Flowee

The Flowee peeps are happy to announce a new release of the full node and related applications. Flowee the Hub is now fully compliant with the recent Bitcoin Cash protocol upgrade! 🎉 After a couple of weeks of intense work all new features on BCH have been added to the Hub.

@SallyMayweather @cotta3 Use a clean or new bag to not have any reason for dogs or otherwise to cause you trouble going through customs! Have a safe flight.

@cotta3 I’m still going. Just rescheduled my flight.

I just got arrested on the jetway en route to the Bitcoin Cash Conference in Slovenia. They found 7g weed, I paid a $500 fine, missed my flight & I’m omw home. Here’s where it gets interesting- plain clothes DHS agent comes in the interrogation room & tries to recruit me - said they need help catching ppl who use crypto to launder $$, that it’s a specialized field & they’d pay me well. I told em idk shit & that nowadays everything is about compliance this/compliance that… The harassment is real tho. This follows a VERY expensive IRS audit earlier this year. It may be time to leave the US friends…the pedophile class is - as I predicted - getting increasingly desperate and can no longer tolerate dissidents with a loud voice.

I started doing Java at the 1.2 release (previous century) and codebases today are unreadable to me because of all the new language features added and indeed the many people that somehow feel they need to use them all. My language of choice is, and has been for decades, C++ because it is simple and straightforward. Yes, you need to have the dicipline to avoid templates and avoid exceptions. Or at least use them sparingly. I reject probably 80% of the features added in the last decade. Going to a new language because it has less features is likely a long term failing strategy, though. The one sign of a successful language is that they keep adding language features. The ability of AI to help you doesn't really depend on the language, it depends on the quality of your codebase. Much like humans, to be fair. You have good abstractions and are consistent? Your AI will generate clean code with only minor need for attention. All roads lead me to the same conclusion: it is not the language it is the "controller" (or programmer) having the dicipline to use the tool properly.

Of course the problem is morons. But given a choice between a language that gives morons a large selection of footguns and one that doesn't, I know which I'll choose. I would be more willing to actually learn to hand code in Rust than go back to C++. I consider myself quite fortunate that I'm not going to have to do either.

Choice of language for software projects has become a very different game now that we have robot friends to do most of our code generation and translation for us. I have people wondering why I just shipped a project in Rust when I don't like the language and don't hand-code in it myself. I did this because I am adjusted to current reality, and now I'm going to talk about that. The age of hand-coding is mostly over. It no longer matters as much whether the computer language I use is comfortable to my hand, only whether the robot friend I'm using can generate it at high quality. It also matters whether I can read the language, because I am going to want to run my eyeball over it to review the code. Rust meets that bar - I find it kind of spiky but basically readable. Rust is a good deployment language for me to choose when (a) I want solid memory-safety guarantees, and (b) the code is already mature and I don't expect to need to do exploratory programming or serious feature development on it in the future. In particular, this makes Rust a good place for me to land my old C projects. Which is why in the last couple of months I have migrated two of them to Rust. C to Rust translation by robots is cheap and easy now; I will probably continue to do this. Each time I get a bug report on one of these projects in the future, boing! Rusticated. You may believe that Rustacea is stuffed with Communists and sexual deviants. You might even be right. I don't have to care whether that's true anymore, because I have a robot friend who is in all relevant ways smarter than they are. The wider lesson here is that the developer and user community around a language doesn't matter as much as it used to in whether you should get involved with it. Because in the future, we're going to be relying on human community brains less and artificial intelligences more. And that future is now. Not everything C gets moved to Rust, though. I lifted cvs-fast-export to Golang instead, because I think it's fairly likely that I'm going to have to do significant development work on it is in the future, so the payoff from a language I'm more comfortable reading and modifying by hand goes up. I'm certainly never going to start a project in C again. What would be the point, other than masochism? I spent 40 years writing C and I'm very good at it, but I will cheerfully leave it and it's buffer overruns and its heap corruption and its undefined behaviors and its portability problems behind. It helps that my robot friends are good at writing C code that doesn't have those problems, but...why even go there? Why expose yourself to those risks if the robot misses something? These days I do my exploratory programming in Python or Golang. My robot friends are extremely good at generating code in both those languages. I think they're slightly higher leverage on Golang, possibly due to that language having a smaller surface? Python used to be my favorite language. I soured on it for a while after the 2-to-3 transition was massively botched, and the GIL meant concurrency in it was a disaster area, and managing library dependencies became an even bigger disaster area. I'm a little happier with Python now that I can declare strict typing and uv has reduced dependency pain somewhat. But I think if I think I'm going to have to write anything much larger than a glue script in Python, I just shrug and reach for Golang instead. I'm very comfortable in Golang. Over time, I'll probably migrate my older Python projects to Golang because that's cheap and easy now and the performance win can be quite significant. I don't know what other languages I'm going to be using in the future. I do know that choosing a development language is a much less grave commitment than it used to be, because if it turns out to be not well suited for the job I'm doing, I can simply have my robot friend translated to a better one.

