beautyon / Beautyon is on Nostr

"018568c8a4e544b8b17cbc2fda1172a2869463443050f22883f751078c4eba77bf2c46688853ce53cfff2a3c569d9f3eb8fd61e8dfb91b445fc640f0bf0e5695"

Last Notes

2025-09-29 10:12:56 UTC

- reply

Twitter users block others for various reasons, based on their personal experiences, preferences, or interactions on the platform. Here’s a breakdown of common reasons, grounded in user behavior and insights from available data:
1 Harassment or Abuse: Users often block accounts that send harassing, threatening, or abusive messages. This includes personal attacks, trolling, or hate speech targeting their identity, beliefs, or appearance.
2 Spam or Bots: Accounts that flood timelines with spam, repetitive ads, or automated bot-like behavior (e.g., mass-following or posting irrelevant links) are frequently blocked to declutter feeds.
3 Unwanted Interactions: Some users block others for unwanted replies, mentions, or DMs, especially if they feel the interaction is intrusive, argumentative, or off-topic.
4 Differing Opinions: In polarized discussions, users may block those with opposing views to avoid heated debates or to curate a more agreeable timeline, especially during controversial events.
5 Privacy and Safety: Blocking is used to protect personal information or limit visibility from strangers, ex-partners, or accounts that seem suspicious or overly curious.
6 Content Overload: Users might block accounts posting excessive or irrelevant content, like constant self-promotion or low-quality posts, to keep their feed manageable.
7 Past Conflicts: Personal grudges or negative past interactions, even offline, can lead to blocking to prevent further contact or to maintain emotional distance.
8 Mass Blocking: Some users employ tools or lists to block accounts en masse, often based on shared followers of controversial figures or specific keywords, to preemptively avoid unwanted engagement.
From posts on X, users often mention blocking for “peace of mind,” to escape “toxic” interactions, or to stop seeing content they find annoying or irrelevant. For example, a user might block someone for repeatedly quote-tweeting them with snarky comments or for flooding their mentions with unsolicited advice. Data from web sources, like Reddit discussions, suggests blocking is also a way to enforce boundaries, especially for public figures or those with large followings who face constant scrutiny.
If you have a specific scenario or user in mind, I can analyze their X profile or posts for more context on why they might block others. Let me know!

2025-08-25 07:14:30 UTC

- reply

This is the “hoodie anon, hideaway culture”. People should not have to hide their identities in order to swipe software.
Human collaboration in person and in the open should not suffer because the State doesn’t like the code you write.
Having your name associated with the tools you write is not about “recognition” it’s about free association in a free country.

2025-08-24 21:25:59 UTC

- reply

You are conflating terms and misusing English. You even do it in the question itself when you say “possession of the seed phrase”.
You can understand that if you steal a car, you don’t own that car; similarly knowing a secret doesn’t mean you own it.
The problem here is that if you start using the correct language, and accurately, your whole mental framework that’s been handed to you to contextualise bitcoin is destroyed.
No Bitcoin user owns UTXOs. UTXOs are database entries that your private key can be used on to make a signature using someone else’s public key. All UTXO’s are copied in tens of thousands of places; by no stretch of the imagination does anyone own them.
This is like saying because you have a copy of “The Godfather” on your hard drive that you own the copy. You have a copy, you don’t own the film. It’s exactly the same with Bitcoin. You control your private keys that are strings of characters. That string can be used in a mathematical function to produce a mathematical result. Information works differently to physical matter.
No one “owns” math or any string of characters; exclusive use of a secret string of characters is not “ownership”.
https://medium.com/@beautyon_/the-bitlicense-is-a-bad-idea-that-must-die-cb413c076d85
Bitcoin is special because it makes it trivially easy to conflate and superimpose ownership analogies on mathematically generated strings that have utility in a single context. Normal people need analogies to interface with almost everything in modern life, especially where software is concerned.
“Self Custody” is a multi layered analogy set, designed to help you understand how a Private Key works in the Bitcoin context without referring at any time to math or signing processes or the chain of blocks, or databases other people’s Public Keys or anything to do with the actual processes involved with who gets to sign messages and their in context meaning.
Bitcoin is never owned; it’s an entry in a massively replicated public database.
Bitcoin is never sent or received. It is reflected in the public database.
Bitcoin is not money. It is a database.
None of these absolute facts have any bearing on Bitcoin’s utility; analogies are used to help you understand and accept bitcoin as a full replacement for fiat currency and banking services.
Without this contextual help, no member of the public would accept Bitcoin, and in the end, if people can’t use Bitcoin without the need to understand it, it will never change the world at scale.

