Sam retweeted
Unpopular but true: Bitcoin is the most significant monetary advance since the creation of coinage.
If you don't believe me or don't get it, I don't have time to try to convince you, sorry.
Sam retweeted
Ein Professor erklärt, man solle sich nicht zu sehr damit beschäftigen, Geld zu verstehen. Das sei eine Sackgasse.
@saifedean antwortet mit einem großartigen Bild für Inflation. 🪣
Quelle: The Bitcoin Standard Podcast #351 / Doha Debates
Wer profitiert davon, dass du Geld nicht verstehst?
Ein Degrowth-Professor hält es für eine Sackgasse, Geld verstehen zu wollen. Saifedean Ammous erklärt mit einem Eimer, warum genau das gefährlich ist.
Sam retweeted
SAIFEDEAN AMMOUS: "This is an institution whose only function is to increase the money supply, which is how to rob people. You can't use that for good."
"Central banks don't create resources. They simply redistribute existing resources. Central banks don't produce anything valuable for society. Valuable things are labor, capital, actual real resources. Central banks don't make more of that."
"All they do is they create more papers, more claims on that, allowing people to redistribute that. Any attempt at redistributing that puts the person in charge of the money creation as essentially the owner of society."
@DohaDebates
Sam retweeted
Their attack on Jensen is an attack on your freedoms in the age of AI.
They can't have one of the most successful and prominent men in the sector championing open weight models and permissionless access to intelligence.
They want total control.
Sam retweeted
Your wallet isn't thin because of billionaires and Capitalists.
It's because the government keeps eroding your buying power with inflationary debt spending, taxes, and prosperity-destroying regulations.
Replying to @DOGE
This is one of the downsides to the public sector: competition is what breeds innovation, and in government there IS no competition.
That, and you're spending other people's money instead of your own. It's a real recipe for disaster.
Sam retweeted
NEW - Boston Dynamics presents the progress made in the movement capacity of its "humanoid robot" Atlas.
Sam retweeted
📣🚨 BAT SIGNAL: A law in France that would mandate a backdoor in end to end encrypted communications is set for a vote within the next day, after some start-stop skirmishes.
The French Narcotraffic law would require encrypted communications providers—like Signal—create a backdoor by giving the government the ability to add themselves to any group or chat they like. In the name of (checks notes) fighting drug trafficking.
While those hyping this bad law have rushed to assure French politicians that the proposal isn’t’ ‘breaking encryption’ their arguments are as tedious as they are stale as they are laughable. For those catching up, let’s review the basics: end to end encryption must only have two ‘ends’—sender and recipient(s). Otherwise, it is backdoored. Whatever method is devised to add a ‘third end’ —from a perverted PRNG in a cryptographic protocol, to vendor-provided government software grafted onto the side of secure communications that allow said government to add themselves to your chats—it rips a hole in the hull of private communications and is a backdoor.
Indeed, the ghost participant proposal was roundly rebuked (humiliated, even) when it was first proposed in 2019 in the UK. The technical community was united, and it was never implemented in law or otherwise.
We cannot accept any backdoor, however it’s dressed up. Communications don’t stay within jurisdictional boundaries. Which means a hole created in France becomes a vector for anyone wanting to undermine Signal’s robust privacy guarantees, anywhere. Instead of contending with unbreakable math, they only have to compromise a French government employee, or the vendor-provided software used to sideload government operatives into your private chats.
This is why, as always, Signal would exit the French market before it would comply with this law as written. At this moment especially, there is simply too much riding on Signal, on our being able to forge a future in which private communication persists, to allow such pernicious undermining.
We hope—WE HOPE—that this callow, dishonest attack will fail, and will be the last. We would love to get back to the work of maintaining and improving our core technologies, instead of fighting legislation which is distinguished in nothing as much as its refusal to listen to decades of expert consensus in its drive to imperil global cybersecurity and the human right of privacy.





















