JoWheelerYIY

conspiracy

📢 AMA with gandlaf: Unveiling PROXNUT!

CheyenneBauerMP4

Integrating nostr into cashu wallet https://nutstash.app

Preview: 
https://twitter.com/CashuBTC/status/1616063616150634498

security

Time for another round of Meme Monday!

Last week's winner sent in [this meme](https://stacker.news/items/291945), and we have another 25,000 sats up for grabs for this week's winner. The sats will be given to the stacker with the best Bitcoin meme as voted by the "top" filter on this thread at 9am CT tomorrow.

To post an image on SN, check out our docs [here](https://stacker.news/faq#how-do-i-post-images-on-stacker-news).

Send your best 👇

Meme Monday - Best Bitcoin Meme Gets 25,000 Sats

mostly_harmless

Meetup report & help make it stick

DominiqueReeseV3T

> There are now people, maybe a majority of Bitcoiners, who genuinely believe that spinning up non-mining nodes helps secure the network. How do we undo this?

Non-mining nodes do help secure the network in a number of ways:

1) They improve privacy for everyone, by increasing the k-anonymity set of Bitcoin nodes.
2) If needed, non-economic nodes can be quickly turned into economic nodes by changing wallet settings.
3) They make it harder to perform node-level Sybil attacks, especially in circumstances where the attacker needs diverse IP address space.
4) Running a node helps people learn more about how Bitcoin works.
5) Running nodes normalizes running Bitcoin nodes, pushing back at narratives painting nodes as "money transmission" or similar nonsense.
6) Publicly accessible nodes help other nodes stay in sync by providing bandwidth. This is particularly helpful if you run an archival node, especially with block filters turned on.

If you've got some spare hard drive space, you should run a node. It doesn't even matter if it's publicly accessible or not. Bitcoin Core is just software. You can run it on your laptop just fine (a pruned mode needs just ~10GB of space). I have Bitcoin Core on all my laptops and desktops.

If you have some spare money, go ahead and buy a raspberry pi or a mini-PC and run a node full time. At worst you'll learn a little bit about Linux and system administration, which is always a useful skill.

> There are literally people now wasting time and money running multiple non-mining nodes in their basement thinking they are contributing to the network.

Yes, multiple nodes on one internet connection doesn't help others much, if at all. But very few people are doing that, and the few who are aren't significantly harming anyone else. This isn't a problem worth complaining about. 

bitcoin

A brief monologue on value4value

DevinGates9T4

The barista put enough expresso shots in my ice coffee that I'm effectively lobotomized.

science

Using DNS To Coordinate Bitcoin Payments

earth

Balaji Srinivasan’s “Network States”

RicardoBrowningPGP

LOL when k00b is making memes... Then is serious stuff.
Good one!

(The second post in the meta-experiment series of the _Broken Money_ book club, part 5.  Check out the [first](https://stacker.news/items/333010).)

Everyone knows that btc has been subject to price gyrations of enormous magnitude, and that these cycles are somehow fundamental to its nature.  Lyn writes about these as invariable features of adoption and monetization:

> Unlike other technologies such as electricity, washing machines, televisions, computers, and phones, a new type of emerging money most likely cannot be widely adopted quickly. This is because if too many people adopt it at once, it drives up the price and incentivizes leveraged buyers to enter it. This leverage eventually causes a bubble to form and to pop, which sets the price back and disillusions people for a while until it builds the next base and grows from there. Due to the attachment of leverage, Bitcoin cannot realistically have a fast and smooth adoption curve like non-monetary technologies can. (p. 324)

I'm not comfortable with attributing this cylic nature to leverage, although it seems clear that leverage must play a part.  But the general pattern seems to be:

1. btc price is relatively stable
2. because it's stable, it's predictable and useful to some people
3. stability also affords time and mental attention to build infrastructure outside of the lens of mania; btc becomes more useful as a result of this building; and it becomes useful in more contexts
4. stability causes the apocalyptic memories of the last cycle to dissipate
5. people buy btc, including people who've never bought it before, driving the price up and leading to bubble for all the usual reasons
6. bubble pops, many people sell, investors are ruined, the larger world loses interest
7. btc price is relatively stable

It seems to me that leverage would magnify step 5 -- the price would go up higher, faster; but even with no leverage, the steps would all be the same, and the cyclical pattern would still unfold in the way we've come to expect.

Leverage aside, do these steps capture the salient features of a cycle?  What else happens during the different cycle phases?  What's special, interesting, distinct about the version of the cycle that we're currently in?  Is there a [new narrative](https://medium.com/@nic__carter/visions-of-bitcoin-4b7b7cbcd24c) that we should take into account?  Is Lyn right, and we're stuck with these until full btc monetization, or can you think of particular dynamics that could interrupt the customary cyclical pattern?