makeasnek

makeasnek , 3 days ago (edited 3 days ago)

Bitcoin transactions happen at the “speed of light” (~27:00) REALITY CHECK: As Bitcoin has grown, transactions have become slow. It’s in fact why many people do not accept it for purchases anymore.

Bitcoin is the same speed it's always been. Blocks happen every 10 minutes. The transaction is transmitted at the speed of light but final settlement requires a block. Pay a high fee? Get in on the next block. Want to save on fees? Maybe it takes a few blocks for your transaction to go through. If you use Bitcoin lightning (a scaling layer built on top of Bitcoin which moves transactions off-chain but secures them on-chain), transactions take under a second for pennies in fees. Fees are much, much lower than credit card, paypal, or other similar competitors. You could send a billion dollars in a single transaction and pay $1.50 on main chain, or you could send $5 on lightning and pay <1c in fees. Lightning has been around for 5 years now, it works, I use it regularly.

Bitcoin cannot be diluted (~27:25) REALITY CHECK: Bitcoin is always being diluted until it reaches its hard limit.

The supply of Bitcoin, 21 million coins, is known and has always been known. It can't be diluted beyond that point.

Nobody controls the network (~28:25) REALITY CHECK: If someone were to own 50% or more of the network’s compute power, they could control the network.

Nobody owns 51% of the network. Even such an actor can't print extra BTC or force money to move without the appropriate private key. The best they can do is temporarily delay transactions while burning north of a trillion dollars in energy and equipment doing so. Which is why nobody has ever done it.

Bitcoin’s hard limit is likely very dangerous for the network (~29:00): Once the hard limit is reached, it is unclear if people will keep pumping computing power at it. If the creation of new Bitcoin is no longer allowed, it is possible that transaction fees will need to be raised to compensate miners.

Given that fees have continued to increase with time, this seems like not a problem. It's not "dangerous", it's part of the design. If hashrate drops, it drops, but given that fees and hashrate have continued to grow despite continually minting less coins, it's not really a problem.

Bitcoin’s lack of rules allow for massive amounts of fraud and prevents effective taxation (~29:25): While the video paints a cute picture of financial freedom, the reality is that Bitcoin allows for fraud on a world scale and does not allow for sales tax because of the way that anyone can have a cryptocurrency wallet without disclosing their identity.

Anybody can have a cash wallet without disclosing their identity, yet they still pay taxes. Bitcoin's rules prevent the kind of fraud where the value of your money is printed away via supply inflation of central banks or "currency restructuring" on the global scale by the the world bank. People pay taxes because they think it's the right thing to do and/or because the government has guns and makes them. Either way, if you run a company, if you are providing goods and services, you have a place you can send somebody with a gun and enforce those rules. All the companies currently paying taxes would keep paying taxes if they used Bitcoin.

makeasnek , 5 days ago (edited 5 days ago)

In a time of rising political instability and distrust of institutions, institutions will turn more and more to censorship and surveillance. We need decentralized, censorship resistant networks to fight back. #nostr is one such network, so is #tor, #freenet, #i2p, etc. And yes, #lemmy #mastodon and #activitypub too.

makeasnek , 8 days ago

There are many open source wiki softwares: zim, dokuwiki, etc.

makeasnek , 9 days ago

Is there a system that can get information to someone, maintaining anonymity for the sender the whole way through? Like having an open drop box where you’d be able to put whatever documents you want into it.

