Dwight McSchrute @bitcoinprofet

Illinois just signed the most aggressive bitcoin tax in the US. Starting January 2027, the state will impose a 0.20% tax on the gross value of digital assets exchanged, transferred, or stored for customers. Buy bitcoin? Taxed. Transfer bitcoin? Taxed. Hold with a custodian? Taxed. No profit required. No capital gain. Just moving a digital asset triggers the tax. Move $1M through a bank wire, ACH, or brokerage and Illinois takes nothing. Move that same $1M as a digital asset and the state takes $2,000. There is no comparable tax on stocks, bonds, derivatives, bank deposits, or any traditional financial transaction anywhere in the country. The message to every bitcoin company in Illinois is clear: leave.

If your boss cut your pay 7% every year, you’d quit on the spot. But when the central bank cuts your savings 7% every year, you call it normal and thank the bank for holding your money. Same robbery. Better marketing.

Bitcoin is not apolitical, it is anti-political. Separating money and state IS removing the state. Bitcoin is for people who don't want to be coerced by criminals who happen to have won a non-voluntary popularity contest. It is an antidote to politics. That's the whole point

Can't be bearish on Bitcoin. Bitcoin’s 4-year moving average is now ~$59,919. One year ago: ~$47,269. That’s +26.8% YoY. Since the February 5th, 2026 drawdown, the 4-year moving average is already up another $2,575, or +4.5%. Bitcoin's 4-year MA has NEVER gone down year over year. The tourists are staring at red candles. The long-term floor is walking uphill like always. Think Bitcoin is “going sideways”? The noise is going sideways. The monetary black hole is still moving up and to the right.

Incredible

ArchaeoHistories @histories_arch

4 weeks ago

Claude Mellan's Face of Christ, also known as The Sudarium of Saint Veronica (1649), is one of the most technically extraordinary works in art history... The entire portrait is rendered using a single, continuous spiralling line that begins at the tip of Christ's nose and

284 3K 25K 1.2M 6K

You start reading weird books. You buy “The Bitcoin Standard” and then “The Fiat Standard” and then you accidentally end up reading Murray Rothbard, and then somehow you’re reading Mises, and then it’s 11:47 PM on a Tuesday and you’re 340 pages into “Human Action” and you’re highlighting passages about praxeology and your wife comes downstairs and asks if you’re coming to bed and you say “in a minute” but you don’t come to bed for two hours because you have just discovered that everything you were taught about economics in college was wrong, all of it, every single sentence, and now you can’t go back, you can never go back, you have been orange-pilled in a way that goes deeper than money, you have been epistemologically orange-pilled, you now believe that John Maynard Keynes was a charlatan and the gold standard was actually fine and the income tax is theft and you can never say any of this out loud at a dinner party ever again.

Here's the simple reason ruminant meat (beef, lamb) is metabolically superior to monogastric meat (chicken, pork). Monogastrics store whatever they're fed. Grain goes in, linoleic acid ends up in the fat. Pork fat now runs around 20% PUFA. Chicken fat around 25%. The bird and the pig are, in 2026, walking vehicles for the seed oils they were finished on. Ruminants are built differently. The four-chambered stomach biohydrogenates polyunsaturated fats, converting unstable plant oils into stable saturated and monounsaturated fats before the fat is ever laid down. Grain in. Beef fat still around 2-4% PUFA. The cow eats the seed oil substrate and quietly disarms it on the way through. The pig and the chicken eat it and pass it on to whoever is eating them next. Beef and lamb: built-in detox. Pork and chicken: storage tanks for the food system you were trying to avoid. If you've cut seed oils out of the cupboard but you're still eating chicken every day, the bottle isn't gone. It's just on a plate.

BREAKING 🚨 Steak ‘n Shake just announced all their beef will be 100% grass-fed and grass-finished starting June 1st. The U.S. government should start taking pointers from a fast food chain. Doing the right thing and way better approval rating. It’s where we’re at right now..

#Bitcoin has a color. Not the brand orange. The actual wavelength of its block frequency, transposed 58 octaves into visible light: 624 nm. Orange-red. The protocol vibrates at the color it already wears. Nobody planned this. The math just does it.

How butter is made. Take cream from a cow. Shake it. Strain off the buttermilk. Salt to taste. Total processing steps: three. How seed oil is made. Take seeds. Heat them to 88°C to denature the proteins and break the cell walls. Crush them between mechanical rollers under several tonnes of pressure. Mix the resulting paste with hexane, a petroleum-derived solvent originally used to dissolve grease off engine blocks. Let the hexane bath dissolve the remaining fat from the press cake. Distill the hexane back out, mostly. Some stays in the oil. The food regulators have decided this is fine. Now wash the dark, stinking, brown sludge with sodium hydroxide to neutralise the free fatty acids that taste rancid because the oil already is. Filter through activated bleaching clay to remove the colour pigments that would otherwise reveal what colour cooking oil naturally is. Steam it at 240°C under vacuum for an hour to strip out the smell. Without this step, no human would willingly put it near food. Pour the resulting clear, odourless liquid into a plastic bottle. But yes. Definitely healthier than butter. Trust the experts.

