La amenaza más peligrosa no es la transparencia: es el anonimato entre los poderosos.
En las sombras de la Red Relámpago, las cosas oscuras se arrastran y la responsabilidad desaparece.
Cuando el gobierno actúa en secreto, no es la libertad lo que protegen, sino su corrupción.
No es la persona pequeña la que se beneficia del anonimato: son los corruptos, los criminales y los poderosos.
Un sistema que oculta las transacciones oculta la verdad. Y sin verdad, la justicia no puede sobrevivir.
La verdadera libertad no está en las sombras. Está en la luz, donde cada acción es visible y cada error exige una rendición de cuentas.
La Red Relámpago no protege a la gente; protege a los poderosos borrando la verdad.
S. Tominaga
@CsTominaga
19h • 7 tweets
Oct 03, 2024
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1841635308368257533.html
En las sombras de la Red Relámpago, las cosas oscuras se arrastran y la responsabilidad desaparece.
Cuando el gobierno actúa en secreto, no es la libertad lo que protegen, sino su corrupción.
No es la persona pequeña la que se beneficia del anonimato: son los corruptos, los criminales y los poderosos.
Un sistema que oculta las transacciones oculta la verdad. Y sin verdad, la justicia no puede sobrevivir.
La verdadera libertad no está en las sombras. Está en la luz, donde cada acción es visible y cada error exige una rendición de cuentas.
La Red Relámpago no protege a la gente; protege a los poderosos borrando la verdad.
S. Tominaga
@CsTominaga
19h • 7 tweets
Oct 03, 2024
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1841635308368257533.html
Threadreaderapp
Thread by @CsTominaga on Thread Reader App
@CsTominaga: The most dangerous threat isn’t transparency—it’s anonymity among the powerful. In the shadows of the Lightning Network, the dark things crawl, and accountability vanishes. When the government acts in s...…
👍1
Los partidarios del BTC tienen un pequeño defecto del que preferirían no hablar. No pueden. En realidad no. Pero sigue ahí, como una piedra en el zapato. El problema con el BTC es que no se puede utilizar como dinero digital. No de la forma que importa. Se suponía que debía serlo, pero en algún momento se perdió.
La idea, la visión, se les escapó de las manos como si fuera arena y ahora se aferran a algo frágil, inútil en manos de las personas que más lo necesitan.
Se suponía que iba a ser algo sencillo, algo que se pudiera usar día tras día, como se usa el dinero para el autobús, para el café, para las miles de pequeñas cosas que componen una vida, pero ya no es así.
Se ha convertido en una reliquia, algo que los especuladores pueden tirar a la basura. Ya no es para la gente común, ni para la persona que necesita comprar pan o pagar una factura.
Te dirán lo contrario. Te dirán que está por llegar. Que cambiará. Que están trabajando en ello. Pero la verdad es más simple de lo que quieren admitir.
BTC no se puede usar como dinero digital.
Simplemente no se puede.
S. Tominaga
@CsTominaga
19h • 5 tweets
Oct 02, 2024
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1841282738978247154.html
La idea, la visión, se les escapó de las manos como si fuera arena y ahora se aferran a algo frágil, inútil en manos de las personas que más lo necesitan.
Se suponía que iba a ser algo sencillo, algo que se pudiera usar día tras día, como se usa el dinero para el autobús, para el café, para las miles de pequeñas cosas que componen una vida, pero ya no es así.
Se ha convertido en una reliquia, algo que los especuladores pueden tirar a la basura. Ya no es para la gente común, ni para la persona que necesita comprar pan o pagar una factura.
Te dirán lo contrario. Te dirán que está por llegar. Que cambiará. Que están trabajando en ello. Pero la verdad es más simple de lo que quieren admitir.
BTC no se puede usar como dinero digital.
Simplemente no se puede.
S. Tominaga
@CsTominaga
19h • 5 tweets
Oct 02, 2024
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1841282738978247154.html
Threadreaderapp
Thread by @CsTominaga on Thread Reader App
@CsTominaga: The BTC people have one little flaw they’d rather not speak about. They can’t. Not really. But it sits there all the same, like a rock in the shoe. The thing about BTC is, it...
🔥1
2024 10 03 threadreaderapp.pdf
2.8 MB
Si tienes tiempo para leer, aquí hay lectura para rato!!!😎
https://threadreaderapp.com/user/CsTominaga
https://threadreaderapp.com/user/CsTominaga
News: Patents, Corporations & Property Rights
https://youtube.com/watch?v=33uK4oRMUao&si=obcB99Pj4DXW5Xv2
https://youtube.com/watch?v=33uK4oRMUao&si=obcB99Pj4DXW5Xv2
YouTube
News: Patents, Corporations & Property Rights
http://www.BetBitcoinSV.com
https://www.BsvBroker.com
https://lamint.io/join/45d2f799-0dce-4361-81fb-dc9b5b29e477
https://rumble.com/v5fxsvx-9222024-sg-sits-down-w-historianbsv-specialist-sirtoshi-and-quantum-finance.html
https://www.BsvBroker.com
https://lamint.io/join/45d2f799-0dce-4361-81fb-dc9b5b29e477
https://rumble.com/v5fxsvx-9222024-sg-sits-down-w-historianbsv-specialist-sirtoshi-and-quantum-finance.html
S Tominaga
@CsTominaga
18h • 5 tweets • Read on X
Let us, then, examine the true nature of entities like Unified Patents LLC and COPA through the lens of reason, not deception.
These organizations cloak themselves in the rhetoric of justice, all while perpetuating an insidious game that serves not the innovator, but the corporate giants that feed off the ideas of others.
They masquerade as defenders of intellectual property, but what they are, in essence, is the antithesis of that. They stand not for the mind that creates but for the bureaucracy that seeks to enslave it.
Unified Patents LLC does not protect against so-called "patent trolls"—it is the troll.
With their clever legal maneuvering, they undermine the very concept of individual ownership and innovation, allowing large corporations to crush the weak, to extinguish the light of invention before it has even had the chance to shine.
COPA, under the guise of some high-minded alliance, is nothing more than a shield—a litigation buffer designed to protect these corporate titans from the consequences of their own mediocrity.
What is their game?
It is simple.
They hold just enough funding to weather legal battles without consequence.
Should one entity fall, they will simply rise from the ashes under a different name, carrying on their insidious work, indifferent to the creators left in ruin.
These entities do not innovate; they litigate. And when they lose? They lose nothing—because their structure is designed to shield them, to phoenix into a new aggressive form, continuing their assault on the very thing that keeps progress alive: individual innovation.
This is the moral inversion of our time—where the creators, the thinkers, the minds that drive civilization forward are vilified as "trolls," while the true looters are heralded as protectors of the system. They claim to fight for fairness, but fairness is not their goal.
Their goal is to ensure that the strong—the corporations with endless resources—never have to innovate again. Instead, they can simply litigate their way to dominance, crushing the very individuals who would dare to challenge them with a better idea.
And so, what we are witnessing is the slow, deliberate death of innovation, buried beneath layers of legal sophistry and corporate doublespeak.
It is not the so-called "patent trolls" that threaten the future of progress—it is these entities, these litigation machines, that have no purpose other than to shield the mediocre from the consequences of their own inability to create.
