yep confirmed:

so need me to quote your "layer" stuff you say everytime. pretending LN is a thing fixed to bitcoin, and a solution, next gen offering of bitcoin.. sorry.. its a separate network that fits different blockchains. its not bitcoinL2 at all..

millisats are not a thing bitcoin understands.
millisats are a unit of measure signed into a "promise"(commitment) (IOU contract) on the other network that are not settled within that network, so very much an IOU . a completely different contract than the one that vaults and unvaults the real asset

but thank you for taking my post personal, its an admission you are one of the fangirls.

even the "liquid" teams are trying to untrain each other from calling liquid a bitcoinL2
here is an example of how they explain liquid
" Anyone can issue new assets on Liquid, including stablecoins and security tokens. Each asset can be traded freely within the network, taking advantage of Liquid’s privacy, speed, and secure trading features."

they even now say they transact "liquid bitcoin LBTC" rather than saying they are transacting bitcoin BTC. so they are trying to separate the differences to avoid confusion


picture it this way. you both lock up gold in a safety deposit box which has 2 keys.
add to this that the other guy can find different ways to open the box and take funds not promised to him by displaying to an auditor the wrong contract

and separately away from the safety deposit box you both sign unsettled IOU promises over who deserves what share of the box contents. requiring both to agree and each others permission..

he can also have this same setup with other partners. and so you all pass favours between each other, valued in this different unit of measure.. swapping value in the form of IOU, like pass the parcel

yes you can later create a formal request in gold value, that has rounded up-down the IOU promise value unit..  you both sign and both keep a copy as a more formal contract.
eventually to show the box auditor who deserves what using the more formal contract. but the auditor allowing you to take the contents does not know if the contract is number 5 minus 1, 10 minus 3 or 20 minus 7 and its then a fight over a punishment if one party showed the wrong formal contract to the box auditor.

not the LN payments (parcel swaps) are IOU. in every sense..
the settlement contracts are a different contract. not to be confused with the LN payment iou's

three blind men walk into a bar.
     "ouch","ouch","ouch"

whats the difference between a church nun and a female in a shower
      ones got a soul full of hope, the other has a hole full of soap

whats the difference between a bitcoiner and an altnet fangirl
      bitcoiners use a secure network. altneters pretend their crap network is bitcoin+
(its not a joke, but i still laugh when i see altnet fangirls advertise their network as such)

how do you get in a short term relationship and out of one quick
tell them your a international currency trader...   ...then nerd-splain bitcoin

a blonde approached me in a supermarket and asked me how to invest in bitcoin. i told her to 'buy the dip'
she came back saying "here you go, will you tell me now" passing me 3 jars of condiments

average PC with 3 gaming GPU uses more then 600w PSU

this is not 600w a day.. this is 600w an hour
39w is if computer is in sleep mode/standby

active use 24/7 is actually more like 12kwh. which is about £2.50 a day in electric
..
because you are GPU mining. your obviously altcoin mining.
so before even investing. find a way to calculate how much hashrate you can produce with the 3 gpu's and see how much altcoin you can get for that hashrate, and see if it even comes close to or more then £2.50.

many people GPU mining and asic mining bitcoin in 2012-13(GPU) 2013-21(asic) found that as soon as they broke even
on the miners in 9 months, the hashrate had doubled which meant endlessly paying for more asics just to ensure they got same satoshi earnings. and meant paying more in electric each year

now here is the next thing.. how often does the hashrate/difficulty go up.
this is important because for every 2x in hashrate/difficulty. means that you are going to need to 2x your GPU amount just to stay inline with same altcoin earnings.
this then also means that you will have to 2x your solar panels to power it.

so a word of warning. when buying solar panels which might not break even for 10 years compared to just buying electric from the grid.. you will end up buying endless solar panels and GPU's just trying to stay ahead.

so unless you start with enough solar to be 16x your first years demand, and the cost of such can break even in 5 years.. its not ideal to be playing with solar panels.

the idea being if you have 16x first years demand. if the hashrate doubles each year
(Y2:2x  Y3:4x  Y4:8x Y5:16x)
in years 1-4 you can sell your excess back to the grid to help pay for the panels. and by the 5th year you still have capacity and breaking even/profiting still because its all paid off

just having 3 panels producing 1kwh.. wont even last you a year before needing to change, upgrade,add more

i understand LN fangirls mindset is like saying
'we out performed bank wire transfers of dollar by introducing visa'
but remember visa is a separate payment network than bank wire and "visa" is not "dollar"

try calling LN a multi crypto fast payment network, to actually describe what it is and does (its actually good PR for you fangirls).. pretending visa is dollar2.0 is inaccurate.. as is calling LN, bitcoin2.0

oh and LN did not out perform visa by any metric
there are only under 32 thousand users on LN
(32k nodes, but multiple nodes owned by same people EG LG-BIG has over 40 nodes alone)

visa has done 188billion transactions in 2020 (transaction count not economic value)

i personally know the technical sides but i do enjoy people that like to inform using average joe speaking terms to explain it and i found your format very understandable at the simple level, but there are a few critiques to tweak.

