Someone tell Democrats that the solution to their woes is just to vote for Trump. They don't even necessarily need to wash the dye streaks out of their hair.

Some people love obeying. Give them arbitrary rules like, "stand six feet apart".

Sometimes I accidentally follow someone who's into monero - sorry about that, rest assured, I'll block when I realise.

Sometimes say "that's what she said" randomly just to confuse people

There is literally no sexier way to accept sovereign AF Bitcoin payments than running lightning, BTCPay, RTL, Thunderhub, on Parmanode , with Zeus lightning wallet on your phone. Try it on my donation page. just_saying.GIF

Donations – Bitcoin Guides

Daily #WhiteboardNotes

Daily #WhiteboardNotes

If you run your own Bitcoin node, why not also store your own Nostr data? You can with Parmanode, easy AF.

58k again??

There, I said it.

Daily #WhiteboardNotes

Got mad at the wife, so, bought more #Bitcoin, feel good.

Quick morning rant: No matter what... 1) anyone else does with their node, (whether it's -the version they have; the fork they have; if they run one of those sexy Parmanodes all the cool kids have, or the quantity of nodes spun up) 2) or no matter the number of bitcoin others might have... ...if you stay strong, no one can do ANYTHING to change the node you run, which is effectively YOUR CHOICE of the money you have adopted and accept as payment to your wallet. If no on agrees with you, it affects the quality of the money you've adopted, but it can never affect your choice. If the rest of the world adopted a shitcoin (fiat, gold, Bitcoin Finks Vision - doesn't matter which), it would mean the true Bitcoin adoption has gone backwards, not that Bitcoin has changed. They all will have to come back eventually after they get diluted to poverty by whoever the rulers of that version are. No one agreed with Satoshi at the start by the way, but true adoption of a money that no one can control has, and always will, continue to go up, until everyone in the world who hasn't perished, WANTS Bitcoin (not "has", as some will become Bitcoiners beginning in absolute poverty). I didn't make the rules, Satoshi did.

Remember to stack #ƨats arrogantly AF

Parman's considerate driving tips... There's a double turning lane at a traffic light. 12 cars waiting in one of the lanes, 2 in the other! The 12th car is blocking others behind from getting in to the empty lane, and backing up the traffic going straight. Only the first 4 to 6 cars will make across each turning light change. Some people just enjoy lining up and being boosted, farken hell. Don't be like these people; fill up the lanes evenly. Stay tuned for more of Parman's considerate driving tips.

If you're orange pilling a friend who is not going to get off Windows, you can still help them to run a node - Parmanode4Win. Currently it has Bitcoin Core, Sparrow wallet (autoconnects to Core), Tor, Docker, and WSL - all easy to install AF. Well you have them syncing the chain, in the coming days I'll have electrs server and mempool available. You could learn to set it up for your orange pilling adventures later, even if you have no friends at the moment. Go to the website and download the executable, and then double click. C'mon I couldn't have made it any easier.

I am offering 150,000 sats to anyone who can demonstrate a zk-stark working in the following way... 1) I will create a text file with some arbitrary content, encrypt it, and hash the encrypted version. 2) You shall get a copy of the plain text and the encrypted file, and the decryption key. 3) I will pretend to not know the contents for this exercise, for proof of concept. 4) You will create code that can generate a zk-proof that takes these inputs: a) the encrypted file b) the decryption key c) a regex search (or simple grep search if regex too complex) ... and returns a True or False reading with respect to the regex search. 5) The hard part: I will give you a "random" regex to search, you create the proof, and direct me how to perform a verification SIMPLY, on my local Linux computer, with free open source software, and without the need for a shitcoin's blockchain or 3rd party verifier. I HAVE TO VERIFY. 6) The hardest part - I'll need to be shown that there's a clear way that I can reproduce the procedure; if I need to learn a new coding language, that's not a barrier. If I need to build my own polynomial circuit for this very basic zk-stark check, that could take years of work, so no beuno. You can use libraries to build the polynomial circuit, but I must be able to be convinced trustlessly that your computer has honestly performed the regex search, and you know if the document contains the search term, and can do that without revealing the contents of the document or the decryption key. If you do this I agree to paying the bounty and if satisfied, will probably give a tip. I reserve the right to refuse to pay if I detect trickery, shenaniganary, or abuse, eg weaseling out of doing what I intended because of some loophole in the way I structured these terms. This must be a zk-stark proof, not zk-snark. There must be no back doors, and no trusted setup. If I detect trust required, defeating the purpose of a zk-stark, the deal is off... but I may still pay some amount at my discretion; it's hard to know in advance. -------- Tweet from 5 days ago .. After 4 days of math and research, I can demonstrate to anyone interested that #zkstarks is a scam... They claim to remove the trusted setup of zk-snarks (used in the shit coin zcash), but in fact have shifted the trust to the proover who designs the the individual contract (circuit). The verifier can't see the circuit but can mathematically verify that the circuit behaves as claimed. Many hundreds of pages have been devoted to showing how the link between the circuit and the proof is valid, but the very first step is not discussed. "How is anyone to know of the circuit was created honestly in the first place?" The functioning of the circuit is obfuscated mathematically with high degree polynomials, so it could be malicious and the approval must be trusted in how they designed it. For instance, a claim could be made that a particular encrypted document when decrypted with a key that is not seen yeilds a true result. But the malicious actor could instead insert code that gives a true result directly if that same document is inputted. No actual decryption is designed to happen. Then this code is converted to a polynomial, and then expand (low degree expansion) to obfuscate the original code. The verifier then checks that the polynomial behaves as expected, but they've got no way of checking that the correct polynomial has been used. They could enter or check documents that are different to the target, and of course they'll get a false reading in the same way that they would if the key didn't work, but they'll be deceived. While the mathematics works, actual inputs a malicious meaning that the setup is trusted... NZK starks is a scam, bamboozling everyone with mathematics, and hiding the fact If something is simple as: dog shit in, dog shit out And they want to bring this into Bitcoin, pppppfffffftttt FUCK YOU

I disagree

People realise that bitcoin is scarce, right?

I'm here to burst bubbles. Dollar cost averaging is GAMBLING. Here me out... If you regularly buy bitcoin with a component of your paycheck, that's not DCA, that's regular LUM SUM buying. DCA would be if you take a paycheck and spread the purchasing OF THAT QUANTITY of "money" over the time. You withhold buying with it all, and spread your risk over time, so that if it goes down after buying with the first small fraction, you don't feel as bad, because you get to buy more bitcoin at a lower price with your next fraction. In summary of that, you are gambling that the price won't go up over the time you withhold your buying. Because if it does go up you end up with fewer bitcoin, and if it goes down you end up with more bitcoin. On the other hand, lump sum buying is the exact opposite. You're gambling the price will not go down. If it goes down after you lump sum buy, and it always does, you end up with fewer bitcoin. And if it goes up right after you buy, then your gamble paid off. People think that DCA is a hedge but in fact it is not, it is one extreme of a gambling strategy, and lump sum is the other extreme. To correctly hedge you would take any quantitative money that comes to you, and lump some half of it, and DCA the other. Until next time.