I don’t necessarily disagree. Lyn didn’t say exactly what Napier thinks govt would do so I’m guessing what I think is the most common claim: they co-opt a few entities that control a large (and growing) portion of the UTXO set and either outright seize it, or do something else like a forced fork onto “gov chain”.

Maybe that’s not the angle. But if it is, how does the likes of Nostr combat it effectively?

And if it’s not the govt angle, what would it be?

*don’t see

ETFs/Coinbase and Microstrategy at the present time.

I see how our enhanced abilities to coordinate these days help much in the scenario where a government decides to go after these large blocks of UTXOs controlled by a handful of entities.

What precisely is it about improved coordination that negates the financial repression tools which Napier claims will destroy Bitcoin?

I believe we need to make it sufficiently difficult for the government to control large swathes of the UTXO set to avoid what happened to gold, but I don’t quite see how better/faster communication tools help very much there.

It’s really amazing. The interesting thing to me is that I get it now more than ever— even though I run shorter distances and with less intensity than I used to.

I’m wondering if it is down to me skimming more information than ever from Nostr and X, which ultimately gives me more information to work with when in that higher functioning mode.

Total speculation and it contradicts what you’re suggesting to some extent, but it’s interesting to me.

Maybe I’m dumb!

I don’t mind well targeted ads for businesses that I want to support.

If a site’s ads are onerous or low quality, I’m unlikely to return.

There’s the occasional exception where I use archive.is

I think so. I would make two bets about where we’ll be in 10 years and am trying to figure out the implications:

- Block space will be massively more valuable than today, as tools built around digital permanence become more prevalent. Almost all monetary transactions will be fully ‘packed / joined’ with many inputs and outputs, which spam transactions of today don’t need to compete with.

- Mining will be massively more decentralized than today making it harder/more costly to route around nodes.

I dont think the second one matters so much as it relates to spam, as we only need a small minority of nodes to propagate transactions based on likelihood of mining vs a qualitative assessment of what’s inside, in order for it to be mined.