• • •
S Tominaga
@CsTominaga
21h
COPA’s claim (in response to my skeleton) that I used ChatGPT to generate legal documents is a prime example of a classic logical fallacy: the ad hominem attack. Instead of addressing the actual merits of my case, they attempt to undermine my credibility by making baseless allegations that are completely irrelevant to the matter at hand. What’s more, during the court proceedings, COPA had access to all of my files and documents. If there had been any evidence supporting their claim, they would have found it. Yet, despite finding nothing, they continue to make these false accusations.
This is not an argument grounded in facts or logic—it’s a diversion, a way to sidestep the substantive issues by casting aspersions on me personally. The use of such tactics is a clear indication that they either cannot or will not engage with the real questions before the court.
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1841777816817566158.html
@CsTominaga
18h • 5 tweets • Read on X
Let us, then, examine the true nature of entities like Unified Patents LLC and COPA through the lens of reason, not deception.
These organizations cloak themselves in the rhetoric of justice, all while perpetuating an insidious game that serves not the innovator, but the corporate giants that feed off the ideas of others.
They masquerade as defenders of intellectual property, but what they are, in essence, is the antithesis of that. They stand not for the mind that creates but for the bureaucracy that seeks to enslave it.
Unified Patents LLC does not protect against so-called "patent trolls"—it is the troll.
With their clever legal maneuvering, they undermine the very concept of individual ownership and innovation, allowing large corporations to crush the weak, to extinguish the light of invention before it has even had the chance to shine.
COPA, under the guise of some high-minded alliance, is nothing more than a shield—a litigation buffer designed to protect these corporate titans from the consequences of their own mediocrity.
What is their game?
It is simple.
They hold just enough funding to weather legal battles without consequence.
Should one entity fall, they will simply rise from the ashes under a different name, carrying on their insidious work, indifferent to the creators left in ruin.
These entities do not innovate; they litigate. And when they lose? They lose nothing—because their structure is designed to shield them, to phoenix into a new aggressive form, continuing their assault on the very thing that keeps progress alive: individual innovation.
This is the moral inversion of our time—where the creators, the thinkers, the minds that drive civilization forward are vilified as "trolls," while the true looters are heralded as protectors of the system. They claim to fight for fairness, but fairness is not their goal.
Their goal is to ensure that the strong—the corporations with endless resources—never have to innovate again. Instead, they can simply litigate their way to dominance, crushing the very individuals who would dare to challenge them with a better idea.
And so, what we are witnessing is the slow, deliberate death of innovation, buried beneath layers of legal sophistry and corporate doublespeak.
It is not the so-called "patent trolls" that threaten the future of progress—it is these entities, these litigation machines, that have no purpose other than to shield the mediocre from the consequences of their own inability to create.
• • •
S Tominaga
@CsTominaga
21h
COPA’s claim (in response to my skeleton) that I used ChatGPT to generate legal documents is a prime example of a classic logical fallacy: the ad hominem attack. Instead of addressing the actual merits of my case, they attempt to undermine my credibility by making baseless allegations that are completely irrelevant to the matter at hand. What’s more, during the court proceedings, COPA had access to all of my files and documents. If there had been any evidence supporting their claim, they would have found it. Yet, despite finding nothing, they continue to make these false accusations.
This is not an argument grounded in facts or logic—it’s a diversion, a way to sidestep the substantive issues by casting aspersions on me personally. The use of such tactics is a clear indication that they either cannot or will not engage with the real questions before the court.
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1841777816817566158.html
Threadreaderapp
Thread by @CsTominaga on Thread Reader App
@CsTominaga: Let us, then, examine the true nature of entities like Unified Patents LLC and COPA through the lens of reason, not deception. These organizations cloak themselves in the rhetoric of justice, all while ...…
Whether I used AI or not to write the skeleton (which I did not) is completely irrelevant to the authenticity of the evidence or the strength of the arguments I have presented. But by throwing out these unsubstantiated claims, COPA hopes to distract from the actual evidence, shifting the focus away from what matters: the facts.
This is the kind of thing that may work in the world of public opinion, where emotion and personal attacks often take precedence over logic and reason. But in a court of law, where decisions are—or at least should be—based on facts and evidence, such tactics should have no place. COPA’s allegations, lacking any proof, amount to nothing more than a smokescreen. It's a transparent attempt to discredit me without addressing the substance of my case. And that’s the hallmark of a weak argument—when you can’t refute the facts, you attack the person instead.
Read 7 tweets

S Tominaga
@CsTominaga
Oct 3
Martti Malmi and Adam Back—
This is the kind of thing that may work in the world of public opinion, where emotion and personal attacks often take precedence over logic and reason. But in a court of law, where decisions are—or at least should be—based on facts and evidence, such tactics should have no place. COPA’s allegations, lacking any proof, amount to nothing more than a smokescreen. It's a transparent attempt to discredit me without addressing the substance of my case. And that’s the hallmark of a weak argument—when you can’t refute the facts, you attack the person instead.
Read 7 tweets

S Tominaga
@CsTominaga
Oct 3
Martti Malmi and Adam Back—
Threadreaderapp
Latest Twitter Threads by @CsTominaga on Thread Reader App
Read the latest Twitter threads from @CsTominaga on Thread Reader App!
S Tominaga
@CsTominaga
18h • 5 tweets • Leer más X
Examinemos, entonces, la verdadera naturaleza de entidades como Unified Patents LLC y COPA a través de la lente de la razón, no del engaño.
Estas organizaciones se disfrazan de retórica de justicia, mientras perpetúan un juego insidioso que no beneficia al innovador, sino a los gigantes corporativos que se alimentan de las ideas de otros.
Se hacen pasar por defensores de la propiedad intelectual, pero lo que son, en esencia, es la antítesis de eso. No representan a la mente que crea, sino a la burocracia que busca esclavizarla.
Unified Patents LLC no protege contra los llamados "trolls de patentes"; es el troll.
Con sus hábiles maniobras legales, socavan el concepto mismo de propiedad individual e innovación, permitiendo que las grandes corporaciones aplasten a los débiles, extingan la luz de la invención antes de que haya tenido la oportunidad de brillar.
La COPA, bajo la apariencia de una alianza de nobles ideas, no es más que un escudo, un amortiguador de litigios diseñado para proteger a estos titanes corporativos de las consecuencias de su propia mediocridad.
¿Cuál es su juego?
Es simple.
Tienen la financiación suficiente para soportar batallas legales sin consecuencias.
Si una entidad cae, simplemente resurgirá de las cenizas bajo un nombre diferente, continuando su trabajo insidioso, indiferentes a los creadores que quedan en la ruina.
Estas entidades no innovan; litigan. ¿Y cuando pierden? No pierden nada, porque su estructura está diseñada para protegerlas, para transformarse en un ave fénix en una nueva forma agresiva, continuando su ataque contra lo que mantiene vivo el progreso: la innovación individual.
Esta es la inversión moral de nuestro tiempo: los creadores, los pensadores, las mentes que impulsan la civilización son vilipendiados como "trolls", mientras que los verdaderos saqueadores son proclamados como protectores del sistema. Afirman luchar por la justicia, pero la justicia no es su objetivo.
