This is the encryption debate part II View quoted note →

This is the alternative to digital cash. View quoted note →

Still thinking about this They’re both attacked, I think the difference is anyone can have fun exercising 2A rights. 4A rights are abstract until it’s too late View quoted note →

Kendrick is him

This is now my pet bitcoin change View quoted note →

This is my pet bitcoin change @note1yx0qf84fk60lrvqx2mxwesvtkrd7xm0vgvy876t6dlzat26j7u6qhjsau

msats…. Never again

mask off

This has been said before but not enough. Do you think we will have digital money someday? True internet currency? If you do (are we going to print bills and make coins forever? Maybe actually), there are two ways to do it. 1) the fed makes a money database (CBDC) 2) decentralized open protocol (Bitcoin) 1 is the naive way to go. The fed makes money now, and has some sort of ledger for the banks it deals with. Just extend that to everyone. The reason why it is naive is the unprecedented power that puts in the hands of the gov’t. Every txn and account balance visible, full discretion over access. The founding fathers couldn’t ever conceive of a way to have that much control. An unelected official could take away the ability for someone to buy food in an instant with no due process. Less obvious, imagine a market regulator having insight into the exact balances, P/Ls of all of the industry players they regulate. You think insider trading / lobbying in congress is bad now? 1 is true and total control. I don’t think most (including in the US gov) really want this? I also don’t think most people understand the implications of 1, especially if it’s packaged as “safe, trusted, just like dollars, fair” 2 is the opposite. Maximum access, no central control, but bad guys will use it. I really liked Natalie Smolenski’s talk at the bitcoin policy summit recently Is there an in between? This is much like the encryption debate— you can’t have backdoored encryption to make sure bad guys don’t use it. The backdoors will be used against the good guys / everyone. Half encryption is no encryption. In a digital currency system, the same principle applies. Bitcoin and lightning built on top of it use cryptography at their core. To try to police or patrol either at the protocol level is to break the things that make them neutral and valuable in the first place. Might as well use the database. This is the fundamental issue we face today. I worry most people won’t realize the importance until it’s too late.

Currently a grand total of 0 currencies are able to be used by 8 Billion people

Expecting Bitcoin to be ready for 8 Billion people *right now* even after 10+ years is pretty wild. The internet only reaches 5.35 Billion currently and it has a 30 year head start

Lightning criticisms like “we can’t get everyone onto lightning” are bitcoin criticisms. If everyone can’t get a UTXO, everyone can’t hold bitcoin. When we feel we’re starting to approach the limits of bitcoin, we will have a lot of reason to make changes

Going from accepting 0 fee btc txns to forcing a minimum of 100+ sats was silly. Give us the range from .0001 to 1 back

We should have always been able to send txns for less than 1 sat / vbyte

We need a 4A lobby that’s as strong as the 2A lobby

Hmm

When you’re using global money there is no longer such a thing as a remittance