Como se dice bitcoin en plural, como se juega bitcoin
Como se dice bitcoin en plural, como se juega bitcoin
BUIP043: (closed) Exploring the Bitcoin Network | Bitcoin
Former Bitcoin Developer Shares Early Satoshi Nakamoto
Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. | Bitcoin Forum
FlowBTC | Bitcoin News
[ 🎶 Thinking Cap ] This post is framed around results of cypher-based queries for the number 1234 against my custom lexicon files built up over a year of phrase inputs (mostly gleaned from newspaper headlines and their 'quoted phrases', or stream of conciousness inspired by them). There are not very many, but the few there are appear to be instructive. I have used some repetition to aid those with trouble remembering numbers. Perhaps NSFW. (For the confused: see here, here and here) If you are brand new to this collection of scrolls, I recommend reading (as much as you can of) this before returning here, which will help to justify my particular focus below (the belt). Did you gnow A=1? There are 26 letters in the English-Latin Alphabet. The basic alphabetic gematria code acknowledges that A=1, B=2, C=3, ..., Z=26 (ie. ordinal gematria). In this basic alphabetic cypher (which is implied if I do not specify):
"Alphabetic Codes" = 123
... "Reveal The Code" = 123
... .. .. "To Reveal All" = 123
If you flip the numeric ordering about (ie. look in the mirror: treat 'Z' as 1, down to 'A' as 26), then...
This ("The ABC") is the name of the earliest alphabet primer textbooks for kids.
The first church primers paralleled the introduction of school textbooks known as “the ABC”
The Alphabet is a vessel for messages:
"Boat" = 123 primes (ie. an Ark ... an Archive ... built using a geometric Architecture of symbols)
If, instead of the basic alphabetic ordinal cyphers above, we use another cypher some call Agrippa's Key, and some call the 'jewish cipher', which is based on the ancient Hebrew and Greek gematria charts, and maps that scheme to the Latin Alphabet, we can ask a catch-phrase question (written more formally than usual)
What's in a name?
"What is in a name?" = 1234 jewish-latin-agrippa
Here we move beyond the three steps of ABC and arrive at the Door of Dalet. Behind it, if we have the write keys, we might discover...
ie. quantum-entanglement: you cannot give birth to your first alphabetic Son, a strong boy named Aleph, and deny he is '1'. You cannot have your second child, a beautiful maiden, Beth, and deny she is '2'. Animals on the ark 2 by 2. You cannot order the alphabet, and deny the letters have ordinal indexes (ie. numbers associated with them - significant others)
Obstetrics is the field of study concentrated on pregnancy, childbirth, and the postpartum period. As a medical specialty, obstetrics is combined with gynaecology under the discipline known as obstetrics and gynecology (OB/GYN) which is a surgical field.
... ( "The Last Proof of Life After Death" = 911 primes )
I have a spell-matching feature that can cross-match multiple cypher results and return the 'closest frequency matches' of all the spells I've ever entered into my gematria tools. At the time of writing the lexicon file is half a megabyte in size (plain text) and contains 37,694 words and phrases. When I ask for the spellings that most closely match: "live forever", I get the following three results as top matches:
'white liquid', 'into the girl', and 'the dilution' (with 8+ cypher matches)
There are a lot of flowery symbolic or metaphorical phrases that it could have returned, but it seems the Heptapods are rather blunt. Again:
"Divine Feminine" = 911 jewish-latin-agrippa
... .. "Sexy Girl" = 911 jewish-latin-agrippa
From... Revelation 9:11 King James Version (KJV):
And they had a king  over them, which is the angel of the bottomless pit, whose name in the Hebrew tongue is Abaddon  , but in the Greek tongue hath his name Apollyon.
This is perhaps a dual - the Abaddon is both Father Beast (and Lord of the Harem, perhaps, given the plural 'them') and the Beastly Progeny (ie. King and Prince):
"Pregnant" = 333 jewish-latin-agrippa
"The Temple" = 333 jewish-latin-agrippa
... "A Baby" = 333 trigonal
The angelic little baby, retrieved from the bottomless pit, is the apple of mommy and daddy's eyes (even though it is very naughty, ruling over their lives for many years after his or her noxious retrieval from the Underworld).
Viva Las Vegas (ie. V.L.V ): 777 (ie. to win at slots):
"A Triple-Seven" = 1234 trigonal | 2,322 squares
The Boeing 777 is a premiere passenger aircraft. The Boeing 787 is called the Dreamliner (ie "The Call" = 787 squares ... of Morpheus) The Boeing 747 is Old Faithful, the Jumbo Jet of Time Air Force One is a 747
"Air Force" = 223 primes
"Winds" = 223 primes
"Goddess" = 223 primes
... "The Law" = 223 primes
... "Air Force" = 223 primes
"Winds" = 223 primes
"The Law" = "Goddess" = 223 primes
She steps on "The Scale" = 223 primes ... ...and hopes she is ...
"Weightless" = 1234 jewish-latin-agrippa
From an old Alphabet Primer:
... He that ne'er learns his ABC, ... For ever will a Blockhead be. ... But he that learns these Letters fair, ... Shall have a Coach to take the Air.
Enregisterment is often partially, rather than completely, true, sort of like an accent viewed through a funhouse mirror.
I was triggered to made this post due to various recent media 'events', this 'crazy' 'news item' the final straw that broke the gimel's black (I link to old reddit theme because it is objectively better ):
These are things we can imagine Alphabet Sages might desire to encode and honour - as much for a mnemonic purpose, as for teaching purposes, or for archiving [...] knowledge [...] or purely for the sake of esoterica itself (ie. wizard just likes math, or architecture, and thus honours math and arches, secretely in words using basic algebra and references to certain idioms and golden numbers. Wizard works for King, shows him tricks. King decrees new Bible edition, and new Dictionary version).
He found me to be of a tractable, inquiring, and fearless disposition. A dash of melancholy is lacking in me, else I would make all, who are inclined to blame the Comte de GABALIS for having concealed nothing from me, confess that I was a not unfit subject for the Occult Sciences. One cannot make great progress in them, it is true, without melancholy; but the little that I possess in no wise disheartened him. You have, he told me a hundred times, Saturn in an angle, in his own house, and retrograde; some day you cannot. fail to be as melancholy as a Sage ought to be; for the wisest of all men, as we learn in the Cabala, had like you Jupiter in the Ascendant, nevertheless so powerful was the influence of his Saturn, though far weaker than yours, that one cannot find proof of his having laughed a single time in all his life. The Amateurs must, therefore, find fault with my Saturn and not with the Comte de GABALIS, if I prefer to divulge their secrets rather than to practise them.
First of all, what is an OG username? An OG username is a virtual account that has a name such as a verb/noun/place/animal etc. This makes the account's value go up. Now you may ask yourself, why would I want such accounts? These accounts aren't modified like most of them are, meaning that they don't have "xx" or numbers which make them unique". For example, Kiwi is an OG name, but KiwiIsCool, Kiwi5 or Kiwising (2 prefixes aren't even semi) wouldn't be classified as OG. However, "Kiwis" would be Semi-OG as it is plural or has an added suffix or prefix. ( -s, -ing, -ed, -er, etc) Having an OG or Semi-OG name makes you get more noticed and recognized. In other words, owning an OG username make you look cool and shows a high social status among young fellows. It shows that you are an early adopter of a platform. Second of all, where do you sell an OG username? You could sell an OG username at pretty much any online forum that offers a wild west-type marketplace. Now, how did I make money? There are so many ways (many of which are illegal) but the most common is to buy and resell. Just like buying and selling shoes/clothing products. Buy low, sell high My story about selling instagram handles: It started out with my affiliation with dealing Minecraft accounts. I have a reddit previous reddit post about this that you can view by looking at my posts. I was deep into the online account selling community and would say I was reputable enough to get into other marketplaces. I had funds set aside from mining crypto, selling minecraft accounts, and fortnite accounts (which I will get into on another post). Anyways, I had connects from the Minecraft community. A long time friend of mine (let's call him Bobby) that was known for selling some of the most top tier accounts ended up moving over to selling social media accounts. Bobby had several methods of retrieving these top tier social media handles. The handles he owned ranged from $100 to $5000. He had a list of over 200 usernames. Now how did he get these accounts? There could've been 3 ways: Recreating Emails, Turboing/Autoclaiming, and Jacking,
He recreated the emails that the instagram accounts reside on. For example, username @ Hello is on the email [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]). Yet, the email is many years inactive and also the instagram is also 5 years+ inactive so in all honesty, who uses the account? Nobody. It's an asset waiting to be recovered. So in order to find the email that the instagram account @ Hello, Bobby searches through leaked databases, leaked email lists, and public or private 0day exploits. All of this info is legal and out there on public databases. After finding the email, chances are it's on a common email provider (yahoo, outlook, hotmail). Bobby then submits a support ticket to the email support with some info and ends up getting a brand new email that matches the Instagram email @ Hello. Sends a password reset link to the email. Then boom, he's in. Once he has access to the account, he can list his new asset for sale on the forums.
The second way that he could've claimed this many accounts is by turbo. A turbo is a program thats coded by someone who knows what they're doing. I guess you can kind of relate turbos to hypebeast/sneaker check out bots. What it is essentially, is spamming the name change button super fast, like 10x faster than a human can ever do it. So pretty much the program is either running 24/7 with servers with a huge username list or targeting specific usernames hoping that when the person who owns the handle changes the username, the program will snag it up on either a already created instagram account or a fresh uncreated email one.
The third way is by jacking. And this right here folks is illegal. Sim Swapping is one of these jacking ways. So someone steals your phone number and gets the two factor authentication codes then steals whatever else is connected to your phone number. The next way is by finding a way to get into the recovery email of your primary email. Which first of all is probably found by searching through legit, public, leaked databases. You'd be surprised what they got in these leaked databases. It doesn't take much to just search an email up and find anything connected to it. Anyways, Bobby jacks the email or instagram account. Boom! Flips it for profit.
