What is this, part deux

In addition to what I said last week, I'm now linking posts using my own description (vs the post title) to show how they sit in my mind -- since the whole point is that this is my own synthesis, vs a summary, that approach seems more consistent.

The basics of pseudonymity by @satoshiplanet

We're all using nyms, but I've been getting uncomfortable with the chain of opsec violations on the road to this one, and to the others I've built up over the years. (My recent post on cloud storage stems from this growing discomfort.) It's like buying a house where you have a sneaking suspicion that there's something wrong with the foundation.
The strategies described in the linked guide aren't magic, you can't just check a handful of boxes and then be free to interact however you like online (or irl) without consequence. The contortions you'll need to perform to stay safe vary in proportion to the severity of your activity: if you're just trying to not get doxxed by assholes, that's one thing; if you're attempting to steal billions of dollars from the Israeli government, that's something else.
That said, this guide is a beautiful starting point to take a harder look at this topic. In my experience, most bitcoiners haven't done even the bare minimum of threat modeling aside from feeling a vague paranoia, so there's some low-hanging fruit to be plucked. (Note also that Christopher Allen / Blockchain Commons is the author of my favorite technical bitcoin introduction.)
Also: this makes me think, again, of the conversation I had w/ @nemo and others about ephemerality and online threat models. If I were doing it over again, part of me thinks all my SN participation is a mistake, because a motivated attacker could figure out my identity. But another part of me is like: basically everything I value about being here is a function of building actual relationships and feeling like this is a real place that I care about. Having some Batman-like identity that doesn't reflect actual-me would be ... sad. Is that really how you want to live?
Tradeoffs, tradeoffs.

Microstrategy at it again by @IgnaciobTato

Here's the deal: Saylor has been good for btc in innumerable ways. It's also obvious [1] that one company owning so much btc is bad for btc. Oh wait, I hear you saying, how can it be both good and bad for btc at the same time? To which I respond: welcome to the world, things are complicated here.
You know what would be great? If Saylor, who loves nothing more than to talk for three straight hours without interruption and almost without taking a breath, would address this issue head-on. The guy is a fucking genius, you can bet that he has spent scores of hours ruminating on it. If I got one shot with him, here's what I would ask:
What can you do in service of the btc ecosystem, other than simply buying and holding, now that you have almost 1% of the supply?

How to be dumb by @k00b

K00b has established just how not-dumb he is with this exploration of how we know things, and even, what it means to know anything -- what are the ingredients of knowing? Maybe those emotions and instincts and gut-feelings actually come from somewhere?
Of course, it's worth noting that the wisdom in @k00b's observation is in a tug of war with people being really dumb, and uncritically following whatever self-soothing biases they're carrying around. It's so much nicer to envelop yourself in a worldview where you are awesome! It's so much easier to interpret ambiguity in a way that lets you be right!
I do this exercise: when I'm really worked up about something, I look inward and ask:
Q: How much of this is me being an asshole because I'm squirming out from under some uncomfortable truth?
And then, inevitably:
A: A lot.

SN analytics by @davidw

David, after some unknown number of proddings and goadings, made good on an earlier promise to reveal the secrets to SN success. As you'd expect if you've been around here very long, it's thorough and super interesting. If you want to give yourself the best chance of posting when you're likely to earn more sats, the charts in this post are your cheat code.
(I'd be interested in any additional thoughts on my generous stacker hypothesis, btw.)

Games for grokking bitcoin by @DarthCoin

We've talked before about the conceptual underpinnings needed to make btc comprehensible to people in the world.
But that's so abstract. What visceral conceptual understanding is needed? How might a person acquire that?
This game is an example of one interesting way to realize this goal. It makes me wonder: what are others? Useful strategies for establishing these conceptual primitives might not look like the education strategies we normally think of. They might look like play.

10k infected github repos by @0xbitcoiner

Surely I am tedious in infinite ways, but one of them that I'm also self-aware about is the idea of trustlessness. Any time I hear someone use the term I mentally adjust my estimate of their IQ down by twenty points.
I don't want to be that guy, but really, there is no trustlessness. The closest substitute is to understand the trust dependency graph and to allocate your attention judiciously. The linked article is another vivid example of this truth.
In addition to the mythical status of trustlessness and Santa, the idea of DYOR is also extraordinarily weaker than people pretend. I mean, you can DYOR, and you should, but it's important to be honest about what that's getting you. Have you ever compiled code from Github? I did. Did you go through it line by line to make sure there's not an evil payload in there someplace? I didn't. Are you confident you'd even be able to recognize it if you saw it? I'm not.
Update: Here's another post linking to a better Ars Technica writeup of the affair.