The timeline is a graveyard of outrage. Everyday more hysteria about who is controlling what, who is scamming whom, and which government is committing the next atrocity. It's all noise. If you want to end the atrocities you have to stop funding the mechanism that enables them. Modern wars and state-sponsored oppression are not possible without central banking. The ability to print money, KYC and censor accounts and selectively freeze assets is the ultimate weapon of the state. We aren't building "crypto" to get rich. We are building a decentralized economy on Bitcoin Cash to make this system of control obsolete. When you hold non-custodial, censorship-resistant value, anchored to reality, not to a government's debt, you remove the fuel from their war machine. Stop arguing about the noise. Start building the exit!

La taxe sur les petits colis chinois est un échec. Surprise totale. Les colis transitent désormais par la Belgique avant d'arriver en France, les emplois logistiques français ont disparu, et le consommateur paye pareil. Bercy découvre la deuxième loi de la thermodynamique appliquée à l'économie : un système contraint trouve toujours sa fuite. Cette histoire est minuscule, mais elle est l'incarnation parfaite du problème français. À chaque fois que l'État touche à l'économie, ça finit dans le mur. À chaque fois. Sans exception. Pas par malchance. Par construction. L'économie n'est pas un tableau Excel. C'est un système vivant de plusieurs milliards d'agents qui prennent des décisions chaque seconde en fonction de leurs contraintes locales. Quand vous taxez les colis chinois, vous ne créez pas magiquement des emplois français. Vous créez une perturbation que le système contourne en quelques semaines, en passant par la Belgique, par les Pays-Bas, par le Luxembourg, ou par n'importe quel point d'entrée moins taxé. Le marché est un objet mouvant. Il a une intelligence distribuée que personne, absolument personne, ne peut surpasser depuis un bureau ministériel. Friedrich Hayek a obtenu le Nobel pour avoir formalisé exactement ce point en 1974. Cinquante ans plus tard, nos hauts fonctionnaires en sont encore à découvrir empiriquement ce qu'il avait démontré théoriquement. Le seul mécanisme connu pour coordonner des milliards de décisions économiques simultanément, c'est le système des prix dans un cadre de libre-échange. Les prix transmettent en temps réel l'information sur la rareté, la demande, la qualité, le risque. Aucun ordinateur, aucun algorithme, aucun comité de planification ne peut répliquer cette densité informationnelle. Ce n'est pas une opinion idéologique. C'est un théorème. Quand un fonctionnaire de Bercy décide de taxer les colis pour "protéger l'emploi français", il imagine un effet de premier ordre. Les colis deviennent plus chers. Donc moins de colis. Donc plus d'emplois locaux. Cause et effet, ligne droite, dossier bouclé. Mais l'économie ne fonctionne jamais en effets de premier ordre. Elle fonctionne en cascades. Effet d'ordre 2 : les distributeurs réorientent leurs flux. Effet d'ordre 3 : les hubs logistiques s'installent en Belgique, et les emplois français disparaissent. Effet d'ordre 4 : la TVA française n'est plus collectée. Effet d'ordre 5 : les consommateurs payent quand même, donc leur pouvoir d'achat baisse. Effet d'ordre 6 : ils consomment moins ailleurs, ce qui détruit des emplois dans d'autres secteurs. Le bilan net de la mesure est négatif sur tous les indicateurs qu'elle prétendait améliorer. Aucun fonctionnaire au monde n'a la capacité cognitive de prévoir une cascade à six ordres dans un système de cette complexité. Ce n'est pas une question d'intelligence individuelle. C'est une limite structurelle de l'intelligence centralisée face à la complexité