2025-08-23 08:51:12 UTC

- reply

“Ownership” and “self custody” are analogies and not descriptions of process, and should absolutely cannot be the basis of any real understanding and never the basis of legislation.
Mischaracterising Bitcoin by analogising is commonplace which is why, even this week, I had to spend an hour in front of a panel of compliance lawyers explaining that addresses in bitcoin wallets on iPhones are not at all like bank accounts.
The toxic analogising that’s mistaken for reality is everywhere, and it distorts the market, because the people who build businesses must contend with computer illiterates who have been grossly mislead by advertising copy.

2025-08-14 13:27:34 UTC

- reply

“Self Sovereignty”; dead giveaway.

2025-08-14 09:12:43 UTC

This is exactly like banning SSL for all applications where the owner of the user's app isn't identified.
The French tried to impose this in the 1990s, but once SSL was everywhere, it was impossible for France to implement it, despite building a regulatory and storage framework to register all SSL private keys.
SSL keys can be generated at will almost instantly by anyone without any technical skill. It happens every time you install a browser or set up a server.
Sound familiar?
That's what happens when you download and open a Bitcoin Wallet. It's exactly the same in nature.
Now an absurd ban is proposed for Bitcoin wallets, and it's pretty obvious this would happen in the, "Then they fight you" stage.
This is why I've been harping on about spreading bitcoin everywhere as quickly as possible, so that it becomes a global default that cannot be revoked without killing the internets.
This is also why I've been working to re-contextualize bitcoin away from what people mistake it for to something more like what it actually is.
No one thinks SSL is "encryption"; they think it is "security". Similarly if people think bitcoin is money, then they will think about it as if it is money, as if you "receive" bitcoin, and all other money analogies.
If this false categorization by Google of Bitcoin wallets doesn't go through, the next attempt surely will. Unfortunately, people with power can't seem to understand long term strategic thinking in this area, despite the history of Public Key Encryption tool adoption being widely known.
A necessary prerequisite to bitcoin being everywhere is the distribution of it to billions of people. That's what we're doing at Azteco. When we succeed in doing this, bitcoin will be a common as SSL Certs in your browser.
And no, it will not be enough to simply build tools that use bitcoin; you can't use bitcoin without getting it, and that is the task many people simply run away from rather than confront head on.
Things that seem to be very large, very bad problems can be completely eliminated. Faketoshi is the most recent example, but there have been many others, like the RSA Munitions Export case. Bitcoin can win and come out unscathed.
It will take dedication to make it happen and people who can think for themselves and make up their own minds about what sort of future they want to be a part of building for mankind.
The bitcoin distribution problem is being effectively solved by Azteco, with 700m people being given access to bitcoin in a way that no real bitcoiner could possibly oppose.
It didn't take many people to solve the big problems; technical ones like Public Key Cryptography, PGP (Zimmerman), Bitcoin (Satoshi), BitTorrent (Bram Cohen) and many others. Your only question for yourself is this, "Am I a part of the solution or the problem?".
And if you think you can build a paralell society on App Store Apps that will help billions of people, you are completely delusional.
If App stores can ban Bitcoin wallets, they can ban your sneaky chat app, which, because it doesn't mediate bitcoin, can't change the world, and even if it could mediate bitcoin transactions, cant do so unless people can get bitcoin to use on it, and if they can, that will surely cause an App store ban, because it will be an "Unlicensed Bitcoin Wallet", however they want to define that.
At some point, as has been in the past, a problem must be solved directly. With SSL, it was the rapid proliferation of browsers and the browser as the default interface to all eCommerce.
The same thing needs to happen with Bitcoin; bitcoin must be the default way billions of people spend online, and the way to do that is to seed the global population with small amounts of bitcoin.
When commercial interests merge with the interests of billions of people, you get a platform that completely resists arbitrary change that doesn't serve the people's or commercial interests.
This is what must happen with bitcoin, and it can happen, and happen very rapidly.
https://blossom.primal.net/fffe9d21519f9bc87ee9915d171fbe1d9413a30907aacd0ba88b601e01d7a2ca.jpg

