For those who don't like videos I think it might by based on this "leak":

https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1824o9c/is_this_leaked_explanation_of_what_ilya_saw_real/

I also think it's BS, but let's speculate a bit

Regarding what algorithms could be cracked (by AI/LLMs/deep learning), I think it depends heavily which kinds of mathematical theories are used. As far as I'm aware how LLMs work, they're basically a "statistical summary of all (or many) books/publications in the world". So let's hypothesize that two widely unknown scientists (e.g. from countries not very prolific in math research, ignored by others) were close to break AES (or any other algorithm) using mathematical theories that complement each other, then the AI algorithm in theory could perhaps find a connection between both and crack it "combining" both.

Very dumb (ELI3 or so ) example:

- We have an encryption algorithm that subtitutes each character of a text by the one that follows in the (Latin) alphabet, and then replaced by another one in a Japanese (or Chinese, or whatever) script, but the way it works is not known to anyone.
- One article published in Suriname in 1988 and long forgotten sustains the theory that the algorithm substitutes a Latin character by a Japanese one
- The other book published in Malawi as a master thesis in 2013 sustains the theory that the algorithm substitutes a Latin character by another Latin character (or another one of the same script, at least)
- The AI knows both books (something no human has done because nobody knows the complete mathematical research of Suriname and Malawi, and few would use publications from such different years) combines both methods and finds the correct way to crack the algo.

So I don't consider the approach to crack an encryption algo with the help of a LLM impossible.

The Reddit thread claims the algo used "Tau analysis" in a way a "Project TUNDRA" was expected to work. No idea what that means, (superficial) Googling is not of help here. That only strengthens the BS hypothesis

Edit: At least the "TUNDRA" thing wasn't arbitrarily chosen, it seems to reference a NSA project described here.

No. It's a very rudimentary token standard, without the extended smart contract possibilities offered by ERC-20. You can't do much more than minting and transfering them. Basically the same thing like Coloured Coins which exist already since 2013, only using Taproot and Ordinals techniques.

As any Ordinals NFT-type inscription, you need two transactions to move ORDI if you want to transfer or trade it. See here and here for other disadvantages.

This is the price evolution:



We can see that it had an initial hype taking it to more than $28 per token, then it crashed down to $2, then it went up in a spectacular bounce when it was listed on Binance to $27.50, and now is falling again.

As alani123 wrote, it has no utility, so it's basically a collectible for those who think BRC-20 and Ordinals were an important milestone in the history of humanity

En los últimos días hubo un par de definiciones del futuro gobierno y acerca de los posibles ministros, el posible jefe del banco central etc.. Parece que por ahora al menos al comienzo van por reformas más bien moderadas, y hasta ahora parece que los que van a mandar en el gobierno no son las fuerzas "libertarias" sino las de centroderecha cercanas al Pro (partido que gobernó 2015-19) y hasta del peronismo (de la facción "disidente"), a pesar de lo que publicó Milei en su cuenta de Twitter. Hay que recordar que la plataforma electoral de La Libertad Avanza propone medidas para los próximos 35 años, por ende cuando dice que el cierre del banco central no es negociable, siempre puede excusarse que el cierre puede quedar "para una etapa posterior" (como las privatizaciones mayores, el arancelamiento de las universidades y hospitales etc.).

Eso también quiere decir que en vez de una dolarización completa en la que se elimina el peso se iría avanzando hacia la libre competencia de monedas (al menos eso ya le "recomendaron"). En un principio eso sería positivo para los usuarios de Bitcoin porque se podrían celebrar contratos en BTC sin vueltas adicionales (en línea con lo que dijo Mondino en LaBitConf en el artículo que enlacé en el último post), aunque sigo con dudas que pasará con la industria "bitcoinera" en Argentina si se eliminan las restricciones cambiarias. Lo ideal sería que las empresas argentinas del sector capten algo del mercado internacional, habría que ver.


