Search content
Sort by
Showing 20 of 20 results by MoneroModel
At some points, I wonder how the world would be without a governance, I don't care to know about histories of how politics and government has been in existence before these days.
My interest is ... Could we (humans) had lived a peaceful soul here on earth without a governing body and no laws?
For a thought-provoking take, I'd recommend Larken Rose's book "The Most Dangerous Superstition" - it's available as a free PDF online and also has an audiobook version on YouTube. Rose argues that voluntary cooperation, not coercive authority, is the path to a more just society. My interest is ... Could we (humans) had lived a peaceful soul here on earth without a governing body and no laws?
Quote
Having respect for "authority" and having respect for humanity are mutually exclusive and diametrically opposed...
Flip through any history book and you will see that most of the injustice and destruction that has occurred throughout the world was not the result of people “breaking the law,” but rather the result of people obeying and enforcing the "laws" of various "governments".
Larken Rose, The Most Dangerous Superstition
Flip through any history book and you will see that most of the injustice and destruction that has occurred throughout the world was not the result of people “breaking the law,” but rather the result of people obeying and enforcing the "laws" of various "governments".
Larken Rose, The Most Dangerous Superstition
Rose even includes this wonderful practical illustration in the book's copyright note:
Quote
A Note About the Copyright...
A “copyright” is usually an implied threat (“Don’t copy this, or else!”). While I hope that anyone who likes this book will buy additional copies from me, if someone does copy this book without my permission, that would not make me feel justified in using force against that person, or, my own or via “government.” I copyrighted the book primarily so that no one else could copyright it and thereby use the violence of the state to prevent me from distributing it.
A “copyright” is usually an implied threat (“Don’t copy this, or else!”). While I hope that anyone who likes this book will buy additional copies from me, if someone does copy this book without my permission, that would not make me feel justified in using force against that person, or, my own or via “government.” I copyrighted the book primarily so that no one else could copyright it and thereby use the violence of the state to prevent me from distributing it.
Just what comes to my mind when I read the majority of the previous comments:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GHsRPpFW8AAV5df.jpg
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GHsRPpFW8AAV5df.jpg
⭐ Merited by DooMAD (2)
Notice how there's no mention in the whitepaper of non-miners relaying transactions or enforcing consensus rules. They were never part of the design, but we now rely heavily upon them. It's because of these nodes that scaling is a far more nuanced and delicate matter. Unlike miners, there's no financial reward for running a non-mining node, but they do help to secure the network. Ergo, making it more increasingly more costly to run something that earns no rewards is a difficult ask.
As someone who runs nodes, relays, bridges, and mailboxes for some projects, I think I can offer a personal perspective on the issue of rewards. For myself and several friends who share in these efforts, running a node transcends any monetary gain. It bestows a profound sense of expanding freedom and liberation in the world—a feeling so potent and invaluable, akin to love (which no amount of money can buy!). This is the essence of increasing total freedom: a united stand against the limitations enforced by governments globally. This feeling is priceless and motivates me to not only forego potential earnings but also to invest my own resources - I buy hardware and allocate both funds and time—all of which hold financial value—to support these projects. From my personal viewpoint, the 'reward problem' arises only when a project shifts from being a platform for the dissenting voices of the people, from a collective resistance to malevolence, to becoming a vehicle for wealth accumulation for 'HODLers' and institutions. After all, no one wants to labor for free while watching the 'rich get richer.' If it's no longer about a selfless collective standing against tyranny, injustice and state, it becomes a service—and services require compensation. Practically speaking, Bitcoin needs to consider implementing a financial reward mechanism for those operating non-mining nodes in the long term.One cannot help but ponder why preemptive measures were not taken to mitigate the centralization of mining power, such as introducing deterrents to ASICs, similar to the RandomX algorithm?
Not sure about everyone else, but I'd rather this topic didn't degenerate into another inane "who is satoshi?" thread. We've got hundreds of those already. I'd politely ask if everyone kept the focus to the historical interest aspect (and definitely don't engage with deranged shitgibbon LeezHamilton, because that's a sure-fire way to ruin a topic rapidly). Faketoshi does not belong in this thread. Talk about him elsewhere, please.
