KompassFrei

https://kompass-frei.com/what-comes-after-understanding-bitcoin/

How does Bitcoin move from being understood to being embodied?

Exploring practical adoption, local settlement networks and sovereignty-based living from Antioquia, Colombia.

Documenting the experiment as it unfolds.

Public Key

npub1zexwnprn77qc8juaw5cv34xh8s90pwg49pzwcctvhgvrwaqlhgrszzrg9a

Profile Code

nprofile1qqspvn8fs3el0qvrewwh2vxg6ntnczhshy2js38vv9kt5xphws0m5pcprpmhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuumwdae8gtnnda3kjctvqyt8wumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnswf5k6ctv9ehx2aquuwkcp

Publishing to

Author Public Key

npub1zexwnprn77qc8juaw5cv34xh8s90pwg49pzwcctvhgvrwaqlhgrszzrg9a

Show more details

Published at

2026-10-22T15:54:30Z

Kind type

0 Metadata

Event JSON

{ "id": "024f3092f3c4e0e58d14870f8e711d886044652e0162ba4aee716cd1afd38d6c", "pubkey": "164ce98473f78183cb9d7530c8d4d73c0af0b9152844ec616cba1837741fba07", "created_at": 1792684470, "kind": 0, "tags": [ [ "alt", "User profile for KompassFrei" ], [ "name", "KompassFrei" ], [ "display_name", "KompassFrei" ], [ "website", "https://kompass-frei.com/what-comes-after-understanding-bitcoin/" ], [ "about", "How does Bitcoin move from being understood to being embodied?\n\nExploring practical adoption, local settlement networks and sovereignty-based living from Antioquia, Colombia.\n\nDocumenting the experiment as it unfolds." ], [ "picture", "https://npub1zexwnprn77qc8juaw5cv34xh8s90pwg49pzwcctvhgvrwaqlhgrszzrg9a.blossom.band/a0bafe8b7daff3d18d6c41c268941e5c7275f7c133895f0c4b5d622a58492409.jpg" ], [ "banner", "https://blossom.primal.net/f40ffa52bba8e5660cc56de6e3e1ed7ab95739ea27e297db05aefd75bb78a3e1.jpg" ], [ "lud16", "snugglyhubcap20@walletofsatoshi.com" ], [ "client", "Amethyst" ], [ "imeta", "url https://blossom.primal.net/f40ffa52bba8e5660cc56de6e3e1ed7ab95739ea27e297db05aefd75bb78a3e1.jpg", "m image/jpeg", "x f40ffa52bba8e5660cc56de6e3e1ed7ab95739ea27e297db05aefd75bb78a3e1", "size 287456", "dim 1217x1280", "blurhash |KBypg0gt6$$NHoeV@WVNH~V9axZWBWXs:Rkofayx^RjxDNboMs.R*jsoJWFs,NHs.j]R+s.WCayIWxsNGs.j[R+s.WCfkE2xsRjW=oJoebIWVofIUt7WBkCjsj@WqoebHM{t7WCs:WBazofj?WXIUxaofWVjsazkCoeWW" ] ], "content": "{\"name\":\"KompassFrei\",\"display_name\":\"KompassFrei\",\"website\":\"https://kompass-frei.com/what-comes-after-understanding-bitcoin/\",\"about\":\"How does Bitcoin move from being understood to being embodied?\\n\\nExploring practical adoption, local settlement networks and sovereignty-based living from Antioquia, Colombia.\\n\\nDocumenting the experiment as it unfolds.\",\"picture\":\"https://npub1zexwnprn77qc8juaw5cv34xh8s90pwg49pzwcctvhgvrwaqlhgrszzrg9a.blossom.band/a0bafe8b7daff3d18d6c41c268941e5c7275f7c133895f0c4b5d622a58492409.jpg\",\"banner\":\"https://blossom.primal.net/f40ffa52bba8e5660cc56de6e3e1ed7ab95739ea27e297db05aefd75bb78a3e1.jpg\",\"lud16\":\"snugglyhubcap20@walletofsatoshi.com\"}", "sig": "9c17a435b7ef299b34adb4d5e2797bca3650796c57232bb8bb7389ed0510b5d76cff936540b4a98cdfb7727c7878166e839812d5b093370010aef51d262cbaa3" }