Para mí hay una probabilidad bastante alta que Milei se quede por cuatro años. Puede tener una "luna de miel" si en el 2024 con el aumento de las cosechas la economía se recupera y baja la inflación, a pesar del ajuste. Es obvio que a Milei lo usan desde varios sectores políticos (lo usó el peronismo en una jugada fallida -- o no tanto, dado su buen resultado en las elecciones para Diputados -- para marginalizar a JxC y ahora lo usa el entorno de Macri, y el "cordobesismo", sobre todo creo que Llaryora está detrás de eso que quiere quedarse con el liderazgo del PJ), pero justo Macri tiene bastante que perder así que sería lo más sensato "recomendarle" de no recurrir a experimentos demasiado extravagantes y minimizar el costo social de las medidas. Lo interesante es que pasará para las elecciones de 2025, si LLA (fuerza política de Milei) se integra al Pro o que pasará.

I'm currently searching for an advertising network that supports Bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies to pay for the ads. It's not necessary that's a crypto-related service, it can also be a traditional service where I could pay e.g. via some kind of gift cards which can be bought with Bitcoin or altcoins (hasn't to be anonymous, registration with real name/phone number is also ok).

Until now the most trustworthy crypto ad service seems to be A-Ads (also called Anonymous Ads, link), which is online since 2013 (afaik) and Trustpilot looks quite good. There is also BuySellAds but that seems to be targeted to bigger customers, while what I'm searching is an Google-Ads-type service for small campaigns.
 
My question is:

- Does somebody here have experiences with them as an advertiser? (positive/negative, everything counts )
- Does it make sense to advertise projects which are not crypto-related there?
- What about international (non-English) traffic? I'm mostly interested in Spanish and German.
- Are there other trustworthy crypto-accepting ad services?


I have of course already googled a bit There are several lists like this one, which show some alternatives to a-ads with even better impression/traffic statistics.

But then I read also this article which strongly recommends against typical crypto ad services like CoinAd. Coinzilla or Bitmedia aren't described that negatively there but seem to be very crypto-focused, while at A-Ads I see also packages for campaigns which are not crypto (nor adult) focused.

Adshares could be interesting perhaps, so I'd be interested in opinions about this one too.

Edit: I added Bidvertiser to the services which seem interesting (a very traditional ad platform accepting Bitcoin), see the post here. So if somebody has experiences ..

@1miau: Isn't it a bit harsh to categorize MinoRaiola as a "known shitposter/plagiarizer" for three (IMO very minor) cases from 2021 and one opinion of a gambling board member (who also categorized this way some other members I'm surprised about finding them in such a list)? I can only judge for the German board because I've not crossed him in the international forum but his posts there are not particularly bad, often he brings some interesting news.

(I hope that is my last intervention here, but that's a doubt I have still.)

Im Moment noch nicht wirklich, ist aber auch nicht akut. Hatte womöglich an Dai gedacht, auch wenn dort auch eine Möglichkeit zum zentralen Eingriff besteht, ist die ganze Konstruktion etwas transparenter - aber auch riskanter, was die Stabilität angeht.

Mich hätte halt technisch interessiert, wie dieses Freezen gelöst ist. Das würde ja praktisch bedeuten, dass man USDT/USDC nicht mit normalen Sendemethoden (also "Partei A unterschreibt mit seinem Privatekey und erteilt das Recht dem Besitzer des Privatekeys B, den Token weiterzutransferieren) versenden kann, sondern dass im Token-Contract Regeln festgelegt sind, die dieses Versenden unmöglich machen können, wenn man auf einer Blacklist steht. Es müsste also bei jedem Versendevorgang ein Check eingebaut sein. Das sollte bei Omni nicht so einfach möglich gewesen sein.

Edit: Wen's interessiert, hab tatsächlich mal reingschaut: hier ist der USDT-Contract, in Zeile 268 ff. wird eine Blacklist definiert, und Zeile 341 ist der Check, mit dem bei jeder Transaktion überprüft wird, das der User nicht geblacklisted ist. Wäre mal interessant wie viele ERC-20-Tokens so eine Funktion verwenden ...

Übrigens ... happy 38000, jetzt hats beim dritten Anlauf geklappt

I meant this proposal more as a sign of goodwill from 1miau, not that these users don't deserve this kind of feedback. Maybe if he does this he has a slight chance to return to DT1, making his anti-scam trust entries more visible again.

(Edit: Alternative: Other DT1 members could "clone" 1miau's scam-related trust entries, so they stay visible.)

Trust in the decentralized way it's used here is a bit like a personal opinion, so I read it as "user X thinks that user Y is Z", not "user Y is Z". Post history of all users is publicly available too, and gives often some insights why these neutral trusts may have been sent. Everybody who does a significant business decision (e.g. trading significant amounts of coins with an user, accepting them into a campaign etc.) should check both.