Thank you DooMAD.Switching topics back to the emails, I've been reading them quite carefully (and therefore slowly) for a better understanding. What do the esteemed ladies and gentlemen think about https://mmalmi.github.io/satoshi/#email-19, where Satoshi's email confirms that Bitcoin was meant to be a digital cash, not an investment tool, as outlined in the Bitcoin white paper title?
Quote
I'm uncomfortable with explicitly saying "consider it an investment." That's a dangerous thing to say, and you should delete that bullet point.
Also, I'd appreciate your thoughts on https://mmalmi.github.io/satoshi/#email-3, specifically his response to a question about scaling.
Quote
100,000 block generating nodes is a good ballpark large-scale size to think about. Propagating a transaction across the whole network twice would consume a total of US$ 0.02 of bandwidth at today's prices. In practice, many would be burning off excess allocated bandwidth or unlimited plans with one of the cheaper backbones. There could be millions of SPV clients. They only matter in how many transactions they generate. If they pay 1 or 2 cents transaction fees, they pay for themselves. I've coded it so you can pay any optional amount of transaction fees you want. When the incentive subsidy eventually tapers off, it may be necessary to put a market-determined transaction fee on your transactions to make sure nodes process them promptly.
To think about what a really huge transaction load would look like, I look at the existing credit card network. I found some more
estimates about how many transactions are online purchases. It's about 15 million tx per day for the entire e-commerce load of the Internet worldwide. At 1KB per transaction, that would be 15GB of bandwidth for each block generating node per day, or about two DVD movies worth. Seems do-able even with today's technology.
Important to remember, even if Bitcoin caught on at dot-com rates of growth, it would still take years to become any substantial
fraction of all transactions. I believe hardware has already recently become strong enough to handle large scale, but if there's any doubt about that, bandwidth speeds, prices, disk space and computing power will be much greater by the time it's needed.
To think about what a really huge transaction load would look like, I look at the existing credit card network. I found some more
estimates about how many transactions are online purchases. It's about 15 million tx per day for the entire e-commerce load of the Internet worldwide. At 1KB per transaction, that would be 15GB of bandwidth for each block generating node per day, or about two DVD movies worth. Seems do-able even with today's technology.
Important to remember, even if Bitcoin caught on at dot-com rates of growth, it would still take years to become any substantial
fraction of all transactions. I believe hardware has already recently become strong enough to handle large scale, but if there's any doubt about that, bandwidth speeds, prices, disk space and computing power will be much greater by the time it's needed.
I also discovered that Satoshi himself discussed this topic right here on the forum:
Quote from: satoshi link=topic=1347.msg15366#msg15366
It can be phased in, like:
if (blocknumber > 115000)
maxblocksize = largerlimit
It can start being in versions way ahead, so by the time it reaches that block number and goes into effect, the older versions that don't have it are already obsolete.
When we're near the cutoff block number, I can put an alert to old versions to make sure they know they have to upgrade.
if (blocknumber > 115000)
maxblocksize = largerlimit
It can start being in versions way ahead, so by the time it reaches that block number and goes into effect, the older versions that don't have it are already obsolete.
When we're near the cutoff block number, I can put an alert to old versions to make sure they know they have to upgrade.
As I delve deeper into these emails, I get a peculiar feeling that Satoshi might have opposed much of what Bitcoin has become and what it represents today...
For sure, way too many people are doing it, even now - I constantly see countless AI linguistic analyses related to new Satoshi emails on Twitter and other corners of the internet. The good thing is that whatever any such analysis shows, it's irrelevant, as it will never be definitive and is destined to be lost among billions of other analyses and 'educated guesses'. Sincerely, I can't understand why some people who clearly respect Satoshi can't also respect his/their evident desire for privacy and security. I understand why malicious entities like criminals and states would want to identify Satoshi, and he/they have covered his/their tracks well to evade such entities (hopefully). And this should clearly signal 'leave me the f%^&* alone' to anyone who appreciates his creation, even just a little bit.
I really hope Mpamaegbu is right and Satoshi understood the nature of what he was getting into from the very beginning.