So Bobby here has loads of instagram accounts, I have no idea how he got em. But the most common ways to obtain them are listed above. Very rarely do people buy a username from someone just by DM'ing on instagram. This story starts with me buying 2 short usernames for $750. I proceeded to list these 2 usernames separately on the forums and sold one for $700 only a few days after posting and the other for $500. Profit was good, I was motivated. Of course when I listed the usernames online, I got many people attempting to waste my time and scam me by not sending the funds first. I noticed this because these users that messaged me had a low reputation. Furthermore, I knew I had profited from this and I saw more potential. I decided to buy 10 usernames that had values from $300-$1000 for $3000 in Bitcoin. You're probably wondering how I even have money for this? Quick answer, I mined cryptocurrency back in 2018 and made a good savings amount from it. $3000 is a big leap from $750 I'd say. After I bought these, I proceeded to list em all separately on the forums and began selling them one by one for bitcoin. People messaged me, we talked, boom. These accounts sold only weeks after I listed them and I ended up profiting around $850-$900 after selling all of my accounts. After I got rid of that batch, I was ready to pick up another batch. 10 accounts for $4000 this time. Same process, secure accounts, list them on forums with set prices. Receive messages from potential buyers, talk to people, negotiate. I was selling about 2 accounts per week. There was this one time I messaged a business with the username account that they are known for. They were extremely interested, so I go ahead and price the username at $1000. They accept the price, send the money via paypal and I hand over the details. That just goes to show what type of value instagram handles have towards businesses. I priced about each account $300 above how much I paid. And made good profit. That is until the price of bitcoin went up 40%+. All the profit I made from this batch almost split in half because the price of Bitcoin went up. I was back to square one but with a few accounts left with potential to profit more. I made quite the reputation for myself on the forums for selling top notch username accounts. I had repeating customers and people coming back for more and more every re-up. I stopped picking up batches of accounts when College Semester Fall 2019 approached due to my busyness. All in all, I learned lots about hustling instagram accounts, talking to people, building a reputation, and having a right mindset for this type of thing. I profited around $2000 but would've probably made so much more if the price of Bitcoin didn't go up 40%. All this shows that the internet market is still growing. And with more and more businesses and people getting involved with instagram/social media, means values and demand skyrocketing. I noticed this is just the dotcom era and instagram handles will sell just like domains sometime in the future.
/r/Monero - Newcomers Please Read. Everything You Need To Know.
What is Monero (XMR)? Monero is a secure, private, untraceable (crypto-)currency. It is open-source and freely available to all. Don't believe us? Click here. Monero is a tool that people can actually use. It makes receiving payments hassle-free, since merchants and individuals no longer need to fear the source of funds they are accepting. With transparent systems like Bitcoin, Ethereum, Verge, or Dash, these people need to hope (or spend substantial resources verifying) the sender did not use the funds illicitly. Furthermore, merchants do not want all their vendors known, and individually do not want everyone to know how much they are spending. If I spend more than I should at Newegg (store), that's my own business. Monero is different because every transaction is always private. There is no way for pools and exchanges to opt out of sending private transactions. Thus, Monero's anonymity set far exceeds any other coin's anonymity set. Over 86,000 transactions in the past month of August, 2017 hid the sender and receiver, and about 99.95% of them also hid the amount (will increase to 100% of all new transactions in September)! There is no suspicion in using a private transaction, since all transactions are private. A single transaction does not stick out.* This privacy is afforded with the best technology. I implore you to take a few minutes to learn about the four main technologies that Monero uses to provide privacy:
Ring signatures hide where the money comes from. Spent inputs in a transaction are hidden among several others that also appear to be spent. Thus, no one knows which source of money is actually being spent. Think of inputs as individual dollars or euros. View a video about this topic here. Note: this is NOT the same as mixing.
RingCT hides the amount. Instead of spending a known value of an input, you can cryptographically commit to a certain value without revealing what the value actually is. This is a very complicated topic, so please view this video for more information.
Kovri is a work-in-progress tool to hide the transaction broadcast. Kovri will make it easy for users to hide their IP address when telling the network that they would like to make a transaction. Kovri will work with other cryptocurrencies and other projects through a common API, and Kovri can be used in a way to hide that you are using Monero at all. Kovri adds additional layers of network security for miners and pools, and it allows for the highest level of censorship resistance possible. A video for this project is available, and you can also check out the Kovri website. In the meantime, there are several guides to using Monero with Tor that work today, including an unofficial Tails build.
Stealth addresses hide where the money goes to. Instead of sending money to a specific address directly, certain outputs are allocated for addresses, but outside observers do not know which addresses these belong to. Even if ring signatures were compromised for some reason, then people would still not know the sending address in a transaction thanks to stealth addresses. View a video about this topic here.
There are several other things that make Monero great! It has a smooth tail emission, dynamic blocks and fees, and an accessible Proof of Work (mining) algorithm. *You can optionally choose a very large, unusual ringsize to make the transaction stick out. This is not recommended, and normal users who leave the ringsize at the default setting will not experience any issues. Also, it's possible for a user to manually add identifying information to the tx_extra field, which is something that a user must seriously go out of their way to do. Now you know Monero (XMR) has the best technology. What else makes Monero (XMR) different than other cryptocurrencies?
Fungible: Every Monero remains equal and identical to any other Monero. It is the property of a crypto asset whose units/value are capable of mutual substitution no matter what historical transactions occurred in the past.
Value-Growth: Monero has a proven chart record of growth and will continue to grow. Don't believe us? August 2015: $0.45, August 2016: $12, August 2017: $100. Growing really fast right? The difference is that it is growing because it's being used appropriately for it's technology and the demand keeps increasing. Swiss banks and offshores management organizations are starting to move from physical assets to Monero (XMR). Monero is dedicated to continue growing.
Development-Growth: Monero has the best team. Over 270 contributors have brought Monero to where it is today. The vast majority of people donate their time to help Monero, but a few get paid through the Forum Funding System (FFS). This is how Monero can be a strong project despite not taking a portion of the block rewards or launching with a premine.
P.S. Want a quick-start, simple your-grandma-could-do-it guide?Here's a great one! Am I a bad person to consider using this? No, Monero is freedom money. You can do whatever you want with it, whenever you want, where ever you want. We make it clear that you should own your wealth 100%. What you do with it, is none of our concern. Where does the word Monero come from? The word Monero comes from the language Esperanto. Monero means coin oand currency. The plural way of saying Monero in Esperanto and in our cryptocurrency is Moneroj.
Is there a lightweight wallet for Monero? Not yet, but you can use the official GUI with a remote node.
Are there any other ways to store Monero (XMR)? Yes, there are many mobile wallets out there that allow you to store Monero (XMR). We do not recommend them, because they are not official releases of Monero. If you do decide to use other wallets, please make sure to do your research first before storing any Moneroj in the wallet. Anything used for Monero outside of official releases, will be used at your own risk. Some may be used for scamming purposes. If you still decide to take the risk; do not use them for large amounts. Also keep in mind that there is a high chance that Monero support will not be able to help you if you bump into any problems from applications outside of official releases. Why should you not use non-official wallets? Well would you buy a house and give your only key you have to the buildemanagement and wait for him/her to open the door to the house you supposedly own? No. Same goes with cryptocurrencies. You should always have possession of your private keys, and your Moneroj. Most non-official releases own your private keys, therefore you do not own the Moneroj.
How can I setup a local wallet while running node with little bandwidth? You can use GUI, as a remote node as it uses very little bandwidth. Go to settings tab and change: "localhost:18089" to "node.moneroworld.com:18089". If you are still having problems, then just use our Monero Web-Wallet.
My vendor only accepts bitcoin but I only have Monero, and I know bitcoin is not private/anonymous. What should I do? Use XMR.TO, but you should also educate them about bitcoins lack of privacy. Tell them to visit this post.
How long does it take to sync to the blockchain? It can take from a few hours (using SSD drive) or even 24 hours, depending on hard drive and connection speed.
List of scams: (Always do a background check / research for anything outside of official releases.)
Freewallet (Mobile Wallet App)
Did you knowover 50 high profile artistsaccept Monero on their online stores? Check out Project Coral Reef
Are there any other sub-reddits that specialize in certain parts of Monero or just related to Monero? Yes, there are a few. However, please keep in mind that this sub-reddit (/Monero) is the official Monero sub-reddit. /xmrtrader - Trading, and investing related discussions & inquires. /MoneroMining - Mining related discussions & inquires. /MoneroCommunity for those who want to help grow the community. /moonero for shitposts and memes. /MoneroMarket for buying and selling wares for Monero. /MoneroSupport for, you guessed it, Monero support. Want to get involved?Click here for a list of sources.
How can I participate in the Monero community? We welcome everyone to join us and help out. Check the "Community Info" section on our subreddit for our website, forum, stack exchange, github, twitter, and facebook. Anyway, we hope you stick around beyond the hype. Monero has a lot going for it, and we hope you agree! We really need your help, since this project is entirely driven by the community!
u/Tempatroy: "u/adam3us, u/nullc, u/luke-jr don't even understand the basic premise of Bitcoin." ... u/nullc: "You have been around for thirteen hours and you think you understand Bitcoin better than people who have been maintaining it for the last six years" ... PLUS: a lengthy response from me :)
I mean if you base your understanding of what Bitcoin is based on the whitepaper or even Satoshi’s talk, people heavily associated with Blockstream (like adam3us, nullc, luke-jr et al.) don’t even understand the basic premise of Bitcoin.
Welcome to Reddit, Tempatroy. Thank you for pinging me to your insult. I’m always interested in hearing when someone who has been around for thirteen hours (and, in fact, needed to be manually whitelisted to get past the 24 hours automod rule in rbtc) thinks that they understand the premise of Bitcoin better than people who have been maintaining it for the last six years, participated in it before the overwhelming majority of people here, or who worked on cryptocurrency for a decade even before Bitcoin.
