The linked article argues that modern fiat systems rely on monetary elasticity — discretionary expansion of money and credit — to absorb crises, defer losses, and sustain the system, even at the cost of inflation and widening wealth concentration. Elastic money isn’t just the firefighter — it’s the arsonist with a pension. The same “flexibility” that rides in to rescue markets after every collapse is what pumped them full of helium in the first place: cheap credit, suppressed risk, leverage stacked on leverage, assets levitating while wages crawl. Then when gravity finally asserts itself, the architects of the boom print the antidote, socialize the losses, and call it stabilization. The cycle repeats: inflate, distort, concentrate wealth, panic, rescue — each bailout quietly seeding the next explosion. Elasticity doesn’t just save the game. It rigs the table, deals the cards, and owns the casino. https://www.zerohedge.com/crypto/modern-money-only-works-cheating-if-youre-long-bitcoin-or-not-long-bitcoin-read

This is very insightful: As societies embraced fiat, the global pool of savings did not become defenceless. inflation arrived, but it was hedgeable. equities, property, credit, productive ownership. capital learned how to run. what didn’t reappear was another asset that hedged inflation without introducing credit risk. Gold has of course played that role for centuries. scarce, apolitical, jurisdictionless, created without leverage, owing nothing to anyone. an inflation hedge that was simultaneously riskless. when gold was demoted as a monetary standard, that role was tolerated, not replaced when gold was ransacked between the long years of 1980 and 2011. curious minds looked for an alternative. #Bitcoin emerged inside that gap. not as a rejection of fiat, and not as a tool for managing economic cycles, but as an attempt to recreate gold’s most elusive property in digital form. not merely scarcity, but scarcity without issuer risk. not just protection against dilution, but insulation from discretion. this is why bitcoin’s design is so severe. if the objective were simply to hedge inflation, the world already has dozens of ways to do that. the harder ambition is to build an asset that can sit beneath the monetary system as collateral rather than inside it. https://www.zerohedge.com/crypto/modern-money-only-works-cheating-if-youre-long-bitcoin-or-not-long-bitcoin-read

This freak of nature does have some good insights.

For text messaging, Nostr-native clients like Keychat and WhiteNoise can make sense in high-censorship settings. They avoid centralized identifiers and can reduce some relay-side metadata exposure. However, they currently lack mature voice and video calling features, especially reliable group video calls. Projects like OxChat attempt to add calling via WebRTC-style connections, but that often reintroduces network-level metadata risks such as IP address exposure and traffic correlation. As a result, these implementations are not yet as privacy-hardened or thoroughly audited as Signal’s voice and video system, which includes specific mitigations to limit IP leakage and metadata exposure.

Taking sovereign tech advice from statists is hiring the prison architect as your escape coach.

I don’t take sovereign tech advice from statists. Period.

We agree on the illness. We disagree on the cure. Spam is a problem. Handing a small circle the scalpel to define “legitimate use” is a different one. We’re arguing for restraint at consensus, flexibility at policy, and markets — not taste committees — sorting the rest.

No, I’m not on v30 and I hate junk as much as you do. But don’t kid yourself: v30 is policy, not God’s law — yet letting a self-anointed “legit use-case” committee set defaults can drift into soft censorship. Maybe next illicit use-case would be using Bitcoin for gambling? We have a precedent here. Core v30 raised OP_RETURN policy to 100k + multiples by default; you can still clamp it back to 83. The real monster is centralizing out-of-band miner pipelines if you try to shun demand at relay level.

The implied meaning is stronger than “just filters.” It’s about who gets to decide what Bitcoin is for. Filters are coded by a gatekeeper.

Bitcoin is permissionless. The protocol doesn’t care about your definition of “money.” If miners include it and users pay for it, it’s valid. Nodes choose their own policies. That’s not censorship — that’s markets. #Bitcoin isn’t a bank. It’s a neutral settlement network.

Seems like this interprets protocol properties as designed specifically for long-term government capture (e.g. the mining algorithm, centralization tendencies, early adoption by certain groups). Bitcoin’s characteristics can also be explained by technical constraints, developer preferences, and emergent network effects.

You should go for 2-3 years to Dagestan and forget.

It shows your grapevine score as 67, which means many high roller profiles has blocked you. Probably because you are pro-Palestine. Fuckin bigots. It means you're on the right path — the path of the meek is always the right path. Congrats.

That's the A tier race for ya 🤣

Crystal clear. Hash-rate never grew clean — it was steroid money and boardroom whales stacking ASIC armies with break-evens in fantasy land. Now the bills hit, fans scream, lights dim, and they’re dumping coin to outrun their own burn rate. Let ’em fry. When the halving rolls in, only the lean, wired-in, freedom-driven miners will still be standing in the smoke.

Hashrate is slipping off the cliff as miners fling their #bitcoin like scorching hot potatoes in a wild, self-feeding doom loop of panic and electricity-soaked desperation.

Yeah, we should have let Luke gatekeep that shit.

You know what else would be really bad for Bitcoin? Having gatekeepers to differentiate what is allowed on chain and what is not. Especially fanatical statists taking up theead in this. We need a middle ground.