Being a smart person, Satoshi was likely exposed to at least some authors who predicted or fantasized about the scenario, such as Lord William Rees-Mogg and James Dale Davidson's non-fiction book "The Sovereign Individual" (1997) or Robert Heinlein's sci-fi novel "The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress" (1966), etc. which vividly warned about state actions in the transition period long before 2009. It's clear that Satoshi had to be fully prepared for this scenario and took steps to protect himself/themselves, and the least we can do is respect his/their will to remain anonymous, imho.
I really hope Mpamaegbu is right and Satoshi understood the nature of what he was getting into from the very beginning.
He understood the nature of what he was getting into from the word go. Anyone who's into a venture that will liberate the people should know that the state won't be happy with them. Satoshi understood that and that's why he masked his/their identity from the very beginning and did all that could be done to remain untraceable.
Being a smart person, Satoshi was likely exposed to at least some authors who predicted or fantasized about the scenario, such as Lord William Rees-Mogg and James Dale Davidson's non-fiction book "The Sovereign Individual" (1997) or Robert Heinlein's sci-fi novel "The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress" (1966), etc. which vividly warned about state actions in the transition period long before 2009. It's clear that Satoshi had to be fully prepared for this scenario and took steps to protect himself/themselves, and the least we can do is respect his/their will to remain anonymous, imho.
The Shirky Principle:Institutions to Preserve Problem to Which They Are Solution
https://effectiviology.com/shirky-principle/
Quote
The Shirky principle is the adage that “institutions will try to preserve the problem to which they are the solution”. More broadly, it can also be characterized as the adage that “every entity tends to prolong the problem it is solving”.
Examples of the Shirky principle
An example of the Shirky principle are tax-filing companies who lobby the government to prevent it from offering a free and easy way to file taxes, to ensure that the companies can continue to make a profit. A similar example of this are private prison companies who lobby the government to support policies that increase the number of incarcerated people and the duration of their incarceration.
Examples of the Shirky principle
An example of the Shirky principle are tax-filing companies who lobby the government to prevent it from offering a free and easy way to file taxes, to ensure that the companies can continue to make a profit. A similar example of this are private prison companies who lobby the government to support policies that increase the number of incarcerated people and the duration of their incarceration.
Just started diving into this historical correspondence between Martti Malmi and Satoshi. The first thing that caught my eye was the forum name anti-state.com! It highlights the anti-state sentiments behind Bitcoin's origins. Almost having FOMO of being born in the wrong place and wrong time...
Quote
I'm Trickstern from the anti-state.com forum, and I would like to help with Bitcoin, if there's something I can do.
its not about "code" (you have been reading mis-informed blogs/tweets) its about if that code operates as a service
there is a term "software-as-a-service" SaaS)
there is a term "software-as-a-service" SaaS)
yes this has other implications where by when code starts operating as a organisation, association, as a service.. then jurisdictions start applying
for instance blockstreams liquid is an example(its federation), another would be LN users that offer "routing" would be payment facilitators/ money services
for instance blockstreams liquid is an example(its federation), another would be LN users that offer "routing" would be payment facilitators/ money services
I've noticed that it's not the first time you've made assumptions about what I read, franky1, and I'd like to clarify my sources to avoid any misunderstandings. I mainly follow the Tornado Cash situation through eff.org and am also somewhat familiar with software-related terminology))
The main point I wanted to emphasize in my initial post was the state views on Bitcoin and distributed / decentralized technologies, as well as the potential for authorities to harshly deal with them (eh, us / some of us).
Quote
The Bitcoin network has a governance structure in which roles are assigned to identified individuals. Authorities could decide that these should be prosecuted in view of the large scale of illegal payments using Bitcoin. Decentralized finance can be regulated as forcefully as the legislator considers necessary.
I'm happy for any state that has you as a citizen, and I genuinely hope that none of us will ever have to choose between state views on Bitcoin "code as an entity" and our shared interest, passion, and investment in the Bitcoin topic. Peace ✌️Thanks for this. Another set of reading for my vacant time.
