What's worst for Europe, war between rulers or war between rulers and citizens?
https://image.nostr.build/2ebd5d7d2cd690fd0d38618e9fda9a9dc54fb6425f2166b603bce6c7ac441315.jpg


It might be counterintuitive to you, but the huge amount of noise in the form of lies and complaints might in fact make it easier to propagate a signal with good ideas from you (the transmitter) to more people (the receivers.)


True. I asked AI if Deutch had looked into Austrian economics or praxeology and the answer was no. So it remains to see how much is incompatible


I suspect it's a sophisticated phrasing of fuck around and find out (FAFO)


It was new to me a week ago. If you help me share this note we might bump into someone who knows more


Question I want to explore together with Nostrians:

What happens with my life if I implement

- Deutsch' explanatory creativity concept

- Mises' praxeology concept

as guidelines for how I live?


👀
nostr:nevent1qqs2ne6fafvtewaaqfeet354v9zr9hs9v8rqma342tt926y5tx7ecsqppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qgs034ppyjnjakycjcj84kgj737aw6kxkmxazrlp0r67qjk0atgdfgsrqsqqqqqp3h9jh2


Nostr is a brain extension


If you play your game Keynesian, then I'll play my game Misesian.


Thx!


Is there a janitor in this building?
😁


Can someone pls cancel out this https://image.nostr.build/df8ca43740ed86b13f746dfe9ed0815dc92dd97d3454c07ee5c936624e5b4520.jpg bot?


Working on it


Hell yeah!!!
(And GM!)


Gentle reminder:

Everything isn't chaos.

We have an order we must understand and respect.

Some thing are more important than other things.

That's why civilization scales in layers, from:

- The belief system broadly speaking, in Layer 0,

- via the monetary system, in Layer 1,

- to all the other layers of active life, in Layer 2


I had the honor to interview María Corina Machado, the leader of the Venezuelan opposition, about how fiat money was weaponized against the Venezuelan people by the Chávez and Maduro regimes

She says Bitcoin is a "lifeline" and "vital means of resistance" and said that a future democratic Venezuelan government will use Bitcoin to rebuild the national reserves that the Chávistas stole and put Venezuela back on a path to peace and prosperity

I've put out a lot of content in the past few years but I think this is the most important thing I've done -- the implications are vast considering a) Venezuela is one of the world's largest energy exporters with some of the world's largest oil reserves and b) María Corina Machado is not some rogue leader or dictator but a US ally

I hope you can watch 🇻🇪
https://m.primal.net/KfiC.mov


I see, but progress also comes from copying people's behavior, which express actionable ideas. You don't learn that from books, at least not very efficiently.


Yes, a bit of a chicken and egg problem.

Provided we could speak a common language, I would see more potential value in speaking with someone very different from me than someone who was very similar to me. Because it seems more likely we both would learn something new from each other and develop something new together than if we were almost the same.


The development of new ideas and more knowledge is the biggest growth accelator, for society and individuals alike.

Therefore, please tell me, if your objective was economic growth, should you rather spend time with and talk to someone who was totally different from you, or with someone who was almost identical to you?


Ideas about money is one example.

People don't learn about it in schools or at home etc,, but they depend on it and are therefore very interested in it.

If everyone else talks about the environment, corruption and high taxes, that represents a massive form of noise.

And if I then come out and say:

"The monetary system is the most beautiful social network ever"

or

"Inflation is and has always been a conscious policy by rulers"

people  almost automatically tune into it, because it sticks out so much against the noise.

Same with Bitcoin, which represents many ideas, and which actually comes true much stromger as a signal the more economic noise that is produced in the form of for bad economic policies.

And it's the same with a bitcoiner, who may very well always transmit the  same based/low time preference signal,  but it becomes easier to receive the signal, the more society is burdened with fiat, bad economic policies and the impact these things have on non-bitcoiners.

On the other hand, if the communication channels were overcrowded with high quality ideas, adding another idea would be difficult for you to propaget from your transmitter to a high number of receivers.


The differences between the economic systems in Norway and what it was like in the USSR are much smaller than people think.

That's also probably why we almost never see socialists marching in our streets - they are largely happy with status quo.

I'll show you:

Grok estimates that the black market economy in the USSR made up around 15-20% of the official GDP.

https://image.nostr.build/9cec4900feb05a73f691efc64255b798e46220291d4a993cd4b24322c7fab97e.jpg

The public sector made up most of the rest, about 80-85%, meaning that it controlled about 4/5 of the economy directly.

The public sector in Norway spent about 62% of mainland GDP last year, and in 2022 it was 66%.

https://image.nostr.build/17c10a58d0a93edaa93ef1adfe92a0cd74c44491c6dba9522d404a1a51e9aeaf.jpg

The real tax rate for the average wage earner in Norway is 68%, a number that grows even higher when you factor in a number of special taxes.

This means that the Norwegian public sector probably directly controls between 2/3 and 3/4 of the economy.

Since the amount of regulations is staggering, the indirect control of the economy is also significant.

Mandatory military service, which represents more than a 100% tax, is 19 months.

It doesn't matter whether it's left or right that has political power.

Both sides hike taxes, regulates more and more, and continuously make the public sector grow.

They're all de facto socialists.

So what on earth should Norwegian socialists protest against?

The need to replace the cross with the hammer and sickle, perhaps?


The differences between the de facto economic systems in Norway and what it was like in the USSR are much smaller than people think.

That's also probably why we almost never see socialists marching in our streets - they are largely happy with status quo.

I'll show you:

Grok estimates that the black market economy in the USSR made up around 15-20% of the official GDP.

https://image.nostr.build/9cec4900feb05a73f691efc64255b798e46220291d4a993cd4b24322c7fab97e.jpg

The public sector made up most of the rest, about 80-85%, meaning that it controlled about 4/5 of the economy directly.

The public sector in Norway spent about 62% of mainland GDP last year, and in 2022 it was 66%.

https://image.nostr.build/17c10a58d0a93edaa93ef1adfe92a0cd74c44491c6dba9522d404a1a51e9aeaf.jpg

The real tax rate for the average wage earner in Norway is 68%, a number that grows even higher when you factor in a number of special taxes.

This means that the Norwegian public sector probably directly controls between 2/3 and 3/4 of the economy.

Since the amount of regulations is staggering, the indirect control of the economy is also significant.

Mandatory military service, which represents more than a 100% tax, is 19 months.

It doesn't matter whether it's left or right that has political power.

Both sides hike taxes, regulates more and more, and continuously make the public sector grow.

They're all de facto socialists.

So what on earth should Norwegian socialists protest against?

The need to replace the cross with the hammer and sickle, perhaps?


Are you for deindustrialization of education?


Thx ❤


Let's make it alright
❤


Jeg har takket ja til å være taler på Frihetskonferansen 2024.

Jeg blir med for å dele og diskutere ideer om hvordan vi vinner tilbake friheten, ikke for å klage på at vi har tapt frihet.

Vi ser fremover.

Og jeg gleder meg.
 https://image.nostr.build/57865d1d0e0753683f3e182b41bb1e030a11abcc9294f5450482d9f4d368d069.jpg


GM!

I woke up at the age of 30, when I finally started reading non-fiction books of my own choice, instead of the books that the school and university obliged me to read.

When did you wake up and why?
 https://image.nostr.build/2aca1a473a0f72c582fc83dec6c2ef4b78456d68ca48509c412a9676f7560ef6.jpg


I turn 52 today 🥳

As a gift to myself I want to share the following with you:

We are smack in the middle of a war of ideas, and I'll tell you why this is good.

https://image.nostr.build/e2eb02f0fc71d9f5cf9455800890e8879844938c0430ff2d1b61b9415af6c278.jpg

The battle is between us - the people - and the political class.

And winning requires that we constantly learn new, actionable ideas.

However, this isn't just an imperative.

Once we throw ourselves into the battle, we develop a passion for it.

You may have experienced it yourself:

Meeting new people and sharing and developing new ideas together with them is wonderful.

You discover that when positive, creative people get together, 1 + 1 is never 2.

When we meet, physically or digitally or we just read each others' writings, we often identify ideas that the other person didn't have before, enabling us to create new knowledge and more understanding together.

And sometimes, when you and I combine our ideas, we develop things that the world hasn't seen or heard before.

It might not be a gigantic innovation, and normally it's just a very, very small thing.

But it's our joint appreciation of the process itself that is so immensely rewarding.

Because we realize that 1 + 1 in the social and intellectual domain more often than not is 3, 10, 1000 a million or more.

Magical is the only way to describe this process, which is reserved to us alone, the humankind.

When this happens, you also realize that there isn't any limit to what we can achieve with more knowledge and understanding.

Immersing me in this form of social interaction gives me a constant dopamin rush.

I'm addicted.

Don't you ever force me into rehab.

Have a nice day ❤


Good point.
But people struggle to understand what Bitcoin is and how it works, partially due to programming caused by "this is incredibly hard to understand and therefore you need to study it for hundreds of hours"

If the facts are:
"Bitcoin is at its core a simple concept, but it's challenging to safely store your bitcoin"

then why not say so?


Most underrated idea:

The simplicity of what's essential with Bitcoin.

This idea drowns in the signal great many people transmit:

"You must study for hundreds of hours before you truly understand Bitcoin."


I think a better option might be to help people with their freedom fight and let them become curious on our ff in the process


X throttles me heavily. Anyone who understands why this happens and why this shadowban test cannot find my account?
 https://video.nostr.build/149d6c937d5ec391155a1945c8b561c39ba61d012a68db65576e12236c202bbb.mp4


Is the growth of knowledge relevant and important?

Is it predictable?

Are its consequences predictable?


Thank u 🧡


Many interesting comments in this thread on what made people "wake up" - something which obviously means different things for different individuals:

nostr:nevent1qqs88ela2mzerxyvev98ulrgv0qfh0xlmmyq5hegf4ukxzvjrxq99pcpzpmhxue69uhkummnw3ezumt0d5hsygyr9g4nem6tza2vff6h99j2gndkf5v7ma38a3z30x63n599at5pnypsgqqqqqqsnska5j


About Machiavelli and Hobbes:
 https://image.nostr.build/5bfcefeeadb84b80fc19768564cefd9867d14fbf495c7a95dbe35e9e3693c20b.jpg

I asked:
What would be the single most shocking fact for people to know about what both Hobbes and Machiavelli recommended that rulers should do?

https://image.nostr.build/3247ced6c80cafdd86ff4f678a83b5b63c23050378d0a128f0565a5e191e134a.jpg

Grok answered:

"Combined Insight:

Moral Flexibility and Absolute Control:
If one were to combine the philosophies, a ruler should not only have absolute power but should also be ready to use any means, including those considered immoral or unethical by common standards, to maintain that power and ensure the state's stability.