And the shitposting issue is definitively one where I'm on 1miau's side. The forum is still a great place of debate about Bitcoin. But it has suffered a lot due to this issue, and I'm thankful for everybody willing to invest the time to fight it.

Indeed I don't see really a "victim" here. There were heated discussions and personal opinions left (as neutral trust entries). Things that happen on the internet every second. I do however acknowledge that 1miau does sometimes discuss in an aggressive way and even may behave unfairly (like in his attack here to mole0815), but who can say that he never did that? Those who really got engaged with him in these OT discussions often were not exactly Mother Theresa too - many of them have/had extreme right-wing opinions and/or adhere to conspiracy theories and were also quite aggressive in their discussion style too. In several cases I could perfectly understand why 1miau got angry. Not in all though, but people are different. (And yes, I've followed some of these discussions, mostly passively.)

@MinoRaiola: So you think that's only 1miau's fault that threads like those about Corona and the Ukraine war got closed? What about Blitzfontaene etc. (very aggressive German anti-vaxx user for those who don't know)? I think there were always two sides who contributed to this heated atmosphere. I think some of his attacks on people like you, mole0815 or thandie (or even me ) were not justified but probably written in anger due to other contributors the same day/week.

I didn't want to add more to this drama, but this sentence deserves a comment:

I've searched through 1miau's (quite numerous) negative trust entries to other forum members and I saw only two which are not related to scams or other Bitcoin-related illegal/questionable activity. One of them is a very recent one to digaran, probably related to this thread (and thus perhaps could be reverted if they calm down both), and the other one went to Snork1979 and is actually the only one caused by a disagreement over (RL) politics, as they accused Snork1979 of Putin propaganda (this case was already discussed here earlier).

There is some neutral feedback that could be questionable but neutral feedback does generally not have negative consequences for these users, neither has adding a ~ to their username in the trust network. So in general, while I repeat that I myself would not use the trust mechanism in this way, I don't see major abuses.

Perhaps 1miau could take back these two negative trust entries (even if I probably agree with them with their opinion about Snork1979 but I don't speak Russian) and convert them to neutral, and delete some entries in this thread written probably in anger (for example the unexplainably harsh attack on mole0815). Not much really questionable behaviour would be left. As I already said I agree generally with their quite harsh-looking, but often justified actions against low-quality posting.

I've only now read about this issue (I'm not very active in the meta boards and Reputation) and don't want to add unnecessary content, but it's possible the forum has lost 1miau (they locked several threads with competitions and cancelled them, see this, this and this one).

In my opinion it would be a very sad outcome if 1miau really left, and really hope they can calm down a bit, maybe take a time to relax and then come back, and their "adversaries" in this dispute think a bit about their actions as well. I think 1miau are an excellent high-quality post author and I support their activities against shitposting as well. However I agree with some of you that they may get easily into heated discussions and "shoot over the target" sometimes. And while I agree that everybody can handle their trust settings like they please, I think it should not be used to pressure others. However, some of 1miau's adversaries have shown very questionable stances (radical right-wing in most cases) in some off-topic threads, so I can understand 1miau's anger a bit.

I always wonder when I see such meta problems deriving in such drama but whatever. Let's talk more about Bitcoin instead

Ya expuse un poco mi opinión general sobre Milei en un hilo inglés sobre el tema (@darbitmobilerecovery tiene razón con su sospecha). Tengo alguna y otra expectativa y simpatizo con el liberalismo en general pero Milei como persona me genera una buena porción de escepticismo. No me convence su personalidad (colérico, con este componente esotérico/mesiánico) porque lo que va a necesitar es capacidad de negociación con muchos sectores. Su partido no llega ni al 15% de los escaños de Diputados ni del Senado, con el Pro como posible aliado puede llegar raspando al tercio pero no más de eso. No me gusta ni su vice (me parece un personaje oscuro y muy inteligente, y para mí hay que rezar que Milei nunca renuncie) ni su alineación con Trump y Bolsonaro, aunque tampoco creo que hay que meterlo en la misma bolsa: no es de extrema derecha, más bien se podría decir que es de "extrema centroderecha" ya que su ideología es simplemente una expresión radical del liberalismo clásico con una pequeña dosis de conservadurismo. Es todo un personaje raro, creo que sin precedentes en la historia reciente (hablando de jefes de estado).