Anyway, I'm a little bit surprised to know that despite the popular belief that Satoshi Nakamoto disappeared since December 12, 2010, these emails are saying it isn't true. Satoshi actually continued to respond to emails even in 2011. The last email coming from Satoshi in this compilation alone was already in February of 2011. And there must probably be more. God knows who else Satoshi corresponded with away from the public.
It seems there's still a lot more to uncover. This appears to be the silver lining of all these lawsuits initiated by the clown CSW.
Anyway, I'm a little bit surprised to know that despite the popular belief that Satoshi Nakamoto disappeared since December 12, 2010, these emails are saying it isn't true. Satoshi actually continued to respond to emails even in 2011. The last email coming from Satoshi in this compilation alone was already in February of 2011. And there must probably be more. God knows who else Satoshi corresponded with away from the public.
It seems there's still a lot more to uncover. This appears to be the silver lining of all these lawsuits initiated by the clown CSW.
Thank you for mentioning that, Darker45 - I also noticed the dates and was also quite surprised. However, I initially thought maybe there was something I didn't know (and I know for sure that I don't know a lot!). I agree that these ongoing lawsuits bring up new information that can help us better understand the history and the people involved - it's a silver lining, as you mentioned, in an otherwise contentious situation.
tornado cash owner got hit for directly receiving revenue for facilitating payments of specific criminal sourced funds knowingly via his service he used in participation of moving value
using code that anyone can use and you not know who how or why they do... is totally different to knowing a criminal wants to move criminally sourced funding and agreeing to help them and then get paid for the help
We can all agree that bad people doing bad things should be punished, franky1. However, I'm concerned about the precedent set by the Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control when it placed "Tornado Cash" (code) on its "Specially Designated Nationals" sanctions list. This is unprecedented (code is not a 'National'!) and has serious implications for free speech and academic freedom. This action effectively prohibits anyone in the United States from "dealing" with Tornado Cash (code). What really gets my attention is how these actions could potentially affect freedom of speech. Government must not make choices that impact the sharing of code, academic progress, and scientific research. And then there are the legal eagles at CoinCenter and CoinBase, raising some big questions through their lawsuits about OFAC's authority and the constitutional side of this. These cases could really shape our future.
Plus, there's this overarching theme of (financial) privacy that keeps popping up in various ways. By the way, I know we've got some old-school veterans on this forum who probably remember the cryptography wars—when code was printed in books and on T-shirts as a form of protest and activism. It's a testament to how cyclical history can be. If it turns out I'm just being alarmist, I'll be the happiest to admit it. 😅
Totally agree with you on the Bitcoin value and the quality of that opinion piece.
But maybe it's just me, my main concern is about the identified individuals in the Bitcoin network. The rhetoric around regulation reminds me of what happened with Tornado Cash...
But maybe it's just me, my main concern is about the identified individuals in the Bitcoin network. The rhetoric around regulation reminds me of what happened with Tornado Cash...
https://www.ledgerinsights.com/ecb-hints-regulators-could-pursue-bitcoin-miners/
Here's why we, the people, need privacy, security, and anonymity (the state can deem you a criminal whenever they want): "The Bitcoin network has a governance structure in which roles are assigned to identified individuals. Authorities could decide that these should be prosecuted in view of the large scale of illegal payments using Bitcoin. Decentralized finance can be regulated as forcefully as the legislator considers necessary."
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GHDcXIWWcAAZTVa?format=jpg&name=large
Here's why we, the people, need privacy, security, and anonymity (the state can deem you a criminal whenever they want): "The Bitcoin network has a governance structure in which roles are assigned to identified individuals. Authorities could decide that these should be prosecuted in view of the large scale of illegal payments using Bitcoin. Decentralized finance can be regulated as forcefully as the legislator considers necessary."
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GHDcXIWWcAAZTVa?format=jpg&name=large
There's a thread about bitcoin history and with just a little bit of research then it will display on google. E,g. Bitcoin history bitcointalk then it will show results and In my opinion, this is also a history since it is a correspondence between the founder himself and sirius. The reason I think this wasn't posted in this forum is because it is a post in twitter made not too long ago so maybe someone haven't found it yet or maybe someone already found it but still busy and haven't got the time to share it in the forum.