Su objetivo es garantizar que los fuertes (las corporaciones con recursos infinitos) nunca más tengan que innovar. En cambio, pueden simplemente litigar para lograr el dominio, aplastando a los mismos individuos que se atreverían a desafiarlos con una mejor idea.
Y así, lo que estamos presenciando es la muerte lenta y deliberada de la innovación, enterrada bajo capas de sofistería legal y doble discurso corporativo.
No son los llamados "trolls de patentes" los que amenazan el futuro del progreso; son estas entidades, estas máquinas de litigio, que no tienen otro propósito que proteger a los mediocres de las consecuencias de su propia incapacidad para crear.
• • •
S Tominaga
@CsTominaga
21h
La afirmación de COPA (en respuesta a mi esqueleto) de que usé ChatGPT para generar documentos legales es un excelente ejemplo de una falacia lógica clásica: el ataque ad hominem. En lugar de abordar los méritos reales de mi caso, intentan socavar mi credibilidad haciendo acusaciones infundadas que son completamente irrelevantes para el asunto en cuestión. Es más, durante los procedimientos judiciales, COPA tuvo acceso a todos mis archivos y documentos. Si hubiera habido alguna evidencia que respaldara su afirmación, la habrían encontrado. Sin embargo, a pesar de no encontrar nada, continúan haciendo estas acusaciones falsas.
Este no es un argumento basado en hechos o lógica: es una distracción, una forma de eludir las cuestiones sustanciales al poner en duda mi persona personalmente. El uso de tales tácticas es una clara indicación de que no pueden o no quieren abordar las preguntas reales ante el tribunal.
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1841777816817566158.html
@CsTominaga
18h • 5 tweets • Leer más X
Examinemos, entonces, la verdadera naturaleza de entidades como Unified Patents LLC y COPA a través de la lente de la razón, no del engaño.
Estas organizaciones se disfrazan de retórica de justicia, mientras perpetúan un juego insidioso que no beneficia al innovador, sino a los gigantes corporativos que se alimentan de las ideas de otros.
Se hacen pasar por defensores de la propiedad intelectual, pero lo que son, en esencia, es la antítesis de eso. No representan a la mente que crea, sino a la burocracia que busca esclavizarla.
Unified Patents LLC no protege contra los llamados "trolls de patentes"; es el troll.
Con sus hábiles maniobras legales, socavan el concepto mismo de propiedad individual e innovación, permitiendo que las grandes corporaciones aplasten a los débiles, extingan la luz de la invención antes de que haya tenido la oportunidad de brillar.
La COPA, bajo la apariencia de una alianza de nobles ideas, no es más que un escudo, un amortiguador de litigios diseñado para proteger a estos titanes corporativos de las consecuencias de su propia mediocridad.
¿Cuál es su juego?
Es simple.
Tienen la financiación suficiente para soportar batallas legales sin consecuencias.
Si una entidad cae, simplemente resurgirá de las cenizas bajo un nombre diferente, continuando su trabajo insidioso, indiferentes a los creadores que quedan en la ruina.
Estas entidades no innovan; litigan. ¿Y cuando pierden? No pierden nada, porque su estructura está diseñada para protegerlas, para transformarse en un ave fénix en una nueva forma agresiva, continuando su ataque contra lo que mantiene vivo el progreso: la innovación individual.
Esta es la inversión moral de nuestro tiempo: los creadores, los pensadores, las mentes que impulsan la civilización son vilipendiados como "trolls", mientras que los verdaderos saqueadores son proclamados como protectores del sistema. Afirman luchar por la justicia, pero la justicia no es su objetivo.
Su objetivo es garantizar que los fuertes (las corporaciones con recursos infinitos) nunca más tengan que innovar. En cambio, pueden simplemente litigar para lograr el dominio, aplastando a los mismos individuos que se atreverían a desafiarlos con una mejor idea.
Y así, lo que estamos presenciando es la muerte lenta y deliberada de la innovación, enterrada bajo capas de sofistería legal y doble discurso corporativo.
No son los llamados "trolls de patentes" los que amenazan el futuro del progreso; son estas entidades, estas máquinas de litigio, que no tienen otro propósito que proteger a los mediocres de las consecuencias de su propia incapacidad para crear.
• • •
S Tominaga
@CsTominaga
21h
La afirmación de COPA (en respuesta a mi esqueleto) de que usé ChatGPT para generar documentos legales es un excelente ejemplo de una falacia lógica clásica: el ataque ad hominem. En lugar de abordar los méritos reales de mi caso, intentan socavar mi credibilidad haciendo acusaciones infundadas que son completamente irrelevantes para el asunto en cuestión. Es más, durante los procedimientos judiciales, COPA tuvo acceso a todos mis archivos y documentos. Si hubiera habido alguna evidencia que respaldara su afirmación, la habrían encontrado. Sin embargo, a pesar de no encontrar nada, continúan haciendo estas acusaciones falsas.
Este no es un argumento basado en hechos o lógica: es una distracción, una forma de eludir las cuestiones sustanciales al poner en duda mi persona personalmente. El uso de tales tácticas es una clara indicación de que no pueden o no quieren abordar las preguntas reales ante el tribunal.
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1841777816817566158.html
S. Tominaga AKA CSW
Oct 3, 2024
https://x.com/CsTominaga/status/1841638758984388655?t=BqRmILnz1y7xuqwfjiZyMQ&s=19
https://t.me/S_Tominaga/1071
Oct 3, 2024
https://x.com/CsTominaga/status/1841638758984388655?t=BqRmILnz1y7xuqwfjiZyMQ&s=19
https://t.me/S_Tominaga/1071
There’s no doubt that misinformation is a growing problem on the internet.
We see it every day—rumors, falsehoods, half-truths spreading like wildfire. But let me be clear: the answer to this problem is not censorship. It’s not about silencing voices or removing information.
The answer lies in something far more powerful—attribution and accountability.
Right now, we see too many people afraid—afraid of the truth.
They fear the responsibility that comes with being held accountable for their words.
But the truth, my friends, must be issued responsibly. And to do that, we need a system of accountability.
Anonymity, as it exists today, is what breeds misinformation. When people hide behind a veil of anonymity, we can’t hold them accountable. We can’t hold their ideas accountable.
We can’t debate openly and honestly when those who spread misinformation can simply erase their trail and disappear.
What we need is a system that is both open and transparent, but one that also respects privacy.
There’s a fundamental difference between anonymity and privacy.
A pseudonym—like those used by the American founding fathers—can still hold weight, can still build credibility over time.
We may not know the name right away, but we can follow the ideas and attribute them to someone who stands by their words.
That’s different from the anonymity we see today, which allows people to hide in the dark, to spread misinformation without consequence.
Anonymity is the breeding ground for misinformation.
It’s where ideas can grow without scrutiny, without accountability.
But privacy—privacy is different. It allows people to protect their personal lives while still standing behind their ideas.
The American founding fathers used pseudonyms, yes, but we can still trace those names back to the men who built this nation.
That’s the difference.
Anonymity is what lives in the dark. Privacy is what lives in the light.
And if we’re going to fight misinformation, we don’t do it by censoring voices.
We do it by bringing the truth into the light.
We do it by holding people accountable for their words and actions.
We do it by building systems that allow for debate, transparency, and accountability—not ones that encourage hiding, erasing, and disappearing.
Misinformation can’t thrive when truth is out in the open.