1. its 2016 blocks every 2 weeks which "averages 10 minutes", NOT EVERY 10 minutes

2. bitcoin has never averaged 7tx/s in a single hour, or day or month.

3. the data limit is not a physical risk aversion limit to hardware or access. we are not in 1999 where dial-up and floppy disks were popular. we are in 2021 where 4tb hard drives and fibre internet are common.

4. the fear of 'data centre' centralisation due to bloat is not a issue(point 3). but lack of archiving peers is a centralising issue. the real fear is not the 'cost of data'  but instead due to devs and altnet people trying to convince users that 'pruning' off the blockchain, saying its not important to archive the blocks after validation,  meaning to not offer data-seeding(torrent buzzword) to other peers, while pretending their 'node' is a full network support node even without archiving is more likely to cause centralisation of the blockchain sources.


the networks unit of measure in code/data is actually sats which are transacted/stored in blocks. its only at the human visual display of a wallet that shows it in formatted bundled amounts which is where 100,000,000 sats =1btc. at code/technical/data level you will never see a btc in raw transaction data or on the bitcoin blockchain.


its been about 8 years since the last "computer" mined. these days its ASIC devices laymans("special devices" not "computers")


you should have explained it like:
from 2009 the mining reward for each block was 50btc (5,000,000,000sat) plus fees as a bonus, and every 210,000 blocks(roughly 4 years) this reward halves. and by approximately the year 2140 the reward would half repeatedly halved  down to nothing. leaving the total btc at ~21million circulation limit.
where fee's become the main/sole income for miners, slowly become more important the closer to 2140 it gets


the value of bitcoin is not in the data. transactions dont set the value of bitcoin. because miners still do work even if the block is empty. asic miners dont care if the blocks are filled or not. they never see the blockdata when mining.

the economics of bitcoin value is actually in the asic work performed(electric burned) vs the reward/fee attached. to the block. presently miners see the reward as the main income and the fee's as just a bonus/tip. which will change the closer to year 2140 they get.
if it costs miners more to mine due to mining competition of competing pools and difficulty increases causing the need to have more asics and burn more electric. the miners just refuse to sell their rewards for less than costs. causing bitcoin value to rise to meet/exceed costs. (lack of new coins on market causes a supply/demand economy)

its not a case of asking for more sats per transaction to break even. its a case of asking for more dollars on the market for the limited sats rewarded sats

the mining cost vs market exchange supply demand currently is more important than the fee(bonus/tip)

if there is a over supply of transactions, yes people pay more to outbid each other to rush their transaction in to a block asap. but to attempt to word it that limiting the blocks capacity creates bitcoin value. is misleading and more false attempts to make it look like bitcoin should not scale.

bitcoin can scale and by allowing more transactions, which means more fee's or lower fees for more people
2500tx of $1 or 5000tx of $0.50 is the same miner bonus, but allows more cheaper transactions, also prevents users thinking that the network is being extortionate by limiting scaling on purpose


try white board and permanent marker.. chalk can be wiped off..


gold and bitcoin both have utility so i agree with those aspects, but the value (economic) is in the mining cost.
simple explanation. if gold could be mined in everyones back yard with just a spoon and a coffee filter for $0.50 an ounce. people would happily sell it for $0.51+ where there would be a ceiling where other people wont want to pay more than $2 for the convenience of not getting hands dirty, because anything more then that they might consider mining their own.
golds underlying value is in the acquisition costs. firstly it costs over $900 to mine which sets the baseline value. and then ontop of that value is the speculation of the supply/demand of existing coin and what people are willing to sell it for.
which is why gold bounces between $1100-$1900 in recent years(above base cost value)
bitcoins baseline most efficient mining cost is over $20k so baseline is currently $20k cost with the speculation of market supply and demand above that


bitcoins main purpose is the transacting of sats. not really meant for timestamping file hashs. so maybe you dont need this paragraph above included otherwise its advertising something bitcoin users are trying to avoid bitcoin being used for


the sats are the raw asset that are mined at a cost(electric burned for asics)
gold is the raw asset that is mined at a cost(burned diesel for excavators and sluice machines)


bitcoin is not the network for all open data to be timestamped as a file hash. not everyone wants to put their data into bitcoin and bitcoin users dont want everyones random file hash added. bitcoins sole purpose is to move sats from one owner to another. so there actually is good reason people should use different blockchains and not bloat bitcoins purposefully limited data space.

im sorry to say this but you seem very much a pro-data limiter but at the same time a pro-data bloater. your idea's that bitcoins value is in this limited space whilst suggesting that people should put random data into blocks is atrociously misguided, and also seems to stem from the misguided thoughts of what you believe creates the value bitcoin has.