Thank you for your input (we may be veering off-topic a bit). To clarify, I did conduct a search prior to posting the link and didn't find it, which is why I decided to share it.
I'm a bit puzzled as to why my posting has upset you. I observed that the same link was posted after mine (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5486274.0) and it seems no one found it inappropriate. In fact, it was deemed valuable enough to merit.
I just wanted to assure you that I don't have any ulterior motives in sharing the link, other than to contribute to bitcointalk discussion. If there's any issue with me specifically posting it, please let me know - I'm here to learn and contribute positively to this community.
Many people may already know this or not but my question is, what's your point in sharing this OP?. Is it related to this one which also mentioned trial https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5484211.140 or another thing. It would be best if you tell something for others to understand what you are trying to do especially other newbies like this. As you can read in the quote, it is an archive of satoshi and sirius's private correspondence although it is also explained that it is incomplete that means sirius is uncomfortable to share all of it and doesn't have back ups as stated in the quote.
I actually stumbled upon this info during a Twitter discussion (you can check it out here: https://twitter.com/marttimalmi/status/1760886692469162491) and thought it was really interesting. So, I jumped over to the bitcointalk.org forum to see what others thought about it. I noticed that it hadn't been posted here yet, and since I believe it's an important part of Bitcoin's history, I decided to share it.The Satoshi-Sirius emails are a unique glimpse into the early development of Bitcoin, and I think it's great that Sirius decided to share them, even though he was initially uncomfortable doing so. While the about the trial isn't directly related, it does touch on some of the same themes around privacy and legal challenges in the crypto space. Overall, I just wanted to contribute to the discussion and help keep Bitcoin's history alive on this forum. I hope others find it interesting and informative too.
⭐ Merited by Welsh (6) ,BlackHatCoiner (4) ,NeuroticFish (2) ,NotFuzzyWarm (2) ,LoyceV (2) ,theymos (1) ,Darker45 (1) ,PowerGlove (1) ,nutildah (1) ,dkbit98 (1) ,Wind_FURY (1) ,DdmrDdmr (1)
Satoshi - Sirius emails 2009-2011
https://mmalmi.github.io/satoshi/
https://mmalmi.github.io/satoshi/
Quote
This is the correspondence between myself (Martti Malmi, AKA Sirius) and Satoshi Nakamoto, the creator of Bitcoin.
I did not feel comfortable sharing private correspondence earlier, but decided to do so for an important trial in the UK in 2024 where I was a witness. Also, a long time has passed now since the emails were sent.
The archive is incomplete and contains only emails from my address @cc.hut.fi. My university email addresses changed to @aalto.fi in early 2011, and I don't have backups of those emails.
There are some passwords and a street address mentioned in the emails, but those are no longer valid or relevant.
I did not feel comfortable sharing private correspondence earlier, but decided to do so for an important trial in the UK in 2024 where I was a witness. Also, a long time has passed now since the emails were sent.
The archive is incomplete and contains only emails from my address @cc.hut.fi. My university email addresses changed to @aalto.fi in early 2011, and I don't have backups of those emails.
There are some passwords and a street address mentioned in the emails, but those are no longer valid or relevant.
If we consider the concept of a world without a governing body, an analogy can be drawn from the current global political stage. Each state or nation on Earth could be seen as akin to an individual human. These entities interact with each other, forming alliances, establishing trade agreements, and occasionally engaging in conflicts, all without a central authority presiding over all of them.
This bird's eye view of how nations maintain diplomacy, trade, and communication, despite cultural, linguistic, and ideological differences, offers insights into the interactions of these already ungoverned entities.
This bird's eye view of how nations maintain diplomacy, trade, and communication, despite cultural, linguistic, and ideological differences, offers insights into the interactions of these already ungoverned entities.
Re: Self-Education Resources: Tips for Developing Math & CS Skills for Bitcoin Tech
ChatBTC is convenient and provide source of the information (which is nice since many chatbot never state the source), but don't rely too much especially for niche topic. And if you already tried it few times, you probably already know the website will ask you for Bitcoin payment to keep using the chatbot.