~ u/nullc Here is my response to u/nullc: TL;DR: Bitcoin cannot be decentralized and permissionless and trustless if we use some political / social process to decide on “the rules”. The only way that Bitcoin can be decentralized and permissionless and trustless is if we use Proof-of-Work to decide on “the rules”. This implies that “the rules” of Bitcoin cannot be be defined using some political / social process before a block is appended several-confirmations-deep into the chain. In the system invented by Satoshi, “the rules” can only be defined using Proof-of-Work. This requires observing which chain has the most Proof-of-work after a block has been appended several-confirmations-deep into the chain. Yes this seems upside-down to people who are accustomed to rules being “handed down” by some authority (Satoshi, Greg, Blockstream, etc.). But - if we want Bitcoin to remain decentralized and permissionless and trustless - then we must recognize that:
The chain with the most Proof-of-Work is the “valid” chain - ie, the chain with the most Proof-of-Work defines “the rules” after the fact; and
There is no concept in Bitcoin of some pre-existing “rules” defining the valid chain.
To put it even more bluntly:
”The rules” are not defined “before the fact” by Greg, or by Blockstream.
”The rules” are defined “after the fact” by observing the chain (not the “valid chain” - simply the “chain”) that has ended up having the most Proof-of-Work.
Details As others have pointed out to u/nullc: u/Tempatroy wasn’t being insulting - he was merely making a factual observation - pointing out that:
Blockstream CTO Greg Maxwell u/nullc does not understand (or perhaps is merely pretending not to understand) the must fundamental aspect of Bitcoin.
I will describe this problem at length below. I apologize in advance for the convolutedness of this exposition - this is only a first draft off the top of my head now. Other people have explained this better - and hopefully I will also someday manage to put together a more succinct exposition of my own. This major “blind spot” of Greg’s has already been commented on at length, eg:
Mining is how you vote for rule changes. Greg’s comments on BU revealed he has no idea how Bitcoin works. He thought “honest” meant “plays by Core rules.” [But] there is no “honesty” involved. There is only the assumption that the majority of miners are INTELLIGENTLY PROFIT-SEEKING. - ForkiusMaximus
a naive, incorrect approach used throughout most of human history - called ‘Approach (1)’ below, versus
the correct approach developed by Satoshi - called ‘Approach (2)’ below
‘Approach (1)’ - The “naive” (incorrect, pre-Satoshi) approach This is the approach adopted by Greg Maxwell u/nullc, and many of the people who follow him - eg Adam Back u/adam3us CEO of Blockstream, and Luke-Jr u/luke-jr (who also thinks he can decide which transactions are “spam” and which are not - ie, he is authoritarian, the antithesis of Bitcoin) - and by the “low-information” people on the censored forum r\bitcoin. I know it sounds like I am being rude here - but the situation is dire, after so many years of censorship, and with Bitcoin’s market cap dropping to 60% of total cryptocurrency market cap for the first time (despite the moderate price rise which actually makes people overlook this drop in market cap), and in view of the hope and promise of Bitcoin as designed by Satoshi - enabling a more rational and sustainable system for capital allocation.
Sidebar on Bitcoin’s “killer app”: I think that “rational and sustainable allocation of capital” is the most important “killer app” of Bitcoin - not coffee, not remittances, not even as a store-of-value or a speculative asset class - although those are all nice things. I would argue that “rational and sustainable allocation of capital” is the main thing which “fantasy fiat” has not been doing - causing the various social and economic and ecological crises which may destroy civilization on our planet in a few decades. The main hope offered by Bitcoin is that, by preventing central bankers from “ninja-mining” their “fantasy fiat” and handing it out to their buddies to invest in non-rational, non-sustainable projects, Bitcoin could help people make decisions for allocating capital which actually increase our well-being, instead of increasing our suffering.
People like Greg and his followers (naively, incorrectly) believe (or pretend to believe) that the “rules” (specifically: the “rules” governing which block to append next) are somehow “pre-defined” and are somehow (already) manifested / incorporated / coded in “the software” - and that the miners must “honestly” obey these pre-defined rules. On the surface (and to people who are used to obeying “rules” handed down from some authority: eg from a government, a religion, a dev team, etc.), this may have a certain appeal - but it is not how Satoshi actually designed Bitcoin. ‘Approach (2)’ - Satoshi’s approach - Proof-of-Work Satoshi, (correctly, brilliantly, counter-intuitively) specified (in the whitepaper, and in his software) that the “rules” of Bitcoin are decided in a totally different way. He specified that the “rules” are decided after the fact - because they are decided by Proof-of-Work. This means that whichever (branch of the) chain ends up having the most Proof-of-Work is by definition the valid chain. The (counter-intuitive, hard-to-understand) implication here is that before any particular (branch of the chain) has clearly “won” in this ongoing, every-ten-minutes battle...
The “rules” determining which “next” block is “valid” are still “up in the air”;
The rules are “not yet decided” until after a block has been buried a-few-blocks-deep into the chain;
The “rules” will only become clear / manifest after we inspect the last few blocks appended to the chain which ended up (“after the fact”) having the most Proof-of-Work.
If we closely examine these two (quite different approaches), we can make a several observations: First: There is a massive logical flaw in “naive” ‘Approach (1)’, when people try to apply it to Bitcoin. This flaw can perhaps be informally captured by the following phrase:
“In ‘Approach (1)’, it’s turtles all the way down (which is of course impossible).”
‘Approach (1)’ suffers from a fatal omission: it fails to specify how the rules manifested / incorporated / coded in the software get put there in the first place. This might seem like a “detail” - but actually it is everything. This can be seen if we ask ourselves the following (rarely asked) questions:
Where do the “rules” come from?
Who makes those rules?
Greg / Adam / Luke-Jr?
“Users”? (see: “User-Activated Soft Fork” / UASF)
“Investors” (aka: the “economic majority”)?
This also leads to other, specific questions, which are applicable in the current situation:
Here’s the answer: Satoshi’s revolutionary solution to defining “the rules” is not based on social or political processes - which can be manipulated (eg by sybil attacks, bribes, coercion, violence, etc.) Instead, Satoshi’s brilliant mechanism for deciding which block to append next is based on Proof-of-Work, as summarized in the slogans “One CPU, one vote” or “They vote with their hashpower”. This moment of “voting with their hashpower” is the actual process where “the rules” (governing the validity of the next block) come into existence. This is all very counterintuitive to many people. But other people (who perhaps have a more “sophisticated” appreciation of social and economic processes - or perhaps a “deeper” understanding of game theory) can often begin to glimpse the massive flaw in “naive” ‘Approach (1)’. The problem with “naive” ‘Approach (1)’ is that it neglects to specify where the rules come from - ie, who makes “the rules” - and how. Once Satohsi himself is removed from the picture, we have a situation where we have to “somehow” do all of the following:
agree on certain rules,
then get them into software,
and then get that software deployed on the network,
and then 51% of all hashpower has to start mining using those rules,
and then in a 10-minute period where various “candidate blocks” are competing to be appended to the chain, one of those blocks ends up getting “buried deeper” under more Proof-of-Work
and at that point , the system has been “upgraded”, and the newly appended block reflects the new “rules”.
In most cases (but not in all cases) “the new rules” are the same as “the old rules”. This is because this system does allow the rules to be changed, when Bitcoin evolves or gets upgraded. We should also add the ‘caveat’ there that this system only works if the majority of hashpower does not adopt “crazy rules” - ie rules which would decrease the value of everyone’s bitcoins. The system only works if the majority of miners are always “intelligently profit-seeking” - ie, if the majority never adopts “crazy rules” which would destroy the value of everyone’s coins. The important thing is that the rules are “post-defined” - after the next block has been added chain (and a few more blocks have been piled on top of it).
This means that there are no “pre-defined” rules in the system.
There are only “post-defined” rules, which can be observed by inspecting the decisions made by the majority of “intelligently profit-seeking” hashpower, as new blocks got appended to the chain.
The only part of this scenario that guarantees a decentralized, permissionless, trustless system is the on-chain Proof-of-Work stuff - not the off-chain social / political stuff. All the other stuff (the political / social process where people argue about rules, code them up in software, and deploy that software on the network) - all that “prior” stuff is done using the “old” “pre-Satoshi” methods - so it’s not actually reliable (ie, it’s not decentralized or permissionless or trustless - ie, it can be sabotaged by sybils, or bribery, or threats of violence, etc.) So the political / social process of talking about the rules on Reddit or on a mailing list, or coding up some rules in some code and offering that code to the public (eg, Greg Maxwell, CTO of Blockstream, saying “These are the rules”) - that part of the process is not “Nakamoto Consensus”, so it’s not reliable, and it’s not “Bitcoin.” The magical moment where the system actually becomes “Bitcoin” is when the majority of “intelligently profit-seeking miners” use Proof-of-Work to decide what block is the one that gets appended to the chain. Another metaphor might be that the (naive, incorrect) ‘Approach (1)’ assumes that some other higher authority (Satoshi, Greg, Core/Blockstream) has already handed down the “rules” in C++ code. Meanwhile the correct ‘Approach (2)’ - (Nakamoto Consensus a/k/a “one CPU, one vote” a/k/a “They vote with their hashpower”) does not require the existence of any authority (no Satoshi, no Greg, no Blockstream) to pre-define the “rules”. Bitcoin simply requires that the majority of miners must be “intelligently profit seeking” - and then whatever they vote on as being “the next block” is by definition the next block - and they “re-decide” on this (essentially “re-deciding” on what the rules are) every ten minutes. This is incredibly counter-intuitive to many, many people - especially to people who are of an “authoritarian” mindset - ie, they are accustomed to “rules being handed down from some higher authority”. But this is how Bitcoin actually works. The rules are decided not by me or by you or by Satoshi or by Greg or by Blockstream. The rules are decided by the miners - and re-decided every ten minutes (usually the “same old” rules as during the previous ten minutes - but not “always”: because there are times when the rules may indeed be upgraded, if the majority of hashpower suddenly decides so). And the mechanism for these rules being decided (and re-decided, and re-decided, every ten minutes) is: hashpower, a/k/a “one CPU, one vote” - which simply requires that the majority of miners must be “intelligently profit-seeking”.
Sidebar: Of course, Exhibit A in any discussion about “authoritarianism” would be Luke-Jr, because he provides the most glaring and grotesque example of the “error of authoritarianism”. This may indeed be a deep-seated psychological problem, so we can’t really “blame” the person for it. But at the same time, we should always be vigilant to make sure that this “error of authoritarianism” does not get adopted as part of Bitcoin’s system for determining “the rules” - because the only way that Bitcoin can remain decentralized and permissionless and trustless is if we use Proof-of-Work (and not some “higher authority”) to determine “the rules”.