Last Notes

2026-10-27 22:06:43 UTC

- reply

https://blossom.primal.net/044f2943dd6dccf170017a87b2114ed827d1ffe8f57c6d1eae34e828dcf210bd.png

2026-10-27 21:56:10 UTC

- reply

https://blossom.primal.net/6eaa6c3e5032de3fb2d632ba45189bff968be923cd7ac5764ca7e590446b66bb.png

2026-10-27 21:45:44 UTC

- reply

https://blossom.primal.net/3f98052dcd83cec7624a908e016b7a9eed127b3431b41ee28a9e95138a11fa1d.png

2026-10-27 21:35:17 UTC

- reply

https://blossom.primal.net/b80ddf63605bed16b1195ebc194cb66fb1a713a53604d6682bec35bba5b36a7c.png

2026-10-27 21:25:00 UTC

- reply

https://blossom.primal.net/867f9c6cdb54f00b0c155a150d5584c4978f6c38afbf02d604e759535db53723.png

2026-10-27 21:12:51 UTC

- reply

https://blossom.primal.net/198c408b6071cc2c7743ec069e7cd68d95841639f5b9ff6bc2cf35a9ebcda8b5.png

2026-10-27 21:01:56 UTC

"A power law grows without bound – it never saturates, never plateaus, never collapses from resource exhaustion – but it does so at a decelerating rate."
G. Santostasi – The Physics of Bitcoin
That is the reason why the mind that thinks and lives in terms of the old paradigm (extraction driven by scarcity) can only attack or try to undermine a scale-free network; otherwise, it would need to rethink its costly business model. Incapable of seeing past the 'beyondless', the ecosystem as a whole now relies on who can see and build beyond what others believe to be 'immutable': perception.
https://blossom.primal.net/23ce2385aa465a863fa882ddffc2340ac6978c7d555c279275dcbe0e1ab88395.png

2026-10-27 01:01:46 UTC

- reply

TxID on mempool.
Labeling in Sparrow wallet for inner tracking of record history only.

2026-10-25 21:27:10 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…5jdn @nprofile…ra2f
1/ Fair points on Stratum V2 and Lightning, @nprofile…ra2f and @nprofile…5jdn. These code adjustments are vital, brilliant engineering steps. However, focusing solely on individual protocol fixes might cause us to miss the macro topological problem facing the network.
2/ Stratum V2 successfully decentralizes block template construction at the software layer. But it cannot decentralize the physical jurisdictions or institutional ownership of massive, industrial-scale mining datacenters. Hardware geography remains a centralizing force.
3/ Furthermore, if the base layer is heavily captured by institutional store-of-value inflows, would escalating on-chain fees not risk pricing everyday users out of managing the very local, non-custodial Lightning channels needed to buy groceries?
4/ This architectural challenge, by the way, assumes the main chain's foundation is immutable... And yet, software adjustments simply cannot override scale-free network physics.
For long-term security, a healthy network MUST CULTIVATE ALTERNATIVE PHYSICAL HUBS within its own ecosystem.
5/ These internal counter-weights are required to balance mining centralization and secure the network through organic growth. If the ecosystem fails to foster these physical counter-weights internally, THE SYSTEMIC RISK TO ANY LAYER built on top becomes too great to ignore.
6/ From the perspective of network theory, migrating to an entirely separate chain isn't a fix. Instead, it drains the vital economic energy and developer talent needed to ensure decentralization where it matters most: inside the CORE architecture.
7/ Fragmenting the community could well be the first step toward a collective surrender—not out of malice, but due to a structural blind spot regarding the SYSTEMIC implications of Bitcoin's network topology.
8/ If we want a network where Bitcoin can be organically earned and spent, the development of decentralized physical hubs is an essential foundation that cannot be bypassed or outsourced. The core ecosystem must take ownership of cultivating this infrastructure from within.