1. full nodes validate and archive full blockchain
2. validator nodes (pruners/lite wallets) dont archive blockchain after validation
3. miners dont validate transactions. asics have no hard drives. they just create the complex block ID hash.
4. pools are full nodes that have extra scripts to communicate to many miners to give them the blockheader to mine

PoS blockchains are less secure than PoW blockchains. and PoW blockchains range in security based on the amount of hashpower(mining) and the difficulty and the type of hash/scrypt they are mining.

its not just about archiving the blockchain that provides security. but also the mining complexity.


150exa, with an average asic being 110terrahash = ~1.3m asics
1.36m asics using 3.25kw/h = 4,431,818kwh = 4,432mwh =4.4gwh
4.4gwh=38,823gw/year = 38TW/y

its 38TW a year not 130tw hours


1. already explained 'special devices'(asics) not computers
2. well i just mathed it out 51% of 1.36m special devices(asics) = 0.69m special devices

to explain a 51% is more simple.
1. a 51% attacker cannot change the rules of bitcoin. fullnodes would just ignore mined blocks that dont meet the rules.
2. a 51% attacker can try to undo existing blocks and take out transactions they dont want in the blockchain.
3. a 51% attacher can ignore adding transactions it doesnt want in new blocks

lets explain (2)
to undo a transaction in a block to be able to refund/re-spend that value after it has confirmed. requires an attacker to go back and make their own block (of the block containing their transaction they want removed). obviously excluding their transaction in the new attempt. and then create subsequent blocks ontop to catch back up and overtake the networks current amount of blocks, to make the attackers chain of blocks the highest amount of blocks. which then makes the attackers chain of blocks the one everyone treats as the one to follow. thus dropping the list of blocks the attacker doesnt want people having.
this comes at a cost because the attacker needs to have more special device power(asics) to make blocks faster than the rest of the network to be able to go back edit and then catch up and overtake.

because even at the most efficient costs of say 4cent/kwh electric. having atleast 0.69m asics at 3.25kwh costs ~$90k an hour in just electric in the cheapest electric region
(note some countries pay $0.32/kwh=$720k in electric (japan))

hardware: 690k asics at $12k each =$8,280,000,000, spread the cost over a year ROI = $22.68m a day= $945k an hour
=$1m an hour hardware and electric for cheapest region ($1.3m for most expensive region)

if it takes ~ 6 blocks(an hour) of the network moving forward, for an attacker to go back 1 block, edit and catch up. that $1m-$1.3m(all inc.) cost means no one is foolish enough to want to attack the network for $1m-$1.3m just to refund his own small transaction of a pizza price.


yep the further back the block they want to start their change from, the more the $1m an hour costs
to go back 5 years, would cost atleast $788M-$3.15BILLION (in electric depending on region)
and the $8,250,000,000 in hardware cost
means $9billion-$12bill to edit blocks from 5 years ago

seems you have now flipped the script from calling bitcoin a finite resource for transactions.. to now be promoted as being a gate way to infinite transactions.. thus also adding more debunking your earlier thoughts that bitcoin value is in the limited transactions.
there is no value in a finite resource if people have access to infinite resource elsewhere pretending to be bitcoin2.0
 

dont be too quick in promoting alternative networks 'contracts' as being guaranteed resistance to attacks. these altnets have no blockchain, no network wide auditing.

the contracts on altnets can be mismanaged and attackers can dupe their contract partners in multiple ways. many people including the developers themselves of alternate networks like LN have lost value.

seems your flip into infinite utility is just the bait and switch to go into full altnet advertising mode.


mostly correct but maybe try a different analogy then the repeated use of chalk and blackboards.
 

bitcoin can and is a currency. if it allows transfer of value from one user to another. its a currency.
what you are trying to suggest is due to purposefully limited transaction capacity on the bitcoin network, makes it impossible to be a common currency for 8 billion people to use daily. but thats not to say its not a currency. its just restricted itself from being a common world wide daily use currency.
if two people. decide to swap a bottle of vodka for a helping hand repairing a car, then that bottle and that favour is currency between the two. it does not require everyone on the planet to swap vodka for favours to be deemed currency

what you consider as the common widely accepted daily use currency is called "money"


LN is a separate network that allows multiple blockchains to lock funds and peg their value over to LN.
ketchup is not 'french fry layer 2' just because it can go on french fries.
ketchup is in a different state, different form, offering a different serving then fries.

advertising LN as bitcoin2.0 is doing a disservice to bitcoin by making it sound like bitcoin is obsolete and useless and that LN is the replacement thats better in all ways.
sorry to inform you due to the lack of LN having a blockchain, due to lack of network wide auditing of value transfer, due to more attack vectors with the contracts LN is not as secure as bitcoin. and should not be advertised as bitcoin2.0


best way to explain the relationship is this:
on the bitcoin network users transact value into a joint (co-signed) address that locks the value in a contract. like a 2key bank safety deposit box.

