How to do bitcoin in a country like India that has a locked down financial system

There are a few based Hindus on this blog, and they have been telling me they cannot do bitcoin, so cannot set up a blog securely.

India has a locked down financial system and war on cash, which Indians are resisting by using gold, but you cannot do long distance transactions in gold.

If you run an electrum wallet over tor in a country like India, the authorities are unlikely to be able to detect it. But how do you convert the fiat of a locked down financial system into bitcoin, to escape the lockdown.

Well, every country with a severely locked down financial system has a large expat diaspora, India and China being the most massive examples, and the Chinese expat population provides channels through the lockdown, channels that Chinese in China use extensively, have been using for a long time, and are using more and more.

A short while ago India and the UAE introduced a cash card to provide Indian UAE expats with a wide open door between the locked down Indian financial system and the wide open UAE financial system.

(Note that you cannot, or at least should not, run a lightning routing node over tor, but if you are trying to sneak past lockdown, should not run a lightning routing node anyway. A lightning node that is a client of a couple of routing nodes should work fine.).

238 Responses to “How to do bitcoin in a country like India that has a locked down financial system”

  1. Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

    What I mean by compromised is that an apparatchik in the US State Department can pick up his phone and make a call and get your information from their servers whenever he wants.

    • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

      This is of course true of practically any web hosted mail service, but people sometimes have delusive ideas that outfits like protonmail are exceptions to the vulnerability of simply getting leaned on, and get burned because of it.

      • CEX DEX Scale Privacy says:

        Not quite exact enough for anyone to make effective decision for themselves.

        No delusions.
        Here is a bit more exact…

        All encrypted webmail services like proton used crypto code that they download from their servers to your browser to execute. All they, or the moles that have infested them, have to do to read your mail is download a trojan version of the crypto blob to the browser. Nobody checks this, and there are not even any TOFU pinned warnings. Since users have no way to download and hardpin their own open third party code into their own browser from third party open sources, they’re defenseless against those phone calls. And that assumes their mail was ever properly encrypted to begin with. Some of these providers have even been busted by the grade school auditor reports they procured for advertising purposes.

        The only way to use any and all mail services securely, including theirs, is to cut-paste your own locally encrypted pgp messages in to them.
        Or at least use Mozilla Thunderbird which can now do gpg messages from and to its IMAPS and SMTPS pipeline.

        Even if the two biggest browsers, Chrome and Microsoft, were shipping the crypto code now, it’s not worth trusting their binaries, or their update systems, etc.

        • Handi says:

          “3.5 shillgens, sir.”

          “Only 3.5? Not great, not terrible…”

          I now assume Thunderbird is the premier Totally Not Compromised Crypto Email for Dissidents, thanks for tip on what to avoid. Not that Mozilla can be trusted after 2014 anyway.

          • CEX DEX Scale Privacy says:

            You didn’t specify the user and use case so that’s a bit moot.
            “Or at least” means exactly what it implied, a simple integrated mail tool so neophytes can at least split off trust from webmail crypto.
            Since you’re 3.5 awesomes, then sure, go teach them your preferred full stack.
            But you didn’t teach them what “2014” is, so like many, it would appear you’re already failing that role for them.

            • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

              When the going solution to email trouble is to use it as an empty wrapper for delivering an other form of communication, I dare say that fairly illustrates the point.

              • Heinrich says:

                Nobody said email wasnt shit. But if emails the only mutual way available, or the only way the regards can figure out, then fine, thunderbirds gpg will do. Nobody in their right mind would say dont at least use that.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  I mean, this topic was raised by a statement that email was shit, in the first place. Everyone agrees, apparently – yet some saying they agree also apparently want to say a lot about it otherwise, too.

  2. Severian says:

    It feels Russian advances are picking up pace now. They are already advancing and fighting in settlements beyound Avdvika, and UKR has retreated from their Kherson suicide mission bridgehead.
    On the other hand Russia just lost another AWACS.

  3. Jamesthe1st says:

    Interesting note, Berkele talked at CPAC and said that Soros is bad and he hit a brick wall in El Salvador.

    • alf says:

      Bukele is turning out to be the real deal, the kind of leader Duterte, Trump and Bolsonaro wish they could be.

      • jim says:

        I was excited by the Reagan Revolution, which radically reversed the economic class warfare leftism. The left, having gone too far on that one, accepted an enormous and radical retreat. Yet Reagan presided over the final destruction of what remained of marriage 1.0, and in retrospect, looks like merely another sudden swerve on the road to immanentizing the eschaton. Cultural, scientific, and technological decline continued, and economic decline was only temporarily and partially reversed.

        Reagan and Thatcher were the real deal, in that they permanently and irreversibly rolled back an aspect of leftism that had become ever more disruptive and destructive.

        And yet, the depiction of the mating dance in media ended when the Reagan Revolution began. The revolution was possible, in that the left had already decided that it was time to focus on destroying marriage, family, and heterosexual sex.

        The Reagan revolution immediately followed the Stonewall riots, which signaled the left swerving away from leftism based on supposed championing of the working class, to leftism intended to eradicate the white working class.

        • alf says:

          It is hard to be a truly great leader. Nip nine problems in the bud, forget problem number ten, grows to be a bigger problem than all the previous problems combined.

        • Anon says:

          “Reagan and Thatcher were the real deal”
          the reason they failed (in complete win against the left) is because they lacked the understanding that this was a faith war not an ideological war that can be won by arguments and debates .
          Even Reactions today is not ready to go toe to toe against Harvard.
          They have been at it for 200years , Reaction is just started, since you and moldbug started blogging 10+ years ago.
          You need infrastructure of an ideas for the religious,social,political etc
          I hope that at least trump could halt leftism until Reaction mature.

          • jim says:

            If Trump is allowed to win the election, it is because Thermidor wants him to halt leftism from getting ever lefter, ever faster. A shark must swim, or drown. If Thermidor succeeds, the faith dies, creating a vacuum.

            But that is a long slow path to victory, with much unpleasantness along the way, for it will take a long time for the faith to die.

            Another path is that Thermidor, getting a rough ride from the radicals, and Trump, getting a rough ride from the radicals, looks for someone who can deal with the problem. And that is not a problem that Thermidoreans have had much success at dealing with. To deal with the left, need reactionaries. The French Thermidor attempted to use the reactionaries to crush the radicals, and then the military to crush the reactionaries. Which worked, except that they wound up with Napoleon.

            Thermidor in power is always shaky, and apt to fall to the right, to the left, or to the absolute power of a single man.

  4. Moe says:

    technical from a lawfare angle.
    will essentialy ban crypto.
    lots of people trying to fight this cunt.
    but still too few.
    american should call their pols and tell them and their legislation to go fuck themselves.

    • Mayflower Sperg says:

      If crypto has to beg governments not to kill it, it’s not very good crypto.

      • dave says:

        Agree. Let the regime pass laws that are clearly irrational and cannot be enforced let alone followed. Undermines the legitimacy of the regime and forces better crypto. it’s a two-fer.

        Splinternet is worst case scenario if Regime keeps doubling down though.

        • jim says:

          The digital programmable radio hackers are preparing for splinternet. But the bandwidth will be low. It will not be interactive, be more like email.

          • Moe says:


            • jim says:

              Despite being true and relevant, deleted because you were asked to take the shill test, and strangely failed to do so.

              Pass the shill test described in the moderation policy and get white listed. Anyone can pass this, regardless of his religious or political beliefs, regardless of what issues he wants to speak about, anyone who is not reading from a script with a supervisor standing over him, can pass this.

              • Moe says:

                “> American should call their pols”

                first of all, you doctored my words to say what they did not say, and to suit you. thats really fraudulent.

                the full quote after preluded context was…

                “american should call their pols and tell them and their legislation to go fuck themselves. lol.”[*deleted*]

                • jim says:

                  I stopped reading at “american should call their pols”.

                  And since you have refused to take the shill test, was clearly right to do so.

                  The additional “fuck themselves” makes no difference to the shill payload. The additional “fuck themselves” is just “hail fellow straight white male Christian”. Or in this case “hail fellow cipherpunk”. An actual cipherpunk would not be dragging a shill wagon and pushing a shill payload.

    • jim says:

      > American should call their pols

      Putting you on moderation. Take the shill test.

      We are prepared for this eventuality. If they ban crypto currency, they are playing into our hands.

      “Oh, Br’er Fox, I don’t care what you do with me, so long as you just don’t throw me in that briar patch over there. Go on and barbecue me up, Br’er Fox, but please don’t throw me in that briar patch.”

      How many times has China banned crypto currency? Russia banned it also.

      The Outer Mongolian ban seems to have been successful, but that is because they have few internet options. Which is fixable, but has not been fixed. Because of vast distances, low tech level, and low population density, it is harder to fix splinternet in Outer Mongolia. No other country has successfully banned crypto currency. Many have tried.

      War is the health of the state, but revolution is the health of crypto.

  5. Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

    So while the whig imperial church has been nattering about a no-account who died suddenly and Tucker Carlson buying groceries, KOG forces casually had a full-blown rout in Avdiivka as positions everywhere collapsed, while commanders belatedly ‘order a retreat’ as their subordinates rush past them out the backdoor.

    Pretty interesting decision making process, how things almost instantly started disintegrating as soon as they sent their ‘politically reliable’ blocking divisions to soak up artillery shells on the front. Did they think their mobiks were motivated by fond dreams of a future of gay sex and feminism for their children, rather than the somewhat more prosaic concern of being shot in the back if they turned tail? Just one more stupid decision in a modern history of stupid decisions.

    Syrskyi was the same guy who cheerled throwing all their strategic manpower reserves into the guns of Wagner at Bakhmut, so these turns of events are perfectly in character. Fighting for lines on the map plays well in meetings with other solipsists to whom Creation doesn’t really exist – a big blinking visceral symbol you can blow up on the wall-projector for the powerpoint presentation – so it is also perfectly understandable how such a character has gone far in the kleptocratic moshpit of occupied ukraine and prevailed over all his contemporaries in taking the top job of command – for however much longer the clown show lasts.

    With friends like these, who needs enemies?

    • Mayflower Sperg says:

      Ukraine still has millions of cat-ladies; has no one thought of using them to hold the line? If they’re only one tenth as good as a man, use ten times as many!

      Seriously, what does Jim plan to do with all these cat-ladies after we take over the world? I suppose euthanasia’s out of the question if we assign any value to Christ’s teachings.

      • Vendat Tunicam says:

        They don’t matter and will disappear in a generation. They’ll also become a lot more pleasant to their acquaintances (they don’t have friends) and family because if they get mouthy men will put them in their place with a firm slap. They’re only a problem now because you can’t punish them without going to jail and so they act with undue status and authority.

        • Mayflower Sperg says:

          More like two generations, 40+ years, and many of them don’t have family either. Who will be responsible for keeping them in line? Will they continue to work, pay taxes, and spend all their money on clothes, shoes, and exotic vacations?

          If they’re allowed any but the most penurious existence, teen girls will look up to them.

          • Handi says:

            Their existence will indeed be penurious. Assuming Christian rulers have power, there won’t be any more quotas on giving them disruptive sinecures. The cost of their labor for stocking shelves or performing minor clerical tasks will plummet until it’s worth keeping them around.

            This will conveniently solve the shoes and vacations problem. What shoes and vacations symbolize to other women is the ability to get men to give her resources. If she is single then the symbol is all the more potent. Careerism is peak potency because she can essentially get paid to emasculate and complain, without even giving up her pussy.

            But if everybody knows the game is different now, and she really had to do actual work herself, then the meaning of the symbol is destroyed.

            Stripped of the symbolic value of controlling men to give them resources, women are not industrious enough to work longer hours for a constant rotation of new shoes, nor are they adventurous enough to really want to explore foreign lands. The whole point of it will be obviated when women mutually know that none of them are getting paid to emasculate and complain.

            This leaves us with the perennial problem of prostitution, they’ll still be able to get shoe and vacation money from men via direct exchange. But in the absence of fake careers it will be obvious when this is happening, and it can be made to be low-status. There’s even the option of sumptuary laws, which are good to have anyway.

            • jim says:

              I think the matter is going to resolved by the victors rewarding their troops with obedient wives.

              • Mayflower Sperg says:

                Still going to be left with millions of cat ladies over 35. What are your soldiers supposed to do with them?

                • jim says:

                  Without affirmative action, will have to get jobs as cleaning ladies, walmart greeters, waitresses, and so on and so forth. The smarter ones, vets, nurses, doctors who specialise in female problems, especially intimate ones, and so on and so forth. The reality of career girl will be a disaster, and the media will present the cat lady, left on the shelf, option as disaster, not because females will be out of the running for most jobs that are high status in the male hierarchy, but because even if a single female gets a high status career, she is failure and low status for being childless and alone. The media and schools have been single mindedly pushing the male standard for status upon females — that if a woman has a happy marriage, many children, and a successful husband, and is looking after them all full time, she is a failure. They will do a 180, and present female status as totally measured by her marriage.

                • Mister Grumpus says:

                  You don’t have to woodchip people. You just need to provide/accommodate a “lifeway” for them that is visibly low-status. Before it was nunneries, and next it can be something else.

                • Mayflower Sperg says:

                  Bringing back nunneries is also an option.

              • Fidelis says:

                Operating on jim time. Unthinkable for too many. Probably a generation from now, after the alphas and zoomers fully come into being the bulk of fighting aged. As it goes, you offer this bargain and the vast bulk of the actual fighters, at least taking the sample that I have, wouldn’t really be for it. They want a rollback, but women are wonderful and you cant limit their right to choose. The up and coming generation cares a lot less about the progressive religion, from what I can tell at least, they’ll take that bargain.

                • jim says:

                  Holy war is coming. During war, the unthinkable very quickly becomes thinkable.

    • A2 says:

      I wonder if Zelensky wanted to accelerate the process by switching in Syrskyi.

      • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

        He cleared out the entire general staff, especially including Zaluzhny, because the former fears being deposed and the later was respected. Not to mention his recent presser tour of getting quiet reassurances from other imperial subjects that the merely legal fact of his ’emergency powers’ running out soon in may will be quietly overlooked.

        All of Zelenski’s moves in recent times can be understood in the context of making sure that Ukraine will die before he does.

        • Mister Grumpus says:

          “All of Zelenski’s moves in recent times can be understood in the context of making sure that Ukraine will die before he does.”

          This and exactly this. Once you see this you can’t go back. Like a lot of things.

          I’m just baffled by how everyone “lost interest” in how the Ukrainian government could be so Jewish, and its armed forces so Nazi, and what about that anyway?

          I’m a lifer here, and thus irretrievably fringe, but I just can’t understand or imagine any other understanding of this situation other than the UkroJews taking an opportunity to genocide the UkroGoys (and sock away a few sheckels) while they have a chance, especially since the UkroJews have such an understandable beef with the UkroGoys after what went down there in the early 40’s.