‘Approach (1)’ is used quite widely. It powers many legacy systems in the world - but it’s not what makes Bitcoin decentralized and permissionless and trustless! In “legacy” systems, people used a political / social process to agree upon some rules (vulnerable to all the old attacks: in particularly sybil attacks, social coercion, ostracism, bribes, threats of violence or actual acts of violence, etc.) - and, eventually, through this messy process, a set of rules was finally hammered out. Then these socially / politically selected rules become manifested / incorporated (“coded up”) in some software, and that software gets deployed on the network, and then everything becomes wonderfully easy: it is now just a question of checking whether a particular block satisfies those rules or not. This (naive, non-Bitcoin) ‘Approach (1)’ all sounds wonderful until one remembers that it does not provide us with any decentralized, permissionless, trustless mechanism for actually forming consensus on what these “rules” should be, and then coding them in software, and getting everyone to install that software on the network! At this point, many people (eg, the smart investors who understood Bitcoin from the very beginning) can see that this “naive” ‘Approach (1)’ neglects to specify the process of how these particular “rules” got manifested / incorporated / coded in the software itself - and how people reached a consensus to deploy this particular software on the network. The current ongoing “blocksize debate” uses a social / political process for deciding on “the rules” - ie, it does not use Proof-of-Work. This is the social / political / off-chain war we’re seeing now - where:
One faction (Core/Blockstream today) wants a “rule” that says that blocks must be less than 1 MB,
Another faction wants a rule that says that blocks must be less than 8 MB,
Another faction (BU / Emergent Consensus) wants a convenient “on-chain pre-signaling system” where miners can pre-announce their intention to adopt certain rules regarding the maximum size of the next block that they will mine (1 MB, 4 MB, 8 MB, etc.)
Another faction (SegWit) wants a new rule where all transactions would be considered “anyone-can-spend”, plus a new rule added to the system to do a different verification process regarding who can actually spend them.
It’s all fine for this social / political / off-chain “rule-deciding” process to be taking place now - wherever it happens to take place - eg, on Reddit, on Slack, in various dev mailing lists, perhaps at meetings at Blockstream, perhaps in secret gathering places such as the notorious “Dragons Den” - and also now to some extent it has been starting to take place at other social / political venues - eg other online forums devoted to discussing other clients (BU, Classic, etc.). But any rules which are decided “off-chain” like this aren’t really “rules” yet. They can only become “rules” if the majority of “intelligently profit-seeking hashpower” actually mines a block which satisfies these “rules”. ‘Approach (2)’ is the major breakthrough invented by Satoshi - his solution to the Byzantine General Problem, supporting decentralized formation of consensus among parties who do not trust each other. This breakthrough was also so counter-intuitive that very, very few people even understood it when Satoshi first proposed it in the whitepaper, and in the accompanying C++ code. In particular, as amazing as it may sound, there are many Core / Blockstream devs who do not actually understand the subtle stuff here about how Bitcoin really works. Why are people always so angry at Greg and Adam and Luke-Jr? I’m going to step on some people’s toes by making provocative and even somewhat unkind statements - I do apologize, but I also do believe I am describing real and unfortunate problems which are critically important to address and resolve. People who do not have a very clear understanding of how political and social processes - and markets and economics - actually work might have a hard time understanding this mechanism invented by Satoshi. Yes this (unfortunately) means guys like Greg Maxwell and Adam Back. They both know cryptography - and Greg knows C++ - but these two guys in particular apparently do not have a very good understanding of how political and social processes - and markets and economics - actually work. They understand how (given a pre-existing set of rules) a particular implementation can reflect / express those “rules”. But they never have shown any understanding for the “bigger” process whereby those “rules” got selected in the first place. Indeed, in their arrogance and hubris, they assume that they are the ones who define those rules (in a non-decentralized, non-permissionless, non-trustless manner - ie, in a totally anti-Bitcoin manner). I know this may sound like an insult - and I have certainly hurled it as an insult on many occasions in this forum over the years - out of frustration at the fact that these two guys have set themselves up as leaders for this system - so they are effectively attempting to sabotaging Bitcoin. But in addition to being an “insult”, it also happens to be a fact. (So maybe we can just call it an “insulting fact”.) I did not originally (several years ago) hurl this as an “insult”. I only started to raise my voice and get angry when (and many other people) I had to repeat this fundamental (but admittedly subtle) aspect of Bitcoin over and over again for years - because guys like Greg and Adam and Luke-Jr - who don’t actually understand how Bitcoin actually works - kept telling people like me that we were “wrong” (when in fact Greg and Adam and Luke-Jr are wrong - at least on this subtle and crucial point about when and where and how the “rules” of Bitcoin get decided). Anyone can read the whitepaper. And if you do, you will notice this amazing thing. The “rules” are not pre-defined by any authority. The “rules” are actually “post-defined” as a by-product of the process of hashing, which is based on the fact that the majority of miners are always “intelligently profit-seeking”. Greg and Adam and Luke-Jr erroneously “assume” that they are the ones who decide the rules. But this is not how Satoshi designed Bitcoin. And this - in a nutshell, is the main reason why people are so angry at Greg and Adam and Luke-Jr. And it’s also, the reason why Bitcoin’s market share has been declining, now dropping below 60% of total cryptocurrency market cap - due in large part to the fact that, for the past few years, Greg and Adam and Luke-Jr have been running around telling everyone that they get to define the rules - when all the really intelligent people involved in Bitcoin know that this is not the case: the hashpower defines the rules, as manifested by Proof-of-Work! Of course, if we want to be “charitable”, then we cannot really “blame” them for being wrong about this subtle but fundamental about where the “rules” of Bitcoin actually come from. The sad but likely truth is that people who spend most of their waking hours thinking about things like C++ and cryptography may have a certain kind of “mindset” which makes them suffer from “blind spots” when it comes to understanding how political and social processes - and markets and economics - actually work. Sorry if this sounds harsh - but at this point, after all the damage inflicted on Bitcoin by Adam and Greg and Luke-Jr (now with Bitcoin’s market share below 60% of total cryptocurrency market cap), a certain amount of “tough love” diagnosis (or even anger, or insults, or name-calling) is certainly justified - in order for Bitcoin to survive. And the only way that Bitcoin can survive is if we reject the attempts by guys like Adam and Greg and Luke-Jr to pre-define Bitcoin’s rules for us. The only way Bitcoin can survive is if we remember that the rules are defined by the majority of the miners, who are “intelligently profit-seeking”. What is at stake here is nothing less than the economic future (and perhaps even the very survival) of humanity. We cannot allow a tiny group of arrogant devs (who apparently lack certain social / economic skills) to destroy Satoshi’s vital invention by forcing “their” rules onto the network. This is why it would be nice if Greg and Adam and Luke-Jr would do some deep inner reflection, to understand that they do not decide the “rules” for Bitcoin.
The “rules” are decided by Proof-of-Work - not by Adam and Greg and Luke-Jr.
So, the only phase of this whole process which actually “matters” (in the novel system devised by Satoshi) is the moment where all this debate actually gets manifested during a ten-minute period where several “candidate blocks” are all simultaneously competing to be appended to the tip of the growing blockchain. And then, only one of these new “candidate” blocks ends up getting a larger amount of Proof-of-Work on top of it (as other, succeeding “candidate” blocks gets added) - and then (and this is the really brilliant part of Satoshi’s invention), the “economic incentive” aspect of Satoshi’s brilliant invention starts to act - combined with the “stochastic” aspect - which is just fancy mathematical terminology for saying that “as more and more blocks get piled on to the chain, it becomes vanishingly improbable for those deeply buried blocks to ever get ‘un-confirmed’ via a chain re-org.”
Sidebar: These two parts - the “economic incentives” stuff involving the valuable economic token, and the “stochastic” stuff where blocks “buried deeper” in the chain will almost certainly not be “un-conformed” by a chain re-org - were hard for guys like Greg and Adam to understand in the early years. Remember, in the early years, when these two “brilliant” guys first heard about Bitcoin:
Greg Maxwell “mathematically proved” that Bitcoin couldn’t work.
And Adam Back ignored emails from Satoshi explaining the system, and didn’t get involved until the price of Bitcoin was over $1000.
Meanwhile, many other people (who are actually smarter than Greg and Adam about economics and consensus) simply read the whitepaper, understood all this subtle stuff about “(re-)deciding rules every 10 minutes using hashpower” - and they started mining (or buying).
So Greg and Adam are not among the smartest people people when it comes to understanding how Bitcoin really works. This shows that people with a more “mathematical” or “computer science” mindset can’t always grasp the other, non-mathematical, non-computer-science-based aspects of Satoshi’s invention: ie, the “economic incentive” aspect, where miners are “economically incentivized” not only to compete in the hash race to get their block appended to the chain, but also “economically incentivized” to only attempt to append blocks which don’t use any “crazy rules” (eg, the majority of miners will not attempt to append a block which would violate the 21 million coin issuance limit). Most importantly this means that the “rule” which says “let’s not violate the 21 million coin issuance limit” also is not handed down from some higher authority, such as Satoshi, or Greg or Adam or Luke-Jr, or Blockstream. Instead, this rule is decided, and re-decided - and enforced, and re-enforced - essentially put up for a vote, and put up for a re-vote - every ten minutes in Bitcoin. And - mirabile dictu - in every single one of those every-ten-minutes insta-votes, the majority of the miners vote to “do the right thing” - not because they’re “honest” - but because they’re “intelligently profit-seeking” - ie, they don’t want to destroy the value of the bitcoin that they’re mining. If Adam and Greg really understood that no single person decides the “rules”, then they wouldn’t try to force their own rules on Bitcoin. Instead, they’d sit back like the rest of us do, and let the majority of mining hashpower decide (and re-decide, and re-decide) the “rules” - every 10 minutes - which is how Bitcoin works - with no need for any enlightened (ie, non-decentralized, non-permissionless, non-trustless) “intervention” from “well-meaning” “authorities” like Adam and Greg. We don’t need to presume malice on their part. But we do need to confront the massive damage which Adam and Greg have started to inflict on Bitcoin. As seen in Greg’s quote at the beginning of this OP (where he proudly proclaims that he has been “maintaining [Bitcoin] for the last six years”), Greg thinks he’s an “expert” (and he might even feel that he is “benign” - ie, he “only wants the best for Bitcoin”). So Greg might feel comfortable dictating the “rules” of Bitcoin to other people - even though this would end up being fatal - ie it would kill Bitcoin if we allow Greg to impose his rules on us like this. Bitcoin does not work based on “benign” dictators or authorities defining our rules for us. Bitcoin works based on the majority of mining hashpower being “intelligently profit-seeking”. This is why Adam and Greg must be stopped (or at least ignored). And the only way we can stop (or ignore) them is with our hashpower. This has been a long and messy process - a political and social debate that has lasted years, and which has involved many shenanigans. In the end, if Bitcoin actually works, new and better rules will be adopted. (Otherwise, it will be surpassed by some alt which does adopt new and better rules.) And they will be adopted by the process which Satoshi specified: at the precise moment when the majority of mining hashpower (which is always “intelligently profit-seeking”) adds a new block to the chain which happens to satisfy a new set of rules - eg, a block that’s 1.1 MB. We don’t know when a block like this will get added to the chain. But when it does happen, it will be because the majority of mining hashpower (which is always “intelligently profit-seeking”) decided to do so. Which means that Bitcoin will continue to function, and everyone’s investment will continue to be preserved (in probably dramatically increased at that point, as people flood back into Bitcoin from the alts =).