then on the altnet. the 2 people then create a different contract that is not measured in sats or btc. but in a different currency called millsat which is pegged at 1000msat=1sat

the LN network does not send msat to a desired destination like bitcoin does. but instead users partnered together partner with other partners. where they then pass the parcel of each mast contract between each partnership. and when it finally gets to the destination. everyone then determines the payment is made. and they can then update their contract. and then if they want to close out of using LN update the other contract measured in sats by rounding the pegged msat to the nearest sat and singing out the contract that can be used on the bitcoin network

..
do not try to mislead people into thinking altnets are bitcoin and all altnet payments are bitcoin transactions. it makes users oblivious to the multitude of risks and lack of independence they actually have when using altnets.


lightning network is an alternate network if people want to peg their bitcoin and play with another network to move value quicker, but this niche has risks and consequences. bitcoin has purposefully been hindered with its developer enticed restrictions to promote other networks.


find a better analogy

1. LN is not 'only one of bitcoins second tier extensions' becasue LN is not fixed/subject to/a feature of only bitcoin. other blockchains can peg to it too. LN only uses the bitcoin brand purely for instant name recognition and to create false instant trust. LN has not actually earned any real trust of its own with the number of flaws and attack vectors it has had in the last 4 years, which bitcoin had not had in its first 4 years

2. yes bitcoin has a contract utility that allows it to be a gateway peg for other networks. and those altnets do have some niche and service utility some may want for fast/cheap or controlled payments. also for being alternate data logging. but that does not mean these other networks are making bitcoin a true "money". (as explained bitcoin is a currency already)

3. yes these other altnets are going to become common 'currencies' (money) but people need to be aware the value might be the same matched economic value. but the unit of account(asset/token) is different at the code/technical level.
a australian dollar is not a american dollar even if you call them both dollar

when you can understand the rounding and different contract formats of the bitcoin locks vs the altnet payments. it becomes clearer


most imagine that 100sat =$1 to allow for 1sat=1cent
this translates to about $1mill / btc
people wont want to make transactions on bitcoin for $25 fee(10sat/byte for 250byte tx) or $250 fee(100sat/byte).
they would prefer a $2.50 fee acceptable cost(250byte at 1sat/byte)

if it costs too much to settle out of an altnet or lock into an altnet. they would just avoid bitcoin altogether and use a different blockchain currency like litecoin to enter and exit LN/sidechains to do their faster payments.


if the price stabilises to double every 2 years. by lets say we deem todays ~$50k per btc(x6.25=) to be this halving's settled value.
using the hourly rate. $50k * 6.25*6= $1,875,000 hourly reward vs $1m-$1.3m hourly cost at 150exa
allowing for hashrate to go upto between 216exa-280exa if hard ware stayed same efficiency

then in 2022=$100k/btc * 6.25 * 6= $3,750,000 hourly reward allowing hashrate to go upto 432exa-560exa
...........2024=$200k/btc * 3.125 * 6= $3,750,000 hourly reward keeping hashrate at/below the 560exa
.......... 2026=$400k/btc * 3.125 * 6= $7,500,000 hourly reward allowing hashrate upto 864exa-1.12zetta
.......... 2028=$800k/btc * 1.5625 * 6= $7,500,000 hourly reward keeping hashrate at/below the 1.12zeta
 and then the plateau begins* of miners losing value from the reward and then requiring the transaction fee's to fill the mising value.
.......... *2030=$1.0m/btc * 1.5625 * 6= $15,000,000 hourly reward keeping hashrate upto 2.24zeta

where if bitcoin price cannot exceed $1mill/btc. then miners will need to be compensated if they want to increase the hashrate or even keep the hashrate

this is because miners are expecting a 'double' of reward value but the coin is maxing at $1m. so they need $600k per coin they are not getting which = $2m an hour.
if we stay with jsut ~2500 transactions a block = 15,000 an hour. it would cost each transaction $135 each

no one would want to pay that.
think about it logically if you bank account done wire transfers slowly, but paypal offered a 'instant fast cheap payment system" but required a entry fee of $135 and an exit fee of $135, would people use paypal their bank account linked to paypal at those costs of the bank vaaut setup in and out of paypal. or would they just end up not using the bank(btc), and find a credit union(ltc) to store their funds outside of paypal and then move daily use amounts into paypal at $1 a entry/exit

this is why bitcoins transaction count needs to increase before the next decade to allow 10x or 100x more transaction onchain


what you will find is that from 2014, big bitcoin mining farms have already had good contract 'quota' system with electric plants. mining farms buy allotments of gw from what power plants call their 'excess production quota' which is a separate allotment they sell to the residential and industry markets, this helps power plants get paid for electric usually not utilised thus allowing power companies to invest in more upgrades.