          Under that frame, the Ukro-Russia war makes sense. No Hollywood saints or villains necessary. Without it, it’s just nonsensical (or no?). I suppose the “Putler” meme has therefore been logically necessary for them, in order to look at the situation and not pass out from the horribly absurdity of it all.

          If anyone else here could comment on this, on how you see normies making sense of the Ukro-Russia phenomenon in a normie kind of way, I sure would appreciate it.

          • jim says:

            It is completely obvious that the Soros/Nuland operation of 2014 was not primarily to expend Ukrainians against Russians, but to expend Ukrainians. I was not aware that anyone doubted this or found it surprising.

            It has long been completely obvious and well known that post World War Nazis were completely owned by the US State Department, and postwar were part of the same operation as “Communism has never been tried” communists. And since the State Department is totally owned by Jews who hate Ukraine and Ukrainians, the end was obvious, and Putin should have foreseen it, but did not.

            Incidentally, the reason why Global American Empire official sources keep calling the CPC (Communist Party of China) the CCP is because every time they say that, they are saying “true communism has never been tried”.

            These are old memes, and I was unaware that they are news to anyone. Any time someone says CCP, it is an insult, like deliberately misprouncing someone’s name, and also an ideological attack from the radical left. And, what do you know. A Nazi will never mention the misdeeds of Soros, and will always call the CPC the CCP.

            Every single Nazi, without exception, is in line with this obscure, minor, and incomprehensible point of Global American Empire radical Leftism. Everyone who says CCP is both making an attack on the CCP, and endorsing what Stalin called “left wing communism”. Anyone who says CCP is speaking within the far left communist bubble. It is a tell, and the Nazis have shown this tell for as long as I can remember. Nazis are commies and commies are Nazis, Nazis and commies are a branch of the United States State Department, and the Nazis will always and invariably robotically use the Jewish left communist memes.

            • Fidelis says:

              Wasn’t the name Wagner chosen because Utkin was a NSDAP fan? Or is that mere propaganda? Someone with more familiarity, I’m sure there’s someone here, please clarify. I was under the impression Utkin really liked the aesthetic and greatly sympathized with the Aryan cause.

              • jim says:

                Observed Nazis are not fighting for the Aryan cause. The State Department is run by Jews. Observed Nazis in the Ukraine are fighting for Jews and killing Aryans, observed Nazis on Gab call anyone who who gives the State Department grief Jewish. Supposedly Musk is a Jew, Putin is a Jew, and anyone who calls out obvious shills on Gab is a Jew.

                As one of the few remaining relatively pure blooded Aryans, I am all in favor of the Aryan cause. And therefore do not much like observed Nazis.

                • Fidelis says:

                  Azog is a complete mystery to me. My best guess is very successful entryists all the way to the top. I’ve met Nazis, in the colloquial sense, in person, and while many of the memes they carry are familiar with regards to the internet versions, they weren’t fans of Gaykrainian shenanigans. I suppose it’s wise to assume people very obsessed with juice but unable to gesture at people with names, addresses and power are shills, but offline that hasn’t proven to be a rule.

                • jim says:

                  > Azog is a complete mystery to me.

                  Should not be. All big conspiracies leak, and this one leaked a very long time ago.

                  After World War II, the CIA cultivated and funded the Ukraine Nazis, though a bunch of nazi exiles who set up shop in Canada, with the intent of fostering revolution against the Soviet Communists. It failed, of course, for no revolution gets anywhere without elite support, but the nazis have been on the CIA payroll since world war II. During the events leading up to the coups in the Ukraine, it became completely obvious that the nazis were taking their marching orders from (((Soros))) and the State Department, in particular, (((Victoria Nuland))).

                  When they initially got into bed with the CIA, not such a bad deal, because common enemy of communism, and because the CIA was not then under the thumb of the radical left. But with communism dead and buried, and the CIA becoming ever lefter, and ever more under Jewish control, the deal slowly got worse and worse, and now will be the death of all of them.

                  Nazism has been a CIA operation for a very long time, and widely known to be a CIA operation for a very long time. It has been an open secret all my life. I have lived a long time, and do not recall a time when it was not widely known. That it was a (((Soros, Nuland))) operation became apparent by 2015.

                  The Azov nazis are a slow boiled frog, and their saucepan has been simmering for a long time. They were well and truly cooked long before the Soviet Union fell. I don’t know how old you are, but chances are this frog was well and truly cooked before you were born.

                • jim says:

                  Nazis you meet in person are not likely to funded through the CIA, and even if funded through the CIA, when in person are likely to tell you what they really think. If typing away on a computer supplied by the FBI or Soros ngo IT department, will say something different.

                • Fidelis says:

                  I genuinely did not know this, it simply never came across my radar. I appreciate the information. It is impressive how one can make an organization act in ways completely opposite to it’s purported goals, and the survival of it’s own constituents. Yet it continued to operate under artillery and drone bombing for years.

                • Lanzo says:

                  there is a part of azov that are [*deleted*]

                • jim says:

                  Azov are a hostile enemy attack on white culture, civilization, and tradition. Ukrainian culture is white and orthodox Christian. They are murderously suppressing Christianity, and forcing Goyim whom they hate and despise into the killing fields at the behest of (((Soros))), (((Nuland))), (((Blinken))) and (((Zelensky))), Jews who hate white people, white culture, Christianity, white tradition, white history, and the civilization we created, who just want us dead, and are just as happy to kill off Ukrainians as Russians.

                  It is like the Star Wars movies. The people making the movies today just hate the originals, hate the fans for liking the originals, and just want the fans to suffer by seeing their beloved characters destroyed, ridiculed, and belittled. These guys just do not like us. She Hulk was just hours of the writers and actresses being angry at the fans and the original story and characters, without plot, story, character, competent video editing, or good special effects, berating us for being us. They just do not like us, say so, and do not want us to exist.

                  This is why America is out of shells and artillery. North Korea, a small poor country, just exported to Russia vastly more shells than the entire Global American Empire is capable of making, because the guys running the Global American Empire just do not like the men who used to make shells and gun barrels. They hate the rust belt, and just want it to rust, even though that is where their shells came from. Intel cannot make chips for the same reason. Disney cannot make movies for the same reason as America cannot make shells and gun barrels. They want to blow up Russians, but even more, they do not want white males to have jobs.

            • notglowing says:

              Everyone who says CCP is both making an attack on the CCP, and [in agreement with GAE]

              You say this often but I don’t understand how you can claim this so confidently – few understand the distinction you’re making. You’re the only one I’ve heard making this point.

              What I can say is that:
              – The people who came up with it, most likely did understand it the way you do
              – Same with official GAE sources, because they don’t leave such things to chance
              – Anyone who calls it CCP is usually openly hostile to China

              However, I believe that the real distinction between CCP and CPC goes over the head of the vast majority of less important people who use the word. It’s certainly not obvious. On the face of it, the words sound like they mean the same thing. Before you pointed it out, I didn’t even notice it myself. I could’ve called it the CCP without realizing it carried any particular meaning aside from sounding more like CCCP. And as you say, official western sources call it CCP. Random boomers who “hate those damn communists” will call it CCP. Is it because they believe communism hasn’t been tried, or just because that’s what they heard it being called?

              • Mayflower Sperg says:

                Nor did I have any idea until Jim pointed it out. A much stronger tell is when people use CE and BCE instead of AD and BC.

              • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                The trotskyites will call it the chinese communist party as they are implicitly asserting that their True Communism is uncontaminated by any niggling details in the clay of reality to be shaped, a procrustean frame to which any particular aspect of reality must be cut to fit; which of course ultimately leads up too including reality itself. In other words, no Stalinist pragmatism as like ‘communism in one country’.

                So it’s true that they call the Chinese ruling class the CCP; and it’s also true that the Communist Party of China really is a Chinese Communist Party.

                When Xi Jinping steps up to the podium to give a speech to the Communist Party of China, they are implicitly asserting that they are True Communism. And in the contents of that speech, he will talk about how ‘socialism is patriotism’ and ‘nationalism and socialism are inseparable’ and the greatness of ‘China’s model of socialism’ and ‘socialism with Chinese characteristics’ and so on, and so forth.

              • jim says:

                Havel’s Greengrocer does not know or much care what the slogans mean, but he knows he is supposed to speak them.

              • skippy says:

                “Random boomers who “hate those damn communists” will call it CCP.”

                The boomers are the victim of a psyop attack by people who were pro-communist during the Cold War attempting to enlist boomer support for a war against China precisely because China is NOT communist [enough]. Boomercons have no intellectual sovereignty and tend to absorb enemy language without thinking. Just like how the Dems have betrayed the real meaning of Martin Luther King etc.

                • Lanzo says:

                  [*voluntarist anarchism with Global American Empire payload deleted*]

                • jim says:

                  If you want to debate anarchism, take the shill test. I am very sympathetic to anarcho capitalism and crypto anarchism, though my idea of a good healthy desirable anarcho capitalist polity doubtless features a fair bit more extortion, piracy, and brigandage than yours does.

                  Your payload was that Islam is expansionist, China is expansionist, but no imagines or speaks about the Global American Empire. Not a problem, no such thing, move along, nothing to see here.

                  China is not trying to conquer America — or conquer anyone outside traditional Chinese boundaries, though they would like to have more hegemony and soft power than they do, and they very much resent American domination of their sea trade routes. The Global American Empire is trying to conquer China.

                  What China is doing is bribing American elites to pursue self destructive policies that are destroying America economically and are likely to lead to civil war. China wants the Global American Empire to tear itself apart, to give themselves some breathing room. Preferably tear itself apart with enormous bloodshed, as in Civil War One. But they have no interest in conquering or politically dominating whoever is left standing, while the Global American Empire works ceaseless to bring down every state that is not securely under its thumb with the intent of bringing it under its thumb as the Ukraine is.

                • Lanzo says:

                  [*deleted*]You are a baldfaced liar about what I said and did not say. [*deleted*]
                  here’s exactly what i said so people can see exactly what i said and that you are a liar about what i said. [*deleted*]

                • jim says:

                  If you want your stuff to go through, all you have to do is commit a thought crime. Pass the shill test described in the moderation policy and get white listed. Anyone can pass this, regardless of his religious or political beliefs, regardless of what issues he wants to speak about, anyone who is not reading from a script with a supervisor standing over him, can pass this.

                  The trouble is that your payload runs directly contrary to what you are ostensibly saying. You say you are pushing anarchism, while pushing Global American Empire totalitarianism, by presupposing that everyone agrees on things that these days even the normies vehemently reject.

                • Lanzo says:

                  jim you are obviously liar and a cumdodger.
                  you did not quote anything i said to support your false assement, so you manufactured bullshit lies.
                  i dont have to jump your stupid hoops.
                  i already posted, and first, and you dodged.
                  so you either undelete what i said and come out and “debate” what i say unedited like a man, or you leave.
                  i dont care which.
                  because after seeing u delete people, im already exposing your games in this thread on my blog.

                  faggots cant make anything,
                  and anything infested with faggots cannot make or be made to make anything,
                  and anyone like your butt buddy alex soros pushing faggits into everything eventually
                  will die from not having any food or house or anything made for them.
                  because making stuff requires actual men to make stuff.
                  at least youre right about that.

                • jim says:

                  Not a thought crime, a misdirection. It would be a thought crime if you told us of Soros’s actual misdeeds. Criticizing faggots comes close to being a thought crime, but your criticisms avoid what matters. Now if you explained why stoning them or throwing them from high buildings was a good idea, or even rejected that position in a way that makes it clear what the arguments in favor of it are, that would count as a thought crime

    • jim says:

      Putting the Ukraine Nazis in same meat grinder they had been stuffing the rest of the Goys into was a truly disastrous idea. They promptly ran away because there was no anti retreat force behind them, they were the anti retreat force, and everyone ran away right behind them.

      • Pooba says:

        AZOV was a great ragtag fighting force of white men [*deleted*].


        But they were white, werent jews[*deleted*]

        • jim says:

          Anyone who says “CCP” is part of a group whose leadership is as Jewish as Bar Mitzvah. It is a reliable tell.

          The “true communism has never been tried” shills are inextricably interlinked with the “more anti semitic than thou” shills, and the “true communism has never been tried” shills are as Jewish as the Ukrainian government.

          • Pooba says:

            AZOV also has white women that were not Jews, and white towns and white farms with white children, and many to most of them are some form of christian, not jew or hindu or muslim. Don’t try and tell us AZOV aren’t fighting to preserve that.

            > Anyone who says “CCP”

            Never mentioned “CCP”. Stop lying.

            > is part of a group whose leadership is as Jewish as Bar Mitzvah.

            Don’t really care about the Jews one way or another, and def don’t give a fuck about their leaders. Stop presuming.

            > “true communism has never been tried”

            True *whatever* has never been tried. But commienism and socialist nonsense has all been tried, and generally failed.

            “Anarchism”, in its pure literal meaning “without archy” hasn’t been tried, but its western-american mod-leftist form has been out diversifying the streets with garbage for the last decade or two.

            To avoid that leftist contamination…
            Try Voluntaryism for a more ideologically neutral form.
            Or Agorism for a more active mesh form.

            • jim says:

              > AZOV also has white …

              All of them under the command of Jews. During the greatest Ukrainian counteroffensive they were implementing a moronic strategy that (((armchair general Kagan))) described on Youtube. When I heard (((armchair general Kagan))) describe and explain it, he though it the greatest thing since sliced bread, but I thought it was suicidally stupid. I later learned that Pentagon generals also thought it was suicidally stupid, and General Zaluzhny thought it was suicidally stupid, but General Zaluzhny in the end did as (((Kagan))) told him, and the Azov Nazis forced Ukrainian Goyim to do as (((Kagan))) told them. And lo and hehold, it turned out to be stupid for all the reasons I expected when watching (((Kagan))) on Youtube.

              And the CCP tell reveals that they have been under the command of Jews since not long after World War II, for the “true communism has never been tried” shills are as Jewish as a bar mitzvah.

              > Never mentioned “CCP”. Stop lying..

              The shills who are pulling the same wagon as you and pushing the same payload as you will never call the CPC by its correct name. They always call it the CCP, which is a tell as Jewish as a bar mitzvah. And you phrased your response to avoid needing to refer to the CPC by its correct name.

              > Try Voluntaryism for a more ideologically neutral form.
              > Or Agorism for a more active mesh form.

              In your last comment you were a nazi. In this comment an anarchist, and in your next comment, you will be true communist.

              I an an anarcho capitalist in principle, but anarchism is useless in war, there will always be war, and holy war is coming up real soon. And to fight and win a holy war, we need throne and altar.

              • Pooba says:

                I NEVER SAID “CCP” [*deleted*]

                • jim says:

                  I never said you did. I said that shills who drag the same wagon as you and push the same payload as you call the CPC the CCP, which is a tell as Jewish as a bar mitzvah.

                  And I notice that so far, you have been unable to call the CPC by its correct name, even when you were talking about China.

                • jim says:

                  I am now silently deleting all your comments, because you said that stuff already, and you are still pulling the same wagon. If you want your stuff to go through without moderation, pass the shill test described in the moderation policy and get white listed. Anyone can pass this, regardless of his religious or political beliefs, regardless of what issues he wants to speak about, anyone who is not reading from a script with a supervisor standing over him, can pass this.