Yes many journalistic organizations have secure drop-boxes for this purpose. You have to either trust that their drop-box doesn't record your IP address/other info OR use an anonymity system like Tor or I2P to make sure whatever they record doesn't reveal your identity.

makeasnek OP , 10 days ago

How to contact your MEP. We beat this bill last time, we can beat it again https://www.europarl.europa.eu/meps/en/home

makeasnek , 10 days ago (edited 10 days ago)

Actually, tipping on social media posts are an excellent use for Bitcoin. I regularly tip on nostr, it works well, I wish lemmy had it too. Good luck enabling transactions that complete in under a second, globally, for less than a penny in fees, with any other system. And without requiring you to hire an absolute team of lawyers to setup accounts and manage liquidity and make deals with foreign banks to backstop that liquidity. Oh and don't forget about counterparty risks, chargebacks, currency conversion, and long settlement times! Bitcoin solves that all magically for basically free.

makeasnek , 9 days ago

As somebody who:

• Uses nostr (and prefers it)
• Uses AP via Lemmy & Mastodon (and likes it)
• Knows what AP and Nostr are and how they work and the pros/cons of the two network designs are

I also found this site confusing AF. It sounds cool and interesting, probably? I can't tell lol. Is it a network bridge operating at the level of a relay? Is it an app you can use to connect and post/read to/from both networks at once? What the hell is it?

makeasnek , 9 days ago

It's done off-chain because on-chain would be expensive and slow. On-chain takes 10 min and $1.50-$15 in fees depending on the day. Lightning takes < 1 second for < 1 penny in fees.

Lightning transactions are secured by the base chain, so you're not at risk of losing any funds. The transaction data is "off-chain" because there's no reason for it to be "on-chain".

makeasnek , 9 days ago

Nostr is an open protocol. Plenty of questionable people have contributed to Linux, I still use the OS. Tor was made by an alleged rapist. I still use Tor. Open protocols are sometimes used or made by nasty people. Lemmy and email are "censorship proof", they are both good protocols. Lemmy used to be 100% annoying tankies, but as it grew so did the diversity of the userbase. Nostr is going through the same thing.

You choose who you follow, so you choose who ends up in your feed. For the "public square" areas (trending tweets etc), relays set their own moderation policies just like lemmy, that feature is identical. Find a relay that suits your moderation preferences. Most nostr apps can automatically filter out anything related to crypto/nsfw/politics/other less popular topics and prompt you to do so. If something slips through you can easily click ban and move on.

Tips are a cool functionality. On one social network, content creators don't have an opportunity to get paid for the content they post. On the other they do. Which one do you think will attract the most content creators? My bet is on the second. I like being able to send tips to people who write good posts. But it's an optional feature, you don't have to use it.

makeasnek OP , 11 days ago

These laws are being passed by politicians who generally don't understand technology. What they will achieve is a reduction in privacy and liberty for every citizen in the EU and easier methods to clamp down on dissent. Just because it's not technically perfect or difficult to implement fully doesn't mean it's not a threat. It's one step closer totalitarianism, and what's stopping totalitarianism is everyday people, one step at a time, battling it back.

makeasnek OP , 11 days ago

Good point about the article date, but it is coming up for a vote this week https://www.patrick-breyer.de/en/council-to-greenlight-chat-control-take-action-now/

makeasnek OP , 11 days ago

🫡🫡🫡🫡🫡

makeasnek OP , 10 days ago

And it also shows that states can pay for things without the need to collect taxes for this, for example we saw this during COVID, when sizeable amounts of money were created to give an impulse to the economy and to the people who temporarily lost their income sources

And surely printing money doesn't cause inflation right. Value isn't free. If you have the same demand for a currency and increase it's supply by 10%, it's going to cost 10% more of that currency to buy any given item.

makeasnek OP , 15 days ago

Almost ready for it’s prime time I think. We just need a bit more on the UI/mobile app friendliness to make it shine for all.