But we can only get there when we move away from the shadows of anonymity and into the light of privacy, responsibility, and truth.
So let’s not be afraid of the truth, and let’s not be afraid to stand by it.
Because only when we capture the truth, only when we stand accountable for it, can we truly move forward.
S. Tominaga AKA CSW
Oct 3, 2024
https://x.com/CsTominaga/status/1841638758984388655?t=BqRmILnz1y7xuqwfjiZyMQ&s=19
https://t.me/S_Tominaga/1071
We see it every day—rumors, falsehoods, half-truths spreading like wildfire. But let me be clear: the answer to this problem is not censorship. It’s not about silencing voices or removing information.
The answer lies in something far more powerful—attribution and accountability.
Right now, we see too many people afraid—afraid of the truth.
They fear the responsibility that comes with being held accountable for their words.
But the truth, my friends, must be issued responsibly. And to do that, we need a system of accountability.
Anonymity, as it exists today, is what breeds misinformation. When people hide behind a veil of anonymity, we can’t hold them accountable. We can’t hold their ideas accountable.
We can’t debate openly and honestly when those who spread misinformation can simply erase their trail and disappear.
What we need is a system that is both open and transparent, but one that also respects privacy.
There’s a fundamental difference between anonymity and privacy.
A pseudonym—like those used by the American founding fathers—can still hold weight, can still build credibility over time.
We may not know the name right away, but we can follow the ideas and attribute them to someone who stands by their words.
That’s different from the anonymity we see today, which allows people to hide in the dark, to spread misinformation without consequence.
Anonymity is the breeding ground for misinformation.
It’s where ideas can grow without scrutiny, without accountability.
But privacy—privacy is different. It allows people to protect their personal lives while still standing behind their ideas.
The American founding fathers used pseudonyms, yes, but we can still trace those names back to the men who built this nation.
That’s the difference.
Anonymity is what lives in the dark. Privacy is what lives in the light.
And if we’re going to fight misinformation, we don’t do it by censoring voices.
We do it by bringing the truth into the light.
We do it by holding people accountable for their words and actions.
We do it by building systems that allow for debate, transparency, and accountability—not ones that encourage hiding, erasing, and disappearing.
Misinformation can’t thrive when truth is out in the open.
But we can only get there when we move away from the shadows of anonymity and into the light of privacy, responsibility, and truth.
So let’s not be afraid of the truth, and let’s not be afraid to stand by it.
Because only when we capture the truth, only when we stand accountable for it, can we truly move forward.
S. Tominaga AKA CSW
Oct 3, 2024
https://x.com/CsTominaga/status/1841638758984388655?t=BqRmILnz1y7xuqwfjiZyMQ&s=19
https://t.me/S_Tominaga/1071
💯1
No hay duda de que la desinformación es un problema creciente en Internet.
Lo vemos todos los días: rumores, falsedades, medias verdades que se propagan como un reguero de pólvora. Pero quiero ser claro: la respuesta a este problema no es la censura. No se trata de silenciar voces o eliminar información.
La respuesta está en algo mucho más poderoso: la atribución y la rendición de cuentas.
En este momento, vemos a demasiadas personas asustadas, asustadas de la verdad.
Temen la responsabilidad que conlleva tener que rendir cuentas por sus palabras.
Pero la verdad, amigos míos, debe emitirse de manera responsable. Y para ello, necesitamos un sistema de rendición de cuentas.
El anonimato, tal como existe hoy, es lo que genera desinformación. Cuando las personas se esconden detrás de un velo de anonimato, no podemos exigirles responsabilidades. No podemos exigirles responsabilidades por sus ideas.
No podemos debatir abiertamente y honestamente cuando quienes difunden desinformación pueden simplemente borrar su rastro y desaparecer.
Lo que necesitamos es un sistema que sea abierto y transparente, pero que también respete la privacidad.
Hay una diferencia fundamental entre el anonimato y la privacidad.
Un seudónimo, como los que usaban los padres fundadores de Estados Unidos, puede tener peso y generar credibilidad con el tiempo.
Puede que no conozcamos el nombre de inmediato, pero podemos seguir las ideas y atribuirlas a alguien que se mantiene fiel a sus palabras.
Eso es diferente del anonimato que vemos hoy, que permite a la gente esconderse en la oscuridad y difundir información errónea sin consecuencias.
El anonimato es el caldo de cultivo para la desinformación.
Es donde las ideas pueden crecer sin escrutinio, sin rendición de cuentas.
Pero la privacidad... la privacidad es diferente. Permite a la gente proteger su vida personal y al mismo tiempo defender sus ideas.
Los padres fundadores de Estados Unidos usaban seudónimos, sí, pero todavía podemos rastrear esos nombres hasta los hombres que construyeron esta nación.
Esa es la diferencia.
El anonimato es lo que vive en la oscuridad. La privacidad es lo que vive en la luz.
Y si vamos a luchar contra la desinformación, no lo haremos censurando voces.
Lo haremos sacando la verdad a la luz.
Lo haremos responsabilizando a las personas de sus palabras y acciones.
Lo haremos construyendo sistemas que permitan el debate, la transparencia y la rendición de cuentas, no sistemas que fomenten el ocultamiento, el borrado y la desaparición.
La desinformación no puede prosperar cuando la verdad sale a la luz.
Pero solo podemos llegar allí cuando nos alejemos de las sombras del anonimato y nos adentremos en la luz de la privacidad, la responsabilidad y la verdad.
Así que no tengamos miedo de la verdad y no tengamos miedo de defenderla.
Porque solo cuando capturemos la verdad, solo cuando nos hagamos responsables de ella, podremos avanzar de verdad.
S. Tominaga AKA CSW
Oct 3, 2024
https://x.com/CsTominaga/status/1841638758984388655?t=BqRmILnz1y7xuqwfjiZyMQ&s=19
https://t.me/S_Tominaga/1071
Lo vemos todos los días: rumores, falsedades, medias verdades que se propagan como un reguero de pólvora. Pero quiero ser claro: la respuesta a este problema no es la censura. No se trata de silenciar voces o eliminar información.
La respuesta está en algo mucho más poderoso: la atribución y la rendición de cuentas.
En este momento, vemos a demasiadas personas asustadas, asustadas de la verdad.
Temen la responsabilidad que conlleva tener que rendir cuentas por sus palabras.
Pero la verdad, amigos míos, debe emitirse de manera responsable. Y para ello, necesitamos un sistema de rendición de cuentas.
El anonimato, tal como existe hoy, es lo que genera desinformación. Cuando las personas se esconden detrás de un velo de anonimato, no podemos exigirles responsabilidades. No podemos exigirles responsabilidades por sus ideas.
No podemos debatir abiertamente y honestamente cuando quienes difunden desinformación pueden simplemente borrar su rastro y desaparecer.
Lo que necesitamos es un sistema que sea abierto y transparente, pero que también respete la privacidad.
Hay una diferencia fundamental entre el anonimato y la privacidad.
Un seudónimo, como los que usaban los padres fundadores de Estados Unidos, puede tener peso y generar credibilidad con el tiempo.
Puede que no conozcamos el nombre de inmediato, pero podemos seguir las ideas y atribuirlas a alguien que se mantiene fiel a sus palabras.