Si tengo la esperanza que en el mejor de los casos pueda emprender una lucha más activa contra la corrupción y el clientelismo, aunque el escándalo de la venta de candidaturas, algunos episodios del pasado como su promoción del servicio "dudoso" CoinX, y la sospecha que quiera esconder corrupción de otras figuras políticas que lo apoyan, también me generan dudas. Sin embargo si lo logra lo reconoceré.

Hasta ahora desde su victoria electoral no se ha pronunciado sobre nada relacionado con Bitcoin o criptomonedas pero esto creo que es obvio en una situación como la actual.

Para leer:
La ONG Bitcoin Argentina expresó optimismo por el nuevo gobierno, pero no ofrece "un cheque en blanco" a Milei
Contratos en Bitcoin: la promesa de Milei al mundo cripto

Es posible pero creo que algo tan extremo como lo que tuvimos a mediados del año y ahora quizá no lo veremos más. En mi opinión los más probable es que las olas de actividad/burbujas de BRC-20 sigan bajando en intensidad porque simplemente no hay mucho valor intrínseco detrás de estos tokens. Los tokens ERC-20 en general te dan al menos una ilusión de participar en una empresa, o algunos hasta son directamente utility tokens que te dan algún tipo de crédito para servicios. Y los meme coins independientes como Doge son toda una plataforma con cadena propia. Pero algo como RATS o aún el "token de referencia" (lo podríamos llamar así, por su función de "termómetro" de la intensidad de las burbujas) ORDI? Se podría citar el caso de Shiba Inu que tampoco es independiente y que sobrevivió bastante tiempo, pero en realidad no para de bajar su precio desde mediados de 2022. Y este es el destino que veo para todos estos tokens.

Veo más posible que veamos nuevas olas de nuevas colecciones de NFTs. En este caso sí existe un mínimo de valor real, aunque a mí personalmente no me atraiga en absoluto la UVP de estos NFTs. Pero como hemos visto en febrero/marzo estos NFTs no tienen tanta incidencia en las fees, a lo sumo "cortan" un poco el piso del valor de las comisiones y éstas suben de manera temporaria a 20-40 sat/vbyte, pero no tendremos la congestión total que vemos ahora provocada por BRC-20.

Interessante, meines Erachtens aber falsche Meinung zum Halving in einem Zeit-Artikel von gestern:

Quelle: Kommt jetzt das nächste Krypto-High?

Die fett markierte Schlussfolgerung "die Aktivität am Markt könnte sinken", weil einige Mining-Unternehmen aussteigen, erschließt sich mir überhaupt nicht. Erstens bleibt die Zahl der neu geminten Bitcoins ja dank dem Difficulty-Mechanismus gleich, egal wie viele Mining-Unternehmen mitmachen. Mit dem Halving halbiert sie sich natürlich, aber von der Hashrate hängt sie nicht ab. Und zweitens habe ich ja schon oft in diesem Faden und anderswo geschrieben sind die Miner nur für weniger als 1% des Bitcoin-Handelsvolumens verantwortlich. Warum das irgendwelche Auswirkungen auf dem Preis haben soll, bleibt schleierhaft. Oder kann das mir jemand erklären?

Nicht direkt mit dem Halving im Zusammenhang aber dennoch ein zweiter Punkt im Artikel mit dem ich nicht übereinstimme ist der Hinweis, es fehle an neuen Investoren weil der Preis sich mit weniger Bitcoins bewegt. Denn der Preis wird ja landläufig in US-Dollar berechnet. Und 1400 Bitcoins von Anfang 2023 zu einem Kurs von knapp unter 20000 entsprechen nun mal nicht viel mehr als 700 Bitcoins zu einem Kurs von 36000.

Ansonsten ist der Artikel teilweise gerade für Neueinsteiger lesenswert, für BTC-Experten gibt es wenig neue Erkenntnisse.

Esa frase me pareció un poco rara también. Vi que el artículo fue traducido por IA y me parece que hay una pequeña inexactitud en la traducción porque en el original se ve esto:
Para mí lo que la autora quiso decir con "business experience" es que nunca lideró una empresa o tuvo algún emprendimiento relevante propio. Sí es verdad que como decís tuvo cargos importantes dentro de otras empresas y organizaciones. Se podría debatir si esto ya constituye "leadership", pero el salto desde su actividad anterior a presidente sigue siendo enorme, y creo que tiene razón en argumentar que es una de sus debilidades que no lideró algo más importante que algún y otro equipo de economistas.