2026-10-25 19:21:37 UTC

Pumping the market cap of BTC by using it as a store of value won't magically evolve into a medium of exchange; that's perfectly clear. Treating the asset mainly as a store of value hinders the network from continuing to grow organically and securely. The current 'state' of affairs appears to put the network under heavy constraint due to mining pool centralization, rendering it more and more difficult to effectively (and efficiently) grow the network through exchange.
To claim that a 'captured' network stops Bitcoin's upward trajectory is to ignore the physics of the protocol, though.
A healthy scale-free network must create alternative hubs.
Therefore, I genuinely ask: Is Blake2B such a hub? If not, what happens to the assets of those Bitcoiners attempting to earn and spend Bitcoin?
What we are trying to build is still a network that allows us to buy groceries as well, aren't we?
@nprofile…8z8a @nprofile…ra2f @nprofile…5jdn @nprofile…rwg7 @nprofile…euqs
https://youtu.be/sAfpURsWnCk?is=21eW5B2HjBNVyru9

2026-10-25 13:50:13 UTC

- reply

Bitcoin provides the tools for the purpose of exchange.

2026-10-24 20:15:35 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…5jdn
A question worth asking: what does the market maker ultimately buy and sell Bitcoin for?
Is the goal to capture a spread measured in fiat, or to help grow a functional monetary network through positive feedback loops?
Both can provide liquidity. But are they necessarily building the same economy?

2026-10-24 19:40:28 UTC

- reply

Awesome initiative. Most importantly, help the network grow through exchange for goods and services priced in sats orange pilling every step of the way.

2026-10-24 14:03:33 UTC

- reply

From what I understand, the network is under heavy constraint due to mining pool centralization. The approach above aims at training and motivating new local users to self-custody, eventually run their own nodes (and/or smartly hash) in order to effectively contribute to the network's growth. (As opposed to growth in value through the increase in price only.)
@nprofile…ra2f If at all, how do you think this could fit best into a broader, long-term goal as discussed above in the context of BIP-110?

2026-10-22 18:46:21 UTC

Looking for a publisher
I've finished writing The Measure of Value, an essay exploring the notion of value, closely tied to the deeper meaning behind a concept such as efficiency. What happens when the lens through which we measure value becomes distorted? And how could the effect of a distorted lens possibly influence our daily approach to economics and our very understanding of Bitcoin itself?
Bitcoin enters the argument not as the subject of the book, but as one of its consequences.
I'm now looking for an established or independent publisher interested in serious non-fiction around economics, monetary thought, philosophy, Bitcoin and the broader question of how we measure value.
The manuscript is finished, both in English and Spanish. I'm initially looking at a physical edition including the two versions (a third one, German, is in the making), potentially in the range of 200–1,000 copies.
If you know a publisher, editor, literary agent—or simply someone who understands this part of the publishing world—I'd be grateful for an introduction or a pointer.
Especially interested in people who might see the book as something broader than “another Bitcoin book.”
DMs open.

2026-10-21 12:47:34 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…ra2f mind sharing the thread from The Road to Serfdom?

2026-10-19 19:44:59 UTC

- reply

What tends to go wrong in practice — the recovery design itself, or people underestimating the operational complexity?

2026-10-18 12:01:32 UTC

- reply

Thanks, Jack. That distinction is precisely where my thinking is heading.
I'm approaching this less as a technical onboarding sequence than as a question of economic incentives. Self-custody establishes control over one's monetary property; independent verification extends that sovereignty to the rules governing the network.
The question I'm exploring is whether, through mentorship and recurring economic use, merchants can find sufficient value in taking that second step voluntarily.
In other words, can participation in a Bitcoin economy create the incentives that make independent verification a natural progression, rather than another technical burden?