This could involve:

Manipulation and Deception:
Regularly using lies and deceit to keep subjects in line or to outmaneuver enemies, both foreign and domestic.

Brutality When Necessary: Employing harsh punishments or even violence to quash any form of rebellion or dissent, ensuring that the fear of the ruler's wrath prevents any challenge to his authority.

Control Over Information:
Suppressing or controlling information and education to prevent the populace from questioning the ruler's authority or methods.

Ignoring Traditional Morality: Dismissing conventional moral constraints in favor of pragmatic actions that secure power, even if it means acts that would be universally condemned as evil or tyrannical.

The shock value here lies in how these recommendations starkly oppose contemporary democratic and human rights values, advocating for a form of governance that prioritizes stability and power over individual freedoms and moral integrity."

Does this sound familiar for you today?


If it wasn't for the concept of money, economics would be just another social science among all the others.

But due to the very special nature of money, economics becomes the most important of all social sciences, perhaps of every form of science.

Despite this fact, we learn almost nothing about money and economics in the education system, that is, if you don't take very specific courses, and even then you don't learn to understand money properly.

The valuable idea related to this fact, is that most people don't have a significantly distorted understanding of money.

Instead - it's "tabula raza" / a blank slate.

Therefore, once you introduce people to this important concept called money, they seem to understand it almost intuitively.

Even economists get it :-)


Watching Max Keisers Keisers Report in 2011

Growing up I always asked people 'where does money come from?' and never got a reply

Then a deeper awakening when 'covid hit and I relised it wasnt real, then read The Sovereign Individual, The Bitcoin Standard, Layered Money and Confessions of an Economic Hitman


Thx - and how old were u?


Yes, and even better, defining a problem without whining, and then propose an idea how to solve it


Same to you :-)


Thx, bookmarked


Which book?


You're welcome, you have encountered my kind self tonight. Let's catch up later, see if we agree on something too.

No hard feelings. Didn't want to say stupid thing to you, but you craved it so much, so I thought I would just have to give it to you.


Might be, but you're still the bigger bitch here.


I think we can safely say that you beat narcissism by a hundred miles here.


I don't think most criminals are born evil. Schmuck.
😁


I was fully aware of that, but how to express it in any other way? 😁


Incentives rule.

Steinbeck wrote in East of Eden:

"I believe there are monsters born in the world to human parents. Some you can see, misshapen and horrible, with huge heads or tiny bodies; some are born with no arms, no legs, some with three arms, some with tails or mouths in odd places. They are accidents and no one's fault, as used to be thought. Once they were considered the visible punishment for concealed sins

And just as there are physical monsters, can there not be mental or psychic monsters born? The face and body may be perfect, but if a twisted gene or a malformed egg can produce physical monsters, may not the same process produce a malformed soul?"

I concur.

But the overwhelming majority of human beings are born kind and with an instinct for cooperation.

My experience confirms this, and I think it's logical.

But when evil men are allowed to design institutions that dictate incentives, mosg people also have the capability of acting in malevolent ways.

That's also logical and in line with my experience.

Now, I'm not going to discuss this with you.

You might find something useful in Bregdan's book.

At least it won't hurt you.

And it's well written


95% prefer ideas to constant whining. Makes me optimistic on behalf of humanity.

https://image.nostr.build/43b47bf559e99abb8ed8b8275274f38a6357653e603e109550d0ce3192e79967.jpg


Is misrepresenting what I wrote a strategy you implement to make me entertain you? Get lost


not here to entertain you...


find your circus
🤡


find meaning


Find a dictionary


Takk, ja det er det :-)


Hatching ideas in sunset = brain dope

https://image.nostr.build/5e832f3a4337d47ae9015c8095c841c77870d03b122e5ecdc453ce5acdb3466f.jpg


Sound riot is dope.

And discovering great ideas about freedom fighting is super-dope.

Exit whining.

nostr:nevent1qqsr9fezvder2t65c8ajq96llzx3prwmt4rqt8zfgn70qnfj7g9zlrgppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qgsgx23t8nh5k965cjn4w2ty53xmvngeahmz0mz9z7d4r8g2t6hgrxgrqsqqqqqpc24jaf


Super-corrupt Alberto Fernandez subsidized the media and...

https://image.nostr.build/6d4be68dbd1b15048c1f368152514e2fb9a7004354e6805f080533ee11a425f8.jpg

was worshiped for it, while Milei, the expert cleaner, who got rid of the subsidies to balance the budget...

https://image.nostr.build/44cf3cdd9c6757ccdb87e6fb883df00f9df9b39cdbe53d7c334fefce35e53b3e.jpg

immediately was targeted by sobbing journalists and their employers who called him a criminal.

Foreign news outlets hate Milei too.

They are afraid that taking away the taxpayer-funded punch bowl might become a policy that spreads to their country.

Therefore they alternate between ignoring and villifying him.

Simple as that.


Stavanger, 12. september kl. 18:
Foredrag og samtaler om pengesystemet og frihetskamp.
https://image.nostr.build/a17efd0e9db2d86694301686bcbcf42608bbfd57370a30fd498ffea877d1b05e.jpg


Haugesund, 11.september kl. 1930:
Foredrag og samtaler om pengesystemet og frihetskamp.

https://image.nostr.build/c73b735b407fb25e9bf225c5e2b465e4bce1bbf45bfd2c05fc9232ff5c1be981.jpg


Bergen, 10.september kl. 18:

Foredrag og samtaler om frihetskamp, pengesystemet og utdanningssystemet ++ med Rune Østgård og Martin Thaulow, samt minikonsert med Heidi Lambach og Det Skandaløse Orkester.


Info om foredrag mm. på Vestlandet

https://image.nostr.build/211c325e71d4c88d4809caa802793b4ee5b1f296a3c7f0ce28bbb7f44023586c.jpg

10.9 Bergen
11.9 Haugesund
12.9 Stavanger

Se kommentarfeltene for info

Gleder meg :-)


Norway leaves the cortisol-dominant room of neverending complaints to a dopamin-pumping sphere where everything is possible and we implement actionable ideas on how to fight for freedom.

https://image.nostr.build/211c325e71d4c88d4809caa802793b4ee5b1f296a3c7f0ce28bbb7f44023586c.jpg

It all starts next Tuesday, 10th of September, on LouLou nightclub in Bergen, with talks by me and Martin Thaulow and a mini concert with our friends Det Skandaløse Orkester and Heidi Lambach.

("Sunt opprør" means "sound rebellion")


Does not harm
Acts positively
Cooperates

There's much that can be defined as kind


Let me know what u think of it then


Yes, I have very much to thank her for.

You might like Steinbeck's Sweet Thursday


I read most of her books and was on my way to becone an objectivist.

And 20 years later I conclude that both logics and experience dictate that she had this one wrong.

John Steinbeck got it right, IMO, in East of Eden.

And he was just as much as a thinker as Ayn was.

In fact I think he understood human nature way better than her.

Ayn also lacked a proper understanding of money.

She adored the gold standard, if I remember correctly, but should have embraced monetary freedom.

This is what John wrote:

"I believe there are monsters born in the world to human parents. Some you can see, misshapen and horrible, with huge heads or tiny bodies; some are born with no arms, no legs, some with three arms, some with tails or mouths in odd places. They are accidents and no one's fault, as used to be thought. Once they were considered the visible punishment for concealed sins.

And just as there are physical monsters, can there not be mental or psychic monsters born? The face and body may be perfect, but if a twisted gene or a malformed egg can produce physical monsters, may not the same process produce a malformed soul?"

These poor souls are IMO the exceptions.


I read most of her books and was on my way to becone an objectivist.

And 20 years later I conclude that both logics and experience dictate that she had this one wrong.

John Steinbeck got it right, IMO, in East of Eden.

And he was just as much as a thinker as Ayn was.

In fact I think he understood human nature way better than her.

Ayn also lacked a proper understanding of money.

She adored the gold standard, if I remember correctly, but should have embraced monetary freedom.

This is what John wrote:

Steinbeck monster evil

"I believe there are monsters born in the world to human parents. Some you can see, misshapen and horrible, with huge heads or tiny bodies; some are born with no arms, no legs, some with three arms, some with tails or mouths in odd places. They are accidents and no one's fault, as used to be thought. Once they were considered the visible punishment for concealed sins.

And just as there are physical monsters, can there not be mental or psychic monsters born? The face and body may be perfect, but if a twisted gene or a malformed egg can produce physical monsters, may not the same process produce a malformed soul?"

These poor souls are IMO the exceptions.


Today's survey 🚨

I'm tired of people with lot's of brain power dedicating 99% of their writing to complaining and 1% to discussing ideas.

It's counterproductive, more than enough people are aware of the problems now, that's not at all the missing part.


I mention this SO much.
The entire anglophone’s notion of human nature is literally based on this one piece of obligatory fiction, penned by the headmaster of a boys’ boarding school (and we *know* what they are like) and reinforced by daily ‘news’ propaganda.
The reality, of course, is the polar opposite. God dealt this little synchronicity very nicely 🙏

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/may/09/the-real-lord-of-the-flies-what-happened-when-six-boys-were-shipwrecked-for-15-months


Thx - Bregdan was onto something incredibly important (I read Humankind). He didn't understand the role of money. We build on his insight in one of ouf upcoming projects.


IMHO:

nostr:nevent1qqswn92x7ak53xkwks34cula42znkgcpre54q5nxrf4xxwrh5zs2rqgpz4mhxue69uhkummnw3ezummcw3ezuer9wchsygyr9g4nem6tza2vff6h99j2gndkf5v7ma38a3z30x63n599at5pnypsgqqqqqqsm6pvh9


made this - deep imo.

free speech is a human right.

https://image.nostr.build/031911bb683768c2657807cdb10b540748b9bcc829cecd008c8317997f9f657a.jpg


The idea that human beings by nature are wicked is the mother of all evil.

The first offspring you get from this concept is the idea that we need a state, because we are rabid beasts bound to kill each other if nobody gets a monopoly on the use of violence.

The next offspring is deception in the form of a monopoly on money production, in past times argued to be "necessary to promote trade," nowadays argued to be necessary because "we need some inflation to grease the wheels of the economy."

Once the monopoly in money production has been put into place, the state can create money out of nothing and thus be in a position where it always can win the competition for all sorts of scarce resources, including bread, brains and bullets.

People who disagree with me on this should read Hobbe's Leviathan and the writings of most of today's academics within the social sciences - then ask themselves who these court scribblers have inspired.