2025-08-06 13:48:05 UTC

- reply

QED.

2025-08-06 13:09:47 UTC

The hat that Matt Odell is wearing is from the VC company Ten31. Unlike bitcoiner larpers, who whine about KYC and do nothing about it, like supporting businesses that don't KYC to supply you sats, Matt's company Ten31 invested in Samourai Wallet, showing that at least he puts his money where his mouth is, and it's not all LARPing.
If you want a world without Internet IDs and a bitcoin ecosystem that is KYC free from end to end, you should be like Matt, who invests in and promotes companies that are doing the hard work to make the world you want a reality.
What you do not do is sit on the sidelines and refuse to even speak about the brave people like William Burroughs and Keyonne Rodriguez who are building the systems that are provably what people want. I say, "provably" because hundreds of millions of dollars worth of bitcoin was mediated by Samourai wallet users and its beautiful tools.
At the end of the day, there needs to be a small, dedicated, stubborn number of people like Matt, William Burroughs and Keyonne Rodriguez who are willing to stick their necks out and do whatever they can to grow the Ethical Bitcoin Ecosystem. What is intolerable and inexcusable is burying your head in the sand...like an ostrich.
It is already proven that the small number of fanatical coders and capitalists have the power to change everything. This is why GPG exists, why GNU/LINUX exists, why WhatsApp and Signal exist and why bitcoin, Samourai and other tools exist. Someone has to do the work, someone has to promote the tools, someone has to rise to the challenge.
The perpetually giggling, unserious, threadbare, faddish, cowardly, distracted, unintelligent, eloiesque, "Main Character Syndrome" actors who are too frightened to even say the name "Samourai Wallet" are collaborators with the system they claim to despise and be against.
For all of this, bitcoin will succeed and usher in the world these people are too frightened to talk about and don't even know they need. They rejected fiat reluctantly (and this is not their fault; they're the victims of the State), but once seeing its fundamental flaw, should naturally have been radicalized, but were not.
Oh well...you can't have everything...
OR CAN YOU?
https://medium.com/@beautyon_/bitcoin-surveillance-an-ahistoric-market-error-d3871f671c8c
https://x.com/primal_app/status/1952767736842531222
https://image.nostr.build/0883373c4ff85755332ec8454da852156438308d1e1991fd5e25cc5727c1d71b.jpg

2025-07-22 15:53:24 UTC

- reply

You should ignore me and carry on building. Building is the only thing that matters; not what people say.
If you’re right, everything will change and everyone will benefit; that’s the only true measure when discussing supplanting the censorious and State restricted “app stores”.
You don’t need my or anyone else to approve of what you’re doing; your running software is vindication in itself, and your service being run by hundreds of millions of people, icing on the cake.
Don’t be dissuaded by anyone, don’t be discouraged, put off or made to doubt what you’re building. Plan carefully, address reality directly, comb your assumptions regularly.
Your work is needed, you are appreciated; you are the hero in the story. You chose to do the hard work, and that’s the act of a hero.
NEVER GIVE UP!