Eso es diferente del anonimato que vemos hoy, que permite a la gente esconderse en la oscuridad y difundir información errónea sin consecuencias.
El anonimato es el caldo de cultivo para la desinformación.
Es donde las ideas pueden crecer sin escrutinio, sin rendición de cuentas.
Pero la privacidad... la privacidad es diferente. Permite a la gente proteger su vida personal y al mismo tiempo defender sus ideas.
Los padres fundadores de Estados Unidos usaban seudónimos, sí, pero todavía podemos rastrear esos nombres hasta los hombres que construyeron esta nación.
Esa es la diferencia.
El anonimato es lo que vive en la oscuridad. La privacidad es lo que vive en la luz.
Y si vamos a luchar contra la desinformación, no lo haremos censurando voces.
Lo haremos sacando la verdad a la luz.
Lo haremos responsabilizando a las personas de sus palabras y acciones.
Lo haremos construyendo sistemas que permitan el debate, la transparencia y la rendición de cuentas, no sistemas que fomenten el ocultamiento, el borrado y la desaparición.
La desinformación no puede prosperar cuando la verdad sale a la luz.
Pero solo podemos llegar allí cuando nos alejemos de las sombras del anonimato y nos adentremos en la luz de la privacidad, la responsabilidad y la verdad.
Así que no tengamos miedo de la verdad y no tengamos miedo de defenderla.
Porque solo cuando capturemos la verdad, solo cuando nos hagamos responsables de ella, podremos avanzar de verdad.
S. Tominaga AKA CSW
Oct 3, 2024
https://x.com/CsTominaga/status/1841638758984388655?t=BqRmILnz1y7xuqwfjiZyMQ&s=19
https://t.me/S_Tominaga/1071
S. Tominaga AKA CSW
Oct. 4, 2024
https://x.com/CsTominaga/status/1841996911735349435?t=5k1fnm_VvgDBHpbkJ8uXzg&s=19
https://t.me/S_Tominaga/1074
Oct. 4, 2024
https://x.com/CsTominaga/status/1841996911735349435?t=5k1fnm_VvgDBHpbkJ8uXzg&s=19
https://t.me/S_Tominaga/1074
Satoshi never said, We are all Satoshi.
Satoshi never claimed, This is yours.
Never did Satoshi declare, This is a gift I give to you.
Those who say this now, who declare that Bitcoin belongs to everyone, are not accepting something freely offered. They are taking. It is theft disguised as collectivism.
It is the subversion of the very principles Bitcoin was built upon—individualism, property, and the power of merit.
The masses, the mob, are the instruments by which those in power seize control. They do not want to elevate the individual; they want to crush them under the weight of the collective.
To claim Bitcoin as a gift to all is to reject the very idea of ownership, of creation, of responsibility. It is to spit in the face of the innovation and the mind that brought it forth, and to exalt the mediocrity of the masses over the excellence of the individual.
This is not freedom—it is servitude.
It is not creation—it is destruction.
It is everything Bitcoin was meant to resist.
S. Tominaga AKA CSW
Oct. 4, 2024
https://x.com/CsTominaga/status/1841996911735349435?t=5k1fnm_VvgDBHpbkJ8uXzg&s=19
https://t.me/S_Tominaga/1074
Satoshi never claimed, This is yours.
Never did Satoshi declare, This is a gift I give to you.
Those who say this now, who declare that Bitcoin belongs to everyone, are not accepting something freely offered. They are taking. It is theft disguised as collectivism.
It is the subversion of the very principles Bitcoin was built upon—individualism, property, and the power of merit.
The masses, the mob, are the instruments by which those in power seize control. They do not want to elevate the individual; they want to crush them under the weight of the collective.
To claim Bitcoin as a gift to all is to reject the very idea of ownership, of creation, of responsibility. It is to spit in the face of the innovation and the mind that brought it forth, and to exalt the mediocrity of the masses over the excellence of the individual.
This is not freedom—it is servitude.
It is not creation—it is destruction.
It is everything Bitcoin was meant to resist.
S. Tominaga AKA CSW
Oct. 4, 2024
https://x.com/CsTominaga/status/1841996911735349435?t=5k1fnm_VvgDBHpbkJ8uXzg&s=19
https://t.me/S_Tominaga/1074
💯1
Satoshi nunca dijo: “Todos somos Satoshi”.
Satoshi nunca afirmó: “Esto es tuyo”.
Satoshi nunca declaró: “Este es un regalo que te doy”.
Aquellos que dicen esto ahora, quienes declaran que Bitcoin pertenece a todos, no están aceptando algo que se ofrece libremente. Están tomando. Es un robo disfrazado de colectivismo.
Es la subversión de los principios sobre los que se construyó Bitcoin: el individualismo, la propiedad y el poder del mérito.
Las masas, la turba, son los instrumentos mediante los cuales los que están en el poder toman el control. No quieren elevar al individuo; quieren aplastarlo bajo el peso del colectivo.
Afirmar que Bitcoin es un regalo para todos es rechazar la idea misma de propiedad, de creación, de responsabilidad. Es escupir en la cara de la innovación y la mente que la generó, y exaltar la mediocridad de las masas por sobre la excelencia del individuo.
Esto no es libertad, es servidumbre.
No es creación, es destrucción.
Es todo aquello a lo que Bitcoin se suponía que debía resistir.
S. Tominaga, también conocido como CSW
4 de octubre de 2024
https://x.com/CsTominaga/status/1841996911735349435?t=5k1fnm_VvgDBHpbkJ8uXzg&s=19
https://t.me/S_Tominaga/1074
Satoshi nunca afirmó: “Esto es tuyo”.
Satoshi nunca declaró: “Este es un regalo que te doy”.
Aquellos que dicen esto ahora, quienes declaran que Bitcoin pertenece a todos, no están aceptando algo que se ofrece libremente. Están tomando. Es un robo disfrazado de colectivismo.
Es la subversión de los principios sobre los que se construyó Bitcoin: el individualismo, la propiedad y el poder del mérito.
Las masas, la turba, son los instrumentos mediante los cuales los que están en el poder toman el control. No quieren elevar al individuo; quieren aplastarlo bajo el peso del colectivo.
Afirmar que Bitcoin es un regalo para todos es rechazar la idea misma de propiedad, de creación, de responsabilidad. Es escupir en la cara de la innovación y la mente que la generó, y exaltar la mediocridad de las masas por sobre la excelencia del individuo.
Esto no es libertad, es servidumbre.
No es creación, es destrucción.
Es todo aquello a lo que Bitcoin se suponía que debía resistir.
S. Tominaga, también conocido como CSW
4 de octubre de 2024
https://x.com/CsTominaga/status/1841996911735349435?t=5k1fnm_VvgDBHpbkJ8uXzg&s=19
https://t.me/S_Tominaga/1074
X (formerly Twitter)
S Tominaga (@CsTominaga) on X
Satoshi never said, We are all Satoshi.
Satoshi never claimed, This is yours.
Never did Satoshi declare, This is a gift I give to you.
Those who say this now, who declare that Bitcoin belongs to everyone, are not accepting something freely offered.…
Satoshi never claimed, This is yours.
Never did Satoshi declare, This is a gift I give to you.