When the three aforementioned evil ideas

1. man is by nature wicked
2. someone must have a monopoly on use of violence
3. this someone must have a monopoly on production of money

are allowed to dictate the evolution of the social order, everything that happens to be positive for the citizenry is in view of the de facto rulers either just a necessity for staying in or increasing power or an unintended and unfortunate consequence.

Therefore, it's utterly foolish NOT to expect that it's a decently high probability that all politics, including elections, imply some level of "rigging," or should we say, neverending "stacking" of cards in favor of the political class and against the citizenry.

Everything else within the domain of political science, economics and sociology is in my opinion details of minimal importance.

In conclusion:

It's the idea that humankind by nature is wicked that we must cleans out of people's hearts and minds..

To achieve this we must come up with a superior idea.

And the only superior idea is that human beings are by nature kind, and that it's bad incentive structures put in place by someone posing as 'protectors' that make people act badly.


Not content with taking everything away from its people, the European and US clown elite's politics increasingly looks like a schorched-earth strategy, no?


Freedom = Absence of coercion

If you define it as something else then you constantly run into contraditctions. With this definition, it becomes possible to unite in many types of freedom fights.

How to become free = Play it, it's a game!

One can only learn the rules of the game by playing it. Fuck around and find out (FAFO).

Winning = Becoming a better player

The fact that it's a indefinite game and that you win by becoming a better player means that you can win more often than you lose, and that you can win without me having to lose.

Summary:

Freedom is an indefinite plus sum game where every player can win without anyone having to lose.


Thx for your zap🧡

- freedom: If you define it as something else than absence of coercion it becomes meaningless because you constantly run into contraditctions. But with this definition, it becomes possible to unite in many types of freedom fights

- how to get there: It's a game, and one can only learn the rules of the game by playing it. FAFO.

- winning is the same as becoming better at playing it, because it's a never ending process. This is great, because it means that you can win much more than you lose, and I can win without you having to lose.

I have a maturing idea for a book about this.

Happy with the other books I've written, but this one I'm really looking to start working on 🔥


Isn't it funny, that IDEAS is a resource that becomes more valuable the more you share them?
https://image.nostr.build/66d81731b918d73a8e3dc7949e7f2b174118a5a7f42a6cea4aa39ab26a6dc1c6.jpg


Isn't it funny, that IDEAS is a resource that become more valuable the more you share them?
https://image.nostr.build/66d81731b918d73a8e3dc7949e7f2b174118a5a7f42a6cea4aa39ab26a6dc1c6.jpg


The Freerider syndrome is why people lose their freedom.

https://image.nostr.build/08f366e42e6103ac2678eb843d02e6746e0a1aa190481685598a7b8e43ea10d6.jpg

Most people complain these days, but if you judge people's actions, they at the same time signal very clearly that others must do the work for them.

For many, this kills all motivation for them to do something.

"Why should I do all the hard work for freedom alone that everyone benefits from."

There you have it.

The Freerider syndrom kills people's motivation to fight for Freedom.

So, rule No. 1: Quit being a Freerider


The Freerider syndrome is why people lose their freedom.

https://image.nostr.build/08f366e42e6103ac2678eb843d02e6746e0a1aa190481685598a7b8e43ea10d6.jpg

Most people complain these days, but if you judge people's actions, they at the same time signal very clearly that others must do the work for them.

For many, this kills all motivation for them to do something.

"Why should I do all the hard work alone for freedom that everyone benefits from."

There you have it.

The Freerider syndrom kills people's motivation to fight for  Freedom.

So, rule No. 1: Quit being a Freerider


The Freerider syndrome is why people lose their freedom.

https://image.nostr.build/08f366e42e6103ac2678eb843d02e6746e0a1aa190481685598a7b8e43ea10d6.jpg

Most people complain these days, but if you judge people's actions, they at the same time signal very clearly that others must do the work for them.

For many, this kill all motivation for them to do something.

"Why should I do all the hard work alone for freedom that everyone benefits from."

There you have it.

The Freerider syndrom kills people's motivation to fight for  Freedom.

So, rule No. 1: Quit being a Freerider


The Freerider syndrome is why people lose their freedom.

https://image.nostr.build/08f366e42e6103ac2678eb843d02e6746e0a1aa190481685598a7b8e43ea10d6.jpg

Most people complain these days, but if you judge people's actions, they at the same time signal very clearly that others must do the work for them.

Forn many, this kill all motivation for them to do something.

"Why should I do all the hard work alone for freedom that everyone benefits from."

There you have it.

The Freerider syndrom kills people's motivation to fight for  Freedom.

So, rule No. 1: Quit being a Freerider


Welcome!


Scream about infringements on free speech  -> posts goes viral.

Remind people about who's ultimately responsible for defending freedom 👇 -> few care to read it.

This is the cancer we deal with.

And the screaming is mainly about signalling that others must fix things for them.

nostr:nevent1qqsqyxy0f3h3ezy5ujq7uxx04r5w7pfyr09dwzqqpsq0tw9za5xy2lgpzpmhxue69uhkummnw3ezumt0d5hsygyr9g4nem6tza2vff6h99j2gndkf5v7ma38a3z30x63n599at5pnypsgqqqqqqsfjlsuw


We never do enough, so that's an honest feeling then.


Thx ❤


The family is the link between corruption of the whole society and the freerider mentality where people leave it to a minority to fight for freedom.

It goes like this:

"I know what my employer does is wrong, but I do what I'm being told because I have an obligation to feed my family.

"I cannot join the freedom fight, because I risk losing my job, which would be a violation of my duties to my family.

"Besides, I know other people fight even if I don't.

"Yes, I know it makes me a freerider...

"I don't want to talk about it...."

***A few months later***

"Why does the world come crashing down around me?"

***

"Why did I lose everything?"

***

"Have you seen my family?" https://image.nostr.build/08f366e42e6103ac2678eb843d02e6746e0a1aa190481685598a7b8e43ea10d6.jpg


We have a part of the population called THE YOUTH who I suspect in the future will hate journalists, editors and politicians for what they did:

Stealing the kids' future.


Our 17-year old bronze winner in the European Youth Olympic games, Embla Matilde Njerve, is an idol and a symbol of hope.

As a pole vaulter she works hard every day to push her limits.

https://image.nostr.build/fbf794a811c417a572a9b311ab328e8fea6e94b24f6691f2ffef42bd48135112.jpg

She constantly must suppress the most destructive sentence that humankind can say:

"This is impossible."

I imagine that the following mental steps are obligatory if she shall succeed:

"I want to do this"

"I believe I can make it"

"Here we go"

Then she lifts the pole and happily starts running.

The youth owns the future.

But we are free to copy their way of thinking.


Action needed.

Watch this video about what and who is behind Brazil's criminalization of the X users (the US government and their NGO puppets, no surprise there.)

https://x.com/MikeBenzCyber/status/1829630737911595453?t=qgbWuRJd6HZRBUIPbc0qbw&s=19

The globalist political "elite" blob seems desperate.

Therefore, make sure to promote Nostr on X, so that people have an information and communication escape hatch, for instance when the EU ramps up its efforts to stop Elon.


Our 17-year old Olympian Embla Matilde Njerve is an idol and a symbol of hope.

As a pole vaulter she works hard every day to push her limits.

https://image.nostr.build/fbf794a811c417a572a9b311ab328e8fea6e94b24f6691f2ffef42bd48135112.jpg

She constantly must suppress the most destructive sentence that humankind can say:

"This is impossible."

I imagine that the following mental steps are obligatory if she shall succeed:

"I want to do this"

"I believe I can make it"

"Here we go"

Then she lifts the pole and happily starts running.

The youth owns the future.

But we are free to copy their way of thinking.


Not copper. Red.

I believe that Bitcoiners have a special relationship with the concept we refer to as "truth."

I'm not saying that we are more honest than others.

But we appreciate more than most others being able to verify the correctness of something.

For instance, we like the fact that everyone can verify the software code as well as each and every transaction.

Nothing is hidden.

Everything is in the open.

We value that we don't have to trust someone who says that "Everything is A-OK."

It's possible for everyone to check things out, without having to ask anyone for permission.

I have had the same fascination with the concept of truth as long as I can remember.

Like my father, I have also always been curious about how things work.

He had an amazing talent for understanding technologies.

My grandmother once told me a wonderful story from when he was a kid.

I think he was 12-13 years old.

He sat by the kitchen table and picked apart a mechanical sleep alarm clock, while he carefully studied how the pieces functioned together.

After he had taken it all apart, he patiently reassembled it.

It must have been very satisfactory for him to wind it up and hear the ticking.

The final test was the alarm bell.

"Ring ring ring!"

It worked perfectly.

My father had verified the truth about how the alarm clock worked.

In the 1980s he became a computer engineer.

I remember him sitting for hours in front of his PC, and how he used to fill up all empty spaces in the basement and his home office with all kinds of computer hardware.

He passed away much too early due to cancer in 2011.

Although I didn't inherit my father's understanding of  technology, I got the same passion for diving deep into things, into the very core, and for understanding how things worked.

Social subjects and books have been two of my main interests, which is something I have from my mother.

She has always questioned things, and I'm exactly the same.

I discovered at a very young age how important it is to accept the truth.

I went to kindergarten from I was about two or thee years old.

When I was four, I was moved out of the unit with the small kids and to the unit with the big kids.

Some of the older kids started bullying me.

They shouted:

“Rune has red hair, Rune has red hair.”

The people who worked there were unable to help me.

So, I found myself in a hopeless, prison-like situation.

I complained to my mother, and told her that I wouldn’t go there anymore.

She tried to comfort me, and said:

“It isn’t true what those kids say. You don't have red hair, it's copper brown, and it's beautiful."

The only problem was, this couldn't solve a damn thing with the bullying.

And of course, it didn't.

The day after, I went to the kindergarten as usual, and the bullies pushed on.

It's quite possible that I tried to yell back at them:

"It's not red, it's copper brown!"

If I did, it probably just made things worse, because it would be a confirmation to them that their bullying had the intended effect on me.

However, something must have clicked inside me that day.

When I came home, I met my mother in the entrance.

I ripped the beanie off my head, and shouted angrily to her:

“No, mama, look at this! It’s true - my hair is red - just see for yourself!"

When I came back to the kindergarten the next day, I had accepted my faith.

They had blond, brown or black hair.

My hair was red.

These were facts, nothing more.

They noticed that I suddenly was OK with it.

And then they lost all interest in bullying me.

Accepting the truth had made me impervious to their insults.

My mother told me this story many times, when I was a child, and also after I became a grown-up man.

She says she's convinced that it was a life-changing experience for me, and that it would shape my personality.