@mv1986: 2017 war in der Tat so eine Art Paradigmenwechsel/Tipping-point. Davor ging man eigentlich davon aus, das Altcoins nur einen winzigen Markt darstellen und womöglich bald wieder verschwinden und nur Bitcoin übrig bleibt. Selbst NXT, NEM, Dash und andere kurzzeitige Hypecoins (die teilweise ja auch schon ICO-Token-Standards hatten) konnten daran nix ändern. Mit Ethereum und dem ERC-20-Standard war das dann plötzlich ganz anders ...

Hm. Interessant finde ich ja folgende Zeile:

Self-custodied sollte ja eigentlich "your keys/your coins" bedeuten, also muss es Mechanismen geben, mit denen Tether die Coins trotzdem einfrieren kann. Hat Tether womöglich auch deshalb die Bitcoin/Omni-Chain nicht mehr unterstützt, weil da so ein "Einfrieren" nicht geht, sondern nur mit Ethereum/Tron-Contracts?

Dieser Artikel zeigt wohl in diese Richtung (es scheint also schon länger bekannt zu sein). Das bedeutet, dass ich nun weiß, welche Stablecoins ich ganz bestimmt nicht mehr benutzen werde (hatte USDT sowieso nur sehr selten mal zum Parken von Funds genutzt).

Könnte mir beim heutigen kleinen Drop auch Gewinnmitnahmen aus der Ordinals-Szene vorstellen. Dort gabe es nämlich die letzten Tage eine kleine Bubble (hat ja wahrscheinlich jeder mit halbwegs Kenntnis des Bitcoinmarkts mitgekriegt - deshalb sind die Transaktionen so teuer), nachdem Binance ORDI, einen von diesen BRC-20-Sh*ttoken gelistet hat ... Langsam scheint sie aber wieder zusammenzubrechen, es gibt also Hoffnung für die Fees.

PS: Oder auch das hier:
https://www.zeit.de/wirtschaft/unternehmen/2023-11/binance-ceo-changpeng-zheo-entlassen

No conocía esta propuesta y a simple vista tampoco encuentro nada en Google. ¿Tendrás una fuente?

En general estoy de acuerdo con @darbitmobilerecovery. Ver también este artículo interesante. No estoy de acuerdo en todo lo que dice, pero no la veo a la victoria de Milei tan bullish para Bitcoin (más bien la veo "neutral"), y creo que tiene razón en argumentar que Bitcoin no tendrá mucha importancia en su plan económico.

Es más: por la simple razón de que podría levantar el cepo cambiario es posible que se desplome la actividad cripto en Argentina y que tengan que cerrar varias startups/exchanges locales. El levantamiento del cepo sería obviamente una muy buena noticia para el país si se logra de manera ordenada. Pero la gente perderá una de las grandes razones por las que usó Bitcoin y criptos en general en los últimos años. Se puede afirmar que el "negocio cripto" de Argentina solo tuvo una ventana de oportunidad temporaria por errores de los gobiernos kirchneristas.

Hay una mínima posibilidad que este escenario pesimista no se haga realidad. Por ejemplo, Milei podría intentar de alentar el negocio cripto, quizá habilitando oficialmente exportaciones por BTC (esto lo veo bastante posible), o hasta quitando el IVA a las transacciones con BTC (eso ya sería más bien una utopía ), con la excusa de que no haya tanta demanda de dólares "reales", sino que la gente se acostumbre a los criptodólares como el USDT y a las criptos. Hasta se podría crear una stablecoin estatal, respaldada no por USD sino por activos argentinos. Eso es pura especulación mía ...

Bueno en el caso que se haga como se rumorea, que simplemente autorice el uso del dólar como moneda y para contratos de todo tipo (es decir el "bimonetarismo" que también propuso Bullrich en un momento), no haría falta autorización. Me parece haber leído que ni Ecuador obtuvo autorización de USA, simplemente le dio para adelante. Este video confirmaría que no ese necesita autorización (aunque no se cuán confiable será este canal de YT). Ahora bien, obviamente si EEUU se opone puede haber presiones por otro lado, por ejemplo teniendo en cuenta la deuda argentina con el FMI.