                  If you think my moderation is arbitrary, inconsistent, unfair, biased, and deceptive, and doubtless it often is, because I am cynical, biased, and suspicious, that is a problem you can easily solve, that anyone can easily solve who is free to say what he really thinks.

              • skippy says:

                > “The shills who are pulling the same wagon as you and pushing the same payload as you will never call the CPC by its correct name. They always call it the CCP, which is a tell as Jewish as a bar mitzvah.”

                This sounds very plausible to me, but could you explain why you think so?

                • jim says:

                  I have not seen many gab nazis talk about China, but on the infrequent occasions where they have, they call the CPC the “CCP”.

                  What makes that as Jewish as a bar mitzvah is that the “true communism has never been tried” shills, who do talk about it quite a bit, are as Jewish as a bar mitzvah.

                • Anon says:

                  I never notice until jim pointed to it .
                  The way to understand it is to spell the whole acronum name:
                  CCP ” Chinese Communist Party” GAE name
                  CPC ” Communist Party of China” China name
                  The GAE is saying that this communism is homegrown and so not true communism.
                  While the chine name is saying that this communist party is part from global communist movement and so genune communism, it is from a bygone era when most communist parties were ruled from moscow.

                • skippy says:

                  @jim: Very interesting. I have noticed that GAE officials and those under their influence like to say “CCP” over and over. It felt somehow forced. But never realized why. I assumed it was just boomerbait, trying to win the anti-communist vote for schemes by people who obviously supported communism during the Cold War.

            • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

              The basic problem faced by a ukrainian nationalist is a failure to observe the ordinals of conflict.

              By short-sightedly beefing with their cousins in russia, they got in bed with the gnostic daemonhosts occupying the occident – and this guaranteed their ultimate doom.

              Once you get in bed with the great satan, there is no way your story ends except with a hand pushing you off the stage of existence – whether from the front, or more often, the back. This is the foolish tragedy of azog et all. By their hands have they dug the graves that they and their countrymen now all lie in. Such is the irony.

  6. Redbible says:

    Since this comment is a different train of thought than the point of the comment that it is replying to, I figure I should start a new comment chain. Comment in question:

    Question for everyone: What are good movies that show the mating dance accurately portrayed? If it is just a scene, then mention the scene.

    It seems to me that if we could find a good collection of movies that show the mating dance accurately portrayed, we could potentially use them to help young men to learn the mating dance more quickly.

  7. Sher Singh says:

    [*deleted for Marxist payload*]

    • jim says:

      Empirically, conflicts between economic classes simply never happen. Too many reasons to cooperate.

      Major collective conflicts are always between faiths. Marxists like to interpret them as class conflicts, but as discussed in immense detail in “Clarke’s English Society 1688 to 1632” it is always a religious struggle.

      And since you are claiming to be Indian, you should know that better than anyone.

      • someDude says:

        Talk of class struggle bores Indians of all religions to sleep. Sometimes their eyes glaze over. People who are in the middle of an actual holy war an actual existential struggle for their religious identity, albeit cold, dont have time for manufactured nonsense like class war.

      • Anonymous Fake says:

        [*deleted*] and can say it’s not a faith conflict whatsoever [*deleted*]

        • jim says:

          I was in the trenches with management against human resources. It is a faith conflict.
          If the evil exploiting upper classes were behind immigration from economic reasons, they would import workers, as in Dubai. Instead we see enemies being imported to live on crime, welfare, and fake government jobs. If you compare masss immigration in Dubai, with mass immigration in America, in the one case businessmen are quite obviously and plainly importing employees, in the other case, a religion is importing troops.

          In Dubai, you can see what capitalist motivated mass migration looks like. It looks nothing like what is happening to America.

          In Dubai, they import workers so that capitalists can build stuff. In America, criminals to stop capitalists from building stuff. And now we have ESG, which is quite explicitly all about turning businesses from instruments for creating value, into instruments for propagating the faith. You think the evil capitalists are behind that one?

          • Anonymous Fake says:


            There’s president Bush, saying the conservative position [*deleted*]

            • jim says:

              Since that utterly discredited him in the Republican base, almost as badly as Mike Pence destroyed himself by what he said to Tucker on Ukraine, that is not the conservative position of normie Republicans. Bush is pretty much a curse word among normies and the base of the Republican party.

              You are telling us that the right agrees with progressive position, on matters where Republican voters have repeated been enraged by Rinos going along with the enemy.

              • Dharmicreality says:

                So “old faithful” AF confidently chimes in on a deleted post from resident “Sikh”, almost on cue to push the shill narrative that “class struggle” is a legitimate right wing meme.

                Almost seems like their scripts come from the same office.

                But since this is the old tired and stale narrative being pushed, seems like this particular globohomo faction has run out of steam on other topics.

          • Ryan says:

            Not really disagreeing, but although there aren’t sane economic reasons to import underclass bodies, it’s an applecart situation. Every penny spend on them and the problems they cause increases cashflow which can be skimmed from by politicians and NGOs. Our bandits are not long term thinkers.

  8. Anon says:

    @ jim
    on the topic of war and military
    one interesting fact about the british army is the fact that commission were bought and sold. is this system legacy of the feudal times ?
    the system also seem to have been successful untill abolished by leftist.
    i wonder if it can be introduced again.

    • Mayflower Sperg says:

      This fact, which I learned from Jim, is a rhetorical stun-gun against leftists who say, “What’s wrong with socialism? By your definition, our entire military is socialist!” They’re shocked when I say, “You’re right, it is. Want to see what a capitalist military looks like?”

      After a particular enterprise, e.g. healthcare, has been socialist for one adult lifespan, about sixty years, no one can imagine that any other system is even possible.

      • Lcan says:

        If your authority is intact, then free-market armies will win. You’re buying the right to spoils which you can only get if you’re the winning side. If your authority is broken, war becomes initiated, or they take you over.

        Socialist healthcare sucks, there is no incentive to the patient, only to the system, the patient loses every time, and there is no excellence at any price, because you can’t buy it.

        Lifetimes of psyop mindcontrol indoctrination are devastating.

        “Public schools” are perfect example. Worship of the State is the only thing they teach.

      • Jack Vien says:

        Modern Army of various Leftist regimes is indeed Socialist, because it is also a *slave* army. As such, the care of each soldier entirely rests with his owner, the State. Soldier, unlike genuine warrior (i.e. feudal aristocrat or armed citizen of a legitimate Republic), does nothing by his own means and under his own power; he is equipped and provided for by the Sovereign power, hence a tool bound to a duty of unconditional subservience, most unlike the actual warrior. This goes to show that Socialism is nothing but a system of universal and complete slavery. “You will own nothing, and you will be happy”. (See also old 50s-era Government film strips, targeted at military men nearing the end of their term to convince them to re-enlist, warning them of all the perils and inconveniences of living independently as opposed to just staying in the Forces and letting the State take care of everything for you).

        • Jack Vien says:

          *erratim: should have read “letting the State take care of everything for you”.

        • jim says:

          Before Xenophon became the first economist, he was a mercenary general, who became the first writer on strategy and tactics. And his position was that the key problem of warfare was what we now call logistics. As Napoleon later said, “An army marches on its stomach”.

          And his position on logistics, foreshadowing his subsequent writings on economics, was that if the enemy could force you to rely on socialist logistics, you were in desperate trouble and needed to fix that problem first. In telling the tale of the march of the ten thousand, he uses the word “market” a lot.

    • Anon says:

      by the way for people who interested
      search in youtube for “fit to command” in channel redcoat
      i dont want to post a link to google.

  9. Big Brutha says:

    Off topic: An interesting discussion which touches on a lot of things but includes a very interesting point about Elon Musk and reinforces your statements about him being indispensable to the Thermidoreans.

    • Cloudswrest says:

      Here’s the excerpt from the interview specifically regarding Musk.

      Mike Benz:

      It’s (Twitter) under an extraordinary amount of pressure, and that pressure is going to continue to mount as the election approaches. Elon Musk is a very unique individual, and he has a unique buffer, perhaps when it comes to the national security state because the national security state is actually quite reliant on Elon Musk properties, whether that’s for the electrical, the Green Revolution when it comes to Tesla and the battery technology there. When it comes to SpaceX, the State Department is hugely dependent on SpaceX because of its unbelievable sort of pioneering and saturating presence in the field of low earth orbit satellites that are basically how our telecom system runs to things like starlink. There are dependencies that the National Security state has on Elon Musk. I’m not sure he’d have as much room to negotiate if he had become the world’s richest man selling at a lemonade stand, and if the national security state goes too hard on him by invoking something like CFIUS to sort of nationalize some of these properties, I think the shock wave that it would send to the international investor community would be irrecoverable at a time when we’re engaged in great power competition. So they’re trying to sort of induce, I think a sort of corporate regime change through a series of things involving a sort of death by a thousand paper cuts. I think there’s seven or eight different Justice Department or SEC or FTC investigations into Elon Musk properties that all started after his acquisition of X. But then what they’re trying to do right now is what I call the Transatlantic Flank Attack 2.0. We talked in this dialogue about how the censorship industry really got its start when a bunch of State Department exiles who were expecting promotions took their special set of skills in coercing European countries to pass sanctions on themselves, to cut off their own leg off to spite themselves in order to pass sanctions on Russia.

      They ran back that same playbook with doing a roadshow for censorship instead for sanctions. We are now witnessing Transatlantic Flank attack 2.0, if you will, which is because they have lost a lot of their federal government powers to do this same censorship operation they had been doing from 2018 to 2022. In part because the house has totally turned on them, in part because of the media, in part because Missouri v Biden, which won a slam dunk case, actually banning government censorship at the trial court and appellate court levels. It is now before the Supreme Court, they’ve now moved into two strategies.

      One of them is state level censorship laws. California just passed a new law, which the censorship industry totally drove from start to finish around, they call it platform accountability and transparency, which is basically forcing Elon Musk to give over the kind of narrative mapping data that these CIA conduits and Pentagon cutouts were using to create these weapons of mass deletion, these abilities to just censor everything at scale because they had all the internal platform data. Elon Musk took that away.

      They’re using state laws like this new California law to crack that open. But the major threat right now is the threat from Europe with something called the EU Digital Services Act, which was cooked up in tandem with folks like NewsGuard, which has a board of Michael Hayden, head of the CIA NSA and a Fourstar General. Rick Stengel is on that board from the state department’s propaganda office. Tom Ridge is on that board from the Department of Homeland Security. Oh, and Anders Fogh Rasmussen – he was the general secretary of NATO under the Obama administration. So you have NATO, the CIA, the NSA four star General DHS, and the State Department working with the EU to craft the censorship laws that now are the largest existential threat to X other than potentially advertiser boycotts. Because there is now disinformation is now banned as a matter of law in the EU.

      The EU is a bigger market for X than the us. There’s only 300 million in the USA. But there is 450 million people in Europe. X is now forced to comply with this brand new law that just got ratified this year where they either need to forfeit 6% of their global annual revenue to the EU to maintain operations there, or put in place essentially the kind of CIA bumper cars, if you will, that I’ve been describing over the course of this in order to have a internal mechanism to sensor anything that the EU, which is just a proxy for NATO deems to be disinformation. And you can bet with 65 elections around the globe this year, you can predict every single time what they’re going to define disinformation as. So that’s the main fight right now is dealing with the transatlantic flank attack from Europe.

      • skippy says:

        Interesting article. It’s clearly presenting many things the govt wouldve preferred to have been kept secret.

        At the same time, its presentation of the deep state as military rule will be indirectly comforting to many, but isn’t really true. Clearly those “right wing populists” the whole apparatus was intended to put down are not opponents of the Military Industrial Complex, but opponents of immigration, DEI, trannies, etc. If the military were in charge, no need for immigration, DEI, trannies, etc., in which case the need for surveillance and suppression also goes away.

        What he is saying tries at several points to implant the idea in the reader’s mind that the security state is in charge implicitly pursuing its institutional goals and self-interest, not the Progressive religion, and that these people really are smarter than “a trucker on TikTok” who is challenging them for media control.

        Since he also mentions State, he may just be naive on this point. But also, it could be damage control.

        • alf says:

          He does kind of allude to state department preferring media control above military control, eg that they are better at soft power than hard power.

          He makes a few somewhat inaccurate statements — like when he mentions that in 2018, no one realized how deep the censorship system went. Pretty sure the alt-right knew that in 2016, and NRx knew that in 2010. But, all namefag reservations aside, the information he provides seems pretty solid and provides and inside perspective to our outside descriptions. Sure, he does not outright mention progressive religion, but Tucker can and does.

          • jim says:

            What he is describing is the very ancient application of hard power to obtain soft power, and soft power to persuade. That is how Christianity conquered the world.

            And today, the same strategy is used by demon worshippers. The schools are run by sexual perverts because of hard power, and the perverts woo your children, trannyizing them by persuasion backed by soft power.

            • skippy says:

              He is doing exactly that, but he is eliding the fact that the hard power (GAE surveillance state) has soft power aims (Progressive religion), instead implying that they’re just power guys who wanna power, possibly because evil, which is the standard Progressive frame on military officers.

              Whether intentional or not, his article suggests removing (now-exposed) hard power implements without removing the Progressives from power.

              For example, he claims that the EU exists to back up NATO, and that the loss to GAE from European countries leaving the EU would be the collapse of NATO. But NATO pre-dates the EU, and NATO’s arguably strongest European member, the UK, did not join the EU until quite late, and has now left the EU while remaining in NATO, and indeed is one of the biggest cheerleaders for the Ukraine War. The EU is not a vector for GAE military control over Europe, but a vector for GAE control over Europe’s domestic policies: about trannies, DEI, immigration, and regulation. His point is that this is all about evil military officers expanding their power, in which case we might expect to see a subordinated but healthy Germany with the Prussian General Staff in power and statusful, and German officers having many children, which is not what we see.

              He also suggests that the “problem” the GAE surveillance state is set up to solve is actually a problem: that the messaging problem is “a trucker on TikTok” taking over from the GAE General Staff. Rather, the problem is that critics on the outside who are pointing out correctly that the GAE is aimed at killing its own constituents are now smarter and, in some cases, also better at communications than the GAE priesthood that sits above the GAE General Staff.

            • Anon says:

              Is hard power police and military , soft power is court orders and lawfare?

              • jim says:

                It is a matter of degree. Court orders and lawfare are have the mailed fist visible, so are very much hard power.

                An example of soft power is the pervert groomer schoolteachers asking kids to choose their gender. Also the fact that we have not seen the mating dance accurately portrayed on video since 1980, and boys these days do not know what to do, being afraid to follow their instincts, being unable to comprehend what their instincts are telling them. because it is so alien to what they see portrayed, and girls do not know how to react.

                The international use of the US dollar is soft power. Coca Cola is soft power.

