.
Over time, what is possible becomes normal.
#illusion #technology #neutrality #cbdc #bitcoin #innovation #money #ideology #choise
https://blossom.primal.net/38d61f1b9fc1af343e1dde4988027c3a78c399f54268e608f90987f98e54a3a5.png

2025-12-15 16:55:29 GMT

When the code remains intact but the perspective changes.
There is a misconception that reassures many: as long as the code does not change, nothing can really change.
It is a convenient idea.
But it is also incomplete.
Because technologies do not only exist in protocols.
They exist in the way they are interpreted, described and used.
And above all: in the way they are made socially acceptable.
Bitcoin, from this point of view, is no exception.
We tend to think that technical neutrality coincides with moral neutrality.
That an infrastructure, if formally correct, is also ethically unassailable.
But morality does not reside in software.
It resides in the social context that surrounds it.
The code establishes what is possible.
Culture establishes what is legitimate.
Bitcoin can function perfectly even if its narrative changes radically.
And this is where the real problem arises.
The risk is not technical corruption.
It is the ethical normalisation of foreign logics.
Bitcoin was created as an infrastructure: open, verifiable, impersonal, indifferent to status.
But it can be progressively portrayed as: a tool for tax optimisation, geopolitical leverage, a strategic state asset, 'responsible' infrastructure only if mediated by elites.
In this shift, Bitcoin ceases to be a social good and becomes a resource to be administered.
It is not banned.
It is reinterpreted.
The difference is subtle, but decisive.
The most profound social change is this: Bitcoin has shifted from being a tool for individual autonomy to becoming infrastructure managed on behalf of individuals.
When Bitcoin is primarily framed as a financial product, a complex technology for experts and a potentially dangerous tool to be monitored,
The implicit message is clear: it is not for everyone; it is for those who know how to use it 'correctly'.
This gives rise to a new form of delegation.
Not technical, but moral.
The individual is no longer responsible.
They are protected.
When protection replaces responsibility, freedom becomes a concession.
At a geopolitical level, this change is even more evident.
Bitcoin is no longer just seen as neutral infrastructure, a distributed network and a global protocol.
Instead, it is now considered a lever of international pressure, a potential strategic reserve, a tool of competition between states and an object of selective regulation.
In this scenario, the question is no longer whether Bitcoin should exist, but who legitimises its use.
Who can safeguard it?
Who can broker it?
Who can claim it is 'safe'?
The risk is not direct control.
It is symbolic fencing.
Bitcoin continues to function.
Blocks are still being produced.
Consensus continues to emerge.
However, its social significance could be rendered meaningless.
There is no need to shut it down.
It is enough to render it compatible with everything it sought to distinguish itself from.
The code resists.
Culture does not, unless it is safeguarded.
Bitcoin does not change when the software changes.
It changes when we stop asking ourselves what its purpose really is.
The technology survives.
Responsibility only survives if it is chosen.
Choose.
Choose.
Choose.
#choose #bitcoin #responsability #software #network #change #social #function #controll #freedom #perspective #code
https://blossom.primal.net/97c7b396bff21c5e1d7fc848b826a2c42ad5a1e7cda8f3a6dcbc8ba8e3f6e8bd.png

2025-12-14 15:54:36 GMT

When money comes in through the side door.
There is a recurring idea, almost like a reassuring formula: 'Bitcoin cannot be influenced by anyone.'
This is true.
However, the wrong question is not whether the code can be bent, but whether what grows around the code remains intact.
Infrastructures operate according to rules.
Societies, on the other hand, operate according to balances.
Jeffrey Epstein was not a system error. He was a consistent product of a system that understands the value of access, relationships and doors left ajar. It is not his criminal biography that makes him relevant to this story, but his role as a bridge financier, facilitator and intermediary between worlds that officially should not touch but always have in practice.
Epstein did not purchase technology.
He bought legitimacy.
At a time when Bitcoin was experiencing a period of institutional fragility — the Bitcoin Foundation crisis, regulatory uncertainty and the need for software development continuity — the centre of gravity shifted towards places that promised stability, prestige and protection:
The university. The academy. Recognised knowledge: MIT. The Digital Currency Initiative.
Not out of corruption, but out of necessity.
But out of necessity.
Every nascent system encounters a vacuum sooner or later. And every vacuum attracts capital, relationships and influence.
The emails published in recent months do not reveal a technical conspiracy. They reveal a more subtle and common narrative: the normalisation of power within a space designed to be independent of it.
Those emails are not verdicts.
They are raw documents.
However, raw documents have a dangerous characteristic: they do not lie or explain; they simply show.
They reveal discreet funding.
They reveal informal conversations.
They reveal a familiarity that, while not surprising, should make us reflect.
Bitcoin, as a network and as software, has not been touched. It couldn't be. No email changes the distributed consensus, no donation rewrites the rules, no elite changes the maths. But Bitcoin doesn't just live in code. It lives in the way it is talked about, hosted, institutionalised, made acceptable.
And that's where the problem shifts.
The emails do not talk about bugs.
They talk about frames.
They talk about how a social good can begin to be treated as a political object. About how a technology designed to function without identity is slowly being inserted into networks of reputation, influence, lobbying. Not to destroy it, but to make it compatible with existing logic.
The risk is not the manipulation of the protocol.
The risk is cultural domestication.
When Bitcoin enters the corridors of power, it does not lose its technical properties. It loses something more fragile: its foreignness. It becomes a topic, a tool, a lever. It is discussed as a strategic asset, as infrastructure to be governed, as a geopolitical variable. All legitimate. All understandable. All dangerously human.
Something doesn't add up, yes.
Not because 'Bitcoin has been controlled', but because the same mechanisms that have always shaped institutions, narratives and systems of power have begun to revolve around it too.
The emails published are not all there is. There are others. This is just the tip of the iceberg.
But the point is not what will emerge, but what is already evident: no technology, however neutral, is immune to the social context in which it is absorbed.
The code resists.
The networks work.
But collective responsibility does not, unless it is safeguarded.
#epstein #jeffry #bitcoin #mit #dvi #joi #ioto #manipulation #nsa #cia #email #usa #congress #jmail
https://blossom.primal.net/7925bc87ef3cc9833ab75c2f231dec9eee2702e414a7abccfe92aae8c0ef1610.png

2025-12-03 14:38:43 GMT

While the price screams, technology advances silently.
The word 'volatility' is often used as if it were a moral judgement, an intrinsic flaw that separates the reliable from the unreliable.
However, volatility does not describe an emotion; it describes a measure.
It is the variation in returns over time.
However, without specifying what it is in relation to, over what period and in what context, it is meaningless.
If we view Bitcoin without fear or ideology, we can see that its fluctuations are neither mysterious nor an absolute flaw.
They are an expression of a growing technology.
In the early years of any innovation, there are sudden movements due to little liquidity, information and players. Then time does its work.
The data show a clear trend: Bitcoin's volatility decreases as the network grows, and as market depth, infrastructure, user numbers and, above all, knowledge increase.
This is the natural progression of any network technology.
Volatility is not a mystical entity. It is the result of information, expectations and human behaviour. It also reflects the underlying asset: the pound sterling has political and credit-related underlying assets, while Bitcoin has energy- and cryptography-related underlying assets.
These are two different worlds with two different forms of stability and two different ways of measuring risk.
Claiming that Bitcoin is 'too volatile' without providing a point of reference is akin to saying that the sea is 'too rough' without specifying your location and the time of year.
The idea that Bitcoin is seven times more volatile than equities belongs to the past. Today, the gap is narrowing, and in some periods it is comparable to that of certain innovative technology sectors. Like any living process, volatility changes over time. It changes with us.
Bitcoin is a social asset currently in its growth phase. Its volatility is not a negative thing, but a sign that a global network based on distributed energy and verification is establishing itself in the world of economics. The noise is decreasing, the structure is strengthening and the technology is advancing.
We fear what we do not understand. However, when concepts are restored to their true meaning, fear gives way to reason. Always.
#volatility #price #bitcoin #value #correlation #technology #network #progress #innovation #ideology
https://blossom.primal.net/1f1d0f4fce269a81a5f6cb91035e18df79a2fe022c4f4ad82793ed15146d382a.png
https://blossom.primal.net/21626faee503e3695b250af41422f881dbeba19b048f460bf6db28a60f4947af.jpg

2025-12-02 14:27:18 GMT

I just published Gold as a Financial and Geopolitical Asset. Medium: https://medium.com/@jacopograziuso/gold-as-a-financial-and-geopolitical-asset-3c41cb700542
#medium #post #analisys #gold #instability #systemic #correlation #story #returns #annual #inflation
https://blossom.primal.net/3140f13402d2414e4e91e07eb743e80420db658597fb109cb4c979770449fdaa.png
https://blossom.primal.net/770a18595e8d8ba790a8cfc4e5ee36891f6dfc82458bb8e34fedefd8b4856d3a.jpg

2025-12-01 14:41:36 GMT

Quantum computing and Bitcoin: moving beyond fear.
Quantum computers will hack Bitcoin.
This statement is intended to frighten, not explain.
Quantum technology does exist, but not in the way that sensationalist headlines suggest.
Real quantum computers are fragile, noisy and unstable prototypes.
They work with qubits that lose information in microseconds and require substantial error correction.
Breaking the cryptographic signatures used by Bitcoin would require millions of reliable physical qubits.
Currently, there is not a single perfectly stable logical qubit.
There is no real mathematical threat.
Even if such a machine were to exist one day, Bitcoin would not be the first target.
Strategic technologies are used first where they really matter:
Intelligence, military communications, diplomacy, banking systems and critical infrastructure, for example.
Hacking Bitcoin would reveal to the world a weapon capable of changing the geopolitical balance.
This would make no sense.
Furthermore, Bitcoin is not as exposed as people believe.
Addresses do not display the public key.
Only UTXOs that have already been spent reveal it, and then only for a very limited time.
The network can update its cryptographic primitives, and a BIP path for post-quantum signatures already exists.
Bitcoin is a living protocol that can evolve when needed.
Compromising a UTXO would require time, silence, and significant computing power.
None of these are realistically possible today.
Fear arises where there is a lack of knowledge.
Quantum computing is fascinating, but it is far from being an 'almighty machine'.
Bitcoin, meanwhile, is a social asset built on verifiable and updatable rules.
Don't you worry, child.
#quantum #computing #hack #math #utxo #dontworry #behappy #bitcoin
https://blossom.primal.net/b28e8e3edcb05237b20f97d5bd8ff4f39bc77cf527984c772132c56a136ce601.png

2025-11-28 19:42:52 GMT

Hi Nostr community!👋🏼
I've just published my first report on Medium - check it out!
CME Group Outage: Operational Risk and the Fragility of Modern Market Infrastructure.
https://medium.com/@jacopograziuso/cme-group-outage-operational-risk-and-the-fragility-of-modern-market-infrastructure-253a4adb150f
#medium #nostr #community #risk #fragility #market #infrastructure #outage #cme #group #report #new #first
https://blossom.primal.net/d485b98785b5a92d40c0c7a2810fa7c6c489f093d2aa99a75969c41df5f972d9.jpg

2025-11-27 14:11:27 GMT

There are historical bugs in Bitcoin Core.
Bitcoin Core is the distributed software that verifies the protocol rules. Analysing the bugs that have been fixed can help us to understand how the network has grown stronger over the years.
1) 184 billion overflow (2010):
An error in the checks generated a block containing 184 billion bitcoins, which exceeds the 21 million limit. The community intervened within a few hours, invalidating the block and providing an immediate update. Monetary integrity was restored.
2) Programme blockage caused by an instruction (2010):
Some scripts could cause the node to crash. This instruction was disabled in version 0.3.5. Reduction of the attack surface.
3) Risk of divergent chains (2012):
A flaw in the block structure could create incompatible versions of the blockchain. A quick fix was implemented and the network was re-composed.
4) Node privacy (2013):
A vulnerability allowed IP addresses to be linked to Bitcoin addresses. Patches were distributed between January and February 2013. Privacy requires ongoing maintenance.
5) Risk of double spending and inflation (2018):
A fundamental input check was accidentally removed by a change. There were no attacks on the main network and an immediate patch was applied.
6) Counter exhaustion (2025):
Suboptimal address management could block the node in the long run. Switch to 64-bit counters in recent versions.
All bugs have been fixed without causing any permanent issues. Thanks to open source software, independent checks and timely updates, the network has shown resilience.
Updating the node is a shared responsibility.
#bugs #bitcoin #core #software #opensource #issues #network
https://blossom.primal.net/c1d74a739b8f8b52f0548f73eb9e3ea58506c44335390cf4fda970055dfdcfb1.png