Veo una luz al final del túnel, habrá que ver si es prematuro ...  

ORDI (cuyo listado en Binance causó toda esa segunda ola) bajó unos 25% desde su pico de 27,50 y falló de conseguir un nuevo ATH. RATS y SATS, que hace pocos días fueron listados en KuCoin aparentemente (ver aquí), no pudieron detener su caida. Y al menos las fees hoy ni ayer entraron significativamente al "territorio rojo".

Mi cuadro de mandos de Ordinals muestra que la cantidad de transacciones con contenido Ordinals tuvo un máximo de poco más de 500000 transacciones el 12 de noviembre. Sin embargo, el pico de la ola actual parece haber sido el 15 al 19 de noviembre, cuando se registraron en total casi 2 millones en 5 días, con un poco más de 470000 como máximo el día 18.

Of course Argentina has had one or other form of corruption since the Viceroys' times But for example the Alfonsín government in the 80s has largely escaped from bigger scandals, it was seen generally as relatively austere, although in the economic policy it wasn't very successful, but that was partly caused by the military dictatorship before which had endebted the country due to a capital flight crisis in the early 80s. The following Menem government however had major scandals (and Menem was condemned actually). The only president not investigated by major corruption issues after 1990 was Eduardo Duhalde whose mandate only lasted for 1,5 years (but Duhalde was always suspected for his time as a provincial governor).

Regarding Milei's similarity to Bolsonaro, I strongly disagree he's "the same" kind of personality or views. Milei is a classic liberal/libertarian, and the rest of his ideology is strongly based on Anarchocapitalist views and the "no aggression principle", while Bolsonaro is a classic far-right nationalist who believes in State intervention (although his economic policy had also liberal elements). Milei has rejected nationalism, he even broke with a major taboo - he believes in the Malvinas/Falkland islands inhabitants' right to self determination.

However, where I can agree is that Milei has connections with other "eccentric" right-wing or liberal leaders like Trump/Bolsonaro/Bukele, and he sometimes uses similar communication strategies. He has also some quite right-wing views like the belief that abortion has to be forbidden (he derives it from the "no aggression principle") and also about climate change, which he has denied in the past.

As we are in Bitcoin Discussion here, I link a article with some of Milei's quotes about Bitcoin. In short, he has stated Bitcoin is an "evolution" of money and that it should compete with other currencies.

No, it's not that easy.

Nodes don't have an uniform view about the mempool. So you can't force miners to include certain transactions that pay a certain fee or have waited a certain time, because you can't know they have seen them. It would be necessary to know which transactions "exist objectively" for an efficient priority mechanism, but that's simply not possible when we have decentralized mempools.

If we could enforce a priority mechanism by consensus rule, then we would also be able to enforce an "anti-censorship" rule, i.e. that no transaction that pays enough fees could be discarded by miners. But that has the same problem.

The only way I see to implement such a thing is with a two-step confirmation process: Miners in a block simply collect transactions without verifying them, and in the next block another miner confirms them. This would need collaboration of two miners to override the priority mechanism, but still would be possible. (I have previously mentioned in some discussions a mechanism where nodes have to sign the txes they "know", but this could be gamed, too.)

If you see a way, then - we'd have censorship problem solved, so I'd love to see your BIP

As someone from Argentina I have very mixed feelings about Milei. He has been advocating for an economy where several currencies can compete (in this case, the Peso, the dollar and cryptocurrencies), which should be positive for the local Bitcoin community (although it will be difficult to stabilize the Peso, but once it's done, it may last a bit more than in 2002-9). As a content creator before he became politician (e.g. he wrote articles for a financial newspaper and had a show in TV) he also clearly was pro-Bitcoin.

I however don't believe he'll make BTC legal tender (as I think he's not convinced of the concept of a legal tender). He'll simply push for a permissive regulation, probably.

However, I have serious doubts about his leadership qualities. He's perhaps not necessarily a bad person but a choleric guy who often got very ideologic in his discussions with other politicians and journalists (like in the tweet you linked), and has some very excentric esoteric beliefs (e.g. he believes his deceased pet dog Conan sends him messages from Heaven). But if he wants to solve the country's problems he will have to unite experts from several backgrounds and needs talent to negotiate, also because he doesn't have much seats in Parliament (only about 15% of deputy chamber and Senate seats).

