Corporations hold a ton of Bitcoin. What does that mean? What does self-custody look like for a corporation and how much of this is in self-custody anyway? Much like for an individual, self-custody should mean exclusive access to spend those coins, or more exactly that only corporation-approved process could lead to valid signatures. Government or criminal raids don't necessarily equal access to keys. For example many tech companies have a process to wipe and/or brick hardware in such emergencies. I suppose this gets to details that wouldn't be widely known like who has access to keys. Is it a custodial service like Coinbase? Is it the c-suite? Some set of crypto-notaries? Plus how many signatures are required from how many keys? Fundamentally, the extent to which these bitcoin treasuries are secure against government confiscation affects whether this concentration is good or bad for Bitcoin.

Terrorists use LLCs? I thought they had their own niche Terror Capitalist entities.

Grocery bill? About tree fiddy.

Breaking: Groceries are now more expensive. Bitcoin accordingly.

Snort is an anagram of Nostr. You're welcome.

Joscha Bach says the seven stages of lucidity need not be followed by an individual in order, yet they are referred often by number.

When I get instant follow after a zap it reminds me that Nostr is highly scriptable and I want to open vim.

Test post from Coracle.

Nostr has a great community with a solid social graph. The protocol has a young and experimental dynamic. Everything is signed. Encryption is easy. Relays are uhhh. How can we replace relays with a structure that is global and attack-proof? How about a DHT plus a Web of Trust for moderation?

When I heard about Simon&Schuster being sold to private equity firm KKR, Cory Doctorow and his book Chokepoint Capitalism was the first thing that sprang to mind. Guess they dynamic is not getting better. https://doctorow.medium.com/private-equity-plunderers-want-to-buy-simon-schuster-3206085d6f20