That’s a good question. Maybe trolls

Craig Steven Wright

Sichael Maylor Lason Jowery

Peter Todd.

In the United States, I'd estimate roughly 25 to 35% of Bitcoiners work for the federal, state, or local governments directly or indirectly. Possibly higher. You can include anyone that is in any of these professions - Banking - Compliance / Regulatory related jobs - Defense contracting - Finance - Government positions (the ones obviously labeled by title) - Military

Assume all n you'll be ok

Anyone that advocates completely ceding the realm of law fare to the state. ALL means available. This is a fight for humanity and generations. There is truth we should not fixate on the political to the detriment of the technological. We should not RELY on the legal realm. This trade off primarily comes into play where you have very limited resources as an individual. But many Bitcoiners are millionaires many times over. Step the fuck up and use those resources to fight at the legal, technological, philosophical, psychological, spiritual levels. All. Fucking. Means. Fucking. Available. Anyone telling you differently is a fucking spook trying to demoralize/make you complacent. Do not listen.

You really think Government is that smart? I do not -

Just curious, why would you say these two? Are you just being antagonistic? (I lack a sense of humor!)

Saylor has ties to CIA and has openly made statements about bitcoin privacy being a problem and that we need banks to be custodians for us. You can see who Lowery is associated with on LinkedIn. The guy openly trying to prove that bitcoin is a weapon. Not a good idea.

I see where you are going. We just have to disagree. Jason's work at Space Force (I have read Softwar, twice - great read) has the picture of a deer antlers on the front cover of his thesis. This represents the idea that #Bitcoin is antlers for humans. Interestingly, humans are the only species (other than monkeys) that kill their own for property/mating rights (you can add in their political power too - but that's just property rights). Deer fight until the antlers break, and the buck that loses walks away - they don't kill. Even bears don't kill each other. Jason is making the point that in order to have a war (killing others) you need a GAIN in resources or it makes no sense. Bitcoin make it more costly to go to war than to have kinetic war for property rights (gain). This basically makes kinetic war obsolete. He deep dives into cell division, and many other aspects of life to make the point. SO - when you mention 'bitcoin as a weapon' that's not actually accurate. It's a weapon of peace by making property rights indisputable - ELIMINATING the need for war/most other weapons. It's not quite this simple, the book explores deep avenues. But that's the general idea.

I’ve listened to his podcasts and I’m familiar with his theories. There’s nothing novel about what he is saying, humans have always tried to use technology to protect their property. But one thing he fails to explain is how a government can use Bitcoin proof of work. He talks about using physical power to secure data. But how does the dmv, for example, secure data using proof of work? I recommend you read these:

Cypherpunk Cogitations

A Critique of Softwar Concepts

Do the "Softwar" and "Bitpower" concepts make sense, or is this just a compelling story with logical gaps?

Cypherpunk Cogitations

Softwar Thesis Review

A critique of Jason Lowery's thesis on proof of work systems and "bitpower."

Yeah - read it.... "But Lowery claims that Bitcoin creates a replacement for the kinetic power projection game and is a threat to the United States' "business model" of exporting property defense across that world. That's some massive hand-waving and I fail to see how the dots get connected between Bitcoin and everything else..." I think this author is looking for a simple connection - and it's deeper than that. #Bitcoin 'is' connected to everything else as a base layer of money/value/energy. This is the foundation of Jason's theory. I don't disagree with the author that Jason leaves a lot of gaps uncovered. I believe that's the idea of a thesis? In the second piece, after he reads the book, he makes some great points - again, Jason has not (and can't) close all the gaps. The macrochip concept - energy grid as a macro computer - he makes the case they are all independent. He is correct, in the literal sense. But on a more macro sense, 'energy' is a global connected force. Energy is the foundation for all of life, civilization, and required for humans to evolve. It's also the base layer of WAR - which connects everything (sadly). So I think this guy is deep in the details, but off the beaten path. I would liken it to arguing with a flat earther. They may say something like, "Look out at the horizon - it's flat you idot! Why are you so stupid?" Galileo Galilei proved the earth was not the center of the universe. But 'common knowledge' church goer at the time (the churches power actually) did NOT like his thesis - too many holes! And they threw him in prison - the average person believed for many decades the earth was the center of the universe! Galileo died confined! So the debate goes on - I read nothing that would make me discard Jason's thesis. My perspective is mostly from the energy side. I'm an Electrical Engineer by education and worked in the electric utility industry for 40 years.

I get the point you’re trying to make about the flat earth stuff but I will add that people believed the earth was round long before Jesus was born. Humanity took a step back when the church took power. Regarding the other things, lowery refused to even respond to lopps questions or critiques after he read the entire thesis. I don’t find that to be very encouraging. And if the questions cannot be answered and the gaps remain, what did he really accomplish? Proof of work can’t be used to secure government data and I think most people already believe that bitcoin is a peaceful revolution. Not because it will stop war, but because it replaces fiat and makes war more costly.

So much to dissect there. But I think we have beat it to death for a message board! And yes, EVERY single CENTRAL authority/Government War as far back as history goes was funded by printed money (or clipped coins). There are no exceptions. As Government became more centralized and bigger, so did the wars! To Jason's point, the winner often had the technology advantage. Think gunpowder (which is a fascinating history since the major power of the time REJECTED the technology). On your thought about Jason not responding (even though the author did finally read the book), it's very hard to have a conversation with someone about physics if they have not studied physics. Nutrition is another example, it's SO stinkin' complex, it's hard to have ANY conversations! Simple definitely does not work.

Not even the faintest chance.