Yep, been using it for a few months now and it's getting really good. Not quite as polished as mastodon (as least in the app I'm using), but still very fully featured.

makeasnek OP , 15 days ago (edited 15 days ago)

Lemmy is "uncensorable" and offers identical moderation abilities in the "public square" aspect. E-mail is "uncensorable". Uncensorable does not equal unmoderated. It means if you want to publish something, nobody, not the even the government, can stop you (though they can throw you in prison but that's outside the discussion of protocol). It doesn't mean anybody has to choose to listen to what you publish. It does not mean relays have to include you in their list of public tweets. Relays can pick what tweets/etc they show. They can choose what goes through their relay. What they can't do is stop you and another user from using the protocol to DM each other. As long as one relay allows your traffic through, the traffic will flow. They also can't stop you from tweeting, they can just choose not to show your tweets. If I want to follow somebody, frankly, it should be no business of a relay operator or the government or anybody to prevent me from following them, just like it should not be the business of the government to decide what books I am legally allowed to read. By building networks which are "uncensorable" we can guarantee that it remains not their business for future generations. So that they can live as free, or freer, than we do.

The internet, as a structure, is "uncensorable". This is good. Power should be decentralized. The whim of a government shouldn't dictate how the entirety of the internet operates, and it can't. People in power love censorship, it is to their advantage that we are not able to organize among each other using common communication platforms.

makeasnek OP , 15 days ago

DMs aren't as relevant in Lemmy so I get why securing them isn't a priority, but in Mastodon or any twitter clone it seems like a relevant feature I'd like to have some security/privacy with. Instance admins, and anybody who breaks into their server, being able to see all DMs seems like a security flaw that should be engineered away. Even Facebook, the place with the worst privacy, has E2E encryption (or so they claim, who really knows)

makeasnek OP , 15 days ago

Finding good people to follow has been a challenge for me both on mastodon and nostr. But I find just posting and seeing who likes my posts and then following them has got me a decent feed curated at this point. And searching hashtags for topics I'm interested in.

There are some bridges so you can follow mastodon users on nostr and vice versa, but it's not quite the same. We're still pretty early adopters on both platforms at this point.

makeasnek OP , 15 days ago

It definitely started as mostly crypto bros, kinda like how lemmy was 100% tankies, but it's gotten better. Lots more human rights activists and scientists and even just regular people on there now. A lot of human rights/privacy activists/orgs are joining up to it after nostr got some promotion at their conferences. Ultimately your feed will be who you follow so luckily you're in control of that. The default settings for most nostr apps even include a filter to remove anything crypto, NSFW, and other controversial topics related.

Still very early days for all these platforms.

makeasnek OP , 15 days ago

Why do we even need relays in the first place?

To store message content. To hold message content if you send a message to an offline contact. To handle getting things across networks. To work around NAT etc. To moderate "public square" type features (ie trending posts). Many reasons.

What if one relay is on clearnet and the other one is on Tor?

No problem, relays can communicate cross-network. They relay things between each other so traffic will find a way through as long as one node speaks to both networks.

What if relays I use are not rechable by my contact, that lives in censored country like China and can only connect to relays in there?

As long as there is a relay path between you and your contact, there is no issue. Relays can be run through Tor and other anonymity networks which are very difficult to distinguish from other forms of encrypted traffic.

Why do we even need relays in the first place?

makeasnek OP , 15 days ago (edited 15 days ago)

Okey, so relays can pass message to other relay? Didn’t know that, so thanks.

Relays currently don't talk to each other. But users are typically connected to multiple relays and publish simultaneously to multiple relays. Likewise, a user pulls in data (tweets etc) from multiple relays. My client is connected to ten. So to give you a more accurate answer to your question, to DM another user, you and that other user need to share a relay. If you are crossing networks (such as clearnet->tor), this means one of those relays needs to talk to both networks. If you want to follow a particular person but aren't normally connected to a relay they are on, your client can connect to a relay just to get content from that particular person. All of this is handled automatically, of course.

But then, why not use network like Yggdrasil? Which would be basically like Nostr, but can relay any TCP/IP packet for any app, instead of just Nostr notes.