Fred Krueger's btc perspective by @siggy47

Normally somebody's hot takes on the future of btc is yawn-inducing and I don't even read it unless the person has a background that implies un-correlated information with my usual info diet; and this finance guy, or whatever he is, doesn't make the cut according to that standard. But Siggy's recs mean a lot, so I listened, and I'm glad I did.
If you spend most of your time soaking in the warm bath of maxi narratives, this podcast will probably be unpleasant for you, for a host of reasons I won't enumerate. But what a good angle. My .02 is that he's more right than wrong.
In particular, there's one hard truth I think he's locked in on, which is that, while there's probably another 10x in btc/USD price, and maybe even 100x (if you're willing to wait 30 years), this has an implication that lots of btc peeps are deluding themselves about: the days of putting in pocket change, and getting life-altering returns out the other side, are over. Like: if you put in $10k, which is a lot, and 30 years from now have a million dollars of purchasing power? Like, great, but I regret to inform you that you will not be living the High Life.
I mean, it gives me no joy to say this. I wish I was class of 2011 and writing this from my mega-yacht while being fanned with giant palm leaves by women wearing leather bikinis; but I'm not, and I won't be, and probably you're not and won't be, and we should calibrate our expectations accordingly, if we haven't already. (I already have.)
Again: hope I'm wrong! Hope we run into each other at the private airport! I will buy you a steak to apologize for my short-sightedness.
Update: A related post by @Undisciplined getting at the same stuff. Much elaborated in the comments. Many people disagree with me forcefully.

Thoughts on justice by @Scoresby

What's the purpose of justice? Is justice the highest good? What is it trading off against? How does this change when you're the arbiter of justice, and trying to raise your kids to not grow up to be dicks?
This post made me super happy, not bc the topic is a feel-good topic, but bc we're talking about it here! How great. What a fucking beautiful development.