2025-11-25 12:56:26 GMT

Disintermediation is a new model of relationship between individuals and finance.
In the traditional system, almost every transaction goes through an intermediary, such as banks, clearing houses, payment circuits or money transfer companies.
However, Bitcoin demonstrates that it is possible to transfer value globally without intermediaries, operating instead according to a peer-to-peer model as defined in the 2008 white paper. This involves:
1. Direct international payments: no SWIFT or correspondent banks required, with reduced costs.
2. Individual savings: wealth is no longer dependent on the operations of a central institution.
3. Reduction in transaction costs and settlement times.
4. Greater resilience: fewer centralised points of failure.
5. Global access to services, even in areas where the banking system does not reach.
The BIS and the IMF recognise that this disintermediation raises questions of financial stability, particularly in emerging markets. However, they also acknowledge that Bitcoin's innovations are already influencing monetary policies and payment architecture, prompting many countries to consider CBDCs (unfortunately, providing another means of control).
Bitcoin has indeed introduced a new principle: the ability to transfer value without a central authority. All other digital innovations in finance are a response to this discovery.
Understanding disintermediation is key to understanding the future of finance.
#disintermediation #distributed #bitcoin #finance #controll #system
https://blossom.primal.net/493d1bcbb37e9bcd62c7628563df871de3810dfdbd3a686d6c20d19e2457f83c.png

2025-11-24 15:21:01 GMT

Economic freedom and resistance to censorship: when Bitcoin becomes part of the civil infrastructure.
In many countries, controlling money is a means of exercising power. Freezing accounts, blocking donations, limiting withdrawals and imposing currency restrictions are tools typically used by authoritarian regimes to suppress dissent and opposition.
Bitcoin introduces a decisive technical feature: resistance to censorship.
A valid transaction cannot be blocked, cancelled, or prevented by a central authority. This creates a space for economic freedom where none existed before.
Gladstein's studies (HRF, 2025) document concrete cases:
- Nigeria, during the #EndSARS protests, activists' accounts were frozen, but donations resumed thanks to Bitcoin and BTCPay Server.
- Russia, Hong Kong and Belarus: independent media outlets and dissidents used Bitcoin to receive funds after being 'debanked'.
- Ukraine, 2022: over $200 million was quickly received when banking channels were blocked or unstable.
In all these scenarios, Bitcoin does not replace politics, but it does protect the economic capacity to act. It ensures operational continuity for NGOs, journalists, civic associations, and individuals under authoritarian pressure.
Freedom is not abstract; it exists when you can act.
#freedom #free #bitcoin #resistance #censor #civil #money #bank
https://blossom.primal.net/e3251268655312ad8002d932e591bf23727e1b9095c6c35a5ee26b169e5e512e.png

2025-11-21 12:23:05 GMT

Financial inclusion: Using Bitcoin as social infrastructure in unbanked countries.
Today, over 1.4 billion adults do not have a bank account. This is due to a variety of structural causes, including high costs, missing documents, distance from branches, distrust of institutions, political instability and, above all, the inconvenience of traditional banking.
Bitcoin offers an alternative: an open, global infrastructure.
All you need to access the network is a smartphone. There are no status requirements, geographical barriers or accounts to open. This enables 'bottom-up' financial inclusion.
Data shows that 16 of the top 20 countries for the adoption of alternatives to state currencies are emerging economies. In sub-Saharan Africa, usage grew by 52% in one year, with over 8% of transactions being for amounts under $10,000 — indicating everyday, non-speculative use.
Nigeria is a prime example: around 36% of adults are unbanked, yet the country is a world leader in Bitcoin adoption via peer-to-peer. For many citizens, Bitcoin is the only effective means of accessing tools such as savings, remittances and international payments.
However, it is not a universal solution; digital infrastructure, financial literacy and complementary policies are also required. However, as noted in reports by the World Bank and the IMF, Bitcoin has introduced a new standard of accessibility, capable of including even those who have never had access to the formal system.
True inclusion comes when barriers are reduced, not when intermediaries are added.
#financial #inclusion #unbanked #infrastructure #countries #bitcoin #social #good #asset #account #network
https://blossom.primal.net/a8e2d3c0e122beeda4c973d45ac01955056d08ff3ef105ac0ea10791806706fb.png

2025-11-20 11:39:34 GMT

From monopoly of trust to distributed trust: a cultural shift in the way we think about money.
The traditional financial system is based on hierarchical trust; we rely on banks, central banks, and the state. This is a 'vertical' model in which a few institutions hold a monopoly on public trust.
Bitcoin overturns this paradigm.
The network operates according to mathematical rules and distributed verification, with each node independently checking the validity of transactions. Users do not have to trust the other party, but rather the cryptographic protocol. This is why we talk about a 'trustless' system: not because trust disappears, but because it is redistributed horizontally.
Some studies define this phenomenon as 'trustless trust': a new social model in which guarantees come from a set of publicly verifiable software rules rather than a central authority. This raises an essential question:
What does it mean to trust code rather than institutions?
International institutions remind us that traditional trust remains a fundamental public good. At the same time, Bitcoin's popularity shows that distributed digital trust is already an operational reality, particularly in countries where financial institutions are not trusted.
Understanding how trust works is key to understanding how our freedoms work.
#freedom #trust #institution #bitcoin #trustless #model #public #financial #system #money
https://blossom.primal.net/c2202163300b4c481d1a1bd480afe3ae8712c2bd5516c9c564ca0561b6cbd6a8.png

2025-11-19 11:39:41 GMT

Individual monetary sovereignty occurs when individuals regain ownership of their assets.
In many economies, managing money requires trust in intermediaries, such as banks, which are guaranteed by the central bank. However, there are limits on withdrawals and funds can be frozen in extraordinary situations.
This model is based on an implicit assumption.
control of money is not really in the hands of individuals.
Bitcoin introduces a different paradigm.
Since 2009, individuals who hold their private keys have been able to store and transfer value independently of banks, governments and payment systems. The protocol defines a fixed, known and verifiable supply that cannot be expanded at will, thereby reducing the risk of devaluation induced by expansionary monetary policies.
This operational sovereignty is crucial in times of crisis: hyperinflation in Lebanon and Venezuela, currency restrictions in Nigeria and recurring devaluations in emerging markets have prompted millions of people to choose Bitcoin over traditional currencies to protect their purchasing power.
According to the Human Rights Foundation, over 87% of the world's population lives in countries with unstable currencies. For many of these people, Bitcoin is not a speculative investment, but a means of achieving economic self-determination.
Of course, self-custody entails responsibility for key management, cyber risk and short-term volatility. However, the principle remains: for the first time, individuals can hold wealth without asking anyone's permission.
Awareness is the first step towards economic freedom.
#freedom #economic #bitcoin #awarness #monetary #selfcustody #firststep
https://blossom.primal.net/58bcb28139e2f2b4c9eb6958b45877d8f6a5d9e1890ba023120a441a22269093.png

2025-11-18 15:27:09 GMT

All we see is the canopy. The important things live beneath the ground.
Of Bitcoin, only the surface is visible: users, adoption, freedom and price.
While these are the easiest signs to observe, they do not represent the essence of the phenomenon.
Beneath the surface lies a much larger system comprising a web of rules, incentives, energy, security and distributed cooperation, which makes this social asset possible.
This is a system that does not demand attention or claim to be understood; it only asks to function, like any mature infrastructure.
The average user does not need to know what lies at its roots.
If everyone had to understand it thoroughly, it would never be adopted: it would be reserved for a few technicians.
Mass adoption occurs when complexity ceases to be visible.
When the tool becomes normal, everyday and natural: a gesture, not a lesson.
Bitcoin will follow the same path as the technologies that have changed society: it will first be difficult, then be mediated by simple tools, and finally become invisible.
A social good becomes accessible not when everyone studies it, but when anyone can use it without thinking about it.
But what about the price?
The price is an indicator of technological evolution, not the focus of the discussion.
It is not secondary; it is tertiary.
Those who are only looking for profits are not looking for Bitcoin; they are looking for something else.
Bitcoin is a social asset offering autonomy, continuity, and an economic voice, even when everything else stops.
The strength of the roots can be seen.
The strength of the roots can be felt.
It is in these invisible roots that the technology's true maturity lies.
#bitcoin #system #technology #network #social #adoption #invisible #autonomy #continuity #infrastructure #freedom
https://blossom.primal.net/f1cc6e3a9f8ec9fb9ba4130fcf9facbaf13a013b8a8f65db447a2aadd046366a.jpg

2025-11-18 05:15:10 GMT

- reply

Unfortunately, or fortunately (depending on your point of view), yes.

2025-11-17 15:14:52 GMT

Mass adoption will come when Bitcoin becomes invisible.
A common misconception surrounding the mass adoption of Bitcoin is that everyone must understand it in order to use it.
In reality, however, no technology has ever achieved global diffusion thanks to its users' technical understanding.
Nobody knows how POS terminals, payment cards, or the protocols that govern the internet work. Yet we use them every day.
Internal complexity has never stopped innovation; only the perception of complexity does.
According to innovation diffusion models, mass adoption occurs when a technology aligns with existing habits, requires minimal cognitive effort, and integrates with existing infrastructure.
Bitcoin will be no exception.
Adoption will not occur when everyone understands it, but when it is no longer necessary to do so.
All technologies become mainstream when they stop demanding attention.
The camera was once a niche tool, but when it was integrated into the smartphone, it became universal. Users did not learn photography; they simply used a familiar interface.
The path for Bitcoin will be similar.
The distributed network will continue to function as an energy-digital infrastructure, but end users will only interact with simple tools, such as secure apps and intuitive wallets, and features integrated into the services they already use.
When a social asset becomes invisible, it becomes accessible to all.
Real adoption occurs when the experience is immediate rather than when technical knowledge increases.
Invisible integration has a significant social impact in that it enables people to use a social asset that guarantees economic autonomy, privacy and resilience without requiring specialist skills.
For families, this means being able to send, receive or store value with ease.
For businesses, it means reducing transaction costs, accessing new customers, and operating with fewer constraints.
Mistaking use for technical understanding is a mistake of perspective.
Much of the infrastructure supporting the modern economy is opaque to users, but this does not limit its effectiveness; rather, it encourages adoption.
Bitcoin will be widely adopted when it is perceived as a digital norm integrated into everyday life.
#massadoption #mass #adoption #payment #internet #network #social #asset #invisible
https://blossom.primal.net/bd5a4aeb09bf7d1a41f577a72d709bc55826c72e97323af3464cf92ad320aa2e.png

2025-11-17 04:13:56 GMT

- reply

The code may change, but the rules will not change unless they are voluntarily adopted by the nodes that validate the chain. The addition of thousands of new nodes does not alter this mechanism: if the rules are incompatible, the blocks are discarded. The protocol's resilience comes from this distributed verification, rather than the total number of nodes or the activity of individual developers.

2025-11-16 18:29:21 GMT

- reply

Only the longest chain that complies with the consensus rules is recognised. Validity is not defined by length, but by compatibility with the shared rules: a longer but invalid chain is automatically discarded by fully validating nodes.
Developers do not have the power to change the protocol. While they can propose changes to the code, they cannot impose new rules; an update only becomes effective if those who validate the network choose to adopt it. Security derives from the behaviour of independent nodes, not the identity of those who write the software.
If different nodes reject different sets of blocks, the result is a fork in the chain. In that case, the chain with the economic majority of validating nodes prevails. This natural selection mechanism is built into the protocol and is not based on trust in developers, but on local verification of the same rules by users who decide what to validate.
The protocol is designed so that no actor — developer, miner, company or government — can change the rules. Bitcoin's protection stems from the decentralised verification process, rather than the immutability of the code or the reputation of individuals.