Taking a cursory look at this, it sounds more like a general routing protocol not something that is specifically designed to relay message content or other formatted data (ie you build your apps on top of it, it's just a protocol for packet delivery). Nostr could conceivably run on any base routing protocol like Tor, I2P, or Yggdrasil though I don't know of any specific implementations either way. As long as the relay has a way to resolve addresses and send data to them over TCP it should be fine. Hadn't heard of Yggdrasil yet thanks for letting me know about that I'll do some more reading later.

makeasnek OP , 15 days ago (edited 15 days ago)

Still some of those, as with any social media platform. I have come across a few objectionable things, I just blocked and moved on. But you pick who you follow so you pick who shows up in your feeds. Each relay has their own moderation policies, so (like Lemmy), you can pick relays which suit your moderation preferences (which effect the "trending notes"/public square section). Most nostr apps by default upon install will ask you if you want to automatically filter out crypto/nsfw/foul language/etc. I picked at random and didn't enable many of the filters.

makeasnek , 15 days ago

No, but if a linux distro implemented a local-only version of this, I would be interested in using it.

makeasnek , 15 days ago

My memory isn't perfect, it would be nice to have a second set of eyes, and I could describe things to it aside from knowing the exact words. "What was that website I visited within the last six months where I played an online game that was like snake but different?" or "What was that cryptocurrency i was researching which was touting it had perfect forward secrecy?" "Who was I emailing about the football game" etc.

makeasnek , 19 days ago (edited 19 days ago)

We need more censorship-resistant, private, decentralized communication protocols. We need them to be widespread enough that lawmakers see censoring/controlling them as technically impossible and politically unwise. That means they need to be easy to use for the average person so we can get sufficient adoption. Donate to your software of choice, that's how it happens.

This is kinda how Bitcoin is. Even if a nation-sate wants to "ban" it or attack the network, the network is gonna keep working and doing its thing (technically impossible) and they will piss off a bunch of voters and/or other keys to political power and potentially lose out on businesses and jobs building in this sector (politically unwise). The CCP tried to ban Bitcoin some years ago, did not work at all, and the network wasn't nearly as strong or large as it is today.

makeasnek , 22 days ago (edited 22 days ago)

Downvote this guy all you want, but this is an incredibly true point. For 15 years, Bitcoin has maintained a distributed, uncensorable ledger, the question is, can we use similar ledger tech to store archive.org? Wikipedia is a single point of failure, so is Archive.org. So is the library of congress. We could easily store all the text content of wikipedia on chain that's under 100GB, along with IPFS pointers to media content. Long-term, humanity needs a resilient censorship-resistant system to store our collective knowledge and history. These systems, when sufficiently large, are uncensorable and incredibly difficult to exercise undue influence against or shut down. Ask anybody whose tried to get a judge to enforce a judgement against the bitcoin blockchain lol. And they can survive quite well major disruptive events like wars, natural disasters, and even widespread network disruptions. Blockchain can also solve the spam problem that plagued early P2P systems like Gnutella/Ed2k/etc. Everybody moved to BitTorrent because we could trust custodians (trackers and indexers) to curate lists of valid torrents. But that can be decentralized now.

There's over a dozen different blockchain projects working on the "file storage problem", some of them have very interesting proposals, at least one of those is going to emerge from the smoke with something that will replicate archive.org's current role, but it might be a few years before that happens. Already, we have blockchains which offer "decentralized file storage marketplace" that competes pretty well with current file storage providers (AWS etc), and some of them have been running for years.

makeasnek , 22 days ago

There's no reason to store the data on chain. Chain stores the metadata and pointers to the files (IPFS, torrent/magnet link whatever). Chain administers how many copies etc should exist and enforces those rules. Filecoin etc have already successfully done this.

makeasnek , 23 days ago

Let your MEP know their voters care about privacy. These efforts have been defeated before, it just requires vigilance. Your letter can be as simple as "I care about privacy". That's all you have to write.