most of the 'bans' are not ban and never see again. instead they are legally stop 'open use' to then have the legal power to offer licence/permit/ restricted use. because they cant just offer licences for things that have no restriction in the first place. so legally they have to prohibit it first to then have some control/power on how they can then regulate/permit its use.



again this has already been a known thing thats already been done since 2014 with the big mining farms. but not as a state tax, but instead a bonus for power companies selling their 'excess' production that usually goes to waste

the value of gold and bitcoin are very much linked to production cost.

the less miners, the less secure the block hashes are and the cheaper it gets for an attacker to re-organise the blockchain
if btc peaks and flattens at $1m a coin.. but the reward is 0.78125
then excludling any TX fee bonus. it means the hashrate/difficulty drops to $781k a block to attack. so again fee's become important to keep mining rates and difficulty UP. meaning to prevent fee's costing more due to limited tx capacity, the tx capacity needs to increase. otherwise less people will use bitcoin. which means less people running full nodes and less hobby miners trying to get small income from mining because the fee to move their funds will kill their spendable amount left over.

if transaction fees increase in the number of sats.. this does not have anything to do with the dollar valuation of more sats(wont cause market price changes). it just means people making transactions spend more sats to make transactions.
leaving them with les spendable sats. thus turns into a tax. where instead of 1% tax it turns into 10% tax 50% tax eating into and taking away from their spendable sats

meaning if people think an acceptable fee is like 1% of value. instead of sending $250 with a $2.50 fee(250sat fee at $1/100sat) if the fee ends up being say 13500sat/tx($135 fee) people wont want to use bitcoin for transactions anything less than $13.5k.. which rules out people using bitcoin for their monthly wage amount. and definitely wont use bitcoin to lock up weekly spend amounts to play on altnets.
instead they will put their wages into altcoins like LTC and then move weekly amounts into altnet like LN and just avoid bitcoin entirely.

i hope you can start to picture the dynamics/scenarios of what will happen if devs continue to hinder bitcoin growth simply to advertise altnets which other altcoins can also peg to


all countries will at somepoint do a 'prohibition' era of bitcoin. prohibition of a open utility is always needed to then gain the government control to then offer permits/licences/regulations.

check out america's NY bitlicence.
in 1900's anyone could drink alcohol at any age or take morphine for anything. it was then prohibited, and then governments allowed it under certain licence/permit (age restriction, volume consumed restriction, how and where it can be consumed)

in the 1900's of motor vehicles anyone could drive ant any speed in any direction along the dirt paths. so they temporarily prohibited it to then offer driving licences and rules for driving.

in the 2010's people could test drive automated (driverless cars) then it was quickly prohibited and now only permitted under certain conditions of safety standards


dont think that a countries 'ban' is the end of the story. think of it as chapter one of regulating and licencing fiat businesses to interact with bitcoin in the future while regulating the use to ensure its not abused

security?? um.. ASIC miners dont have hard drives, dont touch blockdata. it doesnt matter if a block is 1mb or 100mb. an asic just handles header data and a hash. (always the same size)

decentralisation?? um, we are not in the 1990's of dialup and floppy disk drives where by 1mb every 10minutes is unsustainable.

its 2021. we have 4tb hard drives and 900mb/s fibre internet.
seriously, why are you trying to push old outdated FUD propaganda to try making bitcoin appear to be useless to users.. are you really that much of a altnet fan and bitcoin hater?

..
that said. there are altnets, like sidechains and LN that have their niches. but they should not be considered as the only option people should be offramped, as a solution where people should avoid using the bitcoin network for months on end..
 as THE ALTNETS have their flaws and security risks and centralisation issues.
other networks, even if branded or sloganed as being bitcoin. are not bitcoin.

having to 'federate' the coin locks in either a side chain management firm or a conglomerate of corporate LN hubs in a hub/spoke model is more risky offchain, than actually having individuals with their single signer privkey independence on the bitcoin network.

i cannot believe in 2021 people are acting like kodak in 1999 saying that digital memory wont replace 35mm picture film "cos digital storage cannot scale"

..
to answer the topic creators question

bitcoin even 4 years after SW and 12 years in total has not ever had a single day that has seen 604800 transaction (7tx/s)
7tx/s represents 4200tx every 10min. or 25200tx an hour. there has never been a single hour that has offered 25k tx.

however they have had blocks that are over 2mb but only containing silly amounts of transactions like 230tx
https://www.blockchain.com/btc/block/540107
(sarcastic thankyou(real facepalm) to segwit for that bad efficiency example)


this is not because its technically/physically impossible to increase the transaction count. but is due to politics of developers saying they dont want to allow it, because they can make more profit/income from selling alternate network solutions by hampering bitcoins ability
('we dont want people buying coffee or pizza using bitcoin' (facepalm))

my advice. never make a single plan that require 0% failure to get to goal.
expect failure.

