AI and robotics will gradually take care of more of our daily routine tasks. Inevitably, this will eventually involve monetary transactions, including the management of some of our wallets and private keys. Just like servants have managed the wealth of royals and nobility of the past, our robots will do so for all humans in the future. This will massively transform how we relate to usage of money. Things like UI of LN apps won’t be as important as it is today - possibly sooner than lots of people realize. Instead - the robot will be the UI we interact with. The wallet is just a protocol that the robots communicate with, and this means that the wallets can instead be designed to maximize security and privacy, even sacrificing some degree of usability.

Based oldies like the Warren Buffetts and Charlie Mungers who refer to crypto as ”rat poison” are basically toxic bitcoin maximalists who just haven’t realized it yet.

Bitcoin tx fees - ”The last tax” In a hyperbitcoinized world where money and state are separated, Bitcoin transaction fees will emerge as the last form of mandatory payment, replacing traditional taxes. The reason is the following. As governments lose the ability to print money and rely on national debt, the inefficiencies inherent in centralized government and the public sector will become transparent. Frankly - the money printer can no longer be used for cover up. This transparency will lead to a gradual privatization of various areas, and financial incentives will favor privatization which eventually eliminates the public sector all together. Consequently, the payment of transaction fees on the Bitcoin or Lightning networks will be the sole mandatory fee for participation in both local and global economies. Hence - it will be the last tax

If bitcoin were to claim a certain percentage of all global assets tomorrow, and we assume global assets are worth 500 trillion USD, the equivalent value of one bitcoin would roughly be worth the following: Bitcoin claiming 1% of global assets = 1 BTC surpasses 238,000 USD Bitcoin claiming 5% of global assets = 1 BTC surpasses 1,2mil USD Bitcoin claiming 10% of global assets = 1 BTC surpasses 2,4mil USD Bitcoin claiiming 20% of global assets = 1 BTC surpasses 4,8 mil USD Bitcoin claiming 30% of global assets = 1 BTC surpasses 7,1 mil USD Bitcoin claiming 40% of global assets = 1 BTC surpasses 9,5 mil USD Bitcoin claiming 50% of global assets = 1 BTC surpasses 11,9 mil USD Each jump on the ladder can happen quickly. ”There are decades where nothing happens; and there are weeks where decades happen”

Decades of inflation is not that prices of goods and services increase - it’s that the fiat currencies are bleeding to death

We should focus more on measuring the price of goods and services in BTC rather than looking at the ”bitcoin price”. The former is a sign of a bitcoin standard mindset, the latter a sign of an fiat investing mindset.

Money should be stupid simple - that way it’s more compatible with more of humanity

Crypto people have a bias rooted in the fiat economy when they argue that the future will consist of lots of cryptocurrencies. The mere term cryptocurrency implies that there are several currencies and it tells about the bias of the person using the term. In fact, the term is not even mentioned in the bitcoin whitepaper. In the fiat era, the existence of multiple currencies was rooted in the nation-state system and the trust-based monetary systems it fostered. People placed their trust in currencies tied to their culture, language, and land. As a result, numerous fiat currencies emerged, each serving the specific needs of individual nations. This multitude of currencies reflected the diverse nature of human societies and their varying levels of trust in centralized institutions. The digital economy, in contrast, operates within a decentralized and trustless framework. At its core, the internet is a binary world of zeros and ones, devoid of geographical or cultural boundaries. This decentralized nature eliminates the need for multiple currencies. In fact, a proliferation of cryptocurrencies in a decentralized economy would hinder its growth, resulting in a fragmented economic landscape. The future digital economy will not be a replica of the fiat era, with a multitude of cryptocurrencies competing for dominance. Instead, it will be built upon the decentralized and trustless principles of the digital realm. The fact that the internet emerged alone rather than as a multitude of internets provides strong support for the theory that the same will happen for digital money. Bitcoin only - there is no second best.

The 5-dollar wrench attack is similar to how bitcoin relates to advanced robotics and AI. It’s not the most technologically sophisticated action, nor the most intelligent. Yet it’s a perfectly orchestrated way of using brute force in the physical sphere to achieve a real world objective.

Are there mobile BTC/LN-wallets apps that also have built in a bitcoin and LN node capability (pruned node) within the app? If not, why? Wouldn’t this be possible with modern mobile phone hardware? And even more so in the future as hardware gets better over time?

Saying things like ”I Love the Blockchain, Just Not Bitcoin.” It’s like saying that you are fascinated by the eye technology - not the human.

There are lots of examples throughout history when ”puritan” believers were frowned upon by the establishment. They argued that the puritans should not be as toxic or as close minded as they were, often driven by the dangerous centrism bias. The established view was that ”things are complex” and that it’s ”too simplistic” to argue the way the puritans argued. One example is Hitler. Lots of politicians underestimated Hitler and his party, while thinking that the concerns raised by some about the Nazi ideology were simplistic or alarmist. The masses viewed the Nazi Party as a passing phase or a reaction to economic instability, rather than recognizing its potential for radical transformation and authoritarianism. Peculiarly in present day, we often see the beliefs of the puritan believers as given things - the once ”simplistic ideas” have become mainstream.

There is an argument to be made that the fear of an over-leveraged world economy is overrated. While it is indeed true that the global debt-to-gdp ratio is higher than ever - it doesn’t mean that it is an entirely bad thing. One could argue that debt is just another word for trust. After all - to issue debt, you have to trust your counterparty. In other words - we are at record debt levels but also record trust levels. In a way, it is a natural thing to see with the rise of the internet. There is more information available than ever before, thus we can make more well-informed decisions on important mattters. It also leads to a situation where we can afford to trust others, since we generally speaking have more knowledge available. Is it a bad thing that we have more trust among individuals and businesses than ever before?

I bet miners are happy right now