It is the middle of July and as promised, the judges have made their decisions about the Bitcoin History Month #1492293 entries. But first, a note about

SlopSlop

Most of the entries were slop. This was regrettable. I suppose that it is a reality to which we must resign ourselves, but I am saddened by it. While I understand that writing is difficult and takes real effort, pasting the output of a prompt session is not interesting to anyone. Let me see if I can explain why.

If I could get all the information of the world without ever talking to anyone or hearing another voice, simply downloaded into my head Neo-in-the-chair-style, I'd still read books and articles. This is because reading is one of the only ways we have of experiencing another person and there is something more valuable in that than just the information. As far as I know, the only way to get yourself to somewhere new in this world is to actually listen to another human being. I'm sure that other configurations of atoms can be novel, but when it comes to delivering newness to our own mental state, there's no matching someone else.

The output from LLMs doesn't afford this same opportunity. It may provide data, but it lacks newness. The output from an LLM is thoughtless. There's no particular considered opinion behind its choice to present the words it does. Instead of the voice, there's the void.

I don't quite know if this distinction is due to what humans are or whether it is how we are, but a human's badly composed sentence is better at changing me than 10,000 polished slop words.

Therefore, we will only be awarding four prizes in total to worthwhile entries and all the slop can go to hell.

How the Elites Used to Think About Bitcoin - 20k satsHow the Elites Used to Think About Bitcoin - 20k sats

This story by @denlillaapan describes a 2011 New Yorker article about Bitcoin. It's wild to see such an early take on Bitcoin by the intelligentsia. Unlike the boogey-men wielding intellectuals of today ("it's used by criminals! money laundering! North Korean hackers! ransomware!"), in 2011 the New Yorker took a fairly relaxed approach to Bitcoin. Early Bitcoin coverage is always pretty interesting, but this one was well worth a look. Read it here: #1506462

Forgotten Satoshi Emails Discovered with Nicholas Bohm - 20k satsForgotten Satoshi Emails Discovered with Nicholas Bohm - 20k sats

Nicholas Bohm is one of those fascinating characters in Bitcoin who seem to have played a very important role and yet who aren't among the communion of Bitcoin saints. @TheSatoshiTimes presents Bohm's history, his communication with Satoshi when Bohm was helping to debug an early Bitcoin client, and how Bohm's emails assisted in defeating Faketoshi. While the story had an odor of slop, it gets a prize for excellent research. Read it here: #1516439

The Man Who Turned Everything into Bitcoin and Disappeared - 20k satsThe Man Who Turned Everything into Bitcoin and Disappeared - 20k sats

Daniel Fraga's story is really cool. It seems that it has showed up in a number of places around the internet, but this was the first I had heard of it. I was really hoping the story would end with a revelation that @guerratotal was the man himself, but alas, it seems it was not to be. Bitcoin is strong because of people like Fraga and Popescu and McAfee. Someone should write an ode or a book or some sort of tribute to all the Bitcoiners who have disappeared. Read it here: #1510988

Grand Prize - 100k satsGrand Prize - 100k sats

The judges all agreed that @raw_avocado's video and website about the early moments of the Bitcoin network was truly excellent. Alex's detailed analysis and artful presentation made for an enjoyable discovery of details about Bitcoin's early history. If you haven't seen it already, take the time and watch it now, it's super fun:

SN link here: #1514120

Prizewinners: please post an invoice in the comments so I can send you your sats.