                • Mayflower Sperg says:

                  What do you think of this black female judge ordering Trump to pay $355 million for a “business fraud” that the alleged victim didn’t even complain about?

                  I expect that more black female judges will pile on with more bogus fines, Trump will eventually start tossing their court summons in the trash, and judges will order him arrested for “contempt of court”. Whether he actually is arrested depends on which faction wins the power struggle.

                  Is Judge Shaniqua helping the radical side or hurting it?

                • jim says:

                  Trump has to be president or Epstein. Judge Shaniqua is useful in making this clear. Musk is running into similar headwinds — he is facing a judicial order to take Tesla away from him and give it to Shaniqua.

      • notglowing says:

        The EU is a bigger market for X than the us. There’s only 300 million in the USA. But there is 450 million people in Europe.

        This is a very American opinion. Europe is not even close to being as important to Twitter’s revenue as the US. More people does not equal a bigger market.

        Twitter is US and in general Anglo dominated. It’s far less popular in my country for example. Major politicians get mediocre engagement.

        450 million to 300 is not a big difference at all when you consider how much less popular twitter is outside the US, UK, and all the other english speaking countries (none of which are in the EU fortunately)

        I think the bigger problem is that if twitter was really discontinued in Europe, it would lose a huge amount of relevance. Twitter is top heavy to begin with, average users aren’t super important, but celebrities and politicians are. Such people won’t be able to use Twitter under their real name as europeans if it gets banned here, even if regular people like me just use VPNs.
        Musk could ban it in Europe but it would be a huge blow.

    • Mister Gumpus says:

      Thank you for bringing this up. Benz’s inability to speak in clear and salad-free English sentences about a subject he’s an “expert” in makes me suspicious.

      He goes on and on about the Defense Department and Aspen Institute and whatever, but never mentions the “Cathedral”, or Harvard, or the officially unofficial ruling faith.

      So I don’t get it. Maybe he gets all of it, but also has to make it out there as a namefag, and thus has no choice but to speak in not-quite-there scramble code.

      • cub says:

        Do you have a more specific criticism of anything in particular that Benz said? How do you even still believe in this Harvard shit, when their president was just forced to resign for betraying the smallest hint of something other than complete, unquestioning obedience to global jewry?

        • Fidelis says:

          I’ve found it odd that no one here likes to mention all the thermidor candidates have had nice little photoshoots where they wear a cute cap and visit neat old architecture in Jerusalem, or Elon’s fun field trip to Poland with little Benny. Musk finds it in him to say no to the state when they ask him for starlink support, but amazingly has time in his busy schedule for some very important history! It’s clear that the thermidor faction is hardcore zionist, which is very relevant if we’re sitting on our hands hoping they elect… radical Christian nationalists? I have faint hopes they’re willing to do that.

          • jim says:

            The big motive behind Thermidor is that war in the Ukraine has suddenly and shockingly revealed American economic and technological decline. These guys want empire, and we do not.

            The cure for economic and technological decline is unimaginably and unthinkably reactionary. It is the 1660 program. That started the industrial, technological, and scientific revolutions, and the domination of Harvard killed it. Harvard set about suppressing and demonizing the scientific method in 1944, and the censorship program that Tucker talks about is vigorously attempting to stamp out any remaining holdouts. So in this, we are on the same side — the anti Harvard side.

            Thermidor is a conflict within the left — between the left that wants empire, and the left that wants to destroy the Americans and the civilisation that made empire possible.

            It is not just a matter of getting Shaniqua off the job of team leadership. It is the O-Ring problem. Nine tenths of an O-ring is a dud O-ring.

            If you have one stupid guy on a team of ten very smart people, you have a stupid team. And if you have one stupid team in an organisation of ten teams, you have a stupid organisation. And the same for malice. And feral women are always malicious, bitter, angry, sad, and frustrated. Neither a dog nor a woman is happy except under an alpha male. A dog needs a master and a woman needs a master, and if they do not have one, will cause trouble.

            If you want your software to work, and HR demands you hire engineerettes, then to prevent them from breaking stuff, you banish them into the art harem, which is located in a different building to the actual engineers. You have to completely exclude them. If they are around, they will disrupt work and break things. You cannot let diversities get at your code or your coders, and if forced to hire them, you have to physically locate them where they cannot get at your code or your coders. Everyone knows this, and no one can say it. Black diversities are not malicious, and will harmlessly goof off, gays will be drunk or stoned, but will not otherwise be disruptive, trannies are OK, apart from making the workplace political, but the behavior of enginerettes only makes sense if they are looking for a spanking. Indians are OK coders, but their clannishness disrupts team cohesion. Unless your entire IT department has the same last name, nothing will get done, and when your entire IT department does have the same last name, which it will before long, they will be plotting to do the same to management, the board, and the shareholders. Chinese are OK coding, apart from a tendency to read specs too literally, and don’t have any particularly malicious objectives, but they tend to be operatives of the Chinese state here to collect western tech. If you don’t mind sharing your tech, or want to share your tech, not a problem.

            • Fidelis says:

              I am disputing none of this. This is all clear and matches pattern recognition on current events. My point is that the very same class interested in empire also has clannish supremecy on the brain — or worse, who knows what rituals these types keep. Therefore actually carrying out the reactionary actions are impossible for them. They are just as allergic to reactionaries as they are to the demon possessed, perhaps simply different demons, to their left. Best outcome I see is some dark horse Caesar type accidentally let in, because they will not consciously annoint anyone able to turn things back to the 1990s, let alone the 1660s.

            • A2 says:

              Someone figure out a corporate policy to get engineerettes married and pregnant soon after they appear.

              • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                The Japanese figured that out, but it was always ‘unspoken understanding’, and thus did not survive slow erosion of SCALE.

                • Vendat Tunicam says:

                  What is SCALE? Not sure why, but I can’t connect to and it’s been so long since I heard the term that I can’t remember the definition. Those guys were funny, I hope they are doing well.

                • A2 says:

                  Many classics at MPC. The AIDS thread was jaw dropping, as was their trolling on Grindr. The excellent Pitbull Drop-Off had me laughing like a madman. Surely I’m forgetting ten for everyone I remember. SCALE came in towards the end, I believe, but for me it didn’t stick. Anyway, it was a golden era in its category.

                  (The JP/Shaman appearance here may have come from MPC too. Possibly.)

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  Once they gated forum membership behind a paywall it was all over, as that basically guarantees getting taken over by polygon agents, as noone else is going to bother spending their money to join an e-forum, especially if they can’t even look at it anymore. Pretty much a complete self-obliteration as any meaningful internet phenomena.

                  As to the question, it comes from discussions of population density and or increasing complexification of intermediating bodies, and problems arising thereof. In this case the inability to have an explicit organizing principle (the implicit ‘office lady’ system in zaibatsus) and enforcement thereof, meant that every case where the edifice is challenged, troubled, or subverted, there was no move to stop the damage, and no effort to repair it, eventually leading to the situation of today, where japanese women all become catladies and men all become grasseaters.

                  (On that note, ‘reactionary glossaries’ were a big thing in the 10’s, and I always liked collecting them, which proved fortuitous as pretty much all of those old places are kill now, and olny archives remain. EG: )

                • Vendat Tunicam says:

                  Thank you to both of you. I have archived tons of stuff via “print” and then clicking “make pdf” or screenshots in a large part because so much NRx and adjacent stuff disappeared during the early aughts.

                  The AIDS thread backfilled so many explanations for why gay acquaintances were so “off”. That was heady stuff for a young guy who knew “it’s ok to be gay” was bullshit but the cuckservative position was a nonstarter as it cedes too much to the enemy frame. I think SCALE didn’t stick because by then if you didn’t blow enough smoke up Pleasureman’s ass you got told to stfu. Now the term small-souled bugman was a stroke of genius, I can’t remember who came up with that either (rippedphreak maybe?) but that describes all the millennials and gen-xrs who handed their balls to progressivism in order to get a degree and a miter.

                • Vendat Tunicam says:

                  *disappeared during the teens, not the aughts. I ought to proofread 😉

            • Cascadia says:

              May I ask what events at Harvard in 1944 are you referring to specifically?

              • jim says:

                Peer Review. When the US got the upper hand over the British empire, Havard got the upper hand over the Royal Society.

                The Royal Society previously excluded people who failed to follow the scientific method from science. Which led the Puritans to riot in the 1660s. They now exclude people who practice the scientific method from science.

  10. A2 says:

    Interesting (or perhaps foreboding) article on Blackrock and BTC:

    One of the problems with the last time around (ending with FTX and the rest going under) was that the customer base seemed to be basically Wall Street people.

  11. k4r4b3y says:

    You should take a closer look at Monero (XMR). It is a much more dangerous tech (in case it finds somewhat widespread use), much more corrosive to the current monetary control of the corrupt governments.

    • Fidelis says:

      It’s been well discussed. Can’t scale and lacks deep liquidity and network effects.

      • Moe says:

        this is utter bullshit.
        everything on the planet “started cold”, from literally non-existant zero, to wherever life and people destined and made things go.
        the ONLY four reasons monero isn’t growing are
        – people are refusing to promote adopt and use it, when they do that they get illiquidity and no network as the result, no ones fault but your own in the end
        – monero is incapable, you cant adopt a coin that cannot serve
        – bitcoin’s first mover network effects, even though btc has also been proven incapable and cannot serve
        – govt pols media banks bashkill xmr even more than they bash btc, bypassing them is easier than doing (1) above
        BUT AGAIN, it all comes down to the consensus result of (1) above.
        if you want xmr or any other [future] coin to win, you need to break the frame and establish a consensus over that coin.
        for that to be possible, you actually need to have a superior coin.
        but you don’t have that yet, so all you’re doing is selling snakeoil, and people are now smart enough to detect and refuse that, so all your efforts get rekt because the coins you’re promoting are in fact incapable and destined to fail as a result.
        PLEASE CALL ME when you have a coin that can service every one of at least 1B people all doing private p2p settled transactions a few times a month in perpetuity, without eventually collapsing under its own storage and fees, and without devolving into “layers” of diminished capability usage models (tabs, feds, citadels, proxied, trusted, central, brokers, custodied, etfs, etc).
        when you have a REAL and CAPABLE COIN, and a true cross coin DEX network that people can run and thus freely trade into it from all the other L1’s, it will “cold start” and sell itself.

        • jim says:

          Bitcoin has hit its scaling limit. Monero’s scaling limit is far smaller. Monero inherently has less capability than Bitcoin. You cannot do contracts on the blockchain. Men cannot be free till crypto eats fiat. Thus the fundamental problem that has to be fixed is scaling, though for freedom, privacy comes a close second.

          When Monero also hits its scaling limit, it will be far smaller than Bitcoin, so will still be a minority currency, will always be a minority currency, and people always want to do transactions in the majority currency.

          • Moe says:

            > Bitcoin has hit its scaling limit.

            this is correct. and these limits have priced out all the avg people and avg use cases of the world. btc is now literally only useful as a custodied etf sov. the banks and govs alone will fill the tx limits. peoples only use now will be to sell their bags to the custodians, because theyve been fee-priced out of daily weekly and soon to be even monthly transactions.

            > Monero inherently has less capability than Bitcoin.

            true. monero shills would be forced to admit this if their coin ever got popular like btc, then xmr would breakdown just like btc, xmr would push etfs so the big baggers could get 2nd life on their incapable dead coin.

            > You cannot do contracts on the blockchain.

            no one cares about “contracts” when they havent even got to first principles…
            1) sound currency money transactions p2p privacy global scaled
            2) IF you have that, in perpetuity proven analysis and gamed out at least a billion users, only THEN you can consider adding feature bloat, “contracts”, and whatever else on top of any free headroom you have left.

            ie: ethereum has these fabled “contracts”, even a “vm”, but its dead for the same reasons btc and xmr are… because it doesnt meet first principles in 1.

            > Men cannot be free till crypto eats fiat.

            true. it is the money use case that matters first, NOTHING else, and all else comes from and after that. OG’s and historians know this.

            > scaling… privacy comes a close second

            if you can scale according to 1, then you can mix.
            privacy comes as an almost free addon after scale, just like TLS was free on http.

            > minority… majority

            the large liquidity and value of a majority will come when you have a real coin.
            otherwise youre just trading pokemon cards among a small band of enthusiasts and praying that some greater fool billionaires will decide to vacuum up your cards into their coffers… a truly worthless proposition.

            real coin => real adoption upon review of 1 => real use => real liquidity => real privacy => real wealth and features and ability to plug it into feature systems

            99.9% of coins projects today are trying to run that equation in the reverse direction, and discovering en masse that they are wrong. btc and xmr are known shitcoins, just like them.

            we want defi (contracts), but that first requires both a money, and a scale, to do them in.
            nobody is doing money anymore. thats sad.
            everyone needs to revisit and do money, first.
            then the promise of crypto come true.
            not least because all this recent defi development will then have scale-money to plug into them.

            in an ideal world with magical new and assembled tech, money will be the app will be the money.
            but in this real world, for now, this day at least, that random chance discovery might be many years away, so you’ll probably need the money network separate from defi networks, due to needs for bandwidth compute headroom. and because its almost impossibly hard to launch even money agnostically and altruistically like satoshi did… greed and power are elixer of the devil that infects projects, the graveyard to which 99.9% of all current coins and defi are thus going.

            • jim says:

              > > You cannot do contracts on the monero blockchain.

              > no one cares about “contracts” when they haven’t even got to first principles…

              In order to do atomic exchanges between two blockchains, which is to say, to enable people to move value between one blockchain and another without registering for Know Your Customer, have to have contracts on the blockchain.

              In order to provide DeFi markets for the exchange of fiat for crypto currency, have to have contracts on the blockchain.

              In order to have a lightning network, have to have contracts on the blockchain.

              To compete, have provide people with an off ramp and on ramp to bitcoin, in the expectation that there will in due course the off ramp will be a whole lot busier than the on ramp. If no contracts on the blockchain, no ramp, making it a whole lot harder to solve Metcalfe’s law and the cold start problem.

              • Moe says:

                any old message system can serve as meetup for two parties to trade value amongst themselves. there are no “contracts” there. people could post gpg here for that, on nntp, etc.

                recall #bitcoin-otc was, and is still.

                anyone know if blockdx still running, or something similar?

                and supposedly bidir btc xmr is running in xmrland now, but that’s only one pair.

                and you can always create an opensource CEX server project that speaks json trade api on github. then anyone who wants to be an exchange can pop up an instance of it on an onion and plug in whatever base pairs they want. then users can point their trade clients at that, and the CEXop gets whatever cut they configured.

                people already run all kind of shit on onions, so that’s no different.

                • Moe says:

                  here another shocking new evidence of btc’s inability to serve…


                  and when millions to billion of small to avg users that have built the price to this stage are priced out of settlement and entry/exit movement, you lose that entire massive marketcap and liquidity and memeshare. you end up relying on the very wealthy sub-10% to hold up the prices under their own very low liquidity use case. it doesn’t work.

                  imo, the entire crypto community needs to go back to square one…
                  figure out how to do money first.

                  all the contract and alt and vm and zk and other research has produced some new tech.
                  but now it needs turned into a better money at scale than today’s legacy btc.