https://www.europarl.europa.eu/meps/en/home

makeasnek , 23 days ago

Let your MEP know their voters care about privacy. These efforts have been defeated before, it just requires vigilance. Your letter can be as simple as "I care about privacy". That's all you have to write.

https://www.europarl.europa.eu/meps/en/home

makeasnek , 23 days ago

Let your MEP know their voters care about privacy. These efforts have been defeated before, it just requires vigilance. Your letter can be as simple as "I care about privacy". That's all you have to write.

https://www.europarl.europa.eu/meps/en/home

makeasnek OP , 25 days ago

It's always the same bullshit when they want to take away your rights:

• "Protect the children"
• "Foreign influence" or "spies"
• "Misinformation"
• "Stop Terrorism"

makeasnek OP , 25 days ago (edited 25 days ago)

They'll start by saying lemmy is spreading "disinformation" or "foreign influence" or "harming children" or whatever their excuse of the day is. Then legislate lemmy apps out of the app stores and go after lemmy server operators or users.

Not saying lemmy couldn't survive as a network, the point of the meme is the dangerous precedent set when people support things like a TikTok ban and say the government should be able to regulate speech or access to speech in that manner. The government shouldn't be able to tell you what you can say or think, who you share those thoughts with, or what media you consume. It's a human right to think and speak and be able to listen to others speak. And unfortunately, for different reasons, both the left and right are cheering on its erosion.

makeasnek OP , 25 days ago

True. Impossible to fully censor. Easy to "censor enough", force out of app stores, and deem illegal while being cheered on by the left and right because they both somehow think it's in their interests, having abandoned the idea of free speech somewhere along in their ideological trajectory. Just like with TikTok ban or the Digital Services Act.

makeasnek OP , 25 days ago (edited 25 days ago)

Look, I get it, I wouldn't give a shit if TikTok imploded tomorrow and went out of business. I don't use it. Actually, I would cheer on TikTok's implosion. It's a cesspool. However:

"First they came for the xxx and I didn't care because I didn't use or like xxx"...."and then they came for me or the thing I liked or used there was nobody left to defend me"

makeasnek , 25 days ago (edited 25 days ago)

The government controls it and they use it to gradually decrease the portion of supply your hard-earned money represents. They aim for 2-3% inflation in a "good year". That's the nice countries, ask any Argentinean how they feel about who controls that money printer. Monetary inflation mostly impacts the poor and middle class who have more of their net wealth in cash whereas rich people have their money safely stored in assets like stocks or land. So the government controls the money printer.

Unless you use Bitcoin. Then the protocol (nobody) controls it. And it's controlled to never make more than 21 million BTC. No person, even if they had a trillion dollars, even if they bought every Bitcoin in existence, even if they had 1000 guys with AKs, no person could make Bitcoin print an extra BTC it wasn't intended to print. Or spend money that they didn't have the private key for. That's a money printer I can trust. It's faithfully done this for 15 years without a single hour of downtime, bank holiday, or being hacked and has a market cap that places it in the top 20 countries by GDP all while experiencing continual growth and adoption. But it's a fad right? That has no purpose? A scam? And on year 16 you'll finally be proven right?

makeasnek , 25 days ago (edited 25 days ago)

Not really, and miners have fantastic financial incentive to remain honest. It's not altruism. In terms of the attack you are talking about (51% attack) Nobody can amass that much computing power and certainly not quietly, good luck acquiring enough ASICs to do it, let alone enough energy. You'd need your own fab for them which means designing your own ASICs (specialized devices for mining which are orders of magnitude more efficient than regular computers) or stealing designs for them. You're already into the billions of dollars right there with having your own fab. You can't buy even half of the processing power you'd need on the open market. A 51% attack is absolutely insanely expensive to do and logistically impossible at this point. And even if they could, the absolute best they can do is temporarily delay transactions or do a double-spend (spend the same BTC twice). They can't spend money they don't have the key for and they can't print extra Bitcoin as all other nodes would reject those transactions as invalid. Doing a double-spend makes no sense because the only benefit of doing so is getting something else in exchange for that BTC. If I'm going to trade say.. 1 billion dollars of oil for your BTC, I'm gonna wait for a few blocks of confirmation, even assuming I could transfer that much value that quickly. And whatever you trade has to be more valuable than the cost of a 51% attack which is probably north of a trillion dollars at this point depending on how you do the math. Plus, you know, the legal/extralegal/diplomatic/etc consequences of your actions depending on what you did the attack for.