EG if your interest is in driving professionally. dont just plan on the hopes of working for formular1. instead set mini goals. stock car racing, nascar, world touring car cup.

basically dont limit yourself to one single point of failure. have multiple options, avenues to move forward and keep you motivated.
..

if your goal is to lose weight.
dont set unachievable goals. set lots of mini goals. for instance never set a goal that you will run in next years local marathon if you have never run the length of your street before. instead set that you will each day run as far as you can handle. and each day try to run an extra 30 metres.
after 365 days you would have got atleast another 10.95km further than you did on day 1

dont try to go from a 3000cal diet to a 1000cal diet overnight and think you can turn it into a lasting lifestyle. start small. if you usually eat a 6piece KFC bucket. try a 6piece grilled skinless chicken breast meal. and then gradually bring it down to a 1 piece grilled chicken

if you usually drink 3litres of sugared soda. switch to diet soda and then flavoured water and then plane water at 1.5litre a day.
..

if your goal is to learn something new.
dont set a goal to learn something complex that has no meaning in your life. instead think about something that will help you in life. something that is actually useful.

there is no need to learn every line of bitcoin protocol code, if you have no intention to write your own node or do anything more then just make a transaction. instead learn a skill that can make your life easier, less stressful.

heres some more prospective for you.

stories of a middle eastern celebrity were talked about in camp fires and gossip presumably from 0AD to ~150AD. passed to younger generations as fables and learning experiences of what to do and not do in life, aka moral laws.

they didnt get properly written down into whats known as the bible for hundreds of years. and the first celebration of christmas was not until 330AD. where the "celebration" was not turkey or gift giving, but literally just going to church for 'mass'.

so the christmas celebration is more about just giving a thankful prayer that some celebrity(mythical actor, or real) 2000 years ago changed the moral stance of some people/communities/countries.

..
now here's a thought that might provoke something.
what modern event, celebrity act or real life persons actions would you think are worthy of gossiping about from now until say 2200. which then become a popular book of morals and basic law people follow.
it does not need to be real life real world action. it can be fictional acting celebrity. but what modern day parable (moral lesson) do you think can stretch the length of time and still thought about in say the year 4000

for instance.
what if in the year 4000, 3d holograms still play this video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BImnSkhHt5w

even in places like america that do medical insurance where the insurance company literally own the hospitals that they recommend customers use, meaning access to medical records direct from medical systems and even controlling expense to not cost as much cash going out.. there is still medical expense fraud and cost/admin wastage of funds.

so having a public community fund which cant control the cost of hospital visits and cant direct access medical systems, means the waste/fraud value is higher meaning premiums are going to be higher.

having a dao that has scanned documents linked is technologically possible. but if that dao cant compare what a customer scans into an application vs what a hospital has on a officially locked medical record.. then the scanned document the customer shows is useless.

many people can even pay a 'homeopath' doctor to sign a prescription for back pain, when there is no actual backpain.
so your issues are still around the fraud risk.

if governments and insurance companies have problems trying to prove fraud and problems recovering loses.. expect a public dao's fraud issues and recovery issues to be multiple of that.

however saying that:
there are some church community medical funds that do their own medical 'credit union' thing.. but thats where the church actually go see the patient, see their scars, medical bills or even meet them in hospital while on their chemo drip and hand the cheque to the hospital, not the patient

the problems is not in the crypto tech.. its actually issues with the real world proof of eligibility.

first of all. those with known pre-existing conditions, or risky lifestyle can just not mention their risks and pay in minimal, but later collect alot.

also those that are claiming support, can forge their illness looking for a free lotto win.

collecting monthly payments into a multisig address is easy. having certain 'federated' (multi-sig) users sign to release funds is easy..

but deciding how much an individual should pay in, and how and who should get pay-outs. thats the issue that is hard to prove unless you have full access to government/medical records.

yes we are stimulated by certain things, like a sugar high, and tryptophan zen (post christmas nap), salt makes you thirsty.

but the thing is that when food manufacturers actually supplement and fortify(add) extra of these things to over stimulate the body to make people want the product more and become loyal customers. there are things that can be done.

take cheap unbranded soda's (lemonade/cola) you can go to a store in the UK and buy 2 litres of the stuff for under 20p (25c) yet a bottle of just half a litre(500ml) of pure water can be over £1($1.20)

this should be flipped, after all if a company can take 2 litres of water, and then add carbonisation and sugar but sell it for less than the same water without additives, then this is wrong on so many economic and production cost levels.

the UK is trying to make sugared beverages more expensive(sugar tax 5p 7c). but this has not translated into making pure water cheaper.
yes a 330ml can of branded pepsi was 50p (70c) a few years ago and is now £1($1.20) but the non sugar version 'pepsi max' can is now also £1($1.20), and a bottle of 500ml pure water is £1.50($1.85)

so branded beverages have not really made healthy water more economically best option. and people if they dislike the branded sugared and unsugared stuff due to price end up having unbranded cheap stuff with additives

but like i said the government can intervene more and make it so pure water is the cheapest option.

