pull down to refresh
374 sats \ 8 replies \ @Coinsreporter 11h \ on: Stacker Saloon
Among the top 10 Cowboys in October last year
#711722
Now...
- @siggy47
- @k00b
- @Undisciplined
- @grayruby
- @BlokchainB
- @Coinsreporter
- @Public_N_M_E
- @WeAreAllSatoshi
- @Aardvark
- @cryotosensei
- The list didn't/don't include hiders.
Who lost the hat among top 10?
- @BitcoinIsTheFuture
- @OneOneSeven
- @TNStacker
- @StillStackinAfterAllTheseYears
- @hn
Lots of "drama" over someone being taken back in due to literally violating their terms of release by circumventing monitoring.
PS:
vxunderground on Twitter/X is a clickbaiter for those sweet sweet X engagement moneys. Lots of things are taken out of context, always highlighting the drama, to get paid. I don't understand why people on nostr would copy this crap.It was up to date, but for some reason the camera stopped working. I force stopped it and got it going again. Zeus is fine. Sorry I bothered everyone. I should have checked the logs first. I never have had a camera issue before.
If we do not impose any additional costs on people trying to use bitcoin as a general-purpose database, such use will absolutely drown out payment use cases, especially merchant Lightning nodes which, at the moment, are bitcoin’s most important payment use case.
What a retard. Empty blocks are being mined, how could he possibly reach the conclusion that these Bitcoin database users are "absolutely drowning out payment use cases"?
Ideally you can just ignore the posts/comments that you don't want to respond to. My general policy on the internet is to recognize that people communicate in many different ways, to absorb what I like / is helpful to me, and to ignore what I don't like / is unhelpful to me.
At least at this stage of human development, hardship is not hard to come by.
I haven't had much hardship in my life, but the two or three serious hardships have usually resulted in growth and good things in my life.
I don't think that over-abundance is too much of an issue really. Most people will have challenges presented to them through the rough edges of life.
Perhaps the thing that our relative abundance can do for us is teach is to see to the challenges we do face as valuable events.
1529 sats \ 21 replies \ @Scoresby 12 Sep \ parent \ on: Peter Wuille post about dropping OP_RETURN limit bitcoin
yeah, bitcoin can be abused, so we legalize the abuse
policy is poorly compared to legality. If you want to make "the trade" illegal, you need to make such transactions invalid. Changing policy is akin to saying "we don't want people to do this, but we will still accept it when it's in a block"
This is what I don't get about what I believe is your argument: Bitcoin is a permissionless network. Run any code you like. Why do you care so much what Core changes when it comes to policy? Just run Knots. Problem solved as far as you are concerned.
1475 sats \ 10 replies \ @optimism 12 Sep \ parent \ on: Peter Wuille post about dropping OP_RETURN limit bitcoin
If you disagree with every single point of someone that has literally written more than half of the critical code that you use also when you run Knots, does that make it nonsense?
I learned this one from Joe Rogan-- Post and ghost. "Don't read the comments."
My take on that is to make your voice heard, speak your truth, and then never read the comments. Commentors are using your words as entertainment, they're not your friends.
The voices that matter are friends and family in your sneakernet.
I slipped and fell down the stairs yesterday... didn't break anything but my body is sore af. I guess I'm a real boomer now, lol.
In my opinion, if you are a merchant looking to support bitcoin adoption, your first task is to build a sustainable business, even if it means accepting fiat. That means building a product that people actually want to use. Make sure you have a good product and that you can cover your expenses and be sustainable.
Alongside that, you will accept bitcoin, and you should accept bitcoin at a lower fare than you accept fiat. If your business is sustainable, you should be able to do that. Bitcoin provides some benefits to merchants, including 1) lower transaction fees than credit cards; and 2) no chargebacks from customers. These reasons alone should be enough to let you lower the rate on bitcoin purchases.
One of the aspects of internet writing that I particularly enjoy is this necessary adherence to the rule of one sitting.
Brave indeed is the writer who believes he can get his readers to return to a webpage after once having departed.
This may have something to do with unreasoning persistence of the PDF (that godforsaken file format); writers who are uncertain their readers will be able to finish the piece in one sitting (and who doubt their ability to bring a reader back sans something new) resort to attempting to lodge their work on our device, like some thorn stuck in our paw, in the hopes that we will actually read it.
In most cases, it simply should have been shorter.
This makes me wonder what the longest item on SN might be -- and whether incan justify dethroning it.
