pull down to refresh
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @justin_shocknet 6h \ parent \ on: 🎲 DiceLN.com Relaunch: Lightning-Fast, Provably Fair Dice Gaming! ⚡ bitcoin
If you try to type in 50 it'll get stuck at 45 seemingly no matter what you pre-select or where you enter the 5... but if the range is only 45-53 i think it might be better not to have it at all and just have 3 buttons.
I assume this is because you wouldn't want to offer 1% chance because then the house is paying 99x, but I'd think entering things like 1 or 99 would be the only reason to have the input as decimal field
throws no_route now, but odd its pretty quick... doesnt feel like it has time to fail.. also should be an easy route: 0301c3924df01f1a376ab20ce9273ee2c4a1f2354c3400e6357d3d4144981ae728
If I try to edit win chance it does some weird behavior I can't describe...
Amounts actually seem ok it may be that one updates the other I didn't realize before
If you weren't around for Just Dice it was legendary:
it had this compounding effect where people invested in the house so it could take bigger and bigger bets, the whale activity on there was insane https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1rnsof/user_xyz2013_just_tried_to_double_his_016_btc/
failed to withdraw to a well-connected router too, the pay in node looks well connected so I assume its an internal error but the message was non-descript
QA:
deposited 100 sats twice, only got credited once
inputs are a little borked, can enter values
Was thinking about justdice recently and how it deserved an LN version, glad to see someone else remembers it... a 1:1 clone would be epic
Am I being summoned for a spicy contrarian take or the conspiracy angle?
I'll do my best at combining both... touched on this topic briefly when it came up recently: #930514
Regarding BPI there's little to conclude from directly, so we need to look at the big picture. What we do know for a fact is how Washington works, and what signals are being sent around the Bitcoinization issue:
-
Nation-state intelligence agencies and/or their megacorp counterparts in the private sector want a thing to happen (or to not happen)
-
They set up public facing organizations to make that happen in a more organic looking way, while keeping themselves out of the spotlight.
-
If it's something they don't want to happen, that public facing org is set up to fail and in the process of so doing inoculate against that thing, or shift the Overton window towards another thing.
So are BitBonds supposed to happen, or not happen?
Trump, Bessent, Lutnick, Lummis, Sacks, Hines, Cruz, probably others... are pretty good signal unto themselves that Bitcoin has mindshare at the highest levels. At face-value, they're telegraphing what is going to happen.
Add in the tariff/globo-monetary order stuff, and that's even further signal that actions are being taken in this direction.
Bessent himself has unpromptedly thrown Bitcoin into the conversation re: store of value, and the "Golden Age" messaging is a clear signal that the dollar reserve Triffin Dilemma system is going to yield to a neutral reserve system and address a massive national security liability.
Any Bitcoiner worth their sats has come to understand the game theory behind all of this, so none of it should be at surprise.
That still leaves the question, is BTCPolicy proposing something sane that can be adopted without any of the aforementioned politicians and Bitcoin companies having to say it themselves? Are there actually buyers lined up for these BitBonds? Or is it set-up purely to fail?
I can't pinpoint anything insane about it, so I err towards its going to happen. It's not materially different than the MSTR playbook, which is seemingly working in the open market, and MSTR itself is an organization that openly linked to Intel-Agencies. It's either a very elaborate and costly trap they made no effort to conceal, or they're tipping off allies who know how to interpret signal.
It's possible of course that these BitBonds require a different buyer scale that never materializes, making the whole thing (and Bitcoiners) look stupid. There's only one way to find out for sure, but it seems counter-intuitive given yet other signals:
Who's who behind BTCPolicy, at least publicly? To me it seems like mostly nobodies, except David Zell, one of the founders of BTCMedia (Bitcoin Magazine) which has gotten the big names at their conferences, Ross pardoned, etc... at times it seemed like David Bailey also of BTCMedia was the only one to think the SBR would actually happen, and he's been vindicated at several steps along the way. He also hinted at the UAE buy before it was public, and the UAE is massively important in the global order as a financial center.
Totaling all this up, I think it's legit, the policy itself isn't overtly stupid, there's people connected to it we've been given no reason to doubt, and all the signaling from the incumbents is at minimum directionally supportive.