banks are not an institution of the state.
banks are private businesses. REGULATED by state.

there is a difference.

a nations government or even a union government of many nations can close a bank and shift customers to another system. or shift to new systems, just look at the last 30 years where europe government changed the rules which made european banks stop handling francs, peseta's, lira and instead forced to only handle euro's

in the middle east many banks were shut down due to them facilitating terrorism.

its not like the banks "are government" they instead work in partnership with government with government being the rule setter.. and sometimes the loophole creator which can let some banks get away with certain acts.

but again this is different then saying that banks rule a nation

im not saying you dont have skills. im saying a few details seemed a bit rushed. where by it looks like other parts of same images you took time/detail in.
if people can't feel like what they are buying is a finalised product, they would steer away from buying it, even investors wont see it as an asset if it looks unfinished. so im not saying you dont have skill sim saying you havnt finished showing your skills.

as for getting a sale, just listing something on a site is never enough to grab enough random peoples eyes to have a large audiences attention. there are not millions of people looking at NFT sites. you need to spread awareness further outside the site. and it does not need to cost lots of money, or time. just smart decision

what you should do is think about who your audience is. and what currency the bidding is in.

because its ethereum currency(NFT usually are). you first audience are ethereum users. then the second audience is those that like art. then the third is ethereum users that like art and have a desire for skulls and female statues(in your 2 of 10 examples)

so your first port of call is to find all the ethereum forums, blogs, websites that ethereum community hang out in. and present your art listings there. drum up some conversation and find the art collector community within it.

sometimes even try to find out what kind of things some ethereum users prefer to see on their walls/invest in as art assets.

EG usually in some societies a skull with a coin is a message that 'the coin is what gets the dead into heaven'. so is your art sending the right message to what the community feel.
EG is a coin and skull the theme message of crypto. or is something like a coin presented as "the moon"

learn what things actually inspire people. and make art that fits the need and desire of art collectors

EG in tourist towns where there are like 10,000 tourists admiring a certain building each hour/day. if you paint a building, you instantly get the eye of loads of people when you show it for sale in the streets the tourists are.
where as, if you paint paris's eiffel tower. but try selling it in the tourist streets of NY, where tourists are more interested in the trade centre, you wont get the same audience. especially if you are asking for euros(french currency) in a place that only uses dollar.

so look at your 10 pieces of art. think about which niche communities it leans towards. and advertise your links to those communities that use the currency you seek in a smaller niche community that are into your type of art.

because its better then just listing it on a auction site, thinking the auction site alone is your audience.

..
take me for instance. if i wanted to sell my bitcoin face to face. i wouldnt just put a pinned card to a noticeboard for a random coffee shop saying im selling coin. instead id look for the coffee shops that do bitcoin meetups.

she will use up all of her appeal chances first to try claiming innocence. as per usual protocol of what lawyers do..

if she just mentioned names now. she loses all options of appeal.

.. then as last resort, she will claim she is guilty, try to lessen her sentence(though kinda late to switch), then claim remorse for actions, again try reducing her sentence because 'rehabilitation system works' where she is reformed(usual deceit)..  then seek further reduction in sentence if she can provide proof of other criminals.

but she is like 60+ so i hope she spends atleast 20-30 years locked up, and literally dies of old age behind bars even with sentence reductions.

i just hope that it wont be a 2005 epstein deal where he just had a silly curfew thing with special deals to give other criminals immunity

excluding kids and dividing partners making joint tax reports.. there are maybe 150mill people making reports.
if you are spending 40 hours filling out a form, your doing it wrong.

..
back in the days of the wild west. there were no government public services making roads. it was farmers that marked their own paths. treading down the dirt as they all followed the same level ground towards and between towns

there were no public funded fire department. it was just a community spirit to have a bucket near their water source to fill up and run towards their neighbours burning houses.

what happens is when a community decide they want their local or national government to maintain something as a service to the citizens. the costs increase, and instead of making excise tax go from 4% to 80%, they decided that different things should be taxed instead. which started with inheritance tax, and land tax. and eventually income tax. so that people would pay a fair share to the services offered by government. without any one product or property having extortionately high tax.

WAR did really cause alot of costs and thus debt. and that was the main trigger of income tax.

income tax. if left as a simple pay X% of income. is fair and just.
the issue is not in income tax, but in the loop hole laws and the exclusion clauses that let the rich get away with not paying their fair X%.

EG a poor person getting $10 an hour cannot claim their work break sandwich as a business cost. yet a rich guy having a "business meeting" every day at noon with his wife he employed as his personal assistant can claim their lunch as a business cost and get tax deductions on many things attached to the lunch.