Those who say this now, who declare that Bitcoin belongs to everyone, are not accepting something freely offered.…
👍1
S. Tominaga AKA CSW
Oct 4, 2024
https://x.com/CsTominaga/status/1841982291696091271?t=om_Ib12A-XC4r7Oi1mBgDA&s=19
https://t.me/S_Tominaga/1077
Oct 4, 2024
https://x.com/CsTominaga/status/1841982291696091271?t=om_Ib12A-XC4r7Oi1mBgDA&s=19
https://t.me/S_Tominaga/1077
"We are all Satoshi."
That single phrase is the cry of the collective—the chant of those who have no vision, no ingenuity, no ability to create—yet demand the rewards of creation.
It is the voice of those who hate the mind, who fear the mind, and who seek to destroy the individual who dares to stand alone and think.
This is the embodiment of everything wrong in a world that worships mediocrity and despises greatness.
A free society does not rise from the collective. It rises from the individual. The man who stands alone, who defies the world, and who says, "This is mine." That is where progress comes from.
That is where excellence, greatness is born. But you—those who chant "we are all Satoshi"—you are the destroyers.
You seek to tear down the individual, to drag him into the mud, because his existence is an insult to your mediocrity.
Do you know what you are saying when you utter those words?
You are declaring that the man who creates, who builds, who invents, has no right to his creation. You are stating that the work of his mind belongs not to him, but to you, to the collective, to anyone who feels entitled to take it.
And why?
Because you did nothing and demand everything.
This is the great evil of collectivism—the belief that the individual owes his life, his work, his mind to the masses.
That his thoughts are not his own, that his genius is not his right, but a gift to be plundered by those who did nothing to earn it.
It is the ultimate inversion of justice: those who contribute nothing claim the right to everything.
The man who invented Bitcoin, the mind who conceived it, is Satoshi alone.
And to steal that from him, to declare "we are all Satoshi," is to rob him of his rightful place. It is to deny the individual, to erase him from existence, and replace him with the faceless horde.
This is the creed of envy, the chant of those who wish to destroy what they cannot create.
The collective does not create. The collective cannot create. It can only take, and in taking, it destroys.
If you believe that "we are all Satoshi," then you believe that the mind, the genius, the creator has no right to his own thoughts.
And that belief is the death of freedom. It is the death of everything that makes a free society possible.
To the individual, to the creator, to the man who dares to think—stand up. Declare that you are not one of them. That you will not be sacrificed to the mob. Because without you, there is no future.
There is only the darkness of the collective, devouring everything in its path until nothing remains.
Hence, "We are all Satoshi." This is collectivism in its most insidious form, a declaration that the individual mind, the singular genius behind creation, does not exist.
It is the ultimate erasure of the inventor. A group—none of whom had the vision or capacity to create—claiming ownership of what is not theirs.
Again, I say that this is the antithesis of a free society. In a world that worships the collective, the individual is obliterated, sacrificed on the altar of mediocrity and envy
Collectivism demands that the individual mind be subsumed by the masses, that greatness be diluted into nothingness, that no one stands apart.
But without the individual, without the Satoshis of the world, there is no progress. There is only stagnation and the hollow triumph of the mob, dragging everyone into the void of mediocrity.
This is not freedom. This is the death of innovation.
S. Tominaga AKA CSW
Oct 4, 2024
https://x.com/CsTominaga/status/1841982291696091271?t=om_Ib12A-XC4r7Oi1mBgDA&s=19
https://t.me/S_Tominaga/1077
That single phrase is the cry of the collective—the chant of those who have no vision, no ingenuity, no ability to create—yet demand the rewards of creation.
It is the voice of those who hate the mind, who fear the mind, and who seek to destroy the individual who dares to stand alone and think.
This is the embodiment of everything wrong in a world that worships mediocrity and despises greatness.
A free society does not rise from the collective. It rises from the individual. The man who stands alone, who defies the world, and who says, "This is mine." That is where progress comes from.
That is where excellence, greatness is born. But you—those who chant "we are all Satoshi"—you are the destroyers.
You seek to tear down the individual, to drag him into the mud, because his existence is an insult to your mediocrity.
Do you know what you are saying when you utter those words?
You are declaring that the man who creates, who builds, who invents, has no right to his creation. You are stating that the work of his mind belongs not to him, but to you, to the collective, to anyone who feels entitled to take it.
And why?
Because you did nothing and demand everything.
This is the great evil of collectivism—the belief that the individual owes his life, his work, his mind to the masses.
That his thoughts are not his own, that his genius is not his right, but a gift to be plundered by those who did nothing to earn it.
It is the ultimate inversion of justice: those who contribute nothing claim the right to everything.
The man who invented Bitcoin, the mind who conceived it, is Satoshi alone.
And to steal that from him, to declare "we are all Satoshi," is to rob him of his rightful place. It is to deny the individual, to erase him from existence, and replace him with the faceless horde.
This is the creed of envy, the chant of those who wish to destroy what they cannot create.
The collective does not create. The collective cannot create. It can only take, and in taking, it destroys.
If you believe that "we are all Satoshi," then you believe that the mind, the genius, the creator has no right to his own thoughts.
And that belief is the death of freedom. It is the death of everything that makes a free society possible.
To the individual, to the creator, to the man who dares to think—stand up. Declare that you are not one of them. That you will not be sacrificed to the mob. Because without you, there is no future.
There is only the darkness of the collective, devouring everything in its path until nothing remains.
Hence, "We are all Satoshi." This is collectivism in its most insidious form, a declaration that the individual mind, the singular genius behind creation, does not exist.
It is the ultimate erasure of the inventor. A group—none of whom had the vision or capacity to create—claiming ownership of what is not theirs.
Again, I say that this is the antithesis of a free society. In a world that worships the collective, the individual is obliterated, sacrificed on the altar of mediocrity and envy
Collectivism demands that the individual mind be subsumed by the masses, that greatness be diluted into nothingness, that no one stands apart.
But without the individual, without the Satoshis of the world, there is no progress. There is only stagnation and the hollow triumph of the mob, dragging everyone into the void of mediocrity.
This is not freedom. This is the death of innovation.
S. Tominaga AKA CSW
Oct 4, 2024
https://x.com/CsTominaga/status/1841982291696091271?t=om_Ib12A-XC4r7Oi1mBgDA&s=19
https://t.me/S_Tominaga/1077
X (formerly Twitter)
S Tominaga (@CsTominaga) on X
"We are all Satoshi."
That single phrase is the cry of the collective—the chant of those who have no vision, no ingenuity, no ability to create—yet demand the rewards of creation.
It is the voice of those who hate the mind, who fear the mind, and who…
That single phrase is the cry of the collective—the chant of those who have no vision, no ingenuity, no ability to create—yet demand the rewards of creation.
It is the voice of those who hate the mind, who fear the mind, and who…
"Todos somos Satoshi".
Esa frase es el grito del colectivo, el canto de quienes no tienen visión, ni ingenio, ni capacidad para crear, pero exigen las recompensas de la creación.
Es la voz de quienes odian la mente, quienes temen a la mente y quienes buscan destruir al individuo, que se atreve a pensar solo.
Esta es la encarnación de todo lo malo en un mundo que rinde culto a la mediocridad y desprecia la grandeza.
Una sociedad libre no surge del colectivo. Surge del individuo. El hombre que se mantiene solo, que desafía al mundo y que dice: "Esto es mío". De ahí proviene el progreso.
