Your description of the scheme brings a distinct geometrical shape to mind.

It is the latest of a few 'eco-populist' proposals by the right wing conservative party. If you read the actual text, it embeds the proposal in ecological reasoning - paraphrased "to guarantee a sustainable population growth, especially in protection of the environment...". Putting a technocratic cap on pop growth is an easy no from me though.

Yes, it is that.

South Africa.

deleted by author

I enjoyed the analogy with the aircraft. In the end it should feel mundane if it works well.

This makes my stone masonry heart warm and fuzzy

Is that last thing that for many development is becoming a performative act to be shared like a holiday on the socials?

I've also wasted time on some of his sensationalist twitter posts, but once it became clear that he's just regurgitating a chat window's output, I quickly gave up. Others spent way more time on it though, which is really frustrating. The constant pandering to some specific agenda (which I think you picked up on correctly), is very annoying. Others have similarly hinted at efforts to build alternative clients.

Indeed.

Also hard work happening in Core at the moment on making maintaining it way more efficient.

bitcoiners must

No.

I only mention Core, because it uses the same bootstap chain, that you could use for LDK, LNDK, Ord, etc. Maybe it would have been better to mention Liana wallet, which is Rust-based and uses this bootstrap chain too.

I wouldn't trust anything that guy is saying. As far as I know there is a bootstrap for Rust through mrustc, gcc, and finally stage0. Bitcoin Core takes a lot of in pride in only shipping a binary that is built from a fully transparently bootstrapped toolchain using a similar chain of tools.

Thanks for the summary :)

I don't know, I've never lived within either :)

The townships in the western cape are probably the worst in the country. And the reason for that is simply space. During apartheid far less space and far fewer services were allocated to people here. The internal migration outpaced their willingness to zone new areas, as done for example eventually in Soweto. This is why I think it is so assinine for the government to focus on rural land use, when the much bigger problem in large parts of the country would be formalizing informal settlements and providing basic property rights and services to them. If you have a shack in a township it is not unheard of that your community just strips you off your property, or that a previous tenant just takes it over again. The land on the edge of the cities is often privately owned agricultural, or a national or provincial park, making land invasions likely and rezoning so difficult.

The playgrounds growing up in SA were awesome! Huge open face slides, big jungle gyms with decent height differences, obstacles that actually cost a big of fear to get over. And yet, after a few years , you'd still rather climb a tall tree :D

Right, I think your 1of 2 two things is a strawman. The first case has never been suggested, and the second case is the exact point of vaults. You create a staging area for your coins under weaker security, but still with yourself in control.

Your solution to congestion then just seems to be "wait it out". But that seems backwards. If the exchange can offer their customers sooner and cheaper access to their coins, I don't see how that is not of mutual benefit?

Like I said before, not a fan of arkade or similar attempts, but that is just one implementation of ark. 2nd has been more honest imo. I'm also not completely convinced of either vaults, or congestion control, but they do make clear cases for base money and might actually enhance lightning.

I'm being genuine here. The two arguments you raised that I highlighted do not make sense to me.

Read the second bullet, i.e. A merchant can ensure funds are not encumbered through certain output types, but then so can an attacker, rendering the vault pointless from the start.

That does not make sense to me. In order to spend from a vault, you first have to unvault to an address that is still in your control. It is supposed to protect your savings, and is not really meant for immediate spending. A merchant has nothing to do with it.

Other than it solves nothing and they lie?

It does solve congestion control for exchange payouts. That seems clear to me?

Can you explain how a merchant would suffer from a vault claw back? That does not make sense to me. Once spent to an arbitrary address, there is no clawback mechanism anymore.

Is there an actual argument you have against ark? I can see it for their whole "arkade" stuff, but afaict that is only one implementation. In the normal case, I just think of it as congestion control, which is great!