Looking back, I think I realized that ignoring the truth comes at a significant cost.

And just as important, I think the episode taught me that embracing the truth could set me free.

Today, it makes me sad to think back on the fact that my father and I often disagreed on many things.

We had very different ideas about the relationship between individuals and the state.

What started as civil conversations, too often ended in quarrels.

It felt like our opposing opinions on politics drove a wedge between us.

If he had lived today, he probably would have developed a fascination for how Bitcoin works.

He wouldn't have trusted Bitcoin, just because others said it's immutable.

I'm confident he would have picked apart every little piece of the technology, in an attempt to verify Bitcoin's promise.

Just like I try to do with the socio-economic aspects of it.

If my father had been alive today, I suspect Bitcoin would have brought us closer together.

He could have explained the technology for me, and I could have explained Bitcoin's socio-economic functions to him.

Possibly, he would have realized that I had been right when I challenged many of the things that the powers at be want us to believe.

It's just guessing, of course.

But it makes sense, because it seems to me that Bitcoin attracts truthseekers like a magnet.

And at the same time, Bitcoin forces us to search for the truth together, instead of quarrelling about the correctness of something that others have fed us with.

***

If you liked this piece, it would be great if you gave it a boost 🧡
 https://image.nostr.build/5cc247b200d85af01593bbccc1f89dbf51a619a6ac253e26e1506785db86a33f.jpg


Yes


Norway's fertility rate dropped from 2,0 in 2009 to 1.4 children per woman by 2022, and the same in 2023.


Thx for your comment and zap 🧡

What we get back in terms of "services" is a big net negative.


A note on taxation.

Historically, how much were slaves allowed to keep of the fruits of their labour?

https://image.nostr.build/e763f4309c88e17a7fa904b37ec3edd69cccdbdfaf838df3d4e3dee2cda4f99e.jpg

News came yesterday of an analysis of the average tax burden in Norway, including tax on income, wealth, VAT and more.

Excluding a few other taxes that we must pay, the answer was 67%.

I figure, if you include all of the special taxes and the 19 months of military conscription (which effectively is almost 100% tax), the result should be closer to 80%.

I'll link to it in a comment (it's in Norwegian).

To get a feeling of how that compares to traditional slavery I asked Grok a question and the answer was illuminating:

My question:
Approximately how big a share of the fruits of their labour have masters let slaves keep throughout history. Give 10 examples, beginning with ancient egypt and ending with something from the united states in the 19th century

Grok's answer
"Determining the exact share of the fruits of labor that slaves retained throughout history is challenging due to the variability in slave systems, the nature of records, and the differences in what was considered "fruits of labor" across different cultures and eras. However, based on historical practices and the information available up to 2024, here are approximate insights into how much slaves might have retained from their labor, focusing on examples from Ancient Egypt through to the 19th century United States:

Ancient Egypt: While slaves existed in Ancient Egypt, the concept of "wages" or retained labor fruits was not as straightforward as in later societies. Slaves could be given land, food, or other forms of compensation, but this was more about sustenance than profit-sharing. Some slaves, especially those with skills or in high demand, might have been allowed to keep a small portion of their earnings or goods, but this was likely minimal, perhaps around 5-10% in modern terms if we were to quantify it.

Classical Greece (Athens): Skilled slaves, like those in the Laurion silver mines or domestic slaves, could earn money through their skills. Some were allowed to keep a portion of their earnings, which might have been around 10-20% of their labor's value, especially if they were involved in commerce or skilled crafts.

Roman Empire: Roman slaves could buy their freedom or were sometimes granted freedom with a portion of their earnings retained. This might equate to around 15-25% of their labor's value, especially for those in urban settings or skilled trades.

Medieval Europe: Serfs, while not slaves in the classical sense, were bound to the land. They might retain around 30-40% of their produce or labor value, but this was more about survival than profit.

Islamic Golden Age (Abbasid Caliphate): Slaves, particularly those with skills or administrative roles, could sometimes retain a portion of their earnings, possibly around 20-30%, especially if they were involved in trade or crafts.

Medieval Islamic World (Mamluks in Egypt): Mamluk slaves, who were military slaves, were not typical in that they could rise to significant power. While not directly applicable to economic fruits, their eventual control over resources might be seen as retaining a significant share, though not in the initial stages of their service.

Renaissance Italy (Venice): Slaves in Venice, often domestic or involved in maritime activities, might retain very little, perhaps 5-10% of their labor's value, as their primary function was service rather than production for profit.
Colonial Latin America: In places like Brazil or the Caribbean, slaves might have been allowed to cultivate their plots or engage in petty trade. This could mean retaining around 10-20% of their labor's value, though this was often more about survival than wealth accumulation.

British Caribbean: Slaves in sugar plantations had harsh conditions with little to no share in the fruits of their labor. However, some could engage in small-scale farming or trade on Sundays, potentially retaining around 5-10% of their labor's value.

19th Century United States: In the U.S., slaves might have been allowed to keep small gardens or engage in minor trade, but their share of the actual labor fruits was minimal, often less than 5%. However, some slaves, especially in urban areas or those with skills like blacksmithing, could earn money on the side, which might be considered as retaining up to 10-15% of their labor's value if we include such earnings.

These percentages are highly speculative and based on general historical practices rather than precise data. The concept of "retaining fruits of labor" varies widely by the type of slavery, the economic system of the time, and the specific roles slaves performed. Moreover, these figures do not account for the inherent exploitation and the fact that slaves were not legally entitled to their labor's value in most systems."

End note from me:
It's not much that separates an average Norwegian tax payer and a slave in terms of how much we are allowed to keep.

Arguing about the difference is IMO largely arguing about semantics.

You may counter that it's more precise to call us serfs.

Whatever floats your boat, I say.

But it still begs the question?

When do the riots start?


And two common words we should think more often about


Why we will win

https://image.nostr.build/9787698a0ad894b23111858316ebf6c3b31a5ea0c728cc0c616889befe8027fb.jpg

When the political class of the West shifted its focus from the combination of

monopoly on religion
+
mopopoly on money

to the combination of

information control
+
mopopoly on money

they also began digging their own grave.

Without the ability to control our fundamental belief system with a well defined religion, with a singular deity, centralized locations for worshiping, and one chosen group of religious leaders, they are IMO doomed to lose this battle with us, which very well be the last one.

Now, what should you do?

- Fight the battle of ideas

- Fight for freedom and sovereignty, and against the master/slave mentality

- Fight for your right to use the money you like best

Let's win this.

And remember:

Truth is the brightest light.

#RebelUp
#LFG


Great, thx for insightful feedback


GM!
https://image.nostr.build/d075eb793850e8b25c74b670e4f077602dd4b12a1938ef312e46738e392e5132.jpg


"Explanatory creativity."

I kinda like that expression.


Meme me an answer:

What's a fair treatment of people who gaslight and smear?


Inflation was, is and will always be fraud.


"Hate crime" is meaningless, ineffective and counterproductive, the "elite" doesn't use the reverse gear, so they'll move to "thought crime" which will have the same issues, and then in the end comes "clown crime" when people are jailed for making jokes about corrupt, stupid politicians.


More good journalism from an actual journalist https://video.nostr.build/1e89822d5648c24b1ed1f42b9a44a1d29bf03e60698685b02cfe1c9a03c13fb1.mp4


Wouldn't it be wonderful if we saw riots in the most lazy cantina in the world: LinkedIn?

Yeah, I know, I'm dreaming.

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/rune-%C3%B8stg%C3%A5rd-324b3010_gm-folks-isnt-now-the-perfect-time-to-activity-7234802936558551040-URy3?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_android


"PANIC CONSPIRATION"

You read it first here.

It's what we see around us these days.

"Full gas, rip out the break pedal, nothing else matters than doubling down on what we do best"

What a fakin clown show.


Not me


"I asked the police if they are investigating the incitement written on the church wall “kill white people” as a hate crime, this is what they replied."

Rebecca Mistereggen, journalist at Document, posted yesterday on X.
 https://video.nostr.build/495c821096e76989129b75ff01872c5364b8f4eefefeb17d78744e58fb8e656f.mp4

Finally some good journalism coming out of my country.


Yup


No 1 is very brave when he stands up.

However...
 https://image.nostr.build/666a0e1df9083fefc9e757a4b9dccfa0009ab53b768e4c831ce31a333b207663.jpg

It's No 2, "the copycat" - who by opting for action instead of passivity forces everyone else in the crowd to think that there are two options, action or passivity, and that each individual must take a stand - who is the deciding facto and in my eyes the real hero.

Don't let No 1 stand alone.

Salute him by copying him, and force everyone to think hard about their choice.


X will be just another NOSTR client. Adapt or die ELON.


Topic: Bitcoin price discovery

More and more #bitcoin is taken off exchanges, but nonetheless the crab market continues to keep poking bitcoiners in the eye.

I asked Grok:

"If we ignore bitcoin futures trading, is it possible that trading of "paper bitcoin" on crypto exchanges has such volume that it affects the bitcoin spot price?"

Grok's conclusive remarks were:

"The sentiment from posts on X and broader market analysis suggests that while spot ETFs and direct ownership of Bitcoin are significant, the derivatives market's volume and its impact on price cannot be understated. This indicates that even without considering futures, the trading volume of what might be colloquially termed "paper Bitcoin" on crypto exchanges could indeed affect the Bitcoin spot price through mechanisms like sentiment, arbitrage, and leveraged trading. However, the exact extent of this influence would require detailed market data analysis beyond what's typically available in public discussions or general insights from X posts."

Comments?

Excluding futures, can trading of "paper bitcoin" negatively affect bitcoin price discovery in theory or practice?


To my point about No 2:

Watch this

https://youtu.be/hO8MwBZl-Vc?si=2tNG5DNxlwPA5S-s


The freakiest clown show today, is the political elite in


Luv it

nostr:nevent1qqs0tk6vxf0ynsc8cyj07mkyte6tznvg24caz6nm738gezxwwdpv2ncppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qgsdw5mzvzugeal9eslu5nuzys8ng27qnpmzeuac2h2awe083j2amjcrqsqqqqqph063t6


People move to Nostr


No 1 is very brave when he stands up.

However...
 https://image.nostr.build/666a0e1df9083fefc9e757a4b9dccfa0009ab53b768e4c831ce31a333b207663.jpg

It's No 2, "the copycat" - who by opting for action instead of passivity forces everyone else in the crowd to think that there are two options, action or passivity, and that each individual must take a stand - who is the deciding factor and in my eyes the real hero.

Don't let No 1 stand alone.

Salute him by copying him, and force everyone to think hard about their choice.


Gleder meg til det!


