@Dean
No relay list published yet.
Recent Notes
It is truly wild how many bitcoiners still don’t know the different between node relay policy and bitcoin protocol consensus…
Its also wild how many people think bypassing relay policies is totally fine and cool.
❤️2
I set up a projector by the fire pit for nostr:npub1hu3hdctm5nkzd8gslnyedfr5ddz3z547jqcl5j88g4fame2jd08qh6h8nh
She absolutely loves it.
https://blossom.primal.net/74dc5cb7fa33f8652422247fa96a32c80c...
Lol, master of engagement bait ❤️ well done sir. Love a good fire.
Oof. The vibes were too high. I hope you built what you wanted to build before the rug.
https://blossom.primal.net/33820db18403498ec43c8a9984b27298619720dfb29de78198695a739597f563.png
Is it really that much better? Seems like usual Anthropic MO. My guess is this is just bullshit hype, in collusion with the US Gov ahead of their IPO
1
The only sane reason for home mining is non-KYC sats.
Yep, but if you have to pay for the hashrate in KYC sats you still have a problem
Answering Your Questions About Bitcoin Home Mining
https://blossom.primal.net/f088f8ada87adc883c9817589722ccfbc13be3ed79ef7aa0f172f0b154f8eb8c.mp4
Totally agree that avoiding KYC is about personal safety but unfortunately the tax man thinks Bitcoin is about tax evasion. So needing to purchase hashpower with Sats does present a problem.
Those sats were probably purchased on a KYC exchange. If you then spend them on hashpower the tax man is going to probably assume you still have them because you didn't sell them on a KYC exchange. Sure you will say you sold them but if audited you will show receipts for what you spent the sats on. There is no way they believe you don't have 100% and some more sats earned through the mining than you started with. In reality you have some small % less. So sure the new sats are in a wallet address that is not KYC'd but the taxman will assume you have as much or more bitcoin than you really have. So it might as well be KYC bitcoin.
Still a worthy endeavor for the cause but I would be interested in ideas to manage the presented issue.
Those sats were probably purchased on a KYC exchange. If you then spend them on hashpower the tax man is going to probably assume you still have them because you didn't sell them on a KYC exchange. Sure you will say you sold them but if audited you will show receipts for what you spent the sats on. There is no way they believe you don't have 100% and some more sats earned through the mining than you started with. In reality you have some small % less. So sure the new sats are in a wallet address that is not KYC'd but the taxman will assume you have as much or more bitcoin than you really have. So it might as well be KYC bitcoin.
Still a worthy endeavor for the cause but I would be interested in ideas to manage the presented issue.
Social media these days isn't that social anymore. I suspect it's not just the fact that there's a bigger influencer culture. People just have fewer meaningful friends. Sadly, one of the results of CO...
I feel like most of the actual social interaction via tech has moved to messenger apps, WhatsApp etc. In some ways thats good. But I do think that the more distant social connections, such as family that you are not as close too, old work colleagues etc are missed out. But perhaps that's as it should be. We are not meant to have an infinite social graph including everyone we ever met.
for what it's worth, im still running bitcoin core v28.0.0
But v30+ and LibreRelay exist and they need a response. Sitting on older versions of Core does not help or in any way assert a dissaproval of v30+
1
Rather than choosing their tribe based on shared principles, most people just reprogram their principles around whatever their tribe is doing.
Did people really have an alternative prior to the internet?
1
🤔 actually... That makes sense. I admit, I never looked closely enough at how inscriptions work to know this... How do they figure they own them if the sats are unspendable? How would they go about...
I probably was being a bit facetious by saying they burned them as they technically can still spend them (which is how they move the ownership of the inscription) but the transaction fee would already be more than the 1000 sats in the utxo so from a monetary sense they burned it but not from an NFT sense. If they really think someone attributes some value to owning the inscription that person might pay some money, making up for the high relative transaction fee. Same point stands though.
New Soft Fork Proposal Being Censored?
https://blossom.primal.net/2968af50836f9f1b3a58865ed2604522d60e4c99361bf8668f77b6a1a28d15ac.mp4
@Comte de Sats Germain can you really call it stealing. No one becomes a new owner of those Sats and the original owner already burned them. What they think they own is the inscription data etc, but really they are expecting us all to pay for its preservation forever.
1❤1