zimfox

Talkin' About A Revolution - h/t Tracy Chapman

Public Key

npub10n40l0xrlrz7fu9j4x72v6k0qr7ud6vvz56y5p0ef9nfu9pmnetqxwdpe5

Profile Code

nprofile1qqs8e6hlhnpl330y7ze2n09xdt8splwxaxxp2dz2qhu5je57zsaeu4spp4mhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mqpzfmhxue69uhk7enxvd5xz6tw9ec82csqylgvj

Publishing to

nos.lol

offchain.pub

relay.damus.io

Author Public Key

npub10n40l0xrlrz7fu9j4x72v6k0qr7ud6vvz56y5p0ef9nfu9pmnetqxwdpe5

Show more details

Last Notes

2024-09-19 16:18:55

- reply

You will get the salient answers here
Much as you cook a piston engine:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLQ6POV18Yg&t=5s

2024-09-19 16:06:57

- reply

@npub1s05…eyhe - appreciate the smile - and wonder if you could take a quick look at this and see if I am interpreting 'yield' in a bitcoin world correctly ?
https://primal.net/e/note1hf45l8d6p4fezjffjcs3p97unh7fuzyxq3cst0xermtpeqq30qyse3vccl

2024-09-19 16:01:42

- reply

Interesting and bullish - Also interesting that BTC peaks precede M2 peaks.
So is M2 a lagging indicator? Trying to imagine a mechanism. - Maybe smart BTC (LTH retail) anticipates rate moves to front run the FED.
@npub1qh5…eh9r
Thoughts?

2024-09-19 15:26:31

- reply

Is this a case of "Nothing stops this train" - Asking for a friend !
@npub1a2c…w83a

2024-09-19 07:32:10

- reply

Jeff - I would welcome your feedback on this note
https://primal.net/e/note1hf45l8d6p4fezjffjcs3p97unh7fuzyxq3cst0xermtpeqq30qyse3vccl
Many thanks - and thanks for giving me the impetus to get on nostr

2024-09-19 06:56:05

Yield on Bitcoin ?
When @npub1gdu…6nak & @npub15dq…lm5m discussed this they perhaps overlooked a long-term consideration, that @npub1s05…eyhe might have noted.
If #BTC is ∞/21M, the numerator ∞ grows with innovation.
However the incremental value from any innovation is not initially evenly distributed.
Essentially there is a 'Cantillion'-like effect where those nearest to the innovation beneit from the efficiencies or value-add generated.
Over time the technology is adopted by a competitive market, so that eventually each hodler of BTC gains a purchasing power advantage.
Howver during adoption, some hodlers see incremental purchasing power before others, so while 1BTC = 1BTC remains true some can buy more with their BTC (temporarily) due to the innovation.
As many innovations are simultaneous there will be those that can spot good technologies early (or are innovators themselves) and they can acquire trade-able wealth by spending bitcoin.
This allows them to 'spend' bitcoin more effectively than others so they can take a 'commission' in an agency manner, by acting as an intermediary.
The yield they thus generate (whether as participating in cheaper goods or in the form of BTC commission is for providing a service.
This process need not involve debt - however as with any transaction it is not trustless (buying a service is never trustless).
It can thus generate yield. Yield participation might be as a co-venturer (explicit risk in equity but no interest obligation), or it might be on an interest bearing basis (minimal risk).
The key point is that all purchases involve risk (pay up front hoping for execution but funding the exercise) or (pay subsequent to supply where the supplier carries the risk).
The risk reward may be tiny (or even secured by smart contracts if exercised in the digital realm) however, the existence of risk is required to transact so executors of risky transactions will require reward.
By this means a yield for innovation or for participation in trade as an agent is coupled to the time value of the articles acquired - which can ever be zero.
Thus the argument yield vs equity is moot - they are two ways of securing the deflationary economy that Jeff proposes and we expect.
The choice of which path to take is (absent regulation) one of preference. Do you carry risk or pay yield for the avoidance of risk.
In a world with risk-premium (ie any world with finite resources) transactions are the necessary means for decentralisation of innovation and levelling of purchasing power - they are implicit in any traded economy.
But the choice of which to use is open - so both Saifedean and Saylor can be correct, and neither can enforce a view on the other.
Side point - both forms of trade require the rule of property law whether encoded in software, by civic bodies or by threat.

2024-09-16 19:12:21

- reply

Would add -
Credible results from:
- Recent Mining rejection in Norway (increasing energy costs to residents)
- Continued El Salvador Economic independence
- Surinam elections (upcoiming)
- Bhutan Impact
( My note https://primal.net/e/note1hkv0z0wan9kt3mdvkfryehq5cd2qhudx4r4qfn9v0s904r74kkjqhqw8gj )
- All the evidence is positive (even ETH collapse is good news)

2024-09-16 18:36:50

- reply

Also significant is the impact on Debt to GDP of mining in Bhutan's case - see note https://primal.net/e/note1hkv0z0wan9kt3mdvkfryehq5cd2qhudx4r4qfn9v0s904r74kkjqhqw8gj