Hipstercoiners may not like Bitcoin becoming a political lobby, but Bitcoin becoming the world reserve currency always had to be a transformative process, not a revolutionary one. Massive institutions that are interlinked and are where most of the worlds wealth resides can't simply rip off the band-aid like individuals can.
The financial world is a tangled web of contracts and liabilities that will take decades to untangle.
Hipstercoiners also need to accept that the Satoshi fairy-tale is operational deception, and that Bitcoin itself in being necessary to address the aforementioned NatSec issues is part of a larger anti-corruption operation. If the NSA or whoever else came out in 2010 and said "hey check this out" no one would have touched it.
My advice is to think strategically more than 5 minutes out and trust the plan.
I'm reminded of this post to all the people wondering where the arrests are, now that Trump is in office. O-Plans of this scale take decades. This was published only 1 year into Trumps first term:
"Those who cannot understand that we cannot simply start arresting w/o first: ensuring the safety & well-being of the population shifting the narrative removing those in DC through resignation to ensure success defeating ISIS/MS13 to prevent fail-safes freezing assets to remove network-to-network abilities kill off COC to prevent top-down comms/org, etc. etc. should not be participating in discussions." Q
The same people that tell you China is incompetent are the same ones that still would tell you Ukraine is winning. They'll also tell you China is porked financially... and while the narrative lately is that wars only start when one side is wrong about who's going to win, there's another scenario, when a financial hail-mary is required. It would seem confrontation is inevitable, by their logic.
Even if we completely dismiss their traditional military, their 5GW asymmetric abilities have killed a million with fentanyl and extracted trillions from us economically... do we really want their sleeper cells activated and taking out our electrical substations next? Movies like "Leave the world behind" are comms letting you know what's on the table.
chip manufacturing facilities
It's a globalist test fail whenever this is still brought into the equation, its about naval power projection (breaking the island chain etc...) into the pacific from the US side, and nothing more.
The hedge on supply chain risks started a long time ago, was literally just announced the latest nvidia chips are being made in AZ.
Remember the psyop with NFL teams were flying masks and shit in on their own planes during the fake pandemic? Exposure op. The supply chain risks either net out or have already been mitigated.
act upon anything
Our treaty with the Phillipines should have this kinetic already if that's what the US wanted, in terms of Thucydides Trap, so why does China keep poking the bear?
The only comm's we're getting that there might not be a confrontation is the alleged rapport between Trump and Xi and whatever they hatched up in the Forbidden City during his first term.
There's a lot of confounding things going on, the fog of war is real, but the "lol their submarine sunk" is the lowest IQ case against take I've seen outside of The Atlantic.
I think this is where many people that think autonomous driving can't work are often coming from, defensive driving.
You can teach the machine the rules and best practices for not being the cause of an accident, but reacting to chaos caused by others is a whole different thing. There's an element of instinct there, there's even situations where you look at the other driver themselves to get a read.
Reading between the lines on this article, the Waymo system seems to have issues stopping or slowing in unsafe ways that don't account for the stupidity of meat-based drivers. Even if the Waymo itself is technically correct and should be able to expect people won't just drive into it, the fact that other human drivers are still on the road is a headwind for making autonomous the safer option. At some point there has to be a flippening of sorts where there's less human drivers and that fact alone makes autonomous safer even if the tech doesn't advance (and just becomes more distributed)
Was just in the city for the weekend and every time I go I don't know how I ever lived there, I flash back to the dread of those times. It's disgusting, congested, and people detached from nature every day somehow become more animal like under a veneer of domestication.
Going to a small town (under 10k people) every few weeks for supplies is about as much as I can tolerate, and even that I time for efficiency and minimal crowds.
Business travel to cities has its novelties, when I don't have access to my own kitchen a decent restaurant can have nice UX... I enjoy historical sights and architecture... but also in this way places like Manhattan are kind of like a theme park. They only exist as places to go make money so you can afford to live somewhere else.
From Gemini:
Here's a summary of the video:
This episode of the Human Action Podcast, hosted by Dr. Bob Murphy, challenges the idea that the U.S. must maintain trade deficits to preserve the dollar's status as the global reserve currency. The discussion references economist Triffin and contrasts his views with those of Ron Paul.