2024-12-17 02:48:17 UTC

3 Bodies: Leninism, Maoism and Marxism. https://x.com/Beautyon_/status/1868838975856681053

2024-12-05 12:39:37 UTC

As bitcoin crosses $100,000 there are still people out there, who absolutely should know better, who are directing users to buy it from KYC Gulag Services.
Out of one side of their mouths, they complain about censorship, government overreach and tyranny, but out of the other they openly promote bad services that abuse users. Why?
Worst of all, they do this to people who are new to bitcoin, giving them a completely false impression that it is a requirement for you to identify yourself to use bitcoin.
What is wrong with these people?
What's wrong with them is that their thinking is incomplete, and they have a slave mentality, brought about by years of being in opposition.
Also, many of the services people recommend are USA only, which is yet another arbitrary restriction. Why is it so hard for people to think?
They simultaneously want bitcoin to change the world, but refuse to help it do that, by recommending inferior services that will not move that ball forward.
I'm sorry to report, dear reader, that it will always be like this; there is an upper limit to the imaginations of the majority of people, even very clever and expert ones, that prevents them from connecting the dots.
It's a tragedy that people who also have large platforms don't take that responsibility seriously. But there it is.
Not to worry; bitcoin is going to spread and dominate globally without them, just as it reached $100,000 without their aid.
https://m.primal.net/MoMy.jpg

2024-12-04 12:05:13 UTC

Signal is not perfect, therefore, do not communicate or coordinate with anyone. Stay in your silo, inert and neutralised, watching the world burn while you are “safe” from being meta data spied on.
Meanwhile other protocols that are fundamentally ill conceived or weak or flawed get a pass, “because purple”, “because e-commerce”, “because Orange”, “because there nothing better than democracy”, etc, etc.
There are now many developers and software entrepreneurs, and a few software developer entrepreneurs, and a few software developer entrepreneurs who are not cowards.
There are enough of the latter intersection to completely change the world for the better, and it doesn’t matter what anyone “thinks” about what they’re doing or whether or not it’s fit for any particular purpose.
Central to their power is the ability to grasp scale and properly assess threats. They don’t suffer from Mind Blindness; they understand that software is about serving people, and not about perfection. They also don’t make breathless impossible claims or promises either, or let weak minded fanboy imaginations run wild…
These are the people, the focussed, determined and most importantly, fearless people who get things done for people, who are…PROTIP: Real. #note1qqq…yta3

2024-11-30 13:49:21 UTC

Is “Socialist Nostr” a real phenomenon? I’m beginning to suspect that it is. Tsk tsk tsk SHAMEFUL!

2024-11-22 02:35:39 UTC

NICO and OPTI. https://x.com/SimplyBitcoinTV/status/1859287542643950017

2024-11-07 19:45:33 UTC

EXPOSED: “OPERATION BITCOIN SEQUESTRATION” https://x.com/beautyon_/status/1854597981372080253?s=46&t=LNe8MN2dQUj_88yB-puY1A

2024-10-30 14:45:54 UTC

- reply

Is English your mother tongue?

2024-10-30 13:43:12 UTC

Anti-Capitalist artists are the worst of the worst hypocrites.
Out of one side of their mouths, they despise and decry "Capitalism", and simultaneously out of the other, are jealous guarders of their own money, and total understanders of their own economic needs and not being, "cheated" out of "their money".
This child like and mind-blind inability to reason outside the fragile shaking matchbox of their world view is deeply troubling. The expectation...naïve expectation...is that anyone who can create fine art must have a broad intelligence and not a narrowly focussed one, is very childish and stupid.
What is the explanation for the ignorant double standards of these people? Who can say.
Some would certainly say that the "creative side" of the brain, being over emphasized, blots out the rational side...but I don't buy this.
All I can say is that it is deeply dissapointing that people who can think (apparently) and who have powerful imaginations cannot extend their powers to reality, simple arithmetic and economics.
https://m.primal.net/LnAv.jpg

2023-02-16 21:40:55 UTC

- reply

Sadly, ZH is a contra indicator. They blocked me in 2013 when I tried to explain Bitcoin to them when they called it, “a Ponzi”. It’s easy for them to pretend that they’re prescient and have inside baseball now that it’s obvious, but the fact is that they’re goldbugs and silver stackers who know nothing about anything other than that. They’re pathetic and part of the problem that three or four companies on earth are going to solve. And you know who and which ones I’m talking about!