I completely agree that it's important not to rely too much on ChatBTC or I, would say, any single source of information, whether it's a chatbot or a human teacher - both have their limitations and both can make mistakes. However, the ChatBTC project has given me an idea to create my own custom version of ChatGPT (https://openai.com/blog/introducing-gpts) using a collection of resources from Lopp's list, some repositories, and Mastering Bitcoin. This will hopefully help me solve my information overload problem 🤯
Re: Do we need more influencial women in crypto to help the gender embrace it?
As a woman—by any definition—the question strikes me as odd, perhaps because of my non-U.S. upbringing.
First, is there a compelling reason a project needs specific types of individuals—women, Indians, or birdwatchers—unless justified by concrete technical, research, or market-related factors? Crypto inherently does not discriminate and is, in my honest opinion, one of the least toxic and most welcoming domains. A primary reason, as highlighted by many, is the anonymity of most community members. Who's to say a significant number of us aren't women? Maybe Satoshi Nakamoto is a woman, or a collective of women—who can tell?
Second, as m2017 said, "if there are women who want to build a career in this field, then if they have the abilities and talents, they will very quickly become famous and influential personalities." From personal experience, I can say that in real life it's already reverse discrimination on steroids. Almost every time I attended any relevant events like at MIT, people offer to join some random project because having a female team member will be beneficial to apply to, say, YCombinator just because of the shape of my organs, and I'm in the right place with that shape. This situation upsets me a lot because I do not want or need genitalia-based affirmative action; I personally consider it (reverse) discrimination.
Third, if you want more women involved in anything, you are working from the wrong direction. It's not the crypto community (or almost any in the English-speaking world) that discriminates against women; it's the huge number of women who are now being treated as slaves/property/cattle and not allowed to have education and participate in literally anything. Free these women, and you automatically increase the number of women participating in all types of projects everywhere. Girls born in the US don't know how lucky they are. The main obstacle in my life to being involved in fields I loved, that my family considered inappropriate for a girl (like computers, technical things, math), was *traditional family values*—the "be pretty not smart" mentality. When it became obvious that I had some math talent by winning local math Olympiads without any training (I was surprised when years later I found out that people train for math Olympiads the same as for sport Olympiads; I was under the impression you are just sent to it and get a free day from school), instead of embracing it, my mother told me a story about some acquaintance of hers who was a math professor but did not have a family and was, according to my mother, very unhappy (although she had no f..g idea). That's why I urgently need to compensate now for all the most productive learning time I lost before I escaped from the iron hug of my "loving family," and I need to self-educate myself very quickly to get up to speed.
Bottom line, yes, we need to end discrimination of women, but not where there is none (like in the crypto community), but where the root of the problem actually is—in terrible societies where women are property, not people. For example, in Afghanistan, the word "kidnapped" is translated differently for men and women: for men/boys, the meaning is close to "kidnapped," but for women/girls, it's "stolen" like a cow—a cow cannot be kidnapped, it can only be stolen. If all those feminists had spent an iota of their energy on fighting the disastrous women's situation where it's actually urgently needed, perhaps this question about "more women" anywhere would be even less relevant than it is now in the English-speaking world.
I apologize for the rant; I needed to say it out loud, and this forum is probably the only place where I can speak freely without self-censorship.
First, is there a compelling reason a project needs specific types of individuals—women, Indians, or birdwatchers—unless justified by concrete technical, research, or market-related factors? Crypto inherently does not discriminate and is, in my honest opinion, one of the least toxic and most welcoming domains. A primary reason, as highlighted by many, is the anonymity of most community members. Who's to say a significant number of us aren't women? Maybe Satoshi Nakamoto is a woman, or a collective of women—who can tell?
Second, as m2017 said, "if there are women who want to build a career in this field, then if they have the abilities and talents, they will very quickly become famous and influential personalities." From personal experience, I can say that in real life it's already reverse discrimination on steroids. Almost every time I attended any relevant events like at MIT, people offer to join some random project because having a female team member will be beneficial to apply to, say, YCombinator just because of the shape of my organs, and I'm in the right place with that shape. This situation upsets me a lot because I do not want or need genitalia-based affirmative action; I personally consider it (reverse) discrimination.