                • Moe says:

                  and now we see Monero, “the best crypto” according to its shills, delisted from two more major exchanges.

                  this is actually a good thing for xmr.

                  but in the end, unless your coin is capable, it wont matter, because to make a difference in the world, you need a global mass, on a global coin, at scale.

                  if xmr had come out as the first coin before bitcoin, xmr would have at least established privacy as the unstoppable network effect and as the expectation going forward.

                  instead btc shills lied for years and established non-privacy as the network effect instead. best psyop ever.

                  but hey btc is now $52k so its all good right?


                • jim says:

                  > and now we see Monero, “the best crypto” according to its shills, delisted from two more major exchanges.

                  Well it is the best crypto. But it can never break out of little niche, and the fact that it cannot do contracts on the blockchain makes it vulnerable to delisting. You always wind up relying on a third party, even on a supposed Defi like Bisq.

                • jim says:

                  No, you cannot. You want anonymity and untraceability — so cannot rely on trust. Without contracts on the blockchain, no atomic exchanges.

                • Moe says:

                  > Well it is the best crypto.
                  > But it can never break out of little niche
                  > and … it cannot do contracts … makes it vulnerable to delisting.

                  well then, by at least those reasons alone,
                  monero is expressly NOT “the best crypto”.

                  by definition, “the best crypto” will be the ones, or the classes of them, that do not have problems, and thus ARE able to reach mass adoption and use, and therefore to put the banks and everyone else out of business.

                  people could argue that XMR is *one* of the better cryptos out there at *this* extant moment.

                  but it is foolish for non-laughable people to argue that XMR, or any other extant crypto, *is* or *will be* “the best”.

                  because if they *are* they wouldn’t be failing, on at least scale, and privacy, and other factors.
                  and along with that, if they *will be*, their adoption would be exploding.

                  PLEASE CALL ME when “the best coin” is developed and released.

                  because rather than simply speculating on it,
                  which is necessarily the case of coinworld today,
                  i would like to adopt and use it to bring forth cryptopia 🙂

              • k4r4b3y says:

                >In order to do atomic exchanges between two blockchains,\

                1) has atomic swap pairs for Monero, against mosts of the famous other coins. It is operational today.

                2) is an under-development decentralized exchange, which will open the no-KYC trading of Monero against other crypto pairs to the masses.

                3) is going to allow a no-KYC fiat-onramp for monero, which is near its mainnet release.

                • CEX DEX Scale Privacy says:

                  While Monero may enable some small use cases and markets, XMR is not “dangerous” to governments because it cannot scale, and because it cannot scale, it will never earn the mass adoption and thus the capital, not just monetary capital but idealogical capital, needed to throw at and win the big problems that crypto was meant to solve. Monero will only be able to throw a few pot shots at best.

                  Crypto needs to advance to win the war, and to quit subjecting itself to its current limitations, such subjugation being the result of Maxi bag-protectionism, such bag-protectionism is the result of both lack of any better bags to move into, and the lack of private exchanges to move the now $1T+ of grown market cap via.

                  All three of those DEX are useless as a DEX unless they offer true cross-L1 capability, that means anyL1 to anyL1.

                  You can’t claim to have a true DEX if you’re only able to service one L1 and its subcoins (like only erc-20 coins on ETH), or if you can only service certain types of coins and/or certain coin api’s (because such coins must have the operations for that specific DEX protocol).

                  If you’re going to lie and say you have a DEX when you don’t, you’re better off to just go create a CEX trade engine, put it on GitHub, that way everyone who wants to can spawn and run those CEX on their own Tor Onion server addresses. That’s true any-to-any among whatever coins you configured your CEX server to carry.

                  Creating a true DEX is impossible without both 1) a universale DEX spec that coins can design for and 2) coins that are designed to work with that DEX spec. No such DEX spec exists, therefore all coins are in limbo waiting, or are design-locking themselves into incapable DEX designs that will also fail. Failed coin designs + failed DEX designs = total failure.

                  A true DEX will trade single-sig nominal values between coins.
                  But it is a hopeless fantasy to consider moving contracts between L1’s without a universale contract VM that all coins adopt.

                  Also Monero Maxis are just as much poison as Bitcoin Maxis are. Both of them are doing nothing but protecting and shilling their own bags of incapable coins, instead of promoting the development of coins that can actually service 1B+ people on Earth.

                  Any and EVERY time you see someone shilling any coin by name, the FIRST thing you MUST ask them is… DO YOU TODAY KNOW HOW TO SCALE for 100+ years and 1B+ users??? If the answer is NO, then you’re taking a GAMBLE on assured failure, and you MUST tell them to go research and do a REAL COIN instead.

                  Because without that mass adoption, all you have is a niche, a curiosity, a boutique, an esoteric, a don’t-work don’t-care, and such things are incapable of changing the world.

                  Even some big voices in BTC are now talking honestly and publicly about the scaling problem and the need for a UTXO preserving, P2P settlement capability preserving, design upgrade. This talk is now ruffling feathers.

                  I actually see another fork war brewing, mostly because the Maxi’s will be unwilling to lose face or capitulate after a decade of lying about BTC, and conning lots of people big and small into BTC.
                  The ETF’s are actually useful here, because although they might not be delivered a fork, ETF holders can instantly click sell as they evaluate the war, without the risk of moving coins through the trad CEX corps. Many small users will lose their coins and savings in the process.

                  PS: Just like “Lightning” is another Maxi Lie re being P2P usage and settlement at scale when in fact it is not…

                  “Pruning” doesn’t actually work on a “Blockchain” either because users will always need to reference back to some as-yet-unpruned transactions to validate what they are receiving, and those tx could be extremely far back and across multiple unprunable chain branches. You thus still require ever-growing-storage and bandwidth and indexes up against unknowable advances in storage-capacity-tech, among other assumptions. But that reliance upon such assumptions, including vaporware storage tech, means that you in fact do NOT have a perpetual-100yr-capable coin design in hand, in fact what you have is a foolishly risky resource and development dependency GAMBLE that will more than likely still bloat and kill your coin in a number of years. Just like Bitcoin and Monero were killed by these capacity issues.
                  Furthermore, you cannot rely upon “archive nodes” or any other type because they are all central, human, and will become attacked or politically corrupt over time. We already see tx and address “filtering”. It will get worse.

                  The ONLY way you can make “pruning” work in a “blockchain”, is if the protocol automatically physically periodically copies and remines all the old UTXOs into the head of the chain, thereby allowing you to delete the old blocks, or if you make it cost-free for users to do so on their own (which can be done with nominal single-sig balances, but becomes a NIGHTMARE for multi-sig, and HOPELESS to expect people to reissue complex contracts.)

                  Else you have to give up on the silly “pruning” nonsense, and go develop a REAL coin that scales.

                • jim says:

                  There is no real coin that scales, because of the problems that you list.

                  I have published the design for the fix, and intend to implement it.

                  But the huge problem with implementing it is that information wants to be free, but programmers want to be paid. To make money out of implementing it, it is necessary to find a way past the cold start problem and Metcalfe’s law.

                  Which one normally does by targeting a small neglected underserved niche, and then expanding out of the niche. The obvious niche is that which and Particl is settling into, because a blockchain based on recursive snarks does what they are trying to do enormously better than a blockchain based on wholesale copying Bitcoin code. But since there is already someone in that niche, would need serious money to take it over. Would have to buy enough market share to get past the coldstart problem, and hire enough developers to catch up them and pass them. It is obvious that Particl have a bitrot and technical debt problem, so not hard to pass them. But would need a sufficient tool of talent, and a sufficient pool of talent wants money up front.

                • jim says:


                  This is very valuable, and very painful, information.

         has already occupied the little privacy niche that I thought had fallen vacant, replacing Bitmessage. Thus stuffing my plans to solve the coldstart and Metcalfe’s law problem by grabbing a small neglected niche and then growing out of it. Particl (the cryptocurrency of basicswapdex) is already doing what I planned to do. It has some obviously flaws, resulting from the decision to run on top of code bases designed with different goals in mind, in order to get up and running in a hurry, but their fundamental strategy is heading straight for the target I intended to target. They are not hitting it yet (what is the holdup on taproot), but are well on the way to hitting it.

         uses some remarkably ingenious cryptography that I had failed to think of — it uses zero knowledge proofs to link Monero scriptless scripts to scriptless scripts running under bitcoin contracts, thus propagating contracts on the Bitcoin chain contract to scriptless scripts on the Bitcoin chain to scriptless scripts on the monero chain, thus effectively enabling a Bitcoin contract to do stuff on the Monero chain.

                  If Monero has an on ramp from Bitcoin, and off ramp to Bitcoin lightning, this solves most of the problems with Monero – until it also hits its scaling limit, which it has not hit, but is in sight.

                  Scaling Monero is starting to be a problem. As you say, it is not a big problem yet, but it is noticeable, and will get more noticeable before long.

                  Glancing briefly at the academic solutions for Monero lightning, any Monero lightning has to be built on off chain scriptless scripts — which looks to me like an unsolvable problem, in the sense that any purported solution is likely to be horrible in practice with a high risk of funds loss. The interesting technology, for which I as yet see no proposals, is atomically swapping bitcoin lightning for monero lightning, which might be complex since the lightning networks will be operating on fundamentally different principles and in fundamentally different ways.

                  Glancing casually at the proposed academic solutions to Monero lightning, not apparent to me that they are in fact solutions. You can get any crap published these days. The basic problem is that there has to be two possible outcomes of an on chain spend event, depending of the state of knowledge of the counterparty, and Monero just fundamentally does not support that. Or maybe it does, I will have to look deeper, but underwhelmed so far.

                  With an on/off ramp in place, this solves most of the problems with Monero, and Bitcoin is hitting its scaling limit, which means that Monero is likely to be the next big move up.

                  But for Monero to move up, needs its own lightning.

                  Particl (the cryptocurrency of, and should, implement taproot, lightning on taproot, particl lightning with atomic swaps to bitcoin lightning and particl lightning with atomic swaps to monero. Then all would be well.

                  But Particl’s strategy of onboarding libraries designed for incompatible objectives carries a risk of bitrot. All quick and dirty get-it-up-in-a-hurry projects suffer from technical debt that can grow into bitrot. Bitrot burned bitmessage, due to its heavy reliance on python libraries, a notorious cause of bitrot, which same cause is now afflicting c-lightning severely. That Particl has not yet implemented taproot or taproot lightning suggests that its overly hasty incorporation of great wads of bitcoin code has given it technical debt and bitrot.

                  I need to look at their choice of libraries Bitrot is a huge problem when you have large dependencies. The bitrot free, technical debt free, version of lightning is rust-lightning, but it is not exactly out of beta yet. Because of Particl’s development plan and because of their strange lag on taproot I have a strong suspicion that they hastily incorporated great wads of code that was already suffering technical debt and bitrot.

                  They are not there yet, and in their haste to get where I was planning to go before anyone else did, they seem to have tripped over a few things. Which things are fixable. But you cannot fix bitrot, except by doing a full replacement of bitrotten code built in a development environment and language less prone to bitrot.

                • CEX DEX Scale Privacy says:

                  At the end of the day, a real currency at scale is still the only and sole prerequisit, minimum viable, and highest priority goal, among all whatever other bullshit extras people think they need but dont actually need for crypto to be able to change the world. Coinspace has tend to forget that one basic thing, and it is that basic that they need to get back to.

                  DEX are indeed fun and necessary research tools and playsets, as are all the other coin technologies and defi research projects. Those researches and running networks are absolutely necessary to free run and develop because it is not yet known where the singularity will come from or what it will be composed of. So long as you do not make the error of claiming you have something in hand, when in fact you do not.

                  However, someday, probably before any of that deluxe stuff is ready, perhaps in the next 2-8 years, someone will solve scale and release a simple real p2p 100yr 1B+ user scale privacy-capable coin. Maybe even one of the existing coins will be modified to become that, or maybe such a coin is already out there in its scalable form right now today but just hasn’t reached the surface news yet.

                  It is that one scalable currency and money/SoV, that final fuck you to all Fiat, that will change the world, no other features or functions matter at this stage. And you will know it is such a coin because it will pass the single question I posted earlier that everyone should be asking every coin.

                  And once that day hits, all those who have bags in other L1’s will generate an instant global demand to move into that coin. It will be utter chaos. No one will be ready for it, and few will have the ability. And many trad CEX and fiat rails will likely be shut down by ban pressure, leaving many peoples bags stranded and unconvertible, at least early on until the underswell can force them to reopen later.

                  Recall that a lot of countries and their trad CEX are really only allowing it because they think its trivia, or are tinkering with it, not because they have allowed or capitulated yet. And the WEF is now officially full on banning everything for CBDC.

                  That’s where having an opensource CEX running on a plethora of popup Onion nodes comes in VERY handy. So long as users keep under 1% of their bag on them, they can safely parallel flow $Millions in value through that steady trade liquidity into the new emergent L1.

                  Given Tor’s Onions are deemed “good enough” by the darknet for all other forms of darknet activities to reasonably survive and prosper, they’re certainly going to be viewed as “good enough” for such benign things as a CEX trading magic internet money.

                  You’ll need many Onion CEX to fill that underswell.

                  Yet no one has put a CEX softwares up on GitHub yet, no one has ever claimed that street cred, anon or otherwise. It is a nice prize still waiting.

                  They’re probably too busy writing and shilling coins that can’t scale, instead of filling that obvious need for a CEX. Given the cross-compatibility issues of DEX between L1’s, such Onion CEX will be perfect complimentary route to DEX and trad CEX. Reputation of Onion CEX’s will develop such that risk of losing that 1% float is minimal.

                  Such CEX also don’t require that any coins ever limit their designs in order to meet a universale DEX spec. That could be an advantage if you are putting scale first.

                  But of course you’ll want to a scaleable coin to be able to expose a DEX and/or network compatible interface anyway.

                  Because after the singularity of a globally scalable coin hits,
                  and it demolishes all the Fiat structures, there will be many freedom
                  things you’ll want to plug your new shiny into anyway, many leading
                  classe of networks apps…
                  – defi, contracts, fintech, tradfi… private and non-private versions
                  – shared file storage, compute, comms, prediction markets, p2p services

                  None of that is possible without first having a scalable p2p money.

                • jim says:

                  Yes, but you said that already. Several times. And I have been saying it since before Bitcoin existed.

                  I will doubtless say it again, and one needs to keep on saying it. But not this often.

                • CEX DEX Scale Privacy says:

                  Monero is one of the more well known research hubs.
                  The ZK podcast is related.
                  I’m always looking for links to crazy research centres and analyst groups,
                  particularly those operating outside of the purely Bitcoin focused ones.