De ahí nace la excelencia, la grandeza. Pero ustedes, quienes cantan "todos somos Satoshi", son los destructores.
Ustedes buscan derribar al individuo, arrastrarlo al barro, porque su existencia es un insulto a su mediocridad.
¿Sabes lo que estás diciendo cuando pronuncias esas palabras?
Estás declarando que el hombre que crea, que construye, que inventa, no tiene derecho a su creación. Estás afirmando que el trabajo de su mente no le pertenece a él, sino a ti, al colectivo, a cualquiera que se sienta con derecho a tomarlo.
¿Y por qué?
Porque no hiciste nada y lo exiges todo.
Este es el gran mal del colectivismo: la creencia de que el individuo debe su vida, su trabajo, su mente a las masas.
Que sus pensamientos no son suyos, que su genio no es su derecho, sino un regalo que puede ser saqueado por aquellos que no hicieron nada para ganárselo.
Es la máxima inversión de la justicia: aquellos que no aportan nada reclaman el derecho a todo.
El hombre que inventó Bitcoin, la mente que lo concibió, es solo Satoshi.
Y robarle eso, declarar "todos somos Satoshi", es robarle el lugar que le corresponde. Es negar al individuo, borrarlo de la existencia y reemplazarlo por la horda sin rostro.
Este es el credo de la envidia, el canto de aquellos que desean destruir lo que no pueden crear.
El colectivo no crea. El colectivo no puede crear. Solo puede tomar, y al tomar, destruye.
Si crees que "todos somos Satoshi", entonces crees que la mente, el genio, el creador no tiene derecho a sus propios pensamientos.
Y esa creencia es la muerte de la libertad. Es la muerte de todo lo que hace posible una sociedad libre.
Al individuo, al creador, al hombre que se atreve a pensar: levántate. Declara que no eres uno de ellos. Que no serás sacrificado a la multitud. Porque sin ti, no hay futuro.
Solo existe la oscuridad del colectivo, devorando todo a su paso hasta que no queda nada.
De ahí que "todos somos Satoshi". Esto es el colectivismo en su forma más insidiosa, una declaración de que la mente individual, el genio singular detrás de la creación, no existe.
Es la eliminación definitiva del inventor. Un grupo, ninguno de cuyos integrantes tuvo la visión o la capacidad de crear, que reclama la propiedad de lo que no es suyo.
Una vez más, digo que esto es la antítesis de una sociedad libre. En un mundo que rinde culto al colectivo, el individuo es aniquilado, sacrificado en el altar de la mediocridad y la envidia.
El colectivismo exige que la mente individual sea absorbida por las masas, que la grandeza se diluya en la nada, que nadie se quede aparte.
Pero sin el individuo, sin los Satoshis del mundo, no hay progreso. Solo hay estancamiento y el triunfo hueco de la multitud, que arrastra a todos al vacío de la mediocridad.
Esto no es libertad. Es la muerte de la innovación.
S. Tominaga AKA CSW
4 de octubre de 2024
https://x.com/CsTominaga/status/1841982291696091271?t=om_Ib12A-XC4r7Oi1mBgDA&s=19
https://t.me/S_Tominaga/1077
Esa frase es el grito del colectivo, el canto de quienes no tienen visión, ni ingenio, ni capacidad para crear, pero exigen las recompensas de la creación.
Es la voz de quienes odian la mente, quienes temen a la mente y quienes buscan destruir al individuo, que se atreve a pensar solo.
Esta es la encarnación de todo lo malo en un mundo que rinde culto a la mediocridad y desprecia la grandeza.
Una sociedad libre no surge del colectivo. Surge del individuo. El hombre que se mantiene solo, que desafía al mundo y que dice: "Esto es mío". De ahí proviene el progreso.
De ahí nace la excelencia, la grandeza. Pero ustedes, quienes cantan "todos somos Satoshi", son los destructores.
Ustedes buscan derribar al individuo, arrastrarlo al barro, porque su existencia es un insulto a su mediocridad.
¿Sabes lo que estás diciendo cuando pronuncias esas palabras?
Estás declarando que el hombre que crea, que construye, que inventa, no tiene derecho a su creación. Estás afirmando que el trabajo de su mente no le pertenece a él, sino a ti, al colectivo, a cualquiera que se sienta con derecho a tomarlo.
¿Y por qué?
Porque no hiciste nada y lo exiges todo.
Este es el gran mal del colectivismo: la creencia de que el individuo debe su vida, su trabajo, su mente a las masas.
Que sus pensamientos no son suyos, que su genio no es su derecho, sino un regalo que puede ser saqueado por aquellos que no hicieron nada para ganárselo.
Es la máxima inversión de la justicia: aquellos que no aportan nada reclaman el derecho a todo.
El hombre que inventó Bitcoin, la mente que lo concibió, es solo Satoshi.
Y robarle eso, declarar "todos somos Satoshi", es robarle el lugar que le corresponde. Es negar al individuo, borrarlo de la existencia y reemplazarlo por la horda sin rostro.
Este es el credo de la envidia, el canto de aquellos que desean destruir lo que no pueden crear.
El colectivo no crea. El colectivo no puede crear. Solo puede tomar, y al tomar, destruye.
Si crees que "todos somos Satoshi", entonces crees que la mente, el genio, el creador no tiene derecho a sus propios pensamientos.
Y esa creencia es la muerte de la libertad. Es la muerte de todo lo que hace posible una sociedad libre.
Al individuo, al creador, al hombre que se atreve a pensar: levántate. Declara que no eres uno de ellos. Que no serás sacrificado a la multitud. Porque sin ti, no hay futuro.
Solo existe la oscuridad del colectivo, devorando todo a su paso hasta que no queda nada.
De ahí que "todos somos Satoshi". Esto es el colectivismo en su forma más insidiosa, una declaración de que la mente individual, el genio singular detrás de la creación, no existe.
Es la eliminación definitiva del inventor. Un grupo, ninguno de cuyos integrantes tuvo la visión o la capacidad de crear, que reclama la propiedad de lo que no es suyo.
Una vez más, digo que esto es la antítesis de una sociedad libre. En un mundo que rinde culto al colectivo, el individuo es aniquilado, sacrificado en el altar de la mediocridad y la envidia.
El colectivismo exige que la mente individual sea absorbida por las masas, que la grandeza se diluya en la nada, que nadie se quede aparte.
Pero sin el individuo, sin los Satoshis del mundo, no hay progreso. Solo hay estancamiento y el triunfo hueco de la multitud, que arrastra a todos al vacío de la mediocridad.
Esto no es libertad. Es la muerte de la innovación.
S. Tominaga AKA CSW
4 de octubre de 2024
https://x.com/CsTominaga/status/1841982291696091271?t=om_Ib12A-XC4r7Oi1mBgDA&s=19
https://t.me/S_Tominaga/1077
X (formerly Twitter)
S Tominaga (@CsTominaga) on X
"We are all Satoshi."
That single phrase is the cry of the collective—the chant of those who have no vision, no ingenuity, no ability to create—yet demand the rewards of creation.
It is the voice of those who hate the mind, who fear the mind, and who…
That single phrase is the cry of the collective—the chant of those who have no vision, no ingenuity, no ability to create—yet demand the rewards of creation.