Just spent many months homeschooling my 4 kids and taking them on a cross continent tour of our great country and its history. My kids are aware of this now.

Hello Julia, sans aucune ironie, c'est top que tu prennes le temps de te renseigner. Mais le problème quand on lit Marx aujourd'hui, c'est qu'on prend pour acquis sa prémisse de départ, alors qu'elle a été démontée scientifiquement il y a plus de 150 ans. Toute la pensée de Marx repose sur la théorie de la valeur-travail. L'idée que la valeur d'un bien vient de la quantité de travail nécessaire pour le produire. Si tu acceptes cette prémisse, alors oui, tout son raisonnement tient. Le capitaliste "vole" la plus-value du travailleur, l'exploitation est mathématique, la révolution est inévitable. Sauf qu'en 1871, trois économistes (Menger en Autriche, Jevons en Angleterre, Walras en Suisse) découvrent indépendamment la même chose : la valeur n'est pas objective, elle est subjective et marginale. Un verre d'eau dans le désert vaut une fortune. Le même verre à côté d'une rivière ne vaut rien. Le travail incorporé est identique. Donc le travail ne détermine pas la valeur. C'est le consommateur qui valorise un bien selon son utilité marginale dans un contexte donné. Exemple concret : tu peux passer 1000 heures à tricoter un pull moche que personne ne veut. Selon Marx, ce pull a énormément de valeur (beaucoup de travail incorporé). Selon la réalité, il ne vaut rien. Parce que personne n'en veut. À l'inverse, Bernard Arnault crée des milliards de valeur non pas parce qu'il "exploite" mais parce qu'il a su anticiper et organiser des désirs humains à grande échelle. La valeur est créée par la coordination, pas extraite par le vol. Cette découverte (la révolution marginaliste) a invalidé tout l'édifice marxiste. Pas pour des raisons idéologiques, pour des raisons scientifiques. C'est pour ça que plus aucun département d'économie sérieux au monde n'enseigne Marx comme un cadre d'analyse valide. On l'enseigne en histoire de la pensée. Maintenant, le truc important. Si ton intention en lisant Marx c'est d'aider les pauvres (c'est une intention noble), alors tu vas être surprise par ce qui suit. Regarde les chiffres de la Banque mondiale. En 1820, 90% de l'humanité vivait dans l'extrême pauvreté. Aujourd'hui, moins de 9%. Cette chute historique ne s'est PAS produite dans les pays qui ont appliqué Marx. Elle s'est produite dans les pays qui ont libéralisé leur économie. Chine post-1978, Vietnam post-1986, Inde post-1991, Pologne post-1989. À chaque fois qu'un pays libéralise, des centaines de millions de gens sortent de la pauvreté en une génération. À chaque fois qu'un pays applique Marx (URSS, Cambodge, Corée du Nord, Venezuela), c'est la famine et les goulags. Ce n'est pas une opinion, c'est l'expérience la plus massive jamais menée en sciences sociales. Plusieurs milliards de cobayes humains, sur un siècle. Donc paradoxalement, si tu aimes vraiment les pauvres, la position la plus cohérente n'est pas d'être marxiste. C'est d'être pour la liberté économique. Parce que c'est empiriquement la seule chose qui a jamais sorti massivement les gens de la misère. Pour creuser, je te recommande trois lectures qui vont changer ta vision : "La Loi" de Frédéric Bastiat (court, lumineux, gratuit en ligne) "La Route de la Servitude" de Hayek "Économie en une leçon" de Henry Hazlitt Bonne lecture, et vraiment chapeau de chercher à comprendre plutôt que de rester dans tes certitudes. C'est rare.

Julia ひ @lifeimitatlife

2 months ago

Depuis tout à l'heure je me renseigne sur les idées de Karl Marx sincèrement je n'arrive pas à comprendre comment on peut être pour le capitalisme et même plus généralement être de droite

359 420 6K 2.3M 368

Just got off a zoom call catching up with a friend of mine from the Boy Scouts who is now a bank manager. Told him that inflation has to be constant because loans create new money with interest and that interest has to be paid off somehow. explained that even the bank of england has written papers describing exactly this process. they all admit this openly. He was literally stunned and almost fell out of his chair. "You mean money is lent into existence? every time a customer draws a line of credit they just print it? and the money supply is constantly increasing?!" this is a guy who is a math major and works at a major bank. even the people running the system don't know how it works.

let me make sure i’m understanding this correctly the supreme court is refunding all tariff money back to corporations. the same corporations that didn’t pay a single cent of those tariffs to begin with. they passed every dollar directly to you through higher prices on everything you buy you went to the store and paid more for groceries. you paid more for clothes. for car parts. for literally everything. that money came out of YOUR pocket not theirs and now the refund goes to THEM? the corporations who used the tariffs as an excuse to raise prices even higher than the tariff itself and pocket the difference the american people funded the tariffs. the corporations profited off the tariffs. and now the corporations get a refund on money they never spent in the first place and nobody in washington thinks the people who actually paid should get the money back. not a single person has even suggested it guess we are never getting our DOGE checks either this country does not work for you. it works for them. it’s a joke and they’re not even pretending anymore