                  For the search engine…


                  Sarang Noether. Discrete logarithm equality across groups. 2018

                  Bitcoin­-Monero Cross-chain Atomic Swap
                  Joel Gugger
                  Abstract. In blockchains where hashed timelock contracts are possible atomic swaps are already de-
                  ployed, but when one of the blockchains doesn’t have this capability it becomes a challenge. This protocol
                  describes how to achieve atomic swaps between Bitcoin and Monero with two transactions per chain
                  without trusting any central authority, servers, nor the other swap participant. We propose a swap
                  between two participants, one holding bitcoin and the other monero, in which when both follow the
                  protocol their funds are not at risk at any moment. The protocol does not require timelocks on the
                  Monero side nor script capabilities but does require two proofs of knowledge of equal discrete logarithm
                  across the edward25519 and the secp256k1 groups and ECDSA one-time VES.
                  Keywords: Blockchain, Atomic Swap, Cross-Chain Transactions, Bitcoin, Monero

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  I wonder why anyone uses protonmail for anything important after it’s already been demonstrated to be compromised.

                • CEX DEX Scale Privacy says:

                  > compromised

                  Compromised to ones model, may not be to another ones.

                  Define what you mean by compromised, exactly…

          • cub says:

            I thought dynamic block size made XMR more scalable than BTC? And that technological progress would alleviate XMR’s storage/bandwidth issues?

            • jim says:

              Monero has already reached the point where people are starting to think about pruning and lightweight client wallets. Once everyone starts pruning and running something like electrum wallets, the end is nigh. Bitcoin can scale further using lightning, but lacking contracts on the blockchain, Monero cannot do something like lightning. Because of all the privacy protecting chaff, it is inherently less scalable than bitcoin. Monero protects privacy by putting a lot of chaff on the blockchain to obfuscate the information, but the only entirely satisfactory cure, to both scaling and privacy, is not to put that information on the blockchain in the first place.

              The Monero blockchain is roughly one quarter as burdensome at the bitcoin blockchain, but gets corrupted considerably more easily. As it gets bigger, corruption becomes a bigger problem. The problem is that it does more random access rewrites, while bitcoin data structures are strictly sequential collections of files. It has reached the point where they need to restructure their data structures to make them less prone to corruption. It is big enough that bigness creates problems that Satoshi foresaw and addressed. Many of the seemingly arbitrary restrictions on bitcoin data structures reflect his concern for failure resistance.

              Because of the random access, you need to keep the Monero blockchain on an SSD, while bitcoin does fine on a spinning rust drive. The bitcoin blockchain is four times as big, but spinning rust drives are typically around four to eight times bigger.

              Big data structures fail from time to time, and the bigger they get the more they fail. Bitcoin’s data structures are less likely to fail than Monero’s, though chainstate, because of rewirtes, is apt to fail.

              • cub says:

                How is it that layer 2 improves BTC privacy, but reduces XMR privacy? Or is that not correct?

                • jim says:

                  The problem is that for lack of contracts on the blockchain, additional layers on Monero are not very capable or functional. You just cannot do lightning over Monero. If you could, you could connect Monero lightning to Bitcoin lightning, and have atomic exchanges.

                  A privacy currency that had lightning would be a better Monero than Monero, and a better Bitcoin than Bitcoin. If it provided better privacy than Monero, would eat Monero’s niche, which is privacy conscious people, and then eat Bitcoin.

              • cub says:

                And the usual methods of ensuring data integrity don’t work for the XMR blockchain because why? its size?

                It works by consensus anyway so it doesn’t seem like you’d need to check for data corruption all that often. One corrupt node won’t take down the whole system.

                • jim says:

                  > One corrupt node won’t take down the whole system

                  No, but it is inconvenient for the person running the node, and getting more inconvenient as the Monero blockchain gets bigger. It is not a huge problem yet, but it is a significant problem and slowly becoming a bigger problem.

                • Moe says:

                  if your code is corrupting your files, then you have to fix that shitty code.

                  if your hardware is corrupting your files, then you have to fix that shitty HW.

                  most people dont know that they need ecc ram and zfs before they can even begin to detect and fix silent HW data corruption. those are relatively low $cost on FreeBSD and Linux with any AMD and select Intel.

                  storage advances are unknown and NOT guaranteed.
                  bigblockers are nice, but they are selling a future their ass cannot guarantee.
                  laws of physics, and laws of parallel tech advances, apply.

                  thus you cannot gamble on future “blockchain” sizes.

                  you *must* either hard cap your data format and fixed length all your fields, and thus prohibit others from abusing and bloating your protocol.

                  and or you must design a protocol database state that does not depend upon and demand an ever expanding storage that you have no guarantee will exist on the market, or exist at both indexable and decentralized low cost.

                  a “perpetual coin” means that it must target all resource demands for at least 100 years of usage.
                  if you cannot guarantee that you wont come up short in one or more of those resources by then,
                  then your coin will fail. thus there is no point in doing your coin. and you need to go back to your drawing board.

                  perhaps only a few would claim at this time to know how to do that.
                  who out there is claiming that?

                  i only claim that you must do that analysis design if you expect your coins to win.

              • k4r4b3y says:

                Hey Jim. First off, thanks for whitelisting my email, and allowing my comments to be visible.

                I would like to comment on some of your points.

                >Monero has already reached the point where people are starting to think about pruning and lightweight client wallets. Once everyone starts pruning and running something like electrum wallets, the end is nigh.

                Where have you heard this “people are starting to think about pruning and lightweight client wallets” sentiment? On /r/Monero? On ? On monero’s IRC/Matrix channels? Because, I am active in most of these channels, and I don’t see such a widespread sentiment. Currently, monero’s tx size is only 4 times larger than simple btc transactions. Keep in mind that, if btc used coinjoin to get the transaction privacy that Monero supplies by default for everyone, then, btc’s tx size would be larger than that of Monero’s. See here: and here:

                Apart from that, scalability solutions such as pruning and running light wallets are okay to talk about, and are valid approaches to get people run monero nodes on reasonable spec’ed hardware. However, these are not the only scaling solutions that Monero developers look into, and the future might present us with much more novel ways to scale the blockchain without losing the full verifiability of the blockchain history.

                >Monero cannot do something like lightning.

                That’s not true. There have been at least three different academic approaches to having a lightning-like second layer on Monero. See this presentation from 2022:

                >The Monero blockchain is roughly one quarter as burdensome at the bitcoin blockchain, but gets corrupted considerably more easily.

                I am not sure what you are talking about here, but I run (and have run in the past) monero nodes on 1) laptop, 2) single board computer, and 3) android machines, and I haven’t came across such a “corruption” issue yet. I guess you have been running a Monero node yourself for a longer amount of time than I, so that the probability of “corruption” had caught up with you?

                >It is big enough that bigness creates problems that Satoshi foresaw and addressed.

                Satoshi also has addressed lack of bitcoin’s transaction privacy and has suggested the privacy-stack that Monero itself has adopted and uses today, which are: 1) stealth addresses 2) ring signatures 3) confidential transactions

                Also, Satoshi was a big-blocker, in that, he has suggested increasing the blocksize limit as the use of btc grew in time. Monero, does this on the algorithmic level by allowing its blocksize increase/decrease automatically—a technique of scaling which bitcoin cash, also, has recently adopted.


                At the end of the day, Bitcoin and Monero are tools of snatching power away from the centralized authorities of today (think, central banking, monetary-political industrial complex which threatens to ban banking to its political dissidents, etc.). To that end, by protecting every one of its users under the shroud of anonymity, Monero does a better job, and acts more caustic to the current power structures of “the Cathedral”. Think of the Canadian Truckers of yesteryears, in which they had tried to raise funds using Bitcoin, but, under its transparent chain, got busted by the authorities.

              • k4r4b3y says:

                Jim, one point I don’t understand with your arguments surrounding bitcoin (and cryptocurrencies, in general) is that, “Monero doesn’t scale,” and, “Lightning solves scaling.”

                These two points of yours have empirical problems for backing them.

                1) Monero scales through its adaptive blocksize limit. This is called “on-chain scaling.” You can make the argument that, “nobody is going to be able to afford 8 TB SSD hardware, thus, even though the protocol *can* scale, the lack of the number of people (“plebs”) that can afford such storage space will cause centralization on the chain-history authority.” But such a counter argument is lazy at best, imo. First of all, adaptive blocksize limit doesn’t mean that the next Monero block can have 100 MB, or 1 GB block sizes. That’s not true. The upper-ceiling limit of Monero blocks slowly increase to accommodate the confirmation-awaiting transactions AND the anxieties around the too fast growing blockchain. Secondly, the storage space keeps getting cheaper and faster to read/write. These two observations of mine give me a peace of mind about Monero’s scalability, much more than what I have on the same point with regards to Bitcoin’s.

                At the end of the day, increasing the block size is essentially how blockchains scale. Blockchains are immutable records of past history, and who would’ve guessed, these records grow larger with more use.

                2) Bitcoin’s lightning doesn’t solve its scaling issues. Especially when the network fees are high. We have seen reports of people unable to open channels on LN because the on-chain fees are too high. Or, we have seen reports of people’s channels getting force-closed by their counter-parties, due to the growing on-chain fees.

                Apart from the evidence that high on-chain fees rendering LN unusable, the bitcoin’s comical 1 MB blocksize limit (which, satoshi has originally intended to be increased with the usage btw), puts a break on how many people can be on-boarded unto LN over a given time frame. In fact, the current blocksize limit doesn’t allow billions of people to transact on LN, as there simply isn’t enough blocksize to accommodate such on-boarding channel-open transactions.

                Due to these two “facts on the ground” we have seen bitcoin twitter talking-heads herd the masses to the custodial LN solutions, in which the users do not own their channel liquidity, and do not have transaction privacy against their custodians.

                Now, please tell me, how is such a “scaling vision” abets and furthers the cause of individual freedom&sovereignty for us, and especially for the political dissidents? How is LN not another walled garden that waits for the status-quo (govt/bankers/big corpos) to swoop in and enslave its users?

                • jim says:

                  Lightning helps with scaling, because though channel openings and closings go on the blockchain, many many transactions do not.

                  Lightning has problems because putting transactions on the blockchain is expensive.

                  If a transaction has to be stored by a twenty thousand people forever, it is a problem. If it has to be stored by a billion people forever, it is a fifty thousand times larger problem. It costs money to store a transaction forever. It costs money to evaluate it for correctness twenty thousand times.

                  This is ultimately going to be reflected in transaction fees and/or currency debasement one way or another way.

                  There are currently about twenty thousand bitcoin nodes. At scale, if we do everything the way we are doing it now, there will would be about a billion nodes – and the transaction fees would be around fifty thousand times higher,one way or another way. When lightning was first envisaged, before it was introduced, someone predicted that by and by channel opening closing would eventually cost comparable to leasing an oil tanker, and everyone nodded their heads. We foresaw and discussed the current problems before lightning was rolled out.

                  And the same thing, more or less, would happen to Monero, except that with Monero, because transactions occupy far more space, and evaluating them far more processing power, it would be many times worse. Everything is on the course that was expected from the beginning.

                  We need a crypto currency that can work with a billion nodes, equal and centerless, several billion lightweight wallets, and tens of billions of accounts. That has been the holy grail from the beginning.

                  We foresaw what is happening now from the beginning, and have been discussing ways to fix it, and ways to postpone the problems until we could find a way to fix it, from the beginning, and lightning is one such method for postponement. Lots of very very smart people have been thinking very hard about this for a very long time. You write as if we were just negligent and careless. Not so. It is hard.

              • DSKlausler says:

                Sorry, the “Reply” link is only available at certain comments – to me anyway..

                Would the GAE EVER allow your described private scalable real coin?

                Seriously, I don’t know… What happens to BitCoin and Monero and the others when this perfect coin is “released”?

                • jim says:

                  China banned Bitcoin umpteen times. Russia banned Bitcoin. Had little effect. If the GAE bans a privacy currency, will have little effect.

                • DSKlausler says:

                  Again, no “reply” available below your post.

                  If your coin is and does as you hope, it would be obvious in short order to those that it matters to, yes? Would they not dump BitCoin and get onboard with the real intended purpose of ditching fiat?

                  How does this work, initially, a baseline, something like 1 JimCoin = 1 gallon of pure water? How is that decided?

                • DSKlausler says:


                • DSKlausler says:

                  “So if we get a niche, get differentiation from Monero and Bitcoin, we can then break out of that niche and eat Monero, being a better privacy coin, a better Monero, and from the Monero niche eat Bitcoin, being, unlike Monero, a better Bitcoin.”

                  Even if this does not come to be, in your estimation, my Hedera will eventually be worthless. Bale out and recover what remains? Wait for the truly private scalable system?

                • jim says:

                  Having been wrong so many times, I am out of the business of making altcoin predictions.

                  However I long ago concluded that Hedera could not work and does not work.

                  At some time in the near future, I will be issuing a post on Nakomoto consensus, parallelling my post on scalability, in which I will briefly reference that issue.

                  Hedera consensus is, more or less, Paxos, and Paxos does not scale to an environment where you have lots of peers that randomly and unpredictably show up and drop out. In Hedera consensus, everyone has to know and agree on how many peers there are.

                  Hedera consensus requires that every peer gets through eventually, which is not going to happen in an environment with lots of peers and an internet that is always going to be erratic for some peers.

                • alf says:

                  your prediction on bitcoin has so far been on the money. Rare moment where I miss starman, if only to rub salt in his wounds.

                • jim says:

                  Yes, I called the dip precisely, at twenty thousand on the way down, and just when it was heading to sixteen thousand on the way down, and immediately started on its current rise.

                  As for calling the next peak — it has a long way to go before a another peak is possible. When the next peak comes, not calling it, because not interested. I am a hodler. So are the overwhelming majority of bit coin holders. The pattern of peaks and lows is a result of mining driving the price down, but with every halving, the impact of miners diminishes, so in future, we should see fewer dramatic fluctuations.

                  From here on, with stability improving, monetary usage will become the primary driver, and the seven transactions per second limit, already a huge problem, will rapidly become a huger problem. The conversion to taproot has barely begun. Taproot has been out for two years, but core lightning only now supports it, and lnd promises to support it soon.

                  It hugely improves bitcoin’s contract capability, because it bring scriptless scripts to bitcoin, which is irrelevant to the average user, but makes a huge difference to dexs, which is where users use contracts without knowing that they are using contracts. I am unaware of any dex using taproot yet, which is oddly slow. There is a great deal of money in it. It has taken a strangely long time to put taproot capabilities to use.

                  Taproot should make possible a lot of layer two solutions to the seven transaction per second limit. But so far, has not. I was expecting that by now everyone, his brother, and his brother’s dog would have atomic exchanges running on the lightning network — it is an obvious and immensely lucrative application. Liquid layer has big money backing, and yet their lightning integrations still suck.

            • CEX DEX Scale Privacy says:

              Dynamic block size as a thing per-se, is unrelated to the ultimate scalability of a coin.

              Proof is that everyone is using DBS now, and their coins are all still failing to scale.

              All DBS or auto-BS does is keep humans from having to change a define in the code in response to network and usage conditions.