Third, if you want more women involved in anything, you are working from the wrong direction. It's not the crypto community (or almost any in the English-speaking world) that discriminates against women; it's the huge number of women who are now being treated as slaves/property/cattle and not allowed to have education and participate in literally anything. Free these women, and you automatically increase the number of women participating in all types of projects everywhere. Girls born in the US don't know how lucky they are. The main obstacle in my life to being involved in fields I loved, that my family considered inappropriate for a girl (like computers, technical things, math), was *traditional family values*—the "be pretty not smart" mentality. When it became obvious that I had some math talent by winning local math Olympiads without any training (I was surprised when years later I found out that people train for math Olympiads the same as for sport Olympiads; I was under the impression you are just sent to it and get a free day from school), instead of embracing it, my mother told me a story about some acquaintance of hers who was a math professor but did not have a family and was, according to my mother, very unhappy (although she had no f..g idea). That's why I urgently need to compensate now for all the most productive learning time I lost before I escaped from the iron hug of my "loving family," and I need to self-educate myself very quickly to get up to speed.
Bottom line, yes, we need to end discrimination of women, but not where there is none (like in the crypto community), but where the root of the problem actually is—in terrible societies where women are property, not people. For example, in Afghanistan, the word "kidnapped" is translated differently for men and women: for men/boys, the meaning is close to "kidnapped," but for women/girls, it's "stolen" like a cow—a cow cannot be kidnapped, it can only be stolen. If all those feminists had spent an iota of their energy on fighting the disastrous women's situation where it's actually urgently needed, perhaps this question about "more women" anywhere would be even less relevant than it is now in the English-speaking world.
I apologize for the rant; I needed to say it out loud, and this forum is probably the only place where I can speak freely without self-censorship.
Re: Self-Education Resources: Tips for Developing Math & CS Skills for Bitcoin Tech
Mastering Bitcoin[1] is perfect fit for you. Jameson Lopp also have list about technical Bitcoin resources[2]
Thanks for the pointers, @ABCbits! I was aware of the book but it had totally slipped my mind, so cheers for the reminder. And Lopp's list is indeed gold – much appreciated! The ChatBTC (technical chat bot) on Lopp's list immediately caught my eye – just checked it out and it looks super cool!
Self-Education Resources: Tips for Developing Math & CS Skills for Bitcoin Tech
⭐ Merited by PowerGlove (1)
Hey everyone!
I'm thrilled to join this fantastic community and am eager to dive into the world of cryptocurrencies and cryptography. As a determined self-learner with some math and computer science knowledge, as well as some programming experience in Python (currently exploring Mojo), JS/HTML/CSS, I believe that the most knowledgeable people here have likely forged their own paths through self-education.
I'm excited to gain the knowledge and skills needed to contribute to the community and eventually create interactive educational materials about relevant technologies. Therefore, I'd genuinely appreciate any advice from experienced members on the most effective resources for building a solid foundation in Bitcoin technologies, distributed systems, and cryptography.
If any of you have personal learning paths to share or can recommend resources similar to the Rosalind project for bioinformatics (rosalind.info) or Project Euler for math/programming problems (projecteuler.net), but specifically tailored to Bitcoin technologies, I'd be incredibly grateful.
Thanks a ton in advance for your insights!
I'm thrilled to join this fantastic community and am eager to dive into the world of cryptocurrencies and cryptography. As a determined self-learner with some math and computer science knowledge, as well as some programming experience in Python (currently exploring Mojo), JS/HTML/CSS, I believe that the most knowledgeable people here have likely forged their own paths through self-education.
I'm excited to gain the knowledge and skills needed to contribute to the community and eventually create interactive educational materials about relevant technologies. Therefore, I'd genuinely appreciate any advice from experienced members on the most effective resources for building a solid foundation in Bitcoin technologies, distributed systems, and cryptography.
If any of you have personal learning paths to share or can recommend resources similar to the Rosalind project for bioinformatics (rosalind.info) or Project Euler for math/programming problems (projecteuler.net), but specifically tailored to Bitcoin technologies, I'd be incredibly grateful.
Thanks a ton in advance for your insights!