2026-10-16 17:19:29 UTC

- reply

This is part of a local initiative I'm developing in Colombia within a broader strategic exploration.
The idea is to go beyond merchant acceptance and explore whether financial mentorship, self-custody and independent verification can become mutually reinforcing parts of a Bitcoin economy.
I'm approaching it less as a checklist for adoption than as an experiment in the conditions under which people voluntarily become more independent participants in the network.
Your experience with merchant acceptance would make your perspective particularly valuable. I'd be interested to hear how you see this approach.
https://blossom.primal.net/e850d6d44aeea86b7104b256ef124d4d9b5410e80ce448e82f87d8f0301c5081.png

2026-10-16 16:32:44 UTC

- reply

I hadn't come across Umbrel, so thanks for bringing it up.
My thinking comes less from a technical onboarding perspective than from Austrian economics, my work on The Measure of Value, and Santostasi's power-law thesis.
I'm wondering whether the organic growth of Bitcoin depends partly on economic incentives that lead participants to strengthen the network through their own choices, rather than on adoption numbers alone.
Self-custody and independent verification may be two different steps in that process. But I'm equally interested in whether the economic benefits become tangible enough for people to choose both voluntarily.
Perhaps the question isn't how to get every merchant to run a node, but under what conditions doing so becomes a natural extension of participating in a Bitcoin economy.

2026-10-16 16:06:19 UTC

- reply

Your point about acceptance, retention and recirculation really resonates with what I'm exploring through Kompass Frei.
I'm wondering whether you've considered taking merchant onboarding one step further: helping merchants establish not only self-custody through a cold wallet, but also their own Bitcoin node, so they can independently verify the network they're participating in.
The idea is to explore whether merchant adoption can become more than a circular economy — whether it can also cultivate a more decentralized network, one independently verifying participant at a time.
Have you explored anything along those lines?

2026-10-15 20:34:25 UTC

- reply

By the way, that line about the flag stayed with me. Interestingly, I initially read ‘No flag issues it’ as ‘No flag issues’ — which, given Beyer's work on the patterns through which we perceive reality, felt like a little demonstration of the very thing we're discussing. Sometimes the mind reveals its assumptions before we even notice them.

2026-10-15 20:29:56 UTC

- reply

It's a line I wrote down from one of those rare interviews you come across on social media.
The other one is priceless:
“We mustn't forget that our present system is always so obstructed that in fact we probably can keep it going only by inflation.
So we must:
First, free the price mechanism.
And then, restore sound currency.”
(The Levin Interviews. Broadcast: 31st May 1980 at the University of Freiburg)
Love The Road to Serfdom.

2026-10-15 16:46:18 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…ra2f
Thank you for taking the time to engage with the idea so thoughtfully. And I'm delighted you're reading Christian's book already!
My wife is a therapist, and together we first met Christian in Mexico while attending one of his training courses. We grew close and have continued exchanging ideas around psychoneurodontology ever since. It's one of those encounters that stays with you and keeps unfolding in unexpected ways.
What first drew me to Beyer's work was probably the way he describes mental patterns that permeate our every thought. Much later, his work helped me see that economics is about far more than money, markets or the allocation of resources. It touches the very foundations of how we relate to one another, how we understand value, and what kind of world our choices help bring into being.
As Hayek put it, learning about economics teaches about freedom (or shows the conditions in which awareness of freedom is possible, and those where it could never be…) I think I'm discovering something similar through Bitcoin: the more I understand its monetary principles, the more questions emerge about human action, sovereignty and the conditions under which people can truly cooperate.
Perhaps that's why your reflection resonates so much. Life is indeed full of blessings, not least the unexpected connections that emerge when we follow an idea far enough.

2026-10-12 04:08:59 UTC

- reply

I'm curious about the numbers. Where does the estimate of 100 million Bitcoin owners come from, and how are the 100,000 people interacting without trusted third parties being counted?
Are these based on separate datasets, or is the latter inferred from node counts?