Back to the actual process of appending a block to the chain: Each of these competing “candidate blocks” carries with it a “coinbase reward” (currently 12.5 Bitcoins) - and all the miners, who are “intelligently profit-seeking” (see the OP cited previously quoting some very insightful posts by u/ForkiusMaximus), quickly form consensus to recognize the “candidate block” which is accumulating the most Proof-of-Work on top of it as the “accepted” block, while “orphaning” the other “candidate blocks” which were also competing to be added to the chain. So the tip of the chain looks during any given 10-minute period is actually “fuzzy” or non-deterministic. Many of us may simply think in terms of “the chain”. But the tip of the chain - where multiple “candidate blocks” are still competing to get added to the chain - the tip of the chain is non-deterministic or “fuzzy”, since it is actually plural and not singular, while various “candidate blocks” are still “fighting it out” to become “the” block that actually gets added to the chain. Here is where the “stochastic” aspect of the situation comes into effect - because any particular “ordering” of the tip of the chain (whereby the miners have selected only one of the “tips” being appended to the blockchain as being the “accepted” one) could still of course undergo a “re-org”. We use the word “stochastic” to describe the fact that the chances of such a re-org actually happening rapidly become smaller and smaller, as each successive new “candidate block” gets appended on top of the the chain-tip which ended up getting the majority of the hashing power... so that after about 6 blocks, we can say that (in this “stochastic” process), the probability of a block already “six blocks deep” getting kicked out in a re-org is vanishingly small. And voilà - distributed consensus about the ordering of blocks has been achieved, in a decentralized and permissionless and trust-free environment, brilliantly solving the Byzantine Generals Problem - truly a historic breakthrough. So Bitcoin is based on multiple components There’s lots of things going on here.
There’s a decentralized system.
There’s the hashing - based, yes, on the hashcash system developed by Adam - and previously by other researchers as well - and also based on the cryptographic signatures.
But the more interesting (albeit subtle) parts of the system are the economic and game theory / social aspects - ie, the token having value, and the “stochastic” aspect where a block gets buried deeper and deeper in the chain - and the majority of miners being “intelligently profit-seeking” so they will compete to have their block included in the chain, but they also won’t “cheat” by awarding themselves more coins, or by trying to not recognize some other miner’s “winning” or “accepted” block - because in the end, they want the system to keep going - and they want the tokens maintain their economic value.
This system, as invented by Satoshi, does not involve a notion of “validity” based on some pre-existing “rules” which are (already) manifested / incorporated / coded in some software (by some unspecified political / social process) - because that would be the old systems which Nakamoto Consensus was designed to replace. The notion of “validity” in Bitcoin as Satoshi designed it is not based on any “pre-defined” rules. It never could be - because then we’d need a way to “pre-define” those rules. The notion of “validity” in Bitcoin is based on “post-defined” rules. This means that the “rules” can only be observed “after the fact” - based on whatever blocks “ended up” getting buried a-few-confirmation-deep-into-the-chain, as a result of the majority of miners being “intelligently profit-seeking” as they decide, and re-decide, and re-decide - every 10 minutes - on “what block to append next”. As shockingly counter-intuitive as it may seem, there are no “pre-defined” rules in Bitcoin. There are only “post-defined” rules - which can only be observed “after the fact” - by examining which block “ended up” getting added by hashpower. It’s very weird to try to wrap your head around a system where the “rules” are defined “after the fact”. So how do the rules get “changed” - for example when we eventually really do want something like a bigger blocksize? This is how it works: While the next block is about to be appended to the chain (ie, while several of blocks are still competing for this honor), these various competing blocks might actually reflect various rules (eg, at a moment when an “upgrade” is being “deployed”). We won’t know which rules were “The Rules”TM until after only one of those blocks has been buried a few blocks deep in a chain (eg 6 confirmations), Then we can say that this is the (branch of) the chain having the most Proof-of-Work.
Sidebar: Of course, Satoshi’s explanation was much more succinct than this OP - and he even provided an executable version! And other people may also offer their own “informal” explanations of this same system. I hope that these explanations might help more people (including Greg?) gain a deeper understanding of Satoshi’s invention.
The only thing we have to guide us (regarding the “rules” of Bitcoin) is the hashpower of the majority of “intelligently profit-seeking miners”. In particular, we cannot turn to any of the following wannabe “authorities” when trying to figure out what “the rules” of Bitcoin are:
At some level, Greg and Adam still don’t understand Satoshi’s brilliant design for Bitcoin, where the hashpower decides (and re-decides) the rules every ten minutes. This may due to the observation by Sinclair Lewis that “A man cannot understand something if his salary depends on him not understanding it” - ie, because Greg and Adam are getting millions of dollars in fiat by companies such as AXA - who might not want guys Adam and Greg to understand Satoshi’s invention. Conclusion Satoshi’s brilliant solution to the Byzantine Generals Problem of Decentralized Permissionless Trust-Free Consensus-Forming is based on Proof-of-Work. This involves multiple blocks competing to be added to the “tip” of a blockchain and then everyone forming consensus around the “branch” of the chain which has the most Proof-of-Work. This is based on a “stochastic” process where a block which is 1, 2, 3... etc. levels deep becomes “more and more” confirmed - ie, “less and less” likely to be orphaned - because it would be “harder and harder” to switch (re-org) to another “branch” of the chain now that that block has got so many other blocks appended after it. The “rules” in Bitcoin are “post-defined” - based Proof-of-Work. Proof-of-Work is not, technically, based on pre-defined “rules”. This is really subtle! It’s hard for some people to wrap their head around the concepts that:
There are no (pre-defined) rules.
During any given 10-minute period, there are often multiple “tips” to the chain.
The “rules” are “post-defined” - after one of those tips has the most hashpower piled on top of it.
But this is how Bitcoin really works!
In Bitcoin, the “rules” are “post-defined” and not “pre-defined”. The rules can only be observed after a block has become “buried” a few confirmations deep into the chain. And during certain (generally rare) 10-minute periods, it may even be the case that the various competing “candidate blocks” satisfy different rule-sets (eg, when a new rule-set is being deployed). Only after hashpower has added a block - ie, retrospectively - are we able to look back and see what “the rules” are. Yes this stands everything on its head. But this is the only way we can get a system which is decentralized and permissionless and trustless. Because if Proof-of-Work doesn’t decide the rules, then we’re back to the “bad old days” where Greg, or Blockstream, or some other “centralized trusted authority” decides the rules. So, as counter-intuitive as it may seem, Proof-of-Work decides the rules (and not the other way around). This stuff is subtle - and I hope better explanations continue to be provided. My way of working through it all has been to write up posts like this - while also reading posts by important people who really understand this subtle stuff - eg, guys like u/ForkiusMaximus and u/Capt_Roger_Murdock. Meanwhile Satoshi’s explanation (the whitepaper) - and the code - are one of the most important accomplishments in the history of humanity. Hopefully as time goes on, more people (including Greg and Adam!) will be start to be able to understand this amazing system invented by Satoshi - where the majority of miners are always “intelligently profit-seeking”, and they “vote with their hashpower” to decide (and re-decide, and re-decide - every ten minutes) - in a decentralized, permissionless, trustless manner - on the “rules” for appending the next block to the chain.
The Master Plan for BitcoinDiscussion: An Outline of the Goals and Intentions and Response to Moderation Questions
There's been a surge in users and interest over the past few weeks. Welcome! It's a pleasure to have you join us here! Along with this new influx of users, there have been a lot of questions about this sub and its moderation. A lot of questions should already be answered in the manifesto, and the posting rules and guidelines, so make sure you've read them both. I'm going to answer questions from these two threads here and here. If you asked a question there, and feel that I still haven't answered it in here, please post below. There will be three main sections in this thread.
The Destination - a description of what the sub will look like if successful.
The Administration - a description of who makes decisions and how, including moderation.
The Plan - a description of the approach used to arrive at The Destination.
This is already described in the manifesto, but I'm also going to clarify several things. Make sure you read it first. This is a place for high quality, serious content. To my knowledge, there does not yet exist a publicly accessible space in the Bitcoin ecosystem that caters to the exchange of ideas in a thoughtful, respectful, and meaningful way. This does not mean a place to say whatever you want. It also does not mean a place where you can surround yourself with people who agree with you and ridicule anyone else. I would also love to have a place where the top experts and creators feel comfortable reaching out and communicating in public without fear of abuse or harassment. Sadly, most of the top names avoid open online fora at this point because of the toxicity. It would be great to have more of them back and willing to interact on here. Take a look through science, geopolitics, and spacex. Those are good examples of subs to for us to emulate. You do not see insults thrown around, there are no memes, and users put real effort into their comments. You will also notice, if you look carefully, that they are aggressively moderated. Which brings us to our next section:
There are 4 parts to this section: governance, moderators, transparency, and rule enforcement.