2025-11-16 15:49:46 GMT

- reply

The distinction between modifying the code and the consensus rules is fundamental. While an implementation may introduce new features, improvements or questionable choices, no change becomes effective on the Timecoin network unless it is voluntarily adopted by its validators. Bitcoin's security does not stem from the code remaining unchanged, but from the fact that consensus is distributed, with each node independently rejecting blocks that are incompatible with the shared rules.
Therefore, the presence of specific software versions – even if widespread – does not constitute control over the protocol. A node may run a version of the code that accepts new features; however, if these features involve blocks or transactions that are incompatible with the existing consensus, the other nodes will discard them. This prevents the change from propagating.
It is legitimate to discuss software governance, the risk of development becoming concentrated, and the need for alternative implementations: competition within the ecosystem is beneficial as it reduces the number of potential failure points. However, these aspects do not enable a group, whether financial, political or technological, to 'alter' Bitcoin from above. The insurmountable limit is local verification of the rules: without widespread adoption by validating nodes, the code cannot change the protocol.
Bitcoin's protection does not depend on blocking developers or assuming hostile coordination, but rather on the network's structural capacity to reject any unshared deviation. This property remains unchanged even in scenarios involving strong social, economic, or political pressure.

2025-11-16 11:38:35 GMT

- reply

The network's defining feature is that it does not require centralised coordination to reject incompatible rules. Each fully validating node applies the same consensus rules locally and autonomously discards blocks that do not comply with them. The 'rejection mechanism' is not a collective process, but rather an aggregation of individual, independent decisions.
For this reason, a change only becomes effective when a significant proportion of nodes voluntarily choose to adopt it. If adoption does not occur, the new code has no effect on the timechain, regardless of the number of reconfigured nodes or any attempts at external coordination.

2025-11-15 17:10:23 GMT

- reply

The number of nodes visible in a public scan does not represent the full network of validating nodes. Many nodes operate in 'unreachable' mode and do not appear in the statistics. For example, Bitnodes' research consistently indicates that observable nodes are only a fraction of the total.
Furthermore, a Sybil attack on the 'visible' component does not affect the consensus rules. While a node can adopt any user agent or version, it cannot impose new rules if the economic majority of fully validating nodes rejects the change. Creating thousands of reconfigured nodes does not alter the validation of the fundamental rules because security stems from local consensus verification rather than counting announced nodes.
Similarly, the use of a particular version by multiple instances does not imply that it can unilaterally change the protocol; an update only becomes effective if it is voluntarily accepted by those who validate the chain. The ability to reject incompatible rules prevents an artificial increase in nodes, even if coordinated, from resulting in a change to the rules.

2025-11-15 15:48:19 GMT

- reply

While the development process can certainly influence discussions and guide preferences, it cannot replace the fundamental mechanism of distributed consensus. It is important to distinguish between 'influence' and 'rule change': the former concerns the social sphere of debate, while the latter concerns cryptographic validation performed by nodes.
Even when there are attempts to 'capture' the development process (through funding, code review or default settings), the consensus rules will not change until the economic majority of nodes voluntarily accept the update. Without this validation, the new code does not activate on the Timecoin network.
Therefore, the network remains resilient not because it is immune to external pressures, but because decision-making power is distributed: each full node retains the ability to reject a change and, if necessary, continue on an alternative version of the protocol. This greatly limits the possibility of directing Bitcoin through 'social levers' alone because the final point of verification is not opinion, but compatibility with the rules.

2025-11-15 14:07:05 GMT

- reply

Bitcoin Core developers cannot change the rules of Bitcoin "from above" because the protocol works by consensus. A change only becomes effective if more than 90% of the network (nodes and miners) adopt it. Without this consensus, the new code has no effect on the timechain.
Furthermore, a minority that does not agree with an update can perform a hard fork and continue with their own timechain. This is precisely what we are seeing today in the debate over OP_RETURN and related proposals:
the network decides, not the developers.

2025-11-15 12:27:41 GMT

Scarcity as a social good.
Scarcity generates conflict.
Wars, crises, and economic history teach us this.
However, there is a form of scarcity that reduces conflict.
It is called Bitcoin.
Every vital system functions thanks to limits.
Energy is finite, time is irreversible, and attention is limited.
Without scarcity, there is no value, and without value, there is no choice.
This is where economics comes in: the art of allocating what is scarce.
Bitcoin did not invent scarcity; it simply made it measurable, shareable, and verifiable.
The 21 million formula is more than just a technical limit.
It is a pact of fairness that no one can violate, not even those who created it.
No decrees, trust, or mediators are needed, only energy and time.
In this sense, Bitcoin is a social convention based on physics, not politics.
It functions as long as there is a connection, electricity, and a willingness to cooperate.
Bitcoin is the first economic infrastructure that does not discriminate based on income, passport, or consent.
When issuance is fixed, each unit becomes a portion of shared time.
Every individual, anywhere in the world, has the same rules and opportunities to participate.
There are no "strong" or "weak" currencies; there is only each person's time converted into verifiable value.
This is the essence of social good:
Not an object, but a condition of equality.
Bitcoin is often accused of "consuming energy."
Bitcoin is often accused of "consuming energy."
However, energy is not wasted if it generates order.
Each joule used for network security prevents the costs associated with corruption, inflation, and censorship.
In the long run, this encourages energy efficiency because only those who produce clean energy can compete.
stable energy sources can compete.
Thus, what appears to be "consumption" becomes a form of natural selection that favors sustainability.
In a world of constant change, predictability is a rare commodity.
Knowing that the rules will be the same tomorrow means having the ability to build.
Bitcoin does not promise salvation; rather, it promises consistency over time. This consistency is a form of freedom.
Anyone can verify it; no one can alter it.
It is an economic and moral experiment.
It transforms blind trust into verifiable trust.
Bitcoin is not just technology, finance, or speculation.
It is a social experiment based on the principle that order comes from limits, not power.
Programmed scarcity does not impoverish; it educates.
It restores human time to its natural weight, which is responsibility.
Freedom is not the absence of rules; it is the knowledge of one's own limits.
#social #good #asset #bitcoin #formula #physics #politics #energy #electricity #currency #consum #efficiency #sustainability #experiment #order #responsability #scarcity #knowledge
https://blossom.primal.net/5f54f67fe76073adb999a5be0bc96109a7984684eba550e8629f1b176a9baa8f.png

2025-11-14 12:54:10 GMT

From Formula to Scarcity: Stock-to-Flow.
Bitcoin is scarce.
This phrase is often repeated but rarely explained.
In economics, scarcity is not an opinion; it is a numerical ratio.
Every material or digital asset has two fundamental quantities:
Stock: The quantity already in existence.
Flow is the quantity added each year.
The ratio of the two, stock-to-flow, defines the monetary hardness of an asset.
The higher the ratio, the more resistant the asset is to inflation; that is, it is difficult to expand its total quantity.
In the case of Bitcoin, monetary inflation is defined as "flow over stock."
Therefore, the stock-to-flow ratio is the inverse of inflation.
It's a simple yet powerful relationship:
What is fragility (inflation) for currencies becomes robustness (scarcity) for Bitcoin.
Each halving event cuts the "flow," or the annual creation of new bitcoins, in half.
The "stock," on the other hand, continues to increase until it reaches the limit of 21 million.
The result is a stock-to-flow ratio that grows in a deterministic manner over time.
Between 2012 and 2016, Bitcoin inflation was 12.5%, and the stock-to-flow ratio was 8.
Today, inflation is 0.83%, and the stock-to-flow ratio is 120.
With the next halving in 2028, inflation will fall to 0.4%, and the stock-to-flow ratio will be 250.
This relationship between inflation and Bitcoin's stock-to-flow ratio will persist until 2140, when inflation will reach zero and the stock-to-flow ratio will become virtually infinite.
Currently, Bitcoin surpasses gold in monetary hardness; gold has a stock-to-flow ratio of around 60–70, whereas Bitcoin is already over 120. At the current rate, it would take 120 years to double the stock of Bitcoin.
Scarcity is not a privilege; it is a form of equality.
In a system where issuance is equal for all, no one can "inflate" the time or labor of others.
Stock-to-flow does not measure price; rather, it measures the fairness of economic time. The higher the stock-to-flow ratio, the more wealth retains its value over time.
Every bitcoin is created with the same amount of energy and follows the same rules.
This distinguishes it from any currency created by decree.
In 2019, an analyst known as PlanB popularized a model correlating Bitcoin's stock-to-flow ratio with its market value.
The model is now criticized and, in part, outdated.
It does not predict price; rather, it describes the consistency of the scarcity mechanism.
Bitcoin is valuable not because it costs money, but because it retains its value over time.
Each block added is a unit of order against the entropy of the global economic system.
Stock-to-flow is not just a technical indicator.
It is a numerical measure of programmed trust. The more it grows, the harder the network is to manipulate.
In Bitcoin, scarcity is not a flaw in the code but rather its most human function.
Once the quantity can no longer grow, the responsibility to use it well increases.
#stocktoflow #scarcity #stock #flow #inflation #halving #gold #planb #technical #quantity #responsability
https://blossom.primal.net/e57f817e24f976fcab834ad95f69af9f2945770b3a4b109962c733b955db34c3.png

2025-11-13 12:37:41 GMT

The formula for ordering: 21 million.
No one can create more bitcoins than the protocol allows.
This sums up a deeper principle: the mathematical order of supply.
Bitcoin's supply does not arise from an act of will, but rather from a predetermined issuance function in the source code.
21 million.
No one can ever exceed that number.
Every 210,000 blocks, the reward for miners is halved.
This is a mechanism of programmed disinflation, not an isolated technical event.
This halving sets the economic tempo of the network, slowing as Bitcoin matures like a heartbeat.
Each block adds order, not chaos.
Each halving reduces the supply, thereby increasing scarcity and strengthening the link between time, energy, and value.
In contrast, scarcity in fiat currencies is only apparent because central banks can expand the monetary base at any time, thereby altering the relationship between savings, debt, and purchasing power.
In Bitcoin, however, scarcity is intrinsic and verifiable; no committee, authority, or emergency can change it.
For the first time in history, a mathematical formula has replaced a political promise.
Behind every Bitcoin, energy has been expended—measurable and irreversible.
The algorithm does not distribute wealth; rather, it recognizes verified energy expenditure.
This is why Bitcoin can be understood as a social good—a distributed accounting system that restores dignity to human and technical effort.
Scarcity does not enrich the few; it stabilizes the value of everyone's time.
The 21 million formula is more than just a quantitative limit.
It is a principle of order in an uncertain economic world.
Every individual can verify this rule, and therefore trust not someone, but something knowable.
In this sense, Bitcoin is not "against" the system; it attempts to bring the system back within the bounds of logic.
There are no press conferences, revisions, or corrective measures—only blocks that will follow one another mathematically for over a century.
Twenty-one million is not just a number; it's a universal order — the digital translation of the concept of natural scarcity.
Where discretion ends, trust begins.
#21 #million #protocol #program #network #block #halving #sistem
https://blossom.primal.net/fbbef44cc1858342a0c367bfe9941bf4b67c347f04404dd109bc8c6f5e397037.png

