If Bitcoin is a power law cos its adoption is like a network, then it must be very similar to adoption of the internet. Has anyone done the power adoption curve for the internet and compared it to Bitcoin? #asknostr #powerlaw

🤔 didn’t know this about “Making Money” by Terry Pratchett. From DeepSeek “That is an excellent question that gets to the heart of Pratchett's brilliant economic and social commentary. While **Sir Terry Pratchett never directly used the phrase "Ponzi scheme" or "fraud" to describe fiat currency in a single, neat quote**, he masterfully explored the concept that money is a shared fiction, a collective agreement that only has value because everyone believes it does. The closest and most famous quote that captures this spirit comes from his 2007 novel, **_Making Money_**, which is all about this very subject. The main character, Moist von Lipwig, a reformed con artist, is put in charge of the Royal Bank and Royal Mint. He realizes that the nature of legitimate money is not so different from a scam, just one that everyone has agreed to participate in. ### The Key Quote: > **“It's all about the **glint** in the eye. The **glamour**. The **shared suspension of disbelief**. My word, my *word*, is as solid as a rock. As solid as a rock? **Rocks are just rock. But my word is my bond. My words** ***are*** **money. My words** ***are*** **worth more than metal.** Because they have the **glint**.”** > — Moist von Lipwig, _Making Money_ ### Why This Quote is Relevant: * **"Shared suspension of disbelief"**: This is the core of fiat currency. A dollar bill is just a piece of paper. Its value comes from our collective agreement to treat it as valuable and, crucially, our belief that everyone else will too. This is identical to the belief that sustains a Ponzi scheme until it collapses. * **The Conman's Perspective**: Having Moist, a former fraudster, explain this is Pratchett's genius. Moist sees that legitimate finance uses the same psychological tricks as a con: confidence, trust, and presentation (the "glint" or "glamour"). * **"Worth more than metal"**: This directly contrasts fiat money (value based on trust and decree) with commodity money (like gold, which has intrinsic value). Moist argues that the *idea* of value is more powerful and useful than the value itself. ### The Broader Context in *Making Money*: The entire plot of the book is an allegory for the transition from a gold standard to a fiat system. Moist must convince the cynical, practical citizens of Ankh-Morpork to trust paper money instead of solid gold. He does this not by showing them a vault full of gold, but by being a more convincing showman than the previous, corrupt bankers. He sells them on the *idea* of stability and trust. ### Another Pratchett Work to Consider: *Going Postal* While not about fiat currency, his earlier book _Going Postal_ features Moist von Lipwig running the Post Office and famously reinventing the **"clacks"** (the Discworld's telegraph system). In it, he invents paper stamps and, more importantly, **financial derivatives** and **futures contracts**. The Patrician, Lord Vetinari, observes: > **“You have undoubtedly **invented a whole new way of being wrong**.”** This highlights Pratchett's view that complex financial instruments, much like fiat money, are abstract constructs that can be incredibly powerful and useful, but are also built on a foundation of belief and are therefore vulnerable to collapse if that belief vanishes. **In summary:** Terry Pratchett didn't call fiat currency a fraud outright. Instead, with his characteristic wit and insight, he pointed out that **all money, whether metal or paper, is ultimately a form of trust and narrative.** The difference between a successful national currency and a Ponzi scheme isn't the underlying psychology, but the scale, governance, and (hopefully) the integrity of the institutions managing that collective belief. The "glint in the eye" quote is the perfect Pratchettian expression of this idea.”