EG in the UK government leader during covid was not having breakfasts or parties with friends and family. he was having "business meetings" with employees/assistants (who just happen to be friends and family socialising). thus he used some tax loopholes to pay for food and drink and also lockdown rule loophole to not break the isolation rules. something the por, common person would not get away with.

keto diet is not desirable if you are already lean. because you have no spare fats to burn and so you end up going into ketoacidosis which can kill you.

yes if you are obese taking out fats and sugars will force your body into ketosis and while you have the excess fats to burn, then you can benefit from it. but its not a diet that fits all people.

it can mess up your organs.

..
as for the government involvement in food standards. well we all [should] know by now that when cereals are 'fortified' then they are obviously not naturally good to be eaten straight from the farm. if something requires fortification or supplements or even some kind of added sweetener or flavouring then that just shows that its not naturally palatable and requires additives to fool your tastebuds/palette into accepting it.
government food standards agencies should be more stricter on what things should be deemed food. and what should be considered a non toxic consumable product.
i do say people "should" know the differences. but many dont, many are not taught the basics at school, but the government think that if they believe people know the difference they dont have to separate "food/nutrition" from "consumable products"


a medium rare steak, the body enjoys. no additives needed. a bowl of cornflakes thats fortified with iron and only tastes nice if you add milk and sugar.. is something thats not natural to the body to eat raw corn or flaked corn without additives

even bread is not natural. chewing on wheat your body dislikes. and it involves milling and mixing with other ingredients to make it somewhat acceptable. so bread is not a natural thing.

basically if your obese and want to 'keto' dont replace your breakfast bacon butty for a dry bowl of unsweetened, unfortified, organic cornflakes. because you are not going to get the nutrients

first. i can see you have skill, in places. but i would not say these are final masterpieces.
A. nice detail at the jaw, but then at the forehead, it just looks like scribbles
B. nice detail at the head/chest. but the stomach/arms it just looks like scribbles

when people buy art they need to feel it. they need to look at it and instantly love it. if people are finding issues and thinking hmm could be better, they will not want to show it on their wall or want to own it.

maybe just blend and layer the scribbles to become more smooth tones of shadow and depth. finish the art and really let it show off your skills.

then its just a numbers game. you need to link people to your NFT listing. the more people that see it the more chances of one wanting to buy it.

think of a theme of a community of art enjoying people. and make art that fits their niche, and then advertise to them.
EG there are millions of millenials that like japanese comics, so make something that resembles that and then advertise it to that community.

such as your skull, advertise that to the EMO/goth community.

what you will find is your not going to sell your art for $$billions. because none of the NFT for $$multimillion are legit transactions. they are instead the art seller making his own bid with his own funds for his own price. as a way of getting some news attention about high priced things being sold. and to snowball some later bids to be valued higher by setting an expectation of high costs..(its a false economics game of setting the market value high)

so if you are going to list an NFT dont be a fool to put a extortionate min price in, and hope someone will make you rich. actually put in a fair price for fair value of something similar to what you produce that has already sold in the real world.

EG if it took you a month. charge min bids on values of a few months income. then as you get famous and release more art the loyal fans will 'bid up' the value due to demand.

van Gogh, the famous artists art might now be worth $$millions. but the artist at the time of selling HIS art he did not get a lifetimes worth of money per piece or combined, he was selling his art for coffee prices or weekly wage prices at best.
but even then some of his art whilst he was alive was not wanted, desired.

art never makes the artist rich from one piece of artwork.. it makes the 15th generation owner(investor) of the sold art rich eventually.

GUILTY!  
cmg777 beat me by 9 minutes

BBC is currently interviewing Alan Dershowitz who is explaining that maxwell will appeal, that this case weakens the other cases against p.andrew and that maxwell wont get a 30+ year sentance, but a sub-20 year sentance.

funny part is that Dershowitz was actually one of the [suspected/accused] assaulters of the victims of epstein/maxwell. so the BBC interviewing Dershowitz about the validity of the guilty verdict seems to be lop sided to create a bias that the verdict is unjust.

BBC should have interviewed an impartial law expert. not one of the assaulters.

expect more drama in about 9 months involving the other cases and appeals, seems maxwell and her chums wont just lay down and accept the verdict

derailed, debunked? you are funny.
i was not the one that turned this bitcoin topic into an altnet advert

but what you will actually find is that if you read what i said, without auto replying like a cult member defence guard.
you would see that i said if you actually honestly advertised whats different about LN and its niche away from bitcoin. its features and benefit that are separate to what bitcoin can offer. you would actually end up promoting the altnet better and gain more support for those that want the niche service it offers.

but atleast also promote its issues and flaws so that users are risk aware, and not just the utopian fantasy of bitcoin2.0 brand tagging.

i say this, but i know you wont bother even conceiving the thought. and just continue with your brand stealing auto fame and trust PR method of promoting deceptive utopia's