2025-11-12 10:59:01 GMT

There is Bitcoin inflation, but not in the way you might think.
In fact, Bitcoin is deflationary, not inflationary.
You often hear the phrase "Bitcoin is deflationary," but it's incorrect.
Each time a block is validated, new bitcoins are created to reward miners for their computational work.
This issuance increases the total amount in circulation, just as a state's monetary base increases with money issuance.
The difference is that no one decides this; it's all written in the code.
Bitcoin inflation equals the ratio of the existing stock of bitcoins to the new amount issued in a given time interval.
Currently, Bitcoin inflation is around 0.83% per year and will be cut in half after the next halving.
In the fiat system, inflation arises from political and monetary decisions, such as interest rates, emissions, and fiscal stimuli.
However, in the Bitcoin protocol, it is an algorithmic constant. Every 210,000 blocks (approximately four years), the reward is halved.
This results in a finite, deterministic, and transparent supply curve down to the last decimal place, converging to 21 million BTC.
In Bitcoin, inflation does not destroy purchasing power.
Initially, it serves as an incentive that allows the network to exist until transaction fees become sufficient to maintain it.
It is not an invisible tax; it is a rule that applies to everyone equally.
While inflation in fiat currencies redistributes wealth without consent, Bitcoin distributes security fairly.
Every miner participates under the same conditions; no one can create more than the protocol allows.
With each halving, the number of new bitcoins decreases by 50%.
Thus, the supply curve flattens and scarcity increases mathematically rather than emotionally.
It's a law of digital nature: over time, Bitcoin transforms from a technical means into a social good.
By 2140, issuance will be zero.
Although inflation will be eliminated, the network will continue to function; energy will sustain trust, not politics.
Bitcoin is not "deflationary"; it is a system of predictable and decreasing inflation based on energy, code, and transparency.
It does not promise returns; it promises temporal equity. What you receive today is proportional to the time and work you have spent, not a central decision.
Fear arises from disorder; trust arises from predictability.
#deflationary #inflation #bitcoin #timechain #algorithm #power #miner #supply #2140 #fear #trust
https://blossom.primal.net/c9153bb6bda88fd0b83e51a4979d606c1359bc37ce128327f38373e2bf44f576.png

2025-11-11 09:43:17 GMT

Bitcoin as a social asset: Freedom to understand.
We have discussed inflation, credit, trust, and deflation.
The question now is not economic, but human: What does all this have to do with freedom?
Bitcoin is not a myth; it is a lens.
It reveals how money is created, who receives it first, and how trust is distributed.
It is not an escape from the system but rather a means of understanding and correcting it.
Bitcoin is the infrastructure that gives everyone the right to act economically, even when the traditional system fails.
Bitcoin is a social good because it provides everyone with the same opportunities: a bank account for the unbanked,
It provides a verifiable tax position, access to energy, water, knowledge, and exchange.
Bitcoin is based on energy, which fuels life, freedom, and progress. Therefore, it reduces waste and optimizes the use of global resources.
Bitcoin does not promise equality of results, but rather, equality of rules.
It transforms responsibility into a conscious choice.
Bitcoin does not divide people into believers and skeptics.
Rather, it separates those who understand from those who delegate.
Those who understand the system are not swayed by fear.
True freedom lies in widespread economic competence, which restores dignity and autonomy to the individual.
Every society is based on trust.
When trust is concentrated, it dies out.
Bitcoin distributes trust over time, space, and among people.
However, without education, freedom becomes risky.
Understanding is the first form of security.
The price changes. The rules do not.
Bitcoin is not a refuge; it's an invitation to understand, choose, and participate.
It is not a currency; it is a cryptoasset, combining energy, technology, and freedom.
Bitcoin is freedom because it works when everything else stops.
During crises, wars, or famines, it continues to operate.
It discourages conflict by redistributing power and trust.
It gives a voice to the voiceless.
Fear is cured with free knowledge. Always.
All shared knowledge becomes a social good.
Bitcoin is an example of this.
Study Bitcoin.
#study #bitcoin #asset #social #freedom #knowledge #good #fear
https://blossom.primal.net/f3c4eb2d536901f0528904fd9456773c4b285de23f4112e5d0b4a949b482cf93.png

2025-11-10 10:20:21 GMT

Bitcoin is a distributed cryptoasset in a world of credit.
Inflation, credit, deflation, and trust.
We have seen how the flow of money determines who wins and who loses.
The question now is where Bitcoin fits into all this.
Bitcoin is a distributed economic network that records transactions on a public ledger called the timechain.
It is neither a company nor a currency.
Rather, it is a distributed cryptoasset, which is a digital asset based on cryptography and energy.
Its protocol defines a predetermined supply of 21 million units.
No authority can change this supply. The rules are public, verifiable, and the same for everyone.
Bitcoin is not a "base currency" and is not intended to replace existing currencies.
Rather, it is a monetary technology that introduces a new level of transparency, discipline, and freedom of choice into the system.
A non-discretionary supply provides a stable point of reference over time.
In the short term, the price in euros or dollars fluctuates, but in the long term, credibility based on scarcity—whether energy, mathematical, or digital—is key.
Bitcoin's value does not measure wealth but rather the progress of the technology that underpins it.
In the traditional system, new money enters from the top and does not reach everyone equally.
Bitcoin, on the other hand, is created from the bottom up, and anyone can access it without permission.
There is no "first beneficiary" (Cantillon).
Even if entry channels (institutions) recreate asymmetries, the protocol remains neutral and accessible.
In the world of credit, money is created out of thin air.
In Bitcoin, not so much.
Credit may exist, but it does not create new BTC.
The supply remains fixed; debt cannot inflate the underlying asset.
This is why Bitcoin separates real value from leverage.
Bitcoin does not eliminate economic cycles, but it makes them more predictable.
It introduces monetary disinflation, which is beneficial if productivity grows but risky if trust is lacking.
Its rules do not change based on governments or crises.
This stability creates a new area of individual responsibility.
Bitcoin's underlying asset is energy.
Proof-of-work links security to the physical cost of maintaining it; each block is the result of real work.
This cost is not waste; it is the cost of security.
Integrating this network with waste energy, whether renewable or nuclear, reduces waste and improves the system's overall efficiency.
Bitcoin does not promise returns.
It promises verifiable rules.
Bitcoin is not a currency, but rather a distributed asset that restores voice and responsibility.
In a world based on credit, this is an epochal change.
#bitcoin #distributed #cryptoasset #world #economy #network #public #proofofwork
https://blossom.primal.net/c98e90cb79d5b51ae2286ff39cf84ad11cce5765dea596315440069d00d60ef1.png

2025-11-08 12:06:25 GMT

The deflationary spiral is the silent brake on hope.
Everyone fears inflation.
But few remember that deflation can also be destructive.
Not because "prices fall," but because when they do so for the wrong reasons, the entire economic system begins to shut down.
Deflation is the persistent reduction in the general price level.
A "deflationary spiral" occurs when this decline feeds on itself:
Prices fall, consumption is postponed, production is reduced, redundancies occur, unemployment rises, incomes fall, and demand decreases. Prices then fall again.
Although it seems like a neutral phenomenon, it is deeply human.
Fear of the future leads to waiting, and waiting freezes economic life.
People do not act, invest, or consume because they believe that "tomorrow it will cost less."
In this "tomorrow that never comes," confidence dies.
This has happened several times before.
During the Great Depression of the 1930s in the United States, prices, wages, and credit collapsed. The real value of debts increased, banks failed, and millions of people lost their jobs and homes.
In the 1990s, Japan experienced two "lost decades": falling prices, a stagnant economy, and a population that saved out of fear.
Today, China is showing similar signs: weak domestic demand, falling producer prices, and slowing exports.
History does not repeat itself, but it often rhymes.
Deflation hits those who have the least the hardest.
Debts become heavier in real terms.
Nominal wages fall.
Companies cut investment and employment.
Young people see opportunities and futures slip away.
Yet, not all deflation is bad.
When it results from greater productivity, such as technological advances, increased efficiency, and reduced costs, it can lower prices without destroying demand.
However, when deflation stems from mistrust and debt, it becomes a slow poison.
From a geopolitical point of view, deflation is also a silent weapon.
It pushes countries to devalue their currencies, compete on prices, and protect their markets.
Deflation reduces risk appetite and slows the transition to clean energy and technology.
Stagnation stifles innovation.
This is why those who discuss economics, currency, or Bitcoin cannot ignore it.
A deflationary economy increases the real value of money, but only at the cost of a contracting economy, drying up credit, and eroding confidence.
If Bitcoin is a social asset, then it must exist in a society that acts, not one that waits.
The risk of deflation lies not in the numbers, but in the minds of those who stop believing that tomorrow can be better than today.
Deflation is not just "falling prices"; it is the silent brake on hope.
#deflation #falling #price #hope #inflation #bitcoin #economy #asset
https://blossom.primal.net/00716af27174d3d62ac05eb93fd0b1d724104d758007a7fd683cb124146c92cb.png

2025-11-07 10:32:24 GMT

🌬 What if we stopped creating money?
Imagine if, tomorrow, all banks decided to stop granting loans.
There would be no new mortgages, no credit for businesses, and no overdrafts for households.
What would happen?
Money would stop circulating.
Most of the money we use is not physical; it's scriptural, or credit-based.
When credit stops, money withdraws. When money withdraws, the economy cools down.
Less credit means less spending.
Less spending means less demand.
Fewer people will produce, work, and earn income.
This is the beginning of a deflationary spiral, a self-perpetuating chain.
Prices begin to fall.
While this may seem like good news, it is not. If prices fall, people postpone consumption, waiting for prices to fall further.
Companies reduce production, wages stagnate, and debts become harder to repay.
The real value of our debts increases, even if our earnings decrease.
This is the deflation trap described by Irving Fisher as early as 1933 and adopted by Keynes. When confidence disappears, money stops moving, and economic time stands still.
In a modern economy, failing to create money is like failing to circulate oxygen.
This isn't because "inflation is needed," but because balance is needed. Money must expand in line with production and confidence in the future.
If money stops, so does the economy.
A society that no longer trusts itself will stop investing, innovating, and imagining.
The economy does not die from inflation. It dies from immobility.
#if #immobility #economy #inflation #stop #create #money
https://blossom.primal.net/e3130c592483432175177102aca772786eab8837ffce93f2aa46a479d0391d58.png

2025-11-06 08:09:30 GMT

💧 The Cantillon effect explains who gains from new money.
Not all money is created equal.
It depends on where it enters the system and who receives it first.
This is the essence of the Cantillon effect, which was formulated in the 18th century by Irish economist Richard Cantillon. Cantillon was one of the first to observe that money creation produces distributional effects, not just inflationary ones.
When the central bank or commercial banks inject new money into the system, it does not reach everyone at the same time.
The first beneficiaries—banks, large companies, and financial markets—receive the money before prices rise.
They can then spend or invest it with greater purchasing power.
Those who receive the money later (workers, pensioners, and families) find themselves facing higher prices.
The result is that the new money transfers wealth from those who receive it last to those who receive it first.
This mechanism is not a "conspiracy," but rather a structural consequence of the current credit system.
Money enters the system from the top, through the financial channel, and only then does it reach the real economy.
Meanwhile, assets (such as shares, real estate, and raw materials) increase in value while wages remain static.
This is why the perception of injustice grows even with "low" inflation: the problem is not how much money increases, but who intercepts it along the way.
The Cantillon effect reminds us that money is not neutral.
Every monetary flow reshapes social relations. Those who create credit indirectly determine who can afford more and who can afford less.
Understanding this means recognizing that the economy is not destiny but a human construct.
Money is like rain; if it always falls on the same fields, drought occurs elsewhere.
Freedom comes from understanding where it falls.
❓️What if we stopped creating money?
🔜 [Continued...]
📶 Stay tuned.
#cantillon #effect #rain #money #central #bank #inflation
https://blossom.primal.net/621e37118901cb91082a30ee0f55f7d3e5b3575a8b149729d89e1e4c068396fb.png