              BTC had no meaningful blocksize limit and no minimum fee, it was serving its niche well.
              Then 10M people tried to adopt it and found out that it cannot scale to service their needs as currency, and cannot even get 200M people settled into and out of it once a year as a Money/Sov.
              Oops, failboat design.

              The “block size” meme came from the failure of Bitcoin to deploy defined fix-length formats for all data fields that users had access to, therefore its users figured out how to shovel their garbage “use cases” onto the chain, bloating it out. If you want to give users options, give them a fixed length to do it in so they don’t spam and wreck your coin into the dustbin of history. And if you cannot scale as a strict network only for moving nominal decimal values around, then you have absolutely NO business trying to build other features into your coin either.

              It also came from the nonsense idea of a “fee market” being necessary to a coins survival. No one has ever proven that mutual shared interest in preserving the nominal values of their own wealth is not a sufficient motivation factor to running nodes. Of course fees do grease the slides, but only for miners interests, not for users interests directly. In fact, Bittorrent and many other networks, including Tor, proved that people were willing to go to great expense and risk to support a network service of value directly to their own interests.

              Blocksize applies only to coins that depend upon “block” “chains”, and ultimately has nothing to do with scale.

              In another post I’ve given the single most important question that you must ask to any given coin about its supposed ability to scale.

              Crypto optimists must speak harsh truths 🙂



    • jim says:

      It is not a thought crime to mention these very bad things. It is a thought crime to explain why they are very bad. Commit the relevant thought crimes, and your comment goes through.

  13. Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

    They dragged Jonathan Leibowitz out of retirement to do the daily show with a message of, “it’s not the end of the world no matter who wins an election”.

    More indications of a thermidor seeding the ground for a Trump second term.

    • jim says:

      The Daily show is the voice of authority.

      Thermidor wants Trump, and will likely be on side with him purging the radicals — albeit his idea of radicals is likely different from theirs, and my idea of radicals is different from Trump’s

      Thermidor is horrified by America’s economic incapacity, which has been revealed in recent events. America is a third world country that thinks itself the purest definition of first world. It has been lying to itself about economic and technological decline for a very long time. They want to remedy this, but any remedy is unimaginably reactionary, and I don’t think they can imagine them, and I doubt that even Trump, a 1980s leftist, can imagine them.

  14. Ryan says:

    Alexei Navalny – poison or clot shot?

    • S says:

      Probably the latter. The closest Russian political parties to ‘western liberal’ are 5th and 6th in the State Duma so there is little support for Navalny.

    • notglowing says:

      I don’t particularly care that he’s dead, but it’s silly to pretend Putin isn’t to blame one way or another. I find it hard to believe he died randomly, I believe Putin would be completely willing to do something like this, and given he died in Russia’s custody I think the Russian government is ultimately responsible on some level.

      • jim says:

        Recall that he and his foreign intelligence agency handlers were videotaped plotting color revolution. Why would Putin want to kill him? He useful as an emblem liking opposition to hostile foreign actions against Russia.

        If anyone killed him, it would be the CIA or the Five Eyes for knowing too much about color revolution.

      • A2 says:

        No obvious advantage for Putin to have Navalny killed, as far as I can tell.

    • Mister Grumpus says:

      A clot shot of Sputnik 5?

      It doesn’t add up any way. Putin is an evil super genius but kills off the “good guy” right after Tucker comes to talk to him?

      Why not keep Navalny in fenced relative luxury — the Snowden treatment — so that this wouldn’t happen?

      Or rather, maybe prophylactically ice the guy to dissuade the desperate from trying a Moscow Maidan Spring 2024? But why now?

      I agree, the story that makes the most sense is the CIA sneaking in and killing him for the headline, but… come on how? Just drone him over the fence? (The story is that he was walking outside and dropped dead.) Shit maybe, because to tell that story officially would make Russia look porous and vulnerable. Diem would say hi, and a heck of a message to the Zelenskites.

      I got the worms man.

      • jim says:

        Going for a walk when your continued existence is permanent hazard to the five eyes is not good for your health. The five eyes have a habit of getting rid of their tools when those tools cease to be useful. Putin also has a habit of getting rid of people that pose a threat, but because Navalny has been exposed, no longer a threat to Putin.

        Putin had opportunity, and bumping off problem people is his known MO, but his motive is weak, and if he had a motive, why now, when Navalny is less of a threat than ever — everyone in Russia hates him, because in bed with Russia’s enemies. The five eyes had motive, and the same known MO, they notoriously do not like leaving loose ends lying around, but considerably less opportunity.

        Navalny was an enemy of Putin, which is well known to be bad for your life expectancy. But he was also in bed with the five eyes, which is also well known to be bad for your life expectancy.

        • Mayflower Sperg says:

          Anglin says that Navalny was hospitalized in Germany a couple of years ago when mRNA vaxes were mandatory for patients and healthcare workers. Going for a walk in the Siberian winter when your blood vessels are full of calamari is never a good idea.

        • simplyconnected says:

          Just came across this:

          According to Rossiya 1 TV [Russia-1 is a state-owned Russian television channel], there are the results of Alexei Navalny’s autopsy. The reason for the 47-year-old’s death was a blood clot in his heart. Doctors suspect that it was formed as a result of vaccination against coronavirus with Phizer vaccine. Navalny had been vaccinated four times.

          Calamari strikes again.

  15. Andrew Anglin says:


    Speaking of crypto, send Anglin money,
    if for nothing else, because his headlines and meme art
    are worth it.

  16. Severian says:

    Looks like it’ll soon be over in Avdvikaa, curious to what the Russians can once they’re past the town.

    • jim says:

      Russian progress, measured in kilometers, has been absolutely insignificant. By this measure, our elite can keep on believing it is a frozen conflict.

      Russian progress, as measured by capturing or surrounding fortifications that the Ukrainians have been building over the last nine years, is major. Russian progress as measured by attritting the Ukrainian army is reaching critical levels at which runaway Ukrainian collapse becomes possible.

      A runaway collapse could start tomorrow, and is likely to happen before the American presidential election.

      Avdiivka was the strongest fortification on the planet. But the city itself is not fortified, rather is surrounded by fortifications to the north, the east the south east, and the south. The Russian attack on the eastern fortifications did not resemble World War I trench warfare. It resembled seventeenth century warfare against fortified cities. Having got through the south eastern and northern fortifications, at enormous and terrible cost, they were then able to take the rear of the southern fortification, cutting it off. The eastern and southern fortifications still stand, but are increasingly isolated, surrounded, and irrelevant, for the important battles are taking place in the city itself. Not that taking an urban area is easy, but it is similar to Backhmut, while getting through the Avdiika fortifications hard indeed.

      As the Ukrainian army becomes increasingly demoralized, Russians are developing a new form of offensive. While you are pounding the hell out of front line troops in the trenches, you sneak your forces a kilometer or two past them and seize their rear.

      As I said earlier, modern warfare increasingly resembles the actions of spies, infiltrators, saboteurs, and flash mobs. Recent Russian advances of a kilometer or two in one leap look like the use of flash mobs.

      • Aidan says:

        “While you are pounding the hell out of front line troops in the trenches, you sneak your forces a kilometer or two past them and seize their rear.”

        That is the way WWI was fought in the East, where distances were too vast to cover the entire front with deep defensive fortifications. Suppress with artillery, then maneuver around through sparse points in enemy defenses at great and terrible cost to attack. On the western front, there was no “around”

      • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

        The KOG’s occasional much balleyhooed ‘deep strikes’ on things like parked bombers and oil refineries are usually implied to be the result of some wunderwaffe or another. A KOG major getting himself captured in the vicinity of such a target after it was hit has shown that the real wonder weapon is rangers literally taking a thousand click hike through the woods to deliver a package, before hiking back.

        All the ‘old lessons’ that have been discussed before are once again being relearned.

        • jim says:

          We have always used entryism, rangers, infiltration, and long hikes through the woods.

          Strong positions are still strong, and taking them has been very costly for the Russians. But they are not nearly as strong as they used to be and are rapidly getting weaker. It used to be that you could take shelter behind the crest of a hill, behind a rock, behind the ruins of a building, and pick off enemies attempting to move. This shut down movement.

          But when the Azov brigade entered Avdiivka, and found themselves fighting Russians rather than mutineers, deserters, or retreaters, they were horrified to discover that these days, explosives can come flying at you from any direction. This makes it much harder to shut down enemy movement. Also much harder to shut down mutiny, mass desertion, or retreat.

          And yet we still have the World War I situation, of clear front lines that are very immobile and terribly costly to change. The world war II method of getting past enemy emplacements, a thundering herd of tanks, no longer works. Men with hand carried anti tank weapons can take them out, and the ground is mined. Mines were always important, and are becoming more important.

          The Russians are trying to figure out how to restore war of movement. In the collapse of Avdiivka, front lines seem to have disappeared. The Russians have been making large advances over open ground — well, large by the standards of the World War I style warfare we have been seeing. Still very small, compared to the big arrow offensives of World War II, and of the big arrow offensives of the early days of the Ukraine special operation.

          Instead of a thundering herd of tanks, we see half a dozen soldiers going for a long walk. The Russians have a thundering herd of tanks marshalled for a big arrow offensive to encircle more turf beyond Avdiivka — this is likely to be normality bias, failure to learn. Their big gains (well big, by the standards of the World War I trench warfare we have been seeing, still tiny by the standards of World War I thundering herd of tanks big arrow offensives) have been little groups of half a dozen soldiers going for long walks.

          What we have been seeing is tanks used as taxis. A tank drives to some location, unloads some soldiers, and then drives back. Where we have seen tank on tank battles, it has been single combat between lone tanks. Russians are expected to launch a World War II style big arrow offensive beyond Avdiivka, but maybe they are just planning a whole lot of taxi driving.

          • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

            Whereas most firecontrol solutions involve distributing the ‘shots’ across space, a landmine solves the firecontrol problem by distributing its ‘shot’ across time.

            Depending on one’s perspective, garrison troops and other more autonomous platforms can also be construed as forms of mining; but such very often require continued servicing as well.

            A garrison needs enemies to present themselves in order to pay dividends, but is otherwise a ‘non-compounding asset’. Mining and earthworking, on the other hand, are compounding assets, especially whenever and wherever the enemy is not a around.

            One of the main things Russia has been doing, besides increased use of mass remote controlled munitions and glider bombs, is exploiting advantages in ‘internal movement’, where they create local overmatches for one engagement, then move on to another sector of the front for another. Even in environments of total battlefield transparency, if the counter-parties do not have similar capability, the calculus will always be against them at any given point.

            In general, the most effective techniques for dealing with reconnaissance-strike is counter-reconnaissance; tracking signals, and sending kill-teams to find and direct fires on their fire-control teams.

          • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

            Whereas most firecontrol solutions involve distributing the ‘shots’ across space, a landmine solves the firecontrol problem by distributing its ‘shot’ across time.

            Depending on one’s perspective, garrison troops and other more autonomous platforms can also be construed as forms of mining; but such very often require continued servicing as well.

            A garrison needs enemies to present themselves in order to pay dividends, but is otherwise a ‘non-compounding asset’. Mining and earthworking, on the other hand, are compounding assets, especially whenever and wherever the enemy is not a around.

            One of the main things Russia has been doing, besides increased use of mass remote controlled munitions and glider bombs, is exploiting advantages in ‘internal movement’, where they create local overmatches for one engagement, then move on to another sector of the front for another. Even in environments of total battlefield transparency, if the counter-parties do not have similar capability, the calculus will always be against them at any given point.

            In general, the most effective techniques for dealing with reconnaissance-strike is counter-reconnaissance; tracking signals, and sending kill-teams to find and direct fires on their fire-control teams.

          • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

            (one of these can be dusted)

  17. Sher Singh says:

    2016-05-17 Why Homosexuals Are A Signalling Hazard In Traditional Societies – Social Matter

    Just realized something – all the places he mentioned are in the Sotadic zone where boy fucking is common.

    What is he even talking about?

    Is it along the lines of 19th C CE – the Pashtun is masculine/open about his desire and rape little boys unlike our shy, effeminate dandys back in England.

    The Signalling Caliph: Neoreaction, Iraq, And The Islamic State

    What’s the consensus on IS?

    Weird how I missed that article in the past.


    Women’s liberation is women’s prostitution.

    He goes on at length about how the modern American progressive woman’s discourse began among prostitutes in the wild west.

    The idea never really clicked with me though.

    Liberation means subservience to progressive approved identities

    Looking back on that article were see that GAE toned down this side of it somewhat and just went for unlimited identity war over every identity becomes gay.

    I guess birthrates dropped enough that they didn’t care?

  18. Sher Singh says:

    Main thoughts on farmer protest:

    India should come out with a news dairy policy with focus on taking over export market for cottage cheese and whey protein.

    Then push that massively to counter over reliance on paddy.

    Milk could become the new oil.

    GAE hatred of milk would also provide a sustainable way to wean India off western culture, gradually.


  19. Sher Singh says:

    [*Off topic, and most readers do not care. This is not an India general news blog*]

  20. simplyconnected says:

    Just a random thought: I realized “long covid” isn’t just how the authorities gaslight the vaxxed, but also how the vaxxed can ask for help (and sympathy) without being thrown under the bus, as they would be if they called their health problems “vax injury”. The vaxxed may or may not be conscious of this.

  21. A2 says:

    Speaking of India, I see that Indian businessmen are mad about getting robbed of their expensive watches in Mayfair (elite part of London). “It doesn’t happen in Delhi!”

    • jim says:

      Despite the many unkind remarks about Indian street shitters, there is plenty of shit on the streets of San Francisco, The west is looking like the third world, and large parts of the former third world are looking like the twenty first century.

      Everyone has been assuming that this appearance, what you see from the air when arriving at the airport, what you see walking through the airport, what you see driving to the city, is deceptive. That American GDP is still the biggest in the world.

      Well Moscow looks like a shiny twenty first century city – not as shiny as Singapore, but it is nice. Way nicer than any American city. And what do you know. It turns out the capacity to make rockets, drones, shells, artillery barrels, and all that seems to have fairly good correlation with what you see casually looking around when coming in through the airport. And crime in the streets turns out to correlate very well with corruption in high places. You can usually judge a book by its cover.

      • Karl says:

        And crime in the streets turns out to correlate very well with corruption in high places.

        For me that is somewhat surprising. Crime in the streets has been rising significantly in the part of Germany where I live, but I don’t suspect people in charge to be more corrupt than 10 or even 20 years ago.

        The people in high places decided to import millions of people from africa and these imports are now commiting crimes. I’d prefer it if the people in high places were simply looting public coffers.

        Maybe street crime correlates well with spiritual corruption of people in high places, but as far as I can see it doesn’t correlate all that well with worldly corruption.

        • jim says:

          > but I don’t suspect people in charge to be more corrupt than 10 or even 20 years ago.

          You are there and I am not, but I have noticed in America a huge amount of normality bias about the corruption level. People in America have been extraordinarily slow to update their expectations of corruption. Trump has been banging that drum from 2016, but it seemed to go in one ear and out the other.