You know, it always felt like the mutiny team was suffering in silence or something it was a really weird dynamic that im still not sure what to make of. no one on the cln team had any idea yall were struggling. i mean yall even lived in the same town as me and i don’t ever remember getting a message asking for help with an issue but maybe my memory fails me. i do remember the occasional outbursts on twitter tho
anyway sorry it failed you so hard. I get how C is challenging i had to learn it to work on CLN. it’s definitely its own unique beast with pretty niche errors etc.
I hate reading stuff like this
Me too, but in this case I mostly ignored the hippie rationale. The basic rules proposed make sense, i.e. proposed rule 1-4. Emphasis mine:
- If content was made with the help of AI, you must convey that this is the case. This includes content that you authored but was motivated by a suggestion of AI.
This is basically the same thing you propose.
- If at any point you used AI's work in your contribution you must demonstrate that you can submit this under the license of the repository.
This means you likely can't use code generated under another ToS (i.e. that of Claude or GPT), but this is a non-AI thing too, so it should technically not be AI-specific.
- The accountability of using AI in a contribution lies by the person that makes that contribution.
Very nice liability limiter, but shouldn't this be the case on all code?
- All communication, that includes: commit messages, pull request messages, documentation, code comments and issues (and comments on issues/pull requests), that is intended to be read by people to understand your thoughts and work must not have been generated with AI. We exclude machine translation and tooling that helps with grammar and spelling check.
This is imho the most important point socially. If you want me to read something, make it so that I want to read it, but again: this is not AI-specific. 1
The other items are not something I'd encourage on a non-niche project, but I guess it's fine for those among us that want to cater not to the world, but to their faction. You have to trust humanity to develop for the world.
I've for a longer time been playing with the idea to improve contribution guidelines based on something like this, but I keep getting back to the point that AI should at most be an example for illustration, not a rule.
Why does it matter how something is "received"?
I do think that they have a point as many people that move away from GH nowadays do so because of copilot skepticism - GitHub went all-in on AI, so the alternatives should be careful. The AI fearful/skeptics need a "home" too (though I'd argue it's much nicer to be homeless / squatting across all platforms, and this also helps against cults.) 2 But bottom line this is more marketing / politics.
"community" just means social media
Agreed. Especially since on many of these platforms you're not allowed to comment on an issue "wtf is this shit", because that will get you instabanned for life, lol.
Footnotes
-
I've for a longer time now been blessed with proper CI on my repos (after I spent years to have that) so I have largely switched my mode in day-to-day review to spend a lot of time on comment and commit quality. It is not for a reason that on my projects I am the most hated maintainer (but also the most senior so tough luck lol) ↩
-
Unfortunately the politics of many of these alternative platforms, including codeberg, are very inclusivity-and-safety focused - I wouldn't run a meaningful FOSS repo under their CoC, because those rules can be weaponized and selectively enforced. ↩
I don't blame anyone. We definitely didn't handle it the best. At the time the CLN team had limited resources because you were on sabbatical and rusty was working on GSR.
We would normally post issues in the discord and often not get replies for days which is where a lot of frustration came.
Really I think most of our frustration stemmed from any cln issue was that it always 2 fold for us, one it'd look bad to our users and we'd also then have to go bother the voltage team for assistance. And for a lot of it we just felt powerless.
However I know we're not totally crazy, I've seen multiple companies try cln and move off it for various reasons
The pernicious nature of this post is that it is trying to equate celebrating a murder with disagreeing with identity politics (because that is the context of Matt Walsh's posts.)
It is the same logic that led to the murder itself: equating the sin of disagreeing with someone's identity to the sin of physical violence.
The two are not equal and should not be treated equally.
This pretty much nails it. Here it is as a table in case it's easier to compare
| feature | ecash | custodial lightning |
|---|---|---|
| can be rugged | yes | yes |
| can recover from lost keys | no | yes |
| can get your account closed | no | yes |
| can receive offline | yes | yes |
| is illegal in US/EU | yes | yes |
| privacy from outside observers | yes | yes |
| privacy from mint/custodian | kinda | no |
The only nuance I would add is that since many of ecash wallets support use of multiple mints, it is easier to use multiple custodians at once (you can have a unified balance, while using ecash tokens from multiple different mints).
Building your own block template is a great opportunity to filter out transactions.
Glad to have independently written something similar this morning for a much smaller audience.
Also GREAT point about the bitaxe - though last time I discussed bitaxes with a mining service provider they laughed me out of the room:
But I have to believe that
they that laugh last... otherwise might as well pack up.I don't have a "more or less?" answer for you, but this is something that's fascinated me since I first read Adam Smith.