It is the voice of those who hate the mind, who fear the mind, and who…
👍1
S. Tominaga AKA CSW
Oct 3, 2024
https://x.com/CsTominaga/status/1841640645120950276?t=5vVK4sqrpAcJQPxyOPYxsQ&s=19
https://t.me/S_Tominaga/1081
Oct 3, 2024
https://x.com/CsTominaga/status/1841640645120950276?t=5vVK4sqrpAcJQPxyOPYxsQ&s=19
https://t.me/S_Tominaga/1081
S. Tominaga AKA CSW
Oct 4, 2024
https://x.com/CsTominaga/status/1842024219087143224?t=lKzQ7BQGLDn1FFTeVwGYGw&s=19
https://t.me/S_Tominaga/1082
Oct 4, 2024
https://x.com/CsTominaga/status/1842024219087143224?t=lKzQ7BQGLDn1FFTeVwGYGw&s=19
https://t.me/S_Tominaga/1082
In 2023, the U.S. federal government collected approximately $4.44 trillion in total revenue (FRED St. Louis Fed).
The majority of this income came from individual income taxes, corporate taxes, and payroll taxes for Social Security and Medicare.
As of Q2 2024, the U.S. Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is approximately $29.02 trillion.
This reflects a 1.37% increase from the previous quarter and a 5.69% rise compared to the same period a year ago.
The current trajectory of the U.S. federal budget, with rising interest rates and increasing debt levels, is concerning.
As the federal government collected $4.44 trillion in 2023, interest payments are already taking up a significant portion of this revenue.
Higher interest rates mean the cost of servicing the national debt will grow rapidly, potentially consuming more of the government's budget. This leaves less room for critical spending on infrastructure, defense, and social programs, exacerbating the deficit.
With a national debt exceeding $33 trillion, even a modest rise in interest rates will dramatically increase the amount the government has to pay in interest.
This, in turn, reduces the ability to finance essential services without resorting to further borrowing, creating a cycle of dependency on debt.
Federal expenditures continue to outpace revenues, and the annual deficits deepen the problem, driving more borrowing and increasing the debt burden further.
If this trend continues, the sustainability of the U.S. financial system becomes questionable. The government will face tough choices in managing its budget, including potential tax increases or spending cuts. Without addressing the imbalance, the increasing cost of servicing debt will place enormous pressure on the U.S. economy, potentially forcing drastic fiscal measures in the near future.
A small, limited government is not only necessary—it is the only moral form of governance. Government's sole purpose should be to protect individual rights and ensure that justice is upheld. It exists to provide essential services such as national defense, the protection of property, and the enforcement of contracts.
Beyond that, any further intrusion by the state represents an overreach, one that curtails the freedom and creativity of individuals. A limited government allows individuals to act in their rational self-interest, to pursue their goals unimpeded by the weight of bureaucracy, taxes, and regulations. It enables the creators, the builders, and the thinkers to flourish—those upon whom civilization depends.
The welfare state, by contrast, represents the moral and economic rot of collectivism. It institutionalizes the redistribution of wealth by force, punishing productivity and rewarding dependency.
The welfare state breeds entitlement, encouraging people to take without producing, to demand without creating. Over time, this parasitic relationship between the productive and the unproductive leads to collapse. As the government grows to provide more 'benefits,' it must seize more resources from those who generate value.
The result is a vicious cycle: more taxation, more control, less freedom, and eventually, the exhaustion of the nation's wealth.
When a society replaces individual responsibility with state handouts, it loses the very foundation upon which progress is built.
Innovation is stifled, ambition is crushed, and the engines of growth grind to a halt. The welfare state fosters mediocrity, while a limited government creates an environment where excellence can thrive. In the end, a welfare state cannot be sustained, for it relies on the destruction of its most productive citizens.
It is not just an economic failure—it is a moral atrocity. True progress, true human flourishing, is only possible when individuals are free to act and succeed based on their own effort and merit, without the interference of an overbearing state.
S. Tominaga AKA CSW
Oct 4, 2024
https://x.com/CsTominaga/status/1842024219087143224?t=lKzQ7BQGLDn1FFTeVwGYGw&s=19
https://t.me/S_Tominaga/1082
The majority of this income came from individual income taxes, corporate taxes, and payroll taxes for Social Security and Medicare.
As of Q2 2024, the U.S. Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is approximately $29.02 trillion.
This reflects a 1.37% increase from the previous quarter and a 5.69% rise compared to the same period a year ago.
The current trajectory of the U.S. federal budget, with rising interest rates and increasing debt levels, is concerning.
As the federal government collected $4.44 trillion in 2023, interest payments are already taking up a significant portion of this revenue.
Higher interest rates mean the cost of servicing the national debt will grow rapidly, potentially consuming more of the government's budget. This leaves less room for critical spending on infrastructure, defense, and social programs, exacerbating the deficit.
With a national debt exceeding $33 trillion, even a modest rise in interest rates will dramatically increase the amount the government has to pay in interest.
This, in turn, reduces the ability to finance essential services without resorting to further borrowing, creating a cycle of dependency on debt.
Federal expenditures continue to outpace revenues, and the annual deficits deepen the problem, driving more borrowing and increasing the debt burden further.
If this trend continues, the sustainability of the U.S. financial system becomes questionable. The government will face tough choices in managing its budget, including potential tax increases or spending cuts. Without addressing the imbalance, the increasing cost of servicing debt will place enormous pressure on the U.S. economy, potentially forcing drastic fiscal measures in the near future.
A small, limited government is not only necessary—it is the only moral form of governance. Government's sole purpose should be to protect individual rights and ensure that justice is upheld. It exists to provide essential services such as national defense, the protection of property, and the enforcement of contracts.
Beyond that, any further intrusion by the state represents an overreach, one that curtails the freedom and creativity of individuals. A limited government allows individuals to act in their rational self-interest, to pursue their goals unimpeded by the weight of bureaucracy, taxes, and regulations. It enables the creators, the builders, and the thinkers to flourish—those upon whom civilization depends.
The welfare state, by contrast, represents the moral and economic rot of collectivism. It institutionalizes the redistribution of wealth by force, punishing productivity and rewarding dependency.
The welfare state breeds entitlement, encouraging people to take without producing, to demand without creating. Over time, this parasitic relationship between the productive and the unproductive leads to collapse. As the government grows to provide more 'benefits,' it must seize more resources from those who generate value.
The result is a vicious cycle: more taxation, more control, less freedom, and eventually, the exhaustion of the nation's wealth.
When a society replaces individual responsibility with state handouts, it loses the very foundation upon which progress is built.
Innovation is stifled, ambition is crushed, and the engines of growth grind to a halt. The welfare state fosters mediocrity, while a limited government creates an environment where excellence can thrive. In the end, a welfare state cannot be sustained, for it relies on the destruction of its most productive citizens.
It is not just an economic failure—it is a moral atrocity. True progress, true human flourishing, is only possible when individuals are free to act and succeed based on their own effort and merit, without the interference of an overbearing state.
S. Tominaga AKA CSW
Oct 4, 2024
https://x.com/CsTominaga/status/1842024219087143224?t=lKzQ7BQGLDn1FFTeVwGYGw&s=19
https://t.me/S_Tominaga/1082
💯1