By the way Argentina's problems are not only monetary. The worst problem it has is the long history of corruption which is nothing new, it goes back until the 1990s Menem government. Myself I know people who were offered bribes by politicians. Milei has promised to fight corruption and cut unnecessary parts of the administration (his famous "chainsaw" proposal). But his party has been involved in very shady practices when they selected their candidates (see here). And Milei has even promoted a crypto ponzi scam in the past (CoinX). So we could say it's the first time a possible crypto scammer became president?

At least these episodes clearly cast a shadow over his intentions.

Habe gerade im spanischen Forum davon mitgekommen. Es ging nämlich eine weitaus steilere These (als etwa die Gegnerschaft Cotars zum digitalen Euro oder ihr Bundestag-Projekt) durch einige Medien, besonders innerhalb der Bitcoin/Krypto-Blase, aber auch Forbes hat mitgemacht: Cotar soll daran arbeiten, Bitcoin zum gesetzlichen Zahlungsmittel in Deutschland zu machen

Die Quelle ist wohl der oben verlinkte Cointelegraph-Artikel. Im Interview (steht auch dort) soll Cotar sich dementsprechend geäußert haben.

Siehe hier:

https://www.binance.com/es-LA/feed/post/2023-11-17-german-parliament-representative-endorses-bitcoin-as-legal-tender-179586701154
https://www.forbes.com/sites/digital-assets/2023/11/17/bitcoin-as-legal-tender-joana-cotar-of-german-bundestag-proposes-groundbreaking-legislation-in-germany/?sh=1a9dd5bf50ec
https://cryptopotato.com/german-lawmaker-advocates-for-bitcoin-to-become-legal-tender/
https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/german-parliament-member-wants-to-make-bitcoin-legal-tender

Ein deutsches Medium, das über diesen angeblichen Plan berichtet? Fehlanzeige. Edit: Doch, ich habe zwei gefunden, aber aus der Bitcoin-Blase:

https://www.crypto-news-flash.com/de/bitcoin-btc-soll-in-deutschland-gesetzliches-zahlungsmittel-werden-bundestag-schlaegt-bahnbrechende-gesetzgebung-vor
https://krypto-guru.de/news/bitcoin-als-alternative-zum-digitalen-euro/

Schade auch, dass das Interview mit Cotar, das die Quelle darstellen soll, nicht vollständig einzusehen ist. Nur das wurde zitiert:


Ich finde das ganze primär aus soziologisch/medienwissenschaftlicher Perspektive interessant. Diese Artikel der Art "XXX schlägt vor, Bitcoin zum gesetzlichen Zahlungsmittel zu machen" sprossen nach El Salvador ja nur so aus dem Boden. Jetzt ist mal Deutschland dran - und (Edit: fast, s.o.) niemand in Deutschland hat's gemerkt

(Unabhängig von der politischen Herkunft der Abgeordneten und der meisten ihrer Positionen zu anderen Themen finde ich das Projekt "Bitcoin im Bundestag" aber durchaus interessant. Und ein Teil des Projekts ist tatsächlich, über Strategien für Staaten zu informieren, um Bitcoin zu unterstützen, mit El Salvador als Beispiel.)


Edit: Ich glaube, ich tue Cointelegraph doch Unrecht: Frau Cotar bereitet offensichtlich tatsächlich einen Antrag für die Anerkennung von Bitcoin als gesetzliches Zahlungsmittel vor. Ich zitiere daraus:


Stehen auch weitere interessante Vorschläge drin, etwa die Zahlung von Steuern mit Bitcoin und die Gleichstellung von Bitcoin-Core-Entwicklern mit EZB-Mitarbeitern (bei der Steuerpflicht). In der Begründung wird sogar die Schaffung einer Bitcoin-Reserve empfohlen. (Allerdings ist auch einiges an Geschwurbel über die EZB drin.)

Natürlich ist die Annahme dieses Gesetzesentwurfs (bzw. zur Zeit ist es ein "Entwurf für einen Entwurf") äußerst fraglich, aber mal sehen, immerhin wird vielleicht drüber geredet. Wäre vielleicht was, mit dem sich auch die FDP profilieren könnte.