Foreløpig info om foredragsturné på Vestlandet:

Tirsdag 10.9: Bergen (LouLou)
Onsdag 11.9: Haugesund (Biblioteket)
Torsdag 12.9: Stavanger (Irishman)

Det skal handle om pengesystem,  politikk og frihetskamp.

Kommer med mer detaljer etter hvert.
https://image.nostr.build/cd282759ac7fdf4199d9e4947d71ddd61d94aaa53dcdf34fd51fc4c47fd49a45.jpg


Short note on intellectual property (IP) policy:

Up until the 20th century, the U.S. government had lax enforcement of IP, particularly concerning foreign creators.

The legal framework allowed for the widespread piracy of foreign works, as the 1790 Copyright Act explicitly excluded protections for non-US authors.

This led to rampant appropriation of foreign designs and publications, with little consequence for infringers, as the government prioritized domestic interests over foreign IP rights.

Officials believed that strong IP protections would mainly benefit foreign creators, raising costs for domestic consumers and hindering local innovation.

The prevailing view was that the U.S. economy needed to develop its own capabilities through imitation before it could afford to protect foreign IP rights.

This perspective was influenced by a "frontier culture" that prioritized individualism and innovation over strict adherence to IP laws.

Calls for better protection from figures like Charles Dickens largely went unheeded, reflecting a broader culture of IP violation during this period.

The US changed its position dramatically in the 20th century, when itself became the strongest economic nation in the world.

While many developing nations, including India, Brazil, Argentina, and Mexico, resisted stringent IP standards, and argued IP favored developed countries at the expense developing countries, Uncle Sam, the former pirate protector, became the world's most aggressive enforcer of IP, pressuring developing countries with the use of trade sanctions.


Had to look up what that means 😁

Yes, true, but that makes you a macker!

(Yes, I had to use AI to find a good slang word 😁)


Feels great to see Nostrians massively promote this protocol on #oldSOME today, following Emmanuel de Wimp's arrest of Durov

Talk about Streisand effect 😁
 https://image.nostr.build/9d7e6f6240765d1d39cd85f7f9c7ee8e63ae55ea0f10fa81a04f9687f50fd549.jpg


Criminal legislation in more advanced societies than ours:

1. In some ancient Germanic tribes, chieftains who betrayed their people could face ritual execution, while ordinary tribesmen might only be exiled for similar offenses.

2. Some Native American tribes, like the Iroquois, had systems where chiefs could be deposed and severely punished by clan mothers for serious transgressions, while regular tribe members faced less severe consequences.

3. In medieval Iceland's decentralized legal system, powerful chieftains (goðar) could face harsher social and economic sanctions for abusing their authority compared to ordinary free men.

4. Among the Nuer people of South Sudan, tribal leaders found guilty of serious crimes could be ritually cursed and ostracized, a fate considered worse than death, while commoners might only face compensation payments.

5. In some Polynesian societies, high-ranking individuals who violated taboos could face execution, while lower-status individuals might only be temporarily banished for similar offenses.

6. Among the Maori of New Zealand, chiefs who seriously violated tribal norms could be stripped of their mana (spiritual power/prestige) and position, a harsher punishment than what commoners typically faced.

7. In some African tribal societies, village elders found guilty of corruption or abuse of power could be publicly shamed and permanently lose their status, while ordinary villagers might only face temporary sanctions.

8. Among the Inuit, respected elders who committed serious offenses could be exiled from the community, effectively a death sentence in harsh Arctic conditions, while younger offenders might face less severe punishments.

9. In some Amazonian tribal groups, shamans who abused their spiritual authority could face execution, while ordinary tribe members might only be subjected to physical punishment or temporary exile for similar offenses.

10. Among the Bedouin of the Arabian Peninsula, tribal sheiks who violated important customs could face loss of leadership and exile, while regular tribesmen might only face fines or temporary ostracism.

In many traditional societies without centralized authority, social sanctions, loss of status, and community disapproval frequently played a more significant role than codified punishments.


Great note on Nostr and Bitcoin, highly recommended!

nostr:nevent1qqszyhhj276ctx30f9tamjrjgaf6vftq4t5nk9vegyhaxssrc3erhmspzamhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumn0wd68ytnzv9hxgtczyq57paf84ku3k8uj6n08sp43qqr9yqfq3ppv6zcya9lhruj0fzvn2qcyqqqqqqg5u8xzh


Thx, glad u liked it!


GM, Rabble. Watched your talk past present future the other day 👌


Let’s make some noise on other platform about NOSTR


Hell yeah!


Hayek 🧡


I won't be surprised if massive Nostr growth triggers the next #Bitcoin #bullrun

Thank you, Emmanuel https://image.nostr.build/9d7e6f6240765d1d39cd85f7f9c7ee8e63ae55ea0f10fa81a04f9687f50fd549.jpg


I won't be surprised if massive Nostr growth triggers the next #Bitcoin #bullrun


Yup, but they don't make the distinction


Same to you!


Veldig bra av Alexander

#Norge
#Ytringsfrihet

nostr:nevent1qqs8dydjarvfkq2uk6aeu2mzpk00pfp8hsq83nvuufsedm674czt9ggppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qgsf88lmfe2ja4wqlfuqnpdtw93lgstessy6ulkcr33vq7kydqa5ygsrqsqqqqqplna3kc


Mornings! https://image.nostr.build/57f746ad3f248e00cb4c7b25bd2e3fa91b058267e185918b8b4b11fd70dfd3c8.jpg


Definitely. Was on my way to work, but it was too beautiful now to leave. Sun, coffee, uplifting music in my ears, hacking the Matrix, just perfect.


GM to all Nostrians!
https://image.nostr.build/57f746ad3f248e00cb4c7b25bd2e3fa91b058267e185918b8b4b11fd70dfd3c8.jpg


GM!


Harari promotes the idea of a small group of human gods who governs useless consumers.

I promote the idea of an infinitely growing group of super humans who doesn't govern anyone.

We're different.

nostr:nevent1qqsy5yg69zsh48e85agj2qmf5azwawj2v0nwhm0pppsm8hsje0vc86spzpmhxue69uhkummnw3ezumt0d5hsygyr9g4nem6tza2vff6h99j2gndkf5v7ma38a3z30x63n599at5pnypsgqqqqqqsv4rzus


Thx for sharing!


Yup, thx, same to you 🧡


Harari promotes the idea of a small group of human gods who govern useless consumers.

I promote the idea of an infinitely growing group of super humans who doesn't govern anyone.

We're different.

nostr:nevent1qqsy5yg69zsh48e85agj2qmf5azwawj2v0nwhm0pppsm8hsje0vc86spzpmhxue69uhkummnw3ezumt0d5hsygyr9g4nem6tza2vff6h99j2gndkf5v7ma38a3z30x63n599at5pnypsgqqqqqqsv4rzus


Nope, sorry


Dear psychopats, sCiencE blew us
#Bitcoin

https://image.nostr.build/1c573f5938ab9fdb8144e725547258f5b840bd36be8c5a52e0269a2559c18871.jpg


Elon feels it https://image.nostr.build/7e8385d660e59927d628c8d52d62cbb9f0fb011eecddc256e931fb8c36bf2a68.jpg


Elon throttling bitcoiners on X might be the best thing that could happen to Nostr.

https://image.nostr.build/920606360602fcd27e2ba4c0ed34757468a2496f09ae39c67f6346865fb118ef.jpg


Amethyst


In view of the French police arresting Telegram CEO Pavel Durov, I thought it might be interesting for you to read this part of my conversation with Perplexity AI on cencorship and monopolization attempts after the invention of the printing press.

Me
I guess it didn't take much time after Gutenberg launched the printing press in 1440 before rulers understood that they had to censor, monopolize or give privileges related to the use of the printing press and distribution of printed texts.

Answer
The introduction of the printing press by Johannes Gutenberg around 1440 indeed led to significant reactions from rulers and authorities across Europe and beyond, primarily due to its potential to disseminate information widely, which could challenge established powers, religious doctrines, and societal norms.

Here's how rulers and authorities responded:

Censorship:
One of the immediate responses was censorship.

Authorities, particularly religious ones, were concerned about the spread of heretical or subversive ideas.

For instance, the Catholic Church, during the Counter-Reformation, established the Index Librorum Prohibitorum (Index of Prohibited Books) in 1559, which listed books that Catholics were forbidden to read or possess due to their content being deemed heretical or contrary to Church doctrine.

This was an attempt to control the spread of Protestant ideas and other unwanted knowledge.

Monopolization and Privileges:
Rulers also sought to control the printing press through monopolies or by granting privileges.

In Venice, for example, the government issued printing privileges to specific printers, giving them exclusive rights to print certain texts.

This not only controlled what was printed but also who could print, effectively creating a form of monopoly.

These privileges were often granted in exchange for loyalty or financial benefits to the state.

Regulation and Licensing:
Beyond outright censorship, many states implemented systems of licensing where printers had to obtain permission to operate or to print specific works.

This allowed authorities to keep tabs on what was being produced and distributed.

In England, for instance, the Crown established the Stationers' Company in 1557, which had the power to regulate printing, including the right to search for and seize illicit presses.

Ottoman Empire's Response: Interestingly, the Ottoman Empire initially resisted the adoption of the printing press, fearing it would lead to the spread of ideas that could challenge Islamic orthodoxy or Ottoman rule.

Printing in Turkish with movable type was only allowed in 1727, significantly later than in Europe, which some historians argue contributed to the Empire's relative decline in intellectual and technological advancements.

Public Burning of Books:
In some instances, particularly during periods of religious fervor or political upheaval, books deemed heretical or seditious were publicly burned.

This was not just censorship but also a public spectacle meant to deter others from similar activities.

Control Over Content:
Beyond outright banning, there was a push to control content through pre-publication censorship.

Manuscripts had to be reviewed by ecclesiastical or secular authorities before they could be printed, ensuring that only approved ideas reached the public.

The response to the printing press was multifaceted, reflecting a broader anxiety about the loss of control over information.

While some rulers saw the economic and cultural benefits of printing, leading to a more nuanced approach of regulation rather than outright suppression, others viewed it as a direct threat to their authority.

This tension between control and the free flow of information has been a recurring theme throughout history, with the printing press as one of the earliest technologies to bring this conflict to the forefront.


YUVAL HARARI'S FLAWED PRESENTATION OF THE HISTORY OF HUMANKIND

https://image.nostr.build/c91434b521fa2e4da3e17affade02542c163e94f3d4ff1821633a38d3a14418d.jpg

1. Introduction

In December 2023, Tucker Carlson and Dan Bongino discussed why Professor Yuval Harari and the World Economic Forum (WEF) pose a threat to our lives.