          • Karl says:

            I didn’t want to indicate that the people in charge in Germany are not corrupt. My point was merely that they are not (much) more corrupt than 10 years ago (unless we are talking about spiritual corruption or demon worship), although street crime got much worse.

            • Dharmicreality says:

              Spiritual corruption is the only corruption that matters. The “regular” corruption is a symptom of an obese, dysfunctional bureaucracy that is created by a socialist government and made worse if the state religion is demonic. For instance all the environmental restrictions imposed by paper pushing Gaia worshippers. And travel restrictions imposed by the covid demon cult.

              In fact the bureaucrats who take bribes to get stuff done are the ones who are actually useful in the system. However the holier the left becomes, such unprincipled exceptions become more expensive and dangerous.

            • jim says:

              > My point was merely that they are not (much) more corrupt than 10 years ago

              Maybe. Do you actually know that?

        • Jack Vien says:

          I’d say that, while elite corruption has inflated astronomically, and is organically correlated with the rise in street crime and public disorder, there probably isn’t a direct causal link between the two. It’s not as though street crime is rising because elites are cutting criminal justice system budgets in order to put the money in their own pockets, because prosecutors are taking bribes from the heads of organized crime, or because open-door immigration benefits immigration lawyers; and in any case they could create just as many opportunities to enrich themselves by keeping the streets clean and safe and borders properly policed. The disorder is rising, not because elites are more corrupt than before (although they certainly are), but because they have become evil, insane, and strangely feminine in their petty hatreds and spitefulness; the disorder is a form of State terrorism by proxy against the White middle class the elites loathe so much (anarcho-tyranny).

          • jim says:

            The cities are getting shabbier because we are poorer and unable to build stuff, and the USG Government is losing in the Ukraine because we are poorer and unable to build stuff. One does not cause the other, but they have a common cause.

            And, similarly, state corruption and street crime have a common cause. They allow pet minorities to get away with stuff, and they allow themselves to get away with stuff.

            • Contaminated NEET says:

              More and more, the “pet minorities” are the ones in power. Maybe they’re not yet the ones jetting to Davos and sodomizing each other in Bohemian Grove, but they are the bureaucrats, the judges, the law-enforcers, and in higher and higher positions. And the pet minorities have very different ideas about corruption. I recall a conversation with an “American” tax auditor of Somali descent about how unfair it was that he should assess hundreds of thousands of dollars of tax while making a mere bureaucrat’s salary.

              • jim says:

                They are loading the bureaucracy with pet minorities, because they don’t trust white people. And they are indulging their corruption, just as they are indulging street criminals.

              • Cloudswrest says:

                I recall a conversation with an “American” tax auditor of Somali descent about how unfair it was that he should assess hundreds of thousands of dollars of tax while making a mere bureaucrat’s salary.

                This just gives me the chills knowing these people are being put in positions of power.

        • Mayflower Sperg says:

          The problem is obvious: Western cities still don’t have enough diversity, because if they did, the Democrats who live there would be screaming at Joe Biden to “close the f**king border!!1!”

          The solution to the nigger problem is to admit the truth: Black people are better than white people in every way. Wakanda is real, and all that nonsense about Africa being a corrupt, violent, impoverished shithole is just white-supremacist propaganda.

          It sounds silly, but there is historical precedent: In the 1950s Japan admitted that Kim Il Sung had in fact created a workers’ paradise in North Korea. With government assistance, 94,000 ethnic Koreans voluntarily emigrated to the DPRK and almost none returned, so happy were they to have escaped the racist, capitalist, imperialist Japanese!

  22. Your Uncle Bob says:

    Off topic, anecdotal, small sample size, trivial topic, but…

    The Super Bowl hasn’t been the universal topic of conversation I’ve come to expect it to be. I know people still watched it, but there wasn’t the usual confident assumption that everyone else watched it. But no one’s denounced it, or acted embarrassed or defensive, just gone quiet about it. In comparison to previous years anyway – the holdout vocal fans were more among my affluent boomer acquaintances, nominally conservative but of the “I’m not racist” camp. The strangely quiet sector leans more to grugs and younger men.

    Again, small sample size. And very possibly some selection effect in some of my friends, although I’m more or less gray man about politics in my public persona.

    If it’s not just my small circle, I wonder if I can take it as a crack in the wall of normal time thinking. Nigger fatigue + jew fatigue + overseas war fatigue + real economic concern, all leading to normies no longer worshiping on one of our high holy days with the same old fervor.

    • jim says:

      You are still white listed. I don’t understand why some white listed people sometimes hit moderation.

    • jim says:

      Seeing a whole lot of indicators of such fatigue. Normies just are not buying the official narrative any more. Normies are alt right adjacent.

      Retelling a story: at a party, older middle aged people, family men, mostly highly paid high skilled “working class” jobs which pull down a whole lot more pay than most college graduate jobs these days, someone starts complaining about gays at the swimming hole. I say what you would expect me to say: I recommend the biblical solution to gays – everyone concurs, or enough people concur that no one feels like expressing the official position on the biblical solution.

      Tucker is saying what normies are thinking.

    • Jamesthe1st says:

      On a similar note, they had the parade in KC MO and it was interrupted by a nigger shootout. You could tell because the media wasn’t showing who the suspected shooter that was arrested was.

    • awildgoose says:


      I just wanted to confirm that your experience of the next day Super Bowl atmosphere was not unique.

      In my workplace, there was zero discussion of the Super Bowl. Nothing about the close-scoring game, nothing about the ads, nothing about the MVP, not even a peep about the happy (fake) couple.

      My sample population was a couple dozen people, with all generations from Zoomers to Boomers included.

      I agree with your conclusion that this is a sign of a shift in normie thinking, though they are unable to verbalize that shift yet.

      • jim says:

        Normies need someone else to verbalise it. If they could verbalise it themselves, not normies.

        America is reaching the edge of a preference cascade.

        Meanwhile, in the Ukraine, the collapse of the Ukrainian army may well have started today, as the Azov brigade, the retreat blockers, the mutineer slaughterers, mutinied and retreated. Who will stop mutinies now?

        How long surrounded forces in the remaining fortifications on the east and south of Avdiivka hold out will be a tell. The strong places in Mariupol held out while surrounded for a very long time. We shall see how long the strong places around Avdiivka hold. If they fold fairly quickly, we may conclude that the Ukraine is flat out of true believers, and the last substantial armed force of true believers folded today.

    • Anoymous says:

      Another angle—why would all the mexicans and dot indians in America care about this fixture of American culture?

  23. Aryaman says:

    I didn’t know BTC was specifically illegal in India. India cares about rich people leaving the country with too much money (but less than they used to), so the trouble is the man who comes to India with BTC to sell is left with Rupees that are not very easy to leave with. That is where expats come in, having uses for Rupees they receive. You would expect this to result in a slightly but not terribly unfavorable domestic exchange rate, which is what appears to be the case on KYC exchanges and p2p swap services (where a crypto dollar costs about 10 percent more than a fiat dollar, except that you cannot buy fiat dollars with your rupees if you are a rich man).

    And I wouldn’t trust the KYC exchanges much but once you move it to your own wallet I wouldn’t expect there’s much they can do to you. If your interest is anonymous online consumption my guess you are okay. If you are trying to evade capital controls at scale then I don’t really know.

    But really I assume most people in India with enough money to care know someone outside of India who would be happy to sell to them, and I assume stuff like this is happening all over the place.

    • Moe says:

      not believing that, in a country of 1B+ people, that you can’t find 100+ enthusiast meetup groups, software meetups, and 10000+ people to trade privately in person with.

      and there are few places where it’s literally illegal for such not-for-business personal-use-only in-person private trade and holding.

      and fewer places where there’s a physical border wall that you can’t get out, except soon the USA will build one to trap its people and money inside. so do not go to the usa.

      if you cant ship fiat or gold out, you can ship goods or business out, and can embed gold and fiat in those too.

      • jim says:

        Moving gold around requires trust and order, and moving value between monero and some other form of value requires trust and order. These are in short supply and rapidly getting shorter. We have to have a privacy currency that enables atomic exchanges between blockchains. Social solutions are not going to fix it.

        Long ago, the cypherpunks tried e-gold. Did not work. Bitcoin was a response to this failure. We have already trodden the paths you suggest we walk. You need to learn some history.

        • Moe says:

          e-gold and all that was known, and failed after getting lawfared.

          the dot-india stated a get “anything” into crypto problem.

          i said he can find ways to do that “into” via both
          – in his country, via meetups
          – outside, via shipping shit that has value, or stashing value in other shit and shipping that, or masquerading value in business companies

          and you mentioned
          – outside, via govt-bank money transfer systems (cards) between expats

          few worry about how to get money into crypto, that’s an old world problem.
          cryptocurrency doesnt solve for that. thats up to the users to figure out.

          the digital world problem is how to get both…
          – a good crypto money
          – it adopted, in less than a lifetime

          on privacy… privacy-only coins are nice.

          there are different types…

          external-privacy privacy-capable (ie: bitcoin_cash bch, ecash xec) (ie: CEX, DEX, swaps, mix, atomics, coinjoin, cashfusion, etc), these coins obviously need to have the necessary functions and apis to support those integrations.

          privacy-off-by-default (ie: zcash),

          privacy-on-by-default (ie: monero xmr, piratechain arrr),

          now strategy…

          getting an external-privacy privacy-capable coin developed and out there would evade regulators bullshit. it works as a privacy trojan horse. and if they were designed modularly, an internal-privacy mode could be added to them later after mass adoption (ie: after 1000x btc’s current adoption level) when its time to cinch the deal.

          privacy-off-by-default zec is currently listed on many more places than monero, so that’s still working as a trojan horse too. but its facing warfare and is still trying to reach the point of being a capable coin.

          privacy-on-by-default coins seem to be going to have a hard time getting both
          – past lawfare against them
          – adopted at any usable level of mass for goods and services, due to that

          so given available strategies above, it’s probably not 100% heresy to do an
          external-privacy privacy-capable privacy-trojan-horse coin as the next gen coin.
          and making it modular towards becoming off-by-default and on-by-default modes.

          as to the default privacy modes, the network doesnt necessarily have to run them,
          thus directly exposing itself to lawfare bullshit,
          but it could just ‘carry’ the privacy-data-tx that the user’s client side plugin modules send.

          consider pgp and bernstein were ruled not munitions.
          and both those plus code were ruled free speech.
          presumably networks of crypto and code (tor, coins)
          might be too, but its not been ruled yet.
          and the author of tornadocash code is still in jail awaiting trial soon.
          so devs need to be anon, or brutally public as a good option too.

          bitcoin doesnt seem capable of usable privacy, in part because imo btc isn’t usable.

          a next gen coin will be both usable and a privacy win.

  24. Anon says:

    If it’s not too much trouble and cause you risk.
    do you know of a reliable webhosting with bitcoin?

    • jim says:


      I have leased many hosts, from many different hosting providers, and purchased many domain names, with bitcoin. But I don’t want to provide that information to anyone. has a list of bitcoin friendly hosting providers, most of which sell domain names and dns services also.

      The Russian sites should work OK if you create an account through a coffee shop internet, rather than a vpn. For some reason, all Russian sites are averse to payments and account creation coming from a vpn or another hosted site. Possibly they have a geographic blacklist and are averse to people trying to get around it.

  25. dharmicreality says:

    The Indian Government are kind of in two minds about Bitcoin and crypto. On the one hand, they see the huge technological and business benefits of crypto and on the other hand, they want to have centralized control over it to squeeze more taxes and control it like fiat, which is the exact opposite of what crypto is about.

    I’m not technical enough about crypto to comment on this, but I am guessing that, most likely the authorities will ignore or remain blissfully unaware of the smaller crypto transactions. They will be more than happy to collect tax for crypto transactions and continue to ignore it generally. They are more worried about the terror funding aspects than anything.

    The war on cash has generally failed though and they have quietly buried it. Though of course, they succeeded in driving more people to use UPI (India’s unified payment gateway). I don’t see the Modi government repeating its earlier demonetization exercise.

    • someDude says:

      They’ve succeeded. All the business owners near my place prefer to be paid digitally via UPI. No one has any change at all.

      • Dharmicreality says:

        Not denying that UPI has become very popular and even street vendors have a QR code to scan. But cash still thrives everywhere. Very few refuse cash. And even more so outside the cities cash is still going strong.

        I don’t see the same initial enthusiasm for digital payments now. For Indians old habits die hard. I think the Modi government has realized that.

        • someDude says:

          They don’t refuse cash if you tender the exact amount. They also wont refuse cash if they get to keep the change. But how many customers have exact change and how many would be okay to let the merchant keep the change. So UPI wins

          • Dharmicreality says:

            I have the opposite experience. Small traders seem to prefer cash and discourage UPI or card payments by keeping a limit below which they will not accept digital payments.

  26. Cloudswrest says:

    Doesn’t India have a Hawala network?

    • someDude says:

      They help with escaping excessive fees in international money transfers for the majority of the population that uses it. They also help some actors transfer large sums of money without coming under the gaze of the state.

      I greatly doubt they help with Bitcoin.

      • jim says:

        I checked the Hawala network a very long time ago. No bitcoin connection. I don’t know if that is still the case. Obviously bitcoin capability would be very useful — also would be competition.

        • someDude says:

          How can they convince a technically adept person to work for them and not for a respectable multinational company? In India, that would be difficult. Maybe not so difficult in a place like Russia.

  27. Sher Singh says:


    Or just ask your local Baniya for all the tricks.

    Decent thread on how subsidies are almost an inherent part of agriculture.
    Three Types of Miracles [thread]

    When Guru Gobind Singh arrived in Agra, he was aggressively questioned by a strict Muslim Sayyid if he possessed any abilities to perform miracles – to which the Guru playfully described 3 types of miracles…

    Will be staying out of future conversations.


    • FrankNorman says:

      Oh come on, tell us what his 3 types of miracles were. The link you posted doesn’t.

      • Sher Singh says:

        [The Political]

        The Guru replied that miracles exist on the tongue of the Emperor, who can make a poor man into a great leader and who can command thousands of people by their word. The Sayyid wasn’t happy with this answer and asked again, “Ok, but I asked about you…”

        [The Financial]

        The Guru then put his hand in his pocket and took out several gold coins, “Look, this is the second type of miracle”, and explained how people with wealth can do what they want. The Sayyid now really frustrated asked again for the third time, “what about you?!”

        [The Martial]

        At this point Guru Gobind Singh quickly unsheathed his sword which was glistening brightly – the Sayyid got scared and lowered his head. The Guru then said, “This too is a miracle, should I show you how it works and take off your head?”×360

        Guru Gobind Singh wrote, “Godly people detest those performing false miracles and tricks.” (Sri Guru Dasam Granth Sahib, Ang 54)


      • someDude says:

        You may think you are trolling him, but he and his handlers might well take this as engagement. Being a shill, he is impervious to humor, reason, sense, truth, beauty, goodness and a whole litany of qualities that permit good men to cooperate with one another.

Leave a Reply