Kalshi @Kalshi

2 months ago

JUST IN: US to refund $166 billion in tariffs after Supreme Court ruling

762 798 7K 18.3M 866

The year is 1950. Your doctor lights a cigarette and tells you smoking is fine. He read it in a study. He is telling the truth about having read it. He does not know, or is not saying, that the study was funded by the tobacco industry. The year is 1958. Your doctor tells you to eat less fat. The evidence is contested. The contestation is not in the public messaging. The food industry has been helpful in clarifying which findings deserve attention. Some researchers who published contradictory data have been quietly defunded. Ancel Keys is on the cover of Time magazine. The year is 1962. Your doctor prescribes thalidomide to your pregnant wife for morning sickness. It has been approved. The FDA gave it the green light in Europe. Twelve thousand children will be born with severe limb malformations before anyone in an official capacity acknowledges the problem. The families are told the drug was safe. The drug was approved. Both of these things remain true. The year is 1972. Your doctor prescribes Valium. Britain is in the grip of a benzodiazepine wave that will last two decades. The dependency risk is known internally. It is not shared. Your doctor is not lying to you. He was not told either. The year is 1999. Your doctor prescribes Vioxx for your arthritis. It is newer than ibuprofen, well-tolerated, and Merck has a study showing it works. Merck also has internal data suggesting it roughly doubles the risk of heart attack. This data will not reach your doctor for four more years. Fifty thousand people are estimated to have died in the interim. Merck eventually settles for 4.85 billion dollars. No criminal charges are brought. The year is 2002. Your doctor prescribes OxyContin. Purdue Pharma trained its sales representatives to tell doctors the addiction risk was less than one percent. That figure came from a letter, not a study. The letter was about patients with terminal cancer on short-term doses in hospital settings. Your doctor is a GP with a patient who has a bad back. Nobody draws a distinction. Nobody is required to. The year is 2008. Your doctor checks your cholesterol. Your LDL is elevated. You are prescribed a statin. Nobody mentions that the number needed to treat for primary prevention is approximately 250. Nobody mentions that the muscle deterioration you'll notice over the next two years is listed as a rare side effect rather than a documented pattern affecting a meaningful percentage of patients. The trial that informed the prescription was funded by the manufacturer. Now it is today. Your doctor has new guidelines. New studies. New consensus. He is confident. He has always been confident. The confidence has never been the problem. The confidence is, in fact, precisely the problem.

Charles Lindbergh in his famous “Des Moines” speech where he points out the media is disproportionately run by Jews and labeling everyone “Nazis” who is against the War…. This could literally be written today about the Iran war…

keyboard_arrow_left Previous keyboard_arrow_right Next

"Most men die at 27; we just bury them at 72." - Mark Twain

BIP-361 wants to freeze Satoshi's coins to protect against quantum computers. This might be the most dangerous idea in Bitcoin's history. And the threat it's solving isn't even real. Shor's algorithm theoretically breaks elliptic curve cryptography. Theoretically. The machines that could actually do this don't exist. We need millions of stable, error-corrected qubits. Today's best hardware has thousands and isn't close. We're decades away. Maybe more. But even if quantum computers eventually cracked old P2PK addresses, so what? Coins re-entering circulation isn't a crisis. It's a Gold Rush. People race to recover forgotten wallets. Supply hits the market. Prices adjust. Holders who care migrate to quantum-resistant addresses. The market absorbs it. That's not a bug. That's Bitcoin working exactly as designed. "But Satoshi's coins..." What about them? Satoshi never gave anyone authority over those coins. Not Jameson Lopp. Not the developers. Not the community. The whole point of Bitcoin is that nobody freezes your coins. Nobody. Not even with good intentions. Here's the precedent that should terrify you: once you establish that coins can be frozen for their own protection, you've introduced permissioned holding into a permissionless system. The Bitcoin that can freeze lost coins to protect us from hypothetical quantum threats is the same Bitcoin that can freeze your coins to protect us from hypothetical criminals. The logic is identical. The door, once opened, doesn't close. Solve quantum resistance the Bitcoin way. Better address standards, user education, voluntary migration. That's how every legitimate upgrade happens. Bitcoin's immutability isn't a bug to patch when it gets inconvenient. It's the whole product.

Bitcoin Archive @BitcoinArchive

2 months ago

Cypherpunk Jameson Lopp and other Bitcoin developers propose BIP-361 to freeze quantum vulnerable wallets. This could lock dormant BTC like Satoshi Nakamoto’s 1.1M coins, now worth $74B, before quantum computers can steal them.

keyboard_arrow_left Previous keyboard_arrow_right Next

891 366 3K 1.2M 405

Andrew Jackson famously said that the banks were trying to kill him, but he would kill them first…& they tried, sending an assassin who would miss his shot before Jackson literally beat him with a cane. What a legend. Jackson would cancel the charter of the second bank of the United States and the result was the most prosperous middle class in the history of the world. That’s what they took from you in 1913. That’s what the Federal Reserve is about.