Klaus Schwab, who is the founder of WEF, seems to rely on some of Harari’s teaching when he formulates his policy recommendations to leaders around the world.

Harari knows a lot of historical facts, is good at storytelling and masters the art of rhetoric.

Commentators and academics therefore find it difficult to show exactly where Harari goes wrong in his analysis.

What I want to bring to everyone’s’ attention, is that Harari and Schwab base their policy recommendation on a narrative about the history of our civilization that simply isn’t correct.

It’s probably the repetition of this narrative that makes Schwab’s communication so effective when he talks to intellectuals, policymakers, journalists and leaders of giant corporations who firmly believe in “leadership” and the idea of technocratic global governance.

However, when we point out the flaws in Harari’s analysis of humankind and our history, it becomes a lot easier to shoot down his and Schwab’s ideas.

Therefore, I hope you will join me in this thread, as it in about ten minutes enables you to understand where Harari went so terribly wrong.

2. Harari’s background and some of his ideas:

Wikipedia gives us the following introduction to him:

«Yuval Noah Harari, born 1976 is an Israeli author, public intellectual, historian and professor in the Department of History at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. He is the author of the popular science bestsellers Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind (2014), Homo Deus: A Brief History of Tomorrow (2016), and 21 Lessons for the 21st Century (2018). His writings examine free will, consciousness, intelligence, happiness, and suffering.»

Harari, who is married to a man and describes himself as an atheist and a vegan, promotes such ideas as:

- people don’t have free will, and human rights are a fiction,

- we are witnessing a natural development of a technocratic two-tier society where a «useless class» of consumers is guided or ruled by an elite class of «human gods. »

In short, Harari suggests that what we use to refer to as the foundation of liberal society is imagination, while the development of an apartheid-like dystopia is natural.

3. Harari’s understanding of the history of civilization

Harari’s analysis of the history is affected by his lack of understanding of the service that money renders to humankind and how different monetary systems dictate the development of very different forms of society.

He writes in Sapiens that:

«Money is the most universal and most efficient system of mutual trust ever devised.»

This and other statements he has made about money tell us that he has understood that money is a cornerstone of our civilization, something which definitely is true.

From there on, it unfortunately goes all south for him.

Harari’s problem is that he doesn’t seem to understand that we get a very different society when people have monetary freedom (the right to use which money they like best, also sometimes inadequately referred to as «currency competition») compared to when a group of people has a monopoly in money production.

In the former, everyone must work to get money.

In the latter, a small elite can extract wealth from everyone else because they can produce money instead of working for it.

Harari, for his part, doesn’t make any such distinction at all.

4. Monetary freedom in a historical context

Monetary freedom has most likely been the dominant system throughout the more than 5000 years that we have had civilizations.

It’s the monopoly in money production that is the anomaly.

Here are some examples:

We had monetary freedom in Norway until 1050 AD.

The Dutch reintroduced it in the Netherlands after the rebellion in 1566 and they had it for about 150 years.

The Irish in practice held on to monetary freedom much longer, unclear how long, but it was all gone when the British crown finally managed to put Ireland under its thumb in the early 17th century.

The Americans established de facto monetary freedom in the US after the revolution in 1783, and it lasted until 1857.

And, finally, Argentina followed the same path as the US from the revolution in 1816 and kept it at least to 1880.

(It’s this system, that the new president of Argentina, Javier Milei, now wants to reestablish.)

5. Institutions in a society with monetary freedom

Societies with monetary freedom typically have no or very weak central governments.

Instead, families, relatives and clans have strong bonds.

Furthermore, private property is almost sacred, and one rarely sees large scale wars in this type of societies.

The reason is that without a monopoly in money creation it becomes difficult to set up an apparatus that can extract wealth from the people to finance this type of aggression.

However, the decentralized structure and a strong will to defend against intruders mean that they can be very capable of defending their freedom, as was the case in the region of Norway, where I live, until 1050 AD.

You can say that a society that has monetary freedom and little or no state primarily is rigged for defense and production, while a society with a monopoly in monetary production is rigged for expansionary war and destruction.

6. Why compound interest is of paramount importance

In order to understand why civilizations develop so differently with different monetary systems, one needs to understand the effect of compound interest.

A typical rate of monetary inflation (expansion of the money supply) in societies with monopolies in money production, has been 7-8% per year.

In a society where money makes up half of all economic transactions, an annual expansion of 7% means that the ones who control the monopoly can extract and take control of 7% of the society’s production each year.

Due to the effect of positive compound interest, constantly increasing the money supply by 7% each year can theoretically result in an accumulated wealth extraction that has doubled in as little as 10 years, tripled within 16 years and quadrupled in 20 years.

The rest of the society experiences the exact opposite, as people see that their money loses value at a negative compounding rate of 7% each year.

Therefore, those who are far away from the money spigot may have to double their productivity in 10 years, triple it in 16 years and quadruple it in 20 years if they want to preserve their share of wealth, their standard of living and keep their means of production, compared to a situation with no manipulation of the money supply.

This is of course nigh on impossible.

Therefore, establishing a monopoly in money production can easily transform a society from being fundamentally decentralized into becoming a two tier system in less than a generation.

It typically ends up with a small wealthy class of creditors with a lot of political power on one hand, and a large poor and indebted class of people with no or little political power on the other hand.

It all sounds so familiar, doesn’t it?

The combined effect of the compound positive interest rates for the «elite» and the compound negative interest rates for the rest explains how enormous effect a monopoly in money production has on society.

The gargantuan redistribution of wealth that takes place in such a society should be compared with what happens in a society without this system, where the distribution of wealth (and power) will be much more evenly spread.

This also helps explaining why families and kinship can remain a lot stronger in societies with monetary freedom.

Once a group of powerful men begins to fuel its influence with a monopoly in money production, the emerging state apparatus basically outcompetes the family and the clan as social institutions.

7. Why countries with monetary freedom become powerful magnets

When you set up a system with monetary freedom in one country, it quickly attracts talent and capital from countries with monopolies in money production.

It’s almost as if monetary freedom is a nuclear-powered magnet.

The explanation for this effect is that it’s much more profitable to work and invest in a country with money that doesn’t steal from you.

Therefore, people “vote” with their feet and their savings.

Harari doesn’t seem to be sufficiently aware of these mechanisms.

For instance, in Sapiens, he explains the Golden Age of the Netherlands with a boom in bank credit.

The reality, however, is that it was monetary freedom, sound money and full reserve banking that served as the foundation for the fantastic growth that the Dutch experienced in the 16th and 17th Century.

Because the other countries had kings and emperors who extracted wealth from their citizens via aggressive monetary policies, the very opposite system in the Netherlands caused it to attract capital and talent from the other countries at an extreme pace.

Harari also fails to recognize that it was the same mechanisms that played out after the American and Argentinian revolutions.

European rulers stuck with their monopolies in money production and continued to pillage their underlings.

As a result, Europe literally became drained of talent and capital that fled to America.

8. Conclusion

Harari’s Sapiens is supposed to be an exposition of the history of humankind.

However, due to the defects that I have shed light on above, the book cannot at all serve this purpose.

Perhaps Harari doesn’t understand it himself, but his narrative of humankind and the history of civilization draws squarely on the type of society we get when a ruling class is allowed to have a monopoly in money creation.

But as you now realize, this version of civilization is neither natural, nor has it been the dominant way of how we organize our activities.

On the contrary, the normal and, above all, much more human situation has been a civilization with monetary freedom, a significantly smaller state apparatus and a decentralized society where strong institutions such as family, kinship and respect of private property keep it all together.

People should therefore be very skeptical to Harari’s and Schwab’s visions for humankind and how we should organize us in the future.

***

Thank you for reading.

If you want to join forces in the battle of ideas, I would appreciate it if you follow me, like and share this note.

You may also want to go to our web page at UNDOQO dot com and check out UNBAR, where I discuss Harari's understanding of money in more detail, with a focus on the relationship between the monetary system and globalization.

UNBAR is amazingly illustrated by designer viz Mattis Storhaug, and it aims to open up the eyes of people from all walks of life, especially those who are critical to globalization but don't understand the importance of monetary policy.


Short note on intellectual property (IP) policy:

Up until the 20th century, the US government had lax enforcement of IP, particularly concerning foreign creators.

The legal framework allowed for the widespread piracy of foreign works, as the 1790 Copyright Act explicitly excluded protections for non-US authors.

This led to rampant appropriation of foreign designs and publications, with little consequence for infringers, as the government prioritized domestic interests over foreign IP rights.

Officials believed that strong IP protections would mainly benefit foreign creators, raising costs for domestic consumers and hindering local innovation.

The prevailing view was that the U.S. economy needed to develop its own capabilities through imitation before it could afford to protect foreign IP rights.

This perspective was influenced by a "frontier culture" that prioritized individualism and innovation over strict adherence to IP laws.

Calls for better protection from figures like Charles Dickens largely went unheeded, reflecting a broader culture of IP violation during this period.

The US changed its position dramatically in the 20th century, when itself became the strongest economic nation in the world.

While many developing nations, including India, Brazil, Argentina, and Mexico, resisted stringent IP standards, and argued IP favored developed countries at the expense developing countries, Uncle Sam, the former pirate protector, became the world's most aggressive enforcer of IP, pressuring developing countries with the use of trade sanctions.


Short note on intellectual property (IP) policy:

Up until the 20th century, the U.S. government had lax enforcement of IP, particularly concerning foreign creators.

The legal framework allowed for the widespread piracy of foreign works, as the 1790 Copyright Act explicitly excluded protections for non-US authors.

This led to rampant appropriation of foreign designs and publications, with little consequence for infringers, as the government prioritized domestic interests over foreign IP rights.

Officials believed that strong IP protections would mainly benefit foreign creators, raising costs for domestic consumers and hindering local innovation.

The prevailing view was that the U.S. economy needed to develop its own capabilities through imitation before it could afford to protect foreign IP rights.

This perspective was influenced by a "frontier culture" that prioritized individualism and innovation over strict adherence to IP laws.

Calls for better protection from figures like Charles Dickens largely went unheeded, reflecting a broader culture of IP violation during this period.

The US changed its position dramatically in the 20th century, when itself became the strongest economic nation in the world.

While many developing nations, including India, Brazil, Argentina, and Mexico, resisted stringent IP standards, and argued IP favored developed countries at the expense developing countries, Uncle Sam, the former pirate protector, became the world's most aggressive enforcer of IP, pressuring developing countries with the use of trade sanctions.