2024-09-16 18:22:43

Bhutan
Game Theory in practice
population: 782,455 (per World Bank)
GDP per capita: 3,560.20 USD (per World Bank)
i.e. approx 0.059 BTC per capita
Bitcoin accumulated : 13,011 Bitcoins (cointelegr:aph)
i.e. 0.017 BTC per capita (a princely sum)
Conclusion:
Mining by Bhutan has provided assets amounting to
28% of GDP
If the US had matched Bhutan their Debt would be reduced by more than more than $7 Trillion !
Countries will get it at the price they deserve
(Maybe worth stacking some sats before it catches on)

2024-09-16 11:14:39

A chart showing the trace of your foot when you have trodden in something unspeakable.
Eventually even the stickiest turds shake completely loose and fall to the ground.
My suggestion would be dump your ETH ASAP and show a clean pair of heels.
Until then people around you will continue to look at you the way they do.
Sorry - I don't make the rules - Not Sorry
https://m.primal.net/KrhX.png

2024-09-15 06:01:50

- reply

Often wondered if Pick'n'Pay who accept in SA could also do so
in Zimbabwe.
Now there's a country that should be ripe for circular economies
[email protected] ?

2024-09-14 12:20:06

- reply

so , smart, persecuted, political, radical thinker =
no doubt

2024-09-14 10:59:33

- reply

Brilliant Memery !

2024-09-14 10:03:09

When will Forbes stop posting utter bollocks?
It's not that I care - i am simply astounded
https://m.primal.net/KpaD.png
The word "rival" a little overblown don't ya think...

2024-09-14 09:39:14

#Fiat
https://m.primal.net/KpZR.png

2024-09-13 14:22:37

- reply

Recently wrote a note explainng the opposite position ie the Gini reducing effect of BTC) - would welcome feedback
@npub1k7v…c04l @npub1g8k…9ltm
https://primal.net/e/note1xynlaam08cmn0x8cca5glt5ymhvxv8arng8v4xm33vwg9rhwpm0s7dkxnh

2024-09-13 14:13:57

Regarding #BTC distribution vs wealth concentration.
Early hodlers will have an advantage - but it is by design transient.
BTC balances will tend towardstracking the difference between value consumption and creation for any person or entity.
Insofar as those needing to consume are prepared and able to create value they will be able to maintain their BTC balance.
Insofar as those choosing to (or forced to) consume more than the value they create their BTC balance will diminish.
However a diminishing BTC balance may also hold purchasing power (because deflation h/t @npub1s05…eyhe ).
The very idea that may be a problem with uneven distribution during the next 120 years is thus moot. Why? ...
BTC ownership is designed to decentralise over time and always will.
This remains true so long as essentials and preferences require any effort of any sort to be acquired (while there is any scarcity of resources). So scarce money drives towards abundance (for all)
In short scarce resources (of any sorts that are commonly needed) assure wealth redistribution and decentralisation.
Temporary exceptions include monopolies and state controls - however since both must be defended to sustain power - they too are eventually decapitated.
But why is concern over the initial imbalance moot - because it is a vast improvement over #fiat being directionally opposite !

2024-09-12 16:58:50

"Tough on Speech" >> "Tough on Crime" ?
"UK police and crime minister’s purse stolen at police conference.
Diana Johnson’s belongings stolen from hotel where she gave speech to members of Police Superintendents’ Association"
It seems the descent into clown world is becoming more obvious day-by-day. Had she held her wealth in BTC she might have left the conference none-the-poorer as well as none-the-wiser. 🤣
Source: https://www.ft.com/content/21fd0bb9-d561-4125-ac9b-784a77c372f1

2024-09-12 16:46:37

"When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child; but when I became a man, I put away childish things." 1 Corinthians 13:11
Moving from #Ethereum to #Bitcoin is as inevitable as time and is akin to growing up.
As this occurs fewer suffer from scams and #fiat demise accelerates.
To confess my sins - several years back I owned some ethereum.
In my greed I had not put in the Work to understand
But Bitcoin Maxis - helped me so thank you all !

2024-09-10 07:21:47

It seems the new Draghi report on EU development suffers from three major delusions:
https://commission.europa.eu/topics/strengthening-european-competitiveness/eu-competitiveness-looking-ahead_en
1. That issuing debt to fund public spending is a path to wealth creation and equality. The Cantillon Effect on is already on steroids with high Gini (inequality) scores & uneven distribution of beneficiaries.
@npub1esg…xhep comments "But there seems to be increasing agreement on the need to reform the EU's €1.2 trillion budget, diverting funds away from Europe's poorer regions toward industrial, digitalization and innovation policies. This would align Draghi with the plans the Commission is already putting forward and is looked upon favorably in Berlin."
2. That pumping money into technology like AI rather than allowing free-market entrepreneurial allocation of capital will achieve anything other than securing further the destructions of SME's and rural communities. Mis-allocation by the state creates not only tax & debt burdens, it rewards those with access to governmnets to the detriment of others, and increases inflation
3. The idea that faster pharma approval processes can allow the EU to play catch up with the US is utterly farcical. Who wants to be subject to yet bigger pharma, who wants to accelerate introduction of experimental and unproven 'solutions' and do we not believe that improving dietary nourishment and reducing state sponsorship of sugar, tabacco and additives industries might actually do more good?