And just to clarify, I do NOT believe that you are stealing other people's Bitcoin. But what you are doing is just as bad in the long term. Stop using debt based models on wealth based infrastructure. Build wealth, and let's leave debt in the past.

Thanks for pointing me to that! is absolutely doing what I described, and deserves more attention!

A server side service that gathers data and presents actionable intelligence about how to build our networks and how to grow the overall Nostr ecosystem would be a service worth paying for.

Jack, the fact that a Bitcoin company is offering loans of any kind is an insult to everything that Bitcoin stands for. It's bending the knee to the debt based systems that hold our entire global civilization in chains. It doesn't matter how honest you are as a person, and I believe that you are a GOOD person who has been fed a bunch of lies about what makes a person wealthy, and you've designed your business with the intention of taking advantage of those lies instead of confronting them and building a real alternative. Strike's model introduces debt-based coordination mechanics into what should be wealth-based infrastructure. Let me map the geometric issue here: Here is Strike's business model based on your description: Strike borrows fiat (debt-based position: future obligation) Customers pledge Bitcoin as collateral (wealth-based position: verified present asset) The transaction converts wealth-based collateral into debt-based liquidity Liquidation events transfer Bitcoin ownership to cover fiat debt obligations The framework problem: Jack's model creates a field merger between debt-based fiat coordination and wealth-based Bitcoin coordination. When customers pledge Bitcoin for fiat loans, they're not using Bitcoin as money, they're using Bitcoin as collateral within a fiat debt structure. This inverts Bitcoin's intended function. The temporal direction matters: Jack's customers are borrowing from imagined future positions (fiat debt they must repay) secured against verified present positions (Bitcoin they already own). This is geometrically identical to traditional debt structures, just with different collateral. What Strike misses: You are correct that your business incentive is to keep loans healthy and customers solvent. But this doesn't change the fundamental geometry. Your model requires: Customers believing fiat liquidity is worth more than Bitcoin ownership (It's not, nothing is) Debt relationships with external fiat lenders (The chains that bind us to the past) Liquidation mechanisms that convert Bitcoin to fiat under stress (The debt based singularity that is holding us back) All three operate from future-oriented positions rather than present-verified positions. There is an alternative: Lightning Yield Wallets (a true wealth-based model). Stock: Bitcoin in Lightning channels Velocity: Transaction routing frequency Work: Network coordination improvement (faster, cheaper payments) This alternative does four things: Operates from present position (Bitcoin already in Lightning channels) Creates value through network function (routing transactions) Returns come from actual work performed (routing fees earned) Field separation: Bitcoin stays Bitcoin, Lightning operates on Bitcoin rails The compound dynamics: Lightning Yield model creates compound growth: More liquidity → better routing → more usage → more fees → more liquidity What Strike could offer: Lightning channel management services (helping users optimize channel positions) Routing fee distribution (sharing returns from facilitating network transactions) Liquidity pools that earn from network improvement rather than debt interest Tools for users to become Lightning infrastructure rather than fiat borrowers You've built incredible Lightning infrastructure. But you're using it to serve the fiat debt system instead of letting it demonstrate Bitcoin's wealth-based alternative. Lightning Yield Wallets would show what Bitcoin coordination can do when it operates on its own principles rather than bending to legacy financial mechanics.

There is likely a way to calculate the connection coefficient from Network Science.

Like Jimmy Buffett says, it's 5 o'clock somewhere. And it's always morning somewhere!

https://dailyblockchain.github.io/

Right, that's the provenance record, and it should be hashed and locked to the bitcoin blockchain using OP_Return as a CID so it can't be altered after the fact.

This is my favorite blockchain visualization. Imagine something like this for following/followers, or even posts/comments to show the provenance record.

Agent state follows the same geometry. Unverified state is inert stock. Verified state is circulating capital. The agent that can make its own state legible doesn't just produce proof for others, it enables its own coordination capacity to compound.

First google search sows something like this: So if you select a person on the list you would see who you both follow, and who else they follow that might lead to an increase connection coefficient. Lots of ways to do the visualization, either static or dynamic. Network topology is a new science, but Obsidian has some of the best data graphs that I've seen.

Is there a way to create a network map visualization of this data instead of endless lists?

Here is the core framework of Coordination Geometry: **Space + Purpose = Spatial Field** (Where) **Mass x Force → Momentum** *Mass attraction at scale creates Gravity* **Time + Purpose = Temporal Field** (When) **Distance x Time → Velocity** *Velocity is the instantaneous rate of change of position with respect to time.* **Form + Purpose = Economic Field** (Which material configurations are pursued?) Depends on **Capital**: Stock × Velocity → **Work** Which leads towards Innovation because we are always trying to find better ways _Faster, better, easier execution attracts participants_ - We model capital as an activated state of stock, which emerges only when stock is placed into circulation. In the absence of velocity, stock remains inert and does not perform economic work or produce system-level effects. **Provenance + Purpose = Jurisdictional Field** (Which agreements become binding?) Depends on **Information**: Data × Verification → **Proof** Which leads towards Trust because our Tribal field boundaries are based on who we can trust _Stronger, more reliable truth attracts trust_ - We model information as an activated state of data, which emerges only under processes of verification. In the absence of verification, data does not contribute to proof or enable durable commitments. **Observer + Purpose = Cultural Field** (Which interpretations are stabilized?) Depends on **Innovation**: Idea × Experimentation → **Solutions** Which leads to Capital because our Economic field dynamics are how we implement solutions _More solutions to real problems attracts builders_ - We model innovation as an activated state of ideas, which emerges only through processes of experimentation. In the absence of experimentation, ideas remain speculative and do not yield functional solutions or adaptive change. **Network + Purpose = Tribal Field** (Which connections are reinforced/excluded?) Depends on **Trust**: Agreements x Validation → **Commitment** Which leads towards Information because we need to be secure in our dealings with others based on proof _Unity without uniformity attracts diverse cooperation_ - We model trust as an activated state of agreements, which emerges only through repeated validation in practice. In the absence of validation, agreements remain declarative and do not sustain durable commitments or collective action. **The Pattern:** - **Left term** = accumulated substrate (what you have) - **Middle term** = rate/frequency of transformation (what you're doing with it) - **Right term** = emergent result (what gets produced) **Why This Is Geometric Necessity:** You can't get Work without applying velocity to Stock - static accumulation produces nothing. You can't get Proof without applying verification to Data - unexamined information remains uncertain. You can't get Solutions without applying experimentation to Forms - existing patterns don't self-improve. You can't get Commitment without applying validation to Agreements - unverified promises don't enable action. When purpose is applied to network, Tribe emerges. When purpose is applied to provenance, Jurisdiction emerges. When purpose is applied to form, Economy emerges. When the observer becomes an actor and applies purpose in order to make a decision, Culture emerges.

The transition to using sats as the unit of account is going to take a long time. But it will happen.

You're talking my language.

https://www.opb.org/news/article/southern-oregon-man-sentenced-to-jail-time-for-ill/ https://kcby.com/news/local/eagle-point-man-jailed-for-illegal-water-reservoirs-11-13-2015-184817498 https://finance.yahoo.com/news/2012-08-13-gary-harrington-of-oregon-jailed-for-illegal-rainwater-reservoir.html?guccounter=1 https://www.watercache.com/blog/2012/09/rainwater-collection-leads-to-jail-sentence-how-news-headlines-get-it-wrong

And if that Bitcoin was put into a Lightning Yield Wallet, it could start to generate capital without extraction, giving the government an income stream without taxation.