2026-10-12 04:07:11 UTC

- reply

Tauri's post catches my attention because it reflects something highly valuable: a curious mind looking for patterns that might help Bitcoin grow.
The question matters, even though some of its technical implications are beyond my current understanding. But the figures themselves made me wonder. If roughly 100 million people own Bitcoin, while only around 100,000 are said to interact with the network without trusted third parties, what exactly are we measuring? Ownership? Independent verification? The degree to which people actually participate in the network?
And what would have to change for Bitcoin ownership to evolve into a genuinely self-sustaining economic ecosystem? If these figures are even approximately accurate, they suggest that ownership alone tells us relatively little about how far we have come.
Running a node, holding bitcoin, transacting, building businesses and accepting payments are all different forms of participation. They are not interchangeable, but they may reinforce one another. Clearly, the maturity of Bitcoin cannot be measured by ownership alone, or even by the number of nodes.
Therefore the central distinction, to me, is between economic activity that happens around Bitcoin and economic activity that strengthens Bitcoin itself.
Capital flowing into Bitcoin, financial products built around it, and businesses profiting from its price may generate enormous economic value. But that does not necessarily mean they strengthen Bitcoin's role as a monetary network.
The deeper question is how much economic activity actively reinforces the network by creating genuine demand for its monetary properties, expanding its use in voluntary exchange, deepening its liquidity, and supporting the infrastructure and participation that allow it to endure.
In other words, does the economy emerging around Bitcoin merely benefit from the network, or does it also help sustain and strengthen the network on which it depends? What kind of economy does Bitcoin need in order for its own foundations to efficiently grow through its use?
This is where the exploration is leading: beyond Bitcoin as an asset, towards the conditions under which a healthy ecosystem, integrated by decentralized nodes operating under one protocol, can continuously and coherently adapt to change.
#nevent1q…dk9x

2026-10-10 13:45:06 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…ra2f @nprofile…rwg7 @nprofile…2jpv
I have reflected on this whole subject time and time again. When I first shared the post attached below, it found little engagement. I genuinely wonder: was the assumption totally erroneous, or did it hit a raw nerve that the market isn't ready to face?
Money is primarily a medium of exchange, yet we haven't been able to establish widespread adoption around daily, physical peer-to-peer transactions. Instead, we are witnessing massive institutional adoption—which effectively shifts Bitcoin into centralized custody wrappers under the old fiat paradigm.
Seen through the lens of Physics, this fundamentally mutates the network risk. It alters the very nature of the nodes, dampening the organic, scale-free network dynamics driven by sovereign individual users aligning with the protocol's core rules.
The type of adoption absolutely matters. Institutional custody fundamentally changes the structural matrix of the network, replacing a high-entropy, distributed topology with centralized hubs of low entropy. If the price goes up but the underlying architecture flattens into a legacy hub-and-spoke system, have we actually won, or have we allowed the closed thermodynamic properties of the protocol to be stripped away?
Your thoughts on this are warmly appreciated.
#nevent1q…meax

2026-10-07 12:26:43 UTC

- reply

Perhaps the deeper question is: what are we actually trying to preserve?
Once preservation–as opposed to extraction or an extraction-based economy– comes first, the question becomes one of optionality, infrastructure, and ultimately jurisdiction. Different forms of property (both physical and digital) may serve different parts of that equation.
The form matters less than the principles it "embodies".

2026-10-07 11:19:57 UTC

- reply

Neither morally nor physically is there another way.
The justification of Bitcoin's ledger—and the increasing energy cost required to secure it—testifies to a well-described physical law: the conservation of energy.
As G. Santostasi explores in The Physics of Bitcoin, Bitcoin doesn't make the cost of monetary integrity disappear. It makes the cost explicit.

2026-10-07 11:09:07 UTC

- reply

The interesting question isn't simply where the price is going. It's what people are doing with their scarce capital—and what those actions reveal about their expectations, and ultimately, about how we measure value.

2026-10-06 18:51:55 UTC

- reply

I'd be curious to hear what you make of it.

2026-10-06 00:07:02 UTC

- reply

Government still falls into the realm the limitations of which need to be transcended by exercising the power of our sentiment beyond ideologies (nation) and physical boundaries (countries). One stands for an extended archetype of the father, the other stands for mother or materialization, both on the same level, both needing to be integrated as one.
(Image: Pattern of the subconscious mind as inspired and conveyed beautifully in The Spirit Cycle: A Life Matrix, by Christian Beyer)
https://blossom.primal.net/edf4ae67220ed21e84172f89c6a11ee95480a2dae4d8466815986d1a0f645615.png

2026-09-10 17:34:40 UTC

- reply

So perhaps the deeper question isn't whether Bitcoin can survive disagreement, but whether it can accommodate genuinely different understandings of what the ecosystem is for without those differences becoming grounds for exit?
Less of a 'consensus mechanics' issue and more of an 'ecosystem cohesion' topic.