2025-11-05 08:02:45 GMT

💭 2% is not a lie. It is an average.
Many people think that 2% inflation is a lie.
And, in their own way, they are right.
Because that 2% is an average, not our real life.
Institutions calculate the average increase in prices for thousands of goods and services: bread, energy, rents, technology, transport, leisure.
But each of us has our own personal basket.
Those who live in rented accommodation, those who have children, those who work far away, those who pay for a car or bills: everyone experiences different levels of inflation.
And the goods that really matter — food, housing, energy — are not increasing by 2%, but by 20, 30, 50%.
The problem is not the index.
The problem is that wages are not growing as fast as prices.
Between 2000 and 2023, real wages in Italy increased by only 0.4%.
Zero point four.
In Germany, they increased by 34%.
In the United States, by 49%.
And we wonder why we are poorer.
Keynes said that a little inflation helps the economy:
it encourages investment, moves money around and creates jobs.
But it only works if the fruits of growth also reach workers.
When productivity rises and wages remain static,
inflation does not stimulate: it devours.
It is not the ECB that is stealing our purchasing power.
It is a system that no longer distributes the value it creates.
2% is not a lie.
It is a blurred photograph.
To see clearly, we must ask ourselves where inflation hits, who pays for it and who gains from it.
Only then will we understand why life costs more, and why the truth is not in the numbers, but in the daily experience of those who live them.
Because fear is cured by free knowledge.
Always.
#freedom #free #knowledge #inflation #bitcoin #average #lie #truth #real
https://blossom.primal.net/e2e265da09aa260dc51a8a76969e28ef4ce2bb4f8665cdd285983fa200607ab8.png

2025-11-04 08:04:41 GMT

☯️ Man, fear and truth.
Man fears what he does not know.
When fear stems from ignorance, it becomes a tool of power: those who do not understand are easy to frighten.
But there is also a 'good' kind of fear: the kind that drives us to understand, to study, to seek the truth.
Knowledge does not eliminate fear, it transforms it.
It takes us from terror to awareness of the complexity and rules of the world we live in.
Inflation, currency, central banks are not invisible monsters: they are human constructs, imperfect tools, but necessary for organising economic coexistence.
We cannot eliminate them, but we can understand them, and therefore demand that they work better.
True freedom does not lie in having more money, but in knowing what it is.
Those who know how money works do not allow themselves to be bought by fear.
Those who know how to read a family budget are no longer a number in the statistics.
Those who know, choose.
That is why awareness is a political, moral and human act.
Because it frees us from blind suspicion and restores the dignity of thought.
Truth is never absolute, but it is always verifiable.
And the first truth to accept is this: fear is cured by free knowledge.
Always.
Bitcoin or euro, gold or shells: the problem is not the medium of exchange, it is the person who uses it without understanding it.
Understanding does not mean accepting, it means seeing further.
🔜 [continue...]
📶 Stay tuned
#man #fear #truth #inflation #bitcoin #euro #gold #knowledge
https://blossom.primal.net/8fbb7b62859d52a57f4be765c1a4d03eb24b0437502bc0ee560110fd947a9de7.png

2025-11-03 10:13:32 GMT

📈 Understanding inflation so you don't have to fear it.
Fear arises when we don't understand.
In economics, ignorance is not a crime; it's a common human condition.
No one has really explained inflation to us, nor have they taught us how to defend ourselves against those who use economics to confuse us.
Inflation simply means that, on average, prices are rising.
It is neither an "order from above" nor a conspiracy by central banks. Rather, it is a reflection of the prices of goods and services, such as bread, bills, rent, gasoline, clothing, and technology.
When these prices rise overall, we say there is inflation.
However, no one "decides" this. Rather, it is the result of global factors such as wars, energy, raw materials, and logistics.
Central banks do not decide how much bread or gasoline should cost.
Their task is to keep the value of money stable over time, which is why they aim for inflation "around 2%."
They don't try to "create" inflation; they try to avoid extremes, such as uncontrolled inflation or deflation (falling prices that cool the economy).
For example, if your doctor tells you that the ideal body temperature is 37°C, it does not mean that they want you to have a fever. They are simply explaining that 37°C is equilibrium.
The same applies to the central bank. It does not "want" inflation; it wants to prevent the economy from becoming ill.
So, who prints money?
No one, as you might imagine.
Today, money is not physical currency; it is credit.
When a bank grants you a loan, the money is created at that moment. When you pay it back, the money disappears.
The central bank does not decide how much money is in circulation; rather, it decides how much that money costs by adjusting interest rates.
When rates rise, the cost of borrowing money increases, which slows down the economy.
If rates fall, credit expands and more money is created.
It's a delicate balance, not a magic button.
Italy ranks last in Europe for financial education.
It is not our fault, but rather the fault of an education system that has forgotten to teach us how the things that govern us every day work.
🔜 [Continued...]
📶 Stay tuned.
#inflation #truth #bitcoin #central #bank #money #fear #human
https://blossom.primal.net/7ec38629ab935e6edd6bf8918b44da2c4b36fd182a285be166f3d1b8195616d5.png

2025-10-31 08:01:25 GMT

📆 October 31, 2008 – October 31, 2025
🎂 Seventeen years since the Bitcoin White Paper:
"A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System"
‐ Satoshi Nakamoto
On October 31, 2008, as the world was facing its deepest financial crisis since the Great Depression, a nine-page document was published on a small cryptography mailing list: the Bitcoin White Paper.
These nine pages, like a seed sown in silence, would sprout one of the most profound revolutions of our time.
It was not a political appeal.
It was not an ideological statement.
Rather, it was the technical description of a philosophical idea: to give human beings back the ability to trust without having to believe.
Satoshi Nakamoto, a faceless name, chose anonymity as a symbolic gesture; the author eclipsed himself to let the work speak for itself. Bitcoin was not created as a tool of rebellion but rather as an answer to an age-old question:
How can people cooperate, exchange value, and develop economic relationships without delegating trust to institutions, intermediaries, or central authorities?
This did not imply a lack of trust in others, but rather a trust in humanity.
It implied trust in their discernment, responsibility, and freedom to choose.
Bitcoin is not just a technological project; it is a social asset.
It was created to remind us that freedom is not a privilege granted by others, but rather a natural condition that must be defended by being distributed.
Every node, every user, and every individual who participates in its functioning is a living part of this balance.
Satoshi did not want to create a currency.
He wanted to return currency to society, freeing it from manipulation, corruption, and arbitrariness.
He wanted to create a system where rules replaced power, transparency replaced blind faith, and individual responsibility became the basis of civilized living again.
The white paper does not discuss price, investment, or returns.
Instead, it discusses peer-to-peer trust, transparency as a means of fostering honesty, and autonomy through knowledge.
It is a manifesto for a society in which cooperation arises from the bottom up rather than being imposed from the top down.
Bitcoin is a collective memory that never forgets.
Each block is a testament to human history, proof that truth can be shared and verified but not owned.
Its distributed functioning reflects an ethical vision—the idea that truth, like freedom, cannot have an owner.
Seventeen years later, Bitcoin is no longer an experiment.
It is a living, imperfect, and controversial reality that is unequivocally human.
It is the legacy of a thought that does not seek approval but understanding.
It does not seek consensus, but rather awareness.
Celebrating Bitcoin today does not mean idolizing its price or technology.
It means remembering why it exists.
Because one day, someone hidden behind a pseudonym believed it was possible to create a value system based not on blind trust but on shared truth.
First and foremost, Bitcoin is a social and moral message:
Humans are capable of cooperating, being honest, and creating order and value without command or debt.
Bitcoin reminds us that freedom is not a cry; it is a distributed structure of responsibility.
Today, 17 years after October 31, 2008, we celebrate not the technology but the idea.
Not the software, but the hope.
Not the currency, but humanity.
Bitcoin was not created to change money.
It was created to change our understanding of freedom.
#freedom #human #whitepaper #10312008 #bitcoin #satoshi #nakamoto #technology #awarness #trust
https://blossom.primal.net/c284f47f2dcbc92e4c28738e6dc2d835be96c9a79519dab597551bb168d183c9.png

2025-07-16 19:31:26 GMT

In order to fully accept Bitcoin as a peaceful, nonviolent social revolution, we must also acknowledge and address its negative aspects.
Every day, we walk a fine line called fear. On one side is terror, which can manipulate us by influencing our choices on a subconscious level. On the other side is awareness, which comes from freedom and knowledge.
Even with Bitcoin, we should not limit ourselves to seeing only its "revolutionary" and positive aspects. We must also recognize its potential downsides, such as its instrumental use in sensitive geopolitical contexts.
Ultimately, Bitcoin can be a powerful tool for freedom, but only if it is accompanied by deep awareness and authentic knowledge.
I remember what the Cypherpunk manifesto tells us:
There is a crucial difference between secrecy and privacy.
> Secrecy is imposition, concealment, and opacity. A secret is something we don't want anyone to know, so we hide it.
> Privacy, on the other hand, is self-determination, protection, personal dignity, and the freedom to choose what to share and with whom.
Bitcoin can be a tool for conscious privacy if used with integrity.
However, it can also be bent to the logic of power, exploitation, or authoritarianism.
Ultimately, it is up to us to choose which side of history we want to be on.
#bitcoin #awarness #knowledge #freedom #cypherpunk #manifesto #privacy #secrecy #revolution

2025-06-25 16:51:29 GMT

- reply

😂 you can do it! Keep believing🚀

2025-06-25 11:45:43 GMT

📜 Bitcoin didn't come out of nowhere. It is the result of over 40 years of innovation.
From the development of asymmetric cryptography in the 1970s to the launch of the Genesis Block in 2009 — via cypherpunk mailing lists, David Chaum's electronic cash systems, Adam Back's Hashcash, and peer-to-peer protocols such as BitTorrent and Tor — each step laid the groundwork for Bitcoin.
🔐 Bitcoin is not just technology; it is also a cultural and political response.
It is the legacy of mathematicians, hackers, engineers, and activists who fought for privacy, individual freedom, and digital autonomy.
Bitcoin is the convergence of seven conceptual pillars: cryptography, timestamping, digital identities, fault tolerance, digital cash, proof of work, smart contracts, and peer-to-peer networks.
📕 Behind every transaction is a century of history.
📌 Behind every block is a philosophy of resistance.
🚫 It is not an impromptu invention. It is a point of arrival and a new beginning.
👉 Bitcoin is culture. It is engineering. It is a silent revolution.
🧠 Understanding its genesis means recognizing that it is not just a "digital currency," but rather a distributed social asset created to forever change the relationship between individuals, the state, and information.
⚡️ Cypherpunks write code. Today, we raise awareness.
#bitcoin #cypherpunk #code #awarness #genesis #technology #story #evolution
https://blossom.primal.net/fc4c328cd801581cf6d1106d8beaa464c85553e49f9356e7bda650e050f30c18.jpg

2025-06-18 09:20:39 GMT

- reply

2025-06-18 09:20:20 GMT

🔥 Bitcoin, Wagner, and the Central African Republic: What Is Really Behind It?
In 2022, the Central African Republic became the second country (after El Salvador) to adopt Bitcoin as legal tender.
A monetary revolution? Perhaps.
An illusion? Probably.
A geopolitical operation? Much more likely.
The law, which was passed "unanimously" by the Central African Parliament, has a murky background.
🔻 A poor state with abundant gold, diamonds, and uranium.
🔻 A colonial currency, the CFA franc, is still in use and guaranteed by France.
🔻 And above all, there is a profound Russian influence exercised by the notorious Wagner Group, which guarantees "security" in exchange for control of resources.
🔍 According to many international sources, such as France24, Bloomberg, and The Economist, the adoption of Bitcoin may have been suggested or encouraged by Wagner itself in order to:
- Facilitate opaque transactions related to mining.
- circumvent traditional banking circuits and Western sanctions;
- Build an alternative model of monetary sovereignty that functions as an anti-IMF and anti-Western force.
The Central African government then launched its own cryptocurrency, the Sango Coin, promising to "tokenize the subsoil."
The result? A failed project. The Constitutional Court ruled against it. The population has no internet. Real adoption of Bitcoin is virtually nonexistent.
💣 But the political message remains: Bitcoin was used as a narrative tool of rupture and resistance even when the economic infrastructure wasn't ready.
🧠 Perhaps we should ask ourselves who benefits from "crypto adoption" without freedom, transparency, and autonomy.
Bitcoin can be a social good. However, not everyone uses it for constructive purposes. Some simply use it to hide.
🔗 Main sources: Bloomberg, France24, The Economist, and CoinDesk.
#bitcoin #legal #tender #value #fiat #elsalvador #rca #cypherpunk
https://blossom.primal.net/f9e586ed82163a24fe9be0babd7e0391a4043a5c30e8112af77e40006f44e2b4.png