I’m a little terrified of AI now. I asked DeepSeek to give me a 7 point plan to combat the threat Bitcoin poses for a large governments Fiat money. And it came up with operation “choke point 2.0”!!!! “Of course. Here is a seven-point plan from the perspective of a large government seeking to neutralize the perceived threat of Bitcoin. --- ### **A Seven-Point Plan to Neutralize the Bitcoin Threat** **Primary Objective:** To protect the state's monetary sovereignty, tax base, and capital controls by systematically eroding Bitcoin's utility, legitimacy, and value within the national economy, without resorting to a technically impossible outright ban on the protocol itself. **1. Strangulation at the On/Off Ramps: Regulate the Exchanges** * **Action:** Enact stringent, mandatory licensing for all cryptocurrency exchanges, wallet providers, and custody services operating within the country. Impose know-your-customer (KYC), anti-money laundering (AML), and counter-financing of terrorism (CFT) requirements that are even more burdensome than those for traditional banks. * **Rationale:** This centralizes control at the critical junctures where national fiat currency (USD, EUR, etc.) converts to crypto and vice versa. By controlling these choke points, the government can monitor, track, and ultimately freeze or seize funds. It makes entering and exiting the Bitcoin ecosystem difficult and intimidating for the average citizen. **2. Erode Utility and Foster Fear: Ban Its Use for Legal Commerce** * **Action:** Pass legislation making it illegal for registered businesses to accept Bitcoin or any cryptocurrency as payment for goods and services. Impose severe financial penalties and potential criminal charges for non-compliance. * **Rationale:** This attacks Bitcoin's core function as a medium of exchange. If citizens cannot use it to buy groceries, pay rent, or purchase goods, its practical utility plummets. It frames Bitcoin as an illegitimate, "shadow" asset, associating its use with illegality and creating fear among potential users. **3. Target the Narrative: A Coordinated Propaganda Campaign** * **Action:** Launch a sustained public relations campaign through state-influenced and friendly media outlets. The messaging will highlight Bitcoin's use for illicit activities (drugs, ransomware, terrorism), its environmental impact (energy consumption), and its volatility as a risk to "hard-working citizens' savings." * **Rationale:** Shape public perception. By controlling the narrative, the government can stigmatize Bitcoin ownership, making it socially unpalatable. This isolates proponents and discourages widespread adoption by the cautious majority. **4. Co-opt the Technology: Launch a Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC)** * **Action:** Accelerate the development and launch of the nation's own Central Bank Digital Currency. Market it as having "all the benefits of crypto" (digital, fast, modern) with none of the downsides (stable, government-backed, legal tender). * **Rationale:** This provides a government-approved alternative that satisfies the public's desire for digital money. A CBDC offers the state *enhanced* control, with programmability, direct tax collection, and perfect visibility into all transactions, directly countering the privacy and freedom Bitcoin offers. **5. Isolate the Ecosystem: Pressure the Private Sector** * **Action:** Apply informal pressure on major banks, payment processors (Visa, Mastercard), and tech companies (Apple, Google) to blacklist known crypto entities. Encourage them to prohibit cryptocurrency purchases on their credit cards and ban crypto-related applications from their app stores. * **Rationale:** This silently severs Bitcoin's connections to the mainstream financial and technological infrastructure without needing a formal law. It further isolates Bitcoin holders and makes the ecosystem clunkier and less accessible. **6. Punish and Example: Aggressive Tax Enforcement** * **Action:** Empower the national tax authority with sweeping capabilities to track crypto transactions (via the regulated exchanges from Point 1). Pursue aggressive and highly publicized lawsuits against high-net-worth individuals and businesses for tax evasion related to cryptocurrency capital gains and unreported transactions. * **Rationale:** This demonstrates the state's power and makes an example of those who try to circumvent its rules. It reinforces that while owning Bitcoin may not be illegal, *using* it to evade the state's claim on profits or transactions will be met with severe financial consequences. **7. Internationalize the Strategy: Form a Coalition of Nations** * **Action:** Use diplomatic channels and international forums (G20, IMF, FATF) to encourage other major economies to adopt a similar regulatory framework. Push for a global set of rules that makes crypto compliance standardized and inescapable. * **Rationale:** Bitcoin is global. A patchwork of laws can be circumvented. A coordinated international front eliminates safe havens and ensures that no major economy offers a significantly more permissive environment, effectively creating a global financial firewall against Bitcoin's decentralized nature. --- **Expected Outcome:** This multi-pronged strategy would not "kill" the Bitcoin network in a technical sense—it would likely persist in a censored, niche form. However, it would successfully cripple its adoption and utility within the nation's borders, rendering it a marginal asset rather than a credible threat to the state's monetary control. The goal is not to destroy the protocol but to **domesticate and neuter it** as a functional tool for citizens.”