Great, much needed, thx


Layer two etc: Everything else
Layer one: The monetary system
Layer zero: People's belief system

nostr:nevent1qqsxznttqqk3xcfx37ln93c7vm5yn48n494v8edjwlfts3mtzaz303cpz4mhxue69uhkummnw3ezummcw3ezuer9wchsygpfjpxurhp3q9vp4p7v62ewxh06q7ljhwh79c07agusj9hlzvefzqpsgqqqqqqssvymx0


Criminal legislation in more advanced societies than ours:

1. In some ancient Germanic tribes, chieftains who betrayed their people could face ritual execution, while ordinary tribesmen might only be exiled for similar offenses.

2. Some Native American tribes, like the Iroquois, had systems where chiefs could be deposed and severely punished by clan mothers for serious transgressions, while regular tribe members faced less severe consequences.

3. In medieval Iceland's decentralized legal system, powerful chieftains (goðar) could face harsher social and economic sanctions for abusing their authority compared to ordinary free men.

4. Among the Nuer people of South Sudan, tribal leaders found guilty of serious crimes could be ritually cursed and ostracized, a fate considered worse than death, while commoners might only face compensation payments.

5. In some Polynesian societies, high-ranking individuals who violated taboos could face execution, while lower-status individuals might only be temporarily banished for similar offenses.

6. Among the Maori of New Zealand, chiefs who seriously violated tribal norms could be stripped of their mana (spiritual power/prestige) and position, a harsher punishment than what commoners typically faced.

7. In some African tribal societies, village elders found guilty of corruption or abuse of power could be publicly shamed and permanently lose their status, while ordinary villagers might only face temporary sanctions.

8. Among the Inuit, respected elders who committed serious offenses could be exiled from the community, effectively a death sentence in harsh Arctic conditions, while younger offenders might face less severe punishments.

9. In some Amazonian tribal groups, shamans who abused their spiritual authority could face execution, while ordinary tribe members might only be subjected to physical punishment or temporary exile for similar offenses.

10. Among the Bedouin of the Arabian Peninsula, tribal sheiks who violated important customs could face loss of leadership and exile, while regular tribesmen might only face fines or temporary ostracism.

In many traditional societies without centralized authority, social sanctions, loss of status, and community disapproval frequently played a more significant role than codified punishments.


Whether official or unofficial, political motives don't matter, only results matter.

The short version of the results of politics:

1. The one percent wealthiest own almost half of the global wealth
2. Most of the rest the state takes
3. In return they make people's lives miserable

#RebelUp
https://image.nostr.build/6aa8f0c877cc962cb67e2fe84aa065eef31d4b7f888b7d8e155d709ddb4e982e.jpg


Thx for insights!


When analyzing power vs. freedom,  people's belief system matter the most, while the monetary system comes in at second place.

We can call the belief system layer zero, and the monetary system layer one.

All the other layers of society; education, consumption, politics, infrastructure, security, trade, laws, taxes, and so forth, build on top of the belief system and the monetary system.

If you don't analyze the two foundational layers thoroughly, you will understand very, very little of what goes on in the other layers, especially when it comes to how power vs freedom is affected.


Macron's wet dream:
Arresting Poseidon for not stopping smugglers.
https://image.nostr.build/1108e30d666e056a3e59a14dc9dd4ccb7f971389d658e2fe19655e278518241d.jpg


You might check out our books

https://undoqo.com/


Bitcoin drones 🧡 https://video.nostr.build/5583d30efb5474ba0279663f05c89881392715f23c1f97417629e0d474658864.mp4


Elon enables deamplifying of accounts without explaining or being public about it. I can't verify his intentions, motives, game plan, etc, and don't trust him. The game itself is hard to understand.


Check or charade?
https://image.nostr.build/c90ab03d8fdf562608292c47cac297007ee38bed7a8e6269493a02c4f87d3622.jpg


Valuable video about why migrating to NOSTR makes sense

nostr:nevent1qqsq8rz9rec85g6aufgx2m5qtt6hnflpe00k74am93em627alp4g3ycpz4mhxue69uhkummnw3ezummcw3ezuer9wchsygxy3c5lqj6g9nqpeg0ea7xgdmurrrq9nc8fx5er2930pq8jdc2vzypsgqqqqqqs32920a


When the blob/deep_state/"political_
_elite"/clown_world is finished tearing up every creation it hates, including numerous misfits produced by itself and beauties which are born as a reaction to its actions, it will have destroyed all fiat currencies and centralized information and communication platforms, leaving #bitcoin and #nostr the final platforms standing.

Decentralization wins.


Sow and harvest, copy and paste

https://x.com/enur72/status/1827755733552652621?s=19


Sow and harvest, copy and paste

https://x.com/enur72/status/1827746342891831769?t=AYc7UXXnid4yux3BSj3TJQ&s=19


Is it possible that Elon's algos try to NPCize us on X?

Has he given in to political pressure?

I'm being heavily deamped at the moment, no doubt about it.

Nostr seems to be the future


Do you think it's too much lying and deception in your social environment?

If so, don't despair!

Read this instead.

I sometimes say the following:

"Truth is the brightest light."

Do you agree?

And I also often say this:

"Lies are the darkest matter."

Am I right?

If you agree,, I leave it to you to do the calculation yourself.

The question you should ponder, is if it is such a bad thing that there are so many lies.

Because, what happens with the signal-to-noise ratio, if you increase the amount of lies and for instance keep the amount of truth speaking stable?


Fikser det også du vettu, Jonas.
https://image.nostr.build/8c6911b0c6568269248c76a9b68e9cb5aa2ccd8cc99dffb0e6763186db42b0c7.jpg


Good is the only acceptable outcome, dear Hodlonaut.

You set a great example as to how it's possible to shape the future, instead of waiting for others to shape yours.

Earlier this week I proposed

"7 powerful ideas for freedom fighting."

Three of these ideas in partucular came to my mind when I saw your post today.

Idea No. 6. No Freeriding
Never, ever be a freerider, someone who just piggybacks on others' fight for freedom.

Comment:
This is just a natural reflex for you, because you know a future with freedom and sovereignty is your own fight too, and just looking at others doing all the work clearly  isn't an option.

Idea No 5: Show Your Capability
Let the world see that you have power, and that you are willing to and capable of using it, especially in intellectual discussions and when others are under attack.

Comment:
You've shown that you have power, that you are capable of using it, and that you also have the strength to restrain yourself. A stoic viking, that's you, bro.

***
Idea No. 4. Copy, Copy, Copy
Let others copy your behaviour and your ideas, and become a pro in copying others' behaviour and their ideas.

Comment:
You inspire others, because you have let yourself be inspired by others and you have transformed that inspiration into action. Just look at what happened a few years ago. "We're all Hodlonaut" happened. And it still happens. Every day.

***

To sum up:

No Freeriding. Check.

Show. Check.

Copy. Check.

Good outcome.
Only acceptable option.

Thank you, brother.

nostr:nevent1qqswpkfhj8hmh5xu57tj53fcrps2cau4re0fenp0sznzg8ccg22pk8spr4mhxue69uhkummnw3ezucnfw33k76twv4ezuum0vd5kzmp0qgsvf82j54enveujhxnwfpg4slpgqshmyna9vfwx6eace9wgw5dv59grqsqqqqqpx5ewgk


🙏
No, haven't it's been on my list a long time now


Do u think it auto-deamps me for a period, to "teach me?"


Are you in search of uplifting ideas?

Rutger Bregman’s *Humankind: A Hopeful History* is a fantastic starting point to escape the doom and gloom mindset.

https://image.nostr.build/295784ec8d1f3a1218c223b93fae0aa74000cef75f15a8b6d7cfce10ebe90fa7.jpg

He argues that humans are inherently kind and cooperative, challenging the belief in our selfish nature.

Isn't that a breath of fresh air?

And you can trust him, because Bregman supports his claims with scientific evidence, philosophical insights, and compelling historical anecdotes.

He also critiques several famous psychological experiments, like the Milgram study, revealing design flaws that undermine their conclusions about human behavior.

He suggests that kindness is contagious, much like fear, and that expecting the best in others inspires positive actions.

Bregman emphasizes that our ability to learn from one another's kindness is vital for societal progress.

If he had integrated in his thesis an analysis of how different monetary systems shape our incentives, his arguments could have been even more powerful, and that's why we pick up on this when we continue our own journey of creating new books.

Anyway, I highly recommend ordering *Humankind* now, it will definitely give you a very positive boost!


Good


Anyone else experienced problems on X after having mentioned nostr there?

Since I posted this one three days ago, followers don''t get me in their feed.

Coincidence?

https://image.nostr.build/4bbd0e4134346a3dedd77f197d1630e33eb4c5026688a0823bca7106f1494fd2.jpg


At the Bitcoin Conference, people could pay for photographs with politicians. Or pay more for a dinner with them.

So when you see an awkward pic with some bitcoiner next to a politician, there’s a good chance they paid for it.

I think most people know that, but for those that don’t, keep that in mind.

All else being equal, the more awkward the pic looks, the more likely they paid for it.


TLDR of Rober Kennedy Jr.'s speech:

Matrix agents are busy morphing into the Democrats


I HIGHLY recommend content creators start utilizing the wide variety of tools within the Nostr ecosystem.

If your content is on a centralized platform, it’s not your content, it’s theirs.

My workflow is simple:

I publish all my video content for nostr:npub10qrssqjsydd38j8mv7h27dq0ynpns3djgu88mhr7cr2qcqrgyezspkxqj8  to nostr:npub1w0rthyjyp2f5gful0gm2500pwyxfrx93a85289xdz0sd6hyef33sh2cu4x (built by nostr:npub1l2vyh47mk2p0qlsku7hg0vn29faehy9hy34ygaclpn66ukqp3afqutajft )

⚡ https://highlighter.com/walker

I pay for the data storage with #bitcoin on https://satellite.earth/cdn

Videos are automatically shared to other video-first Nostr clients like https://www.flare.pub when I publish on Highlighter, and I can further promote them using my Nostr clients of choice, like nostr:npub18m76awca3y37hkvuneavuw6pjj4525fw90necxmadrvjg0sdy6qsngq955 and nostr:npub12vkcxr0luzwp8e673v29eqjhrr7p9vqq8asav85swaepclllj09sylpugg

#GrowNostr by using Nostr.

nostr:npub1gu47n7fxfm4py48jktmu6tdqcvva4e87fntynuzzf62zxnw2e7tsc6907g let me know if you want any help getting set up — sorry this happened to you. https://i.nostr.build/tYqkNOivWa0BPVwA.jpg


7 strong ideas for effective freedom fighting:

1. The layers:
Understand that people's ideas and our belief systems form the foundation of the other societal layers, with the monetary system being the second most important layer.