Highly specialized tasks so obviously underutilize human abilities. For instance, I'm specialized into analyzing data, which requires precisely zero of my physical ability. But, I'm a lot smarter than I am athletic, so my time is most productively spent on purely thinky stuff.
Maybe in a sufficiently specialized and wealthy economy there would be jobs that require my full set of abilities and pay even more. Tasks have been getting increasingly complex since the assembly line days of people literally doing the same single motion over and over again.
There's also a tie-in with your post about whether we have enough already. Job satisfaction and work-life balance probably deserve more consideration than people give them. Most of us can probably afford to accept less pay and may find more benefit from a more fulfilling job than we get from the extra consumption.
I wrote this in response to this video from @jimmysong
Here's my review before reading yours:
For those of us working in reading- and writing-heavy fields — chiefly media and academia
Sucks if you have such a distorted world view to think that the major source of reading and writing is done by the media and academic industries.
While spoken in the voice of an individual author, each piece in this emergent corpus stages a more collective drama.
Right! Such as this article staging a drama by underestimating the fields in which in reality reading and writing is the primary activity.
The single, vital aspect of humanity that LLMs can never match, the essays assert again and again, is our imperfection.
Funny, as it also cannot match humanity's desire for perfection! Else, why do lawyers get sanctioned, vibe coded "super apps" insta-hacked? This must be because secure apps or non-hallucinated case law are features of imperfection. In fact, maybe the corpus of case law that is deemed to exist and the not-hacked software are hallucinations? How do we know? Human hallucination is probably inferior to that of our ChatGPT overlord too!
According to the logic of market share as social transformation, if you move fast and break enough things, nothing can contain you.
Except, if you don't use these apps that are engineered to defraud you of as much time, money and skill development as possible, and truly make you dependent on that subscription with at least 20 more levels of outrageously priced lies ahead of you, then how exactly is some transparent scammer like Sam Altman going to break you? Just don't give money to scammers. It's really that simple.
With every click and prompt, every system-tweaking inch we give to the spectral author, we help underwrite AI profits (or at least the next round of equity funding; no major AI product has yet come close to actually making money).
I repeat: stop giving money to scammers. Hopefully the wonderful full-time writers and readers of media and academia in the back hear me now.
The way out of AI hell is not to regroup around our treasured flaws and beautiful frailties, but to launch a frontal assault. AI, not the human mind, is the weak, narrow, crude machine.
If all you've ever used was a dumb af chatbot app, then yes, it's a weak, narrow, crude machine. It's not even your machine because you just paying rent and you don't understand what you're doing in the first place. Additionally, since there's a 99.99% probability that you forgot to critically think and ask it about something you are an expert in, or forgot that you asked and that the result was sub-par, you're either ignorant, or living the Gell-Mann day in, day out. That is how sad humanity truly is right now.
Notice the poverty of the latter’s style, the artless syntax and plywood prose, and the shoddiness of its substance: the threadbare platitudes, pat theses, mechanical arguments. And just as important, read to recognize the charm, surprise, and strangeness of the real thing.
Which will simply mean that someone will employ some very targeted reinforcement training and eradicate these anti-patters in favor of the patterns you like. In fact, if you had any idea what you were talking about, you would have fine-tuned Qwen3 or gpt-oss for this yourself, so that you don't have to deal with all the shoddy and artless bot speak.
Until AI systems stop gaining in sophistication [..]
If this ever happens I will just start releasing finetunes that address complaints like in this article, to fuck with the minds of the truly ignorant.
Whatever nuance is needed for its interception, resisting AI’s further creep into intellectual labor will also require blunt-force militancy. The steps are simple. Don’t publish AI bullshit.
But then I challenge thee: don't publish human slop either. JUST SAY NO!
When we use generative AI, we consent to the appropriation of our intellectual property by data scrapers.
Can someone please explain to me why one would publish something if not for that "intellectual property" to spread? If you don't want it to spread, keep it secret, patent it, take it to your grave.
We stuff the pockets of oligarchs with even more money. [..] We hand over our autonomy, at the very moment of emerging American fascism.
I have to say it again: Stop giving money to scammers!
A literature which is made by machines, which are owned by corporations, which are run by sociopaths, can only be a “stereotype” — a simplification, a facsimile, an insult, a fake — of real literature. It should be smashed, and can.
Smashed? Okay, war-mongering boomertard with a lack of imagination. Back to the 1940s with ya.