2025-06-14 14:22:36 GMT

👋 Hello everyone!
📖 I am pleased to announce the publication of my dissertation on Bitcoin and energy.
The open-source PDF is currently available only in Italian at the link below, but will soon be available in English as well.
#bitcoin #energy #nuclear #sustainability #efficiency #enviroinmental #economy #thesis #study #research #public
https://linktr.ee/JacopoGraziuso

2025-06-13 17:40:28 GMT

📊 SUSPICIOUSLY ORDERLY MOVEMENTS
It all happened in a matter of hours.
🟡 PAX Gold: +1.06%
🟠 Bitcoin: -4.41%
Look at the charts. Two opposite trends occurred within the same time frame. But what is truly astonishing is the surgical precision of BTC's downward movement. There was no chaos or uncontrolled volatility, just sharp, coordinated declines as if someone were following a well-defined plan.
🚨 It's crazy! If small retailers were responsible, the movements would appear much more disorderly and fragmented. Here, however, it seems to be a strategic, lucid maneuver: we could be witnessing the actions of large operators such as investment funds, asset managers, or institutional desks.
💼 In these cases, it's not the price itself that speaks, but the way it moves. Today, the message seems clear: someone has pressed hard on the accelerator. But who, and why now?
#gold #bitcoin #market #asset #manager #price #retail #controll #finance #crazy
https://blossom.primal.net/691a1b57446562b7536b7028adb032c63989fee10f5ba2b1141aa0fb4738e357.jpg

2025-06-07 12:07:37 GMT

Salento Bitcoin has arrived in Fornelli to admire the fifth statue of revolutionary visionary Satoshi Nakamoto.
Thank you, Mattia Pannoni.
#satoshi #nakamoto #fornelli #bitcoin #art #statue
https://blossom.primal.net/73679a86fc50a7f9e76c0e82c67511430058ab5cd1e71a3a8ee1df761ed683e5.jpg

2025-06-03 11:08:12 GMT

🎯 Bitcoin's Timetable
📉 The halving schedule until 2140
Bitcoin is the only asset whose supply is mathematically programmed. Every four years or so, the reward for miners is cut in half. This process is called "halving." The graph shows when the next halving will happen and by how much.
📌 Important:
The years shown are estimates because blocks are mined at average intervals (every ~10 minutes). However, the reward, quantity issued, and blocks are certain and unchangeable because they are determined by the code itself.
📊 By 2140, the last BTC will be mined.
After that, there will be no more new issuance. Bitcoin will be completely finished: 21 million, forever.
And after that? What will happen?
💬 Open debate:
- Miners will only work thanks to transaction fees.
- Will those fees be enough to protect the network?
- Will we see new incentive and fee management models?
- Will Bitcoin become a global unit of account, or will it become the definitive "digital reserve"?
Bitcoin is more than just technology. It is a social, economic, and cultural experiment.
🧠 Let us reflect together:
What happens when currency can no longer be inflated?
#endofbitcoin #bitcoin #mining #end #finish #block #reward #fee #2140 #halving #scarcity
https://blossom.primal.net/c97512248b6851d36015cfd2cc11865f7089dfa004e02db6356842c1540132a5.jpg

2025-06-01 18:28:18 GMT

🔒 Coinbase was attacked by hackers. The bug was not in the code, but in human error.
The hackers who attacked Coinbase did not crack the code, breach the firewalls, or exploit technical vulnerabilities. They didn't write malware or force cryptographic algorithms.
They did something much simpler—and much more effective.
They bought the silence of some customer support employees.
Through bribery, they obtained sensitive data from some 97,000 users, including names, identity documents, banking information, and transaction history. There were no software breaches. There was no theft of private keys. Only corruption. Just human frailty.
Once they had the data, the cybercriminals demanded $20 million in Bitcoin in exchange for not publicly disclosing everything.
Coinbase refused.
The company chose to face the consequences instead, spending up to $400 million to contain the damage, strengthen systems, compensate customers, and regain control of the situation.
This time, the real bug was not in the code.
It was in the people.
This episode reminds us that security involves not only technology but also trust, transparency, and human integrity.
No matter how robust a cryptographic protocol is, if those managing it are vulnerable, the whole system can collapse.
🔗 Official sources:
Coinbase Blog, May 2025: https://www.coinbase.com/it/blog/protecting-our-customers-standing-up-to-extortionists?utm_source=
Reuters: https://www.reuters.com/business/coinbase-says-cyber-criminals-stole-account-data-some-customers-2025-05-15/?utm_source=
#coinbase #hack #crack #human #blog #corruption #attack #data
https://blossom.primal.net/7b52e5780ca495a593c6b886e405c44578c9fdf313043cca0c76f874e22e9df6.png

2025-05-30 11:42:49 GMT

🧱 What is the "UTXO set"? The Invisible Heart of Bitcoin 🧮
You often hear about transactions, addresses, and wallets, but behind the scenes is a fundamental mechanism that makes it all possible: the UTXO set. 🔐🔄
🔎 UTXO stands for unspent transaction output.
Every Bitcoin transaction spends one or more previous outputs and generates new ones. These "unspent" outputs are called UTXOs.
📦 Think of them as ready-to-use digital coins, each with a precise value and a cryptographic "unlock condition."
💼 Your BTC balance is not like a bank account!
👉 If you see 0.1 BTC in your wallet, it means you have one or more UTXOs whose values add up to that amount.
There is no aggregate account; rather, there is a set of traceable and verifiable "mini-coins."
🧠 What is the UTXO set?
It is the complete, up-to-date set of all existing UTXOs on the network.
📍 Each complete Bitcoin node maintains its own copy of the set locally and uses it to verify that:
✅ The inputs of new transactions are still spendable
❌ There is no double spending.
🔒 The unlock conditions are met.
🏗 How does a transaction work?
It takes one or more existing UTXOs as input.
- Creates new UTXOs as output
- Any difference between the input and output is the miner's fee. 💰
If something is left over, a change output is created for the sender. 🔄
🛠 Why is this important?
The UTXO model is transparent, secure, and auditable.
- Prevents the creation of bitcoins out of thin air
- Makes transactions verifiable independently of each node
It ensures network immutability and reliability
⚙️ Technical Curiosity:
The UTXO set grows over time and can weigh several GB of data. Nodes use optimizations for this reason, but the set is never "pruned" because it must remain intact to guarantee security and validation.
Each transaction changes the set, creating a continuous update cycle.
📌 Bottom line:
The UTXO set is the living ledger of the Bitcoin system. There is no bank or central server; only mathematical rules, cryptographic verification, and total transparency exist.
🔗 Every spent satoshi leaves a trace, and every unspent satoshi is ready to be put back into circulation.
📶 Stay tuned.
#utxo #set #bitcoin #howdoesitwork #technology #curiosity #transaction #btc
https://blossom.primal.net/c71924b85de7f59a12582fe8a86db5f20e2261ffff249498c9229facf6399eb1.png

2025-05-29 11:46:26 GMT

🚨 What happens when you send a payment in Bitcoin? 🧾
Spoiler alert: It doesn't go straight into the blockchain. There's an invisible yet crucial place where everything takes shape. It's called the mempool. 🧠💾
📥 What is the Mempool?
A memory pool is a kind of decentralized waiting room. Each complete Bitcoin node maintains its own version containing all valid transactions awaiting confirmation.
There is not one global queue, but rather many local mempools that, thanks to the distributed network, tend to look very similar.
🔨 Who decides which transactions are confirmed?
Miners choose which transactions to include in the next block. How?
📊 Based on the fee per byte. The higher the fee, the more likely your transaction will be confirmed quickly.
It's a real fee market! 🤑
🔥 What happens if the network is congested?
When there's a surge in transactions (e.g., a bull market or special events), the mempool fills up, and fees skyrocket.
At that point, only those who pay the highest fees can make their way through the other transactions. 📈💸
🛠 Tools for the user:
Modern wallets estimate the most suitable fees in real time.
- Functions such as Replace-By-Fee (RBF) allow you to increase the fee even after sending.
- If a transaction remains in the mempool for too long (e.g., if the fee is too low), some nodes will delete it, and it will have to be sent again.
🔍 At a glance:
The Mempool is the beating heart of the Bitcoin transaction market. It regulates access to blocks in a decentralized manner and guarantees order, security, and efficiency.
📡 It is a meritocratic and transparent system where every satoshi counts. One satoshi is the smallest unit into which bitcoin can be divided (1 BTC = 100 million sats). 1 BTC = 100 million sats).
🌐 The sooner you pay, the sooner you confirm.
❓️ What is the UTXO set, how does it work, and how does it change with the mempool?
📶 Stay tuned.
#mempool #bitcoin #btc #sats #user #payment #rbf
https://blossom.primal.net/83577b4f7fae6fd0d43f754a87286e7e9dd7fb2e27cd5fc98e9898bdbba784b0.png

2025-05-28 09:51:48 GMT

🔍 What are UTXOs in Bitcoin?
The UTXO (unspent transaction output) model is at the heart of Bitcoin's accounting system. Unlike traditional bank accounts, Bitcoin does not record "balances," but rather follows a system of inputs and outputs that cancel each other out.
💡 Simple definition:
A UTXO is an amount of Bitcoin received from a transaction that has not yet been spent. It is the digital equivalent of a coin in your pocket: until you spend it, it is an unspent output.
🧾 How does a Bitcoin transaction work?
Every transaction has inputs (previous UTXOs used) and outputs (new UTXOs created).
Bitcoins do not split at the balance level; rather, they are spent in full and reallocated as new UTXOs.
🧩 Main features:
- 🔐 Each UTXO is associated with a public address and can only be spent with its private key.
They are immutable, meaning they cannot be updated. They are consumed, and new outputs are created.
- 🧾 They are single and indivisible; each input must be spent in full.
- 🔄 Traceable: Each UTXO is publicly verifiable on the blockchain.
🛠 Where are they stored?
In the UTXO set, which is a data structure maintained by each full node.
This set contains all valid, expendable UTXOs at a given time.
It is essential for:
- Verifying that a transaction only spends valid UTXOs
- Preventing double spending (spending the same bitcoins twice).
📉 Fees and fragmentation (UTXO management).
Each UTXO takes up space. The more small UTXOs you have, the larger your transaction will be and the higher the fee you will have to pay.
🧮 UTXO optimization:
- Consolidate UTXOs when fees are low.
- Avoid receiving too many fragmented micropayments.
- Manage your portfolio for long-term efficiency.
⚠️ Practical implications:
✅ Pros:
- A transparent, traceable, and verifiable system
- Enables advanced privacy (e.g., with careful input management).
- Forms the basis for advanced features, such as Lightning and coinjoin.
❌ Cons:
- Can become inefficient if poorly managed
- Requires minimal technical understanding for advanced wallets
- Transactions with many UTXOs can be expensive.
🔐 UTXOs and privacy:
Each UTXO is tied to a specific address.
Using UTXOs from different addresses in the same payment can link identities.
💡 Tip: Use wallets that support UTXO handling and input selection, such as Sparrow and Samourai.
📌 In short, a UTXO is a spendable bitcoin.
You receive them from a transaction, spend them in full, and receive new ones.
Bitcoin works as a system of "digital tokens," not as an account balance.
➡️ Understanding UTXOs is essential to using Bitcoin consciously and safely.
❓ What is the Mempool? What is the UTXO set? How do they work, and what changes do they bring?
📶 Stay tuned.
#utxo #bitcoin #mempool #set #tips #fees #management #features
https://blossom.primal.net/4036559db0bfa6f7400f28508102b8854f177117264b941d66d52e3e7448df6d.png