Notes

[1] Well, it's obvious to me. Is it not obvious to you?
Update: Oh, well, apparently it's not obvious to @DarthCoin.
this territory is moderated
I'm glad you resurfaced Siggy's post. I missed it at the time. This is a great way to keep some of these conversations alive and connected.
I haven't majorly updated my views on bitcoin purchasing power since my post (that you kindly linked to) and I intuitively agree with your take that we've missed the boat on getting stupendously rich just from converting spare change into bitcoin. However, I am wondering if it's that unreasonable for substantially more than 100x returns.
Just thinking about myself here, I'm one of the most active users on one of the most active bitcoin sites, but almost none of my daily economic transactions involve bitcoin. My own usage could easily grow by more than 100x and my bitcoin demand is far greater than anyone I know irl.
Of course, as an economist, my first thought about asset pricing is that everything is already priced in. The Efficient Markets Hypothesis has lots of assumptions built in, though, and we may just not be in that paradigm. For one thing, I can assure everyone that the professional finance/econ establishment knows absolutely fuck-all about bitcoin. Those who do understand it only have a limited supply of capital and probably can't fully price in the available information about bitcoin.
reply
Another aspect of this that's really important are the feedback loops. I have occasionally aspired to write an essay on this but I think it's at least 5k words and so have not. But the argument is something like:
  • It's easy to see certain flywheels -- the more users, the more they want it, the more it's worth, the more buzz, the more users.
  • But flywheels in complex systems contain their own negations. There are other countervailing forces in play that people usually omit, that constrain the infinite growth implied by the flywheel.
    • e.g., the more users, the more they want it, the more it's worth, the more established players stand to lose, the more enemy attention it draws, the more they oppose it and the bend the system toward that opposition
  • In the btc ecosystem, we've seen this play out in a number of ways; notably, the entire existence of altcoins is testimony -- everybody wants their 1000x returns and they just keep forking the ecosystem in search of it
    • Few people are content to let some other lords who got their share during more fruitful times (e.g., Boomers, in the current zeitgeist) just sit there and get richer; in a system that is foundationally constructed around social coordination, they go in search of a more favorable equilibrium
  • This countervailing force, combined with the elastic limits of human psychology, short-circuit what look like nearly infinite gains (infinity / 21m) that more caricaturish models would predict
Something like that.
reply
Yes. "Something like that" is very relevant. My view is that those insights may be sufficient to explain the reluctance to move huge shares of capital into bitcoin at any given time. The dynamics you describe mean timing is even more difficult than with normal assets and totally rational risk aversion is continuing to direct capital towards conventional assets.
Another element is the enormous gulf in expectations. Many of us (myself included) are expecting this technology to be truly revolutionary and emerge as the global money. The vast majority of people have no such expectation. That means the price will remain well below where people like myself expect it to end up.
However, the implication of that line of reasoning is closer to "If we're right, there will be tremendous returns once everyone else realizes that we're right." So, a question emerges: "Should we proceed as though we're right, or not?"
reply
Slight refinement:
"If we're right, there will be tremendous returns once everyone else realizes that we're right."
On what timescale, though? That's everything. If I was eighteen, maybe I would care less.
So, a question emerges: "Should we proceed as though we're right, or not?"
Concretely, what would that mean to you?
To me, the timescale issue seems entirely determinative of this question. Like, if you're Saylor, and so rich your entire btc portfolio can go to zero and you still have a yacht, you can lean into this one. If you're a normal person, maxing out all debt instruments is either epic-level ballsy or else a cautionary tale about the dude who ruined his family's lives.
reply
I agree that the timescale is highly relevant, as is uncertainty in the timescale. My reluctance to go all-in has more to do with my uncertainty in the timescale of mass adoption than thinking I won't see it.
I strongly believe the maxim that "The market can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent" and in that meantime I have to materially provide for my family.
I haven't fully thought through what behavioral differences I should take with these radically different purchasing power estimates, but it would be ridiculous to treat an asset going to $100k the same as an asset going to $10B.
I'll probably end up rationalizing that I should be spending more time on Stacker News, since that's the conclusion I want to reach anyway.
reply
I'll probably end up rationalizing that I should be spending more time on Stacker News, since that's the conclusion I want to reach anyway.
When I reflect on my financial decisions over the last few years, the one constant is that I would've done better had I focused more on bitcoin. I've often avoided focusing on bitcoin by listening to the rational-sounding maxim, “Past performance doesn't guarantee future success.” But part of rationality is knowing when common proverbs don't apply too.
Having posted here ~2 years now, I've observed my old posts growing in value over time, which is an odd feeling when compared to the incorrigible timesinks of other social media sites.
reply
Meaning literally growing in value -- accumulating sats? Or a more expansive sort of value, like seeming increasingly true?
reply
Well, both actually. What I said has becoming increasingly true, since I was writing about El Salvador and the propaganda push that was being prepared against them, which............ 🤡
But apart from that, yes, I meant the sats. The buying power those posts generated has grown, so I can buy more ribeye steaks 🥩 today than I could then.
So the work I did here on SN is still generating value. That's actually not even the case with my fiat mining job. The energy I put into fiat writings 2 years ago is gone, whereas even my SN shitposting energy is preserved and something I can still access.
(That's what I was trying to express to @Undisciplined too, that our posts here on SN can be deceptively valuable, in the sense that even our shitposting energy generates value that doesn't go away.)
I'll probably end up rationalizing that I should be spending more time on Stacker News, since that's the conclusion I want to reach anyway.
The human condition in one sentence :)
reply
233 sats \ 1 reply \ @k00b 2 Mar
giant palm leaves by women wearing leather bikinis
Your yacht sounds like a tiki themed biker bar.
reply
You manage your yacht however you want, k00b.
reply
218 sats \ 0 replies \ @ek 10 Mar
If I were doing it over again, part of me thinks all my SN participation is a mistake, because a motivated attacker could figure out my identity. But another part of me is like: basically everything I value about being here is a function of building actual relationships and feeling like this is a real place that I care about. Having some Batman-like identity that doesn't reflect actual-me would be ... sad. Is that really how you want to live?
Tradeoffs, tradeoffs.
As probably yourself, I wouldn't do anything different but I am slowly accepting that I can't keep my face and name unlinked to this nym I use forever (even though I recently changed it) but I will at least try to give me as much time as possible to prepare for that moment where I will probably just do ... nothing. Not confirm or deny anything, just continue living as if nothing happened since that's how people should react to it: nothing happened and nothing to see, please keep moving and forget whatever you saw.
Feels like even typing this out compromises my plan but oh well.
Tradeoffs, tradeoffs.
reply
Fantastic summary! I don't have much time to read during the week, so these summaries are perfect for me. I would have missed this if you hadn't posted it. Thank you!
reply
10k infected github repos by 0xbitcoiner
Your questions are spot-on and I resonate with your answers entirely. As a developer, I believe we must be more vigilant when using these code sources.
reply