kagi is actually good though

Primal got all the capital and promotion. Multiple orders of magnitude more people got told about it. But Amethyst has all the users, indicating it has multiple orders of magnitude user retention rate. We were told repeatedly that all the centralization and custodial compromises that Primal was making (arguably against the spirit of Nostr) were for user retention. But what the market actually wanted was privacy by default like Amethyst has!

Is it any wonder that these people are from the same cliques that spent $130M trying to shove Lightning down our throats while getting Bitcoin to reject RingCT/fungibility, tokenization, and working with Tether (which now account for nearly 100% of all real world uses of blockchains?) Even if they aren’t malicious, their track record is just so catastrophically bad that I think that the only rational choice is to assume malice.

This is the exact opposite to what most people mean when they say “separation of church and state”. That does not mean that they are like separate branches of the government. It means that the church has absolutely nothing to do with governance.

Your claim here seems to be arguing that the more the Church lorded power and authority over government, the more separated they were from it. Which, to me, seems paradoxically nonsensical.

Tyndale* sorry

It was hardly separate if Henry VIII had to beg the papacy for a divorce (and be denied). Also the Church operated as a fifth column of government by encouraging its adherents to seditiously sabotage any government which it asserted did not have the divine right of kings. If it was separate it would not have delegated divine authority by implication through blessing the rule of monarchs.

The Church at that point was extremely corrupt and bound up in secular matters of governance and finance by too many means to describe outside the medium of tedious literature. While I don’t like the endless gaudy heresies which Tyndall and Luther spawned, Luther’s criticisms of the Church and their hand-rubbing friends were surely deserved and just.

“Let’s make bitcoin less useful as money in hopes that it will deny privacy to the government!” With this attitude, Bitcoin will never be money.

Yes, Bcashers also attempted to hijack control of the Bitcoin network by convincing people that they could “vote” by controlling more nodes (insanely wrong, Bitcoin is defined by what chain has done the most proof of work). They whipped up discontent and tried to give a mob of ignorant social media users influence over the development pipeline. So the way knots is operating is both rhetorically and operationally familiar. Absolutely another Hearn situation, to the letter.

and even then, I think in the age of AI your wife’s attorney will probably shortly ask Claude to look at the blockchain and replicate all of whatever ChainAnalysis has going for it.

traditional European societies did things to women like wrap their mouths in an iron cage called the scold’s bridle or the branks. And Roman tradition held that if your wife removed her veil it was grounds for divorce.

there is no real privacy in coinjoins if your adversary has any significant amount of resources. They are trivial to correlate. Coinjoins are only useful if your adversary isn’t powerful, like say, you are hiding your transactions from your wife or something.