2025-05-27 09:19:33 GMT

🎯 What is a Lightning Network node?
⚡️ The Lightning Network is a layer 2 system built on top of bitcoin to make it faster, cheaper and more scalable. Lightning nodes are the key players in this parallel network: software that processes instant payments off-chain, without writing everything to the blockchain.
🔧 How an LN node works.
- Opens two-way payment channels with other nodes.
- Signs and updates off-chain transactions.
- Requires a full bitcoin node to interact with the blockchain (e.g. open/close channels).
- Must always be online to function properly.
🔄 How does a lightning payment take place?
1. Alice and Bob open a channel with an on-chain transaction.
2. Future transactions take place off-chain, updating the balance in real time.
3. Payments can be routed through multiple nodes (e.g., Alice → Bob → Carol → Dave).
4. At closing, the last signed balance is published on the blockchain.
📡 Types of Lightning Nodes.
1. 🔀 Routing node: routes third-party payments, earns fees.
2.🧍‍♂️Private node: personal use.
3.📱 Mobile node: integrated into simplified wallets (such as Phoenix or Breez).
💻 Main software.
- LND (Go): widely used, easy to integrate.
- Core Lightning (C): highly modular.
- Eclair (Scala): suitable for servers and mobile applications.
- Rust-Lightning: for custom solutions.
⚙️ Bitcoin Nodes vs. Lightning Nodes.
- Verification: full node on-chain; Lightning node off-chain.
- Memory: Full node hundreds of GB; Lightning node a few GB.
- Privacy: full node all public; lightning node more privacy.
- Scalability: full node limited by blocks; lightning node millions of transactions per second.
- Connectivity: full node not always online; lightning node always online.
- Fees: full node variable/high; lightning node few sats.
⚠️ Pros and Cons.
✅️ Pro:
- Instant and almost free payments
- High privacy and scalability
❌️ Cons:
- Channels must be balanced (need liquidity on both sides)
- Not suitable for very large amounts
- Risk of losing funds if backup is not updated
📲 Examples of real-world use cases.
- Mobile Wallets: Phoenix, Muun, Breez
- Merchants accepting BTC via Lightning
- Routing nodes that earn fees by routing payments
➡️ Lightning is the backbone of bitcoin's scalability: fast, cheap, distributed. But as always: Don't trust, verify!
❓️ What are UTXOs?
📶 Stay tuned.
#utxo #bitcoin #lighting #network #blockchain #timechain #node
https://blossom.primal.net/bb9fa3ae561eecf62ffbb661a3eae0b4e207177b67413e798ec7881c347eb2cc.png

2025-05-26 16:40:31 GMT

Hello, Bitcoiners!
I would like to share with you my interview with Atlas21 regarding my dissertation on sustainable Bitcoin mining.🔥🚀
https://atlas21.com/bitcoin-reduces-emissions-and-consumption-the-thesis-published-at-the-university-of-salento/
#bitcoin #btc #energy #nuclear #sustainability #efficiency #enviroinmental #economy #news #research #study #thesis #mining #atlas21 #interview

2025-05-24 12:07:40 GMT

🔒 Who's really in charge of Bitcoin? Full nodes.
🌍 It is not the miners, nor the developers, nor the companies. In Bitcoin, the real power is distributed among thousands of complete nodes, software that verifies every block and transaction according to shared rules. That's why they're critical to the network's resilience and governance.
🧠 Nodes dictate the rules.
- Miners propose blocks, but nodes decide whether to accept them.
- Any node can reject non-compliant transactions or updates. Consensus occurs when the majority of nodes follow the same rules.
⚔️ Fork: when the rules change
- Soft fork = compliant update (e.g. SegWit).
- Hard fork = net split (e.g. Bitcoin Cash).
📌 Real case: in 2017, nodes forced the activation of SegWit (UASF), giving miners a choice: adapt or stay out.
🛡 Defense against attacks:
- ✂️ Censorship? Nodes can reject blocks that exclude valid transactions.
- 💸 Inflation? No block can create more BTC than expected: nodes will reject it.
- 🕸 Network attacks? Nodes filter suspicious connections and protect traffic, even when using Tor or mesh networks.
💰 Nodes guarantee the 21 million limit. It's not enough to "write it in the code": only nodes enforce the limit by checking every single block.
🏛 Political and economic impact
Thanks to the nodes:
- No one can arbitrarily change bitcoin.
- No one can control it from the top.
- No one can violate its monetary policy.
➡️ Bitcoin is resilient because the nodes are sovereign. "Don't trust, verify" is not just a slogan, but an active defense mechanism.
❓️ What is a Lightning Network node?
📶 Stay tuned.
#bitcoin #node #fork #attacks #political #economic
https://blossom.primal.net/27ce87da65e15554ae2c01db77ed55866f0c6abed85a797dc056d9ab48f47e9c.png

2025-05-23 11:09:02 GMT

🎯 How does a full node work?
💻 A full node is the beating heart of the Bitcoin network. It is software that downloads, verifies, and propagates every block and transaction without trusting anyone. Here's how it works:
- 📦 Blockchain database: stores all blocks and the set of spendable bitcoins (UTXO set).
- 🧠 Mempool: stores transactions waiting to be included in a block.
- 🌐 Networking: communicates with other nodes to exchange data, blocks and transactions.
🔍 Each node verifies everything itself:
- Transactions must be valid, correctly signed, and not duplicated.
- Blocks must have the correct proof-of-work, be consistent, and comply with all rules.
- At startup, the node downloads the entire blockchain from 2009 (Initial Block Download).
- It then stays up to date with blocks and transactions in real time.
🔁 Connecting to the network
Each node is connected to dozens of others, constantly exchanging information to keep the network consistent and secure.
🛡 User sovereignty
A full node is not dependent on third parties: it verifies everything itself, protects against errors and attacks, and is the tool to truly participate in the Bitcoin network: Don't trust, verify!
❓️ Who is really in charge of Bitcoin?
📶 Stay tuned.
#fullnode #bitcoin #user #network #blockchain #database #mempool
https://blossom.primal.net/13e487a89bba0f19aecd4071f799da0ad1d7b13d19f56eb2e5f12d032882ea55.png

2025-05-22 11:05:50 GMT

🍕 Today is Pizza Day!
🗓 On May 22, 2010, exactly 15 years ago, Laszlo Hanyecz, a programmer and Bitcoin pioneer living in Florida, exchanged 2 pizzas (original photo at the time) for 10,000 BTC!
💰 At the time, the exchange rate was about $40. It was the first bitcoin "payment" in history.
To date, the dollar value of that transaction would be more than $1 billion!
#bitcoin #pizza #day #laszlo
https://blossom.primal.net/983169eb30f2fe3e59a473d36d2fed2629e843146d3a872f092d77e02f9a90d4.jpg

2025-05-21 09:13:49 GMT

📝 What exactly are Bitcoin nodes?
🗂 1. Full node:
A full node downloads the entire blockchain (over 500 GB by 2025) and verifies each transaction and block according to the rules of the protocol. It:
- Ensures that consensus rules (e.g., double spending, issue limits, valid signature) are met;
- propagates transactions and blocks to other nodes;
- Can be used to validate SPV or Light wallets.
📦 2. Light node or SPV node:
A SPV node (Simplified Payment Verification Node) does not download the entire blockchain, only the block headers. It verifies transactions by relying on full nodes and is often used in mobile and light wallets. Its limitations are that it relies on full nodes for security and does not actively participate in network verification.
⛏️ 3. Mining Node:
This is a node that, in addition to being complete, also performs mining, i.e:
- builds new blocks;
- tries to solve cryptographic problems (proof of work);
- Suggests new blocks to the network.
Large miners use 'mining pools' and sometimes separate the mining function from the validation function, communicating via specific protocols (e.g. Stratum).
📚 4. Archival Node:
Stores the entire history of the blockchain, including UTXO states not required for protocol operation, such as spent transactions and the full history of all issues. It is useful for analytical purposes, blockchain explorers or historical research.
⚡️ 5. Lightning node:
Part of the Lightning Network, a layer 2 protocol built on top of Bitcoin. It:
- Manages two-way, off-chain payment channels;
- operates in parallel with the main blockchain;
- communicates with other Lightning Nodes to route fast, low-cost payments.
❓️How does a node work? What are UTXOs?
📶 Stay tuned.
#bitcoin #spv #node #lighting #network #archivial #mining #full
https://blossom.primal.net/d111ce096dfc0c9931585846ffe5b3f66a66aaeb58f16a4aac7e984d26c6f4ad.png

2025-05-20 09:18:01 GMT

📝 What are nodes? What are they for?
🧠 A Bitcoin node is a device that runs the open source protocol software and participates in the network. Nodes are key components in the functioning of the system, as they
- verify and propagate transactions and blocks
- Maintain an up-to-date copy of the time chain, the public and distributed record of all Bitcoin transactions;
- enforce the rules of the protocol, ensuring that only valid transactions and blocks are accepted into the network.
🧩 There are several types of Bitcoin nodes:
1. Full nodes
2. Light node or SPV node
3. Mining Node
4. Archive Node
5. Lightning Node
🛡 Nodes are the backbone of the Bitcoin network. They not only enable the technical functioning of the protocol, but also:
1. guarantee decentralization, as each node is independent and sovereign;
2. they prevent unilateral changes to the protocol (resistance to non-shared changes);
3. they validate consensus rules, such as
- 21 million BTC maximum;
- Validity of cryptographic signatures;
- Adherence to maximum block sizes;
- validity of bitcoin scripts.
🌍 By 2025, an estimated 20,000 full nodes will be publicly reachable, although the total number could be higher if nodes behind firewalls (non-public) and temporary nodes (connecting only occasionally) are taken into account.
❓️What exactly do the various Bitcoin nodes do?
📶 Stay tuned.
#node #full #lighting #mining #spv #bitcoin #world
https://blossom.primal.net/73e069325edf8f704d1fac3a39ebbcc5610ca7e1104462a9251b2b146fc9720d.png

2025-05-19 11:38:00 GMT

If you don't have Bitcoin, you're already in the minority.
https://blossom.primal.net/cfcabe1a9416799299c651e7d2507fca07c31873d766b7477ff72d5185c9a074.jpg

2025-05-17 12:19:20 GMT

- reply

Is poetry🧡

2025-05-17 08:39:34 GMT

Good morning Bitcoiners! How are you doing?
I would like to share with you some reflections on the program I just watched on "Canale Italia", with guests Gigi Turla and Federico Rivi. During the hour-long program, a brief summary of the Brescia 2025 Bitcare Forum was given, and then some reflections from the audience were broadcast live (live call-in from home).
What emerged strongly from the telephone interventions was the vast amount of misinformation that still surrounds bitcoin. We listened to calls ranging from those who call it a scam, to those who have lost money due to uninformed decisions, to those who do not understand its economic-financial nature, considering it volatile and without intrinsic value, to those who said that their bank has blatantly forbidden them to invest in Bitcoin.
This situation reflects a well-known phenomenon: in an era of free and widespread access to information, false beliefs and confusion paradoxically proliferate, ergo: disinformation. It is crucial, as the guests have pointed out, to rely on competent sources and people to really understand this field.
I invite everyone to reflect on the importance of proper education and dissemination of accurate information to help create a more aware and prepared community, this applies to any discourse.