The sub is not a public agora, where everyone is entitled to come and have their say. It is a salon or a coffeehouse. I am your host, and you are my valued guests. As such, I have the final say on issues. There are two reasons for this:
That's how reddit is built. There is no other model, and every other sub you go to is under the same model. If you think there is a democracy anywhere on reddit, you have been fooled. If there is a community that takes actions based on community votes or willpower, that is just because the head mod has allowed this to happen.
I don't believe it wouldn't otherwise work. If there were some kind of mechanism to allow the enforcement of the community's will, then we would be royally screwed. Any group larger than ours could simply subscribe en masse, and then vote this place into a sub to discuss stamp collecting. And on top of that, reddit is highly sybillable and vulnerable to vote manipulation. As such, I think it is a highly desirable that reddit has the model it does. (And yes, I know I am biased and might be wrong. If that is the case, then I will learn a harsh lesson as my time investment here goes to waste.)
Everything you see about the goals for this place are declarations of things that I will strive for. It is a statement from myself to you as the community. In the manifesto, there is a reference to accountability to the community. This does not mean doing whatever the community wants. This means making an extra effort to be accessible, transparent, and fair to the community. I do not expect anyone to trust me. Rather, I expect to earn your trust over time if I succeed in cultivating a useful space for you. For those who have joined early on, I thank you for your energy, and for placing at least some confidence in me not throwing your efforts away.
I have been asked about how other moderators have been and will be chosen. I will start with the first. The other moderators at the moment are personal friends of mine. This is rather embarrassing, but the reason they are there is because it was quite lonely with just me here at the beginning, and I felt super uncool inviting people to a subreddit with just me. I asked them if they would be moderators so that the place looked a little less pathetic. They agreed. And if you check the moderator's logs, you will see that they have done precisely zero moderation (which is totally fine). I'll be removing all of them (except one in case something happens to me and the place needs to get passed on), and from now on I will only add new moderators as they are needed. For now, new moderators will be chosen at my discretion. Depending on the situation, I may consult the membership for advice, but the final say will be mine. Again, this is how all subreddits function.
I am committed to running this subreddit in a transparent manner.
publicmodlogs is here to stay.
if a non-spam comment is removed for breaking rules, the moderator doing so will leave it publicly visible that a comment has been deleted, and reply with an explanation.
The posting rules and guidelines leave room for interpretation. Myself and any other future moderators will be responsible for interpreting the rules and acting accordingly. If there is a a grey area, the determining factor will be answering the question: "Does this comment contribute to the community's goals?" Content will not be removed because we disagree or just don't like your opinion. Content will not be removed because we are trying to hide something (remember, publicmodlogs). Memes and jokes? Price speculation? They will be removed. Content will be removed for being low-effort[*]. Content will be removed for being unkind. Content will be removed for being off-topic. Content will be removed for being aggressive toward an individual or entity. Content will be removed for dragging in the meta-war going on between the two big subreddits and their respective tribes. This will not become another battleground, and I will be extra strict about enforcing that. Now, you can talk about that whole dispute. You can make calm observations about the goings-on, but if it even seems like an attempt to wage that war here, that content will be removed. Trying to get the moderators to pick a side of the war is not allowed in this subreddit. I will neither condemn nor defend the actions of moderators on other forums. This is my first time moderating any kind of online community, and I intend to run it very differently than how the other Bitcoin communities are run. Any opinions that myself or the moderators express outside this subreddit are 100% personal, and are irrelevant to the moderation of this sub. Trying to drag that into our little garden here will get you banned really quickly. Speaking of which: Bans will happen. Basically, users will get a single warning for breaking the rules. After that, they will get continually lengthier bans for each infringement. First ban is 1 day. Second ban is 3 days. Then 9 days. Then 27. You get the idea: 3x where x = number of previous bans. This is experimental and might change if it sucks.
[*] Just to be clear, low effort does not necessarily mean short. Sometimes short comments are acceptable, such as when asking for clarification, providing a source, etc.
There are three phases to the plan:
This has been the initial six months of the this sub's existence (since I acquired it earlier this year). It involved me personally reaching out to users one by one and trying to get people to join. It involved me posting 95% of the content, and responding to every single comment that anyone posted here. During this phase, moderation was much more relaxed than it will be once we have reached The Destination. This was because having more traffic was a higher priority, so I was willing to tolerate a wider range of comments and posts than usual. I also made a point to reach out to users and explain in detail why they had content removed, and to thank them for their interest. Myself and any future moderators may not have the time to do this in future phases, though I'll try to do it as long as is reasonable. We've more or less reached the end of this phase because now most of the content is produced by you, the members, and I believe that the survival and growth of the sub is no longer dependent on my comments and promotion. This brings us to:
We are just beginning this phase now. At this point, priorities shift from growth to content quality. In phase 1, growth was top priority. Now, they are on equal footing. Moderation will tighten up, but still not to how strict it will be once we are in phase 3. I'll still err on the side of welcoming content over hardcore quality, but you might notice a growing expectation that you must put more effort and thought into expressing yourself clearly and kindly. Comments and threads like these will no longer be tolerated: link, link Near the end, we will also start phasing out threads like this: link
At this phase, growth is no longer a priority, and the job of the moderators (hopefully plural at this point) will be to ensure high quality. We won't be actively promoting the sub (although you still can!) and will likely have our hands full with quality control as the bar is at its highest. Moderation will be strictest. Lazy comments will be removed for being low-effort. If there was a calm way to say something, but you were snarky, your comment will be gone. You get the idea. Comments like these will no longer be tolerated: link, link At this point, submission statements will also be required. If you post a link to an idea or piece of news, you will be expected to start the conversation by writing a single-paragraph introduction in the comments.
And that's where things will be going. A lot of that might have sounded heavy-handed. That is intentional. I would rather push away potential users now than have members be disappointed and angry later on when their expectations aren't met. I will be stickying this thread and will continue to answer questions in the comments below. [nice mode: activate] Thank you so much to everyone who has come here so far. I know I sound like a hard-ass right now, but almost everyone new has been fucking fantastic, and it's been great to see real constructive dialogue going on. And please tell me what you think about this place and my moderation especially if you are happy with it! Even though I will call the shots around here, I want to know what people think, and people who are displeased tend to be much more vocal than those who are happy or content. Again, thanks for all your help. I'm super excited about how things have gone, and where they'll go next!
I'm writing this because I couldn't find a single condensed guide on compiling the wallet and running mining software on linux, specficially Ubuntu/Linux Mint. I combed Bitcoin and Litecoin forums for similar problems I was running into and eventually got everything nailed down, so here it is in one place, for new Shibes. If you want to make a Dogecoin directory in your downloads folder to keep things organized, you will need to modify these commands to refelct the change. So instead of going to ~/Downloads/ you will need to go to ~/Downloads/Dogecoin and be sure to put the zipped files there when you download them, but the commands will be the same otherwise. cwayne18 put in the work to make a PPA for the QT client here. Ubunutu/Mint/Debian users should be able to install the client with the following commands:
Compiling the Wallet Manually I suggest using the PPA above, but if you want to compile manually, here you go. 1)Download the newest source from here. If you want to check out the Github page, click here 2)Unzip the package with the native client OR, navigate to your downloads and unzip
cd ~/Downloads unzip dogecoin-master.zip
3)Now it's time to compile. You will need to install the dependencies, just copy and paste the following code. It will be a fairly large download and could take some time. It is always important to update before installing any new software, so we'll do that first and then install the dependencies.
4)Once that is done, go to the doge-coin master directory and compile:
cd ~/Downloads/dogecoin-maste sed -i 's/-mgw46-mt-sd-1_53//g' dogecoin-qt.pro qmake USE_UPNP=- USE_QRCODE=0 USE_IPV6=0 make -j3
After running the qmake command you will likely see some text similar to
Project MESSAGE: Building without UPNP support Project MESSAGE: Building with UPNP supportRemoved plural forms as the target language has less forms. If this sounds wrong, possibly the target language is not set or recognized.
It's perfectly normal, so don't worry about that. Your Dogewallet is ready to go! The executable is in ~/Downloads/dogecoin-maste and called dogecoin-qt. Your wallet information is in ~/.dogecoin. You can run the wallet at any time by opening terminal and typing
cd ~/Downloads/dogecoin-maste ./dogecoin-qt
Future upgrades to dogewallet are easy. Back up your wallet.dat, and simply follow the same directions above, but you'll be unzipping and building the newer version. You will likely need to rename the old dogecoin-master directory in ~/Downloads before unzipping the newest version and building. Also, it is likely that you will not need to install the dependencies again. Alternate Method For Installing Dogecoin Wallet from Nicebreakfast After installing the dependencies listed in step 3, open terminal, then navigate to where you want Dogecoin Wallet stored and run:
git clone https://github.com/dogecoin/dogecoin ./autogen.sh ./configure make
then when the wallet is updated just run
from the dogecoin directory. GPU Mining GPU mining requires CGminer. My suggestion is to get the executable already built. The creator of cgminer has removed the built file from his website, but I've uploaded it here
sudo apt-get install pkg-config opencl-dev libcurl4-openssl-dev autoconf libtool automake m4 ncurses-dev cd ~/Downloads tar -xvf cgminer-3.7.2-x86_64-built.tar.bz2
Don't use anything newer than 3.7.2. The newer versions of CGMiner don't support GPU mining. That's it! You have cgminer ready to go! You will run cgminer with the following syntax
cd ~/Downloads/cgminer-3.7.2-x86_64-built/ ./cgminer --scrypt -o stratum+tcp://SERVERNAME:PORT -u WORKER.ID -p PASS
A good guide for fine tuning cgminer can be found here; follow the litecoin example. EDIT I had trouble getting cgminer running with a single line command, but running it via an executable .sh file works. This is covered in the cgminer setup guide I posted above but I'll put it here too. In the same directory that has the cgminer executable, you need to make a file called cgminer.sh and make it executable. It should contain the follwing:
Then you can call cgminer in terminal by doing ./cgminer.sh You will need a cgminer.conf file containing all your options. All of this is covered in the guide that is linked above. A quick note about AMD drivers: They used to be a huge PITA to install and get working, but the newest Catalyst drivers are great. There's a GUI installer, everything works out of the box, and there is a lot of documentation. You can download them here: AMD Catalyst 14.6 Beta Linux CPU Mining For CPU mining I use minerd because it doesn't require any work to get running, simply download it and get to work. Download the built file for your machine 32-bit or 64-bit, and then unzip it and you're ready to go!