Inspired by Darkside, I asked DeepSeek “Can you predict the outcomes from the global financial crisis in 2008, if bitcoin existed as it presently exist with the ETFs and treasury companies”. Answer is fascinating. Of course. This is a fascinating "what if" scenario that blends history, economics, and technology. Predicting outcomes requires considering how a decentralized, non-sovereign, and globally accessible asset like Bitcoin would have interacted with the specific causes and effects of the 2008 crisis. First, let's clarify the key elements of your question: * **The 2008 Crisis Core Problem:** A collapse of trust in counter-party risk within the traditional financial system. Institutions like Lehman Brothers, AIG, and Bear Stearns were found to be insolvent due to exposure to toxic mortgage-backed securities. Banks stopped lending to each other, freezing credit markets. * **Bitcoin "as it presently exists":** This implies: * A mature asset class with significant liquidity (~$1T+ market cap). * Spot Bitcoin ETFs (e.g., BlackRock's IBIT, Fidelity's FBTC) providing easy, regulated access for traditional investors. * Publicly traded companies (e.g., MicroStrategy) and national governments (e.g., El Salvador) holding Bitcoin on their treasury balance sheets. Here’s a predicted breakdown of the outcomes, categorized into likely positive and negative consequences. --- ### Likely Positive Outcomes & Mitigating Effects 1. **A Massive "Flight to Safety" and Store of Value:** * **Scenario:** As trust in banks and traditional assets (stocks, bonds, even some currencies) evaporated, investors would have desperately sought alternatives. Gold famously surged during this period. Bitcoin, with its defined monetary policy (hard cap of 21 million) and independence from any government or bank, would have been a prime candidate. * **Outcome:** We would have seen an enormous capital inflow into Bitcoin, far exceeding the 2017 or 2021 bull runs. Its price would have skyrocketed, potentially years ahead of schedule. 2. **The "Bank Bailout" Trade Becomes the "Bitcoin" Trade:** * **Scenario:** A major criticism was that government bailouts (TARP) saved the banks but not the common people. With Bitcoin ETFs available, millions of retail and institutional investors would have had a clear, accessible channel to opt out of the traditional system *en masse*. * **Outcome:** Instead of (or in addition to) public anger, there would have been a massive societal shift of wealth into Bitcoin. This would have been a powerful vote of no confidence in the central bank-led financial system and a historic adoption event. 3. **Validation of Satoshi's Vision:** * **Scenario:** Bitcoin was created in 2008-2009 explicitly in response to the crisis. The whitpaper subtitle is "A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System." Its entire raison d'être is to be a trustless system that doesn't require faith in intermediaries. * **Outcome:** The crisis would have been the ultimate proof-of-concept. The narrative "You can't trust banks; you can trust code" would have been proven correct in real-time, cementing Bitcoin's philosophical foundation. 4. **A Powerful Treasury Asset for Companies and Nations:** * **Scenario:** Companies like MicroStrategy and nations that held Bitcoin on their balance sheets would have seen their reserves appreciate dramatically while traditional assets collapsed. * **Outcome:** This would have created a stark contrast between "forward-thinking" entities and those stuck with devaluing traditional assets. It would have accelerated corporate and sovereign Bitcoin adoption by a decade. --- ### Likely Negative Outcomes & Amplified Risks 1. **Extreme Volatility and Potential Collapse:** * **Scenario:** While Bitcoin might have initially surged, the sheer scale of a global margin call and liquidity crisis would have hit *everything*. Investors needing to cover losses elsewhere would have been forced to sell their best-performing assets—which would have been Bitcoin. * **Outcome:** Bitcoin would likely have experienced a catastrophic crash after its initial meteoric rise. Its relatively smaller market cap compared to today would have made it more susceptible to large-scale liquidations, potentially shaking faith in its stability. 2. **Intense Regulatory Backlash and Scrutiny:** * **Scenario:** Governments and central banks, desperate to maintain control of the monetary system and contain the panic, would have viewed Bitcoin not as a savior but as a threat. They would likely have blamed it for diverting capital needed to stabilize banks or for enabling capital flight. * **Outcome:** A high probability of severe crackdowns: banning Bitcoin ETFs, making on-ramps (bank transfers to exchanges) illegal, and launching aggressive propaganda campaigns against it. The legal battle would have been fierce and immediate. 3. **Systemic Risk from Correlations:** * **Scenario:** With Bitcoin ETFs, major financial institutions (BlackRock, Vanguard, Fidelity) would have been deeply involved. If the price of Bitcoin had crashed violently, it could have created new, unforeseen contagion. * **Outcome:** The very institutions being bailed out might have been exposed to a new, correlated risk via their ETF products, potentially complicating the rescue efforts and creating a new blame game. 4. **Infrastructure Strain:** * **Scenario:** The Bitcoin network of 2008-2010 was in its infancy. Exchanges like Mt. Gox were primitive and insecure. A flood of hundreds of millions of new users would have overwhelmed the infrastructure, leading to likely exchange failures, hacks, and network congestion, eroding trust precisely when it was needed most. --- ### Summary Prediction: A Dichotomous Outcome The most likely outcome is not a simple "good" or "bad" but a dichotomous one: * **Technological & Philosophical Victory:** Bitcoin's core premise would have been proven correct beyond anyone's wildest dreams. It would have provided a crucial escape hatch for global capital and accelerated its adoption by a decade. * **Political & Regulatory War:** This success would have triggered an immediate and brutal response from established powers. The battle for financial sovereignty would have been fought in the open during a period of extreme panic, not slowly over the last 15 years. **In essence, the 2008 crisis would have been both Bitcoin's greatest opportunity and its greatest threat.** It would have massively validated the *idea* of Bitcoin while simultaneously testing its immature ecosystem and provoking a powerful counter-attack from the traditional system it was designed to bypass. The world would look radically different today, but the path to get there would have been far more turbulent.

Fountain

State of Bitcoin with Brandon Keys • Wall Street Legend Predicts HUGE Bitcoin Short Squeeze! with Darkside2030_ - State of Bitcoin Ep. 208 • Watch on Fountain

In this video, we break down why a Wall Street legend believes a HUGE Bitcoin short squeeze is coming and how it could send the price SKYROCKETING....

View quoted note →

It’s difficult and scary to take responsibility for your money. I had a shocking scare today. I’ve got my bitcoin in cold storage and have the pass phrases stored securely in 2 different countries. I hadn’t checked my bitcoin for about 6 months. I was confident it was safe but today I thought I’d better check things. So I went and retrieved the hard wallets and checked. ZERO Bitcoin. The panic I felt at that moment was awful. My fingers were shaking while I ejected and rechecked. Still ZERO. I was beaten. I just sat there for 10 minutes and without hope I checked again. And this time it was there. I checked again and still there. I must have typed the pin wrong. But it scared the shit out of me. Banks here are custodying btc and I’m REALLY tempted to give it to them (for annual fee of 0.5%). But not yet. I just needed to share this. And maybe get opinions. Be careful out there.

Why is there so much flat earth nonsense on NOSTR and where has it all come from?