2025-05-12 19:07:27 GMT

💰 For their work, miners receive two types of rewards:
1. Block reward → new bitcoins created for each block solved
2. Transaction fees → small amounts paid by users to include their transactions in the block
📉 The block reward is halved every 200,000 blocks (roughly every 4 years) in an event known as halving. This reduces future supply, making Bitcoin a predictably scarce and structurally anti-inflationary asset.
⏱️ Bitcoin also has a difficulty adjustment mechanism: every 2,016 blocks (about every two weeks), the difficulty of mining is recalibrated to ensure that a new block is discovered about every 10 minutes. This keeps the output rate constant and predictable.
❗️Attention: Miners are not financial intermediaries. Anyone can participate in mining without authorization from central banks or central institutions. In contrast, traditional intermediaries require regulatory approval to operate.
⚖️ The Bitcoin protocol is an open, distributed and autonomous system where all participants (miners, nodes, users) have an equal say. No central authority. Just shared incentives and distributed consensus.
❓️Who are nodes, what are they for?
📶 Stay tuned.
#bitcoin #protocoll #halving #mining #rewards #fees #difficulty #adjustement #scarcity #permissionless
https://blossom.primal.net/dcd286a2bba65f19f1ba36ca1461ebb8cf2e3838a246c1503277499e27045cf7.png

2025-05-12 11:47:22 GMT

🔐 ₿itcoin is an immutable, transparent, secure and distributed network thanks to the concatenated structure of the blocks that make up its timechain. Each block contains the cryptographic hash of the previous block, making it virtually impossible to alter the data retroactively without compromising the entire blockchain. This mechanism ensures the integrity and resilience of the network.
🔗 The hash is a unique identifier generated using the SHA-256 algorithm, a fixed-length alphanumeric string that securely synthesizes all the data contained in the block. It is the heart of the blockchain's immutability.
⚙️ Within this system are the miners, who use specialized hardware, specifically ASICs (Application-Specific Integrated Circuits), to perform the hashing algorithms. These purpose-built devices are much more efficient than CPUs and GPUs, as Satoshi Nakamoto's white paper points out.
⛏️ Their job? To validate transactions, protect the network and add new blocks to the timechain. In doing so, miners prevent double spending, an inherent risk in digital systems. Without proof of work (PoW), a central authority would be needed to ensure the validity of transactions.
❓️How do miners make money? Why are they doing it? What are halving and difficulty adjustment?
📶 Stay tuned.
#bitcoin #mining #timechain #blockchain #technology #proofofwork #sha256 #asic #miner
https://blossom.primal.net/d96b448caffcb1f4ef44de8792e2d568097234700776fefdedce219d46821de0.png

2025-05-11 22:28:49 GMT

- reply

È stata pazzesca! Complimenti ancora

2025-05-11 22:26:31 GMT

- reply

Totally agree 😂

2025-05-05 15:03:53 GMT

- reply

Presente!

2025-05-03 10:58:33 GMT

📚 Today I had the honor to speak about ₿itcoin (again) at my high school. 2 hours of education for the kids and a wonderful experience for me. Topics such as inflation, fiat currencies, pollution, consumption, supply and demand, cost, price, value and much more were touched upon. It was a very productive and educational day. It is always nice to come back to class and share in a simple way something that has been with you for years and is a passion of yours, great!
🌍 The conclusion you come to is always the same and it's nice when the kids get it, a sign that they got the message: Bitcoin is social.
#bitcoin #pollution #consumption #sustainability #efficiency #enviroinmental #economics #social #finance #inflation #school #fiat #currency #supply #demand #price #cost #value
https://blossom.primal.net/e169da3942fe39d74447c04abef02fba289f4d91ee035cd534936e6f3f9815de.mp4

2025-04-30 18:19:21 GMT

(2/2) Let us continue.
💼 However, these expectations were quickly dashed by the President's emphasis on reducing the trade deficit through protectionist measures, in particular the announcement of "reciprocal" tariffs. This created considerable uncertainty, culminating in a 10% drop in the S&P 500 in just two sessions in April, which led the index to temporarily enter a bear market. Although the administration subsequently issued a 90-day moratorium to review the trade agreements, the market turmoil has not fully dissipated.
🗳️ On the political front, public opinion polls confirm a period of institutional weakness. The president's approval rating stands at 41%, the lowest for the first 100 days of a newly elected president since at least World War II. Only 22% of respondents say they strongly approve of the president's performance, while 45% strongly disapprove, signaling a significant polarization of the electorate.
📜 Another notable element is the extensive use of executive orders: 137 in the first 100 days. This massive recourse to the executive instrument seems unprecedented in contemporary history, clearly surpassing the figures of Joe Biden (45 orders) and Bill Clinton (14). To find a comparable precedent, one must go back to 1933, when Franklin D. Roosevelt signed 99 in the context of the economic emergency following the Great Depression.
⚖️ In summary, the first 100 days of Trump's second term appear to have been marked by high market volatility, political uncertainty and shaky investor confidence. While it is too early to make definitive judgments about the entire term, the economic and political indicators analyzed suggest an overall negative initial impact, both in terms of finance and governance.
📶 Stay tuned.
#Trump #economy #market #analysis #USPolitics2025 #SP500b #presidential #impact
https://m.primal.net/QiiA.png

2025-04-30 11:32:25 GMT

(1/2) Let's talk about the first 100 days of the Trump presidency.
📉 An analysis of the first 100 days of President Donald J. Trump's second term in office reveals a significantly negative picture for the U.S. stock market. Between January 20 and April 25, the S&P 500 Index fell 7.9%, making this period the second-worst in modern presidential history in terms of stock market performance. Only in 1973, during Richard Nixon's term, was the loss greater (-9.9%). This historical context is particularly relevant because it is associated with anti-inflationary policies that anticipated the 1973-1975 recession.
🇺🇸 From a historical perspective, average data from 1944 to 2020 show that the S&P 500 tends to rise by 2.1% during the first 100 days of a new presidency. The largest negative outliers, aside from the Trump case, are George W. Bush in 2001 (-6.9%), Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1953 (-5.8%) and Harry S. Truman in 1949 (-4.9%). At the other end of the spectrum are John F. Kennedy (+8.9% in 1961), Joe Biden (+8.5% in 2021) and Barack Obama (+8.4% in 2009), periods in which expectations of an economic recovery were broadly welcomed by the markets.
❌️ The negative performance of the markets under the second Trump presidency is even more significant when compared to the period between his re-election and Inauguration Day, during which the S&P 500 Index rose 3.7%. This period was interpreted by investors as confirmation of the so-called Trump trade, i.e. the expectation that an administration favorable to deregulation, tax cuts and support for the technology sector could provide a boost to the economy and financial markets.
📶 Stay tuned.
#Trump #economy #market #analysis #USPolitics2025 #SP500b #presidential #impact
https://m.primal.net/QiQT.png

2025-04-29 07:45:24 GMT

- reply

I would certainly panic at first, but after three to four hours I would start to relax, become aware of the facts and start to read a lot and go out for a walk.

2025-04-27 13:55:41 GMT

- reply

"Sound of love"

2025-04-27 13:55:19 GMT

- reply

Prior
#nevent1q…dnym

2025-04-25 09:57:53 GMT

Bitcoin is:
immutable
transparent
secure
distributed
https://m.primal.net/Qchi.png

2025-04-24 16:31:01 GMT

🔍 Before analyzing issues related to bitcoin's pollution, energy consumption, and related environmental and socio-economic impacts, it is necessary to understand how mining works, the figure of the miner, and the architecture of the Bitcoin ecosystem.
⛓️ Mining is the process by which new blocks of transactions are validated and added to the time chain, the public and distributed ledger that forms the basis of the Bitcoin monetary system.
⚙️ This process also enables the creation of new Bitcoins and provides an economic incentive for miners, those who invest their computing resources to contribute to the security and stability of the network.
🧠 The timechain (mistakenly called the blockchain) is a chain of blocks containing verified transactions. To add a new block, miners compete by solving a complex cryptographic problem according to a protocol called Proof of Work (PoW).
🔐 PoW ensures the security of the network by making it extremely costly to change data: changing a block would require redoing all the computation for the previous blocks.
♻️ The problem to be solved, generated by the system, requires huge computational resources, and it is precisely this high energy consumption that fuels the debate about the environmental impact of Bitcoin mining.
📶 Stay tuned.
#bitcoin #mining #education #sustainability #proofofwork #energy #digital #enviroinmental
https://m.primal.net/Qbob.png

2025-04-23 16:10:00 GMT

- reply

That's amazing! To think that at the beginning of the year I wrote that Bitcoin was the seventh most capitalized asset in the world and we were in the 100k zone, now it has climbed so high and we are 'only' at 94k. Crazy!
#nevent1q…jkc0

2025-04-23 12:11:19 GMT

🛡️ As a digital asset recorded on a distributed time chain, bitcoin is not subject to physical degradation. As long as the network exists, it remains immutable and verifiable over time.
✈️ Portability It is extremely high. Bitcoin can be transferred anywhere in the world within minutes over the Internet, without the need for physical transport or currency conversion. All you need is a wallet and a connection.
🔍 Divisibility Each bitcoin can be divided up to eight decimal places. The minimum on-chain unit is the satoshi, equal to one hundred millionth of a BTC, and on the Lightning network, the satoshi can be divided into thousandths, enabling micropayments and fractionalizing value with extreme precision, making bitcoin virtually accessible to everyone.
⚙️ Uniformity All Bitcoin units are perfectly identical in value and characteristics, thanks to the structure of the time chain (blocks, nodes, miners, etc.) and the use of cryptographic protocols that prevent counterfeiting or arbitrary coin creation.
♻️ Fungibility In theory, each bitcoin (or satoshi) is interchangeable with any other. However, some units may be "tainted" if associated with illicit transactions and rejected by certain services or exchanges.
✅️ Recognition The authenticity of each bitcoin transaction is guaranteed and verified by network nodes using cryptographic algorithms. However, the technical understanding of how it works can be a barrier for the average user.
⏳️ Controlled Supply (Scarcity) The total supply of Bitcoins is limited to 21 million units according to a predetermined and immutable algorithm. Issuance takes place through a process known as "halving" every 4 years or so, which halves the amount of new bitcoins injected, ensuring disinflationary and predictable growth.
🌍 All of this and more makes bitcoin a social good.
📶 Stay tuned.
#bitcoin #essentials #digitalgold #money #blockchain #technology #finance #education
https://m.primal.net/QaVd.png

2025-04-23 09:14:59 GMT

- reply

Beautiful words Laura, I agree with you wholeheartedly. You are not alone, like you, I (and many others I guess) find myself in the middle and sometimes it hurts, but you must not beat yourself up. Keep pushing!

2025-04-23 08:59:27 GMT

- reply

Stay tuned to find out how Bitcoin can be a currency in its own right.
#nevent1q…frps

2025-04-23 08:19:33 GMT

- reply

True. On my profile you can find the reasons why Bitcoin is currency, and more!

2025-04-22 11:49:00 GMT

📌 We have seen how a currency must fulfill 3 basic functions to be considered such, and how Bitcoin may be the only cryptoasset that fulfills these premises.
🎖 Store of value.
Bitcoin is designed to store value in the digital space, with a limited supply of 21 million units, making it less inflationary than gold (stock to flow) and often referred to as "digital gold".
🤝🏻 Medium of exchange.
Bitcoin is accepted as payment in a growing number of establishments and platforms, enabling peer-to-peer transactions without centralized intermediaries.
🧾 Unit of account.
Currently, not all prices of goods and services in the world are expressed in BTC: price fluctuations prevent "stable" bitcoin listings. According to The Economist, Bitcoin "works best as a medium of exchange" and has not (yet) established itself as a standard unit of account.
📚 It must also meet operational requirements such as: durability, portability, divisibility, uniformity, fungibility, recognizability, controlled supply (scarcity). We will analyze these shortly.
📶 Stay tuned.
#bitcoin #btc #value #store #scarcity #peertopeer #stocktoflow
https://m.primal.net/QZOZ.png

2025-04-18 16:08:52 GMT

🥇 Bitcoin, the world's leading cryptoasset, has attracted considerable interest both for its economic and financial implications and for its environmental impact.
📈 The exponential increase in the market value of bitcoin has stimulated the expansion of mining activities, leading to a significant increase in energy consumption and associated CO₂ emissions.
♻️ However, recent studies (analyzed below) suggest that the environmental impact of bitcoin may be less than previously thought, and that the asset may have relevant and resilient social benefits.
🏛 Furthermore, it should be noted that the ECB proposed in 2019 to change the name of this type of technology from "cryptocurrencies" to "cryptoassets", which is preferred for various reasons.
📌 The main reason lies in the fact that of the 'currencies', the technologies mentioned do not have the fundamentals, except for bitcoin, which are:
1. Store of value
2. Medium of exchange
3. Unit of account (not completely, but definitely in the future)
❓️ If you are interested in learning more or have questions, leave a comment.
📶 Stay tuned.
#bitcoin #value #crypto #asset #finance #economy #ecb #exchange
https://m.primal.net/QVBr.png

2025-04-17 16:39:37 GMT

- reply

Presente!