distribuée. Les meilleurs économistes mondiaux ne le peuvent pas. Aucun haut fonctionnaire de Bercy ne le peut, peu importe le diplôme. Donc soit ils sont insanes, soit ils sont déconnectés des réalités. Dans les deux cas, ils n'ont rien à faire à la barre. La conclusion est simple. Chaque fois qu'un politique annonce qu'il va "protéger" un secteur, "soutenir" une industrie, "réguler" un marché, "encadrer" une pratique, vous pouvez prendre les paris à 100 contre 1 que le résultat sera l'inverse de l'objectif annoncé. C'est la régularité empirique la plus solide de l'économie politique française des cinquante dernières années. Le marché se régule. Il a toujours su le faire. Ce qui ne se régule jamais, c'est la prétention des bureaucrates à savoir mieux que des centaines de millions de consommateurs et de producteurs ce qui est bon pour eux. Le seul mode opératoire qui marche, c'est le suivant. L'État garantit le contrat, la propriété, la sécurité physique. Et il sort. Tout le reste est entre les mains de ceux qui ont leur peau en jeu, c'est-à-dire les entrepreneurs, les producteurs, les consommateurs. Tout le reste, c'est de la planification soviétique en habit Saint Laurent. Et la planification soviétique a un taux de réussite historique parfait : zéro.

@NymFrance x.com/i/status/20535…

Refuser les services Google Play est désormais perçu comme un comportement suspect. Peu à peu, Google se retrouve en position de décider qui peut accéder pleinement à Internet — et à quelles conditions.

People seem confused what is going on here. Google is basically in a better position than any government to introduce global ID, and this is what it is doing now. Visit a website on your phone, then the Google account it is logged in as will become your passport to get in. It is fore-running the governments of the world that all try to do the same thing. With the main difference that governments are incompetent and will largely fail. So when they inevitably do, Google is ready to sell them the service. What is bad about this is that Google actually will have a good chance of making such a system work. What is good about this is that goverments and especially the EU will never let an American company have that power. Afterall, cancelling people or stories is best done silently. Google just one-upped especially the EU, which is going hard on a digital ID for the net. With age verification set to become required at the end of the year. Age verification is really just a way of making all the adults use some sort of digital ID when they go online. It looks like the governments have compition, something they didn't expect and very likely they won't appreciate.

@EvaVlaar The sinister reason for why the EU is doing this is obvious when you see it. This is about gettiing people to use the digital ID. Proof she said yes in the app and young ones wanting sex will thus need to use the digital id app. The moment you see it, you can't unsee it.

The European Parliament just backed a EU-wide consent-based definition of rape under the banner ''only yes means yes''. Now fate has it that more than 7 years ago, I wrote my master's thesis on why ''consent based'' rape legislation is actually a bad idea, so I figured why not translate and repost a (shorted and popularized) opinion piece I published on the matter back in the days here on X:

Your phone is about to stop being yours. Starting September 2026 an update pushed by Google will block every Android app whose developer hasn't registered with Google, which includes handing over government ID information. Every app and every device, worldwide, with no opt-out. Developers who won't comply will get their apps silently blocked on every device. Keep. Android. Open.