2026-09-07 17:48:19 UTC

Six weeks ago, we documented the first transaction of our pilot.
Since then, the merchant has continued saving sats.
She does not convert back to fiat.
No grand strategy. Just a small change in how value is perceived and held.
The story is continuity.
A first transaction is an event. A repeated choice is the beginning of an economy.
Growth Event #009
Oriente Antioqueño, Colombia
https://blossom.primal.net/756fb77cadcf4d135bf90e6590d7cc79304722238b74288d921703b224c8e2ee.png

2026-08-31 18:47:35 UTC

- reply

Changing the subject for a moment: what’s your take on the BIP-110 conflict—and, more importantly, on what the attempted split and its outcome tell us about Bitcoin’s consensus process?
The network ultimately did not converge around BIP-110, and the minority chain stalled almost immediately. Do you see that as the system working exactly as intended, or as a warning that we may be entering a period where disagreements over Bitcoin’s economic purpose can threaten network coherence?
@nprofile…nv40 @nprofile…rwg7

2026-08-20 23:24:01 UTC

- reply

Concise Technical Diagnosis:
"Root Cause:
The laptop features a modern integrated/dedicated graphics processing unit (GPU) chipset that is completely unsupported by the specific Linux kernel version baked into your current Tails USB build.
Analysis of Attempted Fixes (following your advice@nprofile…ky9k):
nomodeset:
Effectively bypassed the proprietary display driver stack and successfully handed over execution from the bootloader. However, the system stalled immediately afterward because it lacked a fallback basic display driver capable of rendering Tails' graphical user interface (GUI) desktop environment.
nomodeset acpi=off:
Successfully disabled Advanced Configuration and Power Interface hardware calls to resolve potential motherboard power-management conflicts. Despite this, the display output remained entirely unmappable by the system's Xorg/Wayland graphical server, resulting in a persistent black screen with a frozen hardware cursor.
Runlevel 3 (Text Mode): Correctly avoided the broken graphical environment entirely and initialized the Linux kernel into an active state. However, interactive text logins (amnesia login) failed because modern versions of Tails strictly disable all interactive TTY virtual consoles by design to enforce system hardening, preventing any command execution without an active GUI session."

2026-08-20 20:38:26 UTC

- reply

Hello to both of you. I have thoroughly studied the suggested mechanism. I've my CPU/motherboard architecture or RAM allocation). When the bootloader hands over control to the operating system, the system freezes instantly at Booting.... According to AI, this means the Linux kernel cannot map or communicate with the computer's core physical hardware, preventing Tails from loading even a single line of its operating system code.

2026-08-09 20:14:57 UTC

- reply

Thank you for that..
Rolled the dice, a 100+ times, kind of aware that inserting any device whatsoever into that process, defeats the purpose of it indeed, and requires trust at some degree.
From what the essay conveys, there are multiple ways of separating creation from storage from usage.
A word to the Shell script? Where to run it?
And on the "little adjustment" of the 24th word?
What would the exit ramp actually look like to migrate from a Coldcard? Is the latter still an option when combined with a SeedSigner?
Sorry, I am not endowed with programmer skills at all.

2026-08-08 18:34:27 UTC

- reply

That's an important distinction: the technical barrier then may be lower than I thought; the real barrier is the discipline to understand, test and take responsibility for the process. Perhaps self-custody is less a technical problem than a question of agency. A question of being operationally disciplined.
@nprofile…ky9k Excellent practical advice. Thank you

2026-08-08 18:02:56 UTC

- reply

How sophisticated needs a person technically be to master self-custody?

2026-07-29 17:32:03 UTC

- reply

Tauri raises an important question:
who shapes Bitcoin's future?
It made me wonder whether there's another dimension to this.
Bitcoin's block space still isn't being competed for by a mature global monetary economy.
If Bitcoin were already settling trillions of dollars daily for millions of users, wouldn't the fee market itself increasingly determine what belongs on-chain?
Which leaves me wondering:
How much of Bitcoin's future will ultimately be shaped by relay policy, and how much by the economy we succeed in building on top of it?
#nevent1q…5jp0