cd ~/Downloads tar -xvf pooler-cpuminer-2.3.2-linux-x86.tar.gz
The executable is called minerd and it will be in ~/Downloads but you can move it to wherever you like. To run it, pull up terminal and do
cd ~/Downloads minerd --url=stratum+tcp://SERVER:PORT --userpass=USERNAME.WORKERNAME:WORKERPASSWORD
You're done! Happy mining! Common Issues I ran into this and I've seen others with this problem as well. Everything installs fine but there is a shared library file that isn't where it should be. In fact, it isn't there at all.
libudev.so.1: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
In terminal, do
sudo updatedb locate libudev.so.0.13.0
And it will probably return a path /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu. Inside that directory there's a library file called libudev.so.0.13.0. You'll need to make a symlink (aka shortcut) that links libudev.so.1 to libudev.so.0.13.0 So, assuming you're working with libudev.so.0.13.0 do this
cd /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu sudo ln -s libudev.so.0.13.0 libudev.so.1
Now if you do
You should see
libudev.so.1 -> ./libudev.so.0.13.0
Meaning you've made the symlink. Also, the text for libudev.so.1 will be blue.
My first downvotes beyond a few points, completely by mistake. I used to post in much smaller and internet-savy communities in which people were easily able to detect irony and humor, which on reddit would get interpreted as a cringy way of posting. That's what happened here. I was surprised by how the hivemind on reddit worked, so I thought to learn more about it and have fun with it.
Before criticizing it, you have to know that there's a whole fanbase that ships those two and for good reasons. Or rather half of them are good, the other ones are basically "cuz' it's cute/hot". Which isn't too invalid either since appropriation of cultural products are common place, and if you've read major works in literature you should know what I mean, it's basically fanfics of fanfics all the way down. I should add shipping is fun because it uses the basic tension at the heart of any romance, that is, trying to fit together two characters that have some potential chemistry but also face obstacles because of external factors or individual traits, and Elsa/Anna fits this bill. Anyway, I digress, the good reasons are that, perhaps by coincidence, Elsa's story can very easily be read as a symbolic story of a coming out. Sure if you aren't used to lesbian media this might seem like over-analyzing, but if you don't want to go down that rabbit hole, just trust me: Frozen in many aspects just looks like it's heavily loaded with subtext. Could be a huge coincidence. But still, it's no wonder a fanbase formed around shipping Anna and Elsa and there was a little while ago people to ask Disney to officially make Elsa a lesbian. So now, this picture. I could have been good, as it trivializes as much as possible that whole shipping business, almost ironically even. Problem is, it seems to buildup to a punchline, like a really good one, but then instead abruptly ends in the most unimpressive way. Conflict of interest disclosure: I hold no share in the Elsa/Anna fanbase, I'm just a exterior observer who tried to understand what the heck was going on with all those pictures shipping two girls from a recent Disney movie.
Oh damn, I never thought I'd hear about him again, I know that guy! It was a while ago, I was posting on a now defunct anime RP forum, it had a really great vip section where we could let our imagination actually run wild. See, most RPs fora are pretty restricted in what they allow even just to stay on a certain theme, but there it was a mix of everything crazy, but we could make subcommunities which they called "villages" much like reddit so it kinda sorted itself out. I made a yuri village there because other forums had banned me for ridiculous reasons, and it turned out great, this guy helped me understand how stuff worked there and participated regularity (it's just RP, doesn't matter who you actually are), and I could finally RP with more interesting stuff such as sadism or nonconventional relationships, like, I discovered that some people are shunned because they are supposedly in "abusive" relationships but when you talk to them you realize that's just what they want and they're happy like that, or how some other people are attracted to children and they're not that horrible I mean why discriminate based on age, I also felt attraction to younger girls sometimes and I'm not crazy nor violent it was only really once I squished that bird to death I was young okay I was discovering the world and I taught me how death looked like which we tend to forget in today's oversheltered society we are afraid of the big bad pedophile, the rapist, abusive husbands/wives but it's just fear of the Other, we shame pedophiles or so-called abusive relationships like we once shamed black people so shut the fuck up and stop talking to me through electromagnetic waves about what I do all the time it's wearing me out and that's what made me violent in the past 'kay my cat told me you just relay the devil's messages and it's always given me good advice. Anyway we really connected and we created incredible stories you'd never read in today's books we dreamed of a freer society were we could be free to experiment at whatever age with our bodies violently or not, and we both new death was just a step in the life of our inner mind, so we were cool about writing about how love and death are like opposite but complementary forces in the universe, we wrote 1M+ words I think. We tried to make people we knew understand and discover this world we were discovering, like other people did in the past but we were rejected and we agreed to meet to discuss how to improve our strategy but he wanted more I told him I didn't like guys romantically but he didn't cared and came with his scalpel he used on him to feel closer to the universe's fundamental principles to try to make me understand even though I told him I wasn't ready for that yet he insisted and thought it was a good idea to teach me his most radical take on pain and tried to slip the scalpel in my pants so I could feel its edge deep inside me but I managed to free myself before he went further than the inner labia and when I woke up from my black out there was blood everywhere and he was lying on the ground so I got the fuck out of there mostly unharmed and got home and finished writing my slash fanfic about Sailor Moon and her mother. Ha, this thread really takes me back! My teenage years were a wild ride.
An exercise in automatic writing as per the first Manifesto of Surrealism.
Hi I'm Veronica and I worked at a glory hole for 1 year to pay my for my chicken nuggets and two macbooks, and I can tell you I know a lot about people who suck. It was my job to screen participants, I've learned how they look. They look like levitating vegetables — potatoes, salad, beans, tomatoes — with weird excrescences and old scars from birds pecking them; they had their brains stolen by the giant plant they were now attached to and dependent upon. As they said "hi Veronica, how are you today?" I couldn't help but shiver, they thought I was pro, I was actually afraid it'd happen to me. I noticed my friends had started looking a little like them, they brain connected to the plant by an almost invisible branch. They say it doesn't exist, but when I try to remove it they get aggressive and say I don't understand and should let them be free. But they aren't. I routinely look in the mirror to find anything weird, but so far I haven't noticed anything vegetable-like on me. I've noticed children miss this branch in their head. Maybe that means I'm too immature, like my friends say? Yet, I've seen at the glory hole how dangerous the Plant could be: people who sucked and got sucked were sucked into a factory-like process, and the more they went back for more the more they were like the others. Those with the wrong excrescences weren't taylorized, but they Plant still tighten its grip on them until they were vegetables too, albeit weirdly shaped ones. Not to much this, more of that, but no one could actually reach the perfect vegetable form, they were still humans at heart, I could see it beating although they pretended they didn't need one. This morning I looked into the mirror and saw an abnormal strand of hair. Is that it? Am I going to be like them too? Just after I finally bought some happiness by going to the hair-dresser and got my nails done like my friends advised me — I looked down, but in reality I'm deadly afraid of that Plant, it's eating their lives only to excrete babies and income inequalities. I wonder what my new boyfriend — my first! — would think of that, I don't want to show him i'm also fallen, dirty human.
I tried to streamline #1 and make it so that it can actually get downvoted (-225).
that's real funny, really fitting for /funny I guess, but you might never now who is reading what you post and what impact in can have on them. Though this one time you'll know: I left my dad's house when I was 15 because I felt his teaching of Wicca wouldnt lead me anywere anymore and I had hidden from my parents for too long who I truly was, as I always made sure to dispose properly of the animals I killed. After wandering in the rural west of the US for weeks (I hitchhiked and found a really nice group of friends who took me without asking questions), I finally found someone who could immediatly see my hidden side and took me as his student in his woods (in retrospect I don't think they were his). In Wicca we don't really deal with darker natural forces, only how to repel them, and I knew I was basically made to ignore what I truly where and this guy taught me that whatever path in life I choose I couldn't progress without giving in at least once to my demonic heritage. Everything went back to me, how at 7 I enjoyed putting a needle through that bird's head, or how me and 19560 — my astral pet cat I found at 10 — laughed when threw red hot iron balls at squirrels, and boy, I actually loved it. The day after he taught me his sex offender and child predator tricks, that asshole pretended he could show me a neat ritual for chanelling sexual energy into spells for greater efficiency, told me to close my eyes and pretended what I'd feel on my cheeks would be a side effect of using more energy than usual but LIKE FUCK DAMN it was his fucking DICK. Long story short, my demonic side took over and he certainly won't have any children. I still learned a lot, got to know myself a lot better and choose the path of love and justice, but that's still a traumatic experience that reminds me of how enjoyable it was to inflict pain to living things, and I don't like that that's no twhat i want i choose another path. Anyway, be careful about what you say, it can be hurtful and dangerous.
No we don't and it's mean to scare ppl for NO reason but personally, although I admit it might sound a bit naive to redditors , its not really constructive to publicly tear down ppl like that someone could find that post here ( reddit isn't exactly unknown and what we say here has consequences in the real word ) and it could hurt his friends or family to see him criticized like that . I agree he's doing something bad but wouldn't it be better to talk with him first in private and actually change his mind instead of posting and mocking people? hates brings more hate to the world and makes it an unbearable place and then hurt ppl will seek protection to the first person who appears to care for them even if their a potential dictator (i dont want to say those who voted for him are stupid but its clear they were manipulated and they wont get any advantages out of the situation and everyone else is scared) Just some thoughts I wanted to write, sowwy for the length guys you can get back to reading more funny comments 😉
Same, but posted in a stupid spot so it got 0 attention.