We found ourself in a small second hand store here in the area. Got a nice little desk lamp for myself. When I got home I realized it still had an old fashioned incandescent light-bulb. Made illegal by the EU years ago. The light is SOO much nicer than LED lamps. Awesome find.

quickshell, which this was built with, rocks!

Developer can't develop without permission of platform. This is what Google wants for Android. The power to terminate developers access without reason or recourse. And it still is planned by Google to introduce the KYC requirments 'soon'. It is a scary world we live in.

@vaxryy simple solution: use no or less templates

rust errors: tehee ~~ you made a mistake here 👉👈 small fix 😋 C++ errors:

Your understanding on how to scale safely is, in your words, the problem connected to the requirement that every single user of the network has to see all transaction of all others on the network. And this is a flawed understanding, as people like me have said since 2014. An debatable assumption, not a requirement. Satoshi wrote the SPV chapter in the bitcoin whitepaper to indicate this fact and for me to prove here that this is not some new-fangled idea. It literally predates the genesis block. It is, and always has been, the goal to make the 90% of the users use SPV validation. Which doesn't require them to get any other transactions than the ones for them. So your basic premise of what scaling is about is debtable. Which is why the scaling solution people followed as "small blockers" is different from what the "big blockers" followed. Different general architecture. Not scaling. Architecture was the core debate topic.

PART 2/7 What was the Blocksize War really about? (and why couldn't we reach agreement to just "make it bigger?") This is the nerdy stuff, but important to actually understand the history of all this - especially with the nonsense one will get from Bcashers on what the debate even was. If you want to skip this, then just jump to the last 30 seconds. One common bcasher claim is that there was always consensus on making the blocks bigger and scaling limits were a completely made up issue. It's worth noting where the debate about scaling bitcoin truly began.

Did Jeffrey Epstein hijack Bitcoin? PART 1/7 This theory has been making the rounds lately - the Bcashers have been veritably drooling over it since the DOJ dump. It's time to actually go point by point and see if this actually lines up and if there is a real connection between Epstein and the blocksize war. (I'm breaking this up to avoid one long video) To kick it off, let's give the summary of what the conspiracy is, and its main evidence supporting it. (@LibertyLockPod @BretWeinstein @TuckerCarlson)

@Unihertz hello! Is there any way you guys can help communities like lineageos.org to make their offerings available for your hardware? It would be the best combination as all the google stuff makes devices really unattractive for a lot of people.

Android has an app store for power users. It’s called Obtainium. It installs and updates apps directly from their official release pages: • GitHub releases • GitLab releases • F-Droid repos • APKMirror / APKPure • direct APK links Key features: • automatic update tracking • release notifications • install apps straight from source • no Play Store dependency You get apps directly from the developer, not a middleman. Perfect for open-source and privacy-focused Android users.

Error: BidEscrowV2.cash:67 Require statement failed at input 1 in contract BidEscrowV2.cash at line 67. Failing statement: require(tx.outputs[0].tokenCategory == nftCategoryId); WARNING: it is unsafe to use this Bitauth URI when using real private keys as they are included in the transaction template Bitauth URI: ide.bitauth.com/import-templat… [cut off more]

@BCHcash_mint I won a bid but the "complete purchase" doesn't work. Comes back with a really long error. Is this a known issue? Can you help me?

100+ NFTs successfully traded and counting! 📈 Just crossed the Triple-digit trade volume milestone on #CashMint. Great seeing these assets move through #BitcoinCash and connecting with collectors. To everyone who’s been part of these first 100+: We’re just getting started. 🥂

@albertdrosphoto Can you please share the town/church name for us locals?

Yesterday’s full moonset in The Netherlands. There were quite some clouds but luckily the moon showed itself beautifully when it was at the church. Distance: 2.7km, photographed with my 400-800mm lens at 600mm