Found this one at a lawyer's office bathroom

BITCOIN IS DEAD Many will think this just because gold and silver are skyrocketing while the price of bitcoin is “dead.” Many will say that bitcoin failed the “inflation hedge” test or that it is not a “safe haven” and other such nonsense. At some other point I might have agreed, but let me tell you why I don't, and why I think what's happening is good for Bitcoin. (1) Obviously, bankers are attacking Bitcoin from the public perception and its price behavior (which they can manipulate in the short term) and are going to leverage on that. Since they can't manipulate the protocol itself, they manipulate the price (they're experts at that) and public opinion through narratives (they're experts at that too). Since Saylor and the ETFs started, the main narrative pushing bitcoin has become increasingly gay and retarded. Idolatry, getrichquick, Wall Street scams, state lovers, TRUMP SUPPORTERS? WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK. Please, let's get back to basics. (2) We (most Nostr users I assume) are clear that we don't want tourists, we don't want (moon) buyers who come in on the vertical hype and then bring a horrible bear market by selling their valuable sats for less dollars than they bought them for because they listened to some idiot on the other side of a screen. (3) This “cycle” is not seen like others, and that is not necessarily a bad thing. Those of us who are here know why we are here. Whenever we can, we accumulate more subsidized sats in the form of UTXOs and send them directly to our wallets, knowing the value of the economic freedom we acquire. A large part of the ETHOS is low time preference and patience. While we focus on our craft, we save for a better future. This is embodying the teachings of Austrian economics. We already know what is going to happen; what we don't know is when or how exactly. (4) Many people have a perception that there are millions of bitcoin users around the world, based on weak assumptions. The reality is that the actual number of bitcoiners (not people who just own bitcoin) is much lower than most people think. I think Nostr is great proof of this. How many active users are there really? It's logical that a large proportion are bitcoiners, but both are far from being massive, and that's okay! The size of the movement (cypherpunk/bitcoiner) may seem small and hopeless to many, but only if you don't understand that most of the major changes in history were driven by an extremely small group of active individuals. The reality is that most people (+95%) are reactionary, and some of they may join in later, but they don't drive the origins of change. This is simply a slap in the face of reality for many, so that they stop waiting for the things that “have to happen” to happen and get off their asses to make them happen. Change starts with ourselves, our place, and our surroundings, and in that way it will escalate organically as it needs to escalate. We don't need any leaders or bureaucrats to “help” us and define the path; we trust our own ingenuity and ideas and execute them. The greatest danger is that we hand over this monumental network to a bunch of bureaucrats and brats who won't know how to use it properly. Draw the line when you have to, don't be afraid to defend your convictions, fight for what you believe in, build whatever is necessary... What do you think about my points? I'll like to know.

POOR COUNTRIES, RICH POPULATION The biggest difference between “first world” countries and “third world” countries is that in the former, people owe almost everything they “have” (i.e., they have nothing), while in the latter, most people own the little they have. Whether it's some land, a small house or an old car, they may not be the most luxurious, but they are theirs. They had to save up to build/buy them and don't have to answer to anyone else to keep them. The most advanced depend on an interconnected financial system of betting and leverage that can leave them out on the street if they can't keep up with the treadmill they find themselves on. While the poorest are more resilient and freer, they don't have a leash tied to them in the first place, meaning they don't have to work to keep what they have, because they already have it, while they are also more resilient to structural crises because they have probably already experienced them in the past. The former have always lived in reality, so it will not be difficult for them to adapt to it, while the latter have lived in an paper (i.e., consumer credit) illusion that will be hard to let go of. It is like the son of a rich man (paper rich) who becomes poor (stock market collapse) and the poor man who has always been poor: for the latter, it is more of the same, but for the former, it will be an unbearable hell. The other thing is that poor countries are also generally more sovereign because they are poor, that is, they do not import essential goods such as energy and food. On the other hand, rich countries, so confident in their economic capacity, outsource essential production chain processes, adding structural third-party risks to basic subsistence products (mostly food). These are some of my thoughts on this topic today.

Fuck you I wont do what you tell me

Wall street was never capitalist It was always socialist and criminal From the book "the magnet" 1908

If you are not happy just buy a dirtbike

Any music recomendations on wavlake?

What is some of the Other Stuff, you use and/or you are exited about it?

GM ☕️ @The Bitcoin Coffee Guy⚡️☕️