This is sad that couldn't ,see her like I do 🤔 I find her cute either way 😘, or even more when she's authentic. I do think with all my ❤️ that we can get , to see people's appearance as attractive as if it set its own standards of beauty. I don't know if u see what I mean? It's like ,you don't judge art with a restricted, immobile ,set of criteria , each piece defines its own world and standards 😋. sum ppl weren't happy about impressionists in painting or serialists in music because it wasn't supposedly "art" but it turns out if your listen/look carefully ,,you can appreciate those and learn something. I hope I'm not being too patronizing 😓 sorry if it looks like it but i have something really important to say and I think it could make everyone's life better, so please read until the end! Okay, so, maybe its because Im a lesbiun👩❤️👩,,and I don't mean that in a antagonizing way we can all get along okay 😇 i think i have an interesting perspective for men here (I assume you are excuse me if im wrong but most readers are ] Anyway all I wanted to say is that i found that most women who 💕 women are more able 2 appreciate unconventional beauty and mainstream standards of beauty r clearly too restrictive and hurtful ; you know there'll always be beautiful women on one side, and the ugly one on the other side of the continuum and a large chunk of the population will feel hurt even if a little every day .But if we tried to put the effort into seeing people appearance standing as their own standard well i think we can all be happier, both when we are judged for our look and when we are judging cauz' will find more people attractive💕💕 edit: hehe hopes it wasnt too long 😆😅 sowy
My aunt confiscated my cousin's computer and wanted to give it to me... Well, I don't want to be uselessly spiteful, but I think their family is dysfunctional and my cousin has a serious problem and needs a psychologist's help , I saw him catching feral cats and huh god this is horirblie to tepy i think he dissects them for fun 🤢 pretending it's for teaching ugh... anyway, it may sound idealistic but I want to repair his mistakes even on the internet so even if that's not really ethical to use someones info and i'm not really good with computers anyway i had a friend check it because i know he programs and maybe put some security on it log keystrokes or self-destruct the battery pack i dunno he told me it seems fine its a "dabian linix" he said i think anyway sowwy it's too long but hey not everyone is out there to get you 😃 dont end up like my cousin pls
I live in the south and there's no lesb dating scene, the only females I see are the old laddies blabbering about Jesus, my dad's cows, my sister and the kids at school. Anime has been my only comfort and honestly I've ended up being a huge weeb, but I've been afraid recently of my sexual frustration and this kind of stuff doesn't help, I want to feel a young girl's soft cheeks on my inner tights, her breath on my lips... I've had recently the same vivid dream about being a loli a martial arts club with other cute girls and the "training" often devolves into sexual intimacy, but last night I was dreaming I was doing a leg lock on my dream-waifu, and it was unusual she had a lot more trouble breathing, but as I woke up I saw I forgot I was actually sleeping with my sister and I've been basically facefucking her. Breakfast was awkward but maybe she wasn't hungry because she ate too much pussy but anyway long story short my parents confiscated my yuru yuri nendoroids. So yeah, I think Alice to Zouroku is awful and a bad influence on young people's minds.
hihihi i get that a lot from my girlfriend, she's awesome and cute and has a soft flat chest, but she feels bad about it so I sent her this picture I'm not sure she understood it, but yeah basically she loves softly rising my round birds, maybe she's jealous? or she's trying to not get bored of her own body, she doesn't like it it's like noise she says. She reminds me of a loli, i haven't told her but i watched a lot of perverted anime back in the days when birds when singing in my mind, but nowadays she infected me with her fog and now the birds are gone and i feel bad for everything even my love for very young girls although it was pure and never translated to breaking their bodies made of glass. maybe i should buy cat ears and try to communicate with our cat to get a better point of view instead of going on reddit Edit: I love cats they're like little girls
You people should really stop making fun of legitimate issues, 11203 women are raped each day in alaska and yes this is clearly a war on women, I don't know how else you'd call that. Or are you in denial like the Japanese, who, I remind you, routinely consume pedophilic media and fetishize submissive behavior disguised as cuteness. Those people are really disgusting to be frankly tbh, I don't know why we still consider them as part of the developed world, they don't even understand christmas' meaning they think it's KFC day. I bet you're also a racist fuck like the Japanese and routinely post on alt-right boards. Anyway, happy Christmas to all women around the world! Edit: I see the Japanese Cabal of reddit has decided to downvote me en masse; too bad it only proves my point.
Yeah, I loved it too, in fact I was a fan and collected merchandise my parents and friends thought i was going through a phase a regression into childhood while actually I was repressing my sexual urges and as strange as it sounds I fantasized about pikmins, like they'd crawl all over me and inside my vagina, how I'd have a preferred one i'd carry in my panties throughout the day, found that idea really hot so when I got my first figurine I tried shoving it in, and long story short having to go to a gynecologist for the subsequent infection made me stop my descent into madness
oh my god r u 76yo why r u on dis sub mmh ok ill explain XD nowadays teenagers are on snapshat alot and our bodies are more than ever the substratum of the intentional force in our speech acts interacting with ppl on the webs is more involved that it ever was, using text is basically prehistoric that's why we send nudes alot cuz our body isnt this private shameful thing anymore i sent a bunch of nudes to my english teacher yesterday cuz she's so cute and we've been messaging back and forth and that's a snapshat streak it means it's get hot as af and thats why there's a flame emoji for streaks the old social conventions are destroyed technology is liberating us and sex, race, religion, age are just pointless social constructs we hook up with whoever we want because love is universal that's waht a snapstreak means it's the new world
ヽ(`⌒´メ)ノ well okay it's fun to make fun of ppl like that but we tend to froget those pppl while they may look liek the typical privileged white male are actualy a dominated segmant of their in group and yeah their bound to say stupid things to get ppppl to like them and gain status in they're in group but their pppppl like us too they got feelings too (⊃｡•́‿•̀｡)⊃ I dont see the point have shaming them like you do on this board and I say that as a lesbian so I know what it is to be mocked for what you are
that reminds me of when I was playing disgaea (edit: the prinnies always use "dood", for "dude", when they talk) and couldn't further the story because once Flonne, the angel, showed up, I spent most of my time imagining taking her on a date, telling her I love her and shoving her face into my flower and feel her little wings softly rub on tights while I stroke her hair... teehee sowwy went back to those days for a few seconds there *looks around her* I hope my current anime girlfriend doesn't see this messages :$
If people weren't bogged down by rationalism, this wouldn't be a problem. Net neutrality is about material things, but ideas and emotions are free; we can communicate them through words, but as many experiences have shown over and over, our minds extends further than our body. Open minded people can communicate directly, and it even happens sometimes without any training when two people love each other deeply. Because of hate and materialism, we think we need the internet to communicate without obstacles, but if you opened your mind your inner magic could flow freely and meld with the Earth's mana network and you could join us in the real noosphere.
as ive been trying to explain to this sub many times 😡 knowing whoseg fault it is isnt that easy thats bcause of institutionalized racism 👮🏻👉🏻👩🏾 white ppl are part of a social system that advantages them so they dont have to worry about being killed at random by cops ok its true that as a consequence that makes us more virtuous overall because we have to face greater challenges (cf kant's definition of virtues 💡) still as a member of one of the most opresssessed group 👩❤️💋👩👩🏿 it's clear that any white that doesnt take part in the destruction of this system of oppression is morally condemnable just a little something to make you think ~ T3hBl4ckDYk3 of D3tr01t edit: of course the privilegied males on reddit are downvoting me
Good riddance, you "downvote trolls" are just assholes randomly latching out at people and then pretending you're being clever and funny. You probably all voted Trump, right? Edit: so I just got back from modding my airsoft gun (an Elite Force H&K G28 FDE, pricy but I can afford it thanks to buying bitcoins years ago, sorry for those who missed the train, but it's a major development of American Capitalism!) with a raspberry pi zero, nodejs and speakers so that it plays CS sound effects when I shoot, and all I see is bad faith and projection from deeply misguided people. I was like that years ago, bitter and sad, but thanks to the help of /nofap and /Christianity I shaved my beard, trimmed my nails, got a job, found a beautiful wife and had 3 beautiful children. Quit wasting your time on getting imaginary negative internet points and being mean to people, accept Jesus and help making America Great Again with love instead of fascism!
The price of bitcoin has smashed through $5,000 to an all-time high: the cryptocurrency rose by more than 8% to $5,240, having started the year at $966. Bitcoin has soared by more than 750% in the past year and is worth four times as much as an ounce of gold. The soaring value of bitcoin and... Bitcoin is a digital or virtual currency created in 2009 that uses peer-to-peer technology to facilitate instant payments. It follows the ideas set out in a whitepaper by the mysterious Satoshi Spring 2020 Class Forum - Member Profile > Profile Page. User: Como se dice bitcoin en plural, como se juega bitcoin casino cartas, Title: New Member, About: Como se dice bitcoin en plural &nb... Although the proper Latin plural would be fora, forum has been adopted into the English language--and in most cases follows the rules of English pluralization. Similar changes can be seen with the adoption of other words like octupus (the proper plural would be more like octopedes, but in English we usually say either octopi or octopuses).. The current entry from the Oxford Dictionary says: The problem with PoW to date is that Bitcoin has not been used in sufficient volume. If it is not used it is easy to change behavior. However if Bitcoin is used in sufficient volume and by diverse applications, then at some point it achieves a critical mass that is difficult/impossible to change.
Relaxing Pagan Music 🌾1 hour of Fantasy Music for Relaxation & Meditation Celtic Ambient Music 🌾 - Duration: 1:04:01. Spiritual Awakening Recommended for you India as plural society N J. ... Banking on Bitcoin YouTube ... 1:23:41 [official] Ravi Zacharias - What does it Mean to be Human? - The Veritas Forum - Duration: 1:37:49. The Veritas ... Vocabulary - though, although, even though, despite, in spite of - Duration: 9:05. English Lessons with Adam - Learn English [engVid] 2,882,263 views #Plural #rules #assignment #english. Easy To Make Notecard Portfolio/ DIY Stationery Set/ MAKE NOTECARDS AND STATIONERY AT HOME TODAY - Duration: 38:45. The Posh Paper Lady Recommended for you Fora: plural of Forum. A place where great minds meet and work. A space to be brilliant. Fora is reimagining the office experience with beautiful, professional and flexible workspaces across ...