It's not an everything bubble yet. Gold and Bitcoin are undervalued, not part of that bubble. Gold is the next bubble to burst. It'll happen too in the next 10 years. Bitcoin is much easier to confirm than gold. The amount of paper gold will make gold collapse in the next 10 years. #bitcoin

The goal is to be in service of each other. That was always the goal.

I'm mind blown with the amount of people on the left that despise people on the right, in the US. Was watching for example this video: What am I missing here? Is it to destabilize government for some kind of socialist/communist revolution? Is it intentional, non intentional? What do you think? Why is there so much violent hate for Trump? It's hard to understand from the outside. #politics

You're not your wealth, not your body, your personality, your ideas. You are that ball of light, good intentions and good actions that bring light to the world. Just keep shining wherever you are.

When does the economy collapse and people can actually read about what is money? #politics #bitcoin

What I'm more mindblown about is the reactions to Charlie Kirk's death. The reactions. I've seen people that I speak often with, that seem like normal people, be happy about this. A run of the mill moderate Christian conservative, into free-market, etc. Absolutely nothing special about this guy. Probably half of America is like this. And he's Hitler and deserved to die? Why, because someone told you so? I'm cutting off some people from my life. I want to surround myself with real people with actual values. A lot of people are completely brainwashed by the most ridiculous of things. It's like Covid, you don't know them until you do.

I was just thinking. Nostr might be really small and an echo chamber of Bitcoiners. But you know what, at least it feels human. X, or really anywhere else, including Reddit and Discord, on the other hand, feels like people do NOT like each other at all. It's like there's no really love for each other in any way possible. It's a very negative environment. People weren't made for this kind of psychological environment.

New nations states, that much better serve the needs of their people, will be born in the next 10 years. The current problem is people are fighting to take control of the **current** nation states when they should be working to create the **newer** nation states. This is perhaps the biggest problem with communist, marxist, socialist ideology. They try to take control of the existing power structures, instead of creating new ones.

There's a lot of confusion right now. Here's what I think will always work in all scenarios: 1. Move to a rural place, town, region, etc. Ideally a region suffering from rural depopulation. That's the first step to sovereignty and a better future. Rural depopulation is happening **everywhere** in the world and it won't stop. I think that's the biggest opportunity for peace we have. Forget about cities, cities are battlegrounds, places of conflict. And it's from these places that new systems, communities and countries will be born. There's quiet a lot of stuff we can control. We should focus on that. #philosophy

One last post about the Core vs Knots thing and specifically about the Core argument that it keeps "Bitcoin more decentralized". Do make up your mind if you think Bitcoin wins with this or not: --- 1. What the pro-change argument says Removing the OP_RETURN limit supposedly: Reduces UTXO bloat (because people stop hacking around the limit with fake pubkeys). Keeps relay decentralized (so data-heavy users don’t have to rely on private relay networks or mining pools). This means smaller miners can still compete, because they’ll see and include these transactions via the public p2p network. So the pitch is: this helps decentralization by leveling the playing field. 2. Where the critique comes in Now, if you zoom out and ask: Does this help Bitcoin as a monetary network? The answer is more complicated. Yes, technically it avoids some centralization pressures. But what are we protecting here? Not payments. These OP_RETURN use cases are almost entirely non-monetary (protocol metadata, bridging data, sometimes NFTs). So the change is less about “helping Bitcoin as money” and more about “making Bitcoin friendlier to non-monetary protocols.” In other words, the real beneficiaries are projects like Citrea, RSK, token layers, cross-chain bridges, etc. 3. The trade-off On one hand: You do remove some hacks and improve node efficiency (prunable OP_RETURN vs. forever-bloated UTXO set). You do lower the entry barrier for smaller miners by keeping relay public. On the other hand: You’re opening the door for more non-monetary data in blocks, which may raise fees for ordinary payments. You’re implicitly incentivizing Bitcoin’s use as a data layer, not just a monetary settlement layer. 4. The deeper question So your instinct is right: the real debate isn’t “do smaller miners benefit?” — that’s a secondary technical point. The real question is: 👉 Do we want Bitcoin to be optimized for neutrality and broad use cases (including inscriptions, bridges, zk-rollups)… 👉 Or should it stay laser-focused as a monetary network, where extra data is discouraged even if that hurts some projects’ relay convenience? ✅ Conclusion: The “smaller miners” argument is partly valid (technically true, it levels the field), but it’s not the core issue. It’s more of a framing. The heart of the matter is what role Bitcoin should serve: If it’s a neutral ledger, then yes, relaxing OP_RETURN helps. If it’s a monetary network, then this is a distraction — you’re prioritizing non-monetary protocols over Bitcoin’s payment efficiency. --- Neutral is different than monetary network. That's the core of the argument. If you want a truly neutral network use Bitorrent!!!!! Cheers!