The attack isn't a one time thing, your delay only works if you keep attacking. The second you stop, the chain reverse to the "true main chain". A 51% attack has never happened successfully against Bitcoin and never will at this point. Even at the nation-state scale, Bitcoin is tied in enough to international markets at this point that attacking it could easily cause an international bank run/financial collapse and massive diplomatic problems. And all you'd prove is that you wasted an inconceivably large amount of money to attack a system that picked back up right where it started a few minuted, hours, or days later. Because unless you intend to continue your attack and energy use forever, that's exactly what would happen. Meanwhile, you've pissed off every voter, hedge fund, state retirement fund, business, bank, national treasury, international organization, charity, and legislator who has any sort of exposure to Bitcoin.

Some back of the napkin math for anybody interested https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/18salm9/the_economics_of_a_hypothetical_51_attack_on/

makeasnek , 26 days ago

I use lightning on the regular. Transactions confirm in under a second, fees often less than a penny. Works incredibly well. For custodial wallets (less privacy but you can connect to your bank account to buy/sell BTC and they are as easy to use as venmo) check out Strike. For non-custodial wallets, Phoenix is great and super easy, for maximum privacy use Zeus but it's slightly more complex than Phoenix.

Lightning, like Bitcoin which it is built on, provide pseudonymity not anonymity. Understand the difference and look into it if you're curious. Still vastly better than credit cards, banks, etc when it comes to privacy.

makeasnek , 26 days ago

You have solved what you have direct control over, the next step is things you have indirect control over like the policies of your school or government. Get engaged civically. Vote and advocate privacy in your community and to your elected representatives. Ask businesses if they will accept forms of payment which provide greater privacy than credit card like Bitcoin lightning or Monero.

makeasnek OP , 3 months ago (edited 3 months ago)

Commercial transactions -

Aaah, the kind of transaction that most transactions are?

Operated by providers

Aah, so any business which accept crypto must KYC every one of their customers. This makes accepting crypto especially burdensome, which is half the point of this legislation in the first place.

So non-commercial transations are fine, as are crypto transactions to non-custodial wallets.

Unless you're using the wallet to buy or sell something. You know, the thing people use money for.

Why does the government need to have every transaction reported to them? Crime is bad because it causes harm. If harm is being caused, that means a person or entity is causing that harm. That means there is evidence. Follow that.

Police have more surveillance and crime-detecting tools than at any point in human history. Nearly every category of crime, particularly violent crime, is on a decades-long downtrend. We all travel with GPS monitors in our pockets. We all use credit cards instead of cash. We all are recorded by CCTV 90% of the places we go. We don't need to give them more financial surveillance because 'crime'.

makeasnek OP , 3 months ago (edited 3 months ago)

Yep. Unfortunately both the left and right in the US seem to have free speech in their crosshairs one way or another. The right with "don't say gay", their book bans, and war on drag, the left with the TikTok ban, wanting the government to be able to define and regulate "misinformation" on social media, etc. The long-term protectors of free speech like the ACLU have even done a pivot away from free speech cases because they perceive them as unpopular.

makeasnek , 3 months ago

There's lots of people who use the dollar and other currencies I don't like. But I still use the currency. Bitcoin has faithfully kept its fiscal policies and promises for 15 years. It's money whose supply can't be diluted through inflation. You can be your own bank. That has never changed. Whatever it originally promised, it's still doing.