Here are the key points:
Trade Deficits and Historical Context: Trade deficits aren't inherently negative. The U.S. experienced trade deficits during its early growth [10:38], suggesting such deficits can indicate strong investment and economic potential. This is different from trade deficits arising from government overspending [21:44]. Triffin's Dilemma: The video disagrees with the interpretation of Triffin's dilemma, which suggests that a country with a global reserve currency must run trade deficits [24:50]. The U.S. ran trade surpluses for much of the Bretton Woods system era [36:01], and the demand for dollar-denominated assets doesn't necessitate trade deficits [39:49]. Ron Paul's Perspective: The video supports Ron Paul's view that severing the dollar's ties to gold in 1971 led to increased inflation and economic instability [49:20]. This decision contributed to income inequality and a divergence between worker productivity and compensation [53:07]. Proposed Solutions: Instead of tariffs, the video advocates for reduced government spending and a return to sound money policies to improve the trade balance [01:03:07].
Seems this is typical big L Losertarian drivel missing the point entirely and arguing irrelevant things just to virtue signal.
MAGA is well aware the problem stems from the money, and no one has suggested that the US has to run deficits... quite the opposite. Dollar Dutch Disease is another term thrown around by the likes of JD Vance and others in the admin and that has nothing to do with debt.
They're literally calling it the "Golden Age" and the administration is full of Bitcoiners.
Tariffs put a bandaid on the bullet wound while getting partners to the table and onboard with a global re-ordering around Bitcoin Bretton Woods / MaL accords to adopt a neutral money.
The currency manipulation they talk about in context of the tariffs disappears when both trade partners settle in real value, not fiat.
Big L losertarians who's entire identity is wrapped up in being ineffective hipsters would seem to prefer letting the status quo of disaster continue on and getting worse rather than fighting back by speeding up the process with a controlled demolition.
ACCELERATE.
All joking aside there's a case to be made not to use newer address types for cold storage, heck exchanges still aren't using segwit in many cases.
Lawfare, the courts have been weaponized beyond repair, my money is still on a constitutional convention is being set up.
Tariff rates are a function of currency flows
Those events shaped global currency flows, first by making the dollar the world reserve currency, and then making the dollar currency fiat.
Therefore, the same tariff before and after those events its not effectively the same tariff, the flows are different. This is why Trump et al mention currency manipulation and other "non-tariff barriers" that effect these flows.
Say you're an importer of junk from China, and that junk typically costs $100... but then a new 25% tariff gets added, your cost is now $125 or so you would you would think... but no... because $100 price isn't fixed in your currency, it's impacted by the exchange rate of Chinas currency... the same Chinese currency that had its flows reduced by the tariff making it less valuable in dollar terms.
That $100 junk with 25% tariff might become $75 dollar junk with a 25% tariff, actually lowering your cost.
In this example we see the dollar breaking out against the Vietnamese Dong since Vietnam's currency relies on the importing of dollars and those dollar imports just became more expensive. This is why they say the other country picks up the tab, and why all the people bitching about tariffs seem to have no issue with countries having tariffs on the US.
So, a tariff chart showing dollar-based percentages is meaningless, given the Y axis lacks a common denominator.
Word is he does his own speech writing, tweeting, and weaves the narrative... he's also known to consume a lot of media and is constantly surrounded by people from whom he weighs input. I think that's his gift, to calibrate against lots of input and cut it down through BS.
Yes they absolutely troll the media, they openly talk about trolling the media. Trump is where he is because he's a media king and leading up to 16 caught them off guard by wielding the regimes own media against them. Its been an unmasked psyop ever since.
Bannon is his right hand in that, and Navarro is an extension on Bannon.
The Musk Navarro thing is kayfabe, highlighting that Tesla has the most American supply chain.
Navarro hasn't said anything negative about foreign investment, Trump touts investments by Saudi, TSM, Softbank etc...
Navarro cited the German car factories in SC are assembly points, not true factories. Tesla, even being the most American car company, still has reliance on foreign supply chains. This is a national security problem.
There is also no free market to compare to when supply chains span multiple non-free market currencies.
In typical Mises fashion the author is a retard.