2. The battle of ideas:
Win the battle of ideas, and you win the battle for everything else.

3. Help others:
Join others in their fight for freedom instead of just asking them to join your fight for #Bitcoin, food security, drug decriminalization, etc.

4. Copy, copy, copy!
Let others copy your good behavior and ideas, and become adept at copying others' good behavior and ideas.

5. Show what you are capable of:
Let the world see that you have power and are willing and able to use it, especially against those who try to ruin civil discourse and when others are under attack.

6. No freeriders:
Never be a free rider, as those who only seek to benefit from others' fight for freedom without contributing themselves destroy people's motivation to fight.

7. Show your pride:
Be open about how proud you are of what you stand for, and wear your freedom fight as a badge of honor (Satoshi t-shirt, anti-NATO button, Norway out of EEA pins, etc.) https://image.nostr.build/5407b859696c350ff6c9f23c3280586ae99060eb2aa06ab7ecda680b060b8927.jpg


Good on you - thx!


What if Bitcoin turns people into INTs?
😁


What i Bitcoin turns people into INTs?
😁


LT's post on X 👇, follow him there @LektorThaulow https://image.nostr.build/8df56649b29d6cbbc4f343edcb77f27f7212f6666dc6a1e6b745d732faf84e55.jpg


Bitcoiners, check this out:

https://image.nostr.build/50878191845d120dccb9b17c07ecb978e8b702ab5f56ca1350d028ed46f050fb.jpg

***
INT stands for "introvert," "intuitive," and "thinking."

Only 5.4% of the general population belong to these two types, but they make up over half of bitcoiners.

Architects, strategists, and inventors with an insatiable thirst for knowledge.

SFJ stands for "sensing," "feeling," and "judging."

These two types make up 25% of the general population, and almost none of them are bitcoiners.

They are helpful, self-sacrificing protectors with great care.

Probably a bit of pseudoscience, but fun nonetheless.
***

(Machine translation of Lektor Thaulow's post below, h/t to you, hope you join us here on Nostr soon)

#Bitcoin


👇
nostr:nevent1qqsxnftwnyqqux7xhnh5m0w0tl2m66cgpucrej28gwx8ue8ygkd5qhcpr9mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumn0wdmksetjv5hxxmmd9upzqgnuhgh939ymsdvklaum9s69at5naqfgza2yjy5kpmmgc79vwp4nqvzqqqqqqyzysjzp


shoutout rick
https://m.primal.net/KHjM.jpg


Don't know, others have zapped me recently


Thx for the feedback (I mean it)


Do you know Niccolo Machiavelli?

You've probably heard about  his book "The Prince."

https://image.nostr.build/a94f185978f1eba31935c7b4bd39d36485c191b1ad5c214e1b0bcd30b04a7b77.jpg

But you likely didn't read it.

Because you were discusted by the idea of him writing a manual for tyrants, am I not correct?

That's at least why I didn't read it.

Today I learned that there is "strong evidence" indicating that Niccolo wrote it to get his old job back.

Well, that makes exactly zero sense to me.

When the Medicis reclaimed their power in 1512 he had been a long-time civil servant of the City of Florence.

The Medicis suspected him of conspiracy, imprisoned and tortured him, before they sent him into exile.

In Il Principe he wrote a value-free description of how a wise prince rules his people.

It was based on first-hand observations of the rulers of Florence and other states as well as on indepth inspection of historical accounts.

IMO the book puts at full display the way rulers treat us underlings, for everyone to see.

Niccolo initially dedicated the book to Giuliano de' Medici, Lorenzo's uncle.

After Giuliano's death in 1516, he rededicated it to Lorenzo di Piero de' Medici.

He supposedly wrote "The Prince" as a "token of devotion" to the Medici family.

Niccolo made efforts to have the Medici family see and read "The Prince," but there's no clear evidence that they did so during his lifetime.

If he did this to receive employment at the House of Medicis he must have been a complete moron.

But his writings don't indicate that he was.

Far from it.

If the Medicis did read Il Principe they probably hated him even more than they had done before.

Because publishing it could have been a disaster for them.

The book first became available five years after Niccolo passed away.

I gave AI two tasks today, to tell me about his teaching of using 1) deception and 2) religion as political instruments.

Below you can read the answers.

After you have read them you may ask yourself if Machiavelli's recipes makes sense when you try to wrap your head around today's politics in your beloved representative democracies.

Enjoy!

1) Give me a brief summary about what Machiavelli says about why and how a ruler should deceive his people.

AI says:

Machiavelli argues that a ruler should be willing to deceive his people when necessary to maintain power and achieve his goals.

He believes it is better for a prince to be feared than loved, as fear is more reliable.

Machiavelli advises rulers to cultivate an appearance of virtue and morality, while being prepared to act against those virtues when required.

He states that "people are so simple, and so subject to present necessities, that anyone who seeks to deceive will always find someone who will allow himself to be deceived".

According to Machiavelli, rulers should use deception strategically to:

• Maintain their authority and power

• Manipulate public perception

• Outmaneuver rivals and enemies

• Achieve political objectives

However, he cautions that a ruler must be careful not to be hated, as this could lead to rebellion.

The key is to use deception judiciously while maintaining an outward appearance of virtue and strength

2) Give me a brief summary about what Machiavelli says about why and how a ruler should use religion in his politics.

AI says:

Machiavelli viewed religion primarily as a practical tool for rulers to maintain power and control over their subjects.

Here's a brief summary of his key points:

• Religion as a unifying force: Machiavelli believed religion could be used to unite people and garner support for the ruler.

• Maintaining stability: Religious traditions provide a sense of predictability and control, helping to keep society stable.

• Controlling the populace: By respecting and protecting religious practices, rulers can instill fear of disobedience and promise rewards in the afterlife for compliance.

• Appearance of piety: Machiavelli advised rulers to appear religious and virtuous outwardly, even if they weren't genuinely devout.

• Legitimizing authority: Religion could be used to make a ruler's actions seem divinely sanctioned, even if they were harsh or unjust.

• Spectacle and ritual: Religious ceremonies and displays could be used to reinforce the ruler's power and intimidate potential dissenters.

• Instilling virtues: Machiavelli saw religion as a means to cultivate desirable qualities in citizens.

In essence, Machiavelli advocated for a pragmatic approach to religion in politics, viewing it as a powerful tool for maintaining authority rather than a moral imperative.

If you want to join my quest for answers, feel free to hit the like, share and follow buttons.


What does removing tr strings imply?


This podcast episode on Niccolo seems promising.

I've just listened to this beautiful voice of the narrator reading a letter from Niccolo, which he wrote after he was sent in excile.

Just facinating.

https://open.spotify.com/episode/317XgzXv6or5A6sC7zElIp?si=Jiro0oayTLGOSnjQE9ZMlw


Do you know Niccolo Machiavelli?

You've probably heard about  his book "The Prince."

https://image.nostr.build/a94f185978f1eba31935c7b4bd39d36485c191b1ad5c214e1b0bcd30b04a7b77.jpg

But you likely didn't read it.

Because you were disgusted by the idea of him writing a manual for tyrants, am I not correct?

That's at least why I didn't read it.

Today I learned that there is "strong evidence" indicating that Niccolo wrote it to get his old job back.

Well, that makes exactly zero sense to me.

When the Medicis reclaimed their power in 1512 he had been a long-time civil servant of the City of Florence.

The Medicis suspected him of conspiracy, imprisoned and tortured him, before they sent him into exile.

In Il Principe he wrote a value-free description of how a wise prince rules his people.

It was based on first-hand observations of the rulers of Florence and other states as well as on indepth inspection of historical accounts.

IMO the book puts at full display the way rulers treat us underlings, for everyone to see.

Niccolo initially dedicated the book to Giuliano de' Medici, Lorenzo's uncle.

After Giuliano's death in 1516, he rededicated it to Lorenzo di Piero de' Medici.

He supposedly wrote "The Prince" as a "token of devotion" to the Medici family.

Niccolo made efforts to have the Medici family see and read "The Prince," but there's no clear evidence that they did so during his lifetime.

If he did this to receive employment at the House of Medicis he must have been a complete moron.

But his writings don't indicate that he was.

Far from it.

If the Medicis did read Il Principe they probably hated him even more than they had done before.

Because publishing it could have been a disaster for them.

The book first became available five years after Niccolo passed away.

I gave AI two tasks today, to tell me about his teaching of using 1) deception and 2) religion as political instruments.

Below you can read the answers.

After you have read them you may ask yourself if Machiavelli's recipes makes sense when you try to wrap your head around today's politics in your beloved representative democracies.

Enjoy!

1) Give me a brief summary about what Machiavelli says about why and how a ruler should deceive his people.

AI says:

Machiavelli argues that a ruler should be willing to deceive his people when necessary to maintain power and achieve his goals.

He believes it is better for a prince to be feared than loved, as fear is more reliable.

Machiavelli advises rulers to cultivate an appearance of virtue and morality, while being prepared to act against those virtues when required.

He states that "people are so simple, and so subject to present necessities, that anyone who seeks to deceive will always find someone who will allow himself to be deceived".

According to Machiavelli, rulers should use deception strategically to:

• Maintain their authority and power

• Manipulate public perception

• Outmaneuver rivals and enemies

• Achieve political objectives

However, he cautions that a ruler must be careful not to be hated, as this could lead to rebellion.

The key is to use deception judiciously while maintaining an outward appearance of virtue and strength

2) Give me a brief summary about what Machiavelli says about why and how a ruler should use religion in his politics.

AI says:

Machiavelli viewed religion primarily as a practical tool for rulers to maintain power and control over their subjects.

Here's a brief summary of his key points:

• Religion as a unifying force: Machiavelli believed religion could be used to unite people and garner support for the ruler.

• Maintaining stability: Religious traditions provide a sense of predictability and control, helping to keep society stable.

• Controlling the populace: By respecting and protecting religious practices, rulers can instill fear of disobedience and promise rewards in the afterlife for compliance.

• Appearance of piety: Machiavelli advised rulers to appear religious and virtuous outwardly, even if they weren't genuinely devout.

• Legitimizing authority: Religion could be used to make a ruler's actions seem divinely sanctioned, even if they were harsh or unjust.

• Spectacle and ritual: Religious ceremonies and displays could be used to reinforce the ruler's power and intimidate potential dissenters.

• Instilling virtues: Machiavelli saw religion as a means to cultivate desirable qualities in citizens.

In essence, Machiavelli advocated for a pragmatic approach to religion in politics, viewing it as a powerful tool for maintaining authority rather than a moral imperative.

If you want to join my